4 

85 
bishop of Rouen. On June 24th, 1184, Reginald Fitz Jocelin 
(the founder of our noble charity, St. John’s Hospital) was 
consecrated Bishop of Bath. He having been on terms of 
intimacy with Peter when Canon of Salisbury, when he 
himself was Archdeacon of the same diocese, appointed Peter 
Archdeacon of Bath in the following year. Notwithstanding 
the claims and duties of this office Peter was summoned on 
various expeditions to and fro, between London, Canterbury, 
Paris and Rome, and consequently brought into frequent 
communication with two successive Archbishops of Canter- 
bury, the Pope, and the Bishops of Paris and Bath. In com- 
pany with the Pope, he travelled on horseback to Ferrara, and 
interceded in behalf of Archbishop Baldwin, who was em- 
broiled in a severe conflict with the monks of Canterbury. 
The Pope became so irate with Peter’s intercessions that he 
exclaimed : ““ May I never mount a horse again if I do not 
dismount Baldwin from his Archbishopric.”’ That same night 
he was taken ill, and died at Ferrara, 20th October, 1187. 
Peter reported full particulars of this stormy fracas to the 
Archbishop, with the announcement of the accession of the 
new Pope, Gregory VIII., and his own intention of returning 
forthwith to England. His friend, the Archbishop, rewarded 
him with the appointment of Chancellor of his diocese. The 
death of Henry II., in the year 1189, with whom he had been 
on terms of the closest friendship, now deprived Peter of his 
best friend, of whose character, piety and learning he had the 
highest opinion. 
In one of his letters he said that the King often retired from 
the cares and solicitudes of royalty and engaged in secret 
reading and study; not infrequently finding relaxation in 
the company of his clergy, taking part with them in the 
discussion of difficult questions in Divinity. 
It must have been about this period that a dispute arose 
between Fitz Jocelin, Bishop of Bath, and the Archdeacon, in 
consequence of the interference of the Bishop with Peter’s 
vice-Archdeacon, whom he had suspended contrary to the 
privileges granted by the Pope. Peter either resigned or was 
dismissed from the Archdeaconry of Bath. In either case he 
was free and able to accept the honourable position in Can- 
terbury, and also acted as secretary to the Archbishop. 
I have thus briefly summarised the history of our Bath 
antiquary’s career to this point, with a view to show the 
great opportunities afforded him by these various appoint- 
