CHAPTER III.

FRANCISCANS WHO STUDIED IN THE CONVENT AT OXFORD, OR HAD SOME OTHER CONNEXION WITH THE TOWN OR THE UNIVERSITY.

=Agnellus= or =Angnellus of Pisa= was custodian of Paris before becoming first Provincial of England[1204]. He is said to have been made Provincial by St. Francis in 1219[1205]; the order as given by Francis a S. Clara[1206] is as follows:

‘Ego frater Franciscus de Assisio Minister Generalis praecipio tibi fratri Agnello de Pisa per obedientiam, ut vadas ad Angliam, et ibi facias officium Ministeratus. Vale. Frater Franciscus de Assisio.’

It may be doubted whether this letter is authentic, nor is the date beyond dispute. It may be considered as certain that Agnellus did not come to England till September 1224[1207]. He was then a deacon, and about thirty years of age[1208]. He landed with eight others at Dover, went to Canterbury, and thence to London, establishing houses and receiving novices. Such was his humility that he long refused the order of priesthood, and only at length consented, when the Provincial Chapter had procured a command from the General Chapter, that the order should be conferred on him[1209]. He was a zealous guardian of the primitive poverty of the Rule of St. Francis, and would only allow houses to be built or areas to be enlarged where it was absolutely necessary[1210]. He urged the demolition of a conventual building called _Valvert_ at Paris, and forbade the enlargement of the house at Gloucester: he had the infirmary at Oxford built so low that a man could scarcely stand upright in it. He built a school at Oxford of more generous proportions, and encouraged the love of learning in the Order[1211]. The choice of Grostete as the first master of the Minorites was due to Agnellus[1212]. He was, according to Matthew Paris, on familiar terms with the King, and was one of his counsellors[1213]. In December, 1233, he offered his services as peace-maker between Henry III and the rebellious Earl Marshall, though his efforts to induce the latter to submit were unavailing[1214]. It would seem to have been after this that he went to Rome on some business of the English prelates[1215], and he may also at the same time have attended a General Chapter in Italy[1216]. On his return, he was seized with dysentery at Oxford; it was believed that his health had never recovered from the severities to which he was exposed while labouring for peace in the winter of 1233[1217]. He recommended that the General Minister, Elias, should be requested to appoint Albert of Pisa, or Haymo, or Radulf of Rheims, as his successor. He constituted Peter of Tewkesbury his Vicar, and made his last confession to him. He died at Oxford in great pain, crying continually, ‘_Veni, dulcissime Jesu_.’ The exact date of his death is uncertain; it was probably early in 1235[1218]. He was, says Eccleston,

‘a man specially endowed with natural prudence and foresight, and conspicuous for every virtue[1219].’

He was buried in a wooden or leaden coffin in the choir of the chapel before the altar. When this chapel was superseded by the larger church, the friars came by night to remove the body; they found the coffin and the grave

‘full of the purest oil, the corpse with its garments incorrupt and smelling most sweetly.’

His bones were laid with due pomp in ‘a fair stone sepulchre’ in the new church, and the miracles which were wrought at his tomb were a source of honour and profit to the Convent at Oxford[1220].

=Richard de Ingewrthe= or =Indewurde= (Norfolk) is named second in the list of friars who came over with Agnellus in 1224. He was a priest and advanced in years; according to Eccleston he was the first Minorite who preached to the people ‘_citra montes_.’ With three other friars he established the first house of Franciscans in London (at Cornhill); he then proceeded to Oxford with Richard of Devon, hired a house of Robert le Mercer in St. Ebbe’s, and thus founded the original convent in the University town. The two companions then went on to Northampton, where they again hired a house and founded a friary. Richard of Ingewrthe afterwards became custodian of Cambridge, which was specially noted for its poverty under his rule. In 1230, when Agnellus attended the General Chapter at Assisi, he was associated in the Vicariate of the English Province with Henry de Ceruise or Treviso, a lay-brother from Lombardy. Soon after this he was sent by the General, John Parens, as Provincial Minister to Ireland. At length he was released from the office in General Chapter by Albert of Pisa (c. 1239), set out as a missionary to Palestine, and died there[1221].

=Richard of Devon=, a young acolyte, was the third of those who came over with Agnellus. He accompanied R. of Ingewrthe from Canterbury to London, Oxford, and Northampton;

‘and (in Eccleston’s words) left us many examples of longsuffering and obedience. For after he had traversed many provinces in obedience to commands, he was for fifteen years worn out by frequent quartan fevers and remained continually at Romehale[1222].’

=Adam of Oxford= was a master before he entered the Order[1223]. The account of his conversion given by Eccleston[1224] is as follows:

Master Adam of Oxford, of worldwide fame[1225], had made a vow that he would do anything he was asked to do ‘for the love of the blessed Mary;’ and he told this to a certain recluse, who was a friend of his. She revealed his secret to her friends, that is, to a monk of Reading, another of the Cistercian Order, and a Friar Preacher; telling them that they could gain such a man in such a way; not wishing that Adam should become a Friar Minor. But the Blessed Virgin did not permit anyone in his presence to make the needful request; but deferred it to another time. One night he dreamed that he had to cross a bridge, where some men were throwing their nets into the stream, endeavouring to catch him: but he escaped this with great difficulty and reached a very peaceful spot. Now when by the divine will he had escaped all others, he went casually to see the Friars Minors, and during the conversation Friar William de Colvile, the elder, a man of great sanctity, said to him: ‘Dear master, enter our Order for the love of the Mother of God and help our simplicity.’ And Adam immediately consented to do so, as if he had heard the words from the lips of the Mother of God.

He assumed the habit on January 25[1226], probably A. D. 1227. He was at this time assistant, or secretary[1227], to the great Adam Marsh, whom he soon afterwards induced to join the Franciscans. Shortly after this, Adam of Oxford went to Gregory IX, and was at his own desire sent to preach to the Saracens[1228]. From a letter of Grostete’s, addressed to Agnellus and the Convent of Friars Minors at Oxford, relating to this subject, and written in or before 1231[1229], we learn that Adam had formed the resolution of going to preach to the infidels before he entered the Order, and that he was induced to take this latter step partly because it was likely to add to his influence as a missionary. Grostete urges the Friars not to grieve for his loss:

‘for the light of his knowledge is so bright that it ought to be concentrated most there where it may dissipate the thickest darkness of infidelity.’ ‘Have no fear,’ the writer continues, ‘that he will be cut off from the “Sacred Page;” he has humility, and no “_haeretica pravitas_” will slip in.’

He died at Barlete, and miracles are said to have been wrought by his relics or his memory[1230].

=William of York=, ‘a solemn bachelor,’ was probably an Oxford man, as he entered the Order on the same day as Adam of Oxford[1231].

=Adam Rufus=[1232] studied under Grostete in the early part of the thirteenth century, presumably at Oxford. A letter from ‘Robert Grostete called Master,’ written perhaps before he held any preferments, i.e. before 1210, addressed to ‘Master Adam Rufus,’ is extant; it is a treatise on the nature of angels, and Grostete asks Adam to inquire diligently the opinions of the wise men, with whom he converses, on the subject. In another letter written about 1237, Grostete mentions having heard of Friar Ernulphus, papal penitentiary, from ‘Friar Adam Rufus of good memory,’ formerly his beloved pupil and friend. It may be inferred from his connexion with Grostete and Ernulphus or Arnulfus, Vicar of the Order of Minorites[1233], that the Order which he entered was that of the Franciscans.

