Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-04T19:48:08.108Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Roger Bacon as Magician*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 July 2016

A. G. Molland
A. G. Molland*
Affiliation:
University of Aberdeen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The practice of magic was much in vogue in the Renaissance and even the word had gained a limited respectability. Thus in 1558 when Giambattista della Porta published his collection of curiosities of art and nature he did so under the title Magia naturalis, and even in the next century the far more sober Bishop John Wilkins was to publish a book entitled Mathematicall Magick. Such works indicate essential similarities between magic and science in that each has as part of its aim the application of not readily apparent knowledge to practice. But we should not think that the widespread acceptance of natural magic in the Renaissance meant that the term had become a synonym for what we should now call science, for we still have to bear in mind such pictures as those of Marsilio Ficino chanting his Orphic hymns, of John Dee conversing with spirits through his medium Edward Kelly, and of Tommaso Campaneüa and Pope Urban VIII closeted together and performing secret rites to ward off the plague.

Type
Miscellany
Information
Traditio , Volume 30 , 1974 , pp. 445 - 460
Copyright
Copyright © Fordham University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 First ed. 1648; republished in Wilkins, J., The Mathematical and Philosophical Works (Reprint of 2nd ed.; London 1970) II 89–246 Google Scholar

2 Walker, D. P., Spiritual and Demonic Magic from Ficino to Compenella (London 1958) 75–76, writes, ‘The activities designated by the term natural magic all had a strong tendency to become indistinguishable from some other activity more properly called by another name; magic was always on the point of turning into art, science, practical psychology, or, above all, religion.’ Google Scholar

3 Walker, , op. cit . 12–24.Google Scholar

4 See e.g., the article on Dee in Biographia Britannica III (London 1750) 1633–45.Google Scholar

5 Walker, , op. cit. 205–210.Google Scholar

6 Pico della Mirandola, G. & Pico della Mirandola, G. F., Opera quae extant omnia (Basel 1601) I 80–81. Cf. Pico della Mirandola, G., De hominis dignitate (ed. Garin, E.; Florence 1942) 152, and see pp. 23-24 of Garin's introduction.Google Scholar

7 See e.g. Agrippa, H. C., De occulta philosophia ([Cologne] 1533) sig.aa.iii; Wierus, J., De praestigiis daemonum (5th ed. Basel 1577) 154, 880-881; del Rio, M., Disquisitionum magicarum libri sex 1.3, 1.5.q.4 (3rd ed. Mainz, 1606) I 21-22, 185 et passim; Naudé, G., Apologie pour tous les Grands Personnages qui ont esté faussement soupçonnez de Magie (Reprint of 1st ed. Paris 1625; London 1972); Thorndike, L., A History of Magic and Experimental Science (New York 1923-58) II 549-551, 888-890; IV 498, 520, et passim. On Bacon more particularly see also e.g. Rio, del, Disq. mag.1.4.q.1, 1.5.q.1 (I 83, 152-4 in 3rd ed.); Thorndike, , Hist. Mag. VI 244-6, 431, 467; McNeir, W. F., ‘Traditional Elements in the Character of Greene's Friar Bacon,’ Studies in Philology 45 (1948) 172-179.Google Scholar

8 Wood Brown, J., An Enquiry into the Life and Legend of Michael Scot (Edinburgh 1897) 222–228.Google Scholar

9 I use the edition in Early English Prose Romances (ed. Thorns, W. J., 2nd ed.; London 1858) I 179–250. The first edition known of was in 1623, but the work must have been available to Robert Greene whose Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay was written by 1592. See McNeir, , op. cit. (supra n. 7) 172 n. 1.Google Scholar

