Ham.

Itis proposed to enlarge or reconstruct the ancient Church of Portskewet, Monmouthshire. The building is in sound condition, and with its remarkable old churchyard cross is a most venerable and picturesque object. Harold had a palace at Portskewet, and Mr. Freeman is inclined to believe not only that he was the founder of a church there, but that the existing structure is substantially his erection (see “Journal of British Archæological Association,” vol. x.). The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings will do well to watch the proceedings.

THE SUFFIX “HAM” NOT EXCLUSIVELY DERIVED FROM A TEUTONIC SOURCE, BUT OCCASIONALLY ALSO FROM THE CELTIC.

By James Hurly Pring, M.D.

IN a former volume ofThe Antiquarian Magazine(vol. iii. p. 127) I pointed out that the place-nameHamptondid not necessarily represent the Saxon “home-town,” as has so generally, yet erroneously, been assumed, but that the name is frequently derived also fromAvonor ratherAfon, the Celtic word for water or a river, and that it ought, therefore, strictly to beAfonton.

It was shown that this latter view was maintained by Camden, in evidence of which he cites Leland to prove that Hampton Court was anciently called Avon, as it appears in quoting from him the following lines:—

“Est locus insolito rerum splendore superbusAlluiturque vagâ Tamisini fluminis undâ;Nomine ab antiquo jam tempore dictus Avona.”“Where Father Thames his gentle stream rolls on,Avona called, an ancient name it bears.”Gough’sCamden, vol. ii. p. 78.

Here, then, and throughout the paper referred to, it will be seen thatHamis presented to us chiefly, if not solely, in its aspect as a prefix.

It is now my intention to proceed to consider it more especially as a suffix, in which use the instances of it are far more numerous than those in which it is employed as a prefix.

It would seem, then, as a suffix to be almost universally regarded as representing the Saxon “home,” and even Isaac Taylor himself gives no other than a Teutonic derivation for it.

True it is that in this derivation he makes a distinction, dividing it into the two forms of hăm and hām, maintaining that the former signifies an enclosure, whilst the latter is “the Home.” Without venturing to question the accuracy of this distinction, it is to be regretted that (except, indeed, so far as may be guessed at from its associations) it leaves us without any rule whereby we may be enabled to distinguish the hām, thegeheimor home, from hăm an enclosure; whilst, as just stated, Taylor altogether omits to notice that there is yet another distinct source from which “ham” is derived, which isindeed in no respect Teutonic, but is clearly to be referred to the Celtic, as insisted upon both by Camden and by Leland.

The instances in which the termination-hammust be thus referred to the Celtic (as a Saxon corruption of the wordAfon) are well marked and are by no means rare, and it is possible that some of those which have been regarded as examples of hăm, an enclosure, may be found to belong rather to the Celtic derivation from Afon. As an illustration ofhamin the latter aspect, I will at once refer to the class of examples of the word which is furnished by those large tracts of country which are or formerly were liable to inundation from the occasional overflow of some adjacent river (afon), and which have accordingly received the appellation of “hams”—that is, rich low-lying lands in the vicinity of rivers.

These extensive tracts of marsh-land cannot be supposed, especially at the very early period when the name ofhamwas imposed upon them, to have represented “an enclosure,” whilst their general character, and their liability to be frequently flooded, alike forbid the notion that the name of ham in this case was originally associated with a “home or dwelling.”

Each of these “hams,” then, I apprehend must be held to furnish a marked example of the derivation of its name from the Celtic Avon, as it will be found that the distinctive feature ofa riveris present in each of them, and in one case the river even still retains the original Celtic name ofAvon.

As examples of some instances of the name occurring on the banks of the rivers in Somerset, we have the LoxtonHams, the BerrowHams, the PauletHamswith Otterhampton, which latter name, assuming its derivation to be Teutonic, should be the “Otter’s home-town”! Biddisham, Burnham, and Lympsham, the latter being the ancient Lyn-pils-ham, the rich pasture land by the creek of the Lyn or the River Axe, with many others.

Passing now into Devonshire we come upon the NorthHams, and the SouthHams—names which in this case cannot be held to represent either homes or enclosures, whilstwaterorriverswill be found to be conspicuously present in both instances.

In his review of “Risdon’s Survey of Devon,” 1785, Chapple refers to the North and South Hams as being “ancient names,” and states that the county of Devon had originally athreefolddivision, anciently known by the names ofEast,South, andNorth Hams(p. 116). This, however, is the only notice I have seen of theEast Hams.

As one of the places comprehended in the district of theNorth Hams, we have Littleham, which Risdon regards as “Little Home,” assuming-hamin this case “to signify the same with home or habitation.”

But there is no reason to regard either this or Parkhamor any of the other instances of the terminal-hamwhich are found here, as being referable to a Teutonic source, any more than is the case with the hams in Somerset, and as regards the instance of Northamitself, it is interesting to note that (except the omittedton) we have here the actual name of Northam[p]ton, in which Camden expressly insists that thehamisafon.

If we now proceed to the South Hams, we reach an extensive tract of land presenting the same characteristic features as those generally observed in connection with the name ofHam, where it occurs in the situations already alluded to, and which do not correspond either to an enclosure or a home.

We find it, for example, stated in Chapple that “about Teignmouth, Dartmouth, Totness, Modbury, Plymouth, Ashburton, and all those parts of the country which are called the South Hams, the lands are generally of a different kind from any of the former,” &c. (p. 20). Now it is manifest that such an extensive tract of country as that to which the term “South Hams” is here applied cannot possibly claim to be regarded in the light of a home, or an enclosure.

On investigating more closely the district known as theSouth Hams, it will be found to possess many points of special interest.

Here the nameHam, as associated with the presence ofrivers, receives abundant illustration; a considerable portion of the South Hams lying between the rivers Dart and Erme, and through the centre of this runs the RiverAvon, which by its name lends confirmation to the view here maintained as to the occasional derivation of the name of Ham from the Celtic. Along the course of this river it will be seen that the names ofhamandavonseem almost to alternate, or are at least promiscuously intermingled, thus affording additional evidence of their being cognate to each other, and of their common origin.

