_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?
_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?
ULRICH VON HUTTEN AND THE "EPISTOLÆ OBSCURORUM VIRONUM."
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 _Epistolæ_ 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 præfatione, 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 Münch, Leipsic, 1827, 8vo., with the following title:
"Epistolæ Obscurorum Virorum aliaque Ævi Decimi sexti Monimenta Rarissima. Die Briefe der Finsterlinge an Magister Ortuinus von Deventer, nebst andern sehr seltenen Beiträgen 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: