Minor Queries with Answers.
Cromwell's Bible.—I have seen it stated that an edition of the Bible, "printed by John Field, one of his Highness's Printers, 1658," in 12mo., London, was printed by order of Cromwell for distribution to his soldiers. Can any of your correspondents furnish authority for such tradition? It is one of the most incorrectly printed books which I ever met with. In Cotton's list I do not find this edition: he has one in 8vo., 1657, Cambridge, J. Field.
W. C. Trevelyan.
[George Offor, Esq., of Hackney, has kindly favoured us with a reply to this and the following Query: "Eighteen different editions of the Bible, printed by John Field, are in my collection, published between the years 1648 and 1666. In some of these he is described as printer to the University of Cambridge, in others as 'One of His Highness's Printers;' but in those which tradition says were published for the army, he is called 'Printer to the Parliament.' They are all as correctly printed as Bibles were generally published during that time, excepting that by Giles Calvert the Quaker, published in 1653, which is singularly correct and beautiful. Field's editions being remarkable for beauty of typography and smallness, have been much examined, and many errors detected. That of 1653 is the most beautiful and called genuine, and is the copy said to have been printed for the use of the army and navy. Of this I have five different editions, all agreeing in the error in Matthew, ch. vi. v. 24., 'Ye cannot serve and mammon;' and in having the first four psalms on one page. But in some the following errors are corrected, 1 Cor. vi. v. 9., 'The unrighteous shall inherit the kingdom of God;' Rom. ch. vi. v. 13., 'Neither yield ye your members as instruments of righteousness unto sin.' The copy of 1658, which Sir. W. C. Trevelyan describes, is a counterfeit of the genuine edition of 1653, vulgarly called 'The Bastard Field's Bible.' These were reprinted many times. I possess four different editions of it, so exactly alike in form and appearance, that the variations throughout can only be detected by placing them in juxtaposition. They are all neatly printed, without a black line between the columns, and make thicker volumes than the genuine edition. I have never been able to verify the tradition that the Field's Bible, 1653, was printed for the army by order of Cromwell. It is the only one, as far as I can discover, 'Printed by John Field, Printer to the Parliament.' I received the tradition from my father nearly sixty years ago, and have no doubt but that it is founded in fact. It is an inquiry well worthy of investigation.—G. Offor.">[
Canne's Bible.—What is the value of a good copy of Canne's Bible, printed at Edinburgh by John Kincaid, 1756?
Sigma.
["Canne's Bibles were first printed at Amsterdam, 1647, 1662, and 1664; in London, 1682, 1684, 1698: these are all pocket volumes. Then again in Amsterdam, 4to., 1700. At Edinburgh by Watkins in 1747, and by Kincaid in 1766; after which there followed editions very coarsely and incorrectly printed. They are all, excepting that of 1647, in my collection. Kincaid's, 1766, 2 vols. nonpareil, in beautiful condition, bound in green morocco, cost me five shillings. That of 1747, by Watkins, not in such fine condition, two shillings. Sigma can readily imagine the value of Kincaid's edition 1756, by comparison with those of 1747 and 1766. If any of your readers could assist me to procure the first edition, 1647, I should be greatly obliged.—G. Offor.">[
Dryden and Luke Milbourne.—Among the "Quarrels of Authors," I do not find that between glorious John and this reverend gentleman. In a poetical paraphrase of The Christian's Pattern, by the latter (8vo., 1697), he shows unmistakeable evidence of having been lately skinned by the witty tribe, which I take to mean Dryden and his atheistical crew. I am aware that Milbourne invited the attack by his flippant remarks upon the English Virgil, but I know not in which piece of Dryden's to look for it.
J. O.
[Dryden's attack on Milbourne occurs in his preface to the Fables (Scott's edition of his Works, vol. xi. p. 235.). "As a corollary to this preface," says Dryden, "in which I have done justice to others, I owe somewhat to myself; not that I think it worth my time to enter the lists with one Milbourne and one Blackmore, but barely to take notice that such men there are, who have written scurrilously against me without any provocation. Milbourne, who is in orders, pretends, amongst the rest, this quarrel to me, that I have fallen foul on priesthood; if I have, I am only to ask pardon of good priests, and am afraid his part of the reparation will come to little. Let him be satisfied that he shall not be able to force himself upon me for an adversary. I contemn him too much to enter into competition with him." A little lower down Dryden hints that Milbourne lost his living for writing a libel upon his parishioners.]