We have, for example, the name ofHamalone, and ofAveton(Avon-ton) alone, ofAveton(Avon-ton) Gifford, of Bickham,TopshamBridge, Hendham, and further on ofAvonneigh, and lastly of Bantham, occurring at the very mouth of theAvon.

Another feature of considerable interest in connection with the South Hams of Devon, and pointing in a direction confirmatory of the views here advanced, is the fact that the Cornu-British languagecontinued in use in this district long after it had ceased to be spoken in the other parts of the surrounding country. This fact is noticed by Polwhele both in his “Historical Views of Devonshire,” 1791, and in his “History of Cornwall,” whilst Drew affirms that the Cornu-British was spoken here in the time of Edward I. (1272-1307). It is deserving of notice also that an interesting note by F. W. P. Jago in reference to this question has lately appeared in the second volume of the “Western Antiquary” (pp. 202, 203).

Without intending by any means to question the fact that in numerous instances the terminal-hamis derived from the Teutonic, and rightly bears the meaning of “home,” “habitation,” or “enclosure,” I deem it desirable, whilst on this subject, to draw attention to an interesting remark in reference to it which has been made by so high an authority as Mr. Benjamin Thorpe. In commenting on the fact that the Kentish kingdom was founded by adventurers fromJutland(if not actually by Hengist and Horsa), Mr. Thorpe proceeds to observe: “The termination-ham, so common in Kent and elsewhere in England, corresponding to the Germanheim, doesnot appear in Jutland, so far as my means enable me to ascertain.”[82]

The very general, indeed the almost universal reference of “ham” to a Teutonic origin, seems to invest this observation by Thorpe with peculiar interest, and I would venture accordingly to commend its consideration to all those who can discover in “ham” nothing else than the Saxon “heim,” “home,” or “dwelling.”

On the other hand, it must at once be admitted that the derivation of “ham” from the CelticAfonhas received little or no recognition from the days of Camden down to the present time. In regarding it, however, from this point of view, enough it is presumed has now been said to rescue it for the future from this neglect, and to establish its title, in many cases at least, to be rightly and legitimately referred to the Celtic, as here contended for.

Amongthe “South Kensington Art Handbooks” now in course of preparation is one on the “Saracenic Art of Egypt,” by Mr. Stanley Lane-Poole.Itis reported that there are only five genuine signatures of Shakespeare in existence. “From this it is inferred,” writes theSan Francisco News Letter, “that the Bard of Avon did not make a practice of endorsing his friends’ notes—another evidence of his good sense.”

Amongthe “South Kensington Art Handbooks” now in course of preparation is one on the “Saracenic Art of Egypt,” by Mr. Stanley Lane-Poole.

Itis reported that there are only five genuine signatures of Shakespeare in existence. “From this it is inferred,” writes theSan Francisco News Letter, “that the Bard of Avon did not make a practice of endorsing his friends’ notes—another evidence of his good sense.”

Christmas-Eve in Devonshire.—In Devonshire is still observed on Christmas-Eve an ancient custom, which is supposed to ensure a good crop of apples. The farm-servants procure an ash-fagot, round which they carefully put as many binds as possible, because they are rewarded with cups of cider equivalent in number to the binds which encircle the fagot. The fagot is then placed on the fire, and as each bind bursts they claim a cup of cider; they have also a bowl of toast and cider which they take into the orchard, and, putting a piece of toast on the king or principal apple-tree, repeat the following lines:—

“Apple-tree, we wassail thee,To bear and to blow apples enow,Hats full, caps full,Three bushel bags full,Hurrah! hurrah! hurrah!”

It appears that exactly the same words are not always used on this occasion, a different version being given in theGentleman’s Magazinefor 1791.

Tantivy.—According to Harrod’sHistory of Stamford, the origin of this sporting cry is to be sought in the name of St. Tibba, who lived as an anchoritess at Ryhall, near Stamford, and died and was buried there. According to Camden, she was the patroness of hawking, fowling, and other sports, like the Roman Diana. She was a relative of Penda, King of Mercia, and lived a holy life at Godmanchester, in Hunts, before she went to Ryhall. Stukely says that her cell was at the north-west corner of the outside of Ryhall Church. She is thus commemorated by Drayton in hisPolyolbion:—

“And totheseSt. Tibba let us call,In solitude to Christ that pass’d her whole delight,In Godmanchester made her an anchorite,Among which of that house for saints that reckon’d be,Yet never anymore gracèd the same than she.”

Curious Inventory.—The following, from the original in my hands, may interest some of your City readers: “An inventary of the goodes creditte and debtes of Thomas Potter, late of the parishe of St. Nicholas Acon, of the Citie of London, salter, deceased. Made and praysed the one and twentith daie of Aprill, by Richard Smithe, grocer, Thomas Withers, habberdasher, and William Casson, grocer, in the year of Our Lord one thowsand six hundred and nyne, as followeth: Imprimis, one fether bed and a boulster, iiili; item, two cloakes, xxviiis; item, one gowne, xvs; item, two paire of breeches, xiii iiid; item, two ould dubletts, vs; item, one suite of black rathe, xxs; item, two jerkins, viiis; item, two paire of stockinges and a paire of mittens, viiid; item, two wasecotes and a hatt, iii xd; item, eleven fallinge bandes and a paire of cuffes, iisiiii; item, five shirtes and fower handkerchers, viisiid; item, two handtowells and a cloth (?) capp, xs; item, a bible and a prayer-booke, iiisiid; item, a brasse candlesticke and one seale, xviiid; item, one chamberpott, xiid; item, a brushe, iid; item, a leatherne trunke, vis; item, a cashe chest, viiis; item, one half of two cannas amornifi (?), xiiiili iiid.” The last two words are very illegibly written. The document is imperfect.

Greater London.(Vol. ii.) ByEdward Walford, M.A.Cassell & Co. 1884.

