Читать книгу: «Notes and Queries, Number 41, August 10, 1850», страница 4

Various

Шрифт:

REPLIES

TREATISE OF EQUIVOCATION

I can now inform you that the MS. Treatise of Equivocation, about which J.M. inquired (Vol. i., p. 263.), is preserved in the Bodleian Library (Laud, Miscellaneous MSS. 655.). Dodd, in his Church History (vol. ii. pp. 381. 428.), under the names Blackwell and Francis Tresham, mentions the work by its second title, A Treatise against Lying and fraudulent Dissimulation, and states that the MS. is in the Bodleian. Through the kindness of Dr. Baudinel, I have seen the tract; and as there is a certain historical interest attached to it, some information on the subject may be acceptable to your readers. But it may be as well first to give the account of its production at the trial of Guy Fawkes and the conspirators, Jan. 27, 1606. (See State Trials, vol. ii. col. 180.) After Coke had introduced under the seventh head of his speech, as the fourth means for carrying on the plot, "their perfidious and perjurious equivocating," there follows:—

"And here was showed a Book, written not long before the Queen's death, at what time Thomas Winter was employed into Spain, entituled, 'A Treatise of Equivocation,' which book being seen and allowed by Garnet, the superior of the Jesuits, and Blackwell, the Archpriest of England, in the beginning thereof Garnet with his own hand put out those words in the title of 'Equivocation,' and made it thus; 'A Treatise against Lying and fraudulent Dissimulation.' … And in the end thereof, Blackwell besprinkles it with his blessing, saying, 'Tractatus iste valde doctus, et vere pius et Catholicus est. Certe S. Scripturarum, patrum, doctorum, scholasticorum, canonistarum, et optimarum rationum præsidiis plenissime firmat æquitatem æquivocationis; ideoque dignissimus est qui typis propagetur, ad consolationem afflictorum Catholicorum, et omnium piorum instructionem.'"

Coke referred to it again at Garnet's trial, March 28, 1606 (State Trials, vol. ii. p. 234.); and the importance attached to the discovery of the work may be judged of by Morton's Full Satisfaction, 1606: a very large part of which is occupied in discussing it.

The copy in the Bodleian is the one which was produced at the trial. It is a small quarto in a vellum cover, on the outside of which is written, on the front side, in a later hand, "Blackwell de Equivocatione, &c.;" on the other side, in Sir E. Coke's hand, "Equivocations." It consists of sixty-six pages in all; i.e. two leaves at the beginning originally left blank, and not numbered; sixty-one pages numbered continuously, and fifty-nine of them written on: p. 61., that is, the fly-leaf at the end, contains Blackwell's imprimatur as described by Coke. On the first fly-leaf, at the beginning, is the following memorandum:—

"This booke, contening 61 pages, I founde in a chamber in the Inner Temple, wherein Sr Thomas Tresham used to lye, and whiche he obteyned for his two younger sonnes. This 5 of December, 1605." EDW. COKE.

"Os quod mentitur occidit animam."

It may be enough to remind the reader, that after Nov. 5, 1605, Coke, being Attorney-General, was engaged in prosecuting the discovery of the plot and seeking for evidence. Francis Tresham, to whom the authorship is attributed by Dodd (vol. ii. p. 427, 428.), was a son of Sir Thomas Tresham; his connection with Garnet and the plot is well known. Sir T. Tresham died Sept. 11, 1605. (Dodd, vol. ii. p. 58.) Francis had been committed to prison, and died Nov. 20, 1605; and Coke found this in searching his chambers a fortnight after. The title originally stood thus:—

"A TREATISE OF EQUIVOCATION, wherein is largely discussed the question, whether a Catholicke or any other person before a Magistrate being demaunded uppon his oath whether a Prieste were in such a place, may (notwithstanding his perfect knowledge to the contrary), without Perjury, and securely in conscience answere, No: with this secreat meaning reserved in his minde, That he was not there so that any man is bound to detect it."

The words in small capitals and Italics occupying the first two lines are crossed out, and "whe-," the first syllable of whether, re-written at the beginning of line 3. At the end of this title, interlined by another hand, follow the words "newly, overseer … ignorants;" but these words are also struck through and re-written on the preceding leaf, on which, written by the same hand by which the interlineation was made (Garnet's, as it would seem), the title stands,—

"A Treatise of against Lying and fraudulent Dissimulation. Newly overseen by the Authour, and published for the defence of Innocency and for the Instruction of Ignorants."

The "of", in Italics, is struck out. The MS. has other corrections throughout in the same (Garnet's) hand; and was evidently prepared for the press, as Blackwell's imprimatur implies.

I have to apologise for some incorrect dates in my last communication.

J.B.

BOETHIUS' CONSOLATIONS OF PHILOSOPHY

The celebrated treatise De Consolatione Philosophiæ, was translated into English verse by John Walton, otherwise called Johannes Capellanus, in the year 1410. A beautiful manuscript on parchment, of this translation, is preserved in the British Museum (Harl. MS. 43.). Other copies are amongst the archives of Lincoln Cathedral, Baliol College, &c. It was printed in the Monastery of Tavestok in 1525, a copy of which impression is of the utmost rarity. There is an English prose translation by "George Colvil, alias Coldewell," printed by John Cawood, 4to. 1556. And again, Boethius' Five Bookes of Philosophicall Comfort, translated by J.T., and printed at London in 12mo., 1609.

Viscount Preston's translation was first printed in 8vo., 1695. The edition of 1712, mentioned by your correspondent, was the second. Boethius was again translated by W. Causton in 1730, and with notes and illustrations, by the Rev. P. Ridpath, 8vo., 1785. The latter is, I believe, an excellent translation; it is accompanied by a Life of Boethius, drawn up with great care and accuracy. In 1789 a translation by R. Duncan appeared at Edinburgh; and in 1792, an anonymous translation was printed in London. The latter is said to be a miserable performance.

