"Arts, Faculty of"@en . "English, Department of"@en . "DSpace"@en . "UBCV"@en . "Fredeman, Elta Jane"@en . "2011-05-24T22:06:13Z"@en . "1970"@en . "Doctor of Philosophy - PhD"@en . "University of British Columbia"@en . "This dissertation is the first critical examination of the English works of the fifteenth-century Augustinian friar, John Capgrave (1393-1464). The appraisal of them is placed within the context of his whole career, for it is important to recognize that much of his time was devoted to duties as an official of his order and that while his vernacular canon is extensive, it is not as large as his Latin.\r\nThe biographical chapter synthesizes details about Capgrave's home convents, the conventual life and educational system of the Augustinians, the people Capgrave came in contact with and the duties of the offices he held in order to make new conjectures about certain periods in his life, to demonstrate that he was not a sequestered figure ignorant of the turbulent world about him, and to provide the background for some of the characteristic stylistic traits identifiable\r\nin his vernacular works.\r\nIn terms of Capgrave's whole career, it is apparent that the English works are in one sense an interruption, for all four of the saints' lives and The Solace of Pilgrims were written in a twelve-year period before he became provincial of the order in England, and after he had mainly ceased writing the biblical commentaries which had gained him his theological reputation in the 1430's and would preoccupy him once more in the 1450's.\r\nBefore the individual saints' lives are treated, a general chapter demonstrates that Capgrave's four lives all follow the Antonian\r\nmodel of the longer Latin life and are therefore divergent from the native English tradition which focused on a few critical moments, especially the martyrdom itself. It includes a survey of the development of the genre in England, a summary of the features of the Latin lives, and an analysis of traits common to Capgrave's works. \r\nThe next four chapters deal with Capgrave's lives in the order of their composition, and the contents of each chapter are inevitably conditioned by the state of scholarship on the work and the materials available. The study of The Life of St. Norbert, a poem which is still unpublished and has received no critical attention, is chiefly concerned with an identification of the Latin source and a comparison of it with the more legendary version which Capgrave produced. At the same time it considers the various aspects of treatment and style which make Capgrave's poem more dramatic than its source. \r\nThe probable sources of Capgrave's second rime royal legend, The Life of St. Katherine of Alexandria, have already been established; and after treating some of the assumptions about the manuscript transmission, this chapter moves to a more purely literary analysis. Since the poem is so long, the discussion centres on poetic techniques, characterization, and the structure of the two elaborate debates. \r\nThe two prose lives are much briefer; each depends on a single Latin source, one identified, the other apparently no longer extant. The first, The Life of St. Augustine, is closely compared with its source, a Vita by another Augustinian friar, Jordanus of Saxony, to isolate illustrations of traits already described as characteristic of\r\nCapgrave\u00E2\u0080\u0099s work in the earlier chapters and to provide examples of his skill as translator. These same techniques are also discussed in relation to The Life of St. Gilbert of Sempringham, but, here, more emphasis is placed on the correction of misapprehensions about the actual source and on the construction of the work. \r\nIn the last chapter, the survey concludes with a study of Capgrave's two \"original\" works, The Solace of Pilgrims and The Chronicle of England. The derivative nature of their materials is acknowledged and illustrated, but attention is focused on Capgrave's concern for structure and the details which reveal it. \r\nThe conclusion indicates, that devotional works such as Capgrave wrote are more characteristic of the fifteenth century than the few secular works which are subjected to continual scrutiny in most studies of the period and that further examination of his works and their techniques would lead to a more realistic appraisal of the methods and taste of the time."@en . "https://circle.library.ubc.ca/rest/handle/2429/34768?expand=metadata"@en . "THE LIFE AND ENGLISH WRITINGS OF JOHN CAPGRAVE by ELTA JANE FREDEMAN B.A. , University of British Columbia, 1963 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in the Department of ENGLISH We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Apr i l , 1970 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s in p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f the r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I a g r e e t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y . I f u r t h e r agree tha p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my Department o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . It i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Department o f The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Co lumbia V a n c o u v e r 8, Canada Date Abstract This dissertation i s the f i r s t c r i t i c a l examination of the English works of the fifteenth-century Augustinian f r i a r , John.Capgrave (1393-1464). The appraisal of them is placed within the context of his whole career, for i t i s important to recognize that much of his time was devoted to duties as an o f f i c i a l of his order and that while his vernacular canon is extensive, i t is not.as large as his Latin. The biographical chapter synthesizes details about Capgrave's home convents, the conventual l i f e and educational system of the Augustinians, the people Capgrave came in contact with and the duties of the offices he held in order to make new conjectures about certain periods in his l i f e , to demonstrate that he was not a sequestered figure ignorant of the turbulent world about him, and to provide the background for some of the characteristic s t y l i s t i c traits identi-fiable in his vernacular works. In terms of Capgrave's whole career, i t is apparent that the English works are in one sense an interruption, for a l l four of the saints' lives and The Solace of Pilgrims were written in a twelve-year period before he became provincial of the order in England, and after he had mainly ceased writing the b i b l i c a l commentaries which had gained him his theological reputation' in\" the 1430's and would preoccupy him once more in the 1450's. Before the individual saints' lives are treated,, a general chapter demonstrates that Capgrave's four lives a l l follow the Antonian i i i model of the longer Latin l i f e and are therefore divergent from the native English tradition which focused on a few c r i t i c a l moments, especially the martyrdom i t s e l f . It includes a survey of the develop-ment of the genre in England, a summary of the features of the Latin lives, and an analysis of traits common to Capgrave's works. The next four chapters deal with Capgrave's lives in the order of their composition, and the contents of each chapter are inevitably conditioned by the state of scholarship on the work and the materials available. The study of The Life of St. Norbert, a poem which i s s t i l l unpublished and has received no c r i t i c a l attention, i s chiefly concerned with an identification of the Latin source and a comparison of i t with the more legendary version which Capgrave produced. At the same time i t considers the various aspects of treatment and style which make Capgrave's poem more dramatic than i t s source. The probable sources of Capgrave's second rime royal legend, The Life of St. Katherine of Alexandria, have already been established; and after treating some of the assumptions about the manuscript trans-mission, this chapter moves to a more purely literary analysis. Since the poem is so long, the discussion centres on poetic techniques, characterization, and the structure of the two elaborate debates. The two prose lives are much briefer; each depends on a single Latin source, one identified, the other apparently\" no longer extant. The f i r s t , The Life of St. Augustine, is closely compared with i t s source, a Vita by another Augustinian f r i a r , Jordanus of Saxony, to isolate illustrations of traits already described as characteristic of iv Capgrave!s work in the earlier chapters and to provide examples of his s k i l l as translator. These same techniques are also discussed in rela-tion to The Life of St. Gilbert of Sempringham, but, here, more emphasis is placed on the correction of misapprehensions about the actual source and on the construction of the work. In the last chapter, the survey concludes with r a study of Capgrave's two \"original\" works, The Solace of Pilgrims and The Chronicle of England. The derivative nature of their materials is acknowledged and illustrated, but attention is focused on Capgrave's concern for structure and the details which reveal i t . The conclusion indicates, that devotional works such as . Capgrave wrote are more.characteristic of the fifteenth century than the few secular works which are subjected to continual scrutiny in most studies of the period and that further examination of his works and their techniques would lead to a more r e a l i s t i c appraisal of the methods and taste of the time. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I. BIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . 9 I I . THE ENGLISH SAINTS' LIVES . . . . . . 70 I I I . THE LIFE OF. ST. NORBERT 102 IV. THE LIFE OF ST.. KATHERINE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 V. THE LIFE OF ST. AUGUSTINE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231 VI. THE LIFE OF ST. GILBERT 264 VII, THE CHRONICLE OF ENGLAND and THE SOLACE OF PILGRIMS . . 310 CONCLUSION .... . . . . . . . . . . -. . . . .. . , 369 BIBLIOGRAPHY 374 . INTRODUCTION John Capgrave (1393-1464) was born seven years before Chaucer died; he was a contemporary of Bokenham, Hoccleve, Lydgate, Pecock, and many of the Scottish Chaucerians; and before his death, both Malory and Caxton, the two most important late 15th-century writers, had been launched on their respective literary careers. Yet Capgrave, who was regarded in his own lifetime as a highly learned man with considerable influence, i s assigned no more than a minor entry in the annals of 15th-century literature, even though his writings in English exceed in bulk and in variety those of Bokenham and Hoccleve. In the general derogation and dismissal of 15th-century literature that has dominated scholarship, Capgrave has not been so much condemned as i g -nored; and his works have received l i t t l e more than editorial\u00E2\u0080\u0094and that scarcely accurate\u00E2\u0080\u0094attention. It is the purpose of this disser-tation to reinstate Capgrave in his rightful position in the literary history of the period. To that end, the dissertation offers both a study of his l i f e and a comprehensive examination of his vernacular writings, which places him within the context of his age and indicates the p o s s i b i l i t i e s suggested by several unexplored approaches to his works. For nearly four-hundred years after Capgrave's death, only a single work attributed to him was available in printed form. That work, the Latin Nova Legenda Anglia, a collection of saints' lives , is now known to be almost entirely composed by John of Tynemouth. 2 Between 1858 and 1911, manuscript discoveries revived i n t e r e s t i n Capgrave, and during t h i s period a l l but one of h i s English works were printed. Their e d i t o r s , eager to provide texts for another medieval author, were unfortunately content to accept u n c r i t i c a l l y the long-standing appraisal of Capgrave's learning and to perpetuate the many errors i n the received biography. More serious, the editions themselves are i n f e r i o r . The two 19th-century texts\u00E2\u0080\u0094Hingston's e d i t i o n of The Chronicle of England (1858) and Horstmann's e d i t i o n of The L i f e of St. Katherine of Alexandria ( 1 8 9 3 ) \u00E2\u0080\u0094 r e f l e c t poor manuscript choices; and the introductions to both J . J . Munro's e d i t i o n of The Lives of St. Augustine and St. G i l b e r t and a Sermon (1910) and C A . M i l l ' s e d i t i o n of The Solace of Pilgrims (1911) f a i l to correct obvious errors or to provide any l i t e r a r y evaluation. W.H. Clawson's projected e d i t i o n of the Huntington manuscript of The L i f e of St. Norbert was never com-pleted, but t h i s l a s t unpublished English work i s now being edited by Father C L . Smetana, O.S.A. Only since 1943 has Capgrave been given more than perfunctory notice i n l i t e r a r y h i s t o r i e s and i n r e l i g i o u s and h i s t o r i c a l r e f e r -ences. However, the body of c r i t i c a l comment on him i s s t i l l i n o r d i n -ately small. There i s no book devoted to Capgrave; and the few important a r t i c l e s are concerned with s p e c i f i c problems\u00E2\u0080\u0094of biography, bibliography, and s o u r c e s \u00E2\u0080\u0094 r a t h e r than with general assessment. The best and most extensive s i n g l e study i s A l b e r i c de Meijer's three-part bio-bibliography published i n Augustiniana i n 1955-1957, which corrects many of the accumulated errors of the past century and contains the 3 only detailed bibliography. The sources of one poetic and one prose saint's l i f e \u00E2\u0080\u0094 t h e St. Katherine and the St. Augustine\u00E2\u0080\u0094have been exam-ined, and the place of the latter in the religious dispute over precedence between Augustine's order and the Augustinian canons regular has been investigated and evaluated. Of the remaining works, The Solace of Pilgrims has received some slight attention, because of the light i t sheds on the history of medieval Rome, while The Chronicle of England is only mentioned in passing in catalogues of the his t o r i c a l writings of the period. The commentators have not, however, provided a survey of Capgrave's total achievement which examines the course of his career as man and writer for materials which help to explain the style of his vernacular writings and describes the qualities of his particular literary contribution. The dissertation is divided into seven chapters, consisting of an introductory biographical survey, a general chapter on medieval saints' lives , four central chapters on Capgrave's poetic and prose saints' l i v e s , and a fi n a l chapter treating the two later prose works. Treatment necessarily depends on the nature of the mater-i a l under consideration in each of the chapters. Thus, the disserta-tion i s descriptive, h i s t o r i c a l , and c r i t i c a l ; i t seeks to defend no single thesis, either about Capgrave in particular or about Middle English writing in general. Chapter one u t i l i z e s , but goes well beyond, the biographical discoveries of, de Meijer. In addition to fleshing out the skeleton provided by de Meijer regarding Capgrave's education and his l i f e as 4 an Augustinian, the chapter seeks to establish with as great a pre-cision as possible the chronology of his l i f e , especially as i t illum-inates the so-called twelve \"lost years\" between 1423-1440. In his biographical a r t i c l e , de Meijer turned up several new documents relat-ing to Capgrave, but he failed to enlarge and.interpret the bare l i f e records. To remedy this paucity of \"body\" in Capgrave's biography, this chapter includes a discussion of the communal l i f e of the Augustinians, additional details on Capgrave's home convents, the course of his studies, and his trip to Rome; i t also provides a record of his contacts with other Austin friars who achieved literary or ecclesiastical prominence in the period, a study of his patrons and of his duties as prior-provincial, and some reflections on the.probable influence of his education and position on his literary productions. In this instance external materials are adduced.to provide both the background for Capgrave's works and the evidence for conjectures about certain periods in his l i f e . If, for example, no one has treated the early years of Capgrave's education because there is no documentary evidence, there is enough data about the schools of the Augustinian friars to make a relatively detailed description of i t possible. By this method, the effects of Capgrave's lengthy scholastic training and ecclesiastical vocation on his choice of subjects and treatment of them are made more recognizable and immediate. Although the applica-tion of these materials may sometimes seem circuitous, i t s result i s not digressive, for i t makes possible the recreation of a far more v i t a l figure than the l i f e records alone could ever provide. 5 Besides this synthesis, the chapter argues for new dates for some of.the known events in Capgrave's career, different places than those usually assumed for his residence during certain years, and.a reduction in the number of works attributed to him. For a man whose, l i f e i s so thinly documented, every fact has potential significance, and the attempt in this chapter has been to get beneath the fi c t i v e facade of Capgrave as simply \"the most learned of the Augustinians\" to an authentic recreation of the author of the literary works that he is known to have produced. The main body of the dissertation consists of a discussion of Capgrave's English works. It opens with a chapter establishing the background and context of Capgrave's saints' lives. Capgrave himself clearly believed deeply in the church's teachings on saints and miracles; and i t i s imperative that an attempt be made to ill u s t r a t e the nature of his commitment. In one sense i t is fortunate that Capgrave's work has not been subjected to scrutiny by any generation of c r i t i c s , for i t means that there is no need to disprove theories unifying what seems disorganized or disruptive in i t . Part of the purpose in this chapter i s to demonstrate that Capgrave worked within the traditions of.his own time, and that, consequently, i t i s inac-curate to describe the structure, organization, or development of his work as crude or primitive, as the literary historians have generally done. Following this general analysis of their context, of their divergence from the native model, and of their common features, a 6 chapter is devoted to each of the four lives. Instead of conforming to a single, ri g i d model, each chapter follows a pattern intended to an-swer the most immediate and important questions,about i t s subject. Chapter three treats The Life of St. Norbert, a poem which has received no c r i t i c a l attention whatsoever, and it,includes.a summary biography of this l i t t l e known saint, an identification of the Latin sources, and a discussion of the omissions which increase the marvel-lous elements while reducing the historical figure, and of the aspects of style which make Capgrave's version more dramatic. Chapter four deals with Capgrave's second rime royal l i f e , The Life of St. Katherine. The study is facil i t a t e d by the recent (1961) work on i t s sources by Auvo Kurvinen, and after correcting some of.her statements, i t moves to a more purely literary analysis, treating the poetic techniques, the more sophisticated and complex characterization, and the.carefully polished structure of.the highly elaborate debates. At the end of this chapter, the two poetic lives are compared and the considerable advance which The Life of St. Katherine represents is discussed. The-two prose,lives are briefer, but each has i t s peculiar problems. ' The only complete copies extant appear in a single manu-script, Capgrave's holograph; but though they were printed sixty years ago, neither has been:analyzed for i t s reflection of English prose style in the mid-fifteenth century or for evidence of Capgrave's characteristic techniques. In chapter five, the f i r s t of them, The Life of St. Augustine is compared to i t s source, a Latin Vita 7 identified by Arbesmann and Sanderlin in 1943. Since this i s the only case where the source i s both known and in the same medium (i.e. prose), this comparison provides the most concrete demonstration of Capgravian traits already identified in The Life of St. Norbert and The Life of St. Katherine. And, again because direct comparisons can be made, The Life of St. Augustine provides the best examples of Capgrave's s k i l l as a translator. Some of these techniques are also discussed in relation to the second prose l i f e , The Life of St. Gilbert of Sempringham; but more emphasis i s put on the correction of misapprehensions about Capgrave's actual source and on the construction of his work. The last chapter concludes the survey with a study of Capgrave's two \"original\" works, The Solace of Pilgrims and The Chronicle of England. While their materials are derivative, they are innovations, in the sense that Capgrave designed their formats and selected his entries from a variety of sources. In this section attention i s paid to the details which reveal his concern for the structure, some further-examples of his characteristic annotation are provided, and the, texture of his prose in original composition as opposed to direct translation is considered. In sum, this study i s intended to provide an account of.the l i f e and works of a p r o l i f i c fifteenth-century writer to whom count-less references are made in the catalogues of literary histories, but for whom not a single study in depth i s available. It is.hoped that the analyses, focusing, as f i r s t and general studies must, on sources, methods of adaptation, and prose basis for future examinations of receive the.attention they merit passed\u00E2\u0080\u00A2over when.general studies made. and poetic style, w i l l provide the Capgrave.'s works, so that they w i l l and their author w i l l no longer be of the literature of the period are CHAPTER I THE LIFE OF JOHN CAPGRAVE I The received biography of John Capgrave i s characterized as are many other medieval l i v e s by errors and u n c r i t i c a l accretions, most of them the r e s u l t s of confusion, lack of information, and the acceptance of unsubstantiated t r a d i t i o n s . Only a few dates i n Capgrave's l i f e may be given with c e r t a i n t y : h i s b i r t h on A p r i l 23, 1393; h i s promotion to the f i n a l pre-degree status of l e c t o r on A p r i l 8, 1421; h i s appointment as a student to Cambridge on A p r i l 13, 1422; h i s formal completion of the bachelor's degree on March 20, 1423; h i s reception of Henry VI while he was p r i o r at the Austin convent i n Lynn on August 1, 1446; h i s e l e c t i o n as p r i o r - p r o v i n c i a l of England on July 22, 1453 at Winchester and h i s confirmation i n the o f f i c e on May 8,, 1454; his r e - e l e c t i o n at Lynn on August 15, 1455 and reconfirmation on February 14, 1456; h i s recognition of Edmund Rede as the founder of the Austin convent at Ox-ford i n 1456; and h i s death on August 12, 1464. For the rest there i s l i t t l e sure evidence. Some of the problems have been convincingly resolved i n recent years, and i t i s hoped others w i l l be s e t t l e d or c l a r i f i e d i n the course of t h i s chapter. There are no further records of a pub l i c r o l e which would ac-count f o r the great reputation Capgrave apparently enjoyed i n his own time and c e r t a i n l y had attained by the time the l i t e r a r y biographers 10 began to take note of him in the next century. He is l i t t l e help him-self, for he makes only minimal and bare references to a few of the people he met and he makes no comment at a l l on the internal conditions of contemporary England. To come to some understanding of how he could have reached a prominence which is not reflected in his vernacular works, i t is important to realize that he always lived not in a rural monastery but in convents in the centre of busy towns, that he came in contact with many of the important religious and p o l i t i c a l figures of his time, that he travelled abroad, and that he rose to the highest post in the English province of his order. Some aspects of this knowl-edge, especially the study of his educational course, aid in the inter-pretation of his works, but chiefly they administer a corrective to the view of Capgrave as a sequestered figure, unaware of or uninvolved in the l i f e about him. In The Chronicle of England Capgrave gives his birthdate as April 23, 1393,^ and in The Life of St. Katherine he specifically says; 2 \"My cuntre is of northfolke, of be town of lynne.\" Apart from these bare statements, the only genealogical relationship which has ever been suggested for Capgrave is that he was the nephew and namesake of a fourteenth century Austin f r i a r , who was appointed to study at Oxford on the recommendation of the masters, bachelors, and priors of the Oxford limit (administrative district) and who received his doctorate in theology in 1390. Unfamiliar with the Augustinian archives, the early biographers were unaware that there had been two men of the same name; and in the only instance before Alberic de Meijer's 1955 11. biography where they are both mentioned, the literary productions are 3 assigned to the earlier man. It is possible to use the few details known about the f i r s t John Capgrave to remove certain errors in the author's history. Apparently the biographies of the two men, one obscure and the other renowned in his own age, were soon confused; and they were cer-tainly conflated as early as the sixteenth century. Without exception u n t i l the eighteenth century, the commentators name Oxford as the writer's university. After his own works with their references to Cam-bridge were discovered, i t became customary to describe Capgrave as a \"doctor of both the universities.\" In i t s e l f this description i s sus-pect, for the places at the universities were few and zealously guarded in the middle ages. Now that a John Capgrave who did attend Oxford is known, the anomaly is resolved. This new awareness of the f i r s t John Capgrave also helps answer the question of the author's birthplace. In absolute terms, the state-ment in the S_t. Katherine that he was a man of Lynn, Norfolk may mean no more than that he was a resident of the Lynn convent at the time of the poem's composition while he originally came from Kent as his f i r s t biographers say. But, although there is no mention of his unusual sur-name in the l i s t s of guild members and borough o f f i c i a l s or in any of the legal documents extant in the town records, there is reason to assume that he was born either in Lynn i t s e l f or in the immediate v i -cinity . 12 In the f i r s t place, one of the statutes of the Austin f r i a r s required that a novice enter and thereafter be considered a conventual 4 of the convent nearest his parental home. Since Capgrave was sent to Cambridge, i t i s reasonable to assume that he belonged o r i g i n a l l y to the l i m i t which i t served, that i s , to one of the houses at Cambridge, Norwich, Clare, Lynn, L i t t l e Yarmouth, Orford, Huntingdon, or Thetford. Because he was made p r i o r at Lynn by 1446 at the l a t e s t , kept the house as h i s permanent residence even during the period when he was p r i o r -p r o v i n c i a l , and remained there u n t i l h i s death i n 1464, i t seems most l i k e l y that he had also entered the order there. Second, there are i n t e r n a l i n d i c a t i o n s i n h i s works which reveal a f a m i l i a r i t y with Norfolk, and p a r t i c u l a r l y with Lynn, i n his early years. Most important are the references to l o c a l events which he makes i n The Chronicle of England. Throughout the book, he takes note of disasters such as f i r e s i n the county and gives more s p e c i f i c ac-counts of the actions of the various bishops of Norwich than of any others. More p a r t i c u l a r l y , for the year 1400, between the notice of the death of Richard II and the report of the r e b e l l i o n of Owen Glen-dower, he records the capture of some S c o t t i s h f i s h i n g boats by men of Lynn and t h e i r being brought to the town (pp. 276-277). In 1404, when he was eleven, he was apparently an eyewitness to the departure of Princess P h i l i p p a from Lynn f o r her marriage to King E r i c of Norway (Chronicle, p. 292, De I l l u s t r i b u s H e n r i c i s , p. 109). And, f i n a l l y , among the more national events of 1416, he reports the s t e a l i n g of three c h i l d r e n of Lynn by beggars and t h e i r l a t e r recovery i n London (Chronicle, p. 316). 13 F i n a l l y , since the elder Capgrave was nominated to the univer-s i t y by the senior members of the Oxford l i m i t , he c l e a r l y came from one of the eight convents under t h e i r j u r i s d i c t i o n . One of these was i n Kent, at Canterbury, and i t may well have been his home. In any case, though t h i s explanation does not help place the writer i n Norfolk, i t makes i t more l i k e l y that i t was the f i r s t John Capgrave who was \" i n Cantiorum comitatu natus.\" Since the medieval populace was not highly mobile and since these pieces of evidence strongly suggest that the fourteenth century Capgrave was from the south and Capgrave the author from East Anglia, the hypothetical uncle-nephew l i n k between the two i s questionable. In the face of the h i s t o r i c a l evidence, de Meijer's l i t e r a l reading of \"faders\" as \"kinsmen\" i n the following l i n e s i s exceedingly tenuous: Owt of be world to my profyte I cam On-to pe brotherhode quech I am I n n e \u00E2\u0080\u0094 Godd 3eue me grace neuyr for to blynne To folow be steppes of my faders be-for, Whech to be rewle of Austen wer swore. (The L i f e of St. Katherine, Prologue, 11. 241-245) Thus, while i t i s tempting to provide Capgrave with some bond i n the past, i t i s more pr a c t i c a b l e to regard him autonomously and look f i r s t at the town where he spent so much of h i s l i f e . Whether he was born i n the town i t s e l f or i n one of the nearby hamlets, Lynn would have provided Capgrave with opportunities to view the f u l l range of medieval economic, s o c i a l , and r e l i g i o u s a c t i v i t i e s . Although i t i s no longer a prominent centre, Lynn's geographical p o s i -t i o n made i t an important port and market town i n the f i f t e e n t h century. By 1377 i t was ninth i n s i z e among the c i t i e s of England;^ and a 14 petition in 1422 for additional chapels to serve the public gives evi-dence of the numbers who frequented the town. In the same way, the total of fifty-two churches, chapels and oratories shows that there were great resources available for private endowment. That one of the four remaining English factories of the Hanseatic League was in Lynn demonstrates i t s continuing involvement in the Baltic trade. And, while much of England's international trade was destroyed by the wars with the French, by the shifting alliances in the Low Countries, and by the increasing isolation and eastward turning of the Baltic merchants, the merchants of Lynn entered the newly developing Icelandic ventures by 1420 and continually sought to preserve their rights in i t by nego-tiations on their own behalf with the king of the Danes.'7 As concomitants of this busy trading activity, Lynn not only had g a relatively large alien population for an English town, but also f e l t the struggle for p o l i t i c a l strength on the part of the middle class. The increasing prosperity of the members of the seventy-five trade guilds in Lynn f i n a l l y brought them into open conflict with the local merchants in the early years of the fifteenth century while John Cap-grave was a student f r i a r . And though Lynn was to become \"one of the 9 closest of the close boroughs\" in the end, for the moment the small oligarchy controlling the guild of the Holy Trinity was forced by the general class of burgesses in conjunction with the privileged group of episcopal tenants to allow greater participation in the choice of o f f i c i a l s . The increased democracy the townsmen had earned did not last long, but their capacity to get their grievances heard and to 15 force agreements r e f l e c t s the communal power and, therefore, t h e i r r e l a t i v e affluence. Many of the meetings at which corporate a f f a i r s were discussed and compromises established were held within the Augus-t i n i a n convent. Such intrusions of the outside world upon t h e i r r e l i g i o u s l i f e were of course c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the mendicant orders i n the l a t e middle ages, and witnessing the struggle at close range, Capgrave must have become aware early of p o l i t i c a l r e a l i t i e s . With so large a population and so much prosperity, Lynn enjoyed dramatic entertainments s i m i l a r to those i n other large centres. There i s no evidence for a mystery cycle, but plays of St. Thomas and of Mary and Gabriel were c e r t a i n l y a c t e d ; ^ and the various public records of Lynn mention several payments f o r plays or to players (including min-s t r e l s ) during the f i r s t half of the f i f t e e n t h c e n t u r y . ^ Since the Augustinian convent was located i n the centre of the town and frequently housed v i s i t i n g d i g n i t a r i e s , i t i s l i k e l y that Capgrave saw both the public spectacles i n the nearby streets and market place and the p r i -vate entertainments occasionally staged for guests. As l a t e r chapters w i l l show, two aspects of Capgrave's s t y l e i n h i s s a i n t s ' l i v e s bear considerable resemblance to the techniques of the medieval stage. Everywhere, he focuses on c e n t r a l , objective and dramatically r e a l i -zable episodes, and whenever an occasion a r i s e s i n the narrative for a debate, an exorcism, or a conversion, the scene i s e i t h e r c a r e f u l l y described or, at l e a s t , established by some prominent object. Since i t i s now possible to account f o r Capgrave's whereabouts between 1413 and 1415, there i s no longer any reason to question Father 16 de M e i j e r ' s conjecture that Capgrave had j o i n e d the Augustinian order no l a t e r than 1410. Why he chose the Augustinians over the Fr a n c i s c a n s , Dominicans, or Carmeli t e s , a l l of whom were represented i n Lynn, cannot be determined. C e r t a i n l y , h i s order was an important one i n the town, w i t h a house l a r g e enough to e n t e r t a i n Bishop Arundel and h i s r e t i n u e 13 i n 1383 and the Duke and Duchess of Clarence w i t h three hundred horse 14 i n 1413. Moreover, i t was chosen as the arena f o r the meetings of the re p r e s e n t a t i v e s of the town and of the Bishop of Norwich which have been r e f e r r e d to e a r l i e r . As p r i o r , Capgrave was to r e c e i v e Henry VI there i n 1446.'''\"' There were many d i f f e r e n c e s i n the o r i g i n a l i n t e n t i o n s of the founders of the great mendicant orders, but w i t h i n a few generations, they had grown e s s e n t i a l l y a l i k e . For i n s t a n c e , at the command of the pope \u00E2\u0080\u0094 whether or not he was i n s p i r e d i n a v i s i o n by St. Augustine, as Capgrave would have i t ^ - - the Augustinians l e f t t h e i r r u r a l convents f o r the urban l i f e of the other f r i a r s . The Minors soon neglected St. F r a n c i s ' i n j u n c t i o n to renounce human l e a r n i n g and w i t h the other o r -ders followed the Dominicans i n developing advanced schools f o r the study of theology and a l l i e d a r t s . Moreover, a l l the orders of f r i a r s sought to disseminate the b a s i c C h r i s t i a n b e l i e f s to the people, and i n order to discourage concern f o r l o c a l i n t e r e s t s and la r g e e s t a t e s such as occupied so many monastic establishments, they denigrated w o r l d l y possessions and created c e n t r a l i z e d c o n t r o l s u l t i m a t e l y vested i n the pope. F i n a l l y , d e s p i t e the Great Schism and the attempts of s e c u l a r a u t h o r i t i e s to gain t h e i r support f o r n a t i o n a l i s t i c g o a l s , they a l l 17 remained committed to the authority of Rome. Among them, the Augus-t i n i a n theologians provided the chief arguments for the pope's dominion. In the l a t e middle ages the s p i r i t u a l state and moral authority of the f r i a r s weakened; and they became subject to charges of w o r l d l i -ness as they f e l l away from absolute p o v e r t y . ^ Medieval sources point to a general decline i n t h e i r i n t e l l e c t u a l a c t i v i t y as w e l l . The change from great strength to weakness i s perhaps less noticeable i n the case of the Augustinians because they were t h i r d i n s i z e among the orders of f r i a r s i n England, and because they did not produce any scholars at Oxford and Cambridge as important i n the shaping of medi-eval thought as the Franciscans Roger Bacon, Duns Scotus, and William Ockham or the Dominican Nicholas T r i v e t . I t must also be remembered that what appears on the surface as a sudden increase i n the number of Augustinians attending the u n i v e r s i t i e s i n the l a s t decades of the fourteenth century and the beginning of the f i f t e e n t h , and might be taken as evidence of an upsurge i n the academic l e v e l , i s i n f a c t one of the r e s u l t s of the Great Schism (1382-1417). Since France supported the Anti-pope, the Paris studium generale was closed to the other Euro-pean f r i a r s whose countries s t i l l adhered to Rome. In consequence, they were drawn to Oxford, Cambridge, and London, and t h e i r names i n 18 the r o l l s of students hide the continuing decline to a c e r t a i n extent. For a l l t h i s , although the period which saw scholasticism devel-oped to i t s greatest subtlety by a ser i e s of b r i l l i a n t English f r i a r doctors had ended a century before, i t was s t i l l among the mendicant rather than the monastic orders that the leading theologians were found 18 i n the f i f t e e n t h century; and, i n t h i s respect, the Augustinians were not unimportant. They provided t h e i r share of bishops, p a r t i c u l a r l y to I r i s h sees; the Augustinian Geoffrey Hardeby was foremost i n replying to Archbishop F i t z r a l p h ' s attacks on the f r i a r s ; and members of the order were given equal place with other orders i n the great meetings on the h e r e t i c a l teachings of Wyclif which were held at B l a c k f r i a r s under 19 Archbishop William Courtenay and at Oxford and i n the f i f t e e n t h cen-tury heresy t r i a l s which followed the passage of the statute De 20 Haeretico Comburendo. Augustinian h i s t o r i a n s do not discuss the connection i n d e t a i l , but t h e i r order, or at le a s t the Oxford convent of i t , had good reason to sympathize with Wyclif's opinions i n the early stages of the contro-versy. Since disputations were r e g u l a r l y held i n the Austin convent, i t i s not e s p e c i a l l y important that Wyclif was l e c t u r i n g there when he received the news of his condemnation. But many of h i s b e l i e f s were derived from the greatest of the Augustinian theologians, G i l e s of 21 Rome; and the l a t e r p r i o r - p r o v i n c i a l , Thomas Winterton, was one of his close associates. In addition, the appearance of W y c l i f s Determinatio i n the c o l l e c t i o n of works made by another Austin f r i a r , 22 Adam Stocton, i n the 1370's also r e f l e c t s i n t e r e s t i n W y c l i f s ideas. Af t e r the au t h o r i t a t i v e condemnation of W y c l i f s opinions by the mendicant theologians and by Archbishop Courtenay at the B l a c k f r i a r s (or \"Earthquake\") Council of 1382, there i s , with the sing l e exception 23 of Peter Pateshull, no occasion to question the orthodoxy of the English Augustinians. In f a c t , t h e i r r eaction was as immediate and 19 severe as might be expected i n the atmosphere of fear and shock which developed when e s s e n t i a l doctrines were questioned. Wyclif's f r i e n d Thomas Winterton, f o r example, answered Wyclif's t r e a t i s e Confessio i n a work e n t i t l e d Absolutio, r e l y i n g heavily on the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c Augustinian doctrines of lordship and grace; and, i n a r e v i s i o n , the words of praise for Wyclif i n Stocton's c o l l e c t i o n were removed.. Cambridge, where Capgrave was to go, never had s i g n i f i c a n t contact with the heresy though the th e o l o g i c a l students must have been aware of the controversy; and few attempts were made to r a i s e the issues at Oxford a f t e r Archbishop Arundel's v i s i t a t i o n i n 1411. 2 * Persecution was moderate i n England and most heretic s recanted; but the severity of the penalties ensured that orthodoxy was at pains to demonstrate i t s e l f . Yet i f only his English works were considered, Capgrave would seem to have had l i t t l e i n t e r e s t i n debating t h e o l o g i c a l points. Apart from notes on the d o c t r i n a l issues r a i s e d i n the early days of the church, condemnations of Wyclif and Oldcastle, a few r e f -erences to L o l l a r d a c t i v i t i e s i n the years before his Chronicle ends i n 1417, and explanations of the s p e c i f i c heresies the saint combatted i n The L i f e of St. Augustine, he does not touch the subject. In f a c t , however, t h i s i s another instance where the l i t e r a r y personality and the public man are widely divergent, for Capgrave must often have been i n close contact with the disputes. For example, he cannot have been unaware that suspicions of the L o l l a r d heresy were several times raised i n Lynn; and investigations which must have been part of the common gossip were frequently c a r r i e d out i n the diocese of Norwich. 20 A s i n g l e i l l u s t r a t i o n w i l l s u f f i c e to show to what extent he covered his own opinions with an anonymous s t y l e . In 1401, when Capgrave was a boy of eight, a townsman, William Sawtre, was the f i r s t man executed under the new statute; and l a t e r Capgrave recorded the event i n h i s Chronicle. He gives not a si n g l e d e t a i l which suggests any personal knowledge: In the t h i r d 3ere of t h i s Herry was a Parlement at London, wher was mad a statute ageyn L o l l a r d i s , that where evyr th e i were founde preching her evel doctrine, t h e i schuld be take, and presentid to the bischop; and i f thei meynten here opiniones, the i schuld be committed to the seculere hand, and th e i schuld brenne hem and her bokes. This statute was practized i n a prest that sone a f t i r was brent at Smythfeld. (Chronicle, p. 277) How f a r the a t t i t u d e displayed i n his written work r e f l e c t s either apathy or cautious time-serving on Capgrave's part i s d i f f i c u l t to judge; but given the p o s i t i o n he attained, either i s u n l i k e l y . What i s known i s that when Capgrave entered the Order of Hermits of St. Augustine, he found himself i n a community of men who were o f f i c i a l l y committed to the authority of the church both by t h e i r Rome-centred government and by t h e i r newly tested and newly strengthened i n t e l l e c -t u a l convictions. The s e l f - d i s c i p l i n e t h e i r rules required and the education t h e i r most promising students underwent enabled them to pro-vide many of the foremost defenders of the f a i t h . The events of the immediately preceding decades must have deeply affected the men who taught Capgrave and Wyclif's opinions must have been answered and con-demned i n the lectures he heard. In addition, as the next section w i l l show, even i f he was not himself involved i n heresy t r i a l s or public answers to h e r e t i c a l opinions, a number of his fellow conventuals were. 21 II I t i s hoped that t h i s survey of some of the more important events i n the town of Lynn and i n the r e l i g i o u s orders during t h i s period may help to place Capgrave i n his h i s t o r i c a l context. S i m i l a r l y , an examination of the a v a i l a b l e materials on t h e o l o g i c a l education at the time reveals both the content of the works which were.his frame of reference and the a n a l y t i c a l method which i s such an important aspect of h i s l i t e r a r y s t y l e . However, although a number of scholars i n the l a s t decade have unearthed a large body of f a c t s , there i s s t i l l uncer-tainty about the d e t a i l s of courses pursued by medieval students and the periods of time necessary to complete the various requirements. For example, the f u l l grammar course apparently took four years, but i n 25 t h e i r regulations, the Augustinians mention only one a f t e r entry. On the other hand, they also expected the novice to be able to read and sing d i s t i n c t l y when he entered, and, therefore, the young f r i a r s had presumably already had some elementary t r a i n i n g . In f a c t , there are frequent references to boys who do not seem to be members of the order 26 studying grammar i n the convents; and i t may w e l l be that there were provisions for a period of p r e - t r a i n i n g which would resolve the anomaly. Accepting these l i m i t a t i o n s , i t i s possible to provide a reasonably accurate picture of the course of Capgrave's education. Father de Meijer chooses the f i r s t of the two p o s s i b i l i t i e s i n -herent i n Capgrave's statement that he was ordained four or f i v e years before the b i r t h of Henry VI i n 1421 (De I l l u s t r i b u s H e n r i c i s , p. 127) and places the ordination i n 1417. Then he subtracts seven years from 22 thi s date and puts Capgrave's entry into the order i n 1410. There i s i n f a c t no evidence to confirm or refute h i s choice. The average age of entry was fourteen; but the Austins were allowed to accept boys as young as eleven and some cases of ten year olds being admitted are 27 known. As the following discussion w i l l show, the most that can be said i s that to have become a l e c t o r i n 1421, Capgrave cannot have joined l a t e r than 1410 and that i f he were seventeen (as he was then), he had probably previously completed the f u l l grammar course. So far as the e f f e c t on his l a t e r work i s concerned, the systematic d i v i s i o n of the material into orthography, prosody, syntax, and ethimologia, using compilations such as those of Donatus, P r i s c i a n , and Alexander de 28 V i l l a Dei, would have been much the same whether Capgrave studied i n 29 his own convent, the Lynn grammar school, or at the school of one of the other orders. Having entered, Capgrave spent h i s n o v i t i a t e learning the obser-vances of the r u l e . Their constitutions required the Austins to cele -brate f i v e canonical hours and they had i n addi t i o n a conventual mass which a l l of the brothers attended. For the purposes of s e l f - d i s c i p l i n e , they held a chapter of f a u l t s twice a week, kept s t r i c t s i l e n c e (except for the reader at the lectern) during t h e i r two d a i l y meals, and ob-served a great many obligatory f a s t s . A f t e r h i s n o v i t i a t e , a young f r i a r was to take grammar f o r an ad d i t i o n a l year; but, being older than the average, Capgrave had doubt-30 less f i n i s h e d the course, and he probably studied d i a l e c t i c s . This second year done, the consti t u t i o n s of the order provided f o r three years of study at what was known as a studium p a r t i c u l a r e , a school of elementary philosophy. For the Cambridge l i m i t t h i s school was l o c a t e d i n Norwich; and i f Capgrave d i d f o l l o w the course o u t l i n e d above, he must have been sent there by the end of 1412. Apart from the f a c t that i t was a well-known studium, f r e q u e n t l y attended by f o r e i g n f r i a r s , 31 l i t t l e i s known about the school i n Norwich. I f the three-year courses i n the Old and New Logic were given c o n c u r r e n t l y as they seem 32 to have been, Capgrave would have completed h i s term at Norwich and 33 returned to Lynn about the end of 1415. His recording of two Norwich events of 1415 (a f i r e and the death of the bishop, p. 303) i n the C h r o n i c l e provides at l e a s t c i r c u m s t a n t i a l c o n f i r m a t i o n . The methods of i n s t r u c t i o n i n these lower schools were essen-t i a l l y the same as i n the u n i v e r s i t i e s . Texts were read; problems were i s o l a t e d , e x p l i c a t e d , and argued i n d e t a i l ; and then the i n d i v i d u a l p a r t s were r e i n t e g r a t e d . D i s p u t a t i o n s were made on grammatical p o i n t s j u s t as they were on t h e o l o g i c a l . In f a c t , i n the schools of the f r i -a r s , the b a s i c t r a i n i n g i n \" a r t s \" was intended to prepare the student f o r h i s higher s t u d i e s . The l i t e r a l sense of the B i b l e could not be understood without a thorough grounding i n language and grammar. A r i t h m e t i c was e s s e n t i a l f o r number symbolism; and n a t u r a l h i s t o r y f o r the symbolism of b i r d s and beasts. F i n a l l y , r h e t o r i c was r e q u i r e d both 3 A i n the student's own work and f o r h i s l a t e r teaching and preaching. S i m i l a r l y , the r u l e s of r e l i g i o u s observance went f a r beyond the i n c u l c a t i o n of p i e t y and s e l f - d i s c i p l i n e . The p u b l i c examinations of conscience held twice-weekly and the heavy p e n a l t i e s f o r e r r o r s i n 24 l i t u r g i c a l r e c i t a t i o n encouraged b o t h a c r i t i c a l a t t i t u d e and p r e c i s i o n i n p e r f o r m a n c e . Thus, i t i s h a r d l y s u r p r i s i n g t h a t Capgrave's works bear t h e i m p r e s s o f h i s e a r l y t r a i n i n g , s i n c e he had sp e n t t h i r t y y e a r s i n t h e o r d e r as a s t u d e n t and t e a c h e r b e f o r e he w r o t e h i s f i r s t e x t a n t 35 E n g l i s h work i n 1440. Though none of t h e p u b l i s h e d r e g i s t e r s c o n t a i n h i s name \u00E2\u0080\u0094 and 36 few e x i s t f o r t h e whole d i o c e s e o f N o r w i c h i n any case \u00E2\u0080\u0094 Capgrave must have e n t e r e d upon t h e v a r i o u s degrees o f o r d i n a t i o n from f i r s t t o n s u r e - t h r o u g h a c c o l y t e , subdeacon, and deacon - t o p r i e s t d u r i n g h i s y e a r s i n Lynn and N o r w i c h . G i v e n t h e vagueness o f Capgrave's d a t i n g o f h i s f i n a l vows, i t i s q u i t e p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e y were t a k e n i n 1416, perhaps even i n 1415. I n f a c t , an e a r l i e r d a t e t h a n 1417 i s more l i k e l y , f o r o r d i n a t i o n n o r m a l l y f o l l o w e d soon a f t e r t h e c o m p l e t i o n o f 37 p r e - t h e o l o g i c a l s t u d i e s , and Capgrave must have been e n t e r e d upon t h e s i x y e a r c o u r s e as s t u d e n t and c u r s o r by e a r l y 1416 a t t h e l a t e s t i n 38 o r d e r t o have co m p l e t e d i t by 1421 when he was made a l e c t o r . Concessimus v e n e r a b i l i v i r o W i l l e l m o W e l l i s p r o v i n c i a l i p r o v i n c i e A n g l i e u t c o m p l e t a forma d e b i t a f r a t r u m I o h a n n i s Capgrave c u r s o r i s L o n d o n i s ac G i l b e r t o Grey p o s s i t i p s i s c o n f e r r e gradum l e c t o r i i n u n i v e r s i t a t e O x o n i e n s i v e l C a n t a b r i g g e n s i , p r o u t i p s i c o n i u n c t i m v e l d i v i s i m e l l e g e r i n t , h a b i t a tamen d e p o s i t i o n e q u a t u o r m a g i s t r o r u m e t c . E t s i i p s e p r o v i n c i a l i s non p o s s e t d i c t o s f r a t r e s l e c t o r a r e , c o m m i t t a t a l t e r i v i c e s suas a u c t o r i t a t e n o s t r a . Concedentes i n s u p e r d i c t i s i u v e n i b u s e t v o l e n t e s , u t s c i l i c e t p r i m o , v i d e l i c e t f r a t r i I o h a n n i , quod annus p r i m u s l e c t u r e s e n t e n c i a r u m computetur p r o primo anno u n i v e r s i t a t i s , e t q u a r t u s annus l e c t u r e n a t u r a l i u m commutetur s i m i l i t e r i n annum t h e o l o g i e d i c t o f r a t r i G i l b e r t o Grey de g r a t i a s p e c i a l i . By t h e ti m e he had f i n i s h e d a t t h e s t u d i u m p a r t i c u l a r e i n Nor-w i c h ( c . 1415) Capgrave's s c h o l a s t i c a b i l i t i e s must have been r e c o g n i z e d , 25 for the prior-provincial had to recommend promotion to the few places available i n the higher schools. Though there can be l i t t l e doubt that the masters of Capgrave's own area supported him, there is an addition-a l factor which cannot be ignored in accounting for Capgrave's extra-39 ordinarily rapid preferment. The long-time prior-provincial (1402-1417; 1419-1422) Willam Welles was himself originally a member of the Lynn convent, and he is known to have spent much of his time there. Since he must have met Capgrave, he may have personally sponsored him. For most students the universities offered the only avenue for the pursuit of advanced studies, but after a series of disputes early in the fourteenth century the fr i a r s won certain privileges. The uni-versity faculties of arts preserved their rights to the extent that the theological degrees of the fr i a r s were subject to the approval of a l l the regents and that only one member of each order could receive the doctorate every two years; but the fr i a r s were customarily exempt from the requirement that the arts programme be f u l l y satisfied and they were allowed to study elsewhere and yet receive Oxford and Cambridge 40 degrees. The end result of this compromise was that there were two kinds of schools in which the requirements of the f i r s t years of the theological programme could be f u l f i l l e d by a member of the mendicant orders. The lesser of these was the so-called studium generale provinciae, a school of theology under the control of the prior-provincial. The major ones, the studia generalis ordinis, under the direct control of the prior-general, were located in the university towns, and they were more international in character. But since the 26 Augustinians, like the other orders of f r i a r s , did not enter the facul-ty of theology proper and studied instead at their own houses with their own lectors, the courses given in the university towns varied l i t t l e from those provided by the other established studia. Lynn and London were both among the three known studia provinciae in the English Augustinian province, and i t was in them that Capgrave followed the theological course. In a l l probability, he spent the f i r s t two years (1415-1417) at Lynn where there had been a lector in 41 theology since at least 1382, and then moved to London for the period 1417-1422. The basis of the assumption that Capgrave was at Lynn for his f i r s t two years in theology is that, following the statutes of the order, he would not have been permitted to spend more than five years in London and that he is known to have remained there un t i l 1422. Accordingly, he passed through the three pre-degree grades of student, cursor, and lector with their increasing degrees of responsibility for responses and lectures before he reached Cambridge. Two of his student years were at Lynn, and then he was one year a student, three a cursor, and one a lector at the London convent, long the largest and most im-portant one in the country. Perhaps of less relative importance than the one in Lynn so far as the citizenry was concerned, the Austin convent in London was never-theless imposing. It was located against the city walls at Bishopsgate and i t s enormous church, built in 1354, was not much smaller than Canterbury Cathedral. Large crowds \u00E2\u0080\u0094 including the water-bearers whose guild church i t was \u00E2\u0080\u0094 f i l l e d the preaching apse on Sundays, and rooms were frequently l e t to them and others f o r o f f i c e s , meetings, and entertainments. Guild members as w e l l as prominent c i t i z e n s and mem-42 bers of the roy a l family were buried there, and bequests, c o n d i t i o n a l or otherwise, were frequent. A l l of these d e t a i l s emphasize the many connections the f r i a r s had with the outside world. The p a r t i c u l a r s of Capgrave's l i f e i n London cannot be p r e c i s e l y reconstructed. Unfortunately f o r the h i s t o r i a n , the f r i a r s were exempt from episcopal v i s i t a t i o n ; and records which would doubtless have r e -vealed some of the more c h a r a c t e r i s t i c t r i a l s of group l i v i n g are not a v a i l a b l e . Surely there were complaints (ranging from the f o u l meat supplied by the kitchener's r e l a t i v e s to the favouritism of the p r i o r ) as were made to Bishop Alnwich when he v i s i t e d the abbey of St. James at Northampton, where Capgrave's f r i e n d , the Augustinian canon regular John Watford, was abbot. If so, they were unrecorded or l o s t , and only more prosaic accounts of conventual l i f e are l e f t . One s p e c i a l i z e d r u l e f o r the government of an Augustinian studium generale which has been published i s the Mare Magnum produced about 1354 under the d i r e c t i o n of the prior-general, Thomas de Stras-43 bourg, for the Paris convent. Since the extant copy i s dated 1468, i t was c l e a r l y i n force i n the f i f t e e n t h century, and probably the rules for London were s i m i l a r . Much i s concerned with the handling of expenses, d i e t , the choice of o f f i c i a l s , and punishments a l l o t t e d for f a i l u r e to comply with the regulations. Hearing or reading of the mass was a d a i l y requirement f o r a l l the brothers, with ordained students below the rank of master or bachelor ordered to celebrate i t at le a s t three times weekly. This is the only religious observance s p e c i f i -cally mentioned, but certainly the hours would also have been cele-brated . Some additional details about the organization of studies are also found in the Mare Magnum. Two elected bachelors of theology or lectors were to examine the student within six days of his entry to determine that his Latin was not merely conversational but according to the rules of grammar; that he adequately understood the principles of logic and philosophy; and that he was sufficiently versed in theo-45 logical terms to complete the course in the specified time. The whole course is not outlined, but the actual lectures on the books of the Bible were to be finished in two years - the f i r s t devoted to a study of the Pentateuch; the second, to the prophets and the New Testa-46 ment. Disputations, with the students who were to argue and respond appointed by an elected master of studies, were held weekly, and they were attended by a l l the bachelors and masters. According to this rule, the student was to be admitted as a lector when he had finished the three year course. However, i t seems li k e l y that here the term lector reflects the usage of an earlier peri-od, for by Capgrave's time an intermediate three years as cursor, when the student had to lecture on the Bible and the Sentences as well as 47 continue his studies, was required. Obviously, the three daily lec-tures and the disputations were not the student's total occupation. Each had a study, of which he might be deprived for various faults, and i t was there that he read privately. Each student was allowed to 29 borrow three books at a time from the library, and the rules to protect these after their heavy use are a further indication that these theo-logical studies were not mere rote exercises but allowed for, and indeed required, individual interest and i n i t i a t i v e . Some of the other items the author, of this rule f e l t obliged to include are reminders that these students were not ascetics divorced from the world outside, but high-spirited young men living in the cen-tre of a bustling city. Punishments are enjoined for \"immoderate laughing, whistling, shouting, hand-clapping . . . and beating of dishes\"^ in the dormitory, chapter-room, cloister, church, or refec-tory, for staying overnight in the city, and for frequenting taverns. Similarly, the insertion of rules against eating in the cells or enter-taining seculars there, even against removing or selling items of fur-niture from the rooms suggests that a good deal of misbehaviour was either expected or known to exist. By the fifteenth century, b i b l i c a l study had evolved to a point where the theological questions had been separated from the study of 49 l i t e r a l meanings or moral applications. The debates to resolve ap-parent contradictions in doctrinal questions had led to the establish-ment of disputations as a teaching method and to the systematization of doctrine in such works as Peter Lombard's Sentences which with the Vulgate and i t s glosses were the standard textbooks of the period. In practice this separation meant that in his f i r s t years of theologi-cal study the student heard lectures on the books of the Bible and the Glosses, often given by a cursor or lector rather than a master. Each 30 passage of the text was explained at the l i t e r a l and moral level, phrase by phrase, or word by word i f necessary, and homely examples were frequently given. During the course of the lecture, the theo-logical ^uae^iones^ (doctrinal problems) would be pointed out and these would frequently be set for the disputations of the senior students. These disputations were intended not just to be scholastic exercises but to make more clear the reason for accepting proven truths. In the later years, of course, the student's primary focus was doctrinal and the Sentences his major study. Specific illustrations of the effects of these exercises on Capgrave's style w i l l be discussed in later chapters. Throughout his works there is a tendency to state opposing views which he sometimes, in Origen's fashion, refuses to choose between and, sometimes, tries to resolve as the Lombard and his successors did. Similarly, his con-stant pauses for l i t e r a l explanations, etymologies, and moral and symbolic applications a l l clearly show the shaping force of his long years of b i b l i c a l study as i t was constituted at the time. The most important p o l i t i c a l events of his years in London could not have escaped Capgrave's notice, but the only direct reference he makes in his works is to the birth of Henry VI i n December of 1421 and the public rejoicing on that o c c a s i o n . H i s Chronicle stops before the period he was in London; and his De Illustribus Henricis demonstra-bly relies on popular reports. He may have had opportunities to meet John Kemp who was later one of his patrons and some of the other dig-nitaries who frequented the Austin convent; but there is no evidence that he did. 31 C e r t a i n l y he would have been concerned with the scandalous d i s -putes over the e l e c t i o n of the p r o v i n c i a l i n 1419 and with the r e s u l t i n g turmoil i n the order; but his primary occupation was almost c e r t a i n l y with his i n d i v i d u a l duties as student and conventual i n London. The record has disappeared, but Capgrave must have been made a cursor early i n 1418 i n order to complete the f u l l three year term before his ap-pointment as l e c t o r i n 1421. When he assumed the p o s i t i o n of cursor, he enjoyed some s p e c i a l p r i v i l e g e s and shared the l e c t u r i n g duties; but i n a convent as large as London there were many f r i a r s of senior rank. The l i t t l e that i s known about h i s fellow f r i a r s i n London r e -f l e c t s the climate i n which he l i v e d . Some twenty, including the p r i o r , are merely names from ordination l i s t s or from the r e g i s t e r s of the prior-general; but others, l i k e Henry of Colchester who was a medi-ator i n the 1419 dispute, Nicholas Bonet who sat at the heresy t r i a l of William Taylour i n 1423, and the l e c t o r John Stocton who l a t e r became the p r i o r at Oxford, were figures of some s i g n i f i c a n c e i n the order. The man who was to become Capgrave's successor as p r i o r - p r o v i n c i a l , John Bury, came to London from Clare i n 1417, about the same time as Capgrave arri v e d from Lynn. With his i l l e g a l t r i p to Rome and adven-tures i n France, Bury was c l e a r l y a less serious student than Capgrave. Nevertheless, he eventually received h i s doctorate and had reputation enough to be appointed by Bishop Bourgchier, at the instance of John Lowe, to write an answer to Reginald Pecock's The Repressor of Over Much Blaming of the Clergy i n 1457. John Lowe, the only Austin f r i a r elevated\" to an English see during Capgrave's l i f e t i m e , was himself appointed to London i n 1420. With Bonet he was a judge at Taylour's t r i a l , and he went on to become p r i o r - p r o v i n c i a l from 1427-1433 confessor to the king i n 1432, Bishop of St. Asaph i n 1433, and Bishop of Rochester i n 1444. While he was Bishop of St. Asaph, he was one of Capgrave's patrons and i t may have been he who commended Capgrave's exegetical s k i l l to Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester. . To complete the catalogue, mention should be made of the f a r less important but equally i n t e r e s t i n g Thomas Southwell, one of the few f r i a r s whose t r a i n i n g was i n arts and medicine rather than theology. Southwell was instrumental i n the founding of the College of Physicians and Surgeons i n London i n 1423, and he was l a t e r arrested with Duke Humphrey's wife Eleanor Cobham on charges of necromancy. Afte r Capgrave was made a l e c t o r , he would normally have spent an a d d i t i o n a l four years before being admitted as a bachelor of theo-52 logy. In the f i r s t three years be was to give lectures on the Bible and the Sentences and i n the l a s t year, the one known formally as the \"opponency,\" he was expected to engage i n a ser i e s of d i f f i c u l t formal disputations. However, numbers made i t impossible for a l l candidates to give a f u l l course of lec t u r e s , and Capgrave had already been a cursor for three years. Consequently as the document c i t e d above states, he was granted exemption from the lectures on the Sentences when he was appointed a l e c t o r on A p r i l 8, 1421. There was apparently no place immediately a v a i l a b l e at either u n i v e r s i t y , f or Capgrave was s t i l l i n London eight months l a t e r when Henry VI was born on December 6, 1421; and a second l e t t e r of appoint-33 ment, this time specifically to Cambridge, appears in the prior-53 general's registers for April 13, 1422: Assignavimus f r a t r i Iohanni Capgrave, lectori formato provincie Anglie, proximum bacchalario, promoti locum alienigenis debitum in universitate Cantabriggensi eiusdem provincie, i t a quod cum promoto pro limite Cantabriggensi debeat commutari et quartus annus ab anno presenti pro oppositione s i b i deputetur in eadem universitate. Eoque ordine procedat usque ad gradum magisterii inclusive, non obstante quacumque prdinatione aut statuto quomodo-libet huius oppositum dictante, super quibus omnibus dispensamus. This appointment i s in the standard form, assuming that the student w i l l not be presented for the bachelor's degree for four years and then w i l l proceed to his magisterium (doctorate in theology) without any impediment. However, not only must Capgrave's earlier exemption from the Sentences have been honoured, but his additional year in London must also have been construed as his year on the Bible, for, as he him-self confirms, he entered the year of opponency immediately and was 54 promoted to the baccalaureate on March 20, 1423: Fecimus fratrem Iohannem Capgrave lectorem provincie Anglie Bacchalarium auctoritate nostra, assignantes e i promotum Bacchalarii promoti locum alienigenis debitum in nostro conventu et universitate Cantabrigensi de gratia speciali. Because no documentary evidence exists, i t is not possible to date Capgrave's f i n a l degree with certainty. It is clear from the form of his appointment to Cambridge in 1422 that i t was assumed that Cap-grave would proceed directly from the baccalaureate to the magisterium. And both that document and the one awarding him his bachelor's degree assigned him to a \"locum alienigensis debitum,\" a phrase which indicates that Capgrave was among the select group of four students in the convent 34 at various stages in their studies for the highest degree. Since each order of fri a r s was permitted only one promotion to the magisterium every two years, the Austins restricted the number preparing for the degree at each university to four; two from the English province, one.; from Italy, and one from another foreign country. After the Schism had ended and the number of other studia generalia for the order had i n -creased, i t was less necessary for foreigners to come to Oxford and Cambridge. Consequently, Capgrave was assigned one of the two places formerly reserved for foreign f r i a r s when he was made a baccalarius formatus; that i s , when, having completed a l l the requirements as a lector, he was waiting to be able to incept as a magister. To this point the evidence is relatively uncomplicated, but unfortunately missing details make a definitive chronology or catalogue of the Austin magisters at Cambridge impossible. It i s known that a Geoffrey Schale was the Austin magister in 1421; but whether or not the Thomas Lassell who was directed in 1420 to qualify for the degree ever did i s uncertain, for there are no further references to him.\"'\"' If he did take the degree, i t was probably in 1423; i f he did not, there is one other possibility for that year \u00E2\u0080\u0094 the poet Osbern Bokenham. Bokenham was made a baccalarius the day after Capgrave had been (March 21, 1423), and i t i s possible as Father Roth suggests that the words \"incorporari possit\" in the document conferring the degree on him meant he was to incept as magister directly.\"^ Some circumstantial evidence: that he did so comes from the fact that he applied for and received permission to go to Rome later in that same year. If he had become a 35 magister, he would not have been interrupting his studies, although he could not then have performed the two year tour of duty as a regent performing academic functions that was required of each new master. Because, in fact, Bokenham did not go to the continent un t i l about ten years later, in a l l probability he did take the degree in 1423, act as regent un t i l 1425, and then return to his home convent of Clare where he is to be found by 1427. Following him, Capgrave would have incepted in 1425 and remained at Cambridge as a regent un t i l at least 1427.\"^ During his f i r s t three years at Cambridge Capgrave must have engaged in public disputations, for sixteen were required in the year of opponency before the bachelor's degree was awarded and two more were part of the formalities surrounding the inception as magister. How-ever, there is no record of them; and, i n fact, no bachelor's Responsiones (the ideas he presented in answer to the question which was set for the disputation) or master's Determinationes (the pronounce-ment of the correct answer at the end of the disputation) have survived 58 for any English Austin f r i a r . Capgrave's one required sermon, which he preached in 1422, exists in his own later English redaction appended to his Life of St. Gilbert. His subject, the orders under the rule of St. Augustine, is not typical of the moral and doctrinal points on which most sermons were based, but i t was timely. The dispute between the canons regular and the hermits over their respective antiquity and relationship to the communities founded by St. Augustine was longstanding; and an Augus-tinian canon had published a tract ridiculing the direct descent of the 36 order of hermits from St. Augustine's desert establishments in the same 59 year. Within i t s brief compass, this sermon demonstrates the ingenu-ity of practitioners of the exegetical method; and i t provides a devel-oped example of the kind of contrived analogy which become character-i s t i c brief digressions in Capgrave's vernacular works. It begins by likening Augustine to Jacob in three ways; but the specific purpose of the comparison is to prepare for the use of the twelve tribes of Israel, Jacob's sons, as a schema on which to arrange the twelve orders. Fol-lowing this introduction, Capgrave proceeds in logical order, mentioning one of Jacob's sons, giving the etymology of his name, and adducing a reason why a certain order may be likened to him. As a bachelor and then master, Capgrave enjoyed privileges denied those of lesser academic rank. He was entitled to at least one servant, to additional books for his personal use, and even to larger portions at meal times. More important, however, were the dispensations from the rules which allowed him opportunity for private conversations with his own brothers and freedom to meet and entertain acquaintances from outside the order. Only one other Austin f r i a r present at the Cambridge convent during these years is s t i l l a familiar name, the poet Bokenham. If he had indeed shown such promise as a theologian that he was preferred to the magisterium before Capgrave, there is no evidence of i t in his later works. Bokenham spent most of his l i f e in the Clare convent, and though he had a c i r c l e of friends among the Suffolk gentry who commissioned his works, he never achieved the reputation for learn-ing or the distinguished patronage that Capgrave did. Provincial 37 chapter meetings ensured the continuing contact of the two f r i a r s , and Bokenham i s known to have seen Capgrave's L i f e of St. Katherine before he began h i s own. However, there i s no clear evidence of influence \u00E2\u0080\u0094 r e c i p r o c a l or u n i l a t e r a l . Capgrave may have known the Premonstratensian canon John Wygenhale before he came to Cambridge, f or a l l four of the Norfolk towns c a l l e d Wiggenhall l i e within close proximity to Lynn. Since the pr i o r y of the white canons was d i r e c t l y across from the Austin convent, they c e r t a i n l y had every opportunity to meet at the u n i v e r s i t y . I t i s also possible that Capgrave faced such future bishops as William Ayscough, Marmaduke Lumley and Robert Fitzhugh i n the disputations and that he was able to use such associations to advantage l a t e r . The f i r s t two were close friends of the Duke of Suffolk who was, i n turn, the protector of S i r Thomas Tuddenham who financed Capgrave's t r i p to Rome. There can be no doubt that Capgrave sharpened h i s c r i t i c a l sen-ses i n the wider f i e l d of the un i v e r s i t y ' s t h e o l o g i c a l h a l l s and that as a regent he became expert i n the r e s o l u t i o n of debated points. When he was replaced as regent by whoever became the new Austin magister i n 1427, Capgrave was ready to move back into the system of his order and begin t r a i n i n g younger men i n the labourious course he had j u s t f i n i s h e d . 38 III From the completion of his Cambridge studies in 1427 un t i l 1437, there is no reference to Capgrave's a c t i v i t i e s . Furnivall speculated 60 that i t was during these years that he travelled to Rome, but his hypothesis was invalidated by the discovery of Capgrave's Solace of Pilgrims, his guide-book to the holy city, which can be conclusively dated c. 1450 on internal grounds. De Meijer thinks \" i t is possible that Capgrave returned to his native friary, dedicating himself to his-torical studies and theological commentaries.\"^''' It is equally possible that he was appointed to lecture at one of the other convents in the province and the b i b l i c a l studies he superintended for young fr i a r s provided the basis for his earliest writings. One convent where he may well have gone was the one in Northampton. It was so short of brothers by 1427, the year in which Capgrave finished his term as regent, that the prior-general empowered the superior of the house to \"receive and keep four brethren from each English limit and six brethren from each 62 ultra-marine province.\" Because he had just finished his academic duties and had not embarked on any other course, i t is quite l i k e l y that Capgrave was chosen to swell i t s members. Residence in Northamp-ton would account for Capgrave's otherwise unexplained acquaintance with the abbot of the abbey of St. James there, John Watford, to whom he addressed his Concordia, a work intended to reconcile the d i f f e r -63 ences between the Austin f r i a r s and the Augustinian canons regular. In addition, i f he were living at Northampton rather than Lynn, his 39 trip to Woodstock in 1439 to present his Genesis commentary to Duke Humphrey of Gloucester would have been far more feasible. The l i s t of works no longer extant which are attributed to Cap-grave is lengthy. A l l of them are presumed to be in Latin; and, with the exception of a l i f e of Duke Humphrey, they are a l l theological in content, but the authorities for their existence are of unequal value. For example, Bale gives incipits for the three missing commentaries on books of the Pentateuch and for commentaries on the Psalms, the Pauline Epistles, and the Apocalypse, but none for those on Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Ecclesiastes, Isaiah, Daniel, the twelve minor prophets or the canonical epistles or the four evangelists; and, thus, these may well be ghosts. Capgrave certainly wrote commentaries on the four books of Kings. He mentions them in his dedicatory letter to the Genesis com-mentary; books I and III were among the works given to the Oxford l i b -rary by Duke Humphrey in 1444; and Leland notes that he saw commentaries 64 on Kings, presumably to books II and IV, dedicated to John Lowe, both at a former library of the Austin friars in Cambridge and at Walsingham monastery. Two of the lost manuscripts, those of the Manipulus Doctrinae Christianae and of the Concordia or De Augustino et Suis Sequacibus, were in the library of Leland's friend Thomas Key; and the Concordia, which is mentioned by Capgrave in two of his other works,^ found i t s 66 way into Bale's possession. The early biographers further credit Capgrave with five works of a scholastic character: Commentarii Quattuor Super Sententias, Determinationes Theologiae, Ordinariae 40 Disputationes, Ad Positiones Erroneas, and Orationes ad Clerum. There is not a single in c i p i t preserved for any of these works, however, any more than there is for a book of sermons some have attributed to him; and given the tendency of early bibiographers to take the various kinds of scriptural and scholastic works and assign them at random to swell the catalogues, there seems l i t t l e reason to perpetuate these t i t l e s in Capgrave's canon. And, f i n a l l y , a history of the illustrious Augus-tinians which may correspond to the Concordia mentioned earlier i s usually attributed to him.^^ 68 Capgrave is generally regarded as a patronized writer, but he was never as fashionable as John Lydgate nor did he enjoy a coterie fame comparable to that of his fellow f r i a r , Osbern Bokenham. Theo-logical commentary was not the genre sought after by the new patrons or by the humanists, and they did not entreat the man Bale was to describe as \"the most learned of the Augustinians\" to write for them.^ Patrons normally paid for the elaborate dedication copies of manuscripts, and those who received Capgrave's may well have done so too, especially since books made in the convent scriptorium, as his were, were not to 69 be alienated unless they were sold with special permission. However, Capgrave never petitions for more money; at most he includes a plea to be remembered in his patron's prayers as he does at the end of his Life of St. Augustine.