Chapter X: The Revival of English Scholarship (2)

Humphrey's library was fairly well supplied with historical writers. We find the works of Suetonius, the historian of the twelve Cæsars, the Jewish historian Josephus, Tragus Pompeius, and Cassidorus; among later historians Eusebius and Vincent of Beauvais, Bede, and Higden. Among other historical works were a copy of the _Flores Historiarum_, an _Eulogium Historiarum_, a volume entitled _Tripartita Historia_, a _Polycronicon_, the _Granarium_ of Wheathampsted, and other anonymous chronicles. These were a goodly number of historical books for the times in which Humphrey lived, but more remarkable is the large quantity of medical and astronomical treatises. A long list of books from the pens of doctors ancient and modern belonged to him, beginning with the early Greek writers on medicine, and ending with the compilations of his own physician-in-chief, Gilbert Kymer. Side by side with these stand all the leading authorities on astronomy and astrology, including the works of the chief Arabian philosophers and Roger Bacon's _De Celo et Mundo_. No mention is made of Bacon's _Opus Majus_, nor are there any traces of any scientific treatises outside those known to the mediæval scholars. The interest evinced by the Duke in medicine is both interesting and unusual; his knowledge of astrology proved one of the most fatal of his accomplishments in the days when his wife was accused of sorcery. A word should be said about the recurrence of several works on agriculture, both in Humphrey's library and amongst the books he requisitioned Candido to procure for him. Whether this points to a practical interest in agriculture we cannot tell, though the probability is against it, and there seems no reason to believe that the Duke anticipated that other disappointed politician, who forgot grief at the loss of power in the useful, if unheroic, occupation of growing turnips.

Humphrey's chief distinction as a collector of books lies in the possession of those copies of the ancient classics which he had procured from Italy. Though the _Cosmography_ of Ptolemy, the _Politics_ of Aristotle, and the _Lives_ of Plutarch were absolutely unknown in Western Europe till Palla degli Strozzi had them brought to Italy from Constantinople, yet within a few years of this they were to be found in Latin translations among the Duke of Gloucester's books. Other classical works there were in that collection. Five more volumes of Aristotle, the _Republic_, the _Meno_, and the _Phædrus_ of Plato, all the known works of Cicero, and a volume of that 'most learned of the Romans,' Varro; Sallust, the historian of the Cataline conspiracy; grammarians such as Aulus Gellius and Priscian; rhetoricians such as Quintilian; poets such as Ovid and Terence, all stood side by side in this wonderful library. Seneca was represented both by his philosophical and by his dramatic writings, and criticisms on the philosophy of Aristotle might be found from the pen of Averrois or John of Damascus. The Greek language had been relearned in Italy during the Duke's lifetime, and a step towards bringing it to England was taken in the presentation of a Greek dictionary to Oxford. Finally, Humphrey showed his sympathy with the men of the new learning by possessing five volumes of Boccaccio and seven of Petrarch, and his appreciation of what was best in mediæval thought by the inclusion of a volume of Dante and a commentary thereon amongst his books.[1364]

