Caius, the founder, in 1558, of the College at Cambridge, which bears his name.

Caius, then, was a man of undoubted learning, and his histories possess authority, not, however, acquired, nor increased, by his credulity in surreptitious charters, and frivolous disputes about the antiquity of Universities.

He was for beginning his history too soon-in the greater matters of biography he says nothing. He is, however, the first writer of any consequence on the history of our Alma Mater; for as to historiettes, or black books, in the archives of the University, to which he appeals, the former are sometimes of dubious, the latter of no authority at all. If his dates are sometimes wrong, as they will be found by comparing them with Hare's and other authentic documents; if he is inaccurate sometimes in the names and successions of the masters, it should be recollected he wrote when there were few registers kept, and those very negligently. Even from the year 1500, Dr. Richardson's book of Graduates shews, how extremely defective he found every thing of this kind for many years; an observation similar to this is made as an apology, by Mr. Anthony Wood, who begins his great work, the Athenæ Oxonienses, from about the same time.

Stow, our chronicler, who flourished in Queen Elizabeth's reign, to his " Abridged Summary of the Chronicles of England," has subjoined, "an Account of the Universities in England," but too short to be entitled to particular

notice.

So the next printed work, is Parker's Academia Historia Cantabrigiensis. Matthew Parker was Fellow, after

a Entitled, Historiæ Cantabrigiensis Academiæ ab urbe condita, Libri duo; and de Antiquitate Cantabrigiensis. Libri duo, 1574,

wards Master of Bene't College, Cambridge; at length, A. 1559, Archbishop of Canterbury. He procured from the dissolved monasteries and other places, a collection of manuscripts, and books relating to British antiquities. The former were deposited in a library appropriated to their reception in Bene't College. The History of Cambridge is subjoined to his History of the British Church; both being written in Latin.

The Archbishop informs us, his history was published, that those who search after truth might know it with certainty. But, at the outset he holds forth a very discouraging, feeble light. For taking up the old story of Cantaber, he is for confirming it from Lydgate, and Beverley and Bede. What a few rhymes from poor Lydgate can do, I see not. But I do see, the only authority that could have served his purpose, fails him most miserably. For though his doctorum hominum Universitas appears in the text, and Bede in the margin, not a syllable of those sounding words is found in the venerable Bede.

However, Bishop Parker's History of the Colleges, though quite a summary, possesses authority: and his Indulta Regum, being the titles of some of the principal charters and other public instruments relating to the University, may be taken hold of as a very useful clue to its history, so far at least as it reaches.

Next we have the History and Antiquities of the University of Cambridge, by Mr. Parker, Fellow of Caius College, in 1622. This is printed from the Exteros, which is among the MSS. in that library. It follows a good deal in the steps of the Archbishop, but contains nothing

Σκελετος,

Entitled, Catalogus Cancellariorum, Procancellariorum, Procuratorum, &c. usque ad annum, 1571.

of biography beyond the founders and benefactors: with respect to them it contains much useful information; on other subjects answerably to its name, it is a mere skeleton, distinguished from the preceding accounts, principally by giving at large those surreptitious ancient charters, to which they only allude, which, while not received as authority, are amusing enough to curiosity; but of which more hereafter.

Next in order is Dr. Fuller, one who undoubtedly possessed much of historical and biographical knowledgea. He, I suppose, thought that Dr. Caius had trifled enough relative to the Antiquity of the University, and therefore, dismissing the subject with a joke-for no man exceeded him in humour-he is content that the beginning of his history should be at the Conquest: he closes it in 1643. It is not claiming much for Fuller, to say, he is the most agreeable of the Cambridge historians, who in general are so very barren and dull: and he proceeds in chronological order. But on comparing him with my sure guide, Hare, I have sometimes found his dates incorrect; and a gross mistake is pointed out by the MS. historiette, entitled, Aborigines Jesuana, in Jesus College Library.

Fuller dates the foundation of the nunnery of St. Radegundis, (now Jesus College), in the year 1134, whereas the author of the above historiette fully proves, from the testimony of the best Scotch historians, that Malcolm IV. did not begin his reign till 1154, and that he died in the twenty-fifth year of his age; so that as he could not have been born till the year 1140, all his actions that he performed as king must have been-in which testimonies too

a History of the University of Cambridge, 1655.

Hist. University of Cambridge, page 84.

the same writers agree-in the space between 1154 and 1165. Nor does Fuller seem to have been aware that there was a cell for monks here prior to this monastery of nuns. Fuller, misled by Caius, makes Dr. Capon the first Master of Jesus College, whereas the same MS. historiette shews that he was the fourth, and the three first masters they both omit. It has often been observed of Fuller, that a man may be too great a punster for a sound

historian.

In succession to Fuller's History, may be mentioned the Account of the University of Cambridge, and the Colleges there, being a plain relation of many of their oaths, and statutes, and charters. This appears in form of a proposition to both houses of parliament, and is wholly engaged in the point just mentioned. It was printed in 1717. I shall only add, it is to be lamented this account was not seriously attended to. The author, Edmond Miller, Esq. Serjeant at Law, appears to have been of Trinity College -his principal references being made to the statutes of that college-and to have written on serious conviction, and much observation, after having resided in the University many years.

The last History I shall mention is Mr. Carter's History of the University of Cambridge, from its original to the year 1753, &c. together with an accurate List of the Chancellors, &c. Pity, that word should have been added; for never was printed a more inaccurate book. To particularize nothing further now, the very first page of this so accurate list is a tissue of inaccuracies; names misplaced, names mis-spelt, names inserted only once, which should have been repeated; three or four names omitted, and every name antedated: this has been observed by Mr. Robert Smyth; in short, as every body knows, this book is

so full of blunders and inaccuracies, as to be altogether unaccountable, without supposing that Mr. Carter was rather the compiler than the author. The historical part is evidently taken almost verbatim from Mr. Parker, as that of the Ejected Loyalists is from Mr. Walker, and without any acknowledgment. I presume, Carter was furnished with most of the materials, of which he did not know the proper use, by others; that his book was brought through the press by some one (not Mr. Carter, I hope), who was scarcely in his sober senses: so that the very persons, from whom the work was derived, would not choose perhaps to own it; no preface being prefixed, and no name of person appearing to whom Carter must have been indebted, except in his list of subscribers a.

But to do justice, after all, to this strange work, it is the best outline for a History of the University, which we possess the materials are sadly put together, the superstructure bizarre, and the work altogether petit and slight; but the design is good: full of blunders and inaccuracies as it is, the account of eminent men is the only attempt of the kind in any History of the University, if we except the names of founders, benefactors, chancellors, bishops, and masters, and the bare mention of a few names in Dr. Fuller: yet there is no attempt at a general survey of its learned men, though unquestionably the principal feature, as we cannot too often repeat, in the history of a learned body.

We must not pass unnoticed, Mr. Loggan's Cantabrigia Illustrata; for, though not a history of the University, it is a splendid, valuable, and useful illustration of all its principal buildings; consisting of copper-plate engravings, the better perhaps for being rather ancient, for it is

Mr. Carter was a schoolmaster in Cambridge.