Page images
PDF
EPUB

branches of the family, and has lately, it is said, been inherited by a young lady."

One more notice of this wonderful head: —

"This interesting relic is retained in great secresy, from the apprehension of a threat, intimated in the reign of George III., that if mado public, it wnuld be seized by government, as the only party to which it could properly belong." (" N. & Q.]" 1" S. v. 275.)

Now, as an embalmed head of Cromwell has been publicly exhibited, it is clear that there are two embalmed heads; and consequently the argument about the embalmment, previously alluded to, worthless as it is, falls to the ground. This fact is proved by the following exhibition advertisement from the Morning Chronicle of March 18th, 1799:

"The Real Embalmed Head of the Powerful and Renowned Usurper, Oliver Cromwell," &c, &c.

I need not quote the whole of the advertisement, as it has already appeared in "N. & Q." (1" S. xi. 496); but it ends with the following words : —

"A genuine Narrative relating to the Acquisition, Concealment, and Preservation of these Articles, to be had at the place of Exhibition."

"VVe all know what showmen's genuine narratives are worth; still there seems to be a rather

[blocks in formation]

I must apologise for occupying so much space and attention with this embalming argument, as used by the proprietors and exhibitors of Cromwells heads. I merely did so, to show the mental calibre of the race of anatomical relic-mongers. For I could have disposed of the question at once, by proving that Cromwell's head was not embalmed; nor can it be said even that his body was, in the sense in which the word embalmed is used now, and at the period of the Protector's death. Dr. George Bate, who was successively physician to Charles I., Cromwell, and Charles II., gave the autopsy of the usurper to the public in the second part of his JElenchi Motuum Nuperorum in Anglia, published just five years after Cromwell's death, when there must have been plenty alive to contradict him if he dared to state that which was in any form incorrect; and thus he tells what was done with Cromwell's body: —

"Corpus etsi exenteratum animate repletum, ceratisque sextuplicibus involutum, loculo primum plumbeo, dein ligneo fortique iucluderetur; obstacula tamen univcrsa perrnmpente fermento, totas perflavit axles adeo tetra Alephiti, ut ante solennes exequias terras mandari necessaxium merit"

So we learn that the intestines were removed, and their place being filled with spices, the body was wrapped in a six-fold cerecloth, put into a leaden coffin, and the last into a strong wooden one. Yet the corruption burst through all; and

the foul smell pervading the whole house, it was necessary to inter the body before the solemnities of the funeral. Not a word is said about the head: so it is to be hoped that wc shall hear no more of the Wilkinson embalmed cranium, and that-H. W. will acknowledge that the magnificent burial of the Protector is not "still a disputed point." For if the preceding quotation from the Elenchi Motuum be not history, it is the material from which history is formed, and would be received as good and lawful evidence in any English court of justice at the present day. Bate does not tell us what was done with the body; very probably, he did not know. But it was well known by the populace, at the magnificent lying in state and public funeral, that the body was not there, that its place was supplied by a waxen figure: and, while the better informed understood that Cromwell's friends—to use the words of Claudius—"in hugger-mugger" did inter him, the more ignorant and vulgar confidently believed that the Devil had saved all posthumous trouble, by flying away with the Protector wholly and corporeally. So general, and so strong was this belief, that even the grave and learned royal physician, Dr. Bate, absolutely condescends to contradict it, before he proceeds to describe the state of Cromwell's body after death.

The best and most rational argument for the authenticity of the Wilkinson head yet adduced, was given, as I am informed, at a lecture, not long since delivered in a suburban locality, where the head itself was exhibited. I may presume, that whatever the public paid for admittance was received for hearing the lecture, and not for seeing the head. However that may be, the lecturer, having called the attention of his audience to the roundness in form of the cranium, said: "Ladies and gentlemen, this is a convincing proof that the head is Cromwell's; for, as you all know, he was the chief of the Roundheads " I!

