Matthew Paris

CAMS] :<ATE .STUDIES IN

MEDIEVAL LIFE & THOUGHT

NEW SERIES: VOLUME 6

MATTHEW
PARIS

By
RICHARD VAUGHAN

General Editor of the
New Series:

DOM DAVID KNOWLES

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS

Little is known of Matthew Paris, save that he
was a tMrteenth-^oitury Benedictine monk of
St Albany and author of a number of historical
works, including the famous Chronica Majora;
the rest of the details must be pieced together
from his writings. The character that emerges
from Dr Vaughan's studies of the contents,
handwriting, chronology and interrektionships
of the various manuscripts is a colourful one:
we find a man at once diligent but unsystem-
atic, bigoted but possessed of a liberal curiosity,
scurrilous but prepared to estpunge his offensive
remarks if the occasion demanded; above all
a man with a great range of interests, consider-
able artistic talent, and a healthy disrespect for
authority* ffis life as a monk was tar from
cloistered; he hob-nobbed with Kings, Bishops
tad notables, was an inveterate gossip, an
enter* t.u i , ; I' : , , : irate raconteur, and had a
Kutui kiu)*',it<itfi we! understanding of con-

Dr Vaughan assesses his merits as a domestic
and general historian, chronicler, writer of hV
of tb saints, mtmAt, versifier, map-maker
ai4 ilkstmtot (the many plate show examples
;J hfcwork}.

1148 00331 4424

9*4-2.03
Vaughan

Matthew Paris

63-02860

kansas city || public library

Kansas city, missou

itftar

Books will be issued only

on presentation of library card.
Please report lost cards and

change of residence promptly.
Card holders are responsible for

all books, records, films, pictures
or other library materials
checked out on their cards.

CAMBRIDGE STUDIES IN
MEDIEVAL LIFE AND THOUGHT

Edited by M. D. KNOWLES, Litt.D,, F.B.A.

Fellow of Peterhouse and Regius Professor of Modern History in the

University of Cambridge

NEW SERIES, VOL. 6

MATTHEW PARIS

NEW SERIES

VOL. i. The Alley and Bishopric of Ely by EDWARD MILLER

2. Tavistock Abbey by H. p. R. FINBERG

3. Crusading Warfare by R. c. SMAIL

4. Foundations of the Conciliar Theory byBRiAN TIERNEY

5. Bradwardine and the Pelagians by GORDON LEFF

6. Matthew Paris by RICHARD VAUGHAN

Other volumes in preparation

Virgin and Child. B.M. Roy. MS. 14 C vii, f. 6a.

MATTHEW PARIS

BY

RICHARD VAUGHAN

Fellow of Corpus Christi College
Cambridge

CAMBRIDGE

AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS
1958

PUBLISHED BY
THE SYNDICS OF THE CAMBKIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS

Bentley House, 200 Euston Road, London, N.W. i
American Branch: 32 East 57th Street, New York 22, N.Y.

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS
1958

Printed in Great Britain at the University Press, Cambridge
(Brooke Crutchley, University Printer)

CONTENTS

List of Plates page vii

Preface xi

Abbreviations xiii

I The Life of Matthew Paris i

II Matthew Paris and Roger Wendover 21

III The Handwriting and Authorship of the Historical

Manuscripts 35

IV The Relationship and Chronology of the Chronica

Majora, the Historia Anglorum, and the Liber

Additamentorum 49

V The Liber Additamentorum 78

VI The Flores Historiarum: some Manuscript

Problems 92

VII Matthew Paris's Historical Works: Abridgement

and Expurgation no

VIII Matthew Paris the Chronicler 125

IX Matthew Paris the Hagiologist 159

X Matthew Paris the Domestic Historian 182

(i) The Gesta Abbatum 182

(ii) The Vitae Off arum 189

(iii) Domestic Hagiology 195

(iv) The Relics of St Alban 198

CONTENTS

XI Matthew Paris the Artist page 205

XII Other Interests 235

(i) Cartography 235

(ii) Heraldry 250

(iii) Natural Science 253

(iv) Verse 258

Epilogue 261

Bibliography 267

Index 277

VI

LIST OF PLATES

Virgin and Child. British Museum Royal MS. 140
vii, f. 6 a. frontispiece

PLATES I-XXI ARE BETWEEN PP. 276 AND 277

I Matthew Paris on his death-bed, British Museum
Royal MS. 14.0 vii, f. 2i8b.

II Examples of Matthew Paris's handwriting in the early
part of the Chronica Major a (actual size). Corpus
Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 16 ; (a) part of f . 38 b ;
(b) part of f. 82 a.

III Examples of Matthew Paris's handwriting in the later
part of the Chronica Majora (actual size). Corpus
Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 16; (a) part of
f. 242a; (b) part of f. 253 b.

IV Shields in the lower margin of British Museum Cotton
MS. Claudius D vi, ff. 9ib-92a (actual size).

V Shields in the lower margin of British Museum Royal
MS. 14 C vii, ff. 99b-iooa (reduced).

VI The siege of Damietta in 1219, from the margin of
the Chronica Majora, Corpus Christi College, Cam-
bridge, MS. 1 6, f. 55 b.

VII The defeat of the French at Damascus in 1240, from
the margin of the Chronica Majora, Corpus Christi
College, Cambridge, MS. 16, f. 133 b.

VIII Two of Matthew Paris's illustrations of his Vie de
Seint Auban. Trinity College, Dublin, MS. 140;
(a)L 38 a; (6)f.4ib.

IX (a) The Crucifixion. British Museum Royal MS.

2 B vi, f. Qb.

(b) Illustration from the Estoire de Seint Aedward.
Cambridge University Library, MS. Ee iii 59, f. 9 a.

vu

LIST OF PLATES

X Drawings of seated kings.

(a) British Museum Cotton MS. Claudius D vi, f. 5b.

(b) Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 26, p. 28.

XI Drawings of seated kings. British Museum Royal MS.
i4Cvii, f. 8b.

XII First page of one of Matthew Paris's itineraries from
London to Apulia. British Museum Royal MS.
14 C vii, f. 2 a.

XIII First page of another of Matthew Paris's itineraries
from London to Apulia. Corpus Christi College,
Cambridge, MS. 26, f. ia.

XIV Architectural details in Matthew Paris's drawings.

(a) Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 26, p. 220.

(b) Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 16,
f. i 3 8b.

(c) British Museum Royal MS. 14 C vii, f. 9 a.

(d) British Museum Cotton MS. Nero D i, f. 2b.

(e) Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 385,

P- 173-

(/) Bodleian Library, Oxford, Ashmole MS. 304,
f. 38 a.

XV Architectural details in Matthew Paris's itineraries and
map of England and Scotland.

(d) British Museum Cotton MS. Nero D i, f. 183 a.

(b) British Museum Cotton MS. Claudius D vi, f. 8b.

(c) Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 26,
f. iiia.

XVI Map of Palestine. Corpus Christi College, Cambridge,
MS. 26, ff. iiib-iva.

XVII Map of Palestine. Corpus Christi College, Oxford,
MS. 2, f. 2b.

viii

LIST OF PLATES

XVIII Heraldic lions on some of Matthew Paris's shields.

(a) British Museum Cotton MS. Nero D i, L 198 a.

(b) Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 16, 88 b.

(c) British Museum Cotton MS. Nero D i, f. 3b.

(d) Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 16, f. iiib.

(e) Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 26, p. 225 .
(/) British Museum Royal MS. 14 C vii, f. n6b.

XIX A page of coloured shields in the Liber Additamentomm.
British Museum Cotton MS. Nero D i, f. 170 b.

XX Some of Matthew Paris's diagrams illustrating the
Dragmaticon Philosophiae. Corpus Christi College,
Cambridge, MS. 385, Part II, pp. 130, 147, 148, 152
and 178.

XXI (a) Matthew Paris's drawing of an elephant. Corpus
Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 16, f. iva.

(b) The Sphera Bestiamm. Bodleian Library, Oxford,
Ashmole MS. 304, f

IX

PREFACE

WHEN, in the summer of 1951, I was in a position to
embark on research for a Ph.D. thesis, I found myself
unable to decide on a suitable subject. It was Professor
Knowles who suggested Matthew Paris to me, and who super-
vised my researches during the ensuing three years. The result
was a study of the relationship and chronology of Matthew
Paris's historical manuscripts which is incorporated much
altered, and, as I hope, improved in the present work. My
especial thanks are due to Professor Knowles, who, besides
helping me as a supervisor and afterwards, has read the whole
of this book in typescript and been kind enough to accept it for
publication in the series of medieval studies which he edits.
I must also thank Professor Galbraith, who has taken a lively
interest in my work, and thereby been a constant source of
encouragement and stimulation. Professor Cheney has provided
help of a rather different kind, for which I must also record my
thanks : he has read this book in typescript and proof and saved
me from numerous errors, as well as making many suggestions
which led to some important alterations in the text. For his
encouragement since my undergraduate days, frequent loans
and gifts of books, and much learned assistance, I must thank
Professor Dickins. I would also like to thank Dr R. W. Hunt of
the Bodleian Library, Dr C. E. Wright and Mrs Antonia
Gransden of the British Museum, and Mr H. L. Pink of the
University Library, Cambridge, for their help concerning manu-
scripts ; Mr A. G. Woodhead for helping me with Matthew's
Latin, and Dr M. H. Tweedy for helping me with his French;
Dr T. E. Faber for advising me on some points concerning
Matthew's scientific interests; and Professor Mynors, Dr
Dorothy Whitelock, and Mr H. M. Adams. It is not perhaps
inapposite here for me to record my obligations and thanks to
my colleagues of Corpus Christi College for enabling me to
complete this study by electing me into their Fellowship; and
to my wife for her patience and forbearance during the many
hours I have had to spend engrossed in Matthew Paris.

XI

PREFACE

My thanks are due to the authorities of the following for
allowing me to study manuscripts in their possession, and to
the various librarians for their courtesy and help: the British
Museum; the Public Record Office; the Bodleian Library; the
University Library, Cambridge; the John Rylands Library; the
Lambeth Palace Library; Chetham's Hospital, Manchester;
Corpus Christi College, Oxford; Trinity College, Cambridge;
my own College ; and Eton College. I must also thank the Duke
of Devonshire, Mr Francis Thompson and Mr T. E. Wragg for
enabling me to see the manuscripts at Chatsworth; Lord Bute
and Miss Catherine Armet for arranging for me to have Bute
MS. 3 on loan in Cambridge, and Mr H. R. Creswick for
allowing it to be deposited in the University Library here; Miss
M. F. Austin, the Hertfordshire County Librarian, for lending
me some extracts and off-prints concerning the history of
St Albans; and Professor Arnould and Mr H. W. Parke of
Trinity College, Dublin, for transcribing for me the marginalia
in Trinity College, Dublin, MS. E i 40. Finally, I have to
thank the authorities of the following libraries for giving me
permission to reproduce portions of their manuscripts: the
British Museum (frontispiece, Plates I, iv, v, ix (a), x (a), xi,
xii, xiv (c) and (d), xv (a) and (4), xvm (a), (c), and (/), and
xix) ; the Bodleian Library (Plates xiv (/) and xxi (6)) ; the Uni-
versity Library, Cambridge (Plate ix ()); Trinity College,
Dublin (Plate vm) ; Corpus Christi College, Oxford (Plate xvn) ;
and Corpus Christi College, Cambridge (Plates II, in, vi, vn,
x (6), xn, xiv (a), (ft), and (*), xv (c), xvi, xvm (ft), (d\ and (*?),
xx, and xxi (a)).

R. V.

CORPUS CHRISTI COLLEGE
CAMBRIDGE

3 April 1956

xii

ABBREVIATIONS

A Corpus Christ! College, Cambridge, MS, 26.

B Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS, 16.

C British Museum Cotton MS. Nero D v, Part II.

Ch Chetham's Library, Manchester, MS. 6712.

E Eton College, MS. 123,

LA British Museum. Cotton MS. Nero D i.

British Museum Cotton MS. Otho B v.

R British Museum Royal MS. 14 C vii.

V British Museum Cotton MS. Vitellius A xx.

W Bodleian Library Douce MS, 207.

CM. Chronica Majora (ed. Luard),

HA. Historia Anglorum (ed. Madden).

FH. Flores Historiarum (ed. Luard).

AC. Abbreviatio Chronicorum (ed. Madden).

Wats Gesta Abbatum and Vitae Offarum (ed. Wats).

GA. Gesta Abbatum (ed. Riley).

MGH,SS. Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Saiptores.

EHR. English Historical Review,

CHAPTER I

THE LIFE OF MATTHEW PARIS

THE writings of Matthew Paris, monk of St Albans and
historian, seem to have come down to us almost intact,
and it is from them that our very fragmentary knowledge
of his life is derived. In the last century two great scholars,
Madden and Liebermann, brought this information together, 1
and, since their work, not a scrap of new material concerning the
events of Matthew's life has come to light. We have no know-
ledge of his family or even nationality. His name, which he
usually wrote Tarisiensis', but sometimes *de Parisius', was
formerly taken to refer either to this, or to his university educa-
tion; and it was surmised in consequence either that Matthew
was French, or that he was educated at Paris University. But
Parisiensis was a common enough patronymic in thirteenth-
century England, and, on the whole, it seems probable that
Matthew was English, and that he did not receive his education
at Paris, or indeed any other, university. His interests are not
those of a university educated clerk, and his outlook is charac-
teristically English. The phrase 'which in common speech we
call Hoke Day 5 in his Chronica Major a (v, p. 281) shows that he
thought of English as his own language; and his English feelings
are displayed in his account of Henry Ill's campaign in Poitou
in 1242, when he uses the phrase c our men' ('nostri anglici')
in reference to the English troops. 2

The date of Matthew's birth also remains in doubt. He
himself tells us that he took the religious habit (that is, became
a monk) at St Albans on 21 January I2I7. 3 It was customary
at this time for a novice to take the habit when he entered the
house, instead of waiting until he made his profession, 4 so that
it is probable that Matthew entered St Albans as a novice in

1 HA. m, pp. vii-xxii (Madden), and Liebermann, MGH,SS. xxvm,
pp. 74 ff. * CM. iv, pp. 210, 219. 3 HA. in, p. ix.

* That this was true for St Albans is shown by a statute of Abbot Warin;
Wats, pp. 101-2. It was also the custom, in Lanfranc's time: see his Monastic
Constitutions (ed. M. D. Knowles), pp. 105-6.

MATTHEW PARIS

1217, and made his profession a year or two later. At this time,
the minimum age of admission for a novice could hardly have
been under fifteen, so that the date of Matthew's birth cannot
be placed much after 1200. It is unlikely, too, that he was born
much before this, since he lived until 1259, and sixty must have
been a ripe old age for a medieval monk. Some remarks of
Matthew himself which might be taken as evidence for an
earlier date than 1200 are in fact of very doubtful significance.
In the Chronica Majora, for instance, he tells under the year
1195 the story of Vitalis the Venetian, with the following mar-
ginal note: 'King Richard's Apologue, which he related to
Warin, abbot of St Albans; and which he (Warin) passed on to
us' (Apologus Ricardi regis quern abbati Sancti Albani Guarino et
ipse nobis enarravit). 1 If the word 'nobis' here means 'to me',
then Matthew must have been born some years before the death
of Abbot Warin in 1195; but in fact it probably only means
'to us', that is 'to the community'. Under the year 1213 2
Matthew inserts another story, which he says was related in his
hearing (p. 564: 'audiente Mathaeo qui et haec scripsit') to
various St Albans monks by Robert of London, the secular
custodian of the abbey. Robert of London was secular 'custos'
of St Albans in I2o8, 3 but he may easily have visited the abbey
on some later occasion. A third statement of Matthew's, this
time in the Gesta Abbotum, is equally inconclusive: he says, in
reference to Abbot John de Cella's extraordinary feats of
memory: 4 'Hoc enim quasi in confusionem ncsciorum fecisse
ipsum, profecto meminimus.' The word 'meminimus' here
need not necessarily mean 'we remember', it may only mean
'we have recorded'; and so we are by no means compelled to
conclude from this statement that Matthew Paris actually knew
Abbot John, who died in 1214. It seems likely, therefore, that
Matthew was born about the year 1200: at any rate there is no
reliable evidence that he was born before this date.

We know nothing certain about Matthew between 1217 and
1247, t> ut from the language of his chronicle it seems probable
that he was present at Canterbury for the translation of St Thomas
Becket on 7 July 1220; that he was at St Albans in 1228 when

1 n, pp. 413-14. 2 CM. ii, pp. 559-64.

2 HA. m, p. xi. 4 Wats, p. 108.

THE LIFE OF MATTHEW PARIS

the abbey was visited by an Armenian archbishop ; and that he
attended the marriage of Henry III and Eleanor at Westminster
in January I2%6. 1 His account of each of these events seems to
be that of an eye-witness. Our lack of knowledge of Matthew
Paris during these years is probably due to the life he was leading
as a cloistered monk at St Albans; and we may assume that
throughout this time, as well as during most of the rest of his
life, it was only occasionally that he interrupted his historical
writing (in which he was probably more or less continually
engaged from c. 1245 onwards) and the service of God in his
house, to witness some great event either at Westminster,
Canterbury, Winchester, or some other centre. How he was
enabled to leave the abbey from time to time in this way, we
do not know. It is possible, as Professor Cheney has suggested
to me, that he held some such office as chaplain to the abbot;
but there is, so far as I have been able to discover, no evidence
in contemporary records of any monastic official at St Albans
at this time by the name of Matthew. On 13 October 1247
Matthew Paris was present at Westminster for the feast of
St Edward the Confessor, and his account shows that Henry III
knew by this time that he was writing a chronicle, and had
already met him, perhaps during one of his many visits to
St Albans. 2 Matthew's account of his meeting with the king on
this occasion is as follows : 3

And while . . . the king was seated on his throne, noticing the
writer of this work, he called him to him, made him sit down on
a step between the throne and the rest of the hall, and said to him:
* You have noticed all these things, and they are firmly impressed on
your mind.' To which he answered: * Yes, my Lord, for the splendid
doings of this day are worthy of record.' The king then went on:
' . . . I entreat you . . . therefore ... to write an accurate and full account
of all these events . . . lest in the future their memory be in any way
lost to posterity'; and he invited the person with whom he was
speaking to dinner, together with his three companions.

Under the year 1250* Matthew has recorded another of his
conversations with the king, which perhaps occurred in April

1 HA. n, pp. 241-2; CM. iii y pp. 161-4; and CM. in, pp. 336 ff.

2 For these see below, pp. 12-13.

3 CM. iv, pp. 644-5. 4 CM. v, pp. 129-30.

MATTHEW PARIS

1251, when the king was at St Albans. 1 On this occasion, he
tells us, he remonstrated with the king for granting rights of
free warren contrary to the privileges of St Albans. In July 125 1
Matthew was with the king again, this time at Winchester, and
he there heard and noted down at length Thomas of Sherborne's
account of the Pastoureaux in France. 2 In November 1251 he
may have been present at the dedication of the church of Hayles
in Gloucestershire, and at Christmas at York for the marriage
of Henry Ill's daughter Margaret to Alexander II of Scotland;
for his accounts of these events seem to be those of an eye-
witness. 3 Finally, we hear of him again with Henry III at
St Albans in March I257, 4 when he spent some time in the
king's company both at table and in the royal lodgings. On this
occasion the king imparted to him some historical information,
including a list of the canonized kings of England (which
Matthew inserted into his chronicle) and the names of two
hundred and fifty English baronies. During the week which
the king spent at St Albans at this time, Matthew had an
opportunity of putting in a good word to him on behalf of the
University of Oxford, whose M.A.'s had sent a deputation to
complain of the oppression of the bishop of Lincoln.

Matthew's life as a monk of St Albans was on one occasion
disturbed much more seriously than by the occasional visits to
Westminster or elsewhere which we have hitherto noted. It
seems that in the year 1246, as a result of the disappearance of
its abbot with the convent's seal, the abbey of St Benet Holm
on the island of Nidarholm in Norway got into serious financial
difficulties with the London Cahorsins. 5 King Haakon of
Norway sent the prior to England with a letter to Matthew
Paris, requesting his help; and, through his good offices, an
agreement was reached with the money-lenders which enabled
the monks of St Benet Holm to free themselves from debt. In
1247 or 1248, however, they were in trouble again; this time
because of a quarrel with their archbishop, and they were
advised by the papal legate then in Norway to apply to the

1 CM. v, pp. 233-4. 2 CM, v, pp. 246-54.

3 CM. v, pp. 262 and 266-7. 4 CM. v, pp. 617-18.

5 CM. v, pp. 42-5. I have also used the narrative in Knowles, Religious
Orders, I, pp. 294-5.

THE LIFE OF MATTHEW PARIS

pope for someone to visit and reform their house. Innocent IV
allowed them to choose whom they liked, and they decided on
Matthew Paris, probably because of his previous services to
them. The papal mandate to the abbot of St Albans instructing
him to send Matthew to Norway to reform the monastery of
St Benet Holm is copied out by Matthew Paris in four of his
manuscripts. Although by it Matthew is only appointed to
instruct and advise the abbot and monks of St Benet Holm in
regularibus disciplinis et statutis' pertaining to the Benedictine
Order, he copied it into his collection of additional documents
with this heading: 1

The original papal document (Auctenticum papale) by which Dom
Matthew Paris, who wrote these things, was appointed, though
unwillingly, reformer of the Benedictine observance and Visitor of
the Benedictine abbeys and their monks in the kingdom of Norway.

In his Historia Anglorum 2 he introduces the same document
with similar words :

. . .Brother Matthew, the author of this work, was sent by order of
the pope to Norway, to restore Benedictine observance in the
monasteries of the Black monks (ad reformandum Ordinem Sancti
Benedicti in coenobiis monachorum Nigri Or dints).

It looks very much as if Matthew's natural pride in his
appointment caused him to magnify the importance of this
mission and to consider himself Visitor to the whole of the
Benedictine Order in Norway. Be this as it may, his visit there
poses an interesting problem. No doubt the monks of St Benet
Holm chose Matthew as their Visitor on account of the services
he had previously rendered them; but why did King Haakon
write to him, in 1246, asking him to negotiate with the Cahorsin
money-lenders in London on behalf of the monks of St Benet
Holm? H. G. Leach 3 suggested that Matthew's visit to Norway
in 1248 was perhaps not his first, and that he had met Haakon
on a previous visit there. Matthew, however, tells us nothing
of this, and it is most unlikely that, had such an event taken
place, he would have passed over it in silence. The mystery of
Haakon's selection of Matthew as his financial agent in this

1 LA, f. 92 b; for the heading, see CM. v, p. 244, note 4.

2 in, p. 40. 3 Angevin Britain and Scandinavia, p. 105.

MATTHEW PARIS

affair is perhaps partly elucidated, however, by his appointment,
in 1238, of a certain Richard of St Albans to look after his
affairs in England, 1 for it is possible that this Richard, relin-
quishing his post, recommended Matthew to Haakon as a
suitable successor. Nevertheless, however we try to explain
the choice of Matthew in this matter, we still do not know why
he was considered suitable; and we can only hazard the guess
that the interest in and knowledge of financial matters which
he displays throughout his writings 2 reflect a considerable
experience in practical affairs, which he had perhaps already
obtained before 1246, and which qualified him to undertake
these transactions.

The papal mandate sending Matthew to Norway is dated
27 November 1247, and it probably arrived at St Albans early
in 1248; but it was not until the early summer that Matthew
finally set out for Norway. He arrived at the port of Bergen
c. 10 June, 3 at the very moment when a great fire was raging in
the city. Both Matthew and the author of Haakon's Saga give
a vivid description of this fire, which was followed by a violent
thunderstorm over the town. 4 Haakon' s Saga describes how the
lightning struck the mast of a ship in the harbour and dashed it
into small pieces, and how only one person on the ship was hurt
a citizen of Bergen who had gone on board from the town to buy
finery. Matthew, who was ashore at the time celebrating mass
in a neighbouring church, and thanking God for his safe passage
through the perils of the sea, also describes how the mast of his
ship was shivered into pieces, but he, with the pardonable
hyperbole of a passenger, claims that, besides one man killed,
all those on the ship were either wounded or hurt in some way.
He goes on to record how, when Haakon heard of this accident,
he provided the ship with a new and bigger and better ('prae-
stantiorem . . . et majorem') mast. Haakon was in Bergen at the
time, 5 and Matthew delivered to him letters from King Louis IX
of France seeking Haakon's company on his projected crusade,

1 Rymer (ed.), Foedera, I, p. 236.

2 See below, pp. 145-6.

3 Leach, Angevin Britain and Scandinavia, p. 105.

4 CM. v, pp. 35-6, and Dasent (ed.), Saga of Hacon, pp. 266-7.

5 Dasent (ed.), Saga of Hacon, p. 266: he organized attempts to extinguish
the fire with ' kettles J full of sea-water.

THE LIFE OF MATTHEW PARIS

and giving him permission to land in French territory on his
way. Haakon received Matthew kindly and rewarded him with
sumptuous gifts. 1 It would be interesting to know how Matthew
Paris came to be the bearer of these important letters from
Louis IX. Was it mere chance? Or did that monarch have
personal knowledge of the monk of St Albans? There is no
hint, in Matthew's writings, of the answer to these questions;
nor indeed does he give us any further information about his
visit to Norway and his reformation of the monks of St Benet
Holm. He does not even mention his return journey, which
probably took place in 1249.

We have now passed in review the few known facts about the
life of Matthew Paris. The last of these, his death in 1259, was
once undisputed; but recently Sir Maurice Powicke has cast
doubts on this, and has argued that Matthew may have lived
'for some little time after 1259 J . 2 The belief that Matthew died
in this year is based on the colophon which closes the text of his
Chronica Major a, and which is illustrated in Plate I. The text of
this, as translated by Professor Galbraith, 3 reads :

Thus far wrote (perscripsit) the venerable man, brother Matthew
Paris : and though the hand on the pen may vary, nevertheless, as the
same method of composition is maintained throughout, the whole is
ascribed to him. What has been added and continued from this point
onwards may be ascribed to another brother, who presuming to
approach the works of so great a predecessor, and unworthy to
continue them, as he is unworthy to undo the latchet of his shoe,
has not deserved to have even his name mentioned on the page.

Below these words is a drawing of Matthew on his death-bed,
with his 'book of chronicles' on the desk by him, and with the
words 'Hie obit Matheus Parisiensis' written above. Professor
Galbraith, in his criticism of Sir Maurice Powicke's theory,
produced other evidence for the date of Matthew's death. He
pointed out that the continuator of Matthew's Gesta Abbatum
states that Matthew Paris lived and died in the time of Abbot

1 See below, p. 18.

2 Powicke, ' Compilation of the Chronica Major a', Proceedings of the British
Academy, xxx (1944), pp. 157-8.

3 Galbraith, Roger Wendover and Matthew Paris, p. 12.

7

MATTHEW PARIS

John of Hertford. 1 Now H. T. Riley, in his edition of the Gesta
Abbatum^ claims that Abbot John ruled from 1235 to 1260, and
suggests that the text of the Gesta Abbatum from about the year
1255 to 1308 was written by a monk who lived in the early years
of the fourteenth century. 2 If Riley were right on these two
points, the statement about Matthew referred to by Professor
Galbraith would constitute evidence that he died before 1260.
In fact, however, Abbot John of Hertford did not die in 1260,
but in 1263. The date 1260 is found only in the latest manuscript
of the Gesta Abbatum (written by Walsingham), and is due to
a copying error. The true date, 1263, is given in the Bute manu-
script of the Gesta Abbatum and in the Flares Historiarum, and
it can also be inferred from the record evidence. 3 Furthermore
there is evidence that the statement that Matthew Paris lived
and died in the time of Abbot John occurs in a passage added
to the Gesta Abbatum by Thomas Walsingham, and that it did
not form part of the so-called 'Second Continuation' of the
Gesta Abbatum which Riley thought was written in the first half
of the fourteenth century. It is found only in Walsingham 's
manuscript of the Gesta, where it follows a series of extracts
from the Chronica Majora which are likewise only in the
Walsingham manuscript. It seems that Walsingham, having
extracted a considerable amount of material from Matthew
Paris's Chronica Major a^ inserted this statement into his descrip-
tion of the rule of Abbot John as a memorial to his famous pre-
decessor, and on exactly the same evidence as modern historical
opinion has supposed Matthew to have died in 1259, namely,
the colophon at the end of the text of the Chronica Majora,

Sir Maurice Powicke had no positive evidence that Matthew
lived after 1259, but he considered that the evidence from the
colophon and picture at the end of Matthew's chronicle was
inconclusive, and he further remarked that 'in the course of
original composition, a time-lag [i.e. between the events and

1 Galbraith, Roger Wendover and Matthew Paris, p. 30.

2 Perhaps William Rishanger: GA. n, pp. ix-xiii, and I, p. xvii.

3 Bute MS. 3, p. 278 (the manuscript called by Wats the ' Spelman MS.';
it was not known to Riley; its text ends in 1308, and it was written inde-
pendently of the Walsingham MS., c. 1400); PH. n, p. 478; Cal. Pat. Rolls,
1258-66, p. 256 (23 April 1263): grant of abbey to prior and convent during
vacancy for 600 marks.

8

THE LIFE OF MATTHEW PARIS

the recording of them] of a year or more was almost inevitable',
and he showed that the annal for 1252 in the Chronica Major a
was not written before November I253. 1 Powicke's conclusion
is, on the face of it, eminently reasonable. One would not expect
an author to bring the text of his chronicle right up to the time
of his death, and the inference from the colophon might very
well only be that Matthew died (perhaps in 1260 or 1261 or
even later) at a time when the text of his chronicle had arrived
at the point, during the annal for 1259, where it is inserted. In
spite of this, however, I think it far more likely that Matthew
was overtaken by death very soon after the occurrence of the
last event recorded in his chronicle. In a work of the scope and
size of the Chronica Major a, the author must surely have recorded
events in a first rough draft almost as soon as news of them
reached him. In the course of the annal for I256 2 Matthew
records the departure abroad of certain people, and adds that he
does not know why they went: a confession of ignorance which
is understandable only if it was included inadvertently in
the final text from a rough draft made very soon after their
departure especially as they were back in England again in
January i25y. 3 There is more evidence for the use of rough
drafts in the course of the annal for 1257, where a number of
entries are repeated, apparently because they were carelessly
copied twice from a series of rough drafts written perhaps on
loose sheets and scraps of parchment. There is, in fact, every
reason to believe that Matthew wrote out rough drafts im-
mediately on receipt of the information he wished to record,
and that these were later used for writing up the final text of the
chronicle in the existing manuscripts (E and R). If this is so,
it by no means follows that, because there was a time-lag of a
year or two between events and the recording of them in the
manuscript of the Chronica Majora, Matthew died perhaps a
year or more after the date of the last event recorded in his
chronicle. On the contrary, there was probably no such time-
lag between the events and the composition of his drafts, and
these latter no doubt continued right up to the time of his death.
Composed and probably written out by Matthew himself, and

1 Powicke, 'Compilation of the Chronica Major a\ loc. cit. pp. 157-8.
z CM. v, p. 560. 3 CM. v, p. 618.

MATTHEW PARIS

kept up to date, as I suppose, these would have been ready at
hand for Matthew's scribe to copy out into the Chronica Major a
after his death, thus bringing its text up to the last event
recorded by Matthew in draft.

The obvious implication of the picture which accompanies
the colophon at the end of Matthew's Chronica Majora (Plate i)
is that he died while still at work on it, and there is in fact much
evidence to show that Matthew continued to write out his own
manuscripts until failing powers forced him to employ a scribe.
In the Liber Additamentorum^ for instance, there is a series of
documents in just the rough chronological order we should
expect to find had they been copied as their texts became
available to Matthew. These documents extend from f. 71 to
f. 82; they are all in Matthew's own handwriting; and they
extend in date from 1255 to I259- 1 The last, a document of
March 1259, * s t ' ie l atest piece of writing that has survived in
Matthew's own hand, and it is clearly the work of a person of
failing powers. 2 It is followed by some documents of 1258
copied into the book by the scribe who helped Matthew to
complete the texts of his historical manuscripts, and who wrote
the colophon we have been discussing. 3 This, I think, shows
that Matthew's powers failed in the spring or early summer of
1259. Had he lived beyond the summer of this year, we should
expect to find at any rate some signs of his continued use of the
Liber Additamentorum, of all his manuscripts the most intimate
and personal. The scribe of the colophon at the end of Matthew's
Chronica Majora distinguishes carefully between that work and
his own continuation of it, and if, as I have suggested, Matthew
died shortly after the end of the text ascribed to him, we may
assume also that he did so before the earliest event recorded in
the continuation. The original version of this continuation is no
longer extant, but, as Madden has shown, 4 a transcript of it was

1 See pp. 82-3 below.

2 See Vaughan, 'The handwriting of Matthew Paris', Trans, Camb.
Bibliog. Soc. I (1953), Plate xvn (d) and p. 388.

8 HA. i, p. li and note i. Besides these documents in the Liber Addita-
mentorum, this scribe wrote the last part of the texts of Matthew's Chronica
Majora (jR, ff. 2ioa~2i8b); Historia Anglorum (R y ff. I54b-i56b); and
Abbreviatio Chronicorum (B,M. Cotton MS. Claudius D vi, ff. 87b~94b).

4 HA. i, p. xxiii, note 2. See also Galbraith (ed.), St Albans Chronicle,
1406-1420 (1937), p. xxviii.

10

THE LIFE OF MATTHEW PARIS

made in the Chetham manuscript of the Floras Historiarum.
Now the first entry of this continuation refers to 26 June 1259,
and the last entry in Matthew's Chronica Majora to the week
following 25 May. 1 It seems therefore reasonable to conclude
that Matthew Paris died in June 1259.

It may well be asked how it was that a monk of St Albans,
who apparently left the seclusion of the cloister only from time
to time, and who only once left this country, and then only for
a short period, could have kept himself well enough informed
of current events in all parts of Europe to write one of the fullest
and most elaborate of all medieval chronicles. The answer is
that the cloister at St Albans was by no means secluded, and
that Matthew could count many of the leading men of his day
among his acquaintances. Contacts of various kinds with the
outside world were kept up so continually that one wonders if
it is right to use the term 'the outside world' in reference to
a monastery like St Albans, which was in many ways at the very
heart of affairs. The abbey was situated one day's journey from
London on the main route to the north, and it is probable that
the guests' stables, which Matthew tells us held 300 horses, 2
were by no means unnecessarily large. Between 1220 and 1259
the king visited St Albans at least nine times, sometimes staying
as long as a week, and, had a visitors' book been kept in these
years, and preserved for posterity, we might reasonably expect
to find in it the names of most of the great men in the kingdom,
as well as those of a number of important foreigners. The list
printed here is far from complete, for it includes only those
guests mentioned by Roger Wendover and Matthew Paris. How
useful these visitors were, as a source of information for the
chronicler, may be judged from the number who appear also in
the list of Matthew's informants which follows. This list not
only shows how Matthew obtained much of his information and
from whom, but also the variety of circles in which he moved,
the extent of his acquaintance, and the fame and influence which
he enjoyed in his lifetime.

1 FH. n, p. 426 and CM. v, p. 747. 2 CM. v, p. 344.

II

MATTHEW PARIS

VISITORS TO ST ALBANS MENTIONED BY ROGER
WENDOVER AND MATTHEW PARIS, 1220-59

CM.

1223 in, p. 80 A chaplain of the Emperor Baldwin

1225, Easter v, p. 320 Henry III stayed for five days

1228 in, p. 161 An Armenian archbishop who told the

monks about the Wandering Jew

1239 in, p. 568 Otho, the papal legate

1240 IV, p. 43 Richard, earl of Cornwall

1241 iv, p. 172 The prior of Coventry and some of his

monks stayed more than a year

1244, ii June iv, p. 358 Henry III stayed for three days
1244 iv, p. 378 Thomas of Savoy, count of Flanders; his

brother, Boniface, archbishop -elect of
Canterbury; and Walter Suffield, bishop-
elect of Norwich
1244, 21 Dec. iv, p. 402 Henry III stayed for three days

1247 iv, p. 600 John and Alexander, Franciscans and papal

emissaries

1248 v, p. 2 Richard, bishop of Bangor
1251, 2 April v, p. 233 Henry III stayed for three days

1251, 15 Sept. v, pp. 2578 Henry III stayed for three or four days

1251, 29 Sept. v, p. 258 Visitation by the prior of Hurley and the

sub-prior of St Augustine's, Canterbury
1252 v, p. 288 Alan de la Zouche, a royal administrator

returning from Wales
1252 v, p. 288 Richard, bishop of Bangor

1252, 23 Aug. v, pp. 319-20 Henry III stayed five days, together with

his son Edward and his half-brother
Geoffrey of Lusignan (CM. v, pp. 344-5).
Philip Luvel and John Mansel, royal
councillors, were also probably with the
king
1252 v, pp. 340-1 Certain Armenians

1253, Nov. v, pp. 413 fT. Archbishop Boniface, on his way from

Lincoln to London ; he left on 1 1 November

1254, ii July V, p. 451 Walter Suffield, bishop of Norwich and

royal tax collector

1254, Dec. v, p. 468 Some Winchester monks

1255, 9 Mar. v, p. 489 Henry III stayed for six days

1256, Aug. v, p. 574 Henry III

1257, 2 Jan. v, p. 608 Richard, bishop of Bangor; Philip de Eia,

a councillor of Earl Richard of Cornwall ;
and some nobles from the household of
William of Valence

12

THE LIFE OF MATTHEW PARIS

CM.

1257, 3 March v, pp. 617-18 Henry III stayed a week, during which

time a deputation of M.A.'s from the
University of Oxford arrived to see him

1257 v, p. 630 The prior of St Thomas of Acre
1257, 8 Oct. v, pp. 653-4 Queen Eleanor, Eleanor of Castile, and

other noble ladies

1258 v, p. 684 Simon Passelewe, a royal administrator
1258 v, p. 719 Archbishop Boniface

LIST OF MATTHEW'S KNOWN FRIENDS

AND INFORMANTS

(i) Nobility and knights of the British Isles

King Henry III. Matthew knew him well, and he must have
given the chronicler much useful information. For instance, he
told Matthew the cost of the new feretory for St Edward's
remains, 1 and of the homage done to him by Count Amadeus
of Savoy. 2

Queen Eleanor. Gave Matthew some cloth. 3

Richard, earl of Cornwall, brother of Henry III. Evidently one
of Matthew's chief informants. For instance, he told Matthew
of his expenses at Hayles, 4 and Matthew's account of his crusade
is certainly based on information given him by Richard himself. 5

Hubert de Burgh, earl of Kent. Told Matthew about his
escape from Devizes in 1233 ; 6 and many of Matthew's additions
to Roger Wendover seem to be based on his information. 7

Richard of Clare, earl of Gloucester. Told Matthew about
some mounted knights seen in the sky in I236. 8

Isabella, countess of Arundel, widow of Hugh of Albini. Must
have told Matthew about her interview with the king in I252. 9
Matthew lent her one of his books. 10

Richard of Argenton, knight. Witnessed to the truth of the
statements of the archbishop of Armenia. 11

1 HA. n, p. 455- 2 &A. in, p. 8.

3 CM. vi, p. 391. 4 CM. v, p. 262.

5 CM. iv, pp. 43-7, 71, 144-8, 166-7. 6 HA. n, p. 359, note i.

7 See CM. in, pp. 3-4, 28-9, 121, 199 ff., 290-1, etc.

8 CM. in, p. 368. 9 CM. v, pp. 336-7.
10 See below, p. 170. u CM. in, p. 164.

13

MATTHEW PARIS

Baldwin de Vere, knight; Henry Ill's messenger to the emperor
in 1236. He almost certainly told Matthew about this embassy. 1

John of Gaddesden, knight. Gave Matthew information about
the family of Raymond- Berenger V. 2 Evidently a useful contact
for Matthew since he was sent on at least two important diplo-
matic missions. 3

The master of the Temple in Scotland. Probably gave Matthew
information about Louis IX' s crusade. 4

(2) Royal administrators

John Mansel, councillor of Henry 111. Matthew had almost
certainly met him, and he figures largely in the Chronica Major a.
He seems to have lent Matthew a book, for in the margin of the
manuscript of Matthew's life of St Alban 5 we find an alternative
reading headed by Matthew: 'de libro Johannis Mansel'. 6

John of Lexinton, councillor of Henry III. Told Matthew of
the miracles at the tomb of the archdeacon of Northumberland. 7

Roger Thurkelby, judge de Banco. Conversed with Matthew
at dinner on one occasion. 8

Alexander Swereford, baron of the Exchequer. Gave Matthew
some information about King Offa. 9 He was evidently Matthew's
main contact at the Exchequer, and he allowed Matthew to
inspect the Exchequer records. 10

Robert of London , a clerk employed by King John; in 1208 he
was the secular ' custos ' of St Albans. It was he who told Matthew
the story of John's embassy to Morocco. 11

Edward, a councillor of Henry III, and Nicholas, moneyer to
Henry III. These two were among Matthew's informants about
the theft of the relics of St Alban by the Danes. 12

(3) Bishops of the British Isles

Alexander Stavensby, bishop of Coventry and Lichfield. Told
Matthew about the repentance of Fawkes de Breaute. 13

1 CM. nr, pp. 376-8. 2 CM. in, p. 335.

3 CM. v, pp. 585 and 61 1. 4 CM. vi, p. 521.

5 Trinity College, Dublin, MS. E i 40, f. 22 a.

6 See below, p. 196. 7 CM. v, p. 384.

8 CM. v, p. 317; see also v, p. 211.

9 CM. vi, p. 519, note i. 10 See below, pp. 17-18.
11 CM. it, pp. 559-64. 12 GA. I, p. 19.

13 HA. n, p. 265; see also CM. in, pp. 169, 172, 268.

THE LIFE OF MATTHEW PARIS

Eustace de Fauconberg, bishop of London. Told Matthew about
his conversation with Fawkes de Breaute in I224. 1

Peter des Roches, bishop of Winchester. Matthew obtained
from him a book on the marvels of the East which he had
brought back from Palestine in i23i. 2

Nicholas of Farnham, bishop of Durham. Told Matthew the
story of Simon of Tournay. 3

Robert Grosseteste, bishop of Lincoln. In the colophon to the
tract on the virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary in B.M. Royal
MS. 4 D vii (f. 248 a), Matthew says that he had obtained his
exemplar from Grosseteste himself. He was with Grosseteste
at Westminster in October 1247.*

William Button, bishop of Bath. Told Matthew about an
earthquake in I248. 5

Richard Wych, bishop of Chichester. Gave Matthew informa-
tion about St Edmund of Abingdon. 6

John, bishop of Ardfert. Died at St Albans in 1245 after a long
period of residence there. 7

Richard, bishop of Bangor. Resided at St Albans between
1248 and 1256. He repeated, to Matthew, Richard of Cornwall's
words on accepting the German crown. 8

(4) Other English ecclesiastics

Ranulph Besace, canon of St PauTs; formerly physician to King
Richard I. Told Matthew about the murder of the prince of
Antioch by Saladin. 9

Thomas of St Albans, physician to the earl of Arundel and prior
of Wymondham. Probably told Matthew of the earl's anger with
the papal legate in I2I9- 10

John of Basingstoke, archdeacon of Leicester and a friend of
Robert Grosseteste. Told Matthew the stories of the deacon who
apostatized 11 and the beautiful Athenian girl ; 12 and showed him
the Greek numerals which he copied into his chronicle. 13

1 HA. n, p. 266. 2 HA. i, p. 163, note 4.

3 CM. n, pp. 476-7 and HA. n, p. 90.

4 CM. iv, pp. 643-4. 5 CM. v, p. 46 and HA. in, p. 42.

6 CM. v, p. 369 and HA. in, p. 135.

7 HA. n, p. 511 etc. 8 CM. v, p. 602.
9 CM. n, p. 391 ; v, p. 221, and HA. n, p. 37.

10 HA. II, pp. 237 and note 3, 249. u HA. n, pp. 254-5.
12 CM. v, pp. 286-7. 13 CM. v, p. 285.

15

MATTHEW PARIS

John Crakehall, archdeacon of Bedford. Told Matthew of the
bells which rang miraculously on the death of Grosseteste. 1

Ralph, abbot of Ramsey. Gave Matthew a silk cloth. 2

The prior of Westacre. Told Matthew of various gifts made
to the pope at the Council of Lyons. 3

Walter of St Martin, a Dominican, and confessor of Cecilia de
Sanford. Told Matthew of her pious death; 4 and probably
gave Matthew copies of the letters he received from Palestine. 5

John of St Giles, a Dominican. He confessed William de
Marisco before his execution and probably gave Matthew an
account of this. 6

Robert Bacon, a Dominican. Gave Matthew information about
St Edmund of Abingdon. 7

Thomas, a monk of Sherborne. Matthew met him when he was
with the king at Winchester in 1251, and copied down his
account of the Pastoureaux. 8

William, a Franciscan, Matthew drew a picture of him in the
margin of his chronicle, 9 and inserted his picture of Christ in the
Liber Additamentorum (f. I5S). 10

Gervase of Melkeley, perhaps a clerk of Archbishop Stephen
Langton. Probably gave Matthew information about Langton,
as he is cited as a source in Matthew's Life of Langton. 11
There are some verses of his in the Chronica Majora. 12

(5) Foreign informants and acquaintances

King Haakon IV of Norway. Told Matthew how he had
refused the pope's offer of the imperial crown. 13

Waleran, bishop of Beirut. Probably told Matthew of the
difficulties of the journey to Palestine. 14 He was apparently in
England in the summer of I245. 15

1 CM, v, p. 408. 2 Below, p. 18. 3 CM. iv, p. 428.

4 CM. v, pp. 235-6. 6 CM. vi, pp. 203 ff.

6 CM. iv, pp. 196-7; see also CM. in, pp. 324 and 627, and v, p. 705.

7 CM. v, p. 369. 8 CM. v, pp. 246-54.

James, 'Drawings of Matthew Paris', Walpole Society, xiv (1925-6),
no. 52.

10 See Little, 'Brother William of England*, Franciscan Papers, pp. 16-24.

11 Liebermann (ed.), Ungedruckte anglo-normannische Geschichtsquellen,
p. 327. 12 ill, p. 43, and note 5; and iv, p. 493.

13 CM. v, p. 201 ; see also above, pp. 4-6.

14 CM. iv, p. 345, and HA. n, p. 483. 15 CM. iv, pp. 488-9.

16

THE LIFE OF MATTHEW PARIS

Peter, proctor of Philip of Savoy, archbishop-elect of Lyons.
Told Matthew of the archbishop's expenses at a feast. 1

Thomas, chaplain of Cardinal Raynier Cappochi, incarcerated
with him at Naples in 124.1. Told Matthew about their
imprisonment. 2

A messenger of Ferdinand III of Castile. Told Matthew about
his king. 3

(6) Other persons

Geoffrey Hackesalt, a servant of Abbot Warm of St Albans.
Told Matthew about Warm's gifts to King Richard I in ii94. 4

John of St Albans, a goldsmith; and Odo, former moneyer to
King Waldemar III of Denmark. These two were among
Matthew's informants about the theft of the relics of St Alban
by the Danes. 5

Aaron, a Jew of York. Told Matthew how much money the
king had taken from him. 6

A Cahorsin money-lender. Told Matthew how the London
Cahorsins were being despoiled. 7

A note ought to be included here on Matthew's connexion
with the royal Exchequer. He evidently knew Alexander Swere-
ford, a baron of the Exchequer, personally, and was in the habit
of collecting information about matters of state from the
Exchequer clerks. He certainly had access to the Exchequer
records, and well understood their value. 8 Fourteen of the
documents copied into his manuscripts are also to be found in
the Red Book of the Exchequer. The most important of these are
a group of four letters between Pope Gregory IX and the
patriarch of Constantinople, Germanus, of the year 1232; and
a group of six imperial letters. In his Chronica Major a Matthew
refers his readers to the ' consuetudinario scaccarii ' for a fuller
account of the coronation of Henry III and Eleanor in I236. 9
A comparison of the two -accounts shows that Matthew did not
use the existing Red Book, but probably its exemplar; and this

1 CM. vi, p. 444. 2 CM. iv, p. 130. 3 CM. v, pp. 231-2.

4 HA. n, p. 47- 5 GA. i, p. 19. 6 CM. v, p. 136.

7 CM. v, pp. 245-6.

8 Hall (ed.), Red Book of the Exchequer, i, pp. xxix-xxx; Liebermann
(ed.), in MGH,SS. xxvni, p. 82.

9 Hall (ed.), Red Book, I, p. xix.

2 17

MATTHEW PARIS

is borne out by collation of the documents in Matthew with
those in the Red Book. On the basis of this evidence, it is
reasonable to suppose that Matthew obtained from the Exchequer
a great deal of information and documentary material ; it may
indeed have been his main source of the latter. It is worth
noting, too, that the system of signa which Matthew uses in
referring to documents is very similar to that used in the
Exchequer, and was probably copied from it. 1

As a result of his wide connexions, Matthew Paris received
a number of gifts which he later passed on to his house. A list
of some of these, written by himself, has survived at the end of
a short tract which he included in his Liber Additamentorum,
headed 'De pannis sericis huius ecclesiae'. 2 Henry III gave
him some silk material from which he made a set of vestments
for use in the chapel of St Matthias ; and Matthew also presented
to his house a choir-cope he had made out of some cloth given
him by Queen Eleanor, and ornamented with a fine orphrey
given him by his friend King Haakon of Norway. The abbot of
Ramsey, too, gave him some ornamental silk material which he
afterwards gave to St Albans. It seems likely that the gifts
recorded in the late-fourteenth-century Book of Benefactors of
St Albans as from Matthew Paris 3 had likewise been given to
him by friends of his; except perhaps the last item mentioned,
a silver cup, which he may have made himself. 4 The other gifts
recorded are two silver basins, which Matthew perhaps acquired
in Norway, since it appears from the text of the Book of Bene-
factors that he gave them on his return thence, and a pendent
reliquary of gold. While on the subject of his gifts to St Albans
we ought to note Matthew's gifts of books. Of his surviving
autograph manuscripts, four still contain inscriptions in his own
hand recording his gift of them 'to God and St Albans', 5

1 Palgrave (ed,), Ancient KalendarSy I, pp. xxvi-xxvii, describes the system
used in Bishop Stapleton's Calendar. 2 CM, vi, pp. 389-92.

3 B.M. Cotton MS. Nero D vii, ff. sob-si a.

4 Oman, 'Goldsmiths at St Albans Abbey 1 , Trans. St Albans and Herts
Archit. and ArchaeoL Soc. (1932), p. 230.

5 They are B.M. Cotton MS. Nero Di (the Liber A dditamentorum) ;
B.M. Royal MS. 14 C vii (JR); Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS.
1 6 (B); and University Library, Cambridge, MS. Dd xi 78 (poems of Henry
of Avranches, etc.).

18

THE LIFE OF MATTHEW PARIS

It was no doubt largely because of his gifts that Matthew
found his way into the Book of Benefactors, compiled 150 years
after his death. 1 But Thomas Walsingham does not limit him-
self to them; he says: 2

Matthew Paris, a religious monk, an incomparable chronicler and
an excellent painter, was sent by Pope Innocent to reform the
monastery of Holm in Norway, which was under the jurisdiction
of the archbishop of Nidaros. Owing to the idleness of the monks of
this place, its religion had disappeared, its fame had dwindled away,
and its goods had been dissipated. He caused its religion to flourish
again; advanced its fame for sanctity; and carefully added to its
possessions, so that, among the monasteries of that region, it was
reputed inferior to none.

He then goes on to describe the gifts to St Albans which we
have mentioned above. Elsewhere, in a tract ' On the foundation
and merits of the monastery of St Albans', 3 Thomas Walsing-
ham includes Matthew in his list of the historians of his house
with the following remarks : 4

Afterwards flourished Matthew Paris, who ably enlarged (necessarie
ampliavit] the aforesaid Roger's chronicles; who wrote and most
elegantly illustrated (depinxit) the Lives of Saints Alban and Amphi-
balus, and of the archbishops of Canterbury Thomas and Edmund;
and who provided many books for the church. Were I to try to sing
all his praises, the task would be interminable.

The only other notice of Matthew Paris in a later St Albans
source is the well-known eulogy of him in the Gesta Abbatwn,
which, as we have seen, is also probably from the pen of Thomas
Walsingham : 5

At this time, too, flourished and died Dom Matthew Paris; monk
of St Albans, and an eloquent and famous man full of innumerable
virtues; a magnificent historian and chronicler; an excellent author

1 See Galbraith (ed.), St Albans Chronicle, pp. xxxvi-xxxvii.

2 B.M. Cotton MS. Nero D vii, ff. 50)3-51 a.

3 B.M. Cotton MS. Claudius E iv, f. 331 b; printed in Riley (ed.),
Johannis Amundesham Annales, II, pp. 296306.

4 Riley (ed.), Amundesham, p. 303. The phrase c ably enlarged' in the first
line of my translation of this passage is taken from Galbraith's translation,
Roger Wendover and Matthew Paris , p. 22.

5 See above, pp. 7-8. Printed, GA. I, pp. 394-5. I am again indebted
to Galbraith, Roger Wendover and Matthew Paris, p. 30, for parts of my
translation of this passage.

19 2-2

MATTHEW PARIS

(dictator), who frequently revolved in his heart the saying: 'Laziness
is the enemy of the soul', and whom widespread fame commended
in remote parts where he had never been. Diligently compiling
his chronicle from the earliest times up to the end of his life, he
fully recorded the deeds of magnates, both lay and ecclesiastical, as
well as various and wonderful events; and left for the notice of
posterity a marvellous record of the past. He had such skill in the
working (sculpendo) of gold and silver and other metal, and in
painting pictures, that it is thought that there has been no equal to
him since in the Latin world.

Outside St Albans Matthew is mentioned, so far as I have
been able to discover, by only three later chroniclers. 1 Of these,
the most interesting is an anonymous monk of Ramsey, who
wrote, before 1267, a little treatise in prose and verse on the
struggle between Henry III and the barons. For the history of
the period up to the start of the war, he refers his readers to
Matthew Paris with the following words : 2

If anyone wishes to know about his [i.e. Henry Ill's] deeds up to
the forty-second year of his reign [1258], he should consult the
chronicle of Master Matthew, a monk of St Albans; there the diligent
reader can find out how he [Henry III] captured Bedford castle, how
he exiled Archbishop St Edmund, how he behaved in general
(qualiter duocerit} ; and many other things concerning England in his
time.

The other two notices of Matthew are the barest mentions:
Thomas Wykes includes his name, together with those of Bede
and William of Newburgh, among his predecessors in the
writing of history; 3 and the author of the Book of Hyde cites
him by name: 4 ut scribit Matheus Parisiacensis'. 4 A number
of later chroniclers copied from Matthew Paris without men-
tioning his name, but the use thus made of his historical
writings will be examined in a later chapter.

1 The mention of Matthew Paris in John of Oxenedes's chronicle (Ellis
(ed.), ChronicaJ. de Oxenedes^ p. 184) has been copied, together with most
of the rest of the text, from John of Wallingford's chronicle in B.M. Cotton
MS. Julius D vii, fF, 61110, copied in its turn from Matthew's own writings.

2 Halliwell (ed.)> William Rishanger, p. xxi note; the Ramsey monk's use
of the title 'magister', in reference to Matthew Paris, is doubtless an error,
for it is not used elsewhere.

3 Luard (ed.), Annales monastic^ iv, p. 7.

4 See below, pp. 40-1.

20

CHAPTER II

MATTHEW PARIS AND
ROGER WENDOVER

MATTHEW PARIS was the most distinguished of a
succession of historical writers at St Albans, and his
most important work, the Chronica Majora, takes the
form of a revised edition and continuation of the Flores His-
toriarum of his predecessor Roger Wendover, who died on 6 May
I236, 1 twenty-three years before Matthew. It is thus essential,
before we examine Matthew's historical writings, to discuss
their relationship to the work of his predecessor. Our know-
ledge of Roger Wendover and of his chronicle is extremely
scanty, and, in spite of the fact that Roger's work formed the
basis of his own, Matthew tells us nothing about it. Two manu-
scripts of Roger's Flores Historiarum survive, both of them late
copies, one written c. 1300, and the other c. I35O. 2 These,
following Luard's terminology, 3 I shall call respectively W and
O ; and the text which they share in common, OW. Fortunately,
the original manuscript of Matthew's Chronica Majora survives
in three parts: A, Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 26,
containing the text up to 1188; B, Corpus Christi College,
Cambridge, MS. 16, with the text from 1189 to I2 53 5 ^> British
Museum Royal MS, 14 C vii, containing the text from 1254 to
the end, as well as the whole of Matthew's Historia Anglorum.
A was produced under the supervision of Matthew Paris, and
B and R are almost entirely autograph. 4 In this chapter we shall
be concerned only with A and B y since it is in them that the text
of Roger's Flores Historiarum was incorporated by Matthew;
and, since they were written originally as one book, 5 1 shall refer

1 CM. vi, p. 274.

2 W, Oxford, Bodleian Library, Douce MS. 207; and O, B.M. Cotton MS.
Otho B v. Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 264, ff. 1-64, is a series
of extracts from O extending from 1 199 to 1234 and written in the fourteenth
century, before 1352. 3 CM. I, p. Lxxxv.

4 Vaughan, * Handwriting of M. Paris', Trans. Camb. Bibliog. Soc. I (1953),
pp. 390-1. 5 See below, pp. 56-7.

21

MATTHEW PARIS

to them with the symbol AB except when it is necessary to
distinguish between them.

Until recently historians disputed Madden's belief 1 that Roger
Wendover was the founder of the St Albans historical school.
Hardy supposed that Roger had based his Flares Historiamm on
an earlier, twelfth-century, *St Albans compilation' perhaps
written by Walter of St Albans, and extending to 1154 or even
to n88. 2 Luard put forward the theory that this 'St Albans
compilation' was written by Abbot John de Cella (1195-1214);
that its text extended to 1188; and that it formed the basis of
Roger's chronicle. 3 Liebermann, in the introduction to his
edition of excerpts from Roger's chronicle, did not deny the
possibility that Roger used the work of a predecessor extending
to 1 1 88, and he claimed as evidence for this that, up to the
annal for 1188 in the Flores Historiarum, the compiler refers to
himself in the plural, and after it in the singular. 4 But this is
not in fact true, for in at least two places in the early part of the
text the compiler refers to himself in the singular. 5 Liebermann,
however, showed that if there were a compilation lying behind
the text of Roger's chronicle, it was probably not written until
after c. I2O4. 6 This did not rule out the possibility that Abbot
John de Cella was the author of the compilation, and in 1904
Miss Rickert restated this theory, and argued that Abbot John
also wrote the Vitae Offarum and the chronicle attributed to
John of Wallingford in British Museum Cotton MS. Julius D vii
which she took to be a sort of rough draft of the ' St Albans
compilation'. 7 In 1922 Professor Claude Jenkins revived the
theory of a twelfth-century compilation at St Albans, and sug-
gested that the original compilation perhaps ended in 1154, and
that Abbot John continued it thence up to n88. 8 The basis of
the theory of Abbot John's authorship of a compilation extending

1 HA. i, p. xiii.

2 Hardy, A Descriptive Catalogue of Materials relating to the History of
Great Britain and Ireland) in, p. xxxvi and note 3.

a CM. n, pp. x-xii and vii, pp. ix-xi.

4 Liebermann (ed.), in MGH y SS. xxvin, p. 8.

5 CM. I, pp. 270, note 2, and 509.

6 Liebermann (cd.), in MGH,SS. xxvin, pp. 7-8.

7 Rickert, c Old English Offa Saga', Modern Philol. n (1904-5), pp. 29-39.

8 Jenkins, Monastic Chronicler and the Early School of St Albans, pp. 32 ff.
and 40-1.

22

MATTHEW PARIS AND ROGER WENDOVER

to 1 1 88 was a marginal note in one of the manuscripts of Roger
Wendover's Flores Historiarum opposite the annal for uSS: 1
'hue usque in lib. cronic. Johannis abbatis'; but Sir Maurice
Powicke showed that this note, far from referring to a compila-
tion written by Abbot John de Cella, merely meant that, when
it was written, c. 1300, the Abbot John of the time was in
possession of another manuscript of the chronicle (probably A),
the text of which ended at that poinl Powicke went on to state
that there was in fact no evidence of the existence of a ' St Albans
compilation' previous to Roger Wendover; and Professor
Galbraith agreed with him. 2

I do not propose here to attempt to examine in detail the
complex question of the sources of Roger Wendover's Flores
Historiarum, but it should be remarked that, in spite of the
statements of Powicke and Galbraith, the possibility remains
that he may have used an earlier compilation of some kind. The
existing manuscripts O and W are evidently both copies of
Roger's chronicle, for in both the text ends with the words:
'Hue usque scripsit cronica Dominus Rogerus de Wendovre' ; 3
and we may assume from this that OW (as I call the common
source of O and W) was likewise a copy of Roger's chronicle.
But we cannot overlook the possibility that the opening words
of O and W^ ( Incipit prologus in librum qui Flores Historiarum
intitulatur ', 4 refer to a compilation called Flores Historiarum, on
which Roger based the cronica referred to at the end of these
manuscripts. No doubt Madden, Powicke, and Galbraith are
right in considering Roger Wendover as the founder of the
St Albans historical school so far as original historical writing is
concerned, but nobody has yet proved that he did not make use
of a historical compilation written by some unknown monk of
the twelfth or early thirteenth century.

While we are on the subject of Roger Wendover, there is one
small point which we ought to note. Both Sir Maurice Powicke
and Professor Galbraith assumed that Roger Wendover begins
to be original about the year 1201, when 'the great histories of

1 W, f. 135 a-

2 Powicke, Compilation of the Chronica Major a\ Proc. Brit. Acad. xxx
(1944), pp. 148-9; Galbraith, Roger Wendover and Matthew Paris, p. 16, and
note i. 8 CM. in, p. 327, note 2. 4 CM. I, p. i.

23

MATTHEW PARIS

Hoveden and Diceto, his main standby, stopped '. l Liebermann,
however, had long before pointed out that Roger used a book
of annals (called by Liebermann ew) for the reign of King John
which were used later by Taxster, and which had already been
used by the author of the Annales Sancti Edmundi* The manu-
script of these latter ends abruptly in 1212, but Liebermann
suggests that their source, ew, continued at least until 1214, an d
possibly for the rest of the reign of John ; and that many of the
passages which are in Roger Wendover but not in the Annales
Sancti Edmundi were in ew but were omitted by the annalist of
St Edmunds. Roger Wendover also used some annals added
at the end of the St Albans copy of Ralph de Diceto for his
account of John's reign, 3 and it seems, in fact, that there may
be little original material in Roger's chronicle before his account
of Henry Ill's reign.

The text of the existing manuscripts of Roger's Flores His-
toriarum (OW) is by no means identical with that of Matthew's
manuscript of the Chronica Majora, AB. Two main types of
variant occur in the latter, both of which must be examined
here. In the first place, the text of AB, as originally written by
Matthew's scribes, differs in places from that of Roger; and,
secondly, many variations occur in AB which are due to Matthew
Paris himself, both in those parts of the text which he wrote out
himself, and in the margins or between the lines. Let us take
first those variations in the text of AB which are not due to
Matthew himself. Luard discovered that, up to the annal for
231, and again between the annals for 1012 and 1065, the varia-
tions of this kind between OW and AB were such that they
could not rightly be called copies of the same book. Between
231 and 1012, however, he found that these two texts were
identical 'with only such variations as will always exist between
two copies of the same work'. 4 Luard noticed, too, that, up to

1 Powicke, 'Roger Wendover and the Coggeshall Chronicle*, EHR. xxr
(1906), p. 287; Galbraith, Roger Wendover and Matthew Paris, p. 15, whence
the quotation.

2 Liebermann (ed.), Ungedruckte anglo-normannische Geschichtsquellen,
pp. 101 ff.

3 B.M. Royal MS. 13 E vi, fT. 136-7; they are printed in Liebermann (ed.),
Ungedruckte anglo-norm. Geschichtsquellen, pp. 167-72.

4 CM, i, pp. xiii and xxx; the quotation is from p, xiii. Powicke has mis-
represented Luard when he states (* Compilation of the Chronica Majora ',

24

MATTHEW PARIS AND ROGER WENDOVER

231, OPT is fuller than AB, and he thought that this was due to
the fact that, while AB had been copied from an earlier com-
pilation, OW had been enlarged from it. 1 He concluded that
Matthew Paris, in supervising the writing of his Chronica Major a
in AB, had used a manuscript of an earlier compilation which
had been used independently by Roger Wendover; and that,
while AB was throughout an accurate copy of this compilation,
the text of OW had been altered from it up to 231, and again

MS. of the 'St Albans compilation *

Altered up to
231 annal; and
between 1012 and 1065

Copied

OW
Roger Wendover

AB
Matthew Paris

Fig, i. Diagram to show Luard's theory of the relationship
between OW and AB up to 1066.

between 1012 and 1065 (see fig. i). Powicke disagreed with
Luard, and thought that the differences between AB and OW
were due either to Matthew himself, or to the use by his scribes
in AB of a different compilation up to the annal for 23 1. 2 The
only way to resolve this problem is to compare carefully a passage
as it is in OW, AB, and the original source whence it was
derived. Here, first, is an example from before the annal for 231 :

The source, Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia regum Britanniae*
Nee mora concurrentes undique nationum populi exemplum regis

pp. 149-50): 'Luard. . .assumed that the whole of A was independent of
Wendover. He did not point out, what can be inferred from his own foot-
notes, that in fact there is no such independence except for the period from
the Creation to the year A.D. 231, and the period from 1013 to 1065.'

1 CM. i, pp. xxx-xxxi.

2 Powicke, 'Compilation of the Chronica Major a 9 , Proc. Brit. Acad. xxx
(1944), p. 150. 3 A. Griscom (ed.), p- 3^9 (Bern MS.)-

25

MATTHEW PARIS

insequntur, eodemque lauacro mimdati, celesti regno restituuntur.
Beati igitur doctores cum per totam fere insulam paganismum
deleuissent, templa que in honore plurimorum deorum fundata
fuerant uni deo eiusque sanctis dedicauerunt, diuersisque cetibus
ordinatorum repleuerunt

AB. Part of the annal for I85. 1

. . . concurrerunt ad baptismum nationes diversae, exemplum regis
sequentes, ita ut in brevi nullus inveniretur infidelis. Beati igitur
doctor es> cum per totam Britanniam paganismum delevissent, templa,
quae in honore plurimorum deorum fundata fuerant) uni Deo ejusdemque
sanctis dedicaverunt, diversisque ordinatorum coetibus expleverunt.

OW. The same passage, but under the year i83. 2

. . . concurrebant ad baptismum sacramentum nationes diuerse
regis exemplum sequentes, ita ut in breui nullus infidelis remaneret.
Beati igitur doctores Christi, cum per totam Britanniam paganismum
deleuissent, templi [sic] que ob honorern deorum gentilium fundata
fuerant [in W the 'n* is expunct] uni Deo eius sanctis dedicantes,
diuersis ordinatorum cetibus inpleuerunt.

I have italicized those words in AB and OFF which are taken
directly from the source. It will be seen that AB and OW share
a text in common which is different from the source, though
obviously based on it; they are, in fact, clearly versions of one
and the same compilation. It will also be seen that, where the
texts of AB and OW differ, AB is nearer the original source;
a fact which shows that, while the scribe of AB has copied his
exemplar more or less accurately, the scribe of OW has made
alterations from it in the course of writing. A similar comparison
between AB, OIF" and their source may be made for part of the
text between 1012 and 1065:

The source, Florence of Worcester's Chronicon ex chronicis?

Rex Walanorum Griffinus non, Augusti a suis interficitur, et caput
eius caputque navis ipsius cum ornatura comiti Haroldo mittitur,
quae mox ille regi detulit Eadwardo. Quibus gestis, suis fratribus
Blethgento et Rithwalano, rex terram Walanorum dedit; cui et

1 CM. i, p. 129.

2 W, f. 29 a and O, f. 26 a. O is unfortunately badly damaged by fire, and
could therefore only be partially collated here.

3 B. Thorpe (ed.), I, p. 222.

26

MATTHEW PARIS AND ROGER WENDOVER

Haroldo comiti, fidelitatem illi juraverunt, et ad impermm illorum . . .
obedienter se pensuros spoponderunt.

AB. The annal for 1064.!

Gens Walanorum, nonas Augusti, interfecto rege suo Griffino,
caput ejus duci Haroldo miserunt, quod mox Haroldus ad regem
Eadwardum transmittens, alium Walensibus regem praefecit. Qui
Eadwardo regi fidelitatem praestito faciens juramento, omnia, quae
regibus Anglorum solvi consueverant, ipse fideliter se pensurum
spopondit.

OW. The annal for io64. 2

Gens Wallensium nonas Augusti, rege Griffino perempto, caput
suum duci Haroldo miserunt, quod mox Haroldus ad regem Ead-
wardum transmittens, alium Wallensibus regem praefecit; qui,
Anglorum regi fidelitatem faciens, omnia, quae regibus Anglicis solvi
debebantur, ipse fideliter se redditurum spopondit.

Here, again, AB and OW were clearly taken from a common
exemplar, which was, in its turn, taken from the original source ;
and, here again, where AB and OIF differ, AB is almost invari-
ably nearer the source than OW. Thus the differences between
AB and OW are again due to the scribe of OW, who is making
free with the exemplar while that of AB keeps strictly to it.
In this part of the text, however, the scribe of OW has usually
abridged his exemplar, instead of amplifying it, as he did before
the annal for 23 1 . Luard, then, was right in supposing that the
differences between AB and OW are due to alterations made by
the scribe of OPFfrom an exemplar which was copied more or
less accurately by the scribe of AB.

If we take the whole text of the chronicle up to 1066, and
compare it carefully in AB, O and W, the relationship of the
manuscripts can be established with some degree of certainty.
O and W, for instance, were certainly copied from a single
exemplar, OW: W could not have been copied from O, since it
is earlier than that manuscript, nor could O have been copied
from W, since in W four different lines are omitted through
homoeoteleuton, 3 yet in each case the missing line is in O. On

1 CM. I, p. 531. 2 H. O. Coxe (ed.), i, p. 5^4-

3 At CM. i, pp. 252, note 3; 328, note i; 400, note i; and 487, note 16.
The possibility of an intermediate manuscript between OW and O is not
considered here, since its existence would not affect the argument.

27

MATTHEW PARIS

the other hand the readings which O and W have in common
show that they shared a common exemplar ; 1 and, since in both
manuscripts the text is attributed to Roger Wendover, it is
certain that their common exemplar, OW, was likewise a text
of Roger Wendover. O W was undoubtedly copied from another
manuscript, which I shall call b, for errors and omissions com-
mon to O and W, which can only have been due to the careless-
ness of the scribe of OWin copying, occur frequently. 2 Since
these errors are not found in AB, that manuscript cannot have
been copied from OW, and the virtual identity of much of the
text of AB and OW can only be explained on the hypothesis
that AB, like OW, was copied from b (see fig. z).

This same relationship is found after the annal for 1066. For
instance, in the course of the annals for 1098 and 1228, there are
cases of the loss of a line through homoeoteleuton in both O
and W? which show that they still derive from the common
exemplar OW; and the fact that in each case AB has the missing
line shows that it is still not copied from OW (the scribe of
which must have omitted these lines in order that they should
be missing in both O and W) but from OW's exemplar, i. All
the manuscripts carelessly omit several lines of the text of
Magna Carta, 4 a fact which shows that at this point, too, they
all derive from a single manuscript, b. The fact that the text of
b continued at any rate up to the annal for 1228 is of some
significance; for Luard believed that the exemplar of OW and
AB, that is b, was a manuscript of a compilation written at
St Albans before Roger Wendover's time. 5 But the text of any
such compilation would certainly not have extended up to the
year 1228, within eight years of Roger's death; and in fact b
must surely have been an early copy or recension of Roger's own
chronicle, and not an earlier *St Albans compilation'. 6 There is
some evidence that Roger's Floras Historiarum did in fact exist
in two recensions. In both O and W the text is attributed to
Roger Wendover and ends at a point about half-way through
the annal for 1235, the last date mentioned being that of the

1 See Luard's remarks on this, CM. i, p. xiv.

2 See, for instance, CM. i, pp. 297, note i, 340, note i, and 448, note 2,

3 CM. n, p. 83, note 3, and in, p. 149, note 3.

4 CM. n, p. 591, note 5. 5 CM. I, pp. xxx-xxxi.

6 For a discussion of the manuscript lying behind b> see below, pp. 96-7.

28

MATTHEW PARIS AND ROGER WENDOVER

marriage of Frederick II and Isabella on 20 July. 1 On the
other hand a rubric in O at the beginning of book two of Roger's
chronicle (f. 3 a) states that the text continues 'up to the year of
Our Lord 1234' ; anc * i* 1 the fair copy of part two of Matthew's
Chronica Majora (C) the rubricator has written a note referring
to a point in the text between April and May 1234 which says : 2
1 Dom Roger Wendover, one time prior of Belvoir, completed

Fig. 2. Diagram to show the relationship of the manuscripts of
Roger Wendover and Matthew Paris.

(digessit) his chronicle up to this point. Brother Matthew Paris
begins [here].' This note must have been written in or soon
after 1250, and it seems to be the earliest surviving evidence for
the termination of Roger Wendover's Flores Historiarum. It
was copied, c. 1300, into the margin of Matthew's autograph
manuscript of the Chronica Majora (B), but here it refers, not
to a point in the annal for 1234, as in C, but to the point where
the text of O and W ends. Its writer, presumably, had seen
a copy of Roger Wendover's chronicle which ended at this point

1 CM. in, p. 324.

CM. in, p. 290, note 8.

MATTHEW PARIS

In 1235, and assumed that the note in C was misplaced. Apossible
explanation of the discrepancy in this evidence concerning the
termination of Roger's Flares Historiamm is that Roger finished
one recension of his chronicle up to 1234, and that he then
produced a second recension of it, in which the text was con-
tinued into 1235. If this is so, it seems possible that b represented
Roger's first recension, and OW his second; though on the
other hand it is perhaps unlikely that Matthew Paris would have
been content to use the first recension of his predecessor's work,
when a more up to date version was available to him.

Before we go on to discuss those variations in AB which are
due to Matthew Paris, we ought to note that there are a few
cases where a passage in OW does not occur in AB. It is,
however, impossible to ascertain whether these passages were
omitted on purpose by Matthew, or whether they were only
added by Roger in the second recension of his chronicle, that is
in OW, and were consequently omitted in AB simply because
they did not occur in its exemplar b. 1

By no means all the variations from OW which occur in the
original text of AB have so far been discussed, for a large
number occur in those parts of AB which were written by
Matthew himself, not to mention those which are due to
his subsequent additions and alterations in that manuscript.
Matthew himself wrote the annals for 619 and 620 in A, and
nearly all the text of B from the annal for 1213 onwards, and
throughout both manuscripts he has rewritten passages on
erasures and made corrections and additions in the margins.
If we look first at those sections of the text written by Matthew
himself, we find that verbal variations from OW (apart from
those already discussed) occur in them, and very seldom else-
where. Thus, a number occur in the annal for 620, but very
few are to be found elsewhere in this part of A. 2 Again, when
Matthew himself begins writing the text of B during the annal

1 The most important of these passages are mentioned by Luard in his
notes to the Chronica Majora, and printed in Hewlett's edition of Roger
Wendover's Flores Historiarum, i, pp. 225-6; and n, pp. 356-8 and 369-72.
See CM. n, p. 398, note 4; ni, p. 165, note 2; and in, p. 176, note 3.

2 Purely scribal variations are, of course, found throughout the text, but
these differ in character from the deliberate verbal alterations made by
Matthew Paris.

MATTHEW PARIS AND ROGER WENDOVER

for 1213, a large number of variations from OW occur; but they
cease (except for two small additions) 1 when Matthew hands
the quill back to his scribe for ff. 46b~~5oa of B. Unfortunately
Luard's edition of the Chronica Major a is extremely confusing
here, because he frequently does not point out whether or not
a passage added in AB to the text of OIF and consequently
printed by him in large type was in the original text of the
manuscript, or only added subsequently. Owing to this, and to
Luard's uncertainty about the identity of Matthew's hand-
writing, the striking coincidence between the occurrence of
variations in the text of AB and the sections of this text written
by Matthew Paris himself is not at all apparent in his edition.
A careful comparison of the manuscripts, however, shows that
Matthew was at first content merely to supervise the writing of
AB] to insert many of the rubrics in his own hand; and occa-
sionally to write out a piece of its text himself; while his scribes
made a close copy of the exemplar, b. But when the text reached
his own lifetime he took over the writing of it himself, so that
he could incorporate directly into it his own version of the
chronicle of his predecessor. Later he went through the manu-
script making further additions and alterations, both to the
sections of text written by himself, and to those written by his
scribes. These facts are of the utmost importance, for they show
that AB is the actual manuscript into which Matthew Paris
first made his revisions of Roger Wendover: it is, in fact, the
earliest and original complete manuscript of his Chronica Major a?
Were this not so, we should not find variations from OIF occur-
ring in just those parts of the text of AB which were written by
Matthew Paris himself.

