with the whip, Act I. Scene 4; and see _As you like it_, Act I. Scene
2. In Dr. Turner's _New booke of spirituall physik_, 1555, 12mo, fo. 8,
there is a very curious story of John of Low, the king of Scotland's
fool, which throws light on the subject in question. Yet the chastising
of the poor fools seems to have been a very unfair practice, when it
is considered that they were a privileged class with respect to their
wit and satire. Olivia, in _Twelfth night_, says, that "there is no
slander in an allowed fool though he do nothing but rail;" and Jaques,
in _As you like it_, alludes to the above privilege. See likewise
other instances in Reed's _Old plays_, iii. 253, and xi. 417. Yet in
cases where the free discourse of fools gave just offence to the ears
of modest females they seem to have been treated without mercy, and
to have forfeited their usual privilege. This we learn from Brantôme,
who, at the end of his _Dames galantes_, relates a story of a fool
belonging to Elizabeth of France, who got a whipping in the kitchen for
a licentious speech to his mistress. A representation of the manner in
which the flagellation of fools was performed may be seen in a German
edition of Petrarch _De remediis utriusque fortunæ_, published more
than once at Frankfort, in the sixteenth century, part ii. chap. 100.
[64] See his note in _All's well that ends well_, Act I. Scene 3.
[65] Plate II. fig. 1; also figs. 2 and 3, p. 516; and fig. 4, p. 517.
[66] Plate II. fig. 3.
[67] Plate III. figs. 7, 8, 9; also the centre fig. in Plate II. Hence
the French call a bauble _marotte_, from _Marionnette_, or little Mary;
but if the learned reader should prefer to derive the word from the
Greek μορος, or the Latin _morio_, he is at full liberty to do so;
and indeed such preference would be supported by the comparatively
modern figure of the child's head, which the term _marotte_ might
have suggested. The bauble originally used in King Lear is said to
have been extant so late as the time of Garrick, and the figure of
it would certainly have been worth preserving. To supply its place a
representation is given of the head of a real bauble very finely carved
in ivory. See Plate IV. figs. 3, 4. A bauble is very often improperly
put into the hands of Momus.
[68] Plate III. figs. 2, 6, 7, 9; also figs. 1 and 3, p. 516.
[69] Plate III. fig. 4; and see Strutt's _Dress and habits of the
people of England_, Plate LXXI.
[70] Blomefield's _History of Norfolk_, ii. 737.
[71] Plate III. fig. 1. In the Imperial library at Vienna, there
is a manuscript calendar, said to have been written in the time
of Constantius the son of Constantine the great, with drawings of
the twelve months. April is represented as a man dancing with a
_crotalum_ in each hand. This instrument was probably constructed of
brass, in order to make a rattling noise. See it represented in Plate
III. fig. 3, which is copied from a print in _Lambecii Bill. Cæsar.
Vindobon._ tom. iv. p. 291. These months are also given in Montfaucon's
antiquities.
[72] See Ben Jonson's _Devil is an ass_, Scene 1.
[73] Penry's _O read over John Bridges_, fo. 48.
[74] Plate III. fig. 5. copied from Schopperi ΠΑΝΟΠΛΙΑ, _omnium
illiberalium artium genera continens_, &c. Francof. 1568, 12mo, sign.
O. 8.
[75] Figs. 1 and 2, p. 516.
[76] Prologue to _King Henry the Eighth_. Marston's _Malcontent_, Act
I. Scene 7, and Act III. Scene 1.
[77] Malone's Shakspeare, vol. i. part ii. p. 301.
[78] Plate II. fig. 4. Plate IV. fig. 1.
[79] Plate IV. fig. 1.
[80] Plate II. fig. 2.
[81] Coryat's _Crudities_, p. 9. edit. 1611, 4to. Brand's _Observ. on
popular antiquities_, p. 176.
[82] See the notes on a passage in _King John_. Steevens's
_Shakspeare_, viii. p. 79, edit. 1793. "The scribe claims the manor of
Noverinte, by providing _sheep-skins and calves skins to wrappe his
highness wards_ and idiotts in."--_Gesta Grayorum_, 1688, 4to.
[83] See the quotation from Tarlton's _Newes out of purgatory_ given
in a preceding page (509). The portrait of Tarlton in Hardinge's
_Biographical mirror_, and a print in the title of Greene's _Tu quoque,
or the cittie gallant_, show the costume of the purse and feather. See
likewise Plate IV. fig. 2; and the centre fig. in Plate II.
[84] Rabelais, book iii. ch 45.
[85] This picture is very well engraven in Caulfield's _Portraits
of remarkable persons_, vol. ii. There is a beautifully illuminated
psalter preserved among the royal manuscripts in the British Museum, 2
A xvi, written by John Mallard the chaplain and secretary of Henry the
Eighth, with several marginal notes in the king's own hand-writing,
some of which are in pencil. Prefixed to psalm 52, "Dixit insipiens,"
according to a very ancient custom, are the figures of king David and
a fool, in this instance evidently the portraits of Henry and his
favourite Will Somers. That of the latter person is here copied in
Plate IV. fig. 2, but rather enlarged. The countenance bears a strong
resemblance to that of the figure in Holbein's picture of Henry the
Eighth and his family, already noticed in p. 336.
[86] Archæologia, ix. p. 249.
[87] In Tatham's play of The Scot's _figgaries_, 1652, 4to, the king's
fool is described as habited in a long coat with a gold rope or chain
about his neck.
[88] See the print of Archy engraved by Cecill and prefixed to his
_Jests_, in which, unless Mr. Granger could have been certain with
respect to what he has called "a parti-coloured tunic," there is
nothing discriminative of the fool's dress. This portrait has been
copied in Caulfield's above-cited work.
[89] _The woman captain_, Scene I.
[90] See Mr. Malone's _Historical account of the English Stage_.
[91] Parfait, _Histoire du theatre François_, II. pp. 27, 46, 62.
[92] See Mr. Steevens's note at the end of the second act of _The
taming of the shrew_.
[93] Arte of English poesie, 69.
[94] See Mr. Steevens's note in _King Lear_, Act III. Scene 6.
[95] See Mr. Malone's note in _All's well that ends well_, Act I. Scene
3.
DISSERTATION II.
ON THE GESTA ROMANORUM.
Enquiries like the present, however unimportant to the generality of
readers, will not fail of being duly appreciated by those who take an
interest in tracing the origin and progress of literary genius, which
has perhaps been never more successfully, and even laudably, employed,
than in the composition of such works as combine amusement with
instruction. Of these the simple and engaging apologues of many ancient
writers form a considerable portion, and have always been justly and
generally esteemed. This mode of conveying instruction became so
attractive in the middle ages, that the ecclesiastics themselves were
under the necessity of introducing narrations both historical and
imaginary into their discourses, in order to acquire that degree of
popularity and attention which might otherwise have been wanting, and
also for the purpose of enforcing their morality by such examples as
should touch the feelings of the hearers, and operate, with respect at
least to ruder minds, more efficaciously than precept. The work before
us was designed to answer these purposes; and it not only proceeded
on this ground in common with others of a similar nature, but has
even furnished the materials to some of the best writers, and more
especially poets, of ancient and modern times.
It will perhaps be expected that some reason should be assigned
why the present essay has been attempted, after the labours of Mr.
Warton on the same subject, which some may think has been amply and
satisfactorily treated, if not exhausted; and if the judgment and
accuracy of that pleasing and elegant writer had been commensurate
with his taste and industry, the expectation had been exceedingly
well founded. This however is, unfortunately, not the case. He has,
in this and many other instances, left much to be done and undone;
but we ought to feel very grateful to him for having founded a school
that has already produced some accomplished pupils, and will, no
doubt, contribute to form many a future one. Thus much seems due to an
amiable man and excellent character, who has been most undeservedly
insulted for errors of small moment, and censured for opinions of the
most innocuous kind. Even his antiquarian dullness and perseverance
have been arraigned, as if in a work like the history of English
poetry, genius should have occupied the place of industry, and have
created those facts which honest men are content to discover; a method
not uncommon with some writers who have derived too much of their
importance from the indolence and superficiality of their readers,
and who are unwilling to submit to those laws of providence which
justly impose on man the duty of penetrating to the mine before he be
permitted to enjoy the precious metal. Such was not Warton. His taste
and research will remain the admiration of future ages, when the flimsy
compositions of some of his opponents shall be totally forgotten. He
has effected, however imperfectly, more for the illustration of English
poetry than any or all of his predecessors, or than has hitherto been,
accomplished for the poetry of other nations, by any writer whatever.
Mr. Warton's dissertation would, no doubt, have been rendered more
perfect, had he been aware of a fact which had not only escaped his own
attention, but even that of Mr. Tyrwhitt. Neither of these gentlemen,
in consulting the manuscripts of the _Gesta Romanorum_, had perceived
that there were _two_ works so entitled, totally distinct from each
other, except as to imitation, and certainly compiled by different
persons. Of that treated of by Mr. Warton, it is presumed _no
manuscript has been yet described_; of the other several manuscripts
remain, _but it has never been printed, except in some translated
extracts_. It will be better to postpone for the present any further
mention of the latter, and to proceed to submit some additional remarks
on the other. And first of its use and design.
A particular mode of instruction from the pulpit has been already
hinted at, and will admit of some enlargement. Mr. Warton has mentioned
one of the earliest instances of introducing Æsop's fables, as recorded
by Vincent of Beauvais in the thirteenth century.[96] Supplies of
another kind were furnished to those who might be more scrupulous as to
the use of profane examples, not only in that great repertory of pious
fictions, _The golden legend_, but in multitudes of similar stories,
denominated in France _contes devots_, and composed for the purpose
of counteracting the great influence which the witty and licentious
stories of the minstrels had obtained, of which they were palpable
imitations both in construction and versification. Most of these were
founded on miracles supposed to have been operated by the Virgin Mary.
The earliest known specimens of them were composed in the twelfth
century by Hugues Farsi, a monk of St. John de Vignes at Soissons, who
was soon followed by many imitators both in prose and verse.[97] His
own work was turned into French verse by Gautier de Coinsi, another
monk of Soissons, about 1230. A similar collection is the _Lives of the
holy fathers_, chiefly from Saint Jerome, and anonymously composed in
French verse by some person whose name deserved to have been recorded
on account of the great merit of the work, which would be deemed an
ornament to any period, for the excellence of the poetry.
The promptuary of examples for the use of preachers, at the end of
Herolt's _Sermones discipuli_, composed in 1418, has been already
mentioned by Mr. Warton, who has given a curious and correct account
of that work; but he has omitted to notice, that, among a multitude
of pious authors cited in it, the name of Ovid appears. This practice
of indiscriminate quotation became afterwards very common. It was,
indeed, sanctioned by a preceding custom, among religious writers,
of _moralizing_ works of all denominations. Thus, to mention only
a few, Thomas Walleys, a Welsh Dominican friar, had published his
moralizations of Ovid's metamorphoses, in the fourteenth century.[98]
The _Bestiarium_, a treatise on animals, is, as well as the _Gesta
Romanorum_, perhaps an earlier instance. Afterwards the celebrated,
but licentious, _Romance of the rose_ was moralized by Jean Molinet.
Even the game of chess was moralized; for the reader who may take
up Caxton's translation of Jacobus de Cæsolis, will be grievously
disappointed should he expect to find any didactic or even historical
information. We are not to wonder, therefore, if on the restoration
of letters, a system of morality was extracted from Æsop and other
fabulists; and, accordingly, some of the early printed editions of Æsop
were published under the title of _Æsopus moralizatus_, and this,
no doubt, led the way to the moral applications to his fables which
afterwards appeared in other languages.
Among the preachers who interspersed their sermons with narrations of
various kinds, a Carthusian monk of the fifteenth century deserves
particular mention. With as much quaintness as humility, he styles
himself _Guillelmus Hilacensis quondam simplex cordatus pauperculus
discalciatus ac contemptibilis denudatus, sapientissimorum rudissimus,
electorum infimus, et minorum minimus_. He has left a volume of sermons
on the Lord's prayer, with stories in every page.[99] In the British
Museum there is a very curious collection of Latin sermons, compiled
about the reign of Henry the Sixth, by a person who calls himself
a vicar of Magdalen college, Oxford. They abound with stories from
Æsop, Cicero, Seneca, Valerius Maximus, Saint Austin, venerable Bede,
&c.[100] Stephen Baron, an English Minorite in the reign of Henry
the Eighth, has left a similar volume of sermons preached before the
university of Cambridge.[101]
Among the most remarkable persons of this description who soon
followed, were fathers Menot, Maillard, Barelete, Raulin, Vincent
Ferrier, Pierre de Boves, &c., whose discourses are filled with
quotations from Virgil, Valerius Maximus, Apuleius, Dante, Petrarch,
and the _Gesta Romanorum_. Erasmus, ridiculing the absurdities of some
of the theologians, mentions their practice of quoting the _Speculum
historiale_ and _Gesta Romanorum_.[102] Schelhorn speaks of a copy
of the latter in his possession, dated 1499, in which some former
possessor had marked against many of the stories the year in which
he had used them in his sermons.[103] Even in the eighteenth century
the Italians had not left off this custom. Grosley states, that he
heard a buffoon preacher at Rome, who stuffed his discourse with a
thousand tales, among which was that of father Philip's geese, from
Boccaccio.[104]
There is a remarkable work to which the preachers of the middle ages
appear to have been indebted, and which deserves mention here not
only on that account, but also from its having hitherto remained in
unmerited obscurity. This may be partly owing to its having never been
printed. It is a collection of tales and fables that has been ascribed
to Odo de Ceriton, Shirton, or Cirington, for all these names are
mentioned, a Cistercian monk of the twelfth century. In one manuscript
they are called _proverbs_, and given to Hugo de Sancto Victore, of
the monastery of Saint Victoire at Paris, and who lived much about
the last-named period.[105] There is perhaps no task more difficult
than that of ascertaining the real authors of many works of the middle
ages, especially where, as in the present instance, there occurs any
thing satirical against religious abuses. The evidence with respect
to authorship is in favour of the Englishman, because in some of
the stories English sentences are found. Nor do the sarcasms against
the clergy militate in the least against ecclesiastical manufacture.
Numerous instances could be brought to show the satirical spirit of the
clergy, frequently towards each other, and generally against the church
of Rome.
The work in question is an extraordinary mixture of Æsopian fables with
pious and profane histories in great variety. One or two specimens have
been already given,[106] but the reader may not regret the trouble of
perusing the following in addition. "There is a kind of wren, named
after Saint Martin, with very long and slender legs. This bird sitting
one day in a tree, in the fullness of his pride suddenly exclaimed;
'It matters not to me though the heavens fall; for with the aid of my
strong legs I shall be able to support them.' Presently a leaf fell
upon the foolish boaster, who immediately flew away in great terror,
exclaiming, 'O Saint Martin, Saint Martin, help your poor bird!'" The
moral compares Saint Peter denying Christ to this wren, which it also
assimilates to certain pot-valiant soldiers, who boast, in their cups,
that each of them can beat three of the stoutest Frenchmen. Again:
"Isengrin the wolf, to expiate his sins, became a monk. His brethren
endeavoured to teach him his letters, that he might say _Pater noster_;
but all that they were able to get from him was, 'lamb, lamb.' They
told him to look up to the cross, but could never make him turn his
eyes from the sheep. In like manner do the monks cry out for good
wine, and fix their eyes on dainty viands and full trenchers; whence
the English proverb, _Yf alle that the wolf unto the prest worthe and
be sette on to boke salmes to ler, ȝit is ever hys onne eye to the
wodeward_."[107] To conclude with one more, "The wolf being dead, the
lion assembled the rest of the beasts to celebrate his obsequies.
The hare carried the holy water, and the hedge-hogs the wax tapers.
The goats tolled the bells; the badger dug the grave; the fox carried
the coffin; Berengarius the bear celebrated mass; the ox read the
gospels, and the ass the epistles. Mass being finished, and Isengrin
duly buried, the beasts partook of a splendid feast, the expense of
which was defrayed out of the deceased's property. The parties wished
for nothing better than a similar ceremony. So, says the moral, on the
death of any rich usurer, the abbots assemble all the _beasts_ of the
monastery; for in general, the black and white monks are really brutes,
that is, lions in pride; foxes in cunning; hogs in gluttony; goats in
luxury; asses in sloth; and hares in cowardice."
Besides the storehouses of this sort of knowledge that have been
already described, there were doubtless many others that are now lost;
but there is one that ought not to be passed over without some notice.
It is the _Summa prædicantium_ of John Bromyard, an English preacher,
and a violent opponent of Wicliffe. It is an immense repertory of
matter for the use of the clergy, every page containing stories and
examples in all possible variety.[108] It is divided into classes
of such subjects as were adapted to the pulpit, and must have been
a work of immense labour, and the result of much reading. In the
article _rapina_ he has a story resembling chap. viii. of the _Gesta
Romanorum_, which he probably cites under the title of _Antiqua gesta_.
