old several of us in confidence. It was public news
next day. Scholars grew excited. There were hints at the recovery of a
lost MS., which was to 'add to our knowledge of the antique world and
materially alter accepted views of the early state of Roman and Greek
society.' On hearing the news I smiled. 'Some institution,' that was
suspicious--MSS.--they meant forgery. The new treasure was described as
a palimpsest, consisting of fifty or sixty leaves of papyrus. On one
side was a portion of the _Lost Book of Jasher_, of a date not later than
the fourth century; on the other, in cursive characters, the too
notorious work of Aulus Gellius--_De moribus Romanorum_, concealed under
the life of a saint.

But why should I go over old history? Every one remembers the excitement
that the discovery caused--the leaders in the _Times_ and the
_Telegraph_, the doubts of the sceptical, the enthusiasm of the
archaeologists, the jealousy of the Berlin authorities, the offers from
all the libraries of Europe, the aspersions of the British Museum. 'Why,'
asked indignant critics, 'did Dr. Groschen offer his MS. to the
authorities at Oxbridge?' 'Because Oxbridge had been the first to
recognise his genius,' was the crushing reply. And Professor Girdelstone
said that should the FitzTaylor fail to acquire the MS. by any false
economy on the part of the University authorities, the prestige of the
museum would be gone. But this is all old history. I only remind the
reader of what he knows already. I began to bring all my powers, and the
force of the scientific world in Oxbridge, to bear in opposition to the
purchase of the MS. I pulled every wire I knew, and execration was
heaped on me as a vandal, though I only said the University money should
be devoted to other channels than the purchase of doubtful MSS. I was
doing all this, when I was startled by the intelligence that Dr. Groschen
had suddenly come to the conclusion that his find was after all only a
forgery.

The Book of Jasher was a Byzantine fake, and he ascribed the date at the
very earliest to the reign of Alexis Comnenus. Theologians became fierce
on the subject. They had seen the MS.; they knew it was genuine. And
when Dr. Groschen began to have doubts on Aulus Gellius, suggesting it
was a sixteenth-century fabrication, the classical world 'morally and
physically rose and denounced' him. Dr. Groschen, who had something of
the early Christian in his character, bor