Page images
PDF

house of Colonel Campbell of Glen Lyon a curious walking staff belonging to one of his ancestors; it was of iron cased in leather, five feet long; at the top a neat pair of extended wings, like a caduceus, but on being shaken a poniard two feet nine inches long darted out.” vol. I. p. 104. At page 263, vol. I, he gives an engraving of two Lochaber axes. In a note to the Abbotsford edition of Waverley, p. 113, it is stated, that the town guard of Edinburgh were, until a late period, armed with this weapon when on their police duty. There was a hook at the back of the axe, which the ancient Highlanders used to assist them to climb over walls, fixing the hook upon it, and raising themselves by the handle. The axe, which was also much used by the natives of Ireland, is supposed to have been introduced into both countries from Scandinavia. Sir Walter Scott mentions that those Highland broad swords which were marked with a crown were thought to be the most genuine. Macdonald of Glengarrie possessed two silver-hilted and very beautiful Highland broad swords, which belonged to Prince Charles Edward Stuart; they seemed of French manufacture. With regard to the name of that Prince. I believe it will appear from a manuscript now in the British Museum, called a “Prayer Book of Sigismond, the first king of Poland,” which was made in 1524, (and which was in the possession of the Princess Maria Clementina, and in that of the Cardinal York until his death,) that his names at full were “Charles Edward Lewis Casimir Stuart.” I have not seen this manuscript, (in which are entered the births of the children of James and Clementine,) but l have seen the engraving of a ring which belonged to Prince Charles Edward, and it bears the initials, C. E. L. C. S. Pennant, at vol. ii. p. 410, gives an engraving of a military scythe found at Ilay. In the Abbotsford edition, p. 452, of “The Antiquary,” is given a Highland skull cap preserved at Abbotsford, formed in the same manner as chain armour.

Yours, &c. W. H., CLARKE.

-

MR. URBAN,

IN the classical writers, those who have read them with curious attention have occasionally pointed out metrical passages undesignedly occurring in prose composition. Lord Hailes observes in his Antiquities of the Christian Church, p. 97, “I know not whether the metrical numbers of Tacitus have been remarked : for example, “satone res mortalium,” and “Si quis piorum manibus;” and many might be found by the diligent reader in the compositions of our best writers. I must however presume that they were seldom intentionally introduced, or that they are successful in adding a greater grace or force to the composition. In reading the Life of Cicero by Conyers Middleton, a writer whose style has received the highest commendations for purity and elegance, I met with an entire heroic verse : he is speaking of the followers of Caesar, and says, who were generally speaking “a needy, profligate, audacious crew ;” see vol. II. p. 254. This, however, would have been scarcely worthy of a particular notice, but that I was somewhat surprised soon after, in finding that Hooke, in his Roman History, had borrowed these very words, and inserted them in his narrative, without any reference to Middleton at all, as if he approved the practice and admired the execution. See his Roman History, vol. X. p. 77, “a needy, profligate, audacious crew, prepared for every thing that was desperate.”

In the copious and eloquent prose of Isaac Barrow, 1 have occasionally met with metrical passages and lines, as vol. I. p. 305, ed. Oxon. Serm. xiv.

“Define the figure of the fleeting air.” and vol. II. p. 1, Serm. xxv. “And in the cheering freshness of the air."

Yours, &c. J. M.

MR. URBAN, B–h–ll, March 24.

IN the review of Mr. Dyce's very elaborate and excellent edition of Skelton, in the Gent. Mag. Sept. 1844, I observed on a passage, vol. 1, p. 259, “Hic ingreditur Foly, quatiendo crema et faciendo multum, feriendo tabulas et similia.” Mr. Dyce in his note had said he was unacquainted with the word “crema,” and thought it might be a misprint for cremea, or crembalum. I observed that “crema” was the Greek word Xpnua, the fool's thing or bauble; on which Mr. Dyce, in his Appendix, added, “we greatly doubt it.” But of my explanation I have myself no doubt at all ; yet it would have been scarcely worth mentioning , but that I can also set right another passage in the same sentence, which is at present in a corrupt state, viz. “faciendo multum ;” what is the force of that, doing much " the truth is, the words ought to be, faciendo vultus, or vultum, “making faces,” or making a face. The fool comes in, shaking his bauble, and making grimaces like a modern clown ; and l can support my interpretation and correction by a passage, which includes all those different gestures of the fool. “Why, I would have the fool in every act, Be it Comedy or Tragedy. I have laughed Until I cryd again to see what faces The rogue will make. O it does me good To see him hold out his chin, hang down his hands, [part ..fnd twiste his bauble, there is never a About him but breaks jests,” &c. See Goffe's Careless Shepherdess.

