« PreviousContinue »
Egerton Brydges in Collins, i. 172, is wrong, where he suggests that “surely the Viscounty of Beauchamp was entailed on the issue by the first marriage.”
The Viscounty was conferred, as mentioned last month, sixteen days after the King's marriage to Sir Edward Seymour's sister : the Earldom of Hertford was conferred upon him three days after the baptism of his nephew Prince Edward. The remainder was to the heirs male of his body then or thereafter to be born of his present or any future wife—
“Prefato Edwardo et heredibus suis masculis de corpore suo proprio et (blank) munc uxoris sue jam procreatis, ac de eaden (blank) et alia quavis imposterum uxore sua deinceps legittime procreandis.” (Rot. Pat. 29 Hen. VIII. p. 1.)
The patent for the Barony of Seymour, granted to the Earl of Hertford, 15 Feb. 1547, which is printed in Rymer, under the title “De nomine Seymour perpetuando,” has first a like remainder,
w “—prefato Avunculo nostro et heredibus masculis de corpore suo et Anne modo uxoris sue jam procreatis ac de eadem Anna deinceps legittime procreandis." (Rot. Pat. 1 Edw. VI. p. 6.)
but this is followed by the very important concession to the first family, that on the failure of the issue male of Anne, Edward Seymour esquire, son of the said Earl, from the body of the late Katharine his first wife, should be Lord and Baron Seymour, and so the heirs male of his body; after which was added a further remainder, to the male issue of any future wife of the Earl.
The dignity of Duke of Somerset was conferred on the next day after the Barony; and the remainders it may be presumed (for I have not seen them) were worded in the same terms: for it was in virtue of these patents that in the year 1750 Sir Edward Seymour baronet, the representative of Edward Seymour esquire above mentioned, succeeded, after the lapse of more than two centuries, to the dignities of Duke of Somerset and Baron Seymour, which, according to the ordinary course of law, would have been, during the whole of that interval, the inheritance of his own, the elder, branch of the family. J. G. N.
MR. URBAN, Cork, March 18.
AMIDST the multitudinous contributions to your miscellany which, since its remote origin, have made it the repository of such varied riches, and conferred on it an enduring vitality that has triumphantly outlived the changeful revolutions of taste or fashion, so fatal in their influence to its numerous intervenient competitors, few, I believe, continued for an equal period to be more desired by your readers than the selections from Mr. Green's “Diary of a Lover of Literature.” It was a cornucopia whence concurrently flowed the refreshing streams of entertainment, and beamed on the columns of this Magazine the lights of diversified instruction. That a series, however, of desultory ob. servations committed to paper for private use, even by an accomplished scholar, should offer occasional grounds of animadversion, was equally to be expected and pardoned. These notes were, in sact, the promiscuous fruit of studious leisure, embracing in its recreations the whole circle of literary culture, while unrestrained by any definite pursuit, or controlled by a dread of the press, which, several years after the writer's death, was made their public organ, and subjected them to the consequent ordeal of criticism. Some incidental inaccuracies have accordingly attracted my attention; but I shall confine my notice to only two, because the most striking that occurred to me in cursory perusal.
Under the date of June 11, 1810, as reported in this Magazine for Nov. 1839, p. 456, Mr. Green, on visiting the Duke of Manchester's residence at Kimbolton, numbers among the paintings “The Grand Duke of Alva, with his secretary Machiavel, by Titian.” But assuredly the celebrated Florentine, usually distinguished, indeed, as secretary to his native state, never attended in that or any other capacity this grandee of sanguinary same. In fact, the last public or ostensible act of Machiavel's life was his adhesion to the League, formed in 1526 against Alva's sovereign, Charles V. in repression of that Emperor's imputed aspiration to universal monarchy, after the defeat and capture of his most powerful adversary, or check to his views, at Pavia the preceding year.
