374 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



[No. 80; 



Comus, Patavii, 1637, small 4to., at page 278., I 

 find an Icon of Triptolemus sent by Ceres in a 

 chariot drawn by serpents, hovering in the clouds 

 over what I suppose to be Sicily, or Trinacria ; 

 and on a representation of a city below the 

 chariot occurs the very same form of coin, the 

 three legs conjoined, with the addition of three 

 ears of corn. 



This seems to me to be a curious coincidence. 



!Merviniessis. 



Doctrine of (lie Resurrection. — Can any of your 

 readers inform me of any traces of tlie doctrine of 

 the Hesurrcction to be found in authors anterior 

 to the Christian era? The ibllowing passage from 

 Diogenes Laertius is quoted in St. John's Manners 

 and Customs of Ancient Greece, volH. p. 355. : 



" Kai avaPi<iiT€(T6ai, Karh tovs Mayors, (pTjcri {6eo- 

 7rou7ros\ robs aySpanovs, Kul ecreoCai aSavaTovs.' 



How far docs the statement in this passage in- 

 volve the idea of a bodili/ resurrection ? I fancy 

 the doctrine is not countenanced by any of the 

 apparitions in the poetical Hades of Virgil, or of 

 other poets. Zeteticus. 



National Debts. — Is there any published work 

 descriptive of the origin of the foundation of a 

 " National Debt " in Florence so early as the year 

 1344, when the state, owing a sum of money, 

 created a " Mount or Bank," the shares in which 

 were transferable, like our stocks? It is not men- 

 tioned inNiccolo Machiavelli'si/Zstor?/ of Florence; 

 but I have a note of the fiict, without a reference 

 to the authority. Is there any precedent prior 

 to the foundation of our Xational Debt ? 



F. E. M. 



Leicester's Commonwealth. — Are the real authors 

 of Leicester's Commonwealth, and the poetical tract 

 generally found with it, Leicestei-s Ghost, known? 

 According to Dodd's Church History, the first is 

 erroneouslij attributed to Ilobert Parsons the 

 Jesuit. Edward F. Eimbault. 



ilcpIicS* 



HISTOIRE DBS SEVAKAMBES. 



(A'ol. iii., pp. 4. 72. 147.) 



The History of the Sevarites, in the original 

 English edition, consists of two parts: the first 

 published in 1675, in 114 pages, small 12mo., 

 without a pref\ice ; the second published in 1679, 

 in 140 pages, with a preface of six pages. Tli.; 

 French version of this work is mucli altered and 

 enlarged. The title is changed into Histoire des 

 Scvaramhes, the " Sevarites" being dropped. There 

 is a preface of fifteen pages, containing a siipposed 

 letter from Thomas Skinner, dated Bruges, Oct. 28, 

 1672. The work is divided into five parts, 

 three of which are in the first, and two in the 

 second volume of the Amsterdam edition of 171 G. 



These five parts are together more than twice as 

 bulky as the two parts of the English woi-k. 

 There is no copy of the original French edition 

 of 1677-9 described by !Marchand, in any English 

 public library ; but if there is a copy in the French 

 national library, any of your bibliographical cor- 

 respondents at Paris could easily ascertain whether 

 (as is probably the case) the Amsterdam edition 

 is a mere reprint from the original Paris edition. 



The Frencli version of this work is not only 

 much enlarged, but it differs in the names and in- 

 cidents, and is fuller in the account of the institu- 

 tions and customs of the imaginary state. The 

 English edition of 1738 (1 vol. 8vo.) is a literal 

 translation from the French version, though it does 

 not purport to be a translation. It may be doubted 

 whether the translator was aware of the existence 

 of the English publication of 1675-9. The Ger- 

 man translation was published in 1680; the Dutch 

 translation in 1682 : both these appear to have 

 been taken from the French. 



Morhof (Polyhistor., vol. i. p. 74.), who inserts 

 this work among the libri damnati, and dwells 

 upon its deistical character, refers to the French 

 version ; and though he knew that the book had 

 originally appeared in English, he probably was 

 not aware of the difference between the two ver- 

 sions. A note added by his first editor, Moller, 

 states that Morhof often told his friends that he 

 believed Isaac Vossius to have been the author of 

 the work. Isaac Vossius was in England f^om 

 1670 until his death, which took place at Windsor, 

 February 21, 1689. His residence in England, 

 combined with the known laxity of his religious 

 opinions, doubtless suggested to Morhof the con- 

 jecture that he wrote this freethinking Utopia. 

 There is, however, no external evidence to support 

 this conjecture, or to show that it had any better 

 foundation than the conjecture that Bishop Ber- 

 keley wrote Gaudentio di Lucca. The University 

 of Leyden purchased the library of Isaac A^ossius 

 for 36,000 florins. If it is still preserved at 

 Leyden, a search among his books might ascertain 

 whether there is among them any copy of the 

 English or French editions of this work, and 

 whether they contain any written remark by their 

 former possessor. ^Moreover, it is to be observed 

 that the system of natural religion is for the first 

 time developed in the French edition; and this 

 was the part which chiefly gave the book its cele- 

 brity : whereas, the supposition of Morhof implies 

 that the English and French versions are identical. 



Ileumann, in his Schediasma de Libris Anomjmis 

 et Pseudonymis (Jena, 1711), p. 161. (reprinted in 

 Mylius, Bibliotheca Anon, et Pseiidon., Hamburg, 

 1740, vol. i. pp. 170-6.) has an article on the His- 

 toire des Scvaramhes. It is there stated that 

 " Messieui's de Portroyal" superintended the 

 French tr.anslation of the work; but no authority 

 is sriven for the statement. Christian Thomasius, 