King Alfred's Anglo-Saxon version, with an English translation and notes, by J.S. Cardale, was printed at London, in 8vo., 1829.

EDWARD F. RIMBAULT.

Queen Elizabeth's Translation of Boethius (Vol. ii., p. 56.).—One of JARLTZBERG'S inquiries is, "Has Queen Elizabeth's work (which she executed during her captivity before she ascended the throne) been printed?" Certainly not: if it had been, it would have been well known. May we venture to anticipate an affirmative reply to another parallel question—Does Queen Elizabeth's translation of Boethius exist in manuscript? But where did JARLTZBERG learn that it was "executed during her captivity before she ascended the throne?" We know that she made such a translation when she was sixty years of age, that is, in October and November, 1593, (see Nichols's Progresses, &c., of Queen Elizabeth, vol. iii. p. 564., and the Gentleman's Magazine for February last, p. 143.), and it is a very interesting proof of the continuance of her learned studies at that advanced period of her life; and, as the curious document which records this fact is unnoticed in the last edition of Royal and Noble Authors by Mr. Park, it is probably a misapprehension that the same task had engaged some of the hours of her captivity; or rather is it not one of those dove-tailing conjectures in which some of our most popular lady-biographers have recently exhibited such extravagant and misplaced ingenuity?

JOHN GOUGH NICHOLS.

Boethius' Consolations of Philosophy (Vol. ii., p. 56.).—JARLTZBERG is wrong in supposing that Richard Viscount Preston's translation appeared first in 1712. I have now before me an edition in 8vo. "London: printed by J.D. for Awnsham and John Churchill, at the Black Swan, in Paternoster row; and Francis Hildyard, bookseller in York, MDCXCV." Horace Walpole, in his Royal and Noble Authors, states that the publication in 1712 was the "second edition corrected;" and Mr. Park says in a note, that the first edition was in 1695, 8vo.

C.H. COOPER

Cambridge, June 24. 1850.

ETYMOLOGICAL QUERIES ANSWERED

J. MN. (Vol. ii., p. 153.) has propounded a dozen of most recondite and puzzling archaisms, upon which I have to offer a few notes.

"Rykelot, a magpie?"—The popular and provincial names of animals deserve more careful notice than they have received from glossarists. I need scarcely observe how frequently personal names were derived from those of birds. In the Hundred Rolls we find a "Richard Rikelot" in Huntingdonshire (vol. ii. p. 626.). I know not what has led to the supposition that this name denotes the magpie. It may possibly be traced to the same root as that of a cognate species, the cornix frugivora; Roeck, Germ., according to Gesner; Friesic, roek; Ang.-S. hroc, the rook: but I am at a loss to discover anything similar in old French to explain the occurrence of the termination, which seems to be a popular or familiar diminutive, a Gallicism, analogous to partlot.

"Wrusum or Wursum."—The latter is the correct reading. Trotter Brockett includes the word amongst Northern Provincialisms.—"Wursum, pus, particularly when foul." Jamieson is inclined to derive the word woursom or worsum, used in the same sense by Douglas, in his translation of Virgil, and by other North Country writers, from Ang.-S. Wyr, pus, and sum, as denoting quality.

"Sabraz."—This term has perplexed me much in preparing notes on the portion of the Promptorium I have now in hand. In the Harl. MS. 221. is found "Sabrace, sabracia, Comm." The authority cited, the Commentarius Curialium, is still unknown to me; and I have failed in searching for the word sabracia, which is not found in Ducange, or other glossaries of debased Latinity. Mr. Halliwell gives "Sabras, salve, plaster;" but he cites no authority. It appears, however, rather to signify a tonic or astringent solution than a salve. I have hitherto found it only in the following passage (Sloane MS. 73., f. 211., late xv. sec.) in a recipe for making "cheuerel lether of perchemyne." The directions are, that it be "basked to and fro" in a hot solution of "alome roche;—aftir take xelkis of eyren and breke hem smale in a disch, as thou woldist make therof a caudel, and put these to thyn alome water, and chaufe it; thanne take it doun fro the fier, and put it in the cornetrey; thanne tak thi lether and basche it wel in this sabras, to it be wel drunken up into the lether." A little flour is then to be added, the mixture heated, and the "perchemyn well basked therein, and th't that saberas be wel drunken up into the lether;" and if it enters not well into the leather, "lay it abroad in a good long vessel that be scheld, the fleschside upward, and poure thi sabrace al abouen the lether, and rubbe it wel yn." It is further recommended to "late the lether ligge so still al a nyzt in his owen sabras."

"I-menbred, a girdle i-menbred." (Thus, in old French, "menbrer, membrer," &c., Roquefort). Charpentier gives similar use of the Latin word,—"Membrare, instruere, ornare, Gall. garnir;" citing a French document, dated 1352: "Item, unam zonam de serico Membratam de argento et esmandis;" and another of 1366: "Duas zonas de serico, argento stofatas et Membratas." The term was thus used also in England, as in the inventory of valuables belonging to Edward I. in 1300 (Liber Garderobæ, p. 347.):—"Una zona, cum cathenis argenti annell' cum targ' et membris argenti." It might be supposed from this expression, that the membra were, strictly speaking, the transverse bars of metals, or cloux, Fr., by which the girdle was divided into several compartments, the intervening spaces being filled by chased ornaments of goldsmiths' work, and occasionally by armorial scutcheons, "targie."

But enough for the present. I should esteem it a favour if your correspondent would inform me where these curious terms are found, as the context would greatly facilitate their elucidation.