and looked one on another, marvelling at the man’s constant minde,
that thus without all feare made a jest of the cruell torment, and
death now at hand prepared for him. Thus was their expectation clean
disappointed. And in this appeareth what was his meditation in his
chiefest wealth and prosperity, namely, that he should shortly die,
and feed wormes in his grave; which meditation, if all our Bishops and
spirituall men had used, they had not, for a little worldly glory,
forsaken the word of God and truth which they in King Edward’s days
had preached and set forth, nor yet to maintain the Bishop of Rome’s
authority, have committed to the fire so many as they did.”
“At Lavenham, a small town near Bury, where the cavalcade remained two
days, the attempts to induce him to recant were renewed by the Sheriffe
and gentlemen of the county, of whom there was a great concourse,
with the promise even of promotion to a bishopric. On the 8th of
February he was brought out to complete his earthly journey. The same
spirit animated him to the end. On the way, being alighted from his
horse, ‘he lept, and fet a friske or twaine,’ as men commonly do in
dauncing. ‘Why, Master Doctor,’ quoth the Sheriffe, ‘how do you now?’
He answered, ‘Well, God be praised, good Master Sheriffe, never better;
for now I know I am almost at home. I lack not past two stiles to go
over, and I am even at my father’s house; but Master Sheriffe,’ said
he, ‘shall we not go thorow Hadley?’ ‘Yes,’ quoth the Sheriffe, ‘you
shall go thorow Hadley.’ ‘Then,’ said he, ‘O good Lord, I thank thee, I
shall yet once again ere I die, see my flock, whom thou, Lord, knowest
I have most heartily loved, and truely taught.’
“This wish being gratified, his last hours were soothed by the accents
which of all must have been most grateful, the prayers and blessings
of the poor, to whom he had been as a father in the relieving of their
corporeal wants. The street of Hadley was lined with those who invoked
succour and strength for him, mingled with exclamations of woe at the
grievous loss which had befallen themselves. Nor in his own extremity
did he forget the humblest and most needy of those who had been objects
of his care: but stopping by the alms–houses he cast out of a glove to
the inmates of them such money as remained of what charitable persons
had given for his support in prison (his benefices being sequestrated):
and missing two of them, he asked, ‘Is the blind man and blind woman
that dwelt here alive?’ He was answered, ‘Yea, they are there within.’
Then threw he glove and all in at the window, and so rode forth. Thus
this good father and provider for the poore took his leave of those for
whom all his life he had a singular care and studie.
“At the last, coming to Aldham Common, the place assigned where
he should suffer, and seeing a great multitude of people gathered
together, he asked, ‘What place is this; and what meaneth it that
so much people are gathered hither?’ It was answered, ‘It is Aldham
Common, the place where you must suffer; and the people are come to
looke upon you.’ ‘Then,’ said he, ‘thanked be God, I am even at home;
and so light from his horse, and with both his hands rent the hood from
his head.
“Now was his head notted evil favourably, and clipped much like as a
man would clip a foole’s head, which cost the good Bishop Bonner had
bestowed upon him when he degraded him. But when the people saw his
reverend and ancient face with a long white beard, they burst out with
weeping teares, and cried saying, ‘God save thee, good Doctor Taylor!’
with such other like godly wishes. Then would he have spoken to the
people, but the yeomen of the guard were so busie about him, that as
soon as he opened his mouth, one or other thrust a tippestaff into his
mouth, and would in nowise permit him to speak.
“As they were piling the faggots, one Warwick cruelly cast a faggot at
him, which light on his head and broke his face, that the bloud ran
down his visage. Then said Dr. Taylor, ‘O friend, I have harme enough;
what needed that?’”
Here we take leave of him; for it is needless again to enter into the
revolting details of the barbarous method of execution especially
prescribed for errors in matters of faith. The affection borne towards
him was beautifully manifested in a poor woman, who knelt at the stake
to join in his prayers, and could not be driven away by threats or
fear. His last moments were like his life, tranquil, fearless, and
forgiving.
Here, for the present at all events, we close this work. We have now
traced the Grecian nation from the outset of authentic history to the
period of its utmost greatness in arms, arts, and letters: and in doing
so, according to the plan laid down in our introduction, we hope to
have accumulated a mass of historical anecdotes, which, independent
of their intrinsic beauty or interest, may possess a further value,
as tending to throw some light one on another. Like the close of
the Persian war, the close of the Peloponnesian war is a remarkable
epoch: the former marks the beginning of the greatness, the latter the
beginning of the decline of Greece. From thenceforward the history of
Greece becomes more complicated, and our authorities less satisfactory;
inasmuch as, at the close of Xenophon’s Hellenics, we lose that series
of admirable contemporary writers who have hitherto guided us; and
the late compilers, such as Diodorus and Plutarch, make no adequate
amends for the loss. The study, therefore, of the succeeding portion
of history becomes less agreeable and more difficult: at the same time
there is no want of remarkable incidents; for if the annals of Athens
and Sparta become less important, the rise of Thebes to its short–lived
power, the sudden growth of Thessaly under Jason of Pheræ, of Macedonia
under Philip, and, above all, the renovation of the old Grecian spirit
in the Achæan league, would supply abundance to fill another volume,
which should bring down the history of Greece to its final absorption
into the Roman empire.
INDEX OF VOLUME III.
Arginusæ, battle of, 198–205.
Aristophanes, Knights of, 134–147.
Athenians, expedition against Sicily, 171–190
Brown, execution of John, 261–263.
Circumvallation, lines of, 6, 7, 31.
Cleon, 121, 122, 134–148.
Comedy, Greek, account of, 129–134.
Constantinople, factions of circus, 103–112.
Corcyrean sedition, 78–96.
Guthrie, James, execution of, 265–270.
Hawkwood, retreat of Sir J., 194–197
Hermæ, mutilation of, 169, 170.
Huss, John, 244–254.
Jacquerie, 98–101.
Jerome of Prague, 255–257.
Jerusalem, siege of, 32–36.
Knights of Aristophanes, 134–147.
Magdeburg, siege of, 50–62.
Massacre of September 1792, 112–120.
Ney, retreat from Moscow, 190–194.
Nika sedition, 111.
Peloponnesian war, end of, 214–217.
Numantia, siege of, 19–22.
Oates, Titus, 160–168.
Ostend, siege of, 39–50.
Persecutions, civil and religious, 244–283.
Platæa, siege of, 5–19.
Popish plot, 149–160.
Portobello, taken by Vernon, 127–129.
Prelacy, attempted to be restored in Scotland, 257–270.
Presbyterians, persecution of, ibid.
Reformation in England, 270–283.
Réole, La, siege of, 37.
Retreat of Athenians from Syracuse, 178–189;
Rome, civil wars of, compared with seditions in Greece, 95–97.
September, 1792, massacre of, 112–120.
Sicilian expedition, 171–190.
Siege of Platæa, 5–19;
Socrates, history, character, and death of, 218–243.
Sphacteria, capture of Spartans at, 126.
Syracuse, besieged by Marcellus, 28–31;
— by Athenians, 177.
Taylor, Rowland, burnt for heresy, 272–283.
Tyre, siege of, 25–28.
Witts, De, massacre of, 205–214.
Zaragoza, siege of, 63–77.
GENERAL INDEX OF PRINCIPAL SUBJECTS IN ALL VOLUMES
Alp Arslan, vol. i. page 93.
Antony, retreat of, from Parthia, i. 211–213.
Arginusæ, battle of, iii. 198–205.
Aristides, ii. 131, 132, 139, 140, 143.
Aristogiton, i. 169–174.
Aristomenes, i. 40–54.
Aristophanes, Knights of, iii. 134–147.
Armada, Spanish, ii. 112–126.
Athenians, expedition against Sicily, iii. 171–190
Athens, plague of, ii. 166, 169–177.
Bajazet, imprisoned by Tamerlane, i. 86.
——, his treatment of French prisoners, i, 88–92.
Brooke, death of Lord, i. 134.
Brown, execution of John, iii. 261–263.