Theabove-mentioned firm must be congratulated on the very able manner in which they have performed their part in the production of the volume before us; for obvious reasons, it is not for us to speak of the editor’s share in the work, further than to state that he has conscientiously tried to perform the task which he had undertaken. This volume, which completes the work of “Greater London,” comprises the whole of that portion of the metropolitan police area, outside the limits of the Board of Works, which is on the south side of the Thames, extending from Erith in the east to Kingston and Esher in the west, and embracing within its scope the important towns of Woolwich, Chislehurst, Bromley, Croydon, Epsom, Richmond, Kew, and Wimbledon, together with the several smaller parishes, villages and hamlets, that lie within its area. This area, almost every nook and corner of which—thanks to our railway system—may be visited on the Saturday afternoon holidays in summer, and most of them even in winter, contains, as we need hardly add, much that may interest the ordinary visitor, should he care for quiet and peaceful rural scenery, or the artist who may be in search of choice “bits.” Mansions and other buildings will be found possessing historical associations: such, for instance, as Chislehurst, with its memories of the antiquary Camden, and the Emperor Louis Napoleon; Hayes and Keston, the favourite haunts of Pitt and Wilberforce; Beddington, where we find the Carews and Sir Walter Raleigh; Croydon, where there is much to read about in the long roll of primates who have occupied the palace there till Addington became their home; Epsom, where we see “the quality” drinking the waters, and Lord Derby and his friends inaugurating those races whose name is not only national, but world-wide. In the chapters devoted to Richmond and its neighbourhood the reader is placed in contact with bygone English sovereigns and princes and princesses; here, too, he is surrounded by Kitty Clive, Gay, Thomson, and a host of children of the Muses. Indeed, from end to end of the volume the reader is brought face to face with great men and women who have added a light to the pages of English history. It only remains to add that the work possesses a copious index, and that it is profusely illustrated, engravings being given, not only of places as they exist in the present day, but also of historical buildings which have long since been swept away. Of these we may mention Nonsuch Palace, near Cheam, and the Old Palace at Richmond, which latter, through the kindness of Messrs. Cassell, we are enabled to reproduce.

Calendar of State Papers: Colonial, East Indies, 1625-1629.(Rolls Series.) Longman & Co. 1884.

Mr. Sainsburyhas brought out a fourth volume of the “Calendar of East India State Papers,” which, in point of intrinsic interest and editorial treatment, will suffer by comparison with none of its predecessors. Any authoritative compilation, dealing with the vast collection of materials available for the history of British Colonies in their official relations with the parent State, is sure to command the widest interest; and such a work, when treating of the early and truly wayward fortune of the mighty national stake contained in our Indian Empire, should be peculiarly attractive to the countrymen of Clive and Warren Hastings.

The original documents calendered in the present volume consist, as before, chiefly of the Court minutes of the East India Company, domestic State papers and correspondence, original correspondence, East India State papers, and Holland correspondence. The light which these combine to throw upon the contemporary history of our greatest trading community is sometimes almost painfully intense.

The Company in 1625 was in truth placed in both a dangerous and a helpless position. The Amboyne massacre of three years before was as yet not only unpunished, but almost unreproved, except by the voice of popular indignation in England. We may, in fact, estimate the inaction of the Government to a certain extent in proportion to the violence of this outcry against “that most bloody and treacherous villainy.” It was in the spring of this year (1625), we read here, that the crisis provoked by official supineness was reached, a popular outbreak against Dutch residents being apprehended on the approaching Shrove Tuesday. This movement had been fanned by certain incendiary pamphlets; by a picture, and by a play, each reflecting strongly upon the inhumanity of the Dutch towards English traders. The picture, in especial, appears to have been a masterpiece of animosity, for therein was “lively, largely, and artificially” set forth the interior of the supposed Torture Chamber at Amboyne. Now that a tardy justice was about to be dealt to the judicial murderers of their fellows, the Company was content to permit the picture itself to be suppressed. Yet that the members were secretly proud of their manifesto is apparent from their naïve regret that “His Majesty and their Lordships” had not been “presented with a view of this horrid spectacle.” Owing to the precautions of the Council, the fateful day passed without an outbreak, but none the less, as the editor justly observes, the sore rankled long in the hearts of true-born Englishmen. At length reprisals were instituted, and three Dutch ships were arrested at Portsmouth, only to be released, in return, as the popular rumour went, for a secret bribe of three tons of gold. Finally, the dispute was allowed to drag out its slow length in diplomatic correspondence, and a party-trial in Holland.

The remaining features of interest in this volume are connected with the private details of the Company’s financial ventures, and these reveal a state of affairs most melancholy to contemplate. To such a depth of poverty had the once flourishing Company sunk, that in 1629, with a debt of £300,000 already incurred, the Governor was compelled to confess their inability to advance £10,000 to the Crown towards the expenses of the French War. At the same time, too, every investment in the Far East turned out disastrously. The Dutch not only pillaged English factories with impunity, but openly thwarted any chance of carrying on a lucrative trade, by forcing their own spices upon English factors at ruinous prices. Moreover, the constitutions of our countrymen too often succumbed to the pestilential swamps and jungles of New Holland. Then the natives, as usual an unreliable element, both broke their contracts and ill-treated the Company’s factors, in spite of their “accursed oaths to the contrary.” Yet in the end British constancy and enterprise prevailed. Fresh subscriptions poured in, new ships were fitted out, and returned laden with ample wealth. The English merchantmen stoutly held their own against the Dutch pirates, and beat them off—one ship (theLion) against ten—in an action that recalled the glories of Grenville and hisRevenge. Therefore it will be seen that this volume closes with a happier augury of renewed peace and prosperity.

Doctor Johnson: His Life, Works and Table Talk.(Centenary edition.) T. Fisher Unwin. 1884.

