1831.] Portraits of Necromancers.-Earthern Cistern. Mr. URBAN, Uppingham, Nov. 11. THE accompanying drawing (Pl. II. fig. 1.) is an exact copy of an ivory carving in my possession. The figures are not highly raised, but are executed with much skill and spirit. The drawing is of the same size as the carving, which is not in any part thicker than half a crown. The portraits appear to be those of four great characters in necromancy, of which the lower three are probably intended for Mother Shipton, Friar Bacon, and Dr. Faustus, but with the upper one I am unacquainted; nor can I relate its history further than that it was bought at a sale in the neighbourhood of Warminster in Wiltshire, a few years since. Mr. URBAN, R. H. I SEND you (Plate II.) drawings of an ancient vessel, concerning the use and application of which I avail myself of your pages for elucidation. It is of baked clay, or pot-ware. The front, 21 inches long and 13 high, is covered with a bright green glaze. In breadth, it is 54 inches; and is divided, vertically, into two cavities, each 12 inches deep, 81⁄2 long, and 34 wide, by a partition (fig. 2.), through which these cavities communicate by two small irregular holes, one near its middle, and another close to its bottom, where there is also a hole through the front, evidently for a spicket and fosset, or cock: but it has neither handle, feet, nor suspensory ring or hole. The front of this vessel (fig. 4.) is moulded in bas-relief, with an escutcheon, bearing the arms of France and England quarterly, surmounted by a regal crown, and supported by a lion and dragon, with the mottoes hony soit qui mal y pense," on a circular garter, and "Dieu et mon Droit," and the letters H. R. and E. R. (the initials of Henry the Seventh and his Queen Elizabeth) with a rose and fleur-de-lis; the whole between arabesque pilasters of fruit and flowers. This vessel has been denominated a wine-cooler; but, I think, it may have been a receptacle of beer, mead, or wine; perhaps, a flower-pot; or, more probably, a cistern set in a wall, like those vessels of metal or earthenware which are common in the kitchens GENT. MAG. November, 1831. 401 and dining-rooms of continental inns, for the purpose of ablution before meals. Whether it was really a wine-cooler (which I doubt, on account of its not being of a porous texture), depends on the size and shape of the bottles of the time when, I suppose, it was made, the latter end of the fifteenth century. Of this, however, with the date of the invention of cocks, I trust soon to be informed by some of your ingenious Correspondents. This vessel was once the property of Sir James Lowther, of Laleham, Middlesex, from whom it came, about eighty years ago, to the grandmother of Mr. James Harris, of Egham, who wishes to dispose of it. Queen Anne, it is said, had a fishing seat at Laleham. W. B. THE inclosed narrative of the celebrated siege of Londonderry, in 1689, was the result of the comparison of several contemporary documents, including the account of the siege by the non-conformist Mackenzie. The view which it gives of the transactions attending that memorable event, differs in some respects, I believe, from that taken by many previous writers. It was drawn up some years ago for publication, in a topographical work which has since been discontinued. It may therefore be found useful by some future historian, and interesting to the general reader, if preserved in your repository of the history and antiquities of our country. E.W.B.J. SIEGE OF LONDONDERRY. The courage and the policy, together with the fortitude under circumstances of extreme distress and privation, which the defenders of this city displayed, during the siege they underwent in 1689, from the army of James II. bave, it is probable, never been surpassed; and the history of that siege, including the occurrences immediately preceding it, constitutes an important feature in the general bistory of the island. The circumstances of the defence are most generally known, perhaps, from a Tract on the subject, printed in the same year, by the Rev. George Walker, Rector of Donoughmore in the county of Tyrone; but in order to obtain a correct view of them, it has been found necessary to compare his statements with those of John Mackenzie, a non-conforming minister, who was also one of the besieged, 402 Narrative of the Siege of Londonderry. and who published an account of the transactions in 1690. It appears that when the Earl of Tyrconnel sent some forces into England to assist James II. against the Prince of Orange, he fortunately withdrew from Londonderry and its neighbourhood the whole regiment there quartered; and thus that while almost every other place of importance was possessed by the Irish papists, this city was entirely free from their domination. The Lord Lieutenant, however, soon commanded an Irish regiment under Lord Antrim, to quarter in Londonderry; but Col. Phillips, who had been their Governor in the preceding reign, warned the citizens of its march towards them; and on the 8th of December, 1688, the gates were closed against the soldiery, Phillips being reappointed Governor on the following day. When the news of this revolt, as it was termed, arrived at Dublin, Lord Mountjoy and Lieut.-Col. Lundy were dispatched with six companies to reduce the place. An address had been sent into England praying for succours, and it was at first unanimously resolved to resist, until an answer to it had been received; as, however, there were scarce any provisions in the town, and but very few military stores, the inhabitants capitulated with Lord Mountjoy, it being agreed that only two of his companies, and those all Protestants, should enter the city; and that the town companies should keep their arms, and do duty with the others. The office of Governor was assigned by his Lordship to Col. Lundy. On the 21st of March, Capt. Hamilton arrived from England, with arms for 2000 men, and 480 barrels of powder; he also brought a commission from William and Mary, appointing Lundy to be Governor, and those sovereigns were publicly proclaimed with great joy and solemnity. Several engagements ensued with the enemy's forces in the neighbourhood. On the 15th of April, two officers arrived from England, with two regiments under their command, and many necessaries for the town. It would appear that the Governor did not [Nov. take the oath of allegiance to the new Sovereigns, which had been administered on the arrival of Captain Hamilton, and he seems to have designed from the beginning to give up the town, or at least not to act with vigour in its defence. On the 17th, King James or his General sent to know whether he would surrender his charge, upon which he called a Council, the members of which, says Walker, were equally unacquainted with the condition of the town, or the inclination and resolution of the people. It was resolved by these, that there was not provision for the garrison for above ten days, that the place was vetenable against a well appointed army, and therefore that the two regiments from England should not be landed, and that the principal officers should withdraw themselves privately to the ships, in order that the inhabitants might make better terms by capitulation. The Council also deputed an officer to receive proposals from James, and it was agreed with Hamilton, his General, that the army should remain four miles distant from the town; on the 18th, however, the King advanced with it before the walls, in order to frighten the inhabitants, but his men were fired upon and fled, and they were subsequently marched back to St. John's town, at the stipulated distance. On the same day the ships from England left the city, in pursuance of the orders of Council, bearing away the soldiers and provision they had brought, and the preservation of Londonderry from the enemy, at this critical juncture, appears to have been mainly owing to the activity and resolution of Capt. Murray, who, being inimical to Lundy's designs, seized the keys of the gates, and changed the guards in the night.* On the 19th, the post of General and Governor was offered by the garrison to Capt. Murray; he, however, declined accepting it, and Major Baker was elected, who, wishing for an "Assistant for the Stores and Provisions," was allowed to chose whom be pleased, and be accordingly appointed Mr. Walker to this trust. The garrison was now arranged * The account of this transaction appears to have been intentionally suppressed by Walker. Col. Lundy now resigned his office, and was permitted to disguise himself and go to the ships. + It is asserted by Walker, that Baker and himself were in all things jointgovernors during the siege, but it appears from Mackenzie's narrative that he was merely complimented with the title of Governor," this being " always understood with reference to the Stores, the oversight whereof was (besides bis regiment) the only trust committed to him by the garrison." Narrative of the Siege of Londonderry, p. 32. A variety of circumstances concur to evince that Walker was a man of an officious, presuming, intermeddling disposition, and that he has greatly misrepresented his concern in the defence of the city; he affirms that he assisted in several sallies, and even that in one instance he headed the party. We are in 1831.] Narrative of the Siege of Londonderry. into 117 companies of 60 men each, amounting in number to 7020 privates, and 341 officers; and the command of the borse was given to Murray. The number of men, women, and children in the city was about 50,000, of whom more than one third left it, upon a declaration from the besiegers to receive and protect all that would desert; and 7000 died of diseases. There were eighteen Clergymen of the Establishment within the walls, who, when they were not in action, had prayers and sermons every day; and eight non-conforming ministers were equally careful of their people, keeping them very obedient and quiet.* On the 20th of April, Lord Strabane came up to the walls to make proposals, but it being observed that his comrades were taking the opportunity of placing their cannon in a convenient position, he was forced to withdraw by the garrison. The enemy afterwards sent several trumpets to propose terms of surrender, but they were all rejected. On the following day a sally was made, in which 200 of the enemy were killed, together with the French General Mammau, who, heading part of their cavalry, was slain by Col. Murray, the leader of the Irish horse. Much plunder was obtained, and the salliers made good their retreat with trifling loss. Two days afterwards, the town, which from its situation on a gently rising hill was much exposed to the enemy's fire, was so battered by four demi-culverins, that no persons could safely lodge above stairs. By the fire from the walls, in return, two friars were killed in the camp, to the great sorrow of the enemy, "who were much grieved that the blood of those holy men should be spilt by such an beretical rabble." On the 25th, a sally was made under Colonel Murray, in which many of the besiegers were killed, and but very few of the garrison; on this day also the enemy began to bombard the town, but with little damage. The besieged fearing that a battery 403 which the enemy had began to raise would greatly incommode them, on the 6th of May, at four in the morning, a sally was made, in order to arrest or stop their proceedings; the party was victorious, and as usual in this siege, after slaughtering a great number of their opponents, and taking several prisoners of note, returned with a very small diminution of their own numbers. Many sallies were subsequently made for the purpose of destroying the enemy's works, which now rendered it impossible to receive any intelligence from without, and also very difficult to come at the wells for water, which commodity was absolutely fought for many times. About the end of this month, Walker was suspected of treasonable designs, and also of embezzling the stores, in consequence of which the disposal of the latter, and the government of the garrison, was vested in a Council of fourteen officers, of whom Baker was appointed President, but the effective authority of this body was much interrupted by the bustle of the siege. Some time afterwards a disturbance arose, in which Walker had nearly lost his life for acting without authority, in a transaction opposed to the wishes of the Governor and garrison.+ On the 14th of June, part of the works of the besieged were attacked by a body of horse and foot, the van of the former consisting of gentlemen who had sworn to mount the rampart, which in this place was only a dry bank of seven feet in height; this was done by Capt. Butler their leader, and about thirty others; he was taken prisoner, and but three of bis men escaped with their lives, and those with great difficulty. The enemy lost 400 men, and their infantry were observed, in retreating, to take the bodies of their slain comrades upon their backs; in order to shield them from the fire of the townsmen. The bombardment in the night did great damage; many of the sick were destroyed, and all that could move flocked to the walls and formed in Mackenzie's Appendix, p. 8, that Dr. Walker never once sallied during the siege, and that "as to the enemy, he was a man of peace all the time, and was guilty of shedding no other blood to stain his coat with, but that of the grape." In most other respects, the two accounts of this memorable siege are in satisfactory accordance. It was agreed by the Governor, "that the Conformists should have the Cathedral Church the one half of the Lord's day, during the whole time of the siege, and the Non-conformists the other half; the latter entering at 12, had two sermons there every [Sunday] afternoon."-Mackenzie, p. 32. + Mackenzie, p. 36, 38. In this affair, says Mackenzie, p. 36, "our women also did good service, carrying ammunition, match, bread and drink, to our men; and assisted to very good purpose at the bogg-side, in beating off the granadeers with stones, who came so near to our lines." 404 Narrative of the Siege of Londonderry. to those parts of the town most remote from the enemy: by the 15th of the month the garrison was reduced nearly 1000 meu. On that day a fleet of thirty sail was discovered in the Lough, supposed to be sent from England for the relief of the city; but it was at first found impossible to communicate with it, and in order to prevent its arrival, batteries were raised by the enemy, and a strong boom placed across the river, the banks of which were also lined with musketeers. At length, however, a messenger reached Londonderry, bearing advices from Major-Gen. Kirk, in which he informed the besieged of the men, arms, and provision, on board for them, and that he would sail up to their relief as soon as possible. Some further communications were interchanged in July by several ingenious contrivances. About this time all the iron cannonshot in the town being expended, the besieged were compelled to make balls of brick, cast over with lead. Towards the end of the month, when the siege became much closer than before, Conrad de Rosen, Marshal-General of the Irish forces, arrived in the enemy's camp, and expressed himself with great fury towards the besieged, threatening them with direful punishments and torments if they did not surrender. On the 28th, or on the 30th, in consequence, partially, of an Irish prophecy, "That a Clancarty should knock at the gates of Derry," Lord Clancarty possessed himself, at the head of a regiment, of part of the town lines, and entered some miners in a low cellar under the halfbastion, in the east wall. His men were, however, driven back to their main body with considerable