?

ELLFIN AP GWYDDNO.

[This Query seems to have baffled old Stowe. He says, "Towards
the west end of Knight Rider Street is the parish church of St.
Nicolas Cold Abby, a comely church, somewhat ancient, as
appeareth by the ways raised thereabout; so that men are forced
to descend into the body of the church. It hath been called of
many _Golden Abby_, of some _Gold_ (or _Cold_) _Bey_, and so
hath the most ancient writing. But I could never learn the cause
why it should be so called, and therefore I will let it pass.
Perhaps as standing in a _cold_ place, as _Cold Harbour_, and
such like." For communications on the much-disputed etymology of
COLD HARBOUR, see "N. & Q.," Vol. i., p. 60.; Vol. ii., pp. 159.
340.; and Vol. vi., p. 455.]

* * * * *

Replies.

TRENCH ON PROVERBS.

(Vol. viii., pp. 387. 519. 641.)

The courteous spirit which generally distinguishes the communications of
your correspondents, renders the "N. & Q." the most agreeable magazine,
or, as you have it, "medium of inter-communication for literary men,"
&c. I was so much pleased with the general _animus_ which characterised
the strictures on my proposed translation of Ps. cxxvii. 2., that I was
almost disposed to cede to my critics, from sheer good-will towards
them. But the elder D'Israeli speaks of such a thing "as an affair of
literary conscience," which consideration prescribes my yielding in the
present instance; but I trust that our motto will always be, "May our
difference of opinion never alter our inter-communications!"

I must however, at the outset, qualify an expression I made use of,
which seems to have incurred the censure of all your four correspondents
on the subject; I mean the sentence, "The translation of the authorised
version of that sacred affirmation is unintelligible." It seems to be
perfectly intelligible to MESSRS. BUCKTON, JEBB, WALTER, and S. D. I
qualify, therefore, the assertion. I mean to say, that the translation
of the authorised version of that sacred affirmation was, and is,
considered unintelligible to many intelligent biblical critics and
expositors; amongst whom I may name Luther, Mendelsohn, Hengstenberg,
Zunz, and many others whose names will transpire in the sequel.

Having made that concession, I may now proceed with the replying to my
Querists, or rather Critics. MR. BUCKTON is entitled to my first
consideration, not o