As regards “seriendo tabulas,” which Mr. Dyce has passed over, tabulae are flat pieces of wood, or clappers, which were struck or beaten, carried about by the lower class of eople in certain cases, as the “tabulae eprosorum, quas illi quatiunt, ne ab aliquo tangantur.” Thus I trust that I have explained the three allusions in the sentence,—quatiendo crema-faciendo vultum—and seriendo tabulas—shaking his bauble, making faces, and striking his clapper.

Yours, &c. J. M.

MR. URBAN, April 2.

IT is not my intention to enter into any controversy with your very able Correspondent, A. J. K., with respect to his remarks on my notions, contained in your No. for January, of the etymology of the names of the Devil's Dyke, Devil's Den, &c :-but with reference to the subject permit me to say a few words.

I have for many years been convinced of the truth of what is said, as follows: by Henry in his History of Great Britain ;

“It is a further proof or rather demonstration, that the Celtic tongue was the language spoken by the first inhabitants of this island, that the names of very many rivers, brooks, hills, mountains, towns, and cities in all parts of it, are significant in that language, and descriptive of their situations, properties, and appearances. For the first inhabitants of every country are under a necessity of giving names immediately to those objects about which they have daily occasion to converse ; and these primitive names are naturally no other than brief descriptions of the most striking appearances, and obvious properties of these objects in their native tongue. When another nation conquers the country, settles in it, and mingles with the primitive inhabitants, finding names already affixed to all the most conspicuous places and objects in it, they for the most part retain those names, with some slight alteration to adapt them to the genius of their own language. This was evidently done by the Romans in this island, as might be made appear by an induction of almost innumerable particulars.”

As one illustration of these very just conclusions, I will state, that in Surrey there is a town and parish pretty well known, called Letherhed, commonly written Leatherhead. One would be at no loss to account for the name of a place thus now composed of two such common words in our tongue, if those words could be made to apply to any locality on terra firma. The only attempt to account for the name that I have seen or heard of, is in a little MS. history of the place, by the late Rev. Mr. Dallaway, who was vicar there, and a man well known to the antiquarian world, who, after alluding to the difficulties of the subject, presumes that this place might have received its name from one Roger de Ledrede, who had obviously received his name from the place." This silly conjecture, and manifest impossibility, remind one of the stories of the two cats eating each other up, and of the conjuror who advertised that he was

* Richard de Ledred, who had previously been a Franciscan friar in London, was consecrated Bishop of Ossory in 13i's. He is memorable for having instituted the proceedings against Dame Alice Kyteler for sorcery, the narrative of which has been published by the Camden Society,<-EDIT,

to jump down his own throat. The fact is, (it may be assumed,) that Letherhed, which is an ancient place, and which is pleasantly seated on a singularly declivitous bank of the Mole, was so called by the aborigines of this island from that circumstance. The ancient British language, (Celtic if you please), has many words to signify such a sloping situation, viz. LLEDDF, LLETHR, LLETH Rod, LLEthRed D, &c. Yours, &c. J. P. Market Bosworth, March 18.

WILL you permit me to avail myself of the pages of your widely-circulated Magazine to enter the public protest of an humble individual against what appears to him a prevailing disfigurement of our churches, I mean the glaring deformity of low roofs."

The fine vaults of many of our old, and, I fear, the great majority of our repaired, churches (to say nothing of the new) are at this time lamentably “curtailed of their fair proportions,” by the unseemly and inharmonious pitch of their roofs. Directed, apparently, by no enlarged views of symmetry, some of our builders and renovators may have adopted, inconsiderately, the precedents around them of tasteless and defective models. Others, constrained perhaps by limited funds, have felt themselves compelled to leave things nearly as they found them, by making the best of the materials afforded. Others, again, too timid to stem the tide of parochial niggardliness, or to carry out the suggestions of their own good sense and cultivated taste, have succumbed to trifling difficulties and inconveniences, sheltered themselves under the unworthy plea of “restoration,” and foregone the opportunity of improvement, “Letting I dare not wait upon I would.”

