Wondring at this, he straight enquires, what news? What newes, maifter doctor, quoth he, and he fell in a great laughing: in faith yefterday I fcapt a fcowring; for, fyrrah, I went to the grange houfe, where I was appointed to come, and I was no fooner gotten vp the chamber, but the magicall villeine her husband befet the houfe with bils and ftaues, and that he might be fure no feeling nor corner should shrowde me, he fet the houfe on fire, and fo burnt it to the ground. Why, quoth Mutio, and how did you efcape? Alas, quoth he, wel fare a woman's wit! She conueighed me into an old chefte full of writings, which the knew her husband durft not burne; and fo was I faued and brought to Pifa, and yefternight by her maide let home to my lodging. This, quoth he, is the pleasanteft ieft that euer I heard; and vpon this I haue a fute to you. I am this night bidden foorth to fupper; you shall be my gueft; onelye I will craue fo much favour, as after fupper for a pleafant fporte to make relation what fucceffe you haue had in your loues. For that I will not fticke, quoth he; and fo he carried Lionello to his mother-in-lawes house with him, and difcourfed to his wiues brethren who he was, and how at fupper he would difclofe the whole matter: for quoth he, he knowes not that I am Margarets hufband. At this all the brethren bad him welcome, & fo did the mother too; and Margaret fhe was kept out of fight. Supper-time being come, they fell to their victals, & Lionello was carrowft vnto by Mutio, who was very pleasant, to draw him to a merry humor, that he might to the ful difcourfe the effect & fortunes of his loue. Supper being ended, Mutio requested him to tel to the gentleman what had hapned between him & his miftreffe. Lionello with a smiling countenance began to defcribe his mistresse, the house and street where the dwelt, how he fell in loue with her, and how he vfed the counfell of this doctor, who in al his affaires was his fecretarye. Margaret heard all this with a greate feare; & when he came at the laft point fhe caused a cup of wine to be given him by one of her fifters wherein was a ring that he had giuen Margaret. As he had told how he efcapt burning, and was ready to confirm all for a troth, the gentlewoman drunke to him; who taking the cup, and feeing the ring, hauing a quick wit and a reaching head, fpide the fetch, and perceiued that all this while this was his louers hufband, to whome he had reuealed these escapes. At this drinking ye wine, and fwallowing the ring into his mouth, he went forward: Gentlemen, quoth he, how like you of my loues and my fortunes? Wel, quoth the gentlemen; I pray you is it true? As true, quoth he, as if I would be fo fimple as to reueal what I did to Margarets hufband: for know you, gentlemen, that I knew this Mutio to be her husband whom I notified to be my louer; and for yt he was generally known through Pifa to be a iealous fool, therefore with thefe tales I brought him into this paradice, which indeed are fol

lies of mine own braine: for truft me, by the faith of a gentleman, I neuer fpake to the woman, was never in her companye, neither doo I know her if I fee her. At this they all fell in a laughing at Mutio, who was afhamed that Lionello had fo fcoft him: but all was well, they were made friends; but the ieft went fo to his hart, that he shortly after died, and Lionello enioyed the ladye: and for that they two were the death of the old man, now are they plagued in purgatory, and he whips them with nettles."

It is obfervable that in the foregoing novel (which, I believe, Shakspeare had read,) there is no trace of the buck-basket.—In the firft tale of The Fortunate, the Deceived, and Unfortunate Lovers, (of which I have an edition printed in 1684, but the novels it contains had probably appeared in English in our author's time,) a young ftudent of Bologne is taught by an old doctor how to make love; and his firft effay is practifed on his inftructor's wife. The jealous husband having tracked his pupil to his houfe, enters unexpectedly, fully perfuaded that he fhould detect the lady and her lover together; but the gallant is protected from his fury by being concealed under a heap of linen half-dried; and afterwards informs him, (not knowing that his tutor was likewife his mistress's hufband,) what a lucky escape he had. It is therefore, I think, highly probable that Shakspeare had read both stories. MALONE.

Sir Hugh Evans.] See p. 303, and 304.

The question whether priests were formerly knights in confequence of their being called Sir, ftill remains to be decided. Examples that thofe of the lower class were fo called are very numerous; and hence it may be fairly inferred that they at least were not knights, nor is there perhaps a fingle inftance of the order of knighthood being conferred upon ecclefiaftics of any degree.

Having cafually, however, met with a note in Dyer's Reports, which feems at firft view not only to contain fome authority for the cuftom of knighting priests by Abbots, in confequence of a charter granted to the Abbot of Reading for that purpose, but likewise the opinion of two learned judges, founded thereupon, that priests were anciently knights, I have been induced to enter a little more fully upon this difcuffion, and to examine the validity of those opinions. The extract from Dyer is a marginal note in p. 216. B. in the following words: " Trin. 3 Jac. Banc le Roy Holcraft and Gibbons, cas Popham dit que il ad view un ancient charter grant al Abbot de Reading per Roy d'Angliterre, a fair knight, fur que fon conceit fuit que l'Abbot fait, ecclefiaftical perfons, knights, d'illonque come a luy le nofmes de Sir John and Sir Will. que eft done al afcun Clerks a ceft jour fuit derive quel opinion Coke Attorney-General applaud difont que fueront milites cæleftes & milites terreftres." It is proper to mention here that all the reports have been diligently fearched for this case

of Holcraft and Gibbons, in hopes of finding fome further illuftration, but without fuccefs.

