Читать книгу: «Notes and Queries, Number 51, October 19, 1850», страница 3

THE COLLAR OF ESSES

I shall look with interest to the documents announced by Dr. ROCK (Vol. ii., p. 280.), which in his mind connect the Collar of Esses with the "Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus" of the Salisbury liturgy: but hitherto I have found nothing in any of the devices of livery collars that partakes of religious allusion. I am well aware that many of the collars of knighthood of modern Europe, headed by the proud order of the Saint Esprit, display sacred emblems and devices. But the livery collars were perfectly distinct from collars of knighthood. The latter, indeed, did not exist until a subsequent age: and this was one of the most monstrous of the popular errors which I had to combat in my papers in the Gentleman's Magazine. A Frenchman named Favyn, at the commencement of the seventeenth century, published a folio book on Orders of Knighthood, and, giving to many of them an antiquity of several centuries,—often either fabulous or greatly exaggerated,—provided them all with imaginary collars, of which he exhibits engravings. M. Favyn's book was republished in English, and his collars have been handed down from that time to this, in all our heraldic picture-books. This is one important warning which it is necessary to give any one who undertakes to investigate this question. From my own experience of the difficulty with which the mind is gradually disengaged from preconceived and prevailing notions on such points, which it has originally adopted as admitting of no question, I know it is necessary to provide that others should not view my arguments through a different medium to myself. And I cannot state too distinctly, even if I incur more than one repetition, that the Collar of Esses was not a badge of knighthood nor a badge of personal merit; but it was a collar of livery; and the idea typified by livery was feudal dependence, or what we now call party. The earliest livery collar I have traced is the French order of cosses de geneste, or broomcods: and the term "order", I beg to explain, is in its primary sense exactly equivalent to "livery:" it was used in France in that sense before it came to be applied to orders of knighthood. Whether there was any other collar of livery in France, or in other countries of Europe, I have not hitherto ascertained; but I think it highly probable that there was. In England we have some slight glimpses of various collars, on which it would be too long here to enter; and it is enough to say, that there were only two of the king's livery, the Collar of Esses and the Collar of Roses and Suns. The former was the collar of our Lancastrian kings, the latter of those of the house of York. The Collar of Roses and Suns had appendages of the heraldic design which was then called "the king's beast," which with Edward IV. was the white lion of March, and with Richard III. the white boar. When Henry VII. resumed the Lancastrian Collar of Esses, he added to it the portcullis of Beaufort. In the former Lancastrian regions it had no pendant, except a plain or jewelled ring, usually of the trefoil form. All the pendant badges which I have enumerated belong to secular heraldry, as do the roses and suns which form the Yorkist collar. The letter S is an emblem of a somewhat different kind; and, as it proves, more difficult to bring to a satisfactory solution than the symbols of heraldic blazon. As an initial it will bear many interpretations—it may be said, an indefinite number, for every new Œdipus has some fresh conjecture to propose. And this brings me to render the account required by Dr. Rock of the reasons which led me to conclude that the letter S originated with the office of Seneschallus or Steward. I must still refer to the Gentleman's Magazine for 1842, or to the republication of my essays which I have already promised, for fuller details of the evidence I have collected; but its leading results, as affecting the origin of this device, may be stated as follows:—It is ascertained that the Collar of Esses was given by Henry, Earl of Derby, afterwards King Henry IV., during the life-time of his father, John of Ghent, Duke of Lancaster. It also appears that the Duke of Lancaster himself gave a collar, which was worn in compliment to him by his nephew King Richard II. In a window of old St. Paul's, near the duke's monument, his arms were in painted glass, accompanied with the Collar of Esses; which is presumptive proof that his collar was the same as that of his son, the Earl of Derby. If, then, the Collar of Esses was first given by this mighty duke, what would be his meaning in the device? My conjecture is, that it was the initial of the title of that high office which, united to his vast estates, was a main source of his weight and influence in the country,—the office of Steward of England. This, I admit, is a derivation less captivating in idea than another that has been suggested, viz. that S was the initial of Souveraine which is known to have been a motto subsequently used by Henry IV., and which might be supposed to foreshadow the ambition with which the House of Lancaster affected the crown. But the objection to this is, that the device is traced back earlier than the Lancastrian usurpation can be supposed to have been in contemplation. It might still be the initial of Souveraine, if John of Ghent adopted it in allusion to his kingdom of Castille: but, because he is supposed to have used it, and his son the Earl of Derby certainly used it, after the sovereignty of Castille had been finally relinquished, but also before either he or his son can be supposed to have aimed at the sovereignty of their own country, therefore it is that, in the absence of any positive authority, I adhere at present to the opinion that the letter S was the initial of Seneschallus or Steward.