^ In the few works which Capgrave is known to have written on re-quest, the subject is always appropriate to the recipient. The St. Norbert was written for a canon of his order, John Wygenhale; the St. 41 Augustine, for an unnamed lady born on the saint's feast day; and the St. Gilbert for Nicholas Reysby, the master of the Order of Sempringham. These volumes contain neither the long dedications of the Latin works nor the sycophantic tone which Furnivall condemns and others apologize f o r . ^ In each case, Capgrave praises the piety of his patrons, but only in modest terms. Some of his B i b l i c a l commentaries were also written on request, but as in his De Illustribus Henricis, The Chronicle of England, and The Solace of Pilgrims, he was basically drawn to the task of explica-tion through his own interest in the subject matter. In the commentar-ies the dedications are compliments on the attainments of the man addressed and expressions of esteem for the position he holds. Capgrave dedicated a l l or part of his commentary on Kings to the former prior-provincial of his order, John Lowe, during the years (1433-1437) when Lowe was the bishop of St. Asaph. The manuscripts are lost, but the form was the same as he later used in the Genesis and Exodus commentaries which he presented to Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester. As he explains to the Duke at the beginning of the Genesis, Capgrave's method involved a \" t r i p l e exposition\" for each passage, giving the l i t e r a l , allegorical, and moral interpretations. Capgrave points out that the exegesis in these works is not original and that he regards himself merely as the selector and organizer of the fruits of his re-search. But, while this is true, in examining his sources c r i t i c a l l y , choosing and selecting his materials in terms of his own beliefs, Cap-grave was employing the same scholarly method as is evident in his 42 English works. Because Duke Humphrey owned two volumes of the commentary on 72 Kings, i t has often been assumed that they were dedicated to him. However, since John Lowe had been the young king's confessor while Gloucester was his guardian and since i t was at least partially through 73 Humphrey's intercession that he obtained his bishopric, he may well have forwarded Capgrave's work to the Duke. Humphrey of Gloucester was certainly the most important English patron of his day, supporting both native and continental writers. He received dedications from many of the contemporary English poets and chroniclers including John Whethamstede, John Lydgate, John Russell, George Ashley, and Thomas de Norton. Studies of fifteenth century humanism have revealed his correspondence with Decembrio, who trans-lated the Republic for him; he commissioned a number of other trans-lations into Latin from Greek by his secretary Beccaria and by Leonardo Bruni; and he gave financial support to Tito Livio Frulovisi among many others. Moreover, his large gifts of books were essential to the growth of the library at Oxford. For a l l this, i t is easy to over-emphasize Humphrey's role and literary character. When the contents of his library are analyzed i t is clear that his interests were primarily theological and historical, and thus John Capgrave f i t s easily into the mainstream of those the Duke patronized. On the other hand, i t is improbable that their relationship was as close as biographers since the seventeenth century have implied when they state that Capgrave was the Duke's confessor. It may be that Humphrey chose Augustinians for this capacity in his personal retinue and certainly an Austin f r i a r named John South was his confessor in 1446. But that Capgrave ever was is not demonstrable. Leland says only that Humphrey \"toties l i t e r a t i s s i m i Capogrevi prudentissimo consilio utebatur;\" and Bale does not necessarily mean more than that the two men discussed moral problems in private when he says: Ilium igitur prae a l i i s elegit piissimus sui temporis princeps Umfridus Glocestriae dux praedictus, Henrici quinti frater, ut ei adesset a conscientiae secretis. or Ilium ergo prae a l i i s multis elegit piisimus eius temporis princeps, Hunfridus Glocestriae dux, i l l u s t r i s s i m i Henrici quinti Anglorum regis frater, ut s i b i interdum esset a conscientiae colloquio. It was John Pits who f i n a l l y introduced the word \"confess\" into the standard biography in 1619: Singularum habuit patronum Humfredum Glocestriae Ducem, princepem optimum, apud quem multum valuit gratia nec minus auctoritate. Erat enim i l l i a confessionum secretis . . . . And, f i n a l l y , in a work published in 1644 a Spanish Augustinian f r i a r Tomas de Herrera, makes the relationship clearly sacramental: Fuit a sacris confessiohibus Hunfrido Duci Glocestriae, Henrici V Anglorum regis fratri.74 These quotations demonstrate the gradual alterations in a written record which was unsubstantiated in the f i r s t instance; and there i s , in fact, no evidence that Capgrave met Humphrey more than once, i n January, 1439, when he presented his dedication copy of the Genesis commentary to the Duke at Woodstock. 44 The reasons Capgrave gives for dedicating the Genesis to Humphrey do not suggest that the two had any personal relationship earlier: Meditationes meas, quibus in Scriptuarum campo ludens del ectabar, scriptis mandare intendens, alliisque communicare cupiens, n u l l i alio melius destinandas putabam, serenissime Princeps, quam Dominationi vestrae, quippe qui, acumine i n -tellectus subtilissimi vigens, studiosissime, ut fertur, in scrutandis veterum auctorum opusculis indulgetis. Etj quia excellentior via humani studii Sancta Scriptura esse dino-scitur, ideo ad earn specialissime invisendam Spiritus I l l e Supremi Patris vos, ut audivi, inspiravit. 0 quam gloriosum mihi est videre Principem, in his diebus malis, quibus ab ecclesiasticis quasi repellitur scientia, scientiae insudantem et tanquam i i s , qui in ecclesia sunt et studium negligunt sanctum, . . . . . . Causa ergo studii vestri, qua occupatisssime animum l i b r i s impenditis, me maxime movit ut i l l u c opusculum parvitatis meae mitterem, ubi scientia judicandi de l i t t -eratura invenitur. Sed et, Annualia mea revolvens, aliud inveni quod me monet. Scriptum enim in i i s reperi, quod anno Domini M. CCXLVIII. fundatus fuerat Ordo Heremitarum Sancti Augus-t i n i in Anglia per Ricardum de Clara, filium Gilberti de Clara, comitemque Gloverniae. Quia igitur per gloriosos progenitores vestros in hanc ubertatis terram ducti sumus, digne ad ilium, qui generalis fundator noster est, ego tot-ius Ordinis novissimus hoc opus meum direxi, ut s i qua Catholice, et ad Fidem aedificandam, i b i inventa fuerint, ipse non tantum fundator, sed et protector eorum habeatur. Si qua vero inculta, aut p i i s moribus dissona, i l l i c inven-iantur, ipse correctionis lima benignissime emendet. Movit me etiam hoc tertium, quod contra venenosas l i n -guas modernorum Dominatio vestra murus s i t , qui tunciones excipiat . . . .Non ignoramus, i n c l i t e Domine, quod ex bona voluntate vestra optimoque desiderio tota salus nostra dependeat, nec sumus apti ad reddendas vices tuarum sanct-arum meditationum, quas Deo offerimus.75 In this passage Capgrave makes clear, f i r s t of a l l , that he had no dedicatee in mind when he undertook his exegesis; and then he enu-merates three considerations which prompted his choice of Humphrey. He pays tribute to the Duke for taking an interest in theology in a time when many clerics themselves are seeking more worldly rewards; he A5 recalls that an earlier Duke of Gloucester was a founder of the Augus-tinian order in England; and f i n a l l y he points to the present duke as their guardian against \"poisonous tongues.\" This last item seems to be a reference to Humphrey's intervention at Oxford in 1438 when he threatened to withdraw his support after an Austin f r i a r and then the whole convent had been suspended; and i t may be, therefore, an indirect expression of gratitude to the duke from Capgrave and his order. At a l l events, the author and his work were well enough recommended that Capgrave was allowed to make a personal presentation of the book on January 1, 1439; the reception apparently being favourable, he began his commentary on Exodus a l i t t l e more than two weeks l a t e r ^ and dedi-cated i t to the duke as well. Capgrave probably worked on these scriptural exegeses systemat-i c a l l y in the hours he had free from his teaching and canonical duties. In addition to them, he also wrote the lost Concordia, commonly called De Augustino et suis sequacibus by the biographers, during this f i r s t period of literary a c t i v i t y . ^ Dated c. 1440, the Concordia was dedi-cated to the Augustinian canon regular John Watford, who headed his priory in Northampton from 1430 un t i l his death in 1445. Capgrave provides a precis of i t s contents in The Solace of Pilgrims where he calls i t \"a maner of concord betwix be chanonys and us,\" that i s , be-tween the canons regular under the rule of St. Augustine and the Austin f r i a r s . And he also says i t contains some additional material concerning how \"monica came thider [to Rome] and in whos tyme.\" Obviously the work was part of the same long literary dispute over the priority of 46 the Augustinian orders which Capgrave had used a few years earlier as the topic of his university sermon. In keeping with his avowed desire for \"concord,\" Capgrave would have avoided the polemical tone in his treatise, although his conclusion there as elsewhere was doubtless that 78 \"heremites of this ordre be the very childyrn of seynt Austyn.\" His methods in his other works suggest that he cited the various arguments, expressed scepticism about some, and resolved others to his own satis-faction. Besides continuing with his religious pieces, Capgrave wrote six of his seven English works between 1440 and 1453; and i t is chiefly from a knowledge of their backgrounds and from a few internal referen-ces in them and in the Latin De Illustribus Henricis that i t is possible to describe his non-literary career. For example, the fact that he 79 completed his long poetic Life of St. Norbert in August, 1440, short-ly after he finished work on the Exodus commentary, is important on the literary level because i t provides a reminder that the methods of bib-l i c a l exegesis were natural to him and that they are bound to be appar-ent in his vernacular works as well. But also what is known about the dedicatee of the Life of St. Norbert is the basis for the conjecture that by this time Capgrave was again a member of the Austin convent at Lynn. It was produced at the request of John Wygenhale who had been his contemporary at Cambridge and had become the abbot of the Premon-stratensian Priory at West Dereham, Norfolk. The renewed association of the two men which the commission of the poem assumes would be most likely i f Capgrave had returned to Lynn, for West Dereham is less than 47 ten miles away. The only direct evidence Capgrave provides of his movements in the early part of the decade occurs in De Illustribus Henricis (p. 133) when he mentions his presence in Cambridge at the laying of the corner-stone for King's College in 1441. While i t would not have been d i f f i -cult for him to go to Cambridge from Lynn for such an occasion, the reference is too vague to be used to confirm or refute any conjecture about his home at the time. However, he was certainly in Lynn by the time he undertook his second and last poetic work, The Life of St. Katherine of Alexandria, for i t was there that he says he found his source. And since Osbern Bokenham had seen Capgrave's work when he when he wrote his own version of the l i f e for Katherine Denston, Cap-grave must have completed his poem by 1445. A l l four of the manuscripts 80 of i t are dated in the mid-fifteenth century; and none is the author's / original. The number of extant manuscripts probably reflects less Cap-grave's popularity than that of saints' lives in general and lives of St. Katherine in particular, but that there should be so many so close in date suggests that i t was copied rapidly. The _St. Katherine is the only one of the English works which bears neither a dedication nor words of praise for some t i t l e d person, and this fact substantiates Capgrave's statement that he was modernizing 81 an older version which was the work of a priest who died at Lynn. It also suggests that Capgrave had a broader purpose than the satisfaction of a single patron when he wrote the poem. What evidence there is about the provenance of the manuscripts gives no indication that the 48 St. Katherine ever spread beyond Norfolk and Suffolk or that i t was ever read or heard by any but a r e l i g i o u s audience. Even the copy with the fewest of Capgrave's l i n g u i s t i c forms was presented to the Augus-82 t i n i a n canonesses at Campsey Ash, Suffolk. Its a r t i s t i c propensities w i l l be discussed l a t e r , but throughout the work there are summaries and comments on the method of composition which i n d i c a t e that the poem was intended to be heard by an audience rather than read p r i v a t e l y ; and i t may have been designed to be read as a work of devotion during meal-times i n convents. Because both his L a t i n and English works were either requested or at l e a s t g r a t e f u l l y received by important as well as l e s s e r figures, i t i s clear that Capgrave's t h e o l o g i c a l reputation was established by t h i s time. There i s also evidence that he had become a highly regarded member of h i s order, for by 1446, and perhaps as early as 1440, Cap-grave was elected p r i o r at Lynn. In t h i s capacity he would have con-tinued to attend the p r o v i n c i a l chapters as he presumably had done since, on obtaining the magisterium i n 1425, he became e l i g i b l e to vote. His o f f i c e as p r i o r had to be confirmed at each meeting of the p r o v i n c i a l chapter, but t h i s confirmation was l a r g e l y a formality. As a p r i o r , his influence would have been greater than i t had been when he was simply a master, and probably he held various o f f i c e s subordinate to the p r o v i n c i a l before h i s l a t e r e l e c t i o n to that highest o f f i c e , as those who succeeded him, including Bury, Halam, and Penketh, are known to have done. Unfortunately, however, the leaves i n the prior-general's r e g i s t e r which should cover t h i s period i n the h i s t o r y of the English 49 province are missing. It is not even certain who the prior-provincial were, much less the minor o f f i c i a l s and the places where the meetings were held. In his De Illustribus Henricis (pp. 137-139), Capgrave records the v i s i t of Henry VI to Lynn in 1446 and the conversation they had on their tour around the convent. He also says that the house numbered thirty priests and sixteen boys, evidently attending grammar school, and an unspecified number of brothers in minor orders. Such a popula-tion makes Lynn one of the largest of the Austin convents; and the presence of so many junior members suggests that i t was at this time a 83 studium provinciae. The administration of.the financial and r e l i -gious activities in the convent, including the appointment of confes-sors and preachers to the well-attended church, agreements with ser-vants, tenants, and public o f f i c i a l s , and the supervision of students and studies l e f t Capgrave l i t t l e time for literary work. Nevertheless, he apparently inserted a chapter on Henry VI and finished the De Illustribus Henricis,soon after the king's v i s i t ; The holograph manuscript with i t s different coloured inks and marginal ad-ditions . makes clear that Capgrave composed the parts sporadically; and marked changes in the .script, ink, and ruling demonstrate that the sev-84 enth gathering on Henry VI was added later. It should also be noted that this work contains the only reference to Capgrave's intention to write a l i f e of the Duke of Gloucester (p. 109), and i t is ,possible that Leland and Bale and others following them credited Capgrave with such a work without any further manuscript evidence. As the t i t l e indicates, the book is thoroughly adulatory and uncritical in tone even of such recent figures as Henry Despenser, Bishop of Norwich, with whose true character and history Capgrave must have been familiar. Sometime during his years as prior or earlier, Capgrave became acquainted with the notorious extortionist Sir Thomas Tuddenham who with his fellow justice of.the peace, Thomas Heydon, blackmailed and terrorized many among the Norfolk gentry, including notably the Paston family. Tuddenham's estate at Oxburgh was near Lynn, and he doubtless frequented the borough. Not only was he a man whose enmity was to be feared and, therefore, one whom Capgrave would seek to mollify, he was also evidently a benefactor of the Augustinian f r i a r s , for he was buried in the church of their London convent after his execution for 85 treason in 1461. The precise association Capgrave had with him is not known, but i t was at Tuddenham's expense that Capgrave made his only documented v i s i t outside England, a pilgrimage to Rome. Since Capgrave himself does not date his trip and.no record of an exit permit for him has been discovered, only the general dates c. 1447-1452 can be given for the composition of The Solace of Pilgrims. The, terminus a quo reflects his notice of the April 1447 death of Car-dinal Beaufort; the terminus ad quern, the fact that he refers to John, Kemp as cardinal t i t u l a r of St. Balbina and Archbishop of York rather than as cardinal bishop of St. Rufina and Archbishop of Canterbury as he became in 1452. There was a steady stream.of English travellers to Rome during 86 the middle ages, several hundred a year by Capgrave's time, both on business to the papal curia and on pilgrimages. De Meijer speculates that Capgrave's trip was in 1450, the year of Pope Nicholas' jubilee, 87 on the grounds that Capgrave several times mentions large crowds, but there are a number of reasons for suggesting that 1449 is a more likely year. Not only would Capgrave surely have noted the special celebra-tions of a holy year, but also the crowds at certain shrines on days of indulgence would have seemed large to an Englishman who had spent most of his l i f e in smaller, less holy centres regardless of the year. There are, however, two stronger reasons for choosing 1449. F i r s t , i t is known that there was a meeting of the General Chapter of the order in that year; since there is no evidence of another English represen-tative having been sent, i t is not unlikely that Capgrave, who was appointed prior-provincial only four years later, was chosen. Moreover, Capgrave's patron Tuddenham immediately f e l l from his position of promi-nence on the death of the Duke of Suffolk in 1450, and he and Heydon were the subjects of a great series of lawsuits during that year. While the charges were ultimately dismissed and Tuddenham restored, Capgrave would not have been likely to commemorate Tuddenham at the beginning of the Solace in the year of his disgrace. Capgrave l e f t no description of his trip to Italy, but he proba-bly stopped at Paris which was a major studium generale where he may have seen the manuscript of Jordanus of Saxony's Vita Saricti Augustini, the 88 source for his own Life of St. Augustine. Travelling through Italy, he no doubt visited other major Augustinian houses, including Lecceto where the English Austin f r i a r William Flete, a confidant of St. 52 Catherine of Siena, lived his hermit existence. His stay in Rome was long enough to enable him to see a l l the major shrines; and i t was extended by an i l l n e s s . While he was i l l , he was befriended by William Gray. They may have met more than a decade earlier when Capgrave entered the cir c l e surrounding Duke Humphrey and Gray was a B a l l i o l student. Gray's lineage would have given him entry into the group, and his own theo-logical interests and knowledge of Humphrey's f i r s t g i f t to the univer-sity would have attracted him to Woodstock. By the time Capgrave came to Rome, Gray was himself a distinguished collector of manuscripts and a well-known patron as well as Henry VI's proctor at the papal court. It i s a significant indication of Capgrave's reputation, and further evidence that he was not acting in a private capacity on the trip that he should be attended by a man whom the pope personally, albeit unsuc-cessfully, was to try to promote to a bishopric in 1450. Capgrave may have had access to Gray's extensive library where 89 he would have seen many Italian works not often found in England, and he probably made at least the outline of his Solace of Pilgrims during his period of recuperation. Apart from the recollection of scenes in considerable detail, the many inscriptions which he records suggest that he worked on the book while he was s t i l l in Rome. One authority suggests that Capgrave remained in Rome for a year 90 and a half. If so, he must indeed have begun his trip in 1449 and worked on the Solace of Pilgrims during his absence, for he had returned 91 to England and completed his last two saints' lives by 1451. For an 53 Augustinian author, a l i f e of the founder was a natural project, and Capgrave's Life of St. Augustine reveals a close familiarity with both the genuine and spurious writings in the saint's canon, especially i n the early chapters where he is not depending on his main source. S t y l i s t i c considerations w i l l be dealt with in detail later, but the St. Augustine is in every way superior to the hastily composed Life of St. Gilbert which followed i t . When the master of the order of Semp-ringham, Nicholas Reysby, made known his admiration for the j5t^ . Augus- tine and requested a similar work on his patron, he may well have pro-vided the Latin manuscript which Capgrave took as his source. It is an ill-conceived work containing two recensions of the l i f e . Capgrave applied l i t t l e of his usual c r i t i c a l judgment in his translation; he made few additions; and there is no indication that he tried to remove the repetitions in i t . The only other work which has been assigned to this period immediately before his election to the provincialate is the lost Manipulus doctrinae Christianae which, according to Bale, was dedica-ted to John Kemp. Bale's note on i t is ambiguous, however, for he refers to Kemp as both Cardinal of Balbina and Archbishop of Canterbury, t i t l e s he did not hold concurrently. It is more likely that Bale added the better known t i t l e than that Capgrave erred in his dedication, and, consequently the work has to be dated anywhere between 1439 and 1454. Circumstantial evidence for a date closer to 1454 is provided by Bale's cryptic note \"Poggio allegat,\" indicating that Capgrave makes some allusion to the Italian humanist. Poggio had visited England between 54 1418 and 1422, and he was well known after that time. Moreover, Duke Humphrey owned at least one of his works, and Capgrave could have seen i t . However, since Capgrave so infrequently refers to contemporaries 92 and since Gray was friendly with Poggio during his stay in Italy, i t is most likely that Capgrave's reference to the scholar would follow his lengthy exposure to the humanist group in Rome. In 1453 Capgrave was elected provincial at Winchester, and the 93 choice was confirmed by the prior-general the following year. Confirmavimus in priorem provincialem fratrem Iohannem Capgrave provincie Anglie electum unanimiter et concorditer in capitulo provinciali Veyntonie celebrato 1453 in festo Marie Magdalene approbando electionem ac confirmationem eius per vicarium nostrum de eo factam, dando s i b i auctori-tatem in temporalibus et spiritualibus ut a l i i s provincialibus dare consuevimus, precipiendo singulis fratribus dicte provincie, ut s i b i sicut legitimo pastori obedient. Confirmavimus acta predicti capituli precipientes prefato provinciali ut i l i a observari faciat. Two, years later the chapter met at Lynn, where Capgrave made his 94 permanent home, and re-elected him: Confirmavimus in priorem provincialem huius provincie magistrum Iohannem Capgrave electum unanimiter et concorditer in capitulo Lynie celebrato 6a die mensis Augusti 1455, approbando elect-ionem et confirmationem eius per vicarium nostrum de eo factam dando s i b i omnem auctoritatem et potestatem sicut alias habuit in huiusmodi o f f i c i o provincialatus et confirmavimus omnia acta et diffinitiones in dicto capitulo, precipiendo ut obser-varet et observari faceret similiter diffinitiones capitulorum generalium. The only record of his public duties appears in two documents concern-ing the recognition of Sir Edmund Rede as a founder of the Oxford con-95 vent. Capgrave attended the formal services at the convent church on that occasion and many of his activities must have been of a similar 55 functional kind. He was also responsible for ensuring that the general rules of the order were observed in the thirty convents of the province, and to that end he made visitations and heard complaints like those noted by the author of the Augustinian rule the Mare Magnum. Other duties were the recommendation of students to the studia generalia, the provision of lectorships, the arbitration of disputes, and the award-ing of special dispensations and licenses. Recent scholars agree that Capgrave finished his term as provin-c i a l in 1457 and returned to a quiet l i f e at Lynn, carrying on with his last commentaries and The Chronicle of England. Only two of these commentaries are extant; those on the Acts of the Apostles and on the Creed. Both of them are dedicated to William Gray, and they s t i l l re-main at B a l l i o l College where Bishop Gray deposited them. With the Apocalypse of John, Capgrave finished his gathering of \"eld exposiciones upon scripture into o collection\" (Chronicle, p. 1), and turned to an enlargement of the Annualia which he had mentioned as early as 1438 in the Dedication to the Genesis commentary. Capgrave's dedication of this book to the new king, Edward IV, earned him the contempt of F.J. Furnivall, and Furnivall's condemnation of him as a time-server has too long been part of the standard characterization. The power struggles which resulted in the c i v i l war had their origins in events which took place before Capgrave's birth; and they were not concluded until two decades after his death. The older his-torical interpretation which placed a l l fifteenth century figures on either the Lancastrian or Yorkist side has been supplanted by a far 56 more complex view. It is now clear that the battles with the Percies, the r i v a l r i e s of Henry V's brothers (the Dukes of Bedford and Glouces-ter) for influence in the councils of the young king Henry VI during the 1420's, the disgrace of Gloucester in the 1440's and of the Duke of Suffolk in 1450, as well as the battles of the next three decades were a l l manifestations at the courtly level of the struggle for the control of wealth and policy which is seen not only in the alliances formed by aristocratic families but also in borough a c t i v i t i e s . Many of the lesser known disputes, important for their effect on the social and economic sta b i l i t y of fifteenth century England, took place in the Northern counties and in East Anglia. The troubles in Lynn i t s e l f were mentioned earlier, severe riots took place in Norwich in the 1420's, and the general lawlessness in the county is reflected in reports in the Paston Letters. The administration of justice was dependent on influence, and the cost of appeals was so great that there was l i t t l e the average person could do i f he were injured. Moreover, without wealth, he had l i t t l e chance of effecting any change in the situation. In such c i r -cumstances the loyalty of the individual lay with those who could pro-tect his interests, and, obviously, his concern was primarily on a local level. There is no doubt that the office of the king was respec-ted, but i t is equally certain that the general populace was willing to support whoever could gain the throne. The source of the conflict was not the justice of either side's claim to the crown. In addition, the small numbers involved in actual battles forcibly demonstrates that the mass of people were not moved by the issues. Most of Capgrave's associates have been described as vio-lent adherents of one or the other side; but i n fact they were moved by considerations of advantage rather than principle. What their actions show above a l l is that Capgrave, without family or high ecclesiastical position, would not have been required to take sides and that he had l i t t l e reason to do so. And i t i s hardly surprising, nor a matter for condemnation, then, that Capgrave, among many others, should laud Henry VI in the dedication to one work and Edward IV in another. Whether his Chronicle was cut short because of his death, be-cause he was concerned not to indulge in controversy, or because he had partially covered the ground in his De Illustribus Henricis cannot be definitively determined. While his sources are well known and he added l i t t l e , the work is an interesting pastiche of medieval interests and beliefs. Moreover, there is individuality in the characteristic scep-ticism of many of his comments. Capgrave died in Lynn, where he had spent most of his l i f e , on August 12, 1464. His reputation for learning, enhanced by the report 96 that Henry VII tried to have him beatified, was passed from annalist to annalist, but for nearly four hundred years the only work considered to be his that was ever printed was a version of John of Tynmouth's 97 Nova Legenda Angliae. Even in his own day his works do not seem to have been as well known as he was. However, The Life of St. Katherine, as has been shown, was circulated locally, and The Chronicle of England was copied in the next century. Extant fragments indicate that a 58 second Solace of Pilgrims, a second S_t. Gilbert, and a second De Illustribus Henricis once existed, and references suggest that addi-tional copies were made of the commentaries on Genesis, Kings II and IV, and the Creed. The survey of Capgrave's career which this chapter has made provides the context for a literary evaluation of his long-ignored vernacular works. It makes clear that while his writings are the major source of information about him, they \u00E2\u0080\u0094 and especially the vernacular ones \u00E2\u0080\u0094 are by no means the most important side of his active career. And while the discussion of his works proceeds, i t is important to be mindful of the distinction between Capgrave the learned f r i a r chiefly concerned with theology and his religious duties and Capgrave the author who occasionally, almost avocationally, wrote devotional pieces. Through Capgrave, a new perspective on certain aspects of fifteenth century letters may be achieved, for he i s the only recognized scholar of the time with a large vernacular canon. His English works are not characteristic of his writings as a whole in the sense that they are not exegetical in intention, but they are more interesting because they show the s t y l i s t i c effects of a s t r i c t scholastic education on familiar genres and because, through Capgrave's own comments on his points of divergence from his sources, his method of composition may be seen. In the following chapters a l l of the English works w i l l be discussed, be-ginning with the largest group, the saints' lives. 59 Footnotes * The handling of Latin words, phrases, and quotations accords with standard usage throughout the text with one exception. For emphasis, direct Latin quotations (followed immediately by a reference to their source in parentheses) are i t a l i c i z e d and not placed within quotation marks when they are used for purposes of comparing Capgrave's translations. 1Ed. F. C. Hingston (London, 1858), p. 259. 2 Ed. C. Horstmann, E.E.T.S., O.S. 100 (London, 1893), Prologue, 1. 240. 3 L. T o r e l l i , Secoli Agostiniani, VII (Bologna, 1682), 314. A. de Meijer comes to the same conclusion in his three part a r t i c l e on Capgrave. With the single t i t l e , \"John Capgrave, O.E.S.A.,\" the three parts were published respectively in Augustiniana, V (1955), 400-440; and Augustiniana, VII (1957), 118-148, 531-574. They w i l l be cited subsequently as de Meijer, Part I, Part II, or Part III. De Meijer discusses the relationship of the two John Capgraves in Part I, 405-406. A F. Roth, The English Austin Friars, 1249-1538, I (New York, 1966), 47. ^J.C. Russell, British Medieval Population (Albuquerque, 1948), p. 142. He estimates Lynn's population as 4,691. The eight towns larger than Lynn and their estimated populations in 1377 were: London, 34,971; York, 10,872; Bris t o l , 9,518; Plymouth, 7,256; Coventry, 7,226; Norwich, 5,928; Lincoln, 5,354; and Salisbury, 4,839. ^The contents of the petition are known from the reply to i t contained in the Calendar of Entries in the Papal Registers relating to Great Britain and Ireland: Papal Letters, Vol. VII, A.D. 1417-1431, ed. J.A. Twenlow (London, 1906), 441-442: To the bishop of Ely. Mandate as below. The recent petition of the townsmen of Bishop's Lynn (opidanorum v i l l e de Lenne episcopi) in the diocese of Norwich contained that within the bounds of their parish church of St. Margaret, appropriated by papal authority to the prior and convent of Norwich, and served by four monks thereof, one of them called prior, who are re-moveable at the pleasure of the said prior and convent, and by a hired chaplain, a secular priest, the parishioners built at a time immemorial a chapel of St. James and another of St. Nicholas, in each of which a chaplain has hitherto been and s t i l l i s / placed by the said prior and convent, who celebrates 60 therein mass and other divine o f f i c e s and administers to a number of the parishioners by old custom a l l e c c l e s i a s t i c a l sacraments, but not baptism, marriage nor churching of women; and adding that i n the said town the multitude and devotion of the said parishioners has increased so much that on Easter day every year about 1,600 persons receive the communion (sacramento E u c a r i s t i communicantur) i n the said p a r i s h church, and i n the said chapels of St. Nicholas and St. James about 1,400 and 900 r e s p e c t i v e l y . The pope orders the above bishop, i f he finds the f a c t s to be as stated, to grant to the p a r i s h -ioners that they may i n the said chapels hear mass and other divine o f f i c e s by the said chaplains and receive from them the said sacraments, and that the said chaplains may f r e e l y admini-ster to them the same; saving the r i g h t of the parish church and of any other. Ammonet nos suscepti cura. ^B. Power and M.M. Postan, Studies i n English Trade i n the F i f t e e n t h Century (London, 1933), p. 166. 8H.J.M. Ke r l i n g , \"Aliens i n the County of Norfolk, 1436-1485,\" Norfolk Archaeology, XXXIII (1962), 200-212. 9 J . T a i t , The Medieval English Borough (Manchester, 1936), p. 148. 1 0E.K. Chambers says, i n The Medieval Stage, II (Oxford, 1903), 374: There was a Corpus C h r i s t i g u i l d as early as 1400, and the T a i l o r ' s Ordinances of 1441 require them to take part i n the Corpus C h r i s t i procession; but I do not f i n d evidence of regular annual plays. The Chamberlain's Accounts f o r 1385, however, include: ' i i j s i i i j d to c e r t a i n players, playing an i n t e r l u d e on Corpus C h r i s t i day.' ' i i j s i i i j d paid by the Mayor's g i f t to persons playing the interlude of St. Thomas the Martyr.' and those f o r 1462 \u00E2\u0080\u0094 ' i i j s paid f o r two flagons of red wine, spent i n the house of Arnulph Tixonye, by the Mayor and most of h i s brethren, being there to see a c e r t a i n play at the Feast of Corpus C h r i s t i . ' In t h i s same year the Skinners and S a i l o r s 'of the town' received rewards 'for t h e i r labour about the procession of Corpus C h r i s t i t h i s year.' In 1409-1410 Lady de Beaufort came to see a play. and Chambers, Ibid., p. 384, also records: In 1444 the corporation of Lynn showed a play with Mary and Gabriel before Lord Scales, [at Middleton, Norfolk] 61 Further payments are recorded in the extracts from the Lynn records published in the Historical Manuscripts Commission, Eleventh Report, Part III (London, 1887), 162-163. 12 de Meijer, Part I, 407. 13 M. Aston, Thomas Arundel (Oxford, 1967), pp. 184-185. ^H.J. Hillen, A History of the Borough of King 1s Lynn, (Norwich, 1907), p. 165. ^As he reports in his De Illustribus Henricis, ed. F.C. Hingston (London, 1858), pp. 137-139. 16 In The Chronicle of England, p. 157. ^Throughout his work, Father Roth mentions individual cases of lapsed friars and he discusses frequently recorded cases of the abuse of the vow of poverty (I, 186-189). In addition, he seeks to refute charges of Lollardry made against the Austins. He agrees that the two masters who \"spoke against the shirking of taxes by the higher clergy\" in 1374 were on the royal or nationalist, as opposed to papal side \u00E2\u0080\u0094 \"while i t i s true that they voiced only the popular sentiment i t also indicates the inroads W y c l i f s teaching had made among those whose f i r s t allegiance should have been to the Pope,\" (I, 64). But, he says later, \"It has often been said that some English Austins sided with Wyclifs social teaching. Whatever their ideas in the matter might have been, his attack upon faith turned them against him\" (I, 66). Finally, while he suggests there was a decline in scholarship after Capgrave's death (I, 430), he does not see spiritual desuetude u n t i l about forty years before the Act of Supremacy (I, p. 431ff.). For a more generalized view of the possible truth behind charges made against the f r i a r s , see A. Williams, \"Relations between the Mendicant Friars and the Secular Clergy in England in the Later Fourteenth Century,\" Annuale Medievale, I (1969), 22-93. 18 A survey of the data in A.B. Emden's two biographical regis-ters substantiates these conclusions. These two monumental works, A Biographical Register of the University of Oxford to 1500, 3 vols. (Oxford, 1957-1959) and A Biographical Register of the University of Cambridge (Cambridge, 1963), include notices of some 434 Augustinian f r i a r s . (This number was arrived at by reducing the combined total of 212 at Cambridge and 244 at Oxford by the 22 who are either repeated in the Oxford volumes \u00E2\u0080\u0094 Abyndon, de Venezia, de Lucca, Hervy, and Schwarzenberg \u00E2\u0080\u0094 or who occur in the registers of both universities \u00E2\u0080\u0094 Berewyck, Newbigging, Herford, Godwick, Owenby, Cressall, Constanz, Colchester, Marpes, Benit, Sharyngton, Penketh, Galyon, Curteys, Thwaytes, Rose, Toneys.) Of these, 135 received the magisterium, the doctorate in theology. The proportion completing the degree reached 62 nearly 50% i n the generation immediately p r i o r to Capgrave's (35 of 76 English f r i a r s between 1360 and 1400). In addition, none of the 66 foreign f r i a r s \u00E2\u0080\u0094 p r i m a r i l y I t a l i a n and German\u00E2\u0080\u0094 appears before 1358, and there are only 17 a f t e r the beginning of the f i f t e e n t h century. Even more obvious than these i n d i c a t i o n s of the i s o l a t i o n of the Eng-l i s h province of the Augustinian order i s the sharp decline i n the number of f r i a r s who are l i s t e d as licensed to preach a f t e r c. 1352. Between 1274 and 1352, 42 of 84 are licensed, but only 4 of 113 between 1360 and 1400. Cert a i n l y more would have been covered by the blanket licenses issued by some bishops; and, of course, Emden's r e g i s t e r s do not include any of the f r i a r s who received enough t h e o l o g i c a l t r a i n i n g to be licensed to preach but who did not attend either of the univer-s i t i e s . Such data provides a meaningful comment on the men who were Cap-grave's teachers and senior colleagues. When one-third of those r e -corded at the convents i n u n i v e r s i t y towns were foreigners and nearly one-half continued to the f i n a l degree, there can be no doubt that t h e i r view extended well beyond the i n s u l a r and that the disputations they undertook were sophisticated and diverse. 19 H.B. Workman, John W i c l i f : A Study of the English Medieval Church, II (Oxford, 1926). At the B l a c k f r i a r s Council each of the mendicant orders had two representatives. 20 One of the most famous was the t r i a l of William Taylour.in 1423. At that time John Lowe, l a t e r Bishop of St. Asaph, was one of the Augustinian doctors. 21 A. Gwynn, The English Austin F r i a r s i n the Time of Wyclif (London, 1940), pp. 230, 235. 2 2 I b i d . , pp. 236-239. 23 Ibid ., pp. 274-275. Capgrave mentions his defection i n The Chronicle of England, p. 244. 24 1965) See: J.A.F. Thomson, The Later L o l l a r d s , 1414-15 20 (London, 2 5Roth, I, 143. Same. 2 7 I b i d . , p. 137. 28 The terms had s p e c i a l i z e d meanings i n the middle ages. Thus, orthography taught the student to s p e l l and write L a t i n words; and prosody, to read aloud c o r r e c t l y . Then he proceeded to syntax, a study of the rules of grammar and t h e i r a p p l i c a t i o n to the construction of 63 sentences; and, f i n a l l y , he studied the parts of speech by themselves in the division known as ethimologia. Brother Bonaventura discusses these divisions and many of the texts in his a r t i c l e , \"The Teaching of Latin in Later Medieval England,\" Medieval Studies, III (1961), 1-20. Father Roth specifies the three books mentioned in the text as the basic grammars used by the Augustinians (I, 142). 29 When Capgrave was prior at Lynn more than thirty years later, he mentions that sixteen boys were studying at the convent (De Illustribus Henricis, p. 189), and i t is reasonable to assume that the practice was a long-standing one. 30 Father Roth sees a conflict between the order's prescriptions for education and what is known of medieval education. Thus, he says of the f i r s t year following the novitiate: \"Only one year of grammar school was prescribed though both the course in logic (dialectics) and that in grammar lasted one year. From an analogy with the course in philosophy we must surmise that the missing course was taught at the next higher studium or had been anticipated i n the novitiate\" (I, 143). In Capgrave's case i t is possible to resolve the problem in another way and suggest that, as he appears to have been older than the average entrant, he had studied his grammar earlier. 3 1Roth, I, 314. 32 Ibid., p. 145. In addition, he l i s t s the texts Capgrave probably used; \"The textbooks for the Old Logic were the Isagoge of Porphyrius, the Categories or Praedicamenta of Aristotle and his Perihermeneias, a l l of them in the translation of Boethius. The New Logic comprehended in particular the teaching of syllogisms as propounded in the Topica, Analytica Priora and Posteriora of Aristotle.\" 33 N. Toner, \"Augustinian Spiritual Writers of the English Province in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries,\" Sanctus Augustinus, II (1959), 508. Because Capgrave does not mention the Duke of Claren-ce's v i s i t to Lynn in 1413, Father Toner doubts whether he had yet joined the order. If he was in Norwich, he would not have seen i t himself. 34 B. Smalley, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages (Oxford, 1952), p. 26. 35 The Life of St. Norbert. See Chapter three. 36 Sede vacante registers for the see of Norwich in the period 1415-1417 appear in The Register of Bishop Chichele, ed. E.F. Jacob, III (Oxford, 1945), 347-425, but Capgrave's name does not appear. 64 37 Roth, I, 141, n. 253. The age of ordination varied, the candidate usually being 22 in Capgrave's time. If Capgrave may be allowed some further looseness in his account, perhaps he was ordained six years before Henry VI's birth, i.e. in 1415, the year he was 22 and the year he finished his pre-theological studies in Norwich. 38 General Archives, O.E.S.A., Register Dd 4, f. 55 as printed by de Meijer, Part I, 408, n. 40. 3 9Roth, I, 174. 40 D. Knowles, The Religious Orders in England (Cambridge, 1950), pp. 190-191. 41 Since he was nominated as a lector in 1421, had been at London only since 1417, and was required to spend a total of six years (three as a student and three as a cursor) before he was eligible for this rank, there can have been no break in his studies. 42 Roth, I, 280-291 l i s t s some of the better known. 4 3Ed. E. Ypma, Augustiniana, VI (1956), 275-321. 44 Ibid., p. 282. 4 5 I b i d . , p. 310-311. 4 6 I b i d . , p. 308-309. 4 7Roth, I, 160. 48Ypma, pp. 304-305. 4 9Smalley, p. 209. 5 0Roth, I, 147-170. ~^ De Illustribus Henricis, p. 127. 5 2Roth, I, 166-169. 53 General Archives O.E.S.A., Register Dd 4, f. 75v as printed by de Meijer, Part I, 409, n. 42. 54 In his Prologue to The Life of St. Gilbert of Sempringham, ed. J.J. Munro, E.E.T.S., O.S. 140 (London, 1910), 61 Capgrave mentions a sermon he wrote \"be 3er befor myn opposicion,\" and at the opening of the sermon i t s e l f (Ibid., p. 145) he gives the precise date. Clearly, he means by \"opposicion\" the end of the year of opponency, for his 65 bachelor's degree was awarded early in 1423. The document is preserved in the General Archives O.E.S.A., Register Dd 4, f. 106. \"^According to the General Archives O.E.S.A., Register Dd 4, f. 18 as printed in F. Roth, The English Austin Friars, 1249-1538, II (New York, 1961), 295, he was directed to take the magisterium at either Oxford or Cambridge, but A.B. Emden assigns him to Cambridge in his Register. 5 6Roth, I, 172. ~^The matter of Capgrave's progression from lector to magister is unnecessarily confused in the biographies of both Father de Meijer and Father Roth. Much of this confusion comes from the awkward handling of recorded dates. It must be recognized at the outset that while the c i v i l year began on March 25th in England, the dates in the registers of the Augustinian priors-general accord with modern usage as the foliation makes perfectly clear. So, for example, a permission for a certain f r i a r William to make a pilgrimmage to Jerusalem which was given on March 14, 1422 occurs on f. 73v and a dispensation for another f r i a r to practice medicine i n contravention of the order's regulations which is dated April 12, 1422 occurs on f. 75 (Roth, II, 298). In any case, only one of the documents concerning Capgrave is dated before March 25th. Nevertheless, Father de Meijer states (Part I, 408) that Cap-grave was f i r s t appointed a lector in 1422 and he repeats this date on the following page. But in his evidence, the entry in Register Dd 4, f. 55 (Part I, 408, n. 40), he gives the date as \"8 Aprilis 1421.\" That this i s in fact the correct year for the i n i t i a l appointment de Meijer seems to have recognized, for when he cites the document of April 13, 1422 from Register Dd 4, f. 75v (Part I, 409, n. 42) assign-ing Capgrave specifically to Cambridge, he says i t is \"a year later\" and then goes on to say \"This year was 1422\" (Part I, 410), using Cap-grave's own date in the sermon cited in n. 55 as further evidence. There is a further inconsistency in de Meijer's account. In his two references (Part I, 406-407, 409) to the notice of the cele-brations in London at the time of King Henry VI's birth in December 1421 found in De Illustribus Henricis, de Meijer seems to accept Cap-grave's self-denomination studens in a s t r i c t rather than a generic sense. But, as the document of April 8, 1421 shows, Capgrave was already a cursor when he was made a lector. At either of these ranks, Capgrave was responsible for certain lectures; and though space appar-ently prevented him from gaining immediate preferment to one of the universities, there was nothing to prevent him from undertaking the required lectures at the London studium. Indeed, i t is presumably because he did so that he was dispensed from the lectures on the Sen- tences and proceeded to the bachelor's degree with such rapidity. Father Roth derived most of his biographical information from Father de Meijer's articles, although he does place the document of 66 1421 i n the proper context. In one sentence (I, 111) of his discussion of Capgrave as p r i o r - p r o v i n c i a l , however, he doubles the length of Capgrave's stay i n London and as a consequence places the completion of Capgrave's academic t r a i n i n g i n 1433. In turn, t h i s date scarcely coincides with his conclusion on p. 174, that \"The f a s t e s t promotion on record i s that of John Capgrave, the author, who obtained the magister- ium ten years a f t e r his ordination and j u s t within the prescribed time l i m i t . \" In t h i s instance he has no a d d i t i o n a l evidence for the date of either the ordination or of the inception; and he i s not following de Meijer, who places the ordination i n 1417 and the magisterium i n 1425, a period of only eight years. 5 8Roth, I, 169. 5 9 I b i d . , p. 105. 60 The L i f e of St. Katherine, Forewords, p. v i i i . 6 1 P a r t I, 411. 62 General Archives O.E.S.A., Register Dd 4, f . 220v as printed i n Roth, I I , 308. 63 This work i s now l o s t . Capgrave describes i t s contents i n h i s Ye Solace of Pilgrimes, ed. C A . M i l l s (Oxford, 1911), p. 92; John Bale once had i t i n his possession and noted the i n c i p i t with the dedication to Watford. See de Meijer, Part I I I , 548. 64 The dedication to the Genesis Commentary i s printed as an appendix i n De I l l u s t r i b u s Henricis and the reference i n i t to the commentary on Kings appears p. 231; Leland's note appears i n h i s Commentarii de s c r i p t o r i b u s b r i t a n n i c i s , ed. A. H a l l , II (Oxford, 1709), 453. ^ I n Ye Solace of Pilgrimes (see n. 64) and i n the sermon delivered at Cambridge (see n. 55) pp. 146,147. de Meijer, Part I I , 120, n. 8 and Part I I I , 548. 6 7 d e Meijer, Part I I I , 548-549. 6 8 As such he i s discussed by S. Moore i n h i s a r t i c l e , \"Patrons of Letters i n Norfolk and Suffolk c. 1450,\" PMLA, XXVIII (1913), 97-100 and by K. Holzknecht i n h i s L i t e r a r y Patronage i n the Middle Ages (Philadelphia, 1923), pp. 55, 69, 94n, 104n, 112, 121, 145n, 146, 151, 160, 178 among others; and i t i s standard f o r the biographers to r e f e r to Duke Humphrey and John Lowe e s p e c i a l l y as Capgrave's patrons. 69 Roth, I, 371-378 discusses the various r u l i n g s . 67 7 0ed. J.J. Munro, E.E.T.S., O.S. 140 (London, 1910), 60. 7 1See: Furnivall in the Forewords to The Life of St. Katherine, pp. xv-xvi, Hingston in the Preface to De Illustribus Henricis, p. xvi, de Meijer, Part I, 439-440, Roth, I, 417-418, and D. Brimson in \"John Capgrave, O.S.A.,\" Tagastan, IX (1946), 110-111. 72 It is certain Humphrey owned two volumes (1 and 3) of the commentary on Kings, because they were among the books he donated to Oxford in 1443. (See the record of the bequest as printed in the Introduction to The Chronicle of England, pp. xiv-xv). However, the incipits for these are nowhere recorded, while the other two volumes were seen by Leland before their disappearance and their dedication to Lowe noted. 7 3Roth, I, 106. 74 The comments of Leland, Bale, Pits and Herrera have a l l been collated against xeroxed copies of the originals; for convenience, however, they are here cited as they appear in de Meijer, Part II, 119-128. After the seventeenth century, i t was standard to c a l l Capgrave Humphrey's confessor as Father de Meijer did as late as 1955 (Part I, 419). Without explicitly disagreeing, Father Roth suggests that such a formal relationship was improbable: Within the English province Capgrave is notT known to have done anything against the ever growing tendency for personal independence, though his dislike i s evident from his attitude towards honorary papal chaplains. For the same reason he probably disliked the constant recruiting of his best men for the service of noble families. (I, 115) And, recently, on grounds similar to my own, Peter Lucas has denied the possibility, \"John Capgrave, O.S.A., (1393-1464), Scribe and 'Publisher',\" Transactions of the Cambridge Bibliographical Society, V, Part I (1969), p. 31. John South's dispensation to act as Humphrey's chaplain is reprinted from the Calendar of Papal Registers in Roth, II, 328. 7^De Illustribus Henricis, Appendix IV, 229-231. 76 See the colophon as printed in de Meijer, Part III, 539: Incepit hoc opus frater Johannes capgrave in festo sancti antonii confessoris que occurit mense ianuarii anno domini m.cccc. xxxviii . [i.e. 17 Jan. 1439]. 7 7de Meijer, Part III, 548. The assumption is strengthened by the evidence that suggests Capgrave returned to Lynn c. 1440. 78 Ye Solace of Pilgrimes, p. 93 68 79 As Capgrave says in his epilogue: the f r e r i s name pat translate pis story Thei called Ion Capgraue, whech in Assumpcion weke Made a end of a l l his rymyng cry The 3er of Crist our Lord, wit3~outen ly, A thousand, four hundred & fourty euene. (11. 4104-4108) 80 See P. Lucas, pp. 4-5, for the following dates: BM. MSS. Arundel 20 (1460-1500); Arundel 168 (1460-1500); Arundel 396 (1445-1460); and Bodley MS. Rawlinson poet. 118 (1460-1500). 8 1The Life of St. Katherine, Book I, Prologue, 11. 218-219. 82 Arundel 396, See The Life of St. Katherine, Forewords, pp. xxix-xxx and de Meijer, Part III, 564-565. Q O Roth, I, 291. 8 4Lucas, pp. 12-16. Roth, I, 291. ft f\ G. Parks, The English Traveller to Italy, I (Palo Alto, 1954). Park's figures are inexact because precise records are scanty and the data scattered. It is interesting that he says of 1450, the year many assume Capgrave made his trip .-'.to Rome: In 1450 a l l records Were-, said to be broken when. .40,000 pilgrims were thought to arrive daily;: during this year nearly 200 persons, were trampled to death in a panic on the crowded bridge. Such a crowd would indeed have been one to reckon with. I find no evi-dence of so great a crush in The Solace of Pilgrims. Q-7 Part I, 422. 88 R. Arbesmann, \"Jordanus of Saxony's Vita Sancti Augustini, the source for John Capgrave's Life of St. Augustine,\" Traditio, I (1943), 353. 89 R. Weiss, Humanism in England in the Fifteenth Century (Oxford, 1957), pp. 86-96. 90 Toner, p. 508. He offers no documentary evidence, however. 91 The Life of St. Gilbert, which Capgrave says was composed shortly after The Life of St. Augustine (p. 61), ends with a precise date: Thus endith be l i f of Seint Gilbert translat in-to our moder tonge, be 3ere of be incarnacioun of our Lord a Mccccli. (p. 142) 69 92 Weiss, p. 90. 93 General Archives O.E.S.A., Register Dd 6, f. 16, as printed by de Meijer, Part I, 401. 94 General Archives O.E.S.A., Register Dd 6, f. 16, as printed by de Meijer, Part I, 400. 95 Printed in The Chronicle of England, Appendix II, 329-334. 96 The origin of this report i s not ascertainable: de Meijer gives the Introduction to Mi l l s ' edition of Ye Solace of Pilgrimes p. v i i i as his only source and Mills in turn has none. I have found no evidence that Henry VII made any petition to Rome. 97 This legendary has been printed under Capgrave's name since 1516, although i t was long ago conceded that l i t t l e of the material was original. In fact, none of the manuscripts contain Capgrave's name. Peter Lucas has an article forthcoming in The Library surveying Cap-grave's traditional relationship with the Nova Legenda Angliae and suggesting \"that Capgrave's role in connection with this work was probably n i l . \" See his previously cited a r t i c l e , p. 4. CHAPTER II CAPGRAVE AND THE MEDIEVAL SAINTS' LIVES I Despite the popularity of hagiography as a literary form and the endeavours of many scholars to put i t into an historical and literary context,''\" the controlling force underlying the genre tends to be mis-understood. The cliched summaries of their repetitious and incredible contents often distort not only the evaluation of the lives as l i t e r a -ture but also the beliefs of the men who wrote them and the essential purposes to which they were directed. It is necessary, before discus-sing Capgrave's particular application of the form, to examine in some detail the background of the saints' lives in which he was working. The antecedents of the fully developed saint's l i f e l i e far in the past. For some early martyrs genuine records of examinations and 2 executions do exist, and historical works contemporary with the eras of persecution refer to the sufferings of many individual Christians. In the case of later saints, the source materials of the vitae may include notices i n chronicles and even such personal documents as their correspondence and other preserved writings, or reminiscences by friends and pthers who knew them. These sources are essential to any examination of the historical truth of recorded events; but of more importance to the student of literature is the way in which these accounts, whether authenticated or not, are transformed into literary 71 materials and shaped into a recognizable and persistent form. It is unnecessary in the present discussion to trace the complicated proces-ses by which the rhetoric of Greek panegyric was grafted onto the stock of historical records of passions to produce an elementary model for later formal hagiographies. It is important, however, to remember that in the development of the form there is not a direct chronological pro-gression. Rather, the simplest, unadorned varieties of the lives continued to' exist simultaneously with the more sophisticated elabora-tions, and this pattern was repeated as the various stages entered the European vernaculars. Three independent types may be isolated in the evolutionary development of the form: calendars, martyrologies, and longer, semi-3 biographical lives. Using the unchanging solar calendar as a basis, churchmen in both the east and west catalogued the Christian martyrs in l i s t s which were read at certain of the solemn feasts. Tangentially, certain of these calendars were expanded to include the anniversaries of other saintly men and women, some of whom were honoured only in their own regions. In the mainstream of development, however, the more usual tendency was to elaborate the calendars into martyrologies, which passed beyond the mere notation of names and places to include descriptions of the passions suffered, together with accounts of mir-acles which preceded, attended, or followed the saint's death. Some of these martyrologies were in turn extracted and became the foundation for longer, individual accounts. Finally, as the age of the early martyrs receded in time and Christianity produced new proselytizing and ascetic heroes, the desire for longer memorials in narrative form grew, and, with motives of instruction and exhortation to prayer providing additional impetus for composition, individual lives , frequently imbed-ded in sermons, became familiar parts of;private devotional exercises and monastic and public service. In,all three stages, the church ca l -endar provided a logical structure for grouping related works, and everywhere collections flourished. Examples of a l l three varieties survive in the Anglo-Latin and early English literary remains. Both prose and poetic simple calendars exist in Old English. Their contents are virtually identical (one i n -cludes thirty-seven, the other thirty-eight dates), but the verse Meno-4 logium with i t s characteristic Anglo-Saxon poetic devices is better known. The paucity of information contained in these listings i s well illustrated by the note on Gregory the Great, the chief instigator of the Christianization of the new Anglo-Saxon inhabitants of England: l5^nne se halga p3?s emb XI niht a^pele scynde Gregorius in godes ware, breme in Brytene. (11. 37-40) Proof that the calendars remained in vogue during the entire medieval period is offered by.Lydgate's fifteenth-century Kalendare.^ With the dates of the year inscribed line by line in the margin, the calendar i t s e l f becomes a poetic device determining the length of the.poem and forcing condensation of the notices. Here the number of anniversaries ' recorded rises to one hundred and ninety-two; and the anglicization of the genre is reflected by the introduction of many native saints. 73 Obviously, such works were inadequate instruments for use in the religious training of monks and l a i t y in a country distant in time and place from the events and shrines commemorated in them, and i t was necessary for clerics to write their own longer Latin and vernacular lives. Using the Martyrologium Hieronymianum in conjunction with longer vitae in his possession, Bede, for instance, produced a Latin martyrology between 725 and 731 which, probably because i t was one of the most c r i t i c a l and reliable examples of i t s kind, became a source book for writers in subsequent centuries.^ The intention of such works is c l a r i f i e d by Bede's assertion at the end of his Ecclesiastical History that he had not set out in the martyrology to provide either spiritual or l i t e r a l biographies but merely to commemorate the day and manner of each saint's death. 7 In fact, Bede's entries vary in length from the excessively brief II Kl. Oct. In Bethleem Iuda, deposition sancti Hieronimi presbyteri, g qui obiit anno nonagesimo primo. 9 through such notices as that of St. Quentin, to which the miracle of the rediscovery of his body is appended, to quite elaborate accounts such as that on St. Apollinaris, bishop of Ravenna, whose original ordination and assignment to missionary work by St. Peter are included together with a lengthy description of the tortures he endured.^ Four transcripts of an English example of this middle stage of development, known only as An Old English Martyrology (c. 850), are also extant.''\"''' In this work, the notices are often so abbreviated that the editor suggests that they may have been mere reminders for a reader, probably a preacher, familiar with the events from other, presumably 12 Latin, sources. In any case, the accounts are similar to Bede's, though brief details of miracles more frequently appear. Longer lives were also common in England in the early Middle Ages. Much of Bede's Ecclesiastical History is comprised of lives of saintly kings, bishops, and other holy men, many of them deriving from earlier vitae; and Bede, of course, wrote both poetic and prose ver-sions of The Life of St. Cuthbert. The other most frequently cited Anglo-Latin lives of the period are The Life of St. Guthlac by Felix of Crowland and The Life of Gregory the Great written by an anonymous monk of Whitby. Though their merits are unequal, the best Latin lives f o l -low a continental model sometimes referred to as the Antonian after Evragius' Vita Antonii, the most influential and mature example of the form. The content of those lives which follow the Antonian model is a l l more or less consistent and is characterized by the following recognizable features: 1) an apology for the author's incapacity to perform the task before him; 2) an account of the parentage of the saint; 3) the recording of the wonders attendant on his birth; 4) a description of his vicious or rash youth; 5) a c a l l to the religious vocation accompanied by various mental struggles preceding acquiescence; 6) a departure for an isolated area; 7) a narration of battles with demons and other temptations; 8) the establishment of a growing reputa-tion for piety and holiness; 9) the appearance of groups of pilgrims seeking blessings and cures; and, inevitably, 10) an account of the 13 saint's death and the miracles which follow i t . Both Bede and Felix 75 follow the Antonian model. Though they seem eager to impress their readers with the credibility of the reports by reference to eyewitnes-ses, the verbal echoes of Evragius in Bede's work, and of both Evragius and Bede in Felix's, are f o r t i f i e d by some direct borrowing of actual 14 incident. However, their disregard for l i t e r a l truth stems not so much from ignorance of historical c r i t e r i a as from a belief in higher, ethical truths which transcend the factual details in the l i f e which they record. While the Latin model was being imitated in this way, another tradition was adopted i n the vernacular. Although they are quite dis-tinct, the well-known Anglo-Saxon poems Andreas, Elene,^ Juliana, and 16 Guthlac A and B share certain attributes with the prose lives found in compilations such as the Blickling Homilies,^ 7 Aelfric's Catholic Homilies,^ and Lives of the Saints,^ and other individual works. Though they are a l l highly developed, these lives conform to a pattern (established in the martyrologies) of ignoring or truncating the events of a saint's l i f e which do not deal with his conversion, physical t r i -als, passion, or miracles. When the early history of a saint is dis-cussed, i t is treated perfunctorily, following certain conventions which w i l l be discussed shortly. The Andreas is concerned with the saint's adventures in Myrmi-donia; Elene really commemorates the discovery of the true cross; both of the Guthlac poems emphasize his t r i a l s and death; and the primary interest of the Juliana l i e s in her confrontation of the tyrant and her passion. The same focus on a single major event, or on a brief period 76 of time, is characteristic of the homilies. Other examples include the 20 Life of St. Chad, which does not begin u n t i l Chad has been made a 21 bishop; The Legend of St. Veronica, in which the interest in the saint i s entirely subordinated to the desire to procure the r e l i c to 22 cure Tyberius; and the Passion of St. Margaret, which, like the many treatments to follow, describes with reli s h the demons, dragons, and tortures, but leaves the saint l i t t l e more than a f l a t stereotype. It must be firmly maintained at this point that the type of l i f e just described, dealing exclusively with c r i t i c a l moments in the his-tory of the saint, was not an invention of Anglo-Saxon writers. Many continental Latin \"passions\" from which the English works derive were precisely this kind of l i f e . However, the adoption of this model, with i t s concomitant emphasis on marvels and debate to the exclusion of the broader Antonian concerns, established a vernacular tradition from which, as w i l l be shown, a l l four of Capgrave's saints' lives diverge. Although the continuity of the preserved records is often broken, hagiography in Middle English evinces few variations from the conven-tional patterns established i n the earlier period. The most frequently discussed early vernacular lives i n Middle English are the three heroic tales of virginity preserved and the devil defeated in the West-Midland Katherine-group. Much longer than the Old English homilies and most of the other prose lives, these legends s t i l l adhere to the English tradi-tion by their emphasis on the t r i a l s , torments, and martyrdom of the saints. The author of Seinte Marherete, for example, spends only twenty lines on the saint's biography before introducing her f i r s t 77 tormenter, and five of those lines are devoted to her choice of Christ 23 as her lover; the similar preamble to Seinte Iuliene i s even further 24 fore-shortened. Lives of other saints are similarly reduced and simplified: those of Joseph of Arimathea begin only after the cruci-25 fixion; those of St. Anne emphasize the birth and early l i f e of 26 Mary; St. George becomes exclusively a slayer of dragons; and young, native saints such as Edward and Kenelm are the innocent victims of treacherous plots. Lydgate's short legends f a l l into this category, as do the twelve lives Osbern Bokenham collected as the Legendys of Hooly 27 Wummen. When a saint is being treated whose l i f e is relatively 28 uneventful, such as St. Robert of Knaresborough, there is certainly a tendency to manufacture activities and miracles, and the distinction between these and the Antonian type blurs \u00E2\u0080\u0094 except insofar as the sub-ject of the short l i f e never wavers in his faith; he may be attacked but he is never tempted, and there i s thus l i t t l e or no sp i r i t u a l growth evident. Moreover, when the saint has sinned, like St. Mary of 29 Egypt or St. Julian, the emphasis a l l f a l l s on the expiation and on God's grace and forgiveness. Besides the South English Legendary and the Northern Homily 30 Cycle, other English and Latin collections flourished in the Middle English period. In the f i r s t part of the 14th century, John of Tyne-31 mouth produced a Latin Sanctilogium organized according to the calen-dar which, revised, enlarged, and rearranged in alphabetical order, has 32 long been attributed to Capgrave under the t i t l e , Nova Legenda Anglia. The most popular of the European collections was Jacob of Voragine's 78 33 Legenda Aurea. Long before the f i r s t complete translation was made 34 in 1438, i t s 192 short chapters proved a compendious reference work for the compilers of sermon collections which remained in vogue u n t i l well beyond Capgrave's time. Two known compilations are John Mirk's 35 Festial and the anonymous Speculum Sacerdotale. Both of these works were apparently composed a generation before Capgrave was writing, and i f they were not actually known to him, certainly they i l l u s t r a t e the kind of vernacular l i f e with which he was familiar. Like the short Latin lives just mentioned, and the other English types which have been previously considered, these works: ignore or rapidly, pass over the saints' early days and, except for occasional brief catalogues of mir-acles, portray their subjects as unswerving in their course toward martyrdom. As prose compositions, these sermons are often s t y l i s t i c a l -ly immature. Few transitions are employed as the preacher recounts the events documenting the history of the saint's l i f e , and the l i t t l e unity that exists depends almost exclusively on the opening explanation of the significance of the feast day and upon the closing exhortation to prayer. Apart from the representative lives already discussed, i t should be noted that there were also Anglo-Norman lives \u00E2\u0080\u0094 many of them writ-ten on the Antonian model \u00E2\u0080\u0094 dealing with nearly contemporary, or at least historically verifiable, saints, and usually directed at a more learned audience. However, because these l i e outside the English ver-nacular and belong to a different hagiographic tradition, they are less germane to a discussion of Capgrave's art than those types, already 79 surveyed, which belong to the early English and Latin literary remains. The differences between certain f u l l y developed Latin lives that ap-proximate biographical methodology by their subordination of miracles to higher sp i r i t u a l and ethical aims and that large and important class of brief Latin and vernacular lives which, by their reliance on conven-tions and on the cataloguing of incredible marvels, concentrate on a single event or quality has already been pointed out. It remains now to identify these conventions and to elaborate the reasons for their use by English writers of saints' lives. II No extant work contains a l l the features which might be des-cribed as \"typical\" of the saint's l i f e , but i f such a l i f e did exist, i t would follow something like this pattern, presented in chronological order. The noble parents of the saint are aged and barren. If they are Christians, the birth of the child w i l l attest to their great piety. If not, they w i l l either die early in the child's l i f e or be converted to the true faith by him; most commonly, however, such par-ents are rejected by their offspring. Irrespective of their religious convictions, the parents are generally given some premonition of the child's greatness, sometimes by means of a vision, or perhaps by a light issuing from the child's mouth. From i t s earliest days, the child manifests signs of virtue and an aptness for learning. If the saint is pagan by birth, he w i l l be converted suddenly, often through the agency of heavenly visions and conversations, frequently accompanied 80 by a period of fasting reminiscent of Christ in the wilderness. A female saint w i l l almost certainly become the object of advances by the lord of the land or his son; and, as she has already sworn perpetual virginity, she w i l l reject his offers. Male saints have rather more di f f i c u l t y running headlong into martyrdom, but their testing leads equally to a rejection which infuriates the lord or emperor, who, dis-covering that the saint i s a Christian, threatens dire consequences i f the saint refuses to make sacrifice to the pagan gods. During the re-fusal, or a series of refusals couched in the most aggressive and defi-ant terms, the saint proves the worthlessness of the pagan gods by causing statues of idols to f a l l and through his actions converts many of the learned men in the kingdom. Next the saint is subjected to physical tortures such as scourging with iron rods which enable him to exhibit both his fearlessness and the intensity of his belief. While incarcerated in a dark and f i l t h y prison where he is given no food, the saint is visited, fed, and healed of his wounds by angelic attendants who flood the c e l l with light and sweet odour; they also give the saint the courage and strength to overcome the devils and monsters who threaten his endurance. During his confinement, the saint frequently converts both his j a i l e r and sometimes even members of the lord's im-mediate family who, professing their Christianity, are executed before the saint. Removed from his prison c e l l , the saint, persisting in his refusal to revere the pagan gods, is subjected to public tortures, such as f i r e s , racks, and boiling o i l , none of which can k i l l him. In his severest agonies he prophesies events of the future and converts 81 thousands of by-standers. Before he i s f i n a l l y executed with a sword, the saint prays that a l l who ask grace in his name be granted i t , and a sign from heaven confirms that his prayer has been heard. After the saint's death, the body remains incorruptible and perfumed o i l seeps from the tomb; visions of the saint are seen amid the heavenly choir, and miracles are performed at the sepulchre. As the above reconstruction indicates, most of the events in saints' lives are highly romanticized. Besides the conventional cata-logue of events, and the etymology of the saint's name which often introduces the l i f e , other reiterated motifs are apparent, especially those relating to the miracles performed by the saints. These legends clearly echo incidents from the lives of Christ and the prophets. Samuel, Mary, and John the Baptist, for instance, were a l l born to aged and barren parents, and each of their respective births was preceded by an annunciation. The rejection of pagan parents reflects the total immersion in Christ's way and recalls Christ's wedding command that the husband shall leave his father's house and cleave unto his wife (that i s , the church). Similarly, the refusal of worldly wealth, sometimes represented by the suitor, follows Christ's injunction to give up a l l earthly goods and signifies a desire for s p i r i t u a l values. Signs of early virtue and learning parallel Christ's youth and recall his ap-pearance with the doctors i n the temple. The aff l i c t i o n s to which the saint i s subjected, especially the scourgings, are certainly intended to remind the reader (or listener) of Christ's passion; and the incor-r u p t i b i l i t y of the saint's body and the visions of him among the 82 heavenly choirrare conscious, reminders of the Resurrection and Ascen-sion. Even the miracles performed by the saint during his l i f e , or after at his tomb, are modelled on accounts of Christ. Chiefly, these miracles concern physical cures, but some,saints are credited with res-urrections and the exorcising of devils. That these parallels are inten-tional seems clear from the fact that the authors of saints' lives a r b i t r a r i l y assign actions, speeches, visions, and miracles to indi-vidual saints without any regard for documentary evidence. Indeed, there is no perceptible difference in the treatment of historical saints and wholly f i c t i o n a l ones whose entire l i f e may depend on a 36 false etymology or on the misreading of a source inscription. The stereotyped personalities, the recurrence of identical tor-tures in the martyrdom of the saints, and the repetition of miracles which they are reputed to have performed.have long.been used, together with distinct verbal echoes and even direct borrowings, as evidence against the historicity of the events.recorded. Yet praise has been given to such Old English religious poems as Guthlac and Andreas as . survivals of a form which preserves to some degree the heroic motifs of the pagan myths; and Aelfric's Lives of the Saints, coming at the end of the early period, are regarded as examples of the means by which Christian stories were passed on to the people. When they encounter the medieval legendaries, however, c r i t i c s begin to speak with scorn of the credulity of the authors and auditors, of the physical torments and of the sheer repetitiousness of events. Some few works such as Chau-cer's Second Nun's Tale and Lydgate's The Life of Our Lady are conceded 83 genuine a r t i s t i c merit but the majority of saints' lives are considered merely quaint examples of the credulous piety of medieval man. Such a view of the genre is oversimplified. What has too often been obscured is the fact that the authors of saints' lives, motivated as they certainly were by pious devotion, possessed a conception of 37 ethical as opposed to historical truth which in i t s effect posits a demand not unlike Coleridge's \"willing suspension of disbelief,\" which is requisite both for the poet who seeks to create and the reader who wants to perceive. Whatever the credulous reader-listener may have believed, the theologians, and most of the writers, denied both the importance of miracles themselves and those standards of historical veracity which are today adduced against them. There is no need to repeat here the arguments by which Father Delehaye, C.W. Jones, and others following them have amply illustrated the universalizing quali-ties apparent in the development of martyrologies and saints' lives from the calendars. These writers have clearly shown that as early as the 8th Century writers were perfectly aware that they were writing moral exempla rather than l i t e r a l histories of the saints. To Augus-tine and Gregory, miracles were no more than manifestations of the goodness of God which could be easily comprehended by the vulgar. Because God's grace rather than the event was important, i t mattered l i t t l e that a specific action was attributed to the wrong person or, indeed, that the chronological sequence of events might be violated. Appeals to authority and insistence that the author is conforming as closely as he can to l i t e r a l truth must be understood to be subordinate 84 to the primary aim of exhortation to the good l i f e , a view made unequiv-ocal by the anonymous author of the Anglo-Latin Life of St. Gregory: And neither should anyone be offended i f any of these deeds were actually done by some other of the saints, since the holy apostle, through the mystery of one body with i t s members the saints, by comparing i t with the living body has so brought them into union that we should attribute to each member the works of the other in turn. Jo Because the saints are seen as ideals, assembled in a heavenly commu-nity of souls, praise of one is honour for a l l ; and in a metaphorical, or perhaps even an ethical, sense, they a l l j o i n in any \"saintly\" act or virtue. Therefore, i t was not regarded as reprehensible to a t t r i -bute any action or words to a saint so long as they accorded with the kind of behaviour he might have been expected to practice. In fact, since real documents were so scarce, the majority of saints' lives were constructed on precisely this principle. Too many literary c r i t i c s seem to expect from saints' lives the sophistication of modern f i c t i o n or biography. Working backwards from contemporary aesthetic principles, they look for evidence of r e a l i s t i c characterization \u00E2\u0080\u0094 motivation, revelation, development, internal i l l u -mination or awareness \u00E2\u0080\u0094 and would exact from the genre qualities that i t never possessed and purposes which were never intended by the authors. As a mode, saints' lives are monolithic i n structure; a l l elements are subordinated to the controlling moral function. Inten-tionally didactic, the lives work from a fixed set of assumptions. It is inconceivable in hagiography, for example, that any sympathy should be expressed either for heretics or for persecutors of martyrs; and the 85 portraits of tyrants are infused with every e v i l t r a i t that the author can marshal. If the modern reader is tempted to find these unrelieved and hyperbolic characterizations ludicrous, he should remember that they are meant to be read as iconographic symbols of e v i l rather than as individuals with a flesh and blood reality. Characters in saints' lives do not exist for their own sakes, or independent of the didactic intent that colours the whole presentation. Flat, stereotyped charac-ters and conventional, unmotivated actions are simply the components, 39 not so much the limitations, of the species as i t was conceived. I l l Thus, when Capgrave decided, in 1440, to translate a Latin prose saint's l i f e into English verse, he was working in a well-established and conventional genre with which he was undoubtedly thoroughly famil-iar. The popularity of the species, especially among clerics, makes i t self-evident that he had read and heard a great many examples before embarking on his own adaptation. Even the metrical form he chose for his f i r s t two works, rime royal, was no innovation; both Chaucer and 40 Lydgate had employed the form for similar purposes and Capgrave knew the works of both these famous predecessors, i f not their many imita-tors . The only reasonable explanation for Capgrave's sudden turn from the composition of Latin scriptural exegeses, scholastic treatises, and other theological works to English vernacular poetry at the age of forty-seven is accident. Piously willing to accept the task imposed by 86 his friend John Wygenhale, he nowhere evinces a natural inclination for translation or for the popularization of seldom-read texts. Neverthe-less, within eleven years Capgrave did produce four saints' lives; and they contain enough shared traits and commentaries to show ful l y and clearly what was one 15th-century author's conception of the genre. The studies of the individual works which appear in later chapters w i l l demonstrate that Capgrabe's handling of the species bears more the stamp of his education than of his personality, and that while he f o l -lowed identifiable principles in his adaptations, he seldom diverges very far from his immediate source. whether or not Capgrave actually revised John of Tynemouth's Sanctilogium, a series of narratives on the lives of the English saints arranged according to the calendar year, he doubtless knew i t or other collections of short lives based on the Legenda Aurea just as most other clerics did. As a scholar who had had the opportunity to use the convent libraries in the studia at London and Cambridge, he was also probably familiar with a large number of longer ones; and his acquaint-ance with them would have reinforced his tendency to include more scenes than the usual English l i f e . But, as later chapters w i l l show, his rendering of them is much more elaborate and dramatic than that of his antecedents. Capgrave's vernacular works are thus distinct from most of the works in the \"native\" tradition, because they are Antonian, delineating the whole of a saint's career. In the one case where his source did not deal with the saint's ancestry or early years at a l l , The Life of St. Augustine, Capgrave supplied the lacunae from other 87 sources. Partially because of this tendency, and even more because they modify the contents of their immediate and f a i r l y lengthy Latin sources only slightly, Capgrave's works are much longer than most Eng-l i s h writings, with the exception of one or two of Lydgate's works 41 which in length r i v a l Capgrave's Life of St. Norbert. A l l of Capgrave's vernacular lives share these superficial and obvious qualities of length and completeness \u00E2\u0080\u0094 qualities which immedi-ately differentiate them from other contemporary lives in English. In addition, however, they have in common at least four more subtle ele-ments \u00E2\u0080\u0094 relating to their genesis, point of view, sources, and style \u00E2\u0080\u0094 which identify them as the products of a single, individual writer who is exercising conscious control over his materials. F i r s t , three of the four works were written at the request not of a patron but of a friend: The Life of St. Norbert for John Wygen-hale, abbot of the Premonstratensian monastery at West Dereham; The Life of St. Augustine for an unnamed gentlewoman born on the saint's feast day; and The Life of St. Gilbert for the Master of the Order of Sempringham, Nicholas Reysby. The other l i f e , St_. Katherine, was a translation into his own dialect of an earlier English l i f e preserved at the Lynn convent. Since St. Katherine was specially honoured by the order, the prior may well have asked Capgrave to prepare his version. for the information of the less-learned members of the order. The fact that the Katherine exists in four manuscripts, none of them Capgrave's 42 holograph and a l l 6 f Norfolk or Suffolk provenance, reinforces the possibility that the work was intended mainly for local dissemination. 