The Bodleian Library at Oxford
CHAPTER VI
METHODS AND MATERIALS OF MODERN STUDY
Man lives _in_ the present, _for_ the future, but emphatically _by_ the past. He cannot possibly understand what he sees (whether in politics, theology, literature or science), without realizing how it came to be. If he attempts to avoid this necessary study of the past, or affects to despise it, he is beaten in the race of life by those who are wiser than himself. Every characteristic of a living person or nation, the stock of ideas and ideals by which they live, their very habits and daily life, all have roots deep in the past. If this truth is grasped—and it is not less true because it can be clearly and shortly stated—libraries are seen at once to be a necessary adjunct to all education and all civilization. Carlyle saw this when he wrote with characteristic exaggeration that the Modern University is a Library of Books.
But, as is pointed out at p. 10 above, there are libraries and libraries. However valuable elementary and circulating and private libraries may be (and they are the necessary lower rungs of the ladder of progress), it is for the great Libraries of Deposit that the educated student reserves his time, his energies and his admiration. The certainty of finding all, or nearly all, the authorities on his subject, and of finding them at hand, is his delight. If he further discovers a large store of manuscripts from which new information may be drawn, or old texts improved, his pleasure amounts to enthusiasm.
The Bodleian, it is submitted, satisfies these conditions of contentment, and is, and always will be, both for British and foreign students of theology, history, literature or science, a potent element in post-graduate education at Oxford. That it is not fully used, is true; and that it needs much more help before it can exercise its proper functions, is also true. But it has been greatly aided and stimulated by three centuries of goodwill, energy and benefaction; and it does what it can, both in giving free access to all who are properly recommended to it, and in providing catalogues and indexes for their use; it is only the lack of adequate endowment which prevents it from greatly increasing its utility and influence.
There are several departments of study in which the Library is able to furnish ample manuscript materials for original research. Among them may be mentioned especially Theology, Classics, English history and English literature, the local history of the British Isles (especially of Oxford and its neighbourhood), and Oriental literature (especially Hebrew, Sanskrit, Arabic and Chinese). To these may be added Music, old Irish literature and Liturgies without exhausting the list of specialities. The printed collections are rich in English books of all dates (especially Bibles and Theology), in Classics, Historical books of reference, and old literature of various kinds.
Much has been written lately about the pitfalls which await the historical researcher, whether he attempts to interpret the documents of a past age or to enter into its ideas. This is not the place for an enumeration of these difficulties, but they are well summarized (with a short bibliography) in C. G. Crump’s _Logic of History_ (Helps for Students of History, No. 6: 1919; price 8d.). Classical students are at no loss for guides,[28] and it is open to all others simply to take a book or edition of repute, and study its methods, the enumeration of MSS., the grouping of them, and the principles of text-construction and criticism. But at every step they need a large library, and the Bodleian combines the advantages usually only found in a great city with the amenity and surroundings of a country town.
Even in this short manual it may be of practical use to give two actual examples of historical method, applied in one case to prehistoric remains in and the other to elucidation of old and vague chronicles. They are given in the belief that an ounce of practice is worth a hundred-weight of precept.
1. STONEHENGE
What is the date, approximately, when Stonehenge was erected? The data are that it lies in a part of Salisbury Plain which is dotted with a large number of barrows, early and late in date. How can the building, the stones and the ground be made to give up evidence as to date?
In 1889 Sir Arthur Evans investigated the question in a paper in the _Archæological Review_ for January in that year.
1. Many of the barrows, two of which are in obvious connection with the great stones, are shown by their forms and contents to be of the largest type of Bronze Age barrows, known as Round Barrows (for instance, gold relics, glass beads, ivory and cremated remains are signs of lateness). This being so, it is significant that chippings of the stones brought _from a distance_ to Stonehenge are found even in undisturbed barrows of this kind, where the action of earthworms and rabbits in introducing foreign elements is hardly possible. It is clear, therefore, that the building of Stonehenge was at least begun _late_ in that period. There is the point also that with the exception of two, the circumjacent barrows are _not_ in any relation with the great circle, and are therefore not later.
