2nd S. VIII. July 30. '69.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



87 



■"Henry." His name was Lucius, according to 

 the Rolls Office, Beatson, Burke, and Walpole's 

 Royal and Noble Authors. 



Under the title " Hastings," p. 399. of the same 

 ■work, George, 3rd Baron Hastings, is represented 

 as having been created Earl of Huntingdon 8th 

 Dec. 1523. Per contra, on p. 436., under title 

 " Huntingdon," we have " George, Lord Hastings 

 (the same nobleman) created Earl of Huntingdon 

 In 1529. These discrepancies are not commend- 

 able. O'C. 



Original of the Faust Legends. — Mr. Dasent, 

 in the very interesting introduction prefixed to 

 his Popular Tales from the Norse (Edinb. 1859), 

 has the following Note : — • 



" About the same time (the middle of the thirteenth 

 century) began to spread the notion of formal written 

 arguments between the Fiend and men who were to be 

 his after a certain time, during which he was to help 

 them to all earthly good. This too came with Chris- 

 tianity from the East. The first instance was Theophilus, 

 viccdominus of the Bishop of Adana, whose fall and con- 

 version form the original of all the Faust Legends. See 

 ■Grimm, D.M. 969, and 'Theophilus in Icelandic, Low 

 German, and other Tongues, bj' G. W. Daseut, Stockholm, 

 1845,' where a complete account of the literature of the 

 Legend may be found." — P. cxi. 



As I have neither of these works within reach, 

 perhaps some correspondent will kindly favour 

 me with an outline of the life of this Theophilus, 

 and an abstract of Mr. Dasent's "complete account 

 of the literature of the Legend," at least of such 

 part of it as is not generally known amongst 

 Faust Editors ? Even so accomplished a scholar 

 as Mr. Hayward is not aware of " the original of 

 all the Faust Legends ; " and, in the " Historical 

 Notice of the Story of Faust, and the various Pro- 

 ductions in Art and Literature that have grown out 

 of it," which is appended to his admirable Transla- 

 tion oi Faust, he makes no mention of Theophilus. 



EiRIONNACH. 



P.S. It were much to be wished that Mr. Da- 

 sent would reprint his " Introduction " in a sepa- 

 rate form. 



Faber v. Smith. — A friend of mine, who is no 

 mean scholar, tells me that he believes that the 

 English surname Faber is only another attempt 

 to struggle out of Smith, by turning it into Latin. 

 What Is the verdict of "N". & Q." on this deriva- 

 tion ? John G. Talbot. 



ikueviei. 



LETTEHS OF CRANMER AND OSIANDER : BICHABD 

 smith's BOOK SALE, 1682. 



Strype (Memorials of Abp. Cranmer, b. i. c. iii. 

 -vol. i. p. 15. ed. 8vo. Ox.), says that "a great cor- 

 respondence was maintained by letters between 

 ■Cranmer and Osiander 'long after ' 1539." 



" A parcel of these letters in manuscript," he goes on 



to say, " the Right Rev. the Bishop of Sarum mentioned 

 in his History of the Reformation, which he met with in 

 the exquisite library of Mr. Richard Smith, as he told a 

 friend of mine. But notwithstanding, my inquiry after 

 them, I had not the good fortune to see them, nor to find 

 into whose hands they were come, after the selling of that 

 library by auction." 



1. I desire to be helped to the place where Bur- 

 net speaks of this correspondence. I do not re- 

 collect, and cannot find it. 



2. I learn from "N.& Q.," 2°« S. ill. 112, 113.,- 

 that Richard Smith's library was sold by auction 

 in May and June, 1682, and that " a copy of the 

 Sale Catalogue, with manuscripts prices, is now in 

 the British Museum." Does that copy, perad- 

 venture, contain entries of jmrchasers as well as 

 prices ? Might we by Its help ascertain what be- 

 came of papers of such exceeding interest? 



3. If not, is there any other mode of finding 

 out whether the letters are yet in existence, and 

 if so, where? I am extremely anxious to obtain 

 some trace, and, if possible, use of the letters in 

 question, and shall therefore be much obliged by 

 any attention to this Query. W. M. 



Baltimore, U. S. 



[These Letters do not occur in the list of MSS. con- 

 tained in Smith's Catalogue, which only gives the prices, 

 not the purchasers. Burnet (Hist, of Reformation, edit. 

 1829, vol. i. pt. i. p. 186.) alludes to Grineus's letters in a 

 M!^. in B. Smith's library.] 



VLPHILAS. 



In Butler's flbr« Biblica, p. 133., 5th edit., 

 it is stated : — " Ernesti, In his Institutio, says, 

 that Ulphilas, Bishop of the Goths, translated 

 the New Testament Into the Gothic language, in 

 the fourth century ; " and the Chevalier Bunsen, 

 In his Signs of the Times, letter ill. pp. 69. 71., 

 London edition, 1856, speaks of a translation 

 made, about a.d. 370, by Ulphilas, " the first and 

 greatest apostle of the Germans," and Inventor of 

 the Gothic alphabet, of " the whole Bible, ex- 

 cept the books of Kings, from the Greek into his 

 own noble language — a language that owns the 

 same ancient origin with, and is the most closely 

 allied to, their primitive tongue." Was Ulphllas's 

 a translation of the New Testament only, or of 

 the whole Bible, except the books of Kings ? 



Butler also states (J. c), that " this version is 

 supposed to be the version of the Gospels which 

 was published at Dordrect ... in 1665 .... at 

 Amsterdam in 1684 ; at Stockholm in 1672 ; . . . 

 and at Oxford In 1750." Was this version limited 

 to the four Gospels, or did Butler commit an over- 

 sight In using that limited term ? If the version 

 was not so limited, did it, or did Ulphilas's orlginsil 

 translation, contain the verse of the three heavenly 

 toitnesses, 1 John, v. 7. ? Is it beyond question 

 that that verse* is in the old Vatican MS. Greek 