None can doubt the catholicity of Gloucester's tastes after a glance at the names of the books which he collected, and we must believe that they genuinely manifested his predilections, and that Leland was clearly in the right in praising his sound judgment in matters literary.[1365] His taste was developed by genuine study. Numerous references to him by contemporaries prove that his patronage of literature was no pose adopted for the sake of the popularity it might bring. Livius declares that he surpassed all other princes of his time in his devoted study of letters both humane and divine;[1366] Basin bears the best testimony,[1367] Capgrave follows suit,[1368] and an unknown hand has left a record of high praise for his love of study on the fly-leaf of an Oxford manuscript.[1369] It is, moreover, obvious that the Duke's interests were not confined to the volumes presented to Oxford, and it is noteworthy that among the survivals of his library there is a great contrast in subject-matter between the books of the Oxford donation and those which were retained in his own hands. While the Oxford books are strictly classical and scholastic, the others show a wide range of subjects, and give us reason to believe that they must have formed part of a collection of considerable literary interest. This shows at once the wisdom of the Duke in making his selection of works to give away to a great educationary foundation, and his great range of knowledge, which in many cases stepped outside the traditional limits both of the Schoolmen and of the Humanists. Perhaps the most striking fact is the existence of so many French works in Gloucester's library.[1370] The large majority of these are translations from the Latin, which might at first glance seem to imply that Humphrey was but an indifferent Latin scholar, and preferred to read his books in French. It is undoubtedly true that French was to him the most natural language; he invariably used it in inscribing his name in his books, and he even went so far as to possess a French translation of Livy.[1371] But we must remember that in those days of infrequent and costly manuscripts a collector was only too glad to secure a copy of the author he wanted in whatever language it was written, and moreover a large number of these French books, notably the Livy, were presents from friends, and not private purchases on the part of the Duke. It is, however, interesting to note that whilst he gave a Latin version of the military treatise of Ægidius Romanus to Oxford, he retained in his own hands a French version of the same work.[1372] Undoubtedly, Humphrey read gladly and largely in French, but there is ample evidence that he was also a finished Latin scholar, and deeply versed in the classics. This alone can explain the wealth of classical quotations in letters addressed to him on matters purely personal, when the writer was trying to ingratiate himself with his princely correspondent.[1373] Moreover, his letters to his Italian friends, though doubtless they owe their final shape to a secretary, make constant allusion to classical reading. He was never separated from his copy of the _Republic_ of Plato, and on one occasion at least he borrowed a book from the Oxford Library for his own private use.[1374] On this showing he must have been able to read Latin with ease, and his favourite study was the works of Plato, whose philosophical system was the chief new discovery of the Italian Humanists.[1375]

Earnest though he was in the study of the ancient classics, Gloucester did not allow it to restrict his mental vision. As a practical soldier he was interested in the theory of military operations, and besides his copy of the work of Ægidius Romanus he possessed in his private library a French version of the _Epitome Institutionum Rei Militaris_ of Vegetius.[1376] This treatise, which deals with the organisation of armies, the training of soldiers, and other kindred subjects, was doubtless used by him as a basis for his military theories, and proved a useful handbook on which to found a system more in accord with the circumstances of his day. In general literature, apart from the English poetical works composed for him, Humphrey showed an interest in early French romance by the possession of a copy of the _Roman du Renard_[1377] and at the same time this shows how his political inclinations affected his literary outlook. The _Roman du Renard_, unlike its predecessors of the Carlovingian and Arthurian epic cycles, was produced by the growing sense of independence in the French towns. It has a direct bourgeois inspiration, which must have appealed to a man who found his chief supporters among the burgesses of the City of London. Gloucester's personal tastes may also be traced in his possession of a copy of the resolutions passed at the Council of Basel,[1378] and in the _Songe du Vergier_, which also formed part of his library.[1379] This last consists of a discussion on the relative spheres of the spiritual and temporal powers, and shows us the learned Duke applying his intellect to the pressing ecclesiastical problems of his day, problems about which he had taken a very definite stand in his public actions. Closely connected with this was his interest in matters theological, his acceptance of Capgrave's _Commentary on the Book of Genesis_,[1380] and his possession of numerous tracts by Athanasius,[1381] and of both an English and French version of the Bible.[1382]

Apart from matters purely literary, we have reason to believe that Humphrey's interests were very wide. He showed considerable artistic taste in the beautifully illuminated manuscripts which formed part of his library, though the books that were written specially for him were not often very elaborately adorned. Like his brother Bedford, he knew how to appreciate this kind of artistic work, and we need but allude to the beautiful edition of the Psalms compiled for him, to the St. Omer _Psalter_ once in his possession, and to his copies of the _Decameron_ and of Livy, to realise how he was able to gratify this taste.[1383] In an age when artistic values were still the monopoly of Italians, the illuminated books in the Duke's possession, if of no great artistic value, were excellent examples of the decorative work of the period.[1384] In the kindred art of music also Gloucester probably took some interest. We find frequent mention of 'The minstrels of the Duke of Gloucester,' who visited Winchester, Reading, Lydd, and many other towns 'as a courtesy,' for which they received monetary recognition from the inhabitants.[1385] Possibly these were a band of strolling musicians who enjoyed the patronage of the 'Good Duke,' much in the same way as at a later date actors were known as the 'King's servants.' In any case there is a strong presumption that musicians as well as scholars enjoyed the bounty of the Duke of Gloucester.