Although most of these works were undoubtedly composed for the
immediate purpose of assisting the preachers, it by no means follows
that they were exclusively so, or that other uses might not be made
of some of them. Not that they could be accessible to the laity in
any great degree, inasmuch as they were wrapped up in a learned
language. But the private readings of the monks would not be always
of a serious and ascetic nature. They might be disposed occasionally
to recreate their minds with subjects of a lighter and more amusing
nature; and what could be more innocent or delightful than the stories
of the _Gesta Romanorum_? They might even have indulged in this kind
of recreation during their continuance in the refectory after meals.
For this purpose one of the fraternity, more eminently qualified than
the rest, might entertain them with the recital of matters that would
admit of some moral application to be made by the reader, or which was
already attached to the subject. The word _carissimi_, so frequently to
be found in the moralizations, seems as much adapted to this purpose,
as to the addressing of an auditory from the pulpit. Perhaps the same
idea had occurred to him who chose to apply the term _liber monasticus_
to the _Gesta Romanorum_.[109]
The excellent analytical account that has been given of this work would
admit of no other improvement than some augmentation of the sources of
the stories, and of their several imitations; but with respect to the
author of it, some further inquiry may be necessary. Mr. Warton has
attempted to show, with considerable ingenuity as well as plausibility,
that the _Gesta Romanorum_ was composed by Peter Bercheur, a native
of Poitou, and prior of the convent of Saint Eloy at Paris, where
he died in 1362.[110] He has founded this opinion on a passage in
the _Philologia sacra_ of Salomon Glassius, who, in his chapter _de
allegoriis fabularum_, after censuring those writers who not only
employed themselves in allegorizing the scriptures, but affected to
discover in profane stories and poetical fictions certain matters
that seemed to illustrate the mysteries of the Christian faith, makes
the following observation: "Hoc in studio excelluit quidam _Petrus
Berchorius_ Pictaviensis, ordinis Divi Benedicti: qui _peculiari_
libro, _Gesta Romanorum_, necnon legendas patrum, aliasque aniles
fabulas, allegoricè ac mysticè exposuit." On this single testimony, or
rather assertion, which is unaccompanied by any proof or reference to
authority, Mr. Warton proceeds to assign _his_ reasons for concluding
that Bercheur was the author of the _Gesta_, and they are principally
these: 1. A general coincidence between the manner and execution of
the works of Bercheur and the _Gesta_. 2. A resemblance in their
titles. 3. The introduction of some of the stories of the Gesta into
the _Repertorium morale_ of Bercheur.[111] 4. His having allegorized
the Metamorphoses of Ovid. And 5. His writings being full of allusions
to the Roman history. To these might have been added the quotations
common to both the _Gesta_ and the _Repertorium_ from Pliny, Seneca,
Solinus, and Gervase of Tilbury, and the time in which Berchorius
lived, which certainly corresponds with that of the composition of the
_Gesta Romanorum_, as far as can be collected from internal evidence.
It may be remarked in this place, that Mr. Tyrwhitt, in supposing it to
have been written at the end of the 12th or the beginning of the 13th
century, has fixed on too early a date.[112] It could not have been
written before 1256, because the chronicle of Albertus, which is cited
in one of the chapters, terminates with that year.
It might be supposed that very little could be urged in opposition
to the foregoing reasons, nor is it here intended to deny absolutely
that Bercheur was the author of the _Gesta_: but certain doubts
having arisen on the subject, they shall be submitted to the reader,
that he may then be enabled to use his own judgment and discretion
in deciding the question. With respect to the similitude between the
works of Berchorius and the _Gesta Romanorum_, no one would think of
maintaining, on this ground alone, that any two compositions, the
one anonymous, were written by the same author. It shows, generally
speaking, nothing more than coincidence, or, what is more likely,
simple imitation; and it is as probable that the author of one of the
works should have imitated the other, as that one person should have
written both. Perhaps the other reasons might be disposed of in the
same way, but it will be better to state specific objections to them;
and here Mr. Warton's own evidence might be turned against himself. He
had stated on a former occasion,[113] his having seen a manuscript of
the _Gesta in almost Saxon characters_; but it is certain that this
manuscript had doubly deceived him, and that his eye had caught one or
two of the Saxon letters which continued to be used in writing long
after Saxon times.
In the preface to the _Repertorium morale_ Bercheur tells us that
he was by birth a Frenchman, a Benedictine monk, and the familiar
servant of Cardinal de Pratis, or Des Prez, to whom he was indebted
for books and other necessaries towards the completion of his works.
Now throughout the ponderous tomes that have been consulted for this
purpose, there are no Gallicisms to be traced, nor any other symptom
of French authorship. On the other hand, there are strong marks that
the _Gesta Romanorum_ was composed by a German. In the moralization to
chapter 144, there is, in most of the early editions, a German proverb;
and, in chapter 142, several German names of Dogs. Many of the stories
are extracted from German authors, as Cesarius, Albert of Stade, and
Gervase of Tilbury, who wrote his book _De otiis imperialibus_, in
Germany. In this country likewise the earliest editions of the _Gesta_
were printed.
Mr. Warton, anticipating an objection that might be taken from the
omission of any mention of the _Gesta_ by the biographers of Bercheur,
has remarked, that it might have been among his smaller pieces, or
proscribed by graver writers, or even discarded by its author as a
juvenile performance, unsuitable to his character and abounding in
fantastic and unedifying narration. But this description does not
accord with the _general_ use that we know to have been made of it in
the pulpit; nor can it come under the denomination of a work that is
not altogether grave, serious, and moral, nor likely to have been the
effusion of a glowing or youthful mind. Besides, the biographers of
Bercheur are not alone silent as to the _Gesta_; the editors of his
printed works were entirely unacquainted with it as his composition,
and they were more likely to have been better informed on the subject
than Glassius, whose opinion, like Mr. Warton's, seems to have been
mere inference, and unsupported by any evidence. But what is more to
the point, Bercheur has himself, in the prologue to his _Repertorium_,
and in the preface to a French translation of Livy, given a very
particular account of his works, among which his moralizations of the
_Fabulæ poetarum_, never printed, are mentioned; yet this is certainly
not the _Gesta Romanorum_, any more than the _Chronicon_ mentioned
by Mr. Warton.[114] Again; most of the known works of Bercheur are
still existing in manuscript, but not a single manuscript that can be
pronounced to be the _Gesta Romanorum in question_ has occurred after
the most diligent research. Such indeed might be supplied from the
libraries in Germany, and possibly throw new light on this difficult
and mysterious inquiry. Some stress has been laid on the circumstance
of four of the stories in the _Gesta_ being related in the _Repertorium
morale_,[115] but they are not told in the same words, and the
moralizations are entirely different. This has very much the appearance
of different authorship. The title of _Reductorium_ to some of the
editions of the _Gesta_, together with many other matters, might have
been borrowed from the writings of Bercheur by some German Monk, whose
name has been irretrievably consigned to oblivion. It is scarcely worth
while to mention the blunder that Foppens has committed in ascribing
the composition instead of the printing of the _Gesta_, to Gerard De
Leeu, of Gouda in Holland.[116]
It remains to offer some account of the various forms in which this
once popular and celebrated work has appeared; and the rather, because
what has been said on this subject is widely scattered, unconnected,
and frequently erroneous.
MANUSCRIPTS.--It is a fact as remarkable as the obscurity which exists
concerning the author of the _Gesta_, that no manuscript of this work,
that can with certainty be pronounced as such, has been hitherto
described. If the vast stores of manuscripts that are contained in the
monastic and other libraries of Germany, Switzerland, Italy, and Spain,
were examined, there is scarcely a doubt that some original of a work
so often printed would be discovered. Father Montfaucon has indeed
mentioned a manuscript _Gesta Romanorum_ in the Vatican;[117] but it
may be either a transcript from the printed copy, or a different work
under the same title, that will presently be noticed.
PRINTED EDITIONS.--The titles of these are different, and are as
follows:
No. 1. "Incipiunt hystorie collecte ex gestis romanorum et
quibusdam aliis libris cum applicationibus eorundem."
The colophon. "Et sic est finis."
No. 2. "Incipiunt historie notabiles atque magis principales
collecte ex gestis romanorum et quibusdam aliis notabilibus
gestis cum moralizationibus eorundem."
The colophon. "Et sic est finis."
No. 3. "Ex gestis romanorum hystorie notabiles de viciis
virtutibusque tractantes cum applicacionibus moralisatis et
misticis incipiunt feliciter."
The colophon. "Gesta romanorum cum quibus aliis historiis eisdem
annexis ad moralitates dilucide reducta hic finem habent. Que
diligenter correctis aliorum viciis impressit Johannes de
Westphalia &c."
No. 4. "Recollectorium ex gestis romanorum cum pluribus applicatis
historiis."
No. 5. "Ex gestis romanorum hystorie notabiles collecte de viciis
virtutibusque tractantes cum applicacionibus moralisatis et
mysticis incipiunt _fideliter_." (sometimes _feliciter_.)
The colophon. "Ex gestis Romanorum cum pluribus applicatis
hystoriis de virtutibus et viciis mystice ad intellectum
transumptis recollectorii finis."
It is impossible to speak with certainty as to the _first edition_, on
account of the omission of dates, places, and printers' names in some
of the early copies. There are two editions so circumstanced, with
the titles No. 1 and 2, in folio, and containing 152 chapters only.
There is a third printed without date by Nicolas Ketelaer and Gerard
de Leempt at Utrecht, in folio, with 152 chapters, to which Lambinet
has inaccurately assigned the date of 1473.[118] One of these three is
probably the first edition. They are all excessively rare, and a copy
containing 152 chapters only would not easily be found in this country.
Of the editions without date, place, or printer, that contain 181
chapters, there are three, and perhaps more. One of these, in folio,
is in the British Museum, but imperfect. It was certainly printed with
the types used by Ulric Zell, about 1475. Two others, the one in folio,
the other in quarto, were printed without date at Louvain, by John of
Westphalia. He is said to have printed one edition with the date 1473;
but this is probably a mistake copied from one book into another, as
Lambinet assures us that the copy in the royal library at Paris has the
above date, but in _manuscript only_.[119] The following editions with
dates can be spoken of with more confidence.
1. 1480, no place, nor printer. In folio.
2. 1480, at Gouda, by Gerard Leeu. In folio.
3. 1481, at Hasselt, no printer. In folio.
4. 1482, no place, nor printer. In quarto. This is doubtful, being
taken from a bookseller's catalogue.
5. 1488, no place, nor printer. In folio.
6. 1489, no place, nor printer. In folio.
7. 1489, at Strasburg, no printer. In folio.
8. 1490, at Gouda, by Gerard Leeu. In folio.
9. 1493, no place, nor printer. In folio.
10. 1494, no place, nor printer. In quarto.
11. 1494, at Louvain, no printer....
12. 1497, no place, nor printer. In quarto.
13. 1497, at Strasburg, by John Knoblouch. In quarto.
14. 1498, no place, nor printer. In folio.
15. 1499, no place, nor printer. In folio.
16. 1499, at Paris, no printer. In quarto.
17. 1506, at Paris, by Jean Petit. In 12mo.
18. 1508, at Hagenau, by Henry Gran. In folio.
19. 1509, at Paris, by Francois Regnault. In 12mo.
20. 1512, at Venice, no printer. In 12mo.
21. 1515, at Paris, by Jean Petit. In 12mo.
22. 1516, at Venice, by George de Rusconibus. In 8vo.
23. 1517, at Paris, no printer. In 12mo.
24. 1517, at Hagenau, by Henry Gran. In folio.
25. 1520, at Venice, by A. de Bindonis. In 8vo.
26. 1521, at Paris, by Jean Petit. In 12mo.
27. 1521, at Rouen....
28. 1555, at Lyons, no printer. In 12mo.
GERMAN TRANSLATION.--Of this only one edition has occurred, printed at
Augsburg, by John Schopser, 1489, in folio.
DUTCH TRANSLATION.--Two editions are mentioned, the one printed at
Gouda, by Gerard Leeu, 1481, and the other at Zwollis, by Peter Van Os,
1484; both in folio.
FRENCH TRANSLATION.--It does not appear who was the author of the
translation into this language, which is entitled _Le violier[120] des
hystoires Rommaines: moralisez sur les nobles gestes faitz vertueulx
et anciennes chroniques de toutes nations de gens, fort recreatif et
moral_. It contains only one hundred and forty-nine stories. About the
year 1516, Pierre Gringore, herald to the duke of Lorraine, and the
author of several moralities and other works, published a book called
_Les fantasies de mere sote_, which is only a translation in prose,
intermixed with verse, of some twenty or thirty stories in the _Gesta
Romanorum_, with their moralizations. He has suppressed all mention of
his original, and insinuated in the privilege that he was himself the
inventor. This work seems to have preceded the anonymous translation
above mentioned, of which it is possible that Gringore might have
likewise been the author. There is another French _Gestes Romaines_
by Gaguin the historian, which has been mistaken for a translation of
the _Gesta_; but it is nothing more than an extract from the history
of the Roman republic. The editions of the _Violier_ are, 1. without
date, printed at Paris, by Philip Le Noir, in quarto; 2. 1521, printed
at Paris, by Jean de la Garde, in folio; and 3. 1529, printed also at
Paris, for Denis Janot, in quarto.
ENGLISH TRANSLATION.--In 1703 was published a little volume entitled
_Gesta Romanorum_: or _Forty-five histories originally (as 't is said)
collected from the Roman records, with applications or morals for the
suppressing vice, and encouraging virtue and the love of God. Vol.
I. newly and with care translated from the Latin edition, printed,
A.D. M.D.XIV._ This seems to be the first English translation, and the
translator B. P. has remarked in his preface that most of the matters
contained in his book had, as he understood, appeared already in the
English tongue; and therefore he desires the reader, if he should
discover a great difference in names, sense, and expression, to compare
each work with the Latin copy, by which comparison he conceives it
will be found that _his_ translation is faithful. He was not aware
that the preceding translation to which he alludes had been made from
a different work. The stories are here extracted without attention to
the original arrangement, but with a reference in each to the Latin
copy. The editor, whoever he was, designed an extension of his labours
to other volumes. Next followed an edition of the same work, without
date, 18mo, but printed about 1720. It wants the references to the
Latin copy, and the former preface is abridged. It contains fourteen
additional stories that do not belong to the _original Gesta_. Of this
another edition, with the language much altered, was printed in 1722,
18mo, with the same number of stories. The editor signs himself A. B.,
perhaps Bettesworth the printer.
It is now time to proceed to the description of _another Gesta
Romanorum_, and which has indeed been the principal cause of the
present dissertation. This work was undoubtedly composed in England
in imitation of the other; and therefore it will be necessary for the
future to distinguish the two works by the respective appellations of
the _original_ and the _English Gesta_.
It is remarkable that neither Mr. Tyrwhitt nor Mr. Warton, both of
whom had frequent occasion to inspect the work in question, and to
notice certain variations between what they have too loosely termed
the _printed copies_ and the _manuscripts_, should not have perceived
that the latter were in reality a different performance. Mr. Tyrwhitt
indeed, for want of this perception, has made use of certain English
features in the manuscripts as an argument to prove that the _original
Gesta_ was composed in England.[121]
From the great celebrity of the _original Gesta_, it could not fail
of being known to the English clergy, and accordingly we find that it
was used by them in the pulpit as in other countries. If the numerous
volumes of the sermons of the middle ages that still remain in our
college and cathedral libraries were examined, a task by no means here
recommended, it would, no doubt, be found, that they had been indebted
to it among other similar authorities for many of their _examples_; and
to show that this is not a mere conjecture, there is a collection of
ancient sermons in the British Museum that affords a solitary instance
of the introduction of a story from the _original Gesta_.[122] It is
the thirty-ninth story, of two brothers at enmity with each other.
Though anonymous, there is no doubt that these sermons were composed by
some Englishman, who has cited a multitude of authors, and among other
matters the well-known story of the Jew who refused to be delivered
from a jakes into which he had fallen on the sabbath day.
It is natural to suppose that a work like the _original Gesta_
would stimulate some person to the compilation of one that should
emulate if not altogether supersede it; and accordingly this design
was accomplished at a very early period by some Englishman, in all
probability a monk. There is a considerable difficulty even in forming
a conjecture as to the precise time in which this was done. One of
the earliest manuscripts appears to have been written about the reign
of Richard the Second, nor is there any internal evidence in this
work that places its composition below that period. That its purpose
was similar to that of the other is manifest from its being quoted
no less than five times in a collection of sermons by a preacher at
Magdalen college already mentioned, who has likewise introduced
the moralizations generally in the very words of his original. If
additional proofs were wanting of the English origin of the work before
us, it might be stated, 1. That no manuscript of it appears to exist
in any of the catalogues of continental libraries; whereas there are
many in those of this country.[123] 2. That in one of the chapters
there are some English verses,[124] and in another some English proper
names.[125] 3. That it has a few English terms and modes of speech, as
_parliament_, _livery of seizin_, &c.