Itwas inevitable that the Centenary of Dr. Johnson’s death should recall into existence some at least of his contributions to English literature, and Mr. Unwin has done well in publishing at this moment a choice selection from the “burly Doctor’s” works, under the above title. The littlebrochureon our table by no means exhausts that mine of wealth which is to be found in the writings of Dr. Johnson; but, so far as it goes, it is carefully and conscientiously selected, and ought to be most welcome to his many admirers.

Johnsoniana.Arranged by R. W. Montagu. Boot & Son. 1884.

A mostappropriate and well-timed collection of the best of Dr. Johnson’s sayings and opinions, gleaned not only from Boswell but from other sources. These are arranged in chapters under separate headings. Is it by accident, or by set purpose, we wonder, that one chapter is devoted to “Love, Friendship, and Affection,” and another to “Marriage”? The life of Johnson prefixed to this little volume is a happy model of condensation. Published at a shilling, it ought to command just now a very large sale.

Pottery and Porcelaìn.ByF. Litchfield. Bickers. 1884.

Thisis a most useful manual for the collector of old china and articles ofvertu, a guide based on long and large practical experience. The book is partly historic, and the chapters on “Ancient Pottery” and “The Mediæval and Renaissance Periods” will be perhaps the most interesting to our readers. But those whose tastes are more modern than antiquarian will derive more pleasure from the chapters relating the story of the introduction of porcelain into Europe; while nobody, however large his or her own experience may be, can afford to despise or to dispense with the lists of the marks and monograms adopted by the Wedgwoods, the Spodes, the Copelands, and other manufacturers of pottery, or with the “hints and cautions to collectors” to be found on pp. 191-199. The illustrations are numerous and excellent; and the little work can boast the merit of a very careful index.

Phallicism.ByHargrave Jennings. G. Redway. 1884.

This book is writtenad clerum, and appeals to the scholar only, and not to the multitude. It is a masterly and exhaustive account of that worship of the creative powers of nature which, under various names, has prevailed among all the nations of antiquity and of mediæval times, alike in Egypt and India, in Italy and Gaul, among the Israelites of old, and among the primitive inhabitants of Great Britain and Ireland. Mr. Jennings treats of his subject in its celestial and terrestrial, its heathen and Christian aspects; and he traces its connection with the Gnostics, the Buddhists, and the Rosicrucians. He sees Phallicism in the obelisks and pyramids of the Nile, in the monolithic circles of Stonehenge and of Avebury, and in the Round Towers of Ireland. A worship or cult so ancient and so widely spread, it is clear, must have a history, and a curious one; and this Mr. Jennings has traced in a way so scholarly as to leave little or nothing to be said by others. He has carried his inquiry much further back, and also in many more countries, than all previous writers, including Mr. R. P. Knight, who drew his pictures of Phallic worship chiefly from what he had himself witnessed in Italy and the South of France. It will surprise very many of our readers to learn that the erection of the Tower of Babel was probably an early outburst ofthis worship, and that its hidden and mystic meaning was the same as that of the Round Towers in “the sister island,” which were nothing more or less than fire towers, expressive of the ancient faith of the Parsees. How far these speculations are true in fact, must be left to the learned to decide. But certainly the work before us will be found a most valuable auxiliary to all who care to pursue such a subject of inquiry, a subject for which Mr. Jennings is the better fitted on account of his long and intimate acquaintance with the Rosicrucians, their tenets, and their practices. The issue of the work is limited to 400 copies for English subscribers.

Benvenuto Cellini. Nouvel Appendice, aux recherches sur son Œuvre et sur les Pièces qui lui sont attribuées.ParE. Plon. 4to. Paris: Plon, Nourrit et Cie.

Ourreaders may perhaps remember that some time ago we reviewed M. Eugène Plon’s magnificent volume on Benvenuto Cellini.[83]From the extreme care with which the work was done, it was quite evident that we had before us the result of enthusiastic sympathy with the artist whose biography we were invited to study, and whose genius was so thoroughly appreciated. M. Plon would not take a final leave of his hero, and every fresh discovery referring to him would be duly recorded and given to the public. Nor have we been disappointed of our expectation, for the quartobrochureof which we have just transcribed the title-page, is an interesting contribution to the history of art in general, and of Benvenuto Cellini in particular. It consists of two parts, which we shall briefly notice in succession.

“Following the example of Orsino, surnamed Il Cervaicolo, and of so many masters belonging to the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, it might be supposed that Benvenuto Cellini, also, had left behind him portraits in coloured wax, such as we often meet now in public museums and private collections. Comparing an entry forming part of the inventory drawn up after the artist’s death (‘due scatolini di ritratti del Serenissimo Principe Abbozzati,’) with a memorandum of works executed for the Cardinal di Ravenna (‘e per uno suo ritratto grande di cera’), we had conjectured this to be the case, and our hypothesis derived a certain kind of countenance from the fact that Lastri notices (Osservatore Fiorentino, Firenza, 1758) a portrait in wax of Alessandro di Medici, hung up as a votive offering in the Church della Nunziata, and which was ascribed to Benvenuto. Our presumption has now become a reality, thanks to the discovery of a portrait of Francesco di Medici, which we reproduce. It is in coloured wax, and rather high relief on a dark back-ground.”

This description is M. Eugène Plon’s. He further informs us in a footnote that the portrait in question, originally preserved at Prato, is now at Florence, and belongs to the collection of the Commendatore Luigi Vai; its existence was pointed out to our author by the Director of the State Paper Office of Tuscany, Commendatore Cesare Guasti; it was intended for the celebrated Bianca Capello, to whom Francesco di Medici forwarded it, together with this short note:—

“Amata Bianca,—“Fino da Pisa il mio ritratto u’ invio che ’l nostro maestro Cellini m’a fatto in cera. Il mio chore prendete.D. Francisco.”

“Amata Bianca,—“Fino da Pisa il mio ritratto u’ invio che ’l nostro maestro Cellini m’a fatto in cera. Il mio chore prendete.