10 MS Oxford, Bodl., Canon. Misc. 525 fol. 202v-203v: Qualiter fratres minores fuerunt phylosophi naturales capitulum quartum … (203r) … Item frater Rogerius dictus Bachon Anglicus magis reali phylosophie studens quam scribende mirasa [sic] operatus est in ea experimenta. Nam tante subtilitatis in naturali phylosophia extitit ut magis eius mirabilibus experimentis (quibus nulla verior scientia) quam scripture stilo aut doctrine verbo insistens, pontem ultra triginta miliaria longum naturaliter condempsans, super mare a terra firma in Anglie insulam per ipsum inde illuc cum tota sua comitiva transiens, aliquando fecit, ipsum post eius salubrem transitum similiter destruens, rarefaciendo naturaliter. Huiusmodi etiam cum semel in Anglia cuidam ioculatori, de ipso nugas facienti, cyrothecam quam secum portabat dedisset excuciendam ad quamdam, integramque in domo coram omnibus stabiliret [sic] columpnam, ipseque earn excuciente primo percuteret ad earn eiusdem aeris simili condempsatione, sic fecit eius manum dextram qua sic excuciebat cum dicta cyrotheca absorberi quod omnibus eidem viderentur immers[um ?] collumpne. Et per fortitudinem condempsationis ipsius aeris taliter eandem materiam fecit stringi, quod idem ioculator vehementer aclamaret(?) misericordiam, promittens se nunquam de fratre truphari, per ipsius aeris similem rarefactionem liberatus sit. De similibus et maioribus idem Rogerius mencionem facit in sua epistola ad papam Clementem quartum ad laudem Dei amen. Qualiter fratres minores fuerunt perspectivi capitulum quintum…. Item prephatus frater Rogerius Bachon, qui tante huiusmodi scientie plenitudine (203v) redundabat, ut delectatione experimentorum eius, obmissis doctrinis et scriptis componendis, aliquando in universitate Oxonie duo specula composuit patentia, in quorum altero quilibet omni hora diei et noctis poterat accendere candelam, in altero vero videre quid agebant homines in quantumcumque remotis constituti partibus. Et quia ad experimentum primi studentes plus stabant candelas accendendo quam in libris studendis, et in secundo multi, visis suis consanguineis et amicis mori, infirmari, aut aliter impediri, de universitate recedentes studium destruebant, eiusdem universitatis communi consilio utrumque est fractum. Igitur quot qualia et quanta mirabiliora hic in hijs, scilicet phylosophia et perspectiva, composuisset et conscripsisset scientiis, ex quo tarn stupendis in eis instabat experimentis ad laudem Dei amen.' In certain places the manuscript readings seem highly corrupt, but the nature of the marvelous tricks is quite clear. Cf. Little, A. G., ‘Description du manuscrit Canonic. Miscell. 525 de la Bibliothèque Bodléienne á Oxford,’ Opuscules de critique historique 1 (1903) 251–297 esp. 287-8.Google Scholar

11 The extant reports of oral tradition about Bacon are mainly of topographical interest. See e.g. Wood, Anthony, Survey of the Antiquities of the City of Oxford (ed. Clark, A.; Oxford 1889-99) I 425–427; Hearne, Thomas, Remarks and Collections 24 Dec. 1723, 23 Sep. 1724 (Oxford 1885-1921) VIII 148, 271. Google Scholar

12 Bale, John, Illustrium maioris Britanniae scriptorum … summarium ([Ipswich] 1548) fol. 114v: ‘… prestigiator ac Magus necromanticus, non in virtute Dei, sed in operatione malorum spirituum Oxonii ad nasum eneum, scholasticorum domicilium, mirabilia magna fecisse traditur.’ Google Scholar

13 Bale, John, Scriptorum illustrium maioris Brytannie … catalogus (Basel 1557-59) I 342: ‘Accessit ei in Mathesi peritia incredibilis, sed absque Necromantia: quamuis ea a multis infametur.’ Google Scholar

14 The Virgil legends, on which see Spargo, J. W., Virgil the Necromancer (Cambridge Mass. 1934), seem to be an exception, but this is probably explained by the legends growing up long after Virgil's death.Google Scholar

15 See Little, A. G., ‘Roger Bacon's Works with References to the MSS. and Printed Editions,’ Roger Bacon: Essays (ed. Little, A. G.; Oxford 1914) 375–425 and Singer, D. W., ‘Alchemical Writings attributed to Roger Bacon,’ Speculum 7 (1932) 80-86. Pits, J., Relationum historicarum de rebus anglicis tomus primus (Paris 1619) 369, also ascribes some apparently magical works to Bacon.Google Scholar

16 Josten, C. H., ‘A Translation of John Dee's “Monas Hieroglyphica” (Antwerp 1564) with an Introduction and Annotations,’ Ambix 12 (1964) 84–221 at 122-124; Crossley, J., ‘Autobiographical Tracts of Dr. John Dee’ in Chetham Miscellanies 1 (1851) (= Remains Historical and Literary Connected with the Palatine Counties of Lancaster and Chester vol. 24) 75; cf. 26. On aspects of Dee's relation to Bacon see Clulee, N. H., ‘John Dee's Mathematics and the Grading of Compound Qualities,’ Ambix 18 (1971) 178-211.Google Scholar

