Page:The religious life of King Henry VI.djvu/136

110 matter to note is the fact that the manuscript clearly shows that it has been used to sift the evidence given to prove the miracle. There has evidently been a serious attempt to examine into the truth of the assertions made. Thus, against some in a hand different from that of the translator are to be found such expressions as probatum (proven), non-probatum (not proven), non referitur (the witnesses or parties not being forthcoming), etc. In one or two cases we find a note to the effect "let N. or M. be examined." Thus in the case of a miracle said to have been wrought in Sussex on 30th September 1495, in favour of a priest named John Reynald, there is written "let John Reynald, and John Key and John Stranger be examined." Finally, there is entered in the margin the note probatum (proven).

There was obviously, as already stated, great care taken at Windsor in taking the original depositions of the miracles. In one case, for example, a miracle supposed to have been wrought at Sheppey in Kent on "the tuesday after the Feast of Corpus Christi, was sworn to by the witnesses on the tomb of the holy King at Windsor." And, on the same