D. Francisco.”

There is no doubt whatever, therefore, on the authenticity of this portrait. M. Plon has had it photographed in the original size, and it is impossible to imagine anything more exquisite as a work of art. Withreference to the date, it must be assigned between 1568 and 1570, for we know that Benvenuto Cellini died in the beginning of 1571, and about the close of the preceding year he complained of suffering from a severe bronchial attack, which had obliged him to discontinue work for the space of several weeks.

M. Plon has taken the opportunity afforded by the portrait to give us a short sketch of the life of Bianca Capello, her first marriage with Pietro Bonaventuri, the romantic adventures which followed upon it, and her subsequent relations with Francesco di Medici. He has added to his interesting memoir two portraits of Bianca: one by Angiolo Bronzino, preserved in the Uffizi Gallery; the other likewise by Angiolo Bronzino, exhibited in that of the Palazzo Pitti.

The second part of M. Plon’s supplement or appendix is devoted to an account of several works of art ascribed to Benvenuto Cellini. We first meet with a statue of the god Pluto, belonging to a Londonvirtuoso, and which was exhibited at the Burlington Fine Arts Club in 1879. It is supposed to have been cast in the Petit-Nesle foundry, and to have been originally one of the twelveDii Majoresordered by Francis I., and which were to have been worked in silver as decorations for his festivals. There is nothing to prove that we have here a production of Benvenuto Cellini, but it certainly belongs to the school of Michael Angelo, and if the artist is not Cellini he must be Giovanni di Bologna.

The next thing to notice is a large basin of silver-gilt workmanship, belonging to Lord Cowper, and the ewer corresponding to which is described and reproduced in M. Plon’s first volume; it represents a series of scenes from the Old Testament. “The richness and elegance of the compositions,” says our author, “betray the hand of a first-rate artist.” Let us add that both the statue of Pluto previously mentioned and the present basin have found a place amongst the illustrations of the work we are now reviewing.

Two other articles ofvertu(two cups, or rather their mountings) are also ascribed as probably Cellini’s work, on the authority of M. Alfred Darcel (letter to M. Edmond Bonnaffé, in theChronique des Arts et de la Curiosité, April 14, 1883). We have further to mention two gold jewels intended to be worn on a man’s cap (nella berretta), and which were engraved by Cellini’s rival, Caradosso. This naturally leads M. Plon to insert a letter addressed by our artist to Isabella d’Este, Duchess of Mantua, a letter in which he adds further details to those he had already given (seeBenvenuto Cellini) on Caradosso.

The last description we have to allude to here is that of a salt-cellar, which appears to have been made for Frederigo II., Duke of Mantua, and which was a work of high art. M. Plon gives us the correspondence relating to it, correspondence preserved in the archives of the Gonzaga family, and which has been copied there by M. Armand Baschet, who has so often and in so remarkable a manner contributed to our knowledge of the social, political, and intellectual history of Italy during the sixteenth century.

In conclusion, this elegantbrochureis an important and necessary appendix to the volume we reviewed last year; it may be regarded as not only a supplement to M. Plon’scatalogue raisonnéof Benvenuto Cellini’s work, but a memoir of Bianca Capella, and a graphic though far from edifying sketch of Italian life at the time of the Reformation.

English Etchings, Parts xli. and xlii. (D. Bogue, 27, King William-street, W.C.), which are now before us, are fully up to the standard of theparts previously published. Among the plates calling for special mention in these pages is an interesting addition to the series of etchings of Old London, “Covent Garden Market,” by Mr. A. W. Williams. Orleton Church, Herefordshire, a spirited etching by Mr. Oliver Baker, shows the fine Jacobean pulpit of oak, covered with elaborate carving, and part of the chancel arch with the head of a bishop in mitre and amice as a drip-stone termination.

“Emori nolo; sed me esse mortuum nihil æstimo.”—Epicharmus.

The Rev. Hugh Pigot, Rector of Stretham, author of “Suffolk Superstitions” and “The History of Hadleigh,” died in October.

Mr. William Pettit Griffith, architect, died in October. The son of an architect of repute, he was born in 1815, and, adopting his father’s profession, followed it for more than half a century. Devoting much of his leisure to archæology, he became a member of several societies of antiquaries, and wrote “Grecian Architecture,” “A Natural System of Architecture,” “Mediæval Architecture,” “Ancient and Gothic Churches,” besides many papers published in archæological journals and magazines, especially the serial of the Surrey Archæological Society. He designed various schools and other minor public buildings, and restored St. John’s Gate, Clerkenwell, and parts of the church of St. Sepulchre, Holborn.

Mr. Octavian Blewitt, K.L., F.R.G.S., many years secretary of the Royal Literary Fund, died recently, aged 81. In early life Mr. Blewitt travelled much in Italy, Egypt, Greece, Turkey, and other countries, and on his return to England was, in 1839, elected to the post of secretary to the Royal Literary Fund. In this capacity Mr. Blewitt spent many years in arranging the papers, literary, financial, and historical, which constituted the records of the association. Mr. Blewitt was the author of several well-known works, including “The Panorama of Torquay,” published in 1828, and afterwards reprinted in an enlarged edition as “A Descriptive and Historical Sketch of the District comprised between the Dart and Teign,” also the “Handbook for Central Italy and Rome,” and the “Handbook for Southern Italy and Naples,” being two of the series of Murray’s Hand-books.

Signor Luigi Bonfatti, the archivist and librarian of Gubbio, in Umbria, died suddenly at the end of October. “Every seeker into the strange and eventful history of what is now but the time-worn relic of a mediæval city,” writes Mr. W. Mercer, “has lost in him a guide, philosopher, and friend. Only a week before his death he climbed with me the picturesque tower of the Palazzo Pubblico, that often served as a prison-house for captives taken in battle. His pen, fertile with a knowledge of the local antiquities, may be traced in numerous brochures and collected records of recent date. He strove to pierce the shadows that cluster round the memory of Maestro Giorgio and others who made Gubbio famous for his porcelain manufacture, marvels truly of the potter’s art that are scattered far and wide. One small plate only is left to witness in the Municipio to the brilliantreverberithat distinguished the work of artists whose successors from time to time have vainly imagined that they also have caught the secret of the changing colours under flashesof instantaneous light. I left him busily arranging rare books, with a promise that he would send me an early copy of a history of Gubbio, now nearly ready for the press in the able hands of a learned notary, Signor Lucarelli. Those who have known Signor Bonfatti will join me in lamenting the loss of a scholar whose name may sound strange outside Umbria, and unfamiliar to most Italian ears, but which is, nevertheless, an enduring name, notwithstanding its closest connection is with a half-forgotten, ruinous city that itself lies out of the beaten track of wayfarers.”

