Chapter L

[Having had an opportunity of inspecting a copy of Hamelmann's
_Chronicle_, at present belonging to Mr. Quaritch, in which there is a
very interesting engraving of the horn in question (which may possibly
have been a Charter Horn), we are not disposed to pronounce it older
than the latter end of the fifteenth century. If, however, it is still
preserved at Copenhagen, some correspondent there will perhaps do us
the favour to furnish us with a precise description of it, and with the
various legends which are inscribed upon it.--ED.]

* * * * *

GREEK PARTICLES ILLUSTRATED BY THE EASTERN LANGUAGES.

The affinity which exists between such of the vernacular languages of India as are offshoots of the Sanscrit, as the Hindostanee, Mahratta, Guzeratee, &c., and the Greek, Latin, German, and English languages, is now well known to European scholars, more especially since the publication of the researches of Vans Kennedy, Professor Bopp of Berlin, &c. Indeed, scarcely a day passes in which the European resident in India may not recognise, in his intercourse with the natives, many familiar words in all those languages, clothed in an oriental dress. I am inclined also to think that new light may be thrown upon some of the impracticable Greek particles by a reference to the languages of the East; and without wishing to be understood as laying down anything dogmatically in the present communication, I hope, through the medium of your valuable publication, to attract attention to this subject, and invite discussion on it. Taking, as an illustration, the 233d line of the first book of the _Iliad_, where the hero of the poem is violently abusing Agamemnon for depriving him of his prize, the fair maid Briseis, he says,

[Greek: "All' ek toi ereo, kai epi megan horkon homoumai."]

What is the meaning of [Greek: ek] in the above line? It is commonly construed with [Greek: ereo], and translated, "I plainly tell thee--I declare to thee;" [Greek: exereo], "I speak out--proclaim." But may it not be identical with the Sanscrit _ek_, "one," a word, as most of your readers are doubtless aware, in universal use throughout India, Persia, &c; the rendering literally running thus:

"But _one_ thing I tell thee," &c.

That this is the original sense of the line appears probable by comparing it with line 297. of the {419} same book, where in the _second_ speech of Achilles, that _impiger, iracundus, inexorabilis, acer_, chieftain _again_ scolds "the king of men,"--

"[Greek: Allo de toi ereo, sy d' ene phresi balleo sesi.]"
"And _another_ thing I tell thee."

This rendering receives additional confirmation by a comparison with the following:

"[Greek: Touto de toi ereo.]"
_Il._ iii. 177., and _Od._ vii. 243.
"[Greek: Panta de toi ereo.]"
_Od._ iv. 410., and x. 289.

In the last three lines [Greek: Allo], [Greek: Touto], and [Greek: Panta] stand precisely in the same relation to [Greek: ereo] that [Greek: ek] does in the first, [Greek: All'] merely taking the place of [Greek: de], for the sake of versification.

"But _one_ thing I tell thee.
And _another_ thing I tell thee.
But _this_ thing I tell thee.
And _all_ things I tell thee."

It is not impossible that [Greek: exereo] may be a compound of [Greek: ek], "one," and [Greek: ereo], "I speak." There is in the Hindostanee an analogous form of expression, _Ek bat bolo_, "one word speak." This is constantly used to denote, speaking plainly; to speak decidedly; one word only; no display of unnecessary verbiage to conceal thought; no humbug; I tell thee plainly; I speak solemnly--once for all; which is precisely the meaning of [Greek: exereo] in all the passages where it occurs in Homer: _e.g._ _Il._ i. 212. (where it is employed by Minerva in her solemn address to Achilles); _Il._ viii. 286., _Od._ ix. 365. (where it is very characteristically used), &c.

The word _ace_ (ace of spades, &c.) I suppose you will have no difficulty in identifying with the Sanscrit _ek_ and the Greek [Greek: eis], the _c_ sometimes pronounced hard and sometimes soft. The Sanscrit _das_, the Greek [Greek: dek-a], and the Latin _dec-em_, all signifying _ten_, on the same principle, have been long identified.

J. SH.

Bombay.

* * * * *

SAMUEL ROWLANDS, AND HIS CLAIM TO THE AUTHORSHIP OF "THE CHOISE OF CHANGE."