Machiavel died the following summer, 1527, when Alva, born in 1508, was scarcely nineteen, and, holding no official employment, could little require such a secretary. See Guicciardini, “Dell' Istoria d’Italia. Venezia, 1567, 4to.” lib. xvii." Again, at nearly the last recorded date of the Diary, on the 23rd of November, 1824, according to the extract apparent in this Magazine for June 1843, page 581, Mr. Green writes, “Dr. Burney, in his History of Music, after a profound disquisition, decides against the acquaintance of the ancients with counterpoint. But I have found a passage in the recently discovered work of Cicero de Republica, edited by Mai, lib. ii. sec. 42, which certainly decides for it. Ut enim in fidibus aut tibiis,” &c. Mr. Green carried his citation no further; but the original deserves to be quoted in full. It is very explicit: “Utenim in fidibus aut tibiis, atque ut in cantu ipso ac vocibus, concentus est quidam tenendus . . . . isque concentus ex dissimillimarum vocum moderatione concors tamen efficitur et congruens; sic quae harmonia dicitur in cantu, ea est in civitate concordia.” “Thus, in felicitous assimilation of the musical analogy to his direct purpose, he derives from the fusion of so many dissonant elements in civil society, or the State, a consentaneous action and accordant effect.” This pregnant illustration by Cicero of counterpoint, or musical harmony and composition, is adduced by Mr. Green as of novel discovery, whereas it was recited in full, by St. Augustine, and has not only been visible in his noble plea for Christianity, “De Civitate Dei,”
* This and the succeeding three books, supplementary to the historian's original publication, limited in number to sixteen, and printed at Florence in 1561, two volumes 8vo. are greatly inferior in depth of reflection or merit of narrative to their predecessors; nor, indeed, are continuations or compositions resumed at distant intervals, generally of maintained spirit, or equivalent impression, compared with first conceptions. Authors, no doubt, may be named, whose renewed labours do not betray this disparity, such as Gibbon, who, however, enjoyed all the requisites he had contemplated for the pursuit of his history, “health, leisure, and inclination."
GENT. Mag. Vol. XXIII.
(book ii. § 21,) for fourteen hundred years, first in manuscript, and subsequently in print, since the earliest impression of his great work in 1467, but has been uniformly included in the fragmentary remains, collected from various authors, of Cicero's philosophical treatises. Every edition of the great writer contains it, together with the beautiful episode of Scipio's vision — the “Somnium Scipionis,” preserved by Macrobius, from the sixth book “De Republica.” It is, in truth, rather extraordinary that a gentleman of Mr. Green's extensive reading should have been uninformed of the pre-existence of this passage so long anterior in publication to its very recent rescue, by Cardinal Mai, from the superimposed lumber of ascetic lore, or palimpsests. Again, and stranger still, this prince of the Church, to whom the first restoration to light of the paragraph is here ascribed, in the very edition and chapter referred to by our amiable Diarist, distinctly quotes St. Augustine's volume as its previous repository, and adds, that it was to it he was indebted for the compilation of some sentences defective in his manuscript. “Haec omnia habet Augustinus, De Civitate Dei, ii. § 21. Deficit Codex Ciceronianus in medio verbo . . . . Dein multa desunt,” is the subjoined note of the eminent literary resurrectionist, singularly overlooked by Mr. Green, though before his then aberrant eyes, in the volume “De Republica quae supersunt omnia, edente Angelo Maio. Romae, 1822, 8vo,”—the first edition, and not long preceding Mr. Green's note, or even death. To this disputed question, On the Knowledge by Antiquity of Counterpoint, Dr. Burney devotes nearly forty pages of his first volume (108–145), and presents a formidable array of the antagonist advocates. Yet, while among these combatants we reckon some of the most distinguished names in science and literature of their respective times, such as Glareanus, Isaac Vossius, Kepler, Kircher, Mersenne, &c. no reference is made to the almost conclusive passage in St. Augustine, either by himself, or, as traceable through him, by his learned authorities. Still, we * sup3
pose that so pointed a bearing on the contested fact, manifest alike in the most eminent of the Latin fathers and greatest of Roman writers' works, could have eluded their notice, as it did Mr. Green’s and Dr. Burney’s, whose son Charles, a profound classical scholar, must, we may presume, have been ignorant of it, or he would, doubtless, have indicated it to his father, when publishing his history in 1789. Charles was then in highest literary repute. Rousseau's article on Counterpoint, in his Dictionary of Music, is quite satisfactory as to explanation, though too peremptory in conclusion, which refuses all knowledge of it to the ancients. “On voit clairement qu'ils n’en eurent jamais la moindre idée.” His authority is Aristoxenus, a native of Tarentum, then in Magna Graecia, or Southern Italy, and disciple of Aristotle. This writer's treatise, “IIept Approvixów Xrouxetov,” or Harmonic Elements, as it may be rendered, is followed in the collection of Marcus Meibomius, “Antiquae Musicae Auctores Septem,” (Amsterd. 1652, two volumes, 4to.) by Euclides, Nichomachus, Alypius, Gaudentius, Bacchius, and Aristides, constituting the stated number. It is on the construed tenor of the third book of Aristoxenus that Rousseau grounds his view of the subject; but might not the improvement have been introduced during the two centuries that intervened between the Greek musician and Cicero, whose exposition was unknown to Rousseau ? What advances has not the art made during the same space in modern times : But see “Allegemeine Geschichte der Musik, von Johan Nicolaus Forkel, Goettingen, 1788–1801, 4to. Erster Band.” It is a work of deep research, and not sufficiently known. The author, an excellent performer likewise, died in 1818, leaving, besides numerous published works, some unedited essays on Counterpoint. As the personal friend and biographer of Emanuel Bach, he was much too partial to that composer, of great merit no doubt, but surely inferior to Glück, the rival in same of Haydn and Mozart, in conjunction with whom he formed the renowned German triumvirate of the Past century in the art. Yet far be.
