« ZurückWeiter »
merely add, with reference to MR. TItu's remark his friend Dr. Webster with it, and after the doctor's death that no Roman inscription in that part of France it passed to some heedless individual, and remained in ob
| scurity from that time to the present. It is mentioned (Cannes) was “more touching" than that to
further, that the painting is at Mr. Rodd's (a dealer in Venusia Anthimilla, that he will find in the Sepul
old paintings, &c. in London) until it is sold." cralia of any good collection of Latin inscriptions
Who is in possession of this painting now? many similar examples of tender affection simply
“ satirical insignia” or coat of arms is, in the first expressed.
quarter of the shield a block, in the second quarter Toronto.
two axes crossed, in the third quarter a triangu
lar-headed gallows with a rope dependent, in the IIOGARTH.
fourth quarter [? a serpent] twisted in a ring-shape, (4th S. i. 245.)
apparently spitting venom,—the whole inclosed in
an old-fashioned shield with some attempts of foIn answer to your correspondent's query, “whe- | liage in flowers dependent. I must mention that ther Hogarth ever executed replicas of any of his the first painting of Lord Lovat mentioned in this works," I should say he certainly did. Of the account was in the possession, about 1826, of the painting of the famous Lord Lovat which is en Rev. Mr. Birket, of Ovingham, in the neighbourgraved in Hogarth's works, your correspondent hood of Newcastle-upon-Tyne. It was in an oldhas seen a small cabinet full-length represented fashioned frame of the period when it was painted. in the usual attitude of counting the clans. In this Old Mr. Birket was said to have had one of the portrait he is wearing red—I should suppose silk psalms at his church at Ovingham sung to a stockings. In Hone's Table-Book, p. 119, men- Jacobite tune.
W. H. C. tion is made of the original picture of Lord Lovat by Hogarth, lately discovered, from which the
A LACEMAKER'S SONG. etching was taken :“To the present time none of Hogarth's biographers
(4th S. ii. 8.) appear to have been aware of the local habitation of the This is a shortened and modernised version of original painting from which the artist published his the ballad of St. Hugh of Lincoln. This beautiful etching, the popularity of which, at the period to which it alludes, was so great that a printseller offered for it its
old legend has been printed in many forms. The weight in gold : that offer the artist rejected, and he is sweetest in our tongue is “The Prioresse's Tale " said to have received from its sale, for many weeks, at | by Chaucer. He probably, however, had never the rate of twelve pounds each day. The impressions | heard of the Lincoln tragedy. If he bad, I could not be taken off so fast as they were wanted, though cannot but think that he would have laid the the rolling-press was at work all night by the week toge
i scene of his tale, not in the far East, but in Engther. Hogarth said himself that Lord Lovat's portrait ! was taken at the White Hart Inn, at St. Alban's, in atti- | land. tude relating on his fingers the numbers of the clans
“There was in Asie, in a greate citie, “Such a general had so many men,' &c.
Amonges cristen folke a certain iewrie," Samuel Ireland, in his graphic IUustrations of Hogarth, does not come home to the hearts of his readers vol. i. p. 146, 'states that Hogarth was invited to St. 80 warmly as if he had said that what he had to Alban's for the express purpose of being introduced to tell had happened in their own land. Lovat, who was then resting at the White Hart Inn on The best version I remember to have seen of his way to London from Scotland, by Dr. Webster, a physician residing at St. Alban's, and well known to
the “ Jew's Daughter” was printed by Mr. W. C. Boswell, Johnson, and other eminent literary characters Atkinson, of Brigg, in Lincolnshire, in The Atheof that period. The short stay of Lovat at St. Alban's næum of January 19, 1867 (p. 96). It may have allowed the artist but scanty opportunity of providing the appeared in this form before, but if so, I have materials for a complete picture; hence some carpenter
never seen it. These old ballads are common was employed on the instant to glue together some deal board, and plane down one side, which is evident from property, and should be known of all people who the back being in the usual rough state in which the speak our language. I therefore make no apology plank leaves the saw-pit. The painting, from the thin- for begging you to print it once more. ness of the priming-ground, bears evident proof of the
“THE JEW'S DAUGHTER. haste with which the portrait was accomplished. It is observable the button-boles of the coat, &c., are reversed
“The bonny boys of merry Lincoln in the artist's etching, and in the upper corner of the pic
Were playing at the ba', ture are satirical heraldic insignia. The 'satirical heraldic
And wi' them stude the sweet Sir Hugh, insignia' mentioned in the above description, and repre
The flower among them a', sented in the present engraving, do not appear in Ho
“ He kepped the ba' there wi' his foot, garth's well-known whole-length etching of Lord Lovat.
