Part 3

It must also be recollected that Coverdale altered his prologue to the reader in the copies dedicated to Edward VI. Instead of "To helpe me herein I have had sondrye translacyons, not onely in Latyn but also _of the Douche interpreters_," the last four words are omitted, and he has inserted, "in other languages." Coverdale, with indefatigable zeal, made use of every translation in his power. Tyndale's _Pentateuch_ had been for several years published, and had passed through two editions. His translation of _Jonah_, with a long prologue, was printed in 1530 and 1537, and republished in Matthew's (Tyndale's) Bible in 1549. The prologue is inserted in _The Works of Tyndale_, _Frith, and Barnes_, and the translation of _Jonah_ by Tyndale is denounced by Sir Thomas More. Why MR. WALTER doubts its existence I cannot imagine. The title-page is given at full length by Herbert in his _Typographical Antiquities_; and it is a fact that _Henry Walter_, in 1828, in his _Second Letter to the Bishop of Peterborough_, clearly states that which in 1852 he says is "adhuc sub judice." Coverdale rejected from the canon all apocryphal chapters and books, and placed them together as a distinct part, in four of his editions, between the Old and New Testaments, and in one between Esther and Job. In this he neither copied from the Latin nor the German.

No subject connected with English history has been more confused and misrepresented than the history of the English Bible. Mr. Anderson's errors in quotation are most remarkable,--a fact much to be regretted in so laborious a compilation. In his selection of passages to prove the superiority of Tyndale over Coverdale (_Annals_, vol. i. pp. 587, 588), in copying forty-six lines he has made _two hundred and sixty-one errors_; viz. 191 literal errors in spelling, 5 words omitted, 1 added, 2 words exchanged for others, 11 capitals put for small letters, 47 words in Italics which ought to be Roman, 3 words joined, and 1 divided. These extracts ought to have been correct, for accurate reprints were within his reach; it probably exhibits the most extraordinary number of blunders in as short a space as could be found in the annals of literature. Mr. Anderson is equally unfortunate in nearly all his extracts from written documents and printed books: let one more instance suffice. He quotes the just and memorable words of Dr. Geddes in eulogy of our translations made in the reign of Henry VIII. It is astonishing how little obsolete the language of it is, even at this day, and "in point of perspicuity and noble simplicity, propriety of idiom, and purity of style, no English version has yet surpassed it." To this extract Mr. Anderson adds a note (vol. i. p. 586.): "These words are applied by Geddes, by way of distinction, to Tyndale, and not to Coverdale, as sometimes quoted." They occur in Dr. Geddes's _Prospectus for a New Translation of the Holy Bible_, 4to. 1786, p. 88. His words are: "The first compleat edition of an English version of the whole Bible, from the originals, is that of Tyndale's and Coverdale's together." It is to the united labours of these two great men that Dr. Geddes applies his just, and, for a Roman Catholic, liberal eulogium.

Amidst a mass of errors Mr. Anderson complains, in a note on p. 569., that Lewis's _History of the English Bible_ is "grievously in want of correction!" Mr. Anderson's _Annals_ are encumbered with a heavy disquisition on the origin of printing, which reminds us of Knickerbocker's _History of New York_, in which we find to a considerable extent learned accounts of the cosmogony of creation, because, if the world had not been created, in all probability New York would not have existed: the same probability connects the origin of printing with the history of the English Bible. Why the annalist should have omitted any notice of those important Roman Catholic translations at Rheims and Douay, after a long account of Wickliffe's, which was from the same source, is as difficult to account for as is his total silence with regard to a most important revision of the New Testament made in the reign of Edward VI., called by the Company of Stationers "the most vendible volume in English," and which was introduced into Parker's, or the Bishop's Bible, in 1568. A good historical work on this subject is greatly needed, showing not only the editions and gradual improvement, but also the sources whence our translation was derived, and its faithfulness and imperishable renown.

GEORGE OFFOR.

"AS STARS WITH TRAINS OF FIRE," ETC.

(Vol. v., p. 75.)

