Notes and Queries, Number 60, December 21, 1850

DIVISION OF INTELLECTUAL LABOUR

Every one confesses, I believe, the correctness of the principle called "Division of labour." But if any one would form an adequate estimate of the ratio of the effect produced, in this way, to the labour which is expended, let him consult Dr. Adam Smith. I think he states, as an example, that a single labourer cannot make more than ten pins in a day; but if eight labourers are employed, and each of them performs one of the eight separate processes requisite to the formation of a pin, there will not merely be eight times the number of pins formed in a day, but nearly eighty times the number. (Not having the book by me, I cannot be certain of the exact statistics.)

If this principle is proved, then, to be of such extraordinary utility, why should it not be made serviceable in other matters besides the "beaver-like" propensity of amassing wealth and satisfying our material desires? Why should not your periodical be instrumental in transferring this invaluable principle to the labours of the intellectual world? If your correspondents were to send you abstracts or précis of the books which they read, would there not accrue a fourfold benefit? viz.:

1. A division of intellectual labour; so that the amount of knowledge available to each person is multiplied in an increasing ratio.

2. Knowledge is thus presented in so condensed a form as to be more easily comprehended at a glance; so that your readers can with greater facility construct or understand the theories deducible from the whole circle of human knowledge.

3. Authors and inquiring men could tell, before expending days on the perusal of large volumes, whether the particulars which these books contain would be suitable to the object they have in view.

4. The unfair criticisms which are made, and the erroneous notions diffused by interested reviewers, would in a great measure be corrected, in the minds, at least, of your readers.

You might object that such précis would be as partial as the reviews of which the whole literary world complain. But, in the first place, these abstracts would be written by literary men who are not dependent on booksellers for their livelihood, and would not therefore be likely to write up trashy books or detract from the merit of valuable works, for the sake of the book trade. And besides, your correspondents give their articles under their signature, so that one could be openly corrected by another who had read the same work. Again, it is only the leading idea of the book which you would require, and no attendant praise or blame, neither eulogistic exordium nor useless appeals to the reader. The author, moreover, might send you the skeleton of his own book, and you would of course give this the prior place in your journal.

Another objection is, that the length of such précis would not permit them to come within the limits of your work. But they should not be long. And even if one of them should take up four or five pages, you could divide it between two or three successive numbers of your periodical. And, besides, your work, by embracing this object, would be greatly increased in utility; the number of your subscribers would be multiplied, and the increased expense of publication would thus be defrayed.

But, if the advantages resulting from such a division of intellectual labour would be as great as I fondly hope, I feel sure that the energy and enterprise which caused you to give a tangible reality to your scheme for "Notes and Queries" would also enable you to overcome all difficulties, and answer all trifling objections.

ON A PASSAGE IN LOVE'S LABOUR'S LOST

In Love's Labour's Lost, Act II. Sc. 1., Boyet, speaking of the King of Navarre and addressing the Princess of France, says:

This speech is a remarkable specimen of the affected style of compliment prevalent in the time of Elizabeth. The third couplet, at first sight, appears to have a signification exactly opposed to that which the context requires. We should expect, instead of "the tongue all impatient to speak," to find "the tongue all impatient to see."

No one of the editors of Shakspeare appears to me to have given a satisfactory explanation of this passage. I therefore venture to offer the following.

In the Latin poets (who in this followed the Greeks) we find adjectives and participles followed by the genitive case and the gerund in di. Thus in Horace we have "patiens pulveris atque solis," "patiens liminis aut aquæ cœlestis," and in Silius Italicus (vi. 612.), "vetus bellandi." For other instances, see Mr. Baines' Art of Latin Poetry, pp. 56-60.

The Latin poets having taken this license, then proceeded a step further, and substituted the infinitive mood for the gerund in di. I cannot find any instance either of "patiens" or "impatiens" used in this connection; but numerous instances of other adjectives and participles followed by the infinitive mood may be found in pp. 68. to 73. of the Art of Latin Poetry. I cite two only, both from Horace: "indocilis pauperiem pati," "quidlibet impotens sperare."

Following these analogies, I suggest that the words "impatient to speak and not see" mean "impatient of speaking (impatiens loquendi) and not seeing," i.e., "dissatisfied with its function of speaking, preferring that of seeing."