Mr. T. Jones in "NOTES AND QUERIES" (Vol. i., p. 39.), describing a copy of _The Choise of Change_ in the Chetham Library, unhesitatingly ascribes its authorship to the well-known satirist, Samuel Rowlands, whom he says, "appears to have been a Welshman from his love of Triads." Mr. JONES'S dictum, that the letters "S.R.," on the title-page "are the well-known initials of Samuel Rowlands," may well, I think, be questioned. Great caution should be used in these matters. Bibliographers and catalogue-makers are constantly making confusion by assigning works, which bear the initials only, to wrong authors.

_The Choise of Change_ may with much more probability be given to a very different author. I have a copy of the edition of 1598 now before me, in which the name is filled up, in a cotemporary hand, S[imon], R[obson]. And I find in Lowndes' _Bibliographer's Manual_, that the work in question is entered under the latter name. The compiler adds,--"This piece is by some attributed to Dr. Simon Robson, Dean of Bristol in 1598; by others, most probably erroneously, to Samuel Rowland." An examination of the biography of Dr. Robson, who died in 1617, might tend to elucidate some particulars concerning his claim to the authorship of this and several other works of similar character.

Samuel Rowland's earliest publication is supposed to have been _The Betraying of Christ_, &c., printed in 1598. If it can be proved that he has any claim to _The Choise of Change_ (first printed in 1585), we make him an author _thirteen_ years earlier. In the title-page of the latter, the writer, whoever he was, is styled "Gent and Student in the Universitie of Cambridge." This is a fact of some importance towards the elucidation of authorship and has, I believe, escaped the notice of those writers who have touched upon Samuel Rowland's scanty biography. But I can hardly conceive that either of the publications above alluded to came from the same pen as _Humours Ordinarie_, _Martin Mark-all_, _The Four Knaves_, and many others of the same class, which are known to have been the productions of Samuel Rowlands.

Respecting Samuel Rowlands it may be regarded as extraordinary that no account has been discovered; and though his pamphlets almost rival in number those of Greene, Taylor, and Prynne, their prefaces--those fruitful sources of information--throw no light upon the life or circumstances of their author. The late Mr. Octavius Gilchrist considered that "Rowlands was an ecclesiastic [?] by profession;" and, inferring his zeal in the pulpit from his labours through the press, adds, "it should seem that he was an active servant of the church." (See Fry's _Bibliographical Memoranda_, p. 257.) Sir Walter Scott (Preface to his reprint of _The Letting of Humours Blood in the Head Vaine_) gives us a very different idea of the nature of his calling. His words are:

"Excepting that he lived and wrote, none of those industrious
antiquaries have pointed out any particulars respecting Rowland[s]. It
has been remarked that his muse is seldom found in the best company;
and to have become so well acquainted with the bullies, drunkards,
gamesters, and cheats, whom he describes, he must have frequented the
haunts of dissipation in which such characters are to be found. But the
humorous descriptions of low-life exhibited in his satires are more
precious to antiquaries than more grave works, and those who make the
manners of Shakspeare's {420} age the subject their study may better
spare a better author than Samuel Rowlands."

The opinions of both these writers are entitled to some respect, but
they certainly looked upon two very different sides of the question.
Gilchrist's conjecture that he was an ecclesiastic is quite untenable,
and I am fully inclined to agree with Sir Walter Scott, that Rowlands'
company was not of the most _select_ order, and that he must often have
frequented those "haunts of dissipation" which he so well describes in
those works which are the _known_ production of his muse.

EDWARD F. RIMBAULT.

* * * * *

"APRICOT," "PEACH," AND "NECTARINE," ETYMOLOGY OF.

There is something curious in the etymology of the words "apricot," "peach," and "nectarine," and in their equivalents in several languages, which may amuse your readers.

The apricot is an Armenian or Persian fruit, and was known to the Romans later than the peach. It is spoken of by Pliny and by Martial.

Plin. N.H., lib. xv. c. 12.:

"Post autumnum maturescunt Persica, aestate _praecocia_, intra xxx annos
reperta."

Martial, lib. xiii. Epig. 46.:

"Vilia maternis fueramus _praecoqua_ ramis,
Nunc in adaptivis Persica care sumus."

Its only name was given from its ripening earlier than the peach.

The words used in Galen for the same fruit (evidently Graecised Latin), are [Greek: prokokkia] and [Greek: prekokkia]. Elsewhere he says of this fruit, [Greek: tautes ekleleiphthai to palaion onoma]. Dioscorides, with a nearer approach to the Latin, calls apricots [Greek: praikokia.]

