have two Easter Days, whether a year of the Old Style or the New. Later comes the enactment for changing the 3rd of September, 1752, into the 14th, The terms Old Style and New Style refer eleven days being thus cmitted from that to the Julian and Gregorian calendars calendar in regular course it was enacted year. Further, for the continuing of the respectively. Before we in England adopted that the years 1800, 1900, 2100, &c., should the New Style, nearly all other countries had fixed on the 1st of January as the first not be esteemed leap years, but taken to be day of the year, whatever their previous dates common years of 365 days. (The centurial had been. Thus our change of the begin-years are only leap years when they are ning of the civil year by Act of Parliament divisible by 400 without a remainder.) was a corollary only of the New Style. Pope Gregory XIII. began in 1582 the use of the calendar called after him, but we did not adopt it till 1752, being the last to do so of the European nations, except Russia, where the Old Style still obtains (Greece had at that time no separate existence). It is true that, before enacting the New Style or Gregorian calendar, statute 24 Geo. II. c. 23 enacted the regulating of the commencement of the year; but its main object was the correction of the calendar then (1751) in use, i.e., to accord with the Gregorian system. Regulating the commencement of the year was the minor object, viz., the substitution, for a year beginning in England on 25 March, of a year beginning on 1 January, a change of what one may call local custom. The Act recites that the legal supputation of the year of our Lord in England, according to which it began on 25 March, had been found by experience to be attended with divers inconveniences, as it differed not only from the usage of neighbouring nations, but also from the legal method of computation in Scotland, and from the common usage throughout the whole kingdom. 66 This common usage was the historical year, which for a very long period had begun on 1 January. The English civil, ecclesiastical, or legal year began on 25 March. But by sect. 1 of the Act above mentioned it was enacted that the supputation according to which the year of our Lord began on the twentyfifth day of March should not be made use of from and after the last day of December, 1751; and that the first day of January next following the said last day of December should be reckoned, taken, deemed, and accounted to be the first day of the year of our Lord 1752. It was further enacted that each new year should accordingly begin to be reckoned from the first day of every such month of January next preceding the twenty-fifth day of March, on which such year would, according to the then present supputation, have begun. There was also a provision that the feast of Easter, and all other movable feasts thereon depending, should be observed according to the new Calendar, Tables, and Rules annexed to the Act. The new rule as to Easter and other movable feasts was (and is) as follows: 66 Easter Day, on which the rest depend, is always the first Sunay after the full Moon, which happens upon or next after the 21st Day of March; and if the full Moon happens upon a Sunday, Easter Day is the Sunday after." So generally had the historical year been used before 1751, when the Act was passed, that a pamphlet published in 1735 contained the following: "While we are maintaining this beginning of the year according to the rubric of the Common Prayer, we seem to forget that our year begins licensed almanacks, and even in the book of on the 1st of January, both in our common Common Prayer itself; and it may amount to a question very difficult to be answered, why the rubric of the Common Prayer enjoins the year calendar for the lessons, &c., begins on the 1st of to begin on the 25th of March, and yet the The title of this pamphlet was January ? "The Regulation of Easter, or the Cause of the Errors and Differences contracted in the Calculaby Henry Wilson, Mathematician, at Tower tion of it discovered and duly considered, Hill." An example of the confusion produced by the practice of having two modes for computing dates is the date of the death of King Charles I. Some give the date as 30 Jan., 1648, while others give 1649. According to the civil, ecclesiastical, or legal year, 1648 is correct, and indeed that is the year inscribed on the scroll of lead which encircles the coffin; but 1649 is the historical date. Had King Charles been beheaded two months later, 1649 would have been the year according to both systems. It may be worth noting that Canon Sheppard, Sub-Dean of the Chapels Royal, in a lecture on The Execution and Burial of King Charles I.' at the Royal United Service Institution on 17 Feb., 1909, after citing 1648 as the date on the coffin, said: 66 Curiously enough, the slab above the vault ....was