Buchan, Countess of, imprisoned by Edward I., i. 87, 88.
Caligula, i. 134–143.
Cambyses, i. 120–131.
Cid, Chronicle of, ii. 25–28.
Cimon, policy of, ii. 143–146.
Circumvallation, lines of, iii. 6, 7, 31.
Cleomenes, i. 132, 133.
Cleon, iii. 121, 122, 134–148.
Comedy, Greek, account of, iii. 129–134.
Constantinople, factions of circus, iii. 103–112.
———plague of, ii. 178–183.
Corcyrean sedition, iii. 78–96.
Crassus, retreat and death of, i. 198–211.
Crœsus, i. 77–80, 156.
Cylon, insurrection of, i. 154.
Darius, invasion of Scythia by, i. 190–198.
Drageschan, battle of, ii. 74.
Education, Athenians, ii. 152–157.
England, state of, under first Norman kings, i. 23–27.
Fatalism, i. 156–161.
Florence, plague of, ii. 184–197.
Greek history, mythic period of, i. 11–13, 21–23.
Guesclin, Bertrand du, treatment by Black Prince, i. 103, 104, 108–113.
Guthrie, James, execution of, iii. 265–270.
Harmodius, i. 169–174.
Hawkwood, retreat of Sir J., iii. 194–197
Hereward le Wake, i. 54–58.
Hermæ, mutilation of, iii. 169, 170.
Hipparchus and Hippias, i. 168–174.
Huss, John, iii. 244–254.
Jacquerie, iii. 98–101.
Jaques, St., battle of, ii. 64–69.
Jerome of Prague, iii. 255–257.
Jerusalem, siege of, iii. 32–36.
John, King of France, treatment by Black Prince, i. 105–107.
Julian, Emperor, invasion of Parthia, and death, i. 213–223.
Knights of Aristophanes, iii. 134–147.
London, plague of, ii. 218–23.
Magdeburg, siege of, iii. 50–62.
Marathon, battle of, ii. 13–16.
Massacre of September, 1792, iii. 112–120.
Medici, Cosmo de’, i. 175–180.
———Piero, i. 181.
———Lorenzo and Julian, i. 181–189.
Messenians, early history of, i. 40–54.
Milan, plague of, ii. 98–214.
Miltiades, ii. 127–130.
Morgarten, battle of, ii. 43–52.
Napoleon, retreat from Moscow i. 224–237.
Ney, ditto, iii. 190–194.
Nika sedition, iii. 111.
Numantia, siege of, iii. 19–22.
Oates, Titus, iii. 160–168.
Ostend, siege of, iii. 39–50.
Paul, Emperor, i. 143–152.
Pazzi, conspiracy of, i. 183–189.
Pedro, Don, King of Castile, i. 31–36.
Peloponnesian war, origin of, ii. 158–163.
———end of, iii. 214–217.
Pericles, policy of, ii. 147–152.
Persecutions, civil and religious, iii. 244–283.
Pisistratus, i. 163–168.
Plague, historians who have described it, ii. 164–166;
——principal recorded, 166–169;
——of Athens, 169–177;
——of Constantinople, 177–183;
——of Florence, 184–198;
——of Milan, 198–214;
——medical treatment and state of science 214–218;
——of London, 218–231.
Platæa, siege of, iii. 5–19.
Popish plot, iii. 149–160.
Portobello, taken by Vernon, iii. 127–129.
Power, effects of absolute, i. 114–119.
Prelacy, attempted to be restored in Scotland, iii. 257–270.
Presbyterians, persecution of, ibid.
Prisoners of war, treatment of, i. 77–113.
Reading, Aloys, ii. 48.
Reedman, Sir Matthew, anecdote from Froissart, i. 100–102.
Reformation in England, iii. 270–283.
Réole, La, siege of, iii. 37.
Retreat of Darius from Scythia, i. 196–198;
——Antony from Parthia, 211–213;
——Julian in Assyria, 213–223;
——Napoleon from Moscow, 225–237;
——Athenians from Syracuse, iii. 178–189;
——Ney in Russia, 190, 194;
——Hawkwood in Lombardy, 194–197.
Rome, civil wars of, compared with seditions in Greece, iii. 95–97.
Roncesvalles, battle of, i. 74–85.
Salamis, battle of, ii. 86–103.
Scandinavia, compared with Greece in its early state, i. 9–20.
Sempach, battle of, ii. 49–54; Law of, 68.
September, 1792, massacre of, iii. 112–120.
Sicilian expedition, iii. 171–190.
Siege of La Valette, ii. 69–72;
——of Leyden, ii. 103–112;
——of Platæa, iii. 5–19;
——methods of the ancients, their rudeness and little improvement,
until the use of gunpowder, 22–27, 29–32;
——Introduction of cannon, 38, 39;
——Siege of Numantia, 19–22;
——of Tyre, 25–28;
——Syracuse, by Marcellus, 28–31;
——by Athenians, 177;
——of Jerusalem, 32–36;
——of La Réole, 37;
——of Ostend, 39–50;
——of Magdeburg, 50–62;
——of Zaragoza, 63–77.
Sobieski, John, King of Poland, ii. 30–41.
Socrates, history, character, and death of, iii. 218–243.
Sophists, ii. 153–157.
Sphacteria, capture of Spartans at, iii. 126.
Syracuse, besieged by Marcellus, iii. 28–31;
——by Athenians, 177.
Taylor, Rowland, burnt for heresy, iii. 272–283.
Themistocles, character and policy of, ii. 133–140.
Thermopylæ, battle of, ii. 55–64
Tours, battle of, ii. 23–25.
Triumphs, Roman, i. 82–86.
Trojan War, i. 36–39.
Tyre, siege of, iii. 25–28.
Valerian, treatment by Sapor, i. 85, 86.
Valette, La, siege of, ii. 69–72.
Vienne, siege by Turks, and battle, ii. 30–41.
Wallace, i. 58–76.
Witts, De, massacre of, iii. 205–214.
Xerxes, invasion of Greece by, ii. 5–22, 55–64.
Zaragoza, siege of, iii. 63–77.
THE END.
London: WILLIAM CLOWES and SONS, Stamford–street.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Vol. i. p. 51.
[2] Herod. i. 190.
[3] See the siege of Alesia, vii. 72, or the circumvallation of Pompey
at Dyrrachium, by Cæsar’s army, Bell. Civ. iii. 42. The lines of
Torres Vedras, drawn by the British in the Peninsular war, may however
compete, for their extent and the labour bestowed on them, with any of
these ancient works.
[4] After the battle of Platæa, the Athenians and Lacedæmonians
contending for the _aristeia_, or prize for having behaved best in the
battle, that honour, by the mediation of the Corinthians, was conferred
on the Platæans, whose signal zeal throughout the Persian war was
admitted, on all hands, to deserve such a distinction. At the same
time a yearly sacrifice was appointed to be held at Platæa in honour
of the slain; and a sort of sacred character was conferred both on the
Platæans and their territory, with the privileges here enumerated.
[5] Dr. Arnold observes that this is a good instance of that feature of
Greek polytheism by which the gods were known and honoured as standing
in particular relations to mankind, not as the general moral governors
of the world. Three classes of gods were here invoked, each as having a
special point of honour involved in the observation of the oaths here
mentioned: those whose names were pledged to the observance of it, and
who would be personally affronted by its violation; the ancestral gods
_θεοὶ πατρῷοι_ of the Lacedæmonians, who would take it ill that the act
of their descendant, Pausanias, should be disregarded, or the tombs of
the Lacedæmonians at Platæa neglected or profaned; and the local gods
_θεοὶ ἐγχώριοι_, to whom the territory was as a home, and who must
expect to be denied their worship, if their country should be occupied
by strangers, who would bring their own gods along with them.
[6] Such a _natural_ fire, therefore, may have been still greater.
[7] That is, when the star begins to rise before the sun, and so first
becomes visible in the morning. This in the case of Arcturus occurred
about the middle of September.
[8] Thucyd. ii. 71, 78.
