Notes and Queries, Number 45, September 7, 1850 | Page 9

patria Cornubiensis, ... missus Oxonium, deinde Parisios, ... pr? c?teris se dedidit eleganti? lingu? Latin?, fuitque inter pr?cipuos sui temporis poetus per Angliam potissimum et Galliam numeratus. Hunc subinde citat Textor in Cornucopia sub nomine Michaelis Anglici.... In lucem emisit: Historiarum Normanni?, librum unum: Contra Henricum Abrincensem versu. librum unum. Archipoeta vide, quod non sit. (_MS. in Bibliotheca Lunleiana._) Epistolarum et carminum, librum unum. Claruit anno Messi? 1250, sub Henrici tertii regno."
2. Valerius Andreas, however, gives a somewhat different account of Michael Anglicus. In his _Biblioth. Belg._ ed. 8vo. Lovan, 1623, p. 609., he says:
"Michael Anglicus, Bellimontensis, Hanno, I. V. Professor et _Poeta_, scripsit:
Eclogarum, libros iv., ad Episc. Parisien. Eclogarum, libb. ii., ad Lud. Villerium. De mutatione studiorum, lib. i. Elegiam deprecatoriam.
Et alia, qu? Paris. sunt typis edita. Hujus eruditionem et Poemata Bapt. Mantuanus et Joannes Ravisius Testor epigrammate commendarunt: hic etiam in Epithetis suis Anglici auctoritatem non semel adducit."
3. Franciscus Sweertius (_Athen? Belgricoe_, ed. Antv. 1628, p. 565.) gives a similar account to this of Valerius Andreas.
4. And the account given by Christopher Hendreich Brandebargca, (ed. Berolini, 1699, p. 193.) is substantially the same; viz.,
"Anglicus Michael cognomine, sed natione Gallus, patria Belmontensis, utriusque juris Professor, scripsit Eclogarum, lib. iv. ad Episc." &c ... "Et diversorum carminum libros aliquot, qu? omnia Parisiis impressa sunt. Claruit autem A.C. 1500."
5. Moreri takes notice of this apparent confusion made between two different writers, who lived two centuries and a half apart. Speaking of the later {233} of the two, he says (_Dictionnaire Historique_, Paris, 1759, tom. i. par. ii. p. 87.):--
"Anglicus (Michel), natif de Beaumont dans le Hainaut, qui vivoit dans le XVI. siècle, étoit po?te et professeur en droit. Nous avons divers ouvrages de sa fa?on, des églogues, un traité _de mutatione studiorum_, &c. (Valer. Andreas, _Bibl. Belg._) Quelques auteurs l'ont confondu avec Michel Blaumpain. (Voyez Blaumpain.)" #/
Of the earlier Anglicus, Moreri says (ubi sup., tom. ii. par. i. p. 506.):
"Blaumpain (Michel) surnommé _Magister_, Anglois de nation, et _Po?te_, qui vivoit vers l'an 1250. Il est nommé par quelques-un Michel Anglicus. Mais il y a plus d'apparence que c'étoient deux auteurs différens; dont l'un composa une histoire de Normandie, et un traité contre Henri d'Avranches; et l'autre laissa quelques pièces de po?sies;--Eclogarum, libri iv., ad Episcopum Parisiensem; Eclogarum, libri ii., ad Ludovicum Villerium, De mutatione studioram, Elogia deprecatoria, &c. Baptiste Mantuan parle de Michel Anglicus, qui étoit de Beaumont dans l'Hainault. (Pitseus, _De Script. Angl._ p. 322.; Valerius Andreas in _Bibl_, p. 670.)"
Perhaps some of your readers may have access to a copy of the Paris impression of Michael Anglicus, mentioned by Andreas, Sweertius, and Hendreich. J.B. will not need to be reminded of these words of Innocent III., in his first serm. de consecr. Pont. Max., in which he claimed, as St. Peter's successor, to be
"Inter Deum et hominem medius constitutus; citra Deum, sed ultra hominem; minor Deo, sed major homine: qui de omnibus judicat, et a nemine judicatur."--_Innocentii tertii Op._, ed. Colon. 1575, tom. i., p. 189.
Did the claim originate with Pope Innocent?
J. Sansom.
* * * * *
CAXTON'S PRINTING-OFFICE.
I must protest against the manner in which Arun (Vol. ii., p. 187.) has proceeded with the discussion of Caxton's printing at Westminster. Though writing anonymously himself, he has not hesitated to charge me by name with a desire to impeach the accuracy of Mr. C. Knight's _Life of Caxton_, of which, and of other works of the same series, he then volunteers as the champion, as if they, or any one of them, were the object of a general attack. This is especially unfair, as I made the slightest possible allusion to Mr. Knight's work, and may confess I have as yet seen no more of it than the passage quoted by ARUN himself. Any such admixture of personal imputations is decidedly to be deprecated, as being likely to militate against the sober investigation of truth which has hitherto characterised the pages of "NOTES AND QUERIES." ARUN also chooses to say that the only question which is material, is, Who was Caxton's patron? i.e. who was the Abbot of Westminster at the time,--who may not, after all, have actively interfered in the matter. This question remains in some doubt; but it was not the question with which DR. RIMBAULT commenced the discussion. The object of that gentleman's inquiry (Vol. ii., p. 99.) was, the particular spot where Caxton's press was fixed. From a misapprehension of the passage in Stow, a current opinion has obtained that the first English press was erected within the abbey-church, and in the chapel of St. Anne; and Dr. Dibdin conjectured that the chapel of St. Anne stood on the site of Henry VII.'s chapel. The correction of this vulgar error is, I submit, by no means immaterial; especially at a time when a great effort is