inscribed with the date 1649." (see Times, 18 Feb., 1909). The latter date is the historical one. It might have been 164 or 1648-9. Presumably 1649 was inscribed on the slab in or after 1813, when the position of the vault containing the remains of King Charles was ascertained. Much of the above is taken from The Book of Common Prayer, with Notes, Legal and Historical,' by Archibald John Stephens, Ecclesiastical History Society, 1849, vol. i. pp. 272-5. The following puts the differences between the historical and the civil year plainly. It is taken from a very useful little book, "The Jubilee Date-Book. The Regnal Years of the Kings and Queens of England, from William the Conqueror to Victoria,' by Walford D. Selby, of H.M. Public Record Office (Wyman & Sons, 1887) : : In using this Table [i.e., Table of Regnal Years] it is necessary to bear in mind that the dates are calculated according to what is known as the Historical year, that is to say, the year as calculated at the present day from 1 January to 31 December. The reader must remember, how ever, that early documents were dated according to the Civil (otherwise Ecclesiastical or Legal) year, which began on the 25th of March. Thus all dates between the 1st of January and the 24th of March, inclusive, according to the Historical computation, are to be assigned to a date one year (numerically) in advance of the Civil year. To take an example: the reign of King James I. commenced, according to the historical calculation, on 24 March, 1603, but by the civil year computation it was 24 March, 1602; and yet, according to both systems, the second day of this reign was 25 March, 1603.' The term Old Style does not refer to the English civil year, but relates to the Julian calendar, which for centuries before the introduction of the New Style by Pope Gregory XIII. had been the calendar of the Christian world, and is to-day the erroneous calendar of Russia and Greece. ROBERT PIERPOINT. HORNBOOK TEMP. ELIZABETH (11 S. i. 48). -There is a large amount of interesting information, though very badly arranged, in the late Andrew W. Tuer's History of the Hornbook.' London, 1897. Many references to the hornbook in English literature are there brought together. MR. A. E. H. SWAEN'S quotation is introduced twice (pp. 75 and 301). It can be best illustrated by the words set to music, by Thomas Morley in A Plaine and Easie Introduction to Practical Musicke,' London, 1608, printed by Tuer on pp. 31 and 302 :— "Christes crosse be my speede, in all vertue to proceede, A.b.c.d.e.f.g.h.i.k.l.m.n.o.p. q.r.s.&t. double w. v. x. with y. ezod. & per se. con per se. tittle. tittle.est. Amen, When you have done begin againe, begin againe." 72 Tuer's History' gives many cuts of hornbooks, from which their usual contents and arrangement may be seen. A black-letter example, e.g., on p. 296 has the following:Hence the names "Chrisse1. A cross. Crosse,' "Christ's-cross row," &c., for the A B C (p. 62). 2. A capital A. 3. A lowercase alphabet (no j, two forms for 8, v u in this order). 4. The form for et or and (=&, & per se, or ampersand. See Prof. Skeat, 4 S. viii. 468, 'A Student's Pastime,' p. 67). 5. A full stop (=tittle). 6. The five vowels. 7. A capital alphabet (no J, no separate form for V, the z is a minuscule). 8. A syllabarium in two divisions, each headed by the five vowels. 9. "In the name of the Father, and of the Sonne, and of the holy Ghost. Amen." 10. The Lord's Prayer. Roman type, said to be of the reign of Elizabeth, the arrangement in which is almost exactly the same; and so in many On p. 44 may be seen a hornbook in other instances. SHAKESPEARE ILLUSTRATORS (11 S. i. 327, 414).-I have several volumes of the 1762 edition of Theobald. 66 In this all the illustrations are designed by Gravelot and engraved by Van der Gucht. In another edition, probably not Theobald's, printed in 1734 (for J. Tonson), the illustrators are various. Some of the illustrations are signed J. Smith (apparently as engraver); others are said to be designed and engraved by Du Guernier, and one, at least, by Fourdrinier. Royal Avenue, S. W. 66 In MR. SWAEN's extract "to crish Crosse " seems to mean to say the ABC." "Great A" in a hornbook is regularly printed by itself after the cross, before the lower-case alphabet (Hence "Great A, little a, bouncing b," of the nursery rime). With regard to before I could come to q," it may be noted that in one of the hornbooks above referred to q is at the end of the first line, while in the other it begins the second. As for " e perce e or e per se e," a comparison of the words from Morley's book might support the suggestion that this is for & per se or & per se & (=ampersand). See, however, the remarks on p. 299 of Tuer, and The Stanford Dictionary' under a per se, A per se A," &c. "Comperce" or con per se " is the contraction for con. 66 66 J. FOSTER PALMER. 