MR. URBAN,

* Our Correspondent in this Letter censures a form of construction to the error of which the eyes of many other persons have already been opened, and against which the tide of modern practice has, in consequence, decidedly set. However, as he argues on the side of good taste and propriety, his letter is calculated to further a commendable reform, and we therefore gladly give it insertion.—EDIT,

For it may be remarked that, in most instances, the roofs were formed originally of a proper pitch, but the removal of the ends of rasters (decayed at the pole-plate or on the bare stone walls) in order to make them serve again, has, after each operation, lowered the point of the roof, and at length brought it down to its greatest practicable depression. In others the raising of a clerestory at some period subsequent to the erection of the church itself, may have put the work into hands of persons of inferior skill and taste, and hence it has happened that no regard was paid to proportion or general effect. Whatever, however, has been the cause, it is painful to observe that the practice has become far too general, and I therefore earnestly appeal to all who have felt the miserable effect produced by it, at once to make a stand, and to join me in reprobating and decrying it.

“And love the high-embowed roof.”
ilton.

To the man of extensive acquaintance with ecclesiastical architecture, on the continent as well as in this country, I know that I am speaking a language which he will understand when l assert that, as a general rule, every place of worship of genuine Gothic proportions should have a highpitched roof. If any deviations are allowable, it can only be under peculiar circumstances. Where the rule must be evaded, there the second-best thing must be the “expedient;” and here I should say that, where symmetrical juxta-position may render it tolerable, the angle of the chancel arch, or of the arches between the nave and aisles, may be something of a guide for the pitch of the roof. Occasionally a fine archway in the interior wall of the tower may suggest the angle of elevation for the roof. Hence, then, we may aver that the most satisfactory pitch to the eye will be the highest; and that where this is not feasible, it should bear a reference to some conspicuous angle or angles in the arches below.

And now, with respect to taste, which in this, and perhaps every instance, is nothing more than the knowledge of the best adaptation of means towards a pleasing or appropriate effect, I may, perhaps, be allowed to add a few words. In the first place, I should say that the interior of any vaulted building requires an intimate correspondence in the character and proportions of the roof or ceiling. The eye, led upwards from the forms below, or embracing at one coup-d'oeil the general style and concurrence of parts to a whole, carries with it a prepossession from those forms, or a scale by which it measures the subordination of the several parts. It requires the continuance or connexion of certain congruous lines or curves. The artist who disregards this, falls under the well-known censure of Horace : “Infelix operis summa, quia ponere totum Nescit.” In the next place, the dignity or rather majesty of the place (for I cannot use the term “genius loci,”) demand in a church, where it can be attained, loftiness, as well as expanse. We cannot ever hope, and who would ever wish, in such places, to divest ourselves of the religious associations which belong to them ; we cannot enter them without a portion of that awful consciousness, “This is none other than the House of God.” Under such impressions, therefore, the feelings take instant offence at all that is cramped and compressed, all that is cumbersome and unworthy. “The High and Lofty One, who inhabiteth Eternity; the stretching out of whose wings” fills the whole extent of space, He, who is not to be circumscribed by “ dwellings made with hands,” should receive, as a rightful tribute of our homage, all possible height and width, and unobstructed room, in the place his worship. While the mind should be allowed, as far as may be, to expand and expatiate in the interior of such buildings, the uplifted eyes of laud, and thanksgiving, and adoration, should be allowed to rise as it were uninteruptedly to those higher and happier regions whither the Christian worshipper evermore aspires, and where his thoughts so often “flee away and are at rest.” But, lastly, not to enter upon the subject of decoration minutely, it may be observed, that the roof or ceiling of churches, however groined or intersected for strength and durability, (real or apparent,) should always be

as light and chaste, I mean as simple and unostentatious, as it should be elevated. Nowhere is a weight or profusion of ornament more misplaced than upon the crowning and continued arch which canopies the nave of a church. The meditations necessarily inspired by the service of the sanctuary should not be intercepted or extinguished by the overhanging mysteries, intricacies, and refinements of elaborate workmanship. They should rather be drawn imperceptibly onward and upward, by an art which conceals itself, to the goal of our devotional aspirations. And here, I would again venture to say, first, that the finest models instruct us to remedy any slight infringement of the general rule, by giving to the whole interior one uniform colour. It would be well for us if this practice were universal. For it would at once correct the double error of too many of our church-buildings and church-restorations. We have at present not merely the load of superfluous ornament in the roof, destroying the effect of the fair dimensions and noble architecture below, with which it is frequently at distressing variance, but we are oppressed in head and heart by the discussive framework of a massive roofing, and the “browner horror” of oak graining and colouring, or the sombre solidity of the dark timber itself, all seemingly upheld by some very laborious but insecure contrivance. The impression, at least upon my own mind, is that of fearful downfall. But to close at length these hasty observations, which will in all probability excite more cavillers than converts, (for who may hope to convince in a matter of taste ) I can I think safely assure our thrifty ratepayers and churchwardens, that in raising the roof to a high and appropriate pitch, and by giving it the colour of the rest of the interior, they not only adopt one of the maxims which have rendered our own cathedrals and the ecclesiastical edifices of the continent the admiration of the whole world, but they secure to themselves and the parish a very considerable saving in church-erection, church-restoration, and let me add in church-conservation. Yours, &c. ARTHUR BENoN1 Evans. '

