FOOTNOTES:

[265] "A Comment on the Divine Comedy of Dante," in English, printed in Italy, has just reached me. I am delighted to find that this biography of Love, however romantic, is true! In his _ninth year_, Dante was a lover and a poet! The tender sonnet, free from all obscurity, which he composed on Beatrice, is preserved in the above singular volume. There can be no longer any doubt of the story of Beatrice; but the sonnet and the pa.s.sion must be "cla.s.sed among curious natural phenomena," or how far apocryphal, remains for future inquiry.

[266] This work was published in 1742, and the scarcity of these volumes was felt in Granger's day, for they obtained then the considerable price of four guineas; some time ago a fine copy was sold for thirty at a sale, and a cheap copy was offered to me at twelve guineas. These volumes should contain seventeen portraits.

The first was written by Mr. Anderson, who, dying before the second appeared, Lord Egmont, from the materials Anderson had left, concluded his family history--_con amore_.

[267] Mr. Anderson, the writer of the first volume, was a feudal enthusiast; he has thrown out an odd notion that the commercial, or the wealthy cla.s.s, had intruded on the dignity of the ancient n.o.bility; but as wealth has raised such high prices for labour, commodities, &c., it had reached its _ne plus ultra_, and commerce could be carried on no longer! He has ventured on this amusing prediction, "As it is therefore evident that NEW MEN _will never rise again in any age with such advantages of wealth_, at least in considerable numbers, their _party_ will gradually decrease."

[268] Much curious matter about the old Countess of Westmoreland and her seven castles may be found in Whitaker's History of Craven, and in Pennant.

LITERARY PARALLELS.

An opinion on this subject in the preceding article has led me to a further investigation. It may be right to acknowledge that so attractive is this critical and moral amus.e.m.e.nt of comparing great characters with one another, that, among others, Bishop Hurd once proposed to write _a book of Parallels_, and has furnished a specimen in that of Petrarch and Rousseau, and intended for another that of Erasmus with Cicero. It is amusing to observe how a lively and subtle mind can strike out resemblances, and make contraries accord, and at the same time it may show the pinching difficulties through which a parallel is pushed, till it ends in a paradox.

Hurd says of Petrarch and Rousseau--"Both were impelled by an equal enthusiasm, though directed towards different objects: Petrarch's towards the glory of the Roman name, Rousseau's towards his idol of a state of nature; the one religious, the other _un esprit fort_; but may not Petrarch's spite to Babylon be considered, in his time, as a species of free-thinking"--and concludes, that "both were mad, but of a different nature." Unquestionably there were features much alike, and almost peculiar to these two literary characters; but I doubt if Hurd has comprehended them in the parallel.

I now give a specimen of those parallels which have done so much mischief in the literary world, when drawn by a hand which covertly leans on one side. An elaborate one of this sort was composed by Longolius or Longuel, between Budaeus and Erasmus.[269] This man, though of Dutch origin, affected to pa.s.s for a Frenchman, and, to pay his court to his chosen people, gives the preference obliquely to the French Budaeus; though, to make a show of impartiality, he acknowledges that Francis the First had awarded it to Erasmus; but probably he did not infer that kings were the most able reviewers! This parallel was sent forth during the lifetime of both these great scholars, who had long been correspondents, but the publication of the parallel interrupted their friendly intercourse. Erasmus returned his compliments and thanks to Longolius, but at the same time insinuates a gentle hint that he was not overpleased. "What pleases me most," Erasmus writes, "is the just preference you have given Budaeus over me; I confess you are even too economical in your praise of him, as you are too prodigal in mine. I thank you for informing me what it is the learned desire to find in me; my self-love suggests many little excuses, with which, you observe, I am apt _to favour my defects_. If I am careless, it arises partly from my ignorance, and more from my indolence; I am so const.i.tuted, that I cannot conquer my nature; I precipitate rather than compose, and it is far more irksome for me to revise than to write."

This parallel between Erasmus and Budaeus, though the parallel itself was not of a malignant nature, yet disturbed the quiet, and interrupted the friendship of both. When Longolius discovered that the Parisian surpa.s.sed the Hollander in Greek literature and the knowledge of the civil law, and worked more learnedly and laboriously, how did this detract from the finer genius and the varied erudition of the more delightful writer? The parallelist compares Erasmus to "a river swelling its waters, and often overflowing its banks; Budaeus rolled on like a majestic stream, ever restraining its waves within its bed. The Frenchman has more nerve, and blood, and life, and the Hollander more fulness, freshness, and colour."

