Catalogue—in which are entered about 600 volumes, in nearly every one of which, besides the substantive (or initial?) work, are particularised numerous detached writings, varying from two or three to five-and-forty distinct "tracts" to Prior Henry Chichely (1413_1443), the founder of All Souls and St. John's Colleges, Oxford, and who "built the library of the church, and furnished it with books," we will see whether the book "qui intitulatur Johannes Crisestomus," &c. was returned to Canterbury, and had a place in the list;—and this, we think, is satisfactorily shown by the following entry:—
"Johannes Crisostomus de laude Apostoli.
In hoc volumine continentur
Idem de laude Redemptoris.
Brutus latine.
Nomina Regum Britanniæ sicut in ordine successerunt.
Nomina Archiepiscoporum Cantuariensis sicut in ordine suecesserunt.
Tabula et questiones Bede de ratione temporum.
Tabula ejusdem et expositio super tabulam de lunationibus.
Descriptio Britanniæ Insulæ.
Expositio super Merlinum, imperfecta.
It may perhaps be supposed that this proves too much, as, besides the direct title of the volume, eight "tracts" are here entered, while in the Power of Attorney only two are noticed. But we would maintain, nevertheless, that it is the identical book, and explain this variation in the description by the circumstance that the library having, in the space of nearly two centuries, been materially enriched, numerous works, consisting in many cases only of a single "quaternion," were inserted in the volumes already existing. An examination of the structure of books of this period would confirm this view, and show that their apparent clumsiness is to be explained by the facility it was then the custom to afford for the interpolation or extraction of "sheets," by a contrivance somewhat resembling that of the present day for temporarily fixing loose papers in a cover, and known as the "patent leaf-holder."
The second document is a list of certain books, belonging to the monastery of Anglesey, early in the fourteenth century, allotted out to the canons of the house for the purpose of custody, or, perhaps, of study or devotion.
"Isti libri liberati sunt canonicis die……anno regni Regis Edwardi septimo"[1] (7 Edw. 11. A.D. 1314)
Penes Dominum Priorem; Parabelae Salomonis; Psalterium cum……
Penes Dominum J. de Bodek.; Epistolae Pauli……; Quædam notulæ super psalter et liber miraculorum Marias cum miraculis sanctorum.
Penes Sub-priorem; Liber vitas Sancti Thomæ Martiris.
Penes E. de Ely; Quartus liber sententiarum cum sermo……; Liber Reymundi; Liber de vitiis et virtutibus et pastorale.
Penes R. Pichard; Liber Alquini; Liber Johannis de Tyrington cum Catone et aliis.
Penes Henrici Muchet; Liber de vita Sanctae Mariæ Magdalenae et remediarum (?)
Penes Walteri de Yilwilden; Liber S…… ligatus in panno ymnaro glosatus cum constitutionibus; Belet ligatus et vita sanctorum.
Penes Ricardi de Queye; Omeliæ Gregorii (?) super Evangelistos ligatae in nigro corio.
In commune biblia ; Decreta; Decretales; Prima pars moralium Job; Liber de abusionibus.
Liber justitiæ; penes Magistrum Adam de Wilburham.
Penes Walteri de Wyth; Liber Innocentii super sacramenta cum Belet et introductione in uno volumine.
Item penes Sup-priorem; Psalterium glosatum quod fuit in custodia Magistri Henrici de Melreth.
Item aliud psalterium glosatum inpignoratum penes Isabellam Siccadona.
Several of these descriptions are highly curious; particularly the last item, which describes one of the "glossed" psalters as being "in pawn" a fact which, in itself, tells a history of the then condition of the house.
The first document, taken in connection with that referred to by Mr. Hunter, would seem to establish the existence of a system of interchanging the literary wealth of monastic establishments, and thereby greatly extending the advantages of their otherwise scanty stores. Both are executed with all the legal forms used in the most important transactions, which would support the opinion of their not
- ↑ The formula of this date, "anno R. R. E. septimo," would at first sight be considered to refer to the preceding reign; but the list is merely a memorandum on the dorse of a completely executed instrument dated A. D. 1300, which it is highly improbable that it preceded. The style of Edward II. is often found as above, though not usually so.