The subject is, indeed, quite beneath criticism; but any allusion to the heads of deceased notabilities has a very peculiar import at the present time, when a swarm of ephemera are only noticeable by their basking and buzzing in the reflected rays of a great name: when, on all sides, there re-echoes the jubilant chorus—" How delightfully we Shakspearian apples swim!" In the church at Stratford-upon-Avon, there are the following wellknown lines; little better than doggrel, it is true, yet of serious if not solemn signification : —

"GOOD TREND TOR JES03 SAKE FOHBEARE,
TO DIGO THE DUST EXCLOASK1) HEAKE;
BLESTE BE Y" MAN Y* SPARES THES STONES,
AND CVR8T BE HE T* MOVES MY BONES."

And it is to be hoped, that if any sacrilegious wretches dare to disturb the honoured remains of our great bard, under any pretext whatever, that the public, generally and individually, will neither sparp nor respect the bones of such grave-grubbing ghoules ; who, being destitute of moral feeling and intelligence, can be only impressed by the argumentum baculinum, freely administered under the dictum of Judge Lynch.

William Pinkerton.

Attention has once more been directed, in your columns, to the head said to be that of Cromwell, and now in the possession of Mr. W. A. Wilkinson. I have the pleasure of knowing that gentleman; and although I have not spoken to him on the subject, I feel assured that he would most cheerfully afford every facility for a proper examination, and I agree with your correspondent H. W. that such is desirable. I have seen the head several times; and, as I stated in a former communication, it is difficult to resist the evidence in favour of this being the head of the Protector. Mr. Wilkinson treasures the relic; but offers to those who view it, the evidence in his own possession, leaving each observer to draw his own conclusions. Mb. Bucklanu is in error in some not unimportant particulars; and I will give the true version of the history so far as it has descended to Mr. Wilkinson, and this version is sustained by documentary proof in his possession.

The head was not placed upon Temple Bar, but upon the top of Westminster Hall, along with the heads of Ireton and Bradshaw. About the latter end of the reign of James II., it was blown down on a gusty night, and picked up by the sentinel on duty. Probably this soldier might have been attached to the memory of the dead General, or have disposed of it to some old republican; but it is certain that it was not recovered, although a proclamation was issued by the government commanding its restoration. It was at length sold to a member of the family of Russell, of Cambridgeshire—a family which had been united to that of Cromwell by several marriages. It descended down to Samuel Russell, who exhibited it for money; but who ultimately sold it to Mr. Cox, who had a museum in Spring Gardens. This was in 1787. Mr. Cox, however, did not exhibit it; but, at the sale of this museum, sold it for 320?. to three joint purchasers. These persons exhibited the head about 1790, charging half-acrown for admission. The account then goes on to state, that the last of these persons died of apoplexy, and the head became the property of his daughter; and she sold it to Mr. Wilkinson, the father of its present proprietor. There is a memorandum in the handwriting of Mr. Wilkinson, and the following is an extract from it:—

"Juno 25, 1827. This head has now been in my possession for a period of Dfteen years. I have shown it to hundreds of people, and only one gentleman brought

forward an objection to any part of the evidence. He was a Member of Parliament, and a descendant by a collateral branch from Oliver Cromwell. He told me, in contradiction to my remarks, that chestnut hair never turned grey; that "he had a lock of hair, at his country house, which was cut from the Protector's head on his death-bed, and had been carefully passed down through his family to his possession, which lock of hair was perfectly grey. This gentleman has since expressed his opimon that the long exposure was sufficient to have changed the colour of the hair."

I think it has been stated, that when the coffin of Charles I. was opened, the hair was found to be of a light brown colour; while it is known that, at the period of his execution, the hair was a grizzly black. The change in this case was attributed to the process of embalming. The head, in the possession of Mr. Wilkinson, has been embalmed.

The memorandum from which I have quoted goes on to say, that the late Oliver Cromwell, Esq. (a descendant of the Protector), compared this head with an original cast in his possession, and was perfectly satisfied of the genuineness of the skull. Dr. Southgate, the librarian of the British Museum, after comparing it with several models and coins, expressed himself to the joint proprietors: "Gentlemen, you may be assured that this is really the head of Oliver Cromwell."

