at least claim the praise of honesty, is disapproved by the reviewer; and he introduces me as speaking "in a tone like this-It is very presumptive (presumptuous) of a Saxon scholar to think of emendating the text of one MS. by the readings ngs of another; there are several, which all differ much from one another; any one of them would do well enough, for we can manage to make some sense of it; I* shall take the one which seems to me best. Now, did it really never occur to Mr. Guest, that if the copies all varied so much, only one could be right; in which case all the others must be wrong? &c." There is in this sentence a confusion of ideas, which it would take some time to unravel.

I

will merely observe that I never objected to the emendation of one text by another, provided the editor let his reader into the secret, and fairly laid his authorities before him. One MS. may contain a northern, another a southern version of a song; one a valuable, another a worthless copy; and we have a right to know from which of these sources a particular reading has been taken. I do object to an editor blindfolding his reader, and then fabricating a text, so as to suit his own peculiar notions, whether as respects the translation, or criticism in general. A reader may have little confidence in his editor's judgment, or may have a theory of his own, which he wishes to test; but (according to modern practice) beyond his editor's theory he may not penetrate a modern edition stands like a screen before the manuscript.

To show more clearly the folly of editing our manuscripts faithfully, the reviewer quotes a Latin song of the tenth century, and then exhibits certain of its stanzas with such corrections as an editor should apply. Now it might be objected, that no fair analogy could be drawn between the Latin and a language whose principles have been so little investigated as the Anglo-Saxon; but I will take the issue as tendered, and must state it

as my opinion, that an editor who should translate a monkish song into classical Latin, would very ill discharge his editorial duties. Surely I need not inform an antiquary that the Latinity of the middle ages was distinguished in almost every century by some peculiarities of orthography; and that a knowledge of such peculiarities has often furnished most important aid to criticism. During the seventh and eighth centuries, the Latinists of our Northern school, in some cases, substituted is for the classical ending es-writing, for example, Johannis instead of Johannes. Need I point out the beautiful use which has been made of this peculiarity by one of our modern antiquaries? It forms the strongest link in that most curious chain of evidence, by which Mr. Raine identified the body of Saint Cuthbert.

"At the end of his second volume, Mr. Guest gives what we suppose must be considered as his most mature opinion of the mode in which we ought to edit works from MSS. "I would take this opportunity of again pressing upon the reader the importance of copying our MSS. faithfully, I mean not only to the letter, but so as to show their peculiarities as regards punctuation, composition, &c. It is astonishing how much light may thus be thrown upon the structure of our language. For example, many Anglo-Saxon MSS. join the preposition to the substantive, and thus point to the origin of a numerous class of adverbs, aloft, asleep, aground, &c. underfoot, underhand, underneath, &c. today, tonight, tomorrow, &c. Again, in some MSS. several of the common prefixes are carefully (?)† separated from their compounds-gewisse, for example, being written ge wisse, or in Old English, y wisse; and it is from these scattered elements of an adverb that modern scholarship has manufactured a verb and pronoun I wiss. Again, in many Old English MSS. the genitival ending is separated from its noun, thusSaint Benet is scurge, St. Bennet's scourge, a practice which shows us the origin of those phrases to be met with in our Liturgy, and other works of the same date, Christ his sake, God his love,

"We quote this passage, because, had we not found it in Mr. Guest's own book, we might have imagined it to have been written by some one, as a satire upon his system of philology.* Supposing the instances he gives to be correct, yet let us ask of any of our readers the simple question, whether we ought to preserve in our editions all the acknowledged blunders of some bad manuscripts, because one or two of them might have given rise to blunders in the Eton Greek and Latin Grammars, these being the grammars in common use?'" &c.

a

Really a very short answer may suffice for such criticism. Certain peculiarities of orthography are pointed out as having exerted permanent influence on our language; the reviewer calls them acknowledged blunders." Now the orthography adopted at a particular period, or in a particular district, may be open to objection--our modern orthography by many is considered most barbarousbut surely it is a very different thing from the blundering of the copyist. By calling these peculiarities blunders, the reviewer assumes the very thing he has to prove; if they be blunders, our dispute is at an end. I have stated and believe them to be peculiarities of orthography.