=Henry de Reresby=, who entered the Order abroad, was vicar of the custodian of Oxford about 1235 or before. He was made first provincial of Scotland by Elias, but died before he could enter on his duties[1234]. According to Leland’s notes from Eccleston he died at Leicester; according to another account, at Acre in Norfolk[1235]. After his death he appeared to the custodian of Oxford, and said that,

‘if the friars were not damned for excess in buildings, they would at any rate be severely punished,’ and added, ‘if the friars said the divine service well, they would be the sheep of the Apostles[1236].’

=Walter=, a canon of Dunstable, and =John=, a novice of the same priory, escaped from their house through a broken window and joined the Franciscans at Oxford in 1233. Walter afterwards returned with three Minorites to the Chapter of Dunstable, seeking absolution. After submitting to corporal punishment, he was absolved; he was further ordered to restore the books and clothes (_quaternos et pannos_) which he had taken with him, and to deliberate for a year--i.e. during his noviciate--whether the discipline of the Order which he had entered was more severe than that of the Order he had left; if it were so, he was to remain a Minorite; if not, he was to return to Dunstable. John was found by the Prior of Dunstable at London and similarly absolved: he afterwards went to Rome[1237].

=John of Reading=, who became Abbat of Osney in 1229[1238], joined the Minorites in 1235, probably at Northampton[1239]. He is probably the Abbat to whom Bartholomew of Pisa refers as having assisted with his own hands at the building of the Franciscan Church at Oxford[1240]. He was certainly at Oxford about 1250, when Adam Marsh wrote to the Provincial that he was in ill-health and requested that Friar Adam de Bechesoueres, the physician of the Order, might be sent to Oxford to attend him[1241]. Another ‘Frater Johannes Anglicus de Redingis’ was Visitor of Germany in 1229, and Minister of Saxony 1230-1232[1242].

=Albert of Pisa= did not, as stated by Bartholomew of Pisa and others, accompany Agnellus to England. He was (according to Eccleston) Minister of Hungary, Germany (1223-1227), Bologna, the March of Ancona, the March of Treviso, Tuscany, perhaps of Spain in 1227[1243]. He was one of the three recommended by Agnellus as fit persons to succeed him as Provincial of England, but he was not appointed by Elias till almost a year after the death of the first Minister[1244] (c. 1236). He reached England on December 13, and celebrated a Provincial Chapter at Oxford on February 2[1245]. On another occasion Eccleston tells us--

‘Friar Albert was present at the sermon of a young friar at Oxford; and when the preacher boldly condemned loftiness of buildings and abundance of food, he rebuked him for vainglory[1246].’

Soon after his arrival, Albert appointed lecturers at London and Canterbury[1247], though he does not appear to have been a learned man himself. His connexion with Oxford was slight, and his acts as Provincial can hardly claim a place here. After remaining two years and a half in England, he went to Rome to take part in the proceedings against Elias[1248]. On the deposition of the latter (May 15, 1239), Albert was elected Minister General. He died in the same or the following year[1249] and was buried at Rome[1250].

=Ralph of Maidstone=, bishop of Hereford 1234-1239, resigned his see in December, 1239, and was admitted into the Franciscan Order by Haymo[1251]. He took this step in accordance with a vow, made perhaps before he became bishop[1252]. It is uncertain at which convent he took the habit. Bartholomew of Pisa states that he helped with his own hands to build the church at Oxford[1253]. It is not improbable that he was there for some time. He was a Master of Paris, noted for his learning, and was among the ‘famous Englishmen’ who left Paris owing to the disputes in 1229 and settled at Oxford on the invitation of Henry III[1254]. According to a later addition in one of the MSS. of Eccleston’s Chronicle, he lived five years after assuming the habit, staying for the most part in the convent of Gloucester[1255]. The Dunstable Annals state that he was, for a time at any rate, rendered incapable by a fall from a rock, but whether this took place before or after he became a friar is not quite clear[1256]. He died at Gloucester (c. 1245) and

‘was buried in the choir of the brethren, in the presbytery, on the north side under an arch[1257].’

A most interesting relic of the friar-bishop is now in the British Museum. Royal MS. 3 C. xi, a copy of the New Testament with gloss (sec. xiii), belonged to the Friars Minors of Canterbury,

‘_ex dono Fratris Radulphi de Maydenestane, quondam Episcopi Herefordensis_.’

He wrote a _Commentary on the Sentences_ when he was Archdeacon of Chester (c. A. D. 1220). This is mentioned in a treatise on the Sacraments, ‘_secundum Mag. R. de Maidinstan archidiaconum Cestrensem super Sententias_.’

MS. London: Gray’s Inn, 14, f. 28-32 (sec. xiii).

=William of Nottingham= was marked out by nature for a Mendicant Friar.

‘He told me,’ writes Eccleston, ‘that when he was living in his father’s house and some poor boys came begging alms, he gave them of his bread, and received the crust from them, because it seemed to him, that hard bread, which was asked for the love of God, was sweeter than the delicate bread which he ate and his companions; and so, to make their bread sweet like this, the little boys went and begged in their turn (_ab invicem_) for the love of God[1258].’

William’s brother, Augustine, was also a Minorite; he was first in the household of Innocent IV, accompanied the Patriarch of Antioch, the pope’s nephew, to Syria, and at length became bishop of Laodicea[1259]. William himself successfully championed the interests of his Order against the Dominicans at the Roman Curia[1260]. At one period he lived for some time in the Franciscan convent at Rome, where, though (to quote his own words)

‘the brethren had no pittance except chestnuts, he grew so fat that he often blushed[1261].’

He acted as vicar for Friar Haymo in England (1239), and in 1240 was himself

‘elected and confirmed Provincial Minister by those to whom the appointment had been entrusted[1262].’

He had never held any subordinate office, such as that of custodian or warden[1263]. He was a diligent student of the Scriptures, and seems to have attended Grostete’s lectures at Oxford[1264]. As minister, he was energetic in furthering the study of theology, and in developing the educational organization of the Franciscans in England[1265]. During his ministry, the friary at Oxford was greatly enlarged[1266]. Evidence of his popularity was given in the Chapter held at Oxford by the General Minister, John of Parma (c. 1248), when the friars unanimously refused to sanction his deposition[1267]. He was ‘absolved’ from the ministry in the General Chapter of Metz, and sent on behalf of the Order to the Pope[1268]. It was probably in this Chapter, that, with the assistance of John Kethene and Gregory de Bosellis, he carried a decree ‘almost against the whole Chapter,’

‘ut privilegium indultum a Domino Papa de recipienda pecunia per procuratores penitus destrueretur; et expositio Regulae secundum dominum Innocentium, quantum ad ea in quibus laxior esset quam Gregoriana, suspenderetur[1269].’

The cause of his deposition is unknown, but the event excited the displeasure of the English friars, who called a Provincial Chapter and unanimously re-elected him[1270]. A letter from Adam Marsh, congratulating him on this second election and urging him not to decline the office is extant[1271]. But William of Nottingham was already dead. When he reached Genoa on his mission to the Pope, his _socius_, Friar Richard, was struck down by the plague;

‘while others fled, he remained to comfort his companion, and like him he was struck down and died[1272].’

The date of the Chapter of Metz, and consequently of William’s death, is not quite certain; it was probably in the spring or early summer of 1251[1273]. A few extracts from the chronicle of Eccleston (who knew him personally) will illustrate the character of the man.