GLOUCESTER'S LITERARY POSITION

Just as Humphrey was a great student so was he a great personality in the life of England, the Mæcenas of the new learning, and the friend of all scholars. A considerable portion of his books were presents from various people, and he seems to have been always approachable by any one who could take an interest in any branch of knowledge. Those who gave books to him were drawn from various classes of the community. Men who would earn his patronage presented their work to him as did Capgrave;[1386] his friend Wheathampsted cemented their friendship in the same way.[1387] Frenchmen as well as Englishmen knew of his tastes, and approached him with literary gifts, whether it were the learned Bishop of Bayeux,[1388] or an insignificant Canon of Rouen.[1389] The Duke of Bedford chose a choice treasure from the library of Charles VI. as a gift for his brother,[1390] and the Earl of Warwick, the 'Father of Courtesy' and the tutor of the young King Henry VI., offered a French translation of the Decameron as a mark of friendship and esteem for the man under whom he had served.[1391] Men of less mark followed the lead of the princes of the land. Sir Robert Roos, a public servant of some eminence, gave yet another French work to the then Protector of England,[1392] and Sir John Stanley, possibly the Sir John Stanley who was king of the Isle of Man, hastened to add his tribute of homage in the shape of a French Bible.[1393]

It is hard to say whether these gifts were in all cases indications of literary esteem, or merely means towards securing the favour of a powerful prince. At least they show that Humphrey's interest in all kinds of literature and learning was not assumed as a pose, but was a veritable passion, ministered to by all who desired his friendship. To no other man of his time were such gifts in such profusion given, gifts, moreover, which came not only from the needy scholars who desired his support, but from prince, noble, priest, and humble gentleman alike. There is, too, a remarkable absence of party politics in the literary friendships which these gifts manifest. Bedford not once nor twice was compelled to condemn his brother's action. Warwick was a member of the Council of Regency which withstood the Protector's ambitious claims. Sir Robert Roos, though he accompanied Beckington on his embassy to the Court of Armagnac, was prominent in carrying out the peace policy which Humphrey opposed, and in 1445 was intrusted with bringing Henry VI.'s Queen over to England. Sir John Stanley may possibly be the man to whom the Duchess of Gloucester was intrusted when she was confined in Leeds Castle, and when we look further afield we find that Piero del Monte, the friend of Duke Humphrey, did not hesitate to give the papal blessing to the union of Margaret and Henry VI. when they were married by proxy at Tours.

