64 
de petites gloses interlinéaires en Latin sur de certains mots, 
avec quelques notes marginales qui composent une espece de 
petite chaine reciieillie de Saint Hilaire, de Saint Ambroise, de 
Saint Augustin, de Gennadius, et ce me semble de Bede, qui 
est indiqué par la seule lettre B. comme Saint Jerome est in- 
diqué par la lettre H. Ces notes, dont il y en a quelques unes 
fort impertinentes, & qui sont apparement du Compilateur, 
viennent de deux mains; car les unes sont en caracteres Saxons, 
& les autres en caracteres Latins: celles-ci sont beaucoup plus 
recentes.”* 
Simon’s error in the division of the original words vomael- 
bpigce was natural enough to one unacquainted with the prac- 
tice of Irish scribes; and, though a little too venturesome in 
describing the handwriting and language as Saxon, he did no 
more than err with Mabillon, Muratori, and other great autho- 
rities in re diplomatica. It has been the misfortune of ancient 
‘Trish literature that its remains, through the subordinate con- 
dition of this conntry, have, both in England and abroad, been, 
almost without a dissentient voice, adjudged to the Anglo- 
Saxon school, whereby not only has the merit of the teacher 
been transferred to the disciple, but a great obstruction has 
been placed in the way of an acquaintance with Irish manu- 
scripts which are scattered through Europe; the Irish scholar 
neglecting to examine them, because they are called Saxon ; 
and the English to consult them, because unable. 
What notes Simon intended as the fort impertinentes, he 
has not mentioned: possibly that already cited at p. 50, from 
fol. 5 b, and the following : 
Puplicam a Puplo nese, us hepooiani ab henove, et Cpip- 
ciam a Cmpco.—Fol. 3. 
On Matt. xvi. 18, Gc e50 vico cTibi quia cu ep Pecpurp 4 
rupep hance petnam eoipicabo ecclepiam. €x hoc Loco epipcopt 
* Bibliotheque Critique, par Mr. De Sainjore, vol. i. p. 271-5. (Par. 1708.) 