88 If such were the case, i t is probable that Capgrave would assume his readers were aware of his purpose and that he would have no need for honouring a dedicatee. Second, in each of his works, Capgrave observes the rhetorical topos of alleging his incapacity for his task, though he is by no means unique among writers of English saints' lives in his employment of this device. Bokenham's Prologue to the Legendys of Hooly Wummen and Lyd-gate's Prologue to The Life of Our Lady contain but two of the many contemporary examples of i t s use, and Chaucer's whole comic pretense of dullness throughout his works is an adaptation of the theme. S t i l l , the device is more usual in Latin than in English writings, and Cap-43 grave uti l i z e s i t in both English and Latin. His most elaborate extension of the apologetic technique occurs in The Life of St. Norbert where his simple assertion that he is \"of rymeris now pe leest\" (1. 5) is f o r t i f i e d by other conventional motifs associated with the theme: that he has been ordered to write the Life; that c r i t i c s are so severe in this age that nothing escapes their censure; that he bears great love to his subject; and that he hopes the matter w i l l be honoured even i f the manner be deplorable. The amount of space devoted to the apolo-gy is considerably reduced in his later works. In the St_. Katherine, for example, he asks in the most glancing way only for indulgence: Trostyng on other men pat her charyte Schall helpe me in pis cas to wryte and to seyn. (11. 234-235) In The Life of St. Augustine, he moves even farther as he grants that he is \"sumwhat endewid in l e t t i r u r \" (p. 1, 1. 9), although he s t i l l 89 maintains the f i c t i o n of humility by adding, \"3et dar I not take/ up-on me forto be dettour on-to hem bat be endewid in sciens mor ban I\" (p.l, 11. 9-11). And in The Life of St. Gilbert, the topos i s reduced to the formulaic statement, \"I, ffrer I. C., amongis doctouris lest\" (p. 61, 1. 3), before he passes on to a l i t e r a l explanation of the request for the translation. A third feature a l l four lives share is their dependence on specified sources. Capgrave uses such general line f i l l e r s as \"myne auctour seyth\" and \"as be bok t e l l i t h \" as often as do other medieval authors in his poetic lives, but he goes beyond them in both poetry and prose by describing in sufficient detail to make recognizable the work he is translating. The Life of St. Norbert derives directly from the standard Latin l i f e of the saint with revisions and additions which had been made by the end of the 12th century. Obviously, Capgrave does not describe his source in such precise terms, but he announces at the out-set that his purpose is to \"sewe and translate pis story\" (1. 23); and when he comes to the point where the Latin concludes the f i r s t descrip-tion of the Life, he not only makes a firm conclusion but he also ex-plains the nature of the briefer rescension, made by a brother of the Cappenburg monastery, which he is about to translate: These wordis folowand ar drawyn f u l schortly Owt of a book bat l i t h at Capenbregense Her foundouris l i f is wrytin ber seriously; But bei hem-selve bus in schorter sentense Brigged i t thus on-to be complacense Of her breberin, which desired bis l i f And of her desire were r i t h inquysitif (11. 3851-3857) The \"seriously\" in the third line clearly refers to the longer l i f e . 90 Much of the long prologue to The Life of St. Katherine is an account of the unfinished poetic version which Capgrave had before him. Twice he refers to the \"straungenesse of [the] dyrke langage\" (1. 62, 1. 209); and later he speculates on the dialect of the author, a man he identifies only as a sometime \"parson of Seynt Pancras\": Of the west cuntre i t semeth pat he was, Be his maner of speche and be his style; (Book I, Prologue, 11. 225-226) For the last book of his Life, Capgrave had to turn to a second source which he \"translated now newe fro Latyn\" (Book V, Prologue, 1. 62). In this instance, neither the poetic nor the prose source has survived. In the case of the prose lives, only one has an extant source. By whatever process of transmission he received i t , Capgrave translates a Life of St. Augustine written just over a century earlier by another Augustinian f r i a r at the Paris convent. This author Capgrave never identifies by name, and, indeed, this work contains fewer references to his source than do his other writings. Since there can be l i t t l e doubt that Capgrave himself knew the provenance of his source, i t is reason-able to assume, following the argument for his omitting a dedication to The Life of St. Katherine, that he regarded material emanating from his own order as common property, to whose compiler no particular reference need be made. The Life of St. Gilbert presents far more d i f f i c u l t problems regarding sources, and a great part of a later chapter is devoted to a reconstruction of the probable primary source. At this point, i t need only be noted that Capgrave directly states in his prologue (p.61, 11. 91 15-18) that he has been asked to make a translation, and that he recog-nizes a break in his source at the end of Chapter 13. It i s natural that close adherence to widely varying sources would obscure many of the common features of style which are associated with a single author, and certainly i t is not easy to isolate s t y l i s t i c features which identify a work as unmistakably by Capgrave. Neverthe-less, although he seems never to have been concerned with recasting his source in order to make his own \"style\" predominate, there are a number of characteristic methods of adaptation which he consistently employs. Despite the great length of his own translations, Capgrave omits, and readily admits to so doing, passages which he considers prolix, repetitive, or irrelevant. He is harshest on the author of the \"west cuntre\" Life of St. Katherine. Omitting passages from Kath-erine's debate with the philosophers, Capgrave suggests that while there may be those who love argument for i t s own sake, he finds repeti-tion boring: But the same resons that other dede sewe Reherseth my[n] auctor, as he dooth f u l ofte I suffer the leuys to lyL~e]n s t i l l e f u l softe, lete other men here hem that love nugacyon; (Bk. IV, 11. 2112-2115, i t a l i c s added) and: Eke a l this mater, as thenketh me, A- forn i s his werk bis man dede i t tras; Wherfore fro alle these bus schortly I pas, Supposyng that bis same prolyxite Wulde make men wery of reedynge to be. (Bk. IV, 11. 2152-2156) Later, he dismisses another part of the debate as irrelevant: 92 . . . but this dilatacyon, As me thynketh, longeth not to this lyf present, It occupieth ny a l the newe testament, That men myght plod i n her, i f bat hem lyst, Wherfore myn entent I wold that 3e wyst: I love no longe tale, evere hangynge in oon. (Bk. IV, 11. 2278-2283) Sometime, he does retain a passage but hints at i t s irrelevance as he explains i t s inclusion. For example, because he was engaged in certain marriage negotiations, St. Norbert happened to arrive in Spires when the bishop of Magdeburg was being chosen. The report of the d i f f i c u l t i e s in arranging the marriage is both disjointed and frag-mented in the Latin. Capgrave, however, instead of either summarizing or omitting i t , carries the flaw over into his version and clumsily tries to rectify the awkwardness: But of pis mater schul we sese as now, Myn auctour telleth of i t not o word moo. Be-cause i t longeth not to be lyneal bow Of Norbertes lyf but rennyth berfro a l row, He bout3 i t was but a mater occasionate, Whech broute bis Norbert to his grete a-state. (11. 2816-2821) Such omissions and explanations are by no means the only indications that Capgrave did not follow his sources verbatim. He contradicts his author when he feels he has better authority: In bis reknyng myne auctour & I are too: ffor he acordeth not wyt3 cronicles bat ben olde, But diuersyth from hem, & bat in many thyngis per he acordyth, ber I hym hold; And where he diuersyth in ordre of beis kyngis, I leve hym, & to oder mennys rekenyngis I 3eue more credens whech be-fore hym & me Sette a l l bese men i n ordre & degre. (Katherine, Bk. I, 11. 686-693) And, i f he is not wholly convinced, he cites additional p o s s i b i l i t i e s : 93 . . . be othir hith bus, As bis story seith, Petir be leoun; But othir bokes sey he hith Anacletus. (Norbert, 11. 3547-3549) Occasionally, too, he moves to another source i f he feels that his principal author is insufficiently clear or not detailed enough. When the important subject of the incarnation is being discussed, for example, Capgrave w i l l not trust a translation of his source's \"derk\" speech: And yet his langage vnnethe I undirstande; Wherfore with other auctouris I enforce hym thus, Which spoke more pregnauntly as in this matere. (Katherine, Bk. IV, 11. 2198-2200) Similarly, there are passages in which he indicates his recourse to other works, even i f his search has been unproductive. Thus, he reasons about Norbert's birthplace: This mannys name Norbert boo bei called; Of Teutonys nacioun, be story seith r i t h soo; Whech word made me of stody a l a-palled; For whedyr i t is a cyte weel I-walled Or elles a cuntre, auctouris touch him nowt. But aftirward, whann I was bettir be- bowt, I supposed pan pis cuntre stant in Germayne Be-cause pis man, of whech we haue now told, Was sumtyme dwelling in be cite of Colayne. (Norbert, 11. 79-87) These comparisons are a logical extension of Capgrave's exegeti-cal training, during which he was taught to collate commentaries and texts with painstaking care and to look for any unresolved issues which they might contain. Further, because he learned to explain the l i t e r a l and allegorical meanings of b i b l i c a l stories, i n a l l his lives he both explicates b i b l i c a l references, drawing significant parallels between 94 these and similar events in the saint's l i f e , and extends these by pro-viding the appropriate moral applications. His thoroughgoing use of this technique of elaboration w i l l be demonstrated in later chapters, but i t is interesting to note at this point that Capgrave employs chiefly moral exhortation in the St.. Norbert, a combination in the St. Katherine, and almost exclusively explication in the two prose lives. About the basic materials of his lives Capgrave shows l i t t l e skepticism, and he makes few attempts to expand his narrative beyond l i t e r a l reporting. The prefigurations of the unborn Norbert and G i l -bert's greatness; the marvels attending the conversions of Augustine, Norbert and Katherine; the gifts of prophecy revealed in Gilbert and Katherine; the visions seen by the saints or by their close associates; and most of the miracles \u00E2\u0080\u0094 a l l are simply accepted as they occur in the source and included without reference to their spiritual implica-tions. However, since he had not himself made the selection of mate-r i a l s , i t would be an unfair judgment to suggest that CW. Jones' 44 statement that for the medieval theologian miracula = virtutes, that i s , that miracles are only important as manifestations of the saint's virtue, is not applicable in Capgrave's case. There are many instances when he questions the means by which something was achieved or the actual nature of the event. Thus, he says he cannot explain how Adrian was transported from his c e l l to Alexandria and back, or how the celes-t i a l beings who received Katherine in the desert appeared to her. In these cases, he suggests that the miraculous is inexpressible i n human terms. Sometimes, indeed, he states that i t is not required of faith 95 to believe the circumstances of his story, as when he describes the way in which Katherine is miraculously fed in prison: . . . I wil no man bynde But i f he wil, for to leue my tale. She was fed \u00E2\u0080\u0094 that haue we of trewthe; (Katherine, Bk. V, 11. 910-912) Moreover, in the lives of St_. Norbert and ^ t . Katherine, where pagans people the stage, Capgrave frequently points out the efficacy of mira-cles in conversion, and i n both lives he is careful to apply sp i r i t u a l interpretations to physical events. The healing of Katherine's wounds, for example, shows that Thus can oure lord redresse a l doloure whiche men suffre, be i t in heed or sole, (Bk. V, 11. 834-835) And, following one of Norbert's miraculous escapes from a would-be murderer, he says: Thus a l l men bat wil our Lord plese Schul scape daungeris, P O U 3 pat pei be grete, (11. 3260-3261) Also, there i s no doubt that the majority of miracles which occur in these lives occur because of the singular virtue of the saint, which they are intended to i l l u s t r a t e . On the other hand, when the miracles can be read as symbolic representations of internal struggles - as i n the case of St. Norbert's many battles with an especially stubborn devil, or in the slanders which both Norbert and Gilbert endure - Capgrave never presses the interpretation on the reader. For him, ethical issues are enforced by direct exhortation; they may be suggested by the actions of a saint 96 but they are not regarded as direct corollaries. Finally, one or two examples w i l l suffice to show that Capgrave did adhere to the conception of \"ethical\" as opposed to \"his t o r i c a l \" truth, outlined earlier in this chapter. Each of his lives tends to follow a roughly chronological line, though in both the j3jt. Norbert and the St_. Gilbert there are in fact two rescensions. Nevertheless, Cap-grave says in the jTt. Norbert that there is no need to follow any order in recording the acts (1. 1799). He also clearly believed that unau-thenticated, or even historically untrue, good words and deeds could be attributed to a saint, for he is untroubled by the many new speeches that he adds in his lives. If, however, a man's character might be damaged by a false conclusion, he refuses to proceed without authority: Ne I my-selue l i s t not for to ryme Neythir of her vertues ne of her cryme, But i f I fond therfor sum auctoryte. Me pinkith reson pat i t so schuld be. (Norbert, 11. 1992-1995) A l l these t r a i t s , which can be found to a greater or lesser extent in other medieval writers, place Capgrave firmly in the tradi-tion of his time. In combination, however, they coalesce to produce a literary persona and give to Capgrave's writings a character that is distinctly his own. Certainly, Capgrave is no Chaucer viewing l i f e humanely and humourously; neither i s he a Langland trying to capture truths in a language that Capgrave would have regarded as \"mysty\" i n -deed. His mind and his method were concrete, and he modified his sources chiefly for purposes of cl a r i t y . To comprehend how he worked, how he made the figurative l i t e r a l , and how he achieved so many a r t i s t i c a l l y effective scenes is the aim of successive chapters which examine in detail his individual works. 98 Footnotes References to Capgrave's works are provided internally through-out. Though seemingly inconsistent, references are determined by '/ the available text of each work. Because The Life of St. Katherine, ed. C. Horstmann, E.E.T.S., O.S. 100 (London, 1893), is enumerated separately in the Prologue and i n each of the individual books, nota-tions include both book and line numbers (e.g. Katherine, Bk. I, 11. 35-36); The Life of St. Norbert (unpublished MS. edition of W.H. Claw-son) is consecutively numbered and cited only by line reference (e.g. Norbert, 11. 3216-24); The Lives of St. Augustine and Sjt. Gilbert of Sempririgham, ed. J.J. Munro, E.E.T.S., O.S. 140 (London, 1910), are referred to by page and line number. ^Notably, Hippolyte Delehaye, Henri Quentin, Rene Aigrain, and, for English lives in particular, C.W. Jones, Bertram Colgrave, and, most recently, Theodore Wolpers. See the Bibliography. 2 In many of his books and articles, Father Delehaye has shown that supposedly original documents are in reality later reconstructions. Chapter one of his Passions des martyrs et les genres litte\"raires (2nd. ed., Bruxelles, 1966), for example, is largely devoted to the subject. In addition, as Rene Aigrain points out in L'Hagiographie (Paris, 1953, p. 95), as early as the 16th century scholars such as Baronius knew that the \"Acts,\" that i s , the testimonies of the ancient martyrs, had been destroyed on Diocletian's orders and that available documents were only inventions or ill-remembered remains. 3 For an interesting discussion of the timeless and pagan solar calendar which became the basis of the church calendar and of the Heb-raic lunar calendar which, originally used to establish the dates of the moveable feasts, became the recording table for historical events, see C.W. Jones, Saints' Lives and Chronicles in Early England (Ithaca, 1947), 5-13. 4 The Anglo-Saxon Minor Poems, ed. E. Dobbie, Vol. VI of The Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records (New York, 1942), 49-55. \"*The Minor Poems of John Lydgate, ed. H.N. MacCracken, E.E.T.S., E.S. 107 (London, 1911), 363-377. Henri Quentin, Les Martyrologes historiques du moyen age (Paris, 1908), 17-119. In his lengthy opening chapter on Bede, Quentin evaluates the manuscripts and attempts to demonstrate what the precise nature of the original was before later accretions. See The Old English Version of Bede's Ecclesiastical History, ed. T. Miller, E.E.T.S., O.S. 96 (London, 1890), 484. g Quentin, p. 108. 9Ibid., p. 110. 1 0 I b i d . , p. 106. U E d . G. Herzfeld, E.E.T.S., O.S. 116 (London, 1900). 1 2 T M , Ibid., p. x i . 13 Adapted from the comments of Bertram Colgrave, \"The Earliest Saints' Lives Written in England,\" Proceedings of the British Academy, XLIV (1958), 38. 14 Ibid., p. 52. 1 5The Vercelli Book, ed. G.P. Krapp, Vol. II of The Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records (New York, 1932), 3-51, 66-102. 1 6The Exeter Book, ed. G.P. Krapp and E.V. Dobbie, Vol. I l l of The Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records (New York, 1936), 49-88, 113-133. 1 7Ed. R. Morris, E.E.T.S., O.S. 58, 63, 73 (London, 1880). 18 Ed. B. Thorpe, 2 vols. (London, 1844, 1846). 19 Ed. W.W. Skeat, E.E.T.S., O.S. 76, 82 (London, 1881), and O.S. 94, 114 (London, 1900). 20 Ed. Rudolf Vleeskruyer (Amsterdam, 1953). 21 Anglesachsische Homilien und Heiligenleben, ed. Bruno Assmann, III (Darmstadt, 1964), 181-192. 2 2 I b i d . , 170-180. 2 3Ed. F.M. Mack, E.E.T.S., O.S. 193 (London, 1934), p. 4. 1. 15 -p. 6, 1. 21. 24 Ed. S.R.T.O, d'Ardenne, E.E.T.S., O.S. 248 (London, 1961), p. 3, 1. 11 - p. 5, 1. 21. 2 5Ed. W.W. Skeat, E.E.T.S., O.S. 44 (London, 1871). 26 Ed. R.E. Parker, E.E.T.S., O.S. 174 (London, 1930). 27 Ed. M.S. Serjeantson, E.E.T.S., O.S. 206 (London, 1938). 28 Ed. J. Bazire, E.E.T.S., O.S. 228 (London, 1953). 100 29 These and other saints' lives for which editions are not separately cited are found most frequently i n collections such as those noted below. 30 Eds. C. D'Evelyn and A.J. M i l l , E.E.T.S., O.S. 235, 236 (London, 1956), with an introduction by C. D'Evelyn in E.E.T.S., O.S. 244 (London, 1959). 31 John of Tynemouth was a monk at St. Alban's when he made his collection. He apparently travelled extensively in a diligent search for sources. However, the earliest manuscript (Cotton Tiberius E 1) is fire-damaged and has never been printed. None of the extant 15th-cen-tury manuscripts include Capgrave's name, and i t is unlikely that the attribution of the work to him can ever be made with certainty. For a f u l l discussion see Nova Legenda Anglie: As Collected by John of Tynemouth, John Capgrave and Others, and F i r s t Printed, with New Lives by Wynkyn de Worde, ed. Carl Horstmann, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1901). 32 See above reference. 33 Ed. T. Graesse (Dresden, 1846). 34 One of the many valuable articles dealing with the establish-ment of a genuine text of Voragine's work by screening out later accre-tions is Sister Mary Jeremy's \"Caxton's Golden Legend and Varagine's Legenda Aurea,\" Speculum, XXI (1946), 211-211. 3 5Ed. T. Erbe, E.E.T.S., O.S. 96 (London, 1905), and E.H. Weatherly, E.E.T.S., O.S. 200 (London, 1936). 36 ' H. Delehaye, The Legends of the Saints, trans. D. Attwater (London, 1962), 61-62, discusses several examples of just such misread-ing. Delehaye also surveys other ways in which apparently historical but purely f i c t i o n a l saints are created. 37 This idea is most explicitly stated in Jones, p. 83, but i t is basic to most of the recent historians of the saint's l i f e . 38 The Life of St. Gregory, in Jones, p. 118. The early part of this l i f e also includes a discussion of miracles as a demonstration of relative saintliness (see especially p. 99); and the work makes no pretense to chronological order in i t s recitation of anecdotes. 39 Despite the attempts at rehabilitation, and a f a i r l y general acceptance of the principles involved, there has been no wide-spread change of attitude towards the saints' lives. Guthlac's battles, Margaret's dragon, and the tale told by Chaucer's second nun have cap-tured c r i t i c s ' imaginations by their fineness of imagery and by the intensity of their feelings of religious or poetic fervour. Dozens of 101 other fine passages are buried unread in works that have never been anthologized. In the Life of St. Thomas a. Becket in the South English Legendary, to cite only one example, the archbishop is not examined for human flaws as he has been by countless historians, and in many modern plays. Instead, with a l l the accoutrements of predicated holiness, wise youth, and chastity present during his engagement with secular a c t i v i t i e s , he becomes through his speeches a real and steadfast de-fender of the faith, devoid of the overbearing arrogance so common in other lives. 40 Chaucer's two saints' lives, The Prioress's Tale and The Second Nun's Tale, are both in rime royal as are his two stories of long-suffering women, The Man of Law's Tale and The Clerk's Tale. Many of Lydgate's saints' lives are also in rime royal: The Life of Our Lady, St. Austin at Compton, Edmund and Fremund, The Legend of St. George, The Legend of St. Margaret. St. Albon and St. Amphabel is a mixture of seven and eight line stanzas. 41 The Lyf of Our Lady has 5932 lines, Edmund and Fremund 3694, and Albon and Amphabel 4724; The Life of St, Norbert has 4109 lines, and The Life of St. Katherine 8624. 42 The evidence is partially orthographic-linguistic (see F.J. Furnivall's Introduction to The Life of St. Katherine, pp. xxiv-xxxi) and partially circumstantial. Even the manuscript with the least of Capgrave's forms (Arundel 396) once belonged to the Canonesses of St. Augustine of Campsey Ash Priory, Suffolk. See A. de Meijer, \"John Capgrave, O.E.S.A.,\" Augustiniana, VII (1957), 564. 43 In De Illustribus Henricis, ed. F.C. Hingston (London, 1858), p. 1, i t appears as \"suus infirmus servulus, Frater Johannes Capgrave, Doctorum minimus . . . ,\" and in the Dedication to his Genesis Commen-tary (Ibid., p. 229) as \"suus humilis in Christo, et orator sedulus, frater Johannes, inter Doctores minimus.\" None of his other extant Latin work is printed. 44 ^P. 76. CHAPTER III THE LIFE OF ST. NORBERT I To judge from preserved records, John Capgrave had had no practice in vernacular composition nor shown any inclination towards i t when he undertook to provide an English version of The Life of St. Norbert for John Wygenhale, the abbot of the Premonstratensian monas-tery at West Dereham. Since the poem is unpublished, i t s Latin source accessible but hardly known, and the saint himself unfamiliar to most English-speaking people, a summary of Norbert's well-documented career must precede any evaluation of Capgrave's motives or achievement in his version. This biographical survey w i l l also serve to distinguish Norbert from the other saints Capgrave commemorated, particularly St. Gilbert, Norbert's contemporary, who, like him, also established a religious order; and i t w i l l indicate the degree to which the h i s t o r i -cal figure has been subordinated to the v i r Dei in the poem i t s e l f . Born at Xanten between 1080 and 1085, Norbert was highly con-nected on both sides. His father was count of Gennep and a cousin of the Emperor Henry V. His mother was a descendant of the dukes of Lorraine and her most important blood relative was Godfrey of Bouillon, the king of Jerusalem. For their eldest son, Norbert, they provided the formal education typical of noble families, and at the age of eight or nine Norbert was preferred as a subdeacon to the prebend of the 103 c o l l e g e of canons a t X a n t e n . D e s p i t e h i s mother's hopes, N o r b e r t d i d n o t i n i t i a l l y embark on a r e l i g i o u s c a r e e r . A f t e r s p e n d i n g some t i m e as a member of t h e w o r l d l y c o u r t of t h e b i s h o p o f C o l o g n e , F r e d e r i c k of C a r i n t h i a , N o r b e r t j o i n e d t h e emperor's c o u r t and c o u n c i l , where as c h a p l a i n he e x e r t e d c o n s i d e r a b l e i n f l u e n c e and f r e q u e n t l y spoke i n t h e emperor's name. The o n l y p a r t i c u l a r mark o f p i e t y he e x h i b i t e d d u r i n g t h e s e y e a r s was i n t h e y e a r 1111, when, h a v i n g accompanied Henry V on h i s t r i p t o Rome t o c l a i m t h e r i g h t s of i n v e s t i t u r e , N o r b e r t , d i s -t r e s s e d by t h e emperor's s e i z u r e of t h e pope, p r o s t r a t e d h i m s e l f and begged a b s o l u t i o n . He n e v e r t h e l e s s remained w i t h t h e emperor and c o n t i n u e d t o r e f u s e t h e e c c l e s i a s t i c a l p o s i t i o n s t h a t were o f f e r e d t o him. I n 1115, however, t h e y e a r when t h e emperor was excommunicated, N o r b e r t underwent a sudden and m i r a c u l o u s c o n v e r s i o n . S e e k i n g r e t r e a t a t t h e Abbey of S i g e b e r g , he went t h r o u g h a p e r i o d o f penance b e f o r e r e q u e s t i n g o r d i n a t i o n f r o m t h e a r c h b i s h o p of C o l o g n e . F o r t h r e e more y e a r s N o r b e r t o c c u p i e d h i m s e l f w i t h s t u d y and c o n t e m p l a t i o n , v i s i t i n g h o l y men and e n d u r i n g c o m p l a i n t s about t h e a u s t e r i t y of h i s own l i f e and t h e r u l e he a t t e m p t e d t o impose on h i s canons a t X a n t e n . He d i d p r e a c h d u r i n g t h e s e y e a r s , b u t i t was n o t u n t i l 1118, f o l l o w i n g b i t t e r c h a r g e s made a t F r i x l a r a g a i n s t h i s c o n d u c t , t h a t he d e c i d e d on h i s a p o s t o l i c m i s s i o n . I n t h e same y e a r he v i s i t e d Pope G e l a s i u s a t S t . G i l e s and r e c e i v e d f r o m him h i s g e n e r a l l i c e n s e . B e s i d e s t h e t h e o l o g i c a l s u b j e c t s w h i c h he t r e a t e d b e f o r e monas-t i c a u d i e n c e s , N o r b e r t ' s c h i e f message t o t h e p e o p l e was p e a c e . 104 Everywhere he was received enthusiastically, and he was instrumental in ending many local wars between feudal lords. In 1119, his license was confirmed by the new pope, Calixtus II, and Norbert was placed under the special protection of Bishop Bartholemew of Laon. It was Bartholemew who gave him the land on which, late i n 1119, the Abbey Premontre was bui l t , and by Easter of 1120, Norbert headed a small house of fourteen canons. Because Norbert frequently absented himself on preaching missions, some of his followers were tempted to f a l l away from the rigorous adaptation of the Augustinian rule that he had ordained. S t i l l , novices flocked to him from a l l walks of l i f e , attracted both by his powerful personality and by his growing reputa-tion as a worker of miracles. Among the most powerful princes who sought him out were Godfrey, count of Cappenburg, whose gifts made him a second founder of Norbert's new order, and Theobald, count of Champagne and grandson of William the Conqueror. While his order was expanding rapidly, Norbert continued to regard his main role as that of a missionary. His greatest success was in the extirpation of Tanchelin's heresy in Antwerp, but his fame spread gradually throughout a l l of Europe. He gained papal approval of his order in 1126, and later that year he was chosen as archbishop of Magdeburg. Here as elsewhere, his attempts to correct abuses met with strong challenges from both the landed aristocracy and the local clergy, and for three years he was subjected to violations of his authority and even to attacks on his l i f e . His new status as archbishop lending dig-nity to his own rank and his established reputation, he was often 105 called upon to take part in affairs of state. In 1127, he aided his friend Otto of Bamberg i n the conversion of the pagan Wends, but his most important activities in his last years centered on the schism. It was Norbert who brought together Pope Innocent and the Emperor Lothar and induced the latter to undertake the expedition against the Anti-pope Peter Leo. During his trip to Rome, Norbert was instrumental in conducting the negotiations, and indeed a papal bull credits him with saving the papacy. Norbert continued to act as Lothar's chancel-lor on the return journey, but his health was f a i l i n g and he died in Magdeburg on 6 June 1134. Excluded from this account are the many miracles and super-natural events associated with his l i f e and death on which the Vita focuses. Clearly, Norbert was a man of distinction whose name figures prominently in many of the most important p o l i t i c a l controversies of the 12th century. He was regarded as a spiritual peer by contemporary religious figures including Bernard of Clairvaux, and his magnetic personality attracted followers from the highest ranks of medieval society. A friend of popes and a confidant and advisor to emperors, Norbert was reviled by Peter Abelard and attacked by other clerics either jealous or fearful of his power. Notwithstanding his p o l i t i c a l significance, however, Norbert has not attained an important place in church history. Perhaps because he wrote l i t t l e and so had a minimal intellectual influence and because the order he founded never rose to great prominence, his name is less familiar than that of lesser men. 106 The documentary evidence on which the foregoing account of Norbert's l i f e is based^\" is sufficient to demonstrate that the portrait of the saint contained in Capgrave's Latin Vita source and in his poetic Life does not reveal in f u l l the true character of the man. In large measure the lack of balance is the result of the aims and conven-tions of the genre i t s e l f . The saint's l i f e seldom provides any detailed rationale for the deeds of the person commemorated; l i t t l e internal motivation is provided, apart from the passionate love of God, and the words and acts reported are used chiefly to emphasize the virtues of the saint and to exhort the reader. The skeletal biography presented in the Vita i s , of course, based on fact. Norbert did found a religious order, restore peace among various warring feudal factions by admonishing them in Christ's name, defeat a heresy, repair the many inroads made upon the possessions of his archdiocese, and play an important role in ending the schism. Moreover, he was sincerely devout, and his biographer, writing a memorial for his followers, had every reason to stress Norbert's humility, patience, and courage in the face of physical and verbal attacks. But i t was not part of his concern to describe Norbert's high birth or early years during which he took more 2 interest in the courtly l i f e than in his religious duties at Xanten. A fu l l e r knowledge of the historical Norbert than is offered by the Vita biographer enables the modern reader to understand more read-i l y those aspects of his spiritual l i f e on which the Vita concentrates. The absence of these motivational details, which must have been acces-sible to the writer who, after a l l , knew Norbert personally, is another 107 indication of the simplicity of many saints' lives as examples of the biographical genre. A knowledge of what Norbert sacrificed strengthens the impact of his conversion to a harsh, ascetic l i f e and his adherence to the pope rather than to the emperor; i t also explains such minor details as the charge that he wrongfully abandoned the clothing to 3 which he was entitled. Similarly, an awareness of his high birth and station in l i f e helps to cl a r i f y his role in the major events in which he was involved, for his status would assure his being treated with some deference, and when he confronted lords with their wrongdoings he spoke as their equal or superior and not simply as a humble man of God. These observations are not made to suggest either than Norbert was haughty or arrogant or that the author of the Vita wilfully misrepre-sented his subject; the point to be drawn i s that religious purposes overshadowed historical objectivity in the composition of the saints' lives. This conflict between the concerns of the historian and the hagiographer applies equally to the treatment of Norbert's adversaries. A striking instance of the hagiographic tendency to view them simplis-t i c a l l y as only enemies of God, without regard to their possible moti-vation, occurs in section 32 of the Vita (cols. 1304-1306), in which Count Godfrey of Cappenburg, embracing voluntary poverty, decides to give land to Norbert for religious use. Although his wife and her brother are at f i r s t opposed, they f i n a l l y agree to the plan. God-frey's father-in-law, Count Frederick, however, asserts that the prop-erty in question was part of his daughter's dowry and cannot be disposed 108 of. The passage exhibits the habitually slanted style of the saint's . l i f e . Godfrey is a comes . . . praepotentissimus . . . dives, potens . in armis, ut pote homo iuvenis, in praediis multis, servis, .,et a n c i l l i s satis locupletatus (col. 1304) \u00E2\u0080\u0094 in short, the fine, honourable gentle-4 man whom the canons revere as the founder of three monasteries; but while he no doubt was admirable, he must have had human failings as well. His wife's whole role i s shadowy, and i t is by the w i l l of God that she and her brother are converted. The original reference to Count Frederick's objection i s neutral \u00E2\u0080\u0094 de dote f i l i a e suae esse dicebat (col. 1305) \u00E2\u0080\u0094 but when he f a i l s to retreat, the author begins to assail his character. Thus he acts ambitioni suae indulgens (col. 1305); now he is seen only as praetendens [the land] esse dotem f i l i a e suae (col. 1305). His reported threat \u00E2\u0080\u0094 arrogantia verba (col. 1305) \u00E2\u0080\u0094 to hang Norbert and his ass in the balance to see which one is heavier (col. 1305) marks him as crude and makes the humble, unarmed priest who returns only the threat of God's wrath the hero of the scene. Naturally, Frederick's painful death from a stomach disorder a short time later is seen as a just and f i t t i n g end. Although almsgiving and the endowment of churches were valued as unquestionable signs of the giver's piety and virtue as well as a means of ensuring perpetual prayers for his soul, disputes over the alienation of family lands, the rights of possible heirs, and the ownership of the dowry have been the subject of li t i g i o u s debate throughout the centu-ries. Literary students are mindful of Chaucer's Man of Law, \" A l l was fee simple to him in effect,\" and no historian considering this episode 109 in Norbert rs l i f e could disregard the rights of the landlord, with the attendant losses of revenue. But to the hagiographer any opposition to the saint is villainous. Similarly, when Norbert sets out to reappro-priate lands formerly belonging to his church, no allowance is made for the fact that many of them had been held by their new owners for several generations. No distinctions are made; the lords as a group are casti-gated as revilers of the archbishop and defilers of the church. And when Norbert decides to replace the canons of St. Mary's with members of his own order, no sympathy is expressed for the displaced clergy's attachment to their church. They are presented as disobedient and impious, be chanonis of be gret cherch seid him f u l plat Ther schuld no man wit3 hood ne wit3 hat Take a-wey fro hem here possession. (11. 3119-3121) while Norbert's high-handedness is apparently regarded as appropriate: . . . at be last his hert gan he up pulle And took vp-on him auctorite at be f u l l e , That sith he was hed and souereyn of hem al l e , Nedys to his entent bey must bowe and f a l l e Rather than he to hem, pis was the ende. (11. 3126-3130) In these respects, Capgrave's Life of St. Norbert.is even less objective than the Latin Vita, as reference to the index of the contents of the thirty-seven sections of Capgrave's work and the fifty-four of the Latin schematized at the end of this chapter w i l l easily show. By large omissions Capgrave reduces the Vita's picture of Norbert's compel-ling impression on individuals as opposed to faceless groups, and there-by he diminishes to a certain extent the strength of personality 110 inherent in the Latin version. He also discards v i t a l episodes in the saint's l i f e . The story of Godfrey of Cappenburg's family relations related above is not pleasant, but i t does indicate Norbert's appeal, as do the reports of his influence on Hugh of Fosse, Count Theobald, and the countess of Namur. Capgrave omits not only the violent attack on Norbert by the citizens of Magdeburg and his f l i g h t , which might suggest widespread resentment of the bishop, but also the general accounts of the enthusiastic reception he received everywhere, his meeting with Pope Gelasius, his defeat of Tanchelin's heresy, his settlement of the c i v i l disorders at Fosse, and his trip to Rome to have his order confirmed i n 1125/26 together with the secular activities associated with i t . Capgrave's work, however, found i t s audience not among men s t i l l mindful of the names and events but among the saint's disciples three hundred years after his death, in England, a country Norbert had never visited. This audience was less interested in Norbert's tribulations than i n his glories; and continental French and Saxon nobility had not sponsored the foundations in England. Naturally enough, then, the supernatural element, the universal and generalizing features of the saint's l i f e , took on larger proportions. Since Norbert's l i f e was f i l l e d with confrontations by demons, reported as fact rather than as evidence of psychological struggles, the result of the at t r i t i o n of historical content is an emphasis on the repeated and to some extent repetitious defeat of the forces of e v i l by a saintly man. I l l Capgrave is not necessarily the exclusive culprit in this bowd-lerization of Norbert's history. There is evidence to show that he set out to translate, not to revise, his source and that another hand was probably involved in the actual abridgement. Moreover, as the later part of this chapter w i l l prove, Capgrave employed several methods to v i t a l i z e those scenes from Norbert's l i f e which he does include. The specific ways in which he modified the Vita's portrait of Norbert w i l l be discussed in connection with his s t y l i s t i c devices. However, since the purpose of the work and the structure and content of the poem govern the poss i b i l i t i e s in characterization as well as the whole tone, they must be examined f i r s t . II Capgrave did not choose Norbert's l i f e for a subject; i t was, as he makes perfectly clear in the Prologue, written on request: . . . I haue myn entent So I plese him pat 3aue me comaundment To make pis werk . . . (11. 13-15) At this point his patron is unnamed and referred to only as \"my goodly fader,\" but in the envoy to the Life Capgrave expressly identifies him: Sey pou were made to be abbot of Derham; The abbotes name was called at bat tyde The good Ion Wygnale . . . . (11. 4095-4102) In the Prologue also, amid compliments to the white canons as fellow adherents of the Augustinian rule and assertions that he had long since 112 placed himself under Norbert's protection, Capgrave suggests that his poem is in part payment for hospitality granted to him and other f r i a r s at the Premonstratensian abbey at West Dereham: I write to 3 0 U wit3 f u l pur entent; Thankyng 3 0 U euyr of 30ur hertly chere, Whech 36 make us whan we ar oute sent; (11. 58-60) Besides this internal evidence, there are external facts to support conjectures about the circumstances under which the poem was written. F i r s t , although priests were expected to have a working ac-quaintance with Latin, the Premonstratensians were never known as a learned o r d e r f o r this reason a vernacular l i f e of their founder would be a prized accession. Second, the population of the monastery at West Dereham was always small,^ and a priest with the time and s k i l l to make the translation could not likely be found there. But, third, the canons were not restricted to their own group. They had consider-able property and they were celebrated for their hospitality. The monastery at West Dereham was well endowed, and among their many v i s i -tors must have been friars from Capgrave's convent at Lynn, for the two towns are separated by only ten miles. Despite the fact that episcopal records for Norwich are scanty during this period, i t can reasonably be assumed that members of the house at Lynn were licensed to preach and i t is surely to their excursions that Capgrave refers when he says, \"whan we ar oute sent.\" More convincing, perhaps, is the f i n a l piece of external evi-dence, which relates to Capgrave himself. When he returned to Lynn, he t 113 came not just as a learned man to whom Wygenhale might reasonably turn for this translation or for other theological works, but probably as an old acquaintance. There i s no record of Wygenhale's birthdate, but the two men must have been contemporaries. They were studying at Cambridge in the same years; Capgrave received his doctorate in theology and Wygenhale his license or bachelor's degree in canon law in 1425;7 and, as was noted in the biographical chapter, the Augustinian convent in Cambridge faced the Premonstratensian priory. There can be l i t t l e doubt that the two young men from Norfolk would have met and continued to hear of each other as they pursued their respective successful ca-reers. Whether Capgrave volunteered for this translation, and why he chose poetry as his vehicle are unanswerable questions; but i t is cer-tain that his motives were friendly and that his desire to honour the saint was sincere. The precise manuscript Capgrave had to \"sewe and translate\" i s not known but i t derives ultimately from the standard (B) Vita composed g between 1155 and 1164 rather than the shorter (A) version. Most of the extant copies of the Latin l i f e are of the longer version; and, like Capgrave's Life of St. Norbert, they usually contain as an appen-dix a contemporary abridgment of Vita B with a few unparalleled addi-tions made by a brother of the Cappenburg house. Capgrave's Life reports no events that are found only in A, includes many details which 9 are unique to B, and s t i l l recognizes the Cappenburg source of the second recension: 114 These wordis folowand ar drawyn f u l schortly Owt of a book bat l i t h at Capenbregense. Her founderis l i f is wrytin ber seriously; But pel hem-selue bus in schorter sentense Brigged i t thus on-to the complacense Of her breberin. (11. 3851-3856) However, one piece of internal evidence suggests that Capgrave may have been working from a shortened revision and not from the entire Vita B. When he treats Norbert's part in Theobald's marriage negotia-tions, Capgrave can only suppose that the count's fiancee was \"longing to Germayn, wher Norbert came fro\" (1. 2798). Had he seen chapter 34 of the Vita, he should have remembered that the g i r l was the daughter of Englebert of Ratisbon. It i s also demonstrable from the poem that Capgrave's immediate source was written during the Great Schism (1378-1417). This fact makes i t of much later composition than any of the extant manuscripts, for they are a l l of the 12th or early 13th century; and i t makes more probable the suggestion that the passage of time accounted for the excision of matters no longer of general interest. The evidence of the reviser's hand (if he was more than a copyist) is contained in the following lines: In pis tyme, as elde cronicles seyn, f f e l a scisme of whech is dool to her; But neuerpelasse I must telle ^ou a l pleyn Swech maner ping as I fynde wrytin her. Too popes regnes at ones pat same 3er, As now pei doo, God amende pe caas. (11. 3529-3534, i t a l i c s added) Drawing a comparison between the schism Norbert helped heal and the one during which he lived, the writer clearly dates his work. 115 Unfortunately, though there are three references which point to an English composer, they are too vague to help in deciding whether the abridgement was made by the author of this intermediary source or by Capgrave himself. It is likely that any Englishman would have omitted the twice-repeated detail that the faithless novice was an \"Anglicus\"; and either of them might have added the observation that asses are unknown in \"bis cuntre.\" The last reference, to the fact that a spe-c i f i c water jug is cleaner than any \"hens to Kent,\" is probably Cap-grave's own, but since i t seems to be inserted only for purposes of, rhyme, i t s value as evidence is slight. With the manuscript lost and no other contemporary references in the poem, i t is f u t i l e to speculate how extensive may have been Capgrave's revisions. In the particular instance cited above, lines 3530-3532 would appear to be Capgrave's, for they constitute a familiar poetic topos to allege f i d e l i t y to the source. On other occasions, where specific citations are made to \"our langage,\" or where concrete explications of figures of speech occur, Capgrave almost certainly intrudes. But given this break in the manu-script transmission, i t is not possible to consider changes as neces-sarily examples of the author's style; they can only be treated as part of the overall texture of the poem. Like Capgrave's other saints' lives, The Life of St. Norbert follows the tradition of the long Latin lives giving the saint's whole history (i.e. the Antonian) rather than the native model which concen-trates on a few c r i t i c a l moments. Although Capgrave denies that he is following any order in presenting the miracles of Norbert's l i f e , the 116 work is clearly organized along chronological lines, but with only two dates explicitly mentioned \u00E2\u0080\u0094 Norbert's conversion in 1115 and his death in 1134.^ The f i r s t six sections of the poem (11. 1-539) are concerned with his birth, conversion, and early preaching acti v i t i e s ; sections nine and ten (11. 659-833) provide the background for his choice of Premontre as the site for his abbey and the coming of his f i r s t adherents; the description of the setting of the abbey and the construction of the church occupy sections seventeen and eighteen (11. 1604-1799); his elevation to the archbishopric, his installation, his activities to recover the church's lands and to establish his canons in the church of our lady are the subject of sections twenty-seven to twenty-nine (11. 2780-3143); his provision of new abbots for the Premon-stratensian monasteries is dealt with in section thirty-two (11. 3326-3465); and his role in the schism, his il l n e s s , death, and burial are treated in sections thirty-four and thirty-five (11. 3529-3710). In the remaining sections, the focus is either on Norbert's personal be-haviour and governance of his order or on the miraculous events connec-ted with him and his followers. This basic division does not, however, assume any change of tone. A l l the major episodes of his career are attended by some sign proving Norbert's special status or at least by some circumstance which allows the narrator to add instructive commentary. His mother, for example, is informed of his future preferment by a \"heuenely vision\": \"Be mery & glad, woman, & not a-frayde; \"ffor he bat is now in bi wombe conceyuyd A herchbisschop schal be.\" (11. 105-107) 117 His conversion follows a c a l l from God (11. 148-161) and a massive thunderbolt which digs a man-size pit in.the ground (11. 163-168); and the building site for the church at Premontre is shown to one of the brothers by a vision of Christ on the cross (11. 1667-1686). Similarly, the chance that takes Norbert to Spires where he is chosen as archbishop is seen as an instance of the strange workings of God's w i l l : A wonder ping is who God can dispose To worchep a man pat semeth f u l onlikly As to our doom and eke f u l on-weldy. (11. 2784-2786) When the porter at the gate of the archbishop's palace f a i l s to recog-nize Norbert in his threadbare garments as the new lord, there is an opportunity for Norbert to demonstrate his humility and for the narrator both to praise the saint and to exhort his readers: \"Thin eyne be mor cler, I t e l l e the r i t now, \"That callest me a begger, ban her eyne were That chose me to worchep or to degree. Hide not thi-selue ne f i e not for fere. Trost me sikerly bou hast thank of me, So art bou worthi, bou f l a t e r i s t not, parde!\" 0 noble meknesse, bat hast mad bi nest In Norbertis herte and ber hast bi rest! Euyr art bou stabil i n bat same place And euyr wilt bou dwelle to his lyuys ende! Thus was this man stuffid a l with grace, Thus be-gan he in his exaltacioun.to bende . His lyf a l to mekeness. Crist mot us sende Euyr swech condiciones to rest in our breest Whech wer I-founde in this noble preest. (11. 2975-2989) The same motives of instruction, exhortation, and confirmation of Norbert's saintly powers inform the sections dealing with his miracles and his characteristic demeanour. Capgrave certainly regarded 118 the marvellous events as factual, but biographical accuracy was not his chief aim. Throughout the poem, he makes brief statements accounting for the inclusion of certain episodes. When some of Norbert's brethren disparage him with complaints about the rule, Capgrave says: And for pe mannes name was pus defamed God ordeyned a remedy to rere i t a-geyn; With whech mene he was mor I-named Than euer he was be-for, for as clerkys seyn, The deuele, whech is euyr mor in peyn, Exalteth seyntes with his temptacioun With whech pat he supposed to brynge a l a-down. (11. 1023-1029) And there are many more occasions when he interrupts his narrative to praise God for his concern for men or to pray that Norbert's example may serve as a guide. Some are lengthy, like the general prayer to Christ for direction and salvation in the Prologue, which is almost an invocation, 0 Lord Ihesu, of a l l religious men Abbot and maystir, bryng us to vnyte And 3eue us grace wit3 bi comaundmentis ten To f u l f i l l be councell whech wer 30ue be be; That we may dwelle in parfith charite Whil we be her & a f t i r our endyng day To se bat ioye whech bat lasteth ay. (11. 64-70) or the conclusion to the f i r s t recension (11. 3834-3850). Others, specifically commend one of the saint's attributes. Thus Norbert's humility calls forth the \"0 noble meknesse\" passage already quoted (p. 117). Most of the shorter examples however have the tone of a refrain or of a perfunctory response, pious and platitudinous interpolations with l i t t l e v i t a l i t y , such as: God be euyr bankid in his seyntis alle And on her helpyng mote we calle. (11. 2456-2457) 119 Beyond these, Capgrave digresses to explain what he considers the significance of a given event, in the following example providing a moral for the name of the Premontre and stating the suitability of i t s location: f f u l r i t h f u l l y is be name called Premonstrate, ffor Premonstrate in our langage he soundit-j bus\u00E2\u0080\u0094 A place schewid befor, whech was desolate, And a f t i r schuld be inhabit wit3 folk vertuous. It was schewid be name, ban now is i t plenteuous Of schewyng in dede, as we se at y3e. Euyr be i t soo thorw Goddis mercy3e! Rith as be verytees whech are in owr feith Wer schewid be figuris in be elde Testament, Rith so bis ordre whech Norbert forth l e i t h , f f u l of religion, f u l of holy entent, Took in bis place a very fundament. As in a figure schewyd mystily, Amongis busschis & breris hid f u l pryuyly. (11. 757-770) He also employs b i b l i c a l parallels and gives characteristic explanations of terms his author has used. The temptations, misfortunes, and slan-ders which befall Norbert and his brethren are j u s t i f i e d as God's w i l l . One such example follows the disappearance of a novice with money be-longing to the order: God wold hem be weyis of perfeccion lede And lerne hem be smale bingis who bei schuld do in grete; Therfor with temporal duresse he wold hem bete. (11. 1601-1603) Elsewhere Capgrave makes general statements revealing that miracles are meant both to glorify the saint (1. 294) and to give concrete demon-12 strations of the faith to the unlearned. Few of these explanations are found in the Vita, and they are one of the principal marks of Cap-grave's style. Again and again i n the succeeding chapters, the l i t e r a l -120 minded exegete clarifying his materials for a less learned audience w i l l be seen condensing and expanding his source. The Life of St. Norbert also contains examples of less relevant excursions in which Capgrave outlines various possible interpretations but refuses to force a single resolution. Lines 1475-1512, for example, are occupied with a discussion of the habit ordained for the white canons by Norbert. The Vita says only: Laneis ad carnem, laneis ad laborem u t i , et absque ulla tinctura praecepit; l i c e t asperrimo c i l i c i o assidue vestiretur. In sanctuario vero et ubi divina sacramenta tractanda fuerant, vel celebranda, propter munditiam et multimodam honestatem lin e i s u t i voluit, et omni tempore utenda disposuit. (col. 1294) Capgrave f i r s t confirms the wearing of the wool for labour with a bu l l of Pope Innocent (11. 1479-1484); he then states the problem: But for be-cause bat ber is dyuersite In oppiniones of pese clothes partyng, Now lynen, now wollen, to make a vnyte Of this mater, and who I the wrytyng Vndirstand, I w i l l wit3 ony lettyng Telle 3 0 U now vndir pis protestacion That I take up-on me here no dominacyon. (11. 1485-1491) Next, he translates the Latin in two prolix stanzas (11. 1492-1505); and, f i n a l l y , he declares: If men wil algate of here deuocyoun Were lynend alwey; I wil i t not dispraue; Lete euery man a f t i r his discrecioun His obseruances in his monastery haue. But bis wold I, be vynte for to saue, That a l l schuld go l i c h , to kepe honeste, Euene as alle cleyme of o religioun to be. (11. 1506-1512) 121 Thus, he makes a claim for uniformity and gives an opinion, but he w i l l not presume to set a rule. An elaboration of this kind is clearly d i -rected at Capgrave's immediate audience, for i t involves a contemporary dispute. Another passage which exemplifies Capgrave's concern for ques-tions which may arise in his readers' minds even though he cannot answer them occurs at the end of the passage dealing with two brothers who were deluded by the devil into believing they had powers to inter-pret prophetic scriptures. The f i n a l statement in the Latin is that the brothers quarrelled. Aware that this climax i s unsatisfactory, Capgrave points out that he i s not omitting anything w i l f u l l y : Wheythir pei wer mad at on a f t i r pis tyme Mi book te l l e t not; with-outen doute; Ne I my-selue l i s t not for to ryme Neythir of her vertues ne of her cryme, But-if I fond therfor sum auctoryte. Me binkith reson bat i t so schuld be. (11. 1990-1995) This passage offers an interesting sidelight on the whole principle of veracity in the saint's l i f e . Since he elsewhere creates ex nihilo speeches for saint and demon alike, Capgrave certainly did not always demand authority. The difference is that such speeches are written with a view to the black or white character of the subject, and they are therefore \"ethically\" true. Were he to make a statement of reso-lution at this point, however, he might falsely praise or blame. Since for Capgrave the narrative continuity is always subordi-nated to the didactic purpose for retelling the l i f e of the saint in the f i r s t place, his digressions follow a f a i r l y consistent pattern. 122 And his preoccupation with the lessons of the l i f e rather than with the man also explains his excisions and departures from his source. That Capgrave was at least to some degree aware of the c r i t i c a l problem i s suggested by his candid admission that he has been selective, Alle bese byngis bat we haue teld in 30ur audiens Are but a fewe of many that he dede. (11. 659-660) and by his denial that any significance attaches to the chronological ordering of events in the saint's l i f e : . . . now wil we turne To t e l l e 30U treuly his occupacyon, Nout3 only his, but also we schul returne Alle be condicioun of hem bat ber soiorne, So as her actes r i t h wer do indede, ffolowyng non ordr, for i t is no nede. (11. 1794-1799) Throughout, Capgrave is shaping subtly the materials of his source to produce a calculated effect. Digressions, exclusions, selection, shading of emphasis \u00E2\u0080\u0094 a l l reinforce the basic assumptions that under-l i e his handling of the genre. Like other saints' lives, the St. Norbert is intentionally didactic. Directed outwards, with the audi-ence and the impact always in mind, i t exemplifies both those qualities native to the form and the particular adaptations of i t s author. How these are conveyed, and their success, depends on the poetic and s t y l -i s t i c techniques that now remain to be examined. I l l By any definition of poetry compatible with 20th-century aes-thetic theory, Capgrave's writing would be found wanting; but such a 123 comparison puts too negatively and too uncompromisingly the limitations of his verse without sufficient regard for those positive qualities which i t does contain. That he was more comfortable in prose than po-etry is immediately apparent from even a superficial reading of his four saints' lives; but that he should have tested his vernacular a b i l -ity in both media is in i t s e l f an important fact about him as a writer. Why he chose to write in verse cannot, as has already been pointed out, really be adduced, but that he did makes possible areas of comparison \u00E2\u0080\u0094 of style, language (syntax, and diction) \u00E2\u0080\u0094 that otherwise could not be seen. It is manifestly f a i r to state that Capgrave was not by instinct poetically inclined. He was, clearly, familiar with the conventions of his time as regards language, metre, and stanza form, and competent to reproduce them, but he does not advance the art i n any significant way; indeed, i t can be argued whether in fact he ever managed to transcend the level of poetic exposition. Without exaggerating his achievement, i t is no small accomplishment to turn Latin prose into English rime royal while at the same time maintaining a considerable f i d e l i t y to the original text. Capgrave makes syntactical inversions required by the rhyme and employs tags which are relatively unobtrusive to f i l l out lines metrically; but there is l i t t l e evidence that he sensed the evo-cative possibilities inherent i n patterns of sound and imagery. For example, the a l l i t e r a t i o n that occurs is most frequent in the kind of doublets that are characteristic of English, ones such as \"rend..and race\" and \"derk and dym.\" End rhymes seem more often chosen for 124 convenience than for p r e c i s i o n of meaning; and while hi s rhythm i s not monotonously regular, i t i s not patterned or varied to arrest the reader's attention at c r u c i a l moments, and i t i s not always even par-t i c u l a r l y harmonious. In f a c t , his use of metre shows that Capgrave i s a f i g u r e of t r a n s i t i o n i n poetic as well as i n prose composition. Many of the verses may be scanned as iambic pentameter, the l i n e already made pop-ular by Chaucer and soon to be standard. But examination suggests that the influence of the older native metre with i t s four strong stresses and a varying number of unaccented s y l l a b l e s was s t i l l great. When s y l l a b l e counting i s replaced by a regard for the s y n t a c t i c a l l y , ety-mologically, and r h e t o r i c a l l y emphasized words i n a stanza l i k e the following where the number of s y l l a b l e s varies from eight to twelve, his tendency towards a four-stress l i n e i s r e a d i l y apparent: Swech maner sout3 he i n poo dayes. To lerne l e t t i r u r , to lerne eke prudens. To dyuers men made he dyuers asayes. To vse vertu and to voyde necligens Was 3oue a l h i s b y s i , studious eloquens. This was h i s l y f a l l these thre 3er, Saue sumtyme i n preching pe puple wold he l e r . (11. 309-315) The following passage i l l u s t r a t e s amply the e s s e n t i a l l y prosaic nature of The L i f e of Saint Norbert: In t h i s same cherch, of chanones seculer Was ban a college of twenty persones & no moo. Thei kept her obseruaunce i n cloyster & i n qwere Mech be b e t t i r pat he cam too and froo So often as he ded. But he desired boo, Be-cause i t was ny him, his breberin schuld be ber. He seide he him-self wold a l be costes ber 125 Both to the Pope and eke on-to be kyng. He profered hem eke a better place pan pat. This peticioun was not to her lykyng; f f o r be chanonis of be gret cherch seid him f u l p l a t Ther schuld no man wit3 hood ne wit3 hat Take a-wey f r o hem here possession f f o r i f he dede he schuld haue be malyson Of Iesu C r i s t e and owre fader the Pope, whech had confermed i t be many a b u l l e . Thus was our Norbert f r u s t r a t e of h i s hope. But 3et at the l a s t h i s hert gan he up p u l l e And took vp-on him auc t o r i t e at be f u l l e , That s i t h he was hed and souereyn of hem a l l e , Nedys to his entent bey must bowe and f a l l e Rather ban he to hem, b i s was the ende. (11. 3109-3130) While the two expressions, \"& no moo\" (1. 3110) and \"too and froo\" (1. 3111) are the only tags used, and only three l i n e s (3109-3110, 3129) and one phrase (\"up p u l l e , \" 1. 3126) are noticeably inverted i n syntax, there are i n t h i s passage no images and the rhymes are commonplace and bear l i t t l e s t r e s s . Moreover, the highly varied metre of t h i s passage does not serve an a r t i s t i c purpose. Most of the l i n e s may be scanned as iambic pentamer i f the free use of anacrusis i n Middle English verse i s used to account f o r the extra s y l l a b l e s . But the l a s t three l i n e s of the f i r s t stanza are more s a t i s f a c t o r i l y seen as hexameters, and many l i n e s , even such decasyllabic ones as: Of Iesu C r i s t e and owre fader the Pope whech had confermed i t be many a b u l l e , r e a l l y have only four stresses. It i s i n his dramatization of the incidents rather than i n h i s poetic s t y l e that Capgrave's l i t e r a r y s k i l l i s most apparent. A str u c -ture with l i t t l e necessary connection between the events i s common i n 126 medieval narratives, and the Latin Vita S. Norberti is i t s e l f episodic. By his greater awareness of causal relationships and by the subordi-nation of lesser elements, Capgrave improves on the logic of the d i v i -sions and the transitions. On three occasions he draws together previously separated events. Thus he groups Norbert's attendance at the council of Reims, where he was commended to Bishop Bartholemew, with the later events in Laon; and he combines Theobald's request for Norbert to intervene in his marriage arrangements with the result that his journey causes Norbert to be in Spires when the new archbishop is chosen. In the third case, the grouping together of the three miracles concerning the wolf, Capgrave seems to have been guided simply by their logical relation. In two cases in which he allocates a particular event to a different section, he improves both the logic and the overall dramatic effect. Thus, he ends his second section with Norbert's conversion and relegates the stay at Sigeberg to section three, along with the other details of Norbert's period of penance and study. And, later, he dis-sociates the story of the faithless novice from the description of the desolate ground at Premontre and puts i t where i t belongs, with the vision showing the site where the church should be located. With few exceptions, the Latin sections begin with an expression 14 that conveys the passage of time. Generally, however, the author limits himself to the conventional forms \u00E2\u0080\u0094 f u i t , itaque, deinde, cum- que, eo tempore, post,or igitur \u00E2\u0080\u0094 frequently modified to a degree by an ablative absolute. In Capgrave's Life, many episodes open with a 127 summary of the matter they contain or with some connective linking them with a previous passage. The summary may remove the possibility of suspense by pre-stating the outcome of the narrative, as i t does in A f f t i r pis not longe tyme, as I wene, He sayde a masse in a f u l lowe voute; Where f e i a caas of stoynyng & of tene, Vn-to him eke f u l desesy in thoute; But fynaly i t harmed hym r i t h noute. This was be caas . . . (11. 246-251) or, i t may more generally denote the importance of the section. The f i r s t lines of section three, for example, show that Capgrave saw Nor-bert's conversion, the subject of the previous section, as a climactic event and that he wished to isolate i t dramatically from the period of religious training which ensued: Now riseth he up, a-stoyned and a-drad. He fleth be pres pe besinesse he had er, Ther he was wone to singe & be f u l glad Now ar his corage, his wordes, & his cher Turned on-to sadnesse. A redy, a good skoler, To holy ordres he hastith now in a l wise; His stody is now to lerne dyuyne seruyse. (11. 176-182) t When he conneo'ts one episode with a preceding one, Capgrave usually relies on common transitionals such as \"thus,\" though sometimes he achieves a new coherence with his links. For example, although he has f a l s i f i e d history by telescoping the council of Frixlar and Nor-bert's meeting with Gelasius at Saint-Giles, Capgrave manages both to remind the readers that Norbert had obtained a general license to preach and to prepare them for the following four stanzas which effectively summarize Norbert's evangelical travels: 128 Whan he had take bus bis general licens To preche to be puple ouer-al wher he cam, With too deuoute felawis f u l of Innocens, Swech as he was, his iornay sone he nam. Ouyr be feldys, be marys, and be dam Went bei r i t h forth, bei spared no hardnesse; Her hertis were 3oue only to hardynesse. (11. 393-399) More interesting, however, are the ways in which, having increased both the length of the scenes he retains and the episodic nature of the St. Norbert by introductions setting off the parts, by moral applications of the events, and by explications of terms and references, Capgrave s t i l l renders his action more dramatically effective than that in his source. Nearly every episode contains examples of his chief methods: increased use of direct speech, colloquialisms in the idiom, homely imagery, and more detailed description of the actions of characters. Before two scenes are examined more thoroughly, a few brief i l l u s t r a -tions w i l l suffice to cl a r i f y his use of these techniques. Sometimes Capgrave simply lengthens the direct speech given in his Latin source. Thus, when one of the feuding lords at Gemlacum agrees to Norbert's petition for peace, Capgrave replaces the Latin Fiat quod vis; non est aliqua certae rationis oppositio, quam possit aliquis objicere, tuae contradicendo vel obsistendo petitioni. (col. 1281) with \"God bank 3 0 U , ser, for bat 3e l i s t to lere \"Swech as I am both loue and charyte. I wil obeye on-to 3ou in a l l maner wyse; Rith as 3e wil, r i t 3 so schal i t be. I am a-ferd of bat hye iustyse That whan he s i t t i t h in his grete assyse He wil elles dampne me but I do sum good.\" (11. 588-594) 129 In this instance Capgrave does not employ a particularly colloquial idiom; but, turning away from the academic appeal to reason, he does draw on the preacher's threat of eternal damnation. In addition, of course, in the f i r s t four lines he creates a different impression of Norbert's personal effect by emphasizing \"loue and charyte.\" Elsewhere, Capgrave either invents whole speeches or elaborates them from indirect statements in the Latin. For example, according to the Vita, after he was told of the vision concerning the location of the church, Norbert gratias egit Domino Deo (col. 1297). From this hint, Capgrave supplies a seven-line prayer: \"Euyr be bou worcheped for pi hye graas, And neuer be bin honour fro mannis hert layde; ffor whan a l l frenschipis haue be a-sayde Than is bin best, bou 3euest, Lord, coumfort Of bing bat is passed, & eke i f we resort \"On-to pi proteccion for any comyng nede, pan 3euest bou us knowlech of pin hye grace.\" (11. 1690-1696) The introduction of colloquial phrases also serves to alter the tone of the work. He makes a character like the faithless novice more r e a l i s -t i c by having him assure Norbert that \"we lese not in this house a heryng-cobbe\" (1. 1582) on the night before he commits the robbery. Occasionally, the interjection is personal. Referring to one of the many times when Norbert was undeservedly slandered, Capgrave cannot refrain from an outburst which has a fine, impatient ring: And eke for pe slaundir whech was be-falle Of be euele tungis whech can neuer but knok And clater in euele tyme \u00E2\u0080\u0094 wold God bei had a. lok To schet with her tunge \u00E2\u0080\u0094 (11. 1648-1651, i t a l i c s added) 130 Such changes and additions as these are frequent in the St_. Nor-bert, and they give a more forceful tone to the English version. Some of the images also contribute to this effect by their more concrete and homely nature. When Norbert declares his choice of the white habit, for example, Capgrave's approval of his argument is indicated by the introductory line, \"Thus wit3 his malle be nayle-hed he h i t \" (1. 1363). To describe the movement of a demon, Capgrave uses a simile picturing a f l u f f - b a l l blown by the wind: Euene as be wynde l i f t e t h up a wullock ffor very lithnesse, r i t h soo pese s p i r i t i s flye ffro place to place, and pat f u l hastilye. (11. 2189-2191) The juxtaposition of e v i l and harmless elements is by no means ironic; rather, i t reflects a conception of them as co-existing aspects of man's world. Capgrave could also use a brief image to render a scene concrete or to v i v i f y otherwise unrealized characters. When Norbert f i r s t enters Magdeburg as bishop, he is pictured as \"walled/ A l l with men\" (11. 2938-2939); and the indirectly reported speech of his adversaries is given a proverbial tone with The othir part seid he had leyd his ore fferther in the watyr bann he myth rowe. (11. 3043-3044) Additional descriptions of physical action appear everywhere. When the possessed man is brought into Norbert's presence at Traiect, for example, the crowd is given a dynamic role. From the brief Latin phrase, cum magno suffragio plebis circumstantis (col. 1303), Capgrave 131 makes a tableau wherein the people f i r s t kneel praying to Norbert to help the b a i l i f f (11. 2208-2212) and then form separate groups on either side to watch the conflict (11. 2213-2217). Sometimes, so many new details appear that the episode could be pantomimed. For the Latin author, the importance of the devil's appearance to the labourer at Viviers i s to show the efficacy of the invocation of the saint's name. In Capgrave, on the other hand, i t becomes a vivid realization of the powerful effect of apparitions. In this case, Capgrave removes a l l the dialogue. He depicts the man sweating in the f i e l d (11. 2381-2385), running to the well (1. 2386), looking into i t (1. 2390), starting away in terror (1. 2393), meeting the devil (11. 2394-2395), swooning (1. 2399), tearing his clothes as he is possessed (1. 2401), and being seized by other men (1. 2404) \u00E2\u0080\u0094 a l l previous to any mention of the saint. These same techniques obviously coalesce and function together in some of the more extended episodes. New, direct speeches frequently include colloquialisms and homely images, and movement is often i n d i -cated during the scenes in which the speeches are made. Perhaps the most singular example of the combination, which most clearly reveals the total effect of Capgrave's changes, is the possession and exorcism recorded in section twenty (11. 1996-2184). During one of Norbert's absences, one of the brothers is seized by the devil and afterwards bound by his fellows. The devil cries out against the prior who comes to conjure him; but he is forced to admit his identity, and, indeed, he testifies to Christ's lordship when he sees the crucifix. One of the 132 young brethren volunteers to lead the possessed man to the holy-water single-handedly; and in short order the devil appears on the man's tongue in the form of a lettuce seed, makes one more effort to pervert the brothers, and f i n a l l y disappears. The account i s dramatic enough in the Latin; much of i t i s in direct speech and the references to such apparatus as would be required for a stage performance \u00E2\u0080\u0094 including the crucifix and the font \u00E2\u0080\u0094 are already clear. What Capgrave does i s , in the f i r s t place, to lengthen the speeches, both by repetition and extension, so that the prior and the devil become more developed adversaries, and to alter the tone of the devil's speeches so that he becomes cruder. Then, he introduces additions which make the secondary characters more visible and their actions on the stage more effective. In the Latin version of the devil's f i r s t speech, Modo intrabit ad me, modo intrabit ad me, modo venit, modo venit magister i l l e cum clavata tunica sua, maledicantur i p s i ; firmate ostium, firmiter firmate quam celerimme. (col. 1301) the repetition creates a sense of anxiety and impending conflict. How-ever, while Capgrave retains the essential outlines, he depicts a more obvious copy of the ranting devil of the medieval stage: \"Now schal he come, be cursed prest & proude, He schal now entre, and sor on me croude, This daffid fool, with his barred cote! Cursed be he, and hanged be be throte! \"Spere be dor, men, & barr i t sor & fast.\" (11. 2013-2017) 133 In adding the devil's vain threats to bar the prior's way with a tree (11. 2019-2022), Capgrave increases the interval before the prior's f i r s t words and so makes his lack of hesitation more forceful. In the next speech, Capgrave has the devil address the prior as \"dotard balled schrewe\" (1. 2035) and replaces the l i s t of t i t l e s (magister, tutor, doctor) with the generalized slur, \"man pat werith hood or hat\" (1. 2033). In his remaining speeches, there are no further examples of this particular line of offense. But as the devil reveals himself as especially spiteful against Norbert and his followers and defiant in his attempts, despite his powerlessness, Capgrave's expansions increase the sense that his efforts are hopeless. The devil is made to stress his own e v i l and misery by repetition and to remind the audience of his previous defeat: \" . . . Ey me! Ey my! What schal I do? I must now t e l l my name. I am pat deuele, I am r i t h pat same \"Whech dwell sumtyme in pat fayr 3ong mayde At Nyuygelle, whech mayde bo was browt Be-for 30ur Norbert, where he his charmes sayde. He lessed my power and set me a l at nowt. If I had power i t schuld f u l der be bowt. Cursed be bat our bat 30ur Norbert was bore, He and hise, bei contrary me euyrmore.\" (11. 2063-2072) In the Vita, he says only: Ei mi, ei mi, quid agam? Ego sum...ille, qui f u i in puella Nivigellae coram Norberto magistro tuo, albo cane. Maledicatur hora, in qua unquam natus f u i t . (col. 1302) Much of the expansion in Capgrave's f i r s t few lines (11. 2063-2067) is only by repetition, and by the addition of adjectives; but in the 134 remainder, the devil reiterates the events at Nivelles (11. 2068-2069), wishes he had the power to revenge himself (1. 2070), and includes Nor-bert's followers among his adversaries (1. 2072). In the case of the prior the expansions involve expressions of his complete trust in Christ and his acceptance of God's w i l l . So, there is nothing in his long speech conjuring the devil (11. 2045-2061) which is not implicit in the Latin (cols. 1301-1302). The distinction is always between good and e v i l , but because he emphasizes Christ's sacrifice and his love, the prior is a somewhat more humanized figure in Capgrave than his counterpart in the Latin source. The presence of the other members is realized mainly by two additions which give the convent as a whole an active role. The f i r s t is a speech (11. 2079-2088) in which they a l l take part in the decision to pray, fast, and undergo corporal punishment to speed the cure of their brother, rather than merely to accept the command of the prior. Later, by expanding aquam in vase ad hoc habili benedicunt, et cum processione eunt ubi erat demon. . . . (col. 1302) to And to be hous a-non streith bei 3ede. They made haliwater with grete deuocyoun, A vessel f u l , ordeyned for that cause. A l l be couent went on processioun, Syngyng and seying many a holy clause. Whan bei cam bedir . . . (11. 2093-2098) Capgrave provides a participating audience for the f i n a l action. 135 Thus, on stage for the denouement, along with the possessed brother, the demon, and the prior i s the rest of the convent, and to them Capgrave adds a young boy holding the cross. Finally, the part allocated to the young canon who leads the victim to the font is i n -creased. After the prior dramatically pauses to consider his request, a stanza is inserted to focus greater attention on his moment. In place of the abrupt, i l l e solus tenuit et usque ad aquam benedictam a d d u x i t . . . . (col. 1302) Capgrave elaborates: No man halpe him with hand ne wit3 tonge, But brout3 him a-lone l i c h a childe bat is led wit3 norce whil he i s f u l 3unge. This man, bat was be-for-tyme so wilde, Now i s he made in maner meke and milde. The deuele qwook in bis mannes presens, Whech was so hardy to f u l f i l l e obediens. (11. 2143-2149) Another and much briefer example of Capgrave's a b i l i t y to drama-tize an event is found in section thirty-one (11. 3263-3325). His account derives from the following passage in the Latin: Non cessabat aemula iniquitas in occulto, in manifesto mansuetam simulans aequitatem, et tanto gravius et nequius, quanto magis a domesticis fiebat et familiaribus. Familiari-tas vere dicenda est; quia cum quodam noctis tempore, ad celebranda cum c l e r i c i s suis Matutinarum solemnia, more solito surrexisset, advenerat clericus quidam de domesticis, et retro ad ostium se in i n s i d i i s posuerat, iniquitate plenus et crudeli malitia; utpote armatus competentibus armis, quibus innocentum caute et in dolo ferire posset et interficere. Egressisque capellanis qui praecedebant, sicut mos est in terra (praecedunt enim dominos suos capellani) i l l e de i n s i d i i s prosiliens, novissimum putans episcopium, unum ex c l e r i c i s media veste conscissa percussit. Cumque i l l e exclamaret et diceret: \"Quis est que me laedit?\" i l l e , sonitu vocis, non esse ipsum quem 136 quaerebat agnoscens. \"Putavi, inquit, hunc novissimum esse, quem morti tradere disponebam.\" Praecesserat enim episcopus mistim inter alios, eundem eventum, quasi futurorum praescius, timens. At i l l e concito curso in fugam versus est, et cum a l i i ad capiendum ilium insequerentur: \"Sinite, a it v i r Dei, fugere eum, nec malum pro malo reddatus; fecit quippe quantum potuit et quantum ei Deus permisit. nondum enim venit hora mea. Sed qui miserunt eum, non dormient nec quiescent; donee opprobriis suis satientur, et me vel morti tradant, vel, s i divinum s i t opus quod agitur de me, manifeste probatum reddant. (col. 1328) After a two-stanza introduction (11. 3263-3276) stating that Norbert's good example was despised by certain malicious individuals, Capgrave establishes the scene of this particular episode \u00E2\u0080\u0094 Norbert's habitual solemn attendance at the chapel (11. 3277-3280). Then, he gives the unknown clericus a motive; f a i l i n g to observe the rule s t r i c t l y , he has been frequently reprimanded by Norbert (11. 3281-3287). Next, Capgrave inserts a speech made by some of the would-be k i l l e r ' s relatives, so that when the actual c r i s i s occurs, no explanation is necessary: \"This sory bisschop,\" bei seid, \"bat is so lene, Schal neuer be in pees, but grucchin a l l his l y f . Go forth, bou man, take in bin hand a knyf. \"Wayte vp-on him whan he to mateyns goth; Take and serue him, pan schul we be in pees. He is euyr chidyng, euyr angry and wrooth.\" (11. 3288-3293) Finally, the tableau is presented: the clerk lying i n wait (11. 3294-3296), the procession passing by (1. 3298) while the v i l l a i n waits for the last man (11. 3202-3203), Norbert by chance walking in the middle. (1. 3305), and the f a l l i n g of the blow (11. 3309-3310). Then Capgrave adds a speech by the wounded brother to stop the action at the c r i s i s point: 137 \"What art bou?\" he seid, \"in vertu of God a-boue, That smytest me soo, and I greue be nowt. This maner brothirhod is not groundid in loue.\" (11. 3312-3314) At the conclusion, he alters the words of the v i l l a i n to include a more natural expression of surprise: \"0!\" seyde pis theef, \"al mys haue I wrowt! That i l k man whech pat I haue sowt He is skaped and goo or pat I wist!