GLOUCESTER'S LITERARY UNDERSTANDING

Humphrey therefore was more than a mere patron of scholars, and more than a mere literary dilettante. He was known to be more devoted to literature of all kinds than to anything else, and the subtle monks of St. Albans knew well how to win his favour by enlarging his library. His powers of criticism and appreciation are, however, hidden from us. Beyond the nature of the books he collected and a few words of formal appreciation of the works of Plato, we have nothing to guide our judgment, for though a patron and a student, he was not himself an author, in spite of statements to the contrary.[1394] There still exists a copy of certain astrological tables entitled _Tabulæ Humfridi ducis Gloucestriæ in judiciis artis geomansie_, but this was merely a compilation made at his command.[1395] He was content to encourage learning, and to qualify himself for this rôle by study. Thus the Duke of Gloucester devoted a large amount of his superfluous energy to the really great work of encouraging learning in England; yet at first sight it may seem that he laboured in vain. England did not at once adopt the new doctrines that were paving the way to modern methods of study, and it has been thought that Humphrey simply worked in the spirit of the mediæval scholar, and did not in any way appreciate the importance of his actions. England had lagged behind other nations in accepting the doctrines of the Renaissance scholars. Men imbued with the scholastic spirit had journeyed to Italy before the days of Duke Humphrey, but they had not understood the message which the Italians taught them. Richard of Bury had been the friend of Petrarch, but had entirely failed to understand his point of view, and when the future Duke of Gloucester was but five years old, a certain Augustinian monk, known in Italy as Thomas of England, was lecturing in Florence, but was said by Leonardo Bruni to have loved Humanism only so far as an Englishman could understand it.[1396] The Italian scholar therefore had been contemptuous of his English contemporary, but a new era dawns when Humphrey begins to take an interest in Italian scholarship. The Italians who wrote to him showed clearly in their letters that they understood their patron's interest to be intelligent and quite different to the mediæval conceptions of his predecessors, and in some cases we can see the genuine appreciation of the scholar peeping through the adulation of the retainer. His love for Plato, and his clear understanding of the contrast between his philosophy and that of Aristotle, show how entirely he had thrown off the intellectual fetters of the Middle Ages, and in his selection of books we clearly see that he understood that the progress of the future must be based on an understanding of the past. In Humphrey, too, we see traces of that critical faculty which characterised the new movement. He did not look on the classics as an allegorical commentary on the Scriptures, and as a basis for Christian Theology; he studied them from the literary and philosophical point of view, and refused to accept the system laid down by the mediæval schoolmen. He was the first great Englishman to introduce these new ideas into England, though there were other scholars of the period who understood the new doctrines, if they did not preach them; men like Andrew Holles, who after long study in Italy retired to a country benefice, and did nothing towards spreading the new ideas he had acquired.[1397]

GLOUCESTER'S LITERARY INFLUENCE

Herein lies the importance of Duke Humphrey's career. He not only understood the meaning of the new doctrines, but he paved the way towards their fuller appreciation by the nation as a whole. As a layman and a man of affairs he was able to take a more comprehensive view of the significance of the new learning than the churchmen who hitherto had held the monopoly of English knowledge, and he laid the foundations on which others were to build. In the first place he taught men that it was to Italy that they should look for direction in their studies. He himself had not visited that country as so many of his contemporaries had done, but he had brought himself into nearer touch with its intellectual life than any other Englishman. The man who was the patron of Leonardo Bruni, the constant correspondent of Pier Candido Decembrio, the friend of Piero del Monte, and the literary acquaintance of Alfonso of Aragon, the man who more than once was picked out by Æneas Sylvius for literary appreciation, was far more in sympathy with Italian aspirations than such a one as Thomas Beaufort, Duke of Exeter, who showed no signs of having been influenced in any way by his sojourn at the University of Padua.

Yet the interest of Humphrey's Italian sympathies lies not so much in his connection with Italy as in the fact that he never set foot in the country. He did not take himself and his energies to be expended in a selfish pursuit of learning in Italy, like his contemporary Holles, but he helped to bring the intellectual aspirations of the Italians over to England. He not only taught men to study Italian wars, but also led them to bring the results of that study home to their own doors. And he was not without disciples. It is customary to believe that the humanistic aspirations of the 'Good Duke' received no echo in the England of his day, but we cannot but think that his example helped to inspire the exertions of that devoted band of scholars which included the princely ecclesiastic, William Grey, poor students such as John Free, Fleming, and Gunthorpe, and the notorious but scholarly John Tiptoft, Earl of Worcester. Indeed there is much to suggest this, and perhaps the most curious of all our evidence centres in the name of Guarino da Verona, the great schoolmaster of Ferrara, who was intrusted with the education of Lionello and Borso d'Este. Every one of this band of English students studied under the direction of this famous scholar. Grey attended his instructions while living in princely state at Ferrara; Free journeyed from his home in Bristol to get the benefit of his teaching; Tiptoft turned aside during his wanderings in Italy to visit him in his adopted home; all at one time or another joined that ever-increasing band of English scholars who flocked to the Ferrarese school in such numbers as to be specially mentioned by Lodovico Carbone in his funeral oration over the dead scholar.[1398] Humphrey's influence is to be traced here, for it was he who had first pointed to Guarino as the fountain of true learning. When commissioning Zano of Bayeux to buy him books in Italy, he had laid special stress on his desire to possess anything that had been written by this teacher.[1399] By selecting Guarino as the mentor of his intellectual aspirations, he had pointed out the road for future scholars to tread.