Ruddington Vicarage, M. vans, "oo" I HAVE been much interested with the communications from your correspondent respecting the authors of the various articles in the Quarterly Review : it must have cost him no small share of time and pains to have made so formidable a list of contributors, though, doubtless, he derived from the occupation much pleasure, and it must have given a very pleasant relief to his lonely life amongst the bleak hills of Derbyshire. I confess to having long been visited by a similar spirit of curiosity, and, though I cannot presume to so great success in my pursuits annong the anonymous contributors to the Edinburgh, yet, as I have been enabled to

make a few selections, I beg to pre- .

sent them for the amusement of your readers. The list, you will find, extends to No. 29, and, if the patience of your readers should not be exhausted, I shall be happy at some future time to continue the list.

I could very easily have increased the list of writers had I sent you the names of those who are generally considered to claim certain articles: but I havepurposely confined my list to those for whom I could give ample authority.

The names of the writers mentioned in the following list you will find to be those of

1. Jeffrey 15. Brougham 2. Sidney Smith 16. P. Elmsley 3. F. Horner 17. Sir W. Scott 4. Dr. T. Browne 18. George Ellis 5. Jno. Allen 19. Wilberforce 6. Playfair 20. Hallam 7. Murray 21. Hamilton 8. Malthus 22. Payne Knight 9. Leslie 23. Mackintosh 10. T. Moore 24. Gordon 11. Hazlitt 25. Chalmers 12. Romilly 26. Ugo Foscolo 13. Wilson 27. Chevenix

14. Palgrave Jeffrey's papers, having been printed by himself in a collective edition, are therefore chiefly evidenced by himself; but, as that collection does not profess to give more than a selection, of course there are many articles ascribed to him which will not be found in his own edition of his Works, but these, I trust, are given on sufficient authority. GENT, MAG. Wol. XXIII.

With regard to the articles of Sidney Smith, I may observe that I believe all which I have placed in this list will be found in his Works. What reason can be alleged for one article being twice printed, word for word, in the edition of his own works, and the same repetition of the same article in the second edition also : I have sent but few of Sir Jas. Mackintosh's papers; the edition of his Works is now on the eve of publication, as appears by their advertisement, and consequently your readers will be able to fill up their lists with the entire number of all his contributions. You will find a few names derived from a work which appeared some years since called “Selections from the Ed. Rev.;” but I have not placed much dependence upon that work for authority, as I find one article ascribed by it to the pen of Lady Morgan, which has subsequently been claimed by Thomas Moore himself. With these few remarks I beg to present the following list, hoping that some of your numerous readers may perhaps have a similar spirit of searching after the anonymous contributors to one of the most talented and influential periodicals of the present age.

[ocr errors][merged small]

Art. 2. Spital Sermon. By Rev. S. Smith. Wide his Works, vol. i. p. 1. Art. 7. Irvine's Emigration. By F. Horner, esq. Wide his Life, vol. i. p. 203. Art. 8. Thalaba. By Jeffrey. Wide Ed. Rev. vol. xxviii. p. 509, note. Art. 9. Rennell's Sermons. By Rev. S. Smith. Wide his Works, vol. i. p. I l. Art. 11. Christison on Schools. By F. Horner, esq. Vide his Life, vol. i. p. 203. Art. 12. Bowles on the Peace. By do. Wide do. p. 22. Art. 14. Utility of Country Banks. By Francis Horner, esq. Wide his Life, vol. i. p. 203. Art. 16. Sermon. By Rev. S. Smith. Wide his Works, vol. i. p. 28. Art. 18. Public Characters. By do. Wide do. vol. iv. p. 326. 3 S

« PreviousContinue »