148 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



[No. 251. 



and certainly, whether his work or not, very well 

 done. I have consulted Pilkinwton upon the sub- 

 ject, but without success. William wedded the 

 Princess Mary in 1678. Abhba. 



[This portrait is not noticed by Walpole ; but in his 

 Catalogue, of Engravers he speaks of Henrj' Hondius hav- 

 ing, in 1641, engraved a print of William Prince of Orange 

 from a painting by Alexander Cooper. ] 



CennicKs Hymns. — Can you inform me if Cen- 

 nick's Hymns were published in a collected form ? 



Anon. 



[In 1743 was published Select Hymns for the Use of 

 Religious Societies, by John Cennick, in two parts, Bristol, 

 12mo. This collection also contains six hymns by J. 

 Humphreys.] 



Hej^IteS. 



THE DUNCIAD. 



(Yol. X., pp. 65. 109. 129.) 



I am obliged by Me. Markland's endeavour to 

 answer my inquiry, though I was (I may say of 

 course) not ignorant of the passages in the Pope 

 and Swift correspondence to which he refers. The 

 evidence of these passages, though only negative, 

 would be abundantly sufficient if we had not 

 Pope's own positive and repeated assertion to the 

 contrary, namely, that there were no less than 

 ^ve imperfect editions in 1727. To this direct 

 assertion, placed in the front of Pope's own three 

 avowed editions, and even in that presented to 

 the king and queen, the inferences from the letters 

 cited do not seem a sufficient answer. Moreover, 

 it has been long known that the published corre- 

 spondence has been extensively garbled, and some 

 recent articles in the Athenceum have shown that 

 this garbling had been pushed by Pope himself to 

 an extent that renders the correspondence very 

 suspicious evidence of any matter of fact. But in 

 this particular case Mr. Markland, and readers 

 in general, will be surprised to learn that the pas- 

 sage which he quotes from a letter of the 27th No- 

 vember, 1727, is but an additional proof of the 

 inaccuracy of the published correspondence. No 

 such letter exists. The letter referred to under 

 that date is really a combination of two different 

 letters, and neither of them of that date. They 

 are to be found in their separate forms and dates 

 in the Longleat copies; how they came jumbled 

 I do not comprehend, but it proves the gross in- 

 attention of all the editors. The first portion is 

 probably of the date given by Warburton to the 

 whole, viz. 23rd November, 1727, and talks of the 

 Beggar's Opera as in preparation, which was true ; 

 but then it proceeds to talk of its being acted and 

 printed, which did not happen till two or three 

 months later. So that these passages belong to a 

 second letter, the real date of which is the 26 th of 

 February, 1728. This does not, I admit, invali- 



date the inference that Mr. Markland draws 

 about T?ie Dunciad ; indeed, it rather corrobo- 

 rates it as bringing down Swift's evidence three 

 months later ; but it shows how untrustworthy the 

 correspondence is in matters of date and detail. 

 I would beg Mr. Markland to look at a pre- 

 ceding letter of Gay and Pope to Swift, 22nd Oc- 

 tober, 1727, in which Pope says he is afraid of 

 sending Swift " a copy of the poem for fear of the 

 Curlls and Dennises of Ireland." What copy 

 could he mean but a printed one ? And then he 

 goes on to cite the four verses of the opening 

 address to Swift, "Whether thou chuse," &c., 

 which four lines do not appear in the edition dated 

 1728, by A. Dodd, which Malone believed to be the 

 first. All this makes a puzzle, the more difficult 

 to unravel because, as I suspect, it was prepensely 

 concocted by Pope himself for some purpose which 

 we have not yet discovered. C. 



I have a small 8vo. copy of The Dunciad, of 

 which the following is the title : 



" The Dunciad, with Notes variorum, and the Prolego- 

 mena of Scriblerius. The Second Edition, with some 

 Additional Notes. London : printed for Lawton Gilliver, 

 at Homer's Head, against St. Dunstan's Church, Fleet 

 Street, 1729." 



It has the owl engraving as a frontispiece ; and, 

 though purporting to be printed in London in 

 1729, as B. H. C.'s copy is, it was printed for 

 Gilliver, not Dods, as his copy was. It contains 

 the first three books only. Perhaps, however, my 

 only excuse for mentioning this is, that I have a 

 note in the fly-leaf, that " A fourth book was pub- 

 lished, printed separately, in 1742 ;" together with 

 the following extract from Person's Tracts, by 

 Kidd, pp. 323, 324. : 



" Another facetious friend of Dr. Bentley, Mr. Pope, 

 ' used to tell ' Warburton, that when he had anything 

 better than ordinary to say, and yet too bold, he always 

 reserved it for a second or third edition, and then nobody 

 took any notice of it." 



Accordingly in the first edition of The Dunciad, 

 Pope tried the public taste for slander ; and suc- 

 ceeding beyond his most sanguine hopes, he, diffi- 

 dent creature, added a fourth book *, in which he 

 gratified the ignorant and malicious by assailing 

 men of real learning and worth, amongst whom 

 he very properly ranked Dr. Bentley. The Doc- 

 tor being informed that Mr. Pope had abused him, 

 replied, " Ay, like enough ; I spoke against his 

 Homer, and tixe portentous cub never forgives ?"f 



P. H. Fisher. 



C. is surprised that any one who has looked 

 ever so superficially into the subject, should ask 

 where " Pope has distinctly and repeatedly stated" 



* See Mr. Pope to Warburton, ix. 351. 

 f " Mr. Pope's verses are pretty ; they are not the 

 translation of Homer, but of Spondanus." 



