This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world's books discoverable online.
It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.
Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.
Usage guidelines
Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:
+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.
+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.
+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.
+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.
About Google Book Search
Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web
at http : //books . google . com/|
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
^^;
Digitized by
Google
«
%
Digitized by
Google
HI
4
Google
Digitized by ^
THE ENGLISH
HISTORICAL REVIEW
PUBLISHED QUABTERLY
EDITED BY THE
EEV. MANDELL CEEIGHTON, M.A., LL.D.
DIUB PB0FES80B OF E00LBSIA8TIC1L HISTOBT IN THB
UNIVEBSITT 07 CAUBBIDOE
JkMSBiCAN BmxoB, JUSTIN WINSOB, LLJD., Librarian of Harvard College, Cambridge, MaaBaohuetto
VOLUME 11.
1887
<^jr^v>
LONDON
LONGMANS, GEEEN, AND CO.
AND NEW TOBE: 16 EAST 16<» STBEET
1887
^11 righf mtrvei
Digitized by
Google
PURCHASE
APF28 '32
^TBIMTID BY
0POniBWOODl AND 00^ HSW-8TEIR tQUlBl
h
Digitized by
Qoo^<^
CONTENTS OF VOL. n.
•o*
The Empbbss Theodora. By C. E. MaUet 1
Tbb Ohannbl IbiiANdb. By H. O. Eeene, CJ.E 21
QUBBN EUZABBTH AND THE VaLOIB PBINOBB. By MtSS A, M. F.
Bobifuon 40
Eablt ExpiiOrations of America, Bbal and Imaginary. By
A. B. Bopes 78
ViBiGOTHic Spain. By T. Hodgkin, D.C.L 209
OoNFiscATiON FOR Herest IN THE MiDDLE AoBB. By Henry
C.Lea . .285
Ttobnne. By W. O'Connor Morris 260
The History of 1852-1860, and OrbviliiE'b Latest Journals.
By the Bight Hon. W. E. OladsUme, MJ? 281
Aetius and Bonifaoe. By E&uxvrd A. Freema/n, D.CJj. . . 417
Byzantine Palaoes. By J. Theodore Bent 466
Queen Caroline of Naples. By Osear Browning . ' . . 482
The Movements of the Roman Legions from Augustus to
Sbyerus. By E. G. Hardf/ 625
The Life of Justinian by Theophilus. By James Bryce,
D.CJj.,M.P . .657
Charles I and the Earl of Olamorgan. By S. B. Ga/rdiner,
• LL.D 687
Digitized by
Google
iv CONTENTS OF VOL. II,
Thb Emplotmbnt of Indian Auxiliabibs in thb Amebioan
Wab. By Andrew McFa/rlcmd Dams 709
Notes and Doouments 07, 808, 518, 729
Bbviews of Books 158, 858, 558, 774
List of Histobical Books beoentlt pxtblishbd 192, 898, 608, 815
Contents of Pebiodioal Publications . . 208, 408, 618, 825
Index 838
Digitized by
Qoo^^
The English
Historical Review ^l
No. v.— JANUARY 1887
TAe Empress Theodora
THE courageous attempt recently made by M. Debidour * to vin-
dicate the reputation of the empress Theodora has opened
up again the stubborn controversy of which Procopius' * Secret
History * is the theme. Stimulated, it would seem, by the appear-
ance of M. Sardou's drama in Paris, M. Debidour has revised and
republished his earlier essay, and has boldly challenged a compari-
son between the Theodora of history and the Theodora of the
stage. The verdict of public opinion has, it is true, long since
been given on the other side ; but the charges of Procopius have
never before received the searching criticism which they require,
and even now we are fully entitled to ask whether the view upon
which that verdict is founded is supported by the facts.
There are few stranger episodes in literary history than the fate
of this celebrated empress. For us, to whom her name recalls the
beautiful and unprincipled comedian suddenly raised by a freak of
fortune from disgraceful obscurity to rule with undisputed power
over the destinies of the Eoman world, it is difficult to realise how
short a time that estimate of Theodora has existed, and how
different it is from any picture of her which would have been
drawn three hundred years ago. At the dawn of the seventeenth
century the romantic version of the empress's early life which we
accept to-day was practically unknown. To the historical students
of that time Theodora was chiefly remarkable for the prominent
place which she had occupied in Justinian's reign. Of her early
life nothing was recorded, but it was believed that from the date of
* In his monograph L'lmp^raUice Th4odora, It is largely a reprint of a Latin
essay on the same subject (which was presented to the Sorbonne in 1877), and was
published in Paris in 1885.
VOL. n. — NO. V. B
Digitized by
Qoo^^
2 THE EMPRESS THEODORA Jan.
her accession to the throne she had exercised a powerful influence
over her husband. It was known that at a great poUtical crisis
she had displayed unwonted courage, that she had taken a leading
part in the pohcy and intrigues of the Byzantine government, and
that to her wisdom the emperor had attributed the merit of his
legislation. But her virtues had been obscured by grave rehgious
errors, and her attitude towards the popes had proved her to be a
lost and impenitent heretic, on whom the greatest ecclesiastical
writer of the age had lavished every epithet of theological invec-
tive.* Such is the brief account of Theodora which was handed
down in history and tradition for upwards of a thousand years.*
Then suddenly a flood of garish light was let in upon the darkness.
Disinterred from the library of the Vatican, where it had long lain
hidden,. and edited by a learned and laborious critic, the * Secret
History ' of Procopius was presented to the world. For the first
time the character of the empress, as drawn by a contemporary
writer, was revealed in the blackest colours. The famous consort
of Justinian had, it appeared, been really a woman of the lowest
birth and worst character, whose public conduct was signalised by
tyranny and excess, and whose private life was disgraced by a
turpitude wholly without parallel. From the date of the publication
of the * Anecdotes ' Theodora was condemned. The tale of her
iniquities, which for nearly eleven centuries had been forgotten or
imknown, soon obtained universal credence. The testimony or the
silence of all other sources of knowledge was overlooked. And
the sombre picture which Procopius painted in the * Secret History *
is the picture to which our eyes have become accustomed to-day.
Is it, then, too late to inquire what were the claims of this new and
startling version to supersede a record sanctioned by historical
authority and by so long a lapse of time ?
Several obvious causes have contributed to secure general
credit for the disclosures of the 'Anecdotes.' In the first place
they are the work of a contemporary writer. Then they are the
only full and minute account which we have of Justinian's court
and of the private history of the reign. Their author, too, was
beyond all doubt the most eminent historian of his day, and his
high reputation makes us hesitate to reject as utterly unfounded
any statements of his, however extravagant they may appear.
Moreover, two very distinguished writers of a later age, who had
opportunities of sifting and of refuting these revelations, have
deliberately given their sanction to them ; and their attitude has
naturally gone far to predispose the pubhc in Procopius' favour.
* Such as Eve, Herodias, Aleoto, and Tidphone. See^Baroniua (aj>. 648, No. 24)
as quoted by Gibbon (footnote to p. 48 of vol. v. in Smith's edition, which is the
edition referred to in these notes).
* Until 1623, the date of the publication of the Secret History.
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE EMPRESS THEODORA 8
The Latin commentator Nicholas Alemannus and the English
historian Gibhon are qualified to speak on this question with
greater weight, perhaps, than any others, and yet when one comes
to examine their motives, neither of them has a very strong reason
to offer for the course he takes.
Of these strange 'Anecdotes' (writes Gibbon), a part may be true
because probable, and a part true because improbable. Procopius must
have known the former, and the latter he could scarcely invents
On this hypothesis Gibbon has stamped with his authority the
most extraordinary statements of their author, and the stories
which Gibbon related as scandals have, because Gibbon related
them, been widely accepted as facts. With Alemannus the reason-
ing is different, but the result has been the same. Speaking with
the weight which, independently of his industry and learning,
naturally attaches to the first commentator upon the * Anecdotes,'
Alemannus frankly states the argument which appeared to him
conclusive proof of their veracity. It is not worth while, he
maintains, to seek evidence to confirm Procopius, * since nothing is
too execrable to be believed ' of a woman who tried to overthrow
the council of Chalcedon, who established heretics in the high
places of religion, and whom the cardinal Baronius portrays as a
* monster' towards the catholic church.* We must not forget
that the language of Alemannus is significant of the temper in
which the 'Anecdotes' were originally welcomed. If the first
critic of the * Secret History ' approached his task with so pro-
nounced a bias, it is hardly to be wondered at that the reputation
of Theodora has suffered as it has. But perhaps the simplest
reason why Procopius' condemnation of the empress has been
accepted is to be found in the emphasis and detail with which he
has weighted his charges. Of course it has been pointed out ^ that
the accusations are unsupported, and that the evidence of the
* Secret History ' stands alone. But the majority of writers on the
fiubject seem rather to have avoided facing the issue directly.
They have failed to realise that these scandals must be either
substantially true or wholly false; and while rejecting in some
cases Procopius' circumstantial stories as too extravagant to be
credited, they have nevertheless concluded that Theodora was a
worthless character, because the stories told against her are so
numerous and so bad.^
The first question which arises is the question whether the
author of the ' Secret History ' had any obvious motive for libelling
* See footnote to p. 167 of vol. v.
* Alemannus' preface to the Anecdotes f p. vi (Orelli's edition of 1827).
* Especially by Dean Milman, in his notes on Gibbon (vol. v. p. 41).
^ Elsewhere Gibbon has guarded himself against the * pernicious maxim that
-where much is aUeged something must be true.'
B 2
Digitized by
Google
4 THE EMPRESS THEODORA Jan-
the empress. It naturally occurs to one that if his attack upon her
be not well founded, it must have been prompted by the malice of a.
disappointed man. The matter of the authenticity of the * Secret
History' has been so fully and repeatedly argued, that we may
well be content to avoid that controversy here, and to regard the
authorship of Procopius as established. But when that is ad-
mitted, our knowledge of its author's career does not greatly help
us. We know that at the beginning of Justinian's reign, Procopius,
then a young and rising lawyer, was appointed by the emperor to a
post closely connected with the person of Belisarius.® We know
that he remained long in this position, acting sometimes as legal
adviser and sometimes almost as confidential secretary to the
general, but always, it must be remembered, holding a public oflSce
and representing the emperor therein. We know that either in
this or in a similar capacity he accompanied his chief for over
twenty years in all his campaigns, following him to Persia, to-
Africa, to Italy, and to Constantinople. We know that he retained
the emperor's favour so far as to be admitted to the senate and to
receive the high dignity of illustris. We know that the histories of
Justinian's three great wars and the panegyric of the emperor's
buildings were published in the author's lifetime, and form the
basis upon which innumerable later chroniclers have built. And
we know lastly that in the year 558, ten years after the death of
Theodora, the man who had signalised his name by chronicling the
triumphs and the wisdom of Justinian and his consort, composed
upon the same subject a volume so scandalous and so vindictive
that he dared not publish it in his lifetime, but left it to be con-
cealed or neglected for upwards of a thousand years.
But here our knowledge stops. As to Procopius' latter days
— whether he retained to the end the emperor's favour, or fell
into disgrace and revenged himself by concocting a virulent libel,
we have no certainty to guide us. It has been asserted that to-
wards the close of Justinian's reign he received the highest mark of
the emperor's confidence and was appointed praBfect of Constanti-
nople, and hence, Alemannus argues, there is no room to suppose
that the judgment of his latest work was embittered by personal
failure.® But it is difficult to believe that the Procopius who waa
prefect of Constantinople in 562 is identical with the author of the
* Secret History.' In the careful appendix which he devotes ta
this subject Dr. Felix Dahn seems fairly to have disposed of this
supposition and of the argument built upon it. Proving first that
the * Secret History ' could not have been written before the year
558, Dr. Dahn goes on to show that it could scarcely have been
• For Procopius' exact position see Dahn's elaborate work on Procopi'us of Casarea
(p. 18) ; the iirst chapter is a biography of the historian.
* Alemannus' preface to the Anecdotes^ p. ziii (ed. 1827).
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 THE EMPRESS THEODORA 5
written after 562, from the fact that Procopius would never have
omitted to mention the downfall of Belisarius, which happened in
that year. Following the same line of argument, he reasons that
Procopius could not have passed over in silence the terrible in-
vasion of Slavs and Huns which was defeated in August 559, and
that hence the * Secret History ' was written before that date. And
lastly, from the fact that in the ' Anecdotes ' there is no reference
to the memorable catastrophe which befell the church of St. Sophia,
a church on which Procopius had elsewhere lavished pages of de-
scription and eulogium, Dr. Dahn concludes that the author of the
* Anecdotes ' had ceased to write before 7 May 559. Then he proceeds
to discuss elaborately the question whether the * Secret History '
was completed or not, finally deciding that it was left unfinished and
was probably interrupted by the author's death.*® Of course much
of this reasoning must be founded on conjecture. If it be true that
the author of the * Anecdotes ' was preefect of Constantinople in 562,
it may fairly be inferred that he could not have been animated by
disappointed ambition. But if, as seems more probable, he died
before the spring of the year 559, it is by no means certain that
disappointment and failure did not play a large part in his rancorous
attack upon Justinian and Theodora. The question of motive is
one which, with our scanty knowledge of Procopius* circumstances,
it is almost impossible to decide ; but when we consider that Pro-
copius was a native of Caesarea in Palestine, and that that province
suffered perhaps more than any other in Justinian's reign, it does
not seem unlikely that a feeling of local patriotism may have con-
tributed to bias his judgment and to colour his views.**
Now let us turn to the * Secret History,' and examine its trust-
worthiness upon internal grounds. Alemannus claims credit for
the * Anecdotes,' because, he says, they agree so perfectly with the
previously pubUshed ' Histories.' *^ But at the very outset of his
work their author discredits himself. In the preface to his public
history we find these dignified words :
The orator's art calls for eloquence, the poet's for imagination, the
historian's for truth. This is the reason why the author of these volumes
has not attempted to conceal even the failings of those whom he admired
the most, but has, on the contrary, scrupulously set forth in broad dayHght
all the actions, whether good or bad, of the characters of his tale.**
But in the introduction to the * Secret History,' Procopius destroys
>* See the long and careful note on this question in Dr. Dahn's appendix
(pp. 448-459).
" This suggestion is made by Debidour (L^Impirairice TJUodora, pp. 29» 30) in
one of the sections which he devotes to discussing Procopius' motives. It may be
worth noticing, but is hardly of much importance.
" Preface to Anecdotes, p. xii (ed. 1827).
" Debidour also quotes the words (pp. 26-7).
Digitized by
Google
6 THE EMPRESS THEODORA Jan,
the effect of these words by confessing that he is about to reveal
for the first time numerous facts, which, from motives of fear or
prudence, he had deliberately misrepresented or suppressed.^* Then
follows a long series of inconsistencies and contradictions. The
wars which in his previous volumes he had recorded as honourable
and glorious, are now little better than wanton massacres. The
hero, whose skill and conduct had achieved these conquests and
signalised his master's reign, is now only a contemptible and
uxorious husband, the slave of a degraded wife. The buildings
with which Justinian had strengthened and embellished the empire,
are now merely pretexts for extravagance and display. The bene-
volence which had induced Theodora to found a home for the women
whom she had rescued from the streets of Constantinople, is repre-
sented in the * Anecdotes ' as an act of arbitrary folly. ^* At one point
— in the new version which he gives of the circumstances of
Amalasontha's death — Procopius excuses the discrepancy between
his present and his former narrative by admitting that previously
he had purposely concealed the truth.^^ In another place, in the
small matter of the remission of taxes granted to Palestine after
the riots and rebellion there, we are enabled by the testimony of
Alemannus to convict him of deKberate falsehood.^^ Again, we read
in the * Anecdotes ' that Theodora's influence in the government was
so overwhelming, that if ever Justinian gave away an office without
consulting her, the unhappy recipient of the emperor's favour was
doomed to dismissal and disgrace, and in all probability to a dis-
honourable death.^® And yet in the history of John of Cappadocia,
who was Theodora's personal enemy, and whose tyrannous mal-
administration was beyond all doubt, we are informed that all the
efforts of the empress to dislodge the minister were unavailing
until she resorted to trickery and fraud.^® It is not often that the
scarcity of our information permits us to compare the assertions of the
* Anecdotes ' with other contemporary records; but the one instance
in which we are able to do so gives us a fair sample of the method
which Procopius has followed in the * Secret History.' In the account
of Silverius' deposition, which appears in the narrative of the Gothic
war,2<* we are led to believe that the pope was guilty of intriguing with
the Goths, and was deposed on that account.^^ Subsequently, Libera-
tus tells us he was sent under arrest to Constantinople; but returning
" Anecdotes, p. 2 (ed. 1827).
'* Procopius says it led the women to commit suicide (Anecdotes^ p. 126).
*• Anecdotes, p. 120.
*' Ibid, p. 90. Alemamius in his notes (p. 370) convicts, while he vainly endea-
vours to justify, Procopius.
*• Anecdotes, p. 114.
** See Persian Wars, bk. i. c. 24 ; Anecdotes, p. 132, and other references passim.
«» De Bella Oothico, bk. i. c. 25.
** Lord Mahon does not hesitate to accept the story of Silverius' guilt {Life of
Belisarius, p. 225).
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE EMPRESS THEODORA 7
later on to Rome, was transported into banishment by the order of
Vigilius. As to the details of the story told by Liberatus, there
may well be room for doubt ; but all authorities are agreed on the
main point, that Silverius died in exile.^ Nevertheless, Procopius
does not hesitate to charge Antonina obscurely with Silverius'
murder, and a little later on to refer incidentally to one of her
servants as the one who had been guilty of the pontiflPs death. ^ So
far from the ' Secret History ' being in complete accord with other
authorities, and with Procopius' pubhshed works, the discrepancies
between them are so marked that they lead one to suspect that the
author of the ' Anecdotes ' made a collection of scandalous charges,
and strung them together without any regard to what he had said
before, or without much caring whether they were confirmed or
confuted by the facts.
But laying aside the previous works of Procopius, there are
suflScient inconsistencies within the ' Anecdotes ' themselves. In one
place Justinian is described as a wonderfully silly man,** and yet,
as Alemannus observes, Procopius elsewhere remarks on his keen
intellect and constant attendance to business.^ In another place
Theodora is blamed for sleeping all day till nightfall, and all night
till daybreak,^ and yet the author of the * Anecdotes ' is constantly
reproaching her for thrusting herself into every department of
public affairs. Again we are told that the opposition in the impe-
rial family to Justinian's marriage was so strong, that while the
empress Euphemia lived Justinian could never prevail on his
uncle to consent.^ And yet he had sufficient influence to induce
his uncle to confer on this abandoned woman, whom the emperor
entirely refused to countenance, the lofty title of patrician.'*
But the most striking inconsistency of all is to be found in the
account of Theodora's elevation. If the judgment of the * Anecdotes ^
is to count for anything, we must believe that, at the time of her
marriage to Justinian, Theodora was by common consent the most
profligate woman of the age. The 'Anecdotes' inform us that
Justinian was equally remarkable for the self-restraint and austerity
" See Liberatus (in Migne's Patrologue Cursus CompletuSy torn. 68, pp. 1040-1).
The authority of Liberatus alone, who was a deacon of the Carthaginian church and
who wrote in Justinian's reign, is far better than the obscure hints of the Anecdotes.
But he is amply supported by other historians, e.g. Anastasius (in Muratori, torn. iii.
p. 130), the Chronicon VuUumense (in Muratori, i. 336), Pagi {Critica, ii. 668),
Amalrious (in Murat. iii. pt. 2, p. 62), and Agnellus (in Murat. ii. 89, 90).
^ See AnecdoteSt pp. 6 & 10, and Alemannus* notes.
'■* 1j\i0ios iirefHpv&s {Anecdotes j p. 60).
** See Alemannus* note (p. 336) : his attempt to get over the difficulty by saying
that one opinion refers to Justinian's old age and the other to his youth is perhaps
ingenious, but there are absolutely no grounds for such an explanation. The words
are obviously spoken at random, like much else in the Anecdotes.
•-'« Anecdotesy p. 114. «» Ibid. p. 76.
^ The loftiest title that could be conferred on a subject (p. 74, and note at p. 343),
yet Justin's objections to the match were based on Theodora's disreputable character.
Digitized by
Google
8 THE EMPRESS THEODORA Jan.
of his life.** The time of his marriage was a time when he was bent
upon conciliating all parties, so as to secure the succession to the
throne. He had reached an age when he might well be supposed
to have outgrown the passions of his youth.^ His ambitious cal-
culating temperament would be the least likely to imperil substan-
tial advantages by an act of the grossest imprudence. And yet
Procopius tells us that he chose this time to deUberately select for
his bride the most infamous woman in Constantinople. Nor is that'
all. We are asked to believe that this degraded woman was received
as Justinian's consort without a word of protest from the church,
the senate, the army, or the people, that the Roman world was
ready to worship her as a goddess, and that she was immediately
raised with their unanimous approval to a rank seldom conferred
even upon the wives of emperors.^^
The credit of the ' Secret History ' depends on the degree of con-
fidence which its internal evidence inspires. The question we have
to settle is whether we think that its statements bear upon their
face the impress of truth and probability or the traces of malice
and invention. Among the supporters of Procopius there are few
whose judgment, from the point of view of careful criticism, is of
more value than Dr. Dahn's ; and Dr. Dahn distinctly accepts in
its main features the portrait which the ' Anecdotes ' draw of Theo-
dora. In the fifteenth chapter of his book, in which he sums up
the case for Procopius, we find the following passage :
If now we ask whether we may accept the picture of the empress
drawn in the * Secret History ' for a true and accurate portrait, we can
answer unhesitatingly an emphatic Yes. AU the principal traits of this
picture are certainly correct; and they are borne out not only by the
corroborating testimony of other contemporaries, but also to a greater
extent by its marked internal fidelity to life.^* There are portraits of
which we feel at the first glance, without knowing tlie Uving originals,
that they must be accurate in the highest degree : such a portrait is the
Theodora of the * Secret History.'
And although Dr. Dahn admits that there are probably exag-
gerations in Procopius' version, and accuses him of accepting
scandalous reports with the credibility of hatred,^ yet he holds as
clearly established the fact of Theodora's low birth and the degra-
dation of her early life.
As to ' the corroborating testimony of other contemporaries,'
we may for the present lay that aside to be dealt with later on.
All we have to consider for the moment is the internal probability
of the picture which Procopius draws. At the outset we are met
«• Anecdotes, p. 106. •• He was forty-one (Debidour, p. 52).
»> Anecdotes, p. 80.
»• Grosse innere Lebenswahrheit is almost untranslatable (p. 379).
» See footnote, pp. 379, 380 of Dr. Dahn's work.
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE EMPRESS THEODORA 9
again by the difficulty which is always recurring. What are the
* principal traits ' of the portrait ? How much of the substance
of these stories does Dr. Dahn accept, while he rejects the minute
circumstantial narrative on which they are built ? The charges
brought in the ninth chapter of the ' Anecdotes ' against Theodora's
early career are protected from repetition by their grossness. It is
sufficient to say that they impute to the empress a moral turpitude
unparalleled in any age. But it is significant that some of the
passages in this chapter — some of the features in the portrait
which we are asked to accept because of its fidelity to truth — are
so coarse and extravagant in expression that even Alemannus
thought it necessary to omit them, realising that they discr3dited
their author more than they strengthened his case.^ Still, after
these have been eliminated there is left an abundance of passages
-as to which there can be little difficulty in deciding whether they
bear the stamp of truth or the marks of inventive malice. Here
is an instance. In the sixth chapter of the * Anecdotes ' we read
that Justinian
was the cause of calamities to the Boman world greater and more nume-
rous than had ever been heard of in any previous age. ... He never
hesitated to murder his subjects and to rob them of their wealth. He
thought nothing of destroying multitudes of men though innocent of any
crime. ... He was like a deadly pestilence let loose from heaven. . . .
It was not enough for him to have ruined the Eoman empire : he devoted
his energies to the conquest of Africa and Italy, in order to plunge those
countries in misery as deep as he had brought upon the provinces subject
to his sway.^
Again, in the eighth chapter we read that Justinian was exactly
like Domitian,^ that he
passionately delighted in blood and in gold. ... He was easily moved
to crimes, but could not be induced by any persuasion to perform an act
of virtue. ... If any man were to reckon up from the beginning all the
disasters which have ever befEillen the Boman race, and to compare them
with those of Justinian's reign, I beheve he would find that the deaths
occasioned by this man far outnumber all those which have occurred in
times past.^'
In another place we find Justinian represented as devising pre-
texts for massacres in order to deluge his provinces with blood and
to carry off the spoil for himself.^ Later on in the twelfth chapter,
the record of human depravity being exhausted, supernatural
agencies are called in to account for the crimes of the emperor and
his wife.
To me and to many of my order (writes Procopius) they seemed to be
not mortals but murderous demons, inflicted, as the poets say, as a curse
»* Bee Gibbon's footnote, vol. v. p. 43.
" Pp. 48 & 60, ed. 1827. "• P. 62. »' P. 66. »• P. 88.
Digitized by.
Google
10 THE EMPRESS THEODORA Jan.
upon mankind, who, having plotted together how they could most easily
and speedily destroy the human race and all its works, had assumed for
the purpose human shapes, and as man-demons had convulsed the world.'^
On the same page it is gravely recorded that Justinian's mother
confessed that the emperor was not the son of her husband Sabba-
tius, but the offspring of an evil spirit. Further on we are told
that some of the chamberlains attending in the palace at night
saw the emperor rise from his throne and begin to pace the room,
when suddenly his head melted into the air and the headless trunk
continued its walk uninterrupted.*® Another of these privileged atten-
dants related that as he was standing one day by Justinian's chair
the emperor's head was converted into a mass of shapeless flesh
without eyes or distinguishable features.
I write (hereupon observes Procopius naively) not what I have seen
myself, but what I have been told by those who positively asserted that
they saw it.
And in the same connexion it is related that a monk of singular
piety, who came to the palace to have an audience of Justinian,
started back in horror from the threshold of the imperial chamber,
returned home speechless and paralysed with fear, and related to
his friends that he had seen the prince of demons sitting upon the
emperor's throne.*** In chapter xv. we read that Theodora
was- by nature so savage that no lapse of time, no satisfaction of revenge,
no prayers or entreaties, no fear of divine displeasure, could ever stay
her fury :
and in the same chapter we are told that the only point of simi-
larity between Justinian and Theodora was ' their greed of gold
and blood, and their ignorance of truth.' ** And so in the latter
chapters of the book, where the author goes on to speak of Jus-
tinian's administration, and where, as we gather from other sources,
there is some foundation of fact for the narrative he gives, we find
the same extravagances and the same indications of determined
malice. Every measure of the government is represented in the
worst light. The administrative reforms of Justinian are contorted
until they appear as acts of tyranny and folly .^ The defects and
failures of his system are exaggerated to an incredible extent. We
are told that the emperor deliberately selected the worst men he
could for his ministers ; ** that he only approved of those officials
who plundered the people under their care ; and that if his ser-
vants abstained from robbing and injuring those they governed,
** P. 96. The yehemence of Procopius* language makes it difficult to translate
without hyperbole.
« P. 99. « P. 99. « Pp. 112 & 116.
*» bee Anecdotes, pp. 148 & 150, and also Reinhart's note, p. 408. ** P. 168.
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE EMPRESS THEODORA 11
they were never permitted to hold office again.** At last, in the
twenty-second chapter, it is gravely asserted that the minister,
Peter Barsames, recommended himself to the empress by the skill
in magic which he possessed.^
These extracts, it will be seen, are taken from every part of the
book, and they may fairly be said to represent its general tone.
Do they bear the obvious stamp of truth, or do they, on the other
hand, seem to have been dictated by inventive maUce ? Of course
they are extravagant and overdrawn ; but so is the whole of the
* Secret History.' What right have we to set these statements
aside while we accept the scandalous story of Theodora's early life ?
The author does not relate some as romance and some as fact. He
claims for all alike an equal authority. What grounds has any
critic for drawing a sharp dividing line and saying, ' So much of
these tales I choose to believe, and the rest I decline to accept ' ?
The story of Justinian's murderous instincts and supernatural
powers, the suppressed scandals of the ninth chapter, and the pub-
lished accusations of the same chapter against Theodora's early
life, stand together upon the same level. For all alike the testi-
mony of the ' Anecdotes ' is the only testimony we possess. Why
should we unhesitatingly reject the first two charges, and at the
same time hesitate to set aside the last ?
Before we go on to examine Dr. Dahn's loose phrase about con-
temporary testimony — one of the very few loose phrases into which
he is betrayed — let us deal with a point upon which Alemannus
lays some stress. It is the question of the marriage law. In his
preface to the ' Anecdotes ' *'' Alemannus argues with an air of triumph
that if any one doubts Procopius' story of Theodora's early life,
there is conclusive proof that she must have been an actress in the
constitution now incorporated in the code, which, by repealing part
of an old law of Constantine's, permitted actresses to marry men of
high rank.*^ It is true, Alemannus admits, that this constitution
has been generally assigned to Justinian,*® but that Alemannus
thinks he can prove to be a mistake ; it ought properly, he says,
to be attributed to Justin, and in that case it is obvious that Jus-^
tinian induced his uncle to issue the edict in order to facilitate his
marriage with Theodora. But to this method of reasoning, elaborate
and ingenious as it is, there is more than one objection. In the
first place — assuming for the moment that Alemannus can prove
the constitution to be Justin's — it does not necessarily follow that
it was a privilegium intended to serve the wishes of Justinian. To
» p. 106. " Pp. 164 & 166. *' p. ix.
*» Code V. 4. 23 ; and Debidoar, p. 69.
^ Alemannus* notes, p. 348. Alemannus in this and the subsequent pages asserts
that Justinian's laws on the subject are quite different from this. Well, the facts
speak for themselves. Alemannus' method of avoiding a difficulty is never verj
straightforward or convincing ; here his argument seems to me unusually weak.
Digitized by
Google
12 THE EMPRESS THEODORA Jan.
prove that, it must be shown that the law is an isolated instance of
the kind, and could not possibly have been a part of the ordinary
legislation of the time. But, on the contrary, we find that it is
thoroughly in keeping with the legislation of Justinian. The ordi-
nances of Justinian and Theodora are full of references to the sub-
ject, and doubtless the empress took a large share in this as in all
Justinian's legal reforms.^*' Her influence seems to have been con-
stantly exerted to ameliorate the condition of women, for, in the
language of the public history, ' she was naturally inclined to succour
women in misfortune.'** Thus a rescript confirmed in the code
prohibits the owner of a slave to force her to appear upon the stage
against her will ; and forbids the guarantors ** of actresses to pre-
vent them from quitting their trade. Another passage permits
actresses who have left the stage to contract marriages with digni-
taries, without any need of imperial rescript.** Later on, the fifty-
first novel, pubUshed in 537, enables women on the stage to renounce
their profession, and fines those who attempt to hold them to it by
pecuniary engagements. It also revokes the general prohibition
against marriages between persons of unequal rank. And lastly,
the hundred and seventeenth novel, published in 541, legalises all
marriages between persons of unequal condition, even although such
marriages had been contracted before the abrogation of the rescript
of Constantine.*^ Is it not possible to believe that these laws, in-
cluding the one which Alemannus attributes to Justin, were occa-
sioned by a worthier motive than Justinian's eagerness to contract
a disreputable match ?
But there is a graver objection yet to Alemannus' elaborate
hypothesis. His position depends on his being able to prove that
the edict in question was framed by Justin and not by Justinian,
and that it was issued before Justinian's marriage. The constitu-
tion appears in the second edition of the code, published in 534,
seven years after Justinian's accession, and it is there distinctly
attributed to Justinian.** Alemannus too, as has been said, admits
that critics *® have agreed that Justinian was its author, and under-
takes to prove that they and the code are wrong. His argument
that the code is full of errors may be true enough, but taken by
itself it carries little weight. Another of his arguments, that the
*• See preface to novel 8. ** De Bell, Goth, iii. 31. " Fidejussores,
" These two passages are taken from the Code (bk. i. tit. iv. 33). They are quoted
by Debidour, pp. 62, 63.
^* See for all these laws, Debidour's two admirable chapters, pp. 59-64 ; and also
his Latin essay on Theodora— a less popular and perhaps rather more scholarly work
— to which reference has already been made.
** Codex BepetiUs Prcelectionis, V. iv. 23 (Debidour, p. 59).
^* Docti viri (note on p. 348). It must be remembered that it is Alemannus who, in
questioning Justinian's authorship, attacks the received opinion. The burden of proof
therefore lies with him (see pp. 348-352). Gibbon strangely accepts Alemannus*
statements on the point without question or examination (vol. v. p. 44).
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE EMPRESS THEODORA 13
constitution is headed ' Imp. Iust. Augustus,' and is therefore
as likely to be Justin's as Justinian's, tells of course both ways*
But a third argument which he brings forward is more important,
both because he lays stress upon it, and also because if unanswered
it would go far to establish his case. He points out that the consti-
tution is addressed * to Demosthenes, prsetorian praefect,' and hence,
he pleads, it must have been issued in the early years of Justin's
reign ; *^ because at that time Demosthenes held the office of praefect.
But strangely enough Alemannus has himself provided us with the
means of detecting his own disingenuity and of disposing of his
plea. In another part of his notes he has collected and printed in
chronological order the names of the consuls and praetorian praefects
under the emperors Justin and Justinian.*® In that list we find,
as he has stated, that Demosthenes undoubtedly held the post of
praetorian praefect in the early part of Justin's reign. But looking
on a Httle later in the list we find that Demosthenes held the same
office again in two successive years under Justinian ^^ — a fact which
for the purposes of his argument Alemannus has entirely over-
looked. Hence the plea that the constitution must have been
issued by Justin because it is addressed to Demosthenes, breaks
down. With it breaks the whole chain of reasoning by which Ale-
mannus attempts to prove that public opinion was mistaken in
attributing the law to Justinian. There is no ground for rejecting
the belief that the edict was the work of the later emperor ; but, on
the contrary, it seems most probable that it was issued not only
after Justinian's marriage, but even after Theodora had received the
imperial crown.^ And if once it be admitted that the constitution is
Justinian's, the ingenious argument which has been twisted from it to
prove the depravity of Theodora's early career, collapses altogether.
When discussing the credibility of Procopius, both Dr. Dahn
and Alemannus speak of the testimony of other historians. Ale-
mannus in particular magnanimously refrains from quoting what
Other authors, * and especially Victor, Evagrius, and Liberatus, say of
Theodora, Justinian's wife.' ®* Of course if the statements of the
* Anecdotes ' regarding Theodora were corroborated by any contem-
porary writer, they would have a very different claim on our belief.
But what are the facts ? Search as we may on every side, we can
nowhere find a shred of evidence to support the story of Theodora's
flagitious life. We are naturally inclined to ask from what source
the secret historian drew the materials of his history. The scandals
which he relates must, if true, have been the talk of the capital.
*^ Post annum JusUni terHumvelduobtis seqtientibus (p. 348) : from a.d. 521 to 523.
^ Notes to Anecdotes, pp. 411-418.
** Probably about 529 and 530, though it is difficult to calculate exactly.
"* This was in 527. I should be inclined to date the edict about the year 530.
•* Preface to Anecdotes, p. vi.
Digitized by
Google
14 THE EMPRESS THEODORA Jan.
Vices and vicissitudes such as those which mark his history of
Theodora are not easily concealed or forgotten. Theodora herself
had made no secret of the shamelessness of her life. Besides, if
Procopius' assertions are not based on popular rumours, what
foundation can they have ? It is incredible, for instance, that the
story of Antonina and Theodosius, which is told in the third chapter
of the ' Anecdotes ' and repeated by Gibbon at the end of his forty-first
chapter, and which is among the worst of the recorded iatrigues of
the palace, should have been brought to Procopius' ears alone,
while it was rigorously concealed from all the rest of the world.
"Who revealed to the distinguished senator the secrets of Theodora's
dungeons ? The empress, he tells us, always succeeded in suppress-
ing what she wished to be unknown, so that not even her own
accomplices dared to whisper of her crimes.^ If these stories are
not inventions of Procopius, they must have been public property,
and known as such to every man and woman in Constantinople,
and to every writer of the age. But if that be so, if the shame of
the emperor and the iniquities of his consort had become matters
of cormnon report, why is it that no other chronicler, either in that
generation or in those which followed, has ever hinted in his pages
at the most glaring scandal of Justinian's reign ?
Let us take up the challenge of Alemannus and examine the
authors whom, he implies, he might quote in his support. Two of
them are orthodox ecclesiastics, who, it might have been expected,
would not have been too tender with the unorthodox empress.
And yet one of these, Liberatus, a deacon of the church at Car-
thage and a staunch supporter of the three chapters, writing at
the end of Justinian's reign, can find nothing worse to say of
Theodora than that she was an impious enemy of the church ; ^
while the other, Victor, bishop of Tunis, whose exile by Justinian
on theological grounds might well have embittered him against the
court, dilates on Theodora's heresy, but utters no word against her
private reputation." Two other contemporary writers, Johannes
Lydus and Agathias, both of whom spent a great part of their
lives at Constantinople, and one of whom at least possessed an
intimate knowledge of the court, are equally silent on the subject.
And yet Lydus was a disappointed man who does not hesitate to
abuse freely Justinian's system of government and John of Cappa-
docia's private reputation ; while Agathias, writing after Justinian's
death, could scarcely have had much to fear." Nor does the judg-
ment of posterity differ from that of contemporary writers, for the
« Anecdotes, p. 122.
«■ See Liberatus, Breviarium (in Migne, 68, pp. 1040 et seq.)
** See Chromcle of Victor Tununensis (in Migne, torn. 68, pp. 956 et seq,)
** See the work of Lydae (De Magistratibus, bk. iii.), and Agathias' History,
passim.
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE EMPRESS THEODORA 15
hiBtorians of a later age appear to have been as unwilling as their
predecessors to publish the iniquitous history of Theodora's life.
Malala, who lived and wrote soon after Justinian, and Theophanes,
the orthodox and industrious chronicler of the eighth century,
have Kttle but acts of charity and devotion to record of Justinian's
wife.^ The silence of Theophanes is the more remarkable because
we should naturally look for such an allusion in the strange con-
versation which he maintains took place in the circus between the
Green faction and the emperor, when the malcontents loaded
Justinian with abuse and taunted him openly with the delinquencies
of his reign. And yet even at that moment the reputation of
Theodora, who was specially obnoxious to the Green faction, whose
name had been a byword in the circus, and whose elevation was
the worst scandal of the time, appears to have been spared by the
infuriated mob.^^
But it may well be argued that some of these chronicles are so
slight and fragmentary that it is unfair to attach much importance
to their silence. Moreover, it is of course possible that some of
these writers may have known the scandalous tales which were told
of Theodora — they could scarcely have failed to know them if they
existed — and may yet have thought that they did not call for
mention in a pubKc record of the times. Or, again, it may have
been contrary to their practice to estimate the private characters
of the personages whose public acts they relate. Let us, then,
take two authors against whom these objections cannot be brought;
and first let us take one whom Alemannus himself has called as
a witness. Evagrius was born in Syria in the year 536, and
attained considerable eminence as a scholar, advocate, and his-
torian. During his boyhood Theodora was reigning at Constanti-
nople with undisputed power. He was brought up in a country
where, if the ' Anecdotes ' be true, the celebrated empress had some
twenty years before exhibited herself and her vices in every city to
the pubhc gaze. He must have known and conversed with men
who had witnessed and had not forgotten the iniquity of her early
life and the extraordinary vicissitudes of her fortune. Writing
after Justinian's death, he was uninfluenced by any fear of the
consequences if he spoke out. He was fully alive to the defects of
Justinian's government, and he paints in colours ^ almost as black
as those of the "Anecdotes'"^ the rapacity and exactions of the
administration. Nor does Evagrius hesitate to criticise in his
history the morals of the Byzantine emperors. In the beginning
** See Malala {Ch/ronographia, bk. zyiii. pp. 440, 441) ; and Theophanes {Chrono-
gra^hiay p. 286 and passirn),
^ See Theophanes (Chron, pp. 279-282), and Gibbon (vol. v. pp. 61, 62) ; also
Debidoor's Remarks (p. 86).
•• See Gibbon's footnote to p. 64 of his fifth volume.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
16 THE EMPRESS THEODORA Jan.
of his fifth book he deliberately turns aside to dwell upon the
luxury and profligacy of the younger Justin's Kfe.®* In the be-
ginning of his third book he draws an even darker picture of the
emperor Zeno's private life.^® And yet when in the fourth book
of his chronicle he comes to treat of Justinian and Theodora we
cannot find a word of censure or of comment upon the reputation
of a sovereign whose career, according to Procopius, was by far the
most disreputable of all.^^ Let us take another instance. Zonaras,
the eminent historian of the twelfth century, whose judgment
Gibbon estimates highly,^ whose position at court under the
Comneni gave him access to the best information, and whose
picture of Justinian's administration is only less dark than that of
the * Secret History,' might be expected to be more accurate or less
lenient. In his estimate of the sovereigns whose reigns he records
Zonaras proves himself to be no courtier. He does not hesitate to
expose the faults and follies of their lives. He does not attempt
to extenuate the crimes of the empress Martina, the vices of
Constantino Copronymus, the sensual corruption of Eomanus II,
the depravity of the notorious Theophano.^* He at least, one might
fairly argue, would have been the last man to have dealt tenderly
with the character of Theodora. And yet, when we search his
pages for some confirmation of the ' Anecdotes,' we find that he
accuses Theodora of avarice, and condemns the excessive influence
which she exercised over Justinian, but nevertheless has not a
word to say about the supposed profligacy of her Ufe.^^
Where, then, are we to look for witnesses to corroborate the
testimony of the ' Anecdotes ' ? Search as we may through the
historians of every generation, we find in all the same conspiracy of
silence as to Theodora's alleged vices. It is true that if we turn to
tradition, we do find at the dawn of the eleventh century and in the
writings of a monk of Fleuri, an echo of the scandals of Procopius.
But the chronicle of Almoin is such a tangle of fancy and of fiction
that it is almost impossible to discover in it the thread of fact.
The best way of testing his authority is to quote the simple story
which he tells. Justinian and BeKsarius, when young men, were
great friends. One day, while out together in search of adventures,
they made the acquaintance of two sisters, both of whom were
» Evagrias does not mince matters in attacking Justin's morality. ^¥ 8i rbr
$loy iK^eiiifrrifihos kcU rpv^cus ircxy^f ical iiiotfcus iierSirois lyKoXtyMfitpos. . . .
(Ecclesiastical History, bk. v. ch. i.)
'• Zeno's depravity suggests to Evagrius moral reflections (bk. iii. oh. L)
f> Search the fourth book of the Ecclesiastical History, which is occupied by
Justinian's reign. Chapter xxx. contains some severe criticism of the emperor.
'< Gibbon (vol. v. p. 64, footnote) says he * had read with care, and thought with-
out prejudice.'
^a See Zonaras, Anndles, tom. iii., and the chapters on Constantine m, on
Constantine Copronymus, and on Bomanus II, and the foUowing pages.
'« See Zonaras' chapter on Justinian's reign, in the third volume of the Annals,
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE EMPRESS THEODORA 17
Amazons by birth, prisoners by fortune, and wholly unprincipled by
nature. The name of one was Antonia, the name of the other was
Antonina. Antonia fell to the lot of the patrician. Antonina won
the heart of his friend. After some time, however, Justinian and
Antonia severed their connexion, but not before the Amazonian
lady had extracted from her imperial lover a ring as a pledge of
fidelity. Years passed. The patrician succeeded his uncle on the
throne. Then one day there appeared at the doors of the palace
a beautiful woman gorgeously apparelled, who demanded an inter-
view with the emperor. She was led in. At first, it would seem,
her former lover did not recognise her features. But the ring was
produced, the forgotten vows were recalled, the old passion revived
in the emperor's heart, and, overcome by his recollections, he ac-
knowledged Antonia as empress on the spot. The senate and
people not unnaturally objected to this unusual proceeding; but
the execution of several eminent senators inspired the requisite
terror, and Justinian and Antonia were thenceforth obeyed as undis-
puted sovereigns. That is the narrative of Aimoin.^* Alemannus
quotes him in his support. We need not grudge Alemannus his
witness, but it is only fair that if his authority is quoted, his
evidence should be given in full. And if we quote the tradition
recorded by Aimoin, it is only fair to mention a very different
legend which at this time prevailed in the eastern empire. In the
same century there was to be seen in the city of Constantinople a
stately church dedicated to the Spirit of Charity, on a spot where,
if rumour spoke truly, there once had stood the cottage of Theo-
dora.^^ Here, so ran the story, the great empress, coming with her
parents from their native town in Cyprus, had maintained herself
in honourable poverty by spinning wool ; and here it was that the
patrician Justinian, drawn thither by the fame of her beauty and
learning, had wooed and won her for his bride. This tradition, as
narrated by an anonymous writer, may be of little value ; but at
least it shows that in the city where Theodora had lived and
reigned the traditional estimate of her was not the one of Aimoin
or Procopius.
Such, briefly stated, is the case against the ' Anecdotes ' — that
they were first welcomed in a spirit of bigoted partisanship, and
that the publicity they have since received has not always been
dictated by the highest motives ; that they are inspired in many
'* See Aimoin'fl extraordinary chronicle (De Geatis Francoruniy bk. v.) It is not
difficult to recognise in the imaginary Antonia a shadowy reproduction of the
Theodora of the Anecdotes, The narrative is characteristic of Aimoin's style.
'• See the anonymous writer of the eleventh century on the Antiquities of Con-
stantinople (liber iii. p. 132, in Banduri, Imp. Orient, i, 47). It is hardly likely, as
Ludewig in his Vita Justmiani argues, that had Theodora been guilty she would
have taken pains to commemorate her poverty and her former home. She would
rather have tried to obliterate all that reminded her and her subjects of her past life.
VOL. II.— NO. V. C
Digitized by
Qoo^^
18 THE EMPRESS THEODORA Jan.
places by obvious malice ; that the assertions of their author are
often self-contradictory ; that some of their statements are beyond
the bounds of reason, and others undeniably perversions of fact ;
that the improbability of their version of Theodora's life is so
extravagant as to make it, if true, the most startling career in
history; that the charges they bring against her must, if well
founded, have been widely known, and are yet unsupported by any
of the historians of that time or since. Are we, then, prepared
to accept on this foundation the ' Secret History's ' estimate of
Theodora ? Ought we not rather to be content with what we know,
and refrain from rendering the bare chronicle of facts attractive by
dressing it up in the stage garb of scandal ? Is it not possible to
substitute a Theodora of history for the Theodora of romance ?
Of the various accounts of the empress's early life nothing is really
certain, but it seems probable that she came of obscure and lowly
origin, and was raised from poverty to share Justinian's throne.^^
Beautiful, well educated, resolute, and ambitious, she soon acquired a
marked ascendency over her husband. Her unflagging energy,
her keen clear insight, and her power of grasping details led her
to take a prominent part in the tortuous policy of the reign. In
the administration of a great empire it is not likely that her con-
duct was always free from error or partiality, and two grave
charges have been brought against her. It is said that she in-
stigated Amalasontha's death. It has been reiterated by eccle-
siastical writers that she behaved with arbitrary rigour to the popes.
In the latter case the fact that Theodora was a heretic may account
for some of the animosity of orthodox historians. The question of
Silverius' death has been discussed already, and it is not a matter
of great importance whether his deposition was due to Theodora's
enmity or to the very natural suspicion that he was intriguing
with the Goths. The charge of complicity in the murder of
Amalasontha is a more serious accusation. Procopius asserts in
the ' Anecdotes ' that Peter of Thessalonica, the ambassador whom
Justinian sent to Italy in 535, was furnished by Theodora with
secret instructions to hasten the queen's death, and attributes to
Peter's private intrigues Amalasontha's assassination.^^ This story,
which Gibbon has adopted from Procopius, is refuted by an exami-
nation of the chronology, which shows that Peter did not arrive in
Italy until after Amalasontha's death.^ But there are extant some
fragments of a correspondence between Queen Gundelina and
" Debidour (p. 46) acoepts the story of Prooopias as to her birth and parentage.
Without going so far as Lndewig, who traces oat for her a lofty parentage, I think
Procopius' tale is unlikely, chiefly because it is incompatible with the high degree of
culture and education which Theodora possessed, and which seems to have been the
chief reason why the ignorant and superstitious Bigleniza disliked the marriage. See
the quotations from Theophilus which Debidour gives (pp. 55-58).
'* Anecdotes, p. 120. ** See M. Guizot*s footnote to Gibbon, voL v. p. 128.
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE EMPRESS THEODORA 19
Theodora, in which the queen calls upon the empress to fulfil the
promises she had made to her, and in which there is a vague refe-
rence to ' a certain person ' which has been understood to imply a
guilty understanding between them with regard to Amalasontha's
death.^ But it would be ridiculous to attempt to found a charge
upon so unsubstantial a foundation. The motive alleged to account
for Procopius' theory — Theodora's jealous fear lest Amalasontha's
charms might win the heart of Justinian — appears absurd when we
recollect that at the time in question Theodora's influence over her
husband was perhaps greater than it had ever been before. Nor is
it necessary to search far for a reason which could have induced
Theodatus to commit a crime which his interest so obviously dictated
and his principles were not strong enough to resist.®*
As to the rest of Theodora's life, we have only passing glimpses
here and there. We see her conspicuous in her charities, untiring
in her benevolence, active, perhaps bigoted, in her religious zeal.
On one occasion we find her sending a cross of pearls to the
shrine at Jerusalem. At another time we see her journeying to
the warm baths at Pythos, and leaving liberal donations on the
v^ay to be given to the poor. On the shores of the Bosporus a
stately palace was set apart as a refuge for the unhappy women
whom she had rescued from the streets of Constantinople, and more
than one beautiful temple owed its foundation to the unorthodox
empress.®* In every department of government her influence was
powerful and decisive, and that influence seems to have been
generally employed for good. Some of the best provisions of
Justinian's legislation are to be attributed to her wisdom.®* She
did not hesitate to oppose the oppressive system of John of Cappa-
4ocia, the worst and most worthless of all the imperial ministers.®*
But it was on the occasion of the Nika riots that her high qualities
were most conspicuously displayed. At a moment when the
victorious insurgents were in possession of the city, when all the
efforts of Justinian and Belisarius to quell the tumult had failed,
and when the mob had carried off Hypatius and crowned him in
"* See Cassiodoras, Variarum, bk. x. These letters prove that an intimacy existed
between Gondelina and Theodora, and one or two references in them are certainly
-capable of the guilty interpretation which Qibbon gives them. Still they do not seem
to me sufficient ground for implicating Theodora.
** This is reiJly the strongest argument in Theodora's favour, that Theodatus had
an obvious motive for the crime, whereas Theodora had not. The motive of jealousy
suggested by Procopius (Anecdotes, p. 120) is ridiculous. On the other hand, Debidour
very pertinently points out (pp. 96,97) that the death of Amalasontha militated
against the interests of the Byzantine court. Moreover, if Theodora was the accom-
plice of Theodatus, why did not the latter expose her when Justinian and she
denounced him for the murder ?
** See Malala, Chron. xviii. 440, 441 et passim ; and Theoph. i. 286 et passim
{both ed. Bonn).
•• See especially novel 8, and Debidour (pp. 59-74).
** See Lydus, De Magistratibus, iii. passim.
c 2
Digitized by
Google
20 THE EMPRESS THEODORA Jan.
the forum of Constantine, a hurried meeting was held in the
emperor's apartments. All present urged Justinian to escape.
Alone in the midst of the trembling council, Theodora gave her
decision against flight. ' Death,' she pleaded in animated eloquence,
' is a necessity which we all must face ; but those who once have
ruled an empire must never live in exile and survive its loss.' At
length her resolution and her splendid spirit prevailed. It was
determined to make a last attempt to regain command of the city.
The attempt succeeded, and the throne of Justinian was saved.**
Such is the authentic history of Theodora. That she had
probably serious faults, few will deny. She may have been ambitious,
passionate, arbitrary, intolerant. She may have involved herself
too deeply in the dark and ugly labyrinth of Byzantine intrigue. *
We do not claim for her immunity from the errors and influences
of the times in which she lived. But we do claim that she shall
not be judged solely by the libels of the ' Secret History,' and that
the stain of a profligacy unparalleled in any age shall not, on such
authority as that, for ever soil the reputation of a high-spirited and
illustrious queen.
C. E. Mallet.
^ See Procopius, De Bello Penico (lib. i. cap. 24, ed. Bonn).
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 21
The Channel Islands
rE islands of the Norman archipelago have been the subject
of a literature more bulky than valuable. In the early part
of the last century, a learned native of Jersey, Mr. Falle, who was
also a canon of Durham and chaplain to King William III, contri-
buted an accoimt of the islands to Gibson's edition of the * Britannia,'
which he also expanded into a quasi-historical account of Jersey, a
work that has been reproduced in the present age with copious
notes by Mr. DureU. About a quarter of a century ago a local
magistrate, Mr. le Quesne, published a * Constitutional History ' of
Jersey, and the story of the island has also been treated by several
sympathetic French writers. Histories of Guernsey have been
produced by Jonathan Duncan and F. B. Tupper, the last named
a mine of information. The whole archipelago has been described
in a bulky volume by Messrs. Ansted and Latham. But most of the
current works on the subject appear to be lacking in scientific cha-
racter. In a few there is an attempt to employ original documents and
first-hand matter ; but on the whole the subject has certainly not
attracted the due amount of study from properly qualified persons.
Traditions blindly accepted, authorities garbled or misread, erro-
neous theories preconceived, or copied by one author from another ;
such have, for the most part, been the characteristic features of the
historical literature that has dealt with the subject of the Channel
islands. The writer of these notes has to crave the indulgence of
scholars for the shortcomings that may be found in them, whether
due to his own deficiencies or to those of his authorities. The
best printed materials extant are the 'Bulletins de la Societe Jer-
siaise' (Jersey, 1874-86), and to these he would here, once for all,
acknowledge his obligations.
At first sight it may seem as if the importance of the matter
was not suflBcient to require more serious treatment. But, although
of small dimensions, the little insular republics are singularly
ancient and unique things, whose administration reflects consider-
able credit on some of our ancient statesmen in England. They
present, moreover, some interesting illustrations of race questions,
for they were once connected with each other and with the main-
Digitized by
Qoo^<^
22 THE CHANNEL ISLANDS Jan.
land, and their ethnology cannot be dissociated from that of the
tract now known as ' The Cotentin.' It is even probable that the
connexion extended in a southward direction, and that the Beuffetins,
Minquiers, and Chaussey are the landmarks of the latter junction^
as the Ecrehous are of the former. The singular shape of the gulf,
with a straight-cut line of coast from north to south, and a rounded
corner by Mont St. Michel, lends plausibility to the tradition that
the Channel has worn itself a way in what is known as the
* Deroute,' and in so doing has abraded the schistose elements of
the lower lands, leaving the granite bare and crumbling, the mere
skeleton of a palaeontologic country. The Abb6 Manet, a Malouin
antiquary of the early part of the present century, published a
book in which he contended that this had taken place by the action
of a sudden storm-wave, and so late as 709 a.d. But, judging by
the analogy of other instances, such as the tidal deluges of the bay
of Bengal, such a cause appears insufficient. A marine tumult of
that kind may sweep away trees and houses ; but it retires, and in
retiring leaves the land where it was, or even perhaps raises it by
a deposit of silt.* Moreover, it has been shown by M. Chevremont
('Mouvements du Sol') that the evidence has been entirely misread,
and that the changes not only did not occur suddenly, but involved
far longer periods of time than eleven centuries. For historical
purposes, then, we must assume that the islands of the Norman
archipelago have long been pretty much the same in shape and
size as we see this day.
Before the beginning of historic records, nevertheless, they were
doubtless joined to the mainland, and were inhabited by one and
the same neolithic people. In Henri Martin's * Etudes * (Paris, 1872)
will be found some interesting descriptions and conjectures re-
garding the stone monuments of Brittany, to whose class those oi
the islands belong. M. Martin endeavours to show that they must
have been raised by some Celtic tribe, and not by Iberians, Ligurians,
or prehistoric races. Two things, however, have to be explained
before this view can be accepted : one being the presence, at least
in the island monuments, of neolithic remains in tlie ground beneath
the stone erections ; the other, the peculiar nomenclature that the
monuments have always borne. Celts, arrowheads, and similar
relics are fdimd twenty feet below the soil, some of which are
preserved in the museum of the Soci^te Jersiaise ; in some of the
cromlechs Phoenician and Gallo-Eoman remains have been found
at a much less depth. The places were, therefore, the sepulchral
areas of more than one set of human beings at successive periods ;
but the earliest must have been a people who did not work in
' Instances of the sea retiring ooonr on the coast of Kent ; and when aided by the
silt deposited at the month of rivers — as in the delta of the Ganges and the Mississippi
— may cause very considerable accretion.
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE CHANNEL ISLANDS 2S
metal, or (at the least) used stone implements for ceremonial
purposes. As for the names of the monuments, they are doubtless
Celtic, but such as would be used by Celts who knew nothing of
their origin, and looked upon them with ignorant and superstitious
wonder ; tukorrigan, cor-gaur^ pouque-laye. It is also noticeable that
similar monuments are found in Syria and India ; and it seems
probable, further, that they were raised by slave labour, or by a
people who employed a subject proletariat.
Taking all these things into consideration, and observing, more-
over, that the people of the islands are, in form and character,
rather Breton than Norman, we may perhaps provisionally
assume that the early population was either identical with, or
subdued by, some race akin to the modern Basques of Languedoc
and northern Spain, who were again overcome by a Celtic invasion
and settlement. That the Celts did not exterminate the earlier
inhabitants, may be inferred from the fact that the adjacent parts
of the Continent were occupied by a mixed race, admitted to have
originated from a fusion of both. Later even than the Christian
era, the south of Gaul and the north of Spain were occupied by
the ' Celtiberians.' In the fourth century they had blended with
the Gallo-Eoman society, as we see from the statements of Ausonius
the poet, bom at Bordeaux about 809 a.d. and prsefect of Latium
under the emperor Gratianus. Ausonius was evidently proud of
being a * Celtiber.'
Passing on rapidly we shall find that here, as on the mainland,
there must have been a settlement in which the civilisation of the
empire became predominant. That influence, however, belonged
to its earlier, or pagan, period. There is no evidence of the intro-
duction of Eoman Christianity such as occurred in Kent.. The
cross was planted in the islands by missionaries from Ireland and
from Brittany ; and the Celtic hierarchy was centred at Dol. This
was the period of Frankish ascendency, during which the island
church was under Breton bishops although she ultimately became
subordinate to the see of Coutance. A persistent tradition points
to the existence of a comparatively recent isthmus between Jersey
and the Cotentin coast ; and it is said that the bishop of Coutance
could cross by a temporary bridge when proceeding on his visitations.*
M. le Cerf even cites a charter to show that a chapel was built
upon the Ecrehous at a still later, period because the people could
no longer attend divine service at Portbail on the mainland. But
it is not generally believed by local antiquaries that his application
of this document is correct. Be this as it may, there was close
intercourse between the islands and the Frankish province of
Neustria ; for German institutions were introduced in the archi-
* A Boman road is even supposed to have run across the BeufFetins (see map in.
Patriarohe Ahier's Tableaux),
Digitized by
Google
24 THE CHANNEL ISLANDS Jan.
pelago which supplanted the Eoman system there, as they did
under the Saxons in Britain.
In all these changes the earlier races remained. There were
new masters and there were more slaves ; but it is not to be as-
sumed that any race was exterminated. Not only did the Franks
introduce their secular institutions and found a new spiritual juris-
diction ; they waged war for their insular possessions against the
pirates of the northern seas, the remains of whose camps and
barrows are still to be seen. But there is no reason for supposing
that Franks, any more than Eomans, had to conquer the original
population, much less to destroy them. The Eomans slaughtered
the Druids, and overthrew or otherwise obliterated their shrines
and altars. But the fishermen, the agriculturists, the women and
the children, must have been left to provide food and otherwise
labour for the conquerors. If not, the latter would indeed have
justified the trope which literary exigencies put into the mouth of
Galgacus. And what the stern Eoman did not attempt would
hardly be done by the less organising Franks.
There is some evidence of a partial occupation by Saxon and
Danish rovers. Mr. Vigfusson finds mention of the islands in the
Edda ; and it is possible that they were used as a place d'annes by
the ultimate conquerors of Normandy. Arms of that period have
been found buried, especially in Guernsey.' But one finds no
further evidence of alteration in the ethnology of the islands
between the beginning of the sixth century of the christian era
and the annexation of the Cotentin by William Longsword, the
second duke of Normandy, a.d. 982. It is generally assumed
that the Normans now occupied the islands to such an extent that
the population became Norman and has continued so ever since.
In proof of this it is observed that the family names are mostly of
Norman origin, the Norman law is supreme, the French language
is indigenous, the feudal system is still in force. Modern research,
however, has done much to weaken the force of these arguments.
No doubt there are a good many Norman patronymics among the
insular families ; but it is perhaps enough to reply that inasmuch as
family names were not introduced until some time after the Norman
annexation, and when the French language had become general and
the manors were held by Norman lords, family names would be
sufficiently explained by such considerations. The supremacy of
foreign law and language would be merely a badge of poUtical su-
premacy and of a previous backward civilisation, and even so when
looked into will be seen to have little real value.'* The French
language must have come in during the five centuries, more or less,
during which the islands had been under the Franks ; and the law
■ See Vigfusson and Powell, Orimm Centenary Papers^ No. 3.
* A number of non-Ar^-an and Celtic words still linger in the island French.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 THE CHANNEL ISLANDS 25
is really a most visionary guide. The political institutions of the
archipelago were, nay still are, rather Frank than Norman ; and
the Norman * Customary ' was not published until long after the
final alienation from Normandy ; never becoming statute in the
islands.' Even on the mainland the old Gallo-Frankish population
•clung earnestly to their ancestral institutions, as is clear from
Professor Freeman's accotmt of the peasant revolt of a,d. 997.
The same authority (* Norman Conquest,' i. 171) gives reason for
believing that the Normans on acquiring the province of Neustria
not only did not extirpate the inhabitants, but adopted many of their
institutions ; and by the time when the Cotentin and islands were
annexed the Normans had probably become still more Frank. The
priests, magistrates, and autonomous communes of the people had
been respected; Bishop Stubbs has shown that the constitutional
tendency of the duchy was Carlovingian : * What little legal system
subsisted was derived from the Frank institutions as they were when
Normandy was separated from the Frank dominion' ('Constitu-
tional History,' i. § 92). The feudal system itself was not of Nor-
man origin ; and, as introduced into the islands, was commercial
rather than organic. The parishes did not become manors, nor did the
Norman seigneurs usually reside in the islands. They drew rents as
absentee landlords from the old allodial proprietors whom they had
reduced to so much of dependence. But the island farmers have, per-
haps, never abandoned their proprietary claims ; and the chief positive
outcome of the usurpation has been that the name of * Norman ' is
opprobrious and hateful. There is an act of the Jersey Cour Eoyale,
dated 18 Feb. 1539-40, to the following effect : Guille NycoUe est con-
dampne a V amende pour ce que devant Justice le dit Nycolle arrogante-
ment sans cause a appeUez John Hodon * Normant etjilsde Normant,'
Even so late as the Franco-Prussian war of 1870, the misfor-
tunes of the French were a source of rejoicing to their neighbours ;
And among the Jersey farmers a fresh narrative of defeat was met by
the commentary : Tiens ; v'la ces de Normands rosses aequo
unefais. This traditional hostility (manifested in more than words on
many occasions) dates from the times of the original occupation of
the islands by the Normans, whose name is thus used as a generic
term of abuse for all Frenchmen. The provocations received from
Normandy must have been great to cause such an hereditary hatred.
But it is now evidently yielding to milder manners and better
knowledge of the amiable character of the French. In the inquest
made by Henry IH there was no mention of Norman law or cus-
tom, either in writ or return. So far back as the reign of Edward H
the royal conmiissioners sent to examine into the laws and rights
of the islanders, were assured by them either that they had never
» The Grand CoHtumier is no doubt evidence— primd facie — of what the law was
at the time of the separation under John ; but it is not * positive law ' in the islands.
Digitized by
Google
26 THE CHANNEL ISLANDS Jan.
been governed by Norman law, or that it had been with especial
saving of customs and usages which had prevailed beyond the
memory of man. Among these they reckoned self-government
per optimates patrue ; so that their institutions could hardly have
been then regarded as an importation from the duchy.
If any further proof be required of the non-Norman origin of
the bulk of the Channel islanders, it may be observed that there
are few traces of Norman architecture and no remains of any purely
private castle, that sure sign of feudal conquest. A few Norman
families must have, first and last, settled peacefully in the islands.
But that is not a proof of conquest or of extermination of the
natives ; as is clear from the case of Scotland, where Bruce and
Campbell, Gordon and St. Clair are still among the chiefs of society,
although it is certain that Scotland was never conquered or popu-
lated by the Normans. A few of the Channel-island names are
territorial, others are modem French or English. The rest
are the usual survivals of nicknames taken from trades, occupa-
tions, or personal peculiarities, Le Feuvre, Larbalestier, Le Gros^
Le Brun, &c. ; or from offices, as Le Bailly, Le Vesconte.
For the first troubled period succeeding the expansion of
Normandy, under the Conqueror and his sons, the islands con-
tinued an obscure section of the duchy. The lands were parted for
administrative purposes into communes, in which some part was
held in severalty and some in common. Twenty houses formed
the fundamental group in Jersey, and each commune was made up
of several vingtaineSy divisions which are still preserved; ^ in Guern-
sey the group was only twelve. The chief authority was in a court
of twelve magistrates, known in France as echevins, from the
Germanic Schoeffen, or jurats from the Latin. The alternative
titles show the composite origin of the institution, common to the
north, or Frankish, Gaul, and to Acquitaine. These were recog-
nised institutions of the Carlovingian empire ; and there is no rea-
son to doubt that they were respected by the Normans, as held by
Dr. Stubbs. This was due partly to motives of policy, to which the
Normans were generally accessible ; partly also, it may be surmised,
to Norman antecedents, which left those invaders without any pre-
judice in favour of institutions of their own, or aught that they could
substitute for that which they found existing. Even in England,
which was in some senses completely subdued, so masterful a ruler as
William the Conqueror respected the local usages of England ; and
it is not likely that the son of BoUo did less at a time when the
Normans could have had no law of their own, and in a province
which had not been forcibly subjugated. The islands, then, before
Henry II must have enjoyed their own indigenous institutions.
It is stated in Falle's * History * (the source of most of the cur-
' In St. Caen the divisions are oaUed ctteillettes (qd, circles of coUection).
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE CHANNEL ISLANDS 27
rent literature) that the institutions of the islands are based upon
a charter given them by King John immediately after the loss of
the mainland duchy. But this appears to be a myth resting on mere
conjecture. The earliest documentary evidence — that of the inquest
of 82 Henry III — does not show the people in the character of
Normans claiming Norman institutions under such a charter,
although many usages and customs are mentioned. In the com-
mission issued by Henry to Eichard de Gray, that governor is in-
structed to observe and administer the laws which were in use in
the times of the king's grandfather, who became duke of Normandy
in succession to his mother, the empress Maud, before succeeding
Stephen on the throne of England. We are, therefore, safe in
accepting the conclusion of Mr. le Quesne, that King John after
the loss of the duchy 'may have confirmed the liberties of the
people . . . but did not grant or originate them.' And these facts-
illustrate and explain the doctrine, laid down in Calvin's case, that
* the isles of Gamsey and Jersey [are] parts and parcels of the
dukedom of Normandy yet remaining under the actual leigeance
and obedience of the Wng. . . . These islands are no parcels of the
realm of England, but several dominions, enjoyed by several titles,
governed by several laws.' ^
The twelfth century is the beginning of the authentic history of
these singular little states, model republics under royal protection. It
was then that was originated their especial cognisance, formed of the
two leopards, passant, of Normandy and one of Acquitaine, which,
rather than the British escutcheon, is still their heraldic seal
and bearing. It was then probably that the old communal
divisions were formed into parishes for ecclesiastical purposes;
indeed, the date of 1111 a.d. is popularly ascribed to the oldest of
the existing Jersey churches.
During the troubled reign of John, the French made attempts
upon the islands ; and the celebrated naval commander of those
days, Eustace le Moine, took part in the struggle, sometimes on
one side, sometimes on the other. Of the administrative arrange-
ments and the condition of the people we know but little. Some of
the seigneurs probably came over and settled ; notably the ances-
tor of the present house of St. Ouen, who derived his name from a^
fief on the coast of the Cotentin, Carteret near Portbail. For
King Philip (when he declared the dukedom forfeit for John's
failure to appear before him and answer to a complaint which,
according to the latest theory, was not, as commonly stated, the
charge of murdering his nephew, Arthur of Brittany) also pro-
nounced the confiscation of the fiefs of the tenants-in-chief who
might adhere to John.* And of these the founder of the house of
' 7 Coke's Reports, 20 b,
■ Doubt has been thrown on the exact nature of these proceedings by M. Btoont
Digitized by
Google
28 THE CHANNEL ISLANDS Jan.
St. Ouen was one. So that this family, whose distinction extends
beyond the sphere of local story, derives its patronymic from a place
with which its members have never had any connexion since,
although it may be seen from the Jersey coast on any clear day.*
All these seigneurs were probably originally the leading mem-
bers of the legislature : indeed, the assise dlieritagCy at which they
were bound to appear, was the court at which political ordon-
nances long continued to be framed and promulgated. But they
doubtless had for assessors the twelve jurats and the twelve rectors
of parishes; the constables, or mayors of parishes, who now form
the remainder of the official portion of the ' states,' being sub-
sequently admitted as substitutes or deputies when the seigneurs
ceased to attend. The bailiff ultimately became the head of the
local magistracy ; but the governor, or captain, as a royal officer —
perhaps representing the primitive ' count ' or missus dominicus —
originally held real, if undefined, power. In this office was vested
the disposal of the public revenue, the right of presentation to parish
churches, the appointment of functionaries whether civil or mili-
tary, and the general control of the executive administration.
It is probable that the communes were never brought under
feudal obedience, as such ; but that fiefs were created by the crown
from time to time, and the old allodial proprietors induced by
various motives to admit the protection of the lords, without waiv-
ing their status as proprietors, and without incurring any of those
military obligations which, in less fortunate countries, usually
formed part of the feudal tenure. The farms continued heritable
and transferable, subject to money claims or charges in kind ; and
the armed levies were perhaps on a parochial rather than a feudal
basis, from which they ultimately developed into the modern
militia. Five only of the Jersey fiefs were/e/s haubert or of knight-
service, and these (though called * noble ') did not — as elsewhere —
convey a title of honour.
The division into vingtaines, which still prevails in most parts
of Jersey, and the titles of centenier and dotizenier, by which the
parish officers of both islands are still known, point to a time when
in a recent issue of the Revue Historique, But the point is not material to the general
statement given above.
* As an illustration of the antiquity of this family may be cited the report of the
royal commissioners of 2 Edw. I : Jurati de parrochid 5'*' Atidoeni dicunt per sacra-
mentum suum quod Reginaldus de Cartret tenet quasdam landas de dominico regis
pro voluntate ballivi reddendo inde annuatim vii. solidos et valent ix, solidi. Dicunt
etiam quod rex percipit de feodo de WynceUs x, sol. annuatim per manum Johannis
de Cartreto, Elsewhere : De feodis dicunt q. feodum de Wynceleys debet plewutn relevium
Feodum de S^ Audoeno plenum relevium et Rex habere debet custodiam eorundem et
hceredum et redditus dominorum infra cetatem, (V. Extente de Van 1274 ; second
publication of the Soci^t^ Jersiaise.)
The fief of St. Ouen is stiU held by a representative of the house of De Carteret,
i^ho is also (1886) one of the jurats of the island of Jersey.
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE CHANNEL ISLANDS 29
groups of householders were associated for purposes of self-govern-
ment, which perhaps became obsolete under the feudal system.^^
Moreover the seigneurs held courts at which the landholders had
to appear and make aveu for their holdings ; and some of the
charges, in kind and in specie, have subsisted down to our own
day, including the right of annie de succession. Under this
custom the seigneur takes the land of proprietors dying without
issue, and enjoys the profits for a year and a day. This pro-
bably points to an early custom of annual division of tenure : an
analogous right existed in Brittany under the name of droit de
rachat.
Under such a mixture of allodialism and feudalism the islanders
continued their humble existence. The land in each parish was
originally more or less common, subject to periodical division, which
tended, gradually, to become permanent and heritable along with
the original severalty. But in each parish there remained, down
to days still remembered, a communal plough ; and by the law or
custom of banon the members of the parishes had the right of
turning their cattle loose, on a certain day, on fields from which the
crops had been cut and carried. This custom was common not
only to both the islands, but also to the mainland of Normandy,
and is recorded in the * Coutumier de Normandie.' There is no
trace of a game law in the sense of an exclusive right of the
seigneurs to hunt over the lands of the tenants. There was a
maltre des cluisses, however, to watch over the crown warrens;
and alike in Jersey and in Guernsey the right of sporting was
restricted to the gentry, the manans being prohibited from en-
croaching on such privileges under distinct penalties. In the year
1526 an ordinance was passed in Jersey fixing the fine for pursuing
game, en quelque maniere que ce soit, at ten francs, a large sum
considering the place and time. Such laws have, happily, become
obsolete ; and it is understood that no seigneur would now enter
upon the lands of his farmers, for purposes of sport, until he had
asked and obtained permission.
With this scanty account of the original condition of island
society, we must pass on to a few recorded events of history.
The original separation of the islands from the main duchy
took place in a.d. 1203-4. M. Pegot Ogier has collected evidence of
repeated attempts to conquer them on the part of Philip Augustus,
which were resisted with success." Under Henry III no affair of
importance appears to have taken place, excepting always the
inquest of the thirty-second year. During the latter part of Henry's
long and unquiet reign the lordship of the islands was an appanage
** The Qse of a term indioating ' ooUeotion * in St Guen perhaps indicates that in
that manor the power of the seigneur was greater than elsewhere.
»* See also Dupont's HUtoire du Cotentin (Caen, 1873).
Digitized by
Google
80 THE CHANNEL ISLANDS Jan,
of the heir apparent; and there are still extant documentary
proofs of the attention paid to them by that great statesman, after-
wards Edward I. After he became king, that care continued ; and
the qtu) warranto pleas of the beginning of the reign of Edward 11
arose, probably, out of a commission issued by that king's father.
It has been already noted that, on this occasion, the people claimed
the right of being administered by their own jurats, presumably
elected, as an institution that had prevailed ab antiquo, and a tern-
pore quo non exstat memoria ; and that the antiquity was admitted.
Besides these general questions, the holders of the placita of those
days heard and determined money claims as between the crown
and the reUgious houses, and entertained complaints of private
persons against the royal officers. Many churches were buDt on
the islands during these early Plantagenet times, among which the
most conspicuous is that of St. Peter Port, Guernsey, dated a.d.
1312, still in fine preservation, and a grand monument of early
flamboyant architecture.
An extraordinary importance was attached to the possession of
these islands, both on the French side and the English ; a feeling,
indeed, for which it is difficult to account, but which must be kept in
view. Joined to the number of handsome places of worship, it seems
to show that the islands were even then prosperous places, and it
helps to explain the growth of privileges and immunities which
have made the English Hesperides one of the most favoured spots
of the globe. Reiterated charters and declarations of the English
rulers avowed the loyalty of the people, and the sense entertained
of that loyalty by the crown. Of the attempts made to restrain
the oppressions of the local officials, the following example (taken
from a letter of 10 Edward I in the Patent Bolls) may be cited :
Mquitaix dissonvm ut qui balMas seu loca nostra tenent {quos adjusU-
tiam exercendam et tenendam loco nostri ponimus) ad injurias facien-
das prasumant extenders manus suas.
This extract appears to be regarded by an indefatigable local
antiquary, Mr. H. M. Godfray,^* as an indication of the existence
in the end of the thirteenth century of a judicial officer like the
modern bailiff. It is, however, at least possible that the hail of
those days was more of the nature of a farm of the civil adminis-
tration of one of the islands, given for a money consideration by
the royal governor. One of the definitions of the old French word
baUli given by Littr6 is, officier de robe qui rendait la justice au nom
d'un seigneur ; and it is observable that the Guille de St. Bemi, tenens
baUiam at whom the above censure was levelled, was attoume d*Othon
de Orandison, the then lord governor or gardien des Ues, It is,
therefore, rather as baiUi in the sense of farmer-delegate of the
^> The writer would, onoe for all, express his obligations to this gentleman, whose
conscientious labours are destined to throw a permanent light on island history.
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE CHANNEL ISLANDS 81
governor (who may possibly have exercised some judicial functions),
than as an oflBcer answering to the 'bailiff' of the present day (a
chief justice appointed by the crown), that we are to regard De St.
Eemi and his colleagues of the time of Edward I. Grandison ap-
pears to have been an absentee governor, who regarded the islands
as a mere source of pecuniary profit, and the claims of his sons were
ultimately bought up for a compensation of a thousand livrea in
the reign of Edward III.'*
About 1836 trouble began to gather in the Channel. David
Bruce, the exiled king of Scotland, in the course of his ultimately
successful attempts to recover the crown, obtained the aid of the
French king, and fell upon the islands of Wight, Guernsey, and
Jersey ; on which Rex Tnandat quod homines eligantur^ armentwr, et
in insvlas Gemeseye, Jereseye, etc, mittantur, ad eas defendendas ab
invasione sociorum Scotia. Four years later the king complains of
the atrocities of the Scots and their allies in Guernsey, interfidentes
qaos Uluc invenerant, atati, sexui, vel ordini non parcendo. Bahu-
chet, the French admiral (afterwards captured and hanged by the
English), was particularly conspicuous in these cruelties. The docu-
ment quoted by Mr. Tupper (* History of Guernsey,' 87) as evidence
that the castle at St. Peter Port (Cornet) was held at that time for
the English crown is an extract from the Parliamentary EoUs care-
lessly copied. It really refers to the sister island ; and for * Gernes-
eye ' we should read * Gersuye ' or some such word. It does not
appear that the French were finally expelled from Guernsey till 1844 ;
in 1389, when Tupper supposes it to have been recovered, it was
evidently in the possession of the French, whose king granted it to
his eldest son, John, by whom it was re-granted to the celebrated
Marechal de Bricquebec. The chiefs of the Guernsey loyalists took
refuge in Jersey, and finally reconquered their own island with help
from Jersey and from England.
By this time the separation of functions had, probably, taken
place ; the royal writs are regularly addressed to the ' bailiff and
jurats ' on matters of civil administration ; and the governor, or his
lieutenant, appears only in a military capacity. ''
In 1350 a duty was ordered to be levied for the fortification of
the town of St. Peter Port ; but that town was again captured in 1872
by the maritime adventurer Evan of Wales. Sir Edmund Bose,
or Bous, the English governor, was driven to take refuge in Castle
Comet ; but the invader ultimately retired. About the same time
the castle of Gouray, in Jersey, was besieged by the French ; but
** Qrandison'g predecessor as warden of the isles was Amald Jean, who is oaUed
* king's bailiff * in the letters patent of 1275. He appears to have employed deputies
who are also caUed * bailiffs' (v. inquest of the same year. Soo. Jers. second
pablioation).
'' It is to be observed that to this day the bailiff is not elected, like the jurats, and
has not the same power in the court, only voting when the jurats are equally divided.
Digitized by
Google
32 THE CHANNEL ISLANDS Jan.
great uncertainty hangs over the affair ; all that is clear is that this
attempt also failed of success. The castle has since been known as
Mont Orgueil ; and it is possible that its name of pride was ac-
quired from its having resisted a siege at a time when English
prestige, generally, was at a very low ebb.
The good affections and services of the islanders were frequently
acknowledged by the sovereign in these times. In July 1341
Edward III, * considering with thankful remembrance how constantly
and nobly our beloved and faithful subjects of our islands of Jersey,
Guernsey, Sark, and Aldemey have continued in their allegiance,
and what things they have endured for the preservation of the said
islands and the maintenance of our rights and honour . . .'
secures them the same immunities and privileges which they had
heretofore enjoyed. His successor renewed the testimony and
grant. (See Tupper, 96, 118.)
In the Lancastrian period the islanders appear to have suffered
the lot of the shuttlecock between their two quarrelsome neighbours.
In a great naval battle fought about 1403, the French were un-
usually successful ; and having dispersed the English ships and
massacred as many of their sailors as they could capture, fell upon
the islands. The castles held out, but great havoc was wrought
upon the open country. Two years later a landing was effected
in Jersey by Don Pero Nifio, a Castilian commander acting in
alliance with France. A bloody but not very decisive battle was
fought — as is generally believed — in St. Aubin's Bay, and the gallant
leader of the Jerseymen (called * Llamabule ' in the Spanish chro-
nicle) was left dead upon -the sands with many of his followers.'*
In the following reign the tables were turned, and the aggressive
policy of Henry V protected the islands from attack. It is to this
martial monarch that is assigned most of the earlier part of Mont
Orgueil Castle on the east coast of Jersey. His imbecile son and
successor showed favour to the islands ; indeed, it is noticeable that
their best royal friends have been among the weaker of the kings of
England. An inspeximus of Henry VI is said to have recited the
charter of Eichard H, and we have seen that the islands were also
objects of solicitude to Henry III and Edward H. In the latter
part of Henry VI's reign, however, this care obviously gave way to
yet graver anxieties. In 1461 Queen Margaret ceded Jersey to
Louis XI in consideration of a force sent to the succour of her side
in the English wars. Pierre de Dreux-Bres6, coimt of Maulevrier,
the seneschal of Normandy, conducted a semi-oflBcial expedition to
England ; and Surdeval, one of his lieutenants, occupying the castle
of Gouray, Mont Orgueil, held power in the island for many years,
though unable altogether to overcome the influence of the Carterets
'^ It has been suggested that there were two of these attacks, one being on
Guernsey, and that they have been mixed up in the narratives usually accepted.
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE CHANNEL ISLANDS 83
in the western parishes. It is to this date that the moat and part of
the masonry of the manor-house of St. Ouen, their ancestral seat,
are ascribed. A monument of the French occupation continued in
existence many years ; for so late as 1516 the royal commissioners
of that era found a duty on com levied by the ' Captain ' which, they
reported, fuyt comence p, lea ffrauncoys au terns que SurderaU fust
Cajppitaigne}^ The actual occupation was put an end to early in the
reign of Edward IV, when the castle was taken by Sir E. Harleston,
vice-admiral of England, with aid from the seigneur of St. Ouen.
In 1483 the clergy of the diocese of Coutances obtained from
Pope Sixtus IV a bull confirmatory of the neutraUty of the islands.
This singular privilege is mentioned by many historians and jurists,
from Camden and Selden to Falle ; it continued in force down to
the reign of William III, when it was aboUshed by an order in
coimcil, having long been disregarded by the islanders themselves,
who found it a check upon privateering. While it continued in
force it had the effect of preventing, or impeding, hostilities within
sight of the islands, and giving much protection to local commerce.
In 1549, two years after the accession of Edward VI, Sark was
occupied by the French, who made an attempt on Guernsey from
that island. Defeated by the vigilance and valour of the people,
they next attacked Jersey, but with no better result; and Sark
was soon afterwards recovered by England. Aided by the pope,
Henry VH weakened the jurisdiction of the feudal landlords, and
confirmed the parochial administration of the levies, thus laying
the foundation of the modern militia.
The Reformation took root and flourished rapidly in the islands,
especially in Guernsey, where a large immigration of French pro-
testants had already begun before the Marian persecution. The
catholic reaction also reached them, as the well-known account of
the shocking martyrdom of Perotine Massey in Foxe is enough
to show. The French at this period had possession of Aldemey,
from which they were expelled in the following reign by Sir Leonard
Chamberlain, whose son was granted the farm, or perhaps seigneurie,
of that island. During the long reign of EUzabeth, it is evident
that the islands shared in the common prosperity. The last shred
of English territorial aspiration on the continent of Europe being
now gone, the archipelago became an element of another sort in
the national life. Once it had formed a material monument of
the dukedom out of which the royal power had grown, and seemed
to aflford stepping-stones for a victorious return there. Now that
Calais was lost, and that the new monarchy was erected in the
place of the Norman feudalism, all this was forgotten. The
'^ The common story, in Falle and elsewhere, that the Carterets kept the French
entirely ont of the six western parishes, is disproved by a precept from Louis
ordering Maul^yrier to release the priory of St. Peter, which he had seized.
VOL. n. — NO. V. D
Digitized by
Qoo^^
84 THE CHANNEL ISLANDS Jan.
islanders had become Calvinists, too ; and it was no longer either
seemly or politically expedient that they should remain subject to
a bishop who was both a papist and a foreigner. Accordingly, in
the early part of the reign (a,d, 1568), when Paulet or Powlett, the
last Bomish dean, was deposed, if not dead, the spiritual jurisdic-
tion of the bishop of Coutances was ousted and the archipelago
made part of the diocese of Winchester.
Other acts of Elizabeth are the foundation in Guernsey of
the still flourishing college (a.d. 1563) ; the grant of Sark to the
Carterets ; and the improvement of the castle in St. HeUer's harbour,
Jersey, which (like the Guernsey college) has ever since borne the
name of the virgin queen. She also issued an inspeximtts of previous
charters, and bore the usual witness to the loyalty of the islands.
The reign of James I is chiefly noticeable for the introduction
of episcopalianism into Jersey. Heylin relates how this was done by
the help of intrigue and personal motives. In Guernsey presby-
terianism held out better; and the English church was only
grudgingly accepted after the Restoration in that island.
In 1610 the bailiff of Guernsey was Amias de Carteret, seigneur
of Trinity Manor in Jersey. He was appointed lieutenant-governor
by Lord Carew of Hopton, the official enjoying the dignity and
emoluments of governor; and his appointment in Guernsey is
noticeable for more reasons than one : showing, as it does, that a
native of one island could hold office in the other, and also that the
duties of lieutenant-governor and bailiflf were not deemed incom-
patible. So late as the beginning of the eighteenth century, these
offices were again united, in Guernsey, in the person of Sir Edmund
Andros.
In the early part of the reign of Charles I, the French
threatened to attack the islands, in retaliation for Buckingham's
expedition upon their coasts. In consequence of this, additions
and improvements were made in the castle of Elizabeth at
St. Helier. That incommodious fortress — where the quartered
English and French arms of Queen Elizabeth, and the three swords-
in-pile of the Paulets, are still to be seen sculptured on the masonry
— was twice the palace of Charles's son, once as prince of Wales,
and once as king, de jure of Great Britain and Ireland, de facto of
Jersey. Here too was begun the ' History of the Rebellion ; ' Hyde
lived in ' the lower ward ' as a guest of Sir George Carteret, the
royalist governor, for nearly two years. It is at first sight singular
that, while Jersey was, on the whole, royaUst during the trouble of
those times, Guernsey was generally well affected towards the popular
cause ; but the explanation is to be found in the religious difference,
of which traces long remained, and are perhaps even yet not wholly
lost. In 1692 Canon Falle could boast, in a Jersey pulpit, that the
population of the island were all of the church of England, and
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE CHANNEL ISLANDS 35
* there is not one separate sect of any congregation whatsoever in
the whole island.' The use of the liturgy was, however, opposed
in Guernsey for a very long time ; so late as 1755 the dean was
obliged to have recourse to the aid of the magistrates when reading
it in the town church.
In spite of the whig tendencies of his island during the great
rebellion, the Cavalier lieutenant-governor of Guernsey was able to
hold out in Castle Comet by the help occasionally sent him from
Jersey ; and it was not until the larger island had been forcibly
invaded and conquered by a squadron of Blake's ships and a
brigade of Ironsides, that the place surrendered after a siege that
lasted almost as long as that of Troy.
Of the general poKtical condition of the islands in the seven-
teenth century, and of their affection towards England, let the
following, from the royal chaplain. Dr. Peter Heylin, suffice :
The people hve, as it were, in liberd custodid, in a kind of free sub-
jection, not any way acquainted with taxes . . . insomuch that when the
parHaments of England contribute towards the occasion of their princes
there is always a proviso in the act, ' That this grant of subsidies, or
anything therein contained, extend not to charge the inhabitants of
Guernsey and Jersey . . . &c.* These privileges and immunities (to-
gether with divers others) . . . have been a principal occasion of that
constancy wherewith they have persisted feithfully in their allegiance,
and disclaimed even the very name and thought of France ... so much
doth hberty, or at the worst a gentle yoke, prevail upon the mind and
fancy of the people.
It may be added that in Heylin's time the population of
Guernsey — perhaps including the minor isles that constitute the
bailiwick — was estimated at 20,000, and that of Jersey at 80,000.^®
In other respects Guernsey was by far the more prosperous and
(as we should now say) progressive of the islands.
The treatment oif the islands by Cromwell, in spite of the
trouble that they had given, was both constitutional and considerate.
From Burton's Diary (quoted by Mr. Tupper) we find that in
1654 they were exempted from sending members to Westminster,
* because not governed by our laws, but by municipal institutions
of their own.' In 1656 they were similarly exempted from the
incidence of the excise.
Charles II wisely took no notice of the parliamentary proclivities
of either the majority in Guernsey or the minority in Jersey, but
confirmed the ancient privileges of the islands. The French con-
tinued their designs upon them ; but the only serious attempt that
they made was frustrated by friendly information conveyed to one of
the clergy by the Huguenot wife of Turenne, and by the loyalty of
** These estimates were, doubtless, very much in excess of the real figures—
V, table below, p. 37.
d2
Digitized by
Google
86 THE CHANNEL ISLANDS Jan.
the rebel general, Lambert, who was a state prisoner in Guernsey.
Under James n we hear only of a bold attack made in Guernsey
upon the papist portion of the troops, who were disarmed by the
protestant party on the eve of William's accession.
The reign of William III was memorable for the signal victory
of the British navy at Cape la Hogue, largely due to the enterprise
of Mr. John Tupper of Guernsey, who contrived to elude the French
fleet in his yacht, and bring intelligence to the British admiral. It
was during this reign that the business of privateering began to be
seriously renewed *^ by the islanders, who are said to have captured
1,500 French prizes during that comparatively short period. They
carried on this trade throughout the eighteenth century with such
success as to win from Mr. Burke the title of ' one of the naval
powers of the world.'
In 1778, while the American war was at its height, the French
made a serious attempt to land in Jersey, their force being com-
manded by a cadet of the princely house of Nassau, who held a
commission in the French army. The landing was successfully
opposed. In January 1781 a subordinate of Nassau's, by name
Macquart, a broken gamester of the Cassanova type, made a despe-
rate attempt on the town of St. Helier, in which, if successful, he
would doubtless have been supported by a large French force.
Macquart, who is known in history by his assumed title of Baron
de Eallecourt, was shot on the market-place of the town, now the
Boyal Square, and those of his men who survived the brief engage-
ment were sent as prisoners to Portsmouth. The victory was
greatly due to the steady valour of the Jersey militia, of whom
Dumouriez reported at the time that they were such good marks-
men, and so devoted to England, that it would require ten thousand
good troops to conquer the island.
Since that date the loyalty of the people has not been exposed
to any renewal of these rude trials ; but they continue fEtithful and
resolute, as may be seen from a ballad by the late Georges Metivier,
of Guernsey, which may also be cited as a specimen of the local
language :
Quand les Fran^ais front virair d'bord
Nos mors de coeur-de-qu^ne,
Quand j'haiss*teron leu tricolor,
J'n'iron pas k la Seine.
In recent times this spirit has been again acknowledged by
English rulers. King William IV honoured them by declaring
their militia regiments 'royal,' and by appointing an officer of
each island to be a royal aide-de-camp. Her present majesty
visited the islands early in her reign, and paid them similar com-
pliments.
'^ Sir Qeorge Carteret's piracies, under the Commonwealth, are of coarse weU known.
Digitized by
Google
1887
THE CHANNEL ISLANDS
37
It only remains to conclude this unavoidably concise record by
a brief mention of some of the distinguished men whom the islands
have at various times produced. In order properly to explain this,
it is necessary to remind the reader how very small the numbers
of the people have always been.
In the two bailiwicks the population has stood, at various
times, at the following figures :
GUBRNSET.
Jersey.
Town
A.D.
Towil
Total
A.D.
Total
1615
1727
1800
1871
1881
1,800
4,500
8,450
16,166
16,658
8,000 »"
10,500
16,155 »» t
30.598
32,607
1692
1734
1806-15
1871
1881
#
say 7.000
30,756
28.020
15,000
20,000
22,855
56,627
52,445
With nnimportant additions for the minor
inlands.
* Corresponding figures for Jersey not
forthcoming.
In the seventeenth century, therefore, the total of the archipelago
wss probably under 25,000 souls, what would now hardly consti-
tute an elective integer in England. Among those then produced
by this tiny community were George Carteret, who, after adminis-
tering the affairs of Jersey in times of great trouble, and defending
the island valiantly against the invincible Cromwell, became vice-
chamberlain of the royal household, treasurer of the navy, lord
of the admiralty, member of parliament, and commissioner of the
board of trade; Daniel Brevint, dean of Lincoln; John Durel,
dean of Windsor ; Philip Falle, canon of Durham and chaplain to
William III ; and Edmund Andros, who, after filling the post of
governor-general of New England (with which were included New
Jersey and New York), died bailiff and lieutenant-governor of his
native island.
In the following century the islands produced, among other im-
portant persons. Vice- Admiral Philip Durell ; Morant, the historian ;
Admiral Carteret, the circumnavigator ; Dr. James Bandinel, the
Bampton lecturer ; and Jean, the painter : the famous Lord Gran-
ville, secretary of state and viceroy of Ireland, was of the St. Ouen
family, though not born in the island. Major-general Sir I. Brock,
the heroic governor-general of Canada, who died in the arms of
victory in 1812 ; Dobree, the collaborator of Porson and regius pro-
fessor of Greek at the university of Cambridge ; John Macculloch,
the geologist ; the Le Marchants, father and sons ; and Admiral
Lord de Saumarez, were all Channel islanders. Among minor or
more recent celebrities may be mentioned Lempriere, author of the
* Clabsical Dictionary ; ' James Amiraux Jeremie, regius professor
of divinity and dean of Lincoln; not to mention the names of
" V. declaration of 1652.
I** Add soldiers, sailors, and strangers, say 3,000, or total 19,000 (Stiles).
Digitized by
Google
88 THE CHANNEL ISLANDS Jan.
persons now living. This is but an incomplete list ; yet few English
boroughs or even counties could compete with it.
We have only had space for a very brief summary of the cha-
racteristic facts of this curious episode of feudalism. Whatever be
the origin of Channel Island institutions, it is evident that they
had been a perpetual care and object of favour to the kings of the
old monarchy. With the Tudors began the dawn of modern
society ; and the repression of the old aristocratic spirit found an
echo on these remote rocks. The power of the seigneurs was
curbed, the local levies were taken out of their hands and made
into rudiments of the militia force now existing. Originally organ-
ised on the basis of the parish, each company was put under the
command of parochial captains, probably elected by the people.*®
In the reign of Henry VIII a quarrel between the royal governor
of Jersey (Sir Hugh Vaughan) and the bailiff (Helier de Carteret)
led to the discomfiture of the former and favoured the growth of
that independence which now distinguishes the bailiff's office. In
the end of Elizabeth's reign Sir Walter Ealeigh was governor of
Jersey, and there set on foot reforms, among which was a system
of registration for property which is still in operation. The royal
court of Guernsey, in the next reign, had monopolised the power
which ought to belong — and in Jersey does belong — to the ' states '
or representative assembly : the functions of the Guernsey states
are practically suspended, except in regard to the election of office-
bearers and the voting of supplies.
The Eeformation took root naturally, and no religious crisis of
an acute nature disturbs the annals of the islands or the traditional
feelings of their present inhabitants. The great struggle of the
seventeenth century passed off in the same unrancorous manner.
After Cromwell had reduced Jersey, Carteret was treated very
differently from the unlucky defenders of Drogheda ; and Michael
Lempriere, who became bailiff, exercised his influence in favour of
moderation. No blood was shed, and the Cavaliers of the island
were permitted to compound for the retention of their property.
The cause of this difference is not far to seek ; it is the absence
of religious animosity such as had laid Ireland waste in 1641,
and is, therefore, characteristic of OUver's nature, stem but
just. The islands, as we have seen, continued to be considered
during the Commonwealth, being excluded from a parliamentary
redistribution bill and from the excise, in both instances out of
express deference to their ancestral immunities. Under the Eestora-
tion these privileges were secured afresh, while the organisation of
the militia was undertaken in a spirit of seriousness unusual in that
frivolous age. The then governor, Sir Thomas Morgan, was a brave
old Cavalier; and in view of threatened attacks from France he
^ In 1646 the protector Somerset ordered this organisation by parish companies.
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE CHANNEL ISLANDS 89
reformed the militia, combining the parochial companies so as to
make five regiments of infantry (clothed in scarlet) with two troops
of horse guards and a train of artillery whose guns were kept in the
parish churches.
In 1771 some legal and administrative measures were introduced
in Jersey, and that island, by the introduction of a number of elected
deputies into the legislature in the present century, is now poUti-
cally ahead of Guernsey.
Thus it will be seen that, on the whole record, a singular fact
emerges. These insular fragments of the duchy from which the
feudal monarchy of England arose are the parts of the realm in
which feudalism has become least oppressive and autonomy most
complete. While the larger country has retained its game laws and
its quasi-feudal relations of landlord and occupier, the islands have
only kept the more picturesque elements of feudalism. In Great
Britain and Ireland the land became all feudal except such portions
as were held in franc-almoign, and the feudal system still affects
land tenure and agriculture at large. The only parts of those
kingdoms which escaped are the Norse archipelago of Shetland and
Orlmey, where those fragments of ancient Scandinavia, in common
with the continental fatherland of the Normans, never adopted the
system which is connected in our minds with the Norman name.
The Channel archipelago, on the other hand, fell into a mixed
condition. The prevalence of feudalism in the adjacent countries
ultimately proved sufficiently strong to lead to the creation of
fiefs upon the island territory. But the allodial tenure and some
part of the communal organisation remained, and, in their modern
forms, are now stronger than the veneer of feudalism which the
Franks and Normans at one time superimposed. The people have
regained the whole local military power ; the seigneurs, as such,
have lost their seats in the legislative body. Their own courts, with
avetjuc, reUefs, &c. have been so dealt with that they do not clash with
the rights of the yeomen ; the wealth of the islands is distributed
in a fairly equable way ; there is no pauperism among the rural
population, no poUtical disaffection, and no crime.
H. G. Keenb.
Digitized by
Google
40 QUEEN ELIZABETH AND Jan.
Queen Elizabeth
and the Valois Princes
IN the year 1559 a new page was turned over in all the histories of
Europe. Within the year the kingdoms of England, France,
Denmark, and Portugal had lost their sovereigns. There was a
new pope. The doge of Venice and the duke of Ferrara both were
dead ; and Charles V, who from his monastery at Yuste had still
inspired the actions of Spain apd the counsels of the empire —
Charles V had died in September 1558.
Philip II at thirty- three is the oldest king in Europe; but
these young kings and queens are subtle, temporising, full of com-
promises, at once audacious and irresolute. The warrior had
already given place to the diplamat ; the man now gives place to
the woman. Elizabeth of England, Catherine of France, Mary of
Scotland fill the stage of Europe.
Everywhere the poUtics of Europe changed. Spain, by the
death of Mary Tudor, was divorced from England, by the death of
Paul IV was reconciled to Home. France, by the death of Henri II,
was left in the hands of a neglected woman, timid, irresolute, and
little used to rule. The kingdom swung between two opposite
policies — the hope of the Low Countries inclining it to England, the
dread of heresy persuading it to Spain. And England, six months
ago almost a Spanish province, had now become the head and front
of liberal reform.
So much for the purely diplomatic side. But the inner life of
nations was also changing, quickened by the spirit of the Eeformation.
There was a new and dangerous independence of authority; the
people, submissive for nearly two centuries, spoke again of their
rights and of their privileges. The burghers of Seville seized the
ingots of the Indies shipped to Philip II in order to repay them-
selves for the money they had lent the king.* The bankers of
Antwerp refused to advance their gold either to Philip or Elizabeth.
The members of the French parliament refused to vote save ac-
* Forneron, Histoire de Philippe 11,
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 THE V ALOIS PRINCES 41
cording to their conscience. 'Heresy is encouraging ideas of
liberty/ wrote Charles V to his daughter Juana, a few months
before his death.^ And when, in the last illness of Mary Tudor,
the Spanish ambassador offered Elizabeth the protection of PhiKp,
she haughtily declared that she ' was confident in the People who
all were of her party (and this is true) ; it is only by the People
that she occupies her present position ; all that she has she owes
to the People, and nothing to your Majesty, and nothing to the
nobihty of England/ *
This new authority of the people, strong enough in Spain to
seize the royal treasure, in England to support a queen declared
illegitimate and heretical by the pope, was in France more audacious
still. For the Huguenots were no longer merely heretics to heaven
and to Kome. Out of their midst had grown two new parties, the
politiques and the malcontents, heretics to the royal government,
freethinkers not only in religion but in affairs of state. They
asked not only a free church, but a free parliament, clamouring for
the assembly of the states-general.'* And this new party, with a
home policy and a foreign policy to suggest, and other than church
reforms in their petitions, these Huguenots by policy as well as by
conviction, had become so great a power in France that both
Catherine dei Medici and Elizabeth of England were fain, at
different moments, to use them as a crutch to sustain their own
trembling authority. For both Catherine and Elizabeth, the two
great figures of their age, were placed in a diflScult and dangerous
position. In France Catherine had only the name of power. The
people were divided by faction ; the house of Guise and the house
of Conde contended in Paris for the sovereign power. She com-
plained bitterly comMen il est malayse que ceste farce sejoue a tantde
personnages. Only by supporting the Huguenots, by using every
influence that weakened the Guises, could Catherine preserve a sem-
blance of royalty. Car Dyeu m'a laissee, she writes to her daughter
in Spain, aveque troys enfans petys, et en heun royaume tout dyvyse,
n'y ayant heun seal a quije me puise du toutfyer, qui n^aye quelque
pasion particoulyere.^
In England the position of Elizabeth was glorious but full of
dangers. She was still at war with France and Scotland; the
treasury was empty. The catholics might be tempted to proclaim
Mary Stuart. Elizabeth's legitimacy was questioned by every
catholic power ; and though it was the interest of Spain ® to sup-
* Dossier de Tuste, 3 ^tay 1558, quoted by Forneron. See also speech of duke of
Alva, 20 July 1662, Foreign State Papers,
< 1832, Mem, de la Real Acad. vii. 254.
* Armand Basohet, DipUmtatie VSnitienne ; also De la Ferridre and Baumgarten.
* Armand Basohet, Diplomatie V&nUienne^ i. December 1560.
* * We must defend England against Scotland and France, even as we should
defend Brussels.' Granville, 5 Dec. 1559 ; also Margaret of Austria's letter, Teulet
Digitized by
Qoo^^
42 QUEEN ELIZABETH AND Jan.
port Elizabeth against Mary Stuart, still to accept the proffered
hand of PhiUp would be to stultify the bold and Uberal policy on
which Elizabeth had determined. She temporised with Spain ; she
temporised with France* She accepted no definite poUcy. And yet,
with Mary of Scotland queen at Paris, Elizabeth was scarcely safe
upon her throne in London. Mary Stuart did not hesitate to
assume the arms and titles of queen of England and queen of
Ireland in addition to her queenship of Scotland and of France.^
But Elizabeth trusted in her own popularity, her personal ascen-
dency, and in the divided and harassed state of her neighbours.
Aware that so long as their intestine troubles lasted the French
could never attempt invasion, Elizabeth extended a friendly hand to
the French court and spared no effort secretly to fan the civil
war.
Then rather suddenly, in the December of 1560, Francis II
died. Mary Stuart was no longer reigning queen of France.
Almost at the same moment the civil war broke out in open fer-
ment. The gain of Calais became probable for England, the
friendship of England became necessary for France. Elizabeth,
however, felt nowise bound to the house of Valois, which had
nursed and abetted the pretensions of Mary Stuart. She made
no secret of her communication with the Huguenot rebels ; nor of
the fact that by their aid she hoped to regain the town of Calais.
Under the prince of Conde they were powerful in the north. On
15 April 1562, when the Huguenot Vidame de Chartres took the
town of Havre,^ Calais seemed almost within the grasp of England ;
for on 25 Sept. an EngKsh army under Lord Warwick entered
Normandy and occupied Havre.
Elizabeth was now in a very singular position.* Her soldiers
occupied Havre, and fought for the rebels of a Throne with which
she was nominally at peace, at whose court her ambassador, Sir
Thomas Smith, represented her still, and discharged his ordinary
duties ; while a second English ambassador, Sir Nicholas Throck-
morton, had let himself be captured by the rebels, and represented
Elizabeth in the Huguenot camp at Orl6ans. CompUcated as the
situation was, it seemed most advantageous to Elizabeth. Occupying
Havre with her armed men, and subsidising rebellion with her money,
she would refuse to make peace unless Calais were restored. Yet
Catherine was determined on retaining Calais. The civil war became
less a crusade from that moment, and more of a duel between two
clever women. It was the interest of Catherine to make peace
ii. 54 (7 Dec. 1559). * This would unite the three crowns of France, England, and
Scotland on the head of Francois II. The loss of Brussels were not so bad.'
' Murdin, 749. Ellis, Notes of Burghley,
* Paul de Foix to Catherine de Mediois. Foreign State Papers^
» Le XVI Steele et lee VaUns, De la Ferris.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 THE VALOIS PRINCES 48
— of Elizabeth to fan the flame of battle. * For,' writes Throck-
morton from the Huguenot camp,^** * although Conde and his party
do not deserve your aid, yet for recovering Calais, and maintaining
a faction at your majesty's devotion in this realm, it is necessary to
succour them.' So wrote Throckmorton from the rebel camp ; but
Smith, at court, was of a contrary opinion. Again and again he
informed Elizabeth that the French would never yield her Calais,
and that her aid to Conde only served to threaten England with
French reprisals later on. He assures her " that could they get the
aid of Spain the French would make a strong army, seize an
English fort, cause sedition in England and rebellion in Scotland.
Smith fully understood the danger of provoking France to raise the
claims of Mary Stuart ; but he also appreciated the vacillation of
Plulip.*'* In the hesitation of Spain lay the opportunity of England,
and Philip would not yet offend his heretic sister-in-law : * England
and traffic are too much joined.' '^
Elizabeth laid to heart so much of the warning of Smith as
caused her a continual suspicion that Conde and Queen Catherine
would make their terms without her. She was right. On
19 March 1568, Conde and Queen Catherine signed the peace of
Amboise in the absence of Coligny.
The terms were disastrous to England. So far from recovering
Calais, the English were at once expelled the realm. Uon dechaasera
tons estrangers hors du royavlme de France, ran the treaty." * Of
course,' wrote CoUgny, hearing of it, * this word strangers cannot
possibly apply to the English.' It was precisely to them it did
apply. The united French armies, forgetting differences of politics
and religion, attacked the English in Havre. By the end of July,
ignominiously cast out by force and hunger, Warwick had to with-
draw, defeated. France was dangerously at peace again, and not
only at peace, but inspirited by a national success. To one French-
man at least, to CoUgny, the briUiant siege of Havre suggested **
a great foreign enterprise as the cure for civil war, an enterprise
that had become possible since, for a few weeks, Catholics and
Huguenots alike had been able to forget their dissensions, and to
remember that, first of all, they were Frenchmen.
Catherine was mistress of the situation. EUzabeth appeared to
have gained only humiliation and defeat in their encounter. But
in reality she had impressed Catherine with her force, with her
>* Throckmorton to Elizabeth, 15 Dec. 1562. Foreign,
" Smith to Elizabeth, 8 Nov. 1662. Foreign.
" 22 Dec. 1662. Smith to Council. Foreign. »« Sevres.
" Note for the treaty of Amboise. Foreign SUUe Papers,
'• See Fomeron, Philippe 11, and also the Spanish despatches of Ghantonnay,
K 1,600, ArcJwves Nationales, for the chagrin and dismay of Philip at the success of
France in taking Havre : ' Elizabeth had assured him she could stand a siege of at
least a year's duration,* writes Saint-Sulpice to Catherine.
Digitized by
Google
44 QUEEN ELIZABETH AND Jan.
astuteness. Catherine beheld in her a terrible neighbour, a per-
petual scourge to her enemies. The marvellous audacity of Elizabeth
in outraging the champions of Mary Stuart, impressed Catherine
as energy and strength. She would be as effective in alliance as
in enmity. In November 1564, Catherine sent for Smith,** and
asked him in the presence of the king why his queen had never
married. Before the astonished ambassador could answer, she
asked again, * Why does the queen not marry Lord Robert Dudley?*
There were in France, as in England, many scandals about Queen
Elizabeth, and Smith was not ignorant of them when he repUed that,
should the queen desire it, she was free to marry Dudley, for her
parliament had continually pressed marriage upon her, leaving the
absolute choice of a husband to herself. 'Why, then,' rejoined
Queen Catherine again, ' why does your queen not marry Eobert
Dudley ? ' Smith made no answer at the time ; but early in the
February of 1565, Queen Catherine sent again for Smith,*^ and
proposed to him a marriage between Charles IX, her son, the king
of France, and EUzabeth, the queen of England.
The project was singular and audacious. To marry the protestant
queen of England, a reigning and powerful sovereign, to the
reigning king of France, a catholic, and the open enemy of reform,
would indeed be in some sort a gage of rehgious quiet. Catherine,
perhaps, divined that such a peace would be a balm for the many
wounds of France. But in the way of this improbable and almost
unnatural marriage the difficulties were immense, and seemed im-
possible to conquer. Nevertheless Cecil seemed at least to take the
project seriously to heart. It was certainly against the chance of
happiness that the queen was thirty and the king only fifteen years
of age. But, even if they married, Charles and Ehzabeth would see
little of each other. She would reign in England, he in France,
* whither,' said Catherine, ' if your queen marry the king, she must
occasionally let herself be constrained to come.' ** The real difficulty
was, firstly, the question of religion, and secondly, the question of
inheritance. For if one child alone were born to inherit both king-
doms, it was arranged that the seat of rule must be in France, and
England governed by a viceroy.'* This was a hard prospect for
English pride to face. Yet so difficult was the question of succession,
so great the immediate fear of Mary Stuart and the cathoUcs, that
Cecil merely asked a Httle delay in which to consider the prospects
of the match.
But delay was precisely that which Queen Catherine could not
grant. Her authority needed immediate support, and she must have
it, from England or from Spain. She was willing to forgive past
'• Smith, 8 Nov. 1664. Foreign SUUe Papers,
*' 9 Feb. : Smith to Cecil. 16 Feb. : Speech of Cecil to Paul de Foix.
>" Foreign : Smith to Elizabeth, 16 ApriL ** Foreign : Notes by Cecil, 16 Feb.
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE VALOIS PRINCES 45
injuries, to marry her child to Elizabeth, but it must be at once.
Catherine had always in her mind*s eye two opposite goals of suc-
cess, and her tortuous course now made for one and now for the
other. There were two mighty futures open to Prance. As the
ally of Spain, as the second catholic power, France might remain
great in the safe and sacred highways of tradition. But there was
always that other possibility, that audacious liberal dream, which
haunted at some moment all the keener minds of France from the
time when Francis I lay a captive at Pavia to the days of the pro-
ject of Spires in 1573. This second policy would have made
France the antagonist of the empire, would have made her the
great latitudinarian power, the foe of the Inquisition, sheltering
under her broad aegis the protestants of Germany and Denmark,
accepting the fellowship of England and Venice, admitting, if needs
be, the Grand Seigneur himself.
Catherine at this juncture was attempting to decide between
these different ideals. On the one hand, she might marry France
to England and inaugurate a Uberal policy. On the other hand,
she believed that at Bayonne, in June, she would meet the king of
Spain, who would offer her the emperor's daughter for her son.*®
She must be in a position to accept or decline, and therefore
Elizabeth must decide without delay.
Catherine had said to Somers in 1564, ' My son is sought
after upon all sides,' and among the princesses whom rumour se-
lected as the future queen of France were the emperor's daughter,
the infanta of Portugal, the queen of England, and, lastly,
the only daughter of the Grand Turk, born in marriage, willing
for baptism, and enriched with * a dowry of five millions, and
he cannot tell what realms.'** Here was a dazzling choice,
and among the daughter^ of the four great antagonists of the
earth.
The emperor's daughter was a pretty, amiable, and pious child ;
the infanta of Portugal a young girl of sixteen ; the Turkish sultana
had her sacks of treasure, and her charms and veils of mystery ;
Elizabeth was thirty, a heretic, an irascible woman, vain, astute,
extravagant, and though not devoid of a certain wit and good bear-
ing, a certain grace and attraction of manner,** yet neither young
nor lovely, for, says Queen Catherine, * every one tells me of her
beauty, but from what I see of her portrait, I must confess she has
no good painters at court.' ** Charles, however, declared himself the
lover of this least favoured lady. * Madam,' he cried to his mother
in the presence of Smith, * I would have the queen of England an
^ Foreign: Kote by Cecil, 26 March. Smith to Elizabeth, 7 June. Journal of
afitairs in France, Joly 2.
** Smith to Leicester, July 1565.
" Tonmiaseo, Michiel, 1557. " Foreign, Smith, Notes, April.
Digitized by
Google
46 QUEEN ELIZABETH AND Jan.
I could/ ^* and again he declared that he found no fault in her age.
It is possible that the young king, a tall slender long-faced boy,
pallid and amiable,^ was glad to think of an escape from that
inevitable surveillance of his mother's, which, as we learn from
the Venetian ambassadors, gradually sucked the spirit out of a
naturally chivalric and valorous disposition. From some cause,
from the hope of liberty, from ambition, or from obedience, the
yoimg king was willing and eager to marry the queen of England.
And Queen Catherine also was anxious for the match. She pro-
bably disliked Elizabeth, but for the moment she was really desirous
of a placable national anti-crusader policy. She wished for no ex-
travagance of the Inquisition, no interference of the popes. She
wished to subdue the Guises, dangerously popular in Paris. She
spared no pains to conciliate the Huguenots.* France was willing
to ally herself with England ; it was Elizabeth that could not
decide.
To imperil the independence of her kingdom ; to put herself in
the power of a catholic, who would murder her perhaps, and then
marry Mary Stuart ; to become the unloved and elderly wife of a
child of fifteen; this was a melancholy prospect for Elizabeth.
Probably she never intended to consent. But she pretended to
deUberate, partly to secure a rapprochement with France, and partly
to conciliate her own parliament, never weary of insisting on her
marriage. It was not the first time that she had smiled on some
advancing prince, had appeared to soften, meditating all the while
some task for him as impossible as that which any fabled princess
ever set her fairy lover.
Meanwhile there was a great come-and-go of ambassadors and
secretaries, an air of secret business in either court, a stir of
rumour in Europe. * It is whispered here* that marriage is intended
between France and England,' writes Eandolph from Scotland on
80 March ; and so late as June he writes again that ' the queen of
Scots declares herself undone if England mate with France.' But
by this time Elizabeth had refused the alliance. Brave as she was,
she could not endure to wed a lad of fifteen. By 7 June ^ the
affair was virtually at an end. By the end of the month the
queen of Prance had met her child, the queen of Spain, with Alva
at Bayonne.
II
The conference of Bayonne was one of those surprising blunders
which ever and anon interrupt and paralyse the versatile policy of
" Smith to Queen. » Ibid.
** Tommaseo, Soriano, 1561 ; ibid, Barbero, 1563 ; De la Ferridre, p. 1S9.
^ Smith to Elizabeth, 7 Jane. Foreign State Papers.
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE VALOIS PRINCES 47
Catherine. It was surely strange that at the very moment chosen
to conciliate the Huguenots and the powers of the north, Catherine
should let herself be seen upon the Spanish frontier holding counsel
with the duke of Alva. The contemporary impression was profound.
Por several years Catherine had done her utmost to reconcile the
protestants. She had openly protected the queen of Navarre
against the schemes of Spain. She had made Dandelot a colonel.
She allowed Conde to preach in the palace. In January 1564
Chantonnay wrote to the king of Spain : * The king here favours the
admiral and makes very good cheer for him and Andelot.' And
Philip had repKed that he was deeply grieved to find his brother of
France familiar with persons who might lead him to damnation
{le podrian danar).^ Saint- Sulpice, writing from Madrid, tells
Catherine of the horror which her laxity has created in the Spanish
court. The king fears that France is eiidemaniada. In the re-
ports of the Venetian envoys we read a similar tale. For the last
three years Catherine had spared no pains to secure civil peace by
royal toleration, and now quite suddenly she deserted her accus-
tomed policy, and went to concert her measures with Alva at
Bayonne. * She has thrown off the mask,' cried the Huguenots, who
from that moment never wholly trusted in her mediations. And
when next year the Inquisition entered Flanders, all the protes-
tants of Europe were convinced that a great scheme to exter-
minate reform was the real object of the conference of Bayonne.
We know that it was not so. In the ninth volume of the
* Granville State Papers,' and in the minutes sent by Alva at Bayonne
to Philip II, preserved in the French national archives, and abun-
dantly quoted by M. Fomeron in his * Histoire de Philippe II,'
enough remains to show us how little intention had Catherine of
submitting to the dictates" of PhiUp. She was perfectly informed,
through her correspondence with Saint-Sulpice,^ of the fact that
Spain was at least as eager as England that civil war should ravage
and weaken her kingdom. * And the more your majesty is aware
of their longing to hinder any peace, the more anxious I am sure
she will be to conclude one.' Catherine was quite persuaded to
concede nothing to Alva without very mature deliberation.
In fact the conference of Bayonne resulted in pure exasperation
to the Spaniards. Alva had come armed with a double purpose :
firstly, while Catherine was occupied with her daughter, he had de-
termined to conclude behind her back a secret league with Montluc,
the chief of the French infantry ; ^ secondly, he came to demand
of Catherine herself a second and open Holy League with Spain.
*• K 1,501, Arch. Nat See Chantonnay*8 DespatcheSt quoted by Fomeron.
» MS. Bibl. Nat No. 3,161. fol. 96.
" Montluc was the head of a party in France which reaUy feared the apparent
Hngoenotism of Catherine. For the details of his conspiracies (1563-5) with Alva
Digitized by
Google
48 QUEEN ELIZABETH AND Jan.
In reality Alva gained nothing: Catherine outwitted him at
every point. 'Will you join the Holy League?' asked the duke.
* Certainly/ replies Catherine, ' if you include the emperor.' Alva
was disconcerted, for the emperor, pledged to tolerance by fear
of a German rebellion, could not possibly be included in the league.
To add to his exasperation, no sooner had the queen of Prance
arrived at Bayonne, than a Turkish ambassador landed at Mar-
seilles to demand security for Ottoman ships in the ports of France.
' She will do nothing for us,' cries Granville, * she only wishes to
cover her secret alliance with the Tm-k.' •* * It is impossible to
entrap the queen,' writes Alva. * Please God, her real intention be
not liberty of conscience ! ' And Philip scribbles on the margin of
Alva's despatches, la reyna per estos platicos gosise (banters) al
Duque. Catherine dei Medici was at least a match for Alva.
It is a pity that so much abiUty, so much address, were wasted
on elaborating a signal mistake. While the queen was fencing
adroitly with Alva, the Huguenots were convinced that she was
plotting with their enemies to destroy them. In the eyes of the
protestants the conference was a sign of catholic and conservative
consolidation. It meant the unity of France and Spain. A little
later they said it meant the Inquisition. And while the two
catholic courts still were at Bayonne the news came from Scotland
that Mary Stuart had married the catholic Ijord Damley. On the
last day of June, Charles IX wrote to Elizabeth expressing his
approval of the marriage.^
Elizabeth was furious. She had hoped against hope that Mary
would marry Eobert Dudley, and thus gain Scotland to the in-
terests of England. And Mary had married a catholic, French
at heart. Elizabeth saw herself surrounded by enemies upon all
sides : a catholic king and queen at her very gates in Scotland,
and a rejected France conversing with the enemy of heresy at
Bayonne.
It was necessary to make reprisals. All over protestant Europe
there spread a spirit of suspicion and antagonism, a desire to
frustrate the supposed machinations of Catherine and Alva.
Heresy had determined to sell its life dearly. In 1567 the people
of the Netherlands rose in arms against the Inquisition of the
and Philip II, see M. Fomeron's excellent (and abundantly documenUe) Histoire de
Philippe IL
** All through the Spanish state papers of this time we find the old fear of a leagne
between France and the Porte. In August 1570 Don Francis de Alava writes he would
not wonder if next year France should give Toulon to the Turks ! And in October he
warns Philip II that the Huguenots are negotiating with the Grand Seigneur. But the
evidence is abundant. See Charridre, and also Baumgarten's interesting and scholarly
little work Vor der BartlioloTndus-Nacht. For the influence of the Turks in Flanders,
see Fomeron.
« Charles IX to Elizabeth, 30 June. Foreign State Papers,
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE VALOIS PRINCES 49
Spaniaxds, and the presence of Alva with 14,000 men was neces-
sary to subdue them. In the same year (9 Feb.) the Scottish
nobles murdered their catholic sovereign, Henry Darnley, and in
June they made a captive of their catholic queen. In France,
the same year, in September, the court, being at Monceaux, sud-
denly found the protestant army between itself and Paris. The
court escaped with difficulty, and the king was besieged in his
capital by the Huguenots.
There was mutiny in Scotland, rebellion in the Netherlands,
civil war in France; and Elizabeth had her hand in all these
undertakings. Preserving a show of amity with Philip, she sent
secret help to the Prince of Orange.^ Her ministers and her
ambassadors corresponded with Conde and Coligny,^ while she
pretended peace with France. Her intrigues in Scotland were
inspired by yet greater hesitancy and dissimulation. Catherine
was aware how dangerous an enemy she had to conciliate, and the
fear and respect of the queen-mother were increased when in the
spring of 1567 Elizabeth formally demanded^ the restoration of
Calais. From that moment Catherine continually feared lest,
taking advantage of the miserable confusion in France, Elizabeth
should seize both Havre and Calais by force of arms. This re-
doubtable Elizabeth made herself yet more evidently predominate
in the next year. The imprisonment of Mary Stuart was a direct
insult to the Valois, for Mary was a married queen of France*
Charles IX was justly incensed ; but Catherine, impervious to insult,
respected the success of Elizabeth.
For, as England grew noticeable and strong, France, bled by
civil war, dwindled day by day. Affairs were at their blackest in
that divided country; catholics and Huguenots were no longer reli-
gious but political parties, fighting not merely for a different creed,
but for different ideals of government, for a different pohcy. The
Huguenots fought for civic rights, for liberty, for calm. ' There are
many catholics among them,' writes Monluc, bishop of Valence,^
' and the greater part have revolted, hoping to set their country in
the end at rest.' The whole of France was fighting desperately for
the sake of peace.
Supported by continual recruits at home, and by the secret
supplies of Elizabeth abroad,^^ the Huguenot party appeared day
«» Lingard, vi. 114.
»* 148 Cabala. Coligny to Cecil, 7 Jan. 1568. Foreign StaU Papers, Chatillon to
Cecil, 23 Sept. 1568. Foreign State Papers.
«* Note, 7 May 1667, Foreign State Papers ; also Fomeron ii. 271. La response
du Roifust gu'U s^esbahissoit grandement de ceste demande, et luy sembloit gu^U n*en
fdUoU plus parleTt mats seulement de Ventret&nement de la bonne paix et amyti4 qui
estoUenetUx.
** Monlao to Catherine. Foreign State Papers.
" La Mothe-F^nelon, December 1568. F.SJ*. Jeanne d'Albret to Cecil, 16 Jan.
1569. F.SJ*.
VOL. n. — NO. V. E
Digitized by
Google
50 QUEEN ELIZABETH AND Jan.
by day more likely to gain the upper hand. But fortune turned ;
on 13 March 1569, Conde was killed in the battle of Jarnac ; on
October 3, Coligny was utterly routed at Moncontour. The nominal
conqueror of these great generals was a girl-faced stripling of sixteen,
Anjou, Catherine's second and favourite son, for the moment the
hero of his country.
The catholic victories brought peace, a difficult peace, not
actually signed and sealed till August 1570. The catholic party
had won the battle after all ; but Catherine was too shrewd a poli-
tician not to perceive how strong the minority had grown. Again
she resolved to balance, to inquire, to favour a Huguenot policy
while keeping the catholic standard still afloat. Coligny was again
received at court with every mark of respect. The queen, preju-
diced against Spain by the sudden and mysterious death of Eliza-
beth, her daughter, allowed some talk of the favourite Huguenot
project, the winning of the Netherlands by France and England from
the grasp of Philip. A distrust had gradually grown deep and wide
between the queen-mother and her son-in-law of Spain.^® Catherine
began to trim her course for the anti- Spanish party. 'The catholics
seem exhausted,' writes Correr in 1569 ; ^ * the queen does not dare
to offend the Huguenots in never so little, and day by day they gain
in audacity and insolence. . • . There is a talk of marrying Anjou
to EUzabeth, to settle the question of Calais.'
This was the dearest dream of Coligny, the match between
England and France. It would prove a solid bond more durable
than league or amity. Thus united, the two countries would per-
ceive their interests to be the same ; and the Netherlands, divided
among England, France, and Nassau, would exclude Spain from
northern Europe. It is a sign how great already the influence of
Coligny had become, even in the court,*® that no sooner was the
peace signed and sealed in August than he and Chatillon were
permitted to offer the hand of Anjou to the heretic and hostile queen
of England.
It was the second time that Catherine solicited the hand of
England, and though no longer she could offer the very king of
France, Anjou at this moment was scarcely less remarkable, hand-
some, heroic as it seemed, his melancholy head encircled with the
aureole of victory. All the more that she had just married the
king of France to the emperor's daughter,** was Catherine anxious
« Noma to Cecil, 8 April 1668. F.SJ^. » Tommaseo.
** See Baumgarten, 87-98, for the reception of Coligny at court. At first coldly
but kindly received (con cera ragionevole ma non di troppo apparenza^ wrote Petrucci),
he soon gained an extraordinary influence over Charles. * The king opens both his
ears to listen to his stories,* declared Don Francis de Alava, who seriously began to
fear a league of France, Turkey, England, and Germany. In the spring of 1571
Easpar von Schomberg writes to Augustus of Saxony that there is great hope of a
league between the German protestants and France.
*^ The young queen Elizabeth of Austria was anew hope for Spain, which expected
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 THE VALOIS PRINCES 51
that the marriage of Anjou should conciliate the powerful minority of
the Huguenots.
There were reasons also why England should desire the match.
Elizabeth was at that moment more earnest than she had been with
any suitor saving the archduke of Austria. For marriage became
a necessity to her. So long as her death assured the accession of
a catholic queen, her life was not safe from the assassin's dagger.
' I am not able to discern what is best,' writes Burghley ; ^^ * but
surely I see no continuance of her quietness without a marriage.'
The conspiracy of Eidolfi, the conspiracy of the duke of Norfolk,
had very lately shown how unscrupulous was the catholic intention
to win the English crown for a catholic. The duke of Alva, writing
to King Philip,*^ warns him that in case of the natural or violent death
of Elizabeth, the king of Spain must not let slip this opportunity of
re-establishing the Roman church in Britain. In the hope of a
child, Elizabeth saw her best defence from Mary Stuart; in becoming
the wife of the catholic Anjou, her safest protection against a
catholic assassin.
For the moment, Coligny and Catherine, La Mothe-F6nelon
and Burghley, Elizabeth and Conde, all appeared to be in earnest
for the match. The opposition did not come from these ; but King
Charles was furious with Elizabeth for her detention of Mary
Stuart ; but the Guises got hold of Anjou, and assured him that if
he would marry the rightful queen of England, she was not Eliza-
beth, but their enchanting kinswoman, the queen of Scots.
Anjou was fired by the mere description of her. In November
it was reported that the marriage with Bothwell (now in prison for
piracy in a Danish dungeon) could be dissolved as extorted by violence.
The Guises filled the ears of Anjou with this report ; and Lignerolles,
a gentleman of his suite, coming back from Scotland, gave so
eloquent a report of Mary's beauty that Anjou would no more
consent to play the suitor of Elizabeth. Early in 1571 he out-
right refused the marriage. * He will never marry her,' confessed
the queen-mother to La Mothe-Fenelon, * even should she herself
desire it, for he has heard her honour called in question. And in
this I cannot win him over, although he is an obedient son.' **
But Catherine was not the woman to let her plans fall through
to suit a young man's fancy. By March, Anjou was won, and
Catherine wrote *^ again : * He infinitely desires the match.' For
mnch from her influence on Charles IX. (For Alava's despatches see Bamngarten,
34.) She had none. On the other hand, the marriage of the king aronsed the
ambition of Anjou, who foresaw that the birth of royal princes would reduce him to
the level of M. de Montpenaier. (See Contarini's relation in Baschet's Diplomatic
VinUienTie for the year 1671.) It became imperative to provide Anjou with a king-
dom out of France.
« Digges. Burghley to Walsingham, 8 March 1670.
« Teulet, 1571. ** De la Ferridre, 272. « 2 March 1671. F.S.P.
E 2
Digitized by
Google
52 QUEEN ELIZABETH AND Jan-
the moment there seemed no other course open. France had
neither men nor money to espouse the queen of Scotland's
cause. Better to frankly let fly the Huguenot colours, and conquer
Flanders with the help of England. Yet Catherine, never wholly
of one opinion, appears to have doubted and harked back, suffering
dim misgivings. In the early summer. May or June, of 1571, she
did the strangest thing. She wrote to her daughter-in-law, Mary
of Scotland; since on his marriage with Elizabeth there would
be no security for the person of Anjou, she suggested that Mary
should lend him for three years the town and castle of Edinburgh,
to be occupied by a French garrison.** Mary indignantly rejected
the proposal, which indeed could only serve to show in what a coil
of perplexity and fear the queen-mother of France was helping ta
weave the destiny of nations.
But, safe for Anjou or perilous for Anjou, she nerved herself to
desire the match. ' How soon, do you suppose, Carnavalet,' said
Anjou to his tutor, * that we shall all be Huguenots again ? * (For Car-
navalet had once had that reputation.) Indeed, the Huguenots were
daily increasing at the court. The king himself had been won over ;
and though no Huguenot, he held Coligny for his chief friend and
counsellor, the man of men at court. * Quasi govemava tutto,' *^ wrote
the nuncio Salviati. And a year ago Correr had reported to the
signory of Venice,*® * I can give you no idea of the extent of this
Huguenot conspiracy.* Catherine perceived that she must reckon
with heresy, and saw no policy between extermination and adhesion.
For affairs had taken a turn that she had not expected. Coligny
had acquired so great an influence over Charles IX, that, instead
of the Guises, the Huguenots were becoming the predominant and
dangerous party in France. Catherine's policy had ever been to
check the catholics by the protestants, and the house of Conde,
in its turn, by the house of Guise. Let either party become
sovereignly powerful, and its rival was no longer Guise or Conde,.
but the crown. Therefore she sought to engross each party with the
other, while she, left disengaged, dispensed the sovereign arbitra-
tion. At this moment the Guises, lately too potent, were effectively
restrained. Were the Huguenots too powerful yet ? What could
the Huguenots promise ?
Coligny, in fact, promised great things, but he demanded a
daring policy in return. He required that Catherine should not
only marry her son to Elizabeth, but her daughter to the chief of
the reform, Henry of Navarre.*^ He suggested that France, with
*« Alva to Philip, Paris, August 1571. Teulet.
*' Secret despatches of Salviati, Theiner, Annales Ecclesiasticif
*• Tommaseo.
^ Coligny at first would have preferred to marry Henry of Navarre to Elizabeth^,
but this did not sufficiently guarantee the policy of France.
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE VALOIS PRINCES 63
the help of England, should declare a righteous war against Spain,
and divide the tormented provinces of the Netherlands among
England, France, and Nassau. He proposed a great latitudinarian
league of Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, England, Scotland,
Switzerland, and France. He suggested a bold and forceful
counterblast to Spain.
Already on May 25 ^® De Foix had hinted to Walsingham that
his real opponent was the queen-mother. For Catherine, though
incensed against Spain and allured by the audacity of Coligny's
poUcy, was ever timid, and, in this case, ill assured of the co-
operation of Elizabeth. Also she feared lest, growing to such un-
reckoned-upon strength, the influence of Coligny might supersede
her with the king. And Anjou, her favourite son, was intractable —
was already plotting with the Guises for Mary Stuart. Anjou
refused Elizabeth ; and though the king swore that he would make
him the shorter by a head, and though, says Walsingham, 'his
mother never wept so much since the time her husband died,' *'
Anjou again refused to continue in his suit.
Early in the autumn (July 80) Anjou wrote to Elizabeth ^^ say-
ing the difficulties were too great, but he remained devoted. The
match with Anjou was now virtually given over. Catherine with
every day receded further from the party of Charles and Coligny
into the ambushes of Guise. 'The queen-mother seems more
aflfected to the queen of Scots,' writes Walsingham ; ^ and Aguilon
writes home to Spain ^* a little later: * The queen-mother, who governs
all, offers to marry her son Anjou, who is her idol, to the Scotch-
woman, and make her queen of England.' Towards this different
ideal Catherine set her course. Rumours of the English marriage
grew confused and died away. * If neither marriage nor amity
take place,' writes Walsingham from Paris,*^ * then the poor pro-
testants here do think their cause desperate. They tell me so with
tears, and therefore I do believe them.'
But the king was still for the Huguenots. On 19 April 1572 a
defensive league between France and England was signed and
ratified at Blois.
m
The treaty of Blois was signed in April 1572, and at the same
date (4 April) the match with Navarre ^ was solemnly announced.
« Foreign State Papers. *» F.8.P. 30 July. »« p^s^P.
" Walsingham to Burghley, 8 Oct. F.8.P.
" Teulet, 6 Nov. 1572. " Digges, August 1671.
^ The match with Navarre was a direct insult to Philip, who for some time past
had been arranging a marriage between Marguerite de Valois and the king of Portugal.
(See Baumgarten.) Philip when he heard the news sent a messenger to Saint-Gouard,
the French ambassador in Madrid, le hlasmant infiniment, et se esbahissant comment
Digitized by
Google
54 QUEEN ELIZABETH AND Jan-
Smith was sent from England to negotiate with Walsingham for
Queen Elizabeth. He had in reahty a second, and a secret, mission
besides this ostensible business. He was sent to arrange a league
of France, England, the Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland,
Florence, and Sweden ; a great latitudinarian aUiance which should
counterbalance the league formed by Spain, the pope, and Venice.
* In this embassy,' says Aguilon to PhiUp H, * there is more than
meets the eye. ' *^
This league was in most of its essentials the same that so long
had haunted the audacious fancy of Francis I. It was to embrace
alike the old religion and the new ; its object was to defend the
peace of Christendom ; its terms proclaimed the author of any
massacre as de facto atheist. Sir Thomas Smith on the one
hand, and Admiral Coligny on the other, were eager to negotiate
the league. But it was deemed at that moment impracticable ; and
a few months afterwards it was shown how strangely France would
have construed the provisions of its terms.
The treaty of Blois was a makeshift, a substitute. But Smith
and CoUgny hoped to supplant it by a marriage — a third project
for wedding France to England, a wedding proposed between
Elizabeth and Alenfon, the youngest of the sons of Catherine.
Alenfon was no taller than a woman, seamed by confluent small-
pox, and disfigured by an extraordinary enlargement of the nose ;
but he was open and frank, vaUant, and manly. The EngUsh, as
a rule, preferred him to the beautiful Anjou.
* Anjou and Alen9on,' ^® writes Sir Thomas Smith, * are become
the capi Guelfi e Gibellini, for that all Huguenot retainers are
dismissed of Anjou and welcomed of Alen9on. The last is the
refuge and succour of all the Huguenots ; a good fellow and a lusty
prince. The queen-mother offered to send him over on a visit to
EUzabeth. It was still a chance of the English aUiance, and at
least it disembarrassed her of this too eager, too independent youth,
the least loved of her children. But Elizabeth, indignant at the
defection of Anjou, was in no humour to receive him.
If the currents of France and England still flowed together, it
was owing to the influence of Coligny. The admiral was still in
favour — the king still called him his father. But Coligny could not
be satisfied with barren influence. His aim was to deUver Flanders,
to set France and England on the battle-field together. The feeling
throughout the country was very strong. In November 1571 the
Huguenots of France besought the king to let them carry arms
against Alva ; and a letter of Lisle, the English agent, sends word :
une si sageprincesse n^avoist plus tost eslu un toy tel que estoit celui de Portugal^ se
eschauffant extresmement de ceste maMire, See Despatches, quoted by Fomeron.
«' Teolet, Spanish Despatches, 1 Jan. 1572 ontU 16 Got. 1573.
»• 9 Jan. 1672. F.SJ*.
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE VALOIS PRINCES 55
'There is a great likelihood the king will go to war with the
Spaniards, both in Spain and in Flanders.'
The aim of Coligny was to defeat Spain by the aid of England ;
the aim of Elizabeth was to let France engage the anger of Spain
alone. Therefore she would give no definite answer when Catherine
again proposed a Valois marriage ; still according a vague hope to
France, but no special encouragement to Alenfon. The treaty of
Blois was better to her mind than a more explicit engagement.
But France was eager for a closer tie — to the protestants aDd
liberals of France, it was the very question of existence. Mont-
morency went to England in the summer. He was followed by
the dear friend of Alen9on, the Huguenot De la Mole. Lastly,
Coligny himself wrote to Elizabeth in July. And while Elizabeth
played fast and loose, professing amity and willingness to Charles,
assming Walsingham she never could marry Alen9on, * specially
for the blemishes the small-pox hath wrought in his visage * —
while Elizabeth deliberated, the summer of 1572 crept on, and
still the patient Huguenots of France looked towards England for
salvation.
Still the protestants seemed to have cause for hope. The
Turks and the Venetians proposed to Charles IX an anti- Spanish
league.*® Orange was most successful in his march on Holland,
and held Euremond and Vanloo at his devotion. The marriages
with England and Navarre held out a chance of civil peace in
France. And at court CoUgny was in the counsels of the king,
conferring with the ambassadors of England,^® drawing up the pro-
ject of the Flemish war, 'governing the kingdom' in Salviati's
phrase. And Middlemore, writing to Burleigh, relates : ^^ * The
admiral goes to court every day and is always well received, only
the duke of Guise will never speak a word to him.'
The duke and the admiral were playing a dangerous game, and
the lives of the Huguenots and the fate of the Netherlands were the
stake. CoUgny worked hard for a poUcy of moderation ; he strove
to bring about the Anglo-French marriage ; he laboured night and
day for the expedition to the Low Countries, persuading France
and England aUke how much this effort would be to their advance-
ment. CoUgny had his party at the court, and his party included
alike Alenfon and the king. But the Guises were a stronger fac-
tion stiU.
For the Guises were secretly supported by Catherine and by
Anjou. Under the influence of these statesmen (* who do in-
*• Digges : Walsingham to Burghley, Leicester, 13 July 1572. See also Foraeron.
Philip was very early informed ol the anti-Spanish current in France and of the design
of Flanders. He a£Feoted ignorance. Entretanto que no se quitan la mascara, conviene
que no se la quitamos, sino dar lea a entender qtie lo creemos. Arch, Nat. K 1,529 »
dossier 110.
• De la Ferri^re, 315. •» lb, 316 : MSS, Cott, Vespas. British Museum.
Digitized by
Google
56 QUEEN ELIZABETH AND Jan.
cline to Spain/ as Catherine herself admitted) the queennmother
had forgotten her grievance against Philip* She was now per-
suaded that the EngUsh would have no hand in the Netherlands.
She had become timid of the enormous risk involved in the struggle
against Spain. She perceived moreover the vacillation of Elizabeth,
and this increased her fear.
Had Elizabeth been firm, had she given a resolute answer to
Alenfon, had she determined what part to take in the Netherlands,
all might yet have gone well ; but she played her old game,
anxiously trifling with CoUgny and with Alva, not knowing yet in
which to sheathe her claws.^^ Every day rumours came to Paris
that, so far from persisting in the enterprise, the EngUsh queen had
recalled the few of her soldiers who were already in the Netherlands.
And in truth England was afraid lest in abating the claims of Spain
she should too much increase the power of France.^ Thus for many
months England also hesitated, while a tremor seized the whole
protestant world. The queen-mother evidently attempted to with-
draw the king, and on 22 July Walsingham wrote home to Leices-
ter** assuring him how necessary it was that the enterprise of
Flanders should not be slackened. This was on 22 July. At that
moment the king and the queen-mother were apart ; he was hunt-
ing for a week not far from Paris, and she had gone in great haste
to nurse her daughter of Lorraine, who had fallen ill at Monceaux
on the way to Paris. Meanwhile, on 21 July, an envoy extraordi*
nary reached Paris from Venice. This was Giovanni Michiel ; he
had done the journey in eleven days, for the signiory of Venice,
anxious for prosperous quiet, could not make too much haste to in-
terrupt a French war with Spain.
Michiel found the queen-mother absent,** the people eager for
war, the king (a bent, thin, melancholy young man, extremely pale)
subjugated to the influence of CoUgny in the absence of Catherine.
For the first week of his stay in Paris the war was considered
as good as declared ; ^ the people pubUcly spoke of it ; hour after
hour different gentlemen kept coming to the palace offering, one
five hundred horse, the next a thousand horse, according to their
means and at their own expense. The war was popular. Men
remembered how in a few days the cathoUcs and Huguenots
together had seized Havre from the EngUsh. A first detachment
of French soldiers, under Genlis, already was in Flanders and
had been crueUy defeated. The French desired to avenge their
^ Tavannes : Las des irr^olutions de la Royne . . . Elle vetU et ne veut pas,
change d'avis et rechange en un instant Elle fluctue. . • •
^ Digges : Walsingham to Borghley, 12 Aug. 1571. ^ Digges.
*^ The king came back to Paris 30 July ; his mother five or six days after* See
Desjardins, tom. iii. 31 July ; see also Baomgarten, 207.
** See MichiePs relation, Alberi; and also Armand Baschet, Diplamatie
Vinitienne.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 THE VALOIS PRINCES 57
comrades. Among the French captives many under torture had
avowed to Alva the complicity of the king of France. * Savez-vous
que le due d'Alhe me fait mon proces f ' cried Charles IX,^^ and he also
longed for open warfare. But the queen at Monceaux, hearing that
public spirit ran so high, quickly left her daughter and hurried
back to Paris with Anjou. She immediately had an audience with
Michiel, in which, despite the aspect of affairs, she assured him
there should be no war with Spain; letting fall the remarkable
statement that not only with words but with deeds {non solo con
le parole ma con gli effetti) she would prove her resolutions. These
words Michiel, a month later, naturally construed into a prophecy
of the St. Bartholomew massacre.
Michiel affirms premeditation on the part of Catherine. On the
-other hand the nuncio Salviati insists to the papal court at Rome
that the queen only at the last moment conceived the idea of the
massacre, which would never have taken place had Coligny died at
once. This view is very consonant with the vacillating character
of Catherine, always inclined to change the course of fate by a
lucky accident, a sudden inspiration. She would think little of the
removal of a man who supplanted her in the counsels of the king
(she was, says Salviati, sospettosissvma et gelosissima dove si tratta
di scemargli V autorita) and who was about to ruin the country by
plunging it unaided into a desperate war with Spain. Catherine had
the Italian susceptibility to imaginative panic. She felt that at all
costs the invasion of the Netherlands must be averted. It had at
all times been a dangerous game to play. Without the co-operation
of England it became impossible. When the news came to Paris
that Elizabeth meant to recall her troops from the Netherlands,
Catherine was in absolute dejection.
The King (says Walsingham) had proceeded to an open dealing had he
not received advertisement out of England that her Majestie meant to
revoke such of her subjects as are presently in Flanders. Whereupon
such of the Council here as incline to Spain have put the Queen-Mother
in such a fear that the enterprise cannot but miscarry without the assist-
ance of England, as she, with tears, has dissuaded the King for the time,
who otherwise was very resolute.
Thus your Lordship seeth how the bruit of your fear there hath bred
fear here ; whereof I fear there will follow fearful effects unless God put
to His helping hand.
Queen Elizabeth, in reaUty, was responsible for the St. Bartho-
lomew massacre. Yet no one but Walsingham among the English
appears to have realised the gravity of the situation. The queen
apparently enjoyed the game, and Smith repUed to Walsingham
in a letter stuffed with Latin, written from Kenilworth upon
•' Baschet, Dipl V&niU
Digitized by
Qoo^^
68 QUEEN ELIZABETH AND Jan.
22 Aug., saying that no order had been given yet to withdraw
the troops from Flanders, but that Alva had been ®® * gently
answered with a dilatory and a doubtful answer.' Meanwhile
Coligny stood Uterally upon the very brink of death, relying for hia
only hope upon these dilatory and doubtful friends.
The King is grown very cold (writes Walsingham). The Admiral in
this brunt, whose mind is invincible, and foreseeth what is like to ensue,
does not now give over, but layeth before the King his peril if the Prince
of Orange fail ; and though he cannot obtain what were requisite and
necessary for the advancement of the cause, yet doth he obtain somewhat
in conference with him. He desireth for himself nothing more — after
long troubles. Nor would he now expose himself to new perils. But
the case now standing as it doth, he saith he should be a traitor to God
and to his country, and unthankful to Her Majestie, if he should forbear
to do what lieth in him to prevent the same.
But CoUgny could do little. The commissions which were
granted and ready to be sealed for the levying of the troops were
all revoked. The king was cold, and declared that without the army
of England he could do nothing. Catherine went weeping through
the court, shedding her ominous and irresistible tears, * and no-
thing,* says Walsingham, * herein has prevented the king so much
as the tears of his mother.' Catherine wept. Elizabeth smiled
her dubious smile and played her waiting game ; * tarn timidey' aa
Smith explains, * and with continual dalliance.' * How perplexed
the admiral is,' writes Walsingham to Leicester, ' who foreseeth
what is like to follow, your lordship may easily guess.'
All this while the negotiations for the double marriage still
went on. The court had removed to Paris for the wedding of
Princess Marguerite with the young prince of Navarre (18 Aug.) And
still, by friendship or by force, it was hoped the queen of England
would be won. CoUgny in his desperate peril looked to the consent
of Elizabeth as his sole earthly safety. But England, as Walsing-
ham complained,^® * England will only act underhand without heart
or spirit.* In fact, if the correspondence of Alva and De Guaras
may be trusted, Elizabeth was all this while engaged in secret
overtures to Spain. Probably with no more intention than she put
in other of her promises, she even offered to betray the town of
Flushing to Alva, as a guarantee of her good faith.^** Alva, as Mr.
Froude remarks, was not likely to let such a weapon he idle in his
writing-desk, and the effect of her suggested treachery was disas-
trous in France. EUzabeth, however, was careful not openly to
offend. She suggested an interview between herself and the young
brother of Charles, and on 22 Aug. matters appeared to have taken
a more hopeful turn. * The queen,' says Smith, * has come nearer
•• Digges. • Bigges, 26 July.
^ Anton de Guaras to Alva, 30 June. Froude*s History,
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE YALOIS PRINCES 59
to the matter of the marriage than I hoped.' ^* Indeed, she then in-
structed Walsingham in a more consenting mood about the nego-
tiations ; and on the very day when she and Smith wrote to Paris,
Burghley sent a line of kindness and good wishes to Alen9on,
and another to Coligny.^^
But if Elizabeth at last meant to encourage the hearts of the
Huguenots in Flanders and in France, hers was indeed too tardy a
return. Before the letters from Kenilworth could be delivered in
Paris, a scene had taken place which no clever tortuous poUcy, no
delicate doublemindedness, could evermore undo.
For some while there had been violent division in the court of
France, where the two great factions were now of nearly equal
strength. No man's life was safe, and during that time of vehement
tension the law did not dare to interfere. In the sunamer time of
1572 no less than fourteen murders were committed at court and
all unpunished.^* Catherine herself had a hand in at least one of
these.^* Neither party could afford to recoil from any means of
attaining their end* If the army did not soon go off to Flanders,
the cause of the liberals was lost ; if it did, the cause of the Spanish
party.
* When I wrote to you last,' writes the nuncio to the cardinal
of Como, * I told you the admiral was coming on too far, and that
he would get a rap over the knuckles {gli darebbero mlV unge). . . .
I saw even then that they could not tolerate him any longer.' The
king, in fact, gained over by his mother, had invented a ridiculous
pretext to withdraw Coligny from the Flanders invasion. * He had
so much consideration for the admiral,' writes Michiel, *he
would not plainly speak out his mind.' He, therefore, induced
Coligny to submit his project to a final council, not of statesmen,
but of soldiers. The admiral easily agreed, and on the appointed day
he entered the royal cabinet and found there four or five famous
generals and marshals with the king, but also the queen-mother
and Anjou. The admiral, however, did not yet suspect the trap ;
he harangued his fellow-soldiers with sense, brilUance, and elo-
quence. To his surprise every one of them firmly negatived his
proposals, nor would they listen to any of his arguments ; * and the
stupidest,' says Michiel, * were the firmest.' CoUgny at last saw
the plot. These men had all got their lesson by rote. Turning
to the king, he gave in his submission ; * but your majesty must
not find it iU if I, my friends and servitors, keep your promise
for you to the prince of Orange.' And then he turned to Catherine.^^
* Madame,' he said, * this war the king renounces. God grant he
may not find himself involved in another less easy to renounce.'
" Digges, 22 Aug. ^' Foreign, 22 Aug.
^ Relation of the Savoyard ambassador. De la Ferri^re, 318.
^* Theiner, Annalea EcdesiasticL '* Armand Baschet, Diplomatie Vinitienne.
Digitized by
Google
60 QUEEN ELIZABETH AND Jan.
Catherine, ever easily alarmed, took these words as a threat of
civil war. She found that the admiral «' avanzava troppo. It was
necessary to rid her council of this troublesome invader, who might
yet gain the king again as he had done during her absence at Mon-
ceaux. She arranged a plan with Anjou, Guise, and his mother,
Madame de Nemours.
After dinner on Friday, 22 Aug., the admiral was walking
along the rue aux Posses de St. Germain I'Auxerrois reading a
letter. Suddenly from the empty hotel of Madame de Nemours
an unseen assassin took aim at him with an arquebuss, and shot
him in the right hand and the left shoulder.^^ The bullet had been
meant to reach the heart ; but the admiral, reading as he walked,
was holding the paper close to his eyes, and the position of his arms
determined the St. Bartholomew.
Had the archibugiata succeeded, Salviati assures us ^^ that no one
else would have perished. Catherine, jealous of his ascendency,
meant no more than to remove the admiral. It was to have been
no more than the murder of LigneroUes, only the fifteenth of the
summer murders at the court. But the admiral did not die : he
was not even dangerously wounded. And yet, among the crowd of
Huguenots who had come to court, there spread a panic of fury and
suspicion. They stood about the staircase in knots — these suspicious
and irascible provincials, angry to feel themselves entrapped, and
swearing loudly that more than forty thousand arms should avenge
the arm of the admiral.'® And the king, who had not been privy to
the attempt,'^ was furious against the Guises. He made every effort
to discover who had fired the shot ; ®® he went to exhibit his devoted
friendship at the bedside of Coligny. It was clear now that the
party of the admiral must triumph. It was probable that the
Huguenots, who were lodged in numbers in the royal palace, might
rise and wash the insult out in blood. Catherine was in tears and
beside herself with terror. For the Huguenots talked loudly of
vengeance.®^ Conde and Kochefoucault and Piles swore to find
'" Belation of the Mantuan ambassador : De la FerriSre, 320. MichiePs relation :
Alberi. Basohet.
" SalviatVs Despatches. Theiner, Anitales Ecclesiastici,
" Non lasciavano perd di gridare e di bravare che quel bracdo delV ammiraglio
costeriapiu di quaranta altre mila braccia, (Michiel : Alberi.)
'• See Salviati, 22 Aug. : * without knowledge of the king,* and 2 Sept. : * Anjou
knew, but not the king.* See also Walsingham's note on the massacre, F.SJP. : * The
inventors of this monstrous bloodshedding were the queen-mother, duke of Nevers,
Monsieur de Tavannes.* See also Alberi for Miohiel's report.
*> De la Ferri^re.
B^ It must be remembered that massacres were not entirely unknown upon the other
side; and Catherine, as an excuse for her panic, had not only the Michelades of
Nantes with their murdered catholics, but a somewhat mysterious letter from Coligny
to Orange, which she had intercepted on the way. It is probable that Catherine
considered a new and greater Michelade at Paris was referred to here, but the phrase,
notis serons prits pour septenibre^ refers almost certainly to a Huguenot invasion
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 THE VALOIS PRINCES 61
numbers to avenge the admiral if he died. About the stairs and
courtyard of the palace the Huguenot gentlemen strode and swag-
gered,** * loudly menacing with their bravado the house of Guise/
and insolently threatening and braving the queen-mother.
Catherine heard and trembled. That night she went to the
king in tears, and confessed that it was she and Anjou who had
planned the deed, and revealed that she feared the Huguenots would
rise, would murder them and take possession of the person of the
king. For his own safety, for hers, for Anjou's, Catherine
besought her son to throw shame away, and slay not only the
admiral, but all the heretics at once.®^ These heretics were the
king's friends and the king's guests. But the king could not resist
the tears of his mother. A little after midnight he consented (in
sidfar deW alba). By morning he had become more bloody than the
others ; for his lurid half-mad imagination took a fiercer tone than
his mother's perfidy. For to Catherine's Italian nature, incapable
of fanaticism, even the St. Bartholomew was merely a* coup d'etat.
The streets ran with blood in Paris, then in Eouen, Meaux
— throughout the country. Spain and the pope sent empty
compliments to Charles, and sang Te Deuim in their churches.*^
But in Madrid the thing was not liked, says St.-Gouard, buj; con-
demned as chose farieuse legere et non pensee,^ and Vulcob, the
French ambassador at Vienna, writes to Charles IX of the
open disapproval of the emperor. Meanwhile, England, Venice,
Germany, Flanders, turned from the French, shuddering, as from
an accursed thing. * It is on you, madam,' wrote Ferrier from
Venice to Catherine, * on you and on M. d' Anjou, that all the blame
is laid.'
There was horror abroad, and horror too in France. From that
day the queen-mother was not safe without a guard in the streets
of Paris. Catholics, no less than Huguenots, reproached her deed.
And in the court there was melancholy and suspicion. Michiel, the
Venetian ambassador, gives a terrible portrait of the king.^ * He is
a mal garzon, rather mad, melancholy. He sits all day long, his
head sunk in his hunched shoulders, then shoots up for a second,
wide-eyed and terrible and straight. He has callows, rough horny
hands with swollen veins. He speaks of nothing but war and of
of Flanders. M. Basohet speaks of this letter as existing in the possession of M.
Cr6tineau-Joly.
*' Belation of Michiel and Gavalli : De la FerriSre, 320. See also (;uniga*s report,
Baomgarten, 231 : ' The Hagnenots ... as threatening as possible.' Salviati sajs ;
' They speak insolently to the queen-mother.'
" Salviati. «* Fomeron.
** ^hiuiga, writing to Alva, 31 Aug., nses nearly the same words : ' This murder of
the Huguenots was no deliberated event, but sudden, no fue caso pensado^ sino
repentino,
"• Alberi, 172.
Digitized by
Google
62 QUEEN ELIZABETH AND Jan.
dying in battle. They used to love him ; since August they fear
him ; a little more, and they will hate him.'
This was the end of the friend of Coligny, dying now of the
terrible fascination of his crime — a fascination which had made
him ride to see the admiral hanging dead, by his heels, in Paris.®^
But Catherine, the detested Catherine, sure at last of her own su-
premacy, endured easily the hatred of her people. * She appears
indeed,' writes the Savoyard envoy, ^ * twenty years younger than
before, and as one who has come out of a grievous illness and is
suddenly disembarrassed of all danger.' But Cavalli, the Venetian,
gives us the key of her enigma. * All of her momentous actions,'
he writes in 1574, * have ever been guided and regulated by one
most potent passion — and that is the passion for sovereignty
{V affetto di signoreggiare) .' From this point of view Catherine had
succeeded. She was left without a rival. The St. Bartholomew
had been a political failure ; it was none the less a personal
triumph.
IV
Catherine had hoped that the massacre of St. Bartholomew
would prove to Spain the religious and political sincerity of France,®^
while to England it might be explained as a coup d'etat which
crushed an incipient insurrection. But though Spain did not
openly condenm the deed, she was none the more persuaded of
the innocence of France with regard to Flanders; and England
shrank in horror from her old ally.
The great coup d'etat, then, had proved barren or disastrous.
The attitude of Spain remained unchanged ; the attitude of Eng-
land was hostile; the attitude of Flanders one of horror-struck
repulsion. Catherine could not afford to lose the second string to
her bow. It was necessary to regain the confidence of England
and Flanders — it was necessary, but neither she nor Anjou nor
the king was capable in this matter. Catherine remembered her
Huguenot son, the least loved. While imagining himself quite
free and even hostile to his mother, Alenfon at this juncture be*-
came the most useful of her tools.
Hercules de Valois, or Franfois d'Alen9on as he was always
■' Charles IX was terribly afraid lest people should remember his own liberalism of
a month before. He had the supreme baseness to implore Alva to destroy every man
of the small army of Genlis, the first instalment of the expedition to Flanders. Alv&
refused, and let off his captives with the honours of war.
" Relation de M. d'Elb^ne : De la Ferri^re.
"• Spain really triumphed over the St. Bartholomew, which rendered an anti-
Spanish foreign policy impossible for France, ^uiiiga writes : * There is no danger
now of their making alliances in England or in Germany, las quales jamas se fiaron
d'estos. Arch. Nat. K 1530.
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE VALOIS PRINCES 63
called, was a neglected youth, eighteen years of age. * The duke of
Alen9on is very young,' wrote Michiel in this year, * but he has
more grace and style (grazia e garbo) than the others, and a very
good understanding.' * He is,* adds Cavalli,^ * a very silent person,
nor is it easy to know what he thinks. It is said he dissimulates
an immeasurable ambition, and has in his mind some daring enter-
prise.* The position of Alen9on was singular ; to any who had not
sounded the complicated policy of Catherine, it must have appeared
not only singular but dangerous. Living at home with the authors
of the * late execution,' Alen9on was none the less, next to Navarre,
the chief hope of the Huguenots everywhere. At court his position
was a most unhappy one. The king hated him, Anjou derided
him, his mother used and ill-used him. ' They made him a laugh-
ing-stock,' wrote Michiel later, in 1575 ; * they used to slight him
for days together. They held him too tight at home.'
Alen^on had many of the lovable qualities which had come to
80 strange a ruin in his brother Charles IX. He was, it is true, a
feather-brained young fellow,^^ enthusiastic, romantic, his imagina-
tion ever Ughting some straw bonfire, which, blazing bravely for a
moment, soon fired. He had also his brother's chivalrous instinct :
* he is ever,* writes Michiel, * upon the losing side.* But he had
solid qualities as well. Lippomano, who did not like him, and
Michiel, who liked him well, both describe him as a man of his
word, and both assure us ®* he was generous, humane, pleasing,
domestic, and tractable to his friends but a good hater to his
enemies, beneficent and Uberal, sober in his life yet never melan-
choly save with those whom he distrusted. In the words of Smith
we find him, for all his ugliness, for all his evil parentage, for all
his unscrupulous ambition, none the less * a good fellow and a lusty
prince.'
To Alenfon, thwarted and ill-treated at home, the idea of the
EngUsh match appeared embellished with hope, escape, power,
Uberty, and safety. To him it did not matter that Elizabeth was
already an aging woman. She could open for him a glorious
career. But England was in an indignant panic since the massacres
of August ; and EUzabeth had refused to send Leicester to France,
to the christening of the royal infant, lest he should be murdered
while at court.
One way remained, and that Alen9on took. Not approaching the
queen of England with embassies and messengers of state, he sent
her a secret envoy, appealed to her as a desperate fugitive, a
Huguenot in danger of his Ufe — entreating her protection, aid, and
•• Alberi. Michiel, 1672. CavalU, 1674.
" Smith. Michiel. Brantdme. Catherine deMediois said of him, 7Z/atsat^ tot^/ours
Ufol
" Alberi. Michiel, 1672, 1676, 1678. Lippomano, 1679.
Digitized by
Google
64 QUEEN ELIZABETH AND Jan.
refuge. In the mid- winter of 1572 Alen^on despatched to Elizabeth
a singular agent — a Protestant gentleman, Monsieur de Maisonfleur.
Thanks to Mr. Froude, who discovered at Hatfield the first of a
series of letters between Maisonfleur, Alenfon, La Mole, and
Elizabeth, and thanks to Count Hector de la Ferriere, who since
then has brought to light the rest of the correspondence in the
Record OflSce, we can follow step by step the embassy of this un-
usual messenger.
Maisonfleur was a gentleman about the court, an acquaintance
of La Mole's, who until August had Uved scarcely a more reputable
life than others at the court, but who, converted to real feeling by
his near escape on the eve of St. Bartholomew, had since developed
into little less than fanaticism. To Maisonfleur it seemed that
Alen9on, while he stayed at court, risked not merely his own bodily
safety, but the eternal anger of God. He earnestly desired that
Alen9on should * leave the tyrants and avoid the judgment of the
Lord.' *' La Mole, who was also in the plot, hoped to gain a crown
for his master ; but to Maisonfleur it was not only an earthly king-
dom that Alen9on might obtain, he hoped to see him chief in the
house of Israel.
Maisonfleur arrived in England about the middle of December,
and made at first Uttle secret of his embassy. Yet, following the
odd romantic taste of the French court, his oflficial letters read like
pages torn from a romance of chivalry. Every character has a
disguise : Alen9on is Don Lucidor ; EUzabeth, Madame de Lisle ;
and Catherine appears as Madame or Mademoiselle de la Serpente.
The letters are a strange farrago of religion and of faded chivalry,
flavoured with texts and with quaint disguises, with Amadis and
with St. Paul. It is odd to find the serious Burghley mixed up
with all this talk of masquerade and countersignals. But it would
seem that Burghley showed his shrewdness in not wholly disregard-
ing the mission of this fanatic Huguenot gallant. Maisonfleur was
certainly in earnest ; and whereas Alen9on and La Mole seem to
have cared merely to persuade Elizabeth to marriage, Maisonfleur
was equally resolved that she should help the Huguenots of La
Bochelle. Alen9on was to him less a beloved master than the
possible instrument of heaven.
Maisonfleur made no secret of Alen9on's danger and unhappiness
at home. His master, he declared, wished to flee for safety to the
court of England, could he be sure of finding there the loving
support of Elizabeth. The plan was for Alen9on by some means to
escape from Paris to Havre, where he should find an armed English
vessel waiting to carry him at once to London. Alen9on was,
if possible, to bring with him Henry of Navarre, who, with La
Mole, appears to have had a hand in all of his conspiracies.
** De la Ferridre, Correapondanee de Maisonfleur^ 344.
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE VALOIS PRINCES 65
At last all appeared ready. At the end of January Maisonfleur
wrote to his master bidding him hasten over at once : * I prayed,
I counselled, I exhorted, I solicited, I adjured him by all he held
most dear on earth, that, no sooner my letter read, he should mount
his horse and set out for Havre, where the vessel waits.'
But, at the last moment, Alen9on hesitated. He had yet re-
ceived no definite promise from EUzabeth. If he fled to England
only to be rejected, he would be disgraced and ridiculous alike in
England and at home. He fears, says Maisonfleur : il craindroit
de 86 voir toute sa vie un petit cadet de France^ fort inal appointe.
Alen9on was indeed experienced in the vacillations of EUzabeth,
but perhaps a second and darker thought bade him pause and give
heed. He may have remembered how, five years ago, another
royal fugitive, his sister-in-law of Scotland, had fled from her home
to the protection of Elizabeth. Alen9on may have feared an English
dungeon. At least he wrote to Maisonfleur, and refused to budge
without a promise in writing from Elizabeth that upon his arrival
in London she would marry him.
Matters now became difficult for Maisonfleur. In January and
again in March Castelnau de Mauvissi^re, a gentleman of the
moderate party, had arrived in England upon the open negotiation
for the royal match. Maisonfleur was terrified, both for his own
sake and for Alen9on's, lest Catherine should hear from Mauvissiere
of his secret mission. To Catherine, who knew everything, this
also was probably known, and she may have smiled upon the
ridiculous mystery which surrounded a matter debated in every
court in Europe. If Maisonfleur persuaded Elizabeth to Alen9on,
he served the purposes of Catherine ; but the French court cannot
have approved the second mission of this man, the brief that he
held for La Eochelle. Therefore from the time of the second visit of
Mauvissiere innumerable damaging reports were spread about the
agent of Alen9on ; reports which Maisonfleur disproves at some length
in his letters, but which no less hindered the progress of his embassy.
Besides this personal trouble there was the prudence of Alen9on,
the hesitation of Elizabeth, to conquer. * If EUzabeth wiU write a
line I will come,' wrote the young prince. But the EngUsh queen
would not write that line, for she declared that until she had seen
him she could not say but that the blemish of his visage might prove
too great for her affection. The aim of the conspirators was to
marry EUzabeth to Alen9on, and to constitute them chief of aU the
protestants by means of an Anglo-German league. It seemed in-
credible to Maisonfleur that so righteous a scheme should fail for
the vanity and fastidiousness of a woman. He wrote in no sparing
terms to Elizabeth : * It were expedient, madam, that you thought
less of this mere corporal beauty, provided that the service of God
be done ; ' and again he warns her to beware * lest the Uving God
VOL. n. — NO. V. p
Digitized by
Google
66 QUEEN ELIZABETH AND Jan.
demand one day at your hands the loss that may happen to his
church.' Every man, he goes on to say, that is neither lame nor
hunchback is accounted handsome at the court of France ; and he
assures Elizabeth of the natural goodness of Alen9on. But all this
did Uttle to advance the cause of the prince. Only on 28 March,
after three months of the secret mission of Maisonfleur besides the
open treaties of Mauvissiere, Elizabeth at last consented to return
to the status quo ante the recent events in Paris.
The interview was still the question, and Elizabeth sent Ran-
dolph on a feigned mission into France in order to observe the
person and manners of her suitor. But the matter stiQ halted
there. The situation had become singular. Alen9on, with the
protestant Henry of Navarre, was in the camp of Anjou, laying
siege to the protestant city of La Eochelle. Notwithstanding his
position in the catholic camp, Alen9on posed as the chief of the
Huguenot party, grouping round him the new converts, and La
None could hardly keep him from joining the ill-omened fleet of
Montgomery. Indeed, from the letters of Charles IX to Anjou,
which M. de la Ferriere has printed from the Eussian archives, it
would appear that the whole siege of La Eochelle, in which over
twenty thousand Uves were lost, was but a bloody tragi-comedy
to draw on the hesitating Elizabeth. On 18 May Charles wrote to
Anjou concerning the marriage with Alen9on : * The thing to be done
is to get on with the affair of La Eochelle, to study it well, for that
is really the knot of the whole situation.' And next month Elizabeth
had swallowed the bait. She wrote that she would not see Alen9on
* unless the king make peace with La Eochelle.' This was of
course a consent, should those conditions be granted. Charles and
Catherine wished for nothing better. They were even eager for
an excuse to make peace with the protestants. For aflTairs had
changed ; they perceived that St. Bartholomew had brought them
no nearer to Spain (still jealous of the Netherlands), and had in-
finitely alienated the north and the great Italian cities. Mean-
while the throne of Poland had fallen vacant, and Catherine
was willing to run all hazards to secure the election of Anjou.^ For
this it would be necessary to conciliate the prince of Orange and
Count Louis. Therefore the peace with La Eochelle, which seemed
a concession to Elizabeth, was the skilfuUest poUcy of Catherine.
Peace was declared on 24 June ; and through the influence of
Orange, Anjou was soon elected king of Poland. He immediately
repaired to his new kingdom, where he immensely astonished his
subjects, who, imagining themselves to have elected a warrior and
a hero, were (as Michiel informs us) bewildered by the earrings of
their king.
** In order to avert civil war, it was necessary to find a throne for Anjou oat of
France.
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE VALOIS PRINCES 67
All was now clear for the English match. Nothing prevented
the escape of Alen9on (willingly connived at by his mother) and the
consequent interview at Dover. Alen9on might flee to England as
a hunted man, or he might go with the state of a prince. He did
neither. In December Maisonfleur, who was about to leave London
to fight for the prince of Orange, sent him one last despairing
letter :
It is impossible, the letter ran, to tell you the extreme distrust of
M™* de Lisle in this matter. She has been so persuaded that the whole
bSbit is a manoBuvre of Mademoiselle de la Serpente that it is almost
impossible to make her lose this apprehension ; for she says she has so
often been deceived by all the race that she can no more put faith in
aught that cometh from that quarter. . . . Come, then, Seigneur
Lucidor ! For if you still hold out it will seem you say : * Make me king
of England, or else I will not come ; * whereas you have assured me often
that it was not for honours nor a kingdom that you sought this lady, but
for her perfection and the danger you were in.
This letter must have reached Alen^on at the new year, almost
the anniversary of the despatch of Maisonfleur. He had been eager
then : now he showed no haste to obey the summons. He was, in
fact, engaged with a greater matter nearer home ; and though it was
more than ever necessary to have at hand a place of refuge, it was
not in the eventful spring of 1574 that Alenfon could desert his
post and escape as a fugitive to the court of Elizabeth.
Meanwhile, despite the triumphant tactics of Madame la Ser-
pente, the kingdom of France was hurrying down the road to ruin.
Civil war, taxation, a bare exchequer, an extravagant court, bore
witness to the incapacity of Catherine in home affairs, and to the
impotence of the dying and melancholy king. Charles was nearing
the end of a consimiption. The country soon would fall into the
hands of the voluptuous, indolent, effeminate Anjou, the real insti-
gator of the Paris massacre. Catholics and Huguenots shared
alike the general misgiving. Finally the moderate party, or poli-
tiques, joined with the Huguenots in a secret negotiation to transfer
the succession to Alen9on.
* Monsieur d'Alen9on,' says a tract of the time, * Monsieur
d'Alenfon is the hero who will deliver the kingdom from all
these miseries ; ' and Lippomano ** speaks of his popularity in the
country, and of his desire to regulate affairs, to diminish the imposts
and settle the questions of finance. It was, moreover, in Alenyon's
favour that he was harshly treated and mistrusted by his mother
and his brothers. Since 1572 the queen-mother and Anjou had
»* Tommaseo, Lippomano, 1677.
F 2
Digitized by
Google
68 QUEEN ELIZABETH AND Jan.
been detested in France,®^ * for all impute the whole aflfair to you
only, madame,' wrote Ferrier, *and to Monsieur d'Anjou.' The
odium of the people was heaped on Catherine. * She is hated since
August, and has lost all her prestige,' wrote Miehiel in 1572. And
before August, in 1568,*^ she had not dared to ride through the
streets of Paris without an armed escort, lest the people should
destroy her. The people wrote lampoons upon her, and sold under
the palace windows an infamous * Vie de Sainte Catherine.' * It
hits the mark,' cried the cardinal of Lorraine, for the Guises no less
than the Chatillons, the catholics no less than the Huguenots,^^
complained that this woman had betrayed them. But most of all
the politiqiies detested her, for the moderate party was aware that
no wise and steady course could be taken while Catherine, with her
unreasonable ambition and her unreasonable terror, stLQ held the
helm of state.
Alen9on was at court, a sort of honourable prisoner. In bim
centred the hopes of the Huguenot party and of the moderates.
Anjou was at a safe distance in Poland. The conspirators
determined that he should remain there. On the death of Charles,^
three-fourths of the country would rise and acclaim Alen9on king.
Anjou should reign in his foreign kingdom ; the queen-mother
might go to him or remain in safe seclusion in some castle on the
Loire. So the country might be saved. But Charles was long
a-dying, and a rumour flew abroad that Alen9on was unsafe at court.
His presence was entreated by the conspirators. La None, who
was now at the head of a great army, openly declared himself the
mere locum tenens of a greater chief, and the country divined he
meant Alen9on. The Huguenots grew bold, and the moderates, for
success seemed easy. Damville held Languedoc; Montgomery^
Carentan ; and the prince of Orange was prepared to enter France
at any moment. Let Alen9on escape from court to the armies of
his friends. It was arranged that Alen9on, Navarre, and some
Huguenot gentleman should flee the court one night together.
The king was now very Ul ; it was evident the end was near.
The young brother, who was to steal away and seize his kingdom
from him, would be taking the possessions of a dying man. It
would be a last farewell, that ordinary reverence on the night before
the flight. Alen9on was young. A sudden tenderness, a superstition
overcame him. He forgot his ambition, his country, his promise.
At the last moment, all being ready, his heart failed him, and he
did not go. La Mole, who was to have shared his flight with
Coconnas, confessed the whole truth to Catherine. Thus, on the
eve of what seemed infaUible success, the great conspiracy of the
moderates ended in smoke and nothing.
** De la Ferridre, from the St. Petersbarg archives.
•* F.8JP. 24 Feb. and 1 liaroh 1668. •• Ck>rrer'B relation, 1569 : Albert
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE VALOIS PRINCES 69
The royaJ leaders of the plot were now in imminent danger. It
Was observed that on 16 March Alen9on had obtained a safe-conduct
into England, and this made it more evident that he was resolved
to do and dare, and made it doubtful whether the queen of England
were not his accomplice. The anger at court was great. Dangerous
and passionate words were uttered by the king; and though
Catherine concealed her fury, she was not less resentful against a
scheme which would have reduced her to a private estate. At first
the life of Alen9on was threatened.^ Navarre, who was also in the
plot, was scarcely safer. Both princes were kept in prison. But
Charles spent his fury upon La Mole and Coconnas.*^^ Despite the
prayers, the tears, the anguish of Alen9on, on 80 April his fellow-
conspirators were beheaded together. Alen9on fell sick of grief and
kept his bed,^°* seeing scarcely any one, and never ceasing to sigh and
weep in torment for his friends.*®^ He could not take the death of
La Mole as Charles had taken the death of Coligny. Yet might he
have wept a little also for himself and for Navarre. They were in
great danger — not from Charles, who to the last preserved in his
thwarted bloodshot temperament a strain of the magnanimous
chivalry that had distinguished his charming youth. If Charles
lived, the princes were safe. But the king's illness grew worse with
every day, and * if he die,' says Dale, * the duke and Navarre do
think there is no mean for them but to , corrupt the guard.' So
little trust could they place in Catherine. But the two young men
had no money. England as usual seems to have suppUed it ; for
however much or however Uttle the cabinet of Elizabeth may have
been impUcated in the previous conspiracy, they certainly wished
the preservation of Alen9on, both as a possible husband for the
queen and, says Burghley, *as a counterpoise to the tyrant that
shall come from Poland.*
On 80 May, in the afternoon, the French king died.*"* But Henry
ajid Alen9on had no chance to escape; their prison guards and
sentinels were put in every corner ; their windows were grated and
their persons watched. Catherine was determined that Anjou should
succeed in peace, although, says Dale, * there is marvellous misliking
of this doing among all men.' Meanwhile, on his side, the king of
Poland escaped from his kingdom, not without risk, and arrived in
France in the autumn. But even on his coming the two princes
»* Foreign State Papers : Dale to Burghley, April 12 and 16.
!<*« Goconnas riohly deserved his fate. A manuscript in the Archives Nationales
/E 1530), quoted by Fomeron, proves him to have been already, in 1572, a spy in the
pay of Spain. The Spanish ambassador speaks of him as ' perfectly well-informed ;
he most, however, be treated as a gentleman and not as a spy.*
'•* Dale to Burghley, 30 April. »«»2 Secret note. State Papers.
los The death of Charles IX seems to have planged Catherine for a moment into
real despair. She wrote : Piteuse nowvelle pour moi pour avoir vu tant mourvr de mes
infants. Hme dit adieu et me pria de Vembrasser qui me cuyda faire cresver^ et la
demise pa/role qui dit, fust, * Ehy ma mire.' (Fomeron.)
Digitized by
Google
70 QUEEN ELIZABETH AND Jan»
were not set free. The queen-mother knew too well that all the
provinces were on their side, and that Paris had a point of personal
hate in its disregard for her and for Henry III, * by the grace of his
mother, the inert king of France, imaginary king of Poland,
gauflferer of his wife's collars and hairdresser to the queen,' as the
indignant Parisians proclaimed him in their lampoons.*^ In De-
cember a political discourse *°'^ was sold in Paris, pointing out that
Alenfon was the man to save France from the ' disastrous govern-
ment of foreigners ' (the French had never forgiven Catherine her
Tuscan birth), and many and frequent were the signs of the times.
Still Alen9on, as a means of peace with England, was too valuable
to murder ; Catherine kept him safe in prison eighteen months.
But on 15 Sept. 1575, cardinal de Guise being closeted with the
queen, Alen9on escaped in disguise, and in a few days was on the
Loire at the head of the protestant army of La Noue. All had now
taken place as it should, but eighteen months too late. Still the
hopes of the protestants ran high. Elizabeth at once sent Alen9on
a large loan in money, and it was evident, or it appeared so, that
she still would grant him her aflfection and support.
But during vhose wasted eighteen months Elizabeth had
changed. The cause of the protestants appeared to her now as a
forlorn hope, lost beyond remedy.^^ Her consequent veering round
to Spain was rendered more easy by the fact that since the Paris
massacre she had profoundly distrusted the promises of France.
Spain and England were gradually forsaking France for each other.
In the autumn of 1572 trade had reopened between England and
Flanders. In 1574 Alva offered to renew with Elizabeth the old
treaty of Charles V. In May 1575 two anabaptists were burned in
London as a concession to the spirit of Spain. In March 1576
EUzabeth turned away from London with every show of insult and
opprobrium the messengers of the prince of Orange. She refused
help to the States and threatened to take the fort of Flushing.
In fact, in the words of Mr. Froude, * she meditated a complete re-
versal of policy, which, if begun, could hardly stop short of reunion
with Home.'
Alen9on had missed his opportunity. When in April 1576 he
made peace with his brother, a peace that granted the Huguenots
eight large towns in France, he found in Elizabeth no sympathy
for his success. She demanded the immediate restitution of her
money. She refused to help him in the Netherlands. Nay, she
sent Sir Thomas Eandolph to the French king with a message that
she would rather see Spain ^®^ in the Netherlands than France ; so
completely in the last four years had the policy of England
changed.
'•* Estoile. »•* State Papers, December 1574. »•• Froude, Hist. vol. ii.
*^ Instructions to Sir Thomas Randolph. State Papers,
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE VALOIS PRINCES 71
VI
As before, the Netherlands held the key to the situation. The
cruelty of Alva, the Inquisition, the sack of Antwerp with its 8,000
slain, had raised in England an ardent sympathy for Orange. But
the policy of Elizabeth required that she should continue friends
with Spain. She therefore refused to help the Flemings against
Philip, as she had helped the Huguenots against the cathoUcs of
France; and, indeed, so far had her policy changed that in all
her relations with Spain Elizabeth describes herself as a cathoUc at
heart, estranged from Eome by a mere poUtical difference. There
was no help for Flanders in her hands.
She would not aid the Flemings herself, and her great fear wa&
lest France should come to the rescue. A French protectorate in
Flanders was the thing she dreaded most. Her fear of this had
been the real cause of the massacre of St. Bartholomew. And
now that old dream of Coligny's had revived again in the soul of
Alen^on.
The Flemish patriots invoked the aid of France, and France
was not blind to her own advantage. In 1576 Quiiiga writes *^ to
Philip n on 9 Sept. : * I know that the king and his mother have
sent the duke of Alen9on to Namur, representing to him the man-
ner in which he must deal with Flanders.' And the next year, in
July 1577, Marguerite de Valois went to Spa to drink the waters.
Le vrai medecin qui m*avoit ordonne ces eaux, c'estoit mon frere,
Francois de Valois, she frankly avows in her memoirs. While the
charming Marguerite was canvassing the nobiUty of Flanders in her
brother's interest, Alen9on sent Simier to London to try to induce
EKzabeth to aid his cause. The ridiculous fiction of his betrothal
was still kept up, because, says D'Aubigne, the young prince hoped
by means of this amourette to persuade the queen of England to
have him elected duke of Brabant. Elizabeth on her side feigned
to regard him as a lover in order to keep a mistress's right of con-
trol over his actions. But Elizabeth now was pledged to Spanish
interests. She put off Simier with vain promises. And Catherine
dei Medici began to revolve a second plan in her subtle mind un-
known to Alen9on. Would it not be well to veer again, go over to-
the Spanish side, and induce PhiUp to give the Netherlands to Alen-
9on with a Spanish princess ; or should she suggest her kinsman,
Don Antonio of Portugal, as their governor ? ^^ Philip might be
led, or frightened, into settling all diflSculties — Flanders, Portugal,
everything — by a Spanish dowry and a Spanish marriage.
Meanwhile Elizabeth refused to help Alen9on. But the young
'•« Fomeron.
'** PriiQi. For the question of Fortagal see also Fomeron and Banmgarten.
Digitized by
Google
72 QUEEN ELIZABETH AND Jan.
prince was no less alive than she to the influence which, at such a
moment, a French deliverer might gain in Flanders. Over and
over again he had declared that if Ehzabeth would not give him a
lawful place in England, he must win one for himself abroad.
Flanders and Elizabeth were his two alternatives; yet, by her tactics,
the queen of England hoped to refuse him either boon.
Early in 1577 the Spanish army had retired from the States,
leaving Don John of Austria their governor. But Don John dis-
covered that, without an army at his back, a Spanish governor was
far inferior in influence to the prince of Orange. His authority
was but a name. Before the year was out he recalled his troops
from Italy. And now the States lost patience. They were too well
acquainted with this terrible army of Spain. Those ragged, unpaid,
hungry soldiers had too often glutted their cruelty and lust upon
the Flemish cities. The States wrote in despair to Germany, to
England, to Alen9on.^*® England procrastinated, Germany sent an
army httle less tyrannic than that of Spain. Finally Alen^on agreed
to give his service for two months to the States, and in the summer
of 1578 he crossed the frontier with an army of 10,000 men,
taking Binche by assault and entering Maubeuge. At this moment,
successful in the Netherlands, Alen9on renewed his offer to the
queen of England.
Both Spain and England were dismayed at his success. The
Spanish ambassador remonstrated with the king of France ; but
Henry declared that Alenfon went upon a private enterprise, that he
had no control, and that he would prefer war with Spain to civil war
at home. On 9 Aug.^** Elizabeth sent word to the States that would
they only break off their dealings with Monsieur, she would send
them Leicester and 12,000 men. But the States were experienced
in the promises of England, and Alen9on remained. He would
have been better advised to have abandoned his courtship; ^^^ for
the queen in desperation sent him a message by De Bacqueville,
saying that she would willingly see him, and, it might be, having
seen him she would accept him. * I would be very loath,' writes
Burghley to Walsingham upon 8 Sept., * were I De Bacqueville, I
would be very loath to provoke my master to come over upon such
an uncertain answer.' But Alen9on was in a difficult position. His
army was too small to hold the Netherlands against the forces of
Philip, and it was enlisted for only two months. He did not, how-
•*• Alen^on had now succeeded to the dukedom of Anjou, but to avoid confusion I
shall continue to distinguish him as AlenQon.
"• State Papers.
"^ Henry III earnestly implored his brother to give oyer all designs upon
Elizabeth, * who reassures you as she reassured the queen of Scots ; * but Alenpon
declared himself absolutely persuaded of the honourable intentions of Elizabeth, and
taunted the king with being jealous lest his younger brother should be king of
England. See relation of Venetian Amb. 1579 in Baschet's Dip* VimU
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 THE VALOIS PRINCES 73
ever, at once accept the invitation of Elizabeth. That was a second
course to be taken if a better failed.
On the 17th March, 1579, wrote the Venetian ambassador, Lippo-
mano,**^ the Duke of AlenQon suddenly appeared at Court, touched at
heart by some unkindness he had said against his brother. And as he
had clandestinely fled from Court, so by night and secretly would he
return, with few to follow him, even as one who escapes to a place of
safety. He reached the Louvre an hour after midnight, at the moment
when the King was undressing, and his coming was so imexpected the
King could scarce beUeve it. He greeted his brother with tender be-
haviour, and embraced with aflfection ; they wept together and they slept
in the same bed together all the night.
They say that the whole night long M. d'Alen9on sought to induce
the King to support the Flemish enterprise. He urged that it would be
easy to win the Flemings since they so hate the Spaniards, that a war
abroad would make the French forget their grievances at home, that by
sending the Huguenots to Flanders, Henry would diminish the risk of
civil war, that Italy would be delighted at the check to Spain, that
England and Germany would help, that for fear of the Turks the king
of Spain could spare but a portion of his troops, and that it were an
honourable enterprise against tyranny. But the King showed him strong
reasons why he could not do so ; and after a stay of four days Monsieur
returned to Antwerp.
Since Henry would not help him, and his forces were so small,
Alen5on could do little else than gracefully accede to the wishes of
Elizabeth. He disbanded his troops, and at Easter time returned
to Paris, while Simier, in London, continued the negotiations for
the marriage. Elizabeth varied in mood every day, and the general
opinion was that she had no mind to marry. * She makes her
Bport of Alen9on,' wrote Mary Stuart, ^^* and Ehzabeth herself told
Mendoza that she had only raised her lover's hopes to draw him
out of Flanders.*^* Yet so skilfully did Simier manage his master's
affairs, so artfully he betrayed the secret marriages of Leicester and
of Hatton, that in August again the queen desired to see Alen^on.
At once, privily, and without ostentation, Alen9on came. Elizabeth
did not keep her ungainly lover long. Perhaps she divined that all
would not run smooth between Alen9on and his new subjects.
She sent him away, reserving her answer. But she sent him away
with a hundred thousand crowns, and declared her willingness to
proceed with the treaty of marriage. Meanwhile Alenfon gained new
laurels in the States. He had levied an army of sixteen thousand
men, and had driven the Spaniards from Cambray, when Elizabeth
wrote to accept him for her husband. Immediately the young
prince again left his army "® and his career of triumph, and hurried to
"« Tommaseo. "* Teulet, 16 Oct. 1578.
^^^ Froade : note, Decifrado de Don Bernardino. MSS. Simancas.
"' In order to show his absolute confidence in Elizabeth, Alen9on came to England
Digitized by
Qoo^^
74 QUEEN ELIZABETH AND Jan.
Greenwich, eager to catch the fortunate moment before it slipped
away. Ehzabeth received him with a great show of affection. For
a moment it seemed that she would actually marry him ; she gave
him a written promise to regard his enemies as her own, and in the
presence of the assembled court she placed her betrothal ring upon
his finger.
At this moment Alenfon, and indeed the whole court of
England, considered that the many hesitations of Elizabeth had
reached their term. It was not so. The next morning the queen
informed Alen^on that, though she loved him dearly, their marriage
was impossible. The poor youth was utterly bewildered, and pro-
bably Elizabeth herself was Uttle easier, for indeed her course of
action was not clear. For months back ^^^ she had been secretly
endeavouring to bind the king of France in a league with her ; but
Henry would promise nothing until he saw his brother married. If
she married Alenfon without securing the help of France, would she
and he alone be strong enough to oust Philip from the Netherlands ?
If she let him go, and he conquered the Netherlands for himself,
how perilous for England to make the French so great unless she
married Alen9on. On either side there was a risk, to marry or not
to marry. There was also the personal risk of marriage at her age.
Thus Elizabeth waited and dallied, half resolved that it was better
for England to have in the Netherlands the distant Spaniards than
the neighbouring French. In this case, it was always an advantage
to keep Alen^on at her court while his impatient armies clamoured
for him in Brabant ; thus in the infinite fluctuations of her policy
the queen of England hesitated and waited. For three months she
kept her unhappy lover dangling near her, then in October reluc-
tantly she let him go."® He went back to France no more forward in
his marriage than he had been when he came.
with no escort and only seven servantSi thus placing his person completely in her
power. See Baschet.
•" Digges.
>** The Venetian ambassador's despatch tor 18 Oct. 1579 (see Armand Baschet^
DiplomaUe V&nitiewne) contains the Italian translation of a letter in French from
Elizabeth to Alen^on, dated 12 Oct. The letter was sent with a jewelled cap-band
worth 4,000 crowns and a magnificent watch. It runs as follows : ' I send this little
letter written with my own hand to your highness to assure you of my good health.
My Lord Gobet will give yon a full account of our private matters and will tell you I
still live in the wish to make you happy. I pray then you will grant him, for all
things you would have me know, as great a confidence as you would accord myself.
Since he is my good and faithful servant he owes no less allegiance to your highness^
to whom I send two little gifts. I would that in wearing the one round your neck you
should so wear your memory of me the whole day long. And in the other I would
have yon see an image of the crown of this kingdom, which quickly I would set upon
your head with ray own hand were I capable to do as much. And should you doubt
of this, as I am sure you do not, M. Simier, your ambassador here, right quickly
could convince you. And in conclusion I pray God to grant you aU the felicity and
glory for the which sovereigns are put into this world. Elizabeth.*
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE VALOIS PRINCES 76
This delay had, in fact, ruined the cause of Alen9on. He de-
parted ridiculous, stale and out of date ; he set out one Thursday,
8 Feb. 1582, for Antwerp, where Orange and his army had long
been awaiting him. As we know, the luckless Alen9on brought with
him no kingdom, no glorious certainties to compensate the loss of
those critical three months. The queen of England promised some
money, underhand, and perhaps three men-of-war. Alen9on, poor,
unlucky, disappointed, was no longer the protestant hero. He
beheld his own chagrin in the faces of his followers. Soon he was,
relates Pierre d'Estoile, meprise et delaisse (Tun chacun.
vn
It was the ill fortune of the Flemings to be continually betrayed.
Betrayed by Elizabeth, by Charles IX, by the Spaniards, they were
now betrayed by their last protector. Alen^on, intolerably placed
between the advancing Spaniards and the suspicious Flemings,
determined to seize the towns of Flanders with his French soldiers,
and fight to the death to keep his governorship. Between Jan. 5 and
15, 1588, the French garrisons in Dunkirk, Ostend, Dixmuyde, Den-
dermond, Alost, and Vilvoorde, overpowered the burgher guards, and
without the losing of a single life secured these towns for Alen9on. In
view of the exceptional situation, the coup d'etat up to this point de-
served no especial blame. The French were there by consent of the
Flemings to defend Flanders from the Spaniards. They defended
Flanders by annexing it. But in Ghent, Antwerp, and Bruges, the
French plot worked less smoothly. Ghent and Bruges were too
strong to be attempted. At Antwerp, the 4,000 French outside
rushed into the city, and forgetting that they served the semi-
Huguenot Alen9on, the betrothed of Elizabeth, they streamed
through the streets shouting, Vive la messef Tuezf tuez! Nothing
could have been more immediately fatal to their hapless master.
The patriots of Antwerp remembered the massacre of Paris, and
with superhuman energy drove the French beyond their walls
again. By morning Alen9on was in full flight for Dendermond,
pitiably ruined by the madness of his own soldiers.^ ^* With his
flight from the Netherlands the career of Alen9on virtually con-
cludes. For six months he continued in the towns still garrisoned
by his troops, while Elizabeth vainly commanded the States to
reinstate him in his protectorate. For months the hopeless nego-
tiations dragged away ; but the indignant Flemings would no more
"* Still even as late as March 15S4 (see Groen van Prinsterer) Orange wrote : Le
nonibre de peuple quifavoure Frangoia de Valoia surpasse inflnimefnt quasi partout ;
but Alen^n had IcNst the favonr of Orange himself, who mistrusted his influence in
the States. Champagny in his M&movres declares that Orange was the secret enemy
of Alen^on : il eraignait que le prince rCacqvU trap de cridit aupris dea itais.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
76 QUEEN ELIZABETH AND Jan.
of so ambitious an intriguer. The help of Elizabeth came too
officiously, too late, and Alenfon bitterly declared that were it not for
the English he could yet succeed in the Netherlands. Towards the
end of June he retired, with his defeated army, into France. The
cause of the valiant States was lost. France had betrayed them ;
England had deserted them. Elizabeth recalled her troops from
Antwerp and seized such Flemish ships as were in the Channel * as
a punishment for the States' ingratitude.' Meanwhile Spain easily
reconquered the revolted provinces.
Elizabeth had now no safe line of rebels, no convenient Alen9on
between herself and Spain. Her practices of many years, her
advances and desertions, had all come to nothing. Spain was
again the master of a great part of the Netherlands. Meanwhile
Alen9on buried his disgrace in his castle of Chateau-Thierry. Not
tiU six months after his expulsion from Flanders did he summon
spirit enough to enter Paris. There his mother and the king greeted
him with singular affection. They feasted him and honoured him,
and scarcely let him go an instant from their sight. This was in
the middle of February.
A month later Queen Catherine was suddenly summoned to
Chateau-Thierry. Alenfon lay dying of the same strange illness as
his brother Charles — a continual haemorrhage, a slow fever, that
reduced him to the mere attenuated phantom of a man. She did
not stay long, for the dying man had a sick fancy that she and the
king had poisoned him. * Ah,' he would say, * I have paid dear for
the good cheer they gave me in Paris ! ' *^ So, tortured by suspicion,
humiliated by defeat, consumed by fever, the youngest of the Valois
slowly perished.
At the end of May Queen Catherine went again to Chateau-
Thierry. Alen9on was now given over by the physicians. The
queen-mother left him on 2 June, taking with her ^^* the most precious
of his jewels and his furniture ; assuming already the position of
his heir. In fact the death of Alenyon would bequeath an income
of 400,000 crowns to his mother and to Henry. But when she
left him he was not dead.
He lingered for another week, tended in his half-dismantled
castle by servants and physicians. On 10 June he died. 'He
was,' says Estoile, * but thirty years of age, a warrior, French in
name and nature, and an enemy of the Spaniards and of Guise.
As to his death there were many discourses and apprehensions.'
His death meant the subjection of the Netherlands, to Spain, the
impossibiUty of any real alliance between France and England, the
triumph of the Guises. Perhaps when he was dead Elizabeth
realised that she had lost an instrument of her security. At least
she thought it well to display an excessive grief. She put her
>«• Estoile. »« Ibid,
Digitized by
Google
1887 THE VALOIS PRINCES 77
court in mourning, and shut herself in her palace. * Monsieur i&
dead/ writes Walsingham. * Melancholy doth so possess us as both
pubUc and private causes are at a stay for a season.'
As for the Queen, writes Castelnau de la Mauvissi^re/^^ she is still, in
appearance, fall of tears and regrets, telling me that she is as a widow
woman who has lost her husband, and how I know that the late Monsieur
was as much to her, and how she ever held him hers, although they had
not Uved together, and many other such speeches, for she is a princess
who knows how to compose and how to transform herself as suits her best.
And lastly she asked of me what I could do to augment her alliance and
amity with France.
But for this it was too late. The moment for a sincere and
profitable league with France had passed away. Elizabeth had let
the moment slip. Four years thence, unsupported save by the
States she had deserted, only the accident of a storm, the singular
chance of victory, interposed to save the kingdom of England from the
condition of a Spanish province.
A. M. F. Robinson.
>>> Tealet, M889 EsnevaU Castelnau, 2S July 1S84.
Digitized by
Google
78 EARLY EXPLORATIONS OF AMERICA, Jan.
Rarly Explorations of Anurica,
real and imaginary
THE history of the first discovery and exploration of the New
World comprises a series of narratives fully as interesting,
when first told, as the * Thousand Nights and One Night,' and more
improving to study, it may be plausibly alleged, than even the
unexpurgated version of that venerable body of romance. And
had the New World, once discovered and partially known, relapsed
into darkness, and the way across the sea been forgotten, the ' Qua-
tuor Navigationes ' of Vespucci (if ever written) might have taken
the place of the seven voyages of Sindbad the Sailor, and gossip-
ing Peter Martyr of Anghiera might have been the western Sche-
herazade. It is difficult for us, who know already what coasts and
rivers the early explorers were to find, to realise the feelings of the
generation that read the letters of Columbus and Cortes. The
wonders of travel in yet unexplored parts of the earth can never
have for us the same freshness as to men who knew little of the
laws of nature and human history ruling in their own hemisphere,
and had no confident assurance that the laws they knew would hold
good in the New World. We know within certain limits what to
expect from unexplored regions; the first Europeans landing in
America were ready to accept any marvel as possible ; and when
they showed scepticism and reluctance to beUeve, it was most often
because they had started with some preconceived notion of greater
wonders stiU — a notion which was in general contradicted by the
event. The curious tentative maps that chronicle successive dis-
coveries and hypotheses are studded with monuments of dead
theories and lost illusions. The mines of Cipango, the paradise of
Bimini, the strait of Aniah, the Seven Cities, the Amazonian
tribes, the golden city of the inca Manoa — these and other names
sum up the story of the first discoverers, ever driven on through
real wonders in the pursuit of the non-existent.
The Odyssey of the New World was first begun ; then came its
Qiad, in the record of the conquests — the minor cycle of epics
<5lustering round the two great stories of Mexico and Peru, the
struggle between Spaniard and Aztec for dominion, and the inter-
necine war of Spaniard with Spaniard. Then the centre of interest
Digitized by
Qoo^<^
1887 REAL AND IMAGINARY 79
shifts northward, and to the romantic age of discovery and con-
quest succeeds the historical age of colonisation and trade which
founded New France and New England. The New World has lost
its strangeness and romance ; it has been appropriated, despoiled,
partitioned, and is now to become the sphere in which European
political and religious ideas, European state policy, and national
prejudice may work out their results under new conditions. This
phase of development may be said to end with the contest between
England and France for North America. With the American war
of independence begins the emancipation of the colonies from
European control, and their conversion into states affecting to
govern themselves, and in some cases succeeding. With the accom-
plishment of this change the unity of American history ceases ; no
longer assimilated in development and policy by a common colonial
status, a common dependence, the new countries form a system of
independent states, each going on its own separate path hencefor-
ward, and working out its own diverse political and social problems.
In studying the record of America, attention has naturally been
concentrated largely on the most interesting and eventful periods ;
and it is of these especially, though far from exclusively, that English-
speaking writers have treated most worthily. Eobertson, Irving,
Prescott, Helps, have successively done good service in searching
out or popularising the story of the Spanish discoverers and con-
querors ; and if the pioneers of England in America have not as
yet met with the same measure of good fortune as the pioneers of
France, it is not for want of reverent research and careful recording
on the part of their descendants. The history of the duel between
England and France has of late been told by Mr. Parkman in a
manner that seems to preclude repetition : and the war of inde-
pendence has found a worthy, if hardly so impartial, chronicler.
But a history of America as a whole, founded on the wide results
of modern research, but depicting those results in due perspective,
and grasping and presenting clearly the broad lines of sameness
and difference in the records of the various states and settlements
— this has yet to be written.
Thanks to the patient, unselfish, and often unrenowned and
unrewarded research of many students, we have now within reach
a vast body of facts about various stages of development of many
parts of America ; and the further appUcation of the same research
would probably lead to a similar collection of materials for the rest
of the continent. But whether the heaven-born historian will arise
to work this material into artistic shape, or not, real historical
workers are not willing to sit down and wait for him ; they will at
least collect the essential items of known fact, and the opinions of
those best fitted to judge on points of dispute, together with the
authorities on which are based such records or inferences : they
Digitized by
Google
80 EARLY EXPLORATIONS OF AMERICA, Jan.
will have ready pigeonholed for the great writer — and, indeed, for
all others — the materials from which to construct a book or a
theory or a mere personal knowledge. They will arm research for
work and point out its path, even as we give the latest maps to a
discoverer. * Thus far others have gone,' they will say, ' and here
lies the most favourable road.'
It is this task that has been undertaken by the various authors
of the two historical series * which I am now considering, and in
each case the result is one which promises a great future to the
bold application of co-operation to history. In one case a number
of men of special knowledge have been set to write each the history
of some place or period of exploration or settlement, or to investigate
some thorny question, and each narrative is followed by a critical
essay on the sources of information, and often by further biblio-
graphical information from the editor, Mr. Justin Winsor, Ubrarian
of Harvard university. In the other case, Mr. H. H. Bancroft^
of whose method of work I had occasion to speak in a former brief
notice, is the head of a sort of historical manufactory.^ His
method, equally co-operative, results in more apparent unity, and
does not give his subordinates so much latitude or responsibility as
belongs to the collaborators of Mr. Winsor. But there is a funda-
mental similarity beneath the apparent diversity of these two
valuable compilations. Both are attempts — and apparently very
successful ones — to sum up all that has been written on the sub-
jects of which they treat ; both add to their narrative a copious
bibliography of authorities, and estimates of their value. In Mr.
Winsor's volumes we are even informed what booksellers paid, how
much, at what dates, for what rare books — a trick of the librarian
cropping up in the historian.
The * History of America' makes a special study of early
chartography, showing in a series of interesting copies or sketches
of maps the gradual widening of the known world. It also give&
many portraits of persons, and old engravings of places, and
facsimiles of the signatures of everybody, in a manner, including,
by a curious affectation, the signatures of its own contributors.
There is in general a studied avoidance of personal declaration on
disputed points — we are only told what everybody else thought and
wrote ; and this is tantalising, if impartial. Mr. Bancroft, on the
other hand, while his maps are smaller and not nearly so well
executed, is able to give his own opinion on vexed questions and on
the value of authorities in a manner which his wide acquaintance
at first or second hand with these authorities, and his evident
desire to be impartial, render of considerable value. On one point,
> Narrative and Critical History of America, edited by Jastin Winsor. History of
the Pacific States, by Hubert Howe Bancroft,
s Historical Beyiew, i. 690| d».
Digitized by
Qoo^^
188T REAL AND IMAGINARY 81
however, it is necessary for all students of literature sorrowfully to
deny his competence, and that is in questions of style. The mere
narrative of facts is tolerable, if at times rough in manner ; but the
generalisations, moral reflections, and purple — or rather magenta
— patches of description are uniformly bad. Mr. Bancroft's — or
somebody's — remarks on the state of Europe and the manners of
the Spaniards at the time of the conquest, which open the first
volume, read Uke a rude attempt to parody Buckle. I merely
mention this Uterary matter, however, that intending students
may not be rebuffed from consulting the work by meeting on its
threshold with commonplace moralities about the horrors of war,
the coarseness and ignorance of the middle ages, the cruelties of
the Spaniards, &c. &c., more sensible, but hardly less wearisome,
than Alison's well-known justifications of Providence. Once in
touch with their paper bags of facts, Mr. Bancroft and his assistant
writers are again readable and valuable.
Thus much may sufl&ce for the arrangement and style of the
works referred to ; but their Uterary aspect is the least important.
Neither are they to be regarded as adding very much to our absolute
knowledge of the periods of which they treat. Mr. Bancroft's
large special library and carefully formed collection of manuscripts
have furnished him with many minor facts not hitherto recorded,
and the resources of the Harvard library and the papers of many
industrious American societies are at the disposal of Mr. Winsor
and his associates ; but in the main their work is rather settlement
than discovery, rather a polity than a conquest, and, like their own
republican government, rather for use than for show. The chief
value of both works lies in the opportunity they give us of seeing
clearly how far the knowledge and the history of early America
have progressed.
The first problem of importance which historians of the discovery
of America have to solve (for the apparently authentic but resultlesa
voyages of the Northmen, the semi-mythical adventures of the Zeni
&c. are little worth a laborious investigation) is a psychological
matter — it is simply the personal character of Columbus himself,
on the interpretation of which not only much of his biography, but
not a little of the history of his discoveries, must be based. As in
the case of Mary queen of Scots, or indeed of any historical
character of striking personaKty, the dramatic conception of the
character governs the historical interpretation of the Ufe.
The estimate formed of Columbus by historians and biographers
has varied considerably. At present it seems passing through a
cycle of depression. The hero-worship of Irving and others invited
a reaction which finds voice in the expressions of Mr. Bancroft's
common-sense, if somewhat Philistine, impartiality ; * and the more
• Central America, vol. i. pp. 289-246.
VOL. n. — NO. V. a
Digitized by
Google
82 EARLY EXPLORATIONS OF AMERICA, Jan.
extravagant eulogy of M. Koselly de Lorgues and other advocates of
the canonisation of Columbus has met with a corrective in the
work of M. Harrisse, who, indeed, may speak with authority on
questions of American discovery after his extensive labours on the
bibliography of the subject. His late study of Columbus is indis-
putably the most important that has appeared for long, and perhaps,
on the whole, the most trustworthy life as yet written. Possibly the
function of advocatus didboli has carried the historian too far in
depreciation of the admiral, or of the history of him generally at-
tributed to his son Fernando ; and the bibliographer's faults of
attaching too much weight to evidence which he has himself found,
and too readily doubting what his own researches do not confirm,
may have invaUdated the work in some measure. But if this be so—
and I would not venture to assert it— the next swing of the pendulum
will vindicate the admiral from any unjust charges by disclos-
ing new documents, for even so indefatigable a worker as M.
Harrisse has not exhausted the wealth of papers that must still
remain in the Spanish archives, after all the ravages of damp,
moths, rats, and Napoleon.
Accurate and scientific historical labour is often accused of
making its productions dull; and some of those who promote
scientific study have too rashly accepted the charge as a necessary
truth. Undoubtedly impartial and rigorous investigation tends to
diminish the picturesqueness of historical narrative. It reduces
alike the greatness of heroes, the goodness of saints, and the black-
ness of villains, and shows, as a rule, that particular individuals
were responsible for much less than is popularly credited to them.
This process has the disadvantage of depriving those who Uke
violent contrasts of their beloved dramatic or rather melodra-
matic effects ; but to those who desire to study real life, it is far
more interesting, as well as more scientific, to treat of historical
events as resulting from the probable interaction of conceivable
characters and causes. The general result of inquiry and criticism
as recently applied to the history of American discovery has been,
as elsewhere, to level down the heroes and saints, and level up the
knaves and fools, without, however, altering their traditional cha-
racters completely. Isabella is less admirable, Ferdinand less
mean, than Irving makes out ; Fonseca is no longer the villain of
the piece, and Columbus, though still the hero, is not so much
the hero.
The admiral's character seems to be one of not such rare occur-
rence as we might think. He was a good practical seaman ; but in
other respects he seems to have lived rather in a shifting world of
his own conceptions, which were to him as facts ; and though the
pressure of realities sometimfe compelled him to give up some of
his illusions, he none the less continued to hold it the duty of the
Digitized by
Google
1887 REAL AND IMAGINARY 83
world to conform to his conceptions of it. Thus living in a world
of his own creation, self-consciousness was perhaps his strongest
characteristic ; and the universal persecution over which many bio-
graphers have wept is in no small part the well-known delusion
which lies at the root of that extremely common * persecution
mania' into which a morbid self- consciousness often develops.
This egoistic habit of mind was probably necessary to carry Colum-
bus through his great enterprise, for the man was so possessed
with a sense of his personal divine mission as to impress others
with something of his fervour ; but it sufficiently explains how his
colonial projects failed, and how he contrived to suffer injury from
aJl quarters. To take the most familiar instance of his egoism, it
is not hkely that Columbus's heart ever smote him for taking from
Kodrigo of Triana (if that was the sailor's name) the poor little
pension promised to the first beholder of land. And Irving's rather
lame excuse — namely, that the admiral's glory was at stake — prac-
tically means that feeling that he ought to be the first to see land,
Columbus persuaded himself that he had seen it first, or at least a
hght on it. The act, in any case, is characteristic of the man, and
appears to me to bring out the self-regarding and self-centred mind
of the Italian of Eenaissance times in contrast with the more prac-
tical and external observation of the Spaniard. Cortes would not
have thought such a thing worth doing ; Vasco Nunez would not
have thought of it at all.
The same temper comes out in the highest as in the lowest parts
of Columbus's character. His constant reference to his mission of
recovering the holy sepulchre can hardly be thought a mere parade ;
yet he never took any steps towards the carrying out of that mission,
nor ever would have done. Here again comes in the illusion : to
one who Uved in his own world of dreams, the very fervour of his
rehgious purpose probably seemed to excuse him from taking
practical steps to carry it out. He might as well have been one of
those kings to whom a vow of crusade was a periodical source of
revenue.
The great admiral's power of *make-beheve ' was like a child's.
On a few facts, capable of many rational interpretations, he based
the astounding theory, astounding even for those days, of the pear-
shaped earth with the terrestrial paradise at its apex somewhere on
the equator ; and so firm was his beUef in his own a priori conclu-
sions, that he died in the conviction that Cuba was part of the
mainland of Asia — a statement which, indeed, he had once made
his crew swear to maintain, under heavy penalties. This, as Mr.
Bancroft well says, is one of the facts that help us to understand
why Columbus was so unpopular. He was always doing mysterious
things, and preferred to make them more mysterious still. He had
boundless confidence in himself and his mission ; but when he had
o 2
Digitized by
Google
84 EARLY EXPLORATIONS OF AMERICA, Jan.
to deal with men, there was an alternation of severity and lenity, a
distrust and deception of others which begot distrust and deception
in others. The false reckoning which he kept on his first voyage, so
as to entice his men onwards in spite of themselves, was due to this
temper. Pizarro, ruflSan as he was, showed far more wisdom in
the ways of men when he drew that famous line on the beach of
the island of Gallo,^ and bade those step over it who would meet
* labour, hunger, thirst, fatigue, wounds, sickness, and every other
kind of danger ' with him.
But the ugUest part of Columbus's nature was what one can
hardly avoid calling his snobbishness about his family and early
life ; and on this point M. Harrisse in especial has accumulated
many damaging facts. The main source of the current and popular
account (as given in Irving and elsewhere) of Columbus's early life
has been the * Historie,' so called, an ItaKan version (probably very
inaccurate) of a lost Spanish original ascribed to Fernando, the
illegitimate son of Columbus by Beatrix Enriquez. After at first
suspecting the work to be a mere fabrication, M. Harrisse was com-
pelled, by an inspection of unpubUshed works of Las Casas, to admit
that the * Historic ' were due to Fernando, or some one closely con-
nected with him. This, however, rather helps to damage the credit
of the father; for since Fernando, an educated and honourable
man, was hardly likely to publish tales which he knew to be false, it is
probable that the admiral himself was given to talking largely and
vaguely about his youth and his exploits, and that the confused
hints of the * Historic ' owe their origin to him. . This supposition is
confirmed from other sources. We Imow that Columbus stated more
than once that he was not the first admiral of his family — so that
the confusion between him and the Gascon corsairs, the Cazeneuves,
sumamed Coullon, and in Italian Colombo, seems to have been in-
tentional on his part. Possibly he also threw out occasionally dark
hints as to the noble origin of his race, in this as in many other
ways strongly reminding us of that other famous ItaKan, the
tribune Eienzi.
On this question there can be, after M. Harrisse's laborious
researches in the archives of G^noa, Savona, and all the neighbour-
hood, no reasonable doubt. Columbus, in spite of the hints,
declarations, and invectives of the * Historic,' was himself a weaver
and the son of a weaver. There is no reason to suppose that he
ever went to study at Pa via, nor did he become a sailor at an early
age. He sprang from no poor branch of a noble house, and the
arms which he inserted as his family bearings, in the coat granted
* I am glad to see that Mr. Bancroft {Central America, vol. ii. p. 8) and Captain
Clements Markham {Narr, and Crit, History of America, vol. ii. p. 510) both accept
this famous story, though Helps and others doubt it. Pizarro seems a man to whose
character these dramatic episodes were natural.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 REAL AND IMAGINARY 85
him by Ferdinand and Isabella, have every appearance of being
due to his own invention. They are or, a chief gules and bend
azure, a singular combination, and not like the blazon of any
Italian Colombi, all of whom, according to M. Harrisse,^ bore
* canting ' or punning arms, with one or more doves.
I am loth to think that the great navigator, no matter how
earnestly he desired to conceal his humble origin, could have
allowed his aged father Domenico to die in poverty after he had
returned from his first voyage, and was in the full flush of honour
and prosperity. Yet a document discovered by M. Harrisse seems
to show that Domenico, who lived after 1494, was poor and in debt
at that time. Far the most curious instance, however, of the
admiral's desire to obscure his antecedents is to be found in his
will, in which he charges his son and executor Diego to pay to
certain merchants of Genoa, who had carried on business at Lisbon
in 1482, certain sums of money, the recipients to be kept in total
ignorance of the source of these windfalls. There can be little
doubt about the meaning of this. The sums in question were
evidently Columbus's unpaid debts, incurred while trading at Lisbon,
and he had left them unpaid till at least twenty-two years after
they were contracted.
Apart from the new light thrown on the admiral's character,
recent research has not added much to our knowledge of his actions.
The one difficult problem of his history — the determination of the
place of the first landfall — remains as insoluble as ever. Mr.
Winsor's careful statement leaves the honour undetermined between
five islands, to which M. Harrisse adds a sixth.* It is vain to expect
any great approach to certainty in the matter, for all authorities
seem to agree that Columbus's own description does not apply in
every particular to any one of the * 36 islands, 687 cays, and 2,414
rocks ' ^ which constitute the Bahamas.
' Apart from this point, which, after all, is one of chiefly senti-
mental interest, there is comparatively little doubt about the history
of Columbus's voyages. It is far otherwise with the history of his
next successors in discovery, the Cabots, in whom students of English
blood are bound to feel especial interest. The records of their
voyages are distressingly meagre, even after the exhaustive research
and labour of Dr. Charles Deane, who writes of the Cabots in the
'History of America,' and of M. Harrisse. It is still not quite
certain whether John Cabot or his son Sebastian was the real
leader in both voyages, though the probability is very strongly in
favour of the former as far as state papers and letters go. It is
not at all clear when John Cabot died, though there seems nothing
* Harrisse, Christqphe Colombo ii. 169 cfeo. The * family ' coat seems a bit of false
heraldry ; but I leave the learned to pronounce on its possibility.
» Harrisse, Christqphe Colombo I 802. « History of Avicrica, voL ii. p. 68.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
86 EARLY EXPLORATIONS OF AMERICA, Jan.
to support the theory that he died between the first and second
voyages of discovery. After a long tradition of error it has been
possible to fix the dates of the two expeditions with accuracy ; but
we do not know what parts of the coast were discovered, on which
voyage, where the Cabots first saw land, and whether they reached
Florida or Cape Hatteras, or only explored the gulf of St, Lawrence
or the coast of Labrador, and whether a third English voyage was
attempted or not. Sebastian Cabot himself seems to have added
to the confusion by reporting different things to different persons,,
and these reports have almost certainly suffered additional distor-
tion before reaching us at second or third hand. Everything about
him is more or less doubtful ; even the Latin inscription on his
picture is ambiguous by the awkward use of the same case for his-
father's name and his own. It is greatly to be regretted that none
of the Cabots seem to have drawn up a detailed ofl&cial report for
Henry VII. Dr. Deane need hardly blame Eichard Eden, the first
English historian of American discovery, for not being a skilful
* interviewer.' Probably the only result of Eden's cross-examining
Sebastian Cabot (then aged and at no time too exact in statement)
for the benefit of the Massachusetts Historical Society would have
been a yet more hopeless entanglement of the whole question. We
must rest content with such things as we have, and rather wish than
hope that the state papers of Henry VII's reign, when calendared,
may tell us more, or that something authentic may yet turn up at
Bristol. It is a pity, in some respects, that the English govern-
ment had not yet acquired the recording and docketing habits of
the Spaniards. We know far more of the comparatively unsuc-
cessful expedition of Sebastian Cabot to La Plata than of the
first two voyages of his father and himself. It is only through the
invaluable Italian ambassadors that we are really sure of the dates
of those voyages.
One of the disputed points about Sebastian Cabot, and one
which was once of some historical importance, and still seems to
arouse interest, is the question of his birthplace. On this matter
I may be permitted to enlarge somewhat, as it has recently been dis-
cussed by Mr. C. H. Coote in the * Dictionary of National Biography.'
I am unable to agree with his conclusion when he adopts the
current English tradition that the discoverer was born at Bristol,
rejecting the * late and suspicious ' theory of his Venetian birth,
and it therefore is necessary briefly to state the reasons for pre-
ferring the opinion of Dr. Deane and M. Harrisse.
Both of the hypotheses as to Cabot's birthplace seem due
primarily to his own statements to various persons — at least we
cannot trace any other sources of information. He undoubtedly
stated to Bichard Eden, and apparently to other EngUshmen, that
he was born at Bristol, taken to Venice when four years old, and
Digitized by
Google
1887 REAL AND IMAGINARY 87
brought back to England afterwards. He also stated to Peter
Martyr in 1515, to Contarini in 1522, and to a learned Italian,
supposed to be Gian Giacomo Bardolo of Mantua,^ about 1540,
that he was born in Venice and taken young to England, whether
pene infans or * having some knowledge of the humanities and the
sphere,' according to one or other of his statements, we may give
up hope of determining. Mr. Coote is within his rights in im-
pugning the statement to Contarini as made with the purpose of
currying favour with the Venetian authorities, and therefore sus-
picious. Nevertheless I may point out that the Venetian authorities
could probably find out whether Cabot's statement was true, for the
evidence was within their reach ; and when engaging in intrigues
with Venice, which, as he said, would risk his neck, or at any rate
might spoil his credit with his Spanish and EngUsh employers,
Cabot would hardly arouse the watchful suspicion of the council of
ten by a needless lie. Besides, if Cabot was not born in Venice, to
what motive can we ascribe his desire to benefit Venice, at some
risk to himself, by disclosing the secret he imagined himself to
possess? Either in England or in Spain his high position and
credit would have won a readier hearing.
Mr. Coote has not noticed that the statements of EngUsh
birth are also * suspicious.' Sebastian's reasons for claiming
English citizenship are sufficiently obvious. The English of that
time, if not so exclusive as the Venetians, were fully as proud of
their nationality, and probably more incUned to contemn strangers.
Columbus, as we know, found his Italian birth a great hindrance
among Spaniards ; and if Sebastian Cabot could avoid such diffi-
culties by making himself out Bristol-born, we know enough of him
to be sure that no petty question of fact would stand in the way of
his doing so. And English chroniclers had a very strong motive
for claiming Cabot as their countryman. On his discovery the
English claim to dominion in North America was often based, and
this was clearly strengthened by proving the explorer to be not only
the servant but the bom subject of the king of England.
But Contarini's report is not the only one that affirms Cabot's
Venetian birth. Why, if Mr. Coote's opinion is correct, did Sebas-
tian trouble to tell a he to Peter Martyr full seven years before the
intrigue with Contarini ? or what motive could he have for denying
his EngUsh birth to Bardolo of Mantua, between the time when
the secret negotiation with Venice was dropped in Spain and the
time when it was taken up again in England ?
So far, then, as Cabot's own assertions go, the Venetian claim
seems to be the stronger; but Sebastian was evidently a person
whose birthplace and family shifted according to circumstances,
and his unsupported testimony could not be held to decide the
' History of America, vol. iii. p. 26 note.
Digitized by
Google
88 EARLY EXPLORATIONS OF AMERICA, Jan.
question — much less the slight difference in weight between two
bundles of conflicting statements. In such matters a pennyweight
of fact is worth a ton of tradition or theory, and there are two facts
which are certain. On 28 March 1476, John Cabot was natural-
ised as a Venetian citizen, having fulfilled the statutory condition
of fifteen years' continuous residence. And on 5 March 1495-6
the right to discover and occupy unknown lands, and to exercise
jurisdiction and monopohse trade in them, was granted to John
Cabot and his three sons, of whom Sebastian is named the second.
The four names are mentioned on the same footing, and the grant
is co-ordinate to all, which has generally been taken as proving
that all three sons were legally major. Therefore Sebastian must
have been born before 1474, very possibly in 1473, a date which
fits in with what we know from Eichard Eden of Cabot's later years.
John Cabot's wife was a Venetian woman, as we learn from Lorenzo
Pasqualigo's letter of August 1497,® and not improbably possessed
property at Venice.
It seems to result from these dates that all three of John Cabot's
sons were born while their father was still legally domiciled at
Venice ; and though that domicile might not be held to be inter-
rupted by voyages of a moderate length, such as the Grenoese
merchant must have made,® yet a removal to Bristol and a sojourn
of several years there would surely be fatal to a claim for natural-
isation. There remains therefore only the supposition that Sebas-
tian may have been born at Bristol when John Cabot had taken his
wife there on a voyage, and that the child was left there for some
years and then taken back to Venice. This is possible but not at
all probable, nor does it seem worth while to strain possibiUty in
order to credit the less likely of two conflicting statements.
Though Cabot must in all probability remain, as Dr. Deane
calls him, * the sphinx of American discovery,' a somewhat nearer
approach to certainty has been made in the no less perplexing
case of Amerigo Vespucci. The strange chain of events by which
the name of that navigator was affixed on the map to the new
continent, is in itself as improbable as a romance. Vespucci, a*
Florentine pilot, while in the Portuguese service, sent a letter to
his countryman and schoolfellow, Piero Soderini, in 1504, giving an
account of his * four ' voyages. Probably (as Mr. Major thinks) a
copy of this letter was sent to Giocondo, an ItaKan architect at
Paris, who translated it into French and gave it to his friend
Mathias Kingman. Eingman, returning to the Vosges country,
became professor of Latin at St. Die, in the seminary set up
there by Duke Bene of Lorraine. Here the letter of Vespucci
was taken up by Waldzeemiiller, or Hylacomylus as he preferred to
* Venetian Calendars, vol. i. p. 262.
' Baimondo de Soncino says that John Cabot had reached Mecca on a voyage.
Digitized by
Google
1887 REAL AND IMAGINARY 89
<jall himself, the professor of geography, who printed a Latin version
of Vespucci's account with a treatise of his own, pubUshed in 1507.
In this little book, the * Cosraographi» Introductio,' ^® was first
proposed the name of America or Amerige for the continent. In
1509 another edition of the work was pubhshed at Strasburg, the
press at St. Die having been given up ; and thus the name was
spread through Germany. At first it was only what is now South
America that bore the title, for the northern parts of the continent
had been named already, and the connexion between north and
south was only conjectured. There was apparently no desire to
rob Columbus of his honours ; but Vespucci had explored a consider-
able part of the new coast, his narrative was interesting and gained
the ear of the learned, and naturally they united to do him honour.
With some also, the alleged first voyage of 1497 gave a ground
for applying Amerigo's name to the whole continent, which the
Spaniards had simply called tierrajirma.
The suggestion of Waldzeemiiller was taken up by other German
geographers. Mapmakers sometimes put in the new name.
Schoner adopted it in his first globe and a descriptive treatise.
The name spread the more easily that the Spaniards had not found
^any good general name for the mainland ; and by the time that
nation woke up to denounce what was taken as a fraud, the mischief
was done. Vespucci had died in 1512, but his name was immortal.
€olumbus, Columbia, Colombia, Colon, have been adopted as the
names of various states, districts, towns, rivers, &c., but the con-
tinent itself remains marked with the title of the man who did not
discover it first. And, curiously, just as Vespucci had the privilege
of naming the New World, though only one among many explorers,
the United States, though only one state of one half of the con-
tinent, have appropriated the name of the continent to themselves
in defiance of all scientific nomenclature. In view of the confusion
which this often causes we may feel a certain sympathy with the
mournful creature who hit on the idea of calling his country * Fre-
donia ' and his fellow-citizens * Fredish,' under a vague idea that
these words were in some way derived from * freedom.' There
seem to be traces that these terrible names had once some vogue.
There was already no hope of supplanting the new name when
men finally realised the fact that the new continent had nothing to
do with Asia and the Indies. Some writers about Columbus and
the New World revenged themselves by denouncing Vespucci as a
base impostor, who had been in some way suborned by some
nefarious conspiracy of supposed merchants to lay claim to the
discovery of the mainland and have his name put to it. A con-
spiracy of merchants to name a continent is indeed a fascinating, if
rather improbable, notion. Humboldt put an end to such ideas by
*• History of America^ \6L ii. pp. 145-9.
Digitized by
Google
90 EARLY EXPLORATIONS OF AMERICA, Jan.
showing that the naming of the new land after Vespucci was none
of his doing, and was not practically adopted till after his death ;
and the researches of Major, D'Avezac, and others have further
cleared up the singular story. And although, if we disbelieve in
Amerigo's first voyage, it is hard to get in his four expeditions or
to reconcile his accounts with known facts, a good deal of the con-
fusion may be safely put down not to deliberate lying, but to the
blunders of translators, first from ItaUan or Spanish-Italian into
French, and then from French into Latin. On the whole we may
say that the Florentine was not over-modest in his accoimt of his
doings, and not averse to claiming and taking any unappropriated
credit that was going. Besides this, he seems to have been, like
Sebastian Cabot, rather loose and apt to vary in his statements.
But that he in any way deUberately set himself to supplant Colum-
bus by a false claim is highly improbable. So far, therefore, Emer-
son's * dishonest pickle dealer ' is rehabilitated.
A bold and ingenious attempt to vindicate Vespucci completely
has of late revived interest in him. Baron Varnhagen maintains
the accuracy of Amerigo's account of his first voyage, on the hypo-
thesis that it was to North instead of (as generally interpreted)
to South America. This supposition certainly destroys some of the
objections to Vespucci's statement, and weakens even one of the
most fatal of them, namely the fact that the Florentine, though he
had been Ojeda's pilot in exploring the coast of the mainland, was
not called as a witness in the great Columbus lawsuit, which was
to settle the rights of the admiral's family. Now it was the interest
of the Spanish crown to restrict these rights; and if Vespucci had
for the first time discovered any part of the coast in the royal
service (as he says he did), the crown could obviously bar the claims
of Diego Colon over that coast. But even if the discoveries of Amerigo
had been made in the gulf of Mexico, yet the boundaries of the
country (as Mr. Gay *^ well points out) were so little known that his
testimony would still have been useful. And the entire absence of
documents about Vespucci's first expedition, and even (according to
Munoz) the presence of documents proving that he was engaged in
fitting out ships for Columbus during the time of the supposed
voyage, are objections too hard to overcome. Most writers therefore
have come to the conclusion that the voyage of 1497 was a myth ;
and this view is taken by Mr. Gay,*^ the author of the essay on
Vespucci; by Mr. Winsor, the editor, in an elaborate bibhographical
note ; ^* and by Mr. Bancroft, in a long and ably reasoned appendix.'^
The discovery by which the Florentine was thought to have fore-
stalled Cabot must be relegated to the extensive limbo of imaginary
explorations.
" History of America, vol. ii. p. 144. " Ibid, p. 142.
»• Ibid. p. 174 &c. '* Bancroft, Central America, vol. i. pp. 99-107.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 REAL AND IMAGINARY 91
In that limbo there is, perhaps, no more important, minutely
mapped, and at the same time fantastically varying country than
that which includes the famous kingdom or province of Anian with
the still more famous strait of the same name. The history of
this strait is remarkable enough to be worth setting down briefly,
even though the proportion of fact to fiction in the narrative be of
the slenderest.
With the discoveries of Magellan, the Spanish exploration and
conquest of Mexico and Central America, and the French occupa-
tion of Canada, the field of imaginary geography and the scope of
fictitious or doubtful voyages was largely reduced ; but the imagina-
tion long found its home in the north-west and the interior of North
America. The uncertainty of the coast-line of the north-west
lasted down to a singularly late period, hardly any progress in ex-
ploration having been made for nearly two hundred years.
The reason for this delay is obvious. Spain, in accordance
with her accustomed colonial policy, was playing the dog in the
manger. She would not enter in herself to the undiscovered lands,
and them that were entering in she hindered ; and owing to her
command of Mexico and California, the only good bases for
northern exploration on the Pacific coast, she was able to follow her
dilatory plan out with unusual success. After the first era of con-
quest and plunder the fervour of discovery slackened. Spain was
immersed in European politics ; she aspired to be the head of the
nations, acting with the empire under Charles V, and alone under
Philip II. Hence, though exploration was still undertaken, it was
chiefly with a view to the profit of the Spanish crown ; and when
the limits of profitable discovery seemed to have been reached, the
government settled down to devote its decaying energies to extract-
ing the largest possible profits out of the colonies for the support
of Spain's interminable wars.
Yet, what the Spaniards did not want for themselves, they
most emphatically refused to allow others to take ; and in the face of
their constant hostility no colony could well be established on the
Pacific coast, considering the precarious state of commimication
by sea. So the north-west coast was left to the chance explorations
of Spaniards or those who came to plunder them, and neither had
much inducement to push northward or inland.
The void thus left was filled up by the more or less ingenious
conjectures of mapmakers and cosmographers. Some of their
minor delusions — so great is the power of printed error — lasted
longer than one could expect, and showed in some cases a singular
power of resurrection. The belief in an Isthmian strait was soon
given up ; but the supposed insularity of Lower California was a
singularly durable mistake, the more remarkable because it cropped
up again after the peninsula had been credited with its proper form.
Digitized by
Google
92 EARLY EXPLORATIONS OF AMERICA, Jan,
But the most fertile source of conjecture, the delight of roman-
tic explorers and the despair of science, was the famous strait of
Anian. This name, which haunted the maps of two centuries,
embodied two separate ideas, though at first, doubtless, the two
were one. It was the passage through which men might sail from
Atlantic to Pacific, and it was also the strait cutting off America from
Asia. These two were one in the opinion of those who conceived the
northern part of North America to be a prolongation of Asia, and
the strait that separated it from the central part to be the high-
way to India and Cathay ; but from the time when the real dis-
tance between America and Asia began to be known, the name of
Anian was usually, though by no means always, restricted to the
supposed strait between Asia and the new continent. The north-
west passage had several names given to it, and, in fact, varied
with the fancy of inventive mariners and the conjecture of in-
genious chartographers.
The derivation of the word ' Anian ' is obscure ; but it seems to
have come from some name given to the extreme north-east part of
Asia ; and this name has been vaguely ascribed to Marco Polo.
That the title first appeared on the Asiatic side of the strait (though
it afterwards settled on the other) is almost certain, for it is hardly
credible that a mapmaker would put an entirely imaginary name to
an entirely unknown part of a new continent. And if Asiatic, the
name, being applied to the north-east part of the Chinese empire,
would almost inevitably be taken from Marco Polo. But the word
* Anian ' is nowhere mentioned by the Venetian. How, then, did
this * Anian regnum,' * Anian provincia,' come to make its appear-
ance on the map ?
Purchas gives ' Anian ' as an island off the Chinese coast, pro-
bably a corruption of Hainan ; and Polo mentions a province of
Aniriy variously read in some editions ae Amu or Aniu, and placed
by Colonel Yule in Yunnan.** This, then, moved far north by
some mapmaker, may account for * Anian provincia ; ' but what is
* Anian regnum ' ? How were geographers able to settle the poUti-
cal organisation of this unexplored land ?
In Marco Polo's * Travels,' bk. ii. ch. ii-v.*^ an account is given of
a prince named Nayan or Naian, a relative of Eublai Ehan, who
made war on the khan and was captured and put to death after
one of Messer Marco's stock battles. Now Nayan's dominions were
probably near Korea *^ and in about the position where the later
geographers placed their strait ; and if one mapmaker had put in
* Kegnimi Naian ' in the north-east of the great khan's dominions,
the subsequent transposition into 'Anian' is not unlikely, and
would be helped by the actual names of Anin, Hainan, or even
>» Travels of Marco Polo (CoL Yule), vol. ii. pp. 101-4.
>• Ibid. vol. i. pp. 296 Ac »' IHd, p. 308.
Digitized by
Google
1887 REAL AND IMAGINARY 93
Annam. I give this conjecture for what it is worth, which is, not
improbably, very little. In any case the derivation, whatever it
was, was soon confused by a supposed connexion with some ex-
plorer Anus (for Joao) Cortereal,^® who again was confounded with
the earlier and more authentic Cortereals, till a whole galaxy of
fictions had from the first clustered round the famous straits.
The strait of Anian first appears in 1566 in Zaltieri's map ; ^*
Anian itself as a state or country is not mentioned there. Mer*
cator's map of 1569 puts the name on the American side ; Furlani,
in 1574, on the Asiatic. Evidently it was a matter of Uttle
moment on which side this roving kingdom was ultimately to
settle.
But, with this exception, the conception of the position of
Anian and its strait was for the most part rational and tolerably
consistent. The severance was made between the north-east of
Asia and the north-west of North America, and in almost the same
position, as a rule, as the actual Behring's straits. Some maps,
however, after the Dutch voyages to Japan, fiUed up the sea be-
tween Asia and America with a land of Jesso, apparently a distor-
tion of the Aleutian islands and the peninsula of Alaska. Geo-
graphical guessing sometimes went strikingly near the truth. The
map of Conrad Low,^® 1598, is singularly accurate, or rather lucky,
in its rivers, lakes and general configuration. This coincidence
has not yet been used to support the fictitious voyages of this or
that mariner who represented himself as having discovered the
strait ; but Mr. Bancroft remarks ironically that he fully expects
it will be so used. Certainly the resemblance of Low's map to
the real coast is far more striking than that of Juan de Fuca's de-
scription ; yet the Greek pilot's name remains attached to a strait
which in all probability he never saw.
The Greek was the most distinguished and the best believed of
the paper discoverers of the north-west, but he was only one among
many. The strait of Anian, separating Asia from America, was
not of such great importance, and the further north it was removed
the less its configuration mattered. But the north-west passage
through the continent — this was inquired after eagerly as giving
a short sea voyage to India, China, and Japan. It was, in fact, a
discovery of much obvious and immediate profit if it could have
been made ; and accordingly the number of those who had seen the
strait, or at least one end of it, or had even sailed through it, was
large. Not a needy explorer but had passed the strait himself or
seen some one who had done so. The north-west passage was as
commonly seen as the sea serpent in modem times. The Spaniards,
though they no longer cared to explore the strait for themselves,
*■ Bancroft, North-west Coast, vol. i. p. 55. ^» History of America, vol. ii. p. 451.
