Philadelphia.
Passage in Tennyson (Vol. viii., p. 244.).—In the third edition of In Memoriam, LXXXIX., 1850, the last line mentioned by W. T. M. is "Flits by the sea-blue bird of March," instead of "blue sea-bird." This reading appears to be a better one. I would suggest that the bird meant by Tennyson was the Tom-tit, who, from his restlessness, may be said to flit among the bushes.
F. M. Middleton.
Huet's Navigations of Solomon (Vol. vii., p. 381.).—This work of the learned Bishop of Avranches was written in Latin, and translated into French by J. B. Desrockes de Parthenay. It forms part of the second volume of a collection of treatises edited by Bruzen de la Martinière, under the title of Traités Géographiques et Historiques pour faciliter l'intelligence de l'Ecriture Sainte, par divers auteurs célèbres, 1730, 2 vols. 12mo.
I am unable to reply to Edina's second Query, as to the result of Huet's assertions.
Henry H. Breen.
St. Lucia.
Sincere (Vol. viii., pp. 195. 328.).—The derivation of this word from sine cerâ appears very fanciful. If this were the correct derivation, we should expect to find sinecere, for the e would scarcely be dropped; just as we have the English word sinecure, which is the only compound of the preposition sine I know; and is itself not a Latin word, but of a later coinage. Some give as the derivation semel and κεράω—that is, once mixed, without adulteration; the ε being lengthened, as the Greek ἀκήρατος. The proper spelling would then be simcerus, and euphonically sincerus: thus we have sim-plex, which does not mean without a fold, but (semel plico, πλέκω) once folded. So also singulus, semel and termination. The proper meaning may be from tablets, ceratæ tabellæ, which were "once smeared with wax" and then written upon; they were then sinceræ, without forgery or deception. If they were in certain places covered with wax again, for the purpose of adding something secretly and deceptively, they cease to be sinceræ.
J. T. Jeffcock.
Π. Β. asks me for some authority for the alleged practice of Roman potters (or crock-vendors) to rub wax into the flaws of their unsound vessels. This was the very burden of my Query! I am no proficient in the Latin classics: yet I think I know enough to predicate that Π. Β. is wrong in his version of the line—