yond that illustrious musician Forkel extols his favourite. Since writing the above, which necessarily makes frequent reference to St. Augustine, I happened to inspect the successive numbers of the Athenaeum, containing a review of Mrs. Jameson’s able publication, “Sacred and Legendary Art,” or description, personal and historical, of the sanctified characters exhibited for popular veneration in Catholic countries, or collected as the decorating treasures of pictorial galleries, by royal or individual love of art. In the list of the early doctors of the Church here presented, St. Augustine of course obtains due notice and just appreciation. So, indeed, do his three equally sainted associates; thus disarming any special criticism, with the exception of a statement relating to St. Gregory the Great, or first of the name, who is there represented as “the last canonized Pope.” Whether the assertion proceed from the lady or the reviewer, I cannot discover, for I have no immediate access to the original volume; but at all events it is erroneous, and rather surprises me, from its direct variance with history, independently of its ecclesiastical interest, in so well conducted a journal as the Athenaeum. Now among the successors of Gregory, even within the compass of a single century posterior to his death, from 604 to 701, not less than three shine in celestial honours, Martin I., Agatho, and Leo II. Then, though more separately as we advance to later ages, Gregory II. (srom 715 to 731); Leo IV. (from 847 to 855); Leo IX. (from 1049 to 1054); Celestine V. who died in 1294; and Benedict XI. in 1304. The last Pontiff who received this posthumous homage was Pius V. Michael Ghisleri, of the Dominican order, whose decease occurred in 1572, though not canonised till 1702, not a very unusual interval of suspense. It was this Pope who, when apprized of the signal overthrow of the Ottoman Fleet at Lepanto in 1571, chaunted forth in tones of jubilation the words of the Evangelist, in allusion to the name of the conqueror, Don John of Austria, “Fuit homo missus a Deo, cui nomen erat Joannes.” This announcement of the sacred text has been applied, with similar exultation of feeling and expression, to the Greek Emperor John Zimisces in the tenth century, after his victorious career in Syria against the infidels. Again to the renowned John Corvinus Huniades, in the fifteenth century, on his triumphs in Hungary, Wallachia, &c. over the same enemies of our faith; and, finally, to the great John Sobieski, when he delivered Vienna from the impending grasp of the Vizier kara-Mustapha, in September 1683,-a service immense in obligation to all Europe, though reluctantly acknowledged by the Emperor Leopold, the most directly benefited by the consequent security of his capital, and general protection of his threatened hereditary states. French writers pretend that Sobieski in his youth had served in the Mousquetaires of Louis XIV. M. de Châteaubriand, in his recent biography of the celebrated Abbé de Rancé, a work little calculated to enhance his literary fame, alleges it, but the assumption seems destitute of proof. Our young Pretender Charles Edward Stuart" was
* The mention of this hapless name suggests a little personal reminiscence. In 1784, on a Christmas visit to my grand. father, then on the eve of his 86th year, I heard him relate, that, at the accession of George the First to the throne in 1714, he happened to be in society when the exclusion of the Stuarts from their birthright became naturally enough at that moment the topic of discussion, and a venerable gentleman in the course of conversation stated that he had witnessed the execution of Charles the First. His name was Martin, born, he said, the same day as Charles the Second, or the 29th of May, 1630. On the 30th of January, 1649, the date of the royal decapitation, he was in his nineteenth year, consequently quite competent to observe and recollect the sanguinary act in all its details; and his presence at that memorable crisis was confirmed by many uncontested proofs. Between me then and this spectator of the deed, now removed from us by an interval of nearly two centuries, only a single intermediate person appears in the channel of transmission. It was on that visit that I read for my grandparent the death of Dr. Johnson, then announced in the news of the day, while enjoying the school holidays of Christmas.