Matthew evidently at first intended to go carefully through
the whole of AB in order to correct the errors of his scribes.
But this good intention was carried out systematically only up
to about p. 75 (about the annal for 500). At this point he
evidently grew tired of the work of correction, and in the rest of
A he was active only at a few scattered points. Thus, between
the beginning of the book and p. 75 he made over 100 corrections ;
but from here on until the annal for 1066 there are only about

1 CM. n, pp. 653 and 669.

2 For more on this, see below, pp. 50 ff.

31

MATTHEW PARIS

thirty, twenty-two of which occur between the annals for 1006
and 1066. After the annal for 1066 corrections again become
frequent, and it is clear that Matthew went through this part of
the text of A with much more care. Matthew's work of correction
was not, on the whole, very satisfactory. Sometimes he fails to
correct in one place an error which he had avoided elsewhere.
Thus he spoils the sense of one passage which he misunderstood
because the scribe had omitted the initial letter for illumination ;
yet he wrote the same passage out correctly in the Vitae Off arum. 1
Sometimes he makes blundering attempts at correction which
entirely spoil the sense of the passage; as, for instance, where,
mistaking an' ( = c annis') for ante, he alters Roger Wendover's
c Francorum [rex] Marcomirus annis triginta quatuor ' to * Fran-
corum [rex] Marcomirus an[te] triginta quatuor dies obiit'. 2
Sometimes, however, his corrections are successful: he supplies
a missing verb or corrects a scribal blunder, and, on one
occasion, provides a missing line in the margin. 3 Occasionally
he corrects a historical mistake of Roger's: for instance, where
Roger wrongly had ' Walone ', Matthew corrects to * Pandulpho J . 4
On the whole, however, Matthew's corrections of Roger are
inadequate and few in number, and they hardly make up for the
numerous new blunders and inaccuracies which were introduced
into the chronicle through his own or his scribe's carelessness in
AB.

Apart from correction or attempted correction, Matthew's
revision of Roger's Floras Historiarum consists of * improve-
ments', in part stylistic and literary, and in part historical.
His literary alterations often take the form of the addition of
words and phrases, usually colourful and tendentious, to give
vigour and picturesqueness to the narrative, and frequently he
substitutes his own phrases for Roger's more prosaic ones. For
instance, he alters Roger's 'subridens' (in reference to King
John) to 'subsannans'; and 'cerebro perforate' (speaking of
Eustace de Vescy's death from a head wound) to 'cerebro

1 CM, I, p. 359, note 4; Wats, p. 29.

2 CM. i, p. 171, note i ; see also CM. I, p. 141, note z, and n, pp. xxx-xxxi.

3 CM, i, p. 203. Luard does not point out that the words * Vae tibi. . .
lacerabuntur * are omitted through homoeoteleuton in all the MSS., but
added in the margin of A by Matthew himself.

4 CM. ra, p. 61, note 5.

12

MATTHEW PARIS AND ROGER WENDOVER

terebrato'; and elsewhere he adds to Roger's phrase c cum
juramento' the word 'horribili'. 1 Many other examples of this
kind of 'improvement' could be cited. 2 Matthew's love of
playing on words is often reflected in the addition in the margin
of the manuscript of a word similar in form to that used by
Roger, usually preceded with a vel: thus we find * vel indicio* in
reference to the word 'editio', and 'vel fir.' in reference to
'conformari'. 3 Frequently Roger's narrative is 'improved' by
the provision of an apt quotation, some illustrative verses, or an
epitaph. 4 Other characteristic literary alterations are the intro-
duction of direct speech, 5 and the insertion of epithets or short
character sketches, usually bestowing praise or blame, where
Roger Wendover only mentions a name. Here is a passage
containing a number of examples of this kind of ' improvement ' : 6

Fawkes, lacking the bowels of compassion; the warlike and blood-
thirsty Savari de Mauleon with his Poitevins; William Brewer,
bellicose and experienced, with his men; Walter Buc, an assassin and
man of blood, with his filthy ignoble Flemings and Brabanters, stained
with every kind of crime ....

This passage exemplifies another of Matthew's favourite
'improvements' to the text of his predecessor: the introduction
of his own opinions, feelings, and prejudices. When Roger
records Henry Ill's return from Poitou in 1230 without any
comment, Matthew supplies it thus : 7 ' [He returned . . . ] having
wasted an infinite amount of money, and having caused the
death of innumerable nobles; weakened them with sickness and
hunger; or reduced them to extreme poverty . . ..* Again, when
Roger records John of Brienne's flight to France in 1230,
Matthew adds: 8 '[He fled...] with his mercenaries, whom
the pope enriched with ecclesiastical plunder and honoured
with goods taken whencesoever from the poor. . . .'

Many of these colourful, partisan comments and statements

1 CM. n, pp. 586, note 3, and 666, note 2; m, p. ai.

2 See CM. n, p. xxxii, and pp. 622-3, 639-40 etc.

3 CM. I, pp. 174, note 3, and 130, note 2.

4 E.g. at CM. n, pp. 452 and 669; in, pp. 43, 57, 105, 112, 186, note 5, etc.

5 E.g. at CM. n, pp. 624, 637, 645; and in, p. 161.

6 CM. II, pp. 635-6; I have italicized Matthew's additions to the text of
Roger. 7 CM. in, p. 199. 8 CM. in, p. 194.

3 33 VMP

MATTHEW PARIS

added by Matthew enliven the narrative of Roger Wendover;
and we must, I think, regard them as literary, rather than
historical, 'improvements'. Of these latter, however, there are
many examples. A number of small factual details, such as the
insertion of a name or a date, 1 and a large number of short
annalistic entries, sometimes from sources not used by Roger,
are added. 2 Besides these, Matthew added a good many docu-
ments to Roger's text, 3 and on one occasion he inserted in the
margin of AB a more accurate version of a document given by
Roger in the text. 4 Another important type of historical ' im-
provement' is the addition of a number of fairly long pieces
describing an event or relating a story, such as the description
of William Rufus's death and the account of Henry Fs speech
to the nobles in no6. 5 As the text approaches his own time,
Matthew contributes more and more of these insertions, usually
on the basis of information given him by people he knew. The
story of Simon of Tournay, for instance, was told to Matthew by
Nicholas of Farnham, bishop of Durham, 6 and much seems to
have been added on the information of Hubert de Burgh. 7
Sometimes Matthew has a different account of an event from
that of Roger, and he adds his own account into the margin of
AB without any attempt to integrate it with Roger's. 8

We have examined, in some detail, the actual relationship of
the chronicles of Roger Wendover and Matthew Paris. Although
it is true that Matthew's Chronica Majora is more than a mere
continuation of Roger's Flores Historiarum, it is also true that
Matthew owed much more to Roger than a mere source for
the first part of his chronicle, for, besides the content, which,
up to the annal for 1236, is almost wholly Roger's, the form,
scope, and technique of Matthew's Chronica Majora are all
based on Roger's work. As to the relationship of the two men,
we know nothing certain, except, what is clear from a study of
their chronicles, that Matthew learnt his profession, as a his-
torian, from Roger Wendover.

1 E.g. at CM. in, pp. i and 112; n, p. 495.

2 For these, see below, pp. 103 ff.

3 E.g. at CM. 11, pp. 607-10 and ni, p. 34.

4 CM. i, p. 348, note 2. 5 CM. n, pp. 112-13 and 130-1.
6 CM. n, pp. 476-7. 7 See above, p. 13.

8 E.g. CM. in, pp. 28 ff.

CHAPTER III

THE HANDWRITING AND AUTHORSHIP OF
THE HISTORICAL MANUSCRIPTS

IT is only recently that the problem of Matthew Paris's hand-
writing has been thoroughly investigated, and a definite con-
clusion reached. 1 It is unnecessary, here, to recapitulate the
detailed evidence, but it ought, perhaps, to be pointed out that
my study of Matthew's handwriting led me to the conclusion
that Sir Frederick Madden identified it correctly, and that Sir
Thomas Duffus Hardy did not. Since this paper was published,
I have come across a further piece of evidence which I had
previously overlooked, that the Corpus Christi College, Cam-
bridge, manuscript of the Chronica Major a (E) is Matthew's
autograph. In one place 2 Matthew describes himself as ( scriptor
huius libri', but the scribe of the fair copy, British Museum
Cotton MS. Nero D v (C), normally an accurate copyist, has
altered this to 'confector huius libri'. At another point, too, 3
Matthew's reference to himself as * huius paginae scriptor i' has
been altered by the scribe of C to 'compositori'. It appears
from this that the word scriptor (and presumably the verb scribo]
had the definite meaning of * writer' or 'scribe'; and that when
Matthew refers to himself in this way, as he frequently does, 4
he means that he is actually writing.

The Historia Anglorum has always been accepted as Matthew's
autograph; to this, unless the evidence and conclusion of my
paper on Matthew Paris's handwriting be discredited, must now
be added the text of the Chronica Major a from 1213 onwards;
the text of the Flores Historiarum from 1241 to 1249; t ' ie Liber
Additamentorum\ and the Abbreviatio Chronicorum in fact all
the more important historical works usually attributed to
Matthew Paris. As we shall have occasion to mention these

1 In my paper c The Handwriting of Matthew Paris ', Trans. Camb. Bill.
Soc. I (1953). 2 CM. v, p. 129 and note 3.

3 CM, v, p. 136 and note 3.

4 See Vaughan, ' Hand writing of M. Paris ', loc. cit. p. 385, and CM. v, pp. 201
and 317. Sometimes he refers to himself as compositor , as at HA. in, p. 40.

35 3-s

MATTHEW PARIS

works frequently in the pages which follow, a brief description
of some of them will not be out of place here.

(1) Chronica Majora: see above, p. 21.

(2) Historia Anglorum: in B.M. Royal MS. 14 C vii (jR);
the text extends from 1066 to 1253 and is based on that of
the Chronica Majora.

(3) Flores Historiarum up to the annal for 1 249 : the earliest
existing manuscript is number 6712 in the Chetham Library,
Manchester (Ch). This is the work previously ascribed to
'Matthew of Westminster', and is not to be confused with the
Flores Historiarum of Roger Wendover. It has been edited by
Luard for the Rolls Series, and I refer to this edition with the
letters FH,

(4) Abbreviatio Chronicorum: in B.M. Cotton MS. Claudius
D vi; based for the most part on the Historia Anglorum. The
text extends from 1000 to 1255. It was edited by Madden in the
third volume of his Historia Anglorum^ but, to avoid confusion,
I shall refer to this edition with the letters AC.

We may now turn to examine the evidence for the authorship
of these works. Matthew's authorship of the Chronica Majora
from 1236 to 1253 kas never been doubted; nor has it ever been
suggested that he did not write the Historia Anglorum; but there
has been no unanimous agreement about his authorship of the
Chronica Majora from 1254 to 1259, the Abbrematio Chroni-
corum, and the Flores Historiarum, The question of the
authorship of the last part of the Chronica Majora need not
detain us long. Only Hardy has raised a voice against Matthew's
authorship of it, 1 and his view was refuted by Liebermann, who
pointed out that he had misunderstood the meaning of the word
ascribere in the colophon, 2 and went on to show convincingly
that Matthew was indeed the author of the final section of the
Chronica Majora. A suggestion put forward recently by
Denholm- Young takes a modified view of the theory that
Matthew did not himself write this part of the Chronica Majora. 3

1 Hardy, A Descriptive Catalogue of Materials relating to the History of
Great Britain and Ireland, in, pp. 154-5.

2 Liebermann (ed.), MGH,SS. xxvm, p. 78; and *Bericht uber Arbeitcn
in England. . . ' in Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft ftir alter e deutsche Geschichts-
kunde, IV (1879), p. 21.

8 Denholm- Young, Handwriting in England and Wales, p. 52,

HANDWRITING AND AUTHORSHIP

He suggested that the colophon to the Chronica Major a (Plate i,
and above p. 7), linked to the fact that the last eight leaves of
the manuscript are not in Matthew's hand, might lead to the
conclusion that the author of these eight leaves was not Mat-
thew himself, but his scribe, who perhaps wrote them up from
Matthew's notes. But this theory appears to misinterpret the
colophon in much the same way as did Hardy, and to ignore the
explicit words ' up to this point wrote the venerable man, brother
Matthew Paris': 'hucusque perscripsit venerabilis vir frater
Matheus Parisiensis.'

Matthew's authorship of the other two historical works men-
tioned above, the Abbreviatio Chronicorum and the Flores His-
toriarum, has been questioned by Liebermann and Luard respec-
tively. 1 The objections of both are based on the assumption that
these works contain too many absurd blunders to have been
written by Matthew Paris. In fact, however, many blunders
occur in the Chronica Major a and the Historia Anglorum, which
show that Matthew, both when composing and when copying
or abridging, frequently makes careless mistakes of just the kind
that Luard and Liebermann supposed him incapable of. Many
examples could be cited from the Historia Anglorum of faulty
constructions ; 2 omissions of a verb or other important word ; 3
copying blunders such as navigavit ' for negavit ' and ' Oxoniam '
for 'Exoniam'; 4 and the omission of a line through homoeo-
teleuton in the exemplar. 5 More serious mistakes also occur;
for instance, Matthew summarizes a bull of Gregory IX with
the words 6 * Summa : de discordia Templi et Hospitalis ' ; yet the
bull contains no mention of any dissension between the two
Orders. In the Chronica Majora, too, errors are frequent, as,
for instance, when Matthew writes 'comitis pontificis', ap-
parently for 'comitis Pontivi'. 7 Elsewhere, he makes the king of
Navarre and count of Champagne two different people, and in

1 Liebermann (ed.), MGH,SS. xxvm, pp. 101-2 and Luard (ed.), FH. I,
pp. xxxviii-xxxix.

2 E.g. at HA. I, pp. 38, note 3, and 129, note i.

3 E.g. at HA. I, p. 229, note 3; in, pp. 21, note i, and 128, note i.

4 HA. i, pp. 14, note 3, and 254, note 3.

5 HA. I, p. 323, note 4. 6 HA. n, p. 368.

7 CM. in, p. 328; see Powicke, King Henry III and the Lord Edward,
i, p. 1 60, note 2.

37

MATTHEW PARIS

another place he treats the count of Louvain and duke of Bra-
bant in the same way. 1 Sometimes a verb is carelessly omitted;
on one occasion a passage is repeated through homoeoteleuton ;
Aragon is written for Navarre; and the bishop of Carlisle is said
to have been consecrated 'on St Agatha's day', when in St
Agatha's church' is meant. 2 But it would be most unfair to
begin a study of Matthew Paris's works with a list of his errors:
I cite these few merely to show that he was quite capable of
making them, and that, if the Abbreviatio Chronicorum and the
Flares Historiarum are to be excluded from the Parisian corpus,
some other objection to them will have to be found.

There is much positive evidence, quite apart from the fact
that the Abbreviatio Chronicorum is mainly, and the Flores
Historiarum partly, autograph, that Matthew was the author of
both these works. In the Abbreviatio, for instance, he refers to
himself as 'huius opusculi compositor'. 3 This is in fact copied
from the Historia Anglorumf but it seems unlikely that it would
have been retained in the Abbreviatio had Matthew not also
been the compositor of that work. The system of signa, which he
uses in the Chronica Majora and the Historia Anglorum in
reference to documents transcribed elsewhere, 5 is also used in
the Abbreviatio a fact which affords further evidence that he
was its author. Again, several quotations used elsewhere by
Matthew occur in the Abbreviatio: for instance, a line from
Geoffrey of Vinsauf's Nova Poetria* which is used twice in the
Historia Anglorum? and a line of Ovid 8 which occurs in both
the Historia Anglorum^ and the Chronica Majora. The play on
words, which is so characteristic a feature of Matthew's other
historical works, 11 is common also in the Abbreviatio: we find,
for instance, 'molliti et melliti'; 12 'duris ac diris'; 13 'plures et

1 CM. m, p. 335 (see note 4) and iv, p. 21, note 2.

2 CM. iv, pp. 13, note i, 79, note i, and 645, note i.

3 AC., p. 304. 4 in, p. 40.

5 See below, pp. 65 ff. and an. 6 AC., p. 244.

7 ii, p. 276, and ni, p. 83. 8 AC., p. 228.

I, P- 454- 10 iv, p. 6n.

11 See below, p. 127.

12 AC., p. 232; they occur together elsewhere at CM. m, p. 331 ; iv, pp. 61,
221, 374; v, p. 14; HA. I, p. 15.

18 AC., p. 233; they occur together elsewhere at CM. iv, pp. 238, 400;
HA. i, p. 369.

38

HANDWRITING AND AUTHORSHIP

pluries' ; l 'reticere quam recitare'. 2 Even more significant is the
occurrence in the Abbreviatio Chronicorum of some of Matthew's
favourite allusions, such as 'nodum quaerentes in [sjcirpo' 3 and

* in arcum pravum ' ; 4 as well as phrases which he very frequently
uses, such as: 'novit Ille qui nihil ignorat'; 'in arcto positus';

* patulis rictibus inhiantes ' ; ' minus quam deceret aut expediret * ;
'haec iccirco dixerim'; 'tractatus exigit speciales'; and 'inter
duas molas contriti': 5 all of which occur frequently in the
Chronica Majora and the Historia Anglorum. Many of these
phrases are, of course, common enough in other medieval
writers, but the appearance of so many of them in the Abbreviatio
Chronicorum is very good evidence for Matthew's authorship of
this work; and, if we take into account the other evidence men-
tioned above, we must surely conclude that Matthew Paris was
its author as well as its scribe.

Professor Galbraith was the first to put forward evidence to
show that Matthew was the author of the Flares Historiarum up
to the annal for 1249, an d n i s evidence is all the more important
in that it is wholly drawn from the printed text, and is therefore
independent of Madden's attribution of the Floras Historiarum
to Matthew Paris, which was based on the handwriting of the
Chetham manuscript. Galbraith cites two instances in the
Chronica Majora where a quotation is used by Matthew, and
shows that each of these quotations is used in the Flores in
reference to quite different events, but under an identical
mental stimulus. 6 As he puts it: 'The same kind of stimulus
extracts the same quotation'; and he adds in his Appendix a
number of other instances of the use of an identical expression
in a different context, but under a similar mental stimulus, in
the Chronica Majora or the Historia Anglorum and the Flores

1 AC., p. 224; they occur together elsewhere at CM. in, pp. 407, 532;
iv, p. 211.

2 AC., p. 278; it also occurs at HA. n, p. 240.

3 AC., p. 256 ; cf. Terence, Andr. v, iv, 38 ; it occurs in the Chronica Majora
at iv, p. 246 and v, pp. 277, 371 and 635.

4 AC., p. 169; see Ps. Ixxvii, 57; it occurs in the Chronica Majora at in,
p. 409; iv, pp. 69, 171, 479; v, pp. 52, 128 and 183.

5 At p. 202, pp. 208 and 267, p. 229, p. 310, pp. 229 and 260, p. 199, and
p. 234, respectively.

6 Galbraith, Roger Wendover and Matthew Paris, pp. 32-3; the quotation
which follows is from p. 33. For his Appendix, see pp. 45-6.

39

MATTHEW PARIS

Historiarum. Galbraith's evidence can easily be amplified: one
of the quotations which he mentions, from Ovid, occurs three
times in the Chronica Major a and once in the Historia Anglorum,
and is, indeed, one of Matthew's favourites. 1 Again, a note on
the word Friday, which Matthew adds in two places in the
Chronica Majora to the text of Roger Wendover, occurs in
a different context, but almost identical words, in the Flores
Historiarum? The play on words, which we have already noticed
in connexion with the Abbreviatio Chronicorum, is a feature, too,
of the Flores Historiarum. Thus we find 'valeo' and f volo >3 and
'exaudire' and c audire' 4 used together, as frequently also in the
Chronica Majora. 5 Moreover in the Flores Historiarum we find
some of the very same phrases and allusions which we noted in
the Abbreviatio, such as: 'versus in arcum pravum'; 6 *in arcto
positus'; 7 'secus quarn deceret aut expediret'; 8 'haec iccirco
dixerim'; 9 and 'tractatus exigere(n)t speciales', 10 all of which
occur frequently in the Chronica Majora and the Historia
Anglorum\ as well as 'rationis trutina ponderahat', 11 'felix
suscepit incrementum', 12 c etsi de aliis taceamus', 13 'trahunt
ab alto [or immo] suspiria', 14 and 'luce clarius', 15 which are
all characteristic of Matthew Paris. Another remark which
occurs in the Flores is: *ne laeta impermixta tristibus in hoc
mundo eveniant', 16 which appears in slightly different words on
a number of occasions in Matthew's historical writings; for
example, in the Chronica Majora: 11 *ne laetitia huius mundi
eveniat mortalibus impermixta.'

There is one important piece of external evidence for
Matthew's authorship of the Flores Historiarum. The anonymous
Winchester monk of the late fourteenth century who wrote the
chronicle in the Book of Hyde cites Matthew Paris as his source
with the words: *ut scribit Mattheus Parisiacensis', 18 and he

1 Ovid, Metam. iv, 472; it occurs at CM. iv, pp. 6 1, 122; v, p. 55; HA. I,
p. 189. z CM. I, pp. 343, note i, and 403; FH. i, p. 217.

3 n, pp. 292, 350. 4 n, p. 293.

5 For instance, 'volo' and 'valeo 1 , at CM. iv, pp. 210, 423, 486, 559 and
636; *exaudire' and 'audire', for instance, at CM. ni, p. 482; iv, p. 99; v, p. 4.

6 II, pp. 36, 103. 7 n, p. 4. 8 n, p. 180.

a n, p. 279. 10 n, pp. 48, 72, 133, 259. n, p. 350.

12 n, p. 3 1 1- 1S n, p. 353- u n, pp. 14, 278. 15 n, p. 277-

16 FH. ii, p. 48. Cf. FH, n, p. 187, HA. I, p. 230, and below, p. 189 note i.

17 CM. v, p. 731. 18 Edwards (ed.), Liber monasterii de Hyda, p. 261.

40

HANDWRITING AND AUTHORSHIP

also cites the Flores Historiarum: l Haec omnia habentur in Flores
Historiarum', 1 in reference to some passages of which the editor
of the Book of Hyde, misled perhaps by the phrase Flores
Historiarum', points out Roger Wendover as the source. We
might indeed easily suppose that they derive either from Roger's
Flores Historiarum or from Matthew's Chronica Major a, but a
careful comparison of these extracts with the manuscripts of
Roger Wendover and Matthew Paris shows that they are taken
from the work under discussion, that is from the Flores Histo-
riarum formerly attributed to * Matthew of Westminster' and
found in the Chetham manuscript number 6712, and not from
the Flores Historiarum of Roger Wendover. The author of the
chronicle in the Book of Hyde uses this work, calls it the Flores
Historiarum, and attributes it to Matthew Paris. Although he
probably wrote more than a century after Matthew's death, his
testimony is quite explicit, and, when the internal evidence is
also taken into account, we can surely no longer remain in doubt
as to the authorship of the Flores Historiarum up to the annal
for 1249: it was written by Matthew Paris.

There is another work of general historical interest which
ought to be included in the Parisian corpus; for, though it is not
possible to prove that Matthew composed it himself, it was
certainly written under his supervision. This is the short
chronicle in B.M. Cotton MS. Vitellius A xx, 2 which is headed
by Matthew Paris: 'Cronica excerpta a magnis cronicis S.
Albani a conquestu Anglie usque deinceps'. Matthew wrote
some of the text at the beginning of the chronicle, as well as
a number of corrections and additions in the margins or between
the lines. It extends from 1066 to 1246, and the manuscript in
which it is written was given to Tynemouth Priory by Ralph of
Dunham, prior from 1252 to 1265.

So far we have discussed the authorship of works of general
historical interest; but we must turn now to two works of
domestic interest to the abbey of St Albans: the Vitae duorum

1 Edwards (ed.), Liber monasterii de Hyda, p. 265.

2 Ff. 77a-io8b; see Vaughan, 'Handwriting of M. Paris', Trans. Camb.
Bibl. Soc. I (1953), p. 39i, and the references to Madden given there. See
also below, pp. 115-16 fT.

4 1

MATTHEW PARIS

Off arum and the Gesta Abbatum. The first of these consists of
two separate Lives, that of Offa I, a fourth-century ruler of the
Angles, and that of Offa II, king of Mercia in the latter part of
the eighth century. The Lives are linked together by the promise
of Offa I to found a monastery, which remained unfulfilled until
his descendant Offa II founded St Albans. 1 Luard thought that
the Vitae Offarum could not have been written by Matthew
Paris, but that it was the work of a St Albans monk writing,
probably, towards the end of the twelfth century. 2 Both
Chambers and Rickert agreed with him, 3 and indeed this
theory as to the date and authorship of the Vitae Offarum has
been generally accepted ever since. Professor Wilson, for
instance, in his little work The Lost Literature of Medieval
England, refers to the Vitae Offarum as written by an anonymous
twelfth-century St Albans monk. 4 In the very same year,
however, as the publication of Luard' s first volume of Matthew
Paris's Chronica Major a (1872), containing his view that the
Vitae Offarum was the work of a twelfth-century St Albans
monk, there appeared a doctoral dissertation by Ludwig
Theopold, on the sources for the history of eighth-century
England, in which the theory was advanced that the Vitae
Offarum was written by Matthew Paris, 5 Unfortunately, how-
ever, Theopold's work has been ignored by later students of the
Vitae Offarum. I propose here to examine, first, Luard's argu-
ments against Matthew's authorship of this work, and to show
that they are without foundation; and then to put forward
evidence, based partly on that of Theopold, to show that the
Vitae Offarum was in fact written by Matthew Paris.

In support of his theory that the Vitae Offarum was written
by a twelfth-century monk of St Albans, Luard cites what he
took to be conclusive evidence that the Vitae Offarum was not
written by Matthew Paris. In the course of the description of

1 For a fuller discussion of the Vitae Off arum, see below, pp. 189 ff.

2 CM. I, pp. Ixxix-Ixxx and xxxii-xxxiii.

a Chambers, Beowulf \ p. 34, note 3; Rickert, *Old English Offa Saga*,
Mod. PhiloL n (19045), p. 30, and note 5.

4 Wilson, Lost Literature, pp. io~n.

5 Kritische Untersuchungen uber die Quellen zur angelsdchsischen Geschichte
des achten Jahrhunderts, pp. iizffi. Liebermann (ed.) MGH,SS. xxvin,
pp. 078, also supposed Matthew to have been the author of the Vitae
Offarum.

42

HANDWRITING AND AUTHORSHIP

Offa's visit to Rome, the Vitae Offarum begins a paragraph with
the words: 'Dinumerata denique pro distractione pratorurn
pecunia, a loco rex progreditur.' 1 This passage also occurs in
Roger Wendover. In manuscript A of the Chronica Major a the
*D' of 'Dinumerata' was originally omitted in order that an
illuminated initial could be inserted, 2 but this was in fact never
carried out, and Matthew, going through the manuscript, cor-
rected the word to 'Innumerata', and added 'soluta' to make
up the sense, not realizing that the true reading was 'Dinu-
merata'. This, thought Luard, affords *a proof that Paris could
not have been the author of the Life of Off a'. 3 But the text of
the Vitae Offarum in Matthew's Liber Additamentorwn is written
out in his own hand, so that, at one time at any rate, he was
perfectly well acquainted with the correct reading of this passage,
and Luard' s argument from this blundering attempt at cor-
rection, that Matthew was ignorant of the text of the Vitae
Offarum and therefore could not himself have written it, loses
all its force. Moreover, in other manuscripts Matthew frequently
makes blunders very similar to this one, even when he is copying
or abridging from a manuscript written and composed by him-
self. 4 Although the invalidity of this piece of evidence allows
us to reconsider Matthew as a possible author of the Vitae
Offarum, Luard' s other evidence, if valid, rules him out alto-
gether, for he maintained that the Vitae Offarum was used by
Roger Wendover, and, if this is so, it could hardly have been
written by Matthew Paris.

The Vitae Offarum and Roger Wendover's Flores Historiarum
have a certain amount of matter in very similar words, which,
if neither has copied from the other, must have been derived
from a source common to them both. This matter consists in
the main of a detailed account of the invention and translation
of St Alban by Off a; the consequent foundation of St Albans
and Offa's journey to Rome; and the martyrdom of St Aethel-
bert. In Roger Wendover's version of the story of the murder
of St Aethelbert, Aethelbert travels to Mercia on his own account
to seek the hand of Offa's daughter in marriage, whereas in the
Vitae Offarum Aethelbert is summoned to Mercia by Offa,

1 Wats, p. 2,g. 2 CM. I, p. 359, and note 4.

8 CM. i, p. Ixxx. 4 See above, pp. 37-8.

43

MATTHEW PARIS

against the wishes of his queen, Quendrida, with the object of
a matrimonial alliance. 1 While Roger's version of this story
agrees closely with both the lives of St Aethelbert printed by
M. R. James, 2 the Vitae Off arum differs considerably from them :
a fact which shows that Roger's version could not have been
derived from that in the Vitae Off arum. Immediately after his
account of the murder of Aethelbert the author of the Vitae
Off arum describes Offa's grief and the exile of his wicked queen
to a remote spot where, after some years, she was robbed and
thrown into her own well by some thieves. We are then told of
the burial of Aethelbert at Lichfield, of the neglect of his body,
and of its subsequent translation to Hereford. The writer then
explains that, since Aethelbert had no children, his kingdom of
East Anglia fell into Offa's hands; and goes on to describe the
Council of Chelsea. 3 Roger Wendover describes Offa's grief in
words different from those used in the Vitae Offarum', mentions
that he did not eat for three days in exactly the same words as
the Vitae Offarum', and then, passing over the next two para-
graphs in the Vitae Offarum, concludes his sentence with a
mention of Offa's expedition to East Anglia, partly in the same
words as the Vitae Offarum. He then returns to the account of
Aethelbert with a description of his burial, after some neglect,
at Hereford, in words almost identical with those of the Vitae
Offarum, though beginning half-way through a paragraph of
that work. Had Roger been using the Vitae Offarum itself, he
would surely not have deviated from its text in this extraordinary
manner. So far as the account of St Aethelbert is concerned, we
can indeed be sure that Roger has not, in fact, used the Vitae
Offarum at all.

The account of Offa's journey to Rome is often verbally
identical in Roger Wendover and the Vitae Offarum,^ but, here
again, Roger is evidently not using the Vitae. Both Roger and
the author of the Vitae, for instance, have the chapter-heading :
*Ut rex Off a Romam pergens pratum emerit peregrinis', yet
whereas Roger describes this in his text, the author of the Vitae

1 CM. i, pp. 354-5, and Wats, p. 23.

2 James, 'Two Lives of St Acthelbert*, E1IR. xxxn (1917), pp. 222-44.

3 Wats, p. 25. Roger Wendover describes the same events at CM. r,
p. 355. 4 CM. I, pp. 358-9, and Wats, pp. 28-9.

44

HANDWRITING AND AUTHORSHIP

Off arum does not mention Offa's gift of the land to pilgrims.
A comparison of the accounts of the invention of St Alban and
the foundation of St Albans in the Vitae Off arum and in Roger's
Flores Historiarum yields no evidence that Roger is using the
Vitae] 1 and indeed it seems much more probable that the Vitae
is here taken from Roger Wendover, for the account in the
Vitae is altogether fuller and more elaborate. Further evidence
that Roger did not use the Vitae is afforded by the fact that, while
they both include a list of bishops with their sees, originally
taken from William of Malmesbury, Roger has * Halardus Helm-
hamensis et Tidfert Domucensis' nearly correctly, but the Vitae
Off arum has 'Haraldus Helmamensis et Tedfordensis'. 2 Had
Roger Wendover really had the text of the Vitae Off arum before
him, he would surely have made full use of it. Yet he does not
mention Offa I, nor any of the legends concerning Offa II,
except the obviously local tradition of his burial by the Ouse.
Nor does he use the detailed description in the Vitae of the
first Danish attack on England, which turns the story into an
encomium of Offa: instead he scrapes together a meagre account
of this from Henry of Huntingdon and William of Malmesbury. 3

There is, indeed, every indication that Roger Wendover did
not use the Vitae Offarum\ and consequently it seems likely that
it did not even exist when he wrote his Flores Historiarum. This
conclusion allows us to reconsider the whole question of the
authorship of the Vitae Offarum, for we need no longer attribute
it to a contemporary or even precursor of Roger Wendover. It
also reopens the question of the sources of the Vitae, which will
be discussed in a later chapter, 4 where I hope to show that the
historical material in the Vitae Offarum is derived from Roger
Wendover's Flores Historiarum, but was actually taken from
Matthew Paris's own manuscript of the Chronica Majora (A).
Here we are concerned only with the problem of the authorship
of the Vitae, but, before we go on to examine Matthew Paris's
claims, we must consider an alternative possibility that has been
put forward.

Miss Rickert, agreeing with Luard that the Vitae Offarum was

1 Wats, pp. 26-30, and CM. i, pp. 356-61.

2 CM. i, p. 345, and Wats, p. 22.

3 CM. i, p. 353; cf. Wats, p. 22. 4 Below, pp. 191 ff.

45

MATTHEW PARIS

written before Matthew Paris's time, advanced the theory that
it was written by the author of the chronicle attributed to John
of Wallingford. 1 It is true that this writer states that he knows
more about Offa than he describes in his chronicle, and pro-
mises to recount it at a later date when he has investigated the
truth of the matter. 2 This perhaps refers to Offa's part in the
murder of Aethelbert, about which the anonymous author con-
fesses his ignorance. That he could not have been the author of
the Vitae Offarum has been shown by Theopold, who pointed
out that he knew far more about the historical Offa and his place
in history than the author of the Vitae ; 3 and it may be added
that the critical outlook of the anonymous chronicler is quite
different from the rather credulous tone of the Vitae.

Before we discuss the evidence for Matthew's authorship of
the Vitae Offarum, it is worth noting that there is nothing
inherently improbable about this attribution. Indeed we know
that Matthew was keenly interested in Offa of Mercia; 4 that
much of the material used in the Vitae Offarum was available
to him; and that some of it, such as Charlemagne's letter to
Offa, 5 was used elsewhere by him. Furthermore, the earliest
text of the Vitae is written into the Liber Additamentorum in
Matthew's own hand, and there is a reference, before the close
of its text, to other material in this manuscript.

We have already noticed, in our discussion of the authorship
of the Flores Historiarum and the Abbreviatio Chronicorum, that
Matthew frequently uses certain characteristic phrases. Now
although the Vitae Offarum is a very short work, several of these
phrases, such as 'felix suscepit incrementum', 6 'tractatus exigit
speciales', 7 4 ex immo (or alto) trahens suspiria' 8 and *ut decuit
et expedivit', 9 occur in it, and their presence goes some way
towards proving that Matthew wrote it. Furthermore, in the
Vitae Offarum, we find exactly the same play on words as we

1 Rickert, 'Old English Offa Saga', Mod. PhiloL n (1904-5), pp. 29-39.

2 Gale (ed.), Historiae. . .Scriptores XV, p. 530; see p. 194 below.

3 Theopold, Kritische Untersuchungen, p. 113.

4 Theopold, Kritische Untersuchungen, p. 114. Matthew has written notes
about Offa on odd leaves in A and the Liber Additamentorum.

5 Copied by Matthew into the margin of his Chronica Majora (A) from
B.M. Royal MS. 13 D v (text of William of Malmesbury), whence, too, the
copy in the Vitae Offarum was taken. 6 Wats, pp. 5, 10, 20.

7 Idem, pp. 5, 14. 8 Idem, pp. 6, 26. 9 Idem, p. 22.

4 6

HANDWRITING AND AUTHORSHIP

noted above in the Abbreviatio and the Floras ; and sometimes
even the same pairs of words, such as 'volo' and 'valeo' 1 and
'mellitus' and 'mollitus', 2 as well as other pairs of words used
in an identical way, such as 'potenter' and 'prudenter' 3 and
'subactis' and 'subtractis'. 4 Other phrases commonly used by
Matthew Paris which occur in the Vitoe Off arum are 'infausto
sidere', 'quamvis mulier non tamen muliebriter', 'parvipen-
dentes immo vilipendentes', 'singultibus sermonem prorum-
pentibus', 'in arcto constituti', 'in ore gladii' and 'nee censeo
praetereundum'. We find, too, in the Vitae Off arum, some of
Matthew's favourite colourful words, such as 'formidolosus',
'truculenter', and 'muscipula', as well as one of his most
frequently used quotations from Ovid, introduced with his
usual words c juxta illud poeticum 5 . 5

Besides these stylistic and literary parallels between the Vitae
Off arum and Matthew's accepted works, there are some striking
parallels in the accounts of battles. Indeed in this respect
Matthew's descriptive powers seem to have been rather stereo-
typed, as the following examples show.

Account of a battle from the Vitae Offarum. 6

Et congressu inito cruentissimo . . . perstrepunt . . . tubae cum lituis,
et clamor exhortantium, equorum hinnitus, morientium et vulnera-
torum gemitus, fragor lancearum, gladiorum tinnitus, ictuum
tumultus, aera perturbare videbantur. . .irruit [Offa] truculenter,
gladium suum cruore hostili inebriando . . . [Brutum] sub equinis
pedibus potenter praecipitavit.

Account of a battle from the Historia Anglorum. 7

. . . congressum ineunt cruentissimum. Incipit igitur jam con-
flictus, extrahuntur gladii sanguine hinc indeque inebriandi, reson-

abant aeneae cassides malleis ferreis Fragor hastarum, tinnitus

gladiorum, gemitus percussorum, equorum tumultus compressorum
. . . aera usque ad nubes commoverunt .... Nonnulli . . . sub equorum
pedibus conculcantur ....

Account of a battle from the Chronica Majora. 8

. . .et initum certamen in cruentissimum bellum suscitarunt

Clamor congredientium bellatorum, gemitus morientium, tinnitus

1 Wats, pp. 4, 19. 2 Idem, p. 17. 3 Idem, pp. n, 17, 22.

4 Idem, p. 5. 5 Metam. iv, 472, see above, p. 40 and note i.

6 Wats, p. 3. 7 i, p. 124- 8 in, p. 48.

47

MATTHEW PARIS

armorum, hmnitus equorum . . . ictuum fulgurantium frequens mal-
leatio ipsum aera tumultibus repleverunt. Tandem post multa hinc
inde cruenta certamina. . ..

If this evidence has not convinced the reader of Matthew's
authorship of the Vitae Off arum, more can be found, of which
the most conclusive is, perhaps, the expression in it of Matthew's
characteristic outlook and prejudices, and the way in which the
text of its main source is amplified in a manner identical with
Matthew's treatment of the text of Roger Wendover in his
Chronica Majora. Thus of Offa I it is said that, like the best
princes, he did not wish to resist the desires of his nobles ; and
of Offa II that he sent gifts to Pope Adrian because he knew of
the greed of the Romans. 1 We find, too, that the author of the
Vitae Offarum adds to the text of his source an etymological
note or a remark glorifying St Albans, in just the way that
Matthew added to Roger's Flores Historiarum in his Chronica
Majora? If we add to this evidence the fact mentioned above,
and discussed in a later chapter, that the historical material in the
Vitae was taken from Matthew's own manuscript of the Chronica
Majora, we can hardly doubt that the Vitae Offarum ought to be
added to the corpus of historical works written by Matthew Paris.

The Gesta Abbatum has been generally accepted as the work
of Matthew Paris, and there is no need to put forward the
evidence for his authorship in detail. His own manuscript,
written by himself, with many corrections and marginal addi-
tions, is to be found in his Liber Additamentorum (ff. 30 on).
Its text abounds with phrases characteristic of him, and with
expressions of his feelings about Rome and other matters, and
it contains several references to his other manuscripts. Like the
Chronica Majora, it incorporates the work of a predecessor, but
we may conveniently defer our discussion of the relationship of
Matthew Paris and Adam the Cellarer until we review Matthew's
work in the field of domestic history.

1 Wats, pp. 6 and 21.

2 For instance, at Wats, p. 30, he has added the words * quod interpretatur
volens bonum' to the source's mention of Abbot Willegod; and at p. 28 we
find the source interpolated as follows: 'Tractarent de conventu mona-
chorum. . .atque coenobio constituendo et magnifice ac regaliter privilegiando;
ubi protomartyris regni sui, imo totius Britanniae vel Angliae . . . ' (cf. CM. I,
P- 358).

4 8

CHAPTER IV

THE RELATIONSHIP AND CHRONOLOGY

OF THE 'CHRONICA MAJORA', THE

'HISTORIA ANGLORUM', AND THE

'LIBER ADDITAMENTORUM'

IN this chapter we shall be concerned with the three most
important of Matthew Paris's historical productions: the
Chronica Majora, the Historia Anglorum and the Liber
Additamentorum. These are now divided between four manu-
scripts : A and B, containing the text of the Chronica Major a
up to the annal for 1253 ; J?, containing the last part of the text of
the Chronica Major a and the whole of the Historia Anglorum;
and British Museum Cotton MS, Nero D i, the miscellaneous
collection of documentary and other material generally known
as the Liber Additamentorum}- The problem of the relationship
and chronology of these manuscripts is an important one, and
its solution is made possible only by the work of H. R. Luard
and Sir Frederick Madden, each of whom, besides their excel-
lent editions of the Chronica Major a and the Historia Anglorum
respectively, provided in their prefaces detailed and illuminating
studies of Matthew Paris's historical manuscripts. Neither of
them, however, tried to explain exactly how these manuscripts
were related to each other, though they assumed that the
Historia Anglorum was abridged by Matthew Paris from the
text of his Chronica Major a in A and B. In 1941, however, Sir
Maurice Powicke published a paper on the compilation of
Matthew's Chronica Major a, in which for the first time an
attempt was made to establish the relationship of the existing
manuscripts of the Chronica Major a, the Historia Anglorum and
the Liber Additamentorum. Powicke maintained that the text of
the Historia Anglorum up to the annal for 1249 was written
before AB, and that B itself, at any rate from the annal for 1235

1 For the Chronica Major a, see above, pp. 21-2; and, for the Historia
Anglorum, above, p. 36.

4 49 VHP

MATTHEW PARIS

onwards, was a fair copy of the Chronica written in or after
I257- 1 Three years later, in a lecture delivered at Glasgow,
Professor Galbraith showed that Powicke's evidence that B was
written as late as 1257 was unsound, and he gave reasons for
supposing that Madden was right in thinking that the Historia
Anglorum was derived directly from the actual manuscript B. 2
In the same year, Powicke published a revised version of his
paper, 3 in which he accepted Galbraith' s criticism of his theory
as to the date of B, but still maintained that it was a late tran-
script of the Chronica Major a made about the year 1255.
Needless to say, this modern controversy concerning the rela-
tionship of Matthew's historical manuscripts has been of great
help in the present study. Although my conclusions differ
greatly from those of Powicke, his arguments and evidence have
been of as much assistance to me as Galbraith' s criticism of his
conclusions; and, without the help of the work of these two
scholars, the present study would probably not have been
possible.

It was unfortunate that, when Sir Maurice Powicke wrote
his paper on the compilation of the Chronica Majora, the
problem of Matthew's handwriting had not been solved, nor,
I believe, were the manuscripts available to him at that time.
In my study of Matthew's handwriting, I came to the con-
clusion that Madden was right in believing that almost the
whole of B is autograph ; 4 but Powicke believed it to be a tran-
script written by a scribe. Furthermore he states: '^4, and the
first part of B, to the middle of the year 1213, are in the same
hand . . . ' ; 5 but had the manuscripts been available he would
surely have seen at once that Madden and James were right in
attributing this part of the Chronica Major a to several scribes
(one of whom, as Madden pointed out, was Matthew Paris

1 This first version of Powicke's paper was published in Modern Philology,
xxxvin (1940-1), pp. 305 ff.

2 Galbraith, Roger Wendover and Matthew Paris, pp. 26-9; HA. I,
p. liii.

8 In Volume xxx (1944) of the Proceedings of the British Academy,
pp. 147-60.

4 Vaughan, c Handwriting of M. Paris', Trans. Carnb. Bibliog. Soc. I
(1953), P- 39o; see HA. I, p. Ivii.

5 Powicke, * Compilation of the Chronica Major a ', Proc. Brit. Acad. xxx
(i944)> P- 151-

50

RELATIONSHIP AND CHRONOLOGY

himself). 1 Powicke was likewise mistaken in his statement about
B that 'The continuation [that is, B from the annal for 1213
onwards] in another hand, proceeds from the middle of a
sentence without a break, and continues smoothly to the end';
and he goes on to say that this part of the manuscript ( announces
itself as a copy made in the course of a short period'. 2 In fact,
from the point in the annal for 1213 where the handwriting
changes, onwards, the text by no means proceeds smoothly in
the way we should expect of a fair copy, but as follows:

ff. 35a-46a, written by Matthew Paris;

ff. 46a~49a, written by a scribe;

ff. 49b~5oa, written by another scribe;

ff. 5ob-54b, written by Matthew Paris;

ff. 55a-6ib, written by the first scribe mentioned above;

ff. 6ib-mb, written by Matthew Paris;

f. ii2a-b, written by a third scribe;

f. ii2b to the end, written by Matthew Paris.

Speaking of this manuscript, Sir Frederick Madden says: 3
' These pages exhibit the variations in the hand of the author at
different periods, neater and closer at first, and looser and more
irregular towards the close' ; and I think there can be no doubt
that this is so. Far from being a copy executed in a single short
period, B is an autograph manuscript over the writing of which
Matthew must have spent a number of years. A glance at
Plates ii and in shows the contrast between his writing in the
early part of J3, and in the later part; indeed the difference is so
great as to make it seem possible, until a close examination
reveals the similarities, that the handwriting of these folios is the
work of different scribes. The general palaeographical features
of the manuscript show that its writing covered a period of
years. There are frequent changes of ink, marginal additions
and drawings, erasures and alterations in the text, added pages
(for instance ff. n, 12 and 34) and so on; all of which give the
impression that the book was at Matthew's side for a long period,
and that it was added to and worked at by the author during
several years.

1 HA. I, pp. liv, Ivii-lviii; James, Catalogue ofC.C.C.C. MSS., i, pp. 51, 54-

2 Powicke, 'Compilation of the Chronica Major a\ loc. dt. p. 152.

3 HA. I, p. Iviii.

CI 4-2

MATTHEW PARIS

The structure of the manuscript is too complex to be ascer-
tained exactly, but I have tried to show all that I have been able
to discover about it in the accompanying diagram (fig. 3). An
examination of this diagram shows, I think, that the manu-
script is much more likely to be the result of several years' work
by the author than a fair copy written at one time. It should be
noted, too, that there is a striking variation in the size of the
leaves of the manuscript, which would scarcely be likely to
occur in a fair copy. From about the beginning of quire 12 on-
wards the leaves become steadily shorter until those of quires
15 and 1 6, which are a full quarter of an inch shorter than the
leaves of the first eleven quires. Ff. 212-15 are longer, but the
succeeding leaves are again short, up to quire 21, when they
revert to their former size, and remain so to near the end.

Matthew, we know, at first intended to finish his chronicle
at the end of the annal for 1250, and at this point in the Chronica
Major a' 1 he takes leave of the reader with an elaborate termina-
tion which includes these verses :

Terminantur hie Matthaei
Cronica : nam jubilaei

Anni dispensatio
Tempus spondet requiei.
Detur ergo quies ei,

Hie, et caeli solio.

And the couplet:

Siste tui metas studii, Matthaee, quietas,
Nee ventura petas quae postera proferet aetas.

The text in J5, however, continues beyond this point without an
obvious break, and without any further comment, to the end
of the annal for 1253. Now if B really is the autograph and
original manuscript of the Chronica Major a, written by Matthew
Paris over a period of years, we should naturally expect to find
some sign of a break in the writing of the manuscript at the
point where he himself tells us that he at first laid down his pen.
Powicke found no sign of such a break, and he says:

If it [that is B] were not a fair copy of the whole chronicle up to
the year 1253, a break at 1250, where Matthew brings his work to

1 v, pp. 197-8.

52

32

34

11(2)

in (3)

iv (4)

Preliminary matter

a-h: a later
insertion replacing
some lost leaves

11-12: inserted
later by Matthew
Paris

34: inserted later
by Matthew Paris

40: a half leaf

'(5)

vi (6)

vn( 7 )

iii iii

VII! (8)

Fig. 3. Diagram to show the structure of B. Quires 1-8.

53

104, 116: a bifolium oow
lost Luard (CM- m, pp.
397, n. 2, and 407, n. i)
notes these two leaves as
torn out of the MS.

IX (9)

X(IO)

137

138 .

135: 2 half leaf

xn (12)

ig. 3. Quires 9-17.

164
165

XXVII (I 4 )

"45

XIV (15)

187

IT

194 '

200 1-

n:

xv (i6)

3=j="" =a-'

IL

2

H
H

1248

54

228

--' 9.

.-li A

--!. H

xvii (18)

256

1252

XX (21)

; J

W2 '--

a-b: a later insertion
replacing a lost leaf

XVIII (I9J

xix (20)

Conrasum est, et habet
xiiii folia

Fig. 3. Quires 18-23.

Fig. 3 . The arrangement of the leaves in each quire is shown diagrammatically,
with the folio numbers on the left. Matthew's quire numbers are given below
the diagram of each quire, in the place where they occur in the manuscript;
and his numbering of the leaves, together with the symbols he uses to
distinguish the different quires, is given on the right. It will be seen that
this numbering is neither consistent nor methodical, and the leaves of many
of the quires are not numbered at all. I have not always been able to deter-
mine the exact arrangement of the leavesespecially in the case of quire 17.
I have marked the leaves added after Matthew Paris's time, a, b, etc. All the
quire and leaf numbers, as well as the symbols, seem to have been executed
by Matthew himself; and the comments in quire 22 are in his hand. The
numbers vii-x, in this quire, are written in plummet in the inner, lower
corners of the verso of each leaf, not, as elsewhere, in ink in the centre of the
lower margin. The only annal which begins at the beginning of a new leaf is
that for 1252.

55

MATTHEW PARIS

a stately close, would have been inevitable, but in the manuscript
this conclusion is written by the scribe currents calamo on his way
to the actual termination at the year I253- 1

In fact, however, a careful examination of the manuscript
shows that there was a break in the writing at the end of the
annal for 1250, although it is by no means obvious.

The quires of A are numbered throughout the manuscript on
the last leaf of each quire, in red, and almost certainly by
Matthew himself. Those in B are numbered in a similar way,
in red, but with blue ornamentation surrounding the figures.
A careful examination shows that these quire numbers in B are
not the original ones, for in almost every case up to and including
quire number xvin, traces of an earlier numbering, in red, are
visible, either under or near them. A magnifying glass reveals
that the vermilion, which was used for these numbers, cracks
and peels off the parchment very easily, and does not stain it in
the same way as ink, so that the task of erasing the first set of
numbers must have been an easy one ; and it is hardly surprising
that in the case of two of the quires (vi and vm), no trace of the
original number has survived. Sometimes, however, the remains
of the earlier number are quite easily visible, as with quires II
and in. Fortunately for us, Matthew, when he was renumbering
the quires in this manuscript, inadvertently omitted to alter the
number of the fourteenth quire, which, consequently, retains
its original number, xxvii, and disturbs the sequence of quire
numbers, which run xm, xxvii, xiv. This number xxvn is quite
unlike the other numbers in B, all of which have blue ornamenta-
tion round them, but it is identical with those in A. Further-
more, if we count the quires from the start of A, the fourteenth
quire of B is the twenty-seventh in all, a fact which proves con-
clusively that Matthew originally wrote A and B as one book,
AB. The original set of quire numbers in AB extended, so far
as can be judged, only up to and including number xvin in B;
for there is no sign that numbers xix and xx have been written
over earlier, erased numbers; and the last two quires are not
numbered at all. The quires in jB, then, were probably renum-
bered before quires xix and xx had been numbered, and before

1 Powicke, 'Compilation of the Chronica Major a\ Proc. Brit. Acad. xxx
(1944), p. 152.

56

RELATIONSHIP AND CHRONOLOGY

the last two quires were added. Now the text of the annal for
1250 ends on the penultimate leaf of quire xix (f. 243 a), and
it seems, therefore, very likely that Matthew originally ended
AB with the annal for 1250, leaving the last leaf of the last quire
blank, and unnumbered. He then apparently decided to divide
this bulky volume in two, renumbered the quires in J5, and, as
he proceeded with his continuation of the text over the remaining
blank leaf and on to an additional quire, numbered these last
two quires xix and xx.

(a) p. 174 of A to f. 243 a of B

(b) f. 243 b of B to the end

Fig. 4. Diagram to show the change in the arrangement of the page
heads in AB at the end of the annal for 1250.

There is, however, some much more direct evidence of a
break in the writing of B at the end of the annal for 1250. From
p. 174 of A up to f. 243 a of B (the page on which the text of the
annal for 1250 ends), the rubric headings at the top of each page
are decorated with blue coil and line work; but from f. 243 b to
the end of B these headings have no blue decoration, and are
arranged differently across the openings (see fig. 4). The identity
of the ornamentation in the two books shows that it was executed
when they still formed one volume : it is just the kind of decora-
tion which an author would add (it was executed by Matthew
himself) as a finishing touch to a completed manuscript. 1 The

1 It should be noted that this decoration begins on the same page (174 of A)
as the annal for 1066; the explanation probably being that it was carried out
at the time (in 1250) when Matthew began to abridge the Historia Anglorum,
the text of which begins in 1066, from AB.

57

MATTHEW PARIS

fact that it ends on the very same page as the annal for 1250
shows that, when it was carried out, the text of AB ended at
that point, and that Matthew at first intended to leave it thus.
It was only later, when he had continued his chronicle beyond
the year 1250, that he added the second set of rubric headings
from f. 243 b onwards.

A further piece of evidence for a break in the writing of AB
at the end of the annal for 1250 ought to be mentioned, though
its value is doubtful. On the fly-leaf at the end of what is now A,
there is a note in Matthew's hand which reads: 'Cronica ab
origine mundi usque ad annum domini millesimum. . .
. . .simum; videlicet usque ad mortem henrici ii regis anglie.'
Between ' millesimum' and * videlicet* the original reading
of the note has been erased, and Matthew has rewritten some
words on slips of vellum stuck over the erasure. In the first part
of this erasure there is room for about eight letters, but unfor-
tunately the first reading is illegible and the slip of vellum on
which the second was written has disappeared. In the second
part of the erasure, however, both readings appear to have been
-simum. What is the significance of this altered note? When was
it written, and why did Matthew find it necessary to alter it?
Certainly the date of the termination of the chronicle has been
altered, and the words c videlicet usque ad mortem henrici ii'
appear to have been added when the alteration was made, and
to refer to the second, rewritten date. It is hard to explain why
this second date should end with the letters -simum. A in fact
ends at the end of the annal for 1188, and Henry's death is
recorded at the beginning of B, under the year 1189. Neither
of these dates ends with the letters -simum y but Matthew perhaps
wrote the approximate date 1190, and then qualified it with the
remark about Henry IPs death. Be this as it may, the second
version of this note certainly refers to A ; and the most plausible
explanation of the alteration of the date is that what is now the
fly-leaf of A was at one time the fly-leaf of the combined manu-
script AB, and that the note originally referred to the chronicle
in this combined manuscript. If this was so, the original date
could hardly have been 1253, since it ended with the letters
-simum. The words ducentesimum quinquagesimum', however,
would fit in, and it therefore seems probable that this note

58

RELATIONSHIP AND CHRONOLOGY

originally read: 'Cronica ab origine mundi usque ad annum
millesimum ducentesimum quinquagesimum', and referred to
AB as originally finished by Matthew up to the annal for 1250.
Evidently, when AB was divided, the leaf on which this note
was written was removed to the end of A, and the note altered
accordingly.

A more convincing piece of evidence for a break in the writing
of B at the end of the annal for 1250 is the fact that the text of
C ends at this point. 1 There is no doubt that C was copied from
the actual manuscript B, and, since it was copied by a scribe,
there is no reason why its text should have broken off at the end
of the annal for 1250, unless the text of its exemplar likewise
ended at that point. The text of C extends from 1189 to 1250,
and it was evidently designed by Matthew as a fair copy of the
second part of his Chronica Majora as he at first intended to
leave it. It is thus very probable that, when it was copied, the
text of its exemplar extended over the same years. AB was no
doubt divided soon after its text up to 1250 was completed,
and C copied before Matthew had begun to continue B beyond
the annal for 1250.

This rather prolonged discussion has led us to the conclusion
that Matthew wrote A and B as one book, and that this book,
AB, was the earliest and original manuscript of his Chronica
Majora, the text of which at first ended with the annal for 1250.
The evidence just advanced, for a break after the annal for 1250
in the writing of the present manuscript B, clinches this point,
and confirms the conclusion reached in Chapter 11, that AB was
the actual manuscript in which Matthew first made his revisions
of the chronicle of his predecessor, Roger Wendover.

We may now approach the difficult problem of the date of AB.
Plehn pointed out that, under the year I239, 2 Matthew alludes
to the unfortunate deaths of the brothers Gilbert and Walter
Marshal, and that the latter did not in fact die until November
1245. From this he concluded that the annal for 1239 ' m & was

1 C is what I call B.M. Cotton MS. Nero D v, Part II. See below,

p. no.

2 CM. in, p. 524.

59

MATTHEW PARIS

written after November I245- 1 This gives us a terminus a quo for
the writing of Matthew's original section of the Chronica Major a
in B (1236 on): it could hardly have been begun much before
1245. There is no evidence as to the date of the writing of the
earlier part of the Chronica Major a, adapted from Roger Wend-
over (Creation to 1236). Up to the annal for 1213 this was
carried out, as we have seen, by scribes under the direction of
Matthew Paris, and it may well have been written in a compara-
tively short time; so that it seems possible that AB was not
begun until about 1240 or even later.

In the annals after 1245 Matthew frequently lagged, in J3,
a year or more behind the occurrence of the events he describes ;
for instance, the annal for 1248 was written in or after 1249,
and in the course of the annal for 1249 t^ 161 " 6 are references to
events which took place in I25O. 2 It was perhaps Matthew's
visit to Norway in 1248-9 which made him so behindhand, but,
if this is so, he must have worked extremely hard during 1249-50,
for we have conclusive evidence that he had brought the text of
his chronicle right up to date by the end of 1 250 or early in 1 25 1 .
The Emperor Frederick II died on 13 December 1250, and
Matthew mentions this event three times in the Chronica
Major a? It is significant that the death of the famous emperor,
who figures so largely in the pages of the Chronica Major a, is
not recorded in the text of the annal for 1250, but only in the
margin. It is noticed again in the text of the annal for 1251
among entries recording the events of February 1251, in words
which show that the news of it did not reach Matthew until late
January or early February of that year. The third mention of
Frederick's death is at the end of Matthew's description of the
marvellous events of the last half century with which he
originally concluded his Chronica Majora, and which follows
the end of the annal for 1250. Here we find the laconic state-
ment: 4 'Obiit insuper stupor mundi Frethericus, die Sanctae
Luciae, in Apulia.' These words are clearly out of place in the

1 Plehn, *Der politische Charakter von Matheus Parisiensis ', in Staats-
und socialwissenschaftliche Forschungen, xiv (1897), p. 135; he gives other
evidence for this conclusion, pp. 1345.

2 See CM. v, pp. 77 and 88.

3 CM. v, pp. 190 (margin of 1250 annal), 196, and 216 (1251 annal).

4 v, p. 196.

60

RELATIONSHIP AND CHRONOLOGY

context, and a glance at the manuscript shows that they are
written, over an erasure. They occupy one line at the top of
column two on f . 243 a of J3, and the line which was erased in
order to make way for them has been rewritten at the foot of the
preceding column. The explanation of their curious position in
the text of the Chronica Major a is, simply, the convenience of
insertion here. It is inconceivable that Matthew would have
omitted this important piece of news from the text of his
chronicle, had it been available to him at the time of writing,
and we must conclude that he had already completed the annal
for 1250 and brought his chronicle to its elaborate close in jB,
before the news of the emperor's death reached him, that is to
say, before January or early February 1251. It is not possible to
ascertain when exactly Matthew took up his pen to continue the
text of B beyond f. 243 a; but in the course of the annal for 125 1
there are two allusions which show that it was not before I252. 1
In the rest of B, and in R, Matthew seems again to have been
writing a year or two after the events he records.

Our conclusions about B show that Sir Maurice Powicke was
mistaken in his belief that it was a copy of the Chronica Major a
written about the year 1255. His theory, too, that the Historia
Anglorum was, in the main, written before B is likewise mis-
taken, for we know that it was not begun until i25o: 2 the year
in which Matthew was busy completing the text of AB. How
long Matthew took to write the Historia Anglorum we do not
know, but it is probable that the penultimate annal, that for the
year 1252, was not written before 1255, since in copying from
B an allusion to Innocent IV as 'iste papa praesens' 3 Matthew,
in the annal for 1252 in the Historia Anglorum, omits the word
'praesens 5 , which suggests that, by the time he wrote these
words into the Historia Anglorum, Innocent IV was no longer
'the present Pope' (he died in December 1254). The writing of
the Historia Anglorum, then, probably extended over the years
1250-5.

There can be no doubt that the Historia Anglorum was almost

1 CM. v, pp. 236 and 239.

2 On the first page of the Historia Anglorum (i, p. 9) Matthew remarks:
* Nee usque ad tempora haec scribentis, videlicet annum gratiae MCCL est
inventus rex Angliae titulo sanctitatis insignitus.'

3 CM. v, p. 355, HA. in, p. 128.

61

MATTHEW PARIS

entirely copied, or rather abridged, from the actual manuscripts
A and 5; but, as this is an important conclusion, and one
directly contrary to Powicke's thesis, I must, at the risk of being
tedious, give some detailed evidence of its accuracy.

(i) In A, between the annal for 1066 and the end, Matthew
has made many small alterations to the text, which are followed
in the Historia Anglorum. Thus :

Original reading Matthew's altered Reading of the

of A reading of A Historia Anglorum

Normanniam Northanhumbriam Northambriam 1

inter praeter praeter 2

continentiam abstinentiam abstinentiam 3

castellis catallis catallis*

In Bj too, Matthew has made similar alterations, which are
followed in the Historia Anglorum. On f . 5 1 b, for instance, he
has altered 'balistarios' to * regales', and 'urbem' to urbi j : the
Historia Anglorum has 'regales' and 'urbi'. 5

(z) In the annal for i2oo 6 a line is omitted in B through
homoeoteleuton in the exemplar, a mistake which was not due
to Matthew himself, since he did not write this section of the
text of B. In copying this passage into the Historia Anglorum
Matthew noticed that there was an error and added some words
in order to make up the sense : 7 he did not write in the missing
line. It is clear that, in the exemplar of B (6), two lines must
have ended with the same syllables (in this case, of the words
' monasterium ' and 'ministerium'). The line must have been
present in this manuscript, for it occurs in O and W. 8 If the
Historia Anglorum had been copied from Z>, Matthew would
surely either not have made the error of omitting the line, or
he would have omitted it without realizing that he had done so.
The fact that he made up the sense proves that he noticed that
the line was missing in his exemplar; and B is the only manu-
script in which this line is omitted.

1 1094; CM. n, p. 35, note 2; HA. I, p. 47.

2 1135; CM. n, p. 161, note 7; HA. I, p. 249.

3 1178; CM. n, p. 305, note i; HA. I, p. 406.

4 1 1 88; CM. n, p. 330, note 5; HA. I, p. 446, and note i.

5 HA. n, pp. 213 and 211. 6 CM. n, p. 467.

7 HA. n, p. 88; see also CM. n, p. 467, note 6.

8 See fig. 2 above, p. 29.

62

RELATIONSHIP AND CHRONOLOGY

(3) In the course of the annal for 1217 in 5, Matthew inserts
the word 'nisi' into a sentence (f. 50 b), because his scribe had
mistakenly omitted the word ' cum ' ; and this correction is found
in the text of the Historia Anglorum. 1 The nisi reading is peculiar
to fi, and was due to a scribal error in it; the other manuscripts
have the reading cum?

(4) In the annal for 1222 a piece of direct speech is added by
Matthew in the margin of B (f . 58 a), and marked to be inserted
in the text. In the Historia Anglorum* it is incorporated into the
text in the exact place pointed out in B. Many other examples
of this could be cited.

Although the Historia Anglorum is for the most part derived
from AB, up to the annal for 1191 Matthew sometimes used
another manuscript for it (possibly i), perhaps at times when A
or B was being copied by the scribe of C or the Flores Historiarum.
Here are some examples of the Historia Anglorum following the
manuscripts of Roger Wendover against A and B y which make it
clear that some other manuscript was in use:

(1) Annal for ii5i. 4 The source (Robert de Monte), O, and
W all have ' etiam hi ' ; as also the Historia Anglorum. But A
has 'quidem'.

(2) Annal for n62. 5 Aline omitted in A through homoeo-
teleuton is in O, PF, and the Historia Anglorum y in identical
words.

(3) Annal for iigi. 6 Ralph de Diceto the source, O, and W
all have 'quasi'; as also the Historia Anglorum; but this is
omitted in B.

These examples show that Matthew sometimes used one of
the manuscripts of Roger Wendover (either OW or b) for the
Historia Anglorum; he also occasionally used C, for Madden
notices an entry in the Historia which was certainly taken from
this manuscript, 7 and there are probably other examples of its
use. In general, however, it is quite certain that Matthew
abridged the Historia Anglorum from the text of his Chronica
Majora in A and B.

1 ii, p. 206. 2 CM. m, p. 15, note 8. s 11, p. 251.

4 CM. ii, p. 186, note 6; and HA. I, p. 289.

5 CM. n, p. 220, note 2; and HA. i, p. 319.

6 CM. ii, p. 373, note 2; HA. n, p. 22. 7 HA. n, p. 119, note 5.

63

MATTHEW PARIS

Another problem concerning the relationship of B (as well
as C) and the Historia Anglorum now demands our attention.
Throughout B there are marginal notices in Matthew's hand,
consisting usually of a short phrase or single word such as vacat,
offendiculum or impertinens y pointing out passages in the text
which ought to be omitted, or which, at any rate, Matthew
evidently considered offensive or unnecessary. Powicke main-
tained that these directions do not refer to the Historia Anglorum,
but, in so far as they are genuine instructions and not mere
comments, to C. He says : l

Occasionally a marginal note added later in B and followed by
a sign reads 'impertinens Anglorum historiae usque hue', suggesting
that it was intended as a direction to omit certain passages from the
shorter history. Investigation shows, however, that notes of this
kind were added in a most capricious way and also that the writer was
not thinking of any particular book, for he wrote in other places
f pertinens historiae Wallensium, indirecte tamen Anglorum usque
ad hoc signum', and 'pertinet historiae Scotorum'. Moreover the
variant 'impertinens Anglis usque hue' also appears. ... In so far
as (these marginalia) . . . are directions, they were intended for the
guidance of the scribe who made Nero D v, the copy of A and B.

Professor Galbraith took an opposite view. He says : f . . . the
plain inference is that these notes were made on the Corpus MS.
[B] as a guide in the compilation of the Historia Anglorum.' *
Apart from rather vague comments, often in a single word,
these directions in the margins of B fall into two groups. In one
group the wording is usually 'vacat quia offendiculum', * offen-
diculum vacat', or 'cave quia offendiculum', and the letters are
usually written in red and spaced out vertically in the margin
against the offending passage of text. 3 In the other group the
marginal directions always contain the word 'impertinens',
frequently followed by the phrase ( Anglorum historiae', and
the limits of the passage thus referred to are defined by means
of signs. The passages referred to in the first group are invariably
offensive either to the king (usually), or to the pope (occasionally) ;

1 Powicke, c Compilation of the Chronica Major a\ inProc. Brit. Acad. xxx

(1944)7 PP. 156-7-

2 Galbraith, Roger Wendover and Matthew Paris, p. 29.

3 Other passages are marked, simply, offendiculum, but these directions
seem to have no especial significance.

6 4

RELATIONSHIP AND CHRONOLOGY

whereas those referred to in the second group of marginal
directions are inoffensive, and are usually concerned with affairs
on the Continent or in Wales or Scotland; or with legendary
matter, prodigies and visions. I have counted thirty-three
marginal directions of the first group between the annals for
1199 and 1247 in , and twenty of the passages thus indicated
are either omitted, or written in the margin, in C. The scribe
of C, therefore, evidently took some notice of these directions.
Sometimes he began to copy out the offending passage in his
text, then crossed out what he had written and wrote the whole
passage in the margin. In one place in B 1 a passage beginning
in the middle of a sentence is marked in the margin ' vacat, non
quia f alsum sed provocans ' ; and the text of C breaks off abruptly
at this point. Of the forty-seven passages in B marked with the
other type of marginal direction that having the word imper-
tinens and a sign to delimit the impertinent passage which I
have counted, thirty-nine are entirely omitted in the Historia
Anglorum, and the other eight severely abridged. Furthermore,
not a single one of these passages is omitted by the scribe of C.
It is thus evident that, while the first type of marginal direction
(vacat quia offendiculum etc.) was designed for the scribe of C,
the second type (impertinens etc.) was written into the margins
of B by Matthew to remind him of certain passages in the main
chronicle which could well be omitted from the Historia
Anglorum on the grounds of irrelevance.

So far we have found nothing to make us alter our conclusion
that AB is the earliest manuscript of the Chronica Major a\ that
it was completed up to 1250 early in 1251 ; and that the Historia
Anglorum was taken from it. The latter point has been confirmed
by our examination of the marginal directions in B. Sir Maurice
Powicke, however, based his conclusions about the relationship
of B and the Historia Anglorum partly on the evidence from
Matthew's references to documents in these manuscripts.
Throughout the latter part of the Chronica Major a, both in B
and in R (B.M. Royal MS. 14 C vii), there are numerous
references to documents as being in the Liber Additamentorum.
The earliest of these in the text of B is on f. 2i2b, 2 in the course

1 CM. in, p. 381.

2 CM. iv, p. 619. The reference is actually to the 'liber literarum' (sic).
5 65 VHP

MATTHEW PARIS

of the annal for 1247. From here onwards references to the
Liber Additamentorum in the text are of frequent occurrence,
and, as most of them are provided with a signum which is
usually still to be found in the Liber Additamentorum next to the
document referred to, there can be little doubt that these
references are to the existing leaves of the Liber Additamentorum.
In one case this is certain, for, under the year I252, 1 a document
is said in B to be in the Liber Additamentorum ' in cedulis margini
insitis' ; and it is still to be found there, on a strip of parchment
attached to one of the leaves.

Why did Matthew copy out his documents in full into B until
he reached the annal for 1247, and then suddenly begin to keep
them separate as a kind of supplement to his chronicle? The
answer to this question seems to be that he grew tired of the
work of transcription, and perhaps also found that the texts of
the documents in B were adding unnecessarily to the length of
that manuscript. The diagram facing this page (fig. 5) shows
the number of references to the Liber Additamentorum in the
text of each annal of the Chronica Majora, and the number of
documents copied out in full, between the annals for 1235 and
1259. Now in the five annals 1242-6 Matthew copied out fifty-
nine documents in full into B, whereas in the five annals 1248-52,
out of a total of thirty-nine documents, only eighteen are copied
out in J5, and the remainder are referred to as being in the Liber
Additamentorum. This, I think, shows that Matthew thought of
creating the Liber Additamentorum, probably as a labour-saving
device as well as to shorten B, while he was actually writing that
manuscript. The Liber Additamentorum, in fact, seems to have
originated as a gradually growing collection of documents which
Matthew had omitted from B] and not, as Powicke thought, as
a collection of documents which gradually dwindled as its con-
tents were copied into J3. 2 This conclusion is confirmed by the
presence, in B, before the annal for 1247, of a number of
marginal references to the Liber Additamentorum. Had the
Liber Additamentorum already been in existence while Matthew
was writing the earlier part of B (up to the annal for 1247),

1 CM. v, p. 312. The reference is in the margin of B.

2 Powicke, ' Compilation of the Chronica Major a J , Proc. Brit. Acad. xxx
(1944), p. 153.

66

RELATIONSHIP AND CHRONOLOGY

he would surely have inserted his references to it in the text.
No doubt the documents concerned were at first omitted from
B because Matthew thought he could dispense with them; but
when, later, he conceived the idea of a special supplement of
documents, he would naturally include them in it, and go back
in B writing references to them in the margin in the appropriate
places.

20 1

l'O ij>- 'oo \a\ I

CO-CM CM <M

Fig. 5. Diagram to show the number of documents per annal written out in
full in B (white) ; and the number of references to documents as being in the
Liber Additamentorum (shaded).

Seven documents are referred to in the margins of B before
the textual references to the Liber Additamentorum begin during
the annal for 1247. In the case of three of these documents, the
reference is a straightforward one to the Liber Additamentorum,
and requires no further discussion, but the references to the
other four documents need detailed examination. The first of
these documents is said in one place to be ' at the end of the book ' ;
but later on in B it is referred to as being 'in the Liber Addita-
mentorum'^ In the case of the second document, there are again
two references in the margins of B. In the first the document is
said to be 'at the end of the book', but these words have been
partially erased; and in the second the document is said to be
'in the book which is a continuation of this one' ('qui huic est
continuandus'). 2 The third document is said to be 'in the book

1 CM. m, pp. 233, note 5, and 620.

2 CM. iv, pp. 400, note 4, and 427.

6 7

5-2

MATTHEW PARIS

of letters ' and also * in the Liber Additamentorum ', but the words
'in the book of letters' are on an erasure, and the words 'in the
Liber Additamentorum' have been added to the reference later. 1
In the case of the last of these documents the reference is to ' the
end of the book', and has been run through with a pen. 2 The
only possible conclusion from these altered references seems to
be that the documents they refer to were at one time at the end
of J5, and that they were later removed from that manuscript
and kept in a separate volume called the Liber Additamentorum.
We seem to be arriving at a complicated situation. Apparently
Matthew started a supplement of documents while he was
writing the annal for 1247 in J3, and yet, later, when he wrote
these marginal references into B, he seems to have given up the
Liber Additamentorum and to be keeping his documents at the
end of B. Later still, it appears that he resuscitated the Liber
Additamentorum and had to alter his references to the 'end of
the book' into references to the Liber Additamentorum.

The Liber Additamentorum still exists, and we cannot do better
at this juncture than to turn to it to see what light it throws on
the meaning of these references, and, consequently, on its own
origins. The first document in our group of four is written out
on an independent bifolium bound up near the end of the Liber
Additamentorum with some odd leaves and matter not originally
belonging to it. It has perhaps been misplaced. The other three
documents now occupy ff. 87-88 b of the Liber Additamentorum,
where they follow each other in the order they are referred to
in By near the beginning of a homogeneous group of documents
extending over two separate quires of the Liber Additamentorum
(12 and part of what is now 13), from f. 85 to xoob. 3 The
documents extend continuously over these leaves, except for
a break between ff. 97 and 98, where a new quire now begins,
and where the continuity of the text is also interrupted. But
a note on f. 94 a, in which Matthew directs the reader to a
document on f. 99 with the words 'verte v folia sequential
shows that all the documents now on ff. 85-ioob of the Liber
Additamentorum are probably in the same order in which they
were originally written by Matthew. This whole group of docu-

1 CM. rv, p. 518, and notes 3 and 4. 2 CM. iv, p. 586, note 2.
3 For this group of documents, see below, pp. 83-4.

68

RELATIONSHIP AND CHRONOLOGY

ments might therefore easily have been removed from the end
of B and inserted in the Liber Additamentorum. It comprises
every document referred to in B up to (and including) the annal
for 1250 as being in the Liber Additamentorum, with the excep-
tion of the first document in our group with altered references
which, as we saw, is now at the end of the Liber Additamentorum
and evidently misplaced; one document which is no longer to be
found in the Liber Additamentorum^ and three referred to in the
margins of B, the references to which were evidently inserted
after 1250. The documents in this group are written into the
Liber Additamentorum in roughly chronological order and extend
in date from 1242 to 1250; there is not a single document in the
group of later date than 1250. Furthermore, these documents
were evidently written out either in or before 1250, as the
following statement in Matthew's hand on f. 99 shows. 1

It can therefore be gathered from this and other letters that, by
the grace of God, the most Christian King of the French, Louis. . .in
the year of our Lord 1250 has become (factus est) lord of Damietta,
Babylon, Cairo, Alexandria and the transmarine shores. Those who
persevered in this most glorious battle and in the hardship of the
journey are universally considered fortunate; and the prayers for
him which were offered up to the Lord are believed to have had
a glorious outcome.

This passage must have been written before the news of the
disastrous failure of Louis's expedition had reached Matthew
Paris, and soon after the arrival of the letters which announced
his success, that is in 1249-50 ; 2 and, since it forms part of the
text of f. 99 of the Liber Additamentorum^ near the end of our
group of documents, we can be sure that they were written out
in or before 1250. This conclusion points to the probability that
the present ff. 85-100 of the Liber Additamentorum were
originally at the end of J3, and it is not surprising, therefore,
to find on the lower margin of the verso of f. 100 an erased quire
number written in exactly the same style as those now in B, with
the number in red, surrounded with blue decoration, which
might well have been xx. Now if these documents had been
added to B when that manuscript was completed up to the end

1 CM. vi, p. 169. 2 See CM. v, pp. 118 and 138; and 147.

6 9

MATTHEW PARIS

of the annal for 1250, they probably would have been given the
quire number xx, since, as we have seen, the annal for 1250 ends
on the penultimate leaf of quire xix. It seems, therefore, that
when Matthew had completed AB up to this point, and divided
it into two, he attached this quire of documents to the end of J9;
and presumably it remained there until he decided to continue
the text of his Chronica Major a beyond the annal for 1250.

We are now in a position to attempt to describe the writing of
B and the early history of the Liber Additamentorum. While he
was writing the annal for 1247 in B, Matthew evidently decided
to keep a separate appendix of documents. In his first reference
to this appendix, he called it the liber liter arum] 1 but after this
it is invariably called the Liber Additamentorum. When he had
finished AB up to 1250, the point where he intended to bring
his Chronica Majora to a close, Matthew added his ornamental
rubrication at the top of the pages, from 1066 up to the end
(1250). Soon after this, however, he decided that the single
volume AB was too bulky. He therefore separated it into two ;
renumbered the quires in J3; and added his appendix of docu-
ments after the last quire of B. Among these documents were
several dating from before 1247, which he had not referred to in
the text of jB; and it must have been at this time that Matthew
went back and added references to them in the margins of B
before the annal for 1247^ Since he had just added them to the
end of B, it is only natural that, instead of referring to them as
being in the Liber Additamentorum in the same way as the
references to documents in the text of B from 1247 onwards,
he referred to them as being 'at the end of the book'. It is
natural, too, that he should not trouble to alter the textual
references to the Liber Additamentorum, since, though the docu-
ments were now at the end of 5, he probably still thought of
them as constituting a Liber Additamentorum. When he decided
to take up his pen and continue B after 1250, Matthew had to
remove the documents from it; and it was this removal which,
no doubt, caused him to alter the marginal references to

1 Sic; CM. iv, p. 619.

2 See above, pp. 66-7. While the textual references to the Liber Addita-
mentorum, 1247-50, are copied into C, those in the margin before 1247 & re
not, no doubt because they were inserted after the transcription of C in
c. 1250.

