456
NOTES AND QUERIES. [io* B. m. JK 10.
for weisseil, as indeed the rime shows ;
and one MS. has wesse heil, as two words,
correctly. Laticome is, more fully, latincome,
Norman for A.-S. Icet hine citman, i.e., let
him come ; where him refers to the cup.
Drincheheil is Norman for drink hid, i.e.,
drink hale, drink to one's health. Drinc
hindreivart is also spelt drinc hidewart, i e.,
<3rink hither ward, drink " towards " me.
Drintome is also spelt drinctome, Norman for
A.-S. drinc to me, i.e., drink to me. Drinc
Jielfis also drinc half, i.e., drink half. Drinc
tome is, of course, wrong ; the better reading
is tode, Norman for A.-S. to the, i.e., to thee ;
the sense being "I drink to thee." As both
Edgar and Sir A. Malet make nothing of this
passage, perhaps the above explanation may
be useful. It is all perfectly clear and certain.
A last word as to wassfiil, the ai in which lias never been properly explained. It is now clear that wassail is the Norman ^vesseil, or as one MS. has it, wesse heil, an obvious error for wes heil. This is not exactly the A.-S. ives hal, but rather its continental equivalent ; cf. O. Saxon ives hel, O.H.G. wis heil. The O. Saxon wes occurs in the 'Heliand,' 1. 5604; but is also spelt wis. Hence in the 'Heliand,' 1. 259, the Latin Ave Maria occurs as Jlcl ivis thu, Maria; where the A.-S. version has Hal wes thu (Luke i. 28). This solves the whole mystery as to wassail. It is not the true English form, but an equivalent Norman form, which the Normans had picked up on the Continent. The A.-S. wes hal would regularly become ^ves hal in Northumbrian Middle English, which accounts for the Yorkshire ivessal at the present day.
Let me add that the astonishing reading
Drinc folf in one MS. (in the last line) is a
delicious blend of Drinc full and Drinc half.
WALTER W. SKEAT.
See
"The Conquest of England | from Wace's Poem of the | Roman de Ron | now first translated into English Rhyme | by Sir Alexander Malet, Bart., B.A. | Bell & Daldy, 186, Fleet Street, I860," pp. 116
E. MALET. Wrest Wood, Bexhill.
SWEDISH ROYAL FAMILY (10 th S. iii. 409). In the year 1751 Adolphus Frederick, Duke of Holstein Gottorp, succeeded to the throne of Sweden, being descended in the female line from the great Gustavus Vasa, whose surname he assumed as that of his family. His grandson, Gustavus IV., renounced the Swedish throne in 1809, and his children being excluded from the succession by the Diet, his uncle was elected to the throne,
under the style and title of Charles XIII.
The king having no children, Jean Baptiste
Jules Bernadotte, one of Napoleon's generals,
and Prince of Pontecorvo, was elected Prince
Royal of Sweden on 20 August, 1810, and on
5 November following he was adopted by
the king. On the death of the latter, 5 Feb.,
1818, he succeeded to the throneasCharles XIV.
The present King of Sweden and Norway is
his grandson. The son of the exiled King
Gustavus took the title of Prince of Vasa,
and died in 1877, leaving one daughter, the
Princess Carola of Vasa, who married the
late King Albert of Saxony. She was left a
childless widow on 19 June, 1902, and is now
the last surviving representative of the old
royal house of Sweden.
W. F. PEIDEAUX.
The reigning house is that of Bernadotte. BRUTUS need only refer to any history to learn how the house of Vasa lost the crown of Sweden ; and few romances excel in thrilling interest the life-story of Gustavus III., with its bloody ending by the assassin's dagger at the famous masked ball. All Swedish his- torians throw the gravest doubts on the- paternity of his supposed son and successor, Gustavus IV., who was eventually deposed" and driven into exile, and succeeded by a childless uncle, Charles XIII., who adopted Marshal Bernadotte as his heir. The Queen Carola of Saxony, who lately visited tins- country, is a granddaughter of King Gus- tavus IV. ; but the house of Vasa is now- extinct in the male line. The present Crown Princess of Sweden, born Princess of Baden, is another descendant of Gustavus IV. in the- female line. H.
NELSON COLUMN (10 th S. iii. 368). In their issues of 6 July, 1839, both The Mirror and The Literary World published engravings of the Nelson memorial from Mr. William Railton's drawing. In their descriptive ac- counts of the memorial, the particulars of which were evidently obtained from Mr. Railton, the dimensions are given in both journals as follows :
Base ... 10 feet in height.
Pedestal
Base of column
Shaft
Capital
Pedestal ...
Statue
39
9
90
14
14
17
Total height ... 193 feet.
These were evidently the dimensions origin-
ally decided upon, therefore Weale is not so
very far out in his statement. Were they
afterwards modified ?
