Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

parte. On the 14th inst., at Chepstow-villas, his novel 'Sant' Ilario,' "which to this day Bayswater, H.H. the Prince Louis Clovis Bona- receives from another a yearly tribute, paid alterparte, aged 35." He was, therefore, born about nately in the shape of a golden rose and a golden F.D. H. 1861, during the lifetime of Marianna Cecchi. spur"? How, then, could he take the title of prince ? REFERENCE WANTED.-Washington Irving, in Was the marriage with Marianna Cecchi annulled? his 'History of New York' (pref. xxix), gives the following as an extract from Äristotle:

G. MILNER-GIBSON-CULLUM.

"ONCE" FOR "WHEN ONCE."-Within the last few years this misuse of the word once has become quite common. Is it a provincialism, which has gradually slipped into common use by mere unconscious imitation? I read, "Once he had crossed the river, his victory was certain." Of course, 66 when once," or simply "when," is here the proper form of expression.

J. DIXON.

SURNAMES.-I am collecting materials for a new dictionary of surnames, and should be much obliged by the assistance of any of your correspondents. Is there a class of surnames derived from cognizances, crests, house signs, and the like? Peacock, Gull, Bull, Rook, Sparrow, Cock, Starling, &c., look like this. But I doubt whether most or all of them may not be otherwise classed. Gull, compared with Gully, looks like a contraction of something else, possibly Guillaume. So Bull, compared with Bully, Bulleid, Boleyn, &c. Were private houses ever distinguished by signs? Every house in Karlsbad, in a German part of Bohemia, has, to this day, its sign, now usually expressed only in words-e. g., "Zum Herzog von Edimburg." But there nearly every house is a lodging-house. T. WILSON.

HENRY PELHAM is said to have matriculated at Oxford on Sept. 6, 1710, aged fifteen. Can any reader of 'N. & Q.' give me the exact date of his G. F. R. B.

birth?

JOHN LILBURNE.-As John Lilburne's name has cropped up again in N. & Q.,' I should like to say that there are several unsettled dates in his early career which I should be glad to enlist friendly aid in determining. Among them are the very important ones of his birth and marriage. Also that of the first edition of his 'Worke of the Beast,' no copy of which has yet come within my ken. For some years I have been at work upon his life, and find but little difficulty in getting full details after 1642; up to that period it is naturally not so asy. HALLIDAY SParling.

SOURCE OF COUPLET.-In what book does the following couplet occur? I suppose that the Holy Scriptures are meant :

Hic liber est in quo quærit sua dogmata quisque,
Invenit et pariter dogmata quisque sua.
E. WALFORD.

[blocks in formation]

"Wars, conflagrations, deluges, destroy nations, and with them all their monuments, their discoveries, and their vanities. The torch of Science has more than once been extinguished and rekindled-a few individuals who have escaped by accident reunite the thread of generations."

Is this a genuine quotation? If so, I shall feel obliged if any one will give me the reference. J. C.

TITLE OF BARON (Island of BUTE).— "The Butemen, in fighting times, were called Brandams, a distinction much prized, and the numerous small landed proprietors, in virtue of a charter granted them in 1506 by James IV., took the title of Baron, which is hereditary in their families. The title is all but extinct, with one or two exceptions, having passed into the Bute family." What is the title worth? Does it confer any dignity? Is it still recognized? How many distinction? As I am interesting myself in a Buteman's pedigree, I shall be much obliged if any contributor to your columns will kindly help me.

families are there on the island entitled to this

North Shields.

YOUNG GENEALOGIST.

"INCENSE - BREATHING MORN."-What is the precise meaning of this epithet, which certainly has a flavour of Milton, and two instances of which I have found?-one in Gray's 'Elegy written in a Country Churchyard ':—

The breezy call of incense-breathing morn,

The swallow twittering from the straw-built shed, The cock's shrill clarion, or the echoing horn,

No more shall rouse them from their lowly bed.
The other occurs in Wordsworth's 'Ecclesiastical
Sonnets' No. xl.):-

Yet will we not conceal the precious Cross,
Like men ashamed: the Sun with his first smile
Shall greet that symbol crowning the low Pile;
And the fresh air of incense-breathing morn
Shall wooingly embrace it.