[9] There is no mention of these three hundred where the author
relateth the laying of siege; but it must be understood.
[10] Thucyd. iii. 21–24.
[11] Thucyd. iii. 52, 68.
[12] The end of Numantia is rather differently related by Appian,
who says, that after being reduced to such extremity as to eat human
flesh, they surrendered at discretion, and were sold as slaves; Scipio
retaining fifty of them to grace his triumph. The desperate resolution
of the Saguntines, also a Spanish people, confirms the probability of
Florus’s version. Pressed by Hannibal, the elders of the city collected
the most valuable property, both public and private, into a pile, which
they consumed by fire, and for the most part threw themselves into the
flames. The other male inhabitants slew their wives and children, set
fire to their houses, and perished in them, or else fighting to the
death.
[13] Florus, ii. c. 18.
[14] Arrian, ii. 19.
[15] Mr. Rooke, the English translator of Arrian, observes, that “the
number here must needs be erroneous, though all the copies which I
have seen have it the same.” The height certainly is startling, but it
is hazardous to conclude that it must be wrong. Not to rely over–much
on the walls of Babylon, which, according to the father of history,
were about 350 feet high, the battering towers described by Vitruvius,
185 feet in height, were evidently meant to cope with fortifications
as gigantic in height as those here described. And after all, the
city being built on an abrupt rock, which might perhaps be faced with
masonry, if we suppose the whole height from the sea to the battlements
to be meant, there is nothing improbable in the statement. The total
height of the fortifications of Malta from the sea, we believe, is not
much less.
[16] _δεόντως ἠρμοσμένη πρὸς ἔνια τῶν πραγμάτων μέγά τι χρῆμα φαίνεται
καὶ θαυμάσιον_.
[17] Bell. Gall., vii. 72.
[18] Fairfax’s Tasso, xviii. 43–5.
[19] William of Tyre.
[20] La Réole, a town in Gascony.
[21] Boiled leather, “cuir boulu.”
[22] Pavisses were large shields or defences made of plank, &c., which
archers and others bore before them, or fixed in the earth, that they
might shoot, mine, &c., in partial cover from the shot of the garrison.
[23] Lord Berners’ Froissart, vol. i. cap. 109.
[24] One of these old guns, of remarkable size, made of bars of
hammered iron hooped together, is to be seen in Edinburgh Castle, and
is called Mons Meg.
[25] See the medal at the head of this chapter.
[26] Bentivoglio, Hist. of Wars in Flanders, translated by Henry, Earl
of Monmouth, 1698.
[27] Lotichius, Rerum Germanicarum, lib. xxxvii. p. 1.
[28] Harte’s Life of Gustavus Adolphus.
[29] Legend of Montrose, chap. ii.
[30] Harte’s Life of Gustavus Adolphus.
[31]
Venit summa dies, et inevitable fatum,
—— —— fuit Ilium, et ingens
Gloria _Parthenopes_.
Parthenopes, substituted by the quoter for the original word Teucrorum,
has the same meaning as Magdeburg, the maiden city.
[32] Southey, Hist. Peninsular War, chap. ix.
[33] Napier’s History of the Peninsular War, book v. chap. 2.
[34] Attempts made by the French to force their way into the centre of
the city from January 29th to February 2d.
[35] Napier, Hist. of Peninsular War, book v. chap. 3.
[36] _Προξένοι_. The want of public houses of entertainment for
travellers was necessarily supplied by private hospitality. He
whose fortune it was to entertain to–day, of course expected to be
entertained in return when he visited the country of his guest; and
thus were formed hereditary connexions of hospitality, held no less
sacred than the ties of blood. By a natural extension of the practice,
cities formed similar connexions with foreign citizens, who received
their ambassadors, and advocated as far as in them lay both the public
interests of the community, and the private interests of those of its
citizens who required such help. These men were named Proxeni; the
bond of mutual obligation was publicly recorded, and entitled them
to receive as guests the same hospitality and protection which they
afforded as hosts. Etheloproxeni, below translated voluntary hosts,
assumed the same duties, but voluntarily; without the connexion being
publicly acknowledged, and consequently without being entitled to that
public return which the Proxenus claimed as his right.
[37] “Probably vine sticks, round which the vines were trained. To
understand the account given in the text, we must suppose that the
individuals whom Pithias prosecuted were the tenants of the sacred
ground from which the sticks were cut, and possibly had inherited the
possession of it from their ancestors, so that they regarded it from
long use as their own property: just as the Roman aristocracy thought
themselves aggrieved when an Agrarian law called on them to resign the
possession of the national lands which they had for so many generations
appropriated to themselves without any lawful title. As hereditary
tenants of the sacred ground, the Corcyrean nobles had probably been
always in the habit of treating it as their own: so that when suddenly
charged with sacrilege, in abusing their legal rights as tenants, by
cutting down the trees, which belonged not to them, but to the god, the
owner of the land, they, like the Roman nobility, had no legal defence
to make, and could only maintain their encroachments by violence.”
This is Dr. Arnold’s explanation. The Roman aristocracy, however, had
a lawful title to the possession, though not to the full property,
of the lands in question. See Penny Cyclopædia, art. Agrarian Law. A
lease of certain public lands in Attica is preserved in the British
Museum (Elgin Marbles, No. 261), in which the devastation of wood is
especially forbidden. See Boeckh, Public Economy of Athens, English
translation, vol. ii. p. 15. The prosecution and amount of fine were,
however, evidently dictated by party spirit and revenge.
[38] Dr. Arnold supposes the silver stater, or tetradrachm, to be
meant, which is worth, in our coin, between three shillings and three
shillings and sixpence; the tetradrachms vary considerably in weight.
The golden stater, which was worth twenty drachms, ought therefore to
be worth from fifteen shillings to seventeen shillings and sixpence;
but a specimen in the British Museum weighs 132–3/5 grains, which is
about 9½ grains more than a sovereign. Silver therefore seems to have
borne a higher value in relation to gold in Attica than it does in
England.
[39] Arrows, darts, stones, and the like missile weapons.
[40] That came with Nicostratus.
[41] The Greeks had rather singular notions as to the sanctity of
temples. To kill a person within the sacred precincts, or to drag him
away violently, was held sacrilegious; but to wall a suppliant up, and
thus preventing his escape to starve him to death, seems to have been
considered venial, since this mode of proceeding was adopted, in a
former instance, against the king of Sparta, Pausanias. In the latter
case, however, the Delphic oracle pronounced the act a pollution, and
ordered that amends should be made for it to the goddess whose temple
was thus desecrated. See Thucyd. i. 134.
[42] _τοῖς ὀλίγοις_ not few in number, but the leaders of the
oligarchical party.
[43] _Μετάβολαι τῶν ξυντυχιῶν_, changes of the state of things.
[44] Hobbes seems to consider these _ἐταιρίαι_ as associations of
traders or artizans, such as our corporate companies were in their
origin; which is clearly wrong. They would seem to have been more like
the clubs of the French Revolution, formed for the advocacy of certain
opinions, or to promote the safety, and increase the influence of the
several members, by enabling them to act in concert.
[45] By oath.
[46] _Φιλονεικία_, properly that spite which reigneth in two
adversaries whilst they contend, or eagerness in striving. “That is to
say, superadded to the definite motives which lead men to embark in
political contests; they contract, when once embarked in them, a party
spirit wholly distinct from the objects of their party, and which is
sometimes transmitted to their descendants, even when no notions of
the original cause of quarrel are preserved. Such was the case with
the factions of the Circus at Constantinople, and with those deadly
feuds which have prevailed from time to time among the lower classes in
Ireland. In the outrages committed some years ago by the parties called
Caravats and Shanavests, neither the persons who were executed for
these outrages, nor any one else, could tell what was the dispute. It
was notorious who were Caravats and who were Shanavests, and this was
all.”—Arnold.
[47] The eighty–fourth chapter of the third book (which is contained
in this paragraph) has recently been pronounced spurious by several
distinguished critics. See the question discussed by Dr. Arnold, vol.
i. p. 608.
