Page images

For the name of the translator I beg to refer your readers to two -Replies on " Oxford Jeux d'Esprit," at vol. x. 431, and vol. xi. 416, of your First Series. C. W. Bingham.

Several translations of comic pieces may be found in the Arundines Cam*.

C. F. S. Warren.

Tis may see translations of several comic songs among the Reliques of Father Prout. X. Y. Z.

Mr. Kelly, publisher, Grafton Street, Dublin, has printed for a student of Trinity College, Latin and Greek versions of "The Ratcatcher's Daughter," and "Wilikins and his Dinah." They are very clever and amusing, far in advance of "Stakkos Morphides of O'Brallaghan." A. B.

Inquisitions t>. Visitations (3rd S. v. 154.) — The Inquisition represented Robert, Lord de l'lsle of Rougemont (1357—1399), as having died unmarried. The Visitation Book of 1623, named a son of his, William. Hippeus seems to trust the Inquisition rather than the Visitation. Nicolas, quotiDg Dugdale, says that Robert was summoned to Parliament in 1357 and 1360; but never afterwards, nor any of his posterity,—" therefore (says Dugdale), I shall not need to pursue the story of them any further;" but (adds Nicolas) "the Barony must be deemed to be etill vested in his descendants and representatives." The words I have put in italics would seem, perhaps, to justify the record of Visitation, rather than that of Inquisition. The barony of Aldeburgh, of Harewood, the possessor of which was the husband of Robert's sister Elizabeth, had the same fate as that of Robert de Insula de Rubeo Monte. William de Aldeburgh left a legitimate son, aged thirty, at his father's death, in 1388; but the son was never summoned during the three remaining years of his life. Both baronies are now in abeyance. J. Doban.

F.S. I observe that, in making out a census of the peers, some doubt is expressed as to whether "Auckland " should be reckoned as a bishop or an earl. Here is a precedent. John, Baron de Grandison, succeeded his brother Peter in 1358. John had been Bishop of Exeter since 1327; he sat in Parliament in right of his episcopal dignity, and was, consequently, never summoned in his barony. He left a nephew as his next heir; but he was never summoned, and this barony is also in abeyance.

. Natter (3rd S. v. 125, 184.) — Though, very probably, the Anglo-Saxon name of Nadre, whence the German Natter, and our Adder, was first given to the snake-family with reference to their creeping position, from the word "Nether, or Nither, Down, downward, below" (Bosworth), still, the name once given, how easy would be its

transference to other qualities of the hateful tribe, so as to be associated with the idea of venom, &c. Thus Natter-jack might represent Poison-jack, and express a part of his character, which is not, I believe, quite attributable to the malice of his enemies. C. W. Bingham.



Particular! of Price, *c. of the following Books to be tent direct to the gentleman by whom they are required, whose name and addreee are given for that purpose i —

Rbimabds Dr Dippbrsrtus Tocum Ilgtmiu:inL'k. 1717—18. Wlttcm.

berg. Flantarttiu,, TnuvRDi Stnoktmi'i Iieoraico-ciialoaico Rabbini


Spalding Club Books: _

Vol. XXVI. ScOLPTORED Stonbs OP SCOTLAND. Vol. XXXI. TOPOGRAPHY op Abbbobbb And Banpp. Vol. IV. Vol. XXXII. Diaries op Brodir Op Brodir. Surteo Society's Publications. A complete Set. Percy Society's Publications:— Vol. I. No. 1. Ou Bau.aiw.

No. 6. Historical Songs Op Irfland.

No. 7. Soros And Ballad, Relative To Tbb Lordor 'prsr


Vol. II. No. 4. Selections Prom Tbb Minor Pobms Op Ltdoatb. No. 8. Earlt Natal Ballads Op England. m

Tbb Complaint Op Scotland. Leyden'sedition.

Wanted by Mr. Jos. Macleliote, 61, St. Vincent Street, Glasgow.

fiatitti ta Corrrs'urjutrriits'.

Owing to the requirement* of our advertising friends, toe ore compelled to omit our Notes on Books.

T. B. The communication has been lift at the office a* requested.

"JinuuLiH Mt Rappt ROME."—Notsa will find the original in Gent. Mag. Dec. I860, p. Mr, and much information respecting it in the vou for 1831,Parti, pp. 66,IH, awl 518.

