May 25. 1850.] 
NOTES AND QUERIES. 
491 
Essquires and Gentlemen.—I1 would ask your 
correspondent (No. 27. p.437.), whether he has 
ascertained the grounds of distinction made in tbe 
seventeenth and in the early part of the eighteenth 
century, between esguires and gentlemen, when 
both were landed proprietors? We find lists of 
names of governors of hospitals, trustees, &c., 
where’ this distinction is made, and which, appa- 
rently, can only be accounted for on this ground, 
that the estates of the gentleman were smaller in 
extent than those of the esquire; and, conse- 
quently, that the former was so far a person of 
less consideration. Had the bearing of coat ar- 
mour, or a connection with knighthood, any thing 
to do with the matter? J. H. Marxvanp. 
Bath, May. 
Early Inscriptions. —The excellent remarks by 
“T. S. D.” on “ Arabic Numerals, &c.” (No. 18. 
p: 279.) have put me in mind of two cases which 
in some degree confirm the necessity for his cau- 
tion respecting pronouncing definitively on the 
authenticity of old inscriptions, and especially 
those on “ Balks and Beams” in old manorial 
dwellings. The house in which I spent the greater 
portion of my youth was a mansion of the olden 
time, whose pointed gables told a tale of years; 
and whose internal walls and principal floors, both 
below and above stairs, were formed of ‘“raddle 
and daub.” It had formerly belonged to a family 
of the name of Abbot; but the “last of the race” 
wus an extravagant libertine, and, after spending 
a handsome patrimonial estate, ended his days as 
a beggar. Abbot House was evidently an ancient 
structure; but unfortunately, as tradition stated, 
a stone, bearing the date of its erection, had been 
carelessly lost during some repairs. However, in 
my time, on the white wainscot of a long lobby on 
the second floor, the initials, “TT. H. 1478,” were 
distinctly traced in black paint, and many persons 
considered this as nothing less than a “true copy” 
of the lost inscription. Subsequent inquiry, how- 
ever, finally settled the point ; for the inscription 
was traced to the rude hand of one of the work- 
men formerly employed in repairing the building, 
who naively excused himself by declaring that he 
considered it “a pity so old a house should be 
without a year of our Lord.” 
The second instance is that of the occurrence 
of “ four nearly straight lines” on one of the com- 
partments of a fine old font in Stydd Church, near 
Ribchester, which many visitors have mistaken | 
for the date “1178.” <A closer scrutiny, however, 
soon dispels the illusion; and a comparison of this | 
with similar inscriptions on the old oak beams of | 
the roof, soon determines it to be nothing more 
than a rude, or somewhat defaced, attempt to ex- 
hibit the sacred monogram “ I. 1. 8,” 
J. W. 
Burnley, April 27, 1850. 
American Aborigines called Indians (No. 16. 
p. 254.).—I believe the reason is that the con- 
tinent in which they live passed under the name 
of India, with the whole of the New World dis- 
covered at the close of the fifteenth century. It 
is, of course, unnecessary to dwell upon the fact 
of Columbus believing he had discovered a new 
route to India by sailing due west; or upon the 
acquiescence of the whole world in that idea, the 
effects of which have not yet passed away; for we 
not only hear in Seville, even now, of the “ India 
House” meaning house of management of affairs 
for the “ New World,” but we even retain our- 
selves the name of the West Indies, given as un- 
warrantably to the islands of the Caribbean Sea. 
It is needless to do more than allude to this, and 
to other misnomers still prevalent, notwithstand- 
ing the fact of the notions or ideas under which 
the names were originally given having long since 
been exploded; such as the “four quarters of 
the globe,” the “ four elements,” &c. If your cor- 
respondent searches for the solution of his diffi- 
culty on different grounds from those I have 
mentioned, it would not satisfy him to be more 
diffuse ; and if the whole reason be that which I 
conceive, quite enough has been said upon the 
subject. G. W. 
89. Hamilton Terrace, St. John’s Wood. 
“ NorTuMan” is informed, that on the discovery 
of America by Columbus, when he landed at Gua- 
nahani (now called Cat Island), he thought, in 
conformity with his theory of the spherical shape 
of the earth, that he had landed on one of the 
islands lying at the eastern extremity of India; 
and with this belief he gave the inhabitants the 
name of Indians. The following quotations will 
perhaps be interesting :— 
“ America persepe dicitur, sed improprie, Indie 
Occidentales, les Indes Occidentales, Gallis, West Inde, 
Belgis: Non tantum ab Hispanis, qui illam denomi- 
pationem primi usurparunt, sed etiam a Belgis, Anglis, 
et aliquando a Francis, quod eodem fere tempore de- 
| tecta sit ad occidentem, quo ad Orientem India reperta 
est.” — Hofmanni Lexicon Univ. 1677, sub titulo “ Ame- 
rica.” 
“ At eadem terra nonnullis Zndia Occidentalis, nun- 
cupatur, quia eodem tempore, quo India Orientalis in 
Asia, hee etiam detecta fuit ; tum quod utriusque in- 
colis similis ac pene eadem vivendi ratio: nudi quippe 
utrique agunt.”— P, Cluverii Introduct. in Univ. Geo- 
graphiam, Cap. xi. (iv.) 1711. 
“ The most improper name of all, and yet not much 
less used than that of America, is the West Indies: West, 
in regard of the western situation of it from these parts 
of Europe; and Jndies, either as mistook for some 
part of India at the first discovery, or else because the 
seamen use to call all countries, if remote and rich, by 
the name of India.”— Heylyn’s Cosmography, 1677, 
-Book iv., sub initio. 
It is almost needless to mention, that India re- 
—— 
