Notes and Queries, Number 70, March 1, 1851

(Vol. iii., p. 40.)

I cannot refer Demonologist to an authentic report of Booty's case, but I believe none is more so, than that in Kirby's Wonderful and Eccentric Museum, vol. ii. p. 247.

The following extract is given from the journal of Mr. Spinks:—

"Friday, 15th May, 1687. We had the observation of Mr. Booty this day. Captain Barrisby, Captain Bristowe, Captain Brown, I, and Mr. Ball, merchant, went on shore in Captain Barnaby's boat, to shoot rabbits upon Stromboli; and when we had done we called all our men together by us, and about half an hour and fourteen minutes after three in the afternoon, to our great surprise, we all of us saw two men come running towards us with such swiftness that no living man could run half so fast as they did run, when all of us heard Captain Barnaby say, 'Lord bless me, the foremost is old Booty, my next-door neighbour;' but he said he did not know the other that run behind: he was in black clothes, and the foremost was in grey. Then Captain Barnaby desired all of us to take an account of the time, and put it down in our pocket-books, and when we got on board we wrote it in our journals; for we saw them into the flames of fire, and there was a great noise which greatly affrighted us all; for we none of us ever saw or heard the like before. Captain Barnaby said he was certain it was old Booty, which he saw running over Stromboli and into the flames of Hell. It is stated that Captain Barnaby told his wife, and she told somebody else, and that it was afterward told to Mrs. Booty, who arrested Captain Barnaby in a thousand pound action, for what he had said of her husband. Captain Barnaby gave bail to it, and it came on to a trial in the Court of King's Bench, and they had Mr. Booty's wearing apparel brought into court, and the sexton of the parish, and the people that were with him when he died; and we swore to our journals, and it came to the same time within two minutes; ten of our men swore to the buttons on his coat, and that they were covered with the same sort of cloth his coat was made of, and so it proved. The jury asked Mr. Spinks if he knew Mr. Booty. He answered, 'I never saw him till he ran by me on the burning mountain.'"

The chief justice from April, 1687, to February, 1689, was Sir Robert Wright. His name is not given in the report, but the judge said—

"Lord have mercy upon me, and grant that I may never see what you have seen: one, two, or three may be mistaken, but thirty never can be mistaken. So the widow lost her suit."

An action for slander of a deceased husband, brought by the widow, and the defendant held to bail, is a remarkable beginning. The plea of justification, that Booty ran into Hell, is hardly supported by evidence that he ran into the flames at Stromboli. The evidence was, that the defendant said that one of the two runners was Booty; it does not appear that the other witnesses knew him. The witnesses must have kept a good look to observe the buttons of Booty's coat when he ran more than twice as fast as any living man could run. Finally, as the time of the death and the observation "came to the same within two minutes," and Stromboli is about 15° east of Gravesend, Booty must have run to Hell before he died.

I have no doubt that "the case is well known in the navy." The facts are of the sort usually reported to the marines; but the law such as was unknown before 9 & 10 Vict. c. 95.

    H. B. C.

U. U. Club, Feb. 11.

THE CONQUEST

(Vol. ii., p. 440.; Vol. iii., p. 92.)

I question the position of S. K., that the phrase "post conquestum" is used in the deed he cites (Vol. ii., p. 92.) for the accession of the king. "Post conquestum" was, in records and deeds, applied with more or less frequency to all our kings, from Edward III. to Henry VIII. To show this I give the following references to the pages of Madox's Formulare Anglicanum:—

Edward III. 12. 19. 92. 94. 120. 121. 139. 140. 166. 167. 168. 201. 203. 228. 229. 230. 264. 282. 283. 318. 322. 349. 361. 362. 386. 387. 388. 389. 402. 403.

Richard II. 66. 96. 122. 123. 140. 141. 169. 203. 268. 284. 323. 325. 326. 327. 362. 390. 404. 405. 410.

Henry IV. 67. 97. 98. 124. 125. 142. 172. 204. 205. 269. 270. 284. 285. 328. 329. 330. 350. 391. 405. 407.

Henry V. 67. 68. 126. 143. 144. 206. 285. 331. 391. 408. 420.

