LONDON, SATURDAY, JANUARY 8, 1881.

CONTENTS.— No 54. NOTES:-Bishop Fisher's Sermon on Occasion of the Recan

tation of Robert Barnes: Notes on Bishop Fisher, 21-Brisselcock: Turkey, 22-Dr. Guest on the Origin of London, 23 Stamp on Pamphlets, 1712-Culpable Emendation-Indentures relating to the Shelley Family, 24-Hogarth's Residence in Cirencester-The Ornaments in Use in the Second Year of King Edward VI., 25-"Please to ring the bell ""To the bitter end"-Hats worn at Table-Campbell of Lochaw-Christmas Folk-lore, 26. QUERIES:-The Old Organ at St. Paul's- A Swimming

Machine-"Turnip"-Shaws Castle-Napoleon's Power of Sleeping at Will-The Templars in Lincolnshire-"Constitutiones Anglia," &c.-Great Sankey-Guerard de Nancrede -Rawdon Family, 27-Sir John Hobart-The Arrangement of Book-plates-"Lackey"-Houses in Cromer Street-The House of Keys-"The Murdered Queen "-Mrs. Newby's Novels-"Utensil"-Talland, &c., 28. REPLIES:-The Mystery of Berkeley Square," 29-Hermes, the Egyptian-The Great Stone of Thor, 30-The Removal of Book-plates-Portrait of Sir Thomas Browne-A Key to "Endymion," 31-Mowbray Family-"A gaping," &c., Frog -Heraldic, 32-Colours appropriated to the Saints in Art"Throng "-Passion Play in England -T. T. Stoddart"Boycotting"-Mysterions Lake Sounds, 33-Margaret de Clare-Railway Speed-Lord Wellesley's Latin VersesS.P.Q.R.-Edmund Berry Godfrey-Bicknell-Punsters and Pickpockets-The MS. of Gray's "Elegy "-A. Murphy"Snob"-Flamingo-Sir J. Cherowin, 35-Dr. CheyneSeventeenth Century Altarpieces-American Spelling-The Vision of Constantine, 36-"Parson "-"Quadrupedem constringito"-" Beaumontague". "Qui pro alio," &c.-The "Spectator "-Treatment of Angels by the Old MastersCharles II. and Brambletye House-The Executions of '45, 37-" Bullion's day"-Authors Wanted, 38. NOTES ON BOOKS:-Waddington's "English Sonnets"Wheatley's "Samuel Pepys"-Fochier's "Souvenirs Historiques sur Bourgoin"-Rylands's "Lancashire Inquisitions"-Jevons's "Studies in Deductive Logic."

Notes.

BISHOP FISHER'S SERMON ON OCCASION OF THE RECANTATION OF ROBERT BARNES:

NOTES ON BISHOP FISHER.

To the kindness of Dr. Wood, President of St. John's College, Cambridge, I am indebted for the loan of a work of Bishop Fisher's which has escaped the notice of bibliographers.

John Foxe (The Whole Workes of W. Tyndall, John Frith, and Doct. Barnes, London, Iohn Daye, 1573, fol., sign. *AAa. iij*, extracted from the Acts and Monuments) thus describes the scenes at the abjuration of Dr. Barnes in St. Paul's on Quinquagesima Sunday, Feb. 11, 1526 (cf. Hall's Chron., new ed., p. 708):—

"The Cardinall had a skaffolde made for him in the toppe of the steyers before the Quyer dore, where he himselfe with xxvj. Abbottes, mitred Priors and Bishoppes, and he in his whole Pompe mitred (which Barnes had spoken against) sat there inthronized, his Chapleynes and spirituall Doctours in gownes of Dammaske and Satten, and he himselfe in Purple, euen like a bloudy Antichrist. And on the top of the stayers also, there was erected a new pulpit for the Bishop of Rochester, whose name was fisher, to preach against Luther and Barnes, and great basketes full of Bookes standing before the within the rayles, which after the ende of the Sermon, a great fyer being first made before the Roode of Northen, were commaunded to be there

brent, and the aforesayd heretikes after the sermont> go thrise about the fyer, and to cast in their fagottes.' Compare p. 225.

