ii s. i. MAY 28, mo.] NOTES AND QUERIES.
435
thorp- e Was perfectly correct at a time When
thorp-e Was the dative of thorp ; and so in
other cases. The word mead once had a
final -e even in the nominative, as is Well
known to every reader of ' The Canterbury
Tales ' who succeeds in getting as far as
the 89th line of the Prologue. But now that
thorp, thorn, and mead are mere mono-
syllables, the retention of a final -e has
become needless, and is wholly due to
ignorance. The final -e in Maude is a relic
of the Norman pronunciation, when it was
added as being a common feminine suffix, just
as the a was added in the Latinized form
Matilda. The final -e in the French Claude
Was once sounded, and represents the -ium of
the Latin accusative Claudium.
WALTER W. SKEAT.
THOMAS LOVE PEACOCK (11 S. i. 287). The following references may perhaps be useful to MB. VAN DOREN :
Review of ' Gryll Grange.' Fr user's Magazine, 1860, vol. Ixi.
' T. L. Peacock,' by James Davies. Con- temporary Revietc, 1874-5, vol. xxv.
' T. L. Peacock : a Sketch,' by Robert Buchanan 1875. Contained also in New Quarterly Magazine, 1875.
' A Sketch of the Life and Works of Peacock,' by E. W. G. London Society, 1875, vol. xxvii.
4 Literary Study of Peacock.' See G. B. Smith" s ' Poets and Novelists,' 1875.
4 The Stories of Peacock ' Temple Bar, 1875, vol. xliv.
4 Peacock.' See Ward's ' English Poets,' 1880, vol. iv.
4 Peacock's Place in Literature ' See Mrs. Oliphants ' Literary History of England,' 1882.
4 Brief Sketch of Peacock's Career.' Mac- vnillaris Magazine, 1885-6, vol. liii.
4 T. L. Peacock.' See Robert Buchanan's
- A Look round Literature,' 1887.
' Peacock as a Satirist and Novelist.' Temple Bar, 1887, vol. Ixxx.
W. S. S.
GEORGE CHALMERS'S ' SYLVA * : JOHN LEECH (11 S. i. 226, 337). I am grateful to MR. W. SCOTT for his suggestion, but George Chalmers's ' Sylva ' is not included in John Leech's ' Musae Priores, 1 a copy of which lies before me. The ' Sylva/ to judge from the reference in Leyden's * Remains, 1 has an independent existence With an imprint " Parisiis, 1620."
The copy of the ' Musse Priores * in this library is a curious small octavo volume with three distinct paginations :
A H 8 = pp. [8] + 117 + [3] : ' Eroticon libri sex.'
B G=pp. 91 + [5], but with several mis- pagings, so that the last numbered page is marked 87 instead of 91 : ' Idyllia sive Eclogaj.'
A 2 , B G 8 = pp. [41 + 96 (mispaged 94) : ' Epi- grammatum libri quatuor.'
The title-page runs: " loannis Leochsei
Scpti | Musse Priores, | sive j Poematum |
Pars Prior | Londini | 1620 5i ; and on the
verso is noted the division into Erotica,
Idyllia, and Epigrammata ; but several of
the last are dated 1621. Do copies exist with
independent title-pages for Parts II. and III.?
As I pointed out in my original query, one of Leech's Epigrammata (p. 93) is addressed " Georgio Camerario suo n (cf. Mr. Keith Leask's ' Musa Latina Aberdonensis : Poetse Minores, 1 p. 263). P. J. ANDERSON.
University Library, Aberdeen.
DE QTJINCEY AND SWEDENBORG (11 S. i. 109). During the twenty years immediately preceding the appearance of De Quincey's essay something like twenty volumes of Swedenborgian literature Were issued from the press of Newbery in London. These included a life of Swedenborg by J. J. Garth Wilkinson. This flood of literary matter is probably the " revolution n to which De Quincey refers. It is not so easy, however, to connect Cambridge with the "revolutionizing" process, especially in the light of MR. HIGHAM'S statement. There are three ways in which the matter may be explained : (1) J. J. Garth Wilkinson, to whose enthusiasm the movement in favour of Swedenborg at the time in question owed so much, may have been a Cambridge student. Was this so ? (2) Newbery the publisher, may have had a branch of his publishing business at Cambridge. This, however, is not likely in face of what MR. HIGHAM says. Or (3) De Quincey may have mistaken Newbery the London publisher for NeWby, a Cambridge bookseller. In the ' Life of Daniel Macmillan l it is stated (p. 113) that "in the summer of 1843 he became the owner of a small business in Cambridge on the retirement of Mr. NeWby." By a lapsus memorice De Quincey may have ascribed to Newby the Cambridge book- seller what was really due to Newbery the London publisher. W. SCOTT.
'CRAMOND BRIG* (11 S. i. 389). This play, founded on Dodsley's ' King and the Miller of Mansfield, 1 Was Written by William Henry Murray, brother of Mrs. Henry Siddons, and for many years, down to about 1850, manager of the theatres Royal and Adelphi, Edinburgh.
Few pieces are better known to old actors and playgoers. It Was often played, either as a curtain-raiser or an afterpiece, at the Lyceum Theatre during the manage- ment of Sir Henry Irving, under the title of