17 Naudé, , op. cit. (supra n. 7) 488–495.Google Scholar

18 Birch, T., The History of the Royal Society of London (London 1756-7) III 470–474, 477, 479; cf. IV 156.Google Scholar

19 For a scholarly and still very useful account, written largely from this standpoint, see the article on Bacon in Biographia Britannica I (London 1747) 341–364. For other early treatments of Bacon see Ferguson, J., Bibliotheca Chemica (Glasgow 1906) I 63-66. Bacon cannot of course be taken to be an experimental scientist in the modern sense; see Fisher, N. W. and Unguru, S., ‘Experimental Science and Mathematics in Roger Bacon's Thought,’ Traditio 27 (1971) 353-378.Google Scholar

20 Among important studies of Bacon we may note: Charles, E., Roger Bacon (Paris 1861); Roger Bacon: Essays (ed. Little, A. G.; Oxford 1914); Thorndike, L., A History of Magic and Experimental Science II (New York 1923) 616-691; Carton, R., L'Expérience physique chez Roger Bacon (Paris 1924); Crowley, T., Roger Bacon: The Problem of the Soul in his Philosophical Commentaries (Louvain and Dublin 1950); Easton, S. C., Roger Bacon and his Search for a Universal Science (Oxford 1952). Among major editions may be noted: Opera quaedam hactenus inedita (ed. Brewer, J. S., London 1859); The ‘Opus Maius’ of Roger Bacon (ed. Bridges, J. H.; Oxford 1897-1900); Opera hactenus inedita (ed. Steele, R. et al., Oxford 1905-40); Moralis Philosophia (ed. Massa, E.; Zurich 1953). For an extended bibliography on Bacon see Alessio, F., ‘Un secolo di studi su Ruggero Bacone (1848-1957),’ Rivista critica di storia delta filosofia 14 (1959) 81-102.Google Scholar

21 Thorndike, Even (Hist. Mag. II 678) who was much concerned to stress Bacon's similarities to his contemporaries writes, ‘There is no other book quite like the Opus Maius in the Middle Ages, nor has there been one like it since.’ Google Scholar

22 Famous Historie (205-211 Thoms).Google Scholar

23 There was a thirteenth-century Oxford Franciscan called Thomas Bungay, on whom see Emden, A. B., A Biographical Register of the University of Oxford to A. D. 1500 I (Oxford 1957) 305. Little, A. G. and Pelster, F., Oxford Theology and Theologians (Oxford 1934) 75 note that ‘No contemporary evidence to justify the tradition of Bungay's close association with Roger Bacon has yet come to light.’ However, there seems to have been another Friar Bungay in the fifteenth century with a definite reputation as a magician, for when describing the Battle of Barnet of 1471 the chronicler Robert Fabyan wrote, ‘Of the mystes and other impedimentes whiche fyll vpon the lordes partye, by reason of the incantacyons wrought by fryer Bungey, as the fame went, me lyst not to wryte.’ See his The New Chronicles of England (ed. Ellis, H., London 1811) 661. It therefore seems that the legendary tradition has conflated the two to produce a composite figure who can both be contemporary with Bacon and vie with him in magical practices. Little weight can be attached to the ascription of a De magia naturali to Thomas Bungay in Bale, Catalogus I 347.Google Scholar

24 Browne, Thomas, Pseudodoxia epidemica 7.17 (ed. Sayle, C., Works [Edinburgh 1904-07] III 72).Google Scholar

25 Opus tertium (ed. Little, A. G., Part of the Opus Tertium [Aberdeen 1912] 77–86).Google Scholar

26 See the fine survey of legends of speaking heads in Dickson, A., Valentine and Orson (New York 1929) 200–216. Legends of artificial heads, of course, had one ancestor in those of oracular severed heads; our task is to find other progenitors.Google Scholar

