QUERIES.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL QUERIES.

(Continued from page 325.)

(13.) Is it not a grievous and calumnious charge against the principal libraries of England, Germany, and France, that not one of them contains a copy of the Florentine Pandects, in three folio volumes, "magnifice, ac pereleganter, perque accurate impressis," as Fabricius speaks? (Bibl. Græc. xii: 363.) This statement, which may be but a libel, is found in Tilgner (Nov. lib. rar. Collect. Fascic. iv. 710.), Schelhorn (Amæn. Lit. iii. 428.), Vogt (Catal. p. 562. Hamb. 1738), and Solger (Biblioth. i 163.). According to the last writer, the edition in question, Florent. 1553, (for a fac-simile of the letters of the original MS. see Mabillon's Iter Italicum, p. 183.) is,—"splendidissima, et stupendæ raritatis, quæ in tanta est apud Eruditos æstimatione ut pro 100 Imperialibus sæpius divendita fuerit." Would that the race of such purchasers was not extinct! In Gibbon's notice of this impression (Decline and Fall, iv. 197. ed. Milman), there are two mistakes. He calls the editor "Taurellus" instead of Taurellius; and makes the date "1551", when it should have been 1553. These errors, however, are scarcely surprising in a sentence in which Antonius Augustinus is named "Antoninus." The Archbishop of Tarragona had received a still more exalted title in p. 193., for there he was styled "Antoninus Augustus." Are these the author's faults, or are they merely editorial embellishments?

(14.) In what year was the improved woodcut of the Prelum Ascensianum used for the first time? And has it been observed that the small and separated figures incised on the legs of this insigne of Jodocus Badius may sometimes be taken as a safe guide with reference to the exact date of the works in which this mark appears? As an argument serving to justify the occasional adoption of this criterion I would adduce the fact, that the earliest edition of Budæus De Contemptu Rerum fortuitarum is believed to have been printed in 1520 (Greswell's Parisian Greek Press, i. 39.), and this year is accordingly visible in the title-page on the print of the Prelum Ascensianum. That recourse must, however, be had with caution to this method of discovering a date, is manifest; from the circumstance, that 1521, or perhaps I should say an injured 1520, appears on the Badian Device in the third impression of the same treatise (the second with the expositio), though it was set forth "postridie Cal. April 1528."

(15.) Is it owing to the extreme rarity of copies of the first edition of the Pagninian version of the Scriptures that so many writers are perplexed and ignorant concerning it? One might have expected that such a very remarkable impression in all respects would have been so well known to Bishop Walton, that he could not have asserted (Proleg. v.) that it was published in 1523; and the same hallucination is perceptible in the Elenchus Scriptorum by Crowe (p. 4.) It is certain that Pope Leo X. directed that Pagnini's translation should be printed at his expense (Roscoe, ii. 282.), and the Diploma of Adrian VI. is dated "die, xj. Maij. M.D.XXIII.," but the labours of the eminent Dominican were not put forth until the 29th of January, 1527. This is the date in the colophon; and though "1528" is obvious on the title-page, the apparent variation may be accounted for by remembering the several ways of marking the commencement of the year. (Le Long, by Masch, ii. 475.; Chronol. of Hist., by Sir H. Nicolas, p. 40.) Chevillier informs us (Orig. de l'Imp. p. 143.) that the earliest Latin Bible, in which he had seen the verses distinguished by ciphers, was that of Robert Stephens in 1557. Clement (Biblioth. iv. 147.) takes notice of an impression issued two years previously; and these bibliographers have been followed by Greswell (Paris. G. P. i. 342. 390.). Were they all unacquainted with the antecedent exertions of Sante Pagnini (See Pettigrew's Bibl. Sussex. p. 388.)

(16.) Why should Panzer have thought that the true date of the editio princeps of Gregorius Turonensis and Ado Viennensis, comprised in the same small folio volume, was 1516? (Greswell, i. 35.) If he had said 1522, he might have had the assistance of a misprint in the colophon, in which "M.D.XXII." was inserted instead of M.D.XII.; but the royal privilege for the book is dated, "le douziesme iour de mars lan milcinqcens et onze," and the dedication of the works by Badius to Guil. Parvus ends with "Ad. XII Kalendas Decemb. Anni huius M.D.XII."

(17.) Who was the author of Peniteas cito? And is it not evident that the impression at Cologne by Martinus de Werdena, in 1511, is considerably later than that which is adorned on the title-page with a different woodcut, and which exhibits the following words proceeding from the teacher: "Accipies tanti doctoris dogmata sancta?"

R.G.

DRYDEN'S "ESSAY UPON SATIRE."

On what evidence does the statement rest, that the Earl of Mulgrave was the author of the Essay upon Satire, and that Dryden merely corrected and polished it? As at present advised, I have considerable doubt upon the point: and although, in modern editions of Dryden's Works, I find it headed An Essay upon Satire, written by Mr. Dryden and the Earl of Mulgrave, yet in the State Poems, vol. i. p. 179., originally printed in the lifetime of Dryden, it is attributed solely to him—"An Essay upon Satyr. By J. Dryden, Esq." This gets rid of the assertion in the note of "D.," in the Aldine edition of Dryden (i. 105.), that "the Earl of Mulgrave's name has been always joined with Dryden's, as concerned in the composition." Was it not first published without notice that any other person was concerned in it but Dryden?

