« PreviousContinue »
ToMR or king ARTHUR.-Librarty. At NAW orth CASTLE.
MR. URBAN,-In a journey that I made a few years since to Bristol, I passed through Newport, about 16 miles from Gloucester, and whilst the horses were changing, I saw from the wisdow of the inn, where I was sitting, a board on the opposite side of the way, inscribed—“Here is to be seen the tomb of King Arthur.” Attracted by this enticing inscription, I knocked at the door of a humble cottage, which was opened by an old woman, whom I desired to show me the tomb; on which she pointed to a large and ponderous stone coffin, between 7 and 8 feet long, and weighing as was said 3 tons. In it was a well preserved human skeleton, supposed to have been deposited in an inner wooden coffin, that was found to be almost decayed from time and moisture. At the bottom of the stone chest, I noticed two small bronze shovels, a fragment of a bronze hinge, a Roman key of the same materials, and some fragments of pottery. There was also the handle of a large vessel with the letters L. A. S. stamped upon it, which had been most learnedly interpreted to the old dame to mean “Lord Arthur Sovereign.” She informed me that this stone coffin was found at Gloucester, on the premises of a Mr. John Sims, of whom she purchased it on speculation for 16l. I should have mentioned that the edges of it are lined with a thick coating of lead, and a printed paper given to the visitors. replete with ignorance, mentions a leaden coffin, &c. This wonderful tomb of “the Lord Arthur,” is certainly Roman, and of the same kind as some that have been described in the Archaeologia. This specimen of popular ignorance would have better suited Glastonbury than either Gloucester or Newport. The monkish fraud of the supposed tomb of Arthur and his wife Guinevra, at Glastonbury, is too well known to your readers to require any enlargement concerning it in this place. It has been said, that at the dissolution of the monasteries in England, several articles belonging to Glastonbury Abbey were transferred to Naworth Castle, in Cumberland, then in the possession of Lord William Howard, the friend of Camden, who seems to have believed in the monkish fable and in the cross with Arthur's name, which he has given in the Britannia. Mr. Ritson, in his Life of King Arthur, p. 139, states that there is still preserved at the above-mentioned castle a huge volume of three vellum leaves, standing on the floor, being the original legend of Joseph of Arimathea, which Leland beheld with admiration on his visit to Glastonbury Abbey. It would be very desirable to know whether this volume still exists, and to have a particular account of it, as well as of any of the articles formerly at Glastonbury. A catalogue too of the ancient library at Naworth Castle, if it could be obtained by permission of the noble owner, would also be a most acceptable present to many
a bibliomaniac of the present day. r D.
Ma. URBAN,+Be so obliging to an old correspondent as to admit into your interesting Magazine a few remarks on the case in Archery, page 56, which you have decided by authority. My view of the case is opposed to your “opinion,” although fortified by that of the “English Bowman.” The method of numbering bows, by the weights required to draw the middle of the string 27 inches from the bow, is clear and satisfactory; but if the archer must exert a power of 100lbs., in drawing a bow of 50, the numbering by weights must be erroneous. In your decision, words are not used as they are understood by people in general, or by scientific mechanics in particular. For instance, if I list a weight of 50lbs. from the ground, with one hand or both hands, it would be commonly and correctly said that I exert a power of fifty pounds; yet, as it is certain that my feet, at the same time, exert in consequence an increase of pressure on the ground equal to the weightlifted, you and the “English Bowman” must, for consistency, say that I exert a power of 100lbs. Again, if I draw the string while another holds the bow in question, my feet will then make a corresponding increase of pressure against the ground, instead of my left hand against the bow. A perfect spring, after being bent or compressed, will return to its former state with a force equal to the power expended in compressing it; therefore if the bow unbends itself with a power of 50lbs. when I loose the string (or both string and bow at the same instant), surely 100lbs. could not have been exerted in drawing it. In estimating the strength of animals by experiment, they must have footing, or some similar bearing or support, in order to exert their strength; but it is not usual—it would be a perversion of language—to reckon the force which they exert against it as a part of their estimated muscular strength. In confirmation of my judgment in this matter, I refer to the article Dynanometer, in Sir D. Brewster's Edinburgh Encyclopedia, and to Dr. Gregory's Mathematics for Practical Men, page 371. The latter author says, page 377, “A man cannot well draw more than 70lbs. or 80lbs. horizontally; and he cannot thrust with a greater force, acting horizontally at the height of his shoulders, than 27|bs. or 30lbs.” Hoping I have sufficiently shewn the impropriety of the Bowman's assertion, I remain, Sir, your obedient servant, Caer Corin, Jan. 10. A. MEYRick.
GEN EA Log Y of ISABELLA II. THE PRESENT QUEEN OF SPAIN.
