May 21. 1853.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



505 



would likewise seem to be favourable to an abo- 

 riginal source, as Champlain speaks of " la pointe 

 de Quebec, ainsi appellee dessauvages;" not satis- 

 fied with which, some writers assert that the far- 

 iiimed city was named after Candebec, a town on 

 the Seine ; while others say that the Norman navi- 

 gators, on perceiving the lofty headland, exclaimed 

 " Quel bee ! " of which they believe the present 

 name to be a corruption. Dissenting from all 

 other authorities upon the subject, Mr. Hawkins, 

 the editor of a local guide-book called The Picture 

 of Quebec, traces the name to an European source, 

 which he considers to be conclusive, owing to the 

 existence of a seal bearing date 7 Henry V. (1420), 

 and on which the Earl of Suffolk is styled " Domine 

 de Hamburg et de Quebec." Robert Wright. 



SETANTIORUM PORTUS. 



(Vol. vii., pp. 180. 246.) 



Although the positions assigned by Camden to 

 the ancient names of the various estuaries on the 

 coasts of Lancashire and Cumberland iare very 

 much at variance with those laid down by more 

 modern geographers ; still, with regard to the 

 particular locality assigned by him to Setantiorum 

 Partus, he has made a suggestion which seems 

 worthy the attention of your able correspondent C. 



His position for Morecambe Bay is a small inlet 

 to the south of the entrance of Solway Firth, into 

 which the rivers Waver and Wampool empty 

 themselves, and on which stands "the abbey of 

 Ulme, or Holme Cultraine." He derives the name 

 from the British, as signifying a " crooked sea," 

 which doubtless is correct ; we have Mor taweh, 

 the main sea; Morudd, the Red Sea; and Mor 

 camm may be supposed to indicate a bay much 

 indented with inlets. It is needless to say that 

 the present Morecambe Bay answers this de- 

 scription far more accurately than that in the 

 Solway Firth. Belisama JEstuarium he assigns to 

 the mouth of the Ribble, and is obliged to allot 

 Setantiorum Portus to the remaining estuary, now 

 called Morecambe Bay. However, he seems not 

 quite satisfied with this last arrangement, and 

 suggests that it would be more appropriate if we 

 might read, as is found in some copies, Setantiorum 

 XinvT], instead of \ifi.^v, thus assigning the name of 

 Setantii to the inhabitants of the lake district. 



The old editions of Ptolemy, both Greek and 

 Latin, are very incorrect, and, there is little 

 doubt, have suffered from alterations and interpo- 

 lations at the hands of ignorant persons. I have 

 not access at present to anj' edition of his geo- 

 graphy, either of Erasmus, Servetus, or Berlins, 

 so I know not whether any weight should be 

 allowed to the following circumstance ; in the 

 Britannia Romana, in (xibson's Camden, this is 

 almost the only Portus to be found round the 



coast of England. The terms there used are (with 

 one more exception) invariably cestuarium, or 

 fiuvii ostium. If this variation in the old reading 

 be accepted, the appellation as given by Montanus, 

 Bertius, and others, to Winandermere, becomes 

 more intelligible. H. C. K, 



. Rectory, Hereford. 



PHOTOGRAPHIC CORRESPONDENCE. 



Stereoscopic Queries. — Can any of your readers 

 inform me what are the proper angles under which 

 stereoscopic pictures should be taken ? 



Mr. Beard, I am informed, takes his stereo- 

 scopic portraits at about 6^°, or 1 in 9 ; that is to 

 say, his cameras are placed 1 Inch apart for every 

 9 inches the sitter is removed from them. The 

 distance of the sitter with him is generally, I be- 

 .lieve, 8 feet, which would give lOf inches for the 

 extent of the separation between his cameras. 

 More than this has the effect, he says, of making 

 the pictures appear to stand out unnaturally ; that 

 is to say, if the cameras were to be placed 12 

 inches apart (which would be equal to 1 in 8), the 

 pictures would seem to be in greater relief than the 

 objects. 



I find that the pictures on a French stereoscopic 

 slide I have by me have been taken at an angle of 

 10°, or 1 in 6. This was evidently photographed 

 at a considerable distance, the triumphal arch in 

 the Place de Carousel (of which it is a represent- 

 ation) being reduced to about 1^ inch in height. 

 How comes it then that the angle is here Increased 

 to 10° from 6^°, or to 1 In 6 from 1 In 9. 



Moreover, the only work I have been able ta 

 obtain on the mode of taking stereoscopic pictures, 

 lays It down that all portraits, or near objects, 

 should be taken under an angle of 15°, or, as it 

 says, 1 In 5 ; that is, If the camera Is 20 feefe 

 from the sitter, the distance between Its first and 

 second position (supposing only one to be used) 

 should not exceed 4 feet ; otherwise, adds the 

 author, " the stereos! ty will appear unnaturally 

 great." 



When two cameras are employed, the instruct 

 tions proceed to state that the distance between , 

 them would be about -Jg-th of the distance from the 

 part of the object focussed. The example given 

 is a group of portraits, and the angle, 1 In 10, is 

 afterwards spoken of as being equivalent to an arc 

 of 10°. 



Farther on, we are told that " the angle should 

 be lessened as the distance between the nearest 

 and farthest objects increase. Example : if the 

 farthest object be twice as far from the camera as 

 the near object, the angle should be 5° to a central 

 point between these two. 



Now, I find by calculation that the measure- 

 ments and the angle here mentioned by no means 