The internal evidence, too, is strong that Dryden was the author of it. I do not here refer to the free, flexible, and idiomatic character of the versification, so exactly like that of Dryden; but principally to the description the Essay upon Satire contains of the Earl of Mulgrave himself, beginning,

And ending:

Could Mulgrave have so written of himself; or could he have allowed Dryden to interpolate the character. Earlier in the poem we meet with a description of Shaftesbury, which cannot fail to call to mind Dryden's character of him in Absalom and Achitophel; which, as we know, did not make its appearance, even in its first shape, until two years after Dryden was cudgelled in Rose Street as the author of the Essay upon Satire. Everybody bears in mind the triplet,

And what does Dryden (for it must be he who writes) say of Shaftesbury in the Essay upon Satire?

If Mulgrave wrote these lines, and Dryden only corrected them, Dryden was at all events indebted to Mulgrave for the thought of the inequality, and disproportion between the mind and body of Shaftesbury. Moreover, we know that Pope expunged the assertion subsequently made, that Dryden had been "punished" (not beaten, as "D." quotes the passage) "for another's rhimes," when he was bastinadoed, in 1679, at the instigation of Rochester, for the character of him in the Essay upon Satire.

It might suit Mulgrave's purpose afterwards to claim a share in this production; but the evidence, as far as I am acquainted with it, seems all against it. There may be much evidence on the point with which I am not acquainted, and perhaps some of your readers will be so good as to point it out to me. The question is one that I am, at this moment, especially interested in.

THE HERMIT OF HOLYPORT.

MINOR QUERIES.

Æneas Silvius (Pope Pius II.).—A broadsheet was published in 1461, containing the excommunication and dethronement of the Archbishop and Elector Dietrich of Mayence, issued and styled in the most formidable terms by Pius II. This broadsheet, consisting of eighteen lines, and printed on one side only, appears from the uniformity of its type with the Rationale of 1459, to be the product of Fust and Schöffer.

No mention whatever is made of this typographical curiosity in any of the standard bibliographical manuals, from which it seems, that this broadsheet is UNIQUE. Can any information, throwing light upon this subject, be given?

QUERIST.

November, 1850.

"Please the Pigs" is a phrase too vulgarly common not to be well known to your readers. But whence has it arisen? Either in "NOTES AND QUERIES," or elsewhere, it has been explained as a corruption of "Please the pix." Will you allow another suggestion? I think it possible that the pigs of the Gergesenes (Matthew viii. 28. et seq.) may be those appealed to, and that the invocation may be of somewhat impious meaning. John Bradford, the martyr of 1555, has within a few consecutive pages of his writings the following expressions:

"And so by this means, as they save their pigs, which they would not lose, (I mean their worldly pelf), so they would please the Protestants, and be counted with them for gospellers, yea, marry, would they."—Writings of Bradford, Parker Society ed., p.390.

Again:

"Now are they willing to drink of God's cup of afflictions, which He offereth common with His son Christ our Lord, lest they should love their pigs with the Gergenites." p. 409.

Again:

"This is a hard sermon: 'Who is able to abide it?' Therefore, Christ must be prayed to depart, lest all their pigs be drowned. The devil shall have his dwelling again in themselves, rather than in their pigs." p. 409.

These, and similar expressions in the same writer, without reference to any text upon the subject, seem to show, that men loving their pigs more than God, was a theological phrase of the day, descriptive of their too great worldliness. Hence, just as St. Paul said, "if the Lord will," or as we say, "please God," or, as it is sometimes written, "D.V.," worldly men would exclaim, "please the pigs," and thereby mean that, provided it suited their present interest, they would do this or that thing.

ALFRED GATTY.

Ecclesfield.

[We subjoin the following Query, as one so closely connected with the foregoing, that the explanation of the one will probably clear up the obscurity in which the other is involved.]

To save One's Bacon.—Can you or any of your correspondents inform me of the origin of the common saying, "He's just saved his bacon?" It has puzzled me considerably, and I really can form no conjecture why "bacon" should be the article "saved."

C.H.M.

Arabic Numerals.—I should be glad to know something about the projected work of Brugsh, Berlin, referred to in Vol. ii., p. 294.,—its size and price.

J.W.H.

Cardinal.—"Never did Cardinal bring good to England."—We read in Dr. Ligard's History (vol. iv. p. 527.), on the authority of Cavendish, that when the Cardinals Campeggio and Wolsey adjourned the inquiry into the legality of Henry VIII.'s marriage with Catharine of Arragon, "the Duke of Suffolk, striking the table, exclaimed with vehemence, that the 'old saw' was now verified,—'Never did Cardinal bring good to England.'" I should be glad to know if this saying is to be met with elsewhere, and what gave rise to it?

O.P.Q.