And catched it wi' his knee, The picture is a half-length; it was found in the house
Till in at the cruel Jew's window, of a poor person at Verulam, in the neighbourhood of St.
Wi' speed he garred it flee. Alban's, where Hogarth painted it eighty years ago [this ** Cast out the ba' to me, fair maid; was written in 1827), and it is a singular fact, that till its
Cast out the ba' to me.' discovery a few weeks ago, such a picture was not known • Ye ne'er shall hae it, my bonny Sir Hugh, to have been executed. In all probability Hogarth obliged
Till ye cume up to me.
««Cume up, sweet Hugh; cum up, dear Hugh; with that in the Atkinson copy. “Mary Lincoln " Cume up and get the ba''
is the only noticeable variation. This may have "I winna cume up, I winna cume up,
been a penman's or a reciter's error, or it may well Without my playferers a'.'
be the true reading, for Lincoln Cathedral is “ And she has gone to her father's garden,
under the patronage of the Blessed Virgin. The Sae fast as she could rin; And pow'd an apple red and white,
| Acta Sanctorum, 27 Jul. vi. 494, 495, contains an To whyle the young thing in.
account of this boy saint taken from Capgrave's “She wyled him sune through a chamber,
Nova legenda Anglia (Aug. Potthast, Bibliotheca And wyled him sune through twa;
Hist. Medii Ævi, p. 747). There is some doubt And neist they came to her ain chamber,
about the date of his feast day. Alban Butler, The fairest o' them a'.
in his Lives of the Saints, gives August 27; Sir “ She has laid him on a dressing-board,
Harris Nicolas, in his Chronology of History, Whar' she was used to dine!
fixes it on June 29. The murder is believed to And stuck a knife deep in his heart,
have taken place on August 27, 1255. The king's And dressed him like a swine.
writ to the sheriff of Lincolnshire, instructing “ She row'd him in a cake o' lead,
him to impanel a jury of twenty-four knights And bade him lie and sleip; Syne threw him into the Jew's draw-well,
of the county, and a similar number of burFu' fifty fathom deip.
gesses of the city, to certify the king's justices
concerning the death of Hugh, the son of Beatrice, “When bells were rung and mass was sung,
whom the Jews are said to have crucified, is dated And ilka lady gaed hame, Then ilka lady had her young son,
January 7, 40 Hen. III. (1256). Royal and Hist. But Lady Helen bad nane.
Letters, ed. W. W. Shirley, D.D, vol. ii. p. 110. “She row'd her mantel her about,
If the printed list is to be trusted, Roger Beler And sair, sair can she weip;
and Roger his heir filled the post of Sheriff of She ran wi' speed to the Jew's castel,
Lincolnshire that year. Eighteen of the Lincoln Where a' were fast asleip.
Jews were hanged for this crime, and many others “My bonny Sir Hugh, your mither calls;
imprisoned in the Tower of London. Matt. Paris, I pray thee to her speik.'
ed, Wats. 1640, p. 913. "O Lady, rin to the deip draw-well,
There can be no doubt whatever that these Gin ye your son wad seik.'