P. W. 8. We halt not yet seen L'lntermedlaire des Chercheure et Curieux i or. Notes and Queries Francaise, but daily- expect to receive it through Messrs. Williams and Norgate.

F. L.

» Nothing In his lift)

Became him like the leaving XV—Macbeth. Act 1.8c. «.

Bornett Queries. These thaU be tnmirted if the Querist w& add to them where the answers are to be sent. A U queries respecting private individuals must in future give this information.

R. 8. T. u The Usss of BidmondHm" worths productumofWilliam Upton, and was fsVsl produced as a new and favourite sonp at VatsxhaB. The Lass, nodoubt, was a totally imaginary Dulcinea. Vide " N. * Q. 2nd S. ii. <i li. S07.

Old r. Le Neve's Monuroenta Anglicana was completed in Four Parts and a Supplement, Svo, 1717—1718, being fnscriptiimi on monuments from s.o. 1660—1718. His Lives of the Protestant Bishops of England, ta Two Parts, were published in 1720,8vo.

U. C. Dr. Thomas Birch is the author of An Inquiry Into the Bhare which King Charles I. had in the Transactions of the Earl of Glamorgan, Lond. 1747,8vo, ami reprinted in 1756 with an Appendix.

Camol. Theoldrhyme

"When Our Lady fallsln Our Lord's lap, Then, England, beware of mishap:' '— refers to Easter Day, not to Gootl Friday. Scc"N.k, Q." 1st 8. yllL157| Brady's Clavls Calendaria, I. 883: and Fuller's Worthies, art. Berkshire^' Fuller has given a list of the years on which the coincidence had happened since the Conquest.

F.i.RAii-M.-.srd 8. y. p. no.col.ii. lines, for "Hugh-Wade Grey." read " Hugh Wade-Gery."

• «• Cases for binding the volumes of" N. ft Q," may be had of the Publisher, and of all Booksellers and Newsmen.

"notes And Qcbribs" is published at noon on Fi-lday, and is also issued in Montrlt Parts. The Subscription for Stamped Copies for Six Months forwarded direct from the Publisher {including the Halfyearly Index) is 1 Is. id., which may be paid by Post Office Order, payable at the Strand Post Office, in favour of William G. Smitr, 32, Wellington Street, Strand, W.C., to whom all Communications rem The Editor should be addressed.

"Notes & Quebies " is registered for transmission abroad. LOUDON, SATURDAY, MAItCB 19, 1864.

CONTENTS.— N°. 116.

NOTES: —When was Shakspere BornP 225 —An attempt to ascertain the Kind of Hulkin which Prospero, Duke of Milan was set Adrift, 228 — The Stratford Bust of Shakspeare 227 — Shakspeariana, 228 — The Second Shakspeare Folio 1632,233 — Passage in "Cymocline." 231 —Morganatic and Etenburtig, 235-Norfolk Folk Lore. 236-Hymns by the Duke of Roxburgh - Anonymous Contributions to "N * a" —Heralds' Visitations — Vishnu, the Prototype of the Mermaid—Clarges —Thomas Adams, alias Welhowse, 238.

QUERIES:—"Ad eundem" Hoods—Arms wanted—'Sir William Bcresford' — Campolongo's "LithoUalcpn — John Daniel, and other early Players-Digby Pedigree — "The Gleaner," ftc —Family of Goodrich —Abp. Hamilton — Heraldic Query — Rev. James Kennedy —William Lillington Lewis - Joseph Massie - Rebus wanted Richard Smith-St. John Climachus-Song: 'Is it to try met " — Sophocles —Theocritus —Wills at Llandatr, 239.

QPEurES With Answbks:—Milton's "mere A. S. and Rutherford" — Sir Richard Ford —An Epitaph-Gutteridge, the Poet, a Native of Shoreditch— Chough and Crow "—Champak Odours — Bishop Prideaui's Portrait — "Toung Lovelrs Bride," 242.

REPLIES: — Parish Registers, 243 — Greek and Roman Games &c, 244 — The Newton Stone, 245 — Sir Robert Vernon — Sortes Virgilianm — Simon and the Dauphin — Posterity of Harold, King of England— Paul Bowes — Harvey Family —Owen Glyndwrs Parliament House — Quotations wanted — Great Battle of Cats — Rosary — "Retreat" — An Eastern King's Device — Inchgaw — Epigram attributed to Pope—Jeremiah Horrocks, the Astronomer — Torrington Family, 4c, 246.