The reviewer asserts that the resolution of the genitive, which is met with in such phrases as Christ his sake, &c. originated among the contemporaries of Ben Jonson. He is most certainly mistaken. It may be found at least as early as the fourteenth century, and may be traced, in a series of MSS., from thence to the sixteenth-the ending is being gradually replaced by his. The separation of the prefix (which is also denounced as a blunder) is found in a MS. which may perhaps be quoted with advantage, inasmuch as it has been most carefully edited. The MS. of William and the Werwolf furnishes us with numerous examples; a wake, a

reise, a beye, &c. bi com, bi raft, bi gat, &c. for lore, for laft, &c.; and these peculiarities of orthographyor if the reviewer will have it so, these blunders-Sir Frederick Madden has transferred from his manuscript to his letterpress. The example of this able antiquary I have ventured to recommend for general adoption.

From the second chapter of the third book the reviewer carries us to the last chapter of the fourth, a mode of reviewing which may remind one of the worthy gentleman who produced a brick as a specimen of his house. In this chapter was given a list of our Anglo-Saxon poets, with some account of their lives and works. It was the first attempt of the kind, and, I need hardly say, was attended with no ordinary difficulties. Some names were introduced doubtingly; and, in other cases, the reader was left to draw his own conclusion, whether the individual mentioned were author of the poem, or merely transcriber of the MS. These doubtful cases are selected by the reviewer; and it is amusing to see how his confidence rises, in proportion to the diffidence with which some opinion is advanced. "Heorren seems to us to be a mere shadow," says he ; I would refer the reader to Vol. ii. p. 328, n.1; "Deor himself may be but a strange beast!" vol. ii. p. 405; "and Wulfwin Cada, as we conceive, nothing but a transcriber," vol. ii. p. 406. In vol. ii. p. 173, I ventured (contrary to the opinions of Tyrwhitt and of Scott) to refuse Erceldon a place among our English poets; the reviewer waxes bold, and pronounces him to be an imaginary being." One Leofric is known to have written a poetical account of Hereward's exploits; and I ventured to remark that "the songs, relating to Hereward, which (as a contemporary historian informs us) were sung in the streets, and at the alestake, were, in all probability, the production of this poetical chaplain." This conclusion is "very inconsequent; was there nobody

"

in England but poor Leofric who could write a song?" &c. All this is very safe, very easy, and very trenchant criticism, though certainly much more distinguished by its ingenuity than by its ingenuousness.

tled when the labours of Mr. Kemble are laid before the public. I would, however, observe, that Esop and Homer, who were spiritualised away some few years back, are now fast recovering their humanity; and I suspect the "imaginary beings" which haunt the

Pilkington, whose name he found subscribed to another song in the MS. and who had been, "as some have thought," rector of Tottenham. This seemed to me reasonable enough; but the reviewer, "with all due respect to Mr. Guest, conceives that it has been long ago shown (namely by Mr. W. himself, in one of our Magazines) that we have the identical MS. which Bedwell used, and that MS. shows pretty clearly that the whole of Bedwell's tradition was a simple dream of his own," &c. I fear Mr. W.'s memory is full as treacherous as his judgment, for an examination of the MS. has convinced me, not only that Mr. W. has altogether mistaken its date, but also that there are no circumstances connected with it, which warrant this inference-no circumstances which contradict, or throw even the shade of a suspicion upon Bedwell's statement.

A song was found in one of the Harleian MSS. introduced by a stanza, which may be thus modernised,

He that will of wisdom hear,
From wise Hending may he learn
(That was Marcolf's son)
Good principles and fair manners-
Them to teach to many a shreward,
For such was ever his wont;

and, on the strength of this, I ventured to rank Hending as an English poet. Now there is, I am given to understand, a collection of AngloSaxon proverbs, in which the name of Marcolf occurs; and I am told that Mr. Kemble has (with a view to publication) traced these proverbs in the French and German. Whether Marcolf then be "the devil that flyted with King Solomon," as the reviewer asserts, or merely an old author, whose name has gathered fable and mystery around it, may be best set

a non-entity, the phrase "Marcolf's son" will of course mean only, that Hending succeeded to his reputation. The phrase vilain, which is substituted for Hending in the French version (the reviewer styles it the original!) shows us the rank he filled in society.