JOHN PICKFORD, M.A. Newbourne Rectory, Woodbridge. [The meaning does not seem to offer much difficulty if we accept incense odour or perfume.]

BEDDOES.-Is it not desirable that 'N. & Q' should take upon itself the task of unravelling the mystery that surrounds the death of Beddoes, the dramatist? The Encyclopædia Britannica' says that it was the result of an accident that took place while he was out riding. The 'Dictionary of National Biography' gives an account that suggests suicide. I do not know what place (if any)

Beddoes is likely to occupy in the firmament of
fame; but there are so many cases in which
lugubrious stories-always flatly contradicted by
somebody or other-are told about the death of men
of genius (I need only instance Gilbert, Otway, Jean
Jacques Rousseau, and Voltaire) that it seems un-
desirable to add another to the number. Besides,
the death of Beddoes is a comparatively recent
event, and so it may be possible to arrive at the
truth.
T. P. ARMSTRONG.

HOGARTH ENGRAVINGS.-At the sale of the property of the late Miss Langtry, of Alverstoke, the last survivor of an old Alverstoke family, a set of Hogarth's 'Marriage à la Mode' and two other Hogarth's engravings, viz., 'Paul before Felix,' and one from the painting in the Foundling Hospital, were disposed of recently, while she left another Hogarth engraving, 'Garrick as Richard III.,' to a friend.

[blocks in formation]

JOAN I. OF NAPLES.

(8th S. v. 261, 301, 369, 429, 509; vi. 29.) Having in his first tilt at me questioned whether I had looked into Muratori's collection at all, L. L. K. now censures me for having followed at least the Chronicle of Gravina therein too closely. Was it not L. L. K. who first pushed to the front Matteo Camera, having stated that it was a “disappointment" to find that I had made no mention of him? He now rebukes me for relying on Camera, and confounds my statements as to the In connexion with these prints I find the follow-respective chronicles of Bazzano and Gravina, ing original letter pasted in a copy of Hogarth's branding the former author as a prevaricator. If "Analysis of Beauty,' opposite the name and book-L. L. K. will look at the asterisk and note on plate of the Rev. Purefoy Collis, 1758. The letter p. 430, N. & Q.,' he will see that it is Gravina's is addressed to the Rev. Mr. Purefoy Collis, at account of the Durazzo wedding to which I referred Alverstoke, near Gosport, Hants, and is as follows: as a fabrication, not Bazzano's. It is Gravina, in DEAR PYE,-On Fryday last, the day after Mr. Hogarth the pay of the brother of Louis of Hungary, advertised the delivery of his Prints, I received one of Stephen, the Vaiwode of Transylvania, who the first impressions for you. I think it's very well romances about the said wedding, as he does about executed and much about the size of his former of Mr. so much else. Of one thing, however, I am certain, Garrick. I suppose you will have it framed in the same and that is, had L. L. K. really known the Modena manner, which I'll take care to have done by the same Chronicle he would not have thus branded its person as soon as I receive your orders. Harry is still at Bath, and no one here knows when he intends to author as a prevaricator ! return from thence, but I shall expect him about Parliament time, or conclude him Pettycoatly detained. They have it at Oxford yt Lord Cornbury will be called up by writt to the House of Lords, the beginning of the Sessions, by which his seat for that University will become vacant, to supply which there are two candidates already thought of, Sr Edward Turner and S Roger Newdigate, both of the same way of thinking, so that in all probability the other Party will find out a Third, and make some Bustle in the Election.

Though I have had no answer, I hope you received my last with your note to Armstrong safe.

Nothing stirring in Town but Executions and Robberies. My compliments to Mr Prachy [?]. I hope you have had a merry Xmas and I wish you many happy new I am, Dear Pye,

years.

yr most aff. Friend & humble servt
P. DODWELL.

