« AnteriorContinuar »
ELIUS DONATUS DE GRAMMATICA.
(3rd S. xi. 6.)
THE HISTORY OF PRINTING.⚫
(1 S. i. 277, 340, 402; viii. 62; 2nd S. v. 439; Dibdin's edition of Ames & Herbert, ii. 306-8.
xi. 23; xii. 124, 171.)
"It seems unpardonable," says Beloe, in his Anecdotes of Literature, iv. 365, "to undertake the giving an account of the writers on the subject of Grammar, without saying something of Donatus, whose tract on the eight parts of speech has afforded so fertile a source of discussion to bibliographers. Popular as this tract was, and useful as it probably was found, it seems a reasonable conjecture that in the infancy of typography this might exercise the first labours of the earlier printers. We know that this was the case with regard to Sweynheim and Pannartz, whose first production it was at their press established at the Subiaco monastery" [in the Campagna di Roma]. "They commenced their splendid typographical career by working off three hundred copies of a small book which they named Donatus pro puerulis, of which it is supposed not a single fragment has survived to our days."-Cotton's Typographical Gazetteer, p. 273. Cf. Quirinus de Scriptor. Optim. Editionibus, edit. a Schelhornio, p. 233. "Those who are fond of bibliographical researches respecting the early editions of the grammar of Elius Donatus may in addition to what is said of them in Warton's interesting note [Price's edit. ii. 117] consult the facsimile plates of the ancient editions printed abroad in Meerman's Orig. Typog. vol. ii., and the clear and erudite manner in which Daunon discourses
respecting the early editions by Sweynheim and Pannartz and others." [The labours of Sweynheim and Pannartz extended from 1467 to 1475.]
"Analyse des Opinions diverses sur l'Origine de l'Imprimerie, p. 15 et seq. The following from Mr. George Chalmers is well worth subjoining. The Donat which is mentioned in this record was a grammar; from Donatus, a celebrated grammarian, who was the preceptor of St. Jerome, and lived at Rome in the year of the Christian era 354. (By an easy transition the Donat came to signify the Elements of any art.") Ames and Herbert's Typ. Antiq. ed. by Dibdin, vol. ii. 306. "Donatus non Authoris sed libri cujusdam titulus, estque Institutio Grammatices, Harlemi ligno foliatim incisa, ibidemque circa annum Christi 1440 edita, et sic conglutinata, teste P. Scriverio in Tract. de Arte Typographica. Vulgo artis Typographicæ primum specimen habetur.-Beughem, Incunabula Typographia, s. v. Donatus; cf. Meerman, i. p. 127. "Meerman's book is written with the view of demonstrating that Koster was the inventor of the art of printing; and that Harlem, not Mentz, may claim the honour of priority. . . . Fanciful as his hypothesis relating to Harlem and Koster may appear, his book contains a great deal of curious and important matter, in the greatest degree illustrative of the early history of typography. On the subject of the Donatus assigned by Meerman to Koster [antè an. 1441] see his Orig. Typ. c. v. 16;" Beloe's Anecdotes of Literature, iv. pp. 368, 395. cf. Chevillier, p. 283; Oudin's Dissert. de primis artis typographicæ inventoribus, vol. iii. 2743, and Ottley's Inquiry concerning the Invention of Printing, p. 166, who gives extracts from another work written to support the claims of Haerlem, Dissertation sur l'origine de l'invention et le perfectionnement de l'Imprimerie, par Jacques Koning, Amsterdam, 1819, 8vo.
Meerman describes thirteen early printed editions of Donatus, inter alia: Donatus Minor. pag. 1, Icon Docentis.
pag. 2; Icon S. Hieronymi, Char. Goth. Donatus ethimologisatus; Char. Goth. Cf. Santander, ii. 380; Brunet, and Panzer. One edition under this title was printed at Spire, a. 1471. (In the Royal Library, Brit. Mus.) Another at Memmingen. Donatus Minor cum Remigio ad vsum Scholarü anglicanarū pusilloru in domo Caxton westmonasterio [Wynkyn de Worde], quarto. See In the Pepysian collection, Cambridge, supposed to be unique." Hartshorne. Is it not the same edition as that mentioned in the Bodleian Catalogue, 4to, Lond. per Wynandum de Worde, s. a.? Wynkyn de Worde, Caxton's journeyman, continued printing from 1495 to 1536. Editio altera, Donatus pro pueris. Ad calcem, Printed at Westmynstre in Caxton's house, by Wynkyn de Worde, Char. Goth.
