rt in the middle ages, but also give us a
comprehensive insight into the scriptural ideas entertained in those
times; and the bible student may learn much from pondering on these
glittering pages; to the historical student, and to the lover of
antiquities, they offer a verdant field of research, and he may obtain in
this way many a glimpse of the manners and customs of those old times
which the pages of the monkish chroniclers have failed to record.

But all this prodigal decoration greatly enhanced the price of books, and
enabled them to produce a sum, which now to us sounds enormously
extravagant. Moreover, it is supposed that the scarcity of parchment
limited the number of books materially, and prevented their increase to
any extent; but I am prone to doubt this assertion, for my own
observations do not help to prove it. Mr. Hallam says, that in
consequence of this, "an unfortunate practice gained ground of erasing a
manuscript in order to substitute another on the same skin. This
occasioned, probably, the loss of many ancient authors who have made way
for the legends of saints, or other ecclesiastical rubbish."[80] But we
may reasonably question this opinion, when we consider the value of books
in the middle ages, and with what esteem the monks regarded, in spite of
all their paganism, those "heathen dogs" of the ancient world. A doubt
has often forced itself upon my mind when turning over the "crackling
leaves" of many ancient MSS., whether the peculiarity mentioned by
Montfaucon, and described as parchment from which former writing had been
erased, may not be owing, in many cases, to its mode of preparation. It
is true, a great proportion of the membrane on which the writings of the
middle ages are inscribed, appear rough and uneven, but I could not
detect, through many manuscripts of a hundred folios--all of which
evinced this roughness--the unobliterated remains of a single letter. And
when I have met with instances, they appear to have been short
writings--perhaps epistles; for the monks were great correspondents, and,
I suspect, kept economy in view, and often carried on an epistolary
intercourse, for a considerable time, with a very limited amount of
parchment, by erasing the letter to make room for the answer. This,
probably, was usual where the matter of their correspondence was of no
especial importance; so that, what our modern critics, being emboldened
by these faint traces of former writing, have declare