Craven St., Jan. 8th, 1750.
Can any of your readers suggest—(1) Judging
by date of letter, which of the engravings sold at
Miss Langtry's sale is referred to in the above
letter; (2) what Mr. P. Dodwell, of Craven Street,
wrote the letter in question; and (3) who was the
Harry likely to be "Petticoatly detained" in Bath
mentioned therein?

There are many elaborate genealogical notes concerning the Langtrys (stated to be originally from Lancashire), the Purefoys, and the Collises, together with notes of their arms, contained in

Muratori, in his 'Annali,' makes constant use of the Modena Chronicle; but with reference to the death of Andrew, he gives more attention to that of Gravina, and, I think, rather unfairly omits to mention that the Modena Chronicle, the author of which he elsewhere praises as "neque indiligentem neque judicii indignum," exculpates Joanna.

L. L. K. shows that Muratori does not give his authority for the hearsay statement in regard to Andrew's supposed "incompetency." I think a glance at Collenucio will tell him who the authority was, and perhaps the reason why Muratori did not mention him.

On my return to England the other day I again turned to the Ecclesiastical Annals (tom. i. H. Spondanus, Continuatio Cæsar Baronius), ann. 1348, and found the following strange little passage:

"Die quintadecima Martii, solemni pompâ universis Clementi Papâ benigne excepta atque publico consistorio obviantibus Cardinalibus, sub umbella ingressa est; et à audita tanta facundia, præsentibus etiam in civitate oratoribus Regis Hungariæ, Causam suam peroravit, ut omnibus ritè perpensis insons existimata fuerit necis viri sui Andreæ.

Raynaldus, as has been shown by L. L. K., and as I was quite aware, gives us a letter from Clement to Louis of Hungary, in which the Pope

states that he had not wished the queen to come into the Curia at all; that he had even sent envoys as well as letters in order to dissuade her from coming, but that, she being sovereign of Provence, he was at last persuaded by his cardinals that she ought to be received in becoming style: 66 fuerat fratrum nostrorum Consilium quod eadam Regina recipi ut Regina debebat." But what did it not mean and involve to receive Queen Joanna and her husband at Avignon under such circumstances, she burning to clear herself of a criminal accusation and resolved to force the anxious Clement to

restore her to her kingdom? Clement simply says he could not compel her to keep away. We may, therefore, take it for certain, almost, that she did come and was heard. Baluze ('Secunda Vita Clementis VI.') tells us plainly, "Venerunt ambo simul in Curiam" (Ludovicus et Johanna), that is, Luigi of Taranto and Joanna. Still, it is right to mention here that, besides clearing herself of the charge lodged against her by Louis and his mother, Elizabeth, she had to procure Clement's formal pardon for having married Luigi before the granted dispensation had reached Naples, though it was actually on the way thither. It is not improbable she and Luigi had entertained fears lest the active spies of the invader might intercept it; at any rate Acciajuoli, the man of action, who ultimately saved the situation and, possibly, the lives of his sovereign and her consort, personally accelerated the union. But L. L. K. denied formerly (8th S. V. 302) that the queen was heard in Consistory at all, yet now I find him saying, "Well, if she was heard, Clement did not consider it safe to communicate the result to Louis of Hungary."

The so-called "pre-arranged plot " in my account of Queen Joanna arose from no personal hatred of Hungary and Hungarians, but solely from my having come to the simple, but, I think, inevitable, conclusion that, actual evidence against the queen in the matter of the murder of Andrew proving to be wholly insufficient for her conviction, she was, and is, entitled to the full benefit of the doubt, if not to positive absolution. With regard to the Hungarians, I considered that the magnates of Naples, the courtiers, and the people were very naturally jealous of them; with regard to the queen, I found that her censors had been constantly careful to select certain elements of suspicion against her, and to reject any and every circumstance which at all told in her favour. Many loudly accuse her of having murdered Andrew, and invent incredible details; some declare she was only privy to the murder; while others say that, at any rate, she did not assist him, and that she did not mourn him as vehemently as she should have done; one or two only declare her to have been innocent. None brings proof. The mass of vilification that has been heaped upon her in consequence has been truly stupendous. She has been made a scapegoat for

the whole Angevine dynasty of Naples. She has been alternately described as a sort of Jael, a Jezebel, a Messalina, a Bess of Hardwick, a Jane Grey, a Mary Stuart. But to wish a certain man were not your husband, to object to his ambitions, to counteract them even, is not enough, I venture to consider, to warrant stamping one as his murderer in the event of his being politically assassinated. Yet this is, practically, what happened to Queen Joanna in her twenty-first year (she was born in 1325).

