Aug. 24. 1850.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



203 



and the errors of the learned Fabricius (who had 

 a manuscript copy in which the writer was styled 

 " Muiegervile," instead of Aungerville), which 

 have been repeated by Mansi, should be corrected. 

 Dr. James, the first Bodleian librarian, fell into 

 a strange mistake when he imagined that his in- 

 accurate reprint at Oxford, in 1599, was the second 

 edition of this treatise. It was in reality Xht fourth, 

 having been preceded by the impressions, Colon. 

 1473; Spiras, 1483; and Paris, 1500. So far as 

 I remember, the editio princeps has not been spe- 

 cified by Gough. {Brit. Topog. ii. 121.) R. G. 



I find I can answer the Query of L. S. (Vol. ii., 

 p. 153.), who asks, " AVhere can I procure a trans- 

 lation of Robert de Bury's Philobiblon?" 



A translation was published by Mr. Rodd, in 

 1832, of which the following is the title : — 



" Philobiblon : a Treatise on the Love of Books, by 

 Richard de Bury, Bishop of Durham, written in 

 McccxLiv ; and translated from the first Edition, 

 MccccLxxiii, with some Collations. London : Printed 

 for Thomas Rodd, 2. Great Newport Street, Leicester 

 Square, 1832." 



This translation is a small 8vo. volume, of which 

 there is a copy in the Douce collection in the Bod- 

 leian ; at the beginning of which copy, on a fly-leaf, 

 the words, " J. B. Inglis to his friend F. Douce, 

 Esq.," are written ; and opposite, on the inside of 

 the cover, there is -ivritten in pencil, apparently in 

 Douce's own hand, " I had read the MS. of this 

 work before it was printed." 



There appears to have existed some difference of 

 opinion with respect to the authorship of the Philo- 

 biblon. Leland, in his Itinerary, ed. 8vo. Oxford, 

 1744, vol. iii. pp. 77, 78, sub loc. Saresbyri, says, — 



" Ex tabeila in Sacello S. Marije. Orate pro anima 

 Richardi Poure, quondam Sarum Episcopi." . . . . 

 " Qi'.i quidem Richardus Episcopus postea translatus 

 fuit ad Episcopatura Dunelmensem .... Incipit Pro- 

 logus in Philobiblon Richardi Dunelmensis Episcopi, 

 quern librum compilavit Ruberlus Holcot de Old. Pra3- 

 dicatorum sub tiomine dicti Episcopi." 



Still, however, in the appendix to vol. iv. of the 

 Itinerary, p. 164., it is said : — 



" Richardus de Bury, alias Angravyle dictus, episc. 

 Dunelm., scripslt Pliilobiblon." 



Upon Leiand's authority, the Bodleian catalogue 

 ascribes the work in question to Robertus Ilolcot. 

 Watt, however (Bibl. Brit.), seems to imagine R. 

 de Bury and Holcot to be the same person. Ilis 

 words are (vol. i. c. 176): — "Bury, Richard. 

 Dunehn., a/(as Robertus Ilolcot, Bishop of Durham, 

 and Chancellor and Treasurer of Enghind, in the 

 reign of Edward III.;" and again, under llolcot's 

 name, " Ilolcot, Robert, or Richard D. Bury." 



The translator (.J. B. Inglis) distinguislies in his 

 Preface between these contemporary writers, and 

 considers R. de Bury to be the undoubted author 

 of this work passing under his name. In corro- 



boration of his opinion, Mr. Inglis refers to the 

 Biographical and Retrospective Miscellany; and, 

 in order to prove that the work was finished in the 

 author's lifetime, he produces the words : 



" Quod opus (Philobiblon) Aucklandiae in habita- 

 tione sua complevit, 24 die Januarii, anno a cominunis 

 salutis origine 1344, aetatis suae 58, et 11 suae pontiti- 

 catus." 



and then adds : 



" He died 14 April, 1345. Holcot died in 1349." 



There appears to be some confusion about the 

 editions, also, of the Philobiblon. There is an edi- 

 tion, 4to. Par., apud Gaspar. Philippum, 1500; 

 also edit, secund. 4to. Oxonise, 1598; and it is 

 printed in the Philolog. Epist. ex Bibl. Melch. 

 Goldasti, ed. .Lipsia;, 1674. But prior to all these 

 is the edition "printed at Cologne, 1473," from 

 which the translation is made, and which is de- 

 scribed by Watt as " the editio princeps, and a 

 work of uncommon rarity." 



Query. AVhy does the Oxford edition of 1598 

 call itself "editio secundo?" If the Paris edit, of 

 1500 so far diifer from that of 1473 as to entitle it 

 to be considered a different work, had the second 

 MS. passed through Holcot's hands ? J. Sansom. 



The translation of Richard de Bury's Philobiblon, 

 by Mr. Inglis, printed in 1832 for the late Mr. 

 Rodd, is an unsatisfactory performance. The 

 version is bald and spiritless, and some of the best 

 passages of the original are rendered in language 

 that does no justice to the author's meaning. His 

 style is so peculiar, so allusive, and so full of meta- 

 phor and quotation, and the work is luminous with 

 " the sparks of so many sciences," that a good 

 translation is a desideratum. 



I may inform your correspondent that one has 

 lately been prepared and is announced for publica- 

 tion, with a memoir of the illustrious bishop. I 

 may add that the Philobiblon has been six times 

 printed : the last edition, if I remember rightly, 

 was by Dr. James : but some old MS. copies of 

 this remarkable treatise on the Love of Books 

 exist, with some of which the text used by the 

 translator should be collated. But, of the pub- 

 lication announced, it would not become me to say 

 anything more, as the biographer is 



Your faithful servant, 



W. S. G. 



Newcastle-upon - Ty ne. 



ETYMOLOGICAL QUERIES. 



(Vol. ii., p. 153.) 



The very satisfactory replies of IMr. Wat to 

 some of the Queries of J. I\In., given at p. 169- 

 70., make us wish for more, which I trust we shall 

 have, should he be supplied with the context in 

 which the words occur ; without which it is diffi- 



