64 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



[No. 91. 



(^Carmina, Mosis Decalogus) ; Ireiifeus (lib. ii. 

 c. xlii.) ; Ambrose (in Ep. ad EpJies. c. vi.). 

 The Jews divide the Decalogue thus : 



1. I am .... 



2. Thou shalt not have .... 



3. Thou shalt not take .... 



But iu the field of speculation, the Jews have 

 followed a variety of systems for dissecting the 

 Decalogue, as may be seen in Abarvanel in the 

 Pericope " Jetliro," and in Voisin's Prooemium ad 

 Martini Pugionem Fidei. 



The following authors may be consulted on the 

 arguments which have been adduced to support 

 their respective divisions by the Church of Home 

 and the Lutherans on the one side, and the Re- 

 formers or Calvinists and the Church of England 

 on the other. 



1. Church of Rome. — Gothei-'s Papist Misre- 

 presented ; Godden's Catholics No Idolaters ; Gotti 



Vera Ecclesia Christi. 



2. Lutherans. — Salmuthi Theses ; Winchel- 

 manni Dissertafio, S\'C. ; Crameri de distinguendo 

 decalogo, ^'c. ; Franzii Disputatio ; Weimari De- 

 monsiralio ; Opitii Dissertatio de usu accentuationis 

 gemincB in genuina dicisione decalogi ; Dasdorjii 

 Dissertatio de decalogo, ex fundamento accentuum 

 exarninato ; Hachspanii Notes Philologicw in varia 

 loca S. Scriptura ; Pfeifferi Opera {cent. 1.). 



3. Reformers. — Sam. Bohlii vera diuisio deca- 

 logi ex infullibili principio accentuationis. 



In reference to this argument, which is used by 

 both parties, I have been favoured with the fol- 

 lowing remarks by a learned professor of languages, 

 of the Jewish faith : 



" On the subject of your inquiry, the accents do not 

 appear to me to offer any decision. They show which 

 words are to be connected with each other to make up 

 one proposition ; but not how many propositions shall 

 go to make up one commandment." 



4. The Church of England. — Ussher's Answer 

 to a Jesuit (Images), and his Sermon preached 

 hefore the Commons House of Parliament, 1 620 ; 

 Taylor's Ductor Dubitantium (where, in connexion 

 with the Romish controversy, this subject is ex- 

 hausted) ; Stillingfleet's Replies to Gather and 

 Godden; and Forhesii Theologia Christiana. 



T.J. 



THE REPUBLIC OF SAN MARINO. 



(Vol.iii., pp. 321. 376.) 



Though your correspondent Mr. Sydney Smirke 

 has brought to our notice the existence of the 

 republic of San Marino, and informed us of many 

 facts in connexion therewith, and though F. C. B. 

 has enlightened us on several points of "interest in 

 the history of this state, still I do not find in either 

 of these communications the following particulars 

 of its foundation, which are in Addison's Remarks 



on Italy, pp. 62, 63. (ed.Talboys, 1830), and which 

 may interest some of your readers. 



" San Marino was Its founder, a Dalmatian by birth, 

 and l)y trade a mason. He was employed above 

 thirteen hundred years ago in the reparation of Rimini, 

 and after he had finished his work, retired to this so- 

 litary mountain, as finding it very proper for the life of 

 a hermit, which he led in the greatest rigours and aus- 

 terities of religion. He had not been long here before 

 he wrought a reputed miracle, which, joined with his 

 extraordinary sanctity, gained him so great an esteem, 

 that the princess of the coiuitry made him a present of 

 the mountain, to dispose of at his own discretion. His 

 reputation (juickly peopled it, and gave rise to the re- 



]^.iblic «hich calls itsulf after his name The 



best of their churches is dedicated to the saint, and 

 holds his ashes. His statue stands over the high j 

 altar, with the figure of a mountain in its hands j 

 crowned with three castles, which is likewise the arms 

 of the commonwealth. They attribute to his pro- 

 tection the long duration of their state, and look on 

 him as the greatest saint next the blessed Virgin. I 

 saw in their statute book a law against such as speak 

 disrespectfully of him, wlio are to be punished in the 

 same manner as those who are convicted of blasphemy." 



Walter Montagu. 



SHAKSPEARE S USE OF " EISELL. 



(Vol. ii., pp. 241. 286. 329., &c. ; Vol. iii., pp. 66. 

 119. 210., &c.) 



After so much has " been said on both sides," 

 in tlie pages of "Notes and Queries," on the 

 signification oi eisill ov esil in Hamlet, it appears 

 to me that the evidence requires to be carefully 

 summed up. This task I would willingly leave to 

 other hands ; but since no correspondent attempts 

 it, I will venture, if I may be allowed, to take it 

 on myself, and will sti'ive to perform it to the best 

 of my ability. 



The question is, whether by the word under 

 discussion we are to understand vinegar (or some 

 such liquid) or a river. It will be proper, in 

 taking a view of tlie matter, to " begin from the 

 beginning," and to see, in the first place, what the 

 earlier commentators have said. 



1. What the critics before Theobald thought of 

 the word, is not quite certain ; but Theobald states 

 that it had, " through all the editions, been dis- 

 tinguished by Italic characters, as if it were the 

 proper name of a river ; and so," he adds, " I dare 

 say all the editors have from time to time under- 

 stood it to be." But not being able to satisfy 

 himself what river could be meant, he prefen-ed 

 to understand it of vinegar, and interprets the 

 passage, "Wilt thou swallow down large draughts 

 of vinegar ? " 



2. Sir Thomas Hanmer, on the contrary, was so 

 convinced that a river was signified, that he actually 

 altered the passage, arbitrio suo, to 



" Wilt drink up Nile 7 or eat a crocodile ? " 



