t. In his "Papers
Complaint"[f] he writes:--

But O! my soule is vext to thinke how euill
It is abus'd to beare suits to the Deuill.
_Pierse-Pennilesse_ (a _Pies_ eat such a patch)
Made me (agree) that business once dispatch.
And having made me vndergo the shame,
Abusde me further, in the Deuills name:
And made [me] _Dildo_ (dampned Dildo) beare,
Till good men's hate did me in peeces teare.

As regards the manuscript copies there are one or two points worthy of
note. At present we know of two, more or less incomplete, but each of
which supplements, in some degree, the other. These MSS. are
respectively in the Bodleian (Rawl. MS. Poet, 216) and the Inner
Temple (Petyt MS. 538, vol. 43, p. viii., 295b.) libraries. Both texts
are obviously corrupt, the Rawlinson abominably so. Probably the
former was written out from memory alone, while the Petyt, if not a
transcript direct from the original is, at any rate, very near to it.

The Bodleian version is written on paper in a small oblong
leather-covered book, originally with clasps. The penmanship is early
17th century, probably about 1610-20. It is thus catalogued:-- ..."_E
libris_ Matt. Postlethwayt, Aug. 1, 1697. Perhaps (earlier) Henry
Price owned the book." The volume contains besides an English
transcript of Ovid's "Arte Amandis" and some amatory poems.[g] The
date of the Petyt text may be about.... It is written in a
miscellaneous, folio, commonplace-book, and in the catalogue it is
described as "an obscene poem, entitled 'The Choosing of Valentines,'
by Thomas Nash. The first 17 lines are printed at p. lx. of the
Preface to vol i. of Mr. Grosart's edition of Nash's works, as if they
formed the whole piece."[h]

Nothing is known of Postlethwayt and Price, who at one time owned the
Rawlinson copy, that throws light on its source. In the Petyt,
however, we get a suppositional explanation of its manifestly purer
text. Petyt, subsequent to his call to the Bar, in 1670, was for many
years Keeper of the Records in the Tower of London. Now we know that
Lord Essex, an intimate friend and connection of the Earl of
Southampton, and like Southampton a generous and discerning patron of
letters, was for some time in the "free custody" of the Lord Keeper of
the Tower. Further, Southampton, who had joined Essex in his
rebellion, had been tried and convicted with his friend, and though
the Queen spared his life, he was not released from the Tower until
the ascen