Jews suffered for St. Hugh's death. I do not “ Lady Helen ran to the deep draw-well, And kneeled upon her knee;
feel, however, by any means satisfied that the “My bonny Sir Hugh, gin ye be here,
story of his murder is true. When we consider I pray ye speik to me!!
how justice was administered in those times, and “ The lead is wonderous heavy, mither;
how fierce were the prejudices of race and reliThe well is wonderous deip;
gion, we may well doubt whether these persons A kene, kene knise stiks in my heart;
did not die innocently. This feeling is strengthA word I dopnar speik.
ened by the well-known fact that legends of a “Gae hame, gae hame, my mither deir ;
similar nature are found to exist about many other Fetch me my winding sheit;
places. It is not reasonable to suppose tbat such For again in merry Lincoln toun We twa sall nevir meit."
a crime would be frequently repeated.
I shall be much obliged to any of your readers, Bishop Percy printed a version, very similar to English or foreign, who will refer me to stories of the above, “from a MS. copy sent from Scotland" | Jews crucifying Christian children. Tbere are, I (Reliques, ed. iv. 1794, vol. i. p. 38-41.) It is, believe, a host of them in middle-age literature. however, decidedly inferior to the one bere given,
EDWARD PEACOCK. which I will call the Atkinson copy. The Percy Bottesford Manor, Brigg. copy does not profess to have any connection with Lincoln. The first verse lays the scene in some now unknown place :
QUEEN BLEAREYE'S TOMB: PAISLEY ABBEY. “ The rain rins doun through Mirry-land toun,
(4th S. i. 309, 486, 584.)
Our thanks are due to ANGLO-Scorus for the
| valuable assistance afforded with the view of Bishop Percy guessed that Mirry-land Toun fixing the date of erection of this long-considered was Milan, and Pa the River Po. Such a fancy is interesting tomb, and the person (if there was not worth any serious answer.
not a plurality) intended to be commemorated It is stated in Wilde's Lincoln Cathedral, 1819, | by it. p. 27, that a manuscript copy of this ballad was With reference to the centre sbield of the three once in the Minster library there. Only the first upon the stone at the head of the tomb, it is verse is given. It corresponds almost literally suggested that the figure apparently behind the device of the keys, placed in saltire adossé, may 1704 and 1720, to a corner of the abbey garden, be a sword, palewise, with its pommel in base. where it was re-erected in its original form. Here This view is probably correct: the only circum it remained, as the Doctor adds, till a successor, stance militating against it seemingly is, that if a Thomas Earl of Dundonald, being about to feu sword, the point would appear to reach above the out the garden, had it taken to pieces, when the shield considerably, leading to an opinion that it several stones of wbich it was compo-ed were may be rather a crosier or staff upon which the thrown aside and neglected: and so unknown and shield is suspended, provided what is above and | uncared for was this monument, that Dr. Boog behind the shield, and only visible in as far as it was fourteen years the incumbent of the Abbey overtops it, is not a separate device from that on church before he was aware of the existence of the front of the shield, behind the keys. The see of such a structure. This can only, however, have Exeter carried for arms, as Nisbet says (i. 419), a reference to part of the monument as it appears sword in pale, hilted and pommelled, and sur- | now - the altar tomb: for he states that the mounted of two keys in saltire adossé; wbile that female statue was sunk in the pavement of the of Winchester bore a sword in bend sinister, the floor of St. Mirin's aisle; and there it could be seen hilt downward, interposed between two keys in any day, and would necessarily be very often by dorsed, in bend dexter. The former is just the coat the minister of the church. The place in this aislo sculptured on this shield, except that it is wanting where the statue was sunk was probably that in the side device of the “crosiers en pale," as Dr. wbere “the relics” of the Princess Marjory Boog calls them; the lower points of which seem Bruce were deposited by the Eurl of Abercorn, to rest upon the handles of the keys, in base, and when removed from some other part of the abbey the tops of which do not rise quite so far as to buildings to his own burial-place; and “covered," touch the wards of the keys. On the other hand, as Semple states, “ with the foresaid monument" there are examples of shields which 'bear eccle- ! (the female statue, not also the altar tomb), about siastical coats, being figured as suspended from a / ten or twelve years before he wrote, wbich was in crosier; and as one, reference may be made to the 1782. (Semple's Renf., p. 292.) This removal of seal of arms of the prioress of Elcho, mentioned the relics, depositation, and corering of them by by Laing in his supplementary volume of Scottish the monument, would take place then about 1770 Seals, No. 1149, and of which a woodcut is there or 1772; and had they been accompanied in their given.
