Paris text, may be no proof of ignorance of its existence. The circumstance admits of another explanation. -Marana obtained royal license and authority to print his first volume for six years, and the second and third volumes for ten years. He afterwards ceded his rights to Barbin. We may therefore presume that the alteration of title, and the guise of translation, were means adopted to evade the claims of Barbin. After a fair statement of my hypothesis, Mr. Hallam declares that "such a conjecture seems rather violent."-Now, I must be allowed to compare our notions as to violence of conjecture, with reference to the composition of the work. Mr. Hallam believes that some nameless person, with no obvious motive to preparation, announced at once seven volumes of so peculiar a cast, and produced them in three years. Behold my conjecture. I believe that Marana, who indisputably claims the invention of the work, who had published a portion of it, and had written a more considerable portion in continuation, completed the plan which he had announced in 1684, and which had been his principal occupation for more than six years. He presumes that Marana would not have " acquiesced in so gross a robbery upon his reputation."-Marana retired into Italy in 1689, and if he had obtained the pecuniary reward of his labours, by the disposal of the manuscript, might be less solicitous about the bubble reputation-especially as he is said to have lived a life of seclusion. Moreover, the anonymous English volume of 1687 called forth no public remonstrance. Marana was then at Paris, but he submitted to the injustice in silence. He also remarks that Marana" might have published the whole in Holland with impunity."-As far as the liberty of the press was concerned, I admit the justness of the remark. It should be remembered, however, that both authors and publishers have to consider the probability of a sufficient sale. Now, the second English volume must have reached Holland early in 1691, but there was no continental edition of it before 1696. I have before observed that the enterprise was not cherished in Holland. When Mr. Hallam remarks that Marana had about a dozen little volumes by him in 1690, he materially diminishes the force of my argument. The dozen volumes had been achevés dans sa langue three years previously, and probably more were in progress. Now, this is an important point in the evidence. We see the rapidity with which Marana wrote. It would have enabled him to complete the manuscript in 1690-the date which I assign to the disposal of it! The connexion of the manuscript volumes with those published in England is no very bold step. Barbin, who purchased the copyright of three parts of the Espion in 1686, was in correspondence with Wetstein who published a fourth part in 1688; and Rhodes, who published the continuation in 1691, had been in constant communication with Holland, since July 1690. One of my remarks on the errors of Salfi has been misconceived. I do not dispute that Marana retired into Italy in 1689: it is the fit of melancholy which I call a fiction. M. Weiss, who seems to have been the authority of Salfi, cites Dreux du Radier and Drouet, who authorize no such statement. I presume that M. Weiss made his assertion on the authority of Mahmut a very fallacious mode of writing biography. On the Journal de Verdun, Mr. Hallam observes: "this I have never seen; nor is it, perhaps, to be read in England."-The observation startled me, for I have cited the work four times. Do I refer to texts which I have not seen? I leave to others the pursuit of such inquiries, and shall at once recommend Mr. Hallam to visit a certain establishment where his name is held in honour, and to present to one of the attendants a memo. thus endited : 295b 29. Cabinet.-La Clef du Cabinet, 8vo. Verdun, 1704-76. (The vols. for 1754.) H. H. In ten minutes, he may have the gratification of being in company with the instructive M. Dreux du Radier. Mr. Hallam represents me as rather a traducer of John Dunton.