The sermon is in small 4to. The upper and lower margin of the title have merely ornamental borders. The side margins have significant figures: to the left above, branches with flowers; below, a fowler liming birds on a bush; to the right, snails and birds on a branch laden with mulberries (or some such fruit); one of the birds is prepared to make a mouthful of a snail. Title:A sermon had at Paulis by the comandment of the most reuerend father in god my lorde legate and sayd by John' the bysshop of Rochester/ vpo quiquagesom Sonday concernynge certayne heretickes/ whiche tha were abiured for holdynge the heresies of Martyn Luther that famous hereticke and for

Jesu, who so euer ye be yt shall fortune to rede this My dere brother or syster in our sauiour Christe queare/ our lorde for his great mercy graunt you his grace that the redyng therof some what may proffit your soule.

entet/ in puttyng forthe this queare to be printed/ but Fyrst I shall beseche you nat to misconstrue myn that ye take it to the best. For verily my wyll and mynde is that some frute myght ryse by the same vnto the christe people/ whiche be the spouse of Christe. for my lytell porcion. My duty is to endeuer me after Unto whom (though vnworthy) I am ordeyned a minister my poure power to resist these heretickes the whiche

seasse nat to subuert the churche of Christe. If we

shall syt styll and let them in euery place sowe theyr vngratious heresies and euery where distroye the soules/ whiche were so derely bought with that moste precious blode of our sauiour Christe Jesu/ howe terribly shall he lay this vntyll our charge whan we shalbe called vntill a rekenynge for this matter? It shalbe moche rebukefull and moche worthy punishement/ if we for our party shall nat gyue diligêce for the defence of the true christen people/ fro these heresies/ as these heretickes gyue for the corruption of the same/ specially whan we be certayne/ that our labour shall nat be vnrewarded/ [sign. A. ij. v°]......And assuredly these heresies be lyke the stynkynge weedes/ the whiche I euery erthe sprynge by them selfe: for as these euyll weedes nede no settynge/ no sowynge/ no waterynge/ no wedynge/ nor suche other diligenc[es] as the good herbes require/ but sprynge anone withouten all that busines: and where they haue enteres ones in any grounde/ it is veray harde to delyuer

that grounde from them: euen so it is of these heresies/ they nede no plantynge/ they nede no wateryng/ they nede no lowkyng nor wedyng/ but rankly sprynge by them selfe/ of a full lyght occasion......[A. iij. vo] Nowe therfore whan so litell diligence is done about the ministryng of this true doctryne it is necessary that all tho that haue charge of the flocke of Christe/ endeuour them selfe to gaynestande these pernitious heresies. Wherin doutles the moost Reuerend father in god my lorde legate hath nowe meritoriously traueiled, and so entendeth to perseuer and to continue to the full extirpatio of the same. ......[A. iiij. r°] And therfore some what to resist this wicked sede/ by the mocion of dyuerse persos/ I haue put forth this sermon to be redde/ whiche for ye great noyse of ye people within ye churche of Paules/ whan it was sayde/ myght nat be herde. And if parauëture any disciple of Luthers shall thynke/ that myn argumentes and reasons agaynst his maister be nat sufficient: Fyrste let hym consider/ that I dyd shape them to be spoken vntyll a multytude of people/ whiche were nat brought vp in ye subtyll disputations of the schole. Seconde, if it may lyke the same disciple to come vnto me secretely and breake his mynde at more length/ I bynde me by these presentes/ bothe to kepe his secreasy/ and also to spare a leysoure for hym to here the bottum of his mynde/ and he shal here myne agayne/ if it so please hym: and I trust in our lorde/ that fynally we shall so agre/ that either he shal make me a Luthera orels I shall enduce hym to be a catholyke/ and to folowe the doctryne of Christis churche."

The text, "Respice: fides tua te saluum fecit," Luke xviii. 42, is from the gospel for the day. The preacher considered first the multitude; secondly, the blind man as a type of heretics (1, he was singular by himself; 2, he was blind; 3, he sat out of the right way and walked not; 4, he was divided from the people among whom Christ was); thirdly, the diversity between the Church Catholic and the heretics; fourthly, how the blind man was restored to sight, and how a heretic may be restored to the true faith; fifthly, Luther's opinion of faith.