All these scholars followed in the steps of the Duke of Gloucester, and had all grown up before he passed from the scene of his activities. They, however, failed to carry out his theories to the full. Though they submitted themselves to the desire for the new learning, they did but little to bring it home to the great mass of Englishmen. They studied, but they did not teach. They had all learnt the earliest lesson of the new ideas under the shadow of the University of Oxford; all were Oxonians, and thus were direct products of Duke Humphrey's patronage of that home of learning, and they so far followed in his footsteps as to give or bequeath the books they collected either to the University itself, or to some College within it. It was in this way that Gloucester had most conspicuously prepared the high-road to learning. By his gifts of books he had given Oxford students the opportunity of further researches into the human mind, he had thrown open the doors which had hitherto barred the way to Englishmen who desired a knowledge of what the past had thought of life and its component elements. For the first time in England men were able to know something of what the ancients had written. In the book-chests of Oxford lay the seeds of the English Renaissance. The immense importance of access to these books may easily be misunderstood at the present day; it is hard to realise completely the limitations which surrounded the mediæval scholar, but once this is achieved, the presence of these works, which reflected, if they did not very accurately represent, the ideas of classical writers, will be fully appreciated.

By his patronage of Oxford and his gifts of books Humphrey had inspired his immediate successors to carry on his work, and to bring together the materials for future generations to use. His work was crowned when Greek came to be taught in England. He himself had known no Greek, Grey and his friends had known but not imparted it; it remained for William Selling of All Souls at Canterbury, and Thomas Linacre, William Grocyn, and Thomas Latimer at Oxford, to bring this language and the literature which it voiced to the knowledge of educated Englishmen. Linacre, perhaps even more than his fellows, was cast in the mould that Humphrey would have approved. Like Humphrey, he was a man of immensely wide interests, not the dry-as-dust scholar, but the man of the world; like Humphrey, he was a special student of medicine, a science which owed its development in Italy to the discovery of the works of Hippocrates. At the same time he, more than any one else, completed the edifice of which Humphrey had built the foundations. Again we can trace the direct influence of the Duke. This last band of scholars who finally established the new learning in England were, like their predecessors, all Oxonians. The University which Gloucester had started on the way of good things was the parent of the new school of thought, it carried on the work of its great patron. It is to the lasting fame of this indifferent politician that through him the humanities came to be taught in England, that through him Oxford was induced to lead the van in introducing the new culture. We are apt to forget the debt we owe to the work of these early intellectual reformers, and to minimise the influence of the ideas they introduced on every aspect of our lives. Yet reflection will give its due meed of praise to their laborious efforts, and if it goes far enough back, will, like the Bidding Prayer read from the pulpit of the University Church, place Duke Humphrey's name first on the list of benefactors.

GLOUCESTER'S TITLE TO FAME

It is a relief to turn from the stormy political career of Duke Humphrey to that sphere of his activity where undiluted praise can be given; to forget that public life which was marred by instability and prejudice, and to admire that industry which won him a great reputation both with his contemporaries and with posterity. Yet we must not forget that many of the qualities which led him to court disaster in public life were due to his leanings towards a life of study. The circumstances of his life and the tendencies of his age were against him. A student by nature and a politician by birth, he had too much ambition and too little restraint to choose the better path, and confine his energies to spreading the gospel of the new learning. The man of letters is seldom wise in adopting a life of political activity, and the case of Humphrey was in some ways repeated later in the life of Bacon. Even if we place the Duke of Gloucester amongst the worst types of political criminals--and we have no adequate reason for so doing--we must accord him a position of honour amongst those to whom posterity should be grateful. By those who have laboured under the shadow of his personality in the Library which preserves his name the memory of the 'Good Duke' must be cherished as an inspiration. They indeed must catch something of the spirit which enabled Hearne to speak of him as 'that religious, good and learned prince whose handwriting I us'd, whenever I saw it in the Bodleian Library ... to show a particular sort of respect to, as some little Remains of a truly great Man, one that was both a Scholar himself, and the chiefest Promoter of Learning and Scholars at that time.'[1400]

The first page of the Renaissance in England consists of the life of Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, and all who value the inspiration to be drawn from the new era in human thought which dates from that great movement, must respect the memory of this great Lancastrian Prince.

FOOTNOTES:

[1265] Admundesham, _Annales_, ii. 233, and Introduction to vol ii.
p. liv.

[1266] Bale (1559 edition), 584.

[1267] Wheathampsted spent much money on other improvements to the
monastery as well. Dugdale, _Monasticon_, 199, 200.

[1268] Bodley MS., F. _infra_, i. 1. Inscription.

[1269] Arundel MS., 34, f. 666.

[1270] _Epist. Acad._, 237.

[1271] Amundesham, _Annales_, ii. App. A. 256.

[1272] _Epist. Acad._, 235. These two parts of his _Granarium_ which
Wheathampsted gave to Humphrey were at one time amongst the
books of Thomas Allen of Gloucester Hall. Twyne,
_Collectanea_, in the Oxford University Archives, vol. xviii.
p. 123.

[1273] Arundel MS., 34, f. 67.

[1274] See Early English Text Society's edition, 1893.

[1275] Bale, 582; Leland, _Commentarii_, 453.

[1276] Oriel MS., xxxii. f. 1vo. This dedication is printed in
Appendix IV. to Capgrave's _De Illustribus Henricis_, pp.
239-301.

[1277] Oriel MS., xxxii. f. 1vo.

[1278] Capgrave, _De Illustribus Henricis_, 109.

[1279] Bale, 583; Pits, 672.

[1280] Nicolaus Uptonus, _De Studio Militari_ (London, 1654), p. 2.

[1281] _History from Marble_, i, pp. 79 and clxviii.

[1282] _Ordinances_, iv, 345.

[1283] _Ibid._, iii. 99.

[1284] _Rot. Pat._, 25 _Henry VI._, Part i. m. 16.

[1285] _Beckington Correspondence_, ii. 255.

[1286] _Beckington Correspondence, passim._

[1287] Foxe, _Acts and Monuments_, iii. 731.

[1288] Ramsay, ii. 203. No authority is given for the statement.

[1289] See _Political Songs, passim_. Cf. Stow, 385.

[1290] Harleian MS., 2251, ff. 279vo-282vo; Additional MS., 29, 729,
ff. 157vo-161.

[1291] Ashmole MS., 59, ff. 57-59.

[1292] Harleian MS., 2251, ff. 7-8vo; Additional MS., 34, 360, ff.
65vo-67vo.

[1293] Caxton's edition of the _Falls of Princes_ (1494). Cf. MS. 23
of the Library of the Earl of Jersey at Osterley Park, _Hist.
MSS. Report_, viii. Part i. p. 100.

[1294] Bibliothèque Nationale, MS. français, 12,421.

[1295] On this point see Hortis, 646.

[1296] _Minor Poems of Lydgate_, Percy Society Publications (London,
1840), ii. 49-51.

[1297] Bodley MS., 263, ff. 5, 6.

[1298] The poem is printed in F. J. Furnivall's _Manners and Meals
in Olden Times_ (Early English Text Society, 1868), pp.
115-198.

[1299] _Letters of Queen Margaret_, edited by Cecil Monro (Camden
Society, 1863), p. 114.