66 22 22 22 66 22 66 (see 10 S. ii. 427). "Aeiou" and further explanation. Aberystwyth. 46 66 "Tittle" is the stop. our Father ?? require no 66 EDWARD BENSLY. 66 22 "BROCHE 22 Y. T. lance or spear could be called broche; WALTER W. SKEAT. 22 RUMBELOW (11 S. i. 224, 276).-It would seem that this curious name is less rare than is supposed, as two families-apparently unconnected-bore it in recent days in the Isle of Wight. The head master of King The hornbook was called a criss-cross, 22 Edward VI.'s Grammar School was so named; criss-cross row," or 22 cross-row because and the daughter of Dr. Maxwell, who of the (Christ-) cross which generally pre-settled for a time at Cowes, had married a ceded the alphabet in the earlier examples man of this name. of this "tool of education." Some say that it was so called from the amuletic value which it received from the alphabet being written upon it in the form of a cross; but I do not think any instance is known of a hornbook which bears the A B C in the form of the crux decussata. "E perce e" is evidently to impose upon the learner the necessity for repeating a letter so as to fix it in the memory, 66 e per se e," as it also occurs, meaning e by itself e.' As to the "tittle," the earlier "absey-books frequently terminated with three dots or tittles" placed triangularly, and intended to convey to the pupil, after the manner of medieval symbolism, that as there were three dots, yet but one final period, so there were three Persons in one God. These Amen customary dots followed by alluded to in the Song of the Hornbook,' set to music by Thomas Morley in 1608. And per se has become the modern amperzand. Ampussy and,' that is, in full, "and per se and," is the name of the sign for the conjunction and &, which used to be printed at the end of the alphabet (Longman's Magazine, quoted in 'N.E.D.,' Ampersand '). A per se or A per C" was applied to anything of an excellent nature or character, just as Al to-day means a high degree of praise, a person or thing that is facile princeps, e.g., "Christ Jesus is ane A per C, And peirlesse Prince of all mercy Gude and Godlie Ballates,' 1578, also quoted in the N.E.D.'). As to iste, &c., small wonder that the "skoler " stumbled when confronted with the demonstrative of the second person, considering that it took him thirteen "yeare" to get as far as in his elementary alphabet! 8.v. Wroxton Grange, Folkestone. are In mediæval Latin broche is rendered brochia. lib ii. cap. 16, § 6, " de Seriantijs, agens It is used by Henricus de Bracton, "Si quis teneat per seruitium inueniendi domino Regi, certis locis et certis temporibus unum hominem et unum equum, et saccum cum brochia pro aliqua necessitate, vel utilitate exercitum suuin contingente." Fleta also uses the word, lib. i. cap. 11, § 1. Giles Jacob, A New Law Dict.,' says :"That it was an Iron Instrument, you may learn from the following authority: Henricus de Haver ing tenet Manerium de Norton in Com. Essex, per Serjeantiam inveniendi unum hominem, cum uno equo, etc., et uno sacco de corio, et una Brochia ferrea. Anno 13 Ed. I." It was thus probably an iron can or pail. Broche is also an awl or a spit, but does not seem to mean that in the passages here given, or that quoted by MR. FOORD. Was not this a spur ? 'Dictionary. He quotes Langtoft: "Ther stedes broched thei fast." W. B. GERISH. Vide Halliwell's patron of literature, to whom the edition [W. C. B. also refers to the 'N.E.D.'] "THE PETER BOAT AND DOUBLET" (11 S. i. 262, 390). It may interest some of the readers of N. & Q.' to know that St. Peter was the patron of fishmongers at Liège (see Félix de Vigne, Gildes et Corporations,' p. 55), and patron of sellers of river-fish at Gand (see the same author's Corporations de Métiers,' pl. 13). N. M. & A. BOOKS AND ENGRAVINGS : THEIR PRESERVATION (11 S. i. 249). In the early volumes of N. & Q.' the subject of the preservation of books and engravings (especially of the former) was made a matter of inquiry on several occasions. The following references do not pretend to be anything like exhaustive: 1 S. ii. 103, 236; iv. 175, 326; ix. 423; 2 S. ix. 103, 186; 3 S. iv. 495. MR. MANLEY might also consult Powers's 'Handy Book about Books,' p. 46, and an excellent little book in "The Book-Lover's Library "The Enemies of Books,' by William Blades, London, Stock, 1888. W. S. S. LARGE-PAPER COPIES OF Books (11 S. i. 406). This practice dates back to the sixteenth century or earlier, as may be seen by the number of early volumes in this special state mentioned in my B.P.C. Index, 1897-1906,' issued last year. In our family archives are to be found several publications of my ancestor on large paper, notably, Trogus Pompeius, Historie of Justine,' 1606; Topsell, Foure-footed Beastes,' 1607; Milles, Nobilitas.. 