2. The contents of the barrows earlier than Stonehenge have some imported articles which must have come from the continent not before the fifth century B.C. One even is stated to have contained a socketed celt, pointing to the late fourth century. But late Celtic antiquities are wholly absent, which makes it hardly possible that the barrows should be as late as the second century B.C.
3. The skilful hewing and fitting of the huge blocks of Wiltshire Sarsen stone are of the same stage in technical development as the triliths of Syria and Tripoli, and the great Doric temple of Segesta in Sicily, which latter was constructed about 415 B.C.
From these and similar indications he concludes that the gradual building of the great monument was probably between 300 and 150 B.C. He is now inclined to place the date earlier.
In 1901 a small committee of the Society of Antiquaries and two other societies reported on the desirability of setting upright a very large leaning stone at Stonehenge, which showed signs of breaking up as well as of falling still further down. It was successfully raised in September of that year, and it is from the necessary excavations—which were very carefully and scientifically conducted—that various data were collected by Mr. William Gowland, and printed in _Archæologia_, vol. 58 (1902).
No object of metal was found, except one small trace of bronze or copper. From this circumstance he concludes that Stonehenge was constructed at the time when the Neolithic Age was passing into the Bronze Age, and that has been tentatively placed at about 1400 B.C., or not later. Sir Norman Lockyer, he mentions, had recently attempted to determine the date on the hypothesis that the monument was a solar temple, since, as is well known, the midsummer sun rises exactly in the line of the chief avenue from the temple, and exactly over a large detached stone placed no doubt for this very purpose. He deduced a date as early as 1700 B.C.
It is disappointing to observe the discrepancy between these results. But it is particularly instructive, and a salutary warning to all who attempt scientific enquiries into historical problems, to note that both results are based on sound method. Good method, in short, is not sufficient: the data must also be adequate, and where indeterminate they must, as in this case, be approached, tested and used with the greatest caution. For instance, the absence of bronze tools is not _conclusive_ evidence that the Bronze Age had not begun, and therefore that Stonehenge was earlier than about B.C. 1500, for the stone implements found were sufficient for their work and much more easily obtained than bronze tools. Moreover, the stone implements are stated not to be of the characteristic late Stone Age types, and may therefore have been improvised.
2. THE LOSS OF KING JOHN’S TREASURES IN THE WASH, A.D. 1216
Everyone has read how King John in his last days lost all his baggage train in the waves of the Wash (the great bay or inlet which separates Lincolnshire from Norfolk), and is supposed hardly to have saved his own life. The ordinary histories go on to say that he died soon after of chagrin at the disaster, and that Henry III was crowned in a gold circlet because the Crown had been lost with the rest of John’s treasure. The old chroniclers are vague and avoid detail, and it is the kind of story which lends itself to exaggeration. It seems to have struck Sir William St. John Hope that it might be worth while to investigate closely the exact circumstances, and to consider what was lost, and where. Such a quest might indicate possibilities even of the recovery of the treasure, if the spot could be ascertained, and the brilliant results of his application of scientific method have more than justified his attempt, and afford a really interesting example for imitation.
1. First, the chroniclers’ accounts were noted and compared. Roger of Wendover, Matthew Paris and the Coggeshall chronicler state in varying terms that the King and his army barely escaped, and that the baggage which followed was lost in whirlpools or quicksands in the “Well stream,” which disembogues into the sea through the Wash. These are original authorities, and Sir William observes that the first-named was at the time Prior of Belvoir in Leicestershire, about forty miles only from the scene, and that the priory was of the same (Cistercian) order as that of Swineshead, where the King lodged on the night after the catastrophe, and where he fell ill.
2. The route followed by the King himself can fortunately be absolutely ascertained from the fact that every day he made grants which are registered among the Patent and Close Rolls, and each is marked as made at a certain place. We at once learn, therefore, that the King, who had swept much of Norfolk clear of its gold and silver treasures in revenge for the revolt of the Barons, left King’s Lynn on October 11, 1216, for Wisbeach, went thus round the head of the great indentation of the Wash, and journeyed thence on the fateful 12th to Swineshead, in Lincolnshire, where he ordered his baggage to join him by a direct route northward from King’s Lynn across the Wash at low tide. All this is ascertained fact, and we learn already that the King himself was never in danger, but only his baggage train, and its guard and the attendant forces.
3. There is no question of the great changes in the coast line during the last seven hundred years. Whereas the sea used to cover what is now flat and fruitful meadow land, almost as far as Wisbeach, the water is now kept out by the silt it has deposited and by embankments. The accounts of later writers on the disaster, Camden, Brady and local antiquaries, mention the old lines of embankment and with this help they can still be traced. Thus emerges the important fact that there was a definite ford of no great width straight across the Wash and across the Well stream, now called the Welland; the route to the ford is marked by a road and a line of old churches and villages.
4. Next, military historians were asked to estimate the probable amount of baggage and the numbers and composition of the train and its guard. It was estimated that the whole cavalcade would be something like three miles long, not capable of moving more than 2½ miles an hour at best, the crossing being not less than 4½ miles, from Cross Keys northward to Long Sutton, and the channels, where the long and narrow ford encounters its chief difficulty, not far from Long Sutton.
5. On the great day, October 12, 1216, what were the tides? An official of the Nautical Almanac Office specially worked out the problem, with the result: Low water about noon, high water about 6 p.m., the sunset being at 5.15 p.m. It was a spring-tide, favourable for crossing, as so much of the route would be uncovered at low water, but it is clear that the available time for crossing the long ford and the mid-stream of the Welland would not be more than from about 10 a.m. to 2 p.m.—barely time enough, even if all went well.
The position is now clear. Probably the whole train crossed the Lynn stream (the Ouse) from King’s Lynn the day before, and camped as near their supplies at Lynn as possible, in fact just across the river. In the fogs and mists of October, the train would hardly start on the 12th till about 8, and would reach Cross Keys a little before noon. For so unwieldly a cavalcade that was too late. When the Welland was reached the tide would be in full flow, and when the long train of baggage wagons, men, soldiers, mules and horses, excitedly endeavoured to turn back all would be in confusion. They were like the Egyptians in the Red Sea. As none escaped, the whole train must have been on the sands; the ghastly scene of turmoil and death in the quicksands and swiftly rising waters must be left to the imagination; no circumstance of horror was absent. The King probably watched the scene from the northern bank, and saw the hideous tumult and disorder, and the struggles for life.
6. But the treasure fell into soft, shifting quicksands, silt and mud. To what depth? Sir William approached the Great Northern Railway Company, who built in 1887 a new swing-bridge over the river near the spot, and found that probably at 23 feet, certainly at 32 feet, the slowly sinking gold, silver and jewels would be stopped. The composition of every foot of depth, whether silt, clay or sand is known.
7. The fact that the Welland stream, _now_ 240 feet across and 27 feet deep, had in old days no one definite channel, but roamed divided over the wide delta, with much less force and depth than now, completes the enquiry. No part of the treasure would be carried out to sea, but all would sink slowly down to its present place.
A trench cut in those meadows from East to West on the line of the old ford would encounter mules’ bones and human bones, which could be thence tracked with certainty both North and South. On that line will certainly be found, uninjured and secure, Edward the Confessor’s Crown, all the other contents of the King’s movable Chapel and his other portable treasures, with countless pieces of plate and relics and jewels from the rich abbeys and churches of Norfolk.
Such is an outline of a successful application of method to the vague accounts of a great disaster.
In conclusion, some specimens may be given of various kinds of material which await, so far as the writer knows, investigation. Some may turn out to be used or printed, some not to deserve printing, but they may at least lead on intending researchers to adopt the only satisfactory plan, which is to read through the Catalogues of the manuscript collections, and find what suits their tastes and capabilities. The field of Oxford history is so plentiful and so untilled that it can be found by any one without trouble, and it is therefore here passed over. Any one inspired to cultivate it will find a wealth of material, both antiquarian, topical and literary. The following jottings are divided under a few general headings, but are otherwise in no order and could be indefinitely extended. The Bodleian statute requires that the leave of the Librarian or Curators be obtained before any manuscript is copied with a view to publication. The purpose is, not to stifle research, but to eliminate incompetent or conflicting editors.
_Historical_
Register of Lands about Agen, in Gascony, Latin, 13th cent. (2933).
Chronicle of England to 1221, Latin, 14th cent. (2444).
Fountains Abbey records (1892, etc.).
Rich. II and London, a Latin poem, A.D. 1393 (3631).
Military expenses of Henry VIII (30300).
Pococke’s Tour in Ireland, 1758 (30722).
Letterbook of a Parliamentarian officer (Bradshaw) 1648-60 (25573).
Triple picture of the battle of Pinkie, 1547 (30492).
Civil War Scouts’ reports (33552).
Gulielmus Gemeticensis, Historia Normannorum, abt. A.D. 1100 (2580).
Latin Chronicle of the First Crusade and England, 1095-1118 (2402).
Letters to Bp. Burnet (30175).
_Literary_
Latin Dialogue between Magister and Discipulus on the Latin tongue, 11th cent. (2737).
“The Chaunce of the Dyse” (dice), etc., Middle English verse, 15th cent. (2078).
Middle English treatise of a son instructing his mother abt. 1400 (2315).
The history of Greek Studies in Europe (Hody), late 17th cent. (8887-90, 8901-3, etc.).
Middle English verse (3440, 29003, 30314, etc.).
_Miscellaneous_
Hearne’s autograph autobiography (15603).
Pointer on clog-almanacks, 18th cent. (13478).
Aubrey on English architecture, A.D. 1671 (28427).
Letters from China, A.D. 1701 (27874).
Laws, etc., of the Swanimote, A.D. 1587 (30273).
Malone correspondence, A.D. 1767-1811 (28578).
APPENDIX
The chief books on the Bodleian Library are:—
MACRAY, W. D., _Annals of the Bodleian_, 2nd edition, 1890 (the standard work on its history to 1880). 25s.
_Reliquiæ Bodleianæ ... containing his Life ... and a Collection of Letters to Dr. James, etc._ (edited by Thomas Hearne, London, 1703). Unfortunately the letters, being not fully dated, are in almost haphazard order.
NICHOLSON, E. W. B., the Bodleian Library in 1882-7, a Report, 1888, and thereafter Annual Reports issued as parts of the _Oxford University Gazette_.
_Pietas Oxoniensis_, 1902 (chiefly written by E. W. B. Nicholson; _not sold_), contains a Life of Bodley, Account of the early Library, full list of the Catalogues, and the like.
CLARK, ANDREW, _A Bodleian Guide for Visitors_, 1906. 1s. 6d.
GIBSON, S., _Some Oxford Libraries_, 1914. 2s. 6d.
_The Bodleian Quarterly Record_ from 1914: issued quarterly at 6d. This contains a statistical survey of the Library (No. 9), Annals 1880-1919 (Nos. 15, 19, 20, 21), Lists of Early MSS., Essays on the early Catalogues, etc., etc.
_A Manual for Readers_, contains information for readers on admission, Lists of the Bodleian Catalogues, etc. the _Rules for Cataloguing_ and Lists of the Manuscripts and Printed Collections, and of their Catalogues, can be obtained on application.
FOOTNOTES
[1] The classical Latin titles for “Librarian” found in inscriptions are:—_Procurator bibliothecarum_ (perhaps a wider term than _Librarian_), _Magister a bibliotheca_, _Bibliothecarius_ (used by Marcus Aurelius). _Librarius_ was a minor library official: _Librarius a manu_, a secretary in the library.
[2] His arms were:—Quarterly, 1st and 4th argent five martlets in saltire, with a crescent gules for difference, on a chief azure three ducal crowns or (for _Bodley_), 2nd and 3rd argent, two bars wavy between three hone-stones sable two and one (for _Hone_). Motto, _Quarta perennis_ (a reference to the three crowns, which were taken from the University Arms, presumably in 1604, when Bodley was knighted).
[3] _Bibliotheca Bodleiana_ is found in 1605: _Bodleiana_ in 1654; _Bodley’s Library_ in 1666; _Bodleian Library_ in 1695; _Bodley_ in 1706; _Bodleian_ in 1749. The term “Bodley” is now some times used for the old part of the Library, as compared with the “Camera.”
[4] New College: matr., 1592; Fellow; D.D., 1614; died, 1629; Librarian, 1602-1620.
[5] The Letters are well worth republishing, with notes, for Hearne’s edition in 1703 (_Reliquiæ Bodleianæ_) exhibit them in a hopelessly haphazard order, devoid of all chronological sequence.