He sat very long in meditation after matins, and was unwilling to attend to confessions and consultations at night, as his predecessors had done.... Above all things, he was careful to avoid the vice of suspicion. Familiarities of great persons and of women he most studiously avoided, and, with wonderful magnanimity, thought nothing of incurring the anger of the powerful for the sake of justice. He used to say that great persons entrap those familiar with them by their advice, and women with their mendacity and malice turn the heads even of the devout by their flatteries. He studied with all diligence to restore the good name of those who were defamed, provided that he thought them penitent, and to comfort the hearts of the desolate, especially of those who held offices in the Order[1274].

He represented the tendency to a less strict interpretation of the Rule in regard to money than had hitherto obtained in England, holding that--

‘the friars might in a hundred cases lawfully contract debts, and might with their own hands dispense the money of others in alms. He said further that it was right after a visitation to amuse oneself a little in order to distract the mind from what one had heard[1275].’

The following story may be regarded as an instance of his cynicism or knowledge of human nature:--

‘He used to narrate that St. Stephen, the founder of the Order of Grammont, placed a chest in a secret and safe place, and forbade anyone to go near it during his life. The brethren were very inquisitive, and after his death could not refrain from breaking it open, and they found only a piece of parchment with the words; Brother Stephen salutes his brethren and prays them to guard themselves from the laity. For just as you held the chest in honour, as long as you did not know what was in it, so they will hold you in honour[1276].’

That the well-known _Commentary on the Gospels_, called also _Unum ex quatuor_, or _De concordia evangelistarum_, by Friar William of Nottingham, was by this William, and not by his namesake, the seventeenth provincial of the English Minorites[1277], is proved by Eccleston’s words (Mon. Franc. I, p. 70)--

‘... Verba Sancti Evangelii devotissime recolebat; unde et super unum ex quatuor Clementinis (Phillipps MS. f. 80 reads _Clementis_) canones perutiles compilavit, et expositionem quam idem Clemens fecit complete scribi in ordine procuravit.’

The commentary was founded on the work of Clement of Langthon[1278], and the number of MSS. of it still in existence attest its popularity in the Middle Ages.

The work comprised 12 parts. _Inc._ ‘Da mihi intellectum.’

MSS. Brit. Museum: Royal 4 E ii. (A. D. 1381); readers are asked to pray ‘pro anima Fratris Willielmi de Notingham, qui studio laborioso predictam Expositionem ex variis compilavit.’

Oxford:--Bodl.: Laud. Misc. 165 (sec. xiv ineuntis), Balliol Coll. 33 (sec. xiv exeuntis). Merton Coll. 156 and 157 (sec. xiv). Magdalen Coll. 160 (sec. xv). St. John’s Coll. 2 (sec. xv).

Cf. Merton Coll. 68, fol. 121 (sec. xv), ‘Questiones quas movet Notyngham in scripto suo super evangelia extracte secundum ordinem alphabeticum per Mag. Joh. Wykham.’ _Inc._ ‘Abel. Queritur super:’ Lincoln Coll. 78 (sec. xv), a similar work: _Inc._ ‘Abraham. Queritur super illo dicto.’

_Comment. in Longobardum_, perhaps by the other W. of Nottingham.

Mentioned in the Catalogue of Illustrious Franciscans (Leland, _Script._).

=A. of Hereford= (c. 1248) was assigned by the Provincial to Adam Marsh as his secretary. Adam thought him too able a man to be kept in this subordinate position; his learning and eloquence marked him out for a teacher and preacher; many of those appointed by the Provincial Chapter to lecture on theology were far inferior to him. In addition to this his health would not stand the constant strain to which the secretary of the indefatigable doctor was necessarily subjected. Adam therefore requested the Provincial to send him to London to pursue his studies, as A. of Hereford himself desired[1279].

=Laurence de Sutthon= was the friar whom Adam Marsh suggested to the Provincial as A. of Hereford’s successor. A ‘Friar Laurence’ was with Adam in 1249, and the latter wrote to Thomas of York, probably after 1250:

‘Friar Laurence sends you the books of the mother of philosophy (?) for which you sent[1280].’

=Hugo de Lyndun= seems to have been a weak brother at Oxford--weak in mind and body--whom Adam Marsh took under his especial care (c. 1253)[1281].

=John of Beverley= was a friar at Oxford when Martin was warden, and was known to Adam Marsh. Friar Thomas of York laboured for the salvation of the father of this J. of Beverley[1282].

=Gregory de Bosellis= was the first lecturer to the friars at Leicester[1283] (c. 1240?). He was at the General Chapter of Genoa (1244) or Metz when he supported W. of Nottingham, Minister of England[1284]; and he was Vicar of the Province at the time of the same Minister’s death[1285]. He was with the Earl and Countess of Leicester in Gascony[1286], and went to the papal court with the Archbishop of Canterbury in 1250[1287], when the rules of the Order against riding on horseback were relaxed in his favour[1288]. He had studied at some University, probably at Oxford, and was capable of filling Adam Marsh’s place as lecturer to the friars there, though it does not appear whether he ever actually did so[1289].

=Thomas of Maydenstan=, an invalid novice at Oxford, c. 1253; Adam Marsh hearing a rumour that he was to be sent away from Oxford begged the Minister to let him remain,

‘as it is believed that his removal would do injury to the souls of several persons of whose conversion no slight hope is entertained.’

The brethren at Oxford joined in the request[1290].

=Thomas Bachun= of the Convent of Nottingham was recommended by Adam Marsh as a suitable person to act as private secretary or amanuensis to Friar Richard of Cornwall, when the latter was about to proceed to Paris, 1252. It is however uncertain whether he was appointed or whether he studied at Oxford[1291].

=Adam de Bechesoueres= or =Hekeshovre=[1292] occurs several times in Adam Marsh’s letters as the chief physician among the early English friars. Thus at one time Adam writes to John of Stamford, custodian of Oxford, requesting him to allow a poor sick scholar named Ralph of Multon, a friend of the writer’s, to consult Friar A. de Bechesoueres, who has already done him good. The famous Walter de Merton went to him once with a letter of introduction from Adam Marsh. He was wanted again at Oxford to attend Friar John of Reading, formerly Abbat of Osney. Adam Marsh recommended Grostete to consult him about his health. At another time we hear of him going to the General Minister in France, with a ‘supplicatory letter’ from Adam Marsh;

‘he promised,’ adds the latter in a letter to the English Provincial, ‘to return to England soon and humbly submit in all things to the regular discipline.’

=N. of Anivers=, =Anilyeres= or =Aynelers=, a youth of ability, fair learning and great promise, was ordered by the Minister General to go to France, probably about the year 1248. Adam Marsh, anxious that the best should be done both for the young friar and the Order, after consultation with Peter of Tewkesbury, custodian of Oxford, obtained leave from the Provincials of England and France for him to stay for a year or two in England, the consent of the General being also secured:

‘it is thought,’ adds Adam in his letter to the Minister of France, ‘that he will at present find the requisite helps to the successful study of letters more easily obtainable in England than anywhere else.’

N. de Anivers was therefore allowed to spend a year in theological study at Oxford, Cambridge or London. Adam Marsh maintained his interest in his welfare, and, after the year was over, requested the Minister of France to allow him to continue his studies in England up to the ensuing Pentecost: it is probable that he was a pupil of Adam’s at Oxford[1293].

=William of Pokelington= (Yorkshire) entered the Order about 1250 and made his profession at Oxford in 1251[1294]. He was then a master. Shortly before this he had been ill and perhaps took the vows on his recovery[1295]. He was an intimate friend of Adam Marsh and at one period acted as his secretary[1296]. Adam employed him several times as messenger to Grostete[1297], who had a high opinion of him and liked to have him as a companion[1298].