"By the bye," &c.—What is the etymology of the phrases "by the bye," "by and by," and such like?

J.R.N.

Poisons.—Our ancestors believed in the existence of poisons made so artfully that they did not operate till several years after they were administered. I should be greatly obliged by any information on this subject obtained from English books published previously to 1600.

M.

Cabalistic Author.—Who was the author of a chemical and cabalistical work, not noticed by Lowndes, entitled:

"A philosophicall epitaph in hierogliphicall figures. A briefe of the golden calf (the world's idol). The golden ass well managed, and Midas restored to reason. Written by J. Rod, Glauber, and Jehior, the three principles or originall of all things. Published by W.C., Esquire, 8vo. Lond. Printed for William Cooper, at the Pellican, in Little Britain, 1673."

With a long catalogue of chemical books, in three parts, at the end. My copy has two titles, the first being an engraved one, with ten small circles round it, containing hieroglyphical figures, and an engraved frontispiece, which is repeated in the volume, with some other cuts. There are two dedications, one to Robert Boyle, Esq., and the other to Elias Ashmole, Esq.; both signed "W.C. or twice five hundred," which signature is repeated in other parts of the book. What is the meaning of "W.C. or twice five hundred"?

T. CR.

Brandon the Juggler.—Where is any information to be obtained of Brandon the Juggler, who lived in the reign of King Henry VIII.?

T. CR.

Jacobus Præfectus Siculus.—I have a beautiful copy of a poem by this person, entitled De Verbo DEI Cantica. The binding expresses its date: "Neapoli, 1537." It is not, I believe, the work which suggested to Milton his greater songs, though it is a pretty complete outline of the Paradise Lost and Regained/ What is known about the author, or any other works of his?

J.W.H.

The Word "after" in the Rubric—Canons of 1604.—

1. Can any of your correspondents who may have in their possession any old Greek, or Latin, or other versions, of the Book of Common Prayer, kindly inform me how the word after is rendered in the rubrics of the General Confession, the Lord's Prayer in the Post Communion, and the last prayer of the Commination Service? Is it in the sense of post or secundum?

2. Where can any account of the translation of the Canons of 1604 into English be found? It is apprehended the question is one more difficult to answer than might be supposed.

T.Y.

Hard by.—Is not hard by a corruption of the German hierbei? I know no other similar instance of the word hard, that is to say, as signifying proximity, without the conjoint idea of pressure or pursuit.

K.

Thomas Rogers of Horninger.—Can any of the readers of your valuable publication give me, or put me in the way of obtaining, any information about one Thomas Rogers, who was in some way connected with the village of Horninger or Horringer, near Bury St. Edmunds, was author of a work on the Thirty-nine Articles, and died in the year 1616?

S.G.

Corpus Christi Col., Cambridge.

Armorial Bearings.—Three barrulets charged with six church bells, three, two, and one, is a shield occurring in the Speke Chauntry, in Exeter Cathedral. Can this coat be assigned?

J.W.H.

Lady Compton's Letter to her Husband.—In Bishop Goodman's Court of King James I., edited by John S. Brewer, M.A. (vol. ii. p. 127..), is a letter from Lady Compton to her husband, William Lord Compton, afterwards Earl of Northampton, written upon occasion of his coming into possession of a large fortune. This letter, with some important variations, is also given in Knight's London (vol. i. p. 324.), and, if my memory does not deceive me, in Hewitt's Visits to Remarkable Places. This letter is very curious, but I can hardly think it genuine. Can any of your correspondents throw any light on the matter? Was it printed before 1839, when Mr. Brewer's work appeared? Where is the original, or supposed original, to be seen? Above all, is it authentic? If not, is it known when, and by whom, and under what circumstances it was written?

C.H. COOPER.

Cambridge, November 15. 1850.

Romagnasi's Works.—In a "Life of G.D. Romagnasi," in vol. xviii. Law Mag., p. 340., after enumerating several of his works, it is added, "All these are comprised in a single volume, Florentine edit. of 1835." I have in vain endeavoured to procure the work, and have recently received an answer from the first book establishment in Florence, to the effect that no such edition ever appeared either at Florence or elsewhere.

This is strange after the explicit statement in the Law Mag., and I shall be obliged to receive through the medium of your useful pages any information regarding the work in question.

F.R.H.

Christopher Barker's Device.—I have often been puzzled to understand the precise meaning of the inscription on Christopher Barker's device. Whether this arises from my own ignorance, or from any essential difficulty in it, I cannot tell; but I should be glad of an explanation. I copy from a folio edition of the Geneva Bible, "imprinted at London by Christopher Barker, printer to the Queene's Majesty, 1578."

The device consists of a boar's head rising from a mural crown, with a scroll proceeding from its mouth, and embracing a lamb in the lowest fold. The inscription on this scroll is as follows:—

I venture my own solution:—The tiger, the wicked animal, of the old Adam, being made, thanks to the Gospel, a son, is hence become a lamb."

I presume N'Estat to be an abbreviation of "ne è stato." Any correction or illustration of this will oblige.

C.W. BINGHAM.

Bingham's Melcombe, Blandford.