The construction resembles that of the _original Gesta_, from which
a great many stories have been retained; but these are always newly
written, and sometimes materially altered. The moralizations are
uniformly different, and the proper names generally changed. The best
manuscripts contain one hundred and two stories, out of which there are
upwards of forty that are not in the original work, none of which have
been ever printed in the _Latin_ of this _Gesta_, and but few of them
in an English translation. The sources from which many of them were
taken cannot easily be traced, whilst others are extracted from works
that will hereafter be mentioned.
In the following analysis of the additional stories to this _Gesta_,
the plan of Mr. Warton has been adopted. Though it should fail in
exciting much pleasurable sensation in the reader, it may at least
serve to throw a ray or two of light on the manners of the middle ages.
The arrangement of the chapters is from MS. Harl. 2270, but the copy
used is one of equal value in the author's possession. The variety in
these is very inconsiderable.
CHAP. I.--The emperor Anselmus bore a silver shield with five red
roses. He had three sons equally beloved by him. His continual wars
with the king of Egypt had reduced him so low, that of all his temporal
goods only a single tree remained. Being mortally wounded in one of
his battles, he called his sons before him, and bequeathed to the
eldest all that was under the earth and above the earth belonging to
the tree; to the second, all that was great and small in it; and to
the youngest, all that was wet and dry in it. On the king's death
a dispute arose between his sons concerning the possession of the
tree, which by mutual consent was referred for decision to the king
of Reason. He caused all the young men to be bled, and ordered that a
bone, taken from the breast of their dead father, should be dipped in
the blood and afterwards washed. The blood of the two elder sons was
easily discharged, but that of the youngest remained. The king declared
that he was of the true blood and nature of the bone, and the others
bastards; to him therefore the tree was adjudged.
CHAP. II.--The emperor Diocletian, desirous to know what bird had the
greatest affection for its young, goes into a wood and returns to his
palace with an ostrich's nest, which he places under a glass vessel.
The dam follows him, and finding it impossible to get at her offspring,
proceeds to a desert, where she remains thirty-four days, and then
comes home with a worm called Thurnar; this she kills on the vessel,
which being broken by the blood of the animal, her young ones are set
at liberty. At this conduct of the bird Diocletian expresses much
pleasure.
CHAP. IV.--The emperor Gauterus, reflecting on the vanities of the
world, resolves to find a situation where there is nothing but
happiness. He leaves his kingdom, and meets a beautiful woman who had
lost her husband. She offers him marriage, and abundance of wealth;
but on inspecting the nuptial chamber, the emperor is startled and
disgusted at the appearance of several serpents and a lion that
threaten him with destruction. The lady informs him that he may
possibly survive a night or two, but that the animals will afterwards
devour him, as they had her husband. The emperor declines the honour of
this marriage, and proceeds to another country, where the nobles are
desirous to elect him king in the room of their deceased monarch; but
finding a bedchamber like the former, he instantly departs, and arrives
at a third place, where he is offered the kingdom on similar terms.
At length he meets an old man, sitting near a ladder with three steps
raised against a wall. He is interrogated as to his wishes, and answers
that he sought three things, viz. joy without sorrow, abundance without
want, and light without darkness. He is desired to ascend the ladder,
when he finds what he had wished for, and continues on the spot during
the rest of his life. This is, in substance, the 101st story in the
other _Gesta_, but here related with much variety.
CHAP. XVIII.--A knight falls in love with Aglae, the daughter of the
emperor Polentius, and being obliged to be absent in the Holy Land for
seven years, the lady agrees not to marry till his return. In the mean
time the emperor promises his daughter to the king of Hungary, who
being deeply in love with her, consents, at her request, to postpone
the marriage. On the day before the appointed time, the king of
Hungary, riding to the emperor's court in great pomp to celebrate his
nuptials, is met by the knight, with whom he enters into conversation,
and a violent rain coming on, the king's fine clothes are presently
spoiled. The knight remarks that he should have brought his house with
him. The king is struck with the singularity of the admonition. They
arrive at a deep water, and the king plunging in with his horse, is
nearly drowned. The knight tells him that he should have brought his
bridge with him. Shortly after the king inquires what time of day it
is; his companion replies that it is time to eat, and offers a cake,
which is accepted. He then observes to the king that he had acted
unwisely in omitting to bring his father and mother with him. As they
approach the emperor's palace, the knight requests leave of the king
to take another road, meaning to get to the court by a nearer way that
was known to him, and carry off the lady before the king should arrive.
On being asked what road he intended to take, he declares he will speak
the truth. He says, that on that day seven years he had spread a net
in a certain place to which he was then going; that if he should find
it broken he shall leave it, but if whole, that he shall take it with
him. The king arrives at the palace, and is kindly entertained. The
emperor interrogates him concerning the particulars of his journey, and
on hearing the strange observations that the knight had made, commends
him as a wise man, and informs the king that by the house he had meant
nothing more than a cloak; that the bridge he talked of, signified the
attendants who should have been sent before to ascertain the depth
of the water; and that by the king's father and mother, he intimated
the bread and wine that he should have brought with him. But when the
emperor came to reflect on the meaning of the net which had been spread
seven years since, he perceived that his daughter was in danger, and on
commanding her chamber to be examined, found his suspicions verified.
The king being deceived by the knight and the damsel, returned in
disgrace to his own country.
CHAP. XXI.--This is the story of king Lear under the name of
Theodosius, emperor of Rome. It has been already given from the old
English translation in manuscript. See page 420.
CHAP. XXIV.--Antonius made a law at Rome, that whenever a fire happened
in the city a sentinel should cry out to the people to ring all the
bells, and secure the gates. A certain warrior was desirous of becoming
master of the city, and, apprised of this law, consulted with his
companions how it should be evaded. One advised that they should enter
the city peaceably, and proclaim a general feast, at which a certain
liquor should be used that would set all the guests asleep. The
stratagem is adopted, the city fired, the inhabitants carried off, and
not one person left to comply with the emperor's edict.
CHAP. XXV.--A certain knight is unjustly accused before an emperor,
who, when he finds that the accusation cannot be maintained, endeavours
to perplex him with intricate questions, which he is obliged to answer
on pain of death. Among these are, the distance of a sigh from the
heart? the number of flaggons of salt water in the sea? the depth
of it? which are the most honourable and poorest professions? &c.
These are all answered satisfactorily, and the knight dismissed with
commendation.
CHAP. XXVI.--A sick emperor sends into a foreign country for the
physician Averrhoes, who cures him of his disease. This excites the
envy of three other physicians, and they resolve to effect his ruin.
For this purpose they deceive him into a belief that he is become
leprous, and he returns with great sorrow to the emperor, to acquaint
him with his misfortune. Being offered all the consolation that the
emperor can afford him, he requests that he may have the use of a bath
made of goat's blood. By this remedy he is restored to health; and the
emperor, wondering at the suddenness with which he had been attacked,
is informed by Averrhoes that three leprous persons of his own
profession had terrified him, and thereby communicated their disease.
They are immediately punished with death.
CHAP. XXVII.--Antony, emperor of Rome, is fond of chess. Playing once
at this game, he observed that when the men were replaced as usual in
the bag, the king was indiscriminately confounded with the rest of the
pieces. This suggests to him his mortal state, and that he himself
shall be eventually blended with others in the grave. He divides his
kingdom into three parts; one he gives to the king of Jerusalem,
another to his nobles, and the third to the poor. He then retires to
the Holy Land to end his days in peace.
CHAP. XXX.--The emperor Averrhoes proclaims a tournament, and that the
conquerer shall marry his daughter after his decease. Decius, a knight
who excelled in arms, had two infant sons. Hearing of the proclamation,
he goes one morning into a forest where a nightingale was singing
very sweetly. He expresses a wish to know the meaning of the song,
and an old man, suddenly appearing to him, explains it. The bird had
directed him to go to the tournament, but in his way thither he is to
meet with some heavy misfortune, which he is recommended to support
with constancy and patience, because, eventually, his sorrow is to be
turned to joy. The old man then disappears, and the nightingale flies
away. Decius returns home and acquaints his wife with the adventure.
She advises him to go to the tournament with herself and children;
and he had no sooner finished the preparations for his journey, than
his house and all his goods are consumed by fire. Not discouraged,
he embarks on board a vessel, and on his arrival in the country to
which he was going, the captain of the ship demands the price of his
passage. The knight confesses his present inability to comply with the
requisition, but promises on his return from the tournament to satisfy
him fully. The captain, who had in the meantime conceived an improper
passion for the lady, demands her as an hostage, refusing an offer of
the children. The poor knight, finding no remedy, affectionately takes
leave of his wife, and departs in great sorrow with his children. The
mariner in vain attempts the accomplishment of his purpose with the
lady, and after having accompanied her to some strange country, dies.
She is reduced to great misery, and obliged to beg her bread from door
to door. The story then returns to the knight, who, proceeding in his
journey to the emperor's palace, meets with a deep piece of water,
which it was necessary to cross. Not being able to carry over both the
children together, he leaves one of them on the ground. On his return
for his child, a lion springs from a wood, seizes the infant before he
could arrive at the spot, and carries it away. He endeavours in vain to
pursue the ravisher, and at length goes back to his other child. But
here again his ill fortune attends him; a bear had seized it, and was
in the act of carrying it to a neighbouring forest. He now gives way
to his grief, and exclaims bitterly against the nightingale and her
song, but resolves to proceed to the tournament. Here he has better
luck, and repeatedly carries away the prize. The emperor takes him
into great favour, and places him at the head of his armies. Walking
one day through a certain city, he finds a precious stone of three
colours. On carrying it to a lapidary, he is informed that he possesses
a great treasure; that the stone has the power of making the owner
completely happy, of enabling him to find what he might have lost, and
of converting his poverty into wealth, and his sorrows into joy. Soon
afterwards he has occasion to raise troops for the emperor's service,
and in the course of the war two young soldiers eminently distinguish
themselves by their valour. As they are sitting one night at supper,
they make inquiries of each other respecting their parents; and from
certain matters that are detailed, they are recognized by their mother,
who happens to be present. This discovery soon leads to that of their
father, who is known by his wife, from a particular mark in his
forehead. All the parties return to their own country, and end their
days happily.
The burning of the knight's house, and the manner in which he was
deprived of his children, have been borrowed from the romance of _Sir
Isumbras_.[126]
CHAP. XXXI.--A law was made at Rome that the sentinels of the city
should each night examine what was passing in all the houses, so that
no private murders might be committed, nor any thing done whereby the
city should be endangered. It happened that an old knight named Josias
had married a young and beautiful woman, who, by the sweetness of her
singing, attracted many persons to his house, several of whom came
for the purpose of making love to her. Among these were three young
men who were high in the emperor's favour. They respectively agreed
with the woman for a private assignation for which she was to receive
twenty marks. She discloses the matter to her husband, but not choosing
to give up the money, prevails on him to consent to the murder of the
gallants, and the robbing of their persons. This is accomplished,
and the bodies deposited in a cellar. The woman, mindful of the new
law that had been made, sends for one of the sentinels, who was her
brother, pretends that her husband had killed a man in a quarrel, and
prevails on him, for a reward, to dispose of the dead body. She then
delivers to him the first of the young men, whom he puts into a sack
and throws into the sea. On his return to the sister, she pretends
to go into the cellar to draw wine, and cries out for help. When the
sentinel comes to her, she tells him that the dead man is returned.
At this he of course expresses much surprise, but putting the second
body into his sack ties a stone round its neck and plunges it into the
sea. Returning once more, the woman, with additional arts, plays the
same part again. Again he is deceived, and taking away the third body,
carries it into a forest, makes a fire, and consumes it. During this
operation he has occasion to retire, and in the meantime a knight on
horseback, who was going to a tournament, passes by, and alights to
warm himself at the fire. On the other's return the knight is mistaken
for the dead man, and with many bitter words thrown into the fire,
horse and all. The sentinel goes back to his sister, and receives the
stipulated reward. A hue and cry had now been made after the young men
who were missing. The husband and wife engage in a quarrel, and the
murder is of course discovered.
This story has been immediately taken from _The seven wise masters_,
where it forms the _example_ of the sixth master. The ground-work is,
no doubt, oriental, and may be found, perhaps in its most ancient
form, in _The little hunchbacked taylor_ of _The Arabian nights_.
It was imported into Europe very early, and fell into the hands of
the lively and entertaining French minstrels, who have treated it in
various ways, as may be seen in Le Grand, _Fabliaux et contes_, tom.
iv., where it is related five times. The several imitations of it from
_The seven wise masters_ may be found in all the editions of _Prince
Erastus_, an Italian modification of the _Wise masters_. It forms the
substance of a well constructed and entertaining story of two friars,
John and Richard, who are said to have resided at Norwich in the reign
of Henry the Fifth. This is related in Heywood's _History of women_
under the title of _The faire ladie of Norwich_,[127] and has crept
into Blomefield's _History of Norfolk_ in a very extraordinary manner,
unaccompanied with any comment, but with the addition of the murderer's
name, who is unaccountably stated to be Sir Thomas Erpingham, a
well-known character.[128] In the Bodleian library there is an old
English poem entitled _A merry jest of Dane Hew munk of Leicestre, and
how he was foure times slain and once hanged_. Printed at London by J.
Allde, in 4to, without date. This is probably the same story, which
has certainly been borrowed from one of those related by the Norman
minstrels.[129]
CHAP. XXXII.--Folliculus, a knight, was fond of hunting and
tournaments. He had an only son, for whom three nurses were provided.
Next to this child he loved his falcon and his greyhound. It happened
one day that he was called to a tournament, whither his wife and
domestics went also, leaving the child in a cradle, the greyhound lying
by him, and the falcon on his perch. A serpent that inhabited a hole
near the castle, taking advantage of the profound silence that reigned,
crept from his habitation, and advanced towards the cradle to devour
the child. The falcon, perceiving the danger, fluttered with his wings
till he awoke the dog, who instantly attacked the invader, and after a
fierce conflict, in which he was sorely wounded, killed him. He then
lay down on the ground to lick and heal his wounds. When the nurses
returned they found the cradle overturned, the child thrown out, and
the ground covered with blood as well as the dog, who they immediately
concluded had killed the child. Terrified at the idea of meeting the
anger of the parents, they determined to escape, but in their flight
fell in with their mistress, to whom they were compelled to relate the
supposed murder of the child by the greyhound. The knight soon arrived
to hear the sad story, and, maddened with fury, rushed forward to the
spot. The poor wounded and faithful animal made an effort to rise, and
welcome his master with his accustomed fondness; but the enraged knight
received him on the point of his sword, and he fell lifeless to the
ground. On examination of the cradle the infant was found alive and
unhurt, and the dead serpent lying by him. The knight now perceived
what had happened, lamented bitterly over his faithful dog, and blamed
himself for having depended too hastily on the words of his wife.
Abandoning the profession of arms he broke his lance into three pieces,
and vowed a pilgrimage to the Holy Land, where he spent the rest of his
days in peace.
This tale is likewise borrowed by the compiler of the _Gesta_, from the
Seven wise masters, and of oriental construction. It is originally in
Pilpay's fables, being that of _The Santon and the broken pitcher_.[130]
There is a very extraordinary tradition in North Wales, of an incident
resembling that in our story having happened to prince Llewellyn about
the year 1205. He is said to have erected a tomb over his faithful dog,
still known in Carnarvonshire by the name of _Cilhart's grave_.[131]
This tradition is the subject of an elegant ballad by the honourable
Mr. Spencer, privately printed in a single sheet, under the title of
_Beth Gêlert, or The grave of the greyhound_. At Abergavenny priory
church there is said to be the figure of an armed knight with a dog at
his feet; and with this person, whoever he was, the story of _Cilhart_
has also been connected. But the dog, as well as other animals, is
frequently found at the feet of figures on old monuments. On the whole,
the subject appears not undeserving of the consideration of Welsh
antiquaries. It would be proper however, on any such occasion, to bear
in mind the numerous applications of circumstances altogether fabulous
to real persons; one example of which has occurred in the story from
the _Gesta_ that immediately precedes the present.
It may be thought worth adding that Virgil's _Original Gnat_ resembled
in its outline, as given by Donatus, the story in the _Gesta_. A
shepherd there falls asleep in a marshy spot of ground; a serpent
approaches, and is about to kill him. At this moment a gnat settles on
the shepherd's face, stings, and awakens him. He instinctively applies
his hand to the wounded part, and crushes the gnat. He soon perceives
that he had destroyed his benefactor, and, as the only recompense in
his power, erects a tomb to his memory.