METROPOLITAN.

Royal Archæological Institute.—Nov. 6, Mr. J. Micklethwaite, F.S.A., in the chair. The Rev. H. M. Scarth, Rector of Wrington, read a paper on the “Recent Discoveries of Roman Remains at Bath,” in which he explained the various additions to the ancient Thermæ which have lately been brought into the open air, including the large central bath, with its ambulatory, &c. The discovery of antiquities at Zoan, in Egypt, formed the subject of a discourse by Mr. Flinders Petrie, who exhibited some of the objects which had been found. Many of these were taken from the residence of a man of consequence in Egypt, and included articles of domestic use and personal ornamentation,—statues, combs. The last paper read was by Mr. E. Peacock, F.S.A., and comprised some interesting notes on the curious custom of swan marking, or “swan-upping.”

London and Middlesex Archæological Society.—A crowded conversazione was held at Skinners’ Hall on Wednesday evening, Nov. 12; Mr. Alfred White, F.S.A., presided. Mr. G. Laurence Gomme read a paper on “The Early Municipal History of London,” touching upon its charters and institutions, its corporations and public bodies. Mr. J. D. Mathews followed with some “Reminiscences of the Church and Parish of St. John the Baptist upon Walbrook.” Mr. John E. Price then read a paper “On the Recent Discoveries made on the Line of the Inner Circle Railway and at Bevis Marks.” He said the antiquarian treasures turned up in the course of tunnelling for the new railway were numerous and interesting. There were, first of all, Roman sculpture and masonry in position, and the same disjointed and used for other purposes by builders of more recent periods. The fragments of Roman statuary were numerous, and for the most part well preserved along the route taken by the excavations; scrolls and inscriptions being also found. Roman art now and then came to light. The remains of pottery discovered were slight, and not of exceptional interest. At the close of his address the lecturer suggested that a fund should be started and subscriptions invited, in order to purchase or protect the numerous relics constantly being brought to light in London and elsewhere. Among the most interesting articles exhibited was Mr. Walford’s portrait of Dr. Johnson by Sir J. Reynolds, which was engraved in our July number for 1883; there was also a collection of plans, maps, and archæological fragments relating mainly to the city.

Society of Biblical Archæology.—Nov. 4, Dr. S. Birch, President, in the chair. Mr. P. Le Page Renouf read a paper “On some Religious Texts of the Early Egyptian Period preserved in Hieratic Papyri of theBritish Museum.” The President described four fragments of papyrus belonging to the Edinburgh Museum of Science and Art, and exhibited by the Secretary of the Science and Art Department. Mr. E. A. Budge read some notes on Egyptian stelæ, principally of the eighteenth dynasty.

St. Paul’s Ecclesiological Society.—Oct. 28, Mr. J. P. Seddon in the chair. Mr. Hugh Stannus read a paper on “The decoration of St. Paul’s Cathedral,” in which he described the principles of treatment which he regarded as correct, including the “articulation” of the dome design with the architectural substructure. A short discussion followed, in which Mr. Micklethwaite, Mr. G. H. Birch, and Mr. Statham took part. Mr. Micklethwaite urged the desirability of first settling the future arrangement of the cathedral for worship, and its complete furniture (in the widest sense) for that purpose, before deciding on the treatment of the culminating point in the decoration. Mr. Statham recommended a treatment of the dome in eight partitions, such a treatment being rather suited to an octagon dome, such as that at Florence, and being, in fact, a contradiction of the actual architectural structure of a hemispherical dome, and tending to weaken its effect of space and mystery, and reduce the dome from poetry to prose. Mr. Seddon summed up in favour of this latter view.

New Shakspere.—Oct. 24, Mr. F. J. Furnivall, Director, in the chair. The Chairman congratulated the society on reaching its one hundredth meeting. In speaking of work done during the past year, he called attention to Mr. S. L. Lee’s work on “As You Like It,” and that of the Rev. W. A. Harrison on “Richard III.,” as examples of critical work; he also spoke of the success of the Society’s performance of Shakespearian music in chronological order; and took the blame on himself for the delay in the appearance of the “old spelling” edition, mentioning some points in which the editors are endeavouring to make the edition as complete as possible. The following papers were read: by Miss Leigh-Noel “On Shakespeare’s Garden of Girls: I. Hothouse Flowers—Juliet, Imogen, Ophelia,” and by Mr. E. Flügel, giving some early German criticisms on Shakespeare by an ancestor of his own (1699), noticing Shakespeare as not a learned man, not worth much attention, and greatly inferior to Dryden.

National Society for Preserving the Memorials of the Dead.—Oct. 28and 30, twenty-four new members, including Lords Dartmouth and Wharncliffe, and the Bishop of Chester, were elected. Reports as to the work of the Society in the following cases were approved: The replacing of four brasses in Cheam Church; enclosure of the De Ros effigy, near York; restoration of the Barnewall altar-tomb at Lusk, Ireland; replacement of memorial slabs in Milford Church, and in the church of St. Michael in Coslany, Norwich; headstone in Chetwynd churchyard. Reports from the Executive Committee on the following cases were placed before the Council: The replacement of the “Pedlar’s Window” in Lambeth Church; restoration of the monument of Sir Laurence Washington, in Garsdon Church; preservation of the De Vere effigies at Earl’s Colne; removal of memorial slabs from Bishops Stortford Church; and of the Blackhall monument from Totnes Church; the replacement of memorial slabs in Bishops Cannings Church; publication of registers and inscriptions in Banstead Church. It was stated that the work of the Society could be greatly enlarged if larger funds were forthcoming.