From _praecox_, though not immediately, _apricot_ seems to be derived.

Johnson, unable to account for the initial _a_, derives it from _apricus_. The American lexicographer Webster gives, strangely enough _albus coccus_ as its derivation.

The progress of the word from west to east, and then from east to south-west, and from thence northwards, and its various changes in that progress, are rather strange.

One would have supposed that the Arabs, living near the region of which the fruit was a native, might have either had a name of their own for it, or at least have borrowed one from Armenia. But they apparently adopted a slight variation of the Latin, [Greek: to palaion onoma], as Galen says, [Greek: exeleleipto].

The Arabs called it [Arabic: brqwq] or, with the article, [Arabic: albrqwq].

The Spaniards must have had the fruit in Martial's time, but they do not take the name immediately from the Latin, but through the Arabic, and call it _albaricoque_. The Italians, again, copy the Spanish, not the Latin, and call it _albicocco_. The French, from them, have _abricot_. The English, though they take their word from the French, at first called it _abricock_, then _apricock_ (restoring the _p_), and lastly, with the French termination, _apricot_.

From _malum persicum_ was derived the German _Pfirsiche_, and _Pfirsche_, whence come the French _peche_, and our _peach_. But in this instance also, the Spaniards follow the Arabic [Arabic: bryshan], or, with the article [Arabic: albryshan], in their word _alberchigo_. The Arabic seems to be derived from the Latin, and the Persians, though the fruit was their own, give it the same name.

Johnson says that nectarine is French, but gives no authority. It certainly is unknown to the French, who call the fruit either _peche lisse_, or _brugnon_. The Germans also call it _glatte Pfirsche_.

Can any of your readers inform me what is the Armenian word for _apricot_, and whether there is any reason to believe that the Arabic words for _apricot_ and _peach_, are of Armenian and Persian origin? If it is so, the resemblance of the one to _praecox_, and of the other to _persicum_, will be a curious coincidence, but hardly more curious than the resemblance of [Greek: pascha] with [Greek: pascho] which led some of the earlier fathers, who were not Hebraists, to derive [Greek: pascha] from [Greek: pascho].

E.C.H.

* * * * *

MINOR NOTES.

_Chaucer's Monument._--It may interest those of your readers who are busying themselves in the praiseworthy endeavour to procure the means of repairing Chaucer's Monument, especially Mr. Payne Collier, who has furnished, in the November Number of the _Gentleman's Magazine_ (p. 486.), so curious an allusion from Warner's _Albion's England_, to

"---- venerable Chaucer, lost
Had not kind Brigham reared him cost,"

to know that there is evidence in Smith's _Life of Nollekens_, vol. i. p. 79., that remains of the painted figure of Chaucer were to be seen in Nolleken's times. Smith reports a conversation between the artist and Catlin, so many years the principal verger of the abbey, in which Catlin inquires,

"Did you ever notice the remaining colours of the curious little figure
which was painted on the tomb of Chaucer?"

M.N.S.

[We have heard one of the lay vicars of Westminster {421} Abbey, now
deceased, say, that when he was a choir boy, some sixty-five or seventy
years since, the figure of Chaucer might be made out by rubbing a wet
finger over it.]

_Robert Herrick_ (Vol. i., p. 291.)--There is a little volume entitled _Selections from the Hesperides and Works of the Rev. Robert Herrick_. (_Antient_) _Vicar of Dean-Prior, Devon_. By the late Charles Short, Esq., F.R.S. and F.S.A., published by Murray in 1839. I believe it was recalled or suppressed, and that copies are rare.

J.W.H.

_Epitaph of a Wine Merchant._--The following is very beautiful, and well deserves a Note. It is copied from an inscription in All Saints Church, Cambridge.

"In Obitum Mri. Johannis Hammond Oenopolae Epitaphium.
Spiritus ascendit generosi Nectaris astra,
Juxta Altare Calix hic jacet ecce sacrum,
Corporum [Greek: anastasei] cum fit Communia magna
Unio tunc fuerit Nectaris et Calicis."

J.W.H.

