Pagina:Annales monastici Vol IV.djvu/27

Haec pagina nondum emendata est

PREFACE. XiX is original, I do not think there is any reason to doubt his correctness or his honesty. Thomas Wykes is more of a historian than a mere General annalist ; and though I think it is clear that his history of Thomas was ^vl'itten in the monastery of Osney, he has not Wykes. allowed himself to be led away by local influences, or even by the ideas that were popular in his own society. His work is clearly his own, marked by his own feelings and peculiarities ; 'and though he takes a very decided side in his account of the great struggle between Henry III. and Simon de Montfort, I do not think he can be accused of wilfully misrepresenting facts. It is a sin- gular thing to have two histories proceeding from the same religious house, with such very strong opposite political bias, as is displayed by these two Osney writers. There can be no doubt that the whole of Wykes's his- tory is by the same writer ; the same peculiarities of style may be observed throughout. It is occasionally, as I have already remarked, too inflated, but it is rarely obscure ; and for the whole history of the campaigns of Lewes and Evesham, and the events immediately pre- ceding and following them, his history must always be of the first importance and authority. I pass on to point out some of the details most worthy Details of remark which are peculiar to the two chronicles, and Fh*^"^^^ ^? best show their character and historical value. And, of Osney. first, as to the Annals of Osney. In p. 19 will be found a curious anecdote of the impression produced on Henry I. by the service at the dedication of Canterbury cathedral in 1130. In p. 66 a line occurs quoted from a poet even now but little known, Maximianus ; as this verse is quoted again in p. 282, it would seem as if the writer of the later portion of the annals were identical with that of the former. The mention of the true reason (according to the annalist) why the election of John Blund to the see of Canterbury was quashed in the year 1233 (p. 74), shows that the writer had a clear idea of