Hellenic.—Oct. 23, Professor C. T. Newton, C.B., in the chair. TheRev. Edmond Warre, Head Master of Eton, read a paper on “The Raft of Ulysses,” as described in the fifth book of the Odyssey. By personal research and observation of modern processes of shipbuilding, the writer had arrived at a clear idea of the construction of the raft in question, and set forth his conclusions in detail, illustrating them by two models of a raft and of an ancient axe and adze, which had been made under his direction in the School of Mechanics at Eton. Mr. Warre alluded to a confirmation of his theory which he had lately seen in the construction of certain flat vessels which are used at Portsmouth for raising heavy weights from the water. Mr. Newton, after thanking Mr. Warre for his paper, reminded the audience that there existed in the British Museum two genuine fragments of ancient vessels—(1) a bronze figure-head from the Bay of Actium, and (2) a cross-beam from the floor of an ancient galley, dredged up from the bottom of the Lake of Nemi. Professor Jebb considered that Mr. Warre’s paper not only for the first time made quite clear the passage in the Odyssey, but also explained the poetical use of the term σχἑδια for ships in general in a passage in the “Hecuba” of Euripides, because it snowed that such a raft seen from land would really resemble a ship. Mr. E. A. Gardner read a paper on some armour and ornaments from Kertch, which were now in the new Museum at Oxford. After a description of the several articles, Mr. Gardner showed that the importance of these finds in the Crimea lay in the fact that, if not of Athenian handiwork, they were certainly of Athenian design, and so might be added to the comparatively scanty remnants of genuine Hellenic metalwork. In connection with the representation of a camel upon one of the ornaments, Mr. Newton pointed out that in a bronze found at Kameiros and now in the British Museum, a man with an Assyrian cut of beard was seated upon a kneeling camel. This bronze, though possibly of Phœnician design, was found in association with other objects belonging to archaic Greek art. Professor P. Gardner, alluding to the complete and sumptuous way in which the results of these Russian discoveries were published, said that in this respect despotic Russia set a good example to free England.

Royal Institute of British Architects.—Nov. 3, Mr. Ewan Christian, President, in his opening address alluded to the immense strides which architecture had made during the last fifty years under Barry, Pugin, Scott, Street, Burgess, Ruskin, and others. He compared the great advantages which students of the present day enjoyed with those which had to be sought for and only acquired after long years of study, at the time when the Institute was founded, and said that the good old charter under which they were incorporated had been carried out to the letter, for they had promoted, as far as possible, the general advancement of architecture, and the various arts and sciences connected with it. Mr. G. Shaw-Lefevre, M.P., the First Commissioner of Works, in seconding a vote of thanks to the president, said it had been his duty to clear away the old Law Courts, and to consider how the west front of Westminster Hall could be best restored. He had taken the advice of Mr. Pearson, one of the most eminent architects in works of that kind, and he had suggested that it should be restored to the condition in which it existed during the reign of Richard II., the period when the Law Courts were added to it. That would involve the building of a double-storied cloister against the wall of the Hall, so that all the beautiful Norman work would be preserved, and, whilst not concealed, it would be kept from the effects of the atmosphere by which it was surrounded. As therewere different opinions, however, as to the expediency of this work, he had decided to refer the question to a Select Committee of the House of Commons, when evidence could be heard for or against it. Another great improvement would be found in the works at the Tower—a mass of old warehouses had been removed, the inner ballium wall and the Lanthorn Tower had been rebuilt, and this was a work which the public would greatly appreciate when it was complete. No grander field in the world for architectural display was to be found than in the Metropolis. An unbroken series of great buildings, showing every phase of architecture during the last 800 years, was to be seen in it, specially in the Tower, in Westminster Abbey, and in the works of Inigo Jones, Wren, and Barry. He believed, however, that they had arrived at the end of the Gothic revival, so far as secular buildings were concerned, although it might flourish in other respects for many years. Public opinion and the employment of experts were doing a great work in the selection of styles for buildings of all kinds, and he hoped that the present race of architects would be able to leave us buildings as beautiful as did those who lived in the past.

PROVINCIAL.