_Father Blackhal._--In the _Brief Narration of Services done to Three noble Ladies by Gilbert Blackhal_ (Aberdeen, Spalding Club, 1844), the autobiographer states (p. 43.) that, while at Brussels, he provided for his necessities by saying mass "at Notre Dame _de bonne successe_, a chapel of great devotion, so called from a statue of Our Lady, which was brought from Aberdeen to Ostend," &c. It may be interesting to such of your readers as are acquainted with this very amusing volume, to know that the statue is still held in honour. A friend of mine (who had never heard of Blackhal) told me, that being at Brussels on the eve of the Assumption (Aug. 14), 1847, he saw announcements that the _Aberdeen_ image would be carried in procession on the approaching festival. He was obliged, however, to leave Brussels without witnessing the exhibition.

As to Blackhal himself, _The Catholic Annual Register_ for the present year (p. 207.) supplies two facts which were not known to his editor--that he was at last principal of the Scots College at Paris, and that he died July 1. 1671.

J.C.R.

_The Nonjurors_ (Vol. ii., p. 354.).--May I take the liberty of suggesting to MR. YEOWELL that his interesting paper on "The Oratories of the Nonjurors," would have been far more valuable if he had given the authorities for his statements.

J.C.R.

_Booksellers' Catalogues._--Allow me to suggest the propriety and utility of stating the weight or cost of postage to second-hand and other books. It would be a great convenience to many country book-buyers to know the entire cost, carriage-free, of the volumes they require, but have never seen.

ESTE.

_Bailie Nicol Jarvie._--Lockhart, in his _Life of Scott_, speaking of the first representation of _Rob Roy_ on the Edinburgh boards, observes--

"The great and unrivalled attraction was the personification of Bailie
Jarvie by Charles Mackay, who, being himself a native of Glasgow,
entered into the minutest peculiarities of the character with high
_gusto_, and gave the west country dialect in its most racy
perfection."

But in the sweetest cup of praise, there is generally one small drop of bitterness. The drop, in honest Mackay's case, is that by calling him a "native of Glasgow," and, therefore, "to the manner born," he is, by implication, deprived of the credit of speaking the "foreign tongue" like a native. So after wearing his laurels for a quarter of a century with this one withered leaf in them, he has plucked it off, and by a formal affidavit sworn before an Edinburgh bailie, the Glasgow bailie has put it on record that he is really by birth "one of the same class whom King Jamie denominated a real Edinburgh Gutter-Bluid." If there is something droll in the notion of such an affidavit, there is, assuredly, something to move our respect in the earnestness and love of truth which led the bailie to make it, and to prove him a good honest man, as we have no doubt, "his father, the deacon, was before him."

EFFESSA.

_Camels in Gaul._--The use of camels by the Franks in Gaul is more than once referred to by the chroniclers. In the year 585, the treasures of Mummolus and the friends of Gondovald were carried from Bordeaux to Convennes on camels. The troops of Gontran who were pursuing them--

"invenerunt _camelos_ cum ingenti pondere auri atque argenti, sive
equos quos fessos per vias reliquerat"--_Greg. Turon._, l. vii. c. 35.

And after Brunichild had fallen into the hands of Chlotair, she was, before her death, conducted through the army on a camel:--

"Jubetque eam _camelum_ per omnem exercitum sedentem
perducere."--_Fredegarius_, c. 42.

By what people were camels first brought into Gaul? By the Romans; by the Visigoths; or by the Franks themselves?

R.J.K.

* * * * *

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 {422} volumes, "magnifice, ac pereleganter, perque accurate impressis," as Fabricius speaks? (_Bibl. Graec._ xii: 363.) This statement, which may be but a libel, is found in Tilgner (_Nov. lib. rar. Collect._ Fascic. iv. 710.), Schelhorn (_Amaen. 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 stupendae raritatis, quae in tanta est apud Eruditos aestimatione ut pro 100 Imperialibus saepius 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 Budaeus _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 {423} 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,

"Mulgrave had much ado to scape the snare,
Though learn'd in those ill arts that cheat the fair;
For, after all, his vulgar marriage mocks,
With beauty dazzled Numps was in the stocks;"

And ending:

"Him no soft thoughts, no gratitude could move;
To gold he fled, from beauty and from love," &c.

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,

"A fiery soul, which working out its way,
Fretted his pigmy body to decay,
And o'er-inform'd the tenement of clay;"

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

"As by our little Machiavel we find,
That nimblest creature of the busy kind:
His limbs are crippled, and his body shakes,
Yet his hard mind, which all this bustle makes,
No pity on its poor companion takes."

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.

_AEneas 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 _Schoeffer_.

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.]

{424} _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.