1163, was abandoned in consequence of the subsequent troubles; nor was it revived until 1494, and then, in the irony of fate, by Alexander VI. of evil memory. Whether it resulted in a decree does not appear; but Anselm belongs to the number

of those Blessed Doctors whom the ancient and universal consent of the Church has canonised. His feast, 21 April, was raised from a semi-double to a double by Clement XI. in 1720. RIGG, J. M., 1896, St. Anselm of Canterbury, Appendix, p. 284.

Eadmer is a trustworthy historian. DIBDIN, THOMAS FROGNALL, 1824, The Library Companion, p. 157.

As a writer, Eadmer appears under three characters, those of a historian, of a compiler of lives of saints, and of a theologian. His principal historical work, the "Historia Novorum," or history of his own times, in six books, is the most valuable work we possess relating to the events of the reign of William Rufus, and of the earlier part of that of Henry I. .

The life of Anselm, in two books, forms a necessary supplement to this his tory. The "Historia Novorum" was first printed by Selden: it appears to have been very popular in the twelfth century, and is spoken of in high terms of praise by William of Malmesbury. . . Eadmer's theological and miscellaneous writings are brief, and without importance. WRIGHT, THOMAS, 1846, Biographia Britannica Literaria, vol. II, pp. 81, 82.

One distinction belonging to Eadmer's narrative is the nearly entire absence of miracles. He probably considered it improper to introduce such high matter into a composition which did not profess to be of a sacred or spiritual nature. Much of his work, however, is occupied with ecclesiastical transactions, which indeed formed almost the entire home politics, and no small part of the foreign politics also, of that age. He has in particular entered largely into the great controversy

between the crown and the pope about investiture; and one of the most curious parts of his history is a long and detailed account which he gives of his own appointment to the bishopric of St. Andrew's in Scotland, and his contest about his consecration with the stout Scottish

king, Alexander I.-CRAIK, GEORGE L., 1861, A Compendious History of English Literature and of the English Language, vol. I, p. 102.

The work, ("Historia Novorum") is more of an ecclesiastical than a political history. Written with great clearness and elegance.-GAIRDNER, JAMES, 1879, Early Chroniclers of Europe, England, p.66.

It is in the writings of Eadmar, a Benedictine monk of Canterbury, that we find the first indications of original and independent thought and the first faint glimmer of a promise heralding the new national literature. The two most important works of Eadmar are his history of his own times, "Historia Novorum, and his "Biography of Archbishop Anselm," in which he gives a faithful and somewhat minute account of affairs in England from the time of the Conquest to the year 1112. These works are distinguished for their accuracy of statement and for the soundness of judgment displayed in their composition; and, in describing the struggles of Anselm with William Rufus in defense of the claims of the church against the despotic

exactions of kingly authority, they occasionally rise to the dignity and value of genuine literature. They are the most trustworthy authorities that we have for

the history of the period immediately succeeding the Conquest.-BALDWIN, JAMES, 1883, English Literature and Literary Criticism, Prose, p. 27.

William, quitting his own name. of Summerset, assumed that of Malmesbury, because there he had (if not born) his best Preferment. Indeed he was a Duallist in that Convent (and if a Pluralist no ingenious person would have envied him), being Canter of that Church, and Library-Keeper therein. Let me adde, and Library-Maker too, for so may we call his "History of the Saxon Kings and Bishops" before the Conquest, and after it untill his own time; an History to be honoured, both for the Truth and Method thereof. If any Fustiness be found in his Writings, it comes not from the Grape, but from the Cask. The smack of Superstition in his books is not to be imputed to his person, but to the Age wherein he lived and dyed, viz. anno Domini 1142, and was buried in Malmesbury. FULLER, THOMAS, 1662, The Worthies of England, ed. Nichols, vol. II, p. 448.

William of Malmsbury must be acknowledged both for style and judgment, to be by far the best writer of them all.-MILTON, JOHN, 1670, History of Britain, bk. iv. One of the best of the old English historians. A judicious man. HUME, DAVID, 1762, History of England, ch. i, and ch. vii, note.

Well entitled to stand at the head of our historians of the twelfth century. HENRY, ROBERT, 1771-90, The History of Great Britain, bk. iii, ch. iv.