Mr. King, the medallist, has also left an opinion in writing. He says: —

"The head shown to me for Oliver Cromwell's I verily believe to be his real head, as I have carefully examined it with the coin; and think the outline of the face exactly corresponds with it, so far as remains. The nostril, which is still to be seen, inclines downwards, as it does in the coin: the cheek bone seems to be as it was engraved; and the colour of the hair is the same as in one well copied from an original painting by Cooper, in his time, by John Kirk, Bedford Street, Covent Garden, 1775."

The eminent sculptor, Flaxman, pronounced in its favour; and pointed out one remarkable feature, which he said was peculiar to the Cromwell family, and strongly marked in Oliver himself—that of a particularly straight lower jawbone.

The head is still upon the spike to which it was attached originally, and there is every appearance of the whole having grown into decay together, viz., the iron spike, the shaft to which it has been attached, and the head.

1 will, in a second article, give a recapitulation of the evidence on both sides of the question, if this is found acceptable to " N. & Q." T. B.

I believe there is no doubt the head in the possession of Mr. Wilkinson of Beckenham, Kent, is that of Cromwell. Let H. W. write to Mr. Wilkinson; I believe he will grant the privilege sought for. James Gilbert.

2, Devonshire Grove, Old Kent Road, S.E.

THE DANISH RIGHT OF SUCCESSION. (3'« S. v. 134.) In the time of Hamlet, the throne of Denmark was elective in the reigning house. (Koch, Tableau des Revolutions, i. 272, n. 2.) According to Saxo Grammaticus, Hamlet " counterfeited the madman to escape the tyranny of his uncle, and was tempted by a woman (through his uncle's procurement), who thereby thought to undermine the prince, and by that means to find out whether he counterfeited madness or not." Such madness, real or assumed, was necessarily a bar to his election to the monarchy. The Hamlet of history was not cut off in his prime, as Shakspeare disposes of him, but, on his return from England to Denmark, he slays his uncle, burns his palace, makes an oration to the Danes (a most eloquent one as given by Saxo) and is elected king. He goes back to England, kills the king of that country, returns to Denmark with two English wives, and, finally, falls himself through the treachery of one of these ladies. (Knight's Studies of Shahspere, ch. iii. p. 67.) Other instances of election are on record. Denmark since 1661 has been an absolute and hereditary monarchy, and was so confirmed by the whole nation. Frederick VII., the last king, on July 31, 1853, published a new law of succession, to the exclusion of females, and appointing the present king, then Prince Christian of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderbourg-Glucksburg, his successor, and after him, the male descendants of his present wife LouiseWilhelmine - Frederique-Auguste-Caroline- Julie, born Princess of Hesse, " daughter of the sister of the former king, Christian VIII." He thereby directs that the order of succession shall then be exclusively " agnatique;" and should a failure in male descent be likely to occur, he further directs (?) that the successor to the Danish throne shall take care to regulate the succession so as tb preserve the independence and integrity of the monarchy, and the rights of the crown, conformably to the second article of the treaty of London of May 8, 1852, and to obtain for such arrangement the assent of the European powers. (Annuairede Deux Mondes, 1853-4, p. 424.)

T. J. Buckton.

Among the causa causantes of Hamlet's discontent, set forth in the protasis of the drama which bears his name, is the wrong done to himself in the matter of the Danish regality; which Shakspeare's text, as well as authentic history, shows to have been elective; so continuing to be until the com

Earative yesterday of 1660, when it was made ereditary in the present regnant family. His uncle's procurement thereof, and his own disappointment, are ever before him; summing up his father's murder and his mother's marriage with—

"Popped in between the election and my hopes." And when, in his own last moments, the throne being again vacant, its occupant and its expectant each " bloodily stricken," he prophesies that the election will light on Fortinbras, to whom he gives his dying voice. Claudius, to be sure, speaks of himself more as an hereditary than an elected sovereign; conciliating his nephew as "the most immediate to our throne;" and talks of the jus dioinum as confidently as if he had a dynasty of a thousand years to reckon back upon; the argument, however, goes for little: it is a trick of custom with usurpers to prate as glibly of their legitimacy as usurers do of their conscience.

