SJnd S. No 51., Dec. 20. '66.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



493 



" Fondingge." — In a translation of the Lord's 

 Prayer in a MS. in the library of Caius College, 

 Cambridge (date about the thirteenth century), 

 the vf or d fondingge is used for temptation. What 

 is its derivation ? Bovillus. 



Norwich. 



[Dr. Richardson derives it from the Anglo-Saxon 

 fund-ian, to try, attempt or endeavour, examine^ search, 

 or seek after ; and, as Somner expresses it, to labour to 

 come to a thing (J., e. to find), — 



"The fifte, is moder of heUhe, 

 A ft-end in &\\q fondynges (trials)." 



See also Promptorium Parvulorum : " Fondyn^e, or a- 

 saynge. Attemptacio. Ang.-Sax. fandian, tentare." 

 Halliwell gives the fbliowing examples : 



" And of oure gyVt}'s gt-aunt us repentaunce. 

 And strenckytn us to stonde in slWq fondyng." 



MS. Cantab., Ff. ii. 38., f. 13. 

 " Y seyde hyt for no velany*. 

 But for nfondynge." 



MS. Ibid., f. 72.2 



Ttjndale\'i New Testament. -^ I lately- met with 

 ia fcopy of Tyndale's New Testataent in small 8vo., 

 printed in 1538, with nutaie^ous woodcuts. Can 

 any of your readers iliFonn me whether this is a 

 scarce edition ? Any particulars respecting it 

 Would greatly oblige TxjnstAl. 



[According to Dr. Cotton only three copies are known 

 of this very rare edition of Tyndale's Testament with his 

 Prologues, ** Imprynted at Ant'sFerpe by Matthew Crom." 

 They are in the Baptist Library, Bristol, St. Paul's Ca- 

 thedral, and Clirist Church, Oxford, the last copy being 

 imperfect. There is, however, a perfect copy in the 

 Grenville library. In Father Simon's Critical History, he 

 first ascribes this version to Tyndale and Cov6rdale, and 

 afterwards doubts whether it be not from WickliSe's 

 version, whieh was permitted by Heni-y VIII. duHtig Sir 

 T. Cromwell's life, but after his death, by the interference 

 of the bishops, was prohibited. The prevailing opinion, 

 however, ascribes this Testament to Tyndale and Cover- 

 dale. See note in the Gremnlle Catalogue, part i. p. 721. ; 

 also Dr. Cotton's List «f mrio'us Editions of the Sihte, 

 pp. 5. 90. and 99.] 



SHOUIiD THE QUERCUS SESSILIFLOKA BE CULTI- 

 VATED ? 



(2"'' S. ii. 434.) 



Mb. Collyns states " that the Quercus robur is 

 preferred by all workers in hard wood for houses, 

 shipsy wagons, machinery," &c. This preference 

 to the Q. robur, of course implies inferiority in 

 the Q. sessiliflora. Which, then, of the two oaks 

 ought the Admiralty to encourage in the royal 

 forests ? To appreciate the gist of the following 

 remarks, let it be understood that they iapply to 

 two varieties of oak growing in the New Forest, 

 namely, the Q. robur and the Q. sessiliflora ; and 

 f\irther that, to identify them, it must be borne in 

 mind that the Q. robur^ or common oak, bears 



acorns with long stalks, and leaves with short 

 stalks ; while conversely the Q. sessiliflora or 

 " Durmast " (so called by the woodmen) bears 

 acorns with short stalks, and leaves with long 

 stalks. 



During a Visit to the New Forest in the year 

 1849, I found that all the workmen, whether car- 

 penters, sawyers, or hewers, condemned the Dur- 

 mast ; and in a letter from Mr. Nichols, the Navy 

 purveyor to the Earl of Chatham, First Ix)rd of 

 the Admiralty, dated March 1, 1791, he says that, 

 " the Durmast is not so strong, hard, or durable," 

 as the common oak, and he therefoi*e deplores the 

 fact, that in the year 1700, some of the enclosures 

 were planted with Durmast acorns. Again, in 

 the last edition of the Fine. Brit., art. " Timber," 

 the writer — my late respected friend, Augustin 

 Creuze, F.R.S. — says that, " there is no doubt as 

 to the comparative inferiority of Durmast oak. 

 Almost all English writers on timber have as- 

 serted it; and both Buflfon and Du Hamel cor- 

 roborate their assertions." Lastly, in a letter 

 of the Navy Board, dated Dec. 2, 1830, the 

 quality of the Durmast is mistrusted. 



But notwithstanding this mass of respectatile 

 evidence against the poor Q. sessiliflora, no facts 

 were adduced to confirm such wholesale con- 

 demnation, and I conjectured whether its asserted 

 inferiority might not be a sort of popular delusion, 

 similar to the gratuitous notion that the durability 

 of timber depends on the age of the moon, or on 

 the season of the year at the time of felling. 



That this conjecture was hot groundless, the 

 following remarks will prove. In the year 1832, 

 forty pieces bf the common oak and forty pieces of 

 the Durmast oak were respectively used on the 

 starboard and port sides of the " Vindictive." 

 After the lapse of seventeen years, that is to say 

 in 1849, the ofBcei-s of Portsmouth yard reported 

 that the Durmast appeared to be more durable 

 than the common oak. Interested In this result, 

 I followed up the investigation by An experiment, 

 — which I will not tire you by describing, — and 

 the result, to my astonishment, was, that the Dur- 

 mast was denser, stronger, and more elastic than 

 the common oak ! 



Pardon the length of this communication : the 

 importance of the subject must plead the excuse, 

 for, believing that the Delphic oracle is now as 

 applicable to England, as formerly it was to 

 Athens, and that in deed and very truth Britain's 

 best bulwarks are her Wooden walls, it surely 

 cannot be a matter of indifference to determine on 

 the best material with whieh to construct the 

 same. God grant that, manned with "hearts 

 of oak," these her walls may ever prove stronger 

 than adamant ! Esti) perpeiua ! JaMes Bennett. 



H. M. Dockyard, Portsmouth, 

 Dec. Hi 1856. 



