88 
Anglia Ope Codicum Manuscriptorum’”’ (word omitted). 
apud J. H. Parker, Oxonii. 
It has been stated by Harpsfield, that Peter was the author 
of the lives of Wilfrid and St. Guthluc, but I believe this to bea 
mistake. ‘ 
One of his works, “‘ Liber Contra Perfidiam Judzorum,”’ is 
full of declamation and pious wrath against the poor Jews, 
whom he threatens ‘‘ with eternal misery,”’ although, doubtless, 
he had been under obligation to some of them. Another 
quotation confirms this opinion, when he says, “I am com- 
pelled by urgent necessity to go to Canterbury to be crucified 
by the perfidious Jews, and the same torture awaits me in 
London on my return.” 
The gem of this collection, at any rate to the bibliophile, is 
the small quarto edition, entitled, ‘‘ Colloquium Peccatoris et 
Crucifixi Jesu Christi,’ printed in Gothic letter, at Antwerp, 
in 1488, by Nicholas Leu. It is rubricated throughout, 
and underlined with red; one of the rarest examples of 
early printing; only four books are known as the work of 
this printer (brother of Gerard). As none of Peter’s works 
have been translated into English I requested Mr. T. W. Dunn, 
Headmaster of Bath College, to offer a prize for the best 
translation of this interesting piece, but, having been written 
in medieval Latin, he pronounced it unsuitable for his pupils 
to construe. With his characteristic kindness and self-denying 
energy, he insisted on taking it with him to the sea-side, for 
his Easter holiday, and on his return presented me with this 
unique translation as the result. Here is also the work by 
Ingulphus, a monastic historian, who was supposed to have 
written the History of Croyland Abbey, with which was 
published a continuation, stated to be by Peter Blesensis, 
but after a correspondence with the late Professor Earle we 
agreed, as a result of the investigation made by Sir Francis 
Palgrave, that the entire work was a forgery, not written 
either by Ingulphus or Peter Blesensis. 
After this brief and therefore necessarily imperfect resumé 
of his works, in which bibliographical details and technicalities 
have been omitted as out of place here, I think my contention 
will not be disputed, namely, that Peter of Blois was a dis- 
tinguished scholar and author, and although living in the 
12th Century, he was far in advance of his age. 
I have mentioned that when Peter’s connection with Bath 
ceased the Archbishop of Canterbury appointed him Chancellor 