» Bancroft, North-west Coast, vol. i. p. 85.
Digitized by
Google
94 EARLY EXPLORATIONS OF AMERICA, Jan.
still wished to close it to their rivals ; and hence, on one side or
the other, the sailor who told a plausible story was likely to obtain
a hearing. The reports of these inventive mariners, adopted and
developed by the reasonings of men of science, probably gave rise
to the wonderful maps which depicted the north-west. Charts
usually gave the coasts already explored, and left the rest blank ;
but the cosmographer scorned such ignorance. Especially did the
latter seem set against the belief in any great extent of land un-
broken by sea. North America was often represented as a mere
shell of land, straggling in the wildest way between the known
points — Mexico, Florida, and * Bacalaos ' as Newfoundland and
the neighbouring parts were called. Through this hypothetical con-
tinent there must be at least one strait, and some geographers
made several, and even broke up Canada into islands.
Juan de Fuca is in hardly any respect to be distinguished from
the other romancing pilots of his time, so far as his narrative goes.
In 1696 he told Michael Lok, an Englishman, at Venice, that he
had been for forty years in the Spanish service, and while so
engaged had been plundered by Cavendish. Having thus aroused
sympathy, Fuca went on to say, that while on an exploring expedi-
tion in 1592, he had found a broad inlet between 47° and 48** north,
and entered it, and thus found the passage to the * North Sea,' as
the North Atlantic was called, in opposition to the * South Sea ' or
Pacific. The passage was thirty or forty leagues wide at first, and
wider further on, with * divers ilands ' in it. There was a great
pinnacle of rock near the entrance. The land trended north and
east in the main ; it was rich in gold, silver, and pearls, and the
natives wore skins. Fuca could get no reward from Spain, and at
last resorted to the EngUsh authorities, hoping that Elizabeth
would repay the money taken by Cavendish, and provide a ship to
discover the strait. Failing to get a favourable answer from
England, Juan de Fuca, alias Apostolos Valerianus, left Venice for
his native Cephalonia, where, after more correspondence with Lok,
he seems to have died about 1602. *
It is not too much to say that the statement just summarised
has every internal mark of falsehood. It contains absolutely
nothing that could not have been guessed ; and on several points
much better guesses were made by others. We have seen that
conjectural maps sometimes approached the actual configuration of
the coast very nearly ; and a pilot's guess might well turn out to
be as happy as a geographer's. Every ambitious sailor's story
must diflfer from those of his predecessors; and by boxing the
compass of falsehood, the truth might often be accidentally stated.
There is not a scrap of evidence in any archives to corroborate
Fuca's statements; and the idea that the Spaniards wilfully
** Bancroft, North-west Coast, vol. i. p. 70.
Digitized by
Google
1887 REAL AND IMAGINARY 96
neglected to explore a land rich in gold, silver, and pearls is highly
improbable. In that search they were never backward.
Further, as Mr. Bancroft points out,** Fuca's description does
not fit the coast with any accuracy. It has been supposed by his
advocates that he went into the strait which now bears his name,
between Vancouver Island and the mainland, and sailed round the
island. The strait is only about a degree wrong in latitude in
Fuca's account, but it is only twenty miles broad at the mouth,
instead of thirty leagues, and grows narrower. Fuca's pinnacle
* Hedland or Hand ' is not to be found, though Meares thought he
had seen something that would do for it ; and the direction of the
strait is entirely different from the course which the Greek said he
took. As for the gold, silver, and pearls, that was the flourish of a
prospectus. Gold there is in British Columbia, no doubt ; but what
was known of it then ? and what of silver and pearls ?
However, the Greek pilot has had good fortune. His name has
been put to a strait which he probably never entered and certainly
never explored. The American advocates on the Oregon question*^
took up his claim, as giving to Spain, and hence by cession to the
United States, rights extending far up the north-west coast. Hence
a sort of official belief in him was held by many. Meares had
already given the Greek's name to the strait south of Vancouver
Island, and one more name was added to the list of the conquests
of imagination. Juan de Fuca's strait is not, after all, out of place
in a continent named after Amerigo Vespucci.
Fuca, as already mentioned, was only one of a crowd of
discoverers whose feats are reported with a certain dry humour by
Mr. Bancroft, and at less length in Mr. Winsor's * History.' The
north-west passage was the most popular subject of inquiry.
Either the navigator had himself discovered and passed the strait,
or if he were modest, and confined himself to observing an inlet or
the mouth of a river, geographers at once supplied the defect.
Aguilar in 1603 saw, or thought he saw, a river mouth, and this
was at once taken to be the strait of Anian ^* and the way to the
mysterious city of Quivira, which had long ago been found by
Coronado to be a mere Indian wigwam town.^* Native rumours of
great lakes and rivers and cities added to the zeal and stimulated
the ingenuity of mapmakers. Names were placed in profusion in
the undiscovered parts.
Maldonado in 1609 claimed to have passed the strait of Anian
in 1588, thus forestalling or rather antedating Fuca. He also has
found believers, though his strait, being described in more detail, is
" Bancroft, North-west Coast, vol. i. pp. 79, 80.
^ Greenhow, Memoir on the North-west Coast, pp. 42-3.
" Bancroft, North-west Coast, vol. i. p. 88.
» History of America, vol. ii. p. 493.
Digitized by
Google
.96 EARLY EXPLORATIONS OF AMERICA Jan.
more hopelessly wrong than the Greek's. The work of dissecting^
America on paper went merrily on. The discoveries of Admiral
Fonte or Fuente in 1640 broke up the interior into archipelagos
and lakes, and proved that there was no passage. The man was
probably, and his voyages certainly, a myth, and not nearly so well
constructed a myth as the geographical fictions of Poe* But
Fuente's, or his inventor's, discoveries gave rise to the theory of a
huge fresh or salt lake in the interior, through which, probably,
the north-west passage led. This theory was strengthened by
vague Indian reports of the great lakes and rivers of the north.
The internal sea lasted down to the very time when Eussian and
English explorers joined hands on the coast, and ended the reign
of mystery. The whole story is a proof of the singular permanence
of traditional error in the face of reason and sense, the continuance
for centuries of an attitude of mind that saw in every unexplored
inlet on one side of a continent a communication with every un-
explored inlet on the other.
Arthur E. Eopes.
Digitized by
Google
1887 97
Notes afid Documents
THE SOURCES OF THE ASSTBIAN HISTORY OF KTESIAS.
The reputation of Ktesias has undergone remarkable fluctuations. The
ancients ahnost unanimously preferred his romantic narrative to the less
gorgeous descriptions and more sober chronology of Herodotus and Berosus,
and this opinion generally prevailed till the progress of Assyrian research
revealed the baselessness of the royal lists derived from his work, and
attested the superior accuracy of his rivals. Ktesias' authority was there-
fore rejected with contempt till quite recently, when a slight reaction in his
favour has set in. His modem vindicators, such as Professor Sayce in
the introduction to his * Herodotus * and Duncker in the Assyrian and Medo-
Persian portions of his * History of Antiquity,' defend his veracity in so far
as they assume that he really related what he was told, but at the same time
they attach little or no historical value to his assertions as to earher times.
Duncker regards every statement of Ktesias, at all events down to the time
of Darius I, as representing what he styles the * Medo-Persian epos.' Mr.
Sayce (* Herodotus,' introduction, p. xxxiii) says : * The greater part of his
Assyrian history consists of Assyro-Babylonian myths rationaHsed and
transformed in the manner peculiar to the Persians.' This position
appears to be only partially sound, for it is contrary to experience that a
nation like the Persians should construct an elaborate mythology glorify-
ing not their own but another and hostile race.*
Ktesias' mode of constructing his Assyro-Babylonian * history ' was, I
think, as follows. The hi(i>0€pal I3a(ri\tkai of Persia could scarcely have
included Assyrian annals, and he had to supply their place for that por-
tion of his work from other sources. These probably included the popular
Medo-Persian traditions in verse or prose, but I cannot beheve with
Duncker that these were practically the only source. During the frequent
residences of the Persian court at Babylon, Ktesias must have had abun-
dant opportunities of conversing with prominent Babylonians acquainted
with Persian, of which it seems incredible that the king's physician could
have been ignorant.
* The suggestion of Dnncker that the glorification of e.g. Astjages was dae to the
desire to extol the greatness of his conqueror, might apply to a single case, bat not to
a whole series of legends. The ' Persian version * of the story of lo (Herod, i. 1),
which Sayce brings forward as an example of the Persian treatment of foreign
mythology, famishes a very weak argument : so obscure a myth could scarcely have
bc^n known to the Persians. Canon Bawllnson's explanation (on Herod, i. 1) seems
more probable.
VOL. n. — NO. V. H
Digitized by
Google
98 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
His researches into the history of their country would probably not be
very deep. All he wanted was material enough to construct a plausible
and interesting narrative and to damage the reputation of Herodotus. As
Semiramis had been specially mentioned by the latter,* he would probably
make some inquiries as to her, and would hear of Sammuramit wife of
Rimmon-nirari IV, who it seems reasonable to suppose with Lenormant
and others was a Babylonian princess, or at least something more than
an Assyrian queen consort, since her name occurs in a dedicatory inscrip-
tion coupled with her husband's. As the annals of the period are lost,
she may have been regent under one of her husband's weak successors,
and if she was a Babylonian her countrymen would naturally exaggerate
her position. So far there was an historical basis for the narrative of
Etesias, but a considerable portion of the details appear to be derived from
Babylonian myths relating to the goddess Ishtar.^ I cannot, however,
agree with Duncker and others that the way in which these are used was
due in any special way to Persian influence ; on the contrary, whatever
elements in the narrative are not Babylonian seem to be Greek due either
to Etesias himself or to his countrymen residing at Babylon. The nature
of the Persian legends of his time may be fairly inferred from those
handed down to later generations and preserved in the * Shahnameh ' and
other native works, which celebrate Iranian kings, not Semitic goddesses.
On the other hand, the Babylonian legends of Ishtar preserved in the
sixth tablet of the Izdubar epic represent the goddess in a character not
unlike the Semiramis of Etesias, as a warhke princess engaged in nume-
rous amours, and treating her lovers with savage cruelty. Beltis, who is
often confused with Ishtar, was sometimes regarded as the wife of Nin.^
This is sufficient to account for the introduction of Ninus, to whom the
foundation of Nineveh (really called after Nin the god) was naturally
ascribed, both because of the Greek notion of heroes eponymi (which was
entirely foreign to Persian ideas), and because he was looked on as the
first king of Assyria.
On this slight basis of fact and legend Etesias founded an elaborate
romance, just as his contemporary Xenophon used the life of the elder
* Mr. Sayce (on Herod, i. 184) seems inclined to adopt the reading of Scaliger,7€V€5<rt y
for yfvf^a-i t^ktc, before Nitokris, whom Herodotns places in the sixth century b.c.,.
thus making the era of Semiramis not circa b.c. 750 but circa b.o. 2100, or about the
date to which Etesias' chronology would assign her. But why in the face of all the
manuscripts should we reject a date which is approximately correct if the identification
of Semiramis with Sanmiuramit wife of Bimmon-nirari IV (eighth century e.g.) be
admitted, especially as a copyist would be much more likely to bring Herodotus* date
into accordance with that of Etesias, which was most generally received in later times,
than to introduce a variance ? In an author later than Etesias a variation from his
dates might arouse suspicion as to the text, but this does not apply to an earlier one,
for as far as I know there is no mention in any writer earlier than Etesias of any but
the historical Semiramis of the eighth century b.c, all the writers who give an account
agreeing with Etesias' deriving directly or indirectly from him or his contemporary
Deinon.
* The points in Etesias' legend tending to identify Semiramis with the Asiatic love-
goddess are too obvious to require indicating : some of the Greeks detected the true
character of the story from what is related of her birth.
* The first husbiuid of Semiramis was Cannes. Oannes is the name of the divine,
fish in Berosus, and in one aspect Nin is the fish-god.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 99
Qttus, but in the case of the former succeeding writers treated the
romance as serious history.
The duration assigned by Ktesias to the Assyrian empire (1,860 years,
Diod. ii. 21) was probably derived from some tradition as to the date of
the foundation of Nineveh, but the list of kings from Semiramis to Sar-
danapalus seems to be purely his own invention. Had he drawn from
Persian sources, we should expect to find that each king, as in the * Shah-
nameh * of Firdusi, reigned not tens, but hundreds, of years ; the length
actually assigned to each reign in the list is beyond ordinary probabiUty^
but at the same time is not impossible, so as to suggest that, having to
invent names to cover a certain period, he saved himself trouble by giving
as few as possible. The names themselves are of the most heterogeneous
character : a few, e.g. Baleus, Belochus, and Balatores (Tiglath-pileser),
are those of Babylonian or Assyrian deities or kings of whom he had
chanced to hear ; others are ordinary Persian names ; others, e.g. Amyntes,
are Greek.
The only episode of this portion of the history which has come down
to us is the sending of Memnon as an auxiliary to Priam. If, as Ktesias
says, the Assyrians ruled all Asia, it would be asked why did they give
no assistance to their Trojan vassal ? The only part of the Greek tale of
Troy which offered any connexion with upper Asia was the legend of
Memnon, whom one account made leader of the eastern Cushites of
Susiana, which in Ktesias' time was included in Persia, of which
Tithonus is represented as being king. From the words of Diodorus
(ii, 22), Tlepi fity ovv rov "Mi/jiyovoQ roiavT* kv toIq ftaaiKiKoiQ draypa^aic
itrropelaOai tf^atriv oi fi6.pfiapotf we might suppose that here if anywhere we
had an example of a foreign myth ' rationalised and transformed in the
manner peculiar to the Persians,' since the legend is one with absolutely
no historical basis, at least in the form which makes Memnon an eastern
Gushite, and it is therefore quite impossible the Persian chronicles could
have contained any mention of it unless we adopt the improbable hypo-
thesis that they borrowed it outright from the Greeks, though there is no
other trace of it in Oriental Uterature. To me it seems preferable to
assume that an inaccurate writer like Ktesias deemed^
Persian myths about Mithra the sun god sufficient
that he found among the Persians the history of
dawn. The followers of Alexander in India atten^pC^ /alhtifica^o
Greek and Indian heroes quite as farfetched.
Sardanapalus is, of course, Asshur-bani-pal, ^^1^1^
Assyria. His name and luxury were well knov
independently of the Persians, and we need not ma
assigning io his time the destruction of Nineveh, whlSi^afi? Id^pe
under one of his immediate successors. The chronologicfit* wsheme of
Ktesias forced him to antedate that event by several centuries.
The supposition that Ktesias made use of Babylonian sources of in-
formation is supported by one or two statements in a later part of his
work. He assigns to Kambyses a reign of eighteen years {Persic. Exc.
§ 12), while most other writers only give him eight, and it does not appear
that his reign over the Persian empire could have exceeded the shorter
period. It appears, however, from the Babylonian contract tablets that
H 2
Digitized by
Qoo^^
100 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
Kambyses was regarded for at least eleven years as king of Babylon,
Cyrus being for part of this period * king of countries.* It appears, more-
over, from the annalistic tablet (* Trans. Soc. Bib. Arch.' vii. 168), that
Kambyses was in Babylon shortly after its capture, and he may have suc-
ceeded Gobryas as viceroy some years (say in b.c. 587) before he was
raised to the higher dignity of vassal king, the whole period of his govern-
ment being afterwards popularly, though not officially, regarded as his
reign in Babylon. In like manner Ktesias makes the reign of Darius I
only thirty-one years instead of the thirty-six of other writers, the differ-
ence arising from the periods of the Babylonian revolts, the exact duration
of which is uncertain, being deducted. John Gilmobe.
THE BOMAN PBOVINCE OF DAGIA.
A QUESTION of historical geography which, as it seems to me, deserves
more attention than it has yet received, is this : What were the limits of
the Eoman province of Dacia added by Trajan to the empire 9 1 pro-
pose here to recapitulate some of the arguments on this subject adduced
by M. de la Berge (* Essai sur le Edgne de Trajan,* 56-62), adding a few
of my own. Most geographers have considered themselves bound by the
authority of Ptolemy (iii. 8. 4) to accept as the boundaries of Trajan's
province the Tibiscus (Theiss ?) on the west, the Carpathian mountains
on the north, the Tyras or Dniester on the east, and the Danube on the
south.* This demarcation gives to the province of Dacia the eastern
half of Hungary, the Banat, Transylvania, Wallachia, Moldavia, and
Bessarabia, forming an aggregate of at least 70,000 square miles.
Even on the febce of the ordinary classical atlas there are some objec-
tions to such a demarcation as this. The interval between the Danube
(when it is flowing from north to south) and the Theiss is so long and
narrow that it is difficult to suppose that a strategist Hke Trajan would
leave such a wedge between Pannonia and Dacia to be occupied by the
Jazyges Metanastss, to whom, on the authority of Ptolemy, it is assigned.
Again, on the north-eastern frontier of the province it is almost inconceiv-
able that the Eomans would abandon the splendid natural defence afforded
by the Carpathians, and choose such a comparatively feeble defence against
the wandering hordes of Scythia as might be afforded by the river
Dniester. The chief argument, however, brought forward by M. de la
Berge is derived from Eutropius, who estimates the whole circumference
of the province of Dacia at 1,000 Eoman miles; ea provincia decies
centena milUa passmim in circuitu tenuit. For the Dacia of the maps
this figure is decidedly insufficient.^ And though Eutropius is certainly
* Ptol, 8. 8. 1 (ed. Miiller). *H Acucla irfpiopi^erat iirh fikv Apieruy fji4pu rijs tapiAarias
T^s iv Ebpthrji r^ awh rov Kapir^rov 6povs fi^xP^ v4paros r^s €lfrrifi4irns ixiarpoipiis rov Tiipa
irorofiov , . . iirh Bh Si^crcws roU *l(i(v^i rois VLmu^Jutrrcus Kwrh rhv TlfiurKov irorafi6v, iwh
54 fxfffJifJifipias fiipti rov Aayovfilov vorofiov r^ hirh rrls iicrpoirfis rod TifiivKov irorofjiov
fidxpts *A^iovir6\fws iup* ^s IjUri KoXctroi 6 fi^xpt rod TlSyrov Ka\ rwv iK$o\&v Aaa^oiiflios
"itrrpos. There is some doubt whether the Tibiscus is meant for the Theiss or the
Temes. Axiopolis is generally identified with Bassova.
< Though I do not think M. de la Berge can be right in saying that the Theiss
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 101
not a first-rate authority, it is to be observed that he had no reason for
minimising, but rather for magnifying, the extent of Trajan's conquests.
As M. de la Berge remarks, this number is found in all the MSS. of
Eutropius, is confirmed by his brother abbreviator Sextus Kufus,' and
may very probably have been borrowed fi:om some official record to
which Eutropius had access.
Let us then for a moment, relying on this passage of Eutropius, admit
the possibility that Ptolemy was speaking, not of the Eoman province of
Dacia, but of a very different matter, the geographical extension of the
Dacian people ; and then let us consider what size we should be disposed
to attribute to the Dacian province, judging fi:om the best of all evidence,
the undoubted traces of Eoman occupation. Thus considering the ques-
tion, we shall, it is submitted, be almost compelled to reduce the area of
Dacia to that of Transylvania and Little Wallachia (or Wallachia west of
the river Aluta) with the eastern half of the Banat.
Take the Boman roads as given in the * Tabula Peutingeriana,' and
as explained, for instance, in the preface to Smith's ' Atlas of Ancient
Geography.* There is a little difficulty about the identification of a few
of the sites, but there is no doubt that they were all in Transylvania,
Eastern Banat, and Western Wallachia. The Peutinger table itself
shows the roads running up into the roots of the mountains (Alpes
Ba$tamic(B apparently being the Carpathian mountains), but never cross-
ing them.
Still more striking is the argument which we may derive from a study
of the inscriptions in vol. iv. of the * Corpus Lascriptionum Latinarum *
(edited by Mommsen). We there find that the Latin inscriptions for the
province of Dacia exist in overwhelming preponderance in Transylvania,
chiefly at Apulum [Karlshurg], Napoca (Klausenhurg), Polaissa (Torda'i)^
and Sarmisegetusa (near Varhely), A few are found in Eastern Banat,.
and one or two, far fewer than might have been expected, in Little
Wallachia, but none at all — as far as the * Corpus ' bears testimony — in
Moldavia or Wallachia east of the Aluta. It is true that the German
settlers in Siebenburgen (Transylvania) are probably better finders and
reporters of Latin inscriptions than their Eoman and Slavonic neigh-
bours ; still that fact alone will hardly account for so enormous a dif-
ference.
Another weighty argument may be derived from the comparative
Bmallness of the Eoman army of occupation in Dacia. According ta
Mommsen (* Corpus,* iv. 160) this consisted only of the thirteenth legion
(Gemina) possibly increased under Septimius Severus by the fifth (Mace-
donica). When we remember that three legions were the minimum of
the army of occupation for Britain, can we suppose that only two would
have been entrusted with the defence of the immeuse tract of country
between the Theiss and the Dniester, intersected by the great Carpathian
chain, which if not used as a bulwark would immensely increase the dif-
ficulty of holding it ?
alone is 1,400 kilometers (875 miles) in length. From the map 500 kilometers looks
more like the distance.
« De VictariiSf cap. 7.
Digitized by
Google
102 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
Another argument, to which, however, I do not attach so much import-
ance, is that when the true Dacia, north of the Danube, was abandoned,
and when AureHan formed the new province of Dacia out of Western
MoBsia, its northern frontier was formed by the Danube between Singi-
dunum and a point a little below Batiaria. It thus stood nearly fronting
what I believe to have been the old province of Dacia, and was not far
from its equivalent in size. There is no such correspondence at all between
the Dacia of the maps and the new province of AureHan.
With reference to the western frontier of the province, it seems to be
admitted by the general (but not unanimous) consent of map-makers that
this was not the river Theiss, but the Vallum (of which there appear still
to be traces), which runs from a point north of Temesvar southwards to
the Danube, which it touches at Viminacium. This certainly makes the
narrow slip of territory left to the Jazyges MetanasteB look somewhat less
absurd. We must suppose that the desire not to occupy too large an
extent of territory prevented the emperor from pushing his frontier, as we
might naturally have expected him to do, up to the eastern border of
Pannonia. But is it conceivable that while thus cautious on the western
side he would have pushed his eastern frontier over the Carpathians into
the limitless Scythian wilderness ?
As to the geographical extent of the lesser Dacia for which I am con-
tending, its perimeter is thus calculated by M. de la Berge :
Roman miles
From Viminacium to the mouth of the Aluta . . , 248
Length of the Aluta 190
From the source of the Aluta to Porolissum (Dees ?) . • 120
Porolissum to Viminacium • 285
838
This result, as some of the distances have been taken as the crow flies»
corresponds nearly enough with the 1,000 Roman miles of Eutropius.
It is clear from the language of D'Anville (i. 262, Eng. transl. 1810)
that Transylvania was in his time considered to be pretty nearly conter-
minous with Dacia, and I suspect that it is chiefly on his authority that
the latter name has been extended to include also Wallachia and Moldavia.
In recent times philologers finding the Eoumanian language spoken on
both sides of the Carpathians, and believing that this was a legacy from
the Eoman occupation of Dacia, have fallen easily into the same view.
But this argument from language proves far too much, since Roumanian
is spoken in Thrace, in Macedonia, and even in Thessaly, and I suppose
it will now be generally admitted that it is not safe to found upon the
limits of the diffusion of Eoumanian speech any argument as to the
official boundaries of Trajan's province of Dacia.
Possibly I may be arguing for a proposition which scholars have
already silently accepted ; but if so, our school and college maps cer-
tainly require reconstruction. Inscriptions found in large numbers east
and south of the Carpathians might easily upset all that has been here
advanced. My chief interest in the subject — on account of which I should
be grateful even to a hostile critic who would give me some nearer
approach to certainty on the point — is that this romanised Dacia, what-
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 103
ever were its limits, seems to have been the chief dwelling-place of the
Ooths (rather, however, of the Visigoths than the Ostrogoths) during the
hundred years which elapsed between Aurelian and Valens.
Thos. Hodqkin.
MOLMEN AND MOLLAND.
I SEND a few notes in confirmation of the views expressed by Professor
Yinogradoff in his communication on the subject of * Molmen and
MoUand ' (English Historical Keview, vol. i. p. 784). The earliest
mention {eo nomine) of this tenure seems to be found in the important
cartulary of Burton, which purports to be of the early date 1100-1118.
Here the holdings are divided into two classes, (1) ad malam and (2) ad,
opus. This, it will be seen, is exactly parallel to the * mollond ' and
* werklond ' of the St. Paul's inquisition of 1279. Archdeacon Hale has
45ome notes on the latter (* Domesday of St. Paul's,' pp. Ixxiv-v), in
which he observes that tenants of * Forland ' (at Thorpe, Essex) in 1222
are represented by tenants of * Mollond ' in 1279 — a curious point. As
the division ad Tnalam and ad optis corresponds with the division else-
where ad censum and ad operationem (as in * Worcester Registers,'
p. xli), I presume that the censores or censarii of * Domesday ' are molmen.
If so, we may have the distinction between thoI and gafol, to which Pro-
fessor Vinogradoff alludes, represented by the distinction in * Domesday '
between censarii and gablatores. Though I am not sure that I can follow
him in the respective denotations he assigns to the terms mol and gafol,
I may observe that, though eventually * rent,' gafol previously (as
Mr. Seebohm expresses it) consisted of * payments in money, or kind, or
work, rendered by way of rent ' (p. 78). Thus gafol, as a money rent,
might represent a commutation for a rent once paid either in labour or in
kind. To this may be added that the early sense of gafol, as a tributary
rent in kind, is well preserved in * Domesday ' itself, where, in Sussex, the
porci de gablo represent the annual tribute of swine due from the hog-
ward to his lord at slaughter time. It is, of course, important to remember,
as Gneist has rightly pointed out, that Kemble and Dr. Stubbs are dis-
tinctly in error in speaking of gafol as a * tax.'
It is noteworthy that mal (or mol) occurs in Wales ; as in Anglesey,
where we find in the * Record of Carnarvon ' (1868) Gwir Male (i.e.
-Gwyr Mal), or tenants who paid a money rent, opposed to Gtvir Gweith
(i.e. Gwyr Gwaith), or those who held ad opus, (Palmer's * Tenures of
Land in the Marches of North Wales.') Lastly, we have a curious usage
•of the term in * HucsterwoZZ,' a due from which the men of Leicester were
freed by charter of 27 Edward III. (Eighth Report, Hist. MSS. Com-
mission, app. i. 411.) J. H. Round.
RANULP FLAMBARD AND HIS SONS.
In the ' Liber de Miraculis sanctsB Marias Laudunensis ' (ii. c. 6, Migne
45lvi.) the following passage occurs :
Nos itaque non ex umbra mortis sed ex ipsis faucibus ejus, ut nobis
Digitized by
Google
104 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
visum est, liberati gratiarum laudes Domincs referentes, assumpto ejus
feretro atque reliquiis, Cantuariam venimus ubi tunc erat archiepiscoptcs
dominus Guilelmus, nobis notissimus, quoniam jamdudum, pro audientia
[? a/udiendd] lectione magistri Anselmi Laudunum petens, multis diebus
in episcopi domo manserat ibique filios Badulphi cancellarii regis
Anglorum docuerat.
The work was written by Hermann, a monk of Laon, between the
years 1145 and 1149, that is, from thirty to forty years after the events
narrated (cf. lib. iii. cc. 6 and 21). On the Thursday following Easter
day (1112 a.d.) the cathedral at Laon had been burnt to the ground ;
and before the arrival of Whitsunday a little band of seven canons — with
six laymen to assist in carrying the relics of their patron Lady — started
on a tour through the northern parts of France to collect alms for the
rebuilding of their church. At this time Laon was the most important
ecclesiastical school in western Europe, owing its temporary fame to the
success of its two great masters in scholastic divinity, Anselm and his
brother Radulph. It was probably owing to the numerous English pupils,
who had in previous years attended Laon for the sake of studying under
these teachers, that, in the following Lent, a second company was des-
patched to England on a similar errand. On landing they made their
way to Canterbury, where their kindly reception is described in the passage
quoted above.
The whole of this tour through southern England is worth reading
with some attention, more especially for the incidental ghmpses it
gives of contemporary English life. Thus we have the account of the
Flanders merchants crossing over with three hundred marks of silver to
purchase English wool for the looms of their native country ; the story
of the pirate vessel in the straits ; the sketch of the twelfth century fair at
Christchurch, in connexion with which foundation we read that its head
did really bear the title of decanus (cf. Freeman, * William Eufus,' ii.
668) ; the Devonshire dispute over the legend of Arthur many years before
Geoffrey of Monmouth had issued his famous history ; and the story of
the Wsh kidnappers trading to Bristol. But the fiact most interesting ta
note of all is the great number of Englishmen (whether such by birth or
residence) that are incidentally revealed to us as having once been
Anselm's pupils at Laon. Li the course of a few pages no less than seven
are distinctly mentioned, and amongst them the two nephews of Henry I's
great justiciar, Eoger, bishop of Salisbury. The fact that Alexander of
Lincoln and Nigel of Ely both received their education under this famous
theologian has not, I think, been pointed out before ; and it helps to illus-
trate the more general statement of William of Malmesbury as to Eoger's
special glory : qvx)d duos nepotes, sua educationis opera, honesta literaturce
et industries viroSy effecit episcopos ('Hist. Nov.' ii. 82).
It is, however, to the passage quoted at the head of this letter that I
wish to direct special attention with a view to deciding who this Badul-
phus cancellarius regis Anglorum really was. There is, I beUeve, no one
who will exactly correspond to this description, and the only two likely
claimants are Eanulf, who was chancellor from c, 1107-1128 (Eyton ; Henry
of Huntingdon, p. 244), and his more famous namesake BanuH Flambard.
It would be most natural to assume that Hermann is here alluding to the
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 105
former, who was tchancellor at the very time of the visit he records ; nor
does it appear possible to disprove this theory entirely. But, after a careful
consideration of the question, there seems so much to be said in flavour of
Ranulf Flambard that, when we remember that our account of the whole
journey was written by a foreigner nearly forty years after the events re-
lated, and only written by him at second or third hand, we may well doubt
whether the consensus of indirect evidence is not enough to outweigh the
few though precise words of Hermann. And here it may be noted, in
illustration of this position, that in the very same sentence we have a
similar mistake (natural enough in a foreigner), when we are told that
in 1118 A.D. the strangers were received at Canterbury by * WiUiam who
was then archbishop.* As a matter of fact, WiUiam of Corboil, who must
be the person here alluded to, was not elected to the see of Canterbury till
1128 (Sim. of Durh. * Hist. Kegum.' sub an.)
Before setting forth the reasons for identifying Hermann's Badulphus
cancellarius with Kanulf Flambard, it will be best to clear the ground
of preliminary difficulties. These resolve themselves into two heads :
(a) that the name Eanulf is not the same as Badulphus, and (b) that
Eanulf Flambard was not, so far as is known, chancellor of England.
To take (a) first : whatever arguments are urged against Banulf Flam-
bard on this score are equally or rather more applicable to Henry I*s chan-
cellor. The real name of each claimant seems to have been Banulf ; but
in both cases we find the variants Badulphus and Bandulphus. So, for
the chancellor of Henry I, Henry of Huntingdon gives us the forma
' Badulphus * (p. 244, B.S.) and * Bandulphus * (p. 808) ; whereas in the
charters the same person nearly always appears as * Banulfus * (Dugdale,
* Monast.' i. 488, 629, &c.) In the same manner Banulf Flambard figures
in Henry of Huntingdon as ' Badulfus ' (p. 250), 'Bandulfus * (p. 816),
and * Banulfus ' (p. 284). In the charters he too is always Banulf (Dug-
dale, i. 164, 241). The fact is that, as stated before, in both instances
the real name was Banulf ; but in both we have at least one almost con-
temporary corruption into Badulph. I may notice also that, till the
revival of Enghsh historical scholarship in the present century, Banulf
Flambard appears to have figured in popular histories as Balph (i.e. Ba-
dulphus) Flambard. I need only specify HoUinshed's * Bafe, bishop of
Durham * (iii. 28, ed. 1586), and Hume*s * Balph Flambard, the king's
minister * (i. c. 5). On the other hand I can find no second instance of
the corruption of * Chancellor Banulf s ' name into Balph.
To sum up the foregoing remarks, the false form of the name, as it
appears in Hermann of Laon, must be held to rule out both claimants
alike if pressed rigidly. But the mistake is an extremely likely one for
either writer or copyist to have fallen into ; and, this once granted, there
is, if anything (so far as mere spelling is concerned), rather more to be
said in favour of Banulf Flambard than of the other Banulf.
{b) More important, however, is Mr. Foss's statement that Banulf
Flambard was never chancellor — a statement which seems to have the
tacit approval of Professor Freeman and Dr. Stubbs (cf. Foss, i. 56, 57 ;
Stubbs, * Const. Hist.* i. 824, 876 ; Freeman, * WiUiam Bufus,' ii. 557-562).
As I shall show further on, I beheve that Mr. Foss, in his e«igemess to
convict Lord Campbell of inaccuracy, has considerably under-estimated
Digitized by
Google
106 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
the little evidence that exists in favour of the latter's position. It is,
however, more to the purpose to observe that the allusion to Banulf
Flambard may yet hold good even though it should be clearly demon-
strated that this statesman was never theoretically in possession of the
chancellorship. It must be remembered that we are deahng with the
words of an author writing from thirty to fifty years after the events to
which he refers ; and, more than this, the author is a foreigner, who in
the very same sentence has already committed one flagrant blunder (see
above). These are sufficient groimds for admitting the possibility of a
aecond.
I. In the first place Ranulf Flambard, as we learn from the * Continu-
atio Historiae Turgoti ' (Wharton, * Anglia Sacra,* i. 706), had originally
been in the service of a former chancellor, Maurice, bishop of London. This
would at least create a presumption that he was familiar with chancery
work, and would render it highly probable that, at the period of his
greatest power, he should have kept as firm a hand on this department
of government as he seems to have on all others. Again, the very
vagueness of the terms in which his office is spoken of by the historians
of the next generation suggests a power that was irregularly present
everywhere — the masterful dealings of a strong man whose acts were not
limited by any very tender regard for the rights of his colleagues or sub-
ordinates. These historians have no single term by which they can
describe so anomalous and arbitrary an authority. Directly they touch on
this subject their language becomes hazy and wanting in precision;
and, in one instance at least, the spirit of the rhetorician has supplanted
that of the historian. Surely no very definite constitutional office is
implied in Henry of Huntingdon's pladtator sed perversor, exacixyr sed
exustor totiiis Anglia (p. 282) ; or Orderic's stcmmtis regiarum 'pro-
curator opum et justitiarius (ap. Migne, clxxx. 758) ; or Florence of
Worcester's negotiorum totius regni exactor and placitator ac totius regni
exactor (ii. 46, E.H.S.) Still more to the point is Orderic's phiuse
super omnes regios officiates . . . magistratum a rege consecutus est
(p. 580) ; and again, super omnes regni optimates ah illo (sc. rege)
sublimatus est (p. 578). The 'king's chaplain,' to give him what ap-
pears to have been his most general title, seems to have been possessed of
large and undefined powers, for which his contemporaries could find no
exact legal equivalent; and it is very easy to understand how in the
course of fifty years he might, considering his undoubted connexion with
the chancery, be called cancellaHus by a foreigner, especially if we
allow for a Httle confusion with the actual chancellor in 1118, whose
name was likewise Banulf.^
It is, however, by no means impossible that Eanulf did hold this
office at one period of his life. Even Mr. Foss is constrained to admit
that the names of the chancellors between 1098 and ] 098 are extremely
obscure. We have seen that Banulf s early connexion with the chan-
cellor Maurice creates a presumption in favour of this theory. His name has,
from some cause or other, crept into the early hsts of English chancellors ; *
1 See the passages all collected in Freeman's William Rufus.
* Hardy's Chancellors^ p. 2.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 107
tmd it would, to say the least, be somewhat singular that a mere clerk
should at one step mount to so supreme an office as the justiciarship —
which all authorities who deny his chancellorship admit him practically
to have held— without having previously occupied some intermediate
post. Such an office might be conferred at once on a great noble, like
William Fitz-Osbem, or a royal bishop, like Odo of Bayeux ; but hardly
on an obscure clerk such as Eanulf. The case of Roger of Salisbury,
hi^ great contemporary and successor in the justiciarship, is exactly
■analogous ; for he, like Banulf Flambard, originally a simple clerk and
king's chaplain, was chancellor for a short time before being made
justiciar and bishop. However, putting all speculations aside, what is
the plain interpretation of the following passage from the * Continuatio
Hist. Turgoti ' (* Anglia Sacra,' i. 707) ? Gerold has just enticed Ranulf
■on board his ship for the purpose of destroying him, by means of a fialse
message from Bishop Maurice. Then we read : Jam nulla tispiam eva-
dendi sjpes. Ipse annulum quern digito gestabat et Notarius suus sigillum
illius medium projecerunt in flumen ne per hcec ubique locorum per
Angliam cognita simulata prcecepta hostibv^ decipientibus transmissa
rerum perturbarent statum. What can this seal have been, the abuse
of which would have thrown the whole kingdom into disorder, if not the
regis sigillum, in casting which away Ranulf (to borrow an illustration
from Mr. Freeman) would but have been forestalling the conduct of a
later English king, a fugitive on the same river some six hundred years
afterwards; or that of a more modem chancellor who, in a time of
<50nfasion, buried the great seal in his own garden ? If it was not the
great seal, but Ranulf s, which could work such havoc in the kingdom,
we might almost say that Flambard was his own rather than the king's
chancellor.^
On the whole, then, there seem to be sufficient grounds for admit-
ting that Ranulf Flambard m^y have been spoken of as chancellor of
England by a foreigner writing some fifty years after his fall even if he
never held this office definitely ; and, further than this, there are at least
plausible reasons for holding him to have had control over the great seal,
whether he ever held the precise title of chancellor or not. Further than
this we cannot proceed as yet ; and it is perhaps impossible to settle the
question absolutely at this distance of time. But whether the claims of
Ranulf Flambard or Ranulf, the chancellor of Henry I, are to be pre-
ferred in the passage quoted above depends upon a very different kind of
Argimient — one that is purely cumulative.
It will perhaps be well to state briefly the position supported in the
following remarks, viz. that the Badulphus cancellarius of the passage in
question is Ranulf Flambard, and that the residence of the filii Badulphi
at Laon is to be dated about the years 1097-8 a.d. ; though this last pro-
position is not so uncertain, and, for some reasons, it would be preferable
to assign the Laon visit to a period some five years later.
* These are not the only occasions on which the great sigillum regis has been in
the water. On Richard I's journey from Messina to Acre two of his vessels were
wrecked just outside the harbour of Limasol in Cyprus. Amongst those who were
•drowned was * Bogerus Malus Catulus,* the vice-chancellor ; but the seal quod gestabat
m collo suspensum was washed ashore (Bog. of Hoveden, iv. 105-6).
Digitized by
Google
108 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
II. The arguments in favour of Ranulf Flambard may be divided into
six or perhaps seven heads.
(1) In the first place the filii Badulphi of the text are clearly
stated to have been educated by WiUiam (of Corboil), archbishop of Can-
terbury. Now we know from Simeon of Durham that WiUiam of Corboil
was in early life a clerk to Ranulf Flambard. Fuerat antea primo Dunel-
mensis ecclesicB episcopi Banulfi clericus (Simeon, ii. 269 R.S.) Here,
then, is proof positive of an early connexion between Ranulf Flambard
and William of Corboil. But there is no proof of a similar connexion be-
tween William of Corboil and Henry I's chancellor.
(2) On his escape from the Tower, Ranulf Flambard made his way
to Normandy, where he became one of the leading councillors of Robert.
By his influence his brother Fulcher was preferred to the see of Lisieux,
on whose death we learn from Orderic that Ranulf, being deprived of his
own bishopric at Durham through the enmity of King Henry, Lexoviensein
pontificatum filio suo Thomce puero suscepit et, per triennium, non ut
prcBsuh sed ut prases guhemavit (lib. iii. c. 16, ap. Migne, vol. clxxxviii.
768). In the very beginning of 1102 (January), then, Ranulf had
at least one son whom he meditated bringing up as a bishop, and
this son was still a boy. But we can go further than this. Ivo of
Chartres tells us of the horror with which this act was regarded by all
respectable churchmen of the age. It is spurcitia puerorum and nova
et inaudita neophytorum hcBresis (Epp. Ivonis, ap. Migne, vol. clxii. ep.
149). The ^hrdkse spurcitia ptcerorutn reqmre& explanation. A line or
two further on we learn that Flambard had more than one child whom
he intruded on the church of Lisieux: flammigeros pueros prcedictcB
ecclesicB. More precise still is letter 167 : Quod in ecclesia Lexoviensi
patemitas vestra poterit agnoscere qtiam jam per plures annos Banulfu^
agnomine Flammardus, Dunelmensis episcopus, inaudito invasionis genere
occupavit qui duos filios suos vix duodennes, accepto pastorali baculo a
comite Northmam/norum, prcedictcR ecclesia intrudi fecity ed covditione ut si
primogenitus moreretur Judaico more in episcopatum alter alteri subro-
garetur. Ranulf then, about the year 1102, had two sons aged some
twelve years, both of whom he evidently intended to bring up for the
church. Such children might very naturally attend the schools of An-
selm at Laon ; for these schools were pre-eminently theological rather
than civil in their highest teaching (cf. Poole, * Illustr. of Med.
Thought,' 144-5). On the other hand it does not appear that any of the
children of Henry I's chancellor were destined for the church ; and, in-
deed, I can only find one allusion to any son of this Ranulf s. This is
the filiu>s Banulfi who occurs in Leland's * Collectanea * (i. 68) among
the benefactors of Reading Abbey. So far, then, as the question of * cleri-
cal children ' is concerned, Ranulf Flambard fulfils the conditions of the
problem, while the other Ranulf does not.
(8) The words of Hermann are very striking : Archiepiscopus dominus
Guilel/nms nobis notissimu^ qumiiam jamdudum pro audienda lectione
magistri Anselmi. Laudunum petens multis diebus in episcopi domo
manserat ibique filios Badulphi cancellarii regis Anghrum docuerat.
Although Hermann mentions no less than eight of Anselm's pupils, all
of whom were at this time residing in England, yet this is the only occa-
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 109
sion on which he remarks that the visit took place * a long while ago.' This
seems to point to the &ct that the filii Badulphi were remembered in
Laon tradition as being among the earUest of Anselm's English pupils —
perhaps, we might even venture to surmise, belonging to the days when
he first set up his school at Laon towards the end of the preceding cen-
tury. At all events the word jamdudum throws back the period of
William's visit to a date long anterior to 1113 ; and the six years, which
are the utmost that can be allowed to have elapsed since the appointment
of the second Eanulf to the chancellorship, can hardly be considered as
justifying so strong an expression. So that here again the words of our
author tend towards fixing the date of this visit in the time of Eanulf
Flambard's power rather than in the chancellorship of Ranulf 11.
(4) Again, it may be asked what period was the most likely one to
find Enghsh boys staying at Laon in the bishop's house. The list of the
bishops of Laon about this time runs as follows :
Heliland c. 1052-c. 1098.
Enguerrand c. 1098-1104.
Two years' interim.
Gaudricus 1107-Easter 1112.
Hugo ....... Aug. 1112-Feb. 1118
Bartholomew 1112-1151 (?).*
Of these bishops the first and the third are known to have been con-
nected with England ; and it is with one of these two that we should most
naturally expect to find Enghsh boys staying in the episcopal house.
The claims of Bartholomew and Hugo are shut out first by the word
jamdudum, and secondly by the fsbct that, since the murder of Gaudric,
there had been no domnis episcopi at all, for it had been burnt down in
the riots of 1112, as we are expressly told by Hermann (i. c. 1, cf. Guibert
iii. c. 10). Now it must be noted that Ranulf does not appear as
chancellor before August 1107 (Ey ton's Itinerary of WiUiam 11, Add.
MSS. British Museum), and his predecessor Waldric is perhaps found
signing in 1106 (Dugdale, ii. 66). From this it may be inferred that
Banulf did not enter upon the office before 1107 ; a theory which
may be still further strengthened by examining the movements of
Paschal II at this time, from which it will appear that Gauldric or
Waldric cannot well have been consecrated to Laon before the very end
of 1106 or, more probably, not before 18 Feb. 1107 (Baronius viii. ; JaflK,
* Regesta Pontif. Rom.' 493). Hence the further back we have to throw
WiUiam of Corboil's visit in the period anterior to 1108 the less likely are
his pupils, the filii cancellarii, to have been sons of the second, and the
more Ukely are they to have been sons of the first Ranulf. But the word
jamdudum seems to put any recent visit out of the question at once ;
added to which almost the whole of Gaudric's episcopate was occupied
with intestine broils or with visits away from his diocese to England and
Rome. Again, his character, as described by Guibert of Nogent, was that
of a man wholly given up to mihtary exercises — a scomer of books and
learning — in short, the very last man to whose house young boys would
* OcUUa Christianat ix. 623-532, with which cf. Sigeberti Auctarium Laudunense
ap. Pertz, vi. 455.
f/v- /frt^/^ <»...^t<J*.-Or^ t^ SytizedbyGOOQle
/^fv^
110 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
be sent to acquire a clerical education. Added to this he was a murderer^
an extortioner, a liar, and a thief. In fact so notorious was his unfitness
for any episcopal duties, that when he was first proposed for the see of
Laon a sturdy opposition was commenced against his appointment ; and
the leader of this opposition was Anselm of Laon, who actually headed a
deputation to Pascal 11 at Langres for the express purpose of counter-
working Gaudric's election (Guibert, iii. c. 4). Is it probable that we
should find a Httle body of Englishmen staying at Gaudric's house for the
express purpose of attending the lectures of the very Anselm who had
well-nigh succeeded in preventing his election ? How fiercely Gaudric
nursed his old grudges we may see from Guibert*s story of his refusal ta
look at his * History of the Crusade ' because on opening the book he
chanced upon the name of his enemy, Lisiard, bishop of Soissons (iii.
c. 11). If then, for all these reasons, we decide that William's visit can
hardly have taken place while Gaudric was bishop, we at once raise a great
obstacle to the theory that the filii Badulphi were the sons of Ranulf II.
For in this case the visit must have taken place before 1107, i.e. before
Ranulf II's chancellorship.
Passing on to the other bishops, Enguerrand appears to have been
much such a character as Gaudric, though, perhaps, not quite so profligate
and tyrannical ; and, in the absence of any special claim, may fisdrly be
dismissed fi:om the field of competition. Very different, however, is the
case of Helinand. This bishop, as we learn from Guibert, had in earlier
life been one of Edward the Confessor's clerks (iii. 2). Though not a
man of learning himself, he was, according to Guibert's testimony, a man
of regular Hfe, an orderly and munificent ruler of his church, and an
encourager of literature in others ; while it was probably under his pro-
tection that Anselm and his brother Radulph established their schools
at Laon. Lastly, if the story of Ranulf Flambard's presence in England
in the days of Edward the Confessor be true, this prelate may have known
something of Helinand in his earher days. On the whole it would seem
that the closing years of Helinand's life form the most likely period in
which to find English children staying in the bishop's house at Laon.
(5) Some slight evidence regarding the date of the Laon visit may be
found from a consideration of the little that is known concerning the early
life of William of Corboil. From Simeon of Durham we learn that thiff
prelate entered public life as a clerk in the service of Ranulf Flambard at
Durham. Willielmum de Curbellio . . . utpote cum veneranda memoruB
Archiepiscopo Anselmo scBpissime clc familiariter conversatum. Fuerat
autem primo Dunelmensis ecclesicB episcopi Banulfi clericus ; postea
meliorandcB viUa gratia apud Cice effecttis, tandem ad archiepiscopatum
promcvetur (ii. 269, R.S.) This fact of William's connexion with
Ranulf Flambard is to be found in no contemporary historian excepting
in Simeon, and is plainly a local tradition of the church at Durham. The
same historian also informs us that William was elected to the see of
Canterbury ' because of his frequent and familiar intercourse with Arch-
bishop Anselm of pious memory ' {ibid,) Now this intimacy can hardly
be assigned to any other years than those which intervened between
Anselm's return to England late in 1106 and his death 21 April 1109.
For it is scarcely possible that one, who had been the familiar friend of
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 111
Anselm and was bent (to quote Simeon's words) on bettering his life
[meliorandcB vitcR gratia), should pass from the sanctity of such a com-
panionship into the service even of a munificent prelate such as Ranulf
Flambard was in his later years, and still less into that of a covetous,
grasping, and extortionate chancellor such as Banulf II appears to have
been (Henry of Himt. 244), But if we shut out these years we exclude
the only period in which (without doing violence to the word jamdudum)
Wilham could have been at Laon as tutor to the children of Banulf n ;
and this consideration almost forces us to date his visit prior to the rise of
this chancellor, i.e. to conclude that he was tutor to the children of
Flambard, whose clerk we know him to have been at some time subsequent
to 1099.
(6) Again, it may be inferred from Hermann that William's visit was
considerably anterior to that of Alexander and Nigel, the nephews of
Boger of Sahsbury. But their visit can hardly have been later than the
end of 1109, when Gaudric's notorious conduct compelled him to leave
Laon for Bome ; from which date his stay at Laon seems to have been
very broken, while the imminence or actual existence of the * commune *
would have a tendency to prevent Englishmen from coming to the city.
From this point of view also it seems best to antedate the visit to a period
at least a few years previous to 1109, i.e. to assign it to a time previous to
the chancellorship of Banulf U.
(7) Again, looking at the matter in its broadest aspect, which of the
two Banulfe is the more likely to have had children staying in the
bishop's house ? We do not read that the nephews of Boger of Salisbury,
a far more important man than Banulfus cancellaritis (who but for the
accident of his violent death would have left no mark in history), were
so honoured as to be lodged in the episcopal house. Such an honour is,
however, much what we should expect to see claimed by Banulf Fhunbard
with his high ambitions (even for his children), more especially as (to
borrow a quotation from Mr. Freeman) we have Anselm's authority for
stating of him : rum in Anglia solum sed in exteris regnds longe lateque
innotuit.
These seven arguments seem to me to make up a very good case in
favour of Banulf Flambard. It has been shown (1) that Banulf Flambard
may very well have been mistaken by a foreigner for a chancellor, if
indeed he was not once, as there seems some reason to suppose he was,
in practical possession of the office ; (2) that William of Corboil was un-
doubtedly at one time a clerk in Banulf s service ; (8) that Banulf Flam-
bard had two children whom he destined for an ecclesiastical career at
exactly the time when from other circumstances we should most plausibly
date this visit to Laon ; (4) again, we have shown that the word jamdu
dum can hardly bear so narrow an interpretation as merely five or six
years ; and (5) that if we do narrow its signification to a period of only
three or four, even then the years 1107-8-9 are required for those visits
of Alexander and Nigel to Laon which seem to have succeeded William of
Corboil's ; (6) while in William's own life they appear to correspond to
the period of his intimacy with Anselm. Lastly, we have seen that,
whereas Banulf IE is more or less obscure even in English history. Flam-
bard's name was notorious and potent abroad.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
112 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
There yet remains one point to be taken into consideration. It does
not amount to an argument, and yet it appears to add some weight to the
preceding pages. While the Laon priests were in England they seem to
have met with the most hospitable treatment wherever they went, except
in one place. But this one place — where they were received with the most
flagrant insolence and outrage, and where, according to the later version
of the story, the wrath of heaven descended at once upon the heads of
the perpetrators of the insult — was no other than Christchurch, namely,
Twinham, a foundation of which Ranulf Flambard had once been dean,
and with whose previous head he had quarrelled some years before owing
to his conduct in retaining the prebends as they fell vacant in his own
hands. (Dugdale, vi. 808.)
On the other hand it must not be forgotten that there is much to be
said in favour of the claims of Eanulf IL (1) The passage would seem
most naturally to refer to him. (2) As he was Gaudric's immediate
successor in the Enghsh chancellorship, it is not unlikely that he should
send his children to be educated in the house of a prelate with whom he
must have been acquainted. Still, there is no proof that he had more
than one son ; nor that this one son was destined for the church. That
Gaudric was in the habit of visiting England after his elevation to the
see of Laon is evident from Guibert's narrative ; and we know from the
same authority that, on one occasion, Anselm accompanied him (iii.
cc. 4, 7). (3) If, for these Reasons, we prefer the claims of Banulf II,
the word jamduduTJiy on which so much depends, may perhaps be explained
as not forming part of the verbal narrative that Hermann (to judge from
his use of the flrst person plural all through his account of the Enghsh
visit) seems to have taken down from the hps of one of the survivors of
the expedition, but as being his own interpolation derived from an im-
perfect acquaintance with the chronological order of the events he is
narrating.
On the whole the balance of evidence is perhaps in favour of Banulf
Flambard. Could the filii Badulphi be proved to be his sons beyond a
doubt, it would be interesting as showing that an unscrupulous statesman,
who nevertheless somewhat later took so princely a view of his obUga-
tions towards his own cathedral church and city, had a little earlier
determined that his children should be fitted for the lofty offices for which
his paternal ambition destined them by receiving from Anselm of Laon
the finest ecclesiastical education that Western Europe could then afford.
T. A. Abgheb.
A BULL OF POPE ALEXANDEK VI.
There is preserved at Lambeth amongst other documents, entitled
* Fragments,' a broadside which is marked No. 7. Its size is about 16
inches by 10. It is an important document which has escaped the notice
of all historians, being a copy of a buU issued by Pope Alexander VI con-
firming a previous bull of Innocent VIII's, which decreed the succession
of the Enghsh crown to the descendants of Henry VII whether bom from
his present queen, Elizabeth of York, or by his marriage with any sub-
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 113
sequent wife if she should happen to die without issue or should leave no
surviving children.
The bull begins as follows :
* Alexander episcopus servus servorum dei ad futuram Rei memo-
riam ; lioet ea que per sedem apostolicam prsesertim in pacem et quietem ac
tranquillitatem, Gatholicorum Begum et principum illorumque status
conservationem et manutencionem et a scandaUs bellis ac discensionibus
preservationem proinde concessa fuerunt plenam obtineant roboris fir-
mitatem, non nunquam tamen Bomanus pontifex ilia libenter de novo
approbat; et etiam innovat ut eo firmius iUibata persistant quo magis
suo fuerint presidio communita. Dudum siquidem a felicis Becordationis
Innocentio papa octavo praedecessore nostro eman&runt littersB tenoris
* Innocentius &c.*
This preliminary matter occupies five lines, which are immediately
followed by the well-known bull of Innocent, * super successione in Begno
AnglisB approbatoria Et contra Bebelles excommunicatoria,' which the
present document is intended to confirm. This bull may l^e seen in
Bymer*s * Foedera.* It is contained in 78 lines of the broadside, which
ends with the date 1486, 6 kal. Aprilis, Pont. 2. After which follows the
remainder of the bull of Pope Alexander VI, which is as follows, occupy-
ing seven more lines :
' Nos igitur cupientes non minus prospicere et consulere quieti prefati
regis ac Begni sui quam fecerit ipse Innocentius predecessor, motu pro-
prio non ab ipsius regis vel alterius pro eo nobis super hoc oblate
petitionis Instantia sed de nostra liberalitate, hteras predictas ac omnia
et singula in eis contenta auctoritate apostolica thenore presentium appro-
bamus ac plenum firmitatis robur obtinere decemimus iUasque in omni-
bus et per omnia de nouo innouamus et concedimus, non obstantibus
constitutionibus et ordinationibus apostolicis necnon omnibus illis que
pre&tus Innocentius in Uteris predictis voluit non obstare ceterisque
contrariis quibuscimque. Nulh ergo omnino hominum hceat banc
paginam nostre approbationis constitutionis innouationis et concessionis
infiringere vel ei ausu themerario contravenire. Siquis autem hoc
attemptare presumpserit indignationem omnipotentis dei ac beatorum
Petri et Pauli apostolorum ejus se nouerit incursurum.
' Dat. Bome apud Sanctum Petrum Anno Incamationis dominice
M.CCCC. Ixxxxiiij. Non. Octobris Pontificatus nostri Anno iij.*
It is curious that no historian has recorded any such application on the
part of Henry VII to the pope, for there can of course be no doubt that
the bull is the result of an apphcation made by the king for the sake of
strengthening his position on the throne. The wording of the document
must not be pressed to its exact letter as if the pope had decided to pro-
mulgate the bull without any petition having been previously made to
him. The expression motu proprio is only a form which has since been
in common use, but which had been, I believe, first introduced by his
predecessor, Innocent YIII. And the date of the document coincides too
nearly with that of the recent failure of Perkin Warbeck's first attempt
VOL. n. — NO. V. I
Digitized by
Google
114 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
at raising the country in his favour, to leave any doubt as to the king's
having made suit to the pope to confirm the bull of his predecessor, which
is inserted at length.
That the king thought it of the utmost importance is evidenced from the
fact that it was copied and issued in the form of a proclamation. Probably
the Lambeth copy is the only one that has survived ; but up to the present
time there has been no evidence of the existence of any such bull, except-
ing in a few lines of a document first printed by Mr. James Gairdner in
1858 in the volume of the Bolls' Series which contains the life of Henry
VII by Bernard Andr^. In the appendix to that volume, pp. 898-899,
there appears the appeal of Margaret, duchess of Burgundy, to the pope
on behalf of Perkin Warbeck, extracted from a document in the Lambeth
Library. The appeal asserts amongst other allegations that there are
others of the house of Lancaster who have a better claim to the crown
of England than Henry, who, it says, was sprung ex adulterinis am-
plexibus utriusque parentis, but that the house of York possessed the
right of inheritance to which Ehzabeth of York his wife could have
no right whilst Bichard the lawful son and heir of Edward V existed.
But the special point to be noticed in the appeal is the insertion of the
fBMjt, which does not appear anywhere else, of Alexander VI having
actually endorsed the bull of his predecessor. The words in the appeal
of the duchess are : Et pradicta omnia per AlexandrumPapam modemum
licet nulliter et de facto dicitur obtinuisse, his qtcorum interest minime ad
hac vocatis seu auditis, &c.
The existence of the bull is an additional evidence of the uneasy feel-
ing of Henry VII as to the tenure of his throne, which was as yet
scarcely thought safe enough for Ferdinand and Isabella to consent to the
espousals of Prince Arthur and the Infrmta CataUna.
It only remains to say that the document is very closely printed, with
an immense number of the ordinary contractions, which are not, however,
nniformly observed. Nicholas Pocock.
THE BENAISSANCE AND THE JESUITS.
It was not until the end of September that I had an opportunity of see-
ing the July number of this Beview. Upon reading the notice of my
* Chapters in European History * which it contained, I was grieved to
find that my critic, doubtless quite unintentionally, had gravely misappre-
hended and misrepresented me in several important matters. If so well
read a scholar as he evidently is has so seriously misunderstood me, no
doubt many others of less trained and cultivated intellect have fallen into
the hke errors. I avail myself gladly, therefore, of the opportunity afforded
to me by the courtesy of the editor to rectify some of the more important
misconceptions of which I complain.
I should like much, if time permitted, to vindicate against my
critic my view of the formation and development of Christendom ; of
the work done by Gregory VII for the preservation of religious liberty
— the most sacred attribute of human personality ; of our huge debt
to other heroic souls of those middle ages * in which,' as Mr. Carlyle
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 115
has justly observed, ' nearly all the inventions and social institutions
whereby we yet live as civilised men were originated or perfected/ ^
I should Hke to reduce to true proportions the amazing tenet ascribed
to me by my critic as a * conviction,' * that the whole tendency of the
intellectual and social movement which divides modem from medieval
society is in the wrong direction/ It passes my wit to conceive how
so cultivated and accompHshed a scholar could have recorded this
judgment in the face of what I have written about progress in my intro-
ductory dialogue and in my second chapter.^ Progress! Why, as I
have expressly said, the thirst for perfection and the gradual advance to-
wards it form a chief note of the career of our race. Progress ! It is
the very law of history. I use the word * law * advisedly. But here I
must distinguish. To me it appears that one great incontestable conquest
of the modem mind is the expulsion from philosophy of the notion of
uncertain, that is of irrational chance, the establishment of the universal
reign of law. And by law I understand something very different from
the ayayKTi of the ancient stoics or the * necessity ' of modem pheno-
menists. To my mind the word law carries with it the conception that
the world has been designed upon a rational plan ; that its course is
governed by constant method and not by caprice, unreason, or the throw-
ing of Lucretian dice as hazard may direct them : that if we could view
the entire prospect from end to end we should perceive everywhere the
same infinite Power, controlling, overruling, and bringing the action of
secondary causes to an harmonious and reasonable issue. Moreover, while
I find it evident, nay axiomatic, that reason must govem the universe, I
find it, not' indeed equally evident, but still as plain as experience can
make it, that evolution or development is one of the chief methods by
which that government is carried on. The real question is — does evolu-
tion imply one who evolves ? Does law demand, as its correlative, a
mind to conceive it from etemity and to reahse it in time ? Or, con-
trasting the two views, which are not reconcilable, is the key of the
enigma blind necessity, binding fast in fate the universe physical and
spiritual? Or is there behind phenomena an absolute reality, which,
while necessarily existing and necessarily unchangeable, is, in regard to
the existence of all things but itself, free and not necessitated— a will
entirely self-determined, but always according to the eternal rule of right
and wrong, which is God himself? Is there, in other words, a rerum
natura, not founded upon God — if God there be— as to its essence and
existence ? Or is it tme, as St. Augustine held, that Dei voluntas est
rerum natura, and that all things are because He wills them to be, and
that their nature is what it is because they shadow forth His perfection ?
A momentous question, indeed, which I do not in the least intend to dis-
cuss here. I have been at the pains to state it merely because it goes to
the very root of the difference between two schools of thought, in history
as in physics. Those who do not recognise a creator of all things,
visible and invisible, are within their logic when they find no place for
Providence and a moral government of the world. And contemporary
literature furnishes abundant evidence how much the doctrine of M. Littr^,
I Miscellaneous Essays, vol. ii. p. 328. ' See vol. i. pp. 16^26, 186-189.
I 2
Digitized by
Qoo^^
116 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
that * history is a natural phenomenon, where the antecedent produces the
consequent/ is gaining ground. According to this view, the annals of the
world are nothing more than a record of mechanism and fatality, of
necessitated transformation and movement, and the world's sages, saints,
and heroes are mere puppets, * impotent pieces in the game * played —
shall we say ? — by natural selection. Unless I misimderstand my critic
as much as he has misunderstood me, such would appear to be his view.
If that is so, any discussion between us concerning the philosophy of
history would be mere waste of time, because we are hopelessly at variance
on first principles. It would be, to use a happy phrase which I once
heard Cardinal Newman employ, Uke a fight between a dog and a fish.
My critic is, of course, as much entitled to his philosophy as I am to
mine. I make no complaint that he has read my volumes by the light of
his own first principles. But it does surprise me that he has read in them,
not merely things which I have not said, but things which are directly
contrary to what I have said. Now this is especially so with regard to
that portion of his article — nearly one half of it — in which he deals with
my view of the Renaissance and the Jesuits. I am quite sure — ^let me
repeat — that my critic had no wish to misrepresent me. And I suppose
his unhappy misconception must be due to some fault of my own, perhaps
to some want of perspicuity in thought or expression, of which, however,
I am not conscious. The reader must judge how that may be. All I can
do is to exhibit, first, what my critic attributes to me, and then what I
have really written. I shall proceed subsequently to such brief elucida-
tion and amplification of my meaning as may seem to be required for my
immediate purpose.
In the first place, then, as to the Renaissance, my critic writes :
' When Mr. Lilly talks about the Renaissance it will be found that he
generally means so much of the movement as is represented by the Italian
humanism of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, and he considers that
he has proved the new movement to have been adverse to liberty when
he has shown that the influence of a too slavish and narrow study of
classical models was oppressive both in literature and art. ... It is
characteristic of Mr. Lilly's conception of the Renaissance that he repeat-
edly speaks of 1458 as of an important dace in the history of the move-
ment. The fall of Constantinople was historically unimportant; the
substitution of the crescent for the cross on the dome of St. Sophia marks
the beginning of nothing, the end of nothing, except of the nominal in-
dependence of the city whose ruler had continued to bear the titles of the
Eastern Cssars, and of an opportunity offered to Western Christendom
to secure a basis of operations which might effectually have curbed the
ambition of the Turk.'
The following passage, from my fifth chapter, wiU supply materials
for judging whether this account of my conception of the Renaissance is
correct.
' How far is the claim well founded that Michael Angelo is the supreme
artist in whom " the genius of the Renaissance culminated " ? The answer
depends entirely upon the sense in which the word Renaissance is used.
It has been well described as " a question-begging word." There is a large
class of writers, and a far larger class of readers, with whom it stands as
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 117
the symbol of something very grand, but very vague, and so, very mis-
leading, for in the historical province, no less than in the legal, the maxim
holds : Doltis latet in generalibm. Thus M. Michelet in words which
I cited in the last chapter : Uaimdble mot de Renaissance ne rappelle
aux amis du beau qtce Vavdnement d'un art nouveau et le libre essor de
lafantaisie. Pour Virvdit, c'est la r&novation des ittides de Vantiquitd ;
pour les ligistes, le jour qui commence d luire sur le discordant chaos de
nos vieilles coutumes. The two things that belong to this age more than
to all that went before it, he thinks, are '* the discovery of the world " and
** the discovery of man." Le seizi&ine sidcle; he continues, dans sa grande et
Ugitime extension, va de Colomb d CoperniCy de Copemic d OaliUe, de
la dicouverte de la terre d celle du del. Uhovime s'y est retrouvS lu/i-
mime. It would, perhaps, be difficult to compress into the same number
of words a greater number of fallacies. In the first place, nothing is
more unscientific than a rigid demarcation and precise labelling of history
by epochs. As in the existence of the individual man, so in the exist-
ence of human society, no period stands alone. Each is the outcome
and consequence of what went before. Neither art, nor poetry, nor
philosophy, nor physical science, ever suffered a break in continuity of
tradition from classical times to our own. The links which bind the
medieval to the old Roman world are as real, and as certainly to be
found by those who will give themselves the pains to trace them, as
are the links which bind the world of this nineteenth century to that of
the middle ages. In strictness, there has been no re-birth of the human
mind, because the human mind has never died ; no re-discovery by man
of himself, because man, in his worst estate, was not without the con-
sciousness of himself, of his high dignity and great destinies. And, as a
matter of fact, it is not to the period glorified by M. Michelet's brilhant
rhetoric that we must go for the germs of our present intellectual great-
ness, for the inventions and discoveries which lie at the root of our
material civiUsation, for the estabHshment of the only poUtical institu-
tions now existing, which have succeeded in reconciling individual freedom
with stabiUty of government. If we will use the term ' Renaissance ' in a
sense at all approaching that of M. Michelet, we must put back the date
of the re-birth some centuries before the time of Columbus; if not,
indeed, to the days of Charlemagne and his cloister schools, at all events
to the i^e of vast intellectual activity when Dante's mystic song opens
the volume of modem poetry ; when the revived study of Roman juris-
prudence spreads from the law schools of Bologna throughout Christen-
dom ; when St. Thomas Aquinas and his fellows among the scholastics
survey the whole field of human thought with a comprehensive mastery,
and map it out with a subtlety and precision unknown to the ancients,
and too httle appreciated, because too httle known, among ourselves ;
when Roger Bacon, in his cell at Oxford, starts the physical sciences
upon the great career which they have pursued to our own times, and
anticipates their principal achievements ; when Niccola Pisano lays the
foundations of the art schools that were to cover the face of Europe with
those vast edifices which (in the words of Milman) can hardly be con-
templated without awe or entered without devotion, and to fill its churches
and palaces with pictures which we admire and wonder at and copy, but
Digitized by
Google
118 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
cannot rival. If the Benaissance be thus dated, there need be no hesita-
tion in recognising Michael Angelo as its supreme fruit, for what
Niccola Pisano began, cuhninated in him. Like that great master, and
the long series of his illustrious successors, he brought to his work
all the science he had, and it was far beyond their science. The
world had never before witnessed such technical perfection as his ;
it has never witnessed it since. But his spirit is that of the great artists
of the middle ages. His differences from them are purely conventional.
There is in his work nothing of the old Hellenic spirit of bondage to
physical life, and nescience of spiritual and moral force ; there is nothing
of the modem spirit of plagiarism from the antique, and servile copying
of the living model. ** He sums up" (Mr. Pater confesses) ** the whole
character of medieval art in that which most clearly distinguishes it from
classical work," and so may, without impropriety, be called by those who
take pleasure in the appellation, its '* prophet, or seer," as using it to body
forth the loftiest and severest lessons of the religion in which he beheved ;
to express the infinite and imceasing aspirations of human nature. It is
not, however, to the thirteenth century that we must turn for the move-
ment eulogised as the Benaissance by M. Michelet and a school of writers
of whom Mr. Symonds and Mr. Pater are the chief representatives among
ourselves. Their Benaissance really begins from the fall of Constanti-
nople • — although by some of them its first period is placed much earlier
— and is essentially associated with the ** revival of letters," that is, of
the culture of Greek and classical Latin, which the word was originally
employed to denote. The revival of letters was, no doubt, a very im-
portant incident in the transition of society from the medieval order to
the modem, although to regard it as the sufficient key to the comprehen-
sion of the great revolution, religious, intellectual, and moral, which
marked that transition, is exceedingly delusive. The ideas wrought out
in the ninety years of Michael Angelo*s life were too numerous, too great,
too subtly diffused, to be concluded under this formula. The revival of
letters was but one among many contemporaneous movements of the
teeming human intellect ; only one factor in tlie sum of things — a feictor
working with diversity of operation in the different regions of Europe,
with their different races and histories, and institutions and conditions.
Speaking generally, it may be said that in the north its results were
religious, in the south irreligious. In Germany it contributed directly to
the protestant Beformation. In Italy, where scholars threw themselves
upon the study, not of the sacred text and the other sources of christian
doctrine and practice, but of the poetry, philosophy, and art of the ancient
world, the educated class— already half-hearted in their allegiance to
Catholicism — became paganised, and the loosening of the ties of religion
and moraHty was felt throughout society. . . . Heine describes the move-
ment as '' a reaction against christian spiritualism," and '* a rehabihtation
of the flesh." Mr. Pater enumerates as its chief characteristics '* care for
physical beauty, worship of the body, the breaking down of the limits
> * The dates 1453 and 1527,' observes Mr. Symonds, * marking respectively the fall
of Constantinople and the sack of Borne, are convenient for fixing in the mind the
narrow space of time daring which the Benaissance culminated.' {Age of the Despots,
pref. p. i.)
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 119
which the religious system of the middle i^es imposed on the heart and
imagination," and '* a taste for sweetness." It would be easy to multiply
similar quotations, but it is unnecessary. The movement, which was
essentially a foiling back upon the world of sense and matter, is accurately
expressed by the word ** humanism," now naturalised among us. And it
is humanism which writers of the school I have in view intend when
they speak of the Renaissance.* ^
So much as to my view of the Renaissance in general. My critic's
assertion, ' Mr. Lilly considers he has proved the new movement to have
been adverse to liberty when he has shown that the influence of a too
slavish and narrow study of classical models was oppressive both in Htera-
ture and art,' really astonishes me. I have devoted a whole chapter — the
fourth — to a discussion of the question whether the Renaissance was in
truth a new birth unto freedom, and I have pursued the inquiry at much
greater length in the political order than in art or in Uterature, while
I have not omitted to follow it also in the domain of science. The con-
clusion at which I arrive, that, ' whatever the Renaissance was, it was not
a new birth unto liberty, either in politics or in literature, in art or in
science,* ^ maybe true or false ; but whether true or false it certainly does
not rest upon the very singular grounds assigned for it by my critic.
Then as to the fall of Constantinople : I certainly do think that it was an
event of greater importance, both poHtical and hterary, than my critic is
willing to allow. It was, as Professor Creighton writes, * the destruction
of that bulwark which had stood for twelve centuries,* in defence of * the
faith and civilisation of Christendom,* ^ while it * could not be regarded
as entirely a misfortune, for it brought to Italy the literary wealth of
Greece.* ^ But it is chiefly as a landmark in European history that this
great catastrophe is mentioned by me. ' The taking of Constantinople by
Mohammed II marks the close of the middle ages,* I observe in my second
chapter,® and in a note to my fifth chapter I quote M. Littr^ on the word
* Renaissance : * llpoque oH les lettres grecquesfont leur entrie en Occident ;
ce qui excita la pltcs vive ardeur powr VUude des monuments littiraires de
fantiquiti ; cette 4poque commence d la prise de Constantinople en 1458,
qui causa V Emigration de beau^oup de Grecs instruits en Italic.^ If my
critic will give me a better landmark for this epoch, I will gladly accept
it ; but I venture to doubt if he will find one. For the rest I may observe
that I am by no means unaware of the difficulties which attend the chro-
nology of ideas. To show that this is so, I may perhaps venture to quote
the following passage from my fourth chapter :
' It is easy to assign dates for specific facts. It is exceedingly hard to
give them for vast and complex movements of the human mind, which,
vnth the great religious, intellectual, and social phenomena that they
produce, are alone worthy of serious study in the records of the past. For
such movements, in the first stages of their existence, are hidden out of
sight. Like the individual man, they are made secretly, and generations
in which they have been maturing and gathering strength pass away im-
conscious of their growth, until the fulness of the time appointed for their
* Chapters in European HUtory^ vol. ii. p. 6Q. • Vol. i. p. 299.
• History of the Papacy during the Reformationy vol. ii. p. 34 i.
' 16. p. 334. » VoL i. p. 98. • Vol. u. p. 63.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
120 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
manifestation. Still chronological divisions are absolutely necessary, and
there would seem to be no sufficient reason for rejecting those which
custom has rendered familiar to us in European history. It is generally
correct to speak of the first eight centuries of our era as the period of the
formation of Christendom; the next seven are fitly styled the middle
ages ; and the three which follow, down to the closing decade of the last
centiuy, the Eenaissance epoch. Thus we are brought to the new age,
in which our lot is cast. But it must never be forgotten that in every case
the roots of the later period are buried in the earlier. The new idea
germinates under the debris of the old order as it falls to decay and dis-
solution. In this sense, too, the Homeric comparison between the gene-
rations of men and the generations of the leaves holds good. The world
of green furnishes an apt emblem of the life in death which we find in the
world of ideas. But further, ideas, like the productions of the vegetable
kingdom, are subject in their growth and in their decay to the influence
of local and other accidents, sometimes exceedingly difficult to trace. In
the happy soil, ** where some irriguous valley spreads her lap," they mature
more quickly, flourish more luxuriantly, and die sooner than in a land
where nature's gifts are less profusely bestowed. Everywhere they obey
the same laws, but in the time, the manner, and the measure of their
development there are innumerable differences, because in those laws
there is diversity of operation.* ^^
Next, as to the Jesuits, my critic writes :
' Mr. Lilly assures us that art, literature, science, and political freedom
were withering under the malign influence of the new learning and of
the Reformation, when the Jesuits undertook their defence in the name
of the church purified by the counter-reformation from the paganism
of the Eenaissance popes. Such a position would hardly seem to call for
refutation, yet it is advanced by Mr. Lilly with as much assurance as if it
scarcely needed proof.*
Now this position, which my critic represents me to have advanced
* with so much assurance,* has never been advanced by me at all. I have
never said, I have never dreamed of saying, that the Jesuits ' undertook
the defence of art, hterature, science, and political freedom.* And I have
made no mention of ' the counter-reformation,* a phrase which I particu-
larly dislike, nor of * the purification of the church * by the events to
which that phrase is applied. I have spoken of Jesuit art only in one
place, and there assuredly in a very different sense from that which is
attributed to me by my critic. To show how utterly wrong my critic is,
I must cite not only the words specially referring to Jesuit art — I will put
them in italics — but the whole passage. It is extremely distasteful to me
to quote myself so much, but I do not see in what other way I can so com-
pletely rectify my critic's unhappy misconception, and show what I reaUy
hold.
' The architectural monuments of the middle ages which still adorn
Europe were wrought by free and intelligent artists, and truly symbolise
the dominant principles in the lives of their builders. Faith in the
unseen, aspiration towards the infinite, are written on "the features
which were the distinctive creation of the Gothic schools ; in the varied
»• Vol. i. p. 269.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 121
foliage, and thorny fretwork, and shadowy niches, and buttressed pier,
and fearless height of subtle pinnacle and crested tower, sent like * an
unperplexed question up to heaven.* " Far other are the characteristics
of Benaissance architecture. I am not, indeed, concerned to deny the
merit of particular buildings. I am not insensible to the volupttums
pomp of the GesH at Borne, to the richness of material and elegance of
detail of Santa Maria della Salute at Venice. 1 do not doubt the ex-
cellence, after their kind, of many of the works of Palladio and Galeasso
Alessi, of Fran9oi8 Mansard and Inigo Jones. But these structures differ
as widely in motif from such piles as the abbey church and hall of
Westminster, the cathedral of Amiens, and the duomo of Pisa, as a play
of Bacine differs from a play of Shakespeare. The Benaissance archi-
tects, like the Benaissance poets, worked in chains, the iron whereof
entered into their souls. For truth, they have a parade of science ; for
imagination, *' correctness : " cold and earthly, they are satisfied with the
observance of their self-imposed rules; grace and fancy are ruthlessly
sacrificed to Procrustean forms. The note of servitude is upon the neo-
classical architecture, even more fully than upon the architecture of the
ancient world. The designer no longer creates ; he copies, adapts, con-
trives ; technical skill is the highest accomplishment of the artisan, sunk
into an animated tool, ''a mere machine, with its valves smoothed by
heart's blood instead of oil, the most pitiable form of slave.'' Exitus acta
probat. *' Benaissance architecture is the school which has conducted
men's inventive faculties, from the Grand Canal to Gower Street ; from the
marble shaft and the lancet arch, the wreathed leafage and the glowing
and melting harmony of gold and azure, to the square cavity in the brick
wall." Such is, in substance, the base captivity into which the Benais-
sance reduced the architecture of Europe.' ^'
To the achievements of the Jesuits in literature I have made but one
reference in my two volumes. The reader must judge how far it is
eulogistic :
' Unfortunately, however, the versifiers of the Benaissance did not con-
fine themselves to the production of turgid bombast of their own. The
ecclesiastical authorities, if unable to get rid altogether of the breviary
hymns, were determined to " reform " them, that is to reduce them to
classical style and metre; and for this purpose they called to their aid
from time to time the most approved pedants of the day. It is not neces-
sary for me to give here the details of the Procrustean treatment which
was pursued ; and 1 gladly pass over the miserable tale, how the most
beautiful and venerable verses suffered amputation, elongation, incision
and excision, at the hands of men whose highest accomphshment was to
" torture one poor word a thousand ways." It was in the pontificate of
Urban VIII that the hymns in the offices of the Latin church assumed
the form in which they have been since cwrrent. Three members of the
society of Jesus, Famianus Strada, Tarquiniu^ Galludus, and Hierony-
mus Petruccius, were entrusted with the task of reducing them, ad bonum
sermonem et metricas leges. A few escaped with very slight alteration ;
the great majority suffered a process of recasting, the result being not
unlike tJiat achieved by Borrimini in St. John, Lateran, or by Fuga in St.
»» Vol. i. p. 283.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
122 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
Mary Major. Archbishop Trench justly observes : ** Well-nigh the whole
grace and beauty and even vigour of the compositions have disappeared in
the transformation.'' * ^^
The next point is as to Jesuit science, and the fewest words will suffice
to dispose of it. All I have said on the subject is this : * They numbered
in their community the most distinguished representatives not only of
theological, but of secular science.' ^' That this was so, is a patent feu^t
not disputed by their bitterest enemies. But I put it to my critic's own
candour whether my words in the least warrant him in ascribing tome the
proposition that ' when science was withering under the malign influence
of the new learning and of the Reformation, the Jesuits undertook its
defence in the name of the church purified by the coimter-reformation
from the Benaissance popes.'
Lastly, I have nowhere said that when political freedom * was wither-
ing under the mahgn influence of the new learning and the Beformation,
the Jesuits undertook its defence in the name of the church purified by the
counter-reformation from the paganism of the Benaissance popes.* All
that I have said about the political action of the Jesuits is contained in
the following passage :
' St. Ignatius arose in an age of the world when the principle of the
Benaissance was sapping the authority of the catholic church in her rule
and in her doctrine, and attacking her in the very centre of her unity,
when, as Banke observes, " the pope experienced opposition on every side,"
when, apparently, **he had nothing to expect but a lingering and pro-
gressive decline." It was then that the society of Jesus was formed —
" a society of volimteers full of zeal and enthusiasm, with the express
purpose of devoting themselves exclusively to the service of the sovereign
pontiff," of retaining the catholic world in his obedience, and of reducing
to it the non-cathoHc world. The society was thus brought into imme-
diate conflict not only with the development of the Benaissance principle
in the spiritual sphere, but also with the CsBsarism which it introduced
into the public order ; that pagan idea of absolute monarchy, striving,
from the first, to assert its independence of the ancient public law of
Christendom, of which, in medieval times, the vicar of Clirist had been
the judge : to stifle the voice of that pubhc conscience of which he had
been the keeper and witness. Hence it was that to Jesuit theologians
were due those great vindications of the polity of Christendom against
the novel theories which the advocates of the immediate divine right of
kings and unlimited passive obedience had devised to support the new
monarchy. It was the especial glory of Suarez that he recalled to an
age which was fast forgetting it, the true doctrine of Aquinas. And his
teaching was, in the main, that of the society generally, some of whose
writers, indeed, in their zeal against the prevailing errors, carried it to
imdue lengths. It is manifest that the Jesuit theologians insisting, on
the one hand, upon the supreme authority, the high prerogatives of the
pope, and the accountabihty to him of christian princes, while, on the
other, they laid down the limited and fiduciary character of regal power,
and its derivation through the people, must have been in the highest
»* VoL i. p. 232. »« VoL ii p. 99.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 123
degree distasteful to absolutist monarchs. And so in fact it was. Philip
II of Spain regarded Suarez as a republican ; the parliament of Paris
burnt his writings ; the hostility of the society to kings was a favourite
commonplace of protestants, Jansenists and Gallicans. I am aware that
particular Jesuit fathers were the chosen spiritual advisers of monarchs
who were the very type of the new Cassarism ; and that the society itself
was at times protected and favoured in the dominions of such princes.
But that does not in the least affect my argument. The concern of the
Jesuits with secular poHtics was only, if I may so speak, accidental and
by the way. Their primary object, their sole object, was religion.
Except in so far as rehgion was involved, the external order of society,
the civil polity of states, mattered not to them. The absolute sovereign
was as proper an object of their ministry as the beggar or the leper ; nor
would they hesitate to employ their influence with the royal and the
noble among their penitents for the advancement of the sacred cause to
which they were devoted. Here, as elsewhere. Ad Dei majorem gloriam
was their great rule. But principles are stronger than men. And as
time went on, and limitation after limitation disappeared from the royal
authority, it was natural that kings should at last attack the society,
which was the standing witness of the claims of an allegiance higher than
any due to the national ruler, and a perpetual testimony to the restricted
character of his power. It has been remarked by M. Guizot, that if the
christian church had not existed, the world would have been abandoned
to material force. Not one of the least of the claims of the society of
Jesus upon the gratitude of mankind is that in the Benaissance epoch,
when monarchs throughout Europe were labouring with ever-increasing
success to assert the unbridled power of material force, it stood forth by
its very constitution and rule as an obstacle and a protest. It is simple
matter of fact that in the eighteenth century the Jesuits were the chief
champions of the spiritual order, ever bearing witness to its claims and
asserting its supremacy, and at the last, when the battle was lost, perish-
ing in the sacred cause to which they were faithful even unto death.' **
Now every word in this passage was well weighed when I wrote it.
And I am prepared to defend every word. I will here merely observe that
in holding monarchical authority to be not dominium proprietatiSf but of
its very nature limited and fiduciary, the Jesuits were following the com-
mon teaching of the schools ; while their doctrine, that the civil power,
divine in its origin, ' is communicated by God to the people, that it rests
immediately with the people, and that the people can confer it on one or
more persons,' is held by the weightiest cathoHc divines, such as St. John
Chrysostom, St. John Damascene, and St. Thomas Aquinas. ^'^ Suarez
and the other Jesuit theologians, in combating the new GsBsarism of the
" Vol. ii. p. 106.
i> The references will be found in Cardinal Hergenrdther*s KathoUsche Kirche und
chrisUicher Stout, essay ziv. part i. sec. 4. An excellent translation of this very
learned and valuable work has been published by Messrs. Bums <& Oates. The
doctrine, of course, is that political authority rests originally and directly with the
people — the community — and must be by no means confoimded with the modern
sophisms of the absolute, inalienable, and imprescriptible sovereignty of the majority
told by head and of * the sacred right of insurrection.*
Digitized by
Google
124 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
Renaissance, were simply maintaining the polity of Christendom — that
medieval framework of society which, though imdermined in fiw5t, still
subsisted in theory in men's minds. As I have written : ' It must be
remembered that in the pubHc order of the middle ages the notion of
absolute and irresponsible monarchy had no place. The authority of
kings rested everywhere upon constitutional pacts, varying in form but the
same in substance. It was limited, fiduciary, and liable to be forfeited
for grave infringement of the laws which they had sworn to administer, of
the rights which they had sworn to respect, of the duties which they had
sworn to perform. And of monarchs so transgressing, according to the
pubhc law which had gradually grown up, . . . the pope was the
judge. Hence the apostolic chair was the safeguard of right, the
help of the helpless, the refuge of the oppressed. It was also, if
I may so speak, a permanent court of international arbitration, and
thus the nextts of the pubhc order of Europe. And I do not think that
any impartial student of the acts of those who sat therein, from Gregory's
time to the time of the great schism, will deny that, upon the whole, they
rose to the height of their mission. The world has changed all that
now.' *•
But we must not forget that in the seventeenth century this change
had not been wrought out. Neither must we forget that ' the concern of
the Jesuits with secular poUtics was only accidental and by the way.'
That they cared in the least for the ' Uberty of the subject ' which is the
priceless heritage of EngUshmen, I by no means affirm. I am perfectly
well aware that they cared nothing for it. But for the Uberty of the
spiritual order they cared a great deal. ' Principles are stronger than
men.' And with this principle, in my judgment, the whole freedom of
man is bound up. Mr. Mill, following Ouizot, has well remarked that
' the separation, unknown to antiquity, between temporal and spiritual
authority,' which we owe to the church, ' has had the happiest influence
on European civihsation,' and is ' the parent of Uberty of conscience.' He
proceeds : * The separation of temporal and spiritual is founded upon the
idea that material force has no right, no hold, oyer the mind, over con-
viction, over truth. Enormous as have been the sins of the cathoUc
church in the way of reUgious intolerance, her assertion of this principle
has done more for human freedom than aU the fires she has kindled have
done to destroy it.' ^" Of this principle of the ' separation between temporal
and spiritual authority ' the Jesuits were the strenuous upholders. * The
Jesuits combating for a principle that was the parent of Uberty of con-
science I The Jesuits, who instigated the Thirty Years' war, who prompted
the revocation of the edict of Nantes ! No. It is too much.' So, as I
can weU imagine, many a reader will exclaim. And, indeed, he has
found a mouthpiece in my critic, who writes : ' Facts, whatever they once
were, have long ceased to be stubborn. We have become adepts in the
art of manipulating and bending them to suit our theories. So may the
worm be fitted to any hook. But facts, Uke the worm, should be handled
with some Uttle consideration, some affectation of gentleness, if not of
love. Mr. LiUy deals too roughly with his fiekcts ; the startled reader sees
the hook through their contortions.' Let the * startled reader,' let even
" Vol. i. p 192. " Discussions and Dissertations^ vol. ii. p. 243.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 125
my critic, bear with me a little while I explain my meaning, and in doing
BO I shall use no art at all. The modem conception of liberty of con-
science was as impossible in the seventeenth century as was the seven-
teenth centiuy conception of personal liberty in that phase of European
civilisation when the paterfamilias exercised over his children the power
of life and death. The Jesuits took the world as they found it, and did
their best according to their lights — whether those lights were celestial
lodestars or mere earthbom will-o'-the-wisps is not now the question — to
raise men above the world. They availed themselves of every means
which the existing condition of society offered for the promotion of their
great end, as they conceived of it, major Dei gloria. The tendency of the
political order throughout Europe was towards absolutism. The Jesuits
made to themselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness, and, like
Puritans and Calvinists, availed themselves of an arm of flesh when
opportunity offered, with no sort of hesitation or scruple. I have said :
* I am by no means concerned to justify the policy, upon all occasions, of
those who from time to time governed the society.* ^® I will go further.
I think that upon many most momentous occasions their policy was hope-
lessly and deplorably wrong. But ' principles are stronger than men.*
Nay, it is seldom that men are conscious, even dimly, of the more important
ends which they subserve. Thus, to give an example from another pro-
vince, Voltaire, as Mr. Morley has happily pointed out, while trying to
prolong in literature the traditionary ' classicalism ' of the French drama,
' with its appointed conditions and fixed laws, its three unities, its stately
alexandrines and all the other essentials of that special dramatic form,
was at the same moment giving that stir to the opinion of his time which
was the prime agent in definitely breaking the hold of that tradition.' ^^
The rulers of the catholic church, to their own indelible ignominy and to
her shame and confusion, may sink at particular periods in her history
into the familiars and pandars of absolutism. Still she is, and cannot
keep from being, a witness for liberty ; and that because the personality of
man is one of the main foundations upon which she rests. It is the attri-
bute of self-determination that makes us persons. That men are of
indefeasible right independent of all earthly power in the domain of con-
science, each of them, even the humblest, the most degraded, autonomous
in that sacred sphere and accountable to God alone, is the principle by
the manifestation of which the church was made known to the world.
This is the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free. The church by
her very constitution proclaims that there is a limit to human sovereignty,
a sphere in which it shall not enter. For the rest, it is the relative, not
the absolute, which rules in history. And that the catholic church and
the society of Jesus in the Eenaissance epoch were fighting the battle of
mankind against the new Ctesarism is a relative truth,^^ which may soimd
" Vol. ii. p. 98. »» Voltaire, p. 130.
** It is a truth which (George Sand's clear eyes saw, as is evident from the words of
that highly gifted woman which I have cited at p. 107 of my second volume:
L^insHtut des Jisuites renfermait implieitement ou explicitementdans le principe une
doctrine de progris et de UberU. On ne peut nier que cette secte n*ait fait faire de
grand pas d V esprit humain et qu^elle n*ait heaucoup souffert, au sUde dernier^ pour
le principe de la Uberti intellectuelle et morale.
Digitized by
Google
126 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
a hard saying to the ordinary Philistine, whose oracle is his daily news-
paper, but which assuredly should present no difficulty to so accomplished
a scholar as my critic.
There are some other points upon which, in order to make my apology
complete, I must say a few words : they shall be the fewest possible. My
critic writes : * It would occupy too much space to show how prejudiced
and unjust is Mr. Lilly's estimate of the work attempted by Pombal in
Portugal and by Aranda and Charles III in Spain.' All that I think
it necessary to say in reply to this is that my estimate was formed after
very full consideration of the subject, but that I am quite prepared to
reconsider it in the light of any further evidence which my critic may be
able to adduce. He proceeds : ' It is an exaggeration to say that ** the
suppression of the Jesuits equalled the worst deeds of the pagan CflBsars." '
What I have really said — and it expresses my deliberate judgment— is
that ' the suppression of the Jesuits, in its utter lawlessness and wicked-
ness, equalled the worst deeds of the worst of the pagan GsBsars.' The
two propositions are not identical. And an author may feurly expect
that his ipsissima verba will be given in what professes to be a quotation
from him. This is, indeed, as my critic would say, ^ a trifle.' But he
justly remarks, ' A straw may show the current of an inaccurate and un-
historical mind.' Again my critic writes: 'Mr. Lilly insists upon the
admirable administration of Paraguay, but he ignores Mexico, Japan, and
China ; and after all a government which regulated even the minutest
physical details of the lives of its subjects can hardly be said to have
cared greatly to develop the independence or the dignity of the individual.'
But I have never said, nor dreamed of saying, that the Jesuits cared
greatly to develop the independence or the dignity of the individual. To
speak frankly, my chief quarrel with them would be that they did not so
care. And why should I not ignore Mexico, Japan, and China ? I should
have been quite ready to discuss the labours of the society of Jesus in
those countries if the occasion had led me to do so. But it did not.
Surely it is no fetult in an author if he does not write de omnibus rebus et
quibusdam aliis. In the next paragraph my critic observes: 'Pascal,
whom Mr. Lilly quotes, might have taught him the nature of the services
rendered by the Jesuits to morality.' Pascal has taught me a great many
things during the years that I have been his disciple, and no doubt will
teach me many more. As to the ' Provincial Letters,' my sympathy with
the ethical passion which breathes through them is as great as is my
admiration for their literary excellence. But assuredly I should not go
to them only if I desired to learn the nature of the services rendered by
the Jesuits to morality. And if I may venture to offer a word of counsel
to my critic in return for his suggestion, I would recommend him to
rectify by wider reading the judgment which he has apparently founded
upon this single authority. De bonne foi, asks Voltaire, est-ce par la
satire des Lettres Provinciales qu'on doit jttger la morale des Jisuites ? *'
You might as fairly judge of it by the satire of Voltaire's own novel
'* Lettre au P^e de LatouTt ann^e 1746. Qaoted by Cr6tineaa-Joly, Histoire de
la Compagnie de Jisus^ vol. iv. p. 43. I cannot find the letter in my own fine copy of
Voltaire in sixty >f our volumes (Paris, Antoine-Augostin Benooard, 1819), and I have
no time jast now to search elsewhere.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 127
*L'Ing^nu,' which is also a literary masterpiece in its way. Every
scholar who has investigated the subject is perfectly well aware that con-
siderable deductions must be made from Pascal's case against the Jesuit
casuists before it can be accepted as even an approximately true indict-
ment. This has been well stated by Dean Church, who certainly would
be the last to abandon any point which he thought could be honestly
maintained on behalf of a teacher to whom he is so devoted.
* Pascal was by no means always fair, especially in the detail of his proof.
His letters have the exaggeration inseparable from an able, earnest,
passionate attack — the exaggeration of a clear statement and lucid
arrangement of the case on one side ; the exaggeration of ridicule and
irony ; the exaggeration of strong and indignant feeling. Further, they
leave unsaid how the system which they attacked grew up; how long
custom, and a general use, not confined to the Jesuits, if it had made
this system dangerous, had also in all probability, in a measure, corrected
it, as it certainly in a degree excused it ; and they leave the impression
that that was a distinct intention, which was mainly a result, not very
coyly accepted and followed up. Further, he leaves unsaid, for he did
not on principle acknowledge them, the practical necessities of a popular,
and much more of a fashionable religion — much the same under all
circumstances, whether resisted as temptations or accepted as facts.' ^^
With this I quite agree. And my critic, before referring me to the
^Provincial Letters,' might have remembered that I had been at the
pains to state : ' I am by no means concerned to vindicate the teaching of
every moral theologian who has worn the robe of the society of Jesus.' *'
But to proceed. My critic writes : * It is to the Jesuits that we owe
the substitution of the study of words for the study of things, of a pedantic
scholarship and antiquarianism for the attempt to enter into and appre-
ciate the true spirit of the ancients, which has been made the reproach of
modem classical education. All this is very trite.' All this may be very
trite, but it is not very true. My critic here lays the blame upon the
wrong shoulders. The word-spinning and pedantry and ' antiquarianism '
— the phrase is hardly well chosen, but I understand my critic to mean
by it servile worship of antiquity — were not the invention of the Jesuits,
but of those humanists, well described as ' empty-headed pedants, who
had eaten out all that was valuable in their lives in the successful attempt
to acquire a correct Latin style.' ^* Erasmus somewhere introduces us
to one of them, who told him Decern annos consumpsi in legendo Cicerone ;
and echo answered on I The Jesuits adopted the educational traditions
and methods which they found ready to their hands, and tried to make
the best of them. Mr. John Morley, who is not exactly a blind admirer
of the society, testifies : ' The wise devotion of the Jesuits to intellectual
education in the widest sense then possible, is a partial set off against
their mischievous influence on politics and morals.' ^* I feel bound to
confess that this witness is ' suspect ' to me, if I may borrow a phrase
from one of Mr. Morley's heroes. Mr. Morley's admiration is no doubt
honest. Certainly it is intelligible. The Jesuits were the official in-
structors of France in the age which produced the philosophes. Every
" Essays and Reviews, by R. W. Church, p. 487. *» Vol. ii. p. 98.
** See vol. i. p. 294 of my Chapters in European History. ** Voltaire, p. 45.
Digitized by
Google
128 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
one of the most notable EncyolopsBdists, with the exception of D*Alembert,
was their pupil. So was Voltaire, the most considerable man, I suppose,
that has ever been sent forth from their colleges.
So much must suffice to vindicate myself against the misconstructions
of my critic : misconstructions which are not the less, but rather the more,
annoying because of his good fsdth, which I do not in the least doubt.
The question of the position of the Jesuits in respect of the Renaissance
is a very large one. To discuss it in detail would be impossible to me at
present. What I have said may perhaps be sufficient to indicate in
distinct outline the view which I believe to be the true one. It was the
exigencies of the age that called the Jesuits into existence. And the
charges which may be truly urged against them, if impartially examined,
seem to me to amount to this : that they faithfully reflected the character-
istics of the age, and that they sought to combat its spirit with its own
weapons. Mr. Symonds, in one of his recently published volumes, exclaims
against ' their hideous churches, daubed with plaster painted to resemble
costly marbles, encrusted with stucco polished to deceive the eye, loaded
with gewgaws and tinsel, and superfluous ornaments and frescoes, turning
flat surfaces into cupolas and arcades ; the conceits of their pulpit oratory,
its artificial cadences and flowery verbiage, its theatrical appeals to gross
sensations ; their sickly Ciceronian style, their sentimental books of piety,
" the worse for being warm,*' the execrable taste of their poetry, their
flimsy philosophy and disingenuous history.' ^ Well, I do not rate very
highly Jesuit historians or Jesuit poets. I am quite prepared to admit
that there are more things in heaven and earth than were dreamt of by
Jesuit philosophers, although if Mr. Symonds will apply himself to the
perusal of any treatise of any of the more notable of them — say, for
example, Suarez * De Legibus ' — I feel sure he will admit that * flimsy ' is
the last adjective to describe it. Sentimental books of piety and theatrical
appeals to gross sensations are by no means an invention, or a monopoly,
of the society of Jesus. They are no more to my taste than they are to
the taste of Mr. Symonds. Clearly they were to the taste of the age
which found in them its spiritual nourishment, and which materialised
religion as it materialised poetry and architecture and everything else.
Surely it is patent that the Jesuits got their pseudo-classioalism from the
intellectual movement, the glorification of which appears to be the chief
purpose of Mr. Symonds* life. And if the Jesuits, by pressing the new
paganism of the humanists into the service of religion, ' wrought miracles
and converted thousands,* ^^ as Mr. Symonds allows they did, they might
appeal to the authority — which, to be sure, will not weigh much with
Mr. Symonds — of the apostle who said, * I am made all things to all men,
that I might, by all means, save some.' That this was their guiding
principle appears to me open to no manner of doubt, whatever we may
think of some of the applications which they gave to it. But Mr. Symonds
is not content with what may be truly urged against the Jesuits. ' The
same critique,' he tells us, ' applies to Jesuit morality.' ^^ He devotes
much eloquence to a description of * the Jesuit labyrinth of casuistry,
with its windings, turnings, secret chambers, whispering galleries, blind
" The Catholic Reaction^ by John Addington Symonds, part i. p. 807.
^ lb, " lb. p. 808.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 129
alleys, issues of evasion, the whole vicions and monstrous edifice being
crowned with the saving virtue of obedience and the theory of the end
justifying the means.'*® And he proceeds: 'Thus the inventive genius
of the casuist, bent on dissecting immorality and reducing it to classes ;
the interrogative ingenuity of the confessor pruriently inquisitive into
private experience ; the apologetic subtlety of the director, eager to supply
his penitent with salves and anodynes ; were all alike and all together
appHed to anti-social contamination in matters of lubricity, and to anti-
social corruption in matters of dishonesty, fraud, falsehood, illegality,
and violence.' ^
As to the * theory of the end justifying the means,' I may content
myself with observing that no such theory, in Mr. Symonds' sense, has
ever been held by any school of moral theologians in the catholic church.
The commonplaces, licitus est finis, etiam Iddta sunt media, and cui
licitus est finis, licita sunt media, merely assert the general philosophical
principle that if the end, the complete opu^, is a good one, due means
may be taken for its attainment : not all nor any means, but first innocent
means, and secondly means not at all events essentially evil, and which
the end, and the end alone, can justify. Examples of this second class
are afforded by dangerous surgical operations, such as tracheotomy,
lithotomy, amputation. The end of saving life justifies these means.
But neither that end, nor any other, would justify adultery or blasphemy.
Of casuistry I will only say that it is an essential part of the science of
morals. In my own very unjesuitical university of Cambridge there is,
or was until quite recently, a professor of it. In itself it is a good thing.
Like all good things, it may be abused. But aJmsus non tollit usum.
As to 'the interrogative genius of the confessor,' and his anxiety to
minister salves and anodynes to inward wounds, I venture to assert that
Mr. Symonds might resort daily for twelve months to any Jesuit confessor
without being asked a single question, and without experiencing the
application of any flattering unction to his soul, or of any ethical
laudanum to his conscience. And the practice of the confessional in
these matters in the nineteenth century is precisely what it was in the
sixteenth, the seventeenth, and the eighteenth. Louis XY and Madame
de Pompadour did not find the fathers of the society merchants of salves
and anodynes.^ ^ Mr. Symonds is of opinion that all this ' was applied
» The Catholic Reaction, part i. p. 309. •• Ibid. p. 814.
•* * The society,* writes Mr. Jervis in his History of the Church of France, *had
made enemies, not less vindictive, and far more powerful, in another qnarter. They
had mortally offended Madame de Pompadour, and her ill-will entailed that of the
Due de Ghoiseul, who owed his advancement to the reigning favourite, and had just
succeeded to one of the highest posts in the service of the crown. The relations
between the marchioness and Louis XY had of late ceased to be positively criminal ;
she professed herself anxious to repair the past, and to make her peace with the church.
For this purpose she appealed to one of the Jesuit fathers, De Sacy, and proposed to
him, as an arrangement for the future, that she should continue to reside at Versailles
in the quality of the king's confidential friend, renouncing for ever that connexion
which had been so notorious a cause of public scandal. According to her account
(in a memorial sent through a private agent to the pope) the Jesuit seemed disposed
to entertain this proposition ; he prescribed certain changes in her habits, and a rule
of life which she at once adopted and followed exactly. But the negotiation became
known, and so much dissatisfaction was manifested that the confessor found it
VOL. n. — NO. V. K
Digitized by
Google
130 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
to anti-social contamination in matters of lubricity and to anti-social cor-
ruption in matters of dishonesty, fraud, falsehood, illegality, and violence/
When I read this vehement rhetoric I ask myself whether Mr. Symonds
can possibly have realised what his words mean. They mean this : that
men whose whole hves were penance, and holy aspiration, and self-deny-
ing toil for others, were all the time engaged in a diabolical conspiracy
against religion and moraUty. No one ever hated the Jesuits worse than
Voltaire, who rightly discerned in them the most formidable defenders of
the Infdme, But Voltaire's strong common sense was enough to preserve
him from the grotesquely absurd theory which finds favour with Mr.
Symonds. On tdchait, he writes, de prouver quHls avaient un dessein
formd de corrompre les mcBurs des hommes, dessein qu'aucune secte, qu'au-
cune socidU, n'a jamais eUy ni peut avoir, ^^ Surely it is a more rational
explanation that these devoted men, whose ' obvious enthusiasm and holy
lives ' ^^ Mr. Symonds confesses, were anxious not to make sin easy but
penance possible, in the frightful decadence of moraUty which, as he him-
self observes, was brought about by the Renaissance.^* To open wider
the strait gate so that more might go in thereat, to broaden the narrow
way so that more might find it, was unquestionably their object, what-
ever may be said of some of the modes by which they sought to effect it.
But * the whole vicious and monstrous edifice,' Mr. Symonds exclaims,
* was crowned with the virtue of obedience.' * The obedience of the
Jesuit,' he insists, * was to be absolute, extending even to the duty of
committing sins at a superior's orders.*'* Do you doubt it? Mr.
Symonds will give you the ipsissima verba from the constitutions of the
society. ' A sin, whether venial or mortal, must be committed, if it is
commanded by the superior in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ or in
virtue of holy obedience.''^ I have always considered Mr. Symonds
rather an elegant than an accurate scholar. But I am surprised at find-
ing him guilty of so bad a blunder as the one into which he has here
fallen. The words which he is by way of rendering into English occur
necessary to give way. He intimated to the marohionesa that it was impossible for
him to admit her to the sacraments nntU she had retired altogether from her position
at coart. After employing every resource of argmnent and persuasion to shake his
resolution, she dismissed him ; and it appears that subsequently she succeeded in
effecting her object through the intervention of another adviser of more accommodating
conscience. Father P^russeau, the king's confessor, who was likewise consulted on
this occasion, took the same line with his colleague De Sacy, and dissuaded his
majesty from approaching the sacraments, though he expressed an earnest wish to
do so. In this instance, at least, the Jesuits cannot be charged with countenancing
lax morality. Had all the motives which led to the dissolution of the order been of
the same character,* Mr. Jervis adds, * it would have fallen with signal honour to
itself and to the great cause which it professed to represent.* (Vol. ii. p. 365.)
« Si^le de Louis XIV, chap, xxxvii. " P. 261.
^ * The study of the classics,* he writes, * and the effort to assimilate the spirit of
the ancients, undermined men's Christianity, without substituting the religion or the
ethics of the ancient world. . . . Men left the ground of faith and popular convention
for the shoals and shallows of an irrecoverable past.* * While professing stoicism
they wallowed in sensuality, openly affected the worst habits of pagan society, and
devoted their energies to the explanation of foulness.* {Studies in the History of the
Benaissance, pref. xi, and p. 2.)
» P. 264. »• P. S84.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 131
in the fifth chapter of the sixth part of the constitutions. I will give
the chapter in its entirety.
*Qiu>d Constitutiones Peccati Obligationem non inducunt.
* Cum exoptet Societas universas suas Constitutiones, Declarationes, ac
Vivendi ordinem omnino juxta nostrum Institutum, nihil ulla in re de-
clinando, observari ; oportet etiam nihilominus suos omnes securos esse,
vel cert6 adjuvari, ne in laqueum ullius peccati, quod ex vi Constitutionum
proveniat, incident: Visum est nobis in Domino praeter expressum
Votum, quo Societas Simuno Pontifici pro tempore existenti tenetur, ac
tria aha essentialia Paupertatis, Castitatis, et Obedientise, nuUas Con-
stitutiones, Declarationes, vel ordinem ullum vivendi posse obligationem
ad peccatum mortale vel veniale inducere ; nisi Superior ea in Nomine
Domini Nostri Jesu Christi, vel in virtute sanctae ObedientisB juberet ;
quod in rebus, vel personis illis, in quibus judicabicur, quod ad particu-
larem uniuscuj usque, vel ad universale bonum multum conveniet, fieri
poterit ; et loco timoris offensse succedat amor onmis perfectionis et de-
siderium: ut major gloria et laus Christi Creatoris, ac Domini Nostri
consequatur.'
It ought not to be necessary to explain to Mr. Symonds that peccati
obligatio does not mean an obligation to commit sin. OhUgare ad
peccatum is the common ecclesiastical phrase by which is expressed the
extent of the obligation of a rule or precept, that is how iax it can be dis-
obeyed without sin. The words, Visum est nobis in Domino prater ex-
pressum Votum quo Societas Summo Pontifici pro tempore existenti tenetur,
ac tria alia essentialia Paupertatis, Castitatis, et Obedientia, nullas Con-
stitutiones, Declarationes, vel ordinem ullum vivendi posse obligationem ad
peccatum mortale vel veniale inducere, nisi Superior ea in Nomine Domini
Nostri Jesu Christi, vel in virtute sancta ObedienticB juberet, should be
thus rendered : ' It has seemed good to us in the Lord, that saving the
express vow ^^ by which the society is bound to the sovereign pontiff for
the time being, and the three other essential vows of poverty, chastity,
and obedience, no constitutions, declarations, or any rule of life, shall
bind, imder pain of mortal or venial sin : unless the superior should en-
join them in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ or in virtue of holy
obedience.' Or, to put the matter less technically, that except the vows of
poverty, chastity, and obedience, common to the Jesuits with all religious
orders, and the special vow of obedience to the pope peculiar to the
society, no rules or regulations — ^bylaws we may say— are of such a
Bolenm nature that non-compliance with them would amount to a sin,
except in those very special cases where the superior formally commands
compliance in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ or in virtue of holy
obedience. In many old orders all breaches of the rule were considered
sins, as such, that is qu>a breaches. In the Jesuit order the obligation is
limited. Breach of the three essential vows, or of the one special vow,
is a sin. Breach of the provisions of the constitutions, declarations, or
other regulations, is not in itself sin, although it may become sin in the
•^ This vow is peculiar to the society of Jesus. See the bull of Pius HI, Regimini
mUitantis eccUsuB,
X 2
Digitized by
Google
132 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
case stated, because a superior who commands in the name of our Lord
Jesus Christ or in virtue of holy obedience cannot be disobeyed without
sin.
What good should follow this if this were done ?
What harm undone ? Deep harm to disobeyf
Seeing obedience is the bond of rule.
Of course there is no question whatever of obeying a command to commit
a sin. No such command could be lawfully either given or executed.
It would be void ipso facto. To comply with it would be sin. The vows,
that of obedience included, bind only to good, and to the greater good.
It is almost humiliating to have to expend so many words upon so plain
a matter. One might surely have thought it too monstrous an absurdity
to be seriously entertained by any intelligent man, that commands to
conunit sin could be given, I will not say by persons whose saintly lives
are beyond question, but by any rational being, ' in the name of our Lord
Jesus Christ * — of all names ! — or * in virtue of holy obedience ' — of all
things! But this amazing blunder of Mr. Symonds affords a painful
instance of the way in which a mind, not naturally uncandid, may be
completely warped by prejudice, and hopelessly misled by implicit reliance
upon untrustworthy authorities. I observe that among those upon whom
Mr. Symonds founds himself in his diatribes against the Jesuits is the
late M. Paul Bert.^^ It is no wonder that in following such guides Mr.
Symonds has fallen into the most extraordinary errors. The one which I
have just exposed is a conspicuous instance of them. Another, hardly less
egregious, is supplied by his account of 'the political theory of the
Jesuits.' ^^ I cannot now examine it. All I can do is to refer the reader
who desires to learn the truth on the subject to Cardinal Hergenrothef s
very learned work,^^ which, together with the mass of authorities there
referred to, Mr. Symonds would have done well to consult before com-
mitting himself to views which are quite untenable. Of course I am well
aware that it is not necessary for the ordinary protestant controversialist
to know anything of the theological system which he impugns. Thirty-
five years ago Cardinal Newman, in his inimitable way, described how a
country gentleman, a navy captain, a half-pay officer with time on his
hands, will undertake by means of one or two tracts and a set of extracts
against popery to teach the pope in his own religion and to refute a
council. 'He has not studied our doctrines,' the cardinal continues,
'he calls our theological language jargon, and he thinks the whole matter
lies in a nutshell ; he is ever mistaking one thing for another, and thinks
it does not signify. Ignorance is in his case the mother, not certainly of
devotion, but of inconceivable conceit and of preternatural injustice. If
he is to attack or reply, up he takes the first specimen or sample of our
doctrine which the Reformation Society has provided : some dreadful senti-
ment of the Jesuit Bellarmine or of the schoolman Scotus. He has never
turned to the passage in the original work ; never verified it ; never con-
sulted the context ; never constructed its wording ; he blindly puts his own
sense upon it, or the " authorised version " given by the society in question,
» P. 812, note. »• P. 317 et seq,
^ KathoUaehe Kirche und christHcher Stoat. See especially essays xiii. & xiv.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 138
and boldly presents it to the British public, which is forthwith just as much
shocked at it as he is.* ^^ These words are as true a description now as
they were when they were written, of the average Exeter Hall disputant.
But one hardly expected that Mr. Symonds — however masterful his
prejudices — would sink to such a level. Surely it is not unreasonable
to demand that so elegant a writer should make sure of his feicts before
he uses them to point the rhetoric which he dignifies with the name of
history. W. S. Lilly.
THE DEPOSITIONS RELATIKQ TO THE IBISH MASSACBES OF 1641.
I AM obliged to Mr. Dunlop for his admission that I have ' successfully
impugned ' Mr. Gilbert's arguments that the above-mentioned depositions
are * wholly untrustworthy.' But I hope, as a matter of simple justice,
I shall be allowed to say that Mr. Dunlop is wholly mistaken in supposing
that I beHeve them to be the converse of this, i.e. what he calls ' almost
perfectly trustworthy ; ' or that Mr. Froude and I are agreed in our
opinions about them or about Irish history in general. My opinion about
those documents is much nearer to that which, as far as I can judge, is
held by Mr. Lecky, but at the same time by no means identical with his,
and utterly opposed to Mr. Prendergast's, whose ability and powers of
research are greatly clouded by his strong prejudices against the long
parUament and Cromwell. Mr. Lecky told me, with characteristic fair-
ness, when I was about to write my work, that he could pronounce no
opinion on the depositions, as he had never examined them. I under-
stood from Mr. Prendergast that he had merely glanced at them, and I
think in his published works he follows Warner in his now sufficiently
proved great error as to the so-called cancellings. Eeid was the only
historian who examined the manuscripts with the sHghtest care, and even
he failed to perceive the true meaning of the crossed-out passages. But
Mr. Lecky and Reid were not writing on 1641-49, their subject was wholly
different, and I am sure that if they had been writing a special history of
those years or of the Cromwellian settlement they would have carefully sifted
and examined the manuscripts, and that no important point would have
escaped them. When I undertook to write a short sketch of the history
of Lreland in the seventeenth century, and to prepare for publication the
historical records, depositions of 1641-49, letters and records of the high
court of justice in 1650-54, which through want of opportunity, or leisure,
on the part of Reid and Mr. Lecky, and other eminent historians, or
through carelessness, prejudice, and a design to suppress facts unpleasant
to political parties, on the part of less conscientious writers, were virtually
unknown, I had no other object than to serve the interests of histories^
truth. Mr. Dunlop sets out by saying :
*Are we then to accept the simple statement of such men as Dr.
Robert Maxwell, rector of Tinane, no matter how estimable he might
otherwise (?) be, without making some and a very considerable deduction
owing to his prejudices ? What should we think of an ordinary Irish-
man's deposition if to-day an insurrection were to break out in Ireland
«» The Present Position of Catholics, p. 330.
Digitized by
Google
134 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
on the part of the Orangemen, in which the nationalists suffered what
the English colonists professed to have endured in 1641, provided it were
made before a commission composed of nationalists and that the Orange-
men were neither heard nor allowed to cross-examine the deponent?
Surely we should consider such evidence well-nigh altogether worthless.
And yet this is just what Mr. Froude and Miss Hickson decline to allow
in the case of these so-called Irish massacres. They seem firmly con-
vinced, and perhaps no arguments will shake their conviction, that those
depositions are almost perfectly trustworthy. But I venture to assert
that it is impossible to make any historical use of them without making
very considerable deductions owing to the circumstances under which
they were taken.' ^
A few newspapers in their reviews of my book took the same wholly
mistaken view of it which Mr. Dunlop has taken, but I did not think it
worth while to correct them. Newspaper notices of books must often be
very superficial, hasty, and largely influenced by party pohtics. When
the mistake, however, is perpetuated in the pages of the English
HiSTOBiCAL Eeview, I Cannot pass it over so lightly. It is amazing to
me how Mr. Dunlop, if he has read my work, can have believed that I
consider the depositions taken between 1641 and 1649 by the royal clerical
commissioners * almost perfectly trustworthy,* or that I * decline to allow'
(as does Mr. Froude) that ' considerable deductions * must be made for
them * owing to the circumstances under which they were taken.' What
Mr. Froude's opinion may be I cannot say ; the only suggestion he ever
made to me when I was writing the work was that I might rely on Sir
John Temple as a contemporary authority. This I refused to do, because
on comparing Temple's versions of the depositions with the original manu-
scripts I found he had grossly garbled them, omitting and altering as suited
his purpose. Mr. Froude made no further suggestions about the work, and
never saw it, I believe, until it was in the press. At my request he kindly
made considerable alterations in his preface, because as he first wrote it
I feared it might tend to make the volumes appear as if written for a
political purpose. But, so far as I am concerned, if Mr. Dunlop and his
readers will only turn to the following passages in my work, which
passages he seems never to have read, they will find that I have done
exactly what he charges me with not having done.
At p. 88 of my second volume, in a note to the depositions of George
Littlefield and Edward Saltinhall, taken before two of the royal com-
missioners in 1642, 1 said :
' I have given the foregoing as a specimen of one of those very un-
reliable depositions which the royal commissioners sometimes received.
One-fifth of it may be reliable, the rest is evidently mere hearsay.' ^
Again, at pp. 184, 186, 202, and 874, 875, 1 showed how untrustworthy
were some of those depositions taken in 1641-49, and in words almost
identical with those used by Mr. Dunlop, in the passage where he
ventures to assert ' that deductions must be made owing to the circum-
stances under which they were taken,' and wrongly charges me with not
allowing for those circumstances. I said :
' English Histobical Beview for October, p. 741. ' Irish BfassacreSt vol. ii. p. 88.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 135
• The circiuDstances under which those depositions were taken made the
royal commissioners and the deponents more liable to err and to magnify
the reports of the horrors going on aromid them.' ^
Dr. Maxwell's deposition was one of those I had in mind when I said in
my introduction to the whole :
' Such depositions must be accepted with great caution, and only after
they have been carefully collated with others of a more trustworthy
kind.' 4
But because I reject, as I do, at least one-half of Dr. Maxwell's deposi-
tion as mere worthless hearsay, am I therefore to reject it all, when por-
tions of it are shown to be perfectly truthful by trustworthy documents,
and even by the admissions of Sir Phelim O'Neil himself? As, for
instance, the horrible butchery of Dr. Maxwell's brother, when he lay ill
of fever, and of the same deponent's sister-in-law when she was enceinte,
the details of which butchery as given by eye-witnesses amply justify
Judge Lowther's words when sentencing Phelim O'Neil : * What I was
he bom of woman who did this ? ' Mrs. Constable, a woman of good
position, sworn before the royal commissioners in 1648, stated that her
husband, mother-in-law, and brother had been murdered by Sir Phelim's
soldiers and others, who stripped them of all their goods, and that
three Irishmen bragged in her presence that they had drowned Mrs.
Maxwell and her infant, and that she heard an Irish priest, O'Gorr, rebuke
them for the fiendish act, and tell them that * the blood of that child
cried for vengeance against them, and that com or grass would not grow,
nor anything prosper, where they did any of those bloody acts.' * There
is a good deal of second-hand evidence in Mrs. Constable's deposition,
but almost all of it is proved true by other deponents, who saw for
themselves the massacres which she had heard of. I reject the mere
hearsay, but I accept facts as related by eye-witnesses. Irishmen and
Irishwomen, as well as Enghsh, swore they had seen Mrs. Maxwell drowned
by the Irish, and her husband dragged from his fever bed and hanged.
Anna Sherring swore before Dean Jones and the Reverend H. Brereton in
1648, that while her husband, an EngUsh miner, and thirty-two others,
some of them women and infants, were being massacred at the silver
mines in Tipperary, a great thunderstorm occurred, which she beUeved
was a token of God's anger. Am I on account of the poor woman's
superstitious belief to reject her truthful evidence ? It is confirmed in all
essential particulars by two other witnesses in 1645, and by a narrative
drawn up by Mr. Keamey, a Tipperary Roman cathoUc (brother to a
Roman catholic dignitary), after the Restoration for the information of
the marquis of Ormond, when the act of settlement was about to be
passed. This narrative I gave from the Carte MSS. in the Bodleian.^
I might say more to the same purport, but I think enough has been said
to show that Mr. Dunlop is not only mistaken in supposing I beUeve all
those earlier depositions to be * almost perfectly trustworthy,' but that he
is equally mistaken in supposing that there is a ' special significance ' (he
evidently means a special spirit of bigotry and calumny) in the words
• Irish Massacres, vol. i. p. 200. * Ibid, p. 136.
* Ibid, p. 294. • Ibid. vol. ii. p. 261.
Digitized by
Google
186 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
' butcheries ' and ' massacres ' when applied by ' English protestants to
Irish Boman catholics.' The judgment of the Irish priest O'Corr and
of the Irish Boman catholic Mr. Kearney in 1641 and 1661 ' specially
signify ' what all honest men, EngUsh or Irish, thought of the * butcheries '
and ' massacres ' perpetrated by too many of the Irish in those terrible
years. The words of another high-minded Boman cathoHc priest, the
Eev. Dr. O'Connor, living in the last century, which I placed on the title-
page of my book, are as emphatic on this point as are those of O'Corr and
Kearney a century before.
As to Mr. Dunlop's second question, I admit that no man should be
condemned on evidence given in his absence and without being allowed
to bring counter-evidence and to employ counsel to defend him. But if
the accused is a rebel out in open arms, I cannot understand how a royal
commission, or a parhamentary commission, is to compel him to appear
before it, and acknowledge its authority. If the imaginary rebel Orange-
men accused before Mr. Dunlop's imaginary nationaUst court or commis-
sion were out in war, and refused to appear before it on any terms, unless
it were with revolvers and swords to kill the judges or commissioners, and
dynamite the courthouse, surely no historian of the future could blame
the poor nationalists. The notion of the clerical commissioners of
1641-9 haling into their courts or chambers all the wild tribes of O'Neils,
O'Hanlons, O'Elaherties, O'Kennedys &c. who were ravaging the plantations
in those years seems to me positively grotesque. One of the unfortunate
commissioners was murdered on his way from Waterford to Dublin by
the FitzGeralds of Dromada, and his box of depositions was seized on, the
rest moved about in peril of their lives. But here again Mr. Dunlop
seems never to have read the most important of the state papers published
for the first time in my work. Had he done so, he would* have seen that
as soon as the civil war ended in 1650 a high court of justice was at
once established, and that these depositions were laid before it, not by any
means to be accepted without careful investigation of their contents.
Whatever may have been the designs or intentions of Dean Jones, how-
ever exaggerated were his narratives, they were not, any more than the
depositions, entirely trusted by the court ; on the contrary, all were sifted
and tested with the greatest care ; the deponents were re-examined in open
court whenever they could be found. Precisely what Mr. Dunlop seems
to say was not done in the case of the accused in those depositions, was
done ; the rebels, priests and laymen, noblemen, gentlemen, and poor men,
were allowed to employ lawyers, Boman catholic Irishmen, to cross-examine
witnesses, speak in their defence, and produce evidence on their behalf.
Lord Muskerry's speech after sentence proves this if proof were wanting :
* I have,' he said, * in the whole of these proceedings met with justice with-
out any leaning to my prejudice.' ^ He was acquitted of comphcity in
murder, but proved guilty of being in arms against the English parlia-
ment. The Bev. Edmund O'Beilly's trial, given at p. 219 of the same
volume, and the case of Colonel MacSwiney at p. 206, show with what
admirable fairness those trials were conducted. The high court also tried
the protestants guilty of the murders of Irish Boman catholics at Island
Magee and other places.^
' Irish Massacres, vol. ii. p. 204. • Ibid. p. 265.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 137
Mr. Dnnlop is of course folly entitled to hold his own opinion that
the depositions from beginning to end are ' worthless/ and that ' Irish
history can neither gain nor lose by their publication.' But considering
that mainly in consequence of the feicts sworn to in them (setting aside the
mere hearsay) three-fourths of the whole soil of Ireland changed hands in
1650-4, many were hanged and many more were banished or transplanted,
and considering that those documents were laid before the high courts of
justice and the transplantation courts, and used (but less honestly) in
the court of claims in 1660, 1 think few impartial and intelligent students
of history will share in that opinion. Mr. Dennehy's notes to the sixth
book of Clarendon's history, edited by Mr. T. Arnold, say that I have
reduced my first estimate of the protestants massacred in those dreadful
years from 27,000 to 25,000. This is not quite correct. What I did say
was that not less than 25,000 could have been murdered, but that no
accurate estimate of the numbers, as Beid had said, was possible. Sir
William Petty, a bom arithmetician, estimated the number at 87*000, but
he seemed to me to make no allowance for the numbers (probably 8,000
or 10,000) who escaped to England between 1641 and 1649.
Mahy Hickbon.
battle of edgehill.
It is much to be desired that some competent military man, acquainted
with the tactics and means of attack and defence which were in fashion
at the time of the Thirty Years' war, would take in hand the campaigns of
our English civil war, and give us accurate and rational accounts of
what was done. Materials, so far as quantity is concerned, would not fail
him ; in quality indeed, owing to the loose style of narrative which was
then thought sufficient, he would often find them unsatisfactory ; but by
carefully comparing and weighing different accounts, he would generally
be able to arrive at something pretty near the truth.
The present writer has been lately attempting to make a study of the
battle of Edgehill. Pending that full and searching inquiry by an expert
which he hopes, in pursuance of what was said above, may before long be
made, he would be glad of the opportunity to discuss in the columns of
the Beview two points : (I) the nature of the available sources of in-
formation respecting the battle ; (IE) the character of the difficulties and
obscurities which the incompleteness or contradictoriness of the evidence
opposes to the framing of a thoroughly consistent narrative.
I. In the following list of sources — which, it is believed, is nearly
complete, though the indication of any others would be welcomed — the
first class. A, contains narratives written by officers engaged in the battle ;
the second class, B, consists of narratives furnished by persons who were
present at the battle, but as non-combatants ; the third, C, includes the
narratives of contemporary historians, not present — Vicars, May, Heath,
and Whitelocke ; the fourth, D, contains several pamphlets written at the
time, which, though not professing to be reports of the battle, give infor-
mation of more or less value in regard to it ; finally, the fifth class, E,
contains the names of a few of the modem historians of the battle,
whose accounts it is proposed briefly to criticise.
Digitized by
Google
138 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
1. A Belation of the Battaile lately fought between Keynton and
Edgehill by His Majestie's Army and that of the Bebells, Printed at
Oxford by Leonard Lichfield, Printer to the University, 1642 (Royalist
Official Account).
2. An Exact and True Belation of the Dangerous and Bloody Fight
between His Majesties Army and the Parliament's Forces^ neere
Kyneton, In a letter to John Pym, signed by six Colonels — Hollis,
Stapleton, Ballard, Balfoor, Meldrum, and Charles Pym. Date on title
page, Oct. 28. (Parliamentary Official Account ; see Rushworth, vol. v.)
8. A most True and Exact Belation of both the Battels fought by
his Excellency and his Forces against the bloody Cavelliers — at Keynton
and Worcester ; all being set down — withmit favour or partiality to either
Army. . . . Written by a worthy Captain, Master Nathaniel Fiennes^
and commanded to be printed : London^ Nov. 9, 1642.
4. Memoirs of Edmund Ludlcno. First published in 1698.
5. Eight Speeches spoken in Guildhall on Thursday night, Oct. 27,
1642. By Lord Wharton, Mr. Strode, the earls of Pembroke and
Holland, and the Lord Say.
6. Memoirs and Beflexions upon the reign and government of K.
Charles I and King Charles II. By Sir Richard Bulstrode. The author
is said to have died at a great age about 1710. The memoirs were first
published by a bookseller, N. Mist, in 1721.
7. Memoirs of the Beign of King Charles I. By Sir Philip Warwick.
First published in 1701.
8. A True Copy of a Letter sent unto the Bight Hon. the Lord Mayor
from a trusty Friend in the Army. . . . Oct. 24, 1642.
9. A full and true Belation of the great battle — near Eineton ; in a —
Letter from Capt. Edw: Kightley . . . to his friend Mr. Charles Latham
. . . Nov. 4, 1642.
B.
10. 11. Two narratives by Lord Clarendon, one in book vi. of the
* History of the Rebellion,' the other originally written for the Life, but
now printed in the appendix to vol. iii. of the History (ed. 1826), and also
in the edition of 1849.
12.-4 w^yre True and an exacter Belation — of the battle of Edgehill.
By T. C, one of the chaplsdns in the army ; Nov. 26, 1642.
18. Letter from a Worthy Divine [his name was Byfield] to the Bight
Hon. the Lord Mayor . . . from Warwiche Castle the ^Uh Oct. 1642 at
2 o'clock in the morning.
C.
14. Heath, James ; his Chronicle, 1676.
15. Ood in the Mount, or England's Parliamentarie Chronicle, from
1641 to this present moneth of October 1648. By John Vicars ; London,
1644.
16. Parliamentary History. By John May, 1647.
17. Bulstrode Whitelocke's Memorials, 1682.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 139
18. History of the Troubles and Memorable Transactions in Scotland
and England from 1624 to 1645 ; i.e. John 8palding*s Diary ; (Bannatyne
Club) 1828.
D.
19. Special Newes from the Army at Wa/rwich since the Fight, . . .
Warwick, Oct. 27, 1642. By J. B.
20. A Copy of a Letter sent from a Gentleman of Quality dwelling in
Banbury to Mr. Jennings of Fan-Church St. in London.
21. A Most True BelaOon of the Present State of his Majesties Army
• . . 8 Dec. 1642. Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed.
(The Report of a Spy.)
22. Memoirs of Denzil Lord Hollis, from 1641 to 1648. First pub-
Ushed 1699.
Lord Nugent, in his * Memorials of Hampden * (ii. 299), seems to men-
tion other sources besides those enumerated, viz. ' Staunton's Collection,'
* Parliamentary Diumals,' * Oxford Intelligencers.* Whether the collection
made some years ago by Mr. Staunton of civil war pamphlets has been
since dispersed, or if not dispersed where it now is, is unknown to the
present writer ; but there is no reason to think that he found anjrthing of
importance which was not already included in that incomparable collec-
tion made at the time by one Thomasson, a London bookseller, which is
now among the ' King's Pamphlets ' in the British Museum. As to the
'Diumals' and ' Litelligencers,' the reference is probably only to the
official reports (1 and 2) named in the foregoing list.
E.
Memorials of John Hampden. By Lord Nugent, 1882.
History of England. By Banke. Vol. ii.
Studies and Illustrations of the Great Bebellion. By J. L. Sanford,
1868.
The Parliamientary GenerdXs. By Major N. L. Walford, 1886.
In value, of course, the authorities enumerated differ widely. The two
official accounts, particularly that by the six colonels, take the first place.
Next must be ranked Fiennes' pamphlet ; for though the writer, who com-
manded a troop in Balfour's regiment, held only a subordinate position, it
is evident that he did his best to understand all that was going on, and
sought information from those who could give it. The narratives of
Vicars and May are chiefly based on Fiennes. Next to Fiennes should
perhaps be placed Ludlow, for his solid veracity cannot be doubted ; his
account was written, however, many years afterwards, and in exile, so that
he could neither consult authorities, nor compare his own recollections with
those of others. Mr. Sanford, who carefully studied the battle, relies much
on Fiennes, and so far he is quite right. But he never learnt from Fiennes
that Sir W. Constable's regiment was on the left of Essex's army (p. 622),
whereas it was on the right ; nor that the * victorious foot ' on the left of
Rupert's horse imitated the example of the latter in plundering at Eineton.
This could not possibly have happened, nor does any credible witness ever
Digitized by
Qoo^^
140 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
appear to have asserted it. After Ludlow's memoirs may be placed the
two narratives by Clarendon, which, however, can be trusted much more
safely when they speak of royalist tactics and movements than when they
deal with those on the other side. To the narrative of Sir Bichard Bul-
strode, to which Lord Nugent attaches great importance, the present
writer would attach extremely Httle. Bulstrode had been for many years
in diplomatic life, and that was not in those days a school of veracity.
Speaking of what had happened some fifty years before, he writes straight
away, gives not a single reference, and lurusts solely to what he calls his
memory. Not a single detail mentioned by him, if unconfirmed by other
testimony, should be accepted without hesitation. Sir Philip Warwick's
account is sUght and poor ; he was a private in the king's regiment of horse-
guards. The pamphlet of Captain Eightley or Keightley is as nearly as
possible worthless ; by his own showing he saw nothing of the main
battle. Spalding's work is named by Banke as if it were a source of prime
importance; nothing could be more futile. Spalding was a Scotch
minister living at Aberdeen who kept a diary ; in this diary he wrote down
what he heard about the battle of Edgehill, supporting his account to some
extent by the testimony of Scottish officers who were present. He says
that after Bupert's return to the field, the parliament's army * wes rowtid
and all defeat ; ' with other absurd statements, such as a diary of the kind
could hardly escape being full of.
Among the remaining documents probably the most important is the
spy's report as to the state of the king's army, dated within six weeks after
the battle. The spy had deserted, partly, he says, because he could get
no pay, partly because the deUcacy of his conscience was offended by see-
ing the king surrounded by swarms of papists.
n. The points, more or less obscure, to which attention will now be
called, are three ; the movements of the king's left wing, the disposition
of the troops forming the centre of the parhament's army, and the posi-
tion of the strongest cavalry regiment on the king's side, that named after
the prince of Wales.
a. Several accounts on the royaUst side make out the success gained
on the left wing to have been as complete as that gained on the right.
The official report states that on both wings the enemy did not stand the
charge above a quarter of an hour, but fled and were hotly pursued, * the
horse of both our wings routing their foot as well as their horse.'
Clarendon in his first narrative tells the same story ; ' the left wing com-
manded by Mr. Wilmot had as good success ; * * the right wing of their
horse was as easily routed and dispersed as their left.' Sir PhiUp War-
wick says that when Bupert's success was perceived, * Wilmot had very
little to do with their right ; ' meaning apparently that he had no difficulty
in routing them. And this view has been generally taken by historians.
But there are other accounts, even on the royalist side, which throw doubt
on the reahty of Wilmot's success. Heath actually says that Balfour ' put
my lord Wilmot to it, and beat him from his ground.' Warwick observes,
after making the remark just cited, that all who had followed Wilmot's
career during the war knew his fondness for peace ; evidently implying
that his charge was rather a gallop over the field than a real attack.
Clarendon in his second account adds several interesting particulars.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 141
Lord Falkland, on account of the slight disagreement that he had had with
Bupert (p. 60), chose that day to charge with Wilmot. He * used to
protest that he saw no enemy that day of the horse that made any resist-
ance.* After the return of the king's cavalry to the field, Lord Falkland
asked Wilmot's leave to attack Balfour, who was marching about un-
opposed ; but Wilmot replied, ' My lord, we have got the day, and let us
live to enjoy the fruit thereof.' Falkland's evidence makes it certain that
if the left wing encountered any enemy at all, that enemy dispersed and
gave way at once.
The witnesses on the other side either deny that Wilmot gained any
success at all, or declare it to have been of the kind just described. There
were three regiments of horse on the parliamentary right, those of
Sir W. Balfour, Sir Philip Stapleton, and Lord Feilding. Fiennes served
in Balfour's, Ludlow in Stapleton's regiment ; but neither of them speaks
of any disaster having happened to his command ; on the contrary, both
ascribe to these regiments a large share in the defeat of the king's centre.
' The whole brunt of the battle,' says Fiennes, * was sustained by two
regiments of horse [Balfour's and Stapleton's] and four or five of foot.'
With regard to Wilmot's force, Fiennes says that it was reported by
prisoners to have consisted of four regiments, but he could never meet with
any one who had seen such a number, ' or could tell what they did, unless
they went directly to Eineton to plunder the carriages, without charging
our army at all.'
Li tiiese words of Fiennes', taken in connexion with Warwick's
sneer, and the account of the matter which Falkland gave to Clarendon,
we seem to see what reaUy happened. If Balfour and Stapleton kept
edging somewhat to the left, in their desire to check the menacing
advance of the king's infantry under Lindsey and his son, while at the
same time Lord Feilding, who had been placed in reserve, maintained his
original position, while Wilmot, in his love for * peace,' bore somewhat to
his left, it is easily conceivable that the latter in his charge came upon
Lord Feilding's regiment,* broke it without difficulty, and pursued it to
Eineton. Li this way the various reports of what happened on the left
wing may be reconciled tolerably well, and without imputing wilful
misstatement to any one.
b. How were the regiments of the parliamentary centre drawn up ?
The six colonels say that ' Sir J. Meldrum's brigade had the van. Col.
Essex was in the middle, and Col. Ballard, with the Lord General's
regiment, his owne, the Lord Brook's, and Col. HoUis' in the rear.'
Now since, in Bupert's great charge, the regiment of Charles £ssex was
routed, and that of HoUis partially broken, it seems hard to understand
how this last could have been ' in the rear ' of the parUament's army.
An Schelon formation therefore suggests itself; and in the plan of the
battle which the writer has prepared for the volume ('Hist, of the
Rebellion,' book vi.) lately issued by the Clarendon Press, this for-
mation has been shown. Major Walford adopts the same explana-
tion; with a difference, however. He considers the centre to have
been * Echeloned on the right brigade,' that of Meldrum, and has drawn
* Fiennes says not a word about this regiment, though eloquent in the praise of
the two others.
Digitized by
Google
142 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
his plan accordingly. K this had been so, the regiments of the lord
general and Oolonel Ballard must have been at a considerable distance
from the right wing. But, if May may be believed, they were in close
proximity to it, so that Essex, at the crisis of the fighting, was able to
head and lead up into action his own troop (in Stapleton*s regiment) and
his regiment of foot successively. Ballard's too is named by Fiennes
and May as one of the regiments on which the brunt of the battle fell, in
forcing the king's centre. All may, it seems to the present writer (though
as a civilian he would only speak on such a matter with entire submission
to those qualified to form a pvofessional opinion), be made intelligible by
supposing the centre to have been Echeloned on the left brigade, not the
right.
c. The third difficulty only arises from this, that two authorities,
both present in the battle, seem to place the prince of Wales's regiment
of horse on opposite sides of the field. Clarendon, in a' cancelled passage
of his original manuscript of the history,* says that Lord Aubigney was
killed in the charge with the left wing of horse, in which he commanded
a troop. This troop, if the spy's report (No. 21) may be beheved, was in
the prince of Wales's regiment. On the other hand. Sir Bichard Bul-
strode, who tells us (p. 75) that he served in another troop in the same
regiment, declares explicitly and circumstantially that the regiment
charged with Bupert, i.e. on the right wing. Bidstrode's evidence, as
has been intimated already, should be accepted cautiously ; still he could
not well have been mistaken on such a matter, and unless we set down
his authority as absolutely worthless, for which there does not seem suffi-
cient reason, we must conclude that either the spy or Clarendon was
mistaken ; that is, either Lord Aubigney had no command in the prince
of Wales' regiment, or Clarendon is wrong in saying that he charged
with the left wing. T. Arnold.
THE SQUIRE PAPERS.
As the owner of the 1627 prayer book containing various entries tending
to confirm some of the statements of Carlyle's correspondent, William
Squire, I wish to offer a few comments on the use made of its contents
by the contributors to the English Historical Review on this subject.
Mr. Aldis Wright carefally examined this prayer book before he pub-
lished the account given at p. 812 of the April number of the Review.
Finding numerous extracts from authentic sources bound up with the
book, he searched chiefly those to confirm the truth of the papers in his
hands. Mr. Walter Rye subsequently looked through the book with me,
chiefly among the scattered entries, for discrepancies or evidence of what
he called forgeries, a term hardly applicable to various extracts obviously
brought together for family purposes and not for public use. This view
was evidently more conspicuous to the one contributor than to the other.
Based on these data, the first account has the advantage of clearness and
simplicity. Compare the statement, at p. 812, that Carlyle's correspon-
dent was ' the eldest of the twelve children of Matthew Squire, merchant,
> Vol. iii. 286, note q.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 143
of Norwich. . . . His father came from Peterborough and was the son of
Lieutenant John Squire, R.N. &c.' with that given in the October number,
p. 744, where Mr. Rye writes : * I find that a William Squire, no doubt
the same man, was one of the children of Matthew Squire, . . . said
... to have been the son of Lieut. John Squire, R.N., of Peterborough,'
and further on : ' I have ascertained that he was actually descended from
a Thomas Squire, bom 1682,' &c. This Thomas Squire, of Peterborough,
was well known ; he is frequently referred to in these memoranda, and
his position as well as that of his other descendants is in no way exag-
gerated or misstated ; indeed, Mr. Rye acknowledged to me that many par-
ticulars which he had previously doubted were, in his own words, ' proved
np to the hilt ' by the pages bound up with this prayer book which he •
now disparages. The inaccuracies into which the compiler of the book
now in my hands has fallen, seem to me less in number and importance
than those presently to be noticed in the rather one-sided view of the
subject given by Mr. Rye, to whose article the following comments are
directed.
Before dwelling on the trivial corrections required, some points with
reference to this prayer book should be stated, and the relative value of
different entries considered. There is proof in the book itself that it was
not rebound before 1849, and some evidence of entries having been made
in it after the binding, both subsequent to the then owner's interviews
with Carlyle. Inside the cover, under an armorial sketch made by W.
Squire about the time of his marriage,^ and pasted on afterwards, is this
note in his later writing : ' I had this Book fresh bound in London &
copied the extracts from the ^mily prayer Books and other memoranda
W™ Squire;* in two modem fly-leaves are miscellaneous copies from
writs of array and burgess rolls in the British Museum, with references to
each ; then come two inserted leaves of letter paper neatly written and
headed: 'copied verbatim from the old prayer Book belonging to My
Grandfather Mr. John Squire Lieut. R.N. of Peterboro'.'
After the original fly-leaf, with the paper mark in red, is an inserted
leaf, another after ' An Almanacke for XL yeeres ' (from 1627 to 1666),
two after the * Proper Lessons,' three before * The Psalmes of David,' and
one before the metrical psalms ; this last has some later notes continued
on to a loose slip of paper. With this exception the other nme inserted
leaves, with nearly seventeen neatly written pages, are filled with family
details directly relating to the writer and with nothing else. At the end
of the book the two fly-leaves and inside cover of the new binding are
disfigured with the later absurdities which Mr. Rye makes sufficiently
ridiculous at pp. 754 and 755 ; these are of small significance, and have
nothing to do with the book, of which they formed no part until after the
rebinding.
The really important evidence is to be found on the original fly-leaves
and in the marginal notes ; these are of two kinds, some admittedly old
and others in the handwriting of the compiler ; some of these seem to
show that he had documents before him to copy from. This part of the
evidence is confused to an astounding degree at p. 753 of the Review.
* It is dated 1840 : his marriage took place on 21 April 1840, at St. Anne's, Soho,'
London.
Digitized by
Google
144 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
The note beginning ' Ann Clements * is on the inner side of the first fly-
leaf; it is written, in a well-marked woman's hand, with dark ink ; below
is a further calculation up to 1847, and below that is written * M" Law-
sell was EUz Squire daughter of Tho" Squire of Yaxley and Peterboro.
Ann Clements married W" Squire of Westgate Peterboro. G. Son of
T. Squire.
It may be added that Mrs. Lawsell was the eldest daughter of the
Thomas Squire before mentioned, aunt and godmother to this William
Squire to whom she left the book; also that Ann Clements was his
second wife, she and two children by his first wife dying before him, and
that he was high sheriff of the joint counties of Huntingdon and Cam-
bridge in 1807, that he was half-brother to Lieutenant John Squire, and
that he died at Peterborough in 1826. Both were Uving at Peterborough
when the Norwich great-nephew and grandson was at school at Oundle,
and had, as he says, access to old books and papers during the hoUdays
he passed with his aged relatives. This, a genuine manuscript, written in
1809, proves the book to have been a family possession before it passed to
Norwich. There ia also an entry in lighter ink on the outer side of this
fly-leaf probably of the eighteenth century, but obscure, and the paper
near it discoloured. The fly-leaf at the end of the book is similarly dis-
coloured around the outer edges ; it has a watermark the same as the
red mark on the first leaf ; it is not written upon.
The much-discussed signature ' Samvel Sqvire Thrapstone * is on the
inner side of the middle fly-leaf before the metrical psalms. The paper
is the same as all the other leaves of the book ; the edges retain some of
the original colour, they have not been trimmed or altered in the last
binding, and the whole is one book much as it used to be. The signature
is in a free round hand in brown ink, showing through at places on to
the outer side of the leaf; under it in cramped capitals, with the V-
shaped U and in pale brown ink, the name occurs again, and may be
an earlier signature. There are two kinds of old writing on the first
leaf and two here, one of them undoubtedly old. The marked difference
between three of them makes it impossible to speak of them together.
Which, then, is the * genuine ' manuscript of p. 758 ? The upper one on
the middle fly-leaf seems to be the one allowed. If so, nine marginal notes,
two in the body of the book and seven in the metrical psalms, must be
allowed to go with it; this is admitted by all who see the book, and
was so apparent to Mr. Bye that he frankly told me he was disposed to
consider the signature itself a forgery.
The point in which he differs from the authorities at the British
Museum is in attributing this writing to the eighteenth instead of the
seventeenth century. I have myself some copies of manuscript medical
notes dated 1627 with certain letters formed like those in question. On
the first leaf of Weber's edition of Beaumont and Fletcher's works (Edin.
1812) are given in /oc-smtZe three passages from * The Faithful Friends : '
the first is in a clear and very legible writing ; the second has the open or
German r, as in these notes, but in a more cramped writing and with an
old form of e ; the last is in the more open letters and flowing style of the
writing in question, and not unlike it except as to the small r, and the
use of V for u or vice versd. On my copy of the EUuty PatriXiicfi
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 145
(John Williams : 1649) opposite the emblem is an English rhymed ex-
planation written in a flowing open character, closely resembling that in
this prayer book ; and, by a curious coincidence, on exactly the same paper
with a similar watermark to that on the fly-leaf of the prayer book ; this
mark is a vase or ewer with three trefoil points radiating from it surmounted
by a flower and crescent ; the crescent is marked on the neck of the ewer
in the coloured impress ; D B or B is seen on the body of the vase in all
of them.
Next comes a most serious error ; three out of the nine entries, viz.
Nos. 4, 5, 6, given as * certainly forgeries j' were specially pointed out to me
at the British Museum as undoubtedly by the same hand as the signature,
and Nos. 4 and 5 probably of the same date — about 1654 ; after 1660 no
entry in this writing recurs. Three or four marginal notes against the
psalms for the day, referring to events at Yaxley from 1665 to 1669, if
written by W. Squire are warranted by the extracts from the parish
register bound up with the book. He has entered the death of his own
wife in 1851 against the day of the month on which she died. This
seems to have been an old custom. If he copied a memorandum of
Thomas Squire in an older hand, he most likely had an example before
him. This is probably the reason why the open r appears in the four or
five entries referring to Cromwellian encounters; a variation in the
spelling, as of * Nasebie ' and * Siege,* also points to some other copy
than the entries in the metrical psalms ; moreover, those entries against
the psalms for the day are closely written in dark ink, so as to look well
on the page, and with no general resemblance to the free and open for-
mation of the old letters, except as to the one evidently considered as
characteristic, the object obviously being a mere record and not a forgery.
If this charge is to be sustained it must embrace two or three different
kinds of attempts, and, as it now stands, implies a pre-existent forger
of the name, drca 1780. At p. 764 the difference as to 'browner
ink ' can hardly apply ; if it means a light brown ink this might fsdrly
serve to mark the oldest writing, but not that of the note of 1809. A
line further on, the use of the old r is not correctly stated by Mr. Eye ;
perhaps the entry adduced from below Psalm Ixxxiii. is confused with
an * Oliuer ' opposite Psalm Ixxxix. There are * genuine ' old marks and
brackets in two places opposite Psalm Ixxxiii. where the open r is used ;
one of them is half concealed in the rebinding ; it seems to me the late
owner of the book was not fully aware of the value of these marginal
marks to the metrical psalms.
All that follows in Mr. Bye's contribution, as of least importance
and of the small significance stated at the outset, will be noticed last,
after the minor points open to controversy have been mentioned in the
order of their occurrence. First, at p. 744, the date of birth is given as
that of .baptism : a new-bom in&nt would not be taken in November to
the parish church. At p. 745, a lad of sixteen or under seventeen
years of age is made responsible for a hoax in which several others, one
certamly older than himself, are concerned. Mr. Thunder was not hia
brother-in-law imtil some years after the occurrence referred to — the
sister he married was not ten years old in August 1826. In a footnote
it is asserted— and this to disprove the accuracy of W. Squire as to * the
VOL. II. — NO. v. L
Digitized by
Google
146 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
shadow of a cathedral city * — that his &mily had not been in Peterborough
one hundred years. This assertion is inaccurate ; his great-grand&ther,
second son of Thomas, was bom there in 1710; his grandfather died
there in 1884. If Oundle, Islip, Yaxley, and Woodstone are to be called
in the shadow of that city, the first statement is fairly correct. One
Eelham Bquire was living at Oundle before 1641. Thomas, of Peter-
borough, died at Islip, and was buried at Yaxley ; my own elder brother
was bom at Woodstone, nearer to Peterborough than is Yaxley. At
p. 746, the date at which an * intelligent interest ' was shown by W. Squire
in Cromwellian relics is very nearly that at which the prayer book and
other old papers came into his possession. The stirrups are acknowledged,
in a footnote, to be of the period supposed. Further on it is considered
probable that a young man of one-and- twenty described by ' his friends *
(?) on the previous page as associating with the shadiest sporting cha-
racters should take home to read from the Norwich library such works
as those of Rushworth, Whitelocke, Eapin, Bumet, Guizot, and Lingard.
The unusual christian names, p. 747, might have been increased from
those of the transcriber's own family name. Besides Eelham of the
Oundle register, ' William sonne of Eelham baptised 81. Oct. 1641,'
there are the two Scipios, one of them registered at St. Clement Danes,
1680 ; Adam of Balliol, 1667 ; Theophilus and Gabriel, 1660 ; Rowland
and Gains, Eaton Socon, Beds, 1624-1661 ; Cornelius and Marmion,
St. Neot's, 1710 and 1764.
Again, W. Squire has copied family facts carefully and deliberately ;
the transcript of the disputed letters might much of it have been ready
before he wrote to Carlyle or knew precisely what use to make of it (see
first letter, at p. 812) ; it was on larger paper than the 8 in. x 6 in. on
which the family details were written for incorporation with the prayer
book. We see, by what of original manuscript is left, that the handwriting
he copied from was remarkably clear and bold ; not at all like the ' crabbed
writing ' (p. 747) of the earher part of the seventeenth century.
At p. 748 the search for any purchase in the four counties named
failed to discover that of the manor of Eaton Socon in 1624 by Rowland
Squire, and of another in 1640 as stated in Lysons's * Magna Britannia,
1818, County Histories,' vol. i. part 1 ; Gains Squire ^ enforced the induc-
tion of his nominee to the vicarage of Eaton Socon, 1686, by a qtuzre
impedit against the bishop. Gains witnessed a deed in the court rolls
of the united manors of Eynesbury (? and St. Neot's), 8 Jan. 1679-80 ;
he died in 1691.
A negative is difficult of proof. It would be hard to prove where
Cromwell was not at any particular time within certain limits of space ;
at p. 749 it appears that Cromwell was within eight miles of where the
letter is dated on that day. The sister Agnes mentioned at p. 760 was
the sixth in the family, and yormger than the one already referred to.
* As a forther proof that he was not on the high church side, Gains Sqnire was
named in 1687 as J.P. for the connty of Bedford when James II suspended the penal
laws against nonconformists — both papists and dissenters. He seems to have inclined
to the latter party, and was one of those * presumably not opposed to the Declaration
of Indulgence.'— cToTin Bunyan, his hifty Times, aihd Work (p. 362). By John
Brown, B.A, (London, 1885.)
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 147
At p. 751 the fact, not proclaimed by, need not have been known to, the
writer; his wife's mother became Lady Playters after her daughter's
birth, but the property descended to the daughter's children by her first
marriage.* ,
To an objection which follows we may remark that Admiral Squire
and Matthew Squire of Norwich were second cousins. The word * an-
cestor' was used loosely; the admiral was unmarried. At p. 752 a
similarly loose use of 'ancestors' is made. Samuel is shown in the
prayer-book not to have been the ancestor of any of the branch the owner
took such interest in, and was so intimately acquainted with. All his
nearer and more prosperous relatives had settled in Norfolk and Suffolk ;
some had helped him in his difficulties. On the same page it is said ' he
was educated to a great extent abroad ; ' this is doubtful, while his educa-
tion at Oundle is certain.
Lastly, we return to the particulars, somewhat irrelevant, dealt with
on p. 755. The William Squire of London, to whom a grant of arms is
established, had a younger brother Thomas, both sons of a William
Squire. His eldest son was named Thomas ; it might be from either of
these or from a younger son, John, that the Yaxley people claim. The
rector of Great Massingham, Norfolk (1780), was, I suppose, a descendant
of Thomas of BEinxford ; this rector's son John became rector of Laven-
ham, Suffolk, up to 1760 ; he was the father of Dr. John Squire, of Ely
Place, London, one of the founders of the society for the relief of the
widows and orphans of medical men ; his son. Lieutenant-colonel John
Squire, of the Boyal Engineers, lost his life in Spain during the Peninsular
war. Thomas's elder brother William had four sons and six daughters : the
eldest of these sons was Thomas ; the second, Rowland, who settled, 1684,
in Bedfordshire close to St. Neot's ; the third, John ; the fourth, George.
They trace through the first William four generations back to Thomas
Squire of Heanton-on-Chardon, Devon.*
A significant proof may here be given from Mr. Rye's article of how
a sagacious critic can shut his eyes to evidence which makes against his
own position. On p. 754 he quotes the testimony of experts that the
inscriptions on the brasses are * clumsy forgeries,' and that *a very
superficial knowledge of such inscriptions ought to have enabled William
Squire to have produced better examples.' On p. 756 he claims to have
given a coup de grdce to the inscription by showing that it is a * verbatim
transcript, dates and all,' of a genuine brass. Surely this discovery is a
serious blow to the previous testimony of the experts. The clumsy
forgery is after all a verbatim transcript of a genuine brass of the same
date. Its * knowledge of ancient forms ' is by no means * superficial.'
Does not this tend to show that experts are by no means infallible ?. Does
it not weaken Mr. Rye's testimony in other points where he has relied on
internal evidence ?
In conclusion, it must be admitted that many of the later statements
of Carlyle's correspondent are confused, and, where he trusts to memory
* See English Histobical Review, i. 312.
* Harleian Society's Publications, vol. xix., and Harl. MS. 1091. 55, extracted by
John Terriss Squire, who refers me to Drake's Eboracum, pp. 342, 570, for Squires
who were armigeri before 1640 elsewhere and besides those mentioned at p. 755.
L 2
Digitized by
Google
148 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
or impressions, untrustworthy. Yet all that he told Carlyle about his
fiamily is confirmed by the book in my possession, and eAl the entries
referring thereto are strictly truthful. Why should he insert notes of
false papers amidst so many facts of private interest only and for personal
use ? Admit that he knew something of coins, and dabbled in archaeology,
also his inclination to a hoax in his youth, he had not the knowledge or
literary skill then or later to forge these letters attributed to Cromwell ;
and, as a practical joke, two or three letters would have answered that
purpose as well as thirty-five. His education was imperfect, his character
and conduct far from irreproachable ; but the evidence tends to show
that he could not have forged these letters had he wished. Carlyle's
estimate of him was, generally, a correct one, and particularly in the
opinion that ' all manner of truth refracted itself in getting into him,
and in getting out of him.* William Squibe.
UNPUBLISHED LETTERS OP OLIVER CROMWELL.
Six of the following letters are from the Egerton MSB. in the British
Museum (No. 2620). To these three from newspapers and pamphlets of
the period have been added in order to supplement certain of the letters
printed by Carlyle, and for convenience of reference. C. H. Firth.
Mercuriics Aulictcs for 80 April 1645 describes Cromwell's attempt to
storm Farringdon on the morning of 80 April, and states that Cromwell
lost 200 killed, a captain, an ensign, and 8 soldiers prisoners, and had a
large number of wounded. Under 1 May it prints the following letter,
which is in striking contrast to the two printed by Carlyle (letters xxvi.
xxvii.)
' Next morning Master Cromwell sent this letter of thankes to Lieu-
tenant Colonell Burgess.
Sir, — There shall be no interruption of your viewing and gathering
together the dead bodies, and I doe acknowledge it as a fiEivour, your
willingnesse to let me dispose of them. Captaine Cannon is but a
Captaine, his Mayor is Smith so farre as I know, but he is a stranger to
me, I am confident he is but a Captaine, Master Elmes but an Ancient,
I thanke you for your civility to them, you may credit me in this, I rest
Your servant
April 30. Oliver Cromwell
If you accept of equall exchange I shall performe my part.'
n
Letter on behalf of John Lilbume.
' My Lord, — You heere in what a flame theise westeme partes are,
I cannot but minde your Excellency that the enimie are designing to
surprise many places, and wee shall still play the aftergame. I thinke it
of absolute necessitye that some men bee put into Bristol!, especially since
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 149
Chepstow is taken, with which (as I heered) they hould correspondency.
Sir (?), Bristol must have a fixed guarison of foote. I beseech you re-
commend itt to the Parliament that it may be donn, theere cannot bee
lesse then 600 men for itt. Leit-Col Rolphe would bee a fitt man hee is
able to give helpe in the business by his Father Skippon his interest and
it would bee well taken if your LordP would recommend him, there is
necessitye of speede in my opinion, the cittye desire it. I take leave and
rest
Your ex. most humble
May 9th, 1648. Servant 0 Cromwell
My Lord Lieut Col Blaokmore is w^ mee, hee is a godly man and a
good souldier I beg a commission to make him an Adjutant Gen* to the
Army. Hee is very able as most [?] ever were in this army.*
(Egerton MSS. 2620.)
This letter is obviously directed to Lord Fairfax. Its place is
between letters Iviii. and lix. in Carlyle's. It was written by Cromwell
on the march to Chepstow, which he reached two days later.
m
* Sib, — Wee have read your Declaration heere and see in itt nothinge
but what is honest and becominge Christians and honest men to say and
offer, its good to looke up to God who alonne is able to sway hartes to
agree to the good and just thinges contained therein. I verilye beUeve
the honest partye in Scotland will be satisfied in the justnesse thereof;
however it wilbe good that Will Rowe bee hastened with instructions
thitlier. I beseech you command him (if it seems good to your excell*
j'udgment) to goe away with all speede, what is tymely donn herein may
prevent misunderstandings in them. I hope to waite speedily upon yon,
att least to begin my journey upon Tuseday. Your owne regiment wilbe
cominge up. Soe will Okey, mine Harrison's and some others the two
garrisons have men enow (if provided for) to doe that worke. Lambert
will looke to them I rest my Lord, your excellency's most humble and
faythfull servant,
0 Cromwell
Nov. , 1648.' (Egerton MSS.)
This letter — also to Fairfax — was apparently written from Pontefract
near the end of November, for it refers to the Army Remonstrance and
to Cromwell's approaching intention of starting for headquarters.
IV
*Mr. Bushworth, — I desire you to order as from the Gen^ Col
Tomlinson's men now in Hantshire to remove more westward and not
to exact monies before they goe. It beinge certified that that Countye
hath payed all theire monies. I desire you to give the bearer the orders
I rest
Your loving friend
0 Cromwell
April 28th, 1649.* (Egerton MSS.)
Digitized by
Google
150 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
This letter, from the Moderate^ No. 64, July 17-24, 1649, is sufficiently
explained by the extract from that newspaper which precedes it.
*Our Commander in chief, fearing scarcity of Provisions for the
Souldiers, when they are come to the several Ports for Transportation,
hath therefore directed his Letters to the Chief Justices of those several
Counties; to desire. That they will speedily cause Proclamation to be
made, that there may be Markets kept in the several Villages, near Milford
Haven ; which because short, and of publike concernment for those parts,
take a true copy thereof at large.
Gentlembn, — Forasmuch as we are to march by you, to ship for
Ireland, and the Forces ingaged will stand in need of Provisions for their
shipping; and several Regiments having orders from me, to march to
the Port of Milford Haven, and thereabouts ; in order thereunto, these
are to desire. That you will speedily cause Proclamation to be made, or
publike notice given in the several Market Towns, within your Counties,
or Association, That a free Market will be kept in the several Villages,
lying neer Milford Haven, upon Tuesday the 81. of July instant ; and to
be kept daily, till all the Forces be shipped, for all sorts of Provisions,
both for Horse, and men ; And that all people, that bring such Provisions,
shall have ready money for whatsoever we buy. This I thought fit to
signifie, that if possible there may be a sufficiency of Provisions, both for
Accommodation of the Forces, and ease of the places adjacent to the
Haven where so many Forces are to be drawn together.
Your affectionate Friend,
and Servant •
Bristol, July 21, 1649. OlIVEB CroMWEL.
For the Jastioes of Peace of the County of .*
VI
To Lord Fairfax.
* May it please youb Excellencye, — I could not satisfie myselfe to
omitt this oportunitye, it rejoyceth mee to heere of the prosperity e of your
affaires wherein the good of all honest men is soe much concerned, and
indeed my Lord such intemperate spirits beinge suffered to breake forth
and shew their venome, & yett from time to time to be suppressed; shewes
the same good God watcheth over you which hath gone [?] with you all
alonge hitherto and wil be with you to the end, I am verilye persuaded
the discovery of theise men's spirits makes them so manifest that I hope at
least the godly shall not be deceaved by them, w<^ wil be cause of much
rejoycinge. Truely my noble Lord my prayers are for you, and I trust shal
bee that God will still continew his presence and the light of his counte-
nance with you to the end. The Lord shewes us great mercy heere,
indeed Hee, hee only gave this strong towne of Wexford into our
hands, the particulars I forbear because I have spent some paynes in
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 161
writing them to the Parl'^^ I have uoe more att present, but the tender
of the integritye and affection of
My Lord
Your exceUencye's most
Ootob 15 1649 humble servant
Wexford 0 Cbomwell
Sm, — If by your favor or interest S** John Barlacye may obteyne
any incora^ement for his forepast services for the State, either firom
Piur^^ or the Councell of State in England, and that, any directions may
bee given to mee therein [?] I shalbe glad to be serviceable to him in
executinge their commandes, and this I can assure your Excellencye that
the reducing of his reg'^^ was not in the least a reflection upon him but to
save the state a charge *
(Egerton MSS.)
This letter refers to the late rising of the Levellers at Oxford in Sep-
tember 1649. Sir John Borlase, son of the lord justice of the same name,
is the person mentioned in the postscript. The elder Sir John Borlase
died in 1649.
vn
For the right honoturable WilUam Lenthal, Esq.t Speaker of the Parlia-
ment of the Commonwealth of England.
* Sib, — I beg your pardon for that I writ by Paine the messenger that
there were taken prisoners of the evening in Fife five or six hundred
whereas upon fuller information I find that there were taken prisoners
between fifteen and sixteen hundred
I remain
Sur
Your most humble servant
Lithgow 22 July 166L' 0 GboMWELL
(From * Several Proceedings in Parliament,* 24-81 July 1651.)
This letter corrects the one given by Carlyle as No. clxxv. The
same paper (p. 1854) gives a better text of clxxiv. than the one copied
by Carlyle from Kimber's * Life of CromweU.*
vni
To Colonel Robert Lilbtime.
* Sib, — Having some occasion to speake with some godly ministers and
Christians to accomodate the interest and to beget a good understanding
between the people of God of different judgements in this nation ; and
remembering well you did once hint to me some piuTpose of Mr. Patrick
Gilasbie's thoughte to come up hither in order ; (as I suppose) to some
what relating to the people of God in Scotland ; I have thought fit to
require the comming up of Mr. John Levingston, Mr. Patrick Gilasby, and
Mr. John Meinzeis, to w<^** purpose I have here inclosed sent to each of
them a L*^ appointing them the time of their appearance heere ; I desire
Digitized by
Google
152 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Jan.
you to speed their L"* to them, especially to Mr. John Meinzies who is soe
far remote at Aberdene, I desire you to let them have xx£ a peice to defray
the charges of their journey ; lett it be out of the Treasury in Scotland,
not doubting of yo*" care and dilligence herein, I rest
Cockpitt 7th of Yo*" loving ffreind
March 1653 OLIVER P.
I desire you to continue yo*^ care to looke out after Middleton upon the
Coast for I heare he was driven back by foule weather.
I desire you not to make too publique the ends of sending for these
Gentlemen.
For the honble Coll Lilbome Commander in chiefe of the forces in Scotland.'
(Egerton MSS.)
X
Blchard Cromwell to General Monk,
* My Lord, — Although I cannot suppose you altogether unacquainted
with my present condition, nor unsensible of what my friends have repre-
sented to you concerning it. Yet being urged by my present exigencies
and necessitated for some time of late to retire into hiding places to avoid
arrests for debts contracted upon the public account; I have been en-
couraged from the persuasion I have of your affection to me, and the
opportunitie you now have to show me kindness to adde this request to
the former solicitations of my friends, that when the Parliament shall bee
met you would make use of your interest on my behalfe that I bee not
left Uable to debts, which I am confident neither God nor conscience can
.... mine. I cannot but promise myself that when it shall be season-
able, I shall not want a &ithful friend in you to take effectual care of my
concernments ; having this persuasion of you, that as I cannot but thinke
myself unworthy of great things, so you will not thinke mee worthy of
utter mine.
My Lord, I am
your affectionate
friend to serve you,
April 18, 1660.' R. CrOMWELL.
An earlier letter of Fleetwood to Monk, 14 Jan. 16^, asks his aid * on
behalf of that distressed family of his late Highness whose condition I
think is as sad as any poore feunilie in England, the debts contracted during
the government falling upon my Lord Richard Cromwell.' — Egerton
MSS. 2618.
Digitized by
Google
1887 158
Reviews of Books
De Lycurgo in facultate litterwrum Parisiensi ad doctoris gradum pro-
motus disseruit H. Bazin. (Paoris : Ernest Leroux, 1885.)
It is almost superfluous to say that this dissertation adds nothing to our
knowledge of the history of Lycurgus. The veil in which that legislator
is shrouded will probahly never be lifted. Bazin's treatise is an attempt
to reconcile the conflicting accounts which we possess as to Lycurgus'
date and legislation ; but his arguments rest on little more than conjec-
ture, and some of his conjectures are inconsistent.
A writer on Lycurgus is confronted on the very threshold of his in-
vestigation with the question, * Did Lycurgus ever exist ? * Two modem
students of history, Gilbert * and Gelzer,^ writing about the same time,
have each independently and on various grounds denied his personahty.
We are told by Strabo' that Hellanicus entirely ignored Lycurgus
(\victwpytw ^Ir|^aftov fiefivfjtTBai) and attributed the Spartan constitution to
Eurysthenes and Procles ; and we can hardly believe that Hellanicus
could have suppressed so great a name either wilfully or from ignorance.
The extraordinary variety of dates assigned to his life and legislation —
they range from 1100 to 620 — and the apparently symbolical meaning of
many names connected with him in the legends, have been cited as
additional reasons for doubting his existence. It cannot be said that
Bazin has met these difficulties. The sole argument which he adduces is
that the singularity of the Spartan institutions can only be explained on
the supposition that they were founded by one man. But although this
may be used eksprimd facie evidence, it will hardly outweigh the silence
of Hellanicus ; and Busolt ^ has recently explained the peculiar character
of the Spartan and Cretan institutions as due at least in some degree to
the instinct of self-preservation engendered in conquerors of Dorian race
when they had to maintain themselves against hostile masses of subject
peoples.
Assuming, however, that Lycurgus did exist, we are at once met by
chronological difficulties. Not to mention later and less important
authorities, Herodotus (i. 65) and Xenophon (Eep. Laced. 10. 8) assign
as his date the period just after the Dorian invasion, i.e. (presumably) circ.
1100 B.C. Thucydides (though without naming Lycurgus) seems to place
* Studien eur altspartanischen Geschichtet 1872.
* In the RJieinisches Museumy vol. xxviii. p. 1 foil. 1873.
* viii. 366. ^ Oriechische Geschichte^ p. 191.
Digitized by
Google
154 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Jan.
him shortly before 800 B.C. ; while Aristotle, on the strength of the quoit
of Iphitus, on which the name Avicovpyo^; was inscribed, assigns him
to the year 884 or 776, according as Iphitus is regarded as having
originally fomided or as having only reorganised the Olympic festival.
Bazin endeavours to reconcile Herodotus and Thucydides by placing the
Dorian immigration as late as the tenth century ; he claims to have thus
swept away at a stroke two of the darkest centuries of Greek history.
No doubt (as Grote remarks) the lists of Spartan kings previously to the
first Olympiad are to a great extent fictitious, and Bazin expresses him-
self to the same effect ; but it is somewhat inconsistent, after rejecting
these lists as untrustworthy, to proceed to build on them a new calculation
as to the date of the Dorian invasion. This Bazin does, when he assigns
twenty-three years — the average duration of the reigns of nine historical
kings of Sparta — to each king in the Spartan lists from Alcamenes back to
Eurysthenes ; the result is that the Dorian invasion happened in the
tenth century. It is not accurate to say, as Bazin does, that Grote
entertained this view ; Grote merely declares himself^ unable to separate
what is historical from what is not in the Spartan lists, and in another
chapter (part i. c. 18) he expressly says that a long interval must have
elapsed between the Dorian imimigration and the dawn of history, since
' the obscure and barren centuries which immediately precede the first
recorded Olympiad form the natural separation between the legendary
return of the Herakleids and the historical wars of Sparta against
Messene.' The united voice of ancient tradition assigns the Dorian
immigration to the twelfth or beginning of the eleventh century ; and
some such early date is also fixed by the fact that the Homeric poems
(whose development cannot be placed later than the ninth century®)
undoubtedly imply that the various races have already occupied their
historical sites. And if Busolt is right in assigning, as he has recently
done, the fortifications of Mycenee to Dorian chiefs of tlie eleventh
century, we are bound to place the Dorian invasion in the twelfth and
Lycurgus (if we follow Herodotus and Xenophon) not later than the
eleventh century.
On the whole we must allow that the existence of Lycurgus has not
yet been proved ; there is something to be said in favour of viewing him
as a form of Apollo. We may believe this without accepting Gilbert's
conclusion that the Lycurgus-myth did not grow up before the seventh
century, when Terpander's reforms were ascribed to Lycurgus as one of
the forms of Apollo. We know that the Dorians worshipped Apollo from
the earliest times {v. Busolt, p. 472). Gilbert argues that Avicoipyi^ :
AvKtiogi'/EKaepyoc i^Ek-aroCi and Gelzer interprets the name as *the
light-bringer ; ' the last writer also quotes many authorities to show that
in very early times Lycurgus was worshipped as a god at Sparta and had a
temple {ttfwi-, rauQ — not merely a hp^op) and priests. If some traces
could be found of the cult of 'AwakXitty AvKocpyuv either in Sparta or in
other Dorian states, Gilbert's argument would be greatly strengthened ;
but even as it is, the verses ^ in which the Pythian prophetess saluted
* Hist, of Greece, part ii. o. 4.
* Busolt, p. 86, and Professor Percy Gardner's article in MacmUlan's Maganne
for September 1886. ' Hdt. i. 65.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 155
Lycurgus as he entered her shrine sum up not inaptly the present state
of the controversy :
di^«» if tr€ Bthv fAatn-tvaofjLat fj AvBp^nov,
dXX' rrc Koi naKkov O^ov tKnofuUf £ Avicdofyyf,
J. Adam.
The Fall of Constantitiople, being the Story of the Fourth Crusade.
By Edwin Pears, LL.B. (London : Longmans & Co. 1885.)
Quatri^me Croisade ; la Diversion sur Zara et Constantinople. Par J.
Tessier. (Paris : Ernest Leroux. 1885.)
The Latin conquest of Constantinople does not lie on one of the unex-
plored hypaths of history, but it so happened that no monograph dealing
with it existed in English, and Mr. Pears has done well in attempting to
fill the gap. His volume appears at the same time as M. Tessier's pam-
phlet, which covers a small portion of the same ground, being devoted to
the discussion of the causes which turned aside the crusaders of 1204
from their original course towards Egypt and Syria into an attack on
Constantinople. The two works may therefore be taken into considera-
tion at the same time.
The main thesis of Mr. Pears' book is that the irruption of the
Ottoman Turks into Eastern Europe was entirely due to the crushing
blow inflicted on the Byzantine empire by the fourth crusade, all other
causes which led up to that irruption being of very secondary importance.
Further, he subjoins a statement — in which M. Tessier agrees with him —
that the attack on Constantinople was not due to any sudden inspiration
of the moment, but had been long before projected by the Venetians, and
probably also by Boniface of Montferrat.
Both these points are worth discussion, and we must confess that on
each of them our own opinion would lead us to an opposite conclusion to
that at which Mr. Pears has arrived.
The view which maintains that the Byzantine empire, if it weathered
the storm of 1204, would have been unassailable by the Turk, is eminently
controvertible. It rests, in Mr. Pears* case, on the idea that the power
wielded by Alexius Angelus was practically the same as that which
Basil 11 had possessed some two centuries before. Although he does not
state this notion in so many words, it is plainly visible in his account of
Constantinople, whose commerce, wealth, and resources he describes as
they existed in a.d. 1000, not in a.d. 1200. In fact, the reaction against
Gibbon's views on the eastern empire — a reaction started by Finlay and
popularised by Professor Freeman's essays — has gone so far with the
present generation of historians, that there is some danger of our growing
into a behef that the Byzantines, fax from being invariably weak and
incapable, were always strong and energetic. The one view is as false as
the other. The empire of the Angeh was not powerless merely because
its rulers were cowardly and apathetic. It was in itself a mere hollow
shell, whose inner strength had been already eaten out. Looking at it
from the miUtary point of view, we should say that the Byzantine empire
was never its old self after the fatal battle of Manzikert (1071 a.d.)
That defeat shattered not only a single army, but the whole Byzantine
Digitized by
Google
156 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Jan.
military system. As its immediate result, the Seljuk Turks permanently
overran the whole of that central plateau of Asia Minor from which the
emperors had previously drawn their trustiest native troops — those * Ana-
tolic,' *Armeniac,' or 'Isaurian* bands which had always formed the
backbone of the army of the east. The loss of this great recruiting ground
was fatal. The armies of Alexius Comnenus were extemporised make-
shifts, in which the foreign mercenary element was twice as numerous as
it had been in that of Romanus Diogenes. They would never have
succeeded in keeping back the Seljuk from Europe had it not been for the
timely diversion of the first crusade. That expedition saved Constanti-
nople for the moment ; but since it did not drive the Turk out of Asia
Minor, it failed to restore the Byzantine empire to its ancient strength.
The armies of John and Manuel Comnenus grew more and more merce-
nary and anti-national, largely in consequence of the Frankophil pro-
pensities of the latter prince. When, therefore, the incapable Angeli came
to the throne, and failed even to pay their troops, the army of the east
sank into an undisciplined rabble of discontented aliens.
But the Constantinople of a.d. 1200 was a shadow of what it had once
been in a commercial as well as a military sense. It had been the fatal poUcy
of the Comneni to buy the help of the navies of the ItaHan republics by
means of imwise commercial treaties, in which, with a queer parody of
free trade, the foreigner was granted privileges denied to the bom subjects
of the empire. When once the Venetians and Genoese were permitted
to import and export merchandise from the ports of 'Romania* under
duties considerably less than were exacted from the Greek trader, the
commerce of Constantinople could not but decay. Moreover the posses-
sion of the Holy Land by the Franks placed the ItaHans in a direct
commercial contact with the east which they had never before enjoyed.
Instead of seeking Syrian or Egyptian goods on the quays of the Golden
Horn, they now drew them from the fountain-head. Thus a large volume
of trade which had previously passed through the bazaars of Constanti-
nople, now centred itself at Acre and Alexandria. Decreased commerce
meant decreased revenue, and the emperors were deprived of that wealth
which had been the guarantee of strength to the Byzantine realm.
Alike in money and in men, therefore, the empire of the AngeH was
incomparably weaker than that of the BasiHan dynasty. This fact pre-
vents us from subscribing to Mr. Pears* judgment on the meaning of the
Latin conquest. That disaster was the outward token of the weakness of
the eastern empire, not the inner cause of it. After twenty years more
of the rule of those * earthy angels,'' Isaac and Alexius, other hands might
well have wrought the same ruin which Dandolo and Boniface and
Baldwin brought on Constantinople. Perchance John the Bulgarian
might have been the chosen agent — a conjunction which would have saved
Europe many a subsequent crisis, — perchance a third expedition of the
Normans of Sicily might ere long have carried out the enterprise which
Robert and William had almost succeeded in completing ; — perhaps the
sultan of Iconium might have renewed the deeds of his ancestors. But
failing the appearance of some grand personahty, a hero and organiser
such as Leo the Isaurian had once been, the empire was doomed at no
distant date to extinction. It was visibly crumbling to pieces from within
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 157
under the Angeli, a phenomenon which, in all its previous history, it
had never exhibited. It had indeed lost many provinces at earHer
dates to the invader from without. But at no period had a people incor-
porated for nearly two centuries in the empire car\ed out a fresh kingdom in
its midst, as the Bulgarians had just done. Nor had pretenders ever before
cut off old provinces and made themselves independent sovereigns therein,
as Isaac Comnenus had so successfully done in Cyprus. These were fatal
signs of decay. In fact, the fatal administrative system of the Comneni
had so synchronised with the mihtary and commercial exhaustion of the
empire, that all recuperative energy was gone. To find in the jeremiads
of the chroniclers who wrote under the Angeli a promise of national
resurrection, and to hold with Mr. Pears that * there is reasonable hope
that had the Latin invasion fared otherwise than it did, there would have
been a national movement towards reform or revolution. This movement,
as in the west, would probably have been felt first in religion, and the
eastern church might again have taken the lead in shaping the creed of
Europe * — is a hopelessly visionary view of twelfth-century affairs in Con-
stantinople.
Differing from Mr. Pears on his main thesis, we are yet bound to do
him justice by pointing out the many merits of his work. It has not been
put together at second hand, but shows a wide knowledge of the original
authorities of the period, both eastern and western. Its style is agreeable
and even vigorous. Moreover a residence of some years in Constantinople
has enabled the author to describe scenes and locaUties with a freedom
and picturesque thoroughness which only the eye-witness can possess.
The elaborate sketch which he gives of the court, quays, and streets of
the great city in the prime of its wealth is a piece of work of which any
writer might be proud.
We have already stated that the second controversy in which Mr. Pears
is involved — and here M. Tessier appears to plead on the same side — deals
with the reasons which directed the fourth crusade against Constantinople
rather than Alexandria. Both our authors hold that the diversion of the
pilgrims resulted from a long-matured scheme of the Veuetians, the
emperor, and Boniface of Montferrat, which had been settled long before
the Flemish or French crusaders had left their homes. In their view the
delay of the expedition at Venice and its first turning aside against Zara
were carefully planned to blunt the first zeal and energy of the pilgrims,
and to prepare them for a more flagrant violation of their vows. The
objects at which the plotters aimed were, we are told, in the case of Philip
of Suabia, the restoration of his relative, Isaac Angelus ; in that of the
marquis Boniface, a satisfaction of some imaginary claims on Thessalonioa,
to which he pretended in right of his deceased brother ; and in that of the
Venetians, commercial advantages in Egypt. On the strength of declama-
tory passages in Syro-Frankish chroniclers, smartiag under the disappoint-
ment caused by the failure of the crusade to accomplish its original object,
we are invited to believe that Sultan Malek-Adel had sent an embassy to
Venice to bribe its doge to divert the expedition from Egypt. Dandolo is
supposed to have promised, in return for exclusive privileges for Venetian
commerce at Alexandria, that the pilgrims should never reach their goal ;
and we are invited to see, in the subsequent history of the crusade, a tissue
Digitized by
Google
158 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Jan.
of Machiavellian intrigues by which the doge discharged his obligation. All
this is unreal. Heyd has sufficiently disproved the Egyptian embassy, which
is a sheer impossibility, a figment of the angry chroniclers of the kingdom
of Jerusalem. There is no reason to doubt that Philip of Suabia was ready
enough to take advantage of the opportunity of restoring his father-in-law
to the throne of Constantinople which was afforded by the detention of
a formidable and discontented army at Venice and Zara. But we cannot
believe in the far-sighted views attributed to him, by which he is made to
calculate so subtly on contingencies which might well have never occurred.
Similarly with Boniface of Montferrat, we should consider that it was a
case of opportunities taken rather than opportunities manufactured. The
whole course of events, indeed, was one on which no man could have
calculated, and we believe that even up to the moment of the deaths of
Isaac and the younger Alexius the crusaders had no deeper scheme in
hand than that of improving their chances. The Venetians were set
mainly on obtaining a grant of ruinous commercial privileges ; Boniface
intrigued for an appanage, and the main body of the crusaders hoped to
carry away with them every penny which they could wring out of the
gratitude or fear of the restored emperors.
We should be sorry to deter any reader from consulting either of these
works by expressing our disagreement with their conclusions. Both are
well-written interesting productions, and no one can do wrong in consult-
ing them to determine for himself the force of their arguments.
C. Oman.
Calendar of Documents relating to Ireland, preserved in her Majesty's
PubHc Record Office, London, 1302-1807. Edited by the late H. S.
SwEETMAN, B.A., and continued by G. F. Handcock. (London :
Longmans, 1886.)
The publication of this volume, the fifth of its series, completes the
calendar of the Irish state papers preserved in the London Record Office
to the death of Edward I. They will enable the historian to write the
history of the English colony in Lreland with a fullness and accuracy of
detail hitherto impossible. Though many of the documents summarised
are necessarily of a formal character, a considerable proportion of them
possess great historical interest and throw constant light on the English
administration of Ireland at a time scantily treated of in the ordinary
English histories. Edward I*s government of Ireland has been hitherto very
little investigated, though it is but reasonable to expect that the prince who
did so much for the unity of the British isles would have shown an equal
desire to reduce Ireland with Wales and Scotland under his effective rule.
How feu* he attempted, how far he succeeded in this task, can be best studied
in these volumes. It is a pity, however, that the calendar has been limited
to documents preserved in the London Record Office. The rich stores of
documents in Dublin on which Mr. Gilbert has so well drawn in his
* History of the Viceroys of Ireland,* and specimens of which he has given
us in his ' Historic and Municipal Documents of Ireland,' might well have
been laid under contribution. But we must be thankful for what we have
got, and hope for more in the future. The fact that only two of the
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 159
docnmentB here summarised are found in Bymer (Nos. 46 and 47) is alone
enough to show the mass of new materials.
During the years treated of in this volume, the government of Ireland
remained in the hands of John Wogan, who had been appointed in 1295,
and whose rule was marked by the introduction of parliamentary represen-
tation among the English colonists, and by a vigorous and energetic
attempt to enforce English law, and to secure further the English ascen-
dency by restraining the &ctiousness of the rival Norman houses. The
constitutional development is unfortunately hardly touched upon at all by
this calendar, but the administration is illustrated very fully. Though
almost all Ireland was shireground or included in some Norman liberty,
the sheriffs and ministers of the crown could find little obedience. Yet
the feust that Oonnaught, Roscommon, and Ulster were each a comitatiis ; ^
the active share taken by great magnates like the earl of Ulster in the
sul^ugation of Scotland ; the employment of the Frescobaldi to farm the
new customs, and the holding of constant assizes, inquests, and recogni-
tions all over the coimtry, show that English rule had not yet sunk to its
later diminutive proportions. The frequent use of Welshmen as soldiers in
Ireland (e.g. pp. 2, 107) is an interesting illustration of the continued con-
nexion of two countries in some respects very similarly situated. The great
estates of EngUsh magnates in Ireland, another important bond of union
with England, is well illustrated by such documents as the extent of the
lands of Joan of Acre, the countess of Gloucester, between Nos. 658-668.
We read much of the castles erected to curb the native Irish. No. 806
shows the care taken to keep in efficient repair the remote stronghold of
Boscommon, the centre of English influence in eastern Connaught and
the head of a shire. An interesting glimpse into earlier Connaught history
is to be found in No. 437, which describes how *an Irishman named
Pelim O'Conor called himself king of Connaught,' how his son * killed
the leal English,* laid low Roscommon castle, fortified at countless cost,
and how it was again erected to curb the rebel natives. But there are
many signs of weakness and decay. Special encouragement was necessary
to induce the corporation of Kilkenny to defend their town. Many of
Countess Joan's lands * can be extended at no price, for nothing can be
received from them * (e.g. No. 659). Near Kilkeimy, the borough of Ros-
bargon is impoverished and most of its lands lie waste, < as it is destroyed
and burnt out by the common war of those parts and the mutual slaying
of the tenants, who are nearly all dead ' (No. 666). The extent of the
manors of Dysart and Loughrea (Nos. 167 and 198) are striking illustra-
tions of the deplorable condition of central Ireland. Dysart * is so con-
tiguous to the Irish of Leinster and Meath that no English or peaceful
man remains among them.' The land is uncultivated, the fort small and
ruined, the mills broken down, the cost of guard much more than the
receipts. Very modem sounds the complaint of Edmund Butler of the
excessive rents in Connaught (No. 198). At Loughrea the late justiciar of
Ireland himself could get no rent * on account of the power of the Irish,
who prostrated his castles, and burnt and wasted his lands ' (ib,) Another
difficulty was firom the claims of the colonists themselves. The liberty of
' It 18 misleading for the editor to speak in No. 7 of the • county of Kildare * and
the * earldom of Connaught * when comitattis must be the Latin in both cases.
Digitized by
Google
160 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Jan.
Trim insists that ' no sheriff or minister of the crown should meddle with
any office within the hherty, as it is without the bounds of any county.'
Little is said of the native Irish, who were in most cases far beyond
Wogan's jurisdiction. Yet there were Irish tenants so near Dublhi as
ChapeUzod (No. 897). Good behaviour of Irishmen was rewarded by
hcence to use English laws during life, as in the case of Dermot OTalvey,
who had merited this distinction by his services in Scotland (No. 12).
This both illustrates the prevalence of personal law and the holding out
of EngUsh citizenship as a privilege in a way very similar to the manner in
which Roman citizenship was conferred on loyal provincials. But the
general relation of the two races is better illustrated by the case of Bichard
de Geaitone, a clerk of Queen Eleanor, who turned out one Phihp Benet
from his lands, and pleaded that as Philip was an Irishman he had no
business to take out a writ of novel disseisin against him. Any one
apparently could disseise an Irishman without remedy; but a jury
found that Philip was EngHsh, and so he gained his estate back.
Again, Wilham Bahgaveran was expelled from the humble office of door-
keeper of the exchequer at Dublin, which he had obtained by royal grant,
on the ground that he was ' a pure Irishman, and not fit for tiie office.'
An amusing entry is No. 522, where the king complains that ' wines are not
exported in this year from Gascony to England in such abundance as they
are wont to be, because the sovereign pontiflf is staying in Gascony.' Equally
amusing is the story of the supposed theft of the Dublin seal in No. 606.
More than a third of the cflJendar is taken up by the very interesting
and important ecclesiastical taxation of Ireland between the years 1802 and
1806, which is practically the Irish counterpart to the * Taxation of Pope
Nicholas ' in England in 1291, pubUshed long ago by the record commis-
sion. This document has never been completely printed before, though
Dr. Beeves had published the portion treating of the dioceses of Down,
Connor, and Dromore, with very full notes, in his < Ecclesiastical Anti-
quities ' of those dioceses, and the returns for Limerick, Gloyne, Boss,
Emly, Cashel, Cork, and Waterford have been printed in the eighth report
of the Irish record commissioners.
It is unfortunate that the peculiar circumstances under which this
volume appears have somewhat reduced its usefulness. Mr. Sweetman,
the editor of the previous four volumes, was compelled by f&ilure of eye-
sight to give up his work on this book as soon as the sheets were passed
through the press, and soon afterwards he died. The final correction,
indexing, and editing was entrusted to Mr. G. F. Handcock, of the Pubho
Becord Office, who had been thanked by Mr. Sweetman in previous
volumes for his ' efficient aid in arranging and putting together the very
numerous sHps for the index.' Mr. Handcock has given a full index, and
has done good service by comparing the printed taxation with the original
rolls and noting thirteen pages of corrigenda in the 120 pages of the
taxation. This is the best that could be done, but it requires constant
watchfulness in using the taxation to see whether the name given in the
text is really the right form in the roll, and in such a document all
philological interest depends on accuracy in copying the names. It is
also perhaps rather a mistake to translate a document given in extenso.
Anyhow it would have been much better to have simply copied the roll,
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 161
than to print such entries as ' Church of the Villa Ooanloun/ * Plebs de
Othedigan/ * Church de Garthfyding/ * Chapel de Dundela/ or * Church
de Diserto/ which are neither the Latin original nor an English transla-
tion. An attempt — unfortunately not a very systematic one — has been
made to give the modem equivalents of the place names of the taxation ;
but even in the case of the dioceses of Down, Connor, and Dromore, in
which the editor had the invaluable assistance of Bishop Beeves, there
will be found many names identified by Beeves and not identified here.
To take one instance : * The white church with the chapels of the Ford ' is
quoted on page 204, without mentioning that Whitechurch is now Shankill,
and that the * chapel of the Ford ' is situated at the ford over the Lagan
on which afterwards grew up BelfEist. Beference to Dr. Beeves' scholarly
work cannot but cause us to compare the public and the private editions
of a great national document, much to the disadvantage of the former.
Again, Mr. Sweetman's lamented failure of health deprived the volume
of the advantage of even the modest preface not exceeding fifty pages
which the master of the rolls now allows to his editors. Mr. Sweetman's
previous prefaces had not been ambitious, but they had been very usefal
in directing the attention of the student to some of the more important
facts contained in the calendars. Mr. Handcock's preface of a page and
a half might surely have been extended enough to give us at least some
account of the circumstances of the taxation, an excellent summary of
which could have been found in Dr. Beeves' introduction. It would have
been of extreme value, moreover, to have told us something more definite
as to the nature of the two sets of returns of different dates and values
than the meagre reference in the prefeuse. Too much care cannot be taken
to make a national work of such great importance as the calendars com-
plete and final under all circumstances. T. F. Tour.
1^ Les Juifs dans les 4tats frangais du Saint-SUge au moyen dge : docu-
ments pour servvr d Ihistoire des Israelites et de la Papaut^. Par
M. DB Mauldb. (Paris : H. Champion. 1886.)
2. Histoire des Juifs de Nimes au moyen dge. Par Josbph Simon*
(Nimes : A. Catalan. 1886.)
8. Outlines of Jewish History from b,c. 686 to c.e, 1885. By Mbs. (now
Lady) Magnus, author of * About the Jews since Bible Times.*^
(London: Longmans. 1886.)
Thb history of the Jews since the loss of their poUtical importance by the
Boman conquest of the land of Israel, consists only in the three following
points: (1) in the history of their Hterary productions; (2) in that of
their congregational and communal institutions in the various countries
of their exile ; (8) in the history of the treatment they have received
from time to time at the hand of the poHtical powers under which
they had to live. Usually the last point can be summed up in the fol-
lowing sentence : at first they were well treated and sometimes great
privileges were even accorded to them, then used as sponges by the re-
spective authorities, and finally driven out if not massacred.
M. de Maulde's monograph on the history of the Jews in the papal
state of Avignon has the merit of giving original documents from archives,
VOL. n. — NO. V. u
Digitized by
Google
162 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Jan.
and in the notes his bibliography of historical works on Provence is ex-
tremely complete, and will prove very useful even for bibliographers. Of
new facts there are few which are not already known jfrom Dr. Graetz's
excellent * History of the Jews,* of which we hope to see soon an English
translation. Of course M. de Maulde enumerates with great precision
the dates of the various papal decrees in favour of and against the Jews.
Most interesting is the original document, with the superscription of Ce
sont les droictz ou Status qui sont faictz et ordonn^s 'par les Juifs de la
prisente citi d' Avignon, 1558, which gives the statutes of the Jews at
Avignon in eighty-seven chapters. Amongst the six Jewish counsellors
who were deputed to draw up the document together with the papal
authorities, we find the name of Ferussol de Pampellone ; we shall have
therefore to pronounce the name of the author of the * Itinera Mundi,'
edited with a Latin translation and notes by Thomas Hyde, Oxford, 1691,
Abraham Ferussol instead of Farisol or Peritsol.
M. Simon does for Nimes what M. de Maulde has done for Avignon ;
his monograph, however, is not so rich in original documents. At Nimes
as well as in other towns of Provence, Jews had settled at a very early
period, most likely at the epoch of the Bomans. Marseilles, for instance,
is called by Gregory of Tours a Hebrew city. It is curious to mention
that the Jews in the eleventh century already call Nimes in their Hebrew
documents Kiryath Yearim, town of forests (analogous to Numbers xv.
60), accepting the derivation of Nemausus from the Greek rifioQ or the
Latin nemus. The Jews in Provence were indeed very fond of giving to
the towns they inhabited bibUcal names. They call, for instance, Lunel
Yericho, town of the moon ; Orange they call Ysop from the plant ori-
ganum; Aix, Ir harmnayim (2 Samuel xii. 27), the city of water,
AqusB-Sextisa. While M. de Maulde pays little attention in l^s excellent
monograph to the celebrated rabbis of Avignon, M. Simon enumerates
them nearly all.
Lady Magnus* * Outlines ' are intended chiefly for use in Jewish
schools ; the expense of its publication was defrayed by the administrators
of the Jacob Franklin trust, and it was revised by Dr. Friedlander, the
well-known reviser of the Jewish Bible and translator of Maimonides'
* Guide of the Perplexed.' We suppose that his revision extends chiefly
to the Uterary points and items found in the little book. Nobody will
expect a first edition to be perfect ; happy those who can boast of per-
fection in a second or even a third edition. That the authoress should
give up most space to the history of the Jews from 586 b.o. to the
breaking up of the Talmudio schools in Babylonia (about a.d. 500) was
quite right, for this epoch is the most important from a political, rehgious,
and literary point of view ; that the Jews in England should take the
next rank in the number of pages, maybe admitted from a patriotic point
of view. But then too little remains for the great movements in France
and Italy. No mention is made, for instance, of Bashi's 2,500 French
words which are to be found in his commentaries on the Bible and the
Talmud, and which are the earliest source for old French. Nothing is
said about the furious controversy in Provence for and against Maimo-
nides' philosophico-theologioal work in 1286 and again at the end of the
18th century. Of the great schools in Champagne, Paris, and surround-
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 163
ing counties nothing is said, not a word concerning the great services
which the Jews have rendered to mathematics and medicine in the
middle ages, hy their translations from the Arabic into Hebrew, in which
the Tibbonide family excels. Surely these data would be more in-
structive to the yoimg if put in a popular form, than the author's views
on the origin and rise of Christianity, or of Islamism, of which last the
school-children know scarcely the nama Where did Lady Magnus find that
Isldm comes from the Hebrew shalom, * peace ' ? We thought that it is
usually taken in the sense of * submission to the faith.' What is there
edifying for young children in the fanatic movement of Sabbetai Tsebi
(1626-1676), which is only an outgrowth of the Kabbalah in its most insane
and material form ? The same is the case with Spinoza, whose ideas and
theories must remain iminteUigible to school children. Instead of these
pages, it would have been better to say something about the ethical book
of Behaya or Bahya, or the collection of fables by Berechiah (imitation
of Marie de France) and Isaac Sahulah. Where is the Italian poet
Immanuel, the friend and imitator of Dante ?
Even in the chapter on early England not a single literary author is
mentioned ; they are not many, but there are some. In other places, just
the unimportant persons are given ; we have never heard of Isaiah Hurwitz
playing such a great rdle for the introduction of Luria's Kabbalah. The
name of the rabbi who was kept in prison by Rudolph of Hapsburg is
known— it was R. Meir of Rothenburg : why is he left anonymous ? The
same observation refers to the rabbi at the massacre of York, who is
known as Yom Tob, probably of Joigny, whom the authoress again
forgets to name. Here the date of 1189 is even wrong : the massacre at
York took place in 1190.
Want of space forbids us to go into further details. Only one point
more. Among the men of the nineteenth century in England (names
mostly unknown on the continent), Emmanuel Deutsch has rightly a
place; but he was a foreigner: why then is Zedner not mentioned?
Surely the author of the catalogue of the Hebrew printed books in the
British Museum is worth mentioning. Possibly Lady Magnus has never
used Hebrew books, and does not know that such a catalogue exists. In
a second edition, which we hope will be soon wanted, we should venture
to advise the authoress not to meddle with explanations of words Hke
Ba/r Cosiba (not Cosba) by * son of a lie,* which means rather the man
of the locality of Coseba (1 Chron. iv. 22). The cry of insult, Hep, Hep,
is scarcely composed of the initials of Hierosolyma est perdita, but
rather of the words Hah, Hah, * give, give ' (Prov. xxx. 15). Is it certain
that Maranatha represents the Hebrew Moh/rom attah, * curse on thee '
(which is philologically not quite justified), and not rsXheir Maran ata, * our
master come * or * has come * ? Of what use is it in a school book to give
such doubtful learning? We must say a word about the unsuitable
style employed in the Httle book. Lady Magnus writes in too flourish-
iiag a manner for schoolboys, and we think that quotations from poets, such
as Lowell, the poet laureate, and others, are not easily imderstood by those
for whom the * Outlines ' are intended. Where did the authoress unearth
the sentence concerning Rashi, that ' he is said to have made Peslmt of [sic)
the Talmud * ? That is neither Hebrew nor Enghsh. The truth is that
M 2
Digitized by
Qoo^^
164 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Jan*
one is not qualified to write a history of the Jews by the mere £a>ot of
being a Jew, but it requires knowledge of original documents and training
for writing even a small book on history. Poeta nascitur, non fitj is &
dictum which we may reverse in this case — that an historian is not bom>
but trained. A. N.
Les Prdciirseurs de la Bdforme anx Pays-Bos. Par J. J. Altmeyer,
Professeur k TUniversiU de Bruxelles. 2 tom. (Paris et Bruxelles*
1886.)
There are few subjects which better repay investigation than the history
of the little comer of Europe known as the Low Countries. The tribes
thrown together on that spot, much of it wrung by unremitting toil from
the grasp of ocean, have shown a wonderful -capacity of endurance and
development which has enabled them to exercise an influence wholly dis-
proportionate to their numbers on the pohtics, the arts, and the spiritual
and intellectual life of Europe. Any contribution to their history which
shall enable the student better to comprehend the phases of their evolu-
tion is to be warmly welcomed.
In the band of earnest scholars who have done so much within the
last half-century to elucidate the annals of the Netherlands, there have
been none more earnest and untiring than the late Professor Altmeyer.
The interruption of his labours in 1874, followed by his death in 1877,
was a loss felt by all students who had expected much from the great
work on the revolution of the sixteenth century for which he had been pre-
paring during most of the active years of his busy life. His manuscript,
though not completed, was purchased by the Belgian government and depo-
sited in the Royal Library of Brussels, and a committee of his friends have
undertaken its publication. Of this the first instalment is before us.
I regret to say that the result is to some extent disappointing. His
friends tell us that he was in the habit not only of correcting but even of
remodelling his works in the press, and one cannot doubt that if he had
had such opportunity the present volumes would have undergone exten-
sive modifications. Li fact, one cannot believe that he would even have
sent them to the press in their present shape, for they are rather the
materials and rough notes of a scholar than a finished history. Occasion-
ally there are contradictions or discrepancies when a subject happens to
be alluded to more than once. The narrative is frequently interrupted
by extraneous matter suggested by a name or an allusion. There is a
prevailing lack of proportion, which sometimes dismisses important ques-
tions with a few paragraphs, while developing irrelevant subjects at great
length, such as the nineteen pages in chapter viii. devoted to Gldnard's
adventures in acquiring Arabic and the fifteen given to Busbequius and
his Constantinopolitan embassies. Li flEU^t, the whole of chapters viii. xiii.
xiv. XV., comprising a large portion of volume ii., while containing much
curious detail as to literary and scientific history, have the slenderest
relation to the assumed purport of the book. Had it been entitled ' La
Renaissance dans les Pays-Bas,' as seems (ii. 805) to have been the in-
tention of the author, these chapters would have been in place^ but then
much in the first volume would have been equally superfluous.
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 166
Had the author lived to revise his labours, he would doubtless have
discarded a large portion of his second-hand authorities, and would have
verified his statements from the original sources. He would hardly have
reUed upon Beausobre and Michelet for details of the controversy on
free-will between Luther and Erasmus when the works of both polemics
are so readily accessible. He would not have allowed Delprat to mislead
him into representing the voluntary withdrawal of the Germans from the
university of Prague in 1408 as a violent persecution resulting in ex-
pulsion because they were Nominalists (i. 184) ; nor let Moutyn betray
him into the error of saying that St. Bernard disapproved the conversion
of heretics by any methods save those of argumentation (i. 146).
The defects of the work are readily expHcable by the circum-
stances of its publication. Its merits are undoubted, as a most interest-
ing contribution to the history of a remarkable people during a remarkable
period, and it will be of much service in familiarising the students of
other lands with the labour of modem Netherlandish scholars. It
is well worth perusal if only for its elaborate account of John of
Buysbroeck, Gerard Groot, Florent Baduvyns, and the communities of the
Brethren of the Common Life which accompHshed so much for the spiritual
and intellectal enlightenment not only of the Low Countries but of all
Europe. No one, I am sure, can close the volumes without feeling sincere
respect for the vast acquirements of the author, and his resolute upright-
ness of thought, his impartiahty, his love for all that is true and noble
in human nature. Henry C. Lea.
History of the Church of England. By Eichard Watson Dixon, M.A.
Honorary Canon of CarHsle. Vol. HI. (London : Eoutledge. 1886.)
It is somewhat difficult to divine what determined Canon Dixon to apply
his unquestionable historical powers to the subject of the Eeformation
and the reformed church of England. He evidently regards the whole
thing with an intense dislike. We have looked thi:ough this volume
carefully, and can find scarcely a place in which he speaks even tolerantly
of the Eeformation, or BevoUition as he prefers to call it. The whole of
the actors in it come in for some bitter and stinging blows. The formu-
laries do not escape a trenchant criticism, and the picture represented is
that of a hopeless muddle, full of injustice, cruelty, greed, and ignorance.
Now if the picture Canon Dixon draws be a true one— if it were indeed the
case that the church of the Eeformation were such a congeries of follies
and absurdities as he makes it — then it would seem that a penitential and
humble tone ought to pervade the book. But there is nothing of this
kind — one after another is bowled over with a joke and a gibe, just as
if the writer were completely an outsider ; and he goes jauntily on
his way until he comes to his favourite Bonner or Gardiner, or that
' great theologian ' Dr. Smith, when serious laudation is indulged in.
What Mr. Dixon will do with the gentle Bonner and Gardiner in his
next volume it will be curious to observe. Mr. Froude, we think, has
been fax too hard upon Gardiner ; probably he is now destined to receive
full compensation. As for Cranmer, poor man, a thousand pens have of
late been busy in scratching him, so that it might be thought he had
Digitized by
Google
166 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Jan.
been guilty of an unpardonable sin in giving us the English Prayer
Book.
An historical writer, if he designs to give a true and instructive picture
of the times of which he treats, should not get himself mixed up in the
midst of squabbles, and seize upon every scrap of gossip which he can
pick up, swaying hither and thither according to his last discovery ; but
having diligently informed and satisfied himself as to the meaning of
events, should carefully group and arrange his narrative in subordination
to the main issues. A soldier fighting hand to hand in the midst of a
battle may give afterwards a graphic and exciting narrative of the struggle
in which he was engaged, but he would be unable to draw a true picture
of the whole engagement. So is it with the writers who get mixed up with
details, and run madly in chase of every scrap of manuscript which they
have been fortunate enough to discover. It was a saying of the late Mark
Pattison, than whom no man ever had a keener and juster critical sense,
that * history could not be written from manuscripts.' There must be
first the wide and general study of the subject, and the comparison and
criticism of statements, which is physically impossible in the case of
manuscript materials. Who that has felt the torture of being hurried
and driven backwards and forwards by those distracting Simancas manu-
scripts which crowd the notes of Mr. Froude, but will endorse this ?
There is a good deal of the same sort of thing in Canon Dixon's volume.
He has not been to Simancas, apparently, but he has paid great attention
to the calendars, and seems inclined to adopt any gossipy and trashy
statement, merely because it is there. But this is utterly inconsistent
with a calm philosophical grasp of the subject founded on the best sources
of information maturely weighed — such as we admire in the pages of
Bishop Stubbs, with whom there is nothing crude, nothing one-sided»
nothing unfedr.
Now if the Beformation were such an utter mistake as Canon Dixon
seems to think, or if the Elizabethan church were so utterly contemp-
tible a body as Mr. Froude paints it, it is hard to account for the sequel —
for the continuous life, and ever advancing vigour of that church, and
the noble results it shows to-day. But the fact is, these two writers,
approaching their subject from different points of view, but being very
similar in their treatment of it, have gone upon the fundamental mistake
that bright light must suddenly spring out of darkness. They have had
no patience or tolerance for the smoke and the gradual kindling. It was^
an amazing task for a church to oast from it all the abuses which
had gathered round it and encrusted it for many centuries — to do
this, checked and hampered by autocratic and tyrannical rulers, grasp-
ing and greedy statesmen, ignorant and impatient people — to do it
at all, anyhow, by any means. But to do it decently, orderly, and
m prim ecclesiastical guise ; with all its dignitaries saying exactly the
right thing at the right time ; with all its parishes carefully provided
with efficient teachers, well-ordered churches, and decent ceremonial;
with kings, nobles, and parliaments in proper subjection to the ecclesias-
tical state ; with no such thing as robbery, treachery, deceit, or cruelty —
to do ijb thus would be a miracle not yet manifested upon earth. And
yet it seems to be expected by some that the church of England, when
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 167
severed from Borne, should have suddenly sprung forth in complete panoply
Hke Minerva from the head of Jove. One would think that the church
of England was to be regarded at the reformation time as some
new and strange production, suddenly set down in the midst of the
land, inviting criticism and challenging fault-finding. It is not remem-
bered that its clergy were the same clergy who had so long been
mumbling their mass in a language not understanded of the people —
that the people were the same people who had so long believed in winking
Madonnas, and saints whose special privilege it was to cure the toothache
or the itch — who had reverenced Saint Uncumber and run trotting to
the rood at the north door of St. Paul's. Let those who will not weigh
things in true balances cavil as they will, it nevertheless remains the
fact that in those times of weakness, confusion, and rapacity — the days of
the child-king Edward — a great and surpassing work was done ; of which,
we regret to say, we do not find a fitting estimate in the pages of Canon
Dixon.
Take for instance his estimate of the first Prayer Book, which is
generally the subject of laudation by the school to which we presume
Canon Dixon belongs. The most that he can say of it is that * it was
not unworthy in itself of general acceptance, nor discreditable to the
learning of the men who composed it ' (p. 16). But after this faint
praise he goes on to institute an elaborate comparison between the
English book and the Sarum Offices which it superseded, in which the
new arrangement is depicted as a melancholy falling off from the old»
* Of the high choral tone which marked them from antiquity, the daily
prayers of the church lost much in this sweeping revision* (22). The
English collects suffer from * depression of tone,' from * a loss of epi-
grammatic grace and antithetic structure,' of * directness and point,'
and there is 'diffusion and vagueness.' In the Communion Office the
•ordinary was denuded of a great number of prayers, hynms, and
ritual observances, and refrigorated by the introduction of a sermon or
homily,' &c. (27). The tone of the whole disquisition — ^the ceremonies
which had been reduced to ' a trembling brotherhood of two ' &c. — ^is
written (we are compelled to say) in a tone of affectation which is
offensive to the EngHsh churchman. Is it intended to be inferred
that the old Latin services, in which, Canon Dixon admits, the people
had absolutely no share (p. 26 note), were unhappily exchanged for
the English book? Then, as though to disparage the Prayer Book
still more, we are told (p. 6) that it is a mistake to suppose that the
first book was sanctioned by convocation. We have not space to bring
forward the evidence which proves that this is entirely wrong. We
content ourselves with pointing to the fact that Bishop Stubbs, whose
historical dictum will hardly be questioned, has pronounced the other
way. We have to pass over a great deal of this volume, which
abounds in gibes and jocular innuendoes against all concerned in the
very objectionable reforming business, or the estabUshment of 'uni-
formity,' as it is usually described, before we can find a bit of serious
writing conveying to us a picture of any of the actors in the drama. At
page 178 we have a good sketch of ' the boy,' as the young king is always
called. ' This curious boy, precise, observant, and inquisitive, however
Digitized by
Google
168 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Jan.
frail in body, gave no signs of weariness [at the long sermon]. Formed
for public life, in all respects but health, his resolute wiU supported him.
He went through all ceremonies ; he sat at a sermon as at a bear-baiting,
with the same boyish expectation of entertainment, the same gratifica-
tion at being served by a spectacle prepared for him ; and at the end he
seldom foiled, with royal courtesy, to request the writing to be deHvered
to him for his perusal. Edward gave proof during his brief existence
of having inherited his father's fondness for pageants and his father's
keenness of observation. Of his father's inherent coldness and insensi-
bility of affection he also possessed a share.' Hooper also (who, strange
to say, is decidedly a favourite with Canon Dixon ^) is well sketched.
* He was a man of strong body and perfect health, of strong but un-
imaginative mind ; by no means incapable of humihty, but extremely
self-sufficient ; learned ; of tireless patience, absolute sincerity, and con-
siderable benevolence ; but so sour and forbidding that those who came
to consult him had been known to go away without opening their purpose,
repelled by his gloomy look' (p. 181). Hooper, we are told, was the
father of nonconformity, and then we have the usual diatribe upon the
modem misuse of the term nonconformist, as if a term might not be
extended beyond its original meaning; especially if the extension is
etymologically correct.
There is a little confusion in this volume about the first ordinal.
At page 160 we are told that it provided for ministers below the
order of deacons. At page 190 that these orders found in it no place
at all. Similarly with regard to Dr. Cox. At page 249 he is in the
number of the reviewers. At page 279 * Cox was not of the commission
or body of men who revised the first Prayer Book.' At page 218 (note)
Mr. Froude is severely reprehended for having * in countless passages con-
veyed a totally false impression of the history of the time.' That he may
have done ; but here, on Mr. Dixon's own evidence, he appears to have
conveyed a true one. Mr. Dixon is of opinion that the * favourite position
of the reformers of the sixteenth century was that whatever was at
variance with their own convictions was Antichrist, and that they be-
stowed this distinction upon one another as readily as on the common
enemy' (p. 282). This is an exaggeration, and not a justifiable one.
Probably Mr. Dixon is aware that the calling of hard names was not
peculiar to the reformers, and that the Eomanists of whom he speaks so
gently were not altogether free from it. We could point out to Mr.
Dixon a vast mass of medieval writers who said harder things of the
pope than the reformers did. These latter called the pope Antichrist
because they believed it. There are a good many not altogether ignorant
persons who believe the same now. Then why saddle the poor reformers
with this exceptional reproach ?
Mr. Dixon gives an interesting account of the licensed preachers,
and here we are glad to find he is able to speak in terms of respect.
' The whole body of these licensed preachers, the eighty or more names
of whom are preserved, are to be regarded with respect. Some of
' He writes, however, about his readiness to denude Gloucester : * This saorilegions
act, which cost his sane, resolute, and eupeptic conscience not a pang ' (461). This is
assuming an insight with a vengeance 1
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 169
them may have been dull fanatics ; but on the whole they were men
who were prepared to stand by the Beformation and to suffer for it.
They did the work. They were not, at least not all of them, of
the wretched herd who cheated, stole, and canted in the name of
religion, and changed their time as soon as ever the wind shifted to the
opposite quarter. Many of them were men of great eloquence and learn-
ing, the choice of the church. Some of them became martyrs for
reUgion ' (829). But from this very just eulogy one man is excepted, the
' fanatical and vainglorious Scotchman ' Knox. It is a curious illustra-
tion of the contradictions of history to compare this character of John
Enox with the noble sketch of his bold and fearless stand against a profli-
gate queen and a contemptible French faction, so well drawn in the pages
of Mr. Froude. It is the same with Sir William Cecil — the great Lord
Burghley — a ' not uncelebrated statesman,* as Mr. Dixon describes him,
' who was destined to have considerable influence upon the fortunes of
the church of England.* His character is said to be composed of
' selfish sagacity, respectable abihty, great diligence, and some learning.*
This attempt to * damn with faint praise * one of the greatest of England's
worthies comes very near to the ridiculous.
We would point to the account given in this volume of Aless*s Latin
version of the Prayer Book, and of the spirit which animated this man,
who is not an unimportant factor in the reformation movement. He
made a good many alterations in his version which have sometimes
puzzled inquirers. According to Mr. Dixon he did this deliberately to
promote concord. ' A Uberal spirit pervades Aless ; his version is notori-
ously imfaithful, but the variations from his original which he permitted
himself, came not from carelessness, nor from the set design of mutilating
the service in one only direction. They seem referable to several definite
principles. He wished to present the English rites — the rites, to use his
own expression, of his almost native country — as attractively as possible
to the eyes of his imperial patron on the one hand, and on the other
hand to make them acceptable to Frankfort, or Zurich, or Geneva * (295).
This is to apologise for Aless by lauding his liberaHty at the expense
of his honesty. If he was professing to give the English Prayer Book, he
should have given it. There are many other interesting points in this
volume which we should have been glad to mention, but space forbids us.
Upon the whole, though we find much lively reading and some good
things in this volume, as well as evidence of considerable research, it is
not, in our judgment, altogether what a history of the church ought to
be. It is not sufficiently serious nor candid. It is too full of gibes and
mockery, and it does not impress the reader with the fEumess of its
narrative. We may mention also that the references are very inade-
quately given, and that there are no side-notes or chapter headings.
There is also a lack of ItLcidiis ordo. G. G. Pebby.
Margaret of Navarre. (Eminent Women Series.) By A. Maby F.
Robinson. (London : W. H. Allen, 1886.)
This little book is to be taken seriously. Miss Bobinson has drawn
chiefly from original sources, and her list of authorities is full. Des-
jardin*s ' Belations Diplomatiques de la France avec la Toscane ' should
Digitized by
Google
170 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Jan.
perhaps have found a place, and among modem authors the learned
Baron de Ruble. The interest of a biography of Margaret necessarily
centres in the determination of the exact relation which she held to the
early reform movement. This is no easy task. In no country were
renaissance and reform so inextricably intertwined as in France, and in
no French man or woman so hard to disentangle as in Margaret. The
receptivity of the French nature caused the simultaneous acceptance o^
both elements ; the process of composition was chemical, and the result
was not simply the sum of both. Hence a quahty, which was elsewhere con-
fined to individual minds, was in France the property of the upper classes
at large. In the case of Margaret, Miss Bobinson perhaps regards the
problem as a little too simple. She adopts as her motif the disputed
death-bed words that she had acted from compassion and not from con-
viction. But this is inadequate to explain the fetcts— it underrates the
intellectual element in Margaret's religious life. Nor would it be suiO&cient
to say that Margaret's devotion was to persons and not to principles, that
when Francis stood still she could step no further, that if Bri9onnet fell
she could not keep her footing.
Margaret's peculiar characteristic consists in the manner in which
intellect and sentiment condition one another. The sentiment is always
intellectual, and the intellect sentimental. While she is une vraie doc-
trinan/re d'amowr Platonique, she is a sentimentalist in doctrine. Taking
the direct and simple outlines of protestantism, she elaborates it into a
mystical romance. Hence, too, the significance of Brantdme's summary
of her social life : En fait . • • de galanterie • • • elle savaitpltcs que son
favn quotidien. Her galanterie was a science^ it was more of the head than
of the heart, just as her doctrine was more of the heart than of the head.
If one word can sum up Margaret's character, it is simpatia, a fellow-
feeling with all the phases, spiritual or sensuous, of an age of transition,
with its lapses as with its ideals, with its religious rapture as with its
Babelaiserie.
Apart from the central question, the most interesting chapters of the
book are naturally the most personal, the early and the later life, and the
unhappy visit to Spain. We could wish these expanded.
The thread of general history is at first cleverly woven in, but
towards the end it is hardly kept in due subordination to the general
design. Margaret's influence on general pohtics became so slight that
they might have almost been kept out of sight. The chapter on the
Yaudois was not needed, and, if given, the characteristics of Piedmont
should not have been transferred to Provence. Miss Bobinson treads less
surely when off her own domain. The power of Maximilian Sforza was
very different from that of the earlier members of his house. He was
labelled with an imperial title, and the Swiss cantons had set a cheva/ux
defrise of pikes around him. The rebellion of Ghent had nothing to do
with religion, nor was there a protestant Flanders for Francis to protect.
The relation of the several German states to the emperor does not
appear to be clearly understood. The description of John king of
France as John of Burgundy would be misleading to the general reader.
Above all, exception must be taken to the anachronism involved in the
constant use of the term Huguenot. We hear of Huguenot pohtics, and
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 171
of the rebellious Huguenots of Rochelle. The revolt of Rochelle was due
to new regulations as to the salt monopoly and the breach of municipal
privileges. But these are flaws in the frame rather than in the picture,
and this reminds us that Miss Bobinson's , portraits are throughout
admirable. Not only has she carefully examined the works of Clouet
and his school, but she has studied the best of models for simpUcity of
design and brilliancy of colouring, the relazioni of the ambassadors of
Venice.
Margaret's Uterary merits receive sympathetic, yet not exaggerated,
appreciation. Judgment has been shown in the task of interpreting to
the uninitiated the mysteries, now risque and now religious, of the Uterary
culture of a courtly coterie. Yet it may be questioned if the romance of
the age of Fran9ois I is not at once too simple and too artificial to bear
translation even into the tongue of the nineteenth century renaissance.
E. Abmstbong.
Life and Times of General Sir Edward Cecil, Viscount Wimbledon,
By Chables Dalton. (London: Sampson Low & Co. 1885.)
Mb. Dalton's object in writing this biography is ' to make future histo-
rians speak in less condemnation of Cecil when referring to the important
expedition placed under his command in 1625.' Nevertheless, though
the papers printed by Mr. Dalton set forth in the fullest detail the
difficulties of the task confided to Cecil, they are far from proving that
he made the best of his opportunities, and they do show that he made
many mistakes. There is nothing in them to impugn the justice of
Dr. Gardiner's verdict, nor indeed does Mr. Dalton seek to do so. After
all, Cecil's greatest mistake was accepting a command for which he knew
he was unfit, and taking charge of an expedition which he knew was
unfit for its work, from personal ambition and servility to Buckingham
(ii. 120, 122). He accepted the responsibility with his eyes open, and
cannot be acquitted horn a large share of the blame. On the other hand,
the long record of earher services well performed justifies Cecil against
the sneer of Clarendon that he 'had little more of « Holland officer
than the pride and formality.' Pride he had in abundance, and to excess —
witness his quarrel with Count Dohna, his rivalry with Horace Yere, and
other facts brought out in the letters printed by Mr. Dalton. But he was
devoted to his profession, and served twenty-seven years without a break
in the Dutch army, * and all this, as he says, for no other end than to
make me able to serve my prince and country when occasion should be
offered.' ' The knowledge of war,' he writes in another place, * is the
highest of human things that God suffereth man's understanding to
reach unto.' When not actively engaged in war, he was continually
busy in devising plans for the defence of England, for the organisation
of tiie army, and what he terms ' the noble work of bringing this kingdom
to a true discipline.' The defect of Mr. Dalton's book is that he never
makes up his mind for what class of readers he is writing. If for the
learned, why so many digressions on well-worn subjects, such as the
Lake and Overbury cases, the causes of the Thirty Years' war, and the
foreign policy of James I ? If for the general reader, why preserve the
Digitized by
Qoo^^
172 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Jan.
fantastically bad spelling of Cecil, and all the contractions of the docu-
ments printed ? All concerned, however, with the serious study of the
period will thank Mr. Dalton for pubHshing so many important papers
connected with the Cadiz expedition ; and his Hsts of EngUsh officers
in Dutch service will be of great use to biographers and genealogists.
C. H. FiBTH.
The Life of William Cavendish, Duke of Newcastle. By Mabgabet,
Duchess of Newcastle. Edited by C. H. Firth, M.A. (London :
J. C. Nimmo, 1886.)
Mb. Fibth has quickly followed up his excellent edition of Lucy
Hutchinson's ' Memoirs ' by a no less excellent edition of the duchess of
Newcastle's well-known life of her husband. His wide reading in civil
war pamphlets and newspapers has enabled him to annotate difficult
passages successfully, and the well-chosen illustrative matter in the
appendix adds considerably to the value of the work. His study of the
lives of Lord Eythin and Sir Charles Lucas are of special interest, and
he has discussed with great impartiality the controverted point of Fairfax's
conduct in shooting the latter together with Sir George Lisle after the
surrender of Colchester. He does not, however, mention the belief which,
according to an unpublished letter from Sir Edmund Vemey to his
brother, was soon after current amongst the royalists, to the effect that
though no promise of life was given to the prisoners, they were verbally
informed that, from Fairfax's known habit of showing mercy, they had
really nothing to fear. The statement is most likely devoid of foundation,
but further investigation is evidently needed.
In looking over any life of Newcastle, the attention of the reader is
naturally directed to the turning point of his career, his retreat into
Yorkshire after his advance southward in consequence of his victory at
Adwalton Moor. That Newcastle if he had pushed on would have
brought the civil war to an end in favour of the king, is as nearly certain
as any hypothetical conclusion can be. The only question open is whether
he drew back because, as the duchess says, the gentlemen of Yorkshire
refused to follow him, or made the gran rifiuto from low and selfish
motives, because, as Sir Philip Warwick asserts, he preferred being the
first personage in the north to being the second personage in the south.
No one, indeed, would profess to decide with certainty, but the impro-
bability that Warwick would know anything of Newcastle's inmost senti-
ments is so great as to make his testimony almost worthless on the point,
and the strong hold of local patriotism during the war manifested itself
in so many ways as to give an antecedent probability to the explanation
of the duchess.
Mr. Firth inclines, however, to some extent at least, to the other side.
* Warwick,' he says (preface, p. xiv), * asserts that his' — i.e. Newcastle's
— ' desire to retain his independent command, and fear of being placed
imder the orders of Bupert, was the chief motive. That this was one
reason is certain. The queen made use of it to incite Newcastle to
refuse obedience, and her influence was thrown into the scale against
the king's order. To this was added the opposition of the gentlemen of
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 17S
Yorkshire to the proposed scheme, their objections to leaving their own
county, and their urgent appeals to Newcastle to capture Hull and put a
stop to Fairfax's inroads into Yorkshire. It was on this last ground that
Newcastle based his refasal, but there is little doubt that it coincided with
his own inclinations.*
If, however, the two pieces of evidence put forward by Mr. Firth be
examined, they will be found to be not quite so formidable as they look. It
was all very well for Warwick when, in later years, he composed his memoirs,
to say that Newcastle was afraid of being placed under Rupert. At the
time when the events occurred there was not the most distant probabihty
of anything of the kind. Bupert did not become commander-in-chief for
sixteen months after the orders to Newcastle to advance were given, and
Newcastle operating at the head of an independent army in Suffolk or
Essex would be no more under the control of the earl of Forth, who was
the commander-in-chief, than he had been when he was operating in York-
shire. As to the queen's inciting Newcastle to refuse obedience, Mr. Firth
has, no doubt, something to show for it. In a note (page 56) he quotes
Henrietta Maria as writing to Newcastle that the king * had sent me a
letter to command you absolutely to march to him, but I do not send it
you, since I have taken a resolution with yon that you remain.' This
letter, however, proves nothing of importance. It was written on 18 June,
and as Adwalton Moor was not fought till 80 June, it would have been
folly in Newcastle to move southwards with Fairfax's unbeaten army in
his rear. The next quotation looks more to the purpose. The queen
again writes of her husband that ' he had written me to send you word
to go into Suffolk, Norfolk, or Huntingdonshire. I answered him thafc
you were a better judge than he of that, and that I should not do it. The
truth is that they envy your army.' This quotation, however, falls as
much too late for Mr. Firth's purposes as his other quotation falls too
early. The letter from which it is taken is written on 18 Aug. ; that is
to say, three days after Gloucester was sununoned. If Charles had been
able to advance eastwards upon Sussex and Kent, as Newcastle was to
have advanced southwards upon Essex, something considerable might
have been accomplished. The queen, even if she had not been, as we
know that she was, in a very bad temper, might very well write as she
did, when it was proposed that Newcastle should advance unsupported,
without exposing herself to the charge of having been hostile to his march
when such a march was really feasible. On the whole the duchess's
explanation of her husband's conduct may be provisionally accepted as
most in accordance with all that is known from other sources.
Samuel E. Gabdineb.
Memoirs of Mary, Queen of Eiujlandy 1689-1698, uoith Letters dtc.
Edited by Db. Doebneb. (London : Nutt. 1886.)
This collection forms an interesting supplement to a volume published by
Countess Bentinck in 1880 which contained portions of the journal and cor-
respondence of Queen Mary, selected from MSS. in the Bentinck archives.
The memoirs are drawn from materials preserved in the Hanover state
papers, and, though not in Mary's handwriting, bear every internal
Digitized by
Google
174 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Jan.
evidence of genuineness. The first part, comprising the queen's personal
records for the years 1689 to 1698, were until 1888 in the Hanoverian
Chancery in London, and were then removed to Hanover. The former
publication was in French, this in English ; the difference being of course
explained by the fact that the one was composed during Mary's residence
in Holland, the other after she had become queen of England. The
second part of the present volume contains the letters of Mary, her father,
and her husband, to the electress Sophia, transcribed from the original
autographs in the Hanover archives.
It is the memoirs which especially awaken interest, not as affording
any new or important historical information, but as forming rather a most
touching illustration of what Macaulay has with equal truth and felicity
termed the * sweet womanly courage ' of a loved and loving wife. They
are the records, written amid alien surroundings, of the constant self-
examination and the mental struggles of one whose politics were her hus-
band's, but whose religion was her own. Longing only for • the strict
retirement where I led the life of a nun,' and finding herself ' come into a
noisy world full of vanity,' she tells us merely how, under the harassment
of a daily fear for her husband's life, she endeavoured to guide her steps
aright, beneath jealous eyes and amid the babel of rancorous tongues,
through the sloughs of political knavery and religious discord. And at
the end of her narrative we have ceased to wonder that during the four
years of her residence in England jealousy had disappeared, and that
slander had been shamed by the gentle persistence in well-doing and the
modest dignity which served her for a taUsman amid circumstances as
difficult and treacherous as they were antagonistic to her nature and her
hopes.
The spirit in which Mary combated her difficulties was not indeed
aggressive or masterful. She considered that * women should not meddle
in business.' Her idea of helping William — and he appreciated it — ^was
' not to trouble the king about business. I thought, and he has told me
so himself, that when he could get from it, he was glad to come to me,
and have his thoughts diverted by other discourse.' * To serve God and
do all the good I can in the world ' was the programme, a strange one for
those days, which, finding herself * by nature timorous ' and * naturally
extream fearful,' she deliberately adopted. The constant sight of the
capacity and unswerving courage of her husband — ' and such a husband,'
as she calls him with fond pride — doubtless increased the habit of self-
depreciation which finds almost eloquent expression in one of her letters
to the princess Sophia :
* A woman is but a very uselesse and helplesse creature at all times,
especiely in times of war and difficulty. That I find by my own sad ex-
perience, that an old English inclination to the love and honour of the
nation signifys nothing in a woman's heart, without a man's head and
brains.'
Her joy on William's return from war * in good health with great
glory ' is doubly keen, since ' I am rid of all the troublesome bussinesse I
was so little fit for, and at liberty to praise my God, and to perform those
vows I had made in my trouble.' She had found it * impossible to pray
much when one has so much bussiness.'
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 175
In all departments of court life, but especially in one, Mary, with
William's good- will, made her influence felt. She saw that reUgion had
become a mere pohtical symboUsm, and her first resolve was ' to do what
I could towards making devotion loockt on as it ought.' The pomp of the
sacrament, and particularly the practice of the king taking it first and alone,
especially shocked her. She determined to get rid of the * foolery,' and
by her first Christmas day in England, in spite of the opposition of the
bishop of London, she had succeeded, ' with much ado,' in making the
sacrament again a ' communion.'
Worse than all the trials to which she was subjected from such
matters as these, was one, suflScient to wring the nerves of any woman,
which she thus touchingly describes : * On 10 Aug. (1692) I received
Orandval's trial, in which I saw that which must afflict me while I Hve,
that he whom I dare no more name father was consenting to the bar-
barous murder of my husband. 'Tis impossible for me to expresse what
I then felt. I was ashamed to loock anybody in the face. ... I lamented
his sin and his shame ; I feared it might lessen my husband's kindness
to me.' It is pleasant to read a Httle later, 'My husband's kindness
makes up all.'
In the midst of all these agitations — of * cruel thoughts ' that her
husband and he whom she ' dare no more name father ' might by the fate
of war meet hand to hand in battle, of her loneliness and sense of for-
sakenness, during WilUam's absence, by all save the God she trusted —
there was time, and there was the capacity, for much shrewd and inde-
pendent observation. Thus, for example, she describes the council of
nine, whom the king left to support her during his campaign in Ireland :
*Lord President was the person the king had particularly recom-
mended to me, and he was one to whom I must ever owe great obliga-
tions, yet of a temper I can never like. Lord Stuart the king had
likewise recommended as one might be trusted and must be compli-
mented, but he I found weak and obstinate, made a mere tool by a party.
Lord Chamberlain too lazy to give himself the trouble of bussiness, so of
little use. Lord Pembroke is as mad as most of his family, tho' very
good-natured and a man of honour, but not very steady, as I found in the
bussinesse of Lord Torrington. Lord Nottingham was suspected by most
as not true to the government. None would trust or have anything to do
with him, tho' in the post he was he must do all. The king beheved
him an honest man, tho' he was thought too violent for his party.
Lord Monmouth is mad, and his wife who is mader governs him. I knew
him deeply engaged in Scotland, and not much to be trusted, yet must
know all. I will say nothing of Lord Marlborough because 'tis he I could
say the most of, and can never deserve either trust or esteem. Sir John
Louthere, a very honest but weak man, yet chief of the Treasury. Mr.
Bussell was most recommended to me for sincerity, yet he had his
faults.'
We have quoted freely in this brief notice, because in Mary's simple
language lies much of the charm of these memoirs. Their importance
consists, as we have said, not in new historical information that they give,
nor in any efforts of wit ; but the contrast which they draw between the
pure dignity of Mary and the times of moral and political corruption in
Digitized by
Google
176 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Jan^
which she led a well-nigh blameless life is as striking as it is complete.
Any one who can read them without feeUng touched must be strangely
dead to the beauty and the power of the gentler virtues.
Osmund Aibt.
Die armirten Stdnde und die Beichskriegsverfasswng (1681-1697). Von
EiCHARD Festeb. (Frankfurt a. M. : Carl Jiigel. 1886.)
This is a valuable contribution to the elucidation of a period of German
history which had been much neglected by modem writers before Droysen,
and which under Droysen's lead has of late been too exclusively treated
from the point of view obUgatory upon Prussian historiographers. The
earHer part of this period is one of peculiar difficulty, not to say deUcacy,
in the history of the poUcy of the great elector, who here appears in the
character of an ally of France ; but even so, the author of this essay is
doubtless right in protesting against the habit of regarding the history of
Germany at so comparatively early a date as nothing but the history of the
dualism between Austria and Prussia. The labours of Hanoverian writers,
and of Dr. Eocher in particular, are, it is true, adding considerably to
the materials in hand : Herr Fester*s essay itself shows how indefatigably
Ernest Augustus was at work in — shall we say feusiUtating the progress
of the mission of the house of Guelph ? The essayist's own inquiries
take a rather wider range than might be concluded from his title. His
more immediate task is the exposition of the extraordinary impotence
of the military constitution of the empire in the fetal period of Lewis XIV's
most deliberate spoliations, at a time when the mihtary vigour of the
Germans was, if not at its height, at least unsurpassed by that of any
other European people. In the year of the fall of Strassburg (1681) an
imperial army of 40,000 men had been very distinctly put upon paper.
But when in April 1689 war was at last declared by the empire against
France, whose troops had crossed the frontier more than six months
before, there were no imperial forces to conduct it ; and it was really
carried on, so far as Germany was concerned, by the emperor and the
signatory powers of the so-called * Magdeburg concert' of October 1688. A
very curious portion of this essay is a long and by no means unentertaining
history of the relations between the ' armed ' and the ' non-armed ' estates,
to which latter were assigned, at first by the circles of the empire, and then
by the emperor's sole authority, the burdens of winter quarters and war
contributions. Hence bitter complaints on the part of ' assigned ' estates,
as they were called, such as the free city, supposed to be inexhaustible in
its resources, of Frankfort-on-the-Main ; and on the other hand endless
trouble on behalf of ' armed ' estates, such as Electoral Saxony, in ob-
taining part of the moneys allotted to them. Herr Fester carries his
narrative down to the year 1697, when the end of all this chicanery was
the conclusion of the Frankfort association, only a few months before the
opening of peace negotiations at Ryswick, by tiie * un-armed ' circles of
the west and south-west, and their admission into the grand aUiance.
