April 23. 1853.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



4H 



1690. Conveyance from John Spencer to O. and 



L. O., as before mentioned. 

 In Gentleman s Magazine, August, 1842 (pp. 141, 



142.), will be found numerous notices of these 



Spencers or Spensers, with identified localities 



from registers. 



I think that this explanation will solve the dif- 

 ficulty suggested by Ci.iviger. On the main 

 question I have not grounds sufficient for an opi- 

 nion, but add a reference to Gentleman' s Maga- 

 zine., March, 1848, p. 286., for a general objection 

 by Me. Crossley, President of the Chetham 

 Society, who is well acquainted with the locality. 



Lancasteibnsis. 



I was about to address some photographic Queries 

 to the correspondents of " N. & Q." when a note 

 caught my attention relating to Edmund Spenser 

 (in the Number dated March 26.)- The Mr. F. 

 F. Spenser mentioned therein was related to me, 

 being my late father's half-brother. I regret to 

 say that he died very suddenly at Manchester, 

 Nov. 2, 1852. During his lifetime, he took much 

 pains to clear up the doubts about the locality of 

 the poet's retirement, and his relatives in the North ; 

 and has made out a very clear case, I imagine. 

 On a visit to Yorkshire in 1851, I spent a few 

 days with him, and took occasion to urge the 

 necessity of arranging the mass of information he 

 had accumulated on the subject ; which I have no 

 doubt he would have done, had not his sudden 

 death occurred to prevent it. These facts may be 

 of some interest to biographers of the poet, and 

 ■with this object I have ventured to trouble you 

 with this communication. J. B. Spencer. 



11. Montpellier Road, Blackheatli. 



THROWING OLD SHOES FOR LUCK. 



(Vol. ii., p. 196. ; Vol. v., p. 413. ; Vol. vii., pp. 193. 

 288.) 



I do not know whether you will permit me to 

 occupy a small portion of your valuable space in 

 an attempt to suggest an origin of the custom of 

 throwing an old slioe after a newly married bride. 



Your correspondents assume that the old shoe 

 was thrown after the bride for luck, and for luck 

 only. I doubt whether it was so in its origin. 



Among barbarous nations, all transfers of pro- 

 perty, all assertions and relinquishments of rights 

 of dominion, were marked by some external cere- 

 mony or rite ; by which, in the absence of written 

 documents, the memory of the vulgar might be 

 impressed. When, among Scandinavian nations, 

 land was bought or sold, a turf was delivered by 

 the trader to the purchaser : and among the Jews, 

 and probably among other oriental nations, a shoe 

 answered the same purpose. 



In Psalm Ix., beginning with " O God, thou hasfc 

 cast me off," there occurs the phrase, " Moab ia 

 my washpot, over Edom have I cast out my shoe," 

 Immediately after it occurs the exclamation, "O 

 God! who has cast us ofi"!" A similai- passaga 

 occurs in Psalm cix. 



By this passage I understand the Psalmist to 

 mean, that God would thoroughly cast off Edom, 

 and cease to aid him in war or peace. This inter- 

 pretation is consistent with the whole tenor of the 

 Psalm. 



The receiving of a shoe was an evidence and 

 symbol of asserting or accepting dominion or 

 ownership ; the giving back a shoe, the symbol of 

 I'ejecting or resigning it. 



Among the jews, the brother of a childless 

 man was bound to marry his widow : or, at least, 

 he " had the refusal of her," and the lady could 

 not marry again till her husband's brother had 

 formally rejected her. The ceremony by which 

 this rejection was performed took place in opeu 

 court, and is mentioned in Deut. xxv. If the 

 brother publicly refused her, " she loosed his shoe 

 from off his foot, and spat in his face;" or, as 

 great Hebraists ti-anslate it, " spat before his face." 

 His giving up the shoe was a symbol that he 

 abandoned all dominion over her ; and her spitting 

 before him was a defiance, and an assertion of 

 independence. This construction is in accordance 

 with the opinions of Michaelis, as stated in his 

 Laws of Moses, vol. ii. p. 31. 



This practice is still further illustrated by the 

 story of Ruth. Her nearest kinsman refused to 

 marry her, and to redeem her inheritance : he was 

 publicly called on so to do by Boaz, and as pub- 

 licly refused. And the Bible adds, " as it was the 

 custom in Israel concerning changing, that a man 

 plucked off his shoe and delivered it to his neigh- 

 bour," the kinsman plucked off his shoe and de- 

 livered it to Boaz as a public renunciation of Ruth, 

 of all dominion over her, and of his right of pre- 

 marriage. 



These ceremonies were evidently not unknown 

 to the early Christians. When the Emperor Wla- 

 dimir made proposals of marriage to the daughter 

 of Raguald, she refused him, saying, " That she ' 

 would not take off her shoe to the son of a slave." 



There is a passage in Gregory of Tours (c. 20.) 

 where, speaking of espousals, he says, "The bride- 

 groom having given a ring to the fiancee, presents 

 her with a shoe." 



From Michelet's Life of Luther we learn, that 

 the great reformer was at the wedding of Jean 

 Luffte. After supper, he conducted the bride to 

 bed, and told the bridegroom that, according to 

 common custom, he ought to be master in his own 

 house when his wife was not there : and for a 

 symbol, he took off the husband's shoe, and put it 

 upon the head of the bed — " afin qu'il prit ainsi 

 la domination et gouvernement." • ; • 