Of his acquirements as a scholar it is indeed difficult to speak in terms of sufficient commendation. That he had accurately studied nearly all the Roman authors, will be readily allowed by the classical reader of his works. From these

*First pubushed in 1815.

he either quotes or inserts so appositely, as to show how thoroughly he had imbibed their sense and spirit. His adaptations are ever ready and appropriate; they incorporate with his narrative with such exactness that they appear only to occupy their legitimate place. His knowledge of Greek is not equally apparent; at least his references to the writers of Greece are not so frequent, and even these might probably be obtained from translations: from this, however, no conclusion can be drawn that he did not understand the language. With respect to writers subsequent to those deemed classics, his range was so extensive that it is no easy matter to point out many books which he had not seen, and certainly he had perused several which we do not now possess.-SHARPE, JOHN, 1815, tr. William of Malmesbury's Chronicle of the Kings of England, Preface.

The modest, faithful, and erudite historian of the twelfth century.-DIBDIN, THOMAS FROGNALL, 1824, The Library Companion, p. 147.

William of Malmesbury deserves to be considered as one of the most remarkable writers of the twelfth century. . The first English writer after the time of Bede who attempted successfully to raise history above the dry and undigested details of a chronicle. . Next to

the Saxon Chronicle, he is the most valuable authority for Anglo-Saxon history. In his annals of the Norman period, and of his own time, he is judicious, and, as far as could be expected, unprejudiced.WRIGHT, THOMAS, 1846, Biographia Britannica Literaria, vol. II, pp. 134, 137, 138.

The classical reader will probably lament with me that our early historians should have used a style so cumbersome and uninviting. To this general censure Malmesbury is certainly no exception. His Latinity is rude and repulsive, and the true value of his writings arises from the fidelity with which he has recorded facts, which he had either himself witnessed or had obtained from eye-witnesses.-GILES, J. A., 1847, ed. William of Malmesbury's Chronicle of the Kings of England, p. x, note.

William of Malmesbury enjoys the reputation of being a more learned historian, and of endeavouring to invest the dry form of the Old Chronicle with a more attractive style; but his researches are often by no means correct, and his errors cannot be forgotten.-PAULI, GEORG REINHOLD, 1851-3, Life of Alfred the Great, p. 13.

William of Malmesbury, on Roman affairs no high authority.-MILMAN, HENRY HART, 1854, History of Latin Christianity, vol. II, bk. v, ch. xiv, note.

His Histories are throughout original His Histories are throughout original works, and, in their degree, artistic compositions. He has evidently taken great pains with the manner as well as with the matter of them. But he also evinces throughout a love of truth as the first quality of historical writing, and far more of critical faculty in separating the probable from the improbable than any other of his monkish brethren of that age who have set up for historians, notwithstanding his fondness for prodigies and ecclesiastical miracles, in which of course he had the ready and all-digestive belief which was universal in his time.—CRAIK, GEORGE L., 1861, A Compendious History of English Literature and of the English Language, vol. 1, p. 101.

We may see the tendency of English literature at the close of the Norman period in William of Malmesbury. In himself, as in his work, he marks the fusion of the conquerors and the conquered, for he was of both English and Norman parentage, and his sympathies were as divided as his blood. In the form and style of his writings he shows the influence of those classical studies which were now reviving throughout Christendom.

Monk as he is, he discards the older ecclesiastical models and the annalistic form. Events are grouped together with no strict reference to time,

while the lively narrative flows rapidly and loosely along, with constant breaks of digression, over the general history of Europe and the Church.--GREEN, JOHN RICHARD, 1874, A Short History of the English People, ch. iii, sc. i.

In William of Malmesbury we cannot fail to see the familiarity of the true scholar with the books which he had really mastered. FREEMAN, EDWARD A., 1876, The History of the Norman Conquest of England, vol. V, p. 578.

Though the single existing manuscript has reached us in a defective condition, some parts being altogether wanting, while the end is lost, the work is valuable from its graphic description of many of the incidents of the civil war, and the picture it supplies of the prevalent anarchy and suffering. MULLINGER, J. BASS, 1881, English History for Students, Authorities, p. 261.

A man of great reading, unbounded industry, very forward scholarship, and of thoughtful research in many regions of learning. STUBBS, WILLIAM, 1887, ed. Gesta Regum, Preface, vol. 1, p. x.

He was a man of sound judgment and cultured taste, and in consequence shows great love for delineation of character. He has considerable power of tracing the tendencies of important events and the development of political institutions. He is wonderfully broadminded and free from party-feeling, in sympathy with Normans and English alike, while his work is made bright by humour and sharply pointed remarks. HEATH, H. FRANK, 1894, Social England, vol. 1, p. 352.