Notes on Books. *c.


(From An Argument on the Assumed Birthday of

I must now, in order to refresh the memory of the reader, give a retrospective summary of facts and fictions, with comments — the subjects being Shakspebk, William Oldys, esquire, Norroyking-at-arms, the rev. Joseph Greene, B.A., and Edmund Malone, esquire.

William, son of John Shakspere, was baptised at Stratford-upon-Avon on the 26 April 1564, and died on the 23 April 1616 in the fifty-third year of his age. He was buried at Stratford on the 25 April, and is described in the register as a gentleman. — I rely bn Malone, and have said no more on Shakspere than the argument requires, but cannot avoid reflecting on the proceedings of this year. With the utmost respect for the London committee, I must crave leave to record my opinion that equity and congruity are rather more conspicuous in Warwickshire.

Oldys had much experience in biographic composition, but he asserts that Shakspere was born on the 28 April 1563, and that he died at the age of 53, A.d. 1616.—He converts the day and month of the decease of Shakspere into the day and month of his birth ; contradicts the parish register as to the year of his birth; and contradicts the

monumental inscription as to his age at the time of decease. The assertions of Oldys, testified by his handwriting, have no other basis than his own misconceptions.

Greene was for many years master of the grammar-school at Stratford, and therefore had the means of verifying current reports, but he as much as asserts that Shakspere was born in 1563, for he states that he "died at the age of 53.' This statement was printed in 1759. At a later date, he added this note to the baptismal item of William Shakspere, in some extracts from the Stratford register, which were published by Steevens in 1773 —"Bom April 23,1564.' This date was adopted by Malone in 1778, and has been repeated by numerous authors, native and foreign, to the present time. Even those who do not adopt it, condescend to notice it as tradition or reported tradition. — The assertions of Greene are almost identic with those of Oldys, a circumstance which I cannot explain. But this I can affirm: He was a reader at the British Museum before 1772; transcribed the will of Shakspere for his patron, Mr. West; and may have consulted the annotated Langbaine. He names the birthday of Shakspere without one word of evidence; contradicts the parish register as to the year of his birth; and contradicts the inscription as to his age at the time of decease.

Malone, as above stated, had precursors on the birthday theory, but it was the reputation of Malone that gave it currency. He afterwards found time for inquiry. The proof appears in the posthumous Life of William Shakspeare, 1821, 8°. He therein states that Shakspere was born probably on the 23 April 1564, and admits that "we have no direct evidence for the fact." In a note on the Stratford register, which records the baptism of Shakspere on the 26 April 1564, he writes thus: "He was born three days before, April 23, 1564. — I have said this on the faith of Greene, who, I find, made the extract from the register which Mr. West gave Mr. Steevens; but auare, how did Mr. Greene ascertain this fact*' He also says, " for this, as I conceive, his only authority was the inscription"—which affords no such evidence! The sum of the above remarks is surely equivalent to recantation, and I am justified in asserting that Malone, on due reflection, renounced the authority of Greene. Now, it was on the faith of Mr. Greene that Malone had proclaimed in positive terms, and as his own contribution to the life of Shakspere—" He was born on the 23 of April 1564."—I need not point out the inevitable conclusion: the stream cannot be more pure than its source. In plam terms, The Assumed Bibthdat Of Shakspebe Is A Fiction.

In a short note, published on the 23 April 1859, I declared my persuasion, on the evidence of the inscription alone, that Shakspere " was born before the 23 April 1564." I must now declare, after tracing the question through the printed evidence of two centuries, that there is no substantial evidence of a contrary tendency — but, as Johnson remarks, " Every man adheres as long as he can to his own pre-conceplions."

As the eulogist of Oldys, some twenty-five years since, and also, at a later date, of Malone, I must not be taxed with prejudice or critical harshness on this occasion. In fact, the discoveries now announced have been a source of vexation to me—but which, once made, it would not become me to suppress. Bolton Cobhey.