Cambridge Antiquarian Society.—October 20, Mr. J. W. Clark, M.A., President, in the chair. Mr. A. G. Wright exhibited five denarii of Posthumus, with the legendsFELICITAS·AVG:IOVI·STATORI·NEPTVNO·REDVCI:SAECVLI·FELICITAS:SARAPI·COMITI·AVG· from the Beaconsthorpe hoard (1878): also a Roman bronze ear-ring and a mediæval bronze signet-ring, both found at Stony Hill, Lakenheath, early in this present year; also a photograph of a rare palæolithic implement found at March, in 1877. The Rev. S. S. Lewis exhibited a first brass of Marcus Aurelius,rev.HONOSwith portrait of the Emperor erect, olive-branch and cornucopiæ (141A.D.), found in 1883 at Litlington. The Rev. G. F. Browne exhibited an outlined rubbing of the Wilne font, a very intricate and elaborate piece of early work, with twelve bold characters round the base, supposed to be runic or Oriental, and, in the latter case, probably Palmyrene. Mr. Browne showed next a rubbing of the cross at Hawkswell, near Catterick, with the inscription on a small panel,Hæc est crux sancti jacobi: “This is the Cross of the holy James.” The letters have now almost entirely perished. Bede says that James the Deacon, who was with Paulinus when he Christianised Northumbria and baptized so many thousands (A.D.627), lived to a very advanced age near Catterick, and that the place where he lived was called by his name. Gale, in his Itineraries, said this was Akeburg. The only place now known by any such name is a single farmhouse called on the ordnance map Akebar, near Hawkswell Church. Mr. Browne found thatjacobiwas speltgacobion the cross, and therefore supposed that it was pronounced in Anglian times with a strong initialy, and with a shorto, and asked the people whether there was any place near beginning with Yak. He was told that Akebar was pronounced locally Yakbur. This and the cross together made it practically certain that James the Deacon lived at Akebar,i.e., Jacob-burh, or Yakŏbur, and was buried at Hawkswell. The close resemblance of the panel and the inscription to Welsh crosses made Mr. Browne suspect a British influence, and he thought this gave the key to a great puzzle in the early Church history of Northumbria. Nennius said that Rum (or Rumin), son of Urien, baptized Edwin and the Northumbrians, when it is known that Paulinus was the baptizer, and there isnothing to show that Paulinus was Rum. James had an ally in Romanus, the chaplain of Queen Eanfleda, who was the first infant baptized in Northumbria. This Romanus may account for the British character of James’s monument, and may be the Rum or Rumin who has puzzled historians. The Jarrow inscription,In hoc singulari anno vita redditur mundo, had always been taken as a hopeless puzzle. Mr. Browne showed that the stone on which it is cut had formed part of the wall of the original building, in which also was a stone setting forth that the church was dedicated in the fifteenth year of King Ecfrid (A.D.684) and the fourth year of Abbat Ceolfrid. This would give a year to which the inscription might refer, if it could be shown that any very remarkable restoration took place in that year. Mr. Browne showed from passages in Bede that it was the year in which the Abbot of Monkwearmouth and many of his monks died of a pestilence which ravaged the district, and especially Jarrow, which is not heard of after that year. Hence the reference was to the cessation of the plague in the year 684. Mr. O. C. Pell, after stating the strong grounds for supposing that there were many “libere tenentes” in existence at the time of Domesday Survey, and that they appear in the “Inquisitio Eliensis” asvillaniholding acres of demesne land, argued—from (among other examples) an entry in the “Inquisitio Eliensis” respecting Chatteris Manor—that thecarucæof the “lords” and the associatedcarucæof the “homines” were of one and the same uniform standard for rating purposes and for measuring areas ofterræ ad carucam, and showed thereby that this standard was the capacity of a plough drawn by eight oxen. The necessary consequence appeared to be that there must have been at least 324 “homines” holding virgates in villenage in the Isle of Ely alone. This theory was proved to be correct by a comparison of Domesday Survey with the surveys of certain manors contained in old MSS. of 1221 and 1277.

Haileybury College Antiquarian Society.—Sept. 29.The Rev. H. C. Wright gave an account of a holiday spent in Norway. After a few remarks on the beauty of Norwegian cathedrals in general, and on the wooden church at Borgund, he proceeded to describe a Viking’s ship which he had seen. The mound in which the Viking was supposed to be buried was very much dilapidated. The ship was built entirely of oak, and apparently had neither deck nor seats, so that the rowers had to stand upright to row it. The word Viking, he added, is probably derived from the Vicks or Fiords, and is in no way akin to the word sea-king. Mr. F. W. Headley pointed out, with reference to the Viking’s ship, that the planks were fastened on to the ribs of the ship by withies. Speaking of Trondhjem Cathedral, he mentioned the transepts as in good repair. The nave, now almost gone, has contained some very fine Norman work, and the apse at the end of it, which is divided from the choir by a light screen, contains several styles of architecture, ranging from Early English to Flamboyant. Several photographs were passed round in illustration of the speaker’s remarks. Mr. A. W. T. Perowne spoke of Knaresborough Castle, in one of the dungeons of which may be seen a pillar with twelve arches springing from it. He also spoke of Fountains Abbey, which contains both Early English and Norman work—the cloisters and refectory being specimens of the latter. He also gave short accounts of Ripley, Bolton Abbey, Fountains Abbey, and St. Mary’s Abbey, at York. Mr. H. F. Fisher described Wimborne Minster, a cruciform building having two towers—the central and the western. Between the central tower and theeast end is a Norman arch. Under the chancel is a crypt, and there is a church library over the vestry. The church contains also a lunar orrery, of which there are only two other specimens in England—at Wells and at York. Mr. H. Swainson next spoke of Bosham, near Chichester. The setting out of Harold from Bosham Harbour on a voyage to Normandy is recorded in the Bayeux tapestry. The church is built on the site of an old Roman basilica. In the vestry may be seen the corbels of the floor of the room once occupied by the man who kept the light in the tower. The church has a wooden spire. The chronicler spoke of St. Nicholas Church, Leicester, where are some Roman bricks in the tower, and of the Town-hall, which is of wood. He next spoke of Warwick Hospital, founded by the Earl of Essex for twelve old men and a minister, each of whom has a strip of garden; they all move up in turn whenever one dies, the minister always retaining the first strip. Passing on into Shropshire, he spoke of Wenlock Priory, which contains two very large ambulatories; also of the Town-hall, where are a set of stocks, which are not fixed, but stand on wheels. In speaking of Lichfield Cathedral, he mentioned the three spires, and seven huge decorated windows in the Lady-chapel, and also the watching gallery, a feature which exists also in St. Alban’s Abbey. The Close at Lichfield was formerly defended by a moat, of which the present Minster pool is a survival. He also censured the recent removal of the “Pedlar’s Window” from the parish church at Lambeth. Mr. E. P. Ash, a visitor, spoke of Eisenach and the Wartburg, which is said to derive its name from the following incident of Lewis the Springer, who in one of his hunting expeditions, happening to come on the hill on which the Wartburg now stands, exclaimed “Wart Bergdu sollst meineBurgsein” Having given some account of the connection of St. Elizabeth with the Wartburg, from which she was ultimately expelled, and took refuge in a convent, he proceeded to speak of Luther, who is said to have spent ten months therein translating the Bible. Several relics of Luther and his family may be seen there still. In the chapel are some swords that are supposed to have belonged to Gustavus Adolphus.

Surrey Archæological Society.—At a special general meeting held Oct. 15, Mr. Granville Leveson-Gower, F.S.A., in the chair, it was resolved that the annual general meeting be hereafter held in January or February, instead of in June or July as at present.

Back to Index Next