The burden of substantiating her guilt lies with some other writer than myself,-perhaps with L. L. K., if he cares to undertake the task. Let me gently remind him, while it occurs to me, that the question of her proven guilt is, perhaps, of more moment than our own reciprocal chidings, however erudite. If, therefore, he can prove her to have been guilty, by all means let him do so.

Had there been no other motive for the bungling assassination of her boy-husband than her own dissatisfaction at his resolution (prompted from Hungary) to be crowned and to rule over her (in spite of King Robert's opposing decree and the feeling against him at Naples), or than his possible inadequacy as a consort, it would clearly have been difficult to avoid arriving at the damnatory conclusion that Joan was the contriver of the crime; but we have seen that there were several reasons, and truly significant ones, in the minds of other and far older members of the royal family of Naples, as well as in the minds of their jealous dependents, for desiring, at any cost, a postponement of the long negotiated coronation of Andrew, if not for altogether getting rid of him and his Hungarian following by a deed of violence. Gravina declares that his injudicious liberation of the rebellious Pepini was the fatal step, as it had the effect of concentrating the energies of their highplaced enemies and directing the fury of these upon himself ('Chronicon. D. Gravina,' 553-4). At any rate, by means of his death the titular Empress Catherine trusted to secure the throne for one or other of her sons; and likewise by means of his death Charles of Durazzo, son of Agnes of Perigord,* at any rate until Joanna should have a child, would advance a step nearer to that sovereignty to which his duchess, Maria, was heiress 'presumptive.

Andrew had been dead but three months when Joanna gave birth (Dec., 1345) to Carlo Martello, whose paternity Hungarians and Neapolitans equally declared to be above question. Nobody, I take it, but L. L. K. will find any difficulty in admitting this abundantly chronicled fact in

[blocks in formation]

the queen's favour. Now, if she was as immoral as he adjudges her to have been, how did this uncommonly creditable circumstance come to pass? It cannot be denied that Catherine lost no time whatever in urging the claims of her eldest son Robert to the hand of the widowed Joanna. The queen, however, seems to have resolutely eluded his aggressive advances. Evidence, as we shall see, rather tends to show that he was by no means so agreeable to her as perhaps he considered himself to be. Louis of Hungary and his mother Elizabeth, made aware of what was taking place at Naples, wrote vehemently about this affair to Clement at Avignon. Their letters are extant. In March, 1346, already, the Pope returned answer to them that he should not permit a union to take place between Joanna and Robert. In May following he further declares that he will not grant dispensation for such a union without taking time to consider it maturely (Theiner., 'Monum.,' i. 710-712).

This fact discloses two things. It shows the anxiety of Louis to prevent Joanna and the Neapolitan branch of the family becoming independent of him again, and thus checkmating his design upon the kingdom of Naples. It also shows clearly the rapid development of Catherine's own ambitious plans. Towards the ensuing autumn (1346), after the execution of the assassins, actual and suspected, Jeanna had doubtless become fully persuaded there was no escaping some such remarriage. Naples was full of strife, and the Hungarian invasion was becoming a distressing fact. Clement, however, wrote exhorting her to do nothing calculated to further incense the King of Hungary, but to wait patiently. Meanwhile, finding her design not prospering, Catherine had actually forced herself, her son, Robert of Taranto, and her suite, into the Castello Nuovo, and, to the general scandal, took up her residence therein. Shocked by this audacious move, the Pope promptly sent the Abbot of Monte-Cassino to compel Robert to retire from the castello altogether, under severe spiritual threats. It now happened, however, that Catherine fell sick and died (Sept. 20, 1346), and on the occasion of her obsequies at Monte-Vergine Robert went out of the castle. Whereupon the Vatican Chronicle (c. 10) records— "viii Octobris......tum Domina Regina fecit licentiare omnes familiares dicti Imperatoris [Robert] a castro, et noluit quod dictus Imperator ulterius Castrum intraret, sed ipsa [Joanna] personaliter claudi fecit ostia dicti Castri, et claves in suis manibus recepit." In fact, Joanna turned him out, emperor or no emperor, and kept the keys of the castle, once more determined to rule her own realm. Meanwhile, Queen Elizabeth of Hungary, Gravina, and the author of the Este Chronicle lay no blame on Robert of Taranto, but spend volleys of wrath upon “Regina meretrix "_" prava Johanna," &c.