27 William of Malmesbury, Be gestis regum Anglorum 2.172 (ed. Stubbs, W. [London 1887-89] I 202–203).Google Scholar

28 White, L., Medieval Technology and Social Change (London 1964) 90–92 Google Scholar

29 Feldhaus, F. M., ‘Ein Dampfapparat von vor tausend Jahren,’ Prometheus 25 (1913-14) 69–73; Hildburgh, W. L., ‘Aeolophiles as fire-blowers,’ Archaeologia 94 (1951) 27-55. The oldest specimen which Feldhaus describes in some detail is made of bronze. This would have been included under the term ‘brass’ up to the eighteenth century. Roger Bacon's discussion of aes and orichalcum shows that for him the distinction between these terms was not that between modern ‘bronze’ and ‘brass’; see Stillman, J. M., The Story of Alchemy and Early Chemistry (. Dover, ed.; New York 1960) 266-269. The action of human shaped sufflators was described by Albertus Magnus, De meteoris 3.2.17 (Opera omnia II [ed. Jammy, P.; Lyons 1651] 100).Google Scholar

30 Hero of Alexandria, Pneumatica 2.35 (ed. Schmidt, W., Opera quae supersunt omnia I [Leipzig 1899] 316-322). Google Scholar

31 On the later tradition of Hero's Pneumatica see Boas, M., ‘Hero's Pneumatica. A Study of its Transmission and Influence,’ Isis 40 (1949) 38–48. Until very recently it has been assumed that two at least partial Latin translations were made during the Middle Ages; see Birkenmajer, A., ‘Vermischte Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der mittelalterlichen Philosophic’ Beiträge zur Geschichte der Philosophic des Mittelalters 20 Heft 5 (1922) 19-31, and Haskins, C. H., Studies in the History of Mediaeval Science (Ungar ed.; New York 1960) 181-183. However,. Grant, E., ‘Henricus Aristippus, William of Moerbeke and Two Alleged Mediaeval Translations of Hero's Pneumatica,’ Speculum 46 (1971) 656-669, has put forward strong arguments for doubting whether any such translation was made at that time. Nevertheless it will be clear from what follows that the tradition of such devices as are described in the Pneumatica did pass to the Middle Ages. Roger Bacon, Communia mathematica 3.2.2 (ed. Steele, , Op. hact. ined. XVI 44), mentions a De conductibus aquarum. This is probably the fragmentary Latin translation of the Pneumatica of Philo of Byzantium (ed. Schmidt, W., Heronis Alexandrini Opera omnia I 458-489). The devices in this fragment are not as ostentatious as Hero's, but are related; cf. Drachmann, A. G., Ktesibios, Philon and Heron (Copenhagen 1948) 45-47.Google Scholar

32 See e.g. Usher, A. P., A History of Mechanical Inventions (Revised ed.; Cambridge, Mass. 1954) 187–210.Google Scholar

33 See e.g. Sherwood, M., ‘Magic and Mechanics in Medieval Fiction,’ Studies in Philology 44 (1947) 567–592, and Price, D. J. de S., ‘Automata and the Origins of Mechanism and Mechanistic Philosophy,’ Technology and Culture 5 (1964) 9-23.Google Scholar

34 Sherwood, , op. cit. 587–591.Google Scholar

35 In Chaucer, Geoffrey, Squieres Tale 209–211 (ed. Skeat, W. W., Complete Works [Oxford 1894] IV 467) an onlooker says that the horse of brass on which the knight has appeared ‘is rather lyk/ An apparence y-maad by som magyk, / As Iogelours pleyen at thise festes grete.’ Google Scholar

36 Compare the famous lists of possible mechanical devices given by Bacon in Communia mathematica 3.2.2 (43-44 Steele) and Epistola de secretis operibus artis et naturae 4 (ed. Brewer, J. S., Op. quaedam hact. ined. 532-3). Google Scholar

37 Fam. Hist. (211-2 Thoms).Google Scholar

38 Fam. Hist. (213-4 Thoms).Google Scholar

39 Ep. de sec. op. 5 (534-5 Brewer).Google Scholar

40 Fam. Hist. (215-6 Thoms).Google Scholar

41 See supra n. 10. Translation from Little, A. G., ‘Roger Bacon,’ Proceedings of the British Academy 14 (1928) 265–296 at 267.Google Scholar

