Notes and Queries, Number 179, April 2, 1853.

    Wordsworth's Eccles. Sonnets, xii.
    W. L. Nichols.
Bath.

SCARFS WORN BY CLERGYMEN

(Vol. vii., p. 269.)

The mention of the distinction between the broad and narrow scarf, alluded to by me (Vol. vii., p. 215.), was made above thirty years ago, and in Ireland. I have a distinct recollection of the statement as to what had been the practice, then going out of use. I am sorry that I cannot, in answer to C.'s inquiry, recollect who the person was who made it. Nor am I able to specify instances of the partial observance of the distinction, as I had not till long after learned the wisdom of "making a note:" but I had occasion to remark that dignitaries, &c. frequently wore wider scarfs than other clergymen (not however that the narrower one was ever that slender strip so improperly and servilely adopted of late from the corrupt custom of Rome, which has curtailed all ecclesiastical vestments); so that when the discussion upon this subject was revived by others some years ago, it was one to which my mind had been long familiar, independently of any ritual authority.

I hope C. will understand my real object in interfering in this subject. It is solely that I may do a little (what others, I hope, can do more effectually) towards correcting the very injurious, and, I repeat, inadequate statement of the Quart. Review for June, 1851, p. 222. However trifling the matter may be in itself, it is no trifling matter to involve a considerable portion of the clergy, and among them many who are most desirous to uphold both the letter and the spirit of the Church of England, and to resist all real innovation, in a charge of lawlessness. Before the episcopal authority, there so confidently invoked, be interposed, let it be proved that this is not a badge of the clerical order, common to all the churches of Christendom, and actually recognised by the rules, in every respect so truly Catholic, of our own Church. The matter does not, I apprehend, admit of demonstration one way or the other, at least till we have fresh evidence. But to me, as to many others, analogies seem all in favour of the scarf being such a badge; and not only this, but the very regulation of our royal ecclesiastical authorities. The injunctions of Queen Elizabeth, in 1564, seem to mark the tippet as a distinction between clergymen and laymen, who otherwise, in colleges and choirs at least, would have none. I also am strongly of opinion that the tippets mentioned in the 58th and 74th English canons are the two scarfs referred to: the silken tippet (or broad scarf) being for such priests or deacons as hold certain offices, or are M.A., LL.B., or of superior degree; the plain tippet (or narrow scarf) being for all ministers who are non-graduates (Bachelors of Arts were not anciently considered as graduates, but rather as candidates for a degree, as they are still styled in many places abroad); so that all in orders may have tippets. This notion is confirmed by the fact, that the scarf was frequently called a tippet in Ireland within memory. And in a letter, discussing this very subject, in the Gentleman's Mag. (for 1818, part ii. p. 218.[7 - See also p. 315.; and 1819, part i. p. 593.]), the testimony of one is given who had for upwards of fifty years considered the two words as identical, and had heard them in his youth used indiscriminately by aged clergymen. It is notorious that in Ireland, time out of mind, tippets have been more generally worn than hoods in parish churches there. I am not sure (though I lay no stress on the conjecture) whether this may not have been in consequence of the option apparently given by the Canons of wearing either hood or tippet.

It is not correct to restrict the customary use of the scarf to doctors, prebendaries, and chaplains. In some cathedrals the immemorial custom has been to assign it to minor canons and clerical vicars also. At Canterbury, indeed, the minor canons, except otherwise qualified, do not wear it. (But is not this an exception? Was it always so? And, by the way, can any cathedral member of old standing testify as to the customary distinction in his church between the two scarfs, either as to size or materials?) The very general use of it in towns cannot be denied.

I may add, that Bishop Jebb used to disapprove of its disuse by country clergymen. In his Charge he requests that "all beneficed clergymen" of his diocese "who are Masters of Arts, or of any superior degree, and who by chaplaincies or otherwise are entitled to the distinction, may with their surplices wear scarfs or tippets." This apparently was his construction of the Canons.

    John Jebb.

The narrow scarf, called the stole or orarium, is one of the most ancient vestments used by the Christian clergy, representing in its mystical signification the yoke of Christ. Though it may be true that its use is not enjoined by any modern rubric or canon, custom, I think, fully warrants the clergy in wearing it. What other sanction than custom is there for the use of bands?

    E. H. A.

A great deal of very interesting matter bearing upon this question, both in an ecclesiastical and antiquarian point of view, though no definite conclusion is arrived at, will be found in a pamphlet by G. A. French, entitled The Tippets of the Canons Ecclesiastical.

    An Oxford B.C.L.

INSCRIPTIONS IN BOOKS

(Vol. vii., p. 127.)

The following were lines much used when I was at school, and I believe are still so now:

"This book is mine
By right divine;
And if it go astray,
I'll call you kind
My desk to find
And put it safe away."

Another inscription of a menacing kind was,—

"This book is one thing,
My fist is another;
Touch this one thing,
You'll sure feel the other."

A friend was telling me of one of these morsels, which, considering the circumstances, might be said to have been "insult added to injury;" for happening one day in church to have a book alight on his head from the gallery above, on opening it to discover its owner, he found the following positive sentence:

"This book doant blong to you,
So puttem doon."

    Russell Gole.
The following salutary advice to book-borrowers might suitably take its position in the collection already alluded to in "N. & Q.":

"Neither blemish this book, or the leaves double down,
Nor lend it to each idle friend in the town;
Return it when read; or if lost, please supply
Another as good, to the mind and the eye.
With right and with reason you need but be friends,
And each book in my study your pleasure attends."

    O. P.
Birmingham.

Is not this curious warning worthy of preservation in your columns? It is copied from a black-letter label pasted to the inside of an old book cover:

"Steal not this booke, my honest friende,
For fear ye gallows be ye ende;
For if you doe, the Lord will say,
'Where is that booke you stole away?'"

    J. C.
To the collection of inscriptions in books commenced by Balliolensis, allow me to add the following:

"Hic liber est meus,
Testis et est Deus;
Si quis me quærit,
Hic nomen erit."

In French books I have seen more than once,—

"Ne me prend pas;
On te pendra."

An on the fly-leaf of a Bible,—

"Could we with ink the ocean fill,
Were ev'ry stalk on earth a quill,
And were the skies of parchment made,
And ev'ry man a scribe by trade,
To tell the love of God alone
Would drain the ocean dry.
Nor could the scroll contain the whole,
Though stretch'd from sky to sky."

    George S. Master.
Welsh-Hampton, Salop.

I beg to subjoin a few I have met with. Some monastic library had the following in or over its books: