The Digital Ark: Early Modern Collections of Curiosities in England and Scotland, 1580-1700

[ Previous ][ Next ]

Thomas, Duke of Norfolk ( - )

Relationships: Thomas, Duke of Norfolk was a same person as? (uncertain) Thomas (Arundel) Howard (1585-1646)

References in Documents:
MS Book of the dean of Christ Church (MacGregor, ed.) 669 Pictura illustrissimi Principis Thomæ Ducis Norfolciensis, filij sui natu maximi. 100 Picture of the illustrious Thomas, Duke of Norfolk, with his eldest son. MacGregor 1983, no. 267.
Objects mentioned in correspondence

The two fungi you sent the figures of are the finest and rarest as to their figure I have ever seen or read of; and so is your fibula marina, far surpassing one I received from Cornwall much of the same bigness, neither of which I find any where mentioned. The urtica marina minor Jonst. and physalus I never met with, nor have been informed of the canis charcarius alius Jonst. Many of the lupus piscis I have seen, and have bin informed by the king's fishmonger they are taken on our coast, but was not satisfied for some reasons of his relation soe as to enter it into my Pinax; though 't is said to bee peculiar to the river Albis>, yet I thought they might come sometimes thence to your coasts. Trutta marina I have; and the loligo, sepia, and polypus, the three sorts of the molles have bin found on our western coasts, which shall bee exactly distinguished-as for the salmons taken above London towards Richmond and nearer, and that in great quantity, some years they have all of them their lower jaw as you observe, and our fishermen say they usually wear off some part of it on the banks, or else the lower would grow into the upper and soe starve them, as they have sometimes seen. You ask whether I have the mullus ruber asper, or the piscis octangularis Wormii, or the sea worms longer than the earth worms, or the garrulus Argentor. or the duck cald a May chit, or the Dorhawke. The four first I have no account of, the two later I know not especially by those names, wee have noe hawke by that name--your account of Succinum as all the rest will be registred. As for the Aquila Gesneri I never saw nor heard of any such in the colledge for this 25 years last past. Sir you are pleasd to say you shall write more if you know how not to be superfluous-- certainly what you have hitherto done hath bin all curiosities, and I doubt not but you have many more by you. I can direct you noe further then your own reason dictates to you- Besides those mentioned in the Pinax I have 100 to add, and cannot give you a particular of them. Whatever you write is either confirmative or additional. I doe entreat this favour 4 This bird was not mentioned by Browne as at all resembling a duck. 444 MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE. [1669. of you to inform mee fu1ler of those unknown things mentioned herein, and to add the name, page, &c. of the author if mentioned by any, or else to give them such a latin name as you have done for the fungi, which may bee descriptive and differencing of them-Sir I hope the public interest and your own good genius will plead the pardon desired by Your humble Servant