ii B. x. NOV. 21, 1914 j N OTES AND QUERIES.
417
" Boche (popular), rake, ' rip,' ' molrower,'
or ' beard -splitter.' Tete de , German."
It may be worth while to give several French slang words which appear s.v. ' Alle- mand ' in Raphael de Noter's ' Dictionnaire Fran$ais Argot' (? about 1901): " Alle- mand. Boche, choucroutmann, prusco, tete de boche, bosch, alboche, mangeur de chou- croute."
Delvau gives " cabosse," and La Rue " cabeche," as alternative forms of caboche. ROBERT PIERPOINT.
Boche is a diminutive of Alboche, a French slang word used contemptuously to denote a person of Teutonic race. It appears to have been in vulgar use for several genera- tions, and after falling into abeyance has enjoyed a revival of popularity among the French and the Walloons (French-speaking Belgians) since the war of 1870-71. It is probably derived from Allemand (German) and caboche (noddle), and might be literally translated as " German noddle." The Ger- man head is supposed to be square -shaped, not round -shaped like the Latin head ; hence the French of the lower classes fre- quently refer to a German as a tete carree {square head), and thence to " German- head," or Alboche, was for the nimble French mind an easy transition.
Caboche is, of course, derived from the Latin caput.
I have also heard it surmised that the origin of Alboche is quite ancient, and can be traced back to the Latin words albus gilvus, or albogilvus, meaning a whitish yellow, having originated in the observation made in Roman times by the Gauls that their Teutonic invaders were mostly men of light sandy hair or beard. Perhaps some of your readers can throw light on this theory. J. B. BRANDRETH.
GOTHIC MASON-SCULPTORS (11 S. x. 331, 372). L. L. K. does not mention the English edition of the ' Album de Villard de Honne- court,' really of more value to the student than is the original French one, containing as it does Prof. Willis's commentaries and notes in addition to the text of Lassus. The EiiL'lish edition, published in 1859, gains also by the inclusion of a translation of the admirable essay on Villard by Jules
Quioherat.
W. GRANT KEITH.
Wilars de Honecort. Nothing is known
of Wilars de Honecort beyond what may be
gathered from a small volume of skct< lies
by him preserved in the National Library
in Paris. This consists of thirty-three
leaves of vellum, each about 9 in. high and
5 in. wide, filled with pen-and-ink drawings,
many of which are accompanied by expla-
natory notes written in the Picard dialect
of the thirteenth century. A facsimile of
this sketch-book, with notes by Lassus and
Quicherat, translated by Willis, was pub-
lished by J. H. & J. Parker in 1859.
BENJ. WALKER. Langstone, Erdington.
FRANCE AND ENGLAND QUARTERLY (US. x. 281, 336). From these interesting notes arises the question whether Geoffrey V. of Anjou and his son Henry II. of England ever bore arms in the heraldic sense. The former died at the very dawn of heraldry, so the presumption would be against his having done so. The only evidence on the other side seems to be the enamelled por- trait on a copper plate at Le Mans, men- tioned at the second reference. Is it claimed that this is contemporary ? And if so, how does the evidence stand ? Being far from libraries, the only description I can put my hand on is one in Black's ' Guide to Touraine and Brittany' (1901), which includes Maine. This says that the plate was " formerly on the pier over his tomb in the cathedral " (p. 59), with no information as to the date. But even if the plate had been on the tomb itself, it might, perhaps, have been a later addition. Is it possible to obtain information on this all-important question of date ?
In ' Old England ' there is an illustration (No. 402) which seems to represent the Le Mans portrait, but unfortunately it is only a copy of another copy, so is useless for details ; the lions give the impression of having been modernized, and have lost the peculiarities noted by Mu. A. R. BAYLEY. According to this drawing the curved shield is shown in profile, the visible half bearing 4 lions rampant, 2, 1, and 1. This certainly at first sight implies that the whole shield bore 8 lions (4, 2, and 2) ; but if the plate is very ancient, this might be an instance of the " primitive convention " of crowding the whole arms on to the visible half of the shield, as on the first seal of Richard I. (v. inf.).
As to Henry II., I believe there is no evidence of his having borne arms. His great seal shows him with shield on arm, but it is turned away so that only the inside is visible. I suggest that if there were any- thing on the shield it would probably have been turned to show the charge ; and that the fact that this was not done, together
