Page:Notes and Queries - Series 10 - Volume 12.djvu/522

 430

NOTES AND QUERIES. [io s. XIL NOV. 27, im

Church, and the entry states that they were " both of this Hamlet."

A portion of the south side of Harrow Road, near Kensal Green, is within the parish of Hammersmith, and it is probable that somewhere in this locality the house stood. S. MARTIN.

Hammersmith.

" TIKES AND CHURLS." These two words occur together in a well-known passage in 4 Piers Plowman ' (B text, Passus xix. 36) : As wyde as the worlde is wonyth there none But under tribut and taillage as tykes and cherles.

What does the poet mean here by the word "tykes" in connexion with "cherles," and associated with " tribut and taillage '* ? It has been suggested that the " tyke " in ' Piers Plowman ' is identical with the "tike" of the dialects of North England, used in the sense of a hound, cur, or even in the general sense of a dog, the equivalent of the Icelandic tik, meaning a bitch.

William Langland's work is thus identified in ' E.D.D.' ; but surely such an explanation is extremely improbable. The figurative use of the word " tike," in the sense of a rough, ill-mannered, churlish fellow, is quite modern, and is almost unknown south of the Trent. The word taken in connexion with " cherles " is evidently used in a technical sense, and is probably synonymous with "villein" or the "cottar" of Domesday. Is the word of Germanic origin ?

A. L. MAYHEW.

21, Norham Road, Oxford.

HENRY ETOUGH. (See 4 S. xi. 286.) In the British Museum 'Catalogue of Satirical Prints,' No. 2014, Etough is de- scribed as a Jew who embraced Christianity and died Rector of Therfield, Herts, 10 Aug., 1757, aged seventy. I fail to trace the name of Etough in any list of Jewish settlers. It does not seem to me to be Jewish. Is it English ? ISRAEL SOLOMONS.

91, Portsdown Road, W.

TOURNAMENTS AND JOUSTS. I shall be obliged if some reader of ' N. & Q.' will tell me where I can find particulars of tournaments, &c. There are many books that give general information on the subject, but I have not met with one that gives details, such as size of the lists, height and length of the barrier, &c. Were tilting yards all made on the same general plan, with similar proportions ? Did the jousters always charge with their left hand next the barrier ? T. F. D

THE

"STRAWBERRY HILL" CATALOGUE.

(10 S. vii. 461, 517 ; xii. 216, 294, 353.)

I AM sorry to take any exception to MR. ABRAHAMS'S pleasant reply, ante, p. 216 ; but since my original article was partly a criticism of statements made by an earlier contri- butor, I feel called on now to defend my own accuracy.

It is true that I omitted much that I might have written, but I endeavoured to restrict myself as to space, while giving details enough to enable any one to identify the various issues of the catalogue if desired.

As I stated that the lots in catalogues 2 and 3, on ten out of the twenty-four days, exceeded those catalogued in No. 1, and that No. 3 omitted the seventh and eighth days' sale entirely, and also often cata- logued the same lot at greater length than No. 2, it is obvious that the differences did not escape my notice.

The " Preliminary Remarks on the Wal- pole Collection of Prints in the Round Tower," signed S. W., succeeded the sixth day's sale in catalogues 1 and 2. The " brief note occupying one page n which is headed " The Walpole Collection of Prints in the Round Tower, Deferred until the conclusion of the present Auction," succeeds the sixth day's sale in No. 3, and not, as stated by MR. ABRAHAMS, in No. 1.

I believe my identification of the cata- logue which I have called No. 1 (the so- called Duiiciad catalogue) is assured by the note which appears at the end of the cata- logue on p. 250, viz. :

" Note. Some inaccuracies will be discovered in the Catalogue, arising from a want of sufficient time for its examination, in order to be prepared by the time it was originally announced ; these errors will be carefully rectified in the Second Edition, a small portion of which will be printed on large paper."

Although my copy of No. 1 (unlike Nos. 2 and 3, which are in the original wrappers) has been bound, a collation by pages and signatures (in fours) shows that nothing has been subtracted nor added.

As to the statements that " the seventh and eighth days* sales were held in the manner shown by the catalogue," and that I have " presumably confused the print collection with these," the answers, in reverse order, are, first, that the collection of prints sold in the subsequent ten days' sale, and the lots catalogued in Nos. 1 and 2