=Walter de Madele=, =Maddele= or =Maddeley= studied in the Franciscan Convent at Oxford (c. 1235 seq.). While here, he ventured to disregard the custom which forbade the friars to wear shoes.

‘It happened,’ says Eccleston[1299], ‘that he found two shoes, and when he went to Matins, he put them on. He stood therefore at Matins, feeling unusually self-satisfied. But afterwards when he was in bed, he dreamt that he had to go through a dangerous pass between Oxford and Gloucester called “_boysaliz_” (?), which was infested by robbers; and when he was descending into a deep valley, they rushed at him from both sides, shouting, “Kill him!” In great terror he said that he was a Friar Minor. “You lie,” they cried, “for you do not go barefoot;” and when he put out his foot confidently, he found that he was wearing those same shoes: and starting in confusion from sleep, he threw the shoes into the middle of the courtyard.’

Walter was ‘_socius_’ or secretary to Agnellus and was at Oxford at the time of the latter’s death (1235)[1300]. Later he was in Germany with Peter of Tewkesbury, minister of Cologne, and returned to England in 1249 with Friar Paulinus, perhaps a German, in obedience to Peter[1301]. He enjoyed a considerable reputation as a theologian and was lecturer at a Franciscan Convent. Adam Marsh once sent for him to come and see him at Oxford.

‘I conferred with him as you desired,’ he writes to the Provincial[1302], ‘about investigating the meaning of Holy Scripture in the original books of the saints, and he professed himself very ready to do this or anything else which you thought fit to enjoin on him.’

This was not the only subject discussed at the interview. The English Minister suspected Walter of a desire to go abroad and of having obtained from the General the promise of a lectureship in some foreign convent or University. The Provincial had indeed just received an order from the General to send some English friars to teach at Paris, and perhaps Madele’s name was mentioned. Madele however denied the imputation, and Adam recommended the Provincial to keep him in England, sending other friars to Paris, and to remedy his grievances. Though he had long taught theology with success, no competent provision had been made for him; he had not only to exhaust his mind by studies but also to wear out his body by writing daily with his own hand, as he lacked the ‘great volumes and the assistance of companions,’ which had been provided for his predecessors in the office. Eccleston refers to him as dead when he wrote his chronicle[1303]. None of Madele’s writings[1304] have been preserved.

=G. of St. Edmund=: Adam Marsh wrote to the Provincial (W. of Nottingham) on behalf of Martin the warden and the other friars at Oxford, requesting him to order without delay

‘that Friar G. de Sancto Eadmundo be restored to the convent of friars at Oxford[1305].’

=Thomas of Eccleston=, the earliest historian of the Franciscan Order in England, was probably a native of Lancashire[1306]. All that is known of him is contained in his Chronicle. He was an inmate of the London Convent when William of Nottingham was minister (1240-1250), and speaks from his own experience of the poverty and hard fare of the brethren there[1307]. He was a student at Oxford in the lifetime of Grostete, whether before or after the latter became bishop is not clear[1308]. He knew the earliest converts to the Order in England, and enjoyed the intimacy of William of Nottingham[1309]. His history is dedicated to Friar Simon of Esseby--perhaps Ashby in Norfolk or Lincolnshire[1310]. In the preface he states that he had been collecting and arranging materials for twenty-five years, and explains his object in writing.

‘Every upright man ought to judge his life by the examples of better men, because examples strike home more directly than the words of reason.’

Other Orders have lives of their holy brethren; this Chronicle is intended similarly to edify the Franciscans by giving them some account of those who have sacrificed their all to enter the Order and observe the Rule of St. Francis[1311]. From this point of view, chronology was of little importance, and there is scarcely a date in the whole book. It is impossible to give the exact date at which the Chronicle was finished; the deaths of William of Nottingham and of Innocent IV are mentioned[1312]; and the work was probably not completed before 1260. It is certainly the narrative of a contemporary, often of an eye-witness, and, apart from the manifest sincerity of the author, the accuracy of the details can in some instances be tested by independent and trustworthy authority. To take one example; Eccleston’s account of the reception of the friars at Cambridge (pp. 17, 18) may be compared with the following entry in Close Roll 22 Hen. III, m. 12, (June 15 1238):

Rex ballivis suis de Cantebr’ salutem. Sciatis quod concessimus fratribus Minoribus de Cantebr’ domum illam cum pertinenciis in Cantebr’ que fuit Magistri Benjamin Judei et quam prius vobis concesseramus ad Gayolam nostram (_or_ vestram) inde faciendam, ad clausum domorum predictorum fratrum dilatandum, salvis domino feodi serviciis et redditibus ei inde debitis. Et idem vobis precipimus quod eisdem fratribus de domo predicta plenam saisinam habere faciatis.

The following MSS. of the Chronicle ‘_De adventu Fratrum Minorum in Angliam_’ are extant, all dating from the early fourteenth century.

(1) A mutilated MS. in the Chapter Library at York; Brewer’s text for the earlier portion of the Chronicle is founded on this.

(2) Brit. Mus.: Cotton Nero A ix was used by Brewer as the guide for the later part: this MS. begins with _Collatio IX_ (i.e. _Collatio VIII_ in the York MS.).

(3) A fragment of the earlier portion of the Chronicle is contained in a MS. at Lamport House; this has been printed by Howlett in Mon. Franc. II; it supplies most of the chapters wanting in the Cottonian MS., of which it probably formed a part.

(4) No. 3119 of the MSS. of Sir T. Phillipps (Thirlestaine House, Cheltenham), contains the whole Chronicle, though without many of the incidents which occur in the York and Cotton MSS. Neither Brewer nor Howlett knew of its existence. A short account of it will be found in ‘The English Historical Review,’ Oct. 1890, p. 754.

In the same volume of MSS. is the treatise _De impugnatione_, etc., printed in the Appendix C: Bale and Pits ascribe this to Eccleston, but without sufficient authority.

=Roger Bacon= is said on the authority of John Rous[1313] to have been born at or near Ilchester in Dorsetshire. He came of a wealthy perhaps noble family; he speaks of one brother as rich, of another as a scholar. He was probably nephew of Robert Bacon the Dominican. Roger’s family espoused the royal cause in the Barons’ war and suffered great losses[1314]. The year 1214 is usually given as the date of his birth. The date is an inference from the following passage written in 1267:

‘I have laboured much at sciences and languages, and it is now forty years since I first learnt the alphabet; and I was always studious; and except for two of those forty years I have always been _in studio_[1315].’

The last phrase probably means ‘at a University’ or some place of study. Boys of ten or twelve years frequently began their education at Oxford, and it is likely that Bacon went there at an early age[1316]. Roger of Wendover relates that Friar Robert Bacon preached before the King at Oxford in 1233, and fearlessly rebuked him for listening to evil counsellors, especially Peter des Roches. Matthew Paris gives the story with the following addition:

‘a clerk of the court of a pleasant wit, namely, Roger Bacun, ventured to make this joke: “My lord King, what is most harmful to men crossing a strait, or what makes them most afraid?” The King replied, “Those men know who occupy their business in great waters.” “I will tell you,” said the clerk, “_Petrae et Rupes_[1317].”’

