2'"» S. X. Skpt. 15. '6O.3 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



215 



tence of getting rid of him, told him that several gentle- 

 men were waiting at the door for admittance, and that 

 he must not go out immediately; but the Frenchman 

 excused himself by saying he would retire into the other 

 apartments, and whilst the strangers that were admitted 

 were surveying the curiosities with more than ordinary 

 attention, this artful villain retired from them, and con- 

 cealed himself under a dark staircase that led into the 

 street, where he stayed till the company were gone out. 

 After which he stole away medals and other coins to the 

 amount of two hundred pounds and upwards, and got 

 clear off with his booty. It is somewhat observable, that 

 he was often seen lurking near the Museum some time 

 before this affair happened, and very frequently desired 

 to be admitted as soon as he had got a view of the 

 medals. I am sorry I have not time to tell j'ou a few 

 more particulars concerning this transaction, but shall 

 defer it till I know further about it." 



Under date of March 6, 1776, .... "Our 

 Assizes begin to-morrow " . . . . 



In an undated letter, bound between two others, 

 dated Jan. 22, 1777, and March 5, 1777, respec- 

 tively, is the following : — 



" .... I shall now tell you a little Oxford news : the 

 Frenchman who robb'd our Museum was tried at our late 

 Assizes, and found guilty, and sentenced to work on the 

 River Thames for five years." 



S. F. Cb£SW£LL. 



The School, Tonbridge, Kent. 



DERIVATION OF ARTILLERY. 



(2"'» S. X. 70.) 



The following extract from Notes on the Early 

 History of the lloyal Artillery^ chiefly from the 

 MS. Notes of the late Colonel Cleavdand, by Cap- 

 tain W. L. Yonge, R.A., printed in the Proceed- 

 ings of the Royal Artillery Institution, may serve as 

 an answer to this Query : — 



" It may not be altogether out of place to make a few 

 remarks on the 'nomenclature' of the various species of 

 Artillery. The word Artillen/ is said by Moretii, in his 

 ' Treatise' (translated by Sir Jonas Moore, about 1683), to 

 have been derived from the Italian word Artiglio, signi- 

 fying ' the tallons or claws of ravenous fowls, perhaps be • 

 cause its shot flying far off dismembers and tears in pieces 

 all that it meets.' This derivation is probably correct, 

 for we find that the various pieces of Artillery have from 

 very early periods been named after birds of prey and 

 venomous serpents ; thus, among the field pieces (which 

 were necessarily more moveable than the others) we find 

 the Stneriglio, which is a long-winged hawk; t\iQ Falcon; 

 the Saker (a species of Falcon and enumerated as such in 

 the catalogue of Auceps in ' Walton's Angler '). Again, 

 among the heavier and longer pieces we find the different 

 varieties of the Culvering, which name is derived from the 

 Cohibrine or Colubrinetta, a species of serpent ; there is 

 also the well-known Cannon Serpentine, as also the Can- 

 non Basilisk. The 'Bastard' gun was one whose length 

 was less than tiie ordinary of 32 calibres. The Moyenne 

 or Minion (of 26 calibres) was a Bastard piece. Moretii 

 (before quoted) describes also Mortars or Trabucchi. 

 ' They are short pieces, of the nature of Petrieroes ; and 

 with these they shoot Balls of Stone, Grenado shells and 

 cases full of small shot, not by a right line, but by a 

 crooked from on high, so they f^U where it should be ap- 



pointed.' . . . . ' There is no difference betwixt a Mortar 

 piece and a Trabucchio, but in the placing of the Trun- 

 nions.' The Mortar of the present day is the Trabucchio 

 referred to, while the ancient Mortar is something like 

 our 'Coehorn Howitzer.' The derivation of these names 

 is as follows : — The Trabucchio is derived from the Italian 

 verb traboccare, to throw, or hurl ; while the word Mortar 

 has an evident affinity to the word morte, ♦ death,' or mor- 

 torio, mortoro, ' a funeral.' 



" The following is from the Orlando Furioso of Ariosto 

 (circa a.d. 1560), Canto xi. Stanza xxi. et seq. : — 



" Orlando, I pursue. 

 That bore Cymasco's thunderbolt awa}'. 

 And this had in the deepest bottom drowned. 

 That never more the mischief might be found. 



" But with small boot : for the impious memory 

 Of human nature, taught the bolt to frame. 

 After the shaft, which after darting from the sky. 

 Pierces the cloud, and comes to ground with flame ; 

 Who, when he tempted Eve to eat and die. 

 With the apple, hardly wrought more scathe and 



shame — 

 Some deal before, or on our grandsire's day. 

 Guided a necromancer where it lay. 



" More than a hundred fathom buried so, 

 Where hidden it had lain a mighty space — 

 The infernal tool by magic from below 

 Was fished and borne amid the German race. 

 Who, by one proof and the other, taught to know 

 Its powers, and he who plots for our disgrace, 

 The demon, working on their weaker coil. 

 At last upon its fatal purpose hit. 



" To Italy and France on every hand 

 The cruel art among all people past, 

 And there the bronze in hollow mould expand 

 First in the furnace melted by the blast ; 

 Others the iron bore, or small or grand. 

 Fashion the various tube they pierce or cast. 

 And bombard, gun, according to its frame 

 Or single cannon this, or do'ible name. 



" This Saker, Ctdverine, or Falcon hight, 

 I hear all names the inventor has bestowed ; 

 Which splits or shivers steel and stone outright, 

 And where the bullet passes makes a road. 

 Down to the sword, restore thy weapons bright, 

 Sad soldier to the forge, a useless load, 

 And gun or carbine on thy shoulder lay. 

 Who without these, I wot, shall touch no pay." 



I have heard the word derived from arc, a bow 

 (French), and tireur, he who draws the bow. 



W. L. Y. 



JACOBITE HONOURS: LORD CARYLL. 



(2°^ S. X. 102.) 



I am obliged to your con-espondent R. B. for 

 the attempt to compile a list of the persons on 

 whom honours were conferred by James II. after 

 1688, or by his son or grandson. Unfortunately, 

 though he gives dates, he does not give his autho- 

 rities. Thus he records that, in 1759, John Caryll 

 was created Lord Caryll. This is, I believe, a 

 mistake. Mr. Dennistoun, in his Memoirs of 

 Strange and Lumisden, has a note on this Caryll 

 creation which is full of blunders; but he does 