[6] Bodley, however, reserved a life interest in this endowment, and the only independent income of the Librarian and Sub-Librarian as such was 8d. payable to the former and 4d. to the latter from every newly admitted reader—a provision made in the Statutes of 1610.
[7] This grant was hastily made, but actually passed under the Privy Seal, though its execution was for intelligible reasons stopped.
[8] John Rouse or Russe, matr. from Balliol 1596, Fellow of Oriel, 1600-52, M.A., 1604: Librarian, 1620-52.
[9] Exactly the same incident occurred with the Protector, Cromwell, when a MS. was ordered by him. Barlow induced him also to forgo his wish. This was in April, 1654, the year in which Cromwell presented twenty-four MSS.
[10] Thomas Barlow, matr. from Queen’s, 1625; Fellow, 1633-57; Provost, 1657-75; D.D., 1660; Bp. of Lincoln, 1675-91; Librarian, 1652-60.
[11] Thomas Lockey, matr. from Ch. Ch., 1621; D.D., 1660; d. 1679; Librarian, 1660-65.
[12] Thomas Hyde, matr. from Queen’s, 1654; D.D., 1682; Prof. of Arabic, 1691-7; Prof. of Hebrew, 1697-1703; _d._ 1703; Librarian, 1665-1701.
[13] John Hudson, matr. from Queen’s, 1677; Fellow of Univ. Coll., 1686-1711; D.D., 1701; Principal of St. Mary Hall, 1712-19; Librarian, 1701-19.
[14] Joseph Bowles, matr. from Hart Hall, 1713; then of St. Mary Hall; Fellow of Oriel; d. 1729; Librarian, 1719-29.
[15] Robert Fysher, matr. from Ch. Ch., 1715; M.A., 1724; Fellow of Oriel, 1726-47; Librarian, 1729-47.
[16] Humphrey Owen, matr. from Jesus, 1718; D.D., 1763; Principal of Jesus, 1763-68; _d._ 1768; Librarian, 1747-68.
[17] John Price, matr. from Jesus, 1754; M.A., 1760; _d._ 1813; Librarian, 1768-1813. Jesus College men ruled the Library from 1747 to 1813.
[18] It is told in the _Bodleian Quarterly Record_, vol. ii, No. 15 (1917), with plans.
[19] The writer cannot forget an occasion when Professor Henry Nettleship was about to write a paper for the Oxford Philological Society on the _Alapa Manumissionis_. When looking up some references in the General Catalogue he suddenly lighted on a title “De Alapa Manumissionis.” On ordering it, he found a dissertation of a youthful German student of the eighteenth century, who provided many references known to the Professor, and added more.
[20] Bulkeley Bandinel, matr. from New College, 1800; D.D., 1823; _d._ 1861; Librarian, 1813-60.
[21] Henry Octavius Coxe, matr. from Worcester, 1829; M.A., 1836; _d._ 1881. Sub-Librarian, 1838-60; Librarian, 1860-81.
[22] Edward Williams Byron Nicholson, matr. from Trinity; M.A.; d. 1912; Librarian, 1882-1912.
[23] Falconer Madan, matr. from Brasenose, 1870; M.A., 1877; Fellow, 1876-80 and 1889-1902; Hon. Fellow from 1912. Sub-Librarian, 1880-1912; Librarian, 1912-19.
[24] Two members fell in action, R. A. Abrams, M.A., a Senior Assistant, and H. G. Dunn, a member of the Extra Staff, both lieutenants.
[25] Arthur Ernest Cowley, matr. from Trinity, 1879; D.Litt., 1908; Fellow of Magdalen from 1902. Assistant Sub-Librarian, 1896-9; Sub-Librarian, 1900-19; Librarian from 1919.
[26] Full details of all the Catalogues are in the _Manual for Readers_, mentioned above.
[27] All these are enumerated in R. G. C. Proctor’s _Index to the Early Printed Books in the British Museum_, 1898-1900. The Caxtons are fully described in De Ricci’s _Census of Caxtons_, 19.
[28] The latest works on the subject are Professor A. C. Clark’s _Descent of MSS._ (1919) and (with a wider scope) F. W. Hall’s _Companion to Classical Texts_ (1913).
