From The Chronicle of England, by John Capgrave [fifteenth century], edited by the Rev. Frances Charles Hingeston, B. A., The Rolls Series, London: Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans, and Roberts; 1858; pp. 355-356.
THIS curious fragment has been bound up as fly-leaves with the two MSS. of Capgrave’s commentary on the Creeds. The leaves thus singularly preserved are only four in number, the first eight pages being in the All Soul’s MS. (which is Capgrave’s autography copy), the remainder in the Balliol MS. Though they are now (as we have called them) “fly-leaves,” it is quite clear that they have been glued down to the boards by way of lining, and have been afterwards removed. In consequence of this some of the words have been a little mutilated.
There can be no doubt that these remains constitute a part of an original work by John Capgrave. It is true that no notice of his having ever written anything of the kind occurs in the lists of his works 356 which have come down to us; but these, though very copious, are confessedly imperfect, and in almost every instance end with the words “Atque alia plura scripsit,” [and of others he wrote] or words of the same import. On the other hand, as we find from the Epistle Dedicatory prefixed to his Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, that he spent some time in Rome, and that he was in bad health while he was there, we are not exceeding the limits of probability in suggesting that some of this time was spent in preparing an account of the antiquities and curiosities around him.
Again, the handwriting is identical with that of the English Chronicle and the other works of Capgrave of which we possess the autographs. It is, indeed, less regular, but this, if it proved anything, would seem to indicate that these fragments were only first and rough copies, the probability of which the universal carelessness of the spelling, and the incompleteness of many of the sentences, certainly seem to strengthen.
Again, it is impossible to read these fragments after having read the English chronicle, without perceiving the great similarity of style and expression which exists between them, and which would of itself be almost sufficient to decide the question.1
These facts justify, in our opinion, the inference we have drawn, that the following remains form part of a lost work by the Author of the Present Chronicle.
1 Especially compare the account given in these fragments of the manner in which Athens was saved from being destroyed by Alexander the Great, with the relation of the same story in the Chronicle of England. See page 51.