\" (11. 3315-3317) Both of these extended scenes cl a r i f y Capgrave's relationship to his material. As a scholar-poet, he maintains a f i d e l i t y to his sour-ces without that slavish commitment of the copyist which would s t i f l e any recreation of their contents. Although he is working with charac-ters who are conventional and stereotyped and who permit him l i t t l e opportunity for shading or individuation, he manages by a careful manipulation of the scene and setting to give them a dimension through dramatization which they do not have in the Latin original. It is this sense of dramatic balance that distinguishes Capgrave as a writer. That quality more than any other compensates for deficiencies in his poetic and narrative art and gives to his work a stamp of originality. In the second of his poetic lives, The Life of St. Katherine, Capgrave's capacity for dramatic realizations combines with features of design and improved poetic techniques to produce a more a r t i s t i c a l l y effective work. To demonstrate the differences between the two poems more clearly and to show how far they may indicate a greater maturity in Capgrave's work, the next chapter w i l l discuss the sources, style, characterization, and dramatic arrangement of the debates in The Life of St. Katherine. 139 APPENDIX A SUMMARY OF THE CONTENTS OF LATIN VITA B COLLATED WITH CAPGRAVE'S LIFE OF ST. NORBERT Roman numerals in left-hand column refer to sections in Capgrave's Life; the number of stanzas and line numbers are\ given below the Roman numerals [17: 1212-1330]. Arabic numerals refer to chapters in the Vita, Chapters in the Vita that are omitted by Capgrave are so indi-cated [Omit]; when Capgrave's sections do not correspond exactly with the Vita chapters, the break is indicated by a slanted stroke [/]. When no Roman numeral appears opposite a Vita chapter not indicated as omitted in Capgrave, i t can be assumed that i t is included in the previously cited chapter of Capgrave's Life. I 1. Birth of Norbert in 1115 to Herbertus and Hadwig at 8: Xanten, following maternal vision; Norbert's youth 71-126 in the courts of the archbishop of Cologne and the emperor; loved by a l l , he was both intelligent and attractive. II 2. Unsure of the way to turn in the midst of corruption, 7: Norbert, setting off in a thunderstorm with a single 127-75 servant, hears a heavenly voice; he begins to reform III his ways,/ turns his l i f e to study, and resides at Sigeberg. 3. Asks ordination as deacon and priest from archbishop 10: of Cologne; the devil who appears is easily defeated. 140 176-245 spends 40 days at Sigeberg before returning to Xanten. 4. There, the next day, he gives a sermon on eternal l i f e ; his efforts to restore pristine rule are at-tacked but he accepts the contumely and so shows his patience. Omit 5. A dissertation on the reasons holy men endure e v i l . IV 6. The miracle wherein Norbert swallows a spider from 10: the chalice and expells i t through his nose is here 246-315 used to show his faith in God and his disdain for l i f e . 7. Thus, upheld by patience and faith, Norbert spends three years in his austere manner of l i f e and stud-ies, v i s i t i n g Sigeberg, Roda, and the hermit Liudolf. V 8. A council i s held at Frixlar and Norbert is accused 11: of usurping rights of preachers, wearing a habit 316-92 when he is not in orders, and abandoning the clothes to which his rank entitles him; he gives his answers. Omit 9. Deciding to watch in prayer the whole night, Norbert begins to f a i l , but rouses to confront a devil who taunts him. Realizing the reasons some had accused him, he goes to the archbishop and resigns his bene-fices and then gives up a l l his patrimony and sets out barefoot with two companions. Omit 10. At St. Giles he meets Pope Gelasius who absolves him from fault in his double ordination. The pope wished 141 to keep him but Norbert refuses the l i f e of the papal court. Seeing his constancy, the pope gives him f u l l license to preach. Norbert sets off again in icy weather, is joined by a third companion at Orleans and arrives at Valence on Palm Sunday. There his preaching is understood though he spoke in German, not French; his intention to depart is hindered by the illness of his three companions who ultimately die. Meanwhile, his old friend Burchard, bishop of Cambrai arrives and they meet again. During an illness suffered by Norbert, one of the bishop's followers decides he wishes to become Norbert's disciple and sets out to settle his affairs before joining the saint. Thus in 1118, Norbert received Hugh who was later to succeed him. Norbert again sets out preaching and everywhere men from a l l ranks of l i f e collect to hear him; he is successful in reconciling enemies, and he is always received gladly at tables. He also preaches to religious communities on more s t r i c t l y theological subjects. On every side, he leads people away from error, makes them penitent, and restrains them from crime. 142 Omit 14. By Norbert's example and exhortation, Hugh is led towards the perfect l i f e . Omit 15. At Fosse, the people t e l l Norbert of great and murderous disputes. After long prayers and cele-brating the Mass, Norbert exhorts the people to forgive their enemies and peace is established. VII 16. The next day he proceeds to Gemlacum and there seeks 12: to reconcile two warring lords. One recognizes the 540-623 wisdom of Norbert's words, but the other remains ob-stinate. Norbert prophesies that the latter w i l l be seized by his enemies and the truth of his words is proved. VIII 17. Norbert proceeds to Colroy where he again urges 5: peace. When one of the disputants flees the church, 624-58 his horse refuses to move. Thus, he is led to re-pent and God's glory is shown. IX 18. The author urges the truth of the preceding reports 16: against possible derogation. They are in fact only 659-770 a few of Norbert's deeds. Gelasius died that same year (1119) and Calixtus II was chosen as his suc-cessor. The new pope called a council at Reims where Norbert received confirmation of his apostolic letters. 19. Calixtus ordered Bartholemew, bishop of Laon, to take Norbert to his court, and eager to keep holy 143 men in his city, Bartholemew urged him to accept the abbacy of the church of St. Martin. After f i r s t re-fusing, Norbert accepted the task, but the canons soon complained of his stringency. At this time Hugh returned to be Norbert's companion. The bishop continued to urge Norbert to accept a place in his diocese and f i n a l l y he settled on the desolate Premontre'. X 20. The winter being over, Norbert again went on his 9: rounds of preaching, and soon Evermode of Cambrai 771-833 and Antonius of Nivelles became his disciples. With these two, Hugh, and ten others, Norbert took pos-session of Premontre at Easter. XI 21. The demons, enemies of God, naturally attempted to 21: disrupt this new foundation. One brother is tempted 834-980 by a devil pretending to be the t r i n i t y , but he eas-i l y recognizes the delusion. Later, another partic-ularly renowned for the harshness of his fasts is tempted from his abstinence. The others cannot pre-vent his f a l l despite their exhortations; at his return Norbert immediately senses the e v i l . However, he soon perceives the diabolic inspiration and leads the brother back to his customary rigour. XII 22. Then Norbert returns to his preaching, continuing to 33: pacify discord and eventually he returns to Nivelles. 144 981-1211 Certain men there who had not been able to endure the rigour of the l i f e at Premontre sowed opprobrium against him, but the power of his words was greater than their e v i l . He cures a g i r l who had been vexed by a demon for a year and thus i t is proved that Norbert is a true apostle. Omit 23. Norbert goes on to Cologne seeking rel i c s for the church he wishes to build. He fasts and prays and during the night one of the 11,000 virgins appears to him and t e l l s him where her body l i e s . Her body is found and on the following day, after prayers, he also discovers the body of St. Gereon. He is given rel i c s and goes back on his way. The countess of Namur hears, of him and urges him to accept Flo-reffe as a new establishment for his order. He agrees and returns to Premontre at Christmas where there are now thirty lay brothers and clerics. XIII 24. The number increases to forty clerics and more lay 17: brothers, and Norbert night and day exhorts them to 1212-1330 heavenly thoughts. However, he knows that a rule must be established; some advise the eremetical, some the anchorite, some the Cistercian way of l i f e . Norbert chooses the Augustinian rule as most suitable to the combination of canonical and apostolic l i f e he wants./ 145 XIV 8: 1331-86 XV 21: 1387-1533 XVI 10: 1534-1603 XVII 16: 1604-1715 XVIII 12: 1716-99 In ad d i t i o n he sel e c t s the white habit. 25. D e t a i l s of Norbert's austere p r e s c r i p t i o n s are given. 26. One day, on h i s way to Reims, Norbert hears two voices describing one of the novices accompanying him as f a i t h f u l , the other not. The l a t t e r i n s i s t s that he has no plan, but at night absconds with the money^hiddeh-behind the. a l t a r . ; Such an event serves to confirm the lack of concern for wordly things./ Norbert has to consider the place-ment of the buildings i n the rugged area of Premon-t r e , and he and h i s companions pray f o r guidance. 27. One of the brothers has a v i s i o n of Chri s t i n d i c a t i n g the spot f o r the church. 28. Bishop Bartolemew and Lord Thomas of Corey aid i n the b u i l d i n g . The German and French workmen argue u n t i l they are placed on opposite sides during the b u i l d -ing, and then with the s p i r i t of contest, i t i s rushed to completion. During the consecration, the great a l t a r i s moved and the necessary reconstruction i s l a t e r c a r r i e d on s e c r e t l y . In the record of v a r i -ous events which follow, i t i s not possible to discuss the order or to include everything. 146 XIX 29. Norbert returns to preaching peace and unanimity to 28: c l e r i c s and to lay people. Meanwhile, armed demons 1800-1995 appear to some of his brothers who t r y to f i g h t them, but others, recognizing the delusion, banish the demons with holy water and the sign of the cross. The d e v i l could not prevent men of a l l ranks from j o i n i n g Norbert's order. One of the brothers be-li e v e s he can expound Daniel's prophecies and fo r e -t e l l s the future of some of the others. Soon, those who had been confused recognize the delusion. Another thinks he can expound the Apocalypse but wiser brothers refuse to hear him u n t i l Norbert returns. The demon, angered, sets the two expound-ers against each other. XX 30. The demon then seizes another brother who i s so 23: v i o l e n t that he has to be bound. The demon acknowl-1996-2184 edges that i t was he who tormented the g i r l at Ni v e l l e s and a f t e r much e f f o r t he i s f i n a l l y exorcized. XXI 31. Leaving the brothers, the demon pursues Norbert to 26: T r a i e c t and enters a man who i s brought to Norbert 2185-2338 for curing. In h i s raging, the man accuses by-standers of secret s i n s . F i n a l l y , Norbert manages to e f f e c t the cure, but points out that the man has been tormented because of h i s own e v i l deeds. 147 This chapter deals with the conversion of Count God-frey of Cappenburg. Against the desires of his wife, brother, and father-in-law, he decides to change his c a s t l e into a monastery. His wife and brother accept the holy path, but his raging father-in-law, a f t e r attacks and threats, f i n a l l y dies the p a i n f u l death he deserves. Thus the order continues to grow. Everything cannot be t o l d , but Norbert's fame grew i n both France and Germany. Count Theobald, for example, wanted to give up a l l h i s lands to him. Norbert reminds him of his other duties but agrees to give him a r u l e of l i f e and to choose a wife for him. On h i s way to Rome to have his order confirmed, Norbert stops at Ratisbon and gets the Marquis Englebert to agree to give h i s daughter to Theobald. Norbert receives what he asks from the pope and on the return journey a heavenly voice predicts he w i l l be made bishop of Parthenopolis. He i s a f r a i d to l i n g e r at Herbipolis whose l a s t s y l l a b l e i s the same, and there a b l i n d woman i s cured while he celebrates Mass. On h i s way back to Premontre', he establishes houses of the order at Laon and V i v i e r . At V i v i e r a demon possesses a labourer as he drinks at the fountain. 148 The man i s c a r r i e d to Norbert and\" seems to be cured. Norbert knows the demon i s not gone, however, and the exorcism i s not completed u n t i l the next day. People focus on these demonic events, but i t should not be forgotten how he was c a l l e d to Antwerp by the heresy of Tanchelin and how e a s i l y his eloquence r e -c a l l e d the people to the f a i t h . Among other things that happened i s the strange event at Premontre. When the brothers a r r i v e d with water, Norbert said i t was f o u l and ordered i t poured out. This happened twice more and f i n a l l y a huge toad i s poured out. Norbert says the d e v i l has a thousand t r i c k s . Another time some brothers f i n d a wolf devouring a k i d . When they take i t from him, he follows them home. Norbert discovers the theft and orders the ki d returned. A boy who guards the sheep i s j o c u l a r l y asked how he would chase off a wolf. He r e p l i e s that he would command him to depart i n Norbert's name. When the event occurs, the wolf does leave. On another occas-sion, the wolf helps guard the sheep and demands payment f o r his labour at the monastery. Norbert recognizes h i s claim and again shows h i s brothers proper behaviour by example. 149 XXVI 9: 2717-2779 XXVII 27: 2780-2933 XXV 40. The demon appears to a man l a t e at n i g h t , but he 9: b r a v e l y pursues him u n t i l he catches a t r e e and 2654-2716 recognizes the i l l u s i o n . Another one, a f t e r long remaining immobile, makes the demon disappear w i t h the s i g n of the cro s s . 41. The demon a l s o appears to Norbert i n the shape of a bear, but the s a i n t e a s i l y d r i v e s him o f f . 42. The time approaches f o r Theobald's marriage and Nor-bert agrees to i n q u i r e i n t o the reasons the b r i d e has not appeared. He sends h i s expense money to the brothers at Premontre - to a i d i n feeding the poor. On h i s way, he a r r i v e s at Spires where the f i r s t c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the c o u n c i l i s the choice of a new bishop f o r Parthenopolis (Magdeberg). Pointed out as the best man by one of the other nominees, Alberon, l a t e r archbishop of Treves, Norbert i s made bishop of the perverse Slavs and Saxons. XXVIII 43. When Norbert enters h i s possessions, the p o r t e r turns 24: him back because of h i s poor dress. Norbert merely 2934-3101 smiles and says the man knows him b e t t e r than those who chose him. 44. A f t e r h i s cons e c r a t i o n , he discove r s the bad s t a t e of the church's revenues and sets out to recover a l i e n a t e d lands. N a t u r a l l y , he has to endure much 150 calumny both from the lords who hold the possessions and from the c l e r i c s whose i r r e l i g i o u s l i f e he endeavours to correct. XXIX 45. After i n i t i a l d i f f i c u l t i e s , he establishes some of 6: h i s own canons i n the church of the Blessed V i r g i n 3102-43 i n front of the episcopal palace. XXX 46. His order grows i n Saxony. Much murmuring continues 17: against him and on one occasion a man who plans to 3144-3262 murder him i s marvellously revealed by Norbert. XXXI 47. He has enemies even among h i s close s t associates and 9: one t r i e s to k i l l him as he leaves the cathedral. 3263-3325 XXXII 48. He allows an e l e c t i o n of a new abbot f o r Premontre 20: since h i s f l o c k has so long been unattended. Soon 3326-3465 he also chooses abbots f o r the other f i v e monaster-ies and the order continues to multiply. Omit 49. When Honorius dies, the church i s broken by a schism. Norbert attends the true pope's council at Reims and has h i s order and p o s i t i o n confirmed. When he returns to Magdeburg, many accuse him of f a i l i n g to maintain the glory of the church. He shows his constancy, however. At the same time the church was d e f i l e d and Norbert i n s i s t e d on re-con-secrating i t . His enemies said i t was unnecessary and accused him of planning to s t e a l the church's 151 treasure. After a long night hidden i n the church, Norbert i s saved by the a r r i v a l of the count, and he i s able to show that nothing has been disturbed. Omit 50. His enemies continue to r i s e up against him and he XXXIII i s compelled to leave the c i t y . / F i n a l l y , however, 9: the people perceive the truth and o f f e r r e s t i t u t i o n 3466-3528 which Norbert considers unnecessary, 51. Forty marks of s i l v e r are given to repair the damage done his palace. Thus Norbert shows himself able to endure a l l i l l s . XXXIV 52. Lothar, the German emperor, sets up an expedition to 13: re-seat the true pope i n Rome and has Norbert accom-3529-3619 pany him. The t r i p i s successful, but the much weak-ened Norbert dies a short time a f t e r t h e i r return. XXV 53. The cathedral and the church of h i s canons dispute 13: over the body of the s a i n t , and Lothar decides i n 3620-3710 favour of the Premonstratensians. His body has r e -mained uncorrupted while the d e c i s i o n was being made. XXXVI 54. One of h i s distant canons has a v i s i o n of Norbert 20: with an o l i v e branch as a symbol of the order he 3711-3850 has planted, and i t i s found to be the day of the saint's death. Another brother sees a v i s i o n of Norbert who changes into a l i l y and the p r i o r notes the day, which turns out to be the day of h i s b u r i a l . Yet another brother, one of the e a r l i e s t converted, 152 has a v i s i o n of Norbert i n b l i s s . F i n a l assurance of the author that these things are true because they were reported by eyewitnesses. [XXXVIi] [ The second recension of St. Norbert's l i f e , which 37: i s found i n a l l extant versions, follows here.] 3851-4109 153 Footnotes Internal references are to: John Capgrave, The L i f e of St. Norbert, ed. W.H. Clawson, unpublished manuscript i n the Huntington Library (HM55). Line numbers are taken from Professor Clawson's unpublished t r a n s c r i p t , the manuscript of which i s i n the University of Toronto Library. And V i t a S. Norberti, P.L., CLXX (Paris, 1894), c o l s . 1258-1344. References to Capgrave are by l i n e number, to the V i t a by column number. ^Most of the documents are c i t e d i n Godefroid Madelaine, H i s t o i r e de Saint Norbert ( L i l l e , 1886). Of the r e l i g i o u s biographer, Madelaine says, \"Pour l u i l e grand r ^ l e p o l i t i q u e du saint para'it secondaire, et i l n'en parle qu'incidemment\" (p. 14). 2 H.M. Colvin, The White Canons i n England (Oxford, 1951), p. 1. 3 The excommunication of the emperor i s not mentioned i n the St. Norbert; for the accusation on his apparel see Capgrave, 11. 342-343. Certain materials were r e s t r i c t e d to members of s p e c i f i c ranks, and they were expected to wear garments su i t a b l e to t h e i r s t a t i o n . As a member of the n o b i l i t y who had as yet not renounced h i s p o s i t i o n , Nor-bert was vulnerable to t h i s attack. 4 Cappenburg, Elvestat, and Varlar i n V i t a , c o l . 1306. ^Colvin, p. 315. 6 I b i d . , p. 307. 7A.B. Emdem, A Biographical Register of the University of Cam- bridge (Cambridge, 1963). Wygenhale i s l i s t e d under h i s family name, Saresson. Further information about his career i s contained i n Colvin, pp. 321-323. g The l a t e 19th-century controversy over the p r i o r i t y of the two early versions has not yet been f i n a l l y resolved. Roger Wilmans edited as V i t a A a l i f e which he discovered and believed to be e a r l i e r i n Monumenta His tor i a Germanica: Scriptores, XII (Hanover, 1856),- 670-703. His dating was challenged by Godefroid Madelaine i n his H i s t o i r e de Saint Norbert ( L i l l e , 1886), pp. 17-19. The l a t t e r c l e a r l y estab-l i s h e s (p. 18) that the standard L i f e (B) i s of French o r i g i n , A of German. However the sing l e l i n g u i s t i c example that he c i t e s f o r JS's ultimate p r i o r i t y i s scarcely s u f f i c i e n t proof, and his whole argument i s so dogmatic as to cause doubts i n the reader. 9 The three l i s t s which follow c l a r i f y Capgrave's precise r e l a -tionship to V i t a A and 13. While he selects f r e e l y from ]3 (as the t h i r d 154 l i s t i n d i c a t e s ) , he follows B both i n the d e t a i l s omitted from A ( l i s t 2) and i n the addition of d e t a i l s which do not appear i n A at a l l ( l i s t 1). 1) Deta i l s which appear i n Capgrave and 13 but not i n A - Troye as an alternate name for Xanten (1. 93) - The d e t a i l that Evermode kneeled i n Norbert's footsteps when he f i n i s h e d preaching (11. 786-789) - The name of Norbert's second d i s c i p l e (1. 811) - That the t h i r d d i s c i p l e was Hugh of Fosse (11. 813-814) - That Norbert arr i v e d with his d i s c i p l e s at Premontre' i n Passion Week (1. 822) - The generalizing statement that the d e v i l awaits his chance (11. 988-991) - Norbert's d i r e c t speech (1. 1045) and the explanation that he understood the d e v i l ' s t r i c k s (11. 1086-1089) - The explanation that a monk was standing i n the crowd (11. 1095-1098) - The degree to which Norbert's speech ravished his d i s c i p l e s (11. 1235-1239) - The discussion of modification of the rules (11. 1443-1454) - The conclusion to section XV (Chapter 25) that Norbert taught by example (11. 1527-1533) - The moral to the story of the young novice's theft (11. 1599-1603) - The generalized discussion of the doubts of many concerning the success of the order (11. 1629-1658) - Norbert's address to the brothers on Satan's i n e v i t a b l e future assaults (11. 1699-1710) - Norbert's designation of deputies while he i s absent preaching (11. 1800-1816) - Norbert's consultation concerning the brother who wishes to expound b i b l i c a l prophecies (11. 1921-1929) - The speech of those who wished to hear and the i n d i r e c t speech of those who refused to hear the second expounder (11. 1966-1974) - Introductory statement to Section XX (Chapter 30) (11. 1966-1998) - The f a c t that a boy holds the cross during the exorcism (11. 2119-2120) - The image of the order growing as the f r u i t of a tree (11. 2351-2354) - Norbert's ordination of an abbot at V i v i e r s (11. 2362-2363) - The f a c t that the d e v i l was following Norbert (1. 2368) - A d d i t i o n a l d e t a i l s i n the seizure (11. 2380-2455) - Norbert's d i r e c t speech to the brothers about impure water (11. 2474-2476) - The three supernatural events concerning the wolf (11. 2514-2639) 155 - The brother catching a tree as he pursues the devil (1. 2694) - The transition from the t r i a l s of the brothers to Norbert (11. 2717-2719) - The fact that Norbert was involved with negotiations for Duke Theobald when he happened to be in Spires and the arrangements he had made with his brothers (11. 2787-2846) - That Alberon indicated Norbert should be chosen as archbishop (11. 2868-2870) - The explanat ion of the names of the Slavs and Saxons (11. 2913\u00E2\u0080\u0094 2920) - The comparison to Leah and Rachel (11. 2926-2927) - The fact that Norbert's original intention had been to minister to the heathen (11. 2927-2928) - The doorkeeper's speech and the response of the people (11. 2963-2965) - The dialogue between Norbert and o f f i c i a l s on the wasting of church revenue (11. 3008-3024) - Additional details in the reports of his attempts to restore the church's possessions (11. 3037-3100) and of his d i f f i c u l -ties in establishing his canons in the church of Our Lady (11. 3101-3144) - The details concerning the Anti-pope's possession of Rome by the power of his kindred (11. 3542-3556) - Post mortem visions (11. 3711-3826) 2) Details omitted by Capgrave and B from the account in A - Norbert's speech to the pope (Wilmans, p. 678, 11. 30-38) - Chapter 11 (p. 681). Not the same as B/s chapter 11, this sequence concerns a barren woman and a holy child born to her after Norbert's prayers. - The speech of the prior (p. 686, 11. 25, 30) - An appearance by the devil (p.687, 11. 21-36) - The date 1125 (p. 693, 1. 22) - Cardinal's name (p. 694, 1. 4) and his speech (11. 17-24) 3) Capgrave's omissions from J3 (see Appendix) - The Prologue - Chapters 5, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 23, 32, 33, 34, 49, half of 50 - Numerous shorter passages ^The Latin also includes a reference to the year 1118 (col. 1256). Other examples are found in lines: 195-96, 652-58, 1209, 2181-84, 2338, 2642-43, 2987-89, 3499-3500, 3901. 156 He sees the incorruptibility of the saint's body as proof of bodily resurrection (11. 3669-75), for example. Among other ex-planations of the significance of events, the following lines may be cited: 643-44, 1883-90, 2372-73, 2775-79, 2848-49, 3174-76, 3260-63, 3961-69. 13 A theological question concerning the treatment of unclean objects which f a l l upon the altar is at the core of the third example (11. 281-97). 14 The exceptions are chapters 5, 25, 28, 33, 36, 39, 41, 45, 46, 47, 48, 52, 54; three of them (25, 45, 52) begin with erat and two others (46, 47) with other past tense verbs suggesting a time division; three more (5, 33, 36) are omitted in Capgrave's poem; and two (41, 54) begin with generalizing statements. CHAPTER IV THE LIFE OF ST. KATHERINE I The second of Capgrave's poetic lives, The Life of.St. Katherine, may be approximately dated from Osbern Bokenham's acknowledgement of i t in his Legendys of Hooly Wummen.^ This collection of lives was written for various noble ladies who lived in the vi c i n i t y of Bokenham's convent 2 at Clare, and i t was complete by 1447, when yet another Austin f r i a r , 3 Thomas Burgh, had the whole transcribed in Cambridge. In this manu-script. The Lyf of S. Katherine follows The Lyf of Marye Maudelyn, com-posed after Bokenham returned from a,pilgrimage to St. James of Campos-tello in 1445. It is reasonable to suppose that not much time elapsed between the completion of the f i r s t and the commencement of the second l i f e , on which Bokenham says (1.7367) he spent only \"dayis fyve,\" and that, therefore, Capgrave's \"newly compyled\" version (1.6357)\u00E2\u0080\u0094which Bokenham says is available for consultation\u00E2\u0080\u0094was already finished and in circulation, at least in his order. More important than the date, however, or even the confirmation that Capgrave intended his work for dissemination among Augustinians, is the contemporary assessment of Capgrave's s k i l l \u00E2\u0080\u0094 t h e only extant c r i t i c a l commentary\u00E2\u0080\u0094contained in the following lines: More-ouyr a l l bo pat redyn or here Shal pis tretyhs, as lowly as I kan,. I beseche no wyse to lokyn here 158 That.I shuld tell e hou she fyrst began To be crystyne, & howe oon clepyd Adryan Hyr conuertyd & crystnyd in hyr youthe, For bat mater to me is f u l vnkouthe, But who-so lyst knowleche for to haue, And in bat mater enuereyd to be, My fadrys book, maystyr loon Capgrave, Wych pat but newly compylyd he, Mote he seke, & he bere shal se In balaadys rymyd ful craftyly Alle bat for ingnorance here nowe.leue I. But for-as-mych as pat book is rare And straunge to gete, at myn estymacyoun Compendyously of al I wyl declare No more but oonly be passyoun . . . , \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 (11.6347-6364) Obviously, Bokenham's main concern is to justify his translation of the l i f e of St. Katherine found in the Legenda Aurea, which, like most other medieval versions, deals only with the debate with the,philos-ophers and.the martyrdom. At the same time, he is clearly concerned to acknowledge Capgrave's greater competence to handle the theological materials of Katherine's conversion, which figure so prominently in Capgrave's longer L i f e . The passage also has some biographical relevance. Capgrave's position in the order at this time is not documented by contemporary records, but Bokenham's.use of the term \"my fadyr,\" despite the fact that the two men were exact contemporaries and i t was Bokenham who was f i r s t preferred to the doctorate, suggests a clear priority. Though his reference to \"balaadys rymed f u l craftyly\" is merely a descriptive tag and need not be regarded as a serious.literary judgment, Bokenham's tribute i s more than simply a conventional expression of humility toward a superior in the,order, for the whole passage emphasizes Capgrave's-skill .and his : great 159 reputation for learning. There is a certain justice in the man who was to be dignified by the epithet, \"the most:learned of the Augustinians,\"^ choosing the most learned of the virgin martyrs as a subject, though, of course, Capgrave himself saw.no such correspondence, and, as usual, he derived his poem from a source which came into his hands without his having sought i t . While there are no.comtemporary accounts of St. Katherine, she may well have been one of the Alexandrian martyrs. It was the opinion of Hippolyte Delehaye, the most productive and scholarly Bollandist of this century, that i t would never be determined whether she was truly a saint or simply a real person around whom a cult developed.\"* What-ever the case, she was one of the most popular saints of the medieval period, chiefly revered for her learning. The Augustinians recognized her as their patroness of knowledge, and her anniversary was doubtless celebrated by many more convents than the Paris studium generale, for whose fe s t i v i t i e s there is documentation.^ As her legend grew, i t attracted nearly a l l the common fic t i o n a l devices. There are probably earlier lost notices of Katherine, but the version of the Menologium Basilianum (886) is the f i r s t known: The martyr Aikaterina was the daughter of a rich and noble chieftain of Alexandria. She was very beautiful and being at the same time highly talented, she devoted herself to Grecian l i t e r -ature, and to the study of the languages of a l l nations, and so became wise and learned. And i t happened that the Greeks held a festival in honour of their idols; and seeing the slaughter of the animals, she was so greatly moved that she-went to the King Maximinus and expostulated with him in these words: \"why hast though l e f t the liv i n g God to worship l i f e l e s s idols?\" But the 160 emperor caused her to be thrown into prison, and to be punished severely. He then ordered f i f t y orators to be brought, and bade them to reason with Aikaterina, and confute her, & threatening to burn them a l l i f they should f a i l to overpower her. The orators, however, when they saw themselves vanquished, received baptism, and were burnt forthwith. She, on the contrary was-beheaded.7 Even in this early source, the embellishments for the g l o r i f i -cation of the saint are apparent. She is beautiful, of noble birth, and credited with great learning. Moreover, she appears not before the Roman judge, as she would have in fact, but before the emperor himself. Her expostulation with the emperor, her debate with the orators, and their conversion are a l l obvious f i c t i o n a l trappings and f i t subjects for the devices of amplification so familiar to medieval rhetoricians. Thus, by description of scenes and persons, by the addition of dialogues\u00E2\u0080\u0094including expositions of doctrine and prayers\u00E2\u0080\u0094 by hyperbole, by magnification and elaboration of the torments endured, and by the creation or borrowing of miraculous voices and events, medieval Latin hagiographers created a biography on.the Antonian model g for Katherine as they did for so many other saints. Amplification by the invention of events was not Capgrave's method, as has previously been shown; here as elsewhere, he provides evidence which would precisely identify his source were i t s t i l l extant. By Capgrave's time, the story had acquired a great many stan-dard incidents, among them: Katherine's genealogy; the marriage debate; her conversion and the visionary marriage to Christ; the development of the debate with the philosophers; the tortures; the conversion of the queen and of the king's steward; the prayers, conversions, and miracles 161 at her execution; and the miraculous translation of her body to Mount Sinai. No new incidents are added in Capgrave's Life of St. Katherine, and i t is doubtful even whether any of the details relating to the incidents, such as names and numbers, which are unique in Capgrave's. version,\u00E2\u0080\u00A2were actually invented by him. Given what is known about his reworking of identified sources, i t is almost certain that these details were present in the lost,source that l i e s behind St. Katherine. Indeed^ some indication that he was following carefully a specific source is provided by several reservations which he articulates re-garding certain of the recorded events and details, such as the mode of Adrian and Katherine's' voyage to his hermitage from Alexandria, the concreteness of the visions surrounding Katherine's' mystical marriage-to Christ, and the reports of the miracles at her tomb in Sinai. A close Latin prose parallel to Capgrave's poem, in a 15th-century hand, was discovered by Auvo Kurvinen in Bodl. MS. Laud Misc. 9 205; She effectively demonstrates that even though the two share many details, they do not derive from each other; however, she asserts that they depend on a mutual and non-extant source, which she attrib-utes, on the basis of internal evidence in Capgrave's poem, to one' \"Arrek.\" The author of the Latin prose version paralleling Capgrave's poem, she identifies as the John Staneborn whose name appears as a running headline in the liber primus. There are at least two major errors in Dr. Kurvinen's recon-struction, both relating to the transmission of manuscript sources. Dr. Kurvinen' clearly misses a stage' when she claims that \"Staneborn\" 162 and Capgrave had a single source, although i t may be that Capgrave's source and \"Staneborn\" had a common Latin o r i g i n a l . ^ That this is so is attested to by Capgrave's categorical statement that his pre-eminent source was an incomplete English version written in a western dialect: he mad p i l y f f in englysch tunge f u l well. But 3et he deyed or he had fu l l y doo: (Bk. I, Prologue,11.57-58) Of be west c u n t r e i t semeth bat he was, Be hys maner spech & be hys style. (Bk; I, Prologue,11.225-226) Supporting evidence (not entirely circumstantial) derives from a con-sideration of the probabilities of transmission. In the f i r s t placej i t would be a virtually unique, and therefore highly unlikely, for a Latin translation to have been made from a vernacular original. Second, since the author of the English source died at Lynn (11.218-219) and presumably l e f t his unfinished manuscript there, and since \"Staneborn,\" as Dr. Kurvinen indicates, may have been only a scribe or a previous owner, and has no known association with Lynn, there is no reason for assuming that he, or whoever was the author of the Latin prose version, had consulted the work,of Capgrave's- \"preest.\" Kurvinen's second error involves her claim that Capgrave used two versions of \"Arrek's\" work, one.in English and one in Latin, a claim impossible to support from Capgrave's own observations.\"^ Apart from the fact that Capgrave says that his author died leaving the, work unfinished, his only reference to his source for the last book occurs in the Prologue to Book;V:;, \"This sehal be translated' now-newe fro 163 Latyn\" (1.62). There is no suggestion in Capgravels comment that this Latin author is identical with the author of his English source. Unfortunately, Laud Misc. 205 lacks many leaves, and i t s assumed fourth, book is not extant. There i s , therefore, no way to demonstrate whether this missing book may have been derived from the same Latin source as Capgrave's version of the martyrdom, which does come from a Latin source. A further ambiguity relating to the sources must also be resolved. The identification of \"Arrek\" as the author of the f i r s t Latin l i f e and the equating of him with the priest who wrote the English version (who was for a time the rector of St.Pancras, and who died at Lynn) stems from a misreading of the text made by.Furnivall, a misreading which Dr. Kurvinen adopts. Considering Capgrave's weak transition, i t was easy for this mistake to occur. In the Prologue, lines 47-126 deal with the eighteen-year search (11.49-76) made by an English priest for Katherine's l i f e and the vision he has (1.78ff.), which leads him to a book buried by Amylyon f i t z amarak in \"Cyprelond\" (1.121). At this point, Capgrave says: And in pope vrban tyme,.I vndyrstond be fyfte of rome, f e l l a l l bis matere wheche 3e haue herd and 3et 3e schall more clere. (11.124-126) What he means by \"more clere\" is the elaboration (11.127-320) of the contents of this buried book,- Capgrave begins with a long passage on Katherine's confessor, Athanasius,:who wrote.her l i f e in Greek and remained bishop in Alexandria long after her persecutor, Maxentius', 164 death (11.127-129). Then he says that ^Catherine's name was l i t t l e known unti l Arrek made a translation of Athanasius' Greek l i f e ; and he explains how Arrek spent twelve years in Alexandria learning the language before he found and translated the l i f e (11.170-203). It i s \"pis new werk\" (1.199), Arrek's Latin l i f e , that was \"on-to englisch-man/I-soute & founde, & broute un-to londe\" (11.203-204) by Capgrave's. priest. Arrek's Latin l i f e , then, i s the immediate source n o t o f Capgrave's l i f e , but of the English l i f e which Capgrave is versifying, and i t was discovered by the English priest in.the time of Pope Urban, that i s , between 1362 and 1370 (11.124-125). Arrek's translation was made a hundred years after Athanasius' death (11.198-201) , that i s , no 12 later than the beginning of the 5th century. Finally, in giving Katherine's genealogy, Capgrave further distinguishes his English source, reinforcing, by his comparison of i t with older (obviously Latin rather than Greek) chronicles, the.argument that i t is a compo-sition of f a i r l y recent origin: In pis reknyng myne auctour & I are too; ffor he acordeth not wyt3 cronicles pat ben olde, But diuersyth from hem, & bat in many thyngis. bere he acordyth, per I hym hold; And. where he diuersyth in ordre of peis kyngis, I leue hym, & to order mennys.rekenyngis I 3eue more credens whech be-fore hym & me Sette alle pese men in ordre & degre. (Bk. 1,11.686-693) To recapitulate, the above argument.is perhaps best c l a r i f i e d visually by using a manuscript tree, Furnivall and later Kurvinen have traced the source transmission in a direct line from Athanasius 165 to Capgrave, identifying Arrek's translation as the common source of both Capgrave's Life and (in Kurvinen's case) \"Staneborn's\" prose parallel, and Arrek and Capgrave's \"preest\" as one: . Capgrave's Katherine \"Staneborn's\" parallel English source Arrek.(5thC) Athanasius' Greek l i f e Their account f a i l s , however, to consider a l l the evidence: i t ignores Capgrave's own positive statements about his \"auctour,\" or immediate English source, and i t begs the question of his having to rely on an additional Latin source to f i l l in the lacunae occasioned by the incom-pleteness of the English version. If the transmission I have suggested above is accurate\u00E2\u0080\u0094and i t derives wholly from Capgrave's own discussions of his source\u00E2\u0080\u0094the line of descent is as follows: Capgrave's Katherine I \"Staneborn's\" parallel English source I Latin source - I \"Arrek\" Athanasius 166 Since none.of the immediate sources for either Capgrave' s Life.. or \"Staneborn's\" Latin.parallel are extant, source arguments must be limited to problems of transmission, and Capgrave's u t i l i z a t i o n of his sources becomes only a topic for speculation. The matter is of more than academic interest, however, for i t can now be established un-equivocally that for the St\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Katherine he drew primarily upon a ver-nacular source\u00E2\u0080\u0094the unique instance in his canon where this is the case. That he did so may reflect only his adaptation of materials convenient to hand; but i t may also, when added to the extensiveness of his English writings, say something about his concern for the vernacular and reinforce his claim to be regarded as an early and serious writer in English. II . These observations bring no closer the identification of the English priest, and unless the manuscript should suddenly come to light, there would be no particular profit in pursuing his identity. The second problem which arises is no easier to resolve. Given the date of composition and Capgrave's reference.to the \"style\" as well as the \"maner speche\" (Bk. I, Prologue,1.225) as evidence of the west country origin of the author, one suspects that.the lost work was an example of the works in highly stylized prose and poetry which flourished in the western regions. Many of the lines in that part of the Prologue which describes the Latin rather than the. English source are strikingly, a l l i t e r a t i v e : 167 Aungellys bar her, be deuelys bar hys beer (1.159) Who sche for lofe her lyffe hath bus layde (1.178) had brent be bokys, bobe be leffe & be brede (1.192) Countless others which have only two all i t e r a t i v e words echo early 13 14th-century examples from the North-West Midlands dialect. Beyond the al l i t e r a t i o n , there i s one pervasive s t y l i s t i c characteristic of the poem which is found nowhere else in Capgrave's, writing and which is presumably a survival from the or i g i n a l \u00E2\u0080\u0094 r e p e t i - . tion and balance in form and/or meaning, in which two nouns, verbs, or adjectives, identical in meaning, are juxtaposed: pe spede & pe sauacyoun (1.164) hys help & hys socour (1.174) hys conquest & hys victory (1.283) ordeyned & sett (1.199) cryeth & wayleth (1.212) pased & I-gon (1.226) ful huge & f u l grete (1.76) mek & mylde (1.241) Any of these kinds of doublets may be extended to phrase or clause length; and two or more parts of speech may be paralleled: in ioye & in mekyll myrthe.(1.150) many a good coment & many a holy exhortacyon (1.132) for hys owyn spouse & for hys wyffe der (1.191) Schall sche now grone, schall sche now crye? (1.207) every man may know & euery man ler (1.291) 168 Contraries are similarly employed: Bope s t y l l & lowde (1.10) bothe fer & ner (1.11) Wer i t in pees or e l l i s in wer (1.75)-of hethnes & of cristyndome (1.80) loue ne dred (1.146) per wold sche sytte, & per wold sche ryse (1.348) Whech ar of goode wyll & whech ar of i l l e (1.396) Generally, almost any phrase or clause capable of.this kind of ampli-fication receives i t . Thus, in the following cases, while there i s neither identity nor opposition, the expansion cannot be said to advance the narrative: of felde, of town or of see (1.89) in towr & in walle (1.109) wyth fyr & wyth yryn I-slayn & I-brent (1.121) be kyng i s f u l febyll, be qwen f u l eld now (1.206) ladyes in be chaumbyr & lordys in be halle (1.210) Aftyr her age & aftyr her dygnyte (1.324) who men schall speke, & who bei schall wryte (1.368) Sometimes this device i s found in long sequences of lines, occasionally with shorter parallel syntactical units embedded in longer ones. For example, Alexander's admiral's speech is rhetorically sup-ported by twin parallel \"loke\" admonitions, followed by a \"how\"-\"why\"-\"wherefore\" series: 169 \"Loke bat 3e brow not now a l l i n pe mere! Loke pat 3e lese not now your gret namyd lose, Whan pat 3e may so heyly i t endoos! \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 \"Who honoure 3e 3our owne grete astate! Why hate 3e now pat i l k lady must haue? Wherfore haue 3e swech ping i n hate That may 3oure londes & eke 30ur-self saue? (Bk. 11,11.880-886) Lines 882 and.886, which disrupt the s t y l i z e d sequence and add nothing to the debate, may w e l l be Capgrave's additions, concessions to the requirements of the rhyme. Katherine's testament of f a i t h to the philosopher provides two other examples of a s i m i l a r s e r i e s , and here the portions which Capgrave added to meet the demands of h i s verse form are much more obvious: \"I lerne how god i s l o r d of creature, I lerne hough he the.heuene white and blew, The water, the feyr, the erthe, eer bat i t grew, Made a l of n o u g h t \u00E2\u0080\u0094 t h i s i s now my lernyng. I lerne also that he a c h i l d f u l ying \"Was bore i n erthe of Mary, . . . (Bk. IV,11.1354-1359) Line 1355 was almost c e r t a i n l y simply, \"I lerne how he made a l of nought\"; and \" t h i s i s now my l e a r n i n g \" (1.13.58) i s indisputably only a l i n e f i l l e r . S i m i l a r l y , i n the following l i n e s , \"This i s my scole, b i s i s my philosophie This i s be scyens I hope schal neuere l y e ; \"This i s my feyth, t h i s i s my v i c t o r i e . (Bk. IV,11.1371-1373) the second (1.1372) seems merely an addition to meet the requirements of the f i n a l rhyme. In any case, i f these three examples\u00E2\u0080\u0094or any of the hundreds more that might be c i t e d i n the 8624 l i n e s of The L i f e of St. 170 Katherine\u00E2\u0080\u0094are compared to passages which are unquestionably Capgrave's, such as the genealogy passage quoted above, the sections in the.intro-ductory chapter in which he discusses his author's prolixity, his original prologues and conclusions to the various books; or his whole manner in The Life of St. Norbert, there can be l i t t l e doubt that this technique was part of his source, not his own invention. It would be , hazardous to suggest, however, that his original was necessarily a poem, for i t is precisely these features of a l l i t e r a t i o n and balanced constructions which led many 19th century scholars to assume that.the works in the 12th century, West-Midland Katherine Group were poems. It seems most lik e l y that like them, Capgrave's source was one of the highly stylized prose works preserved in the western dialects. The fact that the f i f t h book also reveals these characteristics leads to the further supposition that the original English version derived from an equally rhetorical Latin source. Apart from the correction of his material from what he consider-ed more authoritative works, then, Capgrave seems to have followed his unknown original closely. However, he does make a few other direct comments on the subject matter which reflect the scholar's belief that the vernacular is not a f i t vehicle for the mysteries of faith,.indeed, that making certain.ideas accessible to the :unlearned is a dangerous undertaking. In Book I, he says: . . ;. mych other thyng Was seyd & do, whech nedyth not to rehers, ffor happyly sume foik myght than be be wers To her swech maummentrye & swych-maner rytes. (11.474-477) 171 Later, he editorializes: It is f u l hard swiche pingis for to ryme, To vtter pleynly in langage of oure nacyon Swhiche straunge doutes pat longe to the incarnacioun, But that myn auctour took swiche ping on.hande, And yet his langage vnnethe I vndirstande; Wherfore with other auctouris I enforce hym thus, Whiche spoke more pregnauntly as in this matere. (Bk. IV,11.2194-2200) At the end, refusing to confirm or deny the miracles he has heard and read of at Katherine's tomb, he clearly means that he has no Latin authority and shows that he is fully aware of his own reputation as a theologian: But for be-cause I haue noon auctorite, I dar not wryte heere her declaracyon, lest that I poyson all e myn forsayd weerk, lest pat men eke.of myn owne nacyon Shulde ymagen bat I, whiche am a clerk, Might of swiche thyngis take a wrong merk, Wherfore I commytte a l this thyng in-feere On-to the discrecyon of hem bat shul i t heere, ffor I wil determyne noo conclusyon as in this mater;. (Bk. V,11.1967-1976) The prosaic nature of his intrusions i s , of course, evident again, both in this passage and in the one to follow. What Capgrave is willing to elaborate on for his vernacular audience, in the St. Katherine as in others of his works, are natural phenomena and figures of speech. For example, he explains Katherine and Adrian's i n v i s i b i l i t y as they pass through Alexandria as the result of a spell of blindness invoked by God on the population: 172 . . . a sekenes meruelous\u00E2\u0080\u0094 It is called acrisia, i t maketh men seme blynde As for a tyme, for sykyr a l l her mynde Schall be so a-stoyned pat.pei schull not see bing bat in her hand vp hap ban bee. (Bk. 111,11.801-805) When he refers to Katherine as \"blynde\" during her heathen period, he i n -terrupts the progress of his narrative with the following explanation: Blynd I calle hir whil she was in that l y f , Knewe not c r i s t , baptem had noon I-take, Of heuenly thyngis l i t e l inquisityf hir old oppynyons had she no3t forsake, ffro this blyndenesse cryst made hir a-wake, In oure thredde book ryght as we seyde before--It nedeth not as now reherce i t no more. (Bk. V,11.43-49) Such digressions are frequent in the St. Katherine. At various points in the narrative, he explains why St. Augustine called the Apostles \"ydyotis\" (Bk. 1,1.288) and identifies God's servants as angels (Bk. V.1.699), pauses to discuss earlier meanings of the names f r i a r , hermit, and monk (Bk. 111,11.84-91), and predicates that Adrian was happily occupied while Katherine was ravished to heaven (Bk. I l l , 11.1012-1015); he conjectures why Mary and Katherine had no company when they approached Christ's throne.(Bk. Ill,11.1019-1022), discusses whether Katherine was fed physically or spiritually (Bk..V,11.896-912), and gives Maxentius' later history (Bk. V,11.1097-1110). Proportionately speaking, however, Capgrave's intrusions tend less toward exposition in this work than in his other writings, perhaps because so much of the material is i t s e l f expository. Instead, they tend to be editorial in nature, as when he disparages pagan rites (Bk, I, 1.450, Bk. IV,11.405-406) , makes certain the reader recognizes the false logic of anyone,who speaks against Katherine (Bk. 11,11,1143), and provides his source for a particular statement,(Bk. .1,11.554-557, Bk. V,11.1697-1698). Occasionally, he intrudes personal allusions, such as the anachronistic reference to the Lollards (Bk. 111,1.327), and his acknowledgement of his own ignorance of astrology (Bk. I, 11.390-392) or of a character's name (Bk. 11,1.108). In addition, 14 \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 there are a great many purely conventional addresses to the reader. As in the St. Norbert, Capgrave uses aphorisms to express observations about l i f e in general, Solitary l y f f to stodyers is comfort (Bk. 1,1.350) or about God's power over a l l : Thus can oure lord the pacyens proue Of hem bat am chosen to dwelle a l aboue In heuene in his presens. (Bk. IV,.11.942-944) Such aphorisms, however, are noticeably less hortatory in the St. Katherine than in the previous work.\"'\"\"' Although Capgrave refers to his audience variously as either \"readers\" or \"hearers,\" i t i s clear that he expected his work to be included as part of some edifying or devotional exercise and to be. read in sections, perhaps a book at a time, to a gathered assembly. The five-part structure provides a convenient frame for the separation of episodes in Katherine's l i f e . At the end of Book I, after having recounted Katherine's \"byrth, her kynrod & her countre,\" Capgrave en-forces a distinct interruption of the narrative: It wyl be long or pat pis tale be told; berfor I counsell bat we make her a pause 174 And eke a-rest ryth euene at bis clause. (11.1041-1043) The conclusion of the second book is also definite, although \"Amen\" (1.1498) need imply no suggestion that the reading must necessarily stop there. On the other hand, Book III begins with a recapitulation of the contents of the preceding parts, which seems to assume a.lapse of time: ffor I haue tolde 30W - schortly, as I can, be byrth, be kynrod, be nobyllhed of bis mayde, be gret disputyng of lordes who i t be-gan, And eke hyr answer, what sche to hem sayd; bis haue I pleynly now be-for 30W layde In swech ryme, as I coude best deuyse\u00E2\u0080\u0094 (11.8-13) The book ends with a statement that i s already long enough and a prayer which conclusively divides i t from the succeeding prologue: pis same book whech we hafe be long a-boute, We wyll now ende, i f 36 ber-to acorde.: God sende vs alle of vnite acorde, To plese hym oonly a-boue a l l menne\u00E2\u0080\u0094 ber-to sey we alle wyth 0 0 voys AmEN. -(11.1501-1505) The last two books, the prologues of which commence with origin-al, and elaborate similes not directly associated with the narrative, are more s k i l l f u l l y demarcated as structural.units than the f i r s t three. In the f i r s t forty-two lines of Book IV, men are compared to bees; \"Some w i l l laboure, and some w i l l neuere thryue\" (1.5). The workers take true nourishment from \"goddis lawe\" while the drones only sleep; the church is their hive with cells of honey and wax. The application of this general simile begins at line 43, where, unt i l line 71, the simile is elaborated to suggest Katherine's study of holy books during the two year interval before her persecutor arrives. Capgrave adduces no further reason for concluding the fourth book than that i t is \" f u l convenient\" (1.2341), but he adds a prayer \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 (11.2342-2345) to make his ending more convincing. The opening of the last book is the most interesting for i t demonstrates unequivocally that the five part division of the work was intentional from the outset, and that Capgrave was as capable as.any other author of employing conventional medieval symbols in an allegor-i c a l , fashion. Again suggesting an interval of time in the.reading, Capgrave compares both Katherine and his version of her l i f e to a rose: Now is i t come, oure leyser and oure space, In whiche we may, after oure grete labour, Of other maters, now, whil we haue grace, Turne ageyn and taaste the swete sauour Of this elene virgyne, of this weel sauoured.flour, Whiche with fyue braunches grew thus here in erthe. T h e f i r s t e , the secounde, the thredde, and the feerde haue 3e perceyued, i f 3e haue red a l l e ; Now shal the fyfte be shewed on-to joure sight. ffor now we lyste this lady a rose .to calle, . . . (11.1-10) He then explains that the redness of the rose stands for Katherine's martyrdom; the thorns represent both her suffering and her heathen ancestry. The leaves, protecting the flower and then opening to reveal i t s redness, il l u s t r a t e that her whole l i f e was directed towards martyr-dom. The application of the comparison to his own work follows. Like a rose, two of the leaves have no rough edges; these are the two books which concern her l i f e before her conversion. The last three are the leaves of \"vertu,\" and thus they are \"berdes.\" Finally, because the 176 leaves are evergreen, the reader is reminded that Katherine's grace is everlasting. These two elaborate introductory figures of speech, stylized openings in medieval poetry, are in no way characteristic of Capgrave's writing. While they testify to his familiarity with rhetorical devices employed in.the poetic compositions of his time, they are virtually unique examples of figurative elaborations. In fact, the only others extended to any length are a comparison of the.sparks which indicate that \"summe fyre is nye\" to the holy.words and deeds which prove that \"pe fyre of charite & loue\" burns in Katherine long before she is aware of i t (Bk. 11,11.1-18), the description of how the \"sercle\" of virtues operates (Bk. 11,11.35-49), and Katherine's explanation that she is \"lych a g r i f f . . vp-on an elde stoke\" (Bk. 11,11.1239-1253). And dev-eloped and appropriate on an expository level as they may be, these figures are not original and none adds any l y r i c a l feeling to.the poem. Occasional similes and colloquialisms in dialogue do vi v i f y some passages: . . .as wyth-Inne be wale Of a strong schyppe a man is bor a-lofte, . . . (Bk. 11,11.642-643) The sturdy herte in hym which was soo stoute, Was.hid with langage as venym in a cloute; . . . (Bk. V,11.1005-1006) But for the most part, what l i t t l e imagery there is tends to be casual, undeveloped, repetitious, unimaginative\u00E2\u0080\u0094even t r i t e . Katherine's swooning mother, for example, lie s in a heap \"as rownd as any balle\" 177 (Bk. 11,1.1461); and to describe a heart as \"heuyas led\" (Bk. V,1.784) must have been to overwork a cliche even in the 15th Century. Capgrave repeatedly uses the martyr's symbol, the rose, for Katherine without developing i t (Bk. 1,1.201; Bk. 111,1.949; Bk. IV,1.490, 1.1040); and he so automatically employs either the simile \"as strem out of welle\" or the metaphor \"be welle\" whenever virtues are mentioned, that any force i s lost. And, similarly, in two of the less obvious metaphors he uses, neither of them new, he cannot omit the l i t e r a l explanation:, These vessells of gold, martires I mene (Bk. 1,1.120) these ciclopes, smethes I mene (Bk. V,1.1409) In his diction there is neither the abrupt shifting of levels which creates humour in Chaucer and awkwardness in unskilled hands, nor the aureate style of the Scottish Chaucerians; There are words of French and Latin origin throughout, and some of them (like \"nugacyon\" and \"vinolent\") were short-lived; but the basic vocabulary is simple and native. As his language tends towards a prosaic or plain style, so also there i s l i t t l e technical originality in Capgrave's poetry. His metre is clearly accentual with additional syllables freely admitted, but he vacillates between tetrameter and pentameter lines without any apparent pattern. Thus, four-beat lines like the following are the most common: So sprong our lady oute of pe Iewys, And kateryne of hethen, bis tale f u l trew i s . (Bk. 1,11.55-56) 178 Our lady had called hem on-to pat deute To comfort pis mayde & do hyr seruyse. Tho spak bis lorde, pis hye iustyse: . . (Bk. 111,11.1202-1204) ffor he hath stodied with al.herte and meende Thi virgynal body to destroye and shende; . . . (Bk. V,11.1313-1314) But they frequently alternate with five beat ones such as:, \"ffor i f men take heed, oft-tyme bei may se \"Owte of a tre growyng dyuerse frute, And bat same tre bat sumetyme bar be grene, Now bereth he reed or qwyte, of dyuerse sute. (Bk. 11,11.1239-1242) and But I passe ouere, 3euynge to 30ur assayles Tyme and space. I prey god pat 3our entrayles he endewe with grace, that 3e may knowe the truthe. (Bk. IV,11.1733-1735) Capgrave expresses his belief in the relative unimportance of the technique in comparison to the subject when he says: bis haue I pleynly be-for 30W layde In swech ryme, as I coude best deuyse\u00E2\u0080\u0094 (Bk. 111,11.12-13) and later he suggests that both the vernacular i t s e l f and his imposed form inhibit his attempts at explanation: It i s f u l hard swiches pingis for to ryme, To vtter pleynly in langage of oure nacyon Swhiche straunge doutes pat longe to the incarnacion, . (Bk. IV,11.2194-2196) Consequently, i t is not surprising that he does not explore the possi-b i l i t i e s of rhyme any more than any other technical device. There are stanzas where the rhyme words have weight, but both the high proportion of feminine rhymes and the perfunctory use of.words like \"pis,\" 'ber-by,\" \"wyse\" and \"soo\" to complete a set lessens the general, im-pact. And, f i n a l l y , conventional line f i l l e r s , like \"schortly for to seye\" or \"myn auctour seith,\" and weak transitions, such as \"What schuld I lenger hyde now my mater\" or \"what schuld I lenger to 30W tale now make,\" are commonplace. For Capgrave, the requirements of metre which demanded their,use were only obstacles to be overcome, and he met these, as he did problems of rhyme, with perfunctory solutions that evince l i t t l e imagination. Examples have already been given of Capgrave's tendency to add lines merely to pad out a stanza; in a l l his poetry, there are more of these compentently composed but unin-spired stanzas than there are ones in which form and sense combine. The single measure of advance in metric s k i l l in the St. Katherine over the level of the St^ . Norbert is in the increased use of paired rhyming lines that function almost as heroic couplets. Even in this area, however, the advance is less the result of conscious artistry on Capgrave's part\u00E2\u0080\u0094though change and experience obviously figure\u00E2\u0080\u0094than of the exigencies of dialogue which is so prominent a characteristic of the St. Katherine. Before her debate with the p h i l -osophers begins, Katherine states her unshakeable commitment to Christ \"I wil neuere chaunge, wil I have l y f , I shal been evere to hym truwe spouse and wyf.\" (Bk. IV,11.1049-1050) In the next stanza, Maxentius sets out the inevitable consequence of her commitment, martyrdom: .180 \"Avise 30W of too thyngls whiche ye wil take; Eyther shal 3e deye, or youre lawe forsake.\" (Bk. .IV,11.1056-1057) In both debates, a high proportion of the speeches end in couplets in which the speaker summarizes his statement, demands an answer, or simply underscores rhetorically the conclusion of his argument. \"3e ber vs downn wyth 3our philosophye; But at be last 3e must bowe, hardylye.\" (Bk. .II ,.11.692-693) \"lat vs know pleynly, lady, what 36 mene;. We be 30ur,men, binkyth 3e be.our qwene.\" (Bk. 11,11.769-770) \"Thinke on othir bat haue abyden long, And at be last bei haue walked wrong.\" ' (Bk. II,11..909-910) Capgrave also uses rhymed lines effectively in the narrative portions of the S^ t. Katherine. Dozens of examples might be provided, but the following couplet, which reminds the reader of Katherine's situation and isolates the episode in which the. emperor exhorts the philosophers from the following day's debate, is especially interesting because, by bridging the two episodes, i t functions structurally as a.transitional link while at the same time it.prepares the reader for the narrative advancement which is to follow: ' Thus leue I hem s t i l l e in thoughtful besynesse, And Katarine, oure mayden, in presun and distresse. (Bk. IV,11.1014-1015) III This.is. not to make an exaggerated claim for Capgrave's sense of the fusion of form and meaning in his writing\u00E2\u0080\u0094that the various aspects of his technique can be so readily isolated militates against any such conclusion\u00E2\u0080\u0094however, i t is f a i r to say that even though the poetic quality of the ^ t . Katherine, like the 3^t_. Norbert, is no more than competent, he does.succeed, in his treatment of literary materials in the St. Katherine, in introducing elements,which distinguish i t from any other extant l i f e of the martyred virgin. Chief among his changes are the development of the heroine into a more r e a l i s t i c character, the humanizing of other conventional.figures, and the manipulation of the material of the debate scenes so that a logical sequence of argument is apparent, and the confusion or conversion of the Saint's adversaries becomes more believable. The greater length of Capgrave's work, of course, allows for an extended characterization impossible in the shorter compass of the legendaries. - Certainly, such passages as the description of Katherine's education (Bk. I, Chaps.6-7) or the cata-logue of her ancestors (Bk. I, Chaps.9-12)reflect his use of the traditions of :rhetorical amplification to emphasize the wisdom and nobility of the subject rather than any desire to motivate later actions; but Capgrave adds to the rhetorical nature of his source by his own researches in \"elde cronicles,\" and his changes go far beyond any mere prolix expansion of scenes. In the f i r s t place, Capgrave maps out the course of Katherine's conversion with preparatory,hints so that event, when i t occurs, is neither a sudden assumption nor merely a marvel. A brief comparison with other English versions which follow the native model and focus on the confrontation and climax w i l l confirm this generalization. In The-182 South English Legendary 7 the author states at line 2 that Katherine's parents were \"bobe of olde lawe,\" that i s , pagans, and without any further explanation he proceeds ( l . l l f f . ) to her confrontation of the emperor with attacks on the idols. Bokenham's version simplifies the problem by omitting any reference to her pagan heritage, inserting instead a passage on her natural inclination toward spi r i t u a l values and prayer (11.6404-6413). The same natural virtue i s emphasized-in Capgrave's Katherine, but he stresses her gradual perception of the meaning of her innate beliefs. Thus, a l l of Book I, Chapter 14 i s devoted to Katherine's good works and to the essential point of her perfection, despite her ignorance: Sche was a very seynt, truly, as I wene, bow sche wer not bapti3ed\u00E2\u0080\u0094 (11.803-804) Sche hauntyd holy werkys be steryng of be spryght, Whech made hyr of synne for to hafe fere And to loue vertu . . . (11.814-816) Most importantly, at the end of the chapter, Katherine, s t i l l a pagan, acknowledges her belief in an eternal ruler: \"ber is oon a-boue bat loketh on our face, And on a l l be membrys of our bodye; Iff he ony fowle dede may in vs aspye, He deynyth our seruyse\u00E2\u0080\u0094bis is my preue; Sey clerkys qwat pei wyll, pus I be-leue. \"ffor wele I wote, a-boue Iupiter and alle Is a mayster-rewler, & eterne he i s ; Vp-on ..pis wer Id qwat-so-euyr schall be-falle, . f f a l l e qwan i t schalle, he i s euyr in blysse. And bei bat loue.vertu, schall not wanti I-wysse, Neuyr his gode lordschep, he may, as i t i s skylle, Make goddes of men, qwan pat euyr he wylle.\" (Bk. 1,11.829-840). 183 As his chief subject in the Prologue of Book II, Capgrave takes Katherine's commendation of virginity in a country where this virtue i s unexampled and undesired by the people who are anxious.for a male con-. sort for their queen. He offers this hatred of the flesh as proof.that unknowingly Katherine was seeking Christ as her Lord: Alle poo [her holy acts] were tokenys pat her hert gan seke Here gostly spouse, sche lefte not t y l l sche fond That blyssyd lord. sche knowyth not 3it hys hand As sche schall aftyr, but sche haue tokenys gode; And a l l of god sche knowyth not 3it be rode; Sche knowyth not crist,..sche hath not herd his lore, But 3it be fyre of charite & of loue Brennyth in here, so bat eUer more & more Here hert i s sette on oon bat sytte a-boue. I trowe bat dowe be qwech vp-on cr i s t dide houe ' Whanne he was bapti3ed, had mad in hyr hys nest. (Bk.II, Prologue,11.10-20) Katherine's desire to preserve her chastity, then, becomes the basic, motive for her refusal to wed in the following debate with her lords,, though she never articulates the cause, preferring to refute their arguments. In the course of the.debate, she also defines the perfect spouse (Bk. 11,11.1402-1449), who is endowed with the following charac-t e r i s t i c s : \"wyth-oute pere\" (1.1403), \"stable\" (1.1405), omniscient (11.1408-1410), omnipotent (11.1415-1418), unequalled in wealth (11.1422-1424), generous in heart (11.1425-1428), \"fayr & amyable\" (1.1430), and \"eterne\" (1.1436). So clearly do these requisites of the perfect spouse parallel the attributes of Christ, which would have been instantly perceived by the medieval reader, familiar with the trans-ference of courtly love motifs to devotional poetry, that Capgrave, for once, omits his l i t e r a l explanation of the analogy.-184 In Book II, Katherine also makes two references to b i b l i c a l authorities; in each instance Capgrave ensures, by using Katherine's own direct statement, that his reader remembers that she is not yet a Christian. In her debate^ Katherine uses Nebuchadnezzar's treatment of Daniel as an example of how kings can be misled by the advice of their people, but she adds her own prayer that she might know Daniel's God (Bk. 11,1.524). A few lines later, defending books as preserves of past history, Katherine cites Genesis as one she has read \"on a eve\" (Bk. 11,1.543), and says: \"3et is pat book not of our be-leue Receyued as 3et\u00E2\u0080\u0094\". (Bk. 11,11.544-545) With these extensive developments of Katherine's.predisposition towards saintliness and suggestions that she is familiar with the Old Testament as history, Capgrave prepares the reader for the central book, the story of her conversion, baptism, and marriage to Christ; and he pre-pares for her future martyrdom in a way that no other early English version of the l i f e even approximates. In the early part of Book III, the same technique prevails. On the one.hand, Capgrave has Katherine express doubts about the central mysteries of the faith and ask anxious questions about the lady who sent the hermit (Bk. Ill,11.483-772); on the other, he reiterates that Christ has always been with her, and categorically states that the hermit who comes to instruct her is only an instrument. Moreover, by intruding statements on the striking effect that the hermit's words have on Katherine, he makes clear that her conversion is imminent. 185 Thus, before Adrian becomes involved in his explanation, Capgrave pointedly observes that . . . cryst had made hys horde Or bis ermyte cam, & leyd his grete tresour Ryght in hyr hert emprended f u l l sore; ffor P O W 3 he sent be ermyte as hys messanger, Or be ermyte cam cri s t hym-self was ther. Ryght as gabriell, whan he fro heuene was sent On-to our lady to do.bat hye massage, In to na3areth in forme of man he went, ffayr & fresch, & 3ong eke of age, But er that he cam on-to bis maydes cage, Cryst was ther, as we in bokes rede: Ryth so dyd he her, i f we wyll take hede. But bow3 god were come as ban to hyr hert, It was fer as 3et fro hyr knowlechyng. (Bk. 111,11.465-478) And he incidentally compares Adrian's appearance to the Annunciation in a way characteristic of the saint's l i f e . At one point in the encounter between Katherine and the hermit, midway between Adrian's statement that the immortal lord she seeks is with his virgin mother and Katherine's request for an explanation of the virgin birth, the semi-realistic expression of her emotions and doubts about Christianity and the conventional unquestioning acceptance are momentarily fused: Than was pis mayden sor marred in mynde\u00E2\u0080\u0094 Men myght se in hyr colour, in cheke & in pytte So ran hyr bloode, so changed hyr kynde\u00E2\u0080\u0094 ffor neuyr was sche or now put in pis wytte; Sche is in swech a trauns, wheyther sche stant or sytte Sche vote not hyr-selue, sche is in swech cas, ffor to sey a soth, sche wote not wher sche was. Betwyx too pingys so is sche newly f a l l e , Whech sche schall leue or whech she schall take. If sche leue hyr lawe whych hyr lordes alle 186 hold at pis tyme, & now i t forsake, f f a l l e to a newe for a straunge lordes sake, Sche seeth not what perell in pis mater i s . But for pe ermyte spake of pis lordes blys, hys wordes haue enclyned now f u l sor hyr powte pat sche schall haue a ping long desyred. A l l hyr goddys & hyr goode set sche at nowte, So sor is hyr hert wyth bis loue I-fyred, It schall no mor, sche cast, wyth be werld be myred. (Bk. 111,11.610-628) She is at once quite reasonably distressed and confused because the perfect lord she had described is offered to her by an unknown and i l l -attired man; less logically she is instantaneously inflamed, with love for this \"straunge lord.\" As the narrative moves forward to Katherine's marriage with Christ, the virtuous pagan is gradually replaced by the martyr, and the author's interest now l i e s in glorifying his saint's f i d e l i t y . As he has no further need to try to resolve her paganism and her per-fection, Capgrave reverts to a more conventional characterization of Katherine. His treatment of her at this point is not conventional in the sense that he ceases either to record the progression of her l i f e events or to elaborate the dialogue, or even to humanize Katherine by making her less strident than she is in the common portraits; rather, he becomes more conscious of her moral value, and her use as an example becomes more predominant. As most hpmilists and preachers made clear, an important reason for recounting the l i f e of any martyr was to point out how easy in comparison is the l i f e of most men and by this method to bring men to rectify their e v i l ways. To do.this, most.authors not only exaggerated the torments which the martyr endured, but they also 187 created less colourful scenes designed to exemplify the virtue.of the saint. At this point in Katherine's conversion, the hermit Adrian, long a servant of the Virgin Mary and a man who by undertaking the journey to Alexandria had earlier demonstrated his own,fidelity, is cast in the.role of a doubter so that Katherine can be magnified. Finding his c e l l gone,' Adrian laments, while the s t i l l unbaptized Katherine bids him trust in his lady. In case the reader should.miss the point, Capgrave gives Adrian an explanatory speech: \"3e hafe set 30ur trost hyer pan my-selue; Thow 3e be entered in to be feyth but a lyte, 3e wyll pace in schort tyme oper ten or twelue.\" (Bk. .111,11.855-858) Forewarned of her death by Mary, Katherine hesitates only once in the last two books of the poem. . When Maxentius orders death to those who refuse to adopt his pagan faith, Katherine's old servant suggests that she remain in the palace. Yet, although she immediately, thinks of her baptism and marriage, Katherine does not, as she would in any conventional portrait, promptly act: Thus walked she foorth softly than a-pace, f f u l sore astoyned what hir i s beste for to dob. (Bk. IV,11.497-498) Naturally, her hesitation i s only momentary, but i t i s one of the many. additional touches which Capgrave introduces that soften and humanize his portrait of the character Katherine. Elsewhere, he achieves the same end by eliminating the stridency from Katherine's voice so that the reader can accept that she made her f i n a l response to the emperor s t i l l \"with f u l mylde voys\" (Bk. V,1.1744). With a single exception, 188 Katherine's speeches in the last book are neither violent nor recrim-inatory. She makes statements of faith and consoles others about to be martyred while the narrator takes upon himself the role of judging Maxentius, and so of guiding the reader's view. He refers to the emperor as \"the tyraunt,\" and consistently describes his behaviour and demeanour as mad: Now was the,emperour, ny wod and oute of mynde, his eyne rolled as thei wolde f a l l e out. (Bk. V,11.155-156) Tho chaunged the.emperour.bothe word & chere (Bk. V,1.526) Thanne was be emperour ny wood for Ire (Bk. V,1.603) Very anger his herte now ny sleth (Bk. V,1.969) Soo was he with hir woordes now afrayde, What he shal doo now is he fallen in doute (Bk. V,11.1116-11117) In anger & wodness (Bk. V,1.1247) . . . oute of mesure wood ffor very anger he rente habyte & hood. (Bk.-V,11.1401,1403) in his anger and in his grete Ire (Bk. V, 1.1471) . . . the very malencoly Made hym so wode he wiste not what he sayde. (Bk. V,11.1601-1602) In describing the emperor, Capgrave also uses pejorative verbs and adjectives, such as \"he gloseth\" (Bk. V,1.335) or \"his male-corage & his euele entent\" (Bk. V,1.1705); and he colours his descriptions with 189 partisan phrases such as \"for his wykkydnesse\" (Bk. V,1.956) and \"with doubelnesse\" (Bk. V, 1.1002). There are dozens of others characters in the.poem, but when Katherine's opponents in the debates are excluded, the number who come in contact with her is sharply reduced. Four of the remainder\u00E2\u0080\u0094 Katherine's mother, the hermit.Adrian, Mary, and Christ\u00E2\u0080\u0094do not appear in the typical legendary version of the Katherine Legend or in any others in the English vernacular, since they belong to her youth, the marriage debate, and the conversion scenes of the f i r s t three books. Apart from amplification on her ancestry, and a few lines indirectly expressing her travail at Katherine's birth (Bk. 1,11.211-212) and her grief at her husband's death (Bk. 1,11.463-466), Queen Meliades is used exclusively.as a device of plot. She summons the parliament for Katherine's coronation (Bk. 1,1.512) and replies favourably to the people's request that her daughter marry (Bk. 1,11.974-1026), ordain-ing a second parliament for the purpose. Interestingly, she addresses Katherine only once, to berate her in the marriage debate (Bk. II, 11.1014-1029); after that she disappears even from mention u n t i l Mary informs Katherine in Book III (11.1473-1477) that her mother is dead. Katherine seems to have no f i l i a l feelings for Meliades, and the queen herself i s completely devoid of any peronalizing t r a i t s . From the details mentioned earlier, Adrian would seem to play a mechanical role in the poem. But, while there is no mystical rapture in his expositions of Christian doctrine, there are scenes unrelated to Katherine in which he is clearly conceived as an individual. One 190 example occurs in Book III, Chapter 2, where, walking on the seashore, bemoaning his incapacity to live so ascetic a l i f e as he had in the past, suddenly he i s called upon by the Virgin Mary to be her messenger. This passage confirms Capgrave's later statement that i t i s the virtue of Christ, not the words of Adrian, that move Katherine. The entire scene is rendered concretely; Adrian's opening prayer i s simple, devout, and sincere, and his approach to God forthright and direct: \"Now god,\" he seyd, \"bat sytthest hey in trone, ffor~3eue i t me bat I do not so weell As I was wone! my body i s cause a-lone, And not my soule, f u l sykyrly bis I feele; I may not wake ne fast neuyr a dele, I can no mor^-all bis defaute i s myne; If any goodenes haue I, lord bat is bin. \"Demene not me, lorde, aftyr my febyll myght, But aftyr [my] wylle, bat euyr desyreth in on Wyth blessed dedes to be a-lowed in be syte Of b i mercy! for bow3 my myght be gon, 3et is my soule as stable as any ston, And euyr schal be, as I can best deuyse, In b i drede & eke in b i seruyse.\" (Bk. 111,11.99-112) Adrian i s not a man with a mind and soul.able to unite with the divine mysteries, but one who wants only to serve God as he can. As such, he offers an example to the average man and once again proves, as Capgrave says in The Life of St. Norbert: A wonder bing i t is who God can,dispose To worchep a man pat semeth fu l orilikly As to our doom and eke fu l on-weldy. (11.2784-2786) His simplicity and devotion are enhanced by the language of the poem as Adrian, f a i l i n g to recognize the Virgin and abashed at his mistake^ begs her not to deny him her favour. His i n i t i a l reaction to the vision 191 is described in purely physical,terms, he is not febyll, he is no lenger seke, hys blode is come a-gen on-to hys cheke, hys eyne haue caute of new coumfort a lyght, hys body is 3onthyd, he pinketh hym-self f u l lygth. (Bk. Ill,11.. 123-126) Adrian's inexpressible emotional response is reduced, to the simple ob-servation, \"Thus merueylying be-twyx ioye & drede\" (Bk. 111,1.134). Adrian's refusal to accept the strange lady's commission demonstrates his singular adherence to his vow to cling to the eremitical,life: \"I haue made couenaunt euyr her to dwelle Whyl pat me lestys brethe, f.lesch'-&' f e l l e , Tyl ihesu wyll fecch me, bat was maydenys sone. Speke not ber-of, for i t may not be don!\" (Bk. 111,11.158-161) Mary herself refers to his dullness (Bk. 111,1.171), and later she makes clear that the words he speaks to Katherine w i l l be inspired by Christ (Bk. 111,11.330-333); but there is no derogation intended in this emphasis on Adrian's lack of wit. His slow perception reinforces his simple devotion and makes him a suitable instrument, while several passages affirm the fervour of his love. The f i r s t part of his prayer for Mary's forgiveness, for example, employs two rhetorical series to convey passion: 3e may well se my wytte.is komerous; 3our comyng was to me.so meruelous My wytt was goo pan, I sey 3ow veryly. My lordes moder, myn aduocate, my mary, And I her seruaunt, & euyr hath be & cast! (Bk. 111,11.249-253) Although neither Mary nor Christ are physically visualized, both are attended by excessive brightness and their presence is f e l t as real 192 beings. Mary's warm compassion is realized in human terms, not just in this scene with Adrian but throughout her later dealings with Katherine (Bk. 111,11.1002-1183: 1429-1493). The comparison with earthly relationships is stressed as Mary consistently refers to Katherine as her \"dowtyr\" and \"my sones wyffe.