42 Bacon, Francis, Sylvia sylvarum 8.762 (ed. Spedding, J., Ellis, R. L. and Heath, D. D., Works II [London 1857] 586). Cf. Burton, Robert, Anatomy of Melancholy 1.3.3 (ed. Dell, F. and Jordan-Smith, P. [New York 1927] 364) and d'Israeli, I., Amenities of Literature (London 1842) III 192.Google Scholar

43 Opus tertium 17 (ed. Brewer, J. S., Op. quaedam hact. ined. 59).Google Scholar

44 E.g. in Opus maius 4.2.2 (I 113 Bridges).Google Scholar

45 Op. tert. 32 (111 Brewer).Google Scholar

46 See Rosen, E., ‘The Invention of Eyeglasses,’ Journal of the History of Medicine 11 (1956) 13–46, 183-218.Google Scholar

47 Op. mat 4.2.2 (I 116 Bridges); Op. tert. 13, 33, 36 (47, 113, 116 Brewer). On Petrus Peregrinus and his relation to Bacon see Schlund, E., ‘Petrus Peregrinus von Maricourt,’ Archivum Franciscanum historicum 4 (1911) 436–455, 633-643; 5 (1912) 22-40 and Crombie, A. C., Robert Grosseteste and the Origins of Experimental Science (2nd imp.; Oxford 1961) 204-210.Google Scholar

48 Op. tert. 36 (116 Brewer).Google Scholar

49 Heiberg, J. L. and Wiedemann, E., ‘Ibn al-Haiams Schrift über parabolische Hohlspiegel,’ Bibliotheca Mathematica 103 (1910) 201–237.Google Scholar

50 Op. mai. 4.2.2 (I 116 Bridges). Cf. Vogl, S., Die Physik Roger Bacos (Erlangen 1906) 71.Google Scholar

51 MS London, Brit. Mus., Royal 7.F.viii fol. 4v: ‘Multa enim specula feci fieri comburentia in quibus tanquam per exemplaria potest bonitas nature manifestari nec sunt magni sumptus secundum quantitatem utilium operum et magnificorum. Primura enim speculum factum constitit 60 libras parisiencium que valent circiter 20 libras sterlingorum sed postea feci fieri melius pro 10 libris parisiencium scilicet pro v marcis sterlingorum et postea diligenter expertus in hiis percepi quod melioria possent fieri pro duabus marcis vel 20 solidis … sed magna consideratio et subtilis requiritur in hac parte.’ Cf. Charles, , op. cit. (supra n. 20) 305. Little, A. G. op. cit. (supra n. 15) lists the work from which this quotation is taken as a recension of the De multiplicatione specierum. This it probably is, but Bacon seems to have intended it to form part of the fifth part of his Compendium studii theologiae, which may have been his last projected attempt at a grand synthesis: see Charles, , op. cit. 90-91. From Comp. stud. theol. 1.2 (ed. Rashdall, H. [Aberdeen 1911] 34) we learn that the first part of this work was being written in 1292.Google Scholar

52 Op. mai. 5.3.3.3-4 (II 164-6 Bridges).Google Scholar

58 Op. mai. 5.3.1.6, 5.3.3.3 (II 145-6, 164 Bridges).Google Scholar

54 The best study from this point of view seems still to be Strutt, J., Glig-Gamena Angel-Deod or The Sports and Pastimes of the People of England (London 1801) 152–160. Many jugglers' conjuring tricks are discussed in Reginald Scot, The Discouerie of Witchcraft 13 (ed. Summers, M. [London] 1930); optical illusions are mentioned in ch. 19 on p. 179. On the possible importance of jugglers to the history of technology see Needham, J., Clerks and Craftsmen in China and the West (Cambridge 1970) 58-59.Google Scholar

55 See particularly Squieres Tale 208–227, Frankeleyns Tale 410-423, 533-541 (IV 467 494, 497-8 Skeat). See also Skeat's discussion of the etymology of ‘etregetour’ in III 273.Google Scholar

56 Chambers, E. K., The Mediaeval Stage (Oxford 1903) II 262: ‘alii qui … et faciunt videri quasi quaedam fantasmata per incantationes vel alio modo.’ Google Scholar

57 Cellini, Benvenuto, Life 1.13 (ed. Cust, R. H. H. [London 1927] I 242–247).Google Scholar

58 Brewster, D., Letters on Natural Magic addressed to Sir Walter Scott (London 1832) 68–76.Google Scholar

59 Clagett, M., Nicole Oresme and the Medieval Geometry of Qualities and Motions (Madison, Wis. 1968) 358, 484-5.Google Scholar

