182 
NOTES AND QUERIES. 
[28d 8, No 7,, Fun. 16, 56, 
Judea and Jerusalem, — seems to afford us the 
real clue to the term. Du Cange inclines to this 
explanation. 
To the mere conjectures contained in the other 
three explanations, we may add a sixth, that sug- 
gests itself a8 affording as plausible an explanation 
as any of the above, except the second. As this 
building was erected at Durham expressly for the 
use of females, and as, according to Gervase, all 
interviews between the monks and their female 
relatives took place in these porches or chapels, 
the name may have been given to denote that the 
monks in their occasional interviews with women, 
were to be as cautious and guarded as the Jews, 
whg dwelt in Judea in the south, and in Samaria 
in the centre of Palestine, were, in their communi- 
cations with the people of Galilee, termed “ Galilee 
of the Gentiles,” because it was peopled chiefly by 
Phoenicians, Syrians, and Arabians. Cnyrer. 
| VISCOUNTESS CORBET’S PEERAGE FOR LITE. 
At a time when the question of peerages for 
life has attracted more than usual public interest, 
T am induced to lay before the readers of “N, & 
Q.” a precedent of a similar creation, which, 
though it was not noticed by the eloquent speakers 
in the late debate (probably beciuse, as relating 
to a, female, it was not politically apposite), still 
combines in itself some curious circumstances that 
should invite inquiry. 
Sarah Lady Corbet was on the 23rd Oct., 1679, 
created a viscountess for her natural life, in con- 
sequence (according to the patent, an extract of 
which exists in the College of Arms) of — 
“His Majesty having taken into his royal considera- 
tion the great worth and merits of the trusty and well- 
beloved Sarah Lady Corbet, together with the faithful 
services of the late Sit Vincent Corbet.” 
Sir Vincent, it is true, had taken an active part 
in the beginning of the civil war on the side of 
Charles I., but his military exploits seem to, have 
been confined to two narrow escapes of. being 
taken prisoner in 1643, first at Nantwich, and 
afterwards at Drayton. His property was sub- 
sequently sequestrated, and a fine set of 20227, or, 
according to Dring, of 1588/. 13s. 4d.; but in this 
he only shared the fate of many other at least as 
eminent Cavaliers. He died about 1676, sixteen 
ae after the Restoration, and whatever had 
een his services, up to that time there had been 
no royal recognition or recompense ; though this 
Was too common 4 case to be remarkable. 
Three years after Sir Vincent’s death, his widow 
was ennobled partly (as the patent implies) out 
of gratitude to his “faithful services;” and yet, 
though this loyal gentleman left by his wife two 
“sons, succeeding to an estate that had suffered in 
the royal cause, they are expressly excluded from 
the reversion. of that title which was to be the 
guerdon to their father’s memory. The latter 
plea of the patent is therefore very doubtful. As 
for her ladyship’s own “great worth and merits,” 
it is difficult, of course, to avoid a surmise of what 
this might mean at the court of our “merry mo- 
narch;” but in 1679 the lady was sixty-six years 
of age,—a fact which appears to vindicate her 
reputation; unless, indeed, there were antecedents 
in the early life of both Charles and Lady Corbet 
that might explain this tardy mark of gratitude. | 
Having in vain sought authentic grounds of 
explanation, I took the liberty of inquiring, from 
a lineal descendant of the Corbet family, if any 
traditional account existed of the origin of this 
singular peerage. The reason handed down has 
been, that the Dowager Lady Corbet was a very 
proud woman ; and being annoyed by her daugh- 
ter-in-law taking precedence of her, she com- 
plained to the king, who said he could quickly 
remedy the evil, and made her a peeress for life. 
Now the story has this air of probability, that 
while the title vindicated Lady Corbet’s own posi- 
tion, the limitation of it gave her the satisfaction 
of thinking the rank would tiever descend to her 
rival. All very likely then, 4s far as coiicerns the 
lady ; but this is no explanation of the motives of 
the king. He.may, no doubt, have consented to 
minister to Lady Corbet’s vanity; but why? She 
must have had gréat personal influence, or great 
interest at court, or great claims from past occur- 
rences; and this is just the information I hope 
niay be supplied by the numerous and intelligent 
investigators of history, who are subscribers to 
CNR aby Monson. 
Gatton Park. 
Minot Queries. 
Ged Duncan: — Wanted, information regarding 
Ged Duncan, author of The Constant Lovers, or 
the Sailor's Return, a play, 8vo., 1798. R. J. 
James Norral. — Can any of your readers, ac- 
quainted with the history of the Scottish drama, 
give me any information regarding the following 
piece and its author? The Generous Chief, a 
tragedy, acted at Montrose, 1792, by James Nor- 
ral, A.M. R. J. 
Latin Pentateuch.—I haye a small Latin work, 
containing the Pentateuch and the Books of 
Joshua, Judges, and Ruth, which seem to be all 
that was printed, 4s it is there marked jinis. The 
date, 1541; the printer, Peter Resnault. I should 
feel oblized, if some of your correspondents could 
sive me an idea of its value, and whether it is 
rare? It has a dedication Preface, Hieronyivs 
Pavlino. NE1RBo, 
Cork, 