It cannot be regarded as certain that this Roger Bacon was the famous friar. The name was not uncommon; e.g. a Roger Bacon, a Thomas Bacon, and a Peter Bacon occur in Pat. Roll 3 Edw I. On the other hand Roger was certainly in Oxford in or before this year. He states that St. Edmund, Archbishop of Canterbury, lectured at Oxford in his time, i.e. Edmund Riche who became Archbishop in 1233[1318]. At this period too, Roger attended Grostete’s lectures and made the acquaintance of Adam Marsh, for both of whom he always retained the greatest admiration. He found in them that sympathy with and understanding of his experimental method, which were denied him in later life[1319]. It was doubtless his connexion with these men that led Roger to enter the Franciscan Order. When or where this took place is unknown: perhaps at Oxford before the death of Grostete. He had clearly reached years of discretion when he took the step. This may be inferred from his denunciation of those who entered the Orders as boys and begun the study of theology before they had been grounded in philosophy[1320]. It is also implied in such passages as these:

‘When I was in another state, I wrote nothing on philosophy.’ ‘Men used to wonder before I became a friar that I lived owing to such excessive labour[1321].’

He began his studies on positive science before 1250[1322], and had by 1267 spent more than 2,000 _librae_[1323]

‘on secret books and various experiments and languages and instruments and tables.’

It is not necessary to assume that this sum was expended before he joined the Franciscan Order; he could, and undoubtedly did, obtain money by begging to carry on his experiments[1324]. Roger left Oxford for Paris some time before 1245; he states that he had seen Alexander of Hales with his own eyes[1325], and he heard William of Auvergne dispute on the _Intellectus Agens_ before the whole University: William died in 1248[1326]. Roger was in France in 1250 when he saw the chief of the Pastoureaux, and remarked that

‘he carried in his hand something as though it were sacred, as a man carries relics[1327].’

He is said by Rous to have been made D.D. of Paris and to have been incorporated as D.D. at Oxford[1328]. When he returned to Oxford is unknown; probably soon after 1250. He must have lectured at this time; he won some fame, as he says himself[1329], but without doubt made many enemies. About the year 1257 or 1258--when Adam Marsh could no longer protect his great pupil--Roger was exiled from England and kept under strict supervision in Paris for ten years[1330]. In 1263 he wrote an astronomical treatise called _Computus Naturalium_[1331]. Soon after this, a clerk named Raymund of Laon mentioned Bacon’s name to the Cardinal Bishop of Sabina and roused the latter’s interest in his discoveries[1332]. Bacon sent a letter in reply to the Cardinal’s communication: this has not been preserved. In 1265 the Cardinal became Pope Clement IV. On 22nd of June 1266, Clement wrote requesting Roger to send him a fair copy of the work which Raymond had mentioned, setting forth the remedies he proposed, ‘_circa illa, quae nuper occasione tanti discriminis intimasti_;’ the friar was to do this, in spite of any constitution of his Order to the contrary, secretly and without delay[1333]. The Pope’s supposition that the work was already written was erroneous;

‘for,’ writes Roger[1334], ‘whilst I was in a different state of life, I had written nothing on science; nor in my present condition had I ever been required to do so by my superiors; nay, a strict prohibition has been passed to the contrary, under penalty of forfeiture of the book, and many days’ fasting on bread and water, if any book written by us (i.e. the Franciscans) should be communicated to strangers[1335].’

However, although the book was not yet written, and notwithstanding endless difficulties, want of money, want of mathematical and other instruments and tables, the restrictions of the Rule, jealousy of his superiors and brethren who, he says,

‘kept me on bread and water, suffering no one to have access to me, fearful lest my writings should be divulged to any other than the Pope and themselves[1336]’--

the Opus Majus, the Opus Minus, and the Opus Tertium, were sent to the Pope within fifteen or eighteen months after the arrival of the papal mandate[1337]. ‘Such a feat’ says Brewer, ‘is unparalleled in the annals of literature.’ The Pope probably used his influence in behalf of Roger, as the latter seems to have returned to England about this time and to have been freed from annoyance[1338]. The works sent to Clement he regarded merely as handbooks; at the same time that he was writing them, he was engaged on a larger work which was to embrace the whole range of sciences as then understood[1339]. He was working at this in 1271[1340]. His attacks on all classes, including his own Order, became even more violent than hitherto. In 1277 and 1278 synods were held at Paris and Oxford to condemn erroneous doctrines. The repressive movement extended to the Franciscans; in 1278, Jerome of Ascoli, the Minister General, held a Chapter at Paris, and among other friars Roger Bacon was condemned ‘_propter quasdam novitates_[1341].’ He is believed to have remained in prison for fourteen years. Jerome of Ascoli, who became Pope Nicholas IV in 1288, died in 1292. Raymond Gaufredi, a man of liberal views, was elected General in 1289, and released many friars who had been imprisoned for their opinions by his predecessors. In 1292 he held a General Chapter at Paris, and it is probable that among the friars here set free was Roger Bacon[1342]. It is certain that the last work of Roger’s of which we have any notice was written in 1292[1343]. The date usually assigned for his death (1294) is a pure conjecture[1344]. John Rous says that he was buried among the Friars Minors at Oxford[1345].

Such then is the chronological outline of his life, as far as it can be ascertained. A list of his works will be more useful than a short account of his character or philosophy.

=Roger Bacon’s Works= were neglected and regarded with a pious horror in the Middle Ages[1346]. The result is that many of those which have survived at all have reached us in a fragmentary state. ‘It is easier,’ said Leland, ‘to collect the leaves of the Sibyl than the titles of the works written by Roger Bacon.’ The difficulty has to a considerable extent been removed by Mr. Brewer’s valuable preface to the _Opera Inedita_, and by the labours of M. Charles. The following account of Roger Bacon’s works is based chiefly on these two writers. Some additions have been made and some rearrangement attempted.

Miscellaneous works, lectures, &c., probably early:--

_Computus naturalium_, an astronomical treatise, is the earliest work of Bacon’s to which a date can be assigned; it was written A. D. 1263-4. _Inc._ ‘Omnia tempus habent.’

MSS. British Museum: Royal 7 F viii. fol. 99-191 (sec. xiii).

Oxford: University College, 48.

Douai 691, § 2.

Summary printed by Charles, _Roger Bacon_, pp. 355-8.

_De termino Paschali_, an earlier work, to which Bacon refers in the _Computus naturalium_; (Charles, p. 78).

_Questions on Aristotle’s physics._

MS. Amiens 406, f. 1-25; cf. MS. Bodl. Digby 150, fol. 42 (sec. xiii), ‘Summa Baconis.’

_Quaestiones super librum physicorum a magistro dicto Bacon._

MS. Amiens 406, fol. 26-73.

_De vegetabilibus_ (gloss on this work then attributed to Aristotle).

MS. Amiens 406 (intercalated in the preceding work).

_In Aristotelis Metaphysica._

MS. Amiens 406, fol. 74.

_Tractatus ad declaranda quaedam obscure dicta in libro Secreti Secretorum Aristotelis._ _Inc._ ‘Propter multa in hoc libro contenta qui liber dicitur Secretum Secretorum Aristotelis sive liber de regimine principum.’

MS. Bodl.: Tanner 116, fol. 1 (sec. xiii exeuntis); the same MS. fol. 16, contains Aristotle’s supposititious _Secretum Secretorum_ ‘cum glossa interlineari et notis Rogeri Bacon.’

_Questiones naturales mathematice astronomice_, &c. ‘Expliciunt reprobationes Rogeri Baconis.’

MS. Paris:--Bibl. Nat. 16089, f. 93 (sec. xiii-xiv).

_Bacon in Meteora._ _Inc._ ‘Cum ad noticiam impressionum habendam.’