"It is well known to the learned," says Cotton," that Strasburg (Argentina) is one of those towns which put in a claim to the honour of giving birth to the typographic art; and it has been contended by Schoepflin and others that John Gutenberg printed here between the years 1440 and 1450." See Santander, vol. i. 81, sq.)
Donatus is supposed to have been the first production of the Gutenberg press at Strasbourg between the years 1436 and 1440. See Fischer's Typographischen Seltenheiter, pt. 1, p. 86 (referred to in the Bibliotheca Spenceriana, iii. 63.) There can be no doubt but that Donatus was also printed at Mentz, and perhaps by more than one of the first printers at that place, Gutenberg, Fust, and Schoiffer. See Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana ab Angelo Roccha, p. 411, and Santander, ii. 179.
"Whoever is desirous of having a fair idea of what may properly be called the evidence which we possess respecting the invention of typography must not too implicitly trust Santander; as, to serve the present turn, and bolster up his particular opinions, he seldom scruples to omit whatever would make against his system, or to exaggerate and give a forced interpretation to what he thinks in its favour. Thus in quoting the testimony of Ulric Zell, in the Cologne Chronicle, he is quite silent upon what is said in it of the Donatuses of Holland; and in like manner, when in the few remaining pages of his dissertation he has occasion to cite the very interesting account of the invention and establishment of printing at Mentz, inserted in the Annales Hirsaugienses (see chap. iv.), and which was written by the respectable Trithemius upon the authority of Schaeffer himself, he studiously leaves out the beginning of the narrative [ad annum 1450] evidently because it states that the first book printed by Gutenberg and Fust was printed from engraved wooden blocks, and that the idea of separate characters did not occur to them till afterwards; and he thought the circumstance likely to throw discredit upon the depositions of the Strasburg process; which he had before introduced, in proof that Gutenberg had attempted to print with moveable characters, at Strasburg, as early as 1436 or 1438." Ottley, p. 150.
"The earlier productions of the presses of the illustrious firm of printers, Guttemberg, Fust, and Schoeffer, supposed to have been executed between the years 1450 and 1455, are The Mazarine Latin Bible in two large and magnificent volumes, of which seven copies are known: a Donatus (for which consult the catalogue of the Duke de la Vallière, tom. ii. p. 8, and Denis' Supplement to the Annales Typographici of Maittaire, p. 555), and a Confessio generalis, or Modus Confitendi, a small rudely-executed tract consisting of eight leaves in quarto." Cotton, s. v. Moguntina. There is a specimen of this portion of Dona
tus in the Vallière Catalogue, and in Heincken's Idée Générale d'une collection complète d'Estampes, p. 257, &c. "More ample information and discussion on the invention of this noble art, and the claims of Guttenberg, may be found in Obeiline's Essai sur les annales de la vie de Jean Gutenberg, 1801; Fischer's Essai sur les monumens Typographiques de Gutenberg, 1802, 4to: Danon's Analyse, ut suprà, 1803, 8vo; and the better known works of Schoepflin, Meerman, Fournier, Heinecken, and Lambinet." Chalmers' Biographical Dictionary, Dibdin's Typographical Antiquities. A large number of testimonies in favour of Mentz is given in Oudin's Dissert. ut suprà, capp. ii. iii., and Palmer's General History of Printing, b. 1. chap. iii. pp. 9, 12. "The original instrument, which is dated Nov. 6th, 1455, is decisive in favour of Guttemberg; but the honour of single types, made of metal, is ascribed to Faust, wherein he received great assistance from his servant and son-in-law, Peter Schoeffer," &c.-Luckombe's History and Art of Printing. "The general opinion of late writers is that the art was first perfected at Mentz by the famous trio, Fust, Gutenberg, and Schoeffer; but that nevertheless the earliest use of moveable types must be recognised in the rude specimens attributed to Laurence Coster of Haarlem."-Blades's Life and Typography of William Carton, i. p. 38. Dibdin, ut suprà, describes a Donatus without name of printer, place, or date, folio. "Whether Pfister [who had a press at Bamberg from 1461 to 1481, see Bibl. Spencer. i, 94] or Gutenberg be the printer of it, it is impossible to speak with decision, but every page of the impression wears so rude an aspect that I know of few books which carry a stronger appearance of having been executed by means of wooden blocks than the one under description. It has neither signatures, numerals, nor catchwords, and every page except the last contains 25 lines."
