figured?

E.S.

Dover.

_Michael Scott, the Wizard_.--What works by Michael Scott, the reputed
wizard, (Sir Walter's _Deus ex Machina_ in _The Lay of the Last
Minstrel_), have been printed?

X.Y.A.

_Stone Chalices_.--Can any of the readers of "Notes and Queries" inform
me whether the use of _stone chalices_ was authorised by the ancient
constitutions of the Church; and, if so, at what period, and where the
said constitutions were enacted?

X.Y.A.

* * * * *{121}

REPLIES.

ULRICH VON HUTTEN AND THE "EPISTOLAE OBSCURORUM VIRONUM."

(Vol. ii., p. 55.)

I have never seen the article in the _Quarterly Review_ to which your
correspondent H.B.C. alludes: he will probably find it by reference to
the index, which is not just now within my reach. The neat London
edition, 1710, of the _Epistolae_ was given by Michael Mattaire. There
are several subsequent reimpressions, but none worth notice except that
by Henr. Guil. Rotermund, Hanover, 1827, 8vo.; and again, with
improvements, "cum nova praefatione, nec non illustratione historica
circa originem earum, atque notitia de vita et scriptis virorum in
Epistolis occurentium aucta," 1830, both in 8vo.

The best edition, however, is that given by Dr. Ernst Muench, Leipsic,
1827, 8vo., with the following title:

"Epistolae Obscurorum Virorum aliaque AEvi Decimi sexti Monimenta
Rarissima. Die Briefe der Finsterlinge an Magister Ortuinus von
Deventer, nebst andern sehr seltenen Beitraegen zur
Literatur-Sitten-und-Kirchengeschichte des xvi'n Jahrhunderts."

This contains many important additions, and a copious historical
introduction. Both the editors write in German.

That this admirable satire produced an immense effect at the period of
its publication, there can be no doubt; but that it has ever been
thoroughly understood and relished among us may be doubted. Mr. Hallam,
in his _Literature of Europe_, vol. i., seems to have been disgusted
with the monkish dog-Latin and bald jokes, not recollecting that this
was a necessary and essential part of the design. Nor is it strange that
Steele, who was perhaps not very well acquainted with the history of
literature, should have misconceived the nature of the publication, when
we learn from an epistle of Sir Thomas More to Erasmus, that some of the
stupid theologasters themselves, who were held up to ridicule, received
it with approbation as a serious work:

"_Epist. O