But even the fear of Lewis XIV, whose aggressions had completely altered
the sentiments of the estates of the empire towards its head, was unable
to call into life after the peace of Byswick anything approaching to a
general military constitution.
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 177
Hen* Fester's researches throw considerable light upon many important
passages in European affairs during the troubled period to which they refer ;
though he modestly points to other passages which they have left as dark
as ever, such as the transactions leading to the conclusion of the league of
Augsburg in 1686. Special attention may be directed to his brief but lucid
summary of the military situation in the spring and summer of 1688 ; for in
his opinion it is an error to regard the invasion of the palatinate and the
siege of Philippsburg as nothing more than a diversion intended to hinder
the expedition of William to Orange. The time has certainly come for a
less one-sided treatment of the action of France than has been customary
with historians of the English revolution or editors of Orange correspond-
ence ; and Herr Fester's arguments should not be overlooked by those who
take into accoimt the miUtary condition of Germany as affecting the
schemes of Lewis XVI and Louvois. A. W. Wakd.
Le Ghdtecm de Versailles, Histoire et Description. Par L. Dussieux.
2~« Edition. (Versailles: L. Bernard. 1885.)
Le Petit-TrianoTif Histoire et Description. Par Gustave Desjardins.
(Versailles : L. Bernard. 1885.)
Versailles was the life-blood of that system which made * the favour of
kings the divinity of the French nation.' Hence almost every page of
M. Dussieux' interesting volumes attests the truth of Montesquieu's
apophthegm, La mona/rchie se perd lorsque le prince, rapportant tout
uniquement d lui, appelle V4tat d sa capitale, la capitale d sa cowr, et la
cowr d sa seule personne.*
A royal crime first brought the locality into notice. Its seignior was
murdered by command of Catherine de Medicis during the massacre of
8t. Bartholomew in order that his estate should be given to Albert de
Gondy, due de Retz. Some thirty-five years later its woods witnessed the
d4but as a sportsman of Louis XIII, a child then six years old. Arrived
to manhood his frequent visits to the district for the pleasures of the
chase occasioned the purchase of land, from the De Gondys amongst
others, and in 1624 the erection of a hunting lodge. This ere his death
had developed into a chdteoM, mean indeed if compared with that of
Fontainebleau, yet boasting of rich internal decorations, marble staircases,
and gilded roofis. In the gardens horticulture was supplemented with
fountains, grottoes, and those tart-like • knots and figures of divers coloured
earths ' which Lord Bacon had lately derided. In the mMagerie was a
collection of wild animals, whilst upwards of a hundred men tended the
Mcons, sakerets, merlins &c. that the king was wont to cast at game of
every description from the eagle to the nightingale and the bat. Very
different from such simple pastime was the series of brilliant fStes given
between 1663-74 by Louis XIV when under the influence of Mdlle. de la
Vallidre and Mme. de Montespan. Of these M. Dussieux has gleaned
ample details from the * Gazette * and Loret's * Muse Historique.'
Hitherto consecrated to pleasure, in 1682 Versailles became the seat
of government, and, once more to quote Montesquieu, a seminary for the
conversion of the great seigniors into a corps of lacqueys. Louis XIV
had already despoiled his nobles of power by the creation of intendants.
VOL. II. — ^NO. V. N
Digitized by
Google
178 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Jan-
To deprive them, moreover, of personal freedom, he lured them to his
court, ruined them by luxury and high play, then bought them with those
* pensions, wages, and appointments ' which Vauban estimated at forty
million livres per annum. To prepare Louis XUI's little Ch&teau de
€artes for its new destiny and for the requirements of 10,000 inhabitants,
enlargements were effected, annexes and accessories built. At last there
arose from out the malarious marshes a gigantic disproportioned monster
which by 1690 had swallowed upwards of 116 million livres ; this sum
exceeded by a third the total of one year's public revenue, and must be
multiplied by five to adjust it to the present value of money. The
splendour of the interior of the chdteau may be conceived from the fact
that the whole of the furniture in the grande galerie, benches, chairs,
tables, candelabra, &c., consisted of solid silver and was manufactured at
the Gobelins under the direction of Lebrun.
An elaborate court ceremonial supplied an excuse for the existence of
a class which had resigned its political raison d'itre. So rigid was the
etiquette that even princesses bent the knee as they passed the monarch's
empty bed or the nef that contained his dinner apparatus. Excitement
was sought in cards and dice, balls and masquerades, Lulli's music,
Molidre's comedies and Bourdaloue*s anathemas. But the ennui produced
by so artificial a life was invincible and was increased by a conventual
silence bred of suspicion. To break the monotony the young duchesse de
Bourgogne found distraction by turn in milking cows and making butter,
in gambling and drink, in acting Bacine's sacred dramas, in riding races
en cavalier, in visiting the fairs and halles. Even the self-styled Apollo
wearied of his Parnassus, yearning for a retreat where he might escape
the adoration of his worshippers and enjoy the repose of an ordinary
mortal. His choice fell upon Marly, a hermitage on which he expended
thousands of millions. To suit his caprice vast woods were suddenly
transformed into sheets of ornamental water ; in a few weeks these were
once more replaced by forest trees. It was after a futile attempt to check
one of these extravagances that Mme. de Maintenon exclaimed, ' Mais le
peuple que deviendra-Uil ? ' Marshal Vauban could have told her that
one-tenth of the population was already begging for bread, and that five-
tenths more were reduced to almost the same extremity.
The unreasoning devotion with which Louis XTV in his old age
attempted to atone for the vices of his youth was followed by the orgies of
the regency and the innumerable amours of Louis XV. The history of
Versailles degenerated into a chronique scandaleuse, whilst the very form
of the ch&tea/u received the impress of the general decadence. The palace
that Northleigh in 1702 declared to be the most beautifol in Europe is
described by Smollett in 1768 as ' dark, ill-furnished, dirty, and un-
princely, a fantastic composition of magnificence and littleness, of taste
and foppery.* This verdict is rendered easily intelligible when M. Dussieux
tells of the model kitchens and still-rooms in which his majesty made
ragouts and pastry, of the secret stairs, sliding panels, listening closets,
and spy-holes whence he supervised the members of his seragUo ; or when
the same narrator enters into the minutisB of the appa/rtement des maA-
tresses built immediately over the king's rooms, of the suite on the ground
floor for the reigning favourite, of the appartement des petites maitresses
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 179
for the houris of lesser pretensions, and the houses in the Qocbrtier Pare
aux Oerfs reserved for the amours volages.
La cupiditS de Vhomme et son ignorance I voild les g&nies malfaisants
qui ont perdu la terre I voild les ddcrets du sort qui ont renversi les em-
pires ! * Now the king will be able to sleep in peace,' said Mme. de Pom-
padour when Canada like the other colonies was lost to France, thanks to
peculation and an empty treasury. The princesses were sent to a convent
to receive a cheap education, but the mistress could exact from her royal
lover a present of six thousand livres * for being good enough to allow the
surgeon to bleed her.' During her reign of nineteen years she squan-
dered nearly thirty-seven million Hvres. When Mme. Dubarry became
the recognised sultana the infamy of her character rendered her presenta-
tion at court a diflSculty ; however, Mme. de B^am performed the service
for one hundred thousand ^us, while the duchesse de Mirepoix was
bribed to become her soupeuse by a pension of one hundred thousand livres.
As the collapse of the old rigime drew nearer, and a national bankruptcy
became imminent, every member of the court thirsted for plunder. The
comte de Provence secured spoil to upwards of fourteen million hvres.
The queen's waiting women made fifty thousand livres a year by the
sale of candle-ends. The different royal households domiciled in Versailles
absorbed 88,700,000 Hvres. Louis XVI's table alone cost more than
two million Uvres. His domestic officers and servants mustered four
thousand. Scandalised by the abuses of every description, the emperor
Joseph n predicted in 1777 that terrible struggle in which the despotism
of the monarchy succumbed to the despotism of hberty. By the republic
the chdteau was dedicated to purposes of national instruction. By Louis
XVin it was made an asylum for returned 6migr&s, who dried their linen at
the windows and kept cows and milch goats on the roof. The citizen king
transformed it into a museum of * all the glories of France.* In January
1871 it was the theatre of the deepest humiUation the country has yet
endured.
The addition of an index would render this work as valuable to the
student as it is fascinating to the desultory reader. Such aid is the more
needful as the discursiveness of M. Dussieux' style, joined to the
method by which he has amalgamated the social with the architectural
history of the several portions of the chdteoM, is inimical to ^ consecutive
narrative and the claims of chronological sequence. We would observe
that * Milord Fidlin,' who figures as Enghsh ambassador in 1684 (vol. i.
p. 33), is evidently a misnomer for Basil, Viscount Fielding ; whilst in all
humihty we doubt whether * La Palatine' is any improvement on the
title the lady herself tells us she bore, viz. Madame tout court, or
Madame la duchesse d'0rl6ans. The illustrations possess rare artistic
excellence and antiquarian interest.
Still more sumptuous is the volume which M. Desjardins introduces
to us as • a very big book on a very Httle subject.' It is in truth the
production of an omnivorous collector rather than of a discriminating
historian. Here and there we meet with some fresh instance of Marie
Antoinette's indiscretion, or of the rapacity of her firiends. We glance
through the catalogue of her hbrary, the details of the comedies in which
she acted, the journal kept by her husband whilst at the Petit Trianon.
K 2
Digitized by
Google
180 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Jan.
We study with delight the reproductions of Van Blarenberghe's minia-
tures. But our interest flags over the bills of feje for every member in
the household, detailed statements of garden expenses, botanical disserta-
tions, the estimates of architects, and the like.
E. Blanche Hamilton.
A Sketch of the History of Hindustan from the first Mivslim Conquest U>
tJte Fall of the Mughal Empire. By H. G. Keene, CLE., M.R.A.S.
(London : W. H. Allen. 1885.)
A GOOD history of Lidia under its Mohammedan rulers is much wanted.
The pubHcations of Sir H. M. Elliot, Professor Dowson, and Principal
Bloohmann, and the progress made in antiquarian and notably numismatia
researches by the late Mr. Thomas, Mr. Bodgers, and several other scholars^
have revolutionised to a great extent our notions of medieval Lidia ; and
excellent in many respects as are the works of Elphinstone and the older
authorities, the time has fully come when the mass of material accumu-
lated in recent years should be used in a new and exhaustive history of
Mohammedan India. Mr. Keene's previous works led us to hope that he
would accomplish this important task ; hut the volume before us does not
altogether justify our expectation. For part of the period of which it
treats — the part included between the accession of Akbar in 1556 and the
death of Aurangzib in 1707 — it is perhaps the best, and certainly the
most interesting, general history that we possess ; but the earher period
is very scantily described, and the epoch of the British conquest has
received better treatment from other hands. The early invasions of
India by Mahmud of Ohazni surely merited more than ten lines, and the
rule of his successors in the Panjab and Afghanistan, from 1080 to 1187
(an interval estimated by Mr. Keene at ' about one hundred years *), is
somewhat cursorily discussed in five Unes. Mr. Keene practically ignores
all Mohammedan rule in India before the foundation of the DehH kingdom
by Mohammed b. Sam in 1206 ; he devotes 82 pages to this Dehli kingdom,
which lasted three hundred and twenty years ; he omits all reference to
the numerous minor dynasties which sprang up in Jaunpur, Gujarat,
Malwa &c. on the decline of the central authority ; and he concentrates
his attention almost solely upon the Mughal empire — 1526 to 1808.
Such principles of selection may make a very interesting book, but it
must not be called a history, or even a * sketch of a history,' of Hindustan.
Moreover, this partial sketch appears to have been taken in haste. The
language, albeit graphic, is not what we have a right to expect from
Mr. Keene, and there are a number of hasty generaUsations which mature
reflection would have dismissed. The statement, for example, that Prince
Mohammed was ' an almost solitary instance of a Muslim of rank who took
wine in moderation ' (p. 84), can hardly be accepted as sober history. Haste
has also apparently led Mr. Keene into the occasional suppression of a
sultan, as when he drops out Firoz's son Ibrahim, and makes *Ala-ad-din
immediately succeed the father ; or when he leaves out Mubarak Shah
(1816-20), and describes Taghlak as the successor of 'Ala-ad-dln. Some-
times he confuses two persons, as when he calls Mohammed ibn Taghlak
* Tughlak II ' — quite a different prince — and limits his reign to fourteen
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 181
instead of twenty-six years. A little care would have enabled Mr.
Eeene to dispense with the footnote in which he adopts Mr. Beale's
date 1510 for Sikandar's death against Ferishta's 1517 ; for in Thomas's
* Chronicles of the Pathan Kings of Dehli/ a work indispensable to all
historians of India, the coins of Sikandar bear dates as late as 1514. The
statement, again, that Bahldl seized Dehli on Mohammed's death is con-
tradicted by the fact that *Alam Shah struck coins there for seven years
before Bahldl took possession. In smaller matters this careless haste is
painfully manifest. A note tells us that ' the system of spelling Oriental
words is that adopted by the government of India.' Whatever that
system may be — and Indian oflScials seem to differ on this point^ — it is
surely consistent? But are we to accept as the orthography of the
government of India such varieties as these: Sdyad, Sdyid, Saiyid;
Bah^, Bihdr, Behdr; Ujjein, Ujain; Muhammad, Muhamad; Punjdb,
Panjdb ; Ajmere, Ajmer, Ajmir ; Abul-Fuzl and Fazl ; and so on ? How
does Mr. Eeene justify the use of an acute accent to represent alike the
'alif of prolongation' and the *ayn — as Khdn, Sddi, Ydkub? The
number of small inaccuracies of this kind is serious. Sometimes the
printer is at fault, as when we find repeatedly Ra^itambor for Rantambhor,
Abkar for Akbar, Jaupar for Jauhar ; and it is curious that Messrs. Allen
should have selected a fount of type which possesses no acute accents for
* or Uf and therefore leaves the ordinary reader uncertain as to the pro-
nunciation of Mahmud (Mahmud) while carefully accenting the unmis*
takable syllable Shdh. But no printer is to blame for mistakes in Arabic,
such as * Amir ul Amra ' or * Umra,' for Amir al-Umara, which Mr. Keene
variously translates 'premier,' * premier peer,' and 'chief captain;' or
the insertion of the second vowel in Fateh (Fath) or the apostrophe
before Asad ; or treating the Arabic formula Jalla Jalaluhu as a sort of
Persian, Jilli Jaldlihu. Whence did Mr. Keene derive the information
that Amir is a 'Persian' title? Such errors may be unimportant in
popular Hterature, but in a serious historical work they are inexcusable.
With all its defects, however, and despite its lack of proportion, this
volume will be found a useful and instructive sketch of a great epoch
in Indian history. Mr. Keene hQ.s used the most recent authorities,
notably Elliot's Indian historians, in compiling his graphic and interest-
ing chapters on the * great Mogul ' emperors ; his own wide acquaintance
vnth Asiatic affairs has enabled him to give life and meaning to events
.and characters which in less skilful hands would have lost their signifi-
cance; and in tracing the causes which contributed to the collapse of
Akbar's wonderful organisation of the empire he exhibits clear political
insight. As an interesting and in many ways valuable book, this sketch
of a portion of the history of Hindustan deserves a second and more
iiccurate edition. S. Lane-Poole.
The Early Hanoverians (Epochs of Modem History). By Edwabd E.
Morris. (London : Longmans, 1886.)
Mr. Morris' treatment of the sovereigns of the house of Hanover,
if judged by the scientific standard of history which the works of Ranke
have now made familiar to all historical students, is certainly defective.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
182 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Jan,.
He does not, for example, in the least grasp the relations of the first two
Georges and their beloved Hanover to the hauie politique of England..
• The policy of the first two Georges cannot be described as European/ But
this is just what it was, and just what their fondness for their hereditary
dominions necessarily made it. Hanover, as Banke shows, took the place
formerly occupied by Holland, over which it had besides a paramount in-
fluence, as the centre of the great protestant interest. Prussia, though
at times restive, was gradually forced to obey the same impulses ; the
English people themselves learnt by slow degrees to understand the value
of Hanover, and in the Seven Years' war it became the fulcrum on which
was rested the lever by which the modem British empire was raised
under the hands of Chatham. Its previous office had been much the
same, though, in consequence of English prejudices, less understood. To
treat, therefore, the Hanoverian question, the leading one of the period
treated in this book, on the mere basis of size and population, and number
of troops, and unpopularity with the English, is to miss the whole point.
Nor can we absolve Mr. Morris from the charge of falling short of
the more enlarged view taken now-a-days of the policy of the three Georges
in respect of political party. To imagine that any party but the whigft
could have been trusted by either George I or George II as long as the
Jacobite interest prevailed, even in a contemptible form, is to import the
ideas of our own times into those of five generations ago ; and to blame
George HI for attempting to get * rid of party domination ' as an * un-
successful and almost disastrous ' policy, is to ignore the fact that the
' Revolution families ' had sunk into decrepitude, that Jacobitism had
passed away, and that the time had come for a wholesome ' balance between
the two parties ' which was quite out of the question in 1714. So far
from being disastrous, it was only by a revival of one of the great English
parties, which had been necessarily kept under restraint for two generations,,
that any wholesome political life was brought back to the government.
Similarly we detect in our author an estimate of the treaty of Utrecht
which he has not learnt from Heeren or Banke, writers who can afford to
approach this vexed question free from English party bias, and a view of
Bolingbroke's services to English poUtics which savours not a little of
Macaulay and his school. When will our historical literature shake itself
clear of that fascinating influence ? We look also in vain for a discrimi-
nating treatment of Walpole's career during its later and ignominious
stages, or for any guidance towards the comprehension of the real causes-
which plunged the country into war. The Spaniards are said to have
* exercised their undoubted right of search * in the West Indies ; but so &r
from being * undoubted,' an examination of the various treaties between
England and Spain shows that they had not a shadow of right to*
search English vessels upon the high seas, and this was what they did.
The shallow pun of Walpole upon the ringing of bells at the declaration
of war, to the effect that the people would soon be * wringing their hands,'
is quoted without being exposed ; just as if any nation which is forced inta
war, however unavoidably, can expect to escape reverses, especially at first.
Finally, for we must close our remarks, there is a great opportunity lost
in describing the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle (p. 176) when the object is to
instruct an age which has entirely forgotten the critical importance of Cape
Digitized by
Google
1887 JREVIEWS OF BOOKS 188
Breton in the history of English colonisation and imperial growth. Who
would gather from the cursory notice of it here given that it was the key
to the possession of North America, and that both French and English
were perfectly aware of the fact ? Let any one who doubts it study the
pamphlets of the period and the movements of the hostile fleets.
It is very agreeable to turn to the merits of this little work, its per-
spicuous style, its adoption of so many stories and anecdotes, which are
the life of history, its inclusion of the ever-charming * Anson's Voyage '
amongst its chapters, its numerous maps and tables, and its well-bestowed
praise of Sir Isaac Newton. It is not so certain that in his desire to be
fair the author has hit the right medium as to Voltaire and Rousseau.
His treatment is a great deal too much like whitewashing men for whose
principles and influence it is highly desirable that the rising generation
should have a good deal of the old-fashioned contempt. Whether the
rising generation will make much of such narratives as that of the Polish
war may be doubted. But here the writer is struggling with a difficulty
inherent in the nature of these little books about great things. History
must be more or less an epitome and summary, but these ' epoch' books
have great defects. They may be required and they seem to sell, but
whether they raise the level of historical knowledge may be doubted. We
are, however, so sadly in want of proper histories of England, Scotland,
and Ireland, that we cannot wonder that attempts should be made to
deal with them piecemeal. Montagu Bukrows.
Souvenirs du feu Due de Broglie (1785-1870). Vols. I-IH.
(Paris: L6vy. 1886.)
The due de Broglie, prime minister of France under Louis Philippe,
whose * Souvenirs * are now published by his son, was bom in 1785 and lived
until 1870. He began to write his * Souvenirs ' about 1856, but at his
death had brought them no further than 1880. The first volume covers
the period from 1785 to 1817. The duke was grandson of the famous
marshal de Broglie ; his father, who was colonel of the Bourbonnais
regiment, had served in the American war, and returned to France with
constitutional ideas. Sympathising in consequence with the first move-
ments of the revolution, he incurred the displeasure of the mar^chal, who
from that time never mentioned his son's name. The grandson was bom
early enough to remember the Festival of Federation in 1790. Four
years later the hand of the Terror fell heavily on his family. EKs parents
were Uving in retirement at Saint-Remy, when an order arrived from
Paris for the arrest of both of them. Means of flight were open, and
the boy was present while his father and mother debated whether they
should surrender. They gave themselves up : the father was carried to
Paris and perished on the guillotine ; the mother was taken to the prison
at Vesoul, from which she succeeded in making her escape, resorting to
the extraordinary measure of having her children brought into the town
in order to lull suspicion. Young De Broglie passed the prison-door at
the very moment when his mother's flight was discovered : the scene,
which is most vividly described, never left his memory. The chateau de
Broglie was now confiscated ; the peasants seized and burnt the muni-
Digitized by
Qoo^^
184 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Jan.
ments, and threw the steward out of the window, the approved mode of
enfranchising copyholds at that time. After Thermidor this confiscation,
like others, was annulled, and in 1797 the lad, who in the meantime had
been at Paris and elsewhere seeing something of the new society under
the directory, returned with a tutor in a one-horse chaise to take possession
of the devastated home of his ancestors. He remained only a few days,
and then went back to Ormes, the abode of M. d'Argenson, who had now
become his stepfather. At Ormes he saw the deputies who were trans-
ported after the coup d'6tat of 18 Fructidor, on their way to the coast in
barred vans. The caravan halted close to M. d'Argenson*s gates, but the
prisoners were not allowed to leave the vans ; yoimg Broglie with his
mother and sisters took them fruit and other refreshments, which they
were allowed to accept. ' The sight was a lamentable one ; great was
the indignation felt, but still greater was the consternation. Every one
expected a renewal of the Reign of Terror, and prepared for it with resigna-
tion.' Two years later came the coup d'itat of Brumaire, welcomed by
France at large, according to the writer, because it was just the opposite
of the coup d'&tat of Fructidor, and delivered the nation from its appre-
hensions of a return of the worst times of Jacobinism. The opinion ex-
pressed by the due de Broglie on the consulate is extremely favourable.
Its four years are, he considers, with the ten years of the reign of Henry
lY, the most noble part of the history of France. At this period the
youth was making acquaintance with persons of some eminence, and
pursuing his studies in a desultory way. On reaching full age in 1806,
application was made by his friends for his employment in some branch
of the administration, bad eyesight disqualifying him for the army. He
had, however, to wait three years before the request was granted. In the
meantime accident brought him into contact with some strange figures in
the great poUtical drama then being played. Ormes was on the high road
to Spain. Napoleon passed through the place on his way to Bayonne,
when about to receive the abdication of Charles IV of Spain. Some days
later M. d'Argenson received notice from an imperial courier that the king
and queen of Spain and Godoy, the prince of the peace, would arrive on
the following day at his own house. In due course the imfortunate couple
appeared, travelling in enormous gilded carriages, beUeved to be ttie
identical ones with which Philip Y had made his entry into Spain, the
attendants all in gala costume, as if they were on a drive of ceremony in
Madrid. The king looked hke Lear, but it was only on the outside.
He rushed about the chateau and the gardens roaring for Godoy, and did
not settle down until he had got Godoy into the biUiard-room, where he
passed the whole evening. The queen behaved with much more dignity.
Six months after this sorry pilgrimage came the disaster of Baylen, fol-
lowed by the passage of great masses of troops into Spain, along the same
highway through Ormes, where young Broglie entertained a brilliant
company of officers, of whom one iJone lived to repass the Pyrenees.
In 1809 Broglie's political career began. He was appointed an auditor,
or subordinate secretary, in the war department of the council of state. All
the auditors were at first permitted to be present at the meetings of the
council. Broglie describes the part taken by the emperor in the discus-
sions, and entirely denies that he was great or impressive in his speech.
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 185
* He spoke long, without much connexion in his ideas, very incorrectly,
and constantly repeating the same expressions. In his slovenly and often
trivial mode of utterance there was little trace of the qualities shown in
the memoirs dictated by him at St. Helena.* The emperor, however, was
soon off to the Austrian campaign of 1809, and Broglie himself was sent
to Vienna, and subsequently to Eaab in Hungary, where he acted as civil
commissioner imtil the conclusion of peace. In 1811 he was sent into
Spain, to perform somewhat similar duties at ValladoHd, under Marshal
Bessi^res. Here, in his official capacity, he had to sign his name to
orders of the marshal which, as he candidly allows, would have shocked
even the convention in the height of the Eeign of Terror. Some of these
are given at length, and they well deserve to be preserved, as proof of the
means by which the French attempted to overcome the resistance of the
Spanish people. If the progress of the due de Broglie in the pubho
service was not rapid, his appointments were at least varied and inte-
resting. On the eve of the invasion of Kussia he was attached to the
embassy at Warsaw. Here, after the capture and the evacuation of
Moscow, he shared the suspense of the terrible six weeks that followed.
When the famous 29th bulletin at length arrived, describing the passage
of the Beresina, Broglie was at once despatched with it to M. Otto, the
French ambassador at Vienna, and was present when it was communi-
cated to Mettemich. The * Souvenirs ' at this point are of extreme historical
interest. Broglie was constantly at the centre of events in 1818, and
himself obtained by bribery during the negotiations of Prague statistics of
the army of Austria, and in some cases not only copies but the actual
hsts. Napoleon, however, would not believe that the Austrian army was
so numerous, an error which cost him dear. This at least is Broglie's
statement of the matter, on which, however, a letter written by Napoleon
to Maret on 8 July would seem to place a different complexion. On the
restoration of the Bourbons, Broglie was called to the chamber of peers ;
appointed during the Hundred Days to a seat on one of the councils
of departments, he took the oath to Napoleon, for which he subsequently
reproached himself. On the second restoration, he voted for the acquittal
of Ney, and placed himself in the ranks of the independents, finally, how-
ever, joining the doctrinaires. Here the first volume of the * Souvenirs '
closes. Its interest is but faintly represented by a sketch of its political
contents ; and to some readers its portraiture of that brilliant circle in
which the writer, the son-in-law of Madame de Stagl, moved, will be even
more attractive.
If the truth must be told, the due de Broglie's book ought to have
stopped at the end of the first volume, or rather to have been resumed
only towards the end of the third. The work as it stands resembles a
pottle of London strawberries, in which there is an extremely good layer
at the top, while almost all below is worthless. The explanation of this
is simple ; in the first volume the duke keeps to his own excellent rule,
and writes souvenirs, not history ; in the succeeding volumes he writes
history, not souvenirs. The second and the greater part of the third
volume are simply a parliamentary record from the point of view of a
member of the moderate opposition. In place of Napoleon we have
M. Eoyer-CoUard and M. de Serre, personages to whose speeches and
Digitized by
Qoo^^
186 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Jan.
opinions half a dozen historians have akeady done ample justice. In
the dreary chronicle (which now so completely abandons the character
of souvenirs as to narrate in summary the Spanish, Neapolitan, and
Portuguese revolutions, with which the writer had absolutely nothing
to do) it needs close search to discover anything outside the parlia-
mentary commonplace of which every student of that epoch has long ago
had enough. There are, however, one or two such touches; e.g. the
duke's account of his efforts to keep Lafayette and D'Argenson outside
the range of the investigation made into the conspiracies of 1821 ; or,
again, the account in the duchess's diary of the manners of Madame de
Balbi, as a specimen of the coarseness and the insolent fajniliarity that
belonged to the old rigime. Ces vieilles f&mmes de Vancien regime ont
des fagons inconcevahles, H n'y a qiie la perfection du bon goUt qui
jmisse enseigner de si mauvaises manidres. . . . Elle faisait demander
une prise de tabac d un d&puU de sa connaissance ; puis elle perdait son
rrumchoir, et faisait demander d ses voisins de lui en priter un. Elle
aA)mti en tout, cette famiUarit^ insolente des grandes dames d^ autrefois
qui se croyadent tout permis. Very characteristic is the cause that
brought the duchess's diary to a close. The duke discovered that two of
his men-servants had been hired by the police to copy out every word
the duchess wrote and to send it to the administration. The duke's own
letter to the minister of police, on this discovery being made, is in his
grandest manner ; scarcely worth publishing, however, sixty years later.
In an episode in the third volume which breaks the parliamentary sing-
song we find one more of the fEunous myths of the revolution blown to
the winds, that namely which describes Boissy d'Anglas, as president of
the convention, saluting with Boman dignity the head of the murdered
deputy F6raud when the convention was stormed by the mob on
1 Prairial. It is not often that the actual inventor of a legend can
be discovered, but he has been in this ca^e, and proves to be a certain
M. Hochet, one of a band of Thermidorian journalists, who used their
pens with as little compimction in the good cause as the jeunesse dorSe
did their clubs. La joumde ayant bien fini, confessed M. Hochet to the
duke long afterwards, nous nous r&unimes dans la nuit pour en rSdiger le
rScit. II nous fallait, pour en tirer bon parti, la personnifier dam un
grand homme, et dans quelque action magnanime, C*est alors que nous
imagindmes le petit drame qm est devenu de Vhistoire. The process thus
frankly described probably operated in a good many more cases, which
still need exposure. On the other hand, the duke was himself eye-
witness of an incident in the irevolution of 1880 which, had it been re-
counted at the time, might well have seemed incredible. A lad of twelve
faced a company of soldiers standing entirely alone in the middle of the
street ; when they came within ten paces he fired, then threw down his
gun and awaited his fate. The soldiers fired, but the lad was not hit^
the soldiers, as Broglie thinks, sparing him out of admiration. Though
the duke himself played no important part in the struggle i^;ainst the
ordinances of Charles X, and seems generally to have kept out of harm's
way on principle, it was impossible for a politician of his rank to be
wholly without share in the action of the parliamentary liberals during
the famous three days. As soon as the duke of Orleans had resolved to
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 187
accept power, he summoned Broglie to him, and made him first a con-
fidant and then a minister. At this point the third volume of the * Souvenirs *
ends : the concluding volume, which has not yet reached us, must he re-
served for separate notice hereafter. It is to be regretted that the duke did
not pass at once from 1818 to 1880. His reminiscences of the first years
of the Orleanist monarchy cannot but have been of importance, both
from the personal and from the historical point of view. Those of the
years 1818-1829 are unfortunately as barren of personal interest as they
are historically jejune. C. A. Fyffe.
The second edition of Professor Eh^s's volume on Celtic Britain, in
the series of books on * Early Britain * pubhshed by the Society for Promot-
ing Christian Knowledge, has but lately reached us. It has been changed
not a httle, and lengthened by a few pages ; but our special reason for
noticing it here is that we have not yet found an opportunity of calling
attention to a book which, instead of being, Hke most works issued in a
* series,* a mere compilation or abridgment from previous writings by
the author, is a solid piece of original and independent work from be-
ginning to end. Probably the characteristic which most strikes the
historical student is the sure touch with which Mr. Rh^s, as one might
expect, handles points connected with his own philological studies, and
in a single sentence clears away a cloud of confusion which has been
raised by the vague guesses of those who are only historians. And there
can be no doubt that in the particular branch of history which Mr. Rh^s
writes, philology as the most abundant source of our information is also,
if rightly handled, the safest guide we can have for putting our scanty
historical facts in their proper order. Among the happy suggestions
to be found in the volume before us, we may note the manner in
which the name * Bemicia ' is traced to the * Brigantes ' (pp. 118, 114), and
the brilliant explanation of the word ' Bretwalda ' as chosen to mark the
Northumbrian and East AngHan conquests, the termination being * of the
same meaning and etymology as the Welsh gwledig,' which was the
title borne by the supreme ruler of the K}Tnry as representing the dttx
Britanniarum of the Roman imperial service (pp. 186-188 ; cf. pp. 104,
121, &c.) The notes at this end of the volume, dealing with the etymology
and appHcation of various Celtic names, have been revised throughout
in the new edition, and some interesting additions have been made ; for
instance, the note on Vriconium, which Mr. Rh^s considers should be
spelt with a v instead of a u, and thus brings it into closer connexion with
the Wrekin. We observe that the writer leaves the place of the battle
of Degsastan (as Bseda gives the name), where Aedan was defeated by
iEthelfrith in 608, undecided (p. 168). May not this be the same as the
battle of Cattraeth, of which we read in the ' Gododin * ? The site of
Cattraeth would well suit the requirements of the case ; for it can hardly
be anything but Cataractonium (now represented by the town of Catterick),
which was the important station on the Roman road norfch-west of York.
It would be interesting to know Mr. Rhj^s's opinion on the point. In a
subject so full of puzzles as that with which the professor deals, it is
natural that there should be many things on which his arguments do not
at once convince us. But we may note as specially instructive his treat-
Digitized by
Google
18» REVIEWS OF BOOKS Jan-
ment of early Scottish history, which shows an advance on Mr. Skene's
writings, his remarks on Celtic mythology, and his new and original in-
vestigation into the traces of a pre-Celtio or Ivemian population in the
British islands. Many of the difficulties in the book are doubtless due to
the compression which has been necessary to bring it to the required limits
of its ' series.* It needs considerable rearrangement ; the sentences are
sometimes cumbrous, and the paragraphs often too long.* We cannot but
hope that Mr. Rh;^s may be persuaded to enlarge the volume into what
will assuredly be the standard book on its subject.
Mr. Freeman's Historical Geography of Europe has experienced a
curious fortmie in the process of translation into French. Whether the
book has been improved or not, we need not now discuss ; but we think
that an author has a right to complain when his title and whole method
of arrangement are altered, and when the translation is made not from
the second edition of his work which appeared so long ago as 1882, but
from the first edition which it superseded : — and yet this work is pubhshed
as his own—Histoire g&nirale de V Europe par la giographie politique,
par Edward A. Freeman^ Membre honoraire du ColUge de la Triniti d
Oxford, traduite de V anglais par Qustave Lefehvre ' (Paris : Armand
Cohn. 1886). In the original the text is accompanied throughout by full
marginal headings and dates ; in the translation the dates are inserted in
the text, and the marginal notes entirely omitted. In the place of them
we have a division into sections and sub-sections with separate titles,
which have nothing to correspond with them in the original and are not
always good in themselves. For instance chapter x. on the Eastern
Empire ends with a rapid summary of six pages referring to the entire
chapter : in the French the chapter has become livre iii. and the con-
cluding summary is made into the third section of the ninth chapter of
that livre ; the connexion with the chapter (or livre) as a whole is
lost. Then, as for arrangement, the chapter on * The imperial kingdoms'
is changed into Etirope centrale, opening with Le royaume de Germanie
(887-1806) (p. 185); the * kingdom of Italy' becomes le royaume
d'ltalie des empereurs allemands (p. 231). The inconvenience of trans-
lating from an old edition is especially great in the present case, because
that edition contained a number of additional notes, in some cases referring
to current questions (as about Dulcigno), which ought of course to have
been incorporated in the text, as they are in fact in the English second
edition. But M, Lefehvre is not even faithful to the edition from which
he professes to translate. Names are introduced, the use of which Mr.
Freeman, rightly or wrongly, consistently avoids. Thus on pp. 96, 98, the
* EngUsh ' become in the translation * Anglo-Saxons ; ' instead of * the
empire' (or * the Frankisli dominions ') we find V empire fraud (pp. 888 &c.)
instead of the * duke of the French,' le dtvc de France (p. 887). A French
writer may perhaps be excused for declining to translate the * recovery
of Elsass-Lothringen ; ' but he has no right to read into Mr. Freeman's
account of the coincident change in the German constitution a r^tablisse-
ment de V empire d'Allemagne (p. 228). Nor do we suppose, to take a
small point, that Mr. Freeman can be pleased to see his phrase of ' hand-
ing over Greek and Bulgarian alike to the uncovenanted mercies of the
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 189
Turk ' reduced to on a Uvr4 Us uns et les autres d la compUte discretion
des TuTcs (p. 471). One word must be added about the accoiiipanying
atlas. The author was careful in his preface to disclaim for his maps any
' pretensions to the character of an historical atlas.' This character they
have assumed in the translation ; nine maps are also added, and to each
page is subjoined a summary of the geographical changes made in a given
period. Fhially the volume containing the text is introduced by a dis-
sertation by M. E. Lavisse giving a general survey of the whole subjects
We are not criticising the value of these additions ; they are no doubt
perfectly legitimate, so long as their independent character is clearly
understood and stated on the title-page. But we wish to point out that
in all these changes the translator has misconceived his province, and
that his work is not Mr. Freeman's * Historical Geography of Europe,'
but an adaptation of it.
The Domesday Conunemoration Committee of the Royal Historical
Society held their series of meetings at the end of last October, as we
announced in our July number. The first permanent record of the com-
memoration has appeared in the shape of a beautifully printed quarto
pamphlet, entitled Notes on the Manuscripts dc. exhibited at H.M,
Public Becord Office on that occasion (London: Longmans). The
collection includes not only the Domesday book and its appurtenances,
together with the * Abbreviatio,' the ' Breviate,' and the BoldonBook, but
also such documents as the Red and Black Books of the Exchequer, the
pipe rolls, specimens of exchequer tallies, the * Testa de Nevill,* the
taxation of Nicholas IV,, the * Valor Ecclesiasticus,* and a variety of
registers, chartularies, transcripts of charters, &c. The descriptions are
concise and carefully written; though from the point of view of the
bibhographer, notices like ' This record has been printed,' * portions of
this book have been printed in the transactions of various archsBological
societies,' are quite insufficient. Of Domesday itself we are glad to see
that a special bibliography is in course of preparation by the committee.
In his life oi Raleigh in Messrs. Longmans' series of * English Worthies, '^
Mr. Gosse has sought to portray Raleigh's * personal career disengaged
from the general history of his time.' He claims to be the first to have
' collated ' the fresh matter contained in recent biographies, and to have
added a few new facts. He has also ' taken advantage up to date of the
reports of the Historical Manuscripts Commission and of the two volumes
of Lismore papers ' pubHshed in 1886. This statement, however, leads one
to expect more original work, and a completer use of the authorities at
hand, than the book exhibits. The years of Raleigh's Hfe which fell in
the reign of James I, where Mr. Gardiner's history is available, are more
full and interesting than those dealt with in the earHer chapters. Much
more might be said, for instance, of his marriage and of his position at
court at EHzabeth's death. Some of Mr. Gosse's complaints of the
obscurity of the subject and lack of material seem needless. ' So abso-
lutely is the veil drawn over his personal history at this time [1599] that
the only facts we possess are, that on November 4 Raleigh was lying sick
of an ague, and that on December 18 he was still ill ' (p. 114). There ia
Digitized by
Google
190 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Jan.
an air of elaborate accuracy about this remark that leaves one quite un-
prepared to find in so obvious a source as the Sidney papers some nine or
ten references belonging to the later half of this very year. Mr. Gosse
might like to know, for example, that Raleigh was not too ' sick ' to be
present at a great assembly in the Star chamber on November 29, when
a declaration was made by the council on Essex's management of the
Irish disturbances, and on certain ' dangerous libels cast abroad,' in which,
we learn a few days later, Ealeigh was suspected of being concerned.
Some small mistakes may be noted. On Baleigh's appointment to the
governorship of Jersey, Mr. Gosse says the queen * thought it right . . .
to strike off dOOZ.' from the income attached to the post. This was
simply a continuation of a charge which had been granted to Lord Henry
Seymour on the salary of the previous governor. On page 187 North-
ampton appears as one of Ealeigh*s ' worst enemies ; ' on page 218 as an
* old friend.* No explanation is given of there being two earls in question,
nor are they distinguished in the index. In spite of such blemishes, Mr.
Gosse has made, as might be expected, a very attractive volume. We may
particularly call attention to the excellent use made of Raleigh's own
narratives of his voyages to Guiana, to the charming account of his life
in the Tower, and to the sketch of the * History of the World.' But the
reader might be puzzled to explain how his 'judicial martyrdom ' makes
Raleigh * the embodiment of the spirit of England in the great age of
Elizabeth ' (p. 130).
In this connexion we may notice a pamphlet which Dr. T. N. Brush-
field has reprinted from the Transactions of the Devonshire Association
for the AdvWhcement of Science, Literature, and Art. Dr. Brushfield has
collected forty-seven ways of spelling Sir Walter's name, ranging from
* Rale * to * Wrawley,' and argues strongly in favour of * Ralegh ' being
adopted as the recognised form.
Mr. A. H. Bullen has published a beautiful volume of Lyrics from
the Song Books of the Elizabethan Age (London : J. C. Nimmo), which
he has edited with his accustomed taste and judgment.
The Vicomte E. M. de Vogii6 has published a volume of essays entitled
Le Boman Busse (Paris : Plon, Nourrit, et Cie), the contents of which
have already appeared in the B&vue des Deux-Mondes. The book con-
tains careful studies of the leading Russian novelists, preceded by an
introductory sketch of the literature of Russia in general. Here and
there we feel inclined to challenge a statement. The author says, for
instance, of the Ostromir codex of the gospels (a.d. 1056), Au milieu des
productions si ricentes de la litt&rature nationale, ce volume symbolise
leur source et leur esprit ; whereas the book was hardly known till the
latter days of the empress Catherine. On p. 208, the cathedral of St.
Basil at Moscow is said to have been bdtie par des a/rchitectes tartares.
But there were no Tatar architects, and this fantastic btiilding, as well as
other Moscow churches, was btiilt by Italians, who were extensively em-
ployed by the Ivans. M. de Vogii^ gives a rapid summary of the master-
pieces of the Russian novelists, some of which are already known in
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 191
England, and others (as those of Dostoievski) gradually becoming
^miliar. The analysis of these works is subtle and appreciative.
Messrs. Macmillan & Co. have brought out a second edition of the
translation of Lanfre/s History of Napoleon, which first appeared in
1871-79. Like its predecessor the work is in four volumes, but they are
smaller in size, and more uniform in thickness ; the type is also larger.
The addition of an index is a useful feature in this reissue.
The late Hobart Pasha's autobiographical sketches {Sketches from my
Life : London, Longmans) trench too closely upon politics to be reviewed
in detail here ; but it may be said of them that they preserve recollections
of an eyewitness concerning the American civil war and the last Busso-
Turkish campaign which possess some of the merits of firsthand evi-
dence. Hobart, however, was too much of a party man to see things
with an unprejudiced eye, and many of his statements require qualifica-
tion, while his habitual neglect of dates has led him into occasional re-
versals of history, as when he writes of Pius IX's escape from Civiti
Vecchia, as though it happened after Oudinot's occupation.
Mr. J. Bass Mullinger asks us to correct an oversight in his notice of the
ArchitecPu/ral History of the University of Cambridge which appeared in
the October number of the English Histobicaii Eeview (vol. i. pp.
788-792)* ' I ought,' he says, * to have mentioned that the facts relating
to the notable Benedictine movement which led to the establishment of a
college for their own order at Cambridge are given by Mr. Willis Clark in
pp. xlviii, xlix of the introduction. A careful comparison of these flacts
with the history of the site of Magdalene College given in the second
volume would supply a sufficient corrective of the discrepancies in these
latter pages to which I drew attention ; but these pages give no reference
to the account in the introduction, and (as the febcts were already familiar
to me) their mention there escaped my memory when I came to the
account of Magdalene College itself.'
Digitized by
Google
192
Jan»
List of Historical Books recently published
I. GENEEAL HISTORY
(Indading works relating to the allied branches of knowledge and works
of miscellaneous contents)
Gasaobandi (V.) Lo spirito della storia
d*Oocidente. I: Medio evo, con an'
appendice snlla storia dell' evo modemo.
Pp. 238. Genoa : tipogr. dell' Istituto
Sordomnti. 8*50 1.
Frebbcan (E. a.) The chief periods of
European history ; six lectures read in
the university of Oxford [1886] : with
an essay on Greek cities under Boman
rule. Pp. 250. London: Maomillan.
10/6.
Laurie (S. S.) Lectures on the rise and
early constitution of universities ; with
a survey of medieval education [aj>.
200-1360]. Pp. 293. London : Kegan
Paul. 6/.
BCabqibr (£.) Essai sur I'organisation
du pouvoir judiciaire k Borne, dans
I'ancienne constitution fran^aise, ei
d'apr^ le droit constitutionnel modeme.
Pp. 189. Toulouse: Saint-Gyprien.
BfsBOATOR (Gerard). Orbis Imago. Map-
pemonde [1638]. Notice par J. van
Raemdonck. Pp. 85. Saint Nicolas:
Edom (from the *Annales dn ceroW
arch^ologique du pays de Waes,' x. 4).
MxTLHALL (M. G.) Dictionary of Statistics.
New edition, revised. Pp.500. London:
Boutledge. 6/.
QuATBEFAOES (A1 de). Histoirc g^n^rale
des races humaines. Introduction k
r^tude des races humaines ; questions
g^n^rales (* Biblioth^ue ethnologique ') .
Illustr. Paris : Hennuyer. 12 f .
Baoinet (A.) Le costume historique.
Ginq cents planches, avec des notices
expUcatives et une 6tude. Paris : Didot.
4to.
Seidler (G.) Budget und Budgetrecht
im Staatshaushalte der oonstitutio-
nellen Monarchic, mit besonderer Bfick-
sichtsnahmeauf dasdsterreichische und
deutsche Verfassungsrecht. Pp. 244.
Vienna : Hdlder.
^ Thoumas (g^^ral G.) Les capitulations ;
^tude historique militaire sur la res-
ponsabilit^du commandement. Pp. 503.
Nancy : Berger-Levrault. 18mo. 6 f.
n. ORIENTAL HISTORY
Castelli (D.) Storia degl' Israeliti dalle
origini nno alia monarchia, secondo le
fonti bibliche criticamente esposte. Pp.
ciii, 416. Milan : Hoepli. 16mo. 6 1.
Ghuboh (A. J.) The Story of Garthage.
Pp. 332. London : Fisher Unwin. 6/.
Gluok (M.) De Tyro ab Alexandre Magno
oppugnata et capta; qusstiones de
fontibus ad Alexandri Magni historiam
pertinentibus. Pp. 53. Ednigsberg :
Koch Bl Beimer. 1 m.
KoTTEK (H.) Das sechste Buch des Bellum
ludaicum, nach der von Geriani photo-
lithographisch edirten Peschitta-Hand-
Bchrift tibersetzt und kritisch bearbeitet.
Pp. 45, 30. Berlin : Bosenstein & Hil-
desheimer. 3 m.
Manzi (L.) n commercio in Etiopia,
Nubia, Abissinia, Sudan, dai primordt
alia dominazione musulmana. Pp.
343.
81.
Boma: tip. Gentenari. 16mo.
NoLDEKE (T.) Ueber Mommsen's Dar-
stellung der rdmischen Herrschaft und
rOmischen PoUtik im Orient. Pp. 21.
Leipzig: Brockhaus. (From the * Zeit-
schrift derdeutschen morgenlandischen
Gesellschaft.')
Salza (N.) Gartagine dalle origini alle
guerre puniche : ricerche storiche. Pp.
96. Gasale : Pane. 16mo. 1*60 1.
Smend (K) & SooiN (A.) Die Inschrift
des Eonigs Mesa von Moab, fiir akade-
mische Vorlesungen herausgegeben.
PP' 35 » plate. Freiburg-im-Breisgau :
Mohr. 2*60 m.
SiOTH (B. Payne). Daniel : an exposition
of the historical portion of the writings
of tibe prophet Da^L London : Nisbet.
6/.
Digitized by
Qoo^<^
1887 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED 193
m. GREEK HISTORY
Attinoeb (G.) Beitrage zur Geschiohte
von Delos bis auf 01. 153. 2. Pp. 73.
Frauenfeld : Huber. 2 m.
DuNCKER (M.) Geschichte des Alter-
thums. Neue Folge. 11. Pp. 525.
Leipzig: Danc'ker & Humblot.
GnLDENGBOME (baronne Diane de).
L'Aohaie f^dale; 6tude sur le moyen
Age en Gr^ [1206-1456]. Paris:
Leroax. 10 f.
FiNCATi (L.) La perdita di Negroponte :
laglio 1470. Pp. 49. Rome : Forzani.
(From the * Rivista Marittima.')
FoKKE (A.) Bettangen des Alkibiades.
II : Der Aofenthalt des Alkibiades in
Sparta. Pp. 112. Emden : Haynel.
2 m.
Leemans (O.) Grieksche opschriften uit
Klein- Azie in den laatsten tijd voor het
Bijks-Museum te Leiden aangewonnen.
Uitgegeven door de Koninklijke Aka-
demie van Wetenschappen te Amster-
dam. Pp. 40, plates. Amsterdam :
MiiUer. 4to. 1-80 fl.
Mbnard (L.) Histoire des Grecs. 2
vol., iUustr. Paris : Delagrave. 12mo.
7-50 f.
Sathias (C. N.) Documents in^dits rela-
tifs k rhistoire de la Gr^e an moyen
Age. VI. Pp. 333. Venice : Visentini.
201.
Veroooio (B.) Giannandrea Dona alia
battaglia di Lepanto. Pp. 220. Genoa :
tip. dell' Istituto Sordomuti. 2 1.
IV. ROMAN HISTORY
Fbrsini (C.) Storia delle fonti del
diritto romano e della giurispnidenza
romana. Pp. 150. Milan : Hoepli.
2-60 1.
Gbboobovius (F.) Geschichte der Stadt
Bom im Mittelalter. Vom fiinften bis
zum sechzehnten Jahrhondert. 4th
edit. I. Pp. 488. Stuttgart: Gotta.
9 m.
Hbuzey (L.) Les operations militaires
de Jules C^ar, 6tudi6es sur le terrain
par la mission de Mac^oine. Aveo
cartes et vues. Paris: Hachette.
10 f.
JuRispRUDENTi^ antejustinian» qusB su-
persunt. Edited by P. £. Huschke.
5th ed. enlarged and corrected. Pp.
880. Leipzig : Teubner. 6*75 m.
Lepaulle (E.) L'6dit de maximum et la
situation mon^taire de Vempire sous
DiocUtien. Pp. 122. Paris: Bollin &
Feuardent. 4to. 5 f .
Pellisson (M.) Bome sous Trajan. Pp.
304. Paris : Librairie g6nerale de vul-
garisation. 2*50 f.
PuGLiA (F.) Studl di storia del diritto
romano, secondo i risultati della filo-
sofia scientifica. Pp. 196. Messina:
Carmelo De Stefano. 4 1.
Bauschen (G.) Ephemerides Tullianea
rerum inde ab exsilio Ciceronis [Mart.
57 A.C.] usque ad extremum annum LIV
gestarum. Pp. 64. Bonn: Behrendt.
1-20 m.
Bugoiero (E. de). Dizionario epigrafico
diantiohit^ romana. 1: Abiicus^Achaia.
Pp. 32. Bome: Pasqualuoci. 1*50 1.
ScHWEDER (E.) Beitrage zur Eritik der
Ghorographie des Augustus. Ill : Ueber
die Chorographia, die rdmisohe Quelle
des Strabo, und iiber die Provinzial-
statistik in der Geographic des Plinius.
Pp. 59. Kiel : Haeseler. 2 m.
SoLTAU (W.) Prolegomena zu emer r6-
mischen Chronologic (Jastrow*s *His-
torische Untersuchungen,' III). Pp.
188. Berlin : Gaertner. 5 m.
TiOHB (A.) The development of the Bo-
man constitution. Pp. 131. New York :
Appleton. 18mo. 45 cents.
Zalla (A.) & Parrini (C.) Storia di Boma
antica daUe origini italiohe fino aUa ca-
duta deirimpero d*Occidente. Pp. 188.
Florence : Paggi. 16mo. 2 1.
V. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY
Babilebnse, Concilium. (Monumenta con-
ciliorum generalium seculi quinti de-
cimi ediderunt Cffisareee Academite
Scientiarum socii delegati.) Scriptorum
m, pars 1. Pp. 398. Vienna : Gerold's
Sohn. 4to.
BoccACiNo (F.) <fe Caucino (A.) Le fonda-
zioni di patrimonii ecclesiastici, ossia
titolo di ordinazione, e la legislazione
del regno d'ltalia. Pp. 203. Turin:
tip. Subalpina.
Charles (abb^ B.) <fe Menjot d'Elbknnb
(S.) Cartulaire de I'abbaye de Saint-
Vincent du Mans (ordre de Saint-
Benolt). I [572-1184], 1. Pp. 239.
Mamers : Fleury & Dangin. 4to. 10 f.
VOL. II. — NO. V.
Cheranck (L. de). Saint Francois d*As-
sise [1182-1226]. Pp. xxiv, 468, por-
trait. Paris : Poussielgue. 18mo. 3 f.
Constance.— Begesta episcoporum Con-
stantiensium. Begesten zur Geschich-
te der Bischdfe von Constanz von
Bubulcus bis Thomas Berlower [517-
1496]. I, 1. Edited by F. von Weech
<fe Paul Ladewig. Pp. 80. Innsbruck :
Wagner. 4to.
CuRzoN (H. de). La r^le du Temple, pu-
blic pour la Soci^t^ de I'Histoire de
France. Pp. xxxvii, 368. Paris : Lau-
rens. 9 f.
Dalton (H.) John a Lasco : his earlier
life and labours. A contribution
Digitized by
Google
194 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED Jan.
to the history of the reformation in
Poland, Germany, and England. Trans-
lated from the German by the rev. M.
J. Evans. Pp. 376. London : Hodder &
Stoughton. 7/6.
DoBRiNO (O.) Beitrage zur altesten Ge-
schichte des Bisthums Metz. Pp. 150,
map. Innsbruck: Wagner.
Ferreiroa (U.) Historia apolog^tica de
los Papas, desde San Pedro al Pontifice
reinante. I. Pp. 376. Valladolid : Pas-
tor. 4to. 6 rs.
FoNTANELLENsiUM, Gesta abbatum *. edi-
ted by S. Loewenfeld (Scriptores Bermn
Germanioanmi in nsnm scholarom, ex
Monumentis Germanisa historiois re-
cusi). Pp. 60. Hanover : Hahn. 90 pf.
Franciscans. — Annales minorum, sen tri-
om ordinum a s. Francisco institn-
torum [1612-1622]. XXV. Ad Claras
Aquas prope Florentiam: ex typ. col-
legii s. Bonaventurie. Pp. 742. Folio.
Harnack (A.) Die Quellen der soge-
nannten apostolisohen Eirchenordnong,
nebst einer Untersuohung iiber den Ur-
sprung des Lectorats und der anderen
niederen Weihen (Gebhart & Hamack's
Texte und Untersuchungen zur Ge-
schichte der altchristlichen Literatnr.
II, 5.) Pp. 106. Leipzig : Hinriohs. 4 m.
HiNAiTLT (abb^ A. C.) Origines chr6-
tiennes de la Ganle oeltique; recher-
ohes historiques sur la fondation de
r^glise de Chartres et des ^lises de
Sens, de Troyes, et d'Orl^ans. Pp. 534.
Paris : Bray & Betaux. 6 f.
Herzooenruro, Urkunden des regulirten
Ghorherrenstiftes, vom Jahre seiner Ue-
bertragung von St. Georgen [1244-
1460]. Edited by M. Faigl. Pp. 557.
Vienna: Mayer.
Jrnkins (B. C.) The story of the Cara£Fa,
the pontificate of Paul IV, with all that
followed after his death in the pontifi-
cate of Pius IV ; translated with introd.
and notes, from a manuscript written
about 1640-50. Pp. 116. London:
Eegan Paul. 12mo. 8/6.
Kruoer (G.) Lucifer, Bischof von Ca-
laris, und das Schisma der Luciferianer.
Pp. 130. Leipzig: Breitkopf and Har-
tel. 2*40 m.
Lanolois (E.^ Les registres de Nicolas
IV : reoueii des bulles de ce pape, pu-
blic oa analyst d'apr^ les manus-
orits originaux des archives du Vatican.
I. Pp. 136. Paris : Thorin. 4to. 10 f.
LsoHLBR (G. V.) Urkondenfunde zur Ge-
Bchiohte des diristlichen Altertums.
Pp. 80. Leipzig : Edehnann.
BfAOAia(F.) Ennodio [a biography]. 3 vol.
Pp. 386, 323, 444. Pavia : Fusi.
Mattheis (L. de). San Gregorio VII e il
pontificate romano. Pp.693. Siena:
tip. s. Bernardino. 16mo. 4 1.
Maurer (M.) Pabst Calixt H. I: Vor-
gesohichte. Pp. 82. Munich : Kaiser.
1-60 m.
Meloares MarIn (J.) Procedimientos de
la Inquisici6n ; persecuciones religio-
sas ; origen y car&cter eclesi&stico de la
Inquisioi6n Ac. II. Pp. 489. Madrid:
Bubiilos. 4.50 rs.
PouGEois (abb6 A.) Histoire de Pie IX,
son pontificat et son si^le. VI : La cap-
tivity et la mort. Pp. 548, illustr.
Paris : Boussidre. 6 f.
PoNTiFicuM Bomanomm, Acta inedita.
-Ill : Urkunden der Papste [590-1197].
Edited by J. von Pflugk-Harttung.
Ill, 1. Pp. 411. Stuttgart: Kohl-
hammer. 18 m.
B^ORMATEURS, Gorrespondauce des, dans
les pays de la langue fran^aise. Edited,
with historical and bibliographical
notes, by A. L. Herminjard [1541-
1542]. VII. Pp. 546. Geneva : Georg.
10 f.
Both (F. W. E.) Die Visionen und Briefe
der heiligen Elisabeth, und die Schrif-
ten der Aebte Ekbert und Emecho von
Schdnau, nach den Original-Hand-
sohriftenherausgegeben : mit einemhis-
torischen Abriss des Lebens der heili-
gen Elisabeth, der Aebte Ekbert und
Emecho von Schdnau. 2nd ed. Pp.
cxxviii, 423 ; plate. Wiirzburg : Woerl.
8 m.
BovERS (M. A. N.) Geschiedenis van het
Christendom. 2nd edit, enlarged and
improved. Pp. 274. Amsterdam: T.
van Holkema.
Salembier (L.) Petrus de Alliaoo. Pp.
Ixix, 384. Lille : Lefort. 7 f .
Schneider (C. M.) Gregor VII der Hei-
lige; ein Lebensbild, zur Erinnerung
an das achthundertjahrige Jubilaum des
Heimganges dieses grossen Papstes
gezeidmet. Pp. 372. Batisbon : Ver-
higs-Anstalt. 5*80 m.
Terris (J. de). Les Evdques de Carpen-
tras; 6tude historique. Paris : Le-
chevalier. 6 f.
Vattier (V.) John Wydyff, sa vie, ses
oeuvres, sa doctrine. Portrait. Paris :
Leroux. 10 f .
WiNTERSTEiN (B.) Der Episkopat in den
drei ersten christliohen Jahrhunderten.
Pp. 97. Vienna : Tdplitz & Deuticke.
WoLFSORUBER (C.) Die vorpapstUche
Lebensperiode Gregors des Grossen,
nach seinen Briefen dargestellt Pp.
50. Augsburg : Huttler. 1*50 m.
VI. MEDIEVAL fflSTORY
Gerbxhk (M.) Les monnaies de Charle-
magne. Premiere partie: description
des pieces. Pp. 132. Ghent: Leliaert,
Siffer, A C*. 7*50 f.
Gantisaki (F.) Considerazioni soUa
oaduta dell' impero d*Oooidente. Pp.
13. CastroviUari : Patitucci. 16mo.
Desprez (A.) La France et TEurope
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED 195
sous Charlemagne. Pp. 303. Paris :
lib. g^n^rale de valgarisatlon. 3 f.
EiCHNEB (B.) Beitrage zur Gesohichte
des Venetianer Friedenskongresses vom
Jahre 1177. Pp. 66. Berlin : Calvary.
1-20 m.
FoRAS (comte A.) Le droit du seigneur
au moyen ≥ 6tude critique et his-
torique. Paris : Lechevalier. 12mo.
8-60 f.
Hbtd (W.) Histoire du commerce du
Levant au moyen Age. Edition Iran-
9aise refondue et oonsid^rablement
augments par Pauteur, public sous
le patronnage de la Soci6t6 de I'Orient
latin par Furcy Baynaud. II. Paris :
Lechevalier. 20 f .
MiKuiiLA (J.) Der Sdldner in den Heeren
Kaiser Friedrichs II. Pp. 70. Breslau :
Edhler. 1 m.
NissL (A.) Der Gerichtsstand des Clerus
im frankisohen Reich. Pp. 247. Inns-
bruck : Wagner.
Prou (M.) Baoul Glaber : les cinq livres
de ses histoires [900-1044]. Pp. 143.
Paris : Picard. 3-50 f.
VII. MODEEN HISTOEY
Bbibfwechsel der Ednigin Katharina und
des KSnigs J6rome von Westphalen,
sowie des Kaisers Napoleon I, mit dem
Kdnig Friedrich von Wiirttemberg.
Edited by A. von Schlossberger. I :
[8 October 1801-22 December 1810].
Pp. zxxii, 422. Stuttgart: Kohlham-
mer. 10 m.
Castelar (E.) Historia del ano 1884.
Pp. 421. Madrid: Bivadeneyra. 4to.
De F'ezensac fduc). Campagne de Bussie
[1812] ; with notes by Granville Sharp.
Pp. 180. London : Bivington. 2/6.
Dklaforest (G.) L*Alsace ; souvenirs de
la guerre de 1870-1871. Pp. 216.
Tours : Mame. 1*20 f.
Gatti (C.) Giacobini e liberali. I : La
rivoluzione francese di 1789. 11:
I tempi Napoleonici. Ill: II risorgi-
mento italiano. Pp. 247 ; portraits.
Florence : Salani. 16mo.
HoPF (J.) Nouveau recueil g^n^ral de
traitis et autres actes relatifs aux rap-
ports de droit international ; continua-
tion du grand recueil de G. Fr. de
Martens. Second series, X, 4. Gdt-
tingen : Dieterich. 6*40 m.
MarAchal (E.) Histoire de PEurope et
particuli^rement de la France [1610-
1789]. Pp. 1076. Paris: Delalain.
12mo. 6-60 f.
Masson (F.) Les diplomates de la revo-
lution : Hugon de Basseville k Borne ;
Bemadotte k Vienne Illustr. Paris :
Perrin. 6 f.
Moreaux (L.) Le g6n6ral Ben6 Moreauz
et rarm6e de la MoseUe [1792-1796].
Avec portrait, cartes, et pieces justifi-
catives. Paris : Didot. 12mo. 3*50 f.
Moris (H.) Operations militaires dans
les Alpes et les Apennins pendant la
guerre de la succession d'Autriche
[1742-1748], d'apr^s des documents
inddits. Pp. 360; map, Ac. Paris:
Baudoin. (From the 'Annales de la
Soci^te des Lettres, Sciences, Arts des
Alpes Maritimes,* X.)
Saint-Germain (de). 18 Juin 1815 :
Waterloo ; Bruxelles apr^s la bataille :
r6cit d*un t^moin oculaire. Pp. 61.
Brussels : Deprez. 18mo. 50 centimes.
Tadschbr (J.) Geschichte der Jahre
1815 bis 1871, kurz zusammengefasst.
Pp. 300. Gotha : Perthes. 5 m.
Vial (J.) Histoire abr^g^ des campagnes
modernes. 2 vol. Pp. 421, 357, with
atlas of 50 plates. Paris: Baudoin.
12 f.
Weir (A.) The historical basis of modem
Europe [1760-1816]: an introductory
study of the general history of Europe
in the nineteenth century. Pp. 630.
London: Sonnenschein. 15/.
WiNTGENS (W.) Politieke nabetrachting
[1848-1885]. Pp. 62. The Hague:
Belinfante.
Vm. FRENCH HISTORY
AuTORDE (F.) Histoire de la Marche;
m^moires du president Chorllon [1635-
1685] : ouvrage in^t, public d'apr^s
le manuscrit original. Pp. 238. Gu6ret :
Amiault. 5 f.
Baird (H. M.) The Huguenots and Henry
of Navarre. 2 vol. Pp. 458, 525, maps.
London: Eegan Paul. 24/.
Beautemps-Beaupre (C. J.) Les juges or-
dinaires d'Anjou et du Maine [1371-
1508]. Pp. 52. Angers: Lach^ et
Dolbeau.
Bellet (abb^ C.) Histoire du cardinal
Le Camus, 6v^ue et prince de Gre-
noble. Paris : Picard. 7*50 f.
Benoist (C.) Etudes historiques sur le
quatorzi^me si^le : la politique du roi
Charles Y; la nation et la royaut^.
Paris : Cerf . 12mo. 3*50 f .
Bimrenet (E.) Les ^oliers de la nation
de Picardie et de Champagne k Tuni-
versit^ d'Orl^ans. Pp. 184. Orleans :
Herluison.
Bois de Janciont (M. du). Sentence
arbitrale rendue par Jean II au sujet
d'une contestation entre Jacques, con-
notable de Bourbon, Blanche de Pon-
thieu, et Catherine d'Artois. Pp. 38.
Amiens : Douillet.
B018LI8LE (A. de). MOmoires de Saint-
o 2
Digitized by
Qoo^^
196 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED Jan.
Simon. Nouvelle Edition, augments
des additions de Saint-Simon an
Joamal de Dangeau, et de notes et
appendices. V. Pp. 655. Paris:
Hachette. 7-60 f.
BoncHABT (Alain). Les grandes chro-
niques de Bretaigne, composes en l*an
1514. Ed. by H. Le Meignen. I.
Paris : Lechevalier. 8'75 f.
BocaiER (L.) & BoNDois (P.) Histoire de
France depuis Loais XI jusqn'^ 1815.
PP' 353 *» 32 illustr. Paris : Alcan.
12mo. 2-60 f.,
Brutails (A.) Etude sur Tesclavage en
Roussillon dutreizidme au dix-septi^me
si^cle. Pp. 44. Paris : Larose &
Forcel. 2 f.
Caix de Saint- Aymoub (vicomte de). La
France en Ethiopie : Histoire des rela-
tions de la France aveo PAbyssinie
chr^tienne sous les rdgnes de Louis
XIHet Louis XIV [1684-1706]. Pp.375.
Map. Paris: Challamel. 12mo. 3*50 f.
Garkl (Pierre). Une ^meute k Caen
sous Louis Xm et Richelieu [1639] ;
Episode de la r6volte des nu-pieds en
basse Normandie. Documents in^dits.
Paris : Lechevalier. 2*50 f.
Ghabaud (A.) M^moire historique sur la
ville de Saint-Quentin, 6crit en 1775.
Pp. 198 ; map. Saint-Quentin : Poette.
Chalamet (A.) Les grands Fran^ais.
Les Franvais au Canada ; ddcouverte
et colonisation. Pp. 199; illustr.
Paris : Picard-Bemheini. 2 f.
Chapellier (abb6 C.) Etude sur la
veritable nationality de Jeanne d*Arc.
Pp. 15 ; plate. Nancy: Cr6pin-Leblond.
Chevalier (E.) Histoire de la marine
francaise sous le consulat et Tempire,
faisant suite k PHistoire de la marine
franyaise sous la r^publique. Paris:
Hachette. 7-60 f.
Closmadeuc (Ct. de). Les soroiers de
Lorient, proems criminel devant la
s^n^chauss^ d'Hennebont [1736]. Pp.
48. Vannes : Galles.
CoioNET (Madame). Fin de la vieille
France: Un gentilhomme des temps
passes ; Fran(;ois de Sc^peaux, sire de
Vieilleville [1509-1571]. Portraits et
r^cits du seizidme si^le, r^ne de
Henri II. Pp.438. Paris: Plon. 7*50 f.
Colombez (abb6). Histoire de la province
et comt6 de Bigorre, 6crite vers 1735.
Publi^e pour la premiere fois et annot^
par Tabb^ F. Duffau. Paris: Cham-
pion. 6 f.
Daudet(E.) Histoire deP^migration. II:
Les ^migr^s et la seconde coalition
[1797-1800]. Paris : Decaux. 6 f.
Danicourt (A.) Une r^volte k P6ronne
sous le gouvemement du mar6chal
d'Ancre [1616], avec des documents
in^its. Pp. 166 ; 2 portraits. P^ronne :
Quentin. 4 f.
DhRouLiiiDE (P.) Le premier grenadier de
France ; La Tour d'Auvergne : 6tude
>^»ographique. Pp. 274. Paris : HurtreL
16mo.
DuFOUR (A.) Relation du si^e de Corbes
[1590]. Traduite du j6suite Dondin,
avec introduction et notes. Pp. 44.
Fontainebleau : Bourges.
Fonbrune-Berbinau (P.) Daniel de Super-
ville [1657-1728J. Paris : Fischbacher.
8-50 f .
Fontaine de Bambouillet. La r^gence
et le cardinal Dubois, relations anecdo-
tiques. Pp. 381. Paris : L6vy. 18mo.
3-50 f.
GntoNDE, Archives historiques du d^parte-
ment de la. XXIV. Pp. 592. Bor-
deaux: F6ret. 4to. 20 f.
GuERRiER (W.) L'abb^ de Mablv,
moraliste et politique : 6tude sur la
doctrine morale du jacobinisme puri-
tain et sur II d^veloppement de I'esprit
r6publicain au dix-huiti^me si^le.
Paris : Vieweg. 8 f .
GniGUB (G.) B^its de la guerre de cent
ans : Les Tard-venus en Lyonnais,
Forez, et Beaujolais [1356-1369].
Paris : Champion. 18 f.
Hanotattx (G.) Etudes historiques sur le
seizidme et le dix-septi^e si^le en
France. Paris : Hachette. 12mo.
3-50 f.
Heath (K.) The reformation in France,
from its dawn to the revocation of the
edict of Nantes. (Church History
Series.) Illustr. London : Beligioos
Tract Society. 2/6.
Labbbt de la Boque (P. E. M.) Becher-
ches historiques sur le si^e du Mont
Saint-Michel par les Anglais [1423-
1424]. Pp. 64. Valognes: Luce.
16mo.
Lacombe (P.) Les noms des rues de Paris
sous la revolution. Pp. 39. Nantes :
Forest & Grimaud.
La Gournerie (E. de). Les debris de
Quiberon; souvenirs du d^sastre de
1795: suivis de la liste des victimes
rectifi^. Pp. 294. Nantes: Libaros.
18mo. 4 f.
Lagrange (abb6 F.) Vie de monseigneur
Dupanloup, ^vdque d'Orl^ans, membre
de PAcad^mie fran^aise. 3 vol. Pp.
Ixxvi, 483. 438, 496. Paris: Pous-
sielgue. 10*50 f.
Le Charpentieb (H.) Melanges histo-
riques sur Pontoise. Pp. xxxviii, 156.
Pontoise : Pdris. 4 f.
Legeat (F.) Documents historiques sur
la vente des biens nationaux dans le
d^partement de la Sarthe. I, H. Pp.
575» 564* ^ Mans: Leguicheux.
12mo.
Lb Gendrb (P.) Les hommes de la re-
volution: LakanaL Pp. 144. Paris:
Maurice. 16mo. 2 f.
Lehautcourt (P.) Campagne du nord
[1870-1871]: Histoire de la defense
nationale dans le nord de la France.
Maps. Paris : Lavauzelle. 6 f.
L'HoTB (abbe E.) Etudes historiques
sur le diocese de Saint-Die: Notre-
Dame de Saint-Die. Pp. 99. Saint-
Die: Humbert.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED 197
LuoHAiRE (A.) Becherches historiques et
diplomatiques sur les premidres ann^s
de la vie de Louis le Gros [1081-1100].
Pp.51. Paris: Picard. 2-60 f.
Mayidal (J.) & Laubbnt (E.) Archives
parlementaires de 1787 k 1860 : Keoueil
complet des d^bats ISgislatifs et poli-
tiques des chambres franpaises. Deu-
zitee s^rie [1800 k 1860J. LXUl [3
aoAt 1830-1" octobre 1830]. Pp. 816.
Paris : Dupont. 20 f.
MouLARD (P.) Enqudte sar les principes
religieox et la residence des gentils-
hommes dans le dioc^e da Mans en
1577. Pp. 55. Le Mans: Monnoyer.
Petit (abb^ J. A.) Histoire oontemporaine
de la France. IX: Charles X. Pp.
561. Paris : Palm6. 6 f.
PiCAUD (A.) La veiUe de la revolution.
Pp. 279. Paris : Charavay. 3*60 f.
BoBiNET(Dr.) Danton6migr6: recherches
sar la diplomatic de la r^pablique
[1793]. I^. 281. Paris : Le Soudier.
18mo. 4 f.
B0BIN8ON (A. Mary F.) Margaret of An-
gouldme, qaeen of Navarre. (* Eminent
Women ' series, ed. by J. H. Ingram.)
London : W. H. Allen. 3/6.
BosEROT (A.) Le plus ancien registre des
deliberations du conseil de ville de
Troyes [1429-1433]. Paris: Picard.
7-60 f.
BoussEL (abbe). Etude historique sur les
premiers evdques de Langres. Pp. 1 50.
Langres : Ballet-Bideaud. 1*50 f .
Bttble (A. de). Antoine de Bourbon et
Jeanne d'Albret (suite) : le manage de
Jeanne d'Albret. IV. Pp. 448. Paris :
Labitte.
Saint-Julien (A. de) & Bienatme (G.)
Les droits d'entree et d'octroi k Paris,
depuis le douzidme si^ole. Pp. 148.
Paris: Imprimerie Nationale.
Saint-Simon (de). Memoires. Publies par
MM. Cheruel et A. Begnier fils. XXI :
Supplement, publie par A. de Boislisle.
Pp. 451. Paris: Hachette. 18mo.
3-50 f.
Sebbe (J. A J. B. H.) Histoire de Brive
ancienne. Pp. 163. Brive : Verlhac.
SoBEL (A.) La maison de Jeanne d'Arc k
Domremy. Pp. 102, illustr. Orleans :
Herluison. 2-60 f.
SuPFLE (T.) G«schichte des deutschen
Eultureinflusses auf Frankreich mit
besonderer Berticksichtigung der lit-
terarischen Einwirkung. I: Yon den
altesten germanischen Einflilssen bis
auf die Zeit Elopstocks. Pp. 359.
Gotha : Thienemann. 7 m.
Tallox (M.) Histoire civile, politique, et
religieuse d*une ville du Languedoc.
Les Vans. 2 vol. I [des origines
k 1721], pp. 207 ; II [1721-1789], pp.
344. Privas : Imp. du Patriote. 8 f.
Tamizey de Larroque (P.) Les guerres
du rdgne de Louis XIII et de la mi-
norite de Louis XIV: Memoires de
Jacques de Chastenet, seigneur de
Puysegur. 2 vol. Pp. 304, 292. Paris :
lib. de la Sooiete bibiiographique.
12mo. 6 f.
Tessier (J.) La mort d'Etienne Marcel:
etude historique. Pp. 40. Paris:
Dupont.
TiEULUER (G.) Le coustumier de la
vicomte de Dieppe, publie pour la
premiere fois par E. Coppinger. Pp.
Ivii, 100. Dieppe : Leprdtre. 5 f.
TuETET (A.) Histoire generale de Paris :
Begistres des deliberations du bureau
de la ville de Paris, publies par les soins
du service des travaux historiques. II
[1527-1539]. Pp.467. Paris: Cham-
pion. 30 f .
Troyes. — Collection de documents inedits
relatifs k la ville de Troyes et k la
Champagne meridionale. UI. Pp.
474. Troyes : Lacroix. 8 f.
Vausntin -Smith & Gdioue (M. G.) Biblio-
theca Dumbensis, ou recueil de chartes,
titres, et documents pour servir a
Thistoire des Dombes. 2 vol. Pp.
764, 813. Trevouz : Jeannin. 4to. 30 f.
Valois (Marguerite de). Lettres inedites,
tirees de la Bibliotheque Imperiale de
Saint-Petersbourg [1579-1606], publies
par P. Lauzun. (* Archives Historiques
de la Gascogne,' XI.) Pp. 57. Paris :
Champion. 2*50 f.
VASCHAiiDE (H.) Olivier de Serres, sei-
gneur du Pradel, sa vie et ses travaux.
Documents inedits. Portrait, &c. Paris:
Plon. 10 f .
Zeller (B.) Louis de France et Jean
Sans-Peur, Orleans et Bourgogne [1400-
1409] ; extraits de Froissart, du reli-
gieux de Saint-Denis, de Juvenal des
Ursins, etde Monstrelet. Pp. 168, illustr.
Paris : Hachette. 16mo. 50 c.
Les Armagnacs et les Bourguignons ;
la Commune de 1413 [1409-1413]; ex-
traits du religieux de Saint-Denis, de
Monstrelet, et de Juvenal des Ursins.
Pp. 178, illustr. Paris : Hachette. 16mo.
50 c.
IX. GERMAN HISTORY
(Including Austria. See also Slavonian section)
Baring -Gould (Bev. S.) & Gilman (A.)
The story of Germany. (Story of the
Nations.) Pp. 440. Lonaon: Fisher
Unwin. 6/.
Below (G. von). Die landstandische Ver-
fassung in Julich und Berg bis zum
Jahre 1511, eine verfassungsgeschicht-
liche Studie. II: Die Zeit des bergi-
schen Bechtsbuchs. Pp. 79. Diisseldorf :
Voss. 3 m.
BussoN (A.) Beitrage zur Kritik der steyei-
ischen Beimchronik und zur Beichs-
Digitized by
Google
198 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED Jan.
gesohichte im dreizehnten und vier-
zehnten Jahrhundert. Pp. 33. Vienna :
Gerold's Sohn.
CoMBi (C.) Istria : stud! storici e politic!.
Pp.xlv, 318. Milan : Rebeschini. 16mo.
6 1.
Greusinos markische Fursten-Chronik.
Edited by F. Holtze. (Sohriften des
Vereins fur die Geschichte Berlins.
XXIII.) Pp. 205. Berlin : Mittler. 2-50 m.
DiEFENBACH (J.) Der Hexenwahn vor und
nach der Giaubensspaltung in Deutsch-
land. Pp. 360. Mentz : Kirchheim.
6 m.
DiixiNG (A.) Uebersicht iiber die Mimz>
geschichte des kaiserlichen freien welt-
lichen Stifts Quedlinburg. Pp. 36;
plates. Quedlinburg : Huch. 4to. 4 m.
HXnsen (J.) Beitrage zur Geschichte von
Aachen. I, 8. Kritik sagenhafter Be-
ziehungen Karls des Grossen zu Aa-
chen ; Die lutherische Gemeinde zu
Aachen im Laufe des sechzehnten
Jahrhunderts. Pp. 80. Bonn : Weber.
1-80 m.
Heidelbeiio. — Urkundenbuch der Univer-
sitat. Zur fiinfhundertjahrigen Stif-
tungsfeier der Universitat im Auftrage
derselben von*E. Winkelmann. 2 vol.
Pp. 496, 405. Heidelberg: Winter.
40 m.
Hkilmann (G. D.) Der Feldzug von 1800
in Deutschland. (From the • Jahrbiicher
fiir die deutsche Armee und Marine.')
Berlin: Wilhelmi. Pp. 132.
HiLGARD (A.) Urkunden zur Geschichte
der Stadt Speyer. Pp. 565. Strass-
burg: Trubner. 4to.
Historische Aufsatze, dem Andenken an
Georg Waitz gewidmet. Pp. 703. Han-
over : Hahn. 16 m.
K08BR (R.) Friedrich der Grosse als
Kronprinz. Pp. 267. Stuttgart : Cotta.
4 m.
Krones (F. R. von). Zur Geschichte Os-
terreichs im Zeitalter der franzdsischen
Kriege und der Restauration [1792-
1816], mit besonderer Riicksicht auf
das Beruf sleben des Staatsmannes Frei-
herrn Anton von Baldacci. Pp. 396.
Goth a : Perthes. 8 m.
EuNZE (K.) Die politische Stellung der
niederrheinischen Filrsten in den Jah-
ren 1314-1334. Pp. 86. GSttingen :
Vanderboeck & Ruprecht. 2 m.
Mecklenburqisches Urkundenbuch, he-
rausgegeben von dem Verein fiir meck-
lenburgische Geschiohte und Alter-
thumskunde. XIV [1356-1360]. Pp.
677. Schwerin : Stiller. 4to. 15 m.
Mentz. — Chronicon Moguntinum ;
edited by C. Hegel. (Scriptores rerum
Germaniearum in usum scholarum, ex
Monumentis German isB historicis re-
cusi.) Pp.103. Hanover : Hahn.
Nolten (F.) Archaologische Beschrei-
bung der Milnster- oder Krdnungskirche
in Aachen, nebst einem Versuch iiber
die Lage des Pallastes Karls des
Grossen daselbst. Mit einem Grund-
riss und Durchschnitt der Kirche.
Neuer, durch biographische und sach-
liche Zusatze vermehrter Abdruck be-
sorgt von J. Chorus [Joh. Becker]. Pp.
80. Aachen : Creutzer. 1 m.
NosiNiCH (J.) & Wiener (L.) Kaiser
Josef II als Staatsmann und Feld-
herr : Oesterreiohs Politik und Kriege in
den Jahren 1763-1790. Pp. 366. Vi-
enna : Seidel.
Prussia.— Acten der Standetage Ost- und
Westpreussens. Edited by M. Toeppen.
V, 2. (Published by the Verein fiir die
Geschichte von Ost- und Westpreus-
sen.) Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot.
9*60 m.
Rennbr (Dr.) Lebensbilder aus der Pie-
tistenzeit : ein Beitrag zur Geschichte
und Wiirdigung des spateren Pietismus.
Pp. 409. Bremen : Muller. 5 m.
Roth (E.) Geschichte von Hessen. 2nd
edit., continued to the fall of the elec-
torate by C. von Stamford. Pp. 590.
Cassel: Freyschmidt.
Roth von Schreckenstein (K. H.) Die
Ritterwilrde und der Ritterstand. His-
torisoh-politische Studien iiber deutsch-
mittelalterliche Standesverhaltnisse auf
dem Lande und in der Stadt. Pp. 735.
18 m.
Stein (F.) Geschichte Frankens. H.
Pp. 436, map. Schweinfurt : Stoer.
Strassburo. — Urkunden und Akten der
Stadt. I : Urkundenbuch der Stadt
Strassburg. II : Politische Urkunden
[1266-1332], bearbeitet von W.Wiegand.
Pp. 482. Strassburg: Triibner. 4to.
24 m.
Sybel (H. von). Gedachtnissrede auf
Leopold von Ranke. Pp. 18. Berlin :
Reimer. 4to. 1 m.
Tirol. — Acta Tirolensia : Urkundliche
Quellen zur Geschichte Tirols. I: Die
Traditions-Biicher des Hochstifts
Brixen; edited by O. Redlich. Pp.
Ixiv, 356. Innsbruck : Wagner.
Trinius (A.) Geschichte des Krieges gegen
Danemark [1864]. (Geschichte der
Einigungskriege, nach den vorziig-
lichsten Quellen fiir die Mitkampfer
und das deutsche Volk goschildert. I.)
Pp. 462. Berlin : Hempel. 6 m.
Geschichte des Krieges gegen Oest-
reich und des Mainfeldzuges [1866J.
(In the same series, II.) Pp. 547.
7-50 m.
Uluann (H.) Der Geschichtssohreiber
Johann von Miiller und Friedrich der
Grosse. (' Preussische Jahrbucher,* 58.
2.)
Weech (F. von). Siegel von Urkunden
aus dem grossherzoglich badischen Ge-
neral-Landesarchiv zu Karlsruhe. 2nd
series. UI. 15 plates. Pp. 8. Frank-
furt : Keller. Fol. 15 m.
Weerth (O.) & AnemI'ller (E.) Biblio-
theca Lippiaca. Uebersicht fiber die
landeskundliche und geschichtliche
Litteratur des Fiirstenthums Lippe. Pp.
88. Detmold: Hinrichs. 1-60 m.
Digitized by
Google
1887 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED 199
Webveke (N. van). Beitrage zar Ge-
Bohichte des Luxemburger Landes. I.
Pp. 70. Luxemburg : Bruck.
WiNDECKE (Eberbardt). Das Leben Ednig
Sigmunds, nach Handschriften yon
Hagen. ((^eschiohtsschreiber der deut-
schenVorzeit in deutscher Bearbeitung,
LXXIX.) Pp. 337. Leipzig : Duncker.
6 m.
WiTTE (H.) Zur Geschichte der burgun-
diflchen Herrschaft am Oberrhein [1469-
1473]. (From the * Zeitschrift fiir Ge-
schichte des Oberrheins.' New series.
I.)
X. HISTOKY OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND
Bologna (G.) Ingresso in Londra dell'
ambasciatore per la serenissima repub-
blica di Venezia, N. H. Niccol6 Tron,
seguito il xxvii agosto 1715. Pp. 21.
Schio : tip. Marin.
Brodrick (hon. G. C.) History of the uni-
versity of Oxford. (* Epochs of Church
History.') London : Longmans. Pp.
235. 2/6.
Buiuiows (M.) History of the family of
Brocas of Beaurepaire and Boche Court,
with some account of the English rule
in Aquitaine. Pp. 496. London :
Longmans. 42/.
Cbowthee (G. H.) a descriptive history
of the Wakefield battles, and a short
account of this ancient and important
town. Pp. 95, illustr. Wakefield : Nichol-
son. 1/.
Demaus (rev. B.) William Tyndale, a
biography; a contribution to the
history of the English Bible. New ed.,
revised by B. Lovett. London :
Beligious Tract Society. 8/.
Godwin (G. N.) The civil war in south-
west Hampshire. Pp. 24. Southamp-
ton: Gilbert. 4to. 6d.
GoLDBCHMiDT (S.) Gcschichtc der Juden
in England von den altesten Zeiten bis
zu ihrer Yerbannung. I : Eilftes und
zwolftes Jahrhunderte. Pp.76. Berlin:
Bosenstein & Hildesheimer. 8 m.
Gardiner (S. B.) History of the great
civil war [1642-1649]. I [1642-1644].
24 maps. London : Longmans. 21/.
GuASCONi (B.) Belazione della storia
d' Inghilterra del 1647, scritta dal
colonello e residente in Londra, Ber-
nardino Guasconi, ed inviata a Ferdi-
nando II in Firenze. Ed. by G.Gargani.
Pp. 68. Florence : Bicci (privately
printed).
Hall (H.) Society in the Elizabethan
age. London: Sonnensohein. 10/6.
Hatward letters, being a selection from
the correspondence of the late Abraham
Hayward [1834-1884]. Ed. by H. E.
Carlisle. 2 voL London: Murray.
24/.
Hewlett (H. G.) Post-Norman Britain ;
foreign influence upon the history of
England, from the accession of Henry
in to the revolution of 1688. London :
S. P. C. K. 3/.
Hore (A. H.) The church in England,
from William III to Victoria. 2 vol.
Pp. 1076. Oxford: Parker. 15/.
Keith (D.) A history of Scotland, civil
and ecclesiastical, from the earliest
times to the death of David I [1153].
2 vol. Pp. 660. Edinburgh : Paterson.
12/6.
EoHLER (A.) S. J. Die Martyrer und
Bekenner der Gesellschaft Jesu in Eng-
land wahrend der Jahre 1580 bis
1680. Pp. 647 ; portraits. Innsbruck :
Vereins-Buchhandlung.
Lyte (H. C. Maxwell). History of the
university of Oxford from the earliest
times to 1580. Pp. 504. London : Mao-
millan. 16/.
LoFTiE (Bev. W. J.) London. (* Historic
Towns.') Pp. 223 ; map. London :
Longmans. 3/6.
Plasse (abb6 F. X.) Le olerg6 fran9ai8
r6f ugi6 en Angleterre. I. Pp.xxxv,392;
8 illustr. Paris : Pahn6. 6 f .
Bamseia, Cartularium Monasterii de. Ed.
by W. H. Hart and the rev. P. A. Lyons.
II. London : Published under the direc-
tion of the master of the rolls. 10/.
SouLANOE-BoDiN " (A.) La mission du
due de Nivemais k Londres [1762-
1763]. Pp. 35. Paris : Bureaux de la
* Bevue britannique.'
Stephen (Leslie). Dictionary of national
biography. IX : Canute-Chaloner.
London : Smith A Elder. 12|6.
Walpolb (Spencer). A history of Eng-
land, from the conclusion of the great
war in 1816. IV, V. Pp. i2io.
London: Longmans. 36/.
XI. ITALIAN HISTORY
Amari (M.) Altre narrazioni del vespro
siciliano, scritte nel buon secolo della
lingua. Pp. liv, 141. Milan : Hoepli.
16mo. 2-50 1.
Aronani (F.) Cenni storici sulla zecca,
sulle monete e medaglie de' Manfredi
signori di Faenza, e sul sigiUo del
comune e del popolo della stessa citt^.
Pp. 80. Faenza : Conti.
Berti (D.) II conte di Cavour avanti il
1848. Pp. 371. Borne : Voghera Carlo.
BoNGHi (B.) Amaldo da Brescia : studio.
^V' 73' <^i**^ ^ Castello: Lapi.
16mo. 11.
BoTTi (G.) Della varia fortuna dei Siooli
e dei Sicani innanzi alle colonic greohe
di Sicilia: notizia. Pp.21. Messina:
Tipogratia del Progresso.
Digitized by
Google
200 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED Jan.
Gandido (E.) Gronaca udinese [1564-
1564] trascritta ed annotata da V.
Joppi. Pp. 30. Udine: Tip. del
Patronata.
Glabetta ^G.) La suocessione di Ema-
naele Filiberto al trono Sabaudo, e la
prima ristorazione della casa di Savoia.
Pp. 462. Turin : Botla. 6 1.
Junius. La vall^ d^Aoste au moyen &ge
et k la renaissance: essai. Pp. 128.
Turin: Tarizzo. 16mo. 1-501.
Mabiano (B.) Biografi e oritioi del Ma-
chiavelli: saggi. Pp. 112. Naples:
tip. deU' UniversiU.
Mario (Jessie W.). Della vita di Giuseppe
Mazzini. Pp. 499. Milan : Sonzogno.
9-30 1.
Menoaooi (P.) Memorie documentate per
la storia della rivoluzione italiana. Ill,
1. Pp.128. Borne: tip. di San Giuseppe.
Merkel (G.) Manfredi I e Manfredi II
Lancia : contributo alia storia politica
e letteraria italiana neU* epoca sueva.
Pp. 188. Turin: Loescher. 5 1.
Bavegoi (F.) Bacconto storioo della bat-
taglia di Montanara. Pp. 170. Flo-
rence : tip. del * Fieramosca.' 1*501.
Sala (G. a.) Diario romano degli anni
1798-1799. ni. Pp. 368. Borne:
Presso la Society. 6 1.
Yn>ABi (G.) Frammenti storici deU' agro
ticinese. 2 vol. Pp.398, 542. Pavia:
Fusi. 101.
Waoner (A.) Die unteritalisohen Nor-
mannen und das Papsttum in ihren
beiderseitigen Beziehungen, von Victor
m bis Hadrian IV [1086-1156].
Pp. 54, with 2 genealogical tables.
Breslau : EOhler. 1 m.
Xn. HISTOEY OF THE NETHEELANDS
Bennecke (H.) Zur Geschichte des
deutschen Strafprozesses : das Strafver-
fahren nach den hollandisohen und
flandrischen Bechten der zwdlften und
dreizehnten Jahrhunderte. Pp. 134.
Marburg : Elwert. 8*50 m.
BoRMANS (S.) M^oire du 16gat Onufrius
sur les affaires de Li^ge [1468]. Pp.
xxxiv, 202. Brussels: Hayez.
Gapelle (J. van de). Het beleg en de
verdediging van Haarlem [1572-1578J.
I, II. I^. 232, 238. Haarlem : Nobels.
Dehaisnes (chan.) Documents et ex-
traits divers concemant Thistoire de
Tart dans la Flandre, I'Artois, et le
Hainaut, avant le quinzidme si^le.
I [627-1373] ; H [1374-1401]. 2 vol.
Paris : Ghampion. 4to. 140 f.
NAMik^HE (A. J.) Gours d'histoire natio-
nale. Ginquidme partie : p^riode espa-
gnole. XVII. Pp. 464. Louvain :
Fonteyn. 4 f.
Le r^gne de Philippe II et la lutte
religieuse dans les Pays-Bas au seizi^me
sidcle. V. Pp. 512. Louvain: Fonteyn.
4f.
BiEBEEK (Jan van). Dagverhaal. I
[1652-1655]. Pp. 605. Utrecht:
Kemink.
BoEVER (N. de). De kroniek van Staets.
Eene bladzijde uit de geschiedenis van
het fabriekambt der stad Amsterdam
[1594-1628]. Pp. 43. Amsterdam:
ten Brink & de Vries. 1-25 fl.
Sepp (G.) Bibliotheek van Nederlandsche
kerkgeschiedschrijvers : opgave van
het geen Nederlanders over de geschie-
denis der christelijke kerk geschreven
hebben. Pp. 510. Leyden: Brill. 20
cents.
Utrecht. — Album studiosorum academic
Bhenotraiectime [1634 - 1886] : acce-
dunt nomina curatorum et professorum
per eadem secula. Pp. xlvi, 251,60.
Utrecht : Beijers & J. van Boekhoven.
26-25 fl.
Xm. SCANDINAVIAN HISTOEY
Lund (T.) Das tagliche Leben in Skan-
dinavien wahrend des sechzehnten Jahr-
hunderts; eine kulturhistorische Studie
iiber die Entwiokelung und Einrichtung
der Wohnungen. Deutsche vom Ver-
fasser besorgte Ausgabe. Gopenhagen :
A. F. Hdst.
McDaniel (S.) Life of St. Olave, martyr,
king and patron of Norway. Pp. 36.
London : Washboume. 1/.
ScHLBSwio-Holstein-Lauenburgische Be-
gesten und Urkunden. Im Auftrage
der Gesellschaft fiir Schleswig-Holstein-
Lauenburgische Greschichte bearbeitet
und herausgegeben von P. Hasse. II
[1250-1300]. Hamburg: Voss. 4to. 4m.
XIV. SLAVONIAN AND EOUMANIAN HISTOEY
Baieb (B.) Die Insel Biigen nach ihrer
arohkologisdien Bedeutung. Pp. 70.
Stralsund: Bremer.
Ghabpin-Feuoerolles (Madame de).
^l^onore d*Autriche, reine de Po-
logne. Pp. 224. Saint-Etienne: Th^
Uer. 3-50 f .
Cracow.— CoUectaneorum ex archive col-
legii historici Gracoviensis tom. III.
(Soriptores rerum Polonicarum, IX.)
Pp- 499« Gracow : Friedlein.
Historici diarii domus professffi
sooietatis Jesu Gracoviensis anni novem
[1600-1608]. (Scriptores rerum Poloni-
carum, X.) Pp. 285. Gracow: Friedlein.
Elk (J.) Die jiidisohen Kolonien in Buss-
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED 201
land. Ealtarhistorisolie Stndie und
Beitrag zur Goschiohte der Juden in
Bnsaliuid. Pp. 219. Frankfurt : Kauff-
mann. 4 m.
Ebahmbr (major). Der russisohe Erieg-
schaaplatz in seinem Einflnsse anf die
dort operirenden Armeen im Feldzuge
1812 und dem polnischen Insurrections-
kriege [1830-1831]. Pp. 30. Berlin :
Mittler.
Lepab (J.) Ueber die Kultur-Thatigkeit
der slavischen Apostel Cyrill und
Method. Pp. 16. Prague: Wiesner.
LBBOY-BsAUiiiEn (A.) L*empire des tzars
et les Busses. U : Les institutions.
Pp. 636. Paris : Haohette. 7-60 t
MoNUMENTA spectautia historiam Slavo-
rum meridionalium. XV, XVI: Acta
historiam confinii militaris Groatiie
illustrantia [1479-1693]. Pp. 390, 435.
Agram: Hartman.
Ofbn, Die Eroberung von, und der Feld-
zug gegen dieTiirken in Ungam [1686],
dargestellt nach den Acten der Wiener
Archive und anderen authentischen
Quellen. Pp. 126 ; plates. Vienna :
Seidel.
Tadba (F.) Gancellaria Johannis Novi-
forensis episcopi Olomucensis [1364-
1380]. Brief e und Urkunden des 01-
miitzer Bischofs Johann von Neumarkt.
Pp.157. Vienna : Gerold's Sohn.
Ulamowski (B.) Libri judiciales anti-
quissimi terrsB Cracoviensis. I : [1374-
1390]. Pp. 387. Cracow : Friedlein.
Urechia (V. A.) Belatiunile Franciei cu
Romania sub Ludovic XIV, XV, & XVI ;
conferinta tinuta la Atheneu romSnu.
Bucharest : Socecu <& Go. 12mo.
Vambkby (A.) The story of Hungary;
with the collaboration of L. Heilprin.
Pp. 453; map (fee. London: Fisher
Unwin.
XV. HISTORY OF SPAIN AND PORTUGAL
(Including South America, (fee.)
Balaoubr (V.) Historia de Cataluila. V,
VI, Vn. Pp. 513, 533. 515. Madrid :
TeUo. 4to. 83 rs.
Castellamos (J.) Historia del nuovo
reino de Granada. Publicala por pri-
mera vez D. Antonio Paz y Melia. I.
(€k>lecci6n de escritores castellanos,
XLIV.) Pp. Ivii, 450. Madrid : P6rez
Dubrull. 6-60 rs.
Coleooi6n de documentos in^ditos para
la historia de Espaiia. Edited by the
marqu6s de la Fuensanta del Valle, J. S.
Ray6n, & F. de Zabalburu. LXXXVI :
Historia de Felipe IV, tom. ii. Pp.
688. Madrid : Murillo. 4to. 13 rs.
CoNSTirncioNEs de Espana y las dem4s
naciones de Enropa, con la historia
general de Espana misma y de cada
una de las otras naciones. Bevised ed.,
2 vol. Pp. 234, 352, portraits. Ma-
drid: Escribano & Echevarria. 4to.
9rs.
Daban (V.) Le general Miguel Miramon :
notes sur Thistoire du Mexique. Pp.
252. Bome : Perino. 6 1.
FsRNija>EZ DuBo (C.) La armada in-
vencible. II. Pp. 539. Madrid:
Murillo.
La conquista de las Azores en 1583.
Pp. 525. Madrid: Bivadeneyra. 4to.
8r8.
Guzman Blanco (A.) De bevrijder van
Zuid-Amerika : eene bijdrage tot de
gesohiedenis der Zuid-Amenkaansche
oni^Qiankelijkheidsoorlogen. Pp. 84.
Amsterdam: Olivier.
iBAfiBz Y Gabcia (S.) Historia de las
islas Marianas con su derrotero, y de
las Garolinas y Palaos, desde el descu-
brimiento por Magallanes en el ano
1521 hasta nuestros dias. Pp. 207.
Granada: Sabatel. 4to.
Itubbiza y Zavala (J. B.) Historia gene-
ral de Vizcaya : origen de merindades
y su gobiemo antiguo ; cat41ogo de los
senores que tuvo. Ecrita en afio de
1785. Precedida de un pr61ogo del P.
Fidel Fita. Pp. 413. Madrid : Aguado.
L6pez (D.) La politica de Felipe U :
memoria leida en el Ateneo de Madrid.
Pp. 32. Madrid: Hem4ndez. 4to.
Ir.
Majobca. — Gronic6n mayoricense. No-
ticias y relaciones hist6rica8 de Mallor-
cas [1229-1800]. Edited from manu-
scripts (fee. by aI Gampaner y Fuertes.
Pp. 611. Pahna de Mallorca: Golomar
y Salas. Folio. 24*50 rs.
Pabides y Guillkn (V.) Origen del
nombre de Extremadura, el de los anti-
guos y modemos de sus comarcas,
ciudades, villas, pueblos, y rios ; situa-
ci6n de sus antiguas poblaciones y
oaminos. Pp. 97. Plasencia: Hon-
tiveros. 1*25 rs.
Pella y Foboas (J.) Historia del Ampur-
din. Estudio de la civilizaci6n en las
comarcas del Nordeste de Gataluua.
VL Pp. 576. Madrid : Murillo.
Pebalta (M. M. de). Gosta-Bka y Go-
lombia de 1573 k 1881 ; su jurisdicci6n
y sus limites territoriales. Pp. 392.
Madrid : Hem&ndez. 4to. 31 rs.
Tbatchevbky (A.) L'Espagne k I'^poque
de la revolution fran^aise. Pp. 55.
Paris: Alcan.
Beibs (W.) & Stubel (A.) The necropolis
of Ancon in Peru ; a series of illustra-
tions of the civilisation and industry of
the empire of the Incas : being the
results of excavations made on the
spot. XIV. Pp. II, 11 plates. Berlin :
Asher. Fol. 30 m.
Bey y Escabiz (A.) Historia y descrip-
ci6n de la ciudad de la Goruna. I.
Pp. 24. La Goruiia : Abad. Fol.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
202 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED Jan.
XVI. SWISS HISTOEY
G6m£z de Cadiz (E.) Historia de Suiza. •
Pp. 297. Madrid : MuriUo. 4to. 3 ra.
Meyer (W.) Die Schlacht bei Zurich am
25 und 27 September 1799. With a
preface by G. Meyer von Knonau.
Pp. 42, plan. Ziirich : Sohulthess.
Yautbey (mgr.) Histoire des 6v^ues de
B&le. niustr. Einsiedeln : Benziger.
WiOHSEB (S. J.) Ck)smus Heer, Landam-
mann des Kantons Olarus [1790-1837].
Ein Beitrag zur vaterl&ndischen G«-
sohichte. Pp. 365. Glarus : Baschlin.
XVII. HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
(Including Canada)
CocKEB (W. J.) The civil government of
Michigan, with chapters on political
machinery, and the government of the
United States. Pp. 251. Detroit: Rich-
mond & Backus. 12mo. 75 cents.
Cbawford (Lucy). The history of the
White Mountains from the first settle-
ment of Upper Coos and Pequaket.
New ed. Portland (Maine) : Thurston.
12mo. $2,
Davis (W. T.) History of the town of
Plymouth. Pp. 188. Philadelphia:
Evarts. ^3-60.
DoYLB (J. A.) The English in America :
the puritan colonies. 2 vol. London :
Longmans. 36/.
Dbake (S. A.) The making of New Eng-
land [1580-1643]. Pp. 251; maps.
New York: Scribner*s Sons. 12mo.
$l'bO,
FsYROL (J.) Les Fran^ais en Am^rique
(Canada, Acadie, Louisiane). Pp. 240.
Paris : Lecdne & Oudin. 1*70 f.
Eapp (F.) Die Deutschen im Staate New-
York, wahrend des achtzehnten Jahr-
hundertes. Pp. 229. New York :
Stciger.
HocHSTBTTEK (C.) Die Geschichte der
evangelisch-lutnerischen Missouri-Sy-
node in Nord-Amerika und ihrer Lehr-
kampfe von der sachsischen Auswan-
derung im Jahre 1838 bis zum Jahre
1884. Pp. 480. Dresden : Naumann.
LiVBRMORB (C. H.) The republic of New
Haven : a history of municipal evolu-
tion. Pp. 350. Baltimore: Murray.
Macy (J.) Our government : how it
grew, what it does, and how it does it.
Pp. 238. Boston : Ginn. 12mo. 80
cents.
Madison (Dolly), wife of James Madison,
president of the United States, Memoirs
and letters of. Ed. by her grand-niece.
Pp. 210. Boston. 16mo.
(ExMELiN (A. O.) Histoire des flibustiers-
aventuriers am^cains au dix-septidme
si^le. Pp. 319. Paris: Delagrave.
16mo. 1 f.
Pabis (Comte de). The battle of Gettys-
burg. (From * The Civil War in Ame-
rica.') Pp. 315 ; maps. Philadelphia :
Porter & Coates. j?l-60.
Tbtjmbull (J. H.) Memorial history of
Hartford county, Connecticut [1633-
1884]. 2 vol. Pp. 704, 570. Boston :
Osgood.
WiLLUMs (G. A.) Topics and references
in American history. Pp. 50. Syra-
cuse : Bardeen. 16mo. oO cents.
W1N8OB (J.) Narrative and critical his-
tory of Ajnerica, edited by. HI : Eng-
lish explorations and settlements in
North America [1497-1689]. IV:
French explorations and settlements in
North America, including those of the
Portuguese, Dutch, and Swedes [1600-
1700]. Pp. 578; XXX, 516. Boston:
Houghton, Mifflin, & Co.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887
Contents of Periodical Publications
I. FRANCE AND BELGIUM
Bevue Historique, zzzii. 2.— November
— G. Block : Democratic reform at
Rome in the third century j b.c, con-
tinued [dealing with the authorities
which have been supposed to imply a
change at that date in the constitution
of the conUtia centuriata] C. Bk-
mont: The condemnation of John
Lackland by the court of peers of
France [1202], concluded [maintaining
that this was the only condemnation,
and that John's supposed summons in
1203 on the charge of murdering
Arthur of Brittany is unhistorical].
VicoMTB G. d'Avenbl: The French
clergy and liberty of conscience under
Louis XIII [part of a forthcoming
volume of the writer's * Richelieu et la
monarchic absolue '] Baron Du
Gassb : On the * Correspondance de
NapoUon J^,* continued [supplement
of letters, 81 Oct. 1806-16 Feb. 1809.
omitted in the edition]. Fustel de
Ck)X7i.ANaE8 : Obituary notice of &miU
Belot [t 80 Sept.].
Bevue des Questions Historiqnes, zl. 2.
— October — Abb6 O. Delabc : Tlie pon-
tificate of Nicholas II [a narrative,
including, among other things, the
text with translation and notes of the
disputed decretal of 10 April 1059, and
treating in detail of the affair of Beren-
gar of Tours, and of the relations of
the pope with the Normans of Apulia,
with France, and with Germany]
E. Prampain, S.J. : The Gunpowder
plot [a detailed narrative, based upon
extensive study of the documentary
evidence, but written in apparent ig-
norance of the materials brought to
light by Mr. Gardiner among the Hat-
Held papers] Abb^ E. Allain : The
policy of tJie revolution concerning
education [^giving an account of the
debates of the conseils from 14 Bru-
maire, an IV, to Flor^al, an VII]
L. SciouT : Pius VI, the directory ^ and
the grand duke of Tuscany [1798-9 ;
continuation of article in previous
volume on *The directory and the
Boman republic ']. D. d'Aussy : La
faction du cceur navr^^ Episode des
guerrcs de religion [1573].
Bibliotheqne de TEcoie des Chartes, zlvlL
4. — P. Pkliciee : Narrative of the jour-
ney of the Burgundian deputies to Blois
on the accession of Charles VIII [1483],
followed by an account of their election
to the states-general at Beaune [1484],
with their instructions [proems verbal
from a manuscript in the Bibliothdque
Nationale] F. Aubebt : The ' huis-
siers^ of the parliament of Paris [1300-
1420; with documents] P. FouR-
nieb: An unknown opponent of St.
Bernard and Peter Lombard [descrip-
tion of a work entitled ' Liber de
vera philosophia,' preserved among the
manuscripts of the Grande Chartreuse at
Grenoble and written by a partisan of
Gilbert de la Porr^ some time after
1179. Among the extracts given are a
new account of the council of Bheims,
1148, and a variety of notices of the
theological disputes of the time].
F. Bournon: On the defences of the
soutJiem suburb of Paris prior to the
fortifications of Philip Augustus [addu-
cing evidence of the existence of an
ancient wall].
Annales de TEcole Libre des Scienoes
Folitiques, iv,— October— H* Pioeon-
NEAu : La politique coloniale de Colbert
[regarding Colbert not as a systematic
protectionist, but as guided by the cir-
cumstances and interests of France at
the time. His dealings with the trading
companies which he established, more
especially with the West Indian com-
pany, show that he regarded monopoly
as merely a temporary expedient. His
ideas on colonial government were
juster and more liberal than those of
his predecessors or indeed his suc-
cessors] Vicomte H. Begoxjen : La
Prusse et VEglise cathoiique [1815-
1870]. F. AuBURTiN : LHmpdt fon-
der en France jusqn'en 1789 ; second
article [sketches the history of the taxa-
tion of land in France from Colbert to
1789. The constituent assembly
applied to the land tax principles
Digitized by
Google
204 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS Jan.
which were generally accepted by
public opinion, and had been already
put in practice on different occasions.
In taxation as in the political order the
remark of Mignet holds good, that the
states-general merely decreed a revolu-
tion already effected]. The Japanese
correspondent of the review contributes
an essay on public opinion and parlia-
mentary government in Japan [public
opinion dates from 1868 ; a Japanese
parliament is to meet in 1890].
Bulletin fpigraphiqne.- «7tiZj/— C. de la
Bebob : ^organisation des flottes ro-
mainest continued. G. Lafatb : Ins-
criptions inSdites de la Corse. A.
Delattbe : Inscriptions latines de Car-
thage,
Bulletin de la Sooiete de THistoire du
Frotestantisme Fran^ais, zzv. 9, 10. —
September — A. Picreral-Dardier : The
emigration of 1762, concluded [with
unpublished letters]. N. Weiss : The
execution of two Huguenot ladies at
Paris [1588, with extract from the
registers of the parliament]. C.
Head : Daniel Chamier, continued
G. L. Fbossard: On the ecclesiastical
discipline of the reformed churches of
France, continued. =^= October — N.
Weiss : The reformation at Metz and
Thionville in 1624. F. Puaux : Par-
ticulars of the public burning of
Claude's * Plavntes des Protestants * at
London [May 19, 1686, from diplo-
matic correspondence] Statistics of
the protestant population of France in
1760 [337,807 certain, together with
256,000 estimated].
Compte rendu de TAcademie des Sciences
Morales et Folitiques. — August —
FusTBL DE CouLANoi!^ : Observations
sur un ouvrage de M. Simile de Lave-
leye intituU * La propH4tS collective
du sol dans divers pays.* E. Bout-
MY : La r&volution industrielle et
agrairet et le gouvemement oligar-
chiqtie en Angleterre au dix-huitihne
sOcle.
La Controverse et le Contemporain. —
Augttst, September — Mgr. Bicard :
L'abbS Maury avant 1789, continued.
== August — P. Allard : La persecu-
tion de VaUrien, continued. Sep-
tember—J. Souben: Les causes de la
decadence de VEspagne au seiziime et
au dix-septi^me si4cle.^= October —
P. Allard : Les chrUiens sous Claude
le Gothigue [268-270].
Joomal Asiatiqae. — May, July—R. Sau-
VAiRE : Mat4riaux pour servir d Vhis-
toire de la numismatique etdela m^tro-
logie musulmane, continued.
Messager des Sciences Historiques de
Bel^que, 1886, part iii.— P. Claeys &
J. Geerts: The ancient fortifications of
Ghent [with four folding plates]. L.
DE ViLLERs : The birth and early years
of Jacqueline of Bavaria, and her mar-
riage with John, duke of Touraine,
afterwards dauphin [with extracts from
accounts, <&c.j H. Deleuate : On
the biography of Henry of Ghent [almost
entirely based upon Father Ehrle's
monograph in Denifle & Ehrle's * Ar-
chiv,' i. 365-401]. Ferses, rfc, cur-
rent at Ghent in 1814 and 1815.
Nouyelle JLevjie,— September 1— F. db
Lesseps : episodes de 1848 d Pa/ris et
d Madrid Zaborowski: L^eimploi
des m^taux chez les Egyptiens et les
ChaXd4ens.^=^October 1.-— L. Pauliat :
La politique coloniaU sous Vancien re-
gime.
La Beyolution Yr2Lii^B.\w.— July-Septem-
ber— L. DE MoNTLUC : La Bretagne d la
veille de la revolution, F. Bouvi^rb :
Quatrefages de la Roquette [continued].
J. F. CoLPAVRU : Reorganisation du
pouvoir judidaire [two articles].
T. Lhuillibr : Liste annotSe des dSpuUs
d VassembUe nationaXe constituante
powr les baillages de Meaux, Melun,
Nemours, et Provins.
Bevue Celtique.— Ma^ — J. Abercrombt :
Ttffo Irish fifteenth-century versions of
sir John Mandeville*s * Travels^* con-
tinued.
Beyne Critique d'Histoire et de Littera-
tnre. — October 4 — Unpublished letter of
anofficerof the army of the Rhine [June
17, 1793]. n -T. B. : Political Cor-
respondence of CasHllon and Marillac.
F. DE CouLANOEs: Reply to M,
ViolleVs criticism in Rev. Critt August
9, with observations by the latter [deal-
ing with questions of property and
common possession in early German
society, Ac] 18 — A. Chuoubt : Re-
cent works on Wallenstein E.
MiJNTz: The Vatican library under
Nicolas V and Calixtus III. 25 —
A. CHT7QUET : Bemhard of Weimar [on
Droysen's biography] .==Not?6m6er 1
— The Same: Napoleon as a general
[review of count Yorck von Wartem-
burg].
Bevue des Denx-Mondes. — AugxMt 1, Oc-
tober 1 — C. DB Mazade : Mettemich [to
1816], two articles.=: — A ugust 1-—G,
BouRDEAu: L'Allemagne au dix-hui-
tiime 8iecle.=:15 — A. Mattry: Une
conspiration sous Louis XIV ; la d4-
couverte du cofnplot du chevalier de
Rohan et de Latriaumont.=^ Septem-
ber 1 — E. Gebhabt: Une renaissance
reUgieuse au moyen dge ; Vapostolat de
saint Francois d*Assise.^==l-15—'E,
Daudet: Les Bourbons et la seconde
coalition [1798-1800].=15, October
15 — FusTEL DE CouLANOES : L^itcndue,
la constitution, et la culture du do-
maine rural chez les Remains.
Bevue de Ocographie. — October— L. Des-
CHAMPS : Un colonisateur du temps de
Richelieu, Isaac de Razilly,
Bevue des Jbtudes Juives. — July — ^Fbied-
LAin>ER: Les Pharisiens et les gens
du peuple. ^A. Cahen : Le rabbmat
de Metz, continued. Schwabzfeld :
Digitized by
Google
1887 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS 205
Deux episodes de Vhistoire des Juifs
roumains.
Sevne Politique et Litteraire.— /Sep^^^-
ber 4 — M. PeiiLet : NapoUon d VUe
d'Elbe, d*apris des documents nou-
veaux.
Bevne de THistoire des Beligions.— «7uZ^-
August —A.. B^ville: L*empereur Ju-
lieviy oontinaed G. Dottin: La
croycmce d VimmortaUtA de Vdme chez
Us andens Irlandais.
Bevue delaBevolution.— -4Mgft«i— Paqart
d'Hermansart : La r^olution dans le
nord de la France ; un magistrat muni-
cipal d Saint-Omer [1791] Rapport
de Kellerniann sur lea op^ations mili-
taires de Mont Blanc [17 Sept.-20 Oct.
1793].= September-October — F. A.
Lefebvbe : Une commune boulonnaise
pendant la r&oolution.==^Scptember —
TuRREAU : Plan pour la conquSte de
Saint- Domingue,
II. GERMANY AND AUSTRIA
SybePs Hiitorisolie Zeitiohrift, Ivii 1.
Munich. — K. Lohheteb: NikolausKop-
pemikus [a biography based upon the
work published by L. Prowe in 1883,
with observations on Copernicus* reli-
gious position]. J.vonPfluok-Hart-
TUNO : The beginnings of the Wirttem-
berg ministry of Freiherr von Linden^
from his memoirs [giving an account of
the events in Wirttemberg following the
political movements of 1848].
Blstoriflches Jahrbuoh der OdrreB-Oesell-
schaft, yii. 4. Munich. — S. Ehses:
The policy of Pope Clement VII dovm
to the battle of Paviay continued.
W. ScHWARz: Contributions to the
biography of the Cologne theologian J,
Gtropper^ from sources at Bome, con-
tinued. A. VON Bbumont: Leopold
von Banke. H. V. Sauerland:
Notes on the state of the papal archives
and finance during the great schdsm.
H. Finks : On three suspected
documents of Gregory IX. P. P. M.
Alberdinok Thum: Recent literature
concerning the history of France and
the Low Countries in the second half
of the sixteenth century,
Heues Archiv der Gesellsohaft flir ftltere
Deataclie OeioMolitskunde, xii. 1.
Hanover.— G. Waitz: Criticism of
matericUs for Danish history [dealing
with Sueno Aggonis, Saxo Grammaticus,
the 'Annales Colbazienses/ 'Lun-
denses,* Ac] The Same : On the first
part of the * Annates Fuldenses.* S.
Herzbebo-Frankbl : On the oldest book
of Oie confraternity of St. Peter at
Salzburg [dating from about 784
onwards] ^H. Hahn : The names in
St, Bomface^s letters and the * Liber
vitcB ecclesicB Dunelmensis * [an attempt
to identify many of the Lindisfarne
benefactors with persons appearing in
St. Boniface^s correspondence]. O.
Holdeb-Eooeb : On the * Translatvo
S, Benedicti,* L. von EEeinemann :
Criticism of materials for the history
of Tegemsee B. Thommen : On
some spuriotis imperial diplomat in
Switserland [professing to be of the
eleventh and twelfth centuries] F.
KuRZB : On the * Chronicon Gozecense,''
F. W. £. Both: An unpublished life
of Awno Ilf archbishop of Cologne.
A. Bethfeld : On the * Oenealogia
regum Francorum.' J. May : On
Hermannus contractus.
Brieger*8 Zel«^so]irift fiir Kirchen-
gesohiohte, viii 4. — November. Gotha.
V. ScHULTZB : On the history of Con-
siantine the Greats continued [dealing
with the emperor's measures against
divination and sacrificial observances,
and with the fall of Licinius] J.
Gottschick: The doctrine of Hus^
Luther^ and Zwingli respecting the
churchy continued.
Dove ft Friedberg'8 Zeitschrift ftlr Kir-
chenreoht, zxi. 2, 8. Freiburg-im-
Breisgau. — K. Eohler: The old pro-
testant doctrine of the three ecclesias-
tical orders [in the time of the refor-
mation]. C. Meurbr: Divorce ac-
cording to canon law W. Martens :
The appointment to the papal chair
under the emperors Henry III and IV,
continued [examining the falsifications,
papal and royalist, of the decretals of
1069, 1060, and IO6I3.
Denifle ft Ehrle's Archiv ftir Litteratnr-
und Kirchen-Oetchichte des Mittel-
alters, ii. 8, 4. Berlin. — F. Ehrle :
On the proceedings preliminary to the
council of Vienne [printing a protest
of the Franciscan body against the
* Spirituals ' and in particular against
the doctrines of Peter Johannis Olivi,
1 March, 1311 ; and a defence of those
doctrines by Ubertino da Casale, written
apparently soon afterwards]. H.
Denifle: Master EckeharVs Latin
writings and the basis of his teaching.
[Eckehart has hitherto been known ex-
clusively by his German works. Father
Denifle, by the discovery of some of his
Latin writings in a manuscript at
Erfurt, claims to have established the
mystic's true position as a Thomistio
schoolman, in spite of a tendency which
led him dangerously near pantheism.
Abundant specimens are given of the
works in question. From a notice in an
appendix it appears that another Latin
manuscript of Eckehart has lately been
identified by the same scholar at Cues.]
Father Denifle further prints the
Acts of the process against Eckehart
[held at Cologne in 1327. The editor
maintains that this was the first oflicial
Digitized by
Google
206 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS Jan.
cognisance taken of his views]. — He
also traces the origin of the mystic style
of preaching in Oermany [to the prac-
tice in nunneries dependent on the
Dominican order]. F. Ehrle prints
documents concerning LevHs the Ba-
varian and the FraOcelliand GhibelUns
of Todi and Amelia [1328], concluded.
Mitttaeilungen des InstitntB fttr Oester-
reichifche OeschichtsforBchnng, vii.
4. Innsbruck.— A. Schulte : Studies
in the early history of the house of
Habsburg, II : The administration of
the Habsburg possessions in Elsass in
1303 F. kIltenbrunner : The col-
lection of letters of Berard of Naples^
continued. [Calendar of the letters in
chronological order, from Urban IV to
Honorius, besides some of later date ;
with remarks on their historical value,
<fec.] A. BussoN : On the promise
made by Otto III, margrave of Bran-
denburg^ to Ottokar of Bohemia re-
specting the imperial election [1262].
H. V. Sauebland : Passages in the
* Historia Polonica * of John Dlugoss
borrowed from Dietrich of Nielieim,
G. Schmidt prints a narrative of a
journey from Halberstadt to Pressburg
[1429-1480] E.Werttnsky: Review
of Seebohm's * English Village Com-
munities.*
Ermifch's Heues Arehiv f&r S&chBiiclie
Oeschichte und Alterthumikunde, tU.
8. 4. Dresden. — P. Bookbohr : Ekbert
II, margra/oe of Meissen [d. 1090].
H. Knothe: Die Kragensche Fehde
[led by Heinrich Eragen in 1510 and
the following years] A. von Minck-
wiTZ : History of the garrison of Dresden
from the middle ages downwards
A. Gaedbke : On the papers of Hans
Georg von Amim, lieutenant-general
in the electoral Saxon service [1631-
1634, with documents].
Zeitschrift fttr Katholische Theologie, z.
4. Innsbruck. — K. Munchen : The
• Teaching of the Twelve Apostles.*
B. DuHR, S. J.: The charges against
father Petre H. Grisar: Reports
addressed to the Vatican on the state of
protestantism and the catholic revival
in Bohemia under Ferdinand II.
TheologiBche Studien und Xritlken, 1887,
1. Gotha.— K. MiJLLER: The WaU
devises and their separate groups down
to the beginning of the fourteenth cen-
tury, continued.
m. GEEAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND
Chnrcli Quarterly Beview. Ho. 45.— Oc-
tober — Father Paolo Sarpi [a biographi-
caX study].
Dublin Beview. 8rd Series. No. 82.— Oc-
fc>6er~ The very rev. S. Malone : Where
was St, Patrick bom ? [arguing in fa-
vour of Bath. The writer cites among
his authorities the well-known forgery,
* Bichard of Cirencester, de Situ Britan-
nuB.'l Letters of pope Leo XIII
for the Society of Jesus, July 13, 1886 ;
to the bishop of Hungary, August 22 ;
and on the establishment of an episco-
pal hierarchy in India, September 1.]
Edinburgh Beview. No. 836.— October—
The third invasion of France [military
criticism of the operations of the army
of the Bhine, and the siege and capitu-
lation of Metz, 1870]. The architec-
tural history of Cambridge. Wal-
pole's History of England. Letters
and despatches of Lord Nelson.
Quarterly Beview. Ho. Z2S.- October --
The deamess of gold [dealing with re-
cent economical questions]. The
historical criticism of the New Testa-
ment [review of the * Introductions to
the New Testament ' by Salmon and
Holtzmann].
ScottlBh Beview, tyI.— October— D. Bike-
LAS : The Byzantine empire [the first
instalment of a translation of the
k. Bikelas's work, Tltpi Bv(airriy&y, con-
taining a rapid summary of the history
of the empire and an account of the
various inroads which it suffered from
foreign races] Ossian*s Prayer [Gae-
lic text from the dean of Lismore's book,
with translation].
IV. ITALY
Archivio Storico Italiano. zvii. 2, 8.— A.
Medin : The death of Giovanni Aguto
[sir John Hawkwood ; unpublished do-
cuments and songs of the fourteenth
century] P. Santini : The condition
of the country people in the thirteenth
century. D. Cakutti : The cavaliere
di Savcja and the youth of prince Eu-
gene (two articles) A. Reumont:
The marquis di PrU at Brussels [1716-
1726]. The Same: Jean-Baptiste
Rousseau and the marquis di Pri^,
BiviiU Storica Italiana, ill. 8.— Turin.
— V. La Mantia : Originand history of
the inquisition in Sicily [from the reign
of the emperor Frederick II to the
abolition of the tribunal of the inquisi-
tion in the island in 1782 ; giving the
general notices of the work of the holy
office and the laws <Iro. regulating it, and
illustrating the history by specimens of
its actual operations. The monograph
is accompanied with numerous docu-
ments and narratives hitherto unpub-
lished].
Archivio Storico Lombardo, xiii. 8. — B.
Digitized by
Google
1887 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS 207
BxiNiBB : Gcisparo Viseonti, B. Sab-
BADna : Letters and speeches published
and unpublished of Gasparino Bar-
aisza [a bibliography], continued. G.
Casati : New notices relating to Tomaso
de Marini [1476-1672, fermiere e teso-
riere generale dello stato di Milano],
from nnpablished dooiunents A.
Nbbi : Unpublished letters of Chiuseppe
BaretH to Aniondo Greppi [1761-1770].
^E. MoTTA : On Francesco Sforxa's
supposed visit to the baths of Bormio
[1462, denying that it took place]. A.
Mbdin prints a description of the city and
territory of Brescia drawn up in 1493.
ArehiYio Storico Sicilia^o. New Series,
X. 8, 4. Palermo.— V. di Giovanni :
La Croce delta Misericordia^ afterwards
caUed La Croce de' Vespri, at Palermo,
C. S. Patti : Note on CasteUo Ur-
sine [a structure of Frederick U] ^E.
Salemi: Memorials of the destroyed
church of San Oiacomo la Marina at
Palermo [with plates]. P. M.Bocca :
On the history of Castellama/re del
Oolfo [chiefly in the sixteenth century].
G. GosENTiNo : New documents re-
lating to the inquisition in Sicily [ap-
pendix to previous article, with two
additional documents]. L. Boouno
prints a Penitentiary from a twelfth-
century manuscript at Palermo, G.
Cobertino : On the use of wax tablets
in Sicily in the fourteenth century,
E. Palaez : The life of Ariadeno Bar-
barossa [translated from an unpub-
lished Spanish version of the original
Turkish, with commentary and notes,
continued].
Arohiyio Yeneto. xzz. 8. — B. Cecohetti:
Venetian Ufe about the year 1300 [con-
tinued]. G. GnntiATo : On a manu-
script relating to the siege of Corfu
[1716] V. CiAN : On an embassy
ofPietro Bembo [December 1514], first
article [a contribution to the history of
Leo X's relations with Venice] B.
Pkedelli ]prin%a five documents relating
to the war of the * CasteUo d'Amore '
[1215] in Treviso [with introduc-
tion]. ^B. C. : Deaths from cold and
famine at Venice [1666] ; and the
famine in France [1662].
zxzi 1, 2.~A. Medin : The surrender
of Trevisa and the death of Cangrande
I delta Scala ; songs of the fottrteenth
century, B. Cecohetti: Notes on
Venetian ladies of the middle ages
[from various sources] V. Cian : On
an embassy of Pietro Bembo [conclu-
ded]. C. Cipolla: Researches into
the traditions concerning the ancient
immigrations into the lagoon-country
[oontmued]. G. Giomo: Calendar of
some deliberations of the Senato Misti^
concluded [July 1302-Jnne 1332].
0. Cipolla: Statuti rurali Vero-
nesi [twelfth and thirteenth centuries].
V. RUSSIA
(Communicated by W. B. Mobiill)
The Antiquary (Starina), September^
November — The memoirs of admiral
ChichagoVt continued. = September
— Recollections of Matthew Mou/ratnev-
Apostol [one of the Dekabrists; after
thirty years* exile he was allowed to
return from Siberia in 1866, and died
at Moscow in 1886, aged ninety-three].
== September-October— \, Babatin-
8KI : The Polish rebellion of 1863,
continued. == September— M, Vavi-
Lov : The last days of Russian America^
continued. Memoirs of D, J, Kipi-
anit continued [interesting details
relating to the history of Georgia in
the earlier part of the present century].
== September-November—'^, Schil-
dbb: The siege of Plevna in 1877.
[These articles are of the highest im-
portance ; with them are incorporated
the correspondence and notes of Tod-
leben, showing the difficulties with
which he had to contend.] =^ Sep-
tember— Contributions to the latest
history of Bulgaria [an account of the
opposition to Prince Alexander]. ==
October— J, Zmounchilla : Extracts
from the posthumous memoirs of Eras-
mus Stogov [a well-known Bussian
sailor, who has a great deal to tell us
about the exiles in Siberia]. =^ No-
vember— Recollections of the Dekabrist
BeUyev, continued O. Heukeli>er :
A surgeon*s recollections of M, D. Sko-
belev [does not think that the general
died of foul play, but that he was of an
excitable temperament and remarkably
careless about his health]. Further
contributions to the latest Bulgarian
history N. DavIdov : Stories of the
Ufe of the Emperor Nicholas,
Historioal Messenger (Istorioheskiyiest-
nik).— September— J, Doubasov : Trials
of the Doukhobortei of Tamhov in 1803
[a sect which denied the divinity of the
Holy Ghost. The account is a curious
contribution to the history of dissent in
Bussia\ A. B n: Russian catho-
lics at Moscow at the end of the
seventeenth century M. Gobodetz-
Ki : The museum of antiquities atVilna,
== October — P. KabatIoin : Happy
moments in the life of the emperor
Paul, 1796-1801 [stories illustrating
the favourable side of the character of
this eccentric man] P. P : The
French in Rtissia [a study of the
various political adventurers who have
visited the country from the earliest
times]. N. Kouteinikov : 27t« agony
Digitized by
Qoo^^
208 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS Jan.
of Poland [a sketch of the last years
of the republic]. == November — A.
Bruckner : New materials for the his-
tory of the first years of the reign of
Catherine II [many valuable details
gathered from the reports of the
Austrian ambassador, Count Mercy
d'Argenteau. Professor Bruckner of
Dorpat has already published a life of
Catherine of great merit] S. Pe-
TRovsKi: Traditions of the TJieils family
[who came to Bussia from Holland in
the time of Peter the Great, and since
then have held various important posts
in the empire] I. Mozhaiski : Suax)-
rov in the village of Kochanskoe, from
the narrative of an old inhabitant
[this was an estate belonging to Snvorov
to which he retired during his disgrace].
L. King : Stories about the emperor
Nicholas [generally illustrating the
more amiable side of his character,
which it is well should be known when
we hear so much of the opposite].
VI. SPAIN
Boletin de la Beal Acadeniia de la His-
toria, ix. 1-8. — May-September— F,
CoDEBA, : Scarce coins of Almdtamid of
Seville [dated 45(6 ?), probably an error
for 46(6 ?) F. Fita prints forty-six
documents relaUng to the history of Ma-
drid [1236-1275 ; papal and royal privi-
leges, conveyances and exchanges,
letters of Ferdinand III and Alfonso X,
Ac] : followed by the Legend of St,
Isidore (Latin text) by the Deacon Juan
[identified with Gil de Zamora]. J.
G. DE Arteche : Notice of manuscript
by J, Arantigui y Sam on the origin and
development of artillery in Spain in the
fourteenth and fifteenth centuries [the
first occasion of its use is stated to be at
the siege of Algeciras by Mohammed IV
of Granada]. F. Fita prints an un-
edited fuero of Alcald [1223], an a{free-
ment between the archbishop of Toledo
and archdeacon of Madrid^ and tlie
monastery of St. Domingo de Silos, as
to the church of St, Martin near Madrid
[1224]. == 4. October— F, Fita prints
Fuerosof Uceda [1222], Madrid [1222],
and Alcald de Benares [1223] L.
Franco y Lopez: Columbus a Spaniard
[asbomatCalvi in Corsica, then belong-
ing to Aragon]. C. Fernandez-
DuRO gives a letter [1593] describing
the detention in France and examina-
tion of a learned Spanish heretic Pedro
Jates [a Calvinist with modifications].
E. HuRNER : On the discovery of
the remaining portion of a Roman in-
scription of the republican period [see
Corp. Inscript. Lat., No. 3861] at Sagun-
tum Jesi^'s Grikda: Excavation of
Jewish cemetery at Segovia, with two
plates [describing its use as a refuge on
the expulsion of the Jews from Segovia
in 1492]. F. Fita: Unedited docu-
ments relating to Jeios at Segovia : 1.
Formation of a distinct Jewry [1481] ; 2.
Cession (in trust) of the Jewish ceme-
tery to the municipality [1460] ; 3. Or-
diniance of Doua Catalina relating to for-
mation of Jewry. Cession of syna-
gogue to monastery of St. Maria de
Merced [14121. J. M. Quadrado :
Document relating to Juderia of the city
of MaUorca [1391 ; requiring converted
Jews to state their intention of remain-
ing in the calle or of leaving : with list
of inhabitants and tenements t&o.]
Beviata de Ciencias Hiit6ricai, iv. 4. —
Historia de los condes de EmpHrias y
de Perclada, J. Pella t Foroas :
La gran invasion francesa en CataluAa
[1286J. F. Fernandez y GonzJLlez :
Biografia de Muea ben Nozayr^ por
Aben al-Abbar.
Beviflta Contemporanea. — June 15, 30—
B. JoRDANA : De los estados indigenas
existentes en Filipinos en tiempo de la
conquista espaflola.==JuJy 16— F.
Blxtxentritt : On the same.==Jun«
15, 30, August 16 — D. Lopez: La
polUica de Felipe II^=August 15,
September 15, 30 — A. de Sandoval:
Estudios acerca de la edad m>edia.
Beviata de EspaSLa.— J^uZy 10— J. S. de
Toca: Juicio critico acerca de sor
Maria de Agredo y Felipe H^, con-
tinued.
Vn. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
ICagaiine of Ameriean History, xvi. 4, 5.
October— J. Dimitry: On the cession
of Louisiana by France to Spain
[1764], and its immediate consequences.
W. A. Mowry: The territorial
growth of the United States [in the
present century]. J. W. de Peyster :
General A. A. Humphreys [b. 1806].
■==iOctober, November — A. E. Lee :
From Cedar mountain to ChantUly^
contmued.z==November — R C. Fow-
ler : Governor Thomas Pownall [1720-
1805] A. W. Clason : Tlie national
democratic convention at Charles-
Urn [I860]. W. Allan: General
Pope's campaign [in Virginia, 1862].
Johni Hopkini TTniversity Studies in
Historieal and Politieal Sdence, 4th
■eriet, z. — C. H. Liverhore : The town
and city government of New Haven,
Connecticut [1784-1886].
Baum'8 Chnrcli Beview. Ko. 165.— Be v.
D. M. Bates: French colonial effort
and failure. J. G.Hall: The his-
tory of the papacy during the reformat
Hon [review of Creighton*s work].
Bev. E. E. Beardslby : Life of J. B.
Kerf oot, first bishop of Pittsburgh.
Digitized by
Google
The English
Historical Review
No. VI.— APRIL 1887
Visigothic Spain
rB foundation of the Visigothic state in Spain and southern
Gaul is one of the most interesting and remarkable chapters
in the history of the barbarian migratibns ; and it illustrates, in some
ways with exceptional clearness, the Anglo-Saxon period of our own
history. For the Visigoths, like our forefathers, were a people who,
having at first raged exceedingly against the faith held throughout
the Boman empire, were afterwards themselves won over to profess
it, though the Visigoth's rancour was that of the Arian christian,
while the Saxon's was that of the unreclaimed heathen. Being thus
brought into obedience to the law of the catholic church, Visigotli
as weU as Saxon distinguished himself by the abjectness of his
submission to his spiritual rulers. And perhaps partly in conse-
quence of the prominent place thenceforward taken by ecclesiastics
in the administration of the state, both Visigoth and Saxon were
found wanting in virility and vigour when the day came for defend-
ing their country against the heathen or the Mussulman invader.
In the following paper I propose to indicate some of the most
important phases in the development of the Visigothic state, follow-
ing chiefly the guidance of Professor Dahn, who in the sixth volume
of his 'Eonige der Germanen' (lately republished in a second
edition) has treated with thoroughness and patience all the more
important questions connected with the constitutional history of the
Visigoths.
The strength of Professor Dahn's method lies essentially in its
careful analysis ; and his determination to investigate the history
of each German race ly itself , excluding all others for the time
being from his field of vision, though it necessarily leads to some
repetition, will, we believe, be found hereafter to have given the
book its chief value. It is hardly necessary to say that of the
VOL. n. — NO. VI. p
Digitized by
Qoo^^
210 riSIGOTHIC SPAIN April
races thus studied the two great Gothic nations occupy by far the
largest portion of the book. For the Ostrogoths the 'Edictum
Theodorici* and the *Vari»' of Cassiodorus constitute the chief
QueUen : for the Visigoths, the * Breviarium* of Alaric II, the ' Inter-
pretatio ' of this document, and the * Code of Visigothic Laws.'
For the history of Visigothic legislation Dahn refers us to his
very complete and careful ' Westgothische Studien.* * He has a
perfect right to do so, considering how thoroughly he has there
treated of the subject, and how inconveniently his already bulky
volume would have been increased in size if anything like the whole
of the * Studien* had been incorporated with the *K6nige der
Germanen.' Still we think it would have been better and more
considerate to his reader if he had in a few pages given a short
summing up of the chief results as to the history of the Code to
which his researches have led him.
The * Breviarium Alarici ' put forth by command of Alaric II on
the eve of his last and fatal encounter with Clovis, being merely a
compilation of Boman law, could not be expected to throw much
light on the specially Teutonic usages of the Gothic kingdom. But
the * Interpretatio ' which accompanies the whole of this Code and
Digest (except the excerpts from Gains), although compiled probably
by Bomans, does, from the object which it proposed to itself (an ex-
planation of the Boman law for the benefit of the Bomano-Gothic
people), necessarily illustrate in various ways the changes which the
irruption of the barbarians had wrought in Boman provincial life.
Savigny , who pleads ^ for more respectful treatment than the ' Inter-
pretatio ' received before his time, says :
Here, too, Goths were not the compilers, and the introduction of prin-
ciples of Gothic jurisprudence throughout was not the object in view,
although not seldom the changed political constitution made a change
in the text necessary. Of later time this ' Interpretation ' has been much
too scurvily handled, since at every departure from the Boman text people
have been ready at once to cry out about ' barbarism ' and ' ignorance.'
But certainly in most cases of this kind there was a real change of the
law, for however little one may be inclined to attribute profound learning
to the compilers, the work as a whole appears by no means either rough
or thoughtlessly put together.
After admitting the unfortunate attempts of the ^ Interpretatio ' to
explain the history of certain laws {lex Papia and lex AqmUa),
Savigny notices how instructive and trustworthy it is for the con-
stitution of its own time.
Into the field of research thus indicated by Savigny, Dahn has
zealously entered, and both his text and notes teem with compari-
sons between the text of the Theodosian code preserved in the ' Bre-
viarium,' and the commentary (for such in truth it is) furnished by
* Kdnigsberg, 1874. ^ GescltichU des Hfmiachen BechUt ii. 56.
Digitized by
Google
1887 VISIGOTHIC SPAIN 211
the authors of the ^ Interpretation Our only regret is that, for want
of a page or two of explanation, some of this really valuable work
will rather perplex than enlighten many of his readers.
As for the * Lex Visigothorum,' which forms the especial subject-
matter of Professor Dahn's inquiries, and of which this sixth volume
of the ' Eonige * might almost be considered as an analytical digest,
it consists, as was long ago observed, of two parts, the * Antiqua '
and the edicts of the later Yisigothic kings from Gundemar to
Egica (612-701). The ' Antiqua ' is, in Savigny's view, a general
expression for all that, at the time of the formation of the Code,
was incorporated therein from the old customary law of the Goths,
from the edicts of forgotten kings, from the laws of other Germanic
nations, or even from Boman law.' Dahn, on the other hand, con-
siders (and this view seems now to be generally held by those who
have studied the matter) that the ^ Antiqua ' was a regular code of
early Yisigothic law, the precursor of the present ' Lex Visigo-
thorum.' The formation of the latter he seems to be inclined to
attribute, with Savigny, to Chindaswinth and Eeceswinth (641-
672), who undeniably contributed to it a large number of edicts,
though a few laws of later kings, reaching down, as has been
aheady said, to Egica, have afterwards been added. But as for the
compilation of the ' Antiqua,* he is very clear and unhesitating in
assigning it to Becared, the first catholic king of the Visigoths (686-
601) ; and he points out that it was precisely after so great a change
had been made in all social and political relations as was involved
in the acceptance by the Gothic intruders of the creed of the
Boman provincials, that a new law book was likely to be compiled.^.
Not yet, however, are the two races, the Gothic and the Boman,
sufficiently fused to enable one law book to serve for both. Still in
the days of Becared (if he were its author) the ' Antiqua ' was a law
for men of Gothic extraction only, while the Boman provincials and
the oflficers of the church continued to use the ' Breviarium Alarici,*
which was in fact a * handy book ' to the Theodosian code. The
entire fusion of the two systems of jurisprudence and the proclama-
tion of the legislative unity of the two nations who dwelt on the soil
of Spain, was a task reserved for the venerable Chindaswinth, who at
the age of seventy-nine mounted the throne of Toledo, and for his son
and successor Beceswintb, the partner in all his* designs. Chindas-
winth clearly perceived that there could be but one end to the con-
flict of laws which still existed in the kingdom. The Boman law,
the law of the ecclesiastics, the citizens, the great mass of the agri-
' Antiqua heiszt in dem Oesetxbuch jede Stelle, die nicht einem einzelnen
gothischen KOnig, aU Oesete desselben srugeschrieben werden hiSnnte ; aUo alles, was
man aus alten gothischen RechtsgewoJmhfiitent aus rOmischem Recht und vidleicht
auch aus dem Recht cmderer germanischen Stdmme aufzunehmen gut fand.
L,c, ii. 70.
* Dahn, Westgothische Studien, 7-11.
p 2
Digitized by
Qoo^^
212 VISIGOTHIC SPAIN April
cultural population, must in the end prevail if the old G-othic
nobility were determined to cling to their separate and unmodified
code. He therefore decided to infuse a large Boman element into
the Gothic code, to proclaim that it was law for Goth and Boman
alike, that henceforth there was to be but one people in the eye of
the law dwelling in the Yisigothie kingdom, and to abolish the
* Breviarium ' for ever.* The words in which Chindaswinth, while
permitting the study of Boman law as a part of a liberal education,
prohibits its practical use in the tribunals, are curious enough to
deserve quotation.
AliencB gentis legibus ad exercitium utiUtatis imbui et permittimtcs
et optamus : ad negotiorumvero discussionem et restUtamus et prohibemus.
Quavwis enim eloquiis polleant, tamien difficultatibus hcerent : adeo cum
suffidat ad juatitia plenitvdinem, et prcBsorutatio rationum et conpe-
tentvum ordo verhorum, qua codicis hujus series agnoscitur cantinere,
nolumus sive Bomanis Ugibus, sive alienis institutUmibus amodo amplius
convexari.^
We clearly have here an intention to make codicis hujus series
sole and supreme in all the law courts of Spain. And hence, what-
ever maybe the ultimate verdict of scholars as to the question of the
origin of the * Antiqua,' there is a general consent of opinion to
regard Chindaswinth and his son Beceswinth ^ as bearing the same
relation to the existing ' Lex Visigothorum ' which Justinian bears
to the Code.
Highly characteristic of the aged monarch's determination to
push his new law book into general circulation is his decree * that
' whensoever this code shall chance to be sold, it shall not be allow-
able for the seller to receive nor for the buyer to pay a higher price
than twelve solidi (7Z. 4«.) for the same. Any buyer or seller daring
to exceed this price shall be sentenced by the judge to be beaten
with 100 strokes of the scourge.'
To understand the political system disclosed by the ' Lex Visigo-
thorum,' we must grasp the distinctive character of the three chief
periods of Visigothic history.
For the first century of the existence of that state which was
founded by the comrades of Alaric (412-507), its centre of gravity
was placed north rather than south of the Pyrenees. Territory in
Spain indeed was possessed by the sovereigns from Ataulfus to
Alaric H, and there are some indications that the former of these
sovereigns was inclined to fix the royal residence at Barcelona ; but
* Ir.c. 32, 33. See Savignj, ii. SO, on this subject of the prohibition of Boman law
in Spain.
• Lex Visigoihoruntt lib. ii. t. 1, 1. 9.
^ All the edicts of this king are headed Fls or Fls Ols (Flavins or Flavios
Oloriosns) bods rex. bods stands for BecisvinDns, bat the abbreviation looks so much
more fitting for BecarcDUS that it is apt to puzzle a student unforewamed.
■ Lex Vis. Ub. v. tit. 4, 1. 22.
Digitized by
Google
1887 VISIGOTHIC SPAIN 21S
the attractions of Aqaitaine, wealthy, fertile, and permeated by the
best Roman culture, prevailed, and Toulouse by the Garonne was
the chosen capital of the early Yisigothic kings. So it remained
until in 507 Glovis defeated Alaric on the Campus Yogladensis, and
Aquitaine, though retaining for centuries a separate character of its
own, became a part of the great Frankish monarchy.
For this portion of Visigothic history the materials are not over-
abundant. Some, perhaps, of the laws labelled as ' Antiqua ' may
belong to this period, but who shall venture to say which they are ?
A more fruitful field of inquiry is opened by the * Breviarium Alarici *
already referred to ; since, Roman as it was in its origin and destined
for the Roman provincials, the deviations of the * Interpretatio * illus-
trate, as Savigny pointed out, and as Dahn has abundantly proved
in detail, the peculiarities of the Gothic political system in con-
nexion with which it had to be used. But the most important of all
our authorities for the history of Visigothic Aquitaine is certainly
the letters of Apollinaris Sidonius, and this vein has been well
worked by Professor Dahn. Besides the celebrated letter describing
the court of Theodoric II at Toulouse, a letter which is, we believe,
quite unique as a description by a cultivated Roman of the daily life
of one of the Teutonic kings who had established themselves within
the limits of the empire, we have also sketches of men like Leo
who, Roman by birth, served as ministers under such a king. We
can look upon vivid, probably too vivid, pictures of the persecution
of the catholics by Euric, we are present at the election of the bishop
of Bourges, we watch each successive stage of the gallant but fruit-
less resistance of the Arvemi to the arms of the barbarians.
Still, though all this is a part, and a necessary part, of the history
of the Visigothic monarchy, and though Professor Dahn is strictly
within the limits of his duty in putting the evidence of Sidonius
so fully before us, we cannot altogether repress the feeling that
all this Aquitanian business is out of the field of the telescope
for us. Aquitaine had to cast in her lot with France ; and when
we are tracing the fortunes of the Visigoths, we want to be south
of the Pyrenees, and to see how they moulded the destinies of Spain.
One point calls for attentive notice in this century of history
between Alaric I and Alaric II. It is that the elective character of
Visigothic kingship, that character which belonged more or less to
all the Teutonic sovereignties, and which the Visigothic was so con-
spicuously to possess during the two centuries that followed, was
fast disappearing during the long ascendency of the house of
Theodoric of Toulouse. To that house belonged all the kings of the
Visigoths ® from Theodoric himself to his great-grandson Amalaric.
The dark deeds of which the palace of Toulouse was repeatedly wit-
ness entitle us to call the principle of succession 'inheritance
• Six in nomber, or seven if we include Gesalic.
Digitized by
Google
214 VISIGOTHIC SPAIN April
tempered by fratricide.' Doubtless Dahn is right in saying that,
the throne of the Visigoths was still an elective throne, but we are
surely safe in asserting that with another century of unbroken suc-
cession in that family, it would have become as practically heredi-
tary as the throne of the West Saxons or the Franks.'®
The second great period in Visigothic history is somewhat less
than a century in length, extending from 507 (the fall of the
kingdom of Toulouse) to 587 (the conversion of Eecared). This is
the period during which the state was predominantly " Spanish in
its geographical situation, but still Arian in its profession of faith,
and, speaking generally, Gothic and anti-Boman in its principles
of government. The chief source to which we must go for informa-
tion as to the political system of the Spanish- Arian state is those
laws to which reference has already been made and which bear the
name of ^ Antiqua.'
For some fifteen years Visigothic Spain rested and prospered
under the wise and peaceful rule of the great Ostrogoth, Theodoric,
the maternal grandfather of Amalaric, son of Alaric U. Upon his
guardian's death Amalaric succeeded to the throne of his ancestors.
His reign was short and troubled, and on his death (581) the
elective principle came into action again with disastrous effects. Of
the five obscure princes whose reigns occupy the next forty years,
we need only remark that their power was continually set at
defiance by a turbulent aristocracy, which evidently considered itself
little, if at all, inferior to these mushroom kings, and that it was
during this troublous and demoralising time that Justinian, already
elated by his victory over the last remains of Ostrogothic power in
Italy, succeeded in effecting a lodgment of imperial troops in Spain.
This Byzantine occupation of Carthagena and Malaga, as we are
inclined to call it, this reclamation of parts of Baetica and Tarra-
conensis for the Boman * republic,' as contemporaries (especially
contemporary ecclesiastics) styled it, lasted for eighty years, and
was a sore drain upon the strength, and menace to the security of
the Gothic state.
The one heroic name connected with this dreary portion of the
Visigothic annals is the name of the last Arian king of the Goths,
one whose character and deeds have been well portrayed by
Professor Dahn, and yet better by our own countrywoman, Mrs.
'* And in this connexion it is worth considering whether there may not be some
tmth in the old-fashioned theory which represented Theodoric of Toulouse as of the
family of Alaric. We quite admit that the line of Sidonius (c. vii. 505), Qiub noster
peccavit avus, as applied by Theodoric to Alaric, is not enough to prryve the genea-
logical connexion, but perhaps, taken in conjunction with the fact that Enrio named
his son Alaric, it may be aUowed to render probable the conjecture that some such con-
nexion was popularly supposed to exist.
** Not exclusively, since the Oaulish province of Septimania still formed part
of it.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 VISIGOTHIC SPAIN 215
Ward,** the lion-hearted Leovigild (668-586). The situation of the
Gothic race in Spain when he ascended the throne was one full of
danger. From without and from within they were menaced by
their ortibodox foes, Suevi in Gallicia and the north of Portugal,
imperial garrisons in the seaports of Murcia, Andalusia, and
Algarve ; in the Pyrenean ravines the tameless Basque population,
then, as so often since, opposed to the ruler of the Spamsh plain be-
cause he was its ruler ; across the Pyrenees, three Frankish kings,
all orthodox, all ambitious, terrible in their enmity, almost more
dangerous in their sUppery friendship. Within the borders of the
kingdom a Roman population, still imperfectly reconciled to the
rule of the invaders, were more and more disposed to look up to
the catholic bishop and the catholic priest as their natural and
victorious leaders in the coming struggle ; while the Gothic nobles
themselves, turbulent, unstable, and treacherous, were ready at any
moment to engage in any plot which seemed likely to be successful
for shaking the temporary sovereign from his throne and placing
one of their number upon it in his stead. Such was the political
outlook when, by the death of his brother in 572, Leovigild was
left sole king of the Visigoths.
Leovigild struck early and timely blows at the turbulent Gothic
aristocracy, but the other dangers of the situation were fearfully
intensified when, in 580, the conversion to Catholicism of the king's
eldest son, Hermenigild, furnished all the deadliest enemies of the
Arian state with a champion and a leader from the bosom of the
royal family itself. The disaster came from what had seemed at
first sight a judicious measure for strengthening the throne of
Leovigild. Thirteen years before, Brunechildis, daughter of his pre-
decessor Athanagild, had crossed the Pyrenees to become the bride
of Sigebert of Austrasia. She had then renounced the Arian creed
of her fathers in order to conform to her husband's faith ; and now,
when her little daughter Ingunthis, in the thirteenth year of her
age, came southwards to marry Hermenigild the Visigoth, it was
natural for Leovigild to suppose that she would turn Arian, with as
much docility as her mother had turned cathoUc, for a crown.
It was natural, perhaps, for an Arian king to suppose this. It
seems that these Teutonic sovereigns could never understand that
while Arianism was with them a sentiment, a national fashion, a
habit of religious thought inherited from their fathers, cathoUcism,
with its noble army of martyrs, its venerated fathers of the church,
its possession of the chair of St. Peter, its wellnigh universal
acceptance by all the Latin-speaking and Greek-speaking popula-
tion of the empire, was a faith^ like that which had inspired the
resistance of the Maccabees to Antiochus — was, to the apprehension
of the faithful, a rope let down to earth from heaven, and that
** Art. * LeoTigild ' in Dictionary of Christian Biography,
Digitized by
Google
216 VISIGOTHIC SPAIN April
not only the strong man, the veteran controversialist, but even the
weak and tender maiden, would die rather than abandon it.
At all events Ingunthis did not abandon her allegiance to the
creed of Nicsea. Her grandmother, Goisvintha, now for a second
time queen of the Visigoths, and sharing the throne of Leovigild,
sought at first to persuade her with honeyed words, then by ouflb
and kicks and by pulling out her hair, to terrify her into accepting
re-baptism at the hands of an Arian bishop; but the child of
twelve years old, alone among strangers, steadfastly refused, de-
claring that she was already cleansed from original sin by her first
baptism, and that she would never cease to confess the Trinity in
Unity. At length she and her husband were sent in honourable
exile to Seville, and from thence, before the year was ended, came
the momentous, but hardly unexpected, tidings that Hermenigild
himself, the destined heir of Leovigild, ^ won by the conversation of
his wife,' had sought and obtained entrance into the church of the
Homoousion.
Upon the conversion of Hermenigild, easily but not necessarily
followed the fatal step of seeking alliances with the Byzantines and
the Suevi, of coining money in his own name, and of raising the
standard of rebellion against his father (580).^'
Leovigild, though thus ' ringed around with foes,' was neither
daunted into surrender nor goaded into premature attack. He
appears to have allowed his rebellious son to reign for a time
unmolested in the province of Bsetiea, to have invited him to a
theological conference (which Hermenigild declined to attend, ' be-
cause thou art hostile unto me for that I am a catholic '), and to
have prevailed on his Arian bishops to make some concessions in
order to facilitate the reception of catholics into their church.
Then he struck at the Basque rebels in the north ; he enticed the
Frankish king of Neustria to his side by a projected alliance between
his other son Becared and the daughter of Ghilperic ; and at length,
in 582, having thus secured his rear, he marched with a powerful
army against Hermenigild. Merida surrendered to him ; Seville,
the rebels' capital, after a long blockade was also taken, and the
Suevic army, which approached to raise the siege, was beaten back
with great loss. Hermenigild fled to Cordova, which was now held
by a Byzantine garrison for the emperor Tiberius II ; but Leovigild,
thinking that enough had been done by iron, tried a golden key
with the gates of this city. The corrupt prsefect who commanded
the garrison of Cordova surrendered the fugitive prince and the
city into the hands of Leovigild's officers for a bribe of 80,000 solidi
(18,000i.) After an interview with his brother Becared, who con-
'* The condemnation of Hermenigild's rebellion is creditable to the fairness of the
orthodox Gregory of Tours : Neaciens miser judicium sibi imminere divinum, qui
contra genitorem, quamlibet hcereHcum talia cogitaret {Hist Franc, vi 43.)
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 VISIGOTHIC SPAIN 217
veyed to him an assurance that he should be treated with no
indignity, Hermenigild consented to seek his father's presence and
implore his forgiveness (584). The promise of honourable treat-
ment is said not to have been kept: he was banished, in vile
raiment and with scant attendance, to the city of Valencia, whence
he appears to have been removed to Tarragona, and there, one or
two years later,** on his definite refusal to return to the creed
of his forefathers, he was slain by a certain Sisebert (otherwise
unknown to history), certainly with the tacit approval, perhaps by
the express orders, of Leovigild. His wife and infant son, who
had been left in the hands of the Byzantines, were despatched to the
court of Constantinople. InguntUs, however, died on the way at
Carthage, the whole of her eventful and chequered life having been
comprised within the space of twenty years. Her child Athanagild,
named after his great-grandfather, the father of Brunechildis,
reached Constantinople in safety, and may possibly have been a
witness of the great triumphs and great disasters which marked
the reign of Heraclius.
Shortly before the tragedy of Hermenigild's rebellion had been
ended by his death, Leovigild accomplished the greatest exploit of
his reign, in the entire subjugation of the Suevi and the annexa-
tion of their territory to the Gothic kingdom. Thus had the
formidable confederacy against him been utterly crushed, and out
of extremest danger he had plucked safety for himself and his
successor^. The imperialists it was not for him to expel from the
limits of the peninsula ; but it was a great point gained that no
independent Teutonic nation, hostile to the Yisigothic throne, now
existed on the soil of Spain.
The story of Leovigild's life illustrates in a striking manner
the real difficulties — perhaps we may say the impossibilities —
of the task which, by the very fact of his birth, appeared to
be laid upon a Teutonic, Arian, patriotic king, ruling, as head
of a tribe of warriors, amid a romanised, cathoUc population of
provincials. However the difficulty is grappled with, whether
with relentless hardness and fanatical intolerance, as by Gaiseric
the Vandal and (apparently) by Euric the Visigoth, or with gentle-
ness, fairness, and moderation, as by Theodoric the Ostrogoth
and Gundebad the Burgundian, it does not really prove amenable
to either mode of treatment. If external foes be repressed, internal
ones arise ; if the armies that fight under the Homoousian banner
be defeated, a princess or a priest preaches the Homoousian doctrines
inside the veil of the king's presence-chamber : sooner or later the
faith of the great civilised world-empire prevails over the creed of
those who were recently a barbarous tribe, and Teutonic Arianism
becomes one of the ' portions and parcels of the dreadful past.'
^* In 585 according to Dahn, in 586 according to Mrs. Ward.
Digitized by
Google
218 VISIGOTHIC SPAIN April
Thus it was in the case of the Visigoths. Leovigild appeared by
his conquests to have placed the national sectarian monarchy on
an immovable basis ; and behold, within three years after the death
of Leovigild the third council of Toledo was summoned to receive
from the hands of a son of Leovigild the confession of his adhesion
to the creed of Nicaea, and the complete abandonment of every posi-
tion which the Arian kings had been upholding for two centuries.
Hermenigild's premature attempt to cathoUcise the monarchy had
ended in disastrous failure; his brother Becared's attempt to
accomphsh the same result was crowned with triumphant success.
Two or three insurrections stirred up by the aged and implacable
Ooisvintha, or abetted by heterodox prelates, failed to stem the tide
of reUgious change. Whither the king led, his nobles sooner or
later (and apparently after no great interval) were well content to
follow ; and in half a century after the death of Leovigild we find
it attributed as a matter of high praise to the reigning sovereign
(as it has been to so many Spanish sovereigns since his day) that
* he will not suffer any one who is not a cathoUc to dwell in his
reahn.' ^*
'^ Thus the conversion of Becared marks the transition to the
third great period of Visigothic history, that during which the state
was cathoUc and Spanish, but still under the dominion of kings who
were necessarily of Gothic blood.*^ This period embraced 124 years
(687-711 ^^), and was terminated by the Moorish invasion, that
event so strange, so terrible, so unlike any that has befallen any
other state of Western Europe, that event which seems to project a
gloomy shadow over the whole century that preceded it, and forces
the historical student to inquire into the causes of the decay of
the Gothic energy which made not defeat only, but so sudden and
ignominious a collapse of the national power, possible.
The * Lex Visigothorum,' far the larger part of which was
compiled during this third period, is, of course, one most impor-
tant source from which our information is derived. Almost equally
important, however, are the * Acts ' of the fifteen councils of Toledo,
from the third to the seventeenth,^^ which assumed so singular a
** Nee sinit degere in regno 8iio eum qui non sU catJiolicus. Acts of the sixth
council of Toledo, a.d. 638.
>* The necessity that the king mast be genere Qothiis is asserted by the sixth
cotincil of Toledo, and evidently continued till the Saracen invasion. See Klhnge der
Qennanen, vi. 626.
■' Beckoning from Ataulfus' entry into Oanl (412), it will be seen that we have a
space of almost exactly three centuries for the duration of the Visigothic state. And
if we remember that the second period (607-587) is twenty years short of the century
and the third twenty-four years over it, we may, to assist the memory, apportion these
three centuries as follows : the first to the Gaulish and Arian, the second to the
Spanish and Arian, the third to the Spanish and catholic state.
*" The Acts of the eighteenth council, that held under King Witica, are un
fortunately lost.
Digitized by
Google
1887 VISIGOTHIC SPAIN 219
power of legislating for the whole population of Spain, lay as well
as ecclesiastical, and whose proceedings Dahn here analyses with
his nsnal thoroughness.
As to the social condition of the people, Dahn devotes many
pages to the discussion of a question familiar to most inquirers into
the history of the early middle ages, but nowhere more important
than in Visigothic Spain, * What had become of the Gemein-
freien?* This class, for which unfortunately we lack a precise
name in our modern English (since * freeholder * is a little too
vague), but which we may fairly translate into the ceorls of our
Saxon forefathers, must have formed the bone and sinew of the
armies of Alaric and Ataulfus. Though we cannot assert that it
had disappeared when the armies of Muza crossed the straits of
Gibraltar, it had certainly ceased to be of any great account in the
state. Whence came this denudation of a social stratum once so
important ?
In his answer to this question Dahn brings out strongly one
point which used to be strangely lost sight of by students of the
political systems founded on the ruins of the Koman empire, and
that is the immense influence which, at any rate in Spain and
Gaul, the organisation of the empire itself still exercised on the bar-
barian inhabitants of the new state. Himself a Teuton of the
Teutons, Dahn would, one can see, have liked nothing better than
to find the Visigothic state teeming with maxims, principles, and
institutions derived from the forest and pasture Kfe of the Gothic
people as they existed in their old settlements by the shores of the
Baltic and the Euxine. But the more diligently he has inquired,
flie more he has been convinced that though there are such survivals
of Teutonism in the Visigothic state, they are not numerous, and
that, in fact, if you are to understand anything of the manner of
life of the Visigoths in Spain during the sixth and seventh centuries,
you must study the Eoman state far more than the Gothic people,
the configuration and markings of the mould far more than the
chemical composition of the metal that was poured into it
The process of romanisation of the Gothic invaders began
doubtless with the upper classes of society, and it began upon the
sunny coteaux of Aquitaine, where in the fifth century they had fixed
their favourite dwelling-place. But after the expulsion from Gaul
it still went on, and after the middle of the sixth century it pro-
ceeded with terrible rapidity. If ever any champion of the old
Gothic feelings and ideas filled the throne, he was sure to be suc-
ceeded by some romanising son, who swept away all that his father
had done, and seemed to care for no applause but that of the
churchmen and the provincials. Yet we must not overstate the
rapidity of the process. Down to the accession of Recesvinth (652),
that is till within sixty years of the Moorish invasion, intermarriage
Digitized by
Google
220 VISIGOTHIC SPAIN April
between persons belonging to the two diverse races, Goth and Boman,
was still prohibited. True it is that such a prohibition had found a
place in the Theodosian code, but there the motive for its insertion
was the Eoman's pride of race, which forbade him to ally himself
with a barbarian. Its reception into the law books of the Visigoths
(whether it were contained in the ' Breviarium ' or the ' Antiqua *)
was doubtless due to the same feeling on the opposite side, to the
conviction that a descendant of one of the free fierce comrades of
Alaric or Theodoric would lower his status and enfeeble his progeny
by mingling his blood with a daughter of the enslaved and effemi-
nate provincials of the empire.
So, too, even the repeated injunctions to the judges that no
difference is to be made between Goths and Eomans show that down
to a comparatively late period there was a difference, and an im-
portant one, which caused the man of Teutonic origin to weigh
heavier in the scale than his Iberian fellow-subject. The king, aa
has been already said, could be only a man of Gothic descent.
When appeals are made to the patriotism and courage of the
soldiers, the latter are addressed as Goths rather than as Spaniards,
and the title of the kingdom down to the very day of Xeres de la
Frontera was Regnum Gothorum, not Regnum Hispanue.
Thus, then, the fusion of the two nations was not complete when
the Moor landed in the peninsula, but it had been making rapid
progress ; and we may remember that even at the commencement
of the process Theodoric the Ostrogoth had said in his shrewd way,
Romanvs miser imitattir Gothum et vilis Gothus imitatur Romanum^^
Applying this fact of the great influence exerted by Eoman society
on the invading Teutons to the question before us, the reason of
the decay of the class of Gemeinfreien, we ask what institution
existed in the Roman provinces which could have brought about
such a result. Professor Dahn's answer to this question is, ' the
institution of slavery.' Of course slavery existed also in the Teu-
tonic nations; but the slavery described by Tacitus,^ which re-
sembles villenage more than absolute slavery, was evidently a very
different affair from the Roman — much simpler, much less widely
extended, much less important in its influence on society. With
much care Dahn traces the indications afforded us by the Visi-
gothic Code as to the various classes making up the great social
stratum of the * unfree,' and throughout he discovers the prepon-
derating influence exercised by Roman usages and maxims of
Roman law.
The great number of freedmen, the tenacity with which the law
insisted on their observing all the duties involved in the word
obaequium towards their former masters, and the way in which they
voluntarily or involuntarily co-operated towards the increase of the
*• Anon. Valesiij 61. * Qermaniai xxv.
Digitized by
Google
1887 riSIGOTHIC SPAIN 221
wealth of their emancipator, are all points in which Visigothic law
followed that of Rome. And while from below there was thus being
formed an ever-increasing class of poor dependents on the will of a
few great proprietors, the same process was doubtless also going on
from the higher class of free but not wealthy landowners. Dahn
quotes in this connexion, as he is entitled to do, the well-known
passages from Salvian which describe how, under the pressure of
taxation and the venal administration of the laws, free proprietors
were continually being forced down into the class of colonic while
the colonus again was sometimes being depressed into the servus.
We have hitherto thought of this process of degradation as affecting
only the Soman provincials, but why should it not also have affected
the smaller Gothic landowners? The times were troubled: the
king was far off, and the great landowner was nigh at hand and
practically ruling almost like a king in his large, often unjustly
acquired, domain : the popular assembly and all similar guarantees
which had once existed for the rights of the petty freeman had long
since ceased to have any practical value. We may fairly suppose
that in these circumstances vilis Gothus would imitate the Eoman
in submitting himself by a regular ' commendation,' or by some
process which was practically equivalent thereto, to the will of his
all-powerful neighbour.^*
Thus, then, in the course of generations, the poorer landowners,
who must undoubtedly have once existed in the social system of the
Visigoths, and whom Dahn compares to the Bamrschaft of modem
Germany (or, we might add, to the Boers of the Transvaal state in
South Africa), vanished away, and we find ourselves in the later
developments of the state practically in the presence of two classes
only — the great nobles, more or less closely connected with the
royal household, who are spoken of as priores, primoresy honestioris
loci persona, majores personce, and so forth, and their dependents,
the rmtici, mediocres, or vileSf who, though still in some points
theoretically distinguished from the aervi, are ever practically sinking
more nearly to an equaUty with the slaves, and whose lot is evidently
in many respects far less enviable than that of the slaves on the
royal domain.
The landed property of some of these honestiores persotue was
evidently enormous, and Dahn doubts whether the count or other
officer of the king was really able to execute legal process within its
limits." Surrounded by his devoted band of bucellarii or sajonea,^
the great landowner could practically long defy the king's mandate,
'* See pp. 126-144 for Dahn's description of this process, and 167-185 for the
nature of obsequium,
« P. 124.
** Pp. 138>136, Dahn discusses the difficult questions connected with the former
of these words, and comes to the conclusion that the bucellarius (who was known also
both in the eastern and western empires) gradually gave place to the s(yo.
Digitized by
Google
222 VISIGOTHIC SPAIN April
until perchance on the occasion of some revolution in the state
he attached himself to the losing side, saw himself despoiled of his
lands in favour of the adherents of the conqueror, and sank, he and
his children, into the despised class of viles persona.
The question what amount of wealth sufficed to place its pos-
sessor in the privileged class is an interesting one, but is naturally
susceptible of only a very rough approximative answer. From a
consideration of the law of dowries, Dahn comes to the conclusion
that probably no one was considered to belong to the class of
lumestioreSy majores, or seniores gentU Oothorum who did not possess
at least 60,000 to 80,000 solidi (86,000i. to 48,000L sterling).
The existence of this landed aristocracy, wealthy and turbulent,
oppressive towards the poorer freemen, and insubordinate towards
the king, was a cause, and in some sUght degree a justification,
of the singular change which the Visigothic monarchy under-
went during its third period. This change had the effect of
making it a more completely priest-governed state than the
world has perhaps ever seen with the exception of Paraguay
and the States of the Church. The conversion of Becared to
Catholicism was no doubt due to an honest change of reUgious
belief, and, as has been already hinted, the time was fully come for
the Visigothic state to enter the broad mid-channel of religious
thought in Europe as it swept from Nicaea to Chalcedon, from
Athanasius to Gregory, and from Benedict to Bernard. But the
passionate eagerness with which the Goths threw themselves into
their new orthodoxy, and the vast influence which the church had
never ceased to exercise over the Boman population, made it possible
for Becared and his successors to construct of the Spanish catholic
church a bulwark to protect the throne against the assaults of a
turbulent aristocracy.
Thus do we arrive at some understanding of the process by
which the church council in Spain gradually drew to itself almost
the whole power of the state, and came in fact to hold in the Visi-
gothic monarchy almost exactly the same dominant position which
the house of commons holds in the England of to-day. The third
council of Toledo, held in 589, registered the conversion of the
Spanish king and people to Catholicism, and already took some
steps towards bringing the civil functionaries under the control
of the bishops. Between that date and the fall of the monarchy
in 711, fifteen councils were held, all of which, in fact, wielded the
power of a modem parliament, and which concerned themselves to
some small extent with church discipline, but far more with the
purely political questions of legislation and administration.
Professor Dahn has traced the development of theocratic power
in the * Acta^ of these coimcils with considerable minuteness,^ and
« Pp. 421-492.
Digitized by
Google
1887 VISIGOTHIC SPAIN 228
is careful to show how at each step of the process the real in-
crease of priestly power was made to wear the appearance of defe-
rence to the royal authority, sometimes even of a deference contrary
to church-right and the canon law, as for example when the king is
authorised in his own name to inflict the penalty of excommunication
on political offenders. But the great Spanish churchmen of the sixth
and seventh centuries, the Leanders and the Isidores, the Julians
and the Braulios, knew well how to conduct their long campaign.
So long as the king moulded his policy entirely by the advice of his
ecclesiastical councillors, so long as a council in which prelates
possessed the large majority of voices was the chief legislative
assembly of the realm, they might safely allow their royal pupil to
assume something of the attitude and wield some of the thunders
of a national head of the church. The church does not need jealously
to defend its privileges against the state when it is itself rapidly
becoming conterminous with the state.
In the councils of Toledo the king was generally, perhaps al-
ways, accompanied by a certain number of high officers of the
palace ; " but if we may judge by the number of their signatures
to the * Acta,' they were in a very small minority when compared
with the ecclesiastics. Thus only five palatines subscribe the decrees
of the third council, which was attended by sixty-seven bishops.
The eighth was attended by seventeen palatines, fifty-one bishops,
thirteen abbots, and eleven representatives of bishops : the twelfth
by fifteen palatines, thirty-four bishops, four abbots, and three
representatives of bishops. We may fairly infer that in those
councils in which the presence of the palatines is alluded to only
in general terms or passed over in complete silence, the proportions
were at least equally favourable to the ecclesiastical element. Still
the presence of the palatines was to a certain extent a recognition of
the theoretical right of the state to legislate for the church, while in
practice the church was legislating, sometimes with needless and
officious minuteness, for the state.
The proceedings of such a council are generally commenced by
the king's entrance. Kneeling as a lowly suppliant, he entreats the
fathers of the council to intercede for him with the Almighty, and
then presents a tomus containing the chief topics on which he soU-
cits their advice and suggests their legislation. This tomm^ which
Dahn aptly compares to the speech of a sovereign opening parlia-
ment, was no doubt generally composed by some ecclesiastical
adviser of the crown, such as the bishop of Toledo or Seville, and
was closely followed in the * Acta ' of the ensuing council.
A short survey of the subjects treated of in these councils will give
some idea of the wide-reaching sphere of their activity. The third
^ These ooortiers, known to the Boman law as palatini, are believed hj Dahn to
be designated hj the Oardingi of the Visigothic eode.
y
Digitized by
Google
224 VISIGOTHIC SPAIN April
council of Toledo (589), as has been said, was chiefly occupied with
registering the change in the national creed accomplished by the
conversion of Becared. It, however, also decreed that widows and
virgins, especially those who had taken vows of chastity, were not
to be forced into matrimony by any one, even the king himself.
More remarkable was the provision, ' in accordance with the decree
of our most glorious lord the king,' that the judges and officers of
the courts of justice should attend the yearly provincial synods of
the clergy held in November, ' in order that they may learn in what
godly and righteous fashion they have to deal with those under them,
and that they are not to oppress either freemen or the slaves on the
royal domain with uncalled-for burdens and distraints. For ac-
cording to the royal admonition, the bishops are to be overseers of
the treatment of subjects by the judges, so that they may either them-
selves warn and punish the latter, or bring their deeds of injustice
to the knowledge of the king ; and if they are not able to lead the
censured person to a better mind, they are themselves to excommu-
nicate him. The bishop and the aeniorea [nobiUty] shall together
compute what allowances can be made to the judges without over-
burdening the province.'
Such an enactment as this, coming at the time when the
cathoKc bishops and clergy were only just emerging from the
status of functionaries of a tolerated sect, shows a gigantic stride
through championship of the people towards domination of the
state.
The fourth council of Toledo, held in 688 under the presidency
of the great St. Isidore of Seville, had two main objects in view — to
give a solemn sanction to a political revolution, and to organise the
persecution of the Jews. Sisenanth now sat upon the throne of the
Visigoths, a mere creature of the bishops, who had obtained his
crown by the overthrow of the gallant Swinthila. The latter king,
who reigned from 621 to 681, was in some respects an imitator and a
worthy follower of the great Leovigild. It was he who had brought
to an end the Byzantine domination in Spain aftor it had lasted
eighty years. He had humbled the Basques, and seemed on the
point of foimding a great and strong dynasty. But though so
liberal to the humbler classes of his subjects that he was called
* the friend of the poor,' he was on bad terms with the great nobility
of his realm both lay and clerical. No councils were held during
the ten years of his reign ; and at length the combined hostility of
these two powerful orders, abetted by foreign Frankish aid, availed
to hurl him from his throne and to place thereupon the pliant
priest-ridden Sisenanth.
The fourth council, moved thereto doubtless by the entreaties
of the anxious usurper, closed its proceedings with a solemn homily
on the divine right of kings. The disloyalty of other nations (pro-
Digitized by
Google
1887 VISIGOTHIC SPAIN 225
bably the Franks or the Lombards) to their divmely appointed rulers
is glanced at and severely rebuked ; the king's murder is declared to
be an act of sacrilege, and any one who in violation of his oath shall
seek to compass the death of the king or to strip him of his royal
dignity is pronounced anathema in the sight of God the Father and
all his holy angels, and with all his comrades is extruded from the
fellowship of the catholic church and the whole of Christendom.
Barely has Satan rebuked sin with more emphasis, except on the
floor of the British house of commons. After this solemn ana-
thema on all future rebels comes a passage which no doubt gives a
clue to all these proceedings of the council : ' But as for Swinthila,
who, influenced by remorse for his various crimes, voluntarily re-
signed the crown, we have decided, with the consent of the people,
that neither he nor his wife nor his children shall ever again be
received into our fellowship, nor restored to the honour from which
for their transgression they have fallen. Their possessions shall be
confiscated except such sum as our most pious prince in his com-
passion may think fit to leave to them.* The same sentence of ex-
communication and confiscation is then pronounced on Gaila,
' brother of the aforesaid Swinthila by blood, and brother in crime; *
and is extended to his wife and family.
Before the council reached this edifying close, it had, as was before
said, taken up in earnest the question of the extermination of the
Jewish people in Spain. It was especially hard upon the Hebrew
nation that the Yisigothic people should thus set their hearts upon
their destruction. In the earlier days of the monarchy, under the
Arian kings Euric, Alaric 11, Theodoric, they had been treated with
exceptional leniency by the Goths, and had requited their kindness
by fighting for them at Aries and at Naples against their enemies,
Frankish or Byzantine. As soon as the Goths were relieved, by the
national conversion under Becared, from the stigma of heresy, they
began to turn against their old aUies. The anti-Jewish legislation
of Becared, however, was comparatively gentle, consisting chiefly of
the prohibition to Jews to marry christian wives, to acquire christian
slaves, or to hold any office in the state which conferred criminal juris-
diction over christians. Under Sisibut (612-620) these laws received
a sharper edge ; many Jews had to submit to compulsory baptism,
and many, to avoid the pressure which was being applied to them,
escaped to Gaul. Under the vaUant Swinthila (621-631), little
friendly as he was to the priesthood, the persecution slumbered.
Now, under his more docile successor Sisenanth, it awoke with
remorseless appetite. Something was said, for decency's sake, in
condemnation of compulsory baptism, but it was decreed that those
Jews who ' in the days of the God-fearing king Sisibut ' had been
subjected to it, must not cast off their involuntarily accepted faith.
All the children of the Hebrews were to be taken away from them,
VOL. n. — ^NO. VI. Q
Digitized by
Google
226 VISIGOTHIC SPAIN April
and brought up in convents or christian families. Mixed marriages
were to be dissolved, unless the Jewish consort were willing to
embrace Christianity. Relapsed Jews were declared incapable of
bearing witness in courts of justice. Official situations of every
kind, even those financial offices which had previously been left
open to them, were now absolutely closed against them; and no
Jew was to be allowed to possess a christian slave, ' since it is an
impiety that the members of Christ should serve the members of
Antichrist,' but all persons holding this position under them were
to be at once emancipated by the king.
Succeeding councils carried forward to the best of their ability
the work of persecution. It is clear, from the repetition of similar
enactments, that there was much difficulty in bringing the practice
of these Judenhetzen into full accord with the cruel theory. This
limpness in the administration of the edicts must be attributed, not
to any mitigating influence of public opinion, but to the fact that
the still large wealth of the Jewish victims was freely expended in
bribing the officers of the law.
By the sixth council of Toledo (688) it was formally declared
that no one who was not a catholic should be suffered to live in
Spain ; and it was provided that the whole body of anti- Jewish legis-
lation should be solemnly sworn to by each king on his accession.
By the ninth council (655) the baptised Jews were placed under
the special control of the bishops, in order that it might be seen
that they kept the christian festivals, and refrained from keeping the
Jewish. The twelfth council (681), summoned under Ervigius, was
earnestly entreated by the king to tear up the poisonous plant of
Judaism by the roots, and accordingly the whole legal armoury of
oppressive enactments against the Jews was furbished up anew.
A long catalogue of things forbidden and commanded to the
unhappy outlaws was ended by a provision which placed the
administration of the anti-Jewish laws exclusively in the hands of
ecclesiastics; civil judges who presumed to intermeddle therein,
at any rate without an ecclesiastical assessor, being subjected to
severe penalties, which also were inflicted on the priest who should
show himself lukewarm in the application of the persecuting
edicts.
The sixteenth council (698), under King Egica, forbade the
Jews to meet upon the quayside of a conmiercial town (' the place
where merchants most do congregate '), or to transact any manner
of business with christians, a prohibition which was no doubt
extensively evaded. By the same council all fiscal obligations
imposed on Jews as such were removed from those who were
willing to profess Christianity, the deficiency thus caused being
ordered to be supplied by increased contributions from their obsti-
nate brethren.
Digitized by
Google
1887 VISIGOTHIC SPAIN 227
Lastly y the seventeenth council (694), under the same king,
after declaring that ' the ancient glory of Spanish unity in the faith
must be upheld/ alludes to the fact — which can surprise no one who
has studied the details of this century of anti-Jewish legislation —
that the men of the persecuted race had been conspiring with
enemies over sea in order to destroy the christian faith, and had
even hoped — which does not seem a probable accusation — to seat
some accomplice of theirs on the throne. At the same time King
Egica has to confess that he himself, in the earlier part of his
reign, has allowed Jews to violate the law by keeping christian
slaves, but he now withdraws this permission. An infraction of the
law such as this, probably from corrupt motives, confessed and
apologised for by the king himself, throws an interesting light on
the difficulty which attended every attempt at a conscientious
enforcement of these laws, theoretically so stringent. A certain
number of Jews then receive permission to dwell in the passes of
ihe Pyrenees, though it seems that even these have nominally to
profess conformity to the christian faith.
All the remainder, all those who dwell in the fields and cities of
the peninsula, are at once brought in bondage to the JUcus, and
by it assigned as slaves to suitable owners. Their new masters are
to give a written promise that they shall not be allowed to practise
any of their national customs. Their children at seven years old
are to be taken from them, and debarred from all further com-
munication with their parents. In order that the JUcm may not
suffer through this sudden degradation of a large and wealthy class
of taxpayers into bond slaves, the lands formerly occupied by the
Jews are to be assigned to a selected number of their former
christian slaves, by whom the previous quota of taxation is hence-
forward to be paid to the state.
Here ends the dreary story of Visigothic attempts to * uproot the
poisonous plant of Judaism.' Japhet had exhausted all the powers
of his intellect in the attempt to exterminate the sons of Shem who
were dwelling within his gates, and in seventeen years' time Shem
was to take a fearful revenge. True, the vengeance came not from
the race of Isaac, but from thefr terrible kinsmen of the desert,
the tameless children of Ishmael. But there can be no doubt
that the rapid success of the Saracens was due in part at least to
thefr secret understanding with the Jews. The soil was mined
under the feet of the Gothic lords of Spain, and in every large city
there was probably to be found a band of Jewish conspfrators —
whether they nominally professed Christianity or not made no
matter — sore and savage at the irritating persecution to which they
had been subjected for three generations, and as eager to betray the
cause of the Goths to the Saracen as they had once been to
champion it against the Frank.
Q 2
Digitized by
Google
228 VISIGOTHIC SPAIN April
Southey's preface to his poem of ' Roderic * begins with these
words :
The history of the Visigoths for some years before their overthrow is
very imperfectly known. It is, however, apparent that the enmity
between the royal families of Ghindaswinth and Wamba was one main
cause of the destruction of the kingdom, the latter party having assisted
in betraying their country to the Moors for the gratification of their own
revenge.
Since Southey's time the obscurity resting on the last days of
the Visigothic kingdom has become even darker, modem criticism
being compelled to reject some fables which then passed current as
authentic history. But the account of the matter given in the
above sentence is still the best that we can put forward. The
thirty years' duel between the houses of Ghindaswinth and Wamba —
a duel in reading of which our sympathies sway curiously first
to one side and then to the other — still remains probably the chief
political cause (added to many social causes) of the easy triumph of
the Moors.
Ghindaswinth (641-652) was the veteran leader of the party of
the nobles, and was raised to the throne as the result of a success-
ful conspiracy. A man of stern character and strong will — Dahn
considers him a worthy successor of Leovigild and Swintlula — and
acquainted, by his own previous share in them, with all the
plots and stratagems of a turbulent aristocracy, he set himself to
work, with energy undiminished by his nearly fourscore years, to
make such plots impossible for the future. He succeeded in the task,
and the eleven years of his reign were years of severely maintained
order and of useful legislation. We, who contemplate sometimes with
admiration, sometimes with dismay, the versatility and resource of
some of our aged politicians, may be usefully reminded of the
vigour shown by this aged Visigothic king, who at seventy-nine
years of age turned round upon all his old associates and began an
entirely fresh career, which lasted till his death at the age of ninety.
It is true that during the last three years of his reign his son
Receswinth, who was associated with him in the throne, may have
greatly lightened the labour of reigning. Though he was obliged
to curb the growing insolence of the higher ecclesiastics and to
defend his prerogative from their attacks, Ghindaswinth bore a
high character for personal piety and showed considerable interest
in literature. Of the influence exerted upon the development of
Visigothic law by this king, and by his son Beceswinth, who succeeded
him, and who in his reign of twenty years (652-672) seems to
have yielded up all the ground which his father had won from the
ecclesiastical party, we have spoken in the early part of this article.
On the death of Beceswinth, Wamba was elected king, a stout
soldier— of noble birth, and not called Gincinnatus-like from the
Digitized by
Google
1887 VISIOOTHIC SPAIN 229
plough, ae later legends tell. His eight years' reign (672-680) was
signalised by a vigorous and successful campaign against the Byzan-
tine Paulus, who, when sent to quell a revolt that had broken out in
Gothic Graul, had placed himself at its head and proclaimed himself
king. With the details of these warUke operations, though they
afiford us interesting glimpses of the Roman cities of Nimes and Nar-
bonne, we have here no concern ; but it is important for us to notice
the measures taken by Wamba for restoring the Visigothic army to
an eflScient condition. In case of a hostile invasion every bishop,
duke, or count, every ikiufaths,^ I'icarius,^'' or gardingus ^ within
one hundred miles of the scene of action was to hasten to the spot
with all his followers (apparently slaves as well as free depen-
dents^). Failing to render prompt obedience to this law, the
great ecclesiastic was to be banished the realm, while his revenues
were to be liable to such fine as the king might think fit to impose ;
and the layman, whether a noble or mediocrior viliorqiie persona^ was
to lose whatever dignity he possessed and be reduced to the condition
of utter slavery.^
It was probably the fact that Wamba had not spared even the
great territorial ecclesiastics in his eflforts to reorganise the defences
of the kingdom, which led to the connivance or the active co-operation
of certain churchmen in the strange and scandalous transaction which
closed his reign. Ervigius, descended on the father's side from a
Byzantine exile and on the mother's from the family of King
Chindaswinth, was a palatinns who had been treated with excep-
tional favour by Wamba. In the eighth year of Wamba's reign,
the king, who was now probably advanced in years, fell into a state
of unconsciousness, the result, so men said then or afterwards, of a
potion handed to him by Ervigius. In this unconscious state he
received the host and was wrapped in the garb of a penitent. His
brain regained its power ; but Ervigius, supported by a powerful
party of nobles and ecclesiastics, insisted that the man who had
once been wrapped in the penitential robe and so had ' entered into
reUgion,' must no longer reign over the Visigoths. Wamba saw
that it was hopeless to contend against such unscrupulous and
powerful conspirators, accepted their decree, and retired into a con-
vent at Burgos, where he died some years afterwards.
For throwing a cloak of legitimacy over a transaction like
this, whereby reUgion and justice were alike outraged, such a body
as the council of Toledo was exceptionally qualified. The twelfth
of these assemblies met (681) under the presidency of JuUan,
metropolitan of Toledo, who, after writing the life of Wamba in
^ Captain of thousand. »' Representative of the count. ^ Palatine.
* Cum omni virtute sud : of. Shakespeare's use of • a power.'
* Amisso testimonio dignitatis^ redigaiur protitma ad conditionem tUUnuB
servituHs. (L, V. ix. 2. 8.)
Digitized by
Google
280 VISIGOTHIC SPAIN AprU
flowing periods, seems to have joined in the conspiracy by which he
had been stripped of his kingship. Before this council Ervigius
appeared in the guise of a suppliant beseeching the intercession of
the fathers of the council with the Almighty on his behalf, lament-
ing the decay of morals in the land, and beseeching them, as the salt
of the earth, to arrest the growing corruption. He also entreated
them to confirm his accession to the throne, and to Ughten the yoke
of Wamba's miUtary legislation, by which, as he averred, half the
population of Spain had suffered the loss of their civil rights. In
reply to this tomus of Ervigius, the council undertook the respon-
sibiUty of vouching for the regularity of Wamba's deposition, released
his subjects from their oath of allegiance, and anathematised all the
enemies of Ervigius. It also passed a canon, which, though ex-
pressed in general terms, was evidently aimed at the fallen sovereign,
to the effect that those who, even against their will, have received the
grace of God (conveyed by extreme unction, the tonsure, and the
penitential habit), if they shall afterwards, on recovering from their
sickness, ungratefully fight against .that which they ought to deem
their highest good, are to be compelled to keep the vows which they
have made (or which have been made for them) to lead the life of
pcenitentes and to be declared incapable of civil oflGice. By the same
council the miUtary legislation .of Wamba was repealed, and all the
offenders who had been struck down by it were restored to their
civil rights.
The thirteenth council of Toledo, again held under the presidency
of Julian, received another tomtit from the pious and obsequious
usurper. Its contents may be guessed from the decrees of the
council, which restored to their property and their civil rights the
' unhappy ' adherents of Duke Paulus, and passed an amnesty for
all political offenders since the time of King Chindila (640). Evi-
dently Ervigius's only hope of maintaining himself on the throne
was by undoing as much as possible of the work of his predecessor,
and conciUating all those foes to order and good government whom
he had struck down. Possibly, too, in the case of the adherents of
Duke Paulus the fact of his own Byzantine origin may have dis-
ix)sed him to sympathise with a rebel who was also a Byzantine.
Further, the nobles, who probably complained that under the
energetic rule of Wamba some of their privileges had been violated,
were formally guaranteed against punishment without trial, and the
king was made to promise not to bestow palatine rank upon their
freedmen, thus raising their clientes to as high a position or higher
than their own, and freeing them from the obligations of obsequium.
But the most important of aU the acts of this council was that
whereby the King Ervigius, his wife Leovigotho, and all their sons
and daughters were solemnly taken under the protection of the
council — the Visigothic king being willing to crouch behind the
Digitized by
Google
1887 VISIOOTHIC SPAIN 281
bishop's palUum. The anathema of the ehurch was to light upon
any attempt to procure his abdicatitm, to compass his death, or
forcibly to inflict upon him the tonsure or wrap him in the peni-
tential robe. Thus naively did the fears of Ervigius reveal them-
selves lest the same measure which he had meted to Wamba should
by some ambitious palatine be meted out to him. And as a further
security against domestic treachery, the queen was warned under
penalty of hell fire not to dream of remarriage after the husband's
death. Evidently the conscience-stricken and suspicious king
thought that his best guarantee against premature saintship was to
be found in the presence in his sick-room of one person who could
in no conceivable circumstances gain by his downfall.
The result of the assiduous court thus paid by the nervous
usurper to the clergy was greatly to weaken the royal prerogative,
and Professor Dahn is probably justified in saying ^^ that all the
good work that had been done by Chindaswinth and Wamba in
consolidating and strengthening the Gothic state was undone by
Ervigius.
After all, the torment of remorse and apprehension was too
much for the usurper's nerves, and he did himself, voluntarily, what
he had forced his predecessor to do against his will. After adopt-
ing— as far as it was possible for him in an elective monarchy to
adopt — Wamba's nephew, Egica, as his heir, marrying him to
his daughter, and binding him by a solemn oath to do nothing that
might in any way injure his family, Ervigius retired (687) into a
convent, where he soon after died.
Thus, then, had the pendulum swung back once more ; and now
a kinsman of Wamba was on the Visigothic throne, with power, if
his oath did not restrain him, to mar the fortunes of the house of
Chindaswinth. A council was summoned, the fifteenth of Toledo
(688), still under the presidency of Julian, who, through all these
mutations of fortune in the state, kept his place at the head of the
church. To the fathers of the council Egica presented himself,
doing the accustomed lowly reverence, and besought their advice
as to a difficult case of conscience which had arisen in his breast.
He had sworn two oaths : the first, at his marriage with Ervigius's
daughter, that he would in all matters help the sons of Ervigius to
victory, and in every difficulty would act according to their advice ;
the second, on his designation as successor to the throne, that he
would never deny justice to any of the people entrusted to his care.
Now these two oaths were contrary to one another, for Ervigius had
enriched his family with the proceeds of many unjust confiscations,
and these proceedings must be reversed, and the sons of Ervigius
must see judgment go against them if the coronation oath of the
new king were faithfully observed.
»» P. 217.
Digitized by
Google
282 riSIGOTHIC SPAIN April
One conjectures already, from the position of the questioner, in
what sense the answer of the council would be given ; and, more-
over, there seems httle reason to doubt that Ervigius in his des-
perate attempts to secure his dynasty had committed many acts of
high-handed injustice, and that pubUc opinion truly supported
Egica in calling for their reversal. At any rate the answer of the
council was, that as far as could possibly be done both oaths must
be kept by the new king, but that when they came into hopeless
conflict, the second oath, that to the nation, must be preferred to
the first oath, sworn to his wife's relations.
Again the royal family were placed under a guarantee by the
council, and this was renewed five years after by the sixteenth
council of Toledo (698), which, after passing sundry canons against
Jews, idolaters, and persons guilty of unnatural crimes, proceeded,
in language worthy of the seventeenth century, to enlarge upon the
duty of a subject to his king.
Next after the obedience which is due to God, it is the highest virtue
to keep one's plighted faith to kings whom he has appointed as his
representatives on earth. The vows, therefore, which have been taken
to sovereign princes must be rigorously observed, and the faith which
has been promised to them must not be injured by any machinations of
evil. But the wicked obduracy of many secular persons, and even,
what is fiEbr worse, of some priests, despises this solemnly sworn fealty,
and, while it encompasses the promise with a misty vapour of adjura-
tions, secretly cherishes accursed treason in its heart.
This gloomy preamble leads up to an announcement that Sisbert,
bishop of Toledo, has been guilty of a conspiracy against the
king's crown and life, and that he is accordingly stripped of his
dignity, expelled from the bosom of the cathoHc church, made to
forfeit all his property to the king, condemned to penal servitude
for hfe, and (unless the king's grace should otherwise decide) only
to be restored upon his deathbed to the conununion of the faithful.
It is further stated that the king has already by his own authority
translated Bishop FeUx from Seville to Toledo to fill the vacancy
caused by the treachery of Sisbert, and this proceeding is approved
and confirmed by the council.
The seventeenth council of Toledo, held in 694, King Egica being
still upon the throne, ordained (perhaps as the result of a percep-
tion that these assemblies were becoming too merely secular in
their character) that the first three days of every future council
should be spent in fasting and reUgious exercises. It also dealt
with a strange and superstitious custom which had grown up among
the priests, of saying masses for men still Uving, in the hope of
thereby procuring their death. This grotesque perversion of the
rites of the church was forbidden under penalty of lifelong
banishment and excommunication. But the main business of
Digitized by
Google
1887 VISIGOTHIC SPAIN 238
this council, as of so many of its predecessors — apart from the
ever present duty of sharpening the penal laws against the Jews —
was political. Litanies were to be sung on three days in every
month for the express purpose of preventing the devil from tempt-
ing the people into rebellion ; and the widow and children of the
reigning king were, after his death, expressly taken under the pro-
tection of the bishops, all attempts to defame their character, to
interfere with their liberty, or to force them to embrace a monastic
life, being punishable with anathema and the torments of hell.
This is the last of the Visigothic councils of which we have any
record, the ' Acts ' of the eighteenth council of Toledo (701) having
perished — doubtless in the flood of the Moorish invasion.^ The
king under whom it was held was Wittiza (or Witiges), son of
Egica, who reigned from 701 to 710. The ordinary tale of the
hideous vices of this king, of his deposition by Eoderic, a grandson
or great-grandson of King Chindaswinth, and of the treachery of
the sons of Wittiza which insured the victory of the Moors on the
fatal day of Xeres de la Frontera, is so well known that we need not
repeat it here. When we come to inquire what evidence of a
Uterally trustworthy and contemporary character we have for all
this narrative, it is astonishing to find how it eludes our grasp.
We think the best course will be here to let Professor Dahn sum
up the question in his own words.^
Critical examination of the authorities, late as they are, proves that
of this king Wittiza we know practically nothing, and can at most only
state the following propositions : he was beloved in the highest degree by
the people and equally hated by the priesthood ; he therefore probably
combated with energy the absolute dominion of the mitre over the crown.
Not free from the immorality which had for two generations been eating
deep into the heart of the Gothic people, he also seems to have used
harsh measures towards certain families of the secular nobihtj, whom
possibly he had injured by his acts of incontinence.
However, the judgment of the authorities nearest to his own time
(the continuator of Joannes Biclarensis, ovr, 721, and Isidorus Pacensis,
cvr, 750} is only favourable, and contains no trace of the later accusa-
tions. He remitted the punishments inflicted by his father, and solemnly
burned in pubhc the bonds which Egica had by force or fraud extorted
from many of his subjects. He recalled the exiles, and restored them to
their dignities and possessions. He ruled for fifteen years [counting from
his association with his father] in a most prosperous manner, and all
Spain rejoiced with great joy.
It is not till a hundred years later that the first hint of reproach
reaches us from a foreign source (the * Chronicon Moissiacense,' a South
Oaulish chronicle, oir. 818). According to this writer he set an ill
" It has been suggested that possibly the reason why the Acta of this council have
not been preserved may be that they were unfavourable to the power of the church.
" Pp. 224-228.
Digitized by
Google
284 VISIGOTHIC SPAIN AprU
example to clergy and laity by his unchaste life.^* Like an avalanche
these accusations grow in every succeeding record. The further the
writer is from the tune, the more terrible are his charges. They culmi-
nate in the chronicle of Albayda {cir, 888) and with King Alfonso {dr.
912), till at length in Lucas of Tuy (1260) the various charges, with
some additions of his own, are combined into a picture, the extravagance^
exaggeration, and motive of which are obvious at the first glance. A
little before this the Archbishop Boderic Ximenes of Toledo (1247) seek^
to reconcile the discordant notices of Wittiza by making him. in the
outset of his reign rule as an exemplary prince such as is described in
the earUer annals, and then by a change like that of Nero suddenly
plunge into all the abominations and cruelties of the later historians.
Wittiza seems to have died a natural death. His successor, Eoderic^
belongs to history by his name and scarcely anything more. His his-
torical existence is most securely vouched for by the appearance of hi&
name in the list of kings in the Visigothic code. A coin with his name
is doubtful : his sepulchral inscription at Viseu in Portugal is indubitably
false.
Dahn then summarises the legendary history of Roderic, his
amours with Doiia Cava, daughter of Count Julian, governor of
Africa, the father's revenge, the calling in of the Moors, the eight
white mules which drew the king to the field of battle, the treachery
of the sons of Wittiza, the fight, the flight, the ruin of the Gothic
cause, the disappearance of the king, the only relic of whom was a
golden sandal found in the bed of the river Guadalete. He proceeds :
So runs the legend. History, however, can only say that the Gothie
kingdom was already ripe for ruin when Islam, in the first fervour of ita
enthusiastic career of conquest, appeared in North Afiica, and soon
gathered courage for the easy spring over the narrow strait. We can
see that legend has made the names of the last two kings, Wittiza and
Boderic, types of the fateful, easily besetting sins of the whole nation^
immorality and party rancour — that is the historical import of all these
traditions.
In the condition of Visigothic Spain we see not only the historical
preparation for feudalism, but also its historical justification. This-
state, composed of a king strong enough for tyranny but not strong
enough for steady rule, of nobles rich, grasping, and turbulent, of
ecclesiastics striving to interfere in every detail of political life and
destroying the virility of the nation, and lastly of a poor pale
remnant of the class of small free landowners, could not endure,
could not bring happiness and stability to its citizens. It needed the
decentralisation of feudalism, with its constant recognition of corre-
lative rights and duties between all the members of the body politic,
to restore health and manliness to the people, and to prepare the
conquerors of the Moor and the discoverers of America.
Thomas Hodgkin.
** WUicha deditus in feminis exemplo buo sacerdotes ac popiUum luxuriose viver^
docuitf irritans furorcin Domini,
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 236
Confiscation for Heresy in the
Middle Ages
IN many ways which have attracted Uttle attention, the Inqnisi*
tion was a factor of importance in the development of the
middle ages. Under the theocracy which was the social ideal of
Latin Christianity, the enforcement of uniformity of faith was the
highest duty of both church and state. To accomplish this the
dungeon and the stake were not spared, but an equally efficacious
instrument was the forfeiture of the heretic's property.
For the source of this penalty, as of so much else, we must look to
the Soman law. It is true that, cruel as were the imperial edicts
against heresy, they did not go to the length of thus indirectly
punishing the innocent. Even when the detested ManichsBans
were mercilessly condemned to death, their property was confis-
cated only when their heirs were likewise heretics. If the children
were orthodox, they succeeded to the estate of the heretic parent^
who could not execute a will and disinherit them. It was otherwise
with crime. Any conviction involving deportation or the mines
carried with it confiscation, though the wife could reclaim her
dower and any gifts made to her before the commission of the
offence, and so could children emancipated from the patria potestas.
In majestas, or treason, the offender was liable to condemnation
after death, involving the confiscation of his estate, which was
held to have lapsed to the fisc at the time when he first conceived
the crime. These provisions furnished the armoury whence pope
and king drew the weapons which rendered the pursuit of heresy
attractive and profitable.^
King Boger, who occupied the throne of Naples during the first
half of the twelfth century, seems to have been the first to apply
the Soman practice by decreeing confiscation for all who aposta-
tised from the cathoUc faith — whether to the Greek church, to
Islam, or to Judaism, does not appear. Yet the church cannot
escape the responsibility of naturalising this penalty in European
law as a punishment for spiritual transgressions. The great
council of Tours, held by Alexander III in 1163, commanded aU
> Constt. 13, 15, 17, Cod. I. v. ; 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, Cod. IX. xlix. ; 5, 6, Cod. IX. viii.
Digitized by
Google
236 CONFISCATION FOR HERESY AprU
secular princes to imprison heretics and confiscate their property.
The Verona decretal of Lucius III in 1184 sought to obtain for the
church the benefit of the confiscation, which he declared was
incurred by heresy. One of the earliest acts of Innocent HI, in
his double capacity of temporal prince and head of Christianity,
was to address a decretal to his subjects of Viterbo, in which
he says :
In the lands subject to our temporal jurisdiction we order the property
of heretics to be confiscated ; in other lands we command this to be done
by the temporal princes and powers, who, if they show themselves negli-
gent therein, shall be compelled to it by ecclesiastical censures. Nor
shall the property of heretics who withdraw from heresy revert to them,
unless some one pleases to take pity on them. For as, according to the
legal sanctions, in addition to capital punishment, the property of those
guilty of majestas is confiscated, and life simply is allowed to their chil-
dren through mercy alone, so much the more should those who wander
from the faith and offend the Son of God be cut off from Christ and be
despoiled of their temporal goods, since it is a far greater crime to assail
spiritual than temporal majesty.^
This decretal, which was adopted into the canon law, is impor-
tant as embodying the whole theory of the subject. In imitation
of the Roman law of majestas, the property of the heretic was
forfeited from the moment he became a heretic or committed an
act of heresy. If he recanted, it might be restored to him purely
in mercy. When the ecclesiastical tribunals declared him to be, or
to have been, a heretic, confiscation followed; the act of seizing
the property and the mercy which might spare it were matters for
the secular power.
Innocent Hi's decretal further illustrates the fact that, at the
commencement of the struggle with heresy, the chief difficulty
encountered by the church in relation to confiscation was to per-
suade or coerce the temporal rulers to do their duty in taking
possession of heretical property. This was one of the principiJ
offences which Raymond VI of Toulouse expiated so bitterly, as
Innocent explained to him in 1210. His son proclaimed con-
fiscation as the law in his statutes of 1234, and included in its
provisions, in accordance with the ordonnance of Louis VIII in 1226
and that of Louis IX in 1229, all who favoured heretics in any way
or refused to aid in their capture ; but, as his policy did not always
agree with its enforcement, he sometimes had to be sternly rebuked
for neglect. After all danger of armed resistance had disappeared,
sovereigns as a rule eagerly welcomed the opportunity of recruiting
' Constt Sicular, Ub. i. tit. 3. GonciL Taronens. ann. 1168, o. 4. Luoii PP. Ill
epist 171. Innoo. PP. Ill regest. ii. 1. Cap. 10 Extra, v. 7. It was probably in obe-
dience to the canon of Tours that in 117S the property of Pierre Mauran of Toulouse
was declared forfeited to the count, and he was allowed to redeem it with a fine of
five hundred pounds of silver. Roger Hoveden. Annal, ann. 1178.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 IN THE MIDDLE AGES 287
their slender revenues ; the confiscation of the property of heretics
and of fautors of heresy was generally recognised in European law,
although the church was occasionally obliged to repeat its injunc-
tions and threats, and although there were some regions in which
they were slackly obeyed.*
The relation of the ecclesiastical courts to confiscation varied
essentially with time and place. In France the principle derived
from the Boman law was generally recognised, that the title to
property devolved to the fisc as soon as the crime had been com-
mitted. There was therefore nothing for the inquisitor to do with
regard to it. He simply ascertained and announced the guilt of
the accused, and left the state to take action. Thus Gui Foucoix
treats the subject as one wholly outside of the functions of the
inquisitor, who at most can only advise the secular ruler, or inter-
cede for mercy ; while he holds that those only are legally exempt
from forfeiture who come forward spontaneously and confess before
any evidence has been taken against them. In accordance with this,
there is, as a rule, no allusion to confiscation in the sentences of
the French Inquisition ; though in one or two instances chance has
preserved for us, in the accounts of the procureurs des encours, or
royal stewards of the confiscations, evidence that estates were sold
in behalf of the fisc in cases in which the forfeiture is not speci-
fied in the sentence. In condemnations of absentees and of the dead,
confiscation is occasionally declared, as though in these the state
might need some guidance ; but even here the practice is not uni-
form. In the register of Bernard de Caux (1246-1248), in thirty-
two cases of contumacious absentees, confiscation is included in the
sentence, and in nine similar ones it is omitted, as well as in 169
condemnations to prison, in which it was undoubtedly operative.
In the Inquisition of Carcassonne, a sentence of 12 Dec. 1828 on
five deceased persons, who would have been imprisoned had they
^ Innoc. PP. Ill regest. xiL 154 (cap. 26 Extra v. xl.) Isambert, Anc, Laix Frang,
i. 228, 232. Hardnin. vii. 203-8. Vaissette, Hist. 04n. de Languedoc, iii. pr. 385.
CJoncU. Albiens. ann. 1264 c. 26. Innoc. PP. IV bulla Cum fratres, ann. 1252 (Mag.
BuU. Rojn. i, 90). Confiscation was an ordinary resource of medieval law. In
England, from the time of Alfred, property as well as life was forfeited for treason
(Alfred's DoainSt 4 ; Thorpe, i. 63), a penalty which was retained until 1870 (Low and
Pulling's Dictiona/ry of English History^ p. 469). In France, murder, false witness,
treachery, homicide, and rape were all punished with death and confiscation
(Beaumanoir, Coutumes du Beauvoisis, xxx. 2-5). By the German feudal law the fief
might be forfeited for a vast number of offences, but the distinction was drawn that if
the offence was against the lord the fief reverted to him, if for simply a crime it
descended to the heirs {Feudor. lib. i. tit. xxiii-iv.) In Navarre, confiscation formed
part of the penalties of suicide, murder, treason, and even of blows or wounds inflicted
where the queen or royal children were dwelling. There is a case in which confisca-
tion was enforced on a man because he struck another at Olite, which was within a
league of Tafalla, where the queen chanced to be staying at the time (G. B. de Lagrdze,
La Navarre Frangaiaet ii. 386).
Digitized by
Google
288 CONFISCATION FOR HERESY April
lived, ends with et consequenter bona ipsorum dicimtis conJUcanda^
while a previous sentence, 24 Feb. 1326, identical in character, on
four defunct culprits, has no such corollary appended. In fact,
strictly speaking, it was recognised that the inquisitor had no power
to remit confiscations without permission from the fisc, and the
custom of extending mercy to those who came forward voluntarily
and confessed was founded upon a special concession to that effect,
granted by Baymond of Toulouse to the Inquisition in 1285. As
soon as a suspected heretic was cited or arrested, the secular officials
sequestrated his property and notified his debtors by proclamation.
No doubt when condemnation took place, the inquisitor communi-
cated the result to the proper officials ; but, as a rule, no record of
the fact seems to have been kept in the archives of the holy office,
although an early manual of practice specifies it as part of his
duty to see that the confiscation was enforced.^
In Italy it was long before any settled practice was established.
In 1252 a bull of Innocent IV directs the rulers of Lombardy,
Tarvisina, and Bomagna to confiscate without fail the property of
all who are excommunicated as heretics, or as receivers, defenders,
or fautors of heretics, thus recognising confiscation as a matter be-
longing to the secular power. Yet soon the papal authority suc-
ceeded in obtaining a share of the spoils, even beyond the limits of
the states of the church, as is seen in the bulls ad extirpanda of
Innocent IV and Alexander IV, and the matter thus became one in
which the Inquisition had a direct interest. The indifference which
so well became the French tribunals was therefore not readily
maintained, and the share of the inquisitor in the results led him
to participate in the process of securing them. Yet there were
variations in practice. Zanghino Ugolini tells us that formerly
confiscations were decreed in the States of the Church by the eccle-
siastical judges, and elsewhere by the secular power, but that in
his time {circa 1820) they were everywhere in Italy included in
the jurisdiction of the episcopal and inquisitorial courts, and the
secular authorities had nothing to do with them; but he adds
that confiscation is prescribed by law for heresy, and that the in-
quisitor has no discretion to remit it, except in the case of voluntary
converts with the assent of the bishop. Yet, though the forfeiture
occurs ipso facto by the commission of the crime, it requires a de-
claratory sentence of confiscation. This consequently was ex-
pressed in the most formal manner in the condemnation of the
accused by the Italian Inquisition, and the secular authorities were
ordered not to interfere unless called upon.*
* Gold. Folcod. QiuEsL xv. GoU. Doat, xxxiii. 207 ; xxxiv. 189 ; xxxv. 68. MSS.
Bib. Nat. fonds latin. No. 9992. Coll. Doat, xxviii. 131, 164. Responsa Prudentum
(Doat, xxxTii. 83). (hrandes Chroniques, ann. 1323. Les Glim, t. i. p. 656. Gaill.
PelisBO, Chron., ed. Molinier, p. 27. MSS. Bib. Nat. fonds latin, No. 14930, fol. 224.
^ Coll. Doat, xxxi. 175. Zanohini Tract de Hceret. c. xviii. xxv. xxvi. xli.
Digitized by
Google
1887 IN THE MIDDLE AGES 289
At a very early period in some places the Italian inquisitors
seem to have undertaken not only to decree but to control the con-
fiscations. About 1245 we find the Florentine inquisitor, Euggieri
Calcagni, sentencing a relapsed Catharan to a fine of one hundred
lire. Ruggieri acknowledges the receipt of this, to be appHed to
the pope or to the furtherance of the faith, and formally concedes
the rest of the heretic's estate to his wife, thus exercising owner-
ship over the whole. Yet this was not maintained, for in 1288
there is a sentence of the i)odesta of Florence reciting that the
inquisitor Fra Salomone da Lucca had notified him that the widow
Ruvinosa, lately deceased, had died a heretic and that her property
was to be confiscated ; wherefore he orders it to be seized and sold,
and the proceeds divided according to the papal constitutions. At
length, however, the inquisitors assumed and exercised full control
over the handling of the confiscations. In the conveyance of a con-
fiscated house by the municipal authorities of Florence in 1827 to the
Dominicans, the deed is careful to assert that it is made with the
assent of the inquisitor. Even in Naples we see King Robert in
1824 ordering the inquisitors to pay out of the royal share of the
confiscations fifty ounces of gold to the prior of the church of San
Domenico of Naples to aid in its coinpletion.^
In Germany the diet of Worms in 1231 indicates the confusion
existing in the feudal mind between heresy and treason by allowing
the allodial lands and personal property of the condemned to
descend to the heirs, while fiefs were confiscated to the seignior. If
the culprit was a serf, his goods enured to his master ; but from all
personal property was deducted the cost of burning its owner and
the droits de jmtice of the seigneur justicier. Two years later, in
1238, the council of Mainz protested against the injustice, which
quickly showed itself in Germany as elsewhere, of assuming guilt
as soon as a man was accused, and treating his property as though
he were convicted. It directed that the estates of those on trial
should remain untouched until sentence was rendered, and any one
who meanwhile should plunder or partition them should be ex-
communicated until he made restitution and rendered satisfaction.
Finally, when the Emperor Charles IV endeavoured to introduce
the Inquisition into Germany in 1869, he adopted the Italian cus-
tom and ordered one-third of the confiscations to be made over to
the inquisitors.'
The exact degree of criminality which entailed confiscation is
• Lami, Antichitd Toscane, pp. 660, 688-9. Zanohini Tract, de HcBreU o. xxvi.
Archivio di Firenze, Prov. S. Maria Novella, 18 Nov. 1827. Archivio di Napoli,
regist. 263 lett. A, fol. 63.
* Hist, Diplom, Frid, II, t. iii. p. 466. Ealtner, Kanrad v, Marburg u, die InqtUsi-
iion, Prag, 1882, p. 147. Mosheim de Beghardis, p. 347.
Digitized by
Google
240 CONFISCATION FOR HERESY April
not capable of very rigid definition. Even in states where the in-
quisitor nominally had no control over it, his arbitrary discretion
as to the fate of the accused placed the matter practically in his
hands, and his notification to the secular authorities would be a
virtual sentence. It is probable that custom varied with time and
with the temper of the inquisitor. We have seen that Innocent III
commanded it for all heretics, but what constituted technical
heresy was not so easily determined. The statutes of Baymond
decreed it not only for heretics but for those who showed them favour.
The council of Beziers in 1288 demanded it for all reconciled con-
verts not condemned to wear crosses, and those of Beziers in 1246
and Albi in 1254 prescribed it for all whom the inquisitors should
condemn to imprisonment. This, finally, was admitted by legists
as the invariable test, although St. Louis, when in 1259 he miti-
gated his ordonnance of 1229, ordered confiscation not only for
those who were condemned to prison, but for those who con-
tumaciously refused obedience to citations, and for those in whose
houses heretics were found, his officials being instructed to ascertain
from the inquisitors in all cases while pending whether the accused
deserved imprisonment, and if so, to retain the sequestrated pro-
perty. When he further provided, as a special grace, that the
heirs should be restored to possession in cases where the heretic
had offered himself for conversion before citation, had entered a
religious order, and had worthily died there, he showed how uni-
versal confiscation had previously been, and how ruthlessly the
principle had been enforced that a single act of heresy forfeited all
ownership.®
According to the most lenient construction of the law, therefore,
the imprisonment of a reconciled convert carried with it the confis-
cation of his property; and as imprisonment was the ordinary
penance, confiscation was general. There may possibly have been
exceptions. Six prisoners released in 1248 by Innocent lY had
been in gaol for some time — some of them for four years and
more after confessing heresy — and yet the liberal contributions to
the Holy Land, which purchased their pardon, show that they or
their friends must have had control of property, unless, indeed, the
money was raised on a pledge of the estates to be restored. So
when Alaman de Boaix was condemned to imprisonment in 1248,
the sentence provided for an annuity to be paid to a person de-
signated and for compensation to be made for the rapine which he
had committed, which would look as though property were left to
biTTi ; but as he had for ten years been a contumacious and pro-
scribed fugitive, these fines must have been taken out of his estate
* Hardain, vii. 208. Conoil. Biterrens. aim. 1238, o. 4 ; ann. 1246, Append.
0. 86. Conoil. Albiens. ann. 1254, o. 26. Gold. Fnlood. QucBst xy. Isambert,
Anc. Loix Fran^. i. 257. Arch, de PInq. de Caroass. (Doat, xxzi. 263).
Digitized by
Google
1887 IN THE MIDDLE AGES 241
in the hands of his state. Apparent exceptions such as these can
he accounted for, and the proceedings of the Inquisition as a whole
indicate that imprisonment and confiscation were inseparable.
Sometimes even it is stated in sentences passed upon the dead,
that they are pronounced worthy of imprisonment in order to de-
prive the heirs of succession to their estates. At a later date, in-
deed, Eymerich, who dismisses the whole matter briefly as one
with which the inquisitor has no concern, speaks as though con-
fiscation only took place when a heretic did not repent and recant
before the sentence, but his commentator Pegna easily proves this
to be an error. Zanghino assumes as a matter of course that
property is forfeited by the act of heresy. He points out that
pecuniary penance cannot be imposed because the whole estate is
gone, altiiough there may be mercy shown at discretion with the
assent of the bishop, and simple suspicion is not subject to con-
fiscation.^
In the early zeal of persecution everything was swept away in
wholesale seizure, but in 1287 Gregory IX assumed that the
dowers of catholic wives ought to be exempt in certain cases ; in
1247 Innocent IV made a rule that such dowers should not be in*
<;luded in future forfeitures, and in 1258 St. Louis accepted this rule.
It was subject to serious limitations, however, since under the
canon law the wife could not claim it if she had been cognisant of
her husband's heresy when she married, and, according to some
authorities, if she had lived with him after ascertaining it, or even
if she had failed to inform against him within forty days after
•discovering it. As the children were incapable of inheritance, she
only held the dower for life, after which it fell into the fisc.'®
Although in principle confiscation was an afiEEtir of the state, the
division of the spoils did not follow any invariable rule. Before the
organisation of the Inquisition, when the Waldenses of Strassburg
were burnt, it is mentioned that their forfeited property was equally
divided between the church and the secular authorities. Lucius UI,
AS we have just seen, endeavoured to turn the whole forfeitures to
the benefit of the church. In the papal territory there could be
little question as to this, and Innocent lY, in his bull Ad exUrpanda
of 1252, showed disinterestedness in devoting the whole proceeds to
the stimulation of persecution. One third was given to the local
authorities, one third to the officials of the Inquisition, and one
* ArohiyeB de Tlnq. de Carcass. (Doat, xxxi. 152). Berger, Begistres d^Innoc. IV,
No. 1844. MSS. Bib. Nat. fonds latin, No. 9992. Lib. SenterUL Inq. Tolosan.
pp. 158-62. Archives de Tlnq. de Carcass. (Doat, xxvii. 98). Eymerio. Direct. Jnquis,
pp. 663-5 (ed. 1607). Zanchini Tract, de Hceret, c. xviii. xix. xxy.
^ Archives de VEvdch^ de B^ziers (Doat, xxxi. 85). Potthast* No. 12743.
Isambert, i. 257. C. 14 Sexto, v. 2. Zanchini c. xxv. Livree de Joatice et de Plet,
liv. i. tit. iii. § 7.
VOL. n. — NO. VI. R
Digitized by
Google
242 CONFISCATION FOR HERESY April
third to the bishop and inquisitor to be expended in the assault on
heresy — provisions which were retained in the subsequent recen-
sions of the bull by Alexander IV and Clement IV, while forfeited
bail went exclusively to the inquisitor. Yet this was speedily held
to refer only to the independent states of Italy, for in 1260 we find
Alexander IV ordering the inquisitors of Rome and Spoleto to selC,
the confiscated estates of heretics and pay over the proceeds to the
pope himself ; and a transaction of 1261 shows Urban IV collect-
ing 820 lire from some confiscations at Spoleto."
At length both in the Roman province and elsewhere through-
out Italy the custom settled down to a tripartite division among
the local community, the Inquisition, and the papal camera — the
reason for the latter, as given by Benedict XI, being that the bishops
appropriated to themselves the share entrusted to them for the pro-
secution of heresy. In Florence, a transaction of 1283 shows this
to be the received regulation ; and documents of various dates dur-
ing the next half-century, indicate that it was the custom of the
republic to appoint attorneys or trustees to take seisin of confis-
cated property in the name of the city, which in 1819 liberally
granted its share for the next ten years to the construction of the
church of Santa Reparata. That the amounts were not small may
be inferred from a petition of the inquisitors to the republic in
1299, setting forth that the holy office must have funds wherewith
to pay its stipendiary officials, and therefore praying leave to invest
in real estate the sums accruing to the Inquisition from this source,
showing accumulations prudently garnered for the future. The re-
quest was granted to the extent of 1,000 lire with the proviso that
none of the city's share be taken. This precaution would seem to
argue no great confidence in the integrity of the inquisitors ; nor
was the insinuation uncalled for. By this time the money-changers
had fairly occupied the temple, and it seemed almost impossible to pre-
serve official honesty where persecution had become almost as much
a financial speculation as a matter of faith. That plain-spoken
Franciscan, Alvaro Pelayo, bishop of Silva and papal penitentiary,
writing about the year 1885, bitterly reproaches those of his brethren
who act as inquisitors, with their abuse of the funds accruing to the
holy office. The papal division into thirds, he declares, was gene-
rally disregarded, the inquisitors monopolised the whole and spent
it on themselves, or enriched their kindred at their pleasure.
Chance has preserved in the Florentine archives some documents
confirmatory of this accusation. It seems that in 1848 Clement VI
obtained evidence that the inquisitors of both Florence and Lucca
" Hoffmann, Oeschichte der InquisiHon, ii. 370. Lnoii PP. Ill epist. 171. Innoo.
PP. IV bnlla Ad exHrpanda, § 34. Ejusd. boUa Super extirpatume, 80 Maii 1254
(Bipoll. i. 247). Alex. PP. IV bulla DiscrUiom (Mag, BtUl Roman, i. 120). Potthast*
Beg. ParU. Ko. 1S200.
Digitized by
Google
1887 IN THE MIDDLE AGES 248
were habitually defranding the papal camera of its third of the fines
and confiscations, and accordingly he sent to Pietro da Yitale,
primicerio of Lucca, authority to collect the sums in arrears and to
prosecute the embezzlers. How it fared with them we have no
means of knowing, but the camera seems not to have gained much
in filling the vacancies thus occasioned. Fra Pietro di Aquila, a
Franciscan of high standing, was appointed in Florence, who fell at
once into the same evil ways, and withiil two years was obliged to
fly from a prosecution by the 'primicerio, in addition to the charges
of extortion brought against him by the republic.^'
In Naples under the Angevins, when the Inquisition was first
introduced, Charles of Anjou monopolised the confiscations with
the same rapacity that was customary in France. As early as
March 1270 we find him ordering his representatives in the Princi-
pato Ultra to account in detail for the estates of three heretics re-
cently burnt at Benevento. In 1290 Charles II ordered the fines
and confiscations to be divided into thirds, of which one should
enure to the royal fisc, one be used for the promotion of the faith,
and one be given to the Inquisition. Feudal lands, however, were to
revert to the crown or to the immediate lord as the case might
require.**
In Venice the compromise reached in 1289 between the sig-
niory and Nicholas IV, whereby the republic permitted the intro-
duction of the Inquisition, provided that all receipts of the holy
office should be for the benefit of the state, and this arrangement
seemed to have been maintained.*^
In the other Italian states the papal curia grew dissatisfied with
its share when there was no longer a necessity of purchasing the
co-operation of the civil power with a third of the spoils. It is a
disputed point with the jurists when and how the change was
effected ; but in the first quarter of the fourteenth century the
church succeeded in grasping the whole of the ccmfiscations, which
were divided equally between the Inquisition and the papal
camera. The rapacity with which this source of income was ex-
ploited is illustrated in a case occurring at Pisa in 1804. The in-
quisitor Angelo da Beggio had condemned the memory of a de-
ceased citizen and confiscated his property, part of which he then
gave away, and part he sold at prices which the papal curia
esteemed too low. Benedict XI thereupon ordered the bishop of
Ostia not to punish the inquisitor, but to use freely the censures of
the church in hunting up the property in the hands of the holders
" Nich. PP. rV bulla Hahet veatra, 3 Oct 1290. Baynald. ann. 1438, No. 24.
Lami, AnUchUd Tosccme^ pp. 588-9. Alv. Pelag. de Planck Eccles. lib. ii. art. 47.
Arohiyio di Firenze, Biformazione, olasse v. No. 110 ; olasse xL Distinz. i. No. 89.
>* Arohivio di Napoli, registro 9, lett. C, fol. 90 ; regist. 51, lett A, fol. 9 ; regist.
98, lett. B, fol. 18 ; regist. 113, lett. A, fol. 194 ; MSS. Ghioocorelli, t. viii.
" Albizio, BUposUi al P. Paolo Sarpij p. 26.
B 2
Digitized by
Google
244 CONFISCATION FOR HERESY April
and to take it from them. Finally, in 1488, Engenius lY generously
handed back to the bishops the share of the papal camera in order
to stimulate their slackness in persecution, and where the bishop was
also the temporal lord of his see the confiscations were to be divided
equally between him and the Inquisition."
In Spain the rule was laid down that if the heretic were a
clerk or a lay vassal of the church, the confiscation went to the
church ; if otherwise, to the temporal seignior.**
This greed for the plunder of the wretched victims of persecu-
tion is peculiarly repulsive as exhibited by the church, and may to
some extent palliate the similar action by the state in countries
where it was strong enough to seize and retain the spoils. The
threats and coercion which at first were necessary to induce the
temporal princes to confiscate the property of their heretical sub-
jects soon became superfluous, and history has few examples of
man's eagerness to profit by his fellows' misfortunes more de-
plorable than that of the vultures which followed in the wake of the
Inquisition to batten on the ruin which it wrought.
Under the feudal system the confiscations were for the benefit
of the seigneur hatLt-justicier. The rapid extension of the royal
jurisdiction in the second half of the thirteenth century in France
ended by practically placing them in the hands of the king, but
during the earlier and more profitable period there were quarrels
over the spoils. After the treaty of Paris in 1229, which secured
Languedoc to the crown, St. Louis in granting fiefs in the newly
acquired territories seems to have endeavoured to provide for these
questions by reserving the confiscations for heresy. The prudence
of this is shown by the suit brought by the marSchaux de Mirepoix,
one of the few permanent families founded by the adventurers who
accompanied De Montfort, who claimed the movables of all heretics
captured in their lands, even if the goods were in the lands of the
king — a demand which was rejected by the parlement of Paris in
1269. The bishops put in a claim to the confiscations of all real
and personal property of heretics Uving under their jurisdiction,
and at the council of Lille (Gomtat Yenaissin) in 1261 they threatened
with excommunication any one who should dispute it. They really
had some cause of complaint, for, in contravention of a canon of the
council of B6ziers in 1246, lands held of them in fief were thus being
transferred to the king, and they found themselves losing instead of
» Zanohini Tract, de Haret, o. xix. xxvi. xli. Of. Pegns Comment in Eym^ric.
p. 659. Grandjean, Begistre de BenoU, xL No. 299. Baynald. ann. 148S, No. 24. Yet
it must be placed to Benedict's credit that in 1804 he authorised Fra Simcme,
inquisitor of Rome, to restore confiscations nnjnstly made by his predecessors, and to
moderate punishments inflicted by them if he considered them too severe. (Grand-
jean, No. 474.)
>* Alonsi de Spina Foridlion JFidei lib. ii« consid. xL (ed. 1694, fo). 74).
Digitized by
Google
1887 IN THE MIDDLE AGES 245
gaining by persecution, St. Louis finally listened to their grievances,
and, about 1255, entered into an agreement whereby all such lands
were divided equally between the bishop and the king, with a right
on the part of the prelate to buy out within two months the royal
share at a price fixed by arbitration. If this right was not exer-
cised, the king was bound within a year and a day to pass the lands
out of his hands into those of a person of the same condition as the
former tenant, to be held under the same terms of service or villen-
age ; but all movables were declared to belong unreservedly to the
crown. What an ample harvest was afforded to the lawyers by the
intricate quarrels arising from this wholesale spoliation, is illus-
trated by a suit brought by the bishops of Bode^ for some lands
held by the crown as heretic confiscations. After dragging on for
thirty years it reached the parlement of Paris, which coolly annulled
all the proceedings on the ground that those who had acted for the
crown had lacked the proper authority. Almost equally protracted
and confused was a suit between Eleanor de Montfort, countess of
Yendome, and the king over the lands of Jean Baudier and Bay-
mond Calverie. The confiscation occurred in 1800, and the suit
was still dragging on in 1827, to be finally compromised in 1885.*^
By a special transaction of 21 Dec. 1264, between St. Louis
and Bernard de Gombret, bishop of Albi, the prelate of that see
enjoyed one half of all the confiscations within it, with the further
advantage that the remainder of real estate passed into his posses-
sion if the king did not sell his share within a twelvemonth, and
became his property if not sold within three years ; and in the
accounts of the royal procureurs des encours of Carcassonne we con-
stantly find the confiscations in Albi shared with the bishop.
Although between St. John's day of 1822 and 1828 this share in
money amounted only to 160 livres, there were times when it was
much greater. About the year 1800, Bishop Bernard de Castanet
generously gave to the Dominican church of Albi his portion of the
estates of two citizens, Guillem Aymeric and Jean de Castanet, con-
demned after death, which amounted to more than 1,000 livres.
This privilege of the see of Albi may perhaps have arisen from &
special deputation of inquisitorial powers granted in 1247 by Inno-
cent IV to Bishop Bertrand, for in the following year, 1248, we
see the latter doing a thriving business in selling commutations of
confiscations to condemned heretics who repented. It is true that
when Alfonse of Poitiers in 1258 endeavoured to speculate in the
same way by allowing heretics to redeem their confiscated property^
»' Livres de Jostice et de Plet, liv. i. tit. iii. § 7. Vaissette, iii. 891. Lea Olim^ L
317 ; iii. 1126-9 ; ii. 1440-2. MSS.Bib. Nat. fonds latin, No. 11847. ConcU. Insulan.
ann. 1251 o. 8. Gonoil. Biterrens. ann. 1246 c. 4. Balaz. Ck>ncil. Narbonn. append
pp. 96-99. Coll. Doat, xxxy. 48. Cf. Berger, Regietres d' Innocent IV, No. 1648-44
1547-48. Molinier, L'lnquiaiHon dans le midi de la France, p. 101 .
Digitized by
Google
246 CONFISCATION FOR HERESY April
.he was compelled to desist by the earnest representations of the
archbishop of Narbonne and bishop of Toulouse, who declared that
this would lead to the scandal of the faithful and the destruction of
religion ; but doubtless the bishops of Albi continued to claim and
exercise a control over the confiscations which led the king to divide
the spoils with them. This division led to constant quarrels. In
vain Philippe le Bel in 1307 ordered the observance of the agreement
with restitution for any infractions. In 1316 we find the bishop
<3laiming properties which bad not been sold within the three years,
and Armand Assalit, the royal procureur des encours, arguing that he
had been prevented from effecting sales by just and legitimate causes,
when the seneschal Aymeric de Croso decided that the impediments
had been legitimate and that the rights of the king were not for-
feited. The heads of the church of Albi evidently had a keen eye
for the profitable side of persecution.*®
AH prelates were not as rapacious as those of Albi, one of whom
we find still, in 1328, complaining of the evasions resorted to by the
victims to save a fragment of their property for their famiUes, but
the princes and their representatives were relentless in grasping all
they could lay their hands on. I have mentioned that as soon as
a suspect was cited before the Inquisition, his property was seques-
trated to await the result, and proclamation made to all his debtors
and those who held his effects to bring everything to the king. Charles
of Anjou carried this practice to Naples, where a royal order in 1269
to arrest sixty-nine heretics contains instructions to seize simulta-
neously their goods, which are to be held for the king. So assured
were the officials that condemnation would follow trial, that they fre-
quently did not await the result, but carried out the confiscation in
advance. This abuse was coeval with the founding of the Inquisi-
tion. In 1237 Gregory IX complained of it and forbade it, but to
little purpose, for in 1246 the council of Beziers again prohibited it,
unless, indeed, the offender had knowingly adhered to those who were
known to be heretics, in which case apparently it was sanctioned.
When, in 1259, St. Louis mitigated the rigours of confiscation, he in-
directly forbade this wrong by instructing his officials that when the
accused was not condemned to imprisonment, they should give him
or his heirs a hearing to reclaim the property ; but if there was any
suspicion of heresy it was not to be restored without taking security
that it should be surrendered if anything was proved within five
years, during which period it was not to be aUenated. Yet still the
outrage of confiscation before conviction continued with sufficient
frequency to induce Boniface VIII to embody its prohibition in the
canon law. Even this did not put a stop to it. The Inquisition
'* Haar^a, Bernard DUideux, p. 21. ColL Doat, xxxiv. 189. Bern. Guidon.
Siat Conv, AlUens. Vaissette, iii pr. 467, 500. Arch, de Tlnq. de Carcass. (Doat,
xxzi 143, 146). ColL Doat, xxxiy. 181, 135.
Digitized by
Google
1887 IN THE MIDDLE AGES 247
had 80 habituated men's minds to the belief that no one escaped
^ho had once fallen into its hands, that the officials considered them-
selves safe in acting upon the presumption. By an unusual coinci-
dence we have the data from various sources in a single case of
this kind which is doubtless the type of many others. In the pro-
secutions at Albi in 1300 a certain Jean Baudier was first examined
January 20, when he acknowledged nothing. At a second hearing,
February 5, he confessed to acts of heresy, and he was condemned
March 7, yet his confiscated property was sold January 29, not only
before his sentence, but before his confession.**
The ferocious rapacity with which this process of confiscation
was carried on may be conceived from a report made by Jean
d'Arsis, seneschal of Kouergue, to Alfonse of Poitiers about 1253, as
an evidence of the zeal with which he was guarding the interests of
his suzerain. The bishop of Bodez was conducting a vigorous
episcopal inquisition, and at Najac had handed over a certain
Hugues Paraire as a heretic, whom the seneschal burnt ' inconti-
nently,' and collected over 1,000 litres towmois from his estate.
Hearing subsequently that the bishop had cited before him at Eodez
six other citizens of Najac, D'Arsis hastened thither to see that no
fraud was practised on the count. The bishop told him that these
men were all heretics, and that he would gain for the count 100,000
Bols from their confiscation, but both he and his assessors begged
the seneschal to forego a portion to the culprits or their children,
which that loyal servitor bluntly refused. Then the bishop, follow-
ing evil counsel and in fraud of the ri^ts of the count, endeavoured
to elude the forfeitures by condemning the heretics to some lighter
penance ; the seneschal, however, knew his master's rights, and
seized the property, after which he allowed some pittance to the
penitents and their children, reporting that in addition to this he
was in possession of about 1,000 Uvres, and he winds up by advising
the count, if he wishes not to be defrauded, to appoint some one to
watch and supervise the further inquisitions of the bishop. On the
other hand, the bishops complained that the officials of Alfonse per-
mitted heretics, for a pecuniary consideration, to retain a part or
the whole of their confiscated property, or else condemned to the
fiames those who did not deserve it in order to seize their estates.
These frightful abuses grew so unbearable that in 1254 the officials
of Alfonse, including Gui Foueoix, endeavoured to reform them by
issuing general regulations on the subject, but the matter was one
which in its inherent nature scarce admitted of reform. Yet Alfonse
with all his greed was not unwilling to share the plunder with those
^ Archiyes de TEydch^ d'Albi (Doat, xxxt. 85, S3). Les Olitn, i. 556. Archivio
di Napoli, regist. 4, lett. B, fol. 47. Conoil. Biterrens. ann. 1246, o. 3. Isambert, i. 257.
