Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 24.djvu/621

Rh VYKEHAM.] WILLIAM 585 the Gatinais, and in the present department of Loiret. This and the fact of his authorship may be said to be the only things positively known about him. The rubric of the poem, where his own part finishes, attributes Jean de Meung s continuation to a period forty years later than William s death and the consequent interruption of the romance. Arguing backwards, this death used to be put at about 1260; but Jean de Meung s own work has recently been dated earlier, and so the composition of the first part has been thrown back to a period before 1240. The author represents himself as having dreamed the dream which furnished the substance of the poem in his twentieth year, and as having set to work to &quot; rhyme it &quot; five years later. The general characteristics of the Roman will be found noticed under FRANCE (see vol. ix. p. 643). It may be added here that, though the later and longer part shows signs of greater intellectual vigour and wider knowledge than the earlier and shorter, William of Lorris has more poetry than his continuator, made a much greater impression on the spirit of his own and following ages, and is to all appearance more original. The great features of his four or five thousand lines are, in the first place, the extraordi nary vividness and beauty of his word-pictures, in which for colour, freshness, and individuality he has not many rivals except in the greatest masters, and, secondly, the fashion of allegorical presentation, which, hackneyed and wearisome as it afterwards became, was evidently in his time new and striking. There are of course traces of it before, as in some romances, such as those of Raoul de Houdenc, in the troubadours, and in other writers ; but it was unquestion ably William of Lorris who fixed the style. And to have fixed a style which captivated Europe for at least two centuries, if not three, does not happen to many of the personages of literary history. The most convenient edition of the Roman de la Rose is that of F. Michel (2 vols., Paris, 1864). WILLIAM OF MALMESBURY. See MALMESBURY, WIL LIAM OF. WILLIAM OF NEWBURGH, born about 1136, was a canon of Newburgh in the North Riding of Yorkshire, and author of a valuable chronicle of English affairs from the Norman Conquest to 1197. He calls himself Gulielmus Parvus, and is frequently referred to as William Petyt or Little. His work (Gulielmi NeubrigensisRerumAnglicarum Lihri V.} was edited by Silvius at Antwerp in 1567 and by Hearne at Oxford in 1719 (3 vols. 8vo) ; the latest edition is that by H. C. Hamilton for the English Historical Society (HistoriaRerumAnglicarum,WillelmiParvi,8,T,D., Ordinis Sancti Augustini Canonici Regularis in Ccenobio B. Marise de Novoburgo in Agro Eboracensi, 2 vols., 1856). WILLIAM OF OCCAM. See OCCAM. WILLIAM OF WYKEHAM (1324-1404), bishop of Win chester and chancellor of England, was born in 1324 at Wickham in Hampshire. His father was a yeoman ; his mother is said to have been of noble descent. He was educated at the priory school, Winchester, at the cost of Sir John Scures, lord of the manor of Wickham and governor of Winchester Castle, who afterwards took him into his service. When he was twenty-two years old he passed into the service of Eclingdon, bishop of Winchester. In 1347 the bishop introduced him to the king as a young man likely to be useful from his skill in architecture. Edward III., who was then completing the Round Tower at Windsor, made him his chaplain. But his employment for some time was mainly secular : he acted as guardian of several of the king s manors and as cJerk of the works at Henley and elsewhere. In 1356 he was appointed surveyor of the works at Windsor, and a little later surveyor and svarden of several other castles. In 1359 he began the building of the great quadrangle to the east of the keep at Windsor, a work which occupied ten years. This building established his fame as an architect. Two years after its completion he was employed to build Queenborough Castle (Kent). Meanwhile he was also gaining experience in affairs of state. In 1360 he must have been a member of the king s council, for he appears as a witness to the ratification of the treaty of Bretigny. In 1364 he became keeper of the privy seal. In 1365 he was one of the commissioners to treat for peace with Scotland. And, although he was not yet in holy orders, he was loaded by the king with preferments, one of which, the living of Pulham in Norfolk, involved him (about 1360) in a dispute with the pope. In fact he had attained to such eminence that Froissart says, &quot;At this time there reigned in England a priest called Sir William de Wican, so much in favour with the king that by him everything was done.&quot; Early in life William had received the tonsure ; but it was not till 1362 that he was ordained deacon and priest. In 1363 he became archdeacon of Northampton, and pro vost and prebendary of Wells. Although at this time he possessed a number of prebends, it appears, from a return which he made in 1366 on account of a papal bull against pluralities, that he only held one benefice with cure of souls. On the translation of Bishop Edingdon in this year from Winchester to Canterbury William was nominated by the king to the vacant bishopric ; but the pope withheld his confirmation for some time, and it was not till October 1367 that William was consecrated bishop of Winchester. A month previously he had been made chancellor of Eng land. During his first chancellorship the war with France was renewed and went against the English. The blame for this fell in great measure on the ministry, and in 1371 William resigned the great seal. But in 1373 he was one of a committee of the Lords appointed to confer with the Commons on the question of an aid. About this time he fell out with John of Gaunt, with whom he had pre viously been on good terms. Since the overthrow of the clerical ministry in 1371 John of Gaunt had been practi cally head of the government, but the conduct of his sup porters caused general discontent. In the &quot; Good Parlia ment&quot; of 1376 Lord Latimer was impeached, and the bishop was active in promoting his trial and punishment. This was a great blow to John of Gaunt. The death of the Black Prince in June 1376 enabled him to take his revenge. The bishop was attacked in the council on the ground of malversation and misconduct of public affairs during his chancellorship, condemned to pay an enormous fine, and deprived of the temporalities of his see. The other bishops took his side and regarded his punishment as an insult to their order. It was not, however, till after the accession of Richard II. (1377) that William recovered his position. He then received a full pardon, and was reconciled to John of Gaunt. During the next ten years he became more and more clearly identified with the constitutional or Lancastrian party. In 1380 and 1381 he was named on commissions for the reform of the king s household. In 1382 he took part in a conference with the Commons. Next year he successfully opposed a demand from the lords of the Scot tish marches for a share in the public funds in order to defray the expense of guarding the border, a duty on the performance of which rested their title to their lands. In 1386 he became one of the commission appointed to examine into the Exchequer and to act as a sort of council of regency. It was before this commission that the five &quot;lords appellant&quot; impeached Richard II. s favourites, who next year were condemned by the &quot; Merciless Parlia ment.&quot; A year later (1389) the king suddenly resumed the reins of power. In order, apparently, to conciliate the clergy, Richard at once offered the irreat seal to the XXIV. 74