Gilbertus Anglicus | Page 6

evidence that this Gillibertus was Gilbertus
Anglicus, author of the Compendium Medicinae. On the whole then the
visit of Gilbert to France early in the 13th century, and his access in
this way to early translations of Averroës, while a convenient and
plausible conjecture on the part of Dr. Payne, does not seem supported

by any trustworthy historical evidence.
[Footnote 3: Janus, 1903, p. 20.]
The "_Liber de speculis_" mentioned by Gilbert (f. 126 c), and since
the time of Freind generally accepted as the work of Bacon, is almost
certainly not from the pen of that eminent philosopher. In addition to
the fact that Bacon himself says he had (for obvious reasons) written
nothing except a few tracts (_capitula quaedam_) prior to the
composition of his Opus Magnum in 1267, the real author of the Liber
de speculis is probably mentioned by Bacon in the following passage
from the Opus Tertium:
"_Nam in hoc ostenditur specialiter bonitas naturae, ut dicit auctor libri
de speculis comburentibus._"[4]
[Footnote 4: Cap. XXXVI, p. 116, edition of Brewer.]
We must therefore agree with Dr. Payne that the Liber de speculis of
Gilbert was at least not the work of Roger Bacon.
Dr. Freind regards the chapters of Gilbert on the subject of leprosy as
borrowed substantially from the "Chirurgia" of Theodorius of Cervia,
who wrote about the year 1266. This view has also been generally
accepted by later writers. But Dr. Payne boldly challenges the view of
Freind, declares that Theodorius copied his chapters from Gilbert, and
asserts that Theodorius was a notorious plagiarist. Now, while the bold
assertion of Dr. Payne cannot, of course, be accepted as proof of
Gilbert's precedence in chronological order, if that precedence is
otherwise established, it will explain the similarity of the chapters of
the two writers very satisfactorily. For the present, however, this
similarity can be adduced as evidence on neither side.
Again, Gilbert, with the enthusiasm of a loyal pupil, speaks (f. 47 b) of
a certain Magister Ricardus, "omnium doctorum doctissimus," whose
views on uroscopy certainly indicate a mind superior to his age. Now
there were about this period at least two eminent physicians who bore
the name of Ricardus. Of these the senior, a Frenchman, known also as

Ricardus Salednitanus, is highly praised by Aegidius of Corbeil (Gilles
de Corbeil, Aegidius Corboliensis), physician to King Philip Augustus
of France (1180-1223). This Ricardus was a famous teacher at
Salernum when Aegidius was in attendance at that famous university,
therefore probably about the close of the 12th century. The second
Ricardus, called Parisiensis, has been recently identified by Toply with
Richard of Wendover, an English canon of St. Paul's, and at one time
physician to Pope Gregory IX, who died in 1241. Toply believes him to
have been also the author of the "Anatomia Ricardi," recently published.
This Ricardus died in 1252.
Now to which of these Ricardi does the eulogistic language of Gilbert
refer? Dr. Payne believes it to be the senior, Ricardus Salernitanus. Mr.
Kingsford, on the other hand, thinks it to be Ricardus Parisiensis, who
died in 1252. A Liber de urinis has been ascribed to each of them, but,
it seems to me, with greater probability to Ricardus Salernitanus. If too
the author of the "_Anatomia Ricardi_" was a contemporary of Gilbert,
we might reasonably expect to find in the Compendium some
evidences of Gilbert's acquaintance with that work. But Gilbert's
discussion of anatomical questions is totally unlike that of the author of
the "Anatomia," and betrays not the slightest evidence of knowledge of
such a treatise. On the whole then I am inclined to agree in this
question with Dr. Payne, and to consider the Ricardus of Gilbert
identical with Ricardus Salernitanus, the famous professor of the
School of Salernum. This conclusion is further justified by the fact,
generally accepted by all modern writers, that Gilbert was himself a
pupil of Salernum.
Singularly enough, both Dr. Payne and Mr. Kingsford profess to find in
the Compendium some evidence that Gilbert sojourned in Syria for a
certain period, though the circumstances of this sojourn are viewed
differently by the two biographers. Dr. Payne thinks that the physician,
after completing his education in England, proceeded to the Continent
and extended his travels as far as Syrian Tripoli, where he met
Archbishop Walter and became attached to his staff. As the prelate
returned to England in 1192, this sojourn of Gilbert in Syria must have
been about 1190-91, when, according to Dr. Payne's chronology,

Gilbert could have been not more than about twenty years of age. Dr.
Payne bases his story upon a certain passage in the Compendium, in
which Gilbert says that he met in Syrian Tripoli "a canonicus suffering
from rheumatic symptoms." I have been entirely unable to find the
passage referred to in