\" She not only arouses Katherine from her despair when she,is afraid to look on Christ's. face.and accompanies her in his presence; she also consoles Katherine when Christ informs her that she cannot see him until she is cleansed of sin. The scene in which Mary compares baptism to a prenuptial bathing shows the indecorum into which the one to one relationship of l i t e r a l and figurative levels occasionally degenerates: \"Beth not discomfortyd in no-maner weye Weyth my sones wordes! for, in sykyrnesse, 3e must to hys byddyng f u l buxumly obeye. It i s a goodely vsage, sothely to seye: Who schal be weddyd on-to duke or kynge, Be-for hyr weddyng to hafe a bathynge, \"ffor to mak hyr swete, for to make hyr elene\u00E2\u0080\u0094 Ellys myght sche renne in f u l grete offens. Be pis example on-to 30W I mene, Do 36 3our deuer, do 30ur dylygens ffor to plese 3our lorde! a-non goo we hens In to 3on chapell to 30ur baptistery; Aftyr 3our waschyng 3e schal be f u l l mery\" (Bk. 111,11.1066-1078) Mary herself :undresses Katherine for the christening ceremony, presents her to Christ as his bride, and gives her away at the marriage. The treatment of Christ is more d i f f i c u l t and more subtly han-dled. On three of the four occasions in which he appears in the poem, he is apprehended only on an abstract level. When he refuses to accept the unbaptized Katherine, an article of faith is being presented, and Capgrave makes this clear by his description of Christ's words as \"mysty\" (Bk. 111,1.1030). And in Book V, when Christ appears to.Kath-erine in prison (11.924-936) and answers her f i n a l prayer , (11.1860-1883), he is disembodied since his purpose is primarily to enunciate the efficacy of martyrdom. At the wedding, however, he is both King of Heaven and a real bridegroom. The actual events of the wedding, as he asks Katherine i f she w i l l marry him (Bk. 111,1.1231) and takes the. ring from Mary's hand to give to his bride (Bk. 111,11.1275-1276), are overbalanced by passages acknowledging his universal lordship and asserting the mystical significance of the ceremony; but their very presence in the poem.reflects the anthropomorphic conception of Christ, the l i t e r a l apprehension of allegory in the Middle Ages. The other three characters of importance are the tyrant Maxen-tius, his queen, and his favoured advisor, Porphiry. A l l appear in other versions, the emperor as the type of e v i l persecutor necessary to any tale of martyrdom, the other two as confidantes of the v i l l a i n who are nevertheless converted by his victim. Something has been said of Capgrave's treatment of Maxentius earlier,.but the portrait is not wholly unrelieved. The complexities introduced are perhaps more troublesome than helpful, however, and certainly Capgrave would not have been interested.in \"explaining\" Maxentius' motives. S t i l l , he is made more'than a vicious, bloodthirsty pagan. His avowal of love for Katherine, including his statement that he.recognizes his prior duty to his wife, gives a more 'human motive to his acts, credits him with a sense of honour, and even suggests that he is truly devoted to his 194 own gods: \"But loue haue,I on-to 3 0 W , sekirly, As to best of alle saue oon and no moo. [&] whi I doo soo i f 3e wil wete.why: Yowre beaute i t causeth 3oure connyngeke, pat I loue 30W so weel that, i f 3e wil consent And thuryfye to Iubiter omnypotent, \"3e shul haue honoure, no woman shal be liche. 0 swete virgyne, enclyne 30ur wil to me! 0 fayre visage of beute now most rich, 0 woman wurthi to Imperial degree, . 0 very merour of parfighte f e l i c i t e , Wolde god 3e knewe what care I haue for yow, And what behestes I made in myn avow! \"Whi wolde 3e despise oure goddis immortal? Whi wolde 3e calle hem.soo villenous a name? Why seyde 36 thei were feendes infernal?. Whi slaundre 36 soo her hooly;endued fame? \"Betwixe the queen and you shal be no distaunce But oonly this, because of oure spousayle: She must of me haue moredewe plesaunce,, The-loue Be-twixe vs, I trowe, shal neuere, fayle: (Bk. V,11.345-361; 393-396) Given this preparation and Katherine's continued,refusals, the,cruel death he orders for his wife immediately upon discovering her defection seems less the natural behaviour of the conventional tyrant than the, spontaneous response of a man harassed and betrayed, who feels his power to command crumbling. The reader's response to Maxentius is heightened by,his long lament when he discovers that.it is his beloved Porphiry who disobeyed his commands and buried the queen. Porphiry's words are \"a wounde/ On-to Maxcens-is. herte\" (Bk. V,11.1597-1598); and in his speech, Maxentius reveals genuine distress over his wife, a hope that he can 195 regain Porphiry as he so often tried to gain Katherine, and his belief in his own gods: \"0 me most wretched of alle men bat leue! Whereto brought nature me on-to lyf? Whi wolde she to me suche astate geue, Whanne she thus wretchedly hath taken my wyf? had she suffered me with a sharpe knyf Be steked in.my cradel, she-had doo be best! ffor now am I feued of my dewe reste.. \"ffor porphirie here, on whom I most trost, 0, porphiry now, the beste frende I haue, My good,porphirye, my gentel knyght, is lost, So disceyued of witchecraft bat gynne[th] to raue. Euene as the spokes resten in the naue, Soo in his breste stood a l my cpmforte; To swiche a-nother frend can I neuere resorte. \"He dysceyued my wyf, but she now is ded; he hath disceyued hym-self, that greueth me most. Myn herte is waxen as heuy as ony.leed, Soo am I cornered with thoughtis in my goost. Alias, my porphirye! I durste a made a boost: Though a l my kyngdam had me forsake, ffals to my croune no man shuld the make! \"Yet, though thou hast doon this grete despite, Disseyued my wyf and. disceyued thi-selue, Yet of pi treson thou shalt haue respyte; Ten dayes I graunte the or e l l i s twelue: Leue bat crysten company, forsake pat elue, Ihesu of na3areth\u00E2\u0080\u0094he dede neuere man good, he is cause of spillyng ofmekel gentel blood. \"If bou wilt leue bis newe cursed scole, Thou shalt haue grace bou shalt not deye. So wyse a man now made a foole! hoo caused the soo sone to reneye The holy relygion, the very true weye Whiche that oure faderis kepten with-oute mynde? Alias man, alias! thi reson is f u l blynde.\" (Bk. V,11.1604-1638) In the cases of :the Queen and Porphiry, individualization derives neither from such complication of character nor from detailed motivation 196 behind their conversions. Instead, both exhibit compassion\u00E2\u0080\u0094the.Queen for Katherine, Porphiry for both Katherine and the Queen. At the out-set, the Queen declares that she has long believed in Christianity (Bk. V,1.750), but fear of scorn (1.753) and.her husband's anger (11. 754-755) have prevented her conversion. Reports of Katherine's impris-onment and starvation meued the queen of very womanly pete To haue compassyon of these peynes alle (Bk. V,11.736-737) When she approaches Porphiry to gain access to Katherine, he too de-clares his sympathy for the woman he had seen defeat the philosophers: \"With this mater haue I ben sore torment; Me thenketh, grete wrong this lady suffreth heere, Soo horrybely bete[n], kepte fro mete and drynk, And she noon harm dooth,in no manere!\" (Bk. V,11.791-794) In the prison, the two visitors view Katherine surrounded by angels, and they are assured that these heavenly attendants w i l l prove the means of salvation for many others (Bk. V, 11.806-882). Though they leave, \"keepyng this mater al close in sylens\" (Bk. V,1.882), they have been strengthened by the sights and words, and when the opportunity comes each proves his virtue. However, while the conventional portrait of the saint demands that Katherine convert others, their stature as martyrs must be kept, subordinate to her own. Thus, neither the Queen nor Porphiry is intro-duced on Katherine's behalf when Maxentius returns, threatens her once again, and has the e v i l engine designed by Cursates built (Bk. V , l l . 946-1400). Instead, the Queen waits until 4000 more,pagans have been 197 destroyed in the angelic demolition of the Katherine-wheel and then attacks her husband on the grounds that he is foolish and cruel tp re-main obstinate and prideful when he has seen the might of the Christian God (Bk. V,11.1423-1449). Unlike Katherine, who is unmoved by tortures \u00E2\u0080\u0094 a conventional t r a i t of the saint which always reduces the modern reader's capacity for empathy\u00E2\u0080\u0094the Queen fears that pain may cause her to recant, and she begs Katherine to pray that she may endure the suffering: \"Prey eke for me that I may kepe alsoo \"The same good purpos whiche I am Inne, That this peyne horryble make me not reneye The 1awe of you cristen, for more ne'for mynne; I am soore a-feerde my flesh, er that I deye, ffor very dreed the contrarie shuld seye:\" (Bk. V,11.1498-1503) By the Queen's request, the focus is returned to Katherine and her speech (Bk. V,11.1507-1527) assuring the Queen that she is chosen and promising heavenly consolation. The issue here, as earlier when Katherine told,the condemned philosophers that the blood.they shed in martyrdom made baptism unnecessary (Bk. V,11.253-280) , is not to dem-onstrate the efficacy of the saint's intercession but rather to suggest that s t i l l on earth she is privy to God's ultimate judgment. In Porphiry's case, Katherine does not reappear after the prison scene, and he becomes, in effect, a weak echo of her actions. As she refused to be silent during the pagan ceremonies, so he confesses that he buried the Queen \"boldly with-outen fere\" (Bk. V,1.1568). And when the emperor discovers that the rest of his court has also been converted, 198 Porphiry asserts that he has been the prime mover: \"Men wil wene that thou be ny wood To sle th[is] puple thus sodeynly in her blood And lete me scape whiche stered hem a l l e . \" (Bk. V,ll.1677-1679) Finally, he assumes Katherine's role as a prophet of doom for Maxentius and comforter for those-about to be martyred (Bk. V,11.1680-1682). Here, in a digression, Capgrave shows again his understanding that the purpose, of the saints and martyrs is to provide i l l u s t r a t i v e examples to weaker souls: Thus seyde this man as I vndirstond To comforte hem pus er thei be deed; Be-cause thei were of visage heuy as leed, he was adred f u l soore bat thei shulde fayle If thei with-oute hym had goon to [bis] batayle. (Bk. V,11.1683-1687) IV Implicit in the:discussion of style and characterization in The Life of St. Katherine to this point i s the judgment that Book III, with i t s emphasis on Katherine's conversion\u00E2\u0080\u0094a feature unusual in shorter versions of the legend\u00E2\u0080\u0094is the narrative centre of the poem. Though Book I l l ' s position as the apex has perhaps been lost,sight of in the welter of detail already elaborated, i t s crucial positioning is rein-forced by,the symmetrical balance of the books which surround i t . Books I and V offer a logical, and obvious enough, frame for any saint's l i f e that details the early l i f e , conversion, and passion as the pre-eminent divisions. The presentation of popular themes of medieval disputations, treatises and literatures in conventional stylized debates in the two 199 books preceding and following the conversion, however, increases the impact of the conversion in quite another way. Not only do Books II and IV emphasize the consistency of Katherine's character both before and after conversion, they also, by their static settings, provide an interesting contrast with the splendid movement\u00E2\u0080\u0094from hermit's, c e l l to Alexandria, back to the c e l l and up to Heaven\u00E2\u0080\u0094in the central book. More important to this section, however, is Capgrave's careful structur-ing of the debates and the results achieved by this ordering of se-quences within the.lengthy arguments. Because the f i r s t debate has sixteen speakers and the second-twelve, and because Katherine is resolute, f i r s t in her virginity.and later in her Christianity, i t might easily be assumed that the scenes can.be l i t t l e more.than tedious and repetitious amplifications glorify-ing the saint. In fact, however, there is progression in both debate scenes, and i f Katherine is not quite so persuasive as Capgrave declares\u00E2\u0080\u0094 Of hir wit and of hir eloquens; Thei that now in presens am there. herde neuere be-fore swiche-maner sentens. She can alle thyng of very experiens. (Bk. IV,11.1633-1636) \u00E2\u0080\u0094there is nevertheless far more reasonable preparation for her success in confusing the lords at the end of Book II and converting the p h i l -osophers by the end of Book.IV than is apparent, in most medieval de-bates. Following his practice of establishing episodes by a clear del-ineation of setting, Capgrave sets the static stage for each debate in 200 such a way that, with the narrative links removed, the scene might easily be construed as a drama, in the limited sense, say, that the earliest Elizabethan plays can be so designated. The debates contain none of the subtleties of sophisticated drama; the.characters merely orate at one another in what amount to set sequential speeches\u00E2\u0080\u0094but even in the marriage debate the visual environment is not unlike that of a staged dramatization. The participants in the debate are intro-duced in the following lines: be lordes are gadred to-gedyr a l l in-fer. be lenghe of be halle f u l l y too hundyrd pace So was i t , certen, in wech pel gadered wer, Syttyng in her cownsell . . . (Bk. 11,11.100-103) Directions are provided both by expressions, such as \"Than rps a lord, a man of grete statur,/ A rych man . . .\".(Bk. 11,11.232-233), \"Than ros a r e a l l , a rych lord ber-wyth-alle\" (1.316), or \"he stode up pan\" (1.A50) and \"he stode.up tho\" (1.667); or by abbreviated reminders of : the other spectators: Euery man satt s t i l l e and held his pees To her pe spech, be tale whech bat he Be-gan to t e l l e ; for his auctorite Was boo f u l gret . . . (Bk. 11,11.570-573) Before the f i n a l appeal by the wise clerk whom the lords have chosen, Capgrave invents a.time lapse wherein the assembled peers disperse, consult, and reconvene: Qwan bei had sayd a l l bat euyr bei coude, bei went a-sundre & parted for a space; Comound her wyttys s t y l l , & no-ping lowde, Euyr [h]opyng & lokyng aftyr grace Of pis same mayde, i f pel i t myght purchase, 201 And at a day sette pei cam to-gedyr a-geyn, To haue an answer of hyr plat & pleyn. (Bk. 11,11.1261-1267) In fact, while this stanza and the next state l i t e r a l l y that the par-liament was adjourned, their effect i s more to imbue a motionless scene with action, foreshadowing the. conclusion of the debate and elevating this speaker with his scholastic arguments, than to dissipate the visual image of the formal session. The formality of the stage i s far greater in the second debate, for from the.outset Katherine is a prisoner at the bar, come not simply to reason with subjects whose advice she is not bound to take but to defend the true faith against an overlord who has power over her.physi-cally and to win souls to salvation. The stakes in this second debate are sufficiently high to generate a greater.interest in the conflict and the outcome; and Capgrave presents the tension of the situation by an implied contrast between the bustling mob and the stately assembly where the defenseless Katherine is isolated from her accusers: Now in the Citee, for to see this mayde, Gadered in-feere with noyse and rumo[u]r; . Euery man there after his connynge sayde: \"Now is come the day and eke the hour In whiche there shal f a l l e f u l grete honour On som party, or elles f u l grete shame.\" And be-cause this lady was of soo grete game, Euery man is besy to stoonde that tyme ny, That he myght heere and see a l bat was doo. The-emperour is sette, the lordes sit t e faste by The cle[r]kis eke were sette, be too and too; The may is sette in a sete also Right be hir-self for she is lefte allone. The emperour, sittyng al hy in his trone.' (Bk. IV,11.1254-1267) 202 Many of the directives in this scene are of the \"then rose\" category, but far more frequent are those which include a statement of the speaker's tone, f a c i a l expression, or mode of action: ffor very anger of colour.was he wan; with cryenge voys he f i l l e d tho the place, (Bk. IV,11.1405-1406) in haste . . . (Bk. IV,1.1492) Soo aferd was he neuere in a l his l y f Of no mater ne of no diuers cas Soo of this mater now he fesed was; But thus seyde he pan softly . . . (Bk. IV,11.1858-1861) The effect of these responsive directives is to emphasize the rashness. of the philosophers' attacks on Katherine and to put into severe r e l i e f her own poised motions and calm words: The mayde stood up, and wyth f u l good chere She crossed hir hed, hir mowth and hir brest; (Bk. IV,11.1317-1318) with moost goodly chere . . . (Bk. IV,1.1458) with sad avisement . . . (Bk. IV,1.1590) The way Capgrave creates variety in the formal atmospheres of the two dialogues can only.be seen by an examination of the arguments and demeanour of the different speakers and of Capgrave's responses to them. The arguments to be raised in the marriage debate are prepared for as early as Book,I, Chapter 8, with the consternation of the people at the death of the king (11.452-462), and they are advanced in Chapter 15, where three interwoven issues are outlined. Since Katherine 203 is too interested in her studies, she has not taken a lord, and there-fore the people have no leader for battles, and they are afraid the succession w i l l f a i l . Thus, marriage and lordship are combined at the outset, and i t remains for the individual speakers set against Kather-ine to develop the conventional points. The debate i t s e l f occupies 1420 lines divided into thirty-two chapters. It is commenced by a suitably servile address made by the unnamed lord who is,chosen as speaker (Bk. 11,11.112-154). The purpose of this opening address is simply to state the subject of the argument, namely, that Katherine's people wish her to leave her studies and marry. Apparently astonished, and acting as i f the whole matter.were only now brought to her attention, Katherine meditates on the problem of her vow of chastity (11.157-194) and then disembles, asking for delay, for the most obvious reason, \"I am but 3unge\" (1.211). Her contrived procrastination i s effectively and definitively countered by the next speaker, a man of rank and wealth enough to take the floor, but one also given to plain-dealing. Capgrave prepares for this speaker's bluntness of tone with the cautionary comment: hys wytte was not sufficient as in bis cas To speke in pis mater, ryth pus he bouth. (Bk. 11,11.236-237) He then allows the speaker to launch into an account of his personal financial losses, a direct attack.on the Queen's previous response\u00E2\u0080\u0094 \"We ar come'heder to her now your entent In bis mater, & 3e haske a-vysement.'\" (Bk. 11,11.244-245) \u00E2\u0080\u0094 a series of proverbs (11.250-258) to prove, \"In long a-bydyng is f u l 204 l y t y l prowe\" (1.248), and, after a disgusting description of the disem-bowling common in medieval warfare (11.267-271), a declaration that Katherine's people need a male ruler to lead them. The elementary nature of this speaker's arguments gives i t a logical priority at the commencement of, the debate; and the speech e l i c i t s from Katherine a response devoid of.crudity but equally direct. After a mere line and a half asserting that she is more injured than her people by the loss of her father, she argues that a captain could be chosen, as had been done in her father's time, and without equivocation she details punish-ments which her father could no more,perform alone than she can. Accordingly, a ris i n g - f a l l i n g current is introduced into the debate which by balancing two groups of speakers in the opposition against Katherine creates a secondary and more.subtle tension than would be. provided by the set speeches alone. With the third speaker, Clarus, Prince of Capodos, the compli-mentary tone of the opening address reappears, though the specific re-ferences to fealty are replaced by,acknowledgments of Katherine's wisdom (11.319-320, 358, 364) and beauty (11.344, 364). Clarus essentially reiterates the previous churl's argument, but he courteously disguises his charge of female weakness beneath the cloak of a natural distinc-tion between the sexes: \"Natur can not ne wyll not, parde, plante Myght & strength in women, for bei i t waunt; In stede of strength, of natur bei hafe beute.\" (Bk. 11,11.361-363) After making this generalization, he piously expresses the hope that Katherine w i l l produce many progeny. When he is finished, Katherine 205 replies in his own dignified vein, expressing her thanks for his con-cern and counsel. The very length of her reply\u00E2\u0080\u0094ten,stanzas as compared to the five she took to reply to the former speaker\u00E2\u0080\u0094reinforces the impression that Clarus is to be taken seriously. Nevertheless, i t is difficulty\u00C2\u00A9 believe that Capgrave intended no irony in her words when she says: \"I thank 30w^ syr; I sey not pat 3e raue, But wysely spek a l l pat 3e haue told, And for pis talkyng I am to 30W behold.\" (Bk. 11,11.383-385) Immediately afterward she charges him with exaggerating the case (11. 387-392) and with f a i l i n g to admit that her soldiers presently keep the peace as law officers punish criminals. A similar balance between argument and refutation continues in the next set. The \"erle of Iaff,\" \"Ananye,\" is not described as angry, but he is clearly aroused by Katherine's response to Clarus, for Cap-grave says,\"A3ens hyr answer he gan ryght-pus replye\" (1.451). More-over, Ananye omits the formalities and moves directly to what he believes to l i e at the.root of Katherine's obstinate refusal to comply \u00E2\u0080\u0094her constant devotion to her studies. To his mind books are value-less , \"\u00E2\u0080\u00A2. . . bei wyll not saue Neyther man ne best; bei dull a mann[y]s mende, Apeyr hys body, his eyne bei make blynde.\" (Bk. 11,11.467-469) and he wishes that whoever introduced Katherine to this foul course \"mote be hangyd\" (1.471). Katherine does not reciprocate with this kind of violence in her reply, but an abrupt and imperious tone 206 emerges when her answer is given without either narrative introduction or formal address\u00E2\u0080\u0094\"36 wold allgate bat I schuld wedded be . . .\". (1.464)\u00E2\u0080\u0094and.when she curtly informs him of the road.to a well-ordered kingdom: \"help 3e on your syde as I shal on myn! loke 36 be trewe on-to my crowne & me, let no treson in 30ur hertys lyn: Than schal bis lond.ful wele demened be.\" (Bk. 11,11.498-501) In addition, after her defense of,learning (11.534-560), she suggests that she is indeed unafraid to exercize her royal powers: \"Blame not swech ping pat stant in f u l l grete stede; Curse not my mayster, for pan wyll I be wroth! It semyth 30U bettir for to bydde 3our bede Than to sey swech wordes . . . .\". (Bk. 11,11.561-564) Taking another tack, the f i f t h speaker, Hercules of Paphon, returns to softer and more flattering tones. He not only brings the bookish Ovid as witness against Katherine's position, proving by him that the inevi-table should be accepted, but he also tries to make the \"medecyn\" more palatable by suggesting that since a husband could assume many of her duties, such as the \"progresses\" through the lands under her sway, she would have more free time for study. Again, compliments are returned in kind. Elaborately commending Hercules' knightly prowess (11.610-623), Katherine softens her quite logical refutation of his case on the grounds that no man can be in two places at once. Once more the failure of persuasion leads to an angry outburst, and the.\"duk of damaske,\" \"wroth\" with Katherine, takes his turn. The second and fourth speakers relied on blunt crudeness and violent 207 condemnation respectively to make their points; Damask's anger is res-trained, and, assuming the wisdom of age, he avows his loyalty to Katherine before reminding her of her oath to redress wrongs and de-claring that \"wher is no lorde, ber is no lawe\" (1.688): \"In my 3ong age, ryght thus dyd I l e r : be pupyll must nedys on-to pe kynge obeye, love hym & drede hym euyr t y l l bei deye, ffor bei ar bounde f u l l sor thus to dp; And we wyll euyr hertly bowe ber-too\" (Bk. 11,11.668-672) The Duke's brevity indicates his calm anger, and Katherine, in her even briefer response, maintains the.tone. Using the Duke's argument against him, she says that while she has no intention of disregarding her oath, i t is the sworn duty of the Duke to stop \"debate\" or up-risings. A clerk then seeks to meet Katherine on her own learned ground, thinking he has caught her in a logical contradiction because, though she has assured her people she wants proper governance for them, she s t i l l refuses to marry. Capgrave tries to establish the relative neutrality of his demeanour by pre-disposing the reader.to find care-ful reasoning in what is in fact a very simple argument: A Gret clerk poo stod up be hym-selue, bat was f f u l scharp in wytte, as I wene; In pis mater he thowte boo for to delue A l y t y l l depper . . . (Bk. 11,11.715-718) These lines clearly show the poet attempting to adjust the rationale of the debate; but the sense of,progression is also confirmed as.ele-ments of earlier arguments are s k i l l f u l l y fused. Here, a third 208 reference is made to Katherine's studies. The clerk neither condemns books outright as Ananye had done.nor, following Hercules' example, draws on classical authorities to disparage learning in women; instead, in a clever reversal of the usual clerk versus woman role, he suggests that reading Valerius' anti-feminist tracts has made Katherine fearful of marriage, when in fact, \"swech myschauns/ . . . is not pus in swech grete mageste\" (11.743-744). Again, Katherine's reply corresponds in length, and, f i t t i n g her words to the audience, she displays her command of the rhetorical vocab-ulary as she proceeds toward her assertion that she meant to choose a duke rather than a consort: \" . . . whech pat schuld lede 3OW, Not for to haue no (!) gouernauns vp-on me, But to my byddyng he must lowte & bowe. Thus schull 3e haue 30ur.wylle, & I schall haue myne;\" (Bk. 11,11.828-832) She mentiones \"termes\" five times (11.779, 807-808, 817, 824), and i n -sists upon precise meanings\u00E2\u0080\u0094\"vse my langage.stabyly & ferme\" (1.808). Further, she recognizes the misuse of rhetoric for she says, \"I vse treuly myn art\" (1.805); and twice she accuses the clerk of sophistry: \" l e t t be 30ur sophym! 30ur-termes ar but sour!, ffor thow 3e bryng forth alle 30ur hool bunch, 3e schall not make an elne of a vnch\" (Bk. 11,11.817-819) \"3our termes come owte of bat s o t y l l box . Of Aristoteles elenkes, made in swych wyse Who so lerned hem, he schall seme wyse.\" (Bk. 11,11.824-826) Finally, she gives an example of false logic: \"I sett cas a man hath 30ue to o^w a.best^ It folowyth not ber-of bat he 3aue 30W an ox; he may as weell paye be mor as be lest, he may chese to 3eue 30W a hors or a fox.\" (Bk. 11,11.820-823) This example of her s k i l l leads to the climax of the f i r s t part of the debate in the following brief exchange with the earl of Lyma-sones, who admits her wit and offers no additional argument, except to make the point that the lords would be restive unless their leader were both equal to her and superior to them. The last eight lines of Katherine's brief rejoinder indicate the f i n a l i t y of her rejection of a l l these arguments: \"Thus say I now & bus sayde I ere: \"I wyll abyde t y l l better tyme may come,. A 3ere or two, t y l l bat I,elder be; ffor to wedde 3it me thynk i t f u l l sone; And to 30ur gouernawns bus I demene me. Iff 36 lyst not to haue on, I graunt 30W two or thre, Whych men may gouerne wyth-owtyn enuye. I profyr 30W reson, what-so-euer 3e crye.\" (Bk. 11,11.868-875) This conclusion occurs midway in the range of sixteen speakers; and with her refusal of immediate marriage complete, the next stage is to remove the pretense and bring her to an explicit statement that she never intends to wed. The issue i s broached as the f i r s t speaker in the second half of the debate, the admiral of Alexander, asks, \"why hate 36 now bat i l k lady must haue?\" (1.884), before going on to give his practical argument against her single rule. From personal experience he has found 210 \"per is many a man & many dyuerse degre, Both cristen & hethen . . . I woote not sumtyme what i s best to doo, I dwelle her soo in swech-maner drede, I knowe not my frende whan I haue nede.\" (Bk. 11,11.899-903) While Katherine does not hesitate to answer either part, saying f i r s t that she has no taste for l o v e \u00E2\u0080\u0094 \"My wyttys, I te l l e 3 O U , no-ping besybeen l[n] swech mater, neythir to lust ne to lou e \u00E2\u0080\u0094 ffy on bo hertes bat euer on swech bing houe!\" (Bk. 11,11.913-915) \u00E2\u0080\u0094and then asserting that the admiral has only to exercise his power to establish peace in his realm, she has not yet denied categorically, the eventuality of marriage. That the time has now arrived for deeper probing is indicated by the conciliatory request made by the Queen's cousin, \"Ser clamadour . . . duke of Antioche,\" that since they cannot ascend to Katherine's level of wit, she should condescend to reveal her mind (11.938-959). This plainness reveals Capgrave's organization-al s k i l l , as does,his arrangement of the issues for debate so that at this point Katherine has no arguments to answer. S t i l l she proceeds by indirection a l i t t l e longer. The poem is never suspenseful, but Katherine's long philosophical dissertation on the nature of kingship (11.960-994) both advances her characterization and cushions the abruptness of her announcement that the subject i s for her exhausted: \"But for 36 wyll allgate know myn hert, Whath bat I thynk, I t e l l 30W platt & pleyn: per schall neuyr man, be he neuyr so smert No eke so st[r]ong, wynne me, bat is to seyn haue me to spowse\u00E2\u0080\u0094-I wyll no lenger.feyn\u00E2\u0080\u0094 But i f he be so strong hym-self a-lone bat he be able to fyght wyth a l l hys fone. \"Thys is be ende, & bis my wyll now i s , let vs no mor as in bis mater speke.\" (Bk. 11,11.995-1003) Since this passage so evidently foreshadows the description of Christ as the perfect lover which ends the debate and the book, the fi n a l sequence of speekers is used chiefly as a delaying device preparatory to the denouement. From this point the careful structuring disinte-grates markedly, though the apparently random nature of the remaining part of the debate may i t s e l f be seen as an integral part of the con-fusion generated among the assembly by Katherine's firm words and adamant position: Than was per woo & wayling eke enowe, bei morned alle & made mekyl mone Whan pat pei sey wher-to be mater drowe, (Bk. 11,11.1009-1011) The remainder of the debate is clearly anticlimactic. Other lords, grasping at straws and reiterating earlier arguments, are marshaled, but they speak without conviction. In rapid succession, Katherine's mother r a i l s against her error (11.1014-1029); her uncle inveighs against chastity using the familiar argument that Katherine herself would not have been born had her mother remained chaste (11. 1057-1085); Baldake merely repeats \"We want a leeder\" in his two-stanza address (11.1114-1127); the lord of Nichopolis returns to the theme that a ruler must have power as well as wit and that therefore the lords require a man to rule such as other nations have (11.1146-1169); f i n a l l y , the Duke of Athens appeals to Katherine's pride in. her noble blood, using a syllogism to suggest that she has betrayed her kind (11.1198-1225). 212 By a l l these arguments Katherine remains unmoved. Since she has no intention of agreeing to their demands, she makes no real effort to adduce counter-arguments. The only novelty in her replies occurs in Chapter 29, in which she argues that they would regret her choice i f i t f e l l to a weak or foolish man. Significantly, however, \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 a balancing of the two.halves of the debate is achieved. Just as Katherine had used her scholastic learning to undermine the arguments of the clerk in Chapter 14, now, in Chapter 31, she sets out logically to disprove the Duke of Athens' assertions. Again, she employs rhetorical terms and refutes the argument with naturalistic examples: \" . . . thow bat 3e be endewyd Wyth werdly wysdam & can a l l ping pleynly, So pat 3e may wyth no sophym be pursewyd: 3et to 30ur motyff answer pus may I, And voyd 30m: resoun well & pregnantly, \"Owte of a tre growyng dyuerse frute, And pat same tre pat sumetyme bar be grene, Now bereth he reed or qwyte, of dyuerse sute. Be bis example pleynly pus I mene: My modyr i s , & so am I, a qween, In.pis we a-cord; & pat I am a may, In pat we dyuerse, I can not ber-to sey nay. \"It semeth me pat lych a g r i f f am I, I-planted be god vp-on an elde stoke, Of an oper kynde, an othyr sauour hardyly; And euene as be miracle be elde blok, Wech is clouyn in four wyth many a knok, Schall rather folow be gryff, pan pe gryff hym, So faryth i t be me & be my elder kyn:\" (Bk. 11,11.1233-1253) This elaboration, like the earlier one; serves a useful narrative function by momentarily diverting the reader's attention in order to strengthen the impact of Katherine's f i n a l words: 213 \"ffarwell ffadyr, ffarwell modyr & eem, Whan bat her counsell is not profitable; I take swych l y f f e , I hope i s ferm & stabyll.\" (Bk. 11,11.1258-1260) Something has already been said of, the long, f i n a l exchange be-tween Katherine and the.wisest clerk which occupies Chapters 32 and 33. By offering four considerations which should encourage Katherine to marry\u00E2\u0080\u0094her \"bloode ; r y a l l , \" her \"beaute,\" her \"cunnyng,\" and her \"rychesse\"\u00E2\u0080\u0094the clerk establishes the basis for Katherine's descrip-tion of her only acceptable spouse, a definition which in turn prepares 18 for Katherine's mystical marriage to Christ in the central book. The question of the poetry has not figured prominently in this long discussion of the f i r s t debate primarily because.the quality of the verse is not a feature which distinguishes i t from dozens of other examples in medieval writing. Occasionally there are individual lines and images whose v i t a l i t y and aptness excite the reader, but these are not dominant. Rather, Capgrave's talent l i e s in his capacity to ex-ploit hidden possibilities- in his static material. With no real opportunity to alter Katherine herself or her adversaries, he manages to effect a subtle change in the presentation, transforming the debate in which two irreconcilable extremes are rigidly and repetitiously advanced into one in which the same two extremes are made more dynamic by simply varying the tones adopted by the speakers involved. Even though the characters cannot be described as r e a l i s t i c \u00E2\u0080\u0094 i n the sense that they have, any l i f e outside the particular scene\u00E2\u0080\u0094their speeches are appropriate to their station, and their words and rhetoric cannot be regarded as interchangeable. Within the circumscribed limits of each speaker, h i s words, behaviour, and ideas are presented with a con-sistency that necessitates a s t r u c t u r a l l y balanced and l o g i c a l r eply. The second debate i n The L i f e of St. Katherine, the t h e o l o g i c a l one with the philosophers, occurs i n the second h a l f of Book IV and occupies j u s t under 1100 l i n e s . This second debate i s considerably shorter than the f i r s t , but i t i s also\u00E2\u0080\u0094perhaps because i t i s shorter \u00E2\u0080\u0094much more c l o s e l y structured. The organization i s demonstrably t r i -p a r t i t e , each part co n s i s t i n g of encounters between Katherine and various of.the philosophers which culminate i n a statement of conver-19 sion. In t h i s debate, Capgrave seems to go w e l l beyond the a r t i f i -c i a l devices employed for p a r a l l e l i s m and balance i n Book I I , i n which the outcome of the narrative i s simply held o f f to provide a d d i t i o n a l elaboration to the debate scene. Again, as i n Book I I , although i t holds off the climax, the delay cannot have been intended to provide suspense since i n both,cases the end of the debate i s predetermined. In the standard treatments of Katherine's meeting with the philosophers, she-is brought before the t r i b u n a l and there expounds C h r i s t i a n doctrine so convincingly that despite the emperor's threats,. the astonished philosophers e i t h e r are converted immediately and 20 happily die a f i e r y death as they do in, Bokenham's version, or they are converted a f t e r putting at most one or two d o c t r i n a l questions as 21 i s the case with the legend i n the Katherine Group. Capgrave trans-forms t h i s standard debate scene into a f u l l - s c a l e t h e o l o g i c a l dispu-t a t i o n between Katherine and twelve i d e n t i f i e d ( f i v e named and seven anonymous) adversaries among the gathered assembly. The disputants 215 are divided into f o u r , d i s t i n c t groups, each of whom argue d o c t r i n a l issues with Katherine. To put the organization b r i e f l y , the debate i s divided into 26 chapters (19-44), Chapter 19 introduces the scene. In Chapters 20-26, Katherine debates with three philosophers, of whom only one, Astenes, i s named; Katherine's speeches occupy Chapters 22, 24, 26. Chapter 27 i s t r a n s i t i o n a l as one of the philosophers concedes and Katherine becomes by consensus (1*1653) the i n s t r u c t r e s s of the philosophers. In Chapters 28-31, Katherine answers queries put to her by two of the masters, and i n Chapter 32 occurs the f i r s t conversion, followed by Maxentius' attack,, Chapters 33-39 present the \"new motyf[s]\" of Appollymas, another master, and Alfragan, leading to the second conversion (Katherine speaks, i n Chapters 34, 36, 38). In Chapters 40-44, Katherine debates with Aryot, concluding with the t h i r d and f i n a l conversion. Schematically, then, there are three parts: Part I = Chapters 19-32 (with 27-31 t r a n s i t i o n a l ) ; Part II = Chapters 33-39; Part I I I = Chapters 40-44\u00E2\u0080\u0094the l a s t chapter i n each part ending i n a statement of,conversion. In Chapter.19, the assembly gathers and : Maxentius orders Katherine to \"Defende t h i f e i t h with a l the circumstaunce/ That bou can thenke\" (11,1292-1293). C r u c i a l to any such debate, of course, i s the ultimate purpose, which i s to convert the s a i n t , or at l e a s t to bring her to renounce her f a i t h ; so, on the urging of the f i r s t of the Council to speak, Amphos of Athene, who admonishes Katherine to. \"Sey ye goure groundes, and we shul puruay Answeris ther-too\u00E2\u0080\u009E or we goo [hens] t h i s day, We caste us sekyr newely you to conuay 216 On-to that feyth whiche 3e dede reneye Be wykked counsail. therfore f i r s t shal yee Speke in this mater, and than answer wee.\" (Bk. IV,11.1311-1316) she commences her defence in Chapter 20. As defender of the faith, , Katherine immediately seizes the i n i t i a t i v e from the philosophers, and within a few chapters the argument-counterargument procedure gives way to a question-answer technique in which she i s , in reality, giving the assembly elementary instruction in the Christian beliefs. Her dominance in the debate i s apparent in the fact that eleven of the 26 books belong exclusively to her; and, significantly, after her opening address, the f i r s t disputant, fearful that in the end she w i l l triumph, advises the emperor to stop the proceedings: \"Wherfore, s i r kyng, be war of hir offens, Suffre no[w] this lady, [no] lengere [for] to speke; These lewde foolkis that list e n with grete silens. With apparent resons she shal soone I-cheke, That fro her feith she shal soone hem breke\u00E2\u0080\u0094 Thei come neuere horn, though we wolde hem drawe. To suffre swiche prechouris i t i s agayn oure;lawe.\" (Bk. IV,11.1429-1435) Following her i n i t i a l statement, Katherine then debates with three of the pagan philosophers, and the early chapters are characterized by the strength of the pagan argument, which diminishes after the turn in Chapter 27. As a kind of collaborator with Katherine, Capgrave allows no direct attack upon the tenets of Christian belief, and the f i r s t re-spondent i s described as a madman: there stpd vp tho.a man. Of fers corage, though i t were wodnesse\u00E2\u0080\u0094 Maister astenes, sop thei called hym than; 217 ffor very anger of colour was he wan; with cryenge voys he f i l l e d tho the place, (Bk. IV,11.1402-1406) Only after this precautionary description does Capgrave.give this speaker leave to condemn Christianity as \"delirament\" (1.1421) or to cast doubts on the virgin birth and the resurrection. The second and third speakers defend the use of idols, as incentives to worship (11. 1494-1512) and discuss the pagan gods as symbols of the.eternal natural principles (11.1564-1589). Katherine has no d i f f i c u l t y in dismissing the arguments of all.three speakers, and, as in the earlier debate, an attempt is made to make her tone consonant with that of the individual adversary. She.makes a direct assault on the open blasphemy of the f i r s t speaker, without any attempt to convert him: \"Make no comparyson be-twyx 3our god and myn! ffor my god hath made al ping of nought, Eke your goddis arn not soo> goode as swyn\u00E2\u0080\u0094 Thei can no3t.grunten whan hem eyleth ought.\" (Bk. IV,11.1478-1481) While she makes insulting remarks about the morals of and the rites accorded to the pagan gods in her reply to the,second speaker (11. 1513-1554), she at least appeals to the philosopher's reason: \"3e pat ben wyse/ f f l e this foly, drede the hye Iustise!\" (11.1553-1554). In the third exchange, a neat balance is achieved by the speaker's i n -sistence on the philosophical grounds of pagan belief and by Katherine's rebuttal that the \"figures\" and\"colouris\" of his \"exposicions\" are precisely what has led them to \"wurshep the shadwe and leve the substauns\" (1.1616). 218 A further underlying motif in this part is the recurrent pre-diction of the conversion of the philosophers. Astenes' admonition to Maxentius has already been cited in this regard, but Capgrave inter-poses himself following the arguments of the second and third speakers, saying \"god wulde haue hym turned in this manere\" (Bk. IV,1.1490) of the second, and describing the reaction of the third to Katherine's argument: Oure blissed lord his herte gan tho bynde On-to his seruyse\u00E2\u0080\u0094therfore lete hym goo, Sitte and reste as for that tyme with wo! Thus shul thei stynte whan god wil.sey pees; Of alle wysdam he can soone relees. (Bk. IV,11.1557-1561) Chapter 27 i s plainly transitional,,for i t opens with another, philosopher asserting his belief in.Katherine's words, addressing his . colleagues to \"leue, felawes, now oure olde scole\" (1.1640), and.re-questing further instruction.... The assembled .philosophers - allagree. and Katherine is \"eke . . . as glad as thei\"'(1.1660): Thus is consented now a l l be cpmpanye; Thei wil lere of hir, bei sey plat and pleyne, ffor i t i s aboue al her phylosophie, What lord he i s pat made the wynd- and reyn. That there is swiche on, can thei weel [l]-seyn, But what he i s , or what is his name, This desire thei to lerne now of this dame. (Bk. IV,11.1653-1659) From this point, Katherine becomes essentially a Christian teacher, and the t r i a l aspect of the debate is virtually dropped. In Chapters 28-31, the argument-response technique continues but the two speakers, the \"Maister Princypal\" and another unidentified philosopher, are primarily seeking c l a r i f i c a t i o n when they ask Katherine to explain the 219 human and divine nature of Christ and to prove.her statements \"Be natural resons\" (1.1778). And in Chapter 32, Capgrave confirms the conversion that was f i r s t announced in Chapter 27: Whanne this answere was.youe thus to bis man, Eche man be-syde bat stood tho aboute f f u l merueylously chaunge thei be-gan. ffor thei bat cristen were, with-oute[n] doute, Whiche to the maumentis before-tyme dede loute, Now wayle bei soore with f u l grete repentauns, Demyng hem-self f u l worthi gret penauns; (Bk. IV,11.1821-1827) Because Capgrave might well have brought the debate to a con r elusion at this point, i t is pertinent, to inquire why he does not, especially since the fact that three separate \u00E2\u0080\u00A2conversions seem to take place, (in Chapters 27/32, 39, .44) could lead to a charge of inconsis-tency. Several reasons may be advanced for the structure that Capgrave imposes. F i r s t , i t must be emphasized that the conversions in.the debate are of two kinds\u00E2\u0080\u0094individual and collective. In Chapter 27, for example, when the master acknowledges his acceptance of Katherine's doctrines\u00E2\u0080\u0094\"I wil beleue now as bis lady demeth\" (1.1652)\u00E2\u0080\u0094his personal conversion leads only to the consent of the other philosophers that \"Thei wil lere of,hir\" (1.1654). In Chapter 32, when Capgrave announces the conversion,.there are at least two reservations to be made. The philosophers have been overwhelmed and silenced.by the force of Katherine's arguments, and, their stunned acceptance of Chris-tian doctrine \"putte pe puple in conceytes [ful] suspens\" (1.1838). Capgrave capitalizes at this point on the inherent drama of.the s i t -uation, for the pagan-spectators at this debate.have not yet been converted and neither, of course, has Maxentius, who immediately 220 shames the assembled philosophers,and exhorts them to \"pluk vp 30ure hertis, lete no3t oure lawe thus f a l l e , / lete not oure goddys suffre thus this wrong!\" (11.1849-1850). More.drastically, he warns them that i f they do, \"the moost part of yow shalle/ Er longe tyme be the nekke shul be hong\" (11.1851-1852); and his threats are sufficient to prompt the continuance of the debate in the second part, in which Appollymas, another master, and Alfragan advance their \"new mo tyf [ s ] . \" \" That fear of the emperor is the prime motivation of this second round of speakers is made clear by Capgrave's description of Appollymas: Soo aferd was he neuere in a l his lyf Of no mater ne of no diuers cas Soo as of this mater now he fesed was; But thus seyde he pan softly to the mayde: (Bk., IVj 11.1858-1861) None of the speakers in. Part-111 makes any attempt to argue the cause of the pagan gods; rather, they probe deeper the Christian God whom Katherine has presented with such eloquence. And, thus, although the form is retained, the tone of the debate is not. Each in turn i s separately converted to Katherine's faith: Appollymas: \"As 3e beleue, lady, soo beleue I\" (Bk. IV,1.1932) Alfragan: \"I can noo more, I wil turne to hyr feyth And leue myn olde, what ony man seyth\" (Bk. IV,11.2071-2072). The conversion of the middle speaker, though not specified, is obvious-ly to be-assumed; and the response among the assembly is unanimous: Thei cryed a l l concoursly with oo voys That thei consenten to his conclusyon, Oo god confesse thei . (Bk. IV,11.2080-2082) 221 Katherine's arguments\u00E2\u0080\u0094and.by implication the tenets of Christian doctrine\u00E2\u0080\u0094are substantial enough to overcome even Maxentius' threat of death. Thus, though Capgrave does not make the point specifically, Katherine, who has long ago accepted her condition, i s , by instructing the pagan philosophers, preparing them for eventual martyrdom. An interesting shift occurs in Chapter 39 following the conver-sion of Alfragan\u00E2\u0080\u0094the debate moves from the assembly of philosophers into the public arena. Their philosophers having apparently a l l capit-ulated, the people begin to dispute among themselves, f i r s t about the failure of their pagan masters to defeat Katherine, and then about the arguments which have led them to their defection from pagan belief. Maxentius, seeing his people \"despyse\" and \"spurne\" their own gods, once again explodes in wrath, and two fi n a l disputants take the stage. The f i r s t of these Capgrave dismisses peremptorily (probably depart-ing from his source) as having nothing new to offer. With Chapter 40, Aryot,.\"thorgh-oute that lande/ Most famous men noysed in pat tyme\" (11.2119-2120), launches the argument of the third and f i n a l part; and he i s obviously\u00E2\u0080\u00A2intended to be Katherine's most formidable adversary. Aryot i s the only speaker in the debate who establishes clear terms for the argument, and the alternatives he proposes foreshadow. Katherine's complete victory in the end: \"If i t soo be-falle bat I, with argumentis grete Or e l l i s with auctoryte, bat I may 30W leede ffrom a l l 30ure feyth and from 30ure fekel creede, Than haue we wonne; and if,that 3e led me, Thanne haue we doo, for victour are 3e.\" (Bk. IV,11.2138-2142) 222 Katherine and Aryot debate for four chapters the v i t a l issues of Christian doctrine\u00E2\u0080\u0094the dual nature of Christ, the virgin birth, the Trinity, and original sin. As in Part II, however, i t is not a con-f l i c t between two alternatives; pagan theology is presented only negatively and by implication. It i s Katherine's faith that must be defended, and this gives her an instant advantage over her adversary. At the end of their debate, Katherine triumphs, and \"Aryot stood s t i l l e as ony ston\" (1.2301). With his personal conversion, the conversion of the entire assembly, both philosophers and populace (though not,.of course, the king), is assured. . And i t is Aryot who, acknowledging that \"we haue gon wrong.euere on-to this day\" (1.2305), puts the question, \"This is my crede; felawes, what sey 3ee?\" (1.2317), to which Thei answerden a l l pat thei had now founde Thyng pat thei [had] sought alle her lif-dayes; This wil thei kepen now as a true grpunde, ffor thei haue walked many perillous wayes, With veyne argumentis iangelynge [euer] as Iayes; (Bk. IV,11.2318-2322) Their response is followed by a general expression of repentance and a prayer for forgiveness, at the conclusion of which Capgrave observes, \"Thus are thei conuerted; this conflicte i s I-doo\" (1.2339). Structurally, the second debate, though similar to the f i r s t , is more carefully controlled. The tripartite division, the paralleling of the three speakers in the f i r s t and second parts, and the three con-versions are neatly enough balanced to tempt an allegorical interpre- . tation (e.g., in terms of the Trinity); but, as has been shown, the organization almost certainly reflects Capgrave's preoccupation with the inherently dramatic aspects of the debate i t s e l f . By allowing 223 the several tensions.and conflicts in the narrative to determine his structure, Capgrave makes a successful fi c t i o n out of what would other-wise be l i t t l e more than a theological tract. He has in fact shaped his material to create certain effects which suggest at least conscious a r t i s t i c control. The total impact on the whole of The Life of St. Katherjne is to vi v i f y the character of Katherine herself. The.ideals of beauty, virtue, and learning that are Katherine's natural attributes are f o r t i f i e d by the wisdom which accompanies her apologetics and these a l l coalesce in this portrait of her as defender of the.faith. In con-verting the heathens, she doubtless strengthens her own convictions, and so is better prepared for the ordeals which l i e ahead. The debate with the philosophers, then, is central to Katherine's life-story, and, coupled with i t s counterpart in Book II, i t provides a f i t t i n g frame for the,conversion of Katherine that is the apex of the poem. V The Life of St. Katherine is Capgrave's last and longest poem. It i s also the most ambitious of his literary works in English. While i t does not seriously advance his rank as a poet, the St. Katherine is a more sophisticated and.polished work that The Life of St. Norbert, with which i t must inevitably be compared. Whereas the St. Norbert i s prosaic and episodic, the St. Katherine is carefully and climactically structured, and there is considerably more evidence of a conscious attempt to use poetic language, unimaginative though most of the figures of speech may be. Despite Capgrave's alterations, the St^. Norbert remains form-less, without a centre for the 37 breaks in the narrative. On the other, hand, the five books of the St. Katherine all.have.clearly defined themes, so that the structure at once orders the material and arranges i t in a dramatic sequence. The accounts of Katherine's studies and genealogy and of her debate with her lords in the f i r s t two books in -clude within them the motivation for the c r i s i s of the third, her mystical conversion to Christianity, and then\u00E2\u0080\u0094in a manner which re-sembles the movement of later tragedies\u00E2\u0080\u0094the theological debate of the fourth book delays the climax of the passion which occupies the last book. An attempt has been made to demonstrate how this organization, with the corresponding adjustments in the narrative that Capgrave was forced to make, affects the presentation of the story. Evidence has also been offered which clearly indicates that in the.St^. Katherine, Capgrave makes a much more li b e r a l adaptation of his source material than he does in the St. Norbert. And there is no doubt that, however fla t may be the characterization in the St. Katherine, the central character is more fully developed and realized on a,more human scale than i s Norbert. In fact, although she is not \"humanized,\" Katherine does.at times achieve a certain dynamic realism that makes her almost believable. The main source of accomplishment in the later poem, how-ever, is in the treatment of narrative conflict, in which not only dialogue but inner tension work to produce a fict i o n a l interest that overrides the didactic intention of Capgrave's retelling of the story. 225 It i s almost as i f Capgrave himself became more involved in his Kather-ine and sought to give her a life-dimension within a conventional con-text. This may account for the fu l l e r treatment accorded her, for not even the prose lives are as detailed and rounded as the S_t. Katherine. In part, the gradual development of the main character and the more dramatic subject matter are responsible for the greater psycho-logical interest of the St. Katherine. But,.in addition, the events are given an expressionistic impact which those of the St. Norbert do not have. The debates which demonstrate Katherine's gradual change from heathen princess to Christian martyr may be taken as objective correlatives for her internal struggles with the conflicting ideologies; and, similarly, the concrete portrayal of her marriage is an objecti-fication of her commitment to Christ. In the St. Norbert there i s no such relation of the event to the psychological contest. Norbert's recall to the l i f e God had ordained for him comes suddenly, without preparation, and thereafter he is a f l a t , unchanging character. If the reports of.miracles which are the basis for most of the poem are interesting to the modern reader, i t is because they show the agonizing effect of a.belief in the powers of the forces of e v i l on medieval men, not because they reveal anything about the saint in whose honour they are told. This argument s t i l l does not explain Capgrave's conscious,de-cision to write the ^ t . Katherine or the St_. Norbert in poetry, and no amount of speculation on this question has suggested f r u i t f u l avenues for pursuit. Not even the known or proffered sources provide a 226 satisfactory answer, for the source of the St^ . Norbert was certainly not a poem, and, though Capgrave is vague about the source of the St. Katherine, i t may well have been an a l l i t e r a t i v e prose l i f e . In electing to cast both works in rime royal, Capgrave was probably doing no more than.following contemporary examples; however, he.may perhaps have been consciously experimenting, not with literary forms per se, but to find new ways of presenting and popularizing the moral teachings of ;the church. In other words, he may have chosen the form for the same reasons that he decided to write his saints' lives in the vernac-ular. Or, the S_t. Norbert and the St_. Katherine may. represent early tendencies in Capgrave that gave way to a later exclusive concentration on prose, though in this regard i t should be remembered that he did not turn to the writing of English u n t i l his mid-forties. Whatever the explanation, i t is d i f f i c u l t to make value-judgments of Capgrave's poetic accomplishments. His poetic writings, like his later prose works, have a certain literary (as opposed to historical) interest as extant examples of medieval writing, but they are not great creative and imaginative literature.. At the end of Book IV in The Life of St. Katherine, Capgrave says, \"I loue no longe tale, euere hangynge in oon\" (1.2283). The St. Katherine is 8,624 lines in length, almost, equivalent to Paradise Lost. As such, i t presents a great many problems and a great many avenues for exploration that have not been pursued in this chapter. The ques-tions, that have been dealt with have been concentrated on because they a l l bear on aspects of. Capgrave's other writings in English which remain 227 to be considered. The Life of St. Katherine could easily, and perhaps should be the focus for a later and more thorough investigation. The St. Norbert and St. Katherine are linked as joint produc-tions from the f i r s t stage of Capgrave's English writings and as the two poetic saints' lives in an oeuvre containing two others in prose. In combination, they offer early examples of his use of the vernacular arid extensive specimens of his poetry. They also provide an interes-ting contrast with the two prose lives which follow them chronologi-cally and remain to be considered. In Capgrave's English writings, these two poems loom large, and they must figure prominently in any attempt to evaluate him as a writer. 228 Footnotes Internal references are to: John Capgrave, The Life of St. Katherine of Alexandria, E.E.T.S., O.S. 100, ed. C. Horstmann (London, 1893). For the f i r s t three books, this text includes the versions found in both Bodl. MS. Rawlinson 116 and BM. MS. Arundel 396, and the quotations have been cited from the former as the closer to Capgrave's dialect. For the last two books, only the text of Arundel 396 is given. 1Ed. M.S. Serjeantson, E.E.T.S., O.S. 206 (London, 1938). 2 See S. Moore's discussion of Bokenham's relations with his patrons in his a r t i c l e : \"Patrons of Letters in Norfolk and Suffolk, c. 1450,\" PMLA, XXVIII (1913). 3 Bokenham, p. 289. 4 John Bale, Scriptorum illustrium maioris Brytanniae, quam nunc Angliam ac Scotiam vocant catalogus, I (Basle, 1557), 582. ^Hippolyte Delehaye, The Legends of the Saints, trans. D. Attwater (London, 1962), p. 89. Francis Roth, The English Austin Friars, 1249-1538, I (New York, 1966), 192. 7As translated from the Greek by E. Einenkel in his edition of the 12th Century West-Midland Life of St. Katherine, E.E.T.S., O.S. 80 (London, 1884), v i i i . 8 For a discussion of the way i n which rhetorical techniques were applied to saints' lives, specifically to the lives of the martyrs, see Hippolyte Delehaye, Les Passions des Martyrs et les Genres Litteraires, 2nd ed. (Bruxelles, 1966). 9 Auvo Kurvinen, \"The Source of Capgrave's Life of St. Katherine of Alexandria,\" Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, LXI (1960), 278. ^ I b i d . , pp. 315-319. Following this logic, the attribution of certain deviations from the Vulgate (Standard Latin) version and from Staneborn to Capgrave himself becomes uncertain; they may just as well have been the work of his predecessor. U I b i d . , p. 324. 229 12 I reached this conclusion independently, but Theodor Wolpers agrees in his Die-englische Heiligenlegende des Mittelalters (Tubingen, 1964), pp.331-333. He emphasizes also Capgrave's distinction between \"oon arrek\" (1. 173), \"this arrek\" (1. 199) for the author of the Latin l i f e and the several uses of \"bis preest\" (11. 47,54,71,204) for the author of the English version. And he points out (p. 332, n. 17) that Arrek may well be the Arechis to whom an early Latin version i s attributed. 13 A catalogue of the lines and the investigation of this possibility are beyond the scope of this chapter. Also, much more would have to be determined about Capgrave's own dialect before an authoritative statement could be made. 1 4Bk. I: 11. 314-315, 335-336, 357, 378, 471, 528, 554-560, 567, 633, 685, 783, 1034, 1042. Bk. II: Prologue, 11. 1, 3, 4, 6, 29, 57, 70. Bk. I l l : 11. 22, 56, 384, 1013, 1502. Bk. IV: 11. 35-36, 68, 193, 374, 435, 838-839, 1092, 2286-2287. Bk. V: Prologue 11. 2, 3. ^For other examples of such pieces of wisdom see Bk. I: 11. 430-432, 510-511, 609, 817, 820. Bk. I l l : 11. 365-369, 873-875, 934-938, 978-980, 1186-1187, 1282-1295, 1303-1308, 1424-1428. Bk. IV: Prologue, 11. 1-42 and 11. 180-191, 1560-1561, 2293-2296. Bk. V: 11. 332-334, 835-838, 944-945, 1368-1373. ^ I n Bokenham, for example, a l l of the early material on Katherine's noble ancestry, great beauty, and knowledge is summed up in 41 lines (11. 6375-6415). 1 7Ed. C. d'Evelyn and A.J. M i l l , E.E.T.S., O.S. 236 (London, 1956), 533. 18 To compare the speakers here with the eleven in the Latin l i f e would enlarge the chapter to unacceptable proportions. In Kurvinen's a r t i c l e the speakers and their arguments are summarized (pp. 281-282). 19 This second debate has closer a f f i n i t i e s with the Staneborn version in the order and names of speakers as well as in the arguments adduced. Capgrave's early insertion of statements that certain people were converted and his whole structure make the f i n a l effect of the English and Latin version quite different. See Kurvinen (pp. 288-293). 20 There the debate i s reduced to Katherine's enunciation of Christian doctrine (11. 6748-6795), the emperor's anger at the silent philosophers (11. 6803-6807), and the confession of one, speaking for a l l , that they have been converted by Katherine's words (11. 6810-6825). In this instance after Katherine t e l l s of man's f a l l and redemption, she is questioned on the dual (God and man) nature of Christ and on his ignominious death before the conversion and martyrdom of the philosophers, (pp. 35-65). CHAPTER V THE LIFE OF ST. AUGUSTINE I In turning to prose saints' lives in 1451, Capgrave found a medium more compatible with his own natural inclinations :towards bio-graphy, theology, and moral instruction. His poetic lives are by no means insignificant examples of the genre, but the exigencies of rhyme and poetic decoration are foreign in many ways to the training he had undergone, to his interest in academic and theological issues, and to the l i t e r a l mind and austere character he seems to have possessed. The shift was fortuitous, too, for the discipline imposed as he adapted his Latin sources for a less educated audience in both The Life of St. Augustine and The Life of St. Gilbert reinforced the methods and principles which also control his last vernacular works. There are several reasons why Capgrave might be expected to choose the l i f e of St. Augustine of Hippo for a subject and why he was prepared to undertake i t . To begin with, his order claimed to descend from the saint's original monastic establishment in Africa, and i t s members were governed by a rule they believed he had provided.\"'' More-over, since Augustine is one of the four great Latin fathers of the church, his theological opinions, as they appear in his own works and as they influenced later scholastic commentators, were heavily impres-sed upon any student who followed the divinity course as Capgrave did. 232 But, while his experience thus equipped Capgrave to adapt and expand his materials, he was not \"meued\" to compose this work by his own de-sires but by the request of an unnamed woman\" who happened to be born on 2 Augustine's feast day. Because Augustine's influence is so pervasive, any material concerning him draws scholarly attention, and Capgrave's Life has been no exception. To date, however, the commentaries have been basically limited to the enumeration of contents and the identification of sources. In addition, since standard reference works do not yet correctly repre-sent Capgrave's bibliography, the old error describing the Life of St. Augustine as an original composition, begun by i t s E.E.T.S; editor Munro in 1910 and perpetuated by Gerrould in his history of the saint's 3 l i f e , i s retained in even the most recent general studies. One reason c r i t i c a l notice is minimal is that The Life of St. Augustine was virtually unknown un t i l i t passed to the British Museum 4 from private hands in 1902. In fact, although as early as 1748, Thomas Tanner had seen Capgrave's own reference to a vernacular l i f e while he was examining the Concordia and suggested that i t was related to Capgrave's other lost works dealing with Augustine and the Augustinians,\"* no other biographer mentions i t . Thirty-three years passed after the publication of Munro's edition before George Sanderlin and Rudolph Arbesmann separately and almost simultaneously identified Capgrave's source as Jordanus of Saxony's Vita S. Augustini. ' Certainly, the evidence of the parallel passages cited by Father Arbesmann seems conclusive, and, indeed, i t 233 is borne out by detailed analysis. It i s strange that the connection went so long unnoticed, for Jordanus was a prominent fourteenth century member of the Augustinian order, well-known for his executive a b i l i t y , often given responsible assignments, and an important author besides. 7 Although the Vita was not printed.until 1686, several of Jordanus' homiletic works are incunabula, and the basic reference for Augustinian history, his Liber Vitasfratrum, was in print in 1587/88. Perhaps those who had seen both versions,failed to perceive the relationship because Capgrave's Life begins with a prologue and five chapters which do not appear in the Vita S; Augustini. The possibility that leaves are missing from the opening of Jordanus' work is unlikely for the whole codex.Ideals with St. Augustine, his mother, arid his writings; and the complete manuscript (Codex de l'Arsenal 251, Paris) 8 is preserved in the author's own holograph. Therefore, the abrupt opening must be regarded as intentional; but, i f Arbesmann's conjec-ture that Jordanus prepared this collection as a preliminary to his 9 Vitasfratrum i s correct, his divergence from the model of the longer Latin saint's l i f e becomes explicable. Interested only in Augustine's literary and religious career, he ignores the saint's antecedents and birth and begins with the sixteen year old Augustine's desire for advanced rhetorical studies. Because this was not his purpose, Capgrave restored the early part of Augustine's -history. Well-acquainted with -available materials, Jordanus relied on three lives by Possidius, D/'Harvengt, and'Dacius which he considered trustworthy in addition to a number of genuine and spurious works 234 attributed to Augustine.\"^ The careful selection and balance of materials evident in the Vita S. Augustini reveal that Jordanus and Capgrave were alike in their historical and concrete turn of mind as well as in education and career. In Jordanus' case, both the pedagog-i c a l technique of the divinity schools and the historian's desire for accuracy lay behind the identification of\" sources in phrases opening with Latin tags such as hec ipse or ut_ ipse; but the consistency of their use, like Capgrave's constant refusal to commit himself on uncertain.issues, gives the piece a tone of-detachment. This suggest-ion of a-temperamental similarity between the two authors i s increased by Jordanus' clear decision to omit or abbreviate descriptions of Augustine's philosophical and emotional struggles. Similarly, though here as elsewhere he is ready.to add physical details, Capgrave tends to excise l y r i c a l and abstract expressions. There is more than one explanation possible for Capgrave's acquaintance with Jordanus' work. From the point of view of neatness, i t is attractive to adopt Arbesmann's suggestion that Capgrave paused at the Paris convent during his journey to Rome and either made his translation of the Vita then or procured a copy to take with him. It is equally l i k e l y , however, that transcriptions were made and dissem-inated as Jordanus had requested^ during the hundred and thirty years which separate the two'versions. Indeed, other copies of the Vita do 12 exist, and many French f r i a r s who could have brought manuscripts 13 with them came to the Oxford and Cambridge studia generalia. 235 The second alternative has as a corollary, of course, the pos-s i b i l i t y that Capgrave's f i r s t five chapters may be the work of some unknown intermediary; Furthermore^ as his treatment of his source for The Life of St. Gilbert vividly demonstrates, i t was not Capgrave's habit to make major rearrangements of the material he was translating. He added commentaries and omitted passages, but he seldom altered the sequence of the narrative. : Thus, the division of the material into chapters with descriptive headings, and the fact that five of the chapters do not even correspond with the beginnings of new paragraphs in the Vita lend circumstantial weight to the theory that the trans-14 mission was not direct. Nevertheless, apart from the addition of the five new i n i t i a l chapters giving an account of Augustine's~ birthplace, parentage and early schooling, and two later ones (12 and 24), a l l mainly derived from the Confessions, the Latin and English versions.are basically congruent. Chapters six, seven and eight concern his studies in Carthage and his nine-year adherence to the Manichean heresy; and chapters nine to twenty-four narrate the events of Augustine's sojourn in Italy, his reputation as a rhetorician, his conversion, his f i r s t compositions, and his decision to return to Africa. Of the remainder, three (26, 41, and 42) describe Augustine's writings; five (36-40), his characteristic behaviour and demeanour; and thirteen continue the biography with the institution of the various monasteries, his advance-ment to the episcopacy, andj f i n a l l y , his death during the Vandalic invasions. 236 II Such differences as the physical division of the contents and the inclusion of seven new chapters can be seen on the surface, but close analysis also reveals a wide range of minor deviations ;and alter-ations which change the direction of the work. The fact that the primary audience was a woman, educated enough to read the vernacular but not even a member of a.religious community, gave Capgrave further reason to remove the scholarly apparatus. He would have regarded the citation of secondary sources as irrelevant to her education and his own purpose. Therefore, while Capgrave retains many of the references to Augustine's\" own works, he excises a l l those to Ppssidius and the Legenda Famosa along with the hec i b i ipse tags following quotations from Augustine's sermons.\"''*' There is only a single inconsistency in his practice;\"\"\"^ otherwise, apart from occasions where he inserts his own notes from Augustine's work, there are only five pieces of docu-mentation not found in the Latin. Moreover, as these additions cite Gregory's Dialogues, the Psalms and the Pauline epistles,\"'\"7 a l l well-known in the middle ages, they suggest an author working to increase his audience's sense of familiarity with the material. Similarly, where Jordanus gives the t i t l e s of several sermons or quotes Augustine's works to document his generalizations, Capgrave often reduces the number of examples or makes a summary comment. In 18 most instances, only one or two sentences disappear, and the one long omission of this kind shows Capgrave c r i t i c a l l y choosing to avoid 237 repetition. In place of more than three pages,(p. 54,1.2 - p. 57,1.19) f i l l e d with Augustine's ownystatements concerning the establishment of his three monasteries, a l l of which repeat details recorded earlier in the Vita from the chronicler's reports,'Capgrave's Life has only: Many pingis myth we plant in here, who bat he loued bettyr be felauchip of be heremites pan of be prestis in be cathedral cherch, and what grucching be same prestis made a-geyn bis affecciori, but a l l bis^ I ley be-side and w i l procede to pe opir part of his l i f . (p. 44,1.35 - p. 45,1.4) before returning to the narrative. If Capgrave's sensitivity to the needs of his audience i s a reasonable explanation for these two large groups of excisions, i t probably also accounts for most of the additions he makes. A l l these elaborations tend to deflect the main course of the narrative, but be-fore examining the precedents for such disruptions, their various forms must be examined. In a l l his works Capgrave digresses to define ecclesiastical terms'; here he also interrupts the narrative to define the contents of Augustine's works, to explain the beliefs of various heretical groups, and, indeed, to insert asides who pertinence is not always immediately clear. Certainly, Jordanus would not have f e l t such elaborations necessary, for he made his collection while resident in one of the order's studia generalia and intended i t for his own later use and for his fellow f r i a r s , most of whom underwent intensive theological train-ing and were, therefore, familiar not only with technical terms but also with the subject matter of the major' theologians' works. However, Capgrave's less-educated audience would not have found the mere 238 translation of'Latin terms\" and the catalogues of writings into English illuminating. Thus, i f he'wished these portions to be instructive, as he so obviously did, Capgrave had to elaborate. A l l of the examples show that Capgrave intended his definitions to be objective; they never become:speculative or abstract. However, his concreteness was not the result of his natural proclivity for the l i t e r a l alone. F i r s t , Capgrave apparently thought that description of philosophical arguments would have been inappropriate, for when he mentions Augustine's \"pe quantite of pe soule,\" he says \" s o t i l binggis ar touched whech long' not to bis maner of wryting pat is cleped narratyf\" (p. 31,11.19-20). A similar, though less explicit statement occurs several pages earlier: \"Meeh mor ping i s touchid in pis book, speciali of be knowlech of God, whech ping as now we may not declar\" (p. 24,11.14-15). Moreover, he believed that i t was dangerous to expose the unlearned to heretical opinions which they might not be able to combat. When he f i r s t refers to the Manichees, for example, he says, \"Many mo heresies held bei whech were f u l perilous to be rehersed, specialy in our tonge\" (p. 9,11.32-33),. Such a fear was,: common, and for Capgrave i t was reinforced by the many attempts to suppress Lollardry in his time.^. In addition to these more general issues, of course, Capgrave had the particular needs of his patroness as a guide. Her desire to have a translation of the Vita attests to her piety, but i t also suggests that she would'not\" have been\" familiar with the details Capgrave explains. Moreover, theological questions were not the 239 usual concern of a mid-fifteenth century \"gentill woman\"; she need only accept and\" adhere to the orthodox views. Therefore, not feeling that he had any reason to argue or\" explain philosophy, Capgrave simply, stated errors and gave summaries of undefined terms. The clearest cases of explanatory elaboration involve simple definitions. There are only two in The Life of St. Augustine; \"cathecume\": . . . a cathecume is as mech to seye as a newe receyuour of pe feith, for in elde tyme men had certeyn dayes assined be-twix her conuercion and here baptem pat pei myth lerne wel pe articules of our feith or pei wer bounde berto. And.so schuld men do now, as I suppose', i f pei schuld be bapti3ed as pat age. (p. 9,11.1-5) and \"fluctuaciori\": Fluctuacibn calle we her whan a man is broute fro an euel entent, and 3et be same man stand in study wheithir he schal' to be good wey or nowt. In' pis plit h stood our Austyn. . (p. 16,11.20-22) Interestingly, neither is the mere exegetical interruption that those in The Life of St. Gilbert are. Instead, the f i n a l sentence of each digression serves to reintegrate the commentary.into the main flow of the narrative, in the f i r s t instance by relating the event to the reader; in the second, by drawing attention to Augustine again. Simi-la r l y , when he expands the reference to Ambrose's sermon on the incarnation, Capgrave includes a definition but makes i t subordinate to the theological principle; \"who pat for pe special loue whech he had to mankynde he disdeyned not to take pe flesch and blood of man with a l l be infirmites, saue synne\"(p,'15,11.9-12). 240 The expansions associated with the t i t l e s of Augustine's works are much like the definitions. Thoughhis alterations are not consis-tent with any discernible principles,~Capgrave seldom uses a t i t l e , without additional commentary. Apart from the Latin sermons, which he apparently regarded as a group and\" whose incipits he seldom translates, Capgrave either gives only a Latin or- an English t i t l e followed by a brief comment or he gives both and furnishes a longer note. When the Latin alone appears, the summary of the subject which follows i s , in fact, no more than a free and enlarged translation of 21 the. t i t l e . Nevertheless, in doing so, Capgrave does provide his lay 22 reader with important information. On the other hand, Capgrave's additions are less integral to the subject when he uses only English. Possibly a lay person would not know that the Sermon on the Mount contained the Pater Noster, and Capgrave's expansion (p. 42,11.18-20) is not mere prolixity. However, his remarks on \"of musik\" (p. 35,11.2-14), \"of be quantite of pe soule\" (p. 31,11.17-20), and \"of pe Trinite\" (p. 56,11.3-7)\u00E2\u0080\u0094-interesting though they are as asides on literature and education\u00E2\u0080\u0094are not connected with the main direction 23 or intention of the narrative. Precisely the same\u00E2\u0080\u00A2distinction between the extraneous and the significant must also be,made for his comments on the third group of t i t l e s , those containing both the Latin and an English translation. In every case, of course, the l i t e r a l translation is useful, but only one of the additions is pertinent per se. Moreover, the kinds of i r r e l e -vance vary. For example, since De_ Pulchro et Apto was already lost in 241 Augustine's time, Capgrave.did not know i t , and he could only elaborate by rationalizing the loss . . . his bokes whech he mad a f t i r he was cristen be more in deynte ban boo whech he mad be-fore. (p. 12,11.12-13) 24 Similarly, he had not seen De Achademicis, and so he used the assumed derivation of the t i t l e for the centre of his development (p. 23,11,24-29). On the other hand, though he had more knowledge of the three works in this group which are related to the two major themes of this version of Augustine's l i f e , his activities as a defender of the faith against heretics and his role' in the establishment of religious orders, Capgrave did not markedly change his treatment. Only with De Libero Arbitrio where he notes the Manichean belief in co-eternal principles of good and e v i l does he focus on a primary issue. In the case of De Moribus Manicheorum e_t De Mo rib us Ecclesie Catholici, he discusses the licentiousness of the' heretics' (p. 31,11.12-15), and his addition to Jordanus' description of' De Opere Monachorum is a purely digressive account of.the altered meaning of the word \"monk\" (p. 54,1.26 -p. 55,1,7), The same lack: of a concern for absolute relevance seems to prevail in other additions. Some, like the brief statements on the 25 opinions of the Arian, Donatist, Pelagian, and Manichean heretics are not objectionable, for - combatting such opinions was Augustine's concern; some, like the l i s t of Roman gods'\"(p.~ 56,1.12) , are too brief to be disruptive; others, however, like the pause to give the etymology and 242 location of Hostie (p. 31,11.31-33) and the passages on the origin of the Barbarian tribes (p. 58,11.18-27) or Carthage's importance as a trading city (p. 34,11.5-8), are by length alone too prominent to be read over or dismissed. The reason for what seems an undisciplined and irrational style on the surface begins to become apparent in the examination of the remaining short explanatory additions. Capgrave's constant aim is to cl a r i f y the meaning of his source. Thus, he stops to make certain that the,importance of an event i s not overlooked and that i t is correctly interpreted, either to clear up a possible ambiguity before a question arises, or simply to make details more precise. In the f i r s t category, for example, where Jordanus is satisfied to report the circumstances of Augustine's moves to Rome and Milan, Capgrave adds passages to show that God's providence, not fate, lay behind the decision (p. 13,11.19-21; p. 14,1.27). Similarly, he explains why Augustine used notaries when he debated with heretics (p. 42,11.3-5), why Faustus was called to argue with Augustine (p. 12,11.16-25), why God allowed Augustine to suffer illness (p. 25,11.2-3), and why Ambrose composed hymns (p. 27,11.10-16). Occasionally, too, Capgrave foresees possible ambiguities and seeks to forestall them. Thus, because there might be some question about Augustine's right to make his f i r s t monastic establishment when he was not yet in holy orders himselfy Capgrave states (p. 34,11.23-25) that some of the hermits Augustine brought to Africa with him were priests. Later, when Jordanus'notes that the hermits were permitted 243 to preach and receive confession,\" Capgrave,' perhaps mindful of charges of abuse in his own time, adds \"not a l l e , but boo whech were lerned in 26 diuinite and custumablely vsed in good l y f \" (p. 41,11.10-11). Finally, Capgrave lengthens certain passages in order to make the stages of a process more clear or to make details more precise. Thus, for example, following the attribution of the Te Deum jointly to Ambrose and Augustine, Capgrave explains, \"Ambrose be-gan be f i r s t vers, and Augustin be secund, and bus bei said i t to anende\" (p. 25,11.35-36). On many other occasions, the extra detail is only a clarifying phrase. Thus, when Jordanus refers to Augustine's desire to leave his school and notes that i t i s f a l l , Capgrave adds \"whan skole i s wone'to cese.\" (p. 23,1.11); so, too, though the seven psalms which Augustine reads constantly while he awaits death would obviously be the penitential psalms, leaving no room for error, Capgrave says, \"poo same whech we rede with be Letanye\" (p. 60,11.4-5). Before any positive statement of.some principle governing Capgrave's composition is made, one further substantial group.of additions must be taken into account. Since a l l of these involve en-larged descriptions of\" other figures in the L i f e , i t i s tempting to credit Capgrave with a desire to humanize his central figure by making his associates more vivid. Such a conclusion would, howeverdistort the quality of Capgrave's work in favour of modern standards of realism in characterization unknown to him' and\" directly opposed not only to his own aim but to the general' purpose of~ the genre. Even allowing that the portrait of St. Augustine s t i l l f a i l s to achieve more than two 244 dimensions after a l l of Capgrave!s changes, i t can be shown that the new statements are directed outwards t o - instruct the reader rather than inwards to reflect facets of Augustine's character. When Capgrave unites Simplician and Ambrose, the bishop of Milan, Augustine's two chief guides through his conversion, by adding that the bishop both supported' the hermit during his l i f e (p. 19,1.1) and chose him as his successor (p. 19,11.3-5), he is interested not in their relationship to Augustine but in them as further examples of the holy l i f e , and his purpose here i s consistent with the other additions he makes when they are' mentioned. His method' is similar when he elaborates on the activities of Augustine's various contemporaries who were closely associated with him. When' he describes Pbncian's v i s i t to Alipius and Augustine, Capgrave propounds\" a general moral precept-\u00E2\u0080\u0094\"cam on-to.hem to se her welfar, as be maner of men is whech he bore in straunge cuntre and dwelle fer fro hom\" (p. 20,11.2-3)\u00E2\u0080\u0094instead of elaborating the character presented. Moreover, the lengthy passages on Alipius' seizure for theft (p. 17, 1.20 - p. 18,1.24) and'Vitalis' discovery of a bag of gold (p. 30,11.5-27) neither provide insight into personality nor relate to the main themes of the Life, Capgrave says the purpose of the f i r s t event was \"for to lerne him whech schuld be aftirward a iuge of mennes soules in be cherch\" bat he schuld not deme ouyr sone of signes outward\" (p. 18,11.22.