complete illustration of the passage, in his _Glossary_, where we have
"BULGA, _hýdig-faet_." It is possible, therefore, that _higdifatu_ is a
mere error of the scribe. Now Du Cange, v. _Bulga_, cites this very
passage from Aelfric's _Glossary_, and adds, "i.e. _vas ex corio
confectum_," but his whole article is worth consulting. That the Latin
word in the _Colloquy_ should be _Cassidilia_ is quite clear. Thus in an
old MS. English Gloss on the Bible (penes me), the passage in Tobit,
viii. 2., "Protulit de _Cassidili_ suo," is rendered, "brouzt forth of
his _Scrippe_." Coverdale has it, "take out of his _bagge_," and Luther,
"langte aus seinem _Sücklein_," which word is exchanged for _büdel_ in
the Saxon version. In two old Teutonic Glosses on the Bible published by
Graff (_Diutiska, ii. 178.), we have the following variations:--

_de cassidi_ burssa, _de sacello t. sacciperio_ kiula
_de cassili_ burissa, _de sacello t. sacciperio_ kiulla.

Another Gloss in Graff's 1st vol. p. 192., on the word _Cadus_, may
perhaps throw some light on the subject. The philological student need
not be reminded of the wide application of the word _vas_, Lat., _fazz_,
O.G., and _faet_. A.S.; but for my own part, I conclude that the
shoewright intended to designate by _higdifatu_ all sorts of _leathern
budgets_. Every Anglo-Saxon student must be so sensible of the great
obligation he is under to our distinguished scholar Mr. Thorpe, that I
trust it will not be deemed invidious or ungracious to point out another
passage in this _Colloquy_ which seems to have hitherto baffled him, but
which it appears to me may be elucidated.

To the question, "Hwilce fixas gefehst thu?" the fisherman answers,
"Aelas aud hacodas, mynas, aud aelputan, sceotan aud lampredan, aud swa
hwylce swa on waetere swymath, _sprote_."