_ (Vol. ii., p. 21.).--As a conjecture, I would suggest
the derivation of _Sarum_ may have been this. Salisbury was as
frequently written Sarisbury. The contracted form of this was Sap., the
ordinary import of which is the termination of the Latin genitive plural
_rum_. Thus an imperfectly educated clerk would be apt to read _Sarum_
instead of Sarisburia; and the error would pass current, until one
reading was accepted for right as much as the other. In other instances
we adopt the Law Latin or Law French of mediaeval times; as the county of
_Oxon_ for Oxfordshire, _Salop_ for Shropshire, &c., and _Durham_ is
generally supposed to be French (_Duresmm_), substituted for the
Anglo-Saxon Dunholm, in Latin _Dunelmum_. I shall perhaps be adding a
circumstance of which few readers will be aware, in remarking that the
Bishops of Durham, down to the present day, take alternately the Latin
and French signatures, _Duresm_ and _Dunelm_.

J.G.N.

"_Epigrams on the Universities_" (Vol. ii., p. 88.).--The following
extract frown Hartshorne's _Book-rarities in the University of
Cambridge_ will fully answer the Query of your Norwich correspondent.

After mentioning, the donation to that University, by George I., of the
valuable library of Dr. Moore, Bishop of Ely, which his Majesty had
purchased for 6,000 guineas, the author adds,--

"When George I. sent these books to the University, he sent at
the time a troop of horse to Oxford, which gave occasion to the
following well-known epigram from Dr. Trapp, smart in its way,
but not so clever as the answer from Sir William Browne:--

"The King, observing, with judicious eyes,
The state of both his Universities,
To one he sent a regiment; for why?
That learned body wanted loyalty:
To th' other he sent books, as well discerning
How much that loyal body wanted learning."

_The Answer._

"The King to Oxford sent his troop of horse,
For Tories hold no argument but force:
With equal care to Cambridge books he sent,
For Whigs allow no force but argument.

"The books were received Nov. 19, 20, &c., 1715."

G.A.S.

[J.J. DREDGE, V. (Belgravia), and many other correspondents,
have also kindly replied to this Query.]

_Dulcarnon_ (Vol. i., p. 254.)--_Urry_ says nothing, but quotes
_Speght_, and _Skene_, and _Selden_.

"_Dulcarnon_," says Speght, "is a proposition in _Euclid_ (lib. i.
theor.