1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Richard of Cirencester
RICHARD OF CIRENCESTER (c. 1335-c. 1401), historical writer, was a member of the Benedictine abbey at Westminster, and his name (“Circestre”) first appears on the chamberlain's list of the monks of that foundation drawn up in the year 1355. In the year 1391 he obtained a licence from the abbot to go to Rome, and in this the abbot gives his testimony to Richard's perfect and sincere observance of religion for upwards of thirty years. In 1400 Richard was in the infirmary of the abbey, where he died in the following year. His only known extant work is Speculum Historiale de Gestis Regum Angliae, 447–1066. The MS. of this is in the university library at Cambridge, and has been edited for the Rolls Series (No. 30) by Professor J. E. B. Mayor (2 vols., London, 1863–69). It is in four books, and at the conclusion of the fourth book Richard expresses his intention of continuing his narrative from the accession of William I., and incorporating a sketch of the Conqueror's career from his birth. This design he does not, however, appear to have carried into effect. The value of the Speculum as a contribution to our historical knowledge is but slight, for it is mainly a compilation from other writers; while even in transscribing these the compiler is guilty of great carelessness. He gives, however, numerous charters relating to Westminster Abbey, and also a very complete account of the saints whose tombs were in the abbey church, and especially of Edward the Confessor. The work was, however, largely used by historians and antiquaries, until, with the rise of a more critical spirit, its value became more accurately estimated. Besides the Speculum Richard also wrote, according to the statement of William of Woodford in his Answer to Wyclifie (Edward Brown, Fasciculus Rerum expetendarum, p. 193), a treatise De Officiis; and there was formerly in the cathedral library at Peterborough another tractate from his pen, entitled Super Symbolum. Of neither of these works, however, does any known copy now exist.
This forgery was accepted as genuine by a well-known antiquary of the 18th century, Dr William Stukeley, and under the sanction of his authority continued for a long time to be regarded in the same light by numerous scholars and antiquaries, includin Gibbon and Lingard. On the other hand, critics of a 'later dite gave expression, on various grounds, to a contrary conclusion. All doubt on the subject may, however, be held to have been effectually set at rest by the masterly exposure of the whole fraud drawn up byProfessor Mayor in the preface to the edition above referred to of the Speculum. He has there not only demonstrated, from the external and internal evidence alike, the spuriousness of the whole treatise, but in a collation (extending to nearly a hundred pages) of numerous passages with corresponding passages in classical medieval authorities, has also traced out the various sources whence Bertram derived the terminology and the facts which he reproduced in the De Situ. (J. B. M.)