Nuremberg was amongst the first places to admit the newly-discovered art of printing. Creusner printed there from 1473 to 1497. Brunet mentions an edition, "Impressum p. Fridericum Kreusner" (a Nuremberg, vers. 1472,) which is deposited in the public library, as we are told by Santander, vol. ii. pp. 380-1. See also Beloe, p. 368.
Augsburgh, Augusta Vindelicorum, was furnished with the art of printing at a very early period. Denis describes a Donatus, Augustæ Vindelicorum, per Herman Kaestlin, 1481. In the Bodleian.
In the same year it was printed Venetiis per Erhardum Ratdolt. Joannes de Spira established his press at Venice in 1469.
Cologne, Colonia Agrippina, an imperial city of Germany, was one of the first towns to receive and adopt the art of printing after it had been promulgated from Mayence. Donatus was there printed in 1499 and 1500. Panzer describes no less than forty-two editions of grammatical tracts by this author, or commentaries on them, after this date.
"The popularity of the Ars Grammatica, especially of the second part, De octo partibus Orationis, is sufficiently evinced by the prodigious number of editions which appeared during the infancy of printing, most of them in Gothic characters, without date or name of place or of printer, and the typographical history of no work, with the exception of the Scriptures, has excited more interest
among bibliographers, or given them more trouble."Dr. Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography. Santander (vol. ii. 380) describes various fragments of the "Donatus," which have at different times been discovered. See also Sotheby's Principia Typog., p. 129, sq.
In reference to the beautiful and interesting volume entitled Diomedes, Radcliffe (Bibliotheca Chetham., vol. ii. No. 5564), remarks:—
"Editio Princeps et Perantiqua; cum illuminationibus. Per Nicolaum Jenson Gallicum. Sine anni et loci indicio. (Jenson Venetiis. Artem typographicam exercuisse ab anno 1461 ad 1481 memoravit Maittaire ap. Annal. Typog. vol. i. p. 37, sqq.)" The contents, which may be gathered from the first leaf (the authors in this collection de re grammatica, are Diomedes, Phocas, Caper, Agrætius, Donatus, Servius, and Sergius), are given by Beloe, iv. 375, and Dibdin's Bibliotheca Spenceriana, iii. 62. The former observes, 'This book is by no means of common occurrence.' I only know of one, which is in the collection of Lord Spencer." "This impression is described with sufficient minuteness by Fossi in the Bibl. Bure, Belles Lettres, i. 2259; and Brunet, who remarks Magliabech. vol. i. col 615-16." Dibdin. See also De that it was intended as a sequel to Nonnius Marcellus printed by Jenson in 1476.
"I gladly avail myself," says Beloe, "of this opportu-
the year 1481, as after that period no book appeared with
"A reimpression of this collection appeared in 1486, 4to, Vicent. per Henr. de sancto Urso.-Ed. alt. fol. Ven. 1495.-Ed. alt. Jo. Riuius recensuit, fol. Ven. per Jo. Rubeum et Bernardinum fratres Vercellenses, 1511.Grammatici varii, sc. Probus; Max Victorinus; Donatus;
Seruius; Sergius; Attilius Fortunatianus; Donatianus
Caesius Bassus; Terentianus Maurus, et Beda; ed. H. 1504.-Grammatici illustres 12, fol. in ædibus Ascens. Joh. Parrhasio, fol. Mediolani, Joh. Ang. Seinzenzeler, 1516.-Diomedes grammaticus aliique decem et novem authores, &c. fol. Venet. 1522.-Diomedis grammatici opus ab Joh. Cæsario emendatum; item Donati de orationis partibus et barbarismo libellus ab eodem recognitus, 8vo. Haganoæ, per Joh. Secerium, 1526.-Rei grammatica [Scriptores], scil. Palamon, Scaurus, Donatus, &c. 8vo. Basil. per Adamum Petrum, 1527.-Grammatica Latinæ auctores Latini per Heliam Putschium editi. 4to. Hanov. 1605. Donatus is one of the thirty grammarians in this collection. See De Bure, 2250; Fabricii Bibl. Latina, pp. 256-64; ejusdem Suppl. 781-97; Bibl. Regiæ Catalogus in Brit. Museo.-Corpus Grammaticorum Latinorum veterum collegit, auxit, recensuit, ac potiorem
The work of Donatus has usually been published in the form of two or more distinct and separate tracts-1. "Ars sive Editio prima, de literis, syllabis, pedibus et tonis." This tract was printed in Bedæ Opp. vol. i. as well as in the collections of Putschius and Lindemannus. "Editio Secunda, de octo partibus Orationis," as above, also in Bede's Opp.; but Dr. Giles, in his new edition, rejects these, as they can no longer be retained among Bede's works. To these are commonly annexed, "De barbarismo," "De solocismo," "De ceteris vitiis," "De metaplasmo," "De schematibus," "De tropis."
