NOTES AND REPLIES. "ORION" HORNE.-Our last month's article on "Orion" Horne has led to some controversy in the columns of the Argus. In noticing the contents of the number the critic implied that "J. H." was in error as to a Mrs. Samuel Butler having given dramatic readings in Melbourne some score or more of years ago. It was excusingly suggested that he might have mixed up in his memory the so-stated performance with that of a Mr. Kemble, who had done, the critic said, something curious in the way of doubling the character of Othello and Iago in a half-blacked face when giving a dramatic recital in Melbourne. This singular performance no one seems to remember, but many appear to recall the readings of Mrs. Butler-Dr. Neild writing very clearly about it, but denying that the lady was the Mrs. Samuel Butler, who was a member of the Kemble family. Dr. Neild's letter has been supported by another correspondent of equally good memory, and "J. H." as the author of the article, followed in an explanation that Horne told him of the identity of the Mrs. Samuel Butler with her more famous namesake. He is in doubt whether Horne had been himself misled, or whether he romanced on the matter to get a better attendance at the lady's public reading, to which he contributed a Spanish serenade, in costume, with guitar accompaniment. NOTICE. We are happy to inform our readers that we have made arrangements for the republication in "ONCE A MONTH" of "JACOBI'S WIFE," by ADELINE SERGEANT, a tale characterised by great power of description, and immense variety of striking incident. The "Prologue" appears in our present issue. The first chapter of the story itself will appear in our next. As intimated in our last number, prizes of £3, £2, and £1 respectively will be given in order of merit for the three best Essays on the following subject:"Presence of Mind in cases of Accident and Emergency: its Advantages and Cultivation." The Essays to be in length equal to seven or eight pages of "ONCE A MONTH." Each Essay must be distinguished by a MOTTO, and accompanied by a sealed envelope, with the same motto on the outside, containing the name and address of the writer. The successful Essays will become the copyright property of the Magazine. After the result has been announced, the others will be returned on application. The competition is open to young persons of both sexes, under twenty years of age. The Essays are to be forwarded to the office of" ONCE A MONTH," addressed to the Editor, on or before the 1st November. No. V. ONCE A MONTH. NOVEMBER 15, 1884. VOL. I. THE HISTORY OF A TEXTUAL CRITICISM. The attention of all who are interested in the revision of ancient texts and versions may be very profitably directed to the following account, of which the first part is transferred from a literary and critical journal of comparatively recent date. We say comparatively recent, in relation to the annals of criticism; but yet prior to the introduction of the "newer criticism," or, as some call it, the "HochKritik," now so fully developed from German sources. It will at once be seen, from the method and style of this extract, how vastly superior are those employed by the present race of critics. "High diddle diddle The cat and the fiddle, The cow jumped over the moon; To see such fine sport, And the dish ran away with the spoon. "This fragment, so valuable, and of such great consequence to the literary world, is replete with false readings and corruptions; which faults I hope to correct, by the collation of many rare and valuable MSS., and by supplying the true readings, as determined by Bentley, Porson, and other learned critics. "Line 1.-This abrupt commencement of this highly lyrical and truly poetical piece, has given unspeakable trouble to all the learned of all ages and countries. Some with great ingenuity, although falsely, suppose that these words are an exclamation of wonder, at the unusual and curious proceedings which ensue. But Bentley and Porson both concur in supposing it must be the name of some person, either 'I. Diddle,' or 'Hugh Diddle,' and which latter reading is preferable. The repetition of the word diddle, is not, as some suppose, a repeated exclamation, but a verb; which, as the scholiast justly observes, signifies the motion of the arm in fiddling. Some read twiddle, but in vain. Porson and Blomfield confirm the scholiast. "2. Here is evidently a corruption of the word catgut, as all the critics agree. The scholiast says it was a sort of instrument like our hurdy-gurdy; an evident mistake. Here then we must read-The catgut of the fiddles. "3.