INDEX
Agar, Ralph, 48
Alexander, Romance of, 51
Allibond, Dr. John, 25
America. _See_ United States
Ashmole colln., 35, 53
Aubrey MSS., 53
Backhouse MSS., 54
“Baggage books,” 19
Ball, Anne, 16
Ballard MSS., 51
Barlow colln., 29, 50
Barlow, Bp. Thomas, Bodley’s Librarian (_d._ 1691), 25
Bandinel, Dr. Bulkeley, Bodley’s Librarian (_d._ 1861), 31-4
Barocci MSS., 24, 50
Bay Psalm book, 56
Beckwith MSS., 52
Bede, the Venerable, 24, 44
Benedictine Order, 8
Berlin library, 12
Bernard colln., 51
Bernard, Dr. Edward, 27, 28, 42
Bible, the Mazarine, 31
— N.T.—Gospels (Codex O, Latin), 51; (MacRegol), 51
— — Acts (Codex E, Greek), 45
Blakeway MSS., 53
Blomefield MSS., 52
Bodleian Library—Bodley’s offer to found it (1598), 16
— position among other libraries, 12
— stages of its history, _see_ list of contents
— _Admission_, 13, 20, 41
— _Arts End_, 21, 38
— _Associations_ and Attractions, 42-8, 57-8
— Number of _books_, 13, 27, 39
— _Books_ (order on shelves, 1605), 19, 38
— Oldest printed _book_, 49
— Printed _books_, 29, 54-5
— List of chief _books_ in it, 64
— _Buildings_, 37-9
— _Buildings_, plan of, _frontispiece_
— _Camera_, 31, 34, 36, 39
— _Catalogues_—First printed (1605), 19
— — Second printed (1620), 23
— — Third printed (1674), 26
— — Fourth printed (1738), 29
— — Fifth printed (1843-51), 33
— — Present Catalogue of Printed Books, 35, 42
— — Bernard’s “Old Catalogue” of MSS. (1697), 27, 42
— — Oriental MSS. (1787-1835), 31
— — Quarto series, 33, 42
— — Subject Catalogue, 19
— — Summary Catalogue, 33, 42
— _Catalogue_ Revision, 36, 37
— _Charters_ and Rolls, 13, 35
— _Collections_ and special MSS. _See_ under their names
— _Curators_, 40
— _Days and Hours of opening_, 20, 32, 41
— _Dissertations_, 33
— “_Duke Humphrey._” _See_ Reading Room, Old
— _Finance_, 42, 18_n_, 21, 28
— _Incunabula_ and Blockbooks, 55
— _Janitor_, 20, 40
— _Languages_ represented (1605), 22
— _Lending_ out books, 20, 25, 42
— Bodley’s _Librarian_, 18, 20, 40
— Smallest _Manuscript_, 47
— Classical _Manuscripts_ (statistics), 49
— Noteworthy _Manuscripts_, 49-54 and _passim_.
