2°* S. IX. June 30. *60.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



509 



author of the method of rendering heraldic tinc- 

 tures by dots and lines. He calls it, in his Becueil 

 published in 1639, " une nouvelle methode de 

 cognoistre les nietaux et couleurs sur la taille 

 douce " : and says that it is " invention dont je 

 m'asseure les Genealogistes me scauront bon gre." 

 In his Science Heroique, published in 1644, he 

 says of the invention, " laquelle a este imitee et 

 pratiquee par le docte Petra Sancta au livre in- 

 titule Tessera Gentilities." 



I cannot avoid coming to the conclusion, either 

 that De la Colombiere was attempting a literary 

 piracy, or, which one prefers thinking, was guilty 

 of a very large oversight in his own favour. It 

 was not in his larger work, the Tessera Gentilitia, 

 that Fr. Silv. Petrasancta first announced his 

 method. He did this, as I mentioned in my 

 notice (p. 372.), in his Symbola Heroica, pub- 

 lished in 1634. This date, 1634, relieves those 

 who are interested in the question from pur- 

 suing any inquiry as to De la Colombiere's state- 

 ment about the Tessera Gentilitia of 1638, and 

 his own first work of 1639. He makes no men- 

 tion of the earlier work of Petrasancta, and con- 

 fines his suggestion of imitation to the Tessera, 

 1638. We may fairly assume that, as he does 

 not mention the Symbola, 1634, in which Petra- 

 sancta had announced his method fully, he either 

 wished to avoid mentioning what would at once 

 disprove his own claim, or did not know its ex- 

 istence. However, a work published in 1634 will 

 not easily be accepted as containing an imitation 

 of a method announced as new in 1639. With this 

 I think wc may finally dismiss De la Colombiere. 



But C. S. P. has introduced matter quite new 

 to me, and probably new to many of the heraldic 

 readers of " N. & Q.," for which all such persons 

 are very much indebted to him. After this evi- 

 dence it must be at once admitted that a method 

 of rendering tinctures by engraving was sug- 

 gested before Petrasancta announced his method 

 in 1634. But in the passage from Petrasancta's 

 Symbola Heroica, beginning " Sive autem," which 

 I quoted on page 372., he seems to allude to a 

 well-known and prevailing opinion that colours 

 were rendered by different modes of hatching. 

 He does not say that he was the first to propose 

 any method of rendering tinctures : but he pro- 

 duces one which was unquestionably new, namely, 

 that which is now familiar to us'all. Purpure is 

 not mentioned in his Schema. I will here also 

 quote the other passage in which he announces 

 his method — the passage in his Tessera Gentilitia, 

 ]). 5!)., now lying before me : — 



" Sed et monuerim ctiam fore, ut solius beneficio sculp- 

 ture, in tesseris gentilitiis, quas, cum occaaio feret, pro- 

 ponam frequenter, turn iconis turn areas seu metallum 

 sen colorem Lector absque errore deprehendere possit. 

 Schemata id manifc9tum reddent : etenim quod punctim 

 incidctur, id aureum crit: argenteum, quod fuerit ex- 

 pers omnis sculptunc," &c. 



The rest follow ; purpure is giosn last but one. 

 And here in 1638 we still see Petrasancta treating 

 his method as one not generally known, by speak- 

 ing of it in the future tense. 



It seems to me that Fr. Silvester Petrasancta 

 remains clearly possessor of the good fortune of 

 having been the inventor of the present most 

 useful method of heraldic engraving, and that he 

 is probably a witness to the fact that the idea of 

 such a method, originally esthetic, did not be»in 

 with him, ' D. P. 



BURNING OF THE JESUITICAL BOOKS. 

 (2 nd S. ix. 488.) 



I have to trespass on your kindness by asking 

 for space to answer your correspondent Eric, in 

 a very few words ; although I really feel disin- 

 clined to weary your readers with the ominous 

 name, " Junius," any more. But Eric has put me 

 on my defence. 



He accuses me of "inaccuracy" of a serious 

 kind: — 1. In stating that the Jesuitical books 

 were burnt at Paris in August, 1761 (the date of 

 the arret condemning them) ; whereas, according 

 to Eric, " the execution of the arret was sus- 

 pended for one year," and .the burning really took 

 place in August, 1762. And he refers to a pas- 

 sage in " N. & Q." (1 st S. x. 323.), in which that 

 circumstance of the postponement is certainly 

 very confidently stated. 



The best authority I can refer to is the Journal 

 de Barbier, that careful and curious eyewitness 

 of Parisian life, whose Diary has been lately pub- 

 lished. He says, under the date Friday, August 7, 

 1761, after mentioning the condemnation: "Ze 

 meme jour on a execute l'arret ; et le bourreau a 

 briile au pied du grand escalier plus de 25 livres 

 ou ouvrages faits anciennement par les Jesuites " 

 (vol. iv. p. 407.). I should really be glad to know 

 on what evidence the notion of " postponement " 

 was founded. 



2. In saying that Francis might have been in 

 Paris in August, 1671, whereas, according to a 

 note of Mr. Wade's on Junius, "Francis is not 

 known to have been in Paris that year (1761) ; he 

 is known to have been with Lord Kinnoul at Lis- 

 bon, from which city he returned to England in 

 October." I have not by me Mr. Wade's note to 

 refer to. But Lord Kinnoul left England for 

 Portugal on March 7, 1760; and left Lisbon, on 

 his return, Oct. 30, 1760. I quote both dates 

 from the Gentleman's Magazine. 



The Author of "A Few Words on Junius and 

 Macaulat " in " The Cornhill Magazine." 



GARIBALDI, AN IRISH CELEBRITY. 

 (2 n "-S. ix. 424. 494.) 

 In a recent number of yours there appeared a 

 letter signed John Hibton Garstin, referring to 



