^{page 393 note a} Boart, i. e. diamond dust.

^{page 393 note b} i. e. 1629 of our present computation.

^{page 394 note a} This record was, I believe, first published by Mr. W. H, Carpenter, in his Pictorial Notices of Vandyke, 4to, 1844, and subsequently in Mr. Wornum's edition of Horace Walpole'Anecdotess of Painting in England.

^{page 394 note b} Astle's original drawing is in the Society's possession.

^{page 396 note a} A curious statement occurs in a letter of 21 Dec. 1640, from Eosetti to Card. Barberini referring to the poverty of the royal family at that time. He writes, “ed essi ré e regina erano ridotti ad un segno d'infilicita tale che non havevano da mangiare la mattina sequenti se non impeguavano le gioie.”

^{page 396 note b} Tayernier, J. B., Voyage en Turquie. 3 vols. 4to. Paris, 1672-1679.

^{page 397 note a} Walpole, , Anecdotes of Painting in England, ed. 1762, ii. 66Google Scholar, ed. 1849, i. 285, states in reference to Charles L's jewels: “His George, diamond and seals, which Charles at his execution destined to his successor, the Parliament voted should not be so delivered.”

Can this relate to Charles's diamond signet when Prince of Wales, now in the royal collection at Windsor, or to another diamond signet, or merely an ornamental stone?

I find the following memorandum, but the reference has been unfortunately lost from my notes. Either the attribution or the date 1661 must be erroneous:

“Mem: The impression of a signet of King Charles I. (or Charles II.?) of somewhat coarse workmanship but evidently cut on a hard stone, occurs upon a letter addressed by him to Cardinal Azzolini on the 7th October, 1661. It is similar in general style, the royal arms surmounted by the crown and between the letters C and R, but whether cut upon a diamond we do not know, nor have I been able to examine the impression.”

N.B.—For a record (discovered since the above was in type) of a similar diamond signet having belonged to Charles I., see Postscript.

^{page 398 note a} See a biographical notice in the Gentleman's Magazine, obituary, vol. xcix. pt. 2, p. 75.

^{page 400 note a} The following is a copy of the letter received from MM. Rossel et fils:

“Nous déclarons avoir vendu a Monsieur C. Drury Fortnum une bague un diamant gravé aux armes royales d'Angleterre avec corps émaillé et certifions que cette dite bague faisait partie de la collection leguee a la Yille de Genève par feu S. A. R. le Due de Brunswick.

“Genève, le 6 Janvier, 1879.

“(Signed) Rossel Et Fils.

“Experts nommes par la Ville de Genève et charges de la vente aux enchères publiques des diamants, bijoux, joyaux, &c. dépendant de la succession de S. A. R. le feu Due de Brunswick.”

^{page 400 note b} The true and heraldic lozenge is somewhat longer in its perpendicular than in its horizontal diameter, measuring from the angles; when much elongated it becomes a “fusil”: but the square so transposed becomes a lozenge in the general acceptance of that term, although it remains rectangular.

^{page 401 note b} Archaeologia, XLV. 26Google Scholar.

^{page 402 note a} Another reason for this omission may have been the difficulty of executing so many bearings as the impaled coats required, on so small a space and so hard a material.

^{page 403 note a} I would here wish to correct a typographical error in my paper at p. 25 of vol. XLV. of Archaeologies, where, under No. 98, “The seal of King Charles I. when Prince of Wales,” the letters C R seem to have been printed in error for C P. Also on the next page, line 20, the word “sculptors “is printed in lieu of “scalptors.”

^{page 403 note b} Vide Archaeologia, XLV. 26Google Scholar.

^{page 404 note a} Lives of the Queens of England, 1846, vol. ix. p. 297. The Society of Antiquaries begs to thank Messrs. George Bell and Sons, the present proprietors of that work, for their courtesy in supplying the figure of Mary of Modena's seal. H. S. M.

^{page 404 note b} Archaeologia, XVIII. 236Google Scholar.