Qad §, No 16., Aprit 19. °56.] 
NOTES AND QUERIES. 
309 
RS 
Beautiful copy, with all the plates, russia, extra gilt. 
Dublin. 1739. 
This splendid copy of Ware belonged to the celebrated 
Pugin, and has his medizval book-plate. It formerly 
belonged to John Carpenter, R. C. Archbishop of Dublin, 
and has in the second volume his book-plate and arms, 
with a verse beautifully written by him in the Irish 
character. All the plates complete. Plates and seals, 
&c., connected with the see of Cashel, inserted. 
269. Poncii (Joannis, Hyberni Coreagiensi; Ordinis 
Minorum) Integer Philosophie Cursus ad Mentem Scoti. 
Half calf. Paris. 1649. 
Extremely rare; not noticed by Lowndes, &c. The 
author wrote several very rare books relating to Irish 
history in controversy with Sir R. Beling. 
274. Liber de Vita et Honestate Clericorum ; very early 
printed, first page illuminated, good copy. Ven. 1489. 
300. Life and Death of John Atherton, Lord Bishop of 
Waterford and Lismore. London. 1641. 
Excessively rare; curious woodcuts of the execution of 
the bishop and his proctor. 
805. Treland’s Complaint and England’s Pitie (a most 
rare tract). London. 1641. 
309. The Man of Manners, or Plebeian Polished. 
London. 1740. ; 
A most extraordinary pamphlet, containing, among other 
things, “ The Irishman’s Caution in refusing to look at 
the Corpse of his dead Countrymen,” &c. 
619. Payne’s Exposition of the Irish Exchange (a 
privately printed pamphlet). Wells. 1806. 
621. Stary. Life of Thomas Stary, one of the People 
called Quakers. Folio. Newcastle. 1747. 
Very scarce; contains accounts of curious occurrences in 
Dublin, Wexford, Cork, Malo, Clonmel, and other 
places, 1698—1716. In Cashel he was opposed by 
Archbishop Palliser; at Thurles a curious scene occurs 
between him and the curate; besides a variety of other 
interesting incidents. 
657. Walsh’s Miscellanies (scarce). Dublin. 1761. 
660. Irish Ballads, a Collection of Old Irish Songs, 
neatly half bound. Waterford, 
R. H. 
March 17. 
NOTES ON THE FLEUR-DE-LIS. 
(Continued from p. 246.) 
We now proceed to the question of the intro- 
duction and use of the fleur-de-lis as a charge in 
the arms of the sovereigns of Great Britain, in 
those of their alliances, and of their subjects, either 
by concession, hereditary claim, or by question- 
able adoption. It already appears that, in France, 
this charge was of a character entirely royal, and 
it may fairly be inferred that its earliest employ- 
ment in Egypt was connected with the same dis- 
tinctive superiority, since the sphinx, on whose 
head it appears, was invariably the representative 
of kingly dignity. (Wilkinson, i. 416.) It may 
be added farther, that its royal import was addi- 
tionally confirmed by the grant of the “ tressure 
flory counterflory,” made by Charlemagne, then 
Emperor and {King of France, in the year 792 
(Clarke), to Achaius, King of Scotland, as a badge 
and memorial of their ancient alliance, and “ to 
shew that the French lilies should defend and 
guard the Scotch lion.” In the year 1371 this 
royal tressure was doubled by King Robert 
Stewart, in approval of the French alliance, 
which he renewed with Charles V., then King of 
France. Alexander Nisbet says that the double 
tressure was anciently conceded to none but such 
as had matched with, or were descendants from, 
some of the daughters of the royal family. (See 
Porny.) In the following notes this tressure is 
admitted as an equivalent to the fleur-de-lis; and 
it may be here stated, that as this latter charge is 
the present sole object of inquiry, other ordi- 
naries, and even the tinctures which belong to 
the respective shields, are generally omitted, as 
irrelevant to our purpose. 
It may be considered a singular fact, that a 
charge so thoroughly of royal origin, adopted as 
such from a foreign country, and now, out of 
respect to that country, abandoned by the sove- 
reigns of Great Britain, should have so very ex- 
tensive a prevalence in the common shields of this 
country. Its permissive use as an honourable 
augmentation for services performed, and its here- 
ditary transmission on such account, or even 
through remote royal alliance or descent, may, 
it is true, be easily comprehended. But the 
formidable array of names which thus claim one 
or other of these distinctive rights almost pre- 
cludes their admission into a work like “N. & 
Q.” As, however, they have, though still perhaps 
incomplete, been brought together with consider- 
able trouble, and may admit of many subdivisions, 
I shall take the liberty of submitting successively, 
for insertion in your pages, a catalogue derived 
from the following sources, of those who carry the 
fleur-de-lis, or the royal double tressure F. C. 
of Scotland : 
1. A chronological list taken from Heylin’s 
Help to English History (ed. 1773). 
2. A list from Dansey’s splendid Jilustrations on 
the English Crusaders. 
3. The same from Burke's Peerage and Baro- 
netage (ed. 1846). 
4, The same from Burke’s Landed Gentry. 
5. Ditto from an unpublished and unfinished 
“ Heraldic Dictionary,” by (the late) T. D. Fos- 
broke, M.A., F.A.S., with the extracts from which 
I have been supplied by the courtesy of his son- 
in-law, C. R. Court, Esq., and the kind labours of 
his granddaughter Miss F. F. C. 
In these several lists some repetitions, no doubt, 
occur. They are, however, permitted to remain, 
either as supplying confirmatory authority, or as 
chronologically explanatory, in some instances, of 
the original ground of adoption. Where this is 
not apparent, it would be of historical interest to 
receive from the bearers of the charge precise in- 
