Notes and Queries, Number 23, April 6, 1850. Various

"To the Reader" is also subscribed B.N.; and then begins the body of the work, thus headed: "Crosse and Pile, or, Crossing of Proverbs." It opens as follows:

      "Proverb. The more the merrier.

      Cross. Not so; one hand is enough in a purse.

      P. Every man loves himselfe best.

      C. Not so, when man is undone by suretyship.

      P. He that runnes fastest gets most ground.

      C. Not so, for then foote-men would have more land than their masters.

      P. He runnes far that never turnes.

      C. Not so, he may breake his necke in a short course.

      P. No man can call againe yesterday.

      C. Yes, hee may call till his heart ake, though it never come.

      P. Had I wist was a foole.

      C. No, he was a foole that said so."

      And so it proceeds, not without humour and point, here and there borrowing from known sources, as in the following:—

      "Proverb. The world is a long journey.

      Cros. Not so, the sunne goes it every day.

      P. It is a great way to the bottom of the sea.

      C. Not so, it is but a stone's cast."

      However, my object is not to give specimens of the production further than are necessary for its identification. My queries are, 1st, Who bought Mr. Heber's fragment, and where is it now to be found? 2nd, Are any of your correspondents aware of the existence of a perfect copy of the work?

      I naturally take a peculiar interest about Nicholas Breton, because I have in my possession an unknown collection of amatory and pastoral poems by him, printed in quarto in 1604, in matter and measure obvious imitations of productions in "The Passionate Pilgrim," 1599, imputed to Shakespeare, and some of which are unquestionably by Richard Barnfield.

      Any new information regarding Breton and his works will be most acceptable to me. I am already in possession of undoubted proof that he was the Nicholas Breton whose epitaph is on the chancel-wall of the church of Norton, in Northamptonshire, a point Ritson seems to have questioned.

J. Payne Collier.

      March 30. 1850.

      THE SWORD CALLED CURTANA

      In the wardrobe account for the year 1483, are "iij swerdes, whereof oon with a flat poynte, called curtana, and ij other swords, all iij swords covered in a yerde di of crymysym tisshue cloth of gold."

      The name of curtana for many ages continued to be given to the first royal sword in England. It existed as long ago as the reign of Henry III., at whose coronation (A.D. 1236) it was carried by the Earl of Chester. We find it at the coronations of Edward II. and Richard II.; also in the time of Henry IV., Richard III., and Henry VII.; and among the royal arms of Edward VI. we read of "a swerde called curtana."

      Can any of your readers explain the origin of the name curtana, a sword so famous that it carries us back to the days of ancient chivalry, when it was wielded by the Dane Uggiero, or by the still more famed Orlando.

Edward F. Rimbault.

      IS THE DOMBEC THE DOMESDAY OF ALFRED?

      I beg to propose the following "Query":—Is the Dombec, a work referred to in the Laws of Edward the Elder, the same as what has been called the Domesday or Winchester Book of Alfred the Great? I incline to think that it is not, and shall be much obliged to any of your correspondents, learned in the Anglo-Saxon period of our history, who will give himself the trouble of resolving my doubts.

      Sir Henry Spelman, in his Glossary voce Dombec, calls it the Liber Judicialis of the Anglo-Saxons; and says it is mentioned in the first chapter of the laws of Edward the Elder, where the king directs his judges to conduct themselves in their judicial proceedings as on [Old English: thaere dom bec stand], that is, as is enjoined in their Dome Book.—"Quod," he continues, "an de præcedentium Regum legibus quæ hodie extant, intelligendum sit: an de alio quopiam libro hactenus non prodeunte, incertum est."

      But this uncertainty does not seem to have attached itself to the mind of Sir William Blackstone; for in the third section of the Introduction prefixed to his Commentaries on the Laws of England