70

RELATIONSHIP AND CHRONOLOGY

documents at the end of the book into references to the Liber
Additamentorum, and in two cases to add new references to this
effect. 1 To this removal, too, was due the final appearance of
the Liber Additamentorum as a separate, independent volume.
When he wrote the annal for 1251 into 5, and had finally
removed his appendix of documents from it, Matthew could
well refer to the Liber Additamentorum^ as he does during this
annal, with the words : ' sed ea in libro Additamentorum, ut hoc
volumen deoneretur, annotantur.' 2

We must now take leave of J3, and turn our attention again to
the Historia Anglorum, which contains a number of references to
documents both 'in libro Additamentorum' and 'in cronicis
majoribus S. Albani', though without the signs which are used
so extensively in B. Sir Maurice Powicke supposed that none
of the references in the Historia Anglorum before the annal
for 1249 referred to the actual manuscript B. He was led to
this conclusion by the fact that, in the course of the annal for
1249 i n t ' ie Historia Anglorum, a document is said to be in the
Chronica Major a at a certain sign; and the sign and the docu-
ment are still to be found there, while none of the earlier
references in the Historia Anglorum to documents in the Chronica
Majora is provided with signs. 3 Powicke also noticed that a
number of documents said in the Historia Anglorum to be in the
Liber Additamentorum are no longer to be found there, but are
in the text of B ; and he concluded from this that the documents
were in the Liber Additamentorum when the Historia Anglorum
was written, but were removed thence later when Matthew
copied them into B. But, as we have seen, Powicke was wrong
in supposing that most of the Historia Anglorum was written
before B y and we must find some other explanation of these
apparently erroneous references. Owing to the fact that very
many of the references in the Historia Anglorum to documents
elsewhere have been erased and altered by Matthew, an analysis
of them is bound to be incomplete. Wherever possible, however,
Madden made out the original reference, as well as the subse-
quent one which Matthew frequently added on a piece of vellum

1 See above, pp. 67-8. 2 CM. v, p. 229.

3 For this and what follows, see Powicke, ' Compilation of the Chronica
Majora' ', Proc. Brit. Acad. xxx (1944), pp. 153-5.

71

MATTHEW PARIS

stuck down over its predecessor. Out of a probable total of
eighty explicit references to other manuscripts in the text of the
Historia Anglorum, sixty-six have been altered into vague general
references of the type 'in libris plurimorum', 'in libris mul-
torum', 'in libris religiosorum', 'in multis locis Angliae 5 , 'in
aliquibus Aquilonarium rotulis', 'in original! 5 , 'in rotulis scac-
carii 5 , 'in rotulis vicecomitum', 'in autentico papae', etc. Of
these altered references, ten were originally to the Chronica
Major a: namely, 'in majoribus cronicis S. Albani', 'in historia
magna huius opusculi', 'in magnis cronicis S. Albani', etc.;
and twenty-seven to the Liber Additamentorum, namely, 'in
libro additamentorum', 'in libro suplementorum vel addita-
mentorum', etc. 1

It is impossible to explain this wholesale alteration of specific
references to the Chronica Major a and the Liber Additamentorum
on the grounds that the references were correct when first made,
but became incorrect when the documents referred to were
transferred by Matthew from the Liber Additamentorum into J3,
because (quite apart from the fact that B was written before the
Historia Anglorum) among those so altered were at least ten
correct references to documents as being in the Chronica Majora,
and at least six correct references to documents in the Liber
Additamentorum which are still there. This alteration of references
to documents in the Historia Anglorum extends only to the annal
for 1251. Before it Matthew referred the reader to the Liber
Additamentorum or the Chronica Majora for a document when-
ever he had an opportunity; after this annal many documents are
mentioned in the Historia Anglorum but without any reference
to where they can be found, and some are referred to in terms
as vague as those used in the second set of references mentioned
above. Matthew evidently changed his method of referring to
documents before he had finished writing the Historia Anglorum,

1 According to Powicke (' Compilation of the Chronica Majora ', Proc. Brit.
Acad. xxx (1944), p. 153), Matthew referred to the Liber Additamentorum as
' the book of many things, the book of very many things (liber plurimorum)
and so on'. But in fact the Liber Additamentorum is always referred to as
the liber additamentorum, the liber suplementorum, or the liber literarum.
Perhaps Powicke mistook the phrases ' in libris plurimorum * and ' in libris
multorum' for references to the Liber Additamentorum^ though they clearly
mean 'in most people's books' and 'in the books of many people'.

72

RELATIONSHIP AND CHRONOLOGY

and probably while he was writing the annal for 1251. At this
point he for some reason decided to give up referring explicitly
to documents as being in the Chronica Majora or the Liber
Additamentorum, and took the trouble to go back through his
text erasing the explicit references wherever he found them.
(He overlooked fourteen.) In this way he brought the Historia
Anglorum into line with the Flores Historiarum, in Matthew's
section of which there are some vague references to documents
as being elsewhere ('apud S. Albanum', 'in regio thesauro',
etc.), but no explicit ones. It is worth noting, too, that just the
same kind of vague reference occurs in the Abbreviatio Chroni-
corum. The alteration of these references in the Historia Anglorum,
then, is of no significance in our discussion of the relationship
of that work to B and the Liber Additamentorum ; it was carried
out with the immediate object of expunging from the Historia
Anglorum all the explicit references to Matthew's other manu-
scripts. What the ultimate object was it is difficult to say, but
it may not be mere coincidence that Matthew's expurgation of
the Historia Anglorum, that is to say his erasure of many offensive
passages and their replacement with milder or harmless ones,
likewise ends in the course of the annal for I25I. 1 If, as is
possible, these two series of alterations were made at the same
time, then it seems likely that they were made for the same
reason, and that Matthew intended to make the manuscript fit
for someone outside St Albans, 2 for whom references to docu-
ments in his other manuscripts would be useless.

We may now proceed with our discussion of the original set
of references to documents in the Historia Anglorum. The text of
fifty of these can be ascertained with a reasonable degree of
certainty, thirty-eight of which referred to the Liber Additamen-
torum, and twelve to the Chronica Majora. Of the thirty-eight
referring to the Liber Additamentorum (or liber suplementorum),
about thirty refer to documents which are in fact in B, and
which were undoubtedly in B when the Historia Anglorum was
copied from it. What is the explanation of this curious fact?
Either, it seems, Matthew intended, when he wrote the Historia
Anglorum, to collect all these documents into the Liber Addita-

1 See below, pp. 121-4.

2 Madden (HA. m, p. xxxii) suggested the king.

73

MATTHEW PARIS

mentorum at some later date, or the references to the Liber
Additamentorum do not refer to the separate Liber Additamen-
torum as we know it now, but to the actual manuscript B, of
which, as we have seen, the Liber Additamentorum formed part
at the time when the Historia Anglorum was copied from it.
Now the first of these explanations seems most unlikely, for it
implies that Matthew planned to make the Liber Additamentorum
an independent work: a great collection of all his documentary
material. Yet all the evidence points to its continued use as an ap-
pendix of documents only, and certainly, if such an intention
ever existed, it can only have been a momentary one, for Matthew
continued using the Liber Additamentorum as an appendix to his
main chronicle until shortly before his death, and there is no
sign at all that he ever attempted to turn it into a grand collection
of all his documents. On the other hand, the second possible
explanation, that, at the time when he was writing the Historia
Anglorum, Matthew thought of B, since the documents were
then at the end of it, as his Liber Additamentorum, although
prima facie equally fantastic, is supported by some quite sub-
stantial evidence. In the early part of the Historia Anglorum,
up to the annal for 1188, all the references are to documents
as being 'in cronicis S. Albani 5 , 'in magnis cronicis', etc., and
there is not one to the Liber Additamentorum.^ The documents
thus referred to are all in A, the manuscript from which Matthew
was copying, and which at this time was probably still joined
to B; and we may assume from these references that he thought
of the undivided AB as 'the great St Albans chronicle'. If
we look at the Historia Anglorum from 1189 onwards, we find
that all the recoverable references to documents in the text,
between the annals for 1189 and 1246 inclusive, are to the Liber
Additamentorum: there is not a single one to the magna cronica.
Yet all the documents thus referred to are in B the very manu-
script from which Matthew was copying when he wrote these
references in the Historia Anglorum. It can hardly be a co-
incidence that, in the early part of the Historia (up to 1 188), the
references are to the 'Chronica Majora'; and in the part taken
from B, to the Liber Additamentorum', while the documents
referred to are all in A and B respectively, and it seerns that we
1 One is possibly to the liber epistolarum; see HA. I, p. 345, note 6.

74

RELATIONSHIP AND CHRONOLOGY

must conclude that Matthew split AB into two while he was
writing the Historia Anglorum, and that after this operation,
S, since it contained his own continuation (1235-50) of the
'St Albans chronicle', as well as his appendix of additional
documents, to which he had already often referred as the Liber
Additamentorum, was regarded as constituting the additional
book itself.

We have seen that, when Matthew decided to continue the
text of B after 1250, he removed his additional documents from
it, and made them into a separate Liber Additamentorum. Now
this change is reflected in a change in the character of the
references to documents in the Historia Anglorum. Let us
imagine, for a moment, the actual process of writing the Historia.
Matthew has before him the text of J3, to which he refers the
reader from time to time as he abridges the Historia Anglorum
from it, for documents which he does not trouble to copy out in
full. Let us suppose, as we have given some grounds for sup-
posing, that he is in the habit of referring to B as the * Liber
Additamentorum'. Now when he arrives at the annal for 1247,
he comes across, first of all, a marginal reference in B to a docu-
ment as being in the Liber Additamentorum^ and, soon after-
wards, he meets with the earliest references in the text of B to the
Liber Additamentorum. He copied these references more or less
word for word into the Historia Anglorum? They could be left
unaltered, as references to the Liber Additamentorum, since the
documents to which they referred were still in the end of B\
and in the course of the annal for 1248 in the Historia Anglorum
Matthew still refers to documents in B as being in the Liber
Additamentorum. Soon after this, however, he must have
decided to continue the text of his Chronica Major a in J5, and
he was forced to remove the additional documents from it, and
to reconstitute them finally as a separate Liber Additamentorum.
This entailed a radical change in his terminology, for he had to
give up calling B the Liber Additamentorum. It is no doubt for
this reason that, in the course of the annal for 1249 in the
Historia Anglorum, we find a reference in the text (the first
since before the annal for 1188 when A was the exemplar)
'majoribus cronicis S. Albani'; and a sign is drawn in the
1 CM. iv, p. 609. 2 in, pp. 22, note 7; and 27, note 3.

75

MATTHEW PARIS

margin which is also found in the margin of B next to the
document concerned. 1 But Matthew evidently had difficulty in
remembering his new distinction between B and the Liber
Additamentorum> for on two occasions in this same annal in the
Historia Anglorum he mistakenly reverts to the old terminology,
and calls B the Liber Additamentorum? In the second of these
references his memory slipped badly, for it is to the very same
document which he had already correctly said, earlier in this
annal, 3 to be 'in cronicis majoribus', which we know, from the
sign, to have meant the actual manuscript B. The remaining
references in the Historia Anglorum are 'correct'; that is, those
to the Liber Additamentorum refer to documents in the existing
Liber (there are four or five in all), and the only reference to the
Chronica Major a is to a document in B. To this last we ought to
add two marginal references, no doubt inserted into the Historia
after Matthew's change of terminology, in both of which a docu-
ment in B is said to be in the Chronica Majora.^

Although this supposed change of terminology by Matthew
appears perhaps rather far-fetched, it does seem to be the only
hypothesis which fits all the evidence. It is borne out, too, by
the fact that, in the case of one of the references to a document
as being in the Liber Additamentorum when it was actually in J5,
Matthew has later added the words ' vel in magnis cronicis ' ; and
in the case of another, he afterwards inserted the words 'et
cronicorum S. Albani' under the words f libro Additamentorum'
of the original reference: in the book of Additamenta and
St Albans chronicles'. 5

The rather detailed discussions of this chapter may now be
briefly summarized. Matthew first wrote out the Chronica
Major a in AB, finishing its text at the end of the annal for 1250,
early in 1251. During the writing of the last fpur annals, he had
omitted a number of documents from the text, and referred to
them as being in the Liber Additamentorum. When AB had been
completed to the year 1250, he split it into two, altered the quire
numbers in J3, and added the documents, to which he had been

1 HA. in, p. 45, note 8. 2 in, pp. 47, note 5, and 53.

3 HA. in, p. 45. 4 ii, pp. 440 and 494, note 4.

5 HA. n, p. 500, note 5; and in, p. 16, note i.

7 6

RELATIONSHIP AND CHRONOLOGY

referring as the Liber Additamentorum^ at the end of B. It must
have been at about this time that C was copied, by a scribe,
from B. Work on the Historia Anglorum had been started in
1250, and probably proceeded slowly, as it was written by
Matthew himself. Meanwhile some further references to docu-
ments had been added to the margins of B before the annal for
1247, and, since the Liber Additamentorum now formed part of
B, these references were at first to 'the end of the book'; but
they were altered to references to the Liber Additamentorum
after Matthew had removed his documents from the end of J5,
to make room for his continuation of the text of the Chronica
Major a (125 1 onwards) in that manuscript. When this happened
we do not exactly know, but it was probably in the years 1252-3,
and not before the writing of the Historia Anglorum had reached
the annal for 1249, f r > U P to then, in the Historia, B is referred
to as the Liber Additamentorum. The most important conclusion
that emerges is that the writing of the Chronica Major a in B
and R, from about the annal for 1245 to the end, was throughout
only a year or two behind events. Far from being a late copy,
made at the end of Matthew's life, B is, at any rate from the
annal for 1245 onwards, the author's original, autograph account
of contemporary events.

77

CHAPTER V

THE 'LIBER ADDITAMENTORUM'

IN the course of the preceding chapter much reference has
been made to Matthew's Liber Additamentorum^ and we have
seen that it began its life as a small group of documents at
the end of B. The existing Liber Additamentorum contains many
of the documents referred to by Matthew in his historical manu-
scripts, as well as others which he does not mention elsewhere.
It contains, too, a collection of St Albans charters and papal
privileges; Matthew's Gesta Abbatum and Vitae Offarum; and
much miscellaneous material. Owing to the fact that many of the
leaves are no longer in their original quires, it presents a difficult
problem for the palaeographer; but its structure is important
because of the evidence it affords of the way in which this unique
collection of historical material was gathered together, and,
consequently, I have tried to set it out in diagrammatic form
(see fig. 6).

If we are to reconstruct this manuscript in anything like its
original form, the first stage must be to rearrange the contents
according to the late medieval foliation which still in part sur-
vives. We know that this earlier foliation goes back to the
fourteenth or early fifteenth century, because there are several
references in British Museum Cotton MS. Tiberius E vi (the
St Albans Liber Memorandorum) to a Liber de Gestis Abbatum,
which give the. correct folio number for the earlier foliation of
our Liber Additamentorum ; and these references occur on ff. 260-
63 of the Liber Memorandorum, a section of the manuscript
written c. 1400. We can omit, from our reconstruction, the
group of folios 161-6 inclusive, since these were probably added
to the manuscript in modern times. This quire certainly once
belonged to some other book, for on f. 161 we have the signature
of Sir Robert Cotton, which suggests that in his time this leaf
prefaced some other manuscript in his possession; and in any
case these leaves differ from those in the rest of the book in size
and lay-out, and are foliated 2-6 in an early hand. Here, then,

78

.

IV

, 1

V

J L

2

-- }

".

! u

IV

J -1

T

....

J

3

^ "1

? Apparently three odd leaves
stuck together

38 : inserted later by
Matthew Paris

"El

81: a fragment

85 : once belonged
to quire 12

n T

Erased quire
number, perhaps
once xx

Fig. 6. Diagram to show the structure of the Liber
Additamentorum. Quires 1-13.

79

J

124, 125, 129: three
leaves stuck together ;
124-5 probably once
a bifolium

r6 4
1 66

164: a fragment

169: a fragment
not shown here

172-4: odd leaves
added in fourteenth
century

-o.v.o

- o.vi.o

- o.vii.o

- o . viii . o

175-8: fourteenth-century
matter

The remaining leaves are mostly
odd ; many of them stuck together.
188-91 make two bifolia and 193-4
is a bifolium

144
H5,

Fig. 6. Quires 14-25.

Fig. 6. The foliation used in this diagram is that of Luard (CM. vi). The
original arrangement of the quires has been much disturbed by subsequent
rebinding, and in the diagram I have followed the present division into
quires, though for the sake of clarity I have made more divisions than are
really necessary: for instance, quires 16, 17, and 18 in the diagram might
well be regarded as forming a single gathering. Up to f. 160, leaves over
which the text runs continuously are linked by a vertical line running down
the left of each quire diagram. In cases where two leaves have been stuck
together to make a bifolium, the line representing the sheet of parchment in
the manuscript is broken by dots. In many cases leaves stuck together in this
way probably originally formed bifolia, which later came apart and then had
to be repaired. Quire 23 did not originally belong to this manuscript (see
above, p. 78).

80

THE 'LIBER ADDITAMENTORUM'

is a rough list of the contents of the Liber Additamentorum as it
probably was in the fourteenth century, within a hundred years
of Matthew's death. Luard's foliation, used in his edition of
the Liber Additamentorum in volume vi of the Chronica Major a,
is placed in brackets after the fourteenth-century foliation. 1

1-25 (2-26) Vitae Offarum, with a short tract Cum Danorum

rabies.

27-39 (148-60) St Albans charters and papal privileges.
4~73 (3~^3) P art I f the Gesta Abbatum, with some documents

written on spare leaves at the end of the last quire.
74-83 (64-73) P art M f the Gesta Abbatum, with documents of

1255-7-

84-115 (74-106) Documents of 1242-59.
116-19 (171-4) Fourteenth- century matter.
120-33 (107-20) Documents of 1252-4.
134-41 (121-8) Miscellaneous documents, many of 1254.
142-50 (175-83) Mostly fourteenth-century matter, with some odd

leaves.

151-3 (27-9) Tracts on St Alban etc.
154-74 (129-47) Miscellaneous, including Matthew's tract on the

St Albans gems etc.

176-7 (167-8) The charges against Hubert de Burgh (1239).
178 on (184 on) Miscellaneous,

The next stage in our reconstruction of the original Liber
Additamentorum is to omit all the fourteenth-century matter, as
well as the odd leaves which have only fragmentary material,
and which contribute nothing towards our knowledge of the
structure and history of the manuscript. We may omit, too,
the tracts on St Alban (ff. 27-9 of Luard's foliation), and divide
the documentary material into more homogeneous groups. The
Liber Additamentorum must have been arranged roughly as
follows when Matthew died.

Luard's
foliation

2-26 Vitae Offarum and Cum Danorum rabies.
148-60 St Albans charters and papal privileges.
30-63 Part i of the Gesta Abbatum, with attached documents.

1 Luard (ed.), CM. vi, pp. 491-523, published a full description of this
manuscript, and, in all the references to it in this book, his foliation, given
there, is used.

6 8l VHP

MATTHEW PARIS

Luard's
foliation
64-73 Part II of the Gesta Abbatum, written in 1255, followed

by documents in rough chronological order of 1255-7.
74-84 Documents of 1256-9.
85-100 Documents of 1242-50, written out in or before 1250.

Ff. 167-8 perhaps once preceded f. 85.
101-5 Miscellaneous documents of 1250 and 1256-7.
107-20 Documents, mostly of 1252-4. A study of the references

in the Chronica Major a shows that these documents

were thus arranged when the text of the annal for

1254 was written into R.

1 2 1-8 Miscellaneous documents, including a number of 1254.
129-36 Miscellaneous material of 1257, together with some later

material added after Matthew's death.
144-6 Matthew's tract on the gems etc. Once followed 63 ;

moved when Part n of the Gesta Abbatum was inserted

into its present position.
167-8 The charges against Hubert de Burgh.

We are now in a position to try to describe the way in which
the documentary material in the Liber Additamentorum was put
together. The Gesta Abbatum was written in two parts, the first
of which extends from the beginning to the death of Abbot
William in 1235. After this there follow some documents,
written on the spare leaves remaining at the end of quire 8.
The second part of the Gesta Abbatum begins on the first leaf of
the next quire (f. 64). It consists of a short description of the
abbacy of John of Hertford (1235-63), and the continuous text
breaks down on f. 68 b, at a point where Matthew says: 1

Moreover this Abbot John . . . has never, I say, since the time of his
creation up to the twentieth year of his rule (in which year this page
was written by Brother Matthew Paris, who does not presume to lay
down the law (diffinire) concerning the future), alienated the posses-
sions of his church.

The text of part two of the Gesta Abbatum continues beyond
this point in the form of short paragraphs recording isolated
events, but it soon gives way to documents ; at first of domestic
interest only, but, from 71 onwards, of general interest as well.
These continue until f. 84, but in Matthew's hand only to f. 82.

1 Wats, p. 145.

82

THE 'LIBER ADDITAMENTORUM'

The dates of the documents on these leaves, which follow
straight on from the St Albans documents of various dates with
which the second part of the Gesta Abbatum closes, are significant.
They begin with the year 1255, and continue in rough chrono-
logical order to f. 82, where the last of this group in Matthew's
hand is the latest document written by him into the Liber
Additamentorum^ dated March 1259. The last two leaves of the
quire (f. 85 belongs to the next quire) have been used for some
documents of 1258 not written by Matthew. Now these docu-
ments, dating from 1255 to 1259, f^ 1 *! a homogeneous group
collected and written into the Liber Additamentorum by Matthew
between 1255 and his death; for they carry straight on from the
concluding section of the second part of the Gesta Abbatum,
which we know, from Matthew's statement translated above,
was written in 1255. The only interloper in this series of docu-
ments is one of 1252 on f. yob ; but an examination of the manu-
script shows that this was inserted after the main series was
written, and not by Matthew Paris. To this group of documents
we must add those on ff. 129-39. These consist of a number in
Matthew's hand, of 1257, and some others written into the book
by his assistant, shortly after his death. As can be seen from
fig. 6, Matthew's numbering of ff. 134-7 follows on from that of
ff. 76-7 (though the leaf numbered o. iiii. o is not now to be
found); and indeed it appears that the whole quire, ff. 129-43
(some blank leaves, filled up in the fourteenth century, originally
followed the documents on ff. 12939), was once connected with
ff. 74-84. The group of documents, then, which Matthew wrote
into the Liber Additamentorum between 1255 an< ^ ^ s death,
extends over ff. 71-82 and 129-36; while the documents added
to this group shortly after his death extend over ff. 83-4 and
136-9. Although, owing to subsequent rearrangement of the
manuscript, it is impossible to ascertain exactly how ff. 129-39
were connected with ff . 74-84, it is very probable that all the docu-
ments in this group were originally in rough chronological order.
A second easily identifiable group of documents, extending
over ff. 85-100, follows the one just described. The handwriting
of this group looks earlier than that of most of the rest of the
book; it is tidier and more controlled. The earliest document
in this group dates from 1242, the latest from 1250, and most

83 6-2

MATTHEW PARIS

of the documents in it are of 1247-50. The arrangement is again
roughly chronological. On the verso of the last leaf of the group
(f. 100) is the erased quire number which has already been
mentioned 1 as being apparently identical with those in J3, and,
as we have seen, this group of documents contains almost all
those referred to in jB up to the annal for 1250 as being in the
Liber Additamentorum. It is, in fact, the group of documents
added by Matthew to the end of B, which was later removed to
form the documentary nucleus of the Liber Additamentorum.

So far we have identified the first group of documents which
went to make up the Liber Additamentorum, and the last. The
documents of the intermediate years, 1250-4, are rather more
difficult to arrange into well-ordered groups. One group seems
to extend over S. 101-5, but the documents are not in any
particular order, for the first few date from 1250, with one of
1251, while there follow documents of various dates (1247-54)
which are repeated elsewhere in the book, and then a series of
documents of the years 1255-6, with one at the end dating from
1257 which appears to have been added some time later.
Following these, however, is a better defined group extending
over ff. 107-20, mostly of 1252-4. Apart from one or two
documents of earlier date, the chronological order of this group
is only seriously disturbed by a document of 1255, but this has
almost certainly been inserted later, and was not written by
Matthew himself. Lastly, there is another group of documents
on ff. 1 2 1-8, of rather miscellaneous date, though about half of
them belong to 1254.

The identification of these groups of documents shows that the
Liber Additamentorum was not compiled in an entirely hap-
hazard fashion, but that Matthew collected his documents more
or less in chronological order, probably as he obtained them;
and, apart from the group of documents written in or before
1250,2 which was originally at the end of B y there is every
indication that the documentary material inthe Liber Additamen-
torum dates from after 1250. On the verso of f, 63, in the lower
margin, is a pencil note in Matthew's hand which is now partly
illegible ; but it is still possible to make out the words : * . . . abbatis
Johannis'. This could be taken to imply that the second part of
1 See above, p. 69. 2 See pp. 68-70 above.

8 4

THE 'LIBER ADDITAMENTORUM'

the Gesta Abbatum, which now begins on the next page, was not
originally in this position. Indeed we know from other evidence
that at one time the tract on the St Albans gems, etc., followed
f. 63; for on f. 62 a Matthew says that some verses on Abbot
William are written out three leaves further on, but they are
now to be found on f. 145, where the tract on the gems begins.
It is therefore very probable that the second part of the Gesta
Abbatum, which Matthew was writing in 1255, together with the
documents which he added to it dating from 1255 to 1259, had
its original place in the book after the last group of documents
mentioned above (ff. 121-8), which includes a number of 1254,
and immediately before the other documents of 1257-9 on
ff. 129-39. It seems likely that the '1254' group originally
followed, as it still does, the group of documents dating from
1252-4. The arrangement of the bulk of the documentary
material, before Matthew moved the second part of the Gesta
Abbatum and the documents attached to it, would thus have
been as follows :

ff. 85-100 Documents of 1 242-50, originally at the end of B.

ff. 107-20 Documents of 12524.

ff. 121-8 Miscellaneous documents, about half of 1254.

ff. 64-84 Documents of 1255-9, preceded by Part n of

and 129-39 the Gesta Abbatum.

The Liber Additamentorum, then, was evidently a reasonably
well-ordered collection of documents and extracts dating from
c. 1244-59, which Matthew put together in the first place at the
end of B, and which, after e. 1251-3, constituted a separate
book which was added to steadily until his death; the documents
being copied into it more or less in the order in which he
obtained them.

Besides documentary material, the Liber Additamentorum
contains two historical works of domestic importance, the Gesta
Abbatum and the Vitae Offarum. Although I shall postpone a
general discussion of these until a later chapter, something
ought to be said here about their date and relationship to
Matthew's other manuscripts. In view of the fact that the
Gesta Abbatum is nowhere mentioned in the Chronica Majora,

85

MATTHEW PARIS

yet is referred to on a number of occasions in the Historia
Anglomm, it would seem probable that, when AB was written,
Matthew had not yet begun the Gesta Abbatum. This is confirmed
when the text of the Gesta Abbatum is compared with that of
AB, for we find a number of cases where it seems to be taken
from AB 9 and occasionally one of Matthew's additions to Roger
Wendover in AB has found its way into the text of the Gesta
Abbatum. In the two following examples I have italicized
Matthew's additions in AB. 1

1 i ) Chronica Major a ; part of the annal for 1 2 1 4 : 2 ' Eodem tempore
Johannes abbas ecclesiae sancti Albani, in die beati Kenelmi regis et
martyris, decimo nono anno praelationis suae, plenus dierum, sanctitate
et religione insignis, scientia ad plenum eruditus . . . .'

The Gesta Abbatum : 3 * Transit igitur ab hoc mundo praenominatus
abbas Johannes, de exilio videlicet ad patriam, de naufragio ad
portum, anno domini MCCXIIII die beati Kenelmi regis et
martyris . . . anno vero praelationis suae XIX, sanctitate et religione
insignis, dierum plenus. . ..'

(2) Chronica Major a; part of the annal for iziy: 4 'Quibus ita
gestis dictus Falcasius cum suis praedonibus excommunicatis et
spoliis nimis dampnosis, et captivis tractis turpiterque vinctis . . . .'

The Gesta Abbatum: 5 f Et sic ipse Falco et sui complices cum
captivorum numerositate quam secum trahebant, diversis praediis
onerati . . . .'

These parallels show that the first part of the Gesta Abbatum
was not written until after the early part of AB. On the other
hand, it was certainly concluded by 1250, for Matthew refers
to the Gesta on a number of occasions in the Historia Anglorum?
which he began in 1250; and a comparison of the two shows
that the first part of the Gesta Abbatum was sometimes used in
the writing of the Historia Anglorum. The second part of the
Gesta Abbatum was, as we shall see, written in 1255. Again,
there are striking parallels with AB, especially in the account
of the election of Abbot John in I235, 7 which make it clear that
the second part of the Gesta was also based in part on Matthew's
Chronica Majora in AB.

1 These were made while he was writing the text; see pp. 30-1 above.

2 n, p. 576. 3 Wats, p. 112. * in, p. 12. 5 Wats, p. 119.

6 HA. I, pp. 23, 228, 276, 291; n, p. 55.

7 CM. in, pp. 307-8; Wats, pp. 135-8.

86

THE 'LIBER ADDITAMENTORUM'

In the Liber Additamentorum, the text of the first part of the
Gesta Abbatum extends from S. 30 to 62 a, and it appears to have
been written more or less currente calamo, apart from one leaf
probably inserted later (f. 38), and a number of marginal addi-
tions and corrections. On f. 62 the text breaks down into a
number of isolated passages and transcripts of documents, which
continue on to the next leaf. The character of the handwriting
bears out our conclusion about the date of this part of the Gesta,
for it appears to have been written before most of the rest of the
Liber Additamentorum, that is, before 1250. The documents
on ff. 62-63 b date from 1219 to 1251, and have been written
on the spare leaves which remained at the end of the quire.
Powicke says that the Gesta Abbatum was finished in I255, 1 but
this statement needs some qualification, for, judging from the
presence of the documents just mentioned, some of which have
no connexion with St Albans, the first part of the Gesta seems
originally to have been planned and written as a work complete
in itself, ending at the end of the abbacy of William of Trum-
pington (1235); and, as we have seen, it was finished before
1250. It would not even be quite accurate to say that the second
part of the Gesta Abbatum was finished in 1255, for the text, in
the Liber Additamentorum, continues beyond Matthew's state-
ment, already quoted, to the effect that he was writing in 1255.
Judging from its brevity, however, and from the way in which
it precedes documents of the years 1255 on, and probably once
followed those of 1254, the whole of the second part of the Gesta
would seem to have been written in the year 1255.

In the course of the Gesta Abbatum Matthew on several
occasions refers the reader to material elsewhere in the Liber
Additamentorum, or in one of his other manuscripts. In his
account of Warm's abbacy, for instance, he says that the papal
bull Religiosam vitam eligentibus 'is written out above, in the
present volume 5 ; 2 and it is in fact still to be found in the Liber
Additamentorum among the other papal documents, which, as
can be seen from our reconstruction of the original arrangement
of the book, 3 were once between the Vitae Offarum and the
Gesta Abbatum. There is a curious reference in the text of the

1 Powicke, 'Compilation of the Chronica Major a' t Proc. Brit. Acad. xxx
(1944), p. 155. * Wats, p. 95- 3 Above, pp. 81-2.

87

MATTHEW PARIS

Gesta on f. 49 b, where the description of the invention of
St Amphibalus is said by Matthew to be in a chronicle 'in this
book'. 1 Powicke supposed that the chronicle in question was
the Historia Anglorwn? but this is impossible, since this
reference occurs in the first part of the Gesta, which was
written before the Historia Anglorum. It is probable, in fact,
that the chronicle 'in this book' was either a copy of Roger
Wendover's Floras Historiarum, or AB itself; and, as it seems
unlikely that Matthew would have kept his Gesta together with
a manuscript of Roger Wendover's chronicle, we may con-
clude that the reference is probably to AB. In the years leading
up to 1250, evidently, Matthew kept his general and domestic
histories together, or at least intended to do so, for this reference
might represent an intention rather than a fact.

The most puzzling reference in the Gesta Abbatum to another
manuscript of Matthew's occurs in the text of the second part of
the Gesta. In his account of the election of Abbot John of
Hertford, Matthew refers us to some letters concerning it as
being ' in hoc volumine ubi scilicet pingitur avicula'. The letters
thus referred to are not now to be found in the Liber Additament-
orum, but they have been copied out by Matthew into the text
of jB, though there is no sign there of an avicula. 3 Powicke
thought that when this reference was written, B had not yet been
begun, and the documents referred to were in the Liber Addita-
mentorum, but were removed some time later when they were
copied into B* But we have seen that the second part of the
Gesta was probably written in 1255, when the text of B up to
1250 had long been finished; and, in any case, this part of the
Gesta can be shown to be based in part on the text of A B. 5 I can
only suggest that the documents referred to were in the Liber
Additamentorum when Matthew made this reference to them,
together with the sign of the 'little bird', but that they have
since been lost ; like the copy of the agreement between St Albans
and Westminster which we know was in the Liber Additament-
orum until after Matthew's death, though there is no sign of

1 Wats, p. 93.

2 Powicke, 'Compilation of the Chronica Majora\ loc. cit. p. 156.

3 Wats, p. 139, and CM. in, pp. 313-18.

4 Powicke, 'Compilation of the Chronica Major a\ loc. cit. pp. 153-6.

5 See p. 86 above.

88

THE 'LIBER ADDITAMENTORUM'

it there now. 1 There is another rather puzzling reference in the
text of the first part of the Gesta Abbatum, in which Matthew
says that the story of the recovery by Egwin of the bones of
St Alban, which had been stolen by the Danes and removed by
them to Denmark, is told above in the course of the history of
Abbot Wlnoth. 2 If we turn back to f. 30 b, 3 we find no mention
of this story in the text, but Matthew has added a few lines in
the margin, directing the reader to the tract Cum Danorum rabies,
where it is set out in full on ff. 25 b-26b. It is curious that the
reference to this should be in the text, while the story itself was
obviously added later, but an examination of the manuscript
shows that the leaf on which this reference occurs (f. 38) has
been inserted later by Matthew into the text of the Gesta. Two
other references in the Gesta Abbatum ought to be mentioned,
though I have not discovered to what they in fact refer. They
are:

(1) Concerning the knights of the Swan, *sed haec suo loco
plenius conscribentur'. 4

(2) Concerning the Cross of Josaphath, 'quae quadam
prolixa narratione continetur in fine hums libri'. 5

The only evidence for the date of the Vitae Off arum is
Matthew's own statement near the end of its text. He says: 6

. . .in quantum licet alicui abbati habere pontificalem dignitatem,
prout tarn nova quam vetera instrumenta inde obtenta manifeste
protestantur, quae in hoc libro, videlicet in sequentibus, annotantur.
Gesta quoque abbatum omnium qui a tempore regis Off ani fundatoris
ecclesiae Sancti Albani in eadem ecclesia extiterunt, usque ad annum
gratiae millesimum ducentesimum quinquagesimum, similiter in
praesenti volumine denotantur.

The text of the first part of the Gesta Abbatum extends to
1235, and that of the second part to 1255, so that this statement
can hardly refer to either of them, and Matthew is evidently here
thinking rather of the year in which he was writing than of his
book on the abbots. The translation should therefore probably
be '. . .the deeds of all the abbots from Offa until now [i.e.
1250] are described in this book' ; and we may therefore tenta-

1 It was copied thence by the continuator of the Gesta Abbatum, and is

printed in GA. i, pp. 363-6. 2 Wats, p. 60. 3 Wats, p. 38.

4 Wats, p. 46. 5 Wats, p. 126. 6 Wats, p. 31.

MATTHEW PARIS

tively conclude that the Vitae Off arum was completed in 1250,
and added, in that year, to a book which already contained the
papal privileges referred to by Matthew (which originally pre-
ceded the Gesta}, as well as the first part of the Gesta Abbatum.
Now was this book originally (that is, in or before 1250) a part
of the Liber Additamentorum, or was it only added later into the
Liber Additamentorum^ This is a difficult question to answer
with any degree of certainty, but, from the reference to a
1 chronicle in this book' which we discussed above, 1 it seems
likely that the Gesta Abbatum was originally at the end of AB,
and, if this were so, it is possible that the Vitae Offarum and the
papal privileges (together no doubt with the charters that go
with them) formed with it part of the collection of documents
which, as we have seen, were kept at the end of B until Matthew
conceived the idea of a separate Liber Additamentorum.

It seems not unreasonable to suppose that, in the year 1250,
when Matthew drew the text of the Chronica Majora to its
intended close, he purposed at the same time to complete his
other historical labours, and to combine the whole in a single
manuscript, AB, containing the full text of his Chronica Majora,
the additional documents referred to in its text but not copied
out there, as well as his domestic histories and the documents
concerning them. The references to the Gesta Abbatum in the
Historia Anglorum do not cast serious doubts on this theory, for
the words c cuius beneficia in libro de Gestis Abbatum, apud
Sanctum Albanum habito, plenius describuntur' (i, p. 228), for
instance, do not necessarily mean that the Gesta Abbatum was
at this time a separate book, all on its own. In or before 1250,
then, Matthew had probably gathered the material that was
later to become his Liber Additamentorum at the end of his
Chronica Majora in AB. To this original nucleus the docu-
mentary material was evidently added by Matthew more or less
continually from 1250 onwards until his death, during which
time, probably c. 1252, it was finally separated fromS, to become
the Liber Additamentorum as we know it now. This book became
the repository for all kinds of rough notes, jottings, and even
drawings, as well as much miscellaneous material; all of which
reflect Matthew's catholic interests and inquisitive mind.

1 P. 88.

90

THE 'LIBER ADDITAMENTORUM'

Among other things, we find in the Liber Additamentorum a
drawing of an elephant (f. i68b); an itinerary from London to
Apulia(ff. i82b-i83a); a page of coloured shields (f. iyob); alist
of ' farms ' belonging to St Albans (ff . 1 80 b-i 8 1 a) ; a drawing of
a parhelion seen in the sky in 1233 (f. 185 a) ; and an outline map
of Great Britain (f. i86b): all of them executed by Matthew
himself. More material was added to the Liber Additamentorum
after Matthew's death, and indeed from its origins until recent
times it has been constantly added to and rearranged; and its
present chaotic and haphazard appearance is by no means due
entirely to Matthew Paris. As it was built up and used by him,
the Liber Additamentorum was a reasonably well organized
appendix to his main chronicle, consisting in the main of a
collection of texts of domestic interest, followed by the docu-
mentary material of general interest which he gathered together
during the last ten or twelve years of his life. 1

1 In the whole of the Liber Additamentorum there are less than half a dozen
documents of general interest dating from before 1247.

CHAPTER VI

THE 'FLORES HISTORIARUM': SOME
MANUSCRIPT PROBLEMS

MATTHEWPARIS'S Flores Historiarum presents us with
yet another series of intricate manuscript problems,
which we must try to unravel. 1 Though many manu-
scripts of this work are extant, only two concern us here, for all
the others have been shown to derive from them. 2 These are
the manuscript in Chetham's Library, Manchester, number
6712 (which, following Luard, I shall call C&), and manuscript
number 123 in the Library of Eton College (E). Up to the annal
for 1294 E is a fair copy of the Flores Historiarum written by one
scribe of c. 1300, and after this it has been continued by various
scribes up to 1306. Ch, on the other hand, must be regarded as
original, at least in part. Up to the annal for 1241 it was written
by two St Albans scribes of c. 1250. From 1241 to near the end
of the annal for 1249 ^ was written by Matthew Paris himself;
and from 1249 to I2 ^S ^Y th er St Albans scribes of the mid-
thirteenth century. From the annal for 1265 onwards it was
written at Westminster. 3 In all the manuscripts of the Flores
Historiarum the text is divided into two books, the first of which
ends with the annal for 1066. Here we shall be concerned only
with Book I, and Book n up to the annal for 1249, this being the
part of the Flores for which Matthew Paris was responsible.
Although both books are based on Matthew's Chronica Major a,
they differ very much in character, for, while Book I is for the
most part a full and exact copy of the Chronica Major a, Book II
has been very much abridged and altered from it, although it
includes a considerable amount of additional matter. Unfortu-
nately Luard, in his edition of the Flores Historiarum^ only very
inadequately carried out the task, which he set himself in his
preface, 4 of distinguishing by means of large and small type

1 For the authorship of the Flores, see above, pp. 39-41.

2 FH. i, pp. xxxiii-xxxiv, and xvii.

3 For Ch y see FH. i, pp. xii ff. ; and for E t i, pp. xv ff.

4 FH. i, p. xlix.

92

THE 'FLORES HISTORIARUM'

between the text of the Chronica Majora, as copied into the
Flores, and the additional matter in the Floras which was not
taken from the Chronica. This unfortunate failure has neces-
sitated a complete collation of the printed texts of the Flores and
the Chronica Majora, and it is on this collation, and not on the
differences of type in Luard' s edition of the Flores, that the
discussion which follows is based.

The two books of the Flores Historiarum are so different in
character that a separate discussion is demanded for each of
them. Let us look first at Book i, which extends from the
Creation up to 1066. A problem that confronts us immediately
is the relationship of Ch and E. The text which these two manu-
scripts share in common varies sufficiently from that of the
Chronica Majora for us to be sure that they cannot have been
taken independently from that work. 1 Either, then, they shared
a common exemplar, in its turn derived from the Chronica
Majora, or one of them was copied from the other. Ch could
not have been copied from E, because E was written fifty years
after Ch\ nor could E have been copied from Ch y for there are
four separate lines missing in Ch through homoeoteleuton in the
exemplar, all of which are present in J5. 2 Both Luard and
Liebermann agreed that neither of these manuscripts could have
been copied from the other, 3 and we must therefore conclude
that they shared a common exemplar, which I shall call ChE*

Having established the existence of a manuscript, ChE, lying
behind Ch and E y we are now in a position to examine the
relationship of ChE and the early part of Matthew's Chronica
Majora in A. There are considerable differences, in Book I,
between ChE and A, although they occur only in certain parts
of the text. Up to about the annal for 231, ChE is a reasonably
accurate copy of A, but with a number of additional passages,
and a few small alterations. From about the annal for 231 to that
for 567, and again between 619 and 633, there are many verbal

1 As Luard apparently supposed; FH. i, p. xxxiv.

2 At FH. I, pp. 157, note 4; 264, note 4; 281, and 544, note 2.

3 FH. i, pp. xxxiii-xxxiv.

* It should be noted that there was probably an intermediate manuscript
between ChE and E (see below, pp. 101-2). Its existence, however, would
not affect the present discussion.

93

MATTHEW PARIS

differences between A and ChE, but only two material additions
to ChE. One of these, the story of the miraculous appearance of
the chrism at the baptism of Clovis, is inserted into the annal
for 476, and the other, an abridgement of an entry in Roger
Wendover omitted from A, under the year 352. 1 Between the
annals for 633 and 1065 t ' ie texts of ChE and A are identical,
apart from the usual scribal variations, but after the beginning
of the annal for 1065, until the end of Book i, ChE is very much
altered from the text of A. The character of the variations
between ChE and A in the annals 231-567 and 619-33 is well
shown when their texts are compared with that of their ultimate
source. In the example which follows, I have italicized the
alterations from A in ChE.

The source, Geoffrey of Monmonth j s Historia regum Britanniae*

Et si omnes istum liberare niterentur, ego eum in frusta conscin-
derem. Insequerer namque prophetam Samuelem, qui cum Agag
regem Amalech in potestatem tenuisset, conscidit ilium in frusta,
dicens: sicut fecisti matres sine liberis, sic faciam hodie matrem
tuam sine liberis inter mulieres: sic igitur facite de isto, qui alter
Agag consistit.

A. Part of the annal for 489?

Etsi omnes istum liberare vellent, ego eum in frusta conciderem.
Samuel namque propheta, cum Agag regem Amalech in bello
cepisset, mactavit ilium in frusta, dicens, 'Sicut fecisti matres sine
liberis, sic faciam matrem tuam hodie sine liberis inter mulieres;
similiter facite de isto qui alter Agag existit/

ChE. Part of the annal for 489.*

. . .et ait, frendens prae ira, 'Etsi omnes istum liberare vellent, ego
eum in frusta concidam. Quid haesitatis, effeminati? Nonne Samuel
propheta, cum regem Amalech in bello captum membratim concidisset,
ait, Sicut fecisti matres sine liberis, sic faciam matrem tuam esse sine
liberis hodie inter mulieres; similiter facite de isto altero Agag, qui
multas matres suis orbavit filiis.'

A comparison of these passages shows that, while the compiler
of A has made a sober and more or less accurate paraphrase of

1 See FH. i, pp. 240 and 188; for the latter, see also CM. i, p. 164, note 3.

2 A. Griscom (ed.)> p. 406.

3 CM. i, p. 221. * FH. i, p. 244.

94

THE C FLORES HISTORIARUM*

his source, the author of ChE has produced, in the process of
copying from A, a rather highly coloured and greatly ' improved '
version of this speech. The author of ChE was, of course,
Matthew Paris. The way in which ChE has been altered from A
in this part of Book i of the Flores Historiarum is characteristic
of him, and is paralleled exactly by his treatment of Roger
Wendover in the Chronica Majora, which we discussed in
Chapter n. 1 Sometimes a minute alteration in ChE is identical
with one made by Matthew to the text of Roger Wendover in A.
For instance, in one place where the text of A had 'exulatus',
Matthew has written 'vel exuP above the line. 2 In another
place, where the word 'exulatusque' occurred in A, this has
been altered, in ChE, into 'exulque'; 3 and elsewhere, the word
'exiliatus' in A has been altered, in ChE, into 'exuP. 4 All the
variations from A, in ChE, seem to be due to Matthew Paris,
and it is likely that their curious distribution in Book I of the
Flores Historiarum (231-567; 619-33; 1065-6) is due to the fact
that Matthew himself wrote out these parts of the text of ChE,
while the rest was left to a scribe.

The excerpts printed above show that A and ChE are, in
spite of their variations, versions of one and the same compilation ;
and the fact that some of the errors which are common to them
both occur also in O and W demonstrates the dependence of A,
OW and ChE on a single ultimate exemplar. In one place, for
instance, a passage is omitted, because of homoeoteleuton, in
all these manuscripts; 5 and elsewhere they all have 'Orences-
triam' for 'Cirencestriam', and 'Cnutoni' erroneously for
'Tovio'. 6 Up to the annal for 1066, then, A, OW and ChE
are merely different versions of Roger Wendover's Flores
Historiarum.

Let us look a little more closely at the relationship of these
manuscripts. Book I of ChE is certainly derived from the actual
manuscript A, for some of Matthew's alterations in A are copied
into ChE. For example, in the annal for 261 ChE copies an

1 See pp. 32 ff., above. 2 CM. I, p. 17, note i.

3 In the annal for 241; CM. i, p. 138, and FH. I, p. 155.

4 In the annal for 519; CM. i, p. 235, and FH. i, p. 260.

5 CM. i, p. 203; see above, p. 32, note 3.

6 CM. i, p. 502, note i ; FH. i, p. 549, note i (Luard does not point out
that W also reads 'Orencestriam'), and CM. i, p. 516, note 3; FH. i, p. 564.

95

MATTHEW PARIS

alteration wrongly made by Matthew in A because he misread
that manuscript; 1 and again, in the annal for 386, another of
Matthew's blundering attempts at correction is copied into ChE
from A. 2 Throughout the text of Book i, ChE and A have a
number of errors, variants and omissions in common, which
show that the scribe of ChE had A before him while he wrote,
and copied largely from it. But it is easy to show that he was
not wholly dependent on A ; and, indeed, it is clear that he had
access to a manuscript lying behind both A and OW. In the
annal for 885, for instance, ChE has correctly, with William of
Malmesbury (the source), 'in imperio Romanorum', while A and
OPFhave 'in paganorum imperio'. 3 Again, in the annal for 490,
A and OPT have 'grandi' wrongly for 'grandes', which ChE
has. 4 In A 9 three separate lines are lost at different points
through careless copying; but none of these is missing in ChE. 5
There is one example, too, of a line lost through homoeoteleuton
in manuscripts A, O and W, which is present in ChE Besides
making use of A, then, the scribe of ChE used a manuscript
lying behind all the others. This manuscript cannot have been
the exemplar of A and OW, which we have called b, 7 for ChE
avoids mistakes common to A and OW, which they must have
copied from b. We have, therefore, to postulate another manu-
script, the exemplar of b and part-exemplar of ChE, which I shall
call a. In Book I of the Flores Historiarwn the manuscripts are
thus related as shown in fig. 7.

We saw in Chapter n that &, since its text extended at least to
the annal for 1228, was probably a manuscript of Roger Wend-
over's Flores Historiarwn, and not an earlier compilation. But
what of <2? This, it seems, could have been a manuscript of some
early compilation called the Flores Historiarum and perhaps
extending only to 1066, which was used by Roger Wendover as
the basis for the early part of his chronicle, and used again by

1 CM. I, p. 141, note 2; FH. i, p. 159, note 4.

2 CM. i, p. 171, note i; FH. i, p. 195.

3 CM. i, p. 420, note i, and FH. i, p. 462.

4 CM. i, p. 222, note 5, and FH. I, p. 245.

5 CM. i, pp. 232, 315 and 477; FH. i, pp. 257, 352 and 524.

6 CM. i, p. 300 and FH. i, p. 334. The line, not noticed by Luard, is
'diebus tribus, et cessavit sedes anno uno, mensibus sex'.

7 See p. 28 above.

9 6

THE 'FLORES HISTORIARUM'

Matthew Paris in the preparation of ChE. But we cannot em-
bark here on an examination of the sources of Roger Wendover.
What is important for us is to note that Matthew made two

Fig. 7. Diagram to show the relationship of the manuscripts of Book I of
Matthew's Flores Historiarum to those of Matthew's Chronica Majora and
Roger Wendover's Flores Historiarum.

separate versions of the compilation used by Roger, one in AB,
and the other in Book I of ChE.

So far we have limited our discussion to Book I of the Flores
Historiarum, the text of which extends from the Creation to
1066. Book II presents a very different series of problems, for

MATTHEW PARIS

its text is quite different in character from that of Book I,
which follows the Chronica Majora more or less closely. In
Book n, however, as in Book I, Ch and E continue to share, in the
main, the same text, and it is clear that their relationship remains
the same: they are derived from a common exemplar, ChE. As
with Book I, so with Book n, it is certain that Ch was not copied
from E, for the latter was written fifty years after the former.
Nor can E be derived from Ch, for, in the course of the annal
for I2I2, 1 E has the date 'quinto', correctly, while Ch has
'septimo'; and, elsewhere, Ch has a passage taken word for
word from the Southward Annals, except for the last word
'intimaverunt', while E ends the same sentence, as does the
Southwark Annals, with the word ' nunciaverunt '. 2 Again, in the
course of the annal for 1217 a long passage is omitted in Ch
through homoeoteleuton, but it is present in E? Many more
examples could be cited to show that E is not derived from Ch,
and there is thus no doubt as to the continued existence, in
Book n, of their common exemplar. I shall continue to call this
ChE, although it is by no means clear that it formed part of the
manuscript containing Book I of ChE. It is difficult to be sure
how far the text of this exemplar extended. It seems very
likely, however, that from the annal for 1241, when Matthew
takes up the pen in CA, 4 that manuscript is no longer copied
accurately from an exemplar, and the fact that E follows
Matthew's text very closely until the annal for 1244 seems to
show that it is here derived from Ch. At one point there is a
marginal addition in Ch which is in the text of E, and, elsewhere,
Ch has 'vi* interlined, and this also occurs in the text of E. 5
Although the evidence is slight, then, it seems likely that the
text of ChE extended only to the point in Ch where Matthew
took up his pen near the end of the annal for 1241.

In Book n of the Floras Historiarum there is no sign of the
use of the manuscript which I have called a, but, owing to the
very abbreviated nature of the excerpts from the Chronica
Majora in this part of the Flores, we cannot be sure that it was

1 PH. n, p. 142.

2 FH. 11, p. 106, note 3; B,M. Cotton MS. Faustina A viii, f. 135 b.

8 FH. II, pp. 164-5; see p. 164, note 4. 4 FH. n, p. 250, note i.

5 FH. n, pp. 266, note 4, and 272, note 2.

THE 'FLORES HISTORIARUM'

not used. Certainly AB was used, and indeed it is clear that
Book ii of ChE, like Book I, is mainly derived from Matthew's
Chronica Majora in AB. In one place, for instance, while O
and W have 'Ivo' correctly, A has 'suo', and ChE 'suho'; 1
and, elsewhere, O and IF have 'capiuntur' while A and ChE
have 'capti sunt 5 . 2 Furthermore, in the course of Book n, ChE
often, though by no means always, incorporates Matthew's
corrections in AB into its text. Besides AB, the fair copy of B,
which I have called C, seems to have been used in the prepara-
tion of ChE, perhaps at times when B was not available for
copying. Thus, in one place, C and ChE have 'Cisterciensem'
against all the other manuscripts, which read correctly ' Certes-
iensem'; 3 and, in another place, Luard was able to show that
C was the exemplar of ChE.* But, even in the part of the text of
ChE where C was used, B was not abandoned for long, for,
while the examples just cited, of the use of C, occur in the
annals for 1198 and 1209, it is certain that B was used in the
annals for 1204 and 1205, and again in the annal for I22i. 5 In
the section of Ch which Matthew himself wrote the exemplar
was By as may be seen in the course of the annal for I242, 6 where
the phrase * de scuto xx solidis', which is not in C, is introduced
into the text of Ch from the margin of B.

Much use has been made, in the preceding pages, of the
symbol ChE, to denote the common exemplar of Ch and E.
These two manuscripts, however, are by no means identical,
and we must turn now to consider their differences. In Book I,
Ch has two entries concerning Westminster which are not in E, 7
and E has some passages from the Historia Miscella and other
sources, 8 as well as some corrections, which are not found in Ch.
In Book n, the differences between these two manuscripts are
more extensive. There are a few passages which are in E but
not in Ch, and these seem to be additions in E rather than

1 CM. n, p. 34, note i, and FH. II, p. 25, note 8.

2 CM. n, p. 328, note 4, and FH. n, p. 98.

3 FH. n, p. 120, note i ; CM. n, p. 450, note i.

4 FH. n, p. 138, note 5.

5 See FH. n, pp. 129, 130 and 172, where evidence to this effect is found.

6 FH. II, p. 258. 7 FH. I, pp, 566-7 and 579-8o.
8 For instance, FH. i, pp. 47-5 3 and m-i3-

99 7-2

MATTHEW PARIS

omissions in Ch. The copy of King John's charter of submission
in E appears to be one of them. 1 A number of variations
between Ch and E occur, in which E appears to have a shortened
version of the corresponding passage in Ch', but it is difficult
to ascertain whether these variations are due to amplification
from the text of ChE by the scribe of Ch, or to abridgement in E.
The former, however, seems more probable, in view of the
interesting fact that on a number of occasions the version in E
is found in identical words in the short chronicle in British
Museum Cotton MS. Vitellius A xx, which I have already men-
tioned, 2 and which I shall here call V. Owing to the damaged
state of V, it is often difficult to collate these passages, but the
version of part of the annal for 1 1 19 in E is certainly the same as
that in F, and part of the annal for 1128, which is not from AB,
is given in the same words in E and V? After the annal for
1134 the text of V is no longer similar to that of the Flores
Historiarum, and no more parallels are found. The explanation
of these passages common to E and V seems to be that they
were in the text of ChE, but that Ch has been amplified in the
process of copying, while E has not. This certainly seems to have
happened in the annals I22O-2, 4 where there are a number of
passages in Ch which are neither in E nor AB, and which were
therefore probably added in the course of writing by the scribe
of Ch, no doubt under the supervision of Matthew Paris.

Ch, as we have seen, contains a number of entries relating to
Westminster which are not taken from AB, and which, since
they do not appear in E, were probably not in ChE. Besides
the two Westminster entries in Book I of Ch, there are a number
in Book ii. 5 Now Ch was sent to Westminster in or soon after
I265, 6 an d the fact that it actually went there removes any
doubts which might have been entertained about these West-
minster entries: Matthew must have had the book especially
written for Westminster. It is probable that he intended to

1 FH. ii, pp. 145-6.

2 Above, p. 41. See also below, pp. 115-16 ff.

8 FH. n, pp. 47, note 5 (1119), and 53, notes 3, 4 and 6 (1128). See v,
f. 8oa-b.

4 FH. n, pp. 170-5.

5 FH. n, pp. 106, 122, 231, 289, 314 and 321.

6 FH. I, p. xiii.

IOO

THE 'FLORES HISTORIARUM'

finish the manuscript near the end of the annal for 1249, f r he
closes his section of the text at this point with the couplet: 1

Cernis completas hie nostro tempore metas,
Si plus forte petas, tibi postera nunciet aetas.

For some reason, however, it was not sent at once to West-
minster, but kept at St Albans. Later two scribes finished the
annal for 1249, an d started that for 1250, abridging from J5.
This part of the text of Ch was evidently written some years
after that written by Matthew, for, whereas in the preceding
annals the original text of B is copied into Ch, here Matthew's
edited text of B has been followed, and, as we shall see, it was
probably not until 1257 or later that Matthew carried out his
large-scale editing of the text of B. 2 Later still another scribe,
the last who wrote at St Albans, copied into Ch the text of
Matthew's Abbreviatio Chronicorum until its close in the middle
of the annal for 1255. He then abridged the annals 1256-9 from
the Chronica Major a ; and continued up to 1265 from the original
continuation of Matthew's Chronica Major a, which was once at
the end of the third volume, J?. 3 This last block of annals seems
to have been written currente calamo by a scribe who was
perhaps instructed to bring the manuscript up to date ready for
its dispatch to Westminster, where the text from 1265 onwards
was written, and where the manuscript remained for the rest of
the Middle Ages.

Luard called E the 'Merton manuscript' because it contains
a series of marginal entries concerning the priors of that house. 4
But none of these is in the text, and, out of four entries con-
cerning Merton in the text of Ch, all of which were presumably
in the text of the exemplar CM, only two have been copied
into E, 5 so that it seems unlikely, in fact, that E was originally
a Merton manuscript. So far, in this chapter, we have assumed
that the actual manuscripts Ch and E derived from a common
exemplar, ChE. But there are reasons for supposing that an

1 FH. ii, p. 361.

2 For the annals 1249-50, see FH. n, pp. 361 ff. Luard shows that the
edited text of B was used for these annals, FH. n, p. 361, note i. For the
editing of B, see below, pp. 117 iff. 3 See pp. 10-11 above.

4 FH. i, pp. xv-xvi.

5 FH. n, pp. 46 and 51. Those omitted are at FH. 11, pp. 81 and 88.

IOI

MATTHEW PARIS

intermediate manuscript, e, existed, between ChE and E. 1 E is
a fair copy written by one scribe c. 1300, and we can hardly
suppose that this scribe, writing at that time, would have taken
his text up to 1241 from ChE\ for the annals 1241-4 from Ch\
and for the annals 1244-59 from Matthew's Chronica Major a in
AB and R work which must surely have been carried out at
St Albans and then gone to Westminster to copy the annals
from 1265 onwards from the later parts of Ch. It is far more
likely that a manuscript e was written at St Albans in the middle
years of the thirteenth century, and that the scribe of E took the
first part of his text (probably up to 1264) from this manuscript,
and the later part, from 1265 onwards, from Ch or a manuscript
related to it. If we suppose this to have been the case, it is
possible to explain the sudden abandonment of C/E, by the scribe
of e, during the annal for 1244, on the supposition that he was
working at St Albans just at the time (c. 1265) when Ch was
sent to Westminster. However, this is not the place to pursue
the intricate problems presented by the post-Parisian section of
the Flores Historiarum, and it should be noted that the presence
or absence of e, intermediate between ChE and J?, cannot affect
the argument of this chapter that Ch and E (at any rate up to
1241) are derived from a common exemplar, taken, in its turn,
from Matthew's Chronica Majora.

We showed, in Chapter in, that Matthew was the author of
the Flores Historiarum up to 1249; an< ^ we have now examined
the relationship of the manuscripts of the Flores and Matthew's
other historical manuscripts. One problem, however, remains :
when was the Flores Historiarum written? Book i of ChE incor-
porates only a few of Matthew's corrections and alterations in A,
and none of his longer additions, so that we may be sure that
it was copied soon after the early part of A, up to 1066, was
written. Unfortunately we know little or nothing about the date
of this part of A, but it was probably not begun until c. I24O, 2
and we may therefore perhaps date Book i of the Flores His-
toriarum to c. 1240-5. Book II of the Flores, on the other hand,
could hardly have been written before 1250, since it occasionally
has readings from C, the fair copy of the Chronica Majora made
in or soon after 1250 ; 3 and it was probably completed by 1257,

1 See fig. 7, above, p. 97. 2 See pp. 59-60 above. 3 See p. 59 above.

I O2

THE 'FLORES HISTORIARUM*

when, as we shall see in the next chapter, Matthew seems to have
made his expurgatory alterations to the text of B, for these are
not followed in the Flares Historiarum. Book n (up to the end
of the annal for 1249), therefore, probably dates from c. 1250-5.
The two books of the Flores Historiarum thus differ considerably
in date, as well as in character, and it seems possible that the
Flores, as we know it now, was built up out of two quite separate
works : a version of the main chronicle of Roger and Matthew
extending to 1066; and a severe abridgement of Matthew's
Chronica Majora, together with much additional material, made
some time later, and extending from 1066 to 1249.

There is one text which, owing to its close connexion with
Book n of the Flores Historiarum, may conveniently be discussed
here. This is a series of short entries of an annalistic nature,
which occurs in the Chronica Majora, the Flores Historiarum,
and in the short chronicle V\ and which I shall call Matthew's
'new material' . In the Chronica Major a, much of it has been
added by Matthew in the margins of AB between the annals for
1066 and 1223, and many of these entries are written in a pale
brown ink and a cursive hand, giving the impression of having
been written more or less at one time. Most of the new material
is incorporated into the text of Book II of the Flores Historiarum,
but, on the whole, this is done very clumsily, and in a way that
allows it to be readily distinguished from the rest of the text,
for the most part abridged from AB. Sometimes it is inserted
at the start of the annal, as in 1196, where Matthew begins the
entry with some excerpts from the new material, and, when these
are finished, goes back to AB and copies thence, so that the
phrase f Rex Anglorum fuit ad Natale apud . . . ', which normally
begins the annal in AB, appears half-way through it in the
Flores. 1 Elsewhere the process is altered, and the new material
is inserted in a block at the end of the annal, or, sometimes,
during the course of it. The new material is also found in part
of the short chronicle V, between the annals for 1066 and 1134.
It occurs, too, in the Historia Anglorum and in C, but in these
manuscripts it can be shown to be derived directly from the
margins of AB.

1 FH. n, p. 114.

I0 3

MATTHEW PARIS

The sources of the new material are difficult to identify
accurately, except where well-known works such as William of
Malmesbury's Historia Novella and Ralph de Diceto's Abbre-
viatio Chronicorum are used. Part of the new material is taken
from these, as well as from Robert de Monte and perhaps Henry
of Huntingdon, but much of it was taken from monastic annals
which are no longer extant in their original form. From the
number of entries concerning Reading, for instance, Luard
deduced that a manuscript from that house was used; but this
manuscript is not now known to exist. 1 Again, Luard noticed
that a Southwark manuscript had been used, which he thought
was that actually existing in the Cottonian collection under the
press-mark Faustina A viii. This contains a thirteenth-century
chronicle, apparently written contemporaneously by the canons
of Southwark, the text of which ends in 1240, and which is
generally known as the Southwark Annals* In fact, however,
the Southwark manuscript which was used in the compilation
of Matthew's new material was evidently not Faustina A viii
itself, but a source of the chronicle in that manuscript, as a
comparison of these two extracts shows :

The annal for 1113 in Faustina A viii, f. 132.

Tamisia exiccata et maxim' [sic] miliaria duobus diebus. Cometa
mense. Radulphus archiepiscopus factus.

Part of the new material added in the margin of A. 3

Quarto kalendas Aprilis Tamisia exiccata est et mare [per] duo-
decim miliaria, per duos dies. Radulfus episcopus Rofensis eligitur
ad archiepiscopatum Cantuariensem, sexto kalendas Maii . . . cometa
quoque apparuit mense Maii

A similar situation is found when the text of the Coggeshall
chronicle is compared with the new material: all the evidence
points to the independent use of a common source rather than
the derivation of one from the other. As Powicke long ago
pointed out, 'it is impossible to prove that even Matthew Paris
knew Coggeshall after H95'. 4

1 CM. II, p. xxix; the Southwark manuscript is noticed on the same page.

2 On this see Tyson, * Annals of Southwark and Merton', Surrey Arch.
Coll. xxxvi (1925), pp. 24-57. 3 CM. n, p. 141.

4 Powicke, 'Roger Wendover and the Coggeshall Chronicle*, EHR. xxi
(1906), pp. 292-3, note 25.

104

THE 'FLORES HISTORIARUM'

We cannot, however, pursue here the problem of the origins
of Matthew's new material, for there is much research still to be
done on the thirteenth-century monastic annals, and a number
of texts (including the Southwark Annals) still need editing.
But from whatever sources it was compiled, it seems clear that
the new material was used independently by Matthew in AB and
ChE. That is to say, even though, as we have shown, ChE was
undoubtedly abridged from AB, the new material, which is
written into the margins of AB, was not copied thence into
ChE. In the course of the annal for 1 106, for example, Matthew
wrote into the margin of A an entry concerning the institution
of canons at Southwark, but he mistakenly wrote 'Salisbury'
for 'Southwark': yet ChE and the Southwark Annals give
'Southwark' correctly. 1 Again, in the course of the annal for
1179, Matthew has 'Wudestoc' wrongly for 'Wenloc' in the
margin of A ; but ChE and the Southwark Annals give ' Wenloc'
correctly. 2 Moreover, there are some entries from the new
material in the margins of AB, which do not appear at all in
ChE: for instance, those added to the annal for 1198, which
occur also in the Southwark Annals? If we examine the new
material in the chronicle V, we find a similar situation, for it
was apparently not copied into V from the margins of AB, nor
from ChE', nor is the new material in AB or ChE taken from
that in V. For the year 1091, for instance, the Southwark Annals
record a strong wind; and the entry, though not in A, is in ChE,
in similar words, but without the date, and embroidered in
Matthew's usual fashion. This entry is also in V, which gives
the date correctly, as in the Southwark Annals* 1 In another
place V has phrases from Diceto which are neither in A nor in
ChE, 5 and in the course of the annal for 1070, where both ChE
and V have a description of the plundering of the monasteries by
William the Conqueror, taken from Diceto, the account in
V includes two lines or more ad verbum with Diceto, which are
not in ChE. 6 Furthermore, errors in ChE are often avoided in V:
for instance in the annal for 1120, where A and V have 'Maii'

1 CM. n, p. 133, note 3; FH. n, p. 39; Faustina A viii, f. 132.

2 CM. n, p. 309; FH. n, p. 91 ; Faustina A viii, f. 134.

3 CM. n, pp. 450-1.

4 V, f. 78 b; Faustina A viii, f. 131 b; FH. 11, p. 22.

5 In the annal for 1067, V, f. 77a. 6 V, f. 77a; FH. n, p. 4.

105

MATTHEW PARIS

and ChE has, wrongly, * Aprilis'. 1 That the new material in ChE
cannot have been taken from V is evident from the annal for
1073, where Fhas 'presente' for 'presidente' of AB and ChE y
and 'detrudi' for CAE's 'intrudi'. 2

We must conclude, then, that the new material was copied
independently, but from a common exemplar, into F, ChE and
AB. There is some evidence that this common exemplar was
written in a continuous chronicle form, and that the Floras
Historiarwn of Roger Wendover, rather than the Chronica
Major a of Matthew Paris, was used in its compilation. The annal
for 1 104, for instance, is composed of some extracts altered from
Roger Wendover, a sentence from the Southwark Annals, and
another from an unidentified source; and it occurs in almost
identical words, and with the separate entries in the same order,
in V and CM 1 . 3 It seems, in fact, to have been copied directly,
in both these manuscripts, from the new material. As for the
use of Roger Wendover in the new material, we find that in F,
between the annals for 1066 and 1134, there is only one point
where the text seems to incorporate a reading from A, but there
are several examples of V reading with OW against A: for
instance, in the annal for 1 1 1 2, where V and OIF have the word
'suorum', which is omitted in A 4

If the new material really was compiled in part from Roger
Wendover, it was probably written at St Albans ; and we cannot
preclude the possibility that it was written by Matthew Paris,
and that, since it was based in part on Roger Wendover instead
of on his Chronica Majora, it represents Matthew's earliest
historical activity. Be this as it may, he certainly made use of
the new material, though he failed to integrate it fully into any
one of his chronicles. He seems to have used it first as a basis
for F; but it was abandoned when the writing of that manuscript
reached the annal for 1134. In the Flores Historiarum not all
of it was used, and it is incorporated in a rather clumsy fashion;
and in AB it is incomplete, and only added in the margins. This
muddled use of his material reflects a certain lack of system in

1 V, f. 8oa; FH. n, p. 48; CM. n, p. 149, and note i.

2 V, f. vya; FH. n, p. 6; CM. n, p. u. A has 'retrudi'.

3 V, f. 79 a; FH. n, p. 37; CM. n, p. 126.

4 V, f. 79b; FH. n, p. 42; CM. n, p. 140, note i.

106

THE 'FLORES HISTORIARUM'

Matthew Paris, but we must remember that some of these manu-
scripts were evidently written contemporaneously. If this were
not so, it would be virtually impossible to explain the curious
fact that, while the new material is copied independently into
ChE and the margins of AB, both AB itself and C, the fair copy
of B, were used in the writing of ChE. In fig. 8 I have tried to

Fig. 8. Diagram, to show Matthew's use of the new material in his historical
manuscripts. The dotted lines indicate the relationship of the texts; the
continuous lines show the derivation and use of the new material.

show how the new material was used in Matthew's historical
manuscripts. This diagram no doubt appears complicated; but
we are dealing with a complicated situation. It is quite possible,
for instance, that while Matthew was copying the text of ChE
from AB, he had the new material before him, and copied it into
ChE, at the same time adding it to the margins of his exemplar
AB.

107

MATTHEW PARIS

Although our discussion, in this chapter, of Matthew's Flores
Historiamm and his new material cannot be regarded as exhaus-
tive, we are now in a position to try to describe his activities in
connexion with these two works, and to fit them into our picture
of the writing of the Chronica Major a^ the Historia Anglomm,
and the Liber Additamentorum. Matthew's historical activities
seem to have reached a peak in 1251, at about the time when he
brought his Chronica Majora to its intended close in AB with
the annal for 1250. He had already begun work, in 1250, on the
Historia Anglorum, which he wrote out himself; and it must have
been at this time, that is in 1250-1, that his scribe made the fair
copy of B which I have called C. While this work was in progress,
a new book, the Flores Historiamm, evidently began to take
shape. This was probably a composite work, Book I of which
a version of the Paris-Wendover compilation extending only to
1066 was apparently already in existence by 1250. To this,
probably in or soon after 1250, Matthew began to add Book n,
which was in the main abridged from AB, though much addi-
tional matter was incorporated into it. The bulk of this additional
matter in Book n of the Flores Historiamm was apparently
copied from the collection of monastic annals which I have
called the new material, part of which (1066- i 134) had probably
already been used in the short chronicle V. We do not know
exactly when Matthew decided to add most of this new material
into the margins of AB, but it must have been soon after the
completion of AB to 1250, for it has been copied thence into
both C and the Historia Anglorum. It seems that Matthew must
have gone ahead, writing the new material into the margins of
AB, while work on Book II of ChE was still in progress, for, by
the time the writing of ChE had reached the annal for 1198,
C was sometimes being used as its exemplar, instead of AB.
Book II of the Flores Historiamm (in ChE) was perhaps not
written out by Matthew himself, but he must have supervised
its compilation. Its text seems to have ended in the annal for
1241, and it seems possible that it was left unfinished until
Matthew had Ch copied from it. Ch was written specially for
Westminster, and Matthew himself continued its text from 1241
to near the end of the annal for 1249.

It must be admitted that this theory, as to the writing of

108

THE 'FLORES HISTORIARUM'

Matthew's historical manuscripts, is an extremely tentative one,
and, in particular, it should be noted that the chronology of
some of them is uncertain. Matthew's scribe, for instance,
may have finished copying C from B very soon after AB was
completed to 1250. If this was the case, Book n of ChE could
be dated earlier: indeed it might even be possible to claim that
it was finished, and much of Ch copied from it, by 1251-2.
Different interpretations, too, can be put on our evidence con-
cerning Matthew's use of the new material. Our conclusions,
then, must remain provisional ones; but it is hoped that the
discussions of this chapter have thrown some light on the
relationship of Matthew's historical manuscripts and on his
methods as a historian, even if only to illuminate their
complexity.

109

CHAPTER VII

MATTHEW PARIS'S HISTORICAL WORKS:
ABRIDGEMENT AND EXPURGATION

MATTHEW'S various historical works are perhaps best
regarded as editions of his main chronicle : the Historia
Anglorum and Book 11 of the Flores Historiarum are
abridged editions of the Chronica Majora, and the Abbreviatio
Chronicorum is an abridged edition of the Historia Anglorum.
Even the Chronica Majora itself can be regarded merely as a
'new edition* of Roger Wendover's chronicle. In each of these
abridgements Matthew introduced alterations and additional
material, so that each of them has some independent value of
its own. Before we review these different works, however, it is
worth looking for a moment at the Chronica Majora itself. There
is no evidence that Matthew ever produced a fair copy of the
early part of its text (up to 1188), for the first part of British
Museum Cotton MS. Nero D v (a copy of A) dates from about
fifty years after his death. He did, however, produce a fair copy
of the text of the Chronica Majora from 1189 to 1250, which is
now the second part of Nero D v, and which I have called C.
C was copied by a scribe from B, probably in or shortly after
1250, and many of Matthew's marginalia in B are incorporated
in its text. Some of the errors and inconsistencies of B are
avoided in C: for instance, a passage inadvertently repeated in B
is only copied once into C. 1 On the other hand, many of J3's
errors are transcribed unaltered into C, and its scribe made no
serious or systematic attempt at correction. 2 Matthew wrote very
few marginalia into C, and he seems to have lost interest in it
once it was copied, so that it remains to this day a more or less
untouched copy of his Chronica Majora as he originally intended
to leave it. If we are thinking in terms of editions, C was the
first edition of the Chronica Majora. B, on the other hand, was
Matthew's actual working manuscript, into the margins of which

1 CM. ii, p. 351, note i.

2 See Luard's remarks on the scribe of C, CM. i, p. xii.

110

ABRIDGEMENT AND EXPURGATION

he added new information, alternative readings and corrections;
and to the text of which he went on adding until the end of the
annal for 1253, after which he embarked on the third volume of
the Chronica Majora, which I have called R.

We must not be too ready to assume, from its title, that the
Historia Anglorum was designed as an 'English History ' in
contrast to the general European history in the Chronica Major a.
In fact, Matthew himself refers to the Chronica Majora as the
'historia anglorum', and, in writing it, he evidently thought of
himself as writing what was essentially a history of England,
even though it contained a great deal of Continental history.
In the course of the annal for 1244 in the Chronica Majora he
begins his paragraph describing the pope's attempts to get
David, prince of North Wales, into his power, with the words: 1
' Nor do I think it irrelevant to my matter, or inapposite (imper-
tinens), or indeed wholly unconnected with the history of
England (historiae regni Angliae penitus inutile), to elucidate for
our posterity. . ..* And, in the course of the 1249 annal, 2 he
says that an enumeration of all the crusaders killed in Cyprus
would be f historiae Anglorum impertinens'. Further on in the
Chronica Majora* he excuses himself for including an account
of the battle of Walcheren, with the words: 'Nee haec in
cronicis Anglorum collocassem. . .nisi. . . '; and, shortly after-
wards, 4 he explains that he is confining himself *ad ea quae
Anglicam contingunt historiam'. Matthew, then, evidently
thought of his Chronica Majora as a history of England, and we
need not therefore attach any special significance to the phrase
'historia anglorum 5 in the prologue to the Historia Anglorum,
nor to its occurrence in several places in the text, where it, or
something similar, is evidently used in the same sense as in the
passages quoted above from the Chronica Majora. Thus, in the
Historia Anglorum Matthew justifies his account of the siege
of Nicaea with the words : 5 * Nee mihi videtur a materia croni-
corum et historiarum super eventibus Angliae confectarum
alienum, si. . . *; and he leaves the subject of the crusade and
returns to Henry I, with the phrase: 'Redeuntes autem ad
Anglorum historiam'. 6 In one place in the Historia Anglorum 1

1 CM, iv, p. 316. 2 V, p. 92. 3 V, p. 438. 4 V, p. 440.
5 i, p. 79. 6 HA. i, p. 188.

Ill

MATTHEW PARIS

he omits some letters (which are given in the Chronica Majora),
*ut difficile et diffusum foret in hiis cronicis, quae tantum
statum regni Angliae debent describendo manifestare, plenius
enucleare'; and in the course of the annal for 1249 ^ e excuses
himself for omitting the names of the crusaders killed in Cyprus
with the same words as in the Chronica Major a^ 'Anglorum
historiae impertinens'. 1

It appears probable that Matthew, in the course of writing his
Chronica Major a, found it hard not to include every item of news
which came to hand, and that he was aware of the irrelevance, to
English history, of much of his material. It was, it seems from
the passages quoted above, his intention all along to confine
himself to English affairs, or at least to matters connected with
England. But in the Chronica Majora he had failed to do this,
and it may well be that he embarked on the Historia Anglorum
with the idea of trying to rectify this failing by drastic abridge-
ment, especially of material which, on reflexion, he considered
irrelevant to English history. The marginal directions which he
wrote into AB for his own use in writing the Historia Anglorum
bear this out: 2 the description of the Albigensian crusade is
marked in the margin of B? 'Utile, sed impertinens historiae
Anglorum' ; and the accounts of the council at Bourges and the
siege of Avignon in 1226 are marked in the margin of J3, 4
'Impertinens ad Anglicam historiam'. These passages are
drastically abridged in the Historia Anglorum, and there are
many others like them, marked in AB in a similar way (usually
with signs to delimit them), and omitted or much abridged in
the Historia Anglorum. The formula varies, and sometimes
throws more light on Matthew's intentions. We find, for instance :
c Haec plus pertinent ad imperatorem quam ad historiam
Anglorum'; and 'Pertinens historiae Walensium, indirecte
tamen Anglorum'. 5

But if Matthew was determined, in writing the Historia
Anglorum) to omit a great deal of the material in the Chronica
Majora which was irrelevant to the history of England, he was
also determined to abridge throughout; and the Historia
Anglorum shows a marked desire for brevity. Of the 160 docu-

1 in, p. 66. * See above, pp. 64-5. 8 CM. n, p. 554, note 4.

