Nov. 11. 1854.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



391 



of Rosse his age, to have care that the said Kirk 

 of Leith be planted with all convenient diligence 

 by Mr. David Lindsay, sometymes minister of 

 St. Andrews ;" which settlement, Calderwood 

 adds, was that year efiected by the bishops ; but 

 I do not find him designated the son and successor 

 of the reformer. Lord Lindsay, in his Lives of 

 the Lindsay. % 1849, ascribed to his kinsman, the 

 elder David, a posthumous work under the title — 

 «The Heavenly Chariot layde open for transporting 

 the New-borne Babes of God from Rome infected with 

 Sin, towards that Eternitie in which dwelle Kighteous- 

 ness ; made up of some Eare Pieces of that purest Golde, 

 which is not to bee found but in that Eitchest Thesaurie 

 of Sacred Scripture," &c. " Imprentit at Sanct Androis, 

 by E. Eaban, Printer to the Vniversitie, 1622." 



which, his lordship adds, " I have never been able 

 to meet with." The same book figures in Watt, 

 under the Bishop of Brechin, quite another Lind- 

 say ; and I have now to show that the Heavenly 

 Chariot and The Godly Man's Journey are the 

 same book, by supplying the whole title of the 

 latter : 



« The Godly Man's Journey to Heaven, containing Ten 

 severall Treatises, viz. : — 1. and 2. An Heavenly Chariot ; 

 3. The Blessed Chariotsman; 4. The Lanthorn for the 

 Chariot; 5. The Skilful Chariot-driver; 6. The Gard of 

 the Chariot; 7. The Sixe Eobbers of the Chariot; 8. The 

 Three Eockes layd on the Way ; 9. The only Inne God's 

 Babes aime at ; 10. The Ghosts of the Inne. By Maister 

 D. Lindsay, Minister of God's Word at Leith. 12mo. 

 London, 1625." 



The Rev. Jas. Scott, in his Lives of the He- 

 formers, Edinburgh, 1810, has a memoir of the 

 Bishop of Rosse ; and, upon the authority of 

 Charters, also ascribes the book under the last 

 title to him. Turning, however, to the Catalogue 

 of Scottish Writers, Edinburgh, 1833, I find the 

 reverend gentleman misquotes ; the Godly Man's 

 Journey being there assigned to " D. L., minister 

 of Perth." The London edition contains several 

 titles and dedications to men of rank in the north ; 

 and the whole has an allegorical look, although it 

 is only the " simple meek meditations" of the 

 author. His lanthorn is God's word ; his chariot- 

 driver, guard, and robbers, respectively, the 

 ministers, the celestial angels, the Jesuits and 

 popish seminaries, who would rob us by substi- 

 tuting false doctrines for those of our Reformed 

 Church. Upon the strength of its title, I wonder 

 it did not get a place in Mr. Offor's list, when 

 speculating upon the obligations Bunyan may 

 have been under to his predecessors for sugges- 

 tions. J. O. 



ORIEL. 



(Vol. ix., p. 400.) 



The meaning of this word has been so often 

 asked, and so often received the same learned but 



still unsatisfactory answer, I will venture a con- 

 jectural one, which, at least, has plausibility to 

 recommend it ; and some analogy, derivable from 

 the art nomenclature to which it belongs. 



" In modern writings," says Nares, " we meet 

 with mention of oriel windows ; I doubt the pro- 

 priety of the expression," &c., &c. He doubts 

 the propriety of the designation, because he has 

 been taught to consider the word as applicable 

 only to the atrium or porch ; or because, as sup- 

 posed by some, derivable from area or areola. 

 Now, its application to the projecting windows (so 

 constantly and increasingly in use in these Tudor- 

 loving times), and to no other part of the buildings, 

 erected in the Tudor style, convinces me, that 

 this is not only a legitimate extension of the ap- 

 plicability of the term, but in consonance with, or 

 perhaps the only true original idea, namely, an 

 appendicle, oreille, or projection from the head 

 or main building, — such a projection being, as it 

 were, the ear to that head. Let any one look at 

 a well-constructed oriel window, and deny if he 

 can the justice of this conception. I shall not 

 dilate on its feasibility, but leave it to the con- 

 sideration of those whose moral or physical per- 

 ceptions have not been obfuscated by the learned 

 glamour of the Dryasdusts who have gone before 

 me. The objections I anticipate are, first, the 

 transposition of a letter in the spelling, of i for e, 

 — oriel for oreil, a matter of little account when 

 we consider to whom the use of the word (the 

 working architects) would be transferred by the 

 original inventors, I have not the means of 

 reference to works in old Norman-French, to de- 

 cide on the admission of what I suppose to be the 

 ancient spelling, without the " He," which I sup- 

 pose to be a modern improvement, with a view to 

 liquidity in pronunciation. I presume the word 

 to be originally oreil, easily corrupted into oriel 

 in the mouths of any other than scholarly handi- 

 craftsmen. 



Secondly, in regard to analogous and fancied 

 resemblances. Is not the art full of such images ? 

 Have we not pediments, shafts, capitals, &c., 

 amongst the classical ; and, what is more to the 

 purpose, soflits, corbeils, quaterfoils and mulllons 

 m the Gothic ? Many others will doubtless sug- 

 gest themselves to men better acquainted than I 

 am with the nomenclature of mediseval architec- 

 ture, more violent in their conception than the 

 notion of throwing out a projecting porch, or, still 

 better, clapping on a supplementary window, and 

 calling it by the name of so beautiful a member as 

 the ear. 



Lastly, and it is perhaps the strongest objection 

 of all, It will be said that the derivation is too 

 obvious ; and that, setting aside the idea which 

 prompted it, the words are too much alike. I am 

 fully aware of the ridicule that attaches to the 

 easy adoption of similitudes in etymology. But I 



