THE CAXTON COFFER.
If I were to print the explanation which follows without also producing evidence that it had escaped the notice of those to whose works all students in early English bibliography have recourse, it would seem like advancing a claim to discovery on very slight grounds. I must therefore quote Ames, Herbert, and Dibdin.
"The history of Lombardy, translated from the Latin [by William Caxton], is mentioned by Pitts."—J. AMES, 1749.
"I take this History of Lombardy to be no other than 'the gestis of the Lombardes and of Machomet wyth other cronycles,' added to the life of St. Pelagyen in the Golden legend, and printed separately for the use of the commonality [sic], who could not purchase so large a folio."—W. HERBERT, 1785; T. F. DIBDIN, 1810.
Both Bale and Pits ascribe to Caxton the translation of a work entitled Historia Lumbardica. Ames, as we have seen, states the fact with regard to Pits, but had met with no such work; Herbert, by way of explanation, assumes the existence of a publication of which no one had before heard; and Dibdin, who had far superior means of information, repeats the observations of Herbert without the addition of one word expressive of assent or dissent. May we not infer their inability to solve the problem?
The conjecture of Herbert is very plausible. One fact, however, is worth a score of conjectures; and the fact, in this case, is that in the earlier editions of the Latin legend the title is Legenda sanctorum sive historia Longobardica. Jacques de Voragine, the author of the work in question, was a Lombard by birth, and archbishop of Genoa. Now Lombardi and Longobardi were synonymous terms—as we see in Du Fresne; and so were their derivatives. With this explanation, it must be admitted that the Historia Lumbardica of Bale and Pits is no other than the Golden legend!
BOLTON CORNEY.
Since my last communication, I have ascertained that "Caxton," in Cambridgeshire was also designated "Causton."
In the Abbrev. Rot. Origin., 41 E. 3., Rot. 42., we have—
"Cantabr. Johēs Freville dat viginti marcas [p=] liē feoffandi Johēm de Carleton et Johēm de Selv̅le de man'io de Causton," &c.
And in Cal. Inq., p. m., 4 R. 2., No. 23., we have—
"Elena uxor Johēs Frevill Chr̅. Caxton maner 3a pars—Cantabr."
We have, then, in Cambridgeshire "Causton" and "Caxton" used indifferently for the same manor. There need be no difficulty, therefore, in identifying the name of "Caxton" with "Causton" manor in Hadlow.
We have advanced, then, one step further in our investigation, and the case at present stands thus: Caxton says of himself that he was born in the Weald of Kent. Fuller, as cited by MR. BOLTON CORNEY, says, "William Caxton was born in that town [sc. Caxton]."
In the Weald of Kent is a manor called Causton (to which we may now add) alias Caxton, which manor was owned in the middle of the fourteenth century by a family of the same name (from whom it had passed a century later), and held of the honour of Clare, the lords of which honour, in the fifteenth century, were that ducal and royal house, by which William Caxton was warmly patronised.
From these data we will hope that some of your correspondents may deduce materials for satisfactorily fixing the place of Caxton's birth. Is there upon record any note of armorial bearings, or of any badge used by Caxton? Should there be, and we find such to be at all connected with the bearings of the lords of Causton, it will be additional evidence in our favour.
LAMBERT B. LARKING.
In the body of St. Alphege Church, Canterbury, is the following monumental inscription:
"Pray for the sawlys of John Caxton and of Jone
And Isabel that to this church great good hath done
In making new in the chancell
Of Dexkys and Setys aswell
An Antiphon the which did bye
With a table of the martyrdome of St. Alphye
Forthing much which did pay
And departed out of this life of October the 12 day
And Isabel his second wiff
Passed to blisse where is no strife
The xijt day to tell the trowth
Of the same moneth as our Lord knoweth
In the yeare of our Lord God a thousand fower hundred fowerscore and five."
What relation (if any) was the above to the typographer? They must have been co-existent, and the "Note" may perhaps be a step in the right direction for arriving at the true "stock" of the Caxton Coffer.
FRANCISCUS.