-In the extract which I gave, it was my sole design to expose the coarse flippancy of Mr. John Wilson Croker. The opinions of Dunton may not be of much value; but his evidence, in other respects, I consider as some of the best which has been produced on the question. To the advertisement of a work by the author of the Turkish Spy, I attach more importance than either F. R. A. or Mr. Hallam. Richard Sare, the publisher of that work, was one of the proprietors of the Turkish Spy, and the examination of it, with a view to its authorship, is therefore a special desideratum. I omitted to notice the circumstance before, as it seemed probable that F. R. A. would follow his discovery. up In reply to my argument that Paris is the centre of observation and reflection, Mr. Hallam asks, "Could it be otherwise, on the conditions of keeping up the original design?"-I answer, certainly; either through deficiency of skill, or deficiency of attention. I may cite an example. Montesquieu, who was no ordinary writer, endeavoured to give his Usbek the semblance of a Persian-but Mr. Hallam pronounces him to be more than half Parisian. I am not one of those who consider that Mr. Hallam relies exclusively on the internal evidence of the work. Indeed, an important part of internal evidence, sometimes the most convincing, he omits to notice that of style. I shall therefore produce some specimens of that class: Vol. 1. From the French. or Mazarine Genoa Leghorn Vol. 2. Arabia. The French translators omit the word Talnabs. The volume entitled Entrétiens d'un philosophe avec un solitaire has excited my curiosity, as it has that of Mr. Hallam-but not on the same score. The preface is said to contain some account of the quantité de manuscrits which Marana left, and if the silence of Dreux du Radier is to be considered as evidence, the continuation of the Espion formed no part of those manuscripts-a circumstance which would forcibly tend to confirm my hypothesis as to the disposal of it. As another allusion has been made to the mystic epistle of Mr. Daniel Saltmarsh, I shall submit an interpretation of it.-Mr. Saltmarsh pretends to write from Amsterdam-becaue, as I conceive, Marana had sent his manuscript to Wetstein for disposal. He pretends to have obtained an Italian edition of the work-because Marana had composed the previous part in that language. He states the edition to consist of eight volumes because, with the manuscript before him, he could calculate its precise extent. He offers the work, as a profitable speculation, to his friend in London: the unnamed friend was Dr. Robert Midgley. He reminds him, as an incentive to the enterprise, of his " great acquaintance with learned and ingenious men :" as licenser of the press, he was more or less acquainted with all learned and in From the Italian. ? genious men. He stipulates that only Julio Mazarini or Mazarini In Vol. 1. we observe Gallicisms; as conserve preserve, rendition surrender, voyage journey, defie=challenge; naval army fleet, &c. In Vol. 2. we meet with apparent mistranslations and Italianisms; as, temporize with thy genius, the brims of the horizon, a crystal to the lamp, diseases and dolors, the capricios of fortune, the immarcesscible colour, the best of my spirits [abilities], a prefixed day, a prefixed number of servants, &c. In some cases the manuscript seems to have been illegible. Thus, we are told that the Chinese excel in the art of making porphyry [porcelain]-and we read of Mecca and Medina Talnabs in one other person should share in the speculation we find, accordingly, that Mr. Henry Rhodes was the sole publisher of the work.-Such coincidences were almost sufficient to reveal the true state of the case, even at the time of publication; but some readers, as Sir Walter Scott had the wit to discover, love mystery-and others, provided they are amused, care not whether the name of the author be Onuphrio Muralto or Horace Walpole.