That the rotten carcass of a butt was an old wine cask, is a supposition too ridiculous to be entertained by any one who has seen salt water. Had Shakspeare said this, it would have been a sore point for ever, a tavern joke of which he never would have heard the last; but he was too good a sailor to have dreamt of such a thing even at his sleepiest, and the mention of the wanting tackle, sails, mast, and rats shows that he did not. But this being set aside — and it has been sufficiently set aside by Mr. Dyce — there remains the question whether the word is a misprint, or an unknown nautical term. For my own part, I had for long held the latter opinion, and for this reason, that we find Othello saying : —

"Here is ray journey's end, here is my butt,
And very sea-mark of my utmost sail."

ActV. Sc. 2.

Now there is no reason of circumstance why Othello the soldier should use or go oil' into a sea-simile, unless this, that the sound of the word butt, by the laws of association, brought vaguely before his mind (that is to Shakspeare's fruitful and versatile imagination) the idea of the sea, and so led him to speak no longer of a land butt, but of a sea beacon. And this argument will, I think, appear the stronger to those who have attended to Shakspeare's language, because I think it can have escaped none such that he "has made word suggest word (of course in subordination to the leading thoughts or emotions), and phrase suggest phrase according to the law of association of ideas, and this not merely because he wrote hastily, or because the ability to see an object simultaneously in all its aspects and resemblances was a leading peculiarity of his mind, but because he wittingly and of purpose made use of this law knowing it to be a main law of extempore and unpremeditated speech.*

• The mad speeches in King Lear, some of which have been noticed and some not, are wonderful examples as

My only doubt was, whether the word was an English sea-term, or one borrowed by Shakspeare from the Italian original, and used as other words are used in other plays to give a local colouring to the tale. It may yet be found to have been English, but at present I have only found it in Italian. Looking in Vauzon's Diz. Univ. d. L. Italiana for another word, I came across what I ought to have seen long ago, viz.: —

"Botto, a nautical term. A kind of galliot, Dutch or Flemish, the after part of which is built like a ' fluyt' (la cui poppa ha la forma d'une flauto)."

Turning thence to " Galea," I found under it:

"Galk-aotta. Olandese. Bastimento di carico che ha suU' estremita della poppa una mezznnetta con un ghisso che insieme col auo lorn rimane affatto fuori del bordo; una mtestra a piffero i on una randa ed una gabbia molta allunata; uno straglio di prna all' albero di maestra, che fa le veci di un trinchetto, e de' aocci sovra ll bompresso."

That is to say, a Dutch galliot is a merchant vessel with a small mizenmast stept far aft, so that the boom and gaff of the small spanker project in great part over the bulwarks, a square mainsail with a main topsail, a topsail, a forestay to the mainmast (there being no foremast), with forestaysail and jibs. A rig, in fact, similar to that of the old Welsh sloops. Now as to the shape of the hull, Vauzon has said that the after part is built like a iluyt, and he describes a fluyt as a large Dutch cargo vessel with very rounded ribs, very little run and flattish bottom, the ribs joining the keel almost horizontally, a sort of tub of a thing; and this agrees with the description of a Dutch galliot just given me by a seaman who knows them, they being round-sterned and clumsy in build, though good sea boats. With this, too, agrees the word Botto, the root bott both in Italian and in our own boat, butt, vat, &c, and in the Portuguese bota, along boat, signifying something rounded, and as it were, barrel-shaped. Lastly, the word "bustle," an article of female attire, and the old " buzzled," will exemplify the change of the Italian o into the English u.

There being, therefore, in the Italian harbour, or possibly lying on the beach, some old rotten hulk of this kind, too rotten to be taken home, or to be even worth the trouble of breaking up, the nobleman in charge of Prospero was ordered to take it in tow, into mid-sea and well out of sight of land, and then turn it adrift with Prospero in it. Luckily for us, he was cast ashore at Lampedusa. Bkinslet Nicholson.

In the Mediterranean, off Algiers.

well as proofs of this, the association of ideas being such as would occur not to a sane, but to a crazed and aged man.


Of the value and importance of the Stratford monumental bust, and of the Droeshout engraving— not ns works of art, but as trustworthy representations of Shakspeare in his habit as he lived, there can scarcely be two opinions. That the monumental effigies erected to the memory of the illustrious dead were, in the majority of cases, faithful likenesses, few can doubt. Few can have stepped from the south aisle of Henry VII.'s chapel, after gazing upon the beautiful effigy of the unhappy Queen ot Scots, and then cast his eyes upon the sterner features of her successful rival, the great Elizabeth, without feeling convinced that he had looked upon faithful likenesses of those remarkable women.