Your correspondent A. E. B. has shown on more than one occasion so high an appreciation of the wonderful powers of Shakspeare, and his speculations in connexion therewith are so ingenious, that I feel considerable regret when I am compelled to dissent from his conclusions. I believe with him, that Shakspeare's learning has been very much underrated; but at the same time it must be confessed, that so soon as we abandon the intuition, which some would substitute for learning, by which his knowledge was acquired, the latter ceases to be "mysterious." I regret, however, to say that, if it could be shown that he wrote "asters," and with the intention which A. E. B. claims for him, my conclusion would be against that misuse of learning which left the meaning of a passage dependent on the antithesis between two words used each in a sense different from the usual one, and not understood by the audience to whom they were addressed.

Let us now take another view of the question. The purpose of the passage is to record the occurrence of a series of omens, the harbingers of "fierce events." "The graves _stood tenantless_;" "the sheeted dead _did squeak and gibber_;" "the moist star _was sick almost to doomsday with eclipse_:" each circumstance is distinct. But what did "asters with trains of fire," and "disasters in the sun" do? Mr. Knight says that Malone's proposal to substitute "astres" for "as stars," appears to get rid of the difficulty; but not until the English language admits of the formation of a perfect sentence without a verb will it do so. In short, there is nothing gained by the substitution, as Malone saw when he proposed to turn "disasters" into "_disasterous_," and to supply the verb.

I have no alteration of my own to propose; but I think possibly a suggestion as to the directions to be taken in search of the right text may be of service. In the case of a line or lines being lost, nothing can be done; but I discern a gleam of hope in two other directions. In the first place it is to be observed, that the thoughts of the speaker would in all probability be turned to _night_-portents. There is a reference to the same circumstances in _Julius Cæsar_, Act II. Sc. 2., as having occurred in the night, and been seen by the watch. Now, though there is certainly no reason why Horatio might not have enumerated spots in the sun as one of the omens preceding terrible events, it seems scarcely probable that it was in the order of his allusions to the events of the "fearful night" preceding the death of Cæsar. Let the corruption then be sought for here. Or look for a verb in the place of "disasters" that shall intelligibly connect "the sun" with what precedes. "As stars" must not be changed into "asters" until it can be shown that such change is necessary to a better constructed sentence than any which has yet been suggested.

SAMUEL HICKSON.

St. John's Wood.

DIALS, DIAL MOTTOES, ETC.

(Vol. iv., p. 471., &c.)

Perhaps the following will be of use to your correspondent HERMES (Vol. iv., p. 471.), referring to dials which I take to mean sun-dials.

Lately there was rather an interesting object of that kind to be seen upon the south wall of Glasgow Cathedral, with this motto or inscription:--

"Our life's a flying shadow, God's the pole, The index pointing at Him is our soul; Death the horizon, when our sun is set, Which will through Christ a resurrection get."

That the above cannot now be classed among _living_ inscriptions is entirely to be ascribed to the zeal for clean walls exhibited by Her Majesty's Commissioners of Woods and Forests, under whose auspices the renovation of our cathedral has been accomplished. I regret to mention some other memorials have also disappeared, long familiar to the eye of the antiquary--not granting but that these gentlemen have a power to do what they please; however, _en passant_, we would entreat, if they can, to lay on their hands as charily as possible when such innocent matters come in their way. Though the following well-known lines--

"Good friend, for Jesus' sake forbear, To dig the dust inclosed here; Blest be the man that spares these stones, And curst be he that moves my bones"--

be not literally applicable in the present case, they breathe such a spirit as would almost make any one "nervous" in tampering with revered and time-honoured relics nearly become sacred.

Glasgow does not appear at all rich in dial erections; the only one I know of is in our old street the Gallowgate (or _Gallow's Gate_; as you would say, _the road to Tyburn_), on the south front of a tenement, with no motto, but date 1708. Our long fame for numerous public clocks and excellent bells, according to the ancient adage--

"_Glasgow for bells_, Linlithgow for wells, Falkirk for beans and pease, Edinburgh for wh----s and thieves,"

together with our frequent wet murky atmosphere, may all have contributed to the unfavourableness of endeavouring to mark the flight of Time through the medium of the solar rays.

