ence and repute.[21] This was the practice at a much
later period. When that renowned bibliomaniac, Richard de Bury, wrote his
delightful little book called _Philobiblon_, the same rules were strictly
in force. With respect to the lending of books, his own directions are
that, if any one apply for a particular volume, the librarian was to
carefully consider whether the library contained another copy of it; if
so, he was at liberty to lend the book, taking care, however, that he
obtained a security which was to exceed the value of the loan; they were
at the same time to make a memorandum in writing of the name of the book,
and the nature of the security deposited for it, with the name of the
party to whom it was lent, with that of the officer or librarian who
delivered it.[22]
We learn by the canons before referred to, that the superintendence of
all the writing and transcribing, whether in or out of the monastery,
belonged to the office of the armarian, and that it was his duty to
provide the scribes with parchment and all things necessary for their
work, and to agree upon the price with those whom he employed. The monks
who were appointed to write in the cloisters he supplied with copies for
transcription; and that no time might be wasted, he was to see that a
good supply was kept up. No one was to give to another what he himself
had been ordered to write, or presume to do anything by his own will or
inclination. Nor was it seemly that the armarian even should give any
orders for transcripts to be made without first receiving the permission
of his superior.[23]
We here catch a glimpse of the quiet life of a monkish student, who
labored with this monotonous regularity to amass his little library. If
we dwell on these scraps of information, we shall discover some marks of
a love of learning among them, and the liberality they displayed in
lending their books to each other is a pleasing trait to dwell upon. They
unhesitatingly imparted to others the knowledge they acquired by their
own study with a brotherly frankness and generosity well becoming the
spirit of a student. This they did by extensive correspondence and the
temporary exchange of their books. The system of loan, which they in
this manner carried on to a considerable extent, is an important feature
in connection with our subject; innumerable and interesting instances of
this may be found in the monastic registers, and the private letters of
the times. The ch
|