JOHN GOUGH NICHOLS.

P.S.—Allow me to put a Query to the antiquaries of Scotland. Can any of them help me to the authority from which Nich. Upton derived his livery collar of the King of Scotland "de gormettis fremalibus equorum?"—J.G.N.

Collar of SS (Vol. ii., pp. 89. 194. 248. 280.).—I am surprised that any doubt should have arisen about this term, which has evidently no spiritual or literary derivation from the initial letters of Sovereign, Sanctus, Seneschallus, or any similar word. It is (as MR. ELLACOMBE hints, p. 248.) purely descriptive of the mechanical mode of forming the chain, not by round or closed links, but by hooks alternately deflected into the shape of esses; thus,. Whether chains so made (being more susceptible of ornament than other forms of links) may not have been in special use for particular purposes, I will not say; but I have no doubt that the name means no more than that the links were in the shape of the letter S.

C.

SIRLOIN

Several correspondents who treat of Lancashire matters do not appear to be sufficiently careful to ascertain the correct designations of the places mentioned in their communications. In a late number Mr. J.G. NICHOLS gave some very necessary corrections to CLERICUS CRAVENSIS respecting his note on the "Capture of King Henry VI." (Vol. ii., p. 181.); and I have now to remind H.C. (Vol. ii., p. 268.) that "Haughton Castle" ought to be "Hoghton Tower, near Blackburn, Lancashire." Hoghton Tower and Whittle Springs have of late been much resorted to by pic-nic parties from neighbouring towns; and from the interesting scenery and splendid prospects afforded by these localities, they richly deserve to be classed among the lions of Lancashire. It is not improbable that the far-famed beauties and rugged grandeur of "The Horr" may, for the time, have rendered it impossible for H.C. to attend to orthography and the simple designation "Hoghton Tower," and hence the necessity for the present Note.

The popular tradition of the knighting of the Sirloin has found its way into many publications of a local tendency, and, amongst the rest, into the graphic Traditions of Lancashire, by the late Mr. Roby, whose premature death in the Orion steamer we have had so recently to deplore. Mr. Roby, however, is not disposed to treat the subject very seriously; for after stating that Dr. Morton had preached before the king on the duty of obedience, "inasmuch as it was rendered to the vicegerent of heaven, the high and mighty and puissant James, Defender of the Faith, and so forth," he adds:—

"After this comfortable and gracious doctrine, there was a rushbearing and a piping before the king in the great quadrangle. Robin Hood and Maid Marian, with the fool and Hobby Horse, were, doubtless, enacted to the jingling of morris-dancers and other profanities. These fooleries put the king into such good humour, that he was more witty in his speech than ordinary. Some of these sayings have been recorded, and amongst the rest, that well-known quibble which has been the origin of an absurd mistake, still current through the county, respecting the sirloin. The occasion, as far as we have been able to gather, was thus. Whilst he sat at meat, casting his eyes upon a noble surloin at the lower end of the table, he cried out, 'Bring hither that surloin, sirrah, for 'tis worthy a more honourable post, being, as I may say, not sur-loin, but sir-loin, the noblest joint of all;' which ridiculous and desperate pun raised the wisdom and reputation of England's Solomon to the highest."—Traditions, vol. ii. pp. 190-1.

Most probably Mr. Roby's view of the matter is substantially correct; for although tradition never fails to preserve the remembrance of transactions too trivial, or perhaps too indistinct for sober history to narrate, the existence of a tradition does not necessarily prove, or even require, that the myth should have had its foundation in fact.

Had the circumstance really taken place as tradition prescribes, it would probably have obtained a greater permanency than oral recital; for during the festivities at Hoghton Tower, on the occasion of the visit of the "merrie monarch", there was present a gentleman after Captain Cuttle's own heart, who would most assuredly have made a note of it. This was Nicholas Assheton, Esq., of Downham, whose Journal, as Dr. Whitaker well observes, furnishes an invaluable record of "our ancestors of the parish of Whalley, not merely in the universal circumstances of birth, marriage, and death, but acting and suffering in their individual characters; their businesses, sports, bickerings, carousings, and, such as it was, religion." This worthy chronicler thus describes the King's visit:—

"August 15. (1617). The king came to Preston; ther, at the crosse, Mr. Breares, the lawyer, made a speche, and the corporⁿ presented him with a bowle; and then the king went to a banquet in the town-hall, and soe away to Houghton: ther a speche made. Hunted, and killed a stagg. Wee attend on the lords' table.

"August 16, Houghton. The king hunting: a great companie: killed affore dinner a brace of staggs. Verie hot: soe hee went in to dinner. Wee attend the lords' table, ab^t four o'clock the king went downe to the Allome mynes, and was ther an hower, and viewed them p[re]ciselie, and then went and shott at a stagg, and missed. Then my Lord Compton had lodged two brace. The king shott again, and brake the thigh-bone. A dogg long in coming, and my Lo. Compton shott agⁿ and killed him. Late in to supper.

"Aug. 17, Houghton. Wee served the lords with biskett, wyne, and jellie. The Bushopp of Chester, Dr. Morton, p[re]ched before the king. To dinner. Ab^t four o'clock, ther was a rush-bearing and piping affore them, affore the king in the middle court; then to supp. Then ab^t ten or eleven o'clock, a maske of noblemen, knights, gentlemen, and courtiers, affore the king, in the middle round, in the garden. Some speeches: of the rest, dancing the Huckler, Tom Bedlo, and the Cowp Justice of Peace.

"Aug. 18. The king went away ab^t twelve to Lathome."

The journalist who would note so trivial a circumstance as the heat of the weather, was not likely to omit the knighting of the Sirloin, if it really occurred; and hence, in the absence of more positive proof, we are disposed to take Mr. Roby's view of the case, and treat it as one of the thousand and one pleasant stories which "rumour with her hundred tongues" ever circulates amongst the peasantry of a district where some royal visit, or other unexpected memorable occurrence, has taken place.

But this is not the only "pleasant conceit" of which the "merrie monarch" is said to have delivered himself during his visit to Hoghton Tower. On the way from Preston his attention was attracted by a huge boulder stone which lay in the roadside, and was still in existence not a century ago. "O' my saul," cried he, "that meikle stane would build a bra' chappin block for my Lord Provost. Stop! there be letters thereon: unto what purport?" Several voices recited the inscription:—

 
"Turn me o're, an I'le tel thee plaine."
 

"Then turn it ower," said the monarch, and a long and laborious toil brought to light the following satisfactory intelligence:—

 
"Hot porritch makes hard cake soft,
So torne me o'er againe."
 

"My saul," said the king, "ye shall gang roun' to yere place again: these country gowks mauna ken the riddle without the labour." As a natural consequence, Sir Richard Hoghton's "great companie" would require a correspondingly great quantity of provisions; and the tradition in the locality is, that the subsequent poverty of the family was owing to the enormous expenses incurred under this head; the following characteristic anecdote being usually cited in confirmation of the current opinion. During one of the hunting excursions the king is said to have left his attendants for a short time, in order to examine a numerous herd of horned cattle then grazing in what are now termed the "Bullock Pastures," most of which had probably been provided for the occasion. A day or two afterwards, being hunting in the same locality, he made inquiry respecting the cattle, and was told, in no good-humoured way, by a herdsman unacquainted with his person, that they were all gone to feast the beastly king and his gluttonous company. "By my saul," exclaimed the king, as he left the herdsman, "then 'tis e'en time for me to gang too:" and accordingly, on the following morning, he set out for Lathom House.