Henry VI. 18. 34. 100. 101. 103. 104. 126. 127. 145. 147. 148. 206. 207. 208. 233. 270. 271. 286. 331. 332. 333. 334. 351. 364. 392. 393. 394. 409. 410. 434.

Edward IV. 128. 148. 209. 234. 286. 335. 352. 365. 394. 395.

Richard III. 108. 209. 212. 411.

Henry VII. 71. 214. 235. 339. 352. 365. 396. 412. 438.

Henry VIII. 235. 236. 273. 343. 396. 414.

I believe "post conquestum" was also applied to Edward V.; but the records and deeds of his short reign are necessarily but few.

I conjecture that the use of the term "post conquestum" thus originated.

As we had Kings of England of the name of Edward before the Conquest, Edward the First was distinguished from these monarchs by being styled "King Edward, the son of King Henry" (his father was called "King Henry, the son of King John"). In like manner, Edward II. was distinguished from his father by being called "King Edward, the son of King Edward;" but Edward III. could not thus be distinguished from his father; he was therefore called King Edward III.; but, as there were Kings Edward before the Conquest, the third was qualified by the addition of the phrase in question, "post conquestum." To Richard II. generally, and to his successors up to Henry VIII. either generally or occasionally, the same phrase, "post conquestum," was also applied; but, if we except Edward IV. and V., this phrase was not at all required, or applicable in their cases, inasmuch as no King of England before the Conquest was named either Richard or Henry.

    C. H. Cooper.

Cambridge, Feb. 4. 1851.

DESCENT OF HENRY IV

(Vol. ii., p. 375.; Vol. iii., p. 120.)

Upon the deposition of Richard II., 30th September, 1399, Henry IV., then Duke of Lancaster, claimed the crown in the following terms:

"In the name of the Fader, Sonne, and Holy Ghost, I, Henry of Lancastre, chalenge this Rewme of Ynglonde and the Croune, with all the Membres and the appurtenances, als I that am descendit be ryght lyne of the Blode comyng fro the gude Lord King Henry thirde, and thorghe that ryght that God of his grace hath sent me with helpe of my kyn and of my friendes to recover it: the which Rewme was in poynt to be ondone for defaut of Governance, and undoying of the gude Lawes."

Rapin observes upon this (vol. i. p. 476.):—

"It was not without reason that he affected to make use of obscure expressions, which left undetermined the foundation upon which he built his pretended right. If he seemed to derive his title from Henry III. rather than from Edward III., his grandfather, it was because there was a rumour that Edmund, Earl of Lancaster, surnamed Crouch-back, was eldest son of Henry III.; but by reason of his deformity Edward I., his younger brother, was placed on the throne. According to this supposition, the Duke would have made the ignorant believe he could ground his title upon being son of Blanch of Lancaster, granddaughter of Edmund Crouch-back, and heiress of that family. But as he was sensible everybody could not be imposed upon by so gross a forgery, he added certain expressions, intimating that he built his right also upon the service he had just done the state. This is the meaning of the claim, expressed in such obscure terms. As it was resolved to adjudge the crown to the Duke, the Parliament took care not to examine his claim too closely, but were very willing to suppose it uncontestable. Thus, without any regard to the just rights of the Earl of March, it was decreed that Henry should be proclaimed king, which was done that very day," &c.

It would seem, however, that Henry was to a certain extent compelled to make his claim to the crown in the form he did (Hales, Hist. C. L. c. 5.), notwithstanding his desire to do so as a conqueror. (Seld. Tit. Hon. l. 3.)

    J. B. Colman.

Replies to Minor Queries

Chauncy—Entwysel.—To a dry genealogical Query (Vol. iii., p. 61.), your readers will wish me to reply as briefly as possible. F. R. R. will find that Sir H. Chauncy's statement is borrowed from Weever. The latter founded his statement, that "Wilfred Entwysel was the last heir of his house," on the authority of Dalton, Norroy; but this statement, as your correspondent has shown, and as other evidence would prove, is not well-founded. It may be assumed that Sir Bertyne Entwysel did not leave issue, male, by Lucy his wife, the daughter of Sir John Ashton, of Ashton-under-Lyne, as Leland speaks of a daughter only, "of whom Master Bradene, of Northamptonshire, is descended." His connexion with Lancashire is shown by his epitaph, and by our finding his name as a witness to a Lancashire charter. The alliance which he formed may be urged as a further proof. Leland's expression, that "he came into England," may imply that Sir Bertyne remained in France discharging the duties of his office, from the period of the Battle of Agincourt, where he signally distinguished himself, until his services were again called for in the Wars of the Roses.