The theme of these collections is the parable of the sower, and they relate to (1) the sower, (2) the seed, (3) the good earth, (4) the great increase of fruit. The book is imperfect, ending with G. iii, but it seems certain that only one leaf is wanting. Dr. Wood, in a MS. note, makes this clear :Luther printed by Wynkyn de Worde, which occupied "Ames mentions an edition of the sermon against fifty-six pages. If G was the last signature of this sermon it would have just fifty-six pages.

scribes. Is it possible that some copy of this later sermon was mistaken by Ames's informant for a copy of the earlier sermon, and then assumed to have been printed by Wynkyn de Worde, and that this mistake gave rise to the notion that there were two editions by W. de Worde of the earlier sermon (1521)? The edition reprinted by Mayor [for the Early English Text Society] has only forty-four pages. This volume was probably printed by Peter Treveris in or after 1526."

"Ames had not himself seen the edition which he de

It is highly probable that some of our ancient Roman Catholic families possess a complete copy of this sermon, so important for the Church history of Henry's reign. I shall be very grateful to any one who will enable me to procure a transcript of the missing leaf. Possibly other English works of Bishop Fisher, beside his letters, may be extant. It is important that the collection of the Early English Text Society should be complete, and I entreat your readers for help to make it so. It is said that Fisher is to be canonized; if so, it is to be hoped that some one will collect all extant materials for his life. J. E. B. M. Cambridge.

(To be continued.)

BRISSEL-COCK: TURKEY.

as nowe y most reueret father i god my lorde Legate hauyg this most souerayne auctorite/ hath indeuored hymselfe for [B. iiij. v°] these men here present/ & other/ whiche were out of the way to reduce them in to the wayes of the churche. The heretickes contende/ that it shal nat be lefull thus to do: but they wold haue euery mã lefte vnto theyr libertie. But doutles it may nat be 80: For the nature of man is more prone to all noughtynes rather than to any goodnes. And therfore many must be compelled/ accordyng as the gospell sayth in an other place: compellite eos intrare. If euery ma shuld haue libertie to say what he wolde/ we shuld haue a meruelous

worlde. No mã shulde stere any where for heresies."

Towards the middle of the sermon a pause was allowed for prayer (sig. C. iij. ro). Afterwards followed

"iiij. collectiōs: by the whiche to all them that be nat ouer peruersedly drowned in the heresies of Luther/it shall appare (as I verily suppose) that his doctryne is veray pestilent and pernitious."

print (Harvie Brown's The Capercaillie in Scotland, p. 16, note), I tried to account for its derivation in another manner. The characteristic letter from King James VI. of Scotland, recently published in "N. & Q." (6th S. ii. 203), mentioning "Brissell fowlis," has made me look again into the matter, and I am thereby confirmed in the opinion that the generally accepted meaning is wrong. The name seems first to occur in Lindsay of Pitscottie's Chronicles of Scotland (p. 146, fide Jamieson, but in Dalyell's edition, ii. p. 345), where is an account the Earl of Atholl for James V. when that king of the "great and gorgeous provisioun " made by "went to Atholl to the huntis " in 1529, though it must be stated that in Dalyell's opinion "this passage bears strong evidence of interpolation." Now the date of the introduction of the turkey to Europe is still a matter of uncertainty, but I am

not aware that it has ever been assigned to an earlier year than 1524,* and indeed the earliest published description of the bird, which seems to have been first printed in 1525, is that of Oviedo, who says nothing of its having then been brought to the Old World. There is, indeed, the pretty good evidence of Barnaby Googe of its not having been seen in England before 1530. Hence I think we may regard it as almost impossible that the "Brissel cock" provided for the royal table in the forest of Atholl in 1529 could have been a turkey. Again, we know that the turkey was not indigenous to any part of South America; it is, therefore, highly improbable that the name "Brazil cock" should have ever been conferred upon it, and, moreover, evidence is wanting that such a name ever existed. Jamieson's original supposition that "Brissel cock" is a corruption of "bristle cock," in reference to the hairy tuft with which the turkey's breast is adorned, will not, I think, hold, for "bristle" in Scottish takes another form. Accordingly, I venture here to repeat the suggestion I have elsewhere (as above stated) made that "Brissel cock" is simply coq de broussaille, and another instance of a French word adopted into the Scottish language, in support of which I submit that the sixteenth century form of the word, broissaille, according to M. Littré, brings it even nearer to the Scottish, as indeed one would expect.

