and personal appearance, this man might be considered as a stage actor rather than a priest as he was, to the great disgrace of the priestly order. Such are the persons to whom the king of England intrusts the care and guardianship of many thousands of souls, rejecting such a vast number of learned, prudent and proper men as England has given birth to, who know the language of the natives, and how to instruct the ignorant. In like manner, also, to provoke the anger and hatred of worthy men, the king ill-advisedly gave away the other church benefices which had belonged to the aforesaid William, to unworthy men and foreigners, whose incapability and uselessness was shown by their extraordinary conduct, and who were plainly proved to be reprobates by their conversation, which was not only scurrilous, but also foolish and obscene. This digression from the subject of our narrative is elicited by our sorrow for the causes of it.

(1265).

(B) Matthew Paris died in 1259, and the lot of writing the St. Alban's narrative of Montfort's death fell to another, possibly to William Rishanger. He was fifteen years old at the time1 and far inferior to his predecessor in native talent. Simon of Montfort, however, is his hero, and when speaking of Lewes or Evesham he improves decidedly upon his usual style. In Rishanger's Narratio de Bellis apud Lewes et Evesham the Earl of Leicester is classed among apostles and martyrs, nor is it surprising that he should be credited with miraculous powers. The English clergy were on the patriotic side, and Montfort's character for piety equalled his reputation as a friend of freedom.

SOURCE.-Chronica. W. Rishanger (1250 ?-1312?). Trans. J. A. Giles. London, 1854. P. 353.

Thus released from his imprisonment, Edward assembled a large army, as numbers flocked to join him, and the counties of Hereford, Worcester, Salop and Chester, entered into an alliance with him, the towns and villages, cities and castles, pouring forth their inhabitants to join his standard. He at once besieged and took the city of Gloucester, which the earl had

1It is not implied that Rishanger wrote his chronicle at this precocious age. The date of its composition is uncertain, and even its authorship is matter of debate.

F

lately gained possession of, the garrison left therein taking flight to the castle; but after fifteen days they surrendered the castle also, and on giving their oath not to bear arms against Edward for the future, they were allowed to depart at liberty. The earl of Leicester in the meantime attacked the castle of Monmouth, which the earl of Gloucester had lately taken and fortified, and having compelled the garrison to surrender, razed the castle to the ground. He then entered Glamorganshire, the territory of the said earl of Gloucester, and being met by the prince of Wales with assistance, the two chiefs together ravaged the whole country with fire and sword. Edward, in the meantime, hearing that many of the partisans of Earl Simon had flocked together to the castle of Kenilworth, joined his forces with those of the earl of Gloucester, and setting forth from Worcester in the evening, reached that place by forced marches. Coming on the place suddenly, he made prisoner of the earl of Oxford, and about thirteen knights bannerets, before they could enter the castle, in which Simon, the son of Earl Simon, had already shut himself up. Simon, earl of Leicester, always keeping the king in his company, returned from the south of Wales, and on the festival of St. Peter ad Vincula,1 arrived at Kempsey, a manor of the bishop of Worcester, and stayed there on the day following. Edward then returned from Kenilworth to Worcester, which is only three miles distant from the abovenamed manor; and Simon, on hearing of his arrival there, went away with the king at nightfall, and took up his quarters in the town of Evesham, where he awaited his unhappy destiny. For on the morrow, which was the day of the Finding of St. Stephen, Edward moved from Worcester, crossed the river near the town of Claines, and cut off the approach of the earl to his son, who was in the castle of Kenilworth, and prevented all chance of the father and son meeting. On the following day he drew near the town of Evesham on one side, and the earl of Gloucester and Roger Mortimer came up with their respective forces in two other directions; and thus the earl of Leicester was hemmed in on all sides, and was under the necessity either of voluntarily surrendering, or of giving them battle. . . . At the time of his death, a storm of thunder and lightning occurred, and darkness prevailed to such an extent, that all were struck with amazement. Besides the earl, there fell, in that battle, twelve knights bannerets; namely, Henry, his son; Peter de Montfort; Hugh Despenser, justiciary of England; William de

11st August.

Mandeville; Ralph Basset; Walter de Crespigny; William York; Robert Tregor; Thomas Hostelee; John Beauchamp; Guy Balliol; Roger de Roulee; and a great number of others of inferior rank, such as esquires and foot-soldiers; the greatest loss being amongst the Welsh. Thus ended the labours of that noble man Earl Simon, who gave up not only his property, but also his person, to defend the poor from oppression, and for the maintenance of justice and the rights of the kingdom. He was distinguished for his learning; to him an assiduous attention to divine duties was a pleasure; he was moderate and frugal; and it was a usual practice of his to watch by night, in preference to sleeping. He was bold in speech, and of a severe aspect; he put great confidence in the prayers of religious men, and always paid great respect to ecclesiastics. He endeavoured to adhere to the counsels of St. Robert, surnamed Grosseteste, bishop of Lincoln, and intrusted his children to him to be brought up, when very young. On that prelate's counsel he relied when arranging matters of difficulty, when attempting dubious enterprises, and in finishing what he had begun, especially in those matters by which he hoped to increase his merits. It was reported that the same bishop had enjoined on him, in order to obtain remission of his sins, to take up this cause, for which he fought even to the death; declaring that the peace of the church of England could not be firmly established except by the sword, and positively assuring him that all who died for it would be crowned with martyrdom. Some persons, moreover, stated, that on one occasion the bishop placed his hand on the head of the earl's eldest son, and said to him, "My well-beloved child, both thou and thy father shall die on one day, and by one kind of death; but it will be in the cause of justice and truth". Report goes, that Simon, after his death, was distinguished by the working of many miracles, which, however, were not made publicly known, for fear of kings.

32. THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE MEDIEVAL SCHOLAR (1267).

Roger Bacon's trials were not limited to the dearth of books and instruments which is mentioned below. He was a member of the Franciscan order, and towards the close of his life its head sentenced him to imprisonment on the ground that he was a dangerous person. For centuries there was no just appreciation of his place in the history of science, and he passed

into legend as an alchemist or an enchanter. Since his authentic writings were published and studied, no doubt has remained of his eminence, nor of the hardships he endured in striving to advance physical and mathematical knowledge. Bacon was a great man who lived in a great age, but his spirit was different from that of others, and he was consequently misunderstood. From having lacked recognition he will ever remain a pathetic figure, but because we regard him as a victim to prejudice we must not overlook the activity and acumen which then abounded in many realms of thought.

SOURCE.—Comp. Studii, cap. viii.; Opus Tertium, cap. xv.; and Opus Tertium, cap. xi. Roger Bacon (1214 ?-1294). Trans. J. S. Brewer. London, 1859. (In his preface to Bacon's Opera Inedita, Rolls Series: A, at p. lix.; B, at p. lxiii.; and C, at p. lxxv.)

(4) If the saints made mistakes in their translations, much more do these men, who have little or no title to sanctity at all. So, though we have numerous translations of all the sciences by Gerard of Cremona, Michael Scot,1 Alfred the Englishman, Herman the German, and William Fleming, there is such an utter falsity in all their writings that none can sufficiently wonder at it. For a translation to be true, it is necessary that a translator should know the language from which he is translating, the language into which he translates, and the science he wishes to translate. But who is he? and I will praise him, for he has done marvellous things. Certainly, none of the above-named had any true knowledge of the tongues or the sciences, as is clear, not from their translations only, but their condition of life. All were alive in my time; some in their youth, contemporaries with Gerard of Cremona, who was somewhat more advanced in years among them. Herman the German, who was very intimate with Gerard, is still alive, and a bishop. When I questioned him about certain books of logic, which he had to translate from the Arabic, he roundly told me he knew nothing of logic, and therefore did not dare to translate them; and certainly if he was unacquainted with logic, he could know nothing of other sciences as he ought. Nor did he understand Arabic, as he confessed, because he was rather an assistant in the translations, than the real translator. For he kept Saracens about

1 The famous mathematician, physician and so-called wizard, 11751234 ?

him in Spain, who had a principal hand in his translations. In the same way Michael the Scot claimed the merit of numerous translations. But it is certain that Andrew, a Jew, laboured at them more than he did. And even Michael, as Herman reported, did not understand either the sciences or the tongues. And so of the rest; especially the notorious William Fleming, who is now in such reputation. Whereas it is well known to all the literati at Paris, that he is ignorant of the sciences in the original Greek, to which he makes such pretensions; and therefore he translates falsely, and corrupts the philosophy of the Latins. For Boethius alone was well acquainted with the tongues and their interpretation. My Lord Robert [Grosseteste],2 by reason of his long life and the wonderful methods he employed, knew the sciences better than any other man; for though he did not understand Greek or Hebrew, he had many assistants. But all the rest were ignorant of the tongues and the sciences, and above all this William Fleming, who has no satisfactory knowledge of either, and yet has undertaken to reform all our translations and give us new ones. But I have seen books, and I know them to be faulty, and that they ought to be avoided. For as at this time, the enemies of the Christians, the Jews, the Arabs and Greeks, have the sciences in their own tongues, they will not allow the Christians the use of perfect MSS., but they destroy and corrupt them; particularly when they see incompetent people, who have no acquaintance with the tongues and the sciences presuming to make translations.

(B) The scientific books of Aristotle, of Avicenna,3 of Seneca, of Cicero, and other ancients cannot be had except at a great cost; their principal works have not been translated into Latin, and copies of others are not to be found in ordinary libraries or elsewhere. The admirable books of Cicero De Republica are not to be found anywhere, as far as I can hear, although I have made anxious inquiry for them in different parts of the world and by various messengers. so of many other books of which I send extracts to your beatitude. I could never find the works of Seneca, until after the time when I received your commands, although I made

And

1D, 524. Boethius not only wrote the Consolation of Philosophy, a work universally celebrated in the Middle Ages, but translated extensively from Greek into Latin.

2 Bishop of Lincoln, 1235-1253.

3 An important Saracenic philosopher and physician of Spain. Circ. 980-1037.