MS. Bodleian: Digby 190, fol. 38 (sec. xiv ineuntis).

_Processus fratris Rogeri Bacon ... de invencione cogitacionis_ (astrological fragment). _Inc._ ‘Notandum quod in omni judicio quatuor sunt inquirenda, scil. natura planetae.’

MS. Bodl.: Digby 72, fol. 49 b, 50 (sec. xiv-xv).

_De somno et vigilia._

MSS. Bodl.: Digby 190, f. 77: _Inc._ ‘De somno et vigilia pertractantes, Perypateticorum sentenciam potissime sequemur.’

Cambridge:--Publ. Library Ii, vi. 5, fol. 85 b-88 (sec. xiii). _Inc._ ‘Sompnus ergo et vigilia describuntur multis modis.’

Logic:--

_Summulae Dialectices_, an elementary treatise on logic, characterised by Charles, who expresses a doubt as to its authenticity, as very dry, unimportant, and intended for lecturing purposes. _Inc._ ‘Introductio est brevis et apta demonstratio.’ ‘Expliciunt sumule magistri Roberti (_sic_) Baccun.’

MS. Bodl.: Digby 205, f. 48 (sec. xiv).

_Syncategoremata._ _Inc._ ‘Partium orationis quaedam sunt declinabiles.’

MS. Bodl.: Digby 204, fol. 88 (sec. xiv).

_Summa de sophismatibus et distinctionibus._ _Inc._ ‘Potest queri de difficultatibus accidentibus.’

MS. Bodl.: Digby 67, fol. 117 (sec. xiii); fragment.

_Tractatus de signis logicalibus._ _Inc._ ‘Signum est in predicamento relationis.’

MS. Bodl.: Digby 55, fol. 228 (sec. xiii).

_Opus Majus_, written A. D. 1266-1267; 7 parts. _Inc._ ‘Sapientiae perfecta consideratio consistit in duobus.’

MSS. of the whole work: Oxford:--Bodl. Digby 235 (sec. xv and xiv).

Dublin:--Trinity Coll. 81 (= 221); a transcript of this is in Trinity Coll. Cambridge.

Paris:--Bibl. Mazarine 3488 (sec. xviii).

Rome:--Vatican 4086 (Montfaucon’s Catal. p. 114), ‘Rogerii Baconi causae universales in septem partes distinctae’; probably the _Opus Majus_.

Parts I-VI edited by Jebb, 1733: reprinted at Venice 1750.

The parts often occur separately.

I. _On the four causes of human ignorance_: authority, custom, popular opinion, and the pride of supposed knowledge.

MS. Brit. Museum: Cott. Jul. F vii. fol. 186.

II. _On the causes of perfect wisdom in Holy Scripture_, or, _On the dignity of philosophy_.

III. _On the usefulness of grammar._

This part, Charles points out (p. 62), is not perfect in Jebb’s edition: see _Opus Tertium_, cap. XXVI, XXVII.

IV. _On the usefulness of mathematics._

MSS. London:--British Museum: Cotton, Tib. C. V. (sec. xiv); Julius D. V. ‘De utilitate scientiarum’; Julius F vii. fol. 178 (sec. xv), ‘Declaratio effectus verae mathematicae.’ And fol. 180, ‘De moribus hominum secundum complexiones et constellationes.’

Royal 7 F vii, p. 1 (sec. xiii), ‘Pars quarta compendii studii theologiae’; pp. 82-125, ‘Descriptiones locorum’; pp. 133-140, ‘De utilitate astronomiae,’ or ‘Tractatus de corporibus coelestibus.’

Sloane 2629, f. 17, ‘De utilitate astronomiae.’

Also Lambeth Palace Library 200 (sec. xv), ‘De arte mathematica.’

Oxford:--Bodl. E Musaeo 155, p. 185 (sec. xv ineuntis), ‘Pars quarta in qua ostendit potestatem mathematicae in scientiis et rebus et occupationibus hujus mundi.’ Univ. Coll. 49 (sec. xvii).

Paris:--Bibl. Nat. 7455 A (sec. xv), ‘De utilitatibus scientiae mathematicae verae.’

Cf. Bodl.: Digby 218, f. 98 (sec. xiii-xiv).

Printed, except the last two chapters, by Combach, Frankfurt 1614, under the title: ‘Specula Mathematica in quibus de specierum multiplicatione ... agitur,’ &c.

V. _Perspective and Optics._

MSS. London:--Brit. Mus.: Royal 7 F vii. p. 125 (sec. xiii), ‘De visu et speculis’; 7 F viii. f. 47 (sec. xiii), ‘Perspectiva quedam singularis,’ ‘Perspectiva R. Bacon, liber secundus.’ Sloane 2156, f. 1 (A. D. 1428), and 2542 (sec. xv): Addit. 8786, f. 84, ‘Incipit tractatus de modis videndi.’

Oxford:--Bodl. Digby 77 (sec. xiv) and 91 (sec. xvi).

Paris:--Bibl. Nat. 2598, f. 57 (sec. xv).

Venice:--St. Mark, Classis XI, Cod. 10 (sec. xiv).

Rome:--Vatican (Cod. Lat.) 828, f. 49 (A. D. 1349).

Printed by Combach, Frankfurt 1614, under the title, ‘Rogerii Baconis Angli ... Perspectiva.’

VI. _Experimental Science._

MSS. Brit. Mus.: Sloane 2629 (sec. xvi), extracts.

Oxford:--Bodl.: Digby 235, p. 389; Canon. Misc. 334, fol. 53, ‘Alius tractatus ejusdem Fratris Rogeri extractus de sexta parte compendii studii theologiae.’ Univ. Coll. 49.

VII. _Moral Philosophy._ _Inc._ ‘Manifestavi in precedentibus quod cognitio linguarum.’

MSS. Brit. Mus.: Royal 8 F ii. f. 167-179 (sec. xv), three parts out of six.

Bodl.: Digby 235, p. 421[1347].

Omitted in Jebb’s edition: extracts printed by Charles, pp. 339-348. Printed at Dublin 1860 (?)[1348].

_Opus Minus_, written in 1266-7, was mainly an abstract of the _Opus Majus_ with some additions on the state of scholasticism, on alchemy practical and speculative, and on astronomy. Charles gives the following description of it. It consisted of 6 parts:

i. Introduction or dedicatory letter; ii. Practical alchemy; iii. Explanation of the _Opus Majus_; the order of the sciences inverted, i.e. they were arranged according to their dignity, moral philosophy first; iv. Treatise on the seven sins of Theology; v. Speculative alchemy, or, _De rerum generationibus_ (see below); vi. _De Coelestibus_.

Of this work only the fragment edited by Brewer (_Opera Ined._ 311-390) from MS. Bodl. Digby 218, has been discovered. This includes a few pages of Part ii., all of iii., most of iv., and part of v. Wood quotes a passage from the _Opus Minus_ which does not occur in this fragment (_Opera Ined._ xciv. n. 1). From this it has been assumed that he had access to a MS. of the _Opus Minus_ now lost; but the passage is quoted by Leland, and probably copied from him by Wood. It may perhaps occur in some other work of Bacon’s; thus the passage quoted in _Op. Ined._ pp. xcvii-xcviii, from which Brewer argues that ‘Wood must have seen some other copy of the _Opus Minus_ not now discoverable,’ occurs in Brewer’s edition of the _Opus Tert._ pp. 272-3.