In conclusion, allow me to ask the correspondents to the "NOTES AND QUERIES," what is meant by "dancing the Huckler, Tom Bedlo, and the Cowp Justice of Peace?"

T.T. WILKINSON.

Burnley, Lancashire, Sept. 21. 1850.

Sirloin.-In Nichols's Progresses of King James the First, vol. iii. p. 401., is the following note:—

"There is a laughable tradition, still generally current in Lancashire, that our knight-making monarch, finding, it is presumed, no undubbed man worthy of the chivalric order, knighted at the banquet in Hoghton Tower, in the warmth of his honour-bestowing liberality, a loin of beef, the part ever since called the sirloin. Those who would credit this story have the authority of Dr. Johnson to support them, among whose explanations of the word sir in his dictionary, is that it is 'a title given to the loin of beef, which one of our kings knighted in a fit of good humour.' 'Surloin,' says Dr. Pegge (Gent. Mag., vol. liv. p. 485.), 'is, I conceive, if not knighted by King James as is reported, compounded of the French sur, upon, and the English loin, for the sake of euphony, our particles not easily submitting to composition. In proof of this, the piece of beef so called grows upon the loin, and behind the small ribs of the animal.' Dr. Pegge is probably right, and yet the king, if he did not give the sirloin its name, might, notwithstanding, have indulged in a pun on the already coined word, the etymology of which was then, as now, as little regarded as the thing signified is well approved."

JOHN J. DREDGE.

Sirloin.-Whence then comes the epigram—

 
"Our second Charles, of fame faeete,
On loin of beef did dine,
He held his sword pleased o'er the meat,
'Rise up thou famed sir-loin!'"
 

Was not a loin of pork part of James the First's proposed banquet for the devil?

K.I.P.B.T.

RIOTS OF LONDON

The reminiscences of your correspondent SENEX concerning the riots of London in the last century form an interesting addition to the records of those troubled times; but in all these matters correctness as to dates and facts are of immense importance. The omission of a date, or the narration of events out of their proper sequence, will sometimes create vast and most mischievous confusion in the mind of the reader. Thus, from the order in which SENEX has stated his reminiscences, a reader unacquainted with the events of the time will be likely to assume that the "attack on the King's Bench prison" and "the death of Allen" arose out of, and formed part and parcel of, the Gordon riots of 1780, instead of one of the Wilkes tumults of 1768. By the way, if SENEX was "personally either an actor or spectator" in this outbreak, he fully establishes his claim to the signature he adopts. I quite agree with him that monumental inscriptions are not always remarkable for their truth, and that the one in this case may possibly be somewhat tinged with popular prejudice or strong parental feeling; but, at all events, there can be but little doubt that poor Allen, whether guilty or innocent, was shot by a soldier of the Scotch regiment, be his name what it may; and further, the deed was not the effect of a random shot fired upon the mob,—for the young man was chased into a cow-house, and shot by his pursuer, away from the scene of conflict.

Noorthouck, who published his History of London, 1773, thus speaks of the affair:—

"The next day, May 10. (1768,) produced a more fatal instance of rash violence against the people on account of their attachment to the popular prisoner (Wilkes) in the King's Bench. The parliament being to meet on that day to open the session, great numbers of the populace thronged about the prison from an expectation that Mr. W. would on that occasion recover his liberty; and with an intention to conduct him to the House of Commons. On being disappointed, they grew tumultuous, and an additional party of the third regiment of Guards were sent for. Some foolish paper had been stuck up against the prison wall, which a justice of the peace, then present, was not very wise in taking notice of, for when he took it down the mob insisted on having it from him, which he not regarding, the riot grew louder, the drums beat to arms, the proclamation was read, and while it was reading, some stones and bricks were thrown. William Allen, a young man, son of Mr. Allen, keeper of the Horse Shoe Inn in Blackman Street, and who, as appeared afterwards, was merely a quiet spectator, being pursued along with others, was unfortunately singled out and followed by three soldiers into a cow-house, and shot dead! A number of horse-grenadiers arrived, and these hostile measures having no tendency to disperse the crowd, which rather increased, the people were fired upon, five or six were killed, and about fifteen wounded; among which were two women, one of whom afterwards died in the hospital."

