9*s.:xLjA N .3,i903.] NOTES AND QUERIES.
11
beth Raleigh, grand daughter of the Fame
S r Walter Raleigh," described, in the certificat
that she was buried in woollen, 29 Octobe
1716, as being the daughter of Mr. Philipj
Rawleigh, of Westminster. She would, how
ever, I assume, be great-granddaughter.
R. J. FYNMORE. Sandgate, Kent.
ARMIGEROUS FAMILIES (9 th S. x. 509).
What does H. M. mean? A family whicl
has " used the same arms since the time o
Edward III." is evidently " armigerous." I
is more than that. In any other country in
the world it would be classed as " noble."
D.
MICHAEL BRUCE AND BURNS (9** S. vii. 466 viii. 70, 148, 312, 388, 527; ix. 95, 209, 309 414, 469, 512; x. 69, 130, 449). The parallelism to which allusion has already been made was thus introduced to the notice of his readers by Dr. Mackelvie :
"Before advancing any claims in behalf of Bruce to these pieces [several of the disputed ones, including 'Levina'], we beg to advert to interna evidence which seems to favour Logan. The only piece in his collection bearing any resemblance to the historical ballad in which Bruce is known to have excelled, is 'A Tale,' beginning, 'Where Pastoral Tweed renowned in Song,' one stanza ol which is as follows :
The picture of her mother's youth
Now sainted in the sky, She was the angel of his age
And apple of his eye.
In the episode of ' Levina ' in Bruce's 'Lochleven' these lines occur :
The perfect picture of her mother's youth, His age's hope, the apple of his eye.
Dr. Mackelvie continues :
"These are not accidental coincidences of thought- They are either the production of the same mind> or borrowed by one writer from another. Our firm conviction is that both are the composition of Michael Bruce. The first draught of ' Lochleven ' is now before us, containing the germ of the episode claimed for Logan, and the only difference between it and the one in the printed edition is, that in the former Bruce makes his hero a giant, in the latter a hunter, and expands the episode to a length disproportioned to the poem."
Dr. Mackelvie adds :
"If, because the printed version is somewhat different from the original draught, it is inferred that Logan altered it, then it must be inferred that he altered the whole poem; for it happens that there is as great a difference in the whole, as in this particular part. Many verses are omitted which are, and many verses are added which are not, in the first sketch. The writer has transposed the whole." Par. 87.
Taken along with the internal evidence already presented to readers of 'N. &Q.,'
the above statements in regard to the known
transposing of the whole piece are most
important. The admitted expansion of the
episode of ' Levina ' must not be overlooked.
Dr. Baird states in the most emphatic
manner that nearly 200 lines of it are
entirely Logan's. Nor can it be doubted that
Mackelvie would have utilized these lines as
convincing proof of the correctness of his
case on behalf of Bruce, had they, as they
now stand, or even the slightest resemblance
to them, been in his so-called " first sketch."
For he has printed part of the germ of the
episode taken from Bruce's MS. But although
many of his statements are too indefinite to
be of much value, one cannot imagine that
he -would have neglected to take advantage,
and make the utmost use, of a point so
important as this. Writing of the two
versions of ' Levina,' he says :
'We shall place the opening stanzas of both in juxtaposition. The printed version begins as follows :
Low by the lake, as yet without a name." Then follow eleven lines, the last being the all-important one,
The perfect picture of her mother's youth. Dr. Mackelvie also placed before his readers the opening fourteen lines of the "first draught." Of these lines, all except the first, which is identical with that given above, bear but slight resemblance to those in the 3oem as originally published. The last two "ines are those which refer to Levina : His daughter fair Levina, often there Tended the flow'rs herself a sweeter flow'r.
Dr. Mackelvie, having on the preceding )age to that on which the above quotations occur expressed his " firm conviction " that ' A Tale ' and ' Levina ' were Bruce's, seriously n validates his conviction by printing this portion of ' Levina ' as it appears in the two versions. Had the lines upon which his
- onviction was based been before him in
he "first sketch;" it cannot be conceived hat Dr. Mackelvie would have failed to >rint them also, so that he might clinch his part of his argument by pointing to hem in print as conclusive proof that the draught," the extended poem, and 'A Tale' fere all by Bruce. He did not, however, >ut them in print. I am, therefore, clearly ntitled to conclude that he failed to do so ecause they were not in the MS. before him. already stated, their absence seriously n validates Dr. Mackelvie's "firm conviction," ut at the same time it materially strengthens "internal evidence which seems to favour ogan " (Mackelvie, par. 87). In fact, it is ntirely in his favour!