1608; Vincent, Discoverie of Errours,' 1622. A more careful investigation would almost certainly disclose several earlier instances, W. SCOTT. especially in England. RICHARD MARTIN (11 S. i. 407) was for many years M.P. for co. Galway, and widely known for his love of animals and duelling. His son Thomas Barnewell Martin was the father of the "Connemara Princess" Mary Letitia Martin, the author of Julia a Romance,' 1850. This book Howard: is not in the British Museum, and I fancy was published in U.S.A. I have tried for many years past to obtain a copy without success. An account of this lady will be found in the life of Maria Edgeworth by the Hon. Emily Lawless (Macmillan & Co.) and in my book Connemara ' (1906). Temple, E.C. J. HARRIS STONE. "TATTING" (11 S. i. 426).-The new edition of my Etymological Dictionary' contains the following article: "Tat, to make trimming. (Scand.) North E. tat. to entangle. Cf. M. Swed. tåtte, Dan. dial. tat, Norw. taat, a thread, a strand of a rope, whence Norw. tætta, to interweave. Also Icel. thattr, Swed. tåt, Dan. tot, a filament, G. docht, a wick." We find accordingly, that Molbech's 'Dan. Dial. Dict.' explains tat as "a lock of flax, wool, hair, yarn, or other such thing, which is plaited tater, four tater, and the like." or twisted; they say, a plait of three It seems search further. hardly worth while to Larsen's Dan. Dict.' has "taatt, a strand "; and tatte aal, to catch eels with worms on threads." See also tot in Falk and Torp's Dan. Etym. Dict.' Low G. has dacht as a WALTER W. SKEAT. The custom of printing on finer as distinguished from larger paper became popular towards the middle and close of the eigh-variant of docht. teenth century, with the growth of enterprise among the paper-makers. WM. JAGGARD. This is a subject seldom discussed, at least at any length, in literary publications. Dibdin in his 'Bibliomania devotes a few pages to it, but only from the point of view of an English book-buyer and book-lover. The practice of issuing large-paper copies must have begun at a very early period. It probably dates from the time when presentation copies were sent by the printer to some QUEEN MARY II. (11 S. i. 189).-There is nothing inherently impossible in the sug gestion made by SIR CHARLES KING that Swift may have been the author of the It Brief History' of Queen Mary II. The book must have been written in the latter half of 1694, the year when Mary died. was published in 1695, and seems to have gone into a second edition the same year. And we know that Swift was writing poetry as early as 1693. At the same time, the arguments against his being the author seem STRETTELL-UTTERSON (11 S. i. 448). I wish to correct my query in one particular. I find that the Lyf of Saint Katherin' is duly quoted by Mr. de Ricci in his Census of Caxtons.' My apologies are due to him. H. J. B. CLEMENTS. Killadoon, Celbridge. GIFFARD MILL (11 S. i. 429).-MR. WALES asks which daughter of Sir Ambrose Hardinge Giffard married William Mill. Sir A. H. Giffard was my father's uncle, and none of his daughters married a Mill. He had five daughters : 1. Jane Mary=Sir William Follett. 2. Sarah, died 1895, unmarried. 3. Harriet Capt. W. Bayly. 4. Rose Rev. G. Fagan. = ST. KATHE DUKE'S PLACE, ALDGATE: RINE CREE CHURCH (11 S. i. 326, 397, 437).— The open space in the heart of the City of London known as Duke's Place was part of the precinct of the wealthy Augustinian Priory of the Holy Trinity within the Walls, which stood upon the large piece of ground now surrounded by Duke Street (site of City Wall), Bevis Marks, Bury Street, Creechurch Lane, Leadenhall Street, and Aldgate. The town house of the Abbots of Bury St. Edmunds was hard by in Bevis Marks, and gave Bury Street its name. It was said to be the most wealthy ecclesiastical establishment in the kingdom, and was for that reason the first priory dissolved by Henry VIII. It was granted to his companion Sir Thomas Audley, who demolished the priory church, and built a mansion on a portion of the site. Sir Thomas was one of the four persons, besides the civic officers, who witnessed the beheading of Queen Anne Boleyn in the Tower. His daughter married Thomas, Duke of Norfolk, from whom the estate took the name of "Duke's Place." The Duke was beheaded by Elizabeth on Tower Hill,. almost within bowshot of his house, in 1572, for complicity in the plot with the followers of Mary, Queen of Scots. The mansion has long since disappeared, but a plate exists showing Audley House, the Priory of the Holy Trinity, Mitre Court, Duke's Place, Aldgate, as it appeared after the Fire in 1800, published by J. Sewell, Cornhill, 1802. The estate was sold by the Duke's son Thomas Howard to the, Corporation of the City of London, by whom it is to-day held. Place by Cromwell in 1650, and the synagogue was rebuilt about a hundred years ago. The Jews were allowed to settle in Duke's No tradition exists in the neighbourhood concerning the Duke of St. Albans, but Charles I., when Prince of Wales, probably |