first resting-place with this altar tomb as well as Again, as to the so-called “crosiers en pale," the statue, no reason whatever can be discovered for it is said by ANGLO-Scotus that they seem rather Lord Abercorn not placing over them, when trans"part of the link of a chain"; but a personal in- | ferred to St. Mirin's aisle, the altar tomb also. spection of the tomb has the effect, we think, of This was not done, however; because, in 1774, dispelling such a view. The device is, if not short when Dr. Boog became minister of the abbey, its crosiers, more like a common walking staff; hav- l existence was not known to him, nor for fourteen ing a round knob, or open bend, at the head, of use years afterwards. In 1788 the Doctor had the for the hand to rest upon and grasp. The heraldic stones of the tomb searched for, disinterred from bourdon, or pilgrim's staff, is similar (see Bou- the superincumbent rubbish, and “loosely but tell). But if this device is neither a bourdon nor carefully put together" in the cloister area, which crosier, may it not be a passion nail, seeing it forms is on the south side of the nave. And here pospart of the armorial coat of some ecclesiastic ? sibly they remained till about 1817 or 1820, when
It is true that the monument does not exist the missing stones were supplied conjecturally, now as it originally did. Parts of it have been and the monument was set up where it now lost or destroyed, the result probably of the Re- stands; and when there was added to it the statue formation fervour. Its position, too, bas been and canopy--the former having been raised from shifted more than once; and that which it occu- the pavement of the aisle. At this time the pied originally, before the Reformation era, is monument, as Mr. Billings says, would be in “a certainly not known, although Dr. Boog presumes fragmentary state"; and when reconstructed to say that it stood “originally in a small chapel within the aisle it was covered over, unnecessarily of the abbey church, formed by cutting off the and with little taste or sense, with a coat of stonesouth end of the transept,"-not a very correct coloured paint, so thick that the supplied parts explanation, as no south transept is known to have candot now certainly be recognised. Crawfurd, existed. What his evidence of this fact was, he in his History of Renfrewshire (Rob. edit p. 18), does not say; and he probably only referred to who wrote a little before 1710, having published its position subsequent to the Reformation-a in that year, speaks of a monument as having period more than two hundred years before his | been erected to the Princess Marjory at the abbey; time. He says the monument retained its original but at what part specially, he does not mention. position up to the time when John, Earl of Dun- 1 says this, however, and the statement is imdonald (the third earl) had it removed, between ortant, that the monument was “cut in the form
of a woman, raised about two feet above the sur- stated. It is impossible, therefore, to contend in face of the ground”; which accords strictly with sincerity and certainly, that the original stones, as a separate statement made more than half a cen- | now placed, occupy the very same positions as tury before (about 1654) by Principal Dunlop of they did at first. The stone, for example, now at Glasgow, in a short description of Renfrewshire the head of the tomb, on wbich the three shields to this effect:
of arms are sculptured, may, for aught that can be “ This abbey was honoured by being the burial-place
discovered to the contrary, have been that of the of King Robert II., and of his mother Marjorie Bruce, foot, which now is a supplied stone. whose gravestone is to be seen cut out in the shape of a ANGLO-Scotus assumes that St. Mirin's aisle woman.”— Appendix to Hamilton's History of Renfrew was not erected till the end of the fifteenth censhire, p. 148.
