[92] “_Contra Skeltonum, Lib._ i.” _Script. Illust. Brit._ p. 723. ed. 1559. [93] fol. 259. ed. 1570. [94] vol. i. 411. [95] i. e. snipe. [96] See Notes, vol. ii. 159. If this line alludes to Skelton, it preserves a trait of his personal appearance. [97] i. e. deprived, devoid. [98] sig. c. v. ed. 1570. [99] Vol. i. 376. [100] Vol. i. 409. [101] In a volume of various pieces by Gaguin, dated 1498, is a treatise on metre, which shews no mean acquaintance with the subject. [102] “_Inuectiuam In Guil. Lilium, Lib._ i.” _Script. Illust. Brit._, &c. p. 652. ed. 1559. The reader must not suppose from the description, “Lib. i.,” that the invective in question extended to a volume: it was, I presume, no more than a copy of verses. Wood mentions that this piece was “written in verse and very carping.” _Ath. Ox._ i. 52. ed. Bliss: but most probably he was acquainted with it only through Bale. He also informs us (i. 34) that Lily wrote a tract entitled “_Apologia ad_ { _Joh. Skeltonum._ { _Rob. Whittington._” for a copy of which I have sought in vain. [103] See Weever’s _Fun. Monum._ p. 498. ed. 1631; Stowe’s Collections, _MS. Harl._ 540. fol. 57; and Fuller’s _Worthies_ (_Norfolk_), p. 257. ed. 1662. “And this,” says Fuller, “I will do for W. Lilly, (though often beaten for his sake,) endeavour to translate his answer: “With face so bold, and teeth so sharp, Of viper’s venome, why dost carp? Why are my verses by thee weigh’d In a false scale? may truth be said? Whilst thou to get the more esteem A learned Poet fain wouldst seem, Skelton, thou art, let all men know it, Neither learned, nor a Poet.” [104] Vol. i. 419. [105] See vol. i. 361. [106] See Notes, vol. ii. 318. [107] It was granted to him by the king for life. [108] Vol. i. 419. Concerning this college, see Notes, vol. ii. 334. [109] _A Replycacion agaynst certayne yong scolers abiured of late, &c._ vol. i. 206. In _Typograph. Antiq._ ii. 539. ed. Dibdin, where the _Replycacion_ is described and quoted from Heber’s copy, we are told that it has “a Latin address to Thomas —— who [_sic_] he [Skelton] calls an excellent patron,” &c. That the editor should have read the address without discovering that the said _Thomas_ was Cardinal Wolsey, is truly marvellous. [110] _Garlande of Laurell_, vol. i. 424. [111] See vol. ii. 83, where this _Lenuoy_ (which will be more particularly noticed presently) is appended to the poem _Howe the douty Duke of Albany_, &c. [112] Vol. i. 199. [113] _Animadversions vppon the annotacions and correctōns of some imperfectōns of impressōnes of Chaucers Workes_, &c. p. 13,—in Todd’s _Illust. of Gower and Chaucer_. I may notice here, that among the _Harleian MSS._ (2252, fols. 156, 158) are two poems on the Cardinal, which in the Catalogue of that collection Wanley has described as “Skelton’s libels;” but they are evidently not by him.