but is devoted entirely to the discussion of the genuineness of the picture. This is said to have been preserved with the greatest care from time immemorial (?) “in the mansion of Dalmahoy, the principal seat in Scotland of the Earl of Morton.” The history of it is curious, for it is said to have been painted during her confinement in Lochleven Castle, and to have been once the property of George Douglas, the liberator of Mary, and to have passed from him to his relative James, fourth Earl of Morton. The earl was, as is well known, beheaded by the “Maiden” at Edinburgh in 1581. The date of this picture would be 1567–68.
2. In ‘Illustrations of the Works of Sir Walter Scott,’ 1833, is a portrait of Mary, Queen of Scots, “engraved by J. Thomson, drawn by J. W. Wright from a painting by Zucchero.” In this, a three-quarter length, she is depicted standing, dressed in black, and holding in her right hand a little dog. The countenance is merely that of a fair, pretty young woman. The following description is appended: “Her face, her form, have been so deeply impressed upon the imagination, that even at the distance of three centuries it is unnecessary to remind the reader of the parts which characterize that remarkable countenance” (‘Abbot,’ chap. xxi.).
3. In the ‘Imperial Dictionary of Universal Biography,’ n.d., probably 1867, is an excellent engraved portrait of Mary. This is said to be “engraved by W. Holl from a Painting from the original by Sir John Watson Gordon, P.R.S.A.” This is by far the best, and represents a very beautiful woman with dark hair, having in it pearls, but otherwise very simply attired. On a table on her left hand is an imperial crown. Probably this is copied from some painting taken shortly after her return to Scotland from France about 1561.
4. A small carte de visite portrait is before me, on the margin of which is inscribed “Marie Stuart,” and on the back “E. Neurdein, 28, Bould de Sebastopol, Paris, Portraits, Vues, Reproductions.” This is probably from some picture in France, and represents Mary as a very pleasing looking woman with dark hair, covered by a large hood, the curtain of which hangs down on her shoulders. John Pickford, M.A.
Newbourne Rectory, Woodbridge.
I possess a lock taken from the tress which Lord Belhaven bequeathed to Queen Victoria. It came to me from my grandmother, Lady Charlotte Campbell (sister-in-law of Lady Belhaven), and is in a paper docketed as follows in her hand:—
“Friday, November 30, 1816. Queen Mary’s Hair, given to me by Lord Belhaven and Stenton from out his Cabinet, which said Cabinet pertained also to her Majesty. The Hair was sent to some of her adherents previous to the Battle of Langside.”
I should describe the hair as the fairest auburn, unusually fine and silky, and shining even now like gold, thereby tallying exactly with the descriptions of Brantôme, Ronsard, and other contemporaneous authors. Can any one suggest to me a good and ornamental way of preserving it without sacrificing the paper in which it is wrapped, which is three and a half inches long by two and a half? At present it is liable to diminution and injury by constant inspection. Were it not for the inscription, I should have put it in a crystal locket.
Sir Francis Knollys, in a letter to Secretary Cecil, dated “Carlyll, 28 June, 1568, at mydnyht,” in reference to the servants in waiting on the Scottish Queen, says:—
“Nowe, here are six wayting women, althoe none of reputacion, but Mystress Marye Claton, whoe is praysed by this Q. to be the fynest busker, that is to say, the fynest dresser of a woman’s heade and heare that is to be seen in any countrye, whereof we have seen divers experiences since her comyng hether and among other prettie devyce, yesterday, and this day, she did sett sitche a curled heare upon the Queen that was said to be a perewyke that shoed very delycately, and every other day hightherto she hath a newe devyce of heade dressyng without any coste and yett setteth forthe a woman gaylie well.”
W. Udall, in the ‘Historie of the Life and Death of Mary Stuart, Queene of Scotland,’ 1624, says:—
“Shee came forth maiestically in stature, beautie, and shewe, with a cheerefull countenance, matron-like apparell, and very modest, her head being covered with a linnen veile, and the same hanging very low.”
Swallowfield Park, Reading.
P.S.—In Cuthbert Bede’s interesting note, 7th S. iv. 441, “Wisham” should be Wishaw.
I think Mr. W. T. Lynn’s communication (7th S. iv. 444) satisfactorily settles the year in which Mary Stuart was executed, if ever it had been for even a moment in doubt; but, on what day of the week was her sentence carried out? Do not think this an idle question. February 8, 1587 (Ecclesiastical Calendar), was undoubtedly a Wednesday. Mr. Froude (‘Hist. of England,’ imperial 8vo. edition, 1870, vol. xii., p. 334) adopts this supputation; but in a contemporary letter (see ‘Excerpta Historica,’ Bentley, p. 18) from Sir Marmaduke Darell, an eye-witness of the tragedy, I find the statement, “Between x and xj of the clocke this presente Thursdaie [the italics are mine] she [Mary] was beheaded in the hall of this castle……From Fotheringaie Castle this viijth of February, 1586,” which, of course, according to the explanation of Mr. W. T. Lynn, we must read 1587. Is this a mistake of Sir Marmaduke Darell’s as to the day of the week? No reference to old and new style helps us here. February 8, 1586 (Church Calendar), was a Friday (new style), a Tuesday according to the legal year (old style). February 8,