It will often have been remarked, in a general way, how frequent have been the intermarriages between relations, among the Royal Families of Europe, particularly in those countries where the dispensing power of the Papal See has removed every scruple regarding their impropriety. The near consanguinity to the late King of Spain of all his four wives, was noticed in the memoir of him which was published in the Gentleman's Magazine for November last. But it is only in large and unfrequent works of genealogy, that the singular results of these alliances can be traced and observed. The following tables of the ancestry of the present Queen of Spain have been formed as genealogical curiosities. By the first, which is her pedigree from Louis le Grand, it will be seen that her juvenile Majesty is descended in two ways from her grandfather; in three ways from her great grandfather; in four ways from her great-great-grandfather; and in five ways from her great-great-great-grandfather.
Louis XIV. died 1715.
Louis Doe of Bur- Philip V. King of Spain, died 1746. gundy, d. 1712.
Louis XV. d. 1774.
harles IV. ; d. 1819. Ferdinand IV. King of the
Maria Louisa.-F - ---
| Maria Isabella.RFrancis II. d. 1830.
Ferdinand WII. ; d. 1833. To Christina, 4th Queen,
t r- now Queen Regent of Spain. Isabella II. now Queen of Spain.
GENT. MAG. Vol. 1. Z
In ordinary cases, where no intermarriages of relations have occurred, a person's ancestors are doubled in number with every ascent; thus he has four grand-parents, eight great-grandfathers and mothers, sixteen progenitors in the fourth degree, and thirty-two in the fifth. In consequence of the four intermarriages shown in the preceding pedigree, the young Queen Isabella's ancestors in the fifth degree are reduced from thirty-two to fourteen, as here shown:— so Opalinski, d. 1747. Stanislaus King of Poland, d. 1766.
Maria, d. 1768. [*. Adelaide of Savoy, d. 1712. Maria-Louisa, d. 1759. Louis XV. King of-l-Louis Duke of Burgundy, d. 1712.)
Maria Louin-Trio Duke of Parma, d. 1765. France, d. 1774. IsabelLA-r-Ferdinand Charles IV. d. 1819. Charles III. d. 1788. Philip V. d. 1746.--Louis the Dauphin, d. 1711. the Se- VII. d. Maria of Bavaria, d. 1767. cond, now | 1833. Maria-Isabella.
Elizabeth Farmese, doardo, Duke of Parma, d. 1693.
Maria Chris---Francis II. King of the-r-Ferdinand IV. King of-l-Maria-Amelia, d. 1761.--Augustus II. King of Poland, d. 1763.
enbottle, d. 1750. In the last ascent, it will be perceived, there is no interruption in the usual
progressive increase; but in the next, were it worth while to pursue the research further, there would be several; for Louis Duke of Burgundy was son of the Dauphin and Dauphiness (next below); the Dauphiness was a daughter of Augustus II. below; and Dorothy-Sophia Duchess of Parma was a sister to the mother of the Emperor Charles VI.
It is further remarkable that, if we mount only three generations higher than Louis the Dauphin, we find the young Queen descended from all the four children of Henri IV. and from his grandson Philip Duke of Orleans in two different ways.
I1. Isabel Queen Louis xiii. d. 1643. 3. Henrietta-Maria 2. Catherine, or Chris
of Spain, died Queen of England, tina, Duchess of Sa
1644. died 1662. | voy, d. 1663.
Maria Theresa, FLouis xiv. 2. Charlotte=Philip Duke=1. Heh- Charles-Ema
died 1683. d. 1715. Eliz. of Ba- of Orleans, rietta nuel II. Duke varia, d. d. 1701. Anne, of Savoy, d. 1722. d. 1670. 1675.
Louis the Dau- Charlotte-Eliz. Anna Move! Amadeus phin, d. 1711. Duchess of Lor- ob. 1728. II. d. 1730. raine, d. 1676.5
Louis Duke of:-Mary Ade
Burgundy, d. laide, d.
1712. ! 1712.
Louis XV. d. The Emperor Francis I.
1774. d. 1765.
Maria Louisa, Duchess Maria Carolina, Queen of
of Parma, d. 1759. the Two Sicilies, d. 1814.
Maria-Louisa, Queen Francis II. King of the
of Spain. Two Sicilies, d. 1830.
Ferdinand VII.5-Maria Christina.
Thus the lines of the little Queen's descent from Henri le Grand amount to the
following: Through Louis XIV. and the Dauphin, as shown in the first Table . " . 5 Through the two daughters of Philip Duke of Orleans - - . 2 Through the three daughters of Henri IV. . - - - - 3
In all ten lines of descent . ... 10
That is to say, her Majesty, being eighth in lineal paternal descent from Henri le Grand (compare the two tables), is likewise eighth in descent from him through her mother, through her maternal grandmother, and through Philip Duke of Parma ; and ninth in descent from him through six other different channels. J. G. N.