E. L. S.

Situation or Zoab (3r* S. v. 117, 141.) — On a journey some years since from Jerusalem to Petra and back, I struck the Dead Sea on my return towards the Holy City at its southernmost point, and coasted along the beach for some distance between the sea and that very remarkable salt ridge, Khasm-hsdum, which, in my humble opinion, is Lot's wife. At some little distance from the northern extremity of this ridge is a small heap of stones having more the appearance of the circular foundations of a tower, or, more correctly perhaps, the foundations of a circular tower than anything else. My Arab guides unasked called it by that name, or rather by its present Arabic representative, Zogheir. The expression was familar to me, though no Arabic or Hebrew scholar, from the fact that my guides always spoke of my companion by that title, El Zogheir, the lesser, as distinguished from myself (El Kebir) as being rather lofty of stature. This site must not be confounded with another in the neighbourhood where I afterwards passed the night. Zuweirah El Fohah and El Tatlah, the Upper and Lower, which has a different etymological root alogether I believe.

Now, to proceed to a still darker and more mysterious subject—the sites of the other cities of the plain. At a subsequent visit to the Dead Sea at its northernmost point, about two miles from the embouchure of the Jordan, I saw an island in the sea, which, owing no doubt to the shallowness of its waters after two seasons' draught, had emerged from its depths, and on it I could make out distinctly roughly-squared stones, and columns of the simplest form. Whether this be any vestige of Sodom or Gomorrah, Admah or Zeboim, I do not venture an opinion; I simply state the fact.

May we not look for the fearful fate of the cities in the word Gomorrah itself, which I have understood to be perpetuated in its present Arabic form, Ghamarah, to submerge.

I shall be happy to give C. Gbove or A. E. L any further information in my power. E. H.

Akchitects or Pershore And Salisbury (3r* S. T. 72.) — Your correspondent, writing upon the subject of the Richardson Family, observes in reference to what remains of the once stately Abbey of Pershore, which is now being restored, " that Mr. Gilbert Scott thinks its great lantern tower was erected by the same architect, or by a close imitator of him, who built the steeple of Salisbury."

A few years since, when making sketches of this building, I was also struck with the close resemblance mentioned, and being now engaged in writing a paper to show some remarkable similarities in the accredited works of some of our great mediaeval architects, such as Lanfranc, Gundulph, Flambard, William of Sens, and others, I sought in the History of Pershore Abbey, for the name of the abbot under whose rule it was probable that the tower and choir of Pershore were built, but could find no information on the subject. Upon searching, however, the Pratlington Manuscripts in the Library of the Society of Antiquaries, I found a full account of the abbots of the once famous monastery of Evesham, near Pershore, and singularly enough, I discovered that, in the year 1282, "William de Wytechurch or Marlborough, a monk of Pershore, was elected Abbot of Evesham," and that by him and his successors extensive additions were made to the abbey church.

Nothing can, therefore, be more probable than that this William de Wytechurch (not many miles from Salisbury), either brought with him into Worcestershire the master masons from Salisbury, or such working drawings as enabled him to erect the tower of Pershore in a manner so like that of Salisbury, which was then building. The coincidence may, I think, be thus satisfactorily accounted for. Benj. Fbrret.

Stamp Duty Ok Painters' Canvass (3rd S. v. 99, 141.)—Your correspondent, J. H. Burn, is correct as to the year (1831) he assigns for the total repeal of the excise duty on linens, canvasses, &c.; but he is incorrect as to the date he cites as that on which the above duty was first charged.

The excise duty on "silks, calicoes, linens, or stuffs, printed, painted, or stained," was first imposed by the statute 10 Anne cap. 19, for thirtytwo years from July 20,1712-13, but subsequently made perpetual; and under various Acts making regulations for securing the duties, &c, continued, till finally repealed by 1 Will. IV. cap. 17 (1831.)

"Linens," &c, produced to the officer of excise to be charged with duty for printing, painting, &c, had a mark impressed by him on each end of the piece, to denote that an account of it was token. This mark was technically termed & frame mark; and the ciphers thereon, when explained, incontestibly point out the year in which this

mark had been used on the fabric found stamped with it. The writer has cognisance of the frame marks used in 1781.

A seal, or duty charge stamp, was also used. The statement, therefore, that pictures painted by Gainsborough (who died in 1788), or by Sir Joshua Reynolds (who died in 1792), could not by possibility bear the excise mark, is thus shown to be erroneous. J. K. S.