— Oldest complete _Manuscript_, 49
— Early _names_, 16_n_
— _Oratio Bodleiana_, 41
— _Picture Gallery_, 8, 21, 36, 38
— _Pictures and Coins_, 56
— Contents of the _Quadrangle_, 38
— _Readers_, 41
— Old _Reading Room_, 10, 14, 17, 38
— Upper _Reading Room_, 36
— _Registrum Benefactorum_, 21
— Materials for _research_, 62-3
— _Selden End_, 10, 24, 26, 38
— Statistics of _size_, 13
— _Staff_ (Officers, Assistants, Extra Staff, etc.), 20, 35, 40
— _Statutes_, 20, 36
— _Sub-Librarians_, 20, 40
— _Underground Bookstore_, 36, 39
— _Underkeeper_, 20
— Effect of the _War_, 37
— _Warming_, 32
Bodleian Quarterly Record, 37
Bodley, Mrs. Anne, née Carey, 16
Bodley, Sir Thomas, 15-21
Books, earliest, 7
— Early forms of, 8
Boreal MSS., 53
Bowen MSS., 52
Bowles, Joseph, Bodley’s Librarian (_d._ 1729), 28
Bradley MSS., 52
Brassey, Earl, 36
Brett MSS., 54
Bridge MSS., 52
British Museum, 8, 11, 15, 23, 42, 44
Browne Willis MSS., 52
Bruce MSS., 53
Burton, Robert, 24
Burton, William, 24
Bywater, Ingram, 36
Cædmon, 44
Cambridge, unique earliest view of, 48
— University Library, 15, 29, 44, 45
Canonici MSS., 52
Carey, Anne, 16
Carte MSS., 29, 51
Casaubon MSS., 26, 50
Catullus, 52
“Century of Great Donations,” 28
Chandra MSS., 36, 54
Chanson de Roland, 50
Charles I, King, 25
Charles II, King, 27, 47
Chinese, 22, 36
Clarendon, 1st Earl of, 30, 47, 52
Clarke (E.D.) MSS., 52
Clarke (W.N.) MSS., 53
Cobham, Bp. Thomas de, 14
Codex E of the Acts, 50
Codex Ebnerianus, 54
Codex O of the Latin Gospels, 51
Confucius, 49
Copyright Acts, 20
Cotton, Sir Robert, 8, 21
Cowley, Dr. Arthur Ernest, Bodley’s Librarian (1919-), 37
Coxe, Rev. Henry Octavius, Bodley’s Librarian (_d._ 1881), 34-5
Crevenna sale (1780), 31
Cromwell MSS., 24, 29, 50
Cromwell, Oliver, 25
Dawkins MSS., 52
Deposit, libraries of, 10, 56
Digby MSS., 24, 50
Dodsworth MSS., 26, 50
D’Orville MSS., 52
Dugdale MSS., 53
Dunstan, St., 21
“_Duke Humphrey._” _See_ Bodleian Library—Old _Reading Room_
Earliest English musical composition, 51
Elliott MSS., 53
Ethelred Tropary, 51
Euclid (A.D. 888), 52
Evans, Sir Arthur John, 58
Exeter Cathedral MSS., 21, 49
Fairfax MSS., 26, 50
Fairfax, Lord, 25
Foyle, Messrs., of London, 12
Furney MSS., 52
Fysher, Robert, Bodley’s Librarian (_d._ 1747), 28-9
Gaignières drawings, 52
Gentoo. _See_ Sanskrit
Georgian books, 55
Gloucester, Humphrey Duke of, 14
Gospel-book of St. Margaret of Scotland, 45
Gough colln., 52
Gower MSS., 54
Gowland, William, 59
Grangerism, 48
Hallam MSS., 54
Hamond, John, 48
Hatton MSS., 26, 50
Hearne, Thomas, 28-30, 52
Heather, Dr. William, 31
Hebrew, 33
Herculanean papyri, 54
Hereford, 10
Holman’s Essex MSS., 52
Holmes MSS., 52
Hope collection of Engraved Portraits, 38
Hope, Sir William St. John, 60
Hudson, Dr. John, Bodley’s Librarian (_d._ 1719), 28
Hultzsch MSS., 54
Hunt MSS., 52
Huntington MSS., 26, 50
Hutchison MSS., 52
Hyde, Dr. Thomas, Bodley’s Librarian (_d._ 1703), 26
James I, King, 18
James, Dr. Thomas, Bodley’s Librarian (_d._ 1629), 17-23
Jerome’s Chronicle of Eusebius, 53
John, King, 60-2
Jones MSS., 51
Junius MSS., 26, 50
King’s Quair, 50
Laud MSS., 24, 50
Laud, Archbp. William, 24, 50
Lectern System, in libraries, 9
Leland, John, 24
Le Neve MSS., 52
Leofric Missal, 21, 49
“Librarian,” classical terms for, 14
Libraries, earliest, 7-8
— mediæval, 8-10
— kinds of, 10-12