To the truthfulness of the likeness in the Stratford monument we have the best evidence, as Mr. Dyce has well observed, in the fact that it was raised at the charge of Shakspeare's family, in the laudable anxiety that the features of their illustrious relative should be known to posterity; and if the bust exhibits somewhat more than one should expect of a certain "bonhommie and good nature," as Mr. Friswell declares it does — and if he is right in his assertion, that "the cheeks are fat and sensual" — it must be remembered that Shakspeare was not only the mighty genius to whom we owe works almost divine, but that he was foremost "in the things done at the Mermaid," as if he had " meant to put his whole wit in a jest;" that Aubrey describes him as a " handsome and well-shaped man, very good company, and of a very ready, and pleasant, and smooth wit;" that tradition asserts he took part in the drinking bout with "piping Pebworth and drunken Bidford;" while Ward, in his Diary, says his death was hastened by a merry meeting with Drayton and Ben Jonson. It should be added, that the photograph of the bust, just published in Mr. Friswell's Life Portraits of William Shakespeare, while it must be unquestionably a faithful copy of the original, exhibits this joviality of temperament in a peculiarly marked manner.

The bust, as we now know, was the work of Gerard Johnson; and as it is clear, from the verses of Leonard Digges, that it must have been put up before 1623, there can be little doubt that it was placed in its present position as soon as possible after the poet's death. Sir Francis Chantrey had no doubt, and his opinion deserves the highest consideration, that it was taken from a cast after death; but thought that the artist, in chiselling the lower part of the face, had not made sufficient allowance for the rigidity of the dead muscles about the mouth, and attributed to this error on his part the extraordinary length of the upper lip. But whether it was executed from a cast taken after death or not, there can be little

doubt, as I have said before, that it is a faithful likeness of the poet.

I fully believe it to be so. Yet, at the present moment, when so much interest is felt in everything connected with Shakspeare and his writings, I have thought it right to record a tradition on the subject which has not, to my knowledge, ever before been committed to paper. It is probably without any foundation; but it seems to me that it ought, nevertheless, to be recorded for the use of future inquirers.

In the year 1827 my late kind friend, Mr. Amyot, introduced me to that accomplished antiquary and diligent illustrator of Shakspeare, Francis Douce. When we entered Prospero's cell, in Gower Street, we found there Sir Anthony Carlisle. After some time, the conversation turned on the recently published Life, Diary, and Correspondence of Sir William Dugdale, by which, it will be remembered, the name of the artist who executed the bust was first made known, and thence very naturally to the bust itself. In the course of conversation, Sir Anthony Carlisle stated — and my impression is, that he then mentioned the source from which it had reached him— that he bad heard a tradition that the Stratford bust was not taken from any portrait of Shakspeare, or from Shakspeare himself, but from a blacksmith of Stratford-upon-Avon, who bore a remarkable resemblance to the bard.

Mr. Douce shook his head very doubtfully at the story, which he said he had then heard for the first time; and, in the course of some after remarks, expressed an opinion that it might have originated in some hoax played by that Puck of commentators, George Steevens. But it is a curious circumstance, that a similar tradition with respect to the portraits of Shakspeare was in existence as long ago as 1759, as wilLbe seen by the following extract from the Gentleman's Magazine, p. 380. It is contained in a letter, signed "J. S," and dated from Crane Court: —

"That there is no genuine picture of Shakspeare existing, nor ever was; that called his having been taken long after bis death from a person supposed extremely like him, at the direction of Sir Thomas Clarges; and this I take upon me to affirm as an absolute fact."