C. 19 Sexto, y. 2. MSS. Bib. Nat. fonds latin, No. 11S47. CoU. Doat, xxxv. 68.
Holinier, L^Inq. dans le midi de la Franu, p. 102.
Digitized by
Google
248 CONFISCATION FOR HERESY April
who secured it for him, and several of his not wholly disinterested
liberalities of this kind are on record. In 1268 we have a letter of
his assigning to the Inquisition a revenue of 100 livres per annum
on the confiscated estate of a heretic ; and in 1270 another confirm-
ing the foundation of a chapel from a similar source.^
Nothing could exceed the minute thoroughness with which every
fragment of a confiscated estate was followed up and seized. The
account of the collections of confiscated property from 1802 to 1318^
by the procureurs des encours of Carcassonne is extant in manuscript,
and shows how carefully the debts due to the condemned were looked
after, even to a few pence for a measure of com. In the case of one
wealthy prisoner, Guillem de Fenasse, the estate was not wound up
for eight or ten years, and the whole number of debts collected
amounts to 859, in sums ranging from five deniers upwards. As
the collectors never credit themselves with amounts paid in discharge
of debts due by these estates, it is evident that the rule that a heretic
could give no valid obligations was strictly construed, and that
creditors were shamelessly cheated. In this seizure of debts, the
nobles asserted a right to.claim any sums due by debtors who were
their vassals ; but Philippe de Yalois, in 1329, decided that when the
debts were payable at the domicile of a heretic they enured to the
royal fisc irrespective of the allegiance of the debtor. Another
illustration of the remorseless greed which seized everything is found
in a suit decided by the parlement of Paris in 1302. On the death of
the chevalier GuiUem PrunMe and his wife Isabelle, the guardianship
of their orphans would legally vest in the next of kin, the chevalier
Bernard de Montesquieu, but he had been burnt some years before for
heresy, and his estate of course confiscated. The seneschal of Gar*
cassonne insisted that the guardianship which thus subsequently fell
in, formed part of the assets of the estate, and he accordingly as*
sumed it ; but a nephew, an esquire Bernard de Montesquieu, con-
tested the matter, and finally obtained a decision in his favour.^'
Equal care was exercised in recovering alienated property. As,.
in obedience to the Eoman law of majestaSy forfeiture occurred ipso
facto as soon as the crime of heresy was committed, the heretie
could convey no legal title, and any assignments which he might
have made were void, no matter through how many hands the pro-
perty might have passed. The holder was forced to surrender it,
nor could he demand restitution of what he had paid unless the
money or other consideration were found among the goods of the
heretic. The eagerness with which the rigour of the law was-
** Boutario, Saint Louis et Alfimse de Poitiers, Paris, 1870, pp. 455-6. Donais^
* Les Sooroes de I'hiBtoire de Tlnqaisition ' (Revue des Questions Historiques, ootobre
1881, p. 486). CoU. Doat, xxxii. 51, 64.
*^ Archives de r£v6oh6 d'Albi (Doat, xzxiiL 207-72). CoU. Doat, xxxv. 93. I^
OHm, iL 111.
Digitized by
Google
1887 IN THE MIDDLE AGES 249
enforced may be estimated from a case which occurred in 1272.
Charles of Anjou had written from Naples to his viguier and sous-
viguier at Marseilles, telling them that a certain Maria Roberta,
before condemnation to imprisonment for heresy, had sold a house
which was subject to confiscation ; this he ordered them to seize,
to sell by auction, and to report the proceeds, but they neglected to
do so. The viguiers were changed, and now the unforgetful Charles
writes to the new officials repeating his orders, and holding them
personally responsible for obedience. At the same time he writes
to his seneschal with instructions to look after the matter, as it Ues
very near to his heart.^
Perhaps nothing contributed more to the consolidation of the
royal supremacy in the south of France than the change of owner-
ship which threw into new hands so large a proportion of the pro-
perty of Languedoc. In the domains of the crown the forfeited
lands were granted to favourites or sold at moderate prices to those
who thus became interested in the new order of things arising from
the fall of the house of Toulouse. The royal officials grasped every*
thing on which they could lay their hands whether on the excuse of
treason or of heresy ; and although the rightmindedness of Louis IX
caused an inquest to be held in 1262 which restored a vast
amount of property illegally held, this was but a small fraction
of the whole. To assist his parlement in settling the innumerable
cases which arose, he ordered in 1260 the charters and letters of
greatest importance to be sent to Paris. Those of each of the
six senechausaeea filled a coffer, and the six coffers were deposited
in the treasury of the Sainte ChapeUe. In this process of ab-
sorption the case of the extensive viscounty of Fenouilledes
may be taken as an illustration of the zeal with which the In-
quisition co-operated in securing the political advantages desired
by the crown. FenouillMes had been seized during the crusades
of De Montfort and given to Nuiiez Sancho of Boussillon, from
whom it passed, through the king of Aragon, into the hands
of Saint Louis. In 1264, Beatrix, widow of Hugues, son of the
former Viscount Pierre, applied to the parlement for her rights of
dower and those of her children. Immediately the inquisitor. Pons
de Poyet, commenced a prosecution against the memory of Pierre,
who had died more than twenty years previously, in the bosom of
the church, and had been buried with the templars of Mas-Deu
after receiving the last sacraments. Pons de Poyet found no diffi-
culty in condemning him as suspect of heresy for having associated
with heretics, his bones were dug up and burnt, and the parlement
rejected the claims of his daughter-in-law and grandchildren.
" Arohidiae. Gloss, sup. o. 19 Sexto, y. 3. Arohivio di Napoli, regist 15, lett. C, foL
77, 78. The.English law of felony was also retroaotiye, and all alienations snbeeqaent
to the commission of the erime were void. Braoton, lib. iii. tract, ii. c. 18, No. 8.
Digitized by
Google
250 CONFISCATION FOR HERESY April
Pierre, the eldest of these, in 1300, again put forward a claim for
the ancestral estates, and Boniface VIII espoused his quarrel with
the object of giving trouble to PhiKppe le Bel, but although the
affair was pursued for some years the inquisitorial sentence held
good. It was not only the actual heretics and their descendants
who were dispossessed. The land had been so deeply tinctured with
Catharism and Waldensianism, that there were few indeed whose
ancestors could not be shown by the records of the Inquisition to
have incurred the fatal taint of associating with them.^
The rich bourgeoisie of the cities were ruined in the same way.
Some inventories have been preserved of the goods and chattels
sequestrated, as when in December 1290 and January 1300 twenty-
five or thirty of the wealthiest citizens of Albi were suddenly seized
and condemned, which show how thoroughly everything was swept
into the maelstrom. That of Eaymond Calverie, a notary, gives
us every detail of the plenishing of a well-to-do burgher's house-
hold— every pillow, sheet, and coverlet is enumerated, every article
of kitchen gear, the salted provisions and grain, even his wife's
little trinkets. His farm was subjected to the same minuteness
of seizure. We have a similar insight into the stock of goods of
Jean Baudier, a rich merchant. Every fragment of stuff is duly
measured off — cloths of Ghent, Tpres, Amiens, Cambrai, St. Omer,
Eouen, Paris, Montcornet, &c., with their valuation, pieces of
miniver and other articles of trade. His town house and farm
were inventoried with the same conscientious care. It is easy to
see how prosperous cities were reduced to poverty, how industry
languished, and how the independence of the municipaUties was
broken into subjection in the awful uncertainty which hung over
the head of every man.^*
In this chaos of plunder we may readily imagine that those who
were engaged in such work were not over-nice as to securing a
share of the spoliations. In 1304 Jacques de PoKgnac, keeper of
the inquisitorial gaol at Carcassonne, and several of the officials
employed on the confiscations, were found to have converted and
detained a large amount of valuable property, including a castle,
farms and other lands, vineyards, orchards and movable effects, all
» Voissette, iii. 362, 496 ; iv. 104-5, 211. Archives de TEvdoh^ de B^ziers poat,
xxxi. 35). Beugnot, Les Olim, i. 580, 1029-80. Coll. Doat, zxxiii. 1. The
extent of the change of proprietorship is well illnstrated by a list of the lands and
rents confiscated for heresy to the profit of Philippe de Montfort from his vassals.
It embraces fiefs and other properties in Lautrec, Montredon, Senegats, Babastain, and
Lavaor. The knights and gentlemen and peasants thus stripped are all named with
their offences ; one had died a heretic, another was hereticated on his deathbed, a
third was condemned for heresy, a foarth had been burnt at Lavanr, while in other
cases the father, or mother, or both, had been heretics (Doat, xxxiL 25S-63). Many
examples of sales and donations have been preserved in the Doat collection. I may
instance t. xxxL 171, 237, 255 ; t. xxxii 46, 53, 55, 57, 64, 67, 69, 244, <&c.
«« ColL Doat, xxxu. 309, 316.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 IN THE MIDDLE AGES 251
of which they were compelled to disgorge and suffer punishment at
the king's pleasure.^
It is pleasant to turn from this cruel greed to a case which
excited much interest in Flanders at a time when in that region
the Inquisition had become so nearly dormant that the usages of
confiscation were almost forgotten. The bishop of Toumay and
the vicar of the Inquisition condemned at LiQe a number of heretics,
who were duly burned. They confiscated the property, claiming
the movables for the church and inquisitor, and the realty for the .
fisc. The magistrates of Lille boldly interposed, declaring that
among the liberties of their town was the privilege that no burgher
<50uld forfeit both body and goods ; and, acting for the children of
one of the victims, they took out apostoli and appealed to the pope.
The counsellors of the suzerain, Philippe le Bon of Burgundy, with
-a clearer perception of the law, claimed that the whole confiscation
enured to him, while the ecclesiastics declared the rule to be inva-
riable that the personalty went to the church and only the real
estate to the fisc. The triangular quarrel threatened long and
<50stly litigation, and finally all parties agreed to leave the decision
to the duke himself. With rare wisdom, in 1430, he settled the
matter with general consent by deciding that the sentence of con-
fiscation should be treated as not rendered, and the property be left
to the heirs, at the same time expressly declaring that the rights of
•church, inquisition, city, and state, were reserved without prejudice,
in any case that might arise in future, which was, he said, not likely
to occur. Unfortunately for his reputation, he did not manifest
the same disinterestedness in 1460 in the terrible persecution of
the sorcerers of Arras, when the movables were confiscated to the
episcopal treasury, and he seized the landed property in spite of
the privileges alleged by the city.^
In addition to the misery inflicted by these wholesale confisca-
tions on the thousands of innocent and helpless women and children
thus stripped of everything, it would be almost impossible to exag-
gerate the evil which they entailed upon all classes in the business of
-daily life. All safeguards were withdrawn from every transaction.
No creditor or purchaser could be sure of the orthodoxy of him with
whom he was dealing; and even more than the principle that
ownership was forfeited as soon as heresy had been committed by
the Uving, the practice of proceeding against the memory of the
dead, after an interval virtually unlimited, rendered it impossible
«* Les OUm, ii. 147. Doat, xxvi. 26S.
** Arohives G^^rales de Belgiqae, Papiers d^Etat, y. 405. Mimoires de Jacques
du Clercq, liv. iv. oh. 4, 14. In Arras, a charter of 1385, confirmed by Charles V in
1369, protected the burghers from confiscation when condemned by any competent
tribunal (Duverger, La Vauderie dans les Etats de Philippe le Bon, Arras, 1885, p. 60)
Digitized by
Qoo^^
252 CONFISCATION FOR HERESY AprU
for any man to feel secure in the possession of property, whether it
had descended in his family for generations or had been acquired
within an ordinary Ufetime.
The prescription of time against the church had to be at least
forty years — against the Eoman church, a hundred. Though
some legists held that proceedings against the deceased had to be
commenced within five years after death, others asserted that there
was no limit, and the practice of the Inquisition shows that the
latter opinion was followed. The prescription of forty years'
possession by good catholics was further limited by the conditiona
that they must at no time have had a knowledge that the former
owner was a heretic, and, moreover, he must have died with an
unsullied reputation for orthodoxy — both points which might cast
a grave doubt on titles.^^
Prosecution of the dead by the inquisitorial process was a
mockery in which virtually defence was impossible and confiscation
inevitable. How unexpectedly the blow might fall is seen in the
case of Gherardo of Florence. He was rich and powerful, a
member of one of the noblest and oldest houses, and was consul of
the city in 1218. Secretly a heretic, he was hereticated on hia
deathbed between 1246 and 1250, but the matter lay dormant until
1318, when Fra Grimaldo, the inquisitor of Florence, brought a
successful prosecution against his memory. In the condemnation
were included his children, Ugolino, Cante, Nerlo, and Bertuccio,
and his grandchildren, Goccia, Coppo, Fra Giovanni, Gherardo
prior of S. Quirico, Goccino, Saldino, and Marco — not that they
were heretics, but that they were disinherited and subjected to the
disabilities of descendants of heretics. Where such proceedinga
were hailed as pre-eminent exhibitions of holy zeal, no man could
feel secure in his possessions, whether derived from descent or
purchase.**
Not only were all alienations made by heretics set aside and
the property wrested from the purchasers, but all debts contracted
by them and all hypothecations and liens given to secure loans were
void. Thus doubt was cast upon every obligation that a man
" C. 6, 8, 9, 14, Sexto, ii. 26. Eymerio. Direct Inquis. pp. 570-2. Zanohini
Tract, de Hceret. o. zxiv. Severe as was the contemporary English law against felony^
it had at least this concession to justice, that a felon had to be convicted in his
lifetime; his death before conviction thus prevented confiscation (Bracton, lib. iii^
tract, ii. cap. 18, No. 17).
^ Lami, Aniichitd Toscane^ pp. 497, 586-7. It is true that when, in 1885, Henri
de Chamay, inquisitor of Carcassonne, sent to the papal court the depositions against
the memory of eighteen persons accused of heretical acts committed between 1284 and
1290, and asked for instructions, the decision was that no reliance was to be placed on
the testimony of witnesses who mostly contradicted themselves and who only swore
to what they had heard some fifty years before (Vaissette, iv. 184). Yet the mere
collection of such evidence for such a purpose is a sufficient illustration of the^
system.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 IN THE MIDDLE AGES 268
could enter into. Even when St. Louis softened the rigour of con-
fiscation in Languedoc, the utmost concession he would make was
that creditors should be paid for debts contracted by culprits before
they became heretics, while all claims arising subsequently to an
act of heresy were rejected. As no man could be certain of the
orthodoxy of another, it will be evident how much distrust must
have been thrown upon every bargain and every sale in the
commonest transactions of life. The blighting influence of this
upon the development of commerce and industry can readily be
perceived, coming as it did at a time when the commercial and in-
dustrial movement of Europe was beginning to usher in the dawn
of modem culture. It was not merely the intellectual striving of
the thirteenth century that was repressed by the Inquisition, the
progress of material improvement was seriously retarded. It was
this, among other incidents of persecution, which arrested the
promising civilisation of the south of France and transferred to
England and the Netherlands, where the Inquisition was compara-
tively unknown, the predominance in commerce and industry which
brought freedom and wealth and power and progress in its train.^
The quick-witted Italian commonwealths, then rising into mer-
cantile importance, were keen to recognise the disabilities thus in-
flicted upon them. In Florence a remedy was sought by requiring
the seUer of real estate always to give security against possible
future sentences of confiscation by the Inquisition — the security in
general being that of a third party, although there must have been
no little difficulty in obtaining it, and though it might likewise be
invaUdated at any moment by the same cause. Even in contracts
for personalty security was also often demanded and given. This
was at least only replacing one evil by another of scarcely less
magnitude, and the trouble grew so intolerable that a remedy was
sought for one of its worst features. The republic solemnly repre-
sented to Martin IV the scandals which had occurred, and the yet
greater ones threatened in consequence of the confiscation of the
real estate of heretics in the hands of bond fide purchasers, and by
a special bull of 22 Nov. 1288 the pontiff graciously ordered the
Florentine inquisitors in future not to seize such property.**
The princes who enjoyed the results of confiscations recognised
that they carried with them the correlative duty of defraying the
expenses of the Inquisition ; indeed, self-interest alone would have
prompted them to maintain in a state of the highest efficiency an
instrumentality so profitable. Theoretically it could not be denied
that the bishops were Uable for these expenses ; but, as Gui Foucoix
** Zanchini, Tract, de Haret, c. xxvii. Isambert, i. 257.
M Lami, AnUchitd Toacanet p. 598. Arehivio di Firenzet Biformazione, classe y.
No. 110.
Digitized by
Google
254 CONFISCATION FOR HERESY April
(Clement lY) remarks, their hands were tenacious and their parses
constipated, and as it was useless to look to them for resources he
advises that the pecuniary penances be used for the purpose, pro-
viding it be done decently and without scandalising the people.
Throughout Lombardy and central Italy, as we have seen, this
resource rendered the Inquisition fully self-supporting, and the in-
quisitors were eager to make business out of which they could reap
a harvest of fines and confiscations. In Venice the state defrayed
all expenses and took all profits. In Naples the same policy was at
first pursued by the Angevin monarchs, who took the confiscations
and, in addition to maintaining prisoners, paid to each inquisitor
one augustale (^Ib. of gold) per diem for the expenses of himself
and his associate, his notary and three famiUars with their horses.
These stipends were assigned upon the Naples customs on iron,
pitch, and salt. The orders for their payment ran only for four
months at a time, and had to be renewed. There was considerable
delay in the settlements, and the inquisitors had substantial cause
of complaint, although the officials were threatened with fines for
lack of promptness. In 1272, however, I find a letter issued to the.
inquisitor Fra Matteo di Castellamare providing him with a year's
salary, payable six months in advance. When, as mentioned
above, Charles II in 1290 divided the proceeds according to the
papal prescription, he liberally continued to contribute to the ex-
penses, though on a reduced scale. In letters of 16 May 1294, he
orders the payment to Fra Bartolomeo di Aquila of four tareni
per diem (the tareno was -^ oz. of gold) ; and 7 July of the same
year, he provides that five ounces per month be paid to him for the
expenses of his official family.'*
In France there was at first some question as to the responsi-
bility for the charges attendant upon persecution. The duty of the
bishops to suppress heresy was so plain that they could not refuse
to meet the expenses, at least in part. Before the establishment of
the Inquisition this consisted almost wholly in the maintenance of
imprisoned converts, and at the council of Toulouse in 1229 they
agreed to defray this in the case of those who had no money, while
those who had property to be confiscated they claimed should be
supported by the princes who obtained it. This proposition, like
the subsequent one of the council of Albi in 1254, was altogether
too cumbrous to work. The statutes of Baymond in 1284, while
dwelling elaborately on the subject of confiscation, made no pro-
vision for meeting the cost of the new Inquisition, and the matter
remained unsettled. In 1237 we find Gregory IX complaining
** Goid. Folcod. QtuBst iii. Arehiyio di Napoli, regist. 6, lett. B, fol. 85 ; reg. 10,
lett. B, fol. 6, 7, 96 ; reg. 11, lett. G, fol. 40 ; reg. 13, lett. A, fol. 212 ; reg. 51, lett.
A, foL 9 ; reg. 71, lett M, fol. 882, 885, 440 ; reg. 98, lett. B, fol. 18 ; reg. 113, lett.
A, foL 194 ; reg. 253, lett. A, fol. 63 ; MSS. Chioocarello, t. viii.
Digitized by
Google
1887 IN THE MIDDLE AGES 255
that the royal oflScials contributed nothing for the support of the
prisoners whose property they had confiscated. When in 1246 the
council of Beziers was assembled, the cardinal legate of Albano
reminded the bishops that it was their business to provide for it^
according to the instructions of the council of Montpellier, whose
proceedings have not reached us. The good bishops were not dis-
posed to do this. They claimed that prisons should be built at the
expense of the recipients of the confiscations, and suggested that
the fines should be used for their maintenance and for that of the
inquisitors. The piety of St. Louis, however, would not see the
good work halt for lack of the necessary means; with a more
worldly prince we might assume that he recognised the money
spent on inquisitors as profitably invested. In 1248 we find him
defraying their expenses in all the domains of the crown, and he
piously assumed the cost of the prisons and prisoners, in addition to
which,' in 1244, he ordered his seneschal of Carcassonne to pay out
of the confiscations ten sols per diem to the inquisitors for their
expenses. It may fairly be presumed that Count Eaymond contri-
buted with a grudging hand to the support of an institution which
he had opposed as long as he dared ; but when he was succeeded in
1249 by Jeanne and Alfonse of Poitiers, the latter politic and ava-
ricious prince saw his account in stimulating the zeal of those to
whom he owed his harvest of confiscations. Not only did he defray
the cost of the fixed tribunals, but his seneschals had orders to pay
the expenses of the inquisitors and their familiars in their move-
ments throughout his territories. Charles of Anjou, who was
equally greedy, found time amid his Italian distractions to see that
his seneschal of Provence and Forcalquier kept the Inquisition sup-
plied on the same basis as did the king in the royal dominions.'^
Large as were the returns to the fisc fi:om the industry of the
Inquisition, the inquisitors were sometimes disposed to presume
upon their usefulness and to spend money with a freedom which
seemed unnecessary to those who paid the biUs. Even in the fresh
zeal of 1242 and 1244, before the princes had made provision for
the holy ofl&ce, and while the bishops were yet zealously maintain-
ing their claims to the fines, the luxury and extravagance of the
inquisitors called down upon them the reproof of their own order,
as expressed in the Dominican provincial chapters of Montpellier
and Avignon. It would be of course unjust to cast such reproach
upon all inquisitors, but no doubt many deserved it, and there were
numerous ways in which they could supply their wants, legitimate
"^ Ck>ncil. Tolosan. ann. 1229, o. 9. Gonoil. Albiens. ann. 1254» c. 24. Hardnin,
▼ii. 415. Archives de PEv^h^ de Beziers (Doat, zzzi. 35). Conoil. Biterrens. ann.
,1246, c. 22. D. Bouquet, t. xxi. pp. 262, 264, 266, 278, Ac. Vaissette, 6d. Privat, viii.
1206. Arohiyes de I'lnq. de Carcass. (Doat, xxzL 250). Archivio di Napoli, regist.
20. lett. B, fol. 91.
Digitized by
Google
256 CONFISCATION FOR HERESY Aprfl
and otherwise. It might indeed be a curioas question to determine
the source whence Bernard de Caux, who presided over the tribunal
of Toulouse until his death in 1252, and who as a Dominican could
have owned no property, obtained the means which enabled him to
be a great beneflEtctor to the convent of Agen, founded in 1249.
Even Alfonse of Poitiers sometimes grew tired of ministering to the
wishes of those who served him so well. In a confidential letter of
1268 he complains of the vast expenditures of Pons de Poyet
and Etienne de Gatine, the inquisitors of Toulouse, and instructs
his agent to try to persuade them to remove to Lavaur, where less
extravagance might be hoped for. He offered to put at their dis-
posal the castle of Lavaur, or any other that might be fit to serve
as a prison ; and at the same time he craftily wrote to them direct,
explaining that, in order to enable them to extend their operations,
he would place an enormous castle in their hands."
Some very curious details as to the expenses of the Inquisition,
from St. John's day 1322 to 1823, thus defrayed from the confisca-
tions, are afforded by the accounts of Amaud Assalit, procurewr des
encoun of Carcassonne and Beziers, which have fortunately been
preserved. From the sums thus coming into his hands the pro-
cureur met the outlays of the Inquisition to the minutest item —
the cost of maintaining prisoners, the hunting-up of witnesses, the
tracking of fugitives, and the charges for an auto defe, including
the banquets for the assembly of experts, and the saffron-coloured
cloth for the crosses of penitents. We learn from this that the
wages of the inquisitor himself were 150 Uvres per annum, and
also that they were very irregularly paid. Friar Otbert had been
appointed in Lent 1316, and thus far had received nothing of his
stipend; but now, in consequence of a special letter from King
Charles le Bel, the whole accumulation for six years, amounting to
900 livres, is paid in a lump. Although by this time persecution
was slackening for lack of material, the confiscations were still quite
profitable. Assalit charges himself with 2,219 livres 7 sols 10
deniers, collected during the year, while his outlay, including heavy
legal expenses and the extraordinary payment to Friar Otbert,
amounts to 1,168 livres 11 sols 4 deniers, leaving about 1,050
livres of profit to the crown.**
Persecution, as a steady and continuous policy, rested, after all,
upon confiscation. It was this which supplied the fuel to keep up
« Molinier, L*Inq, dans le micU de la France, p. 808. Bern. Gtiidon. Fundat,
Convent Prcedic. (Martene, Thesaur, vi. 481). Bootaric, Saint Louis et Alfonse de
Poitiers, pp. 456-7.
M CoU. Doat, zzxiy. 189. In 1817 the result had been much less. We have the
reoeipt of the royal treasurer of Carcassonne, Lothaire Blano, to Amaud Assalit, dated
24 Sept. 1817, for collections during the year ending the previous St. John's day,
amounting to 495 livres 6 sols 11 deniers, being the balance after deducting wages
And expenses (Doat, xxxiv. 141).
Digitized by
Google
1887 IN THE MIDDLE AGES 257
the fires of zeal ; and when it was lacking, the business of defend-
ing the faith languished lamentably. Catharism disappeared under
the brilliant aggressiveness of Bernard Qui, the culminating point
of the Inquisition was passed, and thenceforth it steadily declined,
although there were still occasional confiscated estates over which
king, prelate, and noble quarrelled for some years to come.'^ The
spiritual Franciscans, Dulcinists, and Fraticelli were mendicants
who held property to be an abomination ; the Waldenses were poor
folk — mountain shepherds and lowland peasants — and the only
prizes were an occasional sorcerer or usurer.
The intimate connexion between the activity of persecuting
zeal and the material result to be derived from it is well illustrated
in the failure of the first attempt to extend the Inquisition into
Franche-GomtS. John, count of Burgundy, in 1248, represented
to Innocent IV the alarming spread of Waldensianism throughout
the province of Besanfon, and begged for its repression. Appa-
rently the zeal of Count John did not lead him to pay for the
purgation of his dominions, and the plunder to be gained was
inconsiderable, for in 1256 Alexander IV granted the petition of
the friars to be relieved from the duty, in which they averred that
they had exhausted themselves fruitlessly for lack of money. The
same lesion is taught by the want of success which attended all
attempto to establish the Inquisition in Portugal. When in 1876
Gregory XI ordered the bishop of Lisbon to appoint a Franciscan
inquisitor for the kingdom, recognising apparently that there would
be small receipts from confiscations, he provided that the incumbent
should be paid a salary of 200 gold florins per annum, assessed
upon the various sees in proportion of their forced contributions to
the papal camera. The resistance of inertia which rendered this
command resultless doubtless arose from the objection of the pre-
lates to being thus taxed ; and the same may be said of the efforts
of Boniface IX when he appointed Fray Vicente de Lisboa as in-
quisitor of Spain, and ordered his expenses to be defrayed by the
bishops.*
Eymerich, writing in Aragon about 1375, says the source
whence the expenses of the Inquisition should be met is a question
which had been long debated and never settled. The most popular
view among churchmen was that the burden should fall on the
temporal princes, since they obtained the confiscations, and should
accept the charge with the benefit ; but in these times, he sorrow-
fully adds, there are few obstinate heretics, fewer still relapsed, and
scarce any rich ones, so that, as there is Uttle to be gained, the
princes are not willing to defray expenses. Some other means ought
» Doat, XXXV. 79, 100.
*■ Potthast, No. 18000, 16995. Monteiro, Hiatoria da Santa InqtUsigcU), p. i
lib. u. 0. 34, 36.
VOL. n. — NO. VI. 8
Digitized by
Google
258 CONFISCATION FOR HERESY April
to be found, but of all the devices which have been proposed each
has its insuperable objection ; and he concludes by regretting that
an institution so wholesome and so necessary to Christendom should
be so badly provided.*^
It was probably while Eymerich was saddened with these un-
palatable truths that the question was raising itself in the most
practical shape elsewhere. In 1875 Gregory XI persuaded King
Frederic of Sicily to allow the confiscations to enure to the benefit
of the Inquisition, so that funds might not be lacking for the prose-
cution of the good work. At the same time he made a vigorous
effort to exterminate the Waldenses, who were multiplying in Dau-
phine. There were prisons to be built and crowds of prisoners
to be supported, and he directed that the expenses should be de-
frayed by the prelates, whose negligence had given opportunity for
the growth of heresy. Although he ordered this to be enforced by
excommunication, it would seem that the constipated purses of the
bishops could not be relaxed, for soon after we find the inquisitor
laying claim to a share in the confiscations, on the reasonable
ground of his having no other source whence to defray the necessary
expenses of his tribunal. The royal officials insisted on keeping
the whole, and a lively contest arose, which was referred to King
Charles le Sage. The monarch dutifully conferred with the holy
see, and in 1378 issued an ardonnance retaining the whole of the
confiscations, and assigning to the inquisitor a yearly stipend — ^the
same as that paid to the tribunals of Toulouse and Carcassonne —
of 190 Uvres towmois^ out of which all of the expenses of the
Inquisition were to be met, with the proviso that, if the aUowanoe
was not regularly paid, then the inquisitor should be at liberty to
detain a portion of the forfeitures. No doubt this arrangement was
observed for a time, but it lapsed in the terrible disorders which
ensued on the insanity of Charles YI. In 1409 Alexander V left
to his legate to decide whether the inquisitor of Dauphin^ should
receive 300 gold florins a year, to be levied on the Jews of Avignon,
or ten florins a year from each of the bishops of his extensive dis-
trict, or whether the bishops should be compelled to support him and
his officials in his journeys through the country. These precarious
resources disappeared in Uie confusion of the civil wars and invasion
which so nearly wrecked the monarchy. In 1432, when Friar
Pierre Fabri, inquisitor of Embrun, was summoned to attend the
council of Basel, he excused himself on account of his preoccupa-
tions with the stubborn Waldenses, and also on the ground of his
indescribable poverty, ' for never have I had a penny from the
church of God, nor have I a stipend from any other source.' ^
*' Eymerio. DinU, Ingws. pp. 652-3.
" Raynald. AfmdL ann. 1875, No. 26. Wadding, An/iud. Minor, ann. 1375, No. 21,
22 ; ann. 1409, No. 13. Isambert, y. 491. Martene, Atn^l. Coll. viii. 161^
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 IN THE MIDDLE AGES 269
Of course it would be unjust to say that greed and thirst for
plunder were the impelling motives of the Inquisition, but we are
perfectly safe in asserting that but for the gains to be made out of
fines and confiscations its work would have been much less thorough,
and that it would have sunk into comparative insignificance as soon
as the first frantic zeal of bigotry had exhausted itself. This zeal
might have lasted for a generation, to be followed by a period of
comparative inaction, until a fresh onslaught would have been ex-
cited by the recrudescence of heresy. Under a succession of such
spasmodic attacks Catharism would probably have never been com-
pletely rooted out. By confiscation the heretics were forced to
furnish the means for their own destruction. Avarice joined hands
with fanaticism, and between them they supplied motive power for
a hundred years of fierce, unintermitting, unrelenting persecution,
which in the end accomplished its main purpose.
Henbt G. Lba.
8 2
Digitized by
Google
260 April
Turenne
AyiSITOB at Versailles will readily understand the place of
Turenne in the annals of France. The great soldier stands
out on the canvas in a hundred battle scenes of the seventeenth
century, and, amidst the pomp and circumstance of antique war,
seems to guide the fortunes of the house of Bourbon in an
ever-extending sphere of conquest, from vanquished fortresses of
Spanish Flanders to German fcities on the Main and the Inn.
Turenne, in fact, was one of the masters of his art ; he possessed
in the highest degree the faculty of combining operations on an
extensive theatre with the prescient skill which makes success
probable ; and though it is not true, as his eulogists boast, that
modem strategy begins with him, he was, in no doubtful sense, a
consummate strategist. If he was surpassed, too, by generals of
his time in the direction of troops in the shock of battle, if he
had not the inspiration of Conde on the field, or Marlborough's un-
rivalled judgment and insight, he was admirable as a leader of
armies ; he carefully prepared the way to victory ; he has seldom
been equaUed in the rare excellence of rising superior to adverse
fortune, and plucking safety, and even renown, from defeat ; and if
it has been thought that he was somewhat wanting in the qualities
that make the most of success, his sagacity, constancy, and firm
moral courage repeatedly caused him to triumph in the end. Nor
was this eminent man a great captain only; he was a military
administrator of the first order, and contributed perhaps as much
as Louvois to the marvellous improvements which made the armies
of Louis XIV, for nearly fifty years, the terror of a half-subdued
continent ; and he played a not unimportant part in those deep-
laid counsels of craft and ambition which marked that grand era of
the supremacy of France. The public life of Turenne, moreover,
though not altogether free from stain, presents many noble and
attractive features ; and Englishmen ought to dwell on his career
with interest, for he was the companion in arms of our last Stuart
kings ; he discerned the genius of Churchill in youth, and trained
the future victor of Blenheim and Bamilies in the first essays he
made in war ; and he was the only French general who, in modem
Digitized by
Qoo^<^
1887 TURENNE 261
times, has had the command of an English army, and has gained
vdth its aid a decisive victory.
M. Le Roy ' is the latest of Turenne's biographers, and has dis-
covered in the archives of France, especially in those of her foreign
office, fresh materials that bear on the life of his subject ; and he has
thrown new light on more than one passage of the career of Turenne
that was little known, especially on his conduct before the Spanish
Fronde, and on his place in the conncDs of Louis XIV. His work,
however, though long and elaborate, and full of illustrations, maps,
and plans of real use to a diligent student, is not able or of much
value ; and whole pages of it have been taken from other writers
without acknowledgment. I shall occasionally refer to M. Le Boy
in this attempt to lay before the reader a short account of the life
of Turenne, and a concise estimate of his splendid exploits. The
memoirs, however, of the great marshal are still our best authority
for his first campaigns, from 1644 to 1658, and for most of the
parts of his early career ; and Napoleon Ill's Precis of the wars of
Turenne, a masterpiece of military thought, if occasionally inaccu-
rate in facts and dates, and too exacting, perhaps, in its scientific
criticism, is a commentary of the very highest value. Of the his-
tories of Turenne, I prefer that of Bamsay, if only for this reason,
that it suppUed Napoleon with the materials of his celebrated
Henri de la Tour d'Auvergne, the Turenne of history, was bom
in 1611. His father, duke of Bouillon and prince of Sedan, was
one of the sovereign noblesse of France ; his mother was a daughter
of William the Silent ; and the illustrious qualities of the house of
Nassau were seen through life in the future warrior. As has been
the case with many famous chiefs — with WiUiam HI in that age, and
Luxemburg— Turenne was a feeble and sickly child, but resolution
and energy were innate with him ; and we may beUeve the tradition
that he lay all night on a gun-carriage on the ramparts of Sedan
in order to convince his father that he could endure the hardships
of the bivouac and the camp. The boy was brought up with the
assiduous care with which the young nobles of those days were
trained ; mathematics and history were his constant studies, and
his delicate frame, as he grew up, was strengthened by hunting,
riding, and other manly exercises. Unlike that, however, of the
Grand Conde— a different being in so many respects — the youth of
Turenne was not rich in promise ; he learned slowly and seemed to
want inteUigence ; and, indeed, the great parts of the marshal of
France were always obscured to the vulgar eye by an awkward
manner and a dull exterior. Yet, even in those days, the original
genius of the strategist showed its natural tendencies; the lad
' Turenne ; sa Vie ; Us InstittUions miUtaires de son Temps. Par Jules
LeBoy. Paris, 1884.
Digitized by
Google
262 TURENNE April
eagerly mastered the campaigns of Gsesar, and followed the career
of Alexander the Great ; and it is related of him that he sent a
challenge to a comrade who ventured to express doubts as to the
historical truth of the march to the Indus. In 1625^ at tiie age of
fourteen, Turenne entered the profession of which he was to prove
one of the greatest glories. On the death of his father he passed
into the hands of his maternal uncle, Maurice of Nassau; and
he made his first essay in arms as a private soldier under the
eye of that able and successful chief. The successor of Maurice,
Frederick Henry, promoted the young musketeer to a company ;
and Turenne, during the next five years, served constantly in the
field in the protracted contest between the leaders of the States and
the renowned Spinola. The diligent care he bestowed on his men,
and the attention he gave to the details of his calling, soon attracted
the notice of his superiors, and he was publicly thanked by the
commander-in-chief for his gallantry and skill at the siege of Bois-
le-Duc. These qualities, however, were not the distinctive marks
of his natural genius. The experiences of those days, when a
whole campaign was repeatedly spent in reducing a fortress, we
may readily believe, first inspired Turenne with the important
truth, the significance of which he illustrated by many famous
examples, that wars of sieges ought to be less fruitful and decisive
in their general results than ably conducted wars of marches.
During the intervals between these campaigns in the Nether-
lands, Turenne had more than once been summoned to Paris, and,
as was habitual with the young noblesse of the time, had appeared
at the court of Louis XTTT. The brilliant society of the gay capital
had, however, few charms for a youth sedate and sober-minded
beyond his years ; its licentiousness shocked a nature trained by a
pious mother in Calvin's teaching ; and it is curious to read in
Turenne's letters to his sister, one of the heroines of the Fronde,
how he eschewed the glitter and pomp of the town, disliked fine
clothes, and detested debt, the very opposite in this of the reckless
Cond^. In 1680, when in his twentieth year, Turenne obtained a
regiment from Louis XIII ; and the young colonel was soon able to
boast that diligence and discipline had ' made his corps equal to the
choicest troops of the royal household.' During the next thirteen
years Turenne shared the fortunes of the arms of France under
Richelieu's guidance, and he took an active part in the thirty years'
war, in the Netherlands, in Spain, on the Rhine, and in Italy.
Though known from the first as a rising soldier, he did not attain
high command quickly ; he passed through every intermediate grade,
and the experience he thus acquired in the lesser parts of his art,
in the direction of troops in small bodies, and in miUtary arrange-
ments of all kinds, was, as he showed, of the greatest value.
We shall merely glance at Turenne's career while he as yet
Digitized by
Google
1887 TURENNE 268
held a subordinate rank^ To the courage natural to all his order he
added intrepidity, calmness in danger, and fertility of resource
peculiar to himself; and he gave signal proof of these precious
qualities at the great siege of Breisach in 1688, and at that of
Lamotte a few years before. In 1685, when the French army, after
a premature attempt to invade Germany, fell back, ruined and
famished, on the Sarre, Turenne distinguished himself in the retreat ;
and the steadiness with which he confronted the enemy, and the
admirable care he took of his men, were deservedly praised by his
chief, La Yalette. These, however, were not the highest gifts of one
who was, in a great measure, to give a new character to the opera-
tions of war. As a mere officer Turenne had, no doubt, equals, and
certainly was inferior to Gonde; fuid the chief interest that attaches
to this part of his career is tlie proof it affords of his dawning genius
in the sphere in which it was to become pre-eminent. The capacity
of Turenne, even in these early years, as a strategist, in combining
the movements which assure success to troops in the field, is evi-
dent to an attentive observer. In 1686 he defeated Gallas after a
forced march which sturprised his foe; in the following year he
skilfully connected his own operations with those of La Yalette, and
forced Maubeuge after a tenacious defence ; in 1640, at the siege of
Turin, he out-manoeuvred the Spanish commander, and eluded and
baffled the army of rehef ; in 1648, by making a feint against
Alessandria, he deceived his adversary, and pounced upon, and
captured, Trino.
Turenne obtained the bdton from Mazarin, and became a marshal
of France in 1648. His genius, however, was not seen at its full
lustre during the next two years, though evidence of it is not
wanting ; he was only second in command to Gonde for nearly the
whole of this period, and was left to himself on but two occasions ;
and it was his fortune to have been opposed to a general little
known to fame, but one of the great chiefs of the thirty years'
war. In the winter of 1648-4 Turenne was engaged in restoring
the army, which had been driven, after the death of Guebriant,
from the Swabian forests to the edge of the Yosges ; and he crossed
the Bhine about the middle of July, his object being to relieve
Freiburg. He failed, however, in this attempt, a panic having
fallen on part of his troops ; but though Napoleon condemns his
conduct in retreating after a single check, his antagonist, Mercy,
there is reason to believe, had a more powerful force than the
emperor supposed. Gond6, bringing a large reinforcement from
the Bhine, was soon afterwards in supreme command ; and though
the responsibility must be shared by Turenne, his chief is certainly
in the main responsible for the terrible and indecisive struggle
which followed, and in which the prince was, on the whole, discom-
fited. Napoleon has, we think, clearly shown that the French
Digitized by
Google
264 TURENNE April
commanders, on this occasion, made a capital mistake in attacking
Mercy, in his formidable positions around Freiburg; and the
accuracy of this view is proved by the fact that the German general
was compelled to retreat when Gonde, enlightened at last by defeat,
began to threaten his communications and his rear, the true mode
of operating from the first. It is probable, however, that this
movement, late as it was, was planned by Turenne; and mi-
doubtedly the marshal gave proof of skill in his effort to turn the
flank of his enemy by a march through the hills to the south of
Freiburg. Turenne, I am convinced, suggested the fine operations
which soon followed, and which illustrate his strategic insight.
Instead of delaying around Freiburg, Gonde made at once for the
lower Rhine, for the moment exposed to a bold invader ; and May-
ence, Philippsburg, Spires, and Germersheim, with a considerable
part of the surrounding country, passed, in a few weeks, into the
hands of the French. During the winter Turenne had an inde-
pendent command, Gonde having returned in ill-health to France ;
and the powers of the strategist were again seen in his masterly
movements in the Hardt mountains against Mercy and Gharles of
Lorraine, who endeavoured in vain to converge upon him. At the
beginning of the campaign of 1645, however, Mercy was enabled
to take his revenge : he surprised Turenne, who had advanced from
the Rhine to the Tauber without sufficient precautions, and the
great French commander suffered, near Mergentheim, one of the
few complete defeats his career witnessed. Gond^ before long
returned to his post ; and Turenne played but a subordinate part
in the operations of the rest of the year. He endeavoured in vain
to dissuade his colleague from making the reckless attack at Nord-
lingen, in which, as Napoleon truly remarks, all the chances were
on the side of Mercy, impregnably entrenched with a superior army ;
but he ably directed the French left wing, and co-operated in tiie
decisive movement which secured victory through a caprice of
fortune. The errors, however, and the glory of the day must be
laid wholly to the account of Gonde, whose tenacity and admirable
skill on the field excuse in a great measure his audacious rash-
ness.
The victory of Nordlingen proved fruitless, and the French were
compelled to fall back to the Rhine. Turenne held the supreme
command in Germany during the next three campaigns — the last
scenes of the thirty years' war— and his great special gifts became
soon manifest. He was on the French bank of the Rhine in the
summer of 1646, and he had been directed not to cross the river,
the duke of Bavaria having promised Mazarin that, on this con-
dition, he would remain neutral. This compact, however, was not
fulfilled ; the duke joined his troops to those of the emperor, and
the united force marched across the Main, in the hope of destroying
Digitized by
Google
1887 TUBENNE 265
a Swedish contingent lying scattered along the plains of Westphalia.
Tnrenne, indignant at this breach of faith, and without waiting for
orders from Paris, at once broke up from his camp near Mayence,
and,, finding the bridges on the way occupied, descended the Bhine,
crossed the stream at Wesel, and, rapidly moving up the German
bank, joined hands with his allies upon the Lahn, having com-
pletely baffled his enemy's projects by a march of . extraordinary
quickness and daring. The marshal's next operation was one of
those which clearly illustrate his strategic powers. The imperialist
army having fallen back to Nuremberg by an eccentric line, Turenne,
seizing the chord of the arc, made a forced march from the Main
to the Danube, and, anticipating his adversaries by many days,
sat down before the great fortress of Augsburg, thus carrying the
war into the heart of Bavaria. Though he did not capture the
town, owing to a false movement — his single mistake in this brilliant
campaign — he retained the advantageous position he had won, fall-
ing back only a short distance, and, in a few weeks, he was
threatening Munich, having out-manoeuvred his bewildered foes
and turned their line of defence at Memmingen by a movement
across the Lech at Landsberg. These operations closed a passage
of arms still memorable in the annals of war ; and in the following
year gifts of another kind possessed by Turenne were signally
proved, it having been due solely to his capacity for command, to
his intrepid courage, and to the force of his character, that a
dangerous mutiny of the German troops in his army was quelled
on the Bhenish frontier. The strategy of 1646 was repeated in
1648 with equal effect, if with less briUiancy. Turenne joined his
Swedish allies on the Main, and, having wisely refused to invade
Bohemia — a movement which would have exposed his flank and
communications to a perilous attack — he once more hastened to
the upper Danube, his object being again to march into Bavaria.
The enemy, who fell back before him, was reached and defeated in
a pitched battle — remarkable chiefly as the first instance in which
Montecuculi, his worthy rival in future years, gave proof of his
powers — and Turenne, making the most of his success, was soon
across the Lech and the Isar, and, passing the capital, attained the
Inn. The marshal, thus, as it were, heralding the victorious
marches of an even greater warrior in the valley of the Danube,
many years afterwards, ravaged Bavaria with the severity of that
age ; and he had only just turned his face towards the Bhine, when
the peace of Westphalia brought the war to a close.
M. Le Boy has devoted considerable care to the next part of the
career of Turenne, an unhappy passage in a Ufe of renown. In
1649 the marshal, who had remained in Swabia to make the pro-
visions of the peace secure, was in open revolt from his country's
government ; and we may summarily reject the plea in his memoirs
Digitized by
Google
266 TURENNE April
that the severity of the court to the people of Paris was the true
motive that led to the act. He was doubtless influenced by dis-
trust of Mazarin — who, M. Le Roy conclusively shows, had de-
ceived him and his house alike — and by regard for his brother, the
duke of Bouillon, iniquitously treated by the designing minister.
The artifices and the gold of the cardinal prevailed. Turenne,
abandoned by almost all his troops, fled to Holland, with a price
set on his head; but, probably on account of his distinguished
services, he received his pardon at the brief peace of Bueil. Next
year, however, he again rebelled, and it appears certain that on
this occasion the intrigues of Mazarin, a feeling of regard for his
glorious brother-in-arms, Gonde, and, above all, perhaps a passionate
love for Gonde's sister, Anne Genevieve — ^the brilliant Madame de
Longueville of the Fronde — were the real causes of his ill-advised
conduct. The adventures of the warrior, who, it is believed, became
the dupe of a treacherous siren, belong to the scandals of that
prurient age; but history must relate witti shame tiiat Turenne
now appeared for some months, in the field, at the head of the
inveterate foes of France, though the very treaty he made with
Spain shows that he retained loyal and patriotic sentiments. The
capacity of the marshal was seen in his plan for invading France in
1660 ; he wished to march on Paris and to dictate peace, but he
was overruled by his Spanish colleagues, and weeks were lost in
indecisive movements between the Somme, the Oise, and the Aisne.
Meanwhile the royal cause had regained strength, and Mazarin,
having returned to the capital, directed a powerful army to besiege
Bethel, a great strategic point in the wars of those days, which had
fallen into the hands of the enemy. Turenne was overtaken by the
French commander, after an ineffectual attempt to relieve the place,
and, having made a mistake in offering battle, was utterly routed
by superior forces. M. Le Boy has thrown additional light on the
negotiations which ere long foUowed, and which terminated in the
return of Turenne to an allegiance he ought to have never forsaken.
There is no reason to doubt the marshal's statement that he
honestly endeavoured to make peace, but that, finding Gonde and his
Spanish allies impracticable in their excessive demands, he resolved
to free himself from a fatal engagement. Large concessions, how-
ever, made by Mazarin — Turenne was restored to all his honours,
and his brother obtained, in exchange for Sedan, his principality
forfeited ten years before, what seems to have been a fair equiva-
lent— ^had probably much to do with the matter ; and to this we
should add, that the imperious temper of Gond6, and the intense
selfishness and levity of the chiefs of the Fronde, appear to have
wholly chilled the sympathies of the solid, staid, and deep-thinking
soldier. Very possibly, too, disappointed passion may have had an
effect on the marshal's purpose ; and the false wiles of Madame de
Digitized by
Google
1887 TURENNE 267
Longneville, bat too evident from dear-bought experience, perhaps
contributed to make Turenne again a pillar of the throne of the
house of Bourbon.
Turenne had returned to the service of the crown, and was at
the head of the French army by the first months of 1662. In
addition to rare strategic merit, he displayed, during the next two
campaigns, many of the finest qualities of a great warrior, and he
extricated the monarchy from the extreme of peril. When he re-
ceived his command, the royal forces were cooped up in the pro-
vinces of the west ; the capital was in the hands of the Fronde ;
the Spaniards hung on the northern frontier ; and Gond^ maintained
the rebellion in Guyenne. Turenne, as the court was approaching
the Loire, saved the queen and Mazarin from a dangerous ambush,
and soon afterwards turned defeat into victory by making a bold
stand near Gien against Gond^, who, hastening from the south,
had joined hands with the army of the Fronde not far from Mont-
argis, and had annihilated a detachment under the command of
Hocquincourt. Profiting by this success, described by Napoleon as
a specimen of real tactical genius, the marshal proposed to advance
on Paris — the strategist perceived the immense importance of taking
possession of the capital — but Mazarin's timid counsels prevailed,
and Turenne was directed to besiege Etampes, having first defeated
the rebel forces, and conquered the region between the Loire and
the Seine. A new enemy soon appeared in the field : Gharles of
Lorraine advanced from Ghampagne towards Paris ; but Turenne,
showing that rftpid decision which is one of the signs of a master
of war, broke up from Etampes at a moment's notice, and, pre-
venting the juncture of the prince with Gonde, once more averted
impending disaster. A game of manoeuvres around the capital, in
which Turenne and Gonde played the chief parts, was the next
scene of the ever-changing drama ; and, after the murderous fight
of St. Antoine, a Spanish army, descending from Picardy, and acting
in concert with Gharles of Lorraine, advanced to the aid of the
still resisting Fronde. The royal cause would perhaps have been
lost had, as Mazarin urged, the queen fled to Lyons ; and Turenne's
resolute attitude may have saved the monarchy. Lisisting that the
court should remain on the spot, he baffled the cautious Spanish
commanders, who did not venture to cross the Somme ; and then,
placing himself in an entrenched camp between Gond6 and Gharles
of Lorraine, he contrived to paralyse their united eflforts, and to
retain his hold on the adjoining capital. Peace ere long brought
the rebellion to an end; and Turenne was justly hailed as the
saviour of France, having given proof in this arduous contest of
extraordinary fertility of resource and of daring and constancy
beyond praise. The same gifts were again made manifest in the
campaign of 1668. Though Mazarin had regained power, the forces
Digitized by
Google
268 TURENNE AprO
of France were still very inferior to those of Spain for an imme-
diate struggle ; and Spain possessed in the arch-rebel Gond^ a soldier
of marvellous parts and boldness. Turenne, now invested with the
highest command, opened the campaign with the capture of Bethel
— the fortress had been recently lost — and by this brilliant stroke
he defeated a project of invading France by the Aisne and the
Marne, the easiest line of advance to the capital. The enemy was
thus compelled to attack by the more difficult line of the Somme
and the Oise ; and Turenne, moving with admirable skill between
the strong places on the two rivers, succeeded, though with a much
weaker army, and against the advice of reluctant colleagues, in
keeping the allies completely at bay until the season for operations
in the field had closed. In this contest of marches he was, on one
occasion, all but caught by Gonde, not far from Peronne ; but his
bold attitude overawed the Spaniards, and Napoleon cites this as a
good instance ' of the divine side of the art of war,' the genius that
conceives and the strong will that executes.
The growing power of France, under an established government,
began gradually to prevail over the declining strength, the corrup-
tion, and the weak counsels of Spain. Yet, in the four campaigns,
1664-7, the Spaniards were sometimes superior in the field ; had
Gonde directed their still fine armies, the result of the war might
have been different, and the genius, the wisdom, and the constancy
of Turenne threw a decisive weight into the scale of fortune. The
Spaniards took the offensive in the summer of 1664, and the Arch-
duke Leopold sat down before the old capital of Burgundian Artois —
Arras — with an army of 80,000 men, Gonde being only his second
in command. The garrison was not 6,000 strong; and though
successful efforts were sometimes made to intercept the besiegers'
supplies, the fortress, invested on every side, seemed about to faU
in the middle of August. Turenne, however, calling in a detach-
ment which had been engaged in reducing Stenay, and having
reconnoitred the lines with care, made a night attack on the Spanish
army, selecting a point distant from Gond^'s camp, and he relieved
the town after a fierce struggle, completely defeating his astounded
enemy, though Gonde did all that valour could do, when informed
too late, to prevent the rout. James, duke of York, who, with
Gharles U, served at this time under the marshal's eye, has de-
scribed the remarkable skill and forethought with which Turenne
conducted this enterprise, and Napoleon cites this as another
instance of capacity in the field of the highest order. In the fol-
lowing year the tide began to turn ; and France, overleaping her
Picard frontier, stretched over Artois and Spanish Flanders a
steadily strengthening grasp of conquest. Turenne led the invad-
ing forces; and this campaign is a fine example of the peculiar
excellence of this great strategist. Instead of wasting time in a
Digitized by
Google
1887 TURENNE 269
succession of sieges, the marshal masked or turned the smaller
Spanish fortresses; and he actually advanced as far as Mons,
haying taken Gonde and Landrecies on his way, and having splen-
didly illustrated his favourite maxim, ' In war march and do not
besiege.' Turenne, however, suffered a decided check in the cam-
paign of 1656, though the blame should be laid on an imprudent
colleague. The marshal sate down before Valenciennes, too large
a place to surround or pass by, and he was obliged to connect his
own lines with those of his lieutenant. La Fert6, by a dyke rising
above the flooded marsh, which formed the main defence of the
fortress. La Ferte, however, destroyed the dyke, and, a wing of
the French army being thus isolated, Gond6 fell on it with his
accustomed skill, overwhelmed it after a brief struggle, and com-
pelled Turenne to draw off and to raise the siege. Conde pressed
fiercely on the retreating enemy, advanced to Le Quesnoy, and
eagerly sought a battle ; but Turenne had taken a strong position,
and his attitude was so bold and imposing that the prince sullenly
fell back discomfited, his adversary, who, against the advice of his
officers, had ventured to make this daring stand, having thus turned
defeat into victory. The next campaign, that of 1657, found France
in alUance with the England of Cromwell ; Turenne, marching into
Spanish Flanders, overran the country around the Lys, and occu-
pied Mardyck on the channel, and though Gond^ relieved Cambray,
a feat of arms of peculiar excellence, the issue of the contest was
no longer doubtful.
The campaign of 1658 was the last of the war, and the success
of Turenne was decisive and splendid, though Napoleon, the most
exacting of critics, has declared that more ought to have been ac-
compUshed. By this time the French had overcome Artois and had
pushed detachments into Spanish Flanders ; and Mazarin and Crom-
well had agreed to besiege Dunkirk with a French and English
force, the prize when won to be held by England. The fortress,
however, was difficult of approach ; it was protected by the sur-
rounding fortresses of Cassel, Gravelines, and Bergues, and the
whole adjoining country could be easily flooded. Turenne, break-
ing up from his camp near Bethune, marched rapidly forward and
seized Cassel ; and then, crossing the Lys at St. Yenant, passed
Bergues to the left, reached the banks of the Colme, and, having
overcome all kinds of obstacles, approached the downs which en-
circle Dunkirk. The garrison had let the inundation loose, but it
was traversed after some days of toil, and Turenne, aided by 6,000
Ironsides, had drawn lines round the fortress early in June, an
EngUsh fleet closing the front on the sea. The celerity and skill of
the marshal's advance, and the vigour with which he pressed the
siege, had meanwhile astonished the Spanish generals ; and Don
Juan of Austria, in chief ,^ommand, with Cond6 still a subordinate
Digitized by
Google
270 TUBENNE April
only, made a rash effort to relieve the place. Gollectiiig hastily his
scattered forces, Don Juan marched on Dunkirk and offered battle ;
bat his army was weaker than that of Turenne, and had not besides
the sapport of artillery. The marshal, issuing from his lines, at-
tacked ; and as the allied columns took up their ground, Cond6
bitterly remarked to the duke of Gloucester — the English princes
were now in the Spanish camp — * In half an hour you will see a
battle lost.' The result of the day was not for a moment doubtful.
Gonde, indeed, did wonders on the Spanish left, but the English
contingent, to whose fierce courage Turenne pays well-deserved
homage, aided by the fire of an English squadron, easily turned and
crushed Don Juan's right ; and the Spanish army, quickly losing
heart from the want of an arm of great importance, even in the
wars of the seventeenth century, was soon a horde of disbanding
fugitives. Dunkirk had fallen before the end of June ; and the ad-
joining fortresses having fallen with it, the victorious French were
soon in possession of the region between the Lys and the Scheldt,
the enemy unable to appear in the field, and not even attempting
to oppose his progress. Turenne stopped his conquering march at
Oudenarde ; and Napoleon insists that he ought to have pressed
forward and to have finished the war by the capture of Brussels.
Whether this opinion be correct or not, I shall not examine the
various excuses of commentators for the marshal's conduct. Turenne
asserts that he entertained the project, but hesitated to run the risk
of a siege ; and even if this is one of the instances in which he
failed to reap all the fruits of victory, and though Napoleon, we can
scarcely doubt, would have played the bolder and more brilliant
game, few will attempt positively to decide the question.
For some years after the death of Mazarin, Turenne was the
foremost subject in France. He had saved the monarchy and en-
larged its borders ; he was, by general acclaim, the first soldier in
Europe ; his reputation stood at the highest point in the councils
of every state of Christendom ; he was revered and loved by his
youthful sovereign, and his commanding influence had not yet
been weakened by the jealousies and cabals of intriguing courtiers.
His position, in fact, resembled that of Wellington in 1814-16;
and, like Wellington, when at the summit of fame, he gave many
proofs of statesmanlike wisdom. M. Le Boy has devoted much
attention to this part of the career of Turenne, and his indus-
trious research has not been fruitless. The marshal, whose glory
in arms gave him extraordinary weight in foreign affairs, played
at this time a conspicuous part in the ambitious councils of
Louis XIY, and he carried out the traditions of BicheUeu's policy
with equal ability, prudence, and skill. He had great authority at
the court of Whitehall, for he had been the friend of the eidled
Stuarts ; he had offered, when in command in the north, to fit out
Digitized by
Google
1887 TUBENNE 271
an expedition to restore their throne, and he had corresponded
with Monk in the interests of the crown, when that general made
his advance on London. Torenne thns naturally became an instru-
ment to promote the objects of France as regards England, and
Louis XrV made him a chief agent in negotiating the famous cession
of Dunkirk, and in furthering the marriage of Charles U ; the
double purpose being to secure for France a naval position of the
highest value, and to gain England as a possible ally in the event
of a future contest with Spain, through the new tie formed with
the house of Braganza. The marshal, too, was* largely engaged at
this period in the game of intrigue in which France, keen-eyed* in
her own interest9, played England off against the Dutch republic,
seeking at one time to reconcile the two states, and at another to
lead them into war ; and his capacity made such a profound im-
pression on John de Witt, then supreme in the Provinces, that he
was offered the chief command of their armies, although a kinsman
of the House of Orange, the special object of the grand pensionary's
fears. Through his brotherhood in arms with Carman princes
allied to France in the thirty years' war, and witii surviving
veterans of the great Gustavus, Turenne, moreover, had an ample
share in directing the policy of Louis XIV, in the empire, and at
the northern courts; and here, too, he acquitted himself with a
prudence and insight that do him honour. Nor did the soldier-
statesman display this side of his genius only in external affeurs.
Lik^ many other illustrious warriors— Yauban in that age was a
striking example — Turenne had a decided turn for civil administra-
tion in its highest branches. He was an admirer and a disciple of
Colbert ; and he composed reports on the economic state of France
which even now may be read with interest. In one point of the
first importance the marshal was true to the best traditions of four
generations of French statesmen. We may regret that he followed
the movement of nearly all the Galvinist noblesse, and fell away
from the faith of his fathers ; but he was a staunch champion of
Huguenot rights, amidst the official Bomanism of the court, and
he wrote strongly against the iniquitous measures which were
gradually leading to the complete extinction of the liberties con-
ferred by the edict of Nantes.
The chief work of Turenne at this time, however, was the im-
provement of the military power of France. Louvois had a full
share in the toil and the honour, but the marshal superintended,
and in part suggested, the great reforms which made the royal army
an instrument of war of a most formidable kind. These reforms
largely represented a change which had passed over the national
life, and may be described as the transformation of a semi-feudal
and almost a local force, feeble for its size and full of abuses, into
the standing army of a despotic monarchy, well organised, and in
Digitized by
Google
272 TURENNE April
a high state of discipline. France had long possessed a regular
army, bat this was, in a great degree, composed of levies of militia,
hastily raised, and wholly in the hands of officers of the noblesse,
who had a direct interest in making false returns of the numbers of
men in their charge in the field, and were often insubordinate,
corrupt, and ignorant. The gradations of command were, besides,
ill-ordered ; a general-in-chief, for example, had no control over the
heads of the artillery service ; a regimental system no doubt existed,
but the army was not completely divided into distinct units of
regular extent, all separate parts of a connected whole ; there were
no special corps of scientific officers, and the mechanical appliances
of the national forces were very imperfect, even for the age. The
result was weakness, slowness, and inefficiency in the field. Until
after the end of the thirty years' war, the army of France was in-
ferior to that of the house of Austria as a miUtary machine ; and
the slackness of its moral tone may be gathered from the fact that
the household troops were largely made up of men who entered this
chosen body to obtain an exemption from active service. This faulty
system was altogether changed in the fourteen years that followed
the peace of the Pyrenees. The levying of the militia was not
encouraged, but thousands of peasants who would have filled its
ranks were drafted into the regular army, and organised into a
standing force ; and though the noblesse were allowed to retain the
command of the new and improved bodies, they were strictly con-
trolled by royal inspectors, who took care that returns were correct,
that ' men in buckram ' should not exist, and who removed worth-
less and undisciplined officers. The arrangements, too, of command
were reformed, and the relations between the parts of the army
bettered ; a general was given absolute power over the officers and
troops of every arm ; a force in the field was regularly formed into
brigades, regiments, battaUons, and squadrons ; a body of engineers,
soon to be made illustrious by the great name of Vauban, was carefully
trained ; and extraordinary attention was given to making military
mechanism of every kind more perfect, to moving impedimenta with
increased speed, and to devisiug means of overcoming obstacles.
Through these changes an immense addition was made to the strength
of France in war ; and the transformation of her military system
was further illustrated in a striking way by the revolution effected
in the household troops, which, purged of lazy and defective ele-
ments, and composed of the flower of a martial noblesse, were to
gain renown on many a field of fame. Yet even all this does not
afford the measure of the development and increased power of the
forces of France at this period. Like all true strategists, Turenne
was aware of the superiority of infantry as an arm in the field ; he
took care to augment largely the proportion of footmen in the
French army, and the result was that, within a few years, the
Digitized by
Google
1887 TURENNE 273
French infantry had nearly trebled in numbers and, compared with
the cavalry, had become of supreme importance. This reform was
prodigious, even if it stood alone ; and in fact, save that it had not
acquired the formations and tactics mainly due to the discovery and
the use of the bayonet, the French army, when it passed from the
hands of this great commander, had become an army essentially of
the modern type, and was but Uttle changed during the eighteenth
century.
The supremacy in arms of France was seen for the first time
in 1667, when Louis XIV claimed the Spanish Netherlands in right
of his wife Maria Theresa. Turenne commanded the royal forces,
reduced in a few days the great fortress of Lille, and overran the
country between the sea and the Scheldt ; but I shall not comment
on these easy conquests. The celebrated invasion of the Dutch re-
pubUc was undertaken five years afterwards, a contest in which a
single bold stroke would probably have crushed the imperilled
states, but which introduced WiUiam III on the stage of history,
and prepared the way for the great alliance. It was a new era
in war. Napoleon remarks ; the army of France and her alUed
contingents exceeded 130,000 men — a force unknown since the
days of the legions — ^and the reforms of Turenne and Louvois were
seen in the preponderance of the great arm of the infantry, in the
discipline and organised power of the regiments, and in the excel-
lence and elaboration of the arrangements for the field. Turenne,
with Gonde as second in command — the rebel prince had received
his pardon — was at the head of the mass of these forces which had
been concentrated upon the Sambre, and the columns were soon in
march on the Bhine to connect themselves with a wing under
Luxemburg and with the troops of the German allies. The
strategy of the marshal appears in his resolve to mask, and not to
besiege, Maastricht, weeks of precious time being saved by a step
which seemed rash even to the audacious Gonde ; and the fortress
having been effectually hemmed in, the French moved rapidly from
the Meuse to the Rhine. The invading forces, being now united,
advanced down the river in irresistible strength. Fortress after
fortress opened its gates, and in less than two months from the be-
ginning of the campaign, the victorious French had reached the
heart of the states, having mastered the Bhine and crossed the
Yssel, a celerity in war never previously known. By the third
week of June the hostile watch-fires were seen from the steeples of
Amsterdam; and Gonde, it is said, entreated the king to push
cavalry forward and to seize the dykes, which formed the last and
only defence of the city. The advice of Louvois, however, pre-
vented a movement which might have changed the course of
European history. Time was spent in besieging minor fortresses, in
which French garrisons were foolishly placed. The minister, in the
VOL. n. — NO. VI. T
Digitized by
Google
274 TURENNE Aprfl
mere pride of power, allowed William of Orange to redeem his
prisoners. The French were weakened at the decisive point, while
their adversaries soon increased in numbers; and in a few days
Amsterdam was surrounded, the dykes having been boldly cut by
a vast inundation which defied the enemy. Napoleon severely
condemns Turenne for sanctioning operations of this kind and
missing an opportunity of ending the war ; and, though Louis
followed the counsels of Louvois, and the authority of the king was
beyond appeal, still Turenne, we think, ought to have protested
against what he must have known to be fsdse strategy ; and this
was another of the occasions on which he failed to make the most
of success. The genius, however, of the marshal shone out con-
spicuously at the close of the campaign. The terror caused by
the invasion of the states and the stem constancy of the prince of
Orange roused the indignation and pity of Germany. Austria and
Brandenburg joined, for the first time, their armies, and two German
armies were in full march by the autumn upon the Weser and the
Bhine. Louis before this had returned to his capital, his hold on
the provinces being already lost ; and Gonde was before long com-
pelled to stand on the defensive on the verge of Alsace. Li this
position of affairs Turenne carried out a series of operations which
once more illustrate his capacity as a great leader in war. Break-
ing up from his camp near Bois-le-Duc, he crossed the Bhine and
joined his German allies, and soon reached the flank of the hostile
forces, which seemed bearing down from the Main upon Gonde.
Turenne, however, was convinced that Alsace was safe, and that
the enemies' real object was to effect their junction with William's
army by a rapid march from the Bhine to the Meuse ; and, accor-
dingly, he crossed the Bhine again and threw himself into the country
round Treves, holding strong positions in the valley of the Moselle.
The forethought of the marshal was completely justified. Gonde
was easily able to defend his province, and the Germans, having
crossed the Bhine at Mayence, foimd Turenne standing like a lion
in their path, and baffling a skilfully designed concentration of
force which would have exposed France in her turn to invasion.
Turenne had performed great deeds in this campaign, and
the failure in Holland had been chiefly due to Louis XIY and an
overbearing minister. But the issue of the contest had not been
fortunate : France had provoked Germany to rise in arms, and the
abiUty of the marshal's late movements was not evident to the
vulgar eye. The great warrior became an object of sneers and
detraction at Saint-Germain ; and dissensions, ending in an open
rupture, broke out between Louvois and Turenne which largely
reduced Turenne's influence and embittered the closing years of his
Ufe. The king, irritated and vexed with himself, acquiesced at last
in cabals and intrigues which seemed to palliate his own short-
Digitized by
Google
1887 TURENNE 276
comings ; but though he began to turn a favouring eye on Conde —
the prince was now the shining light of the court — ^he wisely retained
Turenne in command in Germany. The campaign of 1678 is not
without interest in some respects ; but it is chiefly memorable as the
first occasion on which Turenne encountered a foe, scarcely inferior
to him in strategic skill, who baffled him within this sphere of
his art. After their failure in the valley of the Moselle, the Grerman
armies had begim to diverge — the Prussians making for the West-
phalian plains, the Austrians retreating towards Franconia. Seizing
the opportunity, Turenne crossed the Rhine at once, in the depth of
winter, marched, notwithstanding the remonstrances of the king,
against the enemies, still not wholly divided, and after a series
of fine movements, in which he advanced as far as the Weser, suc-
ceeded in defeating the Prussian army, and in compelling the
Austrians, completely separated from their allies, to fall back south
of the Main. The Great Elector now sued for peace ; and recent
disasters having produced coolness between the courts of Berlin and
Yienna, the league of Germany appeared dissolved, Turenne's winter
campaign, severe as it was, being more than justified by its brilliant
results. The contest, however, was far from its close, and the later
months of this very year proved inauspicious to the renowned
marshal. The French having invaded Holland again, Spain took
the side of the imperilled states ; the emperor eagerly joined the
allies, and by August a large Austrian army was moving towards
the Bhine from the Bohemian passes. The leader of this force was
a great commander whose first essay in arms I have already
noticed, and who had proved himself to be a master of his art,
especially in the Turkish wars of the empire ; and Montecuculi, as
I have said, was to show that he was not unworthy to cope with
Turenne. At the news of the approach of the enemy, Turenne
crossed the Main and advanced to the Tauber, but Montecuculi,
having won over the prince bishop to the imperial cause, succeeded
in crossing the Main at Wiirzburg, gaining several marches upon
his adversary, and he pressed forward to the Bhine at Mayence,
giving out that he was about to invade Alsace. Turenne, deceived
by what was a mere feint, followed at a distance along the Main ;
and then Montecuculi, showing his real purpose, successfully made
one of those great movements which prove that he was a true
strategist. Embarking his army in boats on the Bhine, he descended
the river until he reached Bonn, which, besieged by a strong Dutch
force, had become the principal scene of the contest ; and, his junc-
tion being eflfected with the prince of Orange, the fortress quickly
fell under their combined efforts. Turenne, angry and baffled,
retired into Alsace.
The result of the failure of the French arms on the Bhine was
a formidable coalition against Louis XIY. He had to encoimter ah
T 2
Digitized by
Google
276 TURENNE April
all but united Germany ; Spain and the Dutch republic maintained
the war ; and England renounced the French alliance, though a small
contingent of British troops continued to serve in the French armies.
The plan for the campaign of 1674 was, in its general features, a
design of Turenne ; it reveals his genius and wisdom alike, and his
exploits in the field, completely effacing the effects of the reverse
of the year before, rank among the finest specimens of his powers.
By his advice Louis, abandoning the north, directed his arms
against Franche-Comte, while the French defended the Bhine;
and the consequence was that, before many weeks, Franche-
Comte was overrun and conquered, and that Gonde was able
to assume again a bold offensive in the Spanish Netherlands.
Turenne, meanwhile, had held the position of danger and honour,
observing Germany ; and his operations, from first to last, were those
of a consummate warrior, even if we admit Napoleon's criticism
that at one great juncture they were not quite perfect. His first
movement was to break up from Alsace, and, crossing the Bhine^
to march to the Neckar ; and he succeeded in throwing himself
between two converging parts of the German armies — a favourite
manoeuvre in which he excelled— and in defeating an Austrian force
at Sinsheim. Having been reinforced, he now watched the approach
of the enemies gathering on all sides to the Bhine ; and, in order
to make their advance difficult, he ravaged the Palatinate with piti-
less sternness — an act for which he has been severely blamed, but
fully justifiable in the opinion of that age. The armies of the
German league, ere long, had attained Mayence, and, Strassburg
having opened the way for them, they entered Alsace by the end of
September, their leader intending to press forward and to invade
France in overwhelming strength, when a Prussian contingent
should come into line. Turenne saw the danger, and did not hesi-
tate. With the energy and resolution of a great captain he attacked
while the Prussians were yet distant, though very inferior in force
to his foes; and he plucked safety from imminent peril on the
bloody and well-contested field of Ensisheim, a place not many
miles from Strassburg, and still of interest to an English traveller ;
for Marlborotigh, who served on the marshal's staff, first won the
praise of his chief on that day. Nor were the remarkable gifts of
Turenne less conspicuous during the rest of the campaign. The
arrival of the Great Elector on the scene made the aUies so superior
in numbers, that the marshal was compelled to fall back ; and he
took a position which, should the enemies try to pass the Yosges,
would menace their flank. The alarm in Paris was now so great,
that the old and despised feudal support of the monarchy — the
arriere-ban — was called out in hot haste ; and in the terror of the
moment the German hordes were seen pouring into Lorraine and
Champagne. But the attitude of Turenne imposed on his foes;
Digitized by
Google
1887 TURENNE 277
the allied chiefs let the occasion pass, and, having received news
that the French were reinforced, they timidly retreated and spread
their armies, in winter quarters, throughout Alsace. Turenne's
next movement, in its conception at least, was an inspiration of
strategic genius. To deceive the enemy he marched into Lorraine ;
covmtermarching there, he skirted the Vosges on the French side,
making the hills a screen ; and having, after great efforts and hard-
ships, attained, unperceived, the gap of Belfort, he burst in on the
astounded Germans, who, surprised and scattered, were unable to
repel the sudden advance of their dreaded antagonist. Turenne>
moving northwards and threatening Strassburg, defeated at Tiirck-
heim the Great Elector, who had hurriedly coUected a part of his
forces ; and the Germans, a beaten and bafSed host, within a few
days were across the Rhine.
Napoleon observes that only a master of war could have conceived
the project of this celebrated movement behind the Vosges. The
execution of the plan, however, the emperor contends, was not
good : instead of advancing as far as Belfort, and assailing thence
the Germans in front, Turenne ought to have crossed the movmtains
by passes near the middle of the chain, and have fallen on the allied
flank and rear ; and, in that event, the whole hostile force would
have been involved in a great disaster. Napoleon, we think, would
have made this stroke — it would have been the counterpart, on a
small scale, of his own operations before Marengo — and possibly
this is another instance in which Turenne did not make the most
of fortune ; yet the strategy of those days, it is fair to recollect,
was necessarily less decisive and bold than that witnessed in the
nineteenth century. The defeat of the Germans upon the Bhine
had weakened the league against Louis XIV ; the Dutch, jealous of
the prince of Orange, were secretly treating at Saint-Germain ; the
Great Elector was menaced by the Swedes ; Spain trembled for her
Netherland frontier ; and France was able to defy the power of a
coalition already breaking up. The emperor, however, continued the
struggle, and Montecuculi was despatched to the Bhine to cope with
Turenne, his late adversary ; bad generalship obviously having been
the cause of the reverses sustained by the German arms. Both com-
manders assumed a cautious offensive, the object of each being to
carry the war into the enemy's country around Strassburg; and
Montecuculi, after a feint on PhiUppsburg, crossed the Bhine at Spires
and menaced Alsace. Turenne, who was observing Strassburg, met
the initiative of his foe by a move which threatened his commu-
nications and even his rear ; and, having thrown a bridge across
the Bhine at Ottenheim, he marched on Wilstedt, in the valley of
the Kinzig, an avenue into the heart of Germany. Montecuculi was
thus forced to recross the Bhine ; and, moving up the river on the
German bank, he took a formidable position near Turenne's camp,
Digitized by
Google
278 TURENNE April
within reach of Strassburg and the marshal's bridge, which, being
constructed far oflf from the city, made it necessary to disseminate
the French army in order to watch and defend both points. The
German commander had now a chance, but he missed a favourable
occasion to attack. Turenne, seeing his danger, raised his bridge,
and, placing it in a spot near Strassburg, concentrated his forces in
a narrow space ; and MontecucuH, foiled in his purpose, descended
the river and encamped near Freistett, his object in this manoeuvre
being to obtain the materials of a bridge, to be sent down from
Strassburg, and thus to gain the means of passing into Alsace.
Turenne, however, barred the course of the Rhine, placing redoubts
and stockades at selected points, and completely frustrated his rival's
hopes ; and the two generals paused for some months, each carefully
watching the other's movements, and seeking for a good opportunity
to strike. The decisive step was taken at last by the marshal ; he
crossed the stream of the Bench with his army, by a ford unguarded
and perhaps unknown ; and this fine movement, which brought the
French directly upon the communications of their foes, compelled
Montecuculi at once to retreat. The imperial chief, abandoning the
Rhine, now made for the defiles and hills of Wiirtemberg; Turenne,
confident of victory at hand, pressed hard on the retiring columns ;
and, on 26 July, 1675, he had reached the little stream of the Sass-
bach, having in a long series of skilful manoeuvres proved his
superiority over his adversary, and, as he thought, brought him at
last to bay. A general battle appeared imminent ; but the great
Frenchman was not to behold a well-prepared and deserved triumph,
and a chance shot from a hostile battery brought the life and
the career of Turenne to an end. It is unnecessary to dwell on
the intense sorrow of the French soldiery for the loss of their
chief ; and the exclamation of Montecuculi when informed of the
death of his great antagonist is generally known. What the worth
of Turenne was in this campaign is best proved by the fact that,
within a few days, his army, deprived of his master hand, was in
full retreat, and barely escaped disaster. The remains of Turenne,
laid at St. Denis, among the tombs of the sovereigns of France,
torn from thence in the madness of 1793, but respected even by
Jacobin hands, have found a resting-place near those of Napoleon,
and repose vmder the dome of the Invalides.
Turenne's peculiar gift was strategy, and though Parma, Gus-
tavus, and even Guebriant were strategists of a high order, the
illustrious Frenchman in his long career developed this branch of
his noble art to a point of perfection unknown before, at least in
the annals of modem Europe. The matshal, to use an expres-
sive phrase, read the theatre of war with the eye of genius ; he
seized the true points of attack and defence and the best means
of employing his forces with a sagacity seldom displayed previously ;
Digitized by
Google
1887 TUBENNE 279
and, far-seeing as well as daring, he adapted admirably his means
to his ends, and usually executed with consummate skill a well-laid,
and often an original, plan. The celerity and caution of his strategy
were its distinctive and most excellent features ; he played a bold
and brilliant but a sure game, and the result was that, though
sometimes defeated, he was usually a winner at the close of a cam-
paign. As for special illustrations of his strategic powers, they are
conspicuous in his fine march on the Danube and the Lech in 1646,
in which, gaining an interior line, he out-manoeuvred the bewildered
archduke ; in his grand plan for the invasion of Holland, particu-
larly in the masking of Maastricht ; in his admirable movement
behind the Yosges in the memorable struggle of 1674 ; and in what
may be called a discovery in the art, that in war you should rather
march than besiege, and that strong places may be compelled to
fall by well-designed operations in the field. Turenne, too, has
been surpassed only by Napoleon in two of the most striking in-
stances of what strategic skill can accompUsh — and war in the
seventeenth century, it must be borne in mind, was in all respects
slower than it is in our own — in rapid, sudden, and well-aimed
attacks on the communications and rear of an enemy, and in inter-
posing between hostile masses, and reaching and beating them in
(detail. In addition, however, to strategic genius, Turenne possessed
gifts of insight and will which belong only to great warriors. His
constancy and firmness were beyond praise ; and those qualities
which. Napoleon remarks, are the most essential in a general, were
shown by many fine and well-known examples. His tenacity in
retaining his hold on Paris probably saved the throne in 1652 ; his
imposing attitude in 1658-6, after serious checks, made his enemy
pause, and changed the event of two campaigns; his attack at
Ensisheim, which perhaps gave a new turn to the whole course of
the war, shows extraordinary force of character ; and it may be said
of him, as it was said of Hannibal, that he was never more for-
midable than after defeat. Though Turenne, moreover, has been
excelled in the management of troops in actual battle, he has seldom
been equalled in the higher gift of making the dispositions before
engaging which tend ultimately to assure success ; and his stand
near Gien, on the Loire, against Gonde, his night march to relieve
Arras, and his arrangements before his victory of the Downs, are
masterpieces of true military skill.
I have spoken of the administrative powers of Turenne, and
shall only repeat that the transformation which made the armies of
Louis XIY by many degrees the best in Europe was largely due to
his creative genius. A word as to the warrior in his camp, to his
relations with his lieutenants and ojfficers, and to the esteem in
which he was held by his troops. Like most great commanders,
Turenne gave special attention to the wants of his men ; his corre-
Digitized by
Google
280 TURENNE April
spondence shows with what diligent care he provided for them in
the bivouac and in the field ; and though his marches severely tasked
their energies, he was, to a proverb, chary of their blood, differing
widely in this from the prodigal Conde. Many anecdotes in the
memoirs of the day attest his kindliness to his subordinates ; and
it was a distinctive mark of his lofty character that, vmlike Napoleon
in this respect, he never laid to their charge shortcomings of his
own. As for his soldiers, his solid and grave qualities did not
excite the passionate feelings which Cond6, and even Villars,
inspired; but their confidence in his genius was absolute, his
authority over them was complete, and he moulded their natures
to the type of his own, and made them energetic, enduring, and
bold. * Give us his charger to lead us ! ' — their angry cry when
after his death they fell into the hands of timid, divided, and igno-
rant chiefs — shows what his army thought of Turenne ; nor less so
did one of the phrases of the camp — * Our father knows where to
go ; we have but to follow.'
On the other hand it may be admitted that Turenne was
scarcely a tactician of the first order ; he had not the intuition of
Gonde on the field, or the skill of the prince in snatching victory,
and, for a general of his transcendent merits, he suffered more than
a fair share of defeats. Consummate strategist, too, as he was, his
circumspect and sedate nature was somewhat wanting in the fiery
impulse which occasionally is a priceless quality; and, though a
plausible case may be made for him, he failed, in at least three
signal instances, in making the most of the gifts of fortune and in
venturing on the decisive movements which would have led to com-
plete success. Turenne, however, is one of the first of warriors,
and, taken altogether, is, I think, the ablest and most perfect chief
of the seventeenth century. One of the most distinctive marks of
his powers is that, while tactics made rapid progress, no strategist
appeared who could compare with him for more than a century
after his death ; in this province he was superior to Marlborough,
Eugene, and Frederick the Great, and strategy, as a science, did
not advance until Napoleon, availing himself of conditions of war-
fare before unperceived, and bringing to the task transcendent
genius, created a new era in the history of war.
William O'Connor Morbis.
Digitized by
Google
1887 281
The History of 1852-60, and Grevilles
latest yournals
THE third and closing portion of the journals of Mr. Greville
brings the number of these volumes up to eight J The history
of our own, and probably still more of coming times, seems menaced
by the danger of being crushed beneath the weight and mass of its
6wn materials. Mr. Greville's work supplies but an infinitesimal
portion of the matter which will be indispensably required in the
final record even of the merely political aspects of his time. Yet it
is upon the whole a valuable contribution towards that final record ;
and this is all that can be asked from those menwires pour servir
among which it holds an honourable place.
Mr. Greville's liberalism was aristocratic and somewhat con-
tracted, but genuine, upright, and void of the narrower prejudices
to which birth, the habits of a man of the world, and the enjoy-
ment (together with other public income) of a lucrative sinecure in
Jamaica might have inclined him. As he showed in his earUer Ufe
by an excellent work on Ireland, he was resolutely opposed to the
baleful system of religious ascendency, and he gave a firm adhesion
to free trade. He agreed with the tories of the school of Feel in
his respect for European right and his attachment to a policy of
peace. He viewed foreign poUtics in the tranquil spirit of Lord
Aberdeen, rather than with the Uvelier emotions of Lord Falmerston
and Lord Bussell. Neither did he share the sympathy with Uberty
abroad which Mr. Canning strove to impart within the precinct of
toryism, and which, with a possible qualification as to the subject
races of Turkey, Lord Palmerston imbibed without dilution from
that source. He did not embrace the broad principle of trust in the
people which characterised Lord Althorp and Lord Bussell. Lideed,
in 1857, he seems to desire remedies ' for the evils and dangers in-
cident to our corrupted population,' ^ and the ' imiversal persuasion
of the magnitude and imminence of the danger.' Everywhere,
* The QrevUle Memoirs (Third Part). A Joomal of the Beign of Queen Victoria
from 1852 to 1860. By the late Charles C. F. Greville, Esq., Clerk of the Coonoil.
d vols. London : Longmans <fe Co., 1887.
* Journals^ ii. 72, 78.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
282 THE HISTORY OF 1852-60, AND April
accordingly, we find him adverse to the schemes for extension of
the franchise, which timidly peeped above the ground at intervals
from 1850 to 1860, and for which the pubUc mind had not yet
become resolutely eager, while that jpurious public mind, which
forms itself from day to day in immediate proximity to the scene of
action, and which always gets the first turn, was keenly opposed to
them.
But the opinions of Mr. Greville were less interesting than the
frame of his mind, which was Uberal and equitable. He was a
hater of cant in every form, and he had a genuine love of justice,
though with a less acute perception of its claims as between rulers
and their subjects than as between man and man. His criticisms
upon persons, most of all perhaps on Lord Palmerston, and next to
him Lord Bussell, are extremely free; still, they are without guile
or malice. The merits and the defects of his journals are, indeed,
closely associated. On the one hand he was always open to reason^
and was eminently exempt from the limitations of the parti pris.
He would recognise public merit wherever he found it, regardless of
the strict consistency of his own appreciations. On the other hand
his habit was, as the conversations of the day suggested, and as
gout permitted, to resume at irregular intervals the business of his
journal, and, with the utmost freedom of expression, fairly to empty
out his mind on each subject as it came up. Hence a complexion
of real freshness overspreads his writings, and the work is eminently
readable. It neither loses continuity (in each of its morsels) by
negligence, nor is it cramped by reserve. But though Mr. Greville
is an acute, he is rarely an original, observer of events, and the staple
of the journals is a record of impressions derived from his varying
informants, whose views as well as their facts he had some predis-
position to accept without suspicion. So that, on the whole, the
variations, nay discrepancies, in his accounts and estimates, partly
of facts but principally of men, are glaring and incessant. In one
page his geese are all swans ; but in the next, or next but one, his
swans are all geese. Stimulated by lively curiosity, he made excel-
lent use of excellent opportunities, but he was without doubt more
receptive than either original or retentive. The book, therefore, is
very dangerous to dip into, but it repays continuous perusal. And
we have all along to bear in mind that these comments, noted on
the instant, have never been subject to a revision, which, it is fair
to assume, would have adjusted more exactly the balance of his
work. Few are there among us who could bear to be judged by our
first thoughts even so well as Mr. Greville.
This extreme range of variation in estimates, and a tendency to
predictions which very rarely indeed are verified, may, perhaps, be
marked as the salient defects of the author's manner. On the other
hand, there can be no doubt as to his most conspicuous gift. It is
Digitized by
Google
1887 GREVILLE'S LATEST JOURNALS 288
a power of drawing characters with ease, with Ufe, with a fidness
never diffuse, and with a fairness hardly ever at fault, and sometimes
conspicuous : witness the case of Lord George Bentinck (in a pre-
ceding series), where there was a strong temptation to be less than
fair. The time may perhaps come when interest in the general
contents of the eight volumes may languish, if not pass away ; but
it might even then remain a question whether the characters of
noteworthy persons which they contain might not deserve to be
extracted and separately published.
The work as a whole should, I think, leave the impression on a
reader's mind that he has to deal with a sound reasoner, a good
writer, and an upright man ; a man inwardly better than his posi-
tion in the world and on the turf; a man who, if circumstances less
easy and luxurious had improved his chances of a masculine life,
might not improbably have turned to the profession of poUtics, and
left some mark on the course of public affairs.
The principal events of the eight years comprised within these
volumes are as follows : The death and obsequies of protection
in 1852; the controversy with Bussia, and the Crimean war,
terminating with the peace of Paris in 1856 ; the second Chinese
or lorcha war ; the Indian mutiny ; the revival and virtual settle-
ment of the great Italian question; and the group of questions
which were compressed within the year 1860, and which made it
one of the most perplexed and critical of our recent parliamentary
history. These were, the French treaty ; the annexations of Savoy
and Nice ; the scheme of fortifications ; the abortion of parliamen-
tary reform ; and the constitutional conflict raised between the two
houses of parliament by the rejection in the house of lords of
the bill for the repeal of the excise duty upon paper. I will offer
remarks, and refer to the pages of Mr. Greville, upon these subjects
severally.
The legislative triumph of free trade in 1846 had been due to
the progress of enlightened opinion, to the patriotism and courage
of Sir Robert Peel, and to the incidental urgency of the prospects
of food supply in the autumn of 1845. But the opposing doctrine,
though scotched, was not killed, and through the following years
protection was the main hinge on which turned the action of our
parliamentary government. A Kentish candidate denounced some
individual, who had rashly broached the notion that there might be
such a person as a conservative free-trader, and replied that ' you
might as well talk of a protestant-catholic' The avowed protec-
tionists of the parliament of 1847-52 were about 270, a larger
number than the parliamentary tories from 1880 to 1886. Defeat
had not extinguished hope. Lord Derby, when endeavouring to
form a cabinet in 1851, contemplated the proposal of a fixed duty
upon com. How then was it that defeat was converted into de-
Digitized by
Google
284 THE HISTORY OF 1852-60, AND April
struction ? It was the triumph of the party that was the destruc-
tion of the cause. Its accession to o£Bce in 1852 entailed the death
of its resistance to free trade, as its accession to office in 1866 was
the death of its resistance to an extension of the franchise. It is
not, I think, to be denied that this conversion of a simple victory
into a final conquest was owing to the death of Sir Bobert Peel.
So long as he lived, he deemed it of the utmost importance to avert
the formation of a protectionist ministry. It was his firm con-
viction, after as well as before the death of Lord George Bentinck,
that such a ministry would make great efforts to re-establish protec-
tion, and that these efforts, though they would not convert, yet
would convulse, the country. Hence, although he had no coalition,
or (I believe) understanding, with Lord Bussell, he rendered that
minister effective support. In the end of the session of 1860 the
great statesman died. On the first occasion after the recess, the
ministry resigned ; and it was only the failure of others to form
a government in February 1851, and the by-play of the Eccle-
siastical Titles Bill, which occupied that session, and thus by
a collateral action postponed until 1852 the accession of a tory
ministry. From the moment of that accession, protection, instead
of a dividing hne for the nation, became a mere memory of the
past. Brought face to face with the responsibilities of power, the
ministers found they could not give even a chance to a system,
which for six years they had proclaimed to be both indispensable
and all-important. It is not necessary to believe they had been
insincere. But at least they had been inconsiderate. The nation
paid the price, in six wasted years of legislative life. This waste
was attended with no compensation whatever; unless it were a
compensation that it finally broke up the conservative party, which
the skill and character of Sir Bobert Peel had elevated, in point
both of principle and practice, to a pitch probably the highest
which it is capable of attaining. But it is right to observe that
although the people, or the constituency, have to supply the motive
force by means of which such a controversy, alike fierce and futile,
was maintained, the responsibility Ues with those who ought to
guide them.
Mr. Greville states, under date of 22 Oct.,' that the Peelites
were indisposed to join the whigs, under the delusive belief that
they could form a government of their own. I can say very posi-
tively that, with the single exception of the duke of Newcastle, none
of those with whom I was associated had toy such belief. They
knew that dichotomy, and not trichotomy, was for our times the law
of the nation's political life. Moreover, the liberal party was within
itself divided. The sympathies of Peelites, in regard to economy
and to peace, lay, like those of their leader, in the direction of one
* Journals, u S»
Digitized by
Google
1887 GREVILLE'S LATEST JOURNALS 285
of the liberal wings, rather than of the main body. They were also
in some cases divided between their hberal opinions and their con-
servative traditions and associations. For many a man, to leave
the party in which he was broaght up is like the stroke of a sword
dividing bone and marrow. But the intermediate position is
essentially a false position, and. nothing can long disguise its false-
ness. Lady Clanricarde was credited with having wittily said that
she wished the Feelites would not continually put themselves up to
auction, and then buy themselves in. I remember having frankly
stated for myself to Lord Derby that we were a public nuisance. Such
a case is among the unavoidable incidents of parliamentary life;
but while rapid migrations from camp to camp may be less credit-
able, slow ones not only are more painful, but are attended with
protracted public iuconvenience. The sum of power to render ser-
vice to the state is diminished, not increased, by an intermediate
position. Its holders can do little or nothing by counsel, for they are
in no man's cabinet. The benefits they confer are Ughtly esteemed ;
but the blows they inflict are more keenly resented than if they
came from avowed foes, as Zeus tells Here in the ^ Iliad ' that he is
less exasperated by her fractious ways, because she is always at
them.*
The drama then played out is a parable of many other dramas.
The facts are facts of the past, but the lessons are of the present
and of the future. It entails a heavy responsibility to embark
political parties in controversies certain to end in defeat, where
there is a sUent sense of what is coming, a latent intention to accept
defeat, and where the postponement of the final issue means only
the enhancement of the price to be paid at the close.
Mr. Oreville more than once predicts the continuance in ofSice
of the first Derby government. Though a moiety of the house
were disposed to give the ministers a short shrift, they were allowed
to transact the necessary business of the session. The meeting of
the new parliament was, with questionable propriety, postponed by
them so long as until 11 Nov. There was no amendment to the
address. Mr. Villiers, on behalf of the liberal party generally,
made a motion later in the month, which approved in terms the
repeal of the corn laws, and which therefore could not be accepted
by the government. But the PeeUtes, who were still a contingent
of more than forty votes, thought it right that ministers should
have an opportunity of proposing their plans. They were strong
enough to turn the scale. After several meetings of the friends
of Lord Aberdeen at his house, Mr. Sidney Herbert and I had
two interviews with Lord Palmerston on 21 Nov., and suggested
* For Jano, she oflFends him not, nor vexes him so much.
For *ti8 her use to cross his will, her impudence is such.
Chapman's Homer's lUad, viiL 368.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
286 THE HISTORY OF 1852-60, AND AprQ
to him an amendment which he moved, and which, for the
moment, saved the administration. It was, however, defeated in
December on the merits of its budget, and immediately resigned.
Peelism was absorbed in the succeeding cabinet, and its adherents
never again acted as a party. But, as an important section of the
Aberdeen ministry, they shared in full the responsibility of the
Crimean war.
That war has surely been the subject, in a remarkable degree,
both of popular misapprehensions and of the vicissitudes of public
feeling. Hailed, and prosecuted, with a profovmd and general en-
thusiasm when it arrived, and relinquished with no small regret
when the peace was concluded, it is now usually mentioned with
contemptuous disapproval. It is also assumed as notorious that
the ship of state was not steered, but simply drifted, into it ; that
the cabinet of the day was in continual conflict within itself at the
various stages of the negotiation ; and that, if it had adopted a
bolder course at an earlier stage, the emperor Nicholas would
have succumbed. Before touching on the real character of the
war, I will refer to these three assertions. The first of them is un-
true, the second ludicrous, the third entirely speculative, and highly
improbable.
I take first the last named of these. Arbitrary prediction is
proverbially a safe weapon for the unscrupulous controversialist.
But it is not the only one. He deals as largely and even more
safely with the preterpluperfect potential. Even more safely ; for
the prediction will at some time be tested by events, the conditional
past never can. It is easy to assert that by earlier action Lord
North might have averted the American and Mr. Pitt the revolu-
tionary war, or that the duke of Wellington, by a bold display of
military force, might have averted Boman catholic emancipation.
Nor can any of these assertions be strictly confuted by argument,
though they may be rejected by common sense. It is only that same
faculty, to which we can have recourse on the present occasion.
It was a dispute on the holy places at Jerusalem which grew by
degrees into the Crimean war. In the first stages of that dispute,
the claims made by Bussia were deemed reasonable. The case
turned against her at a later stage, when she supported an un-
reasonable demand by the military occupation of the Danubian
principalities. This is the point chosen by the objector for his
attack. Had we made this occupation a casus beUi^ the emperor
would have receded and peace would have been maintained. Mr.
Greville informs us that such a proposal was made by Lord
Palmerston ; who, however, did not press it, but * seems to have
given way with a good grace.' *
Mr. Evelyn Ashley, in his * Life of Lord Palmerston,' has supplied
* JoumaUt i. 71.
Digitized by
Google
1887 GREVILLE'S LATEST JOURNALS 287
documentary evidence which explains with perfect clearness the
course which Lord Palmerston pursued. The Pruth was crossed on
2 July, 1858. On the 4th, Lord Palmerston recommended in a
letter to Lord Aberdeen that the French and EngUsh squadrons
should in consequence be sent * up to the Bosphorus.' Lord Aberdeen
did not concur. On the 6th, as I learn from my own journals, there
was a cabinet ; and on the 7th, Lord Palmerston addressed a letter
to Lord John Eussell, in which he states that he * tried again * to
persuade the cabinet to send up the squadrons. As there had been
no cabinet but this one, * again * must have reference to the effort
he had made with Lord Aberdeen. The recollection of the sur-
viving members of the administration of that day is that the men-
tion of the subject in the cabinet was sUght, and that the suggestion
of Lord Palmerston was unsupported. It appears from the * Life'
that on 12 July he circulated among his colleagues a paper in sup-
port of the suggestion. But on the 14th Lord Aberdeen made
representations in reply which induced Lord Palmerston himself to
change his mind ; and he closes the whole incident by writing to
Lord Aberdeen to * admit * that it would be * better ' not to interrupt
the negotiations then in progress by a measure such as he had
suggested.® Thus, then, the cabinet were eventually vmanimous on
the subject with respect to which for a time, but for a time only, he
differed from them. Can it be seriously doubted that, on the case
as it stood before them, they were right ? >
We were at the time acting with all the other great powers
against Bussia. The project was that, abandoning the strong
ground afforded by their union, we should act alone; for there
was not the faintest sign that we should have had a companion in
BO daring a course. When Bussia eventually went to war, it was
in defiance of England and France, united by a solemn convention,
and with Austria in the background as a contingent enemy. What
likelihood was there that he would have receded before our single-
handed menace? What would have been our position in an
offensive war, had he persevered ? We had, at a later date, some
experience on the Danish question of this single-handed threatening
in continental affairs. Lord Palmerston was bold enough to state,
at the close of the session of 1868, that Denmark, if she were
attacked, would not stand alone. But, some six months after,
Denmark was attacked, and she did stand alone. Lord Lansdowne
and Lord Bussell were not advocates of peace at any price ; yet
they were no more prepared than their colleagues for what they
all deemed a dangerous adventure.
The assertion that England, under the guidance of the Aber-
deen cabinet, drifted into the war, supplies a curious example of
the manner in which a plausible untruth, when it has once taken
• Ashley, Life of Lord PaimersUmy ii. 81-5.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
288 THE HISTORY OF 1852-60, AND Aprfl
root, defies eradication. It is said that the words were used by
Lord Clarendon. And they were so. But how ? When the long and
intricate negotiations were closed by a process of exhaustion, but
in the brief interval before any actual declaration of hostilities, Lord
Lyndhurst inquired in the house of lords what was our position.
The time of war had not come, but the time of measures for avert-
ing it had expired ; and Lord Clarendon not less expressively than
truly said that, while the intermediate days were gliding by, we
were drifting into war. This is on record, has been publicly ex-
plained, and is beyond dispute. But the fable is brazen-fronted,
and, like pope Joan, still holds its place. Mr. Greville, himself a
firm and consistent adversary to the war, refers more than once to
the official correspondence, as it was presented to parliament, and
impartially records the public judgment. I quote part of a passage
dated immediately before the outbreak :
The publication of the blue books has relieved the government from
a vast amount of prejudice and suspicion. The pubHc judgment of their
management of the Eastern question is generally very favourable ; and
impartial people applaud their persevering efforts to avert war, and are
satisfied that everything was done that the national honour or dignity
required.^
I have said that the first assertion, which referred to divisions
in the cabinet, was untrue. But this requires some explanation.
The Aberdeen cabinet, composed almost entirely of experienced
men, was in no way remarkable for contentious discussions. "Whigs
were distinct in poUtical position from PeeUtes, Lord BusseU
from Lord Palmerston, and Sir W. Molesworth, the single radical
minister, from all. But no traces of these distinctions were dis-
coverable at the meetings of the cabinet, and I have witnessed
much more of sharp or warm argument in almost every other of
the seven cabinets to which I have had the honour to belong. This
general description appUes in full strictness to the course of the
negotiations which ended in the war. And I strongly incline to
believe that, had it not been broken up by the administrative mis-
carriages of the war, the cabinet of Lord Aberdeen had nothing
extraordinary to apprehend in the way of political danger, either
on home or foreign affairs, and bade fair to take its place among
the more long-lived of our successive governments.
But, although this is exactly true of the cabinet as a whole,
Mr. Greville's book unquestionably shows that it is less true of
those among its members who, from their positions, were in more
frequent contact than the ministers generally with the foreign
office. It is the standing duty of the foreign minister of this
country to keep himself in a contact with the head of the government
which should always be close, but which varies with the weight*
' Journals, L 135,
Digitized by
Google
1887 GREVILLE'S LATEST JOURNALS 289
delicacy, and urgency of affairs. In a case snch as that before us,
and with a minister so full of tact, and so just in his appreciations,
as Lord Clarendon; it could not be less than constant. But it
was also necessary that he should communicate largely with Lord
Bussell, as the leader of the government in the House of Commons ;
and it was not less natural and prudent that he should keep himself
at aU times aware of the views entertained by Lord Palmerston,
whose long and active career in the foreign office had given him
great weight and authority in its affairs. It implied no disparage-
ment to the cabinet, a machine incapable of being worked by any-
thing like daily, sometimes hourly, consultation, if Lord Clarendon
thus became the centre of a distinct set of current communications,
the upshot only of which would become known, on the more impor-
tant occasions, to the ministers at large, especially to those among
them charged with the most laborious departments. He communi-
cated rather freely with Mr. Oreville, as a friend on whom he could
rely. He plainly became cognisant of a certain degree of discrepancy,
not so much in opinions as in mental habits, between his immediate
coadjutors, especially Lord Aberdeen and Lord Palmerston. He
conveyed his experiences to Mr. Greville with a liveliness and facility
of language, in which no man excelled him. Mr. Oreville passed
them on with equal freshness ; and the public has now before it a
picture drawn in colours which without doubt represent truly the
impression of the moment, but which would probably have been
softened and toned down, together with a multitude of the personal
comments, had these joumalB ever been deliberately revised by
their author with a view to publicity.
Lord Aberdeen, indeed, with the self-sacrificing frankness which
formed the basis of his most genuine and engaging character,
passed a subsequent condemnation on himself for having become a
party to the war. Many of his friends believed this censure to be
unfounded, to be a rare and noble error. Whether it were so or
not, I have never learned that any of his friends, or of his col-
leagues, shared either in the confession, or in the repentance on
which it was based. And this brings me to the main question,
namely, whether the Crimean war labours justly under the general
disrepute which appears to have befallen it.
And here I must begin with the inconvenient admission, that
those who at the time approved the war, approved it on very dif-
ferent grovmds. In the minds of some, it was an Arthurian
enterprise, the general defence of the weak against the strong.
With a few distinguished men, it was closely related to a belief that
Turkey was charged with restorative energies which, if only time
were obtained by warding off the foe, would secure for her an
independent and deserved position in the European civilisation.
With others, who were less sanguine, it was expedient to uphold a
VOL. n. — NO. VI. u
Digitized by
Google
290 THE HISTORY OF 1852-60, AND AprU
tottering fabric, lest upon its fall there should ensue throughout the
£ast one universal ruin and confusion. Many thought thai the
power of Bussia was exorbitant, and was dangerous to Europe or
to England, and that it was necessary and possible to feU this
Goliath with a deadly blow. The last-named consideration, in the
shape of sentiment rather than of reason, seems to have been that
which most captivated the public imagination ; and Mr. Gobden in
vain pointed out that, if Bussia was dangerous, she was dangerous
first and most of all to Austria and to Germany, and that the affair of
repressing her was neither primarily nor mainly the affair of the
Western powers. It was feeling, and not argument, that raised the
Crimean war into popularity. It is, as I think, feeling, and not argu-
ment, that has plunged it into the abyss of odium. The experiment^
so far as Turkey is concerned, has not succeeded, and its iU-success
is visited upon the policy which obtained for it a trial.
None of the motives which I have recited as supposed to justify
the war will, I think, be found to form the tissue of the correspon-
dence. It proceeded, as I conceive, upon a more just and noble
idea expressed by Lord Bussell when, on the outbreidi of hostilities,
he denounced the emperor Nicholas as ^ the wanton disturber of the
peace of Europe.' We were not the merely self-elected champions of
that European peace. We, the British nation, were one member
of the great standing confederacy of its powers. Of its chief powers
only, I admit, but of its chief powers acting in the general interest
of the smaller powers, as well as of themselves ; nay, mainly in the
interest of the smaller powers, if a distinction is to be drawn,
because it is they who are the favourite and easy prey of the
aggressor and the spoiler ; acting too by a general consent, which
amounts to moral delegation, in a case where the complexity and
eonstant shifting of the matters to be dealt with absolutely require
that they be left in the hands of a very few. When, at a certain
period in 1858, France had ceased to be a party in the controversy
of the holy places, and the question came to lie between Bussia and
Turkey, this confederacy was acting against one of its own recalci-
trant members, and striving to bring it back within the limits of
the general order. The opposite contention can only be that this
effort was wrong ai» initio ^ and that Bussia ought to have been
allowed to work its will upon Turkey as an outlawed state. Was
such a doctrine tenable ?
At that period two great authorities, namely, Lord Palmerston and
Lord Stratford de Bedcliffe, believed prospectively in the regeneration
of Turkey. They have not been supported by our later experience*
But their belief was not without some warrant or excuse. Mahmoud
had been, at a recent date, a reforming sovereign ; though it is now
fairly open to dispute whether the new Turkish system is better
than the old. Moreover, the energetic will of Lord Stratford had
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 GREVILLE'S LATEST JOURNALS 291
proved effectual in bringmg about at Oonstantinople some really
beneficial changes. Even now we see how, quite apart from the
action or responsibility of Turkey, some of the gravest dangers to
European peace are smouldering, amidst populations essentially
peaceful, breath the surface of the Balkan peninsula. It is surely
hard to say that the great powers, acting as a body, had no concern
with the peace of Europe generally ; or to say that that concern
stopped short of the Balkan peninsula, that is to say, of the Turkish
empire. And, imless by asserting one of these two propositions, it
seems impossible to assail in principle those prolonged and im-
portant stages of the negotiations of 1858, in which Austria, England,
France, and Prussia were with one voice pressing upon Russia the
counsels of moderation and of peace.
In suggesting it as a defence for the poUcy of 1868 that it was
a European protest against the wrong-doing of a single state, I do
not adopt a tone merely apologetic, but am prepared to argue that
this policy represented an advance in civilisation, and a method of
action favourable in itself to peace. To appreciate this argument,
we must go back to the Europe that then was. Although, since
that period, an Italy and a Germany have been effectively constituted,
yet some ground has been lost as well as gained. There was then
no pitting of the great states one against another such as there is
at the present day ; and the pest of militarism, one of the greatest
that afiUcts humanity, had not attained anything like its now por«
teutons and ever-increasing development, to which it is difficult to
see a limit other than the satiety and the exhaustion which war
at the last may produce, or a lapse of continental states into general
bankruptcy. Since the vision of a universal ruler, which played upon
the mind of Dante, disappeared, the law of nations has grown up ;
and although indeterminate in its outline, it is acknowledged to be
on the whole a check upon wrong, and a blessing to mankind. But
the opinion which supports it is a diluted, a disembodied, opinion.
It has no executory power at its back. It seems impossible in our
day to supply one, by means of a formal confederation among states
for the purpose. But the history of .the century had shown that
there might be combinations for good, as well as for evil, formed pro
Mc vice among the powers. By such a combination, though it was
only partial, Greece was restored from slavery to freedom; and
Belgium obtained her emancipation from the incorporating union
which the congress of Vienna, with its utter scepticism as to prin-
ciples, and its unbounded faith in material means, had devised for
her. In neither of these instances, however, was any one of the
great powers worse than a neutral, with malveiUance. In 1868 the
offence came from one among themselves, and the design was that
the others should act as a European constabulary against the
transgressor. Had the four powers, which jointly conducted the
V 2
Digitized by
Qoo^^
292 THE HISTORY OF 1852-60, AND April
argument against Bussia, been equally at one in their sense of the
ulterior obligation which such arguments entail, it appears almost
a certainty that Bussia would have given way to their united
authority.
But when instability of purpose or dynastic sympathies induced
the king of Prussia, though he had put his hand to the plough with
the rest, to turn back and to desert them in their certainly arduous
undertaking, the force of the combination was essentially crippled.
With a friendly Prussia on his frontier, the emperor Nicholas was
free to direct his main attack against Austria ; and it was an opinion
held by men of weight that, before she could be succoured by an
invasion of Bussia from the west, the armies of that power might
find their way to the gates of Vienna. On this ground. Lord
Aberdeen always declined to complain of Austria for not joining in
the war, after she had not only supported, but devised and prompted,
the final summons to the czar which was its immediate cause. So
it came about that, when the moment of action had arrived, Engird
and France stood alone upon the field. They agreed to sustain in
arms what they had urged in argument ; and they agreed also to
clear their moral position by a reciprocal engagement that neither
would seek a selfish benefit from the war. Apart from a question which
we cannot fathom, as to the personal motives of the French emperor,
the war may claim this rare eulogium ; it was an unselfish war.
Is it unreasonable to hold that the recession of the western powers,
at the supreme moment, might have failed to secure peace in the
East, and would have struck a blow at the principle that there are
cases of unwritten law, in which unquestioned right and sufficient
might may warrantably take up arms for the putting down of wrong?
But was the right unquestioned ? Ought we to have persisted in
our advocacy on behalf of Turkey, when Bussia had accepted, and
Turkey had refused, the Vienna note, presented in the autumn of
1868, by the European powers, as a fair adjustinent of the question
in dispute? Did not the acceptance of that note by Bussia consti-
tute a moral covenant between her and them? And after that
acceptance, were they not bound either to enforce the instru-
ment upon the sultan, or to leave him to take the consequences of
refusing it ?
The best answer to this question is perhaps to be found in the
certain fact, that the lapse of the Vienna note did not bring about
the war. The communications were continued through the re-
mainder of the year. Towards its close, Lord Stratford de Bed-
cliffe suggested to his government a plcui of accommodation, to which
he had been able to secure the assent of Turkey. It appeared to
the ministers to possess every advantage that had been offered by
the Vienna note, and to be, for their preventive purposes, identical
with it. When it was laid before the czar, it was at least entertained
Digitized by
Google
1887 GREVILLE'S LATEST JOURNALS 293
by hinii and it does not appear to have been encountered by specific
objections. There was considerable time taken, and there was also
a mission of count Orloff to Vienna, which, though Lord Clarendon ®
had his suspicions about it, was regarded by the Austrian am*
bassador, and according to my recollection by the ministers of this
country generally, as a prelude to acceptance. But eventually the
emperor repelled the pacific overture, and it was this repulsion
which brought the negotiations to a final close.
I shall not dwell on the incidents of the Crimean war beyond
the compass of a few lines. To England, at the outset, accrued a
large share of the mihtary glory, but a small one towards the close.
Indeed, the defence of Sebastopol for eleven months may perhaps
be deemed a more brilliant feat of arms than the attack and capture.
The grievous sufferings of our army in the winter of 1854, from
deficiencies of organisation and supply, naturally raised impatience
at home; and the house of commons ordered an inquiry by a
conunittee, which laid the blame upon the ministry of Lord
Aberdeen. Meantime, the government of Lord Palmerston had
ordered an inquiry by commissioners on the spot, who laid the
blame upon the military authorities of the army. A board of
general officers then sat at Chelsea, and laid the blame on the com-
missariat. Finally, Mr. Boebuck moved in the House of Commons
to proceed upon the report of its committee: but the House refused.
The transaction, as a whole, was discreditable to parliamentary
government. But the interest of a war concentrates itself on the
main issue. The emperor of Bussia, after his defeats at Alma and
Inkermann, declared himself willing to concede the four points,
which had been the cause of war. But the allies were now deter-
mined on the destruction of Sebastopol, soon after which event
hostilities were brought to a close. Can it in justice be denied
that, if the main objects of the war were the chastisement of
Bussia, and an interval of peace for Turkey, with a fair trial of her
capacity to reform her institutions, those objects were attained?
This may remain true although that precious term of twenty tran-
quil years is now known to have been barren of results, and no such
experiment either ought, or is likely, to be repeated. My belief is that,
as compared with most wars, the war of 1854-6 will hold in history
no dishonourable place. For its policy must be regarded h parte
ante, although the inevitable faUibility of human judgments may be
once again illustrated, in an important particular, by its results.
It must, however, be confessed that the Crimean war had impor-
tant consequences, which have their weight apart from its incidents
and its merits. Mr. Greville well observes, that the peace of Paris,
when it arrived, was accepted but not loved. The dogs of war had
been let loose, and had had a meal, but not a satisfying meal. The
• Jonmalit i. 181.
Digitized by
Google
294 THE HISTORY OF 1852-60, AND AprU
government of Lord Palmerston exhibited a prudent self-denial.
British opinion would have supported a continuance of the war, but
it must have been a continuance either single-handed, or with the
sole, and necessarily slender, assistance of Sardinia. In France,
where the quarrel had from the first been one of the emperor rather
than the nation, the emperor, as well as the nation, was heartily
tired and would no more of it. But it had stirred British emotion
from its depths, and such a cauldron cannot be set boiling without
results.
In the first place, it is in the nature of such an alliance, when
carried to the height of close military partnership, to put a daily and
hourly strain on the relations between the respective countries. It
is in the nature of a marriage, but of a marriage not due to love,
or congeniaUty, or even far-reaching calculation, but simply to
occasion. The perpetual openings for diflference in council upon
measures to be taken, the different estimates of the shares severally
due either hi successes or defeats, want of clear accord as to ends
even where means are agreed on, the cropping out of national pecu-
liarities, even the mere difference of language, which so much
hinders sympathy, are in their various degrees sources of danger.
It is well known that in the local measures connected with the
execution of the treaty sharp differences arose ; and it is not alto-
gether improbable that the aUiance, by entailing an unseen but
constant tension, prepared the way for that new condition of
European poUtics, under which the accord of England and France,
operative with certain exceptions since 1830, ceased to be an
element of weight and power in the contingencies of continental
controversy.
Such an effect of the alliance may be matter of dispute. It is,
I think, an assertion less open to controversy that, from the time
of the Crimean war, the temper of the British public became more
susceptible, both of offence and of panic ; that the limitation of public
charge, which had been so energetically prosecuted for a quarter of
a century, from that time gradually lost its hold upon a nation
familiarised with great outlays, and not yet exhausted by them ; and
that we simultaneously passed into a period of comparative apathy
with regard to the work of legislative progress at home. The momentum
imparted by the first reform act had died away; the increase of
wealth had slackened the appetite for improvement, for with the
wealthy it is always well ; excitement increased, but it was quarrel-
some or alarmed excitement, while tranquil progress languished;
and the rise, so to speak, in the national temperament co-operated
with other causes in leading us towards a state of things, in which
the intolerable amount of parliamentary arrears has become a
bye-word.
I shall touch very lightly and briefly on events which happened
Digitized by
Google
1887 GREVILLE'S LATEST JOURNALS 296
between the Crimean war and the year 1860. The second war with
China in 1867 forms one of an unhappy series, on which we may
thankfolly remember that it has long since reached its close. In
the house of commons, a condemnation of Sir John Bowring's
proceedings was supported from every quarter except that of the
government, and carried by a majority of nineteen. But, on a dis-
solution, the constituency not unnaturally rallied to the war-cry,
and the supporters of Lord Palmerston were reinforced by the gain
of nearly fifty seats. He was, notwithstanding this brilliant success,
promptly punished, at the beginning of 1868, by a dismissal from
office for language and a policy which were deemed too pacific, in
his correspondence with France on the alleged harbouring of foreign
conspirators in England. Meantime, the country had been carried
through all the phases of excited feeling by the Indian mutiny of
1867, and Lord Canning had gained immortal honour, and the
ephemeral nickname of ' Clemency Canning,' by his self-command
amidst the storm, and his prudent humanity. It is highly to the
honour of Mr. Greville that, though but very slightly connected
with the viceroy by personal ties, he did not wait for the moment
of the defences made by Lord Granville, Lord Palmerston, and the
duke of Argyll, but bestirred himself to put friends in motion, on
the simple grounds of candour and justice, against the ravings of
the Times.
The reconstitution of Italy will come partially into view, when
we proceed to consider the occurrences of 1860. It was, to say the
least, among the most remarkable events of the century; for it
brought into a living, organic whole what had been a mass of dis-
jointed fragments for fourteen hundred years. Together with the
sense of nationality, and a great increase in the aggregate of wealth,
it has placed law and order on a solid foundation throughout the
peninsula, where, for half a century before, there had been Uttle but
severe repression or constantly recurring revolt. The geographical
limits of Italy were so deeply set by the hand of nature, as to make
the lust of territory, at least of European territory, unlikely, and
to mark her as probably destined to be a conservative power. But
she has not escaped the infection of the prevailing militarism, or
the tremendous burdens it imposes. The Italians, like other free
nations, must accept the responsibilities of free government: it
rests with them, at least collectively, to apply the remedy to the
mischiefs from which they suffer. Meantime, their dangers are,
perhaps, less than those of some great countries, and their com-
pensations greater; for it is agreed that common service in the
Italian army has powerfully quickened the sentiment of the national
unity, while it also appears that the practice of Christian observ-
ances has been more regular as well as more free in Eome since
the downfall of the temporal power of the popedom. Mr. Greville
Digitized by
Google
296 THE HISTORY OF 1862-60, AND April
belonged to a generation which for the most part had little sympathy
with Italy, and it is to be regretted that his references to the action
of Lords Palmerston and Bussell in this matter are usually couched
in terms of censure.
In the summer of 1859, after Lord Pahnerston had takQ^ office,
the question of reform stood for treatment at home, and the recon-
stitution of Italy, opened and begun by the Franco- Augtro- Sar-
dinian war, constituted the salient point of foreign poUtics. Other
serious contingencies were gradually brought into view. We had
invited and suffered in June at the mouth of the Peiho a disaster,
which only became known in this country months afterwards. It
caused the despatch of fresh force to China, which, however, was
the bearer of peaceful proposals. It was during the same autumn
of 1859, that Mr. Cobden broached his conception of a commercial
treaty with France, and obtained such encouragement from members
of the cabinet as warranted his entering into informal communica-
tions with the emperor. But, by degrees, as the session of 1860
proceeded, there was developed out of the miscarriage at the Peiho
a financial disturbance, and a collision between the houses of lords
and commons on the repeal of the paper duty : and out of the Italian
question, the annexation of Savoy and Nice to France, which,
rightly or wrongly, inflamed the temper of this country, brought
about a new and enlarged estimate of our military necessities, put
an end to the remains of the entente cordiale with France, and
might well, but for the counteracting force of the commercial treaty,
have issued at once in a war between the two nations. Barely, if
ever, in the course of our history has there been such a mixture of
high considerations, legislative, miUtary, commercial, foreign, and
constitutional, each for the most part traversing the rest, and all
capable of exercising a vital influence on public policy, as in the
long and complicated session of 1860.
It was, however, the commercial treaty, which first struck the
keynote of the year ; and the silent conflict between the motives
and provisions of the treaty on the one hand, and the excitement
and exasperation of military sentiment on the other, which consti-
tuted its most deeply marked and peculiar feature. These opposing
forces lay in different strata of the British community. The popular
sense was with the treaty ; the upper-class feeling and opinion were
arrayed on the side of our defensive ardour. But the acute com-
mercial instinct of the mercantile classes threw the weight of the
north of England into the scale of peace, and so brought about a
curiously balanced and fluctuating result. Like the builders of the
second Temple, grasping their tool with one hand and the sword with
the other, we with one hand established commercial relations with
France of unexampled amity and closeness, while with the other we
buUt ships, constructed fortifications, and founded volunteers, all
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 GREVILLE'S LATEST JOURNALS 297
with a silent, but well-understood and exclusive, view to an appre-
hended invasion from France.
Another important result was simultaneously achieved, with
which unhappily the school of Mr. Greville have little sympathy,
but which was highly agreeable to the two chief members of the
government. Lord Pahnerston and Lord Bussell, and to some of
their colleagues. The augmentation of our force in 1859 and 1860,
it can hardly be questioned, had the incidental effect of strengthen-
ing the position of England in the councils of Europe with respect
to the reconstitution of Italy.
The views of the French emperor on behalf of Italy had been
limited to the union of Lombardy with the Sardinian kingdom, and
to the formation of an Italian confederation, over which it was
hoped that the pope might preside. But this project never came to
the birth. Louis Napoleon had entangled himself in confidential
communications with a stronger and better informed intellect them
his own. Cavour knew that the Italian governments were under-
mined by an all but universal disaffection. He was powerfully
encouraged by the British minister, Sir James Hudson, whom at
his own table he described to me as quel uomo italianissimoy and of
whom he said ^ in the autumn of 1869, ^ He has done ten times more
than ever I did.' In that year and 1860 the limited acquisition of
Lombardy was so extended, that the kingdom of Italy was definitely
constituted, and extended over the peninsula with limited exceptions ;
those exceptions themselves, as in the event it proved, soon to be
cancelled.
The rapid extension, however, of Uberated Italy, far beyond the
projected limit, induced the Emperor Napoleon to exact from its
reluctant rulers the cession of Nice and of Savoy. Both the leaders
of the British government spoke publicly of this proceeding with
marked disapproval. The whole of the transaction had the air of
being adjusted in the dark, and was of a nature to arouse the sus-
picions of men like Lords Pahnerston and Bussell, whose recollec-
tions carried them back to the last great historic period of French
ambition and aggression. As to the smaller district, which was
purely Italian, it is hard to find a pretext for the severance, though
Nice has now been converted by the French into a splendid and im-
posing city. But as to Savoy, it was plain that she could hardly
continue to be an appendage to an Italian kingdom, with which she
had only the feeble tie of dynasty, while she was severed from it in
language and in blood, as well as by the formidable commercial barrier
of the Alps. It is stated by the editor of these journals as within his
own knowledge '^ that the emperor, in order to obtain the countenance
of the British government, offered to annex ' a considerable portion
joi the Faucigny district to the canton of Geneva,' but that * Lord
* Journals, IL 282. '• Ibid. u. 296 n.
Digitized by
Google
298 THE HISTORY OF 1852-60, AND April
Palmerston rejected the proposal.* Speaking in the house of com-
mons on 24 Aug. 1860, he said that, in the opinion of all the states
of Europe, * for the future, forethought and precaution must be the
duty of every power.' Lord Russell had at an earUer date, after
referring to our preceding relations of special friendship with
France, spoken, amidst warm cheering from the opposition, of the
new necessity for contemplating ' other arrangements.' Mr. G-re-
ville writes on 18 March of this ' concerted villainy,' meaning the
two annexations, that * such enormities as are unblushingly exhibited
to the world excite an indignation which breaks through every
restraint, and people ivill not hold their peace, happen what may.' ^*
Mr. Greville says," with perfect truth, * Nothing can be more
curious than the unravelling of this web.' We promoted with the
whole of our moral force the extension of the Sardinian annexations
beyond the scope of the French plans. France, on account of the
extensions, demanded annexations for herself most unpalatable to
us. Sardinia, having made her concessions to France, proceeded
still further in the erection of a great nation, and obtained the king-
dom of the Two Sicilies. Hereupon there grew up in some impor-
tant quarters a fear of further demands on the part of France*
While we complained of her demand for Savoy and Nice, we were
open to the answer that it was the consequence of proceedings in
Italy which we had with all our might favoured and encouraged ;
and while we cherished warlike emotion in the country by these
complaints, we also applied the most powerful stimulus to its
trading instincts and its peaceful spirit by pushing forward per-
sistently the arrangements for giving effect to the commercial
treaty. The compUcation was extraordinary, the opportunities for
criticism abundant ; but it cannot be doubted that a great balance
of good was gained.
In the country, however, the question of Savoy and Nice was
taken up by poUtical partisanship and irritated susceptibility, not
only with animation but with fury. Still the ministers, if impelled
in the direction of alarm, were held back within the bounds of quie-
tude by the meshes of a large and complex arrangement, to which
both the finance of the year and their credit as a government were
inseparably attached. It was for them, upon the whole, like a case
of the impact of two opposite and equal forces, which causes noise
but need not destroy equilibrium.
The treaty of commerce was in itself a really great historical
event, even had it not been, as I have presumed to suggest, in its con-
sequences an event greater still. Mr. (Tobden had, according to the
generous avowal of Sir Bobert Peel, the lion's part in the repeal of
the com laws. He now conferred on his country a second benefit,
scarcely inferior to the first. The effect on our trade with France
" JoumaU, ii. 296. »« Ibid. ii. 296.
Digitized by
Google
1887 GBEVILLE'S LATEST JOURNALS 299
was enormous. It had already risen, under the influence mainly of
our one-sided legislation in the sense of free commerce, to six and
twenty millions sterling for the year 1869. In 1864 it rose nearly
to fifty, and it has since touched almost seventy. It gave a power-
ful impetus to similar legislation elsewhere, which has since been
checked, indeed, but by no means wholly cancelled. It has created
in France itself an important party favourable to freedom of com-
merce, and though the term has long passed at which the treaty
might have been abolished, it has been maintained by the sheer
force of public opinion. But that party of free commerce is eAm a
party of peace, able, when it has fair play, to act beneficially on the
poUcy of the country ; and it is clear that the disastrous war of
1870, so unjustly waged, was the work of the government, not of
the nation. The treaty was brought about by the contemporaneous
existence, in France and England, of two men, one on either side
the water, singularly imlike, yet like in this, that they were both
emancipated from conventioniJity, and that each was disposed to con-
fide in the other. These two were Cobden and the emperor.
Hence came into existence the most important diplomatic arrange-
ment known in the commercial history of Europe ; conceived in
the brains of these its parents, and brought into the world without
so much as a blue or a yellow book to describe its ante-natal
stages, or even to register its birth. Is it not by a strange irony
of fortune that the same Napoleonic rule should have conferred on
France the greatest material benefit it has ever received, and en-
tailed on it the most ruinous reverse it has ever suffered ?
There are, however, two objections taken to the treaty, one eco-
nomical, and the other moral.
The economical objection is, that it was on our side an offence
against the laws of the science, of which we were the sworn adhe-
rents. The science of poUtical economy says, that any relaxations
of duty are in themselves beneficial to the state which makes them,
and that to withhold the benefit from itself, because it cannot obtain
other relaxations in the laws of other states, is to affirm that * half
a loaf ' is not better, but worse than ' no bread.*
Having served the crown as vice-president and president of the
board of trade in 1841 and the following years, I had a very full
personal experience of the difficulties, nay, the mischiefs, incident
to the negotiation of commercial treaties in the ordinary fekshion.
It is quite true that in the main the operation, however disguised,
may be smnmed up in these words : ' 1 will not, or at the least I
wi£Ji you to believe that I will not, secure for myself certain changes
of commercial law, which I know to be beneficial, imless you will add
to that benefit another benefit, in its nature perfectly separate, by
making certain other changes in your law.' I have said * in the
main ' because the arguments are qualified by a consideration of the
Digitized by
Google
800 THE HISTORY OF 1852-60, AND April
effects which they may produce upon revenue. But this, at the
early date I now speak of, was a consideration of the second order,
as may be plainly perceived from the fact that the correspondence
was conducted by the board of trade through the foreign office, in-
stead of deriving its inspiration from the chancellor of the exchequer.
Now the treaty of 1860 corresponded in point of form with the
tariff treaties we had formerly tried and failed to make, excepting
only that the channel of the correspondence was unofficial. But, in
its substance, it was on the English side absolutely and wholly dif-
ferent. On the French side the emperor Napoleon was thoroughly
seized of the idea that, by a bold stride towards freedom of trade,
he might greatly improve the condition of his people, and thus
strengthen the foundations of his sovereignty; but he was also
aware that he could not wholly remove the fences of protective duty
without exposing his measure to defeat, and himself to serious
damage and disparagement. On his side this was the limiting
consideration. Our commercial aim was different. In the tariffs
of 1842, 1845, and 1858 we had passed through the stages at
which restricted protection is substituted for actual or virtual
monopoly. Our object and intention was to bring about an absolute
equality between producers in various countries as the rule of our
law, and to show the world that, while it is a good to substitute
low duties for high duties, to change low duties into no duties at all
is, in the view of national wealth, a still greater good. Our action,
therefore, was entirely disengaged from all that could lead us to
haggle or to huxter; and, quite apart from co-operation with
France, was only bounded by considerations of revenue. If we
must consider the question as one of give and take, what we gave
was this. First, we tied our own hands in respect to matters on
which we should otherwise have been free, but should never have
wished to use our freedom. Secondly, we made at once, and on
a large scale, fiscal changes which might otherwise, to the great
detriment of the country, have been postponed. On the side of
taking we obtained a vast increase of our trade with France; a
great impulse to legislation for the reUef of commerce throughout
the world ; a considerable security for the continued operation of
the same principles ; and, lastly, a powerful counteraction to the
disturbing causes which in 1860 so gravely menaced the peaceful
relations of the two countries.
A more ambiguous question may be raised as to the conceal-
ment which the emperor practised, and which it was part of his
design to practise, against members of his own government, in
the inception and preparation of the treaty. I certainly remember
learning that in Paris it was deemed essential to keep the minister
of foreign affairs in total ignorance of the negotiations. On this
side the water, the measure assumed the shape of a further and
Digitized by
Google
1887 GREVILLE'S LATEST JOURNALS 801
vast sweep of articles from the tariff. The detail was kept secret, in
accordance with uniform practice, to avoid premature speculation ;
although, on account of the considerable revenue affected by the
change, in lieu of which new provisions would be necessary, it
was requisite to obtain the assent of the cabinet to the outline of
the scheme at an early date. This was effected without great
difficulty. We were only parties to the abnormal concealment
practised by the emperor in this single respect, that we were
aware of it ; for we neither did, nor omitted to do, anything in
consequence of that concealment. The method of proceeding
by personal correspondence was without doubt adopted because
of its rapidity and facility; because we had no stipulations, as
commonly understood, to place upon record; and because the
substance of the treaty, on account of its involving revenue,
required the assent of parliament and was essentially conditional.
Although before its production as part of the budget. Lord Clarendon
(then out of office) ' shook his head, Overstone pronounced against
the treaty, the Times thundered against it,' '' yet it was received
by the house of commons with the liveUest satisfaction.
Its fate was, however, chequered ; and was peculiar in this, that
the first blow struck at it was delivered by the hand of one of the best
among its friends. Lord Bussell, keenly alive to the discredit of any
tampering as in former years with the question of the franchise, in-
sisted on introducing his Beform Bill on 1 March, when the treaty
and the financial proposals of the year, numerous and complex as
they were, had not proceeded beyond their early stages. This was in
flat violation of a rule of Lord Bacon's, even more weighty now them
in his time, which Sir James Graham was fond of quoting : ^ Never
overlap business.' The treaty and the finance had many enemies,
the reform had more. The enemies of the treaty were thus invited
to obstruct it through prolonged debating on reform, and the
enemies of reform to discharge a corresponding office by prolonged
debating on the finance. A large majority of the house were in
disguised hostility to the extension of the franchise. The discussions
on it were at once protracted, intermittent, and languid. No divi-
sion was taken against it ; it was read a second time on 8 May, no
less than two months after its introduction. It was defeated by the
pure vis inertia of the house skilfully applied ; and it was withdrawn
on 11 June. But it had done its work by delaying the tail of the
financial measures until a time when the marriage effected by the
treaty between England and France had outlived its parliamentary
honeymoon. There had intervened the Savoy and Nice explosion ;
settlement with China was uncertain ; the prospects of the harvests
were bad ; French invasion was apprehended by many men usually
rational. The paper duty bill, which would have passed the commons
>* Journals, ii. 289.
Digitized by
Google
802 GREVILLE'S LATEST JOURNALS April
by a large majority at the beginning of March, only escaped defeat
on 8 May by a majority of nine, and was thrown out of the house
of lords on the 20th. Towards the close of the session, the fortifica-
tion scheme was proposed and carried, though on a scale contem-
plating the expenditure of five millions instead of an original sum
of nine. Mr. Greville's sympathies are with the opponents of the
reform bill and the commercial changes, but he recites the events of
this fluctuating year, though in a fragmentary way as he approaches
the end of his work, yet with impartiality ; and his own natural
sagacity led him to say of Lord Derby's movement in the house of
lords, against the repeal of the paper duty, that ' he will probably
obtain a very unwise and perilous success, which he will before
long have reason to regret.'
But he estimated rightly the brilliancy of the momentary
triumph, and when on 6 July the government obtained a minor
success by carrying a resolution to repeal the differential duty of
customs on paper, he writes compassionately, ' The great result is
to give some life to half-dead, broken-down, tempest-tossed Glad-
stone.'
He might perhaps have added what was more material. The
treaty (which was at issue in the vote) was saved from the minis-
terial wreck, and by this, if I am right in my estimate of the
political currents, and torrents, of the year, a real risk of a war
against France, and possibly also against Italy, was averted.
W. E. Gladstone.
Digitized by
Google
1887 808
Notes aTtd Documents
CTESIAS AND THE 8EMIBAMI8 LEGEND.
In the last number of this Review, pp. 97 $g., Mr. Oihnore argnes (agains
Dnncker and others) that Ctesias cannot have got the legend of Semiramis
from Iranian sources^ but made it up himself, combining what he had
heard from Babylonians about the historical Sammuramit (or rather Sam-
muramat), wife (?) of Bammannirar (812-788 b.o.), with the figure of
Ishtar, the warlike and cruel goddess of Babylonian mythology, and build-
ing thereupon an elaborate romance. He assumes that the Semiramis
of Herodotus (whose date, according to that author, may be put about
750 B.C.) is the historical Sammuramat, and appears to hold that the
mythical Semiramis is Gtesias's own creation. This view seems to call
fot modification in accordance with certain evidences which Mr. Gilmore
has not taken into account.
When Herodotus says that Semiramis lived five generations before
Nitoeris, it is barely possible that he identifies her with Sammuramat,
whose date is approximately suitable (i.e. within thirty or forty years) ;
but in that case the identification was a mistake, due to a confusion
between two names which had a similar sound to a Greek ear but were
really quite distinct.
For in the first place the Sammuramat whose name occurs on an
inscription found on several statues of Nebo, with the title ' lady of the
palace ' (wife or mother ?) of Bammannirar, was not queen of Babylon,
but a great lady of the Assyrian court at a time when the Assyrian
empire did not include Babylonia.^
And in the second place the Semitic form of the name Semiramis is
known to be Shdmlr&m, a word formed according to familiar analogies,
and one which has no etymological connexion with Sammuramat, even
the initial letters being etymologicaUy distinct, while at the same time it
bears no mark of having been borrowed and corrupted in the borrowing.
Schrader, indeed (* £. A. T.' 2nd ed. p. 866), will have it that the
Hebrews, borrowing the name Sammuramat, which they did not under-
stand, transformed it into more intelligible shape. But the Hebrews
knew the name of Semiramis only as the name of a deity. Shdmlrftm
occurs in the Old Testament only in the plural form Shemiramoth,
which, in several passages of Ohronicles, appears as the name of a
* She may have been a Babylonian princess by origin, for she seems to be connected
with the first introdaotion into Nineveh of the Babylonian worship of Nebo. See
Digitized by
Google
804 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
Levite, but according to all analogy was originally a place-name and
meant ' images of Sbemiram,' just as Anathoth means ' images of
Anath' (G. Hoffmann, * Syrische Acten persischer Martyrer,' p. 187).
And, in fact, the main evidence that Semiramis in Greek answers to a
Semitic Shemiram is not got from Hebrew at all. The form Shemiram
for the name of the famous Assyrian queen is used by Syrian writers,
who, if they had known the word only from the Greek, would certainly
not have transcribed it so, and place-names derived from Shemiram are
found in Media and Armenia even in the middle ages (Hoffinann, ut
supra). It is incredible that all this has no other foundation than
the imagination of Ctesias, or vague traditions of an obscure AsEfyrian
lady of the eighth century b.o., of whom we know nothing for certain
except that she is named on an inscription as ' lady of the palace ' of
Banunannirar.
Apart from the legends recounted by Greek historians, the main thing
known about Semiramis is that she was celebrated in tradition as the
author of marvellous works of building and engineering (especially earth-
works), and that towns were called after her name far beyond the limits
of the Semitic lands. * The works of Semiramis,' says Strabo (xvi. 1. 2),
'are pointed out throughout almost the whole continent, earthworks
bearing her name, walls and strongholds, aqueducts and stair-like roads
over mountains, canals, roads and bridges.* Ultimately every stupendous
work by the Euphrates or in Iran seems to have been ascribed to her —
even the Behistun inscription of Darius (Diod. iL 18. 2). And it is plain
that this very Semiramis of later folklore is the Semiramis of Herodotus,
who built the marvellous earthworks that confined the Euphrates at
Babylon (i. 184), and after whom one of the gates of that city was named
(iii. 155). That Herodotus supposes her to have been an historical queen,
of comparatively modem date, is a small matter when set against this
substantial evidence that his Semiramis has the same reputation as the
Semiramis of later legend. Moreover, though Herodotus, reserving the
whole history of Babylon for his 'Aatntpim \6yoi (i. 184), tells us no more
about Semiramis, it seems that he knew more, and that what he knew
was not to her advantage, for in i. 185 he says that Nitooris, the other
great Babylonian queen-builder, was a person of more sense ((rvvirm-ipii)
than her predecessor. The commentators who have found in this expres-
sion an allusion to the disorderly life of the mythical Semiramis may be
in error, but at least they have more probability on their side than
E. Meyer, who declares oracularly that the Semiramis of Ctesias has
nothing to do with her of Herodotus (' Oesch. des Alterthums,* p. 499).
And if it is difficult to separate the Semiramis of Herodotus from the
mythical queen of later writers, it is still more difficult to make the latter
the mere invention of Otesias. Dino, for example, certainly does not
copy Ctesias in the details preserved by £lian (* Yar. Hist.* vii 1) ; and
who will believe that Ctesias had such influence in the east as well as in
the west that his romance gave names to Shamlrftmagerd (Van) in
Armenia, to Samlr&n in Dailam, and other places in the remote east ?
It is not disputed that the Semiramis of Ctesias and of later story is
closely akin to the Semitic Aphrodite (Ishtar, Astarte) from whose myth
the leading features in her character are drawn. But in point of fact
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 805
Semiramis is not an historical queen whose legend was enriched in later
times with elements borrowed from religious myth ; she is primarily a
goddess, and becomes a quasi-historical queen only by virtue of that
euhemerism which in the east is so much older than Euhemerus.
The story of Semiramis in Diodorus (through whom we know the
narrative of Ctesias) consists of three parts. The first of these is the
legend of her birth, in which, in spite of a clumsy attempt to present
the story of a theogony as ordinary history, it is clear that Semiramis
is the daughter of Derceto, the fish goddess of Ascalon, and is herself
the Astarte whose sacred doves were honoured at Ascalon and throughout
Syria. Then comes a second part, in which the supernatural element is
more successfully eliminated ; this is the record of her exploits and wars.
Finally we have the legend of her miraculous disappearance from earth
with the statement that the Assyrians (i.e. the Syrians) worship her as a
goddess, and that some say she was turned into a dove. If Ctesias had
been inventing history for the Greeks, instead of recounting a legend, he
would never have given the first and third parts of this story, and the
conclusion is therefore inevitable that in eastern legend Semiramis was a
goddess and a form of Astarte. To seek an historical prototype for her is
as foolish as to seek such a prototype for Heracles or for Bomulus.
That Semiramis is really a Semitic goddess, and that the name was
used in Semitic cultus, appears from the O.T. Shemiramoth, 'images
of Shemiram.' And in spite of the rationalising objections taken by the
author, it is quite clear from the statements of Lucian (De Dea Syria)
that Semiramis and Derceto or Atargatis were worshipped together at
Hierapolis (Bambyce, Mabbog) near the Euphrates, in the same associa-
tion with sacred fish and sacred doves as appears in the birth-legend of
Ctesias. And further, the erroneous statement of Diodorus and other
Greek writers that Semiramis is Syriac for a dove must have some basis,
and is probably a false conclusion from an epithet really given to the
dove in certain parts of Syria. That epithet can hardly be other than
' bird of Semiramis,' Semiramis meaning a form of Astarte.
As regards the name of Semiramis, it is to be observed that the great
Semitic deities were worshipped in many forms (even where the ritual
was the same) and under various titles which are rather epithets than
proper names. Sh3ml-ram, of which the first element means ' name ' and
the second * exalted,' is such an epithet. Two constructions may be put
on the connexion of these elements, and either of them gives a fit title for
a great Semitic goddess. If we render * my name is exalted ' (Hoffmann),
the title means simply 'the highly femied.' But I have ventured to
suggest in the article ' Semiramis,' in the new edition of the * Encyclopaedia
Britannica,' another interpretation, which, perhaps, may be held to be
preferable. In the inscription of Eshmunazar, Astarte is called 'the
name of Baal,' i.e. the manifestation of the chief male deity. Shemiram
in like manner may be rendered ' the name of Bam ; ' and that Bam, ' the
exalted one,' was a divine title appears from the name Hiram (brother of
Bam) and other evidences.^
In the middle part of the story of Semiramis in Diodorus, her divine
character fskHs very much into the background, especially in the three
' That this interpretation is appropriate will appear below, p. 310, note 5.
VOL. n. — NO. VI. X
Digitized by
Google
806 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
episodes which alone are treated with any fulness of detail : the taking of
Bactra, the building of Babylon, and the expedition against India. In all
these there is very good reason to suspect with Mr. Gilmore the presence
of at least a large element which is neither Semitic nor Iranian legend,
but Greek addition. But it is not so plain that the additions are wholly
or even mainly due to Ctesias, for C. Jacoby in the * Rheinisches Museum '
(1855) has shown very clearly that the account in Diodorus does not come
direct from Ctesias, but has incorporated elements from the history of
Alexander's eastern conquests ; and, indeed, he has made it probable that
the work of Ctesias lay before Diodorus not in its original form but as
recast by Clitarchus. If now we set aside on the one hand amplifications
got from the history of Alexander's campaigns, and on the other hand
mistakes which might naturally be made by Ctesias himself, such as the
statement that Semiramis was the foundress of Babylon and not merely
the legendary builder of certain works there, and if further we make a
reasonable sdlowance for the changes that were inevitable in the task of
translating an eastern myth into the semblance of a history that should b^
credible to the Greeks, very little if anything remains that cannot be fairly
regarded as part of an Astarte myth. The character of Semiramis is
throughout that of Astarte or Ishtar, as is generally recognised, and as
Mr. Gilmore has clearly brought out by reference to the epic of Izdubar.
And, as regards the details of her career, it is to be observed that, except
in the parts where the influence of Alexander's campaigns is unmistakable,
the story is little more than a thread of connexion between the various
works in different parts of the East which were ascribed to her, and in part
no doubt had local legends of the goddess. It is plain that as time went on
there was a growing tendency to ascribe all great remains to Semiramis,
and it may be questioned whether in Ctesias's original account she was
already credited with Achaemenian works like the Behistun inscription.
But in view of the late survival of her name in remote parts like Dailam,
and even in the neighbourhood of Merv (where Yacut mentions a place
Shamir&n), there is no reason to doubt that Semiramis was known in
Iranian as well as in Semitic lands, in a variety of local connexions, but
especially in connexion with certain artificial barrows, which, according
to Diodorus (ii. 14. 2), marked the spots where she fixed her tent.
Here, it may be said, we have a circumstance more appropriate to
the historical legend of an actual queen than to the myth of a goddess.
But by good fortune a fragment of John of Antioch (Miiller, • Fr. Hist.
Or.' iv. 539, Syncellus, Bonn ed. i. 119) has been preserved to convict
Diodorus (or his source) of infidelity not only to the original legend, but
to the narrative of Ctesias. For here it is related from Ctesias that the
mounds of Semiramis were nominally erected against inundations (cf.
Herod, i. 184), but really were the graves of her lovers whom she buried
alive. That this is the more original account, cannot be questioned ; it
fits in with what Diodorus himself tells of the fate of the queen's lovers,
and with the fact that one of the mounds ascribed to her was known as
the tomb of Ninus (Diod. ii. 7. 1). Moreover it brings the Semiramis
mounds into close and natural connexion with a central feature of the
Astarte or Ishtar myth, the unhappy fate of all her paramours, which we
read of in the legend of Izdubar. In this legend the first of those to
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 807
whom Ish tar's love has been disastrous is Thammuz, the Adonis of the
Greeks. The characteristic feature in the ritual of Adonis is that the
god was worshipped first as dead and then as again alive, and accordingly
his tomb was shown at various places of his worship in connexion with
temples of Astarte.' Adonis (* lord ') is a mere title, and essentially the
same worship is associated with other names, especially with that of the
eastern Memnon, a figure quite indistinguishable from Adonis, whose
tombs (Memnonia) were shown in various parts of the East. There can,
I think, b0 little doubt that Memnon is nothing more than a corruption
in Greek mouths (under the influence of the Homeric Memnon) of
Naaman (* darling ') or of a diminutive Naamanon. For Ewald has
pointed out that in Isaiah xvii. 10 * plantings of Naamanim ' are equiva-
lent to the Greek gardens of Adonis, and Lagarde (* Semitica,' i. 82) has
pushed the argument further, showing that the name of the anemone,
which is said to have sprung from the blood of Adonis, is probably de-
rived from Naaman (the final long a being pronounced broad and so
passing into w), just as the Arabs call the same flower * wounds of the
Naaman.' These arguments may be strengthened by reference to
Sozomen, vii. 29, who tells of an ancient tomb in Palestine (evidently
sacred, for he supposes it to be the tomb of Micha) which the people of the
place, * not knowing what they say, call Nc^eTcicf/iava * (so we must read ;
see Reland, * Palestina,' p. 698). . This he supposes to mean the ' tomb of
the faithful one,' but it is plain that it was really ' the tomb of the
Naaman,' i.e. of Adonis."* Finally, the river known to the ancients as
Belus (i.e. Baal, a general divine name applicable to any male deity) had
a Memnonion (Joseph. * B. J.' ii. 10, § 2) and was believed to be the place
of the periodical new birth of Bel (Pliny, xxxvi. 190). It is now known as
the river Naftunan. Here, therefore, we have Baal, Memnon, and Naaman
all connected with the same holy place and evidently identical.
We seem, in fact, to be justified in associating all the graves of Semitic
male gods (e.g. the grave of Bel or Baal at Babylon, and that of
Heracles at Tyre) with a worship of the Adonis type — a worship which is
closely connected with that of Astarte and Ishtar, and with a myth in
which the god who dies but rises again is the lover of the great goddess.
And as we already know that Semiramis is a form of Astarte, the conclu-
sion is obvious that the tombs of her lovers are sanctuaries {heroa) cor-
responding to the tomb sanctuaries of Adonis ; and the analogy of the
tombs of Adonis, which at Byblus and elsewhere were associated with a
sanctuary and cult of Astarte, leads us to suppose that where there was
a tumulus of the dead god there was also a sanctuary and worship of the
goddess. We now see the point of the statement that the lovers were
buried alive ; being gods, they lived and received homage in their graves.
So in the Armenian form of the legend, Ara, the lover of Semiramis, is
slain but returns to life, just as Adonis spends part of the year with
Aphrodite and part of it with Persephone (Apollod. iii. 14. 4 ; Macrob.
' At Byblus {De Dea Syria, 6. 7) ; at Amathus (Steph. Byz. compared with
Pausanias, ix. 41. 2), and at Aphaca (Meliton in Cureton, Spic. Syr, p. 44 of the
translation). See also Philostratus, ep. i., and Renan, PhSnide, pp. 287 sq.
* For this mistake, arising from a confusion of two Semitic gutturals, see Jerome
on Isa. xvii. 10, who in the same way there translates naamamm by * faithful.'
X 2
Digitized by
Google
808 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
' Saturnalia ' i. 21. 8). And, again, the statement that the mounds were
nominally built against inundations (cf. Herod, i. 184) implies that they
stood near streams, and this is just what we find in the case of the
Memnonia and tombs of Adonis. Yet another indication of the identity
of our myth and the cult on which it rests with the myth and cult of
Astarte and Adonis may be drawn from the proverb in Mar Apas Catina
(Langlois, * Collection des Historiens de TArm^nie/ p. 29) : ' Semiramis
changed into stone long before Niobe.' For Macrobius (* Sat.' i. 21. 6),
spealdng of the Adonis myth, mentions a statue of Venus in the Lebanon
mourning for her lover, whose eyes appeared to shed tears like the statu©
of Niobe. Such a rock-hewn figure of Astarte mourning for Adonis still
exists, and has been figured by Eenah (' Ph^nicie,' pi. 88).
It were easy to show that the Astarte myth accounts for other fea-
tures in the Semiramis legend; thus the statement of Juba, in Pliny
viii. 16, that one of her lovers was a horse, is taken from the Izdubar
poem, which tells the same thing of Ishtar. Or, again, when ^lian
(' Var. Hist.' xii. 89) makes Semiramis take lions and panthers alive, we
at once see that this story is derived from the common representation of
Astarte and kindred eastern goddesses as riding on a lion (cf . ' De Dea
Syr.* 81). But to dwell on these details would only carry us away from
the main point, namely that the substantial basis of the whole story lies
in the wide dispersion, beyond Semitic lands, of a cult of Semitic character
associated with a goddess who bears a Semitic name. In this as in all
other problems of antique religion legend is to be explained from cult and
not conversely, and the diffusion of a Semitic religion in Iranian lands is
a sufficient basis for the whole story of the conquests of Semiramis. The
victories of the religion were necessarily conceived as the victories of the
goddess, and at length were rationalised into the conquests of a Semitic
queen. So viewed the myth acquires real value to the historian, though
it records, not a chapter of political history, but an ancient chapter in the
history of the religious influence of the Semites on foreign races.
From this point of view it seems possible to get a little further in the
explanation of Ctesias's story and in the determination of its sources. It
is generally admitted that the story formed no part of the official tradition
of the origins of Babylonia and Assyria, which Ctesias might have learned
from Babylonian priests. But this fact by no means involves the con-
clusion that Ctesias invented the whole legend ; on the contrary, it is not
in Babylonia but in Iran that a legend of the xsonquests of Semiramis
would naturally spring up to explain and connect together the local cults
of the foreign goddess. The tendency to connect a number of local
worships by a legendary narrative can be observed in all ancient mytho-
logies, and seems to be the natural expression in matters of religion of an
increased sense of political unity between the worshippers at the several
local shrines which are brought into the story. A nation needs national
deities, and gets them by binding together in a single legend the local
deities of similar cult and character. There is direct historical evidence
that a process of this sort had been going on in Persia just before the
time of Ctesias ; for it appears, both from Berosus (fr. 16) and from the
inscriptions^ that Artaxerxes 11, at whose court Ctesias lived, was the first
Persian king to introduce an official worship of Anaitis in all the great
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 309
,cities of his empire. Anaitis was hardly a new deity, for her name
(Anahita) is genuinely Iranian; so all that Artaxerxes can have done
was to give official recognition and national character to a worship that
had previously existed in unofficial form. And there can be no question
that the official decree must have had for its basis a national movement
towards wider recognition of the deity in question. No arbitrary decree
could have made the worship of Anaitis so important as it continued to
be in Persia from this time forth.
Now, while the name of Anahita is Persian, the type and cultus of the
goddess are hardly to be distinguished from those of Astarte, and scholars
are agreed that she is the Aphrodite Uremia (Astarte) whose worship
Herodotus (i. 131) says that the Persians had adopted from the Assyrians
and Arabs. Anaitis or Anahita, in fact, appears to be the official Persian
name (since Artaxerxes 11) of a goddess borrowed from the Semites and
naturalised by being identified with the previously unimportant Anahita.
The name of Anaitis is not known to Herodotus, who supposes (apparently
incorrectly) that the Persians called her Mitra. But the presumption is that
in old time, before she was completely naturalised, she was worshipped
under one of the many titles which the Semites apphed to the various
forms of Astarte ; and from what we have already learned we can hardly
doubt that, at many of her shrines, this title was Semiramis. To give
certainty to this hypothesis, it ought to be shown that the worship of
Anaitis is not only modelled on Astarte worship in general, but corresponds
to the particular type of that worship which we have seen to be associated
with the name of Semiramis. Her name ought to be brought into con-
nexion with the Semiramis mounds and with the worship of a male deity
corresponding to Adonis. Now one of the shrines of Anaitis about which
we are best informed is that at Zela in Pontus (Strabo, xi. 2. 4 ; xii. 3. 37).
Zela was not so much a town as a fortified sanctuary, and it stood on an
artificial mound which bore the name of Semiramis. Here Anaitis was
worshipped, along with ' the Persian deities, Omanus and Anadates.* The
second name is perhaps corrupt; at least, nothing certain is known
about it ; but as regards Omanus we known from Strabo, xv. 3. 16, that
at the Cappadocian sanctuaries his image was carried about in procession.
From * Ep. Jerem.' 30 sq., Theocr. ' Idyll.' xv. 132. sq., we may gather that
the god so carried in procession was the dead god, and the rite an act of
mourning ; but if this be disputed, it still remains certain that the temple
of Anaitis stood on a ' mound of Semiramis,' and that the Persian cult
succeeded to that of the Semitic deity. And in like manner in Susiana,
where Anaitis was the chief female goddess, we find the worship of
Memnon — that is, of Adonis ; so that it is by no means certain whether
in MUan, * Nat. An.' xii. 23, the lions of Anaitis occurring in a temple of
Adonis in this region justify us in changing the reading to * temple of
Anaitis.' Moreover, in this argument we are not confined to the cases
where Anaitis is mentioned by name ; for the fetct that even in the Avesta
she is worshipped by Ahuramazda himself makes it plain that she was
the supreme female deity of the Iranians, and therefore we are justified
in referring to her cult (or an equivalent thereof) what the Greeks tell us
of the Medea, whom, by a transparent play on the name, they suppose to be
the national heroine of the Medes. This Medea is obviously an equivalent
Digitized by
Google
810 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
of Semiramis, for Strabo, xi. 13. 10. ascribes to her what Diodorus and .
Justin ascribe to Semiramis, viz. the invention of the Median dress, which
seemed so remarkable to the Greeks as necessarily to be derived from a
heroine of masculine character. Tliis feature points unmistakably to a
connexion with Astarte, as may be seen from Usener's introduction to the
* Legenden der h. Pelagia.' And the Median Medea of Strabo has a male
partner, called by the Greeks Jason, whose tomb-sanctuaries, like those of
Adonis or Memnon, were greatly reverenced by the barbarians ; cf. Justin,
xlii. 8, with Strabo ut sup. For the identification of the Median goddess
with Semiramis may be cited also Philostratus, * Vita Apol.' i. 25, com-
pared with the account of the founding of Babylon in Diodorus.^
From all these evidences, then, it would appear that the worship of
the Semitic Aphrodite or Astarte in the form of Semiramis had taken
firm hold of the Iranian lands at an early date, and that in the days of
Artaxerxes II this cult had acquired an importance which led to its being
adopted into the official Persian rehgion. To this end Semiramis was
identified with Anaitis or Anahita, a genuine Persian figure, but one
which had no national significance in earlier times. Under these circum-
stances it is easy to understand (1) the formation of a Semiramis legend
in Iran, (2) the prominence given to this legend by Ctesias, who Uved at
the court of Artaxerxes 11, (8) the disappearance of the Semitic name of
the goddess from later national Iranian legends, while yet it remained
associated with individual places in Iranian lands, and gave colour and
shape to the later worship of Anaitis. The Iranian legend of the con-
quests of Semiramis was no doubt freely handled by Ctesias to suit his
public, but the principal additions to this part of the story appear to be
due to the later Greeks who worked over his narrative, and enriched it
with matter borrowed from the history of Alexander the Great.
There is, however, another part of the story given by Ctesias, which
appears to owe much more to his invention, namely the way in which
Semiramis and her husband Ninus appear as founders of the historical
empire of Nineveh.
That the Iranian legend of the goddess Semiramis did not form
part of an Iranian history of the Assyrian empire goes without saying,
and it is equally certain that the Semiramis and Ninus story formed no
part of the official historical tradition of the Assyrian and Babylonian
priests. The type of the goddess Semiramis is one which was common
to all Semites both in Assyria and elsewhere ; but the name Shemlram
is not Assyrian but Phoenician, or more probably Aramaic. And it is in
the highest degree doubtful whether there was an Assyrian god Nin or
Ninip, as Bawlinson supposes. At any rate, if there was such a god, the
founding of Nineveh and the Assyrian empire was not ascribed to him.
That the Greeks supposed Ninus to be an ancient king of the city of the
same name, proves nothing as to Assyrian tradition ; the &ct stands quite
* This Medea, according to Strabo, ' appeared in pablio instead of the king.* So
we shall find that at Hierapolis the image of Semiramis was borne in public pro-
cession, while the male partner of her sovereignty remained in the temple ; just as
in the legend Semiramis leads an active life, and Ninyas remains secluded in his
palace« The name Shemiram, if interpreted to mean * manifestation of the exalted,*
expresses this relation of the goddess to the god.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 311
on the same footing as the derivation of the name of Medes from Medea
(Herod, vii. 62). It is not even necessary to suppose that it was a Greek
who invented Ninus as eponym hero of Nineveh ; the Semites themselves
were ready enough to invent eponyms of the kind, and any Syrian who
was questioned as to the founder of Nineveh, and who was not possessed
of such traditional lore on the subject as the Babylonian priests doubt-
less had, would not have hesitated to fix on Ninus, whose name was
known from an actually existing monument, viz. the tomb of Ninus by
the Euphrates of which Ctesias speaks. This tomb is the one definite
point that we have to start from in inquiring what the original legend
about Ninus was ; and if it really lay on the Euphrates, it follows at once
that the original Ninus had nothing to do with Nineveh on the Tigris,
or with the Assyrian monarchy of which Nineveh was the capital.*
When Ctesias says that the tomb of Ninus stood in the ancient capital
of the Assyrian monarchy, and also that it stood on the Euphrates, one
of these two assertions is certainly erroneous, and it is usually taken for
granted that the first assertion is right and the second wrong. But this
assumption is altogether arbitrary. No doubt the true site of Nineveh
was never entirely lost in local tradition, for the old name still clung to
it in Eoman times, and even in the middle ages. But in the time of
Artaxerxes U the tradition had become so obscure, that when Xenophon
passed the site and noted the ruins, he was told that they belonged to an
ancient city of the Medes (* Anab.* iii. 4). This is very good evidence that
the tomb of Ninus, which Ctesias describes as an eminence of the dimen-
sions of a mountain dominating all the surrounding plain, formed no
part of the ruins of Nineveh, for if it had it would certainly have been
pointed out to Xenophon. Accordingly, tlie reasonable view of the
matter is, that the great tomb of Ninus really lay on the Euphrates as
Ctesias says it did, and that the mistake of that author lay in supposing
that it marked the site of Nineveh, which he had learned to regard
as the city of King Ninus. And, in fact, it can be shown that there
was a Ninus on the Euphrates answering to Ctesias's description,
and that this Ninus was a seat of Semiramis worship, and the original
home of certain parts of the legends told about her by the Greeks.
Ammianus (xiv. 8. 7), speaking of the cities of Euphratensis, names
* Hierapolis vetus Ninus.' As he speaks in the same way of * Constanti-
nopolis vetus Byzantium,' the meaning seems to be that Hierapolis
(Bambyce, Mabbog), the great seat of the worship of the Syrian goddess,
was anciently called Ninus. Philostratus, in hke manner, speaks several
times of Ninus or * the ancient Ninus,* where he plainly means Hierapolis,
and while the single allusion to the name in Ammianus might be a piece
of blundering antiquarianism, this explanation will hardly cover the case
of Philostratus, who uses also the adjective Ninius in speaking of Damis,
a native of the city and the friend of Apollonius. It must not be assumed
that it is only by a blunder that any other place than Nineveh could bear
the name of Ninus, for in fact we know from Stephanus Byzantius that
Aphrodisias in Caria was called Ninoe. Aphrodisias, as its name denotes,
• The Ninus of Herod, i. 7 belongs to Lydian mythology, and nothing that Hero-
dotus says gives us any right to connect him with Nineveh. The Lydian mythology
presents many points of analogy to the myth of Semiramis.
Digitized by
Google
812 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
was a sanctuary of the oriental Aphrodite, and it is to he presumed that
both here and at Hierapolis the second name of the city was derived
from an associated divinity whose oriental name was something like Nin,
but had nothing whatever to do with Nineveh.
Here, indeed, it may be objected that Ctesias evidently places the city
and tomb of Ninus close to the Euphrates, while Hierapolis lay some
distance to the west, four schoeni from the river according to Strabo,
or three parasangs according to Yacut, s.v. * Manbij.' But, on the other
hand, Zosimus (iii. 12) names Hierapolis as a rendezvous appointed to
the fleet on the Euphrates ; and Joshua Stylites, who certainly did not
write in ignorance, speaks of * Mabbog on the river Euphrates * (chap.
Ixv. p. 64 of Wright's ed.) In fact the commercial importance of Hiera-
polis lay in its being the city which commanded the junction of the two
great trade routes from Antioch to Seleucia, and from Antioch to Harran
(Carrhae) and upper Mesopotamia, and the point of bifurcation was not at
the city itself but at the passage of the Euphrates, a few miles off, where
in the middle ages there was a bridge called the bridge of Mabbog (Jisr
Manbij), and a fortress called sometimes ' the castle of Mabbog ' (Hisn
Manbij, Abulfeda, p. 233), but more usually 'the castle of the star'
(Qal'at al-Nejm). If we consider that in ancient times the most impor-
tant trade of Syria on this line was with the Persian Gulf and avoided
the long caravan routes, ascending the Euphrates in ships as far as
possible, we shall see that the haven on the Euphrates must have been
the starting point of the city, and that the inland foundation was pro-
bably of later growth. At any rate, for all effects upon the history of
civilisation, Hierapolis was as essentially a port on the Euphrates as
Athens was a port on the ^gean. And that this was so appears in the
ritual of the sacred city. According to the * De Dea Syria,* ^caps. 18,
48, the greatest religious festivals of Hierapolis were those celebrated by
a procession 'to the sea.* This phrase is explained by Philostratus
(* Vita Apollonii,* i. 20), who tells us that the Euphrates was called * the
sea,* as it had been in Old Testament times and still is by the Arabs.
For religion, therefore, as well as for trade, Hierapolis was a city by the
Euphrates. And this observation enables us to fix with great probability
the exact site of the tomb-sanctuary of Ninus. The ' castle of the star *
which commanded the bridge of Mabbog, is built on a lofty and isolated
hill (Sachau, * Eeise,* p. 153), such as Ctesias describes. In a Syrian
district, Al-Nejm, ' the star,* appears to be a mere translation of the
Syriac kaukabta, i.e. the planet Venus, which in later times was a
common name of the eastern Aphrodite (e.g. Isaac of Antioch, i. 244 sg.),
so that the castle of the star is in its origin a sanctuary of Astarte, and
may well have been at the same time the tomb of her subordinate partner
Ninus. It is still frequented by great flocks of Astarte's bird, the dove.
We are now prepared to take up a more crucial piece of evidence. If
the Ninus of Ctesias was really Hierapolis or its port on the west bank of
the Euphrates, it was not Assyrian (in our sense of the word) but Syrian,
i.e. Aramaean, and by inference Semiramis and Ninus were Aranuean
deities. But it is a commonplace with orientalists, since Noldeke*s
analysis of the evidence, that Syrian is a mere abridgment of Assyrian,
and that the Oreeks did not keep the two words apart as we do when we
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 818
use the first to mean * AramaBan,' and the second to mean ' pertaining
to the empire of Nineveh.' Thus the expressions * Ninus the Assyrian/
* Semiramis the Assyrian/ may quite well denote Aramsean deities, and
the connexion which Ctesias makes between these legendary figures and
the Assyrian empire may quite well be a mere error favoured by ambiguity
of language. And that the birth legend of Semiramis is really Aramaean
and not Assyrian (in our sense of the word) appears beyond question
from the name of her mother, Derceto. Derceto is a Greek corruption
of Atargatis, a name in which the first element is the specifically Aramaic
form of the Phoenician Astarte, the Babylonian and Assyrian Ishtar. If
Ctesias had learned the birth legend from Babylonian priests, exponents
of the official priestly myths of Babylonia and Assyria, the name of
Derceto could not have occurred in it. And in point of fact the scene of the
legend, as assigned by him, is not Irak or the Tigris valley, but Ascalon in
Philistia. We can be absolutely sure that no genuine Assyrian or
Babylonian legend could possibly have been assigned to so remote a
region, and one which had always been influenced by instead of commu-
nicating its influence to the country of the two rivers. At the same
time it is equally impossible to look on Ascalon as the veritable source of
the Semiramis legend. The Greeks from Herodotus downwards regarded
Ascalon as the most ancient seat of Aphrodite worship, but this only
means that it was the most ancient shrine within their range, which did
not extend to the interior of Asia. It is easy, therefore, to understand
why Ctesias writing for Greeks placed the birth legend in Ascalon, but it
is not easy to understand how, living in Persia, he could have had it from
Ascalon. And it is quite certain that down to the period of Macedonian
sovereignty in Asia the language of the Philistine coast was not Aramaic,
but a Hebrew or Phoenician dialect (cf. Noldeke in * Encyc. Brit.,* ninth
ed., vol. xxi. p. 645), in which the name Derceto or Atargatis is impossible
except in connexion with a borrowed ritual. In a word the birth legend
is Aramaic in form and must have originated at an Aramaan sanctuary.
To clinch this argument and connect it with what has already been
said as to the locaHty of Ninus, it is only necessary to prove, as can
easily be done, that the elements of the birth legend had their home at
Bambyce or Hierapolis. I say the elements of the birth legend, for as
told by Ctesias the story is a complex one, in which several originally
distinct myths appear to be artificially combined. Aphrodite smites the
goddess Derceto with love for one of her own priests. A daughter is
bom of this amour, and Derceto filled with shame kills her lover, exposes
her daughter, and herself plunges into the sacred pool of Ascalon and is
changed into a fish. The infant is fed and brought up by doves till she
is found by shepherds. The king's herdsman, Simmas, adopts her, and
gives her the name of Semiramis and ultimately marries her to Onnes,
an officer in the court of Ninus. Here, therefore, Aphrodite, Derceto,
and Semiramis are all distinct, though in reality the two latter are merely
the two forms of the eastern Aphrodite associated with the fish and
the dove respectively. The essential identity of Derceto and Semiramis
appears even in Ctesias's story, for Derceto's lover whom the goddess
slays is a figure of exactly the same sort as the unfortunate lovers of
Semiramis ; and on the other hand Oimes, the first husband of Semiramis,
Digitized by
Google
314 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS AprU
is plainly the Babylonian fish god Cannes, who must have been originally
associated with the fish form of Astarte. Originally each type of the
great Semitic goddess had a local home and a local seat of its own. But
in process of time several types were brought together in the greater
sanctuaries, and their myths became interfused in various and perplexing
ways, giving rise to complex legends, which never attained to the same
fixity as the old elementary myths of which they were made up, and
indeed were often told in very difierent ways at one and the same shrine.
At HierapoHs, as we know from Lucian, there were both sacred fish and
sacred doves, and one account of the sanctuary was that it was founded
by Semiramis for her mother Dereefo. The usual opinion in antiquity
was that the goddess of HierapoHs was Derceto or Atargatis. But her
statue combined the symbols of various types of Astarte, and there was
in the temple another statue supposed to be that of Semiramis (* De Dea
Syr.' cap. 88), which appears to have been the oldest and most sacred
of all, since it was carried in procession to the Euphrates at the greatest
of the annual feasts (caps. 18, 48). At Hierapolis, therefore, the con-
ditions existed for the formation of a legend like that of Ctesias, in which
Derceto and Semiramis both appear, but we have no right to expect to find
either at Hierapolis or anywhere else a story exactly corresponding to his.
It is enough if we can identify with Mabbog the mythical elements out of
which Ctesias's story is built up. These elements are mainly two :
I. A myth of the transformation of Astarte into a fish (myth of Derceto) ;
II. A myth of the birth of Astarte and the miracle of her being nursed by
doves (myth of Semiramis). Both these myths belong to Hierapolis.
I. Ovid (* Fasti,* ii. 469 sqq.) tells how Dione and Cupid fleeing from
Typhon plunged into the waters of the Euphrates and were saved by two
fishes. The fishes were rewarded by being raised to heaven and placed
in the zodiac. The mention of the Euphrates is the important point
here ; the rest of the story is not given in its original form ; but that
has been preserved by Hyginus (' Astr.' ii. 80) and Manihus (iv. 580 sqq.)
who say that the goddess and her son were transformed into fishes. Ovid
did not choose to say this, but the mention of Typhon shows that he
knew it. The point of the Euphrates where the metamorphosis took
place was by Hierapolis, for Avienus (Arat. * Phen.' 542, 645) calls the
two heavenly fishes Pisces Bambycii,
n. Germanicus (* Schol. Arat.') gives another legend about the same
constellation to the effect that the fishes found an egg in the Euphrates^
and pushed it ashore ; it was hatched by a dove, and brought forth the
Syrian Venus.
The first of these myths was told at Ascalon, as well as at Hierapolis
(Xanthus in Athenseus, viii. 87), but the Aramaic form of the name Derceto,
which Xanthus also uses, decides for the priority of the Hierapolitan
legend.
Both the myths have undergone changes of an arbitrary kind in the
hands of Ctesias. In the first he omits the goddess's son, who appears
both in the Bambycian story and in Xanthus. In the second he drops
the egg as too incredible, though the birth of the goddess from the water is
obviously a genuine feature in an Aphrodite myth, and in its association
with Hierapolis serves to explain the annual feast in which the image o£
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 315
Semiramis was carried down to the river and back again, and also supplies
the interpretation of the Syriac name MabbOg, which means 'place of
emerging * of the goddess.
These two modifications of the genuine myth are closely connected.
If the dove goddess Semiramis was bom from the river, she cannot be
the daughter of Derceto, born before the latter was changed into a fish.
And all that Ctesias says about Derceto*s shame and the exposure of the
child of her illicit love is plainly modem and Greek not Syrian. There
can, I think, be no doubt that in the original story Derceto had no
daughter but only a son, who was a fish god as she herself was a fish
goddess. Semiramis was not the daughter of Derceto, but another type
of the same deity, and Ctesias (or his informant) makes her the daughter
of the goddess by eliminating the son. There was no place in the myth
for a son and a daughter.
In fsLct the fish god, son of the divine queen of Hierapolis, and sharer
of her sanctuary, appears in Ctesias in another connexion as Ninyas son
of Semiramis. Ninyas living * like an invisible god,' hidden in his palace
and surrounded by concubines and eunu6hs, is not at all like a real
Assyrian king ; but he is exactly the type of a Semitic god holding the
second place in an Astarte temple, enthroned in the adytum, and sur-
rounded by hierodouloi and galli. His story is simply the translation
into narrative form of a description of the divine son as worshipped
with his mother in the great temple of Hierapolis. And with this his
name agrees, for Ninyas can be nothing else than the Syriac nun, * fish,'
or its diminutive nunos, * little fish,' in fact the ichthys of Xanthus."
Now in my book on * Kinship in Ancient Arabia,' I have shown that
in the oldest Semitic cults, where a god and a goddess are worshipped
together, they are not husband and wife, the god having the pre-eminence,
but mother and son, the mother taking the first place. This combination
dates from the earliest stage of society,^ when marriage in our sense of the
word was unknown, and when kinship and inheritance ran in the female
line. The mother in such cases is an unmarried but not a chaste goddess.
The Ishtar of the Izdubar legend is a deity of this type, a polyandrous
goddess; and the Syrian Astarte is depicted in the same character by
christian Syriac writers. The prostitution practised at her shrines waa
a relic of ancient polyandry ; the hierodouloi like their mistress were un-
married but not chaste, and at Byblus, at Babylon, and apparently at
Hierapolis also (* De Dea Syr.' c. 60 compared with c. 6) virgins made
practical acknowledgment of the polyandrous principle at the shrine of
the goddess before their marriage.^ Semiramis from the death of Ninus
downwards is just such a polyandrous goddess, who refuses to contract a
legitimate marriage lest (falling under the dominion of her husband) she
should lose her sovereignty (Diod. ii. 18). And this feature in her
character is essential, for the story of the Semiramis mounds shows that
it was incorporated in the ritual of all her shrines. At these the lovers
' Here again we see that the legend is Aramaic, not Palestinian, for nun is an
Aramaic word, and the fish god of Ascalon is Dagon.
" The veiled hint of Lucian is interpreted by what Isaac of Antioch (i. 212) says of
Bethhur. The worship of Bethhur was derived from Harran (ibid, p. 208), and in
religion Harran was ' the sister ' of Mabbog (Jacob of Sarug in Z, d, M, Q, xxix. 110).
Digitized by
Qoo^^
816 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS AprU
play a very subordinate part ; they are heroes rather than gods, and they
have no pretence to share the throne of the goddess. This place belongs
not to a spouse, but to Ninyas the son of the divine queen.
I have gone into this point in some detail, because it supplies the
necessary point of view for criticising what Ctesias says of Ninus. That
Ninus and Ninyas are not originally distinct personages has been often
suspected, but it has generally been thought that Ninyas is merely the
double of Ninus. It appears from what has now been said that the true
state of the case is just the opposite. Ninyas fits exactly into the myth,
while the whole story of Ninus is at variance with its most essential
details. Everything about the Ninus of Ctesias except his tomb is hollow
and unreal. We have seen that he cannot have been originally connected
with Nineveh, so that the exploits ascribed to him are not based on
genuine historical tradition. But these exploits are equally out of place
in the myth ; for even in Ctesias's tale we feel that we are meant to think
of Semiramis as the great conqueror of Asia, and that, therefore, Asia
cannot have been conquered by her husband before her. Ctesias had to
find a career for Ninus because he began by assuming that he was the
founder of Nineveh and the Assyrian empire. But in the whole record
of his wars there is not a single fragment of definite local tradition, not a
single concrete detail of the slightest value except the statement that his
conquests were made with the aid of Arab allies. And this trait is stolen
from the legend of Semiramis, for she, as we have seen, is the Aphrodite
Urania whose worship, as Herodotus tells us, was borrowed from the
Assyrians (Syrians) and Arabs ; and we know from Lucian that all
Arabia thronged to her feast at Hierapolis. The whole exploits of Ninus
before Semiramis comes into his story are mere padding, but the account
of his marriage with her, and the idea that it was through this marriage
that she became a queen (i.e. a deity) are an exact inversion of the original
relation between the great Syrian goddess and the associated god. Ninus
the king is in fsbct Ninyas in a new rdle, transformed from the son into
the husband of the queen. I do not think that we have any reason to
ascribe this inversion to Ctesias, for exactly the same change of relation-
ship took place in the case of other Semitic syzygies, the divine myth
adapting itself to the new state of society in which women were tied to
one husband, and fatherhood, not maternity, became the basis of the law
of kinship and inheritance. In a patriarchal society the old worship of
mother and son seemed out of place, and the son became a husband or
Baal. At Hierapolis this change was not fully carried out ; the mother
and son myth held its ground, as we see from the Eoman legends. But
an acconmiodation to new ideas seems to have been made by splitting the
male god into two, and adding Ninus the husband to Ninyas the son.
This was not done without producing some confusion, as appears in the
story, told by Justin and Agathias, of the incestuous love of the goddess for
her son. On one side, therefore, Ninus is simply the double of his son.
But at the same time he appropriated certain elements from one of the
goddess's lovers, as appears from the story of his early death, and from
the fact that his tomb was shown. The tomb by the Euphrates was, I
apprehend, originally the tomb of the nameless lover whom Deroeto slew.
In like manner, according to the story given by Dino (-Elian, * V. H.'
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 317
vii. 1), Ninus was killed by Semiramis. The hero lover and the divine
son were united in the person of the shortlived husband and king.
In conclusion, let us seek to define precisely the result attained.
Semiramis is a name and form of Astarte, and the story of her conquests
in upper Asia is a translation into the language of pohtical history of the
diffusion and victories of her worship in that region. The centre of
diffusion — at least the main centre — was Bambyoe or Hierapolis, the
greatest sanctuary of the Syrian goddess, to which, at the annual feast of
Semiramis's birth from the Euphrates, pilgrims gathered in the time of
Lucian * from all Syria and Arabia and from the parts beyond the river.'
Hierapolis was never the seat of a great monarchy, but it was a great
meeting-place of trade, where the waterway of the Euphrates was inter-
sected by the road from Coele- Syria to upper Mesopotamia and the
farther east. And just as the worship of Astarte (Aphrodite) was carried
to the west by Phoenician traders, the same worship was spread by
Aramaean traders in the lands of the east. The empire of Assyria had, so
far as we know, no share in the thing at all. It was by a mere bhmder of
the Greeks or of some ignorant Syrian consulted by the Greeks that
the Ninus or Ninyas of Hierapolitan myth was brought into connexion
with Nineveh ; crude euhemerism, a free handling of the local myths of
Semiramis sanctuaries, and a large importation of elements borrowed from
the story of Alexander, did the rest, and produced the fabulous Greek
history of the foundation of the Assyrian empire. It would be easy to
show that the same circle of myth was pressed into service for the Greek
story of Sardanapalus, in which the warlike Assurbanipal is disguised in
the vestments of an effeminate Semitic god.
W. Robertson Sbiith.
THE DEIFICATION OF ALEXANDEB THE GREAT.
Glim magna res erat deumfieriy jam fam>am mimum fecistis, said Father
Janus to the assembled gods ; and where so respectable a divinity leads
the way, we men ought surely to assist the tory party in Olympus in
the laudable endeavour to maintain the exclusiveness of their ancient
company ; but in this instance if we protest against the gratuitous ascrip-
tion of divinity to Alexander, son of Philip, we do it rather to his glory
than his humiliation. Historians have been strangely persistent in re-
peating this charge against the great Macedonian, that he would have
been a god : the strictures of Niebuhr and Grote are not more danming
than the apologies of Droysen ; nor does Thirlwall or Professor Freeman
discredit the legend. And yet it is so utterly groundless, and withal so
injurious, that it may be worth while to examine in some detail this im-
putation of insolence and folly laid to the account of one with whose name
romance has been so busy as to leave small space for history.
It need hardly be premised that in such inquiry we must depend
chiefly on Arrian, the most critical and best informed of the Alexander
historians, and removed by little more than are the other extant chroni-
clers from the period of which he treats ; but still four hundred years is
Digitized by
Google
818 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
a long stretch, and between Alexander and Arrian intervenes a mass of
legend and tradition which, while not affecting the actual facts derived
from Ptolemy or Aristobnlus, will render wellnigh valueless original
comments and deductions by the author himself. Perhaps if we bear
this consideration in mind, and hold as of first importance the narrative
of facts, we may find that it has not been idly said that in no respectable
author is it proved that Alexander called himself son of Ammon.
Students of the historians of this period will, I think, allow that this
inquiry may be confined with much convenience and no less certainty to
four incidents in the record of Alexander — four occasions, that is to say, on
which the assumption of divinity has been accounted most clearly proved.
These are the visit to the oasis of Ammon, the banquet at Baktra, re-
markable for the first prostration, the mutiny at Opis, and the famous
decree demanding divine honour firom the Greek cities. If this fourfold
wave can be surmounted successfully, we may safely relegate the whole
charge to the category of libel.
The first wave is easy : we need not ask what brought Alexander to
Ammon ; it may be that an expedition originally directed against Cyrene
was diverted by the timely cession which met the conqueror at Parae-
tonium,* and that superstition and curiosity then induced a dash across
the desert to the oasis ; or the latter may be the one and original motive,
for, without reckoning the romantic and religious elements in Alexander's
nature, there were great projects floating in his mind, as the letters of the
previous year to Darius had shown, for which he might well desire the
sanction, real or apparent, of so famous a monitor. That he went con-
sulturus de origine sua is simply the invention of an Augustan writer.*
With regard to Alexander's questions and the reply of the oracle, we have
it as clearly as possible on the authority of Ptolemy and Aristobulus that
the consultation took place in camera ^ and that the king revealed no more
than that the answer was agreeable to his wishes ; * but we may gather
in some sort the character of the information then imparted from later
passages in Alexander's life, e.g. his sacrificing to certain gods on the
shore of the Indian Ocean, because, as he said, Ammon had so enjoined
him.^ In fact it is needless to suppose that anything was revealed to the
yoimg conqueror, save the fulfilment in the future of his hopes of con-
quest, and the religious observances to be complied with if he would fight
with the gods upon his side. And yet where Ptolemy and Aristobulus
are ignorant, Diodorus, Plutarch, and Trogus Pompeius are wise ; and
modem historians have been content to accept even the version of the
notorious Callisthenes, including the amazing resuscitation and prd-
voyance of the oracle of Branchid® — a version doubted even m the days of
Strabo.*
The genesis of the fable is explained sufficiently if we remember that
some of those who deified Alexander after his death, and inscribed his
portrait with the symbols of Ammon on their coins, would desire to put
on record some definite proof or sanction of his divinity; and what
better than a literal acknowledgment thereof by the high priest of
Ammon himself? a god who, identified by Greeks and Macedonians
' Diod. xvii. 49. . * Jostin, xi. 11. • Arrian, iii. 3, 4.
* lb. vi. 19. » Strabo, pp. 814, 816.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 319
idth Zeus, and by Egyptians "with Ra the progenitor of their old kings,
appealed to the most powerful elements in Alexander's legacy of empire,
as possibly no other single god could have done. This view is not novel,
for others have already pointed to the sober narrative which Arrian derives
from contemporary historians as outweighing the common fable of lesser
chroniclers ; and the iteration of the truth must be excused by the per-
sistent manner in which it is yet ignored by the few that deal with this
neglected period of history.
Four years have passed, and Alexander is now the great king ; his
empire embraces half a continent, but he well knows that it needs firmer
bonds than those of military coercion, else, in the apt simile of the Indian
sage, he will be but as one that treadeth on a corner of a wine skin to
find the rest ever rise up around him. He is ruler over a few Greeks
and many barbarians : can he safely despise the latter to the exclusive
glorification of the former ? or will it not be an achievement worthy alike
of his prudence and his genius to consolidate Europe and Asia into one
great nation by ties alike of custom and of kindred ? That such was his
purpose in his latter years is, I think, undisputed : for the marriages
solemnised at Susa and the bounties bestowed on ten thousand of his
soldiers who had wedded Asiatics prove it no less than the Median dress
that he himself assumed, and the army of Asiatic youths that his viceroys
were instructed to train and arm in the Macedonian fashion ; and the
vexation of the exclusive Macedonians at the leveUing policy of their
leader, added national exasperation to the more immediate causes of the
outbreak at Opis ; but so little was Alexander deterred from his purpose,
that one of his last acts was the reconstitution of the phalanx on the basis
of a complete fusion of European and Asiatic elements.
But if the fact is undisputed, the justice of the policy has not been so
generally conceded ; nor is it strange that those who persist in looking
at the history of the fourth century before Christ with the eyes of
Demosthenes only should exclaim at the iniquity of contaminating the
pure Hellenic stock with the baser barbarian, forgetting that the very
existence of the new empire depended on the bastard race, and that thus
only could that common language be spread over the East which has
rendered possible ahke the progress of commerce and of Christianity, and
done most to preserve the legacy of Hellenism, the cause of this very
partisanship ; for Athens of the fourth century was but a dying plant in
an effete soil till the Macedonian gathered it to plant its seeds in another
field. Nothing so well displays the wonderful power which Mr. Grote
possessed of identifying himself with the sentiments of the period that
he records as his assumption of the position of an Athenian of the last age
of freedom, who would rather the city of Pericles died under her orators
than live under Macedon to renew the world.
That nothing was intended by the Trpoencvri^ercc exacted at Baktra
except the assimilation of the habit of two peoples before their king, a very
brief review of the actual evidence will abundantly prove. The circum-
stances are related with much detail by Arrian and Curtius, more briefly
by Justin and Plutarch, while the text of Diodorus fails at this point.
The two first named embellish their narratives with speeches ascribing the
suggestion of prostration variously to Anaxarchus or Cleon the Sicilian, but
Digitized by
Google
820 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
agreeing with our other authorities generally (though not in detail)^ in as-
cribing the leadership of the opposition to Callisthenes ; and it is in these
speeches only that a religious significance is ascribed to the ceremony.
To argue from speeches in ancient authors is, needless to say, dangerous
enough at any time, but in this connexion doubly so ; for, while we may
disregard the compositions of Curtius altogether on the general principle
that a rhetorical exercise is least trustworthy when occasion for rhetori-
cal exaggeration is present (and the brief narrative of Justin affords no
ground for supposing the existence of any speeches at all in the original
of Trogus Pompeius), those of Arrian, on the other hand, are certainly not
derived from his best authorities, if from any whatsoever. His words in
introducing the episode are these : 'Yirip rijc vpoerKvyiiireioc Swaig ^yayriuOrf
^AXe^dy^p^ /cat roloahe Karix^i Xoyog J the concluding expression
being never used when Ptolemy or Aristobulus furnishes the narrative. We
may compare it with the words npotrKvyilffdai iOiXeiy *A\ilayZpoy Xoyoc
KaTi\eif vwoverrji fiiv ahrtp koi rfJQ ii^<fii rov^Afipnayoc varpoQ fidWoy ri Ti
^iXivwov 3o(i7c in the preceding chapter, which point to mere legendary
misinterpretation of the real policy implied ; and with eKtJya ovk en iviuKif
doted Tov KdWitrOiyovQ (ciircp iiXriOfi ffvyy€ypawrai) 6ri ic.r.X. in
chapter ix., an expression which prompts a suspicion that Callisthenes
himself may be the author of the whole misrepresentation, which would
assuredly make the hated name of Alexander, which he himself had
little cause to love, stink yet more in the nostrils of the Greeks for whom
his chronicle was written. But even if these speeches, ascribed as they
are to different orators by Arrian and Curtius, be not directly derived
from Callisthenes, but express no more than the essence of a popular
tradition, we may safely put them aside in view of the extraordinary mass
of fable that obscured the great personality of Alexander from the moment
of his death. Lastly, if any one be still ^sposed to accept such speeches
as genuinely representative of facts, it will be easy to find another in
Arrian, that of Alexander to the mutineers, which will tell as strongly
against, as these do for, the hypothesis of self-deification.
We are left, then, with these simple fEU^ts : that at a certain banquet
held in the Baktrian capital the ceremony of prostration was inaugurated,
probably by preconcerted arrangement, and that it met with strong op-
position from the Europeans on Alexander's staff, though none from the
Asiatics. We may also assume that Callisthenes on this occasion repre-
sented the feeling of the Macedonians, and that he possibly suffered in
the sequel for so doing. For there existed at this time, as any one who
will read the judicious remarks of Thirlwall on the trial of Philotas will
admit, a dangerous undercurrent of opposition to Alexander in his own
camp : those veterans who recalled Philip and his uniformly ' national '
policy were not likely to £edl in all at once with his son's attempts to
level the exclusive barriers of Macedonian prejudice; and Macedonian
monarchs had not hitherto held their power on so sure a tenure that even
an Alexander could suffer a malcontent party to vaunt itself in the eyes
of those soldiers on whom depended his all.
One word more on a subject which will recur later, and the second
^« Compare Arrian's aoooxint with Plataroh, Alex. 64. * Arrian, iy, 9.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 321
wave is past. May we not see in this gratnitous ascription of a foolish
and useless motive to an intelligible and politic ceremony, the genesis of
the whole tradition of Alexander's self-affiliation to Ammon ? May it
not be the outcome equally of the ignorance of Oreeks or the malice of
individuals ? A Greek prostrated himself to two powers, a god or the
great king, and if he were Gonon only to one ; to a Oreek the conception
of Alexander as the great king never presented itself ;, he was either a
barbarian king of Macedon, conquering other barbarians, or at best the
self-proclaimed champion of Hellas, avenging her on her hereditary foe
with fire and sword ; and the latter, be it remembered, was a character
which Alexander played pretty consistently to Oreek eyes, sending home
the statues of the Athenian liberators as earnest of his mission of revanche,
burning Persepolis, and cutting off the descendants of the BranchidsB root
and branch for the sins of their fathers. How then should a Oreek, with
thatr mist of anti-barbarian prejudice upon his eyes that darkened the
vision even of Aristotle, entertain for one moment the idea that a descen-
dant of Heracles could be the great king ? Of the two ideas all the hero
legends and popular mythology induced him to prefer the affiliation to
Zeus. Alexander then was being worshipped in Asia as a god ; his fathers
were in direct descent from Zeus as it was, and had taken care to impress
that fact on the Oreeks at certain notable conjunctures not yet wholly
forgotten.
Add to this that scandal and legend had both been free with the
reputation of Alexander's mother ; she had lived on the worst terms with
Philip, the young Alexander was openly branded as a bastard, and, if
there is any truth in a statement of Arrian,® Olympias herself vaunted
him as a son of a god. We need attach no weight now to such tales in
the face of Philip's acknowledgment of his son and Alexander's repeated
references to his father ; ^ but we may be sure such scandal was common
talk in Oreece and Macedonia, which latter country had little cause to
love the cruel and imperious queen-regent ; and thus a motive and an
excuse would be suggested that would make Alexander's presumption
seem the more possible and probable. In later days the paternity of the
great conqueror was farther obscured by an accretion of fortuitous or
interested romance : the conquered peoples hastened to claim him as one
of themselves ; either Nectanebo the magician king, wandering to Pella,
seduces Olympias in the visible shape of Ammon ; *^ or Ochus in disgust
sends back his new bride Philip's daughter, and of her is bom Alexander,
rightful tenth in descent of the race of the Eaianides. ^ * With the single ex-
ception of Solomon, no name is more frequent in the literature and legend
of the East ; prophet, wizard, or philosopher, Escander al Boumi marches
through the earth in many a story, and the Koran and the Persian poets
do but embellish the common legends of centuries, legends which might
• Arrian, v. 10.
* E.g. in his speeoh to the matineers (if that be eridenoe), and in his letter to
Darius. Arrian, ii. 14.
>* Psendo-Callisth. oh. i. foil, and its Latin versions ; Abnlfarag., Hist. Dyn. iv. ;
and other Arabian and Persian forms of the legend, and the medieval cycle generally.
" Persian tradition quoted by D*Herbelot, Bibl, Orient, art. * Escander,' and by
Favre, Becherches sur U$ Histoires fabuleuaes d^ Alexandre, p. 9 foil.
VOL. n. — ^NO. VI. Y
Digitized by
Google
i
822 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS AprU
well be both cause and cover for the introduction of fiction into sober
history, and are but the last expansion of the lying tales of Ephippus or
CaUisthenes.
The third wave is a little one, hardly a wave at all. Alexander has
returned from the limits of his conquest through tlie horrible Gedrosian
sands, through Carmania and Susiana to Opis on the Tigris; and at last
the sullen discontent which had peeped out long ago in Parthia,^' and had
broken his stubborn heart at the Hyphasis, has blazed out into open
mutiny. Of the two incompatible accounts of the soldiers' motive, that
of Justin is by far the more inteUigible, and we may for once prefer him
to Arrian. The latter asserts that the proximate cause of outbreak was
the disgust of the Macedonians at being ordered home while Asiatics
took their places with Alexander. Now this is hard to reconcile, first,
with the tenor of their conduct in Parthia and at the Hyphasis, where
they desired nothing so much as discharge in order to enjoy their gains
at home ; secondly, with the fact that in spite of such violent resistance
they were sent home with Craterus immediately afterwards to the number
of 10,000, while new levies were to replace them ; and, thirdly, with the
fusion of the two races at the great banquet of reconciUation, an experi-
ment too bold surely even for Alexander to hazard with an army that had
just mutinied on account of lesser favours shown to these very Asiatics.
Nor indeed are the 10,000 mixed marriages which Alexander had lately
rewarded at Susa very compatible with any such powerful prejudice. The
version of Justin obviates all these difficulties : the mutiny arose not among
those ordered home, who were glad enough to go, but among those de-
tained who wished equally for discharge : nee annos sed stipendia sua
numerari jubebant : pariter in militiam lectos^ pariter sacramento solvi
aquum censentes. Both accounts, however, agree in stating that the
soldiers bade their king continue the war in company with his father,
meaning thereby, says Arrian, Anunon. Justin adds, qtuitenus stios
milites fastidiat, which is imintelligible on his own showing that the
soldiers only wanted to be set free. Arrian represents Alexander in his
reply again and again alluding to Philip as his father *^ (and possibly this
speech, agreeing generally as it does with that of Curtius, has some
claims to be taken in evidence) ; so that we may conclude that at most a
vulgar gibe was hurled in a moment of ill-humour, and whether historical
or not, no more is proved than that some of Alexander's European
soldiers read, as they were sure to do, their own meaning into his poUcy.
So far very little has been advanced that is new, though much that is
too often forgotten ; but the fourth wave, last and greatest, relates to an
event which, so Deut as I am aware, has not been critically examined
hitherto. Almost all modem historians of Greece record, and that with-
out apparent hesitation, that shortly after Alexander's return to the west
he issued two decrees to the Oreek cities, one enjoining the recall of exiles,
the other demanding divine honours for himself; The first is twice attested
by Diodorus and quoted word for word ; ** it is also recorded by Justin **
'' Jastin, xii. 8.
" Arrian, viL 9: wp&rd y^ iarh ^iXiwirov rov wnpl^s^ ^ it*p koX tliAs, rov \^ov
ip^ofuu. Tavra fi^w rii 4ic rov vorphs rov 4ftov is ifMS ^wfipyfidwa, &e, Ac.
>* xviL 109 ; xviii. 8. '» xiii 5.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 328
and Curtius ; we know it to have been proclaimed at the Olympic festival
of 824, and to have been one of the determining causes of the Lamian
war ; in short, it is as certain as any event of the period. But let us look
to the other decree, fatal alike, if genuine, to our estimate of Alexander
and to our whole hypothesis ; albeit remembering that neither the one
nor the other is in the least discredited by any honours paid spontaneoiisly
by Greek cities, were they as extravagant as those which afterwards dis-
graced the relations of Athens and Demetrius the besieger.
First, no mention whatever of this decree is to be found in any one of
the five principal records of Alexander's life, nor in any remaining frag-
ment of a contemporary or trustworthy historian of the period.*^ The
silence of Arrian I will do no more than record, seeing that he omits also
the decree for the exiles, and that there is a lacuna in our text during this
year 824 : I would simply put him aside, together with Curtius, whose
narrative also fails in this year, as supplying no positive evidence for the
decree. But the silence of Diodorus, Justin, and Plutarch, is a powerful
argument. Remember that the historian first named deals somewhat
fiilly with these closing scenes of Alexander's life, that he twice mentions
and once quotes the companion decree, that Justin also records this other
decree, and that he, as is the case also with Plutarch and Diodorus, is in
no sense disposed to conceal circumstances prejudicial to Alexander. All
three join with Arrian in accepting without question Alexander's lust of
divinity, and record many gratuitous fables in support thereof, but this
most signal confirmation they each and all omit. And whereas Plutarch
proclaims his intention of recording in biography those details which best
display the character of the man, this significant expression of a foohsh
lust, this singular opportunity for declamation, is totally neglected.
Surely, then, we may conclude that this decree, be it genuine or no»
was at least unknown to any of these three historians ; whence, then,
comes our better knowledge ? On what do historians, Niebuhr, Thirlwall,
Droysen, and the like, base their confident assertion ? It will be best
to quote the few references which ancient writers are supposed to make to
this event, and let them speak for themselves.
First, three passages of the * Opera Moralia,' ascribed to Plutarch,
allude to a debate in the Athenian assembly on some proposal to accord
divine honours to Alexander : in the UoXirua vapayyiX/xaTa (§ 8) occur
these words : Hvdias hi b pviriitp^ ore wpoi: tclq tov ^AXeEdvCpov Tifxat avriXeytv^
eiKoyro^ ri yoc * owrw aif vio^ vtpl wpayfidriav roX/ji^g Xiytiv rriXucovriai^ ; ' * «:a*
firjy 'AXefaf^poc,' ciiro^, ' ifiou I't^npoQ 'iffTiv, oy xl/rifiiiffOe dtov dvai : ' in the
treatise £2 irpttrfiuTipi^ ToXcrcvreor (§ 2) we find a vague reference to
Pytheas being prevented by the herald firom speaking, perhaps on this
occasion, on the score of youth ; and lastly, in the Life of Lycurgus
(*Vit. Dec. Orat.' 7) thus: wdXiv hi Oeov arayopevovTiay {* Adfiyaiuty)
^AXi^ayBpoy * Ka\ iro^axoc ar,* elvir (o Avuowpyoc), *6 dcoc, ov ro Upoy cf/oiTac
Idiau vtpL^pAyuirQaiJ'
Mark that in no one of these passages are we given to understand that
the suggestion emanated firom Alexander himself; and if Plutarch (if he
be the author of these passages) knew that it did, it is passing strange
>• As collected and set forth by C. Miiller, Script. Qrac. BibL
T 2
Digitized by
Google
824 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
that he should make no reference to it in his biography of the Mace-
donian.
Secondly, Deinarchus, the most respectable authority that we shall be
able to quote in this connexion, attacks Demosthenes *^ on this wise : iw
yap ToKka vera /u€ra/3a\X<5/Li£i'OC Iv rdig Trpay^aai koi hifjnjyopwi/ oh^Ev vyuc
rcreXcue, ical tote fxiy ypaijuov Kot kirayoptviavy firflira 6X\ov vofiLl^tiv Qtov T^
TovQ vupaCiZofxivtiVQ • roTi it Xcywr, wf oh Itl top ^fj/wy kfif^itrPrifrtiv twy li\
ovpav^ TifxQy 'A\f^di'?p^, v.r.X. Still no mention of a ' decree.'
Valerius Maximus ^^ records a smart saying of Demades : nolentibus
Aihenienailms divinos honores Alexandra decemere^ Videte, inquit, ne dum
calum custoditis terrain amittatis. Lastly, -^lian*** records another
smart and characteristic repartee, this time by tiie LacedsBmonians to a
definite letter to the Greek cities : "AXXo* fiiy &KXa €\pif<i>l<FayTo, Aakehai-
fiovioi ^' iK€7ra, * 'EireiBtj *A\i^av^poc fiovXErai OfcJc eJyai, etrrat Qeoq* But
the same author^* in common with Athenaeus^^ informs us that Demades
was fined for proposing to make Alexander a god, and presumably his
motion was lost; and this hardly accords with the generally accepted
view. If we notice a chance reference in Athenaeus *' to Pytheas* com-
parison of Demosthenes with Demades (which may or may not have to
do with this matter) and the words in the spurious third letter of Demo-
sthenes^^ referring to Pytheas as a notable turncoat, ^rjfioriKoy Aicxp* rfjc
icap6}ov, we have, so far as I am aware, exhausted the ancient authorities
for the supposed decree. And truly a sorry lot they are — iSllian, Athe-
nsBus, Valerius Maximus — to set against the common silence of sober
historians: nor even agreeing among themselves withal, for while one
sets Demades* fine at 100, a second fixes it at 10 talents; one would
imply that the motion was negatived, the other that it was approved ; and
one only, and that the worst, records any express decree at all. In &ct,
if it were not for the words of Deinarchus and the doubtful author, or
authors, of the ' Moralia,* we might almost venture to stigmatise the
whole matter, decree, debates, resolutions and all, as a pleasing fiction
of the anecdote-mongers, concocted for the sake of two or three good
stories.
But if the oration against Demosthenes be genuine — and I know not
that it is doubted — ^there was at least some debate in the Athenian as-
sembly on the matter of divine honours to be paid to Alexander : the con-
sensus of report points to Demades as taking the initiative, and, for reasons
to be hereafter stated, we may presume that his motion was carried.
And this is all ; for we will venture to ignore the gossip of iElian in
view of two things : first the &r too characteristic nature of the Lacedae-
monian reply, somewhat too laconic and smacking overmuch of earlier
days when Sparta was still the city of few words and many deeds, to be
the product of this latter age when the Spartiatae were but a tithe of
their old number and the national character had been revolutionised by
a condottiere king; and secondly the notorious untrustworthiness of
^lian, in itself sufficient to condemn a statement so completely isolated
as this. Granting, then, that we possess a genuine speech of Deinarchus,
and that the ' Opera Moralia ' at least embody better authorities, what did
i» § 97. >» Sapienter dicta aut facta, yiu 13. » Var. Hist, ii, 1»,
ti lb. y. 12 «vi*68. « I&»ii.22 "§29.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 825
really happen in this matter ? Nothing, I would humbly maintain, but
a spontaneous outburst of adulation firom various cities led by the philo*
Macedonian party in each, intended to greet the conqueror on the earUest
occasion whereon an embassy could approach his presence. For years
he had been lost on the confines of the world, and doubtless Greece, like
his own viceroys, had taken heart of grace in the fond hope of seeing his
&ce no more. We know too little of internal Greek history in this period,
but we may guess from the recorded embassies to Darius, from the revolt
of Agis and the acquittal of Ctesiphon in 880, from the hopes of Harpalus,
the operations of Leosthenes, and the instant outbreak of the Lamian war
when Alexander's death was known as certain, that Greece was fermenting
the while with ill-disguised aspirations ; and we may be sure that many a
city, and not least among them Athens, felt qualms enough when she
heard of the conqueror's safe return to Susa to induce the most abject
measures of conciliation. Nor is this only speculation : in the nineteenth
chapter of his last book Arrian tells us that various embassies from Greece
met Alexander at Babylon, but, he adds, hxep ^ri^r etcaaroi Trpefffiivofieroi
ovK ayayiypawrai, and conjectures that they were complimentary. Again,
on his second entry into Babylon, Alexander was met by other Greek
envoys, who in sacred garb set gold crowns upon his head, ofc Oeutpol
iffOty c'c Tifiiit' Seov d^iy/iii'oi.^^ Now if either of these embassies came in
response to an express command (and if such command was given, this
can be no other than the reply), why does not Arrian say so, instead of
rather inducing his readers to consider them spontaneous 7 and if he had
mentioned such command in his lost chapters, why no reference back to
it here ? Nay, he rather tells us that he did not know the motive of the
first embassy; how could he forget the notorious decree? unless this
adulation was but the fruit of the obscure travail of Greek assemblies.
Diodorus ^ tells us the same story with the same omissions, and in com-
mon with Arrian and Justin records similar embassies at the same period
from all nations : had the decree then gone forth into the ends of the
earth?
For the decree we have iBlian ; against it a mass of indirect evidence :
which shall be preferred? Surely the latter, lest we visit the sins of
Athens on the head of Alexander : if any one thinks it less probable that
the former should sin than the latter, let him remember that it was pro-
bably only the Macedonian party, tiien in the ascendant, that sympa-
thised witii such adulation ; — and, if the anecdotes of Valerius Maximus,
Athenaeus, and ^lian count for anything, there would seem to have been
opposition enough ;— and also let him remember that a very few years
later a shadow of Alexander was lodged in the Parthenon, while the city
beneath reeked with the smoke of his hecatombs.
Of modem writers, Thirlwall records the decree without demur:
equally so Droysen : Grote only, little as he loves a Macedonian, ignores
it altogether, while otherwise treating at length of Grecian affairs in
Alexander's absence, so fEir as they can be known. We can hardly accuse
the great historian of ignorance even of such obscure passages as bear on
this matter, more especially with Thirlwall's work before him ; and yet,
«» Arr. vii. 28. " xvii. 118.
Digitized by
Google
326 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
in the poverty of material for these years, it is strange that he should
make no reference even the most contemptuous : possibly we have here a
rare instance of omission.
There remain yet one or two lines of evidence for the defence which
have not been directly noticed hitherto, but are of some moment. The
judgment of history has been doubtless to some extent guided by the
personal reflections of Arrian, notably those that conclude his work ; and
yet the author records matters elsewhere strangely inconsistent with his
own views. Allusion has been made already to the words put into Alex-
ander's mouth at Opis, how he glories in his father Philip in the presence
of his assembled army, surely an inconsistency whether of fact or fiction.
And again and again does Arrian allude to Alexander's recognition of his
descent from the heroes of old, Heracles and Perseus, the mythical pro-
genitors of the Macedonian dynasty ; avroc air' "Apyovt rwv 'Hf>a<LXe£^ttiv
CI I'll I i|£i#v,^^ he marches to Ammon for the envy he had of these two, da-o
yci'ovc oyri rov d/u^oii- : ^^ and on the Hydaspes he pours a libation to
Heracles his forefather .^^ Even a god can hardly claim a dual pedigree ;
and if Alexander preferred the nearer and more singular to the remoter
and more vulgar descent from Zeus, he would surely have been careful
that the one should be forgotten in the other.
But for the most signal confirmation of our hypothesis we must look
to coins. The close of the fourth century B.C. is marked, as is well
known to numismatists, by the introduction of human portraiture on
Greek coins; and Alexander himself has the distinction of being the
first to be so portrayed. It cannot be doubted that herein is the outward
and visible sign of an actual deification ; for none but a god might be so
represented. There seems now to be no question that Alexander himself
never ordered his own portrait to be struck upon his coins.'^ And the only
question is that raised by Visconti, Lenormant, and others as to the possi-
bility of the so-called Heracles of the ordinary currency being in reality
Alexander : this view was derived apparently from an d priori acceptance
of self-deification, based on such untrustworthy statements as that at
Ephippus of Olynthus '^ that Alexander was in the habit of assuming
divine disguises in everyday life, or of Constantine Porphjrrogenitus '*
with regard to actual coins. There is frequently no resemblance whatever
between the Heracles of the coins and later undoubted portraits of
Alexander, such, for example, as those on the medals of Lysimachus and
Ptolemy Soter, or the bust in the British Museum ; and similar heads are
found on the coinage of Macedonian kings antecedent to Alexander. If
the latter ever struck his own portrait, it would at least not be in his
earlier years, to which some of the coins in question undoubtedly belong.
And we have it on the authority of Apuleius and the elder Pliny that only
three, or at most four, artists were permitted to imitate the features
of the master of the world ; Polycletus or Lysippus might preserve them
in marble, Apelles upon canvas, and Pyrgoteles on gems; no mention
^ Arr. ii. 5. » lb. iii. 8. » lb. vi. 3.
** For these facts and some of the arguments, I am indebted to varions nomis-
matioal works, notably those of L. MtUler {NumUmaHqtie d' Alexandre le Grand), BIr.
Staart Poole, and Mr. Barclay Head.
« Apud Athen, 637 E. « De Them. ii. 2.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 327
being made of coins. These and other considerations led L. Miiller
to the conclusion that at most a few towns or governors may have
covertly assimilated the lineaments of Heracles to those of Alexander,
but that this was done without the knowledge of the latter. But Mr.
Poole and Mr. Head deny even this possibility, and in clear language
assert that Alexander's portrait never appears on any coin struck in his
lifetime, Lysimachus being the author of the bold innovation. On the
beautiful medals of the latter as well as on those struck during Ptolemy's
regency, the features of the great conqueror stand forth beyond the
possibility of question ; and the same head with the curling horns of
Ammon and the headgear of Heracles, with that unmistakable inflection
of the neck, and the determined half-contemptuous look that is dis-
cernible in the British Museum portrait, was struck upon a long succession
of coins and medals &r down into Roman days, even to the reign of
Garacalla.
To what does this point ? Surely to this conclusion, that the deifica-
tion of Alexander was wholly posterior to his decease. The restriction of
portraiture upon Greek coins to the gods alone was so invariable and so
notorious, that Alexander would hardly have neglected so visible a token
of that divinity, which he is supposed to have forced down the throat of
a recusant world ; how could he miss that which at once occurred to his
successors when they had occasion to proclaim him a god ? For this I
take to be the significance of the posthumous portraiture : it has been
urged that it is due simply to intercourse with Persia, whose kings had
long engraved their own heads upon their darics; but assuredly this
would have impelled Lysimachus or Ptolemy to represent themselves (as
indeed Ptolemy did in later years), not their dead master ; and it is
curious that Seleucus, who succeeded to the most Persian portion of the
imperial heritage, struck not Alexander's but his own portrait.'^
It would appear, then, that during the intervening period between
Alexander's death and ihe battle of Ipsus, certain of the Diadochi found
it expedient to institute a cult of the founder of Macedonian dominion
abroad, in precisely the same way and for the same motives as the Roman
emperors who succeeded Augustus. In the one case the genius of Roman,
in the other the genius of Macedonian empire, was signified in the
personification ; and in token thereof coins were struck bearing the head
of this political divinity endued with the symbols of his godhead. The
cult may have been employed either as a sentimental rallying point or a
political test ; in either case its importance would tend to diminish as the
Diadochi seated themselves more firmly upon their thrones, and it may
have served only till the actual assumption of the royal title by the
principal satraps. But of its existence both early and late there is ample
evidence ; it began before the terrible corpse was buried, if we may credit
the tale that Aristander promised eternal good fortune to its possessor ;
Ptolemy secured the prize, honoured it with the magnificent obsequies
described by Diodorus,*^ and lodged it in a shrine in Alexandria. Here it
** Albeit there is a distinot resemblance betiveen the supposed Seleaous of these
coins and the ondoabted Alexander on those of Lysimachus : see Coins of the SeleticidcB,
Duane and BartolozzL
« xviii. 26 foU.
Digitized by
Google
828 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
was an object of worship for many centuries, here it was viewed and
honoured by Augustus,'^ here it was robbed by order of Caligula,^ and
shut firom public view by Severus.^^ The indignant Clement reproved his
flock for worshipping with pagan rites one whom Babylon had proved a
corpse,^ and Cyril quoted in scorn to Julian this apotheosis of the mortal
son of Philip.^ The Athenians voted him to be Dionysus ; ^^ Strabo tells
of a grove and festival at Clazomen® dedicated to the new god/' and
altars arose to him in many places,^^ till the cult degenerated into a
fashionable superstition ; the people of Antioch wore his image as a
potent amulet/' and the Macrian house at Home engraved his features on
their plate ; ^^ Roman emperors had them struck upon their seals ; ^^ and
Pompey masqueraded in his cloak/^
The imagination or the policy of a later age has served to obscure the
real origin of this deification, and to charge Alexander with a folly totally
foreign to his character. There were times, indeed, when the fierce
passions inherited of his mother drove him to commit acts for which he
as fiercely repented, and times when his impetuous nature induced such
hizarrerie as the obsequies of Hephaestion : ^^ but these were the hot vain
impulses of the moment that, however deplorable, need surprise no one
who reflects on the nature of the man ; we may grant many such, but
still defy his enemies to produce a single instance of fruitless folly, con-
ceived in cold blood and sustained for years ; for of all Alexander's de-
liberate actions how many may be fairly impeached? He was never
defeated in the field ; never besieged a town that he did not take ; never
lost a foot of ground that he had acquired ; and left his successors half
a world at peace. Not a single reservation need be made to this epitome
of the history of hardly a dozen years: Alexander died at the age of
thirty-two with some crimes to repent of, some extravagances to condone ;
but, after passing through such an ordeal of success as man's weak nature
has never done before or since, leaving a record of the past and a promise
of the future unparalleled in the world's history. This man was at least
not a fool. The age of heroes was no more, and Alexander shared his
soldiers' hardships, ate, drank, and was clothed as they, his body was
pierced by a score of wounds, and blood, not ichor, distilled therefrom.
What profited a transparent fiction among those that moved about him,
or among the rationalising Greeks ? What even among the conquered ?
Amun-Ba might be god in Thebes; he might aid Ptolemy, but who
beyond Pelusiiun knew or honoured his name ? Alexander's sole object
in Asia was to be the great king : he bowed himself alike to Jehovah
» Saet. Aug, 18. '• Snet. CaUg, 52.
^ Dio, 70. 13. * Cohort, ad Oent. p. 77.
» Contr. Jul. vi. 206. *• Diog. Laert. ii. 2. 6.
*^ ziv. 953. *' Ammian. Mar. xxii. 8 ; Oros. i. 2.
** Chiysost. Op. vL p. 610. ** Trebell. Pollio, qiL xiii. p. 1090.
^ Suet. Aug. 50. ^ Appian, De BelU MUh. torn. i. 28, p. 674.
*"* It should not be forgotten that this much and justly oensured extravagance was
posterior to the terrible wound inflicted in the citadel of the Malli, as well as to many
earlier ones ; and also to the horrors of the Oedrosian march, in which Alexander, but
lately convalescent, never spared himself. The rapidity with which he succumbed to
the fever at Babylon in the following year bears witness to a physical deterioration
which may well have produced a corresponding effect on his mind.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 829
fiuid to Bel, and would doubtless have conciliated equally the Persian
hierarchy but for the luckless fire at Persepolis which burnt the sacred
writings. Neither policy nor inclination prompted him to add himself to
the manifold divinities of his empire. D. G. Hogarth.
THE 'VIBGATA.'
The * Gustumals of Battle Abbey/ just published by the Camden Society,
throw a new and curious light on the * virgata ' or * yard.' It is now re-
cognised that the ' yard ' or * virgata ' represented the fourth part of a hide,
whether these terms were used to indicate areal measures or geld-units.
Mr. Seebohm, in his work on ' The English Village Community/ writes :
' We know now what a virgate or yard-land was. We shall find that its
normal area was thirty scattered acres — ten acres in each of the three
fields ' (p. 27). He then deals with ' the relation of the virgate or yard-
land — which is now known to be the normal holding of the normal tenant
in villenage — to the hide and ca/nicate * (p. 86). This, I may observe in
passing, implies a confusion of ideas, which would seem to be very general.
The virgate was related to the hide, the bovate to the carucate. It is
essential that the two different systems should be kept quite distinct.
But to proceed. Mr. Seebohm concludes ' that the normal hide consisted
as a rule of four virgates of about thirty acres each ' (p. 87).
Now Domesday recognises the existence in England of three different
cfystems of land measurement and assessment. That of Kent was the
• solin,' divided into four * juga.* The rest of England was divided between
the ' hidated ' districts of the south, measured by the ' hide * of four
' virgates,* and the ' carucated * districts, measured by the ' carucate ' of
eight * bovates.' This much is beyond dispute.
The great discovery of the essential connexion of the unit of measure-
ment and assessment with the plough team of eight oxen (*caruca*)
explains the relation of tiie bovate to the carucate and that of the jugum
(or yoke) to the solin. It throws, however, no light on that of the vir-
gate to the hide. Indeed, it might, from Mr. Seebohm's work, be doubted
whether the virgate was, in truth, a subdivision of the hide, and was not
rather the original unit, of which the hide was merely the aggregate. It
is probably on this very point that Eemble and others have gone astray.
Mr. Seebohm considers that (in 900) ' the hiwisce or family holding seems
from the services to have been a yard-land of thirty acres * (p. 162). He
also writes that ' the Saxon hide, or the familia of Bede, was . . . the
holding of a fEimily. Hence it was sometimes, like the yard-land or
holding of a servile feimily, called a " hiwisc" which was Anglo-Saxon
and also high German for family.' But the Saxon hide also was trans-
lated into pUmghlaTid or carucate, corresponding with the full team of
eight oxen ' (p. 895). This, it will be seen, is by no means satisfactory,
since we are left in doubt which represents the real family holding, the
hide or the virgate.
Nor is Mr. Seebohm's etymology of * virgate * a quite satisfactory ex-
planation : ' In England the typical holding in the cleared land of the
Digitized by
Google
880 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
open fields was called a yard-leaidf or in earlier Saxon a ^^r^-landes, or
in Latin a virgata terrfe ; ^ yard, gyrd, and mrga all meaning rod, and all
meaning also in a secondary sense a yard-measnre. The holdings in the
open fields were of ya/rded or rooded land — land measured out with a rod
into acres four rods wide, each rod in width heing therefore a rood as we
have seen ' (pp. 171-2). This explanation is surely a strained one. For
why should an area containing, ex hypothesis thirty acres, be specially
named after the rod (virga) by which, says Mr. Seebohm, all areas, firom
the rood upwards, were measured ? The area that one would expect to
find so named would be the ' rood * itself.
It is here that the ' Custumals of Battle Abbey ' come, we shall find,
to our assistance. The manor of Wye, co. Kent, was in that portion of
England which was measured by the ' solin ' and the 'jugum.' The
' virgate,* therefore, in its recognised sense of the fourth part of a hide, was
here unknown. The ' jugum* occupied its place. \et, in this volume,
there is a survey of the manor (1811-12) in which the ' virgata ' occurs,
and in two different senses. In one, it is used for the * rood ' or fourth part
of an acre. This sense is admitted by the editor, who writes : ' The use
here of the word " virgata " for rood is very unusual and rather confusing.
. . . There can, however, be no doubt as to the meaning ' (p. xli). In the
other sense it is used to denote the quarter of a ' jugum.' It is this sense
which is missed by the editor, who, taking it to mean the recognised
* virgate,' gets over the consequent difficulty by defining the < jugum ' as
' equivalent to a hide ' (p. 165).
Let us first deal with this latter sense. On p. 122 the survey, after
dealing with the holdings of a ' jugum ' and a half, of a ' jugum,' and of
a half ' jugum,* proceeds : et prater hcBC virgata Trostel, qua est quarta
pars unius jv^u Again, on p. 180 is a list of the holdings in the
manor, temp. Henry in, the total being given as twenty-eight juga
servilia et una virgata. This amount is thus composed : —
j. T.
2 Holdings of ivfojuga 4 0
8 Do. one and a half juga . . . . 4 2
15 Do. onejtigumt . . • . . . 15 0
2 Do. three virgata 12
5 Do. half A jugum 2 2
_8 Do. one virgata 0 8
80 28 1
This analysis proves that here the typical holding was the ' jugum,* which,
as we have seen, was the equivalent of the ' virgate ' of the hidated districts.
And this latter, as Mr. Seebohm observes, was ' the typical holding ' of
the villein. Five holdings are here expressed in terms of the ' virgata,'
that is, of the qusLrter-jugum, because they could not be expressed in
terms of the jugum or hsU-j^itgum. By the time of Edward n these
holdings had shrunk to one, namely, the ' virgata Trostel ' (ut stipra).
Now this is elsewhere described as una virgata qua dicitur Throstesierd
(p. 188), and in the termination * -ierd ' we may recognise the * yard *
which was latinised ' virgata.'
> What is the evidence for this fonn ?
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 881
Turning now to the other 'virgata/ the rood or quarter-acre, its
nature is here clearly shown. After describing the virgata Trostel, qtu»
est quarta pars unius jtcgi (p. 122), the survey tells us that qtcodlibet
jiiguin [a/rabit] unam acram et dimidiam, et virgata Throstle unam virga-
tarn et dimidiam (p. 128), the latter ' virgata ' being the fourth part of
the ' acra,' as the former was of the ' jngum.' We further learn that an
acre and a half represented an acre and a ' virgate * and a half * virgate '
plus half a ' virgate,* ^ that is to say, that two virgates equalled half an
acre. It is, therefore, absolutely certain that this ' virgata ' was the
rood.
In this same volume we find the * virgata ' used, not as an areal but
as a lineal measure. Thus : et debet claudere V virgata^ haics qtia vocan-
tv/r gavelmerke (p. 6). This instance is taken from the Sussex manor of
Marley. In *' merke ' we may doubtless recognise a boundary fence or
' mark.' Here the ' virgata * can only mean, as the editor takes it,
a *rod.'
Now, looking at these special uses, what we find is this. Whether it
is a quarter of the * jugum ' or of the areal or of the lineal ' acra,' the
'virgata' is in each instance essentially the qiiarter. The inference
that would seem to suggest itself firom this is that its original and obvious
sense was a ' rod ' or * rood ' (i.e. a quarter-acre), and that it was then
used by transference of idea to denote other qua/rters, such as the quarter-
' jugum ' or the quarter-* hida.' Should this be the right view, it would
follow that the hide was the true unit, and the virgate merely its sub-
division, its ' quarter.'
Another noteworthy land term that we meet with in the survey of
Wye is the * wendus : ' Sciendum quod tres sunt wendi, scilicet Dune-
wendus, Chiltenwendus, et Brunelfordwendus. In qtu>libet wendo sunt
decern juga, et sic sunt in triJms wendis xxx juga (p. 122). The place-
names of the ' wendi,' with their equality in ext^it, are suggestive of
their identity with the ' three fields.'
The ' wista ' is another term on which light is here thrown. It occurs,
instead of the usual ' virgata,' in the surveys of two Sussex manors,
Alciston and Marley ; and the evidence that it was equivalent to a virgate,
and was the fourth part of a hide, is conclusive. This completely disposes
of the suggestion made by Mr. Seebohm, and based on one of those
mischievously misleading medisdval tables of measurement,' 'that the
" great wista " of four virgates would correspond with the single hide of
120 acres, and the wista would equal the ordinary half-hide of two vir-
gates ' (p. 61). It is quite certain that the ' wista ' was the equivalent of
the ' virgate,' while the ' great wista ' was the half-hide. But the latter
was an abnormal holding, of which there are only two instances, the
half-hide being the term normally employed.
But though < the ordinary half-hide of two virgates ' is not represented
by the ' wista,' it is by another local holding, the ' wara ' of Stafford-
shire. In the Burton cartulary (' Staffordshire Collections ') we find that
the normal villein holding consists at times of two bovates, and at times
' Quod tantum anrahii unam acram et unam virgatam et dimidiam virgatam ; et
ibi deficit dimidia virgata de acra et dimidia, dc (p. 128).
' Like one of those quoted by Ellis in his Introduction to Domesday,
Digitized by
Google
3S2 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS AprU
of half a ' wara.' The latter is clearly the equiyalent of the virgate ; and
as the ' wara * is umnentioned by Mr. Seebohm, it may be well to set the
fact on record. J. H. Bound.
MOLMEN.
Birch's * Cartularium Saxonicum/ i. 298, contains what purports to be an
earlier instance of the use of the word molman than the one Mr. Bound
cites. It occurs in a charter from king Offa to abbot ^^el n66 of
Canterbury, the date whereof is circa 772. The passage is as follows :
pan on sv^ rihte swa Moulman strecte o)> landes ende. This is clearly
corrupt. Thomas of Elmham, writing in the early part of the fifteenth
century, translates this passage by alia recte ad austrum ad Moulem-
manstrate^ ubi est una extremitas ejusdem terra,* Probably the English
should read : andlang Mdlman strdte o^ landes ende,' i.e. along Mdlman
Street to the end of the estate. This charter is derived from 'MS.
Trin. Hall, Camb., f. 66 6,* but, unfortunately, Mr. Birch gives no hint of
the age of the manuscript. But I think it is clear that the charter, if it be
not a forgery, has been tampered with. The boundaries have certainly been
modernised, for the mention of mdlmenn at this date is clearly an ana-
chronism. I shall endeavour to prove that 7/klZ=rent is of Danish origin,
that this meaning is a late development, and therefore mdlman must be
also a late formation ; so that the word mdlman cannot have existed in
the reign of Offa. It is certainly a noteworthy feature that this class of
tenants should derive their name from a Danish source, and one is
tempted to conclude that the tenure itself was of Danish origin. Apart
from the lack of evidence other than that of etymology, we must, before
accepting such a conclusion, reflect that, after aU, the word mdl-man may
have been coined on English ground by Englishmen after mdZ=rent had
become famiUarised as part of their every-day speech.*
Has not Professor Yinogradoff drawn too sweeping a conclusion in
saying that * borough English was very widely held in medieval England
to imply servile occupation ' ? (English Historicaii Bbvibw, i. 786.)
Against an unqualified acceptance of this view may be urged the £act of
the existence of this custom of descent in so many free boroughs where
there could be no impUcation of servile tenure. And we have the £act that
this custom of descent existed in at least two out of the Five Burhs {Le.
in Nottingham and Stamford), in the very heart of the free Danish dis-
tricts. There is also evidence of its existence amongst free sokemen,
where, again, there could be no imputation of a servile status. I make
these remarks with considerable diffidence, for I fully appreciate the
danger of differing with so great an authority on early English legal
history as Professor Vinogradoff.
Before proceeding to the main part of my note, I may point out
that iElfrfc, in his version of St. Augustine De Auguriis, distinctly
refers to the custom of casting lots for parcels of pasture land. The
* Neither Professor Yinogradoff nor Mr. Bound has noticed the mention of
mdlmenn In the Boldon Book (ed. Greenwell, p. 5). In his glossary Canon Green well
attempts to identify these malmanni with the smaUmannit or minuH honUneSt of the
Pipe Boll, 31 Hen. I. He notices that Bishop Hatfield's Survey speaks of tenentes
vocaii * malmen ' sivefirmarU,
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 388
passage occurs in his 'Lives of the Saints/ ed. Skeat, E.E.T.S., no. xvii.,
line 84 sqq, :
Hl^otan man m6t mid gel^afieui bw4 ])4ah
on woruld-|7ingam blitan wicce-crsefte
]>8et him d^me seota, gif hi hwset 4^1an wiUatS :
)ns is n&n wiglung, ac hip wissmig foroft.
Professor Skeat translates this by : ' Nevertheless a man may cast lots,
in faith, in worldly things, without witchcraft, that he may allot himself
pastures, if men wish to divide anything [i,e, any land] : this is no sorcery,
but very often a direction.' Is this an illustration derived from St.
Augustine, or is it an addition of ^Ifrfc's ?
There are several other Teutonic words like mdlman. It is desirable
to dispose of these before considering our own word. Ducange, s.v,
* Maalman,* has identified the English mdl-man with the German
fhdl-man. This is wrong, for the German mdl-man is clearly a man
viewed in some relationship to a malhim or court, and hence this TrM-man
may be (1) a suitor of a court, or (2) an officer or magistrate of a court
(cl German mahlmcmn in Grimm's * Worterbuch ' ) . This mallum is merely
a latinised form of the Old High German mahal, * contio, pactio, fadus '
(Graff, ' Althochdeutscher Sprachschatz,' ii. 650). Another similar word
is the Danish maah-mandj a spokesman, pleader (maaZ=Goth. mapl,
(lyopa), and the Danes have also another word maals-mandy a measurer
of land in dispute (see Molbech, * Dansk Ordbog '). In this latter word
maal means ' measure,' and is historically the same word as the A.S.
mdlf whence our Tneal, ' a repast.' In this connexion may be mentioned
the curious Danish word maals-jord (yord=earth), which means the land
adjoining a village ' roped ' ^ or measured out in allotments to the villagers
(Molbech).
Now as to the etymology of mdl-man. Professor Vinogradoff cites
Lye and Bosworth to prove that mdl in A.S. meant * rent.' Bosworth's
book is little more than a reprint of Lye, with all Lye's blunders and a
few of Bosworth's own. These dictionaries are very untrustworthy and
uncritical, and the occurrence of a word therein by no means proves tibat it
is a genuine A.S. word. Professor Skeat has disposed of many words
occurring in these dictionaries that never had an existence outside the
inventive brain of William Somner. If we accept Bosworth as an au-
thority for the existence of a word in A. S., we should be perforce obliged
to admit that the Romance word werre ( = guerra), which occurs in the
Chronicle in 1140, was an A.S. word. Turning to Bosworth, I find the
following entries : ' Mai, a speech, discourse, multitude, an assembly, a
place of meeting,' for which he cites the Chron. for 1062, and *Mal,
formal, -es, tribute, toll, subsidy ; stipendium, Chron. 1087.* These
meanings are mere guesses, and, like most philological guesses, they are
wrong. ThiBmdl, -cs, n., represents two Old Norse words that the Anglo-
Saxons had fused into one. In addition to this fusion in A.S. the two
' Molbech explains the obsolete phrase at rebe en Mark^ Ager, Skov (to * rope * a
'mark,* field, or wood) as meaning to assign, after measurement, to each of the villagers
his allotment in the field or wood of the village. Upon this Norse custom of measur-
ing by ropes, see Steenstrup, Nomumneme, i. 298-9. Has this any connexion with
the Dutch maalmefm referred to by Mr. Elton ?
Digitized by
Google
884 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
words are so intimately connected that I find it necessary to deal with
both. As my treatment of the first of these words will afiford me an
opportmiity of correcting several blmiders in the current translations of
the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles, I trust the readers of the ENaLiSH Historical
Beview will pardon the appearance in its pages of what looks like a
purely philological digression.
Mdl (I) occurs in the following passage in Chron. E., atiTto 1062 :
* pi^ bar Godtuine eorl lip his mdl,' literally 'there bare Godwine earl
up his mdV This phrase has been universally translated wrongly.
Thorpe, p. 162, renders it : * Godwine brought forth his speech ; ' Earle
glosses mdl by ' speech, apology ; ' Bosworth gives ibi instituit Godwinus
comes ejus sermonem; and the usually reliable Ettmiiller ('Lexicon
A.S.' p. 228) translates mdl by sermo, loquela. Now this expression
is pure Scandinavian. It occurs in the * Fomaldar Sogur,' i. 864 : * berr
harm w^^fyrvr hr66er sinn mdlit ; hcmn berr upp mdlit,' etc. The phrase
is one of procedure, and means ' to state the grounds of an action,' so that
the above passage in the Chronicle should be translated, as Steenstrup
(' Normarmeme,' iv. 180) points out : * there earl Godwine opened his
case* {Godwine fremsatte da sin Sag). Mdl is thus clearly the Old
Norse mdl, which meant technically a ' suit, action, declaration, or in-
dictment.' Primarily it meant merely ' speech/ and it is thus the same
word as the Gothic vtapl, &yopa (whence mdpljan, XaXtlv) A.S. maf6el,
O.H.G. modal.* With the expression ' to bear up a mdl ' may be com-
pared the O.N. phrase * to bear a suit * {bera sok einom).^ Further
proof of ihe Scandinavian origin of mdl (I) may be found in the phrase
cum^n td wi6ermdle, which occurs twice in Chron. D., anno 1062. This
has been quite as much distorted in translations as mdl. Florence of
Worcester renders it ad placitandum and placitum inire. Ettmiiller, p.
224, gives disceptatio, placitum, decretum judiciale, concilium, and other
writers are equally wide of the mark. Professor Steenstrup, iv. 181,
quotes several passages firom the Scandinavian laws in which * to come
to wither-mdl ' occurs. From these passages it is clear that the meaning
is ' to appear (in court) to answer at the day named ' s the Danish * at
komms til Vedermaalsting.' * Wither = contra, so that wi^Ser-mdi is the
defence, the ' counter-speech ' as it were, of the defendant.
So far we have seen that Mdl (I) is of Scandinavian origin, and that
it is historically the same word as the A.S. m^M. We may reasonably
assume that Mdl (11) is also of Danish origin. Accordingly we find an
O.N. mdle, -a, m., which is a weak noun, i.e. the e represents the Teu-
tonic suffix on ( ss Aryan an). This is sometimes suffixed to stems
* The lengthening of the vowel in mdl, which is according to mle, is caused by
the omission of the interdental spirant (cf. O.N. hvdrr, older form limtSarr=Ooth.
htoa^, * whether (of two) ; * Noreen, AUnordische OrammaHk, § 222. This lengthen-
ing is eaased by the failore to pass the tip of the tongue between the teeth. So in
A.S., names in ateel- appear in late MSB. as ail-, ageU { = aye1), Ae.
* This phrase is the origin, as Steenstrup has shown, of Bracton's saeeabor,
sachaburth (=0.N. sakar-dbere, a prosecutor, * bearer of a suit *), which has puzzled
generation after generation of our legal historians.
* Molbech detines Vedermaalsting as *the Thing or the TMngday at which the
defendant is bound to answer in a suit {at tage til OienmaU i Sagen).* He cites for
this Danske Love (the Danish Laws), v. 107.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 886
without perceptibly changing their meaning,^ although in most cases it
indicates some change of signification. If , as I assume, this O.N. mdl-e
is merely mdl-\-on, it follows that the corresponding A.S. formation
would be *mai^la, -an, m.^ but there is no trace of such a word. This
O.N. mdle means ' terms, agreement,* a meaning that would easily
develop from mdl, * speech.' Mdle also meant ' soldier's pay,' a sense
evolved from 'terms, agreement.' Cleasby and Yigfasson give many
quotations for the meaning ' soldier's pay.' It is clear that the significa-
tion of * money paid as rent ' has grown out of this meaning * soldier's
pay,' and it seems to be an English accretion. The O.N. form correspond-
ing to mdl-man is mdlormaSr, which means * one who receives pay,' not,
like mdl-mant * one who pays.' This favours the view that mdl-man was
compounded on English soil after mdl (U) had acquired the meaning rent.'
An examination of the passages in A.S. in which this mdl (U) occurs
throws considerable Hght upon this evolution of meaning, and confirms
the Scandinavian origin of the word. The passages are as follows :
I. Chron. C, anno 1049: — JSadwerd scylode ix. scypa of mdle. The
entire phrase in this case is Scandinavian. Although Bosworth (followed
by Ettmiiller, p. 677) gives sciUan, * to divide,' as an A.S. verb, there
can be no doubt that the very few instances of its use in A.S. are due to
Danish influence. It is, in short, an O.N. loan-word. So that in this
passage we have mM (II) coupled with an O.N. verb shilja, ' to divide,
out off.' The Norse origin of the entire phrase may be illustrated by the
Danish expression ' at skille Een af Tned nogety to deprive any one of any-
thing. Hence scilian scipu of mdle is purely an anglicised Norse
idiom meaning < to pay off diips.'
n. The next passage, which is equally conclusive, occurs in the
same Chron., anno 1050 : HS sette ealle ^d litsmen of mdle. 1 believe
this passage has been occasionally taken to mean that 'he put the lidmenn
or sailors upon pay,' but the meaning is 'paid off.' Here, to begin with,
litsmen is the O.N. WSs-m^enn and not the corresponding A.S. Ud-menn.
The expression settan of mdli is O.N. setja af mdla in an English
dress. In O.N. setja af means ' to deprive of ' (see the passages in
Cleasby and Vigfusson), and in Danish at af-satte means ' to discharge
from an office or dignity,' as in the phrase Han blev afsat frasit Embede
= he was discharged from his office or post.
m. The next example is thirty-six years later in date, and we see
that mdl has now obtained the meaning of ' rent.' The passage is from
Chron. E., anno 1086 : Se cyng sealde his land swd diore td mdle swd hio
(sic) diorost ndhte. Professor Earle glosses mdl by * terms, bargain,' but
the meaning is clearly that ' he put his land out at as high a ferm as he
could obtain.' The above passage is the only one where mdl is used in
a pure A.S. phrase, so that we may conclude that by this time the word
had become naturalised. This is about the date when mdl-m>am, was
coined, for it could not have existed until rndl had acquired the distinct
meaning of rent.^
* See Kluge, NominaU Stammbildungalehre der cUtgermanischen DiaUctSy § 17
who cites, inter aUa, the O.N. Ij6\>-e = \.8. Uod, * prince,* and the A.S. mdga and mSg
* son, reUtiye,' &o.
' I do not know what is the meaning of the following gloss in a Ute JlB. yooabo-
Digitized by
Google
836 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
Professor Vinogradoff says that *the original distinction between
gafol and mat gets blurrred very soon/ i.e. gafol gets the sense of ' rent '
pure and simple. Mr. Bound appears to dispute this. A charter in
Kemble's ' Codex/ iv. 260, proves that gafol meant ' rent.' In this case
a man named Eetel is to hold certain land for the term of his life on
condition that he pay 21. per annum, the rent of the land, as I take it, to
the abbey of S. Edmondsbury. The expression is : ' ^at is i^t Ketel teste
dike iher td pAnd intd Seynt Hadmundej t$at is, t$as londes gouel/ This
represents : ' l^cBt is, ]>cBt Cytel Ubste dblce gedre tH pund intd Sancte
liadrmmde, ]>(Bt is, pees la/ndes gafol.* This gafol seems to be the rent
reserved to the abbey under a demise for a number of lives, though
there is no actual statement to this ejQfect in the charter itself. In this
work, vol. V. p. 90, 7, gablum occurs in a charter of a woman named
Gynewaru, and seems to mean a rent-charge. The truth is that gafol
was used in a very loose way in Anglo-Saxon, and it covers a variety of
meanings, such as toll, tribute, tax, rent paid in money or kind, &c. It
follows that Mr. Bound (p. 108) is too hasty in charging Eemble and
Dr. Stubbs with being in error in speaking of gafol as a * tax.' I do not
know what passage in Stubbs he refers to, but a perusal of the charters
cited by Eemble in his chapter on Uhiland will prove that gafol sometimes
meant a royal tax or tribute apart from rent. Any lingering doubt upon
this point will be removed by the following glosses from Wright- Wiilcker's
vocabularies : ' Cesareum tributum, i. regalis, gafol ' (204, 12) : * Debita
pensio, i. digna tributa, gedafene gaful * (221, 6 ; 884, 87) ; * Exactio,
gaful ' (897, 88). Indeed, so loosely was this word applied, that it even
meant ' usury ' (see Wright- Wiilcker, 899, 25, and the Middle English
quotations in Matzner's ' Altenglische Sprachproben,* ii. 257). A Celtic
origin has been suggested for gafol, but Ettmiiller is no doubt right in
connecting it with gaf, the stem of the verb « to give.* It may be ex-
plained as ^a/+the suffix la with either a medial or a parasitic (svara-
bhakti) vowel developed between the stem and the suffix. This etymology
will account for the looseness in the application of the word.
W. H. Stevenson.
THE JESUITS AND THE BENAISSANCE.
Mb. Lilly complains that in a notice of his ' Chapters in European History '
which appeared in the July number of the Histobical Review I mis-
understood and misrepresented his meaning. This complaint is made with
so much courtesy and good temper that I should like, if not to withdraw,
lary in Wright- Wiiloker, 504, 27 : * Clasma, maL* Are clctsmata ( = icXdcfUna^) iden-
tical with the K\aff/iariKo\ r6xoi in rod IHinofflov^ cited by Dncange from the Novel of
Constantine Porphyrogenitas De Alienationibus Fundorum^ Dacange says these
KXafffxarucol riwoi videnlur esse dgri a fisco avidsi et ad censum dati, vel cUiendtiL The
singular agreement between KXacfiarucds riwos and mdX-land suggests that mdl in this
gloss means mdl-land. Bat it is only right to state that Dacange dtes another word
clasma=clameum', so that, after all, this mdl may be merely mdZ (I), with its mean-
ing stretched from * suit * to ' claim '—a not unlikely extension of meaning.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 387
:at any rate to modify and explain some of the remarks to wliich he has
taken exception.
And first I will confess that I found it difficult to read his hook in a
wholly impartial temper, although my impatience was not, as he supposes,
that of a believer in any mechanical evolution, but of a believer ' in that
stream of European progress of which the impelling force was protestant-
ism,' to quote Mr. Gardiner's last volume. Mr. Lilly believes in progress
— in a gradual advance towards perfection — ^but, owing I suppose to my
dulness of apprehension, after again looking at his book I still fail to
understand how and in what direction he holds the world to have pro-
gressed since the days of Thomas Aquinas and Dante, or, if he prefers, of
Savonarola and Michel Angelo. Indeed, it seems to me that while the
' ideahstic optimist ' conceives the divine law to be taking shi^ in some
mysterious evolution, the < reaUstic pessimist * sees little but what is de-
plorable in the actual development of human thought.
Mr. Lilly more particularly complains that I misunderstand his view
of the ' Renaissance.' No doubt it is a question-begging word ; in one
sense, as Mr. Lilly says, it may be held to begin with the schools of Charles
the Oreat, and for this < re-birth ' of the human intellect he has abundant
sympathy ; in another sense the term is more particularly applied to the
classical revival of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. But the name is
also given most commonly, and perhaps most justly, to that wider move-
ment of which Ralian humanism was only a subordinate phase ; and my
quarrel with Mr. lolly is, that he fails to recognise how necessary and
salutary this movement was, since it compelled tradition and authority to
submit to a critical examination of their documents and titles and gave
a new birth to those vital principles which had faded out of the religion
and philosophy, the social and political organisation of the middle ages ; and
that he vilifies this Benaissioiice, which, as he says, took in religion the
shape of the Beformation, by applying to it strictures which at the most
are true of Italian humanism : as for instance when he says, ' as in politics
and in literature, so in art also, the Renaissance was a spirit of slavery, a
Teritable Ooddess of Dulness, at whose
' felt approach and secret might,
Art after art goes out, and all is night.' — i. 290.
Mr. Lilly challenges me to suggest a better landmark for the epoch
when, in M. Littr6's words, Greek letters made their way into the West,
than the one given by that learned writer — the capture of Constantinople.
Well, I should perhaps venture to fix upon the council of Florence in 1438
as an event which brought east and west into closer connexion, but a few
dates will show that M. Littr6's words must not be too closely pressed.
In 1896 Chrysoloras professed Greek at Florence, in 1427 Filelfo returned
to Venice with his Greek library and his Greek wife. Before 1448 Leo-
nardo Bruni had translated the ' Ethics,' the * Politics,' and other Greek
works. Before 1458 Cosmo de' Medici had founded the Platonic Academy
at Florence and educated Marsilius Ficinus to expound Greek philosophy ;
at Home Bessarion had been made a cardinal, and Nicholas V had esta-
blished the study of Greek ; the libraries of St. Marco and of the Vatican
had been enriched by treasures of Greek MSS., and Greek scholars like
Argyropoulos and George of Trebizond had been attracted to Italy.
VOL. n. — NO. VI. z
Digitized by
Google
888 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
Finally, Mr. Lilly complains that I have mistaken him for a Jesuit
apologist, when he is really on some points a severe critic of the order.
A straw, Mr. Lilly may fiairly say, shows the current of an uncritical
mind. Yet I will confess that I have perhaps been rather hasty in my
generalisations from his rhetorical flights. But is it not natural to suspect
of partiality an author who writes of the Jesuits : ' Pouring their peaceful
hosts from their centre at Bome throughout the whole world, they sub-
dued it more effectually than the ancient legions, for the weapons of their
warfare were not carnal but spiritual, their aim not to rule over the bodies
but to free the souls of men. ** Qua regio in terris nostri non "plena
laboris ? " they might well have asked, had it not been incompatible with
the spirit of humility which dominated them, that they should think any-
thing of themselves as of themselves. . . . Their sound went out into all
lands, the sound which had greeted the birth of Him by whose name they
were called. . . . Ghurchesandshrines were the trophies of their bloodless
victories, or if not bloodless, purchased by the blood Of their own mar-
tyrs; not the din of battle, but the music of holy bells marked their
progress ; not broken hearts, but healed consciences ; not cities plundered,,
and women ravished and infants wantonly slain, but well-ordered towns,
and virgins dedicated to God, and little children delivered from oblations
to devils and brought into the &mily of Jesus and Mary. Such were their
labours of which every region of the earth was full. . . . Lito such a
mighty tree had the grain of mustard-seed grown — a tree whose height
reached unto the heavens, and the sight thereof to all the earth, and ita
leaves were for the healing of the nations* (iL 99)? Li attacking-
the Jesuits, I am afraid I should have many points of resemblance with
the ' ordinary protestant controversialist ' of whom Mr. Lilly speaks. Tet
at some future time I should like, if the Editor of the EbsTOBiOAL Bbvibw
will give me space, to explain why I think Mr. Lilly is unjust in his esti-
mate of Pombal and of Aranda, and why I think that the policy of the
society in Mexico, Japan, and China afforded some, if not complete,
justification to their enemies, and therefore requires some notice by their
advocates. P. F. Willbbt.
THE DEPOSITIONS BELATIKa TO THE IBISH IfASSACREB OF 1641.
Miss HiCKBON, I am afraid, fiEkils to recognise the point of my argument^
which briefly was: The depositions, owing to the circumstances under
which they were taken, are untrustworthy, and even if they were trust-
worthy, they are historically insignificant. There is nothing in Miss Hick-
son's note in the January number of the English Histobical Review to
make me alter my opinion. I said of Miss Hickson and Mr. Froude, that
they regarded the depositions as documents almost perfectly trustworthy,
and that they declined to make from them the very considerable deduc-
tions required by the circumstances under which they were taken. What
those circumstances were— the prejudices of the commissioners, the
utter absence of cross-examination, the desire for revenge on the part
of the deponents — ^I pointed out in the same paragraph. In making thia
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 889
assertion I have, it appears, misrepresented Miss Hickson's views. She
says she cannot be accountable for those of Mr. Froude, that she even
does not know what his opinion is, and yet, strange to say, she asked him
to write a preface to her book, which he accordingly did and even altered
at her request. For her own part, she says she has done exactly what I
charge her with not having done, and instances certain depositions in
regard to which she declared such deductions necessary. But these
deductions are to be made in the case of palpable absurdities, manifest
exaggerations, hearsay evidence, and historical inaccuracies.^ These, I
need hardly say, were not the circumstances I alluded to.
Unintentionally, no doubt, distorting her quotations, Miss Hickson
proceeds : ' In words almost identical with those used by Mr. Dunlop, in
the passage where he ventures to assert ** that deductions must be made,
owing tq the circumstances under which they were taken/* and wrongly
charges me with not allowing for those circumstances, I said, **The
circumstances under which those depositions were taken made the royal
commissioners and the deponents more liable to err, and to magnify the
reports of the horrors going on around them." ' Now if Miss Hickson
will compare what I said with what she herself really did say in the passage
she refers me to,^ she will find that neither in language nor in meaning
are they * almost identical.' My contention was not that ' the excited state
of the public mind in those later years (1641-4) made commissioners and
witnesses more liable to err,' but that the character of the commissioners,
and their evident willingness to believe everything that men and women,
inspired with the intensest hatred for the Irish, maddened with recent
losses and yearning for revenge, said in the bitterness of their hearts, so
that only iJiey might convict as many of the Irish as possible, rendered
it impossible for us to discriminate between what was £Eklse and what was
true in them. This being the case, I think I was fully justified in speak-
ing of Miss Hickson as one of those who consider the depositions * to be
in the main reUable, and the incidents narrated in them to be historical
fs^tB with only a shght and perfectly explicable admixture of exaggeration.*
As for the depositions taken before* the Commonwealth commissioners^
there is reason d priori for considering them more credible than the earUer
ones. Certainly they seem to be more definite, a &ot which may possibly
be accounted for by the directness of the questions and a desire to ascer-
tain the truth in individual cases.
Miss Hickson estimates that not less than 25,000 protestants were
murdered between 1641 and 1649. I am somewhat curious as to how
she proceeded in her calculation. For, having myself faiLei to arrive at
anything like a proximate estimate of those * massacred ' in Armagh alone,
I am inclined to think President Lowther may have been as near the
mark with his 800,000 as she is with her 25,CK)0. For my own part, I
am not much concerned whether there were 26,000 or 800,000; but I
am particularly anxious as an historical student, and as being engaged in
writing a history of this most perplexing period, to get at the truth in the
matter of these depositions.
Miss Hickson persists in saying that it was * mainly in consequence of
' Irish Massacres, i. 185, 202, 376 ; ii. 88. < Ibid. i. 200.
%2
Digitized by
Google
840 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
the &ot8 sworn to in these depositions (setting aside hearsay) that three-
fourths of the whole soil of Ireland changed hands in 1650-4/ This,
however, I have already tried to prove was not the case.' The ' mas-
sacres ' do not stand to the sale of Irish lands, the transportation and trans-
plantation, in the relation of cause to effect. There is abundant evidence
— bx more than I brought forward — to prove that the rebellion in itself
was regarded by the Long Parliament as sufficient reason for their conduct
towards the Irish catholic landowners. This is not a mere opinion bat
an historical fact, and one which I imagine seriously affects the value of
the depositions. My opinion regarding their intrinsic value may not be
correct, but at any rate it was not hastily formed. Long before Miss
Hickson's book appeared I had for my own purposes consulted not only
several volumes of them, but also that little volume of crabbed hand-
writing, containing the proceedings of the High Court of Justice in
1658-4, which, I quite agree with Mr. Froude, forms the most valuable
portion of her work. When, then, the work did appear, it contained
little that was new to me ; but I am glad to take this opportunity of
thanking her for her trouble in enabling students to judge of these
depositions for themselves, for her sincerity, and, above all, for her un-
doubtedly correct explanation of those ' crossings-out ' which have per-
plexed others besides Warner. B. Dunlop.
A SCHBMB OF TOLERATION PBOPOTJNDED AT XTXBBIDaE IN 1645.
On 18 Feb. 1644-5, the commissioners of Charles I at Uxbridge proposed,
in opposition to the presbyterian system urged by the parliamentary com-
missioners, * That freedom be left to all persons, of what opinions soever,
in matters of ceremony, and that all the penalties of the laws and customs
which enjoin those ceremonies be suspended.' (Bushworth, v. 872.)
It is strange that little notice has been taken of an offer which,
despite its ambiguity, so curiously anticipates the proposals subsequently
made by the army to Charles in 1647, as they anticipated the final settle-
ment of the Toleration Act of 1689. The meaning of the words is no
doubt fax from clear. They might imply complete Uberty of sectarian
worship, or they might only imply permission to the clergy of the several
parishes to act as they pleased in matters of ceremonial. Besides this,
Charles's own want of earnestness in supporting his offer makes it difficult
to suppose that he was himself serious in making it.
It will throw some light, at least on the meaning of the proposal, to
consult a document which appears amongst the Clarendon MSB. (No.
1824) in the Bodleian Library, and which contains the advice of the
Oxford clergy on which Charles based his concession. Whether the pro-
posal itself is considered satisfactory or not, it is worth noticing that
the Oxford clergy were the first persons who, acting as a public body,
made proposals tending to toleration. The document is as follows :
' Eng. Hist, Review, October 1886, pp. 742^.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 841
Proposals of the Clergy,
* Wee think it fitt that toleration bee given (by suspending the penaltyes
of all lawes) both to the presbyterians and independents.
Wee think it fitt that the bishop exercise no act of jurisdiction or
ordination without the counsell of the presbyters, that is the deane and
chapter, and, if it bee thought fitt, any other grave ministers of the
diocese.
And that a very strict course bee taken against all immoderate fees,
unnecessary delayes, and all other abuses in ecclesiasticall courtes.
And that the bishop make his residence in his diocesse, except hee bee
commanded to attend his Majesty.
And that his ordination shall be alwayes in the solemnest and the
publickest manner in the cathedrall church.
And that very strict lawes bee made conceminge the sufficiency and
other quahfications of those men which shall bee received into holy orders,
and that tryall be made of all such by the bishop and his presbyters.
For the firequency of preaching thorough the whole clergy (if that
w^^'' the lawes have formerly required be not thought sufficient) wee
shall be willing to submitt to anything w^^ the wisedom of authority shall
thinke fitt.
That bishops and cathedrall and collegiate churches encrease y^ vicars*
maintenance out of the impropriations.
For pluralityes for the time to come we do not desire that any man
shall be capable of two parsonages or vicarages with cure of soules, if it
seeme good to authority so to order it.
For the inheritance of the church as wee cannot yeild or consent that
any part of it be alienated, so beeing very desirous to express our forward-
ness to contribute our utmost to the satisfying of the present necessityes,
we conceive that a very considerable summ to the value of one hundred
and fifty or two hundred thousand pounds may be raised firom the clergy
by way of subsidy to be payed in eight or ten yeares.
Concerning these or any other ecclesiasticall matters if there be any
particulars which we may seeme to have omitted upon proposall wee hope
to give reasonable satisfEkction.
If it bee demanded whether a bishop may salvo ordine by his consent
delegate such a power to his presbytery as that they shall have a negative
voice to the exercise of all acts of jurisdiction and ordination, so that he
shall be able to do nothing without them, we answere that wee think he
may in both.
If it be demanded whether in point of ordination a bishop may part
with his negative to his presbyters, so that he may by the major part of
them bee forced to ordaine whom hee approoves not, we think he cannot.
If it be demanded whether in point of jurisdiction a bishop may part
with his negative to his presbyters, we answere y* in causes of schism
of false doctrine and other criminall causes wee think hee cannot, in
causes testamentary matrimoniall and decimall we think hee may.
But in all this wee earnestly desire that for the encouraging and pre-
serving the study of the civill law in this kingdome, the chancellours and
Digitized by
Google
842 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
officialls may still remaine as before, and receive no diminutions in their
juist profitts.'
Indorsed in the hand of Nicholas, * 1(>> Febr. 1644.
The clergges paper tendred concerning religion.'
Added in another hand, * Concessions in relation to Episcopacy.*
Samuel B. Oabdineb.
THE SQUIBE PAPERS.
Dr. Squire's article on pp. 142-^ does not even attempt to confute
the main statements in my article in the October part — e.g. that William
Squire had been guilty of participation in two previous hoaxes, that one
at all events of his * fEkmily brasses ' was a forgery (being a word-for-word
reproduction, date and all, of a brass to some one else), and that he who
had been described as an ignoramus, and so incapable of writing the
Squire letters, was really a man who had been taking an intelligent in-
terest in antiquarian subjects for twenty years before he put them forth,
it is perhaps hardly worth while my taking up space in referring to his
remarks, which only touch the very fringe of the subject and have no
bearing on the main issue.
That in treating the family history of the Squire family a strange
genealogist like I may well have made some of the slips of which Dr.
Squire accuses me on p. 146 I do not deny, but none of his corrections,
even if they are rightly made, bear on the subject of the authenticity.
I may not, certainly do not, know the Squire pedigree as well as Dr.
Squire, who refers me to purchases in 1624 and 1640. Very likely he is
right, but my statement was that I had found no such purchases in the
* Feet of Fines,' and this statement is Uterally accurate, as he can find by
referring to the calendar in the Record Office, which I have re-searched.
I objected to the statement that William Squire had lived, he and his,
under the shadow of a cathedral city for three hundred years, and said
they had not been there for more than a hundred years. To this Dr.
Squire says that William Squire's ancestor was bom at Peterborough
in 1710. William Squire was bom at Norwich in 1809, so my remark
was literally accurate. But William Squire's father, Matthew, had settled
as a trader at Norwich in early life, and the boy's bringing up and educa-
tion, which were supposed to have been the reasons for his extraordinary
destmction of valuable manuscripts, were partly in Norwich and partly
abroad, and from a very early age (sixteen) he lived at Norwich.
As to the handwriting, as I said before, I differ entirely from Dr.
Squire and his friends, and as a close student for twenty-five years
venture to stick to my own opinion, but would suggest that the manu-
script be lodged at the Record Office for all the experts to see.
As to the two forms of the letter r, I certainly never saw them occur
in the same line, and should like to be referred to an undoubted case.
Dr. Squire thinks it very unlikely that a young man of twenty-one, who
is described as associating with the shadiest sporting characters, should
take home historical works to read from the Norwich Library. But if be
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 84S
wei» not a reading man, why did he visit the library, and why did Thunder,
another of the hoaxers (p. 746 n.) ? We know that Squire was actually
A collector and donor of articles to the museum twenty years before he
put forth the letters (p. 745), specially thanked for arranging a collection of
coins in 1889, and elected one of the museum committee in 1851.
There is one thing in Dr. 8quire*s paper (p. 147) that looks like * a
hit, a very palpable hit,' and though it does not affect me personally I
will refer to it. I quoted in the body of my paper evidence of experts
that four brasses were ' clumsy forgeries,* and in a postscript showed that
I had just learned that one of them was undoubtedly a forgery, being a
transcript, date and all, of a genuine brass. This, according to Dr. Squire»
is a serious blow to the testimony of my experts. I venture to think it is
not. They, no doubt, treated the whole four as a whole, and may have
founded their opinion (very accurate as the event shows) on any two or
three of them.
* Agnes Maria Clarell Squire ' for either * Agne^w et Marit? et Clarell '
— a treble christian name in 1521 — was quite enough for me, and I don't
suppose they thought very careful study of the others necessary.
Again, the name substituted in the genuine inscription was ' Thomas
Squire de Squierre,* and it is very possible that, finding as I did that
there was no such a place, they considered it as a forgery for thiit reason
alone. That William Squire ' had not the knowledge or literary skill ' to
forge the letters is a matter of opinion solely. He may or may not
have had, and I have always suspected that he had help from a very
much cleverer man indeed. What, I venture to think, I proved in my
former article was that the letters uttered by him were forgeries, that
many of his statements are absolutely untrue, and that he was himself
a hoaxer and forger. The imphed defence (p. 142) that < forgeries ' is a
term hardly applicable to various extracts, obviously brought together for
family purposes and not for pubUc use, seems to me rather amusing.
It is now admitted on all hands that one of the brass inscriptions is
concocted, and yet the implication is that because it was for family use
only it was venial. Walteb Btb.
P.S. — Mr. J. T. Squire thought the other day that he had found the
veritable Samuel Squire occurring in the will of his grandfather, Thomas
Squire the elder, of Little St. Bartholomew, 1647, which also mentions
an Ireton. But I pointed out that this Samuel Squire was a minor in
1647, and so must have been bom after 1626, whereas the mythical
Samuel was supposed to have been written to by Cromwell on important
matters of business as Mr. Samuel Squire (letter 8) on 8 May 1642,
when his namesake could not have been more than sixteen.
PETITIONS TO OHABLES II.
Thb following petitions are taken from what appears to be an office copy-
book of petitions to Charles n, in the later part of his reign, kept by the
clerk of the master of requests, which is among the Eawlinson MSS. in
ihe Bodleian Library, numbered D 18. They are selected as illustrative
Digitized by
Google
844 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
of the civil war in a double way : first, as showing the variety of olaima
upon the royal bounty for services performed, which were unceasingly
urged, and which from their number may well have rendered it impos-
sible for the king to satisfy all claimants ; secondly, as affording some
interesting details with regard to the king*s escape after the battle of
Worcester, which are not to be found in his own or other printed
narratives. The copies are carelessly and clumsily written, and only in
one or two instances give the dates by adding memoranda of orders in
council relative to the petitions ; but there are difficulties in two of the
papers which cannot be accounted for by supposed careless mistakes on
the part of the copyist. In the first one we have the daughter-in-law of
one Balph Vernon Esq. asking for a pension, on the ground that it was
he who bore the standard at Edgehill, and was there killed ; not the Sir
Edmund Yemey who was in truth its knightly defender. The names
Vernon and Vemey may indeed stand the one for the other, but how
Mrs. Isabel could make Mr. Ralph represent Sir Edmund seems inex-
plicable ; she could not mean that the former merely carried a standard,
was a simple comet or ensign ; and in no contemporary record of the
civil war does the name of Ralph Vernon appear to be found. Nor have
I as yet been able to trace the petitioner's own family or marriage.
And then in another paper we find one Hannah Wyatt asking for relief
because she, when a child at Colchester, gave the king something to
diink, on his coming as a thirsty wayfarer to the door, when on his way
to the sea, attended by one only companion. As Charles certainly
never came near Colchester, we can only conclude that some fugitive
cavalier, with one attendant, did indeed gain refreshment at the kindly
door, and that some distinction in appearance and manner gave occasion
to a surmise that possibly it was the king himself who had passed, and
that the child cherished the idea of a royal service rendered at her hands,
and then in later life hoped to find the idea develop into a grateful reality.
But the petitioner must have found, we may be sure, that the king would
no more acknowledge the having ever seen her, than the gentlemen ushers
of his oourt acknowledged the having seen (he first copy of her humble
petition, which was itself missing. William Dunn Macbat.
I. To THE ElNa*S MOST EXCELLENT MaJESTT.
The humble Petition of Izabell Vernon widdow of Thomas Vernon
deceased who was sonn of Balph Vernon Esqr (also deceased)
Bhbwbth, —
That your petitioners said father-in-law served your Majesties
royall father (of ever blessed memory) as standard bearer at Edgehill
fight, where hee was slaine in the fifeild. That your petitioners cozen
Colonel Pudsey also served his Majesty as colonel of a regiment of ffoot,
during all the time of the late warrs, in which hee spent a considerable
estate, and was a great sufferer by plunder and otherwise, and was after-
wards with your Majesty in your exile. That your petitioners brother
Captain Lacy Proctor met your Majesty with two troops of horse at
Carlisle a litUe before Worcester fight, and joyned them to your Majesties
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 84&
forces, and was afterwards slaine in your Majesties service. That her
brother Captain Thomas Proctor was also killed in your service at the
seige of Hooley-Hall in Lancashire, and John Proctor (another of her
brothers) being with your Majesty in your exile died there. And your
petitioner being now growne ancient, and reduced to a very low condition
most humbly prayes that your Majesty will be graciously pleased to
do something for her, to preserve her from perishing in her old age, as
your Majesty in goodnes shall think fitt.
And your petitioner shall ever pray &c.
II. To THE ElNa*S MOST EXCELLENT MaJESTT.
The humble petition of Anne Bogers, wife of John BogerSt and late
daughter of Bichard Pendrell, deceased
Bhbweth, —
That after the decease of the said Bichard Pendrell your
Majesty was gratiously pleased to grant to your petitioner and her said
husband a pention of 100/. per annum payable out of the annual tenths
of the clergy of England. That there is now due of the said pention
125Z., and the same being the oneUe support of your petitioner, her
husband, and 6 children, the want thereof, with the great charges of
attendance in London for some former arreares (since paid) forced him to
contract severall small debts to supporte himself and fEkmily, for which
he was lately cast into Shrewsbury Goale, where he remains in a poor
and distressed condition, and is altogether uncapable of obtayning hia
freedom, or of administering any releif to his helpless feimily to preserve
them from perishing, without your Majesties grace and favour.
Wherefore your petitioner humbly prayes that your Majesty will be
gratiously pleased to order the speedy payment of the said 125Z., whereby
her husband may be released from prison, and shee repaire home to her
family's releif.
And your petitioner (as in duty bound) shall ever pray &o.
UL To the King's most excellent Majesty.
The humble petition of Nicholas Yates
Most hitmblt sheweth, —
That your petitioners father Francis Yates was equally instru-
mentall with the Pendrells in the preservation of your Majesties sacred
person (who God long preserve) at Boscobell and White-Ladies, after
that vnfortunate bataille at Worcester, and your Majesties petitioners,
mother was the first person that brought your Majesty meat in the wood.
That your petitioners father being sent by your sacred Majesty ta
Mr. Jefford of Chillington for money to supply your Majesties then present
occasions, and your petitioners father missing the said Mr. Jefifbrd, your
Majesties petitioner's father according to his duty did then deliver to
your Majesty all the money hee had, part of which your Majesty was
gratiously pleased to accept of and comended his ready loyalty therein.
That your petitioners said father being sent for by Colonel Carlos to
Digitized by
Google
846 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
come vp to London with the said Pendrills to lay himself with them at
your Majesties feet, and to implore your Majestys princely care, was owned
hy your Majesty to he instrumentall accordingly, but your petitioners
father dyed in a few dayes afterwards, and left your Majesties petitioner
an orphan vnprovided for, as by the certificate herevnto annexed (most
humbly) doth appeare to your Majesty.
Your Majesties petitioner therefore most humbly prayes that your
Majesty according to your wounted clemency and goodnes would be
gratiously pleased to consider him accordingly.
And your petitioner (as in duty bound) shall ever pray &c.
Certificate.
These are most humbly to certify that Nicholas Yates, the sonn of
Francis Yates late of Langle-Lawne and Margarit his wife, who were
togeather with the Pendrills particularly instrumentall in the preservation
of his most sacred Majesties person, have never received any marks
of his Majesties favour since his Majesties blessed restauration ; his
father conmung to towne according to his Majesties speciall directions,
but within some few dayes after dyed, and left the said Nicholas an infant
and a proper object of his Majesties royall care.
W: Caklob.
R: ASTLEY.
The marke x of Wm. Pendbill.
Humphrey Pendbill.
Geobge Pendbill.
Maby Pendbill,
The widow of Richard Pendrill, sonn and daughter to
my owne sister, the woman that brought his Majesty
his first meate after his disguize in the wood.
Referrence to the Lords Commissioners of the Treaswry.
At the court at Whitehall,
December 21, 1684.
His Majesty is gratiously pleased to referr this petition to the right
honourable the lords commissioners of the treasury to consider the
petitioners suite and to take such order therein as their lordshipps shall
think fitt. Chables Mobley.
rV. To THE EiNa'S MOST EXCELLENT MaJBSTY.
The humble petition of Elizabeth Smith formerly Badcliffy and servant
/ ^ ' , , ^ maid to old Mrs. Whitegrame [sic] in her house at Moseley, when
your Majesty lay privitely there, in your happy escape from Worcester
Shewbth, —
That your Majesties said petitioner waiting in her poor quality
of [sic] your sacred Majesty at the time and place aforesaid, making your
Majesties fire, and bed in your Majesties chamber there ; and particu-
larly when your Majesty was at your repose, or rest vpon your bed, and
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 847
sound asleep, and notice given that Cromwells soldiers was about the
towne &c., your Majesties petitioner rubbed softly your Majesty vpon the
feet and leggs to wake your Majesty, and wame your Majesty thereof,
and provided sweet herbes into the private place ere your Majesty went
therein ; and other services did do for your Majesty, and the Lord Wilmot
who was there 2 or 8 dayes before your Majesty, all or most of which Mr.
Huddleston knoweth to be true of your Majesties petitioner, and can
sertifie the same if your Majesty please to command it.
Now she your Majesties said poor petitioner comming vp with her
daughter to be touched for the eveil, which they humbly and heartely
thank and pray for your sacred Majesty giving, most humbly prayes and
beggs of your Majesty in tender respect of the premisses above said that
your Majesty wilbe charitably pleased to grant her a little [of] your
Majesties benevolence for their charges, and she your Majesties said
poor petitioner as in duty ever bound shall ever pray for your sacred
Majesty &c.
V. To THE King's most excellent Majesty.
The humble petition of An. Tomlison, daughter of Elinr. Tomlison
Humbly sheweth, —
That whereas your petitioners mother formerly lived at Bously
Lodge in the parish of Alvichurch neare Worcester, at the engagement
at Worcester, where the adverse party to your most sacred Majesty bear-
ing the triumph, to the great greif of your poor petitioners fifather, and
loss of Uberty and estate both personall and reall, and to the ruine of the
whole ffamily, your petitioners mother was blessed with the preservation
of your most sacred Majesty for some time in her house at Bously Lodge,
and from thence for feare of discovery conveyed your royall person to
the woods, not suffering any person to come to or go from your Majesty
but your petitioners mother, for which it pleased your most gracious
Majesty to issue out your gracious promise of continuell benefaction to
her and hers. And now your poor petitioner, being brought to great
penury, and ready to inevitably perish, most humbly implores your most
gracious promise. And having deHvered one petition to your most
gracious Majesty vpon the same account, but being ignorant of your
most gracious answer, most humbly prefers a second petition to your
most sacred Majesty.
That your most sacred Majesty, the premisses being graciously con-
sidered, would be graciously pleasd to order a mainteinance for your poor
petitioner and her &mily without which wee shall inevitably perish.
And your petitioner shall ever pray &c.
Vl. To THE Honourable the Commissioners for the Assessing
OP the Pole-money within his Majesty's Houshold.
The humble petition of Francis Mansell
Sheweth, —
That his Majesty was gratiously pleas'd to settle vpon your
petitioner a pension of 20011. per annum in consideration of service per-
Digitized by
Google
848 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
formed vnto his Majesty in his escape beyond seas after Worcester
battle.
That your petitioner is also swome sewer-extraordinary to attend at
command vpon his Majesty. But your petitioner living in the county of
Surrey a distraint is passing on your petitioners goods and chattells for
the present payment of the pole-assessment for his pension.
Wherevpon he craves your honours favours of being entred in the
roU of his Majesties houshold, and a certificate thereof to be granted him
hee being ready to submitt to what shalbe assessed by your honours vpon
him, and the payment shalbe ordered therevpon.
Praying for his Majesty (as in duty bound)
And your honours.
VII. To THE ElNa*B MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY.
The humble petition of Hanah Wyett
SHEWEINa, —
That in most submissive mannor your Majesties poor petitioner*,
being prest by extreome poverty, was humbly bould, bowing before the^
foot-stoole of your most sacred Majestys throne, to exhibite a humble
petition lately to your Majesty, but hath bin in all the offices enquiring
for it, but neither any there nor any of your gentlemen vshers do acknow-
ledge to have seen it. Wherefore least it be miscarried, your Majesties
poor petitioner is humbly bould, being prest by poverty, to put your
Majesty in remembrance that your said petition was to this effect follow-
ing : That as your Majesty came to Goltchester on foot with only one n
your Majesties company goeing to sea, your Majesty called at the peti-
tioners parents* door (being thirsty) for some thing to drink; your
Majesties poor petitioner being young came then with such as was in the^
house, and gave it to your Majesty to drink ; which gives the poor peti-
tioner the bouldness to begg something for herself and poor ffamilys
present releif. For which act of royall mercy your Majesties petitioner
and poor children shall always pray for a prosperous success vpon all
your Majesties royall acchivements.
And that your princely power may still remaine, to offend your foes^
make their inventions vaine. And false profession prove in effect
prophane. Adding amen.
Oreat Sir,
Pardon the petition thus boldly comes againe.
VIII. To THE ElNa*S MOST EXCELLENT MaJESTT.
The humble petition of Mary Frame widowe of William Frams^ anS
daughter of John Portlock of Cicister in the county of Glocester^
both deceased
Sheweth, —
That your petitioners said father being post-master at Cicister,
during the late rebellion hee assisted your Majesties royall father (ot
ever blessed memory) and his armey with horses and money as long as-
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 849
hee was able. And afterwards he and joar petitioners said husband
^rved in his Majesties owne troope, by reason whereof they were often
plnndred, and at last their estates were sequestred by the rebells, and
they both imprisoned ; for which they had no manner of reparation besides
the satisfaction of having done his Majestic all the service that lay in their
power, which his Majesty was pleas'd at his departure for Scotland, to
have a sence of, and in these words (vizt) Gentlemen I thank you for your
loyall and fiaithfull services, and if ever I or mine be restored to our right
again, you shall be rewarded.
That your petitioners said father when hee heard of your Majesties
8ad disaster at Worcester, declared his desire not to live a day longer,
and went vp into his clossett, and never stired out ahve but dyed there
for greif, and your Majesty was gratiously pleased to say, that the first
house you went into after you came out of the oak was your petitioners
fathers, but his life was just expired with greif before your Majesty
came in.
That your petitioners said husband was always one of the forwardest
in all atteonpts for bring in your Majesty while your Majestic was beyond
sea, and particularly hee was taken prisoner in Sir George Booths never
to be forgotten worthy attempt, and notwithstanding all discouragements
continued loyall to the end of his life.
For as much as your petitioners said hkther and husband lost above
4,000 li. by their constant adherance to your Majesty, and royall father (of
blessed memory) ; And in as much as your petitioner has lately beene
twice burnt out of her house ;
Humbly beggs your Majesty to take the premisses into your gracious
consideration, in allotting her three or foure hundred pounds, or else what
your Majesty pleases towards the reUef of your petitioner, and her five
children, who are reduced to great necessity, but whilest she had anything
to support her, would never trouble your Majesty
So your Majesties petitioner ends with prayers to Almighty God for
your Majesties good health, and long life, and triumphant victories over
your enemies till the end of your reign which shall be ever the prayers of
your Majesties poor petitioner to the end of her life. Maby Frame.
IX. Deare Soveraign, I beseech you pitty a poor innocent captive, who
is and was always a true ffriend to your Majesty to his power, who was once
a drum major vnder Prince Maurice, in which service he received much
damages in body and goods, and now hath he done nothing against the
law of God or man, but for speaking words that were misinterpreted by
those envious people called Quaquers, and lyes added to them, he hath
been sett in the pillory and is fined a thousand markes, which he is no
way capable to pay, and so lyable to perpetuall imprisonment. My humble
request is that you would be pleased to permit him to be brought into
your presence, that he may speake in your Majesties hearing, that you
may judge if he be a man fitt to suffer these things so wrongfully ; for I
always was much affected for any that suffered wrongfully, and have
taken great notice that befell those that abused innocency in any age,
although no way related to him in the flesh, but because it is a christian
Digitized by
Google
350 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
duty to be godly which is good and doth good, and for the love I beare
your Majesty that God may continue his blessings to you, which I ever
prayed and shall pray for; who am your Majesties most humble and
obedient subject and handmaid Elizabeth Bone.
From Queen Street in the Parke in Southwark.
M. DE DUBLBR*S ACCOUNT OF THE DEFENCE OF THE TUILERIE8 ON
10 AUGUST 1792.
Without doubt one of the most romantic episodes of the whole history
of the French revolution is the gallant defence of the Tuileries by the
Swiss guards on 10 Aug. 1792. Their heroism is fitly commemorated
by the famous monument on the lake of Lucerne ; but the exact details
of the fighting upon the day when the fate of the French monarchy was
sealed are not thoroughly understood. The document, which is now
printed for the first time, is of great interest, and clears up many
disputed points in an entirely satisfactory maimer.
Numerous brochures upon the events of 10 Aug. were published
at the time, and many passages in memoirs and chapters in histories
have been devoted to the subject, but there is only one work which treats
solely of the part played by the Swiss guards in the defence of the
Tuileries. This work is the * B^cit de la conduite des Oardes Suisses k
la joum^e du 10 aoiit 1792,' by Colonel Pfyffer d'Altishofen, printed at
Geneva and pubUshed at Lucerne in 1824. It is carefully compiled, and
may be used as a trustworthy authority, but it is of course in no sense a
contemporary account of the behaviour of the Swiss. Colonel Pfyfier
d'Altishofen prefixes a portrait of the Baron de Durler to his little book,
and throughout speaks of him as the real defender of the Tuileries. It
is the manuscript account of the defence by the Baron de Durler himself
which is now published, and it is authenticated by the signatures of certain
other officers of the Swiss guards, namely Joseph Zimmermann, Glutz,
Gibelin, La Corbidre, Boullin, B^pond, and De Luze. It is written in a
simple soldierly style, without any flourishes, and it proves by itself
how well Durler deserved the praise of Pfyfifer d'Altishofen as a plain,
brave, and loyal soldier.
Baron James de Durler was a cadet of one of the Swiss fiEunilies
which regularly supplied officers to the Swiss guards and to the Swiss
regiments in the French service, and he held the rank of senior captain in
the Swiss guards in 1792. He marched with the guards to the Tuileriea
on 8 Aug. and during the night of the 9th was placed in command
of the Swiss posts in the Cour Boyale and the Cour des Suisses, and
of a reserve of 800 men. He was also told by his superior officers,
Lieutenant-colonel de Maillardoz and Major de Bachmann — and this
is of itself an important historical fact — that if the king left the
Tuileries they would accompany him, and that Durler was then to take
command of the Swiss, not to allow himself to be forced, and never to
lay down his arms. This indication shows clearly that the officers about
the king's person quite expected that the king would leave the palace on
the night of 9 Aug. What they had expected came to pass. Louis XVX
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 851
retired to the legislative assembly with the royal &mily, and Durler
was left in command at the Tuileries. How gallantly he held the
Tnileries appears from his own narrative, in which also is described his
rescae by M. Bmat, one of the deputies. Durler and his subordinate
officers made their escape to England, and many of them entered the
Enghsh service in the following year in the regiment de Roll, which
was formed out of French and Swiss Srndgris, With this regiment he
served in the West Indies as lieutenant-colonel, and eventually joined
Sir Balph Abercromby's army in the Mediterranean in 1800. He served
throughout the Egyptian campaign, and was present in Stuart's brigade
at the battles of 8, 15, and 21 March before Alexandria, and died in
Egypt of fever in 1802 (see Oentleman's Magazine t January 1808).
This manuscript was evidently drawn up during his stay in England
after the regiment de Boll was formed, and it is signed by all the Swiss
officers who accepted commissions in that regiment. For whom it was
drawn up there is no trace, but it bears unquestionable internal evidence
of its authenticity. It was purchased by the authorities of the manuscript
department of the British Museum in 1882 from Mr. Carter Blake, who
obtained it from Dr. Westby-Gibson. Dr. Westby-Gibson cannot state
how it came into the possession of his father, who left it to him with
other manuscripts, but has promised to try to trace it.
It is not necessary here to give any account of the behaviour of the
Swiss on 10 Aug. ; it is only necessary to point out a few valuable
pieces of new information which this document affords. One of the most
interesting points is the expectation of the officers that the king would
leave the Tuileries, which has been referred to. Another is contained in
the second sentence of the Belation. The exact number of the Swiss
at the Tuileries has been variously stated. Michelet gives them as
1,830 ; Augnstin Challamel and MM. PoUio and Marcel, in their valuable
' Le Bataillon du Dix Aoiit,* pubhshed in 1881, as 1,200 ; Louis Blanc as
950 ; and Mortimer-Temanx as 900 to 950. Durler sets this vexed ques-
tion at rest by his statement that at 8 a.m. on the morning of 9 Aug.
there were at the Tuileries d peu pris 800 men, * including the ordinary
guard on duty with the king.' He fixes at 6 a.m. the king's inspection of
the forces at the palace, and says that the chefs quieted the differences
between the troops who cried Vive le roi! and those who cried Vive la
nation ! by saying that the king and nation were one — a very curious
statement for the morning of the overthrow of the French monarchy,
which is attributed to Durler himself by Colonel Pfyffer d'Altishofen.
He confirms the report that the Mar^chal de Mailly was placed in
command of the troops at the Tuileries by the king. He speaks of the
attempt of Westermann, whom he makes a mistake in calling an ' ancien
garde Fran^aise,' to win over the Swiss soldiery by speaking German to
them. He confirms the story of M. d'Hervilly's bringing the order from
the king for the Swiss to lay down their arms ; and it is worthy of note
that he always speaks of the assailants as the Marseillois or else as the
troupes de Santerre, thus distinguishing the two chief sections of the
attacking force, the famous battalion from Marseilles and the men of the
faubourgs Saint-Antoine and Saint-Marceau. Other points of interest
appear throughout the Belation.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
352 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
The manuscript is nambered in the British Museum catalogue Add.
MS. 82168, and has been accurately copied even in its orthography.
H. MoBSE Stephens.
RHation de Monsieur de Durler, capitaine au regiment des Gardes-
Suisses, et commandant environ 600 hommes qui se sont difendus sur
VEscalier de la Chapelle et dans VIntirieur du Chdteau, le 10 AoUt
1792.
Dans la joum^e du 8, M'' Mandat, Commandant G6n6ral, donna d> M*" de
Maillardoz, Lt«-Colone], et k M' de Bachman, Major, une requisition de
la Municipality et un ordre par ^rit de &ire venir le plus de soldat
possible au Gh&teau des Thuilleries. Aussitot ces deux Chefe firent
marcher le restant des bataillons de Courbevoie et de Buel, et le 9 & 8
heures du matin, il y avoit k peu prds 800 hommes, y compris la Garde
ordinaire du Boi.
Dans la nuit du 9 au 10 M" Mandat, de Maillardoz, et de Bachman
£rent occuper par les differents postes de la garde Nationale et par les
Gturdes Suisses. Les deux Chefs du Begiment me donndrent le oom-
mandement des postes de la Cour Boyale, de la Cour des Suisses, et d'une
reserve de 800 hommes qui s'y trouvoient en bataille, en ajoutant ; Bi le
Boi se retire du Gh&teau, comme Chefs nous Paccompagnerons ; nous
comptons sur vous, persuades que jamais vous ne vous laisserez forcer et
que dans aucun cas vous ne mettrez has les armes . . . ils donnirent &
M'' de Salis, Capitaine, le commandement des postes sur TEscalier et
dans la Cour de la Beine. Je visitai mes postes et je dis au Commandant
des Gardes Nat. que nous n'^tions que secondaires; mais qu'en cas
d'attaque ils pouvoient ^tre s^s que nous tiendrions ferme.
Vers minuit le tocsin se fit entendre dans tout Paris. Dans la nuit le
Maire Pethion vint au Chateau. . . . Entre 8 et 4 heures quelqaes
Bataillons de renfort de la Garde Nat. • . arrivirent et se rangdrent avec
leurs Canons dans la Cour Boyale, ainsi que la gendarmerie k cheval ; il
m'a paru que ce renfort montoit k peu pris k 2,000 hommes.
Entre 4 et 5 heures j*appris que Monsieur Mandat ayant re^u ordre da
se rendre k la MunioipaUt6 alloit k la ville ; il fut tu^, comme tout le
monde sait, sur les marches de rh6tel de ville.
A 6 heure le Boi descendit dans la Cour royale, accompagn^ de
quelques Chefis de division, des Commandants des Bataillons et de MM.
de Maillardoz et de Bachmann. D passa devant tons les postes ; quelques
gardes Nat. • • cridrent vive le Boi, au moment oii il entroit dans une
espice de Bataillon quarr^ dans la Cour Boyale et d*autres cridrent vive la
Nation ; d*autres murmurdrent et une dispute tris vive s'eleva entr*eux et
les Canoniers. Cependant leurs Chefs parvinrent k les appaiser, en leur
disant que le Boi et la Nation ne fiEdsoient qu'un : ils s'embrassdrent en se
promettant de se soutenir, et de repousser toute attaque.
A 7 heure les murmures recommencirent et qudques bataillons s*en
alldrent . . , k peu-prds dans le meme-tems MM. de Boederer et de
Boissieux, M^ de Camp sont venus de poste en poste, le premier lisoit
un Arrdte du Departement, qui ordonnoit positivement de repousser toute
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 358
attaque d*aprSs la Loi ; alors quelques gardes nationales qui n'avoient
pas charg^ leurs fusils les charg^rent, des Canoniers chargdrent leors
Canons, d'autres rest^rent tranqoilles.
Entre 8 et 9 heure le Boi se retira k rA8sembl6e nationale, avec toute
la famille Eoyale, accompagn6 de plusieurs gentils hommes, d'un ou de
deux bataillons de la garde Nat. . . de la garde Suisse qui 6toit de Service,
command^e par M. le Baron d'Erlach Capitaine de garde, et suivirent
MM. de Maillardoz, de Bachmann, de Sails, Aidemajor, de Wild, Sous
aidemajor, d'AUiman et Chaulet, Adjutant. Me trouvant alors dans la
Cour, je ne vis pas le depart du Boi, ni ce qui passoit dans Tint^rieur de
Ch&teau.
A 9 heure les Troupes de Santerre, Marseillois, Fauxbourgs, etc., com-
menc^rent k paroitre sur le .Carroussel. Aussitot M. de Boissieux me
donna ordre d'abandonner tous les postes dans les Cours, et de me retirer
dans rint^rieur du Chateau — oe qui fdt execute dans Tinstant. Je pla9ai
la majeure partie de mes gens le long de TEscalier k droite et k gauche»
et le premier pallier se trouvant dej^ occupy par quelques Grenadiers des
Filles de St. Thomas et d'autres gardes nat. . . je postal un pelotton
derriSre eux prds la porte de la Chapelle. Je fis monter le reste dans le
premier appartement en face de Tescalier o^ se trouvoient M. le M^ de
Mailly, M. de Zimmermann, M^ de Camp, et L^ des Grenadiers, d'autrea
officiers et beaucoup de soldats du B6giment postes auparavant dana
rint^rieur du Chateau.
J'^tois occup^ k ranger mon monde, lorsque M. le M^ de Mailly
envoya M'' Joseph de Zimmermann L^ des Grenadiers et Colonel d*in-
fjEuiterie me dire de me rendre prSs de lui. J*allai le trouver et il me dit ;
je suis charg6 de la part du Boi, de prendre le commandement du Chateau.
Je demande alors ses ordres, qui fiirent de ne pas me laisser forcer. Je
lui repondis qu'il pouvoit compter sur nous. Pendant que je lui parloia
je vis par les fenetres que le portier ouvroit la porte royale. Des Mar-
seillois parilrent sous la porte en nous faisant signe avec leurs chapeaux
et nous criant de nous joindre k eux. D'abord ils n'osoient pas entrer
dans la Cour, mais apr^s ils prirent le parti d'entrer par Colonne et
d'autres entr^rent par la porte de Marsan et par celle des Suisses, se
glissdrent le long des murs et parvinrent au pied du Ch&teau. D'autrea
plus hardis p^netrdrent dans le vestibule et mont^rent en foule Tescalier
jusqu'au premier pallier, occup^ par quelques grenadiers des filles de
St. Thomas, d'autres gardes Nationales et par nos gens. J'y courrus.
vite avec M. de Beding, Capitaine, Joseph de Zimmermann, et de Glutz,
Aidemajor, et fis mettre une barre de bois au travers de Tescalier. M'' de
Boissieux vint se placer k cot^ de moi, et vouliit parler aux assaillanta
mais ils furent des hurlements et des oris si per9ants, qu'il ne piit se feiire
entendre. L'intrepide BouUin, Adjutant, me proposa d'aller voir 8*il
n*y avoit pas moyen d'appaiser les furieux, Je lui dis qu'il pouvoit le
faire ; il s'y rendit, fiit saisi par eux, on lui enleva sa montre, on com-
menca k le depouiller de ses habits, et dej& on lui fit pencher la tete
pour la lui abattre, lorsqu'il fut delivr^ par nos braves qui couriirent k son
secours.
Un instant apr6s le Commandant des Troupes de Santerre, qui se
trouvoit ^tre un ancien garde Fran9aise, monte pr^ la barre de bois et
VOL. n. — NO. VI. A A
Digitized by
Google
854 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
demanda k parler lui-m^me au Commandant des Soisses. Etant pr^s de
la rampe avec M' de Boissieux, je loi dis, c'est moi. J'avois la main
droite sur la rampe il s'en saisit en me disant ; joignez vous k nous, voos
serez contents et bien trait^s ; il fiaut vous rendre k la Nation. Je lui
repondis vivement ; nous nous croirions deshonnor^s, si nous nous rendions
k vous ; laissez nous tranquilles k nos postes, nous ne vous ferons point
de mal, mais si vous nous attaquez nous nous defendrons jusqu'^ la
demidre extremity ; il me mena9a et j'ajoutai : Je suis responsable de ma
conduite aux Cantons, mes Souverons ; jamais je ne me rendrai k vous
et jamais je ne mettrai bas les armes. A ces mots il leva son sabre, me
dit toutes sortes d'injures, et que je paierois de ma tete Tinfamie de ne
vouloir pas me rendre k la Nation ; il me tenoit fortement la main et le
sabre lev^. Je dis ^ un de mes soldats en allemand ; s*il me lache un
coup de sabre, couchez le par terre d*un coup de fusil. M'entendant parler
allemand, il baissa son sabre et dans ce moment un autre ancien garde
Fran9oise me porta un coup de pique, qui je parai de la main gauche, en
d^barrassant la droite que tenoit encore le Commandant des Troupes de
Santerre.
M" Joseph de Zimmermann, de Glutz, Aidemajor, toujours k c6t4
de moi 8*apper9iirent que de Tautre c6t6 de Tescalier un Chef de la Troupe
de Santerre cherchoit k persuader nos gens de se joindre k lui, et quedej4
deux mauvais sujets venoient d'etre entrain^s par lui. M' Joeeph de
Zimmermann y counit avec TAdjutant Boullin, se mit devant eux et
parvint par sa ferm^t^ et son sang-froid k emp^her la seduction ; il perora
longtems avec ce Chef, qui le conjuroit de mettre bas les armes. Je me
joignis k eux et ce Chef me tint encore le m^me langage.
Le Commandant et son second voyant que toute seduction ^toit inutile
redescendirent sous le vestibule avec tout leur monde excepts deux Mar-
seillois qui se gliss^rent entre les jambes des grenadiers des fiUes de
St. Thomas ; mes soldats voulant tomber dessus, je leur sauvai la vie, en
leur ordonnant de se sauver dans la Chapelle.
L'instant aprds la troupe de Santerre fit feu sous le vestibule; ils
tuirent et blessdrent quelques soldats. Les braves Grenadiers des fiUes
de St. Thomas ripost^rent et les n6tres suivirent leur example. A peine
Tattaque ^toit elle commence sous le vestibule, que Tartillerie de San-
terre plac4e sur la Carroussel et dans la Cour Boyale joua contre les
fen^tres du Ch&teau et les coups de fusils suivirent. M" le M^ de Mailly,
de Zimmermann, M^ de Camp, sans quitter un instant la fenetre de
I'appartement oil . donnoient toute Tartillerie et mousquetterie firent
riposter des coups de fusils par les soldats Suisses, qui se trouvoient avec
eux, et Taffaire devint g^n^rale.
Je repoussai les Marseillois qui ^toient sous le vestibule, j'y descendis
avec ma troupe et jugeant qu'^ la longue nous ne pourrions pas tenir
dans le Ch&teau contre une artillerie immense, je me mis k la t^te de la
Troupe qui 6toit dej4 pris de moi, le tout environ 200 hommes, je sortis
pour attaquer leurs Canons, je balaiai la Cour dont je me rendis maitre en
un moment, — de mSme que de quatre pieces de Canons que je trouvai
decharg^s et sans aucune munition. Quelques grenadiers des fiUes de Si.
Thomas ou des petits pires voyant que cette artillerie nous ^toit inutile,
^tirent les baguettes de leurs fusils et les cass^rent dans la lumidre des
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 866
Oanons ; plusieurs Mrent tu&s but les pieces mSmes. W^ le M^ de Mailly
voyant des fen^tres le combat dans la Oour royale cessa son feu.
Les Marseillois repouss^ dans le Carroussel continuoient de faire stir
nous un feu fort vif en face de la porte royale, beaucoup de soldats fdrent
iu6s et M' de Glutz, Aidemajor, k cot^ de moi pr^sde la porte royale venoit
d'avoir son ^p^e cass^ d'un coup de fusil.
Un sergent de la Compagnie Colonelle d^couvre un poste de quinze k
vingt Marseillois, qui se cachoient ventre k terre contre la porte royale
derridre la guerite de Gavelerie; d'abord je lescrlis morts, en m'appro-
cliantd'euxilsme demanddrentlavie. Je mejettai entr*eux et mes soldats,
qui ^haufif^sparlecombatet transport's de col^ren^avoientpasTair devou-
loir les 'pargner. Je parvins k les contenir : J'ordonnai aux Marseillois de
rendre leurs armes et leur cartouches, je les menai moi-mSme au passage
du Corps de garde Suisse & leur montrant le chemin par oil ils pouvdent
se sauver ; aprds quoi je retoumai k la porte royale, et dirigeai mon feu k
gauche du Cot6 du Corps de garde Suisse, oi^ des Marseillois et autres se
defendoient vigoureusement. Pendant le combat on conduisit deux pieces
de Canons sur notre droite au coin d'un petit jardin en fetce du Corps de
garde Suisse, et on tira sur nous k mitraille^ — en quelques coups ma
malheureuse troupe fut couch^ sur le Carreau. Je restai seul aveo un
sergent et quelques soldats. Nous rentr&mes dans la porte royale, nou3
trouv&mes M<^ de Salis, Capitaine, Gibelin, Sous-aidemajor, et quelques
grenadiers de son poste. Les soldats que M'' de Salis venoit d'amaner
prds de la porte royale, ayant 'f bientdt tu6s, d*autres de la Compagnie
Colonelle vinrent k n6tre secours et ils etkent presque tous le mdme sort.
L'instant aprds M*" d'Hervilly, M^ de Camp, accourAt k moi sans arme
et sans chapeau k travers des coups de fusils et nous crie : De la pari du
Boi, je vous ordonne de cesser le feu et de vous retirer k TAssembl^
Nationale. II repute plus loin le mSme ordre, partout oil les Suisses se
battoient encore dans les cours avec les Marseillois, car ceux-ci s'^tant
oach^s d'abord dans le Ch&teau en grand nombre venoient d'en sortir au
moment oil ils virent ndtre foiblesse et que nous n'avions plus de muni-
tion. Je ralliai, avec M" de Beding, de Salis, Capitaine, de Pfyffer, Capi-
taine, de Zimmermann, M^deCamp, son fils, de Glutz, aidemajor, deLuze,
Gibelin, Ignace de MaiUardoz, de la Corbidre, et d'autres officiers, nos
soldats pour la retraite. En rentrant, sous la porte du Vestibule, je trouvai
une pi^ce de Canon oharg^ ; je la fis pointer contre la porte royale et
j'ordonnai k un grenadier de l^her un coup de fasil sur la lumiire si Ton
venoit k nous poursuivre. Je donnois cet ordre, lorsque un grenadier me
jette rudement contre un ofiBcier, en me disant. On pointe sur vous. Dans
le moment le coup part et enleve la marche sur laquelle j'^tois plac6
auparavant.
M" de Beding et de Glutz, Aidemajor, derri^re le vestibule du cdf
du Jardin vouliirent entrainer un canon sous le vestibule, oil M.^ de Beding
flit bless' : lorsque nous le vimes par terre, nous le criimes mort : il
n'avoit que le bras cass' et sa fin tragique est assez connue.
Je traversai le jardin avec M" Joseph de Zimmermann, de Glutz,
Aidemajor, de Luze, de Gross, de Gibelin, Ignace de Maillardoz, et
d*autres officiers. De toutes parts on tiroit des coups de fusils et de cara*
bines sur nous. Je re^us une balle k travers mon chapeau, et je vis tomber
1 a2
Digitized by
Google
856 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS April
lemalhearenx M' de Gross ayant la cuisse casste. Je le fis emporter par
deux Soldats k une certaine distance.
En arrivant dans le Corridor de Tassembl^ plusieurs depute vinrent
me dire qu'il &lloit que je misse bas les armes, que je ne pouvois pas-
rester arm6 dans Tenceinte de Tassembl^e. Je repondis que Tayant
refus^ jusques k cette heure, je ne pouvois suivre leur conseil, que je
ne mettrois bas les armes que par ordre du Boi et par auoun autre ordre.
M^ Menou, M^ de Camp, me dit que le Boi ^toit dans une loge de
TAssemblte; je priai un depute de vouloir bien m'y conduire, ce qu'il fit.
Je trouvai toute la fieimille Boyale, M'* de Choiseul, d'Hervilly, le Prince
de Poix, et d'autres personnes de la Cour. Je dis au Boi : Sire I on veut
que jemette bas les armes : malgr6 le pen de monde qui me reste, je ne le
ferai que par vos ordres. Le Boi repondit: Posez vos armes, bien
entendu entre les mains de la garde Nat. Je ne veux pas que des
braves gens comme vous perissent tous.
La Beine, M"« Elisabeth et d'autres qui 6toient dans la loge du Boi,
s'inform^rent avec beaucoup d'inter^t si je n'avois pas 6t6 bless6. Je me-
retirai pour me rendre dans la chambre oil ^toient M'^ Joseph de
Zimmermann, de Glutz, Aidemajor, de Luze, de la Corbidre, Ignace de
Maillardoz, d 'Ernst et le restant de nos soldats, environ cent hommes. A.
peine fus-je entr^ dans la chambre que le Boi eut la bont^ de m'envoyer
un billet sign6 de sa main et dont voici les propres mots. . . . Le Boi
ordonne aux Suisses de poser k Tinstant leurs armes, et de se retirer dans,
leurs Casernes (sign4) Louis.
Je fis poser en consequence les armes dans un coin, malgr6 les diffi-
cult6s de quelques soldats qui, quoique sans munitions, dirent, nous
pouvons encore nous defendre, avec la bayonette.
Les d6put6s vinrent nous dire de nous rendre k TEglise des feuillants,.
nous trouvant trop exposes oil nous etions, qu'il fedloit pour n6tre siiret^
que les soldats otassent leurs habits pour que Ton n'appercdt aucun habit
rouge dans la passage. Quelques soldats ayant suivi ce Conseil, noua
nous mimes en marche pour nous rendre aux feuillants. Quatre sentinelled
me dirent que j'6tois le plus coupable, ainsi que les autres OfiBciers, qu'on
alloit nous conduire tout de suite k la municipality. Je dis au Conducteur
que TEglise ^toit un coupegorge et que je n*y resterois pas. Je rappelai
les Officiers. M^ de Glutz, Aidemajor, de Luze, de la Corbidre, Ignace
de Maillardoz me suivirent. M<^ Joseph de Zimmermann trop avanc^
dans TEglise me perdit de vue. Le depute en me disant des duret^s finit
par nous assurer qu'il vouloit nous conduire dans un endroit o^ nous
serious en surety. En effet il nous mena au Comity de Surveillance,
oii ^toient dej& enferm^ M" de Salis, Capitaine, de Pfyffer, Capitaine,
de Zimmermann, M^ de Camp, d*Emst, de Diesbach, de Steinbrug,
Gibelin, de Zimmermann fils, et Castella d'Orgemont.
Quelquetems aprds, ce depute nous envoia quelques rafraichissements ;
d'autres vinrent nous considerer comme des betes curieuses.
Sur le soir enfin un depute allemand, nomm6 Bruat, vint nous parler
avec int^rSt et nous dit en allemand : je vais fiaire mon possible pour vous
sauver ; il fit venir un finppier qui nous apporta de mauvaises culotes et
redingottes que nous payames fort cher. Chacun s'habilla et sortit k la
h&te. M'^ de Salis, Pfyffer, et moi sommes restte les demiers. M' Bruat
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 857
nous dit qu*il nous oonduiroit k minuit par les Corridors o^ il n'y avoit
pas de Sentinelle.
Nous sortimes en effet k minuit, sans trouver de Sentinelle et arrivames
k la Place de Venddme. M'' Bruat vouliit d'abord nous conduire chez lui ;
il changea d^avis, y trouvant du danger. Je le priai de nous ramener
<;liez moi, pr^sumant que Ton ne soup9onneroit pas les Suisses d'aller
<M)ucher chez eux. II trouva mon id6e bonne, et en nous quittant, il nous
pria de ne jamais parler de lui, si nous etions arr^t^s.
Le 11 ^ 4 heure du matin, un de ses parents vint nous dire de sa
part de nous sauver au plutdt. Nous nous separames en nous embrassant
et en nous confiant k la garde de Dieu dans ce Pays de liberty ; par des
ev^nements extraordinaires nous sommes parvenus tous les trois k rentrer
dans nos foyers.
Tous les Officiers bless6s ont M massacres, excepts M** de Bepond qui
a pu s'echapper malgr^ un coup de fusil qu*il a re9u au travers de la
jambe.
Tel est le Precis des principaux faits que j*ai vus avec les ofiBciers ci
dessus, qui se sont trouves sous mon Commandement. D'autres officiers,
avec nos braves soldats, se sont battus et ont peri les armes k la main, soit
4ans le Chateau, soit dans le Jardin, et k la Place de Louis XV. Beaucoup
de temoins oculaires peuvent en donner le detail.
Joseph Zimmermann, Col. d'Lifanterie,
Glutz, Aidemajor,
GiBELiN, Sous-aidemajor,
Sign6s -/a. F. de la Corbi^bb,
BOULLIK,
Bepond, 1*®' Lieutenant,
^De Luze, 2^ Lieutenant.
NoTA. — Le 8 au Soir je fAs chez le Boi, avec M. de Bachmann, Major
du Begiment de Gardes Suisses. II nous parla sur le projet de ce qui
•devoit arriver le 10 et me dit et me repeta plusieurs fois qu'il ne vouloit
pas que dans aucun cas je commendlsse le feu, qu'il falloit que j'eiisse du
monde tai avant que les Suisses l&cliassent un coup de fusil, et qu'au cas
•d'attaques je devois laisser tirer les premiers coups par les gardei
nationales qui 6toient de n6tre Cot^, que dans toutes les cas nous n'^tions
que secondaires. Le matin le Boi me repeta le m^mes choses et que je
devois dire k Mr Mandat Commandant de la Garde Nationale, que nous
n'^tions que secondaires.
Digitized by
Google
358 Aprtt
Reviews of Books
The Methods of Historical Study : Eight Lectures read in the Uni-
versity of Oxford in Michaelmas Term, 1884, with the Inaiigural
Lecture on the Office of the Historical Professor. By Edward A.
Freeman, D.C.L., Regius Professor of Modern History. (London :
Macmillan & Co. 1886.)
More than two years have passed since our great English historian first
began to be called Professor Freeman by the punctilious; but the tributes
still have a clear and solid ring which in his inaugural lecture he paid to
the most eminent of his predecessors. From Arnold he avowed that he
had 'learned what history is, and how it should be studied.* To Mr.
Goldwin Smith, without of course being able to avoid contentious matter ,
he referred in terms of almost youthful enthusiasm. And as to the bishop
of Chester, Mr. Freeman's acknowledgment of his illustrious friend as * the
one man among living scholars to whom one may most freely go as to
an oracle,* seems like the other side of a page recording, in a recent com-
panion volume, Dr. Stubbs's parting welcome to ' the great champion and
representative * of an entire branch of historical literature. Oxford may
be presumed to have followed Goethe's advice in an analogous case, and,
instead of drawing comparisons between the author of the inaugural and
the author of the exaugtural address, to have ' thanked God for both of
them.' Yet in one sense it must have been felt in the university, as it
certainly was outside, that the new professor would have been justified,
like the first king in Prussia, in placing the crown upon his own head.
He owed his rank, not only among English historians, but among English
historical teachers, to himself; and long before he gave his first kcture from
his chair, there were many students who took pride in claiming a place,
however humble, in his school. All these shared in the general feeling of
8atis£ekction that while still vigorous and combative he should have been
enabled to place his wisdom and experience at the service of the university
where his chosen study has already been carried on with greater success
than in any other place of learning in the country. It would be very pre-
sumptuous in me to express an opinion as to whether Oxford has within
the last two years proved its intention of deserving the good fortune which
has again befallen it. Even were I to discuss the rejection of a recent
measure of reform, in which the regius professor of modem history is
understood to have taken a warm interest, and which I could not but con-
sider admirable in itself, I should probably only bum my fingers. What
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 859
would, however, be really grievous to learn, would be that a single genuine
student of history in statu pupillari at Oxford had allowed his * period '
or ' periods * to shut him out from the living voice which, as the last of
these lectures promises, will help him towards something better than a
first class or a fellowship. Should this page, as they say, meet the eye of
such an undergraduate, will he allow the writer to add that he too has
some experience of examination necessities, but that he knows personal
contact with a great master to be capable of quickening, even in mere
remembrance, the efforts of the better part of a lifetime ?
In the earHer of the lectures contained in the present series, Mr. Free-
man seems at more pains than one would have thought called for by the
nature of the case to set himself and his subject right with his academical
audience. It is not his fault that his chair is called one of modem history
only, and nobody will be afi*aid lest he should found his teaching on a
correspondingly narrow basis. On the other hand, no argument in the
world will convince the man who derives a virtuous satisfaction from
reading history, real history, in his leisure hours instead of mere frivolous
fiction, and who is even ready to sit down to Carlyle's * Frederick * with a
map, that history, and modem history in particular, is not an easy study.
The true student will find out the fact soon enough for himself. But it is
well that he should understand at an early stage in the course of his work»
instead of having to find out by dint of a succession of painful autodidactio
experiences, which are the difficulties pecuhar to his own pursuit, which
of them have proved insuperable to whole generations of his predecessors,
and which of them vanish in the face of approved treatment. Thus some
such lectures as those beginning with the third of the present series (on
the nature of historical evidence) and dealing with the materials of
' modem ' history and with the right ways of using those materials, would
in my opinion serve any historical student as a useful introduction to
the more advanced stages of his pursuit. Indeed, I should not scruple to
go further, and to express a wish that Mr. Freeman had cared to work
out this part of his subject more completely. The matter of his third and
fourth lectures, which form the very kernel of his discourse, would have
gained by being put into a more systematic shape ; for as there is a right
season for everything, so a Uttle more rigour of definition and subdivision
would have been perfectly appropriate when the speaker was in every sense
in cathedrd, and when the occasion was, so to speak, oecumenical. If ever
there was a good definition of history, it is that offered by Mr. Freeman
at the opening of his third lecture — * the science of man in his character
as a political being.' For it is as acting in communities, or in his relation
to communities, that man is the subject proper of historical study. Then
why (apart firom the use of the word scieTicey which is no longer worth
debating) should Mr. Freeman afterwards show a certain hesitation about
accepting a definition to which there is no real exception to be taken ?
So, again, in the excellent chapter on * original authorities,' one deside-
rates a more systematic review of the ordinary tests of genuineness and
correctness. In short, the sacrifice of some illustrations, and perhaps
the omission of a few censures which no doubt rendered the lecture on
modem writers the most piqiiant of the course, might have made room
for a fuller exposition of the method (rather than the methods) of true
Digitized by
Google
860 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April
historical study. An eminent German professor of history, whose death
is one of the many we have recently had occasion to mourn in this
branch of learning, and whose narrative power and breadth of historical
view resembled Mr. Freeman's own, in his best years repeatedly gave a
<50ur8e of lectures on historical methodology, which must have been of
the greatest advantage to successive generations of students, as in their
pubHshed form they have been to many of Droysen's readers. I wiD
venture to maintain that such a course would be a very wholesome pre-
paration for many to whom such a book as Lewis's * Credibihty * causes
a kind of shuddering surprise, whereas in truth it contains nothing beyond
a consistent appHcation of unavoidable tests. Undoubtedly, as some of
Mr. Freeman's illustrations in this volume again show, early Boman
history is the historical period to which these tests can be applied more
variously, more persistently, and therefore more instructively, than to any
other, ancient or modem. While on this subject, I cannot help express-
ing a regret that in joining to his strictures on Mommsen an acknowledg-
ment of the services rendered to Roman history by the genius of Niebuhr
and by the recent efforts of Ihne, Mr. Freeman should not have com-
memorated, even in passing, the labours of Schwegler in the same field,
incomparable in their thoroughness, and unlikely ever to be altogether
superseded where they are known.
But it would be a poor return for the pleasure and stimulus which I
have derived from two successive perusals of these lectures within the
course of the last few months, were I to try to find in them Uttle faults of
omission such as were here inevitable, or to demur to particular judgments
and contrasts which may after all be matters of opinion, and even where
they ought not to be such may fail to suit all standards of taste. What
must strike the candid reader of this book, and what, I think, justifies the
wish which I have ventured to found upon it for a fuller treatment of the
same subject by the same hand, is the extraordinary firmness of grasp
maintained by that hand over every part of the theme. Probably there
are other aspects under which so genial a lecture as the concluding one
of the series, on geography and travel, may have proved specially attrac-
tive to Mr. Freeman's audience ; but the chief interest of the series as a
whole Hes in its authoritative character. Professors of history are not
often great historians, but great historians are perhaps still more rarely
qualified to be the revisers of the science which they adorn.
A. W. Wakd.
Studies of Family Life : a Contribution to Social Science,
By C. S. Devas. (London : Bums & Gates. 1886.)
Mb. Devas has gathered together a great deal of interesting information
on the various constitutions of the home at different times among the
white and yellow races of mankind ; he has discussed not only the personal
relations of the members of each family group, but also their respective posi-
tions in regard to family property. The area which the author has had in
view is very wide, for he deals with the opinions of parental and filial
duty which obtain among different tribes, as well as with intricate ques-
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 861
tdons of early law and custom, and other subjects of keen controversy.
It was perhaps wise, in the narrow space allotted to each group, to keep so
fax as possible to exposition and to avoid entering on polemical discussions.
When Mr. Devas departs from this line, he does not always do his
opponents full justice, as in the trenchant remarks with which he dis-
misses the labours of recent students of kinship and marriage among
.savage peoples. On the whole, however, this book shows the judicial
spirit which animated the * Groundwork of Economics,* while his occa-
sional remarks on the sources of information prove that Mr. Devas has
handled his authorities with critical care.
While he undoubtedly possesses many qualifications for the historical
investigation of this important subject, he has preferred to treat it in a
dogmatic rather than a strictly scientific spirit ; he uses history to illus-
trate and enforce the christian doctrine of family relationship, and does
not pretend to pursue knowledge for its own sake. For purposes of ex-
position to the general reader, this mode of treatment is probably the
<slearest ; and even the student may find it advantageous to have a definite
statement of the personal equation of the writer, instead of being left to
discover it for authors who pose as unprejudiced persons. It is a serious
-objection, however, to the plan of the book that the scheme of classifica-
tion is very curious, since it is impossible to detect any definite principle
of arrangement— chronological, geographical, logical, or other. The main
divisions, indeed, into Fore-Christian, Christian, and After-Christian,
are clear enough ; but tlie subdivisions of the first — (1) the Chinese,
(2) the Jews under the Judges, (8) the Romans under the Kings, (4) the
classical Roman family, (5) the Homeric Greeks, (6) classical Athens,
(7) Sparta and the later Greek family, (8) the Hindus, &c. &c. — are some-
what bewildering.
Since he writes with a practical purpose, Mr. Devas is not willing to
lose any opportunity of drawing a moral from the facts he relates. ' It is
-curious,' he says, * to mark how many social features are seen in Burma
that many writers and pohticians recommend for Europe. The " emanci-
pation" of women, the facihty of divorce, the absence of hereditary
dignities and wealth, *' free trade " in land, cremation (which is the general
mode in which they treat their dead), the State and its officers being so
much, private families so Httle. And the curiosity of their language, that
has different words for the same action — for example, sleeping, if the
jperson (the sleeper) be the king, a monk, or an ordinary mortal — is perhaps
not without analogies in the poUtical language of Europe and America.
But the salt that preserves that society is not part of the programme of
our reformers. Amid the equality and mediocrity of the Burmese, the
monasteries are a secure home of hterature and art ; amid their ease and
freedom the people have still kept the sense of reverence ; it is not there
that insolent and shallow youth derides the wisdom of age, or that chil-
•dren turn against their parents.'
But few readers will regret these little lay sermons, as the preacher is
always caustic, never cynical, and certainly never dull.
W. Cunningham.
Digitized by
Google
362 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April
The Letters of Cassiodorus : being a condensed translation of the * Variie
Epistolse* of Magnus Aurelius Cassiodorus, Senator. By Thomas
HoDGKiN, author of * Italy and her Invaders.' (London : Frowde,.
1886.)
This useful work is best described as a guide to Cassiodorus. A full
translation would not have been worth the trouble ; for while the real
student must go to the original, an abbreviation is as much as any one
else can want with so long-winded and obscure a writer. The work may
also be regarded as an irregular appendix to the general account of
Theodoric's reign in the third volume of ' Italy and her Invaders.' The
materials of it were at first intended to form a special chapter on the
Ostrogothic government of Italy, and are thrown into a separate volume
only because they proved * so manifold, so perplexing, so full of curious
and unexpected detail.' Thus we have a condensed translation which
puts in a clear form the general purport of all the letters. A few of
unusual importance are fully translated, while passages of special interest
or difficulty are given also in the original. The introduction consists of
a life of Cassiodorus, a discussion of the fragment known as the * Anec-
doton Holderi,' and some chapters on the organisation of the official
hierarchy. An excellent index completes the work.
The sixth century forms more than any other the transition from the
old world of Greek and Boman heathenism to the new world of Teutonic
Christianity ; and of this age Cassiodorus is the central representative,
standing midway between Procopius and Gregory of Tours. Procopius is
a Greek of the old style, who followed Belisarius in the same spirit as
Ammianus followed JuHan, and with almost as little understanding of the
barbarian and christian influences about him. Gregory, on the other hand,
lived as a christian bishop in the midst of Prankish tumult and disorder,
and * the repubUc ' was to him not very much more than a great and dis-
tant name. To Cassiodorus, however, the old and the new were equally
familiar. If the imperial ensigns had been removed from Italy before his
birth, the imperial system was still kept up by Odovacar and Theodoric.
For a whole generation the Boman and the Goth, the qtuestor and the
sajo, worked side by side for the peace of the * Italian kingdom,' and
Theodoric's * imperial eyes ' were over both. When the great king was
gone, Cassiodorus himself took up the hopeless work, and struggled for a
few years to preserve what wrecks of Boman civilitas he could. When
all was lost, the old statesman began life again as a student in his
Calabrian monastery, working quietly amongst his manuscripts all through
the tumults of the Gothic war. BeHsarius and Justinian were long since
dead, the Lombard was in Italy, and Mahomet already bom when Cassio^
dorus passed to his well-earned rest in 675.
Mr. Hodgkin has done his work well. A few passages he gives up as
hopeless ; but we njay doubt if Cassiodorus himself could have explained
some of them. Amongst the subjects of special interest discussed in the
notes are— the relation of Theodoric to the empire, the Gothic element in
his administration, the Hfe of the ex-emperor Bomulus Augustulus, and
the complicity of Theodora in the murder of Amalasuentha. He prefers
to connect the disputed passage de ilia persona in Gudelina's letter with
the intrigue to make Vigilius bishop of Bome. H. M. Gwatkin.
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 368
Geschichte der Juden in England von den dltesten Zeiten his zu ihrer
Verbannung, Von Dr. S. Goldschmidt. Erster Theil : Elftes und
zwolffces Jdirhonderte. (Berlin : Eosenstein & HUdesheimer : 1886.)
At first sight it may appear strange that a foreigner should have under-
taken— and, as &r as it goes, successfoUy— to write the little exploited
and less known history of the English Jews. But when the real cha-
racter of this book is considered, surprise must yield to the conviction that
it is eminently fit that a German should be its author. Admirable though
it is in every way, and far superior to anything of the kind yet pubhshed,
it falls considerably short of what we have every right to expect of the
Englishman who may write the next history of the Jews in this country,
and for the reason that it deals only with the printed sources, which, if
not precisely scanty, are irritatingly inadequate. Within these limits,
however, a &r wider knowledge is required than has as yet been displayed
by any would-be historian of the English Jews. It is impossible to judge
correctly the career of any one community of Jews apart from the fortunes
and literature of the whole race, and no historian who has hitherto
devoted attention to the English Jews has had more than the faintest
glimmering of the general history of the Hebrew people. Dr. Goldschmidt
is of a country in which Jewish history has been studied with an industry,
a scholarship, and a luxuriant success in no way inferior to the brightest
achievements in general historical literature. The German Jewish savants
hold almost the entire range of Jewish history, with all its countless
ramifications, in the hollow of their hands, and they preserve for new
enterprises all the characteristic German genius for patient inquiry and
critical study. Dr. Goldschmidt is a fedrly representative disciple of this
class of historian, and hence, as far as printed sources go, his work is
practically exhaustive. In place of the few excerpts from the early
chronicles which have hitherto done duty for the history of the English
Jewries before the expulsion, he gives us a critical study of all the autho-
rities. To this he adds the valuable scraps of information which have
cropped up through the researches, in the byways of medieval Hebrew
literary history, of Zunz, Neubauer, and other scholars — our only materials
for the intellectual and rehgious life of the early English Jews, but of
which hitherto no use has been made — and the whole he judges in the
light of a mature knowledge of the history of the Jews generally in
medieval Europe. This is as far as any student outside England can
go; and the specific value of Dr. Goldschmidt's work consists in its
perfect accomplishment of this task.
The book before us is only an instalment. It covers the eleventh and
twelfth centuries, and has a prefatory chapter on the earlier and foggier
period. Of this early period we really know nothing certain, not even
that there were Jews in England, for the quoted references from the
ecclesiastical laws of the archbishops of Canterbury and York, and the
oft-repeated passage from the charter to the monks of Croyland, are quite
possible without a single Jew having been resident in England at the
time. They are less the special statements of English records than the
conventional phrases belonging to the general forms of the ecclesiastical
document of the period. Dr. Goldschmidt, however, accepts them as
Digitized by
Google
864 REVIEWS OF BOOKS , AprU
proving * that the Jews were in England in great numbers.* To this
it may be replied that they cannot prove so much without suggesting
very much more. This is notably the case with the severe prohibitions
against taking part in Jewish religious ceremonies or attending Jewish
divine worship, which would seem to show thisbt either the people were
much attracted by Judaism or that the Jews of the time proselytised on
a large scale. It need hardly be said that there is not a shred of evidence,
either real or presumptive, that such was the case. Of the possibiHty that
there were Jews in England during the Eoman period and even earlier,
Dr. Goldschmidt says very little. He thinks that an industrial colony
of Hebrews may have been settled in Britain by the Bomans. This
is far from unUkely. The Bomans found it convenient to establish
such colonies along the entire line of their conquests. Alexander the
Great did the same before them, and at the present day the Bussians are
following their example in Central Asia. The commercial aptitude of the
Jews, their adaptability to all climates and peoples, and their wholesome
reverence for the powers that be, fully explain this proceeding. About
two hundred years ago a Boman brick was discovered while digging the
foundation of a house in Mark Lane, which, on the score of its having a
bas-relief representing Samson driving the foxes into the field of com, has
been held to favour the hypothesis of a Boman-Jewish colony in the
vicinity. A similar claim is made for Colchester on the ground of some
brick tessera inscribed with Hebrew characters which have been found
there.
From the Conquest the path of Anglo- Jewish history is clear. Stream-
ing into the country from Normandy, the Hebrews rapidly established
communities in various parts of the country, of which London, Oxford,
and Stamford were the principal. Li London and Oxford they lived in
special Jewish quarters, and possessed numerous synagogues which were
not always within the limits of the Ghettos. One of their earliest restric-
tions was in respect to burial-grounds, of which they were only permitted
to have one ; but this disabihty was abolished by Henry II, who allowed
each conmiunity to possess its own. Henry was, indeed, very well dis-
posed towards the Jews, and granted them important privileges. He
allowed the solemn oath of a Jew on a scroll of the law to outweigh the
uncorroborated testimony of a christian ; in certain cases he permitted
Jews to act as judges, and he withdrew them altogether from the juris-
diction of the clergy. In the previous reigns they were also favourably
treated, especially by William Bufus, who was shrewd enough to see the
wisdom of cultivating the geese that laid the golden eggs. With the people
they also seem to have been on good terms. Their legal position was, how-
ever, not satisfactory. In his closing chapter Dr. Goldschmidt attempts to
define it by means of a collection of facts culled from a mass of legal
documents, but he is not altogether successful ; the broad fact that they
were the chattels of the crown, and as such might be dealt with accord-
ing to the will of the sovereign, renders all such attempts useless. They
certainly enjoyed the monarch's protection, but only on condition that
they and their belongings were absolutely at his disposal. With the
accession to the throne of Bichard Cceur de Lion, the era of persecution
began. Of the terrible massacres which marked the opening of this
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 865
reign, notably of the frightful tragedy at York, Dr. Ooldschmidt supplies
a vivid and sympathetic account. He also gives a fairly good sununary
of the facts bearing on the intellectual and religious condition of the Jews.
Their rabbis were obtained from France much in the same way as they
are now brought over from Germany. Some of them acted as teachers at
Oxford, instructing not only their co-religionists, but also the christian
students of the university, in Hebrew science and grammar. The earliest
chief rabbi hitherto recorded belongs to the reign of John, but Dr.
Goldschmidt has detected in the pages of Madox a reference to an episcopus
Jvdeorum dating from the twenty-fourth year of Henry 11. He also
suggests that Babbi Jacob of Orleans, one of the victims of the anti-
Jewish rising in 1189, was rabbi of the London community. Babbi
Yom-Tob of Joigny, who fell at York in the same year, is also credited
with a local rabbinate, although, when the fame and position of that
eminent doctor are remembered, it seems not unlikely that the rabbinate
of York was, if not superior to that of London, at least on the same level
with it, occupying perhaps a similar position to that of the local arch-
bishopric with regard to the see of Canterbury. Early in the twelfth
century, when they were yet free from persecution, the rabbis carried on
public controversies with christian ecclesiastics. Several of them earned
literary distinction. Babbi Jacob of London translated the passover
service for women and children. In the succeeding century Moses ben
Isaac wrote a valuable grammatical work, the ' Sepher Hashoham.' Dr.
Gt)ldschmidt erroneously calls him ' Moses ben Isaac EUmakdan,' confusing
him with Moses the Nakdan or Ghasan of London, the author of an
important treatise on points and accents, of whom he makes no mention.
The author of the * Sepher Hashoham,' which has recently been edited by
the Bev. G. W. Collins, was Moses ben Isaac Hanasiah of England (cf.
Zunz, ' Zur Geschichte ' &c. p. 112). An important event in early Anglo-
Jewish history was the visit to England of the famous commentator,
poet, and philosopher, Abraham ibn Ezra. It says much for the culti-
vated tastes of the Jews of the time that Ibn Ezra came over on the
invitation of a rich London merchant for whom he wrote his * Yesod
Mora.' Dr. Goldschmidt might have added that, during his stay in
England, Ibn Ezra instructed a disciple, Joseph of Mandeville, who com-
mitted to writing the commentary on portions of Exodus and the minor
prophets which he had heard from the mouth of his master. Another
English rabbi who appears to have been well known in his day was
Benjamin of Canterbury, a pupil of Babbenu Tarn.
The second and concluding part of Dr. Goldschmidt*s work will
carry the history down to the expulsion in the reign of Edward I. This
period being one of continuous persecution, the materials are much richer
than those already dealt with. If Dr. Goldschmidt finishes his work as he
has commenced it, there can be no doubt that it will be the most com-^
plete account of the early history of the Jews in England that has yet
been written. Lucien Wolp.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
866 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April
Becords of the Borough of Nottingham, 1156-1647. Published under the
authority of the Corporation. 8 volumes. (London : Quaritch, 1882-6.)
It is no disparagement to this scholarly production, which is a model for
similar undertakings, to say that for the right understanding of its con-
tents it is necessary to possess some knowledge of the earlier history of
the town. For its avowed sphere necessarily excludes all documentary
evidence before 1166, including therein that of Domesday itself, which is
here of peculiar value, and which indeed is the starting-point, as in other
cases, for a documentary history of the town. It is a commonplace of
history that the borough of Nottingham owed its origin and early import-
ance to its strategical and commercial position. Through it ran the high-
way connecting north and south ; through it flowed the river connecting
east and west. It was in this sense * the key alike of Northumbria and
central Britain.' ^ Hence the struggles for its possession in the ninth
and tenth centuries. We should expect it, as one of the Five Boroughs,
to have contained a large Danish population, and this supposition is con-
firmed by the place-names in the volumes before us. Its * gates ' and
• bars,' its * becks ' and * sykes,' its * holms ' and * dales,' and so forth, are
all redolent of the north. And here mention may well be made of the
very valuable and elaborate lists of place-names which the editors give us,
together with their explanations, and the appended glossary. Thus the
Swedish stendr is suggested as the origin of the curious, and here frequent
termination — * stener * or — * steyner,' with which the * Steyne ' at Brighton
should doubtless be compared. We learn also that ' skep ' (a basket) ' is
still in use in Nottingham.*
Mr. Green, who devoted sa much attention to the growth of English
towns, selected Nottingham as a typical instance of the development of
commerce under Cnut. He remarked that * the existence of a merchant-
^Id side by side with its cnichten-gild showed its trading activity.^ The
only evidence, however, for this statement is the witness of Domesday to
the existence of two classes in the town, ' equites ' and * mercatores.' The
fact is a curious one, and invites research, but it does not prove the exist-
ence of a gild. And, indeed, the records of the borough point in the
opposite direction. In his charter to Winchester, Henry II assumes
the existence of the merchant-gild ; in his charter to Lincoln he con-
firms it as it had existed under his predecessors : but in his charter to
Nottingham he is silent on the subject ; and it is left for his son John (temp.
Richard I) to grant the town a merchant-gild, as his own gift (Prceterea
concessi etiam, de propria done meo, . . . gildam mercatorum), and as
a wholly new institution.* Another fact bearing on the point is that the
town had not only a gildhaHj but a moo^hall as well (i. 409), the latter
being still in existence as * the old Moot Hall ' (i. 486). Judging by
analogy, I gather from this that the old moot must have lasted on as the
governing body, before the gild replaced it, long enough for this hall to
receive and retain its name.
A further consideration here arises. We have very important evidence
I Green's Conquest of England, p. 208. * Ibid. p. 439.
* By this I mean that this is the first reoognUion of the gild, though it maj have
existed some time previously in an onanthorised or * adulterine ' condition.
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 367
in Domesday that the burgesses engaged' largely in agricnltnral pursuits.
Six carucates of land lying round about the town were worked by thirty-
eight burgesses, who possessed fourteen plough-teams. It would even
Beem as if they had been liable to the usual villein services {opera).
For we read that this land de censu terre et operibtis bv/rgensium*
reddit so much. As the total amount is given in money, it is probable
that these services had been commuted. The censti^ terre is clearly
landgafol (or shortly gafol), so that the case may be compared with that
of a rural manor, of which I have seen the money rent thus expressed in
a charter : de opere so much, and de gahlo so much. This should bring
home to us a fact which is yet not realised as it should be — namely, the
rural character even of the larger towns. The borough of Nottingham
was surrounded by its open field (campus), as much as any village in the
land. It is this open field of which Domesday is speaking, and in these
volumes we meet with abundant evidence of its nature. Thus, in 1885
we have a grant of three scattered acres and a selion jacentes in campo
Notinghamie (vol. i. p. 122), and an even earlier one of an acre, a half acre,
and three * butts,' similarly scattered, in campis Nottinghamie (p. 44).
Leaving this, let us now turn to a very remarkable point, which would
seem, so for as I know, to have hitherto escaped notice. This is the
quasi-subject relation in which Derby stood to Nottingham. In Domesday,
we may note, the town of Derby is not surveyed, as it should be, at the
head of its own shire, but follows immediately on Nottingham, coming
between that town and its shire. Passing to the Pipe Boll of 1180, we
not only find ' Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire * placed under one sheriff
but also farmed as one shire. And it is specially noteworthy that
Nottingham and Derby have not even a separate existence for. the purpose
of the auxUium burgorum,^ So, in later times (1878), we find the two
towns charged jointly with the provision of a 'balinger.'^ It is clear
that this conjunction was worked solely in the interests of Nottingham.
For in the charter granted by Henry II we find the borough, in the true
spirit of a medieval town, securing for itself this monopoly :
Homines etiam de Notingehamsire et de Derbesire venire dehenb ad
burgum de Notingeham die Veneris et Sabbati cum quadrigis et summagiis
suisy nee aliquis infra decern leucas de Notingeham tinctos pannos operari
debet, fdsi in burgo de Notingeham.
This latter prohibition was probably aimed at Derby. Mr. Eyton,
who had carefully studied the subject, arrived at the conclusion that the
Domesday ' leuca ' represented a mile and a half. If this was so, the
prohibitory clause would seem so framed as just to include Derby. It
would not, however, include either Chesterfield or Newark-on-Trent,
and we elsewhere (Bot. Pip. 4 John) find these towns offering a
small sum each for permission to buy and sell tinctos pannos as they had
done in the time of his father. The local importance of this industry is
seen by the anxiety of the town to secure favourable terms at Lenton
Fair for its mercatores pannorum? It also gave its name to the ' Litster-
gate * or * Dyers' Street,* which appears in 1808.
One of the most interesting and instructive points connected with the
« Lkme&day, i. 280. * Bot. Pip. 81 Hen. I, p. 7.
• Vol. i. p. 197. ' * Circ. 1300 * (vol. i. p. 61).
Digitized by
Qoo^^
868 REVIEWS OF BOOKS AprU
history of Nottingham is its relation to those highways hy land and by
water, at the junction of which it was placed. In Domesday we read as^
follows :
In Snotingeham aqtca TrenUB et fossa et via verstis Eboracum custo-
diuntur ita ut siquis impedierit transitum navium et siquis araverit vel
fossam fecerit in via regis infra duos perticas, emendare habet per VIII.
libras,
Mr. Green and Mr. Freeman have both placed the same construction
on this passage, and this may now be regarded as the accepted and
authorised interpretation. Mr. Freeman writes :
* The town stood on the great highway to the north, both by land
and water, and to keep open and guard the communications both waya
was the great pubhc duty laid upon its burghers. ... No further miUtary
service is spoken of.' •
Such is perhaps, at first sight, the meaning of the above passage. Yet
I venture to think that it should rather be compared with similar entries at
Canterbury and Dover.^ In the light of these, and of that at York,**^ w&
shall probably conclude that it refers to the hcale of the court in which
these offences were to be tried, and to the fine by which they were to h&
punished. Its amount, I may add, has to me a strong Danish flavour.
It is certain that there is nothing in these volumes to confirm the ac-
cepted interpretation. On the contrary, in the struggle with the lords of
Oolwick, which appears to have lasted some ten years (1882-1892),
during which vessels were unable to approach the town sicut de jure in
antique tempore consueverunt^^ the burgesses, helpless, appealed to the
king clamosa insinuations, as being cut off from Hull and the sea by the
obstruction. The king at length took up their case, and his attorney argued
quod aqv/i predicta de Trent est una magnarum ripariarum Anglia, qucs
pro passagio navium et batellonim cum victualibus et aUis mercenariis,
quocv/nque se divertat, per legem aperta et communis esse debet. He
rested his case, it will be seen, on broad and general grounds. No
special guardianship is assigned, throughout, to the burgesses. Nor, I
believe, would such guardianship ever have been recognised by the crown,
trenching as it would on one of the regalia which appears to have been
jealously guarded. The Domesday expression, infra duos perticas^ ia
probably explained by the subsequent charters, which apply to the river
the phrase, qiLantum pertica una obtinebit ex utraque parte fili aqucs.
Whether from midstream or from the centre of the road, the space waa
under royal protection for a perch to the right and to the leffc. Thia
measure ought to be noted.
Possessing, as it does, the rare treasure of an original charter from
Henry II, the town has done well in giving us this document, which is
well preserved, in facsimile. The charters both of Henry II and of John
have been printed by Dr. Stubbs in his * Select Charters,' but we here
learn for the first time that the latter only repeats and confirms a.
charter granted by John when merely count of Mortaigne. The interest
• Norman Conquest, vol. iv. pp. 198-9. • Domesday, i. 1, 2.
'* * Bex h&bet ires vias per terrain et qoartam per aqoam. In his omne forisfactom
est regis et comitis abicunqne vadant vis ' (ibid, i. 298 b).
'» VoL i. pp. 416-17.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 869
of this earlier charter lies in the fact that he granted it, not as king, but
merely in his capacity of lord. Three charters of Henry lEE, and one
from each of the three Edwards, are also here printed.
There is one more matter to which allusion must be made. Through-
out these volumes we constantly hear of distinctions between the ' French '
and * EngHsh ' boroughs of which Nottingham was composed, and in the
charter granting the burgesses the right to elect a mayor (1284) congre-
gatis burgensibus utriusqtce hurgi ejusdem villa, we read et quod statim,
eadem electione facta, eligant unum hallivum de uno hv/rgo et alium de
alio burgo pro diversitate consuetudinum in eisdem burgis habitamm — a
passage deserving careful notice. Here, again, for the origin of this dis-
tinction we have to turn to Domesday, where we learn that (as at Norwich)
a novum burgum was founded on the earl's land, and this burgum would be
the ' French borough,* being inhabited (as at Norwich we are expressly
told was the case) by * Franci.*
It only remains to congratulate Nottingham on setting so excellent an
example to our other ancient towns, and on its good fortune in securing
for this task two editors so admirably qualified (their modesty almost
leaves us in doubt as to their names) as Mr. S. O. Johnson and Mr.
W. H. Stevenson. J. H. Bound.
Seventeen Lectures on the Study of Medieval and Modem History and
Kindred Subjects, delivered at Oxford. By William Stubbs, D.D.
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1886.)
The pleasure and satisfaction of a reader of this volume is somewhat
damped by the feeling that it contains the last will and testament of
Bishop Stubbs as an historical writer. He has brought together the
fragments of his work at Oxford as a sign that he has retired from the
labours of a student to the occupations of practical life. He tells us in
his preface that he has committed these lectures to the press as a means
of weaning himself gradually from the habits of a literary life, * the love
of correcting proof-sheets.* Perhaps he did not think when he wrote that
sentence how great a testimony he incidentally bore to the patient and
careful temper which has been the result of his mental discipline. To be
able to correct proof-sheets with attention implies an absolute power of
self-concentration on the work in hand ; to be able to delight in the pro-
cess implies a fulness of knowledge which makes accuracy an instinct,
and enables a writer to weigh what he has written apart from the sources
which helped him as he wrote. It is a noticeable fact that scarcely any
book embracing such a mass of details as Dr. Stubbs*s ' Constitutional
History * ever appeared from the press with a list of errata containing
so few misprints.
Throughout the lectures which this volume contains runs a protest
against the ' statutory obligation,* in accordance with which the lectures
were delivered. Dr. Stubbs complains of the ' compulsion to produce
something twice a year, which might attract an idle audience,* as unworthy
of a serious student. He can scarcely hope to carry with him the sym-
pathies of his readers, who feel that had it not been for that compulsion
they would not have enjoyed this — we had almost written, posthumous —
VOL. n. — ^NO. VI. B B
Digitized by
Google
370 REVIEWS OF BOOKS AprU
volume. In fact, we cannot help rejoicing that some external force drove
Dr. Stubbs against his will to show us a side of himself and of his
pursuits which might otherwise have passed away unrecorded. He has
shown us how an earnest student, brought into the presence of a mixed
audience, can temper his knowledge with humour, and out of the
storehouse of his learning can bring forth things new and old. These
lectures will hold a place in English literature for other reasons than their
merits as a contribution to historical science. They will be a valuable
record of the progress of study in Oxford for eighteen eventful years ; they
will contain the materials of a study of the life of an Oxford professor, and
they will give posterity an insight into the character of Bishop Stubbs,
which here expresses itself as it had not the opportunity of doing either
in the pages of the * Constitutional History ' or in the prefaces to the * Bolls
Chronicles,' or even, it may be, in episcopal charges deHvered in his
diocese of Chester.
The contents of this volume are miscellaneous, but correspond to
different sides of their writer's activity. Some deal with the condition of
historical studies, especially in Oxford; others, as those on 'Learning
and Literature at the Court of Henry 11,' were suggested by the work of
editing chronicles ; others, on * The History of the Canon Law in England,'
are the results of Dr. Stubbs's careful labour as a member of the ecclesias-
tical courts commission. One lecture was suggested by passing events in
EngHsh politics, * The Medieval Kingdoms of Cyprus and Armenia.' Four
lectures on the reigns of Henry VII and Henry VHI remind us sadly
of what we have lost by the cessation of the * Constitutional History ' at
the accession of the Tudors. We feel that in those lectures the outlines of
English history in the beginning of the sixteenth century are for the first
time sketched with firmness and precision. The character of Henry VIII
as drawn by Dr. Stubbs is truer than that given by any other writer.
It takes into account the conditions of the times, not only in England, but
in Europe ; it is founded upon a knowledge of the sixteenth century, and
does not carry into those times the ideas and prejudices of a later age ; it
recognises the psychological problems of Henry's character, and admits an
evolution of his self-will. It is a model of what historical portraiture
should be, at once charitable and just : charitable, because through the
ages the historian sees in historical personages men of like passions with
himself, animated by complex motives, not to be judged, like heroes or
villains in a play, by a few actions only, but by the prolonged activity of
their lives ; just, because men have to be judged by the &.r-off results of
their doings, which, however natural they may be, are not therefore to be
justified.
It is needless to discuss the new suggestions with which these lectures
abound, or to consider the value of the general views which they contain.
The principles laid down in the lectures * On the Purposes and Methods
of Historical Study/ and ' On the Characteristic Differences between
Medieval and Modem History,' will seem to some to be disputable.
Those who call history a science, and mean thereby that it can produce
results which can be easily popularised and reduced into maxims for
political use, will find small satisfaction from Dr. Stubbs. To him the
value of historical study lies in its educational efficacy to teach the
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 871
methods of political observation and political reasoning, and to train the
sobriety of temper and largeness of view which are necessary for obser-
vation and reasoning alike. Of this temper these lectures give a conspi-
cuous example ; and it was the possession of this temper which gave Dr.
Stubbs an influence upon the historical studies, not only of Oxford, but of
England, which went far beyond his books or his lectures to his ordinary
classes. We cannot but rejoice that the struggle against an * irksome
statutory obligation * forced him to show us more of himself than his
modesty would otherwise have allowed. Valuable as are these lectures in
themselves, they are still more valuable as an exhibition of the calm and
genial temper of mind which the study of history can develop in him who
pursues it for its own sake only. M. Creighton.
The Family of Brocas of Beaurepaire and Roche Court, Heredita/ry
Masters of the Royal B^ickhounds, with some Account of the English
Rule in Aquitaine, By Montagu Burbows, Chichele Professor of
Modem History in the University of Oxford. (London : Long-
mans & Co. 1886.)
In the opening words of his introduction Professor Burrows claims the
interest of the * general reader * for nothing more than the first portion of
this stout volume, in which he sketches the careers of those earlier
members of the English branch of the family of Brocas who have some
right to be considered historical personages. We will avail ourselves of
this indulgence, and confine our remarks chiefly to this part of the work.
As for the Brocas esquires of the fifteenth century, and the chiefe of the
family in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, are they not given at
full length in all their branches in book iii and book iv ? and do they not
figure in the carefully drawn pedigrees in that minute detail which is the
delight of the genealogist, and which must, in this instance, minister
both to the pride and satisfaction of all surviving kin of the house of
Brocas ?
But we would not have Professor Burrows think that we underrate
ihe value of family history. We quite agree with him that the history of
families goes far to making the history of a nation. We could, however,
wish that the author had had more material of a personal character
to work upon. He has written a readable work in a chatty style — to
some it may appear too chatty — but in all worts of this description
there is a tendency to ascribe the possibility, and then the probability, of
certain acts to certain persons, and then insensibly to adopt such sugges-
tions as facts. Professor Burrows is not altogether free from this fault.
A certain distinguished personage is said to have so frequently discussed
the battle of Waterloo, that he at length convinced himself that he had
led a charge in that great victory. The Brocas race was a sturdy one
and full of fight, but we doubt whether a Brocas was to be found in every
great battle of the fourteenth century. Still, even with these ornaments,
no one will complain that Professor Burrows has not done his best to
keep alive the true memory of Brocas. He has rid us of many Brocas
myths, he has disposed of the ancestor who * came over with the Con-
queror,' and he has presented us with the real men — good knights of
B B 2
Digitized by
Google
872 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April
Gascon race, who took kindly to English soil and lived and died good
Englishmen.
The history of the connexion between England and Aquitaine cannot
be fairly written, Professor Burrows insists, until the series of documents
known as the Oascon Bolls shall have been thoroughly explored. But in
his preliminary sketch of the English rule in the south of France he in-
dicates sufficiently the secret of the continuance of that connexion after
the loss of other dependencies of the English crown. The Oascons
enjoyed their liberties under the distant sway of the * Roy Outremer ' in a
way in which they could never hope to enjoy them when once they were
incorporated in the rapidly growing kingdom of France ; and the great
flood of trade which flowed between the English ports and the wealthy
city of Bordeaux formed one of the strongest of all bonds — mutual
advantage. That Englishmen should find employment in Aquitaine,
and that Gascons should seek their fortunes in England, was a natural
consequence ; and it has been Professor Burrows's object to show, and
successfully, that every Gascon was not a Gaveston.
The family of Brocas of Gascony appears to have been of some
importance even as early as the twelfth century, and to have increased
and multiphed in fair numbers in succeeding generations, especially in
the neighbourhood of St. Sever and Sault. From the branch settled at
the latter place, always loyal to, and suffering for, the English cause,
sprang the founders of the English house. In a royal mandate of 1815
a certain Amald de Brocas is recorded as lately slain in the king's service
in the parts of Scotland (' doubtless Bannockbum,* according to Professor
Burrows) ; and it appears to have been this Gascon gentleman's three
sons who are found at this time under protection of the English court.
These were : (1) John, the eldest, who lived a long and useful life in the
public service and was the first founder of the fortunes of the English
house ; (2) Bernard, a clerk in orders, rector of St. Nicholas, Guildford,
in 1824 (in which Uving he was succeeded by a nephew, Amald, whose
tomb may still be seen there), and the holder of sundry offices under the
crown, both in England and Gascony, a man who added acre to acre, was
the first lord of Beaurepaire, the family seat in North Hants, and who
settled his estates to the satisfskction of his friends ; and (3) Amald, who
died young. John, the eldest brother, first appears as a valettus in the
royal household in 1814 ; but in Edward Ill's reign he rose to the im-
portant office of master of the horse — no sinecure during the French wars,
when cavalry was so largely required for the great raids of those cam-
paigns. He was also chief forester of Windsor, warden of Windsor
Hospital, constable of Guildford, and, in fact, was on the fair road to for-
tune, prudently getting lands in Windsor and its neighbourhood and in
other parts of England. In 1840 he received knighthood and further
favours, for good service in the battle of Sluys, Professor Burrows sug-
gests. He served in the campaign of 1841 ; and was sent, in 1844, on an
embassy to congratulate Alfonso of Castile on the capture of Algeciras.
As to the campaign of 1846, he may have been present at Cr6cy, he
certainly took part in the siege of Calais ; but, although he was receiving
war pay in 1848, there is nothing to show that he was present at the
rough fight on Chamy's attempt upon that, town, as Professor Burrows
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 873
would rather have us believe. Nor again, although in 1856 he was in
Aquitaine, can we accept the suggestion that * Edward, disappointed with
the meagre results of his son's plundering expedition to Narbonne, had
sent out his trusty counsellor to review the situation and plan the cam-
paign which ended in the battle of Poitiers ; * nor can we ' assign him
what part we please in that victory,' nor take it for granted that * he was
surely there.' We must ask leave sometimes to discount the enthusiasm
of the family historian. But Sir John was not only a soldier. It is in-
teresting to find him, among other civil appointments, sitting on a com-
mission to superintend the buildings of Windsor Castle ; just as, under
the next reign, his nephew appears in connexion with works on West-
minster Hall. In fine, the worthy knight wins our esteem, and we part
from him with regret when he dies at a good old age in 1865.
His successor. Sir Bernard Brocas, his third surviving son, we all
know, for it is he whose monument we have visited in company with Sir
Koger de Coverley. The fierce light of historical research unhappily
disposes of the verger's pleasant description of him as * the lord who cut
off the king of Morocco's head,' for the family crest, the head of a Moor,
appears to have been borne by Sir Bernard long before he had the chance
of doing execution on the infidel. His career was, perhaps, more brilliant
than that of his father ; at least he pushed the family fortunes with like
success. His evidence in the Scrope and Grosvenor dispute shows that
he served in France, Scotland, Gascony, Brittany, and Spain ; but that
he was present at Crecy, Poitiers, and Najara, although, indeed, he may
have been at two out of the three battles, there is no absolute proof. He
married thrice. An early marriage with Agnes Vavasour brought him
the Denton estates in Yorkshire ; but the union was an unhappy one and
ended in a divorce, and the estates went away again. Professor Burrows
ungallantly, and with small cause, lays the blame on the lady. After
this Sir Bernard grew cautious, and sought safety in widows. An inte-
resting passage in a French chronicle quoted by Professor Burrows proves
that he even aspired to the hand of the Fair Maid of Kent, and that the
Black Princfe himself pleaded his cause with that beautiful lady, who,
however, took the opportunity of declaring her preference for the prince.
So Sir Bernard consoles himself straightway by taking to wife Mary,
the heiress of the De Boches, and widow of Sir John de Borhunte — a
suggestive name — who brought with her to her new husband Boche
Castle and the mastership of the royal buckhounds. After this, in 1862,
he is appointed constable of Aquitaine, under the regency of the Black
Prince. In the later years of his life he often appears as a knight of the
shire (but he had no seat in the Good Parliament), presumably following
the lead of William of Wykeham. But at the opening of Richard's reign
he is again in service for a few months in 1877 as captain, and in 1879
as comptroller, of Calais. Last scene of all : he marries a third wife,
founds mortuary services and a Brocas chantry, and so in course of years
is gathered to his fathers. The imhappy fate of his son, the second Sir
Bernard, who took part in the abortive rising directly after Eichard's
deposition and was executed at Tyburn, sealed the historical career of
the Brocases.
How the future generations fared we leave Professor Burrows to tell.
Digitized by
Google
374 REVIEWS OF BOOKS AprU
But we must, for a moment, notice one whom, in contrast to all his
virtuous ancestry, we may call the bad Brocas — Sir Pexall to wit, who
flourished, as the wicked man flourisheth, early in the seventeenth
century. For he nearly outshone all his forbears, and bid fair to be the
Brocas whom all the world would know and talk about. He nearly
founded a college, * Brocas College,' at Oxford; at least he seriously
thought of it, and took prehminary steps. But, alas for good intentions !
His courage failed him at the eleventh hour, and when he came to make
his will he revoked all his fine scheme. If not a Solomon in wisdom, he
imitated that great monarch in other particulars and left behind him
from seventy to a hundred children ; so that we agree with Professor
Burrows that the revocation was, perhaps, the wisest thing he ever did.
On the other hand the whole project may have been a joke, for the worthy
gentleman loved a jest and kept a professional fool, one * Hodge, jester
to Sir Pexil Brocas of Beaurepaire,' whose portrait is still preserved
among the feunily reUcs.
In conclusion, we would speak in commendation of the pubUcation of
the family deeds at the end of the volume. This is just what ought to be
done in a book of this kind ; and Professor Burrows has arranged and
edited them in the right way. We should, however, have preferred to
see the seals reproduced by photography, instead of by rather poor
drawings which assort ill wiUi the handsomely printed text.
E. Maunde Thobipson.
Gli Spagnuoli e i Veneziani in Romagna, 1527-1529. Da C. Ricci.
(Bologna : RomagnoU dair Acqua, 1886.)
The 225th disjjensa of the series edited by Signor Zambrini (entitled
* Scelta di curiosity letterarie inedite o rare dal secolo xiii. al xvii.*) con-
sists of a contribution to the history of Bomagna by the indefatigable
Corrado Bicci, whose name is well Imown to students of the history and
archaeology of Kavenna. An introduction of nearly two hundred pages is
followed by the letters of Agostino Abiosi, who acted as a sort of Baven-
nate ambassador at Venice for about four months, and also some con-
temporary documents from the Bavenna archives.
A remarkable change in poHtical combinations took place shortly after
Cardinal Giulio Medici had become Pope Clement YII. In 1511 the
pope (Leo X), Spain, and Venice had been united in a holy league against
France and Germany ; and again in 1520, when war broke out between
Charles V and France, the pope joined the Spaniards. But in 1526, after
the peace of Madrid, the situation was wholly different; France, the
pope, Venice, and Milan united against the emperor. In £Ei>ct, Spain and
France had changed positions relatively to the pope ; France was now in
the holy league, and Spain against it. The cause of this change was that
Italy was beginning to feel vividly that the alliance of the Spaniards was
a burden which she could no longer endure. An alliance with the king of
Spain had been the most natural aUiance for the church ; but the presence
of Spanish armies in Italy had been more calamitous to Italy than to
the enemy, and the horse attempted to throw off the rider. It was in
1527 that the critical moment occurred which determined that this
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 875
attempt was not to be successful. The sack of Rome on 6 May, followed
by the flight and imprisonment of Clement, made the footing of Spain in
Italy firm again, by necessitating the treaty of Barcelona.
How far was the pope to blame ? Ricci says that he was the causa
precipiia dei mali. That he was very irresolute it is impossible to doubt.
Suriano attributed this irresolution to timidity, a quahty, he says, com-
monly found in la 7iatura fiorentina. In the work before us Ricci treats
him unsparingly : ' Clement VII had neither truth, nor heart, nor in-
telligence. He was capable of anything.' This is undue severity. In
forming a judgment on Clement's conduct, we must bear in mind the
great perplexities which encompassed him, and the difficulty of the task
which he was attempting to perform. This has not escaped Ranke,
who has treated Clement with impartiality, some would say with leniency.
He was not a successful pope, and perhaps there is no one to whom the
Tacitean epigram, omnium consensu capax imperii nisi imperasset, can
be more truly applied.
Ricci sets the incapacity of the pope in a stronger light by his narrative
of the energy with which the historian, Francesco Guicciardini, Clement's
luogotenente generate in Romagna, acted in spite of all the difficulties
which beset him. These difficulties consisted chiefly in want of money
to pay the greedy and mutinous Swiss, and the lukewarmness of the duke
of Urbino, who commanded the allied Venetian forces, and being an
enemy of the Medici was indisposed to act cordially with the general of
the pope, yet in spite of these difficulties, says Ricci, * Guicciardini, the
strongest and most practical political intelligence of the sixteenth century,
provided for the safety of the cities of Romagna, so that plunder and
bloodshed was limited to the smaller places.* What Guicciardini actually
did was simply to supply these cities with small garrisons.
Whilst Bourbon was gradually pushing southward, the viceroy of
Naples and the pope were negotiating, and Bourbon expressed himself
quite ready to concur in a peace, but alleged that it would be impossible
to induce his soldiers to consent without money. Ricci emphasises the
clearness with which Guicciardini recognised that a truce was out of
the question, and the blindness of Clement (p. xxix). On 9 April, Bourbon
occupied Cotignola, and it was generally supposed, by Nicol6 Machiavelli
among others, that he would proceed thence to Ravenna. But Guic-
ciardini was not of this opinion. He was right as it turned out, and
Ricci dwells with complacency on the sagacity displayed by his hero.
Bourbon now occupied three places in Romagna : Brisighella, the pass of
Castellina (near Faenza), and Cotignola. Ricci points out that Eustachio
Celebrino, in a poem entitled 'La Presa di Roma' (composed 1528),
exaggerated the successes of the constable by recording captures of Lugo,
Bagnacavallo, and Imola, which he never entered. Meldola, which re-
fused, as Cotignola had done, to receive a garrison from the army of the
curia, fell next into Bourbon's hands, and was roughly treated — Meldola
trista —
ultimamente poi la sacchegiomo,
e for molti prigion, morti e ferriti,
le donne vergognate di quel luoco,
et tutto dentro posto a fiamma e faoco.
Digitized by
Google
376 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Aprfl
His next step was to pass into Tuscany by the Valle del Ronco. The
land was plundered, but Florence was saved by the exertions of her Medi-
cising citizen, Guicciardini, who succeeded in inducing all the aUies to
march at once to her assistance — Count Guido, Giovanni dal Vantaggio,
the duke of Urbino, the marquis of Saluzzo, the count of Caiazzo.
Thus, the sum of what Guicciardini performed was to garrison the chief
cities of Bomagna, and to assist in saving Florence from the army of
Bourbon. This he did, but he failed in the main object, which was to
hinder Bourbon from advancmg southward at all. Now this failure may
be excusable, and we must recognise the extreme difficulty of Guicciardini's
position, to which Machiavelli bears testimony. But it is easily conceiv-
able that a general of more boldness and less cautiousness than the
historian might in the same circumstances have prevented the sack of
Rome — might have prevented Bourbon from entering Tuscpny. How-
ever this may be, we must certainly extend the same indulgence to
Clement that we extend to Guicciardini. Both were unsuccessful, both
were in very difficult positions. Guicciardini may have had many causes
to blame Clement, but certainly Clement might have fairly impugned his
services as inefficient. There is not sufficient evidence to justify us in
completely exculpating Guicciardini and absolutely condemning the pope.
We now turn to Ravenna, and to the most interesting and important
part of Ricci's introduction. From 1441 to 1509, Ravenna was under
the -lordship of Venice. In 1509, in consequence of the league of
Cambray, she passed again under the dominion of the pope ; and in 1512,
on 11 April, she witnessed the great battle of Ravenna, in which Gaston
de Foix defeated the Holy League. PYom this battle Ricci dates the
decline and misfortunes of the city. Civil war broke out in 1517 ; it
had been long brewing, but the immediate cause was the adultery of a
lady of the house of Rasponi. The curia was unable to keep order;
there prevailed throughout Romagna discontent with the rule of Rome,
for the taxation was oppressive. Troubles and crimes did not cease
until 1524, when Fr. Guicciardini was named president of Romagna ;
his prompt action and stem justice — la stia mano diferro — soon restored
tranquillity.
Bourbon's departure from Romagna did not deliver Ravenna from all
danger, for he left a division of his army in Cotignola under one Captain
Gogna, in order to secure his retreat. Nor did Guicciardini take all his
troops to Florence ; he left garrisons in Faenza and Forli, as well as in
Ravenna, where his brother Giacomo was in command. The news of
Bourbon's death at Rome tended to allay the apprehensions entertained
at Ravenna of a hostile attempt on the part of Gogna, who at first re-
mained quietly at Cotignola, and, had he been left to himself, would not
have heeded Ravenna. But the Rasponi, whom Guicciardini had banished,
and who were residing in the dominions of the duke of Ferrara, persuaded
Gogna to assist them in recovering Ravenna. What was Giacomo
Giucciardini to do ? The enemy were scouring the country, and would
soon assail the city, which was not strong enough to hold out. A council
was called, and it was decided to apply for aid to Venice, which in the
past had certainly proved itself a better friend to Ravenna than any other
Italian power.
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 877
Agostino Buboli, whose chronicle is our best authority for these
events (first published by Bicci in ' Cronache e Documenti per la Storia
ravennate'), was appointed ambassador to Venice. The application was
successful. Buboli received six hundred scudi, and soon Venetian troops
were sent. They arrived just in time to protect Bavenna against an
assault of the Basponi and Spaniards, assisted by the duke of Ferrara.
After the attack had been successfully repulsed, Bavenna asked Venice
for further assistance. The Venetian garrison was immediately increased
and placed under the command of Giovanni di Naldo.
Here Bicci has made a contribution to an historiographical essay on
Guicciardini. The historian states in his * Storia d' Itaha ' that the
Venetian occupation was the result of an understanding between the
republic and the Guelf party in Bavenna, protection against the
Spaniards being only a pretext {sotto colore di gtuirdarla per timore di
quelli di Cotignola). This statement does not cohere with the narrative
of Buboli, which shows that merely protection was asked, and no design
was at first conceived of placing Bavenna under Venetian supremacy.
More than this, it actually appears from a statement made by Buboli to
Pope Clement at Bologna in 1530, thatFr. Guicciardini himself promoted
the determination to apply for aid to Venice ; and this statement is con-
firmed by a passage in one of his own letters to the bishop of Pola, where
he states that the Venetian protection d piU che necessario alia conserva-
jsione di Bavenna, There can be no doubt that Bicci is right in his con-
clusion, that Guicciardini, wishing afterwards to disclaim all connexion
with the presence of the Venetians in Bavenna, threw the blame on the
Guelfs. This forms an interesting parallel to the way in which he tried
to shift the responsibiUty for failing to rescue the pope after the sack of
Bome on the shoulders of the duke of Urbino.
The Venetian alliance soon changed itself into an occupation, and
the change is connected with a romantic story. The strong citadel on
the east side of Bavenna was held by a Florentine, Andrea Binuccini,
called Malandrocco, and a small garrison. The Venetians wished to have
the castle in their own hands, as the garrison was too small to defend it
efficiently, and they suspected Binuccini of disloyalty. He refused to
give up the castle unless a sum of money were given to him. The Venetians
agreed, but he still hesitated, and put them off from day to day. Their
suspicions were true. Malandrocco was in love with Minozza, a beautiful
lady, daughter of Teseo Basponi, and to obtain her he engaged to betray
the fortress. Minozza was married, but that was no difficulty; the
Basponi were quite ready to put the obstacle out of the way. But the
plan miscarried. The suspicious Venetians, who watched the castle care-
fully every night, were fortunate enough to surprise a messenger leaving
it, bound for Ferrara, with instructions for the Basponi and their con-
federates. Giovanni di Naldo kept the messenger incarcerated for three
days, the time requisite to reach Ferrara and return. On the night of
the third day he and four others conducted the man, bound with cords,
to the foss close to the citadel, and compelled him to give the concerted
signal, a shrill whistle. Malandrocco, unsuspecting and unarmed, de-
scended with a light, lowered the bridge, and opened the gate. He was
overwhelmed at once and slain ; and thus the Venetians gained posses-
Digitized by
Google
878 REVIEWS OF BOOKS AprU
sion of the fortress. This event changed then: position in Ravenna ;
they were now its lords. Varchi's version of the story is very different,
but there is httle doubt that RuboU*s is correct. The Venetian senate
proceeded to appoint Luigi Foscari provveditore in Bomagna, and the
garrison in Ravenna was considerably increased.
At the end of September it was thought necessary to appoint an agent
to represent Ravenna at Venice. Agostino Abiosi was appointed, cittadino,
runs the resolution (p. 130), et molto bene qualificata persona di vertUt
amorevole alia f atria sua. His letters to the * Signori Magnifici * in
Ravenna (pp. 1-124) are valuable as a record of the small details of the
intercourse between Venice and Ravenna at this time, and of the sort of
things thiat a public agent like Abiosi had to do. The most interesting
personcd trait is the interest he takes in Cosimo Magni, the youth who, when
bidden by Lautrec to ask a boon for his valorous deeds at Pavia, begged
for the statue of Regisole (M. Aurelius, it is supposed, or Antoninus Pius on
horseback), which, originally at Rome, had been removed to Ravenna, and
had again been carried off, perhaps in the eighth century, to Pavia.
Ravenna had not forgotten the monument, though she had lost it so long
agO| and now Magni hoped to restore it to her. It was placed in a ship to
be carried down the Po, but never reached Ravenna, for at Cremona a party
of men of Pavia attacked the ship, and succeeded in possessing themselves
of the statue. Agostino Abiosi writes repeatedly to Ravenna, urging in vain
the signoria to take some steps in the matter. He was quite enthusiastic
about Cosimo, who was giovane motto et di bella presentia (letter xxiv,
p. 95).
We have not space to follow Abiosi's letters or Ravennate history
farther, but we have entered into sufficient detail to show that the valu-
able volume will be indispensable to an historian of the days of Clement
Vn. The introduction naturally concludes with the treaty of Barcelona,
which obliged the Venetians to restore Ravenna to the pope, as they had
restored it in 1509 to Julius II ; and an interesting description is added
of the interview of the orator Ruboli with Clement at Bologna.
J. B. BUBY.
Ireland under the Tudors. By Richard Bagwell, M.A.
(London : Longmans & Co., 1885.)
A JUDiCLiL tone is the last characteristic that one would expect to meet
with in the work of an Irish historian. Mr. Froude certainly failed to
exhibit such a temperament in his ''English in Ireland,' and Mr. Lecky^
in his notes on Mr. Froude's book, was at one time suspected of champion-
ing the views of one party in Irish politics rather than of passing an
independent judgment on all parties. Mr. Bagwell has inaugurated a
new departure in Irish historiography. He has confined himself to the
facts of Irish history, has allowed the state papers to speak for them-
selves, and has given no sign of his own predilections throughout his annals,
of the political and ecclesiastical controversies which distracted Ireland
under the Tudors. The reader of Mr. Bagwell's chapter on the vexed
question of the condition of the church under Henry VIII must lay
claim to almost miraculous powers of discernment if he venture to infer
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 379
from those pages the author's personal religious sympathies. No higher
testimony could be adduced as to one kind of Mr. Bagwell's qualifications
to write on Irish history, and it is scarcely generous to suggest defects in
a work which has been undertaken in so severe and so rare a spmt of
justice. Yet it is impossible to deny that Mr. Bagwell, in his long and
laborious study of ^tate papers, has crowded his canvas — so far as pohtical
incident is concerned — with too many facts to enable the student to realise
quite distinctly the salient features of his subject. He has limited him-
self to a chronologicjd method of narration : rebelHon follows rebellion,
statute follows statute, and lord deputy lord deputy, in strictly chrono-
logical sequence, but little endeavour is made to explain the causes of these
eflfects. The hasty reader, whose requirements are always unworthy of
consideration, would gain nothing from a perusal of Mr. Bagwell's learned
volumes ; but it is unfortunately conceivable that a careful examination
of them might leave the painstaking student with a very confused im-
pression of the many factious policies which hindered the social develop-
ment of Ireland and rendered effective government impossible throughout
the epoch. Nevertheless, it would be rank injustice to part with so massive
a collection of historical material otherwise than graciously. The difficul-
ties of bringing into logical prominence each of the varied forces actively
present in Ireland under the early Tudors are well-nigh insuperable. It
is no little gain to have at command an undeniably trustworthy catalogue
of the facts for which those forces were responsible. The two volumes
before us terminate with the close of Sir Henry Sidney's administration
in 1678. It is understood that another volume will complete the under*
taking. When Mr. Bagwell's version of the critical incidents of the latter
part of Elizabeth's reign is before us, we hope to have an opportunity of
noticing the whole work in greater detail. Sidney L. Lee.
Fragments d'Histoire. Par Auguste Laugel. (Paris : Levy, 1886.)
These historical essays appear to be not so much chips from the learned
workshop of an historian engaged in any special study of the sixteenth
century, as slight biographical sketches based upon easily accessible
authorities. That they make no claim either to depth of research or to
originality of view is, perhaps, scarcely a demerit in days when the mono-
graph asserts itself not less than the Pickelhaubey and when, if a writer
shrinks from the labour of minute investigation, and does not care to turn
his stones on every side and to study them in every light, he at any rate
attempts to show that when these stones are built into a wall he can see
a good deal further into them than other people.
But though M. Laugel's * Fragments d'Histoire ' can be confidently
recommended as pleasant and not uninstructive reading to the general
public, they contain little that is likely to be of value to the historical
student.
The first essay, that on Philip II, is the least biographical, and con-
tains the most elaborate analysis of character. M. Laugel's estimate of
the champion of Roman Catholicism seems to be not unjust ; and he is no
doubt right when he asserts that in the main the policy of Philip 11 was
but the continuation — or should we say the exaggeration and caricature ? —
Digitized by
Google
380 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April
of that of Charles V ; although the sedentary and secret toil of his son's
existence so contrasts with the restless activity, the publicity of the life
of the emperor, the efforts which he made to become acquainted with
and in some measure to win the favour of the nationaUties over which
he ruled, that at first sight one is tempted to suppose that there was little
in common between them except their cold and repulsive sensuality.
Occasionally M. Laugel seems to yield to the temptation of pinching
commonplace into paradox, as, for instance, when he says (p. 86) :
' Philip looked upon mankind as dust, and his own remorse led him to
hold them undeserving of pity. The weaknesses of the man were thus the
strength of the ruler.' The author probably means Uttle more than that
PhiHp n regarded an auto de f& as the best pubhc atonement for his
private vice, and that the sincerity of his reHgious faith was one of the
chief reasons why he proved a worse, a more cruel, and a less successful
ruler than his father.
The other essays in the book are on Catharine de' Medici, CoHgni,
Don John of Austria, Alexander Famese, and Gustavus Adolphus. M.
Laugel pronounces Catharine de' Medici an insoluble enigma. So in one
sense is every historical character, as, for the matter of that, every
human being ; but surely the queen-mother of France is not exceptionally
difficult to understand. She was a cold-blooded, ambitious woman, fond
of power, almost as incapable of generous resentment as of gratitude, not
ill-natured, but caring Uttle for any human being except, perhaps, her
third son. Honour, religion, and patriotism were empty words to her,
and the mistakes of her otherwise consistent policy were largely due to
an incapacity to estimate and allow for motives of which she had herself
uo experience : so far, perhaps, she only shared in an error common to
other adepts in Machiavellianism, whose statecraft was a game of chess
with abstract men, the pohtical man whose only motive is ambition, an
entity as little real as the economical man of Ricardo.
The sketch of Coligni is just and sympathetic. It is not uncharacteristic
that M. Laugel should copy the often quoted story of the conversation
between the admiral and his wife in bed from Aubign^ — whose assertion
that this is une histoire qtce j'ai apprise de ceux qui itaient de la partie,
does not prevent our remembering the Theocritean lady's remark : * Some
folk know everything — how Jupiter proposed to Juno' — while he gives
the duke of Aumale's colourless account of the dispute between the protes-
tant leaders before the battle of Dreux, rather than Aubign6's graphic
description of the admiral's obstinacy and angry self-confidence.
The short lives of John of Austria and of the duke of Parma are
equally well written and interesting. The least satisfactory essay is that
on Oustavus Adolphus and Richelieu. It is written entirely from a French
point of view, and the author is apparently unacquainted with the Oerman
authorities who have thrown so much light on the history of the Thirty
Years war. There is little or no foundation for the assertion that the
king of Sweden aimed at the imperial crown, still less that he pro-
posed to invade and deliver Italy ; while scarcely any mention is made of
his real objects, to secure the dominion of the Baltic by the annexation
of Pomerania and to forpa a corpus evangelicorum for the defence of
liberty and protestantism. M. Laugel omits to tell us that Richeheu meant
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 381
the left bank of the Rhine to be the price of the * mighty and salutary '
patronage which France generously extended to the German princes.
France, according to him, was the disinterested friend of Germany, while
the policy of Gustavus, whatever the personal nobility of his character,
was that of a selfish conqueror. P. F. Willert.
History of the Great Civil War, 1642-1649. By S. R. Gardiner.
Vol. I. 1642-1644. (London : Longmans & Co., 1886.)
Three years have not yet passed since the concluding volumes of the new
edition of Mr. Gardiner's * History of England from 1608 to 1642 ' were
issued, and already the first volume of his * History of the Great Civil War,'
extending as far as the king's safe return to Oxford after the second battle
of Newbury, is in our hands. Wisely proceeding from stage to stage, within
limits which though wide are not immeasurable, the eminent historian
will, it may be trusted, live to complete in his accustomed scholarly way,
ohne Hast, ohne Bast, other tasks besides that on which he is at present
engaged. For the success, which may be now regarded as enduringly esta-
blished, of the work already accomplished by him is one of the most hopeful
signs as to the future awaiting the best kind of historical hterature in this
country. Although Mr. Gardiner's volume now before us takes us very near
to the critical campaign of 1645, the time has hardly yet arrived for attempt-
ing to estimate his qualifications for a task, the difficulties of which are not
confined to that of making battles and other military aflfairs intelligible to
readers devoid of military training. On this particular head Mr. Gardiner
dehvers himself in his preface with a judicious mixture of deprecation and
sound sense. He disclaims any knowledge of the mihtary art, but points
out how the results of a series of campaigns are not solely, or even mainly,
dependent on military considerations. On the other hand, he cannot, he
protests, describe battles which he has not seen as if he had seen them ;
so that, with respect to these, he professes only to have given an account
of what appears to him to have happened, after such inquiry as he has been
able to make. In a recent number of this Review, Mr. Thomas Arnold
expressed a wish that some competent military authority would ' give us
accurate and rational accounts of what was done ' in the campaigns of the
Civil War ; but staff-officers' history is not everybody's affair, and even
Mr. Kinglake, with the fullest information at his elbow, and gifted as he
is with an almost Homeric power of episodical narrative, only now and
then contrives to bring home to the untrained readers a notion of how, in
Ranke's phrase, the thing really happened. If, as a reader of this class, I
may venture on an opinion, Mr. Gardiner's success in this direction is fully
ifequal to that of the great majority of modem historians, and is increased
by his dislike of diffuseness. That he has an eye for the locality of a battle-
field is shown for instance by his brief but perfectly perspicuous sketch of
the battle of Lansdown ; while his spirited account of Marston Moor does
justice not only to * the serried ranks of the Puritan troopers,* but also to * the
few Scots in the rear ' — by which grudging expression Cromwell ungene-
rously sought to minimise the assistance derived by him from David Leslie's
regiments. Perhaps, as the present volume ends just before the occurrence
of so decisive a change in the conditions of the war, one might wish that
Digitized by
Google
882 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April
Mr. Gardiner's concluding summary of the strategy of the three campaigns
(1642-4) had been rather more ample ; for it is precisely in such smnmaries
that the best opportunity offers itself for urging more general considerations.
Isolated criticisms are apt to produce less effect, especially when mixed up
with necessarily vague conjectures concerning the authorship of particular
military movements, as in the case of the earl of Forth (Brentford), whom
a sort of consensus of contempt among the royahsts, notably including
Clarendon, may perhaps excuse Mr. Gardiner for treating — shall we say
rather cavalierly ? During nearly the whole of the period under discus-
sion this * decayed * veteran was the nominal general of the king's armies,
having been permanently raised to the command-in-chief immediately after
Edgehill, and retaining it till, after the second battle of Newbury, he was
honourably dismissed to make room for Prince Rupert. It seems to remain
an open question who (particular occasions apart) is to be regarded as the
king's chief strategical adviser in these campaigns. It can hardly have
been Lord Eythin (General King), the old campaigner whom the queen
had sent over from Holland. Mr. Gardiner declines to entertain the sup-
position that the strategy of Charles was his own.
This view is in accordance with that taken throughout this volume of
the conduct of the king. In Mr. Gardiner's deliberate opinion, Charles I
was both the real cause of the civil conflict, and the real obstacle to peace.
At the root of the struggle lay the resolution of the Puritans to reform
English life and society, and to maintain the reforms once effected, in
consonance with their own religious conceptions ; and this resolution
derived much of its strength and stubbornness from the belief that the king,
openly a friend of prelacy, was in his heart perverted to popery. We now
know that what seemed most unbearable in this belief rested on a delusion,
but it was the king, and the king alone, who could have proved it fallacious.
As a matter of course, it operated with double force in minds filled with
fear and horror of the Irish auxiliaries whom the king was thought,
not without reason, to design introducing into the EngUsh war. Sir B.
Byron, indeed, writing to Ormond, knew * no reason why the king should
make any scruple of calling in the Irish, or the Turks, if they would serve
him.' But the general feeling against any such step was almost as strong
at Oxford as it was at Westminster, as the king found when the agents of
the confederate cathohcs waited upon him in the former city in April 1644.
The Irish Cessation of September 1648, by virtue of which ttiese emissaries
appeared before the king, had in London led to the taking up of proceed-
ings against archbishop Laud, whose death in January 1646 was due to
the wild fancy that he had been, in Mr. Gardiner's words, * the centre of
a dark and hideous conspiracy.' As for the Scots, the mere rumour of an
Anglo-Irish combination to operate either in England or in Ulster had in
1648 determined the estates at Edinburgh to join hands with the West-
minster parUament. There can be no doubt that the vacillation of the
king in this matter was most damaging to him, as it was most disastrous
to those few Irishmen who were actually shipped to England ; the brutal
cruelty of Captain Swanley and one or two similar episodes have their
place in the list of the * antecedents ' of the Irish question. On the other
hand, when Mr. Gardiner bitterly blames Charles I for drifting aimlessly
between the opposite courses of ecclesiastical policy — a tolerance of both
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 883
catholics and nonconformists analogous to the attempt which afterwards
ruined James, and an intolerance resembling that of the Clarendon code —
he seems to underrate the difficulty of the problem which was, after all, not
one of this king's making. James II, and the Church of England men under
his predecessor, cannot be accused of having drifted aimlessly ; but the
penal policy of the latter created the whig party, and the tolerant policy
of the former gave that party its opportunity of overthrowing the Stuart
throne. We hear less in this volume of the foreign intrigues which in the
days of the king's misfortunes, as Mr. Gardiner truly says, struck successive
blows at what remained of the intimate relationship between king and people.
In these manoeuvres Queen Henrietta Maria usually had a share, and she
had schemed for Dutch assistance, to be rewarded by the hand of the prince
of Wales, since she had fled to Holland with the crown jewels in 1642.
But the death of Bichelieu once more excited her hopes in the direction
which they most gladly took ; and in 1648 there was a whole crop of
intrigues.
The interception first of letters from Denmark holding out the pro-
spect of aid to the king, and then of Goring's letter laying bare the real
object of Harcourt's mission of mediation, did infinite damage to the
king's cause ; but, so for as he and the queen are concerned, the only
result seems to have been their resumption of the Dutch project. It may
be pleaded, in excuse of Charles, that the methods of his foreign policy
were those of the age rather than of the man ; but while he nowhere proved
himself so incorrigible and so unable to learn, he showed much the same
insincerity in his transactions with the parties and interests at home.
And where proof is actually wanting of such insincerity on his side, the
suspicion of it which undoubtedly existed points at least to the prevalent
view of his character. Thus, the notion that he had wilfully caused a
delay about the opening of the negotiations with the parliamentary com-
missioners, in the .early part of November 1642, incensed the * mutilated '
house of lords to such a degree that they were now found willing to join in
inviting the Scots to intervene in the English civil conflict. His playing
fast and loose with the independents was revealed by another intercepted
letter, which led to the discovery of Brooke's plot ; and the undeceived
sectaries henceforth became the bitterest adversaries to the conclusion of
any peace which should fail to base the national ecclesiastical system on
a rigidly puritan foundation. Even among his friends and followers the
king was unable to awaken and sustain that confidence which is begotten
by confidence ; it was not in his nature, as his political counsellors knew,
and as the chiefs of his army found before Edgehill, entirely to trust a
single person. This general distrust of the king helps to explain the
very early growth of the idea of his dethronement (very early, for since
the spiritual weapons of Eome had grown blunt, the idea of pulling down
kings had grown unfamiUar to a monarchical age, and abdication had not
yet come into fashion as a ready expedient). Mr. Gardiner traces the
first germ of the idea to a letter drawn up at Westminster in March 1644,
in reply to Charles's offer to negotiate, and containing a clause wherein a
time was fixed for the king's return to parliament, failing which, means
were to be taken to provide for the government of the country without him,
^his clause was afterwards, at the instance of the Scotch conmaissioners.
Digitized by
Google
884 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April
withdrawn from the letter actually sent to the king ; but the idea was re-
vived by its author, Vane, a few months later, shortly before Marston Moor»
when it was with some show of indignation rejected by the three generals.
Probably Mr. Gardiner makes too much of the consensus as to the expe-
diency of the king's deposition between so strangely assorted a pair as
Vane and Wilmot, the latter of whom was stated to have talked of setting
up the prince of Wales in the king's stead. Wilmot seems certainly to
have desired a peace ; but his vapourings about the prince of Wales, pro*
bably, as Mr. Gardiner himself says, uttered by him in his cups, may only
show Clarendon to have possibly overrated the capacity of this strange
father of a stranger son when stating him to have been one who * drank
hard, and had a great power over all who did so, which was a great people.'
More interesting in this connexion is Mr. Gardiner's suggestion that the
Elector Palatine, Charles Lewis, came to England, in August 1644, with
the direct intention of supplanting his uncle as the nominee of the parlia-
ment. There is much that is repulsive in the public as well as in the
private life of Charles Lewis, in which latter it must, however, be allowed
that he suffered under the disadvantages of a rather imperious mother, and
a rather unmanageable wife. But considering that after so many years
of waiting and manoeuvring Charles Lewis in the end steered his bark
into port, and considering that after liis return to Heidelberg he exerted
himself in a true spirit of devotion for the benefit of his ill-used subjects,
I should decline to speak of him altogether contemptuously. Moreover, I
confess that I can see no difficulty in the supposition that it was his
interests as claimant of the Palatine electorate which brought him to
England ; for it must not be forgotten that the conferences at Miinster
and Osnabriick opened in this very year 1644, and that the Palatine party
were accordingly straining every nerve for a last effort. Charles Lewis
would at this season, had it advantaged him, have swallowed much more
than the covenant. On the other hand, it must be allowed that the honours
paid to him by the parliament at Gravesend and at Whitehall are less
easily exphcable than the willingness of Charles Lewis to receive them,
unless by some such conjecture as that here offered.
It will be seen from the above that Mr. Gardiner's view of the in-
fluence of the character of King Charles I upon the great struggle in
which his was the most prominent figure, seems to me substantially just.
This does not, Of course, make it necessary to subscribe to every criticism
of the king's conduct, by which the historian consistently seeks to support
his general judgment. The animadversion upon the leniency shown by
Charles to the troops which surrendered to him at Lostwithiel seems to
me strained ; and surely when, in the course of his comments on the
death of Pym, Mr. Gardiner rather oracularly pronounces that it was not
Pym, but Charles I, who had created the parliamentary party, he allows
himself to be carried too far, or rather not far enough — for James I would
in this case have a claim to a share in the paternity.
Nothing can be more instructive than to trace the growth or decline
of important pohtical movements in the pages of an historian who, like
Mr. Gardiner, abhors discursiveness, while adhering as far as possible to
that synchronistic method of narrative which alone corresponds to the
progress of things in actual life. Li this way the volume before us may
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 886
be profitably studied as illustrating the gradual decay, under the fierce
light of the experience gained by the two opposite parties concerning one
another, of the hopes of peace which seemed veiled to Hampden in the
hour of his death ; and, again, as showing the gradual growth of that
resolution to remodel the army, on the fulfilment of which the termina-
tion of the war really depended. Mr. Gardiner deals with these processes
in the true spirit of an historian — not, if I may so say, crying peace where
no peace is, nor even according to the generous dreams of Falkland more
than sympathy. Thus, already in the early stages of the conflict Cromwell's
figure rises before us as that of the real hero, because he was the real master
of the war. In a conversation, of which the date can only be conjectured,
but which seems to have been held some time before the battle of Edge-
hill, he told Hampden that the parliamentary army (or rather the cavalry)
would never conquer until it was composed of men with the spirit of
gentlemen, or of a spirit which would not quail before theirs. Edgehill,
where there was already a marked Piuitan leaven in the army, illustrated
his meaning, and Marston Moor made it plain. But the conception of a
standing army of religious men only matured slowly. The fatal defect
of the military system of the parliament was the want of unity between
its armies ; and this was made obvious when, at midsummer 1644, Essex
and Waller parted, the former asserting his determination to go west,
which neither the house of conunons nor the committee of both kingdoms
dared, or cared, to oppose. Gradually it became clear that the local
levies were inadequate, and that the London trainbands were not to be
depended upon. Thus Waller first suggested the idea of a national army ;
but matters had to become worse before they became better. The incom-
petence of Essex and of Manchester soon completely declared itself. The
figure of the former is drawn very distinctly by Mr. Gardiner, though the
disgraceful escape of this selfwilled but helpless general before the surrender
atliostwithiel almost inclines one to compare him, man of honour though
he was, with Himilco rather than with Nicias. Manchester was a man of
even slighter mould and more pronounced incapacity ; and when at the
end of the campaign of 1644 (after the second battle of Newbury had been
fought in vain) the king was allowed to return to Oxford unhindered, the
doom of the old r&gvme was sealed. The part played by Cromwell in the
preparation of the change is very clearly marked by Mr. Gardiner's narra-
tive, which reminds us at how opportune a season a nail was driven into
the coffin of the Solemn League and Covenant by the Toleration Order.
It was moved by St. John, but it was practically Cromwell's answer to the
declaration, four months earlier, of the three parliamentary generals for
Presbyterianism, and were it possible for peace. Many blunders and many
fidlures may be crowded into three years ; but the true historian can make it
evident, amidst the complications and the collapses which they produce,
how the course of a great conflict steadily shapes itself towards the deter-
mination of its real issues. As it stands, Mr. Gardiner's new volume is in
a sense a fragment ; but already we are allowed to perceive how and why
the victory was to belong to Cromwell and the saints. A. W. Wabd.
VOL. n, — ^NO. VI. c c
Digitized by
Qoo^^
386 REVIEWS OF BOOKS AprU
The English Catholic Nonjurors of 1716 : being a Summary of the Register
of their Estates, with Genealogical and other Notes, and an Appendix of
unpublished Documents in the Pubhc Record Office. Edited by the
late Very Rev. Edgab E. Ebtcourt, M.A., F.S.A., and John Oblebab
Payne, M.A. (London : Bums & Oates.)
All students of the nonjurors and their period must have had occasion
to consult Gosin*s ' Names of the Roman Catholics, Nonjurors, and others^
who refused to take the Oaths to his late Majesty King George/ but very
few indeed can have been lucky enough to discover in it what they wanted
or even a hint of where to find it. This list has been thrice printed, but
never in any sense of the word edited till now. Its very title was mis-
leading, for the entries actually refer to the English catholics only ; the
proper names were in many cases scarcely recognisable ; a portion of the
Lancashire returns and the whole of the Norfolk returns were omitted. For
the present edition the three extant manuscripts have been collated, and a
large quantity of illustrative matter, selected from the works of Mr. Foley,
the ' Douay Diaries,' and many other sources printed and manuscript, has
been introduced. After examining the book throughout, and using it as a
work of reference for some time, we have noticed only one or two slight
defects. Each alternate page should have been headed with the county
to which the entries belong, and the index should, at all costs, have been
made to include every person and place mentioned both in text and notea
Possibly a few of the Latin quotations might have been verified with advan-
tage (e.g. those at pp. 259, 265). But as it stands the book seems to us a
monument of unsparing and judicious labour, and no one who deals with
the thirty years which intervened between the accession of James 11 and
the rebeUion of 1715 will neglect to keep it within easy reach. Under
its former title we have frequently consulted it for biographical details of
obscure nonjurors. It is a weU-known feict that the number of nonjurors
who passed firom the Anglican communion to that of Rome was exceed*
ingly small ; we can only recall a single instance in the present book
(p. 267). The interest of the register is now, therefore, entirely transferred
to the Roman catholic population, and to all those who study the later
history of the Roman church in England it will be henceforth indispen-
sable. It teems with historic names, which, while identified with the
ancient faith, are yet part of our national annals — ^the Arundels, Howards^
Petres, RadcHfifes, and Penderells. While the entries are often of pathetic
and occasionally of tragic interest, a comic element is not wholly want-
ing. At p. 128 is an extract from the will of John Lund, directing that
if his widow, who was a protestant, married again she should have
201. a year more than would be her share if she kept single, * in order
that somebody else may be bothered with her as I have been.' The
volume contains mentions more or less fuU of Bonaventure GifEiBurd, the
intruding president of Magdalen ; of Bishop Peploe, the priest-hunter and
hero of the controversy concerning Lambeth degrees ; of George Penne,
long wanted in connexion with the ' maids of Taunton ' and their ransom
(see Academy, 22 May 1886, p. 865) ; and of many of the rebels on
whom the hand of the government fell so heavily after the affair of
Preston ; of Pope, of Heame, of the Wrights (the eighteenth century
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 887
bankers), of Panton the &moas gamester, and of the Shorts, one of whom
attended Charles 11 on his deathbed, and was mtruded by James II into
a Magdalen fellowship. The appendices contain some very curious
extracts from documents in the Public Becord Office illustrative of entries
in the register, and the ' act to oblige papists to register their names
and real estates * in compliance with which these lists were compiled.
C. E. DOBLB.
A History of the French Bevolution. Vol. I. By H. Morse Stephens.
(London : Bivingtons, 1886.)
This book represents a piece of good earnest work. Although, perhaps,
there is little which will be new to students of the French revolution —
for Mr. Stephens has not introduced us to much unpublished material of
importance — ^yet there is a great deal which is not to be found in any
English book on the period, or, as far as we know, in any general history
of the revolution. The work is largely based on the numerous publica-
tions which have appeared in France during the last twenty years — works
which have taken the form of local histories, or of biographies of the more
prominent men during the revolution, or monographs on special points.
Of the numbers of these publications some idea may be formed from
Mr. Stephens's introduction, but even the long list there given does not
exhaust the authorities of the kind which have been placed under contri-
bution. In short, no work lately published seems to have escaped him.
By far the most valuable part of the book to English readers is that
which deals with the provinces and departments. It is here especially
that so much work has been done in France, and Mr. Stephens has
rightly seen the importance of this side of the subject.
The French revolution has been too exclusively viewed from the side
of Paris alone. No doubt it is true that the predominance of Paris at
that date, as now, exceeds that of any capital in Europe ; but during the
earlier years of the revolution Paris was heartily supported by the bour-
geois of the provincial towns ; and if during the Beign of Terror Paris
was for the moment the mistress of France, the reaction after Thermidor
may be said to be that of the provinces against the capital.
This is the view adopted by Mr. Stephens so far as he has taken us at
present ; and his account of the provincial assemblies of Dauphin^, Brit-
tany, and Franche-Comt^ anterior to the calling of the states-general,
and their influence on the earUer work of that assembly ; the history of
the elections to the states-general of 1789 (c. i.) ; the description of the
riots in the provinces and their condition in 1789-91 (cc. vi. and xvi.) are
especially good. In chapter iv. we have an interesting description of the
newspapers and salons during the first two years. That on the papers
is especially worthy of notice, and we do not know of any book where the
information is to be found in so condensed a form. His chapter on the
financial history deals tersely and clearly with one of the most intri-
cate subjects of the time, while the remarks on the ecclesiastical policy
of the assembly are sensible, and give a complete answer to M. Edgar
Quinet's brilhant but totally unfounded statement, in his book on the
revolution, that the f&ult of the constituent assembly was not that it
c c 2
Digitized by
Google
888 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April
interfered too much with ecclesiastical independence, but that it did not
disestablish Roman Catholicism altogether. Mr. Stephens has not much
di£Bculty in showing the fatal results of the ' civil constitution ' of the
clergy. His description of the army is also of great value (c. xiii.)
Sybel was the first to point out that the early successes of the French
army were not due to the levy en rnasse, but to the soldiers of the old
regime. Mr. Stephens endorses that statement, and shows that ' it was
monarchical France which had trained and disciplined the great generals,
without whose skill all the valour of the soldiers would have been use-
less/ and that ' it was not only the generals but administrators that the
old army supplied to republican France and to Napoleon ' (p. 881). The
origin and the fluctuations in the character of the national guard are also
exceedingly well sketched, and we are glad to see that Mr. Stephens
earefidly distinguishes between the bourgeois class, who were for the most
part represented in the national guard, and the artisans and populace
•^a point which has too often been neglected.
In chapters ix., xvi. our author has given considerable attention to the
eondition of the French colonies, and the effect of the revolution upon
them. But his attempt to controvert the generally accepted opinion that
the French character is not suited for colonisation does not appear to us
very successful. His statement (p. 270) that * no colonies of the middle of
the eighteenth century were so prosperous or weU governed as those of
Canada and Louisiana ' is directly controverted by Mr. Parkman, in his
interesting book, * Montcalm and Wolfe ; ' and further Mr. Stephens for-
gets that the success of a colony depends not so much upon its govern-
ment as upon its trade. It is here that France has always failed. To
this day in the few colonies held by France the English and Germans
monopolise the trade, and it has been asserted that French merchants do
not care to engage in such distant enterprises, and that even those
Frenchmen who attempt to settle abroad have a difficulty in finding
wives who will consent to the exile from home.
On the controverted questions of the period covered by this volume,
Mr. Stephens has no new solution to offer, while with regard to the more
important historical characters of the period he is for the most part
content to follow the now generally received opinions, as, for instance, in
his description of the policy of Orleans, or rather of their party (c. iii.),
and his severe criticism of Necker as a financier who attempted to become
a politician and fedled. In his view of Lafayette he follows Sybel, and
brings fresh evidence to prove, if proof were necessary, that Lafayette was
not the single-minded hero his admirers would have us beHeve, but vain,
narrow, self-sufficient, and self-interested ; and that although he did not
originate the revolt of 5 and 6 Oct. he at least deliberately took advantage
of it— as he did at a later date of the flight of the king — to improve his
position and increase his own importance. Nor does our author give any
new evidence which may help us to understand the causes of the revolt
of October, although the circumstances leading to the revolt and its
incidents are succinctly and graphically told.
In the case of Marat, however, he has been tempted by the fascina-
tion of rehabilitation, and has attempted a half-hearted defence based
upon the work of M. Ghevremont. He speaks of him as ' one of the most
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 889
maligned men of his day * (p. 215). He reminds us of Marat's consider-
able literary attainments, and asks us if he could have held a fashionable
court appointment without being perfectly well-bred and polite. He
cannot, however, deny that his gospel was suspicion — a gospel which in
his later years he carried to the verge of insanity — and can only say in
his defence that the policy of the court in 1789 at least gave good
grounds for the mistrust Marat was ever preaching.
We are glad to find that Mr. Stephens does not follow the fatalist
school represented by Mignet, who looks upon the course which the
revolution took as unavoidable &om the first. Nothing appears to us
more certain than that, if a return to the old regime was impossible, the
violence and extravagance of the movement in the later developments
might easily have been avoided. Bailly indeed, in his memoirs, asserts
that with a king less good and ministers more adroit there would have
been no revolution. This, no doubt, is exaggerated. But who can doubt
that, if Mirabeau had been in power from the first ; if the party of the
right had not followed their insensate policy of ' making things worse
that they might be better ; ' if the king had shown more firmness, and
definitely placed himself at the head of reform ; if, finally, the assembly
had displayed more of the practical wisdom of statesmen, more knowledge
of men, and less devotion to d priori theories, the whole course of the re-
volution might have been changed ? With these views Mr. Stephens has
rightly taken Mirabeau as the centre of interest for his first volume, which
ends shortly after that great man's death. With the general appreciation
of his character we also cordially agree, if we except the somewhat nawe
statement at p. 482, that although on his own confession Mirabeau
'broke every commandment in the decalogue, he was nevertheless a
good as well as a great man.' At p. 471 we have an interesting inquiry
into the possibility of Mirabeau's saving the monarchy in 1791 had he
tried. This, after a careful survey of the attitude of the provinces at
that date, upon the support of which Mirabeau mainly depended, is
answered, and in our opinion rightly answered, in the negative.
We can strongly recommend this book to all who wish to deepen their
knowledge of the French revolution. It is not the work of a genius ; it is
wanting in dramatic power; and Mr. Stephens has an irritating way
of continually breaking the thread of the narrative for the purpose of
giving us biographical sketches of the actors — sketches which are not
very artistically drawn ; — but it is a thorough, accurate piece of work,
fall of information only to be found by very extensive reading.
A. H. Johnson.
Les Beaux Jours de VImp&ratrice Marie-LotUse ; Marie-Louise et la
Decadence de V Empire ; Marie-Louise et V Invasion de 1814 ; Marie-
Louise^ Vile d'Elbe et les Cent- Jours ; Marie-Louise et le Due de
Beichstadt. Par Imbert de Saint- Amand. (Paris: E. Dentu,
1886-86.)
' Two-THiBDS of this voluminous record consist of irrelevant matter. The
amount of new material is small, and its interest is confined to some
correspondence between General Neipperg and Prince Mettemich, and to
some despatches of the Marquis de Maisonfort and M. de Lamartine from
Digitized by
Google
890 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April
the court of Parma. Of the rest of the compilation, part is drawn from
Baron von Helfert's excellent study of the same subject, whilst a still
larger portion is composed of extracts from well-known Napoleonic
memoirs. Never does M. de Saint- Amand cite chapter and verse, though
he may name the author. Too often he omits all typographical signs of
quotation, and transcribes long passages from M^neval, Bausset, Durand,
&c., either verbatim or with some trivial change in tense or adjective.
Thus does he interpret his favourite motto, L'histoire est la risv/rrection
des morts. His own style excels in platitudes both irritating and ludicrous.
Napoleon's overtures for the hand of the Czar's sister closed with the
tardy and evasive reply received from the Bussian court 6 Feb. 1810.
The next morning his marriage contract with Marie-Louise was executed
at the Tuileries in such haste that the Austrian ambassador signed with-
out waiting for the sanction of his own government. However, the
good- will of the Hapsburgs had been already obtained by no less strange
a mediator than the repudiated empress Josephine. The news raised the
Austrian paper rentes thirty per cent, in two hours, whilst the Viennese,
wrote J. Kemer, setting up the victor of Wagram as their god, contem-
plated the dihris of their fortifications and the ruins of their capital as a
sweet reminiscence of the divine man. Now, as throughout her career,
the archduchess proved ' matter too soft a lasting mark to bear.' Hatred
of Napoleon had been inculcated in the games of her childhood, in her
education, in her religion. For a moment she posed as Iphigenia, then
turned to discuss with Mettemich the dancing lessons and other means
of enhancing those personal attractions which were to win her the favour
of le roi des rois.
Pi/O, felicitante sul trono che felice runs the plaintive epitaph written
on Marie-Louise by her third husband, Count BombeUes. There is
greater semblance of truth in Napoleon's summary : ' Her reign was very
short, but she must have enjoyed it thoroughly, for she had the world at
her feet.' The affection he lavished on her she reciprocated to the utmost
of her limited capacity. Guarded by a vigilance worthy of an oriental
harem, her conduct was immaculate. Peu d'iddes, pen d'vnstructiony was
the negative virtue ascribed to her by the empress of Austria, her step-
mother ; to it may be attributed her failure as a social power in that
brilhant court where the old, the new, and the miUtary aristocracies tried
each to echpse the other. Averse to pohtics, she embraced her husband's
fatal error, and regarded as indissoluble the tie between father-in-law and
son-in-law. The siege of Paris by the aUies destroyed this illusion, her
feith in Napoleon's prestige, her loyalty to him and to her child. Fearing
lest his bonne Louise should be carried captive to Vienna and his son's
&te be that of Astyanax, the emperor had enjoined their flight from Paris
should imminent danger arise. Li treacherous obedience the empress
adopted this measure to induce the catastrophe that it was intended to
avert. From Blois she opened private negotiations with the invader in-
compatible with her integrity as regent. In defence M. de Saint-Amand
represents her remarkable appeal to her father as penned at M^neval's
instance, in comphance with the valedictory instructions he had received
from the emperor. But an examination of the dates given by that faithful
secretary proves that Marie-Louise's epistle of 4 April was despatched to
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 391
the Kaiser on the 6th, whilst Napoleon's letter, written in preparation of
his attempted suicide, was dated 8 April and reached M^neval at Orleans
on the 10th. The culmination of the empress's treason was then two
days old ; for on the 8th had occurred the melodramatic scene in which
she had called the household to rescue her from the kings Joseph and
Jerome, who desired to convey her across the Loire for safety. She
declared that to quit Blois without Napoleon's orders was impossible.
Three hours later Schouwaloff arrived, and quietly took possession of her
and the king of Bome. The next day they set out northwards in search
of the Kaiser's protection. On the 11th the cession of Parma and Placenza
rewarded her perfidy.
In the spring of 1815 she was sojourning amidst the gaieties of Vienna,
engrossed in the attentions of General Neipperg and in the barter of her
son for the promised duchies, when her serenity was disturbed by the
emperor's escape from Elba. His failure might injure her prospects ;
therefore she hastened to abjure his designs, and placed herself under the
aegis of the powers. The next morning they proclaimed her husband's
title to existence forfeited. When a few days more saw Napoleon again
installed at the Tuileries, his wife discussed the propriety of rejoining
him with a perturbation that bewildered her followers. They were igno-
rant that she already bore within her the fruit of a passionless adultery,
a fact she confessed long afterwards to Lady Burghersh.^
The captivity of the emperor at St. Helena was to Marie-Louise a
period of ' perfect happiness,' only broken by an occasional fear that he
might yet escape his gaolers. Living with her paramour in her tawdry
court at Parma, she affected to have completely forgotten Paris, its pubhc
buildings, and everything connected with her occupation of the imperial
throne — * all that was a bad dream.' Oblivious of her son, the prisoner
of Schoenbrunn, she could offer ftdsome congratulations to Louis XVni
on the birth of the Due de Bordeaux. When at length news arrived of
the emperor's death, she expressly commanded that the name of the
deceased should not be mentioned in the prayers offered on his behalf.
Napoleon was naught but V^pcmx de Madame.
It is difficult to reconcile these facts with M. de Saint-Amand's opinion
that history has dealt too harshly with his heroine. The emperor to the
last observed a chivalrous reticence regarding his wife's frailties. In
loyalty to their chief, M^neval and Bausset imitated his discretion.
Among the scanty details of the concluding portion of this memoir it is
curious to find no reference to the eulogy pubhshed by the Count de
Bombelles in 1846, and entitled Monumenti e Munificenze di Maria
Lmgiay Arcidtichessa d' Austria. E. Blanche Hamilton.
American Commonwealths: California. By Josiah Boyce, Assistant
Professor of Philosophy in Harvard College. (Boston: Houghton,
Mifain, & Co., 1886.)
The student of American history is often tempted to complain that iiis
teachers deal with their subject somewhat in the fashion of a medieval
chronicler. American writers have been too apt to begin their Diad with
> Journal of Mary Frompion, 1886, pp. 399, 400.
Digitized by
Google
892 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April
Leda*s egg, and to go over again the oft-told tale of the Greenlanders and
the Zeni — those somewhat cloudy predecessors of Columbus and Cabot.
They have too often wasted precious space on those prehistoric mound-
builders who left an impress on the soil of America, none on its human
life as we know it, Mr. Boyce has sternly resisted all such temptations
of Spanish explorers and Spanish missionaries: he does not tell us a
word more than is absolutely needed to make plain his own tale. That
tale has for its subject the process by which Califomia became a portion
of the federal republic. I should, however, leave a very imperfect and
unfedr impression of Mr. Boyce's book if I implied that its sole or even
chief merit was the avoidance of one particular error. Mr. Eoyce has
manifestly worked out his subject with a thoroughly zealous purpose of
getting at the real truth of every event. Hosea Biglow himself could
not be freer from the 'jingo* feeling with which so many Americans
regarded the Mexican war, or hate more cordially the doctrine 'our
country right or wrong.'
Mr. Eoyce's style is for the most part adequate, though it certainly
cannot be called attractive. But it would need very pronounced faults of
manner to mar the effectiveness of a tale such as that which he has to
tell. Mr. Boyce describes the process by which a community made out
of the most unhopeful material, beset by peculiar temptations, was
fashioned into an orderly state. For telling that tale Mr. Boyce possesses
at least two conspicuous qualifications. He has a keen perception of
what is dramatic in his subject — of really illustrative incidents. Yet he
shows no readiness to believe an incident because it would furnish him
with a telling illustration.
To set off against these merits there are marked drawbacks. He has
a taste for rounded and vague moral reflections. In criticising conduct, he
gives one hints and innuendoes when a plain statement would be far more
telling. His style, too, not unfrequently shows one that Lord Macaulay*s
objection to the so-called ' dignity of history ' may be carried a trifle too
far. Mr. Lewis Carroll's poems are hardly such established volumes that
an historian may illustrate his subject by references to their characters.
The detailed accuracy of such a work cannot fairly be tested except by
a specialist who has studied the subject as fully as it has been studied
by the author ; for the history of Califomia has but few points of contact
with those events and persons in American history of whom an ordinary
reader knows something. It is the history of a detached and isolated
conmiunity. One must judge Mr. Boyce by the nature of the evidence
which he produces, and by the power which he shows of sifting and
estimating the value of it. And one who cannot test his statements in
detail may at least say that the whole method and character of the work
raises a strong presumption in favour of its soundness, its careful research,
and impartial judgment. J. A. Doyle.
Professor Droysen's Allgemeiner Historischer Handatlas (Leipzig:
Velhagen & Elasing) has appeared in its completed /orm, and a com-
parison of its arrangement and method with the original edition of Spruner
might serve in itself as a record of the advance which has been made in
the development of historical studies. This atlas is the result of the joint
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 393
work of those best qualified in Germany to undertake such a task, and it^
completeness leaves little to be desired. It embraces ancient and modem
geography alike, and is as full as is consistent with clearness. The addi-
tion of numerous plans and charts makes it helpful in many ways. Its
maps are for the most part printed on a single page, and an increase of
their number has done away with the necessity of compressing into a
angle map a bewildering number of names. Our only regret is that the
editor has not risen superior to the temptation of supplying erlailtemder
Text instead of an index. An index which gave the medieval as well as
the modem name of a town would be of great use, and we wonder that
in a work which aims at such completeness this has been overlooked.
Professor Mommsen's fifth volume has already been so fully noticed
in our pages that we need not do more than call attention to its appear-
' ance in an EngUsh form. The Provinces of the Boman Empire from
Oasar to Diocletian, translated by William P. Dickson. 2 vols. (London :
Bentley). Dr. Dickson is so well Imown by his excellent translation of the
previous volumes of * The History of Bome ' that it is enough to say that
be maintains his standard. There is the same close adherence to
the structure of the original — an adherence which is sometimes carried
to the extent of awkwardness and obscurity. It is, however, a more
pardonable fault than a loose paraphrase. We wonder that the form of
the volumes has been changed, so that the last issue is not uniform with
the most commonly used edition of the previous one.
The second of Dean Kitchin's Winchester Cathedral Becords is a
document of the highest importance. The Charter of Edward III for the
St. Giles's Fair (London: Griffith & Farrant). This charter may
almost be called the locus classiaus for the history of English fairs, as it
recites the i»:evious charters for the Winchester fair, and states in full
the privileges granted by Edward III to the bishop of Winchester as its
protector and lord. Though the main provisions of this charter have
been quoted by Mr. Walford, yet Dean Eitchin's introduction and notes
contain a mass of valuable information. In fact his publication is a
model for local antiquaries. He does not venture beyond his depth, but
sticks to the elucidation of his text. His introduction gives a lively sketch
of the growth of Winchester and of the nature of its fair, which was
second in importance only to the Sturbridge fair at Cambridge. His
notes are of the nature to guide aright the antiquarian student, and are
full of useful, if not always profound, information weU put and to the
point. The book as a whole is admirably fitted to fulfil Dean Eitchin's
purpose, which is, we presume, to kindle in the neighbourhood an interest
in past history, and awaken in others an intelligent desire to advance the
knowledge of the subject.
The Early Tudors, Henry VII and Henry VIII, by the Eev. C. E.
Moberly, Epochs of Modem History (London : Longmans, 1887), is a
painsti^dng httle book, which has aimed at giving a good deal of accurate
information rather than a vivid picture of the times or any independent
judgment on the course of events. Historical portraiture is not Mr.
Digitized by
Google
394 REVIEWS OF BOOKS April
Moberly's strong point, and he has not committed himself to any strong
view about Henry VIII one way or another. In fact he apologises in his
prefiGbce that he had not the advantage of Dr. Stubbs's ' Lectures/ and
tries to shelter himself behind Mr. Friedmann in a way that shows him
to be too modest to venture on an opinion of his own. The merits of
the book are, that it brings together a good deal of information on a
variety of subjects, that it takes a tolerably comprehensive view of the
period, and that it is written in a fresh and easy manner. Its defect is a
want of perspective owing to the writer's timidity and excessive caution.
The Autobiography of Edward, Lord Herbert of Cherbury : edited by
S. L. Lee (London : John G. Nimmo, 1886). Mr. Lee*s edition of this
interesting autobiography bears traces of scrupulous care. Everything hag
been done that could be done ; but Mr. Lee labours under a serious dis-
advantage to a conscientious editor ; he could not discover the original
manuscript, and has been driven to follow Walpole's text with a few
emendations of names where error is discoverable. The introduction gives
a good account of Lord Herbert's life, and a fair estimate of his character
and of his literary works.' The notes are full of genealogical information,
and the appendix brings together all that is known about Lord Herbert's
political career ; though if it were worth while to write on • The Condition
of Wales ' or on * Duelling,' we should have expected something more
original than Mr. Lee has given us.
Mr. W. E. A. Axon has brought out a new edition of the Manchester
Historical Becorder so much altered and remodelled as to be practically
a new work. Its title is, The Annals of Manchester : a Chronological
Becordfrom the ea/rliest Times to the End of 1885 (Manchester: John
Hey wood, 1886). The word Annals is used in its strict sense. The
compiler has not attempted a continuous narrative, but simply gives
under each year all the detached notices bearing upon the history of
Manchester that have come under Mr. Axon's practised observation. The
book is a good example of what might with advantage be done for many of
our important towns. It gives the materials for a history, but it must not
be mistaken for a history itself.
The latter character is aimed at in a series of volumes on Historic
Tovms published by Messrs. Longmans under the editorship of Professor
Freeman and the Bev. W. Hunt. Of Mr. Freeman's peculiar advantages
for writing a town history it is needless to speak, but we may call to mind
his own acknowledgment (in the preface to the fourth volume of the
* Norman Conquest') that it was from J. B. Green, a man above all gifted
with the topographical instinct, that he ' first learned to look on a town as
a whole with a kind of personal history, instead of simply the place where
such and such a church or castle may be found ;' for this conception of
' a kind of personal history' is that which lies at the root of the editors'
plan. To carry it out the condition is laid down that each writer should
not merely know his town from books, but should have a private inti-
macy with it, in many cases as an actual resident of old standing. The
three volimies at present issued are Mr. Freeman's Exeter, Mr. Hunt's
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 895
Bristol, and the Rev. W. J. Lottie's London. The two former give a
continuous history of their cities down to the present day, though gene-
rally from an historical point of view there is less to say about the last two
centuries than about their predecessors. Mr. Hunt indeed is able to keep
a nearly even balance. Commerce, pohtics, and religious movements, all
find their place in the later history of Bristol ; while at Exeter the last
event which directly connects local with general history is the entry of
William of Orange. In regard to London, on the other hand, Mr. Lottie
is so well aware of the impossibility of treating its history in little more
than two hundred pages, that he hardly professes to go beyond the four-
teenth or fitteenth century. All three books are provided with several
maps— those in Mr. Freeman's are particularly good — illustrating the
growth of their respective cities.
Messrs. Forman, Nottingham, will issue by subscription the Domesday
Survey of Nottinghamshire and Butland, edited by Mr. W. H. Stevenson,
whose qualifications for such a task are beyond dispute. The work will
be issued in four parts, at the price of five shillings each. The editor iu
his prospectus modestly expresses a hope that sufficient subscriptions may
be forthcoming to secure him against financial loss. In the hands of Mr,
Stevenson this edition is likely to be of more than merely local importance*
The Vision of William concerning Piers the Plowman, together with
Richard the Bedeless, By William Langland : edited by the Rev. W. W.
Skeat, 2 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon Press.) Mr. Skeat has devoted
twenty years of his life to the production of an edition of * Piers the
Plowman,' and the definite result of his labours has now been pubUshed
in three parallel texts. The completeness of Mr. Skeat's philological
labours leaves nothing to be desired, and the copious glossary which he
appends to his edition enables every one to read and understand with ease
one of the noblest poems of our early literature. Moreover, Mr. Skeat's
introduction and notes discuss aU the questions concerning the text, and
smooth all difficulties concerning the interpretations of his author. About
the historical importance of the poem Mr. Skeat has not much to tell
us ; he may fairly say that he has done enough in providing the material
for others to work upon. We only wish that he had been conscious of
his own limitations. His notes, which are excellent philologically, are
otherwise the outpouring of the common-place book of a man who is
entirely unversed in historical investigation and without even a glim-
mering idea of the meaning of historical criticism. Thus about ' canonical
hours ' he thinks it worth while to write * See Hours in Hook's Church
Dictionary, and the full account in the Ancren Riwle, p. 21.' He thinks
• that Golias is the sole invention of Walter Map.' In fact upon every
point he takes old English hterature as the only, or at least the most
authoritative, source of historical information. He even finds it neces-
sary to tell his readers the conditions of the peace of Bretigny, and adds :
*See Lingard, iv. 118; Thomas Walsingham, i. 290; Fabyan, p. 471.'
However, this airing of heterogeneous learning gives his notes an unex-
pectedness which has a charm of its own, and does not detract from the
substantial value of this excellent edition.
Digitized by
Google
396 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Apri
The value to students of Elizabethan literary history of the Rev.
W. D. Macray's discovery of the two comedies, the Pilgrimage to Par-
nassus and the Betum from Pamassus^ which together with the
well-known second part of the Betum he has published for th«
Clarendon Press, Oxford, has been so extensively recognised by the
literary reviews that it is needless for us to do more than mention the
book here. At the same time its general subject, the poverty and
discontent of scholars, and its abundant illustrations of the social habiti
and manners of the period, give the plays an interest for more than student!
of literature. We may remark, however, that the notes, excellent as
ihey are so far as they go, do not touch a considerable number of points
on which light might have been thrown by so accomplished a scholar as
Mr. Macray.
The New English, by Mr. T. L. Kington Oliphant (London : Macmillan.
2 volumes), may be described as a chronicle of such words, spellings, and
phrases, making their appearance in successive English writings from the
fourteenth century onwards, as have attracted the attention of an uncom-
monly close observer. Of course it is always hazardous to fix upon a
given instance as the first known use of a word or phrase ; but with a
practised reader like Mr. Oliphant we should be seldom fax wrong in
taking his examples as representing something very near, if not always
quite the nearest, to the actual fact. The annahstic method chosen by
the author, though it is apt to oppress the reader who is in search of a
principle by a multiplicity of details, enables the author to illustrate not
merely the changes in the English language and literary style, but also,
by the way, coincident changes in the social conditions of the national
life ; for Mr. Oliphant writes not only as a philologer or a literary student,
but as one who views the growth of our language and literature as in
many ways an interpreter of the growth of the nation itself.
Mr. J. Talboys Wheeler's last book on Indian history — India under
British Bule from the Foundation of the East India Company (London :
Macmillan & Co.) — contains a convenient summary of a subject as to
which a little knowledge is less dangerous than total ignorance. But it is
evidently impossible in three hundred loosely printed pages to give any*
thing like a satisfactory record of events occiirring in almost as many years.
Mr. Wheeler knows a good deal about his subject, and writes clearly,
though his style is poor. The arrangement of the book is historical, but
the author guards himself against its being taken for a history. His
object seems rather to be to provide a manual of information on the
growth of the English power in India, with reference to questions of
practical politics, and from the point of view prevalent among Indian
civilians.
We have received the first number of the Bevue d'Histoire Diploma-
tique, published by the recently founded Soci^t^ d*Histoire Diplomatique
(Paris : Leroux). As the society aims at combining among its members
« those who write the diplomatic history of the past with those who pre-
pare the diplomatic history itself of the future ' — scholars with practical
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 397
diplomatists — so its Bevue contains not only articles on international
subjects which have a distinct bearing on modem politics, but also papers
on the earlier, even on the medieval, history of diplomacy. The contents
of the first number will be found noticed elsewhere. The BetmSy which
is to appear quarterly, is under the management of an editorial committee
consisting of M. Scherer, the Comte de Mas-Latrie, and MM. GefiEroy,
De Vorges, Funck-Brentano, D'Avril, and E. Lavoll^e. The editor is M,
de Maulde.
With its twenty-sixth volume, the contents of the last part of which
will be found chronicled in their place, the Forschungen zur deutschen
Geschichte come to an end. Affcer the death last May of Oeorg Waltz,
who had been editor from the beginning, the charge of completing the
volume already in progress was entrusted to Professor Diimmler of
Halle ; but the Bavarian Historical Commission, under whose auspices
the publication was carried on, has not been able to make arrangements
for its further continuance. No doubt, now that the Neues Archiv makes
its appearance regularly, it might be hard to find support, whether on
the part of writers or readers, for a second publication dealing with the
earlier departments of German history. But the Forschungen were not
limited to the earlier departments ; they took in the whole ground. For
the future, of course, its longer articles bearing on modem history may
find a place in general historical journals like Professor von Sybel's
Zeitschrift But the shorter communications, which formed so valuable
a feature in the Forschungen, will (unless they suit the principles of the
Historisches Jahrbttch) run the risk of drifting into the local Zeitschriften,
where for ordinary students — at least for ordinary students out of Ger-
many— they are mostly as good as buried. Nor can Englishmen but
regret the decease of a publication which has from time to time given ub
Buoh valuable and interesting contributions towards the history of our
own country. It may, however, still be hoped that, though the Bavarian
Commission cannot, some other body, or some publisher, may be able to
resuscitate the Forschungen, even though they cannot find another Waitz
to edit them.
The last (seventh) volume of Qicellen zur Schweizer Geschichte, pub-
lished by the Allgemeine Geschichtforschende Gesellschaft der Schweiz,
is entirely occupied by Ulrich Campell's Latin treatise, BceticB Alpestris
Topographica Descriptio, now for the first time printed in full by Herr
C. J. Kind of Chur. The * topographical description,' which is of great
interest for local history, forms the first book of the Batian History
which Campell completed in 1579.
In the * Letters of Cromwell,' printed in our January number (p. 148)
the title ' Letter on behalf of John Lilbume,' prefixed to No. II., should
be erased : it belonged to a letter which it was decided to omit after the
document was in type, but accidentally the title was left standing. In
Letter I. ' Mayor ' is an obvious misprint for * Major.'
Digitized by
Google
398
April
List of Historical Books recently published
I. GENERAL HISTORY
(Indading works relating to the allied branches of knowledge and works
of miscellaneous contents)
Bachofen (J. J.) Antiqoarisohe Briefe.
n. Strassbnrg: Trdbner.
BbiiOCh (J.) Histoiisohe Beitrage zor
Bevdlkerungslehre. I : Die Bevdlke-
ning der grieohisch-rdmischen Welt.
Pp. 520. Leipzig: Donoker <fe Ham-
blot 11 m.
Davis (G. B.) Outlines of international
law, with an account of its origin and
source, and of its historical develop-
ment. London : Sampson Low.
Dblbbuck (H.) Historische und poli-
tisdie Auf satze. III. Berlin : Walther
& Apolant. 2*50 m.
DacouDRAT (G.) Histoire sommaire de
la civilisation depuis I'origine jusqu'i
nos jours. Pp. 1107, illustr. Paris:
Hachette. 18mo. 7*50 f.
GREooBovnTS (F.) Eleine Schriften zur
Geschichte und Cultur. I. Pp. 323.
Leipzig : Brockhaus. 5'50 m.
Jam£t (P.) Histoire de la science poli*
tique dans ses rapports aveo la morale.
8rd. ed. enlarged. 2 vol. Paris : Alcan.
20 f.
MoNTEOUT (E.) Choses du nord et du
midi: Demiers vikings et premiers
rois du nord ; Sixte-Quint, etc. Paris :
Hachette. 12mo. 8-50 f.
Pabnell (J. S.) History of the penal
laws. Pp. 756, illustr. New York:
J. Sheehy. ^8.
PoHLEB (J.) Bibliotheca historioo-mili-
taris: Systematische Uebersicht der
Erscheinungen aller Sprachen auf dem
Gebiete der Geschichte der Kriege und
Kriegswissenschaft seit Erfindung der
Buchdruckerkunst bis zum Schluss des
Jahresl880. Parti. Pp.64. Gassel :
Kessler. 2 m.
SusEHiHL (F.) De politicis Aristoteleis
quaBStiones criticffi. Pp.128. Leipzig:
Teubner. 2*40 m.
n. ORIENTAL HISTORY
Bebcheu (M. van). La propri^t^ terri-
toriale et Timpdt fonoier sous les pre-
miers califes : Etude sur Pimpdt du
Kharag. Pp. 73. Basle : Georg.
Bbooshooft (P.) Gesohiedenis van den
Atjeh oorlog [1873-1886], in populairen
vorm verteld. Pp. 298, maps. Utrecht:
P. B. van Ditmar. 1*90 fl.
Chms (J. A. van der). De vestiging van
het Nederlandsche gezag over de
Banda-eilanden [1599-1621]. Pp. 184,
maps. The Hague : Nijhoff. 4 fl.
CoBTE (G.) Le conquiste e la dominazione
degli Inglesi nelle Indie : stud! storici.
II : [1828-80]. Pp. 452. Turin : Roux
& Favale. 5 I.
Dalton (C.) Memoir of captain Dalton,
defender of Trichinopoly [1762-3].
Pp. 266. London : W. H. Allen. 6/.
Dkventeb (M. L. van) Gesohiedenis der
Nederlanders op Java. I. Pp. 328.
Haarlem : Tjeenk Willink. 8-26 fl.
Ewald(H.) The history of Israel. YUI:
The post-apostolic age. Transl. by J.
Frederick Smith. Pp. 434. London:
Longmans. 18/.
FiNSLEB (B.) Darstellung und Kritik der
Ansicht Wellhausens von Geschichte
und Religion des Alten Testamentes.
Pp. 91. Zurich : Schulthess.
GoEJE (M. J. de). M^moires d'histoire et
de geographic orientales. I : Mtooire
sur les Carmathes du Bahrein et les
Fatimides. Leyden : E. J. Brill.
HouTSMA (M. T.) Becueil de teztes
relatifs ^ Thistoire des Seljoucides. I :
Seljoucides du Herman par M. Ibrahim.
Leyden.
La Fabelle (E. de). Mtooires du che-
valier de La Farelle sur la prise de
Mah6 [1726]. Pp. 157. Paris : Chal-
lamel. 3 f.
Mahleb (E.) Biblische Chronologic und
Zeitrechnung der Hebraer. Pp. 204.
Vienna: Eonegen.
NEDEBLAND8CH-l2a>i8CH Plakaatbock [1602
Digitized by
Qoo^<^
1887 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED 899
-1811]. Edited by J. A. van der Chijs.
m: [1678-1709]. Pp. 68i. The
Hagae : Nijhoff. 5 fl.
Stbvens (H.) of Vermont. The dawn of
British trade to the East Indies, as
recorded in the court minutes of the
East India Company [1599-1603]:
containing an account of tiie formation
of the company, the first adventure,
and Waymouth's voyage in search of
the north-west passage. Now first
printed from the original manuscript.
With introduction by Sir G. Birdwood.
Pp. 352. London : H. Stevens. 21/.
Tbeubeb ^O.) Beitrage zur Geschicnte
der Lykier. Pp. 32. Tubingen : Fues.
4to. 1*40 m.
Wellhausek (J.) Prolegomena zur Ge-
schichte Israels. 8rd. ed. Pp. 468.
Berlin : Beimer. 8 m.
Williams (C. B.) The defence of
Kahun : a forgotten episode of the first
Afghan war (from a journal kept dur-
ing the siege). Pp. 100. London : W.
H. Allen. 3/6.
Winter (J.) Die Stellung der Sklaven
bei den Juden in rechtlicher und gesell-
schaftlicher Beziehung nach talmu-
dischen Quellen. Pp. 66. Breslau :
Preuss & Jtinger. 1*20 m.
WusTENFELD (F.) Fachr ed-din der
Drusenfiirst und seine Zeitgenossen ;
Die Aufstande in Syrien und Anatolien
gegen die Tiirken in der ersten Halfte
des XI. (XVn.) Jahrhunderts. Pp. 178.
Gdttingen : Dieterioh. 4to. 7 m.
m. GREEK HISTORY
Bebobb (H.) Geschichte der wissen-
schaftlichen Erdkunde der Grieohen.
I : Die Geographic der lonier. Pp. 145.
Leipzig : Veit. 4 m.
Bbuno (S.) La Sicilia greca dalle origini
sino alia caduta di Siracusa. Pp. 244.
Catania : Martinez. 16mo. 8 1.
Canbt (V.) Les institutions de Sparte.
Pp. 489. Lille : Lefort. 12mo. 8*50 f.
DuNOKEB (M.) History of Greece, from
the earliest times to the end of the Per-
sian war. Transl. by S. F. Alleyne & E.
Abbott. Pp. 502. London : Bentley. 15/.
HxiD (B. y.) Historia Numorum: a
manual of Greek numismatics. Pp.
888. Oxford : Clarendon Press. 42/.
HoMOLLE (T.) Les archives de Tinten-
dance sacr^ k D^los [315-166 ▲.€.].
(Bibliothdque des 6coles fran^aises
d'Athdnes et de Bome. XLIX.) Paris:
Thorin. 5-50 f.
Kat.kmawn (A.) Pausanias der Perieget:
Untersucnungen fiber seine Schrift-
stellerei und seine Quellen. Pp. 295*
Berlin : G. Beimer. 8 m.
IV. ROMAN HISTORY
Blooh (G.) La r^forme d6mocratique k
Bome au troisidme si^e avant J6sus-
Christ. Pp. Zy, Nogent-le-Botron :
Daupeley-Gouvemeur.
OoLLEviLLB (vicomte). Histoire abr6g6e
des empereurs remains et grecs et des
personnages pour lesquels on a frapp^
des m^dailles depuis Pomp^ jusqu*a la
prise de Constantinople par les Turcs.
Avec la liste des m6dailles, d'apr^
Beauvais. I. Paris : Picard. 20 f .
Deppe (k.\ Eriegsziige des Tiberius in
Deutschland [a j>. 4, 5] ; mit einer Karte
des Lagers bei Oerlinghausen von T.
Deppe. Pp. 42. Bielefeld : Helmich.
1-25 m.
DxTBUY (V.) History of Bome and the
Boman people. YI. Eegan Paul : London.
80/.
Ihne (W.) Bdmische Geschichte. VI:
Der Eampf um die persdnliche Herr-
schaft. Pp. 585. Leipzig : Engelmann.
6 m.
iNscBipnoNUHLatinarum, Corpus, consilio
academic litterarum regie BorussiciB
editum. VI: Inscriptiones urbis
BomaB Latins ; edited by E. Bormann,
W. Henzen, & C. Huelsen. Pars III.
Pp. 1747-2458. Berlin : Beimer.
68 m.
EoBMEB (A. E.) De epistulis a Cicerone
post reoitum usque ad finem anni a. u. c.
700 datis quaastiones chronologioaB.
Pp. 67. Leipzig : Fock.
MoBfMSEN (T.) The provinces and people
from Caesar to Diocletian. Transl. by
W. F. Dickson. 2 vol. Pp. 720, map.
London : Bentley. 36/.
MoBLOT (£.) Pr^s des institutions poli-
tiques de Bome depuis les origines
jusqu'^ la mort de Th^odose. Paris :
Dupret. 12mo. 4 f .
Bhoem (C.) Aachen zur Zeit der Bdmer.
Pp. 17. Aachen : Cremer. 12mo.
60 pf.
WiLLEMS (P.) Les Elections municipales
k Pomp^i: Discours pronono^ k la
s^nce publique du 12 mars 1886
(Academic Boyale de Belgique). Pp.
142. Brussels: Hayez.
V. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY
Cabayon (A.) Documents inddits con-
cemant la Compagnie de J^sus. XXIII.
Pp. 496. Paris : Taranne. 5 f.
Ceoconi (mgr. E.)^ Histoire du concile dn
Vatican, d'apr^ les documents origi-
naux : Pr^liminaires du concile. (B^it
et documents.) Trad, de Pitalien par
J. Bonhomme et D. Duvillard. 4 vol.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
400 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED AprU
I*P- 553» S«>, 724, 828. Paris : Lecoffre.
82 £.
Ghabkamd (J. A.) Vaudois et protestants
des Alpes : recherohes historiqnes.
Pp. 287. Grenoble : Drevet. 8 £.
Chaix db Lavarbme (abb^ A. G.) Monn-
menta pontificia ArvernisB deourrenti-
bus IX», X", XI", XII" BflBCulis : Corres-
pondanoe diplomatique des papes oon-
oemant TAavergne. Pp. 560. Cler-
mont-Ferrand : Beilet. 4to. 12 f.
Gbeighton (rev. M.) History of the
papacy daring the period of the refor-
mation. Ill, IV : The Italian prinoes
[1464-1618]. Pp. 630. London:
Longmans. 24/.
Gbivkllucci (A.) Storia delle relazioni
tra lo stato e la chiesa. I : Dai primi
tempi del oristianesimo alia caduta dell'
impero romano d'occidente. II : Dalla
oaduta dell' impero romano occidente
alia fine del pontificato di Gregorio
Magno. Pp. 415, 317. Bologna:
Zanichelli. 20 1.
Dblaville Lb Boulx (J.) De prima
origine Hospitalariorum Hierosoly-
mitanomm. Pp. 156. Paris: Thorin.
£oLi (£.) Altchristliche Stadien :
Martyrien und Martyriologien altester
Zeit Mit Textansgaben im Anhang.
Pp. III. Zilrioh: Sohulthess. 2-80 m.
Fauoon (M.) La librairie des papes
d'Avignon, sa formation, sa composi-
tion, ses catalogues [1316-1420]. II.
(Bibliothdque des ^ooles franpaises
d'Athdnes et de Home. L.) Paris:
Thorin. 7 f.
Gbbhabdt (B.) Adrian von Gometo: ein
Beitrag zur Geschichte der Curie und
der Renaissance. Breslau : Preuss &
Jiinger. 2*40 m.
Haobnbaoh (K. R.) Kirchengeschichte
von der altesten Zeit bis zum neun-
zehnten Jahrhundert. II : Das Mittel-
alter. Srd ed., revised by F. Nippold.
Pp. 723. Leipzig : Hirzel. 7 m.
Hauck (A.) Kirchengeschichte Deutsch-
lands. I: Bis zum Tode des Boni-
fatius. Pp. 557. Leipzig: Hinrichs.
10*50 m.
Kalkoff (P.) Die Depeschen des Nuntius
Aleander vom Wormser Reiohstage
[1521] abersetzt und erklart. (Schriften
des Vereins fthr Reformationage-
schichte. XVU.) Pp. 212. Halle:
Niemeyer. 8 m.
KiTHN (F.) Geschichte der ersten lalei-
nisohen Patriarohen von Jerusalem.
Pp. 70. Leipzig : Fock. 1*60 m.
Lantemay (A. de). Labadie et le Garmel
de La Graville pr^ de Bazas. Pp. 88.
Bordeaux: F6ret.
Madblaikb (G.) Histoire de saint Norbert,
fondateur de Tordre de Pr6montr6 et
archevdque de Magdebourg. Pp. 564,
illustr. Lille: Soci6t6 de Saint-Augnstin.
6f.
PiOLiN (P.) Supplement aux vies des
saints et sp^ialement aux petits Bol-
landistes, d'aprds les documents ha-
giographiques les plus authentiques et
les plus r^nts. U. Pp. 680. Paris:
Bloud k Barral. 6*50 f.
Pressensb (E. de). Histoire des trois
premiers sidcles de T^glise chr6tienne.
Nouvelle Edition enti^rement refondue.
I : L*ancien monde et le christianiame.
Paris : Fischbaoher. 7*50 f.
BiNOHOLZ (O.) Des Benedictinerstiftes
Einaiedeln Thatigkeit fiir die Reform
deutscher Kl&ster vor dem Abie Wil-
helm von Hirschau. Pp. 53. Freiburg-
im-Breisgau : Herder. 1 m.
Salabebt (H.) Les saints du dioo^
d*Albi. • Pp. 504. Albi : Amalric. 4 f .
Salles (F.) Annales de I'ordre teuto-
nique ou de Sainte-Marie de Jerusalem
depuis son origine jusqu'il nos jours et
du service de sant^ volontaire, avec les
listes officielles des chevaliers et des
affili^s. Pp. 583. Vienna : Braumuller.
Stober (F.) Quellenstudien zum lauren-
tianischen Schisma [498-514]. (From
the ' Sitzungsberichte der kaiserlichen
Akademie der Wissenschaften.') Pp.
81. Vienna : Gerold*s Sohn.
VI. MEDIEVAL HISTORY
Fblsberg (O.) Beitrage zur Geschichte
des R6merzuges Heinrichs VH. I :
Innere und Finanzpolitik Heinrichs
Vn in Italien. Pp. 80. Leipzig:
Fock. 1*60 m.
Gattdenzi (A.) Un' antica compilazione
di diritto romano e visigoto, con al-
cuni frammenti delle leggi di Eurico,
tratti da un manuscritto della biblio-
teca di Holkham. Pp. 222. Bologna :
Regia tipografia.
G18QUBT (A.) Jean VIU et la fin de Tem-
pire carolingien. Pp. 42. Clermont-
Ferrand : imp. Mont-Louis.
Eqwt.'** (gen. G.) Die Entwickelnng des
Kriegswesens und der Kriegffihrung in
der Ritterzeit von Mitte des elften
Jahrhonderts bis zu den Hussiten-
kriegen. II: Kriegsgesohichtliches von
Mitte des dreizehnten Jahrhunderts
bis zu den Hussitenkriegen. Pp. xxvii,
800 ; with 16 maps and plans. Breslau :
Eoebner. 24 m.
MiJLLEB (K.) Die Waldenser und ihre
einzelnen Gruppen bis zum Anfang des
vierzehnten Jahrhunderts. Pp. 172.
Gotha: Perthes.
NiBHUES (B.) Geschichte des Verhalt-
nisses zwischen Eaiserthum und Papst-
thum im Mittelalter. H : Von der
Wiederemeuerung des abendlandischen
Eaiserthums im Jahre 800 n. Ghr. bia
zur Grflndnng des rfimisch-dentsohen
Eaiserthums durch Otto den Grossen.
Pp. 526. Mdnster : Goppenrath. 6 m.
Digitized by
Google
1887 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED 401
VII. MODERN HISTORY
Benoit-Levy (E.) Histoire de quinze
ans: B6cit des ^v^ements politiqaes
oontemporains [4 septembre 1870-
28 d^cembre 1885J. Illustr. Paris:
Derveaux fils. 4to. 10 f.
BooDANovrrcH (general E.) La bataille
de Navarin [1827], d'apr^ les docu-
ments in^dits des archives imp^riales
russes. Traduit da russe. Paris :
Charpentier. 12mo. 3*50 f.
Cbonolooia. dei principal! trattati di pace,
di alleanza, di commercio dal 1496 ai
nostri giorni ; aggiunti i trattati stipu-
lati di Casa Savoia e del regno d'ltalia.
Pp. 2 1 6. Turin: Unione tipografico-
editrice. 6 1.
CuBELY (general). Itin^raire d*un cava-
lier 16ger de la Grande-Arm6e [1793-
1815], public d'apr^ un manuscrit
authentique. Paris : Berger-Levrault.
12mo. 3-50 f .
Dedtsch-danische Krieg, der [1864]. Her-
ausgegeben vom Grossen Generalstabe
(Abtheilung fur Kriegsgeschichte). I.
Pp. 384, 106; n^aps, &Q. Berlin:
Mittler. 22*50 m.
Fyffb (C. a.) a history of modem
Europe. Ui [1814-1848]. Pp. 520.
London: Cassell. 12/.
Gentz (F. von). Oesterreichs Theilnahme
an den Befreiungskriegen : ein Beitrag
zur Greschichte der Jahre 1813 bis 1815
nach Aufzeichnungen von F. von G^ntz.
Nebst einem Anhang : Briefwechsel zwi-
schen den Pursten Schwarzenberg und
Metternich. Ed. by B. Fiirst Metter-
nich-Winneburg, and arranged by A.
Freiherr von Klinkowstrdm. Pp. 844,
plates. Vienna : Gerold*s Sohn.
Gustave-Adolphe, Precis des campagnes
en Allemagne de [1680-1632], pr6c6d6
d'une bibliographic g^n^rale de This-
toire militaire des temps modemes.
Pp. 216. Brussels : Muquardt. 12mo.
4f.
JoHiNi (general). Pr6cis politique et
militaire des campagnes de 1812 4
1814 : Extraits de souvenirs in^dits.
Pp. 440, 398 ; maps. Lausanne : Benda.
20 fr.
JuRiEN DE LA Gravi^e (admiral). Les
corsaires barbaresques et la marine de
Soliman le Grand. Pp. 377, maps.
Paris : Plon, Nourrit, & Cie.
Lawrence (sergeant William), a hero of
the Peninsular and Waterloo cam-
paigns. The autobiography of. Ed. by
G. N. Bankes. Pp. 262. London:
Sampson Low. 6/.
LiJTKEN. Les Danois sur TEscaut [1808-
1809]. Copenhagen: Hdst.
Mabesca (B.) La pace del 1796 tra le
Due-Sicilie e la Francia studiata sui
documenti dell' archivio di stato di
Napoli. Pp. 248. Naples : Jovene. 5 1.
Mabtens (baron C. de) & Cussy (baron
F. de). Becueil manuel et pratique de
trait^s et conventions, sur lesquels sont
6tablis les relations et les rapports
existant aujourd'hui entre les divers
4tats souverains du globe, depuis
Tannic 1760 jusqu'4 P^poque actuelle.
Second series. By F. H. Gefifcken.
II: [1870-1878]. Pp. 799. Leipzig:
Brookhaus. 15 m.
Person (L.) Une excursion p^dagogique
aux champs de bataille de Ligny et de
Waterloo. Pp. 46, map. Paris: Cerf.
Banks (L. von) History of the Latin and
Teutonic nations [1494-1614]. Trans-
lated by P. A. Ashworth. London:
Bell. 3/6.
BussBLL (colonel C. F.) The earl of
Peterborough and Monmouth, a memoir.
2 vol., illustr. London: Chapman <t
Hall. 32/.
SoREii (A.) L'Europe et la B^volution
fran^aise. H : La chute de la royaut^.
Paris : Plon. 8 f .
Stebbino (W.) Some verdicts of history
reviewed. Pp.412. London: Murray.
12/.
Vandal (A.) Une ambassade fran^aise
en Orient sous Louis XV : La mission
du marquis de Villeneuve [1728-1741].
Paris : Plon. 8 f .
Vigo fP.) Carlo Quinto in Siena nell'
aprile del 1536: relazione di un con-
temporaneo. Pp. xxiv, 52. Bologna:
Bomagnoli. 16mo. 2*50 1.
VrrzTHUM VON Eckbtadt (C. F., Graf). St.
Petersburg und London [1852-1864].
2 vol. Pp. 356, 360. Stuttgart : Cotta.
12 m.
Vm. FRENCH HISTORY
AuBER (abb6). Histoire g^ndrale, civile,
religieuse, et litt^raire du Poitou. II.
Pp. 488. Poitiers : Bonamy. 6 f .
AiTBERT (F.) Le parlement de Paris, de
Philippe-le-Bel k Charles VII [1314-
1422] ; son organisation. Paris :
Picard. 8 f.
Bemont (C.) De la condamnation de
Jean Sans-Terre par la cour des pairs
de France [1202]. Pp. 66. Nogent-
le-Botrou : imp. Daupeley-Gouvemeur.
(From the *Bevue Historique,' XXXII.)
VOL. n. — NO. VI.
BosELLi (J.) La maison d'Armagnac et
Tunit^ franpaise depuis le quinzi^me
sidcle. Pp. 87. Paris : Dentu. 2*60 f.
Broolie (feu due de) Souvenirs du. IV.
Pp. 373. Paris : C. L6vy. 7-60 f .
Cadoudal (G. de). Georges Cadoudal et
la Chouannerie. Pp. 476, map, &c.
Paris : Plon, Nourrit & Cie.
Carel (P.) Histoire de la ville de Caen
depms Philippe-Auguste jusqu'4 Char-
les IX (nouveaux documents in^dits).
Pp. 363. Paris : Champion. 12mo. 5 f .
D D
Digitized by
Qoo^^
402 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED AprU
Chaliamel (A.) Histoire de la liberty en
France depuis 1789 jusqa'4 nos jours.
II. Pp. 487. Paris : Jouvet. 7-60 f.
Charles VI. — Lettere di Carlo VI re di
Franoia e della repubblica di Genova
relative al maresciallo Bucicaldo.
Edited by A. Ceruti. Pp. 16. Genoa :
Tipografia dell' Istituto Sordomuti. 4to.
CosNEAU (E.) Arthur de Bretagne, con-
n6table de Richemont [1393-1458],
Paris : Hachette. 7-60 f .
DuRAND (Madame la g^n^rale). Napo-
leon and Marie-Louise [1810-1814] :
a memoir. Pp. 266. London : Samp-
son Low. 7/6.
Flammebmont (J.) Etudes critiques sur
les sources de Thistoire du dix-huitidme
si^le. I: Les m^moires de Madame
Campan. Pp.43. Paris: Picard. (From
the * Bulletin de la Faculty des Lettres
de Poitiers.*)
Font-Reaulx (H. de). Jeanne d'Arc.
Pp. 317, illustr. Limoges : Ardant.
4to. 3-60 f.
Frizon (abb^ N.) Becueil de documents
in^ts et de pieces rares sur Verdun et
le pays verdunois. II : Histoire ver-
dunoise au temps de Nicolas Psaulme,
par Mathieu Husson TEscossois (pre-
miere partie [154&-1561]) ; charte
touchant Tordre, r^glement, et ordon-
nance de la cit6 de Verdun [1574],
Pp. 208, plate. Verdun : Laurent 12mo.
6t
Gazette de la B^ence [Janvier 1715-
juin 1719], publi6e d^aprds le manu-
scrit in^dit conserve k la Bibliothdque
royale de La Haye. Aveo des annota-
tions et un index par le comte E. de
Barth^lemy. Paris : Charpentier.
12mo. 8-50 f.
Geffroy (A.) Madame de Maintenon,
d'apr^s sa correspondance.authentique :
choix de ses lettres et entretiens.
2 vol. Paris : Hachette. 12mo. 7 f.
HAiiPHEN (E.) Documents historiques.
Discount du roi Henri FV au par-
lement, prononc^ le 16 f^vrier 1599 ;
deux billets du roi Henri IV (1600) ;
trois pi^s concemant ^accusation du
due de Biron (1602). Pp. 39. Paris :
Jouaust & Sigaux.
Lettres in^dites du roi Henry IV
k M. de ViUiers, ambassadeur k
Venise [1600], pnbli^es d'apr^ le
manuscrit de la Biblioth^ue na-
tionale. Pp. 104. Paris: Lib. des
bibliophiles. 5 f .
Imbert de Saint-Amand. Les femmes
des Tuileries : La jeunesse de la duchesse
d*Angoul6me. Pp. 359. Paris : Dentu.
18mo. 3-50 f.
Les femmes de Versailles : La coor
de Louis XIV et la cour de Louis XV.
Pp. 521, illustr. Paris: Dentu. 20 £.
JouBEBT (A.) La vie agricole dans le
Haut-Maine au XIV* si^le, d'apr^ le
rouleau in^dit de Madame d'Olivet
[1335-1342]. Pp.55. Mamers : Fleury
& Dangin. 2 f.
JouBEBT (A.) Etude sur les misdres de
PAnjou aux quinzi^me et seizidme
sidles. Paris : E. Lechevalier. 5 £.
Laffleub de Kermaingakt (P.) L*am-
bassade de France en Angleterre sous
Henri IV : Mission de Jean de Thumery,
sieur de Boissise [1598-1602]. 2 vol.
Pp. xxviii, 605, 287. Paris: Didot. 15 f.
La Gobce (P. de). Histoire de la seconde
r^publique fran^aise. 2 vol. Paris:
Plon. 16 f.
Lanzac de Labobie (L.) Un royaliste
liberal en 1789 : Jean-Joseph Mounier,
sa vie politique et ses ^rits. Pp. 343.
Paris : Plon, Nourrit & Cie.
LiPPEBT (W.) Konig Budolf von Frank
reich. Pp. 126. Leipzig: Fock.
Lloyd (E. M.) Vauban, Montalembert,
Carnot : Engineer studies. Pp. 234,
portraits. London : Chapman & Hfdl.
6/.
Loth (J.) Histoire de Pabbaye royale
de Saint Pierre de Jumi^ges, public
pour la premidre fois. lU. I^. 313.
Bouen: M^^rie. 12 f.
Mailhabd de la Coutube (G.) La tr^
joyeuse, plaisante et r^r&tive histoire
du gentil seigneur de Bayart. Texte
ancien rapproch6 du fran^ais modeme.
Pp. 41 1, illustr. Bruges : Descl^e. 8 f.
MaItre (L.) Les villes disparues de la
Loire-Inf^rieure. I. Pp. 28, map.
Nantes : Forest & Grimaud. 2-50 f.
Mavidal (J.) & Laurent (E.) Archives
parlementaires [1787-1860] : Becueil
complet des d6bats l^slatifs et poli-
tiques des chambres fran^aises. 1**
s^rie [1787-1799]. XXIV, XXV: [10
mars- 11 mai 1791]. Pp. 773, 532.
Paris : Dupont. 40 f.
Metzoer (A.) & Vaesen (J.) Revo-
lution fran^aise : Lyon en 1794, notes
et documents. Pp. 215. Lyon : Georg.
12mo. 5 f.
Monti (J.) Histoire de la Corse. Pp.
193. Paris : Dupret. 18mo. 1-50 f.
Norman (C. B.) Colonial France: Its
history, administration, and commerce.
Pp. 342. London : W. H. Allen. 15/.
Pajol (comte). Les guerres sous Louis
XV. V: Guerre de sept ans [1759-
1763] ; De la paix de Paris k la mort
du roi [1763-1774]. Pp. 543. Paris :
Didot 12 f.
Pardob (Julia). Louis the Fourteenth,
and the court of France in the seven-
teenth century. 3 vol. Pp. 1470,
illustr. New York: Scribner. ^15
Paulliat (L.) La politique ooloniale
sous Pancien regime, d'aprds des docu-
ments emprunt^s aux archives oolo-
niales du ministdre de la marine et des
colonies. Paris : Calmann L^vy.
12mo. 3-50 f.
Pecheur (abb6). Annales du dioo^ de
Soissons. VI. Pp. 636. Soissons :
Fo8s^-d*Arco8se. 10 f.
Philippe-le-Bel. Lettres in^tes, pu-
bli^es par PAcad^mie des sciences, etc.,
de Toulouse. Aveo une introduction
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED 408
par A. Baudouin. Paris: Champion.
7-60 f.
Pierre (V.) La terreur sous le directoire ;
histoire de la pers^ation politique et
religiease aprds le coup d'etat da 18
fructidor, d'aprds les documents in6-
dits. Pp. 481. Paris: Retaux-Bray.
PoiNsioNON (M.) Histoire g6n6rale de la
CJhampagne et de la Brie. III. Pp.
683. Paris : Picard. 8 f.
PoNTBRiANT (count A. dc). Lc capitaine
Merie, baron de Lagorce, gentilhomme
du roi de Navarre, et ses descendants ;
avec lettres et documents in^dits.
Paris : Picard. 7 f .
Bambaud (A.) Histoire de la civilisation
franpaise. II : Depuis la Fronde
jusqu*^ la revolution. Paris: Colin.
• 12mo. 4f.
B^MUSAT (M. de). Correspondanoe, pen-
dant les premieres ann6es de la res-
taur ation, publico par son fils, Paul de
Btousat. V & VI (demiers). Paris :
C.L6vy. 16 f.
Bouvi^RE (F.) Quatrefages de Laroquete,
oonstituant du Gard : 6tude biogra-
phique pour servir k Thistoire de la
revolution fran^aise. Pp. 93. Paris:
Charavay. 2-60 f.
Thureau-Dangin (P.) Histoire de la
monarchic de juillet. IV. Paris :
Plon. 8f.
Trioer (B.) Une forteresse du Maine
pendant Toccupation anglaise : Fres-
nay-le-Vicomte de 1417 k 1450. Pp.
174. Mamers : Fleury A Dangin. 2*50 f.
ViOLLBT (P.) Les etablissements de saint
Louis. IV : Notes (suite et fin), table-
glossaire. Pp. 401. Paris: Laurens.
9f.
Witt (P. de). Les petits Jaoobins : Les
grands hommes de la Terreur. Pp.
119. Paris: Society de publications
p^riodiques. 18mo. 1*25 f.
Zellbr (B.) La France anglaise : Azin-
oourt et le traits de Troyes [1413-1422].
Pp. 183, illustr. Paris : Hachette.
18mo. 50 0.
& Luchaire (A.) Charles VII et la
monarchic absolue [1438-1461] : ex-
traits d*Enguerrand de Monstrelet, de
Mathieu de Coucy, etc. Paris : Ha-
chette. 18mo. 50 0.
Charles IX et Francois de Guise, la
premidre guerre de religion [1560-
1563] : extraits des lettres de Catherine
de Medicis. Paris: Hachette. 18mo.
50 c.
IX. GERMAN HISTORY
(Including Austria-Hitnoary)
Bauugarten (H.) Gesohichte Earls V.
n. Stuttgart: Cotta.
BnoHWALD (G. von). Deutsches Gesell-
schaftsleben im endenden Mittelalter.
II: Zur deutsohen Wirtsohaftsge-
schichte im endenden Mittelalter. Pp.
302. Kiel: Homann. 4*50 m.
BiENEMANN (F.) Conrad von Scharfen-
berg, Bisdiof von Speier und Metz, und
kaiserlicher Hofkanzler [1200>1224].
Strassburg: Heitz. 2*50 m.
BiJCHER (E.) Die Bev5lkerung von
Frankfurt am Main im vierzehnten
und fiinfzehnten Jahrhunderten :
Socialstatistische Studien. I. Pp.
736. Ttlbingen : Laupp. 15 m.
BnoNVisi (cardinaHs) Belationes a. 1686
exaratffi. (Monumenta Vatioana his-
toriam reg^ Hungarise illustrantia.
Second series. II.) Pp. dv, 310.
Wiirzburg : Woerl. 4to. 20 m.
OoLooNB. — Das Buch Weinsberg : Eolner
Denkwiirdigkeiten aus dem sechzehn-
ten Jahrhundert. Ed. by E. H6hl-
baum. I. (Publikationen der Gesell-
sohaft fiir rheinische Geschiohtskunde.
m.) Pp.381. Leipzig: Diirr. 2m.
Droysen (J. G.) <fe DuNCKER (M.) Preus-
sisohe Staatsschriften aus der Begie-
rungszeit E5nig Friedrichs II. II :
[1746-1756]. Pp. 509. Berlin: A.
Duncker.
E0LOFF8TEIN (H. Freiherr von). Der
Beichstag zu Begensburg [1608] : Ein
Beitrag zur Vorgesohichte des dreissig-
jahrigen Erieges. Pp. 118. Munich :
Rieger. 3 m.
Fechnbr (H.) Die handelspolitischen
Beziehungen Preussens zn Oesterreich
wahrend der provinziellen Selbstandig-
keit Schlesiens [1741-1806]. Naohden
Acten des (^eheimen Staatsarchivs zu
Berlin und des Staatsarchivs zu Breslau
dargestellt. Pp. 577. Berlin : Beimer.
12 m.
Friedrichs des Grossen, Politisohe Cor-
respondenz. XIV. Pp. 560. Berlin :
A. Duncker. 14 m.
Galbtschky. Die Urgeschichte der Lan-
gobarden. Pp. 22. Leipzig: Fook.
1-60 m.
Hartuank (F.) The life of Philippus
Theophrastus Bombast, of Hohenheim,
known by the name of Paracelsus. Pp.
230. London: Bedwa^. 10/6.
Hohnstein (0.] Culturhistorische Bilder
aus alter Zeit : Braunschweig am Ende
des Mittelalters. Pp. 256. Brunswick :
Bamdohr. 3 m.
Joachim (E.) Die Entwickelung des
Bheinbundes vom Jahre 1658: Acht
Jahre reichsstandischer Politik [1651-
1658]. Pp.515. Leipzig : Veit. 13-25 m.
Enorr (E.) Der Feldzug des Jahres
1866 in West- u. Suddeutschland,
nach authentischen Quellen bearbeitet.
2nd ed. 3 vol. I^. 442, 486, 442,
maps. Hamburg : Meissner. 8 m.
Erieoer (A.) Uber die Bedeutung des
vierten Buches von Coccinius' Schrift
n 1)2
Digitized by
Qoo^^
404 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED AprU
*• de bellis italiois * fur die Geschichte
Kaiser Maximilians I. Pp. 55.
Heidelberg: Burow. 1-20 m.
liAMPRECHT (K.) Deutsches Wirtschafts-
leben im Mittelalter : Untersuchungen
liber die Entwicklnng der materiellen
Eultur des platten Landes auf Grund
der Quellen zunaohst des Mosellandes.
3 vol. Pp. 1640, 784, 608, maps, &c.
Leipzig : Diirr. 80 m.
LiNDENSGHHiT (L.) Die Alterthiimer
unserer heidnischen Vorzeit, nach den
in dffentlichen und Privatsammlungen
befindlichen Originalien zusammen-
gestellt. IV, 4. Pp. 10, 6 plates.
Mainz : Zabern. 4 m.
LObeck, Urkunden-Buch der Stadt.
Heransgegeben von dem Yereine fiir
Lubeck. Geschichte and Alterthums-
kunde. VIII, 1, 2. Liibeck : Schmer-
sahl. 4to. 6 m.
Masius (Andreas) and seinen Freanden,
Briefe von [1538-1573]. Edited by M.
Lossen. (Pablikationen der Gesellschaft
fiir rheinisohe Geschichtskande. II.)
Pp. 537. Leipzig : Diirr. 11-20 m.
Meinecke (F.) Das Stralendorff'sche
Gutaohten and der Jiilicher Erbfolge-
streit. Pp.61. Berlin: Weber. 1-20 m.
MuHLHAUSKN.— Fragment de Chronique
Malhousienne rim6. Pp. 658. Miihl-
hausen : Petry. 4to. 63 f.
Palatinate.— Ueber die Lehenbiioher der
Karfiirsten and Pfalzgrafen Friedrioh
I and Ludwig V : Zar fiinfhundert-
jfthrigen Jubelfeier der Ruprecht-
Carls-Universitat in Heidelberg iiber-
reioht vom grossherzoglichen General-
Landesarchiv and der badischen his-
torischen Commission. Pp. 21, plates.
Frankfort: BommeL 4to. 4*50 m.
Beichstagsakten, Deatsche. IX: Deat-
sohe Beichstagsakten unter Kaiser
Sigmand. Ill [1427-1431]. Edited
by D. Kerler. Pp. 645. Gotha:
Perthes. 36 m.
B08BNUAOEN (G.) Zur Geschichte der
Beiohsheerfahrt von Heinrich VI bis
Badolf von Habsbarg. Pp. 93. Leip-
zig: Fock.
Bothknhausleb (E.) Die Abteien and
Stifte des Herzogthams Wiirttemberg
im Zeitalter der Reformation. Pp.
269. Stuttgart : Deutsches Volksblatt.
3 m.
Salomon (F.) Ungam im Zeitalter der
Tiirkenherrschaft. Translated by G.
Jurany. Pp. 407. Leipzig: Haessel.
6 m.
ScHELLHAss (E.) Das Kdnigslager vor
Aachen und vor Frankfurt in seiner
rechtsgesohiohtlichen Bedeutung (Jas-
trow's 'Historische Untersuchungen.*
IV). Pp. 207. Berlin : Gaertner. 6 m.
ScHMiD rL.) Die alteste Geschichte des
erlaucnten Gesamthauses der kdnig-
lichen und fiirstlichen Hohenzollem.
II : Die Geschichte der Grafen von
Zollem von der Mitte des elften bis
Schluss des zwdlften Jahrhunderts
nach arkundlichen Quellen bearbeitet.
Pp. xlii, 265. Tiibingen: Laupp. 7*60 m.
SiEQENEB Urkunden-Buch. Ed. by F.
Philippi. I: Bis 1360. Pp. xxxix,
249, map. Siegen : Eogler. 6 m.
SiLLEM (C. H. W.) Die Einfuhrung der
Reformation in Hamburg. (Schriften
des Vereins fiir Reformationsgeschichte.
XVII.) Pp. 195, map. Halle: Niemeyer.
3 m.
Steindobff (E.) Bibliographische Ueber-
sicht iiber Georg Waitz' Werke, Ab-
handlungen, Ausgaben, kleine kritisohe
und publicistische Arbeiten. Pp. 34.
Gdttingen : Dieterich. 1 m.
Wattenbach (W.) Uber die Inquisition
gegen die Waldenser in Pommem und
der Mark Brandenburg. Pp. 102.
Berlin: Reimer. 4to. 4m.
Wedel.— Der Huldigungsbrief der Herren
von Wedel fiir die Sdhne Kaiser Karl's
IV., Wenzel, Siegmund, und Johann,
und den Markgrafen Johann von
Mahren, ausgestellt auf dem Tage zq
Guben am 28. Mai 1374. Pp. 4, plate.
Leipzig : Hermann. Fol. 6*65 m.
Wei7back£B (J.) Der Pf alzgraf als Rioh-
ter iiber den Kdnig. Pp.84. GOttingen-:
Dieterich. 4to. 3*50 m.
ZucKEB (M.) Diirers Stellung zur Refor-
mation. Pp. 80. Erlangen : Deichert.
1-50 m.
X. HISTORY OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND
Abbey (rev. C. J.) The English church
and its bishops [1700-1800:. 2 vol.
Pp. 78a London : Longmans. 24/.
Boutmy (E.) Le d6veloppement de la
constitution et de la soci^t^ politique
en Angleterre. Pp. 345. Paris:
Plon, Nourrit & Cie.
Cooke (E. A.) The diocesan history of
Killaloe, Kilfenora, Clonfert, and Kil-
macduagh [a.d. 639-1886]. Pp. 148.
Dublin: Ponsonby. 12mo. 2/6.
Craig-Bbown (T.) The history of Sel-
kirkshire, or chronicles of Ettrick
Forest. 2 vol. Pp. 584, 415. Edin-
burgh : Douglas.
Davies (J. H.) The life of Richard Baxter
of Kidderminster. Pp. 442. London !
Kent. 10/6.
Edwabd III (King), Year-books of.
Tears 13, 14. Edited and translated
by L. O. Pike. London: Published
under the direction of the master of the
rolls. 10/.
Fbeeuan (E. a.) Exeter. (* Historic
Towns ') Pp. 255. London : Long-
mans. 3/6.
Gbeville (C. C. F.) Journal of the reign
of queen Victoria. (Greville Me-
moirs, 8rd Part.) 2 vol. Pp. 636.
London : Longmans. 24/.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED 405
Hbeoeb (G.) Uber die Trojaneraage
der Britten: Inaagnral-Dissertation.
Pp. 99. Munich : Oldenboorg. 2 m.
Hawkins (E.) The silver coins of Eng-
land arranged and described; with
remarks on British money previous to
the Saxon dynasties. 3rd. ed., with
alterations and additions by R. LI.
Kenyon. Pp. 508, plates. London:
Quaritch. 36/.
HiODBM (Banulphi) Polychronicon ; to-
gether with the English translations of
John Trevisa and of an unknown writer
of the fifteenth century. Edited by the
rev. J. R. Lumby. IX : Continuation
of the Polychronicon by Johannes
Malveme. Pp. xxx, 283, 191, & 87.
London : Published under the direction
of the master of the rolls. 10/.
Hill (F. H.) George Canning. (* Eng-
lish Worthies.*^ Pp. 237. London:
Longmans. 2/6.
HoDDER (£.) Life and works of the
Seventh earl of Shaftesbury. 3 vol. Pp.
1*390, portraits. London : CasselL 86/.
Hughes (T.) James Eraser, second
bishop of Manchester. London : Mao-
millan. 16/.
Hunt (rev. W.) Bristol. (* Historic Towns.*)
Pp. 230. London : Longmans. 3/6.
Eablowa (0.) Maria Stuarts angebliche
Briefe an aen Grafen J. Bothwell. Ein
Beitrag zur Priifung ihrer Aechtheit.
Pp.62. Heidelberg: Winter. 1-60 m.
Maby Stuart : A narrative of the first
eighteen years of her life, principallv
from original documents. Pp. 276.
Edinburgh : Paterson. 5|.
MoBERLY (rev. C. E.) The early Tudors.
('Epochs of Modem History.') London :
Longmans. 2/6.
Monahan (J. C.) Records relating to the
dioceses of Ajdagh and Clonmacnoise.
Pp. 386, map. London : Simpkin. 7/6.
NoROATE (Kate). England under the
Angevin kings. 2 vols. London:
Macmillan.
Papendiek (Mrs.) Court and private
life in the time of Queen Charlotte,
being the journal of Mrs. Papendiek,
assistant keeper of the wardrobe and
reader to her majesty. Edited by Mrs.
y. D. Broughton. 2 vol., portraits.
London: Bentley. 82/.
Records, public, Forty-seventh annual
report of the deputy-keeper of the.
London : Published under the direction
of the master of the rolls. 2/2.
Rogers (C.) Social life in Scotland from
early to recent times. III. Pp. 488.
Edinburgh: Paterson. 18/.
RiPON. Memorials of the church of SS.
Peter and Wilfrid, Ripon. H. Pp. 398.
London : Whittaker. 16/.
Skelton (J.) Maitland of Lethington
and the Scotland of Mary Stuart: a
history. I. Pp. 366. London : Black*
wood. 12/6.
Stephen fLeslie). Dictionary of national
biograpny. X : Chamber-Clarkson.
London : Smith & Elder. 12/6.
Stokes (G. T.) Ireland and the Celtic
church : a history of Ireland, from St.
Patrick to the English conquest in
1172. Pp. 366. London: Hodder A
Stoughton. 9/.
Symonds (J. A.) Philip Sidney. (' Eng-
lish Men of Letters.*) Pp. 206. Lon-
don: Macmillan. 2,6.
Wakeman (H. 0.) & Hassall (A.), Essays
introductory to the study of English
constitutional history, ed. by. Pp. 340.
London: Rivingtons. 6/.
ToRKSHiRE diaries and autobiographies in
the seventeenth and eighteenth cen-
turies. (Surtees Society's Publications.)
Pp. 173, portraits. London: Whittaker.
7|6.
XI. ITALIAN HISTORY
Brandileone (F.) II dritto bizantino
nell' Italia meridionale dalP VHI al XU
secolo. Bologna.
La Mamtia (F. G.) I parlamenti del
regno di Sicilia e gli atti inediti [1541,
1694], Pp. 68. Turin : Bocca. 2-60 1.
Mandalari (M.) Note e documenti di
storia calabrese. Pp. 83. Caserta:
Fuselli. 3 1.
Melena (E.) Garibaldi : Recollections of
his public and private life ; with
letters. Transl. by C. Edwardes. Pp.
340. London: Triibner. 10/6.
MioNiNi (G.) La vita di frate Girolamo
Savonarola, scritta dal padre Timoteo
Botonio, Perugino. Pp. 8. Perugia:
Tipografia Umbra.
MiNUCCi del Rosso (C.) I famigli e le
carceri di una corte arcivescovale dal
secolo XVI al XVIII. Pp. 23. Flo-
rence: Cellini.
Rakdaccio (C.) Storia delle marine
militari italiane [1750-1860] e della
marina militare italiana [1860-1870J.
II. Pp.312. Rome: Forzani. 16mo.
4 I.
Rosa (G.) Stud! di storie bresoiane.
Pp. 191. Brescia: Unione tipografica
bresciana.
Scadcto (F.) Stato e chiesa nelle Due
Sicilie, dai Normanni ai giomi nostri
(sec. XI-XIX). Pp. 802. Palermo:
Amenta. 12 1.
Sicily. — I diplomi angioini dell* archivio
di stato di Palermo raccolti e pubblicati
per cura del socio dottor G. Travali.
Pp. 81, 159. Palermo: Amenta.
Thouas (G.) Les revolutions politiques
de Florence [1177-1630]: Etude sur
leurs causes et de leur enchainement.
Paris : Hachette. 7*50 f.
Venice. — Documenti per la storia dell'
augusta ducale basilica di San Marco
in Venezia dal nono secolo alia fine del
decimottavo. Pp. 308, iUustr. Venice^
Ongania.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
406 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED April
Xn. HISTORY OF THE NETHERLANDS
BitiLL jW. G.) Voorlezingen over de
geschiedenis der Nederlanden. Ill, 3.
Leyden : Brill.
BrsscHK (£. van den). Le conseil de
Gueldre: Essai historique. Bruges:
Daveluy.
Pehaisnes (chanoine). Histoire de Tart
dans la Flandre, TArtois, et le Hainaut
avant le qainzi^me sidcle. Pp. 665,
iUnstr. Lille: Danel. 4to. 60 f.
Fi-L^ (P.) Alessandro Famese, duca di
Parma: Narrazione storica e militare
scritta colla scorta di documenti inediti.
Map. Florence: Cellini.
Hoop-ScHKFFEB (J. G. de). Geschichte
der Reformation in den Niederlanden
von ihrem Beginn bis zum Jahre 1531.
German translation edited by P. Ger-
lach, with preface by F. Nippold. Pp.
xxxvi, 563. Leipzig : Hirzel. 8 m.
Le Glay (E.) Histoire des comtes de
Flandre et des Flamands au moyen-Age.
New and enlarged edition. Vols. I, II.
Pp. 416, 420. Bruges : Descl^ & Cie.
8f.
Knoop (W. J.) Herinneringen aan de
belgische omwenteling van 1830. The
Hague: Ewings.
KuNZE (K.) Die politische Stellung der
niederrheinischen Fiirsten [1314-1334],
Gdttingen: Koestner.
Ndyens (W. J. F.) Geschiedenis der
kerkelijke en politieke gesohillen in de
republiek der zeven vereenigde provin-
oien voornamelijk gedurende hettwaalf-
jarige bestand [1698-1625]. I. Pp.
290. Amsterdam : 0. L. van Langen-
huijsen. 2-37 fl.
Papebuoch (Daniel). Synopsis Anna-
lium Antverpiensium, ex publicis
privatisque ao ferme manuscriptis
monumentis coUectorum. Pp. 49.
Antwerp: Beerts. l-26f.
Remon de France, Histoire des troubles
des Pays-Bas. I : [1555-1575] public
par C. Piot. Brussels: Hayez. 4to.
Beusens (E.) Documents relatifs k This-
toire de I'universit^ de Lou vain [1425-
1797]. m. Pp. 553. Louvain :
Peeters. 10 f .
Wynne (J. A.) De geschillen over de
afdanking van het krijgsvolk in der
Vereenigde Nederlanden in de jaren
1649 en 1650 en de handelingen van
prins Willem II. toegelicht. Utreoht :
Kemink.
Xm. SCANDINAVIAN HISTORY
AscHEHouo (T. H.) Das Staatsrecht der
vereinigten K5nigreiche Schweden und
Norwegen. Pp. 208 (Marquardtsen's
Handbnch des dfifentlichen Bechts der
Gegenwart in Monographien. IV:
Das Staatsrecht der ausserdeutschen
Staaten. II, 2.) Freiburg : Mohr. 7 m.
Boyesen (H. H.) The history of Norway.
Pp. 540. London : Sampson Low. 7/6.
BuBOH (A. H. H. van der). Gezant-
schappen door Zweden en Nederland
wederzijds afgevaardigd gedurende de
jahren 1592-1795. The H^e : NijhofT.
Worsaae (J. J. A.) The pre-history of
the North, based on contemporary
memorials. Translated, with memoir
of the author, by H. F. Simpson. Pp.
316, map, &Q. London : Triibner. 6/.
XIV. SLAVONIAN, LITHUANIAN, AND ROUMANIAN HISTORY
Bohemia. — Begesta diplomatica neo non
epistolaria Bohemiie et Moraviie. lY •
[1333-1346], 4, 5. Ed. J. Emler,
sumtibus regiie scientiarum societatia
Bohemis. Prague : Gr^gr & Yale^ka.
4to.
Bruckner (A.) Bilder aus Busslands
Vergangenheit. I: Beitrage zur Eul-
turgesohiohte Busslands im siebzehnten
Jahrhundert. Pp. 451. Leipzig:
Elischer. 8 m.
Charveriat (£.) Les affaires religieuses
en Bohdme au seizidme si^e, depuis
Torigine des Frdres bohdmes jusques
et y compris la lettre de majesty de
1609. Pp.415. Paris: Plon. 750 f.
DuDiK (B.) Mahrens allgemeine Ge-
schichte. XI : Die Zeit der Luxemburger
bis 1333 ; Die Zeit Budolfs und Fried-
richs von Oesterreich, Heinriohs von
Kamthen, und des Luzemburgers Jo-
hann [August 1306-December 1333].
With index. Pp.490. Briinn: Winiker.
GiEL (G.) Eleine Beitrage zur antiken
Numismatik Stidrusslands. Pp. 43,
plates. Berlin : Weyl. 4to. 6 m.
GRiJNHAOEN (0.) Geschichte Schlesiens.
IL Pp. 446, 46. Gotha : Perthes. 16 m.
HuHN (A. von). The struggle of the
Bulgarians for national independence
under prince Alexander: a military
and political history of the war be-
tween Bulgaria and Servia in 1883.
Translated from the German. Pp. 310,
map. London: Murray. 9/.
HuNrALVT (P.) Neuere Erscheinungen
der rumanischen Geschichtsschreibnng.
Teschen: Prochaska.
PoLA3n>. — Codicis diplomatici Poloni»
minoris pars U [1153-1333]. Pp. Ivi,
374, plate. (Monumenta medii aevi
historioa res gestas Polonife illnstrantia.
Editio ooUegii historici academis lite-
rarum Graooviensis. IX.) Gracow:
Friedlein.
Perlbach (M.) Preussisch-polnische
Studien zur Geschichte des Mittel-
alters. 2 parts. Pp. 149, 128, illostr.
Halle : Niemeyer. 10 m.
Digitized by
Google
1887 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED 407
Rosen (G. von). Qnellen zur pommer-
schen Geschichte. I: Das alteste
Stadtbuch der Stadt Garz auf der Insel
Biigen. Pp. 165, Stettin: Saunier.
Ubioini (A.) Lea origines de Thistoire
roumaine. Texte revu et publi6 par
G. Bengesco. Paris: Leroux. 12mo.
3f.
XV. HISTORY OF SPAIN AND PORTUGAL
Balaquer (V.) Historia de Catalnna.
VIII. Pp. 514. Madrid: TeUo. 4to.
11 rs.
BiTDiNOEB (M.) Acten zu Columbas* Ge-
schichte [1473-1492]: eine kritische
Studie. Pp. 54. Vienna: Gerold's
Sohn.
AcTAs de las Ck>rtes de Castilla. X :
[1588-1590]. Pp. 591. Madrid:
Garcia. Folio.
CoLECCioN de documentos in^ditos parft
la historia de Espaiia. Edited by the
marques de la Fuensanta del Valle,
J. S. Bay6n, & F. de Zabalburu.
LXXXVn : Correspondencia de Felipe
II con BUS embajadores en la oorte de
Inglaterra [1558-1684]. I. Pp. 540.
Madrid : Murillo. 4to. 13 rs.
CuKiosiDADEs dc la historia de Espana.
II : La oorte y monarquia de Espana
en los auos de 1636 y 1637. Pp. 407.
Madrid : Murillo. 5*50 rs.
Granyellb, correspondance du cardinal
de [1565-1685]. V: 1673-1676. Pu-
bli^e par C. Piot. Brussels : Hayez. 4to.
Lane-Poole (S.) The Moors in Spain.
Pp. 285. London : Fisher Unwin.
Matute y Gaviru (J.) Noticias relativas
k la historia de Sevilla, que no constan
en sus anales, recogidas de diversos
impresos y manuscritos. Pp. 182.
Madrid: Murillo. 4to. drs.
MnS^iz (B.) Apuntes hist6rico8 sobre la
revoluci6n de 1868. II. Pp. xxix,
253. Madrid : Tip. de * El Globo.' 7 rs.
ToMio (P.) Historias ^ conquestas dels
excellentisims 6 catholics reys de
Arago 6 de leurs antecessors los contes
de Barcelona. Pp. 202. Madrid:
Murillo. 6 rs.
XVI. SWISS HISTORY
Babthelsmt, ambassadeur de France en
Suisse [1792-1797], Papiers de, publi68
sous les auspices de la commission des
archives diplomatiques, par J. Kaulek.
I: [1792]. Paris: Alcan. 16 f.
Gampelli (Ulrici). BaetisB alpestris
topographioadescriptio[1579]. (Quellen
zur Schweizer Geschichte. Vn.) Pp.
448. Basle : Schneider.
BiTTBB (E.) Chroniques de Geneve
Writes au temps dn roi Henri IV. Pp.
36. (From the * M^moires et documents
publics par la Soci6t6 d'Histoire de
Gendve.* XXII.)
WiNTEB ^G.) Hans Joachim von Zieten :
eine Biographic. 2 vol. Pp. 461, 528.
Leipzig : Duncker & Humblot. 15 m.
XVn. HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
(Including Canada and Mexico)
Alldison (E. p.) & Penbobe (B.) The
city government of Philadelphia. (Johns
Hopkins University Studies, V, 1, 2.)
Pp. 72. Baltimore : Murray. 50 cents.
Billon (F. L.) Annals of St. Louis,
Missouri, in its early days, under
French and Spanish dominations. Pp.
500, illustr. St. Louis: G. I. Jones.
4to. ^10.
BiABT (L.) The Aztecs: their history,
manners, and customs. Transl. by
J. L. Gamer. Pp. 333, maps, Ac.
Chicago: McClurg.
DoNioL jH.) Histoire de la participation
de la France k P^tablissement des Etats-
Unis d*Am6rique : Correspondance
diplomatique et documents. Pp. 711.
Paris : Imp. Nationale. 4to. 80 f .
Eddt (B.) Universalism in America : a
history. U [1801-1886] : BibUography.
Pp.634. Boston : Univ. Pub. House. g2,
Eoleston (M.) The land system of the
New England colonies. (Johns Hop-
kins University Studies, IV, 11, 12.)