The cities and villages under the sunny skies of southern climates, and where also appears a better taste generally than with us for inscriptions on public and private monuments, would, I think, be the richest field for HERMES to explore. I speak from some little observation in a tour of France and Italy, &c., in the year 1846. Sun-dials were to me objects of curiosity, but not of that importance as to be engrossing. On a loose memorandum I have the two following mottoes which particularly struck me, but have not preserved a note of the places, that I think lay on the route from Florence to Bologna:--

(Latin Englished) "This dial indicates every hour to man but his last."

"Se il Sol benigno, mi concede il raggio, L'ora ti mostra, è il ciel ti dia buon viaggio."

On a building near the Cathedral of Geneva, there is rather a novel and curious example of the sun-dial, in a perpendicular line bisected on each side by two curves, the curve on the one side _black_, the other _gilded_, with the following:--

"Fait en 1778--Restauré en 1824, La Courbe noire Indique le Midi du 21 Juin au 21 Décembre, et la Courbe dorée du 21 Décembre au 21 Juin."

Meridian lines, though not, properly speaking, coming under the order of sun-dials, may be reckoned so far cognate; fine specimens of these may be seen in the cathedrals of Milan, Bologna, &c.

Public clocks occasionally become objects of considerable interest, as at Berne, &c., not to mention the _monster_ of Strasbourg, which all the world has heard of.

Quaint allegorising on such subjects as the foregoing, as presenting different stages in the life of man and the fleeting nature of times and things, were not unusual among our old Scotch divines, as in the subsequent quotation from _The Last Battell of the Soule in Death_, by Mr. Zachary Boyd, Glasgow, 1629:--

"Men's dayes are distributed vnto them like _houres_ upon the _Horologe_: some must liue but till _one_; another vnto _two_; another vnto _three_. The _Palme_ turneth about, and with its finger pointeth at the _houre_. So soone as man's appointed _houre_ is come, whether it bee the _first_, _second_, or _third_, there is no more biding (abiding) for him. _Nec prece nec precio_, neither by _pryce_ nor _prayer_ can Death be moued to spare him but an _houre_; no, not, As the sound of the _clocke bell_ ringing, his last _houre_ passeth away with all speede, and turneth not againe, so must the poor man at death packe him out of sight, and no more be seene upon the _land of the living_."

NIGEL.

Glasgow.

CAN BISHOPS VACATE THEIR SEES?

(Vol. iv., p. 293.)

In answer to your correspondent K. S.'s Query, "Can bishops vacate their sees?" I have little hesitation in saying that they can; though I know of no instance (in modern times) of such an occurrence (except colonial bishops); nor have I ever heard of any one but Dr. Pearce who wished so to do. Lord Dover is, however, mistaken in supposing that "his resignation could not be received, on the ground that a bishopric, as being a peerage, is inalienable." The bishop's own account of the matter (see his Life, prefixed to his _Commentary on the Gospels and Acts_) is as follows:--Feeling himself unable, from his age and other infirmities, to perform any longer his duties as Bishop of Rochester, and wishing like Charles V. to retire from the world, he requested his friend Lord Bath to apply to the king for permission to resign. He was soon after sent for by the king, who told him that he had consulted _Lord Mansfield and Lord Northington, and that neither of them saw any objection_. In the mean time, however, Lord Bath asked the king to appoint, as his successor in the see of Rochester, Dr. Newton, then Bishop of Bristol. On this the ministry, not wishing any ecclesiastical dignities to be granted except through their hands, interfered so as to prevent the resignation from being effected; Dr. Pearce being told by the king that his resignation could not be accepted, but that he should have all the credit of it.

Lord Dover's mistake is, I think, to be attributed to his assumption that bishops are peers of the realm. This is, however, by no means the case. A bishop is simply _a Lord of Parliament_, and possesses none of the privileges of the peerage; not those, among others, of freedom from arrest, and trial by their peers. A peer can only be deprived of his peerage by a special act of parliament, and after a trial by the House of Lords; while a bishop can be deprived of his see, and, of consequence, of his seat in the House of Lords, by the sentence of the archbishop of the province, assisted by such of his suffragans as he may summon. The two last instances of deprivation were those of Bishop Watson, of St. David's, by Archbishop Tenison, and of the Bishop of Clogher, in 1822.

