"But the thief who was crucified on his right hand, whose name was _Dimas_, answering, rebuked him, and said, Dost not thou fear God, who art condemned to this punishment? We indeed receive rightly and justly the demerit of our actions; but this Jesus, what evil hath he done?"--vi. 11. "After this, groaning, he said to Jesus, Lord, remember me when Thou comest into Thy kingdom."--vi. 12. It thus appears the names have been differently received: here they appear GESTAS the _im_penitent, and DIMAS the penitent. I have a fine old engraving, nineteen inches by fourteen, bearing date "Greg. Huret, Lugd. inv. et sculp. 1664;" published in Paris, _cum priv. Regis_. The three crosses, with their inscriptions (each in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin), appear. The Latin on the cross of the thief on the right hand of our Lord (and, from the expression of countenance, confessed the penitent) is _DISMAS_ LATRO: the other is _GESTAS_ LATRO. W. C. H. Chelsea. "_Quod fuit esse_" (Vol. vii., p. 235.).--Allow me to suggest the following meaning of the epitaph in Lavenham churchyard, which is the subject of A. B. R.'s Query. The word _est_ has evidently been omitted in the third line: with this restored, the lines will read as a couple of hexameters: "Quod fuit esse, quod est; quod non fuit esse, quod esse; Esse quod (est), non esse; quod est, non est, erit, esse." And the literal meaning, will be: "What was existence, is that which lies here; that which was not existence, is that which is existence; to be what is now, is not to be; that which is now, is not existence, but will be hereafter." This, perhaps, is as enigmatical as the original: but the following lines will render the meaning plainer, though it is difficult to preserve the brevity of the Latin in an English version: All that I really was lies here in dust; That which was death before is life, I trust. To be what _is_, is not, I ween, to _be_; _Is_ not, but _will be_ in eternity. H. C. K. ---- Rectory, Hereford. I think your correspondent A. B. R. is not quite correct in his version of the epitaph of which he inquires the sense. It is evidently intended for two hexameter verses, and, as I have heard it, runs thus: "Quod fuit esse, quod est; quod non fuit esse, quod esse; Esse quod est, non esse; quod est, non est, erit, esse." I inclose a similar epitaph in another churchyard (the _locale_ of which I do not know), which may serve to elucidate its meaning: "That which a Being was, what is it? show: That being which it was, it is not now. To be what 'tis is not to be, you see; That which now is not shall a Being be." Q. S.