Pp. 66. Baltimore : Murray. 50 cents.
Fabrk (J.) Washington, lib^rateur de
TAm^rique, suiTi de Washington et la
revolution am^ricaine (^claircissements
et documents). Pp. 343. Paris : Dela-
grave. 18mo. 3-50 f.
Falgaibollb (E.) Montcalm devant la
posterity : Etude historique. Pp. 196.
Paris : Challamel ain6. 18mo. 3*50 f.
Greq (P.) History of the United States,
from the foundation of Virginia to the
reconstruction of the Union. 2 vol.
London : W. H. Allen. 32/.
Hallowell (B. p.) The quaker invasion
of Massachusetts. New edition revised.
Pp. 229. Boston : Houghton, Mifflin, A
Co. 16mo. ^1-25.
Preston (H. W.) Documents illustrative
of American history [1606-1863], with
introduction and references. Pp. 320.
New York : G. P. Putnam's Sons. /2-60.
BoBEBTs (E. H.) New York. (* American
Commonwealths.') 2 vol. Map. Bos-
ton : B^oughton, Mifflin, & Co. 16mo.
;?2-50.
Stoddabd (W. 0.) George Washington,
Ulysses S. Grant. (' The Lives of the
Presidents.*) 2 vol. Pp. 307, 362,
portraits. New York: White, Stokes,
& Allen. 12mo. ^2-60.
Digitized by
Google
408
April
Contents of Periodical Publications
I. FRANCE AND BELGIUM
Bevne Historiqne, zzziii. 1.— Vicomte
G. d'Avenel : The French clergy and
liberty of conscience under Louis XIII f
concluded. A. Gasquet: The Lom-
bard kingdom and its relations with
the Greek empire and with the Franks
[from its foundation to the conquest by
Charles the Great]. Baron Du Gasse :
On the * Correspondance de NajpoUon
J"",' continued [supplement of letters
and extracts 9 June 1809 to 9 March
1811], C. JuLLiAN : Obituary notice
of Ernest Desjardins [f 22 Oct. 1886].
B. Lbdeber & H. Maczali : Survey of
works on tlie history of Hungary pub-
lished since 1877.
Beyne des Questions Historiqnes, zli. 1.
January — Fustel de Coulanqes :
Analysis of Gregory of Tours* a>ccount
of Sicharius [assailing G. Monod's
article on the same subject in the
* Revue Historique,* xxxi. pt. 2]
P. Allard : TJie empire and the church
during the reign of Gallienus A.
Baudeillart : The claim of Philip V
[of Spain] to the crown of France [deal-
ing with the negotiations that took
place during Louis XY 's illness in 1728,
in the light of the previous renuncia-
tions repeatedly made by the king of
Spain: — partly from the archives at
Alcal4]. L. Pingaud: French com-
merce in the Levant under Louis XVI
[down to the collapse of the 6chelle at
Constantinople in 1792] J. Mar-
TiNOV \ On the ' Italic legend ' [of the
translation of the body of St. Clement].
Bibliothlqne de TEcole des Chartes, zlvii
5. — H. MoRANvnxE : The relations of
Charles VI with Germany [printing
sixteen unpublished letters of the
French king, April-July 1400] H.
F. Delaborde : An episode in the rela-
tions of Alexander Viand Charles VIII
[arguing that the true date of the papal
bull found on the battle-field of For-
novo is 1 Feb. 1495, not 1494] A.
L£ Vavasseur : On the historical value
of Guillaume GrueVs ' Chronicle of
Arthur of Bichemont^ constable of
France and duke of Britanny * [1393-
1458, estimated as written rather in a
local than a national interest] G.
Paris: Notice of Natalie de Wailly
[t 4 Dec. 1886] Description of a
Bouen manuscript of Bedels * Hist*
EccLy* ^c, believed to have been tran-
scribed by Ordericus Vitalis.
Bevue d'Hlitoire Diplomatique, i 1. —
January — Due de BrooijIE : A diplo-
matic manifesto of Voltaire [an address
to the princes of the empire, November
10, 1744, annotated with severe com-
ments by his friend the marquis
d'Argenson]. Baron d^Avril: Aus-
tria and the German confederation
[1850-1851; with the French memo-
randum of 5 March 1851, and lord
Cowley's note of 7 March, and other
documents]. G. Rothan : The alli-
ance of Germany and Austria [1879J.
D. BikELAS : The formation of the
Greek state and its limits, from the
congress of Laybach to the congress of
Berlin. Comte E. de Barthelemt :
Struensee, from French despatches at
Copenhagen [1770-1772] R. de
Maulde : Extradition in G&nevois in
the fourteenth century [with documents].
F. Funck-Brentako : The religious
character of medieval diplomacy [illus-
trated especially from an unpublished
notice of the negotiations preceding
the treaty of Arras, 1435]. Baron
A. Manno, E. Ferrero, & P. Vayra : On
the proposed publication of the des-
patches of the ambassadors of the
house of Savoy [1569-1814].
Annalei de TEoole Libre des Sciences
Politiqnes, ii. \— January, — L. Aucoc:
De la dUimitation du riva^e de la mer.
A. Lebon: La constitution dUe-
mande et VhegHnonie prussienne [argu-
ing that the imperial constitution is
only workable through the position
given to the chancellor] H. Gaidoz :
Les values fran^aises du Pigment,
[About 120,000 of the inhabitants are
French -speaking, of whom the greater
part inhabit the valley of Aosta. The
writer describes the process of italiani-
sation begun by the Italian govem-
Digitized by
Google
1887 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS 409
ment.] Fuzieb: La reorganisation
de Vimpdt sur les ierres en Italie,
Djuvara : Chronique de Roumanie,
Bulletin Oritiqne.— Decem&^r 1 — L. Du-
chesne : La naissance d'un faussaire
pseudo-isidorien au Mans^z==January
15 — A. Baudbillabt: Leitres de Henri
IVdPailhis.
Bulletin £pigrapbiqne. — September— G.
DE LA Beroe : L* organisation des flottes
romaines, concluded.
Bulletin de la Societe de THiftoire du
Protestaotifme Tran^aii, zzxv. 11, 18.
— November, December — J. Bonnet :
The tolerance of cardinal Sadolett two
articles. P. Cobbi&be : The reforma-
Hon in Rouergue [at ViUefranche and
Millau, from a contemporary narrative].
H. L. BoBDDSB : Protestants at
Paris [1766 : police census] . Account
of the restoration of protestant worship
at Paris in 1791. C. L. Fbossard :
On the ecclesiastical discipline of the
reformed churches of France^ concluded.
N. W. : List of hugtienot emi-
grants at Maldon in Essex [1686, from
a Bodleian manuscript] .=^xxxTi. 1, 8.
January t February — E. Sayous: The
huguenot colony at Erlangen ^L.
DE BiCHEMOND prints documeuts rela-
tive to Odet de Nort^ pastor at La Ro-
chelle [1540-1593] C. Read prints
papers concerning huguenot and foreign
protestant burials in Paris in the eigh-
teenth century t two articles. J. Bon-
net : The tolerance of cardinal Sadolet,
continued. C. Read prints letters of
Theodore de B^ze and papers relating
to him A. J. Enschedk : Huguenots
at Aardenburg [1685-1686] H. L.
Bordieb: The house occupied by ad-
miral Coligny at the time of his murder
[with an illustration and map].
Comptei Bendus de TAcademie des Ins-
criptions. — April 1886 — Schluu-
- BEBOEB : Une nouvelle monnaie royaXe
ithiopienne du nigus Kaleb, roi d'Ak-
sum^ conqu^rant de PT^men au sixidme
si^le. - - MowAT : Explication d^une
marque monitaire du temps de Cons-
tantin Q.Baipbt : De la provenance
de retain dans le monde ancien. H.
d*Arbois de JiTBAiNViLLE .* Lc ^fundus *
et la * villa ' en Oaule.
Le Correipondaat.— i\rcn;em6er 10, Decem-
ber 26, & January 10— P. Thtjrbau-
Danqin: La question d' Orient [1839-
1846]. IV : La guerre en vue ; V, VI :
La paix raff ermie. November 10 &
25 — Comte Waliszewski : Un chapitre
de Vhistoire de Chantilly ; Condi et
d'Anghien^ candidate au trdne de Po-
logne [1656-1667].=-D(?c«w6«r 25—
Vicomte d'Avenel: Organisation et
fonctionnement de Varmie franr^aise
pendant la guerre de trente ans.
Journal Aai^tiqxiB.—September—B.. Sau-
VAiRE : Mat&riaux pour servir d Vhis-
toire de la numisftiatique et de la
mitrologic musulmancs, continued.
January — Clermont-Gannbau : LastMe
de Misa ; eoMmen critique du texte.
Journal des Savants.— October^K. Weil :
Correspondanoe de Boeckh et de C. O.
Mueller. == January — H. Wallon:
L'histovre des Romains.
Xessager des Sciences Historiques de
Bel^que, 1S86, part iy.— P. Claets :
History of the Oilde souveraine et
chevali^e des escrimeurs, or Chef-
confririe de Saint-Michel^ at Ghent,
H. Delehayx : On the biography
of Henry of Ohent^ continued [expos-
ing several mistakes as to his identity].
L. DE ViLLEBs : The early Ufe of
Jacqueline of Bavaria^ wife of John^
duke of TourainCt afterwards dauphin,
continued [with extracts from accounts,
Ac.]
ITouyelle BAYue,— December 15— A. Ram-
baud : Les premiers jou^s de la revolu-
tion, d^apres des papiers in6dits.==
January — H. Joly : Le droit naturel
et la science sociale.
La Beyolution Fran9aise. — October— T,
Lhuillieb: Liste annotie des diputis
d VassembUe consHtuante pour les bail-
lages de Meaux, Melun, Nemours, et
Provins, concluded. = December, —
H. MoNiN : £tat de ressort duparlement
de Paris [1789] V. Jeanvbot:
Pierre Suzor, 6v6qu^ constitutionnel de
Tours,
Beyue Critique d*Histoire et de Littera-
ture. — November 15— A. Chuquet :
Coucey's * Coalition de 1701.*==22 —
P. BoNNAissiEUx : Les arrets du conseil
d'itat (r^e de Henri IV).==29— A.
GmiQUET : Recent literature of the
French revolution,=December 13 -
A. Hauvette : Oomperx, * Ueber den Ab-
schluss des Herodoteischen Oeschichts-
werkes.* == 27 — L. Mention : Le
capitaine Merle, gentilhomme du roi
de Navarre,==January 17 — T. db
L. : Halphen's * Discours du roi
Henri IV' [1699], rfc.==24— E.
MiTNTz: Les sarcophages chritiens de
la GattZ«.==31— L. Cabrau : Janet's
• Histoire de la science politique.'
G. Platon : Flach's * Origines de Van-
cienne France.''=February 14. — A,
Chuquet : SoreVs * Chute de la royauti*
Bevue des Deux-Mondes. — November 1 -
G. RoTHAN : Les relations de la France
etdela Prusse [1867-1870], VIH : L'Al-
lemagne et Tltalie k la fin de 1867.=
15 — The Same : La Prusse et la confe-
rence; la question romaine au corps
Ugislatif [1867]. == January 1— C.
Rousset: Le gouvemement du mari-
chal Clauzel en Algirie [1836-18361.
Beyue de Geographie.- iV(wem6«r~L.
Dbapeybon : Une application de la
geographic d VHude de Vhistoire i
Jeanne d'Arc et Philippe le Bon.
L. Deschamps: M&moire du chevalier
de Razilly d Richelieu,=January —
P. Mougeolle : La geographic, nouvelle
mHhode d'inveatigotion historique.
Digitized by
Google
410 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS April
Bevue dei Etndei Juiyes. — October— 1,
liOEB: R^glement des Juifs de Castile
[1439] ; — S<ic des juiveries de Valence et
de Madrid. J. Weyl : Les Juifs
prot4gis aux ichelles du Levant et en
Barharie.
Bevne Maritime et Coloniale— Januat^-
February — Chabaud-Arnault : Etudes
historiques sur la marine militaire de la
France^ continued.
Bevae Politique et Litteraire. — Novem-
ber 27 — J. Barbey d'Aurkvilly : Louis
XIII et Richelieu.
Bevae de THistoire des Beligions. — Sep-
tember—A. BKViLiiE : L'empereur
JulieUy concluded. November, — J.
Beville : L*histoire des religions ; sa
m^thode et son rdle.
Revue de la Revolution. — November-De-
cember— F. A. Lefebvbe : Une com-
mune bourbonnaise pendant la r&volu^
tion, continued. == November — La
Fayette en 1792. Les diUgxUs de la
commune de Paris d Chantilly [1792],
La Vend^ en 1799 Lettre du
g&n^ral Macdonald au directoire exicu-
tif.==Dece7nber — J. Moobe : Journal
d'un Anglais en France [1792], II
Tentative de d^barquement de^ Anglais
d Ostende [n9S].=January — H.
Taine: La Provence en 1790-1791.
— G. de Cadoudal : Georges Cadoudal
et la Chouannerie : L*arm6e rouge.
II. GERMANY AND AUSTRIA
Sybel'i Historisolie Zeitaehrift, Ivii. 2.
Munich.— Freiherr T. von Buhleb :
Correspondence of duke Karl Eugen of
Wilrtemberg with Freiheir H. A. von
Bilhler [Kaiizleidirektor to prince Po-
temkin] in the years 1786-1789
F. GoRREs: Historical criticism and
legend [taking specimen legends and
seeking for the basis of fact in them].
E. Habler : Recent literature upon
Columbus.
Hif torisehes Jahrbueh der CHJrres-Oesell-
sebaft, viii. 1. Munioh.—J. G. Mayer :
Bishop Friedrich Nausea of Vienna at
the council of Trent [from an unpub-
lished manuscript at Schaffhausen].
K. VON Hofleb : The Heidelberg
quincentenary in the light of history
[chiefly a severe criticism of Euno Fi-
scher^s * Festrede ']. H. Grauebt:
Oeorg Waitz [biographical and critical
notice]. Freiherr L. von Bobch : On
the imperial title of Otto I [an attempt
to explain the peculiar significance of
the title *Imperator Augustus Boma-
norum et Francorum/ used in some
documents of the year 966] H.
FiNKE : On the history of the council of
Constance [confirming some points in
Von der Hardt's text from a Vienna
manuscript].
Neuei Archiv der Oesellseliaft ftir <ere
Beutsebe Oesobiclitskuiide, zii. 8.
Hanover. — W. Gundlach: Synopsis of
the materials for the section of * Epi-
stoke ' of the Prankish time in prepara-
tion for the * Monumenta Germanice '
[down to 911] B. Erusch : Chlodo-
vech^s victory over the Alamanni [at-
tacking VogePs hypothesis, Sybel's
• Zeitschrift,' Ivi. 886] P. Hasse:
Description of the Angers fragment of
Saxo Grammaticus [c. 1200; now at
Copenhagen].^— J. May : Life of Paul
of Bemried [the biographer of Gregory
VIIJ H. Bresslau : The title of the
Merovingian kings [criticism of Julien
Havet]. M. Manitius : Notes on
Rahewinj Ruotgerj and Lambert [with
reference to their use of phrases, Ac,
borrowed from classical and other
writers] E. Zeumer : A neivly dis-
covered fragment of West-Gothic law
[the text reprinted from Gaudenzi*s
edition, Bologna, 1886. The writer
considers the capitulary to be a private
compilation] A. Goldmann prints
short annales from 122 to 1044 [from a
Madrid manuscript]. W. Watten-
bach and B. Thomkbn print papal bulls
[relating to the monasteries of Brondolo
and Beinwiel] B. Bohricht: On
letters of Honorius III [of interest for
German history].
Foricbungen lur Beutachen Oeschiebte,
zzvi. 8. Gdttingen.— J. Junofbr: On
the history of Friedrich of Homburg
[1674-5], from materials at Berlin and
Darmstadt G. Droysen: On some
disputed points relating to duke Bern-
hard of Weimar C. Bornhax : The
influence of the reception of foreign law
upon the transformation of the older
German judicial constitution 0.
Volkmar: Lothar IIPs attitude to-
wards the contest concerning investi-
tures [examined in detail with reference
to his own election, and to the eccle-
siastical appointments in different parts
of the empire] W. Wieseneb: On
the historical value of Ebo's * Vita
Ottonis episcopi Bambirgensis.^ ^A.
Edel : On the auihorship of the * Qesta
Heinrici IV metrice * [arguing against
Pannenborg's view that the work is by
Lambert of Hersfeld]. H. Hahn:
The poets Tatwin and Eusebius [deal-
ing with the authorship of Anglo-Saxon
* ^nigmata *] J. von Pfluok-Habt-
TUNG : On the history of the West-Gothic
king Leovigild [discussing the question
of his supposed dependence on the
empire]. O. Fischer : Boniface's
office of legate and his mission in
Saxony.
X. B. Akademie der Wiiienscliaften su
Milnohen — Sitzungsberichte der philos.-
philol. und hist. Classe, 1886, 1-3.—
Digitized by
Google
1887 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS 411
F. Gbeoobovius : Did Alaric destroy the
national gods of Greece ? [arguing against
the opinion of Fallmerayer, and main-
taining that most of the destruction took
place before Alaric's invasion] . Wur-
i>inoeb: On the system of military
defence in Bavaria under the elector
Maximilian I [with a sketch of the
Bavarian military organisation prior
to the seventeenth century]. R.
ScHOLL : On Attic legislation [an
examination of the documents quoted
in Demosth. contra Timocr. §§ 20-23,
33, condemned by Westermann]
J. W. VON Planck: On Widukind^s
account (ii. 10) of the ordeal by battle
at Steele [938, analysing the text in
the light of other accounts of judicial
proceedings ; with the conclusion that
Otto the Great did not then order the
trial by battle in preference to another
means of settling the dispute, but
simply directed from what class the
combatants should be chosen]. E.
WoLFFLDc On the Monumentum An-
cyranum^ and on the inscription of
Lambasis of Hadrian.
Treitsohke ft Belbrfiek*i Preutsiiehe
JahrbtLcher, liz. l-Z— January-March,
Berlin. — Dr. H. Babucke prints nar-
ratives of the flight of two Huguenots
from France [1685-1687. The editor
omits to notice that the first narrative
is an incorrect German version of the
French original which was published
in 1868 in the 'Bulletin de la Soc. de
rhist. du protest, fran^/ xvii. 487-
495], H. Zimmeb: On the import-
ance of the Irish element for medieval
civilisation [dealing with the Irish
missionary-scholars, with illustrations
from manuscripts and from the history
of libraries abroad]. H. Delbbuck :
The work on the tktnish war of 1864
published by the Generalstab T. v.
T. : The strategy of the Russo-Turkish
war [1877-78], two articles.
Denifle ft £hrle*i Archiv fdr Litteratur-
und Kirchen-Oeiehiehte dei Mittel-
altera, iii 1, 2. Berlin.— F. Ehble :
On the proceedings preliminary to the
council of Vienne, concluded [printing
a sketch for a projected collection of
documents bearing on the history of
the Spirituals, by Raymund of Fronsac ;
protests of Bonagrazia of Bergamo
against his banishment ; the replies of
Ubertino da Casale to the articles
brought against him, 1310; with his
charges against the Franciscan commu-
nity, and the replies of the latter ; to-
gether with other documents] H.
Denifle prints the statutes of the law-
university of Bologna [1817-1347], from
a manuscript at Pressburg, and dis-
cusses their relation to those of Paduat
Perugia^ and Florence. Appended is a
new edition of the introduction to the
Paduan statutes, ' De origine et processu
juris scholastici Paduani.*
Zeitsckrift der Beutsoken Morgenlan-
diichen Oeiellionaft, zi. 3. -A. F.
Stenzleb : Das Schwertklingen Oe-
labde der Inder I. Gdidi : The
church-history of the catholikos Sabh-
riS& I [596-604], a fragment of his
biography from a Vatican manuscript.
Mittheilungen det Ixutitnts fUr Oeiter-
reiehiiche Ctoiehiektsfonchniig, viiL
1. Innsbruck.— G. Seeliobb: On the
administration of the imperial chancery
by the elector [archbishop Adolf] cf
Mentz [1471-1475], with a fragment of
the accounts for 1471-1472 F.
ZiMMEBMANN : On a privilege granted by
king Lewis I [1380] to the church of
Marienburg^ in Transsilvania — P.
Kehb : Notes on the papal registers of
supplications in the fourteenth century,
with a facsimile S. Steinhebz:
Charles IVs treaties with the WitUU-
bach dukes at Eltville, 1349 [with two
documents bearing on the claim to the
margraviate of Brandenburg]. E.
Heyck prints a contemporary poem on
the siege of Gran [1595].
Theologisohe Quartalichrift, Ixviii. 4.
Tubingen. — W. Mabtkns : On the spuri-
ousness of three chapters of the * Vita
Hadriani I' [cc. xn-xliii, containing
the famous statement of the donation
by Charles the Great to the papacy of
the Exarchate, the duchy of Spoleto,
&c. The writer argues against their
genuineness.] == Ixix, 1. — Linsen>
MANN : On the worship of the Virgin
and the saints in the christian church
[reply to Benrath, in the * Theol. St.
u. Krit.* for 1886].
Theologliche Studien mid Kritlkeii, 1887,
2. Gotha. — G. Heide: Unpublished
papers relating to Luther, Veit Dietrich,
and Hieronymus Paumgartncr.
Zeitsokrift fttr Xatkoliicke Theologie, zi.
1. Innsbruck.— B. Duhb, S. J. : The
charges against father Petre, con-
tinued. H. Gbisab : On the manu-
scripts of Paul the Deacon's Vita Gre-
gorii [printing a new text] N.
NiLLEs: On the vow of the Teutonic
knights.
Hilgenfeld*! Zeitsehrift far Wiiten-
•chaftliche Theologie, zzz. 1. Leipzig.
— F. GoBBEs: St. George in history,
legend, and art [decided to be histori-
cally not the Gappadocian, but belonging
to the time of some persecution before
Constantine] -A. Hiloenfeld : The
battle of Issos in the Old Testament [a
new interpretation of Psalm Ixviii.].
Digitized by
Google
412 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS April
m. GEEAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND
Choroh Quarterly Beyiew. Ho. 46. —
January — Egyptian Christianity,
Life of Robert Forbes, bishop of Rosa
[from his journals 1762 & 1770]
Early church history, The anti-
quities of Devon ThA early history
of Oxford [the writer questions the
connexion of the university with any
older schools at Oxford, and discredits
the evidence for the existence of the
former before about 1186. The rest of
the article deals chiefly with the con-
stitutional history of the university].
Dublin Beview. 8rd Seriei. Ho. 88.—
Jawua/ry — Rev. T. B. Scannell: The
English constitution in theory and
practice [dealing with changes since
1688, and comparing American and
colonial systems of government]
Bev. A. Hauilton : Ancient Benedictine
customs, Miss E. M. Glerke : The
Portuguese in India, Bev. T. £.
Bbidoett: The emigration of French
priests in 1792 [with an account of the
support given to them in England from
government grants and other sources
until 1817].
Edinburgh Beview. Ho. 887.— January—
The ancient laws of Wales, Thomas
Hohbes. The house of Douglas [based
on W. Eraser's privately printed
• Douglas Book '] The third part of
the * Greville Memoirs ' [1852-1860].
Quarterly Beview. Ho. 2ISn ,- January
— Lord Shaftesbury^s life and work,
Naucratis and the Greeks in
ancient Egypt [sketching the relations
between the Greeks and Egyptians
down to the time of the Ptolemies].
Soottish Beyiew. Ho xvn,— January —
The jurisdiction of the English courts
over Scotsmen D. Bikelas : By-
zantinism and Hellenism [criticism of
Montesquieu and Gibbon; with con-
siderations as to the causes of the decay
of the empire]. St. Magnus of the
Orkneys.
IV. ITALY
Arehivio Storico Italiano, xviii. — G.
Mazzatinti prints five political letters
of V, Armanrvi [6 Aprti-l June 1643,
containing reports of news as to the
war in England]. L. Zdekauer:
Gambling in Italy^ especially in Flo-
rence, in the thirteenth and fourteenth
centuries. C. Vassallo: Falsiftca-
turns in the history of Asti (two ar-
ticles) G. Mancini : On a dialogue
* De Libertate * written by Alamanno
Rinuccini against the government of
Lorenzo the Magnificent. A. B. :
On a diary kept by Qirolamo Lucche-
sini in Prussia [1780-1783] C.
GuASTi prints two letters of Paul III
in favour of Michelangelo Buonarroti,
G. B. Intra : A page in the life of
prince Vincemo Gonzaga [1580-1587].
A. Neri : Francesco Algarotti^ the
diplomatist [with letters of Frederick II,
1740-1742] P. Bajna: An inscrip-
tion at Nepi [1131] I. Del Lungo :
' A feud in Florence [1295].
Bivista Storiea Italiana, iii. 4. Turin.
T. Sandonnini: The controversies
concerning the trial of Galileo [defend-
ing the genuineness of the protocol of
26 Feb. 1616, relative to his submission
before cardinal Bellarmine, and deny-
ing that he was tortured at the trial of
1638. A letter by cardinal Barberini
to the inquisitor at Modena, 2 July
1633, is appended, together with the
text of the sentence and abjuration,
22 July] U. Balzani: Beview of
Hodgkin's * Italy and her Invaders f*
III, IV, G. PiPiTONE -Federioo :
AmarVs ' G^ierra del Yespro siciliano '
[including a list of the more important
changes in the ninth edition].
ArchiTio Storico Lombardo, ziiL 4.— A.
DiNA : Ludovico il Moro from the date
of his accession to power [a narrative
partly based on archives at Milan and
Florence]. — B. Beinier : Gasparo
ViscotUi, concluded. B. Sabbadiki :
Letters and speeches published and un-
published of Gasparino Barzizza [a
bibliography], concluded [with indexes].
Z. VoLTA : Pope Martin Vat MiUm
[printing notices from an unpublished
chronicle by Bartolomeo Morone, juris-
consult of Milan]. E. Motta : A
pilgrimage to the Holy Land [1476]
with documents. S. Fiuppo : The
Duomo of Milan [a bibliography of
works relating to the cathedral, with
index].
ArohiTio Storico per le Proyince Kapo-
letane, xi. 8. — N. Barone : Extracts
from the * Ratio Tfiesaurariorum * pre-
served among the Angevin registers at
Naples, continued [1326-1333] N.
F. Fabaolia prints a contemporary ac-
count of the riot at Naples in 1585.
G. DB Blasiis : The houses of the
Angevin princes in the Piazza di Cas-
telnuovo [with a history of the site,'.
G. DE Petra : Catalogue of a hoard
of coins recently discovered at Naples
[struck by princes of Achaia, dukes of
Athens, Ac, in the thirteenth and
fourteenth centuries; with plate].
B. Capasso prints a diploma of king
Rene [14381. E. Nunziante describes
some letters ofJovianus Pontanus, king
Alfonso of Naples, and others, preserved
Digitized by
Google
1887 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS 418
in the British Moseum (Add. MS.
22818), of which he gives specimens
;14B9-1496]. N. F. Faraqlia prints
documents relating to Giovanni and
FiUppo Villani the elder^ and to Persia
di Ser Brunetto Latino [1327-1328].
Archivio della B. Societi Bomana di
Storia Patria, ix. 8, 4.— B. Fontana:
Vittoria Colonnay marchesa di PescarOy
and the defence of the Capuchins [with
seven letters from and to her, 1535-
1637]. G. ToMAssETTi: Account of
the Roman Campagna in the middle
ages, continued [with plans and views].
E. Sabti : Posthumous notes on the
topography of Rome, collected by G.
Pelliccioni, concluded [dealing with
regiones v-xrv ; with illustrations]
A. Luzxo : Federico Oonzaga^ a hostage
at the court of Julius II [relating the
fortunes of the marquis from August
1509 to March 1513, with unedited let-
ters] G. CJoLETTi : Extracts from
the diary of Stefano Caffari^ continued
[1448-1452, and 1438-1439]. E.
Teza prints an anonymous satirical
poem against Paul V [1607] from a
rare edition collated with a manuscript
at Florence G. Levi prints two
minutes of letters of Boniface VIII
[c. 1299] from the archiepiscopal ar-
chives at Ravenna. [They relate to
the occupation of Argenta on the part
of the marchesi d'Este contrary to the
rights of the church of Bavenna.]
Archlyio Storico Siciliano. New Serial,
xi. 1. — G. Lagumina: Father Joseph
Sterzinger and fifteenth-century Sici-
lian bibliography V. di Giovanni:
The Slavonian quarter in Palermo
[with an account of other settlements
of foreigners]. G. M. C»olumba: The
first Athenian expedition to Sicily [b.c.
427-424]. E. Pelaez: The life of
Ariadeno Barbarossa [translated from
an unpublished Spanish version of the
original Turkish, with commentary
and notes] continued.
V. RUSSIA
(CJommunicated by W. B. Morfill)
The Antiquary (Starina).— Deccmfeer
— N. KoLMAKOV : The old cou/rts
[sketches of Russian criminal procedure
in former times]. Ivan Skobelev
[an account of the military career of
the grandfather of the celebrated Bus-
sian general] N. Miloshevich: Se-
bastopol on the night of the 27th of
August, old style [account of the re-
treat from the southern to the northern
side by an eye-witness] .=^=«7antttiry
—V. TiMosTCHOUK : The American em-
bassy to Russia in 1866 [sent with the
ironclad Miantonomo to congratulate
Alexander IT on his escape troxn. the
attempt of Earakazov]. N. Ebcde-
NER : The second battle of Plevna.
T. Tikhmenev : Cavalry reconnoitring
beyond the Balkans in 1877.=Feb-
ruary — Russian favourites [selections
with notes from the work of Helbig
already cited, continued]. — V.Bakou-
NiNA : The Persian expedition of 1796
[taken from the papers of an old lady
now deceased, wife of a general. The
expedition was directed in the last year
of Catherine's reign against Agha Mo-
hammed Khan, who had attacked Geor-
gia, then under Bussian protection]
A. Kalinovski: Yakov Koulniev [a
sketch of the military career of one of
the favourite captains of Souvorov].
V. Semevski : Struggles between
tlie serfs and their masters during the
reign of the emperor Nicholas [an inter-
esting paper illustrating the condition
of the peasants].
The Historical Messenger (Istorichesld
Viestnik). — December — I. Abseniev :
Warsaw in 1861 [an account of
the city just before the insurrection].
A. Bruckner : New materials for
the history of the early part of the
reign of Catherine 11, continued.
A. B. : The expedition to Logishin [a
story of the rebellion of the peasants
in 1874]. N. Bielozbeskaya : A Don
Cossack in London [an account of the
reception of the Cossack Zemlenoukhin
who came to London with a Bussian
general in 1813].==t/anttat^— S.
BoRSTCHov: The suicide of general
Gerstenzweig [a sad episode at Warsaw
just before the outbreak of the insur-
rection of 1863]. January- Febru-
ary— S. Tatistchev: The emperor
Nicholas and the Austrian court [a
critical estimate of the position in
which Bussia stood to Austria during
the reign] A. Molchanov : The
memoirs of Hobart Pasha [a criti-
cism of this work by no means un-
favourable; we must remember that,
although a great Slavenfresser, Hobart
Pasha always bears a manly testimony
to the bravery of the Bussian soldiers].
==February~¥. Ousov : Among the
ascetics [an account of Bussian sec-
taries, with many interesting details].
Characteristics of prince Alex-
ander of Battenberg [an unfavourable
account from the Bussian point of view,
with some anecdotes gathered at War-
saw concerning the prince's maternal
ancestors] A. Molchanov : English
historical writers on Russia [a criticism,
among other works, of Spencer Wal-
pole's ' History of England from 1815,*
vol. V.].
Digitized by
Qoo^^
414 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS April
VI. SPAIN
Boletm de la Beal Aeademia de la Hii-
toria, ix. 5. — November — V. de la
FuENTE criticises the legends relating
to La Santa Cruz de Caravaca, [The
appearance of the cross dates probably
from 1232 ; the fabulous accretions are
the work of the seventeenth and eigh-
teenth centuries] E. Saayedra gives
a note on the fief of Andorra. [The
vegu^r has, until recent changes, been
selected from a family of Beam bear-
ing the title of the count of Foix].
F. GoDERA exposes the false or
unauthentic character of the Arabic
texts of D. Faustino Muscat. Fidel
FiTA : The Jewry of Segovia [statistics
of the Jewish population previous and
subsequent to massacre of 1391 ; account
of the execution in 1468 of fifteen Jews
on charge of murdering a child in Holy
week ; miracle of the Host stolen by Jews
in 1415 ; trial of don Mayr Alguad^s,
a royal physician ; royal letters of the
fourteenth century protecting certain
monopolies of Franciscans and Domi-
nicans from Jewish competition ;
statistics of the poll-tax of thirty
dineros on Jews over fourteen in four-
teenth and fifteenth centuries, giving
evidence of the conversions by San Vi-
cente Ferrer ; and other documents,
Ac.]=6. — December — F. Fita: Note
on three sepulchral inscriptions from
Merida of the Visigothic period
M. Oliver publishes documents from
the archives of Osuna relating to Alex-
ander VI and his descendants [with
notes. They comprise genealogies ;
dispensations by Sixtus IV to Caesar
Borgia empowering him to take orders
and hold benefices, and to Pedro
Luis, duke of Gandia, to acquire pro-
I>erty ; letters of king Ferdinand
granting legitimation and naturalisa-
tion to Cesar Borgia, and knighthood
to Pedro Luis for gallantry at capture
of Ronda (it was after this that the
duchy of Gandia was bought) ; a will
of Pedro Luis; bull of Alexander VI
legitimating Juan the younger, and
confessing paternity. The documents
show that Pedro Luis (1458-1488) was
bom *de tunc diacono cardinal! et
Boluta,* that Juan (1474), Ctesar (1475),
Lucretia, and Jofre were bora * ex adul-
terio * *■ de episcopo cardinali et conju-
gata ' (Bennossa, Vannozza), that
Juan the younger (1501) was the son by
a different mother of Alexander VI and
not of Cajsar. Seuor Oliver complains
that copies are given without permis-
sion and not quite correctly in Thuasne's
• Joannis Burchardi Diarium,* vol. ill.
appendix] F. Fita : Unedited docu-
ments relating to the Jewry of Segovia
[1490 ; depositions of witnesses, &c ]
T. I. -January — Notice of a
Latin sepulchral inscription from Bue-
nafuente in the diocese of Siguenza
of linguistic and geographical interest ;
the epitaph of Otho, bishop of Gerona
(flOlO), corrected and completed from
a MS. belonging to Seilor Chia, and a
panegyric of the bishop, apparently of
the thirteenth century. F. Codbra :
Inscriptions on fifteen Arabic coins, with
translation^ by F. Caballero Infante.
A. Maria Fabik notices the Nueva
coleccidnde documentos para la historia
de Mexico by J. G. Icazb^ceta [the docu-
ments are connected with the Franciscan
order, and are in great part from the hand
of Jer6nimo de Mendieta. The reviewer
adds three letters by this father, two
addressed to Juan de Ovando, president
of the council of the Indies, and one
to Philip II. They touch on the abuses
of ecclesiastical organisation in the
Indies, and the hostility of the civil
authorities to the order]. F. Fita
continues the publication of documents
relative to the Jewry of Segovia [touch-
ing the purchase of a Jewish property
(interesting as to tenure), and conver-
sions in 1492].
Beviita de Cieneiaa Hiittfrioai , !▼. 5.—
J. DE Taverner t de Ardena : His-
toria de los condes de Empurias y
de Perelada^ continued. C. Bobch
DB LA Trinxbria: Fiestas que celebrd
Barcelona en honor a Felipe F.
Seyifta Contemporanea.— ?^ot76m6«r 15 &
January 15. — A. db Sandoval: Estu-
dios acerca de la edad media, continued.
Seviita de ^p^l^.— August 25.— A.
Weil : Los voluntarios espaHoles en el
sitio de Buda [1686] : don Antonio
Gonzalez y el duqne de Bej ar.=i>ec«m-
ber 10 & 25.— J. S. de Toca : Sor Maria
de Agreda.=January 25.— K San-
tillan: Los sucesos de 1820 d 1828.
—J. Olmedilla t Puia: Estudio
histdrico de la vida y escritos del sabio
cspafiol AndrAs Laguna.
VII. SWITZERLAND
Anieiger fftr Sehweiieriiche Oetehiehte.
Hew Series, xvii. 1-5. Solothum. —
W. Toblbr-Meyer : On recurring
groups of place-names in Switzerland
[suggested as a due to stages in the
settlement of the country] G. To-
bler: Notes on the life of Konrad
Justinger, with an account of two Frei-
burg manuscripts of his chronicle added
by T. VON LiEBENAU Countess
Margaret of Toggenburg. G. Tobler
prints a letter of duke Lewis of Savoy
Digitized by
Google
1887 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS 415
to the town of Bem^ relative to an
appeal for help against Zurich ad-
dressed by the dukes of Austria to the
French court [7 Feb. 1452], and a
letter of the toion of Freiburg to the
duke of Savoy on its submission to him
[June 6, 1462]. T. von Liebenau:
Montbdiard and Stoitzerland [1474-
1476], with documents The Same:
On the history of the Swiss guard at
Borne [1627-1646] Letters of Maza-
fin to Lucerne [6 May 1657], and of
J. G. Tralles to the French minister in
Switzerland^ C F, Reinhard [February
16, 1801] W. Gisi: The wife of
Humbert Whitehand, ancestress of the
Italian dynasty [eleventh century]..
A. Stebn : Notes on the Chronicle of
the • White Book.' E. de Muralt :
The estates of the Pays de Vaud
W. Oechsli : On the genuineness of the
Glaubensmartdat der zwOlf Orte of
January 1624 W. Gisi : The county
of Burgundy in Switzerland. The
Same : TJie origin of the houses of Neu-
chdtel in Switzerland and in the Breis-
gau T. VON Liebenau : On the date
of Felix H&mmerlin's death [after
1457] The Same : Account of a
Formelbuch of Conrad of Diepenhofen^
notary to Rudolf of Habsburg The
Same : On Qermait and French projects
of annexation in 1455 [with a docu-
ment] R. Thommen: Note on the
Sempacher SchlachtUed,
Jahrbuch filr Sehweiserische Oeschiohte,
' xi. Zurich. — J. Amiet : Hans WcUd-
mann [burgomaster of Zurich] in the
first thirty years of his life S.
VooELiN defends Gilg Tschudi as the
first collector and interpreter of Roman
inscriptions in Smtzerland [against
the claim supported by Mommsen for
Johannes Stump^. T. von Liebe-
nau : The Cistercians of Lucerne and
the nunciature [with documents 1660-
1662] H. WiTTE : The war of MUU
hausen [1467-1468].
Vm. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
American Antiqaarian, ix. 1,— January
— M. Eells : The Indians of Puget
Sound S. D. Pbet: Village Ufe
and clan residences among the em-
blematic mounds. Ninth paper.
Andoyer Seyiew, vii.— Fefrniiry— J. H.
W. Stuckenbebo : Ranke and his
method.
Atlantic Monthly, lix. — Jatwary — Heb
beet Tuttle : Frederick the Great and
Madame de Pompadour,
Century, xzxiii. 8. — January — William
M. Sloane : George Bancroft in society ,
in politics^ and in letters. E. P.
Alexandeb : Picketfs charge and
artiUery fighting at Gettysburg.
H. J. Hunt (Chief of artillery of the
army of the Potomac) : The third day
at Gettysburg [in continuation of
two articles dealing with the events of
the two preceding d&ys].=January-
March — J. G. Nicolay & J. Hat :
Abraham Lincoln^ a history [in con-
tinuation of articles which began with
the September number. The authors
were Lincoln's private secretaries, and
the work is really an authorised
biography of Lincoln] .= February —
General J. Lonostbeet : Lee^s inversion
of Pennsylvania [Longstreet attempt-
ing to explain the causes for the Con-
federate disaster at Gettysburg].
Banm'i Church Beyiew. Ho. 167.— F. J.
Pabkeb : Tlie pilgrims of Plymouth and
the puritans of Boston [criticised from
an episcopalian point of view]. -.168.
— Maby Stuabt Smith : Mary and
Martha Washington [mother and wife
of the president. A review of Lossing's
biography].
Education, vii. 6. — January — Hebbeet
B. Adams: History in Yale College
[this article forms one of a series by
Professor Adams describing the history
of history teaching in the leading
American colleges'.
Tohns Hopkins Uniyersity Studies in
Historieal and Political 8oienee, 4th
seriei, zi, xii.— M. Eoleston : The land
system of the Netv England colonies.
fith leriea, i, ii.— E. P. Alunson
& B. Penbose : The city government of
Philadelphda [1681-1887] .==iiL- J.
M. Bugbee : The dty government of
Boston [from 1641 to the present day].
ICagaiine of American History, xyi. 6. —
December— J. B. Fby : On a controversy
concerning a dispute between generals
Halleck and Grant A. £. Leb :
From Cedar mountain to ChantiHy^
concluded. = xyii. 1.^ January — J.
L. Payne: A chapter in VermonVs
history [negotiations with Congress
and with England, 1780-81] J. W.
Johnston : The first American rebel
[Nathaniel Bacon of Virginia, 1676],
C. W. E. Chapin: The Property
Line of 1768 [between Indians and
colonists] A. W. Clason : The Balti-
more convention[lSQO].:=ui. February
— J. Q. HowABD : When did Ohio become
a state f [the date decided to be 19 Feb.
1803] . R. C. ScHENCK : Major-
general David Hunter.
Magazine of Western History, y. 8.—
January — E. B. Wabfield: General
William CampbelU the hero of King^s
mountain. Febimary — G. A. Ro-
bebtson : The original notes of Mason
and Dixon's survey [containing many
entries of considerable interest from the
surveyor's journals].
Hew Englander. — February — E. W.
Behis: Early Springfield [describing
Digitized by
Google
416 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS AprU
the early institutions and customs of
the town].
New England Magaiine, ▼. S,— January
— Hbnbt M. Dexter: The congrega-
tional church^s=Fehniary—G. W.
Shinn : The episcopal chwrch in the
United States,
Hew Prineeton Seview, iii 2.— E. L.
Godkin: Some political and social
aspects of the tariff, Henbi Taine :
Napoleon Bonaparte.
Korth American Beview, exliv. 8. —
March — G. T. Beaureoabd : Drury^s
Bluff and Petersburg [May and June,
1864].
Penniylyania Kagazine of History, x.
4. — Janucvry—A. D. Melliok: Ger-
man emigration to the American
colonieSj its cause and the distribution
of the emigrants. Part II. William
Hekbt Eole : The federal constitution
of 1787 [sketches of members of the
Pennsylvania convention]. Occupa-
tion of New York city by the British
[extracts from a diary kept by E. G.
Schaukirk, pastor of the Moravian
congregation in New York city, 1774 to
1784. These extracts run from 1776-
1783, excepting 1778, the MS. of which
is missing].
Science, ir.— February— O, T. Mason:
The Hupa Indians,
Scribner*! Magazine, i. 1, 2,— January-
February— F, B. Washburne: Remi-
niscences of the siege of Paris [the
author was American minister at Paris
during that time, and had abundant
opportunity for correct observation].
C. Morris : GUmpses at the
diaries of Gouvemeur Morris, United
States minister to France during the
French Bevolution 2. John C.
Ropes : The likenesses of JuUus
Cofsar,
Digitized by
Google
The English
Historical Review
No. VII.— JULY 1887
Aetius and Boniface
THE ' groans of the Britons ' are a famiUar flourish of rhetoric,
heard of doubtless by many who have never thought of the
writing in which the words are found as one of those few precious
rays of light which feebly pierce the darkness which covers the fall
of Britain and the rise of England. I can remember looking on them
in childish days in another light. It may be that I then looked on
the groans of the Britons as the groans of men in whom I had a
direct interest, as the groans of our forefathers, and not of them
whom our forefathers supplanted. But I well remember being
puzzled at the description of the person to whom those groans were
sent. 'Aetius thrice consul' in the middle of the fifth century
seemed a strange and contradictory being. We were then taught
that the Boman commonwealth came to an end in the year 80 before
Christ, as we were taught that the Boman empire came to an end
in the year 476 after Christ. In those days a Boman consul —
other perhaps than the horse of Gains Caesar — after the one mystic
yeai: seemed as impossible as a Boman emperor after the other
mystic year. What would one have thought in those days if one
had lighted on some of those passages in the Spanish annals of the
sixth century which tell how the son of a West-Gothic king rebelled
against his father and went over to the republic ? * Even at a far
later stage of study, it is not without a certain peculiar feeling, a
' See John of Biclar in Bonoalli, ii. 391, recording the revolt of EormeDgild.
Leovegildus rex^ filio Hermenegildo ad remjpublicam commigrante. That means that
he -witiidrew to the imperial province in the south of Spain. The phrase is common
enongh, and goes on into the time of Fredegar and his continuators. It is perhaps
strangest of all when Pippin makes Aistnlf promise ut ulterius ad sedem apostolicam
Romanam et rempublicam nunquam accederet. Only by this time it is just possible
that the faintest change of meaning may have been coming over the word.
VOL. IL — NO. Vn. B B
°^
Digitized by
Google
418 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
alight survival of the days of ignorance, that we find resptLblka,
flometimes respublica Romana, sometimes respublica as a word
which needs no qualifying adjective, used to describe the recovered
Western dominion of Justinian and his successors. And, if in the
sixth century, how much more in the fifth ! If Eormengild could
find a Eoman republic to flee to in Spain, much more might Aetius
a hundred years earlier, when no barbarian king had as yet ruled
in Eome or in Eavenna, stand forth on the soil of Gaul and Italy
as consul of that republic for the third time. And in after times
another thought might be suggested by the superscription of the
famous groans. We have learned how much and how little the
abiding use of the phrase respublica really means, how far apart
that use is from the very modern controversial use both of the Latin
word and of its English equivalent, the once familiar and honoured
name of * commonwealth.' We have learned how nearly nominal
and formal the function of the Eoman consuls and the Eoman
senate had become in ordinary times when the Eoman world was
awakened by the Wandering of the Nations. And we have learned
too how the very events of the Wandering of the Nations now and
then put a new life into the old names and the old forms. In its
greatest strait the Eoman senate could again put forth powers which
were only sleeping, and could treat with Alaric as it had treated of
old with Pyrrhos. So now and then a Eoman consul* too could
stand forth as one worthy to bear the title under which a Curius
and a Scipio had beaten back the enemies of Eome. In one age
the consul Stilicho saved Italy from the hosts of Eadagaisus ; in
another age the consul Belisarius won back Sicily to the allegiance
of Augustus. And so in the days between them, it was with a true
feeling of the facts of the time, with a sound knowledge of who it
was who could really act to destroy or to deliver, that the groans of
the Britons went up, in the year 446 after Christ, not to the august
lords of all, to Theodosius and Valentinian, but to the true king of
men whom they rightly saw in Aetius, son of Gaudentius, in that
year for the third time consul of the commonwealth of Eome.
The groans of the Britons are likely to be a very early impres-
sion, and the tale that records them does not record any act of
Aetius, but rather tells us the reasons why in the affairs of Britain
he could not act. Truly it was not even for the man who then held
his third consulship, and who lived to be murdered by an ungrateful
sovereign in his fourth, to roll back the course of destiny and to
decree that Britain should not change into England. He had
worthier work to do. He had to be the foremost man on one of the
foremost days in the history of the world. No man stands forth
with a higher name than his in the most terrible of all the stages
of the Eternal Question. Few days indeed in its long story can
rise to the greatness of the tremendous issue of the day of the
Digitized by
Google
1887 AETIUS AND BONIFACE 419
Catalaunian fields. Aetius thrice consul held the torch which had
been passed on to him through many earlier hands from Gelon and
Themistokles, and which he was to pass on through many later
hands to Kanares and to Skobeleff. The Britons groaned in vain
when the consul of Eome already saw the approach of Attila loom-
ing in the distance.^ The Scot might overleap the barrier of
Hadrian and Theodosius; the Saxon might harry British and
Oaulish coasts from his light keels; Koman, Goth, Frank, Bur-
gundian, with the Saxon too and the Briton as lesser actors,
might dispute the possession of every inch of Gauhsh soil ; all was
but as the strife of kites and crows compared with the battle of gods
and giants that was coming. Or let us rather look on all disputes
within the European world as a friendly strife, a slight practice in the
art of giving and taking blows, in face of the great day when Eoman
and Goth and Frank were to march forth side by side to do battle
with the Hun.
Of the man who was foremost in such a work as this we natu-
rally seek to have some nearer knowledge. And we have no lack of
materials for drawing a picture of Aetius; the only drawback is
that our materials are somewhat contradictory. He has a career
in Gaul and he has a career out of Gaul, and the two, at least as his
career out of Gaul is commonly told, may at first sight seem incon-
sistent. In Gaul he appears as the constant and successful cham-
pion of the Eoman power against barbarians of every race. He is
the defender of Eoman cities, the winner back of lost Eoman pro-
vinces ; he is the conqueror of the rebellious or the invading Frank,
the guardian of Eoman lands against the advancing Goth, till the
moment when his diplomacy wins over Goth and Frank to give help
against the common enemy. If his exploits are recorded in high-
flown strains in the laureate song of Sidonius, they stand out no
less clearly in the drier entries of the annalists. In Gaul, if we have
to match him as a direct rival against any man, it will be against the
West-Gothic king Theodoric. Between Theodoric and Aetius the
relations are the honourable relations of the leaders of two nations
which may be at any time either friends or enemies, and whom the
skill of Aetius in his later days changes from enemies into friends.
Out of Gaul Aetius appears rather as the friend of the barbarians
than as their enemy ; with the Hun above all he appears as united
by the closest ties of friendship ; he brings his savage allies into
Eoman lands to support the cause of that claimant of the Eoman
throne to whose allegiance he has devoted himself. When that
claimant is overthrown, he goes over with all speed to the cause of
his successful rival ; the minister and general of John becomes at
once the general of Valentinian in Gaul, the minister and adviser of
' The consulship of Aetius and Symmachus, the third of Aetius, oomes in 446, the
jear after Attila had succeeded to the sole monarchy of the Huns.
SB 2
Digitized by
Google
420 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
Placidia at Kavenna. In this last character he is painted, no longer
as the national rival of the Gothic king, but as the political and
personal rival of the other great Koman of his day. The Eoman
world cannot contain Boniface and Aetius at once. Aetius uses
every base art of intrigue to secure his own power at the imperial
court by driving his rival into treason. His plots are found out ;
the rivalry between the two leaders goes on, till it is ended by a
fight, whether open battle or single combat, the result of which is,
in one way or another, the death of Boniface. Aetius can now keep
his place only by the help of the Hun ; but by the help of the Hun
he does keep or regain it. Of this side of him we hardly hear again
till after the great defeat of Attila. Then we get two opposite por-
traits ; in one he wins fresh laurels in Italy ; in another he counsels
the emperor to flee to some other land. In any case he dies, three
years after the Catalaunian battle, by the hand of his sovereign,
stirred up by his eunuchs to suspicions of the great captain's
loyalty.
Of this non-Gaulish side of the life of Aetius, his conduct at the
time of the accession of John at Eavenna, his fight with Boniface,
and his own murder by Valentinian, are all facts, the main outlines
of which rest on good authority. But the long and subtle intrigues
of Aetius against Boniface are unknown to the contemporary writers
and appear only in the next century. Aetius and Boniface were
not always on the same side in politics ; they were opposed to one
another on two great occasions, the disputed succession to the
empire on the death of Honorius and the time when they actually
met in arms. But there is nothing in the annahsts which asserts or
implies any personal quarrel between Aetius and Boniface earlier
than this last strife. The enemies of Boniface at court, the men
who plot against him, are first Castinus and then Felix. And of
these, strangely enough, Felix meets with death by the hand, or
at least by the bidding, of Aetius. In all this there is at least
enough to make us stop and doubt whether the story of elaborate
intrigue and rivalry on the part of Aetius against Boniface can be
accepted. And the whole story seems worth sifting in detail. In
the life and character of a man who plays such a part as that of
Aetius the smallest point is worth examining. There is much too
in the character and history of Boniface which clothes all that
touches him with deep interest. The career of Aetius, as we have
seen, has two sides, which may easily be looked at apart. His acts
on this side of the Alps, his campaigns against the barbarians gene-
rally, his great career in Gaul, his slight connexion with Britain,
are matters which touch me very deeply as part of the great con-
nected history of Gaul and Britain. But they have little to do with
his relations towards Boniface, little to do with his relations towards
the imperial court or to the affairs of Italy. Even questions about his
Digitized by
Google
1887 AETIUS AND BONIFACE 421
personal character are of no great importance from the Gaulish side.
In Gaul he is simply a great warrior, the successful defender of the
declining empire against all foes. Out of Gaul he is, for good or
for evil, something more. I propose therefore, leaving his GauKsh
career to be dealt with in another shape, to treat of the general his-
tory of the man himself in his other relations, and above all in his
relation to his alleged rival Boniface.
As the two are commonly painted — and the picture has in any
case many touches of truth in it — the histories of Aetius and Boni-
face present a singular contrast.* Boniface, the true Eoman, so
long the special guardian of Kome against barbarians of every
race, comes at last to invite barbarians into the province which he
had so long guarded, while Aetius, half barbarian by birth and
training, largely supported throughout his career by barbarian
help, ends as the foremost defender of Europe against the Hun, as
he had once been the defender of Eoman Gaul against the Goth.
In other words, the earlier day of the one, the later day of the
other, is his brightest time. In this picture the barbarian relations
of Aetius, the strictly Eoman position of Boniface, undoubtedly
come from the life. But whether we are to accept the contrast in
its fulness depends on the question whether Boniface ever did for-
sake his Eoman position — whether, in short, he did invite the
Vandal into Africa. In any case there is a contrast between the
two of another kind. There is a side of Boniface in which Aetius
has no share. Boniface is an ecclesiastical as well as a military
hero ; he is the friend and correspondent of Augustine. And his
relations with the saint bring out many points of the man himself,
and set before us the nature of the ecclesiastical influences under
which a layman of the highest rank and character and personal
importance could be brought in days when Aries and Carthage were
decidedly more Christian than Eome.
The picture of the special rivabry between the two men, of the
special intrigues of Aetius against Boniface, seems to come wholly
from Procopius' History of the Vandal War. It is not wonderful
that a story told by a writer who in his own age ranks among the
great masters of history should have won more acceptance than a
story which has to be put together from scattered notices in this
and that meagre annalist. Yet we must remember that Aetius
and Boniface lived in the fifth century, while Procopius wrote in
the sixth. Now it in no way takes away from the position of the
narrator of the wars of Belisarius as one of the foremost among
men who have written the history of their own day that he
is not equally trustworthy in dealing with the history of times
before his own. Procopius plainly had an inquiring spirit and a
keen imagination. He is never an annalist. In the story of the
' This reyereed comparison is weU brought oat by Hodgkin, i. 455.
Digitized by
Google
422 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
wars he recorded events, many of which happened under his own
eyes ; he recorded them from his own personal knowledge, or from
the statements of those who had personal knowledge. But he was
also well pleased- to set down all that he could learn of earlier times
or of distant countries. And about them his sources of knowledge
.were often less trustworthy. What he was sometimes made to
believe about distant lands we may judge by his famous account of
our own land and people. Even in so wild a story as that of Brittia
and Bretannia we feel that we are still dealing with a master. The
reports that he heard were partly true ; when they were, Procopius
could grasp the truth and use it, but, as the reports that he heard
were partly false, he sets down much fable along with the truth.
So with his accounts of earlier times ; he grasps with all the true
historian's power the position and character of Theodoric, and sets
it forth in a few memorable words. But he also sets down many
stories for which the evidence is very weak ; in stories which are
essentially true, he is often misinformed as to details. That is to
say, he set down the received tale that he heard, which might be true
or false. In other words, he was the soldier and statesman, keen to
observe, cunning to weigh, the events of his own time ; he had not
the scholar's instinct for a minute examination of the records of
earlier times. One famous story which has been received chiefly on
his authority, the story of Valentinian and Petronius, has been lately
examined and set aside by a master of the history of those times.*
But the judgment had been pronounced already by the chief master
of all.* In declining to accept Procopius' account of Aetius except
so far as it is otherwise confirmed, I only follow their examples.
But I may add that this story of long continued rivalry and intrigue
is one which would naturally grow out of the enmity which undoubt-
edly did at last arise between Aetius and Boniface. We have a
parallel case in our own history. Because Harold and Tostig were
enemies in the last stage of their lives, legend has painted them as
enemies from childhood. We cannot so easily show in the case of
Aetius and Boniface as we can in the case of Harold and Tostig, that
till the last stage of all there was no enmity between them, but full
friendship, nor can we in the same way show how the first enmity
arose. The general picture which Procopius gives of the two
mighty men, each of whom, if the other had not been, would have
been rightly called the last of the Bomans, is natural and indeed
truthful.^ Under the circumstances the tale of abiding enmity
* Hodgkin, ii. 230.
* Gibbon, cap. xzxv. yi. 135 ed. Milman. * Prooopios is a fabuloas writer for the
events whioh precede his own memory.* Yet he adopts Procopius* story.
' Bell, Vand. L 3 (p. 322). Toi>r« rit Mpt 9ui4>6pm fikv rk iroXirucd f/cWir^K, 4t
roffoOrop 8i n^yaXoi^vxios tc kaU ttJj AWtis ip€rris ^jc^tijk Sotc, cT ti* ofrroiy itcdrtpoy &y8pa
tuf9p€ kwoK^KpiffBai rrr^x^Kc. This iUastrates the different nses of the word 'Pwfuubt by
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 AETIUS AND BONIFACE 423
easily grew up, and -when it had once grown up, details, as ever,
attached themselves. But they are details of the kind which are
always most suspicious, tales of secret intrigues and treasons which
could not be known to the world at large. The utmost that they
can be admitted to prove is a general impression that Aetius was a
man capable of a subtle plot. And that we can hardly take upon
ourselves to deny.
My present object is, holding the account of Procopius, as it
stands, to be legend of the sixth century and not trustworthy history
of the fifth, to try to recover the true story as it may be put together
from the annalists, the writings of Saint Augustine, and other more
trustworthy authorities. In this work I have found very little help
from earUer writers. The received story seems to be taken for
granted by EngUsh writers, almost without glancing at the other.
Gibbon, well as he knew the slight value of the evidence of Procopius
in such a case, not only accepts the story, but hardly notices the
evidence of the annaUsts at all.^ It is different with foreign writers.
From Euinart ® and Tillemont to * the last German book,' which, as
far as I know, is that of Dr. Albert Giildenpenning,^ I have nothing
to complain of in the way of neglect of the authors on whom I have
to ground my story. The excellent Tillemont, as ever in both his
works,^® never passes by a fact, never misses a reference. The whole
materials, or the way to them, are open before us in his pages, but
it is not lacking in respect to our venerable guide to say that they
are not dealt with in a critical spirit. And I cannot say that
modem German writers have greatly advanced on the old French
ecclesiastical writers. All that I have seen who take any notice of
the matter seem to think, with Tillemont, that they are bound to
believe both Procopius and the annalists, and to force the two into
some kind of agreement. I have not picked up very much from
writers hke Dahn " and Wietersheim,*^ who come to the story casu-
ally as part of something much longer. A short monograph by
Sievers ^^ has helped me to one or two points and references, and
the slight mention of the matter by Giildenpenning reveals to me
the existence of a German writer, whose book I have not seen — it
is not to be found in the Bodleian — but who, I suspect, may to
Procopius. Aetius and Boniface are the last of ol ird\ai 'Vwfuuot, a class different from
both the local and the oecumenical Tnfjuuoi of his own time.
' Gap. xziiL vol. vi. 8 et seqq, ed. Milman.
" Historia Persecutionis VandaliccB. Paris, 1694.
* Oeschichte des ostrGmischen Reiches unter den Kaisem Arcadvus und TheodosiU9
IL Von Dr. Albert Giildenpenning. Halle, 1885.
"Both the Histoire des Empereurs, vol. vi. Paris, 1738, and the M^moires pottr
aervir d VHistoire EccUsiastique des six premiers sUcles, voL xiii. (that devoted to
Saint Augustine). Paris, 1710.
** KOnige der Qermanent v. 74.
" Oesch4chte der Volkerwandertmg, voL ii. 188, 189.
" Studien zur Oeschichte der rOmischen Kaiser. Berlin, 1870,. p. 464 et tU,
Digitized by
Google
424 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
some extent have forestalled me. His name is Hansen, and he
published a discourse on Aetius at Dorpat in 1846 J^ It is always
hard to say anything which some German scholar has not said
before one ; but if it should turn out that Dr. Hansen and I have,
at forty years interval, come independently to the same results,
there will be nothing for either to complain of.
To compare then our two men, we know much more of the early
life of Aetius than we do of that of Boniface, but Boniface is the
first to appear as a direct actor in history. In the war with Ataulf
in Gaul, the war in which Constantius holds the first place on the
Eoman side, Boniface appears as the hero of a single exploit, and
as the object of the highest praise from one of our best authorities
for the time. If the narrative of Olympiodoros were less fragmen-
tary, we might better know how it came about that, when Ataulf
was besieging MassaUa in the year 412, it was Boniface, the noble
Boniface, who came to its defence, who with his own hand smote
the Gothic king well nigh to death, who made him withdraw to his
camp and raise the siege, and remained himself to receive the
thanks and praise of the rescued city.^* This exploit stands by itself ;
ten years later we hear of him again in a character which more
directly connects itself with our present subject. In 422 an expedi-
tion is fitting out in Italy against the Vandals in Spain, of which
Castinus, the consul of two years later, is the commander. We
read in somewhat dark language how Castinus, by misconduct of
some kind, by unreasonable and wrongful orders, hindered Boniface,
the man so renowned for warlike skill, from taking a share in the
enterprise, how Boniface refused to follow such a leader, one so
proud and quarrelsome, how he suddenly sailed from Portus to
A&ica, and how this dispute between the generals was the beginning
of great evils to the commonwealth.^^ Another annaUst tells us of
the failure of Castinus in his Spanish campaign ; he says nothing
directly of any relations between Castinus and Boniface, but a few
significant words follow, the force of which can hardly be given
except in the original — Bonifacius palatium deserens Africam in-
vadiV This last word is emphatic and notable ; it is then, ahd
" Gfddenpenning, 280.
^ Olymp. 456. Ataulf besieges Massalia, Ma wXtiytls, Born^rlov rod ytphoiordrov
fiaX6rros, jccU fL6\ts rhv ddi^arov Zuupvyitv, tls riu obctltu iw^x^P^^* VKiiwks^ rV v^Xiy iv
€{f$vfil^ Xnrity, jcal 8i* hralvwv jcal ^b^fdas woiovfidtniv Born^drior, Olympioddros speaks
with special admiration of Boniface.
*• Prosper. Honorio XIII et Theodosio X Coss. Hoc tempore exercUus ad
Hispaniae contra Vandalos missus esU cui Castinus dux fuU, qui Bonifacium tnrum
beUicis artibus prcBclarum, inepto et injurioso imperio a& ea^peditiofUs sua sodetate
averUt. Nam ills perictdosum sibi atque indignum ratus eum sequi quern discordem
Muperbientemque expertus esset^ celeriter se ad portum UrbiSt atque inde ad Africam
proripoit, idque reipubliccB multorum laborum initiumfuit.
*^ Idatins, xxvii. Honorii, ^.d. 421.
Digitized by
Google
1887 AETIUS AND BONIFACE 425
long after,*® a kind of technical term for unjust or unlawful occupa-
tion of anything, from a crown downwards. It seems plain that
Boniface did not go on the enterprise on which we must suppose
that Valentinian or Placidius had sent him, that he left Eavenna and
Italy in anger, and, if the entry stood by itself, we should be tempted
to infer that he seized on Africa as tyrant, that he began in short
the same part that Constantine played a few years before in Britain,
Gaul, and Spain. His conduct directly after shows that this can
hardly be; but the words of both annalists read as if he took
possession of the government of Africa when the imperial orders
would have sent him elsewhere. We are left to make out from these
dark hints whether Boniface was already in command in Africa,
and was summoned thence to Eavenna to take part in the imperial
counsels and in the Spanish expedition, or whether, according, as
we have seen, to the words of one chronicler, he in the strict sense
seized on Africa. The former explanation fits in better with his
later conduct; but the use of so strong a word as invadit must
not be forgotten. It is at least hardly consistent with the picture
which some draw of Boniface as a model of unswerving loyalty.
One thing is clear, namely that, at whatever time and by. what-
ever means Boniface obtained the chief command in Africa, he
won the highest reputation by his conduct there, as he had already
done at some time when he was in the same land in an inferior
military rank. As a simple tribune, in command of a few allied troops,
he had, so his correspondent Saint Augustine witnesses, successfully
beaten back the invasions of the barbarians.*^ Olympiodoros paints
his picture with glowing enthusiasm. Boniface is a hero, foremost in
many strifes with many barbarians ; ready alike to act with few, with
many, or with his own single arm, he had cleared Africa of many
enemies of various races.^ He loved right and hated greediness ;
the same tale is told of him which is told of Sultan Mahmoud ; a
soldier of his army had taken possession of the house and wife of
a countryman ; the injured man makes his moan to Boniface ; the
avenger speeds by night to the farm seven^ty stadia off, and is able the
next day to give the head of the adulterer to his suppliant.** The
state of things in the African province must have needed reform,
when wrong could be punished only in this sultan-like fashion;
still it was something to have a general who was ready to protect the
'* I need not say that invadere, invasio, are among the oommonest Domesday
phrases for onlawfol occupation of every kind. So regrmm invasit is the set Norman
phrase for the accession of Harold.
'* Aug. Ep. 70, ad Bon. Bonifacius . . . tribumis cum pauds fcBderatis omnes
ipsas gentes [Afros barbaroa] expugnando et terrendo pacaverat
** Olymp. 468. Botnt^drios Mip j)k ijfwXKhs jcol Kar^ iroXX&v iro?i\dKis $apfidp»y
4p(<rrcvcr, &AXotc ftir trhv 6\lyots iw^px^fifvos, &\Aotc Zk kcX ffhv wXtfotriw, 4¥iAt€ Z\ kolL
fioyofAax&y, «cal kwK&s ^Iwtiif, irarrl rpAw^ iroAXvv fiapfidpwv fcal Zwp6p«t¥ iOvuv &ir4AAa|c iH^k
" lb.
Digitized by
Google
426 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
provincial against the soldier in any way. For all this picture of
Boniface we have no date ; ^* as a time came when his administra-
tion in Africa ceased to deserve this unqualij&ed praise, we may
conceive that this his most brilliant time came before, or at least did
not last long after, the next time when we hear of any action of
his that can be assigned to any definite consulship. This comes in
424, when we find Boniface in Africa, resisting the- claims of John
to the Western throne. In the absence of any direct hint that he
was seeking the tyranny for himself, we must suppose that he was
avowedly supporting the rights of the Theodosian house ; yet the
language of our one authority is very remarkable. Its tone is more
favourable to John than to Boniface, and Boniface's possession of
Africa is again marked by a word which might suggest doubts as
to the full legitimacy of his position.^
We are now landed in a series of events in which Boniface,
Castinus, and Aetius all take their share. But with regard to
Aetius this time is a more marked epoch than it is with regard to
either of the others. Boniface and Castinus have already appeared
in Western annals ; this is the first time that they mention Aetius.
In truth it is now that, at any rate in the West, his strictly historic
action begins ; we may therefore now put together such an account
of his career up to this point as many, though scattered, notices
enable us to do. Aetius was the son of Gaudentius,^* a chief man
in the Eoman province of Scythia, the modern Dobrutscha, at the
mouth of the Danube. His mother, whose name is not given, was
of Italian birth, wealthy, and sprung of a noble stock. The name
of their son might point to Greek tastes in one or the other parent ;
one almost wonders that no one seems to have played on a name
so fitted for the chieftain who bore the eagles of the Western Eome
to the last and among the greatest of .her victories. The son of
Gaudentius and his Eoman wife was born at Dorostonon on the
Danube, the strong town famous in later wars, in one age as Dory-
stolon, in another as Silistria. Aetius was thus a native of the lands
watered by the great Illyrian river, but he was born too far down its
course to rank as a countryman of the great Illyrian emperors of
an earlier time.^ We are able to trace Gaudentius as holding a high
^ Tillemont (M&m, Eccl. xiii. 712) fixes these early deeds of Boniface to about the
year 417. He certainly had a great military reputation as early as 422.
" Prosper. Castino et Victore Coss, TheodositM Valentinianum amUcB stUB filium
CcBsarem facU, et cum Augusta tnatre sua ad recipiendum occidentale mittitimperium,
quo tempore Joannes^ dum Africam^ quam Bonifacius obtinebat, heUo reposcit, ad
defensicnem sm inflrmior foetus est,
** Renatus Frigeridus ap. Greg. Tor. ii. 8. Qattdentvus pater, Scydce prouitUuB
primoris loci . . . mater Jtala, nobiUs ac locuplez fcemina, I suppose that, by
putting this notice and that of Jordanis together, we get to the statement in the text.
< Itala ' can hardly be a proper name.
** Jordanis, Get 34. . Aetius patricms . . . fortissimorum Moesium stitpe pro^
genitus in Dorostorena civitate apatre Oaudentio, labores bellieos tolerans,reipubKca
Digitized by
Google
1887 AETIUS AND BONIFACE 427
command in Africa, and as playing the part of a zealous Christian by
helping in the destruction of pagan temples in that province.^
And his importance is shown by the way in which his son, in child-
hood and youth, seems to be specially chosen as a hostage in
actions between the emperor and the barbaric powers. He was for
three years a hostage with Alaric ; at a later time, it would seem,
the Gothic king again asked for him in that character, but was
refused by Honorius. At another time he was a hostage with the
Huns.^ In these sojourns among strangers, he learned the ways
of those among whom he dwelt ; he gained a strong personal in-
fluence over them ; he learned alike how to overcome them as
enemies of the empire and how to make use of them in the internal
politics of the empire. He had a wife of whom we hear much,
though her name is not recorded, and two sons, Carpilio and Gau-
dentius, of whom Carpilio was, like his father, a hostage with the
Huns.^ Gaudentius and his nameless mother connect themselves
more directly with the thread of the story. In one account, as
Gaudentius is the grandson of an elder Gaudentius, so is Carpilio
the grandson of an elder Carpilio. That is, the wife of Aetius was
the daughter of Carpilio.^ It is hard to reconcile the bit of prose
which helps us to this name, which can hardly be the name of a
Goth, with the high-flowing verses of two poets in which the wife
of Aetius appears as the daughter of Gothic kings and heroes, as
grudging that she is herself shut out from her ancestral kingship,
and as striving to make up for the loss by raising her son Gau-
dentius to the rank of a Koman Augustus.'® It is hard to see the
i^erce and domineering woman of this picture in another scene
BomancB singulariter natus, qui superbam Suavorum Francorumque [he does not
add Oothorum] barbaHem immensis ckBdibus servire Romano imperio coegisseL The
name of the place takes endless forms ; as Dorystolon it was famous in the tenth
century and as Silistria in the nineteenth, in two opposite ways.
** In Cod. Theod, zi. 17, 8, we find Qavdentiua vir clarissimua comes Africa,
When we remember how the father of Paulinus of Pella was moved about, there is
nothing wonderful in finding the same man employed in all parts of the world.
Augustine (Civ. Dei, zviiL 54, 1) records the fact, and dates it minutely.
Consule Mallio Theodoro (jld, 399) ... in civitate notissima et eminentisaima
Carthagine Africce Oaudentius et Joviue comites imperatoris Honorii, quarto decitno
Kalendas Aprilis faUorum deorum templa everterunt et simulacra fregerunt. This
would surely be too much for one day's work ; perhaps the date only marks the
beginning.
^ Benatus ap. Greg. Tur. ii. 8. Aetius a puero prcetorianust tribus atmis Alarici
obsessus (aL obses), dehmc Chunorum, In Z6simos, vi. 36, Alario asks Xafititf dfiiipovs
'A^TioK K(d 'Icttroyo, rhtf fihtf *lo$lov y^y6fi9tfou iralSa, rhu 8i Tavdcrr^ov. Honorius refuses.
This seems (Tillemont, vL 180) to come between the two times when he was
hostage.
« Prisons, 179. Cassiod. Var, i. 4. » Aetius is CarpUionis gener in Renatus.
** Schwerlich gehtSrte des AHius Gattin, alUrdings eine gothische Filrstentochter,
dem Hause des Theoderich an, says Dahn, K, G. v. 74. The elder Carpilio was hardly
a Gk>thio prince ; yet in Merobaudes' poem on the birthday of one of the sons (iv. 15),
his daughter is thus brought in :
Digitized by
Google
428 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
where the wife of Aetius is painted as a saintly matron whose prayers
have such power with the saints that heaven can never refuse victory
to her husband.^* These stories, to one at least of which we shall
come again, belong to the later years of the life of Aetius ; we are
now concerned with his earlier deeds. It is possible that, far away
as his birthplace was from both Gaul and Africa, his connexion
both with the land which was to be the special scene of his glory
and with the land whose destiny he is said to have ruled from a
distance began early. We have seen the father of Aetius in Africa ;
one mention of himself tells us that Gaudentius, count and magister
militum, was slain, at some time not stated, in a military outbreak
in GauL^* We should have been glad of a date ; but the first mention
of Aetius in any recorded year sets him before us in quite another
quarter, but in one where one might more naturally look for a notice
of the Eoman Scythia than either in Africa or in Gaul. Born as
he was east of Hadria, we first hear of Aetius in his own peninsula
as praefect of Constantinople in the consulship of Maximus and
Plintha. And he left a name behind him in the Eastern Bome, for
two years later the cistern of Aetius was built.^ A tale is told how
the prsefect Aetius hardly escaped death from a murderous dagger
under circumstances which remind us of some of the bloody scenes
of Frankish history in the next century. The story runs that, on
one Sunday, as the prsBfect was going in state to the great church,
the old Saint Sophia, an old man named Kyriakos — could the
name be suggested by the day ? — pretending to present a petition,
Adsit cum socio parente conjunx,
Conjunx non levibus canenda Musis,
Heroum suholes^ propago regum,
Cujus gloria feminam superstat.
This livida cofy'uz of Aetius plays a wonderful part in Sidonius* Panegyric on
Majorian (126-274), pouring forth hexameters boiling over with Greek legendary
references enough to fill a Classical Dictionary. Her name is not given, but She
clearly claims a kingly Gothic descent. The most important passage is 203-6.
Quid faciam infeUx f gnato qucs regna parabo,
Exclusa sceptris GeticiSj respublica si me
PrcBterit, et parvus super hoc OaudenUus hv^us
Calcaturfatis?
Hujus = Majorianu Gaudentius, called after the grandfather on the father's side,
would actually be the elder son. How are we to reconcile the two poets with the prose
writer ? If a Goth could be called Garpilio, there would be no difficulty.
*^ See the story in Greg. Tur. ii. 7. Aetius was fated to die, but she wrestled with
Saint Peter and overcame fate. One thinks of Apollo and the Moirai on behalf of
CrcBsus.
** This is in the chronicle known (somewhat strangely) as Prosper Tiro, that
which looks so carefully after British affairs. In recording the reign of the tyrant
John, it runs: Aetius, Oaudentii comOis [he is magister equUum in Benatus] a
militibus in Qalliis occisi filius, cum Chunnis Joanni opem laturus ItaUam
ingreditur.
" Maroellinus, 421. Cistema Aetii constructa est See Codinus, p. 29. Bandori
Const. Christ. 80.
Digitized by
Google
1887 AETIUS AND BONIFACE 429
struck at him with his hidden weapon, but prevailed no further
than to rend his official garments, his Eoman toga and pcenula,^
This Eastern stage of the hfe of Aetius seems to be overlooked by
all modern wi'iters save one or two who somewhat Ughtly assume
that an Aetius at Constantinople must be a different person from the
Aetius of Eavenna, Aries, and Eome.^ It is hard to see why) in
an age when men were moved so freely over all parts of the Eoman
world, and in the case of a man whose birth and parentage connected
him first of all with the East. We know not whether the praBfect-
ship of Aetius at Constantinople came before or after his father's
murder in Gaul. Four years later we find him in Italy, as a chief
suppporter and officer of the ruler who had supplanted the Theo-
dosian house in the West.
The action of Aetius at this time comes from the best authorities
that we have, and one of them takes the opportunity to paint his
portrait at length. The picture is to be found in one of those
precious fragments of writers older than his own day which have
been preserved to us by Gregory of Auvergne and Tours. Well
shaped, of middle height, with a frame, as it is put, neither weak
nor burthensome, active in mind, strong in every limb, skilled in
every exercise of war, cunning to guide the horse, to use alike the
arrow and the javelin, undaunted in danger, bearing up under
hunger, thirst, and watching — to Frigeridus at least he seemed no
less admirable in peace than in war. For he was moreover one
who sought what was just and whom no seducer could beguile from
his just purpose; he was free from the lust of gain, and even,
according to the teaching of the new creed of Eome, patient under
wrong.^ So he seemed to Gaulish admirers, who seem not to
have looked on his conduct at this time as blameworthy. The long
and feeble reign of Honorius was drawing to its end, when his last
caprice of all, the caprice of hatred following on extravagant fond-
** See Oothofred's Chronology of the Theodosian Ck)de, i. clxv. The consuls are
Monaxius and Plintha. In their consalship the Paschal Chronicle (i. 574) places the
attempt on Aetius. M Tointav r&v indruv Tifi4p<^ irvpicucp tl<r9\66yros *A«t/ow iitdpxov
ir6\tMS furhi rov cxfifMros 4u t{) fi€yd\'p iKKX.r\<rl(f firivl iteptrup irp6 (* KaXdyHav fiapriav
M. r^ c&|4fAcvoy ahrhv i,ire\0iiy K\ifi4vra 4v r^ iraKarrl^^ Kvpuucds ris y^pwv $a\^v fxdxatpeiy
fuyd\'nv tls x^V^^s &<rcaf€l XlfitWov ain^ itpo(T<p4p<av^ KKpovffty ain^ Karh rod ^t^iov ftipovs
rov ffT'fiBovs, &<rr€ rh irty6\ioy avrov Kcd r^v r6yav rpridrjyat. One is reminded of the slaying
of Cffisar, also of Eitchie Moniplies presenting his ' sifflication ' to James Sixth and
First.
*^ So Sievers (p. 456) half hints that the prssfect of Constantinople was not our
Aetius. But why ?
** Ken. Frig. Medii corporis^ virilis habitudinis, decenter formatm, quo neque
inflrmitudini esset neque oneri, animo alacer^ membris vegitus, equ^ prumppissim/us,
sagittarum jactu peritus, contu impiger, bellis aptissimus, pacts artibus Celebris^
nulUus avariticBt minmuB cupiditatis, bonis animi prcBditus, ne impiUsoribus quidem
prams ab instituto suo devianst ivjuriarum patientissimusy laboris adpeUns^ inpavidus
periculorunit famiSf sitis, vigiliarum tolerantissimus, Cui ab meunte atate prcedictum
liquety quantcB potentuB fatis destinaretur, temporibus suis locisque celebrandus.
Digitized by
Google
480 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
neBS, sent away his sister Placidia, now the widow of her Boman
and imperial husband, with her son, the nobilissimus ^ Valentinian,
to seek shelter at Constantinople with her nephew Theodosius.
Their absence left the Theodosian house without a representative
in Italy. The Western throne was open to any adventurer, and it
was seized, not by any mihtary chief, but by the civilian John, chief
of the notaries. His accession or election seems to have been
peaceful and popular, and our only personal portrait of him, drawn
to be sure at a later time, is singularly favourable.^ But some
charged him with Arianism, and his successful rivals in their legis-
lation represent him as trampling on the privileges of the clergy,
much like our Henry 11.^^ He was acknowledged in Italy, Gaul,
and Spain ; that he was not acknowledged in Africa we have already
seen.*® Not a soldier himself, he had men of war at his side. His
cause was maintained by the magister mUitum Castinus, whom we
have heard of as the enemy of Boniface.*^ Aetius was on the same
side, count of the domestics and holding the civil office of cura pa-
lata under the new sovereign of the West. This last was the office
which in a later form became curopalates, the special guardian of
the august dwelling-place and its building.** But between Aetius
** See Clinton in an. 424. Olympioddros makes him be created Nobilissimus
(Sw$t\i<r<nfMs) by Theodosius. Philostorgios (xii. 12) has him abready created
iwi^cafitrraros, which mast mean the same, by Honorias.
** His panegyrist is no other than Procopias {Bell, Vand. i. 8) who is copied by
Sooidas (*I«^n}f) ; he makes, however, a strange mistake as to the length of his
reign as well as in the description of his calling, ol iy *?^fijf fiaffi\4m aibXris r&v rtPa
Ktlrji (TTparwr&v, *lo9dtnrriy 6uofxa, ficuri\4a aipovyraL $r 8^ oZros Mip irp^6s re icai
(vrcVc«5 fJ ijicay icat iperris fierairoulffOai i^twiffrdfityos • ir4pT9 yovy Iny r^y rvpayylha
tx^^ f(erp(«5 i^Jtyiiffaro^ ica2 oi^rc roii ^lafidWovtrt rify iucoiiy dv^irxcr olh'€ <p6yoy Hucoy
tlfryda'aro kx^y 7c cTvai oi^« xp^l*^'^^^ iul>aip4(ru M6€to • is 8i $ap$dpovs oi9h^ 5ri koI
Tpa^ai oT6s T« iyeydytif iir^t ol rk 4k Bv^avrlov iro\4fjua ^y. We shall soon learn to
distrust Procopius for times so long before his own day ; but his picture of John seems
rather to fall in with one or two incidental notices. The election spoken of is more
likely to have happened at Bavenna than at Bome ; but the curious anecdote pre-
served by Olympioddros (46S, see Hodgkin, i.) looks as if he was not disliked. loM(m}t
ris ahO^yHicas rvpayytt * ^' oZ ical rris hfof^fftws y€yofi4yfis, 4f^0fi £<nrep i!w6 rty^s
wof^fftvs TpoaxO^yf * irfirrci, ob or^icfi.* koI rh wk^Oos, &<nctp itya\6oyrts iwl rh ^v^hf,
i.ya/^t»yovffi^ * <rr^irci, od irdrrfi,' What is the exact force of adOfrr^o-oj ?
** Cod, Theod, zvi. Tit iL 47 (vi. 94). Privilegia eeclesiarum omnium qua sctculo
nostro tyrawnus in/vaderatj prona devotione revocamus, , . . Clericos eUam quos
indiscretim ad sacidares judices debere dud infaustus iXU prcBSumptor dixerat,
episcopali audienticB reservamus. See Tillemont, Hist, des Emp, vi. 184. One thinks
of the Constitutions of Clarendon.
«• See note 23.
^* Prosper, 423. H<morius moritur, et regnum ejus Joannes occupaty connivenU, ut
putabaturt CastinOt qui exercitui magister militum prafrnt^ and in 425 on the defeat
of John, Castinus in exsilittm actus esty quia mdebatur Joannem sine conniventia
ipsius regnum rumpoiuisse assumere. He had just before, in 422, said that Castinus
Bonifacium virum bellicis artibus prcBclarum, inepto et iiyurioso imperio a& expedi-
tionis stUB societate avertit, dbc,
^ So Benatus. Ex comite domesticorum et Johannis cura palatU, See Ducange
in Cura, His Formula is given by Cassiodorus, viii. 15. This seems to be the Cos-
trensis sacripalatU of the NoUtiay i. 4, 47. See Giildenpenning, 281.
Digitized by
Google
1887 AETIUS AND BONIFACE 481
and Boniface, though they are on opposite sides, there is no sign
of any direct hostility. The leader of the enterprise against Boni-
face in Africa may have been the Goth Sigisvult; ^ it certainly was
not Aetius. For he was sent on an errand in quite an opposite
direction. Marked out for such a mission by his knowledge of the
barbarians and by his influence among them, he was sent to bring
a Hunnish force to the help of John.^^
This is the earliest act that is distinctly recorded in the Western
career, in the military career, of the man whose highest renown is
to have been the first to check the advance of Attila. It is a strange
beginning, but the bringing in of barbarian allies had Jong been
too common to be looked on with any special horror, and Hunnish
mercenaries had been often employed before and were often em-
ployed after. The story sets Aetius before us as wonderfully
skilful in the management of Bomans and barbarians alike, but
he did Uttle for the prince whose cause he had taken up. Jo-
hannes Augustus was premature. So, though less glaringly, was
Johannes the Boman consul of the next year. There was a consul
John thirty-two years later : ** but the first acknowledged imperial
bearer of the name of the Baptist and the Evangelist was the
Armenian hero of the tenth century, the renowned John Tzimiskes.
In the imperial fasti of the West no name of that class found a place
till the House of Habsburg favoured the world with an august
Matthias and two august Josephs. The house of Theodosius, re-
presented by Placidia Augusta and her son, had not lost all hold on
the sympathies of the West. The present Theodosius, the ruler of
the East, now in loyal eyes sole emperor, sent his aunt and the boy
Valentinian, now proclahned Caesar, to dislodge the tyrant John by
the arms of Ardaburius and his son Aspar.*^ The details of his
overthrow do not directly touch the career of Aetius ; but we are
carried on towards our later narrative when we see Aquileia playing
for the last time the part of one of the great cities of the earth. It
was in its hippodrome that John paid the cruel forfeit of less than
two years dominion.^^ Bavenna, which had maintained his cause,
^ Prosper Tiro places here the entry SiffismUdus ad Africam contra Bonifacium
properavit, as if Sigisvnlt had been sent on behalf of John. Bat one cannot help
thinking that this is a confusion with his later expedition. I know not whether Migne's
edition has any anthority for the form given to his name, ' SigisYoltdeos/ which savoors
rather of an African, either Catholic or Donatist, than of an Arian Gk>th. Elsewhere
he is Sigisvnltos or SigisvnUas. Wald^ we may suppose, is the true ending.
** This is most strongly brought up by Benatus. Johannes Aetium^ id temporu
curam palatiif cum ingenti awri pondere ad Chtmos transmittit, notus sibi obsidaka
mi tempore et famiHoH amicida^ devinctoa,
^ Johannes and Veranes are consuls in 456.
** This story is told by Philostorgios, zii 13. S6krat^, viL 23, 26. Olympio-
d6ros, 471.
*' Philost. xii. 13. *l»dfnnijs ... els 'AiroAijtov ^mr^/iircrai, ic&icct t^k 8«{W irpo-
<iarf(i|9c2s, c7ra koX t^s icc^kkX^s inror^fxytrai, Procopius (BeU. Vand, L 3) adds some
Digitized by
Google
432 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
became, after a passing sack, the dwelling-place in life and death of
the restored Augusta; but it was in Eome itself that the third
Valentinian, the seven years old son of the third Constantius, was
proclaimed Augustus by the authority of his Eastern colleague.**
Three days after the death of John, Aetius came with 60,000 Huns
to his support. A battle took place between the new comers and
the forces of Valentinian under the command of Aspar, in which
many were slain on both sides. An agreement followed ; Aetius
entered the service of Placidia and Valentinian with the rank of
count. He had influence enough with his barbarian following to
persuade them to go back on receiving what, after an analogy in
our own history, we may call a Hungeld^^ Perhaps they also told
at home what a city Aquileia would be for some lucky band of Huns
to plunder or to destroy.
The sphere of action of Aetius is now at once changed to Gaul.
Enlisted in the service of Placidia and Valentinian, he sets forth to
establish the dominion of his sovereigns alike against disaffected
Eomans, of whom we see some signs, against the West-Goth who
threatened Aries, and in course of time against perhaps every bar-
barian enemy or rebel who had made a settlement in Gaul or was
striving either to settle or to destroy. But this his purely Gaulish
and miUtftry career will be best dealt with elsewhere ; no one has
brought that side of him into connexion with his alleged enmity to
Boniface or with political intrigues of any kind. Of the undoubted
enemies of Boniface one was now set aside from his rank and
another was put in his place. Of the two chief supporters of John,
Aetius had won the favour of the victorious side ; Castinus was less
lucky. He was sent into banishment ; the reason assigned is that
it seemed that John could not have assumed the empire without
his consent.*® The wording is remarkable; it might imply that
the partisanship of Castinus was less open than that of Aetius. If
so, the secret plotters fared, and perhaps justly, worse than the
avowed enemy who had led the Huns to the attack of the armies of
details. (&vra OhaX^vrtutavhs ^Iwdyrriv Aa/3cby fv rt r^ ^Aievkriias iiriro9pOfii<p r^y Mpar
rauv x^P^^^ ikwoKoir4vra titniyeu iir6fiirtvff4 re 6y<)f 6xo^fi*Poy, icaX iroAA^ ^^^ '''^y ^^
fficrivris iyravOa irMvra t€ ical iicovo-ovra tKruvw, The importanoe of Salona is as
marked in the story as that of Aquileia.
** This is told in various ways, but that the admission to the rank of Augustus
was at Bome, is plain from Olympioddros. It seems to hare been the last fact that he
recoiled. So Idatius.
<»^'Our best account is Philostorgios, xii. 14. *A4tios 6 ^oarparriyhs *lwdytfov
rod rvpdyyov, ^ler^ rptti ^iiipas rris ixtlyov TfAcirr^y, $apfidpous Ayutf fuoBvrohs tls
(^X^^^^f ifopayif^o* ' «oi ffVfiirXoKris a^ov rt icol rav vepl rhp "Ktnrapa ytytyrifi^tnis, <p6vos
iKar4pw0fv iji^vv iroXis ' Ixf tra (rvop9iis 6 *A4rios rlBtrat irphs U?\xuct9lay koX OvaXtyriuuitfhv^
Koi r^y rod K6firiros i^lay \afifidptiy Kal ol fidp$apot XP^^W icaraB4fi9¥0i r^v hpy^v icol rk
^drXa, dfi^ipovs rt Wvrcj Kcd rh m(rrii \a$6pr€Sf €ij rii oUtTa IjBri &ircxc^pi70'ai'. This is
very like a Danegeld. So Prosper, data vetiia Actio, quod Hunni quos per ipsum
Joannes acdverat ejusdem'studio ad propria reverei sunt,
^ See above, note 41.
Digitized by
Google
1887 AETIUS AND BONIFACE 488
Yalentinian. Gastinus now vanishes from the story. His office
was seemingly bestowed on a certain Felix, whom we hear of as
magister militum in the next year. To this man's power of mischief
justice has clearly not been done, and it looks very much as if some
of his actions, especially his dealings with Boniface, had been
transferred to Aetius. No process could be more natural in the
next age, when Aetius was still a great name, but when Felix was
doubtless forgotten. His first recorded act has nothing to do with
either Boniface or Aetius. He is charged with the deaths of
Patroclus bishop of Aries and of Titus, a holy deacon at Eome,
who is said to have been killed by the practice of Felix while he
was in the act of giving alms to the poor.*^ The Roman tale is
obscure ; the Gaulish one is of some importance in Gaulish history,
and as such I hope to speak of it elsewhere. Neither of them
throws any light on the general story, but both — even if they were
only suspicions — throw some light on the character of Felix. In
the next year Felix comes into the very thick of the main story,
and we must look back for a moment at the position of Boniface.
We have seen that he was perhaps in command in Africa before
the expedition of Gastinus to Spain in 422, that he certainly was in
command there after he had refused to share in that expedition,
but whether by a perfectly regular appointment is not quite clear.*^
We have seen also the way in which Africa under Boniface held out
against John. Still we cannot quite forget either the way in which
his position in Africa has already been spoken of, or the fact, to
which we shall come presently, that the next time we hear of him
he is in distinct, perhaps armed, opposition to the emperor's orders.
Meanwhile he had gone on for a season winning great glory by his
administration of his province, and his successful defence of it
against native African marauders. The words of his correspondent
Saint Augustine here come happily in to explain the vaguer entries
of the annahst, and to make us understand their connexion with the
entry that follows. In the annals Boniface does great exploits and
wins great glory, and is presently dealt with as a rebel.** The
** Prosper (426), after the death of Patroclas, adds ct^ua IFeUois] impuUu
creditus est etiam TOais diaconus vvr scmctua Bomce pectmiaa patiperibui disMbuens
ifUeremptus,
^' See above, note 18.
** Prosper, 427. Hierio et Ardabwre coss. Bomfacio, cfUQUS potentia gloriaque
intra Africam (mgebatur, beUum ad arbitrium FeUoiSt gwLa ad ItaUam venire
a^mtieratj ptibUco namme Ulatum est. Prosper here seems to speak admiringly of
Boniface ; yet we most remember his earlier language about mvadit and obHn^)ai ;
it is even possible that the word poterUia looks the same way. At any rate the
increasing power and glory of a snbjeot were in those days an unavoidable objeot of
jealousy to the prince. Anyhow it is droll when Giildenpenning (280) eztola
Bonifadus as the ever-loyal adherent of Placidia through all difficulties. This writer,
like the good old Tillemont, does not shirk the annalists, bat tries to believe them and
the legend too.
VOL. n. — NO. vn. f p
Digitized by
Google
/^
484 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
words of Augustine " give us the key : we see that, if Boniface had
gained great glory, he had deservedly lost it, and had become an
object of reasonable suspicion at court. From the same source we
learn his exact official rank at this time; he was count of the
domestics and count of Africa. But the count, at any rate at the
time of Augustine's letter, was less active than the tribune had been
in times past. At the time of his appointment all men had hoped
that under his government Africa would again become a peaceful
Eoman land, with its native tribes again subjects and tributaries of
the empire. Now all this had changed ; the barbarians took heart ;
they advanced, they laid waste lands which they had never before
touched. The discourse is wholly about native Africans. There is
not a word which can have any possible reference to the Vandals ;
it was clearly written before the coming of the Vandals was
thought of. The whole correspondence between the saint and
the count is of deep personal and ecclesiastical interest. Boni-
face is set before us as a dear friend of Augustine, as at one
time a man of scrupulous life and religious zeal, full of interest in
theological subjects, on which he poses his illustrious friend with
hard questions. But he had fallen away &om his personal as well
as from his official duties. By a story exactly the reverse of that
of our own Simon, he had vowed chastity after the death of his
wife, but he was now not only married again to a rich lady named
Pelagia, but he had allowed his child to receive Arian baptism, and
he was further suspected of living with mistresses. So busy was
he with his own affairs that he had allowed Africa to be overrun by
Africans. For all these faults both as a Christian man and as a
^* Ang. ep. 220 (or 70), ad Bon. {Op, ii. 814, ed. Bened.). Quid autem dicam de veuta-
tione Africa^ quam fadunt Afri barbari resistenU nullOf dam tu talibtts tuis necessUa-
tibus occuparisj nee aMqmd ordinas unde ista calamitas avertatur 9 Quis autem ere-
derett quis Hmeret, BorUfado domesticorum et Africa comite in Africa constUuio eum
tarn magno exercUu et potestate . . . nunc tantum fudsse barbaros auewoa, tantum
progressurosy tanta vastaturos, tanta raptures, tanta loca quce plena popuUs fuerant
deserta facturos f Qui non dicebant quandocumque tu comitivam sumeres potestatem,
Afros barbaros, non solum domitos, sed etiam tributarios futuros Romance reipublica f
Et nunc quam in contraria versa sit spes honUnum vides, nee diutius hine tecum loqueU'
dum, quia plus ea tupotes cogitare quam nos dicere. It is not easy to see when Bonifaoe
was invested with the rank of count. Augustine's words might ahnost imply that all his
brilliant exploits had been done when he held no higher rank than that of tribune, and
that he had failed in his duty ever since his promotion. We might also suppose that he
had not been count very long when the letter was written. Now the letter must be
earlier than 428, the year of the coming of the Vandals. It is most naturally fixed to 427,
the time of the action of Felix against Boniface. If Boniface in that year was count,
but had not been count very long, the most natural time for his appointment would
be in 425, as the reward of his defence of Africa against John. This might fall in with
the several hints which suggest that there was something irregular about his
position in Africa at an earlier time. We may suppose that, whatever it was before, it
was legalized now, but that, as Augustine implies, the count fell away from the merits
of the tribune and thereby brought on himself the imperial censure which is implied
in the events of 427.
Digitized by
Google
1887 AETIUS AND BONIFACE 4S5
Boman commander, the saint sternly rebukes him and gives him
good advice in both characters. But he assuredly in no way re-
proves him for treasonable dealings with Gaiseric, which, if they
ever happened at all, certainly had not happened then.'^
There are one or two other points in the letter that may be
noticed. Boniface had been, at some stage or other, anxious to
retire from the world, and to give himself wholly to rehgious duties.
He married his second wife in some country which was reached
from Africa by sea, and the voyage was one which he undertook by
imperial bidding.^ This and the fact that the lady seems to have
been an Arian might seem to point to Spain. But it is most unlikely
that a woman bearing the name of Pelagia should have been of
Vandal birth. Boniface may have been sent to Spain on many
unrecorded errands. What we cannot do is to connect such a
voyage with that expedition of Castinus when Boniface did not go
to Spain. Again Augustine, when rebuking Boniface for his neglect
of his military duties, makes Boniface answer that the fault is not
with him, but with those who had wronged him and made him an
evil return for his good service.*^ This doubtless points to the enmity
of Castinus and Felix. It might even suggest that the letter was
written at the very time of the expedition sent by Felix against
Boniface, a time not likely to be marked by vigorous action against
the native barbarians. But if Boniface had been in open rebelUon at
the time of the sending of the letter, surely Augustine would have
made some reference to that fact. It is far more likely that the
letter comes earlier, and that in the state of things which it describes
we see the explanation of what we read in the chronicles. We see
Boniface, from whatever cause, falling aside from his former excel-
lence, ghostly and worldly, and above all, what concerned the empire
more than his irregular marriage, grossly neglecting his duty as a
Eoman military commander in the province of Africa. There is no
direct mention of Castinus and Felix in the acknowledged letters of
Augustine; but there is a remarkable collection of short letters,
purporting to be exchanged between the bishop and the count, which
have been unanimously cast aside by Augustine's editors and com-
mentators. They are rejected, partly as inconsistent with the saint's
" See the earlier letter of Aagastine to Boniface, No. 185 or 50. In the very
weak article on Boniface in the Dictionary of Greek and Boman Biography by a late
popular writer, all this about the Africans is tamed into * bitter reproaches * for the
supposed dealings with Gaiseric In the Dictionary of Christian Biography no lay
Boniface is allowed ; the article on Augustine does not contain the name of Boniface,
but it does contain the astounding statement that Augustine died ' when the armies
of the Hima surrounded the city of Hippo.*
^ AU this comes out in letter 220. The most important passage is : Navigasti,
vaoremque duxistdj sed navigasse obedienticB fmt quam secundum apostolum debebas
sttbUmioribus potestatibus (ii. 813).
>' Ep. 220. Sed forte ad ea respondes illis hoc esse poHus imputandum qui te
laserunt, qui tuis officiosis virtuHbus nonparia sed contraria reddiderunt,
ff2
Digitized by
Google
486 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
style and manner, but partly also as inconsistent with the history
of the time. On the former charge the condemnation seems to rest
on good grounds.'^® There is an abruptness, a jerkiness in truth,
about the letters which is not in the manner of Augustine ; their
very shortness, when the subject supplied such an opportunity for
moralizing, is against them. Some of the expressions used are
hardly in character, and it has even been suggested that some of
, the expressions used are designed to advance certain ecclesiastical
theories. On the whole, we cannot accept the letters as genuine
writings of Augustine and Boniface. Still they are not without
value. The objection to them on historical grounds merely comes
to this, that whoever forged them followed the authentic story of
the annalists, and not the Procopian legend. He may even have
lived at the time and have written from his own knowledge. If so,
his witness is, Uke that of many a false charter, good on all points
save the one which he is trying to establish. Even if we place him
later, he at any rate made up his story from trustworthy sources or
from traditions consistent with them, and he is the only writer who
has done so. The invasion of Africa by the imperial troops sent
against Boniface is strongly brought out.^* Felix is not mentioned
by name, but he is clearly alluded to,^® and the name of Castinus
comes in more than once. If we trust the letters, he sought shelter
in Africa when he was banished from Italy in 425.^^ The shelter
may seem a strange one for the old enemy of Boniface, but we must
again remember the very doubtful position of Boniface in Africa.
He had defended that province against John ; but his earlier and
later relations to Honorius and Placidia are such as to make it pos-
** I have to thank Dr. Bright, who knows the writings of Augustine far better than
I do, for some most valuable hints on this side of the question.
*• In Appendix, ep. 4 (or 185), Augustine is made to say, with a clear reference to
the Arian Sigisvult: Africa lUus, ut audio, miles attigit transmarifvus, sed hujus
miKtis dttx a catholica veritate dissentiL Quid or em sicut oportet ignoro. Ah Italia
hosUs est publicus nuntiatus, contra victrida signa superbas erigens Jutstas. Pacem
inter vos fieri vellem si sHremplenvus quod ignoro, Adest quidem Africce olimparatum
in Italia helium, sed tamen non invideo, flU carissime, Romanice, Sed dico quod
sentio, Non dabit, dimnitate juvante, cathoUcus Jueretico terga, Tvx cordis intenHo
dirigatur ad Deum, rum militem timehis, non Gothum non Hunum»
^ Boniface, in answer (5 or 186), talks about qua adversus me tyrannus Ule ordu
namerit ac disponat, aU in a style of high orthodoxy.
*' App. 10 (or 191). Castinus iUe privatus ex consule vita mece ac nomimis, omni*
bus ut notum est, persecutor, p^ores committens ac fingens factiones, quasi mearum
a me gestarum immemor, donationvm (another reading is Edatium), Italia fugiens^
meis se in Africa defeimonihtu tradidit committendum. Augustine (11 or 192)
answers, Vir iUustrissimus Castintis sacramento se prodidit quod sit ah omni culpa
et errorihus alienus. Quern tihi, ut dicit, fcederatus Ule Sonia, adhuc te in pakUio
posito, falsis suggestionibus condtabat. AU this looks as if it referred to an earlier
time, to the banishment of Castinus in 425. And who is * Edatius ' ?— Aetius ? or
who ? But there is enough of likeness to the true story to suggest that there is, after
all, something in these letters, and that the stories about Gudila — a name hardly
likely to have been invented — may be worth examining.
Digitized by
Google
1887 AETIUS AND BONIFACE 487
sible that the fallen magister mUitum might expect that his own
offences towards Boniface might be thought less of than those of
the imperial government.
In any case we have the undoubted fact that, only two years
after the fall of John, Boniface was looked on at Bavenna as an
enemy of the empire. What was his offence ? It is easy to talk
about the intrigues of Aetius or of anybody else, but once put the
Procopian legend out of sight and the matter seems very plain.
Boniface, as his saintly friend witnesses, had grossly neglected his
duty, and he was called on to account for it. After Augustine's
letter it is really nothing wonderful if we read in the annals that
Boniface was summoned to Italy — that is, to Bavenna ; and that
when he refused to come, he was declared a pubUc enemy. But the
minister who directed this course, whether wise or fooUsh, was not
Aetius but Felix.^^ Of Aetius just at this moment there is no
mention at all ; a little while before and a little while after he is
carrying on his great career in Gaul.^ It is to be noted that at
this point the tone of the Aquitanian chronicler betrays perhaps a
feeling of sympathy with Boniface, certainly a feeling against Felix,
which would be natural enough after even the suspicion of the
deaths of Patroclus and Titus. But though Felix may have been a
bad and even a bloody minister, his first action against Boniface
was assuredly not taken without reason. The count of Africa lets
his province be harried by barbarians without resistance; he is
summoned to Bavenna to explain his conduct ; refusing to come, he
is declared an enemy of the republic. All this is plain enough ;
there is no mention of any action of Aetius ; there is no mention,
nor as yet any hint, of any dealings between Boniface and Gaiseric.
What we have as yet is a war carried on by the Eoman government
against a Eoman rebel. Three commanders are sent against Boni-
face ; one perhaps would have done the work better, as the three
disagreed. Two of them, Mavortius and Galbio, besiege Boniface
in some place not named. Their colleague Sinox enters into a
treasonable correspondence with Boniface, and by his arts the two
loyal commanders are killed. Then Boniface discovers Sinox in
some plot against himself, and puts him to death also. Another
commander, with the distinctly barbarian name of Sigisvult, a man
•* Prosper, 427. Hierio et Ardabure coss, BonifaciOj cujus potentia gloriaqtie int/ra
Africam augebatur, beUum ad arbitrium Felids, quia ad Italiam venire abnn&rat,
publico nomme UkUum est, diidbus Mavortio et Oalbione et Sinoce, Guldenpenmng
(283) knows the workings of the mind of Aetins as minutely as Angustine knew those
of Boniface; Aetius aber, urn nicht dem Argxoohn in der Bnist der Placidia neue
Nahrung zu gewdhreriy liess sich nicht selbst gegen seinen NebenbuJUer entsenden,
sondem sein Parteigenosset der magister miUtum Felix, beauftragte den MavorPUu,
Oalbio und Sinox mit der FUhrung der rGmischen Truppen gegen den * Eeichsfeind *
Bcnifacius.
** See Prosper 425 for his Gk>thio, and 428 for his Prankish victories
Digitized by
Google
488 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
who has ahready flitted before us as a shadow, is sent to carry on
the war with Boniface instead of the three who have all perished.
All this follows naturally enough : it rests on good authority ;
we should simply be glad of fuller details. But between the death
of Sinox and the appointment of Sigisvult, we come to an entry of
the very darkest, made dark, we may be sure, of set purpose.^
While the strife was going on, the disputants, both sides, it would
seem, asked for the help of certain people who had no knowledge of
ships, but to whom the sea was laid open by their invitation. Then
comes the appointment of Sigisvult, and then an entry in which
our sainted chronicler leaves off speaking in proverbs and tells us
plainly that the people of the Vandals crossed from Spain into
Africa. That event is perhaps put a little too early; but its
exact date and its exact details do not concern us. Gaiseric may
have been planning such an enterprise long before ; it is here im-
pUed — for the Vandals of the clear entry are surely the unnamed
people of the dark one — that the immediate occasion of the migra-
tion was the application for help from some or other of the Koman
commanders in the civil war decreed by Felix against Boniface.
The words rather imply that appHcation was made from at least
two opposing quarters. Neither Mavortius, Galbio, Sinox, nor
Boniface is personally named. Suspicion is very strong against
Boniface, but he may not have appHed to Gaiseric till his enemies
had already done so ; he certainly did not do so till civil war was
actually waging against himself. If he ever thought of making
himself tyrant by Vandal help, it was truly a great fall for the
saintly hero described to us at an earlier time ; but it was no more
than many other Eoman governors had done before him.
The notice in Prosper is really the nearest approach which
can be found in any contemporary writer to a charge. against
Boniface of inviting the Vandals into Africa. And Prosper does
not go beyond a dark allusion, in which Boniface is not distinctly
named. From this we may leap to the account in Jordanis, who
three times attributes the coming of the Vandals to the treason of
Boniface. Nothing is said of Aetius. Boniface, being under the
displeasure of Valentinian, sees no help for himself except in calling
in Gaiseric.^ In these hurried references there is nothing that
at all contradicts the story in Prosper; Jordanis perhaps hardly
** Prosper, 427. [Sinox] cvjua proditione Mavortius et Galbio, cum Bonifacium
obsiderent, interempti sunt, moxque ipse a Bonifacio dolo delectus^ occistis est, Exmde
genUbus, qua navibus uti nesciebant, dum a concertanHbus in auxUium vocantu/r,
mare pervium factum est, bellique contra Bonifacium capti in Sigisvultum comitem
cura translata est Oens Vandalorum ab Hispania ad Africam transit. Idatius
places the coming of the Vandals in 429, and says nothing about Boniface.
•* Oetica, 167, 168. Oysericus rex Vandalorum jam a Bonifatio in Africam
invitatus, qui Valentiniano principi veniens in offensa non aUter se quam malo
reipubliccB potuit vindicare.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 AETIU8 AND BONIFACE 489
understood that the displeasure of Valentmian had come to an
actual war, and among the disputants darkly hinted at in the annals,
he or those whom he followed naturally preserved the best known
name.^ We now come to the received story in all its detail, with
the elaborate action of Aetius against Boniface. This is found only
in the introductory matter with which Procopius brings in the
Vandal war. In his narrative Placidia gives Boniface the supreme
command in Africa. Aetius is displeased, but hides his displeasure.®^
When Boniface is away in his government, he tells Placidia that the
count of Africa is aiming at tyranny, that he seeks to deprive
Valentinian of the province ; that she may judge of the truth of
his charge by this sign. Let her summon Boniface to Rome, and he
will not come.*® At the same time he writes a letter to Boniface,
telling him that the emperor's mother is plotting against his life,
and that the sign of her plots is this ; she will recall him without
cause.^ Boniface receives the letter simmioning him to the em-
peror's presence ; he refuses to go, but does not reveal the warning
of Aetius. Placidia on this bestows her fullest confidence on Aetius,
and debates what course to follow with regard to Boniface.^** Boni-
face meanwhile, feeling that he is not strong enough to withstand
the emperor and that to go to Eome would be his destruction,^
turns his thoughts to the Vandals and invites Gaiseric into Africa,
an invitation which the Vandal accepts and enters the province.
Meanwhile the friends of Boniface at Some are amazed that he of
all men should turn tyrant ; ^^ from not a few earlier examples they
might infer that the invitation of barbarians and the taking up of
the tyranny naturally went together. Some of them, at Placidia's
bidding, go to Carthage ; they see Boniface ; he shows them the
letters of Aetius ; they go back to Eome and report to Placidia.
** The entry in the Chronicle of Gassiodorue should here be told (Bonoalli, i. 228).
Hierius et Ardabures, His coss, Bonifacio Africam tenenti infausU helium ingeritur,
Oens Wandalorum a Gothis exclusat de Hispaniis ad Africam transit. Gassiodorus
seems to have had Prosper before him; bat Jordanis can hardly have had the
Chronicles of Cassiodoros before him just then, whatever we say of the Gothic
History.
^ Bell. Vand, i. 3 (p. 822). (The passage immediately follows the description of
Boniface and Aetius quoted in note 6.) ro^otv rhu irtpov Boyupdrioy ^ UXeuciila
arparriyhy &r^8ci|c Aifi&ns aird(nis ' rovro 9h ob fiov\ofi4if<)f ^u 'Acr^y, iXA* fJKurrd yt &s
oinhv oifK ip4<rKti i^-fiytyKty * olh^ yhp ainoTy ^ ^x^P^ ^' ^^' iXriK^u^ &XA* ^h r^ irpo-
** lb, ZUfioXKty , , . &s rvpayyotfif iaroa'T*fyfi<Tas abr^y t« ical fi<urt\4a Aifiiris itini<ni5f
K,r.K Felix must have said something very like this to Placidia.
** lb, l7pfl»f^€ Tphs Boyiipdrioy XdOpa &s ^1^l^ovAc<^i ahr^ ii fi<urt\4t»s fi'firrip iral fio^Xoiro
ainhy 4Kiro9^y woi'fiircurBou, ic.r.A. Somebody, not necessarily Felix, may have written
this to Boniface in sober earnest.
« lb.
** lb. fcal ydp ol oCr€ fiwriKu 4Z6ku hmirdJ^wrBai oUf re cTkcu, ^f 'P^firiy re i,in6m
olitfiia ffttrrtpla i^ahrero,
" lb, p. 324. rov re rpSirov Mvfio6fjLtyoi rod MptivoVy iKXoyi(6fityol rt 4i\Ikos 6
TopiXoyos ^F, 4y OadfAori fi^ydx^ hroiovrro, tl Bovupdrtos rvpayvoiri.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
440 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
Her feax of the power of Aetius hinders her from taking any action
against him, or even giving him any rebuke ; ^' but she tells the
story to the friends of BonifEWje, and prays and adjures them to win
him back to his duty ; let him not endure that the dominion of the
Eomans should pass to barbarians. They again go to Africa and
tell him all ; he repents of his alliance with Gaiseric, and strives in
vain with great promises to persuade him to go back.^* The Vandal,
deeming himself mocked,^* defeats the army under Boniface and
besieges him in Hippo. Strengthened by a reinforcement from
Constantinople under Aspar, he holds out tiU the Vandals raise the
siege.^* Then Aspar goes back, Boniface goes to Placidia, explains
his case, and is received to favour.^ Of the later fate of Boniface
Procopius has nothing to say ; he mentions him once again, but
only to tell of a prophecy current before among the boys of Carthage.
6 should drive out B and then B should drive out 6. So did
Gaiseric drive out Boniface and Belisarius drive out Gelimer.^®
It is easy to point out the many dij£culties and inconsistencies
of this story. First of all, to look at the matter from the most
general point of view, all tales of secret intrigue carry a certain sus-
picion about them, a suspicion which becomes yet greater when we
hear of them for the first time in writers long after the event. We
do not reject them because they are imlikely, but rather because
they are so likely that they are sure to be reported, whether they
happened or not. Or rather we do not strictly reject them, unless
there is some distinct evidence against them ; we rather put them
aside as unproved, as things which very well may have happened,
but of which we cannot venture to say that they did happen. But
here I think we have distinct evidence against the story. The in-
formant from whom Procopius got the tale had clearly not taken in
the state of things at the time. He looked on Boniface as an un-
doubtedly loyal governor in Africa ; he looked on Aetius as the
minister of Placidia, living in Italy and at Eome. This last mark
is curious indeed. When Procopius wrote the Vandal War, he had
not had occasion to hear and think so much about Bavenna as he
came to do before he wrote the Gothic War. He took Eome for
granted as the imperial dwelling-place ; if he found it so assumed
'* Prooop. BeU. Vand, L 3, p. 824. KarcarXMyttffa ri ywij *A4riop fiktf ou^h tlpydaaro
Ax^^t ^^^ ^' ^rffSto'cr ^v ain^ 4s rht^ $<uri\4o»s oIkop hriwpajKro^ lwi^ ain6s re ^vrdfui
fuydXp 4xp^o KcX rh riis fiwriK^las TpdyfAora xomipiL ffSiy Ijy, Here we have the oon>
temporary fact that at this stage there was no open quarrel between Placidia and
Aetins, with the explanation of a later time that their seeming good understanding was
only because of Placidia*s fears.
'^ lb. rrjs Tc vpd^tws avr^ icol rrjs is rohs $ap$dpovs 6fu>Koyias fitr4fit\€ K(d aibrohs
4Ktxdp€t itMpuk irdrra ^oax^t^^^^^ ^^ Aifiifis ia^iffreurBm.
'* lb. r&p 5^ ohn 4v^tx''^it,4in0v rohs K&yavs, iiWit ir€pivfipl(9ir$ai oiofi4ptfv, ks X*H^^
abroTs 4K6utf ^iPoyicdaBii.
'• lb. p. 326. ** lb. T^r ^oi^lw 5l^^vcy, its ohx iiKriBovs alrias 4s abrhp yiwoiro.
« lb. i. 21, p. 897.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 AETIUS AND BONIFACE 441
in the narrative that he followed, it did not occur to him as any
difficulty. A little later, after his mother's death, Yalentinian was
more at Eome than any emperor had been for a good while ; but
daring the administration of Placidia we may always assume the
imperial court to be at Eavenna unless proof can be shown that
it was somewhere else. So again we cannot positively deny that
Aetius may have been at this moment in Italy ; all that we can say
is that there is nothing to show that he was in Italy and everything
to make us think that he was in Gaul. Gaul was now his regular
sphere of action. He has lately smitten the Goths on the Ehone ;
he has before long to smite the Franks on the Ehine. The resi-
dent minister of Placidia at Eavenna was Felix. Aetius could,
as we shaU presently see, come to Italy on occasion ; but he was
certainly not there habitually, and any tale which places him in
Italy, and that not at Eavenna but at Eome, needs some special
confirmation. And no such confirmation is to be had, but rather
the contrary. The informant of Procopius had no idea of the real
circumstances under which Boniface was summoned to Italy, cir-
cumstances which we learn from the letter of Augustine. He had no
idea of the events which followed the summons, of the war declared
against Boniface in the name of the empire and at the instigation
of Felix. He leaves this out, and goes on at once to the story
of the Vandals. He had no notion by whose influence all that
happened was brought about ; he does not mention Felix at all ;
so far as he preserves any shadow of the real story, he puts Aetius
instead of Felix. To me it is plain that the whole story in Proco-
pius grew out of a dim memory of the real later enmity — of which
Procopius says nothing — between Aetius and Boniface, mixed up
with a dim memory of the action of Felix towards Boniface
now. The growth of the story is easy. Somebody acted in an
unfriendly way to Boniface in 427; Aetius and Boniface were
enemies in 432. Therefore the enmity of Aetius is carried back to
the earUer date ; the name of the real enemy of that date gives way
to Aetius' far more famous name ; a story grows up in which the
real circumstances of the time are forgotten, and legendary details
suiting the supposed circumstances are fitted on. In this shape the
tale is told to a statesman and soldier of the next age. He inserts the
legend in his history. The true story still abides in the dry entries
of a chronicler, which, fully to be understood, needed to be com-
pared with writings with which men were familiar enough for pur-
poses of pious edification, but to which they were not in the habit
of turning for points of historical criticism. No wonder then that
the legend lived on instead of the truth. Prosper, even with
Augustine as his commentator, could not stand against Procopius.
And now what is the real story about Boniface and Gaiseric ?
What was Boniface doing at the time of the Vandal invasion of
Digitized by
Google
442 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
Africa ? We have seen the story in Procopius. Boniface invites
Gaiseric ; he repents ; he wars with the Vandals ; he is besieged in
Hippo ; he goes to Placidia and explains himself. In all this there
is nothing that contradicts the account in the annals. It simply
puts it out of sight. Somebody as we have seen, most likely more
than one person, did invite Gaiseric, and Boniface is very likely to
have been one of them. The battles are likely enough ; a Vandal
siege of Hippo in which Boniface defended the city is witnessed by
the best possible evidence, by that of Possidius the biographer of
Augustine, who was actually within the besieged town.^ What we
complain of is that in the received story we hear only of Gaiseric
and nothing of Sigisvult. Yet Sigisvult was certainly doing some-
thing in Africa, something at Hippo. We have the witness of
Augustine himself for that. Sigisvult, clearly a Goth — therefore
doubtless an Arian — took with him an Arian bishop, Maximin by
name, with whom the saint had long theological disputations, which
are extant among his works. Augustine and Maximin met at
Hippo in a time of war. The Arian professed that he had not
come to Hippo to dispute with the Catholic, but that he was sent
by Count Sigisvult to make peace.®® Peace between whom ? Obvi-^
ously between Sigisvult and Boniface, against whom Sigisvult waa
sent to make war. It would be a forced construction indeed ta
make it in any way refer to Gaiseric. So again, in the forged
letters, there are several references to an heretical enemy coming
from Italy, who can be no other than Sigisvult. Against him
Boniface wages war, and Augustine is even made to congratulate
him on a victory.®^ If this is not true history, it is most dis-
tinctly well imagined. The most natural explanation of all this
is that the events referred to in the letters of Augustine, both
acknowledged and doubtful, belong to the year 427, the year of
the expedition of Sigisvult, or at any rate to a time before the
coming of Gaiseric, which is best fixed to 429.®* The unlucky thing
^ Possidias, Vit Aug, 28, after describing the vast host hostium Vandalorum tt
Alanorum commixtam secum haberis Oothorum gentem, aliarumque diversarum^
personarum ex Hispanice partibus iransmariniSf tells how they besieged Hippo when
in ejus fuerit defensione constituttis comes quondam Bonifacins Oothorum foddera-
torum exercitui, Possidius was in Hippo with several other bishops. The words in
roman look rather as if Boniface, deprived of office, acted as a volunteer against the
Vandals.
"* Augustine has a long Collatio cum Maximino (vol. viii. 649 of the Benediotine
edition). It begins Cum Augustinus et Maximinus Hippone Regio unum in locum
convenissentt Maximinus dixit. Ego non oh istam causam in hanc civitatem adven4 ut
aXtercaticmem proferam cum religione tua, sed missus a comite Sigisvulto contempla-
tione pads adveni. For * Sigisvulto * the older edition has regis multa. See Tillemont,
M4m. Eccl. xiii. 1041. Again in Augustine, Sermo cxl. (vol. v. 680 B), we read
Contra quoddam dictum Maximini Arianorum episcopi, qui cum Sigisvulto comite
constitutus in Africa blasphemabat. So Possidius (17) speaks of him as Arianortpn
episcopus Maximinus cum Gothis ad Africam veniens,
** See above note 59 and the letters 14 (195), 15 (196). ** See above note 54.
Digitized by
Google
1887 AETIUS AND BONIFACE 44a
is that we know nothing of the issue of the expedition of Sigisvult,
and it is hard to avoid the conjecture that, as it so utterly passed
out of mind, some of its events got mixed up with the story of the
coming and settlement of Gaiseric. Almost at the same moment
Africa undergoes two invasions, and Boniface acts against twa
invaders. To be sure, one invader was a Boman officer sent
against a rebeUious governor, the other was a barbarian king tear-
ing away a province from the empire. Still both were barbarians^
both were heretics ; they fought, perhaps actually at the same time,
in the same land, against the same enemy. It was easy to forget
the difference between the position of Sigisvult the Goth and that
of Gaiseric the Vandal, and to merge the doings of the less known
man in those of the more famous. It may well be that, as the
excellent Tillemont suggests, peace was made between Boniface and
the government of Eavenna by a certain Count Darius, another of
the correspondents of Augustine, who was certainly sent into Africa
about this time to make peace between some disputants or other.®^
If so, Boniface must have been restored to favour at the latest in
430, the year of Augustine's death,®* and that most likely as the
reward of his services, perhaps volunteered at Hippo. Of the later
career of Sigisvult we know only that he must have kept a high
reputation in some quarter or other. For ten years later he was
consul, consul in company with Aetius.^ Aetius was then in the
midst of Gaulish warfare, and this, his second appointment, came
surely from Bavenna and not from Constantinople. This might
imply that Sigisvult was in favour in the East as well as in the
West. It is unlucky that we hear so little of hun ; but we may
safely set down the Collatio between Augustine and Maximin to
the year of his action in Africa, probably before the Vandal invasion
had begun. And we may fix the acknowledged letter of Augustine
to Boniface as belonging to a time earlier still, when their coming
was not expected, to a time, one is inclined to think, before the dis-
obedience of Boniface to the summons of Placidia. The dangers of
which the letter speaks are neither from the Vandals nor from the
imperial army, but from native Africans. As to the possible rela-
tions between Boniface and Gaiseric Augustine tells us nothing.
Those relations are so prominent in the version of Procopius, and
in all the versions that have been copied from his, that it is hard
to keep them out of our heads. But we must remember that there
is no direct reference to them in any contemporary writer ; there
is only the very dark hint in Prosper. The story has been oddly
turned about. The possible, but not more than possible, tale of
Boniface inviting Gaiseric into Africa has taken a permanent place
*■ See ep. 229 (or 262), 231 (or 264). The saint's correspondent is Darius comes,
qui pacts conficiendcs causa missus est
" Prosper in anno. •* See Prosper in 486, 437, 488.
Digitized by
Google
444 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
in history ; the undoubted fact that he disobeyed the orders of the
empress and was therefore proclaimed a pubUc enemy has alto-
gether passed out of memory.
One part of the story in Procopius may be accepted without
doubt, namely the coming of Aspar with the troops from Constanti-
nople. Of Aspar we have heard already as one of the commanders
sent to displace John from the Western throne ; in later times he had
the disposal of the Eastern throne, and his African campaign was
made memorable by the story of the omen which foretold the future
greatness of Marcian.^ It is only against Gaiseric that Aspar can
possibly have been sent. So again, the statement of Procopius
that Boniface went to Placidia and explained matters to her satis-
faction is doubtless his version of the event of 482, when we do at
last see Boniface in Italy, restored to the favour of Placidia, and
really acting as the enemy of Aetius. But between the expedition
sent to chastise the rebel Boniface in Africa and the appearance of
Boniface himself as a high imperial officer in Italy, five years passed,
five years of no small moment in the Ufe of Aetius.
In 428 came his great Frankish campaign, and we are not sur-
prised to hear of his being raised the next year to a higher miUtary
rank. In the consulship of Florentius and Dionysius, Felix is
exalted to the dignity of patrician, and Aetius takes his place as
magister militum.^'^ This is plain enough ; the entries of the next
year are very puzzling. Our Spanish bishop records a number of
exploits of Aetius in this and in the next year, and for the next year
he is the best possible witness, as he himself had personal deal-
ings with Aetius. Between Aetius's exploits of 429 and 430 he
tells us that Felix was killed at Eavenna in a military outbreak.®*
Here is certainly nothing to suggest that Aetius had anything to do
with this disturbance ; the entry of the death of Felix breaks in on
an otherwise continuous narrative of events in Gaul and Spain
in which Aetius is the grand figure ; we might have been tempted
to think that it was meant to be specially marked as an event con-
nected in time but no otherwise. Our Aquitanian guide tells us
another story. He records the exploits of Aetius in 429 ; in 430
he mentions him only for the startling announcement that in that
year Aetius put to death Felix and his wife Padusia and the deacon
Grunnitus, because he found them to be plotting against him.^
» Bell Vand, i. 4, p. 326.
•' Prosper. Florentio et Dionysio coss. (429). Felice ad patriciam digmtaUm
provectOt Aetitis magister mUiium f actus est.
" Idatius, IV. Valentiniani. Felix qui dicebaiur patricius Bavennce tumtUtu
occiditur mUitari,
"• Prosper. Theodosio XIII et Valentiniano III coss, (430). Aetius FeUcem cum
uxore sua Padusia et Orunnitum diaconum, cum eos insidiari sibi prcesensisset,
interemit. Giildenpenning (p. 306) again sees very deep into the heart of Aetius.
Padusia has been thought to be the SirdSovcra of Olympioddros, p. 467.
Digitized by
Google
1887 AETIUS AND BONIFACE 446
This entry, when compared with that of Idatius, seems more con-
tradictory than any formal contradiction. Formal contradiction
there certainly is none. Aetius may have found time for a hurried
journey to Eavenna on this special errand, even at a time when he
was, just before and just after, so busy in other parts of the world.
This is quite another thing from representing him, as the legend in
Procopius does, as the habitual adviser of Placidia at Eavenna or at
Eome. Or, though such a reading would be a little forced, the
magister militu7n may have found means to stir up the troops at
Eavenna to the slaughter of Felix, even though he was himself
elsewhere. In any case, the entry in Prosper, distinct and detailed
as it is, is of very high authority. We might almost apply the rule.
Credo quia impossibile. It is far more likely that Idatius should
have left out the name of Aetius, either purposely or accidentally,
than that Prosper should have put it in where it had absolutely no
place. But we shall do well to stop and think carefully how much
the two entries taken together really prove. The entry in Prosper
clearly proves that Aetius was at least very generally charged with
the deaths of FeUx, Padusia, and Grunnitus. Were it not for the
entry in Idatius, we should have said that it proved much more
than this. The words of Prosper would certainly not have suggested
an outbreak of the soldiers. They would most naturally be taken
of private murder ; they are perhaps not quite incompatible with a
public execution, military or civil. But they do not distinctly con-
tradict the story of the military sedition, which Idatius distinctly
asserts. We must therefore accept the statement that Felix, and
therefore most likely his wife and the deacon, were killed in the
outbreak of the soldiers. But we can hardly suppose that the
magister militum openly gave the word of command for the slaughter
of the patrician. Such an act would be perfectly possible, as in the
case where Honorius publicly gave thanks for the slaughter of
AUobich. But in such a case the word used would hardly be
iumultus. We are driven to suppose that the action of Aetius
was in any case underhand, that he found means to stir up the
soldiers to the bloody work, without actually ordering it in his offi-
cial character. But this brings the story very near to one of those
stories of secret intrigue which are always open to suspicion. Felix
is said to have been plotting against Aetius ; Aetius is said to have
caused his death in order to escape from his plots. Both sayings
may have been true ; Prosper seems to accept the intrigues of Felix
as well as the precautionary revenge of Aetius. But we cannot be
so certain about either as we may be about things that are recorded
to have been done in broad daylight.
Our knowledge then seems to come to this. The patrician Felix
was killed in a tumult of the soldiers. And there was at least a
general belief that the tumult was the work of the magister militum
Digitized by
Qoo^^
446 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
Aetius, and a further belief that this action of the magister militum
was caused by the discovery (or suspicion) of plots on the part of
the patrician against himself. And we must remember that it is
the entry in Idatius which leads us to put things in this qualified
way ; Prosper alone would have led us to charge Aetius with the
death of Felix far more boldly. Of the relations between Aetius
and Felix we have up to this time had no direct mention. Felix
has been the home adviser of the government of Placidia ; Aetius
has been its defender against foreign enemies. On the promotion
of Felix to a higher rank, Aetius succeeds to the vacant office.
There is nothing in this to suggest enmity. But we know not
what grudges or jealousies there may have been, and we know
firom the stories of the bishop of Aries and the deacon Titus that
Felix was at least believed to be capable of bringing about men's
deaths by secret means. There is nothing unlikely in the story of
his plots against Aetius or of the action by which Aetius stopped
them. Only we have no statement of details, causes, or results ;
and the one thing that gets beyond mere likelihood is the slaughter
of Felix by the soldiers at Eavenna.
Prosper has now no entry of the military exploits of Aetius till
we reach the Burgundian war of 436. This last is also recorded by
Idatius, who further records a Frankish campaign in 431. But
between these two wars comes the most remarkable story of all, in
which, for the first and last time, in the year 432, the names of
Aetius and Boniface are directly brought together in any authentic
narrative. Now at least we see them as enemies. Their enmity
is the end of the career of Boniface ; it is very far from being the
end of the career of Aetius. Of his four consulships it is the year
of the first, that which he shared with Valerius. As his last consul-
flhip led to his death, so his first led to his momentary fall. The
story which Procopius heard in Africa sent Boniface to Italy, but
said nothing as to his fate there. In our best authorities, the con-
temporary annals, we have again two versions which it may need
some little pains to reconcile. Prosper tells us only that Bonifa.ce
came to Eavenna from Africa to receive the rank of magister militum^
that Aetius withstood him, that he overcame Aetius in battle and
died of disease a few days later .^ Idatius is rather fuller. In his
version Boniface at the summons of Placidia comes to Bavenna
as the rival of Aetius. Aetius is deprived of his office, which is
"* Aetio et Valerio cosa, Bonifacius ah Africa ad ItaUam 'per Urbem venU,
accepta magistri militum dignitate ; qui cum sibi reaistentem AeHum praUo
superassett paucos post dies morbo extinctus est. The geography here is remarkable.
To go to Italy had, nnder Honorius and Placidia, become so completely the same
thing as to go to Bavenna, that it was possible to speak of going from Africa to Italy
throngh Bome. That was clearly the obvious way to get to Bavenna, as ten years
before Boniface had gone from Bavenna to Africa by partus UrbiSt see above p. 434.
In both places Bavenna is taken for granted.
Digitized by
Google
1887 AETIUS AND BONIFACE 447
given to Boniface. A few months later the rivals meet in fight,
and Boniface receives a wound of which he dies.^^ From inferior
authorities we get minuter details. The other Prosper, or Tiro, or
whatever we are to call him, says that Aetius, after his consulship
was over, took himself to strong places to escape Boniface, who had
been sent for by Placidia. Then comes a fight of some kind in
which Boniface has the better, but dies of a wound.^^
Another of the endless versions which go under Prosper's name
cuts the tale down to a few words, but tells us, what no other
account does, the place of action. Aetius and Boniface fought five
miles from Ariminum.^ Count Marcellinus has more remarkable
details still. By the stirring up of Placidia a great fight or war
takes place between the patricians Boniface and Aetius. The day
before the fight Aetius provides himself with a longer weapon than
that of Boniface. Boniface is therefore wounded, while Aetius
escapes unhurt. Three months later Boniface dies, counselling his
wealthy wife Pelagia to marry no one except Aetius.^*
Here at last Boniface and Aetius do appear as enemies ; but in
none of these versions is there any hint as to what made them
so. Now we should be inclined to accept the story in Procopius as
supplying us with the cause ; only the story in Procopius can hardly
be forced into agreement with the authentic narrative about Felix
and Sigisvult, and it looks so very much as if it had arisen out of
that narrative. Now in such an age as that, perhaps in any age,
the two foremost men in the state are likely to be rivals ; but up to
this time there has been no authentic mention of their rivalry ; they
have been employed in two quite distinct scenes of action. At the
time of the usurpation of John they were on opposite sides, but they
did not come across each other. And if Aetius was then the rebel
and Boniface the loyal commander, since that time their parts have
been reversed. While Aetius was restoring the power of the empire
** Vni Honorii. Bonifadus in csmulaMonem AetU de Africa per Pladdiam
evocatus in ItaUam ad palatium rediit, Qtti depitUo Actio in locum ejus succedens,
paucispostmensibusy inito adversum Aetium conflictu^ de vulnere quo fuerat per(yuss%u
interiit. The palatium is of coarse at Bavenna, as before.
*^ IX Honorii. Consulatu Aetius editOj Bonifadumy qui ah regi/na accUua
ex Africa fuerat, declinans, ad munitiora ascendit. Bonifadus contra Aetium
certamine habito, percuXsus^ victor quidem sed moriturus abscedit,
*^ This is the version published by Hille in his Inaugural Dissertation, Berlin,
1866, pp. 6, 16. Actio et Valerio. Pugna facta inter Aetium et Bonifacium in V {in
quinto) de Afimino. The word pugna looks rather more like a single combat than
some of the words used elsewhere ; but it need not imply it.
»* Valerio et Actio coss, Placidice matris Valentiniani imp. insHnctu, vngens
helium inter Bonifaciwn et Aetium patricios gestum est. Aetius longiore BonifacU
telopridie sibimet proBparato^ Bonifacium congredientem vulneravit Ukesus ; tertioque
mense Bonifadus wlnere quo saudatus fuerat emoritur, Pelagiam uxorem suam
vaXde locupletem ntUli alteri nisi Actio ut nuberet exhortcms, Marcellinus is wrong in
calling Aetius pcUridus, which he did not become tiU the next year, while Boniface is
not mentioned elsewhere as patrician at all.
Digitized by
Google
448 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
in Gaul, an army had to be sent to Africa to bring Boniface to
obedience. And now, at the moment when Aetius is promoted to
the highest place in the republic, seemingly in the very year of his
consulship, he is deprived of his oflSce of magister milituniy and
Boniface is sent for from Africa to take it in his stead.®* And all
this was a sudden change without any assigned reason ; never do
we more earnestly wish for some source of knowledge fuller than
mere annals. As it is, we can only say that in a despotic court
anything may happen, and that the very services of Aetius and the
height of greatness to which he had risen might be turned against
him. The date seems fixed. The consul then, in the year of his
consulships is deprived of his military dignity, which is given ta
another ; but he does not take the insult quietly : he resists in some
way or another ; a fight of some kind happens, which is followed by
the death of Boniface. So far all stories agree : but there is
diversity as to every detail. Boniface and Aetius meet in fight, but
is it in single combat, an early case in short of the wager of battle,
or is the quarrel to be looked on as rising to the scale of a civil war ?
For the single combat there seems to be hardly anything to be called
authority. Marcellinus indeed clearly describes a single combat
between Boniface and Aetius ; but it reads like a single combat in
a war; ingens helium^ even assuming that the later use of beUum
could have come in so early, would be a strange phrase to describe
a single combat only. And the other Prosper, who seems to connect
the whole matter in some not very intelligible way with the appoint-
ment of Aetius as consul, clearly looked on Aetius as taking warlike
precautions against Boniface, as occupying strong places, and his
account of the death of Boniface would be more consistent with a^
general battle (certamen) than with a single combat. When we
come to the contemporary writers, their language is vague; but
there is nothing to suggest the thought of a single combat. Pralium
and conflictvs are words which imply the meeting of armies, not the
meeting of single men. Boniface, according to Prosper, dies of
disease, a statement perhaps not inconsistent with the version of
Idatius that he died of a wound. But neither implies that the
wound was given by the hand of Aetius. That version comes
wholly jfrom the account of Marcellinus in the next century. It is, I
suspect, firom his chronicle that the whole notion of the single combat
has come ; certainly no one would think of it ifrom reading Prosper
and Idatius only. What they suggest is rather that, after Aetius'
appointment to the consulship, some dispute arose between him and
Placidia — that she proposed to deprive him of his post as magister
militum and to give it to Boni&ce — ^that Aetius, doubtless with an.
** The statement in the article Bonif aoins in the Dictionary of Biography about
coins with the head of Boniface is pore misconception. The coins, or rather medals,,
that are meant have nothing to do with any Boniface.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 AETIUS AND BONIFACE 449
army in his actual command, withstood the transfer of office in
arms— that a battle followed, in which Boniface had the better, but
received a wound of which he died. This seems the natural inter-
pretation of the words of our two best authorities, and it gives a
story far more likely in the fifth century than the story of the
single combat. By what authority was the single combat to be
fought ? Is the empress-mother conceived as the queen of beauty
presiding over the knightly contest ?
She took their hands ; she led them forth into the court below ;
She bade the ring be guarded ; she bade the trumpets blow ;
For lofty place for that stem race the signal she did throw ;
For truth and right the Lord will fight ; together let them go.
It is hard to see by what law of Theodosius or of any earUer
emperor the post of magister mUitum could be disposed of according
to the issue of a single combat between the two illustrious candi-
dates. Again, how are we to explain the issue of the combat ? In
Prosper, and in the other Prosper — Prosper Tiro — Boniface wins
the battle, but dies of a wound received in it, a likely enough chance
of ordinary warfare. But in a single combat, if Aetius, as Mar-
cellinus says, himself unhurt, gave Boniface a deadly wound, then
surely Aetius was the victor in the duel and was entitled to whatever
was the prize of it. And as such Marcellinus seems to look upon
liim ; at least he says nothing of any victory on the part of Boniface,
which comes out so strongly in Prosper. Surely the real story is
that Aetius now, like Boniface five years before, refused obedience to
the imperial orders when those orders went to deprive him of his
military post, and that Placidia sent for Boniface to bring him to
obedience, exactly as Mavortius, Galbio, Sinox, and Sigisvult had
been sent to bring Boniface to obedience. The thought does for a
moment flash across the mind that in those strange times, where ever
and anon some ancient form seems again to come into life for a
moment, the consul of the republic may have fallen back on the
powers of his office in an earUer day. It might too flash across
the mind, considering the early importance of Aetius at Constanti-
nople, that his nomination as consul came from the East, and was
in some unexplained way unacceptable at Eavenna. The dis-
pleasure of Placidia is unexplained on any showing, and the consul-
ship was the natural reward of the long tale of victories in which
Aetius had smitten nation after nation in the West, winding up
with his great Frankish success the year before.^^ Gaul was for a
** Idatius, who has dealings of his own to record, thus brings in his eighth
year of Valentinian, reckoning, it must be remembered, from the death of Honorios,
after the manner of Charles the Second and Lewis the Eighteenth. Superatis per
Aetium in certamine Francis et m pace susceptist Cenaorius comes Icgatus mitiitwr ad
Suevos, supradicto secum Idatio redeu/nte. Bonifacius in cemulationem AeiUy <Bc,
Wieterstein (Oeschichte der Vblkerwanderungy ii. 210) folly sees that what happened
was a real battle, and he describes the forces on both sides in a way which is yery
VOL. n. — NO. vn. o g
Digitized by
Qoo^^
450 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
moment at peace, and the conqueror and consul came to wear his
laurels in Italy. To be degraded at such a moment by the caprice
of a woman might stir any captain of those days to rebellion. On
the whole the story reads far more as if the cemulatio Aetii of Idatius
was a rivalry, possibly an intrigue, on the part of Boniface against
Aetius rather than a rivalry or intrigue of Aetius against Boniface^
The best evidence then points to an open war between the two
great captains. Can we recover any details of the campaign ? There
are several notices which may help us. First of all, we may fairly
accept the statement of a single annal that the fight took place at
the fifth milestone from Ariminum. No one was likely to indulge
in invention on such a point as this, while nothing is more easy
than for such a small bit of geography to be left out. As for the
date of the fighting, according to the story in Idatius, Boniface^
summoned by Placidia, displaces Aetius in his office, and some
months later comes the fight in which Boniface receives his wound.
This fits in curiously with the saying in the other Prosper about
Aetius withdrawing before Boniface to strong places. These months
were clearly occupied in preparations ; then Aetius, whether con-
strained or of his own will, leaves his strong places to meet his
enemy in battle. He is defeated, but the victorious Boniface pre-
sently dies. As to his curious instructions to his wife, the wife
whom, according to Augustine, he ought not to have married, we can
say nothing. If we accept it, it can only be quia impossibile. What
could have put it into anybody's head ? It might seem a singular
piece of advice, even if Aetius had been a single man or a widower.
But it seems to go beyond all bounds of credible impossibility when
we remember that Aetius had a very powerful, though nameless
wife, daughter of Gothic kings and perhaps already aspiring to be
mother of Boman emperors.
Let us look on a step further to the events that followed the
fight and the death of Boniface. It is to be noticed that Mar-
cellinus, who gives us the single combat and the instructions to
Pelagia, has nothing to tell us as to what immediately followed.
But the earlier writers have a good deal to say as to the immediate
results of the quarrel, and from one of them we can perhaps learn
what it was that put the notion of a single combat into anybody's
head. Let us again compare our authorities.
Prosper is the fullest. According to him, Aetius, having lost
likely in itself, bat which it is hard to see in the anthorities. Of coarse Aetias is
dsr ehrg&inge FMherr who duldeU keine Nebenbuhler; he and Boniface are die
erbitterten Feinde, de. According to this accoant, Bonifacius kehrte stoar cUs FlUcht'
Ung, aber dock wohl mit einem nicht unbedeuienden Beer, atis Africa nach ItaUtn
Tieim, As for the battle, wir dUrfen des Aetius Niederlags vielleicht dutch sein
schw^hsres Heer, dessen grdsster Theil in Oallien geblieben sein mag, und dureh
die besten Haustruppen der Kaieeritit welche dem Bonifacius Uberlassen worden seitt^
fHOgen, erkldren.
Digitized by
Google
1887 AETIUS AND BONIFACE 451
or laid down his office, was living on his own estate. There a
nameless enemy attempts a sudden attack on him. He then flees
to Eome and thence to Dalmatia ; from Dalmatia he goes to the
Huns by way of Pannonia. He is still in good favour with his old
friends ; by their help, in some shape or other, he is restored to
the favour of Placidia and Yalentinian, and receives again the office
that he had lost. After this Prosper does not mention Aetius
again, except in relation to GauUsh affairs ; he does not even record
his death. In his annals the third consulship is a blank. But it
is to be noticed that in 439 he gives Aetius the title of patrician,
and that in 440, when speaking of Gaiseric's inroads in Sicily, he
mentions that Gaiseric went back to Carthage, because Sebastian,
a man skilled in war, had gone from Spain into Africa. He goes
on to speak, but darkly, of the relations between Gaiseric and
Sebastian and of the end of Sebastian. But there is nothing in his
account to imply that Sebastian had anything to do with the affairs
of Aetius and Boniface.^^
The account of Idatius lets us know that the Sebastian of Pro-
sper's later story had a good deal to do with both Boniface and
Aetius. He is the son-in-law of Boniface, and on his father-in-law's
death he is appointed to his office, that of magister militum. But,
being overcome by Aetius, he is driven from the palace at Eavenna.
Aetius is restored to his old post ; the next year he is raised to the
rank of patrician. Of Aetius Idatius has nothing more to say —
except in Gaul, where he has a good deal — till he records his last
exploits and his death. But he has a great deal to tell us about the
singular career of Sebastian. He flees.'to Constantinople, an event
which may seem to be connected with the higher promotion of Aetius.
The later entries about Sebastian do not greatly concern us. Only
they go some way to explain the dark entry about him in Prosper.
After very strange goings to and fro, he was put to death by Gai-
seric, according to some accounts, as a Catholic martyr.*'
^ Immediately after the death of Boniface Prosper goes on Aetius verb, cum
depoiita potentate in agro suo degeret, ibique eum quidam invrntGua ^us repentina
incursu opprimere tentass&t, profugus ad urbem, atque UUnc ad Dalmatiam, demde
per Pannomam ad Hunnos pervemt, quorum amidtia auxilioque usus, pacem
prindpum et jus interpolaUB potestatis obtinuit In 440, Valentimano Augusto V et
Anatolio coss,, after a casnal mention of Aetius in Gaol, we' read Oeisericus Siciliam
graviter affligens, accepto mmtio de Sebastiani ab Hispama ad Africam transitu, cele-
titer Carthaginem rediit, ratus periculosum sibi ac suis fore si vir bellandi peritus
recipiendcB Carthagini incubuisseL Verum ille amicum se magis quam hostem videri
volens, diversa omnia apud barbari ammum quam prcesumpserat repperit, eaque spes
causa Uli maxima et caiamitatis et vnfeUcissvmcB mortis fuit.
** Immediately after the death of Boniface Idatius goes on Cui [Bonifacki] Sebas-
tMtn/us gener substitutus per Aetium de palatio superatus expellitur. The next year
Aetius dux utriusque mHitice patricius appellatur, and the next year Sebastianus
exsui et profugus effectus, navigat ad palatium Orientis. Other entries about him
come in 444 and 450. A full account of his martyrdom is given in Victor Vitensis
i. 19. He is there Sebaatianus famosi ilUus gener comitis BonifatU, acer consUio et
sirenuus in bello. This is Victor's only mention of Boniface.
o o2
Digitized by
Google
452 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
The other Prosper has nothing to say about Sebastian, but he
has a great deal more to say about the Huns. After the battle with
Boniface, Aetius flees to the Hunnish king Bugila and asks his
help. By that help he enters the Boman territory; then the Groths
are called to give help against him by the Bomans. In the next
year Aetius is restored to favour, and peace is made with Bugilay
who dies.^
Marcellinus has no further mention of Aetius till the time of his
death. He in no way connects Sebastian with Aetius ; but he
mentions the flight of Sebastian from Constantinople and his death
in Africa, seemingly bringing the two events too near together.*^
When we come to compare these statements, there is no kind
of contradiction between Prosper and Idatius. Each account is
strangely imperfect, but each fills up gaps in the other. Prosper
does not tell us what became of the oflBce of Tnagister miiiium, of
which Aetius had been deprived to make room for Boniface, and
which now again became vacant by the death of Boniface. We
learn from Idatius that it was given to Sebastian, son-in-law of
Boniface, husband, that must be, of a daughter of that earlier
marriage of which Saint Augustine did not wholly disapprove. He
tells us also that Aetius was able in some way or other to dispossess
Sebastian. Prosper, though not mentioning Sebastian at this stage,
tells us how Aetius came to dispossess him, and gives us some very
curious details. Aetius for a moment withdraws into private life,
but we may guess not without a purpose of coming back to the
affairs of the world whenever he might have a chance. No longer
Tnagister militum, having been deprived of the oflSce and having failed
in his attempt to recover it in arms — for the death of Boniface after
the battle must not make us forget the defeat of Aetius in the battle
— he has no armies to command in Gaul, and he must have thought
that it suited his purpose to stay for a while to watch the course of
things in Italy rather than to risk an immediate attempt at seizing
power in Gaul. He is clearly not harshly treated, as far as any
public dealings went, by the court of Bavenna. He is allowed to
withdraw to his private estate; he therefore had, as was likely
enough, lands in Italy. While he is dwelling there, a treacherous
attempt is made on his life, whether by any secret commission jfrom
Placidia, Valentinian, or Sebastian, we have no means of judging.
It reminds one of the attempt on Alkibiades which Tissaphemes did
order, and of the attempt on Hereward, which William did not. On
** The death of Boniface is placed in the ninth year of Theodosias, according to
his reckoning. Thus we read : X. Cum ad Chunnorum gentem, cut tunc Bugila
praeratt post prcBlium se Aetius corUuUsset, impetrato auxUio ad Romanum solum
regredUur. Gothi ad ferendum auxUium a Romanis accitu XL Aetius in gratiam
receptus. RugUa rex Chunnorum^ cum quo pax firmata, moritur, cui Bleda successiL
He says nothing more abont Aetius tiU the year of his death.
»*• Under 4S5 Theodosio XV et Vdlentiniano IVcoss.
Digitized by
Google
1887 AETIUS AND BONIFACE 453
the whole, without setting up Placidia very high, one had rather not
fancy her practising the arts of Fredegund. Anyhow Aetius is more
lucky than either AlkibiadSs or Hereward ; he escapes with life. Now
surely we have here the kernel of truth out of which grew the legend
of the single combat between Boniface and Aetius. Here is a per-
sonal attempt on Aetius, made, not by an army, but by one man or a
few. In such a case something very like a single combat might
easily take place ; there are plenty of stories of the kind, the two to
which I have just referred among them. Nothing could be easier
than to mix up this story with that of the battle with Boniface.
Aetius and Boniface met in fight ; Aetius and somebody met in
single combat ; it was a slight change to make Aetius and Boniface
meet in single combat. This seems likely enough to be the ex-
planation of the story ; but, of course, such an explanation is not
needed for the general course of events. Anyhow, after the attempt
on his life Aetius no longer thinks himself safe in Italy or anywhere
in the Boman dominions ; he must seek the help of the same bar-
barian friends whom he had seven years before brought to support
the cause of John. We know not in what part of Italy his estate
lay, but clearly somewhere where the haven of Home was the nearest
or safest point to take ship. In any case he takes a roundabout way
to get to the Huns. The land journey through northern Italy might
have brought him dangerously near to Eavenna. He therefore flees
to Eome, clearly to set sail from Portus ; he makes the long voyage
to Dalmatia, and so goes to the Huns. By their ' friendship and
help,* whatever those words may imply, he procures his restoration
to imperial favour and to his old ofiSce ; this of course implies the
deprivation of Sebastian, the one point recorded by Idatius.
Now what was the form of this Hunnish friendship and help,
by which a Roman consul or consular is restored to a Boman oflSce ?
Are we to think of Hunnish diplomacy as thus powerful, or did
Aetius again bring a Hunnish force into the empire ? It is at least
certain that, if Placidia or her advisers yielded to Hunnish diplo-
macy, it could have been only because Hunnish diplomacy was ready
to be backed by Hunnish force. The words in which Idatius re-
cords the removal of Sebastian, superatas expeUitur, look very much
like actual force. The fullest account is that of the other Prosper,
to which we must give such an amount of trust as we may think
good. This version does not necessarily imply an actual war, but
it does imply a state of things on the very brink of war. A Hun-
nish invasion must have been looked for as very near when Gothic
aUies — ^West-Goths used to fight against Aetius — were summoned
to give help to Eome. Goth and Eoman might have met the Hun
on other fields than the Catalaunian, in strife in which Aetius and
Theodoric could not have fought side by side. If things had gone
so far as this, we should surely have heard of it. Aetius ' came
Digitized by
Google
454 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
back to Boman soil by help of the Huns ; ' but this might surely be
said though the action of the Huns did not go beyond a threatened
march to the frontier, and though the summons to the Goths was
not actually followed by their presence in Italy. Surely both dangers
were avoided by the simpler process of receiving Aetius to his favour
and displacing Sebastian from his office. We must not press the
words 8wperatu8 and expellitur too far ; they look like force, but they
do not absolutely prove it. At any rate the entries in Idatius show
that Sebastian, though driven from the palace, remained for a while
in Italy. It is only the next year that Aetius rises to the full height
of the patriciate, and it is not till the year after that that Sebastian
flees to Constantinople as an exile.
One is tempted to go on with the singular and striking story of
Sebastian ; but from this point it reaUy has no bearing on the story
or character of Aetius. More important is the fact, which we must
take from the other Prosper, that a peace with the Huns followed
the restoration of Aetius. There had therefore been a previous
state of war, though not necessarily any actual fighting, and it
seems plain that the restoration of Aetius was one of the conditions
of peace. But we can perhaps find another. In the casual allusion
of the best authority on Hunnish matters, that Priscus to whom we
owe our living picture of Attila and his household, we hear of a peace
of Aetius — ^like a peace of Nikias or of Antalkidas — by which Pan-
nonia on the Save, that is most likely the land between Save and
Drave, was given up to the Hun.*®* This peace was the last act of
Bugila ; he died to make way for Bleda and the mightier name of
Attila. We see its fruits in the friendly relations so long kept up
between Aetius and the Huns. Three years later than his return
in 485, when he smites the Burgundians, the Huns come on to
finish his work.*®^ It is in his second consulship in 487 that the
Gothic war is carried on by Hunnish help.*^ It is he who pro-
vides Attila with a Boman secretary,*^ who receives from Attila
the singular gift of a Moorish dwarf and jester,*^ and when Yalen-
tinian sends an embassy to Attila, the Greek narrator of the event
instinctively puts the name of Aetius before the name of his
'** Prisoas, 146, 147. {*Op4ffT7is) 4i^%ir^p wphs r^ "Xi^ worofi^ IlaUymp x^P^* ^9
fiapfidp^ Korii rds *Acr/bv ffrparriyov r&f iawtpUtv *P«/ta/«y trvvBi^Kas iwoKO^ovaaif,
Prisons, chiefly dealing with the affairs of the East, has to distinguish this treaty,
then dearly of some standing, from the diplomacy of Theodosins and ol Actios him-
self in 44S. naiw€s is of coarse high-polite for Pannonians.
*•* See Prosper, 435. Theod, XV et Vol. IVcoss.
>^ Prosper, 487. Aetio II et SigisvuUo coss. BeUum adveraus Octhos HumUs
cnwiUanUbua geritur.
»•* Prisons, 176, 208.
^^ See his story in 01ympiod6ros p. 205, 225 (Sonidas in ZdpKcty). He belonged
to Aspar ; he was taken by the Hans in an inroad into Thrace ; he became a favourite
with Bleda, was inherited by Attila, giyen by him to Aetius, and by him back to his
old master Aspar.
Digitized by
Google
1887 AETIUS AND BONIFACE 455
master.*'^ We should hardly have looked to see the crowning glory
of his life in warfare in which the first great check is given to the
advance of the Honnish power.
It certainly seems to me that, by thus carefully turning our
authorities inside out, we come to a narrative of events which differs
a good deal from that which has been commonly received. Some
parts of the real story have dropped out of notice. Such is all that
concerns Castinus, Felix, and Sigisvult, and the relations of either
Aetius or Bonifetce to any of those persons. The remarkable lan-
guage of the annalists as to the position of Boniface in Africa, the
undoubted fact of his resistance to the imperial orders, and the war
which was therefore waged against him as a pubUc enemy, have
passed out of sight.; so has the death of Felix and the share of
Aetius in it. These are points of some importance both for the
story and for the character of the two chief men ; but they seem to
have been very early forgotten. Instead of them we get the legend
of the complicated intrigues of Aetius against Boniface, of the
treasonable dealings of Boniface with Gaiseric, and of his later
repentance. We have seen that for the intrigues of Aetius there is
no real evidence, that the dealings of Boniface with Gaiseric, though
likely enough, are very doubtful, and that, if they happened at all,
they were caused, not by any plots of Aetius, but by the war declared
against Boniface during the ministry of Felix. We come to the end
of the joint career of the two men, and we find the main authority
for the earlier legend silent, while another later writer suppUes a
romantic story of a single combat which has displaced the actual
battle of the earlier annaKsts. I think I may claim — unless I have
been forestalled at Dorpat — to have put the story together for the
first time in its truth and fulness ; but I must again repeat that the
modem German writers, though they have, to my thinking, not
made all that should have been made of the genuine materials, have
by no means neglected them. I have to thank them for some refer-
ences which I might not have hghted upon for myself. AU that I
complain of is that they confuse the story by bringing in the details
of the Procopian legend as of equal authority with the contempo-
rary annalists. And I believe that every entry of the annalists
and every scrap of information about the matter to be found in any
quarter has been brought together by Tillemont. Nothing ever
escaped the notice of that most careful and valuable scholar ; only
in his simple good faith, he sometimes tried to believe two stories
when it was impossible to believe both at the same time.
And now as to the characters of the two men with whom we
"• Priscos, 186. wp4(rfi€is irapk *Afriov ko), rod fiofftXt^oyros r&v ia"rtpluv *Pt0fuunr
*<rTd\fi<ray, Did he not know Valentinian's name ?
Digitized by
Google
456 AETIU8 AND BONIFACE July
have been dealing. Boniface we certainly leave a little in the dark.
Our personal picture of him comes from Saint Augustine. It is that
of a man who sets out with the highest promise, private and public,
but who falls away from his duties, private and public. At one time
almost a saint, with some tendency to become a monk, he sins
against ecclesiastical rules, perhaps against moral rules also. At
one time the model of a Boman officer, he neglects his duties in
that character also, and leaves his province to be harried by bar-
barians. This is how Boniface appears in the letters of Augustine ;
only the legend has so taken hold of men's minds that, when Augus-
tine writes about native Africans, they have chosen to read about
Vandals. The picture drawn by Augustine is a very natural one ;
Boniface appears as one of the many men whose early days were
their best. A more minute examination of the facts brings out
nothing to set aside the witness of Augustine ; it simply gives the
political errors of Boniface a somewhat different character from that
which they put on in the common story. While the charge of
treasonable dealings with foreign enemies must be pronounced un-
certain, we must charge him with distinct disobedience to his sove-
reign, and with neglect of official duty in a province which there is
some reason to think that he had occupied irregularly. In his public
character in short he is the man of the fifth century. In that ever
shifting age of revolutions, we cannot look for the same kind of
loyalty, the same imswerving obedience to lawful authority, which
we look for either in a citizen of the old Eoman commonwealth or
in the subject of a modern constitutional state. Boniface was at
least not below the common standard of his contemporaries ; he was
very likely above it. He really did nothing very memorable after
his exploit at Massalia ; his name has simply drawn to itself a special
interest, partly from the legend of his relations to Aetius, partly also
from his relations to Augustine. In this latter aspect he comes
home to us in a way in which few captains of his age can come.^®*^
Of Aetius, of most other men of the time, we do not in the same
way know either the private virtues or the private sins.
Whatever allowances we make for Boniface we must make
for Aetius also. He also is a man of the fifth century, and is
assuredly not free from the common faults of the fifth century.
Only the faults which real history shows in him are not the same as
those which we hear of in the legend. In the legend he appears as
a man of subtle and imscrupulous intrigue. There is nothing like
this in the genuine story ; for we should hardly speak in this way
of the wonderful diplomatic power which ever enabled him to bring
!•' Unless indeed we remember that Dardanus, of whom Sidonius (Ep. v. 9) had
80 very bad an opinion, was also a friend and correspondent of the saint. There is a
letter (Ep. IviL) in which Augustine discusses theology with him as freely as he does
with Boniface.
Digitized by
Google
1887 AETIU8 AND BONIFACE 457
some powerful ally to his side, which could bring the Hun to act
against the Goth and the Goth to act against the Hun. His fault
is the natural-fault of a man in his position. Knowing his strength,
both in himself and in the powers that he could call upon, he is too
ready to appeal to force. In this he is simply the man of his time,
neither better nor worse than Boniface. His rebellions, if they are
to be so called, strike us more than the rebellion of Boniface, simply
because his position allowed them to be wrought on a greater scale and
to win greater success. If Aetius brought barbarian aUies to decide
Roman quarrels, it was no more than every man of his time, sove-
reign or subject, did if he had the chance. Indeed, if men were to
fight at all, it was hardly possible for them to fight without bar-
barian allies. All wars of the time were fought with their help.
When Aetius calls in the Huns, all that Placidia can do is to call
in the Goths. And if, with our notions, it seems uglier to call in
Huns than to call in Goths, we can hardly expect the men of the
fifth century to enter minutely into such distinctions, especially as
Goth and Hun alike were called in simply as allies or mercenaries.
Neither side does anything towards biinging in a Hunnish or
Gothic dominion, though of course it was always possible that such
thoughts might come into the minds of the Hunnish or Gothic allies
themselves.' And we may remark further that, though Aetius
several times appeals to force against the measures of the reigning
emperor, he never appeals to it to supplant the reigning emperor.
When many a man, with such powers at his call as Aetius had,
would at once have aimed at the tyranny, Aetius is satisfied with
being restored to his old office. If at an earlier stage he appears as
the supporter of a tyranny, it was at least not a tyranny in his own
person, and we must remember that John, like so many others, is
called tyrant and not emperor simply because he was unsuccessful.
The only thing in the authentic story which looks the least like
intrigue, as the intrigues of Aetius are commonly painted, is the
story of the death of Felix. If that is intrigue, it is force as well ;
but we hardly know enough of the details to pass any judgment.
We can only say that Aetius got rid of a man whom he deemed to be
dangerous in some way which can hardly fail to have been irregular.
On the whole, Aetius comes out from his cross-examination as
certainly something very unlike a faultless hero. All that we can
say for him is that he is certainly not worse, that on the whole he
is better, than the received standard of his time. He has the
greatest opportunities of any man of his time, and, on the whole,
for that time, he does not use them amiss. Of his opportunities for
good he avails himself more than other men, of his opportunities
for evil he avails himself less. We may fairly say that he is loyal
to the empire and the emperor, even though he is fully determined
to maintain, by force if need be, his own claim to be the first subject
Digitized by
Google
458 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
in the empire. The only act that looks like disloyalty to the re-
public itself is the cession of a certain Pannonian district to the Huns.
Most likely this was simply giving the Hunnish king a legal posses-
sion of a land which was already his for all purposes of plunder and
havoc. By such a cession the sufferings of the Eoman inhabitants
of that land, if any were left, were pretty sure to be lessened.
Except with a people who are ready to defend every inch of ground
at the sword's point, the acknowledged mastery even of the Hun or
the Turk is commonly a less evil than his ceaseless inroads from
outside.
Of the two men with whose names we started, the career of
BonifEUJe is over ; the most briUiant time of the career of Aetius is
yet to come. Of his GauUsh career I hope to speak in another shape.
We may then trace him alike in the dry entries of the annalists
and in the sounding verse of the prelate of Auvergne. We may
count up how often he beat back the Goth from imperial Aries, how
he smote the Burgundian and taught the Frank to know his master.
We may then dwell on that clearer tribute to the stoutest champion
of Eome which the annaUst pays when he takes for granted that, if
Gaiseric could tear away Carthage from the republic, it was only
because the sword of Aetius was busy against other foes in Gaul.'^
We may then tell of the great triimiph of his diplomacy, when, li]Le
Demosthenes on his errand to Thebes, like GeUius Egnatius on his
errand to Etruria,*^ he won his enemies to march at his side against
their former aUies. We may tell of the first and greatest European
concert, when Eoman and Goth and Frank — Catholic, Arian, and
heathen — when Briton and Saxon, aUies for a moment on Gaulish
soil,"® went forth together at the bidding of the last Eoman of the
West."^ We may then tell how Saint Anian looked forth from the
battlements of Orleans, like our own Wulfstan from the battlements
of Worcester,"* and how the armies of the world met to take their fill
of the joys of battle on the day of the Catalaunian fields. That
was the day of the crowning glory of Aetius, the day of the great
salvation wrought by him for all the Gauls, and for all the peoples,
nations, and languages, that dwelt within their borders. Let the
Goth serve the Eoman or the Eoman serve the Goth, rather than that
both should see their common heritage trampled down by the horse-
*^ Prosper. Theodosio XVII et Festo coss, (439). Aetio rebus qua in OaUiis
com^ponebantur intento^ Qeisericus, de ciyus amicUia mhil metuebaturp XIV KdL Nov*
Carthaginem dolo pa/sis invadit,
iw Arnold's Borne, ii.
"* See the list in Jordanis» OeUca, 86. Adfuerunt auasiUarea Frond, Scarmaia^
Armoriciani, Liticiani, Burgundiones, Saxones, Bipari, Olibriones.
*" One may here fairly give Aetius the title that Procopins has devised for him,
though not without some memories of Syagrins and iBgidius.
"' Jordanis, GeUca, 89. Ad certamimt hujue goMdia,
Digitized by
Google
1887 AETIUS AND BONIFACE 459
hoofs of the spoiler in whose track grass grows no more. But was
the deUverance of Gaul only a step towards the more cruel harrying
of Italy ? We have heard how Aquileia was to fall and Venice was
to rise, and how the Hun was to be turned away from Eome, not
by the sword of Aetius the patrician, but by the voice of Leo the
bishop. There is too a strange sound of complaint in the annals
of the year which followed the victory of victories, as we read them
in our Aquitanian guide. We hear how Attila, after losing his forces
in Gaul, came again with new forces into Italy, how Aetius —
^ Aetius our leader,' the annaUst stiU calls him in fondness — did
nothing worthy of the renown of the year that was past, how the very
passes of the Alps were left unguarded, how the only counsel that
the patrician could give to his sovereign was that they should both
flee from Italy, how all that could be devised by the wisdom of
prince and senate and people was that an embassy should be sent
to ward o£f the wrath of the terrible foe. That was the embassy
of the holy pontiff and his companions, famous in history, more
famous in legend, most famous of all in the limner's craft."* At
all this Prosper wondered, and, if we accept his tale, we can
only wonder too. We can only ask why Aetius left Italy to its
fate, with as little hope of a full and perfect answer as when we
ask why Heraclius left Jerusalem and Alexandria to their fate. Or
may it be that there is no need for wonder ? There is a coimter-
story from another annaUst who has preserved to us the memory
of many of the earlier exploits of Aetius. In the version of Ida-
tius, Attila enters Italy, but he is driven to make peace with the
empire by the suiBferings which his army endures through a com-
bination of causes, human and divine. Some die of hunger, some
of disease, some by direct strokes from heaven ; but most of all by
the armies sent from the East, where the energetic Marcian now
reigned — armies which Aetius again led to victory."* Which of
these two contradictory versions are we to beUeve ?
'" Prosper here (452, Herculano et Sporatio coss,)^ as in some other places towards
the end of his story, seems almost to forget his character as an annalist, and
indulges in the singular vein of complaint and commentary which I have tried to
analyse. Attila comes nihil dttce nostra Actio secundum prioris beUi opera prospi-
cienUt ita ut ne clusuris quidem Alpium, quibtis hostea prohiberi poierant, uteretur^
hoc solum spei suis superesse existimcmsj si ah omni Italia cum imperatore dia-
cederet. He adds, cum hoc plenum dedecoris et periculi videretur, oontimUt
verecundia metum. Presently nihil inter omnia consUia principis ac senatns
populique Bomani saluhrius visum est quam ut per legatos pax iruculentissimi regis
expeteretur. Then follows the embassy of Leo, Avienas, and Trigetins ; and in the
end rex gavisus est ut et hello ahstineri prceciperet et zUtra Danubium promissa pace
discederet, Jordanis {Oeticat 41, 42) tells essentially the same story with some further
details, specially that Attila threatened to come back, unless Honoria was sent to him.
In neither is there any hint of warlike action on the part of Aetius, Marcian, or any
one on the Boman side.
^^* Idatius, XXIX ValentinianL Secundo regni anno principis Marciani^ Hunmi
qui Italiam prcsdahanturt aliquantis etiam civitaiibus irruptis, divirUtus parOm
Digitized by
Google
460 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
On the side of Prosper there is that commonly safe rule, a rule
of such constant appUcation in the earlier Eoman history, which
makes us always distrust stories of victories which have the air of
being invented, perhaps to balance or conceal actual defeats, per-
haps merely to get rid of the shame of simple inaction or other more
negative kinds of ill-success. The victory recorded by Idatius
might be a little discredited even if the year was a blank in Prosper ;
it seems to be yet more discredited when Prosper makes a positive
complaint of the inaction of Aetius. Yet both annalists are very
trustworthy; each often leaves things out; we have never had
need to suspect either of inventing. And a Spanish bishop had no
particular temptation to invent a deliverance of Italy by the means
of armies sent by the Eastern emperor. After all, it is possible
that we need not suspect anything more than what we have several
times seen already, that one annalist preserves part of the story and
the other another. We must conceive Aetius in Italy; but we
must not conceive of him as at the head of forces such as those
whom he commanded in Gaul. His Goths and Franks, his Britons
and Saxons, did not follow him beyond the Alps. The Goths at
least were acting by imperial authority against a nearer enemy,
Thorismund had succeeded the Theodoric who fell in the great battle
— that first Theodoric from whom Aetius had so often delivered
Aries. Thorismimd had been slain by his brothers Theodoric and
Frederic, and Frederic was now, by imperial commission, putting
down the Bagaudae south of the Pyrenees.*** Aetius may have
been really imable to put Italy into any state of defence till he
received help from the East. That he thought of flight, that he
counselled flight to Valentinian, comes under the head, not of facts
open to all men, but of whispered surmises, as to which neither
Prosper's statement nor that of anybody else goes for much. If
troops did come from the East, if Aetius acted successfully against
Attila, it is certainly strange that Prosper should not only have left
out all mention of the fact, but should have spoken as he did about
Aetius' earlier conduct. But it would be yet more strange if the
statement of Idatius about the Eastern troops is all invention or
delusion. A more serious difficulty is to reconcile a discomfiture of
Attila, whether through natural or miUtary causes, with the story of
the embassy of Pope Leo and his colleagues Avienus and Trigetius,
an embassy of which Idatius seems to know nothing. Of the reality
famet partim morbo quodam^ plagis ccelestibtis feriuntur ; missis etiam per Mardawum
prindpem Actio duce cceduntur auxiliis ; pariUrque in sedibus suis et ccBlestibus
plagis et per Marciani suHguntur exercttum ; et ita subacti, pace facta cum Romanis,
proprias universi repetunt sedes^ ad qitas rex eorum Attila mox reversus interiit.
>^ Idatius records the murder of Thorismund under the twenty-ninth year of
Valentinian, and in the next says : Per Fredericum Theudorid regis fratrem Bacauda
Tarraconenses cceduntur ex auctoritate Romana. This is the year of the death of
Aetius.
Digitized by
Google
1887 AETIUS AND BONIFACE 461
of that embassy, witnessed by Prosper and by Priscus as repre-
sented by Jordanis, there can be no doubt ; but it is quite possible
that its circumstances may have been misunderstood. It takes
something away from the beauty of the story, but it adds to its
UkeUhood as an historical fact, if we beUeve that the holy awe
inspired by the pontiff was backed, not only by the arguments of his
lay comrades, the ex-consul and the ex-praefect, but by the more power-
ful argument of disease and hunger in his army, of the presence of
Aetius in Italy at the head of the army of the East, and of the daring
diversion on the Himnish lands which another army of the East was
making now the East had again a wise and watchful emperor.
And now we come to the last act of all, to the fourth consulship
of Aetius, the last year of his power and of his life. The end of
Aetius is in many things like the end of StiUcho, only Valentinian,
unlike Honorius, had at least energy enough to do his crimes with
his own hand. With Honorius indeed there is always the question
whether we are to look on him as an accountable being or not.
That Valentinian slew Aetius — that, according to the best accounts,
he slew him with his own hands — that, as Sidonius puts it,
Aetium Placidus mactavit semivir amens "^ —
that the act was the act of one who, as the story pithily puts it,
cuts off his right hand with his left "^ — so far all are agreed. About
the circumstances, motives, and instigators of the act there is less
agreement. It is to be noticed that the first fall and the death of
Aetius, with two-and-twenty years between them, both come when
he is in the height of power and glory. In his first consulship
Placidia suddenly turns against him ; the war with Boniface follows,
and on that the attempt on Aetius' life and the other stirring events
of the year. In his last consulship the son of Placidia suddenly
turns against him ; no war follows ; but the attempt on his life is
repeated successfully, for it is the emperor himself who attempts it.
Aetius had escaped from meaner assassins at Constantinople and
at some unknown place in Italy ; in Eome he could not escape the
weapon wielded by the hand of Augustus. For now we are at
Eome ; the Eternal City has again for a while come to the front ;
Valentinian has forsaken his mother's Eavenna, and keeps his court
in the old home of empire. As to the causes which made Valen-
tinian the enemy of the consul of 454 we are not so utterly in the
dark as we were as to the causes which made Placidia the enemy of
the consul of 482. Let us follow the account of Prosper. A fierce
"• Panegyric on Avitus, 869.
^'^ Bell. Vand, i. 4 (p. 829). *P»tialo9y ris liros tlirify c&8ok(/ai}0'€v. ^pofidyov yhp a^hv
fiafft\4ws df ol KoAws 6 rov 'Atrlov Bdyaros ipyacBtlri^ &T€Kplyaro k4yvu oIk Ix't*' M^v
€(8cVa{ rovro ttrt €? ctrt mj AWp odry flpyaarcUf ixtiyo fiivroi its ttpiffra i^€irl<rraad<u Uri
ainov r^y 8c(i2ky r$ Mp^ X^^^ &tot€/a^v cfi}. *P»fjLaiuv ris here means a local Boman.
Digitized by
Google
462 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
quarrel arises between the emperor and the consul and patrician out
of a cause which the annalist says ought to have been a cause
of friendship, an agreement, it would seem, for the marriage of
their children."® Valentinian, we know, had daughters; Aetius
had sons ; it is impossible not to connect this notice of Prosper
with the hints in Sidonius which have been already referred to
about the wife of Aetius — there is nothing said about Aetius him-
self— seeking the empire for her son Gaudentius."® Here is another
point of likeness to StiUcho ; he too was beUeved to be seeking the
empire for his son Eucherius. It is easy to beUeve that the agree-
ments and oaths of which Prosper speaks as concluded between
Valentinian and Aetius may have had something to do with some
scheme, not only for a marriage between Gaudentius and one of
the emperor's daughters, but for securing to them the succession to
the empire or an association in it. Such a scheme might come
naturally when Aetius was at the height of his glory, patrician,
four times consul, deUverer of GauJ, perhaps dehverer of Italy.
But no scheme would be more likely to stir up the jealousy of
Valentinian, already perhaps disposed to envy and hate Aetius on
the very ground of his greatness and glory. Valentinian would
most likely have no' more fondness for successors, colleagues, and
sons-in-law, than Charles of Burgundy had. Valentinian, according
to Prosper, was, like so many other princes, under the dominion of
an eunuch named Heraclius, who stirred him up against Aetius,
and made him beheve that his only hope for safety was to forestall
the plot of his supposed enemy by his destruction.***^ Then comes
the end. Aetius is in the palace. He demands the fulfilment of
the emperor's promises ; he presses the claims of his son, whatever
they were, with vehemence. Then he is slain, Valentinian, it would
seem, dealing the first blow, and those who stood by finishing the
work with their swords. Boetius the praetorian prsefect is killed at
the same time, his crime being firm friendship for Aetius.***
Idatius tells us that Aetius was by guile invited alone to the
palace, and there killed by the hand of the emperor himself. Other
honourable men were brought in one by one, and killed by his spa-
"• Prosper, AeHo et Studio coss. Inter Valentinianum Augustum et Aetiumpatri-
cium,post promissa ifwicemfidei sacramenta, post pactum de cofyunctione filiorunij
dira imimcitrUB convalueruntt et unde fuit gratia charitatis oMgetida, inde exarait
fomea odiorum, incentore, ut creditwn est^ Heraclio spadone, qui ita aihi imperatoris
ammum msincero famulatu astrinxerat ut eum facile in qua vellet impeUeret.
"• See above note 30.
** Prosper, u^. Cum ergo SeracKus sinistra omma imperatori de AeHo per-
waderet, hoc unum creditum est sdluti prindpis profuturum, si inimici molUumes sue
opere prceoccupaaset.
^ lb, Aetius dum placita instantius repetit, et causam filii commotiua agit,
imperatoris manu et circumsta/nHum gladiis crudeUter confectus est ; Boethio prajecto
pratorio simtU peremptOj qui eidem multa amicitia copulabatur. ' Placita ' most here
mean a meeting or interview, as often in Gregory of Tours.
Digitized by
Google
1887 AETIUS ANt) BONIFACE 463
tharius.^^ As to the cause, he gives a dark hint in his entry for the
next year, namely that the wicked counsels of Petronius Maximus
had something to do with the deaths of all these persons.'^ Mar-
cellinus also, in the same incidental way, attributes the deed to
Maximus. He says that Aetius and his friend Boetius were both
killed in the palace by the emperor. He laments the fall of Aetius
with much rhetoric ; he was the great salvation of the Western
republic, the terror of King Attila ; with him fell the Hesperian
realm, and it had never risen again down to his own day.*^
The introduction of Petronius Maximus at once brings us to the
account in Procopius. He brings the death of Aetius into his doubt-
ful story about Valentinian and the wife of Maximus.*^ According
to Procopius the murder of Aetius is part of a very subtle scheme
of vengeance by which Maximus wishes to repay his own wrongs on
Valentinian. He wishes to be emperor himself, and thinks that he
will be more likely to succeed if Aetius can be got out of the way.
The eunuchs are favourable to his plans ; they persuade Valentinian
that Aetius is designing a revolution. With Valentinian the power
and merit of Aetius is enough of itself to make him believe the
charge. He kills Aetius, and a nameless Boman makes the sharp
saying which has been already quoted.**^
The story about the wife of Maximus must be examined on its
own grounds, apart from that of the death of Aetius. I am strongly
inclined to think that it sprang, in the strange way in which such
stories often do spring, out of the unwilling marriage of Eudoxia to
Maximus. But Idatius, who has nothing to say about the wife of
Maximus, distinctly charges Maximus with a hand in the death of
Aetius ; and Marcellinus, who also knows nothing of the legend,
either follows Idatius or repeats the same story from another
quarter. It is therefore no part of the legend, but an inde-
pendent statement, true or false, which has been incorporated in
>" Idatius, XXX Val. Aetius dux et patricius fraudtderUer singtUaris accUua
intra palaMum manu ipsius ValentirUani imperatoris occiditur, Et cum ipso per
spatarium ^us aliqui singulariter intromissi jugulantur honorati. Is honoraU
here to be taken in a technical sense? and the spaiharius seems to come in earlj.
*** Valentiniano VIII et Anthemio coss. (465). Qui [Maasiimm] , . . non sero
documento quid animi haberetprobavitt siquideminterfectores Valentiniam,n<m solum
mm plecterU, sed etiam in amicitiam receperit. He goes on aboat Eudoxia.
^** Aetio et Studio coss. Aetius patricvuSy magna ocoidentalis reipublica salus et
regis Attilcs terror^ a ValenHniano imp, cum Boetio amico in palatio truoidatUTf atque
cum ipso Hesperium cecidit regnum^ nee hactenus valuit relevari,
>«* Bell, Vand, i. 4 (p. 829). ir€pi^Bvyos roivvv 6 Md^tfios rois ^vfiir9<rov<rt ywSfitvof
oinlKa fihv ^s fVi/BovX^v rov pa(ri\4o9S KaBl<rraro, &s Bh rhw *A4riop i^pa fiiya Jiwdfi^vov
. . . Mifit6w ol 4y4wero S>s ol *A4rtos tl rd TpaaaSfitya ifiir6Ztos i<rrai • ravrd re
ZtoMoovfidy^ ifittroy l8o(€v ctvai rhp *A4rtoy imrofiity ToHiffcurBcu TpircpoVf oMy wotfi<rafi4¥^
Sri ^f ainhy w9pi4ffrriK€ ira<ra ^ '^fULwy iXwts, r&y S4 ifi^l r^y fioffiKdws B^pawtituf
9tivo{rxj»y ^hvolK&s ol ix^^'^*^^ hafitr^KT^ rcuf ainStv /xi}x<iy^ fia(ri\4a &t ytttr4pois irpdyfuurw
^yX^tpolri *A4Ti0Sf OitoKtyriyiayhs 8i i\\^ obBcyl Sri fiii rp *Arr(ow dvydfi^t Tf icoi dp«rp
r^Kfiiipi^ffas rhy \6yoy iyta cfvat Krc(vffi rhy &y9pa,
"• See above note 117.
Digitized by
Google
464 AETIUS AND BONIFACE July
the legend. We have no means of either confirming or refuting the
accoimt of Idatius ; it simply comes under the general rule that
secret intrigues are for the most part probable but not proved. The
intrigue, if it happened, must have been very secret, for, if we
accept the plain statement of Prosper, the friends of Aetius knew
that the eunuch Heraclius had been the enemy of their chief, but
had no suspicion of Maximus. Valentinian, he tells us, was so un-
wise that he took the friends and military attendants of Aetius into
his service. They watched their opportunity, and slew both him
and Heraclius at some point outside the city. No one of all the
imperial following stirred to defend or to avenge them.^^ The
possible comphcity of Maximus in the deed is darkly hinted at a
httle later, when it is said that, on assuming the empire, he took
the slayers of Valentinian into his favour.*^
Idatius is shorter ; but he adds that the slayers were, as we
might have expected, barbarian followers of Aetius. He calls the
place where Valentinian was killed campus, and adds that the army
was standing around.^'® The Campus Martins was within the walls
of Aurelian, but as being still an open place used for exercises, it
might be laxly spoken of as outside the city. The very short account
in another version of Prosper gives the spot a name — the Two
Laurels.*'® Marcellinus, as we have seen, asserts the complicity of
Maximus in the death of Valentinian ; he also gives the slayers the
barbarian names of Optila and Transtila.*'* On the whole it is
enough to say that Valentinian was slain by men of Aetius who
wished to avenge the blood of their lord. That is plain. Maximus
may have had some hand in setting them on at some particular
time or in some particular way. If so, he was only the occasion
'*^ Mortem Aetii mors Valentiniani non longo post tempore consecuta estt ta/m w%-
prudenter non declinata ut interfecti Aetii amioos armigerosque ejus sibimet conso-
daret. Qui concepti fadnoris opportunitatem aucupantes, egressum extra Urbem
principem et ludo gestationis intentum iTwpinatis ictibus confoderunt^ Heraclio stmul,
ut erat proximAiSf interempto^ et nvllo ex muUitudine regia ad uUionem tanti sceleris
accenso. See Ducange in * Gestatio.*
>» See Note 123.
*" Quarto regni anno prindpis Mardani per duos barharos Aetii familiares Valert-
tinianus Romce imperator ocdditur in campo exerdtu drcuTtistante,
>* Prosperi Chron. ex MS. August. Boncalli, 701. Aetio et Studio, Eo anno
ocdsi sunt Aetius et Boetius Patricii. Valentiniano VIII et Anthemio, Valentinianus
ipse ocdsus ad duos lauros XVII Kal, Apr, So Chron. Pasch. i. 691, ro^r^ ry frti
ia^yrj 0{fa\€irrtyiay6s AHyovtrros ip y^firi fiiaov 5tJo Ba^y&p,
•" Valentinianus princeps dole Maximi patridij cuju^s eiiam fraude Aetius perier at ^
in campo Martio per OptHam et TranstHam Aetii satellites^ jam percusso Heraclio
spadone, truncatus est. So JordaniB, Getica^ 45. We get a little nearer to one of the
slayers in Gregory of Tours, ii. 8 (adjin,), AduXtus Valentinianus imperator mstuens
ne se per tyrannidem Aetius opprimerett eum nullis causis extantibus interimit. Ipse
posimodum Augustus dum in campo Martio pro tribwnali resedens condonaretwr ad
populum^ Occila buccellarius Aetii adversum veniens eum gladio perfodit. Talis
utrisque extitit finis. This, according to Holder-Egger, comes from the lost annals of
Bayenna.
Digitized by
Google
1887 AETIU8 AND BONIFACE 465
and not the cause. Men who had shared the glories of Aetius and
who mourned for his murder, had motive enough to act as the
avengers of his blood ; they had a strong enough /ceMe against his
murderer, whether an ambitious consular and patrician took advan-
tage of their disposition or not.
And so we end the story of Aetius, as we have some years before
ended the story of his supposed rival. To Aetius four times consul
the Britons might have sent up yet heavier groans than they sent
when he bore the fasces for the third time. Before he had beaten
back the Hun, the tale of the second England had begun. The rest
of the world seems to have been but slightly stirred in the year when
the Jutish ealdormen landed at Ebbsfleet, never to fall back. But
what mattered the sufferings of Kent when the Hun was arming
against Europe ? Six years later, Theodoric, Attila, Aetius, have all
passed away ; Valentinian dies by an irregular vengeance for his
crimes. In the same year, of the two Teutonic heretogan who had
begun the Making of England, one dies in fight with the Briton,
the other becomes the first Teutonic king on British soil. In the
consulship of Valentinian and Anthemius, we turn from Aquitanian
Prosper and Spanish Idatius to our own tale in our own tongue.
*An. cccclv. Her Hengest and Horsa gefuhton wi« Wyrtgeome
J?8Bm cyninge on J^aere stowe )?e is gecweden -^glesJ?rop ; and his
bro'Sor Horsan man )?8Br ofsloh, and after J^aem feng to rice Hengest
and Mbq his sunu.'
Edwabd a. Freeman.
VOL. n. — NO. vn. h h
Digitized by
Google
466 July
Byzantine Palaces
HITHERTO those who have described the ceremonies and pageants
of the Byzantine court, the imperial processions from the
palaces to St. Sophia, the scenes in the hippodrome, and the popular
demonstrations in the Augusteion, have been content to do so with-
out giving any topographical description of the buildings in which
those events took place. The recent work, therefore, of M. Paspate,
which deals minutely with this subject,* is of extreme value as
opening out for us a new field for research, which when followed up
will add life and reality to the complex facts related by Gibbon,
and before him by Constantine Porphyrogennetos, our most trust-
worthy authority on Byzantine imperial life. The diflBculties which
attended M. Paspate in his patient investigations have deterred
others from attempting this work. The Turks who inhabit the
squalid houses which cover a great portion of the hill of palaces
objected to intrusion ; the archaeologist could only penetrate these
narrow alleys at the risk of being pelted with stones, rotten eggs,
and other objectionable missiles. But two events encouraged
M. Paspate to persevere : one was the building of the imiversity in
1848, which disclosed the position of several disputed sites in the
Augusteion ; and secondly the cutting of the Thracian railway in
1872, right through the wall of the old palaces : these discoveries
gave him sufficient data to go upon, ^beacon lights/ as he calls
them, * to guide me in this labyrinth.'
Before accompanying M. Paspate within the walls which en-
closed the hill of palaces, or, as he calls it, the ^Acropolis of Byzan-
tium,' we will see what he has to say about that large open space
which existed immediately before it, and was called the Augusteion,
the centre of popular life in those days, and adorned with statues
and objects of art. It was an oblong space lying between the hippo-
drome and the wall of the palaces, and shut off from the town on the
north by St. Sophia; the southern boundary is a little uncertain, but
M. Paspate considers that its whole length was about 620 yards,
and its uniform width 188 yards. It was adorned with palaces,
* Td Bv(ayr<r^ 'Aydttropa, tcaX rk w4pi^ oMt&v Idp^fAora. With a Plan. By A. O.
Paspate. Athens, 1885.
Digitized by
Google
1887 BYZANTINE PALACES 467
statues, tiny churches, and works of Hellenic art collected from all
parts of Greece and Asia : to-day it is covered by the mosque of
Sultan Achmed Dar el Phorinoim and small Turkish houses.
All this space (says M. Paspate), the ornaments and ruins of which have
long been destroyed or removed to adorn other buildings, is now covered
with dark and noisome workshops, pubHc and private buildings which are
visited rarely by strangers, and by natives under the greatest difficulties
and with the greatest persuasion ; the stupid inhabitants look on with
derision, whilst children throw stones at those who give their attention to
such things.
The earlier buildings of this place, and all the wondrous works
of art which it contained, were destroyed by the great fire in
Justinian's reign. It was originally a place where cooks and coster-
mongers vended their wares, and where the inhabitants danced on
festive occasions ; but Justinian drove away the cooks, raised up
magnificent buildings thereon, and paved it with marble. Through
the open space between the buildings, commonly referred to as
*the middle' by Byzantine writers, the emperor passed on his visits
to and from St. Sophia, and in it he held his receptions of all the
city deputies, and heard their plaints. It is curious that there is
greater ease in placing the * minor monuments of the Augusteion,'
as M. Paspate calls them, than the greater ones. Most of these
stood by the side of the hippodrome. To the north, near St. Sophia,
was the Milion, originally a simple post from which distances in miles
were measured, over which was afterwards raised ' a square building
with seven marble pillars on steps supporting a dome,' and called
the chamber of the Milion. Here the emperor always stopped
to receive deputations on his way from St. Sophia; here were
memorial columns, according to Codinos, to Constantine the Great,
St. Helena, Sophia the wife of Justin the Thracian, and others ;
on this building were stuck up the heads of malefactors who had
been executed. During the excavations in 1848 for the founda-
tions of the imiversity, a square building with seven pillars and
arches was disclosed ; this at once established a satisfactory basis
on which to start a topographical plan of the western side of
this agora.
Immediately to the south of the Milion are the large founda-
tions on which stood the statue of Justinian. The following account
of it is given by M. Paspate :
Some time ago, the barbarians despoiled this statue of Justinian :
they took from it the gilded brass ornaments which adorned it. Thirty
years ago, the statue fell from the column which supported it. Now
the base has been turned into a fountain ; the statue itself was taken
off and shut up in one of the rooms of the sultan's palace, but has lately
been carried off to the furnace, where they cast implements of war.
The calf of the leg of Justinian exceeded my own height, the nose was more
H K 2
Digitized by
Google
468 BYZANTINE PALACES July
than nine times the length of one of my fingers. I was nnabte to measure
the feet of the horse as they lay on the gromid ; however, without the Turks-
seeing me, I was able to ascertain that one of Justinian's toenails waa
five times the length of one of my fingers.
Attached to this coloBsal statue was the oratory of St. Constan-
tine, often alluded to in Byzantine history as a spot where the
emperors used to worship on stated occasions. During the excava-^
tion of 1848 the base of the silver statue of Eudoxia was found,
the empress about whom we read so much in the life of Chrysostom,
and whose anger at being denounced by him was the cause of his
exile. On the base of this statue was an inscription in Greek and
Latin : it was, curiously enough, discovered on the northern side of the
Augusteion, at some distance from the spot where the evidence
of writers who saw it has placed it. So M. Paspate is inclined to
think that the base had been removed during some popular demon-
stration, and accordingly places it between the statue of Justinian
and the church of the two horses.
Nicephorus the Phocian, before he ascended the throne, set up
in the Augusteion a roofless temple, dedicated it to St. Phocas,
and near it placed two stone horses, which gave it the name of
the church of the two horses. We have a description of a revolt
in 1184, in which the followers of the emperor Alexius took up
their position in the church, and shot with their arrows at the
soldiers of the emperor John, who had taken up their position in
the Milion. Close behind the Turkish university M. Paspate haa
discovered ruins of Byzantine walls with low doorways, into which
the owner of the house, despite all his persuasions, will never allow
him to penetrate. From the facts above mentioned, M. Paspate
considers these to be the ruins of the church of the two horses : it ia
within easy bowshot of the Milion, and the only building which
could have given protection to soldiers, unless they had occupied
St. Sophia itself. Thus we have a fair picture of what this side of
the great agora was like.
With regard to the eastern side just beneath the wall of the
palaces, M. Paspate cannot give us so satisfactory a description.
He has been unable to find any traces whatever of the patriarch's
palace, of the old council hall, and of the baths of Zeuxippos, but
he holds out tempting promises to those archseologists who may
be fortunate enough to live in times when bigoted Turks vnll not
inhabit the densely crowded abodes ^hich cover the sites of those
buildings. Meanwhile, all that M. Paspate could do was to collect
the mentions made of these buildings by Byzantine writers, and
assign them the most probable positions after carefully weighing
the evidence. In so doing he had one advantage over former
writers on this subject, for he knew the exact course of the wall
of the palace which was behind these buildings. He first places
Digitized by
Google
1887 BYZANTINE PALACES 469
the church of the Virgin of the brass vendors to the north of
this eastern side of the Augusteion, close beneath the walls of
the palaces and near the great gate of Ghalki. Here the emperors
generally heard a Uturgy before they proceeded to St. Sophia
itself, and the often-mentioned wooden staircase connected it with
St. Sophia, so that the imperial family when so disposed might
attend service in private. A wooden door still existing, but now
always closed, on the east side of St. Sophia, M. Paspate considers
was in connexion with this staircase, ' for it is the only entrance,
according to the nature of the ground, which could be approached
by a staircase/
The patriarch's palace was outside the palace walls, and in the
Augusteion. M. Paspate, from passages which allude to the proxi-
mity of this palace to the gate of Ghalki, places it just to the south
of the church of the brass vendors, through which the patriarch
used to pass. Then this palace had a large garden, which a Bus-
sian monk, writing in 1208, tells us contained ' all kinds of peas,
melons, and pears, of which the emperors partook.' This garden
M. Paspate places as dividing the patriarch's palace from the only
remaining buildings of the Augusteion about which there is any
uncertainty, namely the council hall and the baths of Zeuxippos.
These magnificent buildings must, therefore, according to all autho-
rities, have occupied the only remaining space, namely the south-
east comer. Between the buildings and the wall of the palace
ran a narrow street or alley spoken of by Byzantine writers as
the ' passage of Achilles.' Both the walls of the hippodrome and
of the palace were kept free from buildings by narrow passages,
so that their value from a strategical point of view might not
be interfered with.
Having taken a glance at the large agora which occupied the
space before the palace walls, we will now turn to the more im-
portant part of M. Paspate's work, namely the topography of
the palaces themselves. As was stated above, M. Paspate owes the
groundwork of his plan to the discovery of the walls themselves by
the cutting for the Thracian railway, which was begun in 1870, and
which passed along the whole extent of the acropolis on which the
old palace stood. By the discoveries then brought to light all former
speculations as to the topography of the palaces were confuted, and
M. Paspate had to start from entirely fresh data, unknown to
M. Labarte and others; but whereas previous writers have only
given their ideas on the subject as speculative, and looked upon
the task of discovering the exact position of the palaces as all
but hopeless, M. Paspate has been able to state facts and to
place certain points beyond a doubt, which has enabled him to give
satisfactory suggestions with regard to the others. He thus pre-
faces his account of the palaces :
Digitized by
Google
470 BYZANTINE PALACES July
I am now about to describe other niins, some of which are fortmiately
preserved to this day, which will act as beacons to guide us to the true
topography of the surrounding buildings. I do not doubt that still in this
wide space which the old palaces occupied are preserved under the houses
and in the gardens of the Turkish inhabitants ancient ruins which will
throw light on our history, when it is permitted to visit and study them.
Others yet to come will doubtless describe better than I can do the position
of the palaces, but imfortunately the ruins are being daily pulled down and
sold by the poor possessors with the full knowledge of their sluggish rulers.
A few years before the commencement of the Thracian railway
a great fire destroyed the palaces of the sultan which stood on the
shore of the Bosphorus. Others were built as they now stand, and
the first work of the navvies for the new line was to remove the
(Ubris of the ruined palaces, cut down the old trees and shrubs
from the gardens, and in so doing they laid bare a great portion of
the wall which encircled the ancient palaces, and * furthermore,'
adds M. Paspate, * those who desired to study these points could do
so vdthout being driven away by eunuchs and armed guards.*
The excavations of the workmen first brought to light, near the
gate which was anciently named after St. Barbara, the ruins of a
church dedicated to the martyr Demetrius, often referred to by
Byzantine historians, which the house of Paleologi had profusely
decorated. Close to this were found remnants of the ancient
Greek cyclopean wall which rah along the shore, and on the top of
which the Byzantine emperors had placed the eastern wall of their
palace enclosure. A short distance from this sea wall, under a
little cliflf, the workmen disclosed the wonderfully solid vaults of
the Boukoleon palace, in which lay as if shaken by an earthquake
heaps of marble pillars and capitals. These subterranean vaults
consisted of two distinct chambers connected by a passage. In the
lower one near the sea, but few remnants of pillars and capitals
were found, and the walls resembled those of a cave more than a
vault made by human hands; it is now used as a habitation
for the Armenian railway operatives; but in the inner vault
the workmen loosened from their hiding-place some pillars with
beautiful work upon them, and two slabs three yards long by one
yard four inches wide, one of which had on it two heads erf
life size, one the head of an ox, the other of a lion ; heads of a
similar nature appeared on smaller fragments. This was an ad-
ditional proof that these were the vaults of the Boukoleon palace
(derived, according to some, from bv>cca leonis, according to others
from l3ov9 and \ia)v), which all Byzantine authors agree in placing
down by the shore. These vaults are often referred to as being
used as prisons, and close to this spot was the harbour of Bouko-
leon, where the emperors generally embarked, doubtless making
use of the passage which led down to the sea.
Digitized by
Google
1887 BYZANTINE PALACES ill
Before visiting the central palaces, M. Paspate takes us to the
ruins of some outlying buildings, on or adjoining the walls which
he identifies with the often mentioned noumera; at the south-
western corner of the palace walls, and almost resting on them, is
what M. Paspate calls a Byzantine street, now converted into
dwellings for Turks, which have escaped the notice of archaeologists
from their extreme squalor and difficulty of approach.
I grieve (be says) to have been imable to examine these ruins as I
could have wished, because I was stoned by boys and insulted by
women, and the friendly Turk who went with me could not spare much
time.
These buildings are constructed on walls made out of huge blocks
of stone, remnants of the most ancient wall which encircled the
acropolis. From the road the inhabitants descend three or four
steps to their entrance, proving that this road, like all those around
the palaces, has been raised by the accumulation of debris. Each
house consists of one very firmly built domed chamber, which is
divided into two stories by a wooden floor ; on the ground floor the
workpeople have their shops, and in the upper room the family live
in great squalor, and lighted only by tiny windows in a space only
ten yards long. These buildings M. Paspate believes to have been
the ancient noumera built by Constantine the Great, as Godinos
and others tell us, between the brazen gate and the gate of the
dogs, and close to the baths of Zeuxippos, from which it was sepa-
rated only by a wall, so that it was often confounded with that
building and called *the prisons of Zeuxippos,' for the novmera
was at one time used as a prison, and at another time as lodgings
for servants at the palace. If this supposition be correct, it would
place the battle of Zeuxippos at the south-west extremity of the
Augusteion, adjoining these buildings which occupy this angle of
the palace walls. To the north of these houses, M. Paspate found
the remains of an old Byzantine gateway in the walls, close to
which in 1877 were found two marble pillars.
The workmen on the Thracian railway also disclosed to view
the ancient Garian gate, a domed building resting on four marble
piUars, which was accurately described by Ghoniates as the one by
which Andronicus fled (1188), and which had been standing for
centuries in the seclusion of an Ottoman garden unknown to the
world. Unfortunately the course of the railway rendered necessary
the destruction of this interesting relic of the past. Also another
gate, spoken of as the * eastern gate ' in history, was discovered : it
was the one from which Gonstantine addressed the crowd to assure
them of his safety.
As M. Paspate says, 'without an intimate knowledge of the
palaces and their windings and bypaths, most of the historical
Digitized by
Google
472 BYZANTINE PALACES July
facts of Byzantine history must appear like confused statements.'
With the aid of the above-mentioned discoveries and an intimate
knowledge of the historical facts^ M. Faspate has been unable
to unravel much of the mystery which has hitherto hung around
this hill of palaces; but perhaps the most important clue to an
accurate topography of the inmiediate vicinity of the palaces was
afforded by the discovery M. Faspate has made of the ancient pharos
or lighthouse which stood on the cliff above the Boukoleon palace,
and was in close connexion with the palaces behind it.
Froceeding to the north-east of the buildings, which he considers
to have been the noumera, M. Faspate saw standing in an open .
and deserted spot a big Byzantine building three stories in height,
and even now beautiful in its ruins ; it was surrounded by a garden
full of Byzantine remains, marbles beautifully sculptured, and
capitals of pillars. The sole occupant of this building was an old
Turk, very decrepit and poor ; a small mat and a few cooking
utensils represented all his worldly goods ; but this Turk was kindly
disposed to the archsBologist, and the student of Byzantine topo-
graphy undoubtedly owes him a large debt of gratitude, for, contrary
to the custom of his race, he was glad to see M. Faspate whenever
he came, and was never tired of showing him the nooks and corners
of his quaint abode. Furthermore, he provided M. Faspate with
candles and matches, and sent him all by himself through an old
disused door into extensive vaults beneath, the existence of which
had been known hitherto to this old Turk alone.
The position of the three-storied building on the height in front
of the palaces left no doubt in M. Faspate's mind that it was the
ancient lighthouse from which in ancient days beacon fires were
lighted answering those from the neighbouring heights. The view
from the top M. Faspate found exceedingly comprehensive, including
the opposite coastline of Asia Minor : Scutari, Chalcedon, and the
moimtains as far as Olympus were visible. From its extreme
solidity, and perhaps from its usefulness, this building has been
preserved, whilst the nest of palaces behind it has been entirely
destroyed. Close to it M. Faspate found the ruins of a little Byzantine
church, doubtless the Madonna of the lighthouse, so often alluded
to by Byzantine historians as the favourite worshipping place for
the imperial family, for it was connected with the great palace of
Chrysotriklinos which stood just behind it, and where the emperor
generally resided.
Under the pharos, Theophanes tells us, was the treasure room
of the emperors, which was also used as a robing room. Frocopius
further describes these vaults as * exceedingly safe and labyrinthine,
like unto Tartarus.' Into these vaults M. Faspate often descended
alone and with friends, and there can exist no doubt whatever
that here the emperors kept their priceless gems and treasures,
Digitized by
Google
1887 BYZANTINE PALACES 478
which were exhibited on stated occasions in the halls of the palaces
behind.
There are still a few other ruins which M. Paspate has carefully
examined, and which we will consider before proceeding to the site
of the palaces themselves. Some of these lie along the western
wall of the palaces near the gateway which was anciently called
monothyros ; these he considers to be the ruins of the public ban-
queting hall {apLaTTjrripi^ov) where the emperors entertained their
guests. Contemporary writers place it near this wall and gate, and
as additional proof M. Paspate states that the present Turkish name
of the street in which these ruins are is Arista Sokage, * Arista *
not being a Turkish word at all. In some instances the Turks have
translated Greek names into their own language, the hippodrome
for example ; and in other cases they have preserved a corruption of
the ancient nomenclature.
To the north of the Ughthouse and at a considerable distance
from where the central palaces stood, M. Paspate found the ruins
of a very extensive building surrounded and almost hidden by
squalid Turkish cottages. Now this was about the position where
once stood the splendid Manaura palace, on ground sUghtly higher
than the site of the other palaces which Gonstantine built ' to the
north of the church of our Lord and at some distance from his
other palace.' From contemporary writers we gather that the
Manaura had two stories, and M. Paspate found traces of two
stories on this extensive building. The Manaura had vaults under-
neath it, and so has this ; and as a curious and additional piece of
evidence M. Paspate mentions that the inhabitants told him that
these ruins were formerly pigsties, and the banqueting hall called
the Delphakion, or pigsty, was either a portion of or close to the
Manaura palace. In this palace the emperor was wont to converse
with the people on the second day of the first week of Lent, exhort-
ing them to the fear of (jod and the rigid observance of their
fast ; on other occasions the people were here assembled to listen
to addresses from the throne. On the eastern side were three
chambers and four large pillars raised on steps; in one of these
chambers the emperor robed on his reception days, and then was
seated on the golden throne at the top of the steps, whilst the people
knelt in homage in the body of the hall.
In this palace the elections of patriarchs took place, and from
the steps the emperor proclaimed his choice from the three candidates
sent up to him by the electoral college, with these words : * Divine
grace and our empire has chosen so and so.' Porphyrogennetos
gives us an account of the fabulous wealth and adornment of this
palace. Here was kept the so-called throne of Solomon of exceeding
beauty and weight, and in front of the throne was the tree of gilded
brass, the leaves of which were full of brass and gilded birds of every
Digitized by
Qoo^^
474 BYZANTINE PALACES July
description, which sang in notes made to suit the species of each ;
on either side of the throne stood gilded lions, which bellowed and
opened their mouths by machinery.
Byzantine history is full of accounts of gorgeous receptions
which took place in this palace. Theophilos here assembled the
people shortly before his death, when he was wasted by disease
and scarce able to speak, to recommend to them his wife and son
Michael ; royal marriages were solemnised here ; and here ambas-
sadors were received from the Saracens and other nations. The
accounts of the robes worn by the attendants on this palace and
the decorations of the various haUs strike us, almost more than
anything else, with the unbounded magnificence displayed by the
eastern empire during its declining days.
In his description and topography of the central palaces, M.
Faspate has excellent data to go upon. Starting from the eastern
wall and the pharos on the hill above, as from ascertained facts,
he has not much difl&culty in filling up the space which intervened
between the pharos and the eastern wall of the Augusteion. He
first takes the palace of Chrysotriklinos — ' the golden hall ' which,
we are frequently told, stood just behind and in close connexion
with the pharos and its subterranean vaults — but unfortunately the
site which it must have occupied is now entirely covered with
debris. The pharos was a kind of point or conclusion to this tightly
packed mass of buildings — all of them detached and constructed
not as European palaces are to-day, in a solid mass, but spread
over a large area, some being erected by Constantine and others
by his successors, without any regard for plan or symmetry.
Amongst them were dotted innumerable little churches and ora-
tories, at which many of the ceremonies mentioned by Porphyro-
gennetos took place. In fact, this hill must have been covered
with a perfect labyrinth of architectural and decorative beauty.
The Chrysotriklinos is the building which of all the imperial
palaces is most celebrated, and is often called * the palace ' to dis-
tinguish it from the other buildings; and trom the writings of
Forphyrogennetos we learn a great deal concerning it. It was built
by Justin 11^ the nephew of Justinian, in 578, and consisted of
eight semicircular chambers connected together in one central
dome, which rested on pillars and had eight lights let into it. The
imperial throne stood in one of the chambers, and on each side
were the thrones for other emperors and empresses when more
than one sovereign reigned in Constantinople. Adjoining this
golden hall was an open space reserved for magistrates, patricians,
and others who stood awaiting an audience if the weather was fine ;
but if not, they were permitted to enter the chamber itself. To
the east of the golden chamber was the lobby or oratory of St.
Theodore, where the emperors robed ; this was shut off by curtains,
Digitized by
Google
1887 BYZANTINE PALACES 475
and in it was kept the so-called rod of Moses. The lobby to the
right of the throne had a door which led to the emperor's private
apartments, and in the lobby opposite to it stood those who were
in attendance on the emperor.
From the writings of Theophilos we learn much interesting
matter concerning the decorations and procedure in this marvellous
palace. Above, on the roof of the eastern arch, was the mosaic
representation of the Almighty in human form, a great object of
reverence in the eastern church. Before the throne was another
golden tree, in which 'birds, worked by some musical contri-
vance, sang when air was introduced into them through pipes.*
In the centre of the hall was a great oblong golden table, at the
upper end of which sat the emperor and the patriarch facing east ;
opposite them, and at smaller tables, sat those who were summoned
to attend at the private councils of the emperor. The golden hall
had its own special set of attendants, who looked after the robes
and valuable ornaments which were kept there, and who attended
the courtiers when they were invited to a repast, on which occasion
only five dined at the emperor's table, the rest being served on
smaller tables placed about the hall ; to the emperor's left was the
place of dignity, usually occupied by the patriarch. One of the
eight lobbies was devoted entirely to the regalia and the golden
ornaments with which the hall was adorned ; glass slabs of many
colours were placed as decoration on the walls, artificial flowers,
and many-coloured leaves in silver circles. The servants for the
week, called the chrysoklinitoi, very early on each morning brought
out from the oratory of St. Theodore the skaramangion or ordinary
robe in which the emperor appeared, and placed it on a chair
outside the silver gates. At the first hour the head servant came,
holding the key of the gate, and knocked thrice at the emperor's
door ; as soon as the order was given, the robers entered the private
chamber, or ' sacred chamber ' as it was called, to dress his imperial
highness.
Out of the golden hall silver gates and steps led into the tripe*
ton, a large hall open to the air, which acted as a sort of vestibule,
and was entered from the passage of Lausiakos, which separated
the buildings aroimd the Chrysotriklinos from the other palaces.
All we know of this tripeton was that it contained a clock and
a musical instrument, and through it the emperor passed by a door
into his private banqueting hall to the right, which, according to
Porphyrogennetos, had a large silver table and a great and wonder-
fully wrought chandelier of silver hanging over the same ; through
this room by a door opposite to the one leading out of the tripeton
was entered the ' new chamber,' a hall which Basil the Macedonian
added to the buildings of the Chrysotriklinos; it was a vaulted
chamber supported by sixteen pillars, eight of green Thessalian
Digitized by
Google
476 BYZANTINE PALACES July
stone, six of onyx, which the sculptor had beautified with bunches
of grapes and all sorts of animals, and the remaining two were
ornamented with scrolls; the upper part of these pillars was adorned
with lovely mosaics. On the roof were depicted in mosaic the labours
of Basil, and the burdens and toils of warfare which his subjects had
borne. In the centre of the floor was a stone peacock ornamented with
mosaics, and at the four angles of the building were four eagles
also covered with mosaics. Many-coloured glass slabs ornamented
the walls, representing different flowers, and on the outer walls were
represented Basil and his wife Eudoxia in imperial raiment; by
the side of their parents stood their children holding books, and
aroimd the roof ran on a scroll a prayer of the parents on behalf
of their children, and a thanksgiving from the children for the
grandeur which the Almighty had vouchsafed to bestow on their
parents.
To the right of this hall was the so-called * long hall,' which
led to the door whence the church of the pharos was entered.
This served as an antechamber to the imperial private apart-
ments, and in it the servants for the week remained on watch;
by the side of the door leading into the emperor's sleeping room
stood a large porphyry bowl supported by marble pillars, into
which water flowed out of the mouth of a silver eagle, looking
sideways and treading a twisted snake imder its feet. The
emperor's private room had three doors, one into the * new chamber/
another into the emperor's room, and another into the long hall;
hence the arrangement of these rooms of the Chrysotriklinos is very
easily ascertained. The emperor, when dressed, generally came
forth into the long hall, and proceeded through the door which led
from it to the church of the pharos. In this church the emperors
were crowned, and the treasures contained therein were innume-
rable. The ruins of this sacred edifice M. Faspate claims to have
found adjoining the lighthouse and in the old Turk's garden.
Side by side with it was the temple of St. Demetrios ; a door led from
one into the other, and when occasion required the emperor to
attend service there, he passed through the long chamber, and
through the church of the pharos.
Such may be said to have been the central palace of the Byzantine
emperors which was separated from all others by narrow passages,
notably the passage of Lausiakos, dividing it on the western side
&om the other palaces which covered the space between it and the
walls of the Augusteion. The nearest of these to the Chrysotriklinos
was the Triconchos, or palace of the three shells, so called from its
three semicircular apses. Here on Christmas day the patriarch
and other leading men came to greet their sovereign. The central
of the three apses was supported by four pillars of Boman marble,
whilst the others faced obliquely inwards. The western arch had
Digitized by
Google
1887 BYZANTINE PALACES 477
two pillars to support it, and was entered by three gates, two of
tempered bronze and one coated with silver. The roof was gilded.
On passing through the western gates of the Triconchos, another
covered palace was entered, called the Sigma, from its c-shaped
form (as the Byzantines wrote it), the walls of which were decorated
with many-coloured marbles, and the roof was supported by fifteen
pillars of a stone called dokiminm. Beneath this was a chamber of
similar shape and size, supported by seventeen pillars, and paved
with what was called pepper stone. The northern apse of this
chamber was called the mysterion, as any one who whispered on
the wall could be heard nearly all round. This lower chamber
was principally used as a treasure house for the imperial court.
A building adjoining the Sigma was known as * the mysterious
bowl of the Sigma.* It was a domed building, by which access was
gained from the Augusteion into the palaces, and where many
people were collected during Holy week and at other festivals for
receptions. It had no roof, and once we are told that, on account
of severe winds and much snow in winter, the usual reception had
to take place in the adjoining Triconchos palace. In the centre
was a large bowl from which the building took its name, and at the
time of the receptions this bowl was filled with nuts, almonds, and
pineapples, for the refreshment of the guests. The emperor sat
on a gilded throne to receive the homage of the people who stood
on the western side of the large mysterious bowL Why it was
mysterious we do not know, but it is invariably alluded to as such,
and evidently possessed properties of a well-established nature, which
the historians have not thought it necessary to mention. After
the emperor had left the hall the guests danced around the bowl,
forming linked circles after the fashion which stiU prevails amongst
their Greek descendants. This hall was the last of the connected
row of palaces between the pharos and the Augusteion. In the large
open space between them and the southern wall by which, according
to M. Paspate, the novmera stood', there were many buildings of
a minor nature. Three of these are frequently mentioned ; namely,
the kamelasy with its six columns of Thessalian stone supporting a
gilded roof, and adorned with statuary around holding fruit ; the
mesopatos, where the imperial Ubrary was kept ; and the emperor's
robe room, which had beneath it a vault supported by seven pillars
of Parian marble, doubtless again a treasure room. In this space,
too, there were several of those tiny little churches, gems of Byzan-
tine architecture, where the emperors worshipped on particular
feast days ; and then between these buildings and the wall of the
Augusteion were the two private hippodromes of the palace, so
often confounded by writers with the great public hippodrome out-
side the palatial precincts. One was covered, and the other un^
covered for fine weather. ' The hippodromes in the palace,' says
Digitized by
Google
478 BYZANTINE PALACES July
Porphyrogennetos, 'are so called because in them the imperial
family are wont to exercise themselves and ride on horseback.'
To the north of the Sigma and Triconchos palaces, and sepa-
rated from them by the narrow * passage of Daphne/ there stood a
large number of palaces, the most noteworthy being the palaces of
the Daphne, so called, says Codinos, * because here stood a stele,
which was the most prophetic Daphne of Apollo.' The hall of the
Daphne and the octagon dome of the Daphne are two very cele-
brated centres of Byzantine history ; they were surrounded by other
halls and chambers, and had many tiny churches adjoining them.
Again, to the north of the Daphne palaces, and opening into
the street of Achilles, stood the celebrated *hall of the nineteen
couches,* a palace perhaps more frequently alluded to in Byzantine
history than any other. Here at Eastertide the lords of the
palace assembled and gave each other the kiss of peace ; here at
the feast of lights or Epiphany the emperor summoned the patri-
arch to receive his embrace, whilst the courtiers and accompanying
bishops stood to the right and the left. In the centre of this chamber
on the golden couch, called *the couch of woe,' the bodies of
deceased emperors and empresses were placed prior to their burial,
and here the clergy of St. Sophia and those bidden to the funerals
assembled to accompany the corpses. Porphyrogennetos describes
how splendid feasts were given here by the emperor, and how two
Goths sang before the guests in the Gothic tongue, * to us inexpli-
cable and hard to understand.' At these festivals members of the
white faction sat on the left, whilst those of the green were on the
right ; the couches were against the wall, and in the centre was a
wide open space, where Goths and other entertainers of the feasters
danced and sang. The large number of guests invited to the
imperial festivities, and here entertained at a banquet, attests the
size of this hall. It was customary in this hall to provide couches,
and not seats as was usually done at other banquets, for the
guests, and they reclined at table after the fashion of their an-
cestors.
Adjoining the haU of the nineteen couches was the great entrance
to the palaces from the Augusteion, known as the Ghalki, from its
roof of gilded bronze. The emperor and courtiers generally made
use of this entrance when going in or out of the palace walls, but
none save the emperor was allowed to enter it on horseback.
Eight arches supported the three domes, four the central and
highest, two the northern, and two the southern; the roof was
covered with inscriptions, and the walls with mosaic representations
of Justinian's victory over Belisarius, the capture of cities in Italy
and Libya, and in the centre of these mural decorations were the
emperor himself and his queen Theodora surrounded by courtiers
and in regal state. From the Ghalki two gates opened into the
Digitized by
Google
1887 BYZANTINE PALACES 479
Augusteion, one large and one small, and at these gates the
emperor held many receptions, more especially at the large iron gate
which was the principal entrance to his palace. We are told that
the decorations of this porch were very beautiful, but all we know
of its contents is that the emperor Zeno here put up a memorial
tablet to himself and his wife, and that on the left stood four
columns, which Codinos tells us were brought from the temple of
Diana at Ephesus.
Having thus conducted us through the various halls and palaces
collected together on this hill, besides an infinite number of smaller
buildings, churches, and so forth, which we cannot enumerate
here, M. Paspate borrows from Porphyrogennetos an account of
an imperial procession to St. Sophia to illustrate these several
buildings ; and this we will summarise here, so that a more com-
plete picture of the pageants which graced the Byzantine court may
be obtained.
On the vigil of a great feast, the prepositi (all eunuchs) came to
the Chrysotriklinos to remind the emperor of the impending feast,
and to consult him about the procedure of the morrow, that they
might give instructions to the two demarchs, and to the directors
and servants who superintended the many branches of this laby-
rinthine pile of buildings ; likewise it was their duty to intimate to
the city magistrates that they should see to the cleansing of the
streets by which the procession should pass, and to decorate them
with daphne, cedar, and other sweet-smelling flowers.
Very early on the morning of the feast, the prepositi and other
attendants assembled outside the Chrysotriklinos in the tripeton,
and waited till the big gate was thrown open, when they were
admitted inside and took up their position on seats provided for
them in one of the lobbies. Meanwhile the chamberlain hurried
off to the oratory of St. Theodore to fetch the rod of Moses, and
the robers went to fetch the imperial vestments from the chest in
which they were kept ; the shield-bearers were sent down into the
subterranean vault to bring up * the arms, the shields, the spears,
and the diadem which was to be used in this procession,' and these,
together with the robes to be worn in St. Sophia, were taken and
deposited in the octagon of the Daphne.
When all the preparations were concluded, the emperor came
out of his private sleeping apartment dressed in the scaraTnangion,
and at once proceeded to commence his devotions by offering up a
prayer before the picture of the Almighty in the Chrysotriklinos,
and then, accompanied by the prepositi and robed in the golden
sangia (a garment which came down to the knees), he proceeded to
the Sigma palace, where; all the courtiers were assembled to meet
him and join in the procession. The first order of the day was to
worship in the small churches which, we have seen, lay to the
Digitized by
Google
480 BYZANTINE PALACES July
south of the Sigma palace, close to the imperial hippodromes;
at each of these the emperor lighted a candle, handed to him
by the prepositi, and said a prayer. When these devotions were
concluded, he went to the octagon of the Daphne, accompanied only
by the robers, to put on his pubUc robes, and having said another
prayer in the church of St. Stephen — which adjoined the octagon —
he entered the hall of the Daphne, there to await the patriarch'^
deputy, who brought the order of the day as arranged by the
patriarch for the ceremony in St. Sophia. When this was received,
the emperor again entered the octagon, and a prepositm in a loud
voice again summoned the robers to place the diadem on the
imperial head, and thus arrayed in his splendid robes and his
crown the emperor passed through a number of adjoining rooms,
in each of which public functionaries were waiting to greet him ; in
one he was greeted by the admirals and ofl&cers of the fleet, in
another by the generals and officers of the army, in another by the
first secretary and notaries, and in each hall and church the pro-
cession stopped to worship the relics and pictures there exhibited.
On reaching the hall of nineteen couches the emperor found all
the officers of the palace, the sceptre-bearers, and a large assemblage
of distinguished people marshalled to the right and left, and holding
golden ornaments, ready to do him homage, besides all the deputies
from foreign nations, Saracens, Franks, and Bulgarians. After
this gorgeous reception in the haU of the nineteen couches, the
procession advanced towards the gate of Chalki, in the vestibule
of which the emperor found the physicians on the right and the
wrestlers on the left assembled to wish that * God may grant him
many and good years,' and at the gate itself were gathered together
a large group of musicians singing hymns and playing instruments
in his honour. On issuing forth out of the gate the emperor wa&
met by the deputies of the two factions of the white and the green
in the street of Achilles, and having duly received them, the whole
line of the procession was formed, and headed by the emperor
proceeded to the church of St. Sophia, where the patriarch awaited
him. On entering the sacred edifice the attendants removed the
crown from the imperial head, and accompanied by the patriarch
the emperor went to perform his devotions.
After the gorgeous ceremony in the cathedral was concluded,
the emperor proceeded to the Milion, where another reception of
city deputies took place, after which the procession went up and
down the open space in the middle of the Augusteion, and returned
to the gate of Chalki, where the emperor bade adieu to a portion of
his followers ; but in the hall of the nineteen couches and in the
respective rooms in which he had first met them, he parted with the
other portions of his retinue. He was unrobed of his vestments and
his crown was removed in the octagon of the Daphne, and accom-
Digitized by
Google
1887 BYZANTINE PALACES 481
panied only by the palace officials he retired to the Chrysotriklinos,
where they wished that * God might grant him and his kingdom
many and good years/ and left him in peace. Before finally retiring
to his own private room the emperor worshipped once more before
the great picture of the Almighty, and then the ceremony was
over.
Such was the religious festival in the palace which took place
on Easter Sunday, Pentecost, the Transfiguration, Christmas day^
and the feast of lights. Of the numerous minor festivals and pro-
cessions within the palace walls, Porphyrogennetos gives a minute
accoimt, which is of great value in enabling us to understand the
topography, and constantly referred to by M. Paspate in support
of his statements concerning the position of each building; hence it
is not likely that further excavations, when they can be made, will
do much to disturb the admirably worked-out plan M. Paspate
appends to his interesting volume.
Theodore Bent.
VOL. n. — ^No. vn. > . 1 1
Digitized by
Google
482 July
Queen Caroline of Naples
SOME time ago the editor of this review placed in my hands
about thirty letters addressed by Queen Caroline of Naples,
wife of Ferdinand IV, to Mr. Eobert Fagan, who was consul-general
in Sicily at the beginning of the century.* The letters range in date
over about a year, from March 1812 to April 1813. Some of them
are in Italian and a few in French. They are full of denunciation of
the queen's wrongs and of abuse of Lord WiUiam Bentinck. There is
one letter of his lordship's in which he vies with the queen in strong
expressions. Lord William writes from Palermo, 26 Sept. [1812],
to Mr. Fagan : ' I have read your note just now informing me of the
queen having sent to you to say that the hereditary prince was
declared to be so ill as to be unable to hold for the future the
reins of government. This must be one of her lies, of which she
deals out a great abundance. I think it will be better to put an
end to the negotiations which she takes either for the want of
decision or of instruction, and therefore if she sends for you again I
beg you will not go to her.* Although it was obvious from the corre-
spondence that the relations between Lord William and the queen
were of anything but an amicable character, it did not appear easy
to determine who was in the right. Lord William has always had
the reputation of a just and upright man and a good officer. Queen
Caroline receives a good character from the hands of her (jerman
biographer Helfert. I felt that it would not be fair to write upon
the subject with one-sided evidence in my hands. I therefore made
a careful study of the correspondence relating to Sicily in the Public
Becord Office &om February 1811 to June 1813. Even then it was
not easy to come to a decision. Those who were best acquainted
with both sides of the case seem to have condemned the queen.
At the same time great allowance must be made for an impulsive
passionate nature coming into violent conflict with a cold and obsti-
nate Englishman. In this dilemma I have determined to lay the facts
* These letters to his grandfather were kindly placed at my disposal by Mr. Louis
Fagan, of the Print Boom, British Moseom, who adds that Bobert Fagan was bom
at Cork, and died in Bome 16 Aug. 1816. Besides his other occupations, he was
distinguishedjas an amateur artist, and in 1812 exhibited in the Boyal Academy the
portrait of Lord Amherst*s children.— Editob, Hxstobigal Biyhw.
Digitized by
Qoo^<^
1887 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES 488
before the readers of this review, and aUow them to judge for them-
selves. It will probably be fomid that the inevitable force of circum-
stances is more to be blamed than either the lady or her adversary.
Naples did not become involved in the troubles which followed the
French revolution until nearly ten years after its outbreak. In 1798
the king of the Two Sicilies joined the coalition against France. The
Neapolitan army marched into the Boman territory under the com-
mand of the king. No time was lost by France in avenging the insult.
The army retreated, the old king returned to Naples in the clothes of
a lord-in- waiting, a terrible insurrection broke out in the capital,
and the royal family took refuge, 21 Dec. 1798, in the * Vanguard,*
Nelson's flagship, which three days later sailed for Palermo. The
lazzaroni did their best to resist the French, they broke open the
prisons and let out the convicts, but could not stand against regu-
lar troops, and on 23 Jan. Championnet was after a severe struggle
master of the city. The Parthenopean repubUc was established by
the French, and Ferdinand IV did not return to his country till after
the signing of the peace of Amiens in 1802. He was brought back
with great rejoicings by British ships and under British protection.
Queen Caroline, who had left Palermo two years before for Schon-
brunn, hastened to join him. One of the first results of the breach of
the peace of Amiens was the occupation of Naples by the French.
A hundred and thirty thousand men under Governor St. Cyr occu-
pied aU the ports and strong places from Pescara to Brindisi. Alquier,
the French minister in Naples, insisted upon the dismissal of Acton,
the true and tried servant of the NeapoUtan monarchy. Ferdinand
dared not refuse, and could only console himself by bestowing a
pension on the faUen favourite with the title of prince. Again upon
the throne the king and queen found themselves embarrassed by
the conflicting claims of powerful neighbours. On which side
should they range themselves — on the side of France or on that of
the allies ? Which power was more likely to secure to them the
integrity of their dominions and the security of their throne ?
The defiance of England had been followed by a new coalition
against Napoleon by Austria and Eussia. There were signs of
Austrian sympathies at Naples, as a new Austrian ambassador had
been received with obtrusive welcome. In answer to this the French
garrison was strengthened, and Napoleon sent two letters to the
king and queen, threatening them in direct and even brutal language
with the consequence of their joining the coalition. * The moment
that war breaks out,* he writes to the daughter of Maria Theresa,
* you and your family will have ceased to reign, and your children
will wander throughout Europe to beg assistance for their parents.'
In the spring of 1805 Napoleon incited the wrath of Italy, and
made up his mind to extend his dominions from one end of the
peninsula to the other. In spite of Napoleon's desire not to cause
I 1 2
Digitized by
Google
484 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES July
alarm, this design could not long remain imknown to the parties most
interested. They had no refuge but in joining the coalition. A Eussian
ambassador appeared at Naples. Alquier reported to his court the
wavering allegiance of the sovereigns towards the French. At the
beginning of September St. Cyr had orders to break up from the
extreme south of Italy and march towards the capital. The queen in
great alarm saw no way of safety but by signing a secret treaty
of alliance with Eussia. Still the outward appearance of friendship
with France had to be observed. Talleyrand insisted on the king
agreeing to a treaty of neutraUty with France. It was looked upon
on both sides as waste paper : by the French as a device for gaining
time ; by Ferdinand as a measure extorted by compulsion, to be
cast aside on the first opportunity.
It would have been difficult for the most keen-sighted statesman
to foretell on which side victory would incline. The whole strength of
England, Eussia, and Austria was ranged against Napoleon. Prussia
was only waiting for the first gleam of victory to join the coalition.
How could France, scarcely recovered from serious defeats, stand
against such combined efforts ? All these plans were disconcerted
by the marvellous rapidity and good fortune of the French emperor.
On 5 November the last French troops crossed the frontier of Naples
on their way to the north, but a fortnight before the whole army of
Mack had capitulated at Ulm ; on 20 November the combined Eng-
lish and Eussian fleets sailed into the bay of Naples, and Alquier
demanded his passports. Twelve days later the battle of Auster-
litz was fought, and on 29 Dec, the day after the signing of the
peace of Pressburg, Napoleon issued a proclamation to his army
that the dynasty of Naples had ceased to reign. The allies on whom
the queen had relied began to desert her ; the English troops sailed
to Sicily, the Eussians to Corfu. On 8 February the French army
again crossed the Garigliano, and four days later Ferdinand and
Caroline set sail for Sicily. Joseph Bonaparte was made king of
Naples, to be succeeded two years later by Murat. From this time
the situation is a very complicated one. Joseph and Murat are
both convinced that Naples is a valueless and incomplete possession
without the addition of Sicily. The Neapolitan sovereigns in Sicily
are supported by English arms. Sicily was regarded by the English
partly as a third station in the Mediterranean besides Gibraltar and
Malta, and partly as a point of departure for harassing the French
in Sicily. Ferdinand, or rather Caroline by whom he was urged, dis-
liked the French and EngUsh equally. She was Grerman by birth and
Italian by education. Her great desire was to have her own way, and
be restored to the position, which she had held for so many years, of
queen of the Two Sicilies. She was willing to be fiiendly with either
party who would secure that end ; she was the enemy of which-
ever party was for the moment the most likely to deprive her of her
Digitized by
Google
1887 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES 485
«rown and of her remaining possessions. Joseph and Murat were
open enemies, but the English might at any moment put an end to
the sovereignty which they had already reduced to a shadow, and
annex Sicily as they had annexed Malta. Nor was it certain that
Sicily might not at some time or other be surrendered by the
English as the price of peace. Such an arrangement had been dis-
<3ussed between Lord Yarmouth and TaUeyrand in 1806, and the
negotiations had only been put an end to by the death of Fox. The
connexion with England was indeed a material advantage to the .
Sicilian court. By the treaty of commerce signed between England
and Naples in 1808, we had undertaken the defence of Messina and
Augusta, which required a garrison of at least a thousand strong ;
we also covenanted to pay the court a yearly subsidy of 800,000^.,
to date from September 1805, the date of the landing of the Anglo-
Bussian forces in Naples, and eighteen months later this sum was
raised to 400,000Z. Notwithstanding this UberaUty the queen's
demands for pecuniary aid were persistent and importunate.
The peace of Vienna, which followed the battle of Wagram in
1809, affected the relations of the Sicilian royal family to Napoleon.
The reconciliation between France and Austria was confirmed by
the marriage of Napoleon with Marie Louise, whose mother was
Maria Theresa, the daughter of Ferdinand. Thus the great emperor
became the grandson of Queen Caroline. Although Murat, king of
Naples, had married another Caroline, the sister of Napoleon, who
combined the beauty of the family with the talent of her brother, re-
lations were not always very smooth between his great protector and
himself. His haughty spirit led him to aim at a more independent
kingship, and the favour of Napoleon might at any time be changed
into wrath and revenge. It was natural that Queen Caroline should
not neglect the opportunity which her connexion with the French
imperial court offered of regaining her coveted palaces. Lord
Amherst, writing to Lord Wellesley on 8 Feb. 1811, says that he
has further information of an arrangement between Naples and
Austria, by which Naples is to be restored to Ferdinand IV, and
that a prince of the house of Austria is to be placed on the throne
of Sicily. * This project is to be put into execution by means of
German troops, to whom it is imagined that the Sicilians would
oppose less hostility than to an army consisting of French and
Neapolitans.' The inhabitants of Sicily are to be deprived of arms ;
the levee en masse of the population, which had been so potent an
instrument against the French, is to be discouraged. The queen is
constantly corresponding with Vienna in cipher, notwithstanding
her solemn promise, after the marriage of Marie Louise, that she
would break off all connexion with the court of her birth — ^the
pledge given in March 1810, both by the king and queen, of
unshaken loyalty to the alliance with Great Britain. He adds : * If
Digitized by
Google
486 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES July
your lordship asks me how I can reconcfle these assurances with
the engagements now supposed to be entered into with our enemies,
I answer that I believe jealousy of the designs of Great Britain
predominates in the queen's mind over the hatred she may entertain
for Bonaparte; and with respect to his Sicilian majesty — never
doubting for a moment the loyalty and fidelity of his principles, I
think deception may be practised towards him, and that a plot may
be carried on in which he is no partaker.'
Just at this time another matter caused additional strain to the
relations between the English and SiciUan governments. Sicily
had for a considerable time possessed a parliament of estates of the
medieval and feudal type. It consisted of three arms or branches,
the barons, the clergy, and the tenants of the crown. Among the
last were the most important towns under the presidency of the
praetor of Palermo. The parliament met every four years, and in
later times consisted of 62 prelates, 124 barons, and 46 deputies
from the crown lands. The prince of Butera, as holding eighteen
fiefs, had command of as many votes. The different branches of
the assembly met and voted separately. During the vacation of
parliament a committee of three from each arm watched over the
expenditure of the taxes and the execution of the laws.' The time
had come when a new parliament was to be summoned. It was
opened by the crown prince in the grand hall of the royal palace at
Palermo on 25 Jan. 1810. A yearly subsidy of 250,000 ounces had
been voted in 1802 and 1806. The parliament was now ordered to
increase this to 800,000 ounces, and to give besides a donation to
the queen and one to the crown prince on the birth of his infant
daughter. After three weeks, the parliament had only voted a little
more than half the sum asked for ; on 18 June the king declared
his intention of summoning a new parliament, which was to correct
abuses and equalise taxation. The king promised on his side to
employ in future none but Sicilian ministers. This promise, how-
ever, was not fulfilled. Medici, the minister of finance, was removed,
but the Marchese Donato Tommasi, a Neapolitan, was appointed in
his place. When the new parliament came together, it was found
to be less willing to vote money than its predecessor, and it proposed
a reform in taxation, which was accepted by the king. The needs
of the court continued to be as pressing as ever. The English sub-
sidy was granted for certain well-defined purposes, and, as we shall
presently see, was suspended on the ground that its appUcation had
been improperly altered. On 4 Feb. 1811 Tommasi took strong
measures for bringing money into the royal coffers. An edict was
issued which imposed a tax of one per cent, on all money payments
of every description whatsoever. Further a proposal was made to
sell by lottery a large amount of property belonging to religious
* Botteok and Weloker, ix. 68. Helfert, p. 429.
Digitized by
Google
1887 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES 487
orders. 15,000 tickets were to be issued at ten ounces each, which
would bring in a sum equal to 112,500?.' The edict imposing the
tax was entirely unconstitutional. Only four cases existed in which
the authority of parliament could be dispensed with in raising
supplies — an enemy in the country, an insurrection, the captivity of
the king, and the marriage of his daughters. No such exercise of
arbitrary authority had been known since the war of the Austrian
succession. The measure was a great hindrance to conmierce, and
specially injurious to the numerous English firms settled in the
island. Immediately on the appearance of the edict, forty out of
the fifty-seven barons of which the military arm was then composed,
with Prince Belmonte at their head, drew up a protest against it.