A bishop so deprived does not cease to be a bishop, but only ceases from having jurisdiction over a diocese. Whether a bishop can be deposed from his episcopal office altogether is a matter of doubt, though it is held by most of those who are learned in the canon law, that there is not sufficient authority in any ecclesiastical person, or body of persons, to degrade from the office of bishop any one who has once received episcopal consecration.

R. C. C.

Oxon.

CHARACTER OF A TRUE CHURCHMAN.

(Vol. v., p. 105.)

J. Y. makes an inquiry as to the author of the _Character of a True Churchman_, printed 1711. Your correspondent will do me good service by stating the size, and giving the first few words, of his tract. In 1702, or perhaps in the preceding year, Richard West, D.D., Fellow of Magd. Coll. Oxford, and prebendary of Winchester, published _The True Character of a Churchman, showing the False Pretences to that Name_, one sheet in quarto, no date, of which I have two editions; and it was reprinted in the Somers' _Tracts_: "It is commonly observed," &c. This was answered by Sacheverell in _The Character of a Low Churchman_, 4to. 1702: "It cannot but be visible," &c. And in the same year there was an edition of both these characters printed, paragraph by paragraph, the original character and the reply: London, for A. Baldwin.

I have also _The Character of a True Church of England Man_, a single sheet in 4to.: London, by D. Edwards for N. C. 1702: "Next to the name Christian." And _The True Churchman and Loyal Subject_: London, for J. Morphew, 1710, 8vo. pp. 168.: "The name of the church in whose communion I am," &c. Is this the same with J. Y.'s book with another title?

P. B.

[We have submitted the above to J. Y., who states that "neither of the tracts mentioned by P. B. is the one noticed in his Query. It commences with the following words: 'He [_i.e._ the True Churchman] is one who is not only called a Christian, but is in truth and reality such.' Prefixed is a short letter from the author to his friend in the country; and the edition of 1711 appears to have been the first. It makes sixteen pages of octavo, and consists of short sententious paragraphs, more practical and devotional than controversial. J. Y. discovered it in the British Museum bound up with Dr. Hickes' _Seasonable and Modest Apology_, and other tracts."]

WEARING GLOVES IN PRESENCE OF ROYALTY.

(Vol. i., p. 366.; Vol. ii., pp. 165. 467.; Vol. v., p. 102.).

MR. SINGER'S explanation (Vol. ii., p. 165.) is simple, and, I believe, correct. The covered hands might be considered as discourteous as a covered head: but why should uncovering either be a mark of respect? The solution of this question seems to me of some curiosity, and may perhaps be to many of your readers of some novelty. These and most other modern forms of salutation and civility are derived from chivalry, or at least from war, and they all betoken some deference, as from a conquered person to the conqueror; just as in private life we still continue to sign ourselves the "very humble servants" of our correspondent.

The _uncovered_ head was simply the head _unarmed_; the helmet being removed, the party was at mercy. So the hand _ungloved_ was the hand _ungauntleted_, and to this day it is an incivility to shake hands with gloves on. Shaking hands itself was but a token of truce, in which the parties took hold each of the other's _weapon-hand_, to make sure against treachery. So also a gentleman's _bow_ is but an offer of the neck to the stroke of the adversary: so the lady's _curtsey_ is but the form of going _on her knees_ for mercy. This general principle is marked, as it ought naturally to be, still more strongly in the case of military salutes. Why is a discharge of guns a _salute_? Because it leaves the guns empty, and at the mercy of the opponent. And this is so true, that the saluting with blank cartridge is a modern invention. Formerly salutes were fired by discharging the cannonballs, and there have been instances in which the compliment has been nearly fatal to the visitor whom it meant to honour. When the _officer_ salutes, he points his drawn sword to the ground; and the salute of the troops is, even at this day, called "_presenting arms_,"--that is, presenting them to be taken.