tury. That is a belief entertained by others as Can these descriptions, then, of the monument well; but, as a fact, it is not well ascertained. refer to the altar tomb? We should answer in James Crawfurd of Kylwinnet, and his wife, of the negative. It is more imposing, and quite as the name of Galbraith, no doubt about that time curious as the statue and canopy; and had it (July 15, 1499, is the date of the charter) estaformed then a part, the monument could not blished an altar within it, wbich was dedicated to hare been characterised simply as a “gravestone." | Saints Mirin and Columba; and froin having done Besides, we can see no reason why, if forming a this, they probably received the credit of rearing part, it was left entirely unnoticed. The height d the whole fabric. Semple says, that “in this of this altar tomb, too, is not two feet (the height chapel was interred Elisabeth Muir and Euof Crawfurd), but three feet eight inches. Semple, phemia Ross, both consorts to King Robert besides stating what we have above noticed, says 111." Both of these high personages died, as is that the Princess lies buried at Paisley (p. 292), l well ascertained, during the fourteenth century, where a monument is erected to her memory, and more than one hundred years before the "now (i. e. in 1782) on the north side, and near to founding of the altar by Crawfurd. And the the west end of this burial-place, or Sounding Isle.” | curious sculpturinr, often noticed by our antiThis monument, mentioned by Semple, therefore, quaries, to which Semple refers as within this evidently has no reference to the altar tomb, but chapel, and extending across the whole of the east to the statue alone, sunk into the pavement of the end wall, except for a space in the centre where aisle as referred to by Dr. Boog. In 1788, or 1789, an altar stood, as supposed, and which he homely or about that time, be it observed, the tomb had and ungracefully enough calls a “ range of popish by the Doctor only been "put together" outside in images," would lead to a belief in a much greater the open air, in the cloister area. This was five antiquity for this place (Semple's Renfrewshire, or six years subsequent to the publication of p. 293). It has been conjectured, on the other Semple's work; and Dr. Boog's statement is most hand, that this aisle was the private chapel of the distinct that throughout the interval from 1774 | Paisley monks. The piscina and pix recess are to to 1788 the tomb was not known. If it had be seen in the south side wall; and the abbey stood openly in the aisle by the north wall in church, as known, was used parochially from a 1782 (as Semple says), it behoved to have been very early period. This view regarding the aisle, known to him. Accordingly, it would seem cer- therefore, is not without foundation; and it seems tain that neither Dunlop, Crawsurd, nor Semple to have been recognised as entitled to considerrefer to the altar tomb at all as the monument of ation by the able writers of the New Stut. Account the Princess Marjory, or even part of it; and (voce “ Paisley," p. 217), the Rev. Drs. M'Nair and from all that can be discovered now, it and the Burns. statue, with its accompanying canopy, were only ANGLO-Scotus supposes that the centre shield set up together, for the first time probably, under symbolises an ecclesiastic; and as in his view it Dr. Boog's superintendence between 1783 and holds the post of honour, may not an inference be 1820.
drawn that this altar tomb (exclusive of the What parts of this tomb were awanting in statue and canopy, of course) was meant to com1788 is made plain by Dr. Boog's statement to | memorate some high dignitary of the Paisley the Scotch antiquaries. Exclusive of the female house, as Abbot John Lytchgow, whose name statue and canopy, it seems to bave consisted of twice appears sculptured on it? This abbot chose eleven or twelve different stones, there being for the place of his interment, in 143:3, a site three on each side, one at each end, and three or within what is now the north porch, or entrance four forining the platform on which the recum | to the nare of the church, which is near its west bent female statue now rests. The stones not end, as an inscribed slab on the east wall of that discovered were one of the side stones, that of porch still in situ testifies. (New Stat. Account, the east end, or foot of the tomb, and two or three * Paisley," p. 211; and Hamilton of Wishaw'a of those forming the platform. Whether the stones History of Renfrewshire, Plate of Antiquities.) were all found huddled up in one place, is not | And may not, consequently, a fair inserence be formed that this porch originally was a side An essay on woman, translated from the Spanish chapel in which this altar tomb stood ? This is of El Theatro Critico, p. 37, states:a query we put for ANGLO-Scorus's consideration, “Besides the good qualities before expressed, must be and any of his brother antiquaries to whom the added to the fair sex's account modesty, the most beautisubject may be interesting. Dr. Boog said, in his
ful and most excellent of all; and so congenial to woman, account of the tomb furnished to the S. Antiq.
as not to leave them, even in death, if Pliny is to be cre
dited; who tells us, that the bodies of drowned men float Society (vol. ii.):
with their face upward, and those of drowned women " It is singular that, as the tomb of a queen, all the downwards; ' veluti pudori defunctarum parcente natura,' ornamental figures should be those of ecclesiastic, and
lib. vi. cap. 18: Nature, as it were, sparing the modesty the principal place assigned to a spiritual coat of arms."
of women dying in this manner." May we not, therefore, reasonably conclude that
I am told that Cornelius Agrippa, in his “Essay the statue and canopy, irrespective of, and sepa- | on the Superiority of the Female Sex,” quotes the rate from, this altar tomb, was part of a monu- same fact.
