Page:Notes and Queries - Series 12 - Volume 4.djvu/253

 12 S. IV. SEPT., 1918.]

NOTES AND QUERIES.

247

Polar Star (see, for instance, the map in the 4 Essays in Roman History ' of the late Prof. Pelham). This must have been, for many miles, laid out by the Polar Star. No astronomer, so far as I know, has ever suggested that the Fosse runs true for any fixed star ; nor, if such a star existed, would it be clear how the Romans knew that, by following its guidance, they would attain to Lincoln. One must suppose that they had maps of Britain which showed that a line N.E. from Exeter, through Honiton to Ilchester and Bath, would run into Ciren- cester, and thence straight onward to Leicester, and so to Lincoln. There is no difficulty in thinking that they had such maps, and, if they had, no difficulty would

E resent itself in the way of their getting rom point to point. Once it was plain that the route lay from Bath through Cirencester and Leicester, smoke-columns and stars would do the rest.

If MB. MOORE wishes to know the courses of the Roman roads in Britain, he will do best to examine the Ordnance Survey maps, which mark these roads, and which, if sometimes wrong, are very olten correct which is as much as can be said of any book on the subj ect that I know.

F. HAVERFIELD. Winshields, Oxford.

BARNARD FLOWER, THE KING'S GLAZIER.

(12 S. iii. 436 ; iv. 19.)

MB. WYNDHAM HTTLME in his interesting reply asks " whether the portrait of Prince Arthur in Great Malvern Priory emanated from the same atelier as the corresponding portrait at St. Margaret's, Westminster." The answer is emphatically in the negative. The glass* (inserted 1501-2) in the north window of the north transept in Great Malvern Priory is typically English in every respect, and shows no trace of. foreign influence. It bears no resemblance to the rich but somewhat coarse workmanship displayed in the east window of St. Mar- garet's, Westminster. In its original con- dition the Malvern window depicted the Magnificat (as illustrated by several inci- dents in the life of the Blessed Virgin), together with large figures of three arch-

together with those of seven others, are packed away in cases to safeguard them against any possible damage by air raids.
 * At present the contents of this window,

angels, and of St. Michael and the heavenly hosts overcoming the legions of evil.

The headless figure of Uriel still remains, together with panels rep'resenting tht Visita- tion (illustrated in Westlake's ' History of Design in Painted Glass,' vol. iv.), Nativity, Finding in the Temple, Marriage in Cana, Harrowing of Hell, Ascension, and Corona- tion (the last three imperfect), together with recognizable fragments of the Annun- ciation, Adoration, Presentation, and Fall of the Rebel Angels.

It should be pointed out that the portrait of Prince Arthur was only one of a series. The window also contained figures of King Henry VII. and Queen Elizabeth of York, treated in a similar manner. All three figures knelt in the attitude of prayer before richly draped desks upon which lay open books. They were surmounted by sump- tuous canopies of state, and surrounded by white-robed angels playing musical instru- ments. There were also figures of Sir Reginald Bray (illustrated in vol. iv. of Westlake's 'History'), Sir John Savage, and Sir Thomas Lovell, shown as kneeling at desks against a richly striped, damasked background, and surrounded by a frame of architectural character. *

The identity of the " companion portrait of Prince Arthur" at St. Margaret's, West- minster, has been fully discussed both by Mr. Westlake and by Mr. Winston. The arguments of the latter are quoted (if I mistake not) as a lengthy foot-note in vol. iv. of the ' History of Design in Painted Glass.' Both those experts come to the same conclusion that the glass was not painted abroad, and that the figure in question represented, not Prince Arthur, but King Henry VIII. as a young man.

It is usually claimed that this fine glass was presented by the magistrates of Dort, or Gouda, to Henry VII. for his new chapel, in commemoration of the marriage between Prince Arthur and Katherine of Aragon. It would be interesting to know whether there is any documentary evidence for the story. The chapel had not been com- menced when the marriage took place. Whether a window of this size could be designed and painted for a non-existent building is a problem that I must leave for others to solve.

JOHN D. LE COUTETTB.

Southsea.

possible to reconstruct partially the panels con- taining King Henry VII. and Sir Thomas Lovell.
 * During the recent reloading it was found