CORNISH NAME OF ST. MICHAEL'S MOUNT.
(3rd S. xi. 357, 522.)
I by no means stated in my communication (3rd S. xi. 357) that St. Michael's Mount could not have had two designations. I know well, from long study of Cornish names, that most of these are significant appellatives, and that these appellations are taken from some one of many noticeable features, and that as different persons would choose different characteristics to distinguish the same place or object by, it would have several names, until one, by common usage and consent, came to be considered as a, in fact, the proper
Nor did I deny that coz, "old," was Cornish. It is given as such by Borlase, but I am inclined to think he borrowed it from the Armoric. It is not found in Williams's invaluable Lexicon Cornu Britannicum, but is given in Le Gonidec's Dictionnaire Breton-Française. As an Armoric word, however, as Le Gonidec says, "dans la bouche de plusieurs Bretons," z would be sounded th, which would make it the same as the Cornish coth, "old," of the Lexicon; but further, as t, th; d, dh in old Cornish, became in later times 8, 2, Camden's Careg Cowse might be old rock. But this is not the term used by either of Camden's translators. Gough has Grey; Bishop Gibson, Hoary rock. Of course, what is old may be grey or hoary.
Now, though in this remote corner of England I cannot have access to Camden's original Latin text, yet I am pretty sure he did not intend, whatever word he uses, to mean simply old. William of Worcester gives us "le Hore rok in the Wodd;" Carew gives as the Cornish of this in one place (fol. 3) Čara Clowse in Cowse; and
* I overlooked this in my former communication. This reading fully confirms the conjecture I threw out as to
in another (fol. 154), by mistake, Cara Cowz in Clowze, rendering both the hoare rock in the wood; and as we know that Camden saw Carew's MS., what can be plainer than that he took the name and its rendering from him, the latter part of both being somehow or other omitted?
That the place had the name of St. Michael's Mount before its connection with Mont Sant Michel (Normandy) is plain from the way it is named in Domesday, and in the Charter of Edward the Confessor given in Oliver's Monasticon,__Davies Gilbert, &c. By the bye, the Rev. Rice Rees, in his Essay on Welsh Saints, published 1836, saye that the old story of St. Keyna meeting her nephew, St. Cadoc, at Mount St. Michael, has nothing to do with Cornwall, the hill in question being one so called near Abergavenny, which still maintains its sacred character.
If I am wrong in the illustration I used of Penny come quick, I err in good company-Professor Max Müller, in his paper on "The Jews in Cornwall" (Macmillan, April, p. 486), using it in a similar way. It is true an, not y, is the Cornish article. Yis Welsh; but, as the Welsh and Cornish were formerly but one language, y may remain as an article in some old names, and it is recognised as the article by Lhuyd, Borlase, Pryce, &c. JOHN BANNISTER.
Parsonage, St. Day, Cornwall.
Having very recently visited the British Museum library, I am able to state that Carew is not the earliest authority for the old Cornish name of the Mount, for it is mentioned by Camden, though less fully than by Carew, in the four editions of his Britannia (1586, 1587, 1594, and 1600) published before the date of the first edition of the Survey (1602). In each he gives the den, who is said to have made his survey in 1584, name thus: "Careg Cowse, i. e. rupis cana." Norgives the name in the same form.
CARA COWZ IN CLOWZE.-Though somewhat new to this branch of criticism, I may perhaps be able, from my knowledge of the Celtic tongue
the source of the error (fol. 154). Further confirmation is found (fol. 6), where Carew gives Caraclouse as the common name of a peculiar stone, now called Catacleuse or Catacleu.