[48] Thucyd. iii. 70, 85.
[49] B.C. 425.
[50] _Φορμηδὸν_, signifieth properly, after the manner that mats or
hurdles are platted.
[51] Istone.
[52] Thucyd., iv. 46, 48.
[53] See vol. i. chap. v. p. 154.
[54] Arnold’s Thucydides, App. i. p. 633.
[55] For what little is known or supposed, see Muller’s History of the
Doric Race, book iii. ch. ix. § 5; English Translation, vol. ii.: the
best book of reference for all political information relative to the
Dorian states.
[56] _ἐτύγχανον δὲ καὶ δυνάμει αὐτῶν οἱ πλείους πρῶτοι ὔντες τῆς
πόλεως_, I. 55.
[57] _οἰ ἔχοντες τὰ πράγματα_, III. 72. _οἱ ὀλίγοι_, III. 74.
[58] Cade’s speech to Lord Say, Henry VI. part ii. vol. iv. p. 7.
The last sentence alludes to the law which gave to persons capitally
convicted the benefit of clergy, that is, their lives were spared if
they could read; it being presumed that none but clergy could do so.
[59] Holinshed, vol. ii. p. 746.
[60] Frenzy. The adjective wood, or wode, is of common occurrence in
the Scottish language.
[61] Lord Berners’ Froissart, vol. i. chap. 182, 183.
[62] Ibid., vol. i. chap. 381.
[63] Decline and Fall, chap. xl.
[64] See ‘Ueber die Parteien der Rennbahn, vornehmlich im
Byzantinischen Kaiserthum, von F. Wilken, in von Raumer’s Historisches
Taschenbuch.’
[65] Gibbon, chap. xl.
[66] Procopius, Persic., vol. i. chap. 24.
[67] _ἐς ἀφατόν τι εὔρους διεχέχυτο χρῆμα_.
[68] Procopius, Anecdota, chap. vii.
[69] _εἰς τὰ τζαγγαρία εὐρίσκεται_. Calopodius is meant. This name
in Greek means a _last_; _τζαγγάρης_, a shoemaker; _τζαγγαρία_,
shoemakers’ offices. Not. in Theoph.
[70] _όταν εἰς βορδόνην καθέδρωμαι_, or _βουδρώνην_. _βορδων_ is an
ass: the derivative seems only to occur here. Justinian appears to be
meant, who was called the ass, from his habit of moving his ears. See
the anecdotes, chap. 8. _νωθεῖ ὔνῳ ἐμφερὴς μάλιστα, συχνά οἰ σειομένων
τῶν ὤτον_
[71] The father of Justinian.
[72] Theophanes, p. 154, 6, ed. Par. 1655. This last taunt seems rather
misplaced in the mouth of the greens, who had murdered 3000 of their
enemies in the theatre. It is not always easy to trace the connexion
and meaning of the dialogue. This arises partly from the nature of
the language, which very often is hardly grammatical, partly from
its abruptness and frequent allusions to circumstances unexplained
elsewhere. It is also to be found with several various readings in the
notes to the Anecdotes of Procopius, vol. ii. p. 134, ed. Par. 1663.
[73] _τὸν Καίσαρα προτερῆσαι τῶν ᾰλλων οὐ δέον_. Procop., Pers. iii. xi.
[74] Dulaure, ‘Evénemens de la Révolution Française,’ vol. ii. p. 192.
[75] We have not seen his book itself, but there are extracts from it
in Dulaure, and among them a very curious account of his examination
before the tribunal, vol. ii. p. 198.
[76] Scott, Life of Napoleon, vol. ii. p. 47. The authorities for this
account are Mignet, Hist. de la Révolution Française; Montgaillard,
Hist. de France; and Dulaure, as above quoted.
[77] Mitchell’s Aristophanes, vol. i. p. 139.
[78] With respect to the exact locality of Sphacteria, see the memoir
at the end of the second volume of Arnold’s Thucydides.
[79] See vol. i. chap. 2.
[80] North’s Plutarch—Nicias. This reference of all the evils which
befell Athens to the indecorous behaviour of one speaker is rather
characteristic.
[81] Thucycd., iv. 28.
[82] Thucyd. v. 7.
[83] Philological Museum, vol. ii. p. 706.
[84] Mus. Crit. vol. ii. p. 75, _seq._
[85] Mus. Crit., vol. ii. p. 207.
[86] See the Frogs.
[87] Comedy is divided by the Grecian critics into three branches; the
old, the middle, and the new. Of the two latter we know little, since
the works of Aristophanes, the only perfect comedies extant, belong,
with one exception, to the first. It would be foreign to our purpose to
enter here into a description of them; but it may be generally stated
that they were of a milder character; the licence of personality was
gradually retrenched, and with it, the political importance of the
stage. The lines of distinction cannot be drawn with much precision,
but the former of them seems to commence early in the fourth century
B.C., the latter in the reign of Alexander, which began B.C. 336. The
total loss of the new comedy, and especially of Menander, is perhaps
the greatest that classic literature has sustained. It appears from
the remaining fragments to have been of a highly polished and moral
cast. But a good idea of its general form and tendency may be derived
from Plautus and Terence, of whose plays several are little more than
translations from it.
[88] Knights, line 231, ed. Bekk., see the Scholia. It was usual for
authors to perform a part in their own comedies. Aristophanes had not
hitherto complied with this custom.
[89] The following extracts are from Mr. Mitchell’s translation; to
whom apology is due for occasional omissions, where the allusions
would have required a large body of notes to render them generally
intelligible, without being necessary to the general effect of the
passage, and a few slight alterations.
[90] The Athenian judges used beans in giving their votes. Each
received three obols, about five–pence, for his fee, and in one of
the courts the common number of judges was from two to five hundred
or more. The poorer classes made a livelihood in this way, and hence
there sprung an extraordinary love of litigation, which Aristophanes is
continually satirizing. The ‘Wasps’ is expressly directed against it.
[91] Pnyx, the place of general assembly. It was filled with stone
seats, to which reference will be made hereafter.
[92] Cleon’s father was a tanner, and the poet is continually twitting
him with his dirty trade.
[93] Eucrates.
[94] Lysicles.
[95] A mountain torrent of Attica.
[96] It has been generally said that Cleon lost his popularity and
incurred this fine in consequence of the representation of the Knights;
but there is no authority for the former supposition, and the latter is
disproved by the mention of this fine in the opening of the Acharnians,
acted the year before, in the sixth year of the Peloponnesian war. The
prosecution was conducted by the Knights; which probably led to the
mistake.
[97] In the original it occupies altogether more than 100 lines in a
play of 1400.
[98] Thunder from the right hand was an omen of good fortune. See the
original, ver. 639.
[99] A crown or chaplet was the usual reward of such persons as brought
good news.
[100] A sacrifice and a public feast were synonymous, for only a small
portion of the victims were offered to the gods.
[101] “The sausage–seller in Aristophanes promises to offer a
thousand goats to Artemis Agrotera (outbidding in jest the offering
of thanks for the battle of Marathon), whenever a hundred trichides,
a small kind of fish, were sold for an obolus, which was therefore an
impossibility.” Boeckh, Public Economy of Athens.
[102] The seats in the Pnyx.
[103] _κᾷτα καθίζου μαλακῶς ἵνα μὴ τρίβῃς τἠ ν ἐν Σαλαμίνι_, v. 783.
That the respected member on which the chief stress of the battle of
Salamis had fallen, might be exempt in future from all common friction.
[104] Bacis was an ancient Bœotian seer of high reputation, who
prophesied the Persian invasion among other things: see Herod, viii.
77. The name and existence of Glanis, like the oracles to be produced,
is a ready fiction of the sausage–seller.
[105] We are not answerable for the fidelity of Mr. Mitchell’s
translation of this, or of some other lines. The corresponding line in
the original is indeed hardly susceptible of translation.
[106] A city of Arcadia. A word of similar sound means “lame.”
