at the commencement of the book, but may be indefinitely multiplied. Democritus, junior, in mere literary honesty, was clearly of a more tender conscience than Bacon, as, for example, it is known beyond question that Bacon availed himself of translations from the Greek, but it is Burton who confesses doing the same. "Greek authors, Plato, Plutarch, Athenaeus, I have cited out of their interpreters, because the original was not so ready" (p. 14). Burton confesses what Bacon leaves posterity to discover for itself. It only remains to advert briefly to a marked peculiarity in the style of both Bacon and Burton, that is, inaccuracy of quotation, generally due to trusting to memory without having recourse to the text. A Pindaric fault. This is so generally known and admitted as regards Bacon, that I need not dwell on it in his case, but Burton I consider was equally careless, and Mr. A. H. Bullen admits as much where, at the close of his Introduction to Shilleto's edition, he says, "Burton often quoted Memoriter and many of his references are inexact" (page xxx.). First we have to deal with inaccuracies which may be merely press errors. In the Address to the Reader, e.g., we find the following, which may be of this class. Insanienti for Insanientis (Horace Carm. I. xxxiv. 2). Page 20. Page 28. Daturi for Daturos (Horace Carm. III. vi. 47). More numerous, however, are those instances clearly due to careless quotation. Page II. Page 22. Non ego ventosae venor suffragia plebis Here venor and plebis are transposed. Page 78. Page 75. Here the word "omnes" is an interpolation not in the text. "Aliquando" bonus (Horace Ars Poetica). "Aliquando" used for quandoque. "Ad summum sapiens" (Horace Epistles I. i. 108). The words should be Praecipueque sanus. Page 29. Unius ob noxam "furias que” (Virgil Aeneid I. 41). The text has "et furias." Page 66. En leges "ipsi" (Juvenal II. 31). Page 31. Quis furor, o "Cives" (Lucan. Pharsalia, Cives should be "caeci." Page 39. "Haec " sani esse hominis, "quis" quis" sanus juret Orestes (Persius III. 118). Page II. Page 77. Here "haec " is used for non, and " quis" for non. 66 Quae fuerant" (Ovid. Ex. Ponto. I. v. 15). The words are “ Qui feci.” 66 "Jam" quoque (Ovid. Fasti VI. 307). "Jam "should be nunc; and so on ad infinitum. Another class of deviations from the text may be regarded as paraphrases rather than errors of memory, as for example Page 34. Hic arcentur haeriditatibus liberi. A paraphrase of the description of Crotona, "In hac urbe nemo liberos tollit" (Petronius Satires, 116). Then again, as an example of Baconian echoes which reverberate through the pages of Burton, the following may be quoted, where Bacon in the Advancement of Learning enunciates his opinion of the complete man ner in which theology had been studied in his day. "In this part, touching the exposition of the Scriptures, I can report no deficience." What Burton says on this subject, glancing at physics, is a mere echo of the above. "Not that I prefer it before Divinity, which I do acknowledge to be the Queene of Professions, and to which all the rest are as Handmaids, but that in Divinity I saw no such great need" (page 14). In conclusion, I would urge everyone interested in The Anatomy to study the learned and interesting papers on that work by Professor Bensley, of Adelaide, commencing in Notes and Queries for 1903, and I will draw attention to an error I do not think has been noticed by him. In the Index of Shilleto's edition, St. Ambrose is alone quoted "passim," from which I infer that the Editor did not differentiate Ambrose of Alexandria, who befriended Origen (page 12), from Ambrose, Bishop of Mediolanum, who died a century later, the Ambrose of the Index, passim ! Ilfracombe, 1905. W. THEOBALD. JUDGE STOTSENBURG'S IMPARTIAL STUDY HE publication of Judge Stotsenburg's IMPAR TH TIAL STUDY OF THE SHAKESPEARE TITLE* diverts a stream of fresh facts into the Shakespeare-Bacon controversy. This is well, for as Milton says of Truth, "If her waters flow not in a perpetual progression, they sicken into a muddy pool of conformity and tradition." The conclusion to which Judge Stotsenburg arrives is that the Shakespeare plays were not the work of a single author, but of a syndicate of the poets Dekker, Drayton, Munday, Chettle, Heywood, Webster, Middleton, Porter, and others, and that in this syndicate Bacon held the position of polisher and reconstructor; "a conclusion that forces itself upon my mind," says the author, "because, first, I believe that Bacon, if he originated the plays, would have observed the unities, and, secondly, because his philosophical views and his peculiarities are interwoven in some of them." From the evidence which Judge Stotsenburg presents it is apparent either that other writers had a hand in "Shakespeare," or (for his arguments cut both ways, although the author does not appear to contemplate it), Shakespeare had some responsibility for the writings of the lesser dramatists. "The reader," says the Judge, "has the facts before him on which to form his own conclusions." Were we to form our judgment solely on the facts presented in the work under discussion we should certainly arrive at Judge Stotsenburg's conclusions, but there is a far larger group of facts which have been left unnoted and which materially affect the points at issue. In the first place, Judge Stotsenburg falls into the com * Gay and Bird. 10/6 net. mon error that London, in the reign of Elizabeth, was teeming with great poets and scholars. If this really were so, all we can say is that contemporaries were extraordinarily blind to the grace and intellectuality of their surroundings. "O ever shameful, O most shameless times!" exclaims Drummond. "Save that suns light we see, of good hear tell, This earth we court so much were very hell." Corresponding in verse with his friends, William Jeffreys and George Sandys, Michael Drayton asks hopelessly, "What canst thou look or hope for from his pen Who lives with beasts though in the shape of men ?" So barren and depraved were his surroundings that he considered "This very time wherein we two now live Shall in the compass wound the Muses more According to the testimony of those then living, London was utterly smothered under a pall of Cimmerian darkness. Learning was at such an ebb that the mere capacity to read and write entitled the possessors to the privileges of "Benefit of Clergy." We are constantly confronted with laments at the inhuman dearth of noble natures, and that "Noble minds live, orphan-like, forlorn." "What hapless hap had I," exclaims Drummond, "now to be born in these unhappy times, and dying days." "To tell my countries shame," says Michael Drayton, "I not delight, but do bemoan it." Of all branches of letters, Poetry seems to have been most particularly in disrepute. "Few nowadays," says Massinger, "dare express themselves a friend to |