CHAP. XXXVI.--A king having educated his three sons under a celebrated
philosopher, interrogates each of them as to what kind of a God he
should prefer; for it was the custom of the country that every man
should make his own choice on this occasion. The eldest chooses Jupiter
for his power, the second Jupiter also for his wisdom, the third
Mercury for his piety and mercy. The king recommends a Deity who should
unite all these properties, and who is compared to Jesus Christ, &c.
CHAP. XLVI.--The emperor Alexander made a law that no man should turn
a flat-fish on his plate, so as to eat the other side, under pain of
death; it being nevertheless permitted him to ask three things before
his execution. The son of an offender against this law saves his
father's life by his ingenuity, and contrives to marry the emperor's
daughter.
CHAP. XLVII.--A law was made that if any child should die, or even be
hurt by the negligence of the person to whose care it were committed,
such person should suffer death. A knight requested as a reward for
some services, that he might have the care of the king's son. This
was accordingly granted, and the child delivered over to nurses. In
their absence at a fair, a wolf entered the house and carried off the
infant towards a wood. A shepherd gathering fruit in an orchard saw the
affair and gave the alarm. The child was recovered, but not till it had
received a bite that left a mark in its forehead. When the king had
received back his son, he discovered the wound, and menaced the knight
with the punishment of the law. The knight asserted that he was not a
God, nor able to control the effect of nature. The king maintained that
the mark was not natural, but produced by accident; and the knight at
length confessed the fact, and threw himself on the king's mercy. He
was only enjoined to do exclusive homage to the king, and taken into
favour.
In the moral, God is the maker of the law. He delivers man's soul
to him pure and unspotted, to be nourished in deeds of virtue. The
ecclesiastics are the nurses, who instead of attending to their duty,
frequent the worldly fairs of wickedness and vanity. The wolf is the
devil, who seizes the soul and endeavours to precipitate it into hell;
but the good preacher sitting in the arbour of the holy scriptures,
gives the alarm, and delivers it from the clutches of the devil, &c.
CHAP. XLVIII.--This story has been given from the old English
translation in manuscript, at the end of the notes to the Merchant of
Venice. See p. 173.
CHAP. XLIX.--An emperor made a law that whoever violated a Virgin
should lose both his eyes. His own son is found guilty of the crime,
and the emperor, notwithstanding the entreaties of his nobles, enforces
punishment, but consents to divide the loss of sight with the aggressor.
CHAP. L.--This story is in the other _Gesta_, but differently related.
A king on some domestic difference with his wife, had been told by her
that one only of her three sons was legitimate; but which of them was
so she refused to discover. This gave him much uneasiness; and his
death soon afterwards approaching, he called his children together,
and declared in the presence of witnesses, that he left a ring which
had very singular properties to him that should be found to be his
lawful son. On his death a dispute arose between the youths, and it was
at length agreed to refer its decision to the king of Jerusalem. He
immediately ordered that the dead body of the father should be taken up
and tied to a tree: that each of the sons should shoot an arrow at it,
and that he who penetrated the deepest should have the ring. The eldest
shot first, and the arrow went far into the body; the second shot also,
and deeper than the other. The youngest son stood at a distance, and
wept bitterly; but the king said to him, "Young man, take your arrow
and shoot as your brothers have done." He answered, "Far be it from me
to commit so great a crime. I would not for the whole world disfigure
the body of my father." The king said, "Without doubt you are his son,
and the others only bastards; to you therefore I adjudge the ring."
This story has been entitled _The judgment of Solomon_, and is probably
of oriental origin.[132] It is often represented in that illumination
which in the ancient manuscripts of the French translation of the
Bible by Guiars des Moulins is prefixed to the proverbs of Solomon,
although the story itself does not occur in that bible, nor in the
original commentary by Petrus Comestor. It appears to have been a
great favourite in the middle ages, and was often related from the
pulpit.[133] The original _judgment of Solomon_ in the first book of
Kings had probably reached the continent of India at some very early
period, as it is imitated in the following story which occurs in one of
the books belonging to the kingdom of Pegu. Two women went out together
to bathe, each accompanied by her child. Whilst they were in the water,
the children being left on the bank of the river, an alligator seized
one of them and carried it away. A dispute arose between the women for
the possession of the remaining infant, and they at length agreed to
go before the judge. To determine the controversy, the judge ordered
one of the women to lay hold of the child's head, and the other of
its heels, and thus to pull for it. In the course of the struggle,
the child was hurt, and cried out; one of the women instantly quitted
her hold, and the other carried off the prize. The judge ordered her
to be brought back, and told her that as she had manifested so little
compassion for the sufferings of the child, she could not possibly be
its mother. The infant was restored to the other woman.[134] There
is another ingenious adjudication by the emperor Claudius, scarcely
inferior to Solomon's. A woman had refused to acknowledge her son: and,
the arguments on each side being doubtful, Claudius ordered that the
parties should be married. The mother was compelled to a confession.
See Sueton. in Claud. cap. 15.
CHAP. LI.--Archillaus, a Roman emperor of an elegant person and lofty
stature, was desirous to have a shirt made by the hands of a pure and
spotless virgin, in such a skilful and subtile manner as to prolong
the duration of his life. After the strictest search no such virgin
could be found; or at least, says the story, no female whose talents
were competent to the task. Some time afterwards the emperor walking
in his orchard, and meditating on the above matter, was accosted by a
certain person who told him that he believed there was one young woman
remaining in the country who was in all respects capable of performing
what he desired. A messenger was immediately despatched by the emperor
on this pleasing mission, with instructions to salute the lady most
honourably on his part, and to present her with a particular piece of
cloth three inches only in length and breadth, and to request that
she would convert it into the shirt required; with a promise that if
she succeeded, she should become his wife. The messenger faithfully
executed his instructions; but when the damsel saw the cloth, she
told him that it was impossible with such a quantity to make a shirt
that would fit the emperor in the manner required, but undertook
notwithstanding to make one according to the best of her ability. When
the emperor heard the answer he sent a pure and handsome vessel to the
lady, in which she manufactured a shirt that gave him satisfaction.
He performed his promise and married her. This very silly and obscure
story is allegorized into the miraculous conception of the Virgin Mary.
CHAP. LIV.--Is also in the other _Gesta_, but here related with much
greater variety of circumstance, and in all respects improved. The
story has been very properly termed by Mr. Warton, a beautiful one; but
he has not been equally accurate in his statement that "Occleve has
literally followed the book before us (i. e. the original _Gesta_,)
and has even translated into English prose the moralisation annexed."
Occleve's immediate model was our English _Gesta_; nor is it improbable
that he might even be the translator of it; the moralisation also is
entirely different.[135] Mr. Warton has omitted to notice that this
story corresponds with that of Fortunatus; which, unless itself of
oriental origin, might have been taken from it.[136]
CHAP. LVI.--An emperor who had only a daughter, hunting one day in a
forest, lost his way, and was obliged to seek shelter in the cottage
of a forester. He was kindly and hospitably received, and after taking
some refreshment, retired to rest without disclosing to the man who
he was. As he lay in bed he thought he heard a voice that said to
him, "take, take, take;" presently after, another that cried, "give,
give, give;" and then a third that still more emphatically pronounced
these words, "fly, fly, fly; for this night a child is born who shall
succeed to your empire." When he arose in the morning, he inquired of
the forester if any child had been born during the night, who informed
him that his wife had just been delivered of a son. The emperor then
discovered himself, examined a mark on the child's forehead, and told
the man that he should send for it the next day, as he designed to
have it bred up at his court. On his return home he directed some
confidential servants to take away the child from the forester's
cottage, to put it to death, and to bring back its heart, that he might
be satisfied that his orders were obeyed. A contention arose among the
domestics about destroying the infant,[137] and one more humane than
the rest, proposed the killing of a pig in its stead, and delivering
the heart to the king. This was at length acceded to by the others.
The child was wrapped up in some linen, and placed in a hollow tree
for present shelter. When the emperor received the supposed heart
of the child he cast it into the fire, and mocked the idle dreams
that had tormented him. Shortly after, as an earl was hunting in the
above forest, the dogs discovered the child, which was taken home and
committed to the care of the earl's wife, whom he prevailed on to
acknowledge it as their own, and to give out that she had just been
delivered of it. When thirteen years had elapsed from this time, the
emperor proclaimed a great feast, to which, among others, the earl
was invited, who carried the boy with him as a squire to attend his
person. When the youth came into the presence of the emperor, the
latter instantly perceived the mark on his forehead, and in great anger
interrogated the earl so strictly that he confessed the manner in which
he had discovered the child. But the emperor's indignation was still
more excited against the servants whom he had employed. He sent for
them and commanded them on their oaths to speak the truth. The emperor,
now satisfied of the identity of the youth, informed the earl that he
should retain him at his court, and that he himself was at liberty to
return home. It happened that at this time the empress was in a foreign
kingdom with her daughter. The emperor therefore sent the youth to
her with a letter in which he commanded her to cause him to be put to
death in the most cruel and ignominious manner. In the prosecution
of his journey, the poor young man came to the castle of a knight
whom he humbly entreated to afford him lodging; and being hospitably
received, laid himself down to sleep, placing near him a box in which
he had deposited the letter. The knight accidentally seeing the box,
became anxious to know its contents; and having opened it immediately
perceived the emperor's signet. This he very carefully put aside,
and, reading the letter, was moved with compassion for the youth. He
immediately resolved to save his life, and substituted another letter,
in which the king was made to direct the empress to marry her daughter
to the young man with great solemnity, and to detain him with her until
he should himself arrive. This letter was delivered to the empress,
and the supposed directions of the emperor complied with. The youth by
his deportment engaged the affections of all. Some time afterwards the
emperor resolved to visit the empress, and on his arrival she went out
to meet him accompanied by her children. As soon as the emperor saw the
young man, he again recognized him; and, beholding his wife with looks
of fury and indignation, he demanded of her why she had omitted to obey
his commands. She maintained that they had been obeyed by the marriage
of the youth to their daughter, who then stood before him, and, as she
perceived, with child. The anger of the emperor was now mitigated, and
he exclaimed, "The will of the Lord be done, for I see it is in vain
to oppose it." He saluted his children with great affection, and they
succeeded happily to his throne.
CHAP. LXII.--Cornelius seduces an emperor's daughter, murders her
infant, and abandons her. The emperor expostulates to no purpose. He
then proclaims a tournament in which the wicked knight is overcome. The
princess is brought back to her father.
CHAP. LXVIII.--An emperor in his old age foolishly married a young
wife, who carried on an intrigue with a certain knight. He resolved to
make a journey to the Holy Land, and, setting out immediately, left his
kingdom in the custody of the empress and his nobles. The captain of
the ship in which he embarked, having received a large bribe for the
purpose, threw the unfortunate emperor into the sea, and returned home
with the news of his death, to the great joy of the wicked empress. The
old monarch, who had been a good swimmer from his youth, fortunately
reached an island which he found inhabited only by wild beasts. The
third day after his arrival, he saw in a wood a young lion fighting
with a strong and full-grown leopard; and compassionating the lion,
who was nearly overpowered by his adversary, he drew his sword and
killed the leopard. The grateful lion remained with him, and every day
brought him as food some animal that he had hunted, which the emperor
dressed by means of a fire that he contrived to make. After some time
had elapsed, as he was one day walking on the shore, he perceived a
ship, and making signals of distress, was taken on board. The faithful
lion plunged after him into the sea, and swam by the side of the
vessel, till some of the sailors, perceiving that he was exhausted with
fatigue and about to sink, lifted him into the ship. On the emperor's
arrival in his own kingdom he handsomely rewarded the captain, and
proceeded to his palace accompanied by the lion. When he arrived
there, he heard the sound of musical instruments, and perceived other
demonstrations of joy. On inquiry he learned that the empress had been
just married, and that his subjects believed he had perished in his
voyage to the Holy Land. He then applied to one of the domestics of the
palace to report him to the new emperor as a minstrel newly arrived,
and to request that he might be permitted to entertain him with the
tricks of his lion. He was ordered to appear before the new sovereign;
whom the lion no sooner beheld than he instantly tore him in pieces,
and immediately afterwards the empress. The nobles, astonished at what
they saw, were now preparing to make their escape, when the emperor
discovered himself, and desired them to lay aside their fear, as the
vengeance of God had been accomplished. After relating his adventures,
he reassumed his government.
CHAP. LXX.--Josias, a warlike king, was married to the king of Apulia's
daughter, who had vowed she would unite herself to that man only who
had obtained the victory in all his battles. Walking one day in his
garden he saw it written in a star, that he should undertake as many
wars for the love of Christ as he had for that of his lady, to whom
he communicated the vision. She was extremely afflicted at the news,
and threatened to destroy herself and the infant in her womb, but was
comforted by her husband with a promise of returning as soon as he
had conquered all the enemies of Christ. He then departed in company
with Tirius, a valiant knight to whom he was attached, and they shortly
arrived in Ethiopia. The king desired his friend to remain there, and
subdue the country, whilst he should accomplish other conquests. Tirius
requested of the king that he would send him occasional tidings of
himself, and directions how to act in his absence. This was promised;
and the knight received at the same time a ring from his master, as
a pledge whereby to remember him. The king took his departure, and
went to the Holy Land. In his absence a certain tyrant named Acharon,
made war against Tirius; and finding it impossible to subdue him,
accused him of treason to the king of Ethiopia, who deprived him of
all his possessions, so that he became very poor and was obliged to
beg his bread. Josias soon afterwards returned from the Holy Land to
Ethiopia, in the character of a pilgrim, and by chance met Tirius,
whom he immediately recognized, but remained himself unknown. He put
many questions to his friend, who related to him his misfortunes, and
added, that he was in daily expectation of the speedy return of his
own sovereign, whose token he still preserved, and whom he described
as the better half of his soul. Josias told him that he had travelled
far on account of the love he also bore to the same person; that he
was exceedingly fatigued, and requested of him to sit down that he
might repose his head on his bosom. Tirius answered, that he would do
this and much more for him. Whilst Josias was asleep, a white weasel
issued from his mouth, and proceeding towards a mountain, walked round
it. It then returned, and again entered the mouth of the king. Tirius
wondered much at this, and when the king awoke was interrogated as to
what he had seen. Josias, on being informed, said, "Let us go to the
mountain, perhaps we may behold more wonders." On their coming to a
hollow place in the mountain, they found a dragon lying dead, with a
large quantity of gold in his belly, and a sharp sword, on which was
inscribed, "By my power, and with the king's assistance, the knight
Tirius shall once more possess his lands." Josias then discovered
himself to his friend, who fell on the ground and kissed his feet. The
king gave all the gold to Tirius, but reserved the sword for himself,
and commanded the knight not to disclose who he was until they should
have accomplished their purpose. Josias then proceeded in his pilgrim's
habit to the king's palace, where he found the tyrant Acharon, and
sat himself down before the largest table. The king inquired of him
whence he came and what tidings he brought. The pilgrim answered, "I
come from the Holy Land, where many persons recommend your soul to
Christ for having despoiled a worthy knight of his lands on the lying
accusation of a tyrant." Acharon then exclaimed, "Why hast thou uttered
these things? I would thou wert able to defend thyself, that I might
fight with thee." The pilgrim requested leave to accept the challenge,
which the king granted, and promised that if he obtained the victory he
should not only receive all the lost lands of the knight, but be made
the second man in his kingdom. The day of battle was appointed, and
the combatants respectively maintained the contest with considerable
valour. At length Acharon, exhausted with fatigue, was about to yield,
when he said to the pilgrim, "You are doubtless a generous adversary,
I die with thirst; suffer me to go once to the river and drink." The
pilgrim acquiesced on the like conditions for himself. When Acharon had
quenched his thirst, his strength returned; he renewed the combat with
vigour, and Josias, in his turn, sorely pressed, requested permission
to drink. His treacherous enemy not only refused him, but compelled him
to fight his way to the water, into which he plunged and assuaged his
thirst. Having recovered his strength, the battle was continued till
the evening; and when Acharon was once more about to yield the victory,
the king parted the combatants, and appointed the next day to renew the
battle. At night the king sent for the pilgrim, commended his valour,
and desired his daughter to take him under her care, and provide him
with all necessaries, that he might be able to maintain the combat
on the following day. The damsel then led him to a chamber, bathed
him,[138] prepared his supper, and afterwards placed him in a bed with
four feet, so that it could be easily moved from place to place. In the
mean time Acharon called together his four sons, all of them robust
young men; told them of the danger his life would be in if he should
renew the contest with the pilgrim on the ensuing day, and prevailed
with them to seize him in his chamber whilst he slept, and throw him
into the sea. It happened that a fisherman from his vessel perceived by
the light of the moon the floating bed, and to his great astonishment
a man lying upon it. Josias also awoke, and wondered much at seeing
the stars over his head. The fisherman cried out to the king, and the
king to him for assistance, telling him he was the person who had the
day before been engaged in combat with the tyrant. The fisherman took
him on board his vessel, and afterwards to his dwelling, where he was
again put to bed. On the morrow Acharon armed himself and went to the
palace, exclaiming aloud, "Bring forth the traitor pilgrim, that I may
this day present his head to our lord the king." When the princess was
ordered by her father to awake the pilgrim, she was astonished to find
him gone, together with the bed; and when the king heard the strange
news he was much grieved, for he loved the pilgrim, and detested the
tyrant. The fisherman at length appeared and related what had happened.
Josias returned to the palace, armed himself, once more attacked his
adversary, who was by this time quite dejected, and cutting off his
head, presented it to the king. He was then desired to name the reward
that he wished for, when he requested that the lands which Tirius
had acquired by his valour might be again restored to him. Josias
afterwards took leave of his friend, returned to his own kingdom, and
ended his days in peace.[139]
CHAP. LXXI.--An emperor committed the education of his only son to one
of his knights, who had obtained a victory at a tournament. The child
was placed in a chamber, round which the seven liberal sciences were
depicted, so that when he lay awake in bed he could be gathering all
kinds of knowledge. Near the bed was a fountain, in which the child
could bathe, and beyond the fountain a window to admit the sun. It
happened that a bear, finding the door open, entered the chamber and
washed himself in the fountain, so that the water was much infected
with his filth. The knight and his wife soon afterwards drank of the
fountain, and became leprous. An eagle also flew in at the window,
and carried off the king's son. At length a skilful physician was
consulted, who cured the parties of their leprosy, and instructed them
how to recover the child.
CHAP. LXXII.--A king hears the song of a nightingale. He is desirous of
knowing what it means; and, applying to a wise knight, is informed that
it directs him to seek three things, viz. joy without sorrow, abundance
without want, and light without darkness. The king sets out in pursuit
of them, and arrives in a kingdom where the sovereign was just dead,
leaving his throne to his sister. She becomes enamoured of the royal
traveller and offers him marriage. Here the story is discontinued, but
the narrator refers to chap. iv. as containing the same matter.
CHAP. LXXVII.--In the castle of an emperor was a fountain, the water
of which had the property of curing drunkenness. To this vice, which
the emperor particularly detested, one of his knights, named Ydronicus,
was much addicted; but whenever he perceived the consequences of his
intemperance, he repaired to the fountain, and drinking a hearty
draught, recovered himself in such a manner that the emperor, who was
extremely attached to him, had never yet discovered his failing. It
happened that the emperor had found a bird in his forest which sang so
sweetly, that, being fond of melody, he repaired daily to the spot to
hear it. The particular attention which the emperor bestowed on these
two favourites had excited the envy of his courtiers, among whom one
wiser than the rest at length undertook their ruin. He first sealed
up the fountain, so that when Ydronicus next became intoxicated he
was deprived of his usual remedy; and the emperor, perceiving his
condition, was filled with indignation, and instantly decreed his
banishment. The insidious courtier then repaired to the forest; and
watching attentively the motions of the bird, perceived that her
mate often came to visit her, but that in his absence she committed
infidelities with strange birds, and then bathing herself in an
adjacent well, deceived her mate on his return. He therefore closed up
the well, and the unfaithful bird being soon detected by her mate, he
tore her to pieces. The latter part of this story seems borrowed from
the last chapter of the original _Gesta_.
CHAP. LXXVIII.--A law was made at Rome, that no man should marry for
beauty, but for riches only; and that no woman should be united to a
poor man, unless he should by some means acquire wealth equal to her
own. A certain poor knight solicited the hand of a rich lady, but
she reminded him of the law, and desired him to use the best means
of complying with it, in order to effect their union. He departed in
great sorrow, and after much inquiry, was informed of a rich duke
who had been blind from the day of his birth. Him he resolved to
murder, and obtain his wealth; but found that he was protected in the
day-time by several armed domestics, and at night by the vigilance of a
faithful dog. He contrived however to kill the dog with an arrow, and
immediately afterwards the master, with whose money he returned to the
lady. He informed her that he had accomplished his purpose; and being
interrogated how this had been done in so short a space of time, he
related all that had happened. The lady desired, before the marriage
should take place, that he would go to the spot where the duke was
buried, lay himself on his tomb, listen to what he might hear, and then
report it to her. The knight armed himself, and went accordingly. In
the middle of the night he heard a voice saying, "O duke, that liest
here, what asketh thou that I can do for thee?" The answer was, "O
Jesus, thou upright judge, all that I require is vengeance for my blood
unjustly spilt." The voice rejoined, "Thirty years from this time thy
wish shall be fulfilled." The knight, extremely terrified, returned
with the news to the lady. She reflected that thirty years were a long
period, and resolved on the marriage. During the whole of the above
time the parties remained in perfect happiness.
When the thirty years were nearly elapsed, the knight built a very
strong castle, and over one of the gates, in a conspicuous place,
caused the following verses to be written:
"In my distress, religion's aid I sought;
But my distress reliev'd, I held it nought.
The wolf was sick, a lamb he seem'd to be;
But health restor'd, the wolf again we see."
Interrogated as to the meaning of these enigmatical lines, the knight
at once explained them by relating his own story, and added that in
eight days time the thirty years would expire. He invited all his
friends to a feast at that period; and when the day was arrived, the
guests placed at table, and the minstrels attuning their instruments of
music, a beautiful bird flew in at the window and began to sing with
uncommon sweetness. The knight listened attentively, and said, "I fear
this bird prognosticates misfortune." He then took his bow, and shot
an arrow into it in the presence of all the company. Instantly the
castle divided in two parts, and, with the knight, his wife, and all
who were in it, was precipitated to the lowest depth of the infernal
regions. The story adds, that on the spot where the castle stood, there
is now a spacious lake, on which no substance whatever floats, but is
immediately plunged to the bottom.
CHAP. LXXIX.--The emperor Miremius had an only son, on whose birth the
wise men being consulted as to his future destiny, declared that he
would not live except he were brought up for seven years under ground,
where the light of the sun could never come. This was accordingly done;
and at the expiration of the time the young prince was taken out of
his subterraneous confinement, and became the admiration of all men
for his virtues and good disposition. In due time he was married to
a daughter of the king of Hungary. At each corner of the nuptial bed
was placed a little dog to watch, and near it a burning lamp, which
by the emperor's special command was to be lighted only by the hands
of a pure virgin. The prince coming one night into the chamber found
the lamp extinguished, and made a solemn vow that he would never more
enter the bed until the lamp were rekindled; but after many inquiries
no virgin could be found for the purpose. The prince determined to make
search himself, and taking affectionate leave of his wife, proceeded
on his expedition. He presently overtook a lion, whose foot had been
wounded by a thorn, which he extracted, and the animal followed him.
Arriving at the castle of a king who had a virgin daughter, the prince
fell in love with and demanded her in marriage. The king consented,
on condition that he would destroy a horrible dragon, who had nearly
devoured all the sheep and oxen in the country, and for whose future
supply it would soon be necessary to draw lots in the king's own
family. The prince agreed to the proposal, and waited till the period
arrived when the lot had fallen on the king's daughter. He then became
exceedingly terrified, but ventured to attack the dragon, who was on
the point of destroying him, when the lion came to his assistance, and
speedily killed his adversary. The virgin was delivered to the prince,
who took her home to his wife. The lamp was rekindled, to the great joy
of the parties, and the virgin treated with all possible kindness and
attention. The dog and the lamp in this story are introduced in chap.
i. of the other _Gesta_, but the tales have nothing else in common.
CHAP. LXXX.--There was a law at Rome, that every woman at her
purification should write some words on the church door, for the
edification of the people, and then return home with due solemnity.
The empress on this occasion writes, "I am a king governing the age;
all the world is mine." Some time afterwards a noble lady attended by
several musicians comes to be purified. She inscribes on the door,
"I am an infant at the breast whose milk is wine," and returns home
to prepare a feast. The empress is much offended, and sends for her.
She procures two serpents, and compels the lady to suckle them, &c.
The substance of this story is incorporated with the old ballad of "A
warning piece to England, or the fall of queen Eleanor."[140]
CHAP. LXXXI.--A city is infested with dragons and other venomous
animals that destroy the inhabitants. A philosopher advises the emperor
to hang a live lion on a cross, and thus terrify the other creatures
from molesting the city.
CHAP. LXXXII.--A law was made, that if any one could escape from
prison and fly to the king's palace he should receive protection. An
imprisoned knight is visited by a bird, who leaves a precious stone, by
the touch of which his fetters are loosed and he escapes, &c.
CHAP. LXXXIV.--A dispute arose between the three sons of an emperor
respecting the succession. The nobles decided that they should run
a race on horseback, and that he whose horse neighed should inherit
the throne. A cunning servant of one of the princes contrived that
his master should win, by placing in the horse's way a mare that he
remembered. This is the well-known story of Darius.
CHAP. XC.--Of a law that whoever violated a virgin without making
atonement to her father within a certain time should suffer death.
CHAP. XCII.--Of a madman who tore his flesh every day, and was poisoned
by his father.
CHAP. XCIII.--An empress falls in love with a young knight; and
becoming extremely sick, the physicians inform her husband that there
is no mode of cure, but the bathing her with the knight's blood.
CHAP. XCIV.--A poor man is promoted by an emperor to great honours, but
soon becomes proud, and rebels against his sovereign. He is banished
with his accomplices. These invite their successors to a poisoned
banquet. The emperor is recommended by his son to apply to a damsel who
possesses a well with miraculous powers. By means of its water the dead
men are restored to life. The prince is rewarded with a crown of gold.
CHAP. XCVII.--Jonathas, having contrived to keep fire and water in his
house, at a time when his fellow citizens had been plundered of them
by a tyrant named Eulopius, is rewarded by having the education of the
emperor of Rome's son committed to him. He builds a chamber for the
young prince, and causes various images and inscriptions to be placed
in it, which keep him attentive to his charge. He is finally promoted
to great honour.
CHAP. XCVIII.--The emperor Martin had brought up his nephew Fulgentius
as his page and cup-bearer; but his steward soon became envious of
the young man, and resolved to effect his ruin. For this purpose he
prevailed on the emperor to believe that Fulgentius had ungratefully
circulated many ill reports of him, and particularly that he was
leprous to such a degree that it was unsafe to approach his person or
administer his drink to him. He then went to the young man, related to
him that the emperor had made great complaint of the foulness of his
breath, and advised him, when he performed the duties of his office,
to take special care to turn his head aside. The innocent Fulgentius
pursued this insidious counsel, and, the emperor's anger being excited,
he struck his nephew violently on the breast, and drove him from his
presence. He then consulted with the steward how he should deprive
the youth of life; and it was settled that some men who lived near at
hand, and kept a furnace to burn stones for cement, should immediately
be directed to throw into their fire, without the least ceremony, that
person who should come early on the morrow, and desire them to fulfil
the emperor's commands. Measures were then taken that Fulgentius should
be the victim; but in his progress to the lime-kiln he was induced by
the sound of a church bell to deviate from his road, and attend the
celebration of the mass. During the service he fell asleep, and when
it was finished no efforts of the priest could for a very considerable
time awake him. In the meanwhile the steward, solicitous to hear of the
young man's death, repaired to the spot, and inquiring if the emperor's
commands had been executed, was seized by the workmen, who, in spite
of all his entreaties and remonstrances, threw him into the furnace.
Fulgentius himself soon afterwards arrived, delivered his message, and
was surprised to hear of the steward's death, and the miraculous manner
in which he himself had escaped. He then returned thanks to God for
his preservation, and went back to the palace. The emperor in great
anger demanded why he had not executed his commands. Fulgentius related
what had happened, and this leading to a mutual explanation, he was
restored to his uncle's favour, and ended his days honourably. This
story may have come from the East.[141] It is likewise extremely well
related in the _Contes devots_ or _Miracles of the Virgin_,[142] and in
other places.[143]
CHAP. XCIX.--A marriage was proposed between the son of Anselmus,
emperor of Rome, and the daughter of the king of Apulia. The young
lady in her voyage was shipwrecked and swallowed by a whale. In this
situation she contrived to make a fire and to wound the animal with
a knife, so that he was driven towards the shore, and slain by an
earl named Pirius, who delivered the princess and took her under his
protection. On relating her story she was conveyed to the emperor. In
order to prove whether she was worthy to receive the hand of his son,
he placed before her three vessels. The first was of gold, and filled
with dead men's bones; on it was this inscription; _who chuses me shall
find what he deserves_. The second was of silver filled with earth,
and thus inscribed; _who chuses me shall find what nature covets_.
The third vessel was of lead, but filled with precious stones. It had
this inscription; _who chuses me shall find what God hath placed_. The
emperor then commanded her to chuse one of the vessels, informing her
that if she made choice of that which should profit herself and others,
she would obtain his son; if of what should profit neither herself
nor others, she would lose him. The princess after praying to God for
assistance, preferred the leaden vessel. The emperor informed her that
she had chosen as he wished, and immediately united her with his son.
This is obviously the story which had supplied the caskets in the
_Merchant of Venice_. See the note at the end of that play, p. 169.
CHAP. C.--A king hunting in a forest loses his attendants, and is left
alone. He meets a lame lion, who stretches out his foot to him, as if
soliciting assistance. The king, perceiving a thorn, extracts it, and
binds up the wound with certain herbs. Finding no way out of the wood,
he is obliged to take shelter in the lion's den, where he is supplied
with food by the grateful animal. After remaining here some time a bear
comes to the den. The rest of the story will not admit of being told.
What has been stated is evidently grafted on the well-known tale of
Androcles.
CHAP. CI.--A certain emperor made a pilgrimage to the Holy Land,
leaving the care of the kingdom in his absence to his wife, a wise
and beautiful woman. The emperor's brother not only oppressed and
persecuted many of his subjects, but had even the temerity to make
unlawful love to the empress. On consulting with her counsellors, they
advised her to cast him into prison, which was accordingly done. Here
he lay until rumours were spread of the emperor's intended return;
and fearing that if his unworthy conduct were reported to his brother
he should be sentenced to die, he entreated mercy of the empress, and
made such solemn promises of future good behaviour that she consented
to release him. On the emperor's arrival, his wife and brother went
out to meet him; but in passing through a forest, a stag springing up,
diverted the attention of the domestics who accompanied them, and they
were left entirely by themselves. The wicked brother now renewed his
solicitations to the empress; but receiving from her the most positive
refusal of compliance, and menaced with the vengeance of her husband,
he inhumanly tied her by the hair to a tree, leaving her palfrey by
the side of her. He then rejoined the attendants, and pretended that a
multitude of armed men had attacked him and carried off the empress.
Shortly afterwards the unfortunate lady was discovered by an earl who
was hunting in the forest, taken home to his castle, and by her own
consent appointed to superintend the care of his infant daughter.
Here a certain seneschal fell in love with her, but his addresses
being rejected, he determined on speedy revenge. For this purpose he
contrived to get into the castle at night, and proceeding to the earl's
chamber, found the empress in bed and asleep with the child. After
murdering the infant, he placed the bloody knife in the empress's hand.
During the night the earl's wife awoke, and perceiving by the light
of the lamp what had happened, accused the empress of the murder in
the most bitter terms, and entreated her husband to inflict immediate
punishment. The earl, however, thought fit to spare the empress's life,
and contented himself with dismissing her from his castle. The poor
lady mounted her palfrey, and had not proceeded far, when she met a
robber going to execution. Her compassion led her to ransom the man by
means of a sum of money; and, depending on his gratitude, she sent him
before her to the next city to provide lodging and other necessaries.
All the inhabitants of the place admired her beauty, and many persons
in vain solicited her love. It happened that a ship arrived in the
harbour of this city laden with merchandize, and the empress despatched
her servant to the captain, requesting him to attend her for the
purpose of negociating for the articles she might want. The captain
came, received her orders, and promised to send the goods; but he was
also captivated with the beauty of the empress, and desired her servant
to follow him. He then offered the man a large reward to assist him in
getting his mistress on board the vessel, that he might thus have her
in his power, and carry her away. The fellow consented; and, telling
his lady that the captain would only permit his merchandize to be
examined on board the ship, prevailed on her to accompany him thither,
and she immediately became a prisoner. The vessel sailed, the commander
earnestly pressed his unlawful solicitations, and threatened death in
case of refusal. The empress requested a short respite, and addressed
her prayers to heaven for assistance. A tempest instantly arose, the
ship sunk to the bottom, and all perished except the empress and the
captain. Each of them had clung to a piece of timber, but they were
cast on different shores; and the empress, without her knowledge, on
that of her own country. Here she soon found shelter in a convent,
and applying herself to the study of healing the sick, soon became so
skilful that her fame spread throughout the land. About this time the
emperor's wicked brother had become a loathsome leper; the earl whose
daughter had been killed was blind and paralytic; the treacherous
servant became lame and gouty, and otherwise diseased; and the master
of the ship had lost his reason. When the emperor heard of the lady's
skill in curing diseases, he accompanied his brother to the convent,
where the others had also come to be healed. The empress, preserving
her disguise, informed them that she had no power of relieving them
unless they previously, and in the presence of each other, made
a fall and solemn confession of their sins, and repented of them
sincerely. This was accordingly done; and when the innocence of the
empress was clearly manifested, to the great and mutual surprise of
all the parties, she first performed her promise to the sick, and then
discovered herself to the emperor. He conducted her to the palace with
much joy, and they finished their days happily.
Occleve has related this story in verse from the present work,[144] and
it is also to be found in the _Patrañas_ of Timoneda.[145] The outline
has been borrowed from one of the _Contes devots_, or miracles of the
Virgin Mary.[146] The incident of the bloody knife occurs likewise in
Chaucer's _Man of law's tale_, and in a story related by Gower.[147]
The author of this _Gesta_ has been nowhere recorded; but it may be
necessary on this occasion to lay before the reader part of a note
prefixed to the Merchant of Venice, in which Dr. Farmer has corrected
one mistake, but inadvertently fallen into another. He says, "In a
MS. of _Lidgate_, I find a _tale of two marchants of Egipt_ and of
_Baldad, ex Gestis Romanorum_. _Leland_ therefore could not be the
original author _as Bishop Tanner suspected_. He lived a century after
Lidgate." The inference is perfectly just; but the suspicion was not
Bishop Tanner's, who has only retailed that of another writer, Richard
Robinson, and he in reality seems to have regarded Leland merely as
a _translator_, as will presently appear.[148] Dr. Farmer had been
deceived by the mode of printing Robinson's words, which have much
the appearance of belonging to the bishop. There would have been more
probability in a conjecture that either Walleis or Bromyard might have
been the fabricator of the _English Gesta_. The moralizations to Ovid's
metamorphoses, which the former of these persons composed, adapt him
extremely well to the purpose; but though the date of his existence is,
on the whole, uncertain, he seems to have lived about half a century
too early, viz. towards the beginning of the fourteenth century.[149]
From what has already been said of Bromyard, it will appear that he
was no less qualified than the other for the authorship of the work in
question.
TRANSLATION.--As this work was not circulated in foreign countries,
no translation of it appears to have been made in any other language
than the English; and in that, not of the whole. There is a very fine
manuscript in the Harleian collection, written in the reign of Henry
the Sixth, containing seventy stories only.[150] In this manuscript
are several pieces by Lydgate, and some tales from Gower's _Confessio
amantis_. As the _English Gesta_ appears to have been extremely well
known to both these writers, and also to Occleve, it is by no means
improbable that the above translation was made by one or the other
of them. Whether it has ever been _printed_ is another question. Mr.
Warton has twice mentioned an addition without date by Wynkyn de
Worde;[151] and Dr. Farmer has also, in a note prefixed to the Merchant
of Venice, referred to the same edition. It had escaped the researches
of the industrious Herbert, who has only mentioned it after Mr.
Warton,[152] and has in vain been sought for on the present occasion.
The fortunate possessor of it may have the means of ascertaining
whether it be the same as the above manuscript, by referring to the
stories that have been given in the present volume at the end of the
remarks on the plays of King Lear, and the Merchant of Venice.
Among the manuscripts in the Royal Library, now in the British Museum,
there is one entitled "_Eupolemia; Archippus and Panoplia_; that ys
to say. His good warrfare agenst Satan and his malignant spirites;
his good soldyer agenst the flesh, the lustes and concupiscences
therof: And his complet harness agenst the worlde and the wickednes
and wretchednes therof. Conteyning a true catalogue of all his pore
paynefull laboures, translated, collected, allso printed and published
and præsented in English, by authority. Shewyng allso what good
Benifactors hee hathe had, for meyntenance of his sayde pore study and
peine, and what hynderances hee hathe had othirwyse from the yeare of
oure Savyour Christe 1576, untill this yeare 1602, for 26 yeares. Newly
written oute to the glory of God, honour of the Queenes most excellent
Majesty, comfort of the faythfull and convertion or subvertion of
their enemyes. By _R. Robinson_, London." This strange work has a
great number of scriptural quotations in Latin and English, in the
several margins. The dedication is here given for its singularity.
"Sacrosanctæ beatæque Trinitati, simulque serenissimæ ac pientiss.
regis majestati sacrum. Pro relevio professionis Christianæ ac remedio
oppressionis inhumanæ. Cum impressione presentis codicilli." Then
follows a dedication to Queen Elizabeth, made up of scraps from the
sacred writings, and from Tibullus, Ovid and Juvenal; next, another
to King James, entirely scriptural and in Latin verse. Afterwards
we have a list of the author's works, which he divides into three
columns, the first containing their titles, the second the allowance
and printing, and the third patrons and benevolences. Among these is
the following: "1577. A record of ancyent historyes intituled in Latin
_Gesta Romanorum_, translated (auctore ut supponitur Johane Leylando
antiquario) by mee perused corrected and bettered. Perused further by
the wardens of the stationers and printed first and last by Thomas
Easte in Aldersgate streete 6 tymes to this yeare 1601,[153] cont. 21
shetes. Dedicated for 5 impressions to the R. honorable Lady Margaret
Countess of Lyneux, who gave me for her booke 13_s._ 4_d._ besydes sale
of 25 boks. Dedicated last to the wardens of the Lether sellers,[154]
who with others have given mee xx_s._ Dedicated last of all anno 1602
to D. Watson B. of Chichester and B. Almoner to the Queenes Majesty
who, (not so thankfull to mee as I deserved) gave me but ijs. for my
booke dedicatory."[155] If Leland made any translation of the _Gesta_,
it must have been that printed by Wynkyn de Worde, which Robinson
perhaps alludes to, when he says that he had _perused bettered and
corrected_ the work; for it is very clear that the older translation in
the Harleian manuscript was not known to him.
MANUSCRIPTS.--Of these many are still remaining. They are, in general,
written during the reigns of the Fifth and Sixth Henries, though one
or two appear to be as old as that of Richard the Second. As the work
was a great favourite, many of the stories are found in some of those
miscellaneous volumes, which, in all probability, constituted the
private libraries of the monks. If these were carefully examined, there
is no doubt that many might be added to the following, necessarily
imperfect, list:--
IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.
1. Harl. 206. 37. 47. contains 26 stories.
2. 219. 15 stories.
3. 406. 37 stories.
4. 2270. 102 stories.
5. 3132. 81 stories.
6. 5259. 101 stories.
7. 5369. 43 stories.
8. Sloane, 4029. 95 stories.
9. Bibl. Reg. 8 F. vi.
AT OXFORD.
10. Bodl. 1986. or B. 3. 10.
11. 2760. or MS. sup. O. i. Art. 17.
12. 3826. but query?
13. Coll. Lincoln. lib. theolog. 60.
14. Magdal. 13.
15. 60.
16. Joh. Bapt. C. 31.
17. G. 48.
MISCELLANEOUS.
18. Worcester Cathedral. 80.
19. Hereford Cathedral. 74.
20. MSS. Rob. Burscough, 82, in Catal. MSS. Angliæ.
21. MSS. Symonds D'Ewes, 150. Catal. MSS. Angliæ.
22. Trin. Coll. Dublin, G. 326.
23. In the author's possession. 101 stories.
24. Ibid. 50 stories.
25. Ibid. 34 stories.
PRINTED EDITIONS.--It has been already stated that the Latin copy of
this work has never been printed. The following are all translations
into English, No. 1 may be that ascribed to Leland; the rest are by
Robinson.
1. No date, printed by Wynkyn de Worde....
2. 1577. T. East. From Robinson's Eupolemia, as above.
3. 1595. T. East. 12mo. In the author's possession. Contains 43
stories.
4. No date. R. Bishop. 12mo.
5. No date. Stansby. 12mo.
6. 1648. R. Bishop. 12mo. 44 stories.
7. 1663. J. B. for A. Crook. 12mo.
8. 1668. A. J. for A. Crook. 12mo. 44 stories.
9. 1672. E. Crowch, for A. Crook. 12mo.
10. 1689. for T. Bassett, &c. 12mo. 44 stories.
11. 1703. for R. Chiswell. 12mo. The same as that of 1668.
FOOTNOTES:
[96] p. j. For the benefit of those who may have an opportunity of
consulting the original, a mistake in Mr. Warton's reference to the
_Speculum historiale_ is corrected, which should be lib. IV. c. viii.
[97] A fine collection of them, in verse, was in the library of the
Duke de la Valliere. One volume is in MS., Harl. 4401, two others in
the author's possession, as well as a third in prose, beautifully
painted in camaieu gris. Some of those in prose have been printed.
See a memoir by Racine in the _Acad. des inscript._ tom. xviii. p.
360. Specimens of them may be seen in the fifth volume of that very
entertaining work, the _Fabliaux et contes_ of M. Le Grand.
[98] There is a great deal of confusion respecting this man, some
making him an English Jacobin of the fourteenth century. He has been
mistaken for other persons of the same name, and his works are by no
means well ascertained, being often confounded with those of Nicolas
Trivet and others. In his Ovid he has been indebted to a preceding work
by Alexander Neckam. Another allegorical work on Ovid's metamorphoses
was written about 1370, by Giovanni Buonsignore di Castello, and a
tropological explanation of them was published by Pierre Lavigne,
about 1500. There is also a manuscript in the Royal library at Paris,
entitled _Ovidii metamorphosis moralisata, per Johannem Bourgauldum_.
See Labbe _nova bibl. MSS._, p. 321.
[99] It was printed at Paris, 1494, in 12mo, by Geringard Rembolt.
[100] MS. Harl. 5396. This manuscript contains another similar
collection; and these are the more worthy of being noticed, as we have
very few of the kind printed in England.
[101] These were printed by Wynkyn de Worde, and at Paris, without date.
[102] "Hic mihi stultam aliquam et indoctam fabulam, ex Speculo opinor
historiali, aut Gestis Romanorum, in medium adferunt, et eandem
interpretantur allegoricè, tropologicè, et anagogicè."--_Stultitiæ
laus._ Basil. 1780, 8vo, p. 261.
[103] Amœnit. eccles., i. 807.
[104] Observ. on Italy, ii. 108.
[105] This MS. is in the author's possession, as well as another of
the same work with considerable variations. A third is in the library
of the Royal Society, No. 292, and there ascribed to Odo de Ceriton.
Concerning this person, who was tutor in theology to the celebrated
John of Salisbury, see Bale, _Script. Brytann. catal._ pars i. p.
221, edit. 1559. Tanner, _Bibl. Britannico-Hibernic._ p. 560. A great
deal of confusion, and yet not more than is often found on similar
occasions, has been made concerning this work and its author. It
has been confounded with a moral treatise on natural history called
_Bestiarium_, from which it is totally different. If the reader be
desirous of perplexing himself with further inquiries concerning this
subject, he may consult Fabricius, _Bibl. med. ætat._, i. 93, & v. 466,
edit. 1734. Cave, _Script. eccles._ p. 572. Pitts, p. 245. There is
another similar but anonymous work among the Harl. MSS., No. 219, that
has some fables not in the others, and wants many in both.
[106] See pp. 157, 334.
[107] That is, "Though the wolf come to the priest, and be set to his
book to learn psalms, yet is one of his eyes ever turned towards the
wood." A similar fable is among those composed by Marie de France in
the twelfth century. A curate having tamed a wolf, undertook to teach
him to read. "Now," says he to the scholar, "repeat after me, A." The
wolf articulated A. "Good," says the curate; "now say B." The wolf
cried "bee, bee;" but thinking he heard the bleating of the sheep,
away he ran to the fold. This apologue is probably from the East. See
the story of _Bohetzad and his ten vizirs_ in the continuation of the
Arabian nights' entertainments. The other seems to have been borrowed
from the celebrated and interesting romance of Reynard the Fox,
evidently composed long before the twelfth century.
[108] Printed at Nuremberg, 1485. Paris, 1500. Basil, sine anno, in
folio.
[109] Michael Neander, apud Schelhorn. _Amœnit. ecclesiast._ i. 798.
[110] Diss. on the Gesta Romanorum, p. lxxxvi.
[111] The _Repertorium_ or _Reductorium morale_ is an extraordinary
performance for the time in which it was composed. It contains a system
of natural history that may be consulted with advantage, even by modern
students; but it is obscured by unlimited credulity and the grossest
absurdities, which may nevertheless have their use in exhibiting the
folly of learning when unaccompanied by judgment. The good monk is even
occasionally witty, but without design. In speaking of the noise which
frogs make, he compares them to the lawyers, "Tales sunt causidici
et advocati quod vero isti sunt _clamosi_, quia clamando litigant ad
invicem."
[112] Canterbury tales, iv. 331.
[113] Vol. ii. p. 14.
[114] Diss. on the Gesta Romanorum, p. xc.
[115] Ubi supr. p. lxxxviii.
[116] Biblioth. Belgic. i. 353.
[117] Biblioth. MSS. tom. i. p. 17. No. 172.
[118] Recherches sur l'origine de l'imprimerie. Bruxelles, an vii. 8vo,
p. 246.
[119] Recherches, &c. p. 205.
[120] An obsolete word that signifies a flower-pot.
[121] Cant. tales, IV. 331.
[122] MS. Harl. 5396.
[123] There may perhaps be one exception in the Vatican MS. mentioned
before in p. 531.
[124] MS. Harl. 2270, chap. 53.
[125] MS. Harl. 5259, chap. 28; but in most of the MSS. they are
omitted.
[126] See Mr. Ellis's _Metrical romances_, vol. iii. pp. 155, 157.
[127] P. 253, folio edit.
[128] Vol. iii. p. 647. Mr. Gough speaks of it as separately printed.
_Brit. Topogr._ ii. 27. It is also copied in Burton's _Unparallelled
varieties_, p. 159, edit. 1699, 12mo, and _The gentleman's magazine_,
vol. 1. p. 310. It has been twice versified: 1. anonymously, under the
title of _A hue and cry after the priest, or the convent, a tale_,
1749, 8vo; and 2. by Mr. Jodrell under that of _The knight and friars_,
1785, 4to.
[129] The curious reader may also consult the following authorities,
where he will find the above story in some shape or other. Fauchet,
_Anciens poetes Francois_, chap. lxxxix. Barbasan, _Fabliaux et
contes_, ii. 125. The first novel of Masuccio. Straparole, _Piacevole
notte_, N. v. fab. 3. _Patrañas_ di Timoneda, patr. 3. _Comptes du
monde adventureux_, 1595, 18mo, compte xxiii. Guellette _Contes
Tartares_, in the story of _Les 3 bossus de Damas. Histoire des
larrons_, tom. i. pp. 2, 239. _Biblioth. amus. et instructive_, tom.
ii. p. 14. _Bibl._ de Du Verdier et La croix du Maine, par Juvigny,
tom. iv. p. 376. _Pasquil's Jests_, or _Mother Bunch's merriments_, p.
51; and Marlow's _Jew of Malta_, in Reed's _Old plays_, vol. viii. p.
366.
[130] This fable is only to be found in Mons. de Cardonne's
translation, book V.; Galland's and the English edition having no
more than the first 4 books. It occurs also in that exceedingly rare
and curious work, the _Directorium vitæ humanæ_, printed in Germany,
without date, place, or name of printer, at the end of the fifteenth
century; and in its imitation, the _Moral. philosophia_ of Doni, part
ii. p. 68, in the English translation of which, printed by Denham,
1570, 4to, it has been omitted. It is also in Starkij _Specimen
sapientiæ Indorum_, 1697, 12mo, p. 339. The two last works are in fact
the fables of Pilpay under different forms, or rather the _Heetopades_
of Veeshnu Sarma, the Hindoo fabulist, who appears to be the parent of
all.
The same story occurs likewise in the following works. Le Grand,
_Fabliaux et contes_, tom. iii. p. 168. Sansovino, _Cento novelle_,
giorn. 9, nov. 1. _Les facetieuses journées_, p. 287. Lestrange's
_Æsop_, vol. i. fab. 464, 8vo edition. _Asiatic miscellany_, 12mo,
1787, p. 73, from the _Ayar Danish_ of Abulfazel, which seems to have
been extracted from, or at least much resembles, the oriental work that
forms the seventh chapter in the _Directorium humanæ vitæ_.
[131] Jones's _Relics of the Welsh bards_, p. 75, where there is an old
Welsh song, or _Englyn_ on the subject.
[132] See Le Grand, _Fabliaux et contes_, ii. 426, who quotes the
_Tartarian tales_ for a similar story.
[133] See the exempla at the end of the _Sermones discipuli_, ex. ix.
de. B. The _Sermones fratris Gulielmi Cartusiensis_, 1494, 12mo, sig.
V. 7 b. An ancient collection of Latin sermons in the Harl. coll. No.
5396. See likewise _A christen exhortation unto customable swearers_,
at the end of _The christen state of matrimonye_, 1543, 12mo, p. 28,
the author of which cites the _Preceptorium Johannis Beets_, a German
preacher about 1450; and Burton's _Unparellelled varieties_, p. 21.
[134] From _Memorandums in India by John Marshall_, beginning Sep.
11th, 1678, preserved among the Harleian MSS. in the British Museum,
No. 4523. The above person appears to have been a very curious and
intelligent traveller, and many of his observations on the manners
of the Indians would be exceedingly well worth publishing. Marshall
was educated at Cambridge, had a great desire to travel, and by the
interest of Lord Craven, went out 1667, in the India ship the Unicorn,
in the Company's service.
[135] The _whole_ of Occleve's poem may be seen in MS. Reg. 17 D. vi.
with the moralisation, omitted by Browne, who has otherwise mutilated
the poem.
[136] One reason for suspecting it might have originated in the East
is that it forms the subject of one of the old French _fabliaux_,
many of which came in with the Crusades. See Sinner, _Catal. des
MSS. de Berne_, iii. 389. It has been likewise imitated by La Harpe
in his _Pied de nez_. Some traces of resemblance may be found in the
stories of _Ahmed, and the enchanted horse_ in the Arabian nights
entertainments.
[137] This incident has been introduced into the popular old ballad of
_The children in the wood_.
[138] This was a common practice in the times of chivalry, and many
examples of it may be found in ancient romances. The ladies not only
assisted in bathing the knights, after the fatigues of battle, but
administered proper medicines to heal their wounds. Similar instances
occur in the writings of Homer. In the Odyssey, Polycaste, one of the
daughters of Nestor, bathes Telemachus; and it appears that Helen
herself had performed the like office for Ulysses.
[139] The incident of the weasel in this story is manifestly borrowed
from a similar relation in the chronicle of Helinandus, a monk of the
twelfth century, from which it is inserted in Wierus _De præstigiis
dæmonum_, lib. i. cap. 14, as in allusion of the devil.
[140] Coll. of old ballads, vol. i. No. xiii.
[141] See Scott's _Tales from the Arabic and Persian_, p. 53, where
there is an excellent story of similar construction.
[142] Le Grand, _Fabliaux_, v. 74.
[143] _Cento novelle antiche._ nov. 68. _Patrañas_ de Timoneda, pat.
17. _Dialogus creaturarum moralizatus_, cap. 120. Minsheu's address to
the reader, before his _Spanish grammar_, 1623, folio.
[144] MS. Reg. 17 D. vi.
[145] Patr. 21.
[146] See Vincent de Beauvais, _Specul. historiale_, lib. viii. cap.
90, 91. Herolt, _Sermones discipuli_, par. iii. exempl. i. de mirac. b.
Virginis, and Le Grand, _Fabliaux_, v. 164.
[147] _Confessio Amantis_, fo. 32.
[148] _Biblioth. Britannico-Hibern._ p. 476.
[149] Dufresnoy, in his catalogue of Roman historians, has this strange
article, "_Thomas Walheis_ gesta Romanorum, cum applicationibus
moralisatis ac mysticis. Paris, 1499, in 4." _Methode pour etudier
l'histoire_, xi. 78, edit. 1772, 12mo. It remains to account for this
most extraordinary assertion. It is certain that the book itself, which
is the _original Gesta_, affords no evidence in support of it.
[150] No. 7333. Out of the seventy stories there are twenty-four of
the additional. The whole deserve to be printed, partly as a curious
monument of the English language.
[151] Vol. ii. p. 18, and vol. iii. p. lxxxiii.
[152] _Typogr. antiq._ p. 233.
[153] This seems a mistake for 1602.
[154] He had already stated himself a member of their company. Of this
man little more is known than that he lived by his pen. He appears to
have assisted in a translation from _Meteranus_ of an account of the
civil wars in the Netherlands, published in 1602, by Thomas Churchyard,
who in the dedication says that he was "a man more debased by many then
he merits of any, so good parts are there in the man."
[155] MS. Reg. 18, A. lxvi. In 1576, Robinson appears to have had a
licence to print, _xpmas recreacons of histories and moralizacons
aplied for our solace and consolacons_. See Herbert's typogr. antiq. p.
1023. This might have been his then intended title for the translation
of _Gesta Romanorum_.
DISSERTATION III.
ON THE ANCIENT ENGLISH MORRIS DANCE.
It is the observation of an elegant writer, that disquisitions
concerning the manners and conduct of our species in early times,
or indeed at any time, are always curious at least, and amusing. An
investigation of the subject before us, if completely and successfully
performed, would serve to fill up a chasm in the history of our popular
antiquities: but this must not be expected. The culpable indifference
of historical writers to private manners, and more especially to the
recreations and amusements of the common people, has occasioned the
difficulties that always attend inquiries of this nature, many of
which are involved in impenetrable darkness; whilst others can only
receive illustration from detached and scattered facts, accompanied by
judicious inferences and opinions.
It will be necessary, in the first place, to attempt some definition
of what the Morris dance originally was: this may be best accomplished
by the aid of etymology, which will generally be found a faithful
guide, when managed with discretion. It seems, however, on the present
occasion to have been too slightly treated in a work of considerable
labour and ingenuity, the author of which has expressed an opinion that
the Morris dance originated from that part of the ancient ceremony of
the feast of fools, in which certain persons habited like buffoons,
with bells, &c., joined in a dance. He then proceeds as follows: "The
word _Morris_ applied to the dance is usually derived from _Morisco_,
which in the Spanish language signifies a _Moor_, as if the dance
had been taken from the Moors: but I cannot help considering this as
a mistake; for it appears to me that the _Morisco_ or Moor dance is
exceedingly different from the morris-dance formerly practised in this
country; it being performed with the castanets or rattles, at the ends
of the fingers, and not with bells attached to various parts of the
dress.[156] I shall not pretend to investigate the derivation of the
word _Morris_; though probably it might be found at home: it seems,
however, to have been applied to the dance in modern times, and, I
trust, long after the festival to which it originally belonged was done
away and had nearly sunk into oblivion."[157]
[Illustration: AN ANCIENT MORRIS DANCE.
_Published by T. Tegg Sept.ʳ 1839._]
Now if the term in question had been _exclusively_ used in England,
there would have been some weight in these observations; but when we
find it adopted by most of the European nations to express a dance, the
origin of which both English and foreign glossaries uniformly ascribe
to the Moors, we must pause at least before we consent to abandon
the only clue that presents itself to assist us. The genuine Moorish
or Morisco dance was, no doubt, very different from the European
_morris_; but there is scarcely an instance in which a fashion or
amusement that has been borrowed from a distant region has not in its
progress through other countries undergone such alterations as have
much obscured its origin. This remark may be exemplified in chess and
cards, which, beyond all doubt, were invented in India or China, and
spread, by means of the Arabians, progressively throughout Spain,
Italy, France, England, and the north of Europe. But the above writer
has cited a passage from the play of _Variety_, 1649, in which the
_Spanish Morisco_ is mentioned; and this not only shows the legitimacy
of the term _morris_, but that the real and uncorrupted Moorish dance
was to be found in Spain, where it still continues to delight both
natives and strangers under the name of the _fandango_. It may be
likewise remarked, that the exquisitely pretty music to this lively
dance is undoubtedly Moorish.[158] The Spanish morris was also danced
at puppet-shows by a person habited like a Moor, with castagnets;
and Junius [Du Jon] has informed us that the morris dancers usually
blackened their faces with soot, that they might the better pass for
Moors.[159]
Some have sought the origin of the morris in the _Pyrrhica saltatio_
of the ancients, a military dance which seems to have been invented
by the Greeks, and was afterwards adopted by the Salii or priests of
Mars. This continued to be practised for many ages, till it became
corrupted by figures and gesticulations foreign to its original
purpose. Such a dance was that well known in France and Italy by
the name of the dance of fools or _Matachins_, who were habited in
short jackets with gilt-paper helmets, long streamers tied to their
shoulders, and bells to their legs. They carried in their hands a sword
and buckler, with which they made a clashing noise, and performed
various quick and sprightly evolutions.[160] A species of this sword
dance by some means or other got introduced into England, where it has
generally and unaccountably been exhibited by women, whose dexterous
feats of tumbling and dancing with swords at fairs, and in the minor
theatres, are still remembered by many persons.[161] A very learned
writer, speaking of the _Pyrrhica saltatio_, informs us, that "The
common people in many parts of England still practise what they call a
_Morisco dance_, in a wild manner, and as it were in armour, at proper
intervals striking upon each others staves, &c."[162] This might be
found on inquiry to differ from the common morris, and to be a mixture
of the old Pyrrhic and Moorish dances. Such a one may be alluded to in
_The second part of King Henry the Sixth_, Act III. Scene 1,
"... I have seen him
Caper upright like a _wild Morisco_,
Shaking the bloody darts, as he his bells."
Before we proceed to an examination of the more immediate object of
this essay, the English morris, it may be as well to lay before the
reader a short description of the _uncorrupted morris dance_, as
practised in France about the beginning of the sixteenth century. It
has been preserved by Tabourot, the oldest and by far the most curious
writer of any other on the art of dancing.[163] He relates, that in
his youthful days it was the custom in good societies for a boy to
come into the hall, when supper was finished, with his face blackened,
his forehead bound with white or yellow taffeta, and bells tied to
his legs. He then proceeded to dance the _Morisco_, the whole length
of the hall, backwards and forwards to the great amusement of the
company.[164] He hints that the bells might have been borrowed from
the _crotali_ of the ancients in the Pyrrhic dance. He then describes
the more modern morris dance, which was performed by striking the
ground with the forepart of the feet; but, as this was found to be too
fatiguing, the motion was afterwards confined to the heel, the toes
being kept firm, by which means the dancer contrived to rattle his
bells with more effect. He adds that this mode of dancing fell into
disuse, as it was found to bring on gouty complaints. This is the air
to which the last-mentioned morris was performed.
[Music]
It has been supposed that the morris dance was first brought into
England in the time of Edward the Third, when John of Gaunt returned
from Spain;[165] but it is much more probable that we had it from our
Gallic neighbours, or even from the Flemings. Few if any vestiges of
it can be traced beyond the reign of Henry the Seventh; about which
time, and particularly in that of Henry the Eighth, the churchwardens'
accounts in several parishes afford materials that throw much light on
the subject, and show that the morris dance made a very considerable
figure in the parochial festivals. A late valuable writer has remarked
that in some places the May-games of Robin Hood were nothing more than
a morris dance, in which _Robin Hood_, _Little John_, _Maid Marian_,
and _Friar Tuck_, were the principal personages, the others being a
clown or fool, the hobby-horse, the taborer, and the dancers, who
were more or less numerous;[166] but this seems to be a mistake. The
May-games of Robin Hood appear to have been principally instituted
for the encouragement of archery, and were generally accompanied by
morris dancers, who, nevertheless, formed but a subordinate part of
the ceremony. It is by no means clear that at any time Robin Hood
and his companions were _constituent_ characters in the morris.
There were, besides, May-games of a more simple nature, being merely
dances round a May-pole, by the lads and lasses of the village, and
the undoubted remains of the Roman Floralia.[167] We find also that
other festivals and ceremonies had their morris, as Holy-Thursday; the
Whitsun-ales; the bride-ales, or weddings,[168] and a sort of play
or pageant called the lord of misrule. Sheriffs too had their morris
dance.[169] The reader may be amused with the following account of
the lord of misrule, as it contains a description of an attendant
morris. It has been fortunately handed down to us by a puritanical
writer of the reign of Elizabeth, whose loud ravings against the
fashionable excesses of his countrymen have contributed to furnish
posterity with the completest information respecting a considerable
portion of the manners and customs of the above period that is any
where to be found. These are his words: "First, all the wilde heads
of the parish, flocking togither, chuse them a graund captaine (of
mischiefe) whome they innoble with the title of _my Lord of misrule_,
and him they crowne with great solemnitie, and adopt for their king.
This king annoynted, chooseth foorth twenty, fourtie, threescore or
a hundred lustie guttes like to himselfe to waite upon his lordly
majesty, and to guarde his noble person. Then every one of these his
men, he investeth with his liveries of greene, yellow, or some other
light wanton color. And as though that were not (bawdy) gawdy enough,
I should say, they bedecke themselves with scarffes, ribbons and laces
hanged all over with golde ringes, precious stones, and other jewels:
this done, they tie about either legge twentie or fortie belles, with
rich handkerchiefe in their handes, and sometimes laide a crosse over
their shoulders and neckes, borrowed for the most part of their pretie
_Mopsies_ and loving _Bessies_, for bussing them in the darke. Thus all
things set in order, then have they their hobby-horses, their dragons
and other antiques, together with their baudie _pipers_, and thundering
_drummers_, to strike up the _Devils Daunce_ withall: then martch
this heathen company towards the church and churchyarde, their pypers
pypyng, their drummers thundering, their stumpes dancing, their bells
iyngling, their handkercheefes fluttering about their heades like madde
men, their hobbie horses, and other monsters skirmishing amongst the
throng: and in this sorte they go to the church (though the minister be
at prayer or preaching) dauncing and swinging their handkerchiefes over
their heads in the church like Devils incarnate, with such a confused
noise, that no man can heare his owne voyce. Then the foolish people
they looke, they stare, they laugh, they fleere, and mount upon formes
and pewes, to see these goodly pageants solemnized in this sort. Then
after this about the church they goe againe and againe, and so foorth
into the church yard, where they have commonly their sommer haules,
their bowers, arbours, and banquetting houses set up, wherein they
feast, banquet, and daunce all that day, and (peradventure) all that
night too. And thus these terrestrial _furies_ spend the Sabboth day.
Another sort of fantasticall fooles bring to these helhoundes (the
Lord of misrule and his complices) some bread, some good ale, some new
cheese, some olde cheese, some custardes, some cracknels, some cakes,
some flaunes, some tartes, some creame, some meat, some one thing,
some another; but if they knewe that as often as they bringe anye to
the maintenance of these execrable pastimes, they offer sacrifice to
the Devill and Sathanas, they would repent and withdrawe their handes,
which God graunt they may."[170] Another declaimer of the like kind,
speaking of May games and morris dances, thus holds forth: "The abuses
which are committed in your may-games are infinite. The first whereof
is this, that you doe use to attyre in womans apparrell whom yon doe
most commenly call _maymarrions_, whereby you infringe that straight
commaundement whiche is given in Deut. xxii. 5, that men must not put
on womens apparrell for feare of enormities. Nay I myself have seene
in a may game a troupe, the greater part wherof hath been men, and yet
have they been attyred so like unto women, that theyr faces being hidde
(as they were indeede) a man coulde not discerne them from women. The
second abuse, which of all other is the greatest, is this, that it hath
been toulde that your morice dauncers have daunced naked in nettes:
what greater entisement unto naughtines could have been devised? The
third abuse is, that you (because you will loose no tyme) doe use
commonly to runne into woodes in the night time, amongst maidens, to
fet bowes, in so muche as I have hearde of tenne maidens which went
to fet May, and nine of them came home with childe."[171] He seems
likewise to allude to a character of the _Devil_ in the May games, of
which no mention is elsewhere made.
In the course of time these several recreations were blended together
so as to become almost indistinguishable. It is, however, very certain
that the May games of Robin Hood, accompanied with the morris, were at
first a distinct ceremony from the simple morris, which when Warner
lived was celebrated about the season of Easter, and before the May
games: he thus speaks of them:
"At Paske begun our Morrise, and ere Penticost our May."[172]
It is probable that when the practice of archery declined, the May
games of _Robin Hood_ were discontinued, and that the morris dance was
transferred to the celebration of Whitsuntide, either as connected with
the Whitsun ales, or as a separate amusement. In the latter instance
it appears to have retained one or two of the characters in the May
pageants; but no uniformity was or possibly could be observed, as the
arrangement would vary in different places according to the humour or
convenience of the parties.
The painted glass window belonging to George Tollett, Esq., at Betley,
in Staffordshire, exhibits, in all probability, the most curious as
well as the oldest representation of an English May game and morris
dance, that is any where to be found.[173] The learned possessor of
this curiosity, to whom the readers of Shakspeare are much indebted not
only for this, but for many other valuable communications, has supposed
that the window might have been painted in the youthful days of Henry
the Eighth, when he delighted in May games; but it must be observed
that the dresses and costume of some of the figures are certainly of
an older period, and may, without much hazard, be pronounced to belong
to the reign of Edward the Fourth. Among other proofs that could be
adduced, it will be sufficient to compare it with the annexed print
of another morris dance. This is a copy from an exceedingly scarce
engraving on copper by Israel Von Mecheln, or Meckenen, so named
from the place of his nativity, a German village on the confines of
Flanders, in which latter country this artist appears chiefly to have
resided; and therefore in most of his prints we may observe the Flemish
costume of his time. From the pointed shoes that we see in one of the
figures it must have been executed between the year 1460, and 1470;
about which latter period the broadtoed shoes came into fashion in
France and Flanders. It seems to have been intended as a pattern for
goldsmiths' work, probably a cup or tankard.
The artist, in a fancy representation of foliage, has introduced
several figures belonging to a Flemish May game morris, consisting
of the lady of the May, the fool, the piper, two morris dancers with
bells and streamers, and four other dancing characters, for which
appropriate names will not easily be found. The similitude between some
of the figures in this print and others in Mr. Tollett's window, is
very striking, and shows that the period of execution, as to both, was
nearly the same. One objection to this opinion will, no doubt, present
itself to the skilful spectator, and that is the shape of the letters
which form the inscription A MERY MAY on the pane of glass No. 8. These
are comparatively modern, and cannot be carried further back than the
time of Elizabeth; but this will be accounted for hereafter.
The above curious _painting_ has furnished the means of ascertaining
some of the personages of which the May games and morris consisted at
the time of its execution. To trace their original forms and numbers,
or the progressive changes they underwent, with any degree of accuracy,
would be perhaps impossible; because not only the materials for such an
attempt are extremely few, but a variety of circumstances contributed
to constitute their differences even during the same period. Wherever
we turn, nothing but irregularity presents itself. Sometimes we have a
lady of the May, _simply_, with a friar Tuck; and in later times a Maid
Marian remained without even a Robin Hood or a friar. But consistency
is not to be looked for on these occasions, when we find, as has been
remarked, that the May games, those of Robin Hood, the ales, and the
morris dances, were blended together as convenience or caprice happened
to dictate.[174]
The several characters that seem in more ancient times to have composed
the May game and morris were the following: Robin Hood, Little John,
Friar Tuck, Maid Marian the queen or lady of the May, the fool, the
piper, and several morris dancers habited, as it appears, in various
modes. Afterwards a hobby horse and a dragon were added. To avoid the
confusion that might otherwise ensue, it will be best to speak of each
character by itself.
I. ROBIN HOOD. The history of this celebrated outlaw has been so ably
and ingeniously treated by Mr. Ritson, and every fact that relates to
him so minutely developed, that it will be long before any novelty
shall be discovered of sufficient importance to deserve attention.
It appears that in the May game he sometimes carried a painted
standard.[175]
II. LITTLE JOHN. The faithful companion of Robin Hood, but of whom
little that is not fabulous has been handed down to us. He is first
mentioned, together with Robin Hood, by Fordun the Scotish historian,
who wrote in the fourteenth century, and who speaks of the celebration
of the story of these persons in the _theatrical performances_ of his
time, and of the minstrels' songs relating to them, which he says the
common people preferred to all _other romances_.[176]
III. FRIAR TUCK. There is no very ancient mention of this person, whose
history is very uncertain. Drayton has thus recorded him, among other
companions of Robin Hood:
"Of _Tuck the merry friar_ which many a sermon made
In praise of Robin Hood, his outlaws and their trade."[177]
He is known to have formed one of the characters in the May games
during the reign of Henry the Eighth, and had been probably introduced
into them at a much earlier period. From the occurrence of this name on
other occasions, there is good reason for supposing that it was a sort
of generic appellation for any friar, and that it originated from the
dress of the order, which was _tucked_ or folded at the waist by means
of a cord or girdle. Thus Chaucer, in his prologue to the _Canterbury
tales_, says of the Reve;
"_Tucked_ he was, as is a frere aboute:"
And he describes one of the friars in the Sompnour's tale:
"With scrippe and tipped staff, _ytucked_ hie."
This friar maintained his situation in the morris under the reign of
Elizabeth, being thus mentioned in Warner's _Albion's England_:
"Tho Robin Hood, liell John, _frier Tucke_ and Marian deftly play:"
but is not heard of afterwards. In Ben Jonson's _Masque of gipsies_,
the clown takes notice of his omission in the dance.[178]
IV. MAID MARIAN. None of the materials that constitute the more
authentic history of Robin Hood, prove the existence of such a
character in the shape of his mistress. There is a pretty French
pastoral drama of the eleventh or twelfth century, entitled _Le jeu du
berger et de la bergere_, in which the principal characters are _Robin_
and _Marion_, a shepherd and shepherdess. Mr. Warton thought that our
English Marian might be illustrated from this composition; but Mr.
Ritson is unwilling to assent to this opinion, on the ground that the
French Robin and Marion "are not the Robin and Marian of Sherwood." Yet
Mr. Warton probably meant no more than that the name of Marian had been
suggested from the above drama, which was a great favourite among the
common people in France, and performed much about the season at which
the May games were celebrated in England. The great intercourse between
the countries might have been the means of importing this name amidst
an infinite variety of other matters; and there is indeed no other mode
of accounting for the introduction of a name which never occurs in the
page of English history.[179] We have seen that the story of Robin Hood
was, at a very early period, of a dramatic cast; and it was perfectly
natural that a principal character should be transferred from one
drama to another. It might be thought likewise that the English Robin
deserved his Marian as well as the other. The circumstance of the
French Marian being acted by a boy contributes to support the above
opinion; the part of the English character having been personated,
though not always, in like manner. Little, if any, stress can be laid
on the authority of an old play cited by Mr. Steevens to prove that
"_Maid Marian_ was originally a name assumed by _Matilda_, the daughter
of Robert Lord Fitzwater, while Robin Hood remained in a state of
outlawry."[180] This is rather to be considered as a dramatic fiction,
designed to explain a character the origin of which had been long
forgotten.
Maid Marian not only officiated as the paramour of Robin Hood in the
May games, but as the _queen or lady of the May_, who seems to have
been introduced long before the games of Robin Hood. In the isle of
Man they not only elected a queen of May, but likewise a queen of
winter.[181] Gatherings for the May lady, as anciently for Robin Hood,
were lately kept up at Cambridge, but in a corrupted form, the real
occasion of this ceremony being, in all probability, quite unknown to
the gatherers. There can be no doubt that the queen of the May is the
legitimate representative of the Goddess Flora in the Roman festival.
The introduction of Robin Hood into the celebration of May probably
suggested the addition of a _king_ or _lord of the May_. In the year
1306 Robert Bruce caused himself to be crowned at Scone, and a second
time by the hands of his mistress, the adulterous wife of the earl of
Bowhan, who changed his name to David. It is reported that he said
to his own wife on this occasion, "Yesterday we were but earl and
countess, to day we are king and queen;" to which she replied, "True,
you are now a _summer king_, but you may not chance to be a winter
one." Matthew of Westminster has recorded this fact, and Holinshed,
who copies him, makes the lady say, that "she feared they should prove
but as _a summer king and queen, such as in country townes the yong
folks chose for sport to dance about may-poles_." In 1557 there was a
May game in Fenchurch-street, with a _Lord and Lady of the May_, and
a morris dance.[182] Both these characters are introduced in a morris
in Fletcher's play of _The two noble kinsmen_, Act. III.; and, in the
_Knight of the burning pestle_, a grocer's apprentice personates a lord
of the May dressed out in "scarves, feathers, and rings." He is made to
deliver a speech from the conduit to the populace, of which this is a
part:
"London, to thee I do present the merry month of May,
Let each true subject be content to hear me what I say:
For from the top of conduit-head, as plainly may appear,
I will both tell my name to you, and wherefore I came here.
My name is _Rafe_, by due descent, though not ignoble I,
Yet far inferiour to the flock of gracious grocery.
And by the common counsel of my fellows in the Strand,
With gilded staff, and crossed skarfe, the _May lord_ here I stand."
A lord and lady are still preserved in some places where the
Whitsun-ales continue to be celebrated, and perhaps in other morrises
during the season of May.
To return to Maid Marian.--She was usually dressed according to the
fashion of the time, as we may collect from the figures of her in
Mr. Tollett's window, and Israel's engraving. In both the kirtle and
petticoat are alike; and the pendent veil is supported by the hand. The
English figure holds a flower, and has a fancy coronet as _queen of the
May_. The other has apparently an apple in her hand, and her steeple
head-dress is what was actually worn in the middle of the fifteenth
century by queens and ladies of high rank. Barnaby Rich, who wrote in
the reigns of Elizabeth and James I., inveighing against the foppery
of men's apparel, exclaims, "And from whence commeth this wearing, and
this embroidering of long locks, this curiosity that is used amongst
men, in frizeling and curling of their haire, this gentlewoman-like
starcht bands, so be-edged and belaced, _fitter for Maid Marion in a
Moris dance_, then for him that hath either that spirit or courage that
shold be in a gentleman?"[183]
It appears that the Lady of the May was sometimes carried in procession
on men's shoulders; for Stephen Batman, speaking of the Pope and
his ceremonies, states that he is carried on the backs of four
deacons, "after the maner of carying whytepot queenes in Western May
games."[184] Her usual gait was nice and affected.[185] Thus in the
description of the family visit to the royal guest, in the old ballad
of _The miller of Mansfield_:
"And so they jetted down towards the king's hall:
The merry old miller, with his hands on his side;
His wife, like Maid Marian did _mince_ at that tide."
But although the May-lady was originally a character of some delicacy
and importance, she appears to have afterwards declined in both
respects. In the time of Elizabeth she was visually represented by some
smooth-faced and effeminate youth.[186] Falstaff tells the hostess,
that "for _womanhood_ Maid Marian may be the Deputy's wife of the ward
to her;" meaning perhaps that she was as masculine in her appearance
as the country clown who personated Maid Marian: and in Fletcher's
_Monsieur Thomas_, Dorothea desires her brother to conduct himself with
more gentleness towards his mistress, unless he would choose to marry
_Malkyn the May Lady_; another allusion to the degraded state of Maid
Marian, who is here assimilated to a vulgar drudge or scullion both in
name and condition. But during the whole of her existence mirth and
gaiety were her constant companions. The translator of _The hospitall
of incurable fooles_, 1600, 4to, speaking of Acco, the old woman who
became mad on beholding her ugliness in a mirror, says that "one while
shee could be _as merrie as Maid Marrian_." Nor was this character,
even in later times, _uniformly_ vulgar. Every one will call to mind
Nicholas Breton's pretty sonnet of _Phyllida and Corydon_, where the
shepherdess,
"... with garlands gay
Was made the Lady of the Maye."
V. THE FOOL. This character in the morris was the same, in point of
dress, as the domestic buffoon of his time. In Mr. Tollett's window
he has additional bells tied to his arms and ancles as a morris
dancer, but is, in other respects, the English fool of the fifteenth
century. Yet the habit of this eccentric person was not the same in all
countries, nor even uniform in the same country. Accordingly, he is
very differently accoutred in the Flemish print. He has a cap or hood
with asses' ears, and a row of bells for the crest; in his left hand
he carries a bauble, and over his right arm hangs a cloth or napkin.
He wears behind what seems intended for a purse or wallet, with which
the fool in the old German prints is generally exhibited. It is certain
that there was only one fool in the morris; and therefore Mr. Steevens
and Mr. Tollett have erred in supposing the figure No. 1, in the
window, to be the _Bavian fool with the bib_. The former gentleman had
apparently misconceived the following passage in Fletcher's _Two noble
kinsmen_,
"... and next the fool,
The _Bavian_, with long tail and eke long tool."
Here are not _two_ fools described. The construction is, "next comes
the fool, i. e. the Bavian fool," &c. This might have been the
_idiot_ fool, and so denominated from his wearing a bib, in French
_bavon_,[187] because he drivelled. Thus in _Bonduca_, Act V., Decius
talks of a "dull _slavering_ fool." The tricks of the Bavian, his
tumbling and barking like a dog, suggested perhaps by the conduct of
Robert the Devil when disguised as a fool in his well known and once
popular romance, were peculiar to the morris dance described in _The
two noble kinsmen_, which has some other characters that seem to have
been introduced for stage effect, and not to have belonged to the
genuine morris. The tail was the fox tail that was sometimes worn by
the morris fool; and the long tool will be best understood by referring
to the cut of the idiot in the _genuine_ copy of the _dance of death_
usually, though improperly, ascribed to Holbein, and by reflecting on
some peculiar properties and qualifications of the idiot character.
What Mr. Tollett has termed a _bib_ was in fact no uncommon part of
the male dress in the fifteenth century. Some of the contemporary
figures of the Beverley minstrels are so habited, as well as others in
the representation of the Whitsun ale at Cirencester.[188] Whatever
character the supposed Bavian of the window was, he is also found in
the print by Israel on the left hand of the fool, not only in the same
habit, but with his hands and feet precisely in similar attitudes.
There is no doubt that the morris dance was in some respects a sort of
_chironomy_; and Higgins, the English editor of Junius's _Nomenclator_,
has actually translated the word _chironomia_ by "the morrise
dance."[189] In the absence of some of the other characters of the
morris dance, the exertions of the fool appear to have been increased,
as we learn from Ben Jonson's _Entertainment at Althrope_:
"But see the hobby-horse is forgot.
Foole, it must be your lot,
To supply his want with faces
And some other buffon graces.
You know how."--
Coryat relates that near Montreuil he saw "_a Whitsuntide foole_
disguised like a foole, wearing a long coate, wherein there were many
severall peeces of cloth of divers colours, at the corners whereof
there hanged the tailes of squirrels: he bestowed a little peece of
plate, wherein was expressed the effigies of the Virgin Mary, upon
every one that gave him money: for he begged money of all travellers
for the benefite of the parish church."[190] The romance of _The
spiritual Quixote_ has a morris fool with a fox's tail depending from
his cap, and a sheep bell attached to his hinder parts. In the modern
morris dance the fool is continued, but his real character and dress
appear to have been long since forgotten. In some places he is called
_the Squire_.
VI. THE PIPER. Sometimes called Tom Piper, an obvious and necessary
attendant on a morris, and who requires very little illustration. Mr.
Steevens has already referred to Drayton for the mention of him; and
Spenser, in his third eclogue, speaking of the rimes of bad poets,
observes that
"_Tom Piper_ makes as little melodie;"
whence we are to infer that his music was not usually of the very best
kind. The resemblance, as to attitude and dress, between the figures
of this character in Mr. Tollett's painting and the Flemish print, is
remarkable. In both we have the sword and feather. What Mr. Tollett has
termed his _silver shield_ seems a mistake for the lower part or flap
of his stomacher.
VII. THE HOBBY-HORSE; of which the earliest vestige now remaining is in
the painted window at Betley. It has been already observed that he was
often omitted in the morris. During the reign of Elizabeth the Puritans
made considerable havoc among the May-games, by their preachings and
invectives. Poor Maid Marian was assimilated to the whore of Babylon;
friar Tuck was deemed a remnant of Popery, and the Hobby-horse an
impious and Pagan superstition; and they were at length most completely
put to the rout as the bitterest enemies of religion. King James's
book of sports restored the lady and the hobby-horse: but during the
commonwealth they were again attacked by a new set of fanatics; and,
together with the whole of the May festivities, the Whitsun-ales, &c.,
in many parts of England degraded. At the restoration they were once
more revived.[191] The allusions to the omission of the Hobby-horse
are frequent in the old plays, and the line
"For O, for O, the hobby-horse is forgot,"
is termed by Hamlet _an epitaph_, which Mr. Theobald supposed, with
great probability, to have been satirical. The following extract from
a scene in Beaumont and Fletcher's _Women pleased_, Act IV., will best
show the sentiments of the puritans on this occasion, and which the
author has deservedly ridiculed:
HOB.
Surely I will dance no more, 'tis most ridiculous,
I find my wife's instructions now mere verities,
My learned wife's, she often hath pronounc'd to me
My safety; _Bomby_, defie these sports, thou art damn'd else.
This beast of Babylon I will never back again,
His pace is sure prophane, and his lewd wi-hees,
The sons of Hymyn and Gymyn, in the wilderness.
FAR.
Fie neighbour _Bomby_, in your fits again?
Your zeal sweats, this is not careful, neighbour,
The _Hobby-horse_ is a seemly _Hobby-horse_.
HOB.
The beast is an unseemly, and a lewd beast,
And got at Rome by the Pope's coach-horses,
His mother was the mare of ignorance.
SOTO.
Cobler thou ly'st, and thou wert a thousand coblers
His mother was an honest mare, and a mare of good credit,
Scorn'd any coach-horse the Pope had; thou art foolish,
And thy blind zeal makes thee abuse the beast.
HOB.
I do defie thee and thy foot-cloth too,
And tell thee to thy face, this prophane riding
I feel it in my conscience, and I dare speak it,
This unedified ambling hath brought a scourge upon us.
FAR.
Will you dance no more, neighbour?
HOB.