This construction, at least, renders the passage intelligible.

TREATISE OF EQUIVOCATION

I feel greatly indebted to J.B. for a complete solution of the question respecting this ambiguous book. Bewildered by the frequent reference to it by nearly cotemporaneous writers, I had apprehended it certain, that it had been a printed, if not a published work; and that even a second edition had altered the title of the first. It is now certain, that its existence was, and is, only in manuscript; and that the alteration was intended only for its first impression, if printed at all. It is a fact not generally known, that many papal productions of the time were multiplied and circulated by copies in MS.: Leycester's Commonwealth, of which I have a very neat transcript, and of which many more are extant in different libraries, is one proof of the fact.1 I observe that in Bernard's very valuable Bibliotheca MSS., &c., I had marked under Laud Misc. MSS., p. 62. No. 968. 45. A Treatise against Equivocation or Fraudulent Dissimulation, what I supposed might be the work in request: but being prepossessed with the notion that the work was in print, I did not pursue any inquiry in that direction. I almost now suspect that this is the very work which J.B. has brought to light. I had hoped during the present year to visit the Bodleian, and satisfy myself with an inspection of the important document. I am additionally gratified with the information relative to the same subject by Mr. Sansom, p. 446. J.B. observes, that the MS. occupies sixty-six pages only. Will no one have the charity for historic literature to make it a public benefit? If with notes, so much the better. It is of far more interest, as history is concerned, and that of our own country, than many of the tracts in the Harleian or Somers' Collections. Parsons's notice of it in his Mitigation, and towards the end, as if he was just then made acquainted with it, is very characteristic and instructive. He knew of it well enough, but thought others might not.

Again I say, why not print the work?

[We have reason to believe that this important historical document is about to be printed.]

PARALLEL PASSAGES

In Shakspeare's Henry IV., Act V. Sc. 4., the Prince exclaims, beholding Percy's corpse,—

In Ovid we find the following parallel:—

A second one appears in the pretended lines on the sepulchre of Scipio Africanus:—

The same reflection we find in Ossian:—

It is very difficult indeed to determine in which of these passages the leading thought is expressed best, in which is to be found the most energy, the deepest feeling, the most touching shortness. I think one should prefer the passage of Shakspeare, because the direct mention of the corporal existence gives a magnificent liveliness to the picture, and because the very contrast of the space appears most lively by it; whereas, at the first reading of the other passages, it is not the human being, consisting of body and soul, which comes in our mind, but only the human spirit, of which we know already that it cannot be buried in the grave.

One of the most eminent modern authors seems to have imitated the passage of Shakspeare's Henry IV. Schiller, in his Jungfrau von Orleans, says:—

Berlin.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL QUERIES

(25.) Has there been but a single effort made to immortalise among printers Valentine Tag? Mercier, Abbé de Saint-Léger, in his Supplément à l'Hist. de l'Imprimerie, by Marchand, p. 111., accuses Baron Heinecken of having stated that this fictitious typographer set forth the Fables Allemandes in 1461. Heinecken, however, had merely quoted six German lines, the penultimate of which is

intimating only that the work had been concluded on St. Valentine's day.