Poor Cock. Robin's Death (3rd S. v. 98.) — In case this query should not catch the eye of any one more accurately informed, I venture to reply that I believe the coloured glass, representing Cock Robin's death, is to be found in the church of Clipsham, in Rutlandshire, near Stamford; though I saw two or three fine churches on the same day last summer, and neglected to make a note of it, so that I cannot be quite certain. My impression is, that it was neither very old nor English glass ; but a Low-Country glass, of a late date. C. W. Bingham.

Longevity or Clergtmen (3rd S. v. 22, 44, 123.)—The Rev. James Fishwick was licensed to the Chapelry of Pndiham, Lancashire, April 10, 1740, and was buried at Padiham, April 26, 1793, aged eighry-two, and having held the incumbency for fifty-three years. H. Fishwick.

Let me add to your list the Rev. John Haynes, rector of Cathistock, Dorset, who enjoyed that living from 1698 to 1758, a period of sixty years. His age was ninety when he died, and his lengthened tenure must have been rather annoying to the patron, for he was presented by the bishop on a lapse. His predecessor in the living was one Michael Cheeke, who succeeded his father, Robert Cheeke. The latter died in 1677. Can any of your readers give me information about either?

Dorset.

Fowls With Human Remains (3rd S. v. 55.)— In reply to Captain Mackenzie's query whether the bones of fowls have ever been discovered associated with human remains, I inform him that during the excavations at Warka, in Chaldea, carried on by Mr. Loftus between 1849 and 1852, bones of fowls were frequently found deposited upon the coffin lids disinterred there, and in one case the bones of a small bird were found inside a coffin. Flints and steel, glass bottles, beads, terracotta lamps, dishes, &c. &c, were exhumed at the same time. H. C.

Alfred Bunn (3rd S. v. 55.) — Probably the Rev. H. T. Bunn, of Abergavenny, who, I have been informed, was a brother of the above, would supply the information required. H. B.

Mjjvius (3rd S. iv. 168, 238.)—The Mtevius of Virgil and Horace (Bnc. iii. 90, Epod. x.) was probably a real person who bore that name. (See Smith's Class. Dictionary, i. 478, tit. "Bavius.") As Horace died forty-nine years and Virgil sixtytwo before Martial was born, we may infer that their Msavius was not hia. De Mavio, lib. x. ep. 76, does not relate to the same person as In Mavium, lib. xi. ep. 46. The first is, —

"Jucundus, probus, innocens, amicus
Lingua doctus utraque, cuius uiium est,
Sed magnum vitium, quod est poeta."

It is better to refer to than to cite what is said of the other. On the first Le Maire quotes from a commentator whose name he does not give, —

"Querela hcec et indignatio ipsius Martialis videtur, Bed per modestiam sibi adsciscit nomen Mtevii mali scilicet poeto;" and adds, " Non hoc credo: Msevii vicem dolet poeta, et poctarum omnium, et suam, at non suam sub persona Msevii."

In the examples of the civil law Mtevius bears the same relation to Titius as Roe to Doe in the English. Aulus Agerius is one of the same family. His name occurs in the form called Slipulatio Aguiliana, given in Inst. iii. t. 30, and D. xlvi. t. 18:

"Quidquid'te mihi ex quacumque causa dare facere oportet oportebit, prtesens in diemve, aut sub conditione, quarumque rerum mihi tecum actio est, quaeque vol adversus te petitio, vol adversus te persecutio est, eritve, qnodque tu meum babes, tencs, possides, dolovc malo fecisti, quo minus possideas, quanti quoeque earum rerum res erit, tantam pecuniam dare stipulatus est Aulus Agerius spopondit Numerals Xigidius. Quod Numerius Kigidius Aulo Agerio spopondit id haberetne a se acceptum, Kunierus Nigidius Aulo Agerio rogavit, Aulus Agerius Numerio Nigidio acceptum fecit."