I should feel obliged to the Editor to give the original Latin of "Careg Cowse, i. e. a hoary rock." This is given by Bishop Gibson as part of the text. So also Philemon Holland, p. 188 (ed. 1610)" Careg Cowse, that is, the hoary crag or rock." The author of the Life of Carew, prefixed to the edition of his works, 1769, says,"Mr. Camden, in the sixth edition of his Britannia, printed in 1607, acknowledges, at the end of his account of Cornwall, that our author had been his chief guide through
in its various dialects, to throw a little light on the British name of St. Michael's Mount, as above quoted. If I am not mistaken it is Carrig glas na cloiché. As the name appears to have been taken down phonetically by Carew, Camden, Gilbert, and the other authorities alluded to in your note, the words given by them correspond pretty closely with the Celtic pronunciation of the name, as I suppose it to be. The meaning of my version, however, is not "the grey rock in the wood," but "the grey rock of the stone," or seat or chair. This derivation includes both "Myghel's Mount and Chaire."
Your readers have all heard of the stone (or coronation chair) of Scone, on which the Scottish kings were crowned; and the term applies equally to the seat on which the great Cornish saint was supposed to be "enthroned." There is no such word as Clowze or Kuz in the Cornish language; nor is there any expression that sounds like either of them which denotes "a wood," so far as I know. The name for it in Gaelic is Coillé; and although I have not a Cornish dictionary beside me, I am inclined to think that the term used there is not very dissimilar in sound or spelling from that which I have given. Whereas cloiche (the genitive of clach, or stone,) comes tolerably near the phonetic Clouze, while it brings out precisely the ancient British name of St. Michael's Mount-Carrig glas na cloiché, or the Grey Rock and Chair. W. M. S.
PARC AUX CERFS.
.(3rd S. xii. 8.)
The Parc aux Cerfs of Louis XV. had a real existence, although it has been the subject of much exaggeration, especially by writers of the revolutionary period. The recent researches of M. le Roi, the conservateur de la Bibliothèque de Versaille, have thrown much light on what has hitherto been an historical mystery. They are to be found in his interesting work entitled Curiosités historiques sur Louis XIII, XIV, et XV, Mesdames de Maintenon, de Pompadour, et Dubarri, a copy of which is in the library of the
The original Parc aux Cerfs was founded by Louis XIII. for the rearing of animals for the chase, and existed until 1694, when Louis XIV. took the land for building. The notorious seraglio of his successor took its name from being situated in a street built on the ground. It consisted of one small house, containing only four rooms and a few closets, and was situated in the present Rue St. Médéric at Versailles. It was established by Madame de Pompadour as a means of retaining her influence over the king, when her own charms had ceased to captivate him. The house was bought for him, as appears by the deed of
sale dated Nov. 25, 1755. It was closed by the last favourite, Madame du Barri, in 1771: her influence over her royal lover having become paramount. It passed into private hands, and still exists as a private residence. It appears from the memoirs of Madame du Hausset, the waitingwoman of Madame de Pompadour, that there were never more than two women, and very often only one at the same time in the house, which was frequently vacant for several months. Lebel, the king's valet de chambre, was at the head of the small establishment under an assumed name, and the king himself passed as a nobleman of the court. When the favour of the fair prisoner began to wane, she was married in the provinces with a dowry of 100,000 livres. If she became a mother there, she was seldom allowed to retain her child, which received an annuity of 10,000 or 12,000 livres. As years passed on, the recipients of this bounty became numerous, and when any died the others inherited the portion that had thus lapsed. It would be impossible to say what may have been the entire outlay on the Parc aux Cerfs; but the assertion of the historian Lacretelle, who carries the sum up to a hundred millions, is evidently a gross exaggeration as well as that of Soulavie, in the Memoirs of the Duke de Richelieu, who states that Louis XV. had portioned off as many as 1800 damsels, who resided in various elegant little retreats dispersed up and down the Parc. M. le Roi has reduced all these wild reports to the dull level of fact; and if the hoary voluptuary is not exonerated, at all events the measure of his iniquity is much lightened. In connection with this subject, I may be allowed to state that M. le Roi's book contains some very curious particulars concerning the two personages who established and brought to a close an institution of so peculiar a character. The learned librarian has brought to light the contemporaneous manuscript reports of the actual cost to France of the reign of these two sultanas. The sums distributed by Madame de Pompadour, during the nineteen years of her favour, amount to 36,327,268 livres 16 sous and 5 deniers; and those expended by Madame du Barri, from the commencement of her influence in 1769 to the time of her death on the scaffold in 1793, reach the amount of 12,429,559 livres. M. le Roi gives the details of these enormous sums, and very curious they are; but it would lead too far to enter into further particulars, and I can only refer to his interesting volume. J. B. DITCHFIELD.