(26.) Can there be any more fruitful source of error with respect to the age of early printed books than the convenient system of esteeming as the primary edition that in which the date is for the first time visible? It might be thought that experienced bibliographers would invariably avoid such a palpable mistake; but the reverse of this hypothesis is unfortunately true. Let us select for an example the case of the Vita Jesu Christi, by the Carthusian Ludolphus de Saxonia, a work not unlikely to have been promulgated in the infancy of the typographic art. Panzer, Santander, and Dr. Kloss (189.) commence with an impression at Strasburg, which was followed by one at Cologne, in 1474. Of these the former is mentioned by Denis, and by Bauer also (ii. 315.). Laire notes it likewise (Ind. Par., i. 543.: cf. 278.), but errs in making Eggestein the printer, as no account of him is discernible after 1472. (Meerman, i. 215.) Glancing at the misconceptions of Maittaire and Wharton, who go no farther back than the years 1478 and 1483 respectively, let us return to the suppressed editio princeps of 1474. De Bure (Théol., pp. 121-2.) records a copy, and gives the colophon. He says, "Cette édition, qui est l'originale de cet ouvrage, est fort rare;" and his opinion has been adopted by Seemiller (i. 61.), who adds, "Litteris impressum est hoc opus sculptis." In opposition to all these eminent authorities, I will venture to express my belief that the earliest edition is one which is undated. A volume in the Lambeth collection, without a date, and entered in Dr. Maitland's List, p. 42., is thus described therein: "Folio, eights, Gothic type, col. 57 lines;" and possibly the printer's device (List, p. 348.) might be appropriated by I. Mentelin, of Strasburg. To this book, nevertheless, we must allot a place inferior to what I would bestow upon another folio, in which the type is particularly Gothic and uneven, and in which each of the double columns contains but forty-seven lines, and the antique initial letters sometimes used are plainly of the same xylographic race as that one with which the oldest Viola Sanctorum is introduced. It may be delineated, in technical terms, as being sine loco, anno, et nomine typographi. Car. sigg., paginarum num. et custodd. Vocum character majusculus est, ater, crassus, et rudis. Why should not Mentz have been the birthplace of this book? for there it appears that the author's MS. was "veneratione non parva" preserved, and there he most probably died. I would say that it was printed between 1465 and 1470. It is bound up with a Fasciculus Temporum, Colon. 1479, which looks quite modern when compared with it, and its beginning is: "De Vita hiesu a venerabili viro fratro (sic) Ludolpho Cartusiensi edita incipit feliciter." The leaves are in number forty-eight. At the end of the book itself is, "Explicit vita ihesu." Then succeeds a leaf, on the recto of which is a table of contents for the entire work and after its termination we find: "Explicit vita cristi de quatuor ewãgelistis et expositõne doctorum sanctorum sumpta."

(27.) Upon what grounds should Mr. Bliss (Vol. ii., p. 463.) refuse to be contented with the very accurate reprint of Cardinal Allen's Admonition to the Nobility and People of England and Ireland, with a Preface by Eupator (the Rev. Joseph Mendham), London, Duncan, 1842?

(28.) In an article on Ticknor's History of Spanish Literature, in the Quarterly Review for last September, p. 316, we read:

"The second Index Expurgatorius ever printed was the Spanish one of Charles V. in 1546."

Was the critic dreaming when he wrote these words? for, otherwise, how could he have managed to compress so much confusion into so small a space? To say nothing of "the second" Expurgatory Index, the first was not printed until 1571; and this was a Belgic, not a "Spanish one." It is stamped by its title-page as having been "in Belgia concinnatus," and it was the product of the press of Plantin, at Antwerp. With regard to the Indices Expurgatorii of Spain, the earliest of them was prepared by the command of Cardinal Quiroga, and issued by Gomez, typographer-royal at Madrid, in 1584. The copy in my hand, which belonged to Michiels, is impressed with his book-mark "première édition." Will the writer in the Quarterly Review henceforth remember that an Expurgatory Index is essentially different from one of the Prohibitory class? But even though he should faithfully promise to bear this fact in mind, his misreport as to the year "1546" must not remain uncensured; for this was not the date of the "second" appearance of an imperial mandement. There was an ordinance published for the restraint of the press, not only in 1544, but also in 1540, and even in 1510. For the last, see Panzer, vii. 258.

(29.) What is the nearest approach to certainty among the attempts successfully to individuate the ancient relater of Mirabilia Romæ? That he lived in the thirteenth century seems to be admitted; and the work, as put forth in Montfaucon's Diarium Italicum (pp. 283-298.), will be found to differ considerably from the edition, in 12mo. with the arms of Pope Leo X. on the title-page.

(30.) "Antiquitas Sæculi Juventus Mundi."—The discussion in your pages (Vol. ii., pp. 218. 350. 395. 466.) of the origin of this phrase has so distinctly assumed a bibliographical aspect, that I feel justified on the present occasion in inquiring from your various correspondents whether, while they have been citing Bacon and Bruno, Whewell and Hallam, they have lost sight of the beautiful language of the author of the Second Book of Esdras (chap. xiv. 10.)?

"The world hath lost his youth, and the times begin to wax old."

"Sæculum perdidit juventutem suam, et tempora appropinquant senescere."—Biblia, ed. Paris, 1523.