The author adds,—

"The soldiers were next day publicly thanked by a letter from the Secretary-at-War in his master's name. McLaughlin, who actually killed the inoffensive Allen, was withdrawn from justice and could never be found, so that though his two associates Donald Maclaine and Donald Maclaury, with their commanding officer Alexander Murray, were proceeded against for the murder, the prosecution came to nothing and only contributed to heighten the general discontent."

With respect to the monument in St. Mary's, Newington, I extract the following from the Oxford Magazine for 1769, p. 39.:—

"Tuesday, July 25. A fine large marble tombstone, elegantly finished, was erected over the grave of Mr. Allen, junr., in the church-yard of St. Mary, Newington, Surry. It had been placed twice before, but taken away on some disputed points. On the sides are the following inscriptions:—

North Side

Sacred to the Memory of

William Allen,

An Englishman of unspotted life and amiable disposition, [who was inhumanely murdered near St. George's Fields, the 10th day of May, 1768, by the Scottish detachment from the army.]¹

"His disconsolate parents, inhabitants of this parish, caused this tomb to be erected to an only son, lost to them and the world, in his twentieth year, as a monument of his virtues and their affections."

At page 53. of the same volume is a copperplate representing the tomb. On one side appears a soldier leaning on his musket. On his cap is inscribed "3rd Regt.;" his right hand points to the tomb; and a label proceeding from his mouth represents him saying, "I have obtained a pension of a shilling a day only for putting an end to thy days." At the foot of the tomb is represented a large thistle, from the centre of which proceeds the words, "Murder screened and rewarded."

Accompanying this print are, among other remarks, the following:—

"It was generally believed that he was m–d by one Maclane, a Scottish soldier of the 3d Reg^t. The father prosecuted, Ad–n undertook the defence of the soldier. The solicitor of the Treasury, Mr. Nuthall, the deputy-solicitor, Mr. Francis, and Mr. Barlow of the Crown Office, attended the trial, and it is said, paid the whole expence for the prisoner out of the Treasury, to the amount of a very considerable sum. The defence set up was, that young Allen was not killed by Maclane, but by another Scottish soldier of the same regiment, one McLaughlin, who confessed it at the time to the justice, as the justice says, though he owns he took no one step against a person who declared himself a murderer in the most express terms.... The perfect innocence of the young man as to the charge of being concerned in any riot or tumult, is universally acknowledged, and a more general good character is nowhere to be found. This McLaughlin soon made his escape, therefore was a deserter as well as a murtherer, yet he has had a discharge sent him with an allowance of a shilling a day."

Maclane was most probably the "Mac" alluded to by SENEX; but his account differs in so many respects from cotemporaneous records that I have ventured to trespass somewhat largely upon your space. I may add, that I by no means agree in the propriety of erasing a monumental inscription of more than eighty years' existence without some much stronger proof of its falsehood; for I quite coincide with the remarks of Rev. D. Lysons, in his allusion to this monument (Surrey, p. 393.), that

"Allen was illegally killed, whether he was concerned in the riots or not, as he was shot apart from the mob at a time when he might, if necessary, have been apprehended and brought to justice."

E.B. PRICE.

September 30. 1850.

The Rev. Dr. John Free² preached a sermon on the above occasion (which was printed) from the 24th chapter of Leviticus, 21st and 22nd verses, "He that killeth a man," &c.; and he boldly and fearlessly denominates the act as a murder, and severely reprehends those in authority who screened and protected the murderer. The sermon is of sixteen pages, and there is an appendix of twenty-six pages, in which are detailed various depositions, and all the circumstances connected with the catastrophe.

§ N.

Your correspondent SENEX will find in Malcolm's Anecdotes of London (Vol. ii., p. 74.), "A summary of the trial of Donald Maclane, on Tuesday last, at Guildford Assizes, for the murder of William Allen, Jun., on the 10th of May last, in St. George's Fields."

R. BARKER, JUN.

A long account of this lamentable transaction may be found in every magazine eighty-two years since. The riot took place in St. George's Fields, May 10. 1768, and originated in the cry of "Wilkes and Liberty."

GILBERT.