They commanded amongst them 160 votes out of the 275 which
were assigned to their order. The population found means to evade
the edict. Business arrangements, which before depended on law,
were now left to rest on the good faith of the contracting parties.
The protest of the barons was presented to the king, but the tax
continued to be levied. The lottery project failed; only a small
number of the tickets were taken up.
If we are to beUeve our agents, the eyes of the Sicilians were
turned with hope to the English government. Lord Amherst hjwl
been recalled, and Lord William Bentinck, who was to take his
place as civil and military governor of the island, was looked for
with impatience, as pursuing a more energetic exercise of English
authority.
Lord William Bentinck's arrival (sdys Mr. Douglas, writing on
22 June 1811) is expected with a degree of anxiety which nobody can con-
ceive but those who are on the spot. The Sicilians look up with eager
and gasping hope that he may be bearer of instructions to adopt a lofty
and decisive tone which may compel the court to the adoption of a milder
system of government. I can assure you most positively that the majority
of the Sicilians will be satisfied with nothing less than the British flag
flying all over Sicily, It is impossible that things can go on as they are
at present. Last year when I made the tour of the island I found the
universal cry to be * J/" the English will not take Sicily, the French must,*
These expressions of opinion, whether true or false, were not calcu-
lated to influence the queen favourably towards the English, and she
had been the more alarmed by a discussion which took place in parlia-
ment upon the Sicilian subsidy on 1 May. In the meantime she
determined upon a bold stroke. On 19 July a royal decree directed
the arrest of five of the principal barons who had signed the protest,
Princes Belmonte, Villarmosa, ViUafranca, PetruUa, and Aci.'* They
were carried off by a Sicilian corvette under the guns of Admiral
■ Amherst to WeUesley, 26 March 1811.
* Douglas to WeUesley, 24 Jane 1811.
Digitized by
Google
488 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES July
Boyle's flagship to be confined in various Italian islands. Three
days after this event Bentinck reached Palermo.
Lord William Charles Cavendish Bentinck, second son of the
third duke of Portland, was bom 14 Sept. 1774. He served in the
Scots Greys under the duke of York in Flanders, was attached to
the army of Suworov in Italy, was from 1804 to 1807 governor
of Madras, and commanded an English brigade at the battle of
Corunna. He had therefore enjoyed ample experience both of civil
and military commands. He was a just and upright man. His chief
defect was that he was too much of an Englishman, and was apt to
consider narrow English remedies as a panacea for all political
diseases whenever they might arise. He had received very ample
instructions both open and secret. He was to be at once am-
bassador and commander-in-chief, to exercise all the functions
which had been separately performed by Lord Amherst and Sir
James Stuart. His first attention was to be directed to the subsidy.
That was to be devoted to the payment of the Sicilian army and
navy in due proportions, and an account of expenditure was to be
rendered to the English government every three months. There
is a grave suspicion that these conditions had not been complied
with ; if Bentinck finds them justified, he is to threaten the sus-
pension of payment. The due application of the subsidy for the
defence of the island is regarded as the keystone of the alliance.
At the same time other important matters will claim Bentinck's
attention. The discontent of the Sicilian nation, arising from the
exclusion of Sicilians from the government and the employment of
Neapolitans, from the neglect of the advice of parliament and the
imposition of arbitrary taxes, is of serious moment to English in-
terests. The feudal rights of the nobility and the privileges of
corporations are serious hindrances to the development of the
country. The irritation caused by these evils is so great that there
is danger of a revolution ; the queen is jealous of English influ-
ence, and is afraid that she and her husband may at any time be
sacrificed to France. Bentinck was to remove if possible the
causes of this jealousy. He was to give a solemn pledge that so
long as Ferdinand was faithful to England, the English govern-
ment would under all circumstances maintain his right both to
Sicily and Naples, and at any rate secure him in the possession of
Sicily. But the court must be willing to listen to English advice.
England does not wish to interfere in the internal government
of Sicily, except where abuses jeopardise the defence against the
common enemy and the security of the English alliance. It is
absolutely necessary that Sicilians should be admitted to the mi-
nistry, and that the orders of parliament should be attended to. If
the neglect of these measures should lead to a revolution, English
arms could not be used to put it down. On the other hand, if the
Digitized by
Google
1887 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES 489
king will listen to English warnings, the British forces will be
employed in the protection of his person and government, in main-
taining his just and le^timate authority in Sicily, as well as in the
defence of the island against the enemy.
Bentinck had a weary task before him. He was to ^ve advice
which might be good and was certain to be unpalatable. He was
to offer it with discretion and temper. It was only too probable
that the discretion and temper would be such as instigated the
severity of John Knox towards Mary Stuart. On this first occa-
sion Bentinck only stayed a month in Sicily. He did his best
to induce the king and queen to revoke the obnoxious edict, to
recall the exiled barons, to allow Palermo to be garrisoned by
British troops, and, it is said,^ to send a Sicilian contingent of
120,000 men to strengthen the British army in Spain. His
advances were met with an absolute refusal. On 27 Aug. Lord
William, having ^ven a brilliant ball on the previous evening, em-
barked on board the *Cephalus' and sailed with great haste to
London. The queen was in a deep state of dejection. She wrote
on 80 Aug. to the emperor at Vienna : ' I am almost forgotten by
my enemies, but pressed down and trodden imder foot, robbed and
almost dethroned by those who call themselves our friends and
aUies, for whom we have sacrificed so much. Will your majesty
grant me a refuge in one of your cities, Briinn, Graz, or Salzburg,
to finish my unhappy life there ? ' ® Shortly after this she had a
dangerous attack of illness. On 16 Sept. she took an emetic
against the advice of her physicians, and, experiencing no relief, she
drank twenty-four glasses of water. Soon after this at two o'clock in
the afternoon, whilst she was conversing with the Marchese Tommasi,
she fell down senseless. She was with difficulty carried by five
persons to a sofa. After some time she came to herself and sent for
her confessor and her children. She took an affectionate leave of
them. To her eldest son she recommended her dearly beloved
youngest son Leopold and the emigres who had accompanied her
from Naples. She bade Leopold, then twenty-one years old, to
behave well. To her favourite daughter, the duchess of Genevois,
she said, * Mimi, you have always been very good to me ; ' and to
Marie Am6Ue, duchess of Orleans, afterwards queen of the French,
* I thank you also, my dear Emily ; live happily.' * Pray for me, my
children,' she concluded ; ' I stand in great need of your prayers.'
At ten o'clock she had another attack, and the last sacraments were
administered to her. Soon after this she asked to be bled in the
foot, which had relieved her in a similar illness at Leghorn. Next
day she was much better, and in a day or two was out of danger.
We shall see, however, that this illness was only the beginning of
the end.
» Helfert, p. 486. • Helfert, p. 489.
Digitized by
Google
490 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES July
At the beginning of November 1811 it was known in Palermo
that Lady William Bentinck, who had remained behind in that city,
was expecting her husband to arrive about the 20th. He did not
actually reach Sicily till 7 Dec. He came with very precise
and not very agreeable instructions. He had informed his govern-
ment that Sicily was by no means in a satisfactory state of defence,
that the miUtary force raised by the English subsidy was, in the
event of an invasion, more likely to be a hindrance than a help,
while the discontent of the population against the government
prevented eflScient co-operation against an enemy. Acting on this
advice, Lord Wellesley determined that the subsidy should be sus-
pended from 1 Oct. until Bentinck should think it advisable to
resume it. The exiled barons were to be recalled, and persons
opposed to the EngUsh to be removed from the ministry. His
instructions further reminded him that there was grave suspicion,
but no absolute proof, that the queen had conducted a treasonable
correspondence with the French. He was to watch carefully for
evidences of guilt, but was to understand that the English troops
were in no case to be used to silence the court of Palermo. If all
advice failed, they were to be transferred to some spot where they
could be of greater use. The placing of the whole disposal of the
subsidy in Bentinck's hands gave him immense authority.
Bentinck was also ordered to superintend a plan for wresting
Italy from the French, which has been Kttle noticed by English
historians. Archduke Francis of Este (afterwards duke of Modena,
now a young man of two-and-thirty) had formed the design of
collecting an army in Sardinia for the invasion of Italy. The
English government instructed Bentinck to render what assistance
he could to the enterprise. On his former journey to Palermo he
had stopped at Cagliari to gain what information he could about
the archduke's armament. He reported favourably of him, said
that besides the loss of his dominions he had a special grievance
against Napoleon for having deprived him of his betrothed bride,
Marie Louise. His plan was to collect an army of Austrians and
Italians who were disgusted with Napoleon's government. He looked
especially to the Dalmatians, whose country had recently been annexed
by France, to form the nucleus of the conspiracy. With an army
of this kind he would rouse a national insurrection in Italy against
the French such as they were already contending with in Spain.
The first idea had been to make the Ionian islands and the island
of Lissa on the coast of Dalmatia the principal rallying of the arch-
duke's armament, but subsequently the island of Sardinia was
preferred. Bentinck was entrusted with 100,0002. to spend on the
enterprise, and 50,000i. for the defence of Sardinia. He was autho-
rised to promise the archduke 5,000Z. a year if he should engage in
actual warfare in Italy. Bentinck was to decide upon all measures
Digitized by
Google
1887 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES 491
which it might be desirable to take. At the same time the people of
Italy must not be excited to any exertion which they may not think
necessary for their own safety and interests. The principal reliance
of Italy must rest upon the unanimity, courage, and perseverance of
her own people in applying the resources of their country against
the common enemy with the necessary precautions of prudence.
The season and mode of resistance must be chosen by them on the
spot. It would be wrong to afford any assistance to a partial attack
or premature project which should neither unite the energy or zeal
of the great body of the people, nor be founded on a due sense of
the difficulties and dangers of such an enterprise.^
Bentinck's first step on his arrival was to inform the Marquis
Circello, the prime minister, that the subsidy had been suspended.
Two days later he was presented to the king and queen. Knowing
that the queen was really the mainspring of the government, he was
anxious for a conversation with her as soon as possible, and this
was arranged for 13 Dec. Bentinck, on being introduced, said
that he wished to see her majesty as soon as possible on his
arrival, as she had been the last person he had taken leave of. The
prince regent of England was actuated solely by friendship and
regard, and never had any other object in view than the honour and
independence of the king of Sicily. Here the queen stopped him, and
asked him if he were an honest man and could make such a remark.
For six years it had been the settled wish of the English to take the
country. Fox le spirituel had said so, Moore le Jacobin enrage did not
deny it, Drummond quiparlait comme tinfou, Stuart, and Bentinck
himself were all working to the same end. She had always said so
to her ministers, who first thought her mad, but now admitted that
she was right. How had we behaved with regard to Spain ? Prince
Leopold had been invited by the Spanish ministry, and we refused
to let him go. Sir John Stuart had remained at Ischia inactive
with 28,000 men, when there were only 8,000 French in Naples.
On Bentinck urging the employment of Sicilians, she said that the
king ought to be allowed to choose his own servants. The council
consisted of Butera, Cassaro, and Parisi, who were Sicilians,
Circello, qui est une bete^ Medici, who was an able man, and ArtaU,
minister of war. ' As for him,* she said, ' he is a fool whom you
may boil, cook, and roast if you please.' It would be impossible to
compose the council of Sicilians, from the difficulty of finding
persons who could read and write. Cassaro was an honest man,
and, she added ironically, ' a great genius. He has a sublime idea
of geography ; he would think it quite natural if you told him that
the EngUsh squadron had just anchored in the port of Vienna.'
She would be very glad to see Prince Belmonte in the ministry,
because he would immediately turn against the English. In the
' Lord Wellesley to Lord W. Bentinck, October 1811.
Digitized by
Google
492 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES July
very room in which they were now standing he had cautioned her
against the EngUsh, who wished to reduce the sovereign to the
condition of a nabob. It was quite impossible either that Bentinck
could command the army or that the barons should be recalled.
She had never corresponded with Napoleon nor with his grand-
daughter ; Napoleon was a coquin. She would leave the country,
not to beg her bread in England or Italy, but to go to Germany,
and hoped that a frigate would not be refused her to take her to
Durazzo or Constantinople. The king might do as he pleased;
perhaps he would abdicate in favour of his son. The conversation
lasted two hours. It left the impression on Bentinck that, with
exceeding good abilities, she probably never had any common sense,
and that her mind, enfeebled by age (she was now fifty-nine years
of age), by vast quantities of opium and the operation of violent
passions, had reached a state Uttle short of actual insanity.^ Two
days before this interview the queen had sent for Fagan, the British
consul-general, with whom she had quarrelled, and whom she had
not seen for a year.
There is no doubt that Bentinck and the English government
believed firmly that the queen had carried on treasonable corre-
spondence with the enemy, with Murat certainly, if not with
Napoleon. It is difficult from the materials at hand to get a clear
idea of when this was, but there seems to be evidence that during
the year 1811 tolerably frequent communications were kept up
between Palermo and Naples. A small felucca mounting one or
two guns would sail from Naples to Palmerola, the westernmost of
the Ponza group; thence it would proceed nearly due south to
XJstica, a small isolated island lying due north of Palermo about
five hours' sail. The emissary would remain ten or twelve days at
Palermo, and have frequent interviews with the queen three hours
after sunset. The emissary would return by the same route.
Prince Ascoli was in the secret, and one Castroni conducted the
correspondence. The letters were sealed by a lyre with the inscrip-
tion Nous sommes d'accord. It appeared that Napoleon had pro-
mised the queen compensation for herself and a niece of his own
for Prince Leopold if she would co-operate in driving the English
out of Sicily. Murat was to march his troops down to Reggio,
while the Sicilian troops attacked the English and favoured the
landing of the French at Messina. The fieet had been corrupted,
and two battalions devoted to the queen had been formed under the
supervision of the police. There is so much converging evidence
for a design of this kind that the charge is probably not without
foundation. It is corroborated by the remarkable conversation
between General Donkin and General Goldeipaar which will be found
at length at the end of this article.
« Bentinck to Wellesley, 26 Deo. ISll.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES 49»
Another charge was of a totally different character. A certain
Baron Jacobi, a German diplomatist, was overheard at Messina
giving utterance to designs for turning the English out of Sicily.
It was said that in pursuance of a secret article of the treaty of
Vienna, Naples and Calabria were to be restored to King Ferdinand,
while Sicily was given to one of the emperor's brothers. The ar-
rangement was sanctioned by the court of St. Petersburg, and
Baron Jacobi was sent to Palermo as the envoy of Austria.^ What-
ever might have been the result of either of these plans, they were
frustrated by the arrival of Lord WiUiam Bentinck. After Usten-
ing to all the evidence Bentinck informed his government that it
was his decided opinion that a treacherous correspondence had
been carried on with the enemy. He felt that energetic measures
were necessary for the security of the island, and deprecated the
limitations of his instructions. He ordered up a regiment from
Malta to Messina, and collected transports at Melazzo and Palermo.
He considered that in * listening to the call of the whole country '
the British government was fulfilling the duties of a good and great
nation.^® Admiral Fremantle was also in favour of energetic mea-
sures. He felt sure that there had been treachery on the part of
the Sicilian government, but up to the present he had not dis-
covered any document which would criminate any part of the royal
family.
Bentinck had a second interview with the queen on 2 Jan.
1812. She expressed great anxiety for an accommodation; she
had always been EngUsh by sentiment, and * now,' she said with
a smile, * I must be EngUsh by necessity.' She would not oppose
force. She had persuaded the king not to abdicate, but to re-
turn to Palermo for his birthday. He was now at the Ficuzza,
a shooting-box in the mountains about six miles from Palermo.
She had never corresponded with France, and in future no vessel
should go to Naples without a passport from the English admiral,
and no letter without being shown to Bentinck. She hoped that
Bentinck would come to her at all hours without notice and
speak without restraint. Bentinck took care not to irritate her,
and the interview passed off quietly. From the palace he went
to Circello, who announced to him the king's concern to appoint
him captain-general under certain restrictions, and showed him a
plan for a new administration. This was to add four new members
to the council, but not to change any of the ministers except the
minister of war. Bentinck said that the arrangement was entirely
unsatisfactory. He declined to give his objections or to propose
names, but said that Prince Gassaro shoidd be consulted. The
next day Circello showed Bentinck a list of names which Prince
* VioUand'B declaration, Sicily, voL 78.
>' Bentinck to V^ellesley, 1 Jan. 1812.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
494 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES July
Gassaro hapd suggested for the ministry. Bentinck, however, had
previously seen Prince Gassaro, and had heard from him that he
had neither been consulted nor had approved of the names. Ben-
tinck, feeling that whilst the barons remained in exile Prince
Gassaro was the only person who could be trusted to oppose the
queen's measures, urged him to take the three departments of
finance, war, and the interior, leaving the foreign ofl&ce to Gircello.
After some hesitation he accepted.
On 6 Jan. Bentinck accepted an invitation from the king to
visit him at the Ficuzza, where he stayed a night. The king did
not talk on politics ; this was left to the ^uke of Ascoli. The duke
abused the queen roundly ; he said that she was surrounded by a
crowd of villains and the dregs of Naples, whom he was ashamed to
see in her antechamber. She was a woman with whom nothing
could be carried on, whose intentions varied every five minutes, who
speaks * to you, to me, to the porter, the priests, with a crowd of
rogues and villains, believes what each one says and changes with
each of their opinions.' He said that the king would never consent
to Prince Gassaro holding these offices, as both the king and the
queen disliked him exceedingly. The only hope lay in the queen's
death, which might not be far distant. On returning to Palermo
Bentinck informed Gircello that if Prince Gassaro were not appointed
a principal place in the government he would leave Palermo for
Messina that day week. On 9 Jan. the court gave way. Bentinck's
arrangement was carried out except that Gargeles, 'a spy and a
creature of the queen's,' was made minister of war.* * Notwithstand-
ing this submission Bentinck gave orders for the garrison of
Melazzo to sail to Palermo, Melazzo being reinforced from Messina.
On 16 Jan. by a royal decree the hereditary prince was ap-
pointed vicar-general and alter ego of the king with full powers.
This was attributed to the king's state of health, but Bentinck in a
despatch of 17 Jan. ^ves a graphic account of the means by which
it was brought about. On the 10th he paid the prince a visit by
invitation, and had a very long conversation with him. The prince
repudiated the suggestion that his mother had corresponded with
the French, while Bentinck disclaimed any desire to acquire the
island on the part of the English. Bentinck urged that the king
should abdicate, and that the barons should be recalled. The
prince was afraid of the revolutionary character of the barons, and
did not believe in the existence of popular discontents. Bentinck
said that the only way to drive the French from Italy was to hold
out Uberty and a constitution to the nation. Bentinck left the
prince with the impression that he had never spoken with a person
more dispassionate, honest, and apparently well-meaning. After
this conversation the prince went to his ifiother, fell down on his
" Bentinck to Wellesley, 11 Jan. 1812.
Digitized by
Google
1887 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES 495
knees and urged her to retire from public affairs ; he would now
accept the transfer of the royal authority, which the king had
already offered him three times. The queen was very angry, and
reproached her son in the bitterest terms. However, next day
Circello came to Bentinck to say that the queen was going to the
Ficuzza to persuade the king to transfer everything to the prince,
and that he hoped that he would countermand the troops, which
was done accordingly. Fortunately they had not sailed from
Milazzo. Two days later Bentinck saw both the prince and the queen.
The prince had by no means got over his treatment by the queen,
although he said that she was the kindest of mothers. The queen
asked Bentinck what was to be done. He advised abdication, which
the queen would not hear of. She was deeply moved, and said that
the English wished to dethrone the king and his family. She abused
Napoleon, and said that if she had ever thought of selling Sicily it
would have been to the English. At last she became very wild.
She said that there was only one way to save the king's honour,
that he should place himself at the head of his army to reconquer
Naples, and if necessary die like Tippoo Sahib in the breach. Bentinck
said that the king could do as he pleased with his own troops. She
asked Bentinck to write it down, and forced a pen into his hand, but
when he refused she wrote herself, * Lord Bentinck declares that he
does not object to the expedition to Naples.' ' This,' she said, * will
leave you in complete possession of Sicily, which you will not dis-
like.' The king came to Palermo on the 14th, when Bentinck says
that the queen made a last attempt to persuade him not to sur-
render his authority. This, however, is very doubtful. On the 16th,
as we have said above, the prince was appointed alter ego. The
king retired to the Ficuzza and the queen to Santa Croce. The first
acts of the prince were to appoint Bentinck captain-general under the
orders of the king, to recall the barons, and to repeal the obnoxious
one per cent. tax. Bentinck was offered a seat upon the council,
which he declined. In consequence of these measures the subsidy
was ordered to be paid in full as before. Nevertheless Bentinck still
continued to suspect the queen. The prince defended her, saying that
injustice was done her, that she did not interfere with him, and that
it was hard that she should not be left in quiet in her retirement.
At Messina, whither he had gone upon business, Bentinck heard
detailed accounts of the queen's correspondence with the enemy.
She had written to Murat, to Napoleon, to Marie Louise, to offer to
give up the island to the French if some compensation could be found
for her husband and herself. The kingdom of Holland had been
suggested. The correspondence was carried on with melodramatic
secrecy. Letters were written in lemon juice or pricked in from
holes which could only be seen when held to the light. Muffled
messengers met the queen in the suburbs of Palermo. Seals were
Digitized by
Google
496 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES July
broken in half to be used as tokens. It is difficult to say how
much of this was true. Without doubt the queen would have
been happy to exchange the position of a prisoner for one of inde-
pendence. It was one thing to scheme these plots, another to carry
them out. Bentinck, however, could make no allowances. Castle-
reagh, the new foreign minister, was a harder man than Wellesley.
On 16 March, Bentinck wrote to the queen that he had evidence of a
direct correspondence with the French, which, however, he could
not divulge, and that she must retire from the neighbourhood of
Palermo to a more distant part of the island. The prince wrote
warmly in his mother's defence ; he demanded proof of treasonable
correspondence, and warned Bentinck against the falsehoods of in-
famous persons. The queen was quite ready to quit the island
when the season permitted, and when she had ascertained whither
to go. * My lord,' he concludes, * if we wish to produce real good
and quickly, which I do not doubt, let us unite, let us proceed, and
spare me the pain which steps of this nature cause me. Let my
parents be respected and you will find me entirely yours.' Bentinck
now insisted on the ministry being changed. Belmonte took the
place of Circello, Villanuova of Tommasi, Aci became minister of war
instead of Castellentini, Cassaro was minister of justice. He also
continued to insist upon the queen's retirement from Palermo. On
17 April he wrote to Padre Cacamo, the king's confessor, to request
him to persuade his majesty to remove the queen from the island.
Cacamo answered that he could not interfere in a matter which
was alien to his character and his conscience. A week later Ben-
tinck wrote to the king himself, urging that a parliament was about
to meet, and that it could not deliberate in security unless the queen
were absent. A copy of this was sent to the queen, who replied
with great dignity and force. She says that the difficulties of the
situation do not arise from her, but from the nature of things, that
his charges against her are the invention of her personal enemies,
that public opinion is really with her. ' Let Lord Bentinck be at
last convinced,' she concludes, ^ that the daughter of Maria Theresa
may be oppressed and calumniated, but never dishonoured.' It is to
this period that the first letter of the queen to Fagan belongs. She
pours out her heart to him in confidence, and bewails her unhappy
fate. She is ready to die like her unhappy sister Marie Antoinette,
but she will do her duty till the grave. She declares that she has
never swerved in her attachment to the English alliance, that she
has been always loyal and true. It is gratifying to find that Fagan's
services in this respect were not unappreciated by Bentinck, who
writes on 7 May to request that his salary may be raised on the
ground that he has been employed in the most confidential com-
munications with the queen, has gained in a great degree her
majesty's goodwill, and in the delicate and embarrassing business
Digitized by
Google
1887 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES 497
with which he has been entrusted has acquitted himself to Bentinck's
satisfaction. Sicily could hardly be said to flourish under British
government ; the loaf got smaller and dearer every day. Sicilian
troops were transported under General Maitland to Spain, where
they were shut up in the walls of Alicante by the French. The
queen's letters to Fagan of this period are full of warm-hearted
affection for him and his family. She complains bitterly of her
ill-health, of her fever and want of sleep, which she ascribes to her
troubles. Bentinck soon obtained what he desired, she joined the
king at Ficuzza, and when he went to Solunto for the tunny-fishing
she returned to the villa of La Bagaria, which is only at a httle dis-
tance. About this time she received along-expected letter from the
emperor of Austria offering her a home in Germany if she desired it.
Castlereagh, who had become foreign minister in January 1812,
was more Ukely to urge Bentinck to strong measures than his pre-
decessor Wellesley. The * Hints on the Improvement of Sicily *
which are printed amongst his papers, viii. 224-232, although
their author is unknown, were certainly read and studied by him.
Their general drift is that we should anglicise Sicily as much as
possible, if we do not actually annex it. The chief instrument of
amelioration was to be the introduction of a constitution on the
English pattern, which was regarded at that time as a panacea for
all poUtical ills. Bentinck's new instructions of 9 May order him
to make the army a thoroughly national force, to introduce a regular
system of paying, clothing, and arming the troops, to make such
reforms of the Sicilian constitution as may insure the affection of
the people, and make the Neapolitans anxious to receive equal
advantages together with the return of their lawful sovereigns. Ben-
tinck says (30 June) that he was at first opposed to the idea of an
English constitution on the ground of the people not being fit for it,
but as he also says that the queen was in favour of it whereas
her protests against it were continuous, much weight cannot be
attached to that assertion.
ParUament met on 18 June, and the groundwork of the consti-
tution had been in discussion for some weeks before. The principal
authors were Princes Belmonte and Villa Hermosa. The strong
wish of the hereditary prince to attempt the reconquest of Naples
now that Murat was absent on the expedition to Kussia was made
a lever for pressing the acceptance of reforms. The French govern-
ment in Naples, however unpopular in some respects, had certainly
ameliorated the general condition of the people, and if the Bour-
bons wished to return it could only be with a constitution. Sixteen
resolutions were drawn up to be submitted to the parliament as a
basis for the new constitution. 1. It is to embrace the English
constitution ' from the first line to the last,* with such modifications
as the parliament may consider necessary. 2. AU feudal rights
VOL. n. — NO. vn. k k
Digitized by
Google
498 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES July
and distinctions are to be abolished, and the whole population
of Sicily declared equal before the law. 3. The nation, being free
to elect its prince, elects, subject to the observance of the present
constitution, Francesco Borbone, all other claims to the throne
being declared void. 4. That pubUc lands now belong to the na-
tion, but are assigned to the decent support of the royal family.
5. Forest laws are abolished. 6. Only SiciUan subjects can have any
pubUc employment. 7. The chamber of ecclesiastics is aboUshed
and incorporated with the chamber of peers. 8. The legislative
power rests with the nation meeting in parliament with the consent
of the king. 9. Parliament is to determine the number of the army.
10. The king may not leave the kingdom without the consent o(
parliament, and if the throne become vacant the nation may elect Sk
new king. 11. The nation is to pay dowries for the king's daughters,
but they are not to be married without the consent of the nation.
14. ParUament is to meet every year. If the king does not summon,
the chancellor is to do so. 15. The person of the sovereign is
sacred, but the ministers may be impeached. 16. The minister of
marine shall always be chosen from the commons, and the ministers
of grace and justice from the lords. These bases were afterwards
modified, and eventually the constitution was passed in fourteen
articles.
The preamble states that the constitution of England is to be
the basis of the Sicilian constitution, except as regards religion,
which is to be Eoman catholic as heretofore. 1. The legislative
authority belongs exclusively to parliament, but the sovereign has
a veto. 2. The executive authority is vested in the person of the
king. 8. The judicial authority is distinct from and independent of
the executive and legislative authority. Judges and magistrates may
be removed by the house of peers on the accusation of the house
of commons. 4. The person of the king is sacred and inviolable.
6. Ministers and pubUc functionaries may be impeached by the parlia-
ment. 6. ParUament is to consist of two houses, peers and commons.
Ecclesiastics to sit with the peers. 7. The barons are to have only
one vote apiece. 8. Parliament is prorogued by the king, but must
be convoked every year. 9. The crown lands and other national
resources are to be administered by the nation, who shaU also
determine the amount of the civil list. 10. No SiciUan shall be
punished except by law. Peers are to be judged by peers. 11. The
feudal system is to be entirely aboUshed. 12. Certain ancient rights
on land are to be abolished with compensation. 13. Money bills
must originate in the commons, and must be approved or vetoed
by the lords without amendment. 14. The parUament shaU have
the right of adding to or amending the constitution. Of these
articles, all but three received the royal assent. No. 10 was vetoed,
and 9 and 13 were deferred for future consideration.
Digitized by
Google
1887 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES 499
It is not difficult to imagine the feelings of the queen during this
time. On 16 June she writes to Fagan : * The day after to-morrow
the extraordinary parliament is to open which is to bring about the
happiness of Sicily. Such are the repeated assurances of Lord
Bentinck, who has, indeed, forced and brought about the holding of
this parliament. I repeat what I have so often said, and what I
deeply feel, it will never bring about the happiness of the people,
but act as the cause of many evils.' She was, however, little able
to give effect to her opinions, being at this time terribly in debt.
She turned to Fagan as to a confidant whom she could trust, and by
his advice wrote him a letter to be shown to Lord Bentinck. Her
public letters are always in French and are signed Charlotte, which
was not one of her names, whereas her private letters are in Italian
and are signed Caroline.*^ Her letter of 21 June asks for an advance
of 100,000Z., to be repaid by deducting 50,000Z. from the subsidy for
twenty months. She says what civil things she can to the English,
and goes so far as to hope that the new constitution may be on the
English model. In her private Italian letter she tells Fagan how
much it has cost her to write this, but beggars must not be choosers.
She also hints that the collections of Capodimonte transferred to
Sicily in 1798 are worth a million sterling, and might, if deposited
in a London bank or sold, secure her an income of 60,000i. a year.
There is a list of her debts in the Record Office which amounts to
154,000 ounces.*^ Bentinck requested Fagan on 9 July to tell the
queen that he could not pay so large a sum of money without the
authority of the English government, that he had given her advice
which she would not take, and that, although he should be glad to
extricate her, he did not see how it was to be done. The queen
replies on 14 July that she has no objection to an application being
made to the English government, who are, indeed, the cause of her
misfortunes ; and she encloses the list of her debts as given above.
On 80 July she writes a private letter to Fagan, of which, however,
there is an English translation in the Eecord Office, that she has
persuaded the king to seek an interview with Bentinck, which she
trusts will improve the relations between them. An account of
what passed is given in a letter from the queen to Fagan of 4 Aug.
I beg you, without fail, to retiun me either the whole letter, or at all
events as soon as possible the annexed paper. We live in doubtful times
when no one should be trusted, and I wish this confidential paper to be
returned. I return you many thanks for your letter of 8 Aug., and I am
much obliged to you for the interest which you evince for me on every
occasion. I saw Lord William Bentinck on the 1st of this month ; I
had great difficulty in persuading the king to the interview, which I had
conceived would be useful. The conversation between the king, Lord
1^ She was christened Maria Karoline Luise Johanna Josephe Antonia.
'' The Neapolitan ounce at this time was worth about 13s. ^d,
K X 2
Digitized by
Google
500 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES July
William, and Mr. Lamb lasted three complete hours, during which I was
in the greatest agony, knowing well that everything depended upon the
result of it ; from its length I was induced to flatter myself that the con-
ference would be amicable, but it had scarcely finished when the king
removed these hopes. I confess I was annoyed at finding myself at dinner
in company with those who had effected our destruction and dishonour,
and as I am of a candid and sincere disposition, I dare say that my looks
betrayed my feelings ; during dinner, however, reflection soothed them, and
when it was over, I begged Lord William and Mr. Lamb to walk into my
room, where he sat down without uttering a word ; a repulsive silence.
I begged him to speak to me, and for the honour of Great Britain to con-
sider what might be beneficial to her ancient ally ; he continued mute as
a stone, and at last I said to him that I had a right to expect that he
would converse with me on friendly terms ; he then loosed his tongue,
and in the most bitter maimer, wi^ a sarcastic smile, he assured me
that he never expected and certainly never wished either to see me or
to speak with me, and this he urged with a tone and manner which was
not customary, even among equals, before the general revolution of
Europe. We passed then to the subject of the parhament, and he con-
stantly repeated, without entering into any detail, il faut sanctionner. I
took the trouble, by an exercise of patience which shortens one's life, to
explain to him that he did not defend the rights of the king, his ally, at
whose court he was accredited, to which he answered ' that he had used
every means in his power to defend the nation.' I said that only a few
factious individuals were defended by his lordship's measures ; that the
nation, the provinces, the second order, and the people, all cried out
against this aristocracy ; he repUed ' that the whole were happy and
content, and that only a few alterations were required to introduce the
English constitution.' I said that I did not know what his court would
say, finding that, instead of rendering Sicily happy, he had established a
destructive aristocracy, which had disgusted, and perhaps revolutionised,
the provinces, and facilitated the introduction of the French. He asked
me, in a tone of irony and reproof, what I should say if the parliament
had imanimously asked for the English constitution : I with perfect
composure answered that I should say, I consider it a meanness in a
nation already having a constitution to seek for another, but that I
should prefer the English constitution to those fifteen articles, a shapeless
machine, which had deprived the king of all that belongs to him, of his
authority, his revenue, honour, and his pre-eminence, restoring and con-
firming at the same time the oppressive baronial rights. He continued
to say it was the best, and I, not being able to concur with him, said that
I was resolved to depart from this island, but in one of our own frigates,
which was competent to my honour. In short. Lord William was stem
toward me, manifesting ill will and spite, and I see that for me all is
useless ; I am miserably rewarded for enthusiastic Anglomania. These
are facts. Befleotion upon what would be said in England, when it
becomes known she is the protector of aristocracy, induced him to send
to tell the vicar that if he would accept the English constitution entire,
he would in that case sustain the veto against the other demands of the
parliament. With this assurance the prince came on 2 Aug., and laying
Digitized by
Google
1887 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES 501
a paper before the king, he, constrained by necessity and by the urgent
circumstances of the case, subscribed it. I send it you in the greatest
confidence. I have told you only facts, and I abstain from mentioning
my reflections, which are very painful, and the truth of which time will
prove. My health, respecting which you show so much anxiety, suffers
much ; sleep has forsaken me, and the air disagrees with me, but I have
not time to think of those things ; my mind is tortured to see our ancient
allies behaving towards us in a manner which our enemies, the French,
never even contemplated, during the two long periods that they sojourned
in the provinces of Puglia.
I now propose to give information of all that is passing to England,
and to our other allies, and to request an asylum in my country, where I
may end my unhappy life in peace, at a distance from the infamous cabals
and intrigues of this place. Were it not for the absolute impossibility of
maintaining myself, I would not accept of a penny from the nation who
have behaved so ill to us ; but I am a mother, I have children, and cannot
cut short my days ; I must therefore wait for the pension which our
rebeUious subjects shall assign to us. All these are melancholy reflec-
tions. I cannot, in honesty, withdraw myself from unhappy Sicily, with-
out discharging my debts ; I conceive myself honourable, and I wish to
conclude my unhappy career as such.
I am near my unfortunate and honoured husband, a king of fifty-four
years' standing, a true lover of the happiness of his subjects, perfectly just,
a true and sincere friend and ally, and after all treated as he has been by
his subjects and allies t But he possesses a strong sense of religion, which
affords him consolation. I cannot deny that I feel this treatment very
sensibly, nor do I think we are yet at the end of our miseries, they have
gone too for to stop. We have lost Sicily, and every reasonable hope of
recovering Naples. All is lost to us. This is a melancholy but just
picture of our situation ; I trace it for a friend, whom I have known to
be honest, loyal, and sincere, which I shall ever remember with gratitude.
A thousand compliments to your wife and your daughter, and believe me
with esteem your grateful friend, Gabolina.
The criticisms of the queen upon the new constitution were not
too severe. The sudden abolition of feudal and other customary
rights of property caused great discontent amongst the persons af-
fected by it. A large bottle full of gunpowder and pieces of iron
was thrown on the night of 12 Aug. into the house of parliament.
By an accident it failed to explode. It was attributed to the duke
of Crano, who afterwards confessed the crime ; but it was an ex-
pression of the general discontent. Many of those best able to
judge thought that the idea of forcing a constitution similar to
that of England on a foreign people was absurd, that many parts
of it were not suitable to the continent. An Englishman, writing
from Palermo on 26 Aug. 1812, says : * To copy a law verbatim and
to apply it to a people in totally different circumstances is to coun-
teract and spoil the very effect we intended. ... In one moment is
overturned the whole fabric of an ancient government which has
Digitized by
Google
502 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES July
existed nearly ten centuries, without opening one of its records nor
examining the foundations on which it rested, and with the same
precipitation it is voted that the British constitution is to be
adopted. . . . Lord William Bentinck in allowing such resolu-
tions to be formed has proved himself extremely unacquainted
with two material points — the Sicilian government which he has
overturned with a view of reforming, and the British constitution
which he thinks he has been establishing.' Blaquiere tells us,
writing in the middle of July, that he had received a number of
letters from Sicily which all concurred in representing the state of
the island, if possible, more deplorable than ever, and that every one
from the monarch to the peasant was opposed to the new arrange-
ments.
On 19 Aug. the queen writes to Fagan as follows : —
I have received jour consoling and honest letter, and I am infinitely
obliged to you for it, but the day of 19 Aug. has extinguished in me
every hope of relief, and has overwhelmed me with the deepest despair.
For two days the vicar has been writing the most violent letters, saying
that he wishes to act as he pleases, or that he will throw up the charge,
and leave the king to contend for himself ; moreover, he gives a most
frightful description of the great violence of Bentinck, and says that if
the king returns to authority he will be constrained to act in the same
way, adding a long detail of the most unpleasant subjects in order to dis-
suade him from returning to the government. Gacamo and Cassaro have
come here this morning : the latter has represented in such a dreadfal
light the contest which is inevitable with Bentinck, and the necessity of
conceding everything immediately, that the king, losing himself through
consternation, has confirmed and even exceeded the powers which he gave
to the vicar on 16 Jan. ; he has conceded to Bentinck seven thousand
men, to be paid from our subsidy, and has given him full power over
the royal household ; in short, the king has not entirely abdicated, he has
done the same thing, and we may say, consummatum est. For my part
I feel their maUce towards us more than ever ; every sacred duty of pro-
bity should induce Bentinck to arrange the payment of my debts at the
expense of England, in which case be will obtain my departure from
Sicily, but I will not go while I have a grain of debt, wishing to conclude
honestly, having Hved so. It appears to me that they have already done
us mischief enough in thus perfidiously depriving us of a kingdom, and in
using every sort of infamous intrigue to annihilate us entirely. We are
ruined and undone, at the mercy of fifty revolutionary regicides, who will
make us grieve while they are protected by the minister of Great Britain,
our ally, who supports the regicides, and who has destroyed the principles
of a son who has hitherto been obedient and dutiful, but now a traitor and
a revolutionary I In short, he has rendered me truly miserable, and I see
no hope except in my immediate departure from Sicily, otherwise they
will commit the most barbarous outrage against my innocent person. I
confess to you that my mind is agonised. I foresaw every misfortune, I
perceive that the parhament is literally attacking the sovereign authority.
Digitized by
Google
1887 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES 503
I cannot express my affliction and despair, which I am assured proceed
Irom the minister of our faithful ally. Adieu.
Believe me your good mistress,
Carolina.
On 13 Sept. Bentinck sent a letter to the king at the Ficuzza
saying that he had positive orders from his government that the
queen was to take no part in public affairs. The queen interpreted
it to mean that she must leave Sicily, and that night she had a fit
of apoplexy. Bentinck remarks upon it : * It has recurred within
two days of the time when she suffered a similar attack last year.
Upon this occasion the fit has been much less severe. She was
yesterday [14 Sept.] very much recovered.' He says also that her
abstinence from public affairs can only be accomplished by her
leaving Sicily. Such is the unanimous opinion of the public as
well as of all the ministers and of the prince himself. * But desir-
able as this event would be, I do feel very great reluctance to en-
force it at the queen's time of life ; in the state of her health, and
at this advanced season, such an act might appear cruel. But I
mean to require that her majesty shall fix her residence at a greater
distance from Palermo, where, as the king will not accompany her,
her influence will no longer be exercised in that quarter where it
has been always so pernicious.'
In the middle of September the prince was attacked by a serious
illness. The account which Bentinck gives in a letter to Castlereagh
of 9 Oct. is so characteristic that it is worth while to print it in full-
Palermo : 4 Oct. 1812.
My Lord, — I have to acquaint your lordship that the hereditary prince
has been attacked by a severe illness, which for some time threatened the
most serious consequences ; it began by spasms in the stomach, which it
was apprehended from their commencement might be dangerous. On
22 Sept. the queen came to the palace, and the day after the violence
of the attacks was so much increased that the greatest apprehensions
were entertained as to the result. This state continued with little inter-
mission during the four following days. The symptoms were of a nature
so like poison that it was generally believed arsenic had been administered ;
and such is the opinion entertained of her majesty's character, that the
general suspicion was fixed upon the queen. During the agonies of the
prince, she sat by his bedside without either speaking or moving a feature.
When the physicians declared his life to be in danger the prince wept,
and her majesty shed tears, requesting those present would observe how
much she was affected. On the physicians pronouncing their opinion
that the prince had taken poison, she turned to him and said, * Have I
ever been deficient in affection to you ? ' to which he answered, * No,
maman.' The result of the illness has destroyed every suspicion of its
having been caused by poison, but it is certain that the impression
was very strong upon the mind of the prince himself. In a conversation:
Digitized by
Google
504 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES July
with the prince Belmonte daring his iUness he did not disguise the sus-
picion, and in speaking of the prince Belmonte, who has lately suffered
much from ill-health, he said, * Pcmvre Belmonte, nous sommes attaquSs
par la mSme maladie.* The queen herself imprudently contributed to
give currency to this report, with the view of throwing the odium upon
the exiled barons, whom she accused of wishing by this means to obtain
the regency for the duke of Orleans. Her majesty did not scruple to tell
the hereditary prince that he was reported to have been poisoned by the
duke of Orleans, and said to the duchess of Orleans that it was supposed
to have been done either by herself or by the duke. On the evening of
the 26th the prince's danger was so imminent that the king was sent for
from the Ficuzza, and arrived the next morning ; in the interview with
the prince he testified the greatest interest and affection for him ; they
mutually shed tears, and it was not till the morning of the 28th, when
his rojal highness was considered out of danger, tiiat his majesty left
Palermo, and was followed by the queen the day after. The hereditary
prince has since retired to a country house near Palermo, and his health
has considerably improved. This removes the apprehensions which were
excited by his illness at a time when the residence of her majesty about
the person of the king has so strengthened her dominion over his mind,
that the loss of the prince might have been expected to be the signal for
the adoption of new measures the most inimical to our interests and
policy. But I regret to say that the prince's close attention to the details
of business, which his habit of suspicion prevents him from entrusting to
his ministers, added to the anxiety he has experienced from the opposi-
tion of his parents, and the painful struggles which her majesty has
lost no opportunity of exciting between his filial piety and the duties of
his situation, have so far impaired a constitution not naturally strong,
that he is by no means to be considered as a good life, and the recurrence
of the same attack, which there is much reason to apprehend, may sud-
denly plunge us into difficulties and embarrassments from which we have
so narrowly escaped.
I have the honour to be, my lord, your lordship's most obedient*
humble servant, W. C. Bentinck.
Surely a statesman with such deep-seated prejudices against the
queen was entirely unfit for the delicate situation in which he was
placed.*^ A letter of the queen to Fagan of 28 Sept. expresses
great distress at the calumnies of which she has been the object,
ajid unbounded confidence in Fagan's friendship and affection.
A letter of Bentinck's to Castlereagh of 24 Oct. gives a very
naJLve and full account of his efforts to get the queen away from
Palermo. On 13 Sept. he wrote to the king on the subject, but
received no answer. Then came the illness of the prince. The
arrival of the queen at Palermo to see her son stimulated Lord
William to new efforts. He sent for the marquis de St. Glair, a
friend of the royal family, and told him his difficulty. On the 24th
^* The hereditary prince died 8 Nov. 1830 at the age of fifty-three, the father of
Beven sons and seven daaghters.
Digitized by
Google
1887 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES 605
Prince Gassaro brought him a message from the king, saying that
he had heard Bentinck was going to write to him again, and that
he did not wish to receive any more impertinent letters from him,
but desired to see the proofs he had against the queen, whom he
wished he would leave quiet. After some conversation, Bentinck
insisted not only that the queen should go away, but that the date
of her departure should be fixed. Gassaro saw the queen, who
rephed that she would stay with the king till the spring, when they
would both leave the island. This was at the very time when
the prince was in the greatest danger. On 9 Oct. Bentinck wrote a
letter to the king ; three days afterwards it was returned by the
hereditary prince unopened. In the letter which enclosed it the
prince declared that the queen had never interfered with him.
Bentinck then went to Gircello, the ex-minister, who refused to
interfere. On 15 Oct. Bentinck, undaunted by these rebuffs,
rode down to the Ficuzza, twenty-three miles distant, taking with
him a letter for the king. He had not been ten minutes in the
antechamber when he saw the queen going into the king's room.
Father Gacamo, the king's confessor, then appeared and said that
the king could not receive Bentinck unless he promised not to
enter upon business. At the same time he sent a dignified
message : —
The orders of your court direct you to require the queen's absence
from Palermo, her removal from the seat of government, her non-inter-
ference with affairs of state. His majesty has secured these points, has
resigned the reins of government to the vicar-general, and considering
himself as a private individual has retired from business, taking under
especial guidance and protection her majesty his wife. Being under his
protection, he is responsible for her actions. His separation from her
majesty cannot be admitted, but in order to remove all doubt of her inter-
ference in state affairs it is intended to transfer her abode to Santa
Margherita the first day in November, there to remain until after the
shooting season, and in the spring of the year her majesty proposes
retiring to the continent.
Bentinck then sent Gacamo to ask whether he was to understand
that the king would not admit him to his presence. The king
returned answer that he was still king, and that it did not suit his
convenience to receive Bentinck. He would let him know his inten-
tions through Prince Gassaro, but that he would never be separated
from the queen. Bentinck then said that if he did not receive an
answer in two days he should have to adopt other measures. The
confessor, alarmed at his violence, went again to the king, and after
a considerable delay returned with the reply that his majesty would
receive no peremptory terms, and that he would never be separated
from the queen. The confessor offered an interview with the queen,
but that he declined, ' as it would be painful to both parties, and
Digitized by
Google
506 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES July
would not be attended with any advantage.' After Bentinck'a
departure the king sent for Princes Cassaro and Circello, and they
brought back word that the queen was going to Santa Margherita,
about forty miles from Palermo, and intended going to Vienna in
the spring. Bentinck exacted an assurance in writing that the
queen would remain at Santa Margherita and not return to Ficuzza.^
The king afterwards disclaimed the authority of the two noblemen
to give any such assurance. A letter of Queen Caroline's to Fagaa
of 9 Oct. declares that she will never desert her husband, but
will do her duty as wife, mother, and honest woman, and that in
the fulfilment of what she thought right she was ready to suffer
anything. Another letter of 31 Oct. is very touching. She is
full of gratitude to Fagan. If Bentinck had only had more know*
ledge of mankind, and had acted towards the king with uprightness
and cordiaUty, things would have gone differently. She expresses
a great respect for Lady William Bentinck, and will not invite her
into the savage desert of Ficuzza, but as the queen is going for
ten days to Palermo before her departure for her new exile, she
hopes to have a visit from her. She is indignant at the letter which
Bentinck has written to the prince. * I am sorry for his lordship,
who, being deceived with respect to me, persecutes me in a manner
so indecent and so prejudicial to the dignity of the British nation
and its good faith towards a faithful ally.'
After paying a last visit to Palermo the queen retired with her
husband to Santa Margherita, a lonely country house in the neigh-
bourhood of Girgenti. All provisions had to be brought on the
backs of mules. The queen herself was borne thither in a
litter, and soon after her arrival was dangerously ill. Husband
and wife were sore pinched for means. In December they removed
to Castelvetrano in the south of the island, about eighty miles from
Palermo. The removal of the queen did not expedite the working
of the constitution. On 7 Dec. Bentinck complains to Prince
Belmonte that the acts passed in the last session of parliament had
not yet received the sanction of the vicar-general. About the same
time he suggested to the EngKsh government that they should
facilitate the queen's departure from the island by granting her an
allowance on that condition. He cynically adds : * The state of her
majesty's health is such that she would in all probability receive the
allowance in question for a very few years.' ** The home govern-
ment, who were in constant communication with Prince Castelcicala^
the Sicilian minister in London, were anxious on the one hand to
escape the odium of coercing the queen, and on the other to main-
tain the full authority of Bentinck. Then Castlereagh, writing on
5 Dec, admits that he has told Gastelcicala that the government do
not insist on the queen leaving the island provided she keeps aloof
** Bentinck to Castlereagh, 10 Dec. 1812.
Digitized by
Google
1887 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES 507
from pubKc affairs. However, on 9 Feb. 1813 he writes to Bentinck,
that in consequence of the new representations he has received from
him he has informed Gastelcicala that the queen must leave the
island, and that he proposes she should go to Vienna rather than
to Sardinia. At the same time he warns Bentinck that all ex-
pression of using force must be avoided, and that no restraint must
be placed on the return of the queen. On 4 Jan. the queen came
to the Ficuzza, which Bentinck immediately complained of as a
breach of agreement. He called on Princes Cassaro and Circello
to enforce their written undertaking, but it will be remembered
that the king had repudiated their promise as soon as he heard of
its being given. The duke of Orleans (afterwards Louis-Philippe)
took the opportunity of giving the hereditary princes some good
advice. The best plan was to submit to Bentinck; the English
government would have their way, and would make Sicily subor-
dinate to their political views. If they had intended to take the
island, they would have done so long ago. The royal family were
entirely dependent on the English government. How could it be
otherwise when they received a large English subsidy, and were
protected by a large English force ? * Make yourself,' said the duke,
* Vhomme des Anglais ; if you oppose them you can do them no
harm, you will only irritate and annoy them, and you may lose
your crown, whereas an opposite course will secure you peace,
happiness, and prosperity.' The position of the prince was a very
uncomfortable one. He was anxious for more power or for none at
all. Let the king either abdicate or resume the vicariat ; the pre-
sent state of affairs was unendurable.
It was soon to be put an end to. On 9 March the king appeared
suddenly at the palace in Palermo, announced that his health was
recovered, and that he assumed the reins of government. He sent
for the ministers and told them that he only intended to sanction
such parts of the constitution as were analogous to that of England.
Princes Belmonte and Cassaro said that the hereditary prince had
taken great pains to ascertain the analogy and to adhere to it strictly.
The king said he was sure it was otherwise. On the same day the
queen left the Ficuzza for Castelvetrano. On Prince Belmonte re-
monstrating, the king said that Bentinck might do what he pleased*
Europe would judge between them. He was determined not to give
way. In the evening the king went in state to the cathedral, where
a Te Deum was performed for the recovery of his health and his re-
sumption of the government. Masses of people were assembled. The
king was received with acclamations even in the church. Two days
later there was a stormy interview between Bentinck and the king.
The minister said that the Enghsh government would never permit
the constitution to be destroyed. The word 'permit' made the
king very angry. ' I am a simple man,' said Bentinck. * I am
Digitized by
Google
508 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES July
more simple than you,* broke in the king, * I am more honest than
you.' Bentinck bowed, and the king corrected himself. 'I am
honest, you may be also.* Bentinck referred to the old story of
correspondence with the enemy. * Neither I nor my government,*
said the king, * have ever been faithless to the alliance. I cannot listen
to such language ; write what you have to say,* and hastily left the
room. There was great agitation in the streets. Cries of * Viva U
re ! * were mixed with shouts of * Ftwri gli Inglesi / * On 13 March
Bentinck sent a letter to Prince Belmonte to say that unless a
guarantee were given that the new constitution would be observed
he should consider the alliance at an end. The letter was pre-
sented to the king on the 14th, and he prepared an answer on the
day following. Belmonte declined to present, and with Euggiero
Settimo resigned his office. Bentinck then stated that another
day's delay would be fatal. The duke of Orleans held long conver-
sations with his father-in-law. On the 16th Bentinck sent his
ultimatum to the king by Mr. Lamb, insisting on the establishment
of the vicariat, with a promise from the king not to resume the
government without the consent of England, and an undertaking
that the queen should leave the island. The first point was con-
ceded readily enough, but there were difficulties about the second.
After considerable pressure the king said that he would next morn-
ing send positive orders to the queen to go immediately to Cagliari,
but that if she refused he could not compel her. A promise was
then extorted from him that if Bentinck used force to carry out
the king's orders the king would not oppose it. Next day the king
retired to his country house at CoUi.
It is difficult to criticise these transactions. There is no proof
whatever that the king intended to destroy the constitution ; indeed,
his professions were of an entirely opposite character. Even if the
queen had advised him to resume the government whilst she
remained at Castelvetrano she could have Uttle influence over its
dehberations. It is difficult to resist the conclusion that Bentinck
acted both with passion and prejudice ; indeed, his feeling towards
the queen amounted to a monomania. On 23 March the country was
without a government, the king was in the country, the prince had
no power assigned to him, and the ministers had resigned their
offices. *I have determined,' writes Bentinck on that date with
something of vindictiveness, ' to require the queen's immediate
departure from the island ; she is the sole cause of all the delay,
difficulty, and embarrassment that has so extraordinarily impeded
the estabUshment of the new constitution. Her majesty will go to
Caghari.' Yet in the very next sentence he complains that the acts
of the last parhament which terminated five months ago have not
yet been sanctioned, which could only be the fault of the hereditary
prince and not of the queen.
Digitized by
Google
1887 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES 509
On the very date of this despatch Bentinck sent Lieutenant-
general Macfarlane to the queen to tell her that she must leave the
island as soon as possible. At the same time he marched three
battalions of English troops, with cavalry and artillery, to Corleone,
in the centre of the island, about forty miles distant from Palermo.
Macfarlane's instructions were to Ksten to no excuses, to insist
upon her going to Cagliari, and to secure her departure in a week
or ten days at the farthest, as soon as the ships have arrived. He
is to avoid force if possible, but ' if unfortunately her majesty will
not consent to your proposal, you will act promptly and decidedly
with the troops at your disposal/ On 25 March, the morning after
his arrival, Macfarlane saw the queen. She at first received his
message with composure and indifference, she disputed Bentinck's
authority, and said that she would leave Sicily at her own time, in
a Sicilian ship, with officers of her own nomination. Macfarlane
then hinted at the employment of force, and mentioned the march
of the troops. She became deeply affected, said that she was in the
worst state of health, and could not move without danger to her
life, that she had lately been seized with a spitting of blood, and
that it would be adding cruelty to insult to use force against her at
such a moment. On the following day she was extremely affected,
but composed and softened. She conjured Macfarlane not to bring
the troops into Castelvetrano. The general pressed her to fix a
day for her departure. After great pressure she said, ' I give my
honour that I shall be ready to depart by the middle of April, but
I hope I shall have the whole of that month, because I shall then
have better weather, but I must go to Trieste and not to Cagliari.'
Macfarlane repeated that he had no authority to prevent the troops
from coming to Castelvetrano, and he left the queen * excessively
agitated and in a flood of tears.' Macfarlane begs Bentinck to
change the place of her destination .from Cagliari to Trieste or
Fiume ; she will then go much more quietly. At the same time he
orders the troops to advance to Santa Margherita, but he fears that
too much pressure may bring about a * return of the commlaions to
which her majesty is subject, which may retard our proceedings.'
On the day of this interview the queen drew up a dignified paper
saying that after mature reflection she had determined to retreat to
the only country suitable to her, being compelled by the minister
of her ally, the king of Great Britain, to leave her family, her
husband, and her dominions, but she must be treated with the
respect due to her rank. She demands as conditions : (1) a frigate
commanded by officers of her choice and the convoy of a ship-of-war ;
(2) a promise to take her to the nearest port from which she could
reach Vienna ; (8) a satisfactory arrangement for paying her allow-
ance ; (4) the payment of her debts by the Sicilian government ;
(5) the payment of the wages of those who accompany her ; (6) the
Digitized by
Google
510 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES July
sending of Prince Moliterno to Vienna to prepare for her arrival.
She promises if these conditions are fulfilled to embark in the month
of April, she does not mind from which port.
By 29 March Bentinck had received Castlereagh's despatch pre-
ferring that the queen should go to Vienna, but for some reason he
continued to insist that she should first go to Cagliari or Malta.
This formed the subject of a conversation between Macfarlane and
the queen on the evening of 81 March. * Why,' she said, ' should
Lord Bentinck wish me to go to Cagliari, when Lord Castlereagh
has decided that I should go to Vienna ? * ' The queen now asked
me whether a letter from herself to Lady WiUiam Bentinck would
have any effect in obtaining a change of sentiment in your lordship.
I answered that I had every reason to think that you were fixed in
your determination.' On 4 April the queen learnt that Bentinck
conceded this point. She was ready to go by Lissa or Constanti-
nople, but she could not start till the 25th (the Sunday after Easter),
when her Easter devotions would be completed.
On 8 April General Macfarlane arrived at Palermo, bringing a
letter addressed to Bentinck by the queen. It was couched in the
same dignified tone as others which we have quoted, and asserted
her willingness to leave Sicily if a proper allowance were made and
proper arrangements provided for her journey. The crown prince,
to whom the letter was shown, wrote : —
My feelings of fiHal affection, attachment, and of gratitude to a tender
mother, induce me to request that you will use every possible means to
mitigate the pain of this separation from her fiEtmily which your govern-
ment requires, considering it necessary to the common interests. Ton
should consider, my lord, that a queen at her advanced age cannot under-
take so long and so difficult a journey without certain comforts and con-
veniences which, even upon the most economical scale, require an expense
proportionate to the length of the journey.
He goes on to express a hope that this may be provided by the
generosity of the English government. Bentinck eventually deter-
mined to allow her 1,000 ounces a month, 8,000i. a year, paying
the first year in advance, the continuance of the pension to be con-
ditional on her good behaviour.
On 16 April the queen wrote a farewell letter of twenty pages to
Mr. Fagan. It was written in French and signed Charlotte, and so
was evidently intended to be shown to Bentinck. There is, indeed,
a complete copy of it in the Foreign Office. In it she complains of
the cruel conduct of her allies the EngUsh, and of the baseless
calumnies of which she has been the victim. She relates the whole
story of her political life ; how her influence with the king, which is
now thrown in her teeth, was employed to prevent him from acce-
ding to the pacte defamiUe which cost her the favour of her father-
in-law Charles UI, and of Louis XV and Louis XVL In the war
Digitized by
Google
1887 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES 511
of the revolution Naples had supported the cause of the allies with
a large fleet and army. She had received the EngUsh fleet on its
way to Egypt, and had undergone great sufferings in 1798 for her
attachment to the English and Russians. In 1804 Naples suffered
from the breach of the peace of Amiens, but the queen had been
faithful, as long as she was able to remain so, to the cause of
the allies. She had received them on 19 Nov. 1805, yet when
they departed in January 1806 they caused every kind of damage.
In Sicily the strong places were occupied by the English troops.
The queen, although seeking to be a good ally to the English, did
not wish Sicily to become an English province. For seven years she
had suffered nothing but calumny and persecution. The rest of the
letter is occupied with the details of the journey, and with a request
that something will be done for the NeapoUtan pensioners who are
dependent upon her. The letter is reasonable and dignified, but is
open to the charge that its principal object was to extort money
from the English government. Indeed, she asks for the loan of a
million sterling, to be repaid by instalments in eight or ten years.
We know already the sum which Bentinck was ready to accord.
The absolute necessity of finding funds for the queen's journey
and the incidence of some military operations against the Italian
islands appear to have caused a certain amount of delay, which was
further extended by the queen's illness. On Monday, 15 May, she
wrote to Fagan that she is in bed with a very severe attack of fever,
and that the next day she will summon the English and Palermitan
doctors to show that she is not shamming. On the 18th Dr. Calvert,
the physician to the forces, visited the queen in conjunction with Dr.
Greco, her private physician, and certified that she was ill of an
intermittent fever, which had continued five days and which pre-
vented her from embarking. He trusted that she might recover in
a few days. Bentinck was not at all disposed to receive this opinion
without question. He wrote to Macfarlane that the queen would
certainly not leave Sicily if she could help it ; that her body and
mind were so deranged by the use of opium that a stranger might
be mistaken as to the state of her health, and that this is the reasoii
for her calling in Dr. Calvert. Bentinck is so certain of this that
the general is ' positively directed to require her majesty's embarka-
tion whenever Dr. Calvert shall state that it can be effected with-
out danger to her majesty's Ufe. Public considerations imperiously
demand that feelings of mere personal convenience should not be
listened to.* If the queen is too iU to go to Constantinople, she can
sail to Cagliari or Zante. If the queen is quite unable to travel,
Castelvetrano must be occupied by British troops, all the *bad
subjects ' by which she is at present surrounded must be forced to
leave the island, and the queen's communications, ' personal as well
as written,' must be vigilantly watched, and must, if necessary, be
Digitized by
Google
512 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES July
placed under military control. This unfeeling letter is written on
24 May, just after Bentinck had heard that the queen, although
following Dr. Calvert's treatment exactly, was mending very slowly,
and that a squadron of Algerine men-of-war was cruising off Gir-
genti.
At the beginning of June, Bentinck left Sicily for the island of
Ponza, where he was to meet an emissary of Murat's, who was at
that time contemplating defection from Napoleon. Bentinck appears
to have regarded with favour the surrender of Naples to Murat, but
refused to give up Sicily. At the same time Napoleon ordered
Murat to have 20,000 men in readiness for the invasion of Sicily in
conjunction with the Toulon fleet.*® Bentinck was of opinion that
half that number could conquer the island, and Sir Edward Fellew
declared that he could not prevent the Toulon fleet from evading
him, although he might be able to overtake it in Naples harbour
before Murat's troops could embark. Thus at the very time of his
leaving the island the queen was between the double danger of the
French and the English. Peace and war were equally fatal to her
dynasty ; the only question seemed to be whether she would lose one
of her crowns or both. Lord Wellington's reply to Bentinck is
characteristic : * In answer to your lordship's despatch I have to
observe that I conceive the island of Sicily is at present in no danger
whatever.' The account of the queen's flnal departure is contained
in a despatch from Lord Montgomerie to Lord Gastlereagh, 19 June
1813. Helfert *^ states that she paid a last visit to Palermo, which
appears to be contradicted by Montgomerie's evidence. The Enghsh
vessels had to go round to Mazzara on account of the Algerine
squadron mentioned above. The queen stayed at Mazzara from
5 June to 14 June * engaged in religious devotions,' Whitsunday
falling that year on 6 June and Trinity Sunday on 13 June. On
Monday, the 14th, at eleven o'clock, after having heard mass and re-
ceived the benediction in the cathedral, she walked down to the
beach accompanied by all the chapter in their full robes and carrying
lighted torches. She entered the boat of the English man-of-war
' Unit6,' Captain Chamberlayne steering. In her suite were her
son Prince Leopold, the prince of Hesse Philippsthal, the Countess
San Marco, and the Marquis St. Clair. At four o'clock the vessels
set sail, and, the wind being favourable, they were soon out of
sight.
We must follow the actors in this history a little farther. The
absence of the queen made matters no better, but, if possible, worse
than before. Pour days after her departure from Mazzara there
was a popular rising in Palermo, and the Belmonte ministry was
overthrown, to be replaced by men more devoted to the crown
prince. Bentinck returned from Spain on 4 Oct. and attended a
" Napier'B Peninsular War, v. 434. >' Helfert, p. 634,
Digitized by
Google
1887 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES 618
council on the 9th. The parliament was to meet next day, but
Bentinck insisted on proroguing it until he had time to confer with
the majority of the commons. This step was hardly in accordance
with the traditions of the British constitution. When parliament
met, the ministers, being found in a minority, were dismissed by
Bentinck's advice, and a few days afterwards the parliament was
dissolved. Bentinck then issued a proclamation that ' until the
glorious work of the constitution so happily begun in the parlia-
ment of 1812 shall have been regularly completed,' he shall govern
the kingdom by martial law. He had now found out what he might
have discovered earlier, that Sicily was not fit for self-government in
the English sense, and that the difficulties of carrying it out were
not caused by the queen, but by the inherent weakness of those
entrusted with power. On his return from Spain he sees ' a degree
of ahenation towards us on the part of the people.* * Experience
has shown the weakness and incapacity of the country. Among
the higher orders there is no courage, no steadiness, very little
instruction, and no knowledge of public business. Among the
lower there exist a general distrust and hatred of the higher ranks,
no good faith and no public spirit.* *The prince himself is the
weakest of his subjects.* The late ministers, 'the best men in the
country, have altogether failed ; their failure arose from their own
personal weakness.' The people are ' clamorous for all the advan-
tages of freedom, but nobody will submit to the sacrifice, nobody
will pay or serve ; this is, shortly, the state of the country.'
The daughter of Maria Theresa would have read these senti-
ments with full approval, but would have wished that wisdom had
come a Uttle earlier for her own sake. She reached Zante on her
journey of exile on 19 June, and left it on 8 Aug. A fortnight
later her frigate anchored in the roadstead of Tenedos. Here she
was delayed nearly a month by the objections made to her frigate
sailing up the Dardanelles, and she did not reach Constantinople
till Sept. 13. After many changes of plan, and much interruption
from bad weather, she reached Odessa in a small sailing boat on
8 Nov. and underwent forty days' quarantine. During this delay
she heard the welcome news of the battle of Leipzig. She left Odessa
on 18 Dec. and travelled by Nicolaiefif and the Ukraine to Podoha,
where she was entertained at Christmas by Count Potocki and
his charming wife. On 7 Jan. 1814 she touched the soil of her
own country, and reached Vienna on 2 Feb. The first week of her
sojourn must have been cheered by the news of the victory of the
allies in France, of the abdication of Napoleon, and of the peace of
Paris. Her return to Sicily and Naples now seemed secured.
When all danger from the side of Napoleon was past, the Enghsh
had no more interest in Naples. On 6 July Ferdinand IV again
took to himself the reins of power, to the delight of the populace, and
VOL. n. — ^NO. vn. l l
Digitized by
Google
614 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES July
with the full approval of Bentinck. Bentinck's successor A'Court
complained that not a day passed without a flagrant violation of
the constitution ; but Gastlereagh had the good sense to reply to
him, that the English could not think of supporting the constitu-
tion by force of arms. * We must let the king now administer his
own government, and our minister, I conceive, must try to with-
draw himself from the character he has lately filled of being head
of a party.* On 19 Aug. the Sicilian frigate * Minerva ' accom-
panied by a British man-of-war sailed from Palermo for Trieste, to
bring back Queen Caroline and her son Leopold to their own
country. But fate had ordained otherwise. On the morning of
8 Sept. the queen was found senseless on the floor of her bed-
chamber, her hand stretched out to pull the bell, and her lips
opened to utter that cry for help which no one was to hear.
Sketch of parts of a corwersation between General Donkin and the French
General Goldema/r, Feb. 26, 1812. Charged with establishing an
exchange of prisoners, he came over to Messina to ratify it,
G, Ma foi, il fiaut avouer, G6n6ral, que vous avez bien men6, et £ut
bien ^clater Taffaire de ces Messieurs que vous avez dans la Citadelle.
Dites-moi un peu, quand est-ce que Ton d^cidera de leur sort ?
D, Vraiment, M. le G6n6ral, je n*en saLs rien. Nous attendons inoes-
samment les ordres de Lord William Bentinck l&-dessus, et nous sommes
^galement pr^ts k les fusilier ou k les pendre, comme Son Excellence
ordonnera.
G. Bah ! vous ne ferez ni Tun ni I'autre. Sit6t que j'ai vu que ces
maladroits n'^toient pas pendus tout de suite, j'ai dit k ManhSs : ' Je te
dis bien, mon ami, que Lord Bentinck ne punira pas de mort ces gens-U.
O'est un fier calculateur que ce diable de Bentinck, et il a quelque objet
en vue avec la Cour ; il pardonnera k ces gens pour obtenir quelque chose
de plus de la Cour.' Mais dites-moi, Q6n^ral, ce ooquin de Giu£r6 (here
on pronouncing his name he burst out into a long string of oaths and
execrations against our fedthful Giu£r6, stamping and a good deal agitated)
oh ! ce villain-l& — ^malpeste ! s'il fdt venu seulement une fois de plus chez
nous, il auroit ^t^ fosill^. Depuis plusieurs jours je le soup9onnois, et j'ai
fait voir k Manhds que ce B — Ik nous jouait ; ah le sao. . . . (more oaths
and execrations) ; mais, G6n6ral, comment est-ce que vous ne pajez pas cet
homme-l&, apr^s le bon service qu'il vous a rendu ? H se plidnt k tout
le monde de vous, comme il faisoit de Manhds, qu'il n'6toit pas assez pay6.
n ne faut pas imaginer oependant que ce coquin vous soit absolument
fidMe ; il vous a tromp6 en certaines choses — et vraiment tromp6, je vous
I'assure, foi de militaire^il vous a tromp6 — il ne vous a pas tout dit et k
present il se r6crie oontre vous et dit que vous le payez fort mal.
D. Quant k cela, G6n6ral, il a bien raison de dire qu'il n'est pas pay6
pa/r nous J mais sibrement il ne se plaint point de oela. Nous ne lui avons
jamais donn6 un sou — non, pas un sou — depuis neuf mois qu'il nous
sert fidelement, et pour deux raisons —
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES 615
1® Faroe que nous le £aisions payer passablement bien par vous autres
pour les contes bleus que je vous envoyais de terns en terns par ses mains
par exemple — pour la nouvelle que je vous envoyois de I'embarquement du
62™« k Melazzo 8 jours aprds son d&pwrt, et quand j'^tois bien stir que le
coup seroit frapp6 sur vos c6tes — ^vous avez pay6 k notre GiuflEr^ pour ce joli
morceau quatre-vingts ounces — et le lendemain vous entendez que notre
d^barquement avoit eu lieu, et que nous avions feit le diable parmi vos
barques et b^timents k Palinuro.
La 2°*« raison que nous avions pour ne pas payer GiuflEr^ ^toit que ce
brave jeune homme s'obstinoit toujours k refuser Targent. Dix fois je lui
ai offert 200, 800, 400 piastres, mais il refusoit toujours, disant : * Je sers
ma patrie et les Anglois; quand j'aurai bien fini cette besogne, alors,
donnez-moi, s'il vous plait, un petit emploi et je serai content.' Voili,
G6n6ral, pourquoi nous ne Tavons pas pay6.
G. (During this Goldemar was very impatient, but at last said)
• G6n6ral, il faut avouer que nous avons 6t6 joliment jou6s (a long oath),
mais joliment — il est inutile de vous le cacher— et je vous dirai franche-
ment que ce fut un coup de foudre pour nous que cette arrestation— pour
moi, j'en ai ^t6 vrodment malade pendant quinze jours ; j'avois la fiivre
et pour 24 heures, ni Manhfis, ni moi, osions nous parler, I'un Tautre
ah I ! I F— (a long oath). (At these Nuts I could not help allowing
rather a strong expression of gratification to escape me, but ended by
saying) :—
D. Pardonnez-moi, mon G6n6ral, je regrette beaucoup d'avoir con
tribu6 k votre maladie — mais vous auriez fait autant pour moi ; k pr6sent
vous n'ave^ qu'i 6tablir une autre et plus stire correspondance.
G. Ne craignez pas— allez I necraignez pas— elle est i&}k bien 6tabUe,
et en tr6s-bon train — nous sommes sup6rieurement servis ; je vous assure
— et par un moyen que vous ne connoitrez pas si t6t. (After this he made
a transition to Palermo — and after expressing himself in terms of the
highest admiration of Lord W. Bentinck having accomplished what he
had without bloodshed, he added) : * Diable, j*ai toujours oraint rarriv6e
de votre Lord Bentinck. Dans son absence il y avoit vraiment de beaux
moments — ^mais, de tr^s-beaux moments. Si nous eussions pu d6cider cette
villaine Cour k 6clater ; mais cette B sse la Reine avec son machia-
v61isme a manoeuvre, et manoeuvre tant, que voili ce diable de Bentinck
qui revient, et alors je dis & Manhfis que TafiiEtire 6toit finie : je me rappelle
bien de ce Bentinck dans lltalie— et k Vienne— Sacrebleu I comme il a
men6 son monde dans ce tems-li ! il a fait des choses dans ce terns qui
lui ont fait autant d'honneur comme n^gociateur qu'elles nous ont fait du
tort — mais — dans son absence — nous aurions dti faire beaucoup si cette
femme se ftit d6cid6e seulement : votre armte 6toit perdue et la Sicile k
nousl
D. Ah, mon G6n6ral, pas si vite — une arm6e de vingt mille hommes
ne se perd pas si facilement.
G. Vingt mille hommes ? bah I mais vous avez trSs peu de Cavallerie
— ^bien peu. . .
D. Je ne dis pas cela ; mais soit — regardez nos montagnes : k quoi
serviroit une Cavallerie nombreuse ici dans un tel pays ? vous ^tes trop bon
mihtaire, et avez trop fait la guerre des montagnes, pour croire que nous
L L 2
Digitized by
Qoo^^
516 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES July
manqnons de Gavallerie pour le service que nous aurons k hire quand vous
yiendrez — mais — dites-moi — la Eeine — ^ne savez-vous pas? — Oui, sans
doute vous saurez pourquoi elle n'a pas voulu se d^ider — o'est-&-dire k
entrer en correspondance avec vous : elle est Autrichienne, trop altiire.
Elle a trop de la fiert^ de sa &mille pour vouloir entrer en correspondance
avec un Eoi vassal et subalteme tel que Murat : si elle daignoit entrer en
correspondance de tout avec quelqu'une des couronnes de nouvelle date,
ce seroit avec Buonaparte lui-m&me, etnonpas avec un de ses Lieutenants
— (I said this to pique him, and make him come out with something. It
had the effect.)
G. (After swelling and blowing out his cheeks) : Ah ! la villaine
menteuse — Ah ! la fiire putain — Elle dit cela : elle ment I P , elle
ment. Si elle dit qu'elle n'a pas voulu entrer en correspondance avec
mon souverain ! (There the murder came out, this really is pretty con-
vincing.) Non, non — c'^toit son — ^machiav^lisme qui a diff6r6 le coup
jusqu'^ I'arriv^e de votre Bentinck — et alors il 6toit trop tard : I'affaire est
finie ; mais une chose je vous dirai : vous croyez avoir affermi votre pouvoir
en Sicile, n'en croyez rien : tant que restera cette femme, vous ne serez
jamais tranquilles — ^vous 6tes trop loyaux — vous ^tes trop faciles h croire.
Je vous le r6pdte, tant que restera en Sicile cette femme-l&, elle vous
tourmentera ; c'est un feu sous la cendre. Si vous voulez Stre tranquilles,
chassez-la — envoyez-la h Yienne. (After this the conversation took a
miscellaneous turn during which Goldemar spoke a great deal of Buona-
parte, and mentioned some instances of his tyranny and injustice to his
army which are truly astonishing. This gave me an opportunity of
sounding him about Murat's feelings to Bonaparte.) He said :
G. Quant k I'Empereur, il n'est pas possible de lui dtre personnelle-
ment attach^ — il est le plus grand 6goiste qui exist&t jamais : cet homme
ne pense, n'agit, ne vit que pour lui seul.
D. Je suis bien aise, G6n6ral, que sur le continent vous commencez k
connoitre son caractire ; il y a bien longtems que vous ^tes les victimes
de son ambition, qui n'a d'autre objet que son propre agrandissement.
Je suis seulement 6tonn6 que ceux qu'il a d6cor^ du titre de Eoi ne
d^rent point I'^tre en effet — par exemple, Murat — comment diable peut-
il se contenter comme il est — ^maitre titulaire d'un beau pays. Home sous
sa main, et Eugene Beanhamois prdt k lui donner la main ? Je parle
d'Eug^ne B parce qu'il n'est pas possible que ce jeune homme ne
soit, k coeur, I'ennemi implacable de Buonaparte : un fils ne pent jamais
pardonner I'insulte qu'a soufferte sa mdre.
G. Oh I — mon 66n6ral (soupirant), que voulez-vous — il y a des
obstacles— des liens— des rapports entre I'Empereur et mon malice !
D. Des liens 1 des rapports ! vous vous moquez de moi, M. Goldemar
— ^vous ne voulez pas tr^s siirement me pr^cher la morale, et me parler
de liens, de reconnoissance, de I'honneur — et tout cela, si n^ssaire, en
v6rit6 entre nous autres en vie priv6e : vous ne voulez pas me parler de
cela entre deux souverains, quand il s'agit de Vind4pendance d'un d'eux ?
Si vous raisonnez de cette mani^re, vous avez trds peu observe tout ce
qui s'est pass6 sur le continent depuis vingt ans.
G. Mais il faut avoir des forces pour une telle entreprise.
Z). Ah! pour cela, jene m'en mele pas. Ceux qui prdf&rentl'ind^-
Digitized by
Google
1887 QUEEN CAROLINE OF NAPLES 517
pendance k resclavagedoivent penser anx moyens pour Clever leurs peuples,
et 86 fortifier contre leur dominateur ; pour moi Je yous avouerai franche-
ment, mais comprenez bien, je ne parle nile langagede mon Gouyemement,
ni de ma nation peut-Stre g6n^alement, mais je parle de moi-mSme —
mon propre sentiment est que j'aimerois mille fois mieux de yoir Murat
ind^pendant que yassal : s'il 6toit ind^pendant, il deyiendroit, malgr^
tons les pr6jug6s, Pallid natural de I'Angleterre. N'importe, soit-il Murat,
soit-il un Bourbon— le souverain de Naples ind^endantt ou se d^battant
pour son ind^pendanoe, deyient, de facto, Tallin des Anglois : c'est contre
la domination uniyerselle de Buonaparte que nous nous battons — et tout
homme qui a le courage de s'^leyer contre ce colosse a droit, non seule-
ment k notre admiration, mais aussi k notre secours : comprenez bien, je
parle tbtoriquement. Quant k mon Gouyemement, ou les Anglois en
g^n^ral, je ne sais pas s'ils seroient de mon opinion ; mais yous, G6n^l
— ^youB, dites-moi francbement, non pas comme Fran9ois ou g^n^ral
napolitain, qu'est-oe que yous pensez de moi, politique ?
O. Oh I ma foi (after considerable lactation), il y a beaucoup de raison
en ce que yous dites ; mais il y a des rapports— des difficult^s. (He here
fell into a silence of a quarter of an hour, the longest interyal of lingual
repose he enjoyed while here, and the conyersation took another turn.
He execrated tiie war and, like eyery other French general I eyer met
with, prayed for peace that he might go and liye quietly. I forgot to
mention that in speaking of Murat's situation I obseryed to him that he
could not be ignorant of Bonaparte's intention to transport him to Poland ;
that Bonaparte was afraid of Murat's growing popularity at Naples, and
that before long he would haye his order to march.)
O. Pour cela, G^n^ral, ce changement n'aura trds siirement pas lieu :
mon — le Boi ne soufiErira pas cela, il a un caract^re tr^s ferme, et il y a un
point au-del& duquel un homme ne yeut que Ton le pousse. L'Empereur,
nous le sayons bien, a envie de transpla/nter Murat, et le projet a d^j& ^t^
entam^ ; mais il ne poussera pas I'affaire au bout : il sait de quoi le Boi
est capable, et ne le poussera pas aux abois. (Here there is a thing to
be seen ; a projet of B's determined on and which the yictim is resolyed to
resist.) He mentioned the address with which Bonaparte had agcdn put
off war with Bussia, and alluded to this as a thing we must be acquainted
with. He did not speak of it as news, but as a thing we no doubt were
well aware of and repeating.
The foregoing will giye an idea of the feeling in Naples about that
country, Bonaparte, and Sicily. All his conyersation was in the same
strain, more or less. He certainly spoke with yery great freedom against
Bonaparte, and entered so fully into the satire of some of the Ambigtis
he found in his bedroom in my house, that he sat up reading them, he
told me, till two in the morning, and I gaye him eyery number I had —
about fifteen.
N.B. — The aboye, as is eyident, is written at a gallop, without pains
or correction. I hope it is legible. Goldemar has just left me, and this
is the moment to fix his conyersation : by to-morrow one-half would haye
eyaporated. (Signed) B. Donkin.
OSGAB BbOWNIKO.
Digitized by
Google
518 July
Notes and Documents
BOliE BECENTLY PUBLISHED LETTEBS OF THE EMPEBOB JULIAN.
Among the results of the exploration set on foot by Mr. Theodore A.
Maurogordatos, of the various libraries scattered over the coasts and
islands of the ^gean and Black Seas, are six entirely new letters, and
many new versions of previously known works of the emperor Julian.
These have been published in an appendix to the 'fiXXi/rococ ^tXoXoycAroc
2v\Xoyoc for the year 1885, by Mr. Papadopoulos Eerameus, who enter-
tains no doubt whatever of their authenticity. And certainly their tone and
style bear a sufficient resemblance to those of the undisputed works of the
emperor, for the student of these works to hail them as a product of the
same author.
Of the six new letters, four are addressed to persons already known as
correspondents of the emperor, and most of them exhibit well-known traits
of the character of the writer.
The first is addressed to his maternal uncle Julian, to whom he also
wrote the thirteenth letter in Hertlein's edition. The confidence which
Julian reposes in this uncle, the affectionate terms in which he addresses
him, and the simpUcity with which (in Letter XIII.) he counts on his
sympathy in his efforts — scarcely as yet declared in pubUc — towards the
restoration of Hellenism, serve to corroborate the opinion that it was
firom the family of his mother (whom we know to have been a student of
Oreek hterature) that Julian derived his tendencies towards Greek re-
ligion and culture. This letter was addressed to the elder Julian while
he was discharging his duties as prefect of the East, and appa-
rently residing in or near Antioch. The eagerness with which Julian
urges him to press forward the work of embellishing the temple of
Daphne, and in particular of setting up columns, the material for which
is to be taken from the imperial palace and from all the surrounding
country, seems to confirm the statement of Ammianus Marcellinus ' that
Julian attributed the great fire which destroyed the temple in October 862
to the vexation of the Christians at the erection of a new peristyle to the
building. Some other characteristic points occur in this letter. The
elder Julian had been vexed by the calumnies of a certain Lauracius,
and his nephew, while desirous of having the whole matter sifted in the
law courts, tries to dissuade him from any acts of arbitrary retaliation,
both because such acts are essentially undignified and because a
distinction should be made between public and private enemies. He
> Lib. zzii. 18.
Digitized by
Qoo^<^
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 519
ridicules the notion of taking vengeance on Lanracius for publishing
certain letters from the emperor to his uncle ; for, however blameworthy
such conduct may be, it can do no harm to those against whom it is
directed. In words which recall Julian's sympathy with the earlier
Cynicism {Orations VI. and VII.) he declares that he has never written
anything — not even to his wife — which could not bear the public gaze.
The second letter is to a lady named Theodora, probably a priestess,
to whom Julian wrote also the fifth letter in Hertlein's edition. He
uses terms of compliment and approval, and refers very cautiously to
some misunderstanding which had arisen between Theodora and the
philosopher Seleucus, whom we know to have been a friend of Julian
and also of Libanius. While he reassures the lady by declaring that
Seleucus had not brought any complaints against her, he warns her
against showing too much favour to the enemies of the gods. The
letter seems to mark one of those occasions on which Julian's bitterness
against the Christians got the better of his principles of kindness and
tolerance.
The third letter is to the high priest Theodorus, whose relations with
Julian are known from the interesting fragment numbered sixty-third in
the edition of the letters by Hertlein. It is not impossible, Mr. Eerameus
thinks, that we have here two fragments joined together so as to appear in
the form of one letter. It contains two passages already known from
their having been cited in the Lexicon of Suidas. In one of these passages
there is a curious difference in the texts. In the letter Julian appeals
to the example of Musonius, saying that when exiled by Nero iTnfxiXiTo
tUv Tvapwy^ a statement explained by a tradition recorded by Philostratus,
that Musonius discovered a spring of fresh water in the ifdand of Tvapa^
In Suidas, however, for Tvapwv we have flapwy^ which term the lexi-
cographer explains as equivalent to rtixuy. This explanation is, of
course, superfluous if the difficulty arises merely from a copyist's error.
The tone in which Theodorus is addressed accords with that adopted by
the emperor elsewhere. He is commended for neglecting the foolish
insults of the fjyefibfy of Greece, and in answer to requests for advice
on matters connected with the temple service, Julian refers him to his
own judgment, as to that of a man more at leisure than he himself can
ever be.
The fourth letter is to the philosopher Prisons, who is mentioned in
the third and addressed in the seventy-first letter of Hertlein, and who is
also mentioned by Ammianus ' as one of those friends of Julian who stood
round his death-bed. Beference is made, dpropos of a new and complete
edition of Aristotle which Pnscus has brought out, to the less extensive
labours of Maximus in the same field. Mention is also made of the
younger lambhchus (to whom are addressed several letters of Julian of
which the authenticity has been much questioned), and he is said to bear
a rank of eminence in theosophy similar to that of the earlier lamblichus
in philosophy.
The fifth letter is to Maximinus, a man of whom we have no record
elsewhere. Julian requests him to make inquiries as to the number
and destination of the ships which are to assemble at CenchreaB. The
« Lib. XXV 3.
Digitized by
Google
620 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS July
person of whom these inquiries are to be made is 6 Twy 'EWjfvufv
tiyovfieroc, by whom, the editor suggests, he probably means the Delphie
Apollo.
The sixth letter is without superscription. If it were not rash to
hazard a conjecture, we would suggest that it may have been addressed
to Theodora or to the ]^iestess Callixena of Letter XXI. It contains
expressions of gratitude to the gods and to the person addressed (a lady)
for gifts and assarances of good-will.
These six letters are followed by several fragments which almost
coincide with passages in the received text, but have several variant
readings. These variations are very numerous in the copy of the eighth
Oration (to Sallust). There are several differences also in proper names.
The Eumenius of Letter XXV., Julian's fellow-student, to whom, from
barbaric Gaul, he wrote a somewhat envious letter of advice as to his
studies, becomes in this version Ammonites. The unknown Amerius,
to whom Julian wrote Letter LV., to console him on the death of his
young and virtuous wife, becomes Hvmeriusy PrcRfect of Egypt. Was
this the same as the sophist Himerius ? We should also like to know
whether he was the successor of the praafect Ecdicius, the recipient of
Julian's instructions as to the banishment of Athanasius, the safe disposal
of the hbrary of George, and the encouragement of the art of music.
(Hertlein, Letters Y. IX. L. LVI.) Alios Gabdnbb.
THB HOUSB OF BTHBLWULF«
Onb of the most puzzling episodes in early English history is the con-
spiracy of Ethelbald against his father, at his return from Eome. ' He
travelled back to his country,' says Asser, ' bringing with him Judith, the
daughter of Charles, king of the Franks. Meanwhile, however, while
king Ethelwulf stayed so long ^ time beyond sea, an infeuny against the
custom of all Christians arose on the western side of Selwood. For King
Ethelbald, the son of King Ethelwulf, and Alstan, bishop of the church
of Sherborne ; Eanwulf, also, alderman of Somersetshire, are reported to
have conspired that King Ethelwulf, on his return from Eome, might
never be received back in the kingdom. This misfortune, unheard of in
all former ages, very many impute to the bishop and alderman only, by
whose counsel they say this was done. Many also ascribe it to the Idng's
insolence ; for that king was obstinate, both in this matter and in many
other perversities, as we have heard by the report of some men, which
also the event showed of that which followed.'
' For as he returned from Home, the aforesaid son of King Ethelwulf,
with all his counsellors, or rather conspirators, endeavoured to accomplish
so great a crime as to drive back the king from his own kingdom : which
neither God suffered to be so done, nor the nobles of all Saxony ^ agreed to.
For lest there should be incurable danger to Saxony, while father and son
> This mast be the meamng, though the word is tawtUhtm.
* Tiz. his unlawful marriage.
* Le. the English kingdom as regarded by a Welshman— not Wessex, as distinct
from the Jatish Kent.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS <J21
made war — yea, lest with the whole nation rebelling against both the
internal disaster should daily increase more cruelly and more bloodily — ^by
the unutterable kindness of the £ather, and assent of all the nobles, the
kingdom, united before, is divided between the father and the son, and
the eastern parts are assigned to the father, the western, on the contrary,
to the son. For where the father by a just judgment ought to have
reigned, there reigned the unrighteous and obstinate son : for the western
part of Saxony was always of higher rank than the eastern.
' When, therefore. King Ethelwulf arrived from Eome, the whole of that
nation, as was meet, so rejoiced at the coming of their elder,^ that, if he
allowed, they desired to drive out his obstinate son Ethelbald, with all
his counsellors, from any share in the kingdom. But he, as we have
said, with excessive kindness, and following prudent counsel, not to bring
the kingdom into peril would not have it so done. And Judith, the
daughter of King Charles, whom he had received from her father, he bade
sit by him on the royal throne without any dispute and hatred of his
nobles, even to the end of his life ; contrary to the perverse custom of that
nation,' where the rank of queen had been abolished, in detestation of the
crimes of Edburgh.
At one time Mr. Freeman went so far as to question the truth of the
whole story, and its authenticity as part of the text of Asser, but for
this there seems to be no justification. The story is told quite in Asser's
manner, and there is no documentary evidence for its omission ; it is re-
cognised by the twelfth-century chroniclers, who pass by the really inter-
polated story of the cowherd. The only evidence against the story is the
silence of the of&cial chronicle ; and this silence is not quite complete.
The Chronicle's statement that the people * were glad ' at the king's return
is niuvely superfluous, until we see how Asser explains their joy. And
why, unless it was under discreditable circumstances, is the fact not
mentioned of Ethelbald being made king in his father's lifetime? It
is implied in the statement of the length of his reign. The compiler,
writing under Alfred's eye, might desire or might be bidden to spare his
brother's memory ; he keeps absolute silence on the undoubted fact of
his scandalous marriage. But Asser, writing for his own countrymen,
oould treat Ethelbald's crimes as freely as Edburgh's.
Still the story is, we repeat, a puzzling one. It is intelligible that a
petulant and wilful youth should, with or without provocation, have
rebelled against his &th6r ; but how came he to gain the support of a
powerful party, headed by statesmen of experience, including a prelate to
whose high diaracter Asser himself bears witness ? And if the nation
at large was honest and loyal, how was it possible pr justifiable for ever
so weak a king, or ever so indulgent a father, to yield to his rebel son the
better half of the kingdom ? One can hardly doubt that Ethelbald must
have had some plausible case. On the other hand, it cannot, in Asser's
impartial judgment, have been a good one. He knew and set aside what
excuses were made for him ; other excuses, which he does not even name,
may have existed, but cannot have been sufficient. Thus we cannot
imagine that Ethelbald was vindicating his mother's rights against his
* Senioris, no donbt in the Benae of ' lord,' not the elder of the two kings.
Digitized by
Google
622 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS July
father's wrong ^ — hardly that he was vindicating his own rights against a
prospective wrong. Alfred was his father's favourite, and his father pro-
cured that he should be anointed king at Borne; but this surely was
intended to secure his succession after his brothers, not to supersede
them. Ethelwulf, who was of mature age in 828, and had a grown-up
son in 889, must now have been fifty-five at least, which was old age as
times went. Egbert seems to have lived to seventy — ^longer than any of
his successors before- George 11 ; but his son can hardly have reckoned on
seeing a child of six grow up. Still less can he have expected to be able
to hand over the kingdom to his yet unborn children by Judith. Ethel-
bald, on the other hand, was old enough to be associated, at least nomi-
nally, with his father in the command at the battle of Ockley in 851 ;
now he was five years older — able, surely, to take care of himself, so that
his rights or reasonable expectations could not be ignored.
But perhaps we may infer what Ethelbald's case was, from the light
thrown on Ethelwulf s fEonily relations by the disposal he made of his
inheritance. It is well known that he left four sons and a daughter, and
that, after certain bequests to the church, he divided his private property
among them. Still better known is it that his four sons successively
occupied the West Saxon throne, and that this was done, in some sort,
in accordance with Ethelwulf s will. But the document that gives us the
clearest and most businesslike recital of these arrangements presupposes
a quite different state of things from what seems impHed in these fiEuniliar
fjBkcts. In Alfred's will there is mention made not of four brothers as
joint or successive heirs to their father, but of three — ^thelbold, ^thered,
and Alfred himself, ^thelbjrht is indeed mentioned as king after
^thelbold's death, but he is described not as brother, but as kinsman
(mage) to ^thered and iBlfred.
Can we account for the co-existence of these different ways of stating
the same facts ? It is generally admitted that Athelstan, who was made
king of Kent immediately on his father's succession to Wessex, is not
likely to have been the son of Osburgh.^ What if Ethelbert were his
own brother ? — then Alfred's language is accounted for. He had two
brothers, fall brothers, and Ethelbert was a less near kinsman. Now, if
this was so, it will appear that Ethelbald was, during his father's absence,
confronted by a natural rival, from a plausible dispute with whom arose
what Asser considers an imnatural rebellion. If Athelstan and Ethelbert
were sons of a first marriage, it will follow — ^if they were illegitimate, it
would still be presumable — that Ethelbert was older than Ethelbald ;
Athelstan, at any rate, was the eldest of the whole family. He had
held the post of king of Kent unchallenged for a number of years, and
' Th*e notion that Ethelwulf divoroed Osbnrgh to marry Judith rests entirely on a
misunderstanding of the well-known story of Alfred's education, which is supposed to
prove that Osburgh lived till 860, or later. What Asser reaUy teUs us is (1) that
Alfred, by the culpable neglect of his parents (Ethelwulf and perhaps Judith), never
learnt to read till he was twelve or more ; (2) that, nevertheless, he got some literary
education by learning English poetry by heart ; (8) that the beginning of his love for
poetry dated from his mother's lifetime, or, indeed, before Alfred's last parting from
her — i.e. before he was five years old. No doubt a child of four or five who can and
will learn a volume of poetry by heart is — as rare a character as Alfred was.
* Alfred was bom in 849 ; Athelstan can hardly have been under fourteen in 839.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 628
apparently had proved worthy of his race and rank. Bat after his victory
at Sandwich he disappears from history ; in all probabiUty he, like his step-
mother, died during his father's absence on the continent. Who, then, was
to be his successor in Kent ; and who was to be regent in Wessex till
Ethelwulf s return ? If Ethelbert were the eldest surviving son, and
Athelstan's own brother, he was the natural successor to the former
office at least. On the other hand, it is likely that Ethelbald already held
the second ; ^ what else does Asser mean by calling bin^ king before his
rebellion ? and, if so, his designation to this might seem to give him a
claim to succeed to what must still have been regarded as the higher
post.
Between the brothers, then, a contest might be natural, and it is con-
ceivable that, when Ethelwulf offended West Saxon feeling by giving
royal rank to his yoimg bride, this act was honestly or artftdly put
forward by Ethelbald's partisans as a plea in his behalf even against his
father. Osburgh plainly had held no such rank» and her son may
have resented the coronation, or even the marriage itself, as an insult to
her memory as well as to himself. Thus, if Ethelwulf decided in Ethel-
bert's favour, Ethelbald might pass on into a refusal to acknowledge his
father's authority, and might be able to carry his party idong with him.
As to the merits of the prior dispute, we should from the modem
point of view make it tium on the legitimacy of Ethelbert's birth. That
of Athelstan's has been doubted ; all we can say is that Ethelwulf left
the impression on posterity, not of a man who became devout after a
more or less vicious youth, but of a good dull man^ with a pious, perhaps
a clerical, training, who was enabled to discharge an arduous task with
honour by sheer conscientiousness and trust in good advisers. But we
must remember that it was a gradual work, not complete before the
eleventh century, for the laws of Christian matrimony to be practically
enforced, at least upon kings ; and a prince who had a concubine need not
have been a profligate. It is certain that the position held by Athelstan
is compatible with his being bom of a union less regular than that with
Osburgh or Judith ; he was probably, at his father's accession, the only
one of his sons old enough for office. On the other hand, if he and
Ethelbert were bom in wedlock, it is still possible that their mother was
of lower rank than Osburgh, the heiress of the Jutish princes of the
Meons in South Hampshire. Or there may have been the feeling that
Ethelbald took precedence of his elder brother as the son bom of a
reigning king. We know that more than a century later, at the death of
Edgar, there was a party in favour of the succession of his son by his
living wife, though St. Edward's legitimacy was unquestioned. Alstan
may have now urged the arguments, whatever they were, which it then
needed St. Dunstan's influence to set aside.
If Ethelbald had not only a strong party but a plausible case, it is
easier to understand how compromise was the wisest course— indeed, the
only alternative to civil war. The compromise adopted agrees with the
view that the controversy was, in the first instance, for the succession to
Kent rather than to Wessex. That Ethelwulf should remain sovereign for
^ It would be carrying conjecture too far to ask if Ethelwulf had created a new
appanage of the shires west of Selwood, so that this was Ethelbald's kingdom*
Digitized by
Google
524 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS July
life was the least that he could ask; that Ethelbald should reoeiye
Wessex at onoe was the most that he could expect ; while Ethelbert was
not ill used if, though he did not obtain Kent at once, he remained the
unquestioned heir thereto after his father.
But when the rivahy between the two elder brothers had been so em-
bittered, how was peace to be restored between them? or how to be
maintained between the two younger ? Apparently, their rivalry was to
be removed by dissociating their interests altogether : neither was to be
the other's heir, but the throne of Wessex was to pass, afiier Ethelbald's
death, to his younger brothers Ethelred and Alfred.
This arrangement was open to the objection that, if it in some sort
restored harmony in the family, it sacrificed such unity in the kingdom as
had been attained by Egbert. If Ethelbert had left children, Kent might
have been separated from Wessex ; if Alfred had been any less eminent
than he was, the sons of Ethelbald or Ethelred might have disputed
the succession with him, as one of them actually did with his son.. But
perhaps the result proves that Ethelwulf was right in risking everything
for the sake of immediate peace ; his younger sons learnt to follow his
example, not Ethelbald's. On Ethelbald's death, they allowed Ethelbert
to reunite the kingdom, though to the prejudice of their rights under their
father's will. Ethelbert, on his side, ' kept his kingdom in goodly concord
and great peace,' and his family too. We know not if he was married or
had children ; but his sons certainly never became rivals to his brothers,
who lived with him as acknowledged princes. Ethelbert's reign, unlike
Athelstan's, two generations later, is not marked by any great personal
exploit ; but, notus in fratres anmi patemi, he may claim a share in the
glory of theirs.
For Ethelbald's marriage it is less possible to make excuse than for
his rebellion. With Eadbald, doubtless, it had been a following of national
custom, not of lawless passion, to succeed to his father's wife as well as
his father's throne ; but the tradition cannot have failed to be broken by
two centuries of Christianity. Nor can we admit the suggestion of Eemble,
accepted by Mr. Oreen, that here too the English Absalom was no worse
than Adonijah. Not only is it plain that Asser knows nothing of such a
plea, but Hincmar, when he married Judith, took for granted that she
was really undertaking the duties of a wife, and that she was old enough
to understand them. Doubtless it was cruel to lay such duties on a child
under thirteen ; it was less her fault than that of the custom of the age,
that the widow of fifteen did what she did. On the other hand, it was
the custom of the age,^ and her father and bridegroom are not to be
held personally responsible for it. Yet, if Ethelwulf was not an old man
befooled by a pretty girl, but a Christian king desirous to bind Christen-
dom together by every sort of tie, why did he not ask for Judith for his
son, or, like Charles, promise to let her have his- son if she were willing
to accept himself?
* Alfred married his eldest girl to Ethelred of Meroia when she was fWMt which
Asser considered quite marriageable age. In her case, as in Judith's, nature avenged
itself, though less scandalously. The story can hardly be an invention, that the
poor little thing suffered so much at the birth of her first child that she vowed that
she woi^d never have another.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 626
It seems to be a mistake to argae» as has been done from Cod. Dipl.
1058, that Ethelbald's marriage was condoned by St. Swithnn. That
document, dated in the year of Ethelwnlf s death, was doubtless executed
ahnost immediately after it. One may guess that the grant to the king
for life of the bishop's estate at Famham was in lieu of a customary
payment at the coronation. Anyhow, nothing is more natural than for
the late king's heir and his widow to sign as king and queen ; we do not
expect her to define her position as queen dowager. Very likely this was
the first occasion when the two met ; unless indeed a formal interview had
followed on the settlement of peace between the father and the oon. Now
the two would ' begin with a Uttle aversion,' remembering how each had
tried to exclude the other from their present rank ; but the antagonism
would of itself rouse curiosity. When the young king saw the beautiful
girl — grown out of childhood since he last saw her, if he ever had, and
very likely honestly sorry for the loss of her kind old husband — it was his
instinct to comfort her in the way pleasantest to himself. It was very
wicked, but it was very human wickedness.
WniLiAM Hbnby Simoox.
A MEDIBVAL LATIN POEM.
The following short poem was transcribed by me at Wolfenbiittel from
the MS. which contains Ovid's * Tristia ' (Gudianus, 192). The MS. is
sec. xiii., and this poem occurs at the end (fol. 5(K), written by the same
scribe as the rest. The last few lines are difficult to read, owing to the
last leaf of the MS. having been damaged. The poem is interesting
partly from the intrinsic cleverness of some of the lines, which form
a very good example of leonine verse, and partly because it affords a
specimen of monkish opposition to the poems of the OoUwrdi, whose ex-
hortations to sensual enjoyment are answered in their own strain by an
assertion of the principles of monastic asceticism. See E. du M^nl,
' Poesies populaires latines du moyen &ge,' p. 179, where there is a
fragment of a poem in a similar strain by Bernard of Morlaix.
Arbore sub quadam dictauit dericus adam
quomodo primus adam peccauit in arbore quadam.
femina uicit, adam uictus fuit arbore quadam ;
femina serpenti mox credidit alta loquenti.
5 femina deceptos sapientes reddit ineptoe ;
femina te, dauid, et te, salamon, superauit ;
femina uictorem uicit uictum per amorem,
femina decepit te Sanson (sie)^ et hoc tua fecit
femina iob ; uicit genesis quoque quomodo dicit ;
10 femina dannari (sic) fecit nabaot lapidari ;
femina, tu christi battiste colla petisti ;
femina cunta regit, iuuenum sibi colla subegit ;
femina corda senum necat inspirando uenenum ;
femina prelatis adimit nomen bonitatis ;
15 femina ditatur cum presbiteris dominatur ;
Digitized by
Google
626 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS July
femina multorom subiit claustrum monacorom ;
femina perito nix est bene fida marito ;
femina tunc gaudet cum perficit omne quod audet ;
femina ditabit infemum si satiabit ;
20 femina que non est fallax bee femina non est ;
femina bella gerit, uix pacis federa querit ;
femina se nescit quia femina nulla senescit ;
femina, nemo furit nisi quem tua flamma perurit ;
femina uel raro uel numquam cedit auaro ;
25 femina, multa licet promittas, non amo dicet ;
femina, donare cessa, cessabit amare ;
femina dum plorat lacrimosa fronte laborat ;
femina dum plangit ut scorpius ora perangit ;
femina uult pungi sua que uult ora penmgi ;
80 femina mors iuuenum portat sub melle uenenum ;
femina predatur et ob hoc lupa iure uocatur ;
femina multorum flammas extinguit amorum ;
femina, te quare multi nequeunt satiare ?
femina, tu iuras, tu non periuria curas ;
85 femina, nee iuras sed mortem iure figuras;
femina, te pulcra signant sub melle sepulcra ;
femina, tu leporem fEiois aptum propter amorem ;
femina, uir mutus loquitur tua signa secutus ;
femina, mitescit per te lupus, agna timescit ;
40 femina, te fante mox cera sit ex adamante ;
femina, uir certe sit amando femina per te ;
femina, tu uerbis et re plus rege superbis ;
femina, nullus ita gladius ferit ut tua uita ;
femina, troia satis dat signa tue probitatis ;
45 femina, tu tristi cure medicina faisti ;
femina sola uale, quia nomen babes speciale ;
femina stella maris sic uirgo maria uocaris ;
femina fallebit falsa q, dioere qa cauebit,
secana (sic) piscibus et mare fluctibus qpa carebit
50 femina corpus opes animam uim lumina uoces
poUuit annichilat necat eripit |||||| at.
femina quem superat numquam uiuit sine pena,
libertate caret turpi destrictus habena,
et, nisi mors faoiat, non soluitur ille cathena,
55 felices illi quos non capit ista sagena.
Line 10 : read, femina damnari fecit nabot et lapidari.
Line 14 : praelatis, magistrates. ' Praelatus, magistratus qui popnlis prieest ' (Du
Cange).
Line 40: cera fit?
Lines 48, 49 : corn|pt. Secana (a fonn of Seqaana) » the Seine. Thus the writer
most have been French. Bead perhaps :
femina fallere falsaqae dicere qnando cauebit,
secana piscibus et mare fluctibus ante carebit.
Line 51 : perhaps eripit [urit aduncjat. Adunoare « aduncis nolis arripere (Da
Cange).
S. Q. Owen.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 527
THE DEPOSITIONS OF 16-41.
I AM unable to find any proof in those documents to sustain the assertion
that the deponents were inspired by the ' intensest hatred ' of the Irish.
On the contrary, they were ready to tell the good as well as the bad deeds
done by the latter, vide * Irish Massacres,' vol. i. pp. 178, 193, 198, 218,
808, and vol. ii. pp. 50, 85. As regards my estimate of the numbers killed
out of war, the reason of which Mr. Dunlop desires to know, I gave it at
page 162 of my * Introduction.* Mr. Dunlop is aUke mistaken in suppos-
ing that ' I asked ' Mr. Froude to write the preface to my work ; and that
I said I did not ' know ' his opinions about the massacres. I * knew ' them,
but I did not undertake to repeat what he has over and over again said on
the subject, needless to say, with &r greater ability than I could bring to
bear on it. I am unable to agree with him in all his opinions about my
native country, but I have a sincere respect for him, and admiration for
his genius. I must, however, be permitted most distinctly to deny that
I ever asked Mr. Froude to write a preface for my work, as Mr. Dunlop
asserts that I did. Mr. Froude offered, rather to my surprise, to write
the preface, and I very thankfully accepted his kind offer, on condition
that there was to be nothing in it which seemed to connect the volume
with present politics.
I must still maintain that it was mainly in consequence of the facts
sworn to in those depositions, bucis of rebellion, wholesale murder and
spoliation, that three-fourths of the soil of Ireland changed hands in
1649-54 ; that immense numbers of Irish and Anglo-Irish were hanged,
or banished or transplanted ; and that therefore it is impossible to deny
the high historical value of those documents, used in successive courts of
justice, republican or royalist, between 1649-70, in as many successive
settlements of' Ireland, the last of which is, as yet, virtually intact.
Maby Hioeson.
THE FOBGED COMMISSION OF 1641.
How fiajr Charles I was guilty of instigating the Irish rebellion of 1641
is a question not easily and perhaps never to be completely and satisfac-
torily answered. It is generally admitted that in the summer of that
year he, or his consort Henrietta, entered into negotiations with certain
of the Irish nobility through the medium of the earl of Antrim. The
object of these negotiations was to incite the nobles of the Pale to seize
the chief fortresses for the king, and to depose the lords justices Parsons and
Borlase, who as nominees of the English parliament might naturally be
expected to oppose the scheme. For it was Charles's intention to employ
the army collected by the late earl of Strafford against the parliament,
and to this end it was necessary that Dublin as a sort of point d'ajpptd
should first of all be captured. This seems clear from the earl of An-
trim's deposition delivered to the parliamentary commissioners after the
conclusion of the war, and printed by Cox in his ' Hibemia Anglicana '
(appendix xlix) : ' The late king, before the said rising of the Irish in
Digitized by
Google
628 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS July
Ireland, sent one Thomas Bourk, kinsman to the earl of Glanricard, to
the earl of Ormond and to the lord of Antrim with a message that it was
the king's pleasure and command that those 8,000 men raised by the earl
of Stra£Ford in Ireland should be continued without disbanding, and that
they should be made up to 20,000, and that they should be armed out of
the store of Dublin, and employed against the parliament, and particu-
larly that the castle of Dublin should be surprised and secured.' This
command, however, arrived too late to be put into execution, for by that
time the 8,000 men had been disbanded and were waiting, some of them
at least, to be enlisted in the Spanish service. This information was
conveyed from the earl of Ormond by one Captain Digby, who found the
king at York on his way to Scotland. It must have been then the month
of August. The king thereupon, according to Antrim, returned a mes-
sage by Digby * signifying his pleasure that all possible endeavours shoidd
be used for getting again together those 8,000 men so disbanded, and that
an army should immediately be raised in Ireland that should declare for
him against the parliament of England, if occasion should be for so
doing, and to do what therein was necessary and convenient for his service.
Upon receiving this the king's pleasure, he, the lord of Antrim, imparted
the design to the lord of Gormanstown and to the lord of Slane, and
after to many others in Leinster ; and after going into Ulster he com-
municated the same to many there. But the fools (such was his lord-
ship's expression to us), well liking the business, would not expect our
time or manner for ordering the work ; but fell upon it without us and
sooner and otherwise than we should have done, taking to themselves and
in their own way the managing of the work and so spoiled it.'
In objection to this account it is usual to urge that the earl of Ormond,
notwithstanding his unquestioned loyalty to Charles, was far too good a
protestant (as witness his conduct in the subsequent negotiations for a
treaty with the Irish catholics) to consent to such a toleration of the Boman
catholic religion as would endanger the protestant interest in Ireland, and
which it is presumed was to be the price of the Irish assistance. This view,
however, appears to rest on a misapprehension of the wishes of the Irish
catholic nobility and gentry. No doubt they desired above all things the
tree exercise of their religion ; but at the time of their negotiations
with the king this idea had not come so largely into prominence as it did
a short time afterwards. What the Irish were especially anxious to secure
was the long-promised Graces. For the nonce their interests were iden-
tical with the king's. From the parliament they had nothing to expect
but the absolute suppression of what religious freedom they then en-
joyed. Under the circumstances the substitution of a simple oath of
allegiance for that of supremacy, the confirmation of their titles, and a
tacit acknowledgment of religious liberty, seemed a boon sufficiently
great to draw them to the king's side. To Ormond, who always depre-
cated harsh measures against the catholic Irish, this could not be objec-
tionable. Still Ormond was a protestant, and it was for this reason
mainly, I think, that Charles employed the earl of Antrim, a Boman
catholic, but, according to Strafford, no incompetent judge in such
matters, a man of small ability and mean miUtary skill. This view of the
earl of Ormond's complicity in the plot for seizing Dublin castle and
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 529
ousting the government is confirmed by Sir Phelim O'Neil's statement in
1658 to the effect that the earl was represented at the meetings of the
conspirators by Colonel John Barry, who was very intimate with him.
This statement will be found in Miss Hickson's * Irish Massacres of 1641/
ii. p. 191. That the Irish believed Ormond to be privy to the scheme is
evident from a passage in the * Aphorismical Discovery/ printed by Mr.
Gilbert, i. p. 12, to the effect that he had been sworn as one of the
seventy-eight persons who undertook to secure each his town or fort.
(Compare Mr. Gardiner's note on p. 7, vol. x. of his * History of England.')
On these grounds, then, Antrim's statement may be accepted as substan-
tially true. One clause in the earl's deposition does not seem to have
attracted attention, but which may serve to throw some additional light
on the king's conduct. Antrim, it will be remembered, was commanded
to raise an army ' that should declare for the king against the parliament
if occasion should be for so doing.' Now it will likewise be remembered
that Charles when he sent this message to Captain Digby was at York on
his way to Scotland. The idea immediately before him was to induce the
Scots to abandon their alliance with the English parliament. Deprived
of their support, he thought himself able, either with or without Scotch
assistance, to suppress the leaders of the commons at home. It was for
this reason that this clause was added in the instructions sent to Antrim.
For a moment after his arrival in Scotland the course of events seemed
to warrant his expectations. For this reason the conspirators in Ireland
were not in a hurry to precipitate matters. Their dilatoriness, however,
did not prove acceptable to the more ardent Irish under O'More and O'Neil,
who began to think the plot was to be abandoned. They therefore reverted
to their old scheme, and determining to act by themselves spoiled the
affair according to the earl of Antrim. By the month of October, how-
ever, Charles began to see that his hopes of Scotch collusion in his design
against the English commons were delusive, and he too reverted to his
old plan — a plan originally prompted by Strafford— of conquering Eng-
land by means of an Irish army. Some time in October, then, he des-
patched Lord Dillon, who was with him in Scotland and in whom he
reposed fall confidence, with a message to the Irish conspirators. But
again the notification of the king's pleasure arrived too late ; for by that
time the north of Ireland was in a state of open rebellion. AU this
seems perfectly clear ; but it is a very different matter when we try to
answer the question — what was the tenor of Lord Dillon's instructions ?
Did the king go so &r as to give into Lord Dillon's hands or transmit by
some other means to Sir Phelim O'Neil the following commission?
* Charles, by the Grace of God, King of England, Scotland, France,
and Ireland, Defender of the Faith &c. to all Catholic subjects within the
Kingdom of Ireland, greeting : Know ye, that We, for the safeguard and
preservation of Our person, have been enforced to make our abode and
residence in the kingdom of Scotland for a long season, occasioned by
reason of the obstinate and disobedient carriage of the Parliament of
England against. Us ; that hath not only presumed to take upon them the
government and disposition of those princely rights and prerogatives,
that have justly descended upon Us and Our predecessors, being kings anji
queens of the said kingdom for many hundred years past, but also have
VOL. n. — NO. vu. M M
Digitized by
Google
680 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS July
possessed themselves of the whole strength of the said kingdom, in
appointing governors, commanders, and officers in all places therein, at
their own will and pleasure without our consent, whereby We are de-
prived of Our sovereignty and are left naked without defence. And for-
asmuch as we are in Ourself very sensible that these storms blow aloft
and are very likely to be carried by the vehemence of the Protestant
party of the kingdom of Ireland, and endanger Our Begal power and
authority there also ; Enow ye, that We, reposing much care and trust
in your duty and obedience, which We have for many years past founds
do hereby give unto you fall power and authority to assemble and meet
together with all the speed and diligence that business of so great a con-
sequence doth require, and to advise and consult together by sufficient and
discreet numbers at all times, days, and places, which you shall in your
judgement hold most convenient, and most for the ordering, settling, and
effecting the great work [illegible] and directed to you in Our letters, and ta
use all politic means and wayd possible to possess yourselves for [illegible]
and safety of all the forts, castles, and places of strength and defence within
the kingdom, except the places, persons, and estates of Our loyal and loving^
subjects the Scots ; also to arrest and seize the goods, estates, and per-
sons of all the English protestants, within the said kingdom to Our use.
And in your care and speedy performance of this Our will and pleasure
We shall rely on your wonted duty and allegiance to Us, which We
shall accept and reward in due time. Witness Ourself at Edinburgh this
1st day of October in the seventeenth year of Our reign.*
This is the commission as it stands printed by Miss Hickson (' Irish.
Massacres,' i. 114), who copied it out of the Armagh volume of deposi-
tions, so that her copy may claim precedence over any other. The
commission, it is generally believed, was published by Phelim O'Neil
and Eoger Maguire on 4 November at Newry, together with the following
proclamatioii : * Phelim O'Neil, Bory Maguire. To all Catholics of the
Eoman party, both English and Irish, in the kingdom of Ireland
we wish all happiness, freedom of conscience, and victory over the
English heretics, who for a long time have tyrannised over our bodies and
usurped by extortion our estates. Be it hereby made known' unto you
all, our friends and countrymen, that the king's most excellent majesty
for many great and urgent causes him thereunto moving, imposing trust
and confidence in our fidelity, hath signified unto us, by his commission
under the great seal of Scotland, bearing date at Edinburgh, the 1st day
of this inst. October 1641, and also by letters under his sign manual, bear-
ing date with the said commission, of divers great and heinous affironta
that the English Protestants, especially the English parliament, have pub-
lished against his royal prerogative, and also against his Catholic friends^
within the kingdom of England, the copy of which commission we here-
with send unto you, to be published with all speed in all parts of this
kingdom that you may be assured of our sufficient warrant and authority
therein.* What then are the arguments that may be adduced for and against
the genuineness of the commission ? Those who believe that Charles did
really grant the commission to the Irish rebels appear to base their con-
clusion principally on the following argument. The seal affixed is that of
Scotland, and the date of it 1 Oct. 1641. During the troubles in Scotland
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 681
the onstodj of the broad seal had been committed to the care of the
marquis of Hamilton, who had enjoyed the king's confidence and been
entrusted bj him with the task of managing Scotland and reducing
the recalcitrant Scots to submission. Both he and his underkeeper
John Hamilton were looked upon as ardent royalists. According to
the author of the * Mystery of Iniquity,' Endymion Porter, who after-
wards played a part in the Glamorgan transactions, and whose subser-
viency to Charles is regarded as an assured fact, was also sometime^
entrusted with the care of the seal. Now on 80 September it was agreed
by the Scotch parliament on the nomination of the king to appoint the
earl of Loudon chancellor, and the seal was to be handed over to him on
2 October. On the 1st, then, it was in a state of transition. If, then,
the In'ng had determined to grant a commission to the Irish, it is supposed
that nothing could have been easier than by working on the loyalty of
Hamilton or the underkeeper or Endymion Porter for him to get posses-
sion of the seal on that day. Further, some time between the 1st and the
8th it is known that Lord Dillon was despatched into Ireland nominally
to take his seat at the council-board. What, it is asked, more easy than
to entrust the commission to him? The coincidence, it is urged, is
at least extraordinarily suspicious, and this suspicion amounts almost to
certainty when we remember the repeated assertions of Sir Phelim
O'Neil ttiat he had the king's commission for what he did. Brodie, Eeid,
Burton, and Miss Hickson are all agreed on this side.
In reply to this argument we may say that even admitting for facts
what are after all only suppositions, it amounts to nothing more than pre-
sumptive evidence. We are prepared to admit the coincidence, for which
there is another reason. The evidence for the genuineness of the document
rests entirely on the supposed loyalty of Hamilton. (See Brodie's note,
ii. p. 878, * History of the British Empire.') Now there is abundant evi-
dence to show that Hamilton had two or three weeks previous to the
appointment of Loudon gone over to Argyle. (See the letter of Sir Patrick
Wemyss to the earl of Ormond, dated Edinburgh, 25 Sept., printed in
Carte's * Original Letters.') * It had gone hard with the Marquis if he
had not fallen in with Argyle, who will bring him off. For, believe it,
the people here are much incensed against him ; but Argyle and he are
sworn to one another, and so think to carry all business.' For Hamilton's
treachery see Mr. Gardiner's * History of England,* x. p. 21-2. It was his
treiK^hery that led to the quarrel with Lord Eer, and to the event known
as the Licident. Of the conduct of Endymion Porter and the under-
keeper we know nothing. Further, granting that there was a commission,
and that it was sent by Dillon, can we believe that the king would have
entrusted the business to Sir Phelim O'Neil and not to the marquis of
Antrim, who had conducted the former negotiations ? But we may even
go farther, and ask is it possible to believe that Charles, notwithstanding-
all his rash and foolish actions, would ever have so far committed himself ?
Miss Hickson, who has been at great pains over this subject, has alleged
('Irish Massacres,' i. p. 116) that the main argument against the
genuineness of the commission rests on a statement made by Dean Eer to
the effect that Sir Phelim O'Neil at his trial confessed to have cut off the
king's seal from a patent he found in Charlemont castle after its capture*
X X 2
Digitized by
Google
632 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS July
which he ordered a Mr. Michael Harrison (if he, the dean, was not mis-
taken in the Christian name) and another gentleman (whose name the
dean had forgotten) to affix to the forged commission. On the contrary,
we are quite willing to put the dean's testimony out of court, though not
convinced by Miss Hickson*s argument. It is admitted by all and it
is beyond dispute that Sir Phelim 0*Neil denied emphatically, both in
court and on the scaffold, that he had ever received such a commission
from the king. And this the d3dng statement of a Eoman catholic, who
had nothing to lose and everything to gain by making the admission his
]udges tried to extort from him, is sufficiently confirmed by what we know
or can gather regarding the history of this commission.
First : Sir Phelim never allowed any one to examine it so closely as to
be able to detect the forged seal. Mr. Michael Harrison, whose deposition
Miss Hickson prints (i. 228-288), and who was the chief witness against
Sir Phelim, had very good reason to deny ever having put his hand to
the forgery, if indeed it was the same person, who, as Sir Phelim (accord-
ing to Dean Eer) said, fixed the seal to the commission. There were
many witnesses ready to swear before the parliamentary commissioners
that ' Sir Phelim had often told them he had a commission firom the late
king for what he acted in the Rebellion ; ' but no one could say that he
had seen it, at least sufficiently closely to recognise the seal. And it was
probably owing to this that the first rumour that got abroad and reached
the ears of the English parliament was that it was the great seal of
England that was attached to it. Second : after Sir Phelim had effected
his purpose of inducing the people to believe that he had the king's war-
rant for his rebeUion, nothing more was said about the commission.
What need, we ask, for all those stipulations between the lords of the
Pale and the Ulster Irish respecting the loyalty of the latter if the former
knew that the king had commanded them to rise ? Why those protesta-
tions of loyalty on the part of the Ulster Irish themselves if they knew
they had a commission which not only exonerated them but also autho-
rise their actions ? Why that absolute silence regarding a commission,
which had it been genuine would have been of the utmost importance to
the Irish both at the commencement of the war and at any time during
its progress ? To all these queries there is but one answer — ^the Irish did
not possess any such commission as is pretended. Bungler that he was.
Sir Phelim's only object was to deceive his countrymen and induce them
to rise in rebeUion, whereas they needed no such inducement. That
accomplished, he thought no more about it till he was placed on his trial,
and then (let us do justice to his courage, for personally he was brave
enough) he utterly denied the charge and unburdened his conscience of
the former deception he had practised under the belief that the justness of
his cause folly warranted it. And, indeed, so far as the king was concerned,
he was not altogether without justification. The popular belief that Charles
was somehow or other mixed up in the business was not without founda-
tion. For though we must exculpate Charles from ever having granted
this commission, yet in the eyes of all impartial critics he must appear
morally culpable of aiding and abetting the rebellion. That the Ulster
Irish and the catholic Irish generally would ultimately have risen is
beyond a doubt ; but it was that fatal message brought by Captain Digby
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 588
to the earl of Antrim that inspired them with the courage requisite for
the immediate undertaking. What the last message was that Lord Dillon
brought we do not know, only we may feel assured that it was not to
countermand the instructions sent by Digby. Whatever it was, it is ex-
ceedingly likely that it furnished Sir Phelim and Roger Maguire with the
materials for their forgery. If further proof of the forgery were neces-
sary, it might be gathered from internal evidence. For, as Mr. Gardiner
points out (x. 92, n.), Charles would never have spoken of the presby-
terians as protestants. One word more. It is commonly supposed that
it was only towards the close of November that the existence of the com-
mission became known. But it is clear that it existed and was spoken
about at the very beginning of the rebellion. There is abundant evidence
in the depositions printed by Miss Hickson to prove this ; but what puts
it beyond a doubt is a proclamation of the lords justices on 80 Oct. against
the calumny of the rebels pretending to act by the king's commission
(Nalson, ii. 688). R. Dunlop.
THE BATTLE OF EDGEHILL.
In the January number of this Review Mr. T. Arnold, in a note on the
battle of Edgehill, expresses a wish ' that some competent military man,
acquainted with the tactics and means of attack and defence which were
in fashion at the time of the Thirty Years' War, would take in hand the
campaigns of our English Civil War, and give us accurate and rational
accounts of what was done.' As I have for some years, during time that
could be spared from professional duties, been engaged on the task of
collecting materials for a mihtary history of the period in question, I
venture to put before the readers of Mr. Arnold's note some of the con-
clusions I have formed regarding this particular action. Following Mr.
Arnold's classification, I propose to examine, first, the sources of infor-
mation available ; and, secondly, the obscurities, contradictions, and omis-
sions of the authorities.
I. Mr. Arnold ranges the sources of information under five heads,
including contemporary accounts, either by eyewitnesses or by those
deriving their information at first hand from such observers, and also those
of more modem historians.
It appears to me preferable to consider only the statements made by
contemporaries. It is true that the statements of later writers deserve
consideration when based upon documents not previously available, or
upon information specially acquired ; but, judging from internal evidence,
so much cannot be said of the accounts of the battle given by any of the
four modem writers mentioned by Mr. Arnold.
Taking, therefore, only the contemporary authorities, it will be best
to group them into two classes — RoyaUst and Parhamentarian — and to
enter each authority in his own class in what appears to be the order of
importance. For brevity's sake the names of the authorities are given
shortly, and, to fEtcilitate reference to the original documents, indications
are also given, in the following lists, to the works in which they are to be
Digitized by
Google
634 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS July
found, and to the Catalogue of the British Museum for MSS. or rare
pamphlets.
EoyaZiat Authoriidet.
I. Official Acconnt, Thom. Coll. E 126. 24, also in Boshworth.
o (Clarendon (History), book vi.
(Clarendon, MS. of Life, Appendix to History, edit. 1849.
8. Bulstrode, Memoirs, 1721.
4. Account in Carte's Letters, vol. i.
5. Warwick, Memoirs, 1701.
6. A Royalist in London, Harl. MSS. 8788, foL 61, 62.
7: Bernard Stuart, in Harl. MSS. 8788, fol. 60.
8. C. H., in Harl. MSS. 8788, fol. 68, also Ellis Orig. Letters, Sen II. iiL 801.
9. Vemey MSS. (Hist. MSS. Commission).
Heath's Chronicle, 1676.
Sanderson, History of Charles 1, 1658.
Parliamentarian Authoritie$,
1. Official Account (by six colonels), Thom. Coll. E 124. 26, also in Bush worth.
2. Hennes' Account, Thom. ColL E 126. 88.
8. Wharton's Account, Thom. Coll. E 124. 82.
4. Ludlow, Memoirs, voL L 1698.
6. T. C.'s Account, Thom. Coll. E 128. 20.
6. J. B.'s Account, Thom. Coll. E 124. 88.
7. A Worthy Divine, Thom. Coll. E 124. 21.
8. Letter to Lord Mayor, Thom. ColL E 124. 18.
9. Deserter's Beport (called by Mr. Arnold • The Spy '), Thom. Coll. E 244. 2.
10. Special Passages, No. 12, Thom. ColL E 126. 1.
II. Special Passages, No. 18, Thom. CoU. E 126. 26.
12. Gentleman of QuaHty, Thom. Coll. E 124. 12.
18. Captain Eeightley's Account, Thom. Coll. E 126. 18.
14. HoUis, Memoirs, 1699 (Maseres tracts).
15. Various, in news from Oxford, Thom. Coll. E 127. 6.
Vicars (God in Mount).
May (Parliamentary History).
Whitelocke (Memoriab).
Bushworth (Collections).
Spalding (History of the troubles in reign of Charlei^ I.).
Baillie (Letters).
In these lists the authorities, whose accounts are evidently based, in
more or less degree, on the statements of some others in the lists, have
not been distinguished by a number. They all, however, were in the
position of getting information at first hand, and occasionally record
{acts or opinions which are useful to the student.
By comparing these lists with those given by Mr. Arnold, it will be
seen that an addition of some eight authorities has been made, of which
number the royelist accounts, in Carte's Letters, and in the Harl. M8S.
are of considerable importance. The Deserter's Beport is very valuable for
its statements regarding the composition of the king's army, and for the
positive estimate it gives of the loss of the royalists at tiie battle. In
the matter of the relative importance of the authorities I am in accord
yniix Mr. Arnold, except in the case of Bulstrode. Bulstrode was a
soldier, had been under fire before, and, from the internal evidence of his
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 685
ftoconnt, separate statements of which are corroborated by other authori-
ties, appears to have carefully observed and clearly remembered the first
stages of the action. As he was one who pursaed to Kineton, he cannot
be expected to detail what occurred during his absence from the field, and
he is candid enough to point out that, in the ' hurry and smoke ' of a
* set field,' it is only natural that a * man takes notice of nothing but what
relates to his own safety.' As some further evidence of his shrewd and
impartial judgment, it may be noted that he expressly states, with
reference to the result of the action, ' I think we had no great reason to
brag of a victory.* No other royalist writer makes, with reference to the
general result of the day, so candid an admission.
n. In discussing the obscurities, contradictions, and omissions of the
euthorities, Mr. Arnold notices three points which are uncertain, viz* the
action of the royahst left wing, the disposition of the parliamentary
centre, and the position, in battle order, of the cavalry regiment belonging
to the prince of Wales. The last of these is evidently, however, a minor
point, when compared with the first two uncertainties. But other diffi-
culties not mentioned by Mr. Arnold exist, such as the numbers of the
opposing forces ; the exact method adopted by each party of marshalling
its forces ; the position and manner of employment of the artillery ; the
various tactical changes during the course of the fight, and the loss on
each side. I purpose to consider of these —
(a) The number and constitution of the troops engaged on each side.
(b) Their disposition when drawn up in battle order.
(c) The main features of the combat.
(a) In a pamphlet in the Thomason Collection (E 88. 9), and reprinted
in Mr. Peacock's army lists, will be found the first published lists of the
forces of the king and of the parliament. Thomason himself notes, in
manuscript, the date of the pubHcation of this pamphlet (December 1642),
which farct would appear to dispose of Mr. Peacock's contention that these
lists were not published till after 1 Jan. 1648. Whether or not we may
fairly accept the king's Hst as representing the army engaged at EdgehiU,
ihere is no question that the parliamentary regiments at Edgehill are all to
he found in the pamphlet, as well as in a separate Hst of the army raised
under Essex (E 117. 8), of earher date. So that the lists of both royal
end parliamentary armies may fairly be assumed as representing, on the
whole, the forces employed at Edgehill, due allowances being made for the
tibsence of certain regiments on detached duty. At this stage of the
inquiry the Deserter's Report is of singular interest and great importance.
The king's * marching army ' is stated in the pamphlet to consist of
fourteen regiments of foot, each consisting of about one thousand men,
and some one thousand five hundred cavalry. We know, however, from
'€larendon and others that, by the time the king advanced on London
irom the borders of Wales, the cavalry had been, by the efforts of Rupert,
much improved and increased in numbers. According to Clarendon, the
army of tiie king, within three weeks of coming to Shrewsbury, amounted
to six thousand foot, two thousand horse, and one thousand dragoons,
the foot being divided into three brigades. Confirmation of this statement
occurs in a pamphlet, ' A Remonstrance of the Present State of the Kings
Armie ... 12 Oct. 1642' (E 121. 86), which states that a general
Digitized by
Google
536 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS July
master of the royal army was attended by 6,800 foot and 1,950 horse*
The Deserter's Aooount, written after Edghill, agrees remarkably with the
army list. He gives fifteen regiments of foot, six regiments (forty troops^
some very weak) of horse, and four regiments of dragoons ; and twelve of
these infantry regiments, mentioned by him, are to be found in the army
list. As he also gives the names of the colonels who commanded four
regiments that were cut to pieces at Edgehill, we obtain, by comparing his
statements with the list of regiments in the army list, a tolerably accurate
method of computing the royalist force engaged at EdgehiU, though not so
certainly as to give the actual names of all the regiments.
In the case of the other army the matter is more dear. We can, by
comparing the army list with the various independent statements made
by the different authorities, not only arrive at a very fair estimate of the
numbers engaged, but at a probability, which is almost certainty, of the
actual distribution of this force on the field.
As regards the royalist army at Edgehill, the following statements are
made: —
Official Account (Parliamentary). Most of horse on right wing. Left wing
only ten troops. The foot ' appeared to us divided into nine great bodies.'
King's forces larger than expected, and estimated by some at 18,000, by
others at 14,000.
Fiennes mentions a similar disposition of the horse, adding that there were
dragoons also on the left wing.
T. G. estimates the army at 24,000 — an evident exaggeration.
Captain Eeightley says fifteen regiments of foot, and sixty regiments (he means
troops) of horse.
Bulstrode gives no detail of numbers, but mentions that dragoons were on both
flanks, and that the reserve consisted of 600 horse under Carnarvon.
Bernard Stuart states that the king had 12,000 foot before the battle.
The Deserter says the king lost 2,000 killed or dispersed.
The conclusions drawn from a careful study of all the authorities
bearing on this point are — That the total royalist force at Edgehill
amounted to 18,000 or 14,000 men, of which 9,000 or 10,000 were in-
fantry, and 4,000 were horse and dragoons. There was, besides, a small
train of artillery.
The parliamentary forces may be estimated with greater certainty.
The army list, already quoted, gives 20 regiments of foot, each nominally
1,200 men ; 75 troops of horse, each troop consisting of 60 men ; 5 troops
of dragoons, eacU 100 strong ; besides certain special troops^ such as 8
companies of firelocks, 100 cuirassiers, 50 carbines (these two forming
Essex's lifeguard), and a train of artillery. The 75 troops of horse
were, apparently, * regimented ' under six colonels.
A list of Ihe regiments — ^which are always distinguished in the various
accounts by the names of their colonels — ^is of great importance in deeding
the actual details of the combat and the position of the troops.
Names of the ColoneU commanding BegvmenU m the Parliamentary Army*
Earl of Essex.
Sior John Meyrick, (Left at Worcester.)
Earl of Peterborough. (In Banbury.)
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 537
Ea/rl of Stamford. (At Hereford.)
Lord Say.
Lord Wharton.
Lord Bochford, (At Coventry. Game up on Monday.)
Lord 8t, John, (Worcester.)
Lord Brook.
Lord Mandevile.
Lord Koberts.
Colonel Cholmley.
Colonel Hollis.
Colonel Bamfield, (? * Barkham ' of The Worthy Divine. May have been in
Banbury. Whitlock says two regiments in Banbury.)
Colonel Orantham. (Escorting guns and train. Arrives Sunday night on field.)
Sir Wm. Constable.
Colonel Ballard.
Sir Wm. Fair&x.
Colonel Charles Essex.
Colonel Hampden, (Escorting train. Arrives Sunday night.)
Ldl this list the regiments belonging to the officers whose names are
printed in italics were, according to different parliamentary authorities,
not at Edgehill, being on detached duty as entered opposite to the name
of each concerned. The rest are exactly twelve in number, and all of
them are mentioned as being at Edgehill.
As regards the parliamentary army at Edgehill, the following state-
ments are made by the authorities : —
Official account (parliamentary) definitely states that at Edgehill there were
eleven regiments of foot, forty-two troops of horse, and seven hundred
dragoons.
Fiennes has an extra in£Euitry regiment, and makes no mention of dragoons.
Wharton agrees generally with the official account, though he understates the
cavalry.
T. C. has thirteen regiments foot, thirty-eight troops horse, and one thousand
dragoons.
The Worthy Divine has twelve regiments foot, fifty troops horse, and two
regiments dragoons. As this writer was one who passed firom rank to rank,
exhorting the troops to the fight, his statement, when it differs from the
official account, deserves to be carefdlly weighed. Vicars (God in Mount),
it may be remarked, states there were eleven or twelve regiments of foot
present.
Captain Keightley's estimate is very similar to the official account.
Clarendon (History), stating that the parliamentary forces were superior to the
royalist, mentions that their right wing consisted of two regiments (i.e. ten
or twelve troops) of horse, and the left of one thousand horse. There was
also, he says, a * good reserve ' of horse.
Taking the actual regiments mentioned by name in the various
authorities, we find that there must have been on the ground 12 regiments
of foot, 42 troops of horse, and 700 to 1,000 dragoons ; and, allowing
for incomplete numbers, that Essex must have commanded in the field
a force amounting to 11,000 infeuitry and 8,000 horse and dragoons.
While superior, therefore, to the king in infantry, he was weaker in cavalry ;
and, taking into consideration the greater relative importance of cavalry
in those days, as well as the superior quality of the king's horse, it may
Digitized by
Google
588 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS July
be assnmed that, while the two armies were numerically about equal, the
preponderance of strength was on the side of the royalists.
(6) My investigations incline me to differ considerably from the con-
clusions arrived at by former writers regarding the ranging of the opposing
armies in battle order. In studying a matter so technical as this is, it is
essential, as Mr. Arnold points out, that the evolutions and tactics em-
ployed at the time should be clearly understood.
The methods of warfoxe in use during the civil war were animated
with the spirit, and directly based on the practice, of the two great cap-
tains of the age — Maurice of Nassau and Gustavus Adolphus. A very
large number of the officers employed on both sides had served their
apprenticeships under one or other of these leaders. It is interesting to
note that Clarendon himself (History), in referring to the very battle we
are now considering, states that Rupert had drawn a ' figure ' for the
marshalling of the royal army (note that Lloyd in his 'M^moires'
states that Buthven marshalled the royal army), while Lindsey, the com-
mander-in-chief, ' prefers ' another ' figure ' drawn up in accordance with
the methods practised under the Nassau princes, under whom both be
and Essex had held commands. It will shortly be shown that the
formations respectively adopted by the royalists and parliamentarians
at Edgehill were essentially different in principle — that of Essex being
in accordance with the custom of the Netherland princes, while that
of the royalists was somewhat exceptional. May we not surmise, there-
fore, that one of the grounds of Lindsey's resignation of the general
direction of the action was dissatisfaction with the judgment of the king
in favour of the * figure ' proposed or advocated by Rupert ; that it was
on this ' figure ' that the royalists were ranged; and that it was in part
due to these new evolutions that the king at Edgehill failed to secure
the victory so confidently expected by his officers at the opening of the
fight?
In drawing up troops of all arms ' in battalia,' as the term used at the
time was — a term which Mr. Sanford somewhat incorrectly translates
(p. 620) by • setting themselves in battalion * — ^the usual custom was to
have, in first line, a certain number of infantry ' tertia,' or regiments, in
the centre, and to 'wing,' or flank, these with horse and dragoons.
Sometimes the intervals between these bodies were very small — not more
than twenty-five yards ; but in ordinary circumstances it was generally con-
sidered the better practice to allow intervals between the bodies at least equal
to the frontage occupied by one of them. About 100 or 150 yards in
rear of the first line, a second line, arranged similarly to the first line,
was drawn up, the only difference being that the regiments of the second
line faced the intervals of the first line, with the object of avoiding
the disastrous confusion that would inevitably occur were the first line
broken and forced back on the second. Occasionally a third line sup-
ported the second ; the depth between the second and third lines being,
however, twice as great as that between the first and second. The pro-
portion of cavalry in such a third line was usually greater than in either
of the other two lines. It is well known that the bayonet, although
invented about 1640, had not at this time come into general use any-
where, and certainly not in England, as in Sir James Turner's military
Digitized by
Google
1887 . NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 539
essays (1688) the pike is mentioned as still being in use, and this weapon
continued to be the regular * white arm ' of the in&ntry till quite the end of
the seventeenth century. In the ' Gentleman's Dictionary ' (1708) it is
alluded to as having only lately become obsolete. The infemtry ' tertia '
were, in consequence, composed of musketeers and pikemen in varying pro-
portions* About the time of the civil war the musketeers were never less
in number, and usually somewhat more numerous, than the pikemen.
These latter occupied the centre of the regiment in parade formations and
£eld evolutions, the whole body being drawn up ten, eight, or six deep in
£le, the last number being, very soon after the commencement of the
war, almost universally adopted. The cavalry were drawn up similarly,
either by troops, or by regiments composed of several troops. The troop
comprised certain officers, trumpeters, and fifty or sixty sabres. The ordi-
nary cavalry were armed with the sword and a ' case ' of pistols. Lancers
were rarely employed during the war, but heavily armed cuirassiers were
much thought of, and frequently employed. Cavalry bodies were, in most
cases, drawn up three deep. Dragoons, at the time, were essentially
mounted infantry ; and in these modem days, when the use of such a body
of troops is being revived, it is of interest to note the various duties on
which they used to be employed during the civil wars. In a general action
they were frequently mixed with cavalry, or used to occupy posts on the
flanks of the line. Infeuitry, usually ' commanded ' (i.e. selected)
musketeers, were often 'lined' (or mixed) in small bodies with the
cavalry, with the objcQt of breaking by their fire the charge of the oppos-
ing cavalry. This plan, it has been supposed, was the invention of
Gustavus Adolphus, but, as a fewt, it is older, having been employed in
France nearly a century earlier than the time of Gustavus. Sometimes
lines of battle were drawn up by intermingling the cavalry and infantry,
but the more general plan was as has been described.
The artillery was at this time very deficient in mobility. Its practice
also appears to have been very uncertain, and usually very bad. But no
doubt its moral efTect, especially against cavalry, was considerable. In
battle order it was usually drawn out in front of the line towards the
flanks ; it also was used, when large intervals separated the units of the
first line, to occupy those intervals. The germ of a light field gun already
existed — the ' leather pieces ' so frequently mentioned in contemporary
accounts — and such lighter pieces were beginning to be employed as
battalion guns. The leather guns, it may be stated, consisted of a light
copper or brass tube surrounded with hempen cord, which again was
covered with leather; examples of such guns are still to be seen in
museums in England and elsewhere.
At the battle of Edgehill almost every one of the technical points
alluded to was illustrated by the practice of either the royahsts or their
opponents. If anyone should wish to study this part of the subject
more in detail, perhaps the work of Sir James Turner (* Pallas Armata,'
1688) is the best authority. He is clearer, and more definite in state-
ment, than most of his contemporaries, and in Chapter XVII., 'On
Embattelling/ while stating the more modem practice in use when he
wrote, he constantly makes references to the older methods.
Before discussing the actual battle orders at Edgehill, it may be as well
Digitized by
Google
640 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS July
to mention that regiments then, as now, were usually brigaded under the
oommand of a general officer, or a colonel. The brigades consisted
usually of three or four regiments, and as in marching order the whole
army was divided into three bodies, called respectively the * van * the
' battle,' and the * rear,' it follows that at Edgehill, where the infantry of
both sides consisted, in each case, of three brigades, each of these brigades
would naturally be called the van, battle, or rear, according to the order
of march adopted on that particular day. The importance of this
consideration will be evident a little farther on.
As regards the marshalling of the army of the parliament, the follow-
ing statements are made by our authorities :
Parliamentary official account. Bight wing horse three regiments, viz. Essex's
regiment commanded by Stapleton, Balfour's regiment, and Fielding's
regiment.
Next these, the foot in three brigades :
1st. The * van ' — Meldrum.
2nd. The < middle '—Colonel Chas. Essex.
Srd. *In the rear' — Colonel Ballard's brigade. This consiBted of the
regiments of Lord Essex, Colonel Ballard, Lord Brook, and Colonel
HoUis.
Li the left wing twenty-four troops commanded by Sir James Bamsay.
Fiennes agrees entirely with the official account, notwithstanding that he, by a
slip of the pen, or of memory, curiously transposes the words * right' and
* left.' He adds that the foot was ' a good space ' behind the horse * when
we began to charge.' It is to be remembered that he personally was in
Balfour's regiment of horse on the right wing. He also states a fetct which,
on account of his position on the field, he had the best means of knowing,
viz. that Fielding's cavalry regiment was behind the other two regiments
and in second line.
The lord mayor's correspondent (No. 8 parliamentary authority) states that the
wings of cavalry were flanked with dragoons.
T. C. states that the left wing (of foot) consisted of five regiments (Wharton,
Mandevile, Cholmley, Colonel Essex, and Fairfiax), that of Fairfax being in
the rear.
The right wing (of foot) consisted of the * lord general's ' regiments (i.e.
Essex's), and comprised Essex's own foot regiment, and those of Brook,
Boberts, Hollis, and Meldrum. (Meldrum was colonel of Lord Say's regi>
ment at Edgehill ; see J. B.'s statement.)
Official royalist account. On left flank of enemy a hedge was occupied by
musketeers.
Bulstrode. Enemy had entrenched their guns. Their horse were * lined ' with
foot on left wing, and spaced at intervals for entrance of reserve of horse.
On enemy's right were some * briars ' occupied by dragoons.
Three guns firom left wing of enemy fire on royalist advancing cavalry.
Bernard Stuart says guns were ' lined ' among the parliamentary horse, thus
corroborating Bulstrode.
London royalist says * left wing ' of enemy consisted of three regiments of foot
and the greater part of their horse.
Clarendon (History) says there were hedges on right of enemy's line, occupied by
musketeers ; that on this flank were two regiments of horse, while on left
flank there was one thousand horse imder Sir James Bamsay. The * reserve *
of horse was a * good ' one.
Taking all these statements together, and with proper allowance for
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS . 641
relative weight, it seems difficult to avoid drawing the following conclu-
sions : —
At Edgehill, Essex's battle order was in two lines, each line consisting
in the centre of infantry regiments, drawn up, probably at full intervals,
with cavalry on both flanks.
The first line, commencing from its own right, consisted of the follow-
ing detail : —
1. Dragoons occupying enclosed and broken ground.
2. Cavalry regiment under Stapleton.
8. Cavab^ regiment imder Balfour.
4. KobertB
Constable - Ist infemtry brigade under Meldrum — the ' van.'
Say (Meldrum)
5. Essex (Colonel Charles) \
Wharton I 2nd in£EUitry brigade under Colonel Essex —
Mandevile I the ' middle.*
Cholmley J
6. Left wing of horse, consisting of a portion of twenty-four troops, probably
* regimented * into three or four regiments, and commanded by Sir James
Kamsay. This cavalry was ' lined ' with selected musketeers of Ballard*8
and HoUis*s regiments.
7. Dragoons and musketeers occupying enclosed and broken ground.
The second line, commencing enumeration from the right, was as
follows :
1. Fielding's cavalry regiment.
2. Lord Essex's regiment '
Lord Brook's regiment The first four regiments mentioned forming
Ballard's regiment - Ballard's brigade, an^ FairfiBkx's regiment form-
HoUis's regiment ing part of Colonel Charles Essex's brigade.
Fairfax's regiment >
8. Cavalry. Some of the twenty-fomr troops commanded by Bamsay. As the
action commenced it is probable that the cavalry of the second line, on this
left flank, gradually reinforced the first line with the object of preventing
outflankment by the superior numbers of the royal cavalry under Bupert.
For every detail given above authority can be cited ; more space than
is here available would, however, be required, if we were to examine fully
the grounds and arguments for each statement.
The artillery was probably placed in front of the first line, towards
the flanks, and in the intervals between the regiments. In the cases of
both infantry and cavalry the bodies were originally drawn up at good
intervals ; probably on the left wing, as the possibility of being outflanked
by the royalist cavalry declared itself, the first line was gradually extended
towards the threatened flank, by bringing up the regiments of the second
line of cavalry to reinforce the first line.
The details of the distribution of the royalist forces cannot be deter-
mined with equal probability. The authorities give us, however, some
indications of the formation adopted by the king's marshal : —
Official royalist account says that there were dragoons on the left wing.
Clarendon says the in&ntry consisted of three brigades, respectively com-
manded by Sir N. Byron, Colonel Wentworth, and Colonel Fielding. The
Digitized by
Google
542 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS July
king's guards and Lindsay*s regiment stood next each other in the line of
battle. The greater part of the dragoons were on the left wing, the cavaky
' here being under Wilmot. Lord Byron commanded a reserve of horse con-
sisting only of his own regiment. As the result of the action, only one-
brigade of foot was broken and thrown into disorder.
Bulstrode states that the whole army was in one ' body/ the horse being on the
wings. The horse were drawn up three deep, the foot six deep. The cavalry
regiment of the prince of Wales (in which he himself rode) was in the right
wing, which was flanked by dragoons under Washington. The other flank
was covered by a regiment of dragoons under Lisle and Ennis. There was,,
he says, a reserve of six himdred horse under Carnarvon.
Warwick, however, states that there were two bodies of reserve cavalry com-
manded, the one by Digby, the other by Byron.
Official parliamentary account says that the royal foot were * divided into nine
great bodies,' and that these * came up all in front.' The horse and dragoons
amounted in aU to four thousand, of which number only ten troops of horse
were on the left wing. By implication we can gather that the extreme left of
the royalist foot was occupied by the king's guards and Lindsay's regiment.
At the close of the action two regiments of the king's foot retired in an orderly
manner, and made a stand on some guns protected either by an entrench-
ment or by a natural ditch.
The Deserter mentions that four regiments were practically annihilated at the
battle, and that the regiment of Sir L. Dives also suflered much loss.
Taking these statements one with another, the most that can be said
regarding the disposition of the royal army is that the battle order con-
sisted of a single line of nine regiments of infiemtry, flanked, as usual, by
cavalry, the greater portion of which — ^i.e. about fifteen hundred horse —
were in the right wing under the command of Rupert. The brigade
originally detailed for the reduction of Banbury is stated to have been
that commanded by Sir N. Byron, and its force is said (official account)
to have been 4,000 men. As the Deserter says the regiment of guards
contained 1,500 men (the parliamentary authorities also testifying to its
strength), and as it is probable that Lindsay's regiment was also a strong
one, it is a reasonable assumption to suppose that the brigade of Sir
N. Byron included these regiments and occupied the left of tiie infantry
line. Beyond this nothing definite can be asserted as regards the dis-
position of the infantry. The dragoons were employed on both flanks,
and there seems to have been a small reserve body of cavalry on each
wing, Carnarvon (or Digby) in command of that on the left, in all some
six hundred sabres, and Byron in conmiand of that on the right, con-
sisting in all of some four hundred sabres. This position is given to
Byron's command, as Clarendon says that the reserve, which he also
states was conmianded by Byron, joined in the pursuit of the parlia-
mentary cavalry when broken by Rupert's charge. The royal artillery
was probably disposed in a manner similar to that adopted by the parlia-
ment, though it is most likely that several guns were massed at a spot
which gave them protection and possibly a command of fire ; for the
retreating infantry, it is stated, feU back on some such position.
(c) In considering the main features of the actual combat, the theories,
relating to the marshalling of the forces, which are now advanced, fit in
very well with the statements made by the different authorities. The
action is commenced by artillery fire, which is, comparatively speaking.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 543
harmless^; tbe parliamentary left wing is outflanked by Bupert, and after
the dragoons on both wings have cleared the hedges and enclosures the
great cavalry attack takes place. Rupert's charge is perfectly successful,
and the broken and disorganised enemy are thrown back on the flank of
the infftntry line, and, in the main, on the flank regiments of the second
line. At the same time, the in&ntry of the left in first line are taken by
panic and, breaking away, add to the confasion of the rout ; the pursuit
to Kineton takes place. Meanwhile Wilmot, on the left wing, has been
gaining ground to the front as well as to the flank, and finally charges,
and routs, Fielding's regiment standing in second line ; Stapleton's and
Balfour's regiments are missed altogether, having probably advanced
forwards and inwards towards the centre of the line, to meet and deal
with the royalist infantry of the left. Owing to the absence of the
cavalry, the reserves even having joined in the headlong pursuit, this
infentry is at last destroyed by the combined exertions of cavalry and
infantry, and the remaining regiments of the king's army sullenly fall
back on their guns. At this juncture the royalist cavalry begins to
return in broken order, having been checked in the pursuit by the ap-
proach of the parhamentary force escorting the train. It is yet possible
to retrieve the day, but the ruin of their infantry makes these ill-dis-
ciplined cavaliers very unwilling to undertake any farther effort, and the
battle comes to a standstill. As Clarendon says, ' the hope of so glorious
a day was quite vanished ; ' and the two armies, or rather the rem-
nants of them, stand in the twihght of the waning day, uncertainly
watching each other, till ' night, the conamon friend to weary 'd and dis-
may'd armies,' parts them. And so ends the first of those drawn battles,
of which there are so many instances in the history of the civil war.
The battle of Edgehill is a remarkable illustration of the force of the
military maxim, the utterance of which is often attributed to some great
modem leader, but which, if not stated at some still earlier period by
some more ancient tactician, is to be found in the ' Art of War ' of Boger
earl of Orrery (1677), where it is laid down that ' whoever has the last
reserves is very likely at last to be the victorious.' W. G. Ross.
THE ASSASSINATION OP GUSTAVUB III OP SWEDEN.
The assassination of Gustavus in (16 March 1792), at the very moment
when that adventurous prince was about to lead the first coalition
against revolutionary France, was an event of European importance. It
is not, however, with the consequences of the catastrophe, but with the
catastrophe itself, that we now propose to briefly deal, for documents have
only recently come to light which make it necessary to completely rewrite
the history of the fatal masquerade at which the ' royal charmer ' lost his
life. Sierakowski's circumstantial description ^ of the murder, which has
hitherto been the authorised version, and of which the numerous French
versions are only so many copies, may now be regarded as apocryphal. As
1 Histoire de Vassassinatde Otutave III. . • Parun offider poUmaia [Count Stera-
kowski] Umoin oculaire. Paris, 1797.
Digitized by
Google
644 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS July
early as 1885 the author of the article * Ankarstrom ' in the ' Biografiskt
Lexicon ofver namnkunnige svenska Mim,' submitted this histoire of a
t&moin oculaire to such a damaging criticism that it is somewhat sur-
prising to find the historian SchinkeP making use of it twenty years
later. Still, it remained the only account by a professed eyewitness till
the executors of the historian FryxeU, in 1882, published the Ldwenhjelm
MS.' Ldwenhjelm was the constant companion of the king throughout
the 16 March, and was the first to hasten to his side after he was
wounded. His evidence is therefore valuable, especially as it is partly
corroborated by two other independent witnesses. G. M. Armfelt, Qus-
tavus's favourite, was not at the masquerade when the shot was fired,
but he arrived ten minutes afterwards, and both his account ^ of what he
saw, and the report of the Prussian minister Brockhausen** to his court
(Brockhausen saw the king almost immediately after the catastrophe),
agree with L6wenhjelm*s narrative. "With the aid of these materials,
supplemented by the brief sketches of Aiguila® and Schartau,^ who seem
to have had access to other contemporary sources, as well as by the
' Anteckningar ' of Schroderheim,® who was with the king in his last
illness every day till he died, we are now able to construct a coherent
narrative of the masked ball without having resort to Sierakowski at all.
The idea of a regicide had long been floating in the air, but it seems to
have first assumed a practical shape in the narrow mind and ferocious
heart of ex-oaptain Jakob Johan Anckarstrom, a typical &natic, with an
imaginary personal wrong ^ to revenge. Anckarstrom soon found accom-
plices in Count Glas Frederik Horn, a frothy young visionary, saturated
with the most virulent Jacobinism, but who at first shrank from murder
as ' too inhuman an expedient,' and in Count A. L. Bibbing, an ex-officer
of the guards, who firom his tenderest infancy had been taught to regard
the king as a monster of iniquity. When, then. Miss de Geer rejected
Bibbing's suit in favour of Baron Essen, one of the handsomest of the
royal equerries, the former assumed as a matter of course that it was at
the instigation of Gustavus, and swore to be revenged. Bibbing possessed
a resolute temper, and all the sagacity which Anckarstrom and Horn
needed. He readily entered into their plans, although doubting at first
whether they were really in earnest, especially after three attempts by
Anckarstrom to kill the king at the opera house had all miscarried. The
Gefle Biksdag intervened. Thither Anckarstrom followed his victim, but
owing to the severity of the weather Gustavus was forced to abandon
' Mirmen om Sveriges nyare historia, Stookhobn, 1855, etc.
' G. L5wenhjehn*8 Minnen af Ottstaf III.
* Oustaf MaurUs Armfelt, af O. Te^er, vol. i. Stockhobn, 1883.
* Brookhaosen's Dip^he tUl Ht hof rOrande KonungamordeL
* Histoire du rigne de Oustave III, Paris, 1815.
' Bidrag UU Kanung Ottstaf III historia, do, Stookhobn, 1826.
' AnUchmngar. Orebro, 1851.
* Sierakow8ki*s romantic fable that Gnstayos broke off a match between AnckantrOm
and an actress, and thus made a murderer of the disappointed lover, is disposed of by
the fact that Anckarstrdm (who, by the way, was anything but a Lovelace) was the hus-
band of a rich and noble lady and the father of a family. A prosecution for sedition*
unknown to the king, who afterwards remitted the sentence, was the real caose of
Anckarstr5m*s irrational animosity.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 646
his usual walks, and the would-be assassin therefore carried his pistob
about in vain. The king returned to the capital on 26 Feb., and on
2 March another masquerade was announced. Bibbing, who seems to
have at last convinced himself that Anckarstrom was no trifler, urged
him to a fresh attempt, engaging to secmre his escape. They both went
to the masquerade accordingly, and the king also, but so few people were
present that again nothing could be done. Another masquerade, which
had been fixed for the 6th, was abandoned, and a week later the last
masquerade of the season was announced for the 16th. The position of
the three conspirators had now become critical. They had been so
sanguine of success that they had imparted their secret to a number
of pohtical friends, and a single imprudent or repentant word from
one of these ' patriots ' might at any moment have brought the active
plotters to the scaffold. It was plain that if the deed were to be done
at all, it should be done at once. Accordingly, after a conference at
Hufvudstad, Horn's country seat, when the two counts promised to pro-
vide for Anckarstrom's children in case he fell, they all three returned to
Stockholm resolved that the following day should be the king's last.
Early on 16 March Bibbing hastened to break the news to General
Pechlin, without whose connivance no plot in Sweden could possibly
succeed. This once redoubtable party leader, after nearly half a century
of successful treachery and treason, had been forced by the revolution of
1772 to retire into private life, where he had ever since remained. He
was now on the verge of the grave, but his appetite for intrigue was
as keen as ever, and for the last two years he had been the soul of a
conspiracy for subverting the government — a conspiracy so vast as to
embrace half the Swedish aristocracy, and so secret as to even baffle
the vigilance of Liljensparre, Gustavus's terrible minister of police.
Bibbing was amsized to find that Anckarstrom's enterprise was no secret
to Pechlin, who had already heard it from Baron Bjelke, though how
Bjelke came to know it is a mystery which, as we shtdl presently see, he
carried to the grave with him a few days later, imder circumstances which
make it tolerably certain that he held in his hand the lost clue to the
whole of this tangled skein of plots within plots. Pechlin welcomed
Bibbing warmly, and assured him that a revolution would be mere child's
play if only the king were disposed of. A conference of all the leading
conspirators, except Horn and Anckarstrom, took place at Pechlin's house
after dinner, when to every one was assigned his proper rdle* It was
arranged that the moment the king was dead all the principal Gustavians
should be arrested, the young crown prince proclaimed king with a council
of regency, and the sovereign estates convened to do the rest. Pechlin
and Bibbing undertook to crowd the masquerade with accomplices ; Johan
Engestrom was entrusted with the task of framing a new liberal constitu-
tion ; Major Hartmannsdorf and Captain Pontus Lilliehorn were to
answer for the guards. ^^ Of all the conspirators, Lilhehom was the
most contemptible. Indeed, his crime should be branded as parricide
rather than regicide. All he had, all he was, he owed entirely to the
^ The di8a£Feotion of a large part of the household troops dated from 1789, when
the king, for his personal security, added to the royal gnard some fresh regiments
whose officers were all plebeians.
VOL. n. — NO. VII. N N
Digitized by
Qoo^^
546 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS July
generosity of Oustavns ; at that very moment he was drawing his pocket-
money from the king's privy purse. A sordid suspicion that others were
more freely participating in the royal bounty armed him against his
benefeu^tor. So little was LiUiehom suspected, that he presumed, in
company with some brother-officers, to pay the wounded monarch a visit
of condolence on the following morning.
At four o'clock Pechlin's guests separated, Bibbing returning home to
make his final arrangements with Horn and Anckarstrom, who there
awaited him. Anckarstrom employed the next few hours in getting ready
his weapons. He loaded each of his pistols with two bullets and fourteen
pieces of lead of various shapes and sizes, and filed the blade of the huge
butcher's knife with which he intended to complete his crime to a razor-
like sharpness, besides carefully barbing the point. This improvised
dagger has been described by those who saw and handled it as one of the
most frightful weapons imaginable ; a wound from it must have proved
instantly fatal. A little before twelve Horn called for Anckarstrom, and
at half-past they went together to the masquerade in black dominoes with
white masks, and there met Bibbing and a number of Pechlin's acquain-
tances, all similarly attired.
Oustavus in always regarded the month of March with a dislike and
a dread which cannot fairly be called superstitious, as, strangely enough,
all the reverses of his chequered career had happened in that month. He
does not, however, appear to have feared the March of 1792 more than
its predecessors, and the fatal 16th found him in the best of humours.
Early in the morning he walked with Lowenhjelm in the Haga Park,
where the new palace, which was to have rivalled the palace at Versailles
in grandeur and magnificence, was just rising from the ground. Lowen-
hjelm asked the king when the building would be completed. < Well,'
replied Gustavus, * if I reach the average age of humanity, I hope to dwell
in it for a few years before I die.' *^ They dined at Haga,^^ and went in
the afternoon to the French theatre, where ' Les folies amoureuses ' of
Begnard was performed, thence proceeding to the opera house, which
they reached shortly after eleven. The king had a little private apart-
ment there, where he used to sup with a few companions whenever he
attended the masquerades. There were with him on the present occasion,
besides Lowenhjelm, Baron Essen, his chief equerry, Lieutenant S^'em-
blad, and three attendants. During the repast, ^' the page Tigerstedt brought
in a letter addressed to the king.^^ Lowenhjelm, who was sitting at
*' The building was abandoned after the king's death as too vast and costly. The
colossal foundations still remain to puzzle or astonish the tourist.
" Sierakowski confidently asserts that the king dined at the opera house and
stayed there for hours, both of which statements are incorreet. He further states that
Gustavus went to the opera on the evening of the 16th. Now there was no opera at all
on the 16th, but Aiguila and Ldwenhjelm agree in stating that the king went to the
French theatre in the afternoon, Sierakowski evidently confuses the opera with the opera
house, and the dramatic performance at the French theatre with the masquerade.
» Aiguila says that it was whilst dining at Haga that Gustavus received the
warning letter ; but Ldwenhjelm, as an eyewitness of what happened during the day,
is a preferable authority.
** Sierakowski states that this anonymous letter was fastened with a wafer im-
pressed with a seal which led to the discovery of the writer. This is incorrect. We
shall see presently how the writer of the letter was really discovered.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 547
Gustavus's left hand, turned his head aside while his master was perusing
it; but, bis curiosity being excited by Tigerstedt's gestures, he peeped over
the king's shoulder and perceived that the mysterious missive was written
in pencil, in a large round hand, and had no signature. Gustavus read
the letter through twice, then smiled and put it into his pocket without
saying a word to any one.
After supper, Lowenhjelm asked the king whether they should mask.
* No,' replied Gustavus, * run away to your little sweetheart downstairs.'
Every one then withdrew except Essen, to whom the king now showed
the anonymous letter.^* It professed to be written by a stranger * whose
pen was directed by the voice of conscience,' began by plainly informing
the king that for some time past a conspiracy had been afoot to take away
his life, and warned him that the murderers had fixed that very night for
carrying it out. The writer earnestly adjured Gustavus not to appear
at the masquerade, and then proceeded, with a strange mixture of bombast
and impudence, to extol his own virtue and patriotism and to lecture his
sovereign on his public and private misconduct, directly threatening him
with future disaster unless he amended the errors of his ways. The
literary style of this singular epistle was as rough as its tone was rude.
It evidently meant to convey the idea that it came from one of the lower
classes. Essen, much disturbed, implored the king not to go to the
masquerade, or, if he did, at least to wecur a coat of mail beneath his
mantle. But Gustavus, laughing at his fears, selected a three-cornered
hat, threw over his shoulders a so-called Venetian silk mantle which left
the decorations on his breast perfectly visible, and put on a half-mask
which barely covered his eyes and the upper part of his nose. He was
as recognisable as if he had been unmasked. He then took Essen's arm
and stepped into his private box, which commanded a view of the whole
of the grand saloon.
Among the crowd of masqueraders whom the severity of the weather
had not deterred from attending, the king's glance fell at once upon a
group of black dominoes who, whispering together, drew near to the
royal box, but immediately dispersed again, as if fearful of attracting
attention. The group in question actually consisted of the assassins who
had entered the opera house at the very moment when the king appeared
in his box, and at once perceived him standing there, with Essen by his
side.
After watching the scene for folly a quarter of an hour, * as motionless
as a picture in its frame,' the king remarked to Essen, ' They have lost
a good opportunity of shooting me. Come, let us go down ; the masque-
^ The exact contents of this mysterious letter will never be known. It was not
printed as a whole in the official report of the trial of the assassins, and subsequently
disappeared, or was destroyed. Fryxell, in his collection of original documents, entitled
* Bidrag till Sveriges historia efter 1772,' has endeavoured to reconstruct this letter
from its extant fragments, and there can be little doubt that the result thus obtained
is substantially correct, for Schartau and Aiguila agree with Fryxell as far as they go.
Sierakowski, with impudent omniscience, pretends that the letter only contained these
words : Je auis encore de vos ami$t quoique faie des radsons pou/r ne le plus Stre.
XTallee pas cm hal ce soir, II y va de voire me. Now, in the first place, the real
letter was a long one, and in the second place the writer expressly declares himself to
be the king's foe, not his friend.
M N 2
Digitized by
Google
548 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS July
rade seems bright and gay. Let us see whether they will dare to kill
me 1 ' The dancing was now in fall swing, and as Oustavos entered the
saloon, leaning on Essen's arm, he was quickly recognised by the decora-
tions upon his breast and the vivacity of his movements. A murmur of
' There's the king ! ' ran through the room. He took a turn round the
saloon, and perceiving Lowenhjelm flirting in a comer with his ' little
sweetheart,' Gustavus stooped down and whispered to her as he passed,
* The pretty mask should be very gracious to her cavaUer there, for he was
quite in a hurry just now to run away from me to her.' He then disappeared
with Essen into the green room, Horn and Anckarstrom, who had been
at his heels all the time, waiting for him close beside the side scenes
among the dancers. They had not long to wait. In a few moments the
king and Essen reappeared, but they had only moved a few steps for-
ward, when two large groups of black dominoes, advancing from opposite
directions, ran together so as to catch the king in their midst and make
further progress impossible. Then a hand tapped Gustavus hghtly on the
shoulder, and a voice exclaimed, ' Bonjou/r, beau masque I ' This was Horn's
signal to Anckarstrom, who, instantly pressing the muzzle of one of his
pistols to the king's body, discharged its contents into his back ^® a little
above the left hip. Lowenhjelm, who heard the muffled report from where
he was sitting, and was under the impression that some practical joker had
let off a squib, hastily quitting his partner, forced his way through the
crowd to restore order. Surprised to find the king and Essen, with their
masks in their hands, hemmed in on every side by a surging throng of
black dominoes, he inquired what was the matter. ' Some villain has
shot the king ! ' exclaimed Essen, casting a searching glance around him.
Too horrified to speak, Lowenhjelm drew his sword, and, standing in
front of the wounded monarch, drove back the throng. A guardsman,
following his example, drove them back from behind, till the two had a
clear space around them as feu: as their swords could reach. But for their
promptitude there can be little doubt that Gustavus would have been dis-
patched upon the spot.^^ Anckarstrom, in his first surprise at the apparent
failure of his pistol-shot, had dropped all his weapons on the floor. He
now mingled with the crowd and raised the cry of fire, which was taken
up by his accomplices to create oonfasion and facilitate escape. But
above the din rose the voice of young Captain PoUet, one of the
king's adjutants, ordering the sentinels to close all the doors, an order
they instantly obeyed. The king had already commanded those about
him to discover and seize but not to hurt the murderer. As the truth
gradually became known, most of the spectators were filled with indigna-
tion, and those persons who wore black dominoes were roughly handled.
The unfortunate monarch, still supported by Essen, and dripping with
blood, was escorted back to his little room, where he reclined upon a red
divan. He bade Lowenhjelm return to the saloon, see how things were
" Aigaila sajs that the king first felt the pistol at his breast, and by a rapid move-
ment turned it aside. But Anckarstrdm, in his confessions, expressly states that he
crept behind the king in order to make sore of him.
■^ Some accounts say that the king staggered and fell immediately he was wounded,
but Anckarstrdm, in his confessions, attributes his failure to kill the king outright to
his own surprise that his victim did not fall.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 549
going on, and say, in answer to all inquiries, that his wound was a mere
scratch. Lowenhjelm found the music still playing,'® for the orchestra
and many of the dancers had apparently noticed nothing. On his own
responsibility he sent for fifty dragoons of the regiment he commanded,
besides issuing an order in the king's name that all the gates of Stock-
holm should be closed till farther notice. On his way back to the king
he was accosted by Bibbing, who asked how his majesty fared. Lowen-
hjelm replied as he had been told. ' Thank God I * exclaimed Bibbing;
* may the murderer be brought to justice I '
A few moments affcer Anckarstrom's shot had been fired, the Prussian
minister, Brockhausen, and the Spanish minister, the ChevaHer de
Corral, arrived at the opera house. On being informed at the door by
Lowenhjelm of the disaster, they at once solicited and obtained an
audience. Gustavus received his visitors with a tranquil gaiety which
they could not sufficiently admire, told them ' with the utmost precision '
how the fatal accident had occurred, and added, ' How unfortunate that,
after having braved in warfare the fire of the enemy, I should have been
wounded in the back in the midst of my own people ! ' Their conversa-
tion was interrupted by the precipitate entrance of the king's chief favour-
ite, the famous Gustaf Maurits Armfelt. The man who had faced death
on many a battle-field with reckless daring stood before the royal couch
wringing his hands and uttering plaintive cries, the very image of despair.
* Be a man, Armfelt ! * cried the king ; * you know from personal ex-
perience that wounds can heal.' He then dismissed him with some secret
instructions.
Meanwhile the news of the catastrophe had attracted the rest of the
corps diplomatique to the palace, and the corridors leading to the king's
private apartment were speedily thronged with diplomatists, court digni-
taries, and the principal officers of state. The Bussian ambassador.
Count Stackelberg, was amongst the first to obtain admission. No sooner
did he see the king than his emotion overcame him, and he exclaimed :
' Oh, sir, in spite of such a warning to have exposed a life so precious
to your country and to Europe I ' ' Thank you, dear count,' replied
Gustavus, ' but when a madman has made up his mind to sacrifice his
own life to obtain yours, he must succeed in the long nm.' Most aflfect-
ing of all was the scene between the king and his brother, Duke Charles.
The duke, who had been summoned fi:om his bed at midnight by Lieu-
tenant Beuterslgold,'^ was so overcome with grief and horror when he
'* It would appear from this that the violente agitation of Aigoila and the terr&ufr
gin&rale of Sierakowski are not to be taken too literally.
*" Whether Duke Charles was privy to his brother's murder still remains a mystery.
Sierakowski assumes his guilt as a matter of oourse, but Sierakowski's assumptions are
worth little. Sohinkel considers it impossible that the duke could have been a fratri-
cide, and his reasons are certainly very cogent. L6wenhjelm dismisses the mere sus-
picion of such a thing with indignant scorn. The story that the duke throughout that
fatal night lay awake on a sofa in general's uniform, with a drawn sword in his hand,
is disposed of by Beuterskjdld's statement that he found him sound asleep in bed — a
statement repeated by Sohinkel and confirmed by Ldwenhjelm and others. This libel is
supposed to have originated with the page Du Besche, who bitterly hated the duke,
but Bishop Wallquist also records it. Baron E. D. Hamilton is reported to have stated
in 1847 that on the afternoon of 16 March, 1792, Gustavus sent him to persuade Duke
Digitized by
Qoo^^
550 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS July
entered the room, that but for the assistance of the royal pages he would
have fedlen to the ground. * Brother Gus ! brother Gus ! ' was all that
he could say, and his voice was choked with tears. The king gave him
a glass of water, or he would have swooned. It seemed to those who
were present as if it were the duke and not the king who had received his
death-blow. Finally, Gustavus, who now began to feel faint, was removed
to the palace. As his litter was borne through the crowded hall, he
gaily remarked that he resembled the holy father carried in solemn pro-
cession from the Vatican to St. Peter's.
Liljensparre, the dreaded minister of police, had now taken possession
of the grand saloon, and lost no time in noting down the names and
addresses of all the masqueraders, who had to pass out before him, one
by one, between two files of soldiers with fixed bayonets. The assassins
were not even suspected, and Horn ^^ had managed to escape not only
from the room, but fi:om the town, before Liljensparre had arrived.
Anckarstrom lingered till the last, and said to the minister, ' You won't
suspect me, I hope ! ' * Why you, more than others ? ' replied Liljensparre ;
but fi:om that moment Anckarstrom was a marked man, and three hours
afterwards he was in custody.^^ With untiring energy and almost
superhuman skill Liljensparre pursued his investigations, and in a few
days all the ringleaders of the conspiracy were in his hands. It was no
easy matter to induce them to confess, it was still more difficult to recon-
cile their conflicting confessions, but Liljensparre's ingenuity triumphed
over every obstacle. The anonymous letter was traced to Lilliehom
through a baker's boy whom he had bribed to deliver it to one of the
royal pages. Bjelke, after destroying all his papers, took poison rather
than face Liljensparre's cross-examination, telling the priest who attended
him in his agony that the king would have nothing more to fear when
he (Bjelke) was dead. Pechlin, arrested on suspicion, jocularly remarked
that it was strange that no conspiracy in Sweden was regarded as com-
plete unless he was included in it. All Liljensparre' s efforts feuled to
Charles's wife, and his sister, the Princess Sophia Albertina, to go to the masquerade ;
that he succeeded in talking them over, but that the duke suddenly came home and
forbade the ladies to go that night. But the old man's memory might easily have
played him false as to an event which took place, if at all, fifty years before. Besides,
we know that the court was in mourning at the time, which would sufficiently account
for the absence of the princesses from the masquerade.
** Horn had fled immediately after the shot, and succeeded in escaping from the
city before the gates were closed. Yet Sierakowski tells us: Le comte de Earn
. . . parut [before Liljensparre] comme les autres, . . . iZ attribua son air de
contravnte . . . d la douleurd^a/ooir perdu son roi, . . . M.de Liljensparre necnUpa^
devoir lefavre arriter [/]. This, however, is nothing to what follows : Successwement,
continues the veracious Umom oculaire^parurent les autres chefs du parti des tnScontens*
tels que MM, Ribbing^ EngestrlJm, Bjelke, lAliehom, le girUral Pechlin, lis
ripondirent tous d leur tour, dc. Now, with the single exception of Bibbing, not one
of these men was present at the masquerade. The inference is, neither was Siera-
kowski.
*^ Immediately after leaving the opera house Liljensparre summoned all the lock-
smiths and armourers of Stockholm to the ministry of police to examine the pistols
and the knife which had been picked up on the floor of the saloon, when Eaufmann,
the gunsmith of the body-guards, recognised the pistols as having been lately repaired
by him for Captain Anckarstrom.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 551
extract anything from the wily old reprobate. Fresh arrests continued
to be made daily, Ribbing and Horn having confessed to more than a
hundred accomplices, and Liljensparre already possessed sufficient evi-
dence 2^ to implicate half the nobility, when an order from the council
of regency, which Gustavus had appointed to rule the realm during
his illness, stayed the hand of the zealous minister. The poHtical at-
mosphere had undergone an important change. The nobihty now began
to tremble for their own safety, and were anxious to make their peace with
the royal martyr. Gustavus, with characteristic magnanimity and fore-
sight, met them halfway. On the morning after the masquerade he
told the &ithful Schroderheim that, if he recovered, the remainder of his
days should be tranquil ; and on the following day, in an interview with
his brother, he not only declared his determination to forget the past,
but solemnly adjured the duke to conceal the names of the assassins
from the infant crown prince. * As destined to rule this people,' added
he, ' I do not wish the seeds of hatred and vengeance to be sown in his
youthful mind.' This tacit reconciliation may be said to have been formally
ratified by Count Brahe's celebrated interview with the king on the
following day. Brahe was the premier peer of Sweden, and his great
name and influence had been invaluable to the nobihty in their struggle
with royalty. He had not set foot in the palace for years, but he now
begged for an audience as a personal favour, and, kneeling down at the
bedside of his sovereign, almost apologised for an opposition which,
determined and uncompromising, had nevertheless always been honour-
able and conscientious. Gustavus extended his hand, but immediately
drawing it back he exclaimed, * Nay ; embrace me, my dear count. 'Tis
indeed a happy accident which has enabled me to regain old friends so
long estranged.' He then embraced Brahe and assured him that every-
thing was forgotten.
The interview with Brahe had such an excellent effect upon the king's
spirits that at first, in spite of a naturally delicate constitution and the
terrible nature of his injuries,*' strong hopes were entertained of his
recovery. But on the 25th disquieting symptoms supervened, and by the
28th all hope of saving the king's life was abandoned. Imprudent diet ^^
and the refusal of the royal patient to allow the room in which he lay to
be thoroughly warmed, hastened the inevitable catastrophe. Nor was
^ In the post-bag which left Stockholm on the morning of the 16th scores of letters
were f oand contaming this single phrase : A minuit il ne sera plus ; arra/ngeg-vous sur
ula, (Aiguila.)
^ The womid was first examined not at the opera house, as stated by Sierakowski,
but at the palace the next morning. The doctors had, however, only been able to ex-
tract a single nail (Sierakowski characteristically says douae pUces /), but dare not
venture upon a regular operation. The post-mortem examination justified their caution.
It was then found that not only were several small bones in the back fractured, but
both the kidneys and the liver were seriously injured, and the leather wadding of
the charge had adhered firmly aux parties graissetises du corps. (Aiguila.)
^ On the 25th, to Schrdderheim's dismay, and in spite of the remonstrances of the
doctors, Gustavus, who was in a highly feverish state, ordered and ate an ice. Schrd-
derheim's evidence on this point is important, as it disposes of the insinuation that
Duke Charles and the physicians procured the ice in order to complete what Anckar-
strdm had begun.
Digitized by
Google
652 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS July
Gustavus suffered to die in peace. He bade those around him, indeed,
avoid all reference to politics during his illness ; but his sick-room was
none the less the battle-ground of fierce but secret intrigues, down to the
very moment of his death. Armfelt and Duke Charles had long been
mortal foes. Both of them were now members of the council of regency.
But the favourite felt that his power was ebbing away with the king's life ;
and in his desperate efforts to retain it he did not even shrink from^
arousing in the naturally suspicious mind of Gustavus the old doubts as
to the perfect loyalty of his brother which had long remained dormant.
Armfelt's efforts to estrange the brothers were, however, only partially
successful. On the day before he died, the king sent for the duke for the
last time ^^ and entreated for the hves of his murderers. The duke was
deeply affected, but earnestly protested against such an abuse of clemency.
' Charles,' replied the king, ' it is enough that I desire ii As your
monarch I command, as your brother I beseech, you to obey me, and yon
shall answer for it to me before God if you do not.' This solemn appeal
prevailed, the duke consenting to remit the capital penalty, save only in
Anckarstrom's case.^
At five minutes to eleven on the following morning, in the forty -sixth
year of his age, Gustavus HI, after receiving the sacrament from Bishop
Wallquist, passed quietly away, displaying to the last an unexampled
fortitude in the midst of the most terrible sufferings. Gustavus was
the last king of Sweden who exercised a European influence, and success-
folly maintained the balance of power in the north. With him disap-
peared the last check to Russian aggrandisement, and before the year was
out, Poland, now without a single ally, fell an easy victim to the rapacity
of her mighty neighbour. R. Nibbbt Baik.
«* This interview, which was related to Ldwenhjebn by the page Bobert, the only
other person present on the occasion, would have been impossible if, as some assert,
the king had died with the conviction that the duke was one of his murderers. Dalberg,
the king^s former physician, who was only summoned to his bedside when all hope
was abandoned, pretends that Robert's narrative is a fable. But it is notorious that
Dalberg was Gustavus's deadliest enemy, and his own account of the king's last
moments is rejected even by the anti-Gustavian Schinkel as practically worthless.
^ Anckarstrdm was subsequently condemned to stand in the piUory and be scourged
three days in succession, to lose his right hand and his head, and to be quartered.
Bjelke's corpse was first hanged and then buried beneath the scaffold. Ribbing, Horn,
Engestrom, Ehrensvard, and Lilliehom were banished, and most of them changed
their names. Pechlin died in confinement at Varberg, four years later.
Digitized by
Google
1887 653
Reviews of Books
The Development of the Athenian Democracy. By P. B. Jevons, M.A.
(London : Griffin & Co.)
This little pamphlet of thirty-seven pages shows wide reading and the
real spirit of enterprise on the part of its writer, who is already known
as the author of a history of Greek literature ; hut it is much wanting in
precision and clearness, and in the technical skill needed for the exposi-
tion of a theory dealing with difficult historical matter. It is an attempt
to re-write the constitutional history of Athens ; no one as yet having
found the true key to the solution of its many problems. This key is
the 0parp/a. Solon*s reforms were ' the triumph of the ^/oarpm over the
yeVoc ; ' the revolution of Eleisthenes was the temporary destruction of
the pohtical power of the ipparpia ; Perikles in B.C. 446 once more recon-
stituted that poHtical power which the <l>paTpia continued to enjoy from
that date onwards, with one brief interval. This reconstruction was,
according to Mr. Jevons, a fatal step, and the decay and downfall of
Athens was the direct consequence of it. The reader is led at the outset
to expect that a flood of new light will be poured upon Athenian history.
But the results obtained do not seem to fulfil the promise of the first
two or three pages. After several careful perusals, we leave off with a
sense that the new microscope with which we have been presented is either
still very imperfect in its construction, or that it is not calculated to help
us in examining more than a small part of the field of operations.
After a short introduction, pp. 6-16 are occupied with an attempt to
prove that the power of the Eupatrid yitn^ was broken forty years before
Solon. This conclusion is based, first, on the argument that in the
fragment of the Berlin papyrus (ed. Diels, p. 10) the Damasias there
spoken of was the archon of B.C. 689 ; secondly, on the assumption that
the first of Aristotle's four * stages ' of democracy (Pol. iv. 6 : the word is
eUoc) represents the Athenian constitution before Solon; thirdly, on
analogy from the early history of Bome, the (pparpla being assumed to be
of precisely the same nature as the curia. Next (if I understand Mr.
Jevons rightly), Solon's share in the ' evolution of the democracy ' was
merely this : abandoning the Eupatrid yivrj to their fate, he definitely
made membership of a <l)f}aTpia the criterion of citizenship; here it is
assumed with Petitus that the law ascribed to Perikles by Plutarch
(Per. 87), which limited the xoXirc/a to children of two Athenian parents,
was really first enacted by Solon. Under Solon, therefore, the ipparpia
triumphed over the yi»og ; and thus is reached Aristotle's second * stage '
of democracy, where all partake of citizenship who are of legitimate birth.
Digitized by
Google
554 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
Mr. Jevons's account of Eleisthenes differs in no essential respect from
the usual one ; he took all political meaning from the phratries and gave
it to his new demes, thus throwing open the iroXirda to others besides
<l>pdropeQ. And thus Aristotle's third form of democracy is reached, where
all partake of citizenship who are free and not slaves. Lastly, Perikles,
though he completed the democracy by the introduction of pay, found it
advisable (in 445, as we learn on p. 24, though on p. 22 we have been
told that there are no grounds for fixing the date) to go back a century
and a half and re-enact Solon's law, thus reconstituting the ipparpia as
the criterion of citizenship. Here Mr. Jevons tacitly abandons Aristotle,
in whose account of democracy no hint of such a reaction is to be found.
There is evidence that Perikles did something — we cannot tell precisely
what — to define the nature of citizenship ; but to argue that he made the
<l>paTpia once more the political force it had formerly been is surely to
push a theory too far. Aristotle must have known of a measure so
extraordinary; but then Aristotle, according to Mr. Jevons, did not
understand Athenian history (p. 21). But Mr. Jevons does not hesitate
to deduce the most terrible consequences from this alleged law of Perikles
and from the re-enactment of it by Aristophon in b.o. 408. * The phratry
triumphed, but Athens fell.' Strange to say, the well-known evils of the
later democracy are to be ascribed to it (p. 87). And the reason why no
one has ever seen all this before is simply that we have not attended to
recent researches into the nature of ' sib-organisation,' and especially those
of Sir H. Maine. No doubt such researches have thrown much light on
the original nature and early history of groups such as the (pparpia ; but I
am at a loss to see how they can give us much help in investigating the
later history of these groups within the fully developed iroXic.
But Mr. Jevons is engaged upon a larger work, as we learn firom
a notice at the end of this pamphlet; and we may hope that in his
* Manual of Greek Antiquities ' he will put his views forward with greater
precision, and in a form which will win them the attention they deserve.
Should he be able to prove, in a larger and maturer work, that in Athens
alone, of all states ancient or modem, the ' sib-organisation ' of society
lived, died, rose again, and finally destroyed the state, he will have made
a very interesting contribution to our historical knowledge.
W. Wabdb Fowlbb.
Mdmoires d*Mstovre et de g6ographde orientales. Par M. J. de Goejb.
No. 1 : seconde Edition : M&moire sv/r Us Carmathes du Bahrein et
les Fatimides. (Leyden : Brill. 1886.)
In 1862 Professor de Goeje brought out his M&moire sur Us Cwrmathes
du Bahrein as the first instalment of a series of treatises on special points
of oriental history and geography. Two other numbers followed : one
was on the FutUh el-Sham ascribed to El-Basrl, the other was entitled La
ConquSte de la Syrie. Circumstances prevented the author from continu-
ing the publication, but meanwhile the value of his brochures was uni-
versally recognised, and all three ran out of print. He now proposes to
reissue them and to carry out his original plan of an extended series of
similar works, and as a beginning he has published a revised edition of
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 555
the first number, on the Earmatis or Carmathians of the Arabian province
of the Bahreyn.
The rise and constitution of this extraordinary secret society form one
of the strangest chapters in the history of Islam, and one which, though
often discussed, has never before received the scientific treatment which
M. de Goeje has bestowed upon it. The new edition is considerably
enlarged, and the influence of the Garmathian heresy upon the Fatimis
of North Africa is traced in some detail. The two movements were in
reality, as M. de Goeje shows, but one, and the study of Fatimite history
is incomplete without an examination of the diabolical principles and
deadly organisation of the Carmathians and their successors, the ' As-
sassins.' The memoir is intended for scholars, and it is to be feared that
only specialists will fully appreciate it, since it assumes more knowledge
of eastern history than most readers can bring to its perusal. This is
hardly a fault, when the purpose of the author is scientific and not popular ;
but the absence of an index to a work which, though small, is full of
names and events is a misfortune. S. L.-P.
Eegistrum Epistolarwn Fratris Johannis Peckham Archiepiscopi Can-
tua/rieTisis. Edited by Chakles Trice Martin, B.A., F.S. A. 3 volumes.
Chronicles and Memorials. (London : Published under the direction
of the Master of the Bolls. 1882-1885.)
It was not until 1873 that the publication of Canon Rainess * Historical
Papers and Letters from the Northern Begisters * first showed that the
management of the Bolls series was aUve to the importance of diocesan
registers. Since then the four thick volumes of Bishop Eellawe's
Durham Begister, and the so-called ' Begister of St. Osmund,' have been
given us, and now Mr. Martin's third and concluding volume of letters
from the earliest extant official records of the see of Canterbury completes
the publication of a work of even more general interest to historians. It
is not too much to hope that they may be speedily followed by the
registers of Archbishop Winchelsey and his successors ; by the thirteenth-
century registers of Lincoln, and the almost equally early archives of the
see of Exeter ; by the registers of great prelates like Thomas of Canti-
lupe, and of great bishoprics like London and Winchester. If it is
worth while starting a society to print twelfth-century pipe rolls, it is
surely worth while to print, or at least calendar, all thirteenth-century
registers. Until this is done they can only remain the happy hunting-
ground of the local antiquarian or the minute specialist.
The letters of Archbishop Peckham are a real addition to our know-
ledge of the reign of Edward I. Though a fair number of them have
been already printed — some, for example, in WiUdns's ' Concilia,' and a
large proportion of those affecting Wales in the first volume of Haddan and
Stubbs's ' Councils ' — the great majority are now published for the first time.
The diversity of their contents well illustrates the wide range of action of a
vigorous and businesslike archbishop of Canterbury. Peckham's ability and
energy, restless ambition, and strong ecclesiastical sympathies led him to
entertain a very exalted notion of his archiepiscopal duties. He was con-
stantly busied in the systematic visitation of his province, in carrying on
Digitized by
Google
556 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
a relentless crusade against pluralists, in stimulating the zeal and pre-
serving the morahtj of monks and nuns, in waging fierce war agunst
Edward and his ministers for their disregard of the rights of the church
or their neglect of ecclesiastical decorum, in proving to the Welsh that
the way of peace and civilisation was hetter than their obstinate persever-
ance in laws in which he could discern no rule of justice. Meddlesome,
pompous, wanting width of sympathy, deficient in simplicity of character,
lacking even in manliness when he weeps over his debts and declaims
against his Italian creditors, Peckham was always absolutely honest and
singleminded in carrying out what he conceived to be his duty. The
purity of his zeal, his real desire to put down abuses and set reforms on
foot, do something towards lessening the prejudice which his reactionary
and anti-national policy cannot but excite.
But I must turn from the archbishop to his editor. On the whole,
Mr. Martin has done his duty solidly and well. He has not only given
us the letters from the register, but has added a summary in English
of the register as a whole. His prefaces, though not ambitious, are
laborious and valuable pieces of work. In them he first furnishes a care-
ful account of the manuscripts he has used, though it perhaps does not
throw much hght on the subject of his book when he describes in minute
detail those parts of the All Souls manuscript which do not bear upon
Peckham. He next gives a good account of Peckham's life, and then
proceeds to supply us with what may be called explanatory prolegomena
to the chief questions discussed in the letters. Much of this is very
valuable. For example, it would be hard to understand the letters con-
cerning the property of the see of Canterbury at Lyons were it not for
Mr. Martin's explanation and the hitherto unprinted grant which he has
obtained from the Canterbury archives. I may notice that not the least
valuable part of the introduction is the occasional inedited document which
Mr. Martin's researches have brought to hght. Some part, however, of
these explanations, especially of those about the monasteries, strikes one
as a little tedious, if not sometimes irrelevant. We can hardly help wishing
that Mr. Martin had shortened these for a more direct commentary
on some of the chief points in the letters. In some cases he has done
this — for example, in the early part of the preface of volume ii., where
he has given us a very clear and useful view of the conquest of North
Wales. We should have desired an attempt to characterise the general
ecclesiastical policy of Edward I, to our knowledge of which the arch-
bishop's letters are so valuable a contribution. As it is, Mr. Martin
hardly brings out even the importance of the council of Beading or the
statute of mortmain, directly as these bear on Peckham's career. But
Mr. Martin has modestly confined his aim to ' illustrating a few of the
events of interest with which Peckham was connected,* and has not risen
to this higher task. He has concluded his introductions with a long and
apparently exhaustive account of Peckham's literary works, including
both those in manuscript and the chief editions of the comparatively few
that have ever been printed. This must have involved great labour and re-
search, the ransacking of many libraries, the consultation of countless cata-
logues. This bibUography is thoroughly well done, and will be found most
valuable to the students of medieval thought, theology, and natural science.
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 557
Mr. Martin is in most cases a careful worker, but a few points in his
prefaces where he has tripped may be noticed. He tells us that only five
dioceses possess registers of earlier date than Peckham*s — i.e. Lincoln,
York, Wells, Worcester, and Hereford ; but the Wells registers only begin
in 1809, while those of Exeter commence as early as 1267. St. Bonaven-
tura, he says, ' held a theological professorship at Paris from 1258 to 1256.^
Now, professor of theology could only mean in the thirteenth century
doctor of divinity, and the phrase is therefore modem and misleading,
even when we remember that the custom of the friars* colleges at Paris to
set apart one regent doctor to teach theology is a faint approach to the
modem system of fixed and endowed professorships. He calls Peckham,
again, * eleventh divinity reader ' at Oxford, but his authority (* Monu-
menta Franciscana,* p. 660) only speaks of him as the eleventh friar who
had taught divinity there. The naive remark that ' education at the
French imiversity (i.e. Paris) was by no means rare in the thirteenth
century ' equally shows a want of acquaintance with the history of
medieval universities, which is rather a serious deficiency for a writer on
so great a doctor as Peckham. The statement that ' dominus implies a
degree in arts rather than in theology ' is hardly correct. No master in
any faculty would be called 'dominus,' a title which was at Oxford ordi-
narily appHed to bachelors of arts, and in some Italian universities was
even appHed to students. Theoretically, perhaps, a bachelor in divinity or
law might be called ' dominus,' but as in most cases they would be
masters of arts the term would hardly ever be so used. It would have
been clearer to suggest that Peckham was a bachelor when he joined the
friars.
Mr. Martin says that the first year of Peckham's archbishopric was
spent in Kent and Sussex, and near London. Sussex is probably a slip
for Surrey ; Peckham was naturally very often at his houses at Mortlake,
Lambeth, and Croydon. ' Near London ' is a vague phrase for the sys-
tematic visitation of the diocese of London, that occupied a good deal of
the new archbishop's superabundant energy in 1279. Again, consistency
in the spelling of proper names, a very unimportant thing in itself, is yet
desirable in a work of learning. It smacks of carelessness to speak on one
page of * Tedisius de Camilla ' and on the next of * Theodosius.' * Gnosall '
is, rather than ' Gnoushale ' or * Cnoshale,' the modem form of a Stafford-
shire village that figures constantly in one period of Peckham's corre-
spondence. The * Bruges ' mentioned among a group of western midland
place names is of course Bridgnorth, and should have been called so.
'Penkridge' should either be always thus spelt or always 'Pencridge,'
and not sometimes one and sometimes the other. An account of the
quarrel of Peckham with Thomas of Cantilupe is incomplete which gives
no reference to Mr. Webb's elaborate introductions to the expenses roll of
bishop Swinfield, a piece of work which, based on Cantilupe's register,
should have been particularly attractive to the editor of another register.
Amauri de Montfort, Mr. Martin says, renounced the priesthood, but
was he ever ordained priest? He was a clerk and a papal chaplain,
and it is true that he gave up the ecclesiastical profession. As Bishanger
(p. 99) says, * renuncians clericatui miles efficitur,' but all * clerici ' were
not priests, and it was a harder matter to ' renounce the priesthood.'
Digitized by
Google
558 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
In spelling Welsh names Mr. Martin was ill advised in following in
many cases the book that he calls in the notes ' Caradoc's History of
Cambria.' He probably means the work of Dr. David Powel and
Humphrey Llwyd, first published in 1684 ; but without venturing on an
opinion as to whether any part of that work had for its basis the chronicle
of Garadoc of Llanoarvan, we may be sure that it is at least impossible
that Caradoc, who lived in the early part of the twelfth century, could
have written the history of the latter part of the thirteenth. Mr. Martin
is still less happy when he follows the spelling of Woodward's history of
Wales, a modem book of which a critic said that it was ' most painfal to
the feelings of a Welshman to witness the mutilation of the high sound-
ing and significant designations ' of Welsh place names in that volume
[Arch, Cambrensis, new series, iii. p. 297). The spelling in Rymer is
certainly * perhaps incorrect,' but is that of Peckham any better ? Why,
then, does Mr. Martin in his English headings to the letters retain the
imperfect phonetics of Peckham's scribes ? Though many of his remarks
on the Welsh conquest are excellent, yet here and there he rather fedls
in bringing out the points. He does not, for example, seem to realise the
importance of Edward's concessions at the peace of 1267 ; and the whole
of the earlier story would have been more intelligible if told in relation to
the barons' wars, with which it was so intimately connected. Llewelyn,
if a vindicator of national independence, was also quite as much a great
baron who made common cause with Simon de Montfort. Again, it is
hardly scholarly to quote Carte as an authority for the behaviour of the
Welsh magnates in London in 1277.
Mr. Martin is wrong in saying, with reference to the war of 1282, that
* all the English chronicles speak of Llewellyn (it should of course
be Llewelyn) ' and David taking Bhuddlan and Flint castles, and of the
imprisonment of Clifford ; ' and in his statement that the capture of Ha-
warden is mentioned by none of the English writers. The Annals of
Worcester say Hawarden castle was attacked, and so agree with the Brut
y Tywysogion {An. Mon. iv. 481). Trokelowe (p. 39) names no castle as
the place of Clifford's capture, though he afterwards mentions the capture
of flint. Bishanger (p. 97) makes David alone capture Clifford at Ha-
warden, and thus force Llewelyn into the war. Mr. Martin, again, speaks
of the ' new castles of Lampadamvaur ' (it should be Llanbadamvawr)
' and Aberystwith ; ' but reference to the authorities quoted in the notes,
to say nothing of local geography, would have taught him that there was
only one castle — that, namely, of Aberystwith, a place which was till
quite the other day in the parish of Llanbadam, and which in the middle
ages was often called the ' new town of Llanbadam.' David was not
executed on 80 Sept., as Mr. Martin says ; the parhament of Shrewsbury
met on that day. David's condemnation was apparently on 3 Oct. {Cont.
Flor. Wig. ii. 229).
Quite inexcusable is it to attribute to Biohard I the saying that he had
' married his daughter luxury to the Black Friars.' Bichard died in 1199.
The Black Friars — i.e. the Dominicans — were not founded till 1216, and
luxury was hardly, as Mr. Martin doubtless knows, the most conspicuous
characteristic of the earlier stages of the mendicant orders. Perhaps he
means ' black monks ;' if so, a terrible suspicion is raised as to whether he
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 559
is clear as to the difference between a monk and a Mar. More probably
be is repeating a secondhand story without a thought as to its probability.
Mr. Martin * reminds the reader* that * by this time ' (i.e. 1288 or 1284)
* the king's son Edward had been bom at Carnarvon, and the new line of
English princes of Wales began.* The latter half of this statement is in
a sense true, for the English princes of Wales began when the * principality '
was annexed to the crown ; but Mr. Martin obviously believes the old
story that Edward 1 made his son prince of Wales at his birth. We may
* remind ' Mr. Martin that Edward of Carnarvon was not made prince of
Wales before 1801 (Annals of Worcester, An. Mon. iv. 548 ; see also ArchcBO-
logia Cambrensis, i. 142-146), and there had not yet been established a
* line * of English princes of Wales ; for the custom of bestowing this title
on the heir-apparent only grew up gradually, and Edward III was probably
never prince of Wales at all. Nay, when Edward was bom at Carnarvon
his elder brother Alfonso was still alive, so that there was no immediate
probability of his becoming king. All these are trifling mistakes perhaps ;
but they go to show that Mr. Martin is stronger as an editor and archi-
vist than as a general historian. But historical power is surely necessary
for the series which includes so much of the best work of Dr. Stubbs.
Mr. Martin deserves every historical worker's warm thanks for his full
and fairly accurate index. It is not, however, by any means absolutely
free from errors. Here are some instances. In p. 1107, under ordinations
held in Croydon Church, there are only references to pp. 1049 and 1051 ;
there should also be references to pp. 1081 and 1046, and, if the arch-
bishop's chapel at Croydon be included, to p. 1084. Under ' David, brother
of Llewellyn,' he omits the very important reference to vol. ii. p. 445,
where is set out at length * the complaint of the lord David ' — i.e. the ex-
cuses alleged by David for his attack on the English castles, from which
sprang the conquest of North Wales. But the worst confusion I have
cQscovered in the index is under * Ely, Nicholas of, bishop of Winchester,*
where there are given references to pp. 81 and 92, though there we only
find letters to the bishop of Ely (quite a different person) and to p. 140,
where is a letter to Pope Nicholas III. As long as * Ely,' or * Nicholas,'
occurred in the name, it was enough for the index-maker to jumble them
up into a single heading. It is from no wish to disparage the solid value
of Mr. Martin's labours that I have dwelt, with perhaps unnecessary
minuteness, on the large crop of small errors which are to be found in
the prefeuses and index of his work. It is a pity that they give an air of
slovenliness and inaccuracy to what is in most respects so valuable and
painstaking an edition. Happily the main thing is the text of Peckham's
letters, and no one could have any complaint as to the fidehty and care
shown by Mr. Martin in working from his manuscript. T. P. Tout.
The English Pa/rUoAnent in its Trcmsformations through a Thousand
Years. By Rudolf Gnbist. Translated by R. Jenbry Sheb.
(London : • Grevel & Co.)
It is good, sometimes, to see ourselves as others see us ; and it is a friendly
critic who here tells us the story of our constitution in a manner somewhat
different from our own writers. ' There are two opposite errors,' says a
Digitized by
Qoo^^
560 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
great English authority, * into which those who study the annals of our
country are in constant danger of fedling — the error of judging the present
by the past, and the error of judging the past by the present. The
former is the error of minds prone to reverence whatever is old, the latter
of minds readily attracted by whatever is new. The former error may
perpetually be observed in the reasonings of conservative pohticians on
the questions of their own day. The latter error perpetually infects the
speculations of writers of the liberal school when they discuss the trans-
actions of an earlier age. The former error is the more pernicious in a
statesman, and the latter in an historian.' Gneist speaks out against the
latter error. He had already given us the 'History of English Self-
Government' and the 'History of English Administration,' and had
combined them into a ' History of the English Constitution.' It re-
mained to complete the series by a book on the English parhaments.
The very titles and order of these publications give us Gneist's point of
view. We must not connect the ' History of the Constitution ' merely
with that of political parties ; we must look at the organic life of the
nation as a whole. Our parliaments have varied so much that, to a
superficial observer, they might seem to be parliaments of different
nations, since they occupied, in relation to the crown, in every century a
different position of right and might. Yet there prevails in them an
inner unity, to which there exists no parallel, when we look at them in
connexion with the administration of the country and of the local com-
munities : whereas the parliamentary system is nothing apart from the
administrative law and the local self-government which are the stable
foundation of the whole superstructure ; the life of the state depends on
the coherence between all classes. In nine essays, therefore, Gneist gives
a biography of our representative assemblies, which have an inner unity
and continuity as if these were but nine days in the life of a man of
worth, who through all the trials and errors of his mortal life remains
true to his nature and his convictions. PoHtical writers erred when they
feishioned out of fragments of this constitution, as it existed in the
eighteenth century, a universal ideal of a representative constitution.
This, under conditions totally different, could only result in an imitation
of the outward uses and abuses of the English parliament, and in fatal
misconceptions, from which European nations are still suffering. Our
institutions were rooted in the English soil, and cannot be rightly treated
of apart from the whole life and growth of the nation. Gneist therefore
tells us a number of home truths. The early times were not so free as
we make them out to have been ; the early parliaments had little import-
ance, our modem system has been created much more by the administra-
tive action of the Idng's council than historians allow, our house of lords
no more represents the Anglo-Saxon assembly of wise men than the
commons do, at least in our sense of a body giving assent to the levying
of taxes. Nor did the witenagemot really elect or depose kings. It was
the strong Norman centraUsing power that welded the English institutions
into a coherent whole, and gave England the start in the race over the
nations of the continent; it was the strong Tudor organisation that
carried us safely through our most dangerous crisis; the constitution
attained its perfection in the eighteenth century, when the nation had
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 661
succeeded in reconciling the antagonisms between society, state, and
chorch, so that the three were completely harmonised. Since that time
the system has been shaken and loosened by the intrusion of the new
social elements of modem industrial life, so that the development of a
new social order is now making itself felt, and any great social change
involves a corresponding political change.
Taking even a larger view, Gneist lays it down that there is a reci-
procal action always going on between state and society, church and
state, constitution and administration, throughout the whole range of the
life of the nation, and each onward step in the history leads to the next
in natural sequence ; parliament is but the connecting link between state
and society. And more generally still, man's free will is largely under
the determining influence of the outer world ; his life depends on his
environment. Political theory may regard men as free and equal, but in
the organism called society, which represents man's combined effort to
make himself a home in the wild world of nature that surrounds him,
there reigns supreme that unchangeable principle in the world of material
endowments, viz. the dependence of the poor on the rich. Such depend-
ence is the unfree element in every state, and it produces that everlasting
conflict of interests which strives, on the one hand, to strengthen and
intensify that dependence, and, on the other, to dissolve and annul it.
The power of the state and of the church here comes in to check and
override the narrow interests of the ruling classes. The king's ofiSce
became the mainstay of an organised body of executive officers and of a
legislation directed to this object ; his judicature prevented the develop-
ment of close guilds, set aside the manorial jurisdiction, prevented any
further development of serfdom, and held together all classes of society
under one law and jurisdiction, under one right of fEunily and of property,
and prevented the inauguration of a separate birthright, in respect of
knights, citizens, and peasants, severally, as on the continent. The loss
to such separate class interests was the gain of the commons as a whole,
and thus the counties and boroughs, similarly organised, obtained that
Arm cohesion which was the cause of the ever-increasing share taken by
the house of commons in the business of parliament. ' Thus was begotten
that power of resistance which gloriously overcame the absolutism that
had returned once more under the Stuarts.'
In much of the history Gneist of course agrees with our own writers,
such as Freeman and Stubbs ; it may be instructive to consider some of
the points in which they differ. He has little new to say of the early
times, and only begins with the year 800 : was he thinking of Milton's
description of the battles between the kites and crows? The powers
of the witenagemot have been over-estimated, but it had the rights of
legislating, of deciding on peace and war, &c., which were wholly lost
under the Norman absolutism. The Norman kings rid England of the
great earls, and put the local power into the hands of their own sheriffs,
who, besides managing the county court, made the toum of the hundred
twice a year, and annually revised the lists of the frankpledge, i.e., of
those who kept up the local police. By the new exchequer system the
kings were independent in matters of finance, the administration of
justice was in the hands of their officers, the feudal levies served on the
VOL. n. — NO. vn. o o
Digitized by
Google
662 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
king's mere summons, all legislation was by royal ordinance — ^what was
there left for any assembly of wise men to do ? During the first century of
Norman rule, therefore, there was no assembly possessed of a legislative
capacity, and the English writers are wrong who say that the witenagemot
lived on, though in an altered shape, and handed over its power to the
great council. It is true that the Conqueror held great court days on
the three great christian festivals, as of old, but it was merely to feast and
display his splendour. The summons was addressed to nearly the same
prelates, earls, court functionaries, and lords as in the witenagemot, but
what was wanting to such court days was any real control over afiEiedrs,
over legislation or administrative measures, or over the church. The
whole development of the constitution from the thirteenth to the fifteenth
century would involve a contradiction were the notion as to a parliament
possessing legislative capacity having previously existed to find acceptance*
In reality the legislative assemblies disappeared, and the local self-govern-
ment was transformed into a provincial administration by royal bailiffs*
But then the excess of royal power worked its own cure. This omni-
potent royal prerogative, by subjecting all free property to equably gradu-
ated services to be performed in the army, the law courts, the police, and
in the paying of taxes, laid, through such services exacted from the higher
classes, the foundation of the sturdiest aristocracy in Europe. Conscious
of the justice of its claims, and borne up by the identity of interests of aU
the propertied classes, the nobility, after the passing of the great charter,
took the lead in opposing the absolute power of the king, obtained a share
in the constitution and administration of the state, and the monarchy under
Edward I accorded to it its fair and equitable position in the English
self-government. It was the pressure of absolute power that fused aU
classes into a coherent mass, able to hold its own and to demand securities
for freedom.
And what does Mr. Freeman say to this ? * According to Gneist, who
has given too much faith to the dreams of Thierry, the assembly which
the English looked on as a continuation of the witenagemot, and the
Normans as the baronial court of their lord, was neither the one nor the
other, but a mere gathering for show. Nobody doubts that the gem6t,
both before and after the Conquest, was a court festival ; the question is
whether after the Conquest, as well as before, it was not a great deal
besides. Gneist confutes himself by bringing together many cases where
national business was discussed. Yet he leaves out the greatest of aU
— the entry in the chronicle, 1085, of the discussion which led to the
taking of Domesday. There is a certain element of truth in his view*
No one doubts that the spirit of the assembly had uttterly changed. No
one doubts that the authority of the two Williams and of Henry I was
practically absolute. But Gneist's way of speaking implies a break in
outward form which never happened. It implies a formal distinction
between Normans and English which was never drawn. It implies that
the spirit and even the form of deliberation must have ceased because the
king's will was practically supreme. Headers of Gneist would certainly
think that the formal change was far greater than it was. When he says
that in truth the witenagemot existed no longer, his words are just
patient of a correct meaning ; but no one would find out from them that
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 563
the word witan remains in use as long as the English chronicle goes on,
and that it is continued in the form of sapientes in Latin writers after-
wards. The facts of the case, indeed the whole history of the English
constitution, cannot be better summed up than in the passage from Allen
which Gneist quotes and ventures to dispute.' And yet do our two autho-
rities differ much ? They agree that the Norman kings were practically
absolute, they agree that old forms were kept up, but Gneist perhaps does
not allow enough for the value of retaining old forms, into which the
breath of life may again be breathed. He compares the way in which
free forms were retained under the Boman empire, but the comparison
shows the difference ; the free nation had perished in the one case, it
survived in the other, and the Anglo-Normans had a security which the
Bomans had not, since the whole nation was armed and the king had no
standing army. And why should not the Norman kings have kept up the
old forms ? It was the Conqueror's object to maintain that he was but
the lawful successor of Edward the Confessor, and he had no jealousy of
the witan — what could be more convenient than to talk over matters with
his chiefs, sitting roimd the fire in the great hall ? Gneist does indeed
allow that the witan had a good deal to do with the succession to the
throne, but then he adds that all cases of succession to the throne during
the early centuries of Norman times were irregular and questionable.
That is, he assumes that primogeniture was the rule, but adds that all
the instances are exceptions. But the rule of a woman or child or
childish man in early times means anarrchy, while hereditary succession
comes in naturally enough when society becomes more settled. Even
under Henry H Gneist says the councils were not feudal parliaments, but
only assembhes of notables having no permanent standing, though they
helped to keep up the popula/r notion that the lex terra, the traditional
common law, that is to say the customary principles of the law of pro-
perty and family, cannot be changed without the assent of the nation.
Here we seem to need a definition of what is meant by parliament in
early times. Gneist, however, allows so much that we need not quarrel
with him about the name of the thing, and we can afford to allow that
our writers have attributed to early great councils too much of the powers
which belonged to the later parliaments. But no one doubted that the
assembly lost much power under Norman rule, or again after the wars of
the roses. The essential point is this, that the king never legislated or
taxed without the assent of some sort of council. If we compare France,
we see the difference throughout, as Comines saw it in later times.
Proceeding onwards Gneist shows that even Magna Charta created no
parliament in the later sense, but that the leaders of the nation were
casting about for suitable remedies against bad government, and under the
schooling of fedlure in their first efforts came to the conviction that the
well-to-do classes needed to be fully represented in order not merely to
check the king's tyranny, but to support his lawful power against the
equal danger from the over-powerful nobles and prelates, and that they
found the remedy in the system of estates, and that the great statesman
Edward I carried out the plans in which his teacher Simon de Montfort
had foiled. Here again, while our writers regard the king's privy council
as being a sort of permanent conunittee of the great council, which had
o o 2
Digitized by
Google
664 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
of course to go about with the king to transact ordinary business, sinoe
the great council only met occasionally, Gneist rather looks on the great
council as being only the permanent coimcil with extended powers, and
expanded by writs being addressed to the most prominent among the
barons. This great assembly is called a parliament in its capacity of
making laws, a council in the sense of its being an enlarged state council,
and a court [curia] as being the highest court of law. Then again, when
the commons appear, Gneist disagrees with Stubbs as to the town
members being elected in county court, and thinks Eiess has shown they
were elected in the towns themselves. Here he might have quoted the
return from the sheriff of Oxfordshire in 1295. * There is no city or borough
in Oxfordshire except the town of Oxford, and the writ which came to me
was sent on to the bailiffs of the liberty of that town, and they answered
me that by the assent of the community of the town of Oxford there were
elected under the writ two burgesses, Thomas de Sowy and Andrew de
Pyrie.' But he hesitates, and rightly, about accepting Biess*s explanation
of the reason why the small boroughs soon ceased to send members.
There are many other points on which Gneist lays stress : e.g. there
was no counting of votes at first either in elections or in parliament ;
people assented or dissented by acclamation, much as in the early German
assemblies mentioned by Tacitus. And again, our parliaments begin by
offering lists of grievances, like the gravamina of German diets, or the
cahiers of the French states-general ; it is by slow degrees only that they
win power. Most true; but our writers allow it, and Gneist perhaps
overrates the amount of difference. Later on he sums up matters very
pithily ; thus as to the seventeenth century : * The Stuarts lacked the in-
telligence needful to carry out the national aims. Hitherto the monarchy
had risen or declined in almost alternate generations ; now the decline
showed itself in a whole dynasty, and through three generations. Hardly
ever has a reigning feunily occupied the throne so destitute of feeling for
the duties of a king. Their views and actions have little in common
with the character of the English royalty and the English people, but
resemble rather the policy of the house of Guise, and are influenced by
the religious struggle in Scotland. However different in character, these
four kings have one thing in conmion — a total want of sense and under-
standing for the national rights.'
The Eeformation had for a time brought confusion into the relations
between church and state. The Tudors had retained the bishops,
not as an order instituted by Christ, but as officials useful for securing
church discipline ; but when the puritans set up the presbyterian rule as
being of divine right, the bishops answered by reasserting the view that
their calling was by divine appointment, and allied themselves with the
equally divine monarchy that nominated them. This led to a struggle,
and it was not till this struggle was over that the Anglican church gained
an intimate connexion with the life of the nation. ' At the beginning of
the eighteenth century it comprised, with unimportant exceptions, the
entire population of England and Wales, and was bound up once more
with the most vital interests and the ideas of the ruling classes of society,
though admittedljr at the same time exposed to the peril of worldly-
mindedness and ambition.* The reign of George IH, when the gentry
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 665
were supreme, is to Gneist the culminatiDg point of the constitution ; it
was to this supremacy that all had been tending from the first. And he
perhaps will not meet with universal assent when he says : ' In the course
of the American war George III alone sometimes represented the interests
of the state in firm and manly fashion. The question must not be judged
according to the colonial pohcy of the present generation. The reproach
of cowardly love of peace, which was directed against Walpole's adminis-
tration, might have been deserved by George, had he (regardless of the
consequences for the maintenance of the English colonies) left the rebel-
lious colonists to themselves. The United States could hardly have
attained a national constitution that would live and last had they gained
their independence by such an abandonment, instead of by the honourable
and manly struggle to which they owe all that is best in the constitution of
their union. In like manner George was justified in taking to himself the
credit of being the only magistrate who did his duty in the wild Gordon
riots against tiie catholics. Again it was his merit that, by a quick resolve
at the last moment, the country was preserved from the injurious India
bill which Fox had already passed through the lower house. In his strong
opposition to catholic emancipation it was not merely a scruple of con-
science as to his coronation oath that prevailed in the king's mind, but
also an insight into the immeasurable consequences of the step as regards
the constitution of the country.* But setting aside modem colonial ideas,
were not the best statesmen of the day, Chatham and Bockingham and .
Burke, opposed to the king's American policy ? And was not the India
bill drawn up by Burke, who knew more about the condition of India than
most Englishmen ; and did not the directors of the East India Company
complain that Pitt's bills were just as bad ? The fact was that the time
had come for taking the government of India out of the hands of the
company ; but Burke's bill was not judged on its merits, or rejected from
any consideration for the benefit of India or of England, but on groimds
of party policy at home as understood by the king. What the effect of
George Ill's refusal to give the rights to the catholics of Ireland which he
had granted to those of Canada has been we know only too well. But
setting aside political views, and looking only to constitutional matters,
we find Gneist allowing that the rule of the gentry destroyed much of the
old local self-government, that they neglected the interests of the weaker
classes, injured the workmen by excessive customs duties, and lavishly
incurred public debt. The beginning of chapter vii contains a heavy
indictment against their system of police, of poor law management, of
their influence on the church, the universities, education, and health, which
we have hardly room to quote. And he laments the want of peasant pro-
prietors and the state of the agricultural population. It is curious to see
that Lecky places the 'golden period of our constitution between the
reform bill of 1882 and the reform bill of 1867, when the intelligent middle
classes were the true centre of political power.' On the whole, Gneist
thinks we have no longer the same firm foundation for our parliamentary
system as of old, and that government by party must soon come to an
end. He apparently does not allow enough for the restoration of local
government which is going on both in town and country. But he pro-
bably does not agree with Hume's view that absolutism will be the eutha-
Digitized by
Google
666 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
nasia of our constitution, and he winds up his friendly warnings with
words of good omen : ' It is for the good of nations as well as of men to
encounter such trials, and the whole past history of England, as the moral
consciousness of the nation has fashioned it through the development of
a thousand years, justifies the confidence that this nation will meet the
storms impending and find in its own past the materials for reconstructing
its free state system; as the German nation has done, whose latent
strength has always lain in what we may call the cell-system of its local
communities.*
We are sorry not to be able to speak well of the translation, but it is
often unintelligible without reference to the German ; and there are some
strange expressions, such as availed of, happened on. There are not a
few mistakes, and some unintelligible insertions, such as, under James I,
^ quarrels as to taxes, monopolies, and the Scottish union (covenant),* where
Mr. Sheehas inserted covenant — can he have been thinking of the Solemn
League and Covenant ? A simple sentence is awkwardly misrepresented
in * The extension of the district system was adjoined to boroughs ' (p. 118),
where the German is, tritt dazu die Ausdehnung des Systems der Kreisver-
bdnde auf eine ansehnliche Zahl von Stddten. We must not perhaps
blame him for following Gneist in speaking of Sir John Hampden, and of
Eobert Fitzwalter, Earl of Dunmore {Baron of Dunmow). Good transla-
tions of Gneist's series of works on England would be of the greatest
service. For modem times few men have studied our blue-books as the
German writer has done. His knowledge of what the executive adminis-
tration effected for Prussia has quickened his sense for like services in
England, on which we perhaps have not laid sufiScient stress.
Charles W. Boase.
Cddigos de Espafla. Coleccidn completa desde el Fuero Juzgo hasta la
Novisima Becopilacidn. Pubhcala D. Marcelo Martinez AlcubiliiaI
2 vols. 8vo. (Madrid: J. L6pez Comacho. 1885, 1886.)
It is to be hoped that this convenient collection will attract the attention
of scholars to the exceeding value of Spanish jurisprudence in the study
of European law. It occupies truly a unique position, which in com-
petent hands might yield most fruitful results. Alone of modem nations,
Spain can trace her laws back to Eome in almost imbroken descent. The
Visigoths estabhshed their domination at a time when Boman civilisation
was still an object of reverence ; they adopted to a great extent its legal
formulas, and their code, in its comparative completeness and orderliness,
offers the strongest contrast to the contemporary and subsequent leges
barbarorum with which it is commonly classed. " Elsewhere, the Franks,
the Burgnndians, the Saxons, the Bavarians, and the other founders of
the European commonwealths, treated the Boman institutions with con-
tempt, and regarded their own crude and barbarous customs as alone
worthy of obedience by free-bom warriors. Even in Italy the Lombards
imposed their legislation on their subjects, to the virtual extinction of the
imperial jurisprudence.
In Spain, even the Arab conquest did not overthrow the Visigothic
code. Preserved by the christian refugees in the mountains of Asturias,
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 667
-when its language grew obsolete it was translated into Bomance, and, as
the ' Fuero Jnzgo/ it continued to be the law of the reconquered peninsula.
When came the great awakening of the thirteenth century, which
witnessed the organisation of jurisprudence in so many lands — producing
the ' Sachsenspiegel ' and ' Schwabenspiegel ' in Germany, the labours of
Bracton and Britton and Home in England, those of St. Louis and of
Beaumanoir and De Fontaines in France — Spain was not idle. France
was adopting imperfectly the revived Eoman law, which served the
ambition of the crown in its struggles with feudalism. England rejected
it in spite of the efforts of Bracton, and so did Germany, at least for a
time. Spain already had it, modified to a form adapted to institutions so
different from those of the empire, and she also possessed a legislator of
whom she is justly proud in the person of Alonso el Sabio. To him she
owes the codes known as * El Fuero real * and * Las Siete Partidas,' which
are well worthy a far more attentive study than they have yet received.
The manner in which the forms and principles of the Boman law are
adapted to the modified feudalism of medieval Spain is full of instruction
in a body of law which represents the growth and habitudes of a people,
and not a system evolved by jurists, like the ' Code Napoleon,' and imposed
on a nation.
Students of history are beginning to appreciate the fact that there are
no monuments more trustworthy and more instructive than laws, none
which shed so much light upon the social life and inner existence of
successive generations, the standards which they have erected for them-
selves, their morals and their habits. These contributions to a knowledge
of the evolution of civiHsation are the most important objects of historical
research, rather than the succession of monarchs and the fate of battles.
Dynasties pass away, but man remains, and he remains what he has been
fashioned in the slow development of the ages, by the ancestral customs
recorded in legislation rather than by the vicissitudes of conquest.
Thus, what more vivid picture can we have of one phase of Spanish life
in the thirteenth century than that furnished by the ' Ordenamiento de
las Tafurerias,' or edict of gambUng houses, issued by King Alonso ?
This curious collection of forty-four laws, compiled by Maestre Boldan,
and promulgated by the king in 1276, sought to diminish the evils of the
all-pervading passion of the gaming table by legalising it and setting
bounds to its abuses. These limitations show the monstrous extent to
which it was indulged. On Christmas eve or day gambling was forbidden,
because, as we are apologetically told, every one ought to be rejoicing in
his own home. The rico ome or hidalgo was prohibited from setting a
dice table outside the front door of his resting place, but could play any-
where inside. The ecclesiastic who committed crimes in a gambling
house could not plead benefit of clergy, but had to answer for them before
the secular tribunals. Money for tiie stakes could not be borrowed on
the arms of a caballero or squire, or on the body of a christian, Jew, or
Moor. The blasphemy inseparable from dicing was restrained by heavy
fines for nobles, while for commoners there were smaller fines or thirty
lashes, ending, for a third offence, with loss of two finger-breadths of the
tongue. The regulations for preventing the use of cogged or other
imfair dice show that cheating had been reduced to a science, and the
Digitized by
Google
568 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
savage penalties of scourging or the loss of a thumb indicate how ineradi-
cable it was. Provisions as to players who ran awaj with the money, and
punishments for quarrelling and murder in gaming houses, are eloquent
as to the disorders which Alonso sought to repress. Well meant as was
this legislation, it failed of its object. Gambling continued to be a pest
which ravaged all ranks of society, and succeeding lawgivers abandoned
the attempt at regulation, and contented themselves with efforts at
repression.
Although the glossaries and indexes might be fuller, and the type of
the text could well be more legible, all students of legislation and of
sociology will thank D. Alcubilla for thus rendering accessible in a com-
pact form the whole corpus juris of Spain from Visigothic times to the
conmiencement of the nineteenth century. Henby C. Lea.
The Truth about John Wyclif: his Life, Writings, and Opinions. Chiefly
from the Evidence of his Contemporaries. By Joseph Stevenson,
S.J. (London : Bums & Gates. 1885.)
John Wyclyff: sa Vie, ses CEuvres, sa Doctrine, Par Victob Vattieb,
ancien Professeur d'Histoire, Professeur de Philosophie. (Paris:
Ernest Leroux. 1886.)
A NEW life of Wyclif would doubtless be welcome, and the above works
are very different attempts to supply the want. The former of them has
been out some time, and the writer was apparently provoked to his task
by the vagaries of the Wyclif quincentenary celebration committee. They
may accept the work as an indication of the harm done by approaching a
purely historic matter in a spirit of partisanship, since Father Stevenson
has emulated them. It is unfortimate that a work displaying real re-
search and much ability should have been undertaken in such a spirit.
The writer regards Wyclif as the originator of the English Eeformation ;
he does not abruptly separate the Lollard movement from the later
movement, and to this conclusion many facts point, although the writer
passes them over : trials for heresy — under the Lancastrian and Tudor
kings — appear in the same localities ; the name Lollard is used in the
proclamations of Henry YUI's reign, and Erasmus wrote to Hadrian VI
that the Lollard heresy was oppressa verius quam extincta, so that we
may assume Lollardry to have been alive when the Eeformation began.
So fEtr one may go with the writer, but we must stop short when he would
lead us from Wyclif to the Albigenses and their kin. (M. Vattier, on
p. 282 of his work, puts the matter historically. ) The coincidences between
their opinions and Wyclif s are sHght, and on points not fundamental (of
marriage we shall speak again) ; his final views on the Eucharist would
not have been accepted by them, and the traces of self-development are
so plain in his case as to make the idea absurd. A philosopher does not
borrow from ignorant men. But on broader grounds there is very little
evidence for any Albigensian influence in England : the two facts cited
— the case at Oxford in 1160, and a letter from Peter of Blois to Geoffirey
of York urging him to cleanse his province — are counterbalanced by the
silence of other writers, and the praise generally given to England as
being free from heresies. The basis of Wyclif 's ideas must be found in
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 569
the philosophy of his day (as the lately issued ' De Benedicta Inoama-
tione ' makes plainer than ever), and the neglect of this fact deprives any
biography, even if &irly written, of value.
But unfortunately Father Stevenson does not take such a view : to
his mind, Wyclif *s after-life was simply determined by his losing the
wardenship of Canterbury Hall, and not being appointed to the see of
Worcester — this last fact being accepted on Walden's sole authority*
The Canterbury Hall incident merits discussion, especially as Father
Stevenson, who has not spared labour, refers to two unpublished docu-
ments (a letter from Langham to Wyclif, and an account of the process)
in the Lambeth library, for a copy of which we should have been grateful.
The other documents may be found in the appendix to Lewis's * Life,' and
in Wilkins {Cone. iii. 52). Even Lechler's account of the matter is
scarcely clear. He probably goes too &r in pressing the distinction
between prater licentiam nostram (of Islip's removal of Woodhull and
his three fellow-monks) and contra formam licentuB nostrce (of Lang-
ham's change) in the royal pardon (dated 8 April 1872 ; document No. viii.
in Lewis). We may notice that the account given by M. Vattier is im-
partial, but throws Httle fresh light on the matter. Father Stevenson
scarcely brings out the way in which the incident was part of the great
university struggle between seculars and regulars, and his whole accoimt
is about the worst part of his book. The regulation of Islip (quoted on
p. 14 from Wilkins in a translation which does not mark its omissions)
does not bear his interpretation that the archbishop was absolute in his
power; it merely makes him the visitor to the exclusion of all other
jurisdiction. (The regulations which boimd the members to abstain from
efforts after reinstatement if expelled are stringent, and show how IsHp
wished to avoid litigation.) The legality of Wyclif 's dismissal is un-
affected either by this or by the oath taken by him as warden. There
is no doubt Islip appointed Wyclif, changing the nature of his founda-
tion; then he died 'leaving his work at Oxford incomplete' (p. 15, quoting
Birchington in Angl. Sacr,), and Langham succeeded him. Had he not
wished to change Islip's plan he would probably have got the royal licence
for the late change, which was apparently wanting. Instead of this, he
made the whole foundation monastic (so we may infer from the account
in the papal mandate, Lewis, 298 : et quod idem Andruynus cardinalis,
prout ei melius et utilvus pro statu dicti collegii videretur expedite^
posset a dicto collegio clericos seculares amovere, vel si ei utiliiis
videretur pro collegio supradicto religiosos supradictos ab ipso collegio
amctoritate prcedicta amovere, ita quod unicum et sohim collegium regu"
larium vel secularium remaneret, etc.). This reference to the beginning
of the process seems to imply wider changes th^ the substitution of
Woodhull for Wyclif, and of three monks for Benger and the two other
seculars. Wyclif 's reference to it in the * De Ecclesia * (p. 871) seems to
imply the same.
Putting aside the pleas advanced on the two sides, the point to decide
was. Had Langham the right to remove Wyclif ? He had the power of a
visitor ; and to submit to the visitor Wyclif was bound by oath. The
causes for expulsion are given (Wilkins, * Cone' iii. 64) : taking monastic
vows ; entering the service of a lord temporal or spiritual ; idleness in
1*
Digitized by
Google
670 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
stadj ; being riotous, quarrelsome, or incorrigible. Even the warden, if
unable to keep peace, or guilty of himself frequently causing disturbance,
might be warned by the senior fellow, and, if imaffected, could be removed
by the archbishop. Apparently Ishp had experience of such a turbulent
head, and one may conjecture (as Lechler apparently does) that Woodhull
had been such a warden. None of these personal causes were alleged
against Wychf so fEtr as we know, and we might reasonably conclude that
Langham, in making the change, exceeded his power as visitor. Whether
he had done so was a perfectly feur point to argue, and no oath of submis-
sion or regulations against legal attempts at reinstatement if rightly
expelled affected Wyclif 's right to argue it. His opponents, however,
seem to have questioned the legality of his own appointment by Islip,
which is again a perfectly fair point to argue.
The matter cannot be absolutely settled; it is absurd to represent
Wyclif as a martyr on the one hand, or on the other as ' a character who
sometimes appears in the police ofiSce and the county court, and seldom is
admired or respected.* Even this last piece of character-drawing is not
enough : the ' defeat ' in this trial (the litigation was not ended before
11 May 1370 — a date not given in this book) was * an overthrow,' and led
Wyclif to an ' entire change of tactics.* ' Worcester had already become
a vision,* and * Oxford was fast fading into a memory.' (Nevertheless he
and his opinions were long popular there, and he lectured there after-
wards.) The startling result of a trial begun after April 1867, and folly
ended by the royal licence in 1872, was that Wyclif made * a new depar-
ture,* and entered upon poHtics. This he did by the tract in which he
calls himself peculiaris regis clerictis (Lewis, p. 849) — a tract certainly
written by 1867, and probably in 1866. Even controversial works need
not be written so recklessly as this.
It is, again, curious to find that Wyclif s political career is represented
as a degradation, a conception foreign to the time. In becoming the
champion of the antipapal feeling, he followed impulses natural to
Englishmen of his day. His power of receiving such impulses (of which
his whole life is an illustration) was the second determining cause of his
development ; the first being his philosophical system. For the latter
Father Stevenson substitutes an inborn inclination to heretical depravity
and a reception of Albigensian errors ; the former he entirely distorts.
The writer refers to the articles condemned by Langham (9 Nov. 1868)
in a letter to Oxford, and seems disposed to ascribe them to Wyclif.
Several are on the clara visio ; others on natural merit reaching salvation,
and so on ; and some of them could not well be ascribed to Wyclif. Others
(e.g. 16 : nihil est nee esse potest malum solum quia prohibitum ; and 20 :
Dens non potest aliquid adnihillare) have a ring of him ; and No 20
appears as No 4 in the heresies which *primo jactavit in aera (Fasc,
Ziz. p. 2) on taking his doctor's degree. It may also be noted that the
introduction to Langham*s articles speaks of zizania, which directly
suggests a collocation of the two sets of articles. Now 1867 or 1868
would be a very likely date for the doctor's degree — a point of some im-
portance. The question is worth more discussion than is given to it.
One thing cannot be passed over ; quoting the Trialogue on Matrimony
(bk. iv. cc. 20-22) Father Stevenson says, ' The teaching of this profli*
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 571
gate reformer is so extravagant and so disgracefal, that it seems to demand
a special notice ' (p. 161) ; he quotes (c. 22), Veritas quidem mihi videtur^
quod assistente consensu con^ugum et dondno apjprobante, subducto quo-
cumqiie signo sensibiU, foret satis. He ought to have also quoted the
question of ' Alithia ' about the celebration cum verbis de prcBsenti or cum
verbis de futv/rOf to which it is an answer. Wyclif is merely discussing
a scholastic question (of which he says, Non detector multum labi in ista
materia) discussed in the supplement to the ' Summa * by Aquinas (quses-
tiones xlv., xlvi. in which many analogies to Wyclif s discussion may be
found). The Tridentine settlement fixed these moot points, although not
without long discussions (in February 1 568) . If Wyclif s words are removed
from their scholastic background and separated from their context it is easy
to prove his * profligacy.' The chapters, however, do not give a low view
of matrimony, and it is hard that a writer whose mind is always full of
the relation between Christ and his spouse the church, who closes the
chapter quoted by saying, Matrimonium autem hominum scimus a
matrimonio Christi et ecclesue exemplandumy should be charged with so
doing. Even were the charge true as Father Stevenson puts it, he should
prove it from the popular English works and not from the Trialogue.
M. Vattier's work demands less notice ; it is a conscientious study of
the chief works on Wyclif, but in 1886 one might look for something
more. A book which gives a long list of Wyclif s writings, a life, and an
account of his opinions, arouses expectations which are here disappointed.
No use is made, for instance, of Dr. Buddensieg's * Polemical Works * (e.g.
* The Summons to Rome,* p. 140, a reference to the De frivolis dtationibus
would have been useful) ; the English works edited by Mr. Matthew are
mentioned (p. 880), but the prefEMse to them ought to have saved M.
Vattier from following Vaughan's information on Wyclif s birthplace. If,
however, we do not form such expectations, and merely ask for a moderate,
full, and readable life, the work gives it. There is also an account of
Wyclif s predecessors and followers, among whom an author Lollard
(p. 286) oddly figures ; his personality and influence are both, of course,
mythical. There are not many departures from the views of Lechler,
but the account of the opinions and philosophy, where Lewald is also used,
is in some respects fuller than Lechler's. The writer certainly deserves
the praise he seems to seek when he puts C'est icy un Uvre de bonne
foy as his motto. But one would be glad to give him higher praise than
that. J. P. Whitney.
A History of the Papacy during the Period of the Beformation, By
M. Creighton, M.A. Vols. III. & IV.— The Italian Princes, 1464-
1518. (London : Longmans & Co. 1887.)
