36 NOTES AND QUERIES. a ix. JULY ,. SILVER MEDAL: IDENTIFICATION (12 S. viii. 512). The personage commemorated by this coin or medal is Emmerich Joseph von Breidenbach-Biirresheim, who, accord- ing to Gams, ' Series episcoporum ecclesiae catholicae,' was Archbishop of Mainz, July 5, 1763-July 11, 1774, and Bishop of Worms, March 1, 1768- July 11, 1774, the latter date being that of his death. The inscription looks as if it has been misread; it begins clearly enough, " Emerich Joseph, by the Grace of God and of the Holy See (D.G. & S. SED.), Archbishop of Mainz." Was he perhaps Chancellor of the Holy Roman Empire (S.R.T.P. GER. ARCAN)"? PR. EL. is Prince Elector, and EP. WO. Bishop of Worms. He does not seem to occur in the 'Allgemeine Deutsche Biographic.' D. R. WEBSTER. The arms are as follows : 1 and 4, Arch- bishoprick of Mainz ; 2 and 3, Bishoprick | of Worms. The wyvern on the shield of pretence is for Breidbach. The " coronet of unusual shape " is a Fnrstenhut. For | Breidbach, argent, a wyvern (Drache) gules crowned azure, see the baronial j families of the Duchy of Nassau in vol. ii., part vii., p. 5, and plate 5 of J. Sieb- i macher's ' Wappenbuch.' The earlier shield of the Bishoprick of j Worms is sable, a key argent bendwise j between eight crosses or, but its later form has billets instead of crosses. The medal commemorates one of the latest of the Archbishop -electors of Mainz, Emmerich Joseph, Baron von Breidbach zu Burresheim. As Elector of Mainz he was ex-officio Arch- Chancellor of the Holy Roman Empire. (It will be remembered that George I. of England playfully styled his brother-in-law, Friedrich Wilhelm, Elector of Brandenburg and King of Prussia, the " Erz-Sandstreuer des heiligen Romischen Reichs " " Arch-Sandbox-Beadle " as Car- lyle translates it.) Emmerich Joseph, as the medal reminds us, was born in 1707, and died in 1774, having been Elector -Archbishop of Mainz from 1763 to 1774 and, in addition, Bishop of Worms from 1768 to 1774. The 'All- gemeine Deutsche Biographic ' devotes four pages to his life. His father was an official and Privy Councillor in the Archbishoprick of Trier. Emmerich was born at Coblenz, educated at Trier, Mainz and Rheims, and appointed Regierungsprasident by the Elector of Mainz (his predecessor) in 1752. This post he exchanged in 1758 for that of Dean of the Cathedral Chapter. As Arch- bishop he was an active and beneficent administrator in financial, educational and ecclesiastical matters, though some of his numerous regulations seem fussy now- adays, e.g., Ms prohibition of the keeping of dogs as mere articles of luxus. His memory was long cherished by the inhabi- tants of Mainz. EDWARD BENSLY. Much Hadham, Herts. This might be a memorial piece of Emrich Joseph Breidbach von Biiresheim, who was Archbishop and Elector of Mainz, 1763-1774, and also simultaneously Bishop of Worms, 1768-74. I do not know what ED stands for in the inscription, but the rest of it appears to run : EMERIC[HVS] JOSEPH[VS] D[EI] G[RATIA] S[ANCTI]S[SIMI or JE] ED [?] MOG[UNTIACENSIS] AR[CHI]EP[ISCO- PVS] S[ANCTI] R[OMANI] I[MPERII] P[RINCEPS] GER[MANI^E] AR[CHI]CAN[CELLARIVS] PR[IMAS] EL[ECTOR . ET] EP[ISCOPVS] WORM[ENSIS], MEDINEWS. LADIES' PORTRAITS (12 S. viii. 510). Mr. J. LAND FEAR LUCAS quotes a statement by Sir Claude Phillips that the names of ladies other than actresses whose portraits were in the earlier exhibitions of the Royal Academy are not mentioned in the catalogues, and asks why this practice existed and when it was abandoned. It was begun in the catalogues of the Society of Artists, whose first exhibition was in 1760, and was probably an adaptation of the custom prevailing at the Paris Salon. It was followed at the Royal Academy from the opening of the first exhibition of 1769 nearly to the end of the eighteenth century, when by the artists' own initiative the names of the sitters began to appear in the cata- logues. In 1798 The True Briton, a daily paper which had for some years published lists of the names of the originals of the principal portraits, announced that it would be un- necessary to do so any longer as so many were given in the catalogues. Other journals fol- lowed suit, and the critics in general wel- comed the publication of the information in the catalogues, because, as one of them put it, " It prevents all that buzzing and fidgeting about the gallery, which has been so much practised heretofore in the ardent wish to discover who or what such a lady is." Although for nearly thirty years the por- traits appeared in the catalogues without
