Page:Notes and Queries - Series 10 - Volume 4.djvu/134

 106 NOTES AND QUERIES. [io» s. iv. AUG. 5.1905. O) by the insertion after the name of each figure of a reference to the page of the text •on which the subject is described, and (2) by the addition at the bottom of each (to the left) of the volume and the number of the plates therein printed, as well as (to the right) of the number of the plate in consecutive series (1 to 261), while the references found in the ordinary copies, which are at the top of the plate, are effaced. Changes like these must have been expensive in so long a series, and it can hardly be supposed that this is the only copy in existence which shows them. The matter is of some little interest to ornithologists, and I would invite any- body having access to a copy of this work —and copies are not very uncommon—to examine it and kindly to let me know the result. I may add that the plates in Dr. Bureau's copy, which he obtained from the •library of the late Prof. Alphonso Milne- Edwards, have never been folded, as is the case with all others that I have seen, but retain their original folio form—42 by 31 mm. ALFRED NEWTON. Magdalene College, Cambridge. LORD NELSON AND CARDINAL YORK. — (1) Lord Nelson gave a silver-mounted <lirk to Lieut. Suckling (a cousin), who had served with him on board the Agamemnon. (2) There is in existence a print of the interior of St. Peter's, which belonged to Cardinal York, and on the back is some writing,in which Lord Nelson's name, Charles Edward's, and the word dirk are decipherable. (3) The Agamemnon was in commission from 1794 to 1796. It does not appear that Cardinal York was driven from home and in distress till 1798. A story copied from some review relates that Nelson rescued the cardinal, had him for seven weeks on board his ship, during which he saw some fighting : that ne landed him on Austrian territory ; that the cardinal afterwards visited the ship, thanked the ad- miral, officers, and crew as his deliverers, and gave Nelson a silver-mounted dirk and cane, which the cardinal valued much, as having belonged to his brother, Charles Edward. From the facts given above it seems im- possible that this could have happened on board the Agamemnon ; but can any lover of the Stuarts or of Nelson help me to further •corroboration of the story from the cardinal's life t NELSON. Trafalgar, Salisbury. THE ARCHIEPISCOPAL CROSS AND ' BECKET.' —In Act I. sc. iii. of 'Becket,' Tennyson seems to have considered that what was remarkable about Becket's cross was the fact that he should bring it into the Council Chamber : but, as I understand the matter, the thing that provoked comment was that St. Thomas carried his own cross, instead of letting it be borne by a cross-bearer. This seems obvious from the whole account in William FitzStephen, and especially from the words thus translated in ' St. Thomas of Canterbury' (in the "English History from Contemporary Writers " Series), p. 75 :— " The bishop of London recommended him to give his cross to one of his clerks, and said he looked as though he were prepared to disturb the whole realm. ' You carry,' said the bishop of London, ' the croas in your hands. If only the king should take his sword, behold ! a king bravely adorned and an archbishop in like sort.' " As is well known, an archbishop never takes his cross into his own hands : it is always borne before him. This point was lost in the recent masterly revival of ' Becket' at Drury Lane, when Roger of York came in with his cross in his hands. FitzStephen, however, makes it quite clear that he did nothing of the sort:— " He [Roger] had his own cross carried before him, [though it was] outside his province, as though dart threatening dart. He had been forbidden by the lord pope, in letters despatched to him, to have his cross borne before him in the province of Can- terbury," &c. Yet another point. The cross which Becket carried at Drury Lane was the single cross carried before archbishops (and the Pope, too, for that matter) at the present day ; but Roger carried the double or so-callea archi- episcopal cross, i.e., a cross with two bars of which the upper is the shorter. There may be authority for this, though the only cross of the kind I have seen in use, viz., at Genoa, was carried at the head of a procession of canons, «fec., the archbishop having the plain cross carried before him. The Misses Malle- spn and Tuker, in their 'Handbook to Chris- tian and Ecclesiastical Rome,' part iv. pp. 470- 471, seem to be of the opinion that the double cross is usually borne before archbishops, but I am convinced from personal experience that this is an error. It may be used in some places, but certainly the Pope, and the Arch- bishops of Milan, Genoa, and Westminster, and (if my memory be not at fault) of Mechlin, Florence, Pisa, and Edinburgh, use the simple cross. The Rev. John O'Brien, in his ' His- tory of the Mass,' p. 128, says :— "We are entirely at a losg to know how this double cross came to be an archiepiscopal ensign. Neither the ' Caerimoniale Kpiscoporum' nor the ' Pontificate Romanum ' gives a word to distinguish it from any other, nor is it spoken of by any liturgi- cal writer of our acquaintance, and there are few