[1300] Amundesham, _Annales_, ii. Appendix D, p. 295.

[1301] Cotton MS., Claudius, D. I, f. 8vo; Letter of Wheathampsted
to Norton.

[1302] See Warton, iii. 131.

[1302] Bodley MS., Arch. F. d. 1. A photographic reproduction of a
MS. once in the possession of Earl Fitzwilliam at
Wentworth-Woodhouse, but now denied to be there. It has been
published by A. S. Napier.

[1304] Palladius, p. 66.

[1305] _Ibid._, p. 85.

[1306] Palladius, p. 22.

[1307] _Ibid._, pp. 21, 22.

[1308] Bodley MS., Arch. F. d. 1, f. 12; Palladius, p. 22.

[1309] Palladius, p. 21. Cf. _St. Albans Chron._, i. 12-17.

[1310] _Epist. Acad._, 103.

[1311] _Epist. Acad._, 198-241.

[1312] _Munimenta Acad._, 266.

[1313] _Ibid._, 277-279.

[1314] _Epist. Acad._, 152.

[1315] _Ibid._, 106.

[1316] _Ibid._, 201-211.

[1317] _Ibid._, 645.

[1318] _Munimenta Acad._, 333-335; _Epist. Acad._, 266.

[1319] _Epist. Acad._, 61.

[1320] _Ibid._, 77-79.

[1321] _Beckington Correspondence_, ii. 256-258.

[1322] _Epist. Acad._, 162-168.

[1323] _Ibid._, 61, 62.

[1324] _Epist. Acad._, 64, 65.

[1325] _Ibid._, 105, 196.

[1326] _Ibid._, 152.

[1327] _Ibid._, 35-37.

[1328] _Beckington Correspondence_, ii. 249, 250; _Epist. Acad._,
110.

[1329] _Epist. Acad._, 115-133.

[1330] _Ibid._, 134, 135.

[1331] _Ibid._, 136.

[1332] _Epist. Acad._, 155-157.

[1333] _Ibid._, 139, 140. It was also through Gloucester's influence
that Bedford was induced to promise to endow his
lectureships; _Ibid._, 81-83, 95.

[1334] _Ibid._, 152, 153.

[1335] _Munimenta Acad._, 266, 267.

[1336] _Epist. Acad._, 114, 115.

[1337] The numbers are variously stated in different letters as 120,
126, and 129. This last corresponds with the number of books
in the indenture; _Ibid._, 179-183.

[1338] _Ibid._, 177-179, 184.

[1339] _Ibid._, 177-179. This was not the first time that Gloucester
had been likened to Julius Cæsar.

[1340] _Epist. Acad._, 184.

[1341] _Munimenta Acad._, 758; _Epist. Acad._, 179.

[1342] _Epist. Acad._, 198, 204, 205.

[1343] _Ibid._, 232-237. The indenture mentions one hundred and
thirty-five volumes as the total, but only one hundred and
thirty-four are given in the list.

[1344] _Ibid., passim._

[1345] Additional MS., 4608, f. 100, 100vo.

[1346] By counting the same items more than once Anthony Wood brings
the total to five hundred and thirty-nine; Wood, _History of
the Antiquities of the University of Oxford_, 914, 915.

[1347] _Munimenta Acad._, 261-266.

[1348] _Ibid._, 326-328; _Epist. Acad._, 188-191.

[1349] _Epist. Acad._, 245.

[1350] _Epist. Acad._, 245, 246.

[1351] _Ibid._, 533.

[1352] It has been stated that these books were ultimately obtained,
but there is no reason to believe this, though ten years
later thirteen volumes, originally bequeathed by some one,
were recovered; _Epist. Acad._, 483. Cf. Wood, _History of
the Antiquities of the University of Oxford_, 915. In 1453 we
hear that all the volumes of this bequest were scattered in
private hands; _Epist. Acad._, 318, 319.

[1353] _Epist. Acad._, 254.

[1354] _Munimenta Acad._, 735.

