ORIGIN OF HISTORY, AND STATE OF HISTORICAL LITERATURE DURING THE MIDDLE
AGES.
I have now laid before the reader an examination of those conspicuous
circumstances to which the progress of civilization is commonly
ascribed; and I have proved that such circumstances, so far from being
the cause of civilization, are at best only its effects; and that
although religion, literature, and legislation do, undoubtedly, modify
the condition of mankind, they are still more modified by it. Indeed, as
we have clearly seen, they, even in their most favourable position, can
be but secondary agents; because, however beneficial their apparent
influence may be, they are themselves the product of preceding changes,
and their results will vary according to the variations of the society
on which they work.
It is thus that, by each successive analysis, the field of the present
inquiry has been narrowed, until we have found reason to believe that
the growth of European civilization is solely due to the progress of
knowledge, and that the progress of knowledge depends on the number of
truths which the human intellect discovers, and on the extent to which
they are diffused. In support of this proposition, I have, as yet, only
brought forward such general arguments as establish a very strong
probability; which, to raise to a certainty, will require an appeal to
history in the widest sense of the term. Thus to verify speculative
conclusions by an exhaustive enumeration of the most important
particular facts, is the task which I purpose to execute so far as my
powers will allow; and in the preceding chapter I have briefly stated
the method according to which the investigation will be conducted.
Besides this, it has appeared to me that the principles which I have
laid down may also be tested by a mode of proceeding which I have not
yet mentioned, but which is intimately connected with the subject now
before us. This is, to incorporate with an inquiry into the progress of
the history of Man, another inquiry into the progress of History itself.
By this means, great light will be thrown on the movements of society;
since there must always be a connexion between the way in which men
contemplate the past, and the way in which they contemplate the present;
both views being in fact different forms of the same habits of thought,
and therefore presenting, in each age, a certain sympathy and
correspondence with each other. It will, moreover, be found, that such
an inquiry into what I call the history of history, will establish two
leading facts of considerable value. The first fact is, that during the
last three centuries, historians, taken as a class, have shown a
constantly increasing respect for the human intellect, and an aversion
for those innumerable contrivances by which it was formerly shackled.
The second fact is, that during the same period, they have displayed a
growing tendency to neglect matters once deemed of paramount importance,
and have been more willing to attend to subjects connected with the
condition of the people and the diffusion of knowledge. These two facts
will be decisively established in the present Introduction; and it must
be admitted, that their existence corroborates the principles which I
have propounded. If it can be ascertained, that as society has improved,
historical literature has constantly tended in one given direction,
there arises a very strong probability in favour of the truth of those
views towards which it is manifestly approaching. Indeed, it is a
probability of this sort which makes it so important for the student of
any particular science to be acquainted with its history; because there
is always a fair presumption that when general knowledge is advancing,
any single department of it, if studied by competent men, is also
advancing, even when the results may have been so small as to seem
unworthy of attention. Hence it becomes highly important to observe the
way in which, during successive ages, historians have shifted their
ground; since we shall find that such changes have in the long-run
always pointed to the same quarter, and are, in reality, only part of
that vast movement by which the human intellect, with infinite
difficulty, has vindicated its own rights, and slowly emancipated itself
from those inveterate prejudices which long impeded its action.
With a view to these considerations, it seems advisable that, when
examining the different civilizations into which the great countries of
Europe have diverged, I should also give an account of the way in which
history has been commonly written in each country. In the employment of
this resource, I shall be mainly guided by a desire to illustrate the
intimate connexion between the actual condition of a people and their
opinions respecting the past; and, in order to keep this connexion in
sight, I shall treat the state of historical literature, not as a
separate subject, but as forming part of the intellectual history of
each nation. The present volume will contain a view of the principal
characteristics of French civilization until the great Revolution; and
with that there will be incorporated an account of the French
historians, and of the remarkable improvements they introduced into
their own departments of knowledge. The relation which these
improvements bore to the state of society from which they proceeded, is
very striking, and will be examined at some length; while, in the next
volume, the civilization and the historical literature of the other
leading countries will be treated in a similar manner. Before, however,
entering into these different subjects, it has occurred to me, that a
preliminary inquiry into the origin of European history would be
interesting, as supplying information respecting matters which are
little known, and also as enabling the reader to understand the extreme
difficulty with which history has reached its present advanced, but
still very imperfect, state. The materials for studying the earliest
condition of Europe have long since perished; but the extensive
information we now possess concerning barbarous nations will supply us
with a useful resource, because they have all much in common; the
opinions of extreme ignorance being, indeed, every where the same,
except when modified by the differences which nature presents in various
countries. I have, therefore, no hesitation in employing the evidence
which has been collected by competent travellers, and drawing inferences
from it respecting that period of the European mind, of which we have no
direct knowledge. Such conclusions will, of course, be speculative; but,
during the last thousand years, we are quite independent of them,
inasmuch as every great country has had chroniclers of its own since the
ninth century, while the French have an uninterrupted series since the
sixth century. In the present chapter, I intend to give specimens of the
way in which, until the sixteenth century, history was habitually
written by the highest European authorities. Its subsequent improvement
during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, will be related under
the separate heads of the countries where the progress was made; and as
history, previous to the improvement, was little else than a tissue of
the grossest errors, I will, in the first place, examine the leading
causes of its universal corruption, and indicate the steps by which it
was so disfigured that, during several centuries, Europe did not possess
a single man who had critically studied the past, or who was even able
to record with tolerable accuracy the events of his own time.
At a very early period in the progress of a people, and long before they
are acquainted with the use of letters, they feel the want of some
resource, which in peace may amuse their leisure, and in war may
stimulate their courage. This is supplied to them by the invention of
ballads; which form the groundwork of all historical knowledge, and
which, in one shape or another, are found among some of the rudest
tribes of the earth. They are, for the most part, sung by a class of men
whose particular business it is thus to preserve the stock of
traditions. Indeed, so natural is this curiosity as to past events,
that there are few nations to whom these bards or minstrels are unknown.
Thus, to select a few instances, it is they who have preserved the
popular traditions, not only of Europe,[418] but also of China, Tibet,
and Tartary;[419] likewise of India,[420] of Scinde,[421] of
Belochistan,[422] of Western Asia,[423] of the islands of the Black
Sea,[424] of Egypt,[425] of Western Africa,[426] of North America,[427]
of South America,[428] and of the islands in the Pacific.[429]
[418] For an account of the ancient bards of Gaul, see the _Benedictine
Hist. Lit. de la France_, vol. i. part i. pp. 25-28. Those of
Scotland are noticed in _Barry's Hist. of the Orkney Islands_, p.
89; and for a modern instance in the island of Col, near Mull,
see _Otter's Life of Clarke_, vol. i. p. 307. As to the Irish
bards in the seventh century, see _Sharon Turner's Hist. of
England_, vol. iii. p. 571. Spenser's account of them in the
sixteenth century (_Somers Tracts_, vol. i. pp. 590, 591) shows
that the order was then falling into contempt; and in the
seventeenth century this is confirmed by Sir William Temple;
_Essay on Poetry_, in _Temple's Works_, vol. iii. pp. 431, 432.
But it was not till the eighteenth century that they became
extinct; for Mr. Prior (_Life of Goldsmith_, vol. i. pp. 36, 37)
says, that Carolan, 'the last of the ancient Irish bards,' died
in 1738. Without them the memory of many events would have been
entirely lost; since, even at the end of the seventeenth century,
there being no registers in Ireland, the ordinary means of
recording facts were so little known, that parents often took the
precaution of having the names and ages of children marked on
their arms with gunpowder. See _Kirkman's Memoirs of Charles
Macklin_, 8vo. 1799, vol. i. pp. 144, 145, a curious book.
Compare, respecting Carolan, _Nichols's Illustrations of the
Eighteenth Century_, vol. vii. pp. 688-694.
[419] On these Toolholos, as they are called, see _Huc's Travels in
Tartary, Thibet, and China_, vol. i. pp. 65-67. Huc says, p. 67,
'These poet-singers, who remind us of the minstrels and
rhapsodists of Greece, are also very numerous in China; but they
are, probably, no where so numerous or so popular as in Thibet.'
[420] On the bards of the Deccan, see _Wilks's History of the South of
India_, 4to. 1810, vol. i. pp. 20, 21, and _Transac. of the
Bombay Soc._ vol. i. p. 162. For those of other parts of India,
see _Heber's Journey_, vol. ii. pp. 452-455; _Burnes on the
North-west Frontier of India_, in _Journal of Geog. Soc._ vol.
iv. pp. 110, 111; _Prinsep_, in _Journal of Asiat. Soc._ vol.
viii. p. 395; _Forbes's Oriental Memoirs_, vol. i. pp. 376, 377,
543; and _Asiatic Researches_, vol. ix. p. 78. They are mentioned
in the oldest Veda, which is also the oldest of all the Indian
books. See _Rig Veda Sanhita_, vol. i. p. 158.
[421] See _Burton's Sindh_, p. 56, 8vo. 1851.
[422] _Burton's Sindh_, p. 59.
[423] _Burnes's Travels into Bokhara_, 8vo. 1834, vol. ii. pp. 107, 115,
116.
[424] _Clarke's Travels_, 8vo. 1816, vol. ii. p. 101.
[425] Compare _Wilkinson's Ancient Egyptians_, vol. ii. p. 304, with
_Bunsen's Egypt_, vol. i. p. 96, vol. ii. p. 92.
[426] I have mislaid my note on the bards of Western Africa, and can
only refer to a hasty notice in _Mungo Park's Travels_, vol. i.
p. 70. 8vo. 1817.
[427] _Buchanan's Sketches of the North-American Indians_, p. 337.
[428] _Prescott's History of Peru_, vol. i. pp. 31, 32, 117.
[429] _Ellis_, _Polynesian Researches_, vol. i. pp. 85, 199, 411;
_Ellis_, _Tour through Hawaii_, p. 91. Compare _Cook's Voyages_,
vol. v. p. 237, with _Beechey's Voyage to the Pacific_, vol. ii.
p. 106. Some of these ballads have been collected, but, I
believe, not published. See _Cheever's Sandwich Islands_, 8vo.
1851, p. 181.
In all these countries, letters were long unknown; and, as a people in
that state have no means of perpetuating their history except by oral
tradition, they select the form best calculated to assist their memory;
and it will, I believe, be found that the first rudiments of knowledge
consist always of poetry, and often of rhyme.[430] The jingle pleases
the ear of the barbarian, and affords a security that he will hand it
down to his children in the unimpaired state in which he received
it.[431] This guarantee against error increases still further the value
of these ballads; and instead of being considered as a mere amusement,
they rise to the dignity of judicial authorities.[432] The allusions
contained in them, are satisfactory proofs to decide the merits of rival
families, or even to fix the limits of those rude estates which such a
society can possess. We therefore find, that the professed reciters and
composers of these songs are the recognized judges in all disputed
matters; and as they are often priests, and believed to be inspired, it
is probably in this way that the notion of the divine origin of poetry
first arose.[433] These ballads will, of course, vary, according to the
customs and temperaments of the different nations, and according to the
climate to which they are accustomed. In the south they assume a
passionate and voluptuous form; in the north they are rather remarkable
for their tragic and warlike character.[434] But, notwithstanding these
diversities, all such productions have one feature in common. They are
not only founded on truth, but making allowance for the colourings of
poetry, they are all strictly true. Men who are constantly repeating
songs which they constantly hear, and who appeal to the authorized
singers of them as final umpires in disputed questions, are not likely
to be mistaken on matters, in the accuracy of which they have so lively
an interest.[435]
[430] It is a singular proof of the carelessness with which the history
of barbarous nations has been studied, that authors constantly
assert rhyme to be a comparatively recent contrivance; and even
Pinkerton, writing to Laing in 1799, says, 'Rhyme was not known
in Europe till about the ninth century.' _Pinkerton's Literary
Correspondence_, vol. ii. p. 92. The truth is, that rhyme was not
only known to the ancient Greeks and Romans, but was used, long
before the date Pinkerton mentions, by the Anglo-Saxons, by the
Irish, by the Welsh, and, I believe, by the Brétons. See _Mure's
Hist. of the Literature of Greece_, vol. ii. p. 113; _Hallam's
Lit. of Europe_, vol. i. p. 31; _Villemarqué_, _Chants Populaires
de la Bretagne_, vol. i. pp. lviii. lix. compared with
_Souvestre_, _les Derniers Bretons_, p. 143; _Turner's Hist. of
England_, vol. iii. pp. 383, 643, vol. vii. pp. 324, 328, 330.
Rhyme is also used by the Fantees (_Bowdich_, _Mission to
Ashantee_, p. 358); by the Persians (_Transac. of Bombay Soc._
vol. ii. p. 82); by the Chinese (_Transac. of Asiatic Soc._ vol.
ii. pp. 407, 409, and _Davis's Chinese_, vol. ii. p. 269); by the
Malays (_Asiatic Researches_, vol. x. pp. 176, 196); by the
Javanese (_Crawfurd's Hist. of the Indian Archipelago_, vol. ii.
pp. 19, 20); and by the Siamese (_Transac. of Asiatic Soc._ vol.
iii. p. 299).
[431] The habit thus acquired, long survives the circumstances which
made it necessary. During many centuries, the love of
versification was so widely diffused, that works in rhyme were
composed on nearly all subjects, even in Europe; and this
practice, which marks the ascendency of the imagination, is, as I
have shown, a characteristic of the great Indian civilization,
where the understanding was always in abeyance. On early French
historians who wrote in rhyme, see _Monteil_, _Hist. des divers
Etats_, vol. vi. p. 147. Montucla (_Hist. des Mathémat._ vol. i.
p. 506) mentions a mathematical treatise, written in the
thirteenth century, 'en vers techniques.' Compare the remarks of
Matter (_Hist. de l'Ecole d'Alexandrie_, vol. ii. pp. 179-183) on
the scientific poetry of Aratus; and on that of Hygin, p. 250.
Thus, too, we find an Anglo-Norman writing 'the Institutes of
Justinian in verse;' _Turner's Hist. of England_, vol. vii. p.
307: and a Polish historian composing 'his numerous works on
genealogy and heraldry mostly in rhyme.' _Talvi's Language and
Literature of the Slavic Nations_, 8vo. 1850, p. 246. Compare
_Origines du Droit Français_, in _[OE]uvres de Michelet_, vol.
ii. p. 310.
[432] Mr. Ellis, a missionary in the South-Sea Islands, says of the
inhabitants, 'Their traditionary ballads were a kind of standard,
or classical authority, to which they referred for the purpose of
determining any disputed fact in their history.' And when doubts
arose, 'as they had no records to which they could at such times
refer, they could only oppose one oral tradition to another;
which unavoidably involved the parties in protracted, and often
obstinate debates.' _Ellis_, _Polynesian Researches_, vol. i. pp.
202, 203. Compare _Elphinstone's Hist. of India_, p. 66; _Laing's
Heimskringla_, 8vo. 1844, vol. i. pp. 50, 51; _Twell's Life of
Pocock_, edit. 1816, p. 143.
[433] The inspiration of poetry is sometimes explained by its
spontaneousness (_Cousin_, _Hist. de la Philosophie_, II^e série,
vol. i. pp. 135, 136); and there can be no doubt that one cause
of the reverence felt for great poets, is the necessity they seem
to experience of pouring out their thoughts without reference to
their own wishes. Still, it will, I believe, be found, that the
notion of poetry being a divine art is most rife in those states
of society in which knowledge is monopolised by the bards, and in
which the bards are both priests and historians. On this
combination of pursuits, compare a note in _Malcolm's Hist. of
Persia_, vol. i. p. 90, with _Mure's Hist. of the Lit. of
Greece_, vol. i. p. 148, vol. ii. p. 228, and _Petrie's_ learned
work, _Ecclesiastical Architecture of Ireland_, Dublin, 1845, p.
354. For evidence of the great respect paid to bards, see
_Mallet's Northern Antiquities_, pp. 234-236; _Wheaton's Hist. of
the Northmen_, pp. 50, 51; _Wright's Biog. Brit. Lit._ vol. i. p.
3; _Warton's Hist. of English Poetry_, 1840, vol. i. pp. xxvi.
xl.; _Grote's Hist. of Greece_, vol. ii. p. 182, 1st edit.; and
on their important duties, see the laws of M[oe]lmund,
_Villemarqué_, _Chants Populaires de la Bretagne_, 1846, vol. i.
pp. v. and vi.; _Thirlwall's Hist. of Greece_, vol. i. p. 229;
and _Origines du Droit_, in _[OE]uvres de Michelet_, vol. ii. p.
372.
[434] _Villemarqué_, _Chants Populaires_, vol. i. p. lv.
[435] As to the general accuracy of the early ballads, which has been
rashly attacked by several writers, and among others by Sir
Walter Scott, see _Villemarqué_, _Chants Populaires_, vol. i. pp.
xxv.-xxxi., and _Talvi's Slavic Nations_, p. 150. On the tenacity
of oral tradition, compare _Niebuhr's History of Rome_, 1847,
vol. i. p. 230, with _Laing's Denmark_, pp. 197, 198, 350;
_Wheaton's Hist. of the Northmen_, pp. 38, 39, 57-59. Another
curious illustration of this is, that several barbarous nations
continue to repeat the old traditions in the old words, for so
many generations, that at length the very language becomes
unintelligible to the majority of those who recite them. See
_Mariner's Account of the Tonga Islands_, vol. i. p. 156, vol.
ii. p. 217, and _Catlin's North-American Indians_, vol. i. p.
126.
This is the earliest, and most simple, of the various stages through
which history is obliged to pass. But, in the course of time, unless
unfavourable circumstances intervene, society advances, and, among other
changes, there is one in particular of the greatest importance: I mean
the introduction of the art of writing, which, before many generations
are passed, must effect a complete alteration in the character of the
national traditions. The manner in which this occurs has, so far as I am
aware, never been pointed out; and it will, therefore, be interesting to
attempt to trace some of its details.
The first, and perhaps the most obvious consideration, is that the
introduction of the art of writing gives permanence to the national
knowledge, and thus lessens the utility of that oral information, in
which all the acquirements of an unlettered people must be contained.
Hence it is, that as a country advances, the influence of tradition
diminishes, and traditions themselves become less trustworthy.[436]
Besides this, the preservers of these traditions lose, in this stage of
society, much of their former reputation. Among a perfectly unlettered
people, the singers of ballads are, as we have already seen, the sole
depositories of those historical facts on which the fame, and often the
property, of their chieftains principally depend. But, when this same
nation becomes acquainted with the art of writing, it grows unwilling to
intrust these matters to the memory of itinerant singers, and avails
itself of its new art to preserve them in a fixed and material form. As
soon as this is effected, the importance of those who repeat the
national traditions is sensibly diminished. They gradually sink into an
inferior class, which, having lost its old reputation, no longer
consists of those superior men to whose abilities it owed its former
fame.[437] Thus we see, that although, without letters, there can be no
knowledge of much importance, it is nevertheless true, that their
introduction is injurious to historical traditions in two distinct
ways: first by weakening the traditions, and secondly by weakening the
class of men whose occupation it is to preserve them.
[436] That the invention of letters would at first weaken the memory, is
noticed in Plato's Phædrus, chap. 135 (_Platonis Opera_, vol. i.
p. 187, edit. Bekker, Lond. 1826); where, however, the argument
is pushed rather too far.
[437] This inevitable decline in the ability of the bards is noticed,
though, as it appears to me, from a wrong point of view, in
_Mure's Literat. of Greece_, vol. ii. p. 230.
But this is not all. Not only does the art of writing lessen the number
of traditionary truths, but it directly encourages the propagation of
falsehoods. This is effected by what may be termed a principle of
accumulation, to which all systems of belief have been deeply indebted.
In ancient times, for example, the name of Hercules was given to several
of those great public robbers who scourged mankind, and who, if their
crimes were successful, as well as enormous, were sure after their death
to be worshipped as heroes.[438] How this appellation originated is
uncertain; but it was probably bestowed at first on a single man, and
afterwards on those who resembled him in the character of their
achievements.[439] This mode of extending the use of a single name is
natural to a barbarous people;[440] and would cause little or no
confusion, as long as the traditions of the country remained local and
unconnected. But as soon as these traditions became fixed by a written
language, the collectors of them, deceived by the similarity of name,
assembled the scattered facts, and, ascribing to a single man these
accumulated exploits, degraded history to the level of a miraculous
mythology.[441] In the same way, soon after the use of letters was known
in the North of Europe, there was drawn up by Saxo Grammaticus the life
of the celebrated Ragnar Lodbrok. Either from accident or design, this
great warrior of Scandinavia, who had taught England to tremble, had
received the same name as another Ragnar, who was prince of Jutland
about a hundred years earlier. This coincidence would have caused no
confusion, as long as each district preserved a distinct and independent
account of its own Ragnar. But, by possessing the resource of writing,
men became able to consolidate the separate trains of events, and, as it
were, fuse two truths into one error. And this was what actually
happened. The credulous Saxo put together the different exploits of both
Ragnars, and, ascribing the whole of them to his favourite hero, has
involved in obscurity one of the most interesting parts of the early
history of Europe.[442]
[438] Varro mentions forty-four of these vagabonds, who were all called
Hercules. See a learned article in _Smith's Biog. and Mythology_,
vol. ii. p. 401, 8vo. 1846. See also _Mackay's Religious
Development of the Greeks and Hebrews_, vol. ii. pp. 71-79. On
the relation between Hercules and Melcarth, compare _Matter_,
_Hist. du Gnosticisme_, vol. i. p. 257, with _Heeren's Asiatic
Nations_, vol. i. p. 295, 8vo. 1846. And as to the Hercules of
Egypt, _Prichard's Analysis of Egyptian Mythology_, 1838, pp.
109, 115-119. As to the confusion of the different Hercules by
the Dorians, see _Thirlwall's Hist. of Greece_, vol. i. p. 257;
and compare p. 130.
[439] This appears to be the opinion of Frederick Schlegel; _Schlegel's
Lectures on the History of Literature_, Edinb. 1818, vol. i.
p. 260.
[440] The habit of generalizing names precedes that more advanced state
of society in which men generalize phenomena. If this proposition
is universally true, which I take it to be, it will throw some
light on the history of disputes between the nominalists and the
realists.
[441] We may form an idea of the fertility of this source of error from
the fact, that in Egypt there were fifty-three cities bearing the
same name: 'L'auteur du Kamous nous apprend qu'il y a en Egypte
cinquante-trois villes du nom de Schobra: en effet, j'ai retrouvé
tous ces noms dans les deux dénombremens déjà cités.'
_Quatremère_, _Recherches sur la Langue et la Littérature de
l'Egypte_, p. 199.
[442] On this confusion respecting Ragnar Lodbrok, see _Geijer's History
of Sweden_, part i. pp. 13, 14; _Lappenberg's Anglo-Saxon Kings_,
vol. ii. p. 31; _Wheaton's Hist. of the Northmen_, p. 150;
_Mallet's Northern Antiquities_, p. 383; _Crichton's
Scandinavia_, vol. i. p. 116. A comparison of these passages will
justify the sarcastic remark of Koch on the history of Swedish
and Danish heroes; _Koch_, _Tableau des Révolutions_, vol. i. p.
57 note.
The annals of the North afford another curious instance of this source
of error. A tribe of Finns, called Quæns, occupied a considerable part
of the eastern coast of the Gulf of Bothnia. Their country was known as
Quænland; and this name gave rise to a belief that, to the north of the
Baltic, there was a nation of Amazons. This would easily have been
corrected by local knowledge; but, by the use of writing, the flying
rumour was at once fixed; and the existence of such a people is
positively affirmed in some of the earliest European histories.[443]
Thus, too, Abo, the ancient capital of Finland, was called Turku, which,
in the Swedish language, means a market-place. Adam of Bremen, having
occasion to treat of the countries adjoining the Baltic,[444] was so
misled by the word Turku, that this celebrated historian assures his
readers that there were Turks in Finland.[445]
[443] _Prichard's Physical Hist. of Mankind_, vol. iii. p. 273. The
Norwegians still give to the Finlanders the name of Quæner. See
_Dillon's Lapland and Iceland_, 8vo. 1840, vol. ii. p. 221.
Compare _Laing's Sweden_, pp. 45, 47. The Amazon river in South
America owes its name to a similar fable. _Henderson's Hist. of
Brazil_, p. 453; _Southey's Hist. of Brazil_, vol. i. p. 112;
_M'Culloh's Researches concerning America_, pp. 407, 408; and
_Journal of Geog. Soc._ vol. xv. p. 65, for an account of the
wide diffusion of this error.
[444] Sharon Turner (_Hist. of England_, vol. iv. p. 30) calls him 'the
Strabo of the Baltic;' and it was from him that most of the
geographers in the Middle Ages derived their knowledge of the
North.
[445] 'It was called in Finnish _Turku_, from the Swedish word _torg_,
which signifies a market-place. The sound of this name misled Adam
of Bremen into the belief that there were Turks in Finland.'
_Cooley's Hist. of Maritime and Inland Discovery_, London, 1830,
vol. i. p. 211.
To these illustrations many others might be added, showing how mere
names deceived the early historians, and gave rise to relations which
were entirely false, and might have been rectified on the spot; but
which, owing to the art of writing, were carried into distant countries,
and thus placed beyond the reach of contradiction. Of such cases, one
more may be mentioned, as it concerns the history of England. Richard
I., the most barbarous of our princes, was known to his contemporaries
as the Lion; an appellation conferred upon him on account of his
fearlessness, and the ferocity of his temper.[446] Hence it was said
that he had the heart of a lion; and the title C[oe]ur de Lion not only
became indissolubly connected with his name, but actually gave rise to a
story, repeated by innumerable writers, according to which he slew a
lion in single combat.[447] The name gave rise to the story; the story
confirmed the name; and another fiction was added to that long series of
falsehoods of which history mainly consisted during the Middle Ages.
[446] The chronicler of his crusade says, that he was called Lion on
account of his never pardoning an offence: 'Nihil injuriarum
reliquit inultum: unde et unus (_i.e._ the King of France) dictus
est Agnus a Griffonibus, alter Leonis nomen accepit.' _Chronicon
Ricardi Divisiensis de Rebus gestis Ricardi Primi_, edit.
Stevenson, Lond. 1838, p. 18. Some of the Egyptian kings received
the name of Lion 'from their heroic exploits.' _Vyse on the
Pyramids_, vol. iii. p. 116.
[447] See Price's learned Preface to _Warton's History of English
Poetry_, vol. i. p. 21; and on the similar story of Henry the
Lion, see _Maury_, _Légendes du Moyen Age_, p. 160. Compare the
account of Duke Godfrey's conflict with a bear, in _Matthæi Paris
Historia Major_, p. 29, Lond. 1684, folio. I should not be
surprised if the story of Alexander and the Lion (_Thirlwall's
History of Greece_, vol. vi. p. 305) were equally fabulous.
The corruptions of history, thus naturally brought about by the mere
introduction of letters, were, in Europe, aided by an additional cause.
With the art of writing, there was, in most cases, also communicated a
knowledge of Christianity; and the new religion not only destroyed many
of the Pagan traditions, but falsified the remainder, by amalgamating
them with monastic legends. The extent to which this was carried would
form a curious subject for inquiry; but one or two instances of it will
perhaps be sufficient to satisfy the generality of readers.
Of the earliest state of the great Northern nations we have little
positive evidence; but several of the lays in which the Scandinavian
poets related the feats of their ancestors, or of their contemporaries,
are still preserved; and, notwithstanding their subsequent corruption,
it is admitted by the most competent judges that they embody real and
historical events. But in the ninth and tenth centuries, Christian
missionaries found their way across the Baltic, and introduced a
knowledge of their religion among the inhabitants of Northern
Europe.[448] Scarcely was this effected, when the sources of history
began to be poisoned. At the end of the eleventh century, Sæmund
Sigfussen, a Christian priest, gathered the popular, and hitherto
unwritten, histories of the North into what is called the Elder Edda;
and he was satisfied with adding to his compilation the corrective of a
Christian hymn.[449] A hundred years later, there was made another
collection of the native histories; but the principle which I have
mentioned, having had a longer time to operate, now displayed its
effects still more clearly. In this second collection, which is known by
the name of the Younger Edda, there is an agreeable mixture of Greek,
Jewish, and Christian fables; and, for the first time in the
Scandinavian annals, we meet with the widely diffused fiction of a
Trojan descent.[450]
[448] The first missionary was Ebbo, about the year 822. He was followed
by Anschar, who afterwards pushed his enterprise as far as
Sweden. The progress was, however, slow; and it was not till the
latter half of the 11th century that Christianity was established
firmly in the North. See _Neander's Hist. of the Church_, vol. v.
pp. 373, 374, 379, 380, 400-402; _Mosheim's Eccles. Hist._ vol.
i. pp. 188, 215, 216; _Barry's Hist. of the Orkney Islands_, p.
125. It is often supposed that some of the Danes in Ireland were
Christians as early as the reign of Ivar I.; but this is a
mistake, into which Ledwich fell by relying on a coin, which in
reality refers to Ivar II. _Petrie's Ecclesiastical Architecture
of Ireland_, p. 225; and _Ledwich's Antiquities of Ireland_, p.
159.
[449] Mr. Wheaton (_History of Northmen_, p. 60) says, that Sæmund
'merely added one song of his own composition, of a moral and
Christian religious tendency; so as thereby to consecrate and
leaven, as it were, the whole mass of Paganism.'
[450] _Wheaton's Hist. of the Northmen_, pp. 89, 90; _Mallet's Northern
Antiquities_, pp. 377, 378, 485; _Schlegel's Lectures on the
History of Literature_, vol. i. p. 265. Indeed, these
interpolations are so numerous, that the earlier German
antiquaries believed the Edda to be a forgery by the northern
monks,--a paradox which Müller refuted more than forty years ago.
_Note in Wheaton_, p. 61. Compare _Palgrave's English
Commonwealth, Anglo-Saxon Period_, vol. i. p. 135.
If, by way of further illustration, we turn to other parts of the world,
we shall find a series of facts confirming this view. We shall find
that, in those countries where there has been no change of religion,
history is more trustworthy and connected than in those countries where
such a change has taken place. In India, Brahmanism, which is still
supreme, was established at so early a period, that its origin is lost
in the remotest antiquity.[451] The consequence is, that the native
annals have never been corrupted by any new superstition; and the
Hindus are possessed of historic traditions more ancient than can be
found among any other Asiatic people.[452] In the same way, the Chinese
have for upwards of 2,000 years preserved the religion of Fo, which is a
form of Buddhism.[453] In China, therefore, though the civilization has
never been equal to that of India, there is a history, not, indeed, as
old as the natives would wish us to believe, but still stretching back
to several centuries before the Christian era, from whence it has been
brought down to our own times in an uninterrupted succession.[454] On
the other hand, the Persians, whose intellectual development was
certainly superior to that of the Chinese, are nevertheless without any
authentic information respecting the early transactions of their ancient
monarchy.[455] For this I can see no possible reason, except the fact,
that Persia, soon after the promulgation of the Koran, was conquered by
the Mohammedans, who completely subverted the Parsee religion, and thus
interrupted the stream of the national traditions.[456] Hence it is
that, putting aside the myths of the Zendavesta, we have no native
authorities for Persian history of any value, until the appearance, in
the eleventh century, of the Shah Nameh; in which, however, Ferdousi has
mingled the miraculous relations of those two religions by which his
country had been successively subjected.[457] The result is, that if it
were not for the various discoveries which have been made, of
monuments, inscriptions, and coins, we should be compelled to rely on
the scanty and inaccurate details in the Greek writers for our knowledge
of the history of one of the most important of the Asiatic
monarchies.[458]
[451] As is evident from the conflicting statements made by the best
orientalists, each of whom has some favourite hypothesis of his
own respecting its origin. It is enough to say, that we have no
account of India existing without Brahmanism; and as to its real
history, nothing can be understood, until more steps have been
taken towards generalizing the laws which regulate the growth of
religious opinions.
[452] Dr. Prichard (_Physical Hist. of Mankind_, vol. iv. pp. 101-105)
thinks that the Hindus have a history beginning B.C. 1391.
Compare _Works of Sir W. Jones_, vol. i. pp. 311, 312. Mr. Wilson
says, that even the genealogies in the Puranas are, 'in all
probability, much more authentic than has been sometimes
supposed.' Wilson's note in _Mill's Hist. of India_, vol. i. pp.
161, 162. See also his preface to the _Vishnu Purana_, p. lxv.;
and _Asiatic Researches_, vol. v. p. 244.
[453] _Journal of Asiatic Soc._ vol. vi. p. 251; _Herder_, _Ideen zur
Geschichte_, vol. iv. p. 70; _Works of Sir W. Jones_, vol. i. p.
104. I learn from a note in _Erman's Siberia_, vol. ii. p. 306,
that one of the missionaries gravely suggests that 'Buddhism
originated in the errors of the Manichæans, and is therefore but
an imitation of Christianity.'
[454] M. Bunsen says, that the Chinese have 'a regular chronology,
extending back 3,000 years B.C.' _Bunsen's Egypt_, vol. i. p. 240.
See also _Humboldt's Cosmos_, vol. ii. p. 475, vol. iv. p. 455;
_Renouard_, _Hist. de la Médecine_, vol. i. pp. 47, 48; and the
statements of Klaproth and Rémusat, in _Prichard's Physical
Hist._ vol. iv. pp. 476, 477. The superior exactness of the
Chinese annals is sometimes ascribed to their early knowledge of
printing, with which they claim to have been acquainted in B.C.
1100. _Meidinger's Essay_, in _Journal of Statistical Society_,
vol. iii. p. 163. But the fact is, that printing was unknown in
China till the ninth or tenth century after Christ, and moveable
types were not invented before 1041. _Humboldt's Cosmos_, vol.
ii. p. 623; _Transac. of Asiatic Society_, vol. i. p. 7; _Journal
Asiatique_, vol. i. p. 137, Paris, 1822; _Davis's Chinese_, vol.
i. pp. 174, 178, vol. iii. p. 1. There are some interesting
papers on the early history of China in _Journal of Asiat. Soc._
vol. i. pp. 57-86, 213-222, vol. ii. pp. 166-171, 276-287.
[455] 'From the death of Alexander (323 B.C.) to the reign of Ardeshir
Babegan (Artaxerxes), the founder of the Sassanian dynasty (200
A.D.), a period of more than five centuries, is almost a blank in
the Persian history.' _Troyer's Preliminary Discourse to the
Dabistan_, 8vo. 1843, vol. i. pp. lv. lvi. See to the same effect
_Erskine on the Zend-Avesta_, in _Transac. of Soc. of Bombay_,
vol. ii. pp. 303-305; and _Malcolm's Hist. of Persia_, vol. i. p.
68. The ancient Persian traditions are said to have been Pehlvi;
_Malcolm_, vol. i. pp. 501-505; but if so, they have all
perished, p. 555: compare Rawlinson's note in _Journal of Geog.
Soc._ vol. x. p. 82.
[456] On the antagonism between Mohammedanism and the old Persian
history, see a note in _Grote's Hist. of Greece_, vol. i. p. 623.
Even at present, or, at all events, during this century, the best
education in Persia consisted in learning the elements of Arabic
grammar, 'logic, jurisprudence, the traditions of their prophet,
and the commentaries on the Koran.' _Vans Kennedy on Persian
Literature_, in _Transac. of Bombay Society_, vol. ii. p. 62. In
the same way the Mohammedans neglected the old history of India,
and would, no doubt, have destroyed or corrupted it; but they
never had anything like the hold of India that they had of
Persia, and, above all, they were unable to displace the native
religion. However, their influence, so far as it went, was
unfavourable; and Mr. Elphinstone (_Hist. of India_, p. 468)
says, that till the sixteenth century there was no instance of a
Mussulman carefully studying Hindu literature.
[457] On the Shah Nameh, see _Works of Sir W. Jones_, vol. iv. pp. 544,
545, vol. v. p. 594; _Mill's Hist. of India_, vol. ii. pp. 64,
65; _Journal of Asiatic Society_, vol. iv. p. 225. It is supposed
by a very high authority that the Persian cuneiform inscriptions
'will enable us, in the end, to introduce something like
chronological accuracy and order into the myths and traditions
embodied in the Shah Nameh.' _Rawlinson on the Inscriptions of
Assyria and Babylonia_, in _Journal of Asiat. Soc._ vol. xii. p.
446.
[458] On the ignorance of the Greeks respecting Persian history, see
Vans Kennedy, in _Transac. of Soc. of Bombay_, vol. ii. pp. 119,
127-129, 136. Indeed, this learned writer says (p. 138) he is
'inclined to suspect that no Greek author ever derived his
information from any native of Persia Proper, that is, of the
country to the east of the Euphrates.' See also on the
perplexities in Persian chronology, _Grote's Hist. of Greece_,
vol. vi. p. 496, vol. ix. p. 3, vol. x. p. 405; and _Donaldson's
New Cratylus_, 1839, p. 87 note. As to the foolish stories which
the Greeks relate respecting Achæmenes, compare _Malcolm's Hist.
of Persia_, vol. i. p. 18, with _Heeren's Asiatic Nations_, vol.
i. p. 243. Even Herodotus, who is invaluable in regard to Egypt,
is not to be relied upon for Persia; as was noticed long ago by
Sir W. Jones, in the preface to his _Nader Shah_ (_Jones's
Works_, vol. v. p. 540), and is partly admitted by Mr. Mure
(_History of the Literature of Ancient Greece_, vol. iv. p. 338,
8vo. 1853).
Even among more barbarous nations, we see the same principle at work.
The Malayo-Polynesian race is well known to ethnologists, as covering an
immense series of islands, extending from Madagascar to within 2,000
miles of the western coast of America.[459] The religion of these
widely scattered people was originally Polytheism, of which the purest
forms were long preserved in the Philippine Islands.[460] But in the
fifteenth century, many of the Polynesian nations were converted to
Mohammedanism;[461] and this was followed by a process precisely the
same as that which I have pointed out in other countries. The new
religion, by changing the current of the national thoughts, corrupted
the purity of the national history. Of all the islands in the Indian
Archipelago, Java was the one which reached the highest
civilization.[462] Now, however, the Javanese have not only lost their
historical traditions, but even those lists of their kings which are
extant are interpolated with the names of Mohammedan saints.[463] On the
other hand, we find that in the adjacent island of Bali, where the old
religion is still preserved,[464] the legends of Java are remembered and
cherished by the people.[465]
[459] That is, to Easter Island, which appears to be its furthest
boundary (_Prichard's Phys. Hist._ vol. v. p. 6); and of which
there is a good account in _Beechey's Voyage to the Pacific_,
vol. i. pp. 43-58, and a notice in _Jour. of Geog. Society_, vol.
i. p. 195. The language of Easter Island has been long known to
be Malayo-Polynesian; for it was understood by a native of the
Society Islands, who accompanied Cook (_Cook's Voyages_, vol.
iii. pp. 294, 308; and _Prichard_, vol. v. p. 147: compare
_Marsden's History of Sumatra_, p. 164). Ethnologists have not
usually paid sufficient honour to this great navigator, who was
the first to remark the similarity between the different
languages in Polynesia proper. _Cook's Voyages_, vol. ii. pp. 60,
61, vol. iii. pp. 230, 280, 290, vol. iv. p. 305, vol. vi. p.
230, vol. vii. p. 115. As to Madagascar being the western limit
of this vast race of people, see _Asiatic Researches_, vol. iv.
p. 222; _Reports on Ethnology by Brit. Assoc. for 1847_, pp. 154,
216, 250; and _Ellis's Hist. of Madagascar_, vol. i. p. 133.
[460] Also the seat of the Tagala language; which, according to William
Humboldt, is the most perfect of all the forms of the
Malayo-Polynesian. _Prichard's Physical Hist._ vol. v. pp. 36,
51, 52.
[461] _Marsden's History of Sumatra_, p. 281. De Thou (_Hist. Univ._
vol. xiii. p. 59) supposes that the Javanese did not become
Mohammedans till late in the sixteenth century; but it is now
known that their conversion took place at least a hundred years
earlier, the old religion being finally abolished in 1478. See
_Crawfurd's Hist. of the Indian Archipelago_, vol. ii. p. 312;
_Low's Sarawak_, p. 96; and _Raffles' Hist. of Java_, vol. i. pp.
309, 349, vol. ii. pp. 1, 66, 254. The doctrines of Mohammed
spread quickly; and the Malay pilgrims enjoy the reputation, in
modern times, of being among the most scrupulously religious of
those who go to the Hadj. _Burckhardt's Arabia_, vol. ii. pp. 96,
97.
[462] The Javanese civilization is examined at great length by William
Humboldt, in his celebrated work, _Ueber die Kawi Sprache_,
Berlin, 1836. From the evidence supplied by some early Chinese
writings, which have only recently been published, there are good
grounds for believing that the Indian Colonies were established
in Java in the first century after Christ. See _Wilson on the Foe
Kue Ki_, in _Journal of Asiat. Soc._ vol. v. p. 137; compare vol.
vi. p. 320.
[463] _Crawfurd's Hist. of the Indian Archipelago_, vol. ii. p. 297.
Compare with this the exactness with which, even in the island of
Celebes, the dates were preserved 'before the introduction of
Mahomedanism.' _Crawfurd_, vol. i. p. 306. For similar Footnote:
instances of royal genealogies being obscured by the introduction
into them of the names of gods, see _Kemble's Saxons in England_,
vol. i. pp. 27, 335.
[464] _Asiatic Researches_, vol. x. p. 191, vol. xiii. p. 128. In the
Appendix to _Raffles' Hist. of Java_, vol. ii. p. cxlii., it is
said, that 'in Bali not more than one in two hundred, if so many,
are Mahomedans.' See also p. 65, and vol. i. p. 530.
[465] Indeed, the Javanese appear to have no other means of acquiring
the old Kawi traditions than by learning them from natives of
Bali. See note to an Essay on the Island of Bali, in _Asiatic
Researches_, vol. xiii. p. 162, Calcutta, 1820, 4to. Sir Stamford
Raffles (_Hist. of Java_, vol. i. p. 400) says, 'It is chiefly to
Bali that we must look for illustrations of the ancient state of
the Javans.' See also p. 414.
It would be useless to adduce further evidence respecting the manner in
which, among an imperfectly civilized people, the establishment of a new
religion will always affect the accuracy of their early history. I need
only observe, that in this way the Christian priests have obscured the
annals of every European people they converted, and have destroyed or
corrupted the traditions of the Gauls,[466] of the Welsh, of the
Irish,[467] of the Anglo-Saxons,[468] of the Sclavonic nations,[469] of
the Finns,[470] and even of the Icelanders.[471]
[466] Respecting the corruption of Druidical traditions in Gaul by
Christian priests, see _Villemarqué_, _Chants Populaires de la
Bretagne_, Paris, 1846, vol. i. pp. xviii. xix.
[467] The injury done to the traditions handed down by Welsh and Irish
bards, is noticed in Dr. Prichard's valuable work, _Physical
Hist. of Mankind_, vol. iii. p. 184, 8vo, 1841. See also
_Warton's Hist. of English Poetry_, vol. i. p. xxxvii. note.
[468] See the remarks on Beowulf, in _Wright's Biog. Brit. Lit._ vol. i.
p. 7, 8vo, 1842. See also pp. 13, 14: and compare _Kemble's
Saxons in England_, vol. i. p. 331.
[469] _Talvi's Language and Literature of the Slavic Nations_, 8vo,
1850, p. 231. The Pagan songs of the Slovaks, in the north-west
of Hungary, were for a time preserved; but even they are now
lost. _Talvi_, p. 216.
[470] The monkish chroniclers neglected the old Finnish traditions; and
allowing them to perish, preferred the inventions of Saxo and
Johannes Magnus. _Prichard's Physical Hist._ vol. iii. pp. 284,
285.
[471] For an instance in which the monks have falsified the old
Icelandic traditions, see Mr. Keightley's learned book on _Fairy
Mythology_, 8vo, 1850, p. 159.
Besides all this, there occurred other circumstances tending in the same
direction. Owing to events which I shall hereafter explain, the
literature of Europe, shortly before the final dissolution of the Roman
Empire, fell entirely into the hands of the clergy, who were long
venerated as the sole instructors of mankind. For several centuries, it
was extremely rare to meet with a layman who could read or write; and of
course it was still rarer to meet with one able to compose a work.
Literature, being thus monopolized by a single class, assumed the
peculiarities natural to its new masters.[472] And as the clergy, taken
as a body, have always looked on it as their business to enforce belief,
rather than encourage inquiry, it is no wonder if they displayed in
their writings the spirit incidental to the habits of their profession.
Hence, as I have already observed, literature, during many ages, instead
of benefiting society, injured it, by increasing credulity, and thus
stopping the progress of knowledge. Indeed, the aptitude for falsehood
became so great, that there was nothing men were unwilling to believe.
Nothing came amiss to their greedy and credulous ears. Histories of
omens, prodigies, apparitions, strange portents, monstrous appearances
in the heavens, the wildest and most incoherent absurdities, were
repeated from mouth to mouth, and copied from book to book, with as much
care as if they were the choicest treasures of human wisdom.[473] That
Europe should ever have emerged from such a state, is the most decisive
proof of the extraordinary energy of Man, since we cannot even conceive
a condition of society more unfavourable to his progress. But it is
evident, that until the emancipation was effected, the credulity and
looseness of thought which were universal, unfitted men for habits of
investigation, and made it impossible for them to engage in a successful
study of past affairs, or even record with accuracy what was taking
place around them.[474]
[472] The Rev. Mr. Dowling, who looks back with great regret to this
happy period, says, 'Writers were almost universally
ecclesiastics. Literature was scarcely anything but a religious
exercise; for everything that was studied, was studied with a
reference to religion. The men, therefore, who wrote history,
wrote ecclesiastical history.' _Dowling's Introduction to the
Critical Study of Ecclesiastical History_, 8vo, 1838, p. 56; a
work of some talent, but chiefly interesting as a manifesto by an
active party.
[473] Thus, for instance, a celebrated historian, who wrote at the end
of the twelfth century says of the reign of William Rufus:
'Ejusdem regis tempore, ut ex parte supradictum est, in sole,
luna, et stellis multa signa visa sunt, mare quoque littus
persæpe egrediebatur, et homines et animalia submersit, villas et
domos quamplures subvertit. In pago qui Barukeshire nominatur,
ante occisionem regis sanguis de fonte tribus septimanis
emanavit. Multis etiam Normannis diabolus in horribili specie se
frequenter in silvis ostendens, plura cum eis de rege et Ranulfo,
et quibusdam aliis locutus est. Nec mirum, nam illorum tempore
ferè omnis legum siluit justitia, causisque justitiæ subpositis,
sola in principibus imperabat pecunia.' _Rog. de Hoveden Annal.
in Scriptores post Bedam_, p. 268. See also the same work, pp.
356-358; and compare _Matthæi Westmonast. Flores Historiarum_,
part i. pp. 266, 289, part ii. p. 298.
[474] Even the descriptions of natural objects which historians
attempted in the Middle Ages, were marked by the same
carelessness. See some good observations by Dr. Arnold, on Bede's
account of the Solent Sea. _Arnold's Lectures on Modern History_,
pp. 102, 103.
If, therefore, we recur to the facts just cited, we may say that,
omitting several circumstances altogether subordinate, there were three
leading causes of the corruption of the history of Europe in the Middle
Ages. The first cause was, the sudden introduction of the art of
writing, and the consequent fusion of different local traditions, which,
when separate, were accurate, but when united were false. The second
cause was, the change of religion; which acted in two ways, producing
not merely an interruption of the old traditions, but also an
interpolation of them. And the third cause, probably the most powerful
of all, was, that history became monopolized by a class of men whose
professional habits made them quick to believe, and who, moreover, had a
direct interest in increasing the general credulity, since it was the
basis upon which their own authority was built.
By the operation of these causes, the history of Europe became corrupted
to an extent for which we can find no parallel in any other period. That
there was, properly speaking, no history, was the smallest part of the
inconvenience; but, unhappily, men, not satisfied with the absence of
truth, supplied its place by the invention of falsehood. Among
innumerable instances of this, there is one species of inventions worth
noticing, because they evince that love of antiquity, which is a marked
characteristic of those classes by whom history was then written. I
allude to fictions regarding the origin of different nations, in all of
which the spirit of the Middle Ages is very discernible. During many
centuries, it was believed by every people that they were directly
descended from ancestors who had been present at the siege of Troy. That
was a proposition which no one thought of doubting.[475] The only
question was, as to the details of so illustrious a lineage. On this,
however, there was a certain unanimity of opinion; since, not to mention
inferior countries, it was admitted that the French were descended from
Francus, whom everybody knew to be the son of Hector; and it was also
known that the Britons came from Brutus, whose father was no other than
Æneas himself.[476]
[475] In _Le Long's Bibliothèque Historique de la France_, vol. ii.
p. 3, it is said, that the descent of the kings of France from
the Trojans was universally believed before the sixteenth
century: 'Cette descendance a été crue véritable près de huit
cents ans, et soutenue par tous les écrivains de notre histoire;
la fausseté n'en a été reconnue qu'au commencement du seizième
siècle.' Polydore Vergil, who died in the middle of the sixteenth
century, attacked this opinion in regard to England, and thereby
made his history unpopular. See _Ellis's Preface to Polydore
Vergil_, p. xx. 4to, 1844, published by the Camden Society. 'He
discarded Brute, as an unreal personage.' In 1128, Henry I., king
of England, inquired from a learned man respecting the early
history of France. The answer is preserved by an historian of the
thirteenth century: 'Regum potentissime, inquiens, sicut pleræque
gentes Europæ, ita Franci a Trojanis originem duxerunt.' _Matthæi
Paris Hist. Major_, p. 59. See also _Rog. de Hov. in Scriptores
post Bedam_, p. 274. On the descent of the Britons from Priam and
Æneas, see _Matthæi Westmonast. Flores Historiarum_, part i. p.
66. Indeed, at the beginning of the fourteenth century, their
Trojan origin was stated as a notorious fact, in a letter written
to Pope Boniface by Edward I., and signed by the English
nobility. See _Warton's Hist. of English Poetry_, vol. i. pp.
131, 132; and _Campbell's Lives of the Chancellors_, vol. i.
p. 185.
[476] The general opinion was, that Brutus, or Brute, was the son of
Æneas; but some historians affirmed that he was the
great-grandson. See _Turner's Hist. of England_, vol. i. p. 63,
vol. vii. p. 220.
Touching the origin of particular places, the great historians of the
Middle Ages are equally communicative. In the accounts they give of
them, as well as in the lives they write of eminent men, the history
usually begins at a very remote period; and the events relating to their
subject are often traced back, in an unbroken series, from the moment
when Noah left the ark, or even when Adam passed the gates of
Paradise.[477] On other occasions, the antiquity they assign is somewhat
less; but the range of their information is always extraordinary. They
say, that the capital of France is called after Paris, the son of Priam,
because he fled there when Troy was overthrown.[478] They also mention
that Tours owed its name to being the burial-place of Turonus, one of
the Trojans;[479] while the city of Troyes was actually built by the
Trojans, as its etymology clearly proves.[480] It was well ascertained
that Nuremberg was called after the Emperor Nero;[481] and Jerusalem
after King Jebus,[482] a man of vast celebrity in the Middle Ages, but
whose existence later historians have not been able to verify. The river
Humber received its name because, in ancient times, a king of the Huns
had been drowned in it.[483] The Gauls derived their origin, according
to some, from Galathia, a female descendant of Japhet; according to
others, from Gomer, the son of Japhet.[484] Prussia was called after
Prussus, a brother of Augustus.[485] This was remarkably modern; but
Silesia had its name from the prophet Elisha--from whom, indeed, the
Silesians descended;[486] while as to the city of Zurich, its exact date
was a matter of dispute, but it was unquestionably built in the time of
Abraham.[487] It was likewise from Abraham and Sarah that the gipsies
immediately sprung.[488] The blood of the Saracens was less pure, since
they were only descended from Sarah--in what way it is not mentioned;
but she probably had them by another marriage, or, may be, as the fruit
of an Egyptian intrigue.[489] At all events, the Scotch certainly came
from Egypt; for they were originally the issue of Scota, who was a
daughter of Pharaoh, and who bequeathed to them her name.[490] On sundry
similar matters, the Middle Ages possessed information equally
valuable. It was well known that the city of Naples was founded on
eggs;[491] and it was also known, that the order of St. Michael was
instituted in person by the archangel, who was himself the first knight,
and to whom, in fact, chivalry owes its origin.[492] In regard to the
Tartars, that people, of course, proceeded from Tartarus; which some
theologians said was an inferior kind of hell, but others declared to be
hell itself.[493] However this might be, the fact of their birth-place
being from below was indisputable, and was proved by many circumstances
which showed the fatal and mysterious influence they were able to
exercise. For the Turks were identical with the Tartars; and it was
notorious, that since the Cross had fallen into Turkish hands, all
Christian children had ten teeth less than formerly; a universal
calamity, which there seemed to be no means of repairing.[494]
[477] In the _Notes to a Chronicle of London from 1089 to 1483_, pp.
183-187, edit. 4to, 1827, there is a pedigree, in which the
history of the bishops of London is traced back, not only to the
migration of Brutus from Troy, but also to Noah and Adam. Thus,
too, Goropius, in his history of Antwerp, written in the
sixteenth century: 'Vond zoowell de Nederlandsche taal als de
Wysbegeerte van Orpheus in de ark van Noach.' _Van Kampen_,
_Geschiedenis der Letteren_, 8vo, 1821, vol. i. p. 91; see also
p. 86. In the thirteenth century, Mathew Paris (_Historia Major_,
p. 352) says of Alfred, 'Hujus genealogia in Anglorum historiis
perducitur usque ad Adam primum parentem.' See, to the same
effect, _Matthæi Westmonast. Flores Historiarum_, part i. pp.
323, 324, 415. In William of Malmesbury's Chronicle (_Scriptores
post Bedam_, p. 22 rev.) the genealogy of the Saxon kings is
traced back to Adam. For other, and similar, instances, see a
note in _Lingard's History of England_, vol. i. p. 403. And Mr.
Ticknor (_History of Spanish Literature_, vol. i. p. 509)
mentions that the Spanish chroniclers present 'an uninterrupted
succession of Spanish kings from Tubal, a grandson of Noah.'
[478] Monteil, in his curious book, _Histoire des divers Etats_, vol. v.
p. 70, mentions the old belief 'que les Parisiens sont du sang
des rois des anciens Troyens, par Paris, fils de Priam.' Even in
the seventeenth century this idea was not extinct; and Coryat,
who travelled in France in 1608, gives another version of it. He
says, 'As for her name of Paris, she hath it (as some write) from
Paris, the eighteenth king of Gallia Celtica, whom some write to
have been lineally descended from Japhet, one of the three sons
of Noah, and to have founded this city.' _Coryat's Crudities_,
1611, reprinted 1776, vol. i. pp. 27, 28.
[479] 'Erat ibi quidam Tros nomine Turonus Bruti nepos.... De nomine
ipsius prædicta civitas Turonis vocabulum nacta est; quia ibidem
sepultus fuit.' _Galfredi Monumet. Hist. Briton._ lib. i. cap.
xv. p. 19. And Mathew of Westminster, who wrote in the fourteenth
century, says (_Flores Historiarum_, part i. p. 17): 'Tros nomine
Turnus.... De nomine verò ipsius Turonorum civitas vocabulum
traxit, quia ibidem, ut testatur Homerus, sepultus fuit.'
[480] 'On convient bien que les Troyens de notre Troyes sont du sang des
anciens Troyens.' _Monteil_, _Divers Etats_, vol. v. p. 69.
[481] Monconys, who was in Nuremberg in 1663, found this opinion still
held there; and he seems himself half inclined to believe it;
for, in visiting a castle, he observes, 'Mais je ne sçai si c'est
un ouvrage de Néron, comme l'on le dit, et que même le nom de
Nuremberg en vient.' _Voyages de Monconys_, vol. iv. p. 141,
edit. Paris, 1695.
[482] 'Deinceps regnante in ea Jebusæo, dicta Jebus, et sic ex Jebus et
Salem dicta est Jebussalem. Unde post dempta _b_ littera et
addita _r_, dicta est Hierusalem.' _Matthæi Paris Historia
Major_, p. 43. This reminds me of another great writer, who was
one of the fathers, and was moreover a saint, and who, says M.
Matter, 'dérive les Samaritains du roi Samarius, fils de Canaan.'
_Matter_, _Hist. du Gnosticisme_, vol. i. p. 41.
[483] 'Humber rex Hunnorum ... ad flumen diffugiens, submersus est intra
ipsum, et nomen suum flumini reliquit.' _Matthæi Westmonast.
Flores Historiarum_, part i. p. 19.
[484] These two opinions, which long divided the learned world, are
stated in _Le Long_, _Bibliothèque Historique de la France_,
vol. ii. pp. 5, 49.
[485] See a curious allusion to this in _De Thou_, _Hist. Univ._
vol. viii. p. 160; where, however, it is erroneously supposed to
be a Russian invention.
[486] 'The Silesians are not without voluminous writers upon their
antiquities; and one of them gravely derives the name and descent
of his country from the prophet Elisha.' _Adams's Letters on
Silesia_, p. 267, Lond. 8vo, 1804.
[487] In 1608, Coryat, when in Zurich, was 'told by the learned
Hospinian that their city was founded in the time of Abraham.'
_Coryat's Crudities_, vol. i. Epistle to the Reader, sig. D. I
always give the most recent instance I have met with, because, in
the history of the European intellect, it is important to know
how long the spirit of the Middle Ages survived in different
countries.
[488] They were 'seuls enfants légitimes' of Abraham and Sarah.
_Monteil_, _Divers Etats_, vol. v. p. 19.
[489] Mathew Paris, who is apprehensive lest the reputation of Sarah
should suffer, says, 'Saraceni perversé se putant ex Sara dici;
sed veriùs Agareni dicuntur ab Agar; et Ismaelitæ, ab Ismaele
filio Abrahæ.' _Hist. Major_, p. 357. Compare a similar passage
in _Mezeray_, _Histoire de France_, vol. i. p. 127: 'Sarrasins,
ou de la ville de Sarai, ou de Sara femme d'Abraham, duquel ils
se disent faussement légitimes héritiers.' After this, the idea,
or the fear of the idea, soon died away; and Beausobre (_Histoire
Critique de Manichée_, vol. i. p. 24) says: 'On dérive
vulgairement le nom de Sarrasins du mot arabe Sarah, ou Sarak,
qui signifie effectivement voleur.' A good example of a secular
turn given to a theological etymology. For a similar case in
northern history, see _Whitelocke's Journal of the Swedish
Embassy_, vol. i. pp. 190, 191.
[490] Early in the fourteenth century, this was stated, in a letter to
the Pope, as a well-known historical fact. See _Lingard's Hist.
of England_, vol. ii. p. 187: 'They are sprung from Scota the
daughter of Pharaoh, who landed in Ireland, and whose descendants
wrested, by force of arms, the northern half of Britain from the
progeny of Brute.'
[491] Mr. Wright (_Narratives of Sorcery_, 8vo, 1851, vol. i. p. 115)
says, 'The foundation of the city of Naples upon eggs, and the
egg on which its fate depended, seem to have been legends
generally current in the Middle Ages;' and he refers to
_Montfaucon_, _Monumens de la Mon. Fr._ vol. ii. p. 329, for
proof, that by the statutes of the order of the Saint Esprit, 'a
chapter of the knights was appointed to be held annually in
castello ovi incantati in mirabili periculo.'
[492] 'The order of Saint Michael, in France, pretends to the possession
of a regular descent from Michael the Archangel, who, according
to the enlightened judgment of French antiquarians, was the
premier chevalier in the world; and it was he, they say, who
established the earliest chivalric order in Paradise itself.'
_Mills's Hist. of Chivalry_, vol. i. pp. 363, 364.
[493] The etymology of Tartars from Tartarus is ascribed to the piety of
Saint Louis in _Prichard's Physical History_, vol. iv. p. 278;
but I think that I have met with it before his time, though I
cannot now recover the passage. The earliest instance I remember
is in 1241, when the saint was twenty-six years old. See a letter
from the emperor Frederick, in _Matthæi Paris Historia Major_, p.
497: 'Pervenissent dicti Tartari (imo Tartarei),' &c; and on the
expression of Louis, see p. 496: 'Quos vocamus Tartaros ad suas
Tartareas sedes.' Since the thirteenth century, the subject has
attracted the attention of English divines; and the celebrated
theologian Whiston mentions 'my last famous discovery, or rather
my revival of Dr. Giles Fletcher's famous discovery, that the
Tartars are no other than the ten tribes of Israel, which have
been so long sought for in vain.' _Memoirs of the Life and
Writings of William Whiston_, p. 575. Compare, on the opinions
held respecting the Tartars, _Journal Asiatique_, I^e série, vol.
vi. p. 374, Paris, 1825.
[494] Peignot (_Dict. des Livres_, vol. ii. p. 69, Paris, 1806) says,
that Rigord, in his history of Philip Augustus, assures his
readers 'que depuis que la vraie croix a été prise par les Turcs,
les enfans n'ont plus que 20 ou 23 dents, au lieu qu'ils en
avaient 30 ou 32 auparavant.' Even in the fifteenth century, it
was believed that the number of teeth had diminished from 32 to
22, or at most 24. See _Sprengel_, _Hist. de la Médecine_, vol.
ii. pp. 481, 482, Paris, 1815. Compare _Hecker on the Black
Death_, pp. 31, 32, in his learned work, _Epidemics of the Middle
Ages_, published by the Sydenham Society.
Other points relating to the history of past events were cleared up with
equal facility. In Europe during many centuries, the only animal food in
general use was pork; beef, veal, and mutton, being comparatively
unknown.[495] It was, therefore, with no small astonishment that the
crusaders, on returning from the East, told their countrymen that they
had been among a people who, like the Jews, thought pork unclean, and
refused to eat it. But the feelings of lively wonder which this
intelligence excited, were destroyed as soon as the cause of the fact
was explained. The subject was taken up by Mathew Paris, the most
eminent historian during the thirteenth century, and one of the most
eminent during the Middle Ages.[496] This celebrated writer informs us,
that the Mohammedans refuse to eat pork on account of a singular
circumstance which happened to their prophet. It appears that Mohammed,
having, on one occasion, gorged himself with food and drink till he was
in a state of insensibility, fell asleep on a dunghill, and, in this
disgraceful condition, was seen by a litter of pigs. The pigs attacked
the fallen prophet, and suffocated him to death; for which reason his
followers abominate pigs, and refuse to partake of their flesh.[497]
This striking fact explains one great peculiarity of the
Mohammedans;[498] and another fact, equally striking, explains how it
was that their sect came into existence. For it was well known, that
Mohammed was originally a cardinal, and only became a heretic because he
failed in his design of being elected pope.[499]
[495] In the sacred books of the Scandinavians, pork is represented as
the principal food, even in heaven. See _Mallet's Northern
Antiquities_, p. 105. It was the chief food of the Irish in the
twelfth century: _Ledwich_, _Antiquities of Ireland_, Dublin,
1804, p. 370; and also of the Anglo-Saxons at an earlier period:
_Turner's Hist. of England_, vol. iii. p. 22. In France it was
equally common, and Charlemagne kept in his forests immense
droves of pigs. _Note in Esprit des Lois_, in _[OE]uvres de
Montesquieu_, p. 513. In Spain those who did not like pork were
tried by the Inquisition as suspected Jews: _Llorente_, _Hist. de
l'Inquisition_, vol. i. pp. 269, 442, 445. Late in the sixteenth
century, there was a particular disease, said to be caused by the
quantity of it eaten in Hungary. _Sprengel_, _Hist. de la
Médecine_, vol. iii. p. 93; and even at present, the barbarous
Lettes are passionately fond of it. _Kohl's Russia_, pp. 386,
387. In the middle of the sixteenth century, I find that Philip
II., when in England, generally dined on bacon; of which he ate
so much, as frequently to make himself very ill. See _Ambassades
de Messieurs de Noailles en Angleterre_, vol. v. pp. 240, 241,
edit. 1763. The ambassador writes, that Philip was 'grand mangeur
oultre mesure,' and used to consume large quantities 'de lard,
dont il faict le plus souvent son principal repas.' In the Middle
Ages, 'les Thuringiens payaient leur tribut en porcs, la denrée
la plus précieuse de leur pays.' _[OE]uvres de Michelet_, vol.
ii. p. 389.
[496] Sismondi (_Hist. des Français_, vol. vii. pp. 325, 326) passes a
high eulogy upon him; and Mosheim (_Ecclesiast. History_, vol. i.
p. 313) says: 'Among the historians (of the thirteenth century),
the first place is due to Mathew Paris; a writer of the highest
merit, both in point of knowledge and prudence.'
[497] _Matthæi Paris Historia Major_, p. 362. He concludes his account
by saying, 'Unde adhuc Saraceni sues præ cæteris animalibus
exosas habent et abominabiles.' Mathew Paris obtained his
information from a clergyman, 'quendam magni nominis celebrem
prædicatorem,' p. 360. According to Mathew of Westminster, the
pigs not only suffocated Mohammed, but actually ate the greater
part of him: 'In maxima parte a porcis corrosum invenerunt.'
_Matthæi Westmonast. Flores Historiarum_, part i. p. 215.
[498] By a singular contradiction, the African Mohammedans now 'believe
that a great enmity subsists between hogs and Christians.' _Mungo
Park's Travels_, vol. i. p. 185. Many medical authors have
supposed that pork is peculiarly unwholesome in hot countries;
but this requires confirmation: and it is certain, that it is
recommended by Arabian physicians, and is more generally eaten
both in Asia and in Africa than is usually believed. Comp.
_Sprengel_, _Hist. de la Médecine_, vol. ii. p. 323; _Volney_,
_Voyage en Syrie_, vol. i. p. 449; _Buchanan's Journey through
the Mysore_, vol. ii. p. 88, vol. iii. p. 57; _Raffles' Hist. of
Java_, vol. ii. p. 5; _Ellis's Hist. of Madagascar_, vol. i. pp.
201, 403, 416; _Cook's Voyages_, vol. ii. p. 265; _Burnes's
Travels into Bokhara_, vol. iii. p. 141. As facts of this sort
are important physiologically and socially, it is advisable that
they should be collected; and I therefore add, that the
North-American Indians are said to have 'a disgust for pork.'
_Journal of the Geog. Society_, vol. xv. p. 30; and that Dobell
(_Travels_, vol. ii. p. 260, 8vo, 1830) says, 'I believe there is
more pork eaten in China than in all the rest of the world put
together.'
[499] This idea, which was a favourite one in the Middle Ages, is said
to have been a Rabbinical invention. See _Lettres de Gui Patin_,
vol. iii. p. 127: 'que Mahomet, le faux prophète, avait été
cardinal; et que, par dépit de n'avoir été pape, il s'étoit fait
hérésiarque.'
In regard to the early history of Christianity, the great writers of the
Middle Ages were particularly inquisitive; and they preserved the memory
of events, of which otherwise we should have been entirely ignorant.
After Froissart, the most celebrated historian of the fourteenth
century, was certainly Mathew of Westminster, with whose name, at least,
most readers are familiar. This eminent man directed his attention,
among other matters, to the history of Judas, in order to discover the
circumstances under which the character of that arch-apostate was
formed. His researches seem to have been very extensive; but their
principal results were, that Judas, when an infant, was deserted by his
parents, and exposed on an island called Scarioth, from whence he
received the name of Judas Iscariot. To this the historian adds, that
after Judas grew up, he, among other enormities, slew his own father,
and then married his own mother.[500] The same writer, in another part
of his history, mentions a fact interesting to those who study the
antiquities of the Holy See. Some questions had been raised as to the
propriety of kissing the pope's toe, and even theologians had their
doubts touching so singular a ceremony. But this difficulty also was set
at rest by Mathew of Westminster, who explains the true origin of the
custom. He says, that formerly it was usual to kiss the hand of his
holiness; but that towards the end of the eighth century, a certain lewd
woman, in making an offering to the pope, not only kissed his hand, but
also pressed it. The pope--his name was Leo--seeing the danger, cut off
his hand, and thus escaped the contamination to which he had been
exposed. Since that time, the precaution has been taken of kissing the
pope's toe instead of his hand; and lest any one should doubt the
accuracy of this account, the historian assures us that the hand, which
had been cut off five or six hundred years before, still existed in
Rome, and was indeed a standing miracle, since it was preserved in the
Lateran in its original state, free from corruption.[501] And as some
readers might wish to be informed respecting the Lateran itself, where
the hand was kept, this also is considered by the historian, in another
part of his great work, where he traces it back to the emperor Nero. For
it is said that this wicked persecutor of the faith, on one occasion,
vomited a frog covered with blood, which he believed to be his own
progeny, and therefore caused to be shut up in a vault, where it
remained hidden for some time. Now, in the Latin language, _latente_
means hidden, and _rana_ means a frog; so that, by putting these two
words together, we have the origin of the Lateran, which, in fact, was
built where the frog was found.[502]
[500] See the ample details in _Matthæi Westmonast. Flores Historiarum_,
part i. pp. 86, 87; and at p. 88, 'Judas matrem suam uxorem
duxerat, et quòd patrem suum occiderat.'
[501] This took place in the year 798. _Matthæi Westmonast. Flores
Historiarum_, part i. p. 293. The historian thus concludes his
relation: 'Et statutum est nunc quòd numquam extunc manus Papæ ab
offerentibus deoscularetur, sed pes. Cùm ante fuerat consuetudo
quòd manus, non pes, deoscularetur. In hujus miraculi memoriam
reservatur adhuc manus abscissa in thesauro lateranensi, quam
dominus custodit incorruptam ad laudem matris suæ.'
[502] '... Ita ut Nero se puero gravidum existimaret.... Tandem dolore
nimio vexatus, medicis ait: Accelerate tempus partus, quia
languore vix anhelitum habeo respirandi. Tunc ipsum ad vomitum
impotionaverunt, et ranam visu terribilem, humoribus infectam, et
sanguine edidit cruentatam.... Unde et pars illa civitatis, ut
aliqui dicunt, ubi rana latuerat, Lateranum, à latente rana,
nomen accepit.' _Matthæi Westmonast._ part i. p. 98. Compare the
account given by Roger of Hoveden, of a woman who vomited two
toads. _Script. post Bedam_, p. 457 rev. In the Middle Ages there
were many superstitions respecting these animals, and they appear
to have been used by heralds as marks of degradation. See
_Lankester's Memorials of Ray_, p. 197.
It would be easy to fill volumes with similar notions, all of which were
devoutly believed in those ages of darkness, or, as they have been well
called, Ages of Faith. Those, indeed, were golden days for the
ecclesiastical profession, since the credulity of men had reached a
height which seemed to ensure to the clergy a long and universal
dominion. How the prospects of the church were subsequently darkened,
and how the human reason began to rebel, will be related in another part
of this Introduction, where I shall endeavour to trace the rise of that
secular and sceptical spirit to which European civilization owes its
origin. But, before closing the present chapter, it may be well to give
a few more illustrations of the opinions held in the Middle Ages; and,
for this purpose, I will select the two historical accounts, which, of
all others, were the most popular, exercised most influence, and were
most universally believed.
The histories to which I refer, are those of Arthur and Charlemagne;
both of which bear the names of dignitaries of the church, and were
received with the respect due to their illustrious authors. That
concerning Charlemagne is called the Chronicle of Turpin, and purports
to be written by Turpin, archbishop of Rheims, a friend of the emperor
and his companion in war.[503] From some passages it contains, there is
reason to think that it was really composed at the beginning of the
twelfth century;[504] but, in the Middle Ages, men were not nice in
these matters, and no one was likely to dispute its authenticity.
Indeed, the name of an archbishop of Rheims was sufficient
recommendation; and we find accordingly, that in the year 1122 it
received the formal approbation of the pope;[505] and that Vincent de
Beauvais, one of the most celebrated writers in the thirteenth century,
and tutor to the sons of Louis IX., mentions it as a work of value, and
as being the principal authority for the reign of Charlemagne.[506]
[503] '... Ego Turpinus in valle Caroli loco præfato, astante rege,' &c.
_De Vita Caroli Magni_, p. 74, edit. Ciampi.
[504] Turner (_History of England_, vol. vii. pp. 250-268) has attempted
to prove that it was written by Calixtus II.; but his arguments,
though ingenious and learned, are not decisive. Warton (_Hist.
Eng. Poetry_, vol. i. p. 128) says it was composed about 1110.
[505] The pope 'statuit historiam Sancti Caroli descriptam a beato
Turpino Remensi Archiepiscopo esse authenticam.' _Note in
Turner_, vol. vii. p. 250.
[506] In his famous Speculum, 'il recommande spécialement les études
historiques, dont il paraît que la plupart de ses contemporains
méconnaissaient l'utilité; mais lorsqu'il indique les sources où
il puisera ce genre d'instruction, c'est Turpin qu'il désigne
comme le principal historien de Charlemagne.' _Histoire
Littéraire de la France_, vol. xviii. p. 474, Paris, 1835, 4to;
see also p. 517; and on its influence in Spain, see _Ticknor's
History of Spanish Literature_, vol. i. pp. 222, 223.
A book thus generally read, and sanctioned by such competent judges,
must be a tolerable standard for testing the knowledge and opinions of
those times. On this account, a short notice of it will be useful for
our present purpose, as it will enable us to understand the extreme
slowness with which history has improved, and the almost imperceptible
steps by which it advanced, until fresh life was breathed into it by the
great thinkers of the eighteenth century.
In the Chronicle of Turpin, we are informed that the invasion of Spain
by Charlemagne took place in consequence of the direct instigation of
St. James, the brother of St. John.[507] The apostle, being the cause of
the attack, adopted measures to secure its success. When Charlemagne
besieged Pamplona, that city made an obstinate resistance; but as soon
as prayers were offered up by the invaders, the walls suddenly fell to
the ground.[508] After this, the emperor rapidly overran the whole
country, almost annihilated the Mohammedans, and built innumerable
churches.[509] But, the resources of Satan are inexhaustible. On the
side of the enemy, a giant now appeared, whose name was Fenacute, and
who was descended from Goliath of old.[510] This Fenacute was the most
formidable opponent the Christians had yet encountered. His strength was
equal to that of forty men;[511] his face measured one cubit; his arms
and legs four cubits; his total height was twenty cubits. Against him
Charlemagne sent the most eminent warriors; but they were easily
discomfited by the giant; of whose prodigious force some idea may be
formed from the fact, that the length even of his fingers was three
palms.[512] The Christians were filled with consternation. In vain did
more than twenty chosen men advance against the giant; not one returned
from the field; Fenacute took them all under his arms, and carried them
off into captivity.[513] At length the celebrated Orlando came forward,
and challenged him to mortal combat. An obstinate fight ensued; and the
Christian, not meeting with the success he expected, engaged his
adversary in a theological discussion.[514] Here the pagan was easily
defeated; and Orlando, warmed by the controversy, pressed on his enemy,
smote the giant with his sword, and dealt him a fatal wound. After
this, the last hope of the Mohammedans was extinct; the Christian arms
had finally triumphed, and Charlemagne divided Spain among those gallant
followers who had aided him in effecting its conquest.[515]
[507] _Caroli Magni Historia_, edit. Ciampi, pp. 3-5.
[508] '... Muri collapsi funditus corruerunt.' _De Vita Caroli_, p. 5.
On this, Ciampi, in his notes on Turpin, gravely says (pp. 94,
95): 'Questo fatto della presa di Pamplona è reso maraviglioso
per la subitanea caduta delle mura, a somiglianza delle mura di
Gerico.' This reminds me of a circumstance mentioned by Monconys,
who, on visiting Oxford in 1663, was shown a horn which was
preserved in that ancient city, because it was said to be made in
the same way as that by which the walls of Jericho were blown
down: 'Les Juifs tiennent que leurs ancêtres se servirent de
pareilles pour abbattre les murailles de Jérico.' _Voyages de
Monconys_, vol. iii. p. 95, edit. Paris, 1695.
[509] _De Vita Caroli_, cap. v. pp. 11, 12; is headed 'De ecclesiis quas
Carolus fecit.'
[510] 'Gigas nomine Fenacutus, qui fuit de genere Goliat.' _De Vita
Caroli_, p. 39.
[511] 'Vim xl. fortium possidebat.' p. 39.
[512] 'Erat enim statura ejus quasi cubitis xx., facies erat longa quasi
unius cubiti, et nasus illius unius palmi mensurati, et brachia
et crura ejus quatuor cubitorum erant, et digiti ejus tribus
palmis,' p. 40.
[513] _De Vita Caroli_, p. 40.
[514] Ibid. pp. 43-47.
[515] _De Vita Caroli_, p. 52. On the twelve peers of Charlemagne, in
connexion with Turpin, see _Sismondi_, _Hist. des Français_, vol.
v. pp. 246, 537, 538, vol. vi. p. 534.
On the history of Arthur, the Middle Ages possessed information equally
authentic. Different accounts had been circulated respecting this
celebrated king;[516] but their comparative value was still unsettled,
when, early in the twelfth century, the subject attracted the attention
of Geoffrey, the well-known Archdeacon of Monmouth. This eminent man, in
A.D. 1147, published the result of his inquiries, in a work which he
called _History of the Britons_.[517] In this book, he takes a
comprehensive view of the whole question; and not only relates the life
of Arthur, but also traces the circumstances which prepared the way for
the appearance of that great conqueror. In regard to the actions of
Arthur, the historian was singularly fortunate, inasmuch as the
materials necessary for that part of his subject were collected by
Walter Archdeacon of Oxford, who was a friend of Geoffrey, and who, like
him, took great interest in the study of history.[518] The work is,
therefore, the joint composition of the two archdeacons; and is entitled
to respect, not only on this account, but also because it was one of the
most popular of all the productions of the Middle Ages.
[516] The Welsh, however, accused Gildas of having thrown his history
'into the sea.' _Palgrave's Anglo-Saxon Commonwealth_, vol. i. p.
453. The industrious Sharon Turner (_Hist. of England_, vol. i.
pp. 282-295) has collected a great deal of evidence respecting
Arthur; of whose existence he, of course, entertains no doubt.
Indeed, at p. 292, he gives us an account of the discovery, in
the twelfth century, of Arthur's body!
[517] In _Turner's Hist. of England_, vol. vii. pp. 269, 270, it is said
to have appeared in 1128; but Mr. Wright (_Biog. Brit. Lit._ vol.
ii. p. 144) seems to have proved that the real date is 1147.
[518] Geoffrey says, 'A Gualtero Oxinefordensi in multis historiis
peritissimo viro audivit' (_i.e. ille_ Geoffrey) 'vili licet
stylo, breviter tamen propalabit, quæ pr[oe]lia inclytus ille rex
post victoriam istam, in Britanniam reversus, cum nepote suo
commiserit.' _Galfredi Monumetensis Historia Britonum_, lib. xi.
sec. i. p. 200. And in the dedication to the Earl of Gloucester,
p. 1, he says, 'Walterus Oxinefordensis archidiaconus, vir in
oratoria arte atque in exoticis historiis eruditus.' Compare
_Matthæi Westmonast. Flores Historiarum_, part i. p. 248.
The earlier part of this great history is occupied with the result of
those researches which the Archdeacon of Monmouth had made into the
state of Britain before the accession of Arthur. With this we are not so
much concerned; though it may be mentioned, that the archdeacon
ascertained that, after the capture of Troy, Ascanius fled from the
city, and begat a son, who became father to Brutus.[519] In those days,
England was peopled by giants, all of whom were slain by Brutus; who,
having extirpated the entire race, built London, settled the affairs of
the country, and called it, after himself, by the name of Britain.[520]
The archdeacon proceeds to relate the actions of a long line of kings
who succeeded Brutus, most of whom were remarkable for their abilities,
and some were famous for the prodigies which occurred in their time.
Thus, during the government of Rivallo, it rained blood for three
consecutive days;[521] and when Morvidus was on the throne, the coasts
were infested by a horrid sea-monster, which, having devoured
innumerable persons, at length swallowed the king himself.[522]
[519] _Galfredi Historia Britonum_, pp. 3, 4.
[520] 'Erat tunc nomen insulæ Albion, quæ a nemine, exceptis paucis
gigantibus, inhabitabatur.... Denique Brutus de nomine suo
insulam Britanniam, sociosque suos Britones appellat.' _Galf.
Hist. Britonum_, p. 20.
[521] 'In tempore ejus tribus diebus cecidit pluvia sanguinea, et
muscarum affluentia; quibus homines moriebantur.' _Hist. Brit._
p. 36.
[522] 'Advenerat namque ex partibus Hibernici maris inauditæ feritatis
bellua, quæ incolas maritimos sine intermissione devorabat.
Cumque fama aures ejus attigisset, accossit ipse ad illam, et
solus cum sola congressus est. At cum omnia tela sua in illam in
vanum consumpsisset, acceleravit monstrum illud, et apertis
faucibus ipsum velut pisciculum devoravit.' _Hist. Brit._ p. 51.
These and similar matters are related by the Archdeacon of Monmouth as
the fruit of his own inquiries; but in the subsequent account of Arthur,
he was aided by his friend the Archdeacon of Oxford. The two archdeacons
inform their readers, that King Arthur owed his existence to a magical
contrivance of Merlin, the celebrated wizard; the particulars of which
they relate with a minuteness which, considering the sacred character of
the historians, is rather remarkable.[523] The subsequent actions of
Arthur did not belie his supernatural origin. His might nothing was able
to withstand. He slew an immense number of Saxons; he overran Norway,
invaded Gaul, fixed his court at Paris, and made preparations to effect
the conquest of all Europe.[524] He engaged two giants in single combat,
and killed them both. One of these giants, who inhabited the Mount of
St. Michael, was the terror of the whole country, and destroyed all the
soldiers sent against him, except those he took prisoners, in order to
eat them while they were yet alive.[525] But he fell a victim to the
prowess of Arthur; as also did another giant, named Ritho, who was, if
possible, still more formidable. For Ritho, not content with warring on
men of the meaner sort, actually clothed himself in furs which were
entirely made of the beards of the kings he had killed.[526]
[523] The particulars of the intrigue are in _Galf. Hist. Brit._
pp. 151, 152. For information respecting Merlin, see also
_Matthæi Westmonast. Flores Historiarum_, part i. pp. 161, 162;
and _Naudé_, _Apologie pour les Grands Hommes_, pp. 308, 309,
318, 319, edit. Amsterdam, 1712.
[524] _Hist. Britonum_, pp. 167-170; a brilliant chapter.
[525] 'Sed et plures capiebat quos semivivos devorabat.' _Hist. Brit._
p. 181.
[526] 'Hic namque ex barbis regum quos peremerat, fecerat sibi pelles,
et mandaverat Arturo ut barbam suam diligenter excoriaret, atque
excoriatam sibi dirigeret: ut quemadmodum ipse ceteris præerat
regibus, ita quoque in honorem ejus ceteris barbis ipsam
superponeret.' _Galf. Hist. Brit._ p. 184.
Such were the statements which, under the name of history, were laid
before the world in the twelfth century; and that, too, not by obscure
writers, but by high dignitaries of the church. Nor was anything
wanting by which the success of the work might be ensured. Its vouchers
were the Archdeacon of Monmouth, and the Archdeacon of Oxford; it was
dedicated to Robert Earl of Gloucester, the son of Henry I.; and it was
considered so important a contribution to the national literature, that
its principal author was raised to the bishopric of Asaph,--a preferment
which he is said to owe to his success in investigating the annals of
English history.[527] A book thus stamped with every possible mark of
approbation, is surely no bad measure of the age in which it was
admired. Indeed, the feeling was so universal, that, during several
centuries, there are not more than two or three instances of any critic
suspecting its accuracy.[528] A Latin abridgment of it was published by
the well-known historian, Alfred of Beverley;[529] and, in order that it
might be more generally known, it was translated into English by
Layamon,[530] and into Anglo-Norman, first by Gaimar, and afterwards by
Wace;[531] zealous men, who were anxious that the important truths it
contained should be diffused as widely as circumstances would allow.
[527] 'It was partly, perhaps, the reputation of this book, which
procured its author the bishopric of St. Asaph.' _Life of
Geoffrey of Monmouth_, in _Wright's Biog. Brit. Lit._ vol. ii. p.
144, 8vo, 1846. According to the Welsh writers, he was Bishop of
Llandaff. See _Stephens's Literature of the Kymry_, 8vo, 1849, p.
323.
[528] Mr. Wright (_Biog. Brit. Lit._ vol. ii. p. 146) says: 'Within a
century after its first publication, it was generally adopted by
writers on English history; and during several centuries, only
one or two rare instances occur of persons who ventured to speak
against its veracity.' And Sir Henry Ellis says of Polydore
Vergil, who wrote early in the sixteenth century, 'For the
repudiation of Geoffrey of Monmouth's history, Polydore Vergil
was considered almost as a man deprived of reason. Such were the
prejudices of the time.' _Polydore Vergil's English Hist._ vol.
i. p. x. edit. Ellis, 1846, 4to. See also, on its popularity,
_Lappenberg's Hist. of the Anglo-Saxon Kings_, vol. i. p. 102. In
the seventeenth century, which was the first sceptical century in
Europe, men began to open their eyes on these matters; and Boyle,
for example, classes together 'the fabulous labours of Hercules,
and exploits of Arthur of Britain.' _Boyle's Works_, vol. iv. p.
425.
[529] _Wright's Biog. Brit. Lit._ vol. ii. p. 156; _Turner's Hist. of
England_, vol. vii. p. 282.
[530] According to Mr. Wright (_Biog. Brit._ vol. ii. p. 439), it was
translated through the medium of Wace. But it would be more
correct to say, that Layamon made the absurdities of Geoffrey the
basis of his work, rather than translated them; for he amplifies
15,000 lines of Wace's _Brut_ into 32,000 of his own jargon. See
_Sir F. Madden's Preface to Layamon's Brut_, 8vo, 1847, vol. i.
p. xiii. I cannot refrain from bearing testimony to the great
philological value of this work of Layamon's, by the publication
of which its accomplished editor has made an important
contribution towards the study of the history of the English
language. So far, however, as Layamon is concerned, we can only
contemplate with wonder an age of which he was considered an
ornament.
[531] _Wright's Biog. Brit. Lit._ vol. ii. pp. 151, 207; _Hallam's
Literature of Europe_, vol. i. p. 35.
It will hardly be necessary that I should adduce further evidence of the
way in which history was written during the Middle Ages; for the
preceding specimens have not been taken at random, but have been
selected from the ablest and most celebrated authors; and as such
present a very favourable type of the knowledge and judgment of Europe
in those days. In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, there
appeared, for the first time, faint signs of an approaching change;[532]
but this improvement was not very marked until late in the sixteenth
century, or even early in the seventeenth. The principal steps of this
interesting movement will be traced in another part of the Introduction,
when I shall show, that although in the seventeenth century the progress
was unmistakable, there was no attempt to take a comprehensive view of
history until nearly the middle of the eighteenth century; when the
subject was studied, first by the great French thinkers, then by one or
two of the Scotch, and, some years later, by the Germans. This
reformation of history was connected, as I shall point out, with other
intellectual changes, which corresponded to it, and which affected the
social relations of all the principal countries of Europe. But, without
anticipating what will be found in another part of this volume, it is
sufficient to say, that not only was no history written before the end
of the sixteenth century, but that the state of society was such as to
make it impossible for one to be written. The knowledge of Europe was
not yet ripe enough to enable it to be successfully applied to the study
of past events. For we are not to suppose that the deficiencies of the
early historians were caused by a lack of natural abilities. The average
intellect of men is probably always the same; but the pressure exercised
on them by society is constantly varying. It was, therefore, the general
condition of society, which, in former days, compelled even the ablest
writers to believe the most childish absurdities. Until that condition
was altered, the existence of history was impossible, because it was
impossible to find any one who knew what was most important to relate,
what to reject, and what to believe.
[532] Of which Froissart is the earliest instance; since he is the
first who took a secular view of affairs, all the preceding
historians being essentially theological. In Spain, too, we find,
late in the fourteenth century, a political spirit beginning to
appear among historians. See the remarks on Ayala, in _Ticknor's
Hist. of Spanish Lit._ vol. i. pp. 165, 166; where, however, Mr.
Ticknor represents Froissart as more unworldly than he really
was.
The consequence was, that even when history was studied by men of such
eminent abilities as Macchiavelli and Bodin, they could turn it to no
better account than to use it as a vehicle for political speculations;
and in none of their works do we find the least attempt to rise to
generalizations large enough to include all the social phenomena. The
same remark applies to Comines, who, though inferior to Macchiavelli and
Bodin, was an observer of no ordinary acuteness, and certainly displays
a rare sagacity in his estimation of particular characters. But this was
due to his own intellect; while the age in which he lived made him
superstitious, and, for the larger purposes of history, miserably
shortsighted. His shortsightedness is strikingly shown in his utter
ignorance of that great intellectual movement, which, in his own time,
was rapidly overthrowing the feudal institutions of the Middle Ages; but
to which he never once alludes, reserving his attention for those
trivial political intrigues in the relation of which he believed
history to consist.[533] As to his superstition, it would be idle to
give many instances of that; since no man could live in the fifteenth
century without having his mind enfeebled by the universal credulity. It
may, however, be observed, that though he was personally acquainted with
statesmen and diplomatists, and had, therefore, the fullest opportunity
of seeing how enterprises of the fairest promise are constantly ruined,
merely by the incapacity of those who undertake them, he, on all
important occasions, ascribes such failure, not to the real cause, but
to the immediate interference of the Deity. So marked, and so
irresistible, was the tendency of the fifteenth century, that this
eminent politician, a man of the world, and well skilled in the arts of
life, deliberately asserts that battles are lost, not because the army
is ill supplied, nor because the campaign is ill conceived, nor because
the general is incompetent; but because the people or their prince are
wicked, and Providence seeks to punish them. For, says Comines, war is a
great mystery; and being used by God as the means of accomplishing his
wishes, He gives victory, sometimes to one side, sometimes to the
other.[534] Hence, too, disturbances occur in the state, solely by
divine disposition; and they never would happen, except that princes or
kingdoms, having become prosperous, forget the source from which their
prosperity proceeded.[535]
[533] On this, Arnold says, truly enough, 'Comines's Memoirs are
striking from their perfect unconsciousness: the knell of the
Middle Ages had been already sounded, yet Comines has no other
notions than such as they had tended to foster; he describes
their events, their characters, their relations, as if they were
to continue for centuries.' _Arnold's Lectures on Modern
History_, p. 118. To this I may add, that whenever Comines has
occasion to mention the lower classes, which is very rarely the
case, he speaks of them with great contempt. See two striking
instances in _Mémoires de Philippe de Comines_, vol. ii. pp. 277,
287, edit. Paris, 1826.
[534] He says, that a field of battle is 'un des accomplissemens des
[oe]uvres que Dieu a commencées aucunes fois par petites mouvetez
et occasions, et en donnant la victoire aucunes fois à l'un, et
aucunes fois à l'autre: et est cecy mystère si grand, que les
royaumes et grandes seigneuries en prennent aucunes fois fins et
désolations, et les autres accroissement, et commencement de
régner.' _Mém. de Comines_, vol. i. pp. 361, 362. Respecting the
wanton invasion of Italy, he says, that the expedition might have
been easily ruined if the enemy had thought of poisoning the
wells or the food: 'mais ils n'y eussent point failly, s'ils y
eussent voulu essayer; mais il est de croire que nostre sauveur
et rédempteur Jésus-Christ leur ostoit leur vouloir.' vol. iii.
p. 154. So, he adds, p. 155, 'pour conclure l'article, semble que
nostre seigneur Jésus-Christ ait voulu que toute la gloire du
voyage ait esté attribuée à luy.' Compare the _Institutes of
Timour_, p. 7; an instructive combination of superstition and
ferocity.
[535] 'Mais mon advis est que cela ne se fait que par disposition
divine; car quand les princes ou royaumes out esté en grande
prospérité ou richesses, et ils ont mesconnoissance dont procède
telle grâce, Dieu leur dresse un ennemi ou ennemie, dont nul ne
se douteroit, comme vous pouvez voir par les rois nommez en la
Bible, et par ce que puis peu d'années en avez veu en cette
Angleterre, et en cette maison de Bourgogne et autres lieux que
avez veu et voyez tous les jours.' _Mém. de Comines_, vol. i. pp.
388, 389. See also his remarks on the Duke of Burgundy, vol. ii.
p. 179; and in particular, his extraordinary digression, livre v.
chap. xviii. vol. ii. pp. 290-298.
Such attempts as these, to make politics a mere branch of theology,[536]
are characteristic of the time; and they are the more interesting, as
the work of a man of great ability, and of one, too, who had grown old
in the experience of public life. When views of this sort were
advocated, not by a monk in his cloister, but by a distinguished
statesman, well versed in public affairs, we may easily imagine what was
the average intellectual condition of those who were every way his
inferiors. It is but too evident, that from them nothing could be
expected; and that many steps had yet to be taken, before Europe could
emerge from the superstition in which it was sunk, and break through
those grievous impediments which hindered its future progress.
[536] Dr. Lingard (_Hist. of England_, vol. i. p. 357) says, 'From the
doctrine of a superintending providence, the piety of our
ancestors had drawn a rash but very convenient inference, that
success is an indication of the Divine will, and that, of course,
to resist a victorious competitor, is to resist the judgment of
heaven:' see also p. 114. The last vestige of this once universal
opinion is the expression, which is gradually falling into
disuse, of 'appealing to the God of Battles.'
But, though much remained to be done, there can be no doubt that the
movement onward was uninterrupted, and that, even while Comines was
writing, there were unequivocal symptoms of a great and decisive change.
Still, they were only indications of what was approaching; and about a
hundred years elapsed, after his death, before the progress was apparent
in the whole of its results. For, though the Protestant Reformation was
a consequence of this progress, it was for some time unfavourable to it,
by encouraging the ablest men in the discussion of questions
inaccessible to human reason, and thus diverting them from subjects in
which their efforts would have been available for the general purposes
of civilization. Hence we find, that little was really accomplished
until the end of the sixteenth century, when, as we shall see in the
next two chapters, the theological fervour began to subside in England
and France, and the way was prepared for that purely secular philosophy,
of which Bacon and Descartes were the exponents, but by no means the
creators.[537] This epoch belongs to the seventeenth century, and from
it we may date the intellectual regeneration of Europe; just as from the
eighteenth century we may date its social regeneration. But during the
greater part of the sixteenth century, the credulity was still
universal, since it affected not merely the lowest and most ignorant
classes, but even those who were best educated. Of this innumerable
proofs might be given; though, for the sake of brevity, I will confine
myself to two instances, which are particularly striking, from the
circumstances attending them, and from the influence they exercised over
men who might be supposed little liable to similar delusions.
[537] See _Guizot_, _Civilisation en Europe_, p. 166; the best passage
in that able, but rather unequal work: 'Parcourez l'histoire du
v^e au xvi^e siècle; c'est la théologie qui possède et dirige
l'esprit humain; toutes les opinions sont empreintes de
théologie; les questions philosophiques, politiques, historiques,
sont toujours considérées sous un point de vue théologique.
L'église est tellement souveraine dans l'ordre intellectuel, que
même les sciences mathématiques et physiques sont tenues de se
soumettre à ses doctrines. L'esprit théologique est en quelque
sort le sang qui a coulé dans les veines du monde européen
jusqu'à Bacon et Descartes. Pour la première fois, Bacon en
Angleterre, et Descartes en France, ont jeté l'intelligence hors
des voies de la théologie.' A noble passage, and perfectly true:
but what would have been the effect produced by Bacon and
Descartes, if, instead of living in the seventeenth century, they
had lived in the seventh? Would their philosophy have been
equally secular; or, being equally secular, would it have been
equally successful?
At the end of the fifteenth, and early in the sixteenth century,
St[oe]ffler, the celebrated astronomer, was professor of mathematics at
Tübingen. This eminent man rendered great services to astronomy, and was
one of the first who pointed out the way of remedying the errors in the
Julian calendar, according to which time was then computed.[538] But
neither his abilities nor his knowledge could protect him against the
spirit of his age. In 1524, he published the result of some abstruse
calculations, in which he had been long engaged, and by which he had
ascertained the remarkable fact, that in that same year the world would
again be destroyed by a deluge. This announcement, made by a man of such
eminence, and made, too, with the utmost confidence, caused a lively and
universal alarm.[539] News of the approaching event was rapidly
circulated, and Europe was filled with consternation. To avoid the first
shock, those who had houses by the sea, or on rivers, abandoned
them;[540] while others, perceiving that such measures could only be
temporary, adopted more active precautions. It was suggested that, as a
preliminary step, the Emperor Charles V. should appoint inspectors to
survey the country, and mark those places which, being least exposed to
the coming flood, would be most likely to afford a shelter. That this
should be done, was the wish of the imperial general, who was then
stationed at Florence, and by whose desire a work was written
recommending it.[541] But the minds of men were too distracted for so
deliberate a plan; and besides, as the height of the flood was
uncertain, it was impossible to say whether it would not reach the top
of the most elevated mountains. In the midst of these and similar
schemes, the fatal day drew near, and nothing had yet been contrived on
a scale large enough to meet the evil. To enumerate the different
proposals which were made and rejected, would fill a long chapter. One
proposal is, however, worth noticing, because it was carried into effect
with great zeal, and is, moreover, very characteristic of the age. An
ecclesiastic of the name of Auriol, who was then professor of canon law
at the University of Toulouse, revolved in his own mind various
expedients by which this universal disaster might be mitigated. At
length it occurred to him that it was practicable to imitate the course
which, on a similar emergency, Noah had adopted with eminent success.
Scarcely was the idea conceived, when it was put into execution. The
inhabitants of Toulouse lent their aid; and an ark was built, in the
hope that some part, at least, of the human species might be preserved,
to continue their race, and repeople the earth, after the waters should
have subsided, and the land again become dry.[542]
[538] Compare _Biog. Univ._ vol. xliii. p. 577, with _Montucla_, _Hist.
des Mathématiques_, vol. i. p. 678.
[539] Naudé mentions, that in France it drove many persons almost mad:
'In Gallia parum afuit quin ad insaniam homines non paucos
periculi metu (diluvium) adegerit.' _Bayle_, in voce
_Stofflerus_, note B.
[540] 'Nam Petrus Cirvellus Hispanorum omnium sui temporis doctissimus,
cum theologiæ, in almo Complutensi gymnasio, lectoris munere
fungeretur, et vero multos, ut ipsemet inquit, fluviis vel mari
finitimos populos, jam stupido metu perculsos, domicilia ac sedes
mutare vidisset, ac prædia, supellectilem, bonaque omnia, contra
justum valorem sub actione distrahere, ac alia loca vel
altitudine, vel siccitate magis secura requirere, sui officii
esse putavit, in publica illa consternatione, quam de nihilo
excitare persuasum non habebat,' &c. _Bayle_, note B.
[541] Ibid.
[542] In addition to the account in Bayle, the reader may refer to
_Biog. Univ._ vol. iii. p. 88, vol. xxxi. p. 283, vol. xliii. pp.
577, 578; _Sprengel_, _Hist. de la Médecine_, vol. iii. p. 251;
_Delambre_, _Hist. de l'Astronomie du Moyen Age_, Paris, 1819,
4to, p. 376; _Montucla_, _Hist. des Mathématiques_, vol. i. p.
622; _Dict. Philosoph._, article _Astrologie_, in _[OE]uvres de
Voltaire_, vol. xxxvii. pp. 148, 149.
About seventy years after this alarm had passed away, there happened
another circumstance, which for a time afforded occupation to the most
celebrated men in one of the principal countries of Europe. At the end
of the sixteenth century, terrible excitement was caused by a report
that a golden tooth had appeared in the jaw of a child born in Silesia.
The rumour, on being investigated, turned out to be too true. It became
impossible to conceal it from the public; and the miracle was soon known
all over Germany, where, being looked on as a mysterious omen, universal
anxiety was felt as to what this new thing might mean. Its real import
was first unfolded by Dr. Horst. In 1595, this eminent physician
published the result of his researches, by which it appears that, at the
birth of the child, the sun was in conjunction with Saturn, at the sign
Aries. The event, therefore, though supernatural, was by no means
alarming. The golden tooth was the precursor of a golden age, in which
the emperor would drive the Turks from Christendom, and lay the
foundations of an empire that would last for thousands of years. And
this, says Horst, is clearly alluded to by Daniel, in his well-known
second chapter, where the prophet speaks of a statue with a golden
head.[543]
[543] This history of the golden tooth is partly related by De Thou: see
his _Hist. Univ._ vol. xi. pp. 634, 635. And on the controversy
to which it gave rise, compare _Hist. des Oracles_, chap. iv., in
_[OE]uvres de Fontenelle_, vol. ii. pp. 219, 220, ed. Paris,
1766; _Sprengel_, _Hist. de la Médecine_, vol. iii. pp. 247-249;
_Biog. Univ._, vol. xx. p. 579.