G. P._ i. 342.
390.). Were they all unacquainted with the antecedent exertions of Sante
Pagnini (See Pettigrew's _Bibl. Sussex._ p. 388.)
(16.) Why should Panzer have thought that the true date of the _editio
princeps_ of Gregorius Turonensis and Ado Viennensis, comprised in the same
small folio volume, was 1516? (Greswell, i. 35.) If he had said 1522, he
might have had the assistance of a misprint in the colophon, in which
"M.D.XXII." was inserted instead of M.D.XII.; but the royal privilege for
the book is dated, "le douziesme iour de mars lan _milcinqcens et onze_,"
and the dedication of the works by Badius to Guil. Parvus ends with "Ad.
XII Kalendas Decemb. Anni huius M.D.XII."
(17.) Who was the author of _Peniteas cito_? And is it not evident that the
impression at Cologne by Martinus de Werdena, in 1511, is considerably
later than that which is adorned on the title-page with a different
woodcut, and which exhibits the following words proceeding from the
teacher: "Accipies tanti doctoris dogmata sancta?"
R.G.
* * * * *
DRYDEN'S "ESSAY UPON SATIRE."
On what evidence does the statement rest, that the Earl of Mulgrave was the
author of the _Essay upon Satire_, and that Dryden merely corrected and
polished it? As at present advised, I have considerable doubt upon the
point: and although, in modern editions of Dryden's _Works_, I find it
headed _An Essay upon Satire, written by Mr.
Pages:
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34