2"d S. IX. May 12. '60.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



369 



In proof of what I say, I refer to p. 445., where 

 we are told that after long endeavour to deter- 

 mine the exact time of the quarrel between Pope 

 and Lady M. W. Montagu, circumstances fix it 

 between 1717 and June, 1719, when Addison died. 

 Sir James Prior had of course only to refer to 

 Pope's published correspondence, of which there 

 have been half a dozen editions in the last half 

 century, and he would have found the most 

 friendly and flattering letters passing between 

 them as late as Sept. f5, 1721. Again (p. 437.) 

 we are told that the imagery of the Messiah was 

 derived from an old fabulous story relative to the 



celebrated cliff' at the seat of Mr. Wortley 



Montagu in Yorkshire. Now the Messiah was 

 published in May, 1712, more than two years, I 

 believe, before Pope knew either Mr. Wortley or 

 Lady Mary ; and there is no evidence leading to 

 the inference that Pope ever was at Mr. Wort- 

 ley's estate in Yorkshire, which indeed was not 

 Mr. Wortley's until after the death of his father 

 •about 1728. 



In reference to Wycherley's well-known mar- 

 riage a few days before his death, we are told 

 (p. 453.) that he settled on his wife " a jointure 

 of 1000£. per annum;" while in the very next 

 page it is written that Wycherley's whole estate 

 " was G001. per annum." 



Malone may be excused for the following ; but 

 how is Sir James Prior to be excused for pro- 

 ducing it in 1860? — 



" None of the biographers have told ns whether Mrs. 

 Racket was the daughter of Pope's father by a former 

 wife, or the daughter of his mother by a former husband, 

 or the wife of rpe who was the son of either his father or 

 mother. I believe she was the wife of Pope's half- 

 brother ; for I saw her once about the year 1760, and she 

 seemed not to be above sixty years old." 



Who Mrs. Racket was, was decided long since 

 in the Athenmum ; and as to Malone seeing her 

 in 1760, it was shown in the same journal that 

 she died in 1747 or 8, and that her will was proved 

 in 1748. 



We have also six whole pages of argument to 

 show that Samuel Dyer was Junius. Here, again, 

 Malone was to be excused: but what excuse 

 could any one have for reproducing it since 1812, 

 when it was shown by the publication of the pri- 

 vate letters that Junius was in communication 

 wifh Woodfall as late as January, 1773, fifteen 

 months after Dyer was dead ? 



I send these as a mere sample ; I could fill a 

 whole number of " N. & Q." with like nonsense. 



M. Y. C. 



CIMEX LECTULARIUS (2"A S. v. 87.) : 

 BKGS (2-4 S. vii. 461.) : BUG (2nd S. ix. 261. 314.) 



I do not know the character of MoufTet's book, 

 nor whether it has engravings of the animals and 

 insects. I think it not unlikely that some other 



malodorus vermin, and not our modern bug, may 

 have frightened the two noblemen. The lady- 

 bird, though pretty to look at, has a similar smell 

 when crushed. 



Southall, writing in 1730, says that bugs have 

 been known in England about sixty years ; and 

 the writer of the article Entomology, Encyclop. 

 Britannica, ix. 163., states that " it is believed 

 that they were unknown in London previous to 

 the great fire of 1666, after which calamity they 

 were transported thither in wood brought from 

 America." If known here in 1503, what was the 

 English name ? Other "familiar beasts" are freely 

 mentioned by the older dramatists, who would not 

 have been restrained by delicacy from using it. 



Bug had a very different meaning in the fifteenth 

 •and in the early part of the sixteenth centuries, as 

 may be seen in passages already cited in " N. & 

 Q." Allow me to add, that in The Spanish Tra- 

 gedy, 1603, Revenge says: — 



" This hand shall hale them down to deepest hell, 

 Where none but furies, bugs, and tortures dwell." 



Had the audience been acquainted with the 

 Cimex lectularius by that name they would have 

 laughed or hissed, and there is no intended bur- 

 lesque in The Spanish Tragedy. 



In a note on the above passage, Select Collection 

 of Old Plays, iii. 201., is : — 



" Nay, then, let's go to sleep ; when bugs and fenes 

 Shall kill our courage with their fancies work." 



Arden of Feversham. 



Sleeping with the cimex would been farce. 

 And : — 



" And in their place came fearful bugges 

 As black as any pitche ; 

 With bellies big and swagging dugges, 

 More loathsome than a witch." 



Churchyard's Challenge, p. 180. 



They were unlike the cimex. 



I should like to know when the word bug was 

 first applied to the punaise. I offer, as a mere 

 conjecture, that on the appearance of a new in- 

 sect, known to be offensive and feared as ve- 

 nomous, a generic name of terror was given, 

 which soon became identified with the species, 

 and unfit for tragedy or heroics. 



" Cimex, Kopt;, 'A<|k5. The chinch, wall-louse, wood- 

 louse, or buggs. Those that haunt beds are here meant: 

 they are flat, red, and stinking, and suck man's blood gree- 

 dily. Pliny saith they are good against all poisons and the 

 bitings of serpents." — Salmon's New London Dispensa- 

 tory, p. 259., Lond. 1702. 



The above is the sixth edition. The " Impri- 

 matur" is dated' Mart. 2, 1676, only ten years after 

 the great fire. 



Salmon's description of the insect is clear. I do 

 not know whether any ancient entomologist has 

 described the K6pts, or cimex, so that we can iden- 

 tify it with the punaise. The cimex is noticed as 

 a frequenter of beds by Catullus, xxiii. 2., and 