[1355] _Munimenta Acad._, 376.

[1356] _Ibid._, 329, 330; _Epist. Acad._, 256.

[1357] _Epist. Acad._, 241.

[1358] _Ibid._, 178.

[1359] _Ibid._, 198.

[1360] See Macray, _Annals of Bodleian_, 13.

[1361] On 1st March 1544 a certain John Stanshawe, gentleman, stole
from the church of St. Mary 'unam Zonam de argent. aurat.
voc. le Duke Humfrey's gyrdyll.' _Letters and Papers, Foreign
and Domestic, of the Reign of Henry VIII._ (London, 1905),
vol. xx. Part 1. p. 655.

[1362] _Epist. Acad._, 373. Letter of the University of Oxford to
Wheathampsted.

[1363] Leland, _Collectanea_, iii. 58; Hearne, MS. Diary, xxxvi. f.
199. It is probable that this motto was used by Gilbert
Kymer. It is found stamped on the binding of a medical work
written for him and now preserved in the Bodleian Library
(Laud MS., 558). Another binding which encloses another
medical treatise written by the same scribe, and presumably
also for Kymer, now in the Merton College Library, bears the
same legend. (Merton College MS., 268.) My attention has been
drawn to this by Mr. Gibson of the Bodleian Library.

[1364] The books alluded to are to be found in the indentures
printed in _Epist. Acad., passim_.

[1365] Leland, _Commentarii_, 453.

[1366] Livius, 2.

[1367] Basin, i. 189.

[1368] Capgrave, _De Illustribus Henricis_, 109.

[1369] Lincoln MS., 106, f. 359vo.

[1370] See Appendix A.

[1371] Bibliothèque de Ste. Geneviève, MS. français, 777.

[1372] Cambridge University Library, MS. Ee. 2, 17.

[1373] See letters in _Beckington Correspondence_, i. 283, 284,
290-293.

[1374] _Epist. Acad._, 246.

[1375] The book borrowed from Oxford was a copy of the _Phædrus_ of
Plato. In the _Epistolæ Academicæ_ this volume is called the
'Phædo,' but a reference to the entry in the Register shows
it to be a misprint for the _Phædrus_, a mistake first
discovered by Mr. Gibson of the Bodleian Library.

[1376] Cambridge University Library, MS. Ee. 2, 17.

[1377] Bibliothèque Nationale, MS. français, 12,583.

[1378] Cotton MS., Nero, E. v.

[1379] Royal MS., 19, C. iv.

[1380] Oriel College MS., xxxii.

[1381] Harleian MS., 33; King's College MS., 27.

[1382] Egerton MS., 617, 618; Bibliothèque Nationale, MS. français,
2.

[1383] For a description of these volumes see Appendix A.

[1384] Leland tells us that Gloucester received many beautiful
illuminated books as presents from religious houses.
_Collectanea_, iii. 58.

[1385] _Hist. MSS. Rep._, v. 517, and xi. 174.

[1386] Oriel College MS., xxxii.

[1387] Corpus Christi College MS., ccxliii.

[1388] Bibliothèque Nationale, MS. latin, 8537.

[1389] Bodley MS., Hatton, 36.

[1390] Bibliothèque de Ste. Geneviève, MS. français, 777.

[1391] Bibliothèque Nationale MS., français, 12,421.

[1392] Cambridge University Library, MS. Ee. 2, 17.

[1393] Bibliothèque Nationale, MS. français, 2.

[1394] Bale (1559 ed.), 583.

[1395] Arundel MS. 60, ff. 277vo-287vo. Cf. Tanner, _Bib. Brit._,
420, 421.

[1396] Einstein, 15.

[1397] See Vespasiano, 238; and Sir Arthur Collins's _Collections
for the Family of Holles_ (1752), 52, 53.

[1398] Leland, _Commentarii_, 462.

[1399] Above, p. 351.

[1400] Hearne's Introduction to _Peter Langtoft's Chronicle_
(Oxford, 1725), p. xx.