But does not this fact plainly show that she resented the unbecoming pressure put upon her by her unscrupulous kinsfolk, and that she was relieved by being able to shut her doors upon Robert? Now, it was not until nine months later still (August, 1347) that Joanna yielded to the politic persuasions of Niccolo Acciajuoli, and accepted the hand of Luigi (the second son of the defunct Catherine), to whom, let us remember, the Florentine banker had been an affectionate guardian and preceptor. Where, then, is the exceeding and indecent hurry for remarriage on Joanna's part? Because a lady is royal, beautiful, and clever, has many besieging suitors, and marries, out of necessity, a year and eleven months after her first husband's death, is she to be put down harshly for a carnally-minded woman? Is it not plain that the large opening for scandal concerning Joanna in this crucial affair was made by quite another person than herselfeven by her whom authorities of every calibre declare to have been the most deeply implicated in the murder of Andrew? No wonder Petrarch, in his second Eclogue, vilified the corruption of the court of Naples. It was dislocated with intrigue. But in it he says no word against the queen herself. It is, of course, easy to say that it was politic of him not to do so. According to Donato Albanzani,* Barbato Sulmone and Petrarch often predicted the death of Andrew in their conversations. Unfortunately, Donato, besides making many errors of fact, is wont, like Gravina, to repeat and accentuate every scandal relative to Naples, just as northern and central Italians are wont to do in our own day; and neither he nor Benvenuto da Imola can be trusted authoritatively in this matter. Still, after his visit to Andrew in 1343, Petrarch must have formed pretty clear notions about the Tarantini and Durazzeschi. As I have related, Petrarch's mission to Naples had been made in order to procure that fatal setting at liberty of the Pepini for his friend Cardinal Colonna. No wonder, then, at the poet's intense subsequent pity for Andrew,† who liberated them, and thus brought about his own death at the ST. CLAIR BADDELEY. hands of their foes.

(To be continued.)

DERAIL (8th S. vi. 107).-The French equivalent dérailler (I have never seen nor heard dérailer) will be found in Bescherelle's 'French Dictionary (1845), and even then the word was apparently not quite new, for, s. v. déraillement, he quotes a passage from "F. Tourn.," no doubt Tourneux, which is in his list of authors quoted. This F. (Félix) Tourneux, according to Vapereau (1858), was the

* Isti vero duo S. Barbatus et Franciscus, in colloquio sepissime predixerunt mortem ipsius regis Andreæ intra se post mortem ipsius regis Roberti.

Epist.,' lib. vi.

editor and in part author of a work called 'L'Encyclopédie des Chemins de Fer' (Renouard, 1841), so that, if the quotation is from this work, the word déraillement dates back at least as far as 1841, and dérailler would, of course, be earlier still. It is quite true that in 1841, and even in 1845, there were still no great lines of railway in France. myself first went to Paris in 1845, and I well remember travelling by diligence from Boulogne to Paris (158 miles) in nineteen hours. But there was already a line to Versailles, and I think the line to Sceaux was made before that. Railway terms were, therefore, already in vogue, and the more so as these two lines started from Paris, and I well remember hearing the word dérailler during my fifteen months' stay at Choisy-le-Roi, near

Paris.

