122 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



[No. 38. 



" M. Ging. Et Sanctus Ambrosius, Sanctus Au- 

 gustinus, et alii omnes zelofsimi doctores non sciebaiit 

 jpsi bene tot, sicut iste Ribaldi ? M. Ort. Ipsi de- 

 berent inteiponeie suis. M. Lttp. Non bene indige- 

 mus de suo Gia;co. M. Ging. Videtur eis, qui 

 sciunt dicere ton, lou. logos, monsotiros, legoiin, taff, higi- 

 otntos, quod ipse sciunt plus quam Deus. M. Ort. 

 Magister noster Lupolde, creditls, quod Deus curat 

 luultnm de iste Gra;co ? M. Lup. Certe non, JMa- 

 gister noster Ortuine, ego credo, quod Deus non curat 

 multura." 



Ranke, in liis History of the Reformation, has 

 very justly estimated the merits and character of 

 these remarkable productions: — 



" We must not look fur the delicate apprehension 

 and tact, whicli can only be formed in a lii?;lily polished 

 state of society, nor for the indignation of insulted mo- 

 rality expressed by the ancients : it is altogether a ca- 

 ricature, not of finislied individual portraits, but of a 

 single type; — a clownish sensual German priest, his 

 intellect narrowed by stupid wonder and fanatical 

 hatred, who relates with silly naivete and gossiping 

 conKdence the various absurd and scandalous situations 

 into which he falls. These letters are not the work of 

 a high poetical genius, but they have truth, coarse 

 strong features of resemblance, and vivid colouring." 



Ranke mentions another satire, which appeared 

 in March, 1520, directed against John Eck, the 

 opponent of Luther, the latter being regai-ded in 

 the light of a successor of Keuchlin, under the title 

 of Abgehohclte Eck, or Ecciiis dedolatus, " which, 

 for fantastic invention, striking and crushing truth, 

 and Aristophanic wit, ftir exceeded the Literm 

 Obsc. v., which it somewhat resembled." I have 

 not yet been able to meet with this; but such liigh 

 praise, from so judicious a critic, makes me very 

 desirous to see and peruse it. S. W. Singee. 



Mickleham, July 3. 1850. 



EpistolcB Ohscurortim Viroi-um. — Your Querist 

 H. B. C. (Vol. ii., pp. 55 — 57.) will find, in the 53rd 

 vol. Edinh. Rev. p. 180., a long article on these 

 celebrated letters, containing mucli of the inform- 

 ation rerpiired. It is worthy of remark, that in 

 page 195. we are told — 



" In 1710 there was printed in London the most 

 elegant edition that has ever appeared of these letters, 

 which the editor, Mich. Mattaire, gravely represents 

 as the productions of their ostensible authors." 



Now this edition, though neat, has no claim to 

 be termed most elegant, which is hardly to be re- 

 conciled with what tlie reviewer says in a note, 

 p. 210., " that the text of this ed. of 1710 is of no 

 authority, and swarms with tj'pographical blun- 

 ders." 



The work on its first appearance produced great 

 excitement, and was condemned by Pope Leo X. 

 See Diet, des Litres Condamnes, ^'c, par Peignot, 

 torn. ii. p. 218. 



Many amusing anecdotes and notices are to be 



found in Bayle's Diet. See particularly sub no- 

 mine Erasmus. Burton, in his Anatomy of Mel. 

 pt. i. sec. 2. Mem. 3. sub. 6. citing Jovius in 

 Elogiis, says, — 



" Hostratus cucullatus adeo graviter ob Reuchlini !i- 

 brum qui inscribitur, Epistol;e Obscurorum Virorum 

 dolore simul et pudore sauciatus, et seipsum interfe- 

 cerit." 



See also Nonv. Diction. Historiqiie in the ac- 

 count of Gratitis, O. 



There is also a good article on these letters in 

 a very excellent work entitled Analectabihlion, or 

 Extraits Critique de divers Livres rares, i^-c, tires 

 du Cabinet du Ma)-q. D.R. (cure). Paris, 1836. 

 2 tomes 8vo. F. E.. A. 



Epistola Obscurorum Virorum. — Tlie article 

 inquired for by H. B. C. (Vol.ii., p. 55.) is probably 

 one in the Edinburgh Review, vol. liii. p. 180., at- 

 tributed to Sir William Hamilton, the distin- 

 guished Professor of Logic in the university of 

 Edinburoh. CH. 



CAXTON S PKINTING -OFFICE. 



(Vol. ii., p. 99.) 



Mr. RiMBAULT is wrong in giving to Abbot 

 ]\Iilling the honour of being the patron of Caxton, 

 which is due to Abbot Esteney. Mr. C. Knight, 

 in his Life of Caxton, which appropriately formed 

 the first work of his series of Weekly Volumes, has 

 the following remarks upon the passage from Stow, 

 quoted by Mr. llimbault : — 



" The careful historian of London here committed 

 one error ; John Islip did not become abbot of West- 

 minster till 1500. John Esteney was made abbot in 

 1474, and remained such until his death in 1498. His 

 predecessor was Thomas IMilling. In Dugdale's Mo- 

 nasticon we find, speaking of Esteney, ' It was in this 

 abbot's time, and not in that of IMilling, or in that of 

 Abbot Islip, that Caxton exercised the art of printing 

 at Westminster.' " — p. 140. 



I have no work at hand to which I can refer 

 for the date of Milling's death, but if 1492 be cor- 

 rect, perhaps he may have been promoted to a 

 bishoprick. 



AVith reference to JMr. Rimbault's remark, that 

 Caxton first mentions the place of his printing in 

 1477, so that he must have jirinted some time with- 

 out informing us where, I may be allowed to ob- 

 serve that it seems highly probable he printed, and 

 indeed learned the art, at Cologne. At the end 

 of the third book of his translation of the Recuyell 

 of the Historyes of Troye, Caxton says : — 



" Thus end I this book, which I have translated 

 after mine author, as nigli as God hath given me cun- 

 ning, to whom be given the laud and praises I 



have practised and iearned, at my great charge and dis- 

 pense, to ordain this said book in print, after the manner 

 and form as you may here see." 



