Catalogs of the Manuscript Books of England and Ireland Collected into One Volume

The engraving described at the top of the page depicts Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester (1390–1447), a founder of the Oxford University library. The image is a copy of a stained-glass window that once existed in Greenwich.

Since the Catalogs of Manuscript Books (which are contained here) along with their Indexes are at last finished and printed, it seemed appropriate, in place of a Preface, to put forward something both about the catalogs themselves and about the indexes joined to them (the care of which was entrusted to me). This is done so that certain objections, which might perhaps arise, may be answered.

Indeed, since this business had to be completed by the hands of several people, among whom not everyone held the same opinion on all matters, and because various parts of it reached the editors' hands successively at different times (not all at once), it is not to be expected that all things should proceed with a uniform character. This could only have been achieved if all the parts had been visible at a single glance original: "uno intuitu" and everything had been carried out according to the same plan. There should be no doubt, therefore, that a candid reader and a fair judge of the matter will easily grant pardon if everything does not respond accurately to a rigid examination. Such a reader will surely view with favor whatever labor was undertaken for his sake and to serve his convenience.

Meanwhile, there are a few things (especially regarding the Indexes) which I thought should be specifically addressed. I. That among these manuscript volumes, some printed books occur. II. That some of these, although manuscripts, are of little weight and perhaps will be of hardly any use. III. That the description of volumes written by ancient authors is sometimes too brief; perhaps the Author’s Name or the indicator of the Age original: "Ætatis Charactere" — referring to the paleographic style or date of the handwriting in which that volume was written is omitted (along with other things of that kind, on which the authority of a manuscript largely depends). Sometimes different authors who happen to have the same name are not sufficiently distinguished; and conversely, when the same writer is indicated by different descriptions, he is taken for different people; or when some book is perhaps praised more extensively, and another more sparingly, than it deserved. IV. Those mistakes sphalmata From the Greek 'sphalma,' meaning a slip or error. that have arisen from a lack of either judgment or diligence on the part of those who provided the catalogs. V. The not infrequent errors of the press that have occurred. These are the points I thought should be answered individually.

I. The Printed Books mixed among the Manuscripts are not so many; they were included in those catalogs from which this one is compiled, and they could not be conveniently separated. For instance, those given as gifts to the Bodleian Library The main research library of the University of Oxford. by those who gave manuscripts should not be withdrawn from them without doing them an injustice. (Consider those held among the manuscripts of the Reverend Archbishop of Canterbury, William Laud Laud (1573–1645) was a major benefactor who donated over 2,000 manuscripts to Oxford.; and those from the gift of Mr. Francis Junius Francis Junius (1591–1677) was a scholar of Germanic languages whose collection is a cornerstone of Old English studies., and others.) Others, although they are printed, are nevertheless held in the place of manuscripts either because of their rarity or for some other cause, and are counted among the manuscripts and kept with them so they might never be lost elsewhere. Others belonged to the Reverend Bishop of Norwich, or Mr. Isaac Vossius, or Mr. Edward Bernard; they had been compared with manuscripts, or were published long ago and are rarely for sale, and thus are to be valued more highly.