-24), and\" of the second to teach \"What-so-euer bou fyndist and gyuyst not a-geyn,'bou s t e l i s t \" (p. 30,11.26-27). Coming as they do at the end of the incidents, these are certainly statements of ethical principles to the; reader' rather than relevant 245 comments on the characters concerned. This didactic tone which was not present in Jordanus' work i s even more emphatically revealed: i n Capgrave's last major series of changes\u00E2\u0080\u0094the elevation to prominence of Augustine's mother, Monica. The alterations are so many and so thoroughgoing that there can be no doubt that they were intended to increase Monica's role; and i t may well be that Capgrave set out to provide a figure with whom his patroness could identify. What Monica becomes is.an ideal of resolute piety in feminine form, and the traits Capgrave chooses to enlarge from the basic portrait are her grief for her son when he is in a degenerate state, her joy at his conversion, and her own deep and abiding faith. In those early chapters which have no parallel in Jordanus' Vita, Capgrave fixes the characterization; and no elements enter later to alter or complicate i t . In chapter two he says, . . . sche was a cristen woman fro hir childhold, and norchid in be best condiciones and most plesaunt to God and to man. (p. 4,11.20-22) and the major portion of the third chapter i s devoted both to the good effects which the \"governauns\" and \"moderacion\" naturally found in such a woman have* on her husband, other local matrons, and her mother-in-law and also to her desire to see her children become good Christians. It is this last aspect, chiefly manifested in her concern for Augus.tine, that Capgrave intensifies in later chapters. To obtain his ends, Capgrave either expands with additional details and direct speech while excising Jordanus' more generalized statements, isolates Monica by placing her activities in separate 246 chapters, or combines these two methods. Often the elaborations.them-selves seem slight but the change in tone is marked. For example, in the description of Augustine's .riotous behaviour during his student, days in Carthage, both the Latin and English lines contrast the responses of his parents. However, whereas Jordanus notes that Augustine dismissed his mother's admonitions as those of an old woman, at i l l e matris monita quasi :anicularia reputans (p. 15,11.8-9), Capgrave ignores this denigration and instead emphasizes Monica's own feelings as she rebukes her son \"with f u l sad countenauns\" (p. 8,1.29). So, too, the changes in the account of her daily devotions after - Augustine deceives her and leaves for Rome, though they amount only to a spelling out of ideas implicit in the- Latin, place greater stress on the fact that all.her actions are directed towards procuring the spiritual well-t, \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 * u 27 being of her son. Though the relationship between mother and son is obviously assumed to be a close one, i t is never Monica's emotions which Capgrave develops. Instead,-he demonstrates her natural wisdom and' acceptance. For Jordanus, De Beata Vita is a scholastic topic separated from his immediate subject, and'he summarizes the discussion in the phrase et tandem diffinitum est inter eos quod beata uita non n i s i in dei cognicione.consistit : (p. 29,11.10-11). Capgrave,-on the. other hand, not only corrects the reported definition in accordance with Augustine's actual words in his book\u00E2\u0080\u0094\"All be cumpany saue his moder saide i t is a blessed lyf a man for to haue a l l pat he desireth\" (p. 24,11.10-11); he also adds Monica's pious-amendment, \"he hath a blessed lyf whech hath 247 al pat he desirith and eke pat he desire no-ping but good ping\" (p. 24,11.12-14). Her own belief in this premise is expressed in the short addition to the beginning of Chapter 21. There Jordanus reports only that Monica was the cause of Augustine's decision to return to Africa, instigante eius pia matre (p. 34,11.16-17), while Capgrave adds, \"for sche had a l l her desire whech sche desired in pis world whan sche wist pat he was a trewe cristen-man'' (p. 29,11.12-13). Chapter 24 is the only one dealing with Monica which is new to Capgrave's l i f e , but even here the prayer given by Augustine emphasizes not his sorrow or sense of' loss at her- death, but rather her purity in l i f e : Thi seruaunt, Lord, whom bou hast now take on-to p i mercy,\" as bou knowist & as I be-leue, a f t i r bat tyme bat sche had take b i feith and\"bi baptern, sche defouled neuer hir\" lippis with no vnclennesse whech schuld be offense on-to bi'lordchipy no lesingis wer founde in hir tonge, no' slaunder, no vice whech longith on-to bat ' membir. ... . Sche bond hir soule on-to be prys of thi blod whil sche lyued, for bere was no day l e f t but sche wold be present where be sacrifise and pe memory ofbi'\"holy blod schuld be had in mynde. (p. 33,11.12-17, 27-30) The other four chapters (7, 9, .11 and 23) are a l l set off,at least by paragraph divisions in the Vita, but -they become testaments of Monica's faith and piety as Capgrave makes his characteristic expansions. The additions to Chapter seven, for example, provide illustrations of the three traits which dominate this portrait. The f i r s t reinforices the portrayal of her grief over Augustine by describing her appearance, \"with f u l heuy cher\" (p. 10, .1.14); the second repeats her single, guiding desire, \"bat sche hoped for to se him a trewe cristen man or sche deyid\" (p. 10,11.22-23); and'the'last\" reiterates her constant 248 efforts on her son's behalf, \"wit3 many menes and many, exhortaciones was b l s i nyth and day to bring him fro bis mischef\" (p. 10,11.7-8). Moreover, Capgrave emphasizes her steadfastness' as he explains, \"Thus was be woman in her consolacion stabil and coude not be led oute for hir trewe beleue with no sophisticacion pat hir son coude make\" (p. 10,11.29-31). Finally, he excises the unfavourable suggestion found in the Latin that her importuning was tedious to the bishop (p. 18,1.1). Obviously,' any work whose surface presents such eclecticism lacks unity and co-ordination of theme by prevailing aesthetic c r i t e r i a . And even i f i t is granted that nearly every addition can somehow be jus t i f i e d , their collective effect is nevertheless s t y l i s t i c a l l y digressive, disruptive, and indiscriminate to the modern reader; and. i f they are to'be seen.as anything more than the minutiae of detail collected by the voracious scholar and trained exegete, some a r t i s t i c method, principle,' or precedent must l i e behind them. It i s a commonplace.that even a literate person in the middle ages:heard rather than read much of the literature with'which he came in contact and t h a t t h e r e f o r e , he did not demand the kind' of precision so highly regarded by the modern reader. Further, as a genre, the saint's l i f e i t s e l f ' tended to derive i t s internal unity from the eulogistic purpose of glorification, not from some controlling theme or thesis regarding the saint's personality or career. While many of them, like Capgrave's Life' of St. Gilbert, are extremely disorganized, both author and reader allowed the introduction of diverse elements 249 because a l l redounded to the saint's honour; for the same reason the apparent lack of plan was' not disturbing. \" Thus,' though Jordanus' Vita tends to be seen as unified because i t follows a chronological order, in reality the continual' focus\" on Augustine provides the-: centre which a plethora, of quotation and citation of authorities cannot disrupt. There is only one medieval\" genre which characteristically exhibits the particular combination of disruptive exegesis and moral exhortation found in Capgrave's Life--the sermon; It is precisely the appearance of this secondary motive,\" the preacher's desire to explain, which describes how Capgrave's work differs from the typical saint's l i f e , and the following discussion w i l l demonstrate that to c a l l his technique disunified is' to be governed by modern principles rather than by an understanding of the traditions within which he worked. It is not necessary to repeat the explanation of the pedagogical method given in the biographical chapter, but a brief comment on and an ill u s t r a t i o n from the contemporary vernacular sermon w i l l make clear that such diversions from the; narrative path would seem natural both' to Capgrave, as a trained exegete and preacher, and to his reader. Many of the preserved Middle English sermons are as brief as the martyrologies, with their abbreviated accounts of the acts and.passions of the saints, and\" they shed l i t t l e l i g h t on Capgrave's style. How--ever,' sermons could also be, and academic ones were expected to be, highly structured. Basically,\" this structuring consists of the elaboration and iteration of the main theme of the day\u00E2\u0080\u0094a B i b l i c a l text, the reasons 250 for observing the feast, or praise of a'saint. The formal arrangements 28 recommended in theoretical works are seldom\" present in their totality in vernacular examples, but their influence is observable throughout. The effect of any of the preferred\" means of\" discussion-\u00E2\u0080\u0094exempla, the four-fold method of exposition, logical argument, and word d e f i n i t i o n -is essentially static; the intended reference, the object of the digression, i s always to get back to the original text after explaining i t more fu l l y ; and thus,.though there has been development, there has been no advance.\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Even when the major part of such a sermon is a saint's l i f e , the narrative element is frequently checked by moral applications or admonitions, and i t ultimately ends with an exhortation., In such cases the story, which i t s e l f is not the primary concern, remains subordinate to the ethical issues being presented. A good example of the developed vernacular sermon is one on 29 Christ's- Ascension included in John Mirk's Festial. After the i n i t i a l announcement of the feast day and the explanation that this is why a light has been\" removed from the choir, the preacher describes Christ's f i n a l appearance to his disciples and the;ascension. Here \"to stegh up\" (i.e., rise): becomes the keynote, and i t is repeatedly used to rec a l l the main text; but before the details of the ascension are given, a mention of the Mount of Olives calls forth a four-line digression on i t s s u i t a b i l i ty as a location since olive o i l \"bytokenybe mercy.\" Then follow references to the: angelic choir and the speed of the ascension accompanied'by an interjection on' Rabanus\" Maurus' calculation of the distance, a calculation which is scorned on the grounds that \"he bat 251 metype pis way,.he can\" best tell e pe myles and pe lengpe of hom\" (p. .152,11.26-28). -The preacher then gives two'more-details\u00E2\u0080\u0094Christ was accompanied by- souls rescued from Hell and his' wounds were fresh\u00E2\u0080\u0094before inserting Bede's five reasons why Christ appeared with his wounds s t i l l fresh. Then he moves to two additional reasons*, for man to rejoice on this occasion; he now has a \"trew avoket\"' in' heaven, and i t increases his \"dignyte\" to have one of his own.kind s i t at the right hand of God. Returning to the; narrative,\" he notes' the marvelling of the.lesser angels at the explanations of the higher orders, and at length he returns to t h e : s t i l l upward-gazing disciples with'whom his sermon began. And, f i n a l l y , he exhorts his parishioners.to ask mercy of Christ and provides one,example of prayer rewarded. Nowhere, of course, does Capgrave introduce such a-dispro-portionate amount' of .digression into his narrative; but sermons.like this one indicate that a model for. his frequent- l i s t s of- reasons 'or causes, for his interruptions on Alipius, V i t a l i s y Victorine, and for the prayer on Monica's death was ready to hand. Such a blending of purposes and techniques helps to explain Capgrave's method of composi-tion in a l l of- his English works, but more' remains to be, said specifically of his prose style. I l l It may seem at the outset that The Life of 'St.\";Augustine is not the best work to discuss in this' context,.for it\" i s a re l a t i v e l y close 252 translation,\u00E2\u0080\u00A2and, as such, i t is governed largely by the style of the Vita. \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 However,' since a l l four of .Capgrave's'saint's -lives are trans-lations and only this one source is' extant in i t s entirety and in the same prose medium, i t provides the soundest basis for studying any differences between- his style in i t and in' the original compositions. : In addition,\u00E2\u0080\u00A2translations from Latin and' French comprise a.large pro-portion of the extant literary prose of this transitional period, and measuring Capgrave's s k i l l as a translator in a sense provides an index to his talent for prose. The major contribution of medieval translation, as Workman sees i t , was the shift from the composition of\"single,phrases and' clauses, frequently resulting in such structural anomalies as changed subject and lack of parallelism, to organization by' broader, more complex 30 units. Further, he establishes and demonstrates as a'general rule that s k i l l in complex sentences is\" directly proportional to the l i t e r a l -31 ness of translation. Interestingly, however, Workman singles out Capgrave's Life of St. Gilbert as an.exception, wherein t h e s t y l e often 32 . improves rather than degenerates when the source is'treated freely. The next chapter w i l l show that Capgrave's source was not in fact the exact,text Workman supposed, but the generalization he makes is con-r firmed by an examination' of The Life of St. Augustine, The praise inherent in this judgment by no means implies that Capgrave i s never guilty\" of Latinisms or that his subordination and co-ordination are always\" perfect. There are' a\" number\"of~ examples of, 253 incorrect or awkward structure based on a too l i t e r a l translation. On the f i n a l page, for example, with \"standyng'his breberin about him, and commendyng his soul to God, he 3ald . . . .\" (p. 60,11.14-15), the ablative absolute which so often caused English translators d i f f i c u l -ties leads Capgrave into a dangling modifier whose meaning is ambiguous. Elsewhere, however, he easily turns such constructions into \"with.\" phrases. Secondly, the automatic urge to supply the missing personal pronouns for Latin verbs often leaves Capgrave with a pleonastic pronoun insertion. Some of ;these are as simple as \"Seynt Ambrose, whan he_ lay at his last ende . . .\" (p. 51,1.15) from Beatus enim ambrosius cum .in extremis esset: . . . (p. 67,1.6); but most are.complicated by the intervention of modifiers between the subject and the pleonastic repetition. Occasionally, these modifiers occur in the Latin as when Capgrave adds an extra \"bei\" in translating u t e t i p s i qui centum annorum sunt\" e t ampliusy pater noster sedendo in lectulo dicant ; (p. 64,11.3-5) as \"pat pei pat drawe to pe age of a- hundred- 3ere, bei schal\" sitte s t i l l e in her beddis.and sey her Pater-noster\" (p. 49,11.24-25). More often, however, i t is Capgrave himself who introduces the modification of the subject, and as he f a i l s to excise the repetition, he reveals in these places at least that the character-33 i s t i c unit composition was s t i l l very much1 a feature of his style. Similarly, the awkward'placement of some of the other modifiers derives from the Latin. For example, \"Faderles childyrn and widowes whan bei wer in onytribulacion he'wold visite\"\"(p.\"48,11.31-32) comes from Pupillos et viduas in tribulacione constitutos' et egrotantes 254 34 postulatius visitabat . . . (p. 62,11.17-18), but many are his own, afterthoughts disrupting the flow of the sequence. On the. other hand, the very errors he makes in changing structures or adding parallel members show Capgrave's conscious desire for subordination and thus mark him as\" a prominent transitional figure. Removing the rhetoric of Augustine's sermon In omnibus operibus vestris by abbreviating the numquid series (p. 34,11.4-12)., for instance, Capgrave f a i l s in parallelism; the two sentences Numquid non i p s i vere pauperes? . . . Numquid non mundum et pompes eius concul-cauerunt? become \"Be not pei very pore men in Crist, and for his loue have for sakyn a l pis world?\" (p. 28,11.32-33). The tension between the old and new methods is sometimes evident too when Capgrave tries to subordinate a series of events which he perceives as having a casual relationship to the following statement and finds he cannot extricate himself from the structure which he has begun. One example is the translation of . . o ipse simplicianus . . . audiuit famam celeberrimam de augustini sapiencia et eius admirabili doctrina, eumque.episcopum esse factum; Propter quod s i b i misit quasdam questiones subtiles de sacra scriptura soluendas. (p. 70,11.12-17) as And whanne he herd sey bat Augustin was bischop at Ypone and famed porw:pe world as for pe grettest labourer in study and pe 'grettest dissoluer of qwestiones pat was leuand.j\u00E2\u0080\u0094-heryng a l pis he sent to him cefteyn \"questiones '-. . . 'A \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 (p. 54,11.6-10, i t a l i c s added) Later, Capgrave uses the same structure when he sees Augustine's f i n a l sickness as the result of the destruction the barbarian invaders 255 brought to Africa (p. 58,1;33 - p. 59,1.5). Thus, obvious as.some of these errors are, they are a l l evidence of concern with prose style. Moreover, smooth rehandling and s k i f u l l transition are much more common.marks of Capgrave's translation. The omissions and additions discussed earlier resulted from the differences in Capgrave and Jordanus' purposes, but there are two groups of changes which are primarily s t y l i s t i c : transitional introductions to chapters and re-arrangement of material on more logical bases. As has already been shown, the only chapter break which does not seem immediately necessary is that between chapters fourteen and fifteen;.and even then, the former recounts the event which provides the impulse for Augustine's fi n a l acceptance of the orthodox faith in the latter. More important, however, is the fact that in eighteen of the thirty-eight openings Capgrave introduces some transitional state-ment. Of the remainder, eleven already contained an expression of time in the Latin, chiefly inter hec, post hec, eo tempore, or interea (chapters 6, 10, 11, 14, 19, 30, 32, 41, 43, 44, 45) and in-six more cases the time and place are stationary (chapters 15, 22, 36, 37, 38 and 39). The transitions Capgrave makes are of four,kinds. In the opening sentences of chapters 7, 9, 13, 21 and 33, Capgrave supplies the reason for the actions or feelings of the person who is the subject. Thus, while the Latin says only Mater autem eius pro eo multum flebat . . . (p. 16,1.15), Capgrave gives the cause of Monica's gr i e f \u00E2\u0080\u0094 \" H i s modir, whan sche herd pat he was falle.on-to bis heresie, 256 sche wept . . .\".(p. 10,11.5-6, i t a l i c s added). At the beginnings of chapters-23, 25, 26, 27 and 31, on the other hand, he reiterates the main events of the preceding chapter. Sometimes he is merely expand-ing a condensation in the Latin, as when Quibus peractis . . . (p. .38,1.16) becomes \"Whann his moder was ded and byried at Hostie, as we seid be-for . . .\" (p. 34,11.3-4); sometimes he provides a new summary of what went before, as \"Dwellyng bus in his own possession he wrot . . .\"\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 (p. 34,11.31-32) or \"Thus lyued our maystir.in holy study and contemplation . . .\" (p. 35,1.22). Thirdly, Capgrave has a group of openings which suggest the passage of time; two chapters (34 and 42) use a phrase comparable to the Latin ones previously cited.(p. 43,1.31, and p. 56,11.5-6) as a relevant aside. Two of the others (16 and 17) begin with a new statement focusing on Augustine's changed habit of mind, and chapter 28 makes the.shift to the establishment of the monasteries with the bishop's help less abrupt by stating that \"He had not longe dwelt at Ypone or he f e i in aqweyntauns of Valery, . . .\" (p. 36,11.32-33). Into the fourth group f a l l the openings of chapters 8, 18, 35 and 40, only the second of which, giving the history of his liaison with Adeodatus' mother, seems altered for transitional purposes. The other three reflect Capgrave's own reading of the work 35 before him, and a i r are minor.-It i s the freedom from slavish literalness these changes indi-cate which is the dominant feature of Capgrave's prose and which suggests his assurance as- he works. The preceding examples illustrate the ways Capgrave amplified or reduced his' source,.changes he 257 introduced to improve transition, and occasional failures as he tried to increase subordination. Further examples w i l l demonstrate more clearly how the improvements overshadow failures. Both large-scale revision and minor alterations figure in these changes; most often they are towards concreteness and conversational tone, leaving less to be inferred by the reader. Two variations he makes in the report of Monica's v i s i t to the African bishop (p. 10,1.31 - p. 11,1.23) serve to il l u s t r a t e his techniques. First,.Capgrave reduced the f i n i t e verbs and adds nouns so that legendo et,intellegendp quam fugienda esset cognovi et fugi (p. 17,11.22-23) becomes \"with long,redyng of her bokes, I aspied bat i t was a secte rather to be fled than folowid\" (p. 11,11.15-16). The nouns make the actual activity more concrete and the other changes both.emphasize the perception of error and support i t with alliteration of parallel forms. Second, with his repetition of the dismissal and explanation of the metaphor . f i l i u s . . . tantarum lacrimarum, Capgrave makes the f i n a l speech more c o l l o q u i a l . ^ The same principle of change towards concreteness, homeliness, expansion and moral exhortation which is evident in these examples, is also apparent in longer passages in The Life of,St. Augustine. Thus, a large section of chapter 36 is altered. The single Latin sentence with careful parallelism and antecedent reference, Religiosis quippe honeste maturus, secularibus vero mature iocundus aderat, ut i l l o s in sanctitate cepta exemplo sui confirmaret et istos ad sanctitatem congrua hylaritate inuitaret. (p. 59,11.5-9) 258 becomes four.with equal structural balance, the additional length de-riving only from a care that his meaning be comprehended., To religious men and women he was in his exhortaciones sad and sobir, 3euyng hem grete ensaumple who bei schuld do. To othir seculer men bat were occupied in pe world he was familiar, and in his talkyng had on-to hem in maner of mery langage with stedfast cher of sadnesse. The o puple coumforted he with sad talking to conferme hem in her holinesse. The obir puple gadered he on-to a perfeccion with goostly myrth and deuoute iocundnesse. (p. 46,11.9-16) A similar re-organization occurs at the beginning of chapter 43 (p. 57,11.10-18) where Capgrave presents Augustine's three reasons for re-reading and revising his works in parallel form,while the Latin has a less logical structure (p. .73,11.8-15). Finally, there are instances where Capgrave considers the rhetorical,effect as he translates and re-orders his passage accord-ingly. For example, while he rejected the numquid series in his translation of one of Augustine's sermons, as too shortened and abrupt, in this example Capgrave not only adds two iterations of the verb came, he also moves the verb to the beginning of his sentences, and divides the third sentence of the Latin so that the repetition becomes more prominent. Ego, sacerdotes del, altissimi, ut multi vestrum viderunt et audire potuerunt, veni ad hanc ciuitatem cum karissimis meis'amicis, euodio, simplicio, alipio, nebridio et anastasio. Securus denique ueni quia sciebam presulari sanctum senem valerium. Propterea securus accessi non ut haberem in uos potestatemy sed ut abiectus essem in domo domini omni diebus uite mee, non ut ministrari deberem, sed ministrare et pacifice uiuere optabam in s o l i -tudine, . . . (p. 42,11.4-12, i t a l i c s added) and 259 As 3e know, I cam on-to bis cyte with my welbeloued frendis Euodio, Simplicio, Alipio, Nebridio & Anastasio. I cam hidir with a maner of sikirnesse, for I wist wel bat be good.fader Valerius was bischop her. I cam hidyr, not for to haue: powere ouyr.3ou in dignite, but for to dwelle as an outcast in be hqus of our Lord.all be dayes of my l y f . I cam hidir, not for to receyue seruyse of ober men, but for to lyue pesibily in desert with my breberin. (p. 37,11.5-12, i t a l i c s added) Such examples from the one work which can be compared to i t s source show that Capgrave was a careful composer despite his lapses and, above a l l , that he was aware of his audience. Such features of his style as the exegetical elaborations, translations, and references to authority figure in a l l of the prose works. But the differences in the nature of their sources and in the persons to whom they were directed make their surface effects highly varied. Thus, The Life of St. Gilbert was clearly meant for readers familiar with the subject; and The Solace of Pilgrims and The Chronicle of England were just as surely not written with any specific audience in mind. 260 Footnotes Internal references to Jordanus' Vita.are from C.L. Smetana s 1948 M.A. thesis which contains a transcript; those- to Capgrave's Life are from E.E.T.S., O.S., 140, ed. J.J. Munro (London, 1910). This volume contains both of the prose lives and the text is based on the only surviving manuscript, Capgrave's holograph, BM. Add. MS. 36704. ^Augustine is now believed to have been the author of a very brief rule, but the much more detailed one under which Capgrave lived had a complex history of transmission. 2 In the prologue to The Life of St. Augustine, Capgrave refers to his patroness only as \"a g e n t i l l woman . . . browt forth in-to bis world in [Augustine's] solempne feste\" (p.1,11.15-16,22). She is tentatively identified by C L. Smetana as a generosa femina, Katherina James, grandmother of the Edmund Rede whom Capgrave formally recognized as the Lynn convent's founder during his term as provincial. No con-firmation is possible for this conjecture, and, indeed, i f the woman did belong to this family of benefactors, the date of composition makes i t more likely that she was Rede's mother or wife. 3 See for example, T. Wolpers, Die Englische Heiligenlegende des Mittelalters (Tubingen, 1964), p. 405. 4 Ed. J.J. Munro, E.E.T.S., O.S., 140 (London, 1910), x i . \"Wbliotheca britannico-hibernica: sive De scriptoribus, qui in Anglia, Scotia et Hibernia ad saeculi XVII initium floruerunt (London, 1748), p. 152. George Sanderlin, \"John Capgrave Speaks Up for the Hermits,\" Speculum, III (1943) 358-362 and Rudolph Arbesmann, \"Jordanus of Saxony's Vita S. Augustini: The Source of John Capgrave's Life of St. Augus- tine,\" Traditio, I (1943),341-353. Of these, Sanderlin 7! brief article is less crucial, for i t s major purpose is to suggest that both Jordanus and Capgrave were motivated by an urge to press their order's claim to predate the Augustinian canons regular. Certainly in this longstanding dispute which ended only at papal command in 1484, the two friars would have supported their own group's opinion. On the other hand, neither the Latin nor the English version is argumentative in tone, and while there are a number of passages asserting Augustine's preference for the ascetic l i f e he shared with his f i r s t chosen com-panions over the episcopal l i f e where his closest associates were the recently instituted prototypes of the canons, they are not long or inappropriately introduced. 261 Arbesmann, I b i d . , surveys Jordanus' career pp. 341-344. I b i d . , p. 344. 9 I b i d . , p. 347 ^ I b i d . , p . 345. 1 1 I b l d . , p. 347. 12_ __. Same, n. 33. \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 '.. , 13 F. Roth, The E n g l i s h A u s t i n F r i a r s , I (New York, 1966). During the fourteenth and f i f t e e n t h c e n t u r i e s some are known to have been i n attendance at the schools. See A.B. Emdem's A B i o g r a p h i c a l R e g i s t e r of the U n i v e r s i t y of Oxford to 1500, 3 V o l s . (Oxford, 1957-59) and A B i o g r a p h i c a l R e g i s t e r of the U n i v e r s i t y of Cambridge to 1500 (Cambridge, 1963). 14 The f i v e chapters are 8, 15, 18, 36 and 45. They begin i n what i s the middle of a paragraph i n the L a t i n v e r s i o n . I t should a l s o be noted that w h i l e nine of Jordanus' paragraphs do begin w i t h a de_ or q u a l i t e r phrase equivalent to a chapter heading, only s i x accord w i t h d i v i s i o n s Capgrave makes and only two of those have a marked s i m i l a r i t y i n the heading used. 15 The f o l l o w i n g i s a l i s t of references i n Jordanus' V i t a omitted by Capgrave: p.15,11.10-11; p.16,11.11-12,13-14; p.18.11. 4-5,11-12,18-19; p.20,11.10-11; p.22,11.5-6; p. 23,11.18-19 ; p'.:28, 11.24-25; p.29,11.12-13,15-16; p.31,11.5,8,11; p.32,11.8-9; p.33, I. 16; p.35,1.24; p.36,1.4; p.40,11.8-9; p.41,11.5,12,15; p.42,1. 21; p.43,1.10; p.44,1.7; p.47,1.23; p.45,11:6-7; .p.46;il.4;23; p.48,1.18; p.49,11.9-10; p.50,1.20; p.51,11.1-2,9-10; p.52,1.19; p.53,11.1-2,8-9,15; p.53,1.24 - p.54,1.1; p.58,1.8; p.59,1.19; p.60,1.10; p.61,1.22; p.63,1.1; p.64,1.7; p.70,11.5-6; p.72,11. 24-25; p.73,1.7; p.74,1.21; p.77,1.19; p.78,11.7-8. 16 He preserves the reference to Dacius, p. 26,11.1-3. 1 7These f i v e occur p.1,1.1; p.7.1.8; p.9.1.22; p.24,1.27; and p .52,11.9-10. Capgrave's a d d i t i o n a l references to Augustine's works are: p.2,11.21-22; p.4,11.12-13,23,25-26,29; p.5,ii.6,11-12, 22-23; p.6,1.31; p.7,11.14,19-20,26; p.11,11.30-31; p.13,1.10; p.15,1.6; p.17,1.22; p.18,1.22; p.26,1.10; p.28,1.25; p.29,1.23; p.30,11.6-8; p.31,11.12,27; p .33,11.4-5,9; p.34,11.17-18; p.36,1. 20; p.37,11.4-5,24; p.38,11.12,22-23; p.38,1.33 - p.39,1.2; p.40, I I . 11-13; p.41,1.12; p.44,11.16,20-21,34-35; p.45,1.10; p.46,11. 26-27; p.48,11.10-11; p.49,11.3,12-13. 262 1 8See V i t a p.23,11.7-10; p.30,11.10-11; p.34,11.5-6,7-8; p.35,11.18-24; p.45,1.5; p.47,11.1-18; p .53,11.15-24; p.64,11.1-2. 19 See chapter two of t h i s thesis and J.A.F. Thomson, The Later L o l l a r d s , 1414-1520 (London, 1965). In addition, the only contemporary reference other than those to h i s patroness i n The L i f e of St. Augus- tine i s to the immoral behaviour of the W y c l i f i t e s , p.31,1.15. 20 Most appear i n L a t i n : p.28,1.25; p.29,1.23; p.30.11.7-8; p.37,1.24; p.39,11.1-2; p.40,11.11-12,13; p.41,1.12; p.44,11.2,35; p.46,1.27; p.48,1.11; p.49,1.13. Two have English t i t l e s only: p.36,1.20 and p.45,1.10. 21 See references to De Immortalite Anime, p.25,11.28-29, De Genesi, p.34,1.32 - p.35,1.1 and De Vera Religione, p.35,11.20-21. 22 Except i n the case of h i s reference to De Ordine (p.23,11. 31-32) where h i s erroneous statement on the contents demonstrates that he was not personally f a m i l i a r with the work. 23 In the other two instances where English alone appears, p.35, 11.15-19 and p.56,1.8 - p.57,1.2, Jordanus provided the commentary. 24 In f a c t , the De Achademicis and Contra Achademicos he so c a r e f u l l y distinguishes are the same book. 2 5P.27,11.18-22; p.31,11.25-26; p.42,11.10-11; p.52,1.21 -p.53,1.11 26 See also p.34,11.15-16. 2 7 V i t a hoc mater neseiebat, sed pro i l l o orabat absens et maiore s o l l i c i t u d i n e eum parturiebat s p i r i t u quam carne pepererat, c o t t i d i e elemosinam faciens et obsequia Sanctis n u l l o d-ie pretermittens oblacionem. Bis i n die mane et vespere ad ecclesiam sine u l l a intermissione veniens non ad vanas fabulas, sed ut dominum audiret i n suis sermonibus et deus i l l a m i n suis oracionibus pro salute f i l i i s u i . Recreatus ergo ex i l i a egritudine cepit sedule agere propter quod venerat ut doceret rome artem rethoricam, et congregabantur ad hospicium eius m u l t i . (p.20,11.12-21) 263 Life pouz he were absent sche prayed for him deuly pat our Lord schuld send her ioye of hir son, for in pis mater sche had mor sorow for him ban euyr sche had to bryng him forth on-to be world. Euery day sche offered for him at be auter; euery day sche gaf elmesse. Twyes on be day went she to cherch, not for to te l l e veyn tales, but for to here tydingis of our Lord of heuene in deuoute sermones, or elles for her diuine seruyse that God schuld accept hir prayeres, whech wer principali for pe goostly helth of hir son Augustin. Be hir prayeres Austyn is now rered fro his seknesse and hath begunne for to do ping for whech he was come, bat is to seye, to tech rethorik; many disciples be gadered on-to his skole, . . . (p.14,11.9-19) See: Middle English Sermons, ed., W.O. Ross, E.E.T.S., O.S., 209 (London, 1949), x l i i i - l v . 29 Ross, p,151,1.23 - p.154,1.23.- . 30 S.K. Workman, Fifteenth Century Translation as an Influence on English Prose (Princeton, 1940), p. 35. 3\"\"Ibid., p. 84. 32\u00E2\u0080\u009E Same. 3 3See p.10,11.5-6; p.12,11.26-27; p.13,11.2-4 and p.57,11. 13-14 for some obvious examples. 34 The awkward construction, p.36,1.34 -p,37,1.2 also comes from the Latin. 35P.11,1.26; p.45,11.7-9 and p.52,11.9-12. The last contains a metaphor studied in Arbesmann's ar t i c l e , \"The 'Malleus' Metaphors in Medieval Characterization,\" Traditio, III (1945), 389-92. 36 Thus, Vade . . . secura; impossible enim est ut f i l i u s tantarum pereat lacrimarum (p.18,11.2-3) becomes \"Go fro me, woman, go fro me with bis sikyrnesse. It i s impossible that a child whech hath so many teres wept for him schuld perisch.\" (p.11,11.19-21). Obviously, many of the other examples discussed in other connections demonstrate this method too. More which are concrete and l i t e r a l com-pared to their sources are found: p.15,11.6-8; p.15,1.28 - p.16,1.5; p.20,11.4-7; p.24,11.22-25; p.27,11.5-7; p.35,11.8-10; p.40,11. 16-19; p.44,11.3-5; p.50,11.17-18; p.51,11.1-7; p.55,11.19-24. CHAPTER VI THE LIFE OF SAINT GILBERT OF SEMPRINGHAM I John Capgrave's second prose saint's l i f e i s of a far less re-nowned figure, the founder of the Gilbertine order, St. Gilbert of. Sempringham. That Capgrave's l i f e has received virtually no c r i t i c a l attention^ is a natural result of the neglect of Gilbert himself. Although he was the only founder of a monastic order in England and the f i r s t saint for whom a papal canonization and decree of universal 2 veneration have been preserved, Gilbert was never a saint whose cult was widely\u00E2\u0080\u00A2observed. He was not martyred like Thomas a Becket; nor were his piety and asceticism so highly regarded as Edward the Confessor's. Moreover, as his order and the.celebration of his feast-day never spread outside England\u00E2\u0080\u0094and these indeed were largely restricted to the East Midlands\u00E2\u0080\u0094the dissolution of the monasteries and the abandonment of the saints quickly led to his submergence. On the.other hand, Gilbert's story is not devoid of interest. \" 3 Born about 1083 of a Norman father and English mother, Gilbert early proved a disappointment to parents who hoped for a son who would con-tribute either knightly prowess or intellectual s k i l l , for he was apparently crippled in some way, and he was not particularly able in his studies (Dugdale p. v,11.28-33). Gilbert fled his home to spend several years in France where he f i n a l l y obtained a master's degree. 265 On his return, he was reconciled to his father, and after a period of teaching the local children and acting as chaplain in the parishes controlled by his family, he entered the service of the bishop of Lincoln. There his piety was as highly regarded as i t had been at home and he became a special penitentiary, what Capgrave calls \"a general juge\" (p. 66,1.4) after reluctantly accepting the holy orders of which he f e l t himself unworthy. Moved to divert his personal wealth to the service of the church and the poor, he established seven of his women,followers in a cloister.in Sempringham in 1137. Soon the uncloistered lay women who served them.also requested a rule and habit, and they were followed by the lay men who t i l l e d the land and.cared for the properties belonging to the group. With his order this far expanded almost by chance, Gilbert went to the Cistercian congress at Citeaux in 1147 and attemp-ted to pass the control of his adherents to that order. Since women were involved, his request was refused and at the Pope's suggestion, 4 he was himself appointed master (Dugdale, p. xi,1.31). Now o f f i c i a l - -ly burdened with the governance, Gilbert f e l t obliged to add lettered clerics to his order, and so the double monasteries began to grow up and the order to expand.^ The tradition does not make clear how far Gilbert was regarded as a worker of miracles in his lifetime, and for eleven years after his death in 1189 no action was taken to raise him to the status of a saint. In 1200, however, members of his order-brought both his l i f e and his pre-and post-mortem miracles to the attention of Hubert-Walter, 266 Archbishop of Canterbury, who set canonization proceedings into oper-ation. The investigation of Gilbert's l i f e and works was carried out 6 as a f u l l papal inquiry, and he was canonized and translated in 1202. In his dedicatory prologue, Capgrave explains his reason for taking the subject in hand: . . . a f t i r 3e [Nicholas Reysby, Master of the.order of Sempring-ham] had red pis lyf of Seynt Augustyn.3e sayde to on of my frendes pat 3e desired gretlype lyf of Seynt Gilbert schuld be-translat in be same forme. -. (p. 61,11.14-16) He describes his method as . . . to translate out of Latyn r i t h as I fynde be-fore me, saue sum addiciones wil I put pertoo whech men of pat ordre haue told me, and eke othir pingis pat schul f a l l e to my,mynde in pe writyng whech be pertinent to,pe mater. (p. 62,11.26-29) From these i n i t i a l statements, i t is clear ;that Capgrave was following closely a specific source; that source is not now known but i t has always been mistakenly identified as the standard Latin version pre-served in the three extant manuscripts\u00E2\u0080\u0094Cotton Cleopatra B 1, Harleian 468, and Digby 36.8 That this identification is an oversimplification can be shown from internal evidence which demonstrates unequivocally that Capgrave was working from a manuscript source that diverged in several striking ways from the extant vitae. Most importantly, instead of being a straightforward narrative account, i t was divided into two sections\u00E2\u0080\u0094 the f i r s t an abridgement of Gilbertls l i f e , about whose contents and development conjectures w i l l be made later; the second standing in closer relationship to the vitae. Although Capgrave's second-part i s 267 selective and incomplete and differs in the order in which events are presented, i t contains whole sections which are l i t e r a l translations from.the known,manuscripts. For this reason, earlier scholars, making only a superficial comparison, have believed that the major difference between the Latin versions\u00E2\u0080\u00A2and the English lay in Capgrave's omissions. To get closer to the truth, i t is necessary to examine the relation-ship and contents of the vitae, to consider Capgrave's own,remarks about his source, and, to trace the probably source for his f i r s t part. The actual relationship of the three Latin manuscripts cannot be regarded as established. The accepted opinion, worked out in 9 detail by the most recent commentator, R..Foreville, involves the following assumptions: 1) that the.\"common source\" of a l l three. vitae was the.book written by a canon of the.order and. presented to the Archbishop,.Hubert Walter, between 1202 and 1205; 2) that this book was an elaboration of the brief l i f e and o f f i c i a l testimony of miracles sent to. the Pope; 3) that Cotton Cleopatra B 1 is an almost contemporary copy of the original; 4) that Harleian 468 is virtually identical with Cotton Cleopatra B 1; and 5) that the later vita, Digby 36, is only a slightly revised version of.these earlier manuscripts./ The neatness of such a chain of descent.is a t t r a c t i v e , ^ but i t ; has been established only by slighting certain.pieces of ;available evidence. The letters concerning the rebellion of the lay brothers,\"^ for example, reveals that there.; are inclusions in the Digby manuscript which do not appear in Cotton and :Harleian. Moreover, the treatment of.miracles in Digby 36 varies so greatly from the other two manuscripts that i t i s d i f f i c u l t to credit the book presented to the Archbishop as the single source for a l l three. As Knowles points out, .the Digby manuscript, though considerably later in date, must represent a tradi-tion that developed contemporaneously with the Cotton.and Harleian i f the inclusion of materials not found in the other two is to be accounted for. An evaluation of the relationship between Capgrave's Life and the three manuscripts requires at least a summary account of their contents, which in general are quite similar. Using Cotton Cleopatra B 1 as a base, because i t i s the only one.printed, the order of materials follows a f a i r l y consistent pattern in a l l three vitae. ' Fi r s t , there is a dedicatory letter to Hubert Walter identifying the author as \"unus ex minimis fratribus ordinis sancti Gilberti 12 Sempinhamensis\", but also as one who was personally acquainted with 13 the saint, and discussing the grounds on which Gilbert has merited canonization (f. 33-36). Second, there i s an account of Gilbert's l i f e which includes the miracles that occurred during i t (f. 36-86). Next follows a description of the visions accompanying Gilbert's death, his burial, and the institution of his successor, Roger (f. 86-89). A break in the chronological order occurs at this point with the insertion of some seventeen letters from various - correspon-dents (including the.pope, the.king;, bishops and archbishops.of England, and Gilbert) concerning the rebellion of the lay brothers 14 (f. 89v-101). Immediately following this interruption, the text returns to the narrative with the account of the canonization and 269 translation proceedings, including the visions seen by the Pope and the messengers of;the curia (f. 101v-114). Finally, added as appendices, there are thirty-four letters concerning Gilbert's canonization (f. 114v-140) and two collections of miracles. The f i r s t group of miracles (f. 140v-156) contains the thirty which were sworn to at the inquest in 1201; the second (f. 156-168) provides twenty-six more which were gathered afterwards. The basic variations in the Digby manuscript l i e in the number and arrangement of miracles, the inclusion of some further reports, and a different division of the contents, with con-siderable additional rubrication.^ The relatively straightforward ordering of materials in the. three known vitae contrasts dramatically with the;structure found in Capgrave's Life. Internal evidence suggests that the Latin manuscript which was sent to him for translationj possibly by the master.of Sempringham himself, must have contained two recensions of the l i f e of St. Gilbert, both apparently.deriving from the standard Latin version, but diverging widely from i t . What seems to be the case is that the Sempringham monastery\u00E2\u0080\u0094or wherever Capgrave obtained the manuscript\u00E2\u0080\u0094possessed a brief l i f e which bore considerable resemblance *' to the readings in the Gilbertine memorial r i t e , the Seruicium S. Gil l e b e r t i , \" ^ which had been revised late in the fourteenth century by one of.the brothers. To this revised l i f e was added, then or later, a second part containing more elaborate descriptions,of some of the central episodes in Gilbert's l i f e and reports of the miracles. 270 Capgrave himself recognizes a juncture in the materials he is using at the point he ends his thirteenth chapter, for he begins the following chapter with the note, \"Her is the secund part of Seint Gilbert ly f . . . .\" (p. 80,1.21). Later.in the work Capgrave refers to \"pe f i r s t part of pis l y f \" and adds that i t belongs to \"be same auctour\" (p. 125,11.31-32). This last comment need not be taken as authorita-tive, for while one man may have produced both parts, i t seems unlikely that so many specific items would have been repeated i f such were the case. Probably Capgrave's words should be taken to indicate that the whole manuscript was in the hand of a single copyist or,, at least, that there is no observable break between the two, rather than that they were written by one author. Beyond these very specific comments, there are other reasons for making an unequivocal statement that Capgrave was not altering, the. structure of his immediate source. F i r s t , the author or authors certainly belonged to the Gilbertine order. Except when Gilbert i s referred to as \"he,\" \"bis man,\" or \"Seynt Gilbert,\" his name is gener-ally preceded by \"bur.\" Moreover, in the second part at least, Gilbert is specifically designated as \"our foundour\" (p. 85,1.11), and the order of nuns is mentioned as \"This religion, whech,we clepe our s i s t i r \" (p. 89,11.34-35). In this last part, too, the author frequently speaks in the f i r s t person plural Sum-tyme, whan we supposed he had be a-slepe, his handis wer cured with his mantel, but his eyne sey we l i f t up tp heuene., and euyr softe wordes.herd.we of his mouth. (p. 96,11.26-28) 271 and, as was noted above, he'was 'familiar.''.with the service/of. St. ; Gilbert. Second, Capgrave's i n i t i a l declaration that he would follow the document \"before me\" (p. 62,1.26) is confirmed by a series of other references to \"myn auctour.\"^\"7 Obviously, the most important of these from the point of view of evidence are those in which Capgrave feels himself bound to explain events and terms. In chapter sixteen, for example, the figurative passage of lines 20-24 is elaborated by an exposition of the Latin author's use of the word \"neophite\" and the meaning of the animal images: A l l pis is seid be be auctour of bis l i f whech is of bis Seynt, bat he calleth hem neophites bat he newly conuerted to religion; for neophites wer cleped in eld tyme folk newly-conuerted to pe feith, and a l l pese transumpciones folowing rehersith our auctour to bis entent, pat men of religion schuld not haue fa i r condiciones outward and euel inward, as malys in soule l i c h a wolf and innocens in wordis l i c h schepis wolle, and soo may men expounne a l l pe other transumpciones. (p. 85,11.24-31) Similarly, in chapter 45, Capgrave discusses the possible meanings of the word subucula as an article of clothing and concludes that i t was probably what he called an \"awbe\" (p. 125,1.31). This elaboration i s particularly important because the preserved Latin versions have only the general word veste (R. Foreville, p. -141), which demonstrates, that whatever the relationship between Capgrave's source and the standard Latin l i f e , he did not himself follow i t . Throughout his work, there are many other examples of explanatory digressions which w i l l be discussed later among the characteristics of Capgrave's style. One f i n a l piece.of supporting circumstantial evidence- is that in both 272 the S_t. Katherine and the S_t. Norbert, Capgrave did have two sources, and in each case he identifies the point at which he changes from one to the other. Part one (chapters 1 to 13) covers all, o f Gilbert's l i f e and was clearly intended as a unit. Amounting to just under one-quarter of Capgrave's narrative, this relatively short recension may have been intended to be,read to the brethren for edification. Alternately, i t may have been meant for circulation to a wider audience, as so many other saints' lives were; and this latter possibility i s supported by. the omission of the specific references to \"our\" order which are found in the second part. On f i r s t examination, this abbreviated version may seem to be an adaptation of the longer Latin l i f e . There are passages,which are translated l i t e r a l l y , although these are scattered} 8the sequence of events is the same, and so are many of the b i b l i c a l comparisons. Morer over, much of the shortening is accomplished by removing the descrip-tion of Gilbert's miracles and the detailed process of his canonization; the former have been reduced to two summaries (p. 74,1.18 \u00E2\u0080\u0094 p. 75,1.5 and p. 79,11,17-23), the latter to a terse condensation (p. 79,1.23 -p. 80,1.20). There i s , however, an overlooked source in which the tradition of a compact l i f e (not unlike the f i r s t redaction sent to Pope ' Innocent III together with the miracle collection) was maintained. This source i s the lectios of the Seruicium jS. G i l l e b e r t i , with which the author of Capgrave's source would certainly have been familiar; and 273 i t seems likely that rather than the f i r s t part being simply an abridge-ment of the longer l i f e , i t i s an elaboration of the lectios coupled with material derived from the standard Latin l i f e . The nine readings ordained for the various services of the saint's day total only seventy-19 six lines: the f i r s t deals with Gilbert's birth and education; the second, with his service under the Bishop of Lincoln; the third, with the establishment of his order; the fourth, f i f t h and,sixth, respective-ly, with his behavior among,men, his abstinence, and his magnanimity and constancy; the seventh, with his continued vigour in old age; the eighth, with his approaching death;.and the last, with his departure from the world and his merited recognition in Heaven. These divisions in the material are significant because they agree with those in Capgrave's version but not with those in the Latin l i f e . How much more clearly a l l i e d to the service than to the standard-Latin l i f e Capgrave's version is can be illustrated by comparing examples from Capgrave's treatment of.the l i f e in the f i r s t part with that in Cleopatra B 1. Lectios four, five and six, for example, are found much elaborated in Capgrave's chapters five, six and seven. In Cotton Cleopatra B 1, however, the materials of Capgrave's chapter five (corresponding to .lectio four) are scattered through the sections Commendatio Qrdinis, Qualiter se habuit in Praelatione, and De 20 Asperitate Vitae ejus. In contrast, Capgrave's chapters six and seven (equivalent to lectios five and six) correspond with the undivided remainder of De Asperitate Vitae ejus. The other divisions in the service and the f i r s t part: of The Life of St. Gilbert also agree except 274 21 that l e c t i o s one and eight have each become two chapters, and there are no p a r a l l e l s i n the service f o r Capgrave's two f i n a l chapters. Even more s p e c i f i c evidence that the author of Capgrave's source was using the service as h i s model may be seen i n the. following instances. F i r s t , the comparison of G i l b e r t to Jacob (which does not appear i n the L a t i n l i f e ) i s found as Erat autem s i c u t Iacob aplastes puer s i m p l i c i t a t e graciosus. (Woolley, p. 117,11.14-15) i n the s e r v i c e , and translated into English as He was i n h i s 3ong age, and i n h i s simpilnesse f u l l gracious l i c h on-to Jacob, . . . (p. 63,11.21-22) In a d d i t i o n , there are three passages of the s e r v i c e , s u c c i n c t l y abbre-v i a t i n g d e t a i l s i n the known L a t i n versions, which are c a r r i e d over 22 l i t e r a l l y into Capgrave's work. F i n a l l y , l e c t i o s four, s i x and eight, although not adopted i n t a c t , are found as the s t r u c t u r a l units 23 of t h e i r respective chapters. From these arguments, i t i s possible to construct a revised manuscript tree leading ultimately to Capgrave's L i f e . Three q u a l i f i -cations must be recognized however: 1) the branch represented by Digby 36 developed independently from the common source; 2) the source of.the second h a l f of Capgrave's l i f e can only be p a r t i c u l a r i z e d as the \"Ur-standard l i f e \" because i t d i f f e r s from a l l the extant v i t a , but they are not to be.regarded as coalescing i n t h i s chain; 3) the f i r s t part of the manuscript sent to Capgrave was an abridged l i f e , the skeleton f o r which was the Seruicium S. G i l l e b e r t i , fleshed out by sele c t i o n s from some manuscript of the vita. The Manuscript Tree Life sent to Pope Miracle collection sent to Pope Common Source -assumed to be MS. presented to Archbishop Hubert Walter (1202-1205) J Digby 36 Source Digby .36 (14th or 15th C.) Cotton Cleopatra BI Harleian 468 (13th Century) Ur- Standard Life Lectios of Seruicium S_. Gilleb e r t i Latin Manuscript sent to Capgrave Selections from the \"standard\" l i f e short l i f e closely re-late to Ser-vice Capgrave's Life of St. Gilbert Chapters j~~ CTiapters 14-60 | 1-13 276 II At this point matters of source and style tend to merge. Clearly, certain of the recorded events diminished in significance as the years passed and as Gilbert became an established saint. Among them are the investigations into Gilbert's holy l i f e and miracles and the trips to and from Rome, both of which are rapidly summarized. His legal battles for control over his inherited livings are totally ignored; and so are his disputes with the lay brothers, except insofar as they may be seen reflected in the passage on his patience: A-nopir is pat all e pe wrongis whech were do to him or his at pat tyme, he bare hem so paciently pat he was neuyr mevid for hem. Be-side a l l bis vexacion bat he had owtward, bere was a-noper ping whech stood nyher his hert, be grete besinesse in spi r i t h , for bo houses whech he had rered, for be soules whech he had gadered, for be grete fere bat he hadde bat he schuld her no euel tytandis of hem. \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 i (p. 72,11.28-35) which i s certainly derived from the description of Gilbert's demeanour in the passages De Constantia ejus and Vexatio falsorum Fratrum of the 24 standard l i f e . This last incident was, of course, basically an internal dispute and may, therefore, have been considered of no conse-quence for a,general audience. Moreover, such a lapse in discipline is not entirely to Gilbert's credit, and the section may have been passed over on that account, just as the suggestions that Gilbert was neither physically nor mentally adept are.muted in chapter one. Other anecdotes which served to humanize Gilbert in the Latin version have also disappeared .in the process of abridgement. The most surprising exclusion is the description of his steadfast support of 277 St. Thomas a Beeket and his persecution for i t . There is no possi-b i l i t y that.the redactor's source did not contain this portion, because Gilbert's speech when he was tried in London for aiding Becket's flight is retained almost l i t e r a l l y as a general comment oh his (Gilbert's) character: . . . he wold sey sumtyme he had leuer chese to be exiled, or elles his brote.to be cutte, ban he schuld s u f f i r in his tyme be lawes of be cherch & be good customes of religion schuld fayle. (p. 73,11.3-6) Elsewhere, the saint becomes more conventional as when the story of his being tempted by his host's daughter when he was a.young man is 25 replaced by additional emphasis on his chastity in the abstract. Similarly, while both versions make his parishioners paragons of virtue, the Latin includes a brief amusing narrative where Gilbert outwits a recalcitrant farmer in order to obtain his tithes (Dugdale, p. v i i , 11.2-9). These omissions and changes in emphasis are probably the work of Capgrave's predecessor, for they are not the kinds of alterations, he was himself li k e l y to make. Moreover, none of the excluded events is mentioned anywhere in the Seruicium S. Gilleberti.\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 On.the other' \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 hand, the removal or truncation of rhetorical or supernatural passages is typical of Capgrave; and a l l of the following are represented in the service. The simile comparing Gilbert's appearance in the world to the light of righteousness which opens the Latin version: Oriens splendor justiciae, qui illuminat omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum, et ad agnitionem sui nominis vult venire; orbis occidui partes occiduas, novis lucis suae radiis tempore:occiduo i l l u s t r a v i t : cujus\" jubare caelitus immisso, velut infusum sydus 278 aethereum.fulsit, sub noctis nostrae tenebris, v i r vitae, admirabilis, . . . (Dugdale, p. v,11.1-4) and becomes Oriens clarissiumus.luxit occidenti. cum hoc lumen orturn est Anglicane genti. (Woolley, p. 115,11.6-7) in the vesper psalm is ignored by Capgrave in favour of the prosaic opening: \"This man was bore'in pat .same place cleped Sempingham\" (p. ; 62,1.31). Equally striking i s the. elimination of the,dream of Gilbert's mother quod quasi descendentem a. supernis,lunam suscepisset in synum (Dugdale, p. v,11.10-11), where, as in innumerable medieval tales of folk.heroes, the greatness of the man is made known while he is yet in the womb. If these two examples demonstrate Capgrave's tendency to avoid the non-literal, others show a,rejection of l y r i c a l expressions of emotion. One instance occurs when Capgrave introduces, in his characteristic fashion, an exegetical explanation of the suitability of Saturday, the day of rest, for Gilbert's death in place of the deeply personal lament found in Cotton Cleopatra B 1: Vix aliquid dicere poterant, qui interfuerant: singultus enim et lachrimae adhaerere fecerunt linguas suas faucibus suis; lachrimosa enim i l i a dies, quae t u l i t nobis patrem et pastorum nostrum,: germanum et amicum; nec qualem patrem habet vel.amittunt caeteri in monasteries' subditi; sed qui omnes nps, quotquot fuimus, quotquot. fueramus genuit in verbo evangelii, et fovit, un nu^tric-ius, quemadmodum gallina corigregare pullos suos \"sub alas.' -Caeterum, quid faciemus, te facto de medio, Domine? Ad quem ibimus? Quem sequemur? Timemus enim te percusso dispergi, sicut oves errantes absque pastore; nam non oportet flere super te, sed super nosmetipsos et super posteros nostros. Sed non est., quod queramus de tempore, nec quod doleamus de casu; quia extunc coepit consolatio nostra, et t i b i proveriit gloria sempiterna. (Dugdalei p. xxiii,11.24-32) 279 While there is no doubt that this passage is f i t t i n g to a contemporary l i f e and not to a revision made two hundred years later, some expres-sion parallel tp the hymn following the.ninth lectio (Wpolley, p, 121, 11.17-34), where grief, is shown transformed to joy by the master's victory in heaven, is expected. In the case of the additions, the same distinction prevails. Some are plainly the work of a predecessor or at least among those things which Capgrave says were told him by members of the Gilbertine order; others are elaborations characteristic of Capgrave's style throughout his English works. Among the former are the statement that Gilbert's father was born in Normandy and came to England with William the Conqueror and, along with i t , the most important piece of evidence for dating and locating the provenance of Capgrave's immediate source\u00E2\u0080\u0094. 26 the commentary on the family history of Lord John Beaumont. Many.of the supplementary B i b l i c a l or patristic passages and comparisons may have been added by the author of Capgrave's source. One which certainly belongs at this level i s the. allusion to Jacob referred to earlier. The only other which seems definitely a t t r i b u t -able to the earlier reviser i s the tale of Athanasius baptizing children in play; here, however, the evidence is purely s t y l i s t i c . As later discussion w i l l show, Capgrave frequently disrupts the narrative flow of his translation for a clarifying interjection, and when'this occurs, i t is sometimes demonstrable and elsewhere reasonable to assume that the;surrounding materials were present in the source. In this case, the comparison begins typically with \"Lich on-to bis man was be 280 holy Athanas in his 3ong days\"; is broken by the additional piece of information, \"bat same Athanas whech mad Quicunque Vult\"; and then continues with the anecdote, \"We rede of him , . . .\" (p. 64,1.26 -p. 65,1.9). There are no grounds on which to ascribe other insertions of this kind to either Capgrave or his source, although the temptation 27 to credit Capgrave with the more elaborate ones at least is great. In this part of the L i f e , Capgrave never mentions.his author after the prologue, and, consequently, his originality in a l l of the following examples cannot be asserted .definitely. Apart from.the 28 identification of b i b l i c a l quotations, three kinds of added material can be distinguished: passages which begin with expressions indicating their parenthetical nature; explanations or elaborations which are not introduced so specifically but which equally suggest the exegete at work; and, f i n a l l y , passages of elaboration which have no parallel in any known Latin version. Some of the f i r s t group may be categorized simply as c l a r i f i c a -tion of comparisons or figurative language. For example, the long digression on Athanasius just discussed is followed by \"Al bis is seid for our Gilberd, bat in so 3ong age had so sad condieiones and so grete 3el to lede soules in heuene\" (p. 65,11.9-11). Similarly, the figure,. \"As a trewe steward . . . he departed his Lordes whete . . . .\" (p. .65,11.14-15) is explained as \"pat is to seyn, pe word of exhor-tacion was not hid in him, but he delt i t oute frely to hem bat wold lerne\" (p. 65,11.16-18). Others show definition by specification as, for example, when he l i s t s the l i b e r a l sciences \"as gramer, retorik, 281 logik and swech obir\" (p. 63,11,31-32) or when Gilbert's duties as the, bishop's chaplain are put in contemporary terms, \"For he was a general juge, as i t semeth, to make remissiones and comminaciones r i t h as he l i s t \" (p. 66,11.4-5). Capgrave's habitual exegetical explanation of words forms part of the second group, for there is no attempt to conceal their nature as asides. His development of the word Saturday has already been mentioned. He also explains the sin of \"touchyng\" (p. 64,11.6-8) and the literary meaning of the word \"cathaloge\" (p. 80,11.1-3). A more interesting example of the same technique is found in the passage where the faults abandoned and virtues adopted by Gilbert's parishoners are exchanged for those regarded as more timely by the later author. Drinking remains a serious vice, but for the commessationibus et impudicitiis . . . spectaculis (Dugdale, p. vi,11.41-42) is inserted \"wrastillingis, ber-baytingis\" (p. 65,1.22). Similarly, while Capgrave retains tithe-paying as a foremost duty, he adds \"to walk a-boute and vi s i t e pore men, to spend her good in swech weye as is plesauns of God and coumfort to pore\" (p. 65,11.25-27). Beyond these two groups, there are certain additions which seem to be Capgrave's. The lengthy insertion in chapter one concerning Gilbert's dual heritage demonstrates both the d i f f i c u l t y of separating the various levels of authorship and the method of annotation found everywhere in Capgrave's work. Lines 3-10 on page 63 were doubtless in the source, for the Beaumont referred to was a well-known benefactor of the Gilbertine establishment in Sempringham, and to the early author 282 probably belongs the.summary statement, \"Than was bis man,medeled with too blodis, Norman of be fader side, Englisch of be moderis side.\" Lines 12-18, however, What auctoris write of bese too naciones < & ; what comendacion bei reherse of hem-is pertinent to sette her in\" magnyfying of pis man. The Normannes, pei sey, pei cam fro Norweye r& conqwered pe lond wher pei dwelle, a puple gentyl of condicion, wise and redy in batayle & grete t i l l e r e s of corn. The descripcion eke of pis nacion must a-corde her-to, be-cause bei conqwered us and at bis day her succession dwellith with us. must be assigned to Capgrave, for not only do they intervene between the sentence on the mixture of bloods and-its logical extension So semeth i t bat bis man.was not bore of no wrecchid nacion, ne of no seruage, but of puple gentil & fremanly & large, both on be fadir side and be moder. but also their contents are specifically referred to as \"pertinent,\" a clear re-iteration of Capgrave's statement in the. Prologue, only fifteen lines earlier, that he would include \"pingis . . . pertinent to pe mater\" (p. 62,11.28-29). Such an amplification is not much different in form from the other examples discussed, but i t . i s far more digressive. If i t was Capgrave's original intention to interpret his whole translation in this fashion, he either gave up his plans. almost immediately or found that not much had \"fa.lle to my.mynde\" (p. 62,1.28). While the manuscript Capgrave used.is lost and there is no known parallel to the f i r s t part of his Life of St. Gilbert, i t is possible to follow his translation in the second part; with some exactitude, for i t closely linked to the standard Latin l i f e . The evidence adduced at-the beginning of this chapter tended to prove that i t was not Capgrave, 283 but his unknown source who chose to amplify the brief l i f e . Before the s t y l i s t i c qualities of this part are considered, some note should be taken of i t s general contents. The parts translated do not include the dedicatory.letter or anything of Gilbert's early l i f e until he f i r s t established his order with the seven maidens in Sempringham, presumably because the compiler felt.the material was adequately handled in the f i r s t part. The f i r s t twelve pages (p. 80.1;23 - p. 92,1.29) follow the Latin almost l i t e r a l l y from the second paragraph of Quantum Sprevit Divitias Seculi to the middle of the passage Separatio Conjunctorum (Dugdale, p. viii,1.46 -p. xii,1.24). The most striking difference here and later between the two versions is that the beginning and ending of chapters seldom accord. The-Latin divisions are far more logical throughout; there is no evident reason, for example, why the description of the cloistering of 29 the nuns should be broken between two chapters, and i t would be 30 equally hard to justify most of the other alterations. There is no way of knowing how this particular difference came about,;and i t is not of great significance except insofar as i t provides additional circumstantial proof that Capgrave's source represents a now lost branch of the transmission of the l i f e of St. Gilbert, Until page 118, with the exceptions,that lines 34-36 on page 97 are adapted from materials found on f. 83-83v of the Cotton manuscript and that the two miracles recorded on page 102 are reversed from their manuscript order, what materials are included substantially follow both the sequence and the language of the Latin'version. The f i r s t 284 large unit omitted, from the. last half of Separatio Conjunctorum to the end of Quod Suscepit Habitum Canonici (Dugdale, p,. x i i , 1.24 -p. xvii,1.24), concerns the regulation and government of the order. In addition, Capgrave's.version gives only a summary of the rebellion of.the lay brothers (p. 94,1.32 - p. 95,1.29), and deletes both Gilbert's own letter of justification (Dugdale, p. xviii,1.48 -p. xix,1.13) and the letters from the king and bishops supporting him (R. Foreville, pp. 92-109). Finally, the whole section describing Gilbert's death i s deleted (Dugdale, p. xxii,1.28 - p. xxiii,1.39). The f i r s t two are obvious abridgments for one interested in composing a general l i f e ; the last probably came from a recognition that.it was included in the f i r s t half. None of the other omissions are of so extensive a nature, and they w i l l be dealt with shortly along with the other s t y l i s t i c considerations. The abrupt break and subsequent rearrangement of the manuscript order which occurs after the narration of the events leading to Gilbert's canonization and translation and continues to the end,of the work is evidently the result of an awkward attempt to bring the post-mortem miracles within the compass of the work rather than leave them, as they are in the known.Latin versions, as appendages to the main text. That this is a later revision i s indicated by the f i n a l i t y of the conclusion to chapter . thirty-eight which clearly shows that i t was intended as an end to the l i f e per se: Our maystir is layd now in his rest; lete us folow perfor pe steppes of his good lyf pat we may be translate' fro wrecchidnesse to ioye and borw his ledyng come to bat' cuntr wher we' schul haue ioye euyr. (p. 117,11.28-31) 285 Furthermore, the opening of the following chapter, with i t s repeated \"Now of our fader Gilbert-. . . now wil we tell e . . .\" (p. 118,11.2-6), makes clear that the recitation of the miracles was meant as a separate entity. Finally, the passage at the.end of the collection (p. 135,11.21-35) with i t s suggestion that further miracles w i l l be added, as they are not, indicates the fragmentary nature of the whole section. A l l of the miracles are. either from those recorded during Gilbert's lifetime or from the f i r s t of the two collections.appended to the l i f e , that i s , from among those which were sworn to at the papal inquiry at Sempringham before the canonization was ordered. However, 31 the order is completely changed, and despite Capgrave's claim, \"Lich pat inquysicion in sentens and in termes . . . wil we write here\" (p. 118,11.9-11), the l e g a l i s t i c formula is not followed. The f i r s t person oath, names, and places are a l l deleted, facts from the attestations of witnesses are included in the narrative, and frequently details not found in the Latin are added.. After the miracles, Capgrave gives the pope's sermon at the time of Gilbert's canonization (p. 136,1.9 - p. 141,1.2). In the Cotton manuscript this sermon,appears in a letter.to Hubert, Archbishop of Canterbury (R'. Foreville, pp. 32-36), one of the group of letters preceding the miracle collections; Since i t s composition was in fact subsequent to the inquiry into the miracles, Capgrave's unknown pre-decessor has re-established chronological order in his work. Neverthe-less, as in the .case:of the miracles themselves,.there is no 286 a s s i m i l a t i o n o f t h e sermon t o make i t an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f t h e c o m p o s i -t i o n , l a r g e l y b ecause t h e l e t t e r s i n w h i c h i t i s c o n t a i n e d a r e r e f e r r e d t o and t h e i r c o n t e n t s summarized i n c h a p t e r t h i r t y - s i x (p. 113,1.30 -P. 114,1.7), b e f o r e , t h e n a r r a t i v e p a s s e s t o t h e f i n a l e v e n t s o f t h e t r a n s l a t i o n . Though t h e ; s e r m o n i s i n e x p l i c a b l y b r o k e n i n t o f i v e c h a p t e r s , t h e r e i s no s e p a r a t i o n between i t and t h e l a s t p o r t i o n s o f t h e L i f e . O m i t t i n g t h e Pope's s p e c i f i c commands c o n c e r n i n g t h e t r a n s l a t i o n , Capgrave's \" a u t o u r \" (p. 141,1.3) t u r n s back t o t h e f i n a l c e remonies and r e c o r d s t h e i n s c r i p t i o n o f b o t h t h e p l a t e o f l e a d w h i c h c o v e r e d t h e tomb and t h e c h a r t e r e n c l o s e d w i t h t h e body (D u g d a l e , p. xxv,1.20 -p. x x v i i , 1 . 2 7 ) . To t h e s e f i n a l m e m o r i a l s , Capgrave adds h i s own t r a n s -l a t i n g d a t e and c o n c l u d e s h i s work. Many o f t h e o m i s s i o n s i n t h e second h a l f o f Capgrave's L i f e o f S t . G i l b e r t a r e so b r i e f as t o be r e g a r d e d o n l y as examples o f t h e r e v i s e r ' s a b b r e v i a t i o n o f h i s l o n g e r s o u r c e . Such i s t h e d e l e t i o n o f one o f t h e many e x p r e s s i o n s . o f G i l b e r t ' s z e a l o u s c o n c e r n f o r c h a s t i t y , quo nemo unquam f o r t i u s z e l a t u s e s t c a s t i t a t e m ( D u g d a l e , p. x i i , 1 . 2 1 ) , from t h e d e s c r i p t i o n o f how f a r a p a r t he s e t t h e houses o f monks and nuns (p. 92,11.19-29), o r t h e r e d u c t i o n o f . . . q u i a i d tamen i n i n j u r i a m e c c l e s i a e r e d u n d a r e t , r e n u i t , d i c e n s m a l l e se s u b i r e e x i l i u m quam t a l e p r a e s t a r e juramentum. C o n s i d e r a v i t enim, quod quamvis r e i Veritas a l i t e r se h a b e r e t quam p u t a b a n t , e t verum j u r a r e non n o c e a t j u r a n t i , s i - c o m p e l l i t u r , l i c e t a malo s i t e x i g e n t i s p o t i u s quam p r a e s t a n t i s y c o n t r a f i d e i tamen e t p i e t a t i s j u s t i c i a m agere v i d e r e t u r , s i j u r a r e t , e t pravum p o s t e r i s p r a e s e n t i b u s q u e - r e l i n q u e r e t exemplum, . . . (Dugdale, p. x v i i , 1 1 . 4 1 - 4 5 ) 287 to But pis refused he, for he saide he had leuer be exiled ban swere, for he wold not leue a bad exaumple to hem pat schuld come.aftir him. (p. 94,11.6-8) and there are many other similar phrases reduced or omitted. The major reason for attributing these exclusions to Capgrave's source is that many of the same phrases contain expansions typical of Capgrave. For examining the nature of the abridgments, the most-important, omissions occur in chapters twenty-one and twenty-two where the perse-cution of Gilbert for his aid to Thomas a Becket and in his dispute with the lay brothers are treated. In both cases, material not bearing on the l i t e r a l account of the.event at hand i s excised. In the f i r s t instance, Capgrave includes a l l the pertinent details of Gilbert's aid to the fugitive archbishop while he was in hiding in England; indeed, he supplements his narrative with evidence from another \"lyf of Seynt Thomas\" (p. 93,1.32). On the other hand, a l l of the essen-t i a l l y digressive description of Gilbert's light-hearted.behaviour in London as he waited to face the judges disappears (Dugdale, p. x v i i i , 11.4-12). The account from the Vexatio Falsorum Fratrum section of the standard l i f e is considerable reduced.in significance by the short space afforded i t in Capgrave's version of the revolt. As was noted earlier in the chapter, Gilbert's letter of self-defense vanishes. At the same time the whole opening paragraph abstractly discussing the invidious attempts to discredit Gilbert is omitted (Dugdale, p. x v i i i , 11.4-12). In the original, this same paragraph also contains one of 288 the rhetorical passages Quis non contra eum in hac causa se erigeret? Quis sanctae religionis subversionem pateretur. multam? Quis non justam.causam crederet ilium habere, qui in sua causa tam juste vellet procedere? (Dugdale, p.. x v i i i , 11.32-33) which tend to be banished in the process of condensation. Finally, since only Gilbert's letter mentions the specific status of the prin-cipals, the lengthy description of Ogger's recalcitrance no longer forms part of the account (Dugdale, p. xix,11.28-41). Elsewhere, similar sacrifices of l y r i c a l passages are apparent. Two of these omissions are the eulogy on Gilbert's c l a r i t y of mind and the continuing strength of his limbs, which appears in Quails erat in Senio (Dugdale, p. xx,ll.26-36)j and the lamentation on his death in the section De Obitu ejus (Dugdale, p. xxiii,11.24-33). As far as the f i r s t of these is concerned, however, a paraphrase did appear in chapter eight of the f i r s t part, and i t may be that i t was deleted here because 32 of i t s repetitive contents rather than i t s encomiastic tone. As the catalogue of s t y l i s t i c features found in the f i r s t part demonstrates, there are several kinds of additions which are typical of Capgrave\u00E2\u0080\u0094especially definitions, elaborations, and explanations which c l a r i f y the terms and figurative language used by his source. Some are simply asides or indications of .the author's learning by extra i l l u s t r a t i o n ; many, however, reveal the basic purpose of the exegetical, scholastic method, for they are attempts to correct errors or to explain the l i t e r a l content of an anecdote. In the second part, there are example's of several ways of intro-ducing and using definitions. Those.on \"a dramme\" (p. 82,11.6-7), \"honest 289 poverty\" (p. 88,11.5-7), and \"acrisia\" (p. 109,11.10-11), are no more than brief digressions from the narrative.\" The latter two, immediately expound a preceding Expression.- : : Sineet \"hones tipoverty\" is a particularly commend-able virtue, i t merits a separate sentence, while \"acrisia\", a medical term, i s relegated' to: a;/'which!' .clause.'; .On .the other hand,-.fiheLexposi-tioh of the \"dramme\", awkwardly inserted though it, is<,' shows- the ^interest-ing result of a combination; of-in.terlinearoannotatipn with Capgrave's usual attempt to explain abstract references l i t e r a l l y . The definition occurs in the middle of a passage likening the joining of the lay sisters to the nuns to the parable of the finding of the lost piece of silver. If the comparison i t s e l f seems somewhat unlikely, i t i s nevertheless in the Latin l i f e : ad congaudendum de dragma inventa convocavit arnicas (Dugdale, p. ix,ll.17-18). Capgrave f i r s t gives an expanded translation of the passage: Wommen chase he f i r s t for be similitude whech our Lord rehersed in be gospell of a womman pat had lost a dramme and found i t , who sche cleped hir frendes' to ioye with hir for hir dramme pat was found. (p. 82,11.1-5) Then he explains how this \"similitude\" is to be applied: : So bese maydenes f i r s t chosen were cause pat many oper schuld be cleped aftirward. (p. 82,11.5-6) Only at this point does he add \"A dramme is a certeyn mony of gold weying pe v i i j part of an vnce\" (p. 82,11,6-7), The whole procedure is reminiscent of the school methods where the.reader f i r s t inter-preted the whole passage and then gave an explanation of i t phrase by 33 phrase and word by word i f necessary. 290 Capgrave's treatment of the word orarium, however, suggests that he is more concerned to correct a possible error in the tradition than.merely to define the term. His phraseology.is, purposely.or not, ambiguous; but he seems to be casting doubt on the existence;of the r e l i c . While he includes the usual passage, \"Seynt Bernard gaue him a kerchy, and perin a certeyn r e l i k , \" he weakens i t f i r s t with the tag, \"as summe say,\" and then by adding, \"but I undirstond bat bis kerchy was goodly bordred on be-endes, for orarium soundith soo in gramer\" (p. 91,11.21-24). On the other hand, when he is adducing evidence to prove that Gilbert's subucula must have been his \"awbe\" rather than his \"schert,\" Capgrave goes beyond the meanings of the word,itself to a quasi-symbolic evaluation of materials presented earlier in the text. . . . a certeyn cloth of lynend whech Seynt Gilbert wered I suppose;veryly i t was his awbe, for my auctor her settetha word 'subucula' whech is both an awbe and a schert, and in be f i r s t part of bis lyf be same auctour seith bat bis holy.man wered next his skyn non hayer, as for be hardest, ne lynand, as for be softest, but he went with wolle, as with pe mene.-(p. 125,1.29 - p . 126.1.1) There are also examples throughout these chapters which conform to the known Latin version (14-23 and 30-38) of the other groups of additions discussed in reference to the f i r s t part. There are many examples where Capgrave explicates figures from the source with or without some introductory.phrase, such as \"pat is to sey\" or \"al pis 34 is seyd for.\" Passages where Capgrave elaborates by extra i l l u s t r a -tion occur: p. 89,1.32; p. 91,1.33 - p. 92,1.3; p. 92,11.29-34; p. 94,11.26-32; p. 107,11.22-25; p. 109,11.12-14; and p. 112,11.18-19. In other cases, as on p. 96,1.16 and p, 112,1.26, Capgrave adds only 291 by identifying the b i b l i c a l source of-a reference. As a f i n a l charac-t e r i s t i c change, the noting of two possible translations as \"wasch, he seith or e l l i s , water,\" (p. 112,1.27) or \"preisable, or praysid,\" (p. 136,lil8) should be observed. Levels of authorship are less easy to distinguish in the.longer, of these additions. It is tempting to ascribe those with the most l i t e r a l content, passages of comparison, for example,- to Capgrave and the more abstract ones to his predecessor. The kinds of circumstantial evidence mentioned earlier tend to support this division, but i t is by no means conclusive. The style of the miracles included in this version of The Life of St. Gilbert must be treated separately, for neither the mode of narration nor the specific miracles related accords with either the Cotton or Digby manuscript. Since the Latin i s not readily available, the following examples of miracles which are included in Capgrave's l i f e should be examined. The f i r s t i s one which he transposes only s t y l i s t i c a l l y ; he adds considerable detail to the second. Hugo de Noketun, laicus, juratus, dixit quod Ailina , uxor f r a t r i s sui Henrici,'-cum aliquamdiu egrotasset, tandem in frenesim inci d i t aut morbum frenesi similem, quia quasi furibonda aliena loquebatur, fremebat dentibus et conspuebat in faciem hominum;et i t a se gere-bat quod oportuit earn l i g a r i fere.per mensem. Postea, idem Hugo et Agnes, soror ejus, una cum viro ipsius, earn traxerunt usque ad Sempingham, ligatam in quadam biga. ; Quo cum venissent, detulerunt earn usque ad sepulchrum magistri G[ileberti]; et ibidem, nocte sequenti, convaluit et resedit, gratias agens Deo; et post,tres dies, sana ad domum reversa est. Testis Agnes, soror predicti. Hugonis, jurata, satis concordat per omnia cum predicto Hugone. Ipsam enim d i c i t se interfuisse et vidisse predictam Ailinam i t a infirmatam et curatam ad tumbam magistri G[ileberti] sicut Hugo d i c i t . 