expressed in it were so suitable to the hour and to a king awaiting death that belief in his authorship continued for some time. In the following reign one Dr. John Gauden claimed to be the author. This might have been for the purpose of gaining royal favor at the hands of Charles II, hence proof should be required for such an important allegation. The matter has been often discussed, but a recent writer has forcibly summed up the arguments for ascribing the authorship to Gauden. In brief, the reasons for belief are these:

1. Similarities of style found in other works by Gauden. This is shown particularly in alliterations, of which there are hundreds of cases in the Eikon. 2. Plays upon words, puns. These are characteristics of Gauden, but not of the king. 3. The vocabulary of the Eikon is very noteworthy. There are about 300 striking words of which very few are used in other writings of the king, but many are found in Gauden. The instances are so numerous as to be convincing. 4. There are many expressions characteristic of Gauden, such as "man of their man;" "blessing of blessings temporal;" "soul of our souls;" etc. There is also characteristic rhythmic construction in many instances. 5. The biblical quotations are those customary to Gauden. Virgil is his favorite classical author, with whom Charles was not known to be familiar. There are other classical allusions which do not seem characteristic of the king. 6. Comparison with the "Vindication of King Charles" by Edward Simmons shows indebtedness to that book. The

"Vindication" was published in 1648 and is thought to have had Gauden's cooperation. The Eikon claims to have been written many years before. 7. There are historical errors in the Eikon which would be improbable in a work of the king, and are sufficient of themselves to cast doubt upon the authorship. 8. The Eikon is verbose in style. This was not a fault of Charles. 9. The style of printing, the title pages and emblems used are such as would connect the other works of Gauden with this.1 These arguments illustrate several principles of criticism, to which attention has already been called, both as to external facts and as to content.

Under any circumstances it is of interest and fre- Place of Origin quently important to know from what place a document or chronicle originated, but this is especially the case when the other factors, time or author, cannot be determined. The object in finding the author is to find the person responsible for the statements in the work. In the absence of that information it may be important to know the place of derivation, for from this we may judge of the proximity of the anonymous writer to the events, the atmosphere in which the work was created, perhaps the political or social bias naturally to be expected. The place where a manuscript was found, or where a book was printed, gives very little basis for the final determination of doubtful cases. Books in all ages, whether in manuscript or type, have travelled far. In times of

1 1C. E. Doble in the Academy, London, May 12, 26; June 9, 30, 1883. Gardiner, History of the Civil War, IV, 325. Dictionary of National Biography, "John Gauden."

Evidence of
Language.

persecution men often had their works printed abroad or gave a false address for protection. Much Puritan literature was published in Geneva and Holland, and much home printing was dated in other countries to prevent detection.

Letters and documents might naturally be supposed to show the language or dialect of their peculiar region, but no final determination can come from these alone. Men may carry their language into foreign parts, or they may write in a dialect to suit the reader, not the writer. In ancient times, we are told, the copyists prepared manuscripts of the Greek authors in the dialects of various cities and islands. In searching for the place of origin all outside phenomena of chirography, materials, or language may offer suggestions, but all must be used with caution. The contents, on the other hand, may reveal what the author hoped to conceal. The peculiar knowledge of locality shown by the document, the incidental references to persons or to the expected readers, may give hints as to the environment of the writer.

CHAPTER X

INTERDEPENDENCE OF SOURCES

THE examples of determination already given show the importance of consulting the predecessors of an author or document. This is particularly true in the study of medieval documents, for at that time the conception of literary property did not exist, nor did the writer scrutinize closely the statements of his predecessors. Whatever had once been written down was usually accepted as good, and criticism was but feebly exercised in any field of literature. We may not stop here to find the cause of that uncritical attitude which was so marked in the period called the "age of authority." This will be discussed later on in the interpretation of historical evidence. As a matter of fact, the literary sins of the past come to the help of the investigator, and for the purposes of external criticism and identification of materials this habit of appropriation is of great service to the student of the medieval period. Authors borrowed literally with great freedom, and embodied fragments of other writers, or whole books, in their own works. As shown by previous examples, we are enabled by a study of quotations to approach the time, place, and authorship of doubtful writings. But in the midst of all of this evidence of borrowing let it not be forgotten that, after all, the principal object of

Forms of Borrowing.

King Alfred in
Rome.

such research is not to convict some one of plagiarism, but to find the original writer of a statement, the person responsible for a given narration. The historian is in search of the witness nearest to the event or the one most competent to report.

Ex

So many forms of borrowing exist that a classification would be difficult even if it were altogether important. The simplest case is like that of the socalled Matthew of Westminster, where the first part is taken word for word from Matthew Paris.1 amples are found, however, in which quotations are taken from two, three, four, and even more sources, depending somewhat upon the remoteness of the last writer from the events described. These cases in simple arithmetic afford little difficulty to the investigator who is familiar with the literature of the given period. Passages from one or many authors may be identified when the copyist has given them in the same or nearly the original form. Each citation and each supposed relation to a previous author must be worked out carefully for itself, and any combination of a group must be demonstrated from materials tested singly from point to point by the procedure heretofore suggested for identification. A previous study of complicated examples will suggest lines of inquiry in approaching a new problem.

A simple case of borrowing in a series of six early chroniclers may be selected from the period of Alfred the Great, where the Saxon Chronicle, Asser, Ethelwerd, Florence of Worcester, Henry of

1 This is assuming that Matthew of Westminster has not yet been discovered to be a mythical personage.