The taste for _biographical parallels_ must have reached us from Plutarch; and there is something malicious in our nature which inclines us to form _comparative estimates_, usually with a view to elevate one great man at the cost of another, whom we would secretly depreciate.

Our political parties at home have often indulged in these fallacious parallels, and Pitt and Fox once balanced the scales, not by the standard weights and measures which ought to have been used, but by the adroitness of the hand that pressed down the scale. In literature, these comparative estimates have proved most prejudicial. A finer model exists not than the _parallel of Dryden and Pope_, by Johnson; for, without designing any undue preference, his vigorous judgment has a.n.a.lysed them by his contrasts, and has rather shown their distinctness than their similarity. But literary _parallels_ usually end in producing _parties_; and, as I have elsewhere observed, often originate in undervaluing one man of genius, for his deficiency in some eminent quality possessed by the other man of genius; they not unfrequently proceed from adverse tastes, and are formed with the concealed design of establishing some favourite one. The world of literature has been deeply infected with this folly. Virgil probably was often vexed in his days by a parallel with Homer, and the _Homerians_ combated with the _Virgilians_. Modern Italy was long divided into such literary sects: a perpetual skirmishing is carried on between the _Ariostoists_ and the _Ta.s.soists_; and feuds as dire as those between two Highland clans were raised concerning the _Petrarchists_, and the _Chiabrerists_. Old _Corneille_ lived to bow his venerable genius before a parallel with _Racine_; and no one has suffered more unjustly by such arbitrary criticisms than _Pope_, for a strange unnatural civil war has often been renewed between the _Drydenists_ and the _Popeists_. Two men of great genius should never be depreciated by the misapplied ingenuity of a parallel; on such occasions we ought to conclude _magis pares quam similes_.

FOOTNOTE:

[269] It is noticed by Jortin in his Life of Erasmus, vol. i. p. 160.

THE PEARL BIBLES AND SIX THOUSAND ERRATA.

As a literary curiosity, I notice a subject which might rather enter into the history of religion. It relates to the extraordinary state of our English Bibles, which were for some time suffered to be so corrupted that no books ever yet swarmed with such innumerable errata!

These errata unquestionably were in great part voluntary commissions, pa.s.sages interpolated, and meanings forged for certain purposes; sometimes to sanction the new creed of a half-hatched sect, and sometimes with an intention to destroy all scriptural authority by a confusion, or an omission of texts--the whole was left open to the option or the malignity of the editors, who, probably, like certain ingenious wine-merchants, contrived to accommodate "the waters of life"

to their customers' peculiar taste. They had also a project of printing Bibles as cheaply and in a form as contracted as they possibly could for the common people; and they proceeded till it nearly ended with having no Bible at all: and, as Fuller, in his "Mixt Contemplations on Better Times," alluding to this circ.u.mstance, with not one of his lucky quibbles, observes, "The _small price_ of the Bible has caused the _small prizing_ of the Bible."

This extraordinary attempt on the English Bible began even before Charles the First's dethronement, and probably arose from an unusual demand for Bibles, as the sectarian fanaticism was increasing. Printing of English Bibles was an article of open trade; every one printed at the lowest price, and as fast as their presses would allow. Even those who were dignified as "his Majesty's Printers" were among these manufacturers; for we have an account of a scandalous omission by them of the important negative in the seventh commandment! The printers were summoned before the Court of High Commission, and this _not_ served to bind them in a fine of three thousand pounds! A prior circ.u.mstance, indeed, had occurred, which induced the government to be more vigilant on the Biblical Press. The learned Usher, one day hastening to preach at Paul's Cross, entered the shop of one of the stationers, as booksellers were then called, and inquiring for a Bible of the London edition, when he came to look for his text, to his astonishment and horror he discovered that the verse was omitted in the Bible! This gave the first occasion of complaint to the king of the insufferable negligence and incapacity of the London press: and, says the ma.n.u.script writer of this anecdote, first bred that great contest which followed, between the University of Cambridge and the London stationers, about the right of printing Bibles.[270]

The secret bibliographical history of these times would show the extraordinary state of the press in this new trade of Bibles. The writer of a curious pamphlet exposes the combination of those called the king's printers, with their contrivances to keep up the prices of Bibles; their correspondence with the booksellers of Scotland and Dublin, by which means they retained the privilege in their own hands: the king's _London_ printers got Bibles printed cheaper at Edinburgh. In 1629, when folio Bibles were wanted, the Cambridge printers sold them at ten shillings in quires; on this the Londoners set six printing-houses at work, and, to annihilate the Cambridgians, printed a similar _folio_ Bible, but sold with it five hundred _quarto_ Roman Bibles, and five hundred _quarto_ English, at five shillings a book; which proved the ruin of the folio Bibles, by keeping them down under the cost price.