Part of the blank on p. 375 is to be filled up from the _Opus Majus, Pars VI, Exemplum II_, where the passage ‘_Est autem--curabit et_’ occurs, word for word. How much of the _Opus Majus_ was here inserted is doubtful; probably to the end of _Exemplum II_. Thus MS. Bodl. Canonic. Miscell. 334, f. 53, begins with the words, ‘_Corpora vero Adae et Evae_,’ _Opus Minus_, p. 373, and leaves off with the words, ‘_et alibi multis modis_,’ which occur at the end of _Opus Majus, Pars VI, Exemp. II_.

The last part of the _Opus Minus_ is wholly wanting in Brewer’s edition. The subject of this part may be gathered from Bacon’s words in _Opus Tert._, cap. xxvi (p. 96):

‘Nunc igitur tangam aliquas radices circa haec quas diligentius exposui in Secundo Opere, ubi de coelestibus egi’: and (p. 99) ‘Sed in Opere Minore ubi de coelestibus tractavi, exposui magis ista.’

In Digby MS. 76, fol. 36 seq. (sec. xiii) is a treatise on this subject, forming part of the _Physics_ in the great _Compendium Philosophiae_ (see below). It is not improbable, that, before being incorporated in this larger work, it formed part of the _Opus Minus_ sent to the Pope; on fol. 42 are the words:

‘et est nunc temporis scilicet anno domini 1266.’

_Opus Tertium_, written in 1267 (see _Opera Ined._ p. 277), 75 chapters.

MSS. London:--Brit. Mus: Cotton Tiberius C. V. (sec. xiv); also Lambeth Palace Library, 200 (chapters 1-45).

Oxford:--Bodl. E Musaeo 155 (sec. xv ineuntis); and Univ. Coll. 49 (A. D. 1617).

Cambridge:--Trinity College, MS. Gale (transcript of the Cotton MS.).

Douai, 691 (sec. xvii), wanting chapters 38-52: this MS. has been described by Victor Cousin, _Journal des Savants_ for 1848 (5 articles).

Printed in Bacon’s _Opera Inedita_ (Rolls Series), pp. 3-310.

Charles has been misled by a passage in the work called ‘_Communia Naturalium_’ into thinking that this latter formed part of the _Opus Tertium_; Charles, _R. Bacon_, pp. 65, 83-4; his description of _Opus Tertium_ is consequently erroneous. The passage is from the Mazarine MS. of the _Communia Naturalium_ (i.e. No. 3576), fol. 85:

‘Quod est improbatum in secunda parte primi operis, deinde in hoc tertio opere explanavi hoc et solvi objectiones.’

These words refer to Bacon’s doctrine that the _intellectus agens_ is not part of the soul, but God and angels. This is insisted on in the _Opus Tertium_, cap. xxiii, and it is not likely that Bacon would do more than refer to it again casually in the course of the same work. The relation of the _Opus Tertium_ to the _Commun. Nat._ is probably as follows: the latter was written or begun first. Bacon repeatedly mentions that he was, while writing his three _Opera_ for the Pope, engaged on a larger work, _Scriptum Principale_, which he did not send to Clement[1349]. Much of this larger work naturally found its way, probably in a summarised form, into the _Opus Tertium_ as we know it, the treatise actually sent to the Pope.

_Tractatus de multiplicatione specierum_, or, _De generatione specierum et multiplicatione et corruptione earum_, is inserted by Jebb in the _Opus Majus_, pp. 358-445, between Part v and Part vi. The subject is however discussed in Part iv, which is often quoted or referred to in Part v. In the _De multiplicatione_, &c. (p. 368), are the words:

Ut tactum est in communibus naturalium.

Again (p. 358):

Recolendum est igitur quod in tertia parte hujus operis tactum est, quod essentia, substantia, natura, potestas, potentia, virtus, vis, significant eandem rem, sed differunt sola comparatione.

There is nothing about this in the third part of the _Opus Majus_; but it is found in the _Communia Naturalium_. The treatise _De multiplicatione specierum_ was therefore part of a work of which the _Communia Naturalium_ formed the third part. This large work was according to Jebb, the _Opus Minus_; according to Charles, the _Opus Tertium_[1350]; according to Brewer, the encyclopaedic _Compendium Philosophiae._ Brewer is no doubt right; the _De multiplicatione_ was intended as a sub-section of the great treatise on Physics.

How then did the treatise come to be regarded as part of the _Opus Majus_, and to be inserted in the MSS. of that work? There can be little doubt that it was, in its original form, the treatise on rays sent to the Pope with the _Opus Majus_, but as a separate work (_Opera Ined._ pp. 227, 230). The references to the _Communia Naturalium_ are not inconsistent with this hypothesis: (1) the treatise on rays does not seem to have been written specially for the Pope, and consequently references to works which he could not know were not unnatural; (2) Bacon had already begun the encyclopaedic work, but found it impossible to get it finished or send it to the Pope (_Opera Inedita_, pp. 60, 315).

_Inc._ ‘Primum igitur capitulum circa influentiam agentis habet tres veritates.’

MSS. London:--Brit. Mus.: Royal 7 F viii. f. 13; _inc._ ‘Postquam habitum,’ &c. Addit. 8786, fol. 20 b: _inc._ ‘Postquam habitum est de principiis rerum naturalium’: Sloane 2156, f. 40 (A. D. 1428); _inc._ ‘Postquam,’ &c.

Oxford:--Bodl. Digby 235, p. 305 (inserted in the _Opus Majus_).

Dublin:--Trinity Coll. 81 (in the _Opus Majus_).

Paris:--Bibl. Nat. 2598 (sec. xv): _inc._ ‘Postquam,’ &c.

Bruges, 490 (sec. xiii), called _Philosophia Baconis_.

Printed in Jebb.

_De speculis_ (on burning mirrors). _Inc._ ‘Ex concavis speculis ad solem positis ignis accenditur.’

MS. Oxford:--Bodl. Ashmole, 440 (sec. xvi); cf. Digby 71.

Printed at Frankfurt 1614, in Combach’s _Specula Mathematica_, p. 168.

_Speculi Abnukefi compositio secundum Rogerium Bacon._ _Inc._ ‘Quia universorum quos de speculis ad datam distanciam.’

MS. Bodl.: Canonic. Misc. 408, fol. 48.

Cf. Brit. Mus. Cott. Vesp. A ii. f. 140.

_Compendium Philosophiae_, an encyclopaedic work, which if completed would have formed a kind of revised and enlarged edition of the _Opus Majus_, _Opus Minus_, and _Opus Tertium_. In the _Communia Naturalium_, cap. i. (MS. Bodl. Digby 70) Bacon gives a sketch of his plan. The work was to consist of four volumes, and to treat of six branches of knowledge, viz., vol. i. Grammar and Logic; vol. ii. Mathematics; vol. iii. Physics; vol. iv. Metaphysics and Morals. This _Compendium_ seems to have been known also as _Liber sex scientiarum_. The latter title is found in the collection printed at Frankfurt in 1603[1351] in MSS. Bodl. Canonic. Misc. No. 334, fol. 49 b; _ibid._, No. 480, fol. 33; and E Musaeo 155, p. 689. In each of these MSS. the same passage is quoted, as follows:

Dicta fratris Rogerii Bacon in libro sex scienciarum in 3{o} gradu sapiencie, ubi loquitur de bono corporis et de bono fortune et de bono et honestate morum. (_Inc._) In debito regimine corporis et prolongatione vite ad ultimos terminos naturales ... miranda potestas astronomie alkimie et perspective et scienciarum experimentalium. Sciendum igitur est pro bono corporis quod homo fuit immortalis naturaliter ... (_Expl._) ut fiant sublimes operaciones et utilissime in hoc mundo, etc.