    J. H. M.

"Pretended" Reprint of Ancient Poetry, in J. Taylor's Catalogue of 1824 (Vol. ii., p. 463.), replied to by Cato (Vol. ii., p. 500.).—My attention has been drawn to the above, wherein doubts have been raised as to the existence of a volume supposed to be UNIQUE; and criticisms follow on my note, which records the fact, that "only TWO COPIES were reprinted." Cato has already stated that the reprinting the TWO COPIES was at the expense of the late Rev. Peter Hall; and ONE COPY produced at his sale twenty shillings: the other copy bore the impress of Mr. Davidson, a highly respectable printer; and that only two copies were reprinted, one of which came direct to me from the Rev. Peter Hall. This copy was purchased from me by an eminent statesman, who has formed one of the finest libraries in the kingdom.

    James Taylor,
    Formerly of Blackfriars Road.

Newick, Jan. 27. 1851.

Lights on the Altar.—I would refer your correspondent D. Sholbus (Vol. ii., p. 495.) to one of the Canons published under King Edgar, about the year 968. Lambard's Latin version of the ordinance is as follows:—

"Semper in ecclesia lumen ardeat dum Missa decantetur."

(Ἀρχαιονομία, ed. Wheloc. p. 70. Cantab. 1644. Compare Cressy's Church History of Brittany, p. 870. A.D. 1668.)

    R. G.

Cognation of the Jews and Lacedæmonians (Vol. ii., p. 377.).—I should occupy too much space in your interesting publication were I to give a list of the critics or ethnographers who have commented on this passage, and shall therefore be content to mention some of the most important works which may afford sufficient information, or at least enable your correspondent to pursue the inquiry farther.

Calmet's Dissertation sur la Parenté des Juifs et des Lacédémoniens, which is included in his Dissertations, Paris, 1720, in 3 vols. 4to, and also in his Commentaires.—Stillingfleet's Origines Sacræ, book iii., c. 4., who admits the probability that the Spartans had relation to Abraham, as deriving from Phaleg, from whom Abraham came. This appears to have been intended by the expressions of Josephus, ἐξ ἑνὸς γένους καὶ ἐκ τῆς πρὸς Ἀβραμον οἰκειότητος (book xii. c. iv.); but the Versions, and most critics, interpret the words in the 12th chap. of 1 Maccabees, ἐκ γένους Ἀβρααμ, as implying that they came from Abraham: see Selden, de Synedriis, l. ii. c. iii. s.v.—The Rev. Charles Forster's Historical Geography of Arabia, part i. sect. vi., in which he discusses "the vestiges of Arab colonies, and maintains the Arabo-Abrahamic origin of the Greeks."—Stephanus Morinus, in Diss. de Cognatione Lacedæmoniorum et Hebræorum (inter dissertationes viii. Dordraci, 1700, 8vo.)

Your correspondent, who, in Vol. ii., p. 230., requests to be supplied with "a list of all the theories and publications respecting the ten tribes commonly called the Lost Tribes," will probably be satisfied with that furnished by Basnage's History of the Jews, in which, however, he overlooks the theory of Olaus Rudbeckius, Filius, that they are to be found neither in Asia, nor Africa, nor America, but in Lapland! The same author, in a treatise de Ave Selau, cujus mentio fit Numer. xi. 31., endeavours to establish an analogy between the Hebrew and Gothic languages.

    T. J.

Queen Mary's Lament (Vol. iii., p. 89.).—The following copy of verses, written by this beautiful and unfortunate princess, during her confinement in Fotheringay Castle, was presented to the public by the kindness of a very eminent and liberal collector:—