4 CM. m, pp. 105 and 114. 5 CM. in, p. 145 and iv, p. 316.

112

ABRIDGEMENT AND EXPURGATION

ments written out in full in B, only five are copied into the
Historia Anglorum. One document, Matthew confesses, is
copied into the Historia because it is short: '. . .in haec verba.
Quae, quia sunt brevia, hie duximus ea annotanda'; 1 and
another, on the double excuse of brevity and relevance: 'Quae,
quia breves et multum operantur ad praesentem materiam, hie
notantur'; 2 but the lengthy account of the Evesham monk's
vision in the Chronica Major a is omitted in the Historia ' quia
narratio prolixa est ' . 3 The Historia Anglorum, then, is an abridge-
ment of the Chronica Majora designed to be confined more
particularly to English affairs. It is successful as an abridge-
ment, but contains a great deal of matter not strictly relevant to
English history. As in the Chronica, so in the Historia, Matthew
evidently found it impossible to confine himself purely to the
affairs of his own country.

The Historia Anglorum, especially in its earlier part, 4 contains
a certain amount of matter not in the Chronica Majora, and it
incorporates in its text a considerable part, though by no means
all, of the new material which Matthew added into the margins
of AB. Towards the end, and especially during the last few
annals, the Historia Anglorum is very much abridged, and, in
comparison with the Chronica Majora, it is lifeless and dulL In
parts its text degenerates into a mere series of laconic entries,
of the type familiar in the lesser monastic chronicles of the time, 5
and there is very little of the lively descriptive narrative so
characteristic of the Chronica Majora. There are, however, some
signs of an attempt, on Matthew's part, to arrange his material
more systematically, for he has tried to collect all the obituary
notices of each annal together at the end, 6 and sometimes the
entries are rearranged in the Historia Anglorum in a more logical
order. The text of the Historia ends with the annal for 1253, and
it seems that Matthew must have lost interest in it some time
before it was finished, no doubt because he was still engrossed
in the recording of contemporary events.

Some time after 1250 (very likely after 1255), Matthew com-

1 i, p. 347. 2 i, p. 355. 3 n, p. 60.

4 See HA. in, pp. xxxv ff.

5 See, for instance, HA. in, pp. 119 and 126.

6 I.e. in the annals for 1242, 1245, 1246 and 1247.

8 113 VMP

MATTHEW PARIS

piled the Abbreviatio Chronicorum. The text of this short work
extends from 1000 to 1255, an d remains unfinished. Up to
the annal for 1066 it is derived from Roger Wendover or the
Chronica Major a, with some additional material from Henry of
Huntingdon and others. 1 From 1066 to 1250 it is abridged from
the Historia Anglorum, but with occasional passages from the
Chronica Major a', 2 and from 1251 onwards it is abridged partly
from the Chronica Major a and partly from the Historia Anglorum,
the last two annals being taken wholly from the Chronica.
Matthew seems to have made no effort, in the Abbreviatio
Chronicorum, to confine himself to English history, and it is
difficult to know with exactly what motive it was written. It is
headed simply: Haec est Abbreviatio compendiosa Cronicorum
Angliae', 3 and perhaps it should be regarded as just another
attempt on Matthew's part to produce an abridged version of
his main chronicle. There is little new material in the Abbre-
viatio, and many of the passages in it which are not derived
from the Historia Anglorum or the Chronica Majora are mere
expressions of opinion, adding nothing new of a factual nature.
Minor alterations from the text of the Historia Anglorum are not
infrequent in the Abbreviatio: for instance the papal legate is
blamed for fomenting the quarrel between Archbishop Edmund
and his monks, while in the Historia Anglorum this is said to
have been due to the devil. 4

Although we have already discussed Book n of the Flares
Historiarum at some length in the previous chapter, it ought,
for the sake of completeness, to be mentioned here. Owing to
the additional material it contains, the Flores is, apart from the
Chronica Majora, probably the most interesting of Matthew's
historical works. It seems to have been designed as a popular
edition of the main chronicle: one manuscript of it (Ch) was
certainly written especially for Westminster. The tone of Book II
of the Flores is vigorous and colourful, and much of it is charac-
teristic of Matthew's best writing. It is markedly anti-papal,
and it is interesting to note that, although it seems to have been
written with a view to general publication, it is the only one of

1 See HA. in, pp. 156-7.

2 For instance, at AC. pp. 253, note 5, 304, note 6, and 313.

3 AC. p. 159. * AC. p. 277, and HA. n, p. 411.

114

ABRIDGEMENT AND EXPURGATION

Matthew's more important historical works which has not been
expurgated by him after it was written.

The shortest of Matthew's abridged editions of the Chronica
Majora is the chronicle in British Museum Cotton MS. Vitellius
A xx, which I have called V. 1 Its text extends from 1066 to
1246, and, up to the annal for 1134, it is, as we have seen, com-
piled from Matthew's new material. The next section of the
text of F, from 1 135 to 1214, is in part abridged from Matthew's
Chronica Majora in AB, and some of Matthew's additions and
alterations in the margins of AB are copied into it; but there
are some variants which show that a manuscript of Roger
Wendover was also used. The annal for 1215, in V, consists of
a series of documents which together take up nine pages
a large proportion of the chronicle's total length of thirty-one
pages. 2 The first of these documents is Magna Carta. Up to
chapter 25, F J s text of this document is similar to that of
Matthew Paris in 5, and it is vitiated in the same way by the
omission of some passages (which have, however, been supplied
in the margins of B, and also of F; all those in B and some of
those in F being in Matthew's hand) and by the introduction
of other passages from the 1225 re-issue of Magna Carta. From
chapter 25 onwards, however, F has the text of the 1215 charter
correctly, instead of the garbled version found in Roger Wend-
over and Matthew Paris. Innocent Ill's grant of free elections
to the church follows Magna Carta in F; and, after it, the list
of barons who swore to support the charter. 3 Both these docu-
ments occur also in B and the Liber Additamentorum, and the
text of the former in F seems to have been taken from the same
source as was used by Matthew for his other copies of it. Next
follows a complete text of ' John's Forest Charter', which is in
fact Henry Ill's Forest Charter of 1225; this document is
corrupt and incomplete in B and in the manuscripts of Roger
Wendover. 4 After this Forest Charter, F continues with a com-
plete and uncorrupt copy of the 1225 reissue of Magna Carta, 5
the only copy of this document in any of Matthew's manu-

1 See p. 41 above, where I have printed the title.

2 The documents take up ff. 93b~ioza of V.

3 F, ff. 97-8. 4 F, ff. 98-9; CM. n, pp. 598-602.
5 F, ff. 99-101 b.

115 8-2

MATTHEW PARIS

scripts; and this is followed by a copy of the Coronation Charter
of Henry I, 1 which is given twice in Matthew's Chronica Major a.
It is noteworthy, in connexion with these documents in V, that
they are less corrupt than any other copies given by Matthew
Paris, and that they are independent of those in B. From 1216
to the end of V in 1246 the text seems to have been abridged
from J3, but there is some evidence that a manuscript of Roger
Wendover was also used up to the annal for 1235. V, therefore,
though a work of minute size when compared to the others so
far reviewed, is of considerable interest, both for the copies of
documents which it contains, and on account of its variety of
sources ; for this little chronicle has been compiled not only from
the Chronica Major a> but also from Roger Wendover 's Flores
Historiarunty Matthew's new material, and at least one other
source.

There is one work, quite different in character from any of
those so far discussed, which we ought to mention: this is
Matthew's genealogical chronicle, which he calls in A (L ivb):
'Cronica sub conpendio abreuiata a fratre M. Parisiensi'. It is
not an abridgement of any particular manuscript, but a brief
chronicle of the kings of England from Alfred onwards. The
names of the kings, sometimes accompanied by drawings of
them, are written in central medallions, and their children are
shown in small medallions below. In general scheme it is very
like the illustrated versions of Peter of Poitier's universal
chronicle, and indeed Matthew may well have based it on
manuscript number 96 in the Library of Eton College, which
was probably executed at St Albans during his lifetime. 2 The
subject-matter of Matthew's genealogical chronicle of the kings
of England is brief and unimportant. He wrote several different
versions of it, for that in A (f. ivb and p. 285) differs considerably
from that in B (S. iiia-b); and that in the Abbreviatio Chroni-
corum 2 ' differs from them both. Copies and versions of this
chronicle are very numerous, and it was evidently a popular
work. John of Wallingford included it in his collection of
historical material, 4 and another nearly contemporary copy has

1 V, ff. ioib-io2. 2 See below, p. 225.

8 Brit. Mus. Cotton MS. Claudius D vi, ff. 6b-8a.
4 Brit. Mus. Cotton MS. Julius D vii, ff. s6b~59b.

116

ABRIDGEMENT AND EXPURGATION

been preserved in the form of a separate parchment roll, with
Merlin's prophecies written out on the verso. 1

It cannot be denied that Matthew Paris was an extremely
unsystematic worker, and he seems to have been constantly
striving to improve on what he had written. Besides producing
a number of shorter versions of his main chronicle, he fre-
quently went back over his manuscripts, making additions and
corrections, and, especially towards the end of his life, erasures
and alterations. These latter represent an attempt at a systematic
expurgation of his manuscripts on a far larger scale than that
carried out, for instance, by William of Malmesbury. Matthew
is a remarkably outspoken writer, and he seems to have realized,
as early as 1250, that many of the offensive comments, scandalous
reports and bitter complaints, in reference especially to the
king, which adorned the text of his Chronica Major a^ ought not
to be reproduced in a fair copy. He therefore went through J5,
pointing out in the margins with the word vacat, or something
similar, the passages to be omitted by the scribe of the fair copy. 2
He did not, however, go through B very systematically, and many
passages just as offensive as those marked vacat were left un-
noticed. Moreover the scribe of C, the existing fair copy of jB,
frequently included passages marked vacat in his text, and most
of those he noticed are only relegated to the margin, instead of
being omitted altogether. All but three of the twenty passages
either omitted from, or written into the margin of, C, because
they are marked vacat in B, cast aspersions on King Henry III.
It is difficult to understand the object of this partial expurgation,
unless Matthew was planning to produce an expurgated version
of his Chronica Majora, perhaps for the king himself, which was
to have been copied from C, the scribe being instructed to omit
the marginalia in that manuscript. Be this as it may, it was not
for several years that Matthew again resorted to expurgation,
and this time it was B itself which suffered.

In the Chronica Majora the expurgation extends in B and
R from the annal for 1241 up to that for 1257. Up to 1250 the
text of all the passages either erased or altered in B is preserved

1 Gerould, 'A text of Merlin's prophecies*, Speculum, xxm (1948),
pp. 102-3. 2 See pp. 64-5 above.

117

MATTHEW PARIS

for us in C; but after this annal the original reading is lost, and
consequently we cannot always be sure of the nature of the
offending remarks. The work of expurgation is neither systema-
tically, nor very thoroughly, carried out. There is none at all,
for instance, in the annals for 1251 and 1252, nor before the
annal for 1241. Even between 1241 and 1250 the expurgation
was far from thorough, and Matthew seems to have worked at
it patchily and more or less at random. If we take Luard's
fourth volume of the Chronica Major a^ which includes the annals
1240-7, we find that passages either rewritten or simply erased
occur (apart from a few solitary ones) in well-defined groups; 1
and that, outside these groups, many passages are left which are
just as offensive as some of those expurgated. 2 Even in those
parts of B in which these groups of expurgated passages occur,
where we might expect to find the work of expurgation
efficiently carried out, it is not. Had Matthew set about his
work more thoroughly, for instance, he would surely not have
left the words 'and the papal Charybdis devoured all his goods'
untouched, at the end of a paragraph whence the words * inspired
by manifest avarice', in reference to the pope, have been
expunged as offensive. 3 Although this work of expurgation is
evidently due to Matthew himself, his scribe rewrote a number
of passages for him. 4 In B (1241-53), nineteen passages of more
than a line in length are erased with nothing substituted, and
thirteen have been erased and rewritten, four by Matthew and
nine by his scribe. In British Museum Royal MS. 14 C vii
(J?; 1254-9), where not a single passage has been merely erased,
three passages of more than a line in length have been rewritten
by Matthew, and nineteen by his scribe. The largest number of
such passages expurgated in any one annal occurs in that for
1254 (twelve), and the second largest in 1255 (four). Towards
the end of B the editing diminishes in frequency, so that in the
last five annals (1249-53) only three passages of more than a line
have been erased, and only one of these is rewritten. The scribe
who helped Matthew with the rewriting of these passages is the

1 At pp. 101-5, 206-11, 254-65, 396-410, 5<>9~i4> 553-65 and 604-19.
For some of the solitary passages, see pp. 279, 360, 425 and 639.

2 See pp. 9, 137, 547 and 577-8 etc. 3 CM. iv, pp. 604-5.
4 For instance at CM. iv, pp. 360, 509 and 510.

118

ABRIDGEMENT AND EXPURGATION

same as the one who finished for him the texts of the Chronica
Majora, the Historia Anglorum and the Abbreviatio Chronicorum y
and he appears to have been called in to help only towards the
end of Matthew's life. 1 This suggests a late date for the expurga-
tion of the Chronica Major a, and the fact that it extends up to the
annal for 1257, and that there is no noticeable change in the tone
of the Chronica Major a right up to its close, supports this sug-
gestion. A comparison of the Historia Anglorum and the
Chronica Majora shows that the former was copied before the
editing had been carried out in the latter, and this fact, too,
points to a late date for the expurgation of B and R. Moreover,
the presence of a number of passages erased (as well as the
tearing out of a whole leaf at one point), 2 but with nothing
substituted, makes it probable that the work of editing has been
left unfinished. It seems, in fact, to have been carried out at the
end of Matthew's life (1258-9), and to have been begun with
the annals after 1253, in R. Matthew seems to have expurgated
this part of his Chronica Majora first, and then to have turned
to the earlier part of its text, in J3, beginning at the annal for
1241, and working unsystematically through the succeeding
annals, until death overtook him in the midst of his labours.

An analysis of those expurgated passages whose original
reading is ascertainable shows that they included both abusive
words and phrases, and factual material presented in a scurrilous
or tendentious manner. Apart from a few erasures of single
words and phrases, and omitting also the erased chapter-
headings, I have counted sixty-one edited passages in the
Chronica Majora. Of forty-three of these it is possible to be
certain of the nature of the offence in the original version:
fifteen were offensive to the papacy; twelve to Archbishop
Boniface; nine to the king; three to the friars; and one each to
Richard of Cornwall, Robert Grosseteste, the papal legate in
Norway, and the king's mother. It seems likely, as pointed out
above, that Matthew intended to rewrite most of the passages
which have been merely erased. No doubt, for instance, the
leaf describing Archbishop Boniface's activities on Visitation,
which he tore out altogether, would have been replaced by
another with a milder account of this ; and the same is probably
1 See above, p. 10, and note 3. 2 See CM. v, pp. xii-xiii.

119

MATTHEW PARIS

true of the offensive passage against the friars, which he erased,
but did not rewrite. 1 But in some cases single words, such as
*turpiter', 'enormiter', 'indecens', 'falsum', etc., or offensive
chapter-headings, such as ' Fratres Predicatores et Minores fiunt
theolonarii papae', 2 have been erased apparently without any
intention of substituting milder ones. Where a passage has
been erased, and another substituted, a comparison of the
two versions is often illuminating. Sometimes the second read-
ing is a toned-down version of the first, as in the following
example: 3

First reading: But the king, realizing the hidden snares and detesting
the greed of the Roman court

Second reading: But the king, realizing that a thing of this kind was
harmful to that church, and likewise to others

But frequently the second, edited reading has a quite dif-
ferent emphasis from the first. For instance, in one place in
the Chronica Majora* Matthew at first described Archbishop
Boniface as *a man. . .insufficient for such a dignity, when
compared to his predecessors the archbishops of Canterbury, in
learning, manners, and years . . . ' ; but he later erased this, and
wrote instead: 'a man of tall stature and elegant body, the uncle
of the lady Eleanor, the illustrious Queen of England. . .'.

Sometimes the second passage contradicts what was said in
the first. For instance, Matthew originally put into the mouth
of a French noble the statement that King Henry III unjustly
hanged Constantine FitzAthulf; 5 but this has been erased, and
in the passage substituted for it the noble is made to state
explicitly that the king knew nothing about it! On several
occasions, too, the second passage has no connexion whatsoever
with the first: thus Matthew's description of Boniface's oppres-
sion of the Canterbury monks in 1244* is altered into an account
of the bishop of Winchester's reception by the king.

Matthew's expurgation of the Historia Anglorum was much
more thorough and effective than that of the Chronica Major a.
It begins with the early thirteenth-century annals, and continues

1 For the torn-out leaf, see above, p. 119, note 2. For the attack on the

friars: CM. iv, pp. 279-80. 2 CM. v, p. 73. 3 CM. iv, p. 102.

* iv, p. 104. 5 CM. iv, p. 206. 6 CM. iv, p. 360.

1 2O

ABRIDGEMENT AND EXPURGATION

nearly up to the end. There are some passages, mostly in the
margin, which have been erased, and nothing substituted; but,
apart from these few, the expunged passages in the Historia
Anglorum have been replaced with milder ones, written either
on the erasure itself, or on a piece of vellum pasted down over
the original passage. All the expurgation in the Historia
Anglorum^ save for one passage in the annal for 1252 which was
rewritten by his scribe, 1 was carried out by Matthew himself.
As in the Chronica Majora, most of the expurgated passages
were of a kind calculated to give offence to pope, king, or
archbishop, but the editing in the Historia Anglorum is on a
bigger scale altogether than that in the Chronica Majora. The
account of John's reign, for instance, is altered slightly in tone
by a large number of minute alterations, as when ' collection! '
is substituted for ' extorsioni ', or * iracundiam ' for ' tyrannidem \ 2
In the annals for 1244-50 so many passages have been expur-
gated and others substituted, that the whole character of this
part of the Historia Anglorum has been altered and toned down.
The alterations are often minute, but subtle; and Matthew
seems to have gone through the whole manuscript very care-
fully. In every case Madden did his best, usually with success,
to read the earlier, expunged passage, but in cases of simple
erasure and rewriting over the erasure this was often impossible;
and we have to guess at the nature of the alteration when we
find, for instance, William of Valence described, on an erasure,
as *vir elegans et generosus'. 3 Often a comparison with the
Chronica Majora will help to establish the original reading in the
Historia Anglorum. In his account, for instance, of the baptism
of Edward, the eldest son of Henry III, Matthew records that
Otho, the papal legate, baptized the child, and continues, a little
clumsily: *ubi praesens extitit archiepiscopus Cantuariensis
Edmundus*. In the Historia Anglorum, where this sentence
occurs, the words 4 ubi' and 'extitit' are on erasures, and the
original reading must have been, as in the Chronica Majora,
'licet praesens esset archiepiscopus': a subtle piece of editing! 4
The scope and technique of Matthew's expurgation of the
Historia Anglorum are noteworthy, and throw a great deal of

1 HA. m, p. 127. 2 HA. n, pp. 102, note i, and 108, note 3.

3 HA. n, p. 421. 4 HA. n, p. 422, and CM. in, p. 540.

121

MATTHEW PARIS

light on his mentality. Here is an example, where the second
passage was pasted down over the first on a slip of vellum, so
that Madden was able to print them both, which shows him at
work in a way characteristic of the expurgation in both the
Historia Anglorum and the Chronica Majora.

First version: 1 At this time the Dominicans and Franciscans
diligently busied themselves in their now lucrative preaching, and,
working hard on behalf of the crusade to the extent of making them-
selves hoarse with vociferation and preaching, they bestowed the
Cross on people of every age, sex, and condition, including invalids.
But on the following day, or even immediately afterwards, receiving
back the Cross for whatever price, they absolved those who had
taken it from their vow of pilgrimage, and collected the money into
the treasury of some powerful person. To simple people this seemed
unseemly and ridiculous, and the devotion of many was cooled, for
it was being sold like sheep for their fleeces; and out of this no small
scandal arose.

Second version: 2 ' At this time the Dominicans and Franciscans,
as well as others expert and learned in the art of preaching, busied
themselves with their sermons, and, sowing useful seed in God's
field, they produced manifold fruit. And in order that Christ's faith-
ful should not be deprived of the advantage of the indulgence which
they promised to those who took the Cross for the crusade, they
courteously received a redemption according to the means of each,
so that, with the help of God's great munificence, a ready will might
be reckoned as good as the deed. For it was considered that women,
children, and invalids, as well as poor and unarmed people, would
be of little use against the armed multitude of infidels.

In some cases the substituted passage describes something
quite different from what was at first related. One passage
casting aspersions on Archbishop Boniface, 3 for instance, is
pasted over with a vellum slip, on which Matthew wrote some
innocuous remarks describing Henry IIFs request for prayers
to be made for a male heir, suggested, no doubt, by the next entry
in the Historia Anglorum, which recorded the birth of his son.
Covering up his many attacks on Boniface seems to have taxed
Matthew's ingenuity, for another of them is pasted over with a
harmless but apparently entirely fictitious meteorological entry ! 4

1 HA. m, pp. 51 and 52, note 3. z HA. m, pp. 51-2.

3 HA. ii, p. 499. 4 HA. n, pp. 489-90.

122

ABRIDGEMENT AND EXPURGATION

The editing of the Historia Anglorum was evidently not
carried out in a hurry, and one passage at least has been rewritten
twice: first, on an erasure (and also with a plummet in the lower
margin), and afterwards on a slip of vellum stuck down over
the text. 1 After the middle of the annal for 1251 in the Historia
Anglorum there is no further editing, 2 though there are one or
two harsh passages which perhaps ought to have been edited. 3
The cessation of the expurgation during the annal for 1251
makes it likely that it was carried out before Matthew finished
writing the Historia Anglorum. Unfortunately, however, there
is very little evidence as to its date, and we can only conclude,
tentatively, that it was carried out towards the end of Matthew's
life, and probably during the years 1256-9.

A number of passages in the Historia Anglorum are marked
with red letters in the margin vacat y or vacat quia offendiculum,
in just the same way as passages in B were pointed out for
omission in C; 4 and it seems probable that these notices were
intended as a guide to Matthew (or a possible scribe) in the
writing of the Abbreviatio Chronicorum, for a number of passages
marked in this way are omitted in that work. A careful com-
parison of the texts of the Historia Anglorum and the Abbreviatio
Chronicorum shows that, up to about the annal for 1243, tne
Abbreviatio was abridged from the original, unaltered text of
the Historia, while from this point onwards it seems to derive
from the expurgated, altered text.

Why did Matthew Paris expurgate his works in this way?
In the case of his fair copy of the Chronica Major a in C, the
expurgation was, in the main, limited to passages offensive to
the king. It was carried out while that manuscript was being
written, probably c. 1250, and we have suggested that its object
was perhaps to produce a fair copy of the Chronica suitable for
presentation to the king. 5 Now Madden thought that the expur-
gation of the Historia Anglorum was perhaps carried out with
this object in view. 6 It is a fact that the sudden cessation of the
expurgation during the annal for 1251 in the Historia Anglorum

1 HA. n, p. 455, note 4.

2 Save for one passage rewritten by Matthew's scribe at in, p. 127.

3 See e.g. HA. in, pp. 125-9. 4 See above, pp. 64-5 and 117.
5 Above, p. 117. B HA. in, p. xxxii.

123

MATTHEW PARIS

coincides with the cessation of a series of explicit references to
documents in Matthew's other manuscripts. Up to the annal
for 1251, these references have nearly all been altered into
vague, general ones, while, after the 1251 annal, vague general
references occur in the text. It does seem possible, as we sug-
gested above, 1 that the expurgation and the alteration of the
references to documents were undertaken with the same end: to
make the book suitable for someone outside St Albans, perhaps
the king. If so, the intention was certainly never carried out, for,
on f. 6b of the Historia Anglorum, there is an inscription in
Matthew's own hand recording his gift of the book to St Albans.
Luard suggested that the editing of the Chronica Major a may
have been carried out by Matthew for fear of giving offence to
the king: for Henry III was a frequent visitor to St Albans. 2
But this is hardly an adequate explanation, for Matthew was
already well known to the king in 1247, and Henry visited
St Albans at least five times between 1250 and 1256; yet the
Chronica Majora was probably not expurgated until 1258-9.
It seems much more likely that the expurgation of the Chronica
Majora was a product of advancing years : the result of a resolve,
on Matthew's part, to try to correct some of his extravagances,
many of which he must have realized were unjust and unde-
served. The thought of approaching death perhaps led him to
soften his animosity towards old friends like the king and public
figures like Archbishop Boniface; and he may have been im-
pelled, by a fear of Divine Judgement, to expunge or tone down
his most violent attacks on the papacy. Qualms of conscience
may well have afflicted a Benedictine monk who had recorded
that 'the papal court stinks to the high heavens 5 , 3 and who had
cast so many aspersions on his king and archbishop. Be this as
it may, it is certainly fortunate for us that this expurgation was
unsystematically carried out, and, at any rate in the Chronica
Majora, never finished; for, had it been more thorough and
complete, Matthew might never have earned his well-deserved
reputation for outspokenness, nor left some of his more vigorous
and colourful prejudices on record for posterity.

1 P. 73- 2 CM. iv, pp. xii-xiii. 3 CM. iv, p. 410.

124

CHAPTER VIII

MATTHEW PARIS THE CHRONICLER

T:

FHE large corpus of historical material which Matthew
Paris has left us includes five works of general interest:
the Chronica Majora, Historia Anglorum, Abbreviatio
Chronicorum, Flores Historiarum and the Liber Additamentorum;
but the last of these is in effect only an appendix or supplement
to the Chronica Majora. Compared to the Chronica Majora,
their source, the Historia Anglorum, Abbreviatio Chronicorum
and the Flores Historiarum are of only incidental value, and our
study of Matthew Paris as a writer and chronicler will therefore
be based on the Chronica Majora. As a historian, in the sense
of one who studies the past, Matthew is of little significance, for
his efforts at historical research were limited to the collection
of some annalistic material, and the composition of the Vitae
Offarum, a work which contains a number of absurd historical
blunders as, for instance, the statement that the first St Albans
monks came from the abbey of Bee in Normandy 1 and which
betrays, on the part of its author, a very slight knowledge of the
historical Offa of Mercia. The real importance of Matthew's
writing lies in his detailed account of the events of his own
lifetime. He drew the Chronica Majora to its intended close
in 1250 with these words: 2 'Here ends the chronicle of Brother
Matthew Paris, monk of St Albans, which he has written down
for the use of posterity and for the love of God and St Alban,
lest age or oblivion efface the memory of modern events.'

Evidently his primary object was the recording of contem-
porary events, and he did this in fuller detail than almost any
other medieval writer. His own section of the Chronica Majora
extends from 1236 to 1259, an d almost the whole of this,
amounting to some 300,000 words, has survived in autograph.
It includes accounts of events in England, Wales, Scotland,
France, Germany, Italy, the Iberian peninsula, Denmark,

1 Wats, p. 30. Bee was founded in 1039, some 250 years after St Albans.

I2S

MATTHEW PARIS

Norway, and the East; indeed, it seems that Matthew con-
sidered no information irrelevant, in spite of the fact that he
thought of his chronicle, primarily, as a history of England.
He well understood the importance of supporting and ampli-
fying his narrative with documentary material, and he has
preserved copies, in the Chronica Majora and the Liber Addita-
mentorum, of some 350 documents of all kinds. Of these, about
100 are of domestic (St Albans) interest only. Among those of
general interest are about forty royal letters and writs; some
twenty letters of Frederick II ; and about sixty papal documents.
Matthew Paris, on account of the scope and size of his chronicle
alone, is unique among medieval English chroniclers.

Matthew's Latin style is vigorous, forceful, and direct: there
is no artificial elegance about it, and little conscious artistry.
It is blunt and straightforward, yet often lively and colourful.
Although it is the rough, unpolished, downright writing of a man
of limited intelligence and fixed ideas, yet it is always vivid and
expressive. It is individual enough to be easily recognizable,
and N. Denholm- Young noted the interesting fact that, even in
his use of the cursus, Matthew is peculiar. 1 His style is rather
stereotyped, and he tends to be repetitive in his use of certain
phrases, biblical and classical allusions, descriptive epithets, and
the like. Some of these recur over and over again, so that their
presence can be used to demonstrate his authorship of doubtful
works. 2 Here are some of the phrases and allusions of which he
was particularly fond:

seminarium discordiae

zelo justitiae

in ore gladii

quod est inauditum

secus quam deceret

dignum duximus huic libro

inserere

versus in arcum pravum
patulis rictibus inhiantes
in magna cordis amaritudine

felix suscepit incrementum
novit Ipse qui nihil ignorat
quorum numerum longum foret

explicare
ab alto (or immo) trahens

suspirmm

sicut sequens sermo declarabit
nee censeo praetereundum
immo potius
haec iccirco dixerim

1 Denholm-Young, Handwriting in England and Wales, p. $2. See also
Browne, British Latin Selections, pp. xxxviixxxviii.

2 See Chapter in above, pp. 38 ff.

126

MATTHEW PARIS THE CHRONICLER

nimis moleste ferens ne mundus iste prospera sine

in triste praesagium adversis impermixta

tractatus exigeret speciales negotium martis

libra rationis trutinare torvo vultu (or oculo)

infausto sidere pedibus equinis

ut plura paucis perstringamus parvipendendo immo potius

in arcto positus vilipendendo

factus de rege tirannus nodum in scirpo quaerere

ut viderentur Apostolorum si scriberentur taedium audien-

tempora renovari tibus generarent

quasi a sends ultimae conditionis

In vocabulary, too, Matthew tends to be repetitive, and to use
the same, often rather colourful, words over and over again,
such as :

cruentus saginari quisquiliae

inhiare ridiculosus truculenter

subsannare procaciter vindemiare (pecuniam)

vispilio muscipulum impudenter

Neologisms and unusual words or phrases also occur, for
instance: ' Romipedes ' ; 'clericulus'; and 'Fretherizare'.

A characteristic feature of Matthew's style is his love of play
on words, frequently expressed by the use of pairs of words of
similar form but different meaning. Some of the commonest
of these are: 'mellitus' and 'mollitus'; 'misertus' and 'misera-
tus j ; 'durus 5 and 'dims'; 'doto' and 'dito'; 'plures' and
'pluries'; 'volo' and 'valeo 5 .

As with vocabulary, so with imagery Matthew tends to be
limited in resources and repetitive; and the following metaphors
occur many times :

like birds in a net

like a thorn in the eye

as if between two millstones

clearer than light

like sand without lime

like a mountain torrent

The metaphor from Isaiah, of the splintering staff which pierces
the hand, is very frequently used; as well as that from the

127

MATTHEW PARIS

Psalms of the vineyard without a wall, pillaged by passers-by. 1
England is often likened to an inexhaustible well ; and when one
thing or person is superior to another, the relationship is com-
pared to the superiority of St Albans over the other English
abbeys, or of St Alban over the other English saints. Matthew's
imagery often reflects his interest in natural phenomena of all
kinds. In this connexion, the following metaphors are among
the most striking :

like blind men feeling along a wall 2

like throwing a bone to a crowd of dogs 3

like bees coming out of a hive 4

like a cuckoo supplanting its foster-parent 5

like a mouse in a sack 6

like a bladder in frosty weather 7

like pouring cold water into a boiling cauldron 8

Matthew has the usual medieval repertory of biblical and
classical quotations; the latter perhaps taken from a Florilegium.
He delights in misquoting a line from a Latin poet to suit his
own purposes; for instance he quotes Lucan: 9

. . . omnisque potestas
Impatiens consortis erit. . .

and gives an alternative version with 'superbus' instead of
' potestas '. He seems to have been much pleased with this emen-
dation, for he uses it on three more occasions in the Chronica
Majora, and once in the Historia Anglorwn. Some of the
classical quotations are repeated up to six times. Ovid is the
most frequently cited author, with thirty-two quotations in all ;
Horace comes next, with eleven; Juvenal follows with six; and
Lucan, Claudian and Virgil are each quoted three times. Of
late classical and medieval authors Matthew quotes from
Justinian; Abdias's apocryphal Ada Apostolorum; Bernard
Sylvester's Cosmographia; Geoffrey of Vinsauf's Nova Poetria
(four times) ; and Henry of Avranches and Gervase of Melkeley .

1 Isa. xxxvi. 6, and Ps. Ixxix. 13. 2 CM. v, p. 532.

8 CM. v, p. 357. 4 FH. n, p. 281.
5 AC. p. 322. 6 FH. n, p. 283.
7 CM. v, p. 31. 8 HA. n, p. 405.

9 Lucan, Phars. i, 93-4; CM. v, p. 77.

128

MATTHEW PARIS THE CHRONICLER

He was interested in verse, and is particularly fond of epitaphs
and topical verses. About ten of the former are given in the
Chronica Majora, some, perhaps, taken from his own collection
of verse in University Library, Cambridge, MS. Dd xi 38.*
Biblical quotations are frequent in all Matthew's historical
writings, but they are unevenly distributed through the Bible,
and an analysis of them would probably reflect Matthew's bibli-
cal interest and knowledge. Thus, Luard notices thirty-eight
quotations from Psalms; twenty-four from Matthew; seventeen
from Luke; nine from Isaiah; five each from Acts, Kings,
Proverbs and Galatians; and four each from Peter, Job, Exodus
and Timothy. Of historians, Matthew knew and used the great
twelfth-century writers William of Malmesbury, Henry of
Huntingdon, Florence of Worcester, Robert de Monte, Geoffrey
of Monmouth, and Ralph de Diceto ; 2 and he made use of later
monastic annals from Southwark, Reading, Coggeshall, Caen
and probably Ramsey. Other twelfth-century works mentioned
in the Chronica Majora are Peter Lombard's Sentences ; Peter
Comestor's Historia Scholastica\ z and a work by William of
Tyre on the marvels of the East, which included an account of
the capture of Antioch and Jerusalem. 4

As a writer, Matthew is endowed with considerable descrip-
tive and anecdotal powers; with a talent for recording conversa-
tion in direct speech ; and with a remarkable flair for the observa-
tion and description of incidental details. Furthermore, he has
an interest in human beings and in the ordinary episodes of
daily life, which is a rare and valuable quality among medieval
chroniclers. Notices of curious and interesting detail, which
show his eager curiosity in everything about him, as well as his
powers of observation, are very common in Matthew's writings.
We are given a detailed account of the metal point used at the

1 See below, p. 260.

2 The copies of Malmesbury, Geoffrey of Monmouth, and Diceto used by
Matthew still exist: the former two in B.M. Royal MS. 13 D v, and the
latter in Royal 1 3 E vi. See Vaughan, ' Handwriting of M. Paris ', Trans. Camb.
Bibliog. Soc. I (1953), p. 391.

3 The MS. used by Matthew was, presumably, B.M. Royal MS. 4 D vii,
which contains examples of his handwriting : see Vaughan, ibid.

4 HA. i, p. 163. On Matthew's knowledge of historians and classical litera-
ture see Marshall, 'Thirteenth-century culture as illustrated by Matthew
Paris', Speculum, xiv (1939), PP- 466-71.

9 129 VMP

MATTHEW PARIS

end of a lance, in connexion with the accidental killing of a
knight during a tournament; the monks' practice of examining
the stars in order to discover the right time for Matins is men-
tioned incidentally; and an invasion of curious birds which
broke open the apples in the abbey orchard in order to eat the
pips is recorded in I25I. 1 The details provided in the account
of the latter leave no doubt that the birds were crossbills, a
species which periodically invades the British Isles in large
numbers from north-east Europe. Matthew's writings are by
no means devoid of human interest and sentiment. For instance,
after his account of the king's departure for Gascony in 1253,
he continues: 2 'The boy Edward, who had been kissed and
embraced repeatedly by his weeping father, stood on the beach
crying and sobbing, for he would not go away while the billowing
(sinuosa) sails of the ships were still in sight.'

Of Matthew's failings, as a chronicler, one of the most obvious
is his carelessness. Many errors, some of language, some due to
faulty copying, and some of a historical nature, are to be found
in his writings. A characteristic error of language, due to care-
lessness, occurs in the annal for 1253 f tf 16 Chronica Major a?
where he has forgotten, half-way through a sentence, how he
had begun it, so that the construction is altered and nonsense
made of the whole passage. A common mistake of this kind is
the inadvertent omission of the verb, 4 or some other vital part
of a sentence. Matthew is just as careless when copying as he is
when composing. Lines are frequently lost through homoeo-
teleuton, and single words are often copied wrongly, as
'venerabilem' for 'verbalem', 'specialiter' for 'spiritualiter',
and 'cotidie' for 'custodie'. 5 Of the many historical blunders
which are due to carelessness, we may note the writing of
'Aragon' for 'Navarre', 'Henricus' for 'Ensius', 'tertio' for
'quarto', and 'Maii' for 'Martii'. 6 If Matthew's work is care-
less, it is also undisciplined and unsystematic. Not one of his
manuscripts is a final fair copy : in all of them, marginal additions
and corrections show that he went back constantly to re-read,

1 CM. v, pp. 319, 422-3, and 254-5.

2 CM. v, p. 383. 3 v, p. 367, note i.

4 See, for instance, CM. iv, p. 550, and v, p. 100.

5 CM. vi, p. 486; p. 478; iv, p. 413, note 2.

6 CM. iv, p. 79, note i ; p. 124, note i ; and v, pp. 638, note 2; 431, note 3.

130

MATTHEW PARIS THE CHRONICLER

revise and amplify what he had already written. Additional
information, not in the Chronica Majora, is to be found in the
Historia Anglorum, Floras Historiarum, and even the Abbreviatio
Chronicorum. A fault common to all these works, which demon-
strates Matthew's lack of order and control, is the frequent
repetition, whether of isolated entries, 1 or of a whole series of
entries ; 2 and sometimes an entry is made in the margin, as if to
remedy an omission in the text, when it has already been
entered there. 3

Matthew's carelessness makes him an inaccurate, and there-
fore frequently unreliable, writer, but his reliability can only be
properly assessed by an examination of his veracity. He himself
was certainly conscious on occasions of his duty to record the
truth, for in one place he expatiates on the difficulty of doing
this : ' The lot of historians is hard indeed, for, if they speak the
truth, they provoke man, and if they record falsehoods they
offend God.' 4 Elsewhere in the Chronica Major a we find the
incidental remark 'lest I should insert something false in this
book ', which shows, at any rate, that he recognized his obligations
in this respect. 5 There is, too, a note written with a plummet
in the margin of f. 244 of B, which reflects his regard for
accuracy ; for, in reference to a certain Guido, mentioned in the
text, he writes: ' Dubium si Guido vel Galfridus.' On the other
hand, Matthew's pious statements about his intentions cannot
be accepted at their face value. In reference to the pope, for
instance, he makes a thoroughly hypocritical remark: 'The
Lord, Judge of all judges, will judge if he has done well. . .for it
is not my business to judge papal actions.' 6 In the very next
annal, however, we find, in reference to a papal letter obtained
by the bishop of Hereford, the exclamation: 'Alas! For shame
and grief! These and other detestable things emanated at this
time from the sulphurous fountain of the Roman church.' 7

In fact, Matthew certainly sometimes allows himself con-
siderable licence in the reporting of facts. We have seen how,
when he went through his manuscripts striking out the offensive

1 E.g. at CM. iv, pp. 8 and 47-8.

2 Six entries are repeated in the 1257 annal in the Chronica Major a.

3 E.g. at CM. iv, p. 207, and note 3.

4 CM. v, pp. 469-70. 5 CM. v, p. 262.
6 CM. v, p. 459. 7 CM. v, p. 524.

131 9-2

MATTHEW PARIS

passages and substituting milder ones, he sometimes concocted
an apparently fictitious entry to replace the erased passage, 1
A careful examination of his copies of documents convicts him
of occasionally tampering with their texts, even to the extent of
deliberate falsification, although he evidently understood the
importance of documents as historical evidence, and had a great
deal of respect for them. In one place, for instance, he goes out
of his way to point out that he was copying from an original
letter, to which twelve seals were appended. 2 But the possibility
of tampering with the texts of the documents he was copying
was always there; and to this standing temptation Matthew
from time to time unfortunately succumbed. In the Chronica
Majora, for instance, he copied from Roger Wendover the text
of an imperial letter written from Jerusalem, describing
Frederick's recovery of that city. But when he came to tran-
scribe this letter into the Flores Historiamm, he could not resist
the temptation of adding to it the following fictitious report of
the emperor's troubles on his return: 3

But, because in this world bitter things are invariably mixed with
sweet, when we were returning to our Empire the way being with
difficulty open we crushed our enemies, who were supported to our
detriment by our father the pope, and managed to put a stop to their
sedition. Had not this business recalled us in great haste, the state of
the church would, by the grace of God, have been consolidated and
wonderfully improved.

At the end of the annal for 1237 in the Chronica Majora
a group of four letters has been inserted, written in fact in 1232,
which passed between Pope Gregory IX and the patriarch,
Germanus, of Constantinople; and there are a number of
material additions to the texts of the patriarch's two letters,
though those of the pope are left untouched. 4 Matthew begins
with the insertion into the patriarch's first letter of a long

1 See above, p. 122. 2 CM. iv, p. 344.

3 CM. in, pp. 173-6; FH. n, pp. 197-8; the passage translated is from.
FH. n, p. 198.

4 These letters are at CM. in, pp. 448-69; Luard collates them with the
copies in the Vatican, VI, pp. 482-5; and I have collated them with the
copies in the Red Book of the Exchequer t ff. 184 ff. The passage translated is
from CM. iv, p. 452, and I have used the translation of Giles, Matthew
Paris's English History, I, p. 102.

MATTHEW PARIS THE CHRONICLER

passage aimed at the pope, part of which runs thus: * And, that
we may arrive at the very pith of the truth, many powerful and
noble men would obey you, if they did not fear the unjust
oppressions, the wanton extortion of money which you practise,
and the undue services which you demand of those subject to
you/ Having taken the plunge, so to speak, with this long inter-
polation, Matthew proceeds to make some minor literary im-
provements to the text of his exemplar ; and, warming to his task,
he inserts more than a (printed) page of additional matter into
the patriarch's second letter, nearly all of which is directed
against the Roman church. The patriarch is made to address the
cardinals thus: 1 'It has given rise to offence in our minds, that
you gape after earthly possessions whencesoever you can scrape
them together, and collect gold and silver. . .you compel king-
doms to be tributary to you. . .you multiply money by traffic '

This unscrupulous tampering with the texts of documents
leads us to suspect Matthew of wilful falsification on occasions
when we should find a scribe guilty only of carelessness: for
instance, at the beginning of his text of Innocent Ill's famous
letter to the English prelates Matthew omits the words in
Christo films' from the phrase 'carissimus in Christo filius
J(ohannes) rex'. 2 We must be careful, however, not to go too
far in accusing Matthew of faking his documentary material,
for in fact his texts of documents, though marred by frequent
errors, are only occasionally embellished with fanciful improve-
ments ' of his own, and material interpolations of more than
a few words are even rarer. In his Ford lectures, A. L. Smith
claimed that the glaring inconsistencies in Matthew's version
of Grosseteste's letter complaining of papal abuses are matched
by similar inconsistencies in letters circulated * as from the pen
of' the Emperor Frederick II. 3 He implied that Matthew had
either fabricated or very seriously tampered with the text of
the Grosseteste letter, and that many of his texts of imperial
letters had been treated in the same way, though not perhaps by

1 CM. in, p. 459. I have again used Giles's translation, Matthew Paris's
English History, I, p. 107.

2 30 March 1215; CM. n, p. 607, note 6.

3 Smith, Church and State in the Middle Ages, pp. 103 ff. The authenticity
of this letter was first questioned by Jourdain in Excursions historiques,
PP* r 55~7 and I 7- For Matthew's copy of it, see CM. v, pp. 389-92.

MATTHEW PARIS

Matthew himself. This, however, is not the case, for Matthew's
text of Grosseteste's letter is almost identical with that in the
Red Book of the Exchequer, and Professor Thomson has demon-
strated its authenticity; 1 and there are actually very few inter-
polations or alterations in the texts of his copies of imperial
letters. 2

Owing to his occasional indulgence in unscrupulous falsifica-
tion Matthew can never be relied on in his treatment of historical
material. When he repeats a good story, the second version often
differs considerably from the first. Thus his account of an
unnamed cardinal's vision of Innocent IV's judgement is greatly
improved and elaborated when it is retailed on the second
occasion, and definitely attributed to Alexander IV. 3 Professor
Galbraith has shown how Matthew sometimes went so far as
to use the same story twice in reference to two different people. 4
Perhaps the most blatant example of his abuse of historical
material is his account, during the annal for 1244 in the Chronica
Majora, of the demands of Master Martin, the papal emissary,
and the English prelates' reply to them; for a long passage is
taken word for word from Roger Wendover's description of the
legate Otho's demands and the prelates' resistance to them, in
1226, the only serious alteration being the substitution of
'Master Martin' for Roger's 'Master Otho'. 5

Matthew, then, has something of the forger in him. He is
neither systematic nor thorough in his fraudulence, but his
sporadic tampering with documentary sources, and misuse of
historical material, as well as his many errors, make him basically
unreliable as a historical source. In his inaccuracy and occasional
deceit or wilful misrepresentation Matthew is by no means
exceptional. He may be a little more fraudulent than most other
medieval chroniclers, but I doubt if he can be singled out as

1 Writings ofR. Grosseteste, pp. 212-13 ; see the Red Book of the Exchequer,
ff. I96b-i97a.

2 The only material interpolation I have discovered is that printed above,
p. 132. For Matthew's treatment of the text of Magna Carta in his Chronica
Major a, see CM. n, pp. xxxiii-xxxvi.

3 CM. v, pp. 471-2 and 491-3.

4 Roger Wendover and Matthew Paris, p. 36, note i. See also Smith,
Church and State in the Middle Ages, p. 177, where he points out that
Matthew puts identical words about the pope into the mouths of two
different people. 5 CM. m, p. 103, and iv, pp. 374-5.

134

MATTHEW PARIS THE CHRONICLER

either more or less careless : certainly he should not be described,
as he has been, as 'the most careful writer of his age'. 1

Before we go on to examine Matthew's outlook and prejudices,
there are one or two small points affecting his general veracity
which may conveniently be mentioned here. Although he is
well known for his habitual outspokenness, and frequently
expresses his own opinions directly, his attacks on king and
pope are more often put into the mouths of others. Thus it is
certain c holy and religious men* who are disgusted with the
pope; and 'many discerning men* are said to have feared that
the spread of the Dominican Order would upset the ancient
equilibrium of the Church. 2 In this way Matthew conceals his
own opinion and at the same time pays himself a discreet compli-
ment; though sometimes, no doubt, these opinions did represent
a section of contemporary 'public opinion'. Current rumours
are often explicitly reported, some of which, like that of an
imminent Danish invasion of England or the conversion of the
Mongol Khan to Christianity, turned out later to be false. 3
It is evident that Matthew, in his eagerness to collect informa-
tion of all kinds, tended to be uncritical in recording it, and this
no doubt accounts for a number of the strange tales and curious
anecdotes which adorn his chronicle. A large part of the
Chronica Majora was probably written down more or less
directly from oral reports, 4 and some of Matthew's acquaintances
seem to have been only too willing to contribute matter redound-
ing to their own merit to the famous chronicle. Professor
Knowles points out that ' public men . . . realized that their share
in events could best be preserved for posterity by judicious
conversations at St Albans'. 5 The most prominent of these,
apart from the king, was Earl Richard of Cornwall, who took the
trouble, for example, to inform Matthew of the cost of his
religious foundation at Hayles, and to add a pious aspiration

1 Collins, * Documents of the Great Charter', Proc. Brit. Acad. xxxiv
(1948), p. 259. German historians of the thirteenth century have noted
Matthew's unreliability, especially in Continental affairs: see, in particular,
Felten, Papst Gregor IX, pp. 6 and 363, and notes; and Kempf, Geschichte
des deutschen Retches wdhrend des grossen Interregnums, pp. 269-73.

2 CM. in, p. 574, and iv, p. 511. 3 CM. iv, p. 9, and v, p. 87.

4 A list of Matthew's informants is given above, pp. 13-17.

5 Knowles, Religious Orders, I, p. 294. See also Hunt, Diet. Nat. Biog.
XV, p. 207.

135

MATTHEW PARIS

which the chronicler duly noted down. 1 When we consider the
worth and reliability of the Chronica Major a, it is important to
remember that some of it, at least, was contributed in this way
by the leading men of the time, who no doubt often exaggerated
their own part in affairs.

On the whole, Matthew is careful with chronology, and few
events and documents are badly misdated. Information seems to
have been entered up on rough drafts more or less as he received
it, and copied thence into the Chronica Majora, so that an
approximate chronological order was usually achieved. Professor
Cheney has recently shown that there is no reason to suppose
that the famous Taper Constitution' of 1244, which Denholm-
Young had attributed to 1238, is misplaced in the Chronica
Major a'^ and in fact it is only very occasionally that an event or
document is inserted under the wrong year. 3 In the dating of
events within the year, however, the Chronica Majora is often
unreliable. Thus the Dominican Chapter of 1250 is described
as meeting 'about the Feast of the Nativity of St John the
Baptist', that is, c. 24 June; but later in the same paragraph it is
said to have met * about Pentecost', c. 15 May, in I25<D. 4 It is
worth noting that Matthew's numbers are no more reliable than
those of most medieval chroniclers. On f. 170 a of the Liber
Additamentorum, for instance, he says that in the campaign of
1244 the king of Scotland had 500 knights and 60,000 foot-
soldiers; but in the Chronica Majora this is altered to 1,000
knights and 100,000 foot-soldiers. 5

If, when considering Matthew's trustworthiness and veracity
as a chronicler, we have to make extensive allowances for his
frequent acceptance of verbal reports, for his inclusion of
rumours and current opinion, as well as for his periodic dis-
regard for historical accuracy, we must make even larger
allowances for his grievances, beliefs, and prejudices; for these

1 CM. v, p. 262.

2 Cheney, 'The Paper Constitution preserved by Matthew Paris', EHR.
LXV (1950), pp. 213-31, and Denholm-Yotmg, 'The Paper Constitution of
1244 \ ibid. LVIII (1943), pp. 401-23.

3 For instance, CM. iv, pp. 386-9 should be under the year 1245. See
also p. 132 above. One document in LA is misdated by ten years through
careless copying: see Powicke, 'Writ for enforcing watch and ward, 1242', in
EHR. LVII (1942), p. 469.

4 CM. v, p. 127. 5 CM. vi, p. 518, note i ; iv, p. 380.

136

MATTHEW PARIS THE CHRONICLER

colour his whole work. Among English writers, Matthew stands
out in front of the curtain of medieval anonymity as a real
person, and in his Chronica Majora his outlook on life, pre-
judices, and interests, as well as his personality, are all revealed
in a manner unusual among chroniclers of his age. He refers
to himself by name on six occasions in the Chronica Majora^
either as 'Brother Matthew Paris', 1 or simply 'Matthew, the
writer of this ', 2 or even on one occasion as ' dominus Matthaeus
Parisiensis monachus ecclesiae Sancti Albani'. 3 The words
'monachus ecclesiae Sancti Albani 5 provide a key to the under-
standing of his whole outlook on life, for this was in a large
measure based on his own material interests as a monk, and on
those of the small aristocratic community of which he was proud
to be a member. 4 In the Gesta Abbatum the convent is invariably
supported against its abbot; and the apparent moral judgement
of each abbot is in reality a purely material one, based on the
abbot's treatment of, and value to, the convent; he is praised,
for instance, if he gives a rent to the convent for the improve-
ment of its beer or kitchen. 5 In sympathy with his own position,
Matthew always supports aristocratic corporations similar to
his own against those exercising power over them: he takes the
side of the canons of Lincoln against their bishop, the monks
of Canterbury against their archbishop, 6 and even the barons
against the king. This, of course, is a question of sentiment
rather than of political theory, but it affects his habits of mind
in just the same way as his zealous devotion to and enthusiasm
for his own Order. The extravagant praises he bestows on Hugh
Northwold, bishop of Ely the only bishop at the time who
was a Benedictine monk 7 and his sympathy for the abbots of
Westminster and Bardney in their quarrels with Grosseteste, 8
are due, in the main, to his patriotic feelings as a Benedictine.
In the Chronica Majora the Cistercian monks of Pontigny are

1 v, pp. 129-30. 2 v, p. 201. 3 v, p. 369.

4 See Plehn, 'Der politische Charakter von Matheus Parisiensis', Staats-
und socialwissenschaftliche Forschungen, xiv (1897), pp. 42-5. In the whole
of what follows I am much indebted to this work.

5 See, on this, Coulton, Five Centuries of Religion, in, p. 192.

6 CM. m, pp. 527 ff.

7 CM. v, pp. 454-5; see Gibbs and Lang, Bishops and Reform, 1215-1272,
pp. 9-10. 8 CM. iv, pp. 151 and 246.

MATTHEW PARIS

criticized for cutting off the arm of St Edmund, and it is implied
that the Benedictines would never have done such a thing: 1
'Many people, considering how carefully the bodies of saints
are venerated in the churches of the Black monks, deplored the
fact that the body of so respected a saint should repose in a
Cistercian church. '

Apart from the Augustinian canons, who perhaps escaped his
diatribes on account of their early foundation, Matthew dis-
approves of all religious orders other than his own. The
Dominicans and Franciscans are often bitterly attacked, 2 and
the appearance of new orders of friars like the cruciferi and the
Bethlehemites calls forth a derogatory remark on the confusion
caused by new and unknown orders. 3 Matthew, incidentally, is
more favourably disposed towards the Hospitallers than towards
the Templars, whom he considered proud, ambitious, and
worldly. 4

Matthew's material interests are paramount, too, in his
attitude towards the important contemporary movements for
Church reform. He does not understand the significance of
the efforts of men like Archbishop Boniface and Robert Grosse-
teste, and he frequently criticizes their visitations, especially of
Benedictine houses, for their thoroughness and efficiency. 5
Matthew, indeed, though he is prepared to admire the sanctity
of the monks of earlier days, 6 is against any attempt at inter-
ference with the privileged social existence of the monks of his
own day, and his idea of what a visitation ought to be must have
been similar to that which took place at St Albans in i25i; 7
which seems to have been little more than a social visit, with
ample warning, by the prior of Hurley, the sub-prior of
St Augustine's, Canterbury, and a papal chaplain. In spite of
his habitual support of chapters against royal interference in the
election of bishops, Matthew was quite out of touch with the
ideas of some of the leading churchmen of his day on the subject
of the independence of the Church from secular interference.
Here, again, it is sentiment and prejudice which mould his

1 CM. v, p. 113.

2 For instance, at CM. iv, pp. 279-80, 511-12, 599-600, etc.

3 CM. iv, pp. 393-4, and v, p. 631.

4 CM. iv, pp. 167-8. 5 See for example CM. v, pp. 226-7.
6 CM. v, pp. 243-4. 7 CM. v, pp. 258-9.

138

MATTHEW PARIS THE CHRONICLER

attitude rather than informed opinion. He seems to approve of
Henry Ill's prohibition of Grosseteste's proposed inquisition
into the morals of his diocese ; l and he does not complain of the
king's interference in Grosseteste's dispute with his chapter. 2
His opposition to royal interference in episcopal elections is
arbitrary and conventional, and often bears little relation to the
realities of the situation. Sometimes his indignation is aroused
because a foreigner is appointed, or a religious rejected; more
often it is due to the appointment by the king of a curialis;
and when the monks or canons themselves elect one of the
latter, Matthew adds a conventional surmise that this was
because they feared the king would oppose any other person. 3
Matthew's view of the State, often referred to as his ' con-
stitutional' attitude, seems also to be based on his own material
interests and those of his house. All forms of taxation are
violently opposed and invariably regarded as mere royal extor-
tion, even when the tax has been agreed to by the universitas
regni. For instance, we are told that Henry III * extorted' (fecit
extorqueri) a scutage in 1242, whereas in fact this had been
agreed to by the barons. 4 Matthew's hatred of taxation leads
him to oppose other aspects of government as mere tyrannical
interference on the part of the king, and both forest inquisitions
and itinerant justices are bitterly complained of. The latter are
regarded merely as royal financial agents, 5 and Matthew refers
to a sum of money raised by Henry III in 1254 w ^h th e wor( is
1 . . .whatever he could extract from the rapines of the itinerant
justices'. 6 He complains, too, of the royal administration of
vacant bishoprics, and regards the government's inquiry into
weights and measures in 1256 purely as a device for raising
money. 7 From this ingenuous disapproval of almost all forms
of governmental activity Matthew no doubt derived his view of
a monarch chosen and controlled by his barons: the royal
extortions must somehow be checked. His political outlook was
evidently in some respects extremely superficial. His most pro-
found thought on the constitutional struggle of his day is the

1 CM. iv, pp. 579-80. 2 CM. iv, p. 156.

3 See Gibbs and Lang, Bishops and Reform, p. 89.

4 CM. iv, p. 227; Plehn, 'Der politische Charakter von Matheus Parisi-
ensis', loc. cit. pp. 623.

5 CM. iv, p. 34 6 CM. v, p. 458. 7 CM. v, pp. 594-5-

MATTHEW PARIS

precept which, having once got hold of, he blindly adheres to,
that the king should take the advice of his natural counsellors.
He did not understand the significance of the struggle for power
which was going on during his lifetime between the barons
and the king. His account of the events of 1258, for instance,
shows that he was neither so well informed, nor so conscious
of the significance of what was going on, as the Burton annalist. 1
So far as one can judge from his description of the 'Parliament'
at Oxford, its only interest for him was in the successful expul-
sion of Henry Ill's Poitevin councillors, and the appointment
of Hugh Bigod as justiciar. 2 Elsewhere Matthew describes
how the corrupt practices and illegal extortions of the sheriffs
were to be heavily punished, but he does not connect this with
the baronial plan of reform. 3 Indeed it is clear that Matthew
understood very little of the nature and significance of the
baronial reform movement, and still less of the events of 1258.
On the other hand, his interest in political issues cannot be
denied, and he evidently had some idea of what constituted a
community, and what was meant by representation. In one
place he quotes the well-known maxim 'what touches all should
be approved by all ' ; 4 and elsewhere he claims that, if the bishops
had united together and sent a representative to Rome, all would
have been well. 5 It is interesting to find that he seems to regard
the monarchy as elective, a belief which demonstrates a certain
grasp of political theory. Thus he alters Roger Wendover's
statement that the barons c crowned' Henry III to 'raised him
up ' ; 6 and he makes Hubert Walter state, at the coronation of
King John, that he had been made king as the result of popular
choice. 7

Matthew's view of the Church in general, and of the papacy in
particular, is similar to, and apparently based on the same feelings
as, his view of the State. 8 All methods of raising money on
behalf of the pope are considered extortionate; and almost all
forms of papal interference in England are condemned as

1 But it is fair to note that Matthew was at this time an old man, no doubt
with failing powers.

2 CM. v, pp. 697-8. 3 CM. v, p. 720. 4 CM. v, p. 225.

5 CM. v, p. 532. 6 CM. m, p. i, c exaltant'. 7 CM. n, pp. 454 if.

8 For what follows see Plehn, 'Der politische Charakter von Matheus
Parisiensis', loc. cit. pp. 94 ff.

140

MATTHEW PARIS THE CHRONICLER

obnoxious and oppressive. Matthew is bitterly hostile to papal
provisions; he thinks it disgraceful that England should be a
papal fief; and he maintains that, just as the barons should resist
royal demands, so the bishops should resist those of the pope.
His hostility to the papacy is neither the result of rational con-
sideration, nor of informed opinion, but of resentment and
prejudice. It is expressed in the form of comments on papal
extortion, avarice, simony, rapine, gluttony, licentiousness and
temporal ambition, which occur so frequently as to become
purely conventional; as well as in the form of mere abusive
language. As with the king, so with the pope, almost every
piece of governmental activity is interpreted as an attempt at
extortion. Gregory IX' s decretal that illegitimate priests must
get a papal dispensation to hold a benefice, the absolution of
would-be crusaders from their vows, and the dispatch of papal
legates and others to England are all regarded as mere devices
for raising money. 1 Matthew was always ready to report adverse
rumours about the papacy, and to retail any scandalous stories
which he heard. He reports that many people believed that the
Cahorsin money-lenders were supported by the pope; 2 and he
tells a story, in the form of a sermon by one of the cardinals to
the citizens of Lyons, to the effect that the papal court had done
a great deal of good while it was in Lyons, for it had converted
the three or four brothels in the town when it first arrived there
into one large brothel stretching right across it. 3 It is interesting
to note that, in spite of all his disparagement of the papacy,
Matthew on one occasion, when he is describing the schismatical
Greek church (as we shall see, the Greeks were one of his betes
noires), becomes a staunch supporter of papal supremacy, with
only one slight qualification: 4 'But that pillar of the church,
the lord pope, the true successor though not quite the perfect
imitator of St Peter, remained firm.'

Although many of Matthew's prejudices were evidently due
to his monastic status, his nationality also played an important
part in moulding his attitude. 5 His hatred of authority, for

1 CM. in, pp. 328 and 374; iv, pp. 84 and 284-5.

2 CM. m, p. 331. 3 CM. v, p. 237. 4 CM. in, p. 519.

5 I use the word nationality in its widest sense, for it is not certain that
Matthew was English by blood.

141

MATTHEW PARIS

instance, is a typically English prejudice rather than a Bene-
dictine one. 'England', he says in his genealogical chronicle, 1
'is the queen of all islands/ The English are considered superior
to all other peoples, and foreigners are treated with a charac-
teristically English contempt. Among them, the especial objects
of Matthew's dislike are the French, Poitevins, Welsh, Greeks,
and Flemings. He refers to the 'habitual insolence' of the
Greeks ; 2 those * wily traitors ' the Poitevins ; 3 the pride and envy
of the French; 4 and the 'filthy ignoble Flemings'. 5 At first 6
the Welsh are described with opprobrium, and are called savage
and faithless ; but later their resistance to the English is admired :
'Like the Trojans, from whom they are descended, they fought
firmly for their ancestral laws and liberties/ 7 For the queen's
relatives, Poitevins, Proven9als, and Savoyards, who came over
to England after Henry's marriage in 1236, Matthew has feelings
of hatred and disgust which seem to have increased in intensity
as he grew older. Thus, in the part of the Chronic a Major a
before the annal for 1252, they are accused of coming to England
to fatten themselves at the expense of the natives ; 8 of bringing
over their female relatives for the purpose of making advan-
tageous marriages with the English nobility; 9 and, in one case,
of borrowing some horses from the abbot of Faversham and
omitting to return them. 10 Later they are called 'the scum of a
terrible rabble', 11 and we are told that they swarmed all over the
city of London in company with other foreigners, ' committing
adulteries, fornicating, brawling, wounding, and murdering'. 12
Other typically English prejudices of Matthew Paris are against
civil servants, lawyers, and theologians. Lawyers are said to
rise to fame much too quickly for the good of their souls;
students are denigrated because they study law with an eye to
future emoluments; and theologians are criticized for daring to
inquire into the impenetrable secrets of the Almighty. 13 Mat-
thew's healthy dislike of civil servants is reflected in a passage
where he complains severely about the satellites regis, and con-
cludes his diatribe against them with the remark that there were

1 A y f. ivb. a CM. in, p. 386. 3 CM. iv, p. 205.

4 CM. v, p. 76. 5 HA. n, p. 170. 6 CM. m, p. 385.

7 CM. v, p. 639. s in, p. 388. 9 iv, p. 598.

10 v, pp. 204-5. n v, p. 597.

13 CM. V, p. 428, and iv, pp. 280-1.

142

MATTHEW PARIS THE CHRONICLER

so many of these petty tyrants in England that the country
seemed to have reverted to Anglo-Saxon times! 1 Although he
was prejudiced against the Cahorsin money-lenders 2 in spite of
the fact that, on occasion, he made use of their services, 3
Matthew, to his credit, had no very deep-seated prejudices
against the Jews, perhaps because of his sympathy for them as
victims of royal extortion. 4

The significance of the various prejudices which we have
enumerated lies in the light they throw on Matthew's whole
outlook. This, it becomes clear, was limited, deep-rooted, and
thoroughly partisan. Matthew was a bigot: he not only allows
his own opinions to colour his historical writings, but introduces
them on every possible occasion. Moreover, since he was
endowed with a vigorous imagination and had a developed
appreciation of the value of 'news', the Chronica Major a is
a colourful subjective account of current events rather than
a sober history. We may perhaps be generous enough, in conse-
quence, to extend to him the licence usually accorded to
journalists, instead of judging him with the criteria normally
applied to historians, but we must never forget, when we use the
Chronica Majora as a historical source, that it can by no means
be relied on for an accurate description of events. What it does
tell us is what Matthew thought happened, or, more often, what
Matthew wants us to think happened.

The character and content of Matthew's chronicle, then, are
determined, and in many ways restricted, by his prejudiced
outlook. But although he looked at things in a very limited way,
he looked at almost everything; and his manifold interests and
passionate curiosity have made the Chronica Majora a kind of
chronological encyclopedia of almost universal scope. Matthew
made no attempt to organize his chronicle, as, for instance, did
William of Malmesbury, in the form of a coherent narrative
covering a period of years: instead, he collected all the informa-
tion he could obtain, and recorded it in rough chronological
order. It has been said of him that the centre of his world was
his own house of St Albans, but, if this be taken to imply narrow
parochialism, then we must deny the statement. It is true that

1 CM. v, p. 595. 2 CM. in, pp. 328-9. 3 See above, p. 4.

4 See CM. in, p. 543, and iv, p. 260.

143

MATTHEW PARIS

his usual metaphor for superiority is the relationship of St
Albans to the other English abbeys, that his outlook on life was
moulded by his monastic status, and that events at St Albans
were more important to him than those, say, in France; but, by
and large, he takes a wider view of things than we should expect
of a monk. His interest in and knowledge of foreign affairs, for
instance, has frequently been pointed out as exceptional. 1 Some
of the great variety of subjects treated in the Chronica Majora
coincide, as we should expect, with Matthew's prejudices, and
much of it is consequently taken up with accounts of * parlia-
ments ' ; of the relation of king and barons ; of royal demands for
money, whether from the barons, the bishops, or the citizens of
London; and of the doings of royal emissaries, wicked sheriffs,
and the like. Much, too, is concerned with the struggle of empire
and papacy; with papal interference in England and other
countries; and with episcopal elections and royal interference
in them. Again, Matthew takes especial care to record Bene-
dictine * news', such as quarrels of abbots with their monks;
quarrels among monks in Benedictine houses ; and statutes of
provincial chapters. He concerns himself, too, with his own
house of St Albans, and much of the Chronica Majora is conse-
quently taken up with accounts of domestic events. 2 Some of
Matthew's interests, however, seem to run contrary to his pre-
judices. It is to his credit, for instance, that, in spite of his
dislike of foreigners, he was curious about the beliefs and way
of life of non-Christians. He included in his chronicle a lengthy
description of the Mohammedans, excerpted from some literary
source; 3 and he collected a great deal of information about the
Mongols, or, as he calls them, Tartars. 4 Much space is, of
course, devoted to the usual medieval phenomena, such as
freaks, prodigies, portents, comets and marine monsters. The
weather receives a good deal of attention, and each annal is
usually concluded with a meteorological summary. Heavy falls
of snow, hard frosts, thunderstorms, floods, and droughts are
all described, often in considerable detail. Many curious pieces
of information, the result of Matthew's catholic interests and

1 For instance, by Gairdner, Early Chroniclers of Europe, pp. 244 and 253.

2 On this, see below, p. 185. 3 CM. in, pp. 34361.
4 See CM. iv, pp. 76-8, 270-7, 386-9, etc.

144

MATTHEW PARIS THE CHRONICLER

great curiosity, are to be found in his Chronica Majora. There is,
for instance, an account of the blood-drinking alliance of the
Galloway chieftains, 1 and of the introduction of Greek numerals
into England; 2 and the discovery of tin in Germany is men-
tioned. 3 Matthew was evidently fascinated by etymologies, and
many of these often, in the best medieval tradition, highly
improbable occur in the Chronica Major a. The word ' Cahor-
sin', for instance, is derived from causantes (cheating) or
capientes (taking), and ursini (bearish); and Athens from
a-thanatos (without death). 4

The Chronica Major a betrays, on the part of its author, a
rather mercenary outlook on life. Sums of money are mentioned
on every possible occasion, and marginal notices about them are
common there, as well as in the Liber Additamentorum. In the
Chronica^ for instance, we are informed of the amount paid by
Henry III to various Poitevins in 1243 ; 5 of the annual sum paid
to Italians from English benefices ; 6 of the sum of the convent
of Westminster's debts on the death of its abbot in I24&; 7
and of the amount of Louis IX's ransom in i25o. 8 Matthew's
mercenary attitude seems to be reflected in his account of the
provincial chapter of the Benedictines in 1249, for he records
the decision of the chapter to order a daily collect to be said on
behalf of the king and queen in all Benedictine houses, and adds :
* though he [the king] made no allowance to them for this pur-
pose'. This monetary interest is of great value to the historian,
for it led to the recording, on nine or ten occasions in the
Chronica Majora, of the price of bread, as well as, on one
occasion, the price of wine. 10 There are some remarkable notices
about trade in the Chronica Majora. We learn, for instance,
how, for fear of the Mongols, the merchants of Gothland and
Frisia did not make their annual journey, in 1238, to Yarmouth,
for the herring fishery ; u and of Frederick IPs merchants sailing
as far as India. 12 Merchants returning from Boston to London
must have proved useful contacts, for on two occasions they
gave Matthew information about floods in Frisia and further

1 in, p. 365. z v, pp. 285-6. 3 iv, p. 151.

4 in, p. 331, and v, p. 286. 5 iv, p. 254.

6 iv, p. 419. 7 iv, p. 586. 8 v, p. 309.

9 CM. v, p. 81. 10 v, p. 46. n in, p. 488.

145

MATTHEW PARIS

east. 1 He notes, too, the effect of war on the Gascon wine trade, 2
and on the Cistercian wool exports. 3

Of the leading men of his day, both in England and on the
Continent, Matthew has much to say, and his vigorous likes and
dislikes are often expressed in the form of praise and blame.
He also permits himself to pass judgement on historical figures
like Harold and William the Conqueror; the former being
a perfidious traitor and a proud tyrant, and the latter a pious,
just and magnificent conqueror, though he too is accused of
tyrannical practices. 4 Matthew's views about King John are
well known: he is greedy and libidinous, wicked, cruel and
tyrannical 5 Indeed, for Matthew, he is a personification of all
the vices. Henry III receives only slightly better treatment, and
it is a remarkable fact that, though Matthew knew him per-
sonally, and was honoured and befriended by him more than
once, 6 his ideas about Henry remained inimical and offensive.
No doubt much of the opprobrium which he heaps on Henry
is an inevitable result of his political prejudices: any king who
tried to govern at all would be bound to incur Matthew's wrath,
for he strongly disapproved of all the activities of government
except that of hanging thieves.

Henry, according to Matthew, was avaricious in the extreme,
tyrannical, weak-minded, and perfidious ; he enjoyed flattery and
practised favouritism; he was contemptible in his subservience
to the pope and in his military expeditions to Gascony; he was
an enemy and plunderer of the English Church, who preferred
his queen's foreign relatives to his own natural counsellors. This
picture of Henry III will not bear close examination. Take, for
instance, his supposed avarice. Matthew calls him 'a vigilant
and indefatigable searcher after money', 7 and a new Crassus, 8
and is constantly inveighing against his greed. But he goes too
far when he claims that it was avarice (as well as the devil) which
prompted Henry to dispatch letters of credit to the pope to
enlist his aid in the acquisition of the kingdom of Sicily for his
son Edmund; 9 and that it was avarice which inspired him to cut

1 CM. iv, p. 240, and v, p. 453. 2 CM. v, p. 277. 3 CM. v, p. 439.
4 For Harold, see HA. I, pp. 5-6 and 8; and for William, HA. I, pp. 7, 8,
and 12-13. 5 See e.g. FH. n, pp. 136-7.

6 See above, pp. 3-4. 7 CM. v, p. 55. 8 CM. v, p. 274.

CM. v, pp. 458-9.

146

MATTHEW PARIS THE CHRONICLER

down his court expenses! 1 In the annal for 1254 Matthew
describes how the king, stranded in Gascony, sent home for
assistance; 2 and the chapter is given the absurd heading:
'A crafty injunction for extorting money.' Matthew, like many of
his contemporaries, had no idea of the expenses of government.
Henry III may well have been avaricious, but an examination
of Matthew's statements alone would never lead us to this con-
clusion. We might just as well argue that, because someone
denounces the tax-collectors as a greedy set of rascals, the
government is avaricious. We are more likely to conclude that
the criticism is extremely superficial; which is certainly true of
Matthew's criticism of Henry III. Even when this has some
foundation in fact, it is impossible to assess its value, for
Matthew's strictures are repeated so often that they become
stereotyped and conventional. He frequently accuses the king
of plundering vacant bishoprics and abbeys, and this no doubt
happened on occasions, but what significance can we attach to
his description of Henry 'laying his greedy hands' on the pro-
perties of the see of Bath, and carrying off what plunder he
could? 3 Or to his account of how Henry deliberately prolonged
the vacancy in the archbishopric of York in order to extract the
maximum amount of money from the see? 4 It is evident that
these detractions are a product of Matthew's grudge against
the king rather than of a critical examination of his actions.
The absurdity of many of his remarks about the king is illus-
trated by his comment on the occasion when Henry sent Simon
Passelewe round to some of the larger Benedictine abbeys to try
to borrow money on his behalf: 5 It was clear, from this, how
eagerly the king desired to damage the Church irretrievably.'
On the whole, Matthew's picture of Henry is a vicious, spiteful
caricature, and not the least spiteful remark made about him is
the comment that, had he not redeemed his evil deeds by con-
stant and liberal almsgiving, his soul would have been seriously
endangered. 6

Matthew seems to have been fascinated by the character and
career of the Emperor Frederick II. Although he criticizes him

1 CM. v, p. 114. 2 CM. v, pp. 423-4.

3 CM. v, p. 3. 4 CM. v, p. 516.

5 CM. v, p. 683. 6 CM. m, pp. 522-3-

147 10-2

MATTHEW PARIS

for his cruelty, tyranny, and pride, 1 he has much sympathy and
even admiration for him. With evident relish, he tells the story
of the French priest whose conscience would not allow him to
obey the papal injunction to excommunicate the emperor, and
who consequently excommunicated whichever of them was the
offending party; and Matthew is pleased to be able to record
that, while the pope punished him for his ' scurrilous levity', the
emperor sent him some valuable gifts. 2 His enthusiasm for
Frederick was not based on ideological considerations Matthew
never thought out the implications of the imperial-papal
struggle but it seems to have been due to the fact that he
thought of Frederick as, like himself, a victim of, or at least
a sufferer from, the activities of the papacy. After 1245, how-
ever, Matthew's enthusiasm waned rapidly, mainly, as A. L.
Smith pointed out, 3 because Frederick published, in that year,
his plans for the expropriation of the church : a direct threat to
Matthew's material interests as a monk. It is interesting to find
that, after Frederick's death, he became a staunch supporter of
Conrad, and he describes how the hostility, threats, and insults
of the pope, as well as poison, contributed to his death. 4
According to A. L. Smith, Matthew contributed a great deal
to the growth of the legend of Frederick II as an appalling,
mysterious, and romantic figure. 5 It is true that this is the
impression we get in reading the Chronica Majora, but it is not
so much due to Matthew himself, as to the reports and rumours
about Frederick which he records, and which show that the
legend of Frederick had already begun to develop. Rather than
accuse Matthew of deliberate falsification, we ought to admit
that here, at least, he is a useful guide to contemporary feeling.
Towards Earl Richard of Cornwall, Henry Ill's brother,
he is reasonably well disposed, though he criticizes him for
raising money by means of the redemption of crusaders' vows, 6
and for being on rather too friendly terms with the pope. 7

1 CM. ill, p. 496; and iv, pp. 353-4 and 648.

2 CM. iv, pp. 406-7.

3 Smith, Church and State in the Middle Ages, pp. 176-7.

4 CM. v, p. 460.

5 Smith, Church and State in the Middle Ages, p. 169.

6 CM. iv, pp. 133-4 and 629-30; v, pp. 73-4 and 146.

7 CM. iv, pp. 561 and 577-8; v, p. 112.

MATTHEW PARIS THE CHRONICLER

Of Simon de Montfort he has little to say, but he regards him
as a naturalis and not an alienigena, and sympathizes with him
in his quarrels with Henry III. 1 He admired Bishop Grosseteste
and revered him as a saint; 2 approving of his criticism of the
papacy, though he strongly disapproved of his harsh methods of
visitation. On several occasions he uses Grosseteste as a mouth-
piece for airing his own prejudices, especially against the papacy,
and in one place against the friars. 3 Matthew has much praise
and sympathy for Hubert de Burgh; and he admired, among
others, Edmund Rich and John Blund; Richard Fishacre and
Robert Bacon; and Blanche, queen of France. His especial
Mtes noires were Boniface of Savoy, archbishop of Canterbury
and a foreigner; Fawkes de Breaute, an enemy of St Albans
described as a * bloody traitor 5 ; 4 and King Henry III.