loss. On the same day Governor Baker died, greatly lamented by the garrison and inha [Nov. bitants; he was succeeded by Col. Mitchelburn, who had previously filled the office during Baker's illness. Gen. Hamilton now again offered conditions to the garrison, and De Rosen declared that if his proposals were not complied with, he would have all the Protestants in the neighbouring country, "of their faction," or related to them, robbed, and driven under the walls of the city, where they should perish if not relieved by the besieged. The proposals were however rejected with indignation, and accordingly, on the second of July, some thousands of poor Protestants were driven beneath the walls; upon this the townsmen immediately erected gallows in sight of the enemy's camp, and threatened to hang all their prisoners, if the people were not suffered to return to their homes. The prisoners were permitted to write to Hamilton their General, who replied in a very unfeeling manner, saying, that if they suffered it could not be helped, but that their death should be avenged by that of many thousands. In two days, however, the people were allowed to depart, and the gallows was taken down. On the 11th, the besieged were again asked whether they would treat for the surrender of the place, and after much parleying and debate, they offered terms to the enemy, who however in their turn refused to accept them. On the 25th a sally was made with the intent of obtaining some of the enemy's cattle; in this respect it was unsuccessful, but above 300 of the enemy were killed. The gallant defenders of Londonderry were now in the greatest distress for want of provisions, and their numbers were reduced by the 27th of July, to less than 4500.* On the 28th, a sermon was preached by Mr. Walker, which, according to Mac *The following statement from Walker's tract, of the prices of provisions in the town at this time, which was drawn up by a gentleman of the garrison, will show the extremity of distress to which its defenders were reduced. A small flook [flounder] taken in the river, not to be purchased under the rate a quantity of meal. kenzie's statement, was of a discouraging On the 30th, at about an hour after The more we consider the circumstances of this siege, the more extraordinary do they appear; the garrison of Londonderry consisted merely of poor people, who had been frightened from their homes; there were in the city no persons experienced in military affairs, nor any engineers; nor was there a single well-mounted gun in the place. Notwithstanding these and other disadvantages, they successfully endured a siege of 105 days, from a well-appointed army of 20,000 men, of which nearly one half was destroyed before the walls. Mr. URBAN, AS there are several mistakes in the account given of the Annesley family, by your Correspondent L. L. B. in the Gentleman's Magazine for June (p. 503), I am induced to send you a correct account of that branch to which your Correspondent refers. Altham Annesley was the second dying without issue, was succeeded "In the midst of this extremity, 40. 405 Arthur first Earl of Anglesey. This Richard died on the 19th November, 1701, leaving two sons, Arthur fourth Lord Altham, and Richard, who on his death succeeded to the title of Altham, and on the death of his cousin Arthur Earl of Anglesey, in April 1737, succeeded also to that title. James Annesley claimed to be the legitimate son of Arthur fourth Lord Altham, by his wife Mary, daughter of John Sheffield, Duke of Buckingham. Richard Earl of Anglesey asserted that he was an illegitimate child of a woman named Landy. To decide this question, an ejectment was brought by James Annesley, against Richard Lord of Anglesey, in November 1743, when a verdict was obtained for the plaintiff. This trial was published in London in 1744, and exhibits the grossest perjury either on one side or the other. At the close of the trial Lord Anglesey's Counsel demanded that a writ of error should be received, which was granted. Ultimately the proceedings were removed to the Court of Chancery, and before the cause was decided, James Annesley died without leaving any issue, and Lord Anglesey became and estates of the Annesley family. the undisputed possessor of the titles Your Correspondent must be incorrect in stating that James Annesley died at the age of 24. On the trial it was given in evidence that he was born in 1715, and consequently must at that time have been 28 years old. I should feel much obliged to your Correspondent if he can give me any account of James Annesley after the trial, particularly as to his marriage, his death, or his burial. I have reason to believe that he died about 1748. Your Cork correspondent, A. S. is incorrect in his statement that the lands belonging to Lord Bantry formed the subject of the law-suit. The ejectment was brought for lands in the nesley succeeded, he would certainly county of Meath; but, had James Anestates, as well as the others belonghave ultimately recovered the Cork ing to the Annesley family. Mr. URBAN, A. Ampton, Suffolk, Nov. 10. TO the first of the biographical notes inserted in p. 495 of your June number, the following may be added concerning that "humble-hearted, loving, honest man,' Sir Henry Cal |