292 Testis Emma, f i l i a predicte Agnetis, jurata, dix i t se vidisse predictam Ailinam infirmatam ut dictum est; et d i c i t earn allatam fuisse ad tumbam magistri G[ileberti] et i b i curatam, sed ipsa nec interfuit, nec hoc v i d i t , sed post paucos dies, cum Ailina ad propria remeasset, curatam earn v i d i t . [Testis] Robertus de Fulebech, laicus, juvenis, juratus, idem di c i t per omnia quod Emma f i l i a Agnetis; tempore hujus examinationis facte, mortui erant predicti Henrici et Ailina uxor sua. (R- Foreville, p. 54) Alina, monialis de Chikesand, que est domus ordinis de Sempingham, jurata, dixit que per triginta annos bis autem in anno graves solita esset sentire angustias et pressuras circa cor et toto latere sinistro; tandem i t a gravata est egritudine i l i a quod credebatur incontinenti moriture et, vocatis magistro et a l i i s sacerdotibus, ut e i tanquam moriture in sacramentis extreme necessitas subvenir-ent, de consilio magistri infusa est o r i ejus aqua qua ablutum fuit corpus magistri G[ileberti] defuncti, imposito super earn pelliceo magistri Gileberti; et ipsa quasi de extasi surgens cepit convales-cere, et i t a plene successu temporis sanitati restituta est, quod numquam postea afflictionem illam sensit. Testis Sara, monialis de Chikesand, jurata, testatur satis con-corditer cum predicta Alina de infirmitate ipsius Aline et modo curationis ejus. (R-_ Foreville, p. 47) What remains after the revision in the f i r s t instance is an anecdote purposely rendered vague. The chief means of condensa-tion in Capgrave's eleven-line description of Ailina's miraculous recovery from her spell of madness (p. 131,11.2-11) is the deletion of the names of everyone involved and of the testimony of the witnesses. Thus, Ailina becomes \"a woman\" and her companions on the trip to Gilbert's tomb, idem Hugo et Agnes, soror ejus, una cum viro ipsius, become.\"hir husband and hir frendis.\" These excisions are partially responsible for the generalized character which replaces the precise, le g a l i s t i c tone of the Latin. An 293 additional cause is the removal of a l l the formulae: the oath, juratus; the identification of status, as, for example, laicus; and the reiterated d i x i t . Another kind of s t y l i s t i c change which occurs even where the translation i s virtually l i t e r a l is the replacement of the series of court reporter's phrases, marked off with commas and semi-colons, by separate sentences and dependent clauses.as when Quia quasi furibonda aliena loquebatur, fremebat dentibus et conspuebat in faciem hominum; . . . (i t a l i c s added) with i t s three independent verbs becomes For as a wod creatur sche spak, gnacching with hir teth, and voy-dyng hir spatil in opir mennes faces and women. (p. 131,11.4-5) There i s , in facty only a single indication that the known,version is not the source of this particular passage; in Capgrave's account the watch lasts for not one night but three. Capgrave's version of the second miracle (p. 127,1.30 -p. 128,1.23) contains similar alterations in favour,of a generalization. The names, the nun's residence, and the le g a l i s t i c format have a l l disappeared along with the stenographic style. For c r i t i c s like 35 Foreville, speaking in reference to the Digby manuscript^ the removal of these elements offers proof of a time lapse and hence of later composition. Here, however, despite any s t y l i s t i c arguments, there are such a large number of supplementary details that one can.only -conclude that Capgrave's source ultimately derived from a time close to Gilbert's death. 294 There is no indication in the Latin, for example, that Ailina \"lost-hir mynde\" (p. 128,11.1-2) as a result of her pain and that her violence was uncontrollable, nor that the master who brought about.her cure was Saint Gilbert's successor in the office (p. 128,11.7-8). Other additions which suggest the authority of a first-hand witness include the restoration of order to her dress and her trance-like cry \"0 moder of mercy,\u00E2\u0080\u0094What schuld we t e l l e long tale?\" (p. 128,11.19-20). The revision of most of the miracles in Capgrave's Life follows one,of these patterns. The additions to the narratives concerning the 36 miraculous cures of a clerk's withered leg, a maiden's contracted knees, 3 7 and a weaver's paralysed arm 3 8 are just as considerable as those in the one just discussed. Moreover, there are so many other 39 minor variations that there can be no doubt that the descriptions found in,Capgrave's work were made at a near contemporary period and that their presence confirms a second tradition. Throughout this portion of the text examples of Capgrave's characteristic revisions also occur. He gives definitions of podagra, 40 ad vinculam, and \"dysentery,\" for example, and for the Latin sepulchrum, he supplies \"pe graue, or elles pe sepultur\" (p. 119,1.3)..\" Similarly, he transposes Latin dates into modern terminology for 41 purposes of clarification,. and he provides extra illustrations to verify the visions at the time of Gilbert's death (p. 105,1.36 -p. 106,1.6). The most personal addition is the digression of the probable direction of Gilbert's travels in Capgrave's own part of the country (p. 103,11.17-20); the most pedantic, or,\u00E2\u0080\u00A2more f a i r l y , most 295 typically exegetical, i s the addition of the names Adam and Christ to the references to \"pe f i r s t man\" and \"pe secunde man\" (p. 103,1.1 and 1.3). Although i t is not the purpose of this chapter to provide a thorough examination of Capgrave's s k i l l as a' translator in The Life of_ S_t. Gilbert, some - evaluation must be made. Obviously, an accurate statement can depend only on those parts which are so closely a l l i e d to the known Latin versions\as to be unquestionably a near l i t e r a l translation of the common original. The two longest.passages available are the Pope's sermon at the.end of the.work, chapters 56-60, and the account of the growth of the order in chapters 15-18. Since the latter allowed Capgrave more freedom in both additions and phraseology, i t provides the better example of his method of composition. A 2 Capgrave's Life is made longer by his own elaborations, and by the less economical structure of English. The absence of cases.and the condensation permitted in Latin by the use of verbals frequently require Capgrave to make a lengthy paraphrase, and there is at least one instance where the loss of grammatical gender.produces awkwardness. Generally, however, Capgrave handles the problem with a high degree of competence. For example, i t is often possible in Latin to summarize a preceding passage with a pronoun:and participle, as in quod videns (Dugdale, p. x,1.8). In such- cases Capgrave usually adopts a subordin-ate time-clause; \"ban whan Seint Gilbert say\" (p. 85,11.12-13). Similarly, when the adjectival use of the participle plus noun or 296 adjective i s not permitted in English, as in militans Deo (Dugdale, p. ix.,1.28> or aetatem habentes (Dugdale, p. x,1.14), i t becomes an adjectival clause; \"whech seruyth God\" (p. 82,11.30-31) or \"as her age grew\" (p. 85,1.33). In one of the.cases where Capgrave preserves this latter participle, he turns an abstract Latin phrase, circumquaque vagantes (Dugdale, p. x,1.4),. into a happily colloquial English one, \"rennyng a-boute be world\" (p. 85,11.2-3). Converting the ablative absolute into idiomatic English is also a frequently,encountered d i f f i c u l t y , and with i t Capgrave is not always successful; Volente Domino (Dugdale, p. x, 1.44) becomes \"be be wil of our Lord God\" (p. 87,1.27) and i l l i s ' viventibus (Dugdale, p. xi',1.7), \"as long as pei lyued\" (p. 88,11.12-13) easily enough, but habito auxilio et consilio venerabilis Alexandri (Dugdale, p. ix,1.41) is l e f t clumsily dangling at the end of the sentence, \" f i r s t axid and had be counsel and be help of Alexander\" (p. 83,1.32). Although the compass of.this survey is short, several general observations,may be made on Capgrave's handling of larger units. F i r s t , there is seldom any want of dexterity. More importantly, however, Capgrave shows considerable s k i l l in recognizing structures parallel in Latin but not in English, phrases which must be expanded to clauses, and dependent clauses which must either become co-ordinate or totally independent to read fluently. A single example where Capgrave recorders a series of Latin accusatives w i l l suffice to show with what ease he' could change structures: 297 . . . praedicavit eis mundi contemptum, et omnis proprietatis abjectionem, suae voluntatis restrietionem.et earnis mortifica-tionem; laborem continuum, et quietem raram; v i g i l i a s multas, et somnum tenuem; jejunia prolixa et cibaria v i l i a ; vestem asperam et cultum nullum; claustri carcerem, ne mala vel prava agerent, et s i l e n t i i vicem ne.eadem dicerent; orationis et meditationis frequentiam, n e . i l l i c i t a cogitarent: . . . (Dugdale, p. x,11.15-19) To his sisteres he prechid pat pei.schuld despise pe world & cast fro her hertis a l l maner of propirte, pat i s to seyne, pei schuld pink no-ping was her, but al comoun, as religious folk must doo: he taute hem be maner who bei schuld chastise her flesch, to trauayle and to occupye hem fro ydilnesse, and neuyr to sitt e qwiete fro labour in prayer or occupacion. He taute hem for to wake & not to slepe mech, to faste longe & not to vse metes oute of tyme. Wrecchid mete, scharp cloth, pis wold he pei schuld haue; no gay aray, but sperd in cloystir as in prison, pat pei schuld do no euele; to kepe silens, pat pei schuld no euele speke, but be occupied with orisones and meditaciones to avoyde euel poutes. (p. 86,11.1-11) Obviously, Capgrave's translation is wordier than necessary and not a l l of the phrases require the restructuring he gives them. On the other hand, while i t is possible to preach \"contempt of the world,\" to preach the \"casting-down of a l l property\" sounds unnatural. Here and throughout the passage, particularly in the fi n a l section claustri . . . cogitarent, the change to i n f i n i t i v e forms gives,a less rigid tone: There are many examples of the expansion of phrases into clauses. Sometimes the abbreviated Latin passages could be translated l i t e r a l l y into correct, i f s t i l t e d , English, as: Quid enim prodest lampas ab oleo vacua; quid caro Integra mente corrupta, corpus mundum e t cor maculatum: . . . (Dugdale, p. ix,11.24-25) which Capgrave turns into three separate sentences; 298 What pr o f i t i t h a laumpe pat hat non oyle? What pr o f i t i t h clene flesch whan be soule i s corrupt? What pr o f i t i t h a body clene and a hert defouled? (p. 82,11.24-26) Others, however, demand the kind of revision Capgrave makes. Thus, tempore tantum congruo aperiendum. (Dugdale, p. ix,1.50) becomes \"for i t was opened but at certeyn tymes whech wer assigned\" (p. 84,11.21-22), and ex frequent! hospicii susceptione (Dugdale, p. xi,11.20-21) is replaced by \"for often bei come and wer loggid with him\" (p. 89,1.19). Finally, there are passages wherein Capgrave changes from a phrase or participle to a clause purely on grounds of an intuitive awareness that the meaning contained i s naturally borne by a superior unit in English. Such a response accounts for the alterations.in the following set. Quae omnia v i r Domini, cum timore et tremore, et quadam coactione accepit; plurima autem refutans et omnino contemnens, eo quod honestam paupertatem semper dillgeret. (Dugdale, p. xi, l l . 3 - 4 , i t a l i c s added) Our fadir Gilbert receyued bese possessiones with f u l gret dred; and.summe was he in maner coact to receyue; summe refused he and wold not haue hem, be-cause his desir was fro be begynnyng of his ordre bat his progenie schuld lyue in honest pouerte. (p. 88,11.1-4) Here, a translation of the ablative phrase would have clearly diminished the emphasis on the element of compulsion; and, similarly, the verbs \"refused\" and \"wold not haue\" are \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 far stronger than the comparable participles. Sometimes Capgrave does follow the Latin structure with consider-, able f i d e l i t y , and as a result the;tone...of his work becomes more. formal, even aphoristic. Among the many examples, the following demonstrate; 299 the effect particularly well: . . . . l i c h a cherch, arid bei a cherch, . . . (p. 84,-11.4-5) for ad modum ecclesiae, immo ecclesia factae (Dugdale, p. ix,1.43) . . . whos exercise i s hard and mede gret, . . . (p. 87,1.12) for quorum est actus d i f f i c i l i s , sed merces multa, . . . . (Dugdale, p. x,1.37) and among the longer ones, . . . bat Sathanas transfigur not him-self in-to an aungell of l i t h ; pat be wolf vdo not on his bak a schepis wolle; bat be ostrich tak not be wengis of.an hauke; bat be asse haue not be leones membris. (p. 85,11.21-24) for ne se transfiguret Sathans in angelum lucis, ne pellem oviriam lupus, pennas accipitris strucio, membraque leonis induat asellus agrestis. (Dugdale, p. x,11.12-13) Each of these does alter the easy, conversational tone of Capgrave's. flow, but never awkwardly. On the other hand, there are a few occasions where his attempt to make a l i t e r a l - translation of the Latin clashes with English idiom. The f i r s t two, both occuring in the same passage, are examples of the retention of a Latin dative. Examples of this usage are found throughout early English, but by the mid-15th century, they are definitely to be regarded as archaic: . . .legem sanctimoniae eis dictavit, et docuit, qua coelesti sponso placerent. (Dugdale, p. ix,11.31-32, i t a l i c s added) 300 becomes he mad to hem a lawe of hblynesse & tawte hem bat same with whech bei schuld plese to be heuenly spouse. . . . (p. 83,11.12-14, i t a l i c s added) However, when.he translates . . . ad majorem sui ruinam, et sanctae religionis subversionem: (Dugdale, p. x,11.11-12) as . . . to grete schame of hemself and grete vylony.to religion. (p. 85,11.19-20) Capgrave is neither' idiomatic nor parallel in structure. In sum, a l l of the evidence adduced leads to the conclusion that Capgrave's translation is a serviceable, workmanlike effort, f i l l e d with evidence of learning, and showing both the establishment of certain principles for revision and a capacity for explanations. However, there is no assimilation, much less a r t i s t i c re-creation, of the two versions, and i t would be wrong,to suggest that either Capgrave or his predecessor demonstrates great talent as an adaptor. 301 Footnotes I n t e r n a l documentation f o l l o w s these p r i n c i p l e s . The only p r i n t e d L a t i n V i t a of St. G i l b e r t appears p a r t i a l l y i n : Dugdale, Monasticon, VI (London, 1830), v - x x i x , and p a r t i a l l y i n : R. F o r e v i l l e , Un proces de c a n o n i s a t i o n au X I I I e . s i e c l e : Le L i v r e de St. G i l b e r t ( P a r i s , 1943). The former i s c i t e d as e.g., Dugdale, p.x,1.10; the l a t t e r , as e.g., R. F o r e v i l l e , p. 6. Capgrave's L i f e of St. G i l b e r t of Sempringham, ed. J . J . Munro, E.E.T.S., O.S., 140 (London, 1910), i s c i t e d simply by page and l i n e . The L a t i n Seruicium S_. G i l l e b e r t i , ed. R.M. Woolley, Henry Br ads haw S o c i e t y , LIX (London, 1921), 115-126, i s c i t e d as e.g., Woolley, p.118,1.2. \"^No separate a r t i c l e s e x i s t ; i t i s not used as a source i n e i t h e r of the two books d e a l i n g w i t h G i l b e r t and h i s order; and i t i s mentioned only i n passing i n treatments of Capgrave h i m s e l f . 2 R. F o r e v i l l e , p. xxxv. 3 G i l b e r t c e r t a i n l y died i n 1189, and he had then passed one hundred. Whether h i s age i s to be read as centesimo sexto or merely senex has been a source of d i s p u t e . I b i d . , p.ix,n.2. 4 Dugdale, p.xi,1.31. In t h i s same s e c t i o n , p . x i i , 1 1 . 2 - 3 , r e c o g n i t i o n of G i l b e r t ' s v i r t u e i s strengthened by the Pope's a s s e r t i o n that he would have made G i l b e r t Archbishop of York had he known him before he f i l l e d the vacancy. \"*For a d i s c u s s i o n of the o r g a n i z a t i o n and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of these monasteries, see R. Graham, _S. G i l b e r t of Sempringham and the G i l b e r t i n e s : A H i s t o r y of the Only E n g l i s h Monastic Order (London, 1901). ^The nature of t h i s i n q u i r y forms the b a s i s of R. F o r e v i l l e ' s work noted above. 7 T h i s passage i s the most important piece of evidence c o n f i r -ming Capgrave's residence i n England i n 1451 and some delay between the composition of the St^. Augustine and the _St. G i l b e r t . g Munro, I n t r o d u c t i o n , p. i x ; R. F o r e v i l l e , p. 113; R. Graham,' p. v. 9 R.\u00C2\u00BB F o r e v i l l e , p. x i v - x v i i . ^ I t i s a l s o more probable than, f o r example, the theory of G i l b e r t ' s DNB biographer, T. A. Archer, that the Cotton and H a r l e i a n v e r s i o n s derived from that of Digby 36. See DNB, V I I (Oxford, 1921-22), 1196, c o l . 1. ^See: David Knowles, \"The Revolt of the Lay Brothers of Sempringham,\" EHR, L (1935), 465-487. 12 This characteristic self-dreprecatory topos is also found in Capgrave's own prologue as \"I, ffrer I.C., amongis doctouris l e s t , \" p. 61,1.3. 13 Tentatively identified by R. . Foreville, p. xxi, as one Ralph de L i l l e , a Gilbertine canon who was sacristan i n the church at Sempringham. 14 There are two additional letters in Digby 36, published i n Knowles, p. 479 and p. 483. R^.-. Foreville, p. xv. My preliminary investigation of the Digby MS raised severe doubts about the accuracy of Mile\u00E2\u0080\u00A2>Foreville's statements. She says, for example, les Miracula y sont represented seulement par des extraits pour la plupart d'ailleurs t i r e du second recueil, lequel, posterieur au proces de canonisation et depourvu d'attestations authentiques, ne presente pas le caractere o f f i c i e l qui f a i t toute la valeur du premier. (p. xv) In fact, of the 28 miracles which Digby 36 gives, 14 are from the f i r s t , the o f f i c i a l collection, 12 are from the second, and 2 are unparalleled in Cotton Cleopatra B 1. And, despite her categorical denial of \"attestations authentiques,\" virt u a l l y a l l of the reports are accompanied by the legal formula iuratus di x i t , and most include the testimony of witnesses who are identified as such. These factors \u00E2\u0080\u0094 especially the two unparalleled miracles \u00E2\u0080\u0094 and the two letters Knowles pointed out suggest a contemporary basis rather than .= \u00C2\u00BB\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Foreville's contention that Digby's source was composed at a time quite distant from the canonization proceedings. I have made a collation of the contents of Digby 36 against both Cotton Cleopatra B 1 and Capgrave. However, the tables would not be appropriate here, since neither the order nor selection of the materials in Digby 36 \u00E2\u0080\u0094 the miracles in particular \u00E2\u0080\u0094 shed any fur-ther light on Capgrave's source. Capgrave does not include the two miracles unique to Digby 36: he excludes some of the others as well, and there is certainly no correspondence in the order i n which they are reported. 303 Obviously the evidence is always tenuous in discussing manu-scripts no longer extant but which are presumed to have once existed. This particular argument is further complicated by disagreements over the date of Digby 36. While R. Foreville, p.xv, and Archer, DNB, VII, 1196, col. 1, place i t in the 15th, Knowles, p. 474 ascribes i t to the 14th. 16 Contained in Digby 36, f,110v-116v. Printed in The Gilbertine Rite, ed. R. M. Woolley, Henry Bradshaw Society, LIX (1921), 115-126. 1 7Capgrave, see: p.80,1.21; p.85,11.24-31; p.125,1.30; p.130,1.4; p.141,1.3. 18 In the following l i s t of l i t e r a l l y translated passages, the many additions and omissions are not accounted for. The references in the l e f t column are to pages and lines in Capgrave's l i f e ; in the right to those in Cotton Cleopatra B 1 as printed in Dugdale's Monasticon. p.63 ,11.26-27 p.v,11.23-24 p.63 ,1.32 - p. 64,1. 1 p.v,11.36-37 p.64 ,11.3-5 p.v,11.44-45 p.64 ,11.22-24 p.vi,11.8-9 p.64 ,11.24-25 p.vi,11.10-11-p.65 11.14-16 p.vi,11.39-40 p. 65 ,11.18-29 p.vi,11.40-45 p.65 11.32-33 p.vi,11.9-10 p.66 11.1-3 p.viii,1.10-11 p.66 11.7-8 p.viii,1.3-4 p. 66 11.9-21 p.vii,11.36-42 p. 66 11.22-25 p.viii,11.38-40 p. 66 11.26-31 p.vii,11.15-19 p.66. 1.35 - p. 67,1. 1 p.ix,11.16-17 p.67, 1.28 p.xii,11.34-35 p.67, 1.29 - p. 68,1. 4 p.xiv,11.13-19 p.68 11.6-10 p.xi,11.3-5 p.69, 11.5-10 p.xiv,11.10-12 p.69, 11.14-18 p.xv,11.29-31 p.69, 11.18-19 p.xv,1.32 p.69, 1.23 - p. 70,1. 3 p.xv,11.33-40 p.70, 11.5-8 p.xv,11.41-42 p.70, 11.8-11 p.xvi,11.1-2 p.70, 11.11-19 p.xv,11.46-50 p.70, 1.20 - p. 71,1. 1 p.xvi,11.3-10 p.71, 11.3-11 p.xvi,11.10-14 p.71, 11.19-21 p.xvi,1.15 p.71, 1.23 - p. 72,1. 13 p.xvi,11.15-27 p.72, 1.25 p.xvii,1.6 p.73, 11.8-11 p.xx,11.26-29 p.73, 11.12-14, 15-19 p.xx,1.29-31 304 p.73,1.27 - p.74,1.13 p.xxi,11.22-31 p.74,11.18-29 p.xxii,11.9-12 p.75,11.5-16 p.xxii,11.28-35 p.75,11.16-31 p.xxii.l1.38-43 p.76,1.2 - p.77,1.13 p.xxii,1.43 - p.xxiii,1.16 p.77,1.15 p.xxiii,1.21 p.77,11.18-23 p.xxiii,11.21-24 p.77,1.23 - p.78,1.4 p.xxiii,11.33-39 p.78,1.21 - p.79,1.16 p.xxiv, 1.'.38 - p.xxv,1.5 1 9Ed. R.M. Woolley, p.117,11.11-19,26-35; p.118,11.1-13,25-34; p.119,11.1-7,14-20,38 - p.120,1.3; p.120,11.11-16,24-31. 20 Those passages which are adopted l i t e r a l l y are put forth in n.18; the break between Qualiter se Habuit in Praelatione and De Asperitate Vitae ejus f a l l s mid 1.18 on p. 79 of Capgrave's work. 21 Lectio one becomes chapters one and two; lectio eight, chap-ters nine and ten. 22 Woolley Capgrave p.117,11.31-35 p.66,11.21-25 p.118,11.1-13 p.67,11.6-28 p.120,11.24-31 p.77,11.25-32 23 To show how closely l i t e r a l these passages are, the Latin is given in f u l l with the corresponding page and line reference in Cap-grave's Life following. Lectio 4, p.118,11.25-34 Qualiter autem se gesserit in pastorali haut dubium quin t o t i iam innotuerit anglorum regioni (p.68,11.19-21) . Erat autem homo h i l l a r i s et iocundus prudens in verbis et urbane eloquencie nec habens in eloquio quicquam reprehensibilitatis admixtum (p.69,11.14-16). Exteriori quoque scemate conformis immo forma facta subditis (p.69,11.18-19) ens in i l l i s quasi unus ex i l l i s (p.69,1.21). Omnia uero que minoribus imperauit in se prius quantum decuit ipse seruauit (p.69,11.23-24). Cum comedebat non quod s i b i sumeret sed quod ceteris tribueret: uoluit apponi p.69,11.24-25) H i l l a r i s conuiua. commensales uultu pocius quam esu saciabat. Unde et miro affectu tarn a suis quam ab alienis diligebatur (p.70,11.2-3). 305 Lectio 6, p.119,11.14-20 Quante fuerit magnanimitatis et constancie. patet non solum in arduis magnorum negociorum que f e l i c i t e r expleuit agressibus: uerum eciam in multis id liquet iniuriarum quas pie t u l i t pro iu s t i c i a tolleranciis (p.72,11.25-28). Tusticie autem et veritatis in tantum erat emulator, ut diceret malle se subire exilium seu guttur prebere secandum: quam sinere quantum in ipso erat aeclesie iura et sancte religionis institua deperire (p.73,11.2-6). (Note also that the phrase seu guttur prebere secandum occurs here and in Capgrave's version, but not in Cotton Cleopatra B 1.) Lectio 8, p.120,11.11-16 Appropinquante autem tempore uocacionis sue cepit plus solito lascescere. pronunciauitque se in hac uita diucius non posse subsistere: quia tocius nature aminiculis destituebature (p. 75,11.8-12) Mox igitur insinuauit per literas omnibus ecclesiis suis sui resolucionem imminere (p.75,11.16-18). postunlans ut oracionibus suis exitum eius munirent (p.75, 11.19-21). 24 See, for example, Dugdale, p.xviii,11.2-12 and p.xix, 11.14-16. 25 The passage occurs in Dugdale, p.vi,11.25-32. 26 Beaumont's w i l l i s dated September 8th, 1396; and he was a well-known benefactor of the Sempringham monastery in whose church he was buried. 27 Others include, Capgrave, the references to Solomon's moder-ation, p.68,11.10-12; to Job's seed, p.68,11.24-25; to Solomon's words, p.69,11.21-23; to \"pe elde faderes lyues of Egipt,\" p.71,11.12-14; to Christ's words to his apostles, p .71,11.17-19; and the addition of Moses to Caleph in the elaboration of the comparison of the aged Gilbert to b i b l i c a l figures, p.73,11.18-22. 28 Ibid., Job, p.63,1.25 and p.77,1.22; the psalm reference p.74,1.20. 29 In Capgrave, in chapters fifteen and sixteen, p.82,1.19 -p.84,1.31. In Dugdale, in the section De Exordio Ordinis de Sempingham et Inclusione Monialium, p.ix,1.23 - p.x,1.2. 306 30 The following table locates the beginnings of chapters in the second part of Capgrave's Life of St. Gilbert in terms of the printed Latin version, Cotton Cleopatra B 1. English Chapter 14 Chapter 15 Chapter 16 Chapter 17 Chapter 18 Chapter 19 Chapter 20 Chapter 21 Chapter 22 Chapter 23 Chapters 24-31 Inclusive Latin Second paragraph Quantum Sprevit Divitias Seculi, Dugdale, p.viii,1.46. Third line, second paragraph of De Exordio Ordinis de Sempingham et Inclusione Monialium, Ibid., p.ix,1.23. Third paragraph, same section, same, 1.45. Beginning of Conversio laicorum Fratrum, Ibid, p.x,1.28. Beginning of Quod adiit Dominum Papam Eugenium, Ibid., p . x i , l . l l . Beginning of Quod comissum est ei a_ Domino Papa Regimen Ordinis sui, same, 1.31. Fourth line of Ordinatio Canonicorum, Ibid., p.xii,1.11. Breaks with l i t e r a l translation for summary of tribulations. Fourth paragraph of De Constantia ejus, Ibid., p.xviii,1.12. Fourth line, second paragraph of Qualis erat in Senio, Ibid., p.xx,1.46. Narrative rather than l e g a l i s t i c versions of miracles done during Gilbert's l i f e . In the Latin, they are treated as independent items; in the English they are frequently gathered into single chapters. More-over, as n.31 shows, their order is not sequential. 307 English Chapter 32 Chapter 33 Chapter 34 Chapter 35 Chapter 36 Chapter 37 Chapters 38-55 Inclusive Chapter 56 Chapter 57 Chapter 58 Chapter 59 Chapter 60 Latin Beginning, Incipit Canonizatio beati Gilberti, Dugdale, p.xxv,1.20. Tenth line, second paragraph, same section, same, 1.47. Ninth line, third paragraph, same section, Ibid., p . x x v i , l . l l . Eleventh line, fourth paragraph, same section, same, 1.37.;' Beginning, sixth paragraph, same section, Ibid., p.xxvii,1.14. Beginning, second paragraph, De Translatione S^. Gileberti Confessoris, same, 1.44. ' ' . Post-mortem miracles treated in the same way as earlier ones. First nine lines not in Latin, then begins with third line Pope Innocent I l l ' s letter to Archbishop of Canter-bury, Cotton Cleopatra B 1, f.l32v, printed R;.Foreville, p.32. Mid 15th line, f i r s t paragraph of letter, f.133, Ibid., p.33,1.7. Beginning third paragraph of letter, f.l33v, same, 1.41. '\. Beginning fourth paragraph of letter, f.l34v, Ibid., p.34,1.26. Thirty-sixth line, fourth paragraph of letter, f.l35v, Ibid., p.35,1.16. No provision has been made in this chart for the many places i n which a single chapter is made up of more than one Latin section or i n which whole passages are omitted. 308 The miracles done by G i l b e r t ' s i n t e r c e s s i o n during h i s l i f e appear i n Capgrave's' L i f e from p.98,1.2 - p.104,1.13 and t o t a l eleven. The following table gives Capgrave's page and l i n e references on the l e f t ; the Cotton Cleopatra B 1 f o l i o references, along with R. Fore-v i l l e ' s page numbers, on the r i g h t . 1. p. 98,11.2-30 f.75v-76; p. 74-75 2. p. 99,11.2-11 f.76; p.75 3. p. 99,11.12-31 f.76-76v; p.75- 76 4. p.100,11.2-11 f.76v; p.76 5. p.100,11.12-26 not i n L a t i n 6. p.100,11.27-35 not i n L a t i n 7. p.101,11.2-27 f.79-79v; p.78- 79 8. p.101,1.28 - p.102,1.3 not i n L a t i n 9. p.102,11.5-17 f.81v-82; p.81 10. p.102,11.18-32 f.81-81v; p.80 11. p.103,1.2 - p.104,1.13 f.80v-81; p. 79-80 In the second group, there are twenty-nine miracles. The tabular arrangement i s the same. 1. p.118 ,1.12 \u00E2\u0080\u0094 p. 119,1.27 f.l40v-142; p. 42-43 2. p. 119 ,1.29 - p. 121,1.11 f.l.42-142v; p.43-\u00E2\u0080\u00A244 3. p..121 ,11.13-22 f.1.44; p.46 4. p.121 ,1.23 - p. 122,1.6 f.,153v-154; p.56 5. p.122 ,11.8-28 f,154v; p.57 6. p. 122 ,1.29 - p. 123,1,8 f.l42v-143; p.44 7. p. 123 ,1.10 - p. 124,1.22 f.l49-149v; p.51-52 8. p. 124 ,11.24-34 f.147; p.49 9. p. 12.5 ,11.1-4 not i n L a t i n 10. p. 125 ,11.5-21 f.l48v-149; p.51 11. p. 125 1.23 - p. 126,1.17 f.l46v-147; p.48 12, p\u00E2\u0080\u009E126 1.1.19-29 f.l55v-156; p.58 13. p. 126 1.30 - p. 127,1.6 f.153; p.55 14. p. 127 11.8-28 f.144-145; p.46 15. p.127 1.30 - p. 128,1.23 f.l45v; p.47 16. p. 128 1.24 - p. 129,1.3 f.143; p.44 17. p. 129 11.5-15 f.l43v-144; p.45 18. p.129 11.16-28 f.l45-145v; p.47 19. p.129. 1.30 - p. 130,1.36 f.l45v-146v; p.48 20. p. 131 11.2-11 f.l51v-152; p.54 2.1. p. 131 11.12-15 f.l.52v; p.55 22. p. 131 11.16-27 f.l52-152v; p.54 23. p. 131, 1,29 - p. 132,1.7 f.l54v-155; p. 57-58 2.4. p. 132, 11.8-10 f.l55-155v; p.58 25. p.132, 11.11-14 f,155v; p.58 26. p. 1.32, 1 s 15 \"\u00E2\u0084\u00A2\" p \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 133,1.4 f.l50-150v; p.52-53 27. p. 133, 11.6-23 f.!53-153v; p.56 28. p. .133, 1.25 - p. 134,1.27 f.l47v-149; p.50 29. p. 134, 1.29 - p. 135,1.21 f.l51-151v; p.53 309 32 A passage of similar tone occurs in the dedicatory letter to Archbishop Hubert Walter, Cotton Cleopatra B 1, f.33-33v (de Fore-v i l l e , p.2,11.10-17). The dedication was not, of course, a part of the version Capgrave worked from. 33 Beryl Smalley, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages (Oxford, 1952), p. 94. 3 4With the tag: p.86,11.2-3; p.87,11.25-26; p.91,1.5; p.93, 11.22-24. Without: p.95,1.3; p.112,11.23-24,1.27,11.29-36; p.114, I. 15; p.138,1.11. 35 R. Foreville, p. xv. 36 The addition is found p.118,11.21-34. It is also interesting that Capgrave specifically declares that the clerk's name is unknown when i t is given as Symon in the Latin version. 3 7Additions include: p.119,1.30; p.120,11.3-5,4-10,25-26,31-33; p.121,11.1-12. 38 Additions are p.130,11.6-17,21,27-29. 39 See: the miracle of Gilbert's canon Albyn p. 98; the des-cription of the smith's cup, p. 100,11.1-3; details on the London f i r e , p.102,1.19; the words of the shipmen, p. 104,11.3-4; and also, p.122, II. 32-33; p.126,1.3; p.131,11.22-24; p.132,1.36 - p.133,1.4; p.133,11.15-17. 40P.99,11.16-17; p.121,1.17; p.128,1.26. 41P.118,1.20; p.131,1.13. Apart from the developments of the terms \"neophyte\" and \"honest pouerte\" which have already been discussed, there are explanatory elaborations on p .82,11.20-22; p.83,11.2-5,11.9-11,11. 20-21; p.84,11.9-10,11.26-28; p.85,1.12; p.86,1.26; p.87,1.1; p.88,11.7-10. 43 Jam tempus advenit, ut egrederetur dilectus cum dilecta in agrum mundi (Dugdale, p.x,1.41) becomes the very clumsy \"Now is the tyme come bat be welbeloued masculyne with the welbeloued feminine schuld go oute in-to be feld of bis world, . . . \" (Capgrave, p.87, 11.19-21, i t a l i c s added). CHAPTER V I I THE SOLACE OF PILGRIMS AND THE CHRONICLE OF ENGLAND Between the four saints' lives and Capgrave's last two English works a major distinction must be made; for, despite their often barren style, the lives belong to a recognized literary genre while The Solace of Pilgrims and The Chronicle of England must be classified with non-imaginative literary forms. It is true that history and literature go hand in hand in the early period and that travel bocks and histories are studied by scholars in both fi e l d s . The Beowulf, for example, has been examined alike for i t s links with the historical past and for i t s poetic metres, diction, and legendary substance; and without such works as the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, King Alfred's Orosius, and the Old Eng-l i s h version of Bede's Ecclesiastical History, the Old English prose remains would be much abbreviated. Similarly, though the body of l i t -erature becomes far larger in Middle English and certain of the writ-ings have considerable literary merit or interest, the two genres continue to occupy a prominent position. The consanguinity of the two fields is nowhere better demonstrated than in the search for the his-torical genesis of the Arthurian material which was ultimately to grow into the greatest of the literary romance cycles. But a point comes when c r i t i c a l judgement has to be exercised; and i t must be recognized that among the vast output of this period there are many works whose contribution either to the study of beliefs 311 of medieval men or to the development of a vernacular prose style is insufficient to win them literary status. Such works are important documents, but literature only within the broadest definition. To this category Capgrave's last two English compositions have to be relegated. There are not in either of them many noteworthy descriptive passages. In both the prose style i s undistinguished; and there is not even in them the redeeming feature of the author's persona, for Capgrave seems to have taken special pains to efface himself from both works. Unlike the saints' lives in which he palpably relied on a well-defined source, in both these works Capgrave ranged over the familiar medieval compendia, using (with few exceptions) only the most readily available and best known ones. But more disappointing than the conven-tionality of the items is the fact that in selecting, arranging, and commenting upon them, Capgrave systematically denies his readers glimp-ses of his personal experiences and attitudes, except insofar as he, as a scholar, occasionally tries to judge the relative h i s t o r i c i t y or accuracy of certain reports. Objectivity i s not for him a mask hiding ironies or allowing unorthodox views to be introduced, but rather an all-pervasive and dulling mode of the non-involved collector-collator. When he mentions England, he frequently refers to i t as \"this\" or \"our\" land, but there is no sense of an emerging nationalism; he evinces no partisan pride in i t s victories or i t s heroes nor any feeling of defen-siveness when he notes i t s defeats or describes i t s v i l l a i n s . On another scale, though he perhaps cites in these two works Augustinian foundations and fr i a r s more often than those of any other order, his 312 remarks on them are equally dispassionate.^ And even when he could introduce personal response to, or memory of, a place or event, he con-sistently bypasses i t in favour of concrete reportage. Both the Solace and the Chronicle share what may be called this anonymous style, which is at once the principal characteristic and the main limitation of the works. That is was intentional is patent; i t s ultimate effect, however, in this case, is to inhibit even descriptive criticism and to preclude any attempt at literary judgement. THE SOLACE OF PILGRIMS Capgrave's anonymous style is immediately evident in his account of the sights he saw in Rome that are recorded in his The Solace of Pilgrims. Much of his commentary testifies that he personally visited the shrines described and made enquiries to discover the truth about recorded events and myths, and even sought to find additional informa-tion; but he is never emotionally, much less s p i r i t u a l l y , moved by the reli c s he describes or the passions he commemorates. In absolute terms, Capgrave could have written many of the de-scriptions by sifting through accounts of shrines in the martyrologies and by reading the standard histories. For example, he need not have seen the woman washing at a certain gate (p. 9) nor the horses carrying salt down from the mountains (p. 11) to say that they did so. And, similarly, the position of the various monuments in relation to each 313 other and of the a l t a r s and chapels within the churches was a s c e r t a i n -able both from books and from maps l i k e the unknown contemporary one that Capgrave informs the reader included the places he describes (p. 2). Once, i n f a c t , Capgrave states that he has not seen the place which i s the subject of the chapter: Archus p r i c i t a r q u i n i i i s an o t h i r place and i n uery suryte I wot not where i t standith. The descripcioun of pe place schal I write as I fynde leuynge be s o i l e f o r to be soute of hem bat w i l walk and take heed more b i s i l y ban I ded. (p. 45) But more often a vague phrase, such as \"as 3et i s sene,\" \"as we goo to,\" or \"stant 3et,\" or a reference to an i n s c r i p t i o n he records and transl a t e s , or a painting which he discusses i n some d e t a i l indicates that he was himself there. In some of the largest churches \u00E2\u0080\u0094 St. John Lateran (pp. 71-76) and Santa Croce (pp. 76-79) \u00E2\u0080\u0094 he was apparently a member of a group being given a guided tour, f o r he r e g i s t e r s the im-portant parts of the church i n an ordered sequence and moves from one sight or place to another with phrases such as \"than go we,\" \" a f t i r v i s i t a c i o u n of bese places we entre i n to,\" \"now go we upward,\" and \"than go we down.\" It i s rare i n the Solace to f i n d a general impression, and the few that are present are u n s p e c i f i c , mere substitutes f o r more concrete d e t a i l s . Of the church of S. V i t a l e , he says only, A f u l desolate place i t i s and a l i n ruine as pere be many moo. (p. 112) before turning to a d e s c r i p t i o n of St. V i t a l i s ' martyrdom; and the statement that S. Maria d i Palma 314 . . . is a praty l i t i l cherch & a place annexid bertoo where is comounly a tavern to the counfort of pilgrimes. (p. 162) is only a prelude to his \"gessing\" about the source of the name and to his recounting of the story of Christ's appearance to Peter in the neighborhood of the church. Through these and other techniques, Capgrave excludes himself from the scenes depicted in the Solace; he also refuses opportunities to v i v i f y his work by directing i t more particularly to the \"solace\" of his countrymen. His language and his planning make clear that he wrote with a vernacular audience in mind, but he only refers to Englishmen, or to their history and customs, on five occasions. Early in the work, he differentiates between methods of ploughing in Italy and England (p. 6); a few pages later, he reports that amphitheatres were \"round swech as we haue in pis lond\" (p. 17) in contrast to other, semi-circu-lar theatres. Among his proofs that the adoption of Christianity was not the cause of Rome's downfall, he introduces the British heroes Belinus and Brennus' mythical conquest of Italy (p.20); and he acknowl-edges that \"an englisch frere\" described to him the recent translation of St. Susanna (p. 123). The f i r s t two of these references are at least intended to strengthen the reader's conception of what the author is describing, but the other two are in their varying ways only inciden-tals. The f i f t h and longest reference to England occurs when Capgrave treats the question of the hist o r i c i t y of St. 'George, but.even here he does not elaborate. Having decided in favour of the accuracy of the Church's ancient councils which numbered St. George among the saints, 315 he poses a second question: But a mongis studious men i s meuyd pis doute. Whi yat be region of ynglond hath b i s seynt i n so s p e c i a l reuerens pat p e i make him a p r i n c i p a l capteyn i n her batayles and t r o s t up on him most a f t i r god. (pp. 88-89) Then, without a si n g l e example of George's a i d to Englishmen or any \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 prayer to h i s country's patron s a i n t , he drops the issue as unresolved as he found i t : Many pingis haue I herd i n b i s mater but of non auctor i t e and berfor w i l I leue i t r i t h as I fynde. (p. 89) Capgrave's r e f u s a l to make any comment which suggests h i s own involvement or v i v i f i e s his own experience i s evident even on the two occasions when he was obviously part of a large crowd at a Lenten s t a t i o n . He mentions that the s e l l i n g of r e l i c s , the celebration of the mass, and the \" t a r i i n g of be puple\" are a l l at' the church ofi.St. John and St. Paul only to prove that the s t a t i o n i s there, and not i n the monastery of St. Andrew (p. 89); and \"pe prees\" (p. 102) at St. Lawrence Panisperna i s mentioned only to account for the f a c t that he was unable to take notes on the \"many obir r e l i k e s . \" C l e a r l y , he selected the s t o r i e s he would t e l l concerning the various monuments from a wide range of p o s s i b i l i t i e s , and i n h i s selec-t i o n he reveals h i s p e r s i s t e n t s c h o l a r l y and b i b l i c a l o r i e n t a t i o n . It i s , nevertheless remarkable that the Solace should be almost devoid of l o c a l colour that would form a backdrop or frame, or at the very l e a s t a context, f o r h i s d e s c r i p t i v e accounts. The s i n g l e digression r e l a t i n g a contemporary Roman custom (and i t i s one Capgrave found d i s t a s t e f u l ) 316 stands out for the vividness of i t s reporting: Up on pis h i l l i s gret ordinaunce on fastinging Sunday for per be grete cartis with bugles perin for to drawe hem and be cartis f u l of swyn, all e bis ordinaunce is sette a boue be h i l l and bere come be romanes with armour and swerdis in her best aray for he bat may cacch a mussel of flesch bat day he is a man for euyr. Thus sodeynly be cartes go down and be men be redy with speris for to gor pe bestis so what for be grete descence and sodeyn fro be h i l l and hurt of be bestis and cry of be men be ger brekith and be bestis are loos a f u l onlikly game me pout3 i t was wher be flesch i s hewe with rusty heren [iron] and summe men hurt and summe dede but bis i s her elde game whech bei can not leue. (pp. 50-51) Notwithstanding this general absence of personality, The Solace of Pilgrims is,:Capgrave';s, ;mosti:de.iLi|6.6r.sfeely.yC0.nfteiyed^land.c\"cenae4StttlXy executed work and the only one for which he himself devised the plan. For this reason i t deserves careful examination and analysis. In the f i r s t chapter of this study, arguments were presented for dating Cap-grave's trip to Rome in 1449, and the internal evidence proving that the Solace could not have been completed later than 1452 was noted. More interesting than the problem of dating, however, is Capgrave's total design and the unified composition of the work; for, almost cer-tainly, he wrote the Solace with the whole composition in mind, from notes which he had taken on his v i s i t to Rome and which he elaborated and organized either during his recuperation or after his return to England. In his introduction, Capgrave f i r s t declares that the regards his work as traditional, and he cites Pictagorus, Plato, Saint Jerome, Marco Polo, and Sir John Mandeville as the illustrious models which he w i l l try to emulate: 317 Many men in pis world aftyr her pilgrimage haue l e f t memoriales of swech pingis as pei haue herd and seyn bat nowt only here eres schuld bere witnesse but eke her eyne . . . . Aftyr a l l pese grete cryeris of many wonderfull bingis I wyl follow with a smal pypying of swech straunge s i t i s as I haue seyn and swech straunge bingis as I haue herd. (p. 1) Next, he ranks according to their r e l i a b i l i t y the three kinds of evidence he has: . . . I schal not write but bat I fynde in auctores & bat is for a principall, or e l l i s pat I sey with eye and pat is for a secundari, or e l l i s pat I suppose is soth lete pat be of best auctorite. (p. 1) Finally, he delineates his planned divisions: The f i r s t part schal declare the disposicioun of rome fro his f i r s t makyng. The secunde part schal declar be holynesse of be same place fro his f i r s t crystendam. (p. 2) Since Capgrave himself entitled his work \"solace of pilgrimys\" (p. 2), the reader is prepared for the devotional rather than the mar-vellous limits of the \"straunge s i t i s \" and expects that both parts w i l l be directed towards the revelation of \"be spiritual tresor of rome\" (p. 60); and this emphasis is indeed confirmed throughout. Capgrave's interest, for example, in the pagan monuments of the f i r s t book is not in the gods or in the events they commemorate or even in their cere-monial and j u d i c i a l functions but in the holy purposes to which they have been turned. This concentration accounts for the statement that prefaces his discussion in chapter eight of twelve archeological remains (most of them temples): Of opir holy places spoken of in our legendis and martilogis wil we trete now for i t is a grete counfort on to our deuocioun 318 bat whan we rede of hem we may remembr bat we sey him. (p. 21) It also explains his choice of the b i b l i c a l l y - c i t e d tablet confirming the friendship of the Romans and Jews preserved in the palace of Trajan and Hadrian as the single item worthy of note there (pp. 48-49), and of the subject matter of most of his annotations in the f i r s t part. Fur-ther, i t indicates why Capgrave would regard a description of Caesar's death as \"ouyr longe for to t e l l e and eke ouyr fer fro our purpos\" (p. 25), while allowing such moral or exegetical digressions as those on V i r g i l ' s fore-knowledge of Christ's impending birth (p. 27), the conquest of Rome by the British (p. 28), the philosophy of the Gymnoso-phists (p. 30), the a b i l i t y of e v i l s p i r i t s to delude men (p. 38), and 3 the existence of holy people before the coming of Christ (p. 40). If his subject matter is limited in this way, i t is also true that his use of authorities does not precisely correspond with the order he suggests in his Prologue. Though he apparently regarded written sources as the primary documentation for information and re-4 peatedly refers to the specific text he uses, he was well aware of the possible conflicts that exist between authorities and of the inevita-b i l i t y of error: \"for errour of writeris I can not discern\" (p. 16); \"Swech contradiccioun is alday in cronciles . . . \" (p. 71). When he l i s t s different theories, he variously concludes the arguments, some-times stating that he believes one is \"be trewer wey\" or even construc-ting additional proofs or attempting to reconcile two different opinions (p. 11 and p. 43); but more often, either refusing to choose at a l l \u00E2\u0080\u0094 319 as he does in the cases of the meaning of Septisolium (pp. 44-45), the proper name of the church at S. Lorenzo in Damaso (pp. 128-129), and the identity of the St. Susanna whose translation was described to him by the other English f r i a r (pp. 123-124) \u00E2\u0080\u0094 or leaving the matter en-ti r e l y to his reader's own judgment: I leue a l pis in pe disposicioun of pe readers. (p. 10) Whepir pis be treuth or nout I make no meyntenaunce. (p. 36) . . . a l l pis leue I to discusse a monges be rederis of pis book. (p. 53) Thus, despite his heavy reliance on written sources for his elaborations, his \"principal\" ground was not the basis of his organiza-tion. And quite evidently, the \"secundari,\" \"pat I sey with eye\" \u00E2\u0080\u0094 or, as he often says, \"herd\" \u00E2\u0080\u0094 giving him material for the notes from which he worked, shaped the essential nature of The Solace of Pilgrims. There is l i t t l e doubt that his method was to work from notes taken on the spot. One reference to an occasion when he was unable to do so has been mentioned earlier; another occurs on p. 87: \"In pis same cherch be many relikes whech I wrote not.\" These notes must have taken di f -ferent forms, and what he saw, discovered for himself, or was told in turn determined the contents of his chapters. Frequently, he copied inscriptions and they, along with their translations, comprise a great part of his entries;\"* at other times, he seems simply to have listed the r e l i c s he was shown and to have sought out verbal or written author-i t i e s for the stories of the martyrdoms or the modes of translation at 320 a later time.. (It 'is l i k e l y , for example,;.that his original. noteponithe Church of the twelve apostles was close to the opening statement in his description: The friday in pe f i r s t weke of lenton is pe stacion at a cherch dedicat to be x i i aposteles. Ther is part of the bodies of philippe and iacob but in special pere is schewid be arme of seint philippe a l hool. Ther ly be bodies eke of pese martires basilides c i r i n i naboris nazarii & celse uictoris & innocencii. (pp. 103-104) There are many other catalogues of r e l i c s equally as brief or only slightly more detailed. From this base he later composed his chapter. Fi r s t , obviously requiring no source, he adds the place of the respec-tive martyrdoms of the apostles, Philip and James, and the fact of their translation to Rome. Then, moving to the lesser figures, he found \"but l i t i l writyng\" for the f i r s t three martyrs and could only add that they . . . were ded for c r i s t i s sake in a cyte bei clepe ebred-unensis [Embrun] and aftirward in tyme of pees translate to rome. (p. 104) Finally, he proceeded to a longer history of Nazarius and Celsus which he found in some martyrology. Similarly, in most other cases, Capgrave elaborates only a single item from the catalogue of r e l i c s . If the church he is discussing is a minor one, dedicated to a l i t t l e known saint, he usually satisfies himself with recounting the saint's his-tory, 7 wheras i f the saint is a major one whom he has already mentioned g several times, he adds some new story. In those cases for which he cites several different authorities, choosing one as the most reliable, i t seems safe to say that he worked after the fact; but when his remarks 321 concern verbal reports, i t is less easy to decide whether he is recol-lecting or consulting his notes. Having divided his notes, as he says, into those concerning \"the disposicioun of rome\" and those concerning i t s \"holynesse,\" he gave each part a kind of chronological arrangment. But, just as Capgrave's intention was not so much to divide pagan from Christian Rome as to separate monuments of temporal events from the spiritual shrines, so the f i r s t part has as a frame Roman history i t -self, from the founding of the city to the deposition of the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II in 1245, while the second describes the churches of Rome (after the f i r s t seven chapters) according to the order in which they are visited in the yearly cycle of the stations of Lent. Since Rome had become the centre of the Christian world long before the end of the historical period which Capgrave records, this bipartite organization necessarily involves a certain amount of repeti-tion and overlapping. However, i t is important to see that chronology determines only the external shape of the work, and Capgrave's careful planning of the Solace only becomes apparent when i t is recognized that the whole operates on a far more complex principle of organization. In Book One, four chapters (1 and 24-26) give a skeletal recitation of the founding and the rulers of Rome; the remaining twenty-two are devoted to the archaeological, sitesodf v-thecdity. These:;in;.turn -.can\be divided into the eight (Chapters 2-8 and 10) in which the various kinds of remains are grouped (including gates, walls, towers, bridges, palaces, arches, cemeteries, pagan shrines, together with the famed seven h i l l s ) and the fourteen devoted to one particular attraction, such as the 322 Capitol or the Colisseum. Obviously, many of the notices in this part impinge upon the matter of the second book, for usually a pagan shrine is memorable because i t stood where an important church now stands, or a gate is important because a martyr whose re l i c s are preserved in one of the churches passed through i t on his way to his execution. Simi-larly, in most cases, the physical position of the churches dealt with in the fifty-four chapters of Book II has been mentioned earlier; and since several of those described i n i t i a l l y as the seven major churches of Rome are repeatedly visited during Lent, even more repetition occurs. What is remarkable in this organization is the consistency with which Capgrave observes the repetition and either omits the account, trun-cates i t , or provides a cross-reference. In the f i r s t book, the forward-looking references reserve mate-r i a l t i l l later, sometimes in general terms, as in . . . of whech places whe speke now but l i t i l for a f t i r in our book we wil speke of hem mor largely. (p. 8) or Many opir places be per pus chaunged to pe best of whech we schul speke more largely in pe secund book whan we schull descryue pe cherchis.9 (p. 22) and sometimes with specific indications of the contents of future dis-cussions, as in Of pe temple pat stood perupon and who i t is dedicate to seynt steuene we schal trete in pe secund book whech schal be of spi r i t u a l pingis. (p. 16) 323 or . . . i t is not our occupacioun for to t e l l e what i t is for pat longith to be secunde book but for to t e l l e what i t was.^O (p. 39) Explicit i n a l l these quotations, especially in the last two, is Capgrave's clear division of his material into sp i r i t u a l and temporal items; and in the single instance i n which he violates his division, he j u s t i f i e s i t on grounds which offer further proof that his whole design was premeditated: . . . be cause we schul not talk perof in pe secund book for i t is neythir on of be u i i cherches ne non of be patriarcal chercis whech be clepe staciones perfor wil I write her be uers whech I red pere. (p. 41) The reminders that he is aware of a repetition are usually brief, such as \"of whech I spake be fore\" (p. 12), but often he identifies the earlier chapter by name \u00E2\u0080\u0094 \"as we seyde before in the capitule de montibus\" (p. 26) or \"Before in pe chapitr of 3ates we seid\" (p. 43) \u00E2\u0080\u0094 or by number: Be fore in be u i i i chapetir spoke we sumwhat in bis mater and her schul we f u l f i l l e bat was l e f t bere (p. 25) And, on occasion, he summarizes the earlier subject matter: . . . Of whech mater we spoke be fore & eke whi he is called qwyrinus in be f i r s t chapetr. (p. 14) These basic varieties of cross-references are exemplified also in Book II except that there is there no instance in which Capgrave declares that something had been rehearsed in the f i r s t book because i t had no sp i r i t u a l significance. Thus, he refers back generally \u00E2\u0080\u0094 324 II of whech we spak be fore\" (p. 124) \u00E2\u0080\u0094 or specifically: 11 or he offers a precis of his past remarks and anticipates his elabora-Of bis grisogonus we spoke sumwhat be for in be t i t l e of seynt anastase. There teld we who he counfortid hir with his noble episteles her wil we te l l e be what tribulacion he went to heuene. The problems inherent in his plan are aptly summed up in his own.phrase, \"as we seid ofte a boue\" (p. 115); for before he i s far advanced in his second book, he is forced to offer less relevant reasons for the inclu-churches as S. Maria Maggiore and St. John Lateran by the end of f i r s t or second reference to i t , but being s t i l l obliged to produce a chapter of roughly the same length for every station, he provides the reader with a series of more literary reasons: . . . of whech place we seid mech ping be fore in be capitule made of pe same cherch. But here 3et we pink i t is resonable to reherse summe bingis perauentur l e f t be for for i t schal make be boke mor perfith and alsoo i t schal not acombir be rederis with no tariing for be processe schal be succinct. tion: sion of certain reports. Having exhausted the major sights of such (p. 94) . . . of whech we spoke of be fore and told a l l pe writyngis whech we found pere. But neuerpelasse for perfeccion of pe book we wil plant in sum notable processe whech f e i in pis place. (p. 100) . . . of whech we spoke mech before but sum pety pingis l e f t we for to plant in whanne pe staciounes come for conueniens of pe book. (p. 104) 325 . . . of whech we spoke be fore but summe addiciones wil we sette here r i t h for conformite of be book. (p. 130) The grafting image that he twice uses suggests Capgrave's aware-ness that certain episodes were of less immediate importance than others. On the other hand, the items introduced after these apologies in no way disturb the texture of the work, for although these and other incidents are highly varied in subject and in amount of detail, Cap-grave did not labour under any abstract assumption that parallel parts must balance. Like the l i s t s of chapter contents that he provides at the be-ginning of Book One (p. 2) and the end of Book Two ;(pp. 155-56), his cross-referencing technique may be attributed to the natural organiza-tional tendency of a scholar steeped in the glossing techniques of the medieval theological course. His perpetual concern that every part seem logically necessary is attributable to the same tendency, and especially evident as he expounds the vanity of repetition: Wednysday in pat weke is be stacion at seynt mari maior of whech place we haue spoke mech for we had a special chapetr perof whan we spoke of pe u i i principal cherchis also on be wednysday in be f i r s t weke of lenton whan be stacion was bere. Now for to reherse ony ping bat is seide be fore but i f haue sum newe circumstaunce or sum newe addicion is but ueyn. For bis cause I wil reherse here a short chronicle whech gregorius turonensis t e l l i t h in worchip of oure lady to pis ende pat euery man or woman whech is bysi to edifye ony hous or oratorie to hir worchip doth to hir and to hir son f u l grete plesauns. (p. 150) There are many examples of his\" planning on a minor scale too, in which, like the lector or preacher setting out the divisions of his text, Capgrave states precisely what he w i l l do and proceeds to do i t . One 326 example occurs in Book One, Chapter Two, where he begins.with-a general statement of his,subject, Now of be 3atis of rome wallis and towris schal be our tretyng.... (p. 7) and then makes general remarks on each of the three, 3atis be per in rome x i i . . . . As for pe wallis . \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 . As touching pe toures . . . . (p. 7, 11. 24-36) before he begins to enumerate the separate gates. And he uses the same technique when he wishes to introduce something which i s , s t r i c t l y speaking, irrelevant: And be cause pat pis man was pe f i r s t pat ordeyned cardinales and before pis man we rede not of pis name perfor i f pe rederes wil consent I wil declare here pe noumbir of pe cardinales pe dignite pe office and eke pe t i t l e s . (p. 141) The argument here is that the very obtrusiveness of Capgrave's referen-ces lays bare the process by which he welded his notes together. Many of them may be needlessly inserted, padding rather than direction for the narrative; but they nevertheless show plainly Capgrave's concern for the neatness of his composition. An interesting modification of his original plan, documentable within the text i t s e l f , offers further evidence of Capgrave's careful construction of The Solace of Pilgrims. For some reason, having f o l -lowed his original conception of the work closely, Capgrave ultimately decided that his second book was too long and that he could best rectify the situation by separating the churches dedicated to Mary into a third division. Since he had at the outset delineated the exact organization 327 he would follow in the Solace, some explanation for this reversal of plan had to be made, and he accordingly devised a scholastic argument for concluding his work \"in a ternarie,\" citing specifically as models the Trinity, the hierarchy of angels, and the three continents of the creation: Thus fer haue we brout our entent yat we haue descryued a l l boo places where staciones be holde in lenton now wil we t e l l e sum notable bingis of obir cherches in rome swech as be famous. Our purpos was in pe beginnyng of bis werk to a mad but too parties berof and so i t is writyn but bis secund part schuld a be ouyr prolix. Therfor men counceled me of pese obir cherches whech schul now come in hand to make a special part be him selue so schal be werk be concluded in a ternarie for bat noum-bir is halowid as we sey in our diuinite be cause our feith prechith on to us thre persones in o godhed. Our lord god alsoo hath made his ministres aungelles and sette in swech perfeccion pat pei be distincte in to i i i ierarchies and euery ierarchie distincte in to i i i ordres. Eke our lord hath dyuyded a l bis world in to i i i parties pat is to sey asie europe and af f r i k . Al pis is said for pe perfeccioun of pis noumber i i i and mech mor ping myth be seid berof i f men wolde. specially i f pei wold take councell of a book whech ysidre mad and i t i s entitiled de more. The orde in bis werk folowyng schal be bis. First wil we speke of a l l be cherchis of our lady whech wil com to rememberauns and bann of obir cherches whech stand in fame and specialy of hem of whom we fynde ony notable wrytyng. (p. 156) Another possible ju s t i f i c a t i o n for grouping together the churches devoted to Mary may be found in the whole issue of the Marian cultus which was being debated fervidly in Capgrave's lifetime. The Feast of the Conception, attributed by St. Bernard to the Canons of Lyon, was transported to England in the 12th century and, though a continuous source of controversy until the Council of Trent, i t was confirmed in 1476 by Pope Sixtus IV, who in 1483 interdicted any charge of heresy either to the celebration of the feast or to the general belief in the immaculate conception of Mary. There is no external or internal 328 evidence, either in the Solace or other writings or in the known facts of Capgrave's l i f e , of any involvement by Capgrave in the controversy over the Marian cultus; but his undoubted familiarity with the writings of the Scottish Fransciscan John Duns Scotus (d. 1308), who supported Mary's claim against the attacks of Aquinas and Bonaventure, and the prominence he gives to the f i n a l grouping of shrines almost certainly reflect Capgrave's own theological bias. Book Three i s , of course, fragmentary, and Capgrave's methods of elaboration do not vary from the earlier pattern, in which he describes the founding of the church or records a miraculous event that took place there. In other words, despite his own explanation (or any pos-sible motivation that may be attributed to him) for demarcating the churches of this section, he does not give them special attention, and the book simply breaks off without reason or preparation. This incom-pleteness and the disruption of an otherwise carefully constructed work is disappointing, but scarcely surprising, for there is no evidence to suggest that Capgrave had the same concern for the integrity or complete-14 ness of his f i n a l version that he evinces in overseeing the manuscript. The Solace of Pilgrims, then, f i n a l l y i s important because i t reinforces certain generalizations already established about Capgrave's techniques as a writer. Ever scrupulous in his attempt to isolate facts, Capgrave collates his various sources, named or unidentified to avoid misleading his reader as he conducts him through the jumble of heterogeneous matter he has garnered about the various monuments of Rome. Throughout the work may be found additional examples of his 329 characteristic amplification by translation, etymology, explanation, and definition,'''\"' and the work contains frequent pauses for pastoral 16 exhortation. S t y l i s t i c a l l y , however, the Solace shows the inferior-ity of his English prose style when he is not directly translating or closely adapting from a single source; and i t s obscurity, whether as a result of unit composition, awkward subordination, intrusion of paren-thetical information or e l l i p s i s , reflects the s t i l l unsure style of mid-15th-century vernacular prose. In fact, a l l of the syntactically unsophisticated traits which S. K. Workman'''7 identifies as common in Middle English prose works be-fore about 1460 or 1470 are demonstrable in The Solace of Pilgrims. Abundant examples of Capgrave's essentially paratactic style occur in the passages already cited. 'Sentences like the following, in which structurally independent units \u00E2\u0080\u0094 either simple or complex \u00E2\u0080\u0094 are com-bined without even an elementary attempt to coordinate them, are common-place : Minuerues temple whech is clepid goddesse of wisdom is now turned in to a cherch of our ladi and a couvent of frere prechoures in whech stant a conclaue bere many a pope hath be chosen for grete sewirnesse for i t ' stant in be myddis of be cyte. (p. 26) Summe sey he hith martinus summe sey macrinus summe sey he deyed in inglond summe sey in rome . . . . (p. 53) Next bat hous is a l i t i l chapel halowid in be worchip of seynt ion baptist in whech no woman entreth and bere as pei sey is plener remissioun tociens quociens of pe graunt of seint siluester woman heue pe same i f pei go on pilgrimage and touch pe dore. (pp. 71-72) 330 Anothir station is bere on be tewsday folowyng at a cherch bei clepe seint balbine i t stant on a h i l l e in be south side of rome munkis bei be as I suppose pat dwelle bere . . . . (p. 107) Equally frequent are fragmentary structures in which parts logically belonging with the material which precedes or follows are arbitrarily separated: A grete hors of brasse is bere of f u l fayr schap whech was sumtyme g i l t and a man eke of be same metall sittyng on his bak with outen s a d i l l . A king boundyn undir be hors fot and a bird sittyng on be horses tied. (p. 31) Summe men sey pat pis ping was doo in domicianes tyme and pe elde cronycles sey i t was doo in the consules tyme. Whech begunne to gouerne rome at be last kyng and cesed whan be f i r s t emperour cam whech was julius cesar eke be twix iulius and domician were ix emperoures. (p. 39) Further proof that the sentences were not fu l l y pre-conceived comes from the asymmetry in both co-ordinate and subordinate elements. Sometimes the asymmetry is simply the result of the compounding of two clearly distinguishable pieces of information: Be pis 3ate go men to seynt anneis cherch and to seynt constaunce and whi pei calle i t numentana auctores say for pat wey goth on to a cuntr whech is called so in whech cuntr wer many worthi werriouris and continued in many batailes a geyn be romaynes as men may rede in be book de gestis romanorum. (p. I D But more often i t is compounded by faulty subordination and ellipses of verbs and pronouns: With inne pis tour was a temple whech pei sey as of ricchesse was worth be bird part of be world of gold siluyr perle and precious stones in which uirg i l e mad a meruelous craft pat of euery region of pe world stood an ymage mad a l l of tre and in his hand a l y t i l belle, as often as ony of bese regiones was 331 in purpos to rebelle a geyn be grete mageste of rome a non pis ymage pat was assigned to pat regioun schuld knylle his b e l l . (p. 27) Thanne thus saued he him selue swymmyng with o hand i i c passe and certey letteris in his opir hand whech wer neuly brout on to him. (p. 24) Marcelline was put in a derk hous where was neythir mete nor l i t h a l l pe f l o r strowid with broke glas and he bare leggis and feet. (p. 114) In addition, Capgrave's constructions are often inconsistent even when they are brief: . . . and pus had romanes pe feld pis man grete worchip and pe perell delyuered. (p. 32) Than were pei beten with staues clobbid with leed led forth- in to pat place where martires were tormentid and put on to hem too leones and i i i i beres. (p. 116) A l l of these features are characteristic of \"unit composition\" where the writer's attention i s \"habitually concentrated only upon the 18 part immediately under expression.\" And they undoubtedly reflect what Workman calls \"unselective insertions,\" \"spontaneous additions, constructed only according to the relationship between [them] and the member preceding not between [them] and the sentence or period as a 19 whole.\" There are many further instances where Capgrave's primary subject is obvious, for he puts i t down, and then, without regard for the grammatical sequence, elaborates i t . Thus, for example, construc-tions where the f i r s t half states the topic are found: The cause whi i t is cleped porta appia for a grete lord of rome whech hith appius claudius mad i t . (p.. 8) 332 0 ping in pe worchip of seynt laurens w i l l we reherse who he rewardith his seruantis. (p. 115) And two other of Capgrave's characteristic constructions also show that his technique was additive. One is his common use of \"al pis\" to re-capitulate the basic sense of a passage which is highly subordinated or modified before proceeding; and the other is the apparently redundant use of \"perfor\" following a sequence which began with \"be cause.\" In fact, both devices are frequently necessary because of the amount of material which has intervened: 1 suppose eke pat pei wer of a nacioun whech be clepid guynosopistis of whom we rede in pe geestis of grete alisaundre pat a f t i r he herd pe fame of hem he wolde algate se hem whom he fond a l naked dwellyng in caues in pe erde euyr preising god neuyr doing wrong lyuyng with outen stryf with oute debate. Her lyuyng plesed pis king so wel pat he comaunded hem to ask of hym what pei wold haue and he schuld graunte hem. Thei prayed him to 3yue hem immortalite and he answerd pat ping whech he had not him self ne not myth haue who schul he 3yue i t on to opir men. Tho pei undirtok of his pride manslauth ouyr rydyng of pe cuntre and mech opir ping and he passed fro hem gretly meuyd of her innocent lyuyng. A l l pis sey we for to proue be liklynesse pat pese too men were of pis nacioun. (p. 30) But be cause pat pere is grete errour whech heraude ded pis dede for pere were i i i perfor w i l l I schortly write a reule whech I fynde in uers pat men may know whan pei regned and what pei ded in her tyme. (p. 96) It is certain that there are many long passages in The Solace of Pilgrims which are directly translated from Latin; and some of them may be readily identified by the very ease of their balance and subordina-20 tion in comparison to the notational style of much of the text. After further research precisely identifies Capgrave's sources, i t may be possible to make accurate studies of his natural idiom in contrast 333 to his style when i t is governed by a syntax which is more highly developed. However, since the concern of this chapter is to show the nature of Capgrave's original compositions, a l l of the preceding exam-ples have been drawn from passages where i t may be argued with some assurance that Capgrave was himself the composer. And in them his style is unquestionably inferior to that of The Life of St. Augustine and The Life of St. Gilbert, where he seldom erred in his demonstration of his f l e x i b i l i t y , ingenuity, and s k i l l in transforming the complexi-ties of a foreign idiom into his own vernacular. II THE CHRONICLE,OF ENGLAND A l i t t l e more than a decade after the composition of The Solace of Pilgrims, Capgrave prepared a presentation copy of the work general-ly known as The Chronicle of England for the new king, Edward the Fourth. For anyone seeking either a f i n a l triumph or even a f i t t i n g climax to Capgrave's writings in English, the Chronicle is inevitably a disappointment. Fortunately, this study has had a pragmatic direc-tion, seeking neither to find some master motif nor to outline a grad-ual development, but rather to reveal Capgrave's works for what they are. In keeping with the evidence, i t has demonstrated that for him English composition was s t r i c t l y an avocation \u00E2\u0080\u0094 albeit an important one \u00E2\u0080\u0094 a practice in which he indulged sporadically and, u n t i l these last two works, always with an external motivation. Moreover, the 334 methods of composition, the contents, and the expressed purpose of the -Chronicle belie any single principle guiding i t s author, or anysense of culmination in the work. That one of the extant manuscripts (Cambridge University Library MS. Gg. 4.12) has recently been demonstrated to be Capgrave's holograph and therefore to have been written between Edward's accession in 1461 and Capgrave's death in 1464, means that this was the last English work on which he was engaged. But whether or not i t should actually be con-strued as his last work in terms of conception is arguable. Two appar-ently contradictory pieces of evidence, one from the Dedication and one which dates from 1438, must be presented and satisfactorily reconciled i f the way in which the Chronicle grew is to be understood. In the Dedication, of which the serious and factual tone cannot be denied, Capgrave implies that a l l the matter of the Chronicle has been gathered in a relatively short period: Now is age com, and I want ny a l that schuld longe to a studier; yet i t plesed me, as for a solace, to gader a schort remembrauns of elde stories, that whanne I loke upon hem, and have a short touch of the writing, I can sone dilate the circumstaunses. (p. 1) Yet, more than twenty years earlier, explaining the several causes why he dedicated his Genesis commentary to Duke Humphrey, Capgrave had noted that the son of an earlier Duke of Gloucester had founded his order in England and said that he had recalled this fact \"Annualia mea 22 revolvens.\" And, indeed, he does record Richard of Clare's role i n the foundation of the Augustinian order i n the Chronicle (pp. 152-153). 23 Like Hingston and Father Roth, Peter Lucas believes that these two 335 works \u00E2\u0080\u0094 the Annualia and the Chronicle \u00E2\u0080\u0094 must be the same. In addi-tion, Lucas points out that the process of extraction, comparison and correction of sources was a lengthy one, usually taking years, and that the Dedication was clearly added to a hastily finished copy of the work. Another interpretation, not necessarily or totally opposed to this view, is possible, however. Capgrave's statement in the Dedica- tion need not be taken to mean that he had only recently begun his entire work; in: fact, i t would have been most unlikely, for the task would have been as onerous as the exegetical labours which he clearly states he can no longer attempt. His comment may mean that the \"schort remembrauns\" is an abridgement, possibly even a translation, of mate-ri a l s that he had been gathering at intervals over several years \u00E2\u0080\u0094 the Annualia; and this is certainly a project which he might have under-taken \"as for a solace\" and which he might have had in hand when the new king acceded. That he ends abruptly in mid-1417 certainly suggests that he was not finished when he decided to prepare a \" f a i r copy\" for the king. The chief internal piece of evidence confirming this theory occurs in a late passage in which Capgrave provides a t i t l e for his book that better describes i t s contents than the conventional one of Chronicle; and his personal approbation seems to be indicated by the 25 addition of his personal t r e f o i l in the margin: Many convenciones were mad betwix the emperoure and the Kyng, and a l her succession dyvyded in XII. Articles, whech were ageyn the ordinauns of our Book; for we think that i t myte be cleped rather \"Abbreviacion of Chronicles\" than a book. (pp. 314-315) 336 His reference is obviously oblique, but i t seems that he knew and prob-ably had before him the \"XII. Articles\" of the Treaty of Canterbury which Henry V presented to parliament in October 1416. His actual practice is inconsistent, for elsewhere he does copy out precise terms, but grammatical ellipses, the appearance of short notes where he char-acteristically included explanations in his other works, and comparisons with his sources reveal that he was quite intentionally \"abbreviating\" throughout, How comprehensive Capgrave's idea of \"elde stories\" was is re-vealed by his choice of the \"universal history\" as a model; for, despite the fact that the Chronicle is the f i r s t one extant in English prose, the form i t s e l f marks Capgrave's work as old-fashioned. From the ear-l i e s t centuries, ecclesiastical historians had tried to synchronize Greek and Roman with Hebrew records in order to provide a complete history of man and to justify Christian theology. Though he had prede-cessors, i t was Eusebius, writing in the middle of the 4th century, who established the bases for medieval chronology with his synoptic tables. The translation and elaboration of his work by St. Jerome made i t immediately available and popular, and writers in the Latin west used i t as a foundation for dozens of continuations in the succeeding cen-turies. Yet, while copies of Eusebius and such of his famous succes-sors as Cassiodorus, Isidore, and Orosius continued to be made, and while clerics remained the chief compilers of histories, in the later middle ages, chroniclers turned more and more to local, national, or dynastic history. However biased their accounts, they had begun to 337 show the q u a l i f i c a t i o n s of h i s t o r i a n s , looking f o r and st a t i n g causes and r e l a t i o n s h i p s , seeking to apportion praise and blame, and impres-sing t h e i r works with the stamp of t h e i r own p e r s o n a l i t i e s . Thus, interested i n the h i s t o r y of t h e i r own land, English writers i n general began t h e i r works either with the coming of Brut, with Caesar's conquest, or with the a r r i v a l of the Angles, Jutes, and Saxons i n 449. They might well adopt mythological sections wholesale from e a r l i e r c h r o n i c l e r s , but as they approached t h e i r own times, they tended to elaborate t h e i r accounts and to make them more f a c t u a l l y r e l i a b l e . The h i s t o r i a n s at St. Alban's, for example, refashioned, recopied, or merely added to already e x i s t i n g annals, but the parts which have been a t t r i b u t e d to Wendover, P a r i s , Rishanger, Trokelowe, Blaneford and Walsingham are densely det a i l e d and highly valuable h i s -t o r i e s of the l a t e 12th, 13th and 14th centuries. Capgrave, however, consciously chose to return to the general and encyclopedic form which divided a l l of human h i s t o r y into s i x epochs, from the Creation to the present; and i n that sense his 26 Chronicle i s antiquated. Before the d e t a i l s of Capgrave's work are considered, i t may be useful to have i n mind the conventional d i v i s i o n s of the general h i s t o r i e s . For once, Capgrave merely adopts a standard o u t l i n e , presenting no explanation f o r the separate eras, though he was c e r t a i n l y f a m i l i a r with models i n which they are not only compared to the ages of men but also elaborated i n the most interminable and didac-27 t i c terms. Bede o f f e r s a b r i e f example i n his E p i s t o l a ad Pleguinam: 338 sex . . . aetatibus mundi tempora distinguuntur. Prima aetas ab Adam usque ad Noe continens generationes decern, annos vero mdclvi; quae tota p e r i i t diluvio, sicut infantiam mergere solet oblivio. Secunda a Noe usque ad Abraham generationes similiter complexa decern, annos autem ccxcii, quae in lingua inventa est, id est hebraea, a pueritia namque homo in c i p i t nosse loqui post infantiam quae et nomen inde accepit, quia f a r i , id est loqui, non potest. Tertia ab Abraham usque ad David generationes x i i i i , annos vero dccccxlii, continens; et quia ab adolescentia in c i p i t homo posse generare, Mattheus generationum ex Abraham sumsit exordium, qui etiam pater gentium constitutus est. Quarta a David usque ad transmigrationem babylonis generationibus aequa iuxta Mattheum x i i i i , annis autem c c c c l x x i i i , porrecta, a qua regum tempore coeperunt, iuvenilis enim dignitas regno est habilis. Quinta deinde usque ad adventum salvatoris in carne generationibus et ipsa x i i i i , porro annis quingentis octoginta novem, extenta, in qua, ut gravi senectute fessa, malis crebrior-ibus plebs hebraea quassatur. Sexta, quae nunc agitur, nulla generationum vel temporum serie certa sed, ut aetas decrepita ipsa, totius saeculi morti finienda. In his Dedication, Capgrave painstakingly informs the king that there were many years for which no events had been noted, especially during the f i r s t age: Also i f 36 merveile that in thoo 3eres fro Adam to the Flood of Noe sumtyme renne a hundred 3ere, or more, where the noumbir stant bare, and no writing therein, this schal be myn excuse; for soth, I coude non fynde, not withstand that I soute with grete diligens. If othir studious men, that have more red than I, or can fynde that I fond not, or have elde bokes whech make more expression of thoo stories that f e i fro the creacion of Adam onto the general Flod than I have, the velim l i t h bare, save the noumbir, redy to receyve that thei wille set in. (p. 2) In fact, for the 2240 years between the Creation and the Flood there 28 are in Capgrave's Chronicle only twenty-seven entries, a l l of which deal with Old Testament history, fifteen being the records of the births of b i b l i c a l figures. The style of most of these notices sug-gests that Capgrave attempted to epitomize a man's whole career when he is f i r s t mentioned and tried also to convey the divine disposition 339 which li e s behind the separation of the worldly works of the sons of Cain and the god-fearing activities of the sons of Seth. The terseness of the entries is totally unlike anything else Capgrave wrote in the vernacular. This quality, which is perfectly consistent with a process of abridgement discussed above, is illustrated by his notation for the year 12: This 3ere Eve bare too childirn at o birth, the man hite Cayn, the woman Calmana, of whech to come Enok, not he that was translate; and Yrad, and Mammael, and Mathusael, and Lamech, that broute in f i r s t bigamie; and he k i l l e d Cayn. (p. 5) Yet he is not always so barrenly concrete; sometimes he adds an etymol-ogy or a brief note on the specific importance of his report: And here may men note that the kynrod of Cayn were evir b i s i for to make armoure and wepin, and the kinrod of Seth bysi to plese and praise God. (p. I D Elsewhere, he cannot refrain from arguing about the proper date of Seth's birth (pp. 6-7), questioning the assignment of Enoch's proph-ecies to the Apocrypha (pp. 12-13), and correcting Jerome's computation of the length of Methusalah's l i f e (pp. 13-14). The longest digression gives six reasons for the longevity of the f i r s t generations (pp. 9-10), and Capgrave's only reason for placing his comments at the year 500 seems to have been an i n i t i a l plan to provide some sort of summary at the commencement of each century. He had discussed Adam's prophecies at \"Anno Mundi Centesimo,\" his penance at \"Anno Mundi CC,\" and the . multiplication of men at \"Anno Mundi CCC\"; but, although he continues to cite particularly the remainder of the centuries, he gives only one 340 further summary, at the year 1000: In this f i r s t thousand 3ere was this world occupied with these sex faderis and patriarkes, Adam, Seth, Enos, Caynan, Malaleel, and Jared. These sex and her childryn cam of the stok of Seth, for the kynrod of Cayn was more multiplied than this kynrod. So semeth i t that the world had mech puple at that same tyme. (p. 12) For the second age, Anno 2241-3283, Capgrave has only nine 29 entries. A l l of them are much longer than those in the f i r s t , for in this section he gives his account not just of the origins of mankind from the three sons of Noah \u00E2\u0080\u0094 an account which he specifically des-cribes as an \"abbreviacioun\" (p. 17) \u00E2\u0080\u0094 but also summary histories of the kingdoms of the Scythians, the Egyptians, and the Assyrians. With the exception of the f i r s t , each section commences with a \"begat,\" which both gives precedence to Hebraic chronology and provides an um-brella under which a far more general \"in this tyme\" leads either to a synopsis of hundreds of years of traditional history or to the re-cording of of some undated event, such as the building of the \"Toure of Confusion\" (p. 20), the beginning of the worship of idols (pp. 21-22), and the founding of witchcraft by Zoroaster (pp. 25-26). The emphasis in each of the sections derives more from the sources he employed than from any specific didactic principles. For some kingdoms, he relies on genealogies; for others, on descriptions of the extent of their territory. Similarly, though Hebrew history is the ostensible source of reference, Capgrave only once mentions the actions of an Old Testament figure as a prefigurement of C h r i s t i a n i t y \u00E2\u0080\u0094 when he praises Abraham as the father of the faith: 341 . . . f o r , whan he was redi to offer his child to God, he beleved v e r i l i that God schuld reise him ageyn to the l i f . He receyved f i r s t the feith of the Trinite, where he sey thre ymages and worchiped on. (p. 25) But, choosing to elaborate the histories of \"Nembrot, Jectan, and Suffene,\" the three princes responsible for the building of the Tower of Babel, he ignores the implication that the confusion of tongues was a divine punishment; and he chooses Fulgentius' explanation of the origins of idol worship in a rich Egyptian's grief over the death of his son in favour of the four other alternatives he notes. The method of narration i s essentially the same in the account of the third age, though the number of years is further reduced (Anno 3284-4163) and the number of entries, many of them including several 30 widely scattered events, is increased to twenty-three. \"Begats\" continue to be used as introductions, now frequently alternating with notices of deaths. Again, the random and disproportionate nature of the items selected is striking. Abraham, Jacob and Moses receive r e l -atively f u l l treatment in the sense that their historical importance is particularly recognized. But the story of the Ten Commandments is omitted, though perhaps i t is meant to be understood in the passage on the discovery of the various alphabets (p. 31); and the exodus of the chosen people i s nowhere mentioned except that the story of the prom-ised land is inherent in the account of the death of Moses: In this 3ere deyed Moises, and no man myte fynde his grave; for, be the comaundment of God, he went up to the h i i of Phasga^ and there our Lord schewid him a l l the lond of behest, and saide on to him, \"Thou schal se this lond, but thou schal not enter i t . \" So deied he there, and was buried in the vale. He lyved 342 here a C. 3ere and XX. At his deth his eyne were not dym, ne no toth f a l l fro his heed. (p. 31) On the other hand, Hercules' twelve labours are enumerated (p. 33), and Mercury's invention of the harp is carefully translated from Isidore (p. 34). In this section, too, Britain is mentioned for the f i r s t time: In this same Hely [Eli]\u00E2\u0080\u00A2tyme,:.Brute,Lthatwwascdf;Eneas,: .Kyng cam into this lond, and called i t Britayn a f t i r his name. Whan he deyid he departed his kyngdam to his thre sones. The f i r s t hite Loegrius; and to him he gaf the lond fro Dovyr onto Humbyr. The secund son hite Albanactus; and to him gave he a l Scotland onto Humbir. The third hite Camber; and to him gave he a l Walis. The f i r s t cuntre was called in thoo dayes Loegria. The secunde Albania. The third Cambria. (p. 37) Clearly enough, from \"this lond\" the author is known to be an English-man, but Capgrave sounds no patriotic note, and he has given no pre-history of Brute's kin except to say that Eneas' son Ascanius had founded the town which was to become Rome in \"the third 3ere a f t i r Troye was distroyed\" (p. 36). The fourth age is the last reckoned in terms of Hebrew rulers, 31 and virtually a l l of the twenty-one items concern the kings. Twice in this part, brief hints of Capgrave himself appear. Describing Asa's destruction of lechery, Capgrave intrudes, revealing a personal dis-taste for lascivious detail: He drow his modir fro cursed governauns, for sche was princesse in a f u l abhominable place, which they cleped \"Sacra Priapi.