I cannot find any "Caius Sigjeus," and suspect that " Sigseus" is a fault of the pen or press for Seiut, which would connect the last name with the rest. Plutarch notices the form : —

Ata ri Ti)v vifjufnjv dadyovres, \4ysiv KtMvovmv' "Oirou av Titos, iy&> Tdla; Tl6r(pov, Soirfp M fiifrots eu'flvf tfffaai ry Koivavtiv atrdmuv Kal ffwdpx*lv, Kal To fitv frnKoifievdv iffrtv' "Orov (tv Kvptos Kal oiVooVffToViiy, Kal iy&> Kvpla Kal otKoMorrotva ' rois 8' ivdfiaffi ro{rrois SXAa'v K^xfrnvrat Kotvois olffiy, Iboirtp ot Vulukoi Vilov, Sifiov, Kal Aoixtov, Titiok, Kc\ ol <pt\i!vo<pot Aiieya Kal Qivva ■KapaKap.Sdjrooaui; — Quastiones Romanic, Q. xxx., ed. Wyttenbach, iii. 111. Oxon.,1796.

The writer in The Enquirer must have been imposed upon, or have thought any names good enough for his readers. H. B. C.

U. U. Club.

Iiyla Holden (3rd S. v. 115.) — In answer to the query of H. S. G., I beg to give the following particulars respecting "Hyla Holden, of Wednesbury, gent.," being, as I am, his great-great-greatnephew. He was born in 1719, and married in 1745, Rebecca (not Elizabeth, as H. S. G. states), daughter of John Walfurd, of Deritend, co. Warwick (not Wednesbury), gent. He died in 1766 (not 1790), and his wife died in 1804. I have only heard of one child of his, Hyla, who died in the prime of life from the effects of a broken

thigh, and left several children, his eldest son being the Rev. Hyla Holden, who, at the time of his death, held the perpetual curacy of Erdington, near Birmingham. Two sons of his are now living, viz., the Rev. H. A. Holden, LL.D., head master of Ipswich School, and H. A. Holden, Esq., solicitor of Birmingham. 0. M. Holder. Corpus Christi College, Oxford.

Quotations Wanted (3rd S. iv. 288.) — The lines commencing with —

"O mark again the coursers of the sun!"

will, I believe, be found in Rogers's " Epistle to a Friend." VV. J. Till.

Croydon.

Sidesmen (3rt S. v. 34, 65, 81.)—With reference to the censorial duties of Sidesmen, the following extracts may be interesting. They -are from one of the old parish books of St. Mary Matfelon, Whitechapel. There were altogether notices of twenty-two such presentments in the years 1582—1587. It would be interesting to know when this practice arose, and how long it continued.

"1582. Aug. 29. Agreed that presentments be made for the wyfe of Thomas Lownsvy, suspected to be a sorceresse.

Randall Ridgewaie for railinge uppon the churchwardens when yv went to straineTdistrain.]

Richard Tailor for absentinge himself one Sondaie y» 25 of August from church, and for working.

Itm. the same Rychard and his wyfe for skolding, fighting, and other disorders.

The wyfe of John Woods for skolding and rayling.

Oct 1, 1583. A presentment against Ralphe Dudley for harboringe of susspected parsons as Jane Trosse and such like.

Against y• wyfe of Willm. Bridge as a notorious skold.

Against Thomas Whitackers for plainge at cardes and tables one y« Sabbath daie at ye time of comon prayers.

Feb. 4, 1584. Robert Banister for a railer and disquieter of the neighbours. Wd Collins for harbouringe the same Robert."

A. D. T.

Merton College.

Colkitto (3rd S. v. 118.) —It may interest your correspondent Philomathes to cite the following passages, from the Legend of Montrose, by Sir Walter Scott, whom nothing escaped, in which mention is made of Colkitto:

"' Our deer-stalkers,' said Angus M'Aulay,'who were abroad to bring in venison for this honourable party, have heard of a band of strangers, speaking neither Saxon nor pure Gaelic, and with difficulty making themselves understood by the people of the country, who are marching this way in arms, under the leading, it is said, of Alnster Ml Donald, who is commonly called Young Colkitto.'" Edition 1830, p. 107.

And again: —

"Behind these charging columns marched in line the Irish, under Colkitto, intended to form the reserve." — Chapter xix. p. 277.

OXONIENSIS.

« EelmineJätka »