Mb. Creighton's new volumes tell the story of the papacy as an Italian
power during the last half-century that preceded and prepared the rise of
protestantism. Next to the merits of moderation and sobriety which the
prefEMse rightly claims, their first characteristic is the economy of evidence,
and the severity with which the raw material is repressed and so kept
out of sight as not to divert the reader's attention or turn his pleasure
into toil. The author prefers the larger public that takes history in the
Digitized by
Qoo^^
672 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
shape of literature, to scholars whose souls are vexed with the iusolubihty
of problems and who get their meals in the kitchen. The extent of
his research appears whenever there is a favourite point to illustrate;
but he generally resembles a writer on the Long parliament who should
treat Bushworth and Clarendon as too trite for quotation, or Mr. Walpole
if he were to strike out several hundred references to * Hansard ' and
the ' Annual Register. ' There is some risk in attempting a smooth narra-
tive of transactions belonging to an age so rich in disputed matter and
dispersed material, and quick with the causes of the reformation. As the
author rarely takes stock or shows the hmit of his lore, the grateful
student, on whom proofs are not obtruded, cannot tell whether they
aboimd, and may be led wrongly and injuriously to doubt whether the
sources of information and suggestion have been fully explored. Nobody
should stand better with Mr. Oreighton than Banke. The late John
Bichard Green used to complain that it was from him that he had lesCmt
to be so dispassionate and inattentive to everything but the chain of
uncoloured feet. In reserve of language, exclusion of all that is not his-
tory, dislike of purple patchwork and emotional effect, their ways are one.
At the same time, the chapter on Savonarola has been more distinctly
a labour of love than any other part of these volumes. Yet the essay on
Savonarola which is among Banke's later writings has not been suffered
to influence the account of the friar's constitution and of the challenge.
Burckhardt,, the most instructive of all writers on the renaissance, is
missed where he is wanted, though there is a trace of him in the descrip-
tion of Caterina Sforza. The sketch of Gemistus Pletho is founded on
Alexandre's edition of his ' Laws,' irrespective of Schulze's later and more
comprehensive treatise. Schulze is as well known to Mr. Oreighton as
Banke or Burckhardt, and his studious exclusion needlessly raises a ques-
tion as to whether this book is written up to date. It relates from the
usual authorities the story of the ancient Boman corpse that was dis-
covered in 1485, carried to the Capitol, and tumultuously admired by
the enthusiasts of the revival. Another account, written by an eye-
witness, at the time, has been published by Janitschek, and reproduced
by Geiger in works only second to those of Voigt and Burckhardt. The
* Begesta Leonis X ' should be an indispensable aid in the study of his
pontificate, and should have roused a suspicion that the act confirming
the legitimacy of Clement VII has long been known, and that the page of
Balan's 'Monumenta* to which we are referred for it is misprinted.
They also prove (p. 828) that the * Bullarium Magnum ' cannot be trusted
by critical scholars. In the character of Paul 11 there is no notice of a
statement made by Gregorovius (vol. vii. 212), whom Mr. Creighton has
studied carefully, though not, I think, in the last edition.
To make this good and to strengthen confidence, we have many valu-
able extracts from unpubUshed works, such as the history of the Angus-
tinian, Cardinal Egidius of Viterbo, one of the least inefficient among the
Italian priesthood of that age, and the diaries of the master of the cere-
monies and bishop of Pesaro, whose manuscripts have been the mainstay
of papal historians from Panvini and Baynaldus to Hergenrother. But
the desire to reject superfluous notes and paraded erudition has influenced
the author's manner in another way. No scrupulous and self-respecting
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 578
writer will speak his mind or say things that challenge inquiry unless the
proof is prompt. To relieve his text of the burden of incessant quotation,
he must understate his meaning and lose in definiteness and precision
what he gains in hghtness. His chisel is necessarily blunted, and he
cannot work in high relief. It has cost Mr. Creighton but little to accept
this drawback on his method. He is not striving to prove a case, or
burrowing towards a conclusion, but wishes to pass through scenes of
raging controversy and passion with a serene curiosity, a suspended judg-
ment, a divided jury, and a pair of white gloves. Avoiding both alterna-
tives of the prophet's mission, he will neither bless nor curse, and seldom
invites his readers to execrate or to admire. His tints are sometimes pale,
and his tones indecisive. I do not refer to such ambiguous sayings as
that Matilda left all her lands to St. Peter, or that the sudden death of
Paul II was regarded as a judgment upon him for his want of faith, or
that Julius n felt the calls of nature strong at the last. But there are
places where, in the author's solicitude to be within the mark, the reader
misses the point. There was a time when the schemes of ecclesiastical
reform found a last refuge in the sacred college itself. In letters written
from Bome on 28 and 28 Sept. 1608, we read: Li Signori Cardinali
essendo in Conclavi, hano ordinati multi Capituli tendenti a proponere de
la Sede apostolical et del Collegio, et creato el Pontefice, li hano facto
gi/urare de observarlL . . . Tutti li Signori Cardinali fumo chiamatiper
N. S, in Congregatione a Palatio, et per f arse mentione de Concilio et de
reformatione de la Corte neli capituli del Conclavi, La Santitd Sua pro-
pose et conckisef se habi a fare el Concilio^ et se habi ad intimare aU
Principi Christia/ni, Ma circa el loco et lo tempo de epso Concilio se
reservd a delibera/re un altra volta, Fu bene ragionato che lo ultimo
Concilio fu facto in Basilea, et per Monsignor de Rohano fu ricordato,
quando se tractard del loco, se habi a chdamare lo Procuratore del Chris-
tianissimo Be, dimonstrando che essendo stato facto lo ultimo in Alla-
magna, seria conveniente questo farse in Franza. La Santitd Sua amphora
propose la reformatione dela Corte, et conclude se ha/oesse a riformare,
Mr. Creighton, who has no faith in the concihar and spiritual movement,
and is satisfied with the printed edition of Giustinian, merely says
that Pius in ' spoke of reforming the church.' The flavour has evapo-
rated. A patriotic Florentine, Boscoli, compassed the death of the Medi-
cean monopolist of power, and suffered, reasonably, for his crime. We
are told that the great question for his friends was the opinion of Aquinas
on the sinfulness of tyrannicide ; and that his confessor declared after-
wards that his soul was in peace. The difficulty for his friends was to
make him beHeve that St. Thomas condemned tyrannicide utterly, and
what his confessor afterwards said was that they had contrived to deceive
him. There is a report that Alexander objected to the ordeal of fire,
because he feared it might succeed. We are only told, in a note, that
it would have been very awkward for him if by any chance Savonarola
had been successful. Caesar Borgia ' awakened the mingled terror and
admiration of bystanders.' This is true of others, besides Machiavelli.
When the news of Caesar's most conspicuous crime reached Venice, a
citizen who hated him, and who kept in secret a diary which has not seen
the light, made this entry : Tutto il mondo cridava contro di lui ; tam^en
Digitized by
Google
674 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
per questo li morti non restisciteranno^ e dimostrava haver un gran co-
raggio, e di farsi signor di tutta V Italia, And somewhat later : Di
quanta riputatione, efausto, e gloria s* attrovava alV hora il Signor Duca
Valentino in Italia, non lo posso per hora dichiarire, perche V effetto
delli 8uoi successi, delli sue vittorie, e del stato acquistato^ lo dimos-
trava, Onde di lui si parlava variamente : alcuni lo volevano far Be
delV Italia, e coronarlo ; altri h volevano fa/r Imperator, The picture
of Julius at the Lateran council, when * he had forgotten to prepare a
speech/ and when he * could only stammer through a few sentences/ is
less vivid than the account of his oratory given by Paris de Grassis :
Non facio mentionem de Julio, qui cum oraturus esset semper per tri-
duum ante actus occupatus erat in studio memorandi sermonis ; et tamen
cum in consistorio publico dicere vellet semper semimori videbatur, ita
ut rmhi esset necesse occurrere et excitare eum in stupore membrorum
occupatum et exinanitum, sicut omnes viderunt, et Sua Sanctitas sape
rmhi hoc idem dixit.
Mr. Creighton has a decided opinion on the question whether Alex-
ander VI died a natural death, but the arguments on either side might
be strengthened. ' Contemporaries saw a proof of the effects of poison in
the rapid decomposition of the pope's body, which grew black and swollen.
• • • It was evidence only of the state of the atmosphere.* Compared
with the report in Sanuto, this is a tame description: El sangue ge
abondava da le rechie, da la bocha e dal naso, adeo che non potevano tanto
sugar quanto V abondava : i labri erano piU grossi che 'I pugno di un
homo : era con la bocha aperta, e ne la bocha ge bogliva il sangue, come
faria una pignata che boglisse al focho, e per la bocha ge salta/va el sangue
a modo de una spina, e sempre abondaA)a : e questo d de visu. Alexander
fell ill on the 12th, not on the 18th, of August. The error may be due to
the omission, by YiUari, of the first sentence in a despatch of 14 August.
In the original it begins with the following words: Sabato passato^
dovendo andare N. S. in signatura, secondo el consueto, la signatu/ra fu*
destinata. Et de la cau^a non se ne intese altro per quella sera. Ma
fu ascripto ad uno pocho de indispositione han)ea hanmto el Signor Duca,
el di inante. The despised Leonetti has the right date. ' It is not sur-
prising that two men, living under the same conditions and in the same
place, should suffer from fever at the same time.' It is a case, not of
two men, but of three ; for Cardinal Hadrian afterwards assured Jovius
that he had been poisoned. When three men who have dined together
are seized with such illness that the oldest dies, and the youngest is pro-
strated during the most critical week of his life, we even now suspect ver-
digris in the saucepan or a toadstool in the mushrooms. Yillari, whose
authority stands high, maintains that the suspicion of poison arose when
the pope was dead. But on 18 August Sanuto writes : Si divulga per
Boma sia std atosegado ; and Priuli has the following entry on the 16th :
Furono lettere da Boma volantissime, per le qtuU s* intendeva come il
Sommo Pontifice essendo stato a solaazo a cena del B^ Cardinale chia-
mato Adria/no, insieme col Duca Valentino et alcuni altri Cardinali,
havendo crapulato ad sobrietatem, essendo ritomato al Pontificale Palazzo,
«' era buttato al letto con la febre molto grave, per la qual infermitd si
giudicava fosse stato avvelenato, e qussto perchi etiam il giomo seguente
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 575
il jprefato Duca Valentino et il Cardinal s' erano buttati al letto con la
febre. On the other hand, the only direct authorities available — Gius-
tinian, Costabili, and Burchard — report that Alexander died a natural
death, and it would appear that the famous supper took place nearly a
week before the guests were taken ill. Giustinian writes on 18 August :
Uno di questi zomi, e fo ozi otto di, andomo a cena ad una vigna del
R^ Adriano, e stettero fin a notte ; dove intravennero etiam altre persons,
e tutti se ne hanno risentito.
Mr. Creighton warns us against the credulous malignity of the writers
he is compelled to use. It must be appraised, he says, as carefully as the
credulity of earlier chroniclers in believing miraculous stories. It will
not do to press the analogy between Caesarius or the Liber Gonformi-
tatumy and Infessura or Burchard. Mr. Creighton accepts the most
scandalous of the scenes recorded by the latter ; he assuredly would not
accept what is gravely testified in the Beatification of Ximenes, that
he stopped the sun at Gran, so that several Moors, seeing the prodigy,
asked to be baptised. But his reluctance to rely on common gossip is
justified by the rank growth of myths in the journals of the cinque cento
Grevilles. On the death of the Venetian Cardinal Michiel in April 1508,
Priuli writes : FH discoperto, come qui sotto appar, che H detto Cardinal fit
attossicatoperintelUgenza del Duca Valentino per haver li danari, efH squar-
tato et abbruciato questo tale, che era Cameriere del detto Cardinale, In
August the same story is repeated : Morse da morte repentina un Cardinale
Tiepote del Pontefice, chia/mato il Cardinale Monreale, hv/ymo di grandis-
sima auttoritdj in dus giomi, al qvM fu trovato tra a/rgenti e denari 120
M. ducati, e si diceva, e givdicaA)asi per certo, il detto povero Ca/rdinale
esser stato awelenato dal Duca Valentino per li sum danari, che all* hora
era consusto ammazzare le persone c* ha/oevano danari a Boma da questo
Duca, The news of the pope's illness suggests the following reflections :
Si dubitava assai che H detto Pontefi^ce rum dovesse da qvssta infermitd
morirCfperche, ut vulgo dicebatur, questo Pontefice ha/vea dato V anima et il
corpo al gran Diavoh delV Inferno ; e perd che non potesse morire ancora
per far delli altri mali. Another relates that an ape was caught in
the apartments of Alexander, who exclaimed, Lasolo, lasolo, chS il dia-
volo. Sanuto has a detailed account of the supper party, according to
which there was no mistake ; but Hadrian, knowing his danger, gave the
butler a heavy bribe to make the exchange. El Cardinal, che pur havia
pawra, se medicine e vomitd, et non have mal alcuno. A ghastly tale is
told in the life of a man who, fifty years later, rose to the summit of
power and dignity and historic fame, but who was then an obscure prelate
about the court. When Alexander came to the villa of Cardinal Hadrian,
it was found that the box containing a consecrated host, which he wore
as a protection, had been forgotten. The prelate, who was sent for it, on
arriving at the Vatican, beheld the pontiff lying dead in his chamber.
No authority is more often cited for the early part of the sixteenth
century than the diary of Marin Sanuto. Mr. Creighton quotes some-
times from the printed edition, sometimes apparently from the Vienna
transcript, which does not always agree with the original. In the con-
spiracy of the cardinals in 1517 his reliance on the fidelity of Marin
Sanuto's precis of despatches raises an interesting problem of his-
Digitized by
Qoo^^
676 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
torical criticism. The statement of Pope Leo, as quoted vol. iv. p. 245, is
inaccurate. There is no question of a letter written by Sauli, or of a
promise made by him, or of a prisoner having confessed that the cardinal
had actually plotted the death of the pope. The text of the despatch,
which, upon all these points, has been distorted, is as follows : Sa/piate
che za alchuni giomi to fed retenir uno de i stw, apresso dil qualfurono
ritrovate alchune scrittv/re, et tandem alchune lettere che lui scrweva al
Cardinal, per che 7 non si havea potuto exeguir quanta lui li havea com-
messo cum molte altre pa/role ; per modo che si poteva judicar ditto Ca/r^
dinal haver Prattato di voler avenena/r Sua Bne. et posto de tormento con-
fessd la veritd, et etiam chel Cardinal de Sa/uU era conscio di tal ribal-
daria. This prisoner, who was in the service of Petrucci, not of Sauli,
confessed under torture ; but the words auto corda assai do not apply
to him as Mr. Greighton supposes. They describe the fate of the physician
whom he denounced. Marin Sanuto writes in the passage which seems
to have been misunderstood : Qv^l Zuan Baptista di Verzei a confessato
il tutto, qual a auto corda assai. On the next page Leo is made to say :
4 zom/i poi fussemo fatti Papa tramono questi di darmi la morte. The
Venetian copy of the diary has : 4 zomi poi fossimo Papa tramono questi
dame la morte. The words actually reported by the envoy are : Quatro
giorm da poi la nostra creatione questi Cardinali tractorono defarun
altro Pontefice, da poi la nostra morte. Of Biario, whom the Venetians
call the cardinal of St. George, Mr. Creighton writes : ' Eiario denied all
knowledge of the matter till the confessions of the others were read to
him ; then he said, ** Since they have said so, it must be true." He
added that he had spoken about it to Soderini and Hadrian, who laughed
and said they would make him pope.' Marco Minio says : Per le deposi-
tione del Sauli et etiam de qv^lche uno de U altri si vede corns etiam
haveano comnmnicato questa cum li B^* Cardinali Voltera et Adriano,
et quel Adriano, intesa la cosa, si messe a rider stringendosi nelle spalle,
che d uno atto solito per lui farsi m^olte volte, et U B^ Volterra disse,
* Faciate pu/r presto' Si che tutti loro dimostrar haver grandissimo odio
al Pontefice. Ma San Zorzi dimostra hwver hoAJuto piU presto grande de-
siderio al papato che altro ; et loro promettevano difarlo papa. It does
not appear that Biario admitted having sounded Soderini and Hadrian,
nor that it was proved by the evidence of others, nor that the two car-
dinals implicated made any promise to elect him. All this is taken from
Sanuto's summary: Quando Jo letto al Cardinal San Zorzi quello
havia detto Siena e Sauli, qu^l prima negava, disse, za che Iharo hanno
dito cussi el dia esser el vera, et chel cormmichae con Voltera et Hadriano
Cardinali quali se la riseno come solito d afar Hadriano, et Voltera disse,
* Faziate pur presto,' e che li prometteva far esso San Zorzi Pa/pa.
Mr. Greighton judges his half-century as an epoch of religious decline,
during which the papacy came down from the elevation at which it was
left by Pius to the degeneracy in which it was found by Luther. With
Paul II it starts well. Then the temptations of politics, the victorious
creation of the temporal state, bring his successors into degrading and
contaminating rivalry with wicked statesmen, and they learn to expend
spiritual authority in exchange for worldly gains, until at last, when they
have to fistce new antagonists, their dignity is tarnished and their credit
Digitized by
Qoo^<^
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 577
gone. At each pontificate the judgment becomes more severe. Sixtus ia
worse than Paul, and Alexander than Sixtus. But worst of all are those
prosperous pontiffs who, in their ambition to become great monarchs^
sacrificed their country and their church. The reformers rose up in opposi-
tion to a vast political machine, to a faggot of secular motives, which had
usurped the seat of Gregory VIE and Innocent IV. The papacy to which
they were untrue had become untrue to itself.
This increasing rigour and occasional indignation, as the plot thickens,,
is assuredly in no wise due to the irrelevant detail that Cambridge does
not elect its Dixie professor among the adherents of Rome. Religious
differences do not tinge his judgment or obstruct the emollient influence
of ingenuous arts. If Mr. Greighton, as a theologian, does not accept the
claims of the pre-reformation popes, as an historian he prefers them to
their adversaries. The members of the council of Pisa are renegades and
schismatics. When Paul II refused to be bound by the compact he had
signed with the other cardinals, he was not to blame. * The attempt to
bind the pope was a legacy of the schism, and rested upon the principles
laid down by the conciliar movement. Such a proceeding was entirely
contrary to the canonical conception of the plenitude of the papal power.'
The character of Pius III ' stood high in all men's estimation, though he
was the father of a large fBunily of children.' Mr. Greighton insists on
the liberality of the popes, not only at the time of which he treats, but
generally. ' Fanaticism had no place in Rome, nor did the papal court
trouble itself about trifles. — It allowed free thought beyond the extremest
limits of ecclesiastical prudence. — The papacy in the middle ages always
showed a tolerant spirit in matters of opinion. — We cannot think that
Roman inquisitors were likely to err on the side of severity.' The last
sentence shows that in varying disinterested history with passages which
might be taken from the polemics of Gardinal Newman, Mr. Greighton is
not unmindful of the Inquisition. But he shows no strong feeling for
the liberty of conscience. He speaks coldly of * writers who themselves
regard toleration as a virtue,' and says that Pomponatius ' was judged in
the papal court with a judicial calmness and impartiality which the
modem advocates of religious tolerance might well admire.' When
speaking of Gemistus, the last original thinker of the tolerant eastern
church, he passes unheeded the most curious passage of the * Laws ' : vv
K(il tro^iiTTwy, fjy rtg napa tuq ^fieripa^ ravrac ^ofac 0'O0i(o/icvoc &X^, iQy ical
ovroQ KeKava-eTai. He declares that it is unjust to brand Sixtus IV as a
persecutor because he granted the powers asked for in the shape of the
Spanish Inquisition. And this is prompted by no tenderness for the memory
of Sixtus ; for we find elsewhere that ' he allowed himself to become an
accomplice in a scheme for assassination which shocked even the blunted
conscience of Italy.' It may be safely said that Mr. Greighton esteems
Ximenes a better specimen of the Ghristian priest than Julius or Leo,
with all their religious liberality.
The spirit of retrospective indulgence and reverence for the operation of
authority, whether it be due to want of certitude or to definite theory, is an
advantage in writing on this portion of history. From a less conservative
point of view the scenery is more gloomy, and the contending parties, tarred
with the same brush, are apt to prove less interesting. Mr. Greighton is able
VOL. n. — NO. vn. p p
Digitized by
Google
B78 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
to be considerate and appreciative both to popes and reformers. He has no
love for the Italian humanists, and may reserve his harshest censures for
the pseudonymous liberalism of More and Socinus. It is not necessary, he
says, to moralise at every turn ; and he neither worries and vilipends his
culprits, like Garlyle and Taine, nor adapts his judgments to dogma, like
Hook and Mozley. He goes farther, and declares that it is not becoming
to adopt an attitude of lofty superiority over any one who ever played a
prominent part in European affairs, or charitable to lavish undiscrimina-
ting censure. Of course this does not imply that justice has one law for
the mighty and another for the fallen. If it means that every age ought
to be kied by its own canons, the application of that sliding scale is a
branch of ethical and historical inquiry that is yet in its teens, and prac-
tically of no avail. Or it may mean that power goes where power is due,
that the will of Providence is made manifest by success, that the judgment
of history is the judgment of heaven. That is undoubtedly a theory of
singular interest and influence as the groundwork of historic conservatism ;
but it has never been brought to the test of exact definition. Mr. Greighton
perceives the sunken rock of moral scepticism, and promises that he
will not lower the standard of moral judgment. In this transition stage
of struggling and straggling ethical science, the familiar tendency to
employ mesology in history, to judge a man by his cause and the cause by
its result, to obviate criticism by assuming the unity and wholeness of
character, to conjure with great names and restore damaged reputations,
not only serves to debase the moral standard, but aims at excluding it.
And it is the office of historical science to maintain morality as the sole
impartial criterion of men and things, and the only one on which honest
minds can be made to agree.
I dwell on the spirit and method and morale of the ' History of the
Papacy,* not only because it is difficult to contend in detail with such a
master of solid fact, but because it is by the spirit and not the letter
that his book will live. Studious men who have examined the hidden
treasures of many Italian libraries, and have grown grey with the dust
of papal archives, are on the track behind him. Pastor's history has
only just reached Pius II ; but it is dense with new knowledge, and
announces a worthy competitor to Banke, Oregorovius, and Creighton.
But not a hole must be left unpicked ; and there are several particulars
on which reader and writer may join issue. The account of the conclave
of 1471 seems scarcely just to Bessarion. According to Panvini, he lost
the tiara not from national or political jealousy, but because he refused
an uncanonical compact : Bes ad Bessa/rionem, twin senatus principem
senem doctrina et vita integritate cUmssvnvum, specta/re videbatur. Quern
UrsimLS ohtvnendipontificatus spe depoiita, Mantuarms, CancelloHtu con-
venientes eertis siib conditiordbus pontificatvm se ei daturos poUicitisunt,
Quumque Ule se ea ratione pontificem creanri velle pemegasset, ut scilicet
paoto oMquo intercedente papatum obtineret, illi, intempestivam senis
severitatem stamaohati, ad Cardinalem Sancti Petri ad Vincula, Magis-
trum Fra/n/Ascum Samonensem, stmt corwersi, vvrum doctrina prcsstantissi-
mum. In a passage apparently inspired by aversion for the irreligious
renaissance, Savonarola is called *the most sincere man amongst the
Italians of the time.' It is invidious to disparage a man whose faith
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 579
was strong enough to resist authority both in church and state, and
who impressed a doctrine which was newer if not more true then than
now, that an awakened conscience must be traced and proved in public
as much as in private life, so that a zealous priest is, normally, a zealous
politician. And it may be that the shrill utterance of opportune prophecy
is not always inconsistent with integrity. But the man who described in
the pulpit his mission from Florence to heaven, and what he heard there,
and afterwards explained that this was all a trope, cannot well be pro-
nounced perfectly sincere on any hypothesis of sanity. How fsa the plea
of partial insanity, which is gaining ground in society, may serve for the
interpretation of history, is a problem which should commend itself to a
writer so slow to use hard words and to associate doltis and culpa. Mr.
Greighton describes the constitution of Julius against simony as a bold
measure, showing a strong sense of the need of amendment. But he
speaks of it as an incident in the annals of the year, a feature in the por-
trait of a pope, a plant sprung from no buried root. The prohibition
of bribery at conclaves was old in the law of the church. Four hundred
and sixty years before, one of the popes wrote that he had been raised
to the papal throne in place of three others, deposed for bribery — explosis
trihus illis, quihus nomen pwpattcs rapina dederat. The rising against
Alexander YI, the coalition between Julian and Savonarola to eject him,
would hardly be intelligible if the law against simony had been no more
than an abrupt innovation. It is not quite accurate to say that the first
care of the cardinals on the death of Julius was to lay hands on the
treasure which he left behind. The Venetian envoy wrote 25 Feb. : Alcuni
Ca/rdinali volcano partir questo tesoro tra tutti It Gardinali, tamen U altri
non hanno voluto, et si riserverd al novo Pontefice. On 2 March he adds :
Han/no Pratto li Cardinali di Castello ducati 80,000 ; et perche U Coat-
dinali die non hanno intrada ducati 600 per uno, Juldo fo una constitu-
tion di da/rli di danaH del Papato fin a quella somma, perhdse li dard
perlio se. The letter of the protonotary Marcello from which the dubious
words are cited — siche pa/rtivano due. 120,000 tra Ihoro — goes on to say
that they got less than this. The election of Leo X is told with the aid
of extracts from Paris de Grassis ; but neither text nor note speaks of the
capitulations in which the future pope pledged himself to revoke, under
pain of excommunication, the sale of indulgences for the fabric of St.
Peter's. ^' 'Promittet, iurabit^ et vovebit, statim post assumptionem stuim
omnes bt singular indulgentias revocare fratrihus Sancti Frandsci ordinis
minoru^^prp^^ fahrica Sancti Petri concessas, sub qudbtisvis verborum
formis, eisque mandabit, sub excomrmmicationis latce sententice pcena, ne
illis ulh modo utantur. The terms of this covenant are not very com-
prehensive, yet they should possess some significance for one who thinks
that a pope weak enough to keep an oath taken in conclave would betray his
trust. They show that Rome was in some measure aware of present evil
and impendhig danger ; and that the refusal of remedy and precaution was
not due to the corruption of courtiers, but to the plenitude of sovereignty.
Although it is not easy to detect a wrong quotation, a taiae infer-
ence, or an unjust judgment in these records of discredited popes, who-
ever consults them for the key to the coming Eeformation will go away
conscious of things left out and replenished with more political than
p p 2
Digitized by
Google
580 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
religious secrets. He will know by what means the papacy, borne
on the stormy tide of absolutism which opens modem history, esta-
blished an independent state on the subjugation of Italy. But the
marrow of things does not lie in the maldng of a distinct principality^
or in the price paid for it, or in the means by which its makers wrought.
Other causes changed the axis of the world. Within the folds of tem-
poral monarchy an ecclesiastical process was going on of more concern to
us than the possession or the partition of Italy. De Maistre*s argument
that those who deem absolutism legitimate in the state have no foothold
to resist it in the church, had been proclaimed already by a writer
favourably known to Mr. Creighton : Nemo est tarn parva urhis dominus,
qui a se appellariferat : et nos Papain appellationi subiectum dicemus ?
At si me, ais, Pontifex indigne premit, quid ogam ? Bedi ad eum
iupplex; ora, onus levet. At si rogatus, interpellatus nolit svJroemre
misero, quid ogam? Quid agis, uhi tuus te princeps sacularis urget f
Feroffn, dices, nam aliud nullum est remedium. Et hie ergo feraa !
The miscarriage of reform left the holy see on a solitary height never
reached before. It was followed by indifference and despair, by patient
watching for a new departure, by helpless schemes to push philosophy
across the margin exposed by the religious ebb. We are familiar
with the antipathy of Machiavelli and the banter of Erasmus; but
the primary fact in the papal economy of that age is not the manifold
and ineffective opposition, but the positive strengthening of authority and
its claims. The change is marked by the extremity of adulation which
came in about the time of Alexander. He is semideus, deus alter in
terris, and, in poetry, simply deu^. The belief that a soul might be
rescued from purgatory for a few coppers, and the sudden expansion
of the dispensing power, facts that alienated Germany and England,
throve naturally in this atmosphere ; and between the parallel and con-
temporaneous growth of the twin monarchies a close and constant con-
nexion prevails. From that last phase of medieval society to modem,
there could be no evolution. But Mr. Creighton's second title is * The
Italian Princes.' He describes the things that vary rather than the things
that endure. We see the successive acts, the passing figures, the tran-
sitory forms, to which the spiritual element imparts an occasional relish ;
but we see little of the impersonal force behind. The system, the idea,
is masked by a crowd of ingenious picturesque and unedifying characters,
who exhibit the springs of Italian politics more truly than the solemn
realities of the church. We are seldom face to face with the institution.
Very rarely indeed we are sent to the * Bullarium Magnum ; ' but that work,
unwieldy as it is, contains an infinitesimal proportion of the acts of
the medieval pontiffs. The inner mind of the papacy has to be perused
through many other collections pertaining to the several countries,
churches, and religious orders ; and these are so voluminous that three
large folios are filled with the bulls that belong to St. Peter's alone. By
giving us life and action for thought and law, Mr. Creighton lifts an
enormous burden. The issues which he has so feur deliberately avoided
will force their way to the front when he reaches the commission given by
Leo to the master of the sacred palace, Cajetan's expedition into Germany,
and the pilgrimage of Eck to Eome. Without reversing his views, or
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 581
modifying any statement, lie has yet to disclose the reason, deeper and
more interior than the worldliness, ignorance, and corruption of eccle-
siastics, which compelled the new life of nations to begin by a convulsion.
Acton.
CfeecMchte Ka/rls V. Yon Hebmann Baumgabten. Zweiter Band,
erste HSJfte. (Stuttgart : Cotta. 1886.)
The second instalment of Professor Baumgarten*s history of Charles V
confirms the impression created by the first, that the work as a whole is
unlikely to accomplish the author's design of presenting his readers in a
lucid form with the substantial results of recent historical researches con-
cerning his subject. In his first volume he had to tell the obscurest part
of his story — that part of the life of Charles V in which the young
sovereign neither knew his own mind nor can fairly be said to have been
his own master. The present volume finds him free from the control of
Chidvres, whose influence was by no means equalled by that of Guttinara,
and engaged in his first great struggle with the rival whose attempt to
defeat his hopes of the imperial crown had so utterly coUapsed. The
present half- volume accompanies this struggle to its dramatic close at
Pavia — a brilliant success which rescued the emperor from more diffi-
culties than he cared to confess even to his council. ' Do not think,'
he had said rather more than two months before, ' that I nowadays tell
everything to the council. To be sure, so long as Chi^vres lived, he
guided me ; would to God that he were still alive, for I perceive that he
was wise.* But in point of fact nothing is more apparent from these
pages than the rapid growth, with the emperor's political insight, of his
determination to choose his course for himself. Though in the narrative
here given of the relations between the emperor and his ' Master Adrian '
after the latter had been elevated to the papacy there is nothing precisely
new, yet I cannot recall any more complete and at the same time better
balanced account of the disappointments which, rather from the force
of circumstances than from any diminution of their mutual goodwill,
pupil and tutor caused to one another. At the same time, the emperor
was clumsily served at Rome, and the attempt to impose a particular line
of action upon the friendly pontiff, without any regard either for his
position or for his point of view, might have ended in something worse
than the delay of his alliance. The league which Adrian VI actually
"brought about just before his death was of no real use to the emperor ;
and with the exception of ten thousand ducats sent to the army by the
pope on one occasion it may be questioned whether the emperor ever
derived any solid advantage from the famous conclave of which he and
his ambassador so vaingloriously pretended to have secured the unex-
pected issue. Yet in the transactions between the pair Charles had
at least the final satisfaction of inducing the pope to abandon the pacific
policy which had seemed to him part of his pontifical task ; and from this
point of view Adrian VI lived just long enough, as Baumgarten severely
says, to sink down almost to the level of Leo X. The truth of this censure
by no means detracts from the tragic pathos of the reign of the last German
pope.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
582 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
Professor Baumgarten, who belongs to a school of historians single-
mindedly intent upon representing the events of history * as they really
were,' sets a good example of candour in confessing, with regard to the
personal administration of Spain by Charles, which began in 1522, that
he is acquainted with no evidence of importance concerning it. He
deserves even more credit for promptly correcting in another note an
unfounded statement into which he was led in his first volume, and ac-
cording to which Charles as early as the beginning of October 1520, at
Louvain, issued a mandate against Luther. No such proclamation, he
now allows, was issued for the Netherlands till the following March.
A. W. Ward.
The Benaissance in Italy : the CathoUc Beaction. By John Addington
Stmonds. 2 volumes. (London : Smith k Elder. 1887.)
Mb. Symonds is to be congratulated on having brought to a successful
termination his important work on the Italian Benaissance. Its merits
as a happy mixture of erudition and brilliant writing have been already
sufficiently recognised ; more so than the difficulties which beset a writer
who aims at giving a picture of the culture of an age in its many-sided
development. When we survey Mr. Symonds' book as a whole we see
how skilfully he has overcome these difficulties by keeping a firm grasp
upon the literary side of his subject and illustrating it from contemporary
life and various forms of artistic expression. Mr. Symonds is primarily
a literary historian, and the literary criticism contained in his fourth and
fifth volumes has a value of its own independent of the contents of the
rest. It is true that the first volume, ' The Age of the Despots,* does not
add much to Burckhardt's ' Cultur der Benaissance ; * nor will the second
volume, * The Bevival of Learning,' take the place of Voigt's * Wieder-
belebung des classischen Alterthums ; ' but the third volume, ' The Fine
Arts,' is the best general sketch which has yet been written of the
development of Italian art in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries ;
while in the fourth and fifth volumes on ' Italian Literature ' Mr. Symonda
enters upon a field which is pecuharly his own, and these volumes consti-
tute the kernel of his book.
The difficulties which beset Mr. Symonds' path culminate in the last
two volumes on *The Catholic Beaction.' If it is difficult to write
literary history in its relation to contemporary life, the difficulties increase
when a phase of literature comes to an end, and Mr. Symonds' concluding
volumes contain more disputable matter than all his previous ones together^
and we doubt if it was necessary for his subject that he should enter so
largely on political considerations. It was enough to show that the
movement of the Benaissance died away in Italy without trying to prove
that it was stifled. We may deplore the catholic reaction without holding
it responsible for the decay of Italian literature, or rather we may feel
doubtful if the right of the catholic church to restore a shattered society
on its ancient lines was not as good as the claim of the Benaissance to be
allowed to lead society into still further disintegration. The catholic
reaction was the result of a recognition of past failure, and its fault was
that it used repressive measures to bring back a past which was impos-
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 68S
sible and which was not even rightly understood. About the failure there
was no doubt, and the papacy might justly attribute much of this failure
to the wanton spirit of the Italian Benaissance, which had been only too
successful in asserting its principles and carrying them into the domains
of politics. The papacy had encouraged it, petted it, and accepted it as
an ally, to its own cost. If the popes had not been so thoroughly im-
pregnated with the Italian spirit, if Leo X had been more of a theologian,
and if his cardinals had been more eminent for learning than for dexterity,
the lines of Oerman thought would not have diverged so widely and the
questions raised by Luther might have met with more reasonable treat-
ment. Similarly in poHtics the Renaissance had destroyed the spirit of
Italian patriotism, had enervated the Italian mind, and almost destroyed
Italian morals ; and in all these exploits could count upon the forbearance
and often upon the co-operation of the papacy, which seemed semi-
paganised by its allurements. It is only fair to observe that if the
Renaissance suffered at the hands of the papacy in the middle of the
sixteenth century, the papacy had suffered in the beginning of the
century from its too ready acquiescence in the seductive teaching where-
with the Renaissance beguiled Italy to its ruin.
Of course this view rests upon the assumption that the Renaissance
is to be regarded as a body of doctrine, a system of life and conduct, not
merely a series of literary and artistic products. Now two of Mr.
Symonds' previous volumes have dealt with the Renaissance in the larger
sense, and three have dealt with it in the smaller sense ; and he seems in
these last volumes to be willing to regard it in the smaller sense just
where the larger sense becomes especially necessary. For the catholic
reaction did not try to put down literature or art as such, but only
teaching which it considered erroneous and art which it held to be
meretricious ; it fought against a view of life which it had tolerated
till actual facts showed its dangers. Mr. Symonds denounces the im-
morality of life under the catholic reaction, and collects an abundant
supply of celebrated cases of vile offences. But are these examples of the
state of society which the catholic reaction produced, or of the state of
society which the catholic reaction was trying to improve ? The stories
of Vittoria Accoramboni and the rest are told in greater detail than the
misdeeds of Gismondo Malatesta and others a century before ; but the
greater attention which they attracted is a sign that men's consciences
were somewhat more awake. The depravity of morals, the heedlessness
of human life, the boundless self-assertion of men who regarded them-
selves as privileged, these were all legacies of the Renaissance. The
crimes of the Caraffa are notorious because they were admitted and were
punished; the crimes of Cesare Borgia are obscure because no one
thought very seriously about them. Of course the methods adopted by
the catholic reaction were neither wise nor right, and were not likely to
be really successful ; but that is no reason why they should bear more
blame than they deserve, or why the Benaissance should have a spurious
halo of martyrdom thrown over its last days.
Indeed it is impossible not to feel that Mr. Symonds' point of view
is somewhat wavering, that he is not quite clear after all whether the
Benaissance was stifled or died a natural death. Then he says (i. 70) :
Digitized by
Google
584 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
* Hamanism was sinking into pedantry and academic erudition. Painting
and sculpture tended towards a kind of empty mannerism. The main
motives supplied to art by medieval traditions and humanistic enthusiasm
were worked out. It was not possible to advance farther on the old lines.*
Yet he speaks later (i. 825) of the catholic reaction as ' checking the tide
of national energy in fall flow/ and this is his prevailing view, for which
we fiEdl to find any real justification. The Italians of the later part of the
sixteenth century inherited the temper of the Renaissance, but their
intellectual attitude bore the marks of the catholic revival. What Mr«
Symonds says of Tasso is true in a way of all the Italians of that period :
' As an artist he belonged to the old order which was passing, as a
Christian to the new order which was emerging.' It may seem a paradox
to say that if the Renaissance had been left to go its own way in Italy it
would have produced nothing more ; whereas the impulse given by
revived Catholicism produced Tasso, Bruno, and 8arpi, in an age which
had not yet lost its sympathy with Ariosto, Ficino, and Machiavelli.
Thus we think that Mr. Symonds has wished to round off his book too
completely, and give a dramatic termination to what was really a process
of decay. It may be argued that the catholic reaction prolonged rather
than precipitated this decay ; but Mr. Symonds has not taken that possi-
bility into consideration. One interesting aspect of the Italian mind he
has omitted — its difficulty in surviving outside Italy, its powerlessness to
adapt itself to other than Italian modes of thought. The Italian exiles
and refugees could find no abiding place in northern Europe. Even the
greatest of them, Giordano Bruno, struck men as a charlatan, and so late
as the days of Marco Antomo de Dominis it was found impossible to
co-ordinate an Italian refugee with any known system. The marks of
the Benaissance went deep into the national mind, and its influence was
more abiding than even Mr. Symonds allows.
We have confined ourselves to the general historical aspect of Mr.
Symonds* last volumes. The literary and artistic criticism which it con-
tains is quite up to Mr. Symonds* former level. His treatment of Tasso
is excellent, and his chapter on Giordano Bruno is the result of real
research. M. Crbighton.
Une Invasion Prussienne en Hollande en 1787. Par Piebre db Witt.
(Paris : Plon, Nourrit et Cie. 1886.)
Thb revolution which Prussian arms effected in Holland in 1787 is an
episode in European history which has rather fallen into oblivion, though
it made a great stir at the time. It occurred in that period between the
death of Frederick the Great and the outbreak of the French revolution
which has been comparatively neglected by historians, but which deserves
the special study of any one who wishes to understand the relations of
the European powers during the great convulsion that followed. The
history of the United Provinces also merits attention, as showing how
long an ill-constructed federation can continue to exist. It is charac-
terised by a consistency in the attitude of political parties which can
hardly be paralleled in any other country of Europe. From the first
foundation of the union by William the Silent, the power of the house
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 585
of Orange had been regarded with jealousy by the wealthy burghers, who
looked upon the state as a republic, and upon the stadtholder as its
* first servant.' Almost invariably the ' patriots/ as the oligarchical
party called themselves, relied for support upon France, while the English
aUiance was the chief bulwark of the princes of Orange. The strength
of the patriots lay in the wealth and resources of Holland, which fully
equalled those of the other six provinces combined. There are thus three
main bases of party relations : (1) the lower orders idolise the princes of
Orange as the founders of their liberties and as their natural protectors
against the arrogance of the burghers ; (2) the six provinces and * the
generality ' are inclined to take the same side out of jealousy of Holland ;
(8) the commercial interests of the wealthy citizens urge them into
hostility to England and friendship with France.
These feelings, which are the key to Dutch history in the seventeenth
century, were equally powerful in the eighteenth. The stadtholdership,
which had been in abeyance since the death of WiUiam UI, was restored
in 1747, and was made hereditary both for males and females. This
arrangement was confirmed in 1766. William IV, raised to power during
a French invasion, married George H's daughter Anne, who acted as
regent during the minority of their son, William V. The connexion with
England during this period was so close, that the lesser state appeared
<mly as a sateUite of its more powerful neighbour. The first alteration
of this state of things was effected by a skilful French diplomatist, M. de
la Vauguyon, who came as envoy to the Hague in 1776. He succeeded
in reorganising the oligarchical party, which speedily obtained such pre-
ponderance, that the Dutch in 1779 were involved in the general coali-
tion against England which had arisen during the war with the American
colonies. The half-hearted conduct of Wilham V in the war, and the
disasters which befell the Dutch during its course, excited the hostile
party to active measures against the stadtholder. A plan was formed to
abolish the office once more, or at least to deprive it of so many of its
prerogatives that its holder should be completely powerless. This met
with encouragement from France, where Vergennes hoped to make the
same use of the United Provinces as he had done of the American
colonies. The success of the ' patriots * would establish French influence
on a permanent footing, and would enable France at once to threaten
England and to command the Austrian Netherlands. Vergennes'
schemes were aided by the demands put forward by Joseph 11 for the
opening of the Scheldt and the cession of Maestricht. French mediation
was successful in inducing the emperor to content himself with a pecu-
niary bribe, and a close aUiance was formed between France and the
States-General. The ' patriots ' were encouraged by this to strike their
first blow by depriving the stadtholder of the command of the garrison
at the Hague.
The task of opposing these schemes and of maintaining English
interests in a country with which we had so long been closely connected
was undertaken by Sir James Harris, afterwards the first Lord Malmes-
bury, and one of the boldest diplomatists England has ever produced.
He set himself to revive the Orange party, which had been terrified into
impotence ; to work upon the jealousy which the other provinces, notably
Digitized by
Google
686 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
Zealand, felt towards Holland ; and to enlist on the same side a third
state which for the first time had an intimate interest in Dutch affairs.
William V had married Wilhelmina, a niece of Frederick the Great, and
thus Prussia might naturally be expected to support the failing cause of the
stadtholder. But Frederick the Great had conceived a bitter hatred
against England, and was eager to cement his alliance with France in
order to thwart the schemes of Joseph 11 for exchanging the Netherlands
for Bavaria. The sacrifice of the stadtholder was hardly too high a price
to pay for the attainment of this end, and the Prussian king advised
William V to make no opposition to France. Under these circumstances
Sir James Harris found his task almost impossible. The stadtholder
himself was incapable, and at the same time so jealous of the superior
abilities of his wife, that * he would not even go to Paradise by her infiu-
enoe.' The government of Pitt was not inclined to risk the chance of
going to war, and it was impossible to urge the Orange party to take
active measures without pledging the honour of England to back them
up. From this dilemma he was saved by the death of Frederick the
Great. Frederick William H was naturally willing to support the cause
of his sister, and though a strong French party existed in Berlin, Hertz-
berg was not indisposed to come to an understanding with England.
For a long time diplomatic intrigues continued without coming to any
conclusion. The steps taken by William Y to restore his authority in
Gelderland had given rise to a civil war, and it was felt that the first
attempt of a foreign power to interfere might kindle a general confla-
gration. At last the hesitation of Prussia was overcome by an insult
offered to Wilhelmina, whom the patriot troops arrested on her way from
Nymegen to the Hague. Frederick William 11 demanded satisfaction,
and on its being refused he ordered the duke of Brunswick to advance
from Wesel. England promised assistance in case France thought fit
to resent the attack upon her allies. The so-called invasion was little
more than a military parade, and the fall of Amsterdam completed the
success of an enterprise which had the goodwill of a majority of the
population. France made no attempt. to gratify the hopes which the
patriots had based upon her support. The death of Vergennes had left
the control of foreign affairs to the feeble hands of Louis XVI and
Montmorin. The duke of Brunswick himself acknowledged that if the
camp at Givet, of which the French talked so much, had really been
formed, his troops would never have crossed the frontier. The restora-
tion of the authority of the stadtholder was a terrible blow to the prestige
of the French monarchy, which was already tottering to its downfall.
M, de Witt, who bears a name memorable in Dutch history, and
whose grandfather played his part in the great struggle, has written a
very interesting narrative of these events. He has the happy knack of
letting his authorities tell the story in their own words, without being
tedious and without presenting only one side of the question. He draws
most of his information from the ' Diaries and Correspondence of the
Earl of Malmesbury,' but has supplemented them by very pertinent
quotations from the French archives. Though naturally inclined to the
side of the patriots and of France, he has not allowed himself to be led
astray by any more misleading form of partiality than regret. It would.
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 687
in fact, be difficult to feel any enthusiastic admiration for the three pen-
sionaries, who gave more time to gluttony and tobacco than to the conside-
ration of affairs ; or for M. de V6rac, the successor of De la Vauguyon, who
spent in corruption the money which he ought to have devoted to the
payment of his household expenses ; or for the Bhingrave of Salm, the
youthful debauchee whose courage was no match for his vices, and who
sought in militant pohtics a consolation for his failure as a man of
fashion. Sir James Harris, even to an opponent, is a more reputable
personage than any of these.
On foreign relations and diplomacy, M. de Witt is both clear and full*
The defect of his book, at any rate for an English, and we should imagine
for a French, reader, is that he takes too much Imowledge for granted of
the domestic history of the United Provinces. He makes it perfectly
clear why England, France, and Prussia acted as they did, but he leaves
us in great obscurity as to why the patriots and the Orange partisans
were so eager in pursuit of their respective objects. Lord Malmesbury's
correspondence throws far more light upon the motives and conduct of
the Dutch parties than M. de Witt does, and we cannot help thinking
that the narrative of diplomatic intrigues might have been most usefully
supplemented by a fuller survey of internal politics. For this we could
well have sacrificed some of the amusing, if unedifying, anecdotes of the
amours with which Frederick William II varied the monotony of studying
the precepts and dogmas of the illuminati of BerHn. Apart from this
error of omission, we have no fault to find with M. de Witt's little book,
which we have read with equal pleasure and instruction. The preface
enables him to give to a purely historical narrative the flavour of a
political pamphlet. France is to be warned by the errors of a century
ago, that she may avoid the folly of allowing Prussia to effect a second
and more permanent intervention in the affairs of Holland. The true
patriots of the present day are to seek assistance in the same quarter as
their miscalled predecessors of the same name, and this time they are
not to be feebly betrayed at the last moment. B. LooaE.
The English in America. The Puritan Colonies.
By J. A. Doyle, M.A. 2 vols. (London : Longmana 1887.)
In 1869 the Arnold Prize at Oxford was awarded to Mr. J. A. Doyle
for an essay on * The American Colonies previous to the Declaration of
Independence.' The theme proved interesting to the essayist, and in 1882
he put forth the first instalment of a larger work on the same general
subject. This volume, dealing more especially with Virginia and the
southern colonies, was well received by historical students in America,
mainly on account of the admirable use its author made of his oppor-
tunities for study and research in the English Becord Office. Four years
have since elapsed, and Mr. Doyle again comes before us as a candidate
for criticism. This time he has little advantage over his predecessors in
the same field, except in so far as the fact of not being a New Englander
may be considered an advantage. In many ways it is a great advantage.
It is impossible, as it is undesirable, for a New Englander to divest
himself of all the prejudices of his environment. There are many things
Digitized by
Qoo^^
688 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
in the early history of the Puritan colonies which have not yet ceased to
be matters of dispute between the historical students of the different
states, and even of different towns in the same state. Unaffected by such
petty considerations, Mr. Doyle has been able to see and judge events in
their true relations to each other and to the whole course of New England
history. He has also been able to make certain statements as to the
relative importance of certain events which no New Englander could have
made without being at once accused of harshness and partiality. But
this impartiality as between American writers is not Mr. Doyle*s only or
chief claim to recognition from Americans. It was easy for him to avoid
taking sides with one party or another while both were Puritans. But
he has succeeded in the far more difficult task of divesting himself to a
very considerable extent of the prejudices which must beset an English-
man and a member of the English church when treating of the motives
and actions of those Englishmen who left their homes and church to
establish a different order of things on the other side of the Atlantic. At
times one can see that his sympathies are not with the Puritans. But
his prejudices are never allowed to cloud his judgment. In his criticisms
of men and measures he has shown a singularly fair and scholarly spirit,
and his estimates of the founders of Massachusetts are seldom at variance
with those of the best American students of the present time. Indeed, it
is curious to note that the most hostile criticisms of the men of olden
time have come from their descendants. Mr. Doyle's work, therefore, as
the first conscientious and intelligent attempt on the part of an English
student to investigate and judge the actions of those Englishmen who
left their homes long ago to found a new England on the western
continent deserves, and we doubt not will obtain, the heartiest recogni-
tion in New England.
In respect to his material, our author has had little advantage, as we
have said, over his predecessors in the same field. Indeed, no one has
paid a greater tribute to the researches of American students than
Mr. Doyle. In one place he says : ' I have often, in the course of this
work, differed from the late Mr. Palfrey, sometimes expUcitly, oftener by
implication. It is but fair that I should confirm, as I can from my own
experience, the laborious and exhaustive care with which he went through
the documents of this date in the Becord Office.' In another place he
calls the ' Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society ' ' a mine of
valuable information.' This society was founded as long ago as 1794.
Its publications, including such well-known works as Winthrop's ' History
of New England ' and Bradford's * Plymouth,' now number eighty-two
volumes. The ' Collections ' are constantly cited by Mr. Doyle, while he
scarcely ever refers to the ' Proceedings.' This is to be regretted, as the
latter series, now comprising twenty-two volumes, contains documents
and papers second only in importance to those printed in the ' Collections,'
besides a mass of bibliographical information that would have been of
great service to our author. In addition to this vast storehouse, historical
societies in the other New England states have added their contribu-
tions, while the American Antiquarian Society, with its headquarters
at Worcester, Massachusetts, has printed, under the title of ' Archaeologia
Americana,' documents to which Mr. Doyle constantly refers. Then, too»
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 589
a publishing society named in honour of the annalist Prince has not
been idle. Many of its publications deal with events occurring outside of
New England. Others, like the ' Andros Tracts ' and Mr. G. F. Adams*s
edition of Morton's 'New English Canaan,' are of extreme value*
Nor have the New England states and municipalities been idle. The
Massachusetts and Plymouth records have been printed by the state of
Massachusetts, and the records of the other states have in almost every
case been printed at public expense. The same is tru^ of the towns and
municipalities ; and from the fifteen volumes of the Boston Becord Com-
mission down to the pamphlet containing, perhaps, only a reprint of the
earliest page of the town-book, there is hardly a town whose records in
one form or another are not, partially at least, accessible to the inquiring
historian. Considering these things, it is not surprising that Mr. Doyle
should have found little that is new. On the other hand, the fact that
he has been able to obtain access to so much of this material in England
is not only surprising, but exceedingly gratifying, to all New Englanders*
Nevertheless we are extremely sorry that Mr. Doyle did i^ot see his way
clear to visit the country whose history he was studying, if even for a few
months. He then would not, in all likelihood, have overlooked certain
important authorities, and his ideas as to geography and the points of the
compass would have been not so strangely at variance with the truth.
Passing over the attempted colonisation of Gosnold, Mr. Doyle appa-
rently dates the beginning of the English occupation of New England
from the ill-fated attempt of the Pophamites to plant a colony at the
mouth of the Sagadahoc, or Kennebec river, as it is now called. Both
attempts were failures, and had no influence on the course of history,
except in so far as the disastrous ending of the Popham settlement
deterred other Englishmen from settling on the coast. No New Eng-
landers trace their descent from the Pophamites. The Pilgrim colonisa-
tion was the first to bear any tangible results. If we go behind that, we
must date the beginning of English occupation north of the Chesapeake
Bay from the coming of Gosnold. In other respects our author's account
of the Popham colony is not fortunate. A slip of the pen has made him
say that the fort at Sabino was destroyed by fire, when it was a storehouse
within the fort that was so destroyed. The fort was standing when the
French, in their desire to expel the intruders, visited the place the next
summer. In fact, Mr. Doyle nowhere refers to the main authority for this
abortive attempt, namely, the well-known * Voyage to Sagadahoc,' which
undoubtedly formed the basis of Strachey's account, on which our author
relies. It is printed, with nearly everything else known about the colony,
in the eighteenth volume of the ' Proceedings of the Massachusetts Histo-
rical Society.' One of the main promoters of this unhappy scheme was
Sir Ferdinando Gorges. In after years he was the persistent enemy of the
Massachusetts people, and as such has received scant justice at the hands
of New England writers. It may well be asked, however, whether
Mr. Doyle has not gone too far in the other direction. This may not be
the case, indeed, with regard to Gorges' relations to American colonisa-
tion ; but with regard to his actions during Essex's ill-fated attempt and
subsequent trial, are Gorges' actions so creditable as our author would
have us believe ? We are incUned to think not
Digitized by
Google
690 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
As to the comparative merits of the different Puritan settlements,
Mr. Doyle sees more clearly than a New Englander can. Concerning the
Plymouth colony he says : ' As &r as the romance of its circumstances
and the personal heroism of its leaders goes, the settlement at Plymouth,
beyond a doubt, must rank higher than that of Massachusetts.' In
another place, however, he remarks with equal truth : * If the Plymouth
settlement had never been made, the political life of New England would
in all probabihty have taken the same form and run the same course as
it did.' His account of the Pilgrim settlement is excellent, though he
has made some blunders in detail, especially with regard to the route of
the ever famous exploring party. This may have arisen from his having
used ' Mourt's Belation ' only in the form given by Young, and not in the
scholarly edition of Henry M. Dexter. For the rest he has relied mainly
on Bradford's history. This is as it should be. But what useful purpose
was subserved by always citing that work by the pagination of the manu-
script ? The MS. is accessible to very few, and Mr. Doyle's quotations can
be verified in America only by reference to the one edition ever printed. It
is true that Mr. Deane, who edited this edition, has given the MS. pagina-
tion in the text, but it is not always easy to pick out a number in
brackets. Very possibly Mr. Doyle may have used the original. At all
events, his account of the discovery and printing of this manuscript is so
remarkable that we may be pardoned for giving it a moment's attention.
On page 15 he writes : * Bradford's history remained in manuscript till
the present century. It had been given up as lost, but was discovered by
Mr. Young about 1840, and has been edited and published by Mr. Charles
Deane in 1856, as the third volume of the fourth series of the " Massa-
chusetts Historical Collection." ' Now the history of this MS. was fully
set forth by Mr. Winsor in the nineteenth volume of the ' Proceedings of
the Massachusetts Historical Society,' and is briefly as follows. As long ago
as 1702 a few extracts from it were printed by Mather in his ' Magnalia.'
Later, Prince made a careful use of it in his annals, published in 1786.
Prince lodged the manuscript volume in the old South Meeting-house in
Boston. During the British occupation of that town it disappeared. In
1844 Dr. Samuel Wilberforce, then bishop of Oxford, published a * His-
tory of the Protestant Episcopal Church in America.' In this work
quotations were made from a ' Manuscript History of the Plantation at
Plymouth ... in the Fulham Library.' Four years later the Rev.
J. 8. M. Anderson, in his • History of the Colonial Church,' distinctly
referred to * Bradford's Manuscript History of Plymouth Colony, . . .
now in the possession of the bishop of London.' Singularly enough, it
was not until 1855 that these allusions attracted the notice of an
American historical student, Mr. J. W. Thornton, who disclosed his
suspicions to Mr. Barry, and he in turn notified Mr. Deane. In all this
Young had no hand. Indeed, at the time of this discovery of the manu-
script he was in his grave.
Another, though more pardonable, error of the same kind is in the
same note. After speaking of Prince's ' Chronological History of New
England,' or ' Annals,' our author says : ' The whole of Prince's work
was edited by Mr. Drake, and published in 1852. My references are to
this edition.' Now Mr. Drake never edited Prince's 'Annals.' That
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 591
was done by Nathan Hale, whose edition was published at Boston in
1826. Mr. Drake, in 1856, having some sheets of this work on his
hands, re-issued it with a new title-page and with a memoir of Prince
and some plates inserted.
Actuated no doubt by perfectly proper motives, Mr. Palfrey in his
* History of New England ' asserted that the Massachusetts Bay Company
obtained a large tract of territory in America, on which ' it was designed
to place a colony which should be a refuge for civil and religious freedom.'
Probably nothing was &rther from the minds of the founders of Massa-
chusetts. This sentence of the leading historian of New England has
done incalculable harm. It has brought down hostile criticism upon the
Puritans for acts that, had their true motives been understood, would
have passed unquestioned. Mr. Quincy well set forth their true purpose
in his address on the * Second Century of Boston.' He said : * They [the
Massachusetts colonists] did not cross the Atlantic on a crusade in behalf
of the rights of mankind in general, but in support of their own rights
and liberties.' The same thing has been even better said by Mr. Doyle
in a passage which shows how completely he has familiarised himself
with his subject. He says : ' The founders of Massachusetts were many
of them rich men, furnished with ability, dwelling peaceably in their
habitations, who forsook the good things of the world to win for them-
selves and their children a home free from its corruptions. The narrow-
ness of their aims and measures must often forbid our sympathy, or even
awake our indignation ; it should never blind us to the greatness of their
undertaking.' In judging their motives and intentions one is invariably
brought face to face with the question. Did the grantees of the Massa-
chusetts Charter intend to transfer the government of the company to
Massachusetts ? Professor Joel Parker many years ago, reasoning on the
evidence furnished by the charter itself, asserted that such a transfer was
designed. A most singular confirmation of his view has been brought
to light by our author. John Winthrop, in a pamphlet on Government
printed in R. C. Winthrop's * Life of John Winthrop,' says : * It being the
manner for such as procured patents for Virginia, Bermudas, and the
West Indies to keep the chief government in the hands of the company
residing in England (and so this was intended), and with great difficulty
we got it abscinded.' Of course this may refer to the order of the com-
pany transferring the charter. But we are inclined to agree with Mr.
Doyle that this ' is a full answer to those who held that in transferring
the government to America the patentees broke faith with the crown.'
In his account of Massachusetts Mr. Doyle has necessarily relied
on Winthrop's 'History.' As to the great governor himself he says:
' Winthrop was indeed Wootton's perfect man, *' whose passions not his
masters are." No American, not even Winthrop's descendants, who have
naturally felt a justifiable pride in their ancestor, have ever gone &rther
than that But Mr. Doyle is not always so full of praise. The other
early governors are dealt with nearly as judiciously, though not so kindly.
For Dudley he seldom has a pleasant word, while in Endicott he sees
the ' embodiment of aU that was narrowest and sternest in Puritanism.'
This is fEkir enough. But as he goes on, his judgment of Endicott grows
severer. On a later page he calls him ' that cruel and narrow-minded
Digitized by
Google
692 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
man/ and still farther on he declares that 'intolerance and brutalitj
were now enthroned at Boston, personified in the governor, John
Endicott.' Now ' brutaUty ' is a strong word. We confess that many
of Endicott^s actions were not to onr liking. But we should always
remember that what are charged against him as brutal acts were acts
performed in what his conscience told him was the rightful discharge of
his duty.
If his admiration of Winthrop as a man may seem to be carried to
an extreme, his judgment of Winthrop's * History of New England ' is
undoubtedly correct. He says : ' It is professedly a diary or chronicle,
composed without any appearance of literary arrangement or grace. Yet
one lays it down with the feeling that the whole internal life of Massa-
chusetts has been disclosed. Nor, when the subject demands it, is there
any lack of that weight and dignity of speech which comes from clearness
and simplicity of mind. And in the whole field of history it would be
hard to name any work, written by one who had taken a leading part in
the events recorded, so free alike from egotism and from the conscious and
ostentatious avoidance of egotism.* Yet it could be wished that he had
relied less on Winthrop and more on the records. It is true that he has
used the ' Colony Eecords ' with the best results. But he seems, on the
other hand, to have overlooked the hardly less important records of the
towns around Boston harbour. The Boston Becord Commission began
to publish its 'Beports' in 1876. Since then it has printed fifteen
volumes. Among them may be mentioned the ' Boston Becords ' from
1684-1769 (six vols.), the * Boston Selectmen's Records,' 1701-1742 (two
vols.), the * Dorchester Records,' 1682-1664, and the * Boston Book of
Possessions,' which is in reality a local Doomsday Book. It is surprising
that one so fond of studying original sources as our author should have
overlooked these. A careful study of them, we are sure, would have
given hini a somewhat different and more accurate idea of ' the internal
life of Massachusetts' than it was possible to derive from Winthrop's
* History.'
In describing the treatment of the Antinomian heretics Mr. Doyle is
not too severe. It may have been a political necessity which led to their
banishment. I am inclined to think it was ; but, be that as it may, he
is none too harsh when he stigmatises the action of the tribunal which
sentenced the heretics ' as a procedure which in its shameless indifference
to the principles of criminal jurisprudence rivalled the worst outrages
under which the English nonconformists had ever suffered.' It is
curious that in this connexion he should describe the subsequent
murder of the head of the Antinomians, Mrs. Hutchinson, as taking
place on Narragansett Bay. In reality, the scene of the massacre was
hundreds of miles from Narragansett Bay, on the shore of the other end
of Long Island Sound.
The map in Mr. Doyle's * Virginia,' Ac, was so very bad that we had
hoped the maps in any future volumes would be decidedly better. We
are sorry to say that this is not the case. Take, for instance, the map
prefixed to vol. i., and supposed to represent New England in 1650.
Leaving out some topographical errors, which are perhaps excusable in
so small a map, it is almost within the bounds of truth to assert that in
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 69»
a map designed to show the extent of the New England colonies there is
not a boundary correctly given. Massachusetts, for example, is given as
extending over Cape Cod, which belonged to Plymouth, while Nantucket
and Martha's Vineyard can hardly be said to have been then within the
jurisdiction of Massachusetts. In the map prefixed to the second volume,
and supposed to show the state of things in 1700, the same boundaries are
assigned to Plymouth which had been nine years before by the ' province
charter ' included within the jurisdiction of Massachusetts. These and
the other errors contained in these maps were at first charitably attributed
to the publishers. But we had not gone isar in the text when we noticed
mistakes occurring so frequently that they could not be attributed to
errors of proof-reading. For instance, besides the one already mentioned,
he calls Connecticut, Ehode Island, and New Haven (not Newhaven, as
it is invariably spelled in this book), the 'colonies south of Cape Cod.'
It would be as correct to speak of Australia as south of the Cape of Good
Hope. Then he says that Guildford is seventeen miles north of Quinni-
piac (New Haven), when it is south and east of that place. Then, too,
Gturdiner's Island, off the north-eastern or eastern end of Long Island,
is given as off the north-western end. We have also noticed many
errors of proof-reading, the oddest being the assertion, in a note to page
870 of vol. i., that there was nothing to * show why the Dartmouth hip
was selected.' Let us hope that in a second edition these blemishes will
disappear. Edwakd Channino.
A Short History of Napoleon the First. By John Robert Sbblby.
(London : Seeley & Co. 1886.)
The First Napoleon: a Sketch, Political and Military. By John
CoDMAN Ropes. (Boston and New York : Houghton, Mifflin, & Co.
1885.)
A CONDENSED biography of Napoleon ought to make the richest and most
interesting volume in profane literature. Frenchmen find it a difficult
book to write, because they feel both the excess and the deficiency of
essential information. The correspondence of the Bonapartes, though
it occupies more than sixty volumes, is mutilated and incomplete.
Materials for an ample supplement are known in France ; a collection of
the emperor's autograph letters was offered for sale in London not long
ago ; and the priceless bundles that passed through Mr. Murray's hands
passed into concealment. The papers of imperial ministers are lost or kept
back. Those of Fouch6 are said to have been burnt at Trieste ; those of
Talleyrand were partially destroyed, and the few readers of his memoirs ,
foretell disappointment. Barras and Sieyds, Cambac^rSs and Caulaincourt,
Mol^ and Pasquier left memoirs which are at least difficult of access to most
people except M. Taine. Some are printed but unpubUshed. The task
maybe fitly undertaken at a distance hymen resolute not to be distracted
by the pursuit of detail or baffled by mysteries that resist inquiry.
Two such lives written in English at the same time are better than
anything of equal compass on the continent. Alike in ability and industry,
they differ widely in the choice of materials and still more in their
conclusions, and so conveniently complete each other. Both are worth
VOL. n. — NO. vn. Q Q
Digitized by
Qoo^^
594 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
reading, apart from the views they are meant to serve. Mr. Seeley's rapid
sketch tells of things not easily found in French books, avoids detail, and
judges austerely. Mr. Eopes, his rival, discourses more on miUtary affairs,
and is not only an admirer but an advocate. We shall not go far wrong
if we take the good of Napoleon from Mr. Hopes, and the bad from Mr.
Seeley. It is difficult to exaggerate either. The American lives afeur
from the temptation of wrongs that cry for vengeance, and pride not yet
appeased. He inherits no part or partnership in the inorganic Europe
which it was Napoleon's mission to destroy, likes the French quite as
much as the EngHsh, and prefers the enhghtened emperor to the Welles-
leys, who called the hberals Jacobins, and supported the Spanish Serviles,
He urges how much he was sinned against, and how much the nations
might have profited by his sway. Canning once said : ' I would not
myself, if I were a rascally Portuguese, or Prussian, or Dutchman, hesitate
one moment to prefer the French ; ' and Mr. Bopes improves this text.
Mr. Seeley surveys from a patriotic elevation the career that did so much
for the expansion of England, and treats it as an episode in the long duel
for the prize of distant empire. A force more constant and irresistible
than human will impels Napoleon to a hopeless struggle with manifest
destiny, and his wars are subsidiary to the supreme national purpose of
crippling England. It is a development of Bapetti's thesis that, in occupy-
ing maritime Europe from the Adriatic to the Baltic, the emperor pursued
the fixed lines of ancient rivalry ; a commentary on the words spoken to
Mol^, that it was the English only that he meant to attack in Bussia ; on
the subtler speech to Schwarzenberg, that he cared for nothing but the
war with England, which all other fighting hindered and retarded ; on the
pithy sentence recorded by MoUien : La France rCa 6tendu ses conquites
que pour enlever des tributaires d VAngleterre, .
The practised observer of history is apparent in many places. The
Constitution Civile is described as the ruin of the revolution ; but the
Concordat is set forth as a contrivance to dissociate the clergy from both
of the preceding orders of things, and make it subserve the new. So close
a student of Marmont could not miss the defect in Napoleon's generalship,
the forward eagerness that would not provide for ill-fortune. But it is a
merit in a biographer of Stein to recognise as he does the prodigious success
of Metternich's ministry during the war of liberation. He is not blinded
by the glare of Bussian snowfields, and knows what Jomini explained long
ago, that the army was destroyed by its commander, and not by the cold.
He does not foil into the extinct error of thinking that the congress of
Vienna was going to pieces when Napoleon escaped ; but he does not make
it clear that the emperor started for France in that belief, and that the
settled concord of Europe was a surprise to him. The spirit of nationality,
the propeller of so much later history, is derived by Mr. Seeley from
the imperial wars ; but he is not careful to distinguish national from
liberal opposition, or the effect of resistance to Napoleon in Spain from
the direct influence upon his Italian countrymen of his political forecast :
L'ltalie est une seule nation. L'unitS de maurs, de langage, de littira-
Pure, doity dans un avenir plus ou moins doign^, rdunir enfin ses habitants
sous un seul gouvemement. — Borne est, sans contredit, la capitale que les
JtaUens choisiront un jour. In other ways he at least does him strict
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 595
justice, showing that the destruction of popular liberties had been the
nation's own act, and that the emperor was continually forced to defend
himself against aggression. More stress might have been laid on the policy
of making Europe pay the deficit of France which Napoleon disclosed
when, in answer to a minister pleading that his finances wanted repose,
he said : Au contraire, elles a' emharrassent ; il leur faut la gtcerre.
His excellent materials would often justify Mr. Seeley in being more
sure of things than he appears ; and when he is not sure he employs pre-
cautions which a compendium ought, if possible, to avoid. He doubts
whether Bonaparte showed any remarkable firmness of character in
Yend6miaire ; whether Camot chose him for the command in Italy ;
whether he bribed Siey^s, as he boasted, with public money. He does not
know whether Monge suggested the expedition to Egypt; whether the
marriage with an archduchess was part of the original plan ; whether the
sudden illness at Pima and the poisoning at Fontainebleau are real;
whether or no the allies resolved upon the march to Paris on 24 March.
Nearly all these things are ascertainable. When there was some hesita-
tion about using force against the rising of Vend^miaire, Bonaparte said :
Attendez-vous que le peuple votes donne la permission de tirer sur hoi ?
The Italian appointment does not rest on the unsupported word of a
Terrorist. La K^veill^re, whose memoirs are an apology for Fructidor
and an attack on the ' Expense & Bailleul,' who reviles Camot for the
favour he enjoyed during the empire, affirms that the nomination was
not the act of Barras. If he could have said that it was not the act of
Camot, he would have said it. We learn from Lavallette that Monge dis-
cussed Egypt, not that he proposed the expedition. Bonaparte is not
our only authority for the gift of public money to SieySs. The other
consul, Roger Ducos, informed Gohier that Siey^s had taken 16,000Z. and
he himself 4,000L, and that the First Consul had said to him : II foAit
gorger ce prStre de biens pour en avoir raison. The Austrian match was
BO little part of the original plan that Napoleon preferred a Russian
grandduchess. Alexander himself directed his thoughts towards Vienna,
and Mettemich had proposed the marriage before the divorce. In February
1810 a French diplomatist wrote to him that Talleyrand had done the most
to alter the emperor's choice, adding : * We shall be on bad terms with
Russia in less than five months, and at war in eighteen.' Thiers and
Bemhardi support the doubt whether the fatal inaction on 28 Aug. 1818
was really due to sudden illness. They say that Fain is the only witness,
and Fain notoriously cannot be trusted. The fact is known on the better
testimony of Maret, Caulaincourt, St. Cyr, and Senflft ; to say nothing of
S^gur, F^zensac, and Pelet. S6gur's narrative of the attempted suicide
was confirmed to many people still living, by Count Flahaut, who was at
Fontainebleau at the time. Our witness for the date of the momentous
conference at Sommepuis is Lord Westmorland, the officer accredited at
headquarters, who was present, and whose statement in his book, and in
his letter published in Toll's memoirs, can scarcely be disputed. The
assertion that, in Napoleon's boyhood, ' his abihties do not seem to have
excited wonder,' is an instance of excessive caution. His mother said to
Prokesch : Au dihut de ses dttcdes, Napolionfut celm de mes enfans qui
me donna le mains d*esp&rances ; il resta longtemps avant d'avoir quelque
Q Q 2
Digitized by
Qoo^^
696 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
succis. And it is rather a balk to be told that the creation of the uni-
versity * gave Napoleon the occasion for some striking and original re-
marks.' He remarked that it was to be un moyen de dinger [otherwise,
surveiller] les opinions politiques et morales, and that there is no safety
for the state * tant qu'on n'apprendra pas, dds Venfance, sHlfaut Stre ri-
publicain ou mona/rchiquet catholique ou irreligieux. The studied vague-
ness of the author's style is inadequate at times to the intense definiteness
of Napoleon's thought and speech. Oncken, who has been of some service
to Mr. Seeley, might have satisfied him that the memorable interview
with Metternich took place on June 26, not June 28, and lasted eight
hours and a half, not ten. As to the dramatic passage, the best reason
for thinking that Metternich reports it faithfully is that the emperor said
the same thing both to Caulaincourt and to Narbonne.
The scheme of interpretation which contemplates the wars of the
empire from the point of view of the continental blockade and the British
shopkeeper falls short in Spain. When Mr. Seeley says that the invasion
was an act of insensate violence, that the Spaniards were entirely subser-
vient to France before, and unanimously hostile after, he passes over
some essential elements of the case. We learn nothing of the technical
provocation which had been given, nothing of the strong French party
which, but for the Eussian expedition, had nearly accomplished the
pacification of the peninsula, or of the statesman's argument for thinking
the suppression of the Bourbons as desirable for the Bonapartes as the
suppression of Murat was afterwards for the Bourbons. There were
Spaniards who, as early as 1805, had foreseen that the extinction of one
family would be needful for the elevation of the other. Napoleon admitted
that he could not leave in Bourbon hands a country that might be one
day formidable, not to himself but to his successors. The soHdity of
ancient thrones, the gathered force of long prescription, filled him with a
mysterious awe which forbade him to be content with making vassals of
that craven dynasty. At Smorgoni, on the night on which he abandoned
his army, he exclaimed : * If I had been bom to the throne, it would have
been easy to make no mistakes.' And he added : Les Bourbons s^en
Ureraient, During the invasion of France he expressed the same thought
thus : * If I were my son, I could go on fighting until I stood with my
back to the Pyrenees.' Towards SieySs Mr. Seeley entertains the senti-
ments which Burke and Mallet du Pan have bequeathed to their succes-
sors. He loves to impute the new absolutism to the destroyer of the old,
and distinguishes but faintly between his work and the suppression of his
work by Napoleon. He even attributes to the backwardness and timidity
of Siey^s the mismanagement which nearly wrecked the enterprise of
Brumaire. The performer who flinched in the drama of St. Cloud was
not Siey^s but Bonaparte. When he turned pale with the terror of
outlawry, Siey^s calmly said : lis vous mettent hors la loi : mettez-les
hors la salle. So the scene was told not many years since by one who
had lived among the actors in it. Mon trend was present, and his account,
virtually the same, is preserved by Eoederer. There we read how, when
all was over, Talleyrand said that it was time to dine ; and how, during
dinner, Montrond was observed to shake his head and mutter : G&iUral
Bonaparte, cela n*est pas correct. There too we read that the yoke of
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 597
the S in Lucien's pamphlet meant not Soldiers, as Mr. Seeley infers, but
SieySs. The First Consul was angry with his brother for attacking so
useful a man, sent Talleyrand with an apology, and had an edition printed
with the word militaires. Like the German writers of whom he makes
great use, he denies to the Bussians the merit of design in the sucoessful
defence of 1812. He thinks that they had learnt from Wellington the
value of retrograde movements, but that the retreat was not based on
strategic calculations of the benefit of space. We know from Dumas and
S6gur that the idea of retreating into the interior had struck a Eussian
officer during the campaign of Eylau, and that he executed it afterwards,
against the feeling of the army, whilst he held command. Alexander had
previously assured a Frenchman that nothing would be lost if he had to
retire beyond Moscow ; and the Frenchman had answered poHtely that
he would still be the first power in Asia. Mr. Seeley is doubtless right
in thinking that the Austrian terms ought to have been conceded at
Prague ; but it is not so clear that, when Austria turned against him in
1818, Napoleon's doom was sealed. He was outnumbered in the propor-
tion of ten to nine ; but he deemed that his presence doubled his force.
It was worth an addition of 60,000 men, says St. Cyr ; and Wellington
thought that it was equal to 40,000. Even at Leipzig the odds were not
greater than at Dresden, where he gained a complete victory. Three of
the best judges, Jomini, St. Cyr, and Bemhardi, do not agree that the
struggle on the Elbe was hopeless. Li the defence of Champagne, Arcis,
which is as decisive a date as Lodi, deserved better treatment than to be
passed over in silence whilst Hagelberg is duly recorded. Having been
repulsed at Laon by the Prussians, Napoleon tried his fortune against the
Austrians, and was defeated at Arcis. It was there he understood that
the end had come, and that he rode forward and stood over a shell about
to explode. An officer, on the point of uttering a warning cry, was
stopped by another, who said : * Don't you see that he is doing it on
purpose, and wants to have it over ? ' Mr. Seeley states that, in 1814,
Fouch6 was weaving a miUtary plot. The proceedings of that exceedingly
able man barely fit in to so plain a form of words. He made a merit of
trying to maintain the Bourbons, and, in a secret interview, had given
some remarkable advice : Servez-vous d lafois de la vertu qui a 6claU
dans Vojppression, de V&nergie qui a 6t6 d&velopp6e dans nos ddsordres, et
des taknts qui se sont produits dans le d&lire. On ne gouveme pas plus
les itats avec Us souvenirs et les repugnances qu'avec les remords,
Blacas of course replied that legitimacy can no more coalesce with
revolution than truth with error. Then Fouch6, exclaiming that the
king, if he had ten crowns with such an adviser, would lose them all,
tried the younger branch. That is how Napoleon afterwards told Meneval
that he had dethroned not Lewis XVIII, but the duke of Orleans.
In such a mass of facts and allusions there are probably not a few
which a vindictive Bonapartist would mark with a sign of interrogation.
He might object that the French at Acre were not reduced to musketry
fire ; that the primate of the confederation did not hold the see of Mentz ;
that Moreau was in the Eussian, not the Austrian camp ; that the Holy
AlHance did not come into existence for three months after the Hundred
Days ; that the first indication of the policy of the concordat dates not
Digitized by
Google
698 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
from Tolentino in February 1797, bat at least as far back as the previous
October, when Bonaparte wrote: tPambitionne hien plus le titre de
sauveur que celui de destructeur du Saint- SUge ; that if the story of his
getting drunk with punch at Campo Formio is derived from Hiiffer, it is
right to add that Hiiffer warns us against believing it ; that the institu-
tions which * brought the country to bankruptcy, civil war, and almost
barbarism,' from 1796 to 1799, were not more pernicious than what had
gone before.
The passage asserting that the discovery had recently been made in
America that a republic must have a president is not written in earnest.
So eminent a student of politics knows that the Americans discovered no
such thing, but adopted a president being used to a governor in the
several states, and that * Orcmje boven ! ' and * Down with the pensionary I '
was not the formula of a new philosophy. Bepublics since then have pro-
spered without presidents, and have perished by them. Any reader im-
pervious to irony whom the authority of a great name might tempt to
take the remark for an axiom, may profitably meditate F^lix Pyat's
speech of 6 Oct. 1848, comparing it with Tocqueville's reply in defence of
the presidential theory. If I may quote a demagogue against an im-
perialist, here is the sort of thing he would find: Qv^'est-ce que la
r&puhlique des Etats- Unis ? Le mot Vindique ; une ripubUque f^d&rale,
girondine, passez-moi le mot, une aggregation d'itats ou corps divers, une
nation d' alluvions et d'att&rissement, composie successivement des parties
h4t4rog&nes, insolidaires. Le danger, en France, est en sens inverse des
EtatS' Unis. Aux Etats- Unis il est dans la dispersion des provinces, et il
fallait un president : en France, il est da/ns la concentration ; il ne faut
qu'une assembUe.
The philosopher of national greatness, when he celebrates the triumph
of British arms, has a manifest peril to shun. It would be congenial to him
to adopt Pittas last speech, proudly graven on the medal commemorating
the peace : Se ipsam virtute, Europam exemplo. But he is guarded not
to inflate the glory and the spoil of England, not to remind us of the time
when an Englishman scorned to fight less than three Frenchmen starving
on their diet of frogs. He yields no countenance to Wellington's gra-
tifying contention, that Napoleon was driven out of Germany by his
own movement on Vittoria. The familiar names, Yittoria, Salamanca,
Toulouse, do not occur on his pages. In one or two places, the American,
advocate as he is, shows greater impartiality. It may be that Bonaparte
miscalculated the naval power of England in the Mediterranean as much
as Mr. Seeley believes, but the grand audacity of that six weeks' voyage
with transports, in the presence of Nelson, deserves warmer recognition.
An almost imperceptible confusion of dates would make it appear that
the invasion of England fedled through the terror that went before the
feice of Galder, rather than through the combinations of continental
powers. * In the last days of August, Admiral Villeneuve, issuing from
Ferrol, took alarm at the news of the approach of an English fleet, and
instead of sailing northward fEu^ed about and retired to Cadiz. Then
for the first time Napoleon admitted the idea of failure, and saw the
necessity of screening it by some great achievement in another quarter.'
Villeneuve issued from Ferrol, not in the last days of August, but on
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 599
the 14tb. At that time Napoleon was quite unable to avoid war
with Austria, and was already preparing for it. On the ISth he had
written : Gette puissance arme, Je veux qu'elle disarme ; si elle ne le
fait pas, j'irai a/vec 200,000 homines lui faire una bonne visite. Mon
parti est pris ; je veux attaqvsr VAutriche, et Stre d Vienne avant le mois
de novembre. Talleyrand was to inform the Austrian ambassador that
he had abandoned his design : II a compris quHl ne pouvait se porter en
Angleterre avec 160,000 hommes lorsque ses frontidres du midi Staient
menacSes. Whilst he was turning his back on England and facing
Austria he continued to entertain hopes of his fleet : J'ai de bonnes
rumoelles de mes escadres du Ferrol et de celle de Eochefort. On
22 Aug. he writes to Talleyrand : Une fois qvs j'aurai levd mon camp
de Vocian, je ne puis phis m'arrAter ; mon projet de guerre maritime est
tout'd'fait manqu^, Du 20 au 26 Fructidor, je suis obligd de faire une
contre-marche pour m'opposer a/ux progr^ des a/rmements de VAutriche.
This was ten days before he knew that his fleet had retired to Cadiz.
The sudden change of front was caused by the forward policy of Mack
and Czartoryski, not by the backwardness of Yilleneuve. It was not
contrived to scatter dust in the eyes of Europe and to screen dis-
comflture, but to resist attack. It is not safe to say positively that
Napoleon had no means of getting at England. She was saved, as it is
the way with islands, by a change in the wind, such as determined her
history in 1688, 1688, and 1798. If a man like De Ruyter or Farragut
had been in Villeneuve's place when Magon, in a fury, flung his wig into
the sea, the landing in Kent would have come into measurable distance.
So indeed it would have been if the Institute had not laughed at the
crazy projector who came with a plan to give Napoleon the empire over
sea and land — the plan of a steamboat. Nobody reading the account of
Moore's expedition would gather that it was a disastrous failure. Bather
it would seem that the thwarted and disconcerted combatant was Napoleon.
' He had missed his mark, and professed to receive information which
showed him that he was urgently needed at Paris.' The information he
had received concerned the material feu^t that Austria was again arming
to attack him. Metternich had gone over to the war party on 4 Dec.
* He would have made short work,* wrote Lord Grey, * if he had not been
called off by Austria.'
In the campaign of 1816 the American is superior both in fulness and
fidelity to the Englishman. He cherishes the forlorn hope of justifying
the orders to Grouchy, and he makes the absence of Davout too prominent,
for Napoleon purposely rejected the four best generals in France ; but he
shows that the plan which so nearly succeeded was not foiled by the skill
of the allies. Mr. Seeley esteems that victory was out of the question,
that the emperor was incapacitated for war, that Waterloo was won, as
Marmont said, by the English alone, whose advance decided the victory.
Not a word of Billow's disproportionate loss, of Ziethen's timely arrival,
of the sight seen by Colonel Beiche when he came upon the field and was
told both by Muffling and Schamhorst that the French were gaining the
day. The Enghsh generals were not so extravagant as Napoleon, who
complained of treason, and Gneisenau, who published that the French at
Ligny were 160,000 strong ; but they started that warm patriotic colouring
Digitized by
Google
600 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
against which General Chesney delivered the warning which Mr. Eopes
observes more heartily than Mr. Seeley. Lord Anglesey averred that the
issue had never been doubtful ; Lord Baglan beheved that the English
were outnumbered by 20,000 men; Wellington knew nothing of the
Prussian attack on the right rear of Napoleon until about an hour before
he advanced. We are invited to beUeve that Napoleon showed him-
aelf, on 16 June, ' an indolent and inefficient general ; ' but we are not
told that he gave orders to turn the Prussian right, which would effectually
have divided his enemies and enabled him to overwhelm the duke of
Wellington. Those orders, everybody knows, were not obeyed. D*Erlon
says : Le marichal Ney^ dtant au moment d'itre forc6 aux Qtiatre Bras,
ne tint pas compte des ordres envoy^s par Vempereur^ et rappela d lui
m,on corps d'amUe. Napoleon saw the consequences in all their gravity
when, on the 17th, he said to D'Erlon, On a perdu la France, It is true
that his officers found fault with his conduct of the campaign, and
Grouchy even ventured to say : II a ouhlii Vart de la gtierre. But this
burst of criticism was no new thing. Besides the envy of Mass^na, the
bitterness of Marmont, and Bemadotte's audacious boast that he had won
a great battle by disobeying orders, clear-sighted officers were never
wanting who knew the Umitations of his talent as accurately as the vices
of his character. Campredon considered with dismay even the tactics of
AusterUtz. After Pultusk and Essling his prestige fell considerably, at
Borodino even the fanatic Davout found fault with his manoeuvre ; even
Eugene and Murat did not know him again. Decr^s and Duroc confided
to friends that he was losing his head. The most intellectual of the
marshals, St. Cyr, declares that he had committed errors of which no
ordinary man would be capable. He says : Dans ce gdnie, STiblime pour
certaines parties de la guerre, il n'entrait aucune des qu>aUtis propres d
la conservation.
Considering the end, the sub-chapter headed ' Was he invincible ? ' was
scarcely needed. Napoleon himself thought that this question was set at
rest before 1809. Rebuking a flatterer, he declared that he had been re-
peatedly defeated, and instanced Acre, Essling, and the first day at Arcole,
for it was then, in November 1796, not, as is here impUed, in an earlier
crisis, that he sent orders to Milan to prepare for the worst. He admitted
to Davout that his plan was faulty at Eylau ; and he assured Gambac^r^s
that the new energy of resistance revealed at Essling changed the whole
direction of his pohcy. At Dresden he confessed with magnanimity that
the worst blunders of the Russian campaign were his own. Although he
despised Mass^na for his cupidity, he insisted that he possessed military
talents, devant lesquels il faut se prostemer. He pronounced himself
equal to St. Cyr in attack, but his inferior in the science of defensive war.
Mr. Seeley denies to Napoleon the merit of originahty. The art of
engrossing power, the kindred art of applying it, had been already brought
to high perfection, and he had great models to study. When Madame
d'Outremont offered half her fortune that her son might be released firom
conscription, he answered that the whole of her fortune and her son too
were his already. This is no more than a brightly pointed repetition of
the assurance given by the Sorbonne to quiet the conscience of Louis XIV,
and of Richelieu's stupendous words to the father of Pascal : Je vous le
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 601
recommande. Once he seemed to rise above himself when at the march-
ing of his legions he was heard to say, Tout cela ne vaut pas les instUu-
tions. But he had been warned repeatedly by at least two of his
shrewdest advisers that he had founded nothing until he had founded
something strong enough to resist him. Having first to account for
pubhc and outward events, Mr. Seeley has no leisure to study the emperor
in council and conversation. He is visibly impatient of the literature of
St. Helena, and of his recorded talk. The disposition common in France
and Germany to reject the ' M^orial ' seems to have affected him. We
miss the catena of characteristic utterances with which Napoleon struck firef
from the night at Gherasco when he assured the Piedmontese negotiators
that he might lose battles but would never lose minutes, down to the last
dictation in which he calls history the only true philosophy. The gross and
graceless tyrant of these pages is not the man who said : Je ne suis pas un
homme, mats une chose.
Whilst the repubhcan New Englander deplores and despises the
triumph of Gastlereagh and Mettemich, it is the note of the Cambridge
history not only to judge their cause just, but their enemy infamous, and
to dwell on the slaughter of Jaffa, the bequest to Gantillon, and the
execution of Enghien. If we must judge a man's intellect by the highest
level which he reaches, and his morahty by the lowest, this is the deciding
test of Napoleon's character, and fixes his place in the seventh circle.
His action at Jaffa was not worse than the action of an English worthy
to whom even recent opinion has been very lenient. The disgraceful codicil
only shows that the testator died unreconciled, and that the companion
who, on hearing him speak of Providence, reported to Sir Hudson Lowe
that his captive was breaking, understood the real habits of his mind. It
raises perhaps a doubt whether it was in derision that he whispered at
Weimar a question as to the existence of Ghrist, which drew from Wieland
the prophetic answer that men might as well deny the existence of
Napoleon. But there is nothing in the Vincennes tragedy to mitigate the
bare guilt of murder, or to turn away the historian's wrath; and his
judgment stands, if the particulars are open to dispute. He makes a
point by saying that the duke was tried and shot for having borne arms
against his country, and was not even charged with comphcity in the plot.
The sixth article of accusation was : d'Stre Vun des fauteurs et complices
de la conspiration tramie pa/r les Anglais contre la vie du Premier Consul^
et devant, en cas de succ^ de cette conspiration^ entrer en France, On
this point he was examined and unanimously condemned, and it is certain
that his participation in the flagrant conspiracy was believed at the time.
Nor is it distributively fair to represent this act as one that seemed almost
normal in the light of revolutionary experience. European opinion did
not stand so high above French, or royalist above revolutionary. We do
not forget what the Austrians did at Eastatt, and the English at Naples,
the undisguised design of La Eochejaquelein, Gentz's indignation when
Fox denounced GuiUet, and the ferocious despatch in which the Eussian
protest was met by asking whether Alexander would have hesitated to
seize his father's murderers if they had ventured within striking distance
of his frontier. Whilst Austria gave assurance that she was ready to
accept without discussion the motives of the arrest, the applause of the
Digitized by
Google
602 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
revolutionists was less decided than Mr. Seeley implies. The Jaoobins,
says Garat, were as indignant as the royalists.
Although Mr. Bopes rises on the other side avowedly to plead a cause,
it is the interest of science that the reason of things should be reasonable,
and that interpreters of history should not resort prematurely to mere
folly and passion, and the psychology made common by Tacitus. The
produce of late years, even of the brief interval since these artists mixed
their colours on both sides of the Atlantic, will not allow the mighty
figure ever again to shine with excessive light. It is weU to have his
enemies watched through the same lens, and weighed in the same scales
as himself; to see how much failure and evil in his life is explained with-
out his fault, by the wiles of foes, by the legacy of time, by the necessity
of defence, and the extremity of peril which the new order suffered from
the girdle of ancient forces ; to mark the regenerating hand, the gratitude
of nations, like the Swiss, that did not thwart him, the gift of fascinating
good men. The use which Thiers made of the finest opportunity ever
afforded to an historian has not resisted the assault of hostile time. Even
that undaunted panegyrist enumerates six grave errors. Napoleon acknow-
ledged many more. If he displayed emotion of the better kind at
Dandolo's last appeal for Venice, and when early friends were torn by
cannon shot, if his firm nerves gave way utterly at Ebersberg when he
saw the fighting done by a lieutenant sterner than himself, yet there is no
evidence of remorse. Few things denote him more than the manner of his
regret for his greatest crime : La mort miritie du dtcc d'Enghien nuisit d
Napoleon dans Vopinion et ne hii fut d'aucutie utiUU j^oUtique. An entire
book of Retractations might be made of avowals such as this. In 1805
he said to Talleyrand : Je me svds tant trompi en ma vie que je n'en
Tougis pas. And in 1818 to Boederer : Une faute ! G'est mm qid ai
fait des fanites. He confessed at various times that he had done wrong
in crowning his relations, in raising his marshals above the level of their
capacity, in restoring the confiscations. The concordat was the worst
fault of his reign ; the Austrian match was his ruin ; the birth of his son,
an onerous comphcation. The unlucky attack upon Spain was not only a
wholesale blunder, as the irrevocable event proved, but a series of blunders
in detail. The invasion of Russia was hopeless during the Spanish war.
He ought to have restored Poland ; he ought not to have remained at
Moscow ; he ought to have stopped at Smolensk ; he ought not to have
crossed the Niemen. At the Berezina he cried : Voild ce qui arrive
qv/md on entasse f amies sur f antes I He regretted the attempted con-
quest of San Domingo, the annexation of Holland, the rejection of
Talleyrand's warning that France would show less energy than himself.
He wished that he had not concluded the armistice after Bautzen, that
he had followed up his victory after Dresden, that he had made peace at
Prague, at Frankfort, at Ghatillon. It would have been better if he* had
employed SieySs, if he had never trusted Fouch^, if he had not sent Nar-
bonne to Vienna. When he heard of the treaty of February 1816 between
England, Austria, and France, he said that that would have been his
true policy. He repented his moderation as sincerely as his violence.
He lamented that he had twice shrunk from making himself dictator, and
had swerved too soon from the scheme of making his dynasty the oldest
Digitized by
Qoo^<^
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 608
in Europe, which it might have become if he had had the resolution to
dethrone the house of Brandenburg after Jena, and to dissolve the
Austrian monarchy after Wagram.
There is that which bars the vindication of his career. It is con-
demned by the best authority, by the final judgment of Napoleon himself.
And this is not the only lesson to be learnt from the later, unofficial,
intimate and even trivial records which the two biographers incline to
disregard. They might have enabled one of the two to admire without
defending, and the other to censure without disparaging, and would have
supplied both with a thousand telling speeches and a thousand striking
traits for a closer and more impressive likeness of the most splendid
genius that has appeared on earth. Aoton.
St. Petersburg und London in den Jahren 1862-1864. Aus den Denk-
wiirdigkeiten von Cabl Fbiedbich Gbap Vitzthum von Eckstadt.
2 volumes. (Stuttgart : J. G. Cotta. 1886.)
St, Petersburg and London in the Years 1852-1864. Reminiscences of
Count Chables Fbedebick Vitzthum von Eckstaedt, late Saxon
Minister at the Court of St. James'. Edited, with a Preface, by Henby
Reeve, C.B., D.C.L. Translated by Edwabd Faibfax Taylob,
2 volumes. (London : Longmans & Co. 1887.)
Only the other day the Preussische Jahrbilcher^ more in sorrow than in
anger at the blindness which before the event even diplomatists now and
then display, held up Count Yitzthum's narrative of his Berlin and Vienna
experiences in the years 1845-1852 as a melancholy example of misguided
intelligence. To have lived with Schwarzenberg, and to have believed
in the plans of a Greater Germany, seems intellectually unpardonable,
though from other points of view excusable, to those who have seen what
they have seen. Yet while all this thunder was descending, or preparing
to descend, the incorrigible veteran was ready with a new series of
memoirs, as bright as the former, and not a whit less frank. Count
Vitzthum is of opinion — and I cannot recall any equally distinct declara-
tion on the part of any other politician in at least hereditary sympathy
with the ancien regime — that for German writers and readers everything
relating to the times before 1866 is matter of history, on which there can
accordingly be no reason for refraining from speaking out. Signs of dis-
cretion are by no means wanting in his new volumes ; but it must be
allowed that on the whole his materials can have suggested to him no
special reason for reserve. During nearly the whole of the period — from
1852 to 1864— covered by them he was a resident in London, though
occasionally employed in dynastic negotiations at Lisbon (of which he has
some curious remembrances en passant), and dividing his holidays between
Paris and home. Li the years 1852 and 1858 he spent a few months as
cha/rg6 d'affaires at St. Petersburg, and acquired enough insight into the
state of things— or rather of persons — there to be able afterwards to apply
something of a genuine connaissance de cause to certain aspects of the
Russo-Turkish imbrogUo. At the court of St. James' he was for many
years an observer in a specially favourable position, who could afford to
keep a cool head and to put on record impartial judgments in the midst
Digitized by
Google
604 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
of transactions as to which his own responsibility was comparatively
insignificant. Towards the close, however, of the period commemorated
in these volumes he becomes a more and more interested spectator, as
German politics begin to attract more and more of the attention of the
pohtical world ; as Lord Clarendon listens with prompt though at times
not very penetrating intelligence, while Mr. DisraeU bestows a fre-
quent though mostly rather oracular approval, and even Lord Bassell
here and there enlarges the area of his poUtical philosophy. Towards
the conclusion of the period here treated, in times which few students
of the history of our foreign pohtics are able to regard with unmixed
complacency. Count Vitzthum, according to his own favourite expression,
assumes the character of the look-out man of the ship ; nor can there be
any doubt but that at this time his keen and indefatigable vigilance exer-
cised an appreciable influence upon the course of affairs. His memoirs
end with the defeat of Lord Palmerston's Danish policy — a defeat attri-
butable to the consistency of the radicals, to the moderation of the less
combative section of the tones (including their leaders), and above all to
the influence of the queen. To that defeat, which was indisputably such,
though at the time it was allowed to assume the disguise of a popular
parliamentary victory achieved by Lord Palmerston under the flag of pro-
sperous revenue returns, Count Vitzthum unmistakably contributed. How
far he sustained Lord Bussell in the period of his conversion, and to what
extent he induced Lord Derby and Mr. Disraeh to take the edge off their
weapons of defence, he can hardly have been himself aware ; but in his
journalistic controversy with Lord Robert Cecil he proved himself no
unequal match for a most powerful pen, though obhged — which is by no
means always an advantage in controversy — to fight in the shade.
It will thus be seen both that Count Vitzthum's new reminiscences
cover much of the same ground as the concluding volumes of the * Greville
Memoirs,' with which they have more than one good story in common,
and that the chief object of the Saxon diplomatist's cavils is the statesman
who, notwithstanding his acknowledged geniahty, figures as a kind of evil
hero in Mr. Greville's surveys of things as they ought not to have been.
Lord Palmerston's good fortune has not pursued him beyond the grave ;
for to the pungency of attacks such as these upon the favourite of a
decade historical Uterature has little to oppose but an unsatisfactory com-
pilation hardly deserving the name of a biography, and the evidence of
Lord Shaftesbury's pathetic trustfulness. Count Vitzthum's poUtical
detestation of Lord * Firebrand,* exphcable enough in itself, was intensi-
fied by his enthusiastic admiration for the Prince Consort. As the repre-
sentative of a sovereign whom her majesty herself regarded in the light
of a relation. Count Vitzthum was a welcome visitor at court, and was
honoured by many intimate political conversations with the prince. I
confess, without wishing to subscribe to courtly phrases, which it would
be impertinence either to contradict or to approve, that it is impossible to
read these memoirs without acknowledging the evidence furnished by
them afresh, not only as to the prince's commanding influence in Enghsh
politics, but also as to his heroic power of self-control. From this point
of view Count Vitzthum's reminiscences have a genuine historic value.
, Of the statesmen whose names are conspicuous in these volumes most
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 605
have passed away, though many were fEuniliar figures only yesterday.
How peculiar a succession of diplomatic representatives, for instance, wa&
that of the French empire at the court of St. James' ; yet on the whole it
cannot be said to have been unskilfully chosen from a rather limited field.
The most awkward member of the series, though the most friendly to our-
selves, was Persigny, who used to present to Lord Clarendon the despatches
of his chief with a Lisez cela vous-mSme ; ce sont encore des bStises de
WalewsJd. None of these passing guests, however, can, when the day of
flitting came, have been missed like der alte Bnmnow, as Count Vitzthum
takes the Hberty of calling a colleague who long loomed large in the eyes
of the London world, but who will perhaps hardly be remembered as one
of the really successful diplomatists of the last generation. The persist-
ent optimism of his reports in the doubtful days before the Crimean war
must have been discounted at St. Petersburg. It certainly seems to have
been readily forgiven there, but it does scant credit to his foresight.
Count Vitzthum has a good story of a birthday dinner at Lord Clarendon's
in 1858, where the foreign secretary and the French ambassador did
their best to let Baron Brunnow, who was seated next to Count Walewski,
overhear their mutual confidences as to the serious intentions of the
western powers. Less generally known than the acquiescence of his-
latter days ('one learns to grow modest in London,' he told Count
Vitzthum) is the part which he is in these memoirs stated to have played
as the joint author with Lord Palmerston of the London treaty of 1852,
the fons et origo of the Danish dilB&culty of 1868-4. If the explanation
given here be the correct one, the treaty was the result of a bargain
between Baron Brunnow and Lord Palmerston, who accepted it in return
for the promise of a condonation of his Greek policy, of which Bussia as
well as France had in the first instance openly disapproved. Whatever
insinuations as to the Russian origin of the London treaty may have been
made in the Danish debates of 1864 and on other occasions, and whatever
may be their justification, the accusation against Lord Palmerston remains
for the present a piece of hearsay, and finds no place even in Pauli's
narrative of these transactions. The rest of Count Vitzthum's account
of the Schleswig-Holstein difficulty rests on a very soHd substratum ; and
the memoranda on this subject of ' a German who is fond of facts,' may
be commended to future historians who will take some little pains with
their * own times.' On questions with which he was less intimately con-
cerned, he shows his colours with equal distinctness, and does not content
himselt with merely hesitating dislike of personages so repugnant to him
as, for instance. Count Cavour. This openness, so refreshing in diplomatic
memoirs, is explained by the plan of Count Vitzthum's compilation, which
consists partly of annual summaries written in the cold blood of later
years, partly in confidential letters by which Count Vitzthum supple-
mented his official despatches to Dresden, and of which the vicissitudes
of his government have allowed him not only to regain partial possession,
but to make liberal use. Count Beust was certainly kept very well informed,
and must have at times been very well amused. There is no indication
in these volumes of any desire — such as has been at times imported to the
representatives of small courts — to make politics. But the record of
Count Vitzthum's endeavours, all the same, forms an interesting contri-
Digitized by
Qoo^^
606 REVIEWS OF BOOKS July
bution to a chapter of history which may not seem so very ancient to
another generation as it seems to ourselves. The English version of his
memoirs will therefore be generally welcomed, more especially as it has
the advantage of being introduced by such an authority as that of
Mr. Reeve. A. W. Wabd.
Medieval students have long rejoiced in the cheap octavo reprints of
the more important works in Pertz's Monumenta GennayticB Historica,
such as those of Paul the Deacon, Lambert of Hersfeld, and Otto of
Freising. The series now extends to nearly forty volumes, costing on the
average less than Is. 8d, apiece ; and the fact that almost one-third of
the number have passed into at least a second edition is evidence enough
of the commercial success of the series. We are glad to see that the
example has just been taken up by the French scholars who have set
about publishing a Collection de textespour servir d V&tude et d Venseigne-
ment de Vhistoiref at a price which is not beyond the means of any student
and which is still further reduced to subscribers. The first volume issued
contains the Histories of Eodulf Glaber, a work which has hitherto been ac-
cessible only in the collections of Pithou, Duchesne, Bouquet, and Migne,
in each case forming only a small part of a large volume. The first book
and extracts from the other four have also been printed by Waitz (in Pertz's
Monumenta), whose edition is the only one that possesses a critical charac-
ter. For the peculiar fact about the other editions is that, whereas of the
two existing manuscripts of the work at Paris, No. 6190 is the more recent,
and is judged by Waitz to be a mere copy of No. 10912, the former has been
taken as the basis of the text and its probable original only occasionally
referred to. The new editor, M. Maurice Prou, has adopted the rational
course of printing straight from MS. 10912, which is of the very century
in which Eodulf Glaber hved, and using the other copy to fill up lacunse due
to the loss of some quires some time after the transcript in MS. 6190 was
made. He has also noted all variants in the latter which are not merely
orthographical, and has added to the completeness of his work by filling
in a few words in the last folio, which is torn, from a fifteenth-century
copy at Rome. We have thus in this new edition the first text of the
Histories, which is at once critical and complete. M. Prou has given brief
notes identifying persons, supplying dates, and giving occasional re-
ferences. There is also an index of names.
In the second volume of the series M. Henri Omont gives an edition
of the first six books of the Historia Francorum of Gregory of Tours,
which is not less valuable than curious. It is well known that Gregory's
work is preserved in two redactions, the first containing six books, the
second — ^the author's definitive work — containing ten. The latter was
edited a few years ago in the Monumenta Oermanice by Dr. Amdt with
80 elaborate a critical apparatus that little was left for a new editor to
exercise his skill upon. M. Omont has therefore chosen to edit Gregory's
earlier text from the best existing codex (the Corbie MS. of the seventh
century), at the same time reprinting from Amdt's edition in smaller
type the passages which the author added subsequently. We are thus
enabled to see at a glance the successive stages in the growth of our main
authority for Merovingian history.
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 607
The Collection de textes to which we call attention is not exactly a
counterpart to the small German Monumenta, It is to cover all periods
of history, not the Middle Ages only, and besides the publication of sub-
stantive chronicles it is also to comprise collections of shorter documents
illustrating constitutional, municipal, provincial history, &c. The publisher
is M. Alphonse Picard. R. L. P.
The twelfth centenary of St. Cuthbert, if it has not produced anything
new, has at least led to a new edition of Archbishop Eyre's excellent
History of St. Cuthbert (Bums & Gates), which has been for some time
out of print. We can only regret that since the publication of the first
edition of this work in 1849 there is nothing to add to the story which it
so admirably told.
The interesting diary kept by one of the members of an embassy sent
by George Podiebrad in 1464 to Louis XI, extracts from which were pub-
lished many years ago by Palacky, has now been found after having been
supposed for many years to be lost. It has been pubHshed in its entirety
by Professor Kalonsek, the gaps which were formerly necessitated by the
rigid censorship of the press then existing having now been supplied.
An account of the embassy will be found in Palacky's History, iv. 2,
267-278.
Documents illustrative of American History, edited by H. W. Preston
(New York and London : Putnam, 1886). This volume is an appHcation
to American history of the method of Dr. Stubbs's * Select Charters,* and
aims at putting before the student in a convenient form the more impor-
tant documents which are the necessary basis of any accurate knowledge.
The documents begin with the first Virginia charter in 1606, and reach
to the emancipation proclamation of 1868. Mr. Preston has not ven-
tured on an introductory sketch, but has contented himself with a brief
explanation of each document accompanied by references to standard
works. Thus his book does not pretend to be more than a modest hand-
book, and as such may be commended. Its value would have been
increased by a complete index.
BoswelVs Life of Johnson, edited by George Birkbeck Hill, 6 vols.
(Clarendon Press), promises to be the definitive edition of an important
English classic. The editor has done his work with exemplary thorough-
ness ; he has devoted the best part of his life to a labour of love, and has
brought to his task ripe scholarship and unflagging enthusiasm. The
result is that the quotations in his notes are always to the point, and he
has been careful to illustrate Johnson's table-talk from his writings, his
letters, and the records of other contemporaries. The reader feels that the
notes are supplied from the editor's knowledge of his subject, while there
is a judicious abstinence from irrelevant erudition. The book is a worthy
monument of EngHsh scholarship. Besides Boswell's Life this edition
also contains his Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides and Johnson's Diary
of a Journey into North Wales, Not the least valuable part of the work
is a singularly copious index, which renders accessible the biographical
details with which the notes abound.
Digitized by
Google
608
July
List of Historical Books recently published
I. GENERAL HISTORY
(Including works relating to the allied branches of knowledge and works
of misoellaneous contents)
Baohelin ^.) Melanges d*histoire et
d'art. Paris : Fisohbaoher. 12mo.
6f.
Ghesneau (Jean). Le voyage de Monsieur
d'Aramon, ambassadeur pour le roy
en Levant. (Recueil de voyages et
de documents pour servir 4 Thistoire
de la g^ographie depuis le XIII* jusqu'^
la fin du XVI* sidcle. VUI.) Paris :
Leroux. 20 f.
Cbozals (J. de). Histoire de la civilisa-
tion. 2 vol. Paris : Delagrave. 12mo.
Gbbhabt (E.) Etudes m^ridionales : La
Renaissance italienne et la philosophic
de I'histoire. Paris : Cerf. 12mo.
8-50 f.
HoBOY (abb^). Droit international et
droit des gens public d'aprds le
Decretum de Gratien. Pp. 375. Paris :
Chevalier-Marescq. 18mo. 3'60 f.
PsNKA (E). Die Herkunft der Arier;
neue Beitrage zur historisohen An-
thropologic der europaisohen Ydlker.
Teschen: Prochaska.
BiBEBo (Diego). Carta universal [1529].
Facsimile of the so-called * Borgian
Map/ by W. Griggs. London : Quaritch.
Sheet. 21/.
RioHTEB (W.) Handel und Verkehr der
wichtigsten Ydlker des Mittelmeers
im Altertume. Pp. 236. Leipzig :
Seemann.
Smith (G. H.) Elements of right and of
the law ; also, a historical and critical
essay upon the several theories of
jurisprudence. 2nd ed. Pp. 398.
Chicago: Callaghan. ^-50.
n. ORIENTAL HISTORY
Benjamin (S. G. W.) The story of Persia.
Pp. 320. New York : Putnam's Sons.
^1-60.
Bezold (C.) Eurzgefasster Ueberblick
uber die babylonisch-assyrische Litera-
tur, nebst einem chronologischen Ex-
curs, U.S.W. Pp. 395. Leipzig :
Schulze.
Castonnbt des Fosses. La France dans
Textrdme Orient : L'Inde franpaise
avant Dupleix. Paris : Challamel. 6 f .
Clebmont-Ganneau. La st^le de M6sa,
examen critique du texte. Pp. 43.
Paris : Imp. nationale.
De Hjoklez (C), Histoire de Tempire de
Kin ou empire d'Or ; traduite du
mandchou par. Pp. 288, map. Lou-
vain : Peeters. 8 f .
Elphinstone (M.) The rise of the
British power in the East. Ed. by sir
T. E. Colebrooke. Pp. 540, maps.
London: Murray. 16/.
Feathebman (A.) Social history of the
races of muikind. 2nd division :
Papuo- and Malayo-Melanesians. Pp.
518. London: Trflbner. 26/.
Geiobb (W.) Civilisation of the Eastern
Iranians in ancient times, with an
introduction in the Avesta religion.
Transl. with preface, Ac, by Darab
Dastur Peshotan Sanjana. II: The
old Iranian polity and the age of the
Avesta. Pp. 286. London : Frowde. 12/.
GuBT (I.) Les origines de Ttle Bourbon.
Pp. 290. Paris : Baudoin.
Hamont (T.) La fin d'un empire fran-
pais aux bides sous Louis XV : Lally-
Tollendal, d*apr^ des documents in6-
dits. Maps. Paris : Plon. 7*60 f.
Le Savoubedx (E.) Etudes historiques
et ex^tiqnes sur TAncien Testament.
Paris : Fischbacher. 12mo. 5 f .
Naville ^.) Das agyptische Todtenbuch
der acntzehnten bis zwanzigsten Dy-
nastic, aus verschiedenen Urkunden
zusammengestellt. Pp. 212, 448. FoUo.
Berlin: Asher.
Obebzineb (L.) n culto del sole presso
gli antichi orientali. I: Pp.218. Trent:
Monauni.
Bawunson (G.) & GiLMAN (A.) The story
of ancient Egypt. Pp.408. New York:
Putnam's Sons. 12mo. ^1*50.
Bobinson (C. S.) The Pharaohs of the
Digitized by
Qoo^<^
1887 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED 60&
bondage and the exodus. Pp. 199.
New York : The Century Company, gl,
Saintk-Annb (B. I. de). Histoire de
r^tablissement de la mission de Perse
par les Pdres Carmes-D^hanss^s
[1604-1612]. Pp. 368. Brussels:
SwaM beige de librairie. 8*50 f.
Sabzbc (E. de). D^couvertes en Chald^e.
Ed. by L. Heuzey. I. Pp. 64, 80
plates. Paris : Leroux. 4to. 80 f .
Sauvaibk (H.) Mat^riaux pour seryir k
Phistoire de la numismatique et de la
m6trologie musulmanes. Pp. 268.
Paris : Leroux. 12 f.
Shith (S. Alden). Die Eeilso>^rifttexte
Asurbanipals, Ednigs von Assyrien
[668-626 B.C.], mit Transsoription^
Uebersetzung, Eommentar, und voll-
standigem Glossar. I: Die Annalen
nach dem Cylinder RM 1. Pp. 131.
Leipzig : Pfeiffer. 7 m.
ToDA (E.) Estudios egiptol6gioos : Son
Not^ en Tebas; inventario y textos
de un sepuloro egipoio de la vig^sima
dinastia. Pp. 64. Madrid: Fortanet.
4to. 8*50 rs.
Wbtl (J.) Les juifs prot^^s fran^ais
aux 6oheUes du Levant et en Barbarie,
sous les rdgnes de Louis XIV et de
Louis XV, d'aprds des documents
ineV.t?. Pp. 35. Paris: Dnrlacher.
2-50 f.
m. GREEK HISTORY
Gabtault (A.) De quelques representa-
tions de navires emprunt6es & des vases
primitifs provenant d*Athdnes. Pp. 26,
plate. Paris : Chamerot. (From
* Monuments Greos/ XI-XIU.)
JuNOHAHN (E. A.) Studien zu Thuky-
dides. Neue Folge. Historisch-En-
tisohes, Exegetisohes, Polemisches. Pp.
95. Berlin : Calvary. 8*60 m.
Mahatft (J. P.) A Oilman (A.) The story
of Alexander's empire. Pp. 323. New
Tork: Putnam's Sons. 12mo. /1*50.
Mbuabakib (A.) Ttvypa/^ia xokirtKii p4a
KopivBicu firrii y9»ypwpiKod vtveucos roQ
po/iov. Pp. 302. Athens: BifiKunrMXtiop
•Ecrrfoy.
Nbuubter (A.) Aratus von Sykion : ein
Charakterbild aus der Zeit des aohai-
sohen Bnndes, nach den Quellen ent-
worfen. Pp. 38, 42. Leipzig : Fook.
Obbbhxjhmbb (E.) Akamanien, Am-
brakia, Amphiloohien, Leukas im
Altertum. Pp. 330, maps. Munich:
Ackermann. 10 m.
Tobpitbb (J.) Quiestiones Pisistrateai.
Pp. 148. Dorpat: Earow.
IV. ROMAN HISTORY
Babblon (E.) Description historique et
chronologique des monnaies de la
r6publiqae romaine, vulgairement
ai^>el6e8 oonsulaires. U. Pp. 669.
Paris : Bollin A Feuardent.
BdDiNOBB (M.^ Der Patrioiat und das
Fehdere<uit m den letzten Jahrzehnten
der rdmischen Bepublik: eine staats-
reohtlichte Untersuchung. Pp. 48.
Vienna : Gerold's Sohn. 4to.
Eutbopi breviariom ab urbe oondita.
Becognovit F. Buehl. Pp. 90. Leipzig:
Teubner. 45 pf.
Gbmoll (A.) Die Scriptores historiie Au-
gusts. I. Pp. 14. Leipzig : Fock. 4to.
Hausbb (K.) Die Bdmerstrassen Earn-
tens. Pp. 35, map. Vienna : Hdlder.
JoBDAN (H.) Commentationis fragmentum
de Sallustii historiarum libri II reliquiis
qusB ad bellum piraticum ServiHanum
pertinent. Pp.8. Ednigsberg: Schubert
(feSeideL 4to. 20 pf.
JuLLZAN (C.) Inscriptions romaines de
Bordeaux. I. Pp. 616, 8 plates, (fee.
Bordeaux : Gounouilhou. 4to. 16 f .
NiBSB (B.) De annalibus Bomanis obser-
yationes. Pp. 15. Marburg: Elwert.
4to.
PoiBBT |J.) Essai sur I'^loquenoe judioi-
aire a Bome pendant la r6publique.
Pp. 299. Paris : Thorin.
PoLTiBNi strategematon libri VIII, ex
reoensione E. WoelfSin. Iterum re-
oensuit, excerpta Polysni e oodioe
taoticorum Florentine addidit, Leonis
imperatoris strategemata e B. Schoellii
apographo subiunxit J. Melber. Pp.
562. Leipzig: Teubner. 7'60 m.
SoHiLLBB (H.) Geschiohte der r6misohen
Eaiserzeit. 11: Von Diokletian bis
zum Tode Theodosius des Orossen.
(Handbiioher der alten Geschichte.
m : BOmische Geschichte. n, 2.) Pp.
492. Gotha : Perthes. 9 m.
SoHNBiDBB (B.) nerda : ein Beitrag zur
rdmischen Eriegsgeschiohte. Pp. 43,
map. Berlin: Weidmann.
W1LKSN8 CEL,) De Strabonis aliorumque
rerum Gallicarum auotorum fontibus.
Pp. 6a Marburg : Elwert. 1-20 m.
V. ECCLESIASTICAL fflSTORY
Bbnham (W.), Dictionary of religion :
an encydopsdia of christian and other
religious doctrines, sects, heresies, his-
tory, biography, AOt edited by. Pp.
1 146. London: CasselL 21/.
VOL. II. — NO. vn.
BoBTOLom (P.) Antiche vite di san Ge-
miniano, vescovo e protettore di Modena,
con appendicL Pp. 132. Modena:
Vincenzi. 4to. 8'50 1.
Cabb (A.) The Church and the Boman
R R
Digitized by
Google
610 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED July
empire. (' Epochs of Choroh History.')
Pp. 2IO. London : Longmans. 2/6.
Chotabd (H.) Le papa Pie YII & Savone.
Pp. 199. Paris : Plon. 12mo. 3 f.
Olausikr (abb6 E.) Saint Gr6goire le
Grand, pape et dooteor de F^lise ; sa
vie, son pontificat, ses oeuvres, son
temps [640-604]; public par Pabb^ H.
Odelin. Pp. 303. Paris: Berche <fe
Tralin. 4 f .
Clembntis Y. (papsa) Begestom ex Yati-
canis arohetypis. Annus qnartns (Be-
gestormn LYI.). Pp. 483. Borne: ex
typographia Yaticana. 4to.
Dabras (abb^ J. E.) Histoire g^^rale de
r^glise. XXIIT. Pp. 628. Paris:
Yivds. 10 f.
Fetzbr (0. A.) Yoruntersnohungen za
einer Gesohichte des Pontificats Alexan-
ders n. Pp. 76. Strassbnrg: Heitz.
1-50 m.
Hatch (E.) The growth of church in-
stitutions. Pp. 240. London : Hodder
& Stoughton. 5/.
L1P8IU8 (B. A.) Die apokryphen Apostel-
geschichten und Apostellegenden : ein
Beitrag zur altchristlichen Literator-
gesohichte. H, 1. Pp. 472. Bruns-
wick : Schwetschke. 16 m.
Plummeb (A.) The church of the early
fathers: External history. ^Epochs
of Church History.') Pp.208. London:
Longmans. 2/6.
Pbou (M.) Les reglstres d'Honorius IV ;
recueil des bulles de oe pape publi^es
ou analyst d'aprte le manusorit ori-
ginal des archives du Yatican. I, IL
Pp. 240. Paris : Thorin. 18 f .
VI. MEDIEVAL HISTORY
Cebexhb (M.) Les monnaies de Charle-
magne. 11. Plates. Ghent: Leliaert,
Siffler, <k Co. 7*60 f.
Glasson (E.) Histoire du droit et des
institutions de la France. I : La Gkiule
celtique, la Gaule romaine. Pp. 592.
Paris : Pichon. 10 f .
GaiooiRB DE TouBS. Histoire des Francs.
I-YI. Texte du manuscrit de Corbie,
^iblioth^ue nationale, ms. lat. 17655.)
Public par H. Omont. (Collection de
textes pour servir k I'^tude et k I'en-
seignement de I'histoire. U.) Paris:
Pioard. 7 f.
Jacob (G.) Der nordisch-baltische Handel
der Araber im Mittelalter. Pp. 152.
Leipzig : Bdhme. 4 m.
La Cboix (C. de). Cimetidres et sarco-
phages m^vingiens du Poitou. Pp.
47, Ulustr. Paris : Imp. nationale.
MoBANTiLLi rH.) Belations de Charles
YI avec I'AJlemagne en 1400. Pp. 25.
Nogent-le-Botrou : Daupeley-Gtouver-
neur.
MdiiLbb (C. T.) Zur Geographic der
alteren Chansons de geste. Pp. 36.
Gdttingen : Yandenhoeok & Buprecht.
PoETA Latini fevi Carolim. m, 1.
Bee. L. Traube. Pp. 265. (Monumenta
GtermaniflB historica inde ab a. Chr. D
usque ad a. MD, ed. Societas aperi-
endis fontibus rerum germanicanun
medii »Yi. — Poetarum Latinorum medii
ffivi tomi in pars 1.) Berlin : Weid-
mann. 4to. 8 m.
Sandoval (A.) Estudios aceroa de la
edad media. I. Pp. 135. Madrid:
Hernandez. 4to. 8*50 rs.
SoHULTZ (J.) Atto von Yercelli [924-961].
Pp. 10 1. Gdttingen: Yandcoihoeok A
Buprecht.
ToMAscHEK (W.) Zur Eunde der Hamus-
Halbinsel. II: Die Handelswege im
zwdlften Jahrhundert nach den Erknn-
digungen des Arabers Idrtst. Pp. 91.
Yienna : Gerold's Sohn.
Tbbdb (H. H.) Les trouvdres et leurs
exhortations aux oroisades. Pp. 23.
Leipzig: Hinrichs. 4to.
Zelleb (J.) Entretiens sur Phistoire da
moyen age. Deuxidme partie. L
Paris : Perrin. 12mo. 8-50 f.
Vn. MODERN HISTORY
Anqubz (L.) Henri lY et I'Allemagne,
d'aprds les m6moires et la correspon-
dfuice de Jacques Bongras. Paris:
Hachette. 5 f .
Bbaunir (H.) Impressions de oampagne
[1870-1871]: Si^ de Strasbourg:
Campagne de la Loire; Campagne de
I'Est. Paris : Alcan. 12mo. 3*50 f.
Bbust (F. F. Graf von). Aus drei Yiertel-
Jahrhunderten : Erinnerungen und
Aufzeichnungen. 2 vol. Pp. 462, 579.
Stuttgart: Cotta. 12mo.
Memoirs of, written by himself.
With an introduction by baron H. de
Worms. 2 vol. Pp. 900. London:
Bemington. 82/.
BoNMAL (E. de). La guerre de HoUande
et I'affaire du TexeL Pp. 80. Paris :
Spectateur militaire. 2 f .
Chttquet (A.) Les guerres de la revolu-
tion: Yalmy. Pp. 277. Paris: Cerf.
12mo. 8*50 f.
Fabbe de Navacbllb (H.) Pr6ois des
guerres du second empire. Paris: Plon.
12mo. 8-60 f.
FoLUET (A.) B^volution fran^se : Les
volontaires de la Savoie [1792-1799] ;
La legion allobroge et les bataillons do
Mont-Blanc. Pp. 383, illustr. Paris:
Baudoin. 18mo. 4 f.
GAUTziMfFQrstN. S.) Allgemeine Kriegs-
geschidite aller Ydlker und Zeiten.
Transl. by general Streccius. lY : Die
neueste Zeit. I: Kriege der ersten
Digitized by
Google
1887 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED 611
franzdsischen Bevolation and der Be-
pablik [1792-1801]. 1 : Die ersten Tier
Jahre [1792-1796]. Pp. 350, map.
Cassel : Eay. 10 m.
Hale (E. £.) & Hale (£. E., jon.)
Franklin in France. Boston : Bo1>erts.
$B.
Habbissb (H.) Excerpta Colombiniana :
Bibliograpnie de qoatre cents pieces
gothiqaes, fran^aises, italiennes, et
latines da commencement da XYI*
si^e, non d^crites josqa'ici. Blostr.
Paris : Welter. 35 f .
Eebytn db Lettenhoys (baron). Bela-
tions politiqaes des Pays-Bas et de
TAngleterre, sons le rdgne de Philippe
n. V : Gtoavemement da dac d*Albe
[September 1667-1670]. (Collection de
chroniqaes beiges in6dites.) Pp. 763.
Brussels: Hayez. 4to.
XuBOPATKiN (general). Eritische Biick-
blicke auf den russisch-torkischen
Krieg [1877-1878], ed. by major Krah-
mer. Neae Folge. I: Die Blockade
Plewnas. Pp. 109, plans. Berlin:
Mittler. 2-80 m.
Petit (E.) Andr6 Doria: Un amiral
condottiere aa seizidme si^e [1466-
1660]. Paris : Qaantin. 7*60 f.
PsEviTi (L.) Giordano Brano e i saoi
tempL Libre tre. Pp. 487. Prato :
Giacchetti. 4*60 1.
Bboueil des instractions donn^es aoz
ambassadears et ministres de France
depnis les trait^s de Westphalie jasqa'iL
la revelation franpaise. Ill : Portugal.
Ed. by the vicomte de Caiz de Saint-
Aymoar. Paris : Alcan. 20 f .
BocoA (M. de). M6moires sar la gaerre
des Frangais en Espagne. Paris :
Fischbacher. 6 f .
BoTHAN (G.) Soavenirs diplomatiqaes :
La France et sa politique ext^rieure en
1867. I. Pp. 420. Paris: L6vy.
7-60 f.
Sandebs (LI. C), Celebrities of the cen-
tury: being a dictionary of men and
women of the nineteenUi century ; ed.
by. Pp. 1076. London : Cassell. 21/.
Saussieb (L.) Invasion [1870-1871]:
Episodes de Poccupation prussienne k
Troyes et dans le d^partement de I'Aube.
Pp. 104. Troyes : Lacroix. 2 f.
Smith (L.) Les coalitions et les grdves
dans I'histoire et I'^conomie politique,
avec an appendioe de lois de divers
pays. Pp. 288. Paris: Guillaumin.
6f.
Yitzthum (count). St. Petersburg and
London [1862-1864] ; reminiscences of
count Charles Yitzthum von Eckstaedt,
late Saxon minister at the court of St.
James*. Ed. by H. Beeve. Transl. by
E. F. Taylor. 2 vol. Pp. 770. Lon-
don: Longmans. 80/.
Vm. FRENCH HISTORY
Abobnay (J. d*^. Diane de Poitiers et son
temps. Pans : Decaux. 12mo. 3*60 f.
Aubeb (abb6). Histoire g^n^rale civile,
religieuse, et litt^raire du Poitou. IH.
Pp. 520, illustr. Poitiers: Bonamy.
6f.
Aubionb (Agrippa d*). Histoire univer-
selle; Edition public pour la Soci6t4
de r Histoire de France par le baron
A. deBuble. I: [1663-1669]. Pp.384.
Paris: Benouard.
Avemel (vicomte G. d*). Bichelieu et la
monarchic absolue. HI. Pp.475. Paris:
Plon. 7-60 f.
B01NVILLIEB8 (E.) La chute de I'empire.
Pp.209. Paris: Dubuisson. 18mo. 2f.
Cabel (P.) Histoire de la ville de Caen
sous Charles IX, Henri HI, et Henri lY
(documents in^ts). Pp. 332. Caen :
Massif. 6 f .
Chabpennb (P.) Histoire des reunions
temporaires d*Avignon et du Comtat
Yenaissin & la France. H. Pp. 578.
Paris : L6vy. 7-60 f .
Chaxtdobdy (comte de). La France k la
suite de la guerre de 1870-71 : La France
k I'int^eur, la France k Text^neur.
Paris : Plon. 3 f.
Chevalueb (chan. U.) Itin^raire des
dauphins de Yiennois de la seconde race.
Pp. 12. Yoiron : impr. Baratier &
Mollaret. (From the * Petite Bevue
Dauphinoise.')
Chbvallibb (chan. U.) Itin^aire de Louis
XI dauphin. Pp. 8. Yoiron.
Chuquet (A.) La campagne de I'Argonne
[1792]. Pp.541. Paris: Cerf. 7*60 f.
Clbby (B. de). Les avant-postes pendant
le si^e de Paris. Paris : Pahn^. 12mo.
2f.
CocHABD (abb6 T.) Les ohartreux d'Or-
l^ans. Pp. 108. Orleans: Herluison.
2-60 f.
Condoboet. — Correspondance in^dite de
Condorcet et de Tuigot [1770-1779],
public avec des notes et une introduc-
tion par C. Henry. Paris : Perrin. 6 f .
CosNAC (J. G. de) & Pontal (Ed.) M^-
moires du marquis de Sourches sur le
rdgne de Louis XIY. YI : [Janvier
1698-d6cembre 1700]. Pp.409. Paris:
Hachette. 7*60 f.
Delisle (L.) Album pal6ographique ou re-
cueil de documents importants relatif s k
rhistoire et k la litt^rature nationales,
reproduits en h^ogravure ; avec des
notices explicatives par la Soci6t6 de
P&ole des Chartes. Introduction par
L. Delisle. Pp. 105, 60 plates. Paris :
Quantin. 160 f. Folio.
DuoN. — Le Mercure dijonnois, ou Journal
des ^vennements qui se sont passes de
1742 k 1789, principalement en Boar-
gogne, publi6 pour la premiere fois,
avec une introduction et des notes, par
G. Dumay. Paris : Lechevalier. 7*60 f.
B B 2
Digitized by
Google
612 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED July
Du Cabse (A.) Supplement k la corres-
pondance de Napoleon I*': lettres oo-
rieoses omises par le oomit^ de publica-
tion; rectifications. Pp. 220. Paris:
Dentu. 18mo. 8-60 f.
DuBsneux QL) Les grands gto^raux de
Louis XTTT, notices historiques. Pp.
392. Paris: Leooffre. 8*60 f.
Fbakoe, L'ancienne; les arts et metiers
an moyen Age. !^tude illustr^e d'aprds
les ouvrages de M. Paul Lacroix. 181
illustr. Paris : Didot. 4 f.
L'industrie et Pari d^ooratif aux
deux derniers sidles. 202 illustr.
Paris : Didot. 4 f .
Frakklin (A.) La vie priy6e d*autrefois.
Arts et metiers, modes, moeurs, usages
des Parisiens du XII* au XYIII* si^le
d'aprds des documents originaux ou in-
Mits. 2 vol. Pp. 248. Paris: Plon.
12mo. 7f.
Frbmt (E.) Origines de Taoad^mie fran-
^aise : L*acad6mie des derniers Yalois
[1670-1686], d*aprte des documents
nouveaux et in^dits. Paris : Leroux.
16 f.
Fbossabd (C. L.) Etude historique et
bibliographique sur la discipline eod^-
siastique des ^lises r6form6es de
France. Paris : Grassart. 1*60 f.
Gazibb (A.) Etudes sur Thistoire reli-
gieuse de la revolution fran^aise, depuis
la reunion des 6tat8-g6n6raux jusqu*au
directoire, d'aprds des documents origi-
naux et in^dits. Paris : Colin. 12mo.
3-60 f.
Gu^EBAULT (L.) l^tnde historique sur
rav^nement de la race cap^tienne.
Pp. 33. Fontenay-le-Comte : Gouraud.
Gv&xs (P.) Histoire g^n^rale de Paris :
Begistres des deliberations du bureau
de la ville de Pans. IH: [1689-1662].
Pp.371. Paris: Champion. 4to. 80 f.
JouBBBT (A.) Les monnaies anglo-fran-
paises frappees au Mans an nom de
Henri VI [1426-1482]. Pp. 12, plates.
Mamers : impr. Fleuxr & Dangin.
La Barbb Dupabcq (de) Histoire de
Henri U [1647-1669]. Paris: Perrin.
6f.
Lb Bot (A.) Le Havre et la Seine-
Inferieure pendant la guerre de 1870-
1871. Pp. 470, map. Paris: Lahure.
8f.
LioNB (prince de). Lettres do, iL la mar-
quise de Coigny [1767] avec une i^eface
de M. de Lesoure. Pp. xxi, 77. Paris :
lib. des Bibliophiles. 16mo.
LoiSBiiBUB (J.) Les privileges de Puniver-
site des lois d'Orieans. Pp.55. Orleans:
Herluison.
Mabtihprbt (comte de). Souvenirs d'un
officier d*etat-major : histoire de Peta-
blissement de la domination franpaise
dans la province d*Oran [1880-1847].
Portrait and map. Paris : Quantin.
6f.
Mavidal (J.) & Laurbnt (E.) Archives
parlementaires de 1787 k 1860. 1**
serie [1787 k 1799]. XXVI: [Du 1^
mai au 6 juin 1791]. Pp. 800. Paris :
Dupont. 20 f.
Mbtzobb (A.) & Vabsem (J.) Bevolution
fran^aise ; Lyon en 1796 : notes et
documents. Pp. 146, plates. Lyon:
Georg. 12mo. 6 f.
Monohanin (A.) Histoire de la revolu-
tion de 1848. Paris : OUendori!. 12mo.
8-60 f.
Pbbet ^.) Histoire d*une grande dame
au dix-nuitieme siede: la Prinoesse
Heiene de Ligne. Portrait. Paris:
Levy. 7-60 f.
Pbbbbt (E.) Les Fran^ais en Alrique,
recits algeriens. I : [1880-1848] ; H :
[1848-1886]. Pp. 487. 493- Pans:
Blond & Barral. 16 f .
Pinoaud(L.) Choiseul-Gouffier: la France
en Orient sous Louis XVI. Pp. 297.
Paris : Picard. 6 f .
Plainb (dom). La guerre de la succes-
sion de Bretagne [1841-1866]. Pp. 75.
Nantes : Forest A Grimaud.
BicHABD (J. M.) Une petite niece de
Saint Louis : Mahaut, comtesse d'Artois
et de Bourgogne [1302-1829] : etude snr
la vie privee, les arts, et Pindustrie ea
Artois et k Paris au conunencement da
quatorzieme sieole. Paris: GhampioiL.
10 f.
BoMBALDi p.) La Corse fran^aise an sei-
zieme siecle : Sampiero Ccorso, colonel
general de Pinfanterie corse au service
de la France. Paris : Lechevalier. 8 f .
SoiouT (L.) Histoire de la constitution
civile du derge et de la persecution
revolutionnaire [1790-1801]. Paris:
Didot. 12mo. 6 f.
Tallom (M.) Fragment de la guerre des
Camisards dans les environs d'Alais,
Vemoux, le Cheylard [1692-1709]. Pp.
xli, 207. Privas : imp. du Patriote.
Thomas (abbe J^ La belle defense de
Saint-Jean-de-Losne en 1686. Pp. 196^
map. Dijon : impr. Jobard.
TousTAiN DB Billy (R.) Histoire eodesi-
astique du diocdse de Coutances. m,
pubUe par A. Heron. Pp. xxxv, 458.
Bouen : Meterie. 12 f .
Valfbbt (J.) Le marechal Baaaine et
Parmee du Bhin, d'aprds les relations
des temoins et les documents officiels.
Pp. 69. Paris: lib. du Moniteur uni-
versel. 18mo.
Valois (N.) Inventaire des arrdts da
conseil d'etat (regne de Henri IV). (In-
ventaires et documents publies par la
direction generale des itfchives natio-
nales.) L Pp. cxlviii, 482. Paris:
Imprimerie nationale. 4to.
Zblleb (B.) Henri HI: Les debuts de
la Ligue [1674-1678]. Extraits des
Memoires de PEstoile, des Memoires
de Marguerite de Valois, <frc. Illustr.
Paris : Hachette. 18mo. 60 c.
Digitized by
Google
1887 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED 618
E. GEEMAN fflSTORY
(Including Austbu-Hunoabt)
Baum (A.) Blagistrat nnd Reformation
in Strassborg bis 1529. Pp. 212.
Strassbaig: Heitz. 4*50 m.
B^BiNouiEB (R.) Die Stammbaome der
Mitgiieder der franzdsischen Golonie in
Berlin, edited by. (Sohriften des
Yereins fur die Geschiohte Berlins.)
Pp. 220. Berlin : Mittler. Folio. 20 m.
Blasendobft (C.) Ctebhard Lebereoht
von Blilcher. Pp. 400, portrait. Ber-
lin : Weidmann. 8 m.
BuBOH (Des Augustinerpropstes Johan-
nes) Chronioon Windeshemense
una Liber de reformatione monasterio-
rum. Ed. by K. Grube. Pp. xlviii, 824.
(Gesohiohtsquellen der Provinz Saoh-
sen XIX.) Halle : Hendel. 16 m.
Enobl (A) & Lehb (E.) Numismatique
de TAlsaoe. 46 plates. Paris : Le-
rouz. 4to. 50 f.
Ebiohson (A.) L'^lise fran^aise de
Strasbourg au xvi* si^e, d'aprds des
documents in6dits. Pp. 72. Strass-
burg: Schmidt.
Palkmann (A.) Beitrage zur (}esohichte
des Fiirstenthums Lippe aus archivali-
schen Quellen. V : Graf Simon VI zur
' Lippe und se^ie Zeit. 2. Pp. 391.
Detmold : Meyer. 5 m.
Prkibsbo. — Urkundenbuch der Stadt
Freiberg in Sachsen. Ed. by H. Er-
misch. n. Bergbau, Bergrecht,
Mtlnze. Pp. Izviii, 529, plate. TCodex
diplomaticus Saxoni» regi». 2. Haupt-
theil, XnL) 4to. Leipzig : Giesecke A
Devrient. 82 m.
Ombist (R.) Les r6formes administra-
tives aocomplies en Prusse [1872-6].
Pp. 34. Bucharest : Edition de la
' Revue G^^rale du Droit et des
Sciences Politiques.* (From the * Revue
G6n6rale.')
HaIiBbbstadt.— Urkundenbuch des Hoch-
stifts Halberstadt und seiner BischMe.
Ed. by G. Schmidt. HI : [1304-1861].
(Publicationen aus den k. preussischen
Staatsarchiv. XXVII.) Pp. 710, plates.
Leipzig : Hirzel. 15 m.
Habticamm (R.) Geschichte Hannovers
von den altesten Zeiten bis auf die
Gegenwart ; mit besonderer Riicksichts-
nahme auf die Entwickelung der Re-
sidenzstadt Hannover. 2nd ed. much
enlarged. 4 voL Pp. 1244, portraits A
maps. Hanover : Kniep. 8 m.
Sbonbs (F. von). Geschichte der Earl
Franzens-Universitat in Graz. Fest-
gabe zur Feier ihres dreihundertjahrigen
Bestandes. Pp. 684. Graz : Leuschner
A Lubensky.
LiNDNXB (A.) Die Aufhebung der Eldster
in Deutschtirol [1782-1787] : ein
Beitrag zur Geschichte Kaiser Joseph's
n. Pp. 485. Innsbruck : Wagner.
BIagdbbubo. — Regesta archiepiscopatua
Magdeburgensis. Sammlung von Aus-
ztigen aus Urkunden und Annalisten
zur Geschichte des Erzstifts und
Herzogthums Magdeburg. Ed. by G.
A. von Mmverstedt. Ill : [1270-1806].
Pp. 810. Magdeburg : Baensch. 6 m.
BIaybb (F. M.) Ueber die Gorrespondenz-
bdcher des Bischofs Sixtus von Frei-
sing [1474-1495]. Pp. 91. Vienna:
Gerold's Sohn.
Mbteb (E. F.) Stettin zur Schwedenzeit.
Stadt, Festung, und Umgegend am
Ende des siebzehnten Jahrhunderts
mit besonderer Beriicksichtigung der
Belagerung von 1677. Pp. 128, maps.
Stettin : Saunier. 2 m.
MoLLBB (E.) Leben und Briefe von
Johannes Theodor Laurent, Titular-
bischof von Ohersones, apostolischem
Vikar von Hamburg und Luxemburg :
Beitrag zur Kirohengeschichte des
neunzehnten Jahrhunderts I : [1804-
1840.] Pp. xxxii, 592. Treves : Pau-
linus-Druckerei. 4*50 m.
Obstebbeioh-Unoabnb, Eriegs-Chronik.
Militarischer Fiihrer auf den Eriegs-
schauplatzen der Monarchic. 11 : Der
siidwestliche Eriegsschauplatz im
Donauthale und in den 5sterrei<^-
schen Alpenl&ndern. Pp. 228, maps.
Vienna: Seidel.
Palatinate.— Regesten der Pfalzgrafen
am Rhein [1214-1400]. L Ed. by
A. Eoch A J. Wille. Pp. 80. Inns-
bruck: Wagner. 4to.
Pick (R.) Aus dem Aachener Stadtarchiv.
I: Verpflichtungsurkunden stadtischer
Beamten [1458-1507]. Pp. 40. Bonn :
Habicht. 1 m.
Reiohstaosakten, Deutsche. IX (com-
pleted). Pp. 708. Gotha: Perthes.
89*60 m.
RooHHOLz (E. L.) Wanderlegenden aus
der oberdeutschen Pestzeit [1848-1850],
zum erstenmal herausgegeben nach
der gleichzeitigen Bemer-Heuidschrift.
Original, Uebersetzung, und Quellen-
nachweis. Pp. 138. Aarau: Sauer-
lander. 8*50f.
Stamn (P. F.) Geschichte Wtbrttem-
bergs. I. (* Geschichte der euro-
paischen Staaten.') Pp. 864, plate.
Gotha : Perthes. 16 m.
Wbbvbke (N. van). Beitrage zur Ge-
schichte des Luxemburger Landes
(completed). Pp. 259. Luxemburg:
Brack. 8-75 m.
WiBOAND (W.) Urkunden und Akten der
Stadt Strassburg. n : Politische Ur-
kunden [1266-1882]. Strassburg :
Trdbner. Pp. 482. 4to.
Zbtssbkbo (H. B. von). Ueber das
Rechtsverfahren Rudolfs von Habsburg
Digitized by
Google
614 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED July
gegen Ottokar von Bdhmen. Pp. 49.
Vienna : Qerold's Sohn.
ZzBOLAUEB n?. Yon). Die Befreiong
Ofens von der THrkenherrsohaft [1686] :
ein Beitrag znr zweihnndert jahrigen
Gedaohtnissfeier. Pp. 192, plate. Izms-
bruok: Wagner.
X. HISTORY OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND
Boabb(C.W.) Oxford. ('Historio Towns.*)
Pp. 230. London : Longmans. 3/6.
Boswell's Life of Johnson, including
Boswell's journal of a tour to the
Hebrides, and Johnson's diary of a
journey into North Wales. Ed. by
G. Birkbeck HilL 6 vol. Pp. cxzxii,
2696. Oxford : Clarendon Press. 63/.
CabtiTHTiW, Municipal records of the city of.
Ed. by B. S. Ferguson and W. Nauson.
Carlisle: Thuman. 15/.
OoNsiTT (right rev. E.) Life of Saint
Cuthbert. Pp. 195. London : Bums &
Oates. 2/6.
Fbbguson (S.) Ogham inscriptions in
Ireland, Wales, and Scotland. Pp. 160.
Edinburgh : Douglas. 12/.
Fbamqubville (comte de). Le gouveme-
ment et le parlement britanniques. 2
vol. Paris: Bothschild.
GoMME (G. L.) Romano-British remains.
A classified collection of the chief con-
tents of the ' Gentleman's Magazine '
[1731-1868]. I. Pp. 297. London :
EUiot Stock. 7/6.
Gboome (F. H.) a short border history.
Pp. 224. Kelso : J. & J. H. Butherfurd.
3/6.
Ingbah (T. D.) a history of the legislative
union of Great Britain and Ireland.
Pp. 236. London : Macmillan. 10/6.
Elopp (0.) Der Fall des Hauses Stuart
und die Succession des Hauses Han-
nover in Gross-Britannien und Irland
im Zusammenhange der europaischen
Angelegenheiten [1660-1714]. XIH:
Die Kriegsjahre [1708-1710]. Pp. 577.
Vienna: Braumiiller.
Koch (J.) Li rei de Engleterre : ein
anglo - normannischer Geschichtsaus-
zug, zum ersten Male kritisch verdffent-
licht. Pp. 31. Berlin : Gartner.
Lbckt (W. E. H.) a history of England
in the eighteenth century. V, VI. Pp.
1238. London : Longmans. 36/.
LuPTON (J. H.) Life of John Colet, dean
of St. Paul's. London : Bell.
Maiotius (MJ| Zu Aldhelm und Baeda.
Pp. 102. Vienna : Gerold's Sohn.
BiAUA Stuabt's Briefwechsel mit An-
thony Babington, ed. by B. Sepp. Pp.
83. Munich : Lindauer. 2 m.
Newell (E. J.^ A popular history of the
ancient Bntish church, with special
reference to the church in Wales.
London: S.P.C.K. 2/6
O'Connor (W. A.) History of the Irish
people. II : The period from the union
to the land act [1881]. Manchester r
Heywood. 3/6.
Pebbeau (P.) Gli Ebrei in Inghilterra
nel secolo xi e xii: relazione. Pp. 15.
Trieste : Morterra. (From the * Corriere
Israelitico.')
Plasse fabb6 F. X.) Le clerg^ fran^ais
r^ugie en Angleterre. U. Pp. 444..
Paris : Pahn6. 760 f.
Quabr^-Retbourbon (L.) Londres au
commencement du dix-huitidme sidde*
d'aprds des documents in6dits. Lille :
impr. Danel. (From the 'Bulletin de
la Soci^t^ de Geographic de Lille.')
BooEBS (J. E. Thorold). The first nine
years of the bank of England. Pp.
xxxiii, 183. Oxford : Clarendon Press.
8/6.
Sepp (B.) Process gegen Maria Stuart
zu Fotheringay [14-24 und 15-25 Ok-
tober 1586], und in der Stemkammer za
Westminster [25 Okt.-4 Nov. 1586]»
nach den Akten dargestellt. Pp. 155.
Munich : Lindauer. 5 m.
Stephen (Leslie). Dictionary of National
Biography. XI : Clater-CondeU, Lon-
don: Smith d^ Elder. 12/6.
Tatlob (J.) Great historic families of
Scotland. 2 vol. London : Virtue. 45/.
Thomas de Canterbury, Saint, Fragments
d'une vie de, en vers accoupl^s, public
pour la premidre f ois d'apr^ les feuil-
lets de la collection Goethals - Ver>
cruysse, par P. Meyer. With f ac-simile.
Paris : Didot. 4to. 10 f.
ToBBLLNO (W. H.) William the Third*
Pp. 276. London : W. H. Allen. 12mo.
2,6.
Vatke (T.) Culturbilder aus Alt-England.
Pp. 326, illustr. Berlin : Eiihn. 5 m.
Wabd (T. H.) The reign of Queen Vic-
toria, a survey of fifty years of pro-
gress ; edited by. 2 vol. London :
Smith A Elder. 82/.
Watebs rB. E. Chester). Parish registera
in England : their history and contents,
with suggestions for securing their
better custody and preservation. New
ed., rewritten throughout and enlarged.
Pp. 118. London: Longmans. 5/.
Wendoveb (Boger de). The flowers of
history. Ed. by H. G. Hewlett L
London: published under the direction
of the master of the rolls. 10/.
ToBK, Historians of the church of, and its
archbishops. Ed. by J. Baine. IL
London : Published under the direction
of the master of the rolls. 10/.
Digitized by
Google
1887 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED 615
XI. ITALIAN HISTOEY
(Including Savoy)
BoNANNi (T.) Ck)rografia dell* ftntioa re-
gione dell' Abmzzo e delle sae vetaste
oitti : relazione. Pp. 72. Aqnila :
GroBsi.
Bbizio (E.) Gaida alle antichiU della
villa e del moseo etrusco di Marzabotto.
Pp. 56. Bologna : Fava & Garagnam.
16mo.
DiNA (A.) Ladovioo il Moro prima della
sua venota al govemo. Pp.44. Milano:
Prato.
GumiciNi (G.) Diario bolognese dall*
anno 1796 al 1818. Pp. 15S. Bologna:
Tip. gi^ Compositori.
Hetox (E.) Genua und seine Marine im
Zeitalter der Ereuzztlge. Beitrage zur
Verfassungsgeschichte. Pp. 199. Inns-
bruck: Wagner.
Jaknblli (G.) Pietro della Yigna di
Capua : nuove ed ultime risposte al
signer G. Faraone. Pp. 518. Caserta :
Nobile. 101.
Malaoola (G.) I rettori nelP antico
studio e nella modema universiU di
Bologna : note storiche e oatalogo.
Pp. 59. Bologna : tip. Monti.
Medin (A.) & Fbati (L.) Lamenti storici
dei seooli XIV, X V, e XVI raccolti e or-
dinati. I. Pp. 275. Bologna: Boma-
gnoli dall' Acqua. 16mo. 9 1.
MuNTZ (E.) Les antiquit^s de la ville de
Borne aux XIV, XV, et XVP sidles.
Topographic, monuments, collections,
d'apris des documents nouveaux.
Plates. Paris : Leroux. 10 f .
MuNTZ (E.) La bibliothdque du Vatican
au XVI* si^e, notes et documents.
Pp. 140. Paris : Leroux. 2*50 f.
Ottolini (V.) La rivoluzione lombarda
del 1848 e 1849, con documenti inediti.
Pp.672. Milan: Hoepli. 16mo. 71.
Palomes (A.) Appendice all' opuscolo
* Be Guglielmo I e le monete di cuoio :
acoenni.' Pp. 80. Palermo : tip. dell'
Armenia. 2 1.
Pebbin (A.) Histoire de la vall^ et du
prieur6 ae Chamonix du X* au XVIII*
si^le, d'apr^s les documents reoueiUis
par A. Bonnefoy. Pp. 255, plates.
Chamb^ry : Perrin. 6 f.
B088I (de). U monastero di S. Erasme,
presBo S. Stefano rotondo, nella casa
dei Valerii sul Celio. Pp. 25. Bome :
Guggiani.
Sanuto (Marino). I Diar!. XV. Pp.
608. Venice : Visentini. 4to. 24 1.
TosTi (L.) La contessa Matilde e i ro-
mani pontefici. Pp. 403. Bome : tip.
della Camera dei Deputati. 4-50 1.
ViLiABi (P.) La storia di (Hrolamo
Savonarola e de' suoi tempi. Newly
corrected and enlarged. I. Pp. xxxix„
533. Florence : Le Monnier. 8
XII. HISTORY OF THE NETHERLANDS
Bas (F. de). Prins Frederik der Neder-
landen en zijn tijd. I. Pp. 682, por-
traits, dc. Schiedam: Boelants.
13-60 fl.
De Potter. Geschiedenis van de ge-
meenten der provincie Cost- Vlaanderen.
VII : Gtent, van den vroegsten tijd tot
heden. Plates. Ghent : Annoot-Braeck-
man.
Devillbbs (L.) Cartulaire des comtes de
Hainaut, de I'avdnement de GuUlaume
II k la mort de Jacqueline de Bavidre.
m. (* Collection de chroniques beiges
in^dites publiSes par ordre du gouveme-
ment.*) Pp. 636. Brussels : Hayez. 4to.
Gouw (J. ter). Geschiedenis van Amster-
dam. V. Pp. 528, map. Amsterdam:
J. G. van Holkema. 12 fl.
EoLLEwuN (A. M.) Geschiedenis van
nederlandsoh Cost- en West-IndiS. Pp.
108. Amersfoort: Slothouwer.
Laoemans (E. G.) Beoueil des traits et
conventions conclus par le royaume
des Pays-Bas avec les puissances 6tran-
gdres depuis 1813 jusqu'4 nos jours.
IX. Pp. 281. The Hague : Belinfante.
7-60 fl.
Nameohe (mgr.) Le rdgne de Philippe II
et la lutte religieuse dans les Pays-Bas
au seizi^me si^le. VI. Pp. 457
Louvain : Fonteyn. 4 f .
Xm. SCANDINAVIAN HISTORY
Beremcbeutz (F. a. G.) Pr^is du droit
constitutionnel du royaume de Su^e ;
pr6c^6 d'un aper^u g6n6ral du pays et
de la population, <&c. Paris : NUsson.
6f.
Lttnde (O. G.) & Overland (0. A.)
Norske Bigsregistranter. I: [1648-
1649]. Pp. 320. Christiania : Dybwad.
Martens (H.) Skandinavische Hof- und
Staatsgeschichten des neunzehnten
Jahrhunderts, nach den schwedischeQ
Quellen des Dr. A. Ahnfelt. Pp. 254.
Stuttgart: Frommann. 4*50 m.
Petersen (H.) Danske geistlige SigiUer
fra middelalderen. I- VI. Pp. 96,
80 plates. Copenhagen : PhUipsen.
4to.
Bobenvinoe (S. U.) a Holstein (H.) De
Danske paa Schelden [1808-1809]. Pp.
94. Copenhagen: Philipsen.
Digitized by
Google
616 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED July
XIV. SLAVONIAN AND ROUMANIAN HISTORY
CzABTOBTSKi (prinoo Adam), M^moires
da, et correspondance aveo Tempereur
Alexandre I*'. Ed. by G. de Mazade.
2 voL Pp. 438, 396. Paris: Plon.
15 f.
Emlsb (J.) Libri oonfinnationQm ad
benefioia eoclesiastica Pragensem per
archidioBoesim Liber VU. ab a. 1410
asque ad a. 1419. Sumptibus Booietatis
historica Pragensis. Pp. 350. Prague :
Bivn&£.
Hosn (Stanislai), S. B. E. CardinaliB
xnajoriB poenitentiarii episcopi Yar-
miensis [1504-1579] epistols, ora-
tiones, legationes. II: [1551-1558].
Ed. by F. Hipler A Y. Zakrzewski. Pp.
xci, 520. (Acta historica res gestas
Poloniffi illustrantia ab a. 1507 ad a.
1795. Ed. collegium historioum aoa-
demis litterarom CracovienBis. IX, 1.)
Cracow: Friedlein.
LiKOWBKi (E.) Geschichte deB allmaligen
Yerfallsderunirten ruthenischen Kirche
im XYIII und XIX Jahrhundert unter
polnischem und ruBsischem Scepter,
nach den Quellen bearbeitet. Transl.
by A. TioozyiiBki. II : Das XIX Jahr-
hundert. Pp. 339. Posen: Jolowioz.
5m«
M1KI1O8ICH (F.) Die serbischen Dynasten
Gmojevic : ein Beitrag zur Geschichte
von Montenegro. Pp. 66. Yienna :
Gerold's Sohn.
OssiPowiTscH (O.) Michael Dmitrie-
witsch Skobolew, sein Leben, sein Cha-
rakter und seine Thaten, nach ms-
sischen Quellen und vorzOglich naoh
seinen eigenen Tagesbef ehlen. Pp. 1 1 1 .
Hanover : Helwing. 2 m.
Pid (J. L.) Die rumanisohen Gesetze
und ihr Nexus mit dem byzantinischen
und slavischen Becht. Pp. 36. Leip-
zig : Duncker & Humblot. 60 pf.
PoELCUAU (A.) Die livlandische Ge-
Bchichtslitteratur im Jahre 1885. Pp.
108. Biga : EymmeL 12mo. 1 m.
WicKZNHAUBBB (F. A.) Molda, Oder Bei-
trage zur Geschichte der Moldau und
Bukowina. Ill: Geschichte der Eldster
Woronetz und Putna. 1. Pp. 96.
Gzemowitz : Pardini.
XV. HISTORY OF SPAIN AND PORTUGAL
Alcobta (S.) Antecedentes hist6rioo8
Bobre los tratados con el Paraguay.
Pp. 247. Buenos Ayres: Moreno y
Nunez. 4to.
Balaoueb (Y.) Historia de Cataluna.
IX. Pp. 534. Madrid: Tello. 4to.
11 rs.
Gastsllanos (J. de). Historia del nuevo
reyno de Granada, publicala por pri-
mera vez D. A. Paz y Mella. II.
(Golecci6n de Escritores Gastellanos,
XLIX.) Pp. Ivii, 450. Madrid : Perez
Dubrull. 5-50 rs.
EsPASfA del siglo decimonono (La). Golec-
ci6n de conferencias hi8t6ricas. U.
Pp. 560. Madrid : Libr. de San Martin.
4to. 12 rs.
MoNTEBo YiDAL (J.) Historia general de
Filipinas desde el descubrimiento de
dichas islas hasta nnestros dias. I.
Pp. 606. Madrid : Tello. 4to. 16 rs.
MoBOADO (A.) Historia de SeviUa.
Pp. 271. Seville: J. M. Ariza. 4to.
16 rs.
Philippine Islands.— Golecci6n de docu-
mentos in6ditos relativos al descubri-
miento, conquista, y organizaci6n de
las antiguas posesiones espanolas de
Ultramar. S^unda serie, HI (Islas
Filipinas, II). Pp. 491. Madrid:
Bivadeneyra. 4to. 16 rs.
Saenz Baquebo (J. M.) Monografias his-
t6rico-criticas. II : Felipe H. I. Pp.
75. Madrid : Hemimdez. 1'25 rs.
XVI. SWISS fflSTORY
DxMOLB (E.) Histoire mon^taire de
Gendve [1535-1792]. Pp. 373, plates.
Geneva : Georg. 4to. 20 f .
- Tableau des monnaies genevoises
frapp6es de 1635 k 1792. Pp. 35. Geneva :
Georg. 16mo. 2 f .
bevillb (comte H. d*). Le oomte Pelle-
grino Bossi ; sa vie, son oeuvre, sa mort
[1787-1848]. Portrait Paris: L6vy.
7-50 f .
Bahn (J. B.) Geschichte des Schloeses
Ghillon. Pp. 24. (' Mittheilungen der
Antiquarischen Gtesellschaft in Zurich,'
XXIII, 3.) Ziirich : Orell & FusslL
Yautbey (mgr.) Histoire des ^vdques de
BAle. lY. (concluding vol. ii.) Pp. 640.
Einsiedeln : Benziger. 10 fr.
XVn. HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
(Including Canada and Mexico)
Baxjdoncoubt (J. de). Histoire populaire
du Ganada d'apr^s les documents Iran-
^ais et am^ricains. Paris: Bloud &
Barral. 5 f.
Bebnabd (J.) Betrospections of America
[1797-1811]. Ed. from the MS. by
Mrs. Bayle Bernard ; with an introduo>
tion, dc, by L. Hutton and B. Matthews.
Digitized by
Google
1887 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED 617
Pp. 380. New York : Harper. 12mo.
B1BB8C0 (prince Georges de). An Mexique
[1862]. Combats et retraite des six
mille. Bliistr. Paris : Plon. 20 1
Bbown (G. W.) Balidmore and the nine-
teenth of April, 1861 : a study of the
war. Pp. 176. Baltimore : Murray. $1,
Bbtob (G.) a short history of the Cana-
dian people. Pp. 532. London:
Sampson Low. 7/6.
Chaenay (D.) The ancient cities of the
New World : being travels and explora-
tions in Mexico and Central America
[1867-1882]. niustr. London : Chap-
man & Hall. 81/6.
Curtis (G. T.) Life, character, and ser-
vice of General G. B. McClellan : an
address. Pp. 103. Boston: Cupples,
Upham, & Go. 12mo. 50 cts.
Ibeland (J. B.) The republic, or a history
of the United States in the adminis-
trations. I-IV. Chicago: Fairbanks
& Pahner. ^10.
Patton (J. H.) A concise history of the
American people from the discoveries
of the continent to the present time.
2 vol. Pp. 1 1 70, illnstr. London:
Sonnenschein. 21/.
Pausoh (captain), chief of Hanau artillery
during tiie Burgoyne campaign [1776^
1777] , Journal of. Transl. by coL W. L.
Stone. With introduction by £. J.
Lowell. Pp. 185. Albany, New
York.
PoBTBB (admiral D. D.) The naval his-
tory of the civil war, U.SJL Pp. 846,
illustr. London : Sampson Low. 4to.
26/.
SoHBOEDEB (L.) The fall of Maximilian's
empire, as seen from a U.S. gunboat's
ports. New York: Putnam's Sons.
12mo. $1.
SouDDER (H. E.) New York. (* American
Commonwealths.') 2 voL Pp. 739,
358. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin, dk Co.
16mo. ^2-60.
Stoddabd (W. O.) John Adams and
Thomas Je£Ferson. [* Lives of the
Presidents.') Pp. 358. New York:
White, Stokes, & Allen. 12mo. ^1*25.
Wharton (F.) A digest of the inter-
national law of the United States, taken
from documents issued by presidents
and secretaries of state, &c. 8 vol.
Pp. xxxiii, 825, 832, 837. Washington :
Government Printing Office.
Digitized by
Google
618
July
Contents of Periodical Publications
I. FRANCE
Bavue Historique, zzziii. 2. — March —
DssoLoeBAUx : Oabrielle d^Estries and
Sully; a criticism of the latter's
* Economies Royales * [tending to show
that Sally's collections indnde not only
misrepresentations but forged letters of
Henry lY, &o., invented for the pur-
pose of magnifying the sarintendimt*s
importance in state affairs and of in-
dulging his jealousy of other persons at
the court]. C. Gross : The English
hansa [tracing the usage of this term
(1) as a payment by merchants on
entering a guild or for acquiring the
right of trading in a town, and (2) as a
synonym for the merchant-guild itself].
E. BouBOEOis prints two tmpub-
Ushed letters of Montcalm [July 1767].
—I. GoLL describes the recent stages
in the controversy concerning the genu-
ineness of the famous vumuscript of
Krdlov4 Dvor and its supposed medie-
val poems, some of which, as is well
known, are, if genuine, of great histori-
cal interest. [The writer regards the
work as a forgery of the beginning of
the present century.] ^xxziv. 1. —
May — M. Wahl: Joseph CharUer
[executed 1793] a study in the history
of the revolution at Lyons, A.
Babbau : Pierre Quillaume de Chavau-
don [of Troyes], a provincial magistrate
under Louis XIV [1647-1727]
Baron nu Cassb : On the ' Correspon-
dance de Napoleon J*^,' concluded [sup-
plement of letters, 11 April, 1811-
6 June, 1815].
Bevne dei Questtoni Hittoriquei, zli. 8.
— April—0. Dblabc : The holy see and
the Norma/n conquest of England, [The
writer cites Roger Hoveden as a primary
authority, and relies without suspicion
on the forged Ingulf.] Comte db
Mas Latbib : Elements of papal diplo-
matics in the middle ages, continued
from voL xzxiz. [describing the consti-
tution of the papal chancery, and giving
the rules for the drawing up of papal
documents, with particulars of the for-
mula, subscriptions, methods of dating,
Ac] L. Soioot: Rome in its rela-
tions with the directory and Bona-
parte [1796-1797] D.d'Ausst: The
revolutionary laws and the revenue
derived from land [attempting to mini-
mise their effect] G. Monod : Reply
to criticisms of M, FusttX de CotUanges,
in the previous number, with conmients
by the latter.
Bibliothdque de TEcole det Ohartet, zlvii.
6. — H. D'Abbois db JuBAOfviLiiE : The
suffix * -iacus * in names of places [con-
sidered as representing originally the
Celtic -acus affixed to Latin stems in
-to, and afterwards mistaken by the
Franks as though the i was part of the
suffix, so that formations like * Teoderi-
ciacus' and * Teodeberciaous ' arose].
A. Bbutails : Description of manu-
scripts belonging to the chapter of
Gerona in Spain, E. Molinieb:
Inventary of the papal treasury under
Boniface VI JI [1296J, continued from
vol. xlvi. N. Valois : Tessier^s * Mort
d* Etienne Marcel ' [attacks the author's
defence of Marcel].
Annalei de TEcole libre des Scieneet
Folitiqiiet, ii. 2,— April — ^R. Eobchlin :
French policy at the congress of Ra-
stadtf continued [negotiations relating
to the cession of the left bank of the
Rhine. The error of the directory lay
in its persistent refusal to buy the con-
sent of Austria. Austria demanded
compensation in Italy for the extension
of French power in that country during
the course of the congress, and for the
cession of the left bank of the Rhine.
The policy of Treilhard, the French
representative, was more prudent than
that of the Directory] G. LsFivBB
PoNTALis : The mission of the marquis
d'EguiOes to Scotland in 1745-46
[D'Eguilles was despatched to aooom-
pany prince Charles Edward, rather to
observe affairs on behalf of the Fr^ich
government than to represent it. He
estimates the army with which the
prince entered England at 7,000 men.
French policy aimed at the separation
of England and Scotland, not at the re-
storation of the Stuarts throughout the
United Kingdom].
Bulletin de la Sooiete de rHittoire du
Digitized by
Google
1887 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS 619
Protestontisme Fran^aia, zxztI 8. —
J. Bonnet : The tolerance of cardinal
SadoUt, oontinued. G. Bead prints
a letter of Theodore Beea to Isaac
Casaubon [1595] ; and A. J. Emschxd^,
documents on the refugees in Holland
[1686-871 C. Bead prints papers
eonceming huguenot and foreign burials
in Paris in the eighteenth century, oon-
tinned.
La ControTerse et le Contemporain.— Ja-
nuary.— P. Allabd : IJa persecution
d*AureUen,==March — Mgr. Bioabd :
L^abbe Maury et Mirabeau, les luttes
dootrinales k la Con8titaante.==4pri}
— E. DB Babth^lemy : La bourgeoisie
frawjaise et la revolution.
La Ck)rrefpondant.— ^66n4ari/ 10— V. de
Chbviony : La correspondance de
Marie d'Agreda et de Philippe TV
25 <& March 10— A. Lamolois : Les
premieres annees du second empire
[from the * Greville Memoirs *]
March lO-ApHl 26 — Mayol de Lupe :
Un pape prisonnier d Savone, d'aprds
des documents in^dits, four articles.
==March 10 — L. Joubert : La coali-
tion de 1701 centre la France,
Journal des Savants. — March — E. Benam :
LHnscription de Mesa.
VonTelle B^ra^.—February 15 — Yioomte
d'Ayenel : Richelieu et les protestants
frangais apres la Rochelle;=iApril
15— J. Zeller: Rodolphe de Hobs-
bourg^ fondatear de la maison d^An-
triche.
La Bevolntion Fran9aise. — Jan/uary —
F. A. AuiiABD : La commission extra-
ordinaire de VassembUe legislative.
A. DuvAND : LHnsurrection et le
siege de Lyon [1798]. V. Jeanvbot :
Pierre Suzor, eveque constitutionnel de
TourSy continued. F. A. Aulard :
Documents in^dits : Les premiers actes
diplomatiques du conseil executif pro-
visoire [aoAt 1792]. == February db
March — The Same : Documents in^dits :
Le regisire des deliberations du conseil
executif provisoire [18 ao^t-22 septem-
bre 1792]. == April— F. Gapfabel :
L*opposition miUtaire sous le consulat.
BeYue Critiqiie d'Histoire et de Littira.
tjos.— February 21 — A. Hauyettb :
Holder's edition of Herodotu8.==^ —
Extracts from the correspondence of
general d*Arbois [one letter dated 1789,
and lour 1797]. = 3farc/i 7— E.
Molinisb: Aleseandre Lenoir et le
Musee des Monuments frangais.=
14 — G. Lacour-Gayet : The Mace-
donian campaigns of Jtdius Ccesar [b.o.
49-8]. 28 — Tamizey de Labboqxte A
G.M. : Geffrey's * Madame de Main-
tenon,*^==April 26 — A. Babth: Le
Bon's ' Civilisations de VInde,*=May
16 — Clebmont-Ganneau : Notes on
oriental archceology [from Palestine
and Cyprus] . ==■ 28 — G. Maspbbo :
OberHner's * Sun-worship among the
ancient nations of the east.* J.
PsiOHABi : Miliarakis's Topography of
Argolis and Corinth,
Bevne des Denz-Kondes.— Fe&rt^ar^ 1 dt
March 1 — C. Bousset : La premiire
expedition de Constantine [Alg6rie], rfc
15 dMarch 1— H. Taine : Napoleon
Bonaparte.==zApril 1~C. Bousset :
Le gouvemem^nt du marechal VaUe en
Algerie [1837-1840]. T. Hamont :
Le proces de Lally-Tolendal,
Bevne de Geographie.— ^e&ruor^ — H.
MoNiN : La France et le ressort du
parlement de Paris [1789].=3farcfc db
April — P. Gaftarel : La decou/oerte du
Canada par les Frangais : Yerazzani,
Cartier, et Boberval. == April— L,
Dbapeybon: Prqjet d'etabUssement en
Afrique [1790].
Bame de la S^olntion. — February-
April — A. Taine : La Provence en
1791-2. =z March— Siege de OSnes,
tentative de ravitaillement [messidor,
an vm] . April— H.. d'Idbville : La
bourgeoisie de 1830 et la Ugende de *89.
n. GERMANY AND AUSTRIA
Sjbers Historische Zeitschrift, Ivii. 8.
Munich.— T. Mommsen : Der Rechen-
schaftsbericht des Augustus [regarding
the Ancyra inscription not as a sepul-
chral monument, but as an * account *
of the emperor's public acts, drawn up
probably, in its original form, previously
to the defeat of Varus] A. Philippi :
Some points in the history of Alci-
biades L. Erhardt : On the bio-
graphy of Karl Friedrich Eichhom,
Historisches Jahrbnch der Odrret-Oesell-
schaft, viii S. Munich.— P. Schanz:
The year of St. PauVs imprisonment
[placed AJ). 58] H. Denifle prints
the report of the disputation of Pablos
Christiani and R. Mose Nachmani
[1263] with other documents, bulls, &o.,
bearing on the subject. E. Onkel :
The appoirUment of duke Ferdinand of
Bavaria as coadjutor of the archbishyp
of Cologne [describing the long pre-
bminary negotiations, 1588-1596].
F. DiTTRioH prints new documents
bearing on the biography of Oasparo
Contarini. H. Finke shows from a
Palatine manuscript at Bome that
Dietrich von Niem, and not Pierre
d'Ailly, was the author of the anony-
metis tract called * De necessitate refor-
matiorUs.*
Xanrenbrecher's Historisches Tasohen-
bnoh, 6th ser. vi Leipzig. — ^B. Euolbb :
Godfrey of Bouillon [a biography].
A. HoBAwrrz : The * CoUoquia *
of Erasmus, E. Habueb : On the
life of [Cortes] the first viceroy of
Mexico, J. Asbach : Cornelius Tad-
Digitized by
Google
620 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS July
tus [with a oritioism of his works], con-
tinued from last year G. Fbank :
Mysticism cmd pieHsm in the mneteewth
eenkiry, S. Lowenfbld : On the
recent history of the papaX archives,
G. VON Bblow : Administrative re-
organistUion in the German territories
in the sixteenth century,
Henes ArohiT der OeteUsohaft fftr Utere
Beutiohe Oeschiohtskiinde, xii 8.
Hanover. — W. Gundlaoh : Synopsis of
the materials for the section of * Epi-
stolee * of the Frankish time in prepa-
ration for the * Momtmenta Germania,*
concluded [printing a new letter of
Alonin] E. Sackur: On the bio-
graphies of Mcijolus B. Gebhabt :
The • Confutatio primatus pap(B ' [as-
signing the work to Matthias Ddring,
who cUed in 1469] ^W. Lippbrt:
The capitulary of the emperor Lothar I
of the year 846 [printing the text with
collation] F. Kdhn : On the criti-
cism of Albert of Aachen [discussing
the historical value of his chronicle].
0. Radbmaoheb : Aventinus and
the Hungarian chronicle [showing the
extent of his obligations to this source].
K. Lbhmanm : On a Paris manu-
script [nouv. acq. 204] of old German
Urns W. ScHTJM I On the* Miracula
Burchardi III archiepiscopi Magde-
burgensis,*
X. B. Akademie der Wissenfohaften lu
KtLnchen : Sitzungsberichte der philos.-
philol. und hist. Classe, 1886, 4.—
A. VON Bbinz: On the nature of the
Roman *fiscus * [examining the changes
in the meaning of the word, and the pro-
cess by which it became identified with
the *8Brarium'] P. von Loheb :
German law under the Frankish empire
[tracing the origin and decline of the
national law-books, the compilation of
the capitularies, and the influence of
the church on both].==1887, 1. —
B. Scholl: Festival commissions at
Athens [illustrated from a recently dis-
covered inscription] F. von Greoo-
BovixTs : The Bceotian campaign of the
Catalan Company [1309] and the battle
of the Cephiseus [a narrative].
J. Fbiedbich : On the history ofEbruint
mayor of the palace^ in connexion with
the *yita s. Leodegarii* [defending
Ebruin] Unoer: On the chronology
of Zeno the philosopher and of Antt-
gonus Gonatas [with a table of the
accessions of the Macedonian kings
from Philip II to Perseus].
Treitschke k Delbrftck^s Preuisiiohe Jahr-
bncher, Ux. ^B.^AprU-June. Berlin.
T. V. T.: The strategy of the Russo-
Turkish war [1877-1878], concluded.
H. VON Treitschke : The political
monarchy of Frederick the Creates
* Anti-MacchiaveU.' H. Delbruck:
The engagement at LangensaUa [1866]
and general Vogel von Falckenstein [a
sharp criticism of the general].
T. ScHiEMANN : St, Nicolaus in Reval,
a study in the church life of the fif-
teenth century, L. Goldsohmidt :
ObituarynoticeofOtto Stobbe [f 19 May].
Bri6ger*8 Zeitschrift fOr Kirehen-
geschichte, iz. l.^May. Gotha.
C. Erbbs: St Cacilidj in connexion
with the papal crypt and the oldest
church at Rome, H. Yibx : Melan-
chthon^s political attitude at the diet of
Augsburg [1580], first article. G. A.
WiLKBNS contributes a survey of the
literature of 1848-1886, dealing with
the history of Spanish protestaniism in
the sixteenth century H. Haupt:
On the history of the Flagellants [in
Germany in 1454]. L. Schulzb : On
the Thomas a Kempis question [treating
of the manuscripts] W. Tb8xx>bpf :
On the genuineness of the date of the
edict of Worms of 8 May 1521
J. Ney : On the history of the diet of
Spires [1529], second article [doou-
ments].— 'E. Stern: On the date of
Erasmus'^s birth [placing it in 1465].
BoTe k Friedberg*8 Zeitschrift fftr Kir-
chenreoht xxiL 1.— Freibnrg-im-Breis-
gau.— W. Martens : On the appoint-
ments to the papal chair under the
emperors Henry III and Henry TV, IV.
concluded. C. Weilani> : The dJona*
tion of Constantine [on its origin,
against Grauert*s theory of its being a
^ankish production].
Jahrbttcher fOr Nationaldkonomie n.
SUtistik, 1887— Afaj^. Jena. Elbteb:
Sismondi [biography, with criticism of
his economic teaching].
MittheilniLgen des Instituts fftr Oester-
reichiiche Oeichichtiflorschiing, Tiii. 8.
Innsbruck. H. Brunner: The origin
of the 'Schbffen' [showing that the
supposed first appearance of the title
' scabinus ' in a Lombard document of
774 really belongs to the year 880, that
the origin of the office is purely
Frankish, and that it was by the
Franks that it was extended over
other parts of the empire]. ^H.
HoooEWEo: The crusade of DamieUa
[1218-1221], first article S. Stbim-
HERZ : The relations of Lewis I of
Hungary with Charles IV, L [1842-
1858] T. Fellner : On the history
of the Austrian central administration
[1498-1848], first article [down to the
establishment of the distinct Austrian
hofkanzlei, after the death of the em-
peror Matthias].— J. Weizsaoxxr :
On the docum>ents of Charles IV^9
treaties with the WitUlsbach dukes at
EltviUe [1849], printed in the pre-
ceding number of the ' Mittheilungen.'
K. KoPL : On the privilege of the
Altstadt of Prague [witii a document].
A. F. P&iBRAM prints a letter of Taaffe
to Lord Arlington [8 June, 1668] on
the policy of Austria at the conclusion
of tiie peace of Aix-la-Chapelle, and
the political testament of the imjperial
Digitized by
Google
1887 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS 621
ambassixdor, Franz von lAsola [a satire
in French verse], both from the English
Beoord Office ; and an English song on
the delivery of Vienna from the Tv/rks
[1683], from a printed tract in the
British Museum. L. Finksl contri-
butes a survey of Polish historical
literature [1880-6].
Ermifoh'i Neues Archiv far S&olisisohe
Oesohiohte nnd Alterthumskunde, viii.
1, 2. Dresden.— S. Issleib : From
Passau to Sievershausen [1552-3, in
continuation of paper in the previous
volume]. — T. Distel prints documents
on the quarrel of the lawyers with the
laity at Leipzig [1574] H. Ermisoh :
On the history of Freiberg during the
twie of the reformation [1526-8]
L. WEiLAifD : On the pedigree of the
Wettiner [from a manuscript at Dres-
den].
Zeitsohrift f&r die gesammte Staats-
wisiensehaft, xlii. Tiibingen. — Taobb :
Financial policy in the American eivU
war. SoHAUBB : Capitanei partus
de Tunithi [explained as indicating not
Pisan officials in Tunis, but officials,
residing in Pisa, of the corporation
of merchants trading to Tunis].—
KiJMELiN: History of an American
township [in Ohio, since 1800]
Wabschaubb : Lotteries in Prussia^
[1703-1767, private, with state sanc-
tion ; 1767-1794, monopolised by state
but let out to individuals; from 1794
onward, managed by state for state
benefit].
Zeltsehrift fiir Katholische Theologie, zi.
2. Innsbruck.— B. Duhb, S. J.: The
charges against father Petre^ concluded.
Hilgenfeld'B Zeitschrift fiir Wissensohaft-
liche Theologie, zzx. 2. Leipzig. —
F. GoBBBs: Arians included in the
official martyroloay of the Roman
church [considered in connexion with
the view of martyrdom held in the
early church, and with the treatment
of heretics in the west].
m. GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND
Church Quarterly Beview. Ko. 47. —
April — The empress Eudoda [based on
Gregorovius's * Athenais'] . The early
christian ministry and the Didache
[arguing for an early date for this
document]. The language spoken
by Christ and the apostles,
Dublin Beview. Srd Series. Ko. xxzir.
April — Hon. Mrs. Maxwell Soott:
Barbotir^s legends of the saints [from
Horstmann's edition] D. L. : The
church after the conquest [review of
Bule*8 edition of Eadmer]. Bev.
C. C. Gbant: Where St. Patrick was
bom [in support of the claim of
Old Eilpatrick, near Dumbarton]
J. B. G. : Lightfoot's * St. Ignatius * and
the Roman primacy Cardinal Man-
ning: Beview of Creighton's * History
of the Papacy J* i-iv.
Sdinbargh Beyiew. Ko. Z^%,— April —
Count Vitzthum's ' Reminiscences *
[1862-1864]. The seventh earl of
Shaftesbury Oino Capponi [a bio-
graphy based mainly on his recently
published correspondence]. Can-
der*s * Syrian Stone-lore* [an account
of recent explorations] Gardiner* s
* History of the great ciml war^* L
The conquest of Burma.
Law Quarterly Beyiew. No. 10. — April —
Judge W. O'CoNNOB MoBBis : The
land system of Ireland [an historical
review]. J. W. Salmond : The history
of contract [down to the sixteenth cen-
tury] H. Jenktns: Remarks on
certain points in Dicey*s * Law of the
Constitution.*
Quarterly Beview. No. Z2%.— April—
The nonjurors. Works on the history
of Suffolk. English history from
Peel to PaXmerston [1835-1855, treat-
ing mainly of Walpole*s 'History,*
Hl-y, and of the * GreviUe Memoirs,'
parts 11 and III].
Scottish Beview. No. xviii. — April —
Bev. A Lowy: The apocryphal cha-
racter of the Moabite stone [endeavour-
ing to impugn it on paloographical
and grammatical grounds]. J. G.
Boubinot: French Canada [political
and descriptive rather than historical].
D. BixxLAs: The subjects of the
Byzantine empire [a rapid sketch of
the material and social conditions of
Byzantine life; art, legislation, litera-
ture, Ac] Thomas of Erceldoune
[a biographical and literary criticism].
G. Lampakes : Inscriptions recently
discovered in Eubcea [conmiunicated
with notes by the marquis of Bute].
IV. HOLLAND AND BELGIUM
Bijdragen voor Vaderlandsohe Oesohie-
denis en Oudheidkunde. Srd Series,
Tol. iii. The Hague ^B. Pbuin:
On some illnesses of William the SHent^
from memoranda of his physician,
Pieter van Foreest P. J. Blok : The
finances of the country of Holland [an
examination of the financial system
under the house of Burgundy, which
was but slightly altered in the sixteenth
century, with a view to estimating the
influence of its pressure among the
causes which led to the rel^llion
against Philip II] F. G. Slot-
HouwEB : * Paepse Stouticheden * [on a
suspected catholic conspiracy, 24 June
Digitized by
Google
622 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS July
1734].— J. L. G. Gregory : Doesburg
on the Ijssel [distingaishing mentions
of the place in historical documents
from those of Doesburg on the Bhine].
B. Fruin: Judicial customs and
ordinances in Holland^ Zeeland, and
Utrecht in the middle ages [dealing with
penalties for breach of the peace, with
special reference to Utrecht]. J. L.
G. Gregory : Vice - Admiral Wem-
berich van Berchem [1680-1653]
T. J. VAN Griethuysen : Points in the
medieval topography of the province of
Utrecht. P. L. Mullbr : Religious
parties at Utrecht [1678-9] G. M.
Slothouwer: Philippe Freiherr von
Stosch^ and his relations toith griffier
Frangois Fagel [illustrating the diplo-
matic history of the years 1712-15].
Bibliography of the history of the
Netherlands [1885-6].
Xeiiager dei Scienoes Hiitoriquat de
Bel^que, 1887, 1. Ghent.— P. Glaeys
& J. Gebrts : The ancient fortifications
of Ghent. II [with plates]. A. db
Ylaminck : On the territory of the
Aduatud [arguing that they settled
on the left bank of the Bhine, b.c.
103, and thence extended westward
until their overthrow, b.c. 63]. H.
Delehaye : On the biography of Henry
of Ghent [making him successively
archdeacon of Bruges and of Toumai],
concluded [with a list of his writings].
V. Vander Haeghen prints docu-
ments relative to the Jesuits at Ghent
in the sixteenth century.
V. ITALY
Arohivio Storieo Italiano, six. 1. Flo-
rence.— L. Zdekauer prints documents
relative to gambling in Italy ^ especially
in Florence, in the thirteenth and four-
teenth centuries.— P. Bajna: An in-
scription at Nepi [1131]. G. Sforza:
Relations between the republic of Lucca
and the papal court [chiefly during the
eighteenth century]. ^L. GhiappeiiLI :
On the age of the earliest statutes of
Pistoia [placed not in 1107 but from
1177 onwards].
Blyista Storica Italiana, iv. 1.— P. Orsi:
The year 1000 [showing that the notion
of its having been a year of terror, from
the expectation of the immediate end
of the world, is not justified by any
oontemporary writers ; that Abbo of
Fleury, writing in 998, who is commonly
cited in support of this view, referred
to a sermon which he heard many
years earlier; and that the popular
view, derived from Abbo, first found
expression in Baronius and Trithemius,
whence it has passed into all current
modem histories]. ^V. Bossi <fc 0.
LoHBROBO : On the influence of tempera-
ture on revolutions [inferring from
statistical data that revolutions in all
ages have been most frequent in spring
and especially in summer].
Archivio Storieo Lombardo, xir. 1.— P.
Bajna : The theatre at Milan^ and songs
on Roland and Oliver [said to have been
recited with mimic accompaniments in
the fourteenth century, if not earlier].
E. MoTTA : Musicians at the court
of the Sforza G.B. Intra: History
of the Palazzo del Te (Tejetto) at
Mantua P. Ghinzoni : The column
of the Porta Vittoria at Milan.
Archivio Storloo per le Province Napole-
tane, xi. 4. — N.Barone : Extracts from
the * Ratio Thesaurariorum * preserved
among the Angevin registers at Naples,
concluded [the present instalment
extends from 1334 to 1342] E.
Percopo : The baths of Puteoli, print-
ing a fourteenth century Italian poem
on their virtues, &c., with a prose
version and glossary. An elalx>rate
introduction is prefixed. E. Nunzi-
ANTE : The consistory of Innocent VIII
on Ren4 of Lorraine's claim on the
kingdom [March 1386], with three
letters of cardinal Ascanio Sforza.
B. Maresca : The marine defence of the
Neapolitan republic down to the execu-
tion of Caracciolo [1799].
AroMrio Storieo Sielliano. Kew Series,
xi. 2. — A. Flandrina: Treaty between
the two Martins [of Aragon and Sicily]
and queen Maria on the one side cmd
Francesco Enrico and Antonio Venti-
miglia on the other [1396], with the
text. E. PAiiAEz : The life of Aria-
deno Barbarossa [translated from an
unpublished version of the original
Turkish, with commentary and notes],
concluded. V. di Giovanni: Notes
on the topography of Palermo in the
fourteenth and sixteenth centuries.
Arohiyio Veneto, xxxii. 1, 2.— L. Fingati:
The capture of Constantinople [May
1453, treated with some use of Vene-
tian materials]. F. Giovanni: Fer-
reto dei Ferreti^ two articles — F.
Ambrosi: Carlo Emanuele Madruzso,
bishop of Trent [1599-1658] E.
SmoNSFELD & v. Belemo: Eleventh-
century documents relating to Broti-
dolo and Chioggia A. Marcello:
The first imprisonment of the con-
dottiero Giovan Paolo Manfrone [with
documents]. L. Fingati: The loss
of Negropont [July 1470, a narrative].
B. Cecchetti : Notes on schools
and studies in Venice in the fourteenth
and fifteenth centuries. V. Mar-
chbsi: On a proposal made to the
Venetians by Henry IV for the recovery
of Cyprus [1607-1608] F. Berlan :
Memorial to the senate at Turin on the
position of Venetian representatives at
the * acts ' of the inquisition [Nov. 1746].
^B. C: Notes on Venetian arUiquities,
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS 623
VI. BUSSIA
(Communioated by W. B. Mobfill)
The Antiquary (BtBii3ia),—March^ April-
Ma^ — Catherine II at the time of the
war toith Sweden [letters and orders
daring the years 1788-89 containing
valuable new material] . March-
April — N. KoLMAKOv: The family of
the counts Sirogonov, 1762-1787 [gives
an interesting account of one of the
great Bussian historical families] .=
March — E. Dbtlov : James Kouhtiev
[an account of one of the heroes of the
war against Napoleon in 1812].=
-4pri^— Prof. D. Ilovaiski : The acqui-
sition of Pskov and Smolensk by Basil
III [a careful study of important
events in Bussian history at the be-
ginning of the sixteenth century].
M. Kolohin: Aide-de-Camp Shumski
at Solaoetski, 1836-1851 [stories of the
conduct of a son of the notorious
Arakcheiev while in confinement there
for various malpractices] ^Prof. D.
EoBSAKOv: An unpublished paper by
Constantine Ravelin on the emancipa-
tion of the serfs, 1857-1864. 0.
Heufbldeb: A surgeon's recollections
of Skobelev [continued] . — — May —A.
Bbuckneb : Correspondence of Catherine
II with Zianmermawn, 1784-1791 [the
author of the once celebrated work * on
Solitude/ whom she tried to induce to
visit Bussia]. V. Bozhkov : Reports
made to the treasury about Nikita
Demidov [the great iron-master at the
beginning of last century; he was
accused of defrauding the revenue by
not paying the proper duties].
Viestnik IstorioheBki [The Historioal
Xesienger]. — Jfarcfc— P.Usov: Female
ascetics [continued, sketches of mem-
bers of the sect of the Old Believers].
March-May— 1>. Budin: Episodes in
the political life of Bosnia and
Herzegovina dnring the last thdrty
years [descriptions of the miserable
condition of the people under the
Turkish yoke, taken chiefly from the
accounts of Hilferding]. A. Lona-
CHEVSKi : Ideas about the tear current
among the peasants of the Ukraine [a
collection of historical anecdotes
gathered on the spot]. ^Y. Eanevski:
An episode of the revolt of the
military colomsts in 1831. [These
military colonies were established by
Arakcheiev and were very unpopular.
The account is from personal en-
periences] . AprU — E. Mabeov : The
wizard in the rural districts [an
account of some of the superstitions of
the Bussian peasants, with strange
BurvivsJs of paganism; an interesting
contribution to folk-lore]. A page
from the history of the Bussian
chancery [some curious extracts from
the secret archives of the beginning
of last fiftn tnry] — — M/ty — A. A^LSHIN-
8KI : Our press in its historico-economi-
eal development ; the government mono-
poly during two centuries [valuable for
the history of the press in Bussia].
y. Abaza : An Embassy to Sweden in
1878 [from personal recollections, the
author having accompanied the em-
bassy sent from Bussia at the corona-
tion of the present sovereign Oscar 11].
N. Pavlitschbv: Some character-
istics of Count Berg [personal recol-
lections of a former governor of
Warsaw] On the eve of the Crimean
war [extracts from the Memoirs of
Count Vitzthum].
Vn. SPAIN
BoletixL de la Beal Academia de la
Hiitoria, x. 2. — February — Notes : On
MS. [1609] by D. Juan de Salazan and
on the author's biography. A letter
[1494] of Archbishop Pedro Gonz&lez
de Mendoza to the chapter of Toledo
on the objections raised by the parish
of St. Thomas to the transference of
the Sinagoga mayor of Toledo to the
order of Galatrava. — A Latin inscrip-
tion (Hiibner No. 5068) found at Villa-
vieja, province of Badajoz [the Boman
station of Laoipea]. E. Toda : A de-
tailed description of the tomb of Son
Not&m at Thebes, giving a catalogue of
the mummies, the furniture of the
mortuary chamber, the hieroglyphic in-
scriptions with translations and plates
of the mural paintings E. Saavedba :
An Arabic sepulchral inscription of
1182 P. FiTA prints a document of
the council ofAlcald de Henares, 15 Jan.
1527 (Bib. Nac.) [fixing the half-yearly
councils for the future ; — of importance
as proving the existence of provincial
councils in the diocese of Toledo] : also
a bull of Honontis III [25 Oct. 1219]
(Bib. Nac.), prescribing regularity in the
observance of the constitution of the
oecumenical Lateran council IV in this
respect: also a Jewish conveyance of
1336, Madrid.==8. — March — Notes :
Two letters of Charles V to the depu-
ties of the estates of Catalonia, 1539
— (1) appointment of S. Francisco de
Borja as governor, (2) information as
to his journey to Flanders. Descrip-
tion of Boman remains at Madrigalejo,
province of G&ceres [the Boman Bo-
dacas]. V. de la Fuente ; Criticism
Digitized by
Google
624 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS July
of El Sefiorio de Biscaya histdrico y
foral by A. de Artifiano j Zurioaldaj.
G. DB Leoca y Gabcu: A note as to
the alleged mal-entendu between Philip
n and Alexander Famese at the end of
1592, with the text of the appointment of
the oonde de Fuentes to the command
of the Spanish troops in France [No-
▼ember 1692] A. Sainz db Baranda:
A visit to the prehistoric rock fortress
of Oayangos [in the province of Bnrgos.
The remains consist of tombs in the
shape of the human body covered by
lids, a staircase to a circular place of
assemblv, and remains of dwellings. In
the tombs were found skeletons and a
mutilated inscription] F. Fita :
The poetess Tecla de Borja^ niece of
Calixtus in H- 1459), with a poem in
her honour oy the trovador Moss^n
Ausias March and her reply; also a
Latin elegy by Antonio Tridentone of
Parma V. db la Fubntb : An ex-
amination of the remains of Rodrigo'
Ximenes de Rada, archbishop of Tolecu),.
and of S' Martin de Finqjosa in the
church of Sta Maria de Huerta.
Beviflto de Cienoiat Hiit6rieat, 1887,
1. — S. Sanpbbb t BfiQUBL: Oeografia^
topografla, y etnografia de la oosta
atlantica de Espafkt en el siglo duo-
decimo dntes de Jesucristo,
Beviflta Contemporanea.— Jlfarc^ 15 — ^A.
DE Sandoval: Estudios acerca de la
edad media, continued.
Bevitta de Stpa&a.~Fe&niar^ 10 — J.
Olmedilla t Pino : De la vida y es-
oritos del sabio espaflol Andris Laguna,
continued.=Maiic^ 10. — B. Santil>
LAN : Los sucesos de 1820 d 1823, con-
tinued.
Vm. UNITED STATES OP AMERICA
Andovmr Beview, vil. iO.—AprU—G. B.
Adams : Origin of the federal system.
Century, xxxiii.— uipriZ & May— J, G.
NicoLAT & J. Hat : Ahraham Lincoln
[bringing the narrative through the
presidential election of 1856] .=4P^
E. Egolbston : Church and meeting-
house before the revoltUion [in con-
tinuation of former articles on social
life in the English North American
colonies]. H. Hill: Chiokamatiga^
the greoi battle of the west.^^=May —
E. Blind: Personal recollections of
Louis Blanc [with notes concerning
ALsaoe and Lorraine] General W.
S. BosBOBANs: The campaign for Chat-
tanooga, General W. S. Fullbbton :
The army of the Cumberland at
Chattanooga Memoranda on the
owU wa/r [criticisms on Longstreet's
article in the February number by OoL
W. Allan and Ck>l. J. S. Mosby, for-
merly in the confederate army].
Baum's Church Beview. Ko. 169. —
W. C. WiNSLow : Naukratis [a review
of the third memoir of the Egypt
Exploration Fund, vol. i.].==170. —
C. H. Hall : Mexico and Haiti and the
constitution. W. S. Pbrrt : The Ufe,
times, and correspondence of William
White, first bishop of Pennsylvania.
Johni Hopkini ITniTerslty Studies, r. 4. —
M. S. Snow : City government of St.
Louis. J. G. Boubinot: LoccU go-
vernment of Canada.
Magaiine of American History, zriL 8.
March—M. D. Conway : Fredericksburg
first and last. I. C. H. Pecb:
John van Buren. — C. W. Pabsons : The
first mayor of New York City, Thomas
WUlett^=^— April— B. E. Mabtin:
Transition period of the American
press:=6* —May— The * White House *
and its memories. William Waddle :
When did Ohio become a state t
J. G. Boubinot: Canada during the
Victorian era.
Xagaiine of Western History, r. 6
March — ^B. A. Hinsdale : Legislation
on compensation of members of congress,
G. W. Buttebfield: Mikoaukee
[in continuation of previous articles]
J. HuTOHiNs: The underground
railroad [describing the methods em-
ployed by the abolitionists in aiding
fugitive slaves to pass through the
northern 8tates].=4p**»^— H.Bicb:
Burr*s western expedition. D. B.
Head (Q.C. of Canada): The bench and
bar of Toronto. IV. [on the career of
chief justice Alcock].
Kew Princeton BeTiew, ilL Z.^May—
H.Tainb : Napoleon Bonaparte [second
and concluding paper].
Korth American BeTiew.~3fay->General
W. T. Shebmam : Orant, Thomas, and
Lee.
Pennsylyania Magaiine of History, Ko.
41.— G. J. Stillb : Beaumarchais and
*the lost miUion* [a chapter of the
secret history of the American revolu-
tion] W. H. Eole: The federal
constitution of 1787 [in continuation of
Srevious artides].
tieal Science Quarterly, ii 1.—
T. D. Eambaut: Louis Riel*s rebel-
lion.
Quarterly Journal of Economies, Harvard
University, i 8. — A. McF. Davib : An
historical study of Law*s system.
8cribner*8 Magaiine, i. 4.— April— W, B.
SooTT : American elephant myths.
E. B. Washbubnb : Reminiscences of the
siege and commune of Paris, the down-
fall of the commune [fourth and con-
cluding paper].
Digitized by
Google
The English
Historical Review
No. VIIL— OCTOBER 1887
The Movements of the Roman Legions
from Augustus to Sever us
rS civil wars between 49 and 29 b.c. form a period of trans-
ition between the military arrangements of the republic a^d
those of the empire, although they have otherwise no important
bearing of their own upon the system which the empire was to in-
troduce. They must, however, have proved with sufficient clear-
ness to Augustus that henceforward a military support must under-
lie whatever supreme authority was to exist at Eome. But it was
one thing to recognise this necessity, quite another to proclaim it
openly. To be permanent and eflfectual the support of the army
must be unobtrusive. For years both in Italy and the provinces
the legions had been a sight far too familiar, and the rest and
peace which all hoped for, even if they hardly dared expect it,
would have been manifestly a delusion if the vast armies of the
last few years were to be kept up.* This was the problem
which Augustus had to face after Actium. Six years before, indeed,
he had had to decide on a similar though less important question.
He had then taken from Lepidus no less than twenty legions,*
including eight which had served under Sextus Pompeius. This
had placed at least forty-four legions* at his disposal; but even
with the final struggle against Antonius still to come, he had de-
cided that so large an army was neither necessary nor consistent
with considerations either of prudence or finance. He accordingly
dismissed twenty thousand of his own veterans, who had seen ten
1 After the battle of Mutina Ootavian had seventeen legions, Antonius sixteen »
Lepidus ten, Brutus and Gassius seventeen. Marquardt, Staatsverwdltung, ii. 444,
* Suet. Aug. 16. Appian, BeU. Civ, v. 123, gives twenty-two as the number.
• Appian, toe. cU. v. 127.
VOL. n. — NO. vni. s s
Digitized by
Google
626 MOVEMENTS OF THE ROMAN LEGIONS Oct.
yeaars' service, all those of Pompeius/ and probably many which had
belonged to Lepidus, leaving himself perhaps twenty-four or twenty-
five for the conflict which could not long be avoided. The army of
Antonius, as the evidence of coins with tolerable certainty ^ proves,
consisted of thirty legions, and therefore, after the battle of Actium,
Augustus found himself in possession of at least fifty. That this
number must be diminished, and largely diminished, there could be
no question ; but the position of affairs on the eastern frontier was
certainly such as called for careful consideration before letting slip the
opportunity which the presence of so large an army offered for
striking a decisive blow in the direction of Farthia. For a genera-
tion Armenia had been practically a client of Bome, though an
oriental kingdom alike in its history, tendencies, and geographical
position.^ It seemed evident that conditions so anomalous must be
provocative of continual ruptures with Farthia, and Augustus with
his strong will and unfaltering resolution might have put an end
perhaps once for all by a decided blow to a state of tension which
the vague schemes of Antonius, so ill carried through, had only made
more dangerous. But the policy of the empire was to be peace,
and Augustus, possibly with regret, let the opportunity pass, and
though he did not renounce the Boman pretensions to interfere
with Armenia, he left an army in Syria quite inadequate to take a
commanding position in case of need.^ Nor was this absence of a
forward policy confined to the east. On the Danube, it is true
the undefined and precarious frontier of Blyricum had to be re-
placed by one more capable of defence against the Dacian and
Sarmatian tribes ; ^ but, the frontier once regulated, the attitude of
the empire was to be everywhere passive and defensive. The
maxim which he handed on to Tiberius, Augustus practised himself
from the commencement. The legions, henceforth to constitute a
regular standing army with definite winter-quarters or standing-
camps, were placed at the extremities of the empire out of sight of
the city and Italy, out of sight even, except perhaps in Syria, of
the chief provincial towns, but obviously not out of reach should
the authority of the principate need support. Accordingly Augustus
determined to reduce his army to the smallest size consistent with
the safety of the frontiers and the possible need of an armed main-
tenance of his own position. Of the number and disposition of the
legions which were maintained our chief knowledge is gained from
the passage in Tacitus ^ referring to the year 28 a.d., in which he
* Dion Cass. zlix. 12-14.
* CJohen, L 26-65. Mommsen, Bes Oesta Dio, Aug. 75.
' On position of Armenia see the admirable ninth chapter in the fifth volume of
Mommsen's Boman History,
^ Under Qmntilius Varos there were only three legions in Syria. Joseph. BelL JucL
* Monmisen, Bea Oesta Dw, Aug, eh. zxz. * Ann, iy. 6.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 FROM AUGUSTUS TO SEVERUS 627
informB us that Tiberius then had twenty-five legions, and of these
he gives the numerical distribution among the provinces, though
without mention of their distinguishing number or cognomina.
These, however, from other sources,*® we know to have been the —
I Germanica," 11 Augusta, III Augusta, III Gallica,*^ III Cyrenaica,**
rV Macedonica," IV Scythica,** V Alauda,*^ V Macedonica, VI
Victrix, VI Ferrata, VII (afterwards) Claudia, Vin Augusta, IX
Hispana,*^ X Fretensis,** X Gemina, XI (afterwards) Claudia, XII
Fulminata, XHI Gemina, XIV Gemina, XV Apollinaris, XVI
Gallica, XX Valeria Victrix,»» XXI Kapax, XXII Deiotariana.**
A little further examination of these legions, however, throws some
additional light upon the military arrangements during the time of
Augustus himself. In the first place it is almost certain that
legions XXI and XXII were created after the disaster to Varus
in 9 A.D. We know from Dion Cassius** and Suetonius^ that
fresh troops were enrolled then, partly from freedmen,^ while
Tacitus in describing the mutiny of the lower German army, con-
sisting of legions I, V, XX, XXI, says that the impulse was given
by the vernacula mtdtitudo^ lately enrolled in the city. Now
the V,^ XX,* l^ certainly existed before, and therefore the XXI"*
must have been the one newly created. The XXII"* was certainly
not created before the XXI'*, and its name Deiotariana seems to
show that it was formed from what had formerly been the army of
Deiotarus, some of whose troops were probably employed by the
Bomans after his death, though not formed into a regular legion
*' In most cases they are identified by other passages in the AnnaXs. The cogno^
mina, if nowhere stated by Tacitus, are known from inscriptions. For the eight
German legions see Ann, i. 81, 87, and Henzen, 6458. The three in Spain rest mainly
on the evidence of coins. See Florez, MedaUas de las Colomas de EspafUit i. tab. jrL
i. yiii. S ; also Tac. Hist, ii. 5S, and Willmann, 1017. For the two in Africa, see
Arm, iv. 23, and Orelli, 8057. For the two in Egypt, see Henzen, 615S, and Orelli,
519 ; conf. also Tac. Hist v. 1. For the four in Syria, see Tac. Ann. ii. 79, ii. 57,
zv. 6, and Hist. iii. 24. For the two in Pannonia, Ann, i. 16, the two in Mcesia, Hen-
zen, 698S, and C. J. L. iii. 1698, and the two in Dalmatia from Dion Gassius, Ix. 15.
" This cognomen is found in only one inscription.
>* Probably levied originally in Gaul.
>* Belonging to Lepidus's African army.
^* Mommsen thinks that the legions called Macedonica were present at the battle
of PhilippL
** Perhaps levied by Julius Cssar for his intended campaign against Burebistas.
'• Suet. CcBsa/r, 24. " Originally levied from Spain.
*' Perhaps so called from being present against Sext. Pompeius in the battle fought
in the straits of Messina.
>* Yell. Paterc. ii. 112. ^ Consisting originally of soldiers of Deiotarus.
»' Dion Cass. Ivi. 23, and Ivii. 5. ^ Suet. Aug. 25. « iirruchs 6x\os.
^* Ann. L 81. Compare also orto ah unetvicesimams qmntanisque initio,.
" Suet. C<BS. 24. " Veil. Paterc. ii. 112.
" The first legion was evidently reconstituted by Tiberius after the defeat of Varus,
as Tac. Arm. L 42, proves, signis a Tiberio acceptis ; but we cannot suppose that the
first legion was wanting in the original army of Augustus, nor would its raw recruits
naturally be sent from the dty.
8 8 2
Digitized by
Qoo^^
628 MOVEMENTS OF THE ROMAN LEGIONS Oct.
till this emergency.^ Next, there seems good ground for believing
that the eight legions XUI-XX were created at a later time than
those from I to XII.** For (1) no trace is found of any of these
earlier than 6 a.d., (2) none of them are mentioned among the
legions whose veterans Augustus settled in colonies, (8) no duplicate
numbers are found among them as among many of those below XTT,
and (4) while the latter are scattered indiscriminately throughout
the empire, these eight are all posted either in Germany or Ulyri-
cum. It is therefore probable that Augustus at first retained only
the legions numbered up to XII, and that it was the unexpected
need of troops in the wars on the Bhine and in Illyricum, and
especially the formidable rising in Fannonia in the year 6 A.D.,
which compelled him to create eight fresh legions.*® Three of
these, XVII, XVIII, XIX, were those destroyed with Varus, and
accordingly these numbers, as ill-omened, never occur again.^
Deducting then from Tacitus's list all those over XII, we find that
the original number of legions maintained by Augustus was
eighteen, though by the retention of several duplicate numbers
drafted from the armies of Antonius or Lepidus he was enabled to
give his army the appearance of consisting only of twelve legions.**
Thus the lU Gallica was probably a legion of Antonius which had
served under him against the Parthians,** while in Cyrenaica be-
longed to the army of Lepidus from Africa. Again, while IV
Macedonica had probably belonged to Augustus since the battle of
Philippi, IV Scythica had belonged to Antonius in the east.
Similarly V Macedonica and VI Ferrata had formed a part of
Antonius's army, while of the two legions numbered X the one
called Fretensis had certainly belonged to Augustus in the war
against Sext. Fompeius, while X Gemina was probably added from
one of the other armies.
The method by which these legions were recruited has lately
had much light thrown upon it by Mommsen (* Hermes,' xix.), who
shows that the broad statement that the legionaries were taken from
citizens and the auxiliaries from peregrini needs much qualification.
Under the republic the military commanders had gradually acquired
the right of granting the civitas to peregrini on their enlistment, a
usage which in the confusion of the civil wars was carried to a great
** We shall see below that both Nero and Vitellius had reooorse to whole troops of
peregrini when they needed additional forces in the civil wars.
» Mommsen, Res OesUa Div. Aug. 70.
** Suet. Aug. 25 : Libertine miUte . ., . bis usus estt semel ad prcBsidium eolo-
marum Illyricum conUngenHum, iterum ad tutelam ripce Rhemfluminis.
*> The XVni'^ and XIX^ legions alone are definitelj mentioned as having been
with Varus. Tac. Awn. i. 60, C. I. Rh. 260, but there is no practical doubt about
the third.
» For the names of many which he disbanded see Marquardt, Staatsverw, iL p. 445.
w Tac Hist iii. 2.
Digitized by
Google
1887 FROM AUGUSTUS TO SEVERUS 629
length, and whole legions, called legiones vemaculce, were in this
way enrolled. Augustus discontinued the practice in this wide
extent, except in such crises as the defeat of Varus, but he reserved
to himself the full right of enUsting peregrini into the legions,
granting them at the same time the Eoman civitas. The evidence
of inscriptions tends to show that, as a rule, the oriental and Egyptian
legions were recruited from the eastern parts of the empire, espe-
cially from Galatia, a part where the civitas must have been especi-
ally rare, while the western and African legions depended mainly
upon Italy and the west. This fact not only explains the infrequent
changed of legions between east and west, but also the incapacity
and want of discipline so often shown by the eastern legions, which
required on critical occasions to be reinforced by the sterner legions
of the west.
Of the Augustan legions by far the greatest proportion was em-
ployed on the Ehine and Danube frontiers. In the former the cam-
paigns of Drusus and Tiberius had at one time extended Eoman
influence, if not Boman administration, as far as the Elbe. Gamps
were established at Mogontiacum, Bonna, Vetera, and Alesio, whilst
the legions quartered in them had the double duty of keeping down
the German tribes on the right bank of the Bhine, and at the same
time of being ready at a moment's notice to check any rising
among the Gallic cantons.^ Towards the Danube Augustus gave an
entirely new frontier to the empire. Pushing his armies forward
from Aquileia towards the north-east, he checked the incursions of
the Dacian tribes, and gradually, in place of the loosely organised
and vaguely bounded Illyricum, he estabUshed three important
miUtary provinces of the first rank, Dalmatia or Upper Illyricum,
Pannonia or Lower Illyricum, and Mcesia.** These, provinces were
guarded by seven legions : camps were formed at Siscia, Carnuntum,
Poetovio, Sirmium, Delminium, and Burnum, whilst the Danube was
made the political, though hardly yet the military, frontier.^ These
forward movements had not been accomplished without reverses,
and in 6 a.d. the determined revolt of the lUyrian tribes was only
put down by rallying most of the military forces of the empire
to the scene of action. In Spain the obstinate though desultory
resistance of the tribes of the Astures and Cantabri necessitated the
presence of three legions posted mainly in the north-west, nor could
this force be diminished before the reign of Claudius. In the east,
as we have seen, Augustus had decided on maintaining the statm
quo, and for this purpose four legions were considered to be suflS-
cient.^^ We may then, with much probability, though not with
** In Gaol itself onlj 1200 troops were stationed at Lugdonnm.
» Mommsen, RGm, Oesch. v. cap. 1. " Mommsen, Res QestcB Div. Aug. cap. xxx.
"^ Under Varus there were three only, one haying been summoned to help Tiberias
in Pannonia.
Digitized by
Google
680 MOVEMENTS OF THE ROMAN LEGIONS Oct
absolute certainty, assume that just previous to the defeat of Varus
the legions were posted as follows : —
Lower Germany : I (afterwards Germanica), V Alauda, XVII, XVJLLL,
XIX.
Upper Germany : ^® 11 Augusta, XIIT and XIV Gemina, XVI Gallica.
Pannonia:^^ VIII Augusta, IX Hispana, XV ApoUinans, XX
Valeria Victrix.*®
Dalmatia : VII and XI (afterwards Claudia).
McBsia : IV Scythica, V Macedonica.
SpaAn : IV Macedonica, VI Victrix, X Gemina.
Syria : III Gallica, VI Ferrata, X Fretensis, XII Fulminata.
Africa : III Augusta.
Egypt : III Cyrenaica.^*
Then in 9 a.d. followed the disaster in Germany and the loss of
legions XVII, XVIII, and XIX. To replace these, as we have seen,
Augustus hastily raised XXI Eapax which was despatched to Lower
Germany, whilst XX Valeria Victrix, with a recently gained reputa-
tion and cognomen, was transferred from Fannonia to the same
quarter, the other new legion XXII Deiotariana being sent to rein-
force the one legion already in Egypt.
On the death of Augustus a mutiny arose among the three
Pannonian legions VHI, IX, and XV, who demanded increase of
pay,** dismissal after sixteen years' service instead of twenty, and ex-
emption from being retained sub vexiUo after dismissal.** A similar
mutiny arose, and for the same reasons, in Lower Germany, when
the legions XXI, V, I, and XX were under the command of Aulas
CflBcina, while their example was followed, though with less violence,
by those in Upper Germany, II, XIII, XIV, and XVI. Not without
difficulty were these mutinies put down, in Fannonia by the
younger Drusus, in Germany by Germanicus, who gave his legions
the opportunity of retrieving their character by a series of cam-
paigns beyond the Ehine. In this region, however, the defeat of
Varus had produced an important change of poUcy. All thoughts
of extending the frontier to the Elbe seem to have been given up,
and though posts were still held on the right bank of the Rhine,
and though Germanicus was allowed to lead his lately mutinous
legions again and again into the heart of Germany, Tiberius was not
to be led away by the enthusiasm of the younger general into any
permanent deviation from the decision of Augustus, and from the
"" The two Germanies were not f ormaUy separated as early as this.
^ The usual number was three, but an extra legion still remained after the re-
bellion.
*> Veil. Patero. c. ii. 112.
*^ Egypt had at first had three legions, but two were sent against the Illyrian in«
surgents, and were afterwards replaced by the new legion XXII Deiotariana. Mommsen,
Qesch. vol. v. p. 592, and Res OesUs Dvo. Aug. p. 72.
^ Viz., a denarius per diem instead of 10 asses. ^ Tao. Ann, L 31.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 FROM AUGUSTUS TO SEVERUS 631
year 17 a.d., when Germanicus was recalled, the Ehine remained
practically the ifrontier for nearly seventy years. Eight legions
were, however, still retained as the normal military force, from this
time definitely divided into two armies, and placed under the
legates respectively of Upper and Lower Germany. Legions I and
XX were stationed at Bonna,^* V and XXI at Vetera, EL and XVI at
Mogontiacum, and XTTT and XIV probably at Argentoratum and
Vindonissa.
Tiberius rigidly adhered to the maxim of Augustus not to extend
the boundaries of the empire, and accordingly in his reign the
movements of the legions were few and unimportant. In 28 a.d.
some hostile movements of the Frisii on the sea coast east of the
Bhine for a time necessitated the presence of both German armies
on the spot, though in what numbers we are not able to say, as it
was the custom in such cases to send only vexiUationes^ from the
more distant legions. Some years earlier the rising of the Numidian
Tacfarinas had necessitated the reinforcement of the legio HI
Augusta by the IX Hispana from Pannonia, which remained in
Africa from 20 a.d. till 24 a.d.^ In the east, Cappadocia was
organised as a province by Germanicus in 17 a.d. and the Boman
frontier pushed to the Upper Euphrates, but Boman legions were not
yet permanently posted in this region. Towards the end of the
reign, the death of Artaxias of Armenia and the ambition of the
Parthian king Artabanos necessitated a forward movement of the
Syrian legions under L. Vitellius, which ended before the old
emperor's death in the submission of Artabanos, and the recognition
of the Boman candidate Mithridates as king of Armenia.^^
The position of the legions under Tiberius then was as follows :^ —
Lower Germany : I Germanica, V Alauda, XX Valeria Victrix, XXI
Bapax.
Upper Germany : U Augusta, XIII and XIV Gemina, XVI Gallica.
Pannonia : VIII Augusta, IX Hispana,** XV Apollinans.
Dahnatia : VII and XI (afterwards Claudia).
Mcssia : IV Scythica, V Macedonica.
Spain : IV Macedonica, VI Victrix, X Gemina.
Syria : IV Gallica, VI Ferrata, X Fretensis, XII Fulminata.
Africa : III Augusta.
Egypt : III Cyrenaica, XXII Deiotariana.
Under Claudius more extensive changes were made. In 41 a.d.
♦* Tac. Ann. i. 16.
^ A vexillatio was a detachment of a legion sent on some campaign at a distance
from the headquarters of the legion. Thus, e.^, we learn that vexillationes of the
German legions at one time served in Britain (Henzen, 5456).
*• Tac. Ann. iii. 9. iv. 23.
^' Mommsen, ROm. Oesch, vol. v. cap. iz., points out how the anomalous position of
Armenia was the constant cause of disputes between the Bomans and the Parthians.
• Tac. Ann, iv. 5. * Except for four years from 20-24 aj).
Digitized by
Google
682 MOVEMENTS OF THE ROMAN LEGIONS Oct-
the Lower German legions were again called upon, this time to check
the incursions of the Ghauci, a fisher-folk between the Ems and the
Weser. Soon after L. Domitius Corbulo was appointed to the
command^ and would probably have soon extended the Boman
frontier to the latter river, had not strict orders come from Bome
to withdraw all legions to the Bhine, and to leave the region on the
right bank to the protection of the Frisii and Chauci themselves.
The cause of this backward policy was the recent acquisition of
a new province, and the consequent need of, as far as possible,
limiting the army in other quarters*
The conquest of Britain, attempted by Julius and more than once
meditated by Augustus, was hardly an exception to the defensive
policy of the latter. Inhabited by kindred tribes and dominated by
Druidic influences, independent Britain was a constant source of
danger to romanised Gaul* Accordingly, in 48 a.d., Aulus Plautius
was sent over to conquer the country. Four legions accompanied
him, the IX Hispana *® from Pannonia, the XX Valeria Victrix ** from
Lower Germany, and the 11 Augusta** and XIV Gemina" from Upper
Germany. Pannonia, where the frontier was at this time quiet,
was left with two legions only. To replace the three taken from
Germany the IV Macedonica was moved from Spain to Upper Ger-
many,*' whilst by the enlargement and division of two already
existing legions two new ones were created, the XV Primigenia for
Lower Germany and the XXII Primigenia " for Upper Germany.
The Upper German legions had on two occasions in this reign to
repel incursions of the Ghatti, which was henceforward the dominant
German tribe in this quarter ; first in 41 under the future emperor
Galba, and then in 60 a.d. under P. Pomponius Secimdus.** In
Dalmatia a conspiracy made against the emperor by the legate
Furius Gamillus Scribonianus occasioned the bestowal of the cog-
nomen ' Glaudia ' on the two legions VTI and XI, which after a
momentary vacillation finally preserved their faith to Glaudius.^ In
the east a desultory warfare was maintained against Parthia con-
cerning Armenia, though not till the close of the reign did the war
assume such proportions as to call for any fresh distribution of
troops or for any extraordinary command. In the year 54, however,
news arrived in Bome that Vologeses had made his brother Tiri-
dates king of Armenia, and Gorbulo was immediately sent out by
Nero's ministers, Burrus and Seneca, to be governor of Gappadocia.
At this time there were still four legions in Syria, VI Ferrata,
»• Tac Ann. xiv. 32. »> Tac Ann. xiv. 84. »« Tac. HisL iii 44.
*• OreUi, 1549. Wilmann, 1429.
** Primigenia was a oognomen given to that part of the original legion which
retained the old eagle, while the other portion retained the original oognomen ; e.g.
Peiotariana and Apollinaris. See Orotefend, in Pauly's Beal-Encyclopadie^ voL iv.
895.
** Tac. Ann. ziL 27. ** Dion Cassias, It. 23.
Digitized by
Google
1887 FROM AUGUSTUS TO SEVERUS 683
stationed at Baphanaea, X Fretensis at Cirrhus,*^ XII Fulminata at
Antioch, and ELI Gallica at Samosata on the Euphrates. But the
Syrian legions were not to the same extent as those on the Danube
and Bhine massed together in permanent camps ; they were needed
for police duties in the large and restless cities of Syria^ and were
accordingly more dispersed among the towns and less used to the
discipline and training of camp life. Of those legions Ummidius
Quadratus, legate of Syria, retained X Ferrata and XII Fulminata,
while to Corbulo were assigned in Cappadocia VI Ferrata,^ HI
Gallica, and a vexiUatio of the X***.** Corbulo, however, found his
legions demoralised by their long inactivity ; delay was necessary in
which to recruit and train them, while an efficient legion from
Germany was sent over at his request.^ This was in all probability
the rV Scythica, which in 88 was in Moesia,^^ but which Claudius
may probably have moved temporarily into Upper Germany against
the Chatti.®* With these three legions Corbulo in 58 took the
offensive, and in two campaigns took Artaxata and Tigranocerta
and subdued the whole of Armenia, leaving a garrison of 1000
legionaries to support the new king Tigranes. Meanwhile by the
death of Quadratus, he became legate both of Cappadocia and Syria,
and as Yologeses was still threatening invasion, he sent two legions,
probably IV and XII, to Armenia, while he himself with the rest
advanced to Zeugma on the Euphrates. Soon after Csesennius
Psetus, the new legate of Cappadocia, arrived and took the command
of the two legions already in Armenia^ and of the V Macedonica,
which was now sent from Moesia.^ Psetus, without waiting for this
latter legion, which was still in Pontus,^ and regardless of the un-
disciplined condition of XII Fulminata, which had seen no service
with Corbulo, advanced rapidly into Armenia and was soon shut up
in Bhandeia. Corbulo, in answer to a request for help, sent
1000 from each of his three legions, but was perhaps not as expe-
ditious as he might have been to help a rival commander. How-
ever, Paetus with his two legions capitulated, and the senate,
disowning the conditions made by him, Corbulo was once more in
command of all the forces in the east, which were now strengthened
by another legion, XV Apollinaris, from Pannonia.^ Sending back
the two disgraced legions, XII and IV, into Syria,^^ he led the Vr*»
and ni'*^, V*** and XV*'', to MeHtene on the Upper Euphrates to meet
Vologeses. He, however, at the last moment consented to let Tiri-
dates do homage to Bome for the Armenian throne, and the war
•^ Tao. Ann. ii. 67. »• Ibid. xiii. 38.
•• Ann, xiii. 40 : Mediis decimanorum delectis.
" Ann, xiii. 35 : Adjectaque ex Oermania legio. ®* C. L L. iii. 1698.
•* This is the view taken by Mommsen, Res Oesta Dvv. Aug. p. 68.
« Tac. Ann, xv. 6. ^ Ibid, •» Ann. xv. 10.
• Ann. xy. 26. •' Ibid.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
634 MOVEMENTS OF THE ROMAN LEGIONS Oct.
ended (63 a.d.) without any essential change in the relations between
Borne and Farthia.
Meanwhile the place of lY Scythica in Moesia, which had been
sent to Corbulo in 64, was supplied by the VII Claudia^ from DaJ-
matia, which being no longer a frontier province could well spare
one of its two legions.^^ When, later on, the V Macedonica was
also sent from Moesia to Paetus in Cappadocia, the Vm Augusta ''^
was transferred from Pannonia to this province, whilst the other
Pannonian legion, XV Apollinaris, was, as we have seen, sent just
before the peace to Corbulo. To garrison Pannonia, Nero probably
moved XIII Gemina from Upper Germany to Poetovio in that
province,^^ whilst the XI Claudia, though probably not moved from
Dalmatia,^^ was ready at hand in case of emergency. At the end
of the Parthian war, therefore, the legions were thus distributed : —
Lower Germany \ I Germanica, V Alauda, XV Primigenia, XXI
Eapax.
Upper Germany : IV Macedonica, XVI GaUica, XXII Primigenia.
Pannonia : XTII Gemina.
Dahnatia : XI Claudia.
McBsia : VEI Claudia, VITE Augusta.
Syria: IV Scythica, III GaUica, VI Ferrata, X Fretensis, XII Pul-
minata, V Macedonica, XV Apollinaris.
Britain : H Augusta, XX Valeria Victrix, IX Hispana, XIV Gemina.
Spain : VI Victrix, X Gemina.
Africa : III Augusta.
Egypt : HE Cyrenaica, XXII Deiotariana.
Meanwhile the legions in Britain had had some hard fighting in
the year 61. The east and south were now tolerably secure, and
Suetonius Paulinus was pressing forward against the Silures in
the west. The winter quarters of the II Augusta were at Isca
(Carleon), those of XIV Gemina at Viroconium,'' those of XX Valeria
Victrix at Deva (Chester), the main strength of the army thus
lying face to face with the Welsh tribes, while the east was thought
to be sufficiently garrisoned by the IX Hispana at Lindum,
Camoludunum being held by the veterans whom Claudius had settled
there. But in the year 61, while Suetonius was absent in the west,
Boadicea at the head of her own people the Iceni raised a revolt,
the Brigantes were induced to join, and soon all the east was in
arms. Petilius Cerealis with the IX legion was completely de-
^ Tao. Hist, i. 79, where Titias Julianas, the legate of this legion, was adorned with
the consular ornaments for victories over the Boxolani.
• Josephus, Bell, Jud, n. xvi. 4.
'* Id, Its legate Minucius Kufus was similarlj adorned.
^* It was certainly in Pannonia bj the end of this reign. Tao. EUt ii. 11.
'< Tac. Hist, ii. 11, proves that there was still a legion in Dalmatia in 69 aj>.
'' Hiibner (Das riinUsche Hear in Britannien) argues that the XTV was statioaMd
at Camoludunum. I however follow Mommsen on the strength (1) of C. J. L, viL 154
and 165, (2) of the strategical necessities of the case.
Digitized by
Google
1887 FROM AUGUSTUS TO SEVERUS 685
feated/* the veterans at Camoludunum cut to pieces, and Verula-
mium and Londinium sacked. Suetonius did his best to remedy
the results of his own security, but was only able to muster the
XIV legion and some vexiUarii of the XX. With these he hastily
marched against the enemy, and, mainly owing to the bravery of
the XIV legion, he defeated them. It was necessary, however, to
send vexiUcmi from the German legions,^* and it was some time
before confidence was restored.
During all the reign of Nero, but especially towards its close^
Moesia was exposed to continual incursions from the Eoxolani,
Sarmatae, and Dacians north of the Danube. An interesting in-
scription dating from this reign ^^ gives a good idea of what was going
on. We learn from it that Plautius iBlianus transferred more than
one hundred thousand of the trans-Danubian population to the
right bank, put down a rising of the Sarmatse, took hostages from
the BastamsB, Boxolani, and Dacians, thus confirming and extend-
ing the peace of the province, and this too quamvis partem magnam
exerdtuB ad expeditionem in Armeniam misissetJ'' It was, however,
found necessary in addition to the two legions VII Claudia and
Vni Augusta, which we have seen transferred to Moesia, to send in
Gallica as well from Syria ^® as soon as it could be spared. In that
province the IV Scythica seems to have taken the place of the III
Gallica as one of the regular legions,^® while the other two western
legions V Macedonica and XV ApoUinaris were about to be sent
back when the long unsettled condition of Judaea at last in 66 a.d.
led to an outbreak of fanaticism in Jerusalem. C. Sestius Gallus,
the legate of Syria, marched at once into Judaea with XII Ful-
minata and vexiUarii of IV Scythica and VI Ferrata. He was,
however, forced to make a disgraceful retreat, and Titus Flavins
Vespasian was appointed the first imperial legate for Judaea. While
Mucianus, the new legate of Syria, retained the three Syrian legions
VI, IV, and XII, Vespasian at once led forward the XV Apollinaris,
while Titus brought up from Alexandreia on the gulf of Issus
V Macedonica and X Fretensis,^ of which at that time the elder Tra-
jan was legate. With these three legions Vespasian in 67 captured
successively Jatopata, Jappha, Tiberias, Tarichaea, and Gamala.
During the winter following the X legion lay at Scythopolis, and the
other two at Caesarea.®^ During the next year Jerusalem was
** Tac. Awn, xiv. 32. " Aim. xiv. 32 and 38. " Orelli, 760.
'' Viz. legions IV Scythica and V Macedonica. See supra.
^* Tac. Hist i. 79, and ii. 74. The exact date is not known, but probably before
the Jewish war broke out in 66, as the legion is not mentioned in Josephus's account
of the campaign.
" Mommsen, Rlhn. Oesch. vol. v. p. 533 note.
M Josephus, Bell. Jud. m. i. 3, ly. ii. Mommsen, loc. dt.t points out that Alexandria
in Egypt cannot be the place meant.
•* Josephus, IV. ii. 1.
Digitized by
Google
636 MOVEMENTS OF THE ROMAN LEGIONS Oct.
gradually hemmed in, and Vespasian would have commenced the
siege in 69 but for the events which were meanwhile happening in
Italy.
Towards the close of his reign Nero had conceived vast designs
of oriental conquest. A grand expedition was to have been made
against the Albanians on the Caspian and another against the
Ethiopians. For the latter vexiUarii of the German legions were
already sent to Alexandria to co-operate with the two legions al-
ready there,®^ while for the former he had selected XIV Gemina from
Britain on account of the prestige it had won against Boadicea,**
and vexiUarii were also taken from Germany and Dlyricum,®*
though they were soon recalled to put down the rising of Vindex.
Apparently also the X Gemina was removed at this time from
Spain probably for the same purpose, as we find that Galba in 69
had only one legion there,®* though it was again in Spain by the
next year.^ The XIV legion had only got as far as Dalmatia when
the death of Nero put an end to all thought of the expedition.
One fresh legion was created by Nero, though in what year is un-
certain. This was called the I Italica,®^ and it was probably sent to
Upper Germany in the place of the XIII Gemina which, as we have
seen, was sent to Pannonia. At the time of Nero's death, probably
in consequence of the rising of Vindex, it was encamped at Lugdu-
num.^ At the end of Nero*s reign, therefore, the legions were as
follows : —
Lower Gemumy: I Germanica, V Alauda, XV Primigenia, XVI
Gallica.«»
Ujpjper Germany : IV Macedonica, XXI Bapax, XXII Primigenia.
Lugdunv/m : I Italica.
Pannonia : Xin Gemina and possibly X Gemina.
Dalmatia : XI Claudia, and temporarily XIV Gemina Martia Victrix.^
Mo&sia : VIE Claudia, VUE Augusta, III Gallica.
Britain : XX Valeria Victrix, IX Hispana, II Augusta.
Spain : VI Victrix.
Syria : IV Scythica, VI Ferrata, XII Fulminata.
Judcea : X Fretensis, V Macedonica, XV ApoUinaris.
Africa : in Augusta.
Egypt : HE Cyrenaica, XXII Deiotariana.
Nero*s reign had thus involved hard fighting in Syria, Britain,
MoBsia, and Judaea, but the successful generals were treated with
ingratitude or worse. Paulinus was recalled, Plautius Silvanus was
neglected, Corbulo was ordered to end his own Ufe, and it was there-
« Tac. Hist. i. 31, 70. " Tac. Hist ii. 11 and 66.
" Hist, i. 6. » Suet. Oaiba, 10. " Hist ii. 58.
«» Dion Cassias, Iv. 24. » Hist. i. 69.
"* At some time before this XXI and XVI had changed places, as we find from
Tac. Hist. iv. 70, that XXI was now in Upper Germany.
^ The cognomina were probably added after the war in Britain.
Digitized by
Google
1887 FROM AUGUSTUS TO SEVERUS 687
fore no wonder that the legions were discontented and restless. The
first spark was lighted in Gaul, where Vindex, governor of Lugdu-
nensis, roused the Sequani to revolt, and summoned to his cause
the governors of Germany and Spain. Galba, then governor of
Tarraconensis, was proclaimed imperator by the VI legion, but
Verginius, governor of Upper Germany, led his legions towards
Lugdunum which still remained faithful to Nero. By him Vindex
was put down, but though he refused the solicitations of his legions
who wished to proclaim him emperor, he acquiesced in the decision
of the senate which acknowledged Galba. Galba lost Uttle time in
marching to Italy, probably recalling to Spain the X*** from Pan-
nonia, and taking with him to Italy ^* a new legion, which he levied
in Spain, the VII Galbiana,^ afterwards called Gemina, which,
however, was at once sent to Pannonia, where, as we have seen,
there had latterly been only one regular legion. On his arrival in
Italy he found a vemacula legio which Nero in the despair of his
last days had created from the marines of the fleet.^ Their re-
quest that Galba would confirm the creation and grant an eagle
was refused at the time^^ but we learn from two diplomata militaria^
that a few days before his death he granted the civitas to those in
the legion who had served twenty campaigns,*^ and so no doubt
confirmed its legionary character,^ It was called the I Adjutrix
and served on Otho's side in the campaigns against Vitellius.
Meanwhile the legions of Upper Germany, disappointed of their
wish to make Verginius emperor and displeased at his recall, showed
eymptoms of discontent, especially the IV Maoedonica and XXn
Primigenia. Hordeonius Flaccus, a feeble man and an invalid, had
been appointed to the post of Verginius, while A. Vitellius was sent
to the lower province and immediately began to make himself
popular with the legions by various indiJgences,*® in which he was
especially helped by Valens, the legate of one of his legions. On
1 Jan., when the oath to Galba should have been renewed, the
I Germanica and V Alauda threw stones at his statues,^ while the
XV Primigenia and XVI Gallica were also mutinous and threatening.
On the same day in the other army the IV and XXII threw down
Galba's statues and took the oath to the senate and Boman people
only. When this news was conveyed to Vitellius, he gave his
troops the choice of marching against the disaffected or choosing
•» Tac. Hist. i. 6.
'* Mist, ii. 11, iii 25, and Dion Cass. Iv. 24. It was probably called Qemina,
beoause the remains of I Germanica were drafted into it.
" Suet. Galba, 12. Tac, Hist. i. 41. •* Tac. Hist, i. 36, ii. 23, 24, 48.
•• C. I. If. iii. pp. 847-8,
** The only legions mentioned in cUplomata miUtaria are the two Ac^jtUrices,
which consisted originally of peregrim. Otherwise they refer only to the auxiliary
troops. . .
" Dion Cass. Iv. 24, . «* Tac. Hist. I ^2, •• Ibid. I 56.
Digitized by
Google
638 MOVEMENTS OF THE ROMAN LEGIONS Oct.
another imperator. The hint was taken, and Yalens, legate of the
I legion, proclaimed Vitellius at Cologne. The other legions
followed, first m the Lower province, then in the Upper. By a
prudent release of Civilis, a leading man among the Batavians,
Vitellius gained to his side eight cohorts of Batavian auxiliaries
formerly attached to the XIV legion, while Junius Blaesus, the
successor of Vindex as governor of Lugdunensis, also joined his
cause, with the legion lying there, I Italica.*^ More important
still was the accession of the British legions which might have
made a dangerous diversion in his rear. Though not coming
over from their province in force, they contributed vexillarii to the
army of Vitellius. He determined on a double march to Italy.
CflBcina with XXI Bapax and vexillarii from the other three legions
of Upper Germany was to proceed by the Pennine Alps, while Valens
with V Alauda and chosen bodies from the other legions was to go
by way of Gaul and the Cottian Alps.
Meanwhile in Bome, Otho, disappointed by the adoption of
Piso, had won the affection of the troops in the city, and on 18 Jan.
Galba was murdered. Otho was proclaimed emperor by the praetorian
guard, and in March set forward with what troops he had to meet
the German armies. There were at Bome at this time a number
of legionary troops ; vexillarii chiefly from the armies of Britain,
Germany, and Illyricum,^^^ whilst the I Adjutrix, organised by Galba,
was also at hand. By these and the prsetorian cohorts, and 7000
gladiators Otho was accompanied, whilst 8000 troops were sent
forward from the four legions of Dalmatia and Pannonia, VII, XI,
XIII, and XrV.^®^ ViteUius himself remained for the present in
Germany, and Valens and CflBcina, after committing many excesses
and cruelties on their march, formed a junction in Italy and con-
fronted Otho's forces.^*^ These were commanded by the veteran
general Suetonius Paulinus and Marius Gelsus, who advised that
a battle should be delayed till the Illyrian and Moesian legions,
which had acknowledged Otho,^^ should come up. Otho was too
impatient to follow this advice,*^ and the battle of Bedriacum,
fought about the middle of April, was the result. Among the in-
cidents of the battle we find that XXI Bapax and I Adjutrix were
opposed to one another, and that the former, after at first losing
its eagle, finally repulsed the latter, ^^ whUst the vexiUarii of the
Xin and XIV were surrounded and driven back by an attack of
the V Alauda.
Vitellius himself meanwhile was recruiting the legