(Continued from Vol. iii., p. 87.)

(39.) Does any one now feel inclined to vindicate for Inchofer, Scioppius, Bariac, or Contarini, the authorship of the Monarchia Solipsorum? Notwithstanding the testimony of the Venice edition of 1652, as well as the very abundant evidence of successive witnesses, in favour of the first-named writer, (whose claim has been recognised so lately as the year 1790, by the Indice Ultimo of Madrid), can there be the smallest doubt that the veritable inventor of this satire upon the Jesuits was their former associate, Jules-Clement Scotti? For the interpretation of his pseudonyme, "Lucius Cornelius EuropÆus," see Niceron, MÉm. xxxix. 70-1.

(40.) Mr. Cureton (Ant. Syr. vers. of Ep. of S. Ignat. Preface, p. ii., Lond. 1845) has asserted that—

"The first Epistles published, bearing the name of St. Ignatius—one to the Holy Virgin, and two to the Apostle St. John, in Latin,—were printed in the year 1495. Three years later there appeared an edition of eleven Epistles, also in Latin, attributed to the same holy Martyr. But nearly seventy years more elapsed before any edition of these Epistles in Greek was printed. In 1557, Val. Paceus published twelve," &c.

Two connected Queries may be founded upon this statement:—(1.) Is not Mr. Cureton undoubtedly in error with respect to the year 1495? for, if we may believe Orlandi, Maittaire, Fabricius (B. G.), and Ceillier, the three Latin Epistles above named had been set forth previously at Cologne, in 1478. (2.) By what mysterious species of arithmetic can it be demonstrated that "nearly seventy years" elapsed between 1498 and 1557? The process must be a somewhat similar one to that by which "A.D. 360" is made equivalent to "five-and-twenty years after the Council of Nice." (Pref., p. xxxiv.) In the former instance "seventy" is hardly a literal translation of Bishop Pearson's "sexaginta:" but whether these miscalculations have been already adverted to, and subsequently amended, or not, I cannot tell.

(41.) In the same Preface (p. xxiv.) a very strange argument was put forward, which, as we may learn from the last Quarterly Review, p. 79., where it is satisfactorily refuted, has been since repeated by Mr. Cureton. He maintains that the Syriac text of the Ignatian Epistles cannot be an epitome, because that "we know of no instances of such abridgment in any Christian writer." To commence with the West,—is not Mr. Cureton acquainted with the manner in which Rufinus dealt with the History of Eusebius? Have we here no specimens of abbreviation; no allusion in the prologue to "omissis quÆ videbantur superflua?" Has Mr. C. never looked into that memorable combination of the independent works of three contemporaries, entitled Historia Tripartita? and, not to wander from the strictest bounds of bibliography, will any one presume to boast of having a copy of this book printed prior to that now near me, (a spectacle which De Bure could never get a sight of), "per Iohannem SchÜszler regie vrbis Augustensis ciuem," anno 1472? But let us go to the East in search of compendiums. Did not Theodorus Lector, early in the sixth century, reduce into a harmony the compositions of Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret? How does Assemani speak of the first two parts of the Ecclesiastical History of Zacharias Rhetor, supposed to have been written in Syriac, about the year 540? "Prima est epitome Socratis, altera Theodoreti." (Biblioth. Orient., tom. ii. cap. vii.) On this occasion, manifestly, ancient records are encountered in an abridged Syriac form; a circumstance which will not strengthen the Curetonian theory relative to the text of the Ignatian Epistles. Again, bearing in mind the resemblance that exists between passages in the interpolated Epistles and in the Apostolic Constitutions, with the latter of which the Didascalia of Ignatius seems to have been commingled, let us inquire, Did not Dr. Grabe, in his Essay upon the Doctrine of the Apostles, published in 1711, unanswerably prove that the Syriac copy of this Didascalia was much more contracted than the Arabic one, or than the Greek Constitutions of the Apostles? Is it not true that extracted portions of these Constitutions are found in some old MS. collections of Canons? Has not Cotelier furnished us with an "Epitome," compiled by Metaphrastes from Clementine counterfeits, concerning the life of S. Peter? And, to descend from the tenth to the sixteenth century, are we not indebted to Carolus Capellius for an "Epitome Apostolicarum Constitutionum, in Creta insula repertarum," 4to., Ingolstad. 1546?

(42.) When Mr Merryweather (Vol. iii., p. 60.) was seeking for monastic notices of extreme longevity, did he always find it feasible to meet with Ingulphus's History of Croyland Abbey "apud Wharton, Anglia Sacra, 613?" and if it be not enough to have read an account of an ecclesiastic who is said to have attained to the delectable age of 168 years, is it not questionable that anything will suffice except it be the narrative of the Seven Sleepers? The third "Lectio" relating to these Champions of Christendom, as it is given in a Vatican MS., makes the period of their slumber to have been about 370 years. Who was the author of that finely-printed and illustrated quarto volume, the Sanctorum Septem Dormientium Historia, ex Ectypis Musei Victorii expressa, published, with the full approbation of the Censors, RomÆ, 1741? "Obscurus esse gestio" is his declaration about himself (p. 63.). Has he remained incognito?

R. G.

SHAKSPEARE'S "ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA."

The first scene of the third act of Shakspeare's play of "Antony and Cleopatra," at first sight, appears to be totally unconnected with what goes before and what follows. It may be observed that the dramas founded on the Roman history are much more regular in their construction than those founded on the English history. Indeed, with respect to the drama in question, I am not aware of any scene, with the exception of that I have mentioned, which does not bear more or less on the fortunes of the personages from whom the play derives its name. Hence I am led to conjecture that the dramatist here alludes to some event of the day, which was well known to his audience. The speech of Ventidius seems to point to something of the kind:

Some of your numerous readers will doubtless be able to inform me whether there is any instance in the annals of that age of an inferior officer outshining his superior, and being cashiered or neglected in consequence.

Malone assigns to the play the date of 1608.

X. Z.

GREENE'S "GROATSWORTH OF WITTE."

The interesting article by the Hermit of Holyport, on the early German translation of Greene's Quip for an Upstart Courtier, will, I am sure, be read with attention by all lovers of our early literature. My object in addressing you on the subject is to draw the attention of your foreign correspondents, and perhaps the notice of your new contemporary, to the great importance of discovering whether the Groatsworth of Witte was also translated into German. The earliest edition I have seen is that of 1617, but it was printed as early as 1592; and I have long been curious to ascertain whether the remarkable passage respecting Shakspeare has descended to us in its genuine state. In the absence of the English edition of 1592, this information might be obtained from a translation published before 1617. Perhaps, however, some of your readers may be able to point out the existence of an earlier edition. I have sought for that of 1592 for several years without any success.

J. O. Halliwell.