134 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



[No. 145. 



in the pores of the horn, and which were now disen- 

 gaged." 



A writer in The Menageries (vol. iii. pp. 19 — 22.) 

 tliinks that the great value set upon the horn of 

 this animal, on account of its imaginary virtues, 

 Suggested the image to the Psalmist, " My horn 

 shalt thou exalt like the horn of the unicorn," and 

 that consequently this animal and the rhinoceros 

 are identical. 



I hope that my discursive and desultory remarks 

 may afford your correspondent Rt. some part of 

 the information he desires. William Bates. 



Birmingham. 



These glasses, as their name implies, were ma- 

 nufactured at Venice, or rather at Murano, one of 

 her isles. At the time these glasses were in the 

 greatest repute, Venice was the only European 

 city possessing a glass manufactory. No orna- 

 mental glass vessels, which can positively be as- 

 cribed to Germany, are known of an earlier date 

 than 1553. The earliest English glass-houses for 

 the manufacture of fine glass, those of the Savoy 

 and Crutched Fi-iars, were not established until 

 the middle of the sixteenth century, and they ap- 

 parently were for a considerable time much in- 

 ferior to the Venetian; for in 1635, nearly a 

 hundred years later. Sir Robert Mansel obtained 

 a monopoly for importing fine Venetian drinking- 

 glasses. Probably Venice owes the introduction 

 of her glass manufacture to her share in the con- 

 quest of Constantinople in the beginning of the 

 thirteenth century. The glass bowls, salvers, 

 bottles, &c., painted in enamel, and vessels with 

 coloured threads or " canes " enclosed in the stems, 

 for which Venice became so celebrated, were the 

 immediate effects of this participation, which were 

 further stimulated by the immigration of Greek 

 artists into Italy 250 years later, on the breaking 

 up of the Empire of the East. The peculiarity of 

 the Venice workmanship consists in its exceeding 

 lightness, no lead being employed in its material. 

 I was not aware that the superstition of the power 

 of a Venice glass to detect poison had ever ob- 

 tained in modern times. Sir Thomas Browne, 

 in his work on Vulgar Errors, published in 1646, 

 remarks — 



" Though it be said that poison will break a Venice 

 glass, yet have we not met any of that nature." 



Might not this superstition arise from these glasses 

 being sometimes used in alchemical processes? 

 When made for this purpose they were grotesque 

 in shape, and frequently in the form of the signs 

 of the zodiac. Some amusing information of Mu- 

 rano and her glass manufacture may be obtained 

 from Howell's Familiar Letters., Nos. 28 & 29. He 

 was sent to Venice by Sir Robert Mansel to 

 obtain information concerning the art. Your cor- 

 respondent, if really interested in this beautiful 



fabric, must have lost much if he did not witness 

 the magnificent collection of Venetian glass brought 

 together and exhibited by the Society of Arts in 

 1850. Possessing one or two specimens of the 

 art, and having but little knowledge concerning it 

 except what I have stated, I shall be very glad if 

 my Reply and Query elicit any further information 

 on the subject. Emabee. 



3SitJiMti to iPltnor <^\itxiti. 



Styles of Dukes and Marquises (Vol. vi., p. 76.). 

 — The proper style of a duke is Most Noble, that 

 of a marquis Most Honourable. The style Most 

 Noble has of late been constantly misapplied to 

 marquises ; most improperly, if there be any utility 

 in distinctions, and in being correct. The official 

 notices in the London Gazette, from many public 

 departments, are, in respect to the styles of people, 

 frequently wrong ; so much so, at times, as to be 

 of no authority, as in the instance referred to by 

 L. T. G. 



Burials (Vol. vi., p. 84.). — It is quite possible 

 that I may have spoken too positively, yet I can- 

 not help thinking that his bishop could catch the 

 clergyman whose irregularity is described, if the 

 bishop chose to try. Such conduct is a violation 

 of the rubric of the burial service, and, I should 

 have thought, a breach of the Act of Uniformity. 

 If a clergyman be at liberty to use the rites and 

 ceremonies of the church just as he likes, so long 

 as he keeps outside the consecrated boundary, per- 

 haps the profanation of the Lord's Supper by ad- 

 ministering the elements to a monkey was not 

 punishable. I have heard that this was done at 

 the instigation of the notorious Lord Sandwich, 

 when at the head of the Navy, and that the priest, 

 who " made himself vile," was rewarded with a 

 valuable benefice. Alfred Gattt. 



If Benbow will look into the Act of Uniformity 

 prefixed to the Book of Common Prayer, he will 

 soon discover that "the whole matter" of burials, 

 about which he writes, does not " resolve itself into 

 a question of good taste and eminent churchman- 

 ship," but of heavy pains and penalties, to which 

 every clergyman is liable, if he uses any of the 

 " open prayers " otherwise than is " set forth in 

 the said book." 



Benbow seems to be a feigned name : if he 

 desired an early answer for the authority of the 

 Rev. Alfred Gatty's position, he might no doubt 

 have easily obtained it, through Her Majesty's 

 Post Oflice messengers, by addressing his Query 

 direct, and under his own proper signature. 



As to bui-ial in unconsecrated ground, if any 

 one prefers some other spot than " God's Acre," 

 or other consecrated ground, where he wishes his 

 remains to be deposited, in that he may certainly 

 have his own choice ; but he thereby excommuni- 