[107] The Grecians indulged their luxury in the article of
drinking–vessels in an extravagant degree, and every sort of cup had
its peculiar appellation. There is no allusion contained in the names
introduced here.
[108] Pallas, the tutelary deity of Athens.
[109] _Ros._ Take you me for a sponge, my lord?
_Hamlet._ Aye, sir, that soaks up the king’s countenance, his rewards,
his authorities. But such officers do the king best service in the end.
He keeps them, like an ape, in the corner of his jaw; first mouthed,
to be last swallowed. When he needs what you have gleaned, it is but
squeezing, and then, sponge, you shall be dry again.—_Hamlet_, iv. 2.
Mr. Mitchell’s translation is plainly modelled on this passage; and is
more like that than the original. Vespasian is said to have promoted
the most rapacious collectors to the highest offices, whom he was
commonly said to use as _sponges_, that he might squeeze them out when
they had sucked up enough.—_Sueton._ c. 16.
[110] Where he had served Demosthenes the same trick, see p. 232–3.
[111] Cleon had received a chaplet in full assembly from the people.
[112] The lowest tradesmen only took their stand at the gates of the
town: every answer is made to show the utter baseness of Cleon’s rival,
and thus to place himself in the most ignominious light.
[113] Parodied from Euripides’ description of the dying Alcestis taking
leave of her bridal bed, v. 181.
[114] Jupiter, the protector of Greece.
[115] Thucyd. v. 16.
[116] Evelyn’s Memoirs.
[117] Roger North, Examen, p. 204.
[118] Queen Elizabeth’s birth–day. These processions were in 1679 and
1680.
[119] Life of Edmund Calamy, vol. i. p. 84.
[120] Burnet, Hist. of his own Times, p. 430. Oates had before only
deposed to a plot among the Jesuits to murder the king.
[121] North’s Examen, p. 186. Oates, in addition to his personal
peculiarities, which are described in a passage presently to be quoted,
was remarkable for a drawling way of speech, which is caricatured
above, “I, Titus Oates,” &c.
[122] Howell’s State Trials, vol. vii. p. 56.
[123] State Trials, vol. vii. p. 120.
[124] Burnet, p. 468.
[125] So in the original. The sense seems to require “not
without.”—Evelyn’s Memoirs.
[126] Evelyn’s Memoirs.
[127] Hist. of his own Times, p. 428.
[128] The readiness of the Athenians to listen to unfounded and
malicious accusations has been noticed in the Knights, and is a
favourite subject of ridicule and reproach throughout Aristophanes. The
following passage of the Wasps is worth notice:—
Be the fault great or small, this cuckoo song
Of tyranny rings ever in our ears;
These fifty years it slept, but now the cry
Is bandied even at Billingsgate, as stale
As mackerel in July. Suppose a turbot
Should suit your palate, straight the sprat–seller
Next stall exclaims, “Why, this is tyranny!
No tastes aristocratical in Athens!”
Or if you buy anchovies, and demand,
Gratis, a leek for sauce, some herb–woman,
Squinting, growls out, “So you’re for tyranny,
Dost think the state will furnish you with garnish?”
Ver. 488.
[129] See Aristophanes, every where, more particularly in the Knights.
Demus demands from Cleon his ring of office:—
Why, how now, rogue?
This is no ring of mine—it tallies not
With my device, or much my eyes deceive me.
_Saus._ Allow me, sir,—what might be your impression?
_Dem._ A roasted thrium,(1) with thick fat enclosed.
_Saus._ (_looking at the ring_) I see no thrium.
_Dem._ What the impression, then?
_Saus._ A wide–mouthed gull, seated upon a rock,
In act to make a speech.
_Mitchell_, p. 245. See also ver. 1260. (Ed. Bekk).
(1) In case the reader should have any curiosity about Athenian
cookery, the following is the recipe for a thrium. Take a certain
quantity of rice, fine flour or grain, boil it till enough done, then
pour off the water, and mix it with soft cheese and a few eggs: roll
the mixture in fig–leaves, tie it in a cloth, and stew it for some time
in gravy. Then remove the cloth, pour over it a plate of fresh boiling
honey, and let it stew till it becomes yellow, observing to turn it
continually. Serve it up with the honey poured over it. Another recipe
gives brains and cheese, mixed up with a rich and highly–esteemed
fish–pickle, as the ingredients.
[130] Burnet, p. 424–5.
[131] North, Examen, p. 225.
[132] North, Examen. p. 176.
[133] Ib. p. 204.
[134] L’Estrange, Dialogue between Zekiel and Ephraim.
[135] State Trials, vol. x. p. 1316.
[136] Hist. of his own Times, p. 627. In Narcissus Luttrell’s MS. Brief
Narration, &c., it is said, under date August 11, 1688, “Titus Oates
stood in the pillory at Charing Cross, according to annual custom.”
State Trials, vol. x. p. 1317.
[137] North, Examen, p. 225.
[138] Life of Calamy, p. 120.
[139] Greece, p. 74.
[140] Thucyd. vii. 87.
[141] Thucyd. vi. 1.
[142] Thucyd. vi. 24.
[143] _τριήραριαρχοι_ The heavy expense of equipping ships of war was
thrown chiefly upon individuals of wealth. Sometimes, as here, the
state provided ships, and the trierarch only the equipment; at others
the trierarch was obliged to build the vessels. The subject is too
intricate to be treated in a note; the curious reader will find it
fully handled in Wolff’s Prolegomena to the Oration against Leptines.
See also a short notice in Dr. Arnold’s note, vi. 31.
[144] About nine–pence halfpenny.
[145] _ὑπηρεσίας_. Petty officers, as the pilot, boatswain, &c. See
Arnold’s notes on the passage.
[146] _Θρανίται_. There being three banks of oars one above another,
the uppermost were called Thranitæ, the middlemost Zeugitæ, and the
lowest Thalamitæ, whereof the thranitæ managed the longest oar, and
therefore in respect of their greater labour might deserve a greater
pay.
[147] _Σημεῖα_. The images which being set on the fore–part of the
galley did give it the name for the most part.
[148] Thucyd. vi. 30. 32.
[149] Grecian citizens on service were always attended by slaves, as
we have often had occasion to observe, who served as light infantry.
The Athenians, however, also employed regular light–armed mercenaries,
archers, and slingers from Crete and elsewhere.
[150] The rock of the citadel. So in Cumberland and Westmoreland there
a score of Castle Crags.
[151] Supposing that the enemy had already occupied the valley of the
Cacyparis; and hoping to reach the interior by turning up this valley.
[152] Goeller and Arnold read fifty stadia only.
[153] “The Syracusan heavy–armed infantry seems to have been of a very
inferior description, and never to have encountered the Athenians with
effect, except when supported by their cavalry. So the disciplined
troops of Peloponnesus under Gylippus alone, ventured to close with the
enemy, while the Syracusans confined themselves to harassing them from
a distance with their missiles.”—_Arnold._
[154] That is, such as the captors concealed, to make slaves of them
for their own private advantage.
[155] A minute account of the transactions of the siege, of the
geography of the neighbourhood of Syracuse, and the portion of country
traversed by the Athenians, will be found at the end of the third
volume of Arnold’s Thucydides.
[156] Sphacteria.
[157] A small measure about half a pint.
[158] Free men, that is.
[159] Thucyd., vi. 1.
[160] “And though it were thus great, yet the Athenians longed very
much to send an army against it out of a desire to bring it all unto
subjection (which was the true motive), but as having withal this fair
pretext of aiding their kinsmen and new confederates.”—vi. 6.
[161] _ὑπερεσίας_.—See above.
[162] Thucyd., viii. 1.
[163] See vol. i. p. 229.
[164] Ségur, Gourgaud, Napoleon in Russia.
[165] Sismondi, Hist. Rep. Ital. Poggio Bracciolini, Hist. Florent.
[166] Thucyd. viii. 97.
[167] Xenophon, Hellenica, lib. i. c. 7.
[168] Xenoph. Hellen., lib. i. cap. 6, 7.
[169] Temple, ‘Essay on the Origin and Nature of Government.’