Since the foregoing was written, I have had an opportunity (thanks to the kindness of Professor Owen) of seeing the curious cast, said to be that of Shakspeare taken after death; and from which Gerard Johnson is supposed to have executed the bust at Stratford. That it is a cast taken after death, there is painful and unmistakeable evidence. That anybody looking at it, without having been told that it was Shakspeare, would at all recognise it as the face of the poet, I cannot for one moment believe. But I have been assured that, owing to the flaccid state of the muscle?, this dissimilarity between such a cast and the ordinary likenesses of an individual, is very common; and as a proof, it was added, that the cast from the face of Napoleon is so unlike any of the existing portraits of him, that it is difficult to recognise in it his well-known features. Judging from the cast itself, I should not be disposed to regard it as a memorial of Shakspeare: for, as Mr. Hain Friswell has well pointed out in his recently published volume (Life Portraits of Shakespeare), "it differs very widely from the bust said to have been taken from it." The forehead is delicate and fine, fully developed, and, though capacious, by no means equal in size to the forehead of the bust. The mask has a short upper lip, the bust a very long one. In the cast, the nose is fine, thin, and aquiline; in the bust it is short and fleshy. In the cast again, the face is a sharp oval, the chin narrow and pointed, and the cheeks thin and drawn in; while, on the contrary, in the bust the face is blunt, the chin square, and the cheeks full, fat, and almost coarse. In short, if it were not profane to say so, I should say that the cast was of a higher and more intellectual character than the bust. It certainly bears more resemblance to the Droeshout engraving than to the bust.

Still, the cast is an object of great interest. It was not brought forward by Dr. Becker with any pecuniary views; and if the history which is given of it could be satisfactorily confirmed, it would certainly assume the place of the most interesting memorial of Shakspeare, except his icorks, which the ravages of time have spared to us. It is said to have been originally procured in this country by an ancestor of Count Kesselstadt, who was attached to one of the ambassadors accredited to the court of James I.; and who, being a great admirer of the poet, it is supposed, bought the cast as a memorial of him from Gerard Johnson. In the year 1843 his descendant, Count and Canon Francis von Kesselstadt, died at Mayence, and in the same year his collections were disposed of by auction. Among the objects sold was a small painting of a corpse crowned with laurel (dated 1637), which Dr. Becker purchased in 1847; and then, having learned the existence of the plaster of Paris cast, after two years' inquiry, he succeeded in discovering the broker in whose possession it was, and became the possessor of that also; and was at once satisfied that the picture had been painted from such cast. On the back of the cast is- inscribed: "+ A° Diii. 1616."

Can any reader of " N. & Q." who is acquainted with our records furnish evidence of any member of the Kesselstadt family having been attached to a diplomatic mission to this country in the time of James I.?

Can any reader of "N. & Q." furnish satisfactory evidence of the existence of such an admiration of Shakspeare in Germany at so early

a period as would be likely to lead a German to wish to possess a memorial OT him P

And may I be permitted to append a third query upon a somewhat cognate subject? Tieek tells us that Gryphius' Absurda Comica oder Herr Peter Squenz, in which ** Peter Squenz" and "Bulla Bottom" delighted the German laughterloving public as Peter Quince and Bully Bottom had amused English audiences, is an im£ roved form of the same comedy, translated by >aniel Schwenler from the Droll published by Kirkman and R. Cox. Was Schwenter's version ever published, and if so, where? And is there not an earlier Droll on the same subject to be found in the literature of the Low Countries? I have a strong impression of having once seen a reference to this Dutch version, before Captain Cuttle enunciated his great "Canon" for all readers. Perhaps M. Delpieere, or some other gentleman well versed in the literature of the Netherlands, will kindly solve a question of considerable interest with respect to the source of that portion of the Midsummer Night's Dream in which the mock tragedy of Pyramus and Tbisbe is introduced. William J. Thoms.

P.S. Can the cast be, after all, not of Shakspeare, but of Cervantes, who died in Madrid on the same day, it will be remembered, which robbed us of Shakspeare? The date on the cast would suit equally well, while the features are, I think, more Cervantes-like than Shakspearian.


Passage In " The Tempest."—Pray find space in your Shakspeare Number to recall attention to the Old Corrector's admirable emendation of that vexed passage in The Tempest:

"Bat these sweet thoughts do ever refresh my labours Most busy, least when I do it."

The Old Corrector substitutes "Busy-blest for "busy, least;" and though Mr. Singer, who had suggested "most busiest," pronounces "busy blest" the very worst and most improbable reading of all that have been suggested, I for one entirely dissent from him. The passage as amended:

"But these sweet thoughts do ever refresh my labour, Most busy blest when I do it"—

conveys to my mind a clear and striking picture of one who finds that the labour he delights in physics pain: and I look upon it as an amendment of the text scarcely less happy than the substitution of" abler" for "nobler" in Julius Casar, and of "halter" for "haste" in Timon of Athens.

T. E.

In the Athenamm of January 9, 1864, is a review of Mr. Dyce's new edition of Shakspeare,

« EelmineJätka »