Page:English Historical Review Volume 37.djvu/619

1922 SHORT NOTICES 611 three articles were printed in 1826, 1844, and 1845 (though the last was in fact never published), while the most considerable of the three books bears date between 1851 and 1864. The articles are important pioneer work, and have often been referred to as representing stages in historical criticism. It was in 1826, for instance, that Palgrave opened a new line of inquiry when he declared that ' Matthew of Westminster is a phantom who never existed ' (ix. 377), and demolished a then unquestioned authority when he condemned Ingulf of Croyland as ' a mere monkish invention ' (ix. 424). But it was very many years before either of these facts sank into the minds of historical teachers or writers. Palgrave's discussion of Ingulf is still worth reading (ix. 418-26) ; and his whole article, though not free from capricious ventures, is altogether a memorable performance. Among other papers we may draw special attention to that on ' The Progress of Historical Enquiry in France ' (x. 1-40). R. L. P. Under the title of Monastic Life in the Middle Ages (London : Bell, 1922), Cardinal Gasquet has published in book-form a number of articles written by him during the past forty years. Some of these have appeared in books or journals which have already come under notice in this Review. The remainder are well-written and interesting, though rather slight, sketches of some phases of medieval life. As contributions to historical knowledge they have less value. The cardinal is the resolute champion of the pre-Reformation church in England, and the thesis he is principally concerned to defend can best be described in his own words (p. 231) : ' history shows that they [the English monks] never introduced, or indeed needed, any startling reforming principles. As a whole, they secured and retained to the last the respect of the Catholic people of England.' So he writes less as an historian than as an advocate, and selects and inter- prets his facts accordingly. Thus in his defence of Abbot Wallingford he dismisses as unfounded reports the charges of Archbishop Morton, though the latter speaks of the ' frequent relations of people worthy of credit' (p. 21) ; on the other hand, he accepts implicitly the testimony of the community in favour of Wallingford, though the community were as much implicated in the charges as the abbot, and were therefore hardly impartial witnesses. Also, the testimony of the obituary to ' the truly just victory ' of the abbot at Rome (p. 25) is in conflict with his own argu- ment (p. 27) that victory really rested with Archbishop Morton ; his attempt to reconcile the two is unconvincing. We think it unfortunate, too, that he has left the chapter on ' Adrian IV and Ireland ' unrevised, in view of the criticisms of it, especially by Dr. Round in The Commune of London. The last and longest chapter and perhaps the most im- portant gives an account, from correspondence discovered in the Vatican Archives, of the very interesting relations of Great Britain with the Holy See from 1792 to 1806. It helps to remind us of the real service that the cardinal has rendered to the advance of historical knowledge. This lies less in his writings, useful as they have often been in breaking fresh ground, than in the encouragement and assistance he has so readily given to students in the great library which is under his charge. Z. N. B. R r 2