It is worth noting that Matthew uses the word martyr' in
a very loose sense. Thus William FitzOsbert, the leader of the
London revolt of 1196, who was caught and hanged, was,
according to Matthew, a martyr to the cause of truth and the
poor; the Winchester monks imprisoned by the royal ' satellites'
in 1241 obtained thereby the 'palm of martyrdom'; and the
unfortunate messengers who first arrived in France with news
of Louis IX's defeat and capture in 1250, and who were put to
death as rumourmongers, were also, according to Matthew
Paris, martyrs. 5 His awards of martyrdom are often useful as a
guide to his sympathies : Archbishop Sewal of York, for instance,
is said to have earned martyrdom on account of his persecution
by the pope. 6

In his highly developed prejudices, and in the lively picture
he gives us of contemporary persons and events, Matthew is
exceptional among medieval chroniclers; but his view of history

1 CM. v, pp. 289-90.

2 At any rate after his death. CM. v, pp. 490-1.

3 For Matthew's view of Grosseteste, see especially CM. v, p. 389 note i,
where he calls the famous letter complaining of papal abuses 'optima
epistola 5 ; v, pp. 226-7, where Matthew deplores his tyrannical visitation of
Ramsey; and v, pp. 400-9, where he puts his prejudices against the pope
and friars into Grosseteste's mouth. Jourdain, in Excursions historiques,
pp. 155 and 16971, wrongly supposed that some of the passages about
Grosseteste in the Chronica Majora were not due to Matthew Paris himself,
but were later interpolations. * CM. v, p. 323.

5 CM. n, p. 419; iv, p. 160; and v, p. 169. 6 CM. v, pp. 678-9.

149

MATTHEW PARIS

and his understanding of the significance of events are typical
of them. He was a firm believer in the miraculous and in the
validity of portents. Earthquakes and thunder were a presage
of future events and a sure sign of Divine wrath and the
approach of the end of the world. 1 The disturbed state of the
elements is constantly connected with the turbulent state of
human affairs. 2 Of the latter Matthew takes a pessimistic view:
the world, he thought, was in a chaotic state, and England was
no exception. 3 Like most medieval chroniclers, he tends always
to take a moral view of history, attributing the bad state of
affairs to the vices and failings of human beings: ' Neither the
threats of the Bible nor the chaos of the elements affect the greed
and ambition of miserable mortals.' 4 Events are explained in
the usual manner of medieval chroniclers : the tragic failure of
Louis IX's crusade in Egypt was due, Matthew believed, to
God's exasperation with the pride of Louis's brother, Robert of
Artois, or with the pope and the crusading leaders for financing
the project with money extorted from the poor. 5 Floods,
Matthew surmises, were probably due to God's anger with the
pope. 6 On the rare occasions when God is left out of Matthew's
explanation of events, some human personality, often the king
or the pope, is introduced in his place. Matthew frequently
fails to understand the motives of those concerned in events, and
his occasional guesses at what was going on are often absurdly
far from the truth: he supposes, for instance, that the object of
the Castilian embassy in 1255 was to extract money from the
king of England, though in fact it was the arrangement of a
marriage alliance. 7

Matthew's naive and ingenuous view of events is especially
apparent in the annual summaries with which he concludes
his account of each year. These are stereotyped and conventional,
the effect of the year on the different countries being described
with one or two adjectives only. Here is a typical example of one
of these annual summaries, describing the year I244: 8 'And so
the year passed. . .most inimical to the Holy Land, turbulent

1 CM. v, pp. 187 and 198-9. CM. iv, p. 603, and v, p. 47.

2 CM. iv, pp. 85, 568, 603, etc. 3 CM. v, p. 625. 4 AC. p. 299.
5 CM. v, pp. 134 and 165; 170-2. r> CM. v, pp. 175-7.

7 CM. v, p. 509, and note i. 8 CM. iv, p. 402.

MATTHEW PARIS THE CHRONICLER

in England, dangerous for the kingdom of France, causing
suspicion in the Church and confusion among the Italians/
For no ascertainable reason, we find that, in the Historia An-
glorum^ the year is said also to have been * pecuniae emunctivus '
in England. The adjectives applied to each country in these
summaries are nearly always chosen from among the following :
'inimicus', 'suspectus', 'hostilis', *inf amis', 'cruentus', 'noci-
vus', 'turbulentus' and 'periculosus'. With one exception
1245 is said to have been ' augmentativus ' for France, 2 pre-
sumably because of its acquisition of Macon and Provence in
that year they are adverse and deprecatory, and they reflect
Matthew's pessimistic outlook on the world, as well as his
inability to grasp the real significance of events.

Few principles guided Matthew in his choice of what to
include in his history and what to omit: reticence, though often
expressed, is seldom practised. He refuses, however, out of
reverence for the Holy Church (he assures us), to expatiate on
the rapacity of the papal nuncio Martin; 3 and he declines to
describe the crimes of Robert Bugre and the charges against
Gilbert Marshal in I24O 4 probably because he did not know
what they were, rather than, as he tells us, because he con-
sidered it better not to enumerate them. Matthew's object in
writing history was largely didactic and monitory, as is the case
with the great majority of medieval chroniclers. He tells us in
one place that he has included a story about a wicked sheriff in
his chronicle in order to demonstrate God's disapproval of
tyranny, 5 and elsewhere he says: 6

It is indeed an excellent thing to perpetuate notable events in
writing, for the praise of God and in order that posterity should be
instructed by reading, how to avoid those things which deserve
punishment, and how to engage in the good things which are
rewarded by God.

Posterity, in fact, has been tricked, rather than instructed, by
Matthew Paris; tricked by the scope of his writings and by
sententious platitudes such as these into accepting the thirteenth

1 n, p. 498. 2 CM. iv, p. 503.

3 CM. iv, p. 416. 4 CM. in, p. 520, and iv, p. 4.

5 CM. v, pp. 580-1. 6 AC. p. 319-

MATTHEW PARIS

century as he saw it, and into regarding him as the greatest
historian of his age, instead of the quidnunc that he was. But how
has posterity treated Matthew Paris? And what was his influence
on succeeding medieval chroniclers? The history of the St Albans
historical school has been admirably surveyed by Professor
Galbraith, 1 and a few remarks will suffice here. The Gesta
Abbatum, Matthew's autograph manuscript of which remained
for more than a hundred years the standard, if not the only,
work on the subject, 2 was copied, abridged, and continued, at
the end of the fourteenth century. His Chronica Majora, as
Galbraith showed, was continued almost without break well
into the fifteenth century, and served as a model and inspiration
for Thomas Walsingham, the other great St Albans historian,
who used it in the compilation of his Ypodigma Neustriae?
St Albans was unique, among English Benedictine houses, in
producing a historical school which lasted until nearly the end
of the Middle Ages, long after the tradition of historical writing
in other houses had died away; and this was largely due to
Matthew 5 s commanding influence on succeeding generations of
St Albans monks.

Outside his own house, Matthew exercised considerable
influence through one work: the Flores Historiarum. This was
copied and recopied, and continually brought up to date. It
was a minor work, derived from the Chronica Majora, but
incorporating a considerable amount of new material. It rapidly
became one of the most popular history books of the age, and
copies were soon circulating throughout England. Luard
notices nineteen manuscripts in the introduction to his edition
of the Flores Historiarum, nearly all of the fourteenth century;
and more can be added to his list, especially if we include
abridgements such as that in British Museum Harley MS. 5418,
ff. 17-76 b. The Flores Historiarum was the basis of a number of

1 St Albans Chronicle, pp. xxvii-lxxi.

2 His Liber Additamentorum was referred to as the Liber de Gestis Abbatum
as late as c. 1400: see above, p. 78.

3 Ed. Riley; see, for instance, pp. 133 and 136. Madden, HA. I, p. xxxviii,
mistakenly derives these passages from the Historia Anglorum, It is worth
noting that a compilation from the Historia Anglorum and Chronica Majora
was made at St Albans in c. 1420-30: the MS. is described by Madden, HA.
i, pp. Ixvi-Ixix.

152

MATTHEW PARIS THE CHRONICLER

later chronicles, such as the Annales Londonienses and Paulini\
and it was used, for instance, by Richard of Cirencester in his
Speculum Historiale, and by the compiler of the Liber de Hyda.
Only the latter mentions Matthew by name in connexion with his
extracts from the Flores Historiarum^ and Matthew's influence
on later medieval writers was exercised either anonymously,
or else under the pseudonym * Matthew of Westminster'
the fictitious author to whom his Flores Historiarum was
soon attributed, and under whose name it went until the last
century.

The Chronica Major a never seems to have passed into general
circulation, and, though two copies of the section up to 1188
were made after Matthew's death, only one copy (C) is known
of the second part of his chronicle, made in his lifetime, and
extending only to the annal for 1250.2 The Chronica Majora
seems to have been used, towards the end of the thirteenth
century, by the Bury St Edmunds chronicler John Taxster,
and it was certainly used by Thomas Wykes and the Osney
chronicler at about the same time. Wykes acknowledges his
debt to Matthew, among others. 3 In his edition of the Flores
Historiarum, Luard printed some extracts from 'the chronicles
of Reginald of Wroxham' which he found in one of the manu-
scripts of the Flores, and which, since they contained some
passages also in Matthew Paris, and were apparently written by
a parson of Wroxham who died in 1235, Luard thought might
be a hitherto unknown source of Matthew Paris. 4 In fact,
however, collation shows that these extracts have been taken
from Matthew Paris's writings, and not vice versa, so that the
parson Reginald and the chronicler must have been two different
persons. Whoever he was, the chronicler Reginald of Wroxham
wrote before 1304, and he seems to have been the only medieval
chronicler outside St Albans to use both the Chronica Majora
and the Historia Anglorum. The latter was also used, in the
fifteenth century, by the author of the Breviarium Chronicorum,
probably the Winchester monk Thomas Rudbourne ; 5 and it was

1 See above, pp. 401.

2 The two copies of the first part of the Chronica are B.M. Cotton MS.
Nero D v, Part I, and B.M. Harley MS. 1620, both written late in the
thirteenth century. 3 See p. 20 above.

4 FH. i, pp. xxiii and liii-lvii. 5 HA. I, p. xxxix, and note i.

153

MATTHEW PARIS

extensively drawn on, and annotated by, the sixteenth-century
historian, Polydore Vergil, 1 The authors of two chronicles
published in the Rolls Series are said by their editors to have
used Matthew Paris's writings: Luard thought that Bartho-
lomew Cotton had used both Roger Wendover and Matthew, 2
and Sir Henry Ellis supposed that John of Oxenedes was well
acquainted with the writings of Matthew Paris. 3 Actually both
Cotton and Oxenedes used a chronicle written by John of
Wallingford, Infirmarius of St Albans and a friend of Matthew
Paris, which was almost entirely abridged from Matthew's
Chronica Major a and Historia Anglorum, and there is no evidence
that either of them knew Matthew's works at first hand. The
Flares Historiarum, then, was the only one of Matthew's writings
to be well known and widely used in medieval times. Only a
handful of later writers knew anything of his other works, and it
is indeed extraordinary that the Chronica Majora, the fullest
and most detailed of all medieval English chronicles, was
virtually unknown outside St Albans during the latter part of
the Middle Ages.

A hundred years after the invention of printing, the first
editions of Matthew Paris' s historical works were published by
Archbishop Matthew Parker. In 1567, he edited the Flores
Historiarum under the name 'Matthew of Westminster', and,
in 1570, having discovered another manuscript in the mean-
while, he brought out a second edition. A year later, he published
his edition of the Chronica Majora, which was reprinted at
Zurich in 1589, and again in 1606. Although these editions are
inaccurate, and entirely inadequate by modern standards, 4 it
was a great achievement of Parker's to make Matthew Paris's
chronicle available to the reading public, even in the corrupt
form in which he printed it. The new edition of the Chronica
Major a which appeared in 1640 was evidently a direct result of

1 See HA. I, p. xli. 2 Historia Anglicana, p. xxxvii.

3 Chronica Johannis de Oxenedes, p. ix.

4 Loyalty to my college, of which Matthew Parker was a former Master,
would make it painful for me to expatiate on the liberties he took with the
texts of his manuscripts; but this is happily unnecessary, since it has already
been done by Madden, HA. I, pp. xxxiii-xxxvii; Luard, CM. n, pp. xxii-
xxviii and FH. i, pp. xliii-xlviii; and Hardy, Descriptive Catalogue, in,
PP- 399-4I4-

154

MATTHEW PARIS THE CHRONICLER

Parker's work. Indeed it was originally intended to be a mere
reprint of Parker's edition, and its editor, Dr William Wats,
who was chaplain to Prince Rupert, did not begin work on it
until the text up to the annal for 1188 had been printed off.
Wats' s edition, though far from perfect, was a definite advance
on Parker's. It was reissued twice (Paris, 1644; London, 1684),
and was not superseded until Luard undertook in 1869 to re-edit
the whole of the Chronica Majora for the Rolls Series. Arch-
bishop Parker had intended to publish Matthew Paris's Historia
Anglorum, but (fortunately, Madden thought!) never proceeded
further than a transcript, 1 and the Historia Anglorum was not
printed until 1866-9, when Sir Frederick Madden edited it in
three volumes for the Rolls Series, adding also the Abbrematio
Chronicorum. This edition was an important landmark in
medieval studies, for it is one of the finest of all those published
in the Rolls Series, and it set a standard of careful accuracy and
profound scholarship which has seldom been equalled since.
The last work of Matthew Paris to be critically edited was the
Floras Historiarum, which, though not attributed to Matthew
Paris, was published by Luard in 1890, also for the Rolls Series.
To these two scholars, Madden and Luard, all succeeding
students and users of Matthew Paris must acknowledge a debt
of gratitude.

The gratitude of many a student of Matthew Paris, including
myself, is also due to the two translators of the Chronica Majora.
It is a remarkable fact that, by the middle of the last century,
Matthew's Chronica Majora had been translated into both
French and English; and even more remarkable, perhaps, that
it was the French translation which appeared first. This fine
work, entitled Grand Chronique de Matthieu Paris, was carried
out by A. Huillard-Breholles in 1 840-1. 2 The English transla-
tion was undertaken by J. A. Giles, and appeared in 1852 in
Bohn's Antiquarian Library; the publishers of which also pro-
duced, in 1853, a translation of the Flores Historiarum by C. D.
Yonge.

1 HA. I, p. xxxvii.

3 It is perhaps worthy of remark that Baudelaire had read this edition of
Matthew Paris, and one of his poems is based on a story related in the
Chronica Majora, see P.-L. Faye, * Baudelaire and Matthew Paris', French
Review, xxiv (1950) pp. 80-1.

155

MATTHEW PARIS

It is as a chronicler that Matthew Paris has chiefly excited the
interest of scholars, and this chapter would be incomplete with-
out at least a brief survey of recent Matthew Paris studies. These
were inaugurated by Sir Frederick Madden in the prefaces to
Volumes I and in of his edition of the Historia Anglorum.
Until the appearance of this work, knowledge of Matthew Paris
had been hazy and inexact: Giles, for instance, thought that
Matthew died c. 1273, an< ^ ^ e was even a ^l e to print the text of
Matthew's chronicle up to that year! 1 Although many of Mad-
den's views were not accepted by later scholars, my studies have
led me to conclude that, in the main, and especially on the
question of Matthew's handwriting, Madden was right. 2 He
collected together all the ascertainable facts about Matthew
Paris, and produced an excellent account of his historical and
other activities, which has remained the basis for all later studies
of Matthew Paris. Madden also identified the handwriting of
Matthew Paris; described the autograph manuscripts, some of
which he himself discovered; and was the first modern scholar
to attribute the Flares Historiarum to Matthew Paris. Within
a few years of the publication of the Historia Anglorum, Sir
Thomas Duffus Hardy published the third volume of his
catalogue of English historical sources, in which he dissented
entirely from Madden on the question of Matthew's hand-
writing, and denied the attribution of the Flores Historiarum
to Matthew Paris. It is curious that later scholars have in
general accepted Hardy's conclusions rather than Madden's,
for, while Hardy was primarily an archivist, and spent most of
his active life in the Record Office, of which for many years he
was head, Madden's interest had always been in manuscript
books, and, after nine years as Assistant Keeper at the British
Museum, he served as Keeper of Manuscripts for thirty years.
His knowledge of manuscripts has seldom, if ever, been rivalled ;
yet Luard, whose prefaces to the different volumes of the
Chronica Major a were published between 1872 and 1883, agreed
with Hardy on the identification of Matthew's handwriting, and
the denial of Matthew's authorship of the Flores Historiarum.
Luard's prefaces marked a great advance in Matthew Paris
studies, for he gave an excellent account of the character of the

1 Giles, Matthew Paris's English History, i, p. vi. z See p. 35 above.

156

MATTHEW PARIS THE CHRONICLER

Chronica Major a, and of Matthew's historical methods; of the
sources used by both Roger Wendover and Matthew ; and of the
relationship of these two writers, whose chronicles he for the
first time clearly distinguished by the use of two different types.
The appearance of Madden's and Luard's editions of Matthew
Paris made possible a much more full and accurate estimate of
Matthew Paris as a chronicler, and, during the next half century
or so, the emphasis of Matthew Paris studies shifted from the
critical investigation of manuscript and related problems to
more general accounts of Matthew himself, and of his position
in medieval historiography. The first of these was that of James
Gairdner, published in iSjg. 1 His account, though short, was
scholarly and penetrating, unlike that which Augustus Jessopp
contributed to the Quarterly Review in 1886, which was neither. 2
'We have in Matthew Paris', wrote Jessopp, 'an instance of a
born historian, one who never consented to be a mere advocate,
taking a side and seeing only half the truth of anything: but
a man gifted with the judicial faculty.' The article on Matthew
Paris in the Dictionary of National Biography, written by W.
Hunt, which appeared in 1895, is an excellent and balanced
account, based largely on the work of Madden and Luard. In
his Ford Lectures, published in 1913, A. L. Smith broke new
ground with a stimulating and lively account of Matthew Paris
the chronicler, in which he exposed some of Matthew's failings,
and described how his record of events was coloured by his own
feelings and prejudices. Meanwhile, Matthew Paris had excited
the interest of German scholars, and Felix Liebermann included
a detailed study of him and his writings in the introduction to his
excerpts from the Chronica Majora relating to Germany, pub-
lished in i888. 3 Like Hardy and Luard, he disputed Madden's
identification of Matthew's handwriting and his attribution of
the Flores Historiarum to Matthew. In spite of his careful
researches, Liebermann added very little to the work of Madden
and Luard; but a great advance was made by H. Plehn, who,
in 1897, published an important work entitled Der politische

1 Early Chroniclers of Europe, pp. 243 fT.

2 Reprinted in Studies by a Recluse, pp. 1-65; my excerpt is from p. 53.

3 These excerpts were translated into German by Grandaur and Watten-
bach, in the series, * Geschichtschreiber der deutschen Vorzeit', 1890.

157

MATTHEW PARIS

Charakter von Matheus Parisiensis, in which he put Lizard's
edition of the Chronica Majora to excellent use in giving an
account, albeit a little too methodical and coherent, of Matthew's
political outlook.

Matthew Paris received little notice from English scholars
after the work of Smith at the beginning of the century, until
in 1927 Professor Claude Jenkins published his vivacious and
entertaining little book on the early St Albans chroniclers, in
which, incidentally, he struck a nice compromise between Mad-
den and Hardy on the question of Matthew's handwriting. In
recent years the controversy between Madden and Hardy has
been paralleled by a controversy between Powicke and Galbraith.
In a paper contributed to Modern Philology in 1941 Sir Maurice
Powicke suggested that Matthew Paris may have lived on after
1259, and inaugurated an entirely new line of study by attempting
to outline the relationship and chronology of Matthew's historical
manuscripts. This paper was severely handled by Professor
Galbraith, 1 who maintained that Matthew Paris did die in 1259,
and contested Powicke's belief that the Historia Anglorum was
written before manuscripts A and B of the Chronica Majora.
Galbraith made a penetrating comparison of Roger Wendover
and Matthew Paris, and, against Hardy, Liebermann, Luard,
and the rest, resuscitated Madden' s belief that Matthew was the
author of the Flores Historiarum, supporting his view with con-
vincing evidence. Apart from two short papers contributed to
the English Historical Review, in which Denholm- Young main-
tained that Matthew Paris had inserted an important constitu-
tional document in the wrong place in his chronicle, and Professor
Cheney (rightly, I think) maintained that he had not, 2 no critical
studies of Matthew Paris have appeared since the second World
War. Professor Knowles, however, gave an excellent short account
of Matthew Paris in his book The Religious Orders in England?

All these studies of different aspects of Matthew Paris have
been of inestimable value in the writing of this book, and if
I have been lucky enough to see slightly further than my pre-
decessors, I have done this, as Bernard of Chartres and his con-
temporaries did, only by clambering on to their broad shoulders.

1 Roger Wendover and Matthew Paris, published in 1944. For more on this
controversy, see p. 50 above. 2 See p. 136 above. " Published in 1948.

158

CHAPTER IX

MATTHEW PARIS THE HAGIOLOGIST

So far we have been concerned with Matthew Paris's
historical works, but he was active also in the field of
hagiology. His saints' lives fall into two groups: those
written in Latin, and those written in Anglo-Norman verse. So
far as is known, he wrote only two Latin biographies, those of
the archbishops Stephen Langton and Edmund Rich, Only
a part of his life of Langton has survived, in the form of three
separate fragments. Sir Frederick Madden pointed out that
one of these was preserved on the verso of a leaf attached to the
end of British Museum Cotton MS. Vespasian B xiii. 1 Later
Liebermann identified, in the Liber Additamentomm, the two
other fragments of this life, one of which contained some of the
text immediately preceding that of the Vespasian fragment, and
the other the rest of a paragraph left unfinished at the end of the
Vespasian fragment. 2 Liebermann prefaced his edition of these
fragments with an excellent discussion, but he thought that
none of them was in Matthew's hand. I cannot agree with him
about this, for a careful examination of the handwriting of these
fragments has convinced me that all three were written out by
Matthew himself. This is not true, however, of the matter on
the recto of the Vespasian fragment (a letter of the abbots of
Waltham and Bury St Edmunds dated 12 November 1253) an d
on the verso of f. 196 of the Liber Additamentorum (a document
of 1252), none of which is written by Matthew. Neither Madden
nor Liebermann discussed the question of the authorship of
this Life of Langton in any detail; but there can be no doubt that
they were right in attributing it to Matthew Paris. The style is
his, and several of his characteristic phrases appear, such as:
'quasi inter duas contritus molas' (pp. 323-4); 'frendens denti-

1 F. issb: see HA. in, p. Hi, note 6.

2 F. 1 96 a, and a separate leaf attached to f. 1960. Liebermann (ed.),
Ungedruckte angle-norm. Geschichtsquellen, p. 318; he prints the text on
pp. 323-9. The references in parentheses which follow are to this edition.

159

MATTHEW PARIS

bus' (p. 324); 'patulis rictibus' (p. 326); and 'que speciales
exigunttractatus' (p. 328). The Liber Additamentorum is referred
to in Matthew's usual way: '[qui] legere desiderat, librum
Additamentorum annalium, que apud Sanctum Albanum sunt,
adeat inspecturus' (p. 328); and, as Liebermann pointed out,
both the Chronica Major a and the Historia Anglorum have been
used in the life. Matthew's authorship is confirmed by the
mention of Gervase of Melkeley as a source of information
(pp. 326-7), for Matthew used some of Gervase's verses, and
cites him by name, in his Chronica Major a ; 1 and by the marginal
comment, so characteristic of Matthew: 'Nota piam decep-
cionem' (p. 326).

Matthew's Life of Langton is hagiographical rather than
biographical, though it was evidently not written with the object
of securing papal canonization. 2 The surviving fragments (which
fit together into a continuous whole) describe an incident on
Langton' s journey to Rome, when he cured a maniac of his
madness; his visit to Innocent III and the cardinals in Rome;
his preaching in various parts on his return journey; and the
translation of St Thomas Becket in 1220. The whole extends
over only five printed pages, but, even in this small fragment,
the general character of the work is revealed. As Liebermann
noticed, Matthew here puts to good effect the use of dialogue,
personal anecdote, and hyperbole: three literary devices which
are effectively employed in his historical writings. Although
Matthew cites Gervase of Melkeley as a source, and Powicke
thought that he might have been one of Langton's clerks, 3 and
therefore a reliable informant, he has made no attempt, in his
Life of Langton, to adhere to the historical facts, even in the
version of them already given in his Chronica Major a. Thus, in
the Life, Langton is said to have incurred the wrath of Innocent
III by refusing to pay the tribute to Rome, whereas neither in
the Chronica Major a nor in the Historia Anglorum is there any
mention of this; and the Chronica Majom's explanation of the
origin of the dispute between Langton and Innocent, in the
encroachment by the papal legate upon the rights of Canterbury,

1 CM. iv, p. 493; and HA. n, p. 232.

* Liebermann (ed.)> Ungedruckte a.-n. Geschichtsquellen, p. 323.

3 Powicke, Stephen Langton, p. 103.

1 60

MATTHEW PARIS THE HAGIOLOGIST

is not mentioned in the life. 1 Again, whereas in the Life Langton
is said to have been summoned to Rome ' sub terribili commin-
acione', on account of his opposition to the tribute, in the
Chronica Major a and the Historia Anglorum he is said to have
gone to Rome of his own accord, to defend his refusal to ban
the Magna Carta barons. Langton's relationship with the pope
is further falsified in the Life by the attribution to Innocent of
an inveterate hatred for him; and history is also disregarded
when Langton is said to have been allowed to return at once to
England from Rome, for in the Chronica Major a Matthew states
that his suspension was confirmed while he was there, and that
he was not allowed to return to England until peace was made
between the barons and the king.

In this biography Matthew portrays Stephen Langton as
a staunch representative of the kingdom of England, firmly
opposing the payment of tribute to Rome, and standing out
against foreign influence. He is made to enshrine and represent
that national feeling against Rome which seems to have been
a more real sentiment in England in the forties and fifties of
the thirteenth century than in Langton's time, and which was
shared, as we have seen, by Matthew himself. Besides his
relationship with the papacy, Langton' s piety and holiness and
his skill as a preacher and theologian are revealed in the sur-
viving fragment of Matthew's life; and to the description of
Langton' s preaching after his visit to Rome Matthew adds the
remark that he was the equal, in theology, of Augustine,
Gregory, and Ambrose (p. 328). It is a pity that more of
Matthew's Life of Stephen Langton has not survived, but
fortunately his Latin hagiography can be studied in his Life of
Langton's successor, Edmund Rich, which has come down to
us in its entirety; and to this we may now turn.

Matthew refers, in his Chronica Major a, to a Life of St Edmund
written by himself. He says: 2

On the strength of the statements of this man [Richard Wych,
bishop of Cbichester], and of the friar, Master Roger Bacon, O.P.,
Dom Matthew Paris, monk of St Albans, wrote the Life of the

1 Liebermann (ed.), Ungedruckte a.-n. Geschichtsquellen, pp. 319-20, where
this and what follows is discussed.

2 V, pp. 369-70.

II l6l VMP

MATTHEW PARIS

above-mentioned St Edmund. . .which he who desires to see can
find at St Albans

Shortly after this, in the Chronica Majora, Matthew mentions
this Life again, 1 and says that it contained also the miracles of
Richard Wych. The identity of this Life of St Edmund has,
however, only recently been established. In his biography of
St Edmund, published in i893, 2 the Reverend W. Wallace
printed as an appendix three Lives of Edmund, one of which,
from British Museum Cotton MS. Julius D vi (ff. 123-156!},
written in the fourteenth century), he attributed to a Canterbury
monk, Eustace. He thought that Matthew's Life was no longer
in existence. Five years after the appearance of Wallace's book,
the Baroness Paravicini published a biography of Edmund, in
the introduction to which she claimed that the Life in Cotton
MS. Julius D vi, printed by Wallace but attributed by him to
Eustace, was in fact that of Matthew Paris. Davis, Baker, Legge
and Lawrence have all accepted her attribution. 3

Wallace's attribution of the Julius Life of Edmund to Eustace
of Canterbury was based on conjecture, for the only fact he
discovered which seemed to make Matthew's authorship un-
likely was the occurrence of the first person in the description
of events at which Matthew Paris was certainly not present. 4
This objection to Matthew's authorship of the Julius Life was
removed by Paravicini and Baker, who pointed out that the
first person could easily have been incorporated into Matthew's
Life from some Canterbury source he was following. 5 The
positive evidence for Matthew's authorship is entirely con-
vincing. Paravicini noticed the general similarity of style and
treatment in the Julius Life and the Chronica Majora. The
vigorous dialogue and vivid, lively narrative of the Julius Life
is indeed characteristic of Matthew Paris ; and Paravicini showed

1 v, p. 384. 2 The Life of St Edmund of Canterbury.

3 Davis, 'An unpublished Life of Edmund Rich', EHR. xxn (1907),
p. 91; Baker, 'La Vie de S. Edmond', Romania, LV (1929), pp. 336-41;
Legge, Anglo-Norman in the Cloisters (1950), p. 27; Lawrence, 'Robert of
Abingdon and Matthew Paris', EHR. LXIX (1954), p. 410.

4 Wallace, Life of St Edmund, pp. 8-9; see pp. 558, 580, etc., for the
occurrence of the first person.

5 Baker (ed.), 'Vie de S. Edmond', loc. cit, p. 338; for the references to
Paravicini which follow, see the introduction to her St Edmund of Abingdon.

162

MATTHEW PARIS THE HAGIOLOGIST

that the sources used in it include those which Matthew tells
us he used for his Life of St Edmund. She printed two
passages from the Julius Life in her introduction and compared
them with similar passages in the Historia Anglorum, and she
likewise compared a passage from the Julius Life concerning
Edmund's private seal with Matthew's very similar description
of it in his Liber Additamentorum. Furthermore, she found that
two quotations from Ovid occur both in the Julius Life and in
Matthew's Chronica Major a, and that one of them is introduced,
in the Julius Life, with the same words as in the Chronica Major a^
and the other in very similar words. 1 The second of these
quotations actually occurs three times in the Chronica Majora
and twice in the Historia Anglorum ; indeed it is one of Matthew's
favourites. 2 Paravicini also noticed that the author of the Julius
Life had the same habit of playing on words as Matthew Paris,
and she might have gone on to cite some of Matthew's typical
pairs of similar words which are to be found in the Julius Life,
such as 'dura' and 'dira 3 , 'leviter' and 'leniter', valuit' and
'voluit', and 'ponens' and 'exponens'. 3 Paravicini's evidence
of stylistic similarities can be further amplified: compare, for
instance, the phrase in the Life, 'nee est fraudatus a desiderio
suo', with the phrase from the Abbreviatio Chronicorum, nec
est a suo desiderio fraudatus'; 4 or f ad instar fluvii qui ex
torrentibus pluvialibus suscipit incrementum' of the Julius
Life with *ad instar fluminis quod ex torrentibus suscipit
incrementum * of the Chronica Majora. 5 Again, many of the
phrases characteristically employed by Matthew Paris in his
historical writings occur also in the Julius Life; for instance:
'ab alto (or immo) trahens (or ducens) suspiria 5 ; 6 'Haecidcirco
scripserim'; 7 'felix suscepit incrementum 5 ; 8 'luce clarius'; 9
'sicut sequens sermo declarabit'; 10 and 'speciales tractatus

1 Paravicini, St Edmund of Abingdon, p. xxxviii.

2 Ovid, Remed. Amor. 119: CM. in, p. 483; iv, p. 158; v, p. 662; HA. ir,
pp. 396 and 405.

3 See above, pp. 38-40; 46-7; and 127.

4 Wallace, Life of St Edmund, p. 550; AC. p. 281.

5 Wallace, ibid. p. 578; CM. v, p. 17.

6 Wallace, ibid. pp. 566, 573,

7 Ibid. p. 543. 8 Ibid. p. 546.

9 Ibid. p. 550. 10 Ibid. pp. 555, 573.

163 **-2

MATTHEW PARIS

exigerent'. 1 We can thus be quite sure that the Life of Edmund
in Cotton MS. Julius D vi is a copy of the one written by
Matthew Paris.

C. H. Lawrence has recently shown that Matthew's Life was
based on a collection of materials made at Pontigny and ex-
tracted from the letters and documents of the canonization
process. He shows, too, how Matthew has added to and altered
his source in his characteristic way; and he gives a list of the
longer passages which Matthew did not derive from his source. 2
These include a certain amount of documentary material, such
as a long statement by Robert Bacon; a letter and a sermon
of St Edmund; a letter of Richard Wych; and the bull of
canonization. Others are probably based on information given
to Matthew by Robert Bacon and Richard Wych, and Lawrence
conjectures that the additional information about Edmund's
family and childhood was given to Matthew by Robert of
Abingdon, Edmund's brother. Though documents and personal
information account for a number of Matthew's additions to his
source, others have been taken from his own historical works.
The description of Edmund's consecration in the Life is very
close to thatinthe Chronica Majora^ and an addition of Matthew's
to Roger Wendover's chronicle is incorporated into the text of
the Life, 3 so that it seems very likely that the Chronica Majora
was used in its composition. On the other hand, in the course of
the account in the Life of the quarrel between the archbishop
and his monks, there are some very close parallels with the
Historia Anglorum^ If we compare the passages concerning
Edmund in the Chronica Majora and the Historia Anglorum
with the corresponding passages in the Life, we find that, when
the Historia Anglorum differs from the Chronica Majora^ it is
invariably closer to the Life. Now since the Historia Anglorum
is for the most part derived directly from the Chronica Majora,
it is probable that these divergences of the Historia Anglorum
from its exemplar are due to the fact that the Life of Edmund

1 Wallace, Life of St Edmund, p. 556 ; see also above, pp. 39, 40, and 126-7.

2 Lawrence, * Robert of Abingdon and Matthew Paris*, EHR, LXIX (1954),
pp. 413-15, For the source of Matthew's Life, see pp. 410-12, and for the
probable connexion between Robert of Abingdon and Matthew, pp. 416-17.

3 Wallace, Life of St Edmund, p. 555; CM. in, pp. 272 and 244.

4 Wallace, ibid. p. 565; HA. n, p. 411.

164

MATTHEW PARIS THE HAGIOLOGIST

was written after the Chronica Major a, but before the Historia
Anglorum was abridged from it. Had the Life been written
after the Historia Anglorum, it would be difficult to explain why
the text of the Historia, normally close to that of the Chronica
Majora, varies from it where St Edmund is mentioned, and
comes, at these points, very close to the text of the Life.

Paravicini pointed out that since Matthew's Life of Edmund
includes a letter of Richard Wych describing the translation of
St Edmund on 9 June 1247, it must have been written after
then; 1 and Lawrence noted that, since Blanche of Castile is
referred to as still living, it must have been written before her
death in 1 253.2 Paravicini noticed, further, that in the Historia
Anglorum Matthew referred to the bull of canonization as being
'in libro Additamentorum', but that this was later altered to
'in libro de vita ipsius' : Lawrence concluded from this that the
Life was not written until after this part of the Historia Anglorum?
The bull of canonization thus referred to is still in the Liber
Additamentorum, and we cannot therefore argue that the reference
was altered because the document was removed thence into the
Life, and the first reference thus made inaccurate. Further-
more, there are many references in the Historia Anglorum which
have been altered in a similar way to this one; and we have seen
that Matthew evidently worked through the text systematically,
altering the explicit references to actual manuscripts at St Albans
into vague general ones. 4 The alteration of this reference in the
Historia Anglorum cannot therefore be used as evidence for the
date of the Life, and we must fall back on the evidence noted
above, and conclude that it was written between 1247 and 1253,
and probably nearer 1247 than 1253, since, as we have seen, it
seems to have been written before the Historia Anglorum. The
only other hint as to its date is the fact that Matthew tells us
that it was written with the help of Richard Wych and Robert
Bacon, and his words suggest that information was supplied

1 Paravicini, St Edmund of Abingdon, p. xxxii; see Wallace, Life of St
Edmund, p. 583.

2 Lawrence, ' Robert of Abingdon and Matthew Paris ', EHR. LXIX (1954),
p. 417, note 4; see Wallace, Life of St Edmund, p. 571.

3 HA. m, p. 13, note 4; Paravicini, St Edmund of Abingdon, pp. xxxviii-
xxxix; Lawrence, 'Robert of Abingdon and Matthew Paris', loc. cit. p. 417.

4 See pp. 72-3 above.

165

MATTHEW PARIS

verbally to him by these two. 1 If this was so, he must have been
collecting material for his Life of Edmund before Bacon's death
in 1 248,2 which adds to the probability of an early date, nearer
1247 ^an 1253.

In his Life of Edmund, Matthew treats his source in much the
same way as, in his Chronica Major a, he treated the text of Roger
Wendover's chronicle. Many small alterations of a stylistic kind
are made, as well as short additions reflecting Matthew's opinions
and attitude of mind. 3 In his longer interpolations, too, Matthew
expresses his characteristic feelings, sometimes more forcibly
than in the Chronica Majora. In describing the baptism of
Henry Ill's son Edward, for instance, Matthew says in the
Chronica Majora that he was baptized by the papal legate Otho,
'though he was not a priest', and 'though the archbishop was
present'. 4 In the Life, Matthew's resentment that the heir to
the throne should be baptized by a mere papal legate is expatiated
upon, and a sharp contrast is drawn between the Englishman
and the foreigner: 5

When the king's son and heir was baptized, Otho, then legate, was
chosen to baptize him: a deacon and a foreigner, of poor character
and inadequate theological knowledge; instead of the archbishop of
Canterbury and primate of all England, who was present: a priest
and an Englishman, of excellent character and even sanctity, and
a celebrated teacher and scholar ....

Characteristic of Matthew, too, is his statement in the Life
that Edmund was only elected archbishop 'after many royal
and papal vexations'; and the insertion of a piece of direct
speech, in which Edmund is warned that, if he does not accept
the archbishopric, the king will intrude some unworthy alien. 6
Whereas in the Chronica Majora Matthew tends to take the side
of the monks in their quarrel with Edmund, 7 in the Historia
Anglorum and the Life he remains neutral, or even sympathizes
with the archbishop. There are other differences between the

1 See pp. 161-2 above. 2 Which he records at CM. v, p. 16.

3 See Lawrence, ' Robert of Abingdon and Matthew Paris ', EHR. LXIX
(1954), PP- 413-14. 4 CM. in, pp. 539 and 540.

5 Wallace, Life of St Edmund, p. 569.
e Ibid. p. 554; see also p. 139 above.
7 See especially in, p. 527,

1 66

MATTHEW PARIS THE HAGIOLOGIST

account of Edmund in the Chronica Majora and that in the
Life, the most striking of which is in Matthew's treatment of the
legate Otho. Although he is described in one place as an
adversary of Edmund, 1 on the whole Matthew takes a fairly
favourable view of Otho in the Chronica Majora. In the Life,
however, he is systematically hostile: Otho is said to have
annulled Edmund's acts in an intolerable manner, 2 and the
reader is given to understand that it was the persecution of the
legate and others which drove Edmund into exile, whereas in
the Chronica Majora 3 his departure is construed as a protest
against papal exactions.

The Life, of course, is a purely hagiological work, designed
to praise St Edmund and demonstrate his sanctity, whereas the
Chronica Majora gives a more factual account of him, with the
emphasis on his part in politics rather than on his personal
sanctity. Extravagant praise of Edmund is, however, a noticeable
feature of the minor historical works written after 1250, especially
of the Floras Historiarum, where he is referred to as * a man of
wonderful sanctity and gentleness' whose fame after his death
spread through the whole of cisalpine Europe. 4 The Flores
Historiarum, like the Historia Anglorum, seems to have been
written after the Life, and it is interesting to find in it an account
of the curing of the pope's illness by the archbishop shortly
before he was canonized, 5 which is not in the Life, and which
Matthew perhaps only heard about after the Life had been
written. He did not attempt, in the Life, to collect all the
available material about St Edmund, though he has added to
his source a considerable amount of historical information
already recorded in the Chronica Majora. On the whole, the
Life lacks the bitter attacks on king and pope which are so
common in the Chronica', and it is by no means the political
biography we might have expected from the pen of Matthew
Paris. Controversial issues are for the most part avoided, and
though Edmund is represented as a much persecuted man,
Matthew is careful not to enlarge on these persecutions, nor to
attack the persecutors. So far as the Life is concerned, he is not

1 iv, p. 72; the statement at in, p. 480 is in the margin and was no doubt
added later; see note 4. 2 Wallace, Life of St Edmund, p. 568.

* FH. n, pp. 213 and 274. 5 n, pp. 314-15.

167

MATTHEW PARIS

being hypocritical when, speaking of the archbishop's tribula-
tions, he says that they were caused by some of the great men
of the kingdom, and adds: 'Whom I do not think, on account of
reverence for the pope and king, it would be decent or safe to
contradict by name/ I Matthew's Life of Edmund is probably
the fullest and most reliable of the contemporary lives, and
Wallace was undoubtedly right in basing his own biography on
it. For the most part it is a balanced and accurate, though rather
fragmentary, account; in which Matthew's political passions, as
well as his prejudices, are subdued in the interests of the central
theme, the sanctity of St Edmund.

There exists a group of saints' Lives in Anglo-Norman verse,
which have been attributed to Matthew Paris; and Dr Legge,
in her book Anglo-Norman in the Cloisters? devotes a chapter
to ' Matthew Paris and his Fellows ' in which she accepts them as
Matthew's work, though without any detailed discussion of the
evidence for his authorship of them. This I shall attempt to
supply here, both for the sake of completeness, and because no
coherent discussion of the authorship of all these Lives has yet
been undertaken. The Lives in question are four in number:

(1) Alban : St Alban, including also St Amphibalus ; in Trinity
College, Dublin, MS. E i 40, ff. 29-50. The text and the illustra-
tions which accompany it are executed by Matthew Paris.

(2) Edward: St Edward the Confessor; in Cambridge Uni-
versity Library MS. Ee iii 59. Written and illustrated (not by
Matthew Paris) about the middle of the thirteenth century.

(3) Thomas: St Thomas Becket, a fragment. Text and
illustrations as Edward.

(4) Edmund: St Edmund Rich; in the Welbeck Abbey
MS., ff. 85b-ioo; written in the second half of the thirteenth
century.

Professor R. Atkinson published an edition of Alban in 1876.
He thought that the poem was written in Matthew's own hand,
and that it was probably also composed by Matthew. Some

1 Wallace, Life of St Edmund, p. 570.

z Dr Legge has admirably discussed the place of these poems in Anglo-
Norman literature as a whole, as well as their general character and signi-
ficance; and I have, in consequence, limited the present discussion to topics
not fully discussed by her.

168

MATTHEW PARIS THE HAGIOLOGIST

of the inadequacies of Atkinson's edition were pointed out by
Gaston Paris in a review contributed to Romania in the same
year, 1 and many more in an elaborate study of the language and
versification of the poem by Suchier, which also appeared in
1876* Suchier thought that it would never be possible to
establish whether or not Alban was Matthew's own work; and
Uhlemann, in his study of the phonology and morphology of
the poem, 3 contributed nothing to the question of its authorship,
except for the suggestion that the legends to the pictures were
probably not written by the author of the text. Matthew's
authorship of Alban was doubted by Menger, 4 but M. R. James
came to the conclusion that it was not only composed by
Matthew, but also written by him, thus upholding the opinion
of the editor of the poem, Atkinson. His theory about the
authorship of Alban was linked to that concerning another of
the Lives, Edward, and it appeared in his introductions to the
facsimile editions of the manuscripts containing these two Lives,
published in 1924 and 1920 respectively. 5 Until the appearance
of James's facsimile edition of the manuscript, no one had
thought of attributing Edward to Matthew Paris. Its editor,
Luard, 6 believed that it had been written by a Westminster
monk; and this theory was elaborated in a dissertation published
by R. Fritz in 19 io. 7 To Alban and Edward James added a third
Life which he attributed to Matthew Paris, Thomas. A frag-
ment of this had been found and published by Paul Meyer in
i885. 8 Meyer was uncertain of its authorship, but he compared
it with Edward, and thought the illustrations similar to those
of Alban. James was thus able, in 1920, to put forward a
coherent theory for Matthew's authorship of Alban, Edward,
and Thomas, but he thought that Edmund was irretrievably lost,
for the copy of it which apparently once existed in British

1 Romania, v (1876), pp. 384-9.

2 Suchier, Uber die Matthaeus Paris zugeschriebene l Vie de Seint Auban*.

3 In Romanische Studien, iv (1880), pp. 543-626.

4 Anglo-Norman Dialect (1904), p. 27.

5 Lowe and Jacob (edd.), Illustrations to the Life of St Alban; James (ed.),
La Estoire de Seint Aedward le Rei.

6 Luard (ed.), Lives of Edward the Confessor, i, pp. 1-315.

7 Fritz, Uber Verfasser und Quellen der altfranzosischen Estoire de Seint
Aedward le Rei, pp. 13-20.

8 With facsimiles (Socie'te' des Anciens Textes Fran?ais, 1885).

169

MATTHEW PARIS

Museum Cotton MS. Vitellius D viii had been destroyed in the
Cottonian fire in 173 1. 1 Fortunately, however, Professor Baker
discovered a copy of this Life at Welbeck Abbey, which he
edited in 1929.2

James's attribution of Alban, Edward, and Thomas to Matthew
Paris was partly based on the statement of Thomas Walsingham
which we have already had occasion to quote: 3 ' . . .Matthew
Paris. . .who wrote and most elegantly illustrated the Lives of
Saints Alban and Amphibalus, and of the archbishops of

Canterbury Thomas and Edmund ' The phrase 'the Lives

of Saints Alban and Amphibalus' no doubt refers to our Alban
in Trinity College, Dublin, MS. E i 40, for the poem is called
by Matthew Testoire de seint Auban. . .e de seint AmphibaP
(f. 50 a), and includes a full account of Amphibalus. James
thought that the text was in Matthew's hand, and he was in-
clined to the belief that the illustrations were his work. In both
these opinions my own studies have fully borne him out. 4 On
the second fly-leaf of this manuscript are some notes in the
handwriting of Matthew Paris which James translates as follows : 5

(1) If you please, you can keep this book until Easter.

(2) G., send, please, to the lady Countess of Arundel, Isabel, that
she is to send you the book about St Thomas the Martyr and
St Edward which I translated and illustrated, and which the lady
Countess of Cornwall may keep until Whitsuntide.

(3) In the Countess of Winchester's book let there be a pair of
images on each page, thus : . . . .

The essentially private nature of these notes shows that the
manuscript in which they were written was Matthew's own.
The third note is in reference to a series of verses, arranged down
the page in pairs, on twelve different saints, and the images were
perhaps designed to preface a psalter. 6 The second note is more

1 James (ed.), Estoire de St Aedward le Rei, p. 18.

2 In Romania, LV (1929), pp. 332-81.

3 Above, p. 19.

4 See Vaughan, 'Handwriting of M. Paris*, Trans. Canib. Bibliog. Soc.
I (rQSS)* and below, p. 221.

6 James in Illustrations to the Life of St Alban, pp. 15-16.

6 See, for instance, British Museum Royal MS. 2 B vi, a psalter which is
prefixed with a series of pictures arranged in pairs, which include a number
of saints, executed at St Albans in Matthew's lifetime. See below, p. 224.

170

MATTHEW PARIS THE HAGIOtOGIST

interesting, for it shows that Matthew had translated and illus-
trated the Lives of SS. Thomas and Edward, apparently in one
book. 'Translated' means, of course, turned from Latin into
Anglo-Norman.

It cannot be mere coincidence that the manuscripts of Alban,
Edward and Thomas are so similar in date, size, format and
style of illumination. Alban, however, which is Matthew's auto-
graph, differs from the other two in a number of ways. The
surviving leaves of Thomas are larger than those of Edward, and
the scribes are different in the two manuscripts, and neither of
them is Matthew himself. It is thus most unlikely that either
Edward or Thomas ever formed part of the single volume men-
tioned by Matthew in his fly-leaf note in Alban. On the other
hand they are, to judge from the script and the style of illumina-
tion, very close copies of Matthew's original, and obvious
products of the scriptorium of St Albans during his lifetime. 1

James was by no means content with the evidence so far
discussed, and he went on to examine the textual similarities
between the Lives he knew: Alban, Edward, and Thomas. 2 He
pointed out that each is a close rendering of a Latin original; he
pointed out, too, that Edward and Thomas are both written in
octosyllabic couplets, usually with three columns on each page,
though sometimes with only two ; and that Alban and Thomas
have Latin legends to the pictures as well as those in Anglo-
Norman which Edward also has. James discovered seventy-
five marked coincidences of vocabulary between Edward and
Thomas, and 585 between Edward and Alban. The verbal
parallels between these poems (including the newly discovered
Edmund) certainly help to demonstrate their common author-
ship, though not enough of Thomas has survived to provide
useful material in this respect. Here are some of the more
striking parallels :

Edmund, 1. 905 : ke parveue et estuee

Edward, 1. 3276: Li fa purveue e estuee

Edmund, 1. 330: Ne prisa vaillant une pume (see also L 1280)

Edward, 1. 559: Ne. . .vailant une pume (see also 1. 4470)

Edmund, 1. 874: a chief de tur

1 For the illustrations of these manuscripts see below, pp. 221-2.

z For what follows see James (ed.), Estoire de St Aedward le Rei, p. 26.

171

MATTHEW PARIS

Edwardy 1. 398 : au chef de tur (see also 1. 4090)

Albany 1. 562: au chef de tur

Edmund, 11. 718-20: espanir. . .cum fet rosee en matinee

Edward, L 141 : u de Us e rose espanie

Albany L 1070: beus ke. . .n'est lis espani (see also 1. 1721)

Edward, L 561 : Ne preisent vailant un bittun

Alban^ L 334: Ne prise mes valiant un butun

Edwardy 1. 719: Pur trestut For k'est a Damas

Albany L 1497 : pur tut Tor de Damas

Edwardy 1. 2154: De quor entent e ben escute

Albany L 104: Auban ben 1'escute e entent i de quor (see also L 175)

Edwardy 1. 3502: Plus clers ke solailz de midiz

Albany L 1060: ke plus ert clers ke solailz de midi

The verbal parallels between these poems are not limited to
phrases and metaphors. There is, for instance, a passage in
Alban mentioning various illnesses, which is very similar to
passages in Edward and Edmund^ and there is one parallel
between Edmund and Edward which might by itself be con-
sidered to afford sufficient evidence of their common authorship :

Edmund Sa char, le mund (et) Fenemi (L 14)
Sa char. . .par chastete (11. 15-16)

Le mund par humilite (L 17)

E si descunfist le diable (1. 19)

Par son penser espiritable (L 20)

Bien dei de lui escrivre estoire (L 23)

E son nun mettre en memoire (1. 24)

Edward ki lur char, diable e mund (1. 21)

venquirent. . . (1. 22)

Sa char venquis par chastete (L 29)

Le mund par humilite (1. 30)

E diable par ses vertuz (1. 31)

Dunt vus escrif e vus translat (1. 35)

Pur refreschir sa memoire (1. 38)

So far our argument may be summarized as follows. We
know, from his own statements, as well as those of Walsingham,
that Matthew Paris illustrated and wrote in Anglo-Norman the
Lives of Alban and Amphibalus, Edward, Thomas, and Edmund.
We have identified his original manuscript of Alban in the
library of Trinity College, Dublin; and we have seen that our

1 Cf. Alban, 11. 148 ff.; Edward, 11. 4426 ff.; and Edmund, 11. 1946 ff.

172

MATTHEW PARIS THE HAGIOLOGIST

manuscripts of Edward and Thomas were probably produced at
St Albans in Matthew's lifetime. They are both, it seems, * first
copies' of Matthew's original. Furthermore, we have shown
that there are a number of textual similarities between the
poems, which points to their common authorship. On the
strength of this evidence alone we might well attribute Alban y
Edward> Thomas and Edmund to Matthew Paris. In the case of
Edmund, however, there is further convincing evidence pointing
to Matthew Paris. Professor Baker noted the following significant
facts about this poem: 1

(1) It is dedicated to Isabel, countess of Arundel (who had
borrowed from Matthew his copy of Thomas and Edward, see
p. 170 above).

(2) The author had written the Life of Edmund in two
languages, and the source of Edmund is Matthew's Latin Life of
St Edmund.

(3) The author's name was Matthew (1. 1692 : ' Faz ge Maheu
en livre mettre').

The question of the authorship of Edward requires some
further discussion, for Luard, followed by Fritz, maintained
that it was written by a Westminster monk. Luard suggested
this because the author in one place calls St Peter (1. 2022) 'le
suen seigneur e le nostre' ; 2 and Fritz developed the theory with
an elaborate and curious series of arguments. He did not,
however, accept Luard's single piece of evidence, for he thought
that the word 'nostre' might easily have been used in a vague
general sense. 3 Fritz pointed out that the centre of interest of
the poem is Westminster Abbey, of which the author clearly had
a detailed knowledge, for he adds to his source a long descrip-
tion of it (11. 2290-323). In the course of his account of the
legend of the fisherman who rowed St Peter across the Thames
for the dedication of the abbey church, the author of the poem
says that the fisherman caught salmon in his nets, though his
source mentioned only fish. From this Fritz deduced that the
author of the poem knew the legend in more detail than was to

1 Baker (ed.), 'Vie de S. Edmond', Romania, LV (1929), PP- 336-41-

2 Luard (ed.), Lives of Edward the Confessor, I, pp. x-xi.

3 Fritz, Uber Verfasser und Quellen der altfranzosischen Estoire de Seint
Aedward le Rei, p. 19, note i ; for what follows, see pp. 15-19.

173

MATTHEW PARIS

be found in his source, and that he must therefore have been
a monk of Westminster. Again, Fritz claimed that the author
of the poem, since he says in one place, when copying from a
document, that the original is before him in two languages,
must have been writing in the scriptorium at Westminster,
where the document in question, which concerns Westminster,
would have been preserved. 1 Finally, Fritz noted that the author
talks about the 'Beus maneres, terres e bois' of the monastery,
while the source mentions only ' possessions' ; and he cited this
as additional evidence that he was a monk of Westminster.

None of these arguments is convincing. Matthew Paris knew
Westminster well and had been there at least once; 2 and his
mention of the ruined hall of William Rufus at Westminster 3
demonstrates his personal knowledge of the place. He is, too,
just the man to improve on his source by altering the word ' fish '
into something a little more exciting. The undoubted fact that
the poem was written in connexion with an important event at
Westminster (it is dedicated to the queen) could adequately
account for the interest in, and glorification of, that house,
which is so apparent in the poem. Furthermore, we should
bear in mind the fact that Matthew Paris wrote a version of his
chronicle, the Chetham manuscript of the Flares Historiarum,
especially for Westminster, and took the trouble to insert into
it a number of passages of Westminster interest only. 4

I think it can be proved conclusively that Edward was written
at St Albans. Although most of it is translated from Aelred of
Rievaulx's Latin Life of Edward the Confessor, some passages
have been taken from a historical source which Fritz identified
as the ' St Albans compilation'. But in fact this historical source
was Matthew's own Flores Historiarum. In this Matthew adds
to the text of the 'St Albans compilation 5 in A the metaphor
'quarum [hastarum] multitude ad instar hiberni grandinis
volando', which occurs, slightly altered, in Edward, where it is
said that arrows, stones and darts flew 'Espessement cum
gresle en Marz'. 5 Again, in the Flores Historiarum, Matthew

1 Fritz, op. cit. p. 17; Edward, 11. 2342-5. 2 See above, p. 3.

8 HA. i, p. 165. * Above, p. 100.

5 FH. i, p. 596, and Edward, 1. 4568; both are in reference to the battle of
Hastings.

174

MATTHEW PARIS THE HAGIOLOGIST

says that when William counter-attacked at the battle of Hastings,
he charged into the English ' quasi prora navis fluctus procellosos
penetrando', while in Edward the same metaphor is applied to
the English when they attacked the Normans: 'Cum fait
dromunz wage en und Quant curt siglant en mer parfund.' 1
The significance of William's fall on the beach, too, is elaborated
in a similar way in the Flores Historiarum and in Edward?
There seem to be only two possible explanations of these
parallels : either the Flores Historiarum and Edward were written
by the same author, that is, Matthew Paris; or the Flores
Historiarum was used in the composition of Edward. The former,
in view of the nature of the parallels, which are not due to
straightforward copying, is the more likely explanation; but,
even if we only accept the latter, we are forced to conclude that
Edward was written at St Albans, for we know that the Flores
Historiarum was not sent to Westminster until after 1265, and
that Edward was already written before then. 3

There is some internal evidence that Matthew was the author
of Edward, for remarks characteristic of him frequently occur
in it. We find, for instance, a dig at Stigand which is typical of
him: *li simoniaus culvertz, Stigantz' (11. 3706-7) ; 4 as well as
sentiments identical with those expressed in the Chronica Major a
on the subject of Englishmen and foreigners in the government
of the country; for in one place Edward is praised for handing
over responsibility to his own subjects, of whose loyalty he
could be quite certain, and not to 'stranges aliens'. 5 Elsewhere
the author of Edward tells us something about himself which
can surely only apply to Matthew Paris: 6

Now I pray you, gentle King Edward,
To have regard to me a sinner,
Who have translated from the Latin,
According to my knowledge and genius,
Your history into French,
That memory of thee may spread;

1 FH. I, p. 595, and Edward, 1. 4557.

2 Cf. FH. I, p. 591, and Edward, 11. 4529 ff.
8 FH. i, p. xiii, and Fritz, op. cit. pp. 11-12.

4 Cf. HA. i, p. 13. 5 Edward, 11. 2496 ff.

6 Edward, 11. 3855-966; I have used Luard's translation, Lives of Edward
the Confessor, I, p. 290.

175

MATTHEW PARIS

And for lay people who letters
Know not, in portraiture
Have I clearly figured it
In this present book

It is scarcely likely that two different people translated and
themselves illustrated a Life of St Edward towards the middle
of the thirteenth century, and we may be certain, therefore,
that this Life of Edward is the same as that referred to by
Matthew in his fly-leaf note in the Dublin manuscript; 1 and
that Matthew Paris was indeed the author of our four Anglo-
Norman saints' Lives: Alban, Edward, Thomas, and Edmund.

There is plenty of evidence, in Matthew's historical manu-
scripts, of his concern with hagiology, and with these four saints
in particular. We shall discuss his interest in St Alban in the
next chapter, and we have already discussed in detail his Latin
Life of Edmund. His interest in St Edward the Confessor is
well shown in the Abbreviatio Chronicorum (p. 167), where he
mentions several legends about the saint which are described in
Edward] as well as in a note on the penultimate fly-leaf of A,
which reads : Here one should consider carefully the exposition
of the parable of Blessed King Edward when he was dying.
Read [it] at the end of his history/ This remark, made in con-
nexion with the genealogical chronicle on this page, refers to
Edward's explanation of a vision, which is described in detail
in Edward. It is worth noting, too, in connexion with Matthew's
interest in St Edward, that there is a marginal note of his in the
Gesta Abbatum 2 to the effect that, in the time of Abbot Robert
of St Albans, Abbot Lawrence of Westminster caused the Life
of Edward the Confessor to be written, as a result of a request of
Henry II's. This is the Life by Aelred of Rievaulx the very
one which was used as a basis for our Edward. Of St Thomas
we read a great deal in the Chronica Majora, and Matthew has
added some long passages about him to Roger Wendover's
account. 3 Moreover, in his manuscript of the poems of Henry
of Avranches Matthew has himself written out Henry's Latin
verse Life of Thomas. 4

1 See p. 170 above.

2 Wats, p. 82. 3 CM. n, pp. 261, 278, etc.
* University Library, Cambridge, MS. Dd xi78, rl. ib~29a.

176

MATTHEW PARIS THE HAGIOLOGIST

Matthew Paris, as we should expect, knew Anglo-Norman
perfectly well and frequently used it. Thus nearly all the
geographical and other notes on his maps and itineraries are in
Anglo-Norman, as are some of his rough notes in the Liber
Additamentorum. Sometimes a document is transcribed in
Anglo-Norman, and in one place in the Liber Additamentorum
Matthew writes out a heading in it. 1 Furthermore, there is some
evidence that he was acquainted with French epic literature in
general. Rene Louis surmised that Matthew may have known
something of the poem Girart de Roussillon, since he marks
Roussillon on his itinerary from London to Apulia, and is the
earliest writer to localize this name. 2 In the Gesta Abbatum
Matthew says of Roger de Thony that he was descended from
those famous knights f qui a Cigni nomine intitulantur'; 3 a
remark which seems to imply some knowledge of the epic
literature concerning Le Chevalier au Cygne. In the Anglo-
Norman poems themselves there is more evidence of Matthew's
knowledge of literature, but it is interesting to find that, even
without reference to them, Matthew appears to have been
perfectly capable of writing in Anglo-Norman verse.

The problem of finding a date for the writing and illustration
of Matthew's Anglo-Norman saints' Lives is a difficult one,
especially when we consider how busy he must have been,
towards the end of his life, with his historical writing. It seems
probable that Alban was written first, for the handwriting is
tidy and controlled, and the illustrations seem to be earlier than
the others attributed to Matthew Paris. 4 The handwriting is in
fact considerably neater than anything in the historical manu-
scripts, and there seems to be no reason why Alban should not
have been written and illustrated in the third, or even the
second, decade of the thirteenth century. If Alban was the first
of Matthew's Anglo-Norman poems, Edmund was probably the
last, for it is based on his Latin Life of Edmund, and must

1 CM. vi, p. 165.

2 Louis, De VHistoire a la Legende, in, p. 173. For Matthew's possible
knowledge of the Roman de Renaud de Montauban, see B6dier, Les Legendes
^piques, IV, p. 244, note I. 3 Wats, p. 46.

4 See, for instance, Rickert, Painting in Britain, p. 119; see also below,
pp. 227-8. Legge, Anglo-Norman in the Cloisters, pp. 21-3, argues that
Alban is the earliest of the four poems.

12 177 VMP

MATTHEW PARIS

therefore have been written after 1247. * Indeed there is some
evidence that it was not written until after 1253, f r tne reference
to Queen Blanche in the Latin Life * quam constat esse muli-
erem consilii magni' is altered in the Anglo-Norman life to
'ke seinte fu et sage et franche', as if the queen's death had
occurred in the meanwhile. 2 Thomas and Edward seem to have
been written at about the same time, for they were originally in
the same manuscript. 3 Both Luard and James thought that
Edward was especially written to be presented to Queen Eleanor
in connexion with some great Westminster event: soon after
1241, thought James; and Luard favoured I245. 4 We shall
therefore perhaps not be far wrong if we date Alban before 1240 ;
Thomas and Edward fairly soon after 1240; and Edmund after
1250, or even perhaps after 1253.

The sources of these poems are in every case easily identifiable.
Alban has been taken, often word for word, from William of
St Albans's Latin Life of St Alban, the text of which, written out
in Matthew's own hand, precedes the Anglo-Norman poem in
the Dublin manuscript. Suchier showed that, in Alban, the
Latin was frequently very closely followed, even sometimes in
the order of words ; 5 and this is true of the other poems. Meyer
pointed out that the source of Thomas was the well-known
Quadrilogus, and he made a detailed comparison between it and
the text of Thomas.* Edward is based on Aelred of Rievaulx's
Latin Life of Edward the Confessor, but Matthew's Floras
Historiarum, as well as, in one place, Henry of Huntingdon,
were also probably used. 7 Edmund is a literal translation from
Matthew's own Latin Life of St Edmund. Thus in each of these
poems (with the partial exception of Edward) a single Latin
source is followed more or less closely, though with minor
additions and alterations of the type usual with Matthew Paris,
and with occasional longer additions. These additions are some-

1 See above, p. 165.

2 Wallace, Life of St Edmund, p. 571 ; Edmund, 1. 1408. Queen Blanche
died in 1253. 3 See p. 170 above.

4 James (ed.), Estoire de St Aedward, p. 17; Luard, Lives of Edward the
Confessor, I, p. xi. Fritz agreed with Luard, Vber Verfasser der Estoire de
Seint Aedward, p. 12. 5 Suchier, Uber die Vie de Seint Auban, pp. 8-9.

6 Meyer (ed.), Vie de Saint Thomas, pp. viii-xxvi.

7 See pp. 174-5 above, and Fritz, tJber Verfasser der Estoire de Seint
Aedward, pp. 21 fF.

178

MATTHEW PARIS THE HAGIOLOGIST

times lyrical passages ;* sometimes explanatory ; 2 and sometimes
political. 3 Frequently a metaphor or a proverb is added to the
source, and direct speech is introduced as a literary device to
increase the dramatic intensity. The occasional slight variations
between Edmund and its Latin source are of interest because
both were written by Matthew. In Edmund, the papal legate
Otho's hostility to Edmund is expatiated upon at greater length
than in the Latin Life, and the archbishop's flight is linked more
closely with Otho's machinations. 4 Furthermore, the Canter-
bury monks are explicitly exonerated from their part in the
quarrel with Edmund, and are said to have been deceived by
malicious advisers, or, as Matthew calls them, 'legistres faus'. 5
In all these poems certain proverbs, phrases, and allusions
occur, which show, I think, that Matthew's Anglo-Norman
poetry was influenced by the epic conventions of his day; and
that he knew something of contemporary vernacular literature.
Thus, in Thomas, two well-known proverbs are added to the
source : 6

leaf 4, 11. 59-60 : De dons mals doit horn le mendre Eslire . . .

11. 60-1 : meuz nus vaut atendre Ke d'estre hastifs e engres

Another proverb occurs in Allan (1. 1314): cist se fert ki ne
veit*. Of the stock literary phrases, au chef du tur' is the
commonest, 7 and many others occur. In Alban, for instance,
we find the following:

1. 69 : n'a pl(ace ne liu)s ci k'a Teuue de Rin

1. 1264: . . .de ci k'a Burdele

1. 1825: pur tut For Costentin

1. 1497: pur tut For de Damas 8

1. 734: ki par autres est garniz, cist beu se chastie

Literary allusions, too, are not uncommon in these poems.
Thus, in Edward, Harold is criticized, and it is said of him that:

11. 4497-8 : D'el hestoires n'enquert, n'en ot
Ne d'ancienne geste un mot

1 E.g. Alban f 11. 104-6; Edmund, 11. 229-32, etc.

2 E.g. Edmund, 11. 1976-7; Edward, 11. 3955-74.

3 E.g. Edmund, 11. 1355-80; Edward, 11. 2496 ff.

4 Edmund, 11. 1355-80. 5 Edmund, 11. 1191 and 1199-1200..

6 Meyer (ed.), Vie de Saint Thomas, p. xxiv, and note i.

7 See pp. 171-2 above. 8 See p. 172 above.

179 12-2

MATTHEW PARIS

A similar remark is made in Edmund, though this time in
praise of its subject:

11. 331-2: Romanz d'Oger u (de) Charlemeine
Ne preisa il une chasteine

There seem to be three allusions, in these poems, to a Brut
of some kind:

Alban, L 1836: en Teille ke cunquist Brutus e Cornelin
1. 1832: passerai Mun Giu, le roiste munt alpin
Edward, 11. 786-7 : Venant en la cumpanie
Brut e la chere hardie

Matthew had evidently read something of the epic literature con-
cerning Duke Richard of Normandy, and probably also the Roman
de Rou\ as may be seen from the following passage in Edward

(U- 4S77- 8 3) : Reis Rou, ki as coups de lance
Descumfist le rei de France
E la mata enmi sa terre
Par force de bataille e guerre.
E dues Richard k'apres li vint
Ki li diable ateint e tint
E le venquit e le lia

It is interesting to note some of the historical and mythical
figures introduced into these poems. In Alban we find Apollo,
Phoebus, Diana, Neptune, Pallas, Jupiter, Tetim (Tethys?),
and Pluto; and in Edward, Priam, Menelaus, and Julius Caesar.
In Edmund (11. 521-3) Matthew tells us that, when the saint
gave up secular studies, he abandoned Plato and Ptolemy
a remark which perhaps tells us more of Matthew's ignorance of
secular studies than of his ' stock-in-trade ' of literary characters.

The language and versification of these poems are characteristic
of thirteenth-century Anglo-Norman verse. In Thomas, for
instance, which, like Edmund and Edward, was written in octo-
syllabic rhyming couplets, there are many lines of seven or nine
syllables, and the same variation occurs in the other two poems.
In these three poems, the same rhyme is frequently used for
four or even six lines in succession another common feature
of thirteenth-century Anglo-Norman verse. Alban is unlike the
other poems, for it is written in laisses. Alexandrines are here
the norm, but Matthew often uses ten- and even fourteen-

180

MATTHEW PARIS THE HAGIOLOGIST

syllabled lines, usually for literary effect and to avoid monotony.
It is curious that he should have used the old epic metre for
Alban y and the new romance metre for the other three poems;
but this is perhaps explicable ori the assumption that Alban was
the first of Matthew's ventures into Anglo-Norman verse. 1 He
was bound by few rules of grammar and syntax, and he often
confuses subject and object, or fails to distinguish between the
singular and plural of the second person of the personal pro-
noun. It is interesting to note that Meyer made a careful study
of the phonology of Thomas, and came to the conclusion that
the author was certainly born in England. 2

There is nothing beautiful or stylish about Matthew's Anglo-
Norman verse: it is the characteristic doggerel of his day. Nor
does he seem to have taken very much trouble with the texts of
these poems, for even in the autograph Alban careless errors
abound. On the other hand, the illustration of the manuscripts
was evidently carefully and systematically executed. As Dr
Legge pointed out, they were designed (except perhaps for
Alban) for the laity, 3 and so the pictures were of paramount
importance, and their subject-matter is explained by means of
rhymed legends. These poems are closely related to Matthew's
historical writings, and they fit into our general picture of his
interests and activities ; but they also show us a new aspect of
him, as the successful producer of illustrated hagiological litera-
ture designed for his friends among the lay aristocracy. Alban
seems to have been produced for Matthew's own house ; Edward,
however, is dedicated to Queen Eleanor; and Edmund to Isabel
of Arundel. Unfortunately the dedication of Thomas is lost. It
appears from his fly-leaf notes in Alban 4 that Matthew ran a kind
of circulating library among his aristocratic friends all of whom
were apparently women which specialized in illustrated, verna-
cular hagiology. New light is thus thrown on Matthew Paris,
for we find that the pessimistic enemy of the world revealed in
the historical writings is quite capable, not only of mixing with
the secular aristocracy of his day, but also of making a contribu-
tion to its rather specialized culture.

1 See p. 177 above,

2 Meyer (ed.), Vie de Saint Thomas, pp. xxvii-xxviii.

3 Legge, Anglo-Norman in the Cloisters, p. 29. 4 See p. 170 above.

181

CHAPTER X

MATTHEW PARIS THE DOMESTIC

HISTORIAN

I. THE 'GESTA ABBATUM'

MATTHEW'S most important contribution to the
domestic history of St Albans is his Gesta Abbatum,
the autograph text of which, written in two parts,
survives in his Liber Additamentorum}- This was printed by
Wats in 1639, though with numerous errors, without distin-
guishing the marginalia from the text, and with no attempt to
describe the sources used. Another edition of the Gesta
Abbatum was carried out by HL T. Riley for the Rolls Series
in 1867-9; but this was printed from Thomas Walsingham's
manuscript, written c. 1394, with little reference to the text of
Matthew's manuscript, with an incomplete and inaccurate col-
lation of Wats's text, and, again, with no attempt to describe
the sources.

In the upper margin of the first leaf of Matthew's text of
the Gesta Abbatum is a note in his own hand which reads : 2
'According to (secundum) the ancient roll of Bartholomew the
clerk, who for a long time had been servant to Adam the Cellarer,
and who kept this roll for himself from among his writings
(scriptis suis), choosing this one alone.' The implication of this note
seems to be that Matthew Paris based at any rate the earlier part
of his Gesta Abbatum on an ' ancient roll ' written by Bartholomew
the clerk, which had probably either been in the possession of
Adam the Cellarer, or had been dictated by him to Bartholomew ;
and it is only natural that the roll in question should have been
attributed to Adam the Cellarer, a well-known twelfth-century
monk of St Albans. There is no record, however, of a clerk,
Bartholomew, connected with Adam the Cellarer; but a 'Bar-
tholomeus clericus' signs a number of charters between 1230
and 1247 immediately after Adam de Belvoir, the praepositus.

1 See above, pp. 48 and 82 ff.

2 B.M. Cotton MS. Nero D i, f. 3oa, printed in GA. i, p. xiv.

182

MATTHEW PARIS THE DOMESTIC HISTORIAN

It is possible that the praepositus was the same official as the
extern cellarer or cellerarius curiae, and that this Adam and
Bartholomew, contemporaries of Matthew Paris, are the ones
mentioned in his note. Adam the Cellarer, however, has a much
stronger claim to be the author of the 'ancient roll'. He began
his career as cellarer on his return from Croyland, where he had
been sent in 1138 to help his uncle Geoffrey, another St Albans
monk, who became abbot of Croyland, in the reformation of
that house, 1 and he held the office of cellarer at St Albans from
c. 1140 until his death, which probably took place between 1167
and H76. 2 His career is reflected in a striking manner in the
text of Matthew's Gesta Abbatum. We know that he was engaged
in litigation on behalf of the convent, and that he played an
especially important part in the territorial transactions of the
middle years of the twelfth century. Up to the end of the
account of Robert's abbacy (1151-66), the whole emphasis of
the Gesta Abbatum is on territorial acquisitions and litigation
concerning them, and the long description of Abbot Robert's
rule is almost entirely devoted to detailed, and often, it seems,
eyewitness, accounts of lawsuits concerning land, in which
Adam the Cellarer is a central figure. After the description of
Robert's rule the character of the Gesta Abbatum alters radically.
Although Simon, who succeeded Robert, was actively engaged
in various territorial transactions, 3 not one of these is mentioned
in the Gesta, and, in the rest of it, territorial transactions and
litigation take their place beside many other topics. We find,
too, that whereas the account of Abbot Robert, who ruled for
fifteen years, occupies twenty-five printed pages, that of Simon,
who ruled for sixteen, takes up only three. This change in the

1 See Dugdale, Monasticon anglicanum, n, p. 101, and Wats, p. 69.

2 Adam signs one undated charter of Abbot Simon (i 167-83. B.M. Cotton
MS. Otho D iii, f. 73 col. 2), but the absence of his signature from several
other of Simon's charters (for instance B.M. Cotton MS. Otho D iii, f. 115,
of 1179, and Chatsworth cartulary, f. 64 b, of 1180), as well as the charter of
1 176 disposing of the lands acquired by him (Chatsworth cartulary, ff. loa-b,
printed in Dugdale, Monasticon, n, pp. 228-9; see Eyton, Court, Household
and Itinerary of King Henry II, p. 204), points to his death during the first
half of Simon's abbacy. Abbot Warin (1183-95) instituted his anniversary
(Wats, p. 98).

3 See, for instance, B.M. Cotton MS. Otho D iii, ff. 29 b, 3oa, 73a~74a,
H5a, i67b and 177 a; Chatsworth cartulary, f. 64b; and B.M. Cotton MS.
Julius D iii, f. 75 b.

183

MATTHEW PARIS

content of the Gesta Abbatum coincides with a change in author-
ship, for throughout the account of Simon's rule there are unmis-
takable signs of Matthew's style, which, up to this point, appear
only in a few passages evidently interpolated by him into the
text of his source. We may surely conclude from this that the
'ancient roll', which Matthew used for the early part of his
Gesta, was closely connected with Adam the Cellarer, and was
probably compiled under his auspices.

Matthew seems to have used some other source besides the
roll of Adam the Cellarer, for his text contains a considerable
amount of repetition, and, in the course of the description of
Abbot Ralph's rule, he has added in the margin another version
of a passage in the text, and headed it: Additwn de alto rotulo. 1
There are a number of other marginal additions in the early
part of Matthew's Gesta Abbatum, some of which were no
doubt taken from this 'other roll'. Fortunately for us, the
passages which Matthew has added to the text of Adam's roll
are usually readily identified, for they frequently include some
of his favourite phrases and expressions, and they often inter-
rupt Adam's narrative because they are carelessly inserted into
it, sometimes in the wrong place. A good example is the story
of Adrian IV's appointment of three bishops to examine into
the claims of the convent of Ely to possess the relics of St Alban,
which is inserted near the end of the account of Abbot Robert's
rule, although the event it describes must have occurred (if it
ever did occur) soon after Robert's accession. 2 Again, the
description of the reformation of Croyland by St Albans monks 3
is inserted into the account of Abbot Robert (1151-66), although
it actually occurred in 1138. In copying his source, Matthew
has made many alterations and additions of the sort we have
noticed when discussing his treatment of sources in his other
works. Thus he sometimes adds a quotation or an allusion; 4
or introduces one of his usual phrases or characteristic com-
ments. 5 He adds, for instance, to Adam's account of Abbot

1 Wats, p. 65, omits the heading. The passage begins *Iste quoque
Radulphus ', and ends *et creatus est'.

2 Wats, pp. 88-9; see also below, p. 201. 3 Wats, p. 69.

4 E.g. Wats, pp. 36 (Virgil, Aen. n, 646) and 47 (Terence, Andr. v, iv, 38).

5 E.g. Wats, pp. 42 ('novit Ille qui nihil ignorat') and 53 ('felix suscepit
incrementum').

184

MATTHEW PARIS THE DOMESTIC HISTORIAN

Robert's gifts to various people when he was leaving Rome the
words: 'sciens ipsos Romanos esse insatiabiles sanguissugae
filios, pecuniae sitibundos'. 1 Of Matthew's longer additions to
his source, apart from those concerning the relics of St Alban,
which we shall examine later, the most noteworthy are one or
two excerpts from Diceto; 2 accounts of Anselm's vision of
William Rufus's death and the foundation of the nunnery of
Sopwell; 3 some additional information about Nicholas Break-
spear; 4 and the account of the reformation of Croyland already
mentioned.