[170] Temple, ‘Observations on the United Provinces,’ ch. ii.
[171] ‘Histoire de la Vie et de la Mort des deux illustres Frères,
Corneille et Jean de Witt.’ Liv. ii. c. 11.
[172] ‘Histoire de la Vie et de la Mort des deux illustres Frères,
Corneille et Jean de Witt.’
[173] ‘General Biography.’
[174] Fox, ‘History of James II.,’ p. 29.
[175] Clinton, ‘Fast. Hellen.’ For a notice of this worthy, see the
Frogs of Aristophanes, v. 677, ed. Bekker.
[176] _ἀπέσφαξεν_—slew him with his own hand, it should seem; a
pleasant office for the commander–in–chief of a civilized nation.
Xenoph. Hellen. ii. c. 1.
[177] Life of Lysander.
[178] Xen. Hellen. ii. c. 2.
[179] Memorabilia, book i. chap. 1, p. 10.
[180] Those readers who wish to inquire into it will find a learned
and able paper on this subject by Schleiermacher, in the Berlin
Transactions, translated in the Philological Museum, vol. ii. No. 6,
“On the worth of Socrates as a philosopher.”
[181] Ibid., p. 544.
[182] The earliest extant notice of this curious question is contained
in the recently discovered Republic of Cicero, edited by Maii, lib. i.
c. 10. As this treatise is not contained in the general editions of the
philosopher we shall translate it:—“You have heard, Tubero, that after
the death of Socrates, Plato, to acquire knowledge, travelled first to
Egypt, then to Sicily and Italy, that he might learn the discoveries of
Pythagoras; and that he had much intercourse with Archytas of Tarentum
and Timæus the Locrian, and got possession of the Commentaries of
Philolaus; and that, as the name of Pythagoras was then in much credit
in those parts, he devoted himself to men of the Pythagorean school and
to those studies. Therefore since he loved Socrates singly, and wished
to refer everything to him, he blended the Socratic humour and subtlety
of language with the obscurity of Pythagoras and that air of gravity
given by so many kinds of learning.”
[183] Tusc. Quæst. v. 4.
[184] Schleiermacher, as above. The rest of this paragraph is taken,
with some trivial alterations, from the History of Greece.
[185] For an account of this class of men, see vol. ii. pp. 153–157.
[186] Mr. Cumberland, in the ‘Observer,’ has made a violent attack on
the moral character of Socrates. Mr. Mitchell has taken a more moderate
and candid tone in the ‘Preliminary Discourse’ to his translation
of Aristophanes. We have to acknowledge ourselves indebted to his
extensive acquaintance with the Socratic writings, for references to
several valuable and characteristic passages.
[187] This is described by Xenophon in his Banquet, in a passage which
we must regard as his genuine recollection of a similar pleasantry on
the part of Socrates. Had it been found in Plato, this might have been
doubtful; but it is not Xenophon’s habit to introduce his master in
this ludicrous manner. At a drinking party in the house of Callias,
Socrates is introduced contesting the point of beauty with Critobulus.
To prove his own superiority, he asks, “whether beauty resides in man
only, or in other things?”
_Critobulus._ I think, by Jupiter, that it exists in a horse also,
and an ox, and many inanimate things: as, for instance, I know of a
handsome shield, or sword, or spear.
_Socrates._ And how is it possible that these things, being all unlike
each other, should all be handsome?
_Critob._ If things are well fitted for the purposes for which we have
them, or are well constituted by nature for useful ends, even these
things are handsome.(a)
_Socr._ Do you know, then, for what you want eyes?
_Critob._ Plainly, to see.
_Socr._ On this ground, then, my eyes would be handsomer than yours.
_Critob._ How so?
_Socr._ Because yours see straight forward only; but mine, which
project, can see to the side also.
_Critob._ You say, then, that a crab is the best eyed of animals?
_Socr._ By all means: since it has eyes the best constituted for that
which is the purpose of eyes.
_Critob._ Granted. But of our noses, which is the handsomest, mine or
yours?
_Socr._ I indeed think mine the handsomest, if the gods, in truth, made
noses for us to smell with: for your nostrils point downwards to the
ground, while mine are spread open, so as to collect smells from all
quarters.
_Critob._ But how can a pug nose be handsomer than a straight one?
_Socr._ Because it constitutes no barrier, but lets the eyes look
straight where they choose; but a high nose, as if out of insolence,
sets a wall between the eyes.
_Critob._ For the mouth, I give up: for if mouths were made to bite
with, you can take a much bigger mouthful than I.
_Socr._ And do you consider it no proof that I am handsomer than you
that the Naiads, who are goddesses, have for children Sileni, who are
more like me than you?
_Critob._ I have nothing to say in reply: but let the votes be taken,
that I may know as soon as possible what penalty I incur.
Verdict for Critobulus.
(a) There is a sort of ambiguity in the Greek word _καλὸς_, which is
applicable to any sort of excellence, whether beauty of form or aptness
to a purpose; so that neither handsome, nor any English single word
which occurs to us, exactly expresses its whole meaning. Familiarly,
indeed, we do use the term beautiful much in the same way; and speak of
a beautiful woman, and a beautiful cricket–bat, without meaning that
there is any more similarity between them, either of form or purpose,
than Critobulus, when he applies the term _καλὸς_ equally to a man, an
ox, or a shield.
[188] Convivium: end.
[189] Convivium, § xxxix., part ii., vol. ii., p. 452, ed. Bekker.
[190] Xen. Conviv., c. 3. So in the Protagoras of Plato, part i., chap.
92, vol. ii., p. 221, ed. Bekker. “Such meetings as these, when they
occupy men such as most of us here profess to be, require no stranger’s
voice, and no poets, whom it is impossible to question about the
meaning of what they relate ... but such men seek the company of each
other for their own sakes, giving and making trial of each other in
their conversation.”
[191] Plat. Laches, § 14, part i., vol. i., p. 270, ed., Bekker.
[192] Convivium, § 44, part ii., vol. ii., p. 465, ed., Bekker.
[193] It would seem to be, in reference to this sort of feeling, that
Plato puts these words into the mouth of Socrates, after sentence
passed on him near the end of the Apology: “For now you have done this,
thinking that you should be liberated from the necessity of giving an
account of your life;” a necessity which, to take Socrates’ own account
of his conduct, they may have been very glad to be liberated from. “For
if you should put me to death, you will not easily find such another
(though the comparison is ridiculous) whom Divinity has united to
this city as to a generous and great horse; but sluggish through his
magnitude, and requiring to be excited by some fly. In like manner,
Divinity appears to have united me, being somewhat like this (_i. e._,
the fly) to the city, that I might not cease exciting, persuading,
and reproving each of you, and everywhere settling on you all day
long.”—Apol. ed., Bekk., part i., vol ii., chap. 18, p. 118. Nobody,
however, ever heard that the horse was grateful to the fly. Again,
“As to what I before observed, that there is great enmity towards me
amongst the vulgar, you may be well assured that it is true. And this
it is which will condemn me, if I should be condemned—the hatred of the
multitude, and not Melitus or Anytus.”—Part i., vol. ii., chap. 16, p.
112, ed., Bekk.
[194] Solon appointed a set of officers, ten in number, who were called
_ῥέτορες_, speakers, to argue and explain to the people the merits
of public questions, for a certain fee. Their qualifications were to
be made the subject of a very close inquiry, according to his laws.
Whether in later times the appellation was confined to these recognized
speakers, or whether all who were ready to speak and plead causes,
as Lysias, Isocrates, &c., were so called, the author has not been
able to ascertain to his satisfaction; but he believes the latter to
be the case, which is not incompatible with the term still retaining
its special meaning, as the title of an officer. Demosthenes calls
himself a _ῥέτωρ_ (De Cor. 301). In later times they acquired much more
importance. Demosthenes was a sort of prime minister. In his time, he
says, the orators and generals ran in couples; one to plan and defend,
the other to perform (_ῥέτωρ ἡγεμὼν, καὶ στρατηγὸς ὡπὸ τούτῳ_, De Rep.
