A LETTER

In such a wide variety of material, we inevitably stumble due to a certain human necessity. However, this is less damaging in Catalogs, since errors can be very easily detected and corrected by checking the Books themselves. There is, however, a class of men who are no less unjust than they are harshly critical; they are offended by even the slightest slip and believe nothing should be brought into the public light unless it has been purged of every tiny blemish. They speak magnificently, but not with human kindness. For Nature has decreed that nothing great should be achieved quickly: just as humans reach full adulthood only by degrees—first through infancy and childhood, then youth—so too does everything human grow gradually and reach maturity through certain stages. We find no part of Learning perfected in a single age or by the labors of a single man; those resources of literature which are most accurate today almost all flowed from modest beginnings.

Nearly a hundred years ago, the Famous James Thomas James (c. 1571–1629), the first librarian of the Bodleian Library. published a Catalog of Manuscripts. It was truly a great work for one man; yet, if you compare it to our own, it appears small and less accurate. Nevertheless, no one is ignorant of how much the Republic of Letters original: "Resp. Literaria"; the international community of scholars and their shared intellectual output. would have suffered without it, unless they are entirely estranged from the writers of the previous age. How many scholars have we known who, chasing the glory of a "perfect work," spent a long lifetime collecting material? Their observations, suppressed for so long, perished with the deaths of the authors; had they been published in a timely manner, they could have aided the labors of others. Thus, in matters of this kind, slowness is no less an enemy to Literature than haste.

What is the point of all this? So that it may be understood that the scholars of Oxford have kept a prudent middle ground in this business, neither rushing the edition nor dragging it out too long. Therefore, let the present age enjoy whatever is accurate; if anything happens to be incomplete or incorrect, let Posterity perfect and amend it.

The work is expanded by extensive Indexes, which will be of great benefit to the Learned. We owe these to the diligence and judgment of Humfrey Wanley, a young man who is not only studious but always ready to promote the efforts of other Scholars. We recognize this character of his both from his whole life and from this specific service. This is so even though there are those who think Indexes (viewing them as "incentives to laziness") should be completely rejected. This judgment, in my opinion, is generally inconvenient for Literature, but in Historical matters, it is plainly ruinous. Those who hold that opinion seem to accuse themselves of the very sloth they condemn in others—unless perhaps they favor their own labors so immoderately that they believe entire works should be committed to memory.

The Life of Thomas Bodley Sir Thomas Bodley (1545–1613), diplomat and founder of the Bodleian Library. prefixed to this Catalog is largely collected from his own papers and letters; the University could not honorably pass over this opportunity to demonstrate its gratitude. The History of the Bodleian Library was written with the same spirit, so that we may honor the names and memories of those whose benevolence allowed the library to reach this greatness.

Regarding the plan of the book, one final thing must be noted: several Colleges of the University of Cambridge sent their Catalogs to Oxford to be published along with ours. The rest of this work is supplemented from James’s Ecloga Referring to the Ecloga Oxonio-Cantabrigiensis (1600), the first combined catalog of Oxford and Cambridge manuscripts.. That book is in the hands of few, yet it will be useful to Scholars until the people of Cambridge, once their Printing House is established, publish a complete volume of their own Catalogs.

So much for the Plan of the work; now let us come to its Utility. Its usefulness has the same boundaries as Science itself, since there is no part of literature that does not receive light and growth from this Treasury. Perhaps those "delicate" sorts will feel otherwise—those who, content with a jumping about in their studies, consult only their own pleasure. We shall not be very concerned about their judgment, since they are enemies not only of this Institution but of Literature itself. These are the people who, when they detect a slip in anyone’s writings, are accustomed to congratulate themselves wonderfully, vainly boasting that they have shown such a small specimen of their own insight. They are the least fit of all to judge Literature, yet they are foolishly diligent in noting errors.