JAN. 26. 1850.] 
OLD PAINTED GILASS. 
For poor ignorant people like myself pray 
insert the following, as perhaps some of your 
heraldic correspondents may afford some informa- 
tion for the benefit of your very humble servant. 
Newington, June 17. 1751. 
To take an account of what Coats of Arms or other 
Paintings are in the windows of the House Mercer 
lives of Mr. Filmer. 
Painted Glass in y’ windows at Mr. Merser House is 
As foloweth 5 Coote of armse in 3 windowse in y’ 
Kichen 2 Surkelor Coots of armse6 Lians traveling 
6 flours of Luse all Rede & a Holfe Surkel a top 
With 2 flours of luce y’ Glass painted Rede 
Blew yoler & of a Green Shaye. 
In y’ Hall one ouel Pease of Painted Glass 
In Chakers of yoler & Green & blew 10 yong 
Hedge frougs 
Two Pikse of Armse on Each Side 
W. B. there was in this Rote on y’ 
Glass Lyfford but there is only now ford 
y’ 3 fust Leters ar Broken & Lost oute 
One Pees of y’ Painted Glass in y’ frount 
Chamber window as foloweth 
In a Surkel 6 flours of Luse 6 Red Lyans 
Traveling 4 Rede Roses 2 Purpul Roses 
With a Croune a tope with 2 flours of Luse & 
A Crass and Beedse all Round y’ Crowne 
‘In y’ same window one more Cootse of arms 
In a Surkel Devidet is as foloweth 3 yoler 
Lyans passant* Set in a Silver Coler 6 flours of 
Luse 
blew Sete in Green, y’ Scoch Coote of arms on 
Each Side y’ thisel & Crown & y’ 3 flours coming 
out of the thistle 
y Croun yoler & y’ flours y* thisal of a silver Coler 
3 Leopards* Hedse Silver & Set in Silver 
2 Roses of a purpul Couler one on Each Side 
2 Spred Eaguls one on Each Side 
& 2 Wingse of a Goos in y’ midel of y’ arms 
of a Goold culer & a vessel like a decanter be- 
tween y™ 
A croun a toupe with 2 flours of Luse on 
Each side of y* Croun one Crass in y® middel & 2 
holfe 
Crasses on Each Side with white Beadse 
all Round y* Crounde a toupe. 
JELFRIC’S COLLOQUY. 
The singular error into which Messrs. Lye and 
Thorpe have fallen in the passage pointed out by 
Mr. Hampson in Z£lfric’s very interesting Collo- 
* Corrections in the original. 
NOTES AND QUERIES. 
197 
quy, is the more remarkable as frie himself 
afforded a complete illustration of the passage, in 
his Glossary, where we have “ Bure, hidig-fet.” 
It is possible, therefore, that higdifatu is a mere 
error of the scribe. Now Du Cange, v. Bulga, 
cites this very passage from lfric’s Glossary, 
and adds, “i.e. vas ex corio confectum,” but his 
whole article is worth consulting. That the Latin 
word in the Colloguy should be Cassidilia is quite 
clear. Thus in an old MS. English Gloss on the 
Bible (penes me), the passage in Tobit, viii. 2., 
“ Protulit de Cassidili suo,” is rendered, ‘‘ brouzt 
forth of his Scrippe.” Coverdale has it, “‘ take out 
of his bagge,” and Luther, “langte aus seinem 
Sdcklein,’ which word is exchanged for biidel in 
the Saxon version. In two old Teutonic Glosses 
on the Bible published by Graff (Diutiska, ii. 178.), 
we have the following variations : — 
de cassidi burssa, de sacello t. saceiperio kiula 
de cassili burissa, de sacello t. saceiperio kiulla. - 
Another Gloss in Graff’s Ist vol. p. 192., on the 
word Cadus, may perhaps throw some light on the 
subject. The philological student need not be re- 
minded of the wide application of the words vas, 
Lat., fazz, O.G., and fet, A.S.; but, for my own 
part, I conclude that the shoewright intended 
to designate by higdifatu all sorts of leathern bud- 
gets. Every Anglo-Saxon student must be so 
sensible of the great obligation he is under to our 
distinguished scholar Mr. ‘Thorpe, that I trust it 
will not be deemed invidious or ungracious to 
point out another passage in this Colloguy which 
seems to have hitherto baffled him, but which it 
appears to me may be elucidated. 
To the question, “ Hwilce fixas gefehst thu ?” 
the fisherman answers, ‘ Ailas aud hacodas, my- 
nas, aud zlputan, sceotan aud lampredan, aud 
swa hwylce swa on wetere swymath, sprote.” 
Mr. Thorpe, in the 1st edition of his Analecta, 
says, ‘ What is intended to be meant by this word 
[sprote], as well as by salu [the correspondent 
word in the Latin], I am at a Joss to conjecture.” 
In his second edition, Mr. Thorpe repeats, “I am 
unable to explain salu otherwise than by supposing 
it may be an error for salice.”” In his Glossary he 
has “ spro’t, ii. 2.? sprout, rod ?” with a reference 
to his note. I must confess I cannot see how the 
substitution of salice for salu would make the pas- 
sage more intelligible, and the explanation of 
spro‘te in the Glossary does not help us. The 
sense required appears to me to be, quickly, swiftly, 
and this will, I think, be found to be the meaning 
of sprote. In the Meso-Gothic Gospels the word 
sprauto occurs several times, and always in the sense 
of cito, subito; and though we have hitherto, I be- 
lieve, no other example in Anglo-Saxon of this ad- 
verbial use of the word, we are warranted, I think, 
in concluding, from the analogy of a cognate lan- 
guage, that it did exist. In regard to the evidently 