At page 402 of the Gentleman's Magazine for May, 1832, I find two anecdotes of oral tradition, The one relating to the
this monarch's maternal great-grandson. (See, with regard to the battle of Lepanto, &c. this Magazine for July, 1839, page 33.) The last actually canonized Pope, I repeat, was Pius V. ; but may we not legitimately pronounce the late Pius VII. entitled to this high reward of his merits and sufferings in the cause of religion, and expect his beatification by an authentic recognition : Amongst ourselves, too, and our immediate contemporaries, will not the transcendent services of the Apostle of Temperance, the living example, as he is the most impressive preacher, of every virtue, in rescuing from a debasing vice his countrymen, and diffusing, as he un
battle of Flodden Field is, indeed, extraordinary in the long period it embraces: but Henry Jenkins, a link of the chain united in transmitted recollection, exceeded any instance of longevity on English record, if, as stated, his life extended beyond one hundred and sixty years; and the case was therefore wholly an exceptional one. I could adduce multiplied examples surpassing the second anecdote. What occurred to myself, as above related, does so considerably, as well as another directly communicated to me, which I may therefore briefly recite. Patrick Gibson, whose death at the age of 111 years, appears in this Journal for July, 1831, page 93, and whom I frequently went to see. in order to forward his occasional donations to his Irish relatives, told me that his father, a Scotchman and Covenanter, had served under the Earl of Argyle, in his ill-fated expedition against James II. in 1685, the very year of Oates's punishment, as mentioned in the second anecdote ; but here, the communication of Argyle's execution, which Gibson's father beheld, was immediate to his son, and not descending, as to this Magazine's correspondent, through a second person. The father again fought against James at the Boyne, but settling in Tipperary, where he obtained the grant of some land, he married a Catholic and embraced her faith, the emancipation of whose professors, in 1829, the period of my visit, no one gloried in more than his son, whose enthusiasm for O'Connell was not less ardent than that of the Agitator's most juvenile adherents. He was pressed into the naval service during the war that closed by the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle, in 1748, when the gang seized him on the quay of Waterford. I resided in Paris at his death, or I could have added some interesting facts to his article in the Obituary. tiringly pursues his glorious and hallowed course, the principles and habits of genuine reform, ensure for him the same consecrated distinction and tribute of veneration ? And if miracles be the test or indispensable attribute of officially proclaimed sanctity, can their evidence be made more manifest than in the spectacle which daily gladdens our view, in this happy transformation of an entire people—of millions, I may say—thus regenerated by the resistless puissance of his inspired voice, and presenting to surrounding nations the most attractive pattern of imitation ? “Si miracula requiris, circumspice ’’ we can unhesitatingly reply to the demander of such a criterion. Of sanctified men was our island in past ages the teeming parent and fostering nursery. That the soil is not wholly effete in congenial fruit, nor the germ extinct in reproductive power, we are now cheered by a signal proof; and addressing him we may express an auspicious hope, that
“Te duce, si qua manent sceleris vestigia
nostri, Irrita perpetua solvent formidine terras.” Yours, &c. J. R. MR. URBAN, York, March 6.
I SHOULD be much interested if I could induce any of your correspondents learned in Highland arms, to give a complete account of them in your Magazine. The notices I have met with are very scanty. In the first place, there is in Grose's Armour a plate of one of the old Highland soldiers, an interesting account of whose mutiny is given in the Gentleman's Magazine, and the cause of it in Lord Mahon's History of England. In the Abbotsford edition of Waverley are some beautiful plates, and I may almost say a complete set of Prince Charles Edward Stuart's arms.
I possess a curious dirk, which was found in the old manor office at Hexham (an ancient tower near the Moot Hall). The occasion of it being found was a singular one; a farmer attending the market at Hexham put his horse into the upper vault (that is, on the ground floor), and upon his return from market he groped round the apartment, and it was very well he did so, for the vaulting beneath had
given way in the centre and the horse had fallen down. Upon lights being procured, a strange scene presented itself, the horse was found at the bottom of the vault unhurt, a descent was made by a ladder, and below was found a gloomy vault which must have been walled up ; in it were three skeletons chained to the wall, and the dirk which I possess stuck in the wall beside them. This was about the year 1820. It then came into the possession of a joiner in Hexham of the name of John Grant, from whom my father procured it and presented it to me. It is about a foot long, has a buck-horn handle, which is larger at the top than towards the bottom, and the blade, the back of which is formed thicker than the front, goes to a fine point. Before the blade joins the handle there is some ornamental work, and a socket at the top of the handle to place the thumb in to throw it by, I should imagine. The bottom of the socket is held to the buckhorn handle by a neat little gothic ornament; the socket is formed of iron. It is not improbable it has belonged to some unfortunate Scotish prisoner, who, together with his companions, has been left to perish in this vault. In this same tower is an ancient inscription inscribed on a beam of oak and a face sculptured thereon, conjectured by Hutchinson in his History of Northumberland, (who has given a plate of it,) to have been the work of a Scotish prisoner. I have some broad swords said to have been used in 1715 and 1745, most of which I found at Hexham House, and the last 1 conjecture must have been left by some stragglers from the main body of Prince Charles Edward's army, in the retreat from Derby, as Dr. Andrews the clergyman then at Hexham was a Jacobite. One of these swords is an Andrew Farriara, with his name on the blade, and I remember on one occasion Mr. Andrew Wright, the author of the History of Hexham, bending the blade with its point to the hilt; it is edged on both sides. I also possess a Highland target beautifully bossed; it belonged to the late Mr. de Cardonnell Lawson, and was picked up on the field of Culloden. Pennant, in his “Tour in Scotland,” (1790,) says, “he saw at the