CONCERNING THE

METHOD & UTILITY

OF THIS

CATALOG,

A LETTER.

I HAVE RECEIVED your letter, which is most full of zeal for literature and for me. When you indicate through it that the Catalog of Manuscript Books is almost brought to a conclusion, you tell of a matter that is by far most welcome. For I have always believed that through an institution of this kind, learning of every genre would be both increased and perfected. But as for what you add—that the famous Bernard original: "Cl. Bernardum"; referring to Edward Bernard (1638–1697), the primary editor of this catalog and a renowned Oxford scholar is struggling with ill health—I take that news as all will who understand how great an ornament he is both to the Republic of Letters The "Republic of Letters" was the long-distance intellectual community of scholars in the late 17th century. and to our University. I wish that, after his perpetual labors and late-night studies, enough strength remained for him to be able to explain the dignity and utility of the work now coming forth into public view. I certainly desire this for the sake of the public good; but all the more vehemently because you impose on me the task of describing and commending it. Yet I undertake this more willingly, partly because I am bound to obey your authority in all things, and partly because the commendation of a book which all the learned so eagerly expect will be easy. First, therefore, receive in a few words what I know and what I feel concerning the method of completing the work, and then concerning the utility of it when finished.

a. Morhof's Polyhistor, page 66. Daniel Georg Morhof was a famous 17th-century polymath; his "Polyhistor" was a standard reference for the history of literature and science.

Unless I trace the origin of this undertaking from the well-known diligence of the Oxonians The members of Oxford University. in promoting literature, I would be quite unjust to the truth. For I remember about five years ago, how frequently certain most learned men—ornaments of both the University and the learned world—used to fall into conversations of this kind: "Nothing would be
"more glorious for the University, or more pleasing to the learned, than if (by publishing a Catalog) the
"Oxford Manuscripts were exposed to the eyes of all. One can judge the former point
"from the admiration that struck foreigners when they looked upon the public Library;
"(for being previously occupied with the Jamesian Catalog, original: "Catalogo Jamesiano"; Thomas James was the first librarian of the Bodleian, who published catalogs in 1605 and 1620. they had thought more
"narrowly of the Bodleian Treasure.) Regarding the second point, one can judge from the incredible value that
"the Catalogs of Manuscript Books—which the most famous men John Mill,
"Henry Maurice, and others, collected for private use—held among the literate.
"These catalogs were surely witnesses of their wit, diligence, and learning; but they are in no way
"to be compared with this work of ours, whether in excellence, variety, or finally, in the number
"of books. Great praise has come to the Oxonians from the published Catalog of
"Printed Books; This refers to the 1674 catalog of the Bodleian's printed books. but an Index of Manuscripts will bring even greater praise,
"insofar as these are rarer than the former, and more sought after by everyone.
"This is owed to the memory of Bodley, Herbert, Laud, and others; Thomas Bodley, William Herbert (Earl of Pembroke), and Archbishop William Laud were the primary benefactors of the library's manuscript collections.
"who, since they brought such honor to the Oxonians with their munificence,
"should in turn be adorned by us with all honors. It is owed to our age,
"which is curious beyond measure in searching out manuscripts. Finally, it is
"owed to Britain, for its own Antiquities (with which the Bodleian Library The text here breaks off; the catchword "leiana" indicates the next page completes the word "Bodleiana". abounds..."