Of the detestable grossness of Louis XV. there can be no shadow of a doubt. On the authority of Lacretelle, Fantin, and Voltaire, The Penny Cyclopædia says,
"After the death of his mistress, the Marchioness of Pompadour, an ambitious intriguing woman, but who had
still some elevation of mind, he became attached to a more vulgar woman, Du Barry, and at last formed a regular harem after the fashion of the Eastern sultans, but more odious from its contrast with European manners, which was called the Pare aux Cerfs" (xiv. 168). "The court of France, which, from the time of the Merovingian founders of the monarchy, had been, with the exception of a very few reigns, remarkable for its licentiousness, became, during the regency and the subsequent reign of Louis XV., the abode of the most barefaced profligacy. The accounts of those scenes which have been transmitted to us in the memoirs of several of the actors, and women too, seem almost incredible." (Madame Necker, Nouveaux Melange Historiques, ii. 39; Penny Cyc., iii. 511.)*
This is not a particularly pleasant subject to write about; still, as the mission of "N. & Q." is to elicit truth and to clear up doubts, unpleasant subjects must occasionally be introduced into its pages. There can be no doubt that Louis XV., who I suppose was one of the most wicked kings that ever disgraced a throne, maintained this establishment. Sir Archibald Alison (History of Europe, ed. 1853, vol. i. p. 181), quoting Lacretelle as his authority, says,—
"It was no wonder the Parisians were tired of Louis XV. The Parc aux Cerfs alone cost the nation, while it was kept up, no less than 100,000,000 francs, or 4,000,0007. sterling."
Again, at p. 182,—
"What is very remarkable, her [Madame du Barri's] lasting ascendency was founded, in a great degree, on the skill with which she sought out, and the taste with which she arrayed other rivals to herself; and the numerous beauties of the establishment called the Parc aux Cerfs, who were successively led to the royal couch, never diminished her lasting influence."
Carlyle, who is an incontrovertible authority on all matters connected with the Revolution and the times immediately preceding it, alludes to this infamous establishment in his French Revolution, vol. i. p. 14:
"Was he (Louis XV.) not wont to catechise his very girls in the Parc aux Cerfs, and pray with and for them, that they might preserve their-orthodoxy? A strange
Of one of these girls-for I will not call them ladies
Mademoiselle Clairon, it was said:
"Son triumphe le plus certain Est d'avoir en débauche égalé Messaline." Capefigue, xlvii. 384 n.
fact, not an unexampled one; for there is no animal so strange as man."
This was the Devil turning monk with a vengeance! Carlyle quotes as his authorities for this singular fact Dulaure and Besenval. Those who are well read in French memoirs of the eighteenth century will doubtless remember numerous allusions to this royal pigsty. When we read of such practices carried on by a monarch of one of the greatest nations of the earth, how can we avoid a feeling of regret at the failure of the dagger of Damiens? Those good folks who believe in "rosewater surgery," and who are thrilled with horror when they read of the guillotine massacres, should, remember that, bad as the guillotine was, the Pare aux Cerfs and the Lettre de cachet system were infinitely worse. For these and other diseases, le
rasoir national was a severe but an effectual cure. JONATHAN BOUCHIER.
5, Selwood Place, Brompton, S.W.
BATTLE OF BAUGE AND THE CARMICHAELS OF THAT ILK.
(3rd S. xi. 120, 483.)
I should have replied sooner to the remarks of J. R. C. on this subject, but I was in hopes of having a thorough search in the Lee charter chest for any documents bearing on the question; as I find, however, that some time must elapse before this can be carried out, I think it better not to delay any longer.
1. J. R. C. assumes that a William de Carmichael, mentioned in a deed of 1410, is the same person who attests the two documents to which he refers, dated 1423 and 1434 respectively.
This is extremely improbable, looking to the average duration of life at the period, and the fact that the attestor of the later deed is mentioned in 1437, and must have survived that date for a number of years. The explanation is, that they were a grandfather and grandson, and that the father of the other. Sir John of Baugé was the son of the one and
What has misled J. R. C. is supposing that, because the latter is described as William Carmichael of that ilk in 1423, and Dominus ejusdem in 1434, it is impossible that at these dates there could have been a Sir John in existence, and in possession of the family estates. The error arises from inattention to the rules which regulate the tenure and transmission of lands in Scotland, and the principles of the feudal system of holdings.
Through the kindness of my friend Mr. Falconer, of Usk, I have before me the proof sheets of a pamphlet he is about to publish upon the pedigree of the Dalmahoys of that ilk: one entry in which illustrates most forcibly the point in question. It is as follows: