Bellingham's signature - Click here to return to homepage.

About the manuscript


Genre

An earlier study of this manuscript classified it as a commonplace book.

What is a commonplace book?

A commonplace book is a notebook into which readers recorded proverbs and pithy sayings under topical headings, called loci (hence the English translation, commonplace). This ancient method of deconstructing and synthesizing texts was widespread in late medieval and Renaissance schools. It was considered an essential aspect of active reading. By the seventeenth century, the term “commonplace book” could refer to a notebook used to record reading notes of any kind. Such books were thought of as a "portable library."

What makes this manuscript a commonplace book?

Henry Bellingham’s Book has one characteristic of a commonplace book: there is an alphabetical list of topical headings on the verso of the first folio in the book. Henry Bellingham probably originally intended for the headings listed here to be copied at the top of each blank page of the book; then the book would have been filled in with quotations as described above. He deviated from this plan, however, and started using the book as a place to record a “digest” version of the printed texts he was reading.

A second list of headings starts at the end of the first, then overflows back onto the recto. This second list appears to have been added later.

Henry Bellingham’s Book might be better described as a “miscellany.” The copying of full texts into a manuscript book according to a reader's need (a miscellany) was a European practice with a long history, as was copying significant or interesting excerpts of text into commonplace books. By the seventeenth century, however, the genres “commonplace book” and “miscellany” had become less rigid.
Back to top.


Why is this manuscript called Henry Bellingham’s Book?

Sir Henry Bellingham was the likely first owner of the book. He was also its first author. Although many of the phrases and paragraphs in this manuscript were composed by others, it is possible to think of Henry Bellingham as a reader-turned-author. As he read, he designated passages to be copied. He determined the order and organization of his book. His annotations are an integral part of the commonplace book. To think of it another way, when Henry Bellingham’s Book is read as a whole work, it is very different from any of the works that he copied. Henry Bellingham, however, only authored the first half of this manuscript. Despite his death in 1650, someone else continued adding to the manuscript at least through 1652. The identity of this second author is a mystery. Nevertheless, he seems to have been participating in the same intellectual project as Henry Bellingham: the second half of the book has a similar format, approach, and content as the first. Bellingham's intellectual heir should also be considered an author of this manuscript.

Read more about Henry Bellingham.
Back to top.


What is happening on the first page?

The first page of the manuscript might be confusing at first. It is best understood as a "scratch" page. Here, Henry Bellingham wrote his name and the price he paid for the blank book (1 shilling, 2 pence). He also wrote out a brief Latin poem ("Animula vagula blandula") to test his pen. Other scribes likely tested their pens here, hence the helter-skelter appearance of the page. The proverbs and excerpts may have significance, but in this context — and without knowing anything about the scribes or owners other than Henry Bellingham — it is impossible to say what their significance might be.
Back to top.


When was this manuscript written?

The manuscript was started sometime between February 1649 and October 1650. The earlier date was determined by looking at one of the first items copied into the manuscript, the headings located on the verso of the first folio. This set of headings was copied sometime after the execution of the king (January 30, 1649); it references Eikon Basilike, which was the title of a book portraying the martyrdom of Charles I, published shortly after he was beheaded. The later date was easy to pinpoint: Henry Bellingham (the first owner and author of the manuscript) was buried on October 10, 1650.

Texts were added by a subsequent author through at least 1652. It appears that an owner of the manuscript annotated the manuscript sometime later in the seventeenth century.
Back to top.

Why are there pins in some pages?

Before sticky-notes and paperclips, people used small pins to tack two pieces of paper together. In these cases, the scribe wanted to associate the small notes with a particular spot in the manuscript. Pins were a common solution to this problem, as they were abundant in households. Two images were made of these pages: one with the pinned notes, and another without them.
Back to top.

What is the writing in the margins of the manuscript?

Marginalia was a typical feature of Western books throughout most of book history. Although there has been a departure from this practice during the twentieth century, some genres (such as textbooks) have preserved the tradition of marginal annotation. Almost all of the texts copied into this manuscript had printed marginalia as part of the published edition. Nevertheless, the annotations in the manuscript are the personal additions of the scribes and owners: they usually do not follow the marginalia of the printed texts. Sometimes the writing in the margins acts as a guide (or outline) to help the reader quickly find a particular spot in the text. Other times, the marginalia consists of questions or arguments with the main body of the text.
Back to top.

Abbreviations and orthography

The scripts in this manuscript can be read with ease after a little practice. Here are some tips to get you started:

In the seventeenth century, the combination th was typically represented by y, which was a character in the Roman alphabet that looked similar to the English character thorn. Therefore, the was spelled ye.

Some letters were interchangeable — such as i and j, u and v, uu (or vv) and w — depending on the role that they play in the word. The vowel i was sometimes represented by y. The "long s" looks like an f without the crosshatch.

Many abbreviations include the use of superscript. A key for those common in this manuscript:

For more palaeography help, consult the guide created by the National Archives. There are also many books on the subject.
Back to top.


Paper and binding*

The manuscript is approximately 31cm tall, 20cm wide. Its first owner most likely purchased it as a blank book, already bound, from a stationer during the first half of the seventeenth century. The artifact consists of handmade sheets of high-quality paper that were made on a small mold. Its quires are uniform in size but the number of sheets in each gathering varies. The gatherings, usually of eight sheets, were folded once. The binder sewed through the centerfolds of each quire, then joined the stitching across the spine. The original limp cover was either vellum or a light-weight paper wrapper; both were typical binding materials in the seventeenth century. Nearly every page of the seventeenth century book contains manuscript text.

Sometime during the nineteenth century, quires of paper manufactured by machine were added to the front and back of the seventeenth century artifact using the same binding techniques as described above. (The use of machines to produce paper began in 1830.) These nineteenth century pages remain blank; a previous owner may have added them to reinforce the aging manuscript.

During the latter half of the twentieth century, the book was tightly rebound between stiff boards covered with paper and leather. The twentieth century binder drilled new holes through the entire pile, side-sewed the manuscript, and glued it into the rigid cover. The original sewing was not removed, which suggests that the twentieth century owners were concerned to reinforce the fragile manuscript. This binding job obscured marginalia on the recto and main text on the verso of each page because the binding method was so different from the original centerfold sewing. The OSU Rare Books and Manuscripts Library acquired the manuscript sometime after this binding.

Because that binding was so tight and the cover so rigid it was necessary to disassemble the book in order to scan the manuscript pages, which contain text and marginalia to their edges. Harry Campbell, Head of Conservation at OSU Libraries, disbound the manuscript. He repaired the leaves damaged by mold and heavy use with Japanese tissue paper and a wheat starch paste. He used the same materials to repair the centerfold of each leaf so that the manuscript could be rebound using the original centerfold-sewing technique. Mr. Campbell used a limp cover, similar to what would have been used in the seventeenth century, to protect the manuscript. The repaired manuscript is now housed in a clamshell box along with its former stiff paper and leather cover, the machine-made quires of paper, and pins (and other debris) removed from the manuscript.

The goal of the conservation treatment was to restore the book to a usable condition. It can be viewed by appointment at the OSU Rare Books and Manuscripts Reading Room.

View photos of restored manuscript.
Back to top.


Condition*

The manuscript is in good condition for its age, despite heavy use, many owners and centuries of poor storage conditions. The manuscript has clearly endured water damage. As a result, the pages are stained, the edges of pages are fragile, and the dampness fostered the growth of mold inside the front cover. (The holes in the first few pages resulted from mold eating away the sizing in the paper.) Heavy use also left its mark by weakening the edges of the pages.
Back to top.


Early ownership

The first owner was most likely Sir Henry Bellingham. It is possible to identify him as the likely first owner of the book, as his name appears twice in the manuscript. The first is likely an autograph, located in the top right corner of the first folio of the manuscript. The second mention of Henry Bellingham’s name is associated with his ascent to the gentry. In May 1620, King James I made him a baronet; a receipt for fees associated with the ceremony was copied into the commonplace book. This event made it possible to identify precisely which Sir Henry Bellingham started the commonplace book.

The published texts copied into Henry Bellingham’s Book date from 1638 to 1652. Yet, we know from the well-kept records on English gentry that Sir Henry Bellingham died in 1650. Who continued to copy texts into Henry Bellingham’s Book after his death?

Henry had only one heir, a son named James Bellingham. But James could not have continued copying texts into the manuscript as late as 1652, because he died within a week of his father in 1650. James also left no heir.

Who might have gained possession of the manuscript after the deaths of Henry and James? No trace of successive owners is left in the manuscript; yet we know that at least one person read the commonplace book, annotated it, and added more texts to it. Successive owner(s) used the manuscript in much the same way as it was originally designed. There is a certain uniformity to the handwriting contained in the manuscript: almost all of the scribes who wrote in the book appear to have been trained at the same schools.

Did the manuscript pass to his amanuensis upon his death? Did it pass from the Sir Henry to a nephew or friend aspiring to similar political and intellectual circles? Was it a notebook supporting the Bellingham’s Parliamentary endeavors? Did Henry or James belong to a group wherein texts on political and natural philosophy were circulated and discussed – and then the manuscript simply continued to move within the group after their deaths? Did one of Bellingham’s female relatives (such as a wife or daughter) use the commonplace book, either before or after his death?
Back to top.

*Harry Campbell, Head of Conservation, provided these insights into the history of the artifact. Interview by site author. Columbus, OH. July 7, 2008.