Nov. 3. 1849.] 
NOTES AND QUERIES. 9 
A BIBLIOGRAPHIC PROJECT. 
Of the various sections into which the his- 
tory of English literature is divisible, there is 
no one in which the absence of collective ma- 
terials is more seriously felt — no one in which 
we are more in need of authentic nofes, or 
which is more apt to raise perplexing queries 
—than that which relates to the authorship 
of anonymous and pseudonymous works. 
The importance of the inquiry is not in- 
ferior to the ardour with which it has some- 
times been pursued, or the curiosity which it 
has excited. On all questions of testimony, 
whether historical or scientific, it is a con- 
sideration of the position and character of the 
writer which chiefly enables us to decide on 
the credibility of his statements, to account 
for the bias of his opinions, and to estimate 
his entire evidence at its just value. The 
remark also applies, in a qualified sense, to 
productions of an imaginative nature. 
On the number of the works of this class, I 
can only hazard a conjecture. In French lite- 
rature, it amounts to about one-third part of 
the whole mass. In English literature, it 
cannot be less than one-sixth part — perhaps 
more. Be it as it may, the SYSTEMATIC AR- 
RANGEMENT of all that has been revealed in 
that way, and of all that is discoverable, is 
essential to the perfection of literary history, 
of literary biography, and of bibliography. 
At the present moment, I can only an- 
nounce the project as a stimulus to unem- 
ployed aspirants, and as a hint to fortunate 
collectors, to prepare for an exhibition of 
their cryptic treasures. —On a future occasion 
I shall describe the plan of construction which 
seems most eligible—shall briefly notice the 
scattered materials which it may be expedient 
to consult, whether in public depositories, or 
in private hands—and shall make an appeal 
to those whose assistance may be required, to 
enable a competent editor to carry out the 
plan with credit and success. 
On the prevalence of anonymous writing, 
on its occasional convenience, and on its per- 
nicious consequences, I shall make no remarks. 
Facts, rather than arguments, should be the 
staple commodity of an instructive miscellany. 
Bouton Corney. 
Barnes Terrace, Surrey, 
29th Oct., 1849. 
NOTES FROM FLY-LEAVES.—NO. l. 
Many scholars and reading-men are in the 
habit of noting down on the fly-leaves of 
their books memoranda, sometimes critical, 
sometimes bibliographical, the result of their 
own knowledge or research. The following 
are specimens of the kind of Notes to which 
we allude; and the possessors of volumes en- 
riched by the Notes and memoranda of men 
of learning to whom they formerly belonged, 
will render us and our readers a most accept- 
able service by forwarding to us copies of 
them for insertion. 
Douce on John of Salisbury. MS. Note in 
a copy of Policraticus, Lug. Bat. 1639. 
“ This extraordinary man flourished in the 
reign of Henry II., and was, therefore, of Old 
Salisbury, not of New Salisbury, which was not 
founded till the reign of Henry III. Having 
had the best education of the time, and being not 
only a genius, but intimate with the most eminent 
men, in particular with Pope Hadrian (who was him- 
self an Englishman), he became at length a bishop, 
and died in 1182. He had perused and studied 
most of the Latin classics, and appears to have de- 
corated every part of his work with splendid frag- 
ments extracted out of them.” — Harris’s Philoso- 
phical Arrangements, p. 457. 
See more relating to John of Salisbury in 
Fabricii, Bib. Med. 4tatis, iv. 380. ;in Tanner, 
Biblioth. Britannico-Hibernica ; in Baillet’s 
Jugemens des Savans, ii. 204. See Senebier, 
Catalogue des Manuserits de Genéve, p. 226. 
“ Johannes Sarisb. multa ex Apuleio de- 
sumpsit,” Almclooven, Plagiaror. Syllab. 36. ; 
and it might have been justly added, that he 
borrowed from Petronius. See the references 
I have made on the last leaf. 
Janus Dousa, in his Motes on Petronius, 
had called John of Salisbury “Cornicula ;” 
but Thomasius, in p. 240 of his work, De 
Plagio Literario, vindicates him satisfactorily. 
See Lipp. ad. Tacit. Annal XII. (pezzi di 
porpora), not noticed by any editor of Pe- 
tronius. Has various readings. See my old 
edition. 
Lacrimas commodabat. 
commendabat. Saris. better. 
Itaque cruciarii unius parentes 
cruciati Saris. 
The above is from Zanetti’s Collection of 
Italian Novels, 4 vol. 8vo. Venet. 1754. 
Mezeray, the French historian, translated 