Another compet.i.tion arose among those who printed English Bibles in Holland, in _duodecimo_, with an English colophon, for half the price even of the lowest in London. Twelve thousand of these _duodecimo_ Bibles, with notes, fabricated in Holland, usually by our fugitive sectarians, were seized by the king's printers, as contrary to the statute.[271] Such was this shameful war of Bibles--folios, quartos, and duodecimos, even in the days of Charles the First. The public spirit of the rising sects was the real occasion of these increased demands for Bibles.

During the civil wars they carried on the same open trade and compet.i.tion, besides the private ventures of the smuggled Bibles. A large impression of these Dutch English Bibles were burnt by order of the a.s.sembly of Divines, for these _three errors_:--

Gen. x.x.xvi. 24.--This is that _a.s.s_ that found rulers in the wilderness--for _mule_.

Ruth iv. 13.--The Lord gave her _corruption_--for _conception_.

Luke xxi. 28.--Look up, and lift up your hands, for your _condemnation_ draweth nigh--for _redemption_.

These errata were none of the printer's; but, as a writer of the times expresses it, "egregious blasphemies, and d.a.m.nable errata" of some sectarian, or some Bellamy editor of that day!

The printing of Bibles at length was a privilege conceded to one William Bentley; but he was opposed by Hills and Field; and a paper war arose, in which they mutually recriminated on each other, with equal truth.

Field printed, in 1653, what was called the Pearl Bible; alluding, I suppose, to that diminutive type in printing, for it could not derive its name from its worth. It is in twenty-fours;[272] but to contract the mighty book into this dwarfishness, all the original Hebrew text prefixed to the Psalms, explaining the occasion and the subject of their composition, is wholly expunged. This Pearl Bible, which may be inspected among the great collection of our English Bibles at the British Museum, is set off by many notable _errata_, of which these are noticed:--

Romans vi. 13.--Neither yield ye your members as instruments of _righteousness_ unto sin--for _unrighteousness_.

First Corinthians vi. 9.--Know ye not that the unrighteous _shall inherit_ the kingdom of G.o.d?--for _shall not inherit_.

This _erratum_ served as the foundation of a dangerous doctrine; for many libertines urged the text from this corrupt Bible against the reproofs of a divine.

This Field was a great forger; and it is said that he received a present of 1500_l._ from the _Independents_ to corrupt a text in Acts vi. 3, to sanction the right of the people to appoint their own pastors.[273] The corruption was the easiest possible; it was only to put a _ye_ instead of a _we_; so that the right in Field's Bible emanated from the people, not from the apostles. The only account I recollect of this extraordinary state of our Bibles is a happy allusion in a line of Butler:--

Religion sp.a.w.n'd a various rout, Of petulant, capricious sects, THE MAGGOTS OF CORRUPTED TEXTS.

In other Bibles by Hills and Field we may find such abundant errata, reducing the text to nonsense or to blasphemy, making the Scriptures contemptible to the mult.i.tude, who came to pray, and not to scoff.

It is affirmed, in the ma.n.u.script account already referred to, that one Bible swarmed with _six thousand faults_! Indeed, from another source we discover that "Sterne, a solid scholar, was the first who summed up the _three thousand and six hundred_ faults that were in our printed Bibles of London."[274] If one book can be made to contain near four thousand errors, little ingenuity was required to reach to six thousand; but perhaps this is the first time so remarkable an incident in the history of literature has ever been chronicled. And that famous edition of the Vulgate, by Pope Sixtus the Fifth, a memorable book of blunders, which commands such high prices, ought now to fall in value, before the pearl Bible, in twenty-fours, of Messrs. Hills and Field!