Charles identifies the _Liber sex scientiarum_ with the _Opus Minus_; but this passage does not occur in the extant portion of the _Opus Minus_ which deals with the same subject and expresses the same ideas (_Opera Ined._, p. 370 _seq._). It seems probable therefore that this passage is an extract from the section on Alchemy in vol. iii. of the _Compendium Philosophiae_.

Vol. I. _Grammar and Logic._ A portion of this has been edited by Brewer, _Opera Ined._, pp. 393-519, under the title _Compendium Studii Philosophiae_. It was written in 1271, and contains an introduction on the value of knowledge and the impediments to it, and the beginning of a treatise on grammar.

MS. Cott. Tiberius C. V. (sec. xiv).

Two other treatises on grammar by Roger Bacon are extant, and probably formed part of the _Comp. Phil._[1352]:

(1) _Inc._ ‘Primus hic liber voluminis grammatici circa linguas alias a Latino.... Manifestata laude et declarata utilitate cognitionis grammatice’ (chiefly on Greek grammar).

MSS. Brit. Museum: Cotton Jul. F viii. f. 175 (sec. xv), a fragment.

Oxford:--Corpus Christi Coll. 148 (sec. xv); Univ. Coll. 47 (sec. xvii).

Douai, 691 § 1 (sec. xvii), copied from Univ. Coll. MS. 47.

(2) _Inc._ ‘Oratio grammatica autem fit mediante verbo.’ ‘Explicit summa de grammatica magistri Rogeri Bacon.’

MS. Cambridge:--Peterhouse, 1, 9, 5, James 3 (sec. xiv).

Vol. II. _Mathematics_; 6 books:

i. _Communia mathematicae_, ii-vi. Special branches of mathematics.

Liber i. _Inc._ ‘Hic incipit volumen verae mathematicae habens sex libros. Primus est de communibus mathematicae, et habet tres partes principales.’

MSS. British Museum: Sloane 2156, f. 74-97 (sec. xv), ending in the second part of the first book.

Bodl.: Digby 76, fol. 48 (sec. xiii), containing the remainder of the first book (?). _Inc._ ‘Mathematica utitur tantum parte.’

Libri ii-vi. An extant fragment of a commentary on Euclid by Bacon may have belonged to this part; in _De Coelestibus_ (_Comp. Phil._ vol. iii.) he often refers to his commentary on the Elements of Euclid (Charles, p. 85).

MS. Digby 76, f. 77-8 (sec. xiii).

A treatise, _De laudibus mathematicae_, expressing the same ideas as Part iv. of the _Opus Majus_, may have been intended as an introduction to this volume.

MS. Royal 7 F vii. fol. 141-152: cf. Digby 218, f. 98.

Vol. III. _Physics._ First came general physics (1 book), then particular sciences (3 books).

Liber i. _Communia Naturalium_, divided into 4 parts.

MSS. Brit. Mus.: Royal 7 F vii. f. 84 (sec. xiii), _Liber Naturalium_. ‘Hoc est volumen naturalis philosophiae in quo traditur scientia rerum naturalium, secundum potestatem octo scientiarum naturalium quae enumerantur in secundo capitulo; et habet hoc volumen quatuor libros principales, Primum scilicet _De communibus ad omnia naturalia_; secundum _De Coelestibus_; tertium _De Elementis, mixtis, inanimatis_; quartum _De vegetabilibus et generabilibus_.’ (This MS. ends at the third part of the first book).

Bodl.: Digby 70 (sec. xiv). _Communia Naturalium._ _Inc._ ‘Postquam tradidi grammaticam’ [Desinit ad init. cap. vii].

Cf. Digby 190, f. 29 (sec. xiv ineuntis). _De principiis naturae_; beginning illegible.

Paris:--Bibl. Mazarine 3576; olim 1271, f. 1-90 (sec. xiv). ‘Incipit liber primus Communium naturalium Fratris Rogeri Bacon, habens quatuor partes principales, quarum prima habet distinctiones quatuor. Prima distinctio est de communibus ad omnia naturalia et habet capitula quatuor. Capitulum primum de ordine scientiae naturalis ad alias. (_Inc._) Postquam tradidi grammaticam secundum linguas diversas.’

Extracts printed by Charles, pp. 369-391.

Libri ii, iii, iv. The special natural sciences, according to the Royal MS. just quoted, were treated in three books. They were seven[1353] in number, as Bacon enumerates them in the second chapter of the first part of the _Communia Naturalium_.

‘Praeter scientiam communem naturalibus, sunt septem speciales, videlicet perspectiva, astronomia judiciaria et operativa, scientia ponderum de gravibus et levibus, alkimia, agricultura, medicina, scientia experimentalis.’

Liber ii. (1) _Optics_ or _Perspective_ (a version of the _De multiplicatione specierum_). _Inc._ ‘Ostensum quippe in principio hujus Compendii Philosophiae.’

MSS. Brit. Mus: Royal 7 F vii. p. 221 (sec. xiii), fragment, called ‘Quinta pars Compendii theologiae’; and Addit. 8786, fol. 2 (fragment).

[Cf. Bodl. Digby 183, fol. 49 (sec. xiv)?] See the references under _Tract. de multiplicatione specierum_.

(2) _Astronomy_, or, _De coelo et mundo_.

MSS. Oxford:--Bodl. Digby 76, f. 1 (sec. xiii), _Compendium Philosophiae_. _Inc._ ‘Prima igitur veritas circa corpora mundi est quod non est unum corpus continuum et unius nature.’ _Ibid._ fol. 36, _De corporibus coelestibus, sc. de zodiaco, sole, etc._ _Inc._ ‘Habito de corporibus mundi prout mundum absolute constituunt’ (cf. _Opus Minus_). Cf. Ashmole 393 I, f. 44 (sec. xv), ‘Veritates de magnitudine ... planetarum. Tractatus extractus de libris celi et mundi,’ etc. Also, Univ. Coll. 49, De corporibus coelestibus.

Paris:--Mazarine 3576, _De coelestibus_ (five chapters). _Inc._ ‘Prima igitur veritas.’

(3) _Gravity_, _Scientia ponderum de gravibus et levibus_.

Cf. _Tractatus trium verborum_.

Liber iii. (4) _Alchemy_, or, _De elementis_[1354].

Liber iv. _De vegetabilibus et generabilibus_[1355].

(5) _Agriculture._

See note in Brewer, _Opera Ined._ p. li.

(6) _Medicine._

(7) _Experimental Science._

Vol. IV. _Metaphysics and Morals._

_Inc._ ‘Quoniam intencio principalis est innuere nobis vicia studii theologici que contracta sunt ex curiositate philosophie.’

MSS. Bodl.: Digby 190, fol. 86 b (sec. xiii-xiv). ‘Methaphisica fratris Rogeri ordinis Fratrum Minorum, de viciis contractis in studio theologie’ (25 lines).

Paris:--Bibl. Nat. 7440 (sec. xiv), fol. 38-40, fol. 25-32. ‘Incipit metaphysica Rogeri Baconis de ordine praedicatorum’ (fragment).

It is, however, probable that these MS. fragments ought to be referred to Bacon’s last work, the _Compendium Studii Theologiae_, rather than to the _Compendium Philosophiae_.

_Compendium studii theologiae_, Bacon’s last work, bears the date 1292 (‘usque ad hunc annum Domini 1292’). Extracts from it are printed by Charles, pp. 410-416. This work consisted of six parts or more.