R. J. F. ment reared in memory of some distinguished lady, as the Princess Marjory, or Robert II.'s! I have never observed the corpse of a man queen; and, as the former was at her death the floating on its face, as stated in the note from only child of The great Brus, as well as the wife Curzon's Armenia, quoted by CPL., and I have of Walter, the sixth High Stewart of Scotland, had ample opportunity of noticing this peculiarity, whose ancestor was founder of the Paisley house, if it existed, during three months' residence on may we not further conclude that she would be the Hooghly above Calcutta. I have counted as interred somewhere in the choir in some pro- many as seven bodies of the infatuated victims of minent post of honour, not far distant from the sacred Ganges " and Hindoo superstition--men, high altar? This choir now is a total ruin, and women, and children, floating by at one time, and it is understood to have been destroyed by the invariably on their backs. This I noted from the falling of the great central tower, not long before fact that the birds of prey, their loathsome atthe Reformation (Stat. Account, suprà p. 216); or, tendants, always attacked the eyes first. as some think, rather by the hands of the excited
W. J. C. Reformers at desire of the Protestant Church, and by the aid of the Privy Council. ESPEDARE.
THE DOUGLAS RINGS: THE DOUGLAS HEART.
(4th S. ii. 17.) FLOATING CORPSES.
While I should be sorry to cause "pain or re(4th S. ii. 9.)
gret” to any unoffending person, I have yet to CPL. will find this question treated at length
| learn that a little harmless raillery in analysing in Sir Thomas Browne's Enquiries inio 1 ulyar
error is forbidden in these pages. MR. IRVING
| does not seem to be aware that in charging me and Common Errors, book iy. ch. vi., wherein he
with a “ tone of comment” which does not meet says :
with his approval, he by implication accuses our “ That women drowned swim prone, but men supine
mutual fri’nd the Editor, and makes that gentleor upon their backs, are popular affirmations whereto we cannot assent. .... The reason yet current was first man particeps.criminis in dumating no onemus
man particeps criminis in admitting the offending assigned by Pliny, Veluti pudori 'defunctarum parcente | article into print. naturâ..... this indeed '(as Scaliger termeth it) is My remarks were dictated by no feeling of disratio civilis non philosophica, &c. &c.
courtesy to MR. CUMING-We being perfect stran
G. W. TOMLINSON. gers—but simply to correct a rather elaborate Huddersfield.
paper founded on error. When in a similar pre
dicament, Mr. IRVING, or any one else, is most Most people who have lived at the ports or welcome to note, like Captain Grose, the “hole in travelled on the rivers of China, during the past my coat,” with any facetious comments that fifteen years, will be inclined to support Curzon, occur to him. In such matters, “veniam damus as quoted by CPL., against Pliny.
petimusque." In 1853, after a dreadful massacre by the Tae- 1. MR. IRVING anusingly misquotes what I pings, the harbour of Amoy was full of corpses, and said, and then objectionably argues upon the misI heard this very subject much discussed, but I quotation, winding up with Shakespeare. He says, never heard it doubted that the female corpse I objected “to MR. CUMING calling the nobleman floated face upwards or supine, and the male face who fell at Dumfries his great ancestor.” Whereas downwards or prone.
| my inquiry was, " How the " Red Cumyn“comes In fact it seemed admitted that this was the to be his (MR. CUMING's) ancestor? ” which rule, and a physical reason was assigned, with could not of course be answered without elaborate which I need not take up your space. W. T. M. detail. This shows the propriety in private life Earley.
of refraining from general assertions of descent