-So ends my comment. In the midst of perplexing uncertainty, and the necessity of frequent conjecture, there is one prominent fact, hitherto not sufficiently noticed, of which I shall now avail myself as the basis of an additional argument on the authorship of the work. I shall also attempt, on the best circum stantial evidence, to point out the editor and the translator. It is certain that Dr. Robert Midgley held the copyright of the Turkish Spy previously to the 27 Dec. 1693. Now, there are various ways in which he might have acquired it. Was it as the author? We possess a specimen of his composition, and it utterly forbids us to ascribe to him a work of so much ability. Did he employ a person to write it? Surely the brilliant success of the work would have induced such person to throw off the mask, and claim his share of applause. There is only one other mode in which he could have acquired it. He may have purchased the inedited manuscript, and have procured the translation of it. Thus, by a new route, we arrive at the same point of conviction. It is probable that Dr. Midgley edited the work. There are circumstances, besides his connexion with it as proprietor, which favour that opinion. He edited The History of the War of Cyprus, 1687, 8vo. It is an avowed translation, but the translation is not claimed by the editor: such is the peculiar case of the Turkish Spy. The History is said to "discover the intrigues and motions of the principal Courts of Europe:" the Turkish Spy is recommended as covering several intrigues and secrets of the Christian Courts." "dis It is probable that Mr. William Bradshaw was the translator of the entire work. Dunton describes him as the literary operative of Midgley, and recognized his style in the first volume. Now, the second and subsequent volumes are said to be translated "from the Italian by the translator of the first volume." The question concerns, as I have before observed, the literary history of France; and as Mr. Urban is not without friends at Paris, I could wish that some employé à la Bibliothèque Royale, or some élève de l'Ecole des Chartes, would favour us with a list of all the editions of the Espion du Grand Seigneur, anterior to the year 1696, which are accessible in the numerous libraries of that capital-and also with a copy of the manuscript note, from the printed catalogue of the royal library, which is said to be the only authority for the date of the decease of Marana. If men of letters, of whatever nation, were more disposed to interchange commodities in such a manner, the beneficial effects of it in promoting mutual riches would soon become visible. I shall now take leave of the mysterious Mahmut. It would give me pleasure if this discussion should be the occasion of eliciting positive evidence on either side; but there is not much chance of it. In the present state of the evidence, I adhere to my hypothesis. With the most unreserved inclination to appreciate fairly the opinion of Mr. Hallam, and with gratifying recollections of his commendation and his courtesy, I cannot lose sight of certain facts to which attention has been drawn-but am willing to commit to impartial readers the task of deciding on the comparative validity of our arguments. MR. URBAN, Oxford, Jan. 18. THE subject of palimpsest inscriptions on sepulchral brasses having been occasionally introduced in some recent numbers of your Magazine, I trouble you with the two following, which were found nearly perfect on a loose brass discovered under the old pews, not long since removed, during the restoration of St. Peter's Church in the East, at Oxford. Some of your Correspondents may perhaps give a history of the two persons mentioned in the first inscription. J. I. "Orate pro animabus Johannis Chpttok, civis et pannarii Londoniensis, et Ricardi Hawnsard armigeri defuncti, nuper de Comitatu Lincolni ensi." (2.) "Terram terra tegat, Demon peccata remittat. Mundus res habeat, spiritus astra petat." N.B. The italic letters are supplied from conjecture, the end of the brass being imperfect. THE story of "Fridolin" is known to most persons who are admirers of art, and of the spirited etchings of Retsch; the story on which the series of plates is founded, we discovered in a scarce and singular work called "Fratris Bonvicini de Ripa Mediolanensis, de Discipulorum Preceptorumque Moribus. Impr. Venetiis per Theod. de Ragazonibus de Asula, dictum Bresanum 1496. 4to." We give it from the original, and shall add one or two more extracts from the work. Miraculum pro exemplo. No. I. "Juvenis quidam, a patre suo inter cœtera monitus omni die, si posset, in honore Christi et matris ejus missam audiret, cum quodam domino morabatur ut ei serviret. Cui quidam conservus invidens, quia carus esset domino, plusquam ipse, insidias tetendit, ut posset facere eum destrui; in tanto quod ejus dominus, qui zelotipus erat, credens servo invido ea quæ dixerat, de juvene innocente cogitavit qualiter occulte eum perderet, et statuit cum uno magistro fornacis, accensâ fornice ut primum nuntium quem ad eum mitteret in mane in fornacem projiceret. Innocens autem juvenis et inscius rei, jussu domini sui mane ad fornacem vadit, sed in itinerecum transiret, audivit missam in quâdam ecclesiâ celebrari, et ibi mōratus est, usque in finem officii divini. Interea servus invidus scire desiderans, jussu domini sui ad fornacem ivit, ut sciret, si magister fornacis implesset quod ei preceptum fuerat; cum autem magister fornacis eum vidisset, credens quod esset ille quem comburi debebat, quia primus erat, combussit eum, et sic invidus digne incidit in foveam quam alteri paraverat. Deinde juvenis innocens, finitâ missâ, ivit ad magistrum fornacis, qui dixit ei, Vade et dic domino tuo quam bene complevi mandatum ejus; et sic innocens juvenis a morte liberatus est; qui postea, recognitâ gratiâ, intravit religionem, et fuit deinceps servus Christi et matris ejus." Miraculum pro exemplo. No. II. "Quidam magister erat Parisius cui apparuit quidam ejus discipulus clericus post mortem, sicut ei præmiserat in ægritudine suâ, habens cappam totam sophismatibus scriptam: qui interrogans a magistro, in quo statu erat, respondit, quod erat in inferno, dicens quod quæli. bet litera, ut ei videbatur, habebat pondus unius turris, et ibidem multum cruciabatur; et hanc pænam habebat, propter vanam gloriam, quam habuerat in sophismatibus; dixit etiam, quod totus ardebat. Qui discipulus interrogatus a magistro suo, utrum esset multum horribilis pæna, dixit ei, Porrige manum tuam, ut aliquid scias de meâ pænâ.' Tunc magister porrexit manum suam, discipulus autem stillavit unam guttam sudoris sui super palmam ejus, quæ continuo perforavit eam penitus, tanquam ferrum acutum : nec postea potuit aliquo medicamine sanari. Magister autem magnopere perterritus, intravit sanctam religionem, dicens, Linquo ranis coax: cra corvis, vanaque vanis, Ad logicam pergo; quæ mortis non timet ergo. Miraculum ad præmissa. No. III. "Quidam dæmon incantatus a quodam Mago, coram eo apparuit in formam juvenis succincti, habentis coronam in capite, et chirotecas in manibus. Qui cum ad quæsita responderet, ecce quidam sacerdos cum corpore Christi transibat juxta, qui ibat ad communicandum quendam infirmum. Tunc dæmon statim posuit coronam in terrâ, et extraxit chirotecas, flectens genua, donec Presbyter transiret. In reversione Presbyteri sine Corpore Christi, cum adhuc dæmon esset ibi, flexit unum genu. Tum magus vero admirans interrogavit eum cur hoc fecisset. Qui respondit, Primo ob reverentiam Corporis Christi feci quod feci; nam scriptum est, In nomine Jesu flectatur omne genu cœlestium, terrestrium, et inferorum, licet fecerim hoc coacte. In reversione autem Presbyteri cum isset sine corpore Christi, flexi tamen unum genu, propter reverentiam sacerdotii, cum Sacerdos sit in loco Christi. Et nota quod propter hoc Miraculum institutum hoc fuit statim ab Ecclesia Dei, ut omnis Presbyter cum transit cum corpore Christi, habeat secum tintinabulum, et lanternam cum lumine." Adducit Miraculum in exemplum. No. IV. "Quidam Miles confitens peccata sua Episcopo suo, confessus est omnia, excepto uno abominabili peccato quod erubuit confiteri, quoniam cum bonus reputaret, erubescebat tum scelus pandere; quo ab episcopo separato, quidam de familia Episcopi accessit ad ipsum tertius, et dixit ei, Nonne, domine, vidistis quod vidi? respondit Episcopus, Quod vidisti? dixit famulus, Quando miles qui recedit venit ad vos, habebat catenam circa collum, et dum fuit coram vobis, vidi quendam canem, qui deformis et niger, precedensque ducebat eum vinctum, non derelinquens eum, et quum recessit, nondum ,demisit eum: sed precedens tenet adhuc eum ligatum. Tunc Episcopus tertius (1. territus) cogitans quod canis ille Diabolus esset, qui nondum dimiserat eum, quia non fuerat confessus omnia sua peccata, statim misit nuntium ad militem, ut sine morâ reverteretur ad eum. Nuntius autem, quando fuit prope hospitium militis, audivit clamores flentium et plorantium in domo ejus, qui interrogavit, quid hoc esset; et dictum fuit, quod miles ille subito mortuus inventus erat et suffocatus in viâ. Miraculum pro Exemplo. No. V. "Quidam Castellanus tantæ malitiæ erat, quod omnes transeuntes per partes illas sine miseratione spoliabat, et licet tam pessimus esset, tamen reverebatur virginem Mariam, et quotidie salutabat eam, et sæpe, et cum devotione contingit, quod beatus Bernardus transibat per partes illas, qui a prædonibus quos Castellanus ad suam petitionem tenebat, spoliatus fuit. Hic autem cum eis ivit coram Castellano, nec potuit precibus ab eo impetrare, ut spolia redderentur. Tunc precatus est eum, ut saltem totam familiam suam et omnes habitantes congregati in castello congregaret, ut coram omnibus dicat quædam utilia. Quo facto, cum omnes congregati essent excepto Canepario Castellani latentes, tunc Beatus Bernardus dicens nihil posse facere sine illo, tum dici fecit eum inquiri, quod ipse vix adducitur. Erat autem ipse Caneparius doemon, qui formam hominis assumpserat. Adjuravit eum per nomen Christi, ut manifestaret coram omnibus, quis esset et qualiter hic esset. Qui coactus adjuratione dolens et tristis manifestavit se esse dæmonem, in speciem hominis; et cum Castellano mansisse annis quatuor decem, ut eum occideret. Tunc iterum interrogatus á beato Bernardo quare tanto tempore cum eo Castellano stetissit, et non occidisset eum? respondit dicens, quod potestatem habebat occidendi eum quacunque die non salutasset virginem Mariam. quia Castellanus nullam diem miserat, in 'qua non salutasset eam, ideo ipsa Mater Dei defendit eum a morte. Tunc beatus Bernardus dimisit eum, qui coram omnibus evanuit ab oculis eorum. Castella Et nus, his visis et auditis, territus, vitam suam in bonum commutavit." Miraculum pro Exemplo. No. VI. "Quidam Pirata pessimus in mari, quâdam die navigans fractâ nave naufragium passus est, qui solus vivens in aquâ, coeteris ejus sociis submersis, totus comestus est a piscibus, exceptis capite, corde, nervis, ossibus et paucis membris, non tamen mori potuerat. Interea navis quædam pertransiit, in qua erant duo fratres minores qui transibant per partes illos. Tunc illi qui erant in nave audierunt vocem Piratæ clamantis, et lamentantis. Qui autem erant in nave, nihil videbant, et timuerunt. Quorum duo descendentes in quandam barchetam demum viderunt caput Piratæ clamantis, qui mirati quomodo viveret, interrogaverunt, quis esset. Ille autem manifestans se fuisse pessimum Piratam, dixit quod nave fractâ, in quâ erant, omnes socii ejus, in mari perierunt omnes, ipse vero non poterat mori quia impetraverat a Beatâ Mariâ se non moriturum, nisi prius confessus esset, quia ipse devotus erat Sanctæ Mariæ, et omni hebdomada faceret suum jejunium. Hoc dicto, fratres audiverunt confessionem ejus, et facta absolutione statim emigravit." Miraculum pro Exemplo. No. VII. "Agricola quidam misit filium suum ad civitatem, ut addisceret cantum; qui adultus factus est sacerdos, et invitavit multos ad missam novam. Patrem autem non invitavit, quia homo vilis videbatur. Tamen ipse novit diem statutum ab aliis, qui cum pullis et multis bonis venit ad civitatem, ut interesset missæ filii sui. Quem videns filius, dolens adventum patris, quam cito potuit, fecit patrem reverti ad domum, ne cognosceretur quod esset pater ejus. Ille autem reversus domum cogitans quam spernatus esset a filio, desperatus cæpit vocare diabolum magno clamore, qui subito apparuit ei, in specium magnæ avis, et visu terribilis, et dixit agricolæ, Quod vis, ecce hic sum. Dixit agricola, volo ut suspendas me per gulam. Dixit Diabolus, ducas corrigiam tuam, et noli nominare nomen matris Dei. Quo facto, cum Diabolus levaret eum in aera, sensit agricola dolorem, et penitus sicut potuit, nominavit Mariam, quo nomine, audito Diabolo, dimisit eum et fugit, et sic virgo Maria liberavit desperatum a morte animæ et corporis, et deinceps egit penitentiam." The volume ends with the following couplet :"Hæc Bonvicinus de Ripa noscere lector, Si vis, composuit carmina dante Deo." |