68 
NOTES AND QUERIES. 
[No. 5. 
communicated to him, containing the whole duty of a 
Player; interspersed with directions for young Actors, 
as to the management of the voice, carriage of the 
body, &c. &c., reckoned the best piece that has ever 
been wrote on the subject,” p. 22. 
This “best piece” on the subject is promised in 
the course of the volume, but it is not found in it. 
Did it appear anywhere else and in any other 
shape? As the Query of Dramaricus is now an- 
swered, perhaps he may be able to reply to this 
question from T.J.L. 
T should have sent this note sooner, had [ not 
waited to see if any body else would answer the 
Query of Dramarticus, and perhaps afford some 
additional information. 
ANCIENT TAPESTRY. 
Sir, —I believe I can answer a Query in your 
Third Number, by N., respecting the whereabouts 
of a piece of ancient tapestry formerly in the pos- 
session of Mr. Yarnold, of Great St. Helen’s, Lon- 
don, described, upon no satisfactory authority, as 
“the Plantagenet Tapestry.” It is at present the 
property of Thos. Baylis, Esq., of Colby House, 
Kensington. A portion of it has been engraved as 
representing Richard IIL, &e ; but it is difficult 
to say what originated that opinion. The subject 
is a crowned female seated by a fountain, and ap- 
parently threatening two male personages with a 
rod or slight sceptre, which she has raised in her 
left hand, her arm being stayed by another female 
standing behind her. This has been said to repre- 
sent Elizabeth of York driving out Richard ITI. 
which, I need scarcely say, she did not do. There 
are nineteen other figures, male and female, look- 
ing on or in conversation, all attired in the costume 
of the close of the 15th century, but without the 
least appearance of indicating any historical per- 
sonage. It is probably an allegorical subject, such 
as we find in the tapestry of the same date under 
the gallery of Wolsey’s Hall at Hampton Court, 
and in that of Nancy published by Mons. Jubinal. 
I believe one of the seven pieces of “ the siege 
of Troy,” mentioned in Query, No. 3., or an eighth 
piece unmentioned, is now in the possession of 
Mr. Pratt, of Bond Street, who bought it of Mr. 
Yarnold’s widow. : 
I may add, that the tapestry in St. Mary’s Hall, 
Coventry, contains, undoubtedly, representations 
of King Henry VI., Queen Margaret, and Cardinal 
Beaufort. It is engraved in Mr. Shaw’s second 
volume of Dresses and Decorations; but the date 
therein assigned to it (before 1447) is erroneous, 
the costume being, like that in the tapestries above 
mentioned, of the rery end of the 15th century. 
J. R. Puancue. 
Brompton, Nov. 20. 1849. 
[To this Note, so obligingly communicated by Mr. 
Plancl 6, we may add, that the tapestry in question was 
exhibited to the Society of Antiquaries at their opening 
meeting on the 22nd ultimo.] 
TRAVELLING IN ENGLAND. 
Mr. Editor — Your No. 3. has just fallen into 
my hands, with the wonderful account of Schultz’s 
journey of fifty miles in six hours, a hundred years 
ago. I am inclined to thing the explanation con- 
sists in a misprint. The distances are given in 
figures, and not in words at length, if we may trust 
your correspondent’s note on p. 35. May nota 1 
have “dropped” before the 6, so that the true 
lection will be, “dass wir auf dem ganzen Wege 
kaum 16 Stunden gefahren sind”? This time 
corresponds with the time of return, on which he 
set out in the evening (at 8?) of one day and ar- 
rived at noon the next. It was also most likely 
that the spring carriages of fifteen years later date 
should go much faster than the old springless ve- 
hicles. Any one who has corrected proofs will ap- 
preciate the “dropping” of a single type, and may 
beready to admit it on such cireumstantial evidence. 
I may remark that 1749 was still Old Style in 
England; but the German Schultz, in dating his 
expedition on Sunday, 10 Aug. 1749, has used the 
New Style, then prevalent in Germany. Sunday, 
10 Aug. 1749, O. S., was on Thursday, 31 July, 
1749, N. S. The York coach-bill cited on the 
same page is in O. S. 
Ts not ‘ Stdts-Kutsche,” in the same communi- 
cation, a misprint ? A.J. E. 
G. G. has perhaps a little overrated the import 
of the passage he quotes. from Schultz's travels. 
“ Dass wir kaum 6 Stunden gefahren sind” — even 
supposing there is no misprint of a 6 for an 8 or 9, 
which is quite possible — will not, I apprehend, 
bear the meaning he collects from the words, viz 
that the journey occupied no more than six hours, or 
less even than so much. 
In the first place, I believe it will be allowed by 
those familiar with German idioms, that the phrase 
haum 6 Stunden, is not to be rendered as though it 
meant no more or less than 6; but rather thus: 
“but little more than 6;” — the “little more,” in 
this indefinite form of expression, being a very un- 
certain quantity, it may be an hour or so. 
Then he says merely that they “kaum 6 Stunden 
gefahren sind,” which may mean that the time 
actually spent in motion did not exceed the number 
of hours indicated, whatever that may be; and 
not that the journey itself, “ineluding stoppages,” 
took up no more. Had he meant to say this, I. 
imagine he would have used a totally different 
phrase: e. g. dass wir binnen haum mehr als 6 Stun- 
den nach London schin gehommen sind; or some- 
thing like these words. 
Making these allowances, the report is con- 
ceivably true, even of a period a century old, as 
regards the rate of day-travelling on the high road 