Who

The reader may now see how genuine was the reviewer's astonishment, that "any one, who had dipped into middle-age literature, should have been ignorant of a legend, which was popular in all shapes and in almost every language in Europe." would suppose that the writer of this sentence gleaned all his knowledge of Marcolf and his sayings from a friend, whose researches on this obscure subject are still in manuscript? What will be said, if he never saw or heard of Hending's name till he opened the work, which he thus ventures to criticise?

Had I a better opinion of the reviewer's scholarship, I might feel some little pride when I view the result of his criticism. But I must not measure my success by his failure. I cannot disguise from myself, that in a work, which ranges over thirteen centuries, and embraces subjects so varied and novel and difficult, there must be numerous errors of detail, and in all probability some errors of principle. I can only hope that the scholarship, which is necessary to detect, may be accompanied with a candour not unwilling to excuse them.

If this discussion be continued, I would recommend it to the controversialist, both as a more satisfactory and a more manly part, to subscribe his initials. The number of those who are interested in these inquiries is so limited, that all hope of remaining anonymous must be vain.

Yours, &c. E. G.

SIR Francis Palgrave, in his "Merchant and Friar," speaking of the physical inventions which constitute æras in the history of civilisation, and questioning whether they have been produced by the strict analogical inductions of reasoning, or rather, whether in almost every case all great inventions do not seem in their first impression to have been independent either of volition or of intellectual excellence, goes on to say,

"And why will intellect refuse to learn humility from her own annals? The chemist promises with exulting confidence to apply his knowledge for the benefit of the navigator, and to give him a new ocean-triumph. The vessel, covered with the combinations of zinc and copper, whose galvanic action is to defeat the corrosive properties by which the metal is consumed, sails gaily from the port, and returns heavy as a drifting log; the keel a mass of zoophytes, scarcely able to drag through the waves. Planned according to the strictest deductions of science, the safety lamp is held up as the proud trophy of philosophy rendered subservient to practical utility. It constistutes the theme of the essay and the subject of the speech, and is flung aside by the workman, who finds he dares not trust its uncertain aid. Such are the results of the reasoning powers as applied for the purpose of discovery by him, who was among the most gifted of our generation, and who finally earned no other meed from the world's friendship, except the cold sympathy of funereal

praise, when, a disappointed exile, he wasted into the tomb."

What authority is there in the his tory of Sir Humphry Davy's Life for the assertion that closes the quotation? With regard to the experiments of applying zinc to the bottom of ships to prevent the corrosion of the copper, though highly ingenious, it must be allowed to have failed; but the disuse of the safety lamp, I have always understood to have arisen rather from the carelessness and indifference of the workmen, than from any distrust of its affording security. But how can it be said, that Sir H. Davy earned no meed of the world's friendship, except the cold sympathy of funereal praise;" when his life was one continued career of

good fortune and prosperity and honour; when he rose from the obscurity of a little remote village of Cornwall to be the leading man of science in the country; when he was the friend equally of the illustrious by birth and fortune as by talents; when he received from his own sovereign the honour of a baronetcy, and from another, the privilege (on account of his high station in the walks of science) of seeing the Continent of Europe open to him alone, when all his countrymen were forbidden to set a foot beyond their own shores; when he was elected President of the Royal Society at home, and received with open arms, and grateful and friendly attentions by the members of the Foreign Institutes? Surely these are "marks of the world's friendship of the most honourable and gratifying kind, and in comparison of which all gifts of fortune must be considered as of no account. With regard to the concluding words -"when, a disappointed exile, he wasted into the tomb," they appear to me as little correct as the former. A man who takes a summer

tour for the sake of fishing in the Lakes of Styria, and examining its natural history, cannot well be called an exile; and Sir Humphry Davy was never absent from home for a longer period than a few months, except in his Italian tour with Lady Davy. So far from being a "disappointed exile," he speaks with delight

of the band of friends whom he always found ready to welcome him on his return to London; and with regard to "wasting into the tomb,” his biographers have shown that the proximate cause of his death was obscure; but that his health was injured by the effects of the laboratory and his chemical researches and experiments. Certainly there are no marks in his biography of any sorrows or disappointments connected with the opinion which society had formed of his high abilities; nor of the discoveries he had made in science, not meeting their reward. He had honours, such as his country does not always bestow even on men of high genius. He had fortune, as he confesses, equal to all his desires; and he had friends in the best and foremost classes of society. On the whole, his life appears to me to have been one of unusual pros perity; and 1 do not find Sir Francis Palgrave's surmises at all supported by the authority of the biographers of this illustrious person.

Mr. URBAN,

Yours, &c. м.

Chelsea, April 5. THE ornamental Garden at Kensington mentioned by your correspondent J. M. (see Gent. Mag. June, p. 338.) was situate on the north-west of the great Green-house, and immediately next to the Palace on the north; its site is now occupied by the large and beautiful promenade called 'Yewtree Walk,' and in some older plans, Brazen-face Walk. The plot and arrangement of this part of the garden is shown in the accompanying woodcut, extracted from John Rocque's "Plan of the Royal Palace and Gardens of Kensington," engraved in 1736, in which by a figure of reference it is designated as the "Old Gravil Pit." In a drawn plan of Kensington Gardens, in the royal collection in the British Museum, about the middle of the last century, this garden is cleared away, but it is still represented as "The Pitt."

The whole extent of the Gardens of Kensington when first inclosed and planted by King William, was about twenty-six acres; they were laid out in the prevalent formal style.

In

Kip's Views of the Seats of the Nobility and Gentry, are many representations of the tiresome uniformity of the gardens at that period, long and straight gravel walks, with clipped hedges extended throughout, only varied by giants, animals, and monsters in yew or holly. The hollow bason and mount, and plantations which excited the admiration of Addison, were all filled up and levelled by Queen Caroline, who altered this and many other parts of the gardens to the state in which we now see them. The great open masses of trees on the east of the palace are said to have been originally planted by command of George the Second to represent an army in marching order; on a fine summer's evening, when enlivened by the

rays of the setting sun, they present to the admirers of forest scenery, by their lively and countless tints, a most majestic and beautiful appearance, not to be equalled in the vicinity of the Metropolis. Many particulars of the gradual extension and improvement of these gardens will be found recorded in my History of Kensington. Yours, &c.

THOMAS FAULKNER.

On the Prayer and Homily Society, and the Modern Greeks.

THE critical accuracy of the modern Greeks may be judged of by the following circumstance :

"The Prayer and Homily Society sent me some polyglot Liturgies of the Church of England to present copies to the dignitaries of the Greek Church. My object was to give them some ideas of the prayers and doctrines of our Church, with which they were entirely unacquainted; and so better dispose them to form translations of the Scriptures, to which some opposition had been shown. I called, among others, on Chrypanto, Bishop of Seres, who was afterwards elected Patriarch, and presented him with one in Ancient Greek. His critical eye at once detected many errors. The first was in the Rubric of the general confession. 'Here,' said he, 'are two faults: the first is δει όλον τον ὁμιλον, it should be όλον τον λαον.' I recollected that this was a literal translation of our Rubric-'the whole congregation,' and told him so. 'Then,' said he, 'όλον is superfluous, for it is contained in ὁμιλον. ' Again,' said he, ' μεταξυ τιθεντων is not Greek. I said μεταξυ governed a genitive case. Yes,' said he, 'but τιθεντων is the genitive absolute, and has the form of μεθαξυ.' I now happened to open at the Prayer of St. Chrysostom, which he ran his eye over, and saidHere is another error, χαρισομενος should be χαριζομενος, not the future, but the present tense.' I said, I believed the first was the word of St. Chrysostom himself.

"The bishop took up his own Liturgy, and referred to the prayer; it was χαριζομενος. It should thus appear that the modern Greeks study their ancient

language with the same care and still re

tain some of the critical acumen for which their ancestors were distinguished." Walsh's Constantinople, ii. 401.