Ord., 173). In earlier times, on the contrary, all the leaders in
Athens were men of action, Themistocles, Cimon, Pericles, &c., down
to Nicias and Alcibiades, though most of them cultivated eloquence at
the same time. Even Cleon thought it necessary to pretend to military
renown.
[195] The passage of Ælian (iii., 17), quoted both by Mitford and
Mitchell, as giving the true solution of the cause of Socrates’ death,
contains no solution at all of that problem: it merely tells us, what
we knew on better authority, that Socrates did not like democracy.
Xenophon, Mem. i., c. 2, does more to support this opinion; for he
states distinctly that the avowed dislike of Socrates to the practice
of choosing magistrates by lot, the bad character of his pupils
Alcibiades and Critias, and his alleged perversion of passages in
the poets, to teach his pupils “to be evil–doers and supporters of
tyrannies,” were topics insisted on by his accusers in the speech for
the prosecution. Nor is it improbable that such topics had their weight
with many in the multitude of judges who composed the court, a body too
numerous to discriminate and weigh evidence.
[196] Apol., c. x., part i., vol. ii., p. 103, ed., Bekker.
[197] “Seeing Anytus pass by, he said, ‘In truth this man is
self–important, as if he would have done some great and noble action,
in having procured my death, because I said that it was not expedient
that he should educate his son about hides, seeing that he himself was
held in the highest esteem by the commonwealth.’”—Apol. Xen., § 29. In
the Menon of Plato, Anytus is represented as taking great offence with
Socrates, for showing that neither Aristides nor Pericles, nor other
great statesmen, had been able to educate their sons so as to impart
to them their own great abilities (he omits to mention Miltiades,
who had a son more eminent than himself, Cimon): a ground of offence
which seems odd enough, unless we suppose Anytus to have felt that
Socrates was talking at him all the time. Anytus concludes his share
in the dialogue with a caution to the philosopher against his freedom
of speech, and a hint that in all places it is readier to do harm
than good to a man, and of all places, most especially in Athens. ‘No
wonder,’ Socrates replies, ‘that Anytus is angry, since he thinks
that I am abusing men, of whom he esteems himself to be one’ (Ed.,
Bekker, part ii., vol. i., p. 378, § 34). These men are the _πολιτικὸι_
(see § 42;) so that Anytus was both _πολιτικὸς_, and (as being a
leather–dealer) _δημιουργὸς_; the two terms used in the passage quoted
from the Apology, and in both capacities it would seem that Socrates
had offended him. One of the commentators on Plato (Forster, Apol. as
above) tells us that the tradesmen of Athens thought that Socrates
corrupted the youth of Athens, because he disapproved of educating
young men, as Anytus is said to have brought up his son solely to
the lucrative crafts of their fathers, and because he led them into
the idle habit of thinking and talking. It may be observed that the
character of Anytus did not stand quite clear; since, according to
Diodorus, having been sent with a fleet to relieve Pylos, and having
failed to do so, as he alleged, from the badness of the weather, he
was accused of treachery, “and, being in great danger, bought himself
off, being the first of the Athenians, as it appears, who ever bribed a
court of justice” (Diod., xiii. 64).
[198] See p. 203, ante.
[199] Mitford, chap. xxxi. 2.
[200] Plat. Apol., § 3, part i., vol. ii. p. 93, ed. Bekker.
[201] The Apology of Plato, though commonly printed without any
division, consists of three parts: Socrates’ defence of himself; his
second speech, as to the amount of punishment, which begins at § 25
(part i., vol. ii., p. 128, ed. Bekker); and his address to the judges
after sentence of death was passed, which begins at § 29 (part i., vol.
ii., p. 133).
[202] This public maintenance (_σιτεῖσθαι ἐν πρυτανείῳ_) was esteemed
one of the highest honours that the state could confer.
[203] Athenian magistrates, who had the charge of executing criminals.
[204] _ταυρηδὸν ὑποβλέψας_, looking up like a bull.
[205] That is, profusely.
[206] The Greeks thought it of much consequence that any momentous
business should be undertaken under favourable omens. Sounds of
lamentation were ill–omened; even the direct mention of death was
avoided when a periphrasis would serve. The tragic poets abound in
instances of this sort of _euphemism_.
[207] Taylor’s translation of Plato. Some slight alterations have been
made where the translator seemed to have gone unnecessarily far from
the language of the original.
[208] “Socrates, though it was the common practice for criminals at the
bar to address the passions, and to flatter and entreat their judges,
and by such means often to obtain acquittals, would, on no account,
do any of those things which, contrary to law, were continually done
in the courts; but though he might readily have gained his acquittal
from his judges if he had done such things even in a moderate degree,
chose rather to die, abiding by the laws, than to live by transgressing
them.”—(Xen. Mem., c. iv., p. 4.)
[209] Hist. of Greece, chap. xxii., § 3.
[210] Hist. of Church, p. 587.
[211] L’Enfant. Hist. de Concile de Constance, liv. 1.
[212] He caused this document to be published at Nuremberg: “Master
John Huss goes to Constance, there to declare the faith which he has
always held, holds now, and, by God’s grace, will hold unto death.
As he has given public notice throughout the kingdom of Bohemia that
he was willing before his departure to give account of his faith at
a general synod of the Archbishopric of Prague, to answer all the
objections which could be made to it, so he notifies in this imperial
city of Nuremberg, that if any one has any error or heresy to object to
him, such person has only to repair to the Council of Constance, since
it is there that he is ready to give account of his faith” (L’Enfant.
liv. i. p. 39).
[213] Hist. Bohemica, c. xxxv.
[214] L’Enfant, liv. i. pp. 36, 37.
[215] L’Enfant, liv. i. p. 40.
[216] Sigismond is said to have blushed when Huss fixed his eyes on
him; as he declared to the Council that he had come willingly under
the pledged protection of the Emperor there present. Charles V., when
pressed to arrest Luther at the Diet of Worms, is said, in allusion to
this circumstance, to have used the following expression; “I do not
mean to blush with my predecessor Sigismond.” The conduct of the two
emperors towards Huss and Luther is well contrasted throughout; and
Charles was not a less zealous Catholic than his predecessor.
[217] Hist. of Church, p. 594.
[218] Animam tuam devovemus infernis diabolis. Æn. Sylv.
[219] Æneas Sylvius, Hist. Bohemica, c. xxxvi.
[220] The murder of Archbishop Sharpe is the most celebrated and
remarkable of these instances of perverted enthusiasm, mistaken
applications of the Old Testament, and determination to see a _special_
Providence in passing events. Burley, Rathillet, and their associates,
when they met on the Magus Muir, had no thought of harming Sharpe:
but when his coach passed that way, they concluded that the Lord had
delivered him into their hands; and therefore they killed him. For the
effect of the persecution, see Fox’s Hist. of James II. “This system
of government, and especially the rigour with which those concerned
in the late insurrections, the excommunication of the king, or the
other outrages complained of, were pursued and hunted, sometimes
by blood–hounds, sometimes by soldiers almost equally savage, and
afterwards shot like wild beasts, drove some of those sectaries who
were styled Cameronians, and other proscribed persons, to measures of
absolute desperation. They made a declaration, which they caused to
be affixed to different churches, importing that they would use the
law of retaliation, and ‘_we will_,’ said they, ‘_punish as enemies to
God, and to the Covenant, such persons as shall make it their work to
imbrue their hands in our blood; and chiefly, if they shall continue
obstinately and with habitual malice to proceed against us_:’ with
more to the like effect. Upon such an occasion, the interference of
government became necessary. The government did indeed interfere, and
by a vote of council ordered, that whoever owned, or refused to disown,
the declaration on oath, should be put to death, in the presence
of two witnesses, though unarmed when taken. The execution of this
massacre, in the twelve counties which were principally concerned,
was committed to the military, and exceeded, if possible, the order
itself. The disowning the declaration was required to be made in a
particular form prescribed. Women obstinate in their fanaticism, lest
female blood should be a stain upon the swords of soldiers engaged in
this honourable employment, were drowned. The habitations, as well of
those who had fled to save themselves, as of those who suffered, were
burnt and destroyed. Such members of the families of the delinquents
as were above twelve years old, were imprisoned for the purpose of
being afterwards transported. The brutality of the soldiers was such
as might be expected from an army let loose from all restraint, and
employed to execute the royal justice, as it was called, upon wretches.
Graham, who has been mentioned before, and who, under the title of
Lord Dundee (a title which was probably conferred on him by James for
these or similar services), was afterwards esteemed such a hero among
the Jacobite party, particularly distinguished himself. Of six unarmed
fugitives whom he seized, he caused four to be shot in his presence,
nor did the remaining two experience any other mercy from him than a
delay of their doom; and at another time, having intercepted the flight
of one of these victims, he had him shown to his family, and then
murdered in the arms of his wife. The example of persons of such high
rank, and who must be presumed to have had an education in some degree
corresponding to their station, could not fail of operating upon men of
a lower order in society. The carnage became every day more general,
and more indiscriminate; and the murder of peasants at their houses, or
while employed in their usual work in the fields, by the soldiers, was
not only not reproved or punished, but deemed a meritorious service by
their superiors.” Chap. ii. p. 128–30.
[221] The following passage, with other interesting particulars
relative to these times, is to be found in Scott’s ‘Minstrelsy of the
Scottish Border.’ It is hardly necessary to refer to ‘Old Mortality,’
as a most vivid and affecting picture of this interesting period of our
history, though coloured by the author’s prejudices in favour of the
dominant party.
[222] Wodrow says that the soldiers hesitated, or refused to fire, and
that Claverhouse shot Brown with his own hands.
[223] We give an abstract, to show both the number and nature of the
crimes which were punished with death.
Jan. 23. Six persons shot, surprised in prayer, in the parish of
Monigaff, Galloway.
Jan. 31. One person shot, taken in hiding, in Durisdeer, Nithsdale.
Jan. 31. Four shot, for refusing the oath of abjuration. Straiton,
Ayrshire.
Feb. 19. Four shot and two hanged, taken in hiding. Orr, Galloway.
Feb. 21. Five killed at Kirkonnel.
Feb. 28. One killed at Barr, in Carrick.
Ten others killed in the above month, at different times, dates
uncertain, facts certain. And so on, through the year, but especially
the first half. All these, it will be observed, are military executions
solely, not men slain in fighting, nor men condemned by the civil
power. Wodrow, book iii. chap. 9. § 6.
[224] Instructions to General–Lieutenant Drummond for marching to the
southern and western shires. Edinb. April 21, 1685.
“1mo. You are to employ all his majesties standing forces, in the
southern and western shires, or so many of them as you shall find
expedient, for pursuing, suppressing, and utterly destroying all such
fugitive rebels as resist, and disturb the peace and quiet of his
majesties government: and you are to cause immediately shoot such of
them to death, as you immediately find in arms.
“2do. You shall give order to apprehend all persons suspect for
harbourers, or resetters of rebels, and fugitive vagabonds: and punish
such as you find guilty, according to law.”
He is farther warranted to take free quarters, for all persons under
his command (not being of his majesty’s forces), in all places where
rebels, and fugitives, and vagabonds are suspected of being reset,
harboured, or connived at.
There is something at once ludicrous and revolting in the following
complaint, and the remedy applied to the grievance. It is a good
specimen of the way in which the Council exercised their inquisitorial
functions:—
“July 14. The magistrates of Glasgow present a petition to the council,
showing that their tolbooth is pestered with many silly old women, who
are a great charge to the town. The council order them to be whipped
and burnt on the cheek severely, who are guilty of reset and converse;
and such as are guilty of ill principles, that they be whipped and all
dismissed.” Wodrow, Hist. of Sufferings of Church of Scotland, vol.
iii. chap. ix. § 3.
Reset and converse are the harbouring and intercourse with proscribed
persons: _guilty of ill principles_ is a phrase of convenient latitude;
but must be understood to signify affection to the kirk and covenant.
[225] Wodrow, book i., chap. 2, § 4.
[226] Burnet says, “he gave no advantage to those that wished to have
saved him, by the least step towards any submission, but much to the
contrary. I saw him suffer. He was so far from showing any fear, that
he rather expressed a contempt of death. He spoke an hour on the ladder
with the composedness of one that was delivering a sermon, rather than
his last words. He justified all that had been done, and exhorted all
people to adhere to the Covenant, which he magnified highly.” Burnet,
Hist. of his own Times.
[227] Wodrow, book i. chap. 2.
[228] Wodrow, book i. chap. 2.
[229] Last Days of Pompeii.
[230] Heber’s ‘Life of Bishop Taylor,’ the worthy descendant of this
excellent man.
[231] By a singular specimen of ignorance, our ancestors, who held the
Mahometans in pious abomination, chose to consider that sect, which
holds images in abomination, as idolaters. Hence the word mawmet, or
maumet, and maumetry, are continually used in our early writers for
idol, and idolatry. “Unleful worschipping of mawmetis.”—Wiclif, 1
Pet. iv. 3. “When the Byshop Amphiarax sodeynly fell down into hell,”
according to Lydgate, Story of Thebes, it was the
“Mede of ydolatrie,
Of rightes olde, and false mammentrye.”—_Caxton’s edition._
[232] The principal question argued in this letter is the marriage of
priests. The following extract, which is of Taylor’s own writing, gives
a good notion of the way in which such examinations might be carried
on:—
“Then my Lord Chancellor said, ‘Diddest thou never read the book that I
set forth of the sacrament?’ I answered, ‘That I had read it.’ Then hee
said, ‘How likest thou that book?’ With that one of the Councell (whose
name I know not),(a) said, ‘My Lord, that is a good question, for I
am sure that book stoppeth all their mouths.’ Then said I, ‘My Lord,
I think many things be farre wide of the truth of God’s word in that
book.’
“Then my Lord said, ‘Thou art a very varlet.’ To that I answered, ‘That
is as bad as Racha, or Fatue.’(b) Then my Lord said, ‘thou art an
ignorant beetlebrow.’
“To that I answered, ‘I have read over and over again the Holy
Scriptures, and St. Augustine’s works through, and Cyprian, Eusebius,
Origene, Gregory Nazianzene, with divers other books, through once;
therefore I thank God I am not utterly ignorant. Besides these, my
Lord, I professed the Civill Laws, as your Lordship did, and I have
read over the Canon Law also.’
“Then my Lord said, ‘With a corrupt judgment thou readest all things.
Touching my profession, it is divinity, in which I have written diverse
bookes.’ ‘Then,’ said I, ‘my Lord, ye did write one booke, _De vera
obedientia_: I would ye had been constant in that; for indeed ye did
never declare a good conscience, that I heard of, but in that one
booke.’
“Then my Lord said, ‘Tut, tut, tut, I wrote against Bucer in Priests’
marriages; but such bookes please not such wretches as thou art, which
hast been married many yeares.’
“To that I answered, ‘I am married indeed, and I have had nine children
in holy matrimony, I thank God: and this I am sure of, that your
proceedings now at present in this realme, against priests’ marriages,
is the maintenance of the doctrine of divells, against naturall law,
civill law, canon law, generall councells, canons of the Apostles,
ancient Doctors, and God’s lawes.’
“Then my Lord Chancellor said, ‘Thou falsifiest the generall councell:
for there is express mention in the said decree, that priests should be
divorced from their wives, which be married.’
“‘Then,’ said I, ‘if those words be there, as you say, then am I
content to lose this great head of mine. Let the book be fetched.’”
(a) “His right name might bee Sir John Clawbacke.”—Fox’s marginal
note.
(b) Taylor had once before twitted the Bishop with his turn for
calling hard names.
[233] The garments of a Roman Catholic priest, which were to be put on
that he might be stripped of them, and thus symbolically deprived of
his pastoral office. The scraping mentioned below was performed on the
parts which were anointed in the Roman ritual of ordination.