There are several other details both of social and military salutation of all countries which might be produced; but I have said enough to indicate the principle.

C.

GOSPEL OAKS.

(Vol. ii., p. 407.)

The inquiry of STEPHEN into the origin of "this delightful name," applied to some fine old oak trees in different parts of the country, has not elicited one answer, nor an additional note of other trees so designated. Oaks are not the only trees so honoured; for I remember reading of a "gospel _elm_," but where situated I do not recollect. Had your valuable publication been then in existence, I should most probably have made a note of it. It would be desirable to elucidate this interesting subject; and if your correspondents would send you a note of such as may be in their neighbourhoods, with the traditions attached to them, much curious and interesting information would be accumulated; and it is possible that some approximation to their date and origin might be arrived at. The Rev. A. G. H. Hollingsworth, in his _History of Stowmarket_, gives an account of a very fine one still remaining in the park of Polstead Hall, Essex, the seat of Charles Tyrell, Esq.:

"It stands (he writes) almost in front of the house, at a distance of about 150 yards, and close to the adjoining early Norman church. It rises like a small feudal tower out of the green field, to the height of twenty feet, and still possesses vigorous remains of the three enormous stems into which it was divided above. This earth-born giant is forty-three feet in circumference four feet from the ground, and the base slopes gradually outwards as the sides bury themselves in the earth, giving one the idea of a skilful architect's hand having systematically planted an enormous foundation for that stupendous mass of wood, with which 1000 or 1500 years must have loaded its shoulders. It is hollow within, and could seat eight or ten persons. The bark is generally gone, except in one or two places, where it winds like a stream of rough verdure to supply the branches, which still drop their acorns into your face as you gaze upwards, and are thus reminded of the passing seasons. Its wood is seared, knotted, and in some places looks like a piece of sculpture smoothed and wrought by hand into waving channels. By its side, and at a distance of some eight feet, is a tall oak of eighty years' growth,--a scion, no doubt, of such a mighty tree. But it looks puerile, and a child, when compared with its parent. And some idea may be formed of this, perhaps one of the last fast departing memorials of Roman and Saxon times, when on comparison it would take twenty or more such trunks of a hundred years' growth, to make up the bulk of the glorious size of this mighty pillar, thus erected by the hand of nature to the memory of past generations."

Mr. Hollingsworth appears to consider them relics of Druidism:

"When Christianity was first introduced into England, it was customary for the missionaries to select some one known gigantic tree as their place of assemblage. These leafy tabernacles were generally oaks of vast size and stature. Nor is it at all unlikely that some of them were thus chosen because from their gigantic bosoms the sacred mistletoe of the Druids had been cut, and they were consecrated by superstitious veneration in the minds of the people as sacred places. Nor were they inappropriate pulpits for the apostolic bishops and priests, who thus, in making their shades vocal with the gospel words, proclaimed by their voice and presence the victory of Christ over darkness and idolatry."

P. 18.

Can the following item in the will of John Cole, of Thelnetham, dated May 8, 1527, be considered as throwing any light upon their origin and use?

"Item, I will have a newe crosse made according to Trappett's crosse at the Hawelanesende, and sett vp at _Short Groves end, where the gospell is sayd vpon Ascension Even_, for y'e w'ch I assigne X_s._"

_Bury Wills_, p. 118.

BURIENSIS.

THE PENDULUM DEMONSTRATION.

(Vol. v., p. 84.)

A few lines will suffice for my rejoinder to H. C. K.'s further observations on this subject.

Since he and I are substantially of the same opinion as to the reality of the phenomenon, it would be bootless to discuss the comparative merits of the considerations that have led us to it. But inasmuch as I am very careful in making assertions, so am I proportionately impatient when their correctness is wrongfully impugned.

H. C. K., in remarking upon a statement of mine, enters into a calculation to show that it is absurd. At least such I suppose to be the meaning of the paragraph concluding with the words "which is absurd."

My assertion was, that the difference alluded to was "greatly in excess of the alleged apparent motion."