From the account of Abbot Simon's rule (1167-83) up to
nearly the end of that of Abbot John of Hertford (1235-63), the
Gesta Abbatum seems to be an original composition of Matthew
Paris. His description of Abbot Simon's rule is brief, but that
of Warin's (1183-95) * s fuller, and is especially interesting for
the account it contains of Warin's statutes, many of which
Matthew transcribes in full. Of John de Cella (1195-1214) we
have a most interesting account, and the picture of William of
Trumpington's abbacy (1214-35) is detailed and fascinating.
Matthew goes on to give us a very full account of the election
of the next abbot, John of Hertford, in 1235. Soon after this,
however, his Gesta Abbatum shrinks to a series of laconic entries
which peter out c. 1255. But although Matthew tells us very-
little, in the Gesta, of Abbot John of Hertford's rule, he included
a detailed record of contemporary domestic history in his
Chronica Major a^ which, from c. 1240 on, seems to have claimed
most of his attention. Fortunately, too, he took the trouble to
transcribe documents of domestic import into his Liber Addita-
mentorum, so that Thomas Walsingham, who continued the
Gesta Abbatum, was able to amplify his narrative of the abbacy
of John of Hertford with transcripts of these documents, as well
as with long and numerous extracts from the Chronica Majora.

The sources of Matthew's section of the Gesta Abbatum need
not detain us long, for he relied to a very large extent on his own
experience and memory, and on the personal information pro-
vided by the older members of his community. His description,
for instance, of the artistic work carried on at St Albans in the

1 Wats, p. 71. 2 Wats, pp. 50 and 74.

3 Wats, pp. 53 and 58-9. 4 Wats, p. 66.

185

MATTHEW PARIS

time of Abbot Simon no doubt derives from information given
him by Master John, one of the goldsmiths concerned, whom
Matthew knew personally. 1 Written sources were also used ; for,
in the course of the account of Abbot William, Matthew in one
place excerpts from a document which, he tells us, was written
out by Abbot William himself; 2 and some of the marginalia in
this part of the Gesta Abbatum* were taken from the St Albans
manuscript of Diceto's history, which contains a number of
additional annals written at St Albans and also used by Roger
Wendover.

Matthew's contribution to the Gesta Abbatum is notable for
the variety of subjects treated. He tells us a great deal, for
instance, about the improvements and alterations to the monastic
buildings carried out by the abbots John de Cella and William
of Trumpington. He describes how Abbot William installed
oak beds in the dorter; restored the tower of the abbey church
and roofed it with lead; repaired the aisle roofs; whitewashed
the inside walls of the church; finished the new bays at the west
end of the nave begun by his predecessor ; and built new cloisters
connecting the various convent buildings. Matthew's section
of the Gesta Abbatum is remarkable, too, for its notices of the
chief local artists of the time and their works. Cups, chalices,
copes, ornamental crosses and reliquaries are all noticed, and
Matthew gives us a detailed description of the altar-pieces
existing in the abbey in John de Cella's time (c. 1200), as well
as the names of some of their artists. The most important of
these were a small group from Colchester: Walter the Painter,
his brother Simon, and Simon's son Richard. Among other
things, Walter executed a magnificent rood-screen supporting
a carving of the Crucifixion, with figures of SS. Mary and John.
Richard painted the interior of Abbot John of Hertford's new
guest-hall. 4 Books, too, are noted, often with valuable detail.
Matthew tells us that Abbot Simon's books were kept in a
painted cupboard near the tomb of Roger the Hermit, and that
the documents concerning Abbot William's rule were kept in

1 GA. i, p. 19. 2 Wats, p. 128.

3 For instance the dedications etc., Wats, p. 119. The annals are printed,
Liebermann (ed.), Ungedruckte a.-n. Geschichtsquellen, pp. 167-72.
* Wats, pp. 108, 122 and 142.

186

MATTHEW PARIS THE DOMESTIC HISTORIAN

an oaken casket inside the big chest of charters. 1 He describes
two Bibles executed in John de Cella's time, 2 one of which was
prefixed with a painting of Christ in Majesty surrounded by the
Four Evangelists by Walter of Colchester ; and the other with
a painting of the Crucifixion. One of the books which he men-
tions particularly, a copy of the Historia Scholastica acquired in
the early years of the century by Prior Raymond, still exists, and
includes some matter added by Matthew himself. 3

Matthew's Gesta Abbatum is strongly coloured by his zealous
devotion to St Albans. Litigation is seen as persecution of his
house, and the temporal affairs of the house are measured in
terms of acquisitions and losses. Richard Marsh, bishop of
Durham, is described as 'an inexorable exactor of money',
'drunk with the poison of satan', because he had demanded a
sum of a hundred marks from the abbey on behalf of the king. 4
Robert FitzWalter, involved in litigation with St Albans over
the wood of Northaw, is likewise bitterly attacked; 5 and the
sudden deaths in sordid circumstances of persecutors of the
abbey, such as Falkes de Breaute and Ralph Cheinduit, are
gloated over with relish, and regarded as personal triumphs of
the avenging St Alban himself. 6 Innocent Ill's fourth Lateran
Council, one of the most important councils of the Middle
Ages, is criticized by Matthew because some of its provisions
infringed the privileges of St Albans. 7 Matthew's 'constitu-
tionalism' is a conspicuous feature of the Gesta Abbatum, and
he invariably supports the convent against its abbot. During the
years his history covers, a very real constitutional struggle was
going on at St Albans over the question of the abbot's right to
banish any monk he pleased to a distant cell; and Matthew
gives us a very partisan description of this struggle. Of Abbot
Warin, for instance, he says: 8

He [Warin], together with his brother Matthew, the distrustful
prior, in order that he might enjoy unquestioned authority, perse-
cuted, dispersed, and followed with inexorable hate the whole

1 Wats, pp. 91 and 128. 2 Wats, p. 108.

3 B.M. Royal MS. 4 D vii; see Wats, p. 108.

4 Wats, p. no. 5 Wats, pp. 104-5.
6 Wats, pp. 119 and 144. 7 Wats, p. 141.

8 Wats, p. 102.

187

MATTHEW PARIS

nobility of venerable persons in the convent; so that juniors of five
years* standing held the foremost positions, and those [of the seniors]
who had remained dared not mutter against his tyranny.

A very similar tale is told of Abbot John de Cella, who, Matthew
feared, would have to answer for his dictatorial conduct at the
Last Judgement. 1 The account of his rule includes an interesting
and detailed description of the attempt made by some of the
monks to impose on the next abbot a signed agreement not to
send monks away from St Albans against their wishes. 2 This in
fact came to nothing, since the new abbot, William, although he
had been foremost among the 'constitutionalists' during the
vacancy, went back on his word ; and in this he was supported
by the papal legate, who appeared in chapter to remind the
monks of the duty of canonical obedience to their abbot, and
tore up the offending document in front of them. 3 If his
sympathy with the monks against their abbot has led Matthew
to describe this struggle in such fascinating detail, his constitu-
tional feelings also led him to record with unusual care the
various abbatial elections of this period, and this interest in
elections is another noteworthy feature of his section of the
Gesta Abbatum. Concerning Warm's election in 1183 Matthew
notes that he was opposed by William Martel, the sacrist, who
complained that Warin (who in fact suffered only from a squint)
was completely blind; but he goes on to state the good con-
stitutional principle that 'the opinions of one could not affect
the fixed intention of the many'. 4 William of Trumpington's
election in 1214 prompted Matthew to record in detail a con-
versation held afterwards among some of the monks, from which
it was clear that the king had put pressure on the electors : * it was
not only the will of God that was at work in this election', com-
ments Matthew meaningly. 5 The importance he attached to
elections is most apparent in that of John of Hertford in 1235,
for he gives a long and detailed account of it, supported with
a group of some twenty documents relating to it. 6

1 Wats, p. 113. 2 Wats, pp. 111-12. 3 Wats, p. 115.

4 Wats, p. 94. 5 Wats, p. 114.

6 Wats, pp. 133-41 ; for more on Matthew's interest in abbatial elections,
see Vaughan, Election of abbots at St Albans in the thirteenth and fourteenth
centuries', Proc. Camb. Antiq. Soc. XLVII (1954), PP- 1-12.

188

MATTHEW PARIS THE DOMESTIC HISTORIAN

Many of the characteristic features of Matthew's historical
writings are apparent in the Gesta Abbatum. Besides the usual
phrases, 1 play on words, 2 and quotations, 3 we find him airing his
usual prejudices : Richard Marsh, Matthew says, was not elected
to the bishopric of Durham, but intruded by the king; 4 the
pope's ministers and servants are described as hanging about
'waiting for gifts with gaping mouths'; 5 and King John is said
to have been the greatest tyrant born of woman. 6 Matthew's
rather cynical, embittered attitude towards the papacy is well
reflected in his remarks about the damage done to the tower of
the abbey church by lightning. He says: 7 . . .twice the abbey
church was struck by lightning and set on fire .... And just as
it is useless to rely on privileges and indulgences of the saints,
so the impression of the papal seal. . .which was fixed to the
summit of the tower, was useless against the lightning. . . .'

In sum, Matthew's Gesta Abbatum, though very short in
comparison with his Chronica Majora, is an important and fasci-
nating work, characteristic of him, and full of human interest,
which served as a model and inspiration to his successors, who
continued it up to the first half of the fifteenth century.

ii. THE 'VITAE OFFARUM'

We have already shown that the Vitae Off arum is an authentic
work of Matthew Paris, and that it was probably written c. 1250.
I have included it here, among Matthew's contributions to the
history of St Albans, because it is, in essence, a work of domestic
interest. The Lives of the two Offas, Offa of Angel and OfFa of
Mercia, are linked together by the promise of Offa I to found
a monastery, and the eventual fulfilment of this promise by
Offa II, in the foundation of St Albans. The real object of the
Vitae Offarum is to describe and account for the foundation of

1 Wats, p. 91, c ab alto trahens suspirium'; p. 103, 'libra rationis trutinare'
(cf. p. 112, 'rationis trutina*); p. 115, *Ne prospera in huius mundi fluctibus
impermixta eveniant' (cf. p. 40 above); etc.

2 Wats, p. ii3/necvolonecvaleo*;pp. 121, i29/misertusacmiseratus',etc.
8 E.g. at Wats, pp. 92, 107 and 117, all of which occur elsewhere in

Matthew's writings. 4 Wats, p. no.

5 Wats, p. 138. 6 Wats, p. 128.

7 Wats, p. 142. 8 See above, pp. 41-8; and 89-90.

MATTHEW PARIS

St Albans ; to emphasize its antiquity and connexion with royalty ;
and to whitewash the character of the founder, Offa of Mercia.

Although Offa I is described as king of England, the account
of him shows that Offa of Angel is really meant. Matthew
describes how Warmund, king of the West Angles, had an only
son, Offa, who was at first blind and dumb, but whose faculties
were later miraculously restored to him, so that he was able to
lead an army to defeat the rebels who had conspired to seize
his rightful throne. So far Matthew's account of Offa I agrees,
in the main, with the accounts of Offa of Angel given by Saxo
Grammaticus and Sweyn Aageson, and alluded to in Widsith and
Beowulf. 1 The rest of Matthew's account is taken up with the
story of Offa's marriage to the daughter of the king of York; of
the loss of his wife and children through trickery; and of his
subsequent recovery of them. This seems to be derived from
a folk-lore theme having no connexion with either Offa. 2
Matthew closes his Life of Offa I with a paragraph describing
his vow to found a monastery, which remained unfulfilled for
many generations.

The early part of the Life of Offa II is very similar to the
early part of Matthew's account of his ancestor. Tuinfreth and
Marcellina have a son, Pinefred, who is blind and deaf from
birth. Remembering the story of Offa I, they pray for his cure,
promising, on his behalf, that, if cured, he will found the
monastery which Offa I had neglected to found. He is cured,
and, having defeated the rebel tyrant Beornred who had expelled
his father from the kingdom, he rules over Mercia with the name
of Offa II; his father Tuinfreth having resigned the kingdom
to him. Offa then marries the wicked Drida, who had been
exiled from France, and, after a series of campaigns which he
fought against rival English kings and against Marmodius, king
of Wales, he makes peace with Charlemagne, who had been
supporting his enemies in England. Offa then settles down to
rule England; transfers the archiepiscopal see to Lichfield; and
drives off the first Danish invaders of the country. Matthew
then describes in detail the murder of Aethelbert, king of East
Anglia, by Offa's wicked queen Drida; her death and the burial

1 Chambers, Beowulf, pp. 31-40; and Wilson, Lost Literature of Medieval
England, p. 10. 2 Wilson, Lost Literature, p. 12.

190

MATTHEW PARIS THE DOMESTIC HISTORIAN

of Aethelbert; and the Council of Chelsea. He then goes on to
describe Offa's miraculous invention of St Alban; his journey
to Rome in quest of privileges for the new house, and its founda-
tion and endowment on his return; and he concludes with an
account of the burial of Offa by the river Ouse near Bedford.
The historical or quasi-historical matter used in the Vitae
Offarum seems to derive entirely from Roger Wendover. It
might be supposed that the matter common to the Vitae
Offarum and Roger Wendover was derived independently in
each of them from the same source, and that this source was
a tract on the foundation of St Albans by Offa of Mercia. That
such a tract existed seems probable from passages in William of
Malmesbury and Henry of Huntingdon ; for the former mentions
some of the details of the invention of St Alban by Offa, and
the latter his gift of St Peter's Pence to Rome. 1 But the matter
common to the Vitae Offarum and Roger Wendover includes
more than just the account of the invention of St Alban and the
foundation of St Albans. It includes, for instance, a description
of the transference of the archiepiscopal see from Canterbury to
Lichfield, the martyrdom of Aethelbert, the Council of Chelsea,
the area ruled over by Offa, and the death and burial of Offa.
It is not difficult to show that it was Roger Wendover who
laboriously gathered together this material from various different
sources, to incorporate it into his Flores Historiarum\ and that
Matthew Paris, when he came to use it in the Vitae Offarum,
took it directly from Roger's chronicle. 2 Compare, for instance,
the following passages from the source, Roger Wendover's
Flores Historiarum and Matthew Paris's Vitae Offarum:

The source, Henry of Huntingdon? s 'Historia Anglorum\ z

Adrianus papa misit legates in Brittanniam ad renovandam fidem
quam praedicaverat Augustinus. Ipsi vero honorifice a regibus et
populis suscepti, super fundamentum stabile aedificaverunt, pulchre
Christi misericordia cooperante. Tenuerunt autem concilium apud
Cealchide, ubi lambert dimisit pattern episcopatus sui.

1 Hamilton (ed.), Gesta pontificum, p. 316; Arnold (ed.)> Historia Ang-
lorum, pp. 123-4.

2 Theopold, Kritische Untersuchungen uber die Quellen zur angelsdchsischen
Geschichte des achten Jahrhunderts, pp. nyfl., provides detailed evidence in
support of this conclusion. 3 Ed. T. Arnold, p. 128.

191

MATTHEW PARIS

Roger Wendover. 1

Adrianus papa legates misit in Britanniam ad fidem, quam
Augustinus praedicaverat, renovandam. Ipsi vero a regibus cum clero
et populo honorifice suscepti super stabile fidei fundamentum pulchre
aedificaverunt, Christi gratia cooperante. Tenuerunt autem concilium
apud Chalchuthe, ubi Lambertus, archiepiscopus Cantuariensis,
partem sui episcopatus archiepiscopo Lichesfeldensi resignavit ....

Matthew Paris, ' Vitae Offarum'*

Adrianus papa 3 legates misit in Britanniam, ad fidem quam
Augustinus episcopus praedicaverat, renovandam et confirmandam,
qui et verbis et operibus sanctae doctrinae et virtutum, populos
adhuc rudes salubriter informarent. Ipsi igitur a rege et clero
honorifice ac reverenter suscepti, super stabile fidei catholicae funda-
mentum, sane ac prudenter, Christi cooperante gratia, aedificaverunt.
Ut hoc autem sapientius, rite prosequerentur, tenuerunt consilium
apud Chalcuthe, ubi etiam Lambertus archiepiscopus Cantuariensis,
partem sui episcopatus archiepiscopo Lichfeldensi, sponte quam
postulaverat, resignavit.

A comparison of these three extracts shows that Roger's
account is taken, almost word for word, from Henry's, while
Matthew, enlarging and embroidering in his usual way, has
taken his account from Roger, not from Henry. A more detailed
examination of the manuscripts enables us to discover which
manuscript of Roger's Floras Historiarum Matthew used for the
writing of the Vitae Off arum : it was his own text of the Chronica
Major a, in A. In one place, for instance, Luard points out that
A has ' totis ' wrongly for c toto ' . The manuscripts of Roger Wend-
over and the source, William of Malmesbury's Gesta pontificum,
have 'toto' correctly, but * totis ' is also the reading of the Vitae
Offarum, though this is not pointed out by the editor of the
Vitae, Wats, who has corrected it to toto ' without giving us the
reading of his manuscript. 4 Elsewhere, too, Matthew copies
into the Vitae Off arum A's erroneous reading of * dominus' for
1 dictis ' of the other manuscripts. 5

The only considerable piece of historical matter in the Vitae
Off arum which is not from Roger Wendover is the account of

1 CM. i, p. 352. z Wats, p. 25.

3 'papa': erased in the manuscript and consequently not in Wats's text.

4 CM. r, p. 345, note 3 ; Wats, p. 22 ; and Hamilton (ed.), Gesta ponti-

y p. 1 6. 3 CM. I, p. 357, note i ; and Wats, p. 27.

192

MATTHEW PARIS THE DOMESTIC HISTORIAN

Offa's campaign against Marmodius, and of the building of his
famous dyke. 1 We can only speculate on the nature of the source
of this account. Rickert has shown that the Marmodius of the
Vitae Offarum was probably the Maredudd of the Welsh
sources, whose death is recorded in 796 ; 2 and the existence of
Offa's dyke shows that Matthew's story of Offa's Welsh cam-
paigns has some basis in history. A written source was probably
used, and Rickert thought that this was a border tradition of
some kind, perhaps a ballad. The story of Offa II's early life has
evidently been adapted from that of Offa I ; and the account of
Offa II's wicked queen, Drida, as well as her name, appears to
have been transferred from Offa I, whose legendary wife was
the valkyrie Thryth. Just as a folk tale was used in the account
of Offa I's queen, so, in the case of Offa II, a folk tale was used
to explain the origins of Drida, who is discovered set adrift in
an open boat on account of her crimes in France. The most
important legendary source used by Matthew in the Vitae
Offarum was evidently an account of Offa I which may have
been an Old English epic whose text actually survived at
St Albans, or only a floating mass of verbal tradition. The
source material is so skilfully woven together in the Vitae
Offarum that it is impossible to unravel it in detail, but it seems
that, besides the historical material he derived from Roger
Wendover, Matthew used a number of rather shadowy sources
which included an epic poem about Offa I (which he used, too,
in his Life of Offa II), a border tradition concerning Offa and
Marmodius, and two popular folk tales.

The writing of the Vitae Offarum marks the last and most
important stage in the development of the story of the founda-
tion of St Albans, and later writers were content to copy it
without further amplification. 3 Of the development of the story
before the writing of the Vitae Offarum little can be ascertained;
but, as we have seen, its core was very probably a tract describing
Offa's miraculous discovery of the tomb of St Alban, and his
subsequent foundation of a monastery on the spot. The next

1 Wats, pp. 16-19.

2 Rickert, ' Old English Offa Saga', Modern Philol. u (1904-5), p. 324; see
her paper, too, for what follows.

3 In part only, in B.M. Cotton MS. Vitellius Axx, ff. 67-70; in full in
Bute MS. 3, ff. 50-91, and B.M. Cotton MS. Claudius E iv, ff. 84-97.

13 193

MATTHEW PARIS

stage is marked by the anonymous author of the chronicle
attributed to John of Wallingford. He knows more about Offa
than was recorded in the tract on the foundation of St Albans,
and he says : ' I have heard many other things worthy of record
about this man [Offa], which, when their veracity is sufficiently

ascertained, I hope, with God's help, to explain elsewhere ' l

He does not, however, know 'the truth' about the murder of
Aethelbert, a deed which he, in common with other chroniclers,
attributes to Offa. In Roger Wendover's Flores Historiamm we
have a more developed stage in the legend, for here Offa is
explicitly exonerated from 'the only stain on his glory 5 , 2 and
the murder is attributed to his wicked queen Drida. Finally, in
the Vitae Offarum, Matthew systematically converts the story
of Offa of Mercia into an eulogy of 'pius fundator noster'. He
is made the hero of the first battle against the marauding Danes ; 3
he is praised for his humility, piety, and munificence; 4 and
he is represented as making good the defaults of his ancestor
in restoring the kingdom to its former extent and fulfilling
the vow made by Offa I. The merits of the first Offa as a
military leader and as the subject of a remarkable miracle are
attributed also to the second Offa; while the faults of the second
Offa are attributed either to his ancestor or to his queen. The
skill with which Matthew has used the contrasts and parallels
between the two Offas is noteworthy, and the way in which he
has built up his story and linked its various elements in a com-
mon glorification of St Albans and its celebrated founder also
reflects considerable literary talent. Matthew was not especially
interested in historical research (he much preferred to concen-
trate on the recording of contemporary events), but his imagina-
tion seems to have been fired by the career of Offa, and his
curiosity, spurred on, no doubt, by the design of glorifying his
house, led him to piece together all the information he could
obtain, both legendary and historical. The result is a largely
fictitious work of value both for the legendary matter preserved
in it and for the light it throws on Matthew's skill as a story-teller. 5

1 Gale (ed.), Scriptores XV, p. 530.

2 Ibid. 3 Wats, p. 22. * Wats, p. 19.

5 A brief glance at the Vitae Off arum suffices to demonstrate Matthew's very-
slight knowledge of history ; one of its many blunders is noticed above, p. 125.

194

MATTHEW PARIS THE DOMESTIC HISTORIAN
III. DOMESTIC HAGIOLOGY

Matthew's hagiological activities have been described in a pre-
vious chapter, but something remains to be said about his work
on the hagiology of his own house. By his time the legend of
SS. Alban and Amphibalus was already fully developed : William
of St Albans had written the definitive prose Passio before the
end of the twelfth century, 1 and Ralph of Dunstable had
followed with a verse rendering of this. Matthew, however,
was keenly interested in domestic hagiology. It was he, as we
have seen, who finally wrote up the story of the foundation of
St Albans by Offa of Mercia, and turned William's Life of
St Alban into Anglo-Norman verse. In the Chronica Major a
and the Gesta Abbatum his concern with domestic hagiology is
very apparent: he amplified the existing account of Abbot
Geoffrey's translation of St Alban in 1129; he amplified Roger
Wendover's account of the invention of St Amphibalus in 1 178 ;
and he gave a detailed description of the discovery of St Alban's
original tomb in 1 257.2 But his pursuit of the subject is best
reflected in his own collection of material concerning SS. Alban
and Amphibalus, which is now manuscript E i 40 in the library
of Trinity College, Dublin. This book contains Ralph Dun-
stable's verse Life of St Alban (ff . 3-20) ; William's prose Life
(ff. 20-28 b); Matthew's own Anglo-Norman verse Life (ff. 29-
50) ; eight lessons for the feast of the invention and translation of
St Alban (ff. 5ob~52b); a tract on the invention and translation
of St Alban (ff. 5 3-62 b and 68b-69b); part of a tract on the
miracles wrought by the relics of St Amphibalus (ff . 73-7) ; copies
of the St Albans foundation charters (ff. 63-8) ; and other frag-
ments. The Lives of Ralph and William, Matthew's Anglo-
Norman poem, and the tract on the miracles of Amphibalus
are all written out by Matthew himself, in a neat, early hand,
and seem to be the earliest surviving examples of his hand-
writing.

Matthew has provided marginal rubrics for the texts of
Ralph's and William's Lives, and he has also added, in the
margins or between the lines of Ralph's verse Life, a number of

1 Acta SS. Boll. June, IV, pp. 149 ff.

2 Wats, pp. 59-61; CM. n, pp. 301-7; and v, p. 608.

195 13-2

MATTHEW PARIS

alternative readings in his characteristic manner. Thus, where
Ralph has the words 'Dulcis amor', Matthew writes, above the
word 'amor', *vel honor'; and elsewhere he writes 'vel futu-
rabant' in the margin with reference to the line: * Ista figurabant
scemate quodque suo.' 1 This is typical of him, and his treatment
of William's prose Life is equally characteristic. Besides the
addition of many marginal comments, often in red with a blue
paragraph marker, he makes one or two explanatory comments
in the margins in his usual manner. One of the more curious of
his marginalia is on f. 22, where we read in a later hand con-
trasting strangely with the young man's hand of the text: 'Hoc
de libro Johannis Mansel: Erat [i.e. St Alban] nanque [sic] dux
et magister militie tocius Britannie.' What this book was I have
not been able to ascertain; but John Mansel was a leading
councillor of Henry III, who figures prominently in the Chronica
Major a^ and whom Matthew probably knew personally. Another
curious marginal note, reflecting Matthew's interest in etymo-
logies, occurs on f . 25 b : 4 Hoc apud Lichefeld euenit. Inde
Lichfeld dicitur quasi campus cadauerum. Lich enim Anglice
cadauer siue corpus mortui dicitur.'

Matthew evidently took some trouble to furnish himself with
a corpus of hagiographical material relating to his own house,
and he was interested enough to work over his material and to
suggest alternative readings, to add something here and there or
to explain some obscurity, and even to correct his own text; for
on f . 25 b he provides in the margin a line which he had at first
carelessly omitted. It is worth noting, however, that he does not
tamper with his source material as he does in his historical
writings, for his text of William's life is copied accurately and
preserved intact, the suggestions and comments being relegated
to the margins. It seems that this is not to be explained on the
assumption that he had more respect for his hagiological sources
than for his historical ones, but rather because he wrote these
lives while still a comparatively young man, and before he had
developed his itch for alteration and improvement.

One of the tracts in this manuscript, also written by Matthew
himself, describes the miracles wrought by the relics of St
Amphibalus after their translation by Abbot William of Trump-
1 T.C.D. MS. E i 40 ff. 10 and 4.

196

MATTHEW PARIS THE DOMESTIC HISTORIAN

ington in I22O. 1 This must have been written after Abbot
William's death in 1235, since he is referred to in the prologue
as 'venerabilis memorie'. There is every reason to suppose that
Matthew was the author, as well as the scribe, of this little tract.
In the first place, there are some striking parallels between its
prologue and the account of the translation of St Amphibalus
in the Gesta Abbatum, this part of which we know to have
been written by Matthew Paris. For instance, in the tract the
feretory is said to have been moved (f. 73) 'de loco ubi antea
collocatum fuerat, scilicet juxta magnum altare sancti Albani,
ad locum ubi nunc positum est in medio videlicet ecclesie. . .',
while according to the Gesta Abbatum 2 it was moved ' a loco ubi
prius collocatum fuerat, videlicet secus majus altare juxta fere-
trum sancti Albani, a parte aquilonari usque ad locum qui in
medio ecclesie includitur'. Secondly, a number of phrases
commonly used by Matthew Paris in his historical writings are
to be found in this tract. For instance:

f . 73 : dignum duximus commendare
f. 74: temporis. . .evoluto curriculo

misertus ac miseratus
f. 74 b: torvo vultu
f . 75 b : dignum memoria censemus recolendum

The fact that this tract was probably composed, as well as
written, by Matthew Paris throws further light on his interests.
It seems that, in his early years, Matthew was much concerned
with domestic hagiology, and we may surmise that the compila-
tion of this manuscript, perhaps mainly in the years before
c. 1235-40, reflects his early absorption in domestic matters.
It was not till later, it seems, that Matthew embarked on a
general history of his house, and on the recording of events in
the world at large.

Of the other tracts in Trinity College, Dublin, manuscript
E i 40, the most noteworthy is that on the invention and transla-
tion of St Alban, for this contains a long interpolation about
King Offa written by Matthew himself, apparently fairly late in
his life. The first part of the text of this tract, together with the

1 Ff. 73-7 ; imperfect at the end: the only known copy.

2 Wats, p. 122.

197

MATTHEW PARIS

interpolation, is written out by Matthew in his Liber Addita-
mentorum, and it has been copied thence into the Dublin manu-
script by the scribe whom Matthew employed to write those
parts of it not written by himself. 1 This interpolation, though
based on the account of King Offa in the Chronica Majora,
contains a reference to the Vitae Off arum: 'prout plenius in
historia de Offa rege scripta continetur'. 2 Though Matthew
evidently hoped to incorporate this interpolation into the
* official' text of the tract on the foundation of St Albans, it is not
in fact to be found in either of the later copies which survive. 3
It is noteworthy, both in connexion with his known interest in
King Offa, and as showing that, later in life at any rate, 4 he was
quite prepared to interpolate passages written by himself into
his source material, even when this consisted of a venerable and
quasi-official account of the foundation of his own house.

IV. THE RELICS OF ST ALBAN

In the course of the early part of the Gesta Abbatwn there are
a number of passages concerning the relics of St Alban which
seem to have been interpolated into the text of Adam the
Cellarer's roll by Matthew Paris, for they interrupt the narrative,
and contain phrases or quotations typical of Matthew. The
clumsiest of these interpolations 5 describes the pious fraud of
Abbot Alfric of St Albans, who, fearing that the precious relics of
St Alban might fall a prey to the marauding Danes, walled them
up under the altar of St Nicholas, and, to 'make assurance
double sure', sent the bones of a certain 'holy monk' to Ely for
safe keeping, giving out that they were the genuine relics of
St Alban. The threatened invasion, however, never took place,
owing to the drowning of the Danish king which was mira-
culously revealed to King Edward the Confessor as he was
attending mass one day at Westminster. As soon as the danger

1 Ff. 27b-29b of the Liber Additamentorum ; fT. 5 3-62 b and 68b-69b of
the Dublin manuscript. The scribe left Matthew to fill in the proper names.

2 Dublin manuscript, f. s8b.

3 Bute MS. 3, ff. 34 ff.; B.M. Cotton MS. Claudius E iv, ff, 40 ff.

4 It refers to the Vitae Off arum which was probably written c. 1250; and
it is written, in the Liber Additamentorum, in an untidy, straggly, and there-
fore probably late, hand. 5 Wats, pp. 43-4.

198

MATTHEW PARIS THE DOMESTIC HISTORIAN

was over, Alfric sent to Ely to demand the return of the relics,
which had been there almost a year. The monks of Ely, however,
determined to keep so precious a treasure, returned, not the
bones which they had been sent, but another set. Alfric, when
he received them, realized at once that the Ely monks were trying
to catch him in just the pious trap he had so successfully set for
them; but, to avoid scandal, he pretended to accept these bones
as the genuine relics of the saint, while secretly recovering the
real relics from the altar of St Nicholas, and placing them in
a shrine in the centre of the church. The Ely monks kept their
set of bones, firmly believing them to be those of St Alban. The
story ends with the statement that King Edward was furious
when he heard of the pretences of the Ely monks, but that he
died before he had time to take action.

Abbot Alfric of St Albans actually ruled from c. 970 until 990,
when he became bishop of Ramsbury. In 995 he was made
archbishop of Canterbury, and he died in 1005. His brother,
Leofric, succeeded him as abbot of St Albans in 990, and ruled
at least until 1007. According to the Gesta Abbatum, Leofric was
succeeded by Leofstan, who died in 1066. In Matthew's auto-
graph copy of the Gesta Abbatum the names Alfric and Leofric in
the headings to the section of text concerning each abbot have
been transposed, so that the account of Alfric's abbacy is headed
Leofric, and that of Leofric's is headed Alfric. Owing to this
error, Leofric was recorded as later becoming archbishop of
Canterbury. Now Matthew knew quite well that it was Alfric
and not Leofric who became archbishop, but, presumably
because the names of the abbots did not occur in the accounts
of their respective abbacies (except in the opening sentence), he
was unaware of the mistaken transposition of their names. He
therefore tried to put matters right by erasing the statement,
under Leofric, to the effect that this abbot later became arch-
bishop of Canterbury, and substituting a remark to the effect
that Leofric, elected archbishop of Canterbury, refused to accept
the honour, asserting that his brother Alfric was more worthy
of it. 1 In the course of the story of Abbot Alfric and the relics
of St Alban, which is added to the account of Leofric's abbacy,
wrongly headed Alfric, the abbot's name, Alfric, is mentioned
1 Wats, p. 42; see the Liber Additamentorum, f. 3 2 a.

199

MATTHEW PARIS

several times, a fact which proves that this story was inter-
polated by someone who did not suspect the error of the trans-
position of the abbots' names. It is found in Matthew's auto-
graph manuscript, and we know that Matthew did not suspect
the error of transposition. It is therefore highly probable that
it was Matthew who inserted the story of Alfric and the relics
into the text of the Gesta Abbatum. It is worth noting, in this
connexion, that a quotation occurs in the course of this story
which is also used in the Chronica Majora?- and that Matthew
describes, in his Edward, the king's vision during mass mentioned
in this story.

This story of the pretended transference of the relics from
St Albans to Ely has many absurd features: indeed it seems to
be a mere clumsy fabrication. Matthew evidently knew that it
referred to an Abbot Alfric, and therefore inserted it under
Alfric \ and he must have invented the references to Edward the
Confessor in an attempt to give the story some kind of historical
context. There can be little doubt that the Ely claims to possess
the relics of St Alban did originate in the actions of an Abbot
Alfric of St Albans; but the Ely story is very different from
Matthew's. According to the Liber Eliensis, this part of which
was written about the middle of the twelfth century, an Abbot
Egfrid of St Albans, who was a nominee of Stigand, fled to Ely
from St Albans on the deposition of his patron in 1070, taking
with him some of the relics of St Alban. 2 John of Tynemouth,
in the first half of the fourteenth century, repeats this story,
which he says he took from a book he found at Ely ; but he calls
the abbot in question Alfric, and adds that when the new abbot of
St Albans, Paul, supported by William the Conqueror, demanded
the return of the relics, the Ely monks sent back a false set. 3

There is, of course, no difficulty in deciding on the relative
merits of these two stories. The Ely account and the version
recorded by John of Tynemouth is fuller and evidently more
accurate than that in the Liber Eliensis is far more credible;
and it seems clear that the St Albans story of Alfric's trick has

1 Ovid, Metam. in, 5, and ix, 408; CM. ni, p. 249.

2 Stewart (ed.)> Liber Eliensis, p. 227.

3 Horstmann (ed.), Nova Legenda Anglic, I, p. 36. This story is also found
in B.IVL Cotton MS. Claudius E iv, f. 45 b, in a St Albans tract on the * false
opinions * of the Ely monks, written at the end of the fourteenth century.

2OO

MATTHEW PARIS THE DOMESTIC HISTORIAN

been fabricated as a counter to the more authentic Ely story.
Other passages seem to have been interpolated by Matthew in
the Gesta Abbatum with a similar end in view. He inserts, for
instance, into Adam the Cellarer's account of Abbot Robert's
rule, 1 a description of how, while he was in Rome, Abbot Robert
induced his old friend Nicholas Breakspear, then pope, to
appoint a panel of bishops to inquire into the Ely monks' claim
to possess the genuine relics of St Alban. This commission is
said to have taken evidence on oath from twelve senior Ely
monks, who admitted that they did not possess the relics. There
is little doubt that this story has been invented, no doubt in an
attempt to meet the claims of Ely to possess the relics. Two
documents of Adrian IV, dating from 1156, mention the fact that
St Alban's bones were at St Albans, as if this was generally
known and undisputed; 2 there is no evidence, apart from this
account, that the investigation ever took place; and it seems
most unlikely that the Ely monks would have admitted that
their claims were false, even under oath.

We must now interrupt our discussion in order to describe
another incident in the curious history of the relics of St Alban,
this time quite certainly recorded by Matthew Paris. 3 According
to this story, a party of Danes, at the time of their invasions of
England, carried off the bones of St Alban and took them to the
Benedictine monastery of Odense. The bones were, however,
later recovered by an enterprising monk of St Albans called
Egwin. He entered the monastery of Odense, was made a monk
there, and, after several years, was at last promoted to the post at
which he had been aiming, that of sacristan. As sacristan he
had charge of the relics, and it was a comparatively simple matter
for him to choose a dark night, creep down to the feretory, and
bore a hole through it. He removed the bones of the saint
through this hole, and covered up his traces by filling it in
carefully. He then put the bones in a box especially prepared
for the purpose, and kept them under his bed until he found
a merchant who agreed to convey what Egwin ingenuously

1 See above, p. 184.

2 Holtzmann (ed.) Papsturkunden in England, m, nos. 100 and 102.

8 He tells us so himself. The story is described on ff. 2,5 b-26b of the Liber
Additamentorum, and printed in GA. I, pp. 12 ff.

2O I

MATTHEW PARIS

described as 'a parcel of books' to the abbey of St Albans. The
chest was joyfully received by the abbot and brethren, and the
merchant presently returned to Denmark with news of its safe
delivery. Once Egwin knew that his task at Odense was accom-
plished, he went to the abbot and complained of homesickness,
brought on by advancing age. The unsuspecting abbot, taking
pity on the English sacrist, who, after years of faithful service,
wished once more to see his native land, gave him leave to
return. Matthew ends his account with a list of his informants
a group of St Albans men who had been in the service of the
king of Denmark.

Although this story is not to be found in the text of the Gesta
Abbatum, a marginal reference shows that Matthew meant it
to be inserted into the account of Wlnoth's abbacy during the
middle years of the ninth century. In spite of Matthew's blunder
over its date, the story has a core of truth behind it. The Vita et
Passio S. Canuti, written early in the twelfth century by the
Englishman Aelnoth, describes how Cnut removed some of the
relics of St Alban from England, and deposited them in the
newly founded monastery of Odense in Denmark. 1 There is
early evidence for the dedication of the church at Odense to
St Alban, since the Chronicon Roskildense records the martyrdom
of Cnut in the church of St Alban there; 2 and the cult of
St Alban even survived into the present century, for W. R. L.
Lowe found a 'St Albans Mineral Water Manufactory', a
pleasure steamer called 'St Alban', and a 'St Albans Market'
there, 3 Cnut was in England in 1070 and 1075, but in 1075 he
achieved only a fleeting pillage of York minster. In 1070 he was
actually at Ely, and took part in the sack of the neighbouring
monastery of Peterborough. Cnut, in fact, almost certainly
removed some relics of St Alban from England in 1070, and the
house whence he removed them was evidently not St Albans,
but Ely. Matthew's story of the recovery of the relics by Egwin
is probably due to a confusion with Hugo Candidus's account
of the recovery by Ywar, the sacrist of Peterborough, of the

1 Langebek (ed.), Scriptores rerum Damcarum, in, pp. 368-72.
* Chronicon Roskildense (ed. M. C. Gertz) in Scriptores minores historiae
Danicae, i, p. 24; see also J0rgensen, Helgendyrkelse i Danmark, pp. 17 ff.
3 Lowe, 'The cult of St. Alban abroad', Hertfordshire Post, 13 July 1910.

202

MATTHEW PARIS THE DOMESTIC HISTORIAN

relics of St Oswald, 1 which had been removed from Peter-
borough by Cnut in 1070, and likewise taken to Odense. 2 No
doubt Matthew's informants assumed that the monastery con-
cerned was St Albans, because the relics, or some of them at any
rate, were those of St Alban.

There is no sign, in the Gesta Abbatum, of the Ely story of an
abbot of St Albans called Alfric (or Egfrid) fleeing to Ely in 1070
with the precious relics of St Alban. Instead Matthew Paris
describes the flight of the first post-Conquest abbot, Fretheric,
to Ely in 1077, as a result of his enmity with William the Con-
queror, and explicitly states that he went by leave of his convent
with only a few books, some clothing, and other necessaries 3
a remark which shows that this part of the account of Abbot
Fretheric was written with the express design of combating the
Ely claims to possess the relics. The story of Abbot Fretheric's
flight to Ely is almost as absurd as that of Abbot Alfric' s pious
fraud, for it is most unlikely that an abbot of St Albans would,
were he really hostile to William the Conqueror, have remained
abbot until as late as 1077, and then fled to Ely. On the other
hand, we have already seen that there is much to be said for the
Ely account of what happened. The reason there given for the
flight of the abbot of St Albans to Ely, that he was a nominee of
Stigand, seems to be the true one, for we know that, among other
benefices, Stigand held the abbey of St Albans on the eve of the
Conquest. 4 Furthermore, Domesday Book records that, at the
time of the Conquest, Stigand was in control of at least two of
the abbot of St Albans's manors. 5 The truth seems to have been
that Leofstan, who died in 1065, was succeeded as abbot of
St Albans by a nominee of Stigand's called Alfric; that this
Alfric left St Albans for the safe recesses of Ely on the deposition
of his patron in 1069 or 1070; and that he was succeeded at
St Albans by Fretheric. It seems clear that Alfric did take some
of the relics of St Alban with him to Ely, and that some of these
were soon afterwards removed by Cnut to Denmark.

1 Mellows (ed.), Chronicle of Hugo Candidus, p. 82.

2 In later times the church at Odense claimed to possess relics of St Oswald
as well as of St Alban; Lowe, * Cult of St Alban abroad', loc. cit.

3 Wats, p. 49.

4 Stewart (ed.), Liber Eliensis, p. 219.

5 Victoria County History, Herts, iv, p. 372, note 61.

203

MATTHEW PARIS

We cannot perhaps be sure that Matthew Paris alone was
responsible for the various stories devised at St Albans to
explain away, and demonstrate the falsity of, Ely's claims to
possess the relics of St Alban. Nor can we always distinguish
between what is due to deliberate falsification, and what to
ignorance. It is clear, however, that there was a certain amount
of conscious fabrication, and that much of it was the work of
Matthew Paris. He seems to have suppressed altogether from
the history of his house the offending Abbot Alfric, and to have
tried to account for the Ely story of the flight of an abbot of
St Albans to their house, by making out that it was another
abbot, Fretheric, who had fled, some years later, and for a quite
different reason, to Ely, and without taking any relics with him.
But it was not enough merely to account for the story of the
flight of an abbot to Ely: the existence of the Ely monks' claims
had still to be explained. And so, it seems, Matthew fabricated
the story of the pious fraud of Abbot Alfric, which had the merit
of explaining how the Ely claims had originated, and yet showing
them to be false. The story related by Matthew, of the recovery
of the relics from Denmark by Egwin, was probably not the
result of deliberate falsification on his part, for it seems likely
that he was ignorant of Cnut's removal of St Alban' s and other
relics from Ely, and that he merely recorded the story as it was
told him by his informants, and guessed that it referred to the
first period of Danish invasion in England, the ninth century.
His treatment of the history of St Alban's relics seems to have
been inspired far more by devotion to his house than by any
regard for historical accuracy, and we need not be surprised to
find that he was prepared to use his literary skill and fertile
imagination in order to substantiate the claims of his own house
to possess the relics of its patron saint, at the expense of historical
truth and even to the extent of deliberately inventing * facts * and
of suppressing one abbot entirely from the records.

204

CHAPTER XI

MATTHEW PARIS THE ARTIST

SIR Frederick Madden was one of the first to draw attention
to MatthewParis's artistic work. He attributed the drawings
in the historical manuscripts to Matthew, as well as some
of those in British Museum Cotton MS. Julius D vii and Royal
MS. 2 B vi. 1 Sir Thomas Duffus Hardy, however, supposed
that the drawings enumerated by Madden were the work of
several different hands, one of which might have been Matthew's,
and he remarked, in particular, that the drawings of the elephant,
made in or soon after 1255, were much too vigorous in execution
to be the work of Matthew Paris, who must by then have been
an old man. 2 It is curious that, whereas in the controversy over
the identification of Matthew's handwriting later scholars fol-
lowed the sceptical Hardy rather than Madden, on the problem
of the identification of his drawings and paintings they have
tended to follow Madden. Thus both Harry Fett and A. Lind-
blom accepted Madden 5 s attribution of the drawings in the
historical manuscripts to Matthew. Fett also attributed the
paintings in Cambridge University Library MS. Ee iii 59
(Edward) to Matthew, but Lindblom disagreed about this,
though he thought that the illustrated Apocalypse in Trinity
College, Cambridge, as well as some of the paintings in British
Museum Royal MS. z A xxii, might have been executed by
Matthew. 3 These two scholars engaged in a controversy over
Matthew's position in the development of Norwegian art in the
Middle Ages. Both agreed that a panel painting of St Peter
formerly at Faaberg was very closely connected with Matthew
Paris, and was perhaps his own work, but Fett thought that
a number of other paintings in Norway showed the influence of
Matthew Paris, and regarded him as the father of medieval art

1 HA, in, pp. xlviii- xlix, especially p. xlviii, notes 3 and 4.

2 Hardy, Descriptive Catalogue, m, pp. Ixx-lxxii; for one of the drawings,
see below, Plate xxi (a).

3 Lindblom, Peinture gothique en Suede et en Norvege, pp. 128-32 and 184.
He sums up the controversy between himself and Fett, with references.

205

MATTHEW PARIS

in Norway. Lindblom contested this strongly, and maintained
that Matthew's influence was only apparent in the Faaberg
St Peter, and that in any case this was not important for the
subsequent development of painting in Norway. He made some
interesting remarks about Matthew's style, which he thought
rather conservative, especially in the treatment of drapery by
means of short, rather stylized folds. In 1916 and 1917 W. R.
Lethaby contributed a series of articles on ' English Primitives'
to the Burlington Magazine. He too followed Madden in attri-
buting the marginal and other drawings in the historical manu-
scripts to Matthew himself, and he thought that the Faaberg
St Peter was very likely a painting executed by Matthew and
taken over to Norway by him. He noticed that the drapery in
this painting is decorated with groups of three red dots charac-
teristic of Matthew, and that the parallel lines across the sleeves,
so typical of Matthew's drawings, occurred in it. 1

A great advance was made in the study of Matthew's artistic
works during the years after the Great War. In 1920 the Rox-
burghe Club brought out a facsimile edition of Cambridge
University Library MS. Ee iii 59 (Edward), the paintings in
which are similar in some respects to those attributed by
Madden to Matthew Paris. In 1924, Lowe and Jacob published
a facsimile of Matthew's illustrated autograph Alban in Trinity
College., Dublin, MS. E i 40; and finally, in 1926, the Walpole
Society published excellent collotype reproductions of nearly
all the important drawings and paintings attributed to Matthew
Paris and not already published. The presiding genius behind
this work was M. R. James, for it was he who wrote the intro-
ductions to all three of these important facsimile editions.
Although he nowhere committed himself to a definite statement,
James made it clear that he thought the drawings in the manu-
scripts of the Chronica Major a and the Historia Anglorum (A, B,
and R), a number of those in the Liber Additamentorum, as well as
those in the Trinity College, Dublin, manuscript of Alban, had
a very strong claim to be the work of Matthew himself; and he
thought that the paintings in British Museum MS. Royal
aAxxii, and the Faaberg St Peter, were at any rate very
closely connected with him. He attributed two of the drawings

1 Lethaby in Burlington Magazine, xxxi (1917), p. 193.
2O6

MATTHEW PARIS THE ARTIST

in British Museum MS. Cotton Julius D vii to Matthew Paris
or his school, and also those in the surviving leaves of the
illustrated copy of Matthew's Thomas. He believed that Mat-
thew had perhaps designed the illustrations in the Cambridge
Edward, but did not himself execute them; nor did he think that
Madden was right in attributing the paintings in British Museum
Royal MS. 2 B vi to Matthew Paris. 1

Subsequent historians of art have usually based their discussion
of Matthew Paris on the work of James. Millar, for instance,
followed James, and so did Borenius and Tristram. 2 The latter
pointed out that the Faaberg St Peter is painted on oak, whereas
indigenous Norwegian paintings of similar date are invariably
on pine: an additional reason for believing that this painting
was taken over to Norway by Matthew Paris. Saunders thought
that Matthew probably had several monks working under or
with him, and that many of the drawings attributed to Matthew
were not actually his. 3 Hermannsson, in his book on medieval
Icelandic manuscripts published in 1935, pointed out that
certain thirteenth-century drawings in Icelandic manuscripts
may well have been influenced by Matthew Paris via Norway ; 4
but this seems to be doubtful, for thirteenth-century line
drawings from different countries are apt to be similar in style
Lethaby, for instance, drew attention to the similarity
between Matthew's drawings and those of Villard of Honne-
court. 5 The only important addition to the corpus of artistic
material attributed to Matthew Paris by James was made by
Professor Wormald in 1943. He discovered that Bodleian MS.
Ashmole 304, a collection of fortune-telling tracts which will
demand our attention in the next chapter, contained a number
of drawings, as well as some diagrams of spheres containing

1 See James, ' Drawings of Matthew Paris', Walpole Society , xiv (1925-6),
pp. 1-3 ; Illustrations to the Life of St Alban, p. 18 ; and Estoire de St Aedward
le Rei, pp. 32-4.

* Millar, English Illuminated Manuscripts, pp. 56-60; and Borenius and
Tristram, English Medieval Painting, pp. 9 and 13, who reproduce the
Faaberg painting, Plate 26. s Saunders, English Illumination, I, p. 75.

4 Hermannsson, Icelandic Illuminated Manuscripts of the Middle Ages, p . i o.

5 Lethaby in Burlington Magazine, xxxi, p. 234; see also Kurth, *M. Paris
and Villard de Honnecourt', ibid. LXXXI (1942), pp. 227-8.

8 Wormald, 'More M. Paris drawings', Walpole Soc. xxxi (1942-3),
pp. 109 ff.

207

MATTHEW PARIS

animals etc., which were identical in style with the drawings
attributed to Matthew Paris, and he concluded that these
drawings, as well as those in the nine manuscripts mentioned
by James, 'can be with good reason ascribed to his [Matthew's]
hand'. 1 Wormald put forward a tentative chronology of Mat-
thew's paintings : he thought that the Offa illustrations in the
Liber Additamentorum may have been executed before the draw-
ings in the Ashmole manuscript, and that the Alban illustrations
in the Trinity College, Dublin, manuscript were probably later.
In 1944 Hollaender published a detailed account of the illustra-
tions in the Chetham Library manuscript of the Flores His-
toriarum, together with reproductions of them all. He thought
that occasionally Matthew himself personally collaborated in
the designing of this series of pictures depicting the coronations
of English kings. 2

The most recent discussion of Matthew Paris as an artist
appeared in 1954, in Miss Rickert J s book on medieval English
painting. 3 As a result of a ' careful stylistic analysis ' (which was
unfortunately not included in her book), based on the famous
painting of the Virgin and Child which prefaces British Museum
Royal MS. 14 C vii (R), she attributed the following paintings
and drawings to Matthew Paris himself:

(1) British Museum Royal MS. 14 C vii: Virgin and Child.

(2) Heads on p. 283 of A 4

(3) Head of Christ on f. 49 b of B.

(4) All the drawings and some of the tinting in the Dublin
Alban ('perhaps Matthew Paris's earliest work').

(5) 'Some original sketches for marginal drawings' in A
andB.

Rickert also described the work of two assistants of Matthew
Paris. The first of these, she claimed, executed 'at least a part'
of the drawings in the Cambridge Edward, and the five tinted
drawings in British Museum Royal MS. 2 Axxii. According
to Rickert, this artist has ' richer decorative detail, more pains-

1 Wormald, ' More Matthew Paris drawings ', loc. cit. p. 109 ; see also p. 1 12.

2 Hollaender, * Pictorial work in the Flares Historiarum', Bulletin of the
John Ry lands Library, xxvm (1944), p. 378.

3 Rickert, Painting in Britain^ pp. 119-20.

4 * Fol. 281 ', Rickert, Painting in Britain^ p. 119, in error. She is doubtful
of this attribution; p. 134, note 63.

208

MATTHEW PARIS THE ARTIST

taking execution, and less convincing figure modelling 5 than
Matthew Paris. The second of these assistants, thought Rickert,
executed the marginal paintings in A and B, 'which, with their
text, may have been added later than the original writing'.
Rickert described this artist's style as very close to Matthew's,
and went on to say that he used a linear formula which gives
the pictures a monotonous sameness in figure types'. She
thought that some of the marginal drawings in A and B were
'certainly' by the Franciscan, Brother William.

Not one of these studies can be accepted as definitive, for
each scholar has voiced his or her opinion on the subject of
Matthew's artistic works without publishing the detailed
stylistic analysis on which such opinions must be based. More-
over, as we have seen, there is a very large measure of disagree-
ment among scholars as to the works actually executed by
Matthew Paris. I hope, therefore, that the reader will forgive
my examining in detail the evidence for the authorship of these
paintings and drawings, and forgive, too, a rather detailed but,
as I think, necessary attempt to describe the salient features of
Matthew's artistic style.

It is quite certain that Matthew Paris was an artist, for we
have both his own and Thomas Walsingham's word for this.
Walsingham tells us that Matthew 'wrote and most elegantly
illustrated the Lives of SS. Alban and Amphibalus, and of
Thomas and Edmund, archbishops of Canterbury'; 1 and that
he 'provided many books [for the monastery] written in his
own and other hands, in which his excellence in both learning
and painting is clear enough'. 2 Matthew himself refers to 'the
book about St Thomas the Martyr and St Edward which
I translated and illustrated'. 3 We have already noticed his keen
interest in artistic matters in connexion with the Gesta Abbatum,
and it only remains to add here that in the Liber Additamentorum
he has inserted a treatise written and illustrated by himself on
the rings and gems of his house, 4 and a list of the paintings and
other works of art executed by Richard the Painter during the

1 Above, p. ig.

2 B.M. Cotton MS. Nero D vii, f. 51 a. 3 Above, p. 170.

4 Oman, 'Jewels of St Albans Abbey*, Burlington Magazine, LVII (1930),
pp. 8 1-2, where it is reproduced in facsimile.

14 209 VHP

MATTHEW PARIS

years i2^.i-~^o. 1 These are valuable both in themselves and for
the light they throw on Matthew's artistic interests.

Some, at any rate, of the books which Matthew himself
provided for his house still contain an inscription in his own
hand recording the gift. Since these are the books on which, in
later times, his reputation at St Albans as an artist evidently in
a large measure depended, we may begin our discussion with
them. Of the four manuscripts whose inscriptions survive, one,
Cambridge University Library MS. Dd xi 78, contains no
drawings or illustrations of any kind, and may therefore be
omitted from the present discussion. The others are : 2

(1) The Liber Additamentorum, B.M. Cotton MS. Nero D i.

(2) R, B.M. Royal MS. 14 C vii.

(3) JS, Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 16.

A fourth illustrated manuscript ought undoubtedly to be added
to these: Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 26 (A).
Although no inscription survives in this book, it was, as we have
seen, at first written as part of B. Furthermore, in R Matthew
refers to the last part of the text of his Chronica Majora (1254-9)
as "the third volume', 3 which shows that he thought of it as
divided between three separate volumes, A, B and R. Now it is
hardly likely that he would have given Volumes II and in
to St Albans, and not Volume i; and I conclude, therefore,
that A was among the manuscripts provided by him for his
house, and that it formerly had an inscription similar to those
in 5, R, and the Liber Additamentorum. It seems, then, that the
books to which Walsingham refers as provided by Matthew for
his house, and 'written in his own and other hands', included
A, JS, R, and the Liber Additamentorum^ as well as perhaps some
others either lost or unidentified. Three of these books are
almost entirely autograph, and were presumably regarded as
Matthew's private property until he handed them over to his
house; and if we take into account his known artistic skill, there
is a strong prima facie case for supposing that Matthew was
also responsible for the artistic work in these manuscripts.

1 CM. vi, pp. 202-3.

2 The inscriptions are reproduced in Vaughan, ' Handwriting of M. Paris ',
Trans. Canib. BibL Soc. i (1953), Plate xix.

3 CM. V, p. 483, note 3 ; p. 544, note i ; p. 604, note i ; and p. 675, note 2.

2IO

MATTHEW PARIS THE ARTIST

The aesthetic features of these four manuscripts support this
conclusion. In all of them the same sense of colour in decorative
detail is apparent. Blue paragraph markers and rubric lettering
are skilfully employed in the margins to give the whole page
a colourful effect, and marginalia are frequently enclosed with
coloured lines, to which a narrow strip of green or brown tint is
often added. Even the quire numbers are beautifully executed
in red and blue. All this, to judge from the writing, is the work
of Matthew himself; and the system of reference signs, too,
which is used in these manuscripts, is due to him. 1 Sometimes
these signa take a pictorial form such as we should expect from
an artist: we find in one place a fish, in another a stag's head. 2
Elsewhere the two halves of an animal's body are used, the
reader being referred, at a point in the manuscript where the
hind half of the body is drawn, to another leaf, where the fore
half is to be found. 3 It is but a short step from these reference
signs to the conventional pictorial signs which Matthew freely
uses in the margins of his historical manuscripts. These con-
ventional signs are so closely related to the text of the chronicle
that it would be difficult to attribute them to a hand other than
Matthew's. The commonest of them are shields, often inserted
reversed to mark the death of the bearer; mitres and croziers to
mark the death and accession of bishops; crowns; and docu-
ments with a pendent seal. But we find also hands, crossbows,
swords, heads, a bell, and so on, each figure symbolizing or
representing an event described in the text. In one place two
hands clasped together in the margin represent a wedding; and
in another a hand reaching down from Heaven to a crowned
head represents Henry Ill's narrow escape from an assassin at
Woodstock. 4 No hard and fast line can be drawn between these
pictorial representations and the more complex ones which
might properly be called 'marginal illustrations' ; and a number
of the drawings in the margins of these manuscripts reproduced
by James are really only symbolical representations of events
rather than actual drawings of them. We may draw attention,

1 See above, pp. 65 ff.

2 Liber Additamentorum, f. 63 b andl?, f. 1 86 (James, c Drawings of M. Paris ',
Walpole Soc. xiv (1925-6), no. 95).

3 Liber Additamentorum, ff. 30 b and 25 b. 4 R, ff. 109 and 128.

211 14-2

MATTHEW PARIS

in this connexion, to the bell with the rope thrown over the
gudgeon, to represent the Interdict; the two kings embracing
each other, to represent the peace signed between Louis and
Henry III in 1217; and the peasant threshing with a flail, to
represent the plundering of the barns of a papal official. 1 Like
these pictorial representations, the straightforward drawings
of events are intimately related to the text of the chronicle, and
all this artistic work seems to represent the aesthetic feelings
and expression of one man only. It must surely have been
Matthew Paris who conceived of the idea of illustrating his
manuscripts in this way, and who carried out this coherent
scheme of illustration, from the simplest reference sign to the
complicated battle scenes in the margins of the Chronica Major a.
It seems to me most unlikely that he would have called in an
assistant to carry out this task, which as we know he himself was
perfectly well equipped to undertake. The marginal pictures,
as well as the other pictorial and decorative work, form an
integral part of the historical manuscripts, and the illustrations
are provided with detailed legends invariably written by Mat-
thew himself. I think that he would by no means have allowed
another monk to interfere in the writing and illustration of these
manuscripts, which were, after all, his own. In one case, where
a drawing by another hand has found its way into the Liber
Additamentorum, Matthew tells us explicitly that this was
executed by his Franciscan friend, Brother William. 2

So far we have done little more than put forward a reasonable
hypothesis. We have pointed out that the historical manuscripts
A, B, R, and the Liber Additamentorum were Matthew's own
books, composed and written by him, that he himself wrote the
legends to the illustrations which form, together with the other
artistic work, an integral part of the manuscripts, and that
Matthew Paris was an artist; and we have concluded that the
illustrations in these manuscripts were executed by him. But we
can, and must, go further than this. What the art historians have
never done, in forming their opinions as to the authorship of
these marginal illustrations, is to take into account the palaeo-

1 James, ' Drawings of M. Paris', Walpole Soc. xiv (1925-6), nos. 31, 39,
and 56.

2 Liber Additamentorum, f. 155.

212

MATTHEW PARIS THE ARTIST

graphical evidence. When this is done, a very significant co-
incidence is found between the frequency of, and changes of
style in, the illustrations, and our knowledge of the writing of
these manuscripts. Let us look, first, at the marginal pictures
in the three volumes of the Chronica Majora: A, B and the
second part of R. There are twenty-four reasonably important
marginal drawings in A (Volume I, -1188); sixty-five in B
(Volume II, 1189-1253); and not one in Volume in of the
Chronica Majora in R (1254-9). From about f. 183 onwards in
By at a point in the annal for 1244, the execution of the drawings
becomes cruder and often clumsy, and their frequency markedly
declines until they peter out altogether during the annal for
1247 (215). There are some twenty drawings of importance in
the Historia Anglorum (the first part of jR), and these are con-
sistently inferior in execution and detail to those in A and the
early part of B (up to c. f. 183). It may be remarked further
that in the Abbreviatio Chronicorum (British Museum Cotton
MS. Claudius D vi), as in Volume m of the Chronica Majora,
there are very few pictorial representations of any kind, and no
drawings worth the name.

If we bear in mind the evidence about the writing of B put
forward in Chapter iv above, and examine the marginal drawings
in this manuscript with care, some interesting facts are revealed.
Thus on f. 64 b we find that a drawing in the upper margin,
representing the death of Fawkes de Breaute, has interfered
with Matthew's rubric lettering across the page to the extent
of causing him to omit the letters '-pore' from the words
'De tempore regis Henrici III'. 1 The drawing, in fact, must
have been executed before the rubric headings and we have
shown that the latter were carried out in or soon after 1250.2
Again, on f. 138 b of J5, a drawing in the lower margin, of the
treaty between Earl Richard and the Saracens, was clearly
executed before Matthew's quire number XI ; for this is placed
near the lower edge of the leaf, instead of in the usual place
higher up, obviously in order to avoid the picture. 3 This quire
number is one of the second series written into B, and was

1 James, 'Drawings of M. Paris', Walpole Soc. xiv (1925-6), no. 49; see
also fig. 4 above, p. 57. * Above, p. 57.

3 See Plate xiv (b). For the quire numbers in B, see pp. 56-7 above.

213

MATTHEW PARIS

probably executed c. 1250-1. On f. i86b is an even more
significant piece of evidence, for here the remains of the original
quire number, as well as the one replacing it (xim), can be seen
tucked away at the side of the leaf to avoid the picture, instead
of in the usual place in the centre of the lower margin. 1 This,
I think, proves conclusively that the picture was drawn before
the first set of quire numbers were written into AB, that is, in
or before 1250.

I think it permissible to deduce from this evidence that the
illustration of A and B was carried out more or less contem-
poraneously with the writing of the text. In one place at least
this is certainly the case, for on f. 126 of B the text has had to
make room for the drawing of the imperial seal in the lower
margin, so that the drawing must have been executed before
Matthew had finished writing the text on this page.

What is the significance of all this? We know that Matthew
had the writing of AB well in hand by the year 1245, and he
probably worked at it more or less continuously up to 1250,
apart from the interruption in 1248-9 caused by his visit to
Norway. By February, 1251, AB had been completed to 1250,
and Matthew was already busy with the Historia Anglorum.
During the years which followed 1250 he must have been
extremely busy coping with the continuation of the Chronica
Major a, as well as with the writing of the Historia Anglorum and
the Floras Historianim, and, later, the Abbreviatio Chronicorum.
Moreover we must remember that by this time he was well
past his prime. Now the decline, both in quantity and quality,
of the marginal illustrations in the historical manuscripts, from
about the annal for 1244 in , which we have noted, fits in
exactly with our knowledge of the writing of these manuscripts,
but only if we assume that Matthew was their artist. Had the
illustrations been carried out by an assistant, we should not
expect their number and quality to fall off during the very years
when Matthew Paris was becoming ever older and busier. On
the contrary, we should expect the work to be even throughout.
The marked decline in the numbers of the illustrations is most
easily explained on the grounds that Matthew found it impossible
to find time, amidst his other activities, to continue with the

1 James, * Drawings of M. Paris', Walpole Soc. xiv (1925-6), no. 94.

214

MATTHEW PARIS THE ARTIST

lavish illustration of his historical manuscripts; and their very
obvious deterioration in quality seems to be due partly to this
and partly to his increasing age. The later illustrations, especially
those in the Historia Anglorum, which we know were executed
after 1250, show definite signs of hurried, and sometimes care-
less, execution, as well as a loss in technical skill None of this
would be apparent, I think, had Matthew been employing an
assistant, and if it should be maintained that the assistant, as
well as Matthew Paris, was getting older and busier and there-
fore less skilled and prolific, I would point out that there were
plenty of skilled artists available at St Albans at this time, whose
help Matthew could have called in had he so desired. I conclude
that he had no desire for assistance in carrying out the intimate
task of illustrating his historical manuscripts, and that, in conse-
quence, the changes in the style and number of the illustrations
directly reflect his growing age and his increasing preoccupation
with the texts of his historical manuscripts, which themselves
increased in number after c. 1250.

When, at the end of his life, probably during his last few
months, Matthew found it impossible to continue writing, he
handed over his pen to an assistant, whose hand is easily
recognized on the closing leaves of the Chronica Majora, the
Historia Anglorum, and the Abbreviatio Chronicorum, as well as
in the colophon at the end of the Chronica Majora. 1 A brief
glance at the manuscripts is sufficient to show that an assistant
also took over the decorative and minor pictorial work on these
pages. We notice at once, for instance, that the paragraph
markers, shields, mitres, croziers and initial letter, on the
last eight leaves of the Chronica Majora, written by Matthew's
scribe, are quite different from those on the earlier pages written
by Matthew himself, and of much less artistic merit. Some of
this work is illustrated in Plate iv, where it can be compared
with some shields and crowns of Matthew's reproduced in
Plate V. 2 I think it safe to conclude from this that Matthew
himself executed the minor pictorial representations of shields
and the like, as well as the large-scale drawings, for we can

1 See p. 7 above, and Plate I.

2 For Matthew's heraldic work, see below, pp. 250-3 and Plates xvm
and xix.

215

MATTHEW PARIS

hardly assume that, at a certain point in three different books
when he began to employ a scribe, Matthew also changed or
abandoned his artistic assistant. There can have been no such
assistant, and clearly what happened was that Matthew called
in a helper who wrote the text and executed as best he could the
pictorial work which had formerly been done by Matthew.

I hope, now, that I have convinced the reader that the large-
scale drawings and the pictorial representations or symbols in
A 9 B and R were executed by Matthew himself. I shall have
to discuss later some of the earliest drawings in A, which seem
to be, at any rate partly, the work of another hand; 1 but there
is one other matter connected with these drawings in the
historical manuscripts, which ought to be discussed here. Miss
Rickert, in her recent book, 2 attributed only a small fraction of
the pictorial matter in these manuscripts to Matthew Paris:
she allowed him the Virgin and Child which prefaces R (repro-
duced as the frontispiece above) ; and some drawings of heads
and * original sketches for marginal drawings' in A and B. She
attributed the Virgin and Child to him on the grounds that it
was signed; and the heads and faces presumably because they
approach the Virgin and Child closely in style and treatment; 3
but I do not know why she attributed the ' original sketches * to
Matthew, rather than the drawings themselves. What are these
c original sketches ' ? One of those mentioned by Rickert is on
p. 66 of A, where a detailed plummet sketch has been made, and
only part of it 'worked up ' in ink. 4 The other is said by Rickert
to be on f. 215 of B, but I have not been able to find it there,
though there is a rather crudely executed ink drawing, 5 which
is in fact the last considerable drawing in the Chronica Major a^
referring to part of the annal for 1247.

It seems to me that almost all the marginal drawings in A and
-B have been 'worked up' from pencil sketches, and signs of

1 See p. 223 below.

3 Painting in Britain, p. 119; for the 'signature' below the Virgin and
Child painting, see Vaughan, * Handwriting of M. Paris ', Trans, Camb. Bibl.
Soc. I (1953), p. 380.

3 It is perhaps worth pointing out that these drawings (James, { Drawings
of M. Paris 5 , Walpole Soc. xiv (1925-6), nos. 25 and 140) are on separate
pieces of parchment attached to the manuscripts.

4 Ibid. no. 10. 5 Ibid. no. 96.

216

MATTHEW PARIS THE ARTIST

pencil work are still clearly visible in a number of them. I have
been able to discover only three pencil sketches which have
not been * worked up* in ink: a crucifix on f. 259 b of E\ the
death of Queen Blanche on f. 268 b; and a boat on f. 279.* All
of them, we note, are after the last proper drawing in the
Chronica Major a, in that part of it which Matthew seems never
to have found time to illustrate. If we suppose that Matthew
himself designed the illustrations in the Chronica Majora, and
left the * working up J to an assistant, then it follows that, at just
the point when Matthew's artistic powers were declining, and
his time becoming more and more taken up with other things,
his assistant, too, was becoming incapable of carrying out his
work properly; and we have to assume, too, that Matthew was
unable to find another assistant to replace him. All this is most
unlikely, and I venture to suggest that Matthew habitually
sketched out his illustrations in pencil, and later worked them
up in ink; and that the ' original pencil sketches ' in B are merely
unfinished illustrations of Matthew's which he never managed
to 'work up 5 finally in ink.

I propose now to try to describe the salient features of
Matthew's artistic style, basing my analysis on the marginal
illustrations in A, B, and J?, two of which are reproduced in
Plates vi and vii. The drawings in these manuscripts are all of the
same basic type, either line alone, or line and wash. The chief
colours are pale green, pale yellowish, and pale brown, and these
tints are very effectively used in the shading of drapery. On the
whole these drawings are executed with remarkable skill. There
is a boldness of line, a confidence, which gives the impression
that they are the work of a skilled artist working accurately with
a rapid, sure touch. The proportions are usually good, and the
human figures especially are lifelike and well drawn. Economy
of line is a notable feature of all the drawings : there is nothing
useless, no unnecessary detail. Hands and feet, for instance, are
usually sketched impressionistically with a few deft lines, instead
of being drawn in detail. No harshness or angularity mars the
softness and roundness of the lines. There is no idea of per-
spective, and architectural features are therefore often badly
distorted; but the way in which things are put together or worn
1 There is another in the Historia Anglorum, JR, f. 42.

217

MATTHEW PARIS

is usually very well shown. Crowns and mitres, for instance, fit
neatly on to the head, and ships' sails to the masts.

All this constitutes a recognizable, individual style, which
may be further defined by describing some of its most charac-
teristic details. Crowns, for instance, are usually divided into
three, are well-drawn and balanced in shape, and are usually
decorated with dots or circlets. There is invariably a double
line at the base, which allows a curl of hair to protrude charac-
teristically at the side of the face. Certain types of hat recur in
these drawings, including a floppy, conical one, often used for
pagans, and a curious, flat, round one. Hats are usually carefully
and artistically fitted on to the head. Mitres are very often
decorated with two circlets, or crosses. Drapery is realistic and
often beautifully drawn and shaped. Its outlines are usually
soft and rounded, and the edges of pieces of drapery, and the
folds, are represented by slightly stylized, curved, parallel lines.
A fold across the chest and a series of parallel lines across the
sleeve near the hand are characteristic; and the upper part of
the dress is often tucked neatly into the girdle on either side.
Patterns on drapery are very characteristic, the commonest
being a sprinkling of small dots (usually red) in triangular groups
of three. Sprinklings of circlets, small crosses, and dots with
a semicircular line half enclosing them are also frequent. Hair
is usually represented with a few well-defined parallel curves
with shading between them, and a lock usually shows behind
a hat or crown. Faces in profile often have a pronounced
indentation above the nose, and a protuberance above that:
they are often rather uncouth and striking. A feature common
to many faces is a single decurved line to represent the mouth,
with a dot below it. Full faces usually have the hair neatly
arranged on either side of the head, and the line of the nose is
connected to that of one of the eyebrows. Heads, or heads and
shoulders, are frequently added behind a figure or group of
figures in order to give an impression of number without adding
too much detail to the drawing. Feet are drawn in a rather
peculiar and characteristic way, and often seem to be bent
backwards. Sometimes they are coloured black, save for a
central white line. The toes are normally only roughly sketched
in with a number of parallel lines, though the big toe is usually

218

MATTHEW PARIS THE ARTIST

drawn more completely; fingers, too, are usually hinted at with,
parallel lines, except, often, for the thumb. The separate lines
of feet, hands, and drapery are often not joined together, for the
artist is skilled enough to convey his meaning without elaborate
and accurate linear detail. In a hand praying, or held out for
some reason, the thumb is nearly always held away from the
fingers in a curious manner. The ground is invariably depicted
in a characteristic way, with a wavy line. Architectural details,
as can be seen from Plates xiv and xv, are stereotyped and
very individual: spires are drawn in a characteristic manner,
and walls are decorated with quatrefoils, groups of two or three
narrow lights, and small circlets. Many more equally charac-
teristic details could be described, but it would be tedious to
enumerate them all here.

I have examined all the drawings that appear in any way to
be connected with Matthew Paris, or have been previously
attributed to him, and conclude that the following can be
definitely attributed to him, since, in all of them, I have found
identical details of style and execution:

A: Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 26; Volume I
of the Chronica Major a. All the drawings and pictorial material
except perhaps for three of the marginal drawings (for which
see p. 223 below).

B: Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 16; Volume H
of the Chronica Majora. The pictorial material on the pre-
liminary leaves, and all the marginal illustrations, including
shields, mitres, etc.

R : British Museum Royal MS . 1 4 C vii ; the Historia Anglorum
and Volume m of the Chronica Majora. All the pictorial material
except for the shields etc. onff. 210-18 and the drawing onf. 2i8b.

British Museum Cotton MS. Nero D i; the Liber Addita-
mentorum. All the pictorial material except for the drawings on
ff. 5a-25a and f. 155.

British Museum Cotton MS. Claudius D vi; the Abbreviatio
Chronicorum. Drawingsof kings of England on if. 2-5 b, but helped
by another hand ; medallion drawings in the genealogical chronicle,
ff. 6b-8; and pictorial representations onff. i6b, 36b, andagb.

Trinity College, Dublin, MS. Ei4o; Vie de S. Auban etc.
All the illustrations.

219

MATTHEW PARIS

Bodleian Library, Oxford, Ashmole MS. 304; fortune-telling
tracts and verses. All the pictorial matter.

British Museum Cotton MS. Julius Dvii; miscellaneous
historical material collected by John of Wallingford. Two tinted
drawings, ff. 42 b and 60 b.

Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 385, Part II;
Dragmaticon Philosophiae. A series of twenty-three diagrams,
some of which have pictorial detail.

Chetham Library, Manchester, MS. 6712; the Flares His-
toriarum. Four shields. 1

Although by no means all Matthew's illustrations have been
reproduced, most of the more important drawings attributed to
him are available in facsimile: the marginal illustrations in the
historical manuscripts, as well as the drawings in the Liber
Additamentorum and Cotton MS. Julius D vii, in volume xiv
of the Walpole Society's publications ; the drawings in Bodleian
Ashmole MS. 304 in volume xxxi of the same society; and
the Alban drawings in Lowe and Jacob's facsimile edition,
entitled: Illustrations to the Life of St. Alban in Trinity College,
Dublin, MS. E i 40.

There is one further point which must be taken into account
in connexion with Matthew's artistic work. In every one of the
manuscripts which I have listed here as containing drawings by
Matthew Paris there is a close connexion between the illustra-
tions and his handwriting ; for nearly all the drawings, including
even the diagrams in the Dragmaticon Philosophiae and one of
the paintings in Cotton MS. Julius D vii, are furnished with
legends written by Matthew himself. I am not of course
arguing that, because any given drawing has legends in Matthew's
hand, the drawing must have been executed by him; but I
do suggest, since almost all the drawings attributable to him
on stylistic and other grounds are in fact provided with
such legends, that one of Matthew's peculiarities as an artist
is the provision of these explanatory legends in his own
hand, and that their presence or absence must be taken into
account when drawings of doubtful authorship are under
consideration.

1 Described in FH. n, p. 304, note 2; p. 305, note 2; p. 308, note i ; and
p. 312, note 8.

22O

MATTHEW PARIS THE ARTIST

We have already discussed the illustrations in the historical
manuscripts which were among those presented by Matthew
to his house and noticed later by Walsingham; but Walsingham
tells us of other manuscripts written and illustrated by Matthew
Paris: Lives of SS. Alban and Amphibalus, and of Thomas and
Edmund. 1 The reader will remember that we came to the
conclusion in Chapter ix 2 that the Trinity College, Dublin,
manuscript is Matthew's original autograph manuscript of his
Life of SS. Alban and Amphibalus, to which Walsingham refers.
Even Rickert was prepared to allow that Matthew was respon-
sible for the drawing in this manuscript, though she evidently
thought that much of the colour had been applied by another
hand. 3 The illustrations, two of which are reproduced in Plate vui,
consist of a series of fifty-four line and wash drawings enclosed
in frames, depicting the Life of SS. Alban and Amphibalus; the
visit of SS. Germanus and Lupus to England in the fifth century ;
and the invention and translation of St Alban and the foundation
of St Albans by Offa of Mercia. In style they are very similar
to the earlier drawings in A and B, and in my opinion are
wholly the work of Matthew Paris.

