NOTES
NOTES AND QUERIES
The history of books and periodicals of a similar character ought to be the object of interest to the readers of this work. The number of works in which answers have been given to proposed questions is not small. Not to mention the Spectator and its imitators, nor the class of almanacs which give riddles and problems, nor mathematical periodicals of a more extensive character,—though all these ought to be discussed in course of time,—there yet remains a class of books in which general questions proposed by the public are answered periodically, either by the public or by the editors. Perhaps an account of one of these may bring out others.
In 1736 and 1737 appeared the Weekly Oracle; or, Universal Library. Published by a Society of Gentlemen. One folio sheet was published weekly, usually ending in the middle of a sentence. (Query. What is the technical name for this mode of publication? If none, what ought to be?) I have one folio volume of seventy numbers, at the end of which notice of suspension is given, with prospect of revival in another form probably no more was published. The introduction is an account of the editorial staff to wit, a learned divine who "hath entered with so much discernment into the true spirit of the schoolmen, especially Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus, that he is qualified to resolve, to a hair's breadth, the nicest cases of conscience." A physician who "knows, to a mathematical point, the just tone and harmony of the risings pulses...." A lawyer who "what he this day has proved to be a contingent remainder, to-morrow he will with equal learning show must operate as an executory devise or as a springing use." A philosopher "able to give the true reason of all things, from the composition of watches, to the raising of minced pies … and who, if he is closely questioned about the planner of squaring the circle, or by what means the perpetual motion, or longitude, may be discovered, we believe has honesty, and we are sure that he has skill enough to say that he knows—nothing of the matter." A moral philosopher who has "discovered a perpetuum mobile of government." An eminent virtuoso who understands "what is the best pickle to preserve a rattle-snake or an Egyptian mummy, better than the nature of the government he lives under, or the economy and welfare of himself and family." Lastly, a man of mode. "Him the beaus and the ladies may consult in the affairs of love, dress, and equipage."
There is a great deal of good answering to tolerably rational questions, mixed with some attempts at humour, and other eccentricities, and occasionally a freedom, both of question and answer, by which we might, were it advisable, confirm the fact, that the decorums of 1736 and of 1850 are two different things.
First, as an instance of a question and answer, which might do as well (if the record be correct) for the present publication.
"Q. We read in our public papers of the Pope's Bull and the Pope's Brief; pray, Gentlemen, what is the difference between them?
"A. They differ much in the same manner as the Great Seal and Privy Seal do here in England. The Bull being of the highest authority where the papal power extends; the Brief is of less authority. The Bull has a leaden seal upon silk affixed to the foot of the instrument, as the wax under the Great Seal is to our letters patent. The Brief has sub annulo piscatoris upon the side."
Query. Is this answer complete and correct?
Now for another specimen:
"Q. Wise Oracle show,
A good reason why,
When from tavern we go,
You're welcome they cry.
"A. The reason is plain,
'Cause doubtful to know,
Till seeing their gain,
If you came well or no."
The following is an example of unanswerable refutation. To show why a man has not one rib less than a woman, it is stated that imperfections are not hereditary; as in the case of
"One Mr. L–, an honest sailor not far from Stepney, who has but one arm, and who cannot walk himself without the assistance of a wooden leg, and yet has a son, born some years after the amputation of is own limbs, whom he has bred both a fiddler and a dancing master."
One more, not for the wretched play upon words, but because it may make a new Query,—What does it all mean?
"Q. Gentlemen, in the preamble to the late Earl of Oxford's patent, I observed, 'And whom they have congratulated upon his escape from the rage of a flagitious parricide.' I desire to know by whom, at what time, and in what manner, the said parricide was to have been committed.
"A. Was to have been! He actually was committed—to Newgate."
So much for some of the "NOTES AND QUEERIES" (as the word ought to be spelt) of a century ago.
COLLAR OF SS
"All the ensigns and marks of honour appertaining
to persons of highest distinction, are equestrian."—Sabnasins.
The interest which attaches to this very ancient and distinguished ensign of chivalrous honour will excuse the introduction into your pages of a fuller dissertation upon the subject than what appears in "NOTES AND QUERIES," Nos. 39. and 41., in answer to the several questions put by your correspondents B. and [Greek: Ph].
After referring to the papers on the Collar of SS., and other collars of livery, published a few years ago in the Gentleman's Magazine, and his intention to arrange them, and other additional collections on the same subject, in the shape of a small volume, MR. J.G. NICHOLS proceeds to say:
"As a direct answer to B.'s question, 'Is there any list of persons who were honoured with that badge, (viz., the Collar of SS.?)', I may reply, No. Persons were not, in fact, 'honoured with the badge,' in the sense that persons are now decorated with stars, crosses, or medals; but the livery collar was assumed by parties holding a certain position. So far as can be ascertained, these were either knights attached to the royal household or service, who wore gold or gilt collars, or esquires in the like position who wore silver collars."
From the statute for the regulation of apparel, passed in the 2nd year of the reign of Henry IV., it is ordained that—
"All the sons of the king, dukes, earls, barons, and baronettes, might use the livery of our Lord the King of his collar as well in his absence as in his presence; and that all other knights and esquires should use it only in the presence of the king and not in his absence."
The royal assent to this bill was accompanied with further regulations, among which were:
"That the dukes, earls, barons, and baronettes of the realm might use the said livery in their counties and elsewhere; and that knights and esquires might use the said livery in going from the hostel of the king and returning, to it, always provided that they did not use it in the counties and countries in which they resided or sojourned."
That the golden Collar of SS. was the undoubted badge or mark of a knight (chevalier, eques auratus seu ordo equestris, for these words respectively indicate the same grade or dignity of knighthood) all our ancient heraldic writers allow. But, were it otherwise, the extract from the statute above given shows that MR. NICHOLS is incorrect in stating, 1st. That there is no list of persons who were honoured with the collar of SS.; 2nd. That persons were not honoured with the badge, in the sense that persons are now decorated with stars, crosses, &c.; 3rd. That the collar was assumed; and, 4th. That the assumers were, "so far as can be ascertained, knights holding a certain position,—such as being attached to the royal household or service."
It is important to point out these four inaccuracies of MR. NICHOLS' reply to B., because it is desirable that his forthcoming volume should not be a heterogeneous collection of notices relating to the Collar of SS., mixed up with observations that will only serve the purpose of darkening knowledge upon the subject of which he treats.
The Collar of SS. is found in great variety of shapes, and at what precise time it became an ensign of equestrian