Mr. Field and his worthy coadjutor seem to have carried the favour of the reigning powers over their opponents; for I find a piece of their secret history. They engaged to pay 500_l._ per annum to some, "whose names I forbear to mention," warily observes the ma.n.u.script writer; and above 100_l._ per annum to Mr. _Marchmont Needham and his wife_, out of the profits of the sales of their Bibles; deriding, insulting, and triumphing over others, out of their confidence in their great friends and purse, as if they were lawless and free, both from offence and punishment.[275] This Marchmont Needham is sufficiently notorious, and his secret history is probably true; for in a Mercurius Politicus of this unprincipled Cobbett of his day, I found an elaborate puff of an edition published by the annuity-granter to this worthy and his wife!

Not only had the Bible to suffer these indignities of size and price, but the Prayer-book was once printed in an illegible and worn-out type; on which the printer being complained of, he stoutly replied, that "it was as good as the price afforded; and being a book which all persons ought to have by heart, it was no matter whether it was read or not, so that it was worn out in their hands." The puritans seem not to have been so nice about the source of purity itself.

These hand-bibles of the sectarists, with their six thousand errata, like the false Duessa, covered their crafty deformity with a fair raiment; for when the great Selden, in the a.s.sembly of divines, delighted to confute them in their own learning, he would say, as Whitelock reports, when they had cited a text to prove their a.s.sertion, "Perhaps in your little pocket-bible with gilt leaves," which they would often pull out and read, "the translation may be so, but the Greek or the Hebrew signifies this."

While these transactions were occurring, it appears that the authentic translation of the Bible, such as we now have it, by the learned translators in James the First's time, was suffered to lie neglected.

The copies of the original ma.n.u.script were in the possession of two of the king's printers, who, from cowardice, consent, and connivance, suppressed the publication; considering that the Bible full of errata, and often, probably, accommodated to the notions of certain sectarists, was more valuable than one authenticated by the hierarchy! Such was the state of the English Bible till 1660![276]

The proverbial expression of _chapter and verse_ seems peculiar to ourselves, and, I suspect, originated in the puritanic period, probably just before the civil wars under Charles the First, from the frequent use of appealing to the Bible on the most frivolous occasions, practised by those whom South calls "those mighty men at _chapter and verse_."

With a sort of religious coquetry, they were vain of perpetually opening their gilt pocket Bibles; they perked them up with such self-sufficiency and perfect ignorance of the original, that the learned Selden found considerable amus.e.m.e.nt in going to their "a.s.sembly of divines," and puzzling or confuting them, as we have noticed. A ludicrous anecdote on one of these occasions is given by a contemporary, which shows how admirably that learned man amused himself with this "a.s.sembly of divines!" They were discussing the distance between Jerusalem and Jericho, with a perfect ignorance of sacred or of ancient geography; one said it was twenty miles, another ten, and at last it was concluded to be only seven, for this strange reason, that fish was brought from Jericho to Jerusalem market! Selden observed, that "possibly the fish in question was salted," and silenced these acute disputants.

It would probably have greatly discomposed these "chapter and verse" men to have informed them that the Scriptures had neither chapter nor verse!

It is by no means clear how the holy writings were anciently divided, and still less how quoted or referred to. The honour of the invention of the present arrangement of the Scriptures is ascribed to Robert Stephens, by his son, in the preface to his Concordance, a task which he performed during a journey on horseback from Paris to London, in 1551; and whether it was done as Yorick would in his Shandean manner lounging on his mule, or at his intermediate baits, he has received all possible thanks for this employment of his time. Two years afterwards he concluded with the Bible. But that the honour of every invention may be disputed, Sanctus Pagninus's Bible, printed at Lyons in 1527, seems to have led the way to these convenient divisions; Stephens, however, improved on Pagninus's mode of paragraphical marks and marginal verses; and our present "chapter and verse," more numerous and more commodiously numbered, were the project of this learned printer, to _recommend his edition of the Bible_; trade and learning were once combined! Whether in this arrangement any disturbance of the continuity of the text has followed, is a subject not fitted for my inquiry.

FOOTNOTES:

[270] Harl. MS. 6395.

[271] "Scintilla, or a light broken into darke Warehouses; of some Printers, sleeping Stationers, and combining Booksellers; in which is only a touch of their forestalling and ingrossing of Books in Pattents, and raysing them to excessive prises. Left to the consideration of the high and honourable House of Parliament, now a.s.sembled. London: Nowhere to be sold, but somewhere to be given."

1641.