Feb. 1. 1851.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES, 



87 



anonymous editions, likewise without dates ? Two 

 of the latter (une much older than the other) are 

 of 12mo. size, in 8vo., as is also Eonaventura's 

 /Stimulus diviiii Anwris, printed in 1510 and 1517. 

 (33.) In what way can we detect tlie propounder 

 of the Notahilis expositio super canoneni ndsse ? 

 His work is of small folio size, without mention of 

 place or year ; but it certainly proceeded from 

 I^uremberg, and was it not one of the primitia 

 of Creusner ? 



(34.) Who is designated by the letters " G. 'N. 

 'N. D.,"' which are put at the head of the Epistle 

 to Zuinglius, De Magistris iiostris Loruniensilms, 

 quot et quales sint ? And why has the Vita S. 

 Nicolai, sice Stultitice Exoriplar, originally at- 

 tached to this performance, been omitted by Dr. 

 Miinch in his edition of the Epistolce ohscurorxim 

 Virorum, aliuque i£vi decimi sexti JMonimenta raris- 

 sima, Leipzig, 1827? If he had reprinted this 

 very desirable appendix, it would have furnished 

 him with the date "Anno m.d xx.," which would 

 have prevented him from assigning this satirical 

 composition to the year " 1521." (Einl. p. 408.) 



(35.) A student can scarcely be considered 

 moderately well versed in ancient ecclesiastical 

 documents who has neither read nor heard of the 

 Somiiium Viridarii ; and we may wonder at, and 

 pity, the learned Goldast, for having fallen into 

 the extravagant mistake of attributing this Latin 

 translation of the celebrated Dialogue, Ze Souge 

 du Verger, to " Philotheus Achlllinus, Consiliarius 

 Kegius." (3Tona)X'h. S. Rom. Imper. i. 58. Planov. 

 1612.) The question arises, How was he misled ? 

 Was it not through a strange misconception of a 

 sentence in the Silva Nuptialis of Nevizan, to 

 which he refers in his preliminary "Dissertatio de 

 Auctoribus?" This writer, who has been ])len- 

 tifully purified by the Roman Index, had^cited the 

 preface of an Italian poem, " II Viridario," com- 

 posed by his contemporary, Giovanni Filoteo 

 AciiiLLiKi; and is it thus that an auihdr of the 

 sixteenth century has got credit for an anonymous 

 achievement of the foiu-teenth age ? Goldastus 

 has hardly been out-Heroded by those who have 

 devised an individual named Viridurius, or " Le 

 Sieur du Vergier." (See liaillet, Deguisemens des 

 Auteurs, p. 479., and M. De la Monnoye's note, 

 pp. 501-2.) 



(3G.) Is there not a transpositional misprint in 

 the colophon of the old German Lifi of S. Doro- 

 thea, the so-called patroness of Prussia ? For it 

 would .seem to be inevitable that we should en- 

 deavour to elicit 1492, and not 1512, from the 

 following date : "Den Dingstag nach Gregory als 

 man tzelete, M.cccc. unde c.\ii." (Vid. Lilienthai, 

 Histor. B. Doroth. p. G. Dantisc, 1744.) 



(37.):- 



" Tlie Original IManuscript of both volumes of this 

 Hi-story will bt; deposited in the Cotton Library, by 



" T. BUKNETT." 



Has this declaration been inserted, in the band- 

 writing of Thomas Burnet, on the revei'se of the 

 title-page of the second volume, in all largopaper 

 copies (and is it strictly limited to them ?) of 

 Bishop J3urnet's History of his own Time, Lond., 

 1734? Compare the printed " Advertisement to 

 the Reader" in the first volume, published in 1724. 



(38.) Mr. T. II. Ilampson, the author of Medii 

 yEiv' Kalendurium, which h.Ts, I believe, been com- 

 mended in " Notes and Queries," informs us, in 

 a precious production which he hns lately issued 

 on l\\e. Religious Deceptions of the Clntrch of Rome, 

 p. 30., that — 



" Dr. Geddes, himself a learned Romanist, has se- 

 lected many [remarkable errors] in his tract, A Disco- 

 very of some Gross Mistakes in tlie Roman Marti/roloytj." 



Only fancy a Romanist, learned or unlearned, 

 having the effrontery to bestow so outrageous an 

 appellation upon such an exjjloit. Does not the 

 second volume of Miscellaneous Tracts, in which 

 the said treatise may be seen, explicitly admonish 

 us to remember that Michael Geddes, LL.D., 

 was erst a chancellor of the Church of Sarum ? 

 " Quid Romaj faciam ? " he upbraidingly^ asks in 

 one of his title-pages, " mentiri nescio." R. G. 



Bishops' Lands. — In the month of September, 

 1642, tlie Parliament appointed a committee for 

 the sale of Bisho])s' lands; and an account of some 

 sold between 1647 and 1651, will be found in 

 vol. i. of the Collectanea Topngraphica, 8vo., 1834. 

 On the Restoration, a committee sat to inquire 

 into these sales and make satisfaction. Bishop 

 Kennet xefers to a MS. containing the orders of 

 the commissioners, but does not state where the 

 MS. was deposited ; nor has Sir Frederic IMadden, 

 who communicated that article to the Collectanea, 

 met with it anywhere. 



Can any of your correspondents give any inform- 

 ation iipon the subject, or say where may be found 

 any accounts of the sales of the lands under the 

 parliamentary orders, or of the proceedings of the 

 commissioners apjTOinted to make restitution upon 

 the king's restoration ? G. 



The Barons of Hugh Lupus. — It appears by 

 the charter foundation to the abbey of St. AVer- 

 burge at Chester, that several very eminent persons 

 held the rank of Baron, under Hugh Lupus, Earl 

 of Chester. The charter is signed by the earl 

 himself and by the following barons : Richard, son 

 of Hugh Lupus; Hervey, Bishop of Bangor; Ra- 

 nulph de Meschines, nephew of the earl ; Roger 

 Bigod, Alan de Perci, \\'illiam Constabular, Ra- 

 niiljih Dapifer, William IMalbanc, Robert Fitz- 

 Hugh, Hugii Fitz-Norman, Hamo de Masci, and 

 Bi<!;od de Loges. 



