| 22 NOTES AND QUERIES. [No. 2. || 
Catalogue—in which are entered about 600 
volumes, in nearly every one of which, be- 
sides the substantive (or initial?) work, are 
particularised numerous detached writings, 
varying from two or three to five-and-forty 
distinet “tracts”—to Prior Henry Chichely 
(1413—1443), the founder of All Souls’ and 
St. John’s Colleges, Oxford, and who “ built 
the library of the church, and furnished it with 
books,” we will see whether the book “ qui 
intitulatur Johannes Crisestomus,” &c. was 
returned to Canterbury, and had a place in 
the list ;—and this, we think, is satisfactorily 
shown by the following entry :— 
“ Johannes Crisostomus de laude Apostoli. 
In hoe volumine continentur 
Idem de laude Redemptoris. 
Brutus latine. 
Nomina Regum Britannie sicut in ordine suc- 
cesserunt. 
Nomina Archiepiscoporum Cantuariensis sicut 
in ordine successerunt. 
Tabula et questiones Bede de ratione temporum. 
Tabula ejusiem et expositio super tabulam de 
lunationibus. 
Descriptio Britanniz Insule. 
Expositio super Merlinum, imperfecta, 
It may perhaps be supposed that this proves 
too much, as, besides the direct title of the 
volume, eight “ tracts” are here entered, while 
in the Power of Attorney only ¢wo are no- 
ticed. But we would maintain, nevertheless, 
that it is the identical book, and explain this 
variation in the deseription by the circum- 
stance that the library having, in the space 
of nearly two centuries, been materially en- 
riched, numerous works, consisting in many 
cases only of a single “ quaternion,” were in- 
serted in the volumes already existing. An 
examination of the structure of books of this 
period would confirm this view, and show that 
their apparent clumsiness is to be explained 
by the facility'it was then the custom to afford 
for the interpolation or extraction of “ sheets,” 
by a contrivance somewhat resembling that 
of the present day for temporarily fixing loose 
papers in a cover, and known as the “ patent 
leaf-holder.” 
The second document is a list of certain 
books, belonging to the monastery of Angle- 
sey, early in the fourteenth century, allotted 
out to the canons of the house for the pur- 
pose of custody, or, perhaps, of study or de- 
votion. 
“Tsti libri liberati sunt canonicis die......anno 
regni Regis Edwardi septimo ” * (7 Edw. II. 
A.D. 1314.) 
Penes Dominum Priorem; Parabelz Salomo- 
nis; Psalterium cum...... 
Penes Dominum J. de Bodek. ; Epistole Pauli 
codes ; Quedam notule super psalter et liber 
miraculorum......Mariz cum miraculis sanc- 
torum. 
Penes Sub-priorem; Liber vite Sancti Thome 
Martiris. 
Penes E. de Ely; Quartus liber sententiarum 
cum sermo......; Liber Reymundi; Liber de 
vitiis et virtutibus et pastorale. 
Penes R. Pichard ; Liber Alquini ; Liber Johan- 
nis de Tyrington cum Catone et aliis. 
Penes Henrici Muchet; Liber de vita Sancte 
Marie Magdalene et remediarum (?) 
Penes Walteri de Yilwilden ; Liber S...... liga- 
tus in panno ymnaro glosatus cum constitu- 
tionibus; Belet ligatus et vita sanctorum. 
Penes Ricardi de Queye; Omelie Gregorii (?) 
super Evangelistos ligate in nigro corio. 
In commune biblia; Decreta; Decretales ; 
Prima pars moralium Job ; Liber de abusio- 
nibus. 
Liber justitie ; penes Magistrum Adam de Wil- 
burham. 
Penes Walteri de Wyth; Liber Innocentii su- 
per sacramenta cum Belet et introductione in 
uno volumine. 
Item penes Sup-priorem ; Psalterium glosatum 
quod fuit in custodia Magistri Henrici de 
Melreth. 
Item aliud psalterium glosatum inpignoratum 
penes Isabellam Siccadona. 
Several of these descriptions are highly 
curious; particularly the last item, which de- 
scribes one of the “ glossed” psalters as being 
“in pawn,” a fact which, in itself, tells a 
history of the then condition of the house. 
The first document, taken in connection 
with that referred to by Mr. Hunter, would 
seem to establish the existence of a system of 
interchanging the literary wealth of monastic 
establishments, and thereby greatly extending 
the advantages of their otherwise scanty 
stores. Both are executed with all the legal 
forms used in the most important transactions, 
which would support the opinion of their not 
* The formula of this date, “anno R. R. E. sep- 
timo,” would at first sight be considered to refer to the 
preceding reign; but the list is merely a memorandum 
on the dorse of a completely executed instrument dated 
A.D. 1300, which it is highly improbable that it pre- 
ceded. The style of Edward II. is often found as 
above, though not usually so. 