I may, perhaps, be allowed to add a few remarks on what has long been a puzzle to writers on poultry as well as to naturalists. Many conjectures have been hazarded as to how the very inappropriate name of "turkey" has been applied to a bird which we know was introduced from America. I believe the truth of the matter to be this. Several, if not most, of the medieval zoologists -I may particularly cite Belon and Aldrovandus -hopelessly confounded the turkey and the guineafowl under the name, proper to the latter, of Meleagris. Gesner must, indeed, be excepted, for he clearly saw that the turkey was not the Meleagris, and finding it had been written of as Gallus peregrinus or Pavo Indicus, he accordingly (in 1555) coined for it the names Gallopavus or Pavogallus, which he used almost indiscriminately. But this confusion was not confined to naturalists. We have in Cooper's edition of the Bibliotheca Eliota, published in 1542, "Meleagrides, byrdes which we doo call hennes of Genny, or Turkie hennes," the earliest use of the latter name with which I am acquainted. It is therefore obvious that "Turkey hen was at first synonymous with "Guinea hen." As the birds became commoner

and better known the confusion was, of course, gradually cleared up, and the name " turkey "clove to the bird from the New World; not, I think, without some reason, for by its constantly repeated call-note, which may be syllabled turk, turk, turk, it may be said to have named itself.

The subject of the introduction of the turkey and the guinea-fowl into Europe is, however, full of interest, and I shall be very glad if any correspondent of "N. & Q." can throw more light upon it. I would only warn those who may proffer their aid that what I have above stated shows that it does not follow because one meets with a turkey cock or turkey hen in an old bill of fare that it was the bird we now mean by that name. To this caution I will add another, that they should eschew, or take with all reservation, the statements they will find in Daines Barrington's specious essay (Miscellanies, pp. 127-151), which Pennant, in his excellent account of the bird (Arctic Zoology, ii. pp. 291-300), did his friend the real kindness of passing over in silence. ALFRED NEWTON.

Magdalene College, Cambridge.

DR. GUEST ON THE ORIGIN OF LONDON.In the Athenæum, and a local paper, the Oxford Journal, as well as in "N. & Q.," attention has been drawn to the literary claims attaching to the memory of the late Master of Caius College. May I mention one point which I trust will interest some of the readers of "N. & Q."?

In a lecture on the campaign of Aulus Plautius in Britain in A.D. 43, delivered at the Royal Institution, and reported with revision by Dr. Guest in the Athenæum, there is a statement as to the origin of London.

Aulus Plautius sailed from Boulogne A.D. 43, and his army, consisting of about 50,000 men, landed in three divisions at Hythe, Dover, and Richborough. But little opposition was experienced from the petty chiefs of Kent, the mutiny in Gaul having put them off their guard. A. Plautius seems to have advanced by Silchester and Marlborough to Cirencester, which became a fresh base of operations. He then probably went down the valley of the Thames by the ancient British trackway, the Icknield Way, which led across the Thames at Wallingford. Here a great battle was fought. Vespasian having forced a way across, Caractacus withdrew, and the next day's fight ended in a victory to the Romans. Plautius pursued the Britons along the Icknield Way by Tring, and then by the Watling Street, southward. The Britons crossed the Thames by a ford, and the Romans higher up by a bridge, when they became entangled in the marshes, and retreated to await the arrival of Claudius. Where was it that they secured for themselves a place of

safety? Dr. Guest's answer is contained in the following extract from his lecture :

"When Plautius withdrew his soldiers from the marshes they had vainly attempted to cross, he no doubt encamped them somewhere in the neighbourhood; I believe the place was London. The name of London refers directly to the marshes, though I cannot here enter into a philological argument to prove the fact. At London the Roman general was able both to watch his enemy and to secure the conquests he had made, while his ships could supply him with all the necessaries he required. When, in the autumn of the year 43, he drew the lines of circumvallation round his camp, he founded the present metropolis of Britain. The spot he selected has been -perhaps with one small interval-the habitation of civilized man for 1,833 [cor. 1,823, now 1,837] years. May we not venture to hope that its influence for good has not been altogether unworthy of the position it has occupied among the cities of the world."-Athenæum, Aug. 4, 1866, p. 148. ED. MARSHALL.

Sandford St. Martin Manor.

STAMP ON PAMPHLETS, 1712.-On Jan. 17, 1712, Queen Anne in a message to the House of Commons drew their attention to "the great licence now taken in publishing false and scandalous Libels." The House, on the following day, in their Address to the Queen, in which, repeating the queen's words, they said that the false and scandalous libels "against your Majesty's Government" were a Reproach to the Nation," promised to find a remedy. It was necessary to curb the free use of the press, especially in newspapers, broadsides, and pamphlets; and after much consideration the celebrated Act relating to soap, paper, parchment, and other matters, 10 Anne, cap. 19, was passed, which imposed a stamp of a halfpenny per half-sheet on all newspapers and pamphlets. Whether or not Swift assisted in the passing of this measure is not very evident, for though he refers to it in his Journal, Jan. 31, 1710/11, as a thing he is trying to prevent, yet subsequently, when the Act was passed, he writes, Aug. 5, in evident triumph, that the low party scribblers were practically extinguished. It is well known that the Act failed in the purpose for which it was intended; that in fact it injured the organs of the Government even more than those which wrote against it; and that in a short time the Act fell into abeyance and the duties were not strictly_levied. Grant (Newspaper Press, i. 102) says, "I have not been able to ascertain when or why the duties fell into disuse." The effect of the Act on the weekly and other papers is easily to be traced, but there seems to be very little information as to the stamping of pamphlets. Recently looking over a considerable number of single pamphlets published in 1712-16, I only found the red penny stamp on one, namely, Wesley's very curious poem against Curll, entitled Neck or Nothing, 1716.

As the stamp would be impressed on the corner

of the paper, in many instances it may have been cut away by the binder's plough. I should be glad to know whether many pamphlets were thus stamped, how long the doing so continued, and whether it was superseded by the payment of the three shilling duty. EDWARD SOLLY.

CULPABLE EMENDATIONS.-One of the most grievous things in English literature is that editors and printers are continually altering texts whenever a word occurs that is in the least unusual. It is a little too bad that they should treat readers as children, and always assume that they are at least as stupid as themselves. I have lately noticed three gross instances of this character, and I think some good might be done by noting more specimens of the same sort. My examples are these, all taken from Richardson's Dictionary. In each instance Richardson gives the correct reading:

1. "The postboy's horse right glad to miss
The lumbering of the wheels."

Cowper, John Gilpin, sixth stanza from
end, ed. 1818.

Altered by some blockhead to rumbling. Who was the blockhead?

2. "As gilds the moon the rim pling of the brook." Crabbe, Parish Register, pt. i. Altered by Crabbe's own son to rippling. This is indeed a sad instance.

3.

"And as a goose

In death contracts his talons close,
So did the knight, and with one claw
The tricker of his pistol draw."

Hudibras, pt. i. c. 3. Altered in Bell's edition, with calm effrontery and without any notice given, to trigger. Yet tricker had not long been introduced into the language from the Dutch trekker, and the later form trigger is a mere corruption. The first duty of every editor is to let his text alone, unless there is certainly a corruption in it. Unfortunately editors often measure their authors by themselves, and think that everything must be corrupt that is not at reason is plain enough. It is less trouble to alter once obvious to their own understandings. The than to investigate, and the chances are considerably in favour of their escaping detection.

Cambridge.

WALTER W. SKEAT.

INDENTURES RELATING TO THE SHELLEY FAMILY.-In December, 1877 (5th S. viii. 441), your correspondent HORATIO gave a learned account of two deeds witnessed, the one by Hellen Bysshe and George More, the other by John Shelley and Hellen Shelley; and he showed that, Hellen Bysshe and Hellen Shelley being one and the same, it was through this alliance between the Shelleys and the Bysshes that the name of Bysshe borne by the poet Shelley, and the name of Hellen with two l's borne by his sister, came into the