60 Op. tert. 13 (47 Brewer): ‘omnium joculatorum illusiones et ingenia.’ Google Scholar

61 See supra n. 10.Google Scholar

62 Singer, C., ‘Steps Leading to the Invention of the First Optical Apparatus,’ Studies in the History and Method of Science II (ed. Singer, C., Oxford 1921) 385-413 at 386-7.Google Scholar

68 Op. mai. 5.3.3.3-4 (II 165-6 Bridges); Grosseteste, Robert, De iride (ed. Baur, L., Die philosophischen Werke [Münster 1912] 74). Cf. Little, , op. cit. (supra n. 41) 274, and. Rosen, E., ‘Did Roger Bacon Invent Eyeglasses?’ Archives international d'histoire des sciences 7 (1954) 3-15.Google Scholar

64 An Arithmeticall Militare Treatise named Stratioticos …. Long since attempted by Leonard Digges Gentleman. Augmented, digested and lately finished by Thomas Digges, his Sonne (London 1579) 189–190.Google Scholar

65 A Geometrical Practice, named Pantometria … framed by Leonard Digges Gentleman, lately finished by Thomas Digges his sonne (London 1571) sig. G.iv-G.iir .Google Scholar

66 Steele, R., ‘Roger Bacon and the State of Science in the Thirteenth Century,’ Studies in the History and Method of Science II (ed. Singer, C., Oxford 1921) 121–150 at 147.Google Scholar

67 Johnson, F. R., Astronomical Thought in Renaissance England (Baltimore 1937) 178–9.Google Scholar

68 Little, , op. cit. (supra n. 15) 382–4.Google Scholar

69 In 1682 Robert Plot thought that it might have been in the custody of Thomas Allen; see Birch, , op. cit. (supra n. 18) IV 156.Google Scholar

70 On some of the difficulties which arise from Bacon's method of writing see Picavet, F., Essais sur l'histoire générale et comparée des théologies et philosophies médiévales (Paris 1913) 218–224.Google Scholar

71 Bacon seems never to have used the term magia naturalis, but it had been used earlier by William of Auvergne e.g. in De legibus 24 (Opera omnia [Paris 1674] I 69).Google Scholar

72 Fam. Hist. (217-8 Thorns). I am unable to identify a historical source for Vandermast. In Greene's play he has the Christian name Jacques. The name may represent a corruption of that of some figure such as the Cracovian Jakob Randersacker, on whom see Thorndike, , Hist. Mag. IV 457, 482.Google Scholar

73 Thorndike, , Hist. Mag. II 659–677.Google Scholar

74 Ibid. 666.Google Scholar

75 Tractatus brevis et utilis ad declarandum quedam obscure dicta in libro Secreto secretorum Aristotelis 3 (ed. Steele, , Op. hact. ined. V 6-8). Google Scholar

76 Op. mai. 3.14; 4 (III 122-5, I 395-9 Bridges); Ep. de sec. op. 3 (529-532 Brewer).Google Scholar

77 Ep. de sec. op. 3 (531 Brewer).Google Scholar

78 Op. tert. 13 (47 Brewer): ‘experimenta vetularum et sortilegia, et carmina earum et omnium magicorum.’ Google Scholar

79 Liber exemplorum (ed. Little, A. G.; Aberdeen 1907) 22.Google Scholar

80 Ep. de sec. op. 3 (532 Brewer).Google Scholar

81 Easton, , op. cit. (supra n. 20) 126-143, 192-202, has very plausibly suggested that Bacon's troubles arose from his holding Joachite views. Cf. Heer, F., The Intellectual History of Europe (London 1966) 135–8. Wood, Anthony, op. cit. (supra n. 11) II 401 suggested that he may have been condemned for the work De victoria Christi contra Antichristum. Tanner, T., Bibliotheca Britannico-Hibernica (London 1748) 63 n.s, following Leland gives the incipit of this as ‘Nec sum propheta, nec filius prophetae.’ Google Scholar

82 It is curious that in his Summa logicae et philosophiae naturalis, which was written probably in the 1340s in Oxford, John Dumbleton referred to Bacon as ‘unus qui Bakun cognominatur’ (MS Vatican, Vat. Lat. 6750, fol. 194vb).Google Scholar