is concealed under a heap of linen half-dried; and afterwards informs him, (not knowing that his tutor was likewise his mistress's husband,) what a lucky escape he had. It is, therefore, I think, highly probable that Shakspeare had read both stories. MALONE.

Sir Hugh Evans] See p. 177 and 178.

The question whether priests were formerly knights in consequence of their being called Sir, still remains to be decided. Examples that those of the lower class were so called are very nume rous; and hence it may be fairly inferred that they at least were not knights, nor is there per haps a single instance of the order of knighthood being conferred upon ecclesiastics of any degree.

Having casually, however, met, with a note in Dyer's Reports, which seems at first view not only to contain some authority for the custom of knighting priests by Abbots, in consequence of a charter granted to the Abbot of Reading for that purpose, but likewise the opinion of two learned judges, founded thereupon, that priests were anciently knights, I have been induced to enter a little more fully upon this discussion, and to examine the validity of those opinions. The extract from Dyer is a marginal note in p. 216. B. in the following words :,,Trin. 3 Jac. Banc le Roy Holcraft and Gibbons, cas Popham dit que il ad view un ancient charter grant al Abbot de Reading per Roy d'Angliterre, a fair knight, sur que son conceit fuit que l'abbot fait, ecclesiastical persons, knights, d'illonque come a luy le nosmes de Sir John and Sir Will. que est done al ascun Clerks a cest jour fuit derive quel opinion Coke Attorney - General applaud disont que fueront mities coelestes et milites terrestres.“ It is proper to mention here that all the reports

have been diligently searched for this case of Hol craft and Gibbons, in hopes of finding some further illustration, but without success.

The charter then above-mentioned appears upon further enquiry to have been the foundation charter of Reading Abbey, and to have been granted by Henry I. in 1125. The words of it referred to by Chief Justice Popham, and upon which he founded his opinion, are as follow:,,Nec faciat milites nisi in sacra veste Christi, in qua par vulos suscipere modeste caveat. Maturos autem seu discretos tam clericos, quam laicos provide suscipiat." This passage is likewise cited by Sel den in his notes upon Eadmer, p. 206, and to il lustrate the word,,clericos" he refers to Mathew Paris for an account of a priest called John Gatesdene, who was created a kuight by Henry III. but not until after he had resigned all his benefices, ,,as he ought to have done," says the historian, who in another place relating the disgrace of Peter de Rivallis, Treasurer to Henry III. (See p. 405, edit. 1640,) has clearly shown how incompatible it was that the clergy should bear arms, as the pro fession of a knight required; and as a further proof may be added the well known story, related by the same historian, of Richard I. and the warlike Bishop of Beauvais. I conceive then that the word „clericos" refers to such of the clergy who should apply for the order of knighthood under the usual restric tion of quitting their former profession; and from Selden's note upon the passage it may be collected that this was his own opinion; or it may possibly allude to those particular knights who were consi dered as religious or ecclesiastical, such as the knights of the order of St. John of Jerusalem, etc. concerning whom see Ashmole's Order of the Garter, p. 49. 51.

With respect to the custom of ecclesiastics con

ferring the order of knighthood, it certainly prevailed in this country before the conquest, as appears from Ingulphus, and was extremely disliked by the Normans; and therefore at a Council held at Westminster in the third year of Henry I. it was ordain ed,,,Ne Abbates faciant milites." See Eadmeri Hist. 68. and Selden's note, p. 207. However it appears that notwithstandig this prohibition, which may at the same time serve to show the great improbability that the order of knighthood was conferred upon ecclesiastics, some of the ceremonies at the creation of knights still continued to be performed by Abbots, as the taking the sword from the altar, etc. which may be seen at large in Selden's Titles of Honour, Part. II. chap. v. and Dugd. Warw. 531, and accordingly this charter, which is dated twenty-three years after the Council at Westminster, amongst other things directs the Abbot,,,Nec faciat milites nisi in sacra veste Christi," etc. Lord Coke's acquiescence in Popham's opinion is founded upon a similar misconception, and his quaint remark,,que fueront milites coelestes et milites terrestres," can only excite a smile. The marginal quotation from Fuller's Church History, B. VI. p. 352.,,Moe Sirs than knights" referred to in a former note by Sir J. Hawkins, certainly means ,,that these Sirs were not knights," and Fuller accounts for the title by supposing them ungraduated Priests.

Before I dismiss this comment upon the opinions of the learned Judges, I am bound to observe that Popham's opinion is also referred to, but in a very careless manner, in Godbolt's Reports, p. 599, in these words: ,,Popham once Chief Justice of this court said that he had seen a commission directed unto a bishop to knight all the parsons within his diocese, and that was the cause that they were called Sir John, Sir Thomas, and so they continued to

1

be called until the reign of Elizabeth." The idea of knighting all the parsons in a diocese is too ludierous to need a serious refutation; and the inaccuracy of the assertion, that the title of Sir lasted till the reign of Elizabeth, thereby implying that it then ceased, is sufficiently obvious, not only from the words of Popham in the other quotation,,que est done al ascuns clerks' cest jour," but from the proof given by Sir John Hawkins of its existence at a much later period.

Having thus, I trust, refuted the opinion that the title of Sir was given to priests in consequence of their being knights, I shall venture to account for it in another manner.

This custom then was most probably borrowed from the French, amongst whom the title Domaus is often appropriated to ecclesiastics, more particnlarly to the Benedictines, Carthusiaus, and Cistercians. It appears to have been originally a title of honour and respect, and was perhaps at first, in this kingdom as in France, applied to particular orders, and became afterwards general as well among the secular as the regular clergy. The reason of preferring Domnus, to Dominus was, that the lat ter belonged to the supreme Being, and the other was considered as a subordinate title, according to an old verse:

,,Coelestem Dominum, terrestrem dicito Domnum."

Hence, Dom, Damp, Dan, Sire, and, lastly Sir; for authorities are not wanting to show that all these tiles were given to ecclesiastics: but I shall forbear to produce them, having, I fear, already trespassed too far upon the reader's patience with this long note. DOUCE.

END OF THE FIRST VOLUME.

1