As for the English derail, I have no doubt in my own mind that it has been borrowed from this dérailler. Our verbs beginning with the particle de are, I believe, commonly derived from French, and are, most of them, I should say, made up of de and another already existing verb. But where is there a verb, in common use, made up in England out of de and a substantive, either originally English or thoroughly naturalized? We have not yet got, fortunately, deway, deroad, or desea (to strand), so why should derail have been put together here? The French, on the contrary, have often made up a verb out of de and a substantive—e. g., dévoyer (voie), dérouter, détraquer, &c., so why not dérailler? Dérailler (which has so long been in constant use) sounds very well, quite as well as the genuine French word débrailler, which differs from it only, both as far as form and pronunciation are concerned, in having a b. But derail is hideous, and I am glad to say that, after all the years that it seems to have existed, I have not seen it in newspapers more than twice, and that quite recently, whilst I have never yet heard it, and sincerely hope I never may.

F. CHANCE.

but for which we have not yet had any term in our rail
way nomenclature. By déraillement is meant the escape
of the wheels of the engine or carriage from the rails;
and the verb to derail or to be derailed may be used in a
corresponding sense.”

the actual introduction and acknowledged source
Nothing could be more satisfactory as showing
of the English word. It only remained to show
that the word was used in French before 1854, and
the link is supplied by DR. CHANCE's admirable
We thence learn that dérailler and déraillement
communication (which he has already shown me).
were in use in French long before the dates given
by Littré and the new Dictionnaire Général.
and freely used the words in 1854, they seem to
It may be added that while Lardner introduced
have been generally adopted in America sooner
needed there.
than in Great Britain, probably because much more
used by the English newspapers and in works on
But they have been commonly
railway engineering for twelve or fifteen years.

[ocr errors]

J. A. H. MURRAY.

There is a chapter on "Railway Accidents" in The Museum of Science and Art' (i. 34), by Dr. Lardner, published by Walton & Maberley, 1854, in which the following passage occurs :

66 Although in most cases of derailment it is the engine which escapes from the rails, yet it occasionally happens that while the engine maintains its position, one or more of the carriages forming the train are derailed."

The word is explained in the following footnote:

"We have adopted this word from the French; it expresses an effect which is often necessary to mention, but nomenclature. By déraillement is meant the escape of for which we have not yet had any term in our railway the wheels of the engine or carriage from the rails; and the verb to derail or to be derailed may be used in a corresponding sense."

Possibly there may be an earlier instance of its
use.
EVERARD HOME COLEMAN.

71, Brecknock Road.

Congreve's only tragedy, 1697.

SOURCE OF QUOTATION WANTED (8th S. vi. Through the kindness of Dr. W. Sykes, of Gos-128).-These lines are from the Mourning Bride,' port, whose labours have contributed so much to the historical treatment of scientific and technical words in the 'New English Dictionary,' my inquiry as to the use of derail, derailment, by Dr. Lardner has been fully answered, and two other correspondents, Messrs. E. H. Coleman and L. Kropf, have called my attention to the same passage, which occurs in Lardner's 'Museum of Science and Art,' published in London, 1854. In the article "Railway Accidents,” p. 176, he writes :—

"Although in most cases of derailment it is the engine which escapes from the rails, yet it occasionally happens that while the engine maintains its position, one or more of the carriages forming the train are derailed." In a foot-note he says:—

"We have adopted this word from the French: it expresses an effect which is often necessary to mention,

and in conversation, extolled above any other in "The noble passage which Johnson, both in writing the English drama, has suffered greatly in the public he contented himself with saying that it was finer estimation from the extravagance of his praise. Had than anything in the tragedies of Dryden, Otway, Lee, Rowe, Southern, Hughes, and Addison-than anything, in short, that had been written for the stage since the days of Charles I.-he would not have been in the wrong." -Lord Macaulay, Comic Dramatists of the RestoraJ. H. W.

tion.'

[ocr errors]

The lines beginning

How reverend is the face of this tall pile, whose origin has excited the curiosity of your correspondents N. M. & A., occur in Act II. sc. iii. of Congreve's Mourning Bride.' They are cited

« AnteriorContinuar »