Sprung from a Norman father and an English mother, he represents the growing fusion of the two races; though his sympathies are manifestly on the Norman side. He is a good specimen of a Benedictine scholar. By general consent he takes the foremost place among the authorities for the Anglo-Norman period. He may be designated the English Herodotus; in the sense of being the Father of its History. His industry in collecting. materials, and his skill and judgment in arranging them, were marvellous for that age; considering his opportunities. and the means at his command.-AUBREY, W. H. S., 1895, The Rise and Growth of the English Nation, vol. 1, p. 158.

at one time prevailed as to the authenticity of his history, make it in every respect a question whether he ought not to be preserved, whilst the ample allusions, and, if we may use the expression, the groundwork, on which many of the facts are based, enable us indubitably to introduce him into our series as an addition (though secondary in value) to materials which our readers will find not to be inexhaustible, respecting our early history.-GILES, J. A., 1842, ed. The British History of Geoffrey of Monmouth, Introduction, p. xvii.

One of the most remarkable writers of the twelfth century, both for the popular reputation which he has since continued to enjoy, and the influence he exercised over subsequent historians. . . . Geoffrey's "History" soon became extensively popular, and within no long time after its publication the celebrity which he had given to the legendary king Arthur obtained for him the title of Galfridus Arturus. It is impossible to consider Geoffrey of Monmouth's History of the British Kings in any other light than as a tissue of fables. Its author was either deceived by his materials, or he wished to deceive his readers. It is certain that, if he did not intentionally deceive, we must understand, by translating the Breton book, that he meant only working up the materials furnished by it into his history; for some parts of the latter work are mere compilations by himself from the old writers on British affairs then commonly referred to.-WRIGHT, THOMAS, 1846, Biographia Britannica Literaria, vol. II, pp. 143, 144.

The Livy of the monkish historians. . . . His style is clear and simple, his narrative. told in an effective manner, while his authenticity has found such eminent supporters as Leland and Usher.-LAWRENCE, EUGENE, 1855, The Lives of the British Historians, vol. I, p. 26.

But Geoffrey's work sufficiently shows that he wrote, as he professed to write, from documents. He probably rationalized a little, tampered with genealogies, arranged dates, and in other ways did infinite mischief; but it would be monstrous to suppose that he invented the history he set forth. If he did, he ought to rank as one of the first artists in literature. But in fact nothing is more difficult than to invent a new story, let alone

twenty; and the exploit becomes incredible, if we add the difficulty of palming the forgeries upon a nation as its own history. There can be no doubt that Geoffrey derived the bulk of his work from old traditions, and probably, as he himself states, from some old compilation.PEARSON, CHARLES H., 1867, History of England During the Early and Middle Ages, vol. 1, p. 621.

Men

A monument of stupendous delusion; but in which he seems to have been the deceiver rather than the deceived. If there were many scholars who saw through this tissue of lies, the great mass were carried away by it. believed the stories presented with so much gravity by a Benedictine and a bishop, and they certainly found their contents most fascinating. The sense of the marvellous and the mysterious was nourished not less than the sense of the chivalric and heroic, or the love for the glitter and splendour of a kingly life; and Geoffrey's rhetorical, even poetical, style brought to bear with their full force all these elements. The effect of the work was therefore tremendous. Geoffrey's influence grew through the entire course of the Middle Ages, and spreading in a thousand channels, reached far into modern times, down to Shakspere, nay to Tennyson.-TEN BRINK, BERNHARD, 187783, History of English Literature (To Wielif), tr. Kennedy, pp. 134, 135.

One of the most extraordinary works of art that the Middle Ages ever succeeded in producing. Of mythical tales and curious legends there was certainly no lack in those days; but the fabrication of a long consecutive history, to fill up a gap or form a prelude to the authentic annals of a nation, was something altogether new. Yet the story was so wonderfully told, the invention was so admirable, and the marvels related appealed so strongly to the imagination, that the world for ages after seems to have been at a loss what to make of it. It was not easy, even at the first, for a man of any judgment to be a thorough believer; but it required some boldness, even after centuries had passed away, to dispute the authority of fictions which owed their vitality in the first instance to Geoffrey's imaginative pen. GAIRDNER, JAMES, 1879, Early Chroniclers of Europe, England, p. 157.