-The next line is mysterious, and has puzzled all the commentators. Some think the cow, exhilarated by the music, would jump over the moon; but by the figure aposiopesis her failure is omitted. The most probable conjecture is, that Hugh Diddle's fiddling took place in a new moon, when the horns of that planet are visible. A highly poetical idea. 4. Some suppose that 'little dog' should by metathesis be made 'little god,' i.e. Cupid; rejoiced at the circumstance of the dish running away with the spoon, which besides being quite in his way, left the scullery-maid with nothing to do, in which interval he might send a sly arrow or two. "5.-Some for dish read fish; and say, that the little dog was rejoiced when he saw the fish run away in the spoon, i.e. being helped with a spoon, by which action some fish is scattered for the amusement of the dog. This last suppos tion is only supported by some hasty and inconsiderate critics. All the rest keep as near the old reading as possible, only substituting little god for little dog, and ran after for ran away with. So that we read Hugh Diddle diddles The catgut of the fiddles; When the dish ran after the spoon. Though Bloomfield reads "The dish jumped over the spoon," and Porson reads The dish danced away with the spoon. Which certainly makes it highly poetical." The above textual commentary, manifestly inferior as it is in every respect to those with which we are now familiar, was for many years considered as satisfactory, and its conclusions were accepted as final. The received text, which stands at the head of it, was still, with some local variations, stoutly adhered to by the common people. On the contrary the amended or revised text was generally accepted by the critics, some of whom, however, inclined to Porson's reading of the last line. The question of the authorship had scarcely been stirred. Some were disposed to ascribe the fragment to Gammer Gurton, whose "Needle" forms the subject of an ancient poem; but the general opinion was that it must have been composed, either by that celebrated person, or by some one else. A few years ago, however, a remarkable incident occurred which unsettled the whole question, as regarded the correctness of the readings, the authorship of the fragment, and even the originality of the English text. An eminent German scholar, Von Schneckendorf by name, had found his way to Cambridge, for the purpose of examining certain rare manuscripts in one of its celebrated libraries. Sitting one evening in his room, and about to light his seldom-relinquished pipe, he received from his faithful attendant a piece of ancient-looking paper, which instantly arrested the Professor's attention. On inquiring where this paper had been found, he was told that it had fallen out of a handful of Arundines Cami which had been brought in to light the fire. In another place the expression, as coming from a servant, might have struck him as extraordinary; but in that learned locality it seemed nothing strange to hear his attendant use the botanical designation. Looking more attentively at the paper, he found it to contain the following lines, written in uncial or capital letters of an archaic Roman form, which he readily deciphered: Hei didulum! atque iterum didulum! felisque fidesque; Vacca super Lunae cornua prosiluit; Spectatum admissus risit sine fine Catellus, Et subita rapuit lanx cochleare fuga. and Here was a discovery. A scholar of Von Schneckendorf's extensive varied erudition was at no loss to determine the identity of these lines with the well-known English fragment. Was the Latin text the original, and the English a mere version? With little hesitation, he decided in the affirmative. Latin, he reflected, was the older language; and while it was easy to understand that a Latin original might be rendered into English for the delectation of English children, it was not easy to imagine the contrary process, there being no Latin children to amuse by it. On that very evening he submitted his discovery to a number of his University friends, who, though unwilling to commit themselves finally, were disposed to countenance his opinion. The youngest of the party, however, while he seemed even hilariously delighted, openly and vigorously dissented; and observing on the paper the letters H.D., said he should not wonder if the Latin had been done by the "Hugh Diddle" of the critical text. This remark was looked upon as a piece of unbecoming levity. The Professor lost no time in communicating with his friends; and in publishing a fac-simile of the valuable document, at the expense of his employer, the Emperor of all the Russias. Critics, both in England and Germany, at once declared the Latin to be the original, and the common English text to be a mere version, of a very modern date. From all quarters they flocked to examine the manuscript. At first it had been a little soiled and ruffled; and, by the critical handling of so many persons, mostly near-sighted, it |