HISTORY OF THE COSBY FAMILY.
Mr. URBAN, -The following extracts of a MS. history of the Cosby family are interesting in many points of view. They are a memorial of the cruelty and barbarity “ of the golden days of good Queen Bess''' and of the sufferings of the Irish. They likewise point out the means by which an Anglo-Irish family rose to opulence; and what has rendered them interesting in my eyes, they furnish us with a history of a member of the noble house of Sidney. The MS. was written by one of the Cosbys, and is transcribed into one of the Egerton MSS. in the British Museum.
It tells us that Francis Cosby was a person much celebrated for undaunted valour, military experience, and civil abilities; that he married Mary Seamor, widow of Sir H. Leyton, and daughter of the Protector, on whose disgrace he
fled to Ireland with a second wife, and served as member for Thomastown, 1559, and was appointed by Queen Mary General of the Kernes, and by Elizabeth Sheriff of Kildare.
“At the same time he received a remarkable grant, empowering him to exercise, by his own authority, martial law, and inflict punishment according as he thought proper. In consequence of this great trust he erected a gallows near his house, upon the spot which is to this day called Gallows Hill, and executed such as he condemned by his own judgment, hanging them, as it is said, alive in chains, with a loaf of bread fixed before them, to render starving more painful, a severity excuseable only by the barbarity of the times which rendered such strictness necessary, and experience shewed expedient. For during his time good order was so well preserved in those parts, that Sir H. Sidney, the Lord Lieutenant,”
reported his success and the public tranquillity to the Queen. “Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.” But mark the just judgment of Heaven. The children of the slain increased in years and strength ; and the MS. tells us, General Cosby lived with great credit and reputation to the age of 70 years, but he at length fell a victim to his constant enemies, the original Irish. Camden's Elizabeth, p. 309-310, edit. 1614.
His constant enemies! Their princes had fallen in the field in defence of their liberties and religion, their fathers had perished on the gallows. Strangers held their patrimonial lands, and they were eating the bread of indigence. A deep debt of gratitude they owed to Queen Elizabeth and General Cosby . But it was not only from those whom they had oppressed that the Cosby's suffered. The General had three sons by Mary Seamour—Arnold, the third son, killed in a duel at Finchley Common, “Lord Bourke, of Castleconnel, a noted Irish rebel,” for which service the Queen refused to pardon him, and he was hanged 1590. Henry, the second son, died unmarried in England. Alexander, who inherited his father's cruelty, and was nearly killed by Rory Oge (Camden's Elizabeth, p. 288) I shall mention hereafter.
“F. Cosby's activity in the Queen's service, and the many good qualities he possessed, brought on a great intimacy and friendship with Sir H. Sidney, who, being himself a man of singular merit, was the more inclined to esteem the deserts of others. Their friendship brought on an alliance between their families which turned out both honourable and beneficial to us. Alexander Cosby, Francis' eldest son, espoused Mrs. Dorcas Sidney, second cousin of the Lord Lieutenant, who came over with him as will appear in its place. Although the service which General Cosby was constantly engaged in seldom allowed him to have a fixed residence, he appears to have used the Abbey of Stradbally as the seat of his family. It was then a very extensive and handsome pile of building, as was evident from the ruins which remained so late as 1722; but Colonel Dudley Cosby having then let the ground to Colonel Mitchell, he pulled down most part of the venerable remains of antiquity for materials to build his house, and left nothing but part of an old chapel, which is still to be seen.”
44 + + + * + + + * It appears that Alexander by his
authority continued the power of martial law which had been granted to his father by Queen Elizabeth, and the tradition of the country records that he used to hang multitudes of his enemies on a Sally tree near the abbey, and he is said to have used the expression, ‘that his Sally was melancholy and unfurnished whenever he saw it w thout one or other of his opposers hanging upon its boughs.' From this circumsance came the name of Silloge, or of the Sally, which the Irish, through reproach, gave the family. He found it, however, necessary to get a patent of indemnity for those irregular though necessary acts of strictness.”
Would James have granted an indemnity to Jefferys or Kirke Yet their ferocity was mildness compared to this. However, the sequel will show that the blood of his victims drew down vengeance on him and his children.
“. It has been already mentioned that he married Mrs. Dorcas Sidney, daughter of William Sidney, of Otford, county of Kent, and cousin to Sir H. Sidney, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. This lady, who had been of the household of Queen Elizabeth, by means of her great connections, obtained grants of vast tracts of land in heir, so that the family at one time possessed one half of the Queen's county and a township ever. Among other lands, she held the towns of Ballynakil, Ballegroan, and Moun