The charter then above-mentioned appears upon further enquiry to have been the foundation charter of Reading Abbey, and to have been granted by Henry I. in 1125. The words of it referred to by Chief Juftice Popham, and upon which he founded his opinion, are as follow: "Nec faciat milites nifi in facra vefte Chrifti, in qua parvulos fufcipere modefte caveat. Maturos autem feu difcretos tam clericos quam laicos provide fufcipiat." This paffage is likewife cited by Selden in his notes upon Eadmer, p. 206, and to illuftrate the word " clericos" he refers to Mathew Paris for an account of a priest called John Gatesdene, who was created a knight by Henry III. but not until after he had refigned all his benefices, "as he ought to have done," fays the hiftorian, who in another place relating the difgrace of Peter de Rivallis, Treasurer to Henry III. (See p. 405, edit. 1640,) has clearly fhown how incompatible it was that the clergy fhould bear arms, as the profeffion of a knight required; and as a further proof may be added the well known ftory, related by the fame hiftorian, of Richard I. and the warlike Bishop of Beauvais. I conceive then that the word " clericos" refers to fuch of the clergy who fhould apply for the order of knighthood under the ufual reftriction of quitting their former profeffion; and from Selden's note upon the paffage it may be collected that this was his own opinion; or it may poffibly allude to those particular knights who were confidered as religious or ecclefiaftical, fuch as the knights of the order of St. John of Jerufalem, &c. concerning whom fee Afhmole's Order of the Garter, p. 49. 51.

66

With respect to the custom of ecclefiaftics conferring the order of knighthood, it certainly prevailed in this country before the conqueft, as appears from Ingulphus, and was extremely disliked by the Normans; and therefore at a Council held at Westminster in the third year of Henry I. it was ordained, "Ne Abbates faciant milites." See Eadmeri Hift. 68. and Selden's note, p. 207. However it appears that notwithstanding this prohibition, which may at the fame time ferve to fhow the great improbability that the order of knighthood was conferred upon ecclefiaftics, fome of the ceremonies at the creation of knights ftill continued to be performed by Abbots, as the taking the fword from the altar, &c. which may be feen at large in Selden's Titles of Honour, Part II. chap. v. and Dugd. Warw. 531, and accordingly this charter, which is dated twenty-three years after the Council at Westminster, amongst other things directs the Abbot, "Nec faciat milites nifi in facra vefte Chrifti," &c. Lord Coke's acquiefcence in Popham's opinion is founded upon a fimilar mifconception, and his quaint remark" que fueront milites cæleftes & milites terreftres," can only excite a smile. The marginal quotation from Fuller's Church Hiftory, B. VI

P. 352. "Moe Sirs than knights" referred to in a former note by Sir J. Hawkins, certainly means— ..that these Sirs were not knights," and Fuller accounts for the title by fuppofing them ungraduated Priests.

Before I difmifs this comment upon the opinions of the learned Judges, I am bound to observe that Popham's opinion is also referred to, but in a very careless manner, in Godbolt's Reports, p. 399, in these words: "Popham once Chief Juftice of this court faid that he had feen a commiffion directed unto a bishop to knight all the parfons within his diocese, and that was the cause that they were called Sir John, Sir Thomas, and fo they continued to be called until the reign of Elizabeth." The idea of knighting all the parfons in a diocese is too ludicrous to need a serious refutation; and the inaccuracy of the affertion, that the title of Sir lafted till the reign of Elizabeth, thereby implying that it then ceafed, is fufficiently obvious, not only from the words of Popham in the other quotation" que eft done al afcuns clerks ceft jour," but from the proof given by Sir John Hawkins of its existence at a much later period.

Having thus, I truft, refuted the opinion that the title of Sir was given to priests in confequence of their being knights, I fhall venture to account for it in another manner.

This cuftom then was most probably borrowed from the French, amongst whom the title Domnus is often appropriated to ecclefiaftics, more particularly to the Benedictines, Carthufians, and Ciftercians. It appears to have been originally a title of honour and refpect, and was perhaps at firft, in this kingdom as in France, applied to particular orders, and became afterwards general as well among the fecular as the regular clergy. The reafon of preferring Domnus, to Dominus was, that the latter belonged to the fupreme Being, and the other was confidered as a fubordinate title, according to an old verse :

"Cæleftem Dominum, terreftrem dicito Domnum."

Hence, Dom, Damp, Dan, Sire, and, laftly Sir; for authorities are not wanting to show that all these titles were given to ecclefiaftics: but I fhall forbear to produce them, having, I fear, already trefpaffed too far upon the reader's patience with this long note.

DOUCE.

THE END OF THE THIRD VOLUME.