We have seen that Matthew himself refers to 'the book about
SS. Thomas and Edward' which he translated and illustrated, 4
and that neither of the existing illustrated manuscripts of Thomas
and Edward can have formed part of this book. 5 They are,
however, very similar, especially in size and format, to Matthew's
original manuscript of Alban, and it seems, therefore, that each
is a close copy of part of Matthew's original book containing
both lives. This is fully borne out by an examination of their
illustrations. Many of the characteristic details of style and
execution, which we noted above as peculiar to Matthew's
artistic work, occur in the illustrations of University Library,
Cambridge, MS. Ee iii 59 (Edward), but their general appearance
is quite different from the authentic drawings of Matthew Paris
in Alban and the historical manuscripts. One of these drawings
is reproduced in Plate ix (6). The execution is painstaking and
has none of Matthew's dash and vigour; and the elaborate and

1 Above, p. 209. 2 Above, p. 170.

3 Rickert, Painting in Britain, p. 119.

4 Above, p. 209. 5 Above, p. 171.

221

MATTHEW PARIS

minute detail is wholly unlike Matthew's rapid, deft strokes.
The individual lines are weakly drawn and often overlap each
other, a fault that is seldom, if ever, found in Matthew's
drawings. Certain tricks of style appear which are common in
Matthew's work, such as the rather angular, almost twisted, feet,
and the addition of heads alone behind other figures; but these
stylistic peculiarities are stiff and unreal in the Edward illustra-
tions, and they are often exaggerated unnaturally. All this
shows, I think, that the artist of Edward was closely copying
a series of drawings of Matthew's; and we need not therefore
be surprised to find parts of pictures sometimes unaccountably
missing, as, for instance, part of a boat on f . 14 a. James supposed
that these pictures were perhaps designed by Matthew Paris
and executed by an assistant, 1 but I think it more likely that
Matthew had no hand in them at all, and that the similarities
between them and Matthew's own drawings are simply due to
the fact that their artist was copying from Matthew's drawings.
I agree with Rickert's identification of the work of this assistant
of Matthew's, and with her attribution to him of the five tinted
drawings in British Museum Royal MS. 2 Axxii, ff. zigb-22i b. 2
These psalter illustrations are much too detailed and ornate, too
laboriously executed, to be the work of Matthew himself; but
many features of them closely approach the work of the artist of
Edward, and there are some close parallels in detail: the very
ornate helm, for instance, figured on f. 220 a of the psalter, is
almost identical with the helms in some of the Edward illustra-
tions. 3 Of the Thomas manuscript too little remains for a detailed
analysis of the illustrations to be made. However, they do not
appear to be by Matthew Paris, but, to judge from the collotype
reproductions (I have not been able to see the original), they
seem to be close to the work of the Edward artist. 4

Matthew's style is a distinctive one, and Rickert's con-
tention, that some of the marginal drawings in the historical
manuscripts were executed by Brother William, a Franciscan
friend of Matthew's, seems to me to be entirely without founda-

1 James (ed.), Estoire de St Aedward le Rei, p. 32.

2 Rickert, Painting in Britain, p. 120.

3 Cf. James, 'Drawings of M. Paris', Walpole Soc. xiv (1925-6), no. 137;
and James (ed.), St Aedward le Rei, especially p. 64 of the facsimiles.

4 For these, see Meyer (ed.), Vie de Saint Thomas.

222

MATTHEW PARIS THE ARTIST

tion. 1 The whole-page painting of Christ on f. 155 of the Liber
Additamentorum, which Matthew states was the work of Brother
William, is quite different in style from any of the chronicle illus-
trations. The hair, for instance, is drawn in with a large number of
very fine lines, whereas Matthew invariably depicts hair with a
small number of thickish lines. The drapery, too, is treated quite
differently, for Brother William's stylized, angular folds are
very unlike Matthew's more rounded and less rigid drapery
patterns.

There are a few drawings about whose attribution to Matthew
Paris I feel rather doubtful. These are the figures of seated kings
in the Abbreviatio Chronicorum, and the drawings on pp. 28, 30
and 35 of A. 2 The figures of kings in the Abbreviatio are much
inferior to Matthew's other drawings, especially in execution,
and in the proportions of the figures. Some of the faces seem
to have been drawn in by another hand, and the colouring, too,
owing to the crude way in which it has been applied, could
hardly have been done by Matthew Paris. On the other hand,
the subject of each picture has been written on the edge of the
leaf by Matthew himself, and much of the drawing seems to
be his. The figure of King Richard, for instance, reproduced
in Plate x (a), seems to be wholly Matthew's work, except
perhaps for the lines round the mouth. This manuscript was
almost certainly his last historical production, and it seems
possible that he left these drawings to be finished by an assistant.
The doubtful drawings near the beginning of A present a rather
different problem. Their general style is very like Matthew's,
but some of the drawing is more finnicky and detailed than that
in the other illustrations in this book. Part of the drawing, for
instance, of the seated king illustrated in Plate x (i), parti-
cularly the face and hair, seems to be too fine to be Matthew's.
It is perhaps permissible to conjecture that these were the first
illustrations to be inserted into this book, and that they are
partly the work of another monk, who perhaps instructed

1 Rickert, Painting in Britain, p. 120. She states, in error, that Brother
William's painting of Christ is signed by him. It is reproduced in Little,
'Brother William of England', Franciscan Papers, Lists and Documents,
Plate iv.

z British Museum Cotton MS. Claudius D vi, ff. 2a-5b; and James,
'Drawings of M. Paris', Walpole Soc. xiv (1925-6), nos. 4, 5 and 7.

223

MATTHEW PARIS

Matthew in the art of drawing, and lent a helping hand to his
first artistic ventures.

Madden attributed to Matthew Paris a series of tinted
drawings in British Museum Royal MS. aBvi; 1 but not so
James, who thought that they were definitely inferior in
artistic merit (Plate IX (a)). They are very similar to Matthew's
own drawings, and it is only when a detailed comparison reveals
certain tricks of style absent in Matthew's work that they can
be distinguished from it. I would point out, in particular, the
presence of lines on the knees and elbows of the figures, which
I have not found in Matthew's drawings; the lack of a sense of
proportion; and the elaboration of detail, especially of hair.
These paintings were certainly executed at St Albans in Mat-
thew's lifetime, and an inscription on f. 2 a records the gift of
the book to St Albans by John de Dalling, a monk of the house. 2

There are a number of other paintings and drawings which
were executed by Matthew's contemporaries at St Albans. The
most famous of these, which accompanies the colophon at the
end of the Chronica Majora (see Plate i), depicts the chronicler
reclining on his death-bed, with his book of chronicles lying
open by him. A superficial glance might give the impression
that this drawing was indistinguishable from those attributed
to Matthew Paris, but a closer inspection reveals numerous
differences. The face and hair, for instance, are unlike anything
in Matthew's drawings, and the hands and fingers, too, are
drawn in with a detail which is quite unlike Matthew's impres-
sionistic treatment of this subj ect. Some other paintings executed
at St Albans in Matthew's lifetime may be seen in the Chetham
Library manuscript of his Floras Historiarwn (Ch). These are
a series of nine illustrations of the coronations of English kings,
which are different in style from, and inferior in merit to,
Matthew's drawings. Hollaender thought that Matthew might
occasionally have helped this artist; 3 but this seems to me

1 Ff. 8a-i2b. Madden, HA. in, p. xlviii, note 4; and James (ed.),
Estoire de St Aedward le Rei, p. 34.

2 The unfinished drawings in C (B.M. Cotton MS. Nero D v, Part II,
fT. 208, 21 3 b, and 214) have been attributed by Madden to Matthew Paris
(HA. I, p. bdi), but I cannot myself see any grounds for this.

8 Hollaender, * Pictorial work in the Flores Historiarum ', Bull. ofj. Rylands
Lib. xxviu (1944), p. 378. He reproduces all the drawings.

224

MATTHEW PARIS THE ARTIST

unlikely, although the four shields in the margins of the section
of text written by Matthew are certainly his work, for they are
identical with those in the historical manuscripts already dis-
cussed. In the coronation drawings the figures are tall and slender,
and tend to be out of proportion in consequence; the drawing is
often rough and clumsy, and the general style of the drapery
and other details quite different from Matthew's. The artist
is not so skilled as the artist of the Edward illustrations, and
his style is different from that of the artist of Royal MS. 2 B vi.
He must have worked in close collaboration with Matthew, for
this manuscript was certainly produced under Matthew's
supervision.

Another book illustrated with line drawings in medallions in
a style similar to that of Matthew Paris is the extended version
of Peter of Poitiers's Compendium historiae in genealogia Christi
in the library of Eton College. 1 The text of this brief universal
chronicle extends to the year 1245, an -d the last events mentioned
are the Council of Lyons and the deposition of the Emperor
Frederick II. The accession of Innocent IV is recorded, but the
original hand has not inserted the number of years he reigned,
so we may assume that the book was written while Innocent was
still alive, that is, before 1254. This manuscript has all the
appearance of having been written and illustrated at St Albans,
and, indeed, it seems to be associated to some extent with
Matthew Paris, for some of the last entries in it mention events
described in detail in the Chronica Major a: the invasion of
Tartars in 1241, the story of St Edmund Rich, and the Council
of Lyons. The illustrations are chiefly heads enclosed in medal-
lions, but there are some tinted drawings rather like those of
Matthew, though cruder and less finished than his. None of
them seem to be by any of the artists so far discussed.

While we are on the subject of manuscripts illustrated in the
'Matthew Paris style', but not by him, mention ought to be
made of the illustrated Apocalypses which began to appear in
England during the middle years of the century. James and
other students of medieval art have attributed a number of the
finest and earliest of these to St Albans: Trinity College,
Cambridge, MS. R 16 2; Bibliotheque Nationale, MS. Fr. 403;

1 MS. 96. See Moore, Works of Peter of Poitiers, pp. 97-117.
15 225 VMP

MATTHEW PARIS

Bodleian Library, MS. Auct. D 4 17; Pierrepont Morgan MS.
524, a replica of Bibliotheque Nationale MS. Fr. 403;
British Museum Additional MS. 35, 166; and Dyson-Perrins
MS. ro. 1 There is no trace, in any of these manuscripts, of
Matthew's hand, either in the text or the illustrations, but the
latter are often very close to his general style, though usually
superior in artistic merit. All these books seem to have been
produced at St Albans in Matthew's lifetime, and there are some
very striking parallels, for instance, between the artist of the
Edward illustrations and those of the Bibliotheque Nationale
and Dyson-Perrins MSS. mentioned above. These manuscripts
represent, it appears, the finest artistic work which the St Albans
scriptorium could produce at this time, and Matthew may well
have picked up some tricks of style from, or even have been
taught to paint by, one or more of the artists who illustrated
these magnificent books. Rickert thought that the scriptorium
at St Albans was ' under the tutelage of Matthew Paris', 2 but it
seems to me that these Apocalypse artists were his masters rather
than his pupils, and I cannot believe that he was responsible
for the style and technique which they brought to such
perfection.

A critic who does not accept the corpus of illustrations here
attributed to Matthew Paris would no doubt maintain that these
drawings are the work of a school or group of artists working
with Matthew Paris. But the force of this argument is surely
somewhat weakened by the separate identification of the work of
several other artists working at the same time and in the same
place as Matthew, and sometimes in very close collaboration
with him. We have discussed the work of several such artists :
the artist of the Edward manuscript and Royal MS, 2 A xxii ; the
artist of Royal MS. 2 B vi; the artist of the coronation pictures
in the Chetham manuscript of the Flares Historiarum; not to
mention the Eton medallion pictures, the picture of Matthew on
his death-bed, the shields and marginal illustrations of his assis-
tant scribe, and the manuscripts of the Apocalypses just men-
tioned. It seems to me that our separate identification of the

1 For references to facsimiles of these MSS., see Rickert, Painting in
Britain, p. 134.

2 Ibid. p. 122.

226

MATTHEW PARIS THE ARTIST

work of many of these artists adds considerably to the probability
that those drawings which we have attributed to Matthew really
are the work of one man, and not that of a group of artists
painting in the same general style.

The chronology of Matthew Paris's drawings and paintings is
difficult to determine with any degree of certainty. I have tried
to work it out on the basis of the drawings in the historical
manuscripts, which are the only ones that can be dated more or
less reliably. We know that the Chronica Major a in A and B was
written during the years before 1 25 1 , and that it was begun some
time before 1245. Originally, it was written as one volume, AB,
which was finished up to the annal for 1250 early in 1251. Here
Matthew at first intended to close his historical labours, and he
put the finishing touches to his single volume: rubric page
headings and quire numbers. Now we have seen that some, at
any rate, of the marginal illustrations in B were executed before
these rubric headings and quire numbers, and I think it reason-
able to suppose that this is true of them all, and that the single
manuscript AB was completed, and illustrated, by 1251.
(Actually there are no illustrations of importance after the
annal for 1247.) The deterioration which they exhibit towards
the end and the appearance of a helping hand in some of those
near the beginning of A show that these marginal illustrations
were executed over a period of years, beginning, perhaps, as early
as c. 1240 or even before. 1 The Historia Anglorum was begun
in 1250, and probably not finished until 1255 or after. Stylisti-
cally, the illustrations in it seem to be late: they are on a far less
elaborate scale than those in A and S; they are fewer in number;
and they are much inferior in execution and technique. How
late they are we do not know, but it seems unlikely that they
were done much later than the text, and we may date them with
some confidence to the years 1250-5.

We have to rely almost entirely on stylistic evidence for
the dating of Matthew's other important surviving group
of paintings in the Trinity College, Dublin, manuscript
containing his Alban, though the appearance of the hand-
writing of Alban seems to indicate that it was written before

1 For the evidence lying behind these statements, see above, pp. 52-61,
213-15, and 223. For the Historia Anglorum, see p. 61 above.

227 15-2

MATTHEW PARIS

I240, 1 and there is no reason to suppose that the illustrations
were not done at the same time. The fifty-four paintings in
this book are very carefully executed in considerable detail
(Plate vm), and Matthew evidently spent a great deal of
time and trouble over them. Minute details such as the nails
in the horses' hoofs and the spurs are meticulously drawn
in, and the hands and fingers are more carefully delineated
than in the chronicle illustrations. On f . 48 a there is a rather
macabre battle-scene, similar to those in the early part of B.
All this seems to point to an early date, and we may agree
with Rickert in attributing the illustrations in Trinity College,
Dublin, MS. E i 40 to Matthew's early period, 2 and probably
to the years before 1240,

The marginal drawings in A, B and J?, and the illustrations
in the Dublin manuscript, are the two most important surviving
groups of Matthew's drawings: indeed together they form the
bulk of what has come down to us. The rest of his artistic work
may be conveniently grouped as follows:

(1) A page of monumental drawings of faces (one of the
Virgin and Child and two of Christ) at the end of A ; a vernicle
on 49 b of B; and the famous Virgin and Child which pre-
faces R? To them we may add the panel painting of St Peter
formerly at Faaberg in Norway, and now in the Oslo Museum. 4

(2) Two tinted drawings in British Museum Cotton MS.
Julius D vii. 5

(3) An unfinished series of drawings in the Liber Addita-
mentorum illustrating the Vitae Offarwn?

(4) Two sets of tinted drawings of seated kings, one pre-
facing R (ff. Sb-ga), the other the Abbreviatio Chronicorum

1 Vaughan, 'Handwriting of M. Paris', Trans. Camb. Bibl. Soc. i (1953),
pp. 388-9.

2 Rickert, Painting in Britain, p, 119.

3 Reproduced in James (ed.), 'Drawings of M. Paris', Walpole Soc. xiv
(1925-6), nos. 25 and 140; and in the frontispiece above.

4 Reproduced in Lindblom, Peinture gothique, Plate vn; and in Borenius
and Tristram, English Medieval Painting, Plate xxvi.

5 Reproduced in James (ed.), 'Drawings of M. Paris', Walpole Soc. xiv
(1925-6), nos. 142 and 143.

6 Reproduced in James (ed,), 'Drawings of M. Paris', Walpole Soc. xiv
(1925-6), nos. 125-30.

228

MATTHEW PARIS THE ARTIST

(5) Half-length drawings of English kings enclosed in medal-
lions, illustrating the genealogical chronicles in the historical
manuscripts. 1

(6) The pictorial matter in the maps and itineraries. 2

(7) The drawings and diagrams in Bodleian Library, Ashmole
MS. 304.3

(8) A series of twenty-three diagrams in Corpus Christi
College, Cambridge, MS. 385.*

Items (6) and (8) will demand our attention in the next
chapter, and I need only point out here that the illustration of the
maps and itineraries seems to date from after 1252, and that
I am unable to suggest a date for the diagrams of the Corpus
Christi manuscript which in any case are of no importance from
the artistic point of view. The work mentioned in item (i) seems
to be fairly early. I have no hesitation at all in attributing
the Faaberg St Peter to Matthew Paris: it was certainly painted
in his lifetime; the style seems to be identical with his; and,
unlike the contemporary Norwegian panel paintings, it is on oak.
Moreover we know that Matthew was in Norway in 1248, and it
seems very likely that he took this painting with him as a gift
either to his friend King Haakon, or to the monks of St Benet
Holm. The drawings of faces in A and 5, and the Virgin and
Child in R, exhibit a monumental style more akin to large-scale
painting than to manuscript illustration, and it is reasonable to
suppose that they were executed at about the same time as the
Faaberg St Peter, that is, in or before 1248.

The two tinted drawings in the Cotton MS. Julius D vii have
been inserted into a miscellaneous collection of historical material
almost entirely copied or abridged from Matthew's manuscripts
by his friend John of Wallingford, the infirmarer of St Albans :
one is a Christ in Majesty, the other a drawing of John of
Wallingford, above which Matthew has written: 'Prater Jo-
hannes de Walingeford quandoque Infirmarius*. If these words
mean 'John of Wallingford, onetime infirmarer*, then the
drawing presumably dates from after 1253, for John was still

1 See p. 116 above. * See below, pp. 235 ff.

3 The most important of these are reproduced by Wormald in Walpole Soc.
xxxr (1942-3), Plates xxvn, xxvm.

4 See below, pp. 254-5.

229

MATTHEW PARIS

infirmarer in that year. 1 The three drawings of philosophers
in Ashmole MS. 304 are rather similar to those in John of
WallingforcTs book. Plato and Socrates share one drawing,
Euclid and Hermann another, and Pythagoras has the third to
himself. The fourth drawing reproduced by Wormald depicts
the heads of the twelve Patriarchs, and exhibits the characteristic
features of Matthew's treatment of the human face. Besides
these, there are a number of rather poor outline drawings of
birds, and some spherical figures which include a certain
amount of well executed pictorial detail (Plate xxi (&)). Both
the birds and the spheres seem to me certainly Matthew's
work. 2 I have found no evidence for the date of these illustra-
tions in Ashmole MS. 304, but much of the handwriting in it is
Matthew's, and appears to date from between 1240 and 1250,
for it is less neat and controlled than that of Alban, but less
'twisted' and ragged than that dating from after 1250. Although
it is little more than a guess, then, I would ascribe the illustra-
tion of this manuscript, with its text, to the decade 1240-50.

I would agree with James in attributing the first six of a series
of outline drawings in the Liber Additamentorum, illustrating the
Vitae Offarum and completed some time after his death, to
Matthew Paris. 3 Most of the characteristic features of his style
are apparent here, including in particular the very characteristic
architectural details, 4 treatment of drapery, and the impres-
sionistic drawing of hands. The helms are identical with many
of those in the chronicle illustrations, and two of the drawings
depict a battle, and share many of the features of the battle-
scenes in 5. 5 The sixth drawing has been completed by another
and, as I think, much later hand, and only the central
figures are Matthew's. 6 The Vitae Offarum, as he planned it,
was evidently to be a book on the lines of his Alban y with a

1 See GA. i, pp. 330-8.

2 The birds are on ff. 43^52; the spheres, ff. 32b~38b. Wormald, 'More
M. Paris drawings', Walpole Soc. xxxi (1942-3), p. 109, says that the spheres
are by the same hand as the drawings of philosophers.

3 * Drawings of M. Paris', Walpole Soc. xiv (1925-6), p. ai. Rickert,
Painting in Britain, p. 134, note 69, disagrees.

4 See Plate xiv (d).

5 James, * Drawings of M. Paris', Walpole Soc. xiv (1925-6), nos. 128 and
129.

6 Ibid. no. 130.

230

MATTHEW PARIS THE ARTIST

framed picture at the top of each page, for spaces were left by
Matthew on each page, and legends for each picture have been
written by him on the lower margins. 1 But although this was
his intention at first, he must have abandoned his plan some
time before his death, for on f. 20 he has added a lengthy
passage to the original text in the space left for a picture. More-
over, none of the drawings executed by him is completed: they
all lack tinting; only the first two have detailed legends; and the
frame of the sixth was only roughly sketched in. There is some
reason to suppose that the text of the Vitae Off arum was written
in 1250,2 and I think it likely that these drawings were executed
at about the same time, and that it was other commitments,
rather than death, which interrupted Matthew's work on
them.

Matthew's drawings of seated kings, prefacing R and the
Abbreviatio Chronicorum, have scarcely been noticed by students
of his artistic work. Madden attributed them to Matthew, but
James felt uncertain about this. 3 I have no hesitation in
ascribing those in R to Matthew, and, as I have already pointed
out, 4 those in the Abbreviatio Chronicorum seem to have been,
at least in part, executed by him: either he was helped with
them, or they were left unfinished at his death and completed
afterwards. In R there are two pages, one of which is repro-
duced in Plate xi, each containing four kings, enthroned and
crowned, and fitted into an ornamental frame. These pictures
are well drawn and tinted, and exhibit the usual features of
Matthew's style, especially in the architectural details, crowns,
feet, and hands. The drapery, too, is characteristic of Matthew,
particularly the patterns of dots and circlets, which can be
exactly paralleled in Allan and the chronicle illustrations.
The legends to these pictures are all in Matthew's hand.
A much more ambitious programme was envisaged in the
Abbreviatio Chronicorum, where four leaves are devoted to
a series of thirty-two drawings of enthroned kings, four to
a page (Plate x (a)). But the work is less fine than that in

1 Many have been cut off by the binder.

2 See pp. 89-90 above.

3 HA. i, p. xlviii, and James, * Drawings of M. Paris *, Walpole Soc. xrv
(1925-6), p. 18.

4 Above, p. 223.

231

MATTHEW PARIS

R: indeed it is for the most part crudely executed, and the
frames are no longer ornamental, nor are the pictures provided
with proper legends, though most of the kings' names have been
written into the margin by Matthew. The date of both these
sets of drawings is hard to determine, but the Historia Anglorum,
forming the first part of R, was begun in 1250, and the kings
prefacing it may be presumed to date from about that time.
Those prefacing the Abbrematio Chronicorum must be con-
siderably later, and are probably the latest surviving examples
of Matthew's artistry.

Finally, we come to the drawings of kings in the genea-
logical chronicles in A, B and the Abbrematio Chronicorum
(Plate xvin (<Q). These are half-length figures, or mere faces,
of Alfred, William the Conqueror, Cnut, St Edward the Con-
fessor, and Richard I. 1 They are of little artistic importance,
and were probably executed after 1250. They seem to be
Matthew's own work, for, although the execution is crude,
many of his tricks of style occur in them. I have not here
enumerated all Matthew's artistic work, for there are some
drawings in the Liber Additamentomm, in particular the tiny
portraits of the abbots of St Albans illustrating the Gesta
Abbatum, which seem certainly to be his, and I feel sure, too,
that the decorative work and the initials, one of which in-
cludes figures, 2 in the historical manuscripts are also his.

With the exception of the Faaberg St Peter and, perhaps, the
page of monumental faces now at the end of A y Matthew's
surviving artistic work consists entirely of book illustration.
Although he was certainly a competent, if not highly skilled,
craftsman, it is perhaps difficult to claim him as a great artist,
for his work has few signs of originality, and seldom conveys
any real depth of feeling. His Alban shows that he could produce
a book in the tradition of the best illustrated Apocalypses of his
day, though artistically inferior to them; but even if all his
illustrated saints' Lives had survived, it is doubtful if his fame
as an artist would have been much enhanced. These books,
after all, were typical products of his age, and his fame really

1 B, f. iiia-b; medallions of Alfred and William. A, . ivb; medallion of
Alfred. Abbreviatio, fL 6b-8a; medallions of Alfred, Cnut, Edward, William,
and Richard. 2 J5, f. i6yb.

232

MATTHEW PARIS THE ARTIST

depends on the more original use to which he put his talents in
the historical manuscripts. Here, and particularly in the margins
of the first two volumes of the Chronica Majora, Matthew is
primarily, perhaps, a cartoonist: certainly he illustrates secular
subjects in a way unusual in thirteenth-century England, and
with remarkable skill. As can be seen in Plate vi he excels
especially in depicting the human figure in action. Both the
large-scale drawings of events recorded in the chronicle, and the
extensive use of pictorial symbols, are foreign to the traditional
book illustration of Matthew's time. Among the former, battle-
scenes are prominent, and the care with which Matthew draws
in the dismembered corpses, as well as the liberality with which
he sprinkles them with blood, reveal a slightly macabre, perhaps
rather sordid, element in his art: he can be relied upon to make
the most of the martyrdom of a saint (Plate vm (a)} ; and he seems
to have enjoyed depicting the cannibalistic orgies of the Tartars. 1
Above all else, however, Matthew the artist is a careful observer,
and his drawings are unusually accurate in the representation of
details : we note, particularly, his ships, clothing, drinking vessels,
weapons, armour, bells, and various mechanical details. In the
work of many a medieval artist we can recognize animals of
various shapes and sizes but of no identifiable species : Matthew
has left us lifelike and easily recognizable drawings of a cat,
elephant, goat, tortoise, deer, camels, horses, lions, oxen and
boars. It is a pity that he did not illustrate a bestiary.

Of Matthew's influence on later artists, and of his place in
the history of art as a whole, I can say but little. Though individual
in style, and original in his illustration of a secular subject like
history, his art remains in most respects a characteristic product
of his age; and if it is true to say that the Chronica Major a was
the first illustrated record of contemporary events to be pro-
duced in medieval England, it is also true that Matthew's work
is in many ways typical of twelfth- and thirteenth-century
monastic art. His influence on subsequent developments appears
to have been slight, for the only artistic production of his which

1 For battles, see James (ed.), c Drawings of M. Paris ', Walpole Soc. xiv
(1925-6), nos. 24, 41 and 89. For the Tartars, see no. 86; see also Matthew's
detailed drawings of people being tortured (no. 34), and dying of the plague
(no. 84).

233

MATTHEW PARIS

seems to have been copied and widely diffused was the illus-
trated genealogical chronicle. 1 At St Albans he inherited the
artistic tradition and aptitude of men such as Walter of Colchester,
Richard the Painter, and the artists of the illustrated Apocalypses ;
and he seems to have been the last great member of that
flourishing school of monk artists.

1 Above, pp. 116-17.

234

CHAPTER XII

OTHER INTERESTS

I. CARTOGRAPHY

A THOUGH Richard Gough, in 1780, had published descrip-
tions and engravings of three maps of England from
manuscripts of Matthew Paris, 1 it was Madden who, in his
preface to volume three of the Historia Anglorum, first claimed
for Matthew an important place in the history of cartography: 2
he believed that the maps and itineraries in Matthew's historical
manuscripts were the work of Matthew himself. Hardy, however,
repudiated Madden's belief, for he thought that Matthew could
never have found time to produce this cartographical material
as well as his histories. 3 Hardy's objections seem to have
influenced later scholars. Thus Michelant and Raynaud thought
that Matthew was the author, though not perhaps the scribe
or artist, of the maps of Palestine, or at least their legends. 4
These two scholars produced an excellent edition of the legends
on three of the maps of Palestine, 5 but they confused these maps
with the itineraries from London to Apulia which precede them
in the manuscripts, and consequently believed that they were
printing the text of the eastern half of an itinerary from London
to Jerusalem, instead of only the legends of a map of Palestine.
This mistake was pointed out by Konrad Miller, who included
a full study of Matthew Paris' s cartographical work in his
important book on medieval world-maps. 6 He gave the first
accurate and full account of Matthew's maps and itineraries,
and thought that Matthew was probably the author of all this
material, but the scribe only of two of the maps of England.
Another German scholar, Friedrich Ludwig, made a detailed
study of Matthew's itinerary from London to Apulia, in which

1 British Topography, i, pp. 61-71 and Plates n-iv.

2 HA. in, pp. 1-lii; see also i, p. xlvii, and note 2.

3 Hardy, Descriptive Catalogue, in, pp. Ixxii-lxxiv.

4 Itineraires a Jerusalem, p. xxiii. 5 In A, B, and R.

6 Mappae Mundi. Die dltesten Welikarten, III, pp, 68-94.

235

MATTHEW PARIS

he analysed the length of each day's journey, and pointed out
a number of errors. 1 As a cartographer, Matthew Paris was
first introduced to English readers in the second volume of
C. R. Beazley's The Dawn of Modern Geography? Beazley gave
an account of Matthew's cartographical work, based, apparently,
on Miller's, and accompanied it with reproductions of some of
the maps and itineraries. He assumed that Matthew was the
author of this material, and supposed that the maps of England,
at least, were autograph. A great advance in the study of
Matthew's cartographical work was made in 1928, with the
publication in colour facsimile by the British Museum of the
four maps of England and Scotland previously attributed to
him. The Reverend H. Poole compiled a list of all the place-
names occurring in these maps, and he and J. P. Gilson together
wrote a short introduction to the facsimiles. On the important
question of the authorship of the maps, Gilson stated that they
were certainly executed under Matthew's supervision, and he
went on to say: 'It seems, in fact, possible that all four maps
are the work of the same hand, and also possible, though to me
by no means certain, that this is the hand of Matthew Paris
himself.' 3 The publication of these maps in facsimile must have
eased the task of Miss Mitchell, who published a detailed study
of them in the Geographical Journal for 1933, in which she
discussed at length their geography, construction, and place-
names. 4 She did not, however, come to any definite conclusion
as to their relationship, nor as to the identity of their scribe or
scribes. She calls these maps * the work of what may probably
be regarded as the earliest English school of cartography'. 5

Before we can embark on a description of this corpus of carto-
graphical material or an appraisement of Matthew's carto-
graphical work, we must decide whether or not it is correctly
attributed to him, and in what sense. Was he the author only,
and were the maps and itineraries executed by a skilled assistant?
Or was he merely a copyist? I have no hesitation in agreeing with
Madden that Matthew was at once author and artist. These maps

1 See below, p. 249. 2 See pp. 584-90 and 638-41.

3 Four Maps of Great Britain, p. 3.

4 * Early maps of Great Britain, I. The Matthew Paris maps *, Geog. Jour.

(1933), pp. 27 ff. 5 Mitchell, ibid. p. 27.

236

OTHER INTERESTS

and itineraries are only found in manuscripts closely associated
with him, and they form a prominent part of the preliminary
material which prefaces his historical manuscripts. Further-
more, though there are four separate versions of the map of
England and Scotland, three of the map of Palestine, and four
of the Apulian itinerary, not one of these can be shown to be
slavishly copied from another. All appear to be the work of one
person who, while he repeats these three works on a number of
occasions, introduces, on each occasion, variations, improve-
ments and alterations. No wonder that Miss Mitchell found
it hard to establish the relationship of the four maps of England
and Scotland. If the reader glances at the British Museum
facsimile edition of these maps, he will see that, though map D is
clearly an unfinished rough sketch, it contains a group of York-
shire place-names not on the other maps. He will note, too,
that while on map c Salisbury is placed south of St Albans, in
A it is due north; and that maps A and B, in spite of their general
similarities, each contain features not found in the other. The
same phenomenon occurs in the Palestine maps and the
itineraries. In the latter, the architectural details are quite
distinct in each itinerary (cf . Plates xn and xin) and the treat-
ment of Italy varies from one itinerary to another. From this
variation we may surely conclude that all this material is the
work of a single scribe-artist who was enough of a cartographer
to find it impossible to copy slavishly his own productions. 1

All these maps and itineraries are illustrated in a manner
identical in style and technique with that employed in the draw-
ings and paintings we have attributed to Matthew Paris : the
same artist is clearly at work in both. The architectural details,
for instance, as can be seen from Plates xiv and xv, are identical
with those found in Matthew's drawings; and the same is true
of the animals, birds, boats, and such-like, which are found in
the Palestine maps and the itineraries. Moreover the same use of
colour, in writing and decoration, is found in the cartographical

1 Copies of some of Matthew's cartographical productions have survived
(see below, p. 241). They differ strikingly in handwriting, style and technique
from Matthew's own maps and itineraries, yet their matter is closer to
that of their exemplars than that of Matthew's maps and itineraries to each
other.

237

MATTHEW PARIS

productions and in Matthew's manuscripts generally: we find
the same use of rubric, the same characteristic blue paragraph
markers, the same trick of enclosing inscriptions and notes with
a coloured rectangular line, often wavy, or looped at the corners. 1
Even more important is the fact that the handwriting on all the
maps and itineraries is undoubtedly that of Matthew Paris, and
contrasts strikingly with that of other scribes. The names, for
instance, which John of Wallingford added to the map of
England and Scotland given to him by Matthew Paris, 2 can be
distinguished at a glance from those written on to the same map
by Matthew Paris. I think that there can be no question that
the whole of this cartographical material is the work of Matthew,
as author, artist, and scribe. Such a combination of talents in
one person need occasion no surprise, for we know that Matthew
was a competent scribe, an author, and an excellent artist.

To what extent Matthew really was the effective author of
these maps and itineraries must unfortunately remain in doubt,
for no source survives of any of them, and we are free to
speculate to what degree he relied on existing material, and to
what extent he based his work on information collected by
himself. There is, however, some evidence to guide our specula-
tion on this important point. We know, for instance, that
Matthew's world-map is a reduced copy of an existing one, for
he tells us this himself. 3 On the other hand, in the maps of
England and Scotland, the outline varies so much from map to
map that it seems more likely that Matthew drew each map
more or less 'out of his head*, so to speak, than that he based
them on an existing map. All of them, however, are evidently
based on the same itinerary from Dover to Newcastle, 4 which
seems to have been the only written cartographical source which
Matthew used. If this is so, the England maps are almost
entirely his own work. There is less evidence as to the extent of
Matthew's authorship in the case of the itineraries and maps of
Palestine, but again it seems that he made an original contribu-
tion of his own of some importance. The obvious connexion

1 See Vaughan, 'Handwriting of M. Paris*, Trans, Camb. Bibl. Soc.
(i953), P- 383-

2 See below, p. 243.

3 See p. 247 below. 4 Seep. 244 below.

238

OTHER INTERESTS

between both of these and the Chronica Major a makes this clear.
The itinerary, for instance, is evidently connected with the
pope's offer of the Sicilian crown to Richard of Cornwall, which
is described in the Chronica Major a?- for one of the versions of
it has a legend describing this ; and Richard's landing at Trapani
in 1241, which is mentioned in the itinerary, is also mentioned
in the Chronica Major a? The information about the Tartars in
the legends of the Palestine map seems to be derived from that
given by Matthew in his Chronica Major a; 3 and a legend on one
of the maps mentions the ruler of Morocco Tamiral Mur-
melin' who is the subject of a long addition by Matthew to the
text of Roger Wendover's chronicle. 4 Two of the legends of the
Palestine map give information about Noah's Ark. 5 According
to one of these, Noah's Ark was in Armenia, where Joseph
Cartaphila, the Wandering Jew, lived, who had been baptized
by Ananias, who also baptized St Paul. The other also states
that Noah's Ark was in Armenia, among wild inaccessible
mountains, surrounded by a desert full of serpents, and adds
that Armenia marches with India. Now information identical
with this is found in two different places in the Chronica Major a :
in the annal for 1228 it is said that Ananias baptized St Paul
and Cartaphila, the latter of whom then lived in Armenia; and
in the annal for 1252 Matthew records the visit of some
Armenians to St Albans, who gave him the rest of the informa-
tion given in these two legends. 6 The only possible conclusion
from this seems to be that much, at any rate, of the information
given in the legends on the Palestine maps was gathered by
Matthew Paris himself.

There is a certain amount of evidence to show that Matthew
was interested in cartography, and that his maps are not mere
slavish copies of existing ones. In the margin of a St Albans
historical manuscript, for instance, next to an account of the
size of England and its bishoprics, he notes: 7 'Hie est discordia

1 v, pp. 346-7. 2 iv, pp. 144 and 145.

3 Itineraires a Jerusalem, edd. Michelant and Raynaud, pp. 125-6; CM.
iv, p. 77, and v, p. 341.

4 Itineraires a Jerusalem, p. 138; and CM. n, pp. 559 ff.

5 Itineraires a Jerusalem, p. 126.

6 CM. m, p. 163; and v, p. 341.

7 British Museum Royal MS. 13 D v, L 152 a.

239

MATTHEW PARIS

inter hoc et Gildam de dimensione Anglie. Respice in principio
Gilde/ In his map of England and Scotland Matthew follows
this account in preference to Gildas, and copies out the part of
it describing the size of Great Britain to give his map a rough
scale. 1 His interest in cartography is shown, too, in some notes
on the last fly-leaf of A, which James deciphered thus : 2

Circa Carleolum patria est dicta Aluedele.

Hie versus austrum Cocormue villa patria complem. [sic]

Aqua Dorecte et currit (?) per Cocormue.

Other notes, in part illegible, have been written by Matthew
on a fly-leaf of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, MS. 2, on the
same leaf as his map of Palestine. 3 They seem to show him in
the very act of collecting cartographical material, and, since
they have never been published, I give them here, in so far as
I have been able to decipher them:

Messana propinquior est terre sancte quam Brundusium. Navi-
gantibus a Massilia in terrain sanctam est Messana media [ui]a.
Marsilia est contermina Hyspanie.

Siciliam, Apuliam, Calabriam, . . . que ducat usque ad Alpes,
Campaniam, Romam cum Romania, Vallem [Spoleti?], Vallem
Anconie, Venetiam, Dalmatiam.

In Arabia est Ydumea ubi crescit ... balsam. [S]aba fflumen?]
Sabea patria. . . .media contermine sunt Indie. Parthia, id est
Tur[c]hia.

PamfirfTlal T ,
A . J Y Idem.
Armenia J

Rex Aragonie adeptus est super sarracenos [in] hispania xxx dietas.
Katalonia est patria contermina prouincie Vallis Moriane. Sabaudia.

Tharsus est archiepiscopatus prope Antiochiam ubi natus est
sanctus Paulus, et est in cilia Armenie minoris. In parte boreali est
Ruscia et [Rjumania et B . . lakania, et superius uersus Anthiokiam
est Yconium.

[Caba?] est [insula?] prope Januam ubi optimi sunt ancipitres.

Inter Ciprim et Aeon comp. . .per mare ccc leuce.

No one of Matthew's cartographical productions is identical
with another, and for this reason it seems worth while to give here

1 He copied this memorandum out again on one of the preliminary leaves
of the Abbreviatio Chronicorum, f. i b.

2 James, Catalogue of C.C.C.C. MSS. i, p. 53.

3 See pp. 245-7 below for this map.

240

OTHER INTERESTS

a complete list of them all. In this list I have prefixed each map
with the letter used for it in previous editions.

(1) Maps of England and Scotland. 1

A. British Museum, Cotton MS. Claudius D vi (AC), f. 8b
(now bound separately).

B. Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. i6(5), f. vb
(incomplete).

c. British Museum Cotton MS. Julius D vii, ff. 5ob~53 (now
bound separately with map A).

D. British Museum Royal MS. 14 C vii (R\ f. 5b.

To these we should add the Scema Britannic on f. i86b of
British Museum Cotton MS. Nero D i (LA), a sketch-map of
the main Roman roads. 2

(2) Maps of Palestine. 3

A. British Museum Royal MS. 14 C vii (R), ff. 4b~5a.

c. Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 16 (), ff. iib
and va (incomplete).

D. Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 26 (A), ff. iiib-
iva.

B, of Michelant, is a post-medieval copy of A. Another
copy exists in British Museum Cotton MS. Tiberius Evi,
ff. 3 b~4a, badly damaged by fire, and probably copied from D.

To these we must add the map of Palestine in Corpus Christi
College, Oxford, MS. 2, ff. 2b-i a. 4

(3) World-map.

Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 26, p. 284. 5
A medieval copy of this map exists in British Museum
Cotton MS. Nero D v, f . i b. 6

1 Excellently reproduced in colour in Four Maps of Great Britain, edited
by J. P. Gilson.

2 Engraved by Miller, Mappae Mundi. Die dltesten Weltkarten, in, p. 83.

3 The legends of these maps are printed in Itiner air esd Jerusalem, pp. 125 ff.
Map A is reproduced in Beazley, Dawn of Modern Geography, n, facing p. 590;
part of c (f. iib) in James, * Drawings of M. Paris', Walpole Soc. xiv (1925-
6), no. 26 ; and D is reproduced below as Plate xvi.

4 Reproduced below for the first time as Plate xvii.

5 - Reproduced in Miller, Mappae Mundi. Die dltesten Weltkarten, m, p. 71.
6 Reproduced in Beazley, Dawn of Modern Geography, n, facing p. 586.

16 241 VHP

MATTHEW PARIS

(4) Itineraries from London to Apulia*

1. British Museum Royal MS. 14 C vii (R), ff. 2a-4a.

2. British Museum Cotton MS. Nero Di(LA),&.

3. Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 26 (A), S. ia-
iiia.

4. Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS. 16 (J3), f. iia
(incomplete).

This mass of material is for the most part arranged systemati-
cally, each volume of the Chronica Major a having been originally
prefaced with, among other preliminary matter, a copy of the
itinerary, the map of Palestine, and the map of England and
Scotland, in that order. The present arrangement of the carto-
graphical material in these manuscripts is as follows :

Itinerary Palestine England

Vol. I (A) i-iiia iiib-iva none

VoL H <*> iia (fra S m '> iib ~ Va vb

Vol. m CR) 2a- 4 a

Little need be said here about Matthew's four maps of
England and Scotland, for they have been reproduced admirably
in facsimile, and discussed at length by Miss Mitchell. 2 They
are the earliest detailed maps of England in existence. Of their
date nothing certain can be ascertained, though the hand-
writing shows that they were executed fairly late in Matthew's
life, probably after c. 1245. The best of these maps is that pre-
facing the Abbreviatio Chronicorum (A). That in B (B) is also
excellent, but unfortunately only about half of it survives. In
both these maps the sea is coloured green and the rivers blue,
and many of the legends are written in red, with blue paragraph
markers. Map A is drawn in an oblong frame, round the outside
of which inscriptions indicate the nearest land lying opposite
each quarter of the map. The map in R (D) is only an outline
sketch, though the sea has been coloured in, and is much less
accurate in shape than maps A and B. It seems to have been
either an early attempt soon abandoned, or else a late, very

1 The only good modern reproduction of any of these seems to be that of
f. 4a of no. i in Beazley, Dawn of Modern Geography, n, facing p. 588. The
first pages of nos. i and 3 are reproduced below, Plates xn and xin. The text
is printed in Miller, Mappae Mundi. Die dltesten Weltkarten, in, pp. 85-90.

2 See above, p. 236.

242

OTHER INTERESTS

rough copy, which was never completed. It has few close
similarities with the other maps, all of which resemble each
other more or less closely. The map in British Museum Cotton
MS. Julius D vii (c) is rather similar to map B, and, since it was
never finished by Matthew Paris, may have been a first draft
which he later abandoned. The main route to the north is dis-
placed to the east, as in map B ; but, whereas in map c the space
thus provided is left blank, in map B it is filled with a legend
describing the size of England, evidently intended to serve as
a rough scale. Map c has recently been taken out of the manu-
script in which it was bound, and preserved in a separate cover
with map A. Its early history is interesting. British Museum
Cotton MS. Julius D vii is a small manuscript containing the
historical collections of John of Wallingford, infirmarer of
St Albans, and a friend of Matthew Paris. Matthew must have
given map c to John of Wallingford while it was still unfinished,
unless John rescued it from the scriptorium wastepaper-basket,
for many of the names on it have been written by John and not
by Matthew. Although this map is on a folio-size leaf, John
decided to incorporate it into his little historical volume, which un-
fortunately entailed folding it into four and cutting through two of
the folds. Later John filled in the four pages provided by the blank
verso of the map with some miscellaneous material of his own. 1
Matthew's maps of England and Scotland are outstanding
among early medieval attempts at cartography, in that they
represent a genuine attempt at a map, rather than a mere
diagrammatical representation. They are orientated with north
at the top, unlike most early medieval maps, and the four points
of the compass were written in at the sides, top and bottom. 2
We have seen that one of them has been provided with an
attempt at a scale. That Matthew was conscious of the im-
portance of scale is shown by a note on map D, to the effect that,
if the page allowed it, the whole map should have been longer. 3
In these maps, too, we find examples of the use of conventional
signs for mountains, trees and towns, which seem to be among
the earliest known. Matthew, of course, was perfectly well

1 See Vaughan, 'Handwriting of M. Paris', Trans. Camb. Bibl. Soc. I
(i953)> P- 382, note 9. 2 Not all of these survive.

3 ' Si pagina pateretur, hec totalis insula longior esse deberet.'

243

16-2

MATTHEW PARIS

acquainted with this idea, for, as we have seen, he used a number
of conventional signs in the margins of his chronicles. All four
maps of England and Scotland are based on an itinerary from
Dover to Newcastle, which runs through Canterbury, Rochester,
London, St Albans, Dunstable, Northampton, Leicester, Belvoir,
Newark, Blyth, Doncaster, Pontefract, Boroughbridge, North-
allerton and Durham, and which, on all the maps, runs north-
south, so that Dover, Canterbury and Rochester are marked due
south of London. This is the one major error in the maps, and
it has caused a serious displacement of much of the south of
England. Norfolk and Suffolk fill up the south-east corner of
the map ; Kent is displaced due south of London ; Sussex south-
west of London; Essex due west; and, in map A, Wiltshire is
inserted north of London, and even of Northampton. In map
c John of Wallingford has shown more sense, for he marks
Wiltshire roughly in the right place, south-west of London.
Of the relative positions of Devon, Somerset and Dorset
Matthew evidently knew little, but Cornwall is correctly marked
in the south-western extremity of the island. Some idea of the
amount of detail in these maps is afforded by the 250 names
listed in the British Museum edition. As we should expect,
St Albans is placed conspicuously on all four maps, in a central
position due north of London. The abbey's five chief cells are
also marked: Tynemouth, Belvoir, Binham, Wymondham and
Wallingford.

The Scema Britannie in the Liber Additamentorum need not
detain us long. It is a rough outline sketch of England and
Scotland showing the four main Roman roads, quite wrongly
intersecting at Dunstable. They are Icknield Street, the Fosse
Way, Ermine Street and Watling Street. This map is orientated
with west at the top, and Matthew has given the rough bearings
of each of the four roads. Thus, Icknield Street is said to lead
'ab oriente in occidentem'; the Fosse Way, "a zephiro australi
in eurum septentrionalem', and so on.

Three of Matthew's maps of Palestine are very similar, and

their legends have been printed in full. 1 Each takes up an

opening in one of the three volumes of the Chronica Majora.

That in 5, besides surviving only in part, is on the whole rougher

1 See above, p. 241 note 3.

244

OTHER INTERESTS

and less full than either of the others, both of which are more
carefully executed and ornamented in colour. The map in A
is reproduced below as Plate xvi. The editors of the legends
of these maps thought that the map in R represented an early
version, and those in A and B a later one. None of these
maps is copied directly from another, and, as with the maps
of England, each displays some features peculiar to itself.
Evidence of their date is scanty, but one of the legends of the
map in A gives some information which Matthew obtained from
the Armenians who visited St Albans in 1252, which shows that
it was executed in or after that year; 1 and the other two maps
were probably executed at about the same time. From the
cartographical point of view, the map of Palestine represented
in these three versions is of little interest. It seems to have been
based on the traditional world-maps, and, like them, lacks any
true sense of proportion or scale. An inordinate amount of
space is taken up with descriptive legends of little or no carto-
graphical importance, and with drawings of boats, cities, animals,
and so on. In accordance with traditional usage, the map is
orientated with east at the top. Only twenty-seven towns are
marked, and natural features are represented only by the Dead
Sea, the rivers Jordan and Farfar, the Caspian mountains, and
the mountains of Lebanon. Although the proportion of the
map has been ruined by the large-scale plan of Acre, this is an
interesting feature in itself, since a number of the more im-
portant buildings are individually marked.

Besides these three maps of Palestine, notable mainly for
their descriptive legends and artistic features, Matthew executed
a fourth map quite different from them, and of much greater
cartographical interest, which is reproduced here for the first
time as Plate xvn. It occupies part of one side of a parchment
bifolium bound at the beginning of Corpus Christi College,
Oxford, MS. 2, a St Albans Bible partly executed by Matthew
Paris. 2 This map is not very carefully finished, and some of it is
sketched in very roughly. The only colouring consists in a few

1 See p. 239 above.

2 See Vaughan, ' Handwriting of M. Paris', Trans. Camb. Bibliog. Soc. I
(1953), p. 391, where I have wrongly attributed only a part of the map of
Palestine to Matthew.

245

MATTHEW PARIS

words written in rubric. The writing is rough and cursive, and
the carefully executed drawings of towns which form so con-
spicuous a feature of the itineraries and other maps of Palestine
are almost entirely lacking. In its general character, this map is
more similar to the maps of England and Scotland than to the
other maps of Palestine, North is placed at the top of the page,
and an attempt at a correct representation of proportion has been
made, in contrast to the more diagrammatic approach of the
other Palestine maps. There are no long descriptive legends or
elaborate drawings to spoil the cartographical qualities of this
map. The coast, marked by a wavy black line on the extreme
left of the page, extends from Antioch and its port, St Symeon,
at the top, to Alexandria and Cairo at the bottom. The different
territories are clearly marked with letters spaced out across the
page: 'Terra Antiochie', 'Armenia', 'Terra Senis de Monte',
'Terra Sirie', 'Terra Egypti', and 'Terra Soldani Babilonie'.
A number of natural features are marked, such as mountains,
rivers, lakes, and springs. The Nile is wrongly called the Tigris,
and is made to flow east-west, but the relative positions of the
Sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea are roughly correct, and the
Jordan is shown joining them. Other natural features recorded
are palm trees, forests, and a plain, the 'planicies Fabe' ; and it is
interesting to find that the crocodiles of the Nile, the salt of the
Dead Sea, and the lions of the 'foresta de Arches' are all noted.
A number of biblical features, too, are marked, such as the tomb
of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the ditch where Adam was
created, and the place where the wood of the Cross grew. The
most valuable feature of this map, however, is the large number
of inhabited places marked on it. There are nearly sixty in all,
and in nearly every case something of the nature of the settle-
ment is indicated by the word episcopatus, cwitas, monasterium,
or castrum (usually the single letter C). To this mass of informa-
tion Matthew has added the distances in days' journeys between
many of the coastal settlements; and the route to Jerusalem is
also marked. Finally, a number of notes give additional informa-
tion about the relative positions of various places, and sometimes
even correct the map. Thus, whereas on the map Damascus is
placed on the river Jordan, due north of the Sea of Galilee,
a note correctly states that in fact Damascus is not on the Jordan,

246

OTHER INTERESTS

and that the headwaters of that river are much nearer the coast
than Damascus. 1 Although this map contains a number of
errors and has many shortcomings, it is probably the most
detailed and important of all the earlier medieval maps of
Palestine, though it seems to have entirely escaped the notice
of historians of cartography; and, even if Matthew's share of
responsibility in it must remain in doubt, we can at least be
thankful to him for preserving it for us.

Matthew's world-map is the least interesting of his carto-
graphical productions. It is traditional in form, and it makes
no advance on the many earlier medieval world-maps. On it,
however, Matthew has written an inscription of great interest,
which reads as follows : 2 ' This is a reduced copy of the world-
maps of Master Robert Melkeley and Waltham [Abbey]. The
king's world-map, which is in his chamber at Westminster, is
most accurately copied in Matthew Paris's Ordinal.' Unfor-
tunately Matthew's Ordinal is not now known to exist. He
does not seem to have thought very highly of the existing
world-map, for it is not executed with especial care, and part of
the page on which it is drawn has been used for his rough notes.

The last of Matthew's cartographical productions is the
famous itinerary from London to Apulia, of which four auto-
graph copies are known to exist. I have listed these on p. 242
above, and shall use the numbers used there in reference to
them. This work was formerly thought to be an itinerary from
London to Jerusalem, but Miller showed that in fact it extended
only to the south of Italy, and that the map of Palestine,
showing Jerusalem, which follows it in three of the manuscripts,
is a separate work. 3 The word 'Apulia' has been rather loosely
used in reference to this work, for the itinerary proper seems
to have ended at Rome. The existing versions, however, vary so
much towards the end that no single title can accurately describe
them all. These variations may be summarized as follows:

(i) The itinerary proper ends with Rome ' terminus itineris
multorum' which is followed by a diagram or map of southern

1 'Istud propinquius est mari, nee contingit Damascum fluuius [sc.
Jordanus].'

2 HA. in, p. H, note i.

3 Miller, Mappae MundL Die dltesten Weltkarten, in, p. 84.

247

MATTHEW PARIS

Italy, called by Matthew Apulia. To this are added (a) a diagram
of Sicily, and (b) a plan of Rome; (a) and (b) are on separate
slips of parchment stuck to the edges of the leaf.

(2) The itinerary ends at Rome, but the diagram of Apulia
which follows has been rearranged in a single column as if it
formed part of the itinerary.

(3) The itinerary proper ends with Siena, and this is followed
by a group of towns in central Italy arranged roughly in two
columns: Arezzo, Viterbo, Sutri; and Perugia, Assisi, Spoleto.
After these comes the diagram of Apulia, and then the plans of
Sicily and Rome fixed to the edges of the leaf.

(4) A simplified version of no. i which has lost its plans of
Sicily and Rome.

I have already mentioned the fact that this itinerary seems to
be connected with the papal offer of the Sicilian crown to Richard
of Cornwall in I252. 1 No. i has the inscription: 2 'Earl Richard,
brother of the king of England, was offered the crown of all this
country [that is, Apulia] .... This was in the time of Pope
Innocent IV, who made him the offer in the year of grace 1253.'
This proposal is described in the Chronica Majora, and it does
seem likely that the itinerary was made in connexion with it.
The words of the inscription, ' This was in the time of Pope
Innocent IV, seem to show that itinerary no. i, at any rate, was
executed after Innocent's death in 1254; and it seems probable
that both the itineraries and the maps of Palestine which follow
them date from after c. 1252. The striking variations between
the four versions of this itinerary bear out the theory outlined
above, that Matthew himself was a cartographer, and that they
are not mere copies of an existing work. We are, unfortunately,
entirely ignorant as to the nature of their source material, but it
does not seem unreasonable to suggest that Matthew compiled
them from information provided by contemporary travellers
to Rome, of whom we know there were many among his
acquaintances.

The two most detailed and finished versions of Matthew's
Apulian itinerary are nos. i and 3 of our list, and the first page
of each is illustrated in Plates xir and xm. No. 2 seems to

1 Above, p. 239.

2 Printed in Miller, Mappae MundL Die altesten Weltkarten, in, p. 89.

248

OTHER INTERESTS

derive from these, for in it Matthew has tried to convert the
diagram of Apulia into a continuation of the itinerary beyond
Rome. The German scholar, Ludwig, made a detailed study of
Matthew's itinerary, and compiled a useful table giving the
towns on the main route with the distances between them, as
well as Matthew's distances in days 5 journeys. 1 He showed that,
while Matthew's distances between the places on the main route
are mostly correct, those of the side-routes, several of which are
marked, are often wildly wrong. He found that the average day's
journey was 35 km., but that days' journeys of up to 60 km.
occurred occasionally. He pointed out that a number of quite
serious mistakes occur in the itinerary : the river Po, for instance,
is in the wrong place, and Valence is wrongly marked between
Lyons and Vienne. For the most part, Matthew's itinerary is
a list of names of towns in French, with the word 'Jurnee'
written vertically between them. They are arranged in vertical
columns, and the itinerary begins in the bottom left-hand corner
of the first page, and runs up each column. In the strict sense
of the word, it is not an itinerary at all, for, especially in Italy
and in no. 3, Matthew seems to have included all the towns he
knew of, without any reference to an actual itinerary. The towns
are indicated by thumbnail sketches of architectural features in
Matthew's characteristic fashion, showing a piece of wall and
a tower or two, and perhaps a spire. Sometimes there is more
information than this. Thus, the gates and some of the chief
buildings of London are marked. Occasionally, minute drawings
are to be found. At Pontremoli, for instance, two pine trees
are drawn in, and marked 'pin'; and a carefully drawn tortoise
is labelled 'tortue'. At Sutri, in no. i, a stork sits on a tower,
and, in no. 3, excellent little drawings of a man with a mule,
and a goat, decorate the neighbourhood of Arezzo.

The map of southern Italy which follows, or forms part of,
the itinerary is of no cartographical importance, and Matthew's
information was evidently too scanty for him to do more than
make a diagram, in which most of the important towns are
marked with little or no relation to their true position. Southern
Italy itself is wrongly placed in relation to the itinerary; for r

1 Ludwig, Untersuchungen iiber die Reise- und Marschgeschwindigkeit im XII.
und XIII. Jahrhundert, pp. 122-9.

249

MATTHEW PARIS

whereas in the itinerary south is at the top of the page and north
at the bottom, in the map of southern Italy the west coast, with
Naples and Salerno on it, is placed at the top. Moreover,
Barletta, Trani, Bari, Brindisi and Otranto are shown along
a coastline vertical to the page and down the left-hand side of
the map, at right angles to the west coast along the top of the
page. Both coastlines are shown more or less straight, and no
idea is given of the outline of southern Italy. The same is true
of the map or diagram of Sicily, which shows the island in the
form of a triangle lying, apparently, more or less opposite Naples.
Matthew's interest in cartography and his skill at drawing
maps are linked closely to his historical and artistic activities,
and to his avid desire to collect and record information of every
kind. It is not therefore surprising that a man of his talents and
curiosity should have added this body of cartographical and
geographical material to his historical manuscripts. His maps
of England and Scotland and the Oxford map of Palestine are
landmarks of the first importance in the history of cartography;
and the itinerary, too, is interesting and valuable. As we have
seen, it is not possible to ascertain exactly the extent of Matthew's
own contribution to this material, but, even if, as seems unlikely,
this was small, we owe its preservation to him, and for this alone
he deserves an important place in the history of medieval
cartography.

II. HERALDRY

When, in the text of Matthew's chronicles, mention is made of
a battle or other event, the shields of the persons concerned are
often painted in the margin of the manuscript; and when the
death of a knight is recorded, his shield is inserted reversed.
There are ninety-five shields in the margins of ./?; seventy-eight
in 5; fourteen in A; six in the Abbreviatio Chronicorum\ and
four in the Chetham manuscript of the Flares Historiarum.
Moreover, in the Liber Additamentorum there is a leaf with some
fifty shields painted in colour, as well as twenty-five uncoloured;
and another page in the same manuscript has twenty-seven
shields roughly tricked and blazoned. Sir Frederick Madden
thought that all these shields were the work of Matthew Paris,
and he included a knowledge of heraldry among Matthew's

250

OTHER INTERESTS

attainments. 1 Hardy, however, doubted if the shields were
drawn by Matthew; and Luard thought it possible that they
were designed by another hand. 2 I have already put forward
evidence to show that Matthew himself executed the shields in
the margins of the historical manuscripts; 3 and the reader can
corroborate this by examining Plate xvm, 4 where he will see that
the heraldic animals of these shields are identical with those in the
drawings and paintings attributed to Matthew Paris. Madden,
then, was right in attributing the shields to Matthew Paris, but
was he also right in attributing to him a knowledge of heraldry?
That Matthew was not a mere artist carrying out someone else's
instructions seems to be indicated by the fact that nearly all the
shields in the Liber Additamentorum y including those only drawn
in trick, are blazoned in his own handwriting, for this shows
that he understood and used heraldic terminology. The same
thing is found in the Chronica Majora. On f. i^b of B, for
instance, Matthew's own plummet notes survive, describing the
shields painted in the margin ; and this, I think, shows that he
painted these shields on the basis of his own descriptions, and
not directly from some roll of arms. His statements, too, some-
times reflect his interest in heraldry. In the Historia Anglorum,
for instance, he says in the margin of one leaf that f many other
French nobles fell, whose names and shields are unknown to me
[nobis] ' ; 5 and in the margin of another he explains that half of
Otto's shield bore the imperial arms, and the other half those of
the kings of England. 6 The very scope and variety, too, of
Matthew's heraldic work indicates his interest in the subject,
and makes it clear that he knew something about it, and was
more than a mere heraldic copyist.

The relationship of the different sets of shields in Matthew's
manuscripts is very hard to determine. On f. iyob of the
Liber Additamentorum (Plate xix) there are forty-two shields
in full colour arranged in rows of six, with the names of their
owners and the blazons written above each shield. Three other
shields have been added in the margins, two of which are in

1 HA. m, pp. xlix-1.

2 Hardy, Descriptive Catalogue, m, p. Ixxii; and CM. vi, p. 469.

3 Above, pp. 211-16 and Plates iv and v.

4 Cf. also Plate x (a).

5 HA. in, p. 84 note i. 6 HA. n, p. 65.

251

MATTHEW PARIS

colour. 1 These shields were probably copied by Matthew from
a roll of arms, since they are arranged in a definite order: King
Henry III comes first, followed by his brother the earl of Cornwall,
the other earls, and then a number of knights. On the recto of this
leaf the shields are arranged in rows of five in no particular order,
and only the first four are completed, the rest being left either
partly coloured, or entirely blank. Five partly coloured shields
have been added in the margin of the leaf, and the three shields
in the lower margin are also later additions. 1 There is good
reason to believe that these shields were executed in 1244, an d>
if this is so, the same is no doubt true of the shields on the verso.
The shields drawn in trick and blazoned on f. 198 are mostly
repeated on f. 170, but they are not directly copied thence.
These shields in the Liber Additamentomm do not form a col-
lection designed to provide exemplars for the heraldic illustra-
tion in the historical manuscripts, for, while thirty-five of the
shields in the Liber Additamentorum do not occur in the other
manuscripts, there are thirty-five shields in the Chronica Major a
which are not in the Liber Additamentorum. Nor have the shields
in the Historia Anglorum been directly copied from those in the
Chronica, for seventeen of them are peculiar to the Historia
Anglorum. On the other hand, all these shields must derive
from a common source, whether this was a roll of arms in
Matthew's possession, or one which he borrowed, or a collection
of paintings and blazons made by himself at different times.

Matthew's love of heraldry seems to have been partly artistic
he evidently appreciated the pictorial value of coloured shields
and partly historical. He collected shields in much the same
way as he collected documents, and, just as he tampered with
his documentary material, so he seems to have tampered with
his heraldic material, for he provides or invents coats of arms for
William the Conqueror and Cnut. 2 Apart from occasional
errors his shields are accurate, and are usually ascribed to
individuals rather than to families. In the history of heraldry-
Matthew's work is of the utmost importance, for he was a

1 For these shields, see von Pusikan (O. Goschen), 'Wappen aus den
Werken des Matthias von Paris', Vierteljahrschrift fur Heraldik, Sphragistik
und Genealogie, 11, where they are described and reproduced.

2 See James, 'Drawings of M. Paris*, Walpole Soc. xiv (1925-6), no. 16;
and Plate xvm (d) below.

252

OTHER INTERESTS

pioneer in the subject, and his shields take the first place in
A. R. Wagner's Catalogue of English Medieval Rolls of Arms.
The earliest actual roll of arms catalogued by Wagner is
Glover's roll, the lost original of which is thought to have been
executed c. 1255, at a ti me when the bulk of Matthew's shields
had already been painted. Glover's roll probably contained
214 shields: Matthew gives us some 130, including a number of
Continental shields, the presence of which reflects the breadth
of his interests, and makes him important as a source for Conti-
nental, as well as English, heraldry. In any estimate of him,
then, his heraldic work must be given a place of importance,
both on account of its utility and significance for historians, and
because of its originality, for Matthew seems to have been one of
the first to conceive the idea of making a collection of coats of arms .
The identification and cataloguing of Matthew's shields was
undertaken by that careful scholar, H. R. Luard, and he printed
a complete list of all the shields occurring in Matthew's manu-
scripts, with the exception of the four in the Floras Historiarum,
as an appendix to the sixth volume of his edition of the Chronica
Major a. A year before the appearance of this, in 1881, Major
Goschen, writing under the pseudonym von Pusikan, published
a detailed account of the shields on f. 170 of the Liber Addita-
mentorum, accompanied by a colour reproduction of this leaf.
The only other detailed study of Matthew's shields was pub-
lished in 1909 by F. Hauptmann, who carefully described all the
shields in the Historia Anglorum and the Abbreviatio Chroni-
corum, and discussed them at length. 1 It is to be hoped that,
some day, this remarkable collection of shields will be repro-
duced in full colour and with an adequate commentary, so as to
collect them together in one volume and do full justice to their
artistic and heraldic merit.

III. NATURAL SCIENCE

We have already discussed Matthew's concern with natural
history and natural phenomena of all kinds in connexion with
the Chronica Major a? but certain aspects of his interest in these

1 Hauptmann, 'Die Wappen in der Historia Minor des M. Parisiensis \
Jahrbuch der K.K. Heraldischen Gesellschaft, XIX (1909).

2 See above, pp. 144-5 J see also HA. in, pp. xlvi-xlvii.

253

MATTHEW PARIS

and similar things merit separate discussion here. I use the
word 'science 1 in a very loose sense, which includes, for the
purposes of this chapter, both astrology and fortune-telling. To
begin, however, with the more authentic sciences, we ought to
note that Matthew's interest in meteorology is by no means
limited to the pages of his chronicles. In the Liber Addita-
mentorum the greater part of a page (f. 185 a) is devoted to an
elaborate drawing, with many annotations, of a parhelion seen
in the sky on 8 April 1233. Matthew tells us that an eyewitness
made a drawing of it while it was still visible, and his drawing is
evidently based on this one. Although the drawing and notes
leave no doubt as to the kind of phenomenon observed, neither
is in fact accurate, and either the observer or Matthew seems to
have been confused by the number and relationship of the suns
and their haloes. It is interesting to find that the points of the
compass are marked on this drawing, east being placed at the
top of the page.

On two occasions Matthew inserts a diagram of an eclipse of
the sun in the margins of his chronicles; in one of these the
earth, moon and sun are shown in a straight line; and, in the
other, the moon is shown superimposed on the sun. 1 These
diagrams are similar to some of those executed by Matthew in
a manuscript which affords further proof of his interest in these
matters. This is Part II of manuscript no. 385 in the library
of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, a copy of William of
Conches' s Dragmaticon Philosophiae which Matthew illustrated
with a series of twenty-three diagrams, some of which are
reproduced in Plate xx. 2 William of Conches (1080-1145) was
a well-known philosopher and teacher at Chartres, and this work
takes the form of a dialogue on * natural substances', during the

1 B, f. 75 b, andjR, f. i8ia.

2 See also Plate xiv (e). When I first examined this manuscript, I attri-
buted these diagrams to Matthew Paris on grounds of style and handwriting
alone, but there is some more convincing evidence which connects it very
closely with Matthew. For instance, on p. in the couplet from Henry of
Avranches's poem on the dedication of Salisbury Cathedral, written in the
lower margin (not by Matthew himself), is misquoted in the same words as by
Matthew in the Chronica Majora, m, pp. 189-90 (and see p. 189, note 5).
Some verses on the winds, too, are written in the lower margin of p. 151
as well as by Matthew himself in LA (CM. vi, p. 465). See Vaughan,
'Handwriting of M. Paris*, Trans. Camb. Bibliog. Soc. I (1953), pp. 382-3.

254

OTHER INTERESTS

course of which various subjects, such as demons, angels, the
four elements, the world, astronomy, creation, animal life, the
seasons, meteorology, and human biology, are discussed; and
it was illustrated with a number of figures. 1 Many illustrated
manuscripts of this work have survived, and Matthew's differs
in no important respect from the others, though his diagrams are
of much more artistic merit. Those reproduced in Plate xx
illustrate (a) the solar system, (b) the phases of the moon, (c) an
eclipse of the moon, (d) the twelve winds; (e) is a schematic
world-map. The diagram reproduced as Plate xiv (e) shows the
path of the sun. Matthew Paris was not a professional artist,
and his illustration of this manuscript is therefore important for
the light it throws on his scientific interests. The fact that one
of the diagrams in it is a wind rose is significant, for his manu-
scripts contain several of these drawn by himself. Professor
Taylor made a special study of the two wind roses drawn by
Matthew in the Liber Additamentorum. 2 One of these is the
traditional twelve-ray rose represented in Plate xx (d), which
came down to the Middle Ages from classical antiquity. It is
headed by Matthew with the words, c Secundum magistrum
Ely am de Derham', which show that it is a copy of a wind rose
designed by Elias of Dereham, the canon of Salisbury who died in
1245. It is very like another twelve-ray diagram copied by John
of Wallingf ord into his manuscript of miscellaneous matter with
the heading: 3 'Secundum Robertum Grosseteste episcopum
Lincolniensem'. Taylor noticed that the other wind rose in the
Liber Additamentorum was very different from these, and of
much greater interest, for in it the circle is divided into sixteen
rays instead of twelve, in accordance with the practice of the
seamen of Matthew's day. 4 This rose is certainly Matthew's own
work, and below it he has written out some mnemonic verses
on the winds composed by himself. He made two other versions
of this sixteen-ray wind rose, which are to be found among the
preliminary matter of the first two volumes of the Chronica

1 It was edited by W. Gratarolus in 1567. For the MSS., see Wilmart,
'Analecta reginensia', Studi e Testi, Lix (1933), p. 263, note 2.

2 'The De ventis of Matthew Paris', Imago Mundi, n (i93?) PP-
They are on f. 184 a and b of the Liber Additamentorum.

3 British Museum Cotton MS. Julius D vii, f. sib.

4 Taylor, ' The De ventis of Matthew Paris', loc. tit. p. 23.

255

MATTHEW PARIS

Major a-, 1 and in each of them Matthew has added, to the Latin
names of the sixteen wind directions, the vernacular equivalents
which are still in use today. Although he himself was probably
not responsible for first bringing the classical twelve-ray wind
rose up to date by dividing the horizon into sixteen parts, his
diagram seems to be the earliest surviving example of this
important modification.

Besides astronomy and meteorology, Matthew interested him-
self in natural history, and, in particular, in the natural history
of the elephant. In February I255 2 Louis IX presented an
elephant to Henry III. This animal was brought across the
Channel by John Gouch, and was housed at the Tower in a
special elephant-house, forty feet long and twenty feet broad.
Matthew records this gift in his Chronica Major a^ and he wrote
a short tract on the elephant to accompany the drawings which
he made from life ('ipso elephante exemplariter assistente'),
and which he inserted into two of his manuscripts. 3 The
accuracy of these drawings can be judged from Plate xxi (a),
where one of them is reproduced. The rather wooden appearance
of the beast seems partly due to Matthew's belief, expressed in
the tract accompanying the drawings and shared by his con-
temporaries, that elephants had no joints in their legs. In the
drawing reproduced here the magister bestie has been drawn in,
standing under the animal's head, in order to give an idea of its
size, for Matthew says : * From the size of the man drawn here
one can get an idea of the size of the beast/ The short tract on
the elephant written by Matthew, which accompanies these
drawings, is incomplete in each of the manuscripts, and the two
versions of it differ considerably. There is also a third version
which was copied from that in the Liber Additamentorum by
John of Wallingford, who also made a rather poor copy of
Matthew's drawing. 4 This particular elephant is described as
being ten years old, and ten feet high, and Matthew goes on to
explain, presumably on the basis of his own observations, that

1 A, f. vb, and B 9 f. ib.

3 For what follows, see also Madden's article in Brayley, Graphic and
Historical Illustrator, pp. 3356.

3 CM. v, p. 489. For the tract and drawings, see B, ff. iva~vb and the
Liber Additamentorum, f. i68b and attached slip.

4 British Museum Cotton MS. Julius D vii, ff. H4a-ii5a.

256

OTHER INTERESTS

the elephant is greyish-black in colour and, unlike other animals,
has no fur; that it is ponderous and robust, and indeed an
altogether prodigious and monstrous animal. It uses its trunk
for obtaining food and drink; has small eyes in the upper part
of its head; and its skin is rough and very hard. So much for
observation: the rest of the tract is compiled from the Bible,
Bernard Sylvester, Virgil, Horace, and the medieval bestiary.
From the latter Matthew took his account of the method of
trapping elephants. Since they have no joints in their legs, they
cannot get up once they have fallen to the ground, and are forced
therefore to sleep reclining against a tree. All the huntsman has
to do is to saw partly through the trunks of the trees used by
the elephants for this purpose, and then kill them as they lie
helpless on the ground! 1 On the whole, this little tract is a
characteristic example of medieval natural-history studies, and
its significance lies in its demonstration of Matthew's interest in
them rather than in any inherent merit.

Matthew's belief in portents and prognostics is well attested
in the Chronica Majora* and his curiosity about natural pheno-
mena is at any rate partly due to this belief. It was only, how-
ever, when Professor Wormald identified the illustrations in
Bodleian Library Ashmole MS. 304 as the work of Matthew
Paris that this well-known collection of fortune-telling tracts
was linked with him. 3 Matthew himself wrote out a large part
of the text of this book, 4 and was no doubt responsible for the
whole of it. It contains a number of different works designed to
tell the fortune of the inquiring reader. 5 Thus in the first work
in the book, the Experimentarius of Bernard of Chartres, four
preliminary tables direct the reader to a line of verse which
forms part of the responses of twenty-five 'judges', and which
tells him his 'fate'. The next work in the collection is the
Pronosticon Socratis Basilei. This is a rather more complicated

1 Caesar tells a similar tale of the elk, De Bello Gallico, vi, 27.

2 Above, p. 150.

3 Wormald, f More Matthew Paris drawings', Walpole Soc. xxxi (1942-3),
pp. 109-12.

4 See Vaughan, * Handwriting of M. Paris J , Trans. Carrib. Bibliog. Soc. i

(I953), PP- 390-1.

5 For what follows see also Black, Catalogue ofAshmolean MSS.> pp. 214-
15; and Lynn Thorndike, History of Magic, n, pp. 113-18.

I7 257 VMP

MATTHEW PARIS

method of fortune-telling, in which certain definite questions,
such as whether or no it is safe to leave the house, are answered
by reference to a series of circular diagrams which direct the
reader to one of the responses of the sixteen kings, giving the
answer to his question. 1 One of the diagrams forming part of
this tract is illustrated here, in Plate xxi (&). Following this in
the manuscript is the Pronostica Pitagorice Consider ationis, in
which any one of thirty-six questions is answered by means
of a number obtained by chance, which refers the reader to
one line of verse among thirty-six different groups of twelve
lines, arranged opposite each of thirty-six different birds.
Other geomancies follow, in which a similar method obtains,
but the answers are given by the twelve patriarchs, the twelve
signs of the zodiac, and so on. 2 This little manuscript fits into
our general picture of Matthew's scientific interests, although
it is a rather curious example of them,

Matthew made no important contribution to medieval science,
but his scientific leanings, especially as revealed by the Drag-
maticon Philosofhiae diagrams, the tract on the elephant, and the
Ashmole fortune-telling manuscript, were evidently very real,
and formed an important element in his outlook. It is true that
his interest in scientific matters was only the result of curiosity;
but, after all, scientific progress and knowledge is still based on
this elementary motive, and we need not deny Matthew a small
share of the authentic scientific approach : he wanted to find out
about things, and, what is more important for us, he recorded his
findings.

IV. VERSE

We have already discussed Matthew's Anglo-Norman verse
Lives of SS. Alban, Edward, Edmund and Thomas. 3 They show
that he was adept at composing the vernacular verse current in
his day. Matthew also tried his hand at writing Latin verse,
though only one or two short pieces are certainly his. The
following lines on the winds, for instance, are written into the

1 To Lynn Thorndike's list of MSS. of this work, History of Magic, ir,
p. 117, note i, should be added Eton College MS. 132, fF. iSSb-iQob.

2 Some of them are printed by Brandin, *Prognostica du MS. Ashmole
304', in Miscellany of Studies in Romance Languages, pp. 59-67.

3 In Chapter ix above.

258

OTHER INTERESTS

Liber Additamentorum in his own hand, and prefixed with the
words: 'Frater Mathaeus de Ventis': 1

Sunt Subsolano socii Wlturmis et Eurus.
Austro junguntur Nothus, Affricus, associati.
Flant Zephiro, Chorus, hinc inde, Favonius imo.
Circius et Boreas Aquilonem concomitantur.

We can be sure, too, that the verses with which he originally
terminated his chronicle were composed by himself; 2 as well
as the couplets added in his hand at the foot of many of the
leaves of his Anglo-Norman Alban. Here is a characteristic
example: 3

Nocte reuelatur Albano uisio grandis
Quomodo dampnatur Saluans pro saluificandis.

The verses on King Offa of Mercia, too, which Matthew wrote
into the margin of his Chronica Majoraf may well have been
composed by himself.

Matthew's interest in, and appreciation of, verse and poetry-
led him to quote freely from the classical poets, and to enliven
his chronicle with occasional apposite fragments of contem-
porary verse. Many of these fragments are epitaphs, such as
those of William Marshal written by Gervase of Melkeley, and
of Simon de Montfort the Elder, written by Roger de Insula. 5
Others refer to some contemporary event, for instance, the
leonine hexameter put into Innocent IV's mouth on his receipt
of the news of Frederick's defeat at Victoria, or that on Richard
of Cornwall's election as king of the Romans in I257. 6 These
fragments are valuable examples of the current satiric verse of
the day, and we owe their preservation to Matthew Paris. Two
longer pieces of contemporary verse are preserved in the Liber
Additamentorum: one a characteristic goliardic piece, the other
some lines on Abbot William of St Albans by Henry of
Avranches. 7 This poet was writing in England for various

1 CM. vi, p. 465. 2 CM. v, pp. 197-8.

3 Trinity College, Dublin, MS. E i 40, f. sob.

4 CM. i, p. 348; they have also been written by Matthew into the margin
of f. 65 of British Museum Royal MS. 13 D v.

5 CM. in, pp. 43 and 57. See also HA. n, pp. 232 and 240.

6 CM. v, pp. 15 and 603. 7 CM. vi, p. 520, note 2, and pp. 62-3.

259 17-2

MATTHEW PARIS

patrons between 1244 and 1262, and Matthew seems to have
taken a special interest in him. In the margin of a leaf of the
Chronica Major a he has written an epitaph of William Marshal,
and has added the words: 1 * There are more epitaphs written
about him in the book of Henry of Avranches's verses which
Brother Matthew Paris has/

The volume here referred to has fortunately survived: it is
now MS. Dd xi 78 in the University Library, Cambridge. It
is a small but thick volume of poetry, much of which is in
Matthew's handwriting, and on f. ib is the characteristic in-
scription in red (partly cut off by the binder) recording his gift
of the book to God and St Albans. This is one of the most
important surviving collections of contemporary Latin verse,
and much of it is explicitly attributed by Matthew to Henry of
Avranches. A full description of it, together with an edition of
part of it, was published by J. C. Russell and J. P. Heironimus
in I935- 2 Besides Henry's poems, it contains some excerpts from
the Doctrinale of Alexander of Ville-Dieu ; a poem by Michael of
Cornwall describing Henry IIFs speech to the surgeons attending
John Mansel in 1243 ; a poem in French probably by Rutebeuf ;
a well-known poem on the heart and the eye, probably by
Philip de Gr&ve, and some miscellaneous epigrams and short
verses. From the list of contents in Matthew's hand on f. i,
we find that some of the manuscript has been lost, for the
epitaphs of William Marshal and a poem by Paulin Piper, listed
there, are no longer to be found. The manuscript contains ample
evidence of Matthew's interest in poetry, for there are corrections
and alternative readings in his own hand throughout it, as well
as a number of notes and reference marks. Once again, we are
indebted to Matthew Paris for the preservation of an important
collection of material relating to the intellectual activities of his
age, and it is true to say that, without this collection of verse,
our knowledge of the Latin verse of the first half of the thirteenth
century would be considerably diminished.