— statistics of great, 12
Library Association, 35
Lister colln., 53
Lockey, Dr. Thomas, Bodley’s Librarian (_d._ 1679), 26
London, unique earliest view of, 48
— _See_ British Museum
Longest poem in the world, 54
Luther literature, 55
MacRegol Gospels, 51
Madan, Falconer, Bodley’s Librarian (1912-19), 36-7
Malone collns., 53
Margaret, St., Queen of Scotland, 46
Marsh MSS., 27, 51
Marshall colln., 29, 50
Mason MSS., 52
Meerman MSS., 53
Mendoza Codex, 50
Merle, William de, 24, 50
Mexican records, 50, 56
Michael MSS., 53
Mill MSS., 53
Milles MSS., 53
Milton, John, 47
Modern study, its methods and materials, 57-62
Montagu colln., 53
Morris, Dr. John, 41
Munich library, 12
Music (perh. the earliest English composition), 51
Music School MSS., 36, 54
Nettleship, Prof. Henry, 33
Nichols Newspapers, 55
Nicholson, Edward Williams Byron, Bodley’s Librarian (_d._ 1912), 35-6
Nicoll, Alexander, 31
Onomatopœia, 7
Oppenheimer colln., 33, 53
Oriental MSS., etc., 22, 31, 33, 36
Ormesby Psalter, 53
Ormulum, 50
Ouseley MSS., 53
Owen, Dr. Humphrey, Bodley’s Librarian (_d._ 1768), 29-30
Oxford. _See_ Bodleian Library
— unique earliest view of, 48
— Ashmolean Museum, 56
— Clarendon Press, 30, 36
— Colleges (loan of MSS.), 36
— Corpus Christi college, 10
— Examination schools, 36, 39
— Jesus college, 30_n_
— Magdalen college, 15
— Old Ashmolean Basement, 36, 39
— Oriel college, 14
— Radcliffe Camera. _See_ Bodleian Library—Camera
— Schools Quadrangle, 31
— Sheldonian Theatre and Basement, 36, 39
— University libraries, old, 14
Oxford Barbers’ company, 54
Oxford Diocesan papers, 35, 54
Oxford University Endowment Fund, 36
Paris, 26
— National library, 12, 15
Parliament at Oxford (1681), 27
Pegge MSS., 52
Pembroke, Earl of, 24
Pepys MSS., 30, 51
Peterborough, 24
Petrograd library, 12
Photography, 36
Pictograms, 7
Pinelli sale (1789), 31
Plato (A.D. 895), 52
Pococke MSS., 26, 50
Price, John, Bodley’s Librarian (_d._ 1813), 30
Pusey, Edw. Bouverie, 31
Rawlinson colln., 30, 51
Reference, libraries of, 10, (56)
Rich, Jeremiah, 47
Roe MSS., 24, 50
Roland, Chanson de, 50
Rolls of papyrus, etc., 8
Romance of Alexander, 51
Rome. _See_ Vatican library
Rouse, John, Bodley’s Librarian (_d._ 1652), 24-5, 47
Saibante MSS., 53
St. Amand colln., 51
Sancroft MSS., 29
Sanskrit (“Gentoo”), 26, 36
Savile colln., 36, 49, 54
_Sayings of Our Lord_, 44
Schoolboy’s Letter, 44
Selden colln., 25, 50
Send, monument of, 7
Shakespeare, William, 23, 29, 32, 46, 54 (signature), 55 (_bis_), 56
Sheldon MSS., 54
Shelley MSS., 36, 54
Speech, early, 7
Stall system, in libraries, 9
Stationers Company, London, 20
Stonehenge, 58-60
Sutherland Collection, 48
Tamil MSS., 53
Tanner colln., 29, 51
Tapestry maps, 32
Thurloe MSS., 30, 51
Tractatus Lutherani, 55
Turbutt Shakespeare, 46
Turner MSS., 54
Turner, Will. Henry, 35
Twyne MSS., 49
United States libraries, 12-13
Uri, Johann, 31
Ussher’s Collectanea, 52
Vatican Library, 12
Venice, 21
Vernon MS., 51
Vienna library, 12
Walker (A.) MSS., 53
Walker (John) MSS., 29, 51
Wall system, in libraries, 10
Wang Hsi Chih, 49
Wardrop colln., 55
Wash, the, 60-62
Watson MSS., 54
Wight MSS., 52
Willis MSS., 52
Wilson MSS., 53
Windsor MSS, 22, 49
Wood colln., 53
Writing, earliest, 7
Würzburg, 24
Wyngaerde, Antonio van den, 48
PRINTED BY WILLIAM BRENDON AND SON, LTD PLYMOUTH, ENGLAND