332 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



[No. 78. 



two inches across, pressed into the face of which 

 is a " hayband" or twisted coil of thin j^archment 

 inclosing the impression. 



I am sure that 1 have seen many examples much 

 earlier And later, but those given are merely in 

 reference to the theory of your Lewes corresjjoii- 

 dent. Even tliey are surely inconsistent with the 

 idea of the practice being peculiar to any localitj' 

 or distinctive of any class. JNIy recollection would 

 lead me to assign the fourteenth to the sixteenth 

 centuries as the period of its use. But still the 

 question remains — Has it any, and what signitica- 

 tion ? I have always considered it to have been 

 a contrivance to strengthen the substance of the 

 seal itself The earliest instances I have seen 

 were "applique" seals, such as the royal privy 

 seals, and with these it would seem to have ori- 

 ginated. Their frail nature suggested the use of 

 some substance to protect the thin layer of wax 

 from damage by the crumpling of the parchment 

 on ^vhich they were impressed. For some time its 

 use was confined to this kind of seal; and fashion 

 may perhaps have extended the practice to pen- 

 dent seals, where, however, it was often efficacious 

 in neutralising the bad quality of the wax so 

 general in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. 

 The plaiting of the bay or straw sometimes as- 

 sumed a fanciful shape. Although the impressions 

 of seals of the time of Henry VII. are often very 

 bad, there are generally traces of their existence ; 

 these may perhaps be discovered in Mr. Loweb's 

 seals if he looks more to the enclosure than to the 

 substance forming it. Joseph Burtt. 



Haijhands in Seeds. — M. A. Lower thinks that 

 ]\Ir. T.Hudson Turner has misapplied his descrip- 

 tion of the seals in his possession. The seals are 

 not impressed upon hai/bands, neither do " some 

 ends of the hay or straw protrude from the sur- 

 face." The little fillet or wreath of ha}', about 

 equal in diameter to a shilling, is inlaid upon the 

 pendent lump of wax, and forms the ornament or 

 device of the seal, rather than an integral portion 

 of it, like that in the specimens referred to by 

 Mr. Turner. 



M. A. Lower begs, under favour, to add, that 

 the very fxct of a Query being inserted in the 

 pages of this invaluable — one might almost say 

 indispensable — publication, implies a candid 

 avowal pro tanio of ignorance on the part of the 

 Querist, who might reasonably expect a j)lain 

 answer, unaccompanied by any ungracious reflec- 

 tion on the side of the more higldy-gifted savant 

 that furnished the reply. As a simple matter of 

 taste, many other correspondents besides JMark 

 Antony Lower may probably object, like the 

 latter's eminent namesake, Mr. Tony Weller, to 

 being " pulled up so wery short," especially in 

 cases where there is a clear misapprehension on the 

 part of the respondent. 



Hayhands in Seals. — It is impossible for one 

 moment to doubt the correctness of Mk. Hudson 

 Turner's remarks on this question, and I hasten 

 to retract my own suggestions, frankly acknow- 

 ledging them to be erroneous. 



1 had always taken the same view as Mr. Tur- 

 ner (for it is very palpable to the eye, and speaks 

 for itself), till diverted from it by one of those 

 sudden fancies which, spite of all caution, will ever 

 and anon unaccountably cross the mind and be- 

 wilder the better judgment. To have established 

 my view, these rushes should have been proved to 

 be afhxed to deeds o( feoffment alone; a point 

 which, at the moment, I overlooked. Even while 

 I write, I have before me a lease granted by the 

 abbey of Denney in the fifteenth century, with a 

 rush in the seal; and Mr. Turner's cited instances 

 of royal charters put an end to all question. 



Lest others be led astray by my freak of fancy, 

 without an opportunity of correcting it by Mb. 

 Turner's statement, the proper course for me is 

 to acknowledge myself wrong — palpably, unmis- 

 takeably wrong, — Mr. Turner's explanation is 

 the correct one ; thanks to him for it — liheravi 

 aniniam meam. , L. B. L. 



NORTH SIDE OF CHURCHYARDS. 



(Vol. ii., pp. 93. 253.; Vol. iii., p. 125.) 



Your correspondents on this subject have ge- 

 nerally taken it as granted, that the prejudice 

 against burying in this portion of the churchyard 

 is almost universal. In a former communication 

 (Vol. ii., p. 93.) I stated that there are at least 

 some exceptions. Since that time I have visited 

 perhaps a hundred churchyards in the counties of 

 York, Derby, Stafford, Bucks, Herts, and Oxford, 

 and in nearly half of these burial had evidently 

 been long since practised on flie north side of the 

 several churches. The parish church of Ashby 

 de la Zouch is built so near the south wall of the 

 churchyard, that the north must clearly have been 

 designed for sepulture. I was incumbent of an 

 ancient village church in that neighbourhood, which 

 is built in the same manner, with scarcely any 

 srround on the south, the north beini; large and 

 considerably raised by the numerous interments 

 which have taken place in it. It has also some old 

 tombs, wiiich ten years ago were fast falling to de- 

 cay. The part south of the church contains very 

 few graves, and all apparently of recent date. 



In my former communication I mentioned, that 

 in this churchyard burial has been chiefly, till of 

 late, on the north side of the church ; and, since 

 that communication, a vault has been made on the 

 south side, which has convinced us the ground 

 had never before been there broken iip. The soil 

 is chalk ; whereas, whenever a gr.ave is made on 

 the north side, human dust and bones are so 