1 CM. m, pp. 43-4.

2 The Shorter Latin Poems of Master Henry of Avranches.

260

EPILOGUE

WHAT sort of a person was Matthew Paris? It might be
supposed that the eighteen, manuscripts containing his
handwriting which still survive would provide us with
ample material to answer this question. Certainly they do pro-
vide us with much useful evidence about him, though they
cannot completely bridge the gap of 700 years which separates
him from us. The very fact that he lived in so different a world
vitiates our picture of Matthew Paris, making the details blurred
and out of focus. Our almost entire lack of information about
the facts of his life forces us to rely on his writings for evidence
of his personality and this in itself is bound to give us a one-
sided picture. Another very real difficulty at any rate for most
of us is the language in which he wrote, for his Latin is an
artificial medium which places him at once at a distance from
us. A greater difficulty attending any attempt to describe and
understand his personality lies in the fact that up to now there
has been little agreement among scholars upon the identity of
Matthew's handwriting, and upon the authorship of some of the
books and paintings attributed to him. Much of this book has
in consequence been taken up with rather technical discussions
of manuscript relationships, authorship, and so on. If this study
proves of any value, I think that it will lie in the solution of
these problems, and in the consequent definition and description
of the material evidence about Matthew Paris. As to his
personality, I propose now to try to integrate and augment the
rather fragmentary picture which has, I hope, gradually taken
shape in the preceding pages. I am only too conscious of the
difficulties outlined above, and it is with some diffidence that
I offer the reader, by way of epilogue, an attempt at a rough
sketch of Matthew Paris as a person.

The brilliant sketch of Matthew Paris which A. L. Smith
included in his Ford Lectures on Church and State in the Middle
Ages, and which underlined, in particular, his quaintness and
prejudice, and his feelings about the papacy, is in some respects
incomplete. In particular, since he was concerned only with

261 17-3

MATTHEW PARIS

Matthew as a chronicler, his picture is the picture of Matthew
Paris as an old man, though not quite, perhaps, in his dotage.
Can we not recognize, in the pages of the Chronica Majora,
something of the asperity, the conservatism, the fixed ways of
thought, the cantankerousness, of middle and old age? So far as
we know, the surviving manuscript of Matthew's own section
of the Chronica was written after 1245 and Matthew was as
old as the century. It is perhaps a little unfair that we can watch
him sinking to his grave, but cannot observe him in his youth
and prime. We see him clearly, in the last decade of his life,
developing a sort of mania for writing, an itch to use the quill.
He becomes rather decrepit; he fiddles about with his material,
rewriting, abridging, correcting, revising. He traverses the same
ground over and over again; he tries with little success to reduce
his vast collection of historical material to some kind of literary
coherence and order. As death approaches, he is forced to give
up writing with his own hand, and to employ a scribe. At the
last, he takes to expurgation, in an effort to tone down or expunge
the worst of his earlier extravagances. Although the Chronica
Majora itself shows no falling-off in these years it remains
lively and colourful to the end it seems clear that, after his
expedition to Norway in 1248-9, Matthew became more and
more engrossed in his books, and it is his character in these last
years of his life which is revealed in the Chronica. Perhaps he
had always been like this, rather crusty and embittered; perhaps
he went sour only in this last period of his life ; we cannot tell,
and we are forced to take him as we find him, already well
advanced in years.

Matthew's greatest virtue is that he is readable. He belongs
to the handful of medieval writers whose works can still be
appreciated and enjoyed today. He was a gifted writer. His
narrative is vivid, animated and dramatic; his description is
colourful; his characters are lifelike. Direct speech is put to
excellent and skilful use to heighten the literary effect of his
narrative. His excellence as a writer tells in his favour : we enjoy
him, and we enjoy, too, his intensely personal way of looking at
things. Actually, there is only one point of view in the Chronica
Majora: Matthew's own. He is an egoist: he exaggerates the
importance of his mission to Norway; he boasts of his acquain-

262

EPILOGUE

tance with the king; and was it not the streak of vanity in him
which prompted him to suppress the name of his predecessor
and mentor, Roger Wendover, whose chronicle he took over
and made his own? Matthew's egoism, however, is of the sort
that appeals, for it is, in the main, the egoism of the man in the
street with an excessive regard for liberty and a high idea of
his own importance. Another quality of Matthew's is his un-
ashamed dislike of the abstract. He is always down to earth,
and never afraid to reveal his dislike of things intellectual.
Invariably, he is unreasonable and prejudiced, and he is proud
of his attitude. He takes every opportunity to air his prejudices
unabashed, and it is partly because of this that his writing has
that naive freshness and vigour which makes him one of the
most readable of English medieval chroniclers.

It is high time that the ghost of Matthew's anti-papalism was
laid. He did not understand politics, though he was keenly
interested in them, and his anti-papalism is by no means ideo-
logical. He never thought about the theory of papal power: he
merely had a grudge against authority. He resented all attempts
at interference with his own material interests, and the king
suffers just as much from his tirades as does the pope. His
so-called 'constitutionalism' has no connexion with political
theory it springs from his zealous defence of the resources and
privileges of his house and order, and from his characteristically
English hatred of authority. But Matthew was a humbug and
a hypocrite. He deplored the splendours of the world, yet he
revelled in them; he played the toady to Abbot William, though,
according to his usual sentiments, he should have despised his
tyranny; he took good care to be on friendly terms with the
king, yet he never ceased to slander him; he showered abuse on
the satellites regis, though he numbered many of them among
his friends. It is possible that this hypocrisy has something to
do with the sort of double life that Matthew led. He was a
cloister monk, yet a man of the world with a flair for business
and courtly aspirations. In spite of his crudities he was polished
enough to mix with contemporary high society: he rubbed
shoulders with the aristocracy and even mixed with the ladies.
Although he was by no means averse to picking up and recording
what the servant overheard, he preferred to have his information

263

MATTHEW PARIS

straight from the horse's mouth, and he took care to know the
right people. He, in his turn, was certainly considered a man
to know.

The Chronica Majora reveals a kindly, human element in
Matthew's character. He must have been, we feel, a friendly,
sympathetic person, with a robust sense of humour sometimes
bordering on the burlesque. Often we cannot tell whether or
not he wrote with laughter in his eyes. Was it in fun that he took
care to insert the drooping eyelid into his drawing of Henry III
among the other kings of England? His language is often
picturesque and amusing. He was an excellent raconteur, and
his gossip is often inspired even when it is worthless and
malicious. As for malicious gossip, we cannot deny that Mat-
thew was an accomplished scandalmonger. His dislikes often
take the form of slanderous remarks or stories which make us
feel bound to attribute to him something of the vicious and
spiteful.

Matthew was endowed with an extremely inquisitive mind,
and his curiosity about everything around him is one of his
most valuable qualities, for it led him to record much of interest
besides the usual medieval 'natural' curiosities such as herm-
aphrodites and other freaks. A great collector of information,
albeit on a rather superficial level, he engaged in some of those
quasi-intellectual pursuits which are of vital importance to a
small mind, but mere relaxation to a great one: heraldry, carto-
graphy, Latin verse; the medieval equivalents, perhaps, of
philately, tourism, or crosswords. To these we should add art
and hagiology, for Matthew was a man of talents as well as of
wide interests. He evidently knew something of vernacular
culture and was quite at home when writing in Anglo-Norman.
Of art and architecture he seems to have had a genuine and deep
appreciation, and, though not himself one of the great artists of
his time, he was thoroughly competent, and interested enough
to leave us much detailed information about the artistic works of
his contemporaries and precursors at St Albans.

When all is said and done, the name of Matthew Paris
deserves to be remembered, not for any inherent greatness, but
for his enshrinement of the foibles and prejudices of the ordinary
man in the street, and, perhaps, because he is the first recog-

264

EPILOGUE

nizable personification of John Bull. The value of the Chronica
Major a lies just as much in the personality it reveals as in the
events it records, and, indeed, Matthew is in many ways much
more interesting as a person than he is useful as a chronicler.
As a mirror of his age he is in some measure a failure, for he
reflects only the surface. He was, too, extremely conservative,
and found it impossible to move with the times. By the middle
of the thirteenth century, if not before, he was a venerable but
antiquated figure. He deplored all novelties : like a true Tory,
he was against all change. The great movements and high ideals
of his time all passed him by. The friars, church reform,
scholasticism meant nothing to him indeed the friars were
a particular object of his opprobrium, and he takes a hostile
view of church reformers and theologians, whom he regards
with suspicion and distrust. The fuss he makes about the intro-
duction of a knowledge of Greek numerals into Western Europe
is a sign of his superficiality, for he quite fails to understand that
this was merely accidental to the discovery and assimilation of
Greek philosophy which was going on during his lifetime. There
is nothing profound or noble about Matthew Paris, and even
among chroniclers the Middle Ages can boast many superior to
him. He was a jack~of-alltrades, a story-teller, a crusty old
gossip ; but his stolid, earthy, kindly, prejudiced figure deserves
a place, though a very subordinate one, among the great
personalities of the age. St Francis, Albert the Great, St Thomas
Aquinas, and many others stand out as representatives of its
nobler ideals and aspirations: Matthew Paris shows us its
seamier side and its trivialities, but, with all his quaintness,
he is a likeable person, who, for his vivid and colourful chrono-
logical encyclopedia, the Chronica Majora, well deserves the
gratitude of posterity.

265

BIBLIOGRAPHY

LIST OF MANUSCRIPTS CITED

Bute, Marquis of:

MS. 3, Gesta Abbatum etc.; see p. 8, note 3.
Cambridge, Corpus Christi College:

MSS. 26 and 16 (A and J5), Chronica Major a to 1253 ; see especi-
ally pp. 30-1 and 49 ff.
MS. 264, containing excerpts from Roger Wendover's Flores

Historiarum; see p. 21, note 2.
MS. 385, Part II, William of Conches' s Dragmaticon Philosophiae

with Matthew Paris's diagrams; see pp. 254-5.
Cambridge, University Library:

MS. Dd xi 78, verses of Henry of Avranches etc.; see p. 260.
MS. Ee iii 39, copy of Matthew Paris's Edward', see pp. 168 ff.,

and 221-2.

Chatsworth, Duke of Devonshire MS. :
St Albans cartulary; cited on p. 183.
Dublin, Trinity College:
MS. 140, Matthew' s collection of domestic hagiographical material,

including his illustrated Albany see pp. 168 ff., 195 ff., and 227-8.
Eton College:

MS. 96, version of Peter of Poitou's universal chronicle; see

pp. 116 and 225.

MS. 123 (E), Flores Historiarum; see pp. 92 ff.
MS. 132, containing a copy of the Pronosticon Socratis Basilei;

see p. 258, note i.
London, British Museum:

Cotton MS. Julius D iii, St Albans cartulary; cited on p. 183.
Cotton MS. Julius D vi, containing a copy of Matthew Paris's

Latin Life of St Edmund; see pp. 162 ff.
Cotton MS. Julius D vii, miscellaneous material collected by

John of Wallingford, mostly copied from Matthew Paris's MSS. ;

see pp. 22, 229 and 243.
Cotton MS. Tiberius Evi, Liber Memorandorum of St Albans;

mentioned on p. 78.
Cotton MS. Claudius D vi, containing Matthew Paris's Abbreviatio

Chronicorum] see p. 36 etc.
Cotton MS. Claudius E iv, Gesta Abbatum, etc., by T. Walsingham ;

cited, p. 19, note 3, p. 193, note 3, and p. 200, note 3.

267

BIBLIOGRAPHY

London, British Museum (cont.)

Cotton MS. Nero D i(LA), Matthew Paris' s Liber Additamentorum;

see especially pp. 78 if.
Cotton MS. Nero Dv, Part II (C), fair copy of Matthew's

Chronica Major a^ 1189-1250; see especially p. no. For Part I

of this MS., see p. 153, note 2.
Cotton MS. Nero D vii, Book of Benefactors of St Albans; see

pp. 18-19.
Cotton MS. Otho B v (O), Floras Historiarum of Roger Wendover;

see pp. a i if.

Cotton MS. Otho D iii, St Albans cartulary; cited on p. 183.
Cotton MS. Vitellius Axx(F), containing a short chronicle

Excerpta a cronicis magnis S. Albani; see especially pp. 115 ff.
Cotton MS. Vitellius D viii, formerly containing Lives of SS.

Edmund and Alban; see pp. 169-70.
Cotton MS. Vespasian B xiii, containing a fragment of Matthew

Paris's Life of Stephen Langton; see p. 159.
Cotton MS. Faustina A viii, containing the Southwark Annals] see

pp. 104 ff.
Harley MS. 1620, copy of the Chronica Majora to 1188; see p. 153,

note 2.
Harley MS. 5418, containing an abridgement of the Flores

Historiarum; see p. 152.
Royal MS. 2 A xxii, Psalter; see p. 222.
Royal MS. 2 B vi, Psalter; see p. 224.
Royal MS. 4Dvii, Historia Scholastica, etc.; see pp. 15, 129,

note 3, and p. 187.
Royal MS. 13 D v, William of Malmesbury, etc. ; see p. 129, note 2,

and pp. 239-40.
Royal MS. 13 E vi, Ralph de Diceto, etc.; see pp. 24, 129, note 2,

and 1 86.
Royal MS. i^Cvii(R), containing Matthew Paris's Historia

Anglorum and the last part of his Chronica Majora, 1254-9; see

pp. 21, 36, etc.
London, Record Office:
MS. E 164/2, the Red Book of the Exchequer; see pp. 17-18 and

132, note 4.

Manchester, Chetham's Library:
MS. 6712 (CA), Flores Historiarum of Matthew Paris; see pp. 92 ff.

and 224-5.

Oxford, Bodleian Library:
Ashmole MS. 304, fortune-telling tracts; see pp. 207-8, 230 and

257-8.

268

MATTHEW PARIS

Oxford, Bodleian Library (cont.)

Douce MS. 207 (W), Flores Historiarum of Roger Wendover; see

pp. 21 S.

Oxford, Corpus Christi College:
MS. 2, Bible, containing Matthew Paris's map of Palestine; see

pp. 245-6.
Welbeck Abbey, Duke of Portland MS.:

Containing a copy of Matthew Paris's Edmund; see p. 168.

PRINTED SOURCES AND FACSIMILES

Ac ta Sanctorum Bollan diana June, IV (Antwerp, 1707).

Aelnothi monachi Historia ortus, vitae, et passionis S. Canuti regis

Daniae, ed. J. Langebek in Scriptores rerum Danicarum medii

aevi, ill (Copenhagen, 1774).
Amundesham, John of. Annales, ed. H. T. Riley, 2 vols. (Rolls

Series, 1870-1).
Avranches, Henry of. Shorter Latin Poems, ed. J, C. Russell and

J. P. Heironimus (Cambridge, Mass., 1935).
Calendar of Patent Rolls, 1258-1266, v (1910).
Candidus, Hugh. Chronicle, ed. W. T. Mellows (Oxford, 1949).
Chronicon Roskildense, ed. M. C. Gertz in Scriptores minores historiae

Danicae medii aevi, I (Copenhagen, 1917-18).
Conches, William of. Dragmaticon Philosophiae, ed. W. Gratarolus

under the title Dialogus de substantiis physicis. . . (Strassburg,

1567)-

Cotton, Bartholomew. Historia Anglicana, ed. H. R. Luard (Rolls

Series, 1859).

Foedera etc., I, ed. T. Rymer (Record Commission, 1816).
Huntingdon, Henry of. Historia Anglorum, ed. T. Arnold (Rolls

Series, 1879).
Lanfranc. Monastic Constitutions, ed. and transl. M. D. Knowles

(London, 1951).
Liber EUensis ad fidem codicum variorum, ed. D. J. Stewart (Anglia

Christiana Society, 1848).

Liber monasterii de Hyda, ed. E. Edwards (Rolls Series, 1866).
Malmesbury, William of. Gesta pontificum, ed. N. E. S. A. Hamilton

(Rolls Series, 1870).
Monmouth, Geoffrey of. Historia regum Britanniae, ed. A. Griscom

(London, 1929).

Nova Legenda Anglie, I, ed. C. Horstmann (Oxford, 1901).
Oxenedes, John of. Chronica, ed. Sir H. Ellis (Rolls Series, 1859).
Papsturkunden in England, m, ed. W. Holtzmann (Berlin, 1952).

269

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Paris, Matthew. Chronica Major a from 1066 onwards, ed. M. Parker

under the title Matthaei Paris monachi Albanensis Historia

Major. . .(London, 1571).
Chronica Major a from 1066 onwards, ed. W. Wats under the title

Matthaei Paris monachi Albanensis angli Historia Major. . .

(London, 1640).
Chronica Majora (CM.), ed. H. R. Luard, 7 vols. (Rolls Series,

1872-84).
Excerpts from the Chronica Major a, Flares Historiarum, etc., ed.

F. Liebermann in Ex rerum Anglicarum scriptoribus saeculi XIII,

MGH,SS. xxvm (Hanover, 1888).
Chronica Majora, transl. by J. A. Giles under the title Matthew

Paris' s English History, 3 vols. (London, 1852-4).
Chronica Majora, transl. into French by A. Huillard-Breholles

under the title Grand Chronique de Matthieu Paris, 9 vols. (Paris,

1840-1).
Excerpts from the Chronica Majora, transl. into German by G.

Grandaur and W. Wattenbach, under the title, Auszuge aus

dergrosseren Chronik des Matthaus von Paris (Leipzig, 1890).
Flores Historiarum, ed. M. Parker under the title Flores Histori-

arum Matthaei Westmonasteriensis monachi. . .(London, 1567).
Flores Historiarum (FH.), ed. H. R. Luard, 3 vols. (Rolls Series,

1890).
Flores Historiarum, transl. by C. D. Yonge under the title Matthew

of Westminster's Flowers of History, 2 vols. (London, 1853).
Historia Anglorum (HA.) and Abbreviatio Chronicorum (AC.), ed.

Sir F. Madden, 3 vols. (Rolls Series, 1866-9).
Vitae duorum Offarum and Gesta Abbatum (Wats), ed. W. Wats

under the title Vitae duorum Offarum. . .et viginti trium abbatum

Sancti Albani. . .(London, 1639).
Vie de Seint Auban, ed. R. Atkinson (London, 1876).
Illustrations to the Life of St Allan in Trinity College, Dublin, MS.

E i 40, ed. in facsimile, W. R. L. Lowe and E. F. Jacob, with an

introduction by M. R. James (Oxford, 1924).
Estoire de Seint Aedward le Rei, ed. H. R. Luard in Lives of Edward

the Confessor (Rolls Series, 1858).
Estoire de Seint Aedward le Rei, ed. in facsimile, M. R. James

(Roxburghe Club, 1920).

'Vie de S. Edmond', ed. A. T. Baker, in Romania, LV (1929).
Vie de Saint Thomas de Cantorbdry, fragments, ed. with facsimiles,

P. Meyer (Societe des Anciens Textes Franais, 1885).
'The drawings of Matthew Paris', ed. in facsimile, M. R. James,

in Walpole Society, xiv (1925-6).

270

MATTHEW PARIS

Paris, Matthew (cont.)

'More Matthew Paris drawings' reproduced by F .Wormald in

Walpole Society, xxxi (1942-3).
Legends on the maps of Palestine, ed. H. Michelant and G. Ray-

naud, in Itineraires a Jerusalem (Societe de T Orient Latin, 1882).
Four Maps of Great Britain, ed. in facsimile, J. P. Gilson (London,

1928).
'Prognostica du MS. Ashmole 304 de la Bodleienne', ed. L. Brandin

in A Miscellany of Studies in Romance Languages and Literatures,

presented to L. E. Kastner (Cambridge, 1932).
Red Book of the Exchequer, ed. H. Hall, 3 parts (Rolls Series, 1897).
Rishanger, William de. Chronicle, ed. J. O. Halliwell (Camden

Society, 1840).

Saga of H aeon, ed. G. W. Dasent (Rolls Series, 1894).
St Albans Chronicle, 1406-1420, ed. V. H. Galbraith (Oxford, 1937).
Stapleton, Bishop, Calendar. Ed. Sir F. Palgrave in Ancient Kalendars

and Inventories of the Treasury of H.M. Exchequer, 3 vols.

(Record Commission, 1836).
'Two Lives of St Aethelbert, King and Martyr', ed. M. R. James,

in EHR. xxxn (1917).
Ungedruckte anglo-normanniscke Geschichtsquellen, ed. F. Liebermann

(Strassburg, 1879).
Wallingford, John of. Chronica attributed to, ed. T. Gale in Historiae

. . .Scriptores XV (Oxford, 1691).
Walsingham, Thomas. Gesta Abbatum (GA), ed. H. T. Riley,

3 vols. (Rolls Series, 1867).

Ypodigma Neustriae, ed. H. T. Riley (Rolls Series, 1876).
Wendover, Roger. Flores Historiarum from 447 onwards, ed. H. O.

Coxe under the title Rogeri de Wendover Chronica sive Flores

Historiarum, 5 vols. (English Historical Society, 1841-4).
Flores Historiarum ed. H. G. Hewlett under the title The Flowers

of History by Roger de Wendover from the year of Our Lord

1154..., 3 vols. (Rolls Series, 1886-9).
Excerpts from the Flores Historiarum, ed. F. Liebermann in

Ex rerum Anglicarum scriptoribus saeculi XIII, MGH,SS.

xxvin (Hanover, 1888).
Worcester, Florence of. Chronicon ex chronicis, ed. B. Thorpe, 2 vols.

(English Historical Society, 1848-9).
Wykes, Thomas. Chronicon, ed. H. R. Luard in Annales monasiici, iv

(Rolls Series, 1869).

271

BIBLIOGRAPHY

MODERN WORKS

BEAZLEY, C. R. The Dawn of Modern Geography, 3 vols. (London,

1897-1906).

BfolER, J. Les Legendes epiques, IV (Paris, 1913).
BLACK, W. H. A Descriptive Catalogue of the MSS. bequeathed unto

the University of Oxford by Elias Ashmole (Oxford, 1845).
BORENIUS, T. and TRISTRAM, E. W. English Medieval Painting

(Cambridge, 1927).
BROWNE, R. A. British Latin Selections. A.D. 500-1400 (Oxford,

1954)*

CHAMBERS, R. W. Beowulf (2nd. ed., Cambridge, 1932).
CHENEY, C. R. 'The Paper Constitution preserved by Matthew

Paris', EHR. LXV (1950).
COLLINS, A. J. 'The documents of the Great Charter', Proceedings

of the British Academy, xxxiv (1948).
COULTON, G. G. Five Centuries of Religion, 4 vols. (Cambridge,

1923-50).
DAVIS, H. W. C. 'An unpublished Life of Edmund Rich', EHR.

xxii (1907).
DENHOLM-YOUNG, N. Handwriting in England and Wales (Cardiff,

'The Paper Constitution of 1244', EHR. LVIII (1943).
DUGDALE, SIR W. Monasticon anglicanum\ new enlarged edition by

J. Caley etc., 6 vols. (London, 1817-30).
EYTON, R. W. Court, Household and Itinerary of King Henry II

(London, 1878).
FAYE, PAUL-LOUIS. * Baudelaire and Matthew Paris ', French Review,

xxiv (1950).

FELTEN, J. Papst Gregor IX (Freiburg, 1886).
FRITZ, R. Vber Verfasser und Quellen der altfranzosischen Estoire de

Seint Aedward le Rei (Heidelberg, 1910).

GAIRDNER, J. Early Chroniclers of Europe: England (London, 1879).
GALBRAITH, V. H. Roger Wendover and Matthew Paris (Glasgow,

1944).
GEROULD, G. H. 'A text of Merlin's prophecies', Speculum, xxin

(1948).
GIBBS, M. and LANG, J. Bishops and Reform, 1215-1272 (Oxford,

1934)-

GOSCHEN, O. (writing under the name 'Von Pusikan'), ' Wappen aus
den Werken des Matthias von Paris', Vierteljahrschrift fur
Heraldik, Sphragistik und Genealogie, 11 (Berlin, 1881).

GOUGH, R. British Topography, 2 vols. (London, 1780).

272

MATTHEW PARIS

HARDY, SIR T. D. A Descriptive Catalogue of Materials relating to the

History of Great Britain and Ireland, 3 vols. (Rolls Series,

1862-71).
HAUPTMANN, F. * Die Wappen in der Historia Minor des Matthaus

Parisiensis', Jahrbuch der K.K. Heraldischen Gesellschaft, xix

(1909).
HERMANNSSON, H. Icelandic Illuminated Manuscripts of the Middle

Ages (Copenhagen, 1935).
HOLLAENDER, A. 'The pictorial work in the Flores Historiarum',

Bulletin of the John Ry lands Library, xxvm (1944).
HUNT, W. * Matthew Paris', Dictionary of National Biography, xv

(1895).
JAMES, M. R. A Descriptive Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the

Library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, 2 vols. (Cambridge,

1912).
JENKINS, CLAUDE. The Monastic Chronicler and the Early School of

St Albans (London, 1922).
JESSOPP, A. *St Albans and her historian', in Studies by a Recluse

(London, 1893) ; reprinted from the Quarterly Review, April 1886.
J0RGENSEN, E. Helgendyrkelse i Danmark (Copenhagen, 1909).
JOURDAIN, C. 'Doutes sur 1'authenticite de quelques ecrits contre la

cour de Rome attribues a Robert Grossetete', in Excursions

historiques et philosophiques a tr avers le moyen age (Paris, 1888);

reprinted from the Bulletin de VAcaddmie des inscriptions et belles-

lettres (1868).
KEMPF, J. Geschichte des deutschen Reiches wahrend des grossen

Interregnums (Wiirzburg, 1893).
KNOWLES, M. D. The Religious Orders in England, I (Cambridge,

1948).
KURTH, B. * Matthew Paris and Villard de Honnecourt', Burlington

Magazine, LXXXI (1942).
LAWRENCE, C. H. 'Robert of Abingdon and Matthew Paris', EHR.

LEACH, H. G. Angevin Britain and Scandinavia (Cambridge, Mass.,

1921).

LEGGE, M. D. Anglo-Norman in the Cloisters (Edinburgh, 1950).
LETHABY, W. R. ' English Primitives, v and vi ', Burlington Magazine,

xxxi (1917).
LIEBERMANN, F. 'Bericht liber Arbeiten in England wahrend des

Sommers 1877', Neues Archil) der Gesellschaft fur alter e deutsche

Geschichtskunde, iv (1879).
LINDBLOM, A. La Peinture gothique en Suede et en Norvege (Stock-

holm, 1916).

273

BIBLIOGRAPHY

LITTLE, A. G. * Brother William of England', in Franciscan Papers,

Lists and Documents (Manchester, 1943).
Louis, R. De VHistoire a la Legende, in (Auxerre, 1947).
LOWE, W. R. L. 'The Cult of St Alban abroad', Hertfordshire Post,

13 July 1910.
LUDWIG, F. F. A, Untersuchungen uber die Reise- und Marsch-

geschwindigkeit im XII. und XIII. Jahrhundert (Berlin, 1897).
MADDEN, SIR F, ' On the knowledge possessed by Europeans of the

elephant in the thirteenth century', in The Graphic and Historical

Illustrator, ed. E. W. Brayley (London, 1834).
MARSHALL, M. H. 'Thirteenth-century culture as illustrated by

Matthew Paris', Speculum, xiv (1939).

MENGER, L. E. The Anglo-Norman Dialect (New York, 1904).
MILLAR, E. G. English Illuminated Manuscripts from the Xth to the

Xlllth Century (Paris, 1926).
MILLER, K. Mappae Mundi. Die dltesten Weltkarten, m (Stuttgart,

MITCHELL, J. B. 'Early maps of Great Britain. I. The Matthew

Paris maps', Geographical Journal, LXXXI (1933).
MOORE, P. S. The Works of Peter of Poitiers (Notre Dame, Ind.,

1936).
OMAN, C. C. 'The goldsmiths at St Albans Abbey during the

twelfth and thirteenth centuries', Transactions of the St Albans

and Hertfordshire Architectural and Archaeological Society (1932).

' The jewels of St Albans Abbey', Burlington Magazine, LVII (1930).

PAGE, W., and REDDAN, M. 'St Albans Abbey', in Victoria County

History: Hertfordshire, IV (London, 1914).
PARAVICINI, F. DE. St Edmund of Abingdon (London, 1898).
PARIS, G. Review of Atkinson's Vie de Seint Auban, in Romania, v

PLEHN, H. 'Der politische Charakter von Matheus Parisiensis', in
Staats- und socialwissenschaftliche Forschungen, xiv, ed. G.
Schmoller (1897).
POWICKE, F. M. King Henry III and the Lord Edward, 2 vols.

(Oxford, 1947).

Stephen Langton (Oxford, 1928).

'The compilation of the Chronica Major a of Matthew Paris',
Proceedings of the British Academy, xxx (1944); reprinted, with
some revisions, from Modern Philology, xxxvin (1940-1).
' Roger Wendover and the Coggeshall Chronicle ', EHR. xxi (1906).
'The writ for enforcing watch and ward, 1242', EHR. LVII (1942).
RICKERT, E. 'The Old English Offa Saga', Modern Philology, n
(1904-5).

274

MATTHEW PARIS

RICKERT, M. Painting in Britain: the Middle Ages (London, 1954).
SAUNDERS, O. E. English Illumination, 2 vols. (Florence, 1928).
SMITH, A. L. Church and State in the Middle Ages (Oxford, 1913).
SUCHIER, H. (Jber die Matthaeus Paris zugeschriebene ' Vie de Seint

Auban' (Halle a. S., 1876).
TAYLOR, E. G. R. 'The De ventis of Matthew Paris', Imago Mundi,

n (i937).

THEOPOLD, L. Kritische Untersuchungen uber die Quetten zur angel-
sdchsischen Geschichte des achten Jahrhunderts (Lwoff, 1872).

THOMSON, S. H. The Writings of Robert Grosseteste (Cambridge,
1940).

THORNDIKE, LYNN. A History of Magic and Experimental Science, n
(London, 1923).

TYSON, M. * The Annals of Southwark and Merton ', Surrey Archaeo-
logical Collections, xxxvi (1925).

UHLEMANN, E. ' Uber die anglonormannische "Vie de Seint Auban "
in Bezug auf Quelle, Lautverhaltnisse und Flexion*, Romanische
Studien, ed. E. Boehmer, IV (1880).

VAUGHAN, R. *The election of abbots at St Albans in the thirteenth
and fourteenth centuries', Proceedings of the Cambridge Anti-
quarian Society, XLVII (1954).

' The handwriting of Matthew Paris ', Transactions of the Cambridge
Bibliographical Society, I (1953).

WAGNER, A. R. A Catalogue of English Medieval Rolls of Arms
(Oxford, 1950).

WALLACE, W. The Life of St Edmund of Canterbury (London, 1893).

WILMART, A. * Analecta reginensia', Studi e Testi, LIX (1933).

WILSON, R. M. The Lost Literature of Medieval England (London,
1952).

275

THE PLATES

PLATE I

Matthew Paris on his death-bed. B.M. Roy. MS. 14 C vii,f.2i8b.
(See pp. 7 ff.)

PLATE II

# *5 SS tu S*. Si* ?** \* >S #* . 5

_^ 9 $r& S"c Q & ^<?

T*^ ^^8 0* ? ^*o^S

iifMrta!

T** v^* ^31 ^r: vl* *, i* M ***<a E as^s r*

Nir*?fll3lfaJ>l

^LiS^^^^^l! ^

^****' S *** >* * ^ ''i***

01

CX3

03
PH

i

g

s

O in

4-)

la

'BSr|5>s35

I||ffe4p

**^ & T? S rf a -2 2s

Q ^i<P <5 ^ s 8 rf

V < S I* *0> <5WtK

o

CS

^

'E

w

PLATE III

= <o B 9*5 SC"O
lilstMhaS*

"c. 5^ SvP^

MflJlPflfirf

I ^?^^r?\8S i
1"? ^-|>g^\^ ?j

^.S^SvaS^a^:
3< S^ ! o

iV5 ri ^ ;

*4

l>t

2

8

5V

cc
N

a

ri
PH

I

S

HO

PL, "

l

I

03
W

PLATE IV

J3

H

ON
ti

'>

Q

I
m

S*

o s;

<: CO

^H N

o '55

S

CO

13

CO

&%!%*.

PLATE V

!I\I5'1 1

PLATE VI

MklW?^

PLATE VII

I

d

S &
-5 CD

CO l-l

I c/i

PLATE VIII

.

.tttt ggiy ucrf itg ittir.j.a> Jtotm*Au

..... ....... "^ *~"

.'ii 02 j

'

ft

(<3) The martyrdom of St Alban, f. 383.

The massacre of the converts, f. 41 b.

Two of Matthew Paris's illustrations of his Vie de Seint Auban.
T.C.D. MS. E i 40. (Seep. 221.)

PLATE IX

(a) The Crucifixion. B.M. Roy. MS. 2 B vi, f. gb. (See p. 224.)

The landing of Edward in England. An illustration from the Estoire
de Seint Aedward. U.L.C. MS. Ee iii 59, f. 93. (See pp. 221-2.)

I : l

1

(a) Richard I. B.M. Cott. MS. Claud. D vi, f. 5 b.

Cassibelaunus (?) C.C.C.C. IVES. 26, p. 28.
^Drawings of seated kings. (See p.

PLATE XI

Drawings of seated kings. B.M. Roy. MS. 14 C vii, f. 8b. (See p. 231.)

PLATE XII

I",

First page of one of Matthew Paris's itineraries from London to Apulia.
B.M. Roy. MS. 14 C vii, f. 2 a, (See pp. 237 and 247 ff.)

PLATE XIII

First page of another of Matthew Paris's itineraries from London to Apulia.
C.C.C.C. MS. 26, f. ia. (See pp. 237 and 247 ff.)

PLATE XIV

4, p. 220.

i J3, f. i38b.

^^^\

' #> * . f

l&^4^^*^&^^%'

(/) Bodl. Ashm., 304,
f. 38a.

Architectural details in Matthew Paris's drawings (see p. 237).
(a) and (b) are from the margins of the Chronica Major a.

PLATE XV

(a) LA,
f. 183 a.

W*&

wtic^t>nanrt-y

A't*Hra-^c- vi

: ^rtrtT C

>t^

\Wlti

^*s*r2S.
?(*

a SlWl?.

nrfrtl <SE B&&B

(6) Claud.
D vi,
f.8b.

^ yp-n^zx^jf
't/ltM^v 1 ^ 1 ^

iteJtf* 1 ?- r^<- ^ : >
l^fedTi^.-

^Pn.-^lu:,

Architectural details in Matthew Paris' s itineraries ((a) and (c)) and
map of England and Scotland (&). (See p. 237.)

PLATE XVI

a
a

<u

CO

vo

23

cj

u

CJ
CJ

PH

<4H

PLATE XVI I

'\ "'^ **?-

-'%

4n *

V4^ Tf w

VCX

%

"" -'-Sk- i!^K^Jta-

^, -> n ?> n % *>

f

~.^ ^%"'

.'''', '4:,. r'-Ufcu. r. ?

^ve-.fe* . -, , ^^i

-u,,*.
Map of Palestine. C.C.C. Oxon. MS. 2, f. zb. (See pp. 245 ff.)

PLATE XVIII

(a) LA, f. 198 a.

4, f. 3 b.

B, f. iiib.

0) A, p. 225.

(/) .R, f. n6b.

Heraldic lions on some of Matthew Paris's shields. (See p. 251.)
(a) One of several shields roughly tricked on a leaf of the Liber
Additamentorum. (6) and (e) Shields in the margin of the Chronica
Majora. (c) and (/) Details from two of Matthew's drawings, (d) One
of the illustrations of Matthew's genealogical chronicle (see p. 232).

PLATE XIX

*<rt*

.'..M &.

^

V >^|^

a u J-. (&$'* ra; f CM* -\vuuto Sr f."i Vffit.'U .>?. 5;- .w.Uo* s C'^umSp? {.- M

A page of coloured shields in the Liber Additamentorum. B.M. Cott.
MS. Nero D i, f. lyob. (See pp. 251-2.)

PLATE XX

(a) P- 130.

(C) P. I 4 8.

P. 147-

p. 152.

hr |V<r<n_ *_, ^ojt
;r v/^T^' cn

Xtn-rttrntif ICmvvA- /

. fr"==r, !M >-

'fefsr

P. 178.

Some of Matthew Paris's diagrams illustrating the Dragmaticon
Philosophiae. C.C.C.C. MS. 385, Part II. (See pp. 244-5.)

PLATE XXI

Matthew Paris's drawing of an elephant in C.C.C.C.
MS. 16, f. iva. (See p. 256.)

The Sphera Bestiarum. Bodl. Lib., Oxon., Ashm. MS. 304, f. 34 b -
(See pp. 257-8.)

INDEX

Aageson, Sweyn, 190
Aaron, a Jew of York, 17
Abbreviatio Chronicorum of M. Paris,

36, 113-14, 123; authorship,

379; illustrations, 219, 223,

231-2
Abdias, apocryphal Acta Aposto-

lorum of, 128
Abingdon, Robert of, brother of

Edmund Rich, 164
Abraham, tomb of, 246
Acre, 240, 245
Adam, 246

Adam the Cellarer, 182-4, 198, 201
Adrian I, pope, 48, 191-2
Adrian IV, pope, 184, 185, 201
Aelnoth, Vita et Passio S. Canuti y

202
Aethelbert, St, king of East Anglia,

43-4, 46, 190-1, 194
Aigueblanche, Peter, bishop of Here-
ford, 131

Albert the Great, 265
Albigensian crusade, 112
Alexander IV, pope, 134
Alexander II, king of Scotland, 136
Alexander, papal collector, 12
Alexandria, 69, 246
Alfred, 232
Alfric, abbot of St Albans (c, 970-90),

later bishop of Ramsbury and

archbishop of Canterbury, 198-

200, 203, 204
Alfric or Egfrid, abbot of St Albans

(? c. 1066-70), 200, 203, 204
Alps, 240

Aluedele (? Allerdale), 240
Amadeus IV, count of Savoy, 13
Ananias, 239

Ancona (Vallis Anconie), 240
Anglo-Norman, 168-81
animals, drawings of, 233
Annales Londonienses, 153
Annales Paulini, 153
Annales Sancti Edmundi, 24
Anselm, archbishop of Canterbury,

185

Antioch, 240, 246

Antioch, prince of, probably Reginald
of Chatillon, 1 5

Apocalypses, illustrated, 205, 225-6

Apollo, 1 80

Apulia, see itinerary, 240

Aqua Dorecte ( ? river Derwent), 240

Aquinas, St Thomas, 265

Arabia, 240

Aragon, king of, 240

* Arches, foresta de ' ( ? forest of Arsur),
246

Ardfert, John bishop of, 15

Arezzo, 248, 249

Argenton, Richard of, 13

Armenia, 239, 240, 246

Armenia, archbishop of, 2-3, 12, 13

Armenians, certain, visit St Albans,
12, 239, 245

Arsur?, forest of ('Foresta de
Arches'), 246

artists and artistic works, 185-7,
209-10

artists at St Albans in Matthew
Paris's lifetime, 221-7

Artois, Robert of, 150

Arundel, William deAlbini, earl of, 15

Assisi, 248

Assisi, St Francis of, 265

Athens, 145

Atkinson, R., 168

Augustinian canons, 138

Avignon, siege of, 112

Avranches, Henry of, 128; book of
his verses, 129, 259-60; Life of
Becket, 176; on Salisbury cathe-
dral, 254 n. ; on Abbot William
of St Albans, 85, 259

' Babylon ', 69 ; lands of the sultan of
C Terra Soldanis BabilomV),
246

Bacon, Robert, 16, 149, 161, 164,
165-6

Baker, A. T., 162, 170, 173

Bangor, Richard, bishop of, 12, 15

Bardney, abbot of, 137

18

277

INDEX

Bari, 250

Barking, Richard of, abbot of West-
minster, 137

Barletta, 250

Bartholomew the clerk, 182-3

Basingstoke, John of, archdeacon of
Leicester, 15

Bath and Wells, bishop of, see
Button; see of, 147

Baudelaire, 155 n.

Beazley, C. R., 236

Bee, abbey of, 125 and n.

Becket, St Thomas, archbishop of
Canterbury, translation of, in
1220, 2, 1 60; Matthew Paris's
Life of, see Vie de Saint Thomas

Bede, 20

Bedford, 191; castle, 20

Beirut, Waleran, bishop of, 16

Belvoir, 244; prior of, see Wendover

Belvoir, Adam de, 1823

Benedictines, the, 137-8, 144; pro-
vincial chapter, 145

Beningworth, Walter de, abbot of
Bardney, 137

Beornred, 190

Beowulf, 190

Bergen, 6

Besace, Ranulph, canon of St Paul's,

15

Bethlehemite friars, 138
Bigod, Hugh, 140
Binham, St Albans cell at, 244
Blanche of Castile, queen of France,

149, 165, 178, 217
Blund, John, 149
Blyth, 244
books, 186-7; given to St Albans by

M. Paris, 18 and n., 210, 260;

used by M. Paris, 129 n.
Borenius T., and Tristram, E. W., 207
Boroughbridge, 244
Bourges, council at, 112
Bovill, Sewal de, archbishop of York,

149

Brabant, see Henry II
Brabanters, 33
Breakspear, Nicholas, see Adrian IV,

pope
Breaut<S, Fawkes de, 14, 15, 33, 86,

149, 187, 213
Brewer, William, 33

Brienne, John of, 33

Brindisi, 240, 250

Brother William, see William

Brut, 1 80

Buc, Walter, 33

Bugre, Robert, 151

Burgh, Hubert de, earl of Kent, 13,

34, 81, 82, 149
Burton annalist, the 140
Bury St Edmunds, letter of the abbot

of, 159
Button, William, bishop of Bath, 15

Caen, annals of, 129

Caesar, Julius, 180, 257 n.

Cahorsin, derivation of word, 145

Cahorsins, 4-5, 17, 141, 143

Cairo, 69, 246

Calabria, 240

Campania (Campagna), 240

Candidus, Hugh, 202

Canterbury, 2, 244; monks of, 137;
archbishops of, see Alfric,
Anselm, Becket, Jaenbeorht,
Langton, Parker, Rich, Savoy,
Stigand

Cappochi, Raynier, cardinal, 17

Carlisle, 240 ; bishop of, see Everdon

Cartaphila, Joseph, the Wandering
Jew, 239

cartographical works, M. Paris's,
arrangement in the Chronica
Major a, 242; copies, 237 n.,
241 ; list of, 241-2 ; see also Eng-
land and Scotland, itinerary,
Palestine, world-map

Caspian mountains, the, 245

Cassibelaunus?, PL x (b)

Castilian embassy in 1255, I S

Cella, John de, abbot of St Albans
(1195-1214), 2, 86, 185, 186-7,
1 88; works ascribed to, 22-3,

4 6

Chablais or Chalonnais? (Katalonia),

240

Champagne, see Theobald
Charlemagne, 46, 180, 190
Chartres, Bernard of, Experiment-

arius, 257

Cheinduit, Ralph, 187
Chelsea, Council of, 44, 191-2
Cheney, C. R., 3, 136, 158

278

INDEX

Chevalier au Cygne, 177
Chichester, bishop of, see Wych
Chronica Majora

authorship of the annals 1254-9,

36-7

colophon, 7-10, 36-7
continuation, lon, 152
copies made after M. Paris's death,

153 and n.
editions, 31, 154-5
essentially a history of England,

III-I2

expurgation, 117-20, 124

fair copy (C) 29, 35, 59, 64-5, 99,
no, 117, 123, 153

'new material' in, 103-9

original MSS. of (A, B, and R):
21, 30-1, 50-9; arrangement of
cartographical material, 242 ;
date, 59-61; division into vol-
umes, 56-9, 210; handwriting,
3 -" 1 , 35, 5 -I J illustration, 213-
20, 223, 227, 233, Pis. vi, vn,
x (6), xiv (b) ; relationship with
Wendover, 24-30; structure of
B, 53-5

references to documents, 65-71

rough drafts, 9, 136

scope and size, 125-6

subjects treated, 144-5

translations, 155

use by later chroniclers, 1534
Chronicon Roskildense, 202
Cirencester, Richard of, Speculum

Historiale, 153
Clare, Richard of, earl of Gloucester,

13

Claudian, 128

Clovis, 94

Cnut, king of England, 232, 252

Cnut, Sty king of Denmark, 202-3,

204

Cockermouth (Cocormue), 240
Coggeshall chronicle, the, 104, 129
Colchester, artists from, 186
Colchester, Simon of, 186
Colchester, Walter of, 186-7, 234
Comestor, Peter, Historia Scholastica,

129; MS. of, used by Matthew

Paris, 129 n., 187
Conches, William of, Dragmaticon

Philosophiae, M. Paris's dia-

grams illustrating, 220, 254-5,

Pis. xiv (e) y xx

Conrad, son of Frederick II, 148
'constitutionalism', at St Albans,

187-8; of M. Paris, 48, 139-40,

187-8

Cornelin, 180
Cornwall, 244
Cornwall, countess of, probably

Sanchia of Provence, 170
Cornwall, Michael of, 260
Cotton, Bartholomew, 154
Coventry, prior and some monks of,

12; bishop of, see Stavensby
Crakehall, John, archdeacon of

Bedford, 16
Cronica excerpta a magnis cronicis S.

Albani, 41, 100, 103, 105-7,

115-16
Cronica sub conpendio abbreviate M.

Paris's genealogical chronicle,

116-17

crossbills, invasion of, in 1251, 130
Croyland, 183; Geoffrey, abbot of,

183; reformation of, 183, 184
Cynethryth, see Drida
Cyprus, in, 112, 240

Balling, John de, monk of St Albans,
224

Dalmatia, 240

Damascus, 246-7 and n.; defeat of
French at, PL vii

Damietta, 69 ; siege of, PL vi

David, prince of North Wales, 1 1 1

Dead Sea, 245, 246

Denholm- Young, N. ; on the author-
ship of the last eight leaves of
the Chronica Majora, 36-7; on
M. Paris's use of the cursus, 126;
on the 'Paper Constitution' of
1244, 136, 158

Denmark, removal of relics to, 89,
201-2, 203, 204

Dereham, Elias of, 255

Derwent, the river?, 240

Devon, 244

Diana, 180

Diceto, Ralph de, 24, 63, 105, 129,
185; St Albans copy of, 24,
129 n., 1 86 and n. ; Abbreviatio
Chronicoruniy 104

279

18-2

INDEX

Domesday Book, 203

Dominican Chapter of 1250, 136

Dominicans, 120, 122, 135, 138

Doncaster, 244

Dorset, 244

Dover, 238, 244

Drida (Cynethryth), wife of King

Offa of Mercia, 44, 190-1, 193,

194
Dunham, Ralph of, prior of Tyne-

mouth, 41
Dunstable, 244
Dunstable, Ralph, verse Life of St

Alban, 195-6
Durham, 244; bishops of, see

Farnham, Marsh

eclipses, 254, 255

Edmund, son of Henry III, 146

Edward the Confessor, 198-9; draw-
ing of, 232; M. Paris's interest
in, 176; M. Paris's Life of, see
Estoire de Seint Aedward le Rei

Edward I, king of England, 121, 130,
166

Edward, a councillor of Henry III, 14

Egfrid, see Alfric

Egwin, monk of St Albans, 89, 201-2,
204

Egypt, 246

Eia, Philip de, 12

Eleanor of Castile, wife of Edward I,

13

Eleanor of Provence, wife of Henry
111,3, 13, 17, 18, 120, 178, 181;
M. Paris on her relatives, 142

elections of abbots, 188; of bishops,
138-9, 1 66, 189

elephant, 91, 205, 256-7, PL xx (a)

Ely, bishop of, see Northwold; con-
vent of, 184, 1 98-204 passim

England and the English, 142

England and Scotland, M. Paris's
maps of, 236-41 passim, 242-4

Ermine Street, 244

Essex, 244

Estoire de Seint Aedward le Rei
(Edward\ 168 ff., 200; author-
ship, 173-6; date, 178; facsimile,
206; illustration, 207, 208, 221
-2, PL ix (&); sources, i74~5>
178

Euclid, 230

Eustace, monk of Canterbury, 162

Everdon, Silvester, bishop of Carlisle,

38

Evesham, vision of the monk of,

113

Exchequer, the, Matthew Paris and,
14, 17-18

Faaberg, see St Peter, the Faaberg

' Fabe, planicies ' (Plain of Faba), 246

Farfar, the river, 245

Farnham, Nicholas of, bishop of
Durham, 15, 34

Fauconberg, Eustace de, bishop of
London, 15

Faversham, abbot of, 142

Ferdinand III, king of Castile, 17

Fett, H., 205

Fishacre, Richard, 149

FitzAthulf, Constantine, 120

FitzOsbert, William, 149

FitzWalter, Robert, 187

Flemings, 33, 142

floods, 145-6, 150

Flares Historiarum of M. Paris, 36,
92-103, 114-15, 152-3, 154;
authorship, 37-41 ; editions and
translations, 92-3, 154-5; illus-
trations in MS. Ch t 208, 224-5 J
* new material ' in, 1039

Flores Historiarum of Roger Wen-
dover, see Wendover, Roger,
Flores Historiarum

Forest Charter, Henry Ill's, of 1225,
called 'John's Forest Charter',
115

fortune-telling tracts, 207, 220,
257-8

Fosse Way, the 244

France, 151

Franciscans, 120, 122, 138

Frederick II, emperor, death, 60-1 ;
defeat of, at Victoria, 259;
deposition of, 225 ; letters of, 17,
126, 132, 133-4; marriage of, 29;
M. Paris on, 147-8

French, the, 142

French epic literature, 177, 179-80

Fretheric, abbot of St Albans ( ? 1070-
77), 203-4

Friars of the Cross (crudferi) t 138

280

INDEX

Frisia, 145

Fritz, R., 169, 173-4

Gaddesden, John of, 14

Gairdner, J., 157

Galbraith, V. H., 158; on the author-
ship of the Flores Historiarum,
39-40; on M. Paris's death, 7-8;
on the relationship and chron-
ology of M. Paris's historical
works, 50, 64

Galilee, Sea of, 246

Galloway chieftains, 145

Gascony, 130, 146, 147

gems and rings of St Albans, 209

genealogical chronicle, M. Paris's, see
Cronica sub conpendio abbreviata

Genoa, 240

Geoffrey, monk of St Albans, later
abbot of Croyland, 183

Germanus, patriarch of Constanti-
nople, see Gregory IX

Germany, 145

Gesta Abbatwn of M. Paris, 185-9;
accounts of Abbots Alfric and
Leofric, 199200; arrangement
of, in the Lib. Additamentorum,
82-3, 84-5; authorship and
sources, 48, 1825; continua-
tions, 8, 152, 185; date, 86-7;
editions, 182; illustration, 232;
relationship with other works of
M. Paris, 85-9, 90; stories about
the relics of St Alban, 198-204

Gildas, 240

Giles, J. A., 155, 156

Gilson, J. P., 236

Girart de Roussillon, 177

Glover's roll (of arms), 253

Gorham, Geoffrey de, abbot of St
Albans (1119-46), 195

Gorham, Robert de, abbot of St
Albans (1151-66), 176, 183-4,
201

Goschen, O. (von Pusikan), 253

Gothland, 145

Gouch, John, royal elephant keeper,
256

Gough, R., 235

Grammaticus, Saxo, 190

Great Britain, maps of, see England
and Scotland

Great St Bernard Pass? (Mun Giu),
1 80

Greek numerals, 15, 145, 265

Greeks, 142

Gregory IX, pope, bull of, 37; de-
cretal of, 141 ; letters exchanged
with Germanus, patriarch of
Constantinople, in 1232, 17,

132-3

Gre"ve, Philip de, 260

Grosseteste, Robert, bishop of Lin-
coln, 15, 16, 119, 137; letter of,
133-4; M. Paris on, 138-9, 149
and n. ; his wind rose, 255

Gubiun, Ralph, abbot of St Albans
(1146-51), 184

Haakon IV, king of Norway, 4-7, 16,

1 8, 229

Haakon's Saga, 6
Hackesalt, Geoffrey, servant of

Abbot Warin of St Albans, 17
Hardy, Sir Thomas Duffus, on M.

Paris, 156, 205, 235; on the

' St Albans compilation ', 22
Harold, 146, 179
Hastings, battle of, 174-5
Hauptmann, F., 253
Hayles, 4, 13, 135

Henry I, king of England, 34, in, 116
Henry III, king of England, i, 3, 17,

20, 33, 117, 120, 122, 123, 124,

139, 140, 145, 211, 212, 260,

263; arms of, 252; befriends
M. Paris, 3-4, 18, 124; drawing
of, 264; elephant presented to,
256-7; Forest Charter of, 115;
information given to M. Paris
by, 4, 13; M. Paris on, 146-7;
visits to St Albans, 4, 12-13,
124; world-map of, 247

Henry II, count of Louvain and
duke of Brabant, 38

Hereford, 44; bishop of, see Aigue-
blanche

Hermann, 230

Hermannsson, H., 207

Hertford, John of, abbot of St Albans
(1235-63), 8 and n., 82, 88, 185,
1 88

Hertford, Thomas of, archdeacon of
Northumberland, 14

28l

INDEX

Historia Anglorum, 36, 61-5, 111-13 *>
date, 6 1 ; edition of, 155 ; expur-
gation, 120-4; illustration, 219,
227, 231-2; references to docu-
ments, 71-6

Historia Miscella> 99

Hollaender, A., 208, 224

Honnecourt, Villard of, 207 and n.

Horace, 128, 257

Hospitallers, 138

Hoveden, Roger, 23-4

Huillard-Breholles, A., 155

Hunt, W., 157

Huntingdon, Henry of, 45, 104, 114,
129, 178, 191; Historia An-
glorum t 191-2

Hurley, prior of, 138

Hyde, Book of y 20, 40-1, 153

Iceland, 207

Icknield Street, 244

Iconium, 240

India, 145, 239, 240

Innocent III, pope, fourth Lateran
Council of, 187; letters of, 115,
133; and S. Langton, 160-1

Innocent IV, pope, 61, 225, 248,
259; mandate sending M. Paris
to Norway, 5, 6, 19; vision of
his judgement, 134

Insula, Roger de, 259

Isaac, tomb of, 246

Isabella, the empress, 29

Isabella, countess of Arundel and
widow of Hugh of Albini, 13,
170, 173, 181

Italy, southern, diagram of, 247-8,
249-50

itinerary from Dover to Newcastle,
238, 244; from London to
Apulia, 91, 235, 239, 242, 247-
50, Pis. xn, xni, xv (a) and (c)

Jacob, tomb of, 246

Jaenbeorht, archbishop of Canter-
bury, 191-2

James, M. R., on M. Paris's artistic
work, 206-7, 222, 224; on his
Anglo-Norman saints' Lives,
169-71

Jenkins, Claude, 22, 158

Jerusalem, 235, 246, 247

Jessopp, A., 157

Jews, 143

John, king of England, 14, 32, 100,

140; M. Paris on, 121, 133, 146,

189

John, bishop of Ardfert, 15
John the Englishman, papal collector,

12

Jordan, river, 245, 2467 and n.
Josaphath, Cross of, 89
Jupiter, 1 80
Justinian, 128
Juvenal, 128

'Katalonia' (? in error for Chablais

or Chalonnais), 240
Kent, 244
kings, drawings of, 223, 228-9, 23 1-2,

Pis. x, xi, xvin (d)
Knowles, Dom David, 135, 158

Lambert (Jaenbeorht), archbishop
of Canterbury, 191-2

Langton, Stephen, archbishop of
Canterbury, 160-1; M. Paris's
Life of, see Vita Stephani
archiepiscopi Cantuariensis

Lateran Council, the fourth, 187

Lawrence, abbot of Westminster, 176

Lawrence, C. H., 164-5

Leach, H. G., 5

Lebanon, the mountains of, 245

Legge, M. D., 168 and n., 181

Leicester, 244

Leofric, abbot of St Albans (? c. 990-
1040), 199-200

Leofstan, abbot of St Albans (? c.
1040-66), 199, 203

Lethaby, W. R., 206, 207

Lexinton, John of, 14

Liber Additamentorum
arrangement of, 78-85
documents of 1242-50, 68-70,

83-4

documents of 1255-9, 10, 83
illustration, 219-20, 230-1, 232
origins and early history, 65-77,

85, 90-1

references to, 65-77
structure, 79-80
Liber Eliensis, 200
Liber Memorandorum, of St Albans, 78

282

INDEX

Lichfield, 44, 190, 191 ; derivation of
word, 196

Liebermann, F., 157; on the author-
ship of the Chronica Majora,
1254-9, 36 ; on M. Paris's Life of
S. Langton, 159-60; on R.
Wendover's sources for John's
reign, 24; on the 'St Albans
compilation', 22

Lincoln, bishop of, see Grosseteste;
canons of, 137

Lindblom, A., 205-6

Lombard, Peter, Sentences , 129

London, 142, 244, 249; bishop of,
see Fauconberg; see also itinerary-
London, Robert of, 'custos' of St
Albans in 1208, 2, 14

Louis VIII, king of France, 212

Louis IX, king of France, 6-7, 14,
69, 145, 149, 150, 256

Louis, R., 177

Louvain, see Henry II

Lowe, W. R. L., 202, 203 n.

Luard, H. R., on the authorship of
the Vitae Off arum, 42-3 ; edition
of the Chronica Majorca, 31,
155-7; on M. Paris's Edward,
169, 173, 178; his list of M.
Paris's shields, 253; on the
relationship of the MSS. of
R. Wendover and M. Paris,
24-5; on the *St Albans com-
pilation', 22, 28

Lucan, 128

Ludwig, F., 235-6, 249

Lusignan, Geoffrey of, 12

Luvel, Philip, 12

Lyons, 141, 249; archb. -elect of, 17

Lyons, Council of, 16, 225

Madden, Sir Frederick, on M. Paris,
155-6, 205, 235; on R. Wen-
dover, 22

Magna Carta, 28, I34n.; copies of,
in V, 115-16

Malmesbury, William of, 45, 96,
117, 129, 143, 191; M. Paris's
MS, of, 129 n. ; Gesta pontificum,
192; Historia Novella, 104

Mansel, John, 12, 14, 196, 260

maps, see England and Scotland,
Palestine, world-map

Marcellina, 190

Margaret, queen of Scotland, 4
Marisco, William de, 16
Marmodius (Maredudd?), king of

Wales, 190, 193
Marseilles, 240
Marsh, Richard, bishop of Durham,

187, 189

Marshal, Gilbert, 59, 151
Marshal, Walter, 59
Marshal, William, 259, 260
Martel, William, sacrist of St Albans,

1 88
Martin, Master, papal nuncio, 134,

151

Matthew, prior of St Albans, 187-8
Maul6on, Savari de, 33
Maurienne (Vallis Moriane), 240
Melkeley, Gervase of, 16, 128, 160,

259

Melkeley, Robert, 247
Menelaus, 180
merchants, 145
Merlin's prophecies, 117
Merton, priory of, 101
Messina, 240
Meyer, P., 169, 178, 181
Michelant, H., and Raynaud, G.,

235, 245

Miller, K., 235, 247
Mitchell, J. B., 236, 237, 242
Mohammedans, 144
Mongol Khan, the, 135
Mongols (Tartars), 144, 225, 233,

239

Monmouth, Geoffrey of, 129; His-
toria regum Britanniae, 25-6, 94;
M. Paris's MS. of, 129 n.
Monte, Robert de, 63, 104, 129
Montfort, Simon de, 149; the elder,

259

Morocco, 14

Mun Giu (? Great St Bernard Pass),
180

Murmelin, 1'amiral, ruler of Moroc-
co, 239

Naples, 250

Navarre, see Theobald

Neptune, 180

Newark, 244

Newburgh, William of, 20

283

INDEX

Newcastle, 238, 244

Nicaea, siege of, in

Nicholas, moneyer to Henry III, 14

Nicholas, papal legate, 188

Nidarholm, 4

Nidaros, archbishop of, 19

Nile, 246

Noah's Ark, 239

Norfolk, 244

Northallerton, 244

Northampton, 244

Northaw, wood of, 187

Northwold, Hugh, bishop of Ely,

137
Norway, M. Paris's visit to, 4-7, 18,

19, 229, 262; M. Paris and

medieval art in, 205-6, 229;

papal legate in, 4, 119
Norwich, bishop of, see SufBeld
numbers, unreliability of M. Paris's,

136

Odense, 201-3

Odo, former moneyer to King

Waldemar III of Denmark, 17
Offa (I), king of the Angles, 42, 48,

189, 190, 193, 194
Offa (II), king of Mercia, 14, 42-8

passim, 89, 125, 189-94 passim,

197-8, 221, 259
Offa's dyke, 193
Ogier, 1 80
Old Man of the Mountain, lands of

the ('Terra Senis de Monte'),

246

Ordinal, M. Paris's, 247
Osney chronicler, the, 153
Otho, papal legate, 12, 114, 121, 134,

1 6 6, 179; M. Paris on, 166-7
Otranto, 250
Otto IV, emperor, 251
Ouse, the river, 45, 191
Ovid, 38, 40, 47, 128, 163
Oxenedes, John of, 20 n., 154
Oxford University, 4, 13

Palestine, 16; maps of, 235, 239, 241,

244-7, Pis. xvi, xvii
Pallas, 1 80

Pamphylia (Pamfir[i]a), 240
* Paper Constitution', the, of 1244,

136

Paravicini, the Baroness, 162-3, 165
parhelion, drawing of a, 91, 254
Paris, Matthew

date of birth, 2

date of death, 7-11, 156

errors and scribal blunders, 32,
37-8, 125, 130

gifts to St Albans, 18; see also
books

handwriting and autograph MSS.,

35

historians used by, 129

historical method: abuse of his-
torical material, 134; collection
of documents, 17-18, 34, 78 ff.,
126; dating of documents and
events, 136; opinions and
rumours, 135; system of signa,
1 8, 38, 651!., 21 1 ; treatment
of documents, 132-4; verbal
reports, 135-6

historical research, 125

historical works: annual sum-
maries in, 150-1 ; editions, 154-
5; influence in Middle Ages,
1524; translations, 155

humour, 264

hypocrisy, 131, 263

interest in cartography, 239-40;
etymologies, 48, 145, 196; hagi-
ology, 176; heraldry, 251 ; litera-
ture, 177, 179-80; money, 145;
Offa of Mercia, 46, 197-8

* new material', 103-9

on the baronial reform movement,
140; Church reform, 138-9;
civil servants, 142-3 ; foreigners,
1 42; the friars, 11920, 122, 138;
the Greek church, 141 ; itinerant
justices, 139; lawyers, 142;
'martyrs', 149; the papacy, 48,
118, 120, 124, 131, 133, 140-1,
185, 189, 263; the State, 139-
40; taxation, 139; theologians,
142; various contemporaries,
146-9

prejudices, 136-43

recent studies, 1568

scribe employed by him, 10 and
n., 118-19, 215-16

style, 126-8; biblical quotations,
129; correction, efforts at, 31-2,

284

INDEX

Paris, Matthew (cont.)

43; favourite phrases, 39, 40,
46-7, 126-7, i59-6o, 163-4,
1 84 and n. , 1 89 n. , 1 97 ; imagery,
127-8, 174-5; play on words,
33, 38-9, 40, 46-7, i27> 163,
189 n. ; quotations and allusions,
33, 38-9, 4, 47> 126-7, 128-9,
179-80, 184 and n., 189 n., 200;
vocabulary, 47, 127, 151
veracity, 131-6
view of history, 149-51; politics,

139-40

works : see Chronica Major a, His-
toria Anglorum, Floras His-
toriarum, Abbreviatio Chronico-
rum, Cronica excerpta a magnis
cronicis S. Albani, Cronica sub
conpendio abbreviata (the genea-
logical chronicle), Gesta Abba-
tum, Vitae Offarum, Vie de Seint
Auban, Vie de Seint Edmond,
Vie de Saint Thomas, Estoire de
Seint Aedward le Rei, Vita Beati
Edmundi archiepiscopi Cantua-
riensis, Vita Stephani archiepis-
copi Cantuariensis; see also
cartographical works, gems and
rings of St Albans, St Amphi-
balus, tract on the miracles of

Paris University, i

Parker, Matthew, archbishop of
Canterbury, 154-5

* Parliament* at Oxford, in 1258, 140

Parthia, 240

Passelewe, Simon, 13, 147

Pastoureaux, 4

Patriarchs, drawings of the, 230

Paul, abbot of St Albans (1077-93),
200

Perugia, 248

Peter, a proctor of Philip of Savoy,

i?

Peterborough, 203
philosophers, drawings of, 230
Phoebus, 1 80
Pinefred (Wineferth), 190
Piper, Paulin, 260
Plato, 1 80, 230
Plehn, H., 59, 157-8
Pluto, 1 80
Po, the river, 249

Poitevins, 33, 140, 142, 145

Poitiers, Peter of, version of the
Compendium historiae in genea-
logia Christi, 116, 225

Poitou, i, 33

Pontefract, 244

Pontigny, 164; monks of, 137-8

Pontremoli, 249

Powicke, Sir Maurice, 158; on M.
Paris's death, 7-9; on the *St
Albans compilation', 23; on
relationship of M. Paris's his-
torical MSS., 25, 49-56, 61, 64,
66, 71-2

Priam, 180

prices, of bread and wine, 145

Pronostica Pitagorice Consider ationis,

258

Pronosticon Socratis Basilei, 257
Provence, count of, see Raymond-

Berenger V
proverbs, 179
psalters, 222, 224
Ptolemy, 180
Pythagoras, 230

Quadrilogus, 178
Quendrida, see Drida

Raleigh, William de, bishop of Win-
chester, 120

Ralph, abbot of Ramsey, 16, 18

Rarnsbury, see Alfric

Ramsey, anonymous monk, of 20;
monastic annals, 129

Raymond-Berenger V, count of
Provence, 14

Raymond, prior of St Albans, 187

Raynaud, G., and Michelant, H.,

235, ^45

Reading, monastic annals of, 104,
129

Red Book of the Exchequer, 17-18,
132 n., 134

Rich, Edmund, archbishop of Canter-
bury, 19, 20, 121, 1 66, 179, 225;
bull of canonization, 1645;
M. Paris on, 149, 166-7;
quarrel with his monks, 114,
1 66, 179; see also Vie de Seint
Ed-mend, Vita Beati Edmundi
archiepiscopi Cantuariensis

285

INDEX

Richard, king of England, 2, 17;

drawing of, 223, 232, PL x (a)
Richard, bishop of Bangor, 12, 15
Richard, duke of Normandy, 180
Richard, earl of Cornwall, 12, 15,
119, 213, 239> 2 4 8 > 259; arms
of, 252; contributes to the
Chronica Major a, 13, 135-6;
M. Paris on, 148
Richard the Painter, 186, 209-10,

234

Rickert, E., 22, 45-6, 193

Rickert, M., 208-9, 216, 221, 222-3,
226

Rievaulx, Aelred of, Life of Edward
the Confessor, 174, 176, 178

Riley, H. T., 8

Roches, Peter des, bishop of Win-
chester, 15

Rochester, 244

Roger the Hermit, tomb of, 186

Roman de Renaud de Montauban,
177 n.

Roman de Rou, 180

Roman roads, 244

'Romania', 240

Rome, 240, 247 ; plan of, 248

Rudbourne, Thomas, Breviarium
Chronicorum, 153

* Rumania ', 240
*Ruscia', 240
Rutebeuf, 260

*Saba flumen'?, 240

* Sabea patria', 240

St Alban: discovery of tomb, 195;
invention and translation by
Offa II, 43, 45, 191, 195, 197-8,
221; Life of, by M. Paris, see
Vie de Seint Auban ; other Lives
of, 195; martyrdom of, PL
viii (a); relics of, 14, 17, 89,
184, 198-204; translation of in
1129, 195

St Albans, abbots of, see Wlnoth,
Alfric, Leofric, Leofstan, Alfric
or Egfrid, Fretheric, Paul, Gor-
ham, Geoffrey de, Gubiun,
Ralph, Gorham, Robert de,
Simon, Warin, Cella, John de,
Trumpington, William of, and
Hertford, John of

St Albans, 88, 91, 137, 185 ff., 237,
244 ; Book of Benefactors of, see
Walsingham; foundation of, 43,
45, 191, 193-4, 195; foundation
charters of, 195; Henry III at,
4, 12-13; other visitors to, 1220-
59, 12-13 ; Liber Memorandorum
of, 78; M. Paris on, 48 and n.,
128, 144, 187; and the outside
world, 11-13; rings and gems
of, tract on the, 209; visitation
of, 138

St Albans, John of, goldsmith, 17,
1 86

St Albans, Richard of, KingHaakon's
agent in England, 6

St Albans, Thomas of, prior of
Wymondham, 15

St Albans, Walter of, 22

St Albans, William of, Life of St
Alban, 178, 195-6

c St Albans compilation', 22-3, 28,
96-7

St Amphibalus, invention of, 88,
195; Life of, 1 68, 170; tract on
the miracles of, 195, 196-7;
translation of, 196-7

St Augustine's, Canterbury, sub-
prior of, 138

St Benet Holm, abbey of, in Norway,
4-7, 19, 229

St Giles, John of, a Dominican, 16

St Martin, Walter of, a Dominican,
16

St Oswald, relics of, 202-3

St Paul, 239, 240

St Peter, 173

St Peter, the Faaberg, now in the
Oslo Museum, 205-7 passim,
228-9

St Peter's Pence, 191

St Symeon, port of Antioch, 246

St Thomas of Acre, prior of, 13

SS. Germanus and Lupus, 221

Saladin, 15

Salerno, 250

Salisbury, 237

Salisbury Cathedral, Henry of Avran-
ches on, 254 n.

Sanford, Cecilia de, 16

Saunders, O. E., 207

Savoy, 240; count of, see Amadeus

286

INDEX

Savoy, Boniface of, archbishop of

Canterbury, 119, 120, 124; M.

Paris on, 119, 120, 122, 138, 149;

visits St Albans, 12, 13
Savoy, Philip of, archbishop-elect of

Lyons, 17
Savoy, Thomas of, count of Flanders,

12

Scema Britannie 91, 241, 244
Scotland, see England and Scotland
'Senis de Monte, Terra', 246
Sicily, 240; diagram of, 248, 250;

kingdom of, 146, 239, 248
Siena, 248
Simon, abbot of St Albans (i 1 67-83),

183-5

Smith, A. L., 133-4, 148, 157, 261-2
Socrates, 230
Somerset, 244
Sopwell, nunnery of, 185
Southwark Annals, the, 98, 104-6, 129
'Spelman MS.', the, of the Gesta

Abbatum, 8 n. 3
Spoleto, 240, 248
Stavensby, Alexander, bishop of

Coventry and Lichfield, 14
Stigand, archbishop of Canterbury,

Matthew Paris on, 175; and St

Albans, 200, 203
Suchier, H., 169, 178
Suffield, Walter, bishop of Norwich,

12

Suffolk, 244
Sussex, 244
Sutri, 248, 249
Swan, knights of the, 89, 177
Swereford, Alexander, 14, 17
Sylvester, Bernard, 257; Cosmo-

graphia, 128
Syria, 246

Tarsus, 240

Taxster, John, 24, 153

Templars, 138

Temple, the, master of in Scotland, 14

Terence, 39 n.

Tetim (Tethys?), 180

Thames, 173

Theobald I, count of Champagne

and king of Navarre, 37
Theopold, L., 42, 46
Thingferth (Tuinfreth), 190

Thomas, chaplain of Cardinal Ray-

nier Cappochi, 17
Thomas, monk of Sherborne, 4, 16
Thomson, S. H., 134
Thony, Roger de, 177
Thryth, legendary wife of Offa 1, 193
Thurkelby, Roger, 14
' Tigris *, in error for Nile, 246
tin, discovered in Germany, 145
trade, 145-6
Trani, 250

Tournay, Simon of, story of, 15, 34
Tower, the, 256
Trapani, 239
Trumpington, William of, abbot of

St Albans (1214-35), 85, 87,

185-8 passim, 196-7, 259, 263
Tuinfreth (Thingferth), 190
*Tur[c]hia*, 240
Tynemouth, St Albans cell at, 244;

prior of, see Dunham
Tynemouth, John of, 200
Tyre, William of, on the marvels of

the East, 15, 129

Uhlemann, E., 169

Valence, 249

Valence, William de, 121 ; household
of, 12

*Vallis Anconie', 240

'Vallis Moriane' (Maurienne), 240

'Vallis Spoleti', 240

Venetia, 240

Vere, Baldwin de, 14

Vergil, Polydore, 154

verse, Anglo-Norman, 168-81 ; Latin,
129, 258-60

Vescy, Eustace de, 32-3

Victoria, 259

Vie de Saint Thomas (Thomas),
168 ff., date and sources, 178;
illustration, 207, 221-2

Vie de Seint Auban (Alban), 168 ff.,
195; autograph MS., 170, 221;
date and sources, 177-8; fac-
simile, 206, 220; illustration,
206, 208, 219-21, 227-8, PI. vni

Vie de Seint Edmond (Edmund),
1 68 ff., authorship, 173-6; date
and sources, 177-8

Vienne, 249

287

INDEX

Ville-Dieu, Alexander of, Doctrinale,
260

Vinsauf, Geoffrey of, Nova Poetria>
38, 128

Virgil, 128, 257

Vita Beati Edmundi archiepiscopi
Cantuariensis, 161-8, 178

Vita Stephani archiepiscopi Cantua-
riensis, 159-61

Vitae Off arum, 125; authorship, 22,
42-8; contents, 190-1 ; date, 89-
90; illustration, 208, 230-1;
MSS., 46, 81, 193 n.; not used
by R. Wendover, 43-5 ; purpose,
189-90, 194; reference to, 198;
sources, 191-3

Vitalis the Venetian, story of, 2

Viterbo, 248

Walcheren, battle of, nr
Waldemar III, king of Denmark,

17

Waleran, bishop of Beirut, 16
Wallace, W., 162, 168
Wallingford, St Albans cell at, 244
Wallingford, John of, infirmarer of

St Albans; chronicle, 20 n.,

154; collectanea, 116, 220, 229-

3O> 255, 256; and M. Paris's

map of England and Scotland,

238, 243, 244
Wallingford, John of, chronicle

wrongly attributed to, 46, 194
Walsingham, Thomas, and the Gesta

Abbatum, 8, 185; influenced by

M. Paris, 152; on M. Paris, 8,

18-20, 170, 209, 221; Ypodigma

Neustriae, 152 and n.
Walter, Hubert, 140
Waltham, abbey, 247; letter of the

abbot of, 159
Wandering Jew, the, see Cartaphila,

Joseph

war, effect of, on trade, 146
Warin, abbot of St Albans (i 183-95),

2, 17, 183 n., 185, 187-8
Warmund, king of the West Angles,

190

Watling Street, 244
Wats, William, 155
weather, 144
Welsh, M. Paris on the, 142; OfTa's

campaigns against the, 193

Wendover, Roger, 21-34 passim, 263
Flores Historiarum, ' improved '
by M. Paris, 31-4; MSS. of, 21
and n.; recensions, 28-30;
relationship of MSS. with those
of M. Paris, 24-30; sources,
23-4, 43-5; termination, 28-30;
use of in V > 106, 115-16

Westacre, the prior of, 16

Westminster, 3, 15, 174, 178, 198,
247; abbey of, 88, 92, 99-101,
173-4, 175; convent of, 145;
abbots of, see Barking, Lawrence

'Westminster, Matthew of ', 41, 153,

154

Widsith, 190
William the Conqueror, 105, 175,

200, 203; arms of, 252; drawing

of, 232; M. Paris on, 146
William Rufus, 34, 174, 185
William, a Franciscan, 16, 209, 222-3
Wilson, R. M., 42
Wiltshire, 244
Winchester, countess of, probably

Matilda, countess of Pembroke,

170
Winchester, 4; monks of, 12, 149;

bishops of, see Raleigh, Roches
wind roses, 255-6
winds, M. Paris's verses on the,

254 n., 258-9
Wineferth (Pinefred), 190
Wlnoth, abbot of St Albans, 89, 202
Woodstock, 211
Worcester, Florence of, 129, Chroni-

con ex chronicis, 26-7
world-map, 238, 241, 247
Wormald, F., 207-8, 257
Wroxham, Reginald of, chronicles

of, 153
Wych, Richard, bishop of Chichester,

15, 161, 162, 164, 165
Wykes, Thomas, 20, 153
Wymondham, St Albans cell at, 244

Yarmouth, 145

Ydumea, 240

York, 4, 190; archbishop of, see

Bovill; archbishopric of, 147
Yorkshire, 237
Ywar, sacrist of Peterborough, 202-3

Zouche, Alan de la, 12

26026

00 <
5 m

33 CO