\" It is not necessari to declare what i t was: but this man dis-troyed hous and auter, ymage and a l . . . . (p. 40, i t a l i c s added) 343 And when he mentions the Mons Adventinus, the additional detail, Whan men go out at Seynt Paule gate, thei go under i t , and leve i t on the l e f t hand. (p. 43) is a reminder of his own acquaintance with Rome. There is also evident in this section a capacity for restraint and objectivity when he treats people or stories whose contravention of the true faith were naturally repugnant to him. The point is emphasized here because this tone con-tinues throughout the work, and the repeated charges by nineteenth-century c r i t i c s of Capgrave's bias and bitterness are not only anach-ronistic but manifest distortions. Of Ahaz, he says simply: This man was of wikkid gouvernauns, for he forsook God, and worcheped maumentrie . . . . (p. 44) And of the tyrannical Manasses: He ded mech evel and displesauns to oure Lord. He edified auteres on to fals goddis. He k i l l i d prophetes and servauntes of God, that the stretes of Jerusalem were f u l of blood. And for this erroure God suffered him for to be take, and led into Babilonie; and a f t i r grete penauns and weping he was restored to his regne, and with grete devocion amendid his defautes. (p. 45) Similarly, recounting the birth of Romulus and Remus, Capgrave's brief interjection is intended as a correction rather than as a condemnation: This mayde hite Rea, and so i t happed that sche was with childe be the god Mars, as_ sche feyned . . . . (p. 43, i t a l i c s added) The f i f t h age lasted only 461 years (Anno Mundi 4737-5198), and Bib l i c a l history is temporarily submerged as swift changes from Persian to Egyptian to Roman chronology reflect the shifts in power. As every-where in the Chronicle, variety is far more apparent in the selection 344 of material and in the presentation of similar items than any constant or consistent principle. Taking the literary references as but one example, Capgrave mentions Sophocles and Euripides as tragedians, and without naming works he defines instead the genre: Trajedi is as mech to say as he that writith eld stories, with ditees hevy and sorowful. (p. 49) He cites the four books Plato supposedly named after his masters: Themeus in on; Phedron a othir; the third, Gorgialis; the IIII Pitharas. (p. 50) and then he comments of Plato's reputation as a man of superhuman wit (p. 50); he refers to none of Aristotle's works and even emphasizes the old rumour that his father was a s p i r i t (p. 52). In the case of Plautus, Capgrave notes only that he wrote eloquently \"whanne he had leisure\" (p. 53), while he quotes from and translates the verses on Terence's tomb. (p. 56). With the birth of Christ in Anno 5199, the last era begins, and from this point the entries become increasingly f u l l e r and more numer-ous. No more than a summary sketch of the form can be given here, but i t is important to see the changes which in part shape the treatment. From this event onward, both the Anno Mundi and the year of the Chris-tian era are provided, and many events continue to be grouped within the inclusive dates of the figure f i r s t mentioned. Until the crucifix-ion in 33 A.D., Christ's activities dominate the account, as would be expected; from 42-404 A.D. the notices are entered under the name of the ruling emperor in Rome and include the diverse events which occurred 345 during his reign; from 419-747 A.D., they are contained under the names of the Eastern emperors; and beginning with Charlemagne in 778 A.D., under the Holy Roman emperors. From 1212, the reigns of the English kings become the point of reference, and Capgrave clearly indicates 32 this new system of annotation: 1212-1215. There IIII. 3eres be the last 3eres of the regne of Kyng Jon. And ye schal undirstand that fro this tyme forward oure annotation schal be a f t i r the regne of the Kyngis of Ynglond: for the empire, in maner sesed here. . . . (p. 149) Within this framework, the histories of the popes, often limited to the notation of the lengths of their terms of office, consistently follows the report on the secular ruler and, then, depending on the i n -formation available, events or natural prodigies which happened in other countries are given. At the same time, while the entries become more detailed as the time moves closer to Capgrave's own, the range of v i -sion narrows, u n t i l , with the exception of ecclesiastical affairs at Rome, everything is seen not just from an English viewpoint but from a vantage point that excludes a l l matters not relating to England. More-over, in the early part of Capgrave's Chronicle, where the scope is supposedly \"universal,\" the universality i s really Mediteranean and the emphasis theological. Capgrave's sources \u00E2\u0080\u0094 and his sources' sources \u00E2\u0080\u0094 for the early period were preoccupied with the spread of the new faith, the challenges to i t by persecutions from without and heresies from within, and the establishment and development of doctrinal matters. Once the i n i t i a l battle for survival was won, secular history, set within the Christian context, came; naturally to the foreground, and was 346 dominated by internecine struggles for wealth and power. Thus, just as the Gothic and Saracen attacks on Rome and Constantinople are reported without any reference to the pre-history of the invaders when the focus is on the centre of the Christian world, events in other nations which 33 have no bearing on England virtually disappear when the centre of interest moves to England. With this summary, i t is possible to proceed to a discussion of this l i t t l e known work as a piece of English historical literature. Because Peter Lucas is presently completing a doctoral dissertation on 34 the Chronicle at the University of Leeds, any attempt to duplicate the details of his work on the relation of Capgrave's work to i t s sources and on the s t y l i s t i c features of the Chronicle would be redun-dant. For this reason questions of originality and literary merit i n terms of both content and style w i l l be treated on a more general level than they have been in preceding chapters. Historians have known of Capgrave's Chronicle for more than 250 years, but, discovering that the only one scene otherwise unpreserved 35 is Henry IV's death-bed conversion, they have virtually ignored i t . Apart from various books of the Bible, Capgrave himself identifies Methodius, Fulgentius, Eusebius, Jerome, Augustine, Isidore, Ambrose, Gregory, Hugo of St. Victor, Bede, and Giraldus among his sources; and scholars have pointed out his major reliance on Higden's Polychronicon, Walsingham's Historia Anglicana and Ypodigma Neustrae, and the English prose chronicle known as The Brut of England. The following rather long example w i l l suffice to show just how derivative Capgrave's 347 Chronicle can be. In the Brut, f o r the years 1367 and 1368, four d i s -connected events are reported: the v i c t o r y of the Black Prince over Henry of Trastamera at Najera i n A p r i l , 1367; the appearance of a comet i n March, 1368; the marriage of L i o n e l of Clarence to the daughter of the Duke of Milan i n June, 1368; and an uprising of the French. [ l ] n be 3er of our Lord a MCCC.lxvii, & of King Edward x i i i . , be t h r i d day of A p r i l l , per was a strong b a t a i l l & a grete, i n a large felde yclept Prya3ers, f a s t by be water of Na3ers i n Spayne, betwene S i r Edward Pryns, & Harry, be Bastarde of Spayne; but pe v i c t o r i e f i l l to Pryns Edwarde, by be grace of God. & bis same Prins Edward had with hym Sere John, be Duke of Lan-castre, h i s brober and worbi ber men of armes, aboute be noumbre of xxx. M. And be King of Spayne had on his side men of diuerce nacions, to be noumbre of a CM. & passyng. Wherfore pe sharpnes & pe fersnes of his aduersarye, wib his f u l boytsus & f u l grete strengthe, made & strevyn be r y 3 t f u l l partye abak a gret wey; but burgh be grace of Almy3ty God, passyng eny mannys strengthe, t h i l k hougest ooste was desparbled myghtfully by be noble Duk of Lancastre and h i s oste, or bat Pryns Edward come nye hym. And whan Harry be Bastard sey bat, he turned wib his men, wib so grete haste and strengthe, to f i e , bat an houge cumpanye of him i n be forseyd f l o o d , & of be brigge ber-of, f i l l e n doun & perisshed. and pere were take, pe E r l of Dene and Sere Bertram Cleykyn, pat was chefe maker and cause of the werre, and also chyueteyn of be vauntward of be b a t a i l l , wib meny ober lordes and knightes, to be noumbre of ij.M; of whom i j c weren of Fraunce, & meny of Scotlond; & bere were f e l d i n be felde on our enemys side, of lordes and kny3tes, with obere mene peple, to pe noumbre of vj M & mo; and of Englissh men but a fewe. And aft e r b i s , bat noble Prins Edward restored be same Piers into h i s kingdom a3en. be whiche Piers afterward, bour3 trecherye & falsnes of be f o r s a i d Bastarde of Spayne as he sate atte be table, he was strangled and deyde. but a f t e r b i s v i c t o r y e , meny noble and hardy men of Engelond, i n Spayne, pour3 the f f l i x & odir diuers siknesses, toke her dethe. & i n p i s same 3er i n Marche, was seyn ' S t e l l a Comata' bitwene be North costes & be west, whos bemes strecched toward Fraunce, and i n be 3er next sewyng of King Edwardes regne x l i i j . , i n A p r i l l , Sere Leonell, King Edwardes sone, bat was duk of Clarence, went towarde Myleyn, with a chose meyne of be g e n t i l s of Englond, f o r t o wedde Galoys d o r t e r , and haue her to wyf, by whom he shold haue half be Lordship of Mileyn. But af t e r pat bey were solempnly 348 wedded, the same Duke, about be N a t i u i t e of our Lady deid. & i n be same 3ere be Frensshe men breken be pees & the trewes, ryding on pe Kinges ground and lordship of Englond, i n pe s h i r e & cuntre of Pountyf, & taken & helden c a s t l s & tounes, & bere be Englisshe men on hond f a l s l y & s o t i l l y , bat bey were cause of breking of be truws. (The Brut, pp. 320-321) Certain differences i n Capgrave's entry suggest that The Brut was not his primary source, unless he found a d d i t i o n a l d e t a i l s elsewhere; but his account i s e s s e n t i a l l y an abbreviation of The Brut version of the episode, with the same events recounted i n the same order: In the XLI. 3ere was a grevous b a t a i l e i n Spayn betwix the Prince Edward and Herry the wrong Kyng of Spayn, where the Englischmen had the b e t t i r . This b a t a i l was by the town and the watir of Na3er. The Kyng of Spayn f l e d , f o r he myte not susteyne the tempest of arowes. VII. thousand men of his were slayn there, and many mo dronchin i n the watyr. There were take the e r l of Dene, and Bertram Cleykyn, that was h i s p r i n -c i p a l counceloure. A f t i r t h i s v i c t o r i e the Kyng P e t i r was restored to his d i g n i t e , and the Prince returned into Gyan. This Kyng, a f t i r the Prince was go, be f a l s deceyt of his enmyes, was k i l l i d at h i s mete. The Prince eke i n that viage was poysoned, for a f t i r that tyme he had nevyr h e l t h of body. In the XLII. 3ere, i n the month of March, there appered betwix the north and the west a s t e r r e t h e i clepe comata, d i r e c t i n g h i s bemes r i t e onto Frauns. And i n the same 3ere, i n the month of A p r i l , Sere Leonel, duk of Clarens, with a chose felauchip, took h i s jornay onto Melan, f o r to have the duke doutir to h i s wif, and ha l f the l y f l o d of that duchy. A f t i r the tyme he had weddid that lady he lyved not longe, but deied i n that cuntre aboute the N a t i v i t e of oure Lady. His body was byried at Pavy, f a s t by the toumbe of Seyn Austin; h i s hert was broute to the Freres of Clare, and b i r i e d , or kept i n leed. In t h i s 3ere the Frenschmen broke the pees, and, o v i r r i d i n the Kyngis londes i n Pounte, distroyed c a s t e l l i s and townes, and took many p r i s o n e r i s ; putting a l the cause upon the Englischmen. (pp. 225-226) 349 The bald statement that Capgrave borrowed widely and followed closely does not in i t s e l f mean that the Chronicle has not literary, as opposed to his t o r i c a l , merit. In order to demonstrate the absence of literary concern, i t remains to show the perfunctoriness of the reporting, the lack of imaginative recreation, and the plain, notation-a l style of the prose. In a sense, a l l three characteristics are a l -l i e d , for Capgrave's stated intention to abbreviate, coupled with the great breadth of focus, doubtless led to his f a i r l y consistent omission of colourful descriptions and speeches, which in turn deprives reported incidents of v i t a l i t y , and to the nondescript and e l l i p t i c a l diction. It is not necessary here to i l l u s t r a t e the actual ellipses in sentence structure or on the rapid shifts in subject within a single entry or paragraph, qualities which tend to make the Chronicle seem at times a set of private notes rather than a literary work composed for a wider audience. There are so many instances of this tendency in the passages cited in this chapter that even the most cursory examination w i l l immediately reveal them. Equally, there is no need to devote space to proving that Capgrave's work lacks descriptive detail. One need only compare the brevity of his entry on Arthur with those in Geoffrey of Monmouth, I^amon, or any of the later a l l i t e r a t i v e works, or his seven lines on the Battle of Hastings (p. 129) with a better known account to see how non-literary his \"annotaciones\" are. What is important is the way in which a l l these coalesce to produce the kind of reports that are typical of the Chronicle. In accordance with the basic schema of the work, the mythical history of Britain i s submerged in and 350 subordinated to the records of imperial and ecclesiastical achievements. But Capgrave's detached manner precludes emotional involvement, and the entries do not reveal either the patriot's fervour or the antiquarian's pleasure in the events of his country's history. More curiously, there is not even any evidence of the ecclesiast's vehemence in the refutation of l i e s . After the coming of Brut (c. Anno 4084), nothing more is said of Britain until Anno 5130, when \"this lond\" appears in the summary of Julius' Caesar's career: Here goth the regne of Egipt onto the Romaynes. For Julius Cesar conquered Egipt, and put i t undir tribute. And in this same time was this lond conquered be the same Julius, thorw mediacion of a lord thei cleped Androche, whech was brothir to the Kyng: his name was Cassebelian. (p. 57) The names mentioned here prove that Capgrave had access to some table, or more probably to a developed account, of the pseudo-historical rulers, but he takes no further note of Britain u n t i l c. 453 A.D., where, after the inevitable passage on the emperor and the popes, he says: In these dayes was Arthure Kyng of Bretayn, that with his manhod conqwered Flaunderes, Frauns, Norwey, and Denmark; and, af t i r he was gretely wounded, he went into a ylde cleped Avallone, and there deyed. The olde Britones suppose that he is o lyve.^6 (p. 87) In making the leap from Caesar to Arthur, Capgrave not only by-passes such famous figures as Lear and Vortigern, but also, and more curiously, he ignores the historical coming of the Saxons and their supposed twelve battles with the Celts in favour of Arthur's wholly legendary conquest 351 of Europe. But this passage shows more than the melange of materials and the absence of detail in the Chronicle. It also reveals the neu-tr a l i t y which flattens the tone throughout. Evidently, Capgrave ac-cepts Arthur's conquests and the place of his death as factual while doubting the Welsh belief that he is \"o lyve\"; yet the report maintains a placid surface which in no way forces the reader to adopt a specific opinion. The next entry which mentions the English shows both how r i g i d the formal organizational plan of the Chronicle is and how memorable anecdotes are excluded and personalities repressed: Mauricius regned XX. 3ere. He kepte the trewe Cristen wey, and he was f u l strong and wis in batayle. He ovyrcam many puples in batail, the Perses, the Armenes, be a noble man that was his werrioure. In his dayes was Gregorie mad Pope, and he confermed that eleccioune with his imperial l e t t e r i s . In the thirtene 3ere of Maurice, Gregori sent Austin and his felaues to the conversion of the Saxones, whech were newe come into the lond be strength, and had dryvyn oute be strength the very eyers into Walis. (p. 93) There is certainly a logic in the development of the entry, in the sense that the emperor is named, his character and the importance of his career summarized, the new Pope introduced, and the expedition to convert the Saxons ordained. But the conversion is minimized by making Gregory the Great faceless. The brief history of the Anglo-Saxon heptarchy (which figures in the entry for 701 A.D.) is divided into seven parallel paragraphs, end-ing in each case with the names of the kings who became Christian and of the bishops who converted them; but i t is only a catalogue (pp. 99-352 . 101). And, this skeleton leaves no room either for the continual battles and the resulting shifts in the power centre which interest the historian 6r::fof literary pieces. These English references have been extracted because the reports on which they are based are familiar; and, though England is not central in the early part, the discussion of them has in no way distorted the total effect of the Chronicle. Except in chronology, there is no greater continuity in either the ecclesiastical or the imperial records. The entries are basically uncritical; they do not seem to have been selected for any single purpose, and there is seldom any evidence that Capgrave was concerned with historical causes and effects. For example, while he sometimes does mention family relationships between successive emperors, most often he merely notes the rulers and refuses to judge the problems posed by the elections of emperors and popes, or even to clarify the nature of disputes between r i v a l claimants. Two examples, one dealing with the reign of the Emperor Justi-nian, the other with the 9th-century Pope Formosus, w i l l demonstrate even more clearly that Capgrave's sole interest was in outlining past events in a chronological fashion. Justinian begins as a good ruler, but there is no specific condemnation of the Leo who deposed him; the people were apparently happy with Tiberius, who had exiled Leo in turn, and, indeed, they resented Justinian's efforts to regain the throne. Moreover, Justinian's behaviour in exile i s tyrannical; and yet, when he is restored, there is no surprise on Capgrave's part at his return to Christian ideals: 353 Justinianus Secundus regned X. 3ere. He took trews with the Sarasines for X.3ere, both be lond and be se. This man, with his wisdam and largenesse encresed the empire, and broute i t to mech worchip. He mad eke many lawes, and ded grete reverens to the Cherch. And in X. 3ere of his empire on Leo Patricius ovyrcam him in batail, put oute his eyne, and cut of his nose, and exiled him onto a place thei clepe Tersone. . . . Leo the Secund regned III. 3ere. For on Tiberius put him fro the empire, cut off his nose, and exiled him to the same place where Justinian was. . . . Tiberius regned VII. 3ere. In his time Justiniane was in exile in Tersone, as we said. He noysed himself openly that he schuld be emperoure ageyne. Upon these wordis the puple there ros ageyn him, and, for love of Tiberi, purposed for to k i l l e him. And whanne he had aspied this, he fled to the prince of Turkis, and weddid his s i s t i r ; and with that princes socoure he conquered both Leon and Tibery, and k i l l i d hem, and recured ageyn the empire. A f t i r that he vengid him so u t t i r l y on his enemies that whan any drope of flewme f e l l e fro his nose, anon he comaunded of his enimes on schuld be slayn. . . . Justinian the Secund regned now ageyn VI. 3ere. He was f i r s t preved of his empire; and now, a f t i r the resumpcion, he regned ageyn VI. ^ere. For a f t i r the tyme he was so restored he served Crist devoutly, and sent a f t i r Constantin the Pope to Constantinople, and there was he hoseled of his hand. (pp. 97-99) Capgrave's refusal to become involved and his indifference to issues is even more d i f f i c u l t to understand in his report of the papal struggle, centring around the Pope Formosus. Since the popes were not secular rulers, they had some theological pretext at issue, and Capgrave the scholar should have been able at least to explain, i f not to resolve, the controversy over Formosus' refusal to accept certain aspects of the Eastern r i t e . Instead, he not only omits the church's ultimate resolu-tion of the dispute in Formosus' favour and refuses to take sides with any of the major popes involved, he does not even identify the source of the \"grete altercacion,\" though he must have been in a position to \"sone dilate the circumstaunces,\" as he promises to do on the f i r s t page of the Chronicle. (This episode incidentally provides several 354 good examples of Capgrave's e l l i p t i c a l style as verbs are omitted and disconnected events are syntactically linked). In this tyme was Pope Martinus Secundus o 3ere and V. monthis And than Adrian the Thirde, I. 3ere. And than Stevene the V., VI. 3ere. And than Formosus V. 3ere, whech was disgraded be Jon the Pope fro a l l the ordres of the Cherch onto lay astat; and a f t i r that he was restored by Martin the Pope; of whech mater was grete altercacion in the Cherch. . . . In this tyme were at Rome these Popes, \u00E2\u0080\u0094 Bonefacius the Sexte XV. dayes. Stephanus the Sexte o 3ere. He was a grete enmye to the Pope Formose. Than was Romanus III. Monthes. And than Theodorus IX. dayes. And than Johannes Nonus II. 3ere. He was frend to Formose. Thane Benedictus Quartus thre monthis. And than Leo Quintus fourty dayes. For on Cristofer deposed him, and was Pope a f t i r him Cristofer was Pope VII. monthis, and he was eject fro the Cherch, and mad a munk. Than was Sergius the Thirde VII. 3ere, monthes foure. In his tyme the Cherch of Lateranensis f e l down, and he mad i t newe. This Sergius was a dekne undir the Pope Formose; and the Pope Formose put him oute of the Cherche, and he fled to Frauns; but, a f t i r , he was mad Pope, and than he comaunded the body of that same Formose whech exiled him to be drawe oute of the grave, and arayed l i c h a bischop, & than the hed smet of, and the body throw into Tiber. But fischeres fond the body, and brout i t ageyn to Seint Petir Cherch; and thei seid cer-teyn ymages that were there ded worchip to the body.3^ (pp. 112-113) A l l these passages are drawn from the f i r s t half of the work, but as the quotation concerning the years 1367 and 1368 te s t i f i e s , the later parts differ in the increasing number of events noted for each reign, not in the treatment. Even the few thumbnail character sketches are not more elaborate. Only a small number of persons universally considered good or e v i l are indicated as such, and usually no concrete examples of their behaviour are provided. Henry I's queen, Maud of 355 Scotland, is portrayed as the epitome of courtly virtues: Sone a f t i r this bataile deied Maute, the good qween, of whos curtesie and humilite, scilens, and othir good maneris, the Englisch poetes at tho dayes mad f u l notabel vers. (p. 133) And at his death, Edward III is described as: . . . gracious and fortunat is pes; devout onto the cherch; fortunat i n batayle; nevir steyned save that in his age he was gretly langaged with lechery. (p. 232) As an exception, the general judgment that John . . . was so fals onto him [Richard i ] , and odious to the puple, that no man desired him. (p. 147) is borne out by the reference to the murder of Prince Arthur and by the description of his sins: For this inobediens, and many myschevous dedis whech he ded in manslauth, gloteny and lecchery, and especially robbyng and spoilyng of monasteries, the Pope cursed the Kyng, and assoiled alle his l i c h men fro his obediauns. (p. 148) Sometimes a brief condemnation of invaders, rebels or traitors against the king or kingdom is inserted, but they are normally expres-sed only in the most generalized terms. For example, Hingwart and Hubba are \"too cursed captaynes\" (p. 109); Alice Perrers is \"a woman malepert, and entermenting in every mater\" (p. 231); and Wat Tyler is \"a proud knave and a malapert\" (p. 237). Praise, too, is apportioned in unspecific terms: John XXIII is \" f u l gracious to all e men\" (p. 184); a rejected wife is \"a fayre woman, and a good . . .\" (p. 245); and the 38 Duchess of Lancaster is \"a woman f u l blessed and devoute\" (p. 258). 356 For the most part, however, Capgrave's non-commital attitude persists, and he does not characterize such dynamic and controversial personalities as William the Conqueror, Stephen, Eleanor of Aquitaine and Henry II, Richard I, Simon de Montfort, a l l those actors in the drama of Edward II \u00E2\u0080\u0094 Gaveston, the Despensers, the Mortimers, and Queen Isabella \u00E2\u0080\u0094 the Black Prince, Richard II, Henry IV and Henry V. The passage on William's t i t l e to the throne, specifically denying any rights to Harold (pp. 128-129), for example, j u s t i f i e s his accession, but with no particular enthusiasm. Stephen's oath of allegiance to Maud is twice mentioned (pp. 134 and 136), but nothing suggests any wrongdoing on the part of the Archbishop of Canterbury who crowned him or the lords who supported him. And this non-interpretive approach, the recognition that the deed has been accomplished whatever the moral issue, is even more apparent in the case of the marriage of Eleanor of Aquitaine and Henry II: Or that he regned he weddid a woman that was qwen of Frauns, hir name was Helianore. There f e i gret s t r i f betwix the King of Fraunce and hir, and therefor the qwen laboured to have a divors betwix hir and hir husband, pretendyng that sche was of his kyn; but hir principal cause was as is seid, for sche desired gretly to be wyf to the Duke of Normande. But in dede the divors was had, and the mariage mad. (pp. 138-139) His mention of Eleanor's \"principal cause\" suggests Capgrave's attitude, 39 but placed as i t i s , i t does not alter the neutrality of the report. Similarly, no certain moral or historical viewpoint i s adopted in the reports of the events in the time of Edward II. While Gaveston is clearly the centre of the dispute between Edward and his lords during 357 the f i r s t five years of the reign, no reason is given to explain why the favourite had been exiled by Edward I; and the only example of his unpleasant behaviour is the report of a tournament at which the aliens he gathered defeated Englishmen in the jousts (p. 175). Thus, the only apparent cause for displeasure is the unworthy one of wounded pride. Later, in Capgrave's bare records of parliaments, conspiracies, and shifting allegiances, i t is equally d i f f i c u l t to support the barons against the Despensers. Capgrave does not seem to doubt that their influence was too great or their ends deserved, but his lack of selec-t i v i t y leaves passages standing which seem to reflect more to the king's than to the lords' credit without providing any guideposts for counterbalance: In the same tyme the barnes were gadered at Seynt Albones; and fro thens thei sent onto the Kyng these V. bischoppis,\"London, Salisbury, Hely, and Herforth, and Chichester, desyring of the Kyng that Hugo Spenser the elder, and Hew the younger, schuld be banchid the rewme, as tretoures; and that a l this rysing of the barnes schuld be pardoned because thei ded i t for the comon profite. The Kyng answered that these too Spenseris had offered him-self oftentyme to answere to here accuseris, and to make amendis to ony forfet that myte be seid ageyn hem; and i t was no lawe that men schuld be condempned withoute answere. (pp. 187-188) Without belabouring this point any further with examples, i t should be clear that Capgrave does not attempt to recreate scenes or to v i v i f y characters in terms of their time either by exercising c r i t i c a l judgment or by anticipating the conclusion of historical events. Thus, 40 the Chronicle is closer to the annal than to a history; one episode becomes as important as another; and individual entries lack that cen-t r a l focus or nucleus which would accrue from a dramatic or climactic 358 development of a specific c r i s i s . This disjointed effect is increased by notes on prodigies, miracles, and even the occasional anecdote, whose presence is foreign to the generally shortened form of the entries. The thirty-five pages devoted to Edward I l l ' s fifty-three year reign are in fact chiefly concerned with the wars against the French and the Scots; the births, marriages, and deaths of royal, noble and other important people; parliaments; certain major and minor religious events; and floods, droughts, and plagues whose effects were so wide-spread that to have omitted them would have been surprising. What i s apparent, however, is Capgrave's random method of collecting these events: In that same 3ere [1338] welowes bore roses, rede and frech; and that was in Januarie. (p. 207) In this 3ere [1359] blod ran owte of the toumbe of Thomas duk of Lancastir at Pounfret. (p. 219) The relevant and the irrelevant are juxtaposed in the entries, without any sense of control or shaping on the part of the compiler. The longer series of \"merveyles in dyvers londes\" (p. 221) are doubtless included for their strangeness, but Capgrave leaves i t for others to discern the economic causes or the importance of such entries as: In that same tyme was gret derth of yrun, led, and bras and othir metalle. (p. 215) or This 3ere [1362] a pound of wax was worth XVIII. d. (p. 221) 359 and This 3ere [1363] a quarter whete was sold for XV. S i (p. 223) Finally, while the stories of Jewet Metles (p. 205) and of the bishop of Lincoln's post-mortem restoration of lands he had stolen in a vision (pp. 210-211) are interesting because they reflect popular current events, that both are as long as the report on the Black Death demonstrates that few principles of proportion or relevance operate in the organization of the material in the Chronicle. The impersonal quality of the Chronicle is seen at i t s greatest in those few notices which remind the reader of Capgrave's own history. That his tone remains so detached even in the note on his own birth seems inconsistent in the face of his inclusion of i t among the signif-icant events of history: In this 3ere [l393], in the XXI. day of Aprile, was that Frere bore whech mad these Annotaciones. (p. 259) Nor do the three events which he records for Lynn during his youth have about any of the excitement which they must have generated when they occurred. In that same 3ere [1400] the schippis of Lennes, which fischid at Aberden, took certeyn schippis of Scotlond, with her amyrel, Ser Robert Logon, knyte, and broute hem to Lennes. (pp. 276-277) In this 3ere [1404] were sent embassiatouris fro the Kyng of Denmark for to have the Kyngis doutir Philip to be joyned in wedlok to her Kyng. The Kyng broute hir to Lenne, for to take schip there. And in that towne he lay nyne daies, the too qwenes, thre sones of the Kyng, Herri, Thomas and Umfrey; and many othir lordes and ladies. (p. 259) 360 In the same 3ere [1416] III. beggeres stole III. childyr at Lenne, and of on thei put oute his eyne, the othir thei broke his bak, and the thirde thei cut of his handis and his feet, that men schuld of pite gyve hem good. Long a f t i r , the fadir of on of hem, whech was a marchaund, cam to London, and the child knew him, and cryed loude,' \"This is my fadir.\" The fadir tok his child fro the beggeris, and mad hem to be arested. The childirn told a l l e the processe, and the beggeris were hangen, f u l wel worthy. (p. 316) However, i f there is l i t t l e personal quality or any central principle of relevance, Capgrave s t i l l shows that he consciously se-lected both his material and the shape of his book. And when he does enter into the Chronicle, he invariably shows more of his method than of his personality. Reference has been made earlier to his sources, to his intention to abbreviate, and to points at which he argues the accuracy of a date or of an event. And occasionally he provides etym-ologies or singles out the most important item in an entry. Such intrusions are essentially the same as the exegetical digressions evident in the saints' lives. Of greater interest are those remarks which bear on the techniques employed in the composition of the Chron- i c l e i t s e l f . In the early part of the Chronicle, he frequently states that the brevity of his entry reflects the paucity of information. Later on, the nature of his own notes is sometimes revealed. When he mentions the six earls Edward III created in 1336, for example, Capgrave was either working from memory or copying from ill-prepared notes, for he l i s t s five and then says \"the sext is not now in mende.\" (p. 204). He sometimes reminds the reader that he knows more than he is recording 361 and his words suggest something which he might have inserted for his own use. For example, the compliments of the Anglo-Norman poets to Henry I's second wife are recalled in: Sche hite, as thei se, Adelida. Of hir beute was mech spech and mech wryting. (p. 133, i t a l i c s added) And, the famous exploits of the son of an Essex tanner are obliquely referred to in: . . . and Ser Jon Haukwood, a mervelous man of armes, whech led i t Itale a grete cumpany clepit \"The White Felauchip.\" His dedis wold ask a. special tretys. (p. 226, i t a l i c s added) Finally, he shows his concern either to be correct himself or to have his work copied correctly in the future when he says: Than went he be the h i l l i s of Alverne, (not Malverne). . . . (p. 229, i t a l i c s added) Thus, despite the random surface of the Chronicle, i t is possible to extract from i t , as from a l l his other English works, evidence of the way Capgrave worked. In fact, because i t s entries are so often notational, leaving i t s skeleton open to view, the Chronicle casts his characteristic traits into greater re l i e f than the others. Coupled with The Solace of Pilgrims as an \"original\" work, i t demonstrates that Capgrave had the capacity to design a work as well as to execute the research and to add to his material from his own resources. The two also show how tenuous the frame holding together amor-phous and eclectic material could be in Middle English works and how foreign c r i t e r i a of relevance to a dominant theme or of proportion in the selection and development were to many writers. Because they do not have the kind of central focus that the main character gives to the four saints' lives, the Solace and the Chronicle reveal these aesthetic issues more clearly than the lives do and provide further evidence that those elements which might be regarded as digressive or disruptive in the earlier works are to be regarded as part of the fabric rather than as stains. 363 Footnotes The internal references are to the printed editions: Ye Solace of Pilgrimes, ed. CA. Mills (London, 1911), and The Chronicle of England, ed. F.C Hingston (London, 1858). Occasionally the editor of the f i r s t has printed a \"y\" for what should clearly be a \"p\". \u00E2\u0080\u00A2*\"The single exception in which he refers to the Augustinians as \"our ordre\" and \"us\" occurs on pp. 92-93 of The Solace of Pilgrims. Perhaps some pride may be attached to the statement that one of them is always \"sexten on to pe popeV' hut i f so i t is very muted indeed. 2 As the editor points out, at least part of Capgrave's statement is erroneous in both instances. In the face of these and many other inaccuracies noted in The Solace, i t is surprising that Mills should praise Capgrave's care so highly in his Introduction (p. v i i i ) . 3 In the second part he makes similar digressions on why Rome is the centre of Christianity (pp. 60-61); on the correspondence in the qualities of o i l and mercy (pp. 111-112); on whether or not i t was God's w i l l that Peter should escape from his prison (p. 118); and on whether Christ himself appeared after his ascension or whether he was represented by angels (p. 163). 4Apart from vague references to \"cronycles\" and \"auctores,\" Capgrave specifically mentions: Solinus (pp. 3,< 4, 14), Varro (pp. 4, 13, 14, 15), V i r g i l (pp. 4, 14, 15, 27), Lucan (pp. 11, 43), Gervase (pp. 12, 43, 64, 65), Dominicus de Arecio (pp. 13, 43, 45, 49), Ovid (pp. 13, 14), Titus Livius (p. 14), Suetonius (p. 25), Proba (p. 27), St. Ambrose (pp. 13, 29, 55), Godfrey of Viterbo (p. 28), Trogus Pbmpeius (p. 29), Isidor of Seville (pp. 29, 55, 156), Juvenal (pp. 34, 35), Papias (p. 34), St. Augustine (pp. 40, 57, 60, 80, 105, 147, 154), Gelasius (p. 69), Osbert (p. 83), Martinus Polonus (pp. 45, 55, 70, 115, 141), St. Prosper (p. 57), St. Jerome (pp. 85, 129, 144), St. Gregory (pp. 55, 100, 129), St. Clement (p. 106), Theodulphus (p. 147), Gregory of Tours (p. 150), St. Bonaventura (p. 152), Strabus (p. 158), Fulgentius (p. 159), The Bible (pp. 38, 48, 64, 65, 73, 96, 111, 118, 130, 153, 161), his dictionary, Catholicon, (pp. 34, 43), the B i b l i c a l Gloss (p. 129), anonymous books: de gestis romanorum, historia antiochena (p. 89), lives of Alexander (pp. 30, 31), St. Anastasia (p. 99), St. Grisogonus (p.99), St. Lawrence (p. 102), St. Helena (p. 152), St. Marcial (p. 152), St. Gregory (p. 155), St. Silvester (p. 166), St. Augustine (p. 167), and a martyrology he knew as Passionarum (p. 102). , ^Inscriptions in marble or on \"tables\" in churches are recorded: pp. 23, 41, 65 (in translation only), 66 (in translation only), 68, 72 (in translation only), 75 (in translation only), 81-82, 87, 122,. 123, 136-137, 159, 160. 364 In addition he refers to the writing but does not give the text pp. 109-110, 157. For St. Peter's the two reli c s used as a basis for elaboration are the vernacle (pp. 63-64) and the p i l l a r on which Christ leaned (pp. 65-66); for St. John Lateran, an image of Mary (p. 72) and the Chapel of the Saviour (p. 75); for \"seint cruce,\" the Jerusalem Chapel (pp. 77-79); for \"seint triphonis,\" the re l i c s of St. Monica (pp. 92-93) and of saints Triphon and Respicius (pp. 93-94); for \"seint clement,\" his relics (pp. 106-107); for \"seint cecile,\" hers (pp. 110-111); at the church dedicated to them, the bodies of Cosmo and Damian (pp. 121-122); at the \"cherch of seynt susanne,\" her newly translated body (pp. 123-124); at \"quator coronatorum,\" the relics of the four \"grauouris of ymagery\" (pp. 127-128); at the station at Saint Paul's, a cloth given to him at his martyrdom (pp. 130-131); at \"nicholaus in carcere,\" the saint's arm (pp. 134-135); and at St. Prisca's, the virgin martyr's relics (pp. 149-150). Sometimes only a single r e l i c is mentioned and a digression from i t provides the matter for the chapter: Chapters 13, 19, 51, 52. Exceptions where several rel i c s receive approximately the same treatment are : The churches of St. Paul (pp. 66-67), St. Sebastian (pp. 67-70), St. Mary Major (p. 85) and St. Praxed (pp. 147-148), In certain other instances some story not concerned with the relic s \u00E2\u0080\u0094 such as the foundation of the church \u00E2\u0080\u0094 is the centre. 7 This l i s t and the one above obviously overlap, for churches dedicated to specific martyrs usually contain some of their important r e l i c s . The chapters of Book II chiefly concerned with a single saint \u00E2\u0080\u0094 or two in conjunction \u00E2\u0080\u0094 are: 6, 8, 9, 10, 14, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 37, 38, 41, 42, 43, 44. 8Chapters 12, 15, 18, 26, 33, 36, 40, 47, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54. 9See also pp.12,11.23-24;' 13,1.1;.:14,1.28; 26,11.23-25. 1 0See also pp.10,11.1-3; 14,11.6-7; 15,11.14-15; 16,11.8-9; 20,11.12-14; 39,11.5-6; 55,11.34-35. * ''\"Other cross-references of these backward-looking varieties occur pp.12,11.15-16; 28,1.8; 48,11.7-8; 52,11.2-3; 52,1.8-53,1.1. 12 Other of these cross-references occur: pp.65,1.30; 71,1.18; 76,11.7-8; 86,11.5-6; 97,1.12; 99,11.19-20; 109,1.5; 117,1.5; 123,11.8-9; 152,11.21-22. See also pp.110,11.8-9; 151,11.21-23. 135,11.11-12; 146,11.28-29; 365 14 Peter J. Lucas, \"John Capgrave, O.S.A. (1393-1464), Scribe and 'Publisher',\" Transactions of the Cambridge Bibliographical,Society, V Part 1 (1969), 1-35. ^ I n fact the three methods often combine when he treats Latin words and phrases; hence no distinction is made in the following l i s t : p.5,11.8-13; p.6,11.2-5; p.7,11.10-12,15-21; p.8,11.4-8; p.9,11.17-21,22-27; p.10,11.3-4,7-10,12-16; p.11,11.10-11; p.12,11.3-4,18-21, 27-28; p.13,11.1-2,2-3,6,7-8,22-23; p.14,11.1-6,8-16,20-22,23-26,32-33; p.15,11.8-14,16-17; p.17,1.31 - p.18,1.1; p.19,11.10-11; p.20, 11.8-9; p.21,1.22 - p.22,1.1; p.23,1.6 - p.24,1.5; p.25,11.20-24; p.26,11.29-33; p.27,1.29 - p.28,1.4; p.32,11.10-11; p.34,11.9-15; p.35,11.16-20; p.40,11.20-22; p.41,11.14-20;' p.42,1.13 - p.43,1.4; p.43,1.21 - p.44,1.2; p.44,11.8-9; p.45,11.18-19; p.46,1.11 - p.47, I. 1; p.47,11.16-17; p.53,11.13-14; p.61,1.25 - p.62,1.1; . p.65,1.36 - p.66,1.1; p.66,11.3-5; p.67,1.13; p.68,11.11-15; p.69,11.18-25, 29-30; p.70,11.3-5; p.72,11.3-4; p.76,1.10; p.81,1.34.- p.82,1.12; p.83,11.20-21; 'p.85,11.23-25; p.87,11.14-21; p.88,11.6-8,31-33; p.95,11.3-8; p.97,11.1-4; p.99,1.37; p.101,11.10-16; p.104,11.7-8; p.105,11.5-6; p.109,1.3; p.Ill,11.3-4; p.114,11.21-23,23-25; p.122, II. 3-8; p.123,1.26 - p.124,1.1; p.130,11.2-15,15-19; p.131,11.13-14; p.134,11.13-14; p.136,1.8 -p.137,1.2; p.137,11.20-25; p.140, 11.6-7; p.141,11.2-3; p.144,11.9-10; p.145,11.16-18; p.147,11.6-11; p.152,11.17-20; p.157,11.4-11,11-14,21-22; p.159,11.3-8; p.160, 1.17 - p.161,1.3; p.161,11.6-9,22-24; p.162,11.13-20; p.165,1.27-p.166,1.4; p.168,11.1-7,11; p.169,1.4; p.170,11.2-3. 16 These include the digressions,referred to earlier in the text and in note three and p.26,11.7-9; p.74,11.19-20; p.Ill,1.13 - p.112, I. 6; p.151,11.16-18, as well as numerous instances where he appeals to the audience with \"3e are to undirstand\" or \"to knowe.\" \"^Fifteenth Century Translation as an Influence on English Prose (Princeton, 1940), p. 35. 18_ Same. 19 Workman, p. 48. 20 Most of these are in the narrations of legends. For a few examples where Capgrave's abbreviation i s relatively slight see: p.65, II. 15-29; p.118,1.34 - p.120,1.17; and p.170,11.3-23. 21 Lucas, p. 25. 22 Capgrave's Dedication to his Genesis Commentary, reprinted in De Illustribus Henricis, ed. F.C. Hingston (London, 1858), pp. 230-231. 23 Hingston, De Illustribus Henricis, p. 226. Francis Roth, The English Austin Friars, 1249-1538, (New York, 1966), pp. 415-416. 366 \"^Lucas, p. 24. 25 Lucas believes the t r e f o i l (a mark made by combining the i n i t i a l s J.C.) to be Capgrave's personal sign, and he discusses the significance of the events i n the Chronicle i t draws attention to. See Lucas, pp. 20-23. 26 There were various methods of arrangement, but basically the \"universal\" histories of Christian writers followed the outline devel-oped by Africanus, Eusebius, and Jerome. According to Sextus Julius Africanus (c. 250) in his Chronographia, creation occurred 5499 years before Christ's birth. About 303 A.D., Eusebius of Caesarea completed his Chronicle and in the chronological tables he established the six ages of the world: 1) from Creation to the birth of Abraham; 2) from the birth of Abraham in 2016 B.C. to the capture of Troy; 3) from the capture of Troy to the f i r s t Olympiad; 4) from the f i r s t Olympiad to the second year of Darius' reign; 5) from the second year of Darius' reign to the death of Christ; 6) from the death of Christ to the twen-tieth year of the reign of the Emperor Constantine (the world was to end at the year 6000). (adapted from H.E. Barnes, A History of Histor- i c a l Writing, rev. ed. (New York, 1962), p. 47. In his translation, Jerome revised the dates somewhat, but otherwise he retained the out-line. As reference to the quotation which follows this passage in the text shows, Capgrave's version accords more closely with the d i v i -sions chosen by Bede, but his chronology follows Eusebius. The chief chronological difference is that he places the creation in 5199 B.C. rather than 5499. Like Bede, he begins the second age with the Flood rather than with the birth of Abraham; his third, with the birth of Abraham's son Isaac; the fourth, with the death of David; the f i f t h , with the reign of Xerxes, Darius' successor; and the sixth, with the birth of Christ. 27 Bede, Opera de Temporibus, ed. CW. Jones (Cambridge, Mass., 1943), p. 308. 28 In the Corpus Christi College, Cambridge MS 169 (which dates c. 1500 and contains none of Capgrave's handwriting) there are two additional Latin entries (pp. 15, 16). 29 There is one additional Latin entry in the printed version (p. 20) 30 A Latin addition is printed p. 35. 31 A Latin addition i s printed p. 47. 367 32 This is the last of Capgrave's notes on his chronological system. In the introduction he explained the dual method of annotation and the point at which he alters the system in the pre-Christian era: Whan the tyme of Crist i s come, than renne to noumberes togidir; the black servith for the age of the world, the rede servith for the annotacion of Crist. Ther is also anothir thing for to note, that the 3eres of the Juges of Israel and of the Kingis of Juda, and of the Kingis of Perse, onto the tyme of Grete Alisaundre, evir that 3ere where the King is first-sette is the last 3ere of his regne, for swech is the computacion of Ysidir, and fro gret Alisaunder forth that 3ere where the King is sette f i r s t is the f i r s t 3ere of his regne. For the newe Cronicules use that forme. These reules had in mynde, the reder schal more parfitely undirstand this book p. 2 And later he reminds the reader of this change. And here leve we the manere of countyng used befor, where we sette evyr the regner in his last 3ere fro this tyme forward we w i l l set hem in her f i r s t 3ere. p. 52 33 Most of the exceptions concern French affairs (pp. 155, 166-167, 177, 180, 190, 235-236, 254, 260) and those dealing with the French monarch often had relevance for the English. Others concern battles between Christians and pagans (pp. 223, 224, 277, 298); and even the apparently extraneous reference to Austria (p. 242) concerns the Duke's mistreatment of pilgrims bound for Rome. 34 In a letter to me Mr. Lucas says, In my study of the Chron- i c l e I am particularly interested in Capgrave's use of his sources \u00E2\u0080\u0094 from a s t y l i s t i c point of view.\" I assume that he w i l l have made far more precise identification of these sources than the historians have. 35 Capgrave is not likely to have been the originator of this story. As C.L. Kingsford says in English Historical Literature in the Fifteenth Century (Oxford, 1913), p. 39, the report was probably cur-rent and i t is only accident that Capgrave's alone survives. 36 Arthur is mentioned on three more occasions: pp. 141, 172, and 211. Merlin's prophecies are also cited (p. 165), although he had not been mentioned earlier. 37 Another much more.nearly contemporary instance is the mixed attitude shown towards Pope Urban in the entries on pp. 241, 254. Though some of Urban's actions were questionable, he was the Roman pope during the Schism and as such he was supported by the English among other nations and by the Augustinians above a l l religious orders. 368 38 There are countless other instances where a single work or a brief phrase expresses a moral judgment on a person or event. But the judgment implied in the assertion is seldom verified by evidence. 39 Like this passage is the one describing the payment of Richard I's ransom (p. 146). The pope may well excommunicate the Duke of Austria, \"but for al that, the mony was payed.\" 40 This distinction is frequently made. The name Chronicle here as in the case of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle is deceptive i f i t is taken to mean any more than annal, a straight-line development. 41 Similarly, he does not indicate that he is an Augustinian f r i a r either in the references to his order or in those to St. Augus-tine, (pp. 82-83, 83, 84, 144, 152, 153, 181). CONCLUSION The amount of writing John Capgrave did in English is extensive; but i t is not the larger part of his canon. It occupied him for only a short period in his l i f e , and i t certainly was not the basis of the reputation he earned in,his own time. Clearly, the Latin theological commentaries that he wrote during the 1430's and 1450's established his reputation for learning; and i t may well be that his public role was greater than remaining documents demonstrate. Thus, in one.sense, the five English works written between 1440 and 1452 and the Chronicle whose material was gathered over many years are interruptions in Capgrave's otherwise scholastic literary career. But, i f the studies in the preceding chapters cannot, therefore, lead to a f i n a l assessment of Capgrave's total career, they do make i t possible to draw conclusions about Capgrave as a writer of English prose and poetry and to suggest that the qualities of his works are probably more characteristic of the English literature of the later middle ages than the exceptional pieces which have been subjected to so much scrutiny. Works in the romance tradition, Chaucer, and poems by his imita-tors were certainly well-known in Capgrave's time; and there are many fifteenth-century l y r i c s , as well as The Kingis Quair, and the works of Henryson, Dunbar, and Malory reflecting both s k i l l in composition and interest in secular themes. S t i l l , manuals of behaviour and religious instruction, collections of sermons and saints' lives had at least as receptive and probably a wider audience. That the subject of 370 the drama was exclusively religious and moralistic and that i t was produced by lay men not members of the clergy further demonstrates the genuine popularity of i t s material. And, so, given the contents of the vast majority of surviving works, including t i t l e s in extant cata-logues of private lib r a r i e s , i t i s evident that Capgrave's English writings reflect that large portion of the reading public's taste which was for didactic literature. This being the case, their style and narrative techniques suggest that there has been an over-emphasis on the \"aureate\"-diction, complicated image patterns, and allegories of a few works, many of which were designed for a closed cir c l e of readers. Apart from the Chronicle, which he claims to have compiled for his own \"solace,\" a l l of Capgrave's works are devotional. His purpose was to honour his subjects and to edify his readers rather than to entertain them or to arouse their emotions. As a result, his narratives are straightforward and uninvolved; and his poetry and prose alike are more notable for their plain expository style than for a r t i s t i c embel-lishment. Capgrave's techniques of expansion, digression, explication, and translation have been explained and illustrated in the earlier chapters. The process of isolating Capgrave's own traits by close comparison of his works with their sources in i t s e l f reinforced the theory that most medieval works were conceived and executed in small units\u00E2\u0080\u0094as.the sentences were\u00E2\u0080\u0094rather than.as unified wholes in'which each part was necessary. In addition, the search for the genesis of the technique and the possibility that the academic sermon provided 371 the model serves as a reminder that this kind of literature i s openly exhortatory, that i t is intended to inform and instruct. Because Capgrave was more concerned with effectively teaching his audience than with developing his materials aesthetically, his characterization i s f l a t . The-general chapter on the saints Vlives showed how common.the stereotype had become and how long the tradition within which Capgrave worked was. He did not need' or intend to present his characters by indirection or in depth, for their virtue had been established by their beatification. The narrative viewpoint in Capgrave's works is also character-i s t i c of the vernacular literature of the fifteenth century. Since his chief concern is to present accepted facts in a clear and detailed manner, the narrator, like the speaker in the sermons of the period, assumes an objective and authoritative role, a voice which is indis-tinguishable from the author himself. There is no a r t i s t i c tension such as derives from the narrator's personal involvement with the hero or the theme, for Capgrave tends to keep himself aloof except insofar as he enters as the scholar-exegete to correct or elaborate some passage. The most important aspect to emphasize about the expository tone and the point of view i s not that Capgrave is different but that he is representative.. Another c r i t i c a l premise about the medieval reader, however, that he was continually aware of and able to perceive narratives according to the four-fold method of exegetical interpre-tation, a theory that has lately been under attack from many quarters, 372 is also seriously questioned by the evidence of Capgrave's English works. Of a l l the writers of the period, Capgrave would seem to have had the best preparation to use the most abstract and complex symbols; and yet he not only does not, he clearly assumes that his readers would not understand i f he did. According to his dedication to the Genesis commentary, he employed only a t r i - p a r t i t e method even in his Latin works; f i r s t the l i t e r a l ; second, the allegorical; and, f i n a l l y , where i t was appropriate, the moral. It is these three alone, with the last two greatly reduced in significance, which are found in a l l Capgrave's English works. In the poems especially, there are frequent examples of his pauses to explain the \"mysty\" meaning of figurative language, a sure indication that he did not feel even the c l e r i c a l audience for which they were intended would necessarily be able to i n -terpret them. The moral notes tend to be reduced to exhortations to prayer and honest deeds, using the saint as an example to the readers. In these ways, like Lydgate, Bokenham, and the anonymous authors of the many other saints' lives and sermon collections, Capgrave lie s in the mainstream of the devotional literature which was to be popular for centuries to come. Drawing attention to his large corpus serves as a reminder of the importance of,the genre, especially in proportional terms. Because he wrote both poetry and prose and composed original passages as well as translations, he:'is also an important example \"for the study of poetics and language. In the dissertation the fluctuation between the older four-stress line and the newer iambic pentameter in his poetry was pointed out and so were examples of his greater 373 assurance and s k i l l in prose when he is translating. In both these areas as well as in his language i t s e l f , much remains to be done. When f u l l and careful analyses have been carried out and his use of the various sources he mentions in The Solace of Pilgrims and The Chronicle of England are evaluated, i t w i l l be possible to make a more precise assessment of his literary position. For the moment, however, i t i s certain that while his English works did not:influence the development of prose or poetry, they are important examples of the language as Middle English became modern and of the genres they represent. Bibliography A. Bibliography of John Capgrave 1. Bibliography 2. Primary Materials a. MSS. b. Editions 3. Secondary Materials B. Selected General Bibliography 1. Primary Materials a. MSS. b. Printed 2. Secondary Materials a. Books b. Articles and Chapters in Books Note: The bibliography of Capgrave refers to vernacular works only, except for De Illustribus Henricis, the single Latin work printed. The secondary materials do not include any of the many general literary and historical works covering the period, nor any of the episcopal registers and British government publications which provided background but did not contribute directly. 375 A. Bibliography of John Capgrave 1. Bibliography de Meijer, A. \"John Capgrave, O.E.S.A. (1393-1464): Bibliography,\" Augustiniana, VII (1957), 118-148, 531-574. Part one contains a bibliography of Capgrave's biographers and a l i s t of secondary references. De Meijer annotates the biographers in chronological order, gives lengthy selections from their works, and points out their errors and obvious indebtedness to one another. In matters of fact, l i s t s of works, or comments on Capgrave's character and learning\u00E2\u0080\u0094which uniformly c a l l for the highest of praise\u00E2\u0080\u0094few of these biographies have anything to add to the earliest ones by Leland and Bale. Indeed, many of the items de Meijer includes are valueless; giving only the barest outline of Capgrave's history or repeating the old errors. Essentially the same judgment must be rendered on the not inconsiderable l i s t of encyclopedias, reference books, and literary histories which are noted, for in many of them Capgrave i s only cited in a catalogue of historians or hagiographers without any individual commentary. The second half of this bibliography is a census of Capgrave's extant and lost works, unhappily not so divided at the outset. Approximate dates, manuscript details, i n c i p i t s, and secondary mater-ia l s which mention the particular work are a l l included. Many secondary items (most of them insignificant) were over-looked by Father de Meijer, and a few have appeared since the publication of his work. In this bibliography, the Latin biographies list e d by de Meijer are not cited again; nor are other books and articles unless they are of major importance; and new or omitted works referring specifically to Capgrave are marked with an asterisk [*]. It should be noted that these additions to de Meijer are a l l also regarded as significant and that no attempt has been made to l i s t a l l the literary histories\u00E2\u0080\u0094such as the CHEL and those by Morley, Ryland, Jusserand, Wyatt, Garrett, Brooke, Moulton, Cousin, Adams, Schofield, or Baugh\u00E2\u0080\u0094general histories, and religious works which make passing reference to Capgrave. 376 2. Primary Materials a. Manuscripts The Life of St. Norbert. handwritten edition by W.H. Clawson from Capgrave's holograph in the Huntington Library (HM 55). A new edition i s being prepared for publication by C. L. Smetana of York University. Other extant holograph manuscripts of Capgrave's vernacular works are: BM. Add. MS. 36704 containing The Li f e of St. Augustine, The Life of St. Gilbert, and A Sermon. Bodley MS. 423, The Solace of Pilgrims. Cambridge University Library, MS. Gg. 4. 12. b. Editions De Illustribus Henricis, ed. F. C. Hingston. London, 1858. The Chronicle of England, ed. F. C. Hingston. London, 1858. The Lives of St. Augustine and St. Gilbert of Sempringham and a Sermon, ed. J. J. Munro, E.E.T.S., O.S. 140. London, 1910. The Life of St. Katherine of Alexandria, ed. C. Horstmann, E.E.T.S., O.S. 100. London, 1893. Ye Solace of Pilgrimes, ed. C. A. Mi l l s . Oxford, 1911. 377 3. Secondary Arbesmann, R. \"Jordanus of Saxony's Vita S. Augustini, the Source for John Capgrave's Life of St. Augustine,\" Traditio, I (1943), 341-354. . \"The 'Malleus' Metaphor in Medieval Characterization,\" Traditio, III (1945), 389-392. Brimson, D. \"John Capgrave, O.S.A.,\" Tagastan, IX (1946), 17-23. de Meijer, A. \"John Capgrave, O.E.S.A. (1393-1464),\" Augustiniana, V (1955), 400-440. Dibelius, W. \"John Capgrave und die englische Schriftsprache,\" Anglia, XXIII (1900), 153-194, 323-375, 429-472; XXIV (1901), 211-263, 269-308. * Lucas, P. J. \"John Capgrave, O.S.A., (1393-1464), Scribe and 'Publisher',\" Transactions of the Cambridge Bibliographical Society, V. Pt. 1 (1969), 1-35. * Kurvinen, A. \"The Source of Capgrave's Life of St. Katherine of Alexandria,\" Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, LXI (1960), 268-324. Sanderlin, G. \"John Capgrave Speaks up for the Hermits,\" Speculum, XVIII (1943), 358-362. * Toner, N. \"Augustinian Spiritual Writers of the English Province in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries,\" Sanctus Augustinus, II, 492-523. .Rome, -1959. \, 378 B. General Bibliography 1. Primary Materials a. Unpub1ished Anonymous. Vita Sancti G i l l e b e r t i . Bodley MS. Digby 36. Jordanus of Saxony. Vita Sancti Augustini. Typescript edition of the holograph manuscript (Codex 251 de L'Arsenal, Paris) by C. L. Smetana, M. A. Thesis, Fordham University, 1948. b. Printed Ae l f r i c . Catholic Homilies, ed. B. Thorpe. 2 vols. London, 1844, 1846. . Lives of the Saints, ed. W. W. Skeat. E.E.T.S., O.S. 76, 82. London, 1881-1900. Anonymous. Andreas, ed. G. P. Krapp, in The Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records, II, 3-51. New York, 1932. . Angleaa'chsische Homilien und Heiligenleben, ed. B. Assman. Darmstadt, 1964. . The Blickling Homilies, ed. R. Morris. E.E.T.S., E.S. 58,63,73. London, 1880. . Elene, ed. G. P. Krapp, in The Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records, II, 66-102. New York, 1932. . Guthlac, ed. G. P. Krapp and E. V. Dobbie, in The Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records, III, 113-133. New York, 1936. . Joseph of Arimathie, ed. W. W. Skeat. E.E.T.S., O.S. 44. Londonj 1871. . Juliana, ed. G. P. Krapp and E. V. Dobbie, in The Anglo-Poetic Records, III, 49-88. New York, 1936. 379 Anonymous. The Li f e of Saint Chad, ed. R. Vleeskruyer. Amsterdam, 1953. . Menologium, ed. E. Dobbie, in The Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records, VI, 49-55. New York, 1942. . The Metrical Life of St. Robert of Knaresborough, ed. J. Bazire. E.E.T.S., O.S. 228. London, 1953. . Middle English Sermons, ed. W. 0. Ross. E.E.T.S., O.S. 209. London, 1940. \u00E2\u0080\u0094. The Middle English Stanzaic Versions of the Li f e of Saint Anne, ed. R. E. Parker. E.E.T.S., O.S. 174. London, 1928. : . An Old English Martyrology, ed. G. Herzfeld. E.E.T.S., O.S. 116. London, 1900. . Seinte Iuliene, ed. S. R. T. 0. d'Ardenne. E.E.T.S., O.S. 248. London, 1961. . Seinte Marherete, ed. F. M. Mack. E.E.T.S., O.S. 193. London, 1934. . The South English Legendary, ed. C. d'Evelyn and A. J. M i l l . E.E.T.S., O.S. 235. London, 1956. . Speculum Sacerdotale, E.H. Weatherly. E.E.T.S., O.S. 200. London, 1936. . Vita Sancti Norberti A, ed. R. Wilmans. Monumenta Historia Germanica ; Scriptores, XII, 670-703. Hanover, 1856. B, ed. J. P. Migne. Patrologiae Latina, CLXX, cols. 1258-1344. Paris, 1894. . Vita Sancti Gil l e b e r t i (BM. MS. Cotton Cleopatra B 1) ed. W. Dugdale. Monasticon, VI, Pt. 2, v-xxix, inter-calated between pp. 946 and 947. London, 1849. ed. R. Foreville. Un proces de canonisation au x i i i siecle : Le Livre de St. Gilbert. Paris, 1943. . Seruicium \u00C2\u00A3. Gi l l e b e r t i , ed. R. M. Woolley. Henry Bradshaw Society, LIX, 115-126. London, 1921. Barclay, A. The Li f e of St. George, ed. W. Nelson. E.E.T.S., O.S. 230. London, 1955. Bede. The Old English Version of Bede's Ecclesiastical History, ed. T. Miller. E.E.T.S., O.S. 95,96. London, 1890-1891. 380 Bede. Opera de Temporibus, ed. C. W. Jones. Cambridge, Mass., 1943. Bokenham, 0. Legendys of Hooly Wumman, ed. M. Serjeantson. E.E.T.S.., O.S. 206. London, 1938. Bradshaw, H. The Life of Saint Werburge of ;Chester, ed. C. Horstmann. \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 E.E.T.S 0. S. 88. London, 1887. John of Tynemouth. Nova Legenda Anglie: as collected by John of Tynmouth, John Capgrave, and others, and f i r s t printed by Wynkyn de Worde, ed. C. Horstmann. 2 vols. Oxford, 1901. Lydgate, J. The Life of Our Lady, ed. J. A. Lauritis. Pittsburgh, 1961. . . Minor Poems, ed. H. N. McCracken. E.E.T.S.., E.S. 107. London, 1911. Mirk, J. Festial, ed. T. Erbe. E.E.T.S., O.S...96. London, 1905. Robinson, T. Mary Magdalene, ed. H, 0. Sommer. E.E.T.S., E.S. 78. London, 1899. 381 2. Secondary Materials a. Books Abram, A. English Life and Manners in the Later Middle Ages. London, 1913. Ackerman, R. W. Backgrounds to Medieval English Literature. New York, 1966. Aigrain, R. L'Hagiographie: Ses,Sources, Ses Mgthodes, Son Histoire. Paris, 1953. Aston, M. Thomas Arundel. Oxford, 1967. Atkins, J. W. H. English Literary Criticism: The Medieval Phase. London, 1952. Barker, E. The Dominican Order and Convocation. Oxford, 1913. Bennett, H. S. Chaucer and the Fifteenth Century. Oxford, 1947. Besant, W. Medieval London. London, 1906. ten Brink, B. A History of English Literature, ed. A. Brandl. Vol. I l l , trans. L. D. Schmidt. London, 1896. Butler, P. Legenda Aurea\u00E2\u0080\u0094Lggende Dorde\u00E2\u0080\u0094Golden Legend: A Study of Caxton's Golden Legend with Special Reference to i t s Relations to the Earlier English Prose Translation. Baltimore, 1899. Cambridge Medieval History, ed. H. M. Gratkin and J. P. Whitney. Vol. VIII. Cambridge, 1964. Carus-Wilson, E. M. Medieval Merchant Venturers. London, 1954. Chambers, E. K. English Literature at the Close of the Middle Ages. Oxford, 1945. 382 * Chambers, R. W. On the Continuity of English Prose from Alfred to More. London, 1932. Chrimes, S. B. Lancastrians, Yorkists and Henry VII. London, 1964. Clarke, W. G. Norfolk and Suffolk. London, 1921. Colvin, H. M. The White Canons in England. Oxford, 1951. Coulton, G. G. Ten Medieval Studies. Boston,.1906. C r i t i c a l Approaches to Medieval Literature: Selected English Institute Papers, 1958-1959, ed. D. Bethurum. New York, 1960. Curtius, E. R. European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages, trans. W. R. Trask. London, 1953. Dahmus, J. William Courtenay, Archbishop of Canterbury 1381-1396. University Park, Pa., 1966. Delehaye, H. The Legends of the Saints, trans. D. Attwater. London, 1962. . Les Passions des Martyrs et les Genres litte'raires. Bruxelles, 1966. Duckett, E. S. Anglo-Saxon Saints and Scholars. New York, 1948. * Emden, A. B. A Biographical Register of the University of Cambridge to 1500. Cambridge, 1963. . A Biographical Register of the University of Oxford to 1500. 3 vols. Oxford, 1957-1959. The English Church and the Papacy in the Middle Ages, ed. C. H. Lawrence. New York, 1965. * Gerrould, G. H. Saints'- Legends. Boston, 1916. Graham, R. English Ecclesiastical Studies. London, 1929. . _S. Gilbert of Sempringham and the Gilbertines: A History of the Only English Monastic Order. London, 1901. Giinter, H. Legenden Studien. Koln, 1906. Gwynn, A. The English Austin Friars in the Time of Wyclif. London, 1940. Hall, D. L. English Medieval Pilgrimages. London, 1965. Hanning, R. W. The Vision of History in Early Britain. New York, 1966. Hillen, H. J. A History of the Borough of King's Lynn. Norwich 1907. Historical Manuscripts Commission: Eleventh Report, Appendix, Part III: The Manuscripts of the Corporations of Southampton and King's Lynn. Londonj 1887. Historical Poems of the XlVth and XVth Centuries, ed. R. H. Robbins. New York, 1959. Holzknecht, K. J. Literary Patronage in the Middle Ages. Philadelphia, 1923. Home, G. Medieval London. London, 1927. Humphreys, K. W. The Book Provisions of the Medieval Friars, 1215-1400. Amsterdam, 1964. Hutchison, H. F. Henry V. London, 1967. Hutt on, E. The Franciscans in England, 1224\u00E2\u0080\u00941538. London, 1926 Jacob, E. F. The Fifteenth Century. Oxford, 1961. Jenkins, C. The Monastic Chronicler and The Early School of St. Albans. London, 1922. Jones, C. W. Saints' Lives and Chronicles in Early England. Ithaca, 1947. Kendall, P. M. The Yorkist Age. New York, 1962. Ker, N. R. Medieval Libraries of Great Britain.. London, 1964. Keynes, F. A. By-ways of Cambridge History. Cambridge, 1947. Kingsford, C. L. English Historical Literature in the Fifteenth Century. Oxford, 1913. -. Prejudice and Promise in Fifteenth. Century England. London, 1925. Knowles, D. Great Historical Enterprises. London, 1963. \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 The Religious Orders in England. Vols. I and II. Cambridge, 1955 and 1957. 384 Knowles, D. Saints and Scholars. Cambridge, 1962. and R. N. Hadcock. Medieval Religious Houses: England and Wales. London, 1953. Krapp, G. P. The Rise of English Literary Prose; New York, 1915. Laurie, S. S. The Rise and Constitution of the Universities. New York, 1903. Madelaine, G. Histoire de Saint Norbert. L i l l e , 1886. Mallet, C. E. A History of the University of Oxford. Vol. I. London, 1924. Mitchell, J. Thomas Hoccleve. Urbana, 1968. Moore, A. K. The Secular Lyric in Middle English. Lexington, 1951. Mullinger, J. B. The University.of Cambridge from the Earliest Times to the Royal Injunction of 1535. Cambridge, 1873. Oakden, J. P. The Poetry of the Alli t e r a t i v e Revival. Manchester, 1937. Owst, G. R. Preaching in Medieval England. Cambridge, 1926. Pantin, W. A. The English Church in the Fourteenth Century. Cambridge, 1955. Papal Registers, Papal Letters. Vols. VII-XI, ed. J. A. Twenlow. London, 1906-1921. Parks, G. B. The English Traveler to Italy. Vol. I. Stanford, 1954. Pendrill, C. Wanderings in Medieval London. New York, 1928. e e Petit, F. D. La Spirituality des pr\u00C2\u00A3montres au x i i et x i i i _ siecles. Paris, 1947. ' Poole, A. L. Medieval England. 2 vols. Oxford, 1958. Quentin, H. Les Martyrologes Historiques du Moyen Age. Paris, 1908. Royal Commission on Historical Monuments: The City of Cambridge. London, 1959. London. Volume IV. The City. London, 1929. 385 Rashdall, H. The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages, ed. F. M. Powicke and A. B. Emden. Vol. III. Oxford, 1936. The Register of Bishop Chichele, ed. E. F. Jacob. 4 vols. Oxford, 1938-1947. Renoir, A. The Poetry of John Lydgate. London, 1967. Rosenthal, C. The Vitae Patrum in Old and Middle English Literature. Philadelphia, 1936. * Roth, F. The English Austin Friars, 1249-1538. Vols. I and II. New York, 1966 and 1961. Russell, J. C. British Medieval Population. Alburquerque, 1948. Saintyves, P. En Marge de La Lggende Dore\"e. Paris, 1930. Salter, H. E. Medieval Archives of. the University of Oxford. 2 vols. Oxford, 1921. Schaar, C. The Golden Mirror. Lundy 1955. Schachner, L. Medieval Universities. London, 1959. Schirmer, W. F. John Lydgate, trans. A. E. Keep. Berkeley, 1961. Schlauch, M. English Medieval Literature and i t s Social Foundations. Warsaw, 1956. Smalley, B. English Friars and Antiquity in the Early Fourteenth Century. New York, 1960. . The Study of the Bible in .the Middle Ages. - Oxford, 1952. Snell, F. J. The Age of Transition.. . 2 vols. London, 1905. Storey, R. L. The End of the House of Lancaster. . London, 196.6. ' Thomas Langley and, the Bishopric of Durham, 1406-1437. London, 1961. /-Stubbs, C. W. The Story of Cambridge. London, 1922. Studies in English Trade in. the Fifteenth Century, ed. E. Power and M. M. Postan. London, 1933. Tait, J. The-Medieval English Borough.. Manchester, 1936. 386 Taylor, H. 0. The Classical,Heritage of the Middle Ages. New York, 1957; . The Medieval Mind. Cambridge, Mass., 1959. Thompson, A. H. The English Clergy and their Organization in the Later Middle Ages. Oxford, 1947. Thompson, J. W. The Medieval Library. Reprint with supplement by B. B. Boyes. New York, 1965. and B. J. Holm. A History of Historical Writing. New York, 1942. Thomson, J. A. F. The Later Lollards, 1414-1520. London, 1965. Thrupp, S. L. The Merchant Class of Medieval London. Chicago, 1948. Trevelyan, G. M. England in the Age of Wycliffe. London, 1946. Valentini, R. and G. Zucchetti. Historia della Citta di Roma. Vol. IV.- Rome, 1953. Vickers, K. H. Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester. London, 1907. Victoria County Histories: Cambridge. Oxford, 1938-1960. Lincoln. London, 1906. Norfolk. Westminster, 1906. Northampton. Westminster, 1902. Oxford. Oxford, 1907. Visitations of Religious Houses- in the Diocese, of Lincoln,, Vol. I l l , Record of Visitations held by William Alnwick, -Bishop of. Lincoln, ed. A. H. Thompson. Oxford, 1927. Weiss, R. Humanism in England during the Fifteenth Century. Oxford, 1957. White j C. L. Aelf r i c . Yale, Studies in English.... Vol. II. Boston, 1898. Williams j G . A. Medieval London From Commune to Capital. London, 1963. Wilson, R. M. The Lost Literature of Medieval England. London, 1952. 387 * Wolpers, T. Die englische Heiligenlegende des Mittelalters. Tubingen, 1964.; . Workman, H. B. John Wyclif; A Study of the English Medieval Church. 2 vols. Oxford, 1926. * Workman, S. K. Fifteenth Century Translation as an Influence on English Prose. / Princeton, 1940. b. Articles and Chapters in Books. Bennett, H. S. \"The Author and His Public in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries,\" Essays and Studies, XXIII (1937), 7-24. Bethurum, D. \"The Form of Aelfric's Lives of the Saints,\" Studies in Philology, XXIX (1932), 515-533. Bonaventura, Brother. \"The Teaching of Latin in Later Medieval England,\" Medieval Studies, XXIII (1961), 1-20. Bulwer, J. \"Notice of a Manuscript Volume among the Records of the Corporation of Lynn,\" Norfolk Archaeology, VI (1864), 217-251. Cater, W. \"The Priory of the Austin Friars, London,\" Journal of the British Archaeological Society, n.s. 18 (1912), pp. 25-44, 57-82. Colgrave, B. \"The Earliest Saints' Lives Written in England,\" Proceedings of the British Academy, XLIV (1958), 35-60. Davis, N. \"Styles in English Prose of the Late Middle and Early Modern Period,\" Actes du VIII e Congres de l a Federation Internationale des langues modernes (Paris, 1961), 165-184. Field, P. J. C. \"Description and Narration in Malory,\" Speculum, XLIII (1968), 476-486. Ford, D. J. M. \"The Saint's Life i n the Vernacular Literature of the Middle Ages,\" Catholic Historical Review, XVII (1931), 268-277. Gri f f i t h s , R. A. \"Local Rivalries and National P o l i t i c s : The Percies, the Nevilles, and the Duke of Exeter, 1452-1455,\" Speculum,XLIII (1968), 589-563. 388 Hackett, B. \"The Spiritual Life of the English Austin Friars of the Fourteenth Century,\" St_. August inus Spirituales Vitae Magister, II (Rome, 1959), 473-492. Hay, D. \"History and Historians in England and France during the Fifteenth Century,\" Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, XXXV (1962), 111-127. Hinton, N. \"Anagogue and Archetype: The Phenomenology of Medieval Literature,\" Annuale Medievale, VII (1966), 57-73. Jacob, E. F. \"Christian Humanism,\" in Europe in the Middle Ages, ed. J. R. Hale, J. R. L. Highfield, B. Smalley (Evanston, 1965), 437-465. . \"Founders and Foundations.in the Later Middle Ages,\" Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, XXXV (1962), 29-46 James, M. R. \"The Catalogue of the Library of the Augustinian Friars at York,\" in Fasciculus Ioanni Willis Clark dicatus (Cambridge, 1909), 2-96. . \"Lives of St. Walstan,\" Norfolk Archaeology, XIX (1917), 238-267. Jeremy, Sister Mary. \"Caxton's Golden Legend and Varagine's Legenda Aurea,\" Speculum, XXI (1946), 211-221. Kerling, N. J. M. \"Aliens in the County of Norfolk, 1436-1485,\" Norfolk Archaeology, XXXIII (1962), 200-212. Knowles, D. \"The Revolt of the Lay Brothers of Sempringham,\" English Historical Review, L (1935), 465-487. Kurtz, E. P. \"From St. Antony to St. Guthlac. A Study of Biography,\" University of California Publications in Modern Philology, XII (Berkeley, 1926). L i t t l e , A. G. and E. Stone, \"Corrodies of the Carmelite Friary of Lynn,\" Journal of Ecclesiastical History, IX (1958), 8-29. * Moore, S. \"Patrons of Letters in Norfolk and Suffolk, c. 1450,\" PMLA, XXVII (1912), 188-207; XXVIII (1913), 79-105. Russell, J.C. \"The Clerical Population in Medieval England,\" Traditio, II (1944), 72-212. 389 Seymour, M. C. \"A Fifteenth Century East Anglian Scribe,\" Medium Aevum, XXXVII (1968), 166-173. Weisheipl, J. A. \"Curriculum of the Faculty of Arts at Oxford in the Early Fourteenth Century,\" Medieval Studies, XXVI (1964), 143-185. Williams, A. \"Relations.Between the Mendicant Friars and the Secular Clergy in England in the Later Fourteenth Century,\" Annuale Medievale, I (1960), 22-93. Wilson, R. M. \"Three Medieval Mystics,\" Essays and Studies, n.s. IX (1956), 87-112. Woolf, R. \"Saints' Lives,\" in Continuations and Beginnings, ed. E. G. Stanley (London, 1966), pp. 37-66. Ypma, E. \"Le Mare Magnum, un code medievale du couvent augustinien de Paris,\" Augustiniana, VI (1956), 275-321. "@en . "Thesis/Dissertation"@en . "10.14288/1.0102163"@en . "eng"@en . "English"@en . "Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library"@en . "University of British Columbia"@en . "For non-commercial purposes only, such as research, private study and education. Additional conditions apply, see Terms of Use https://open.library.ubc.ca/terms_of_use."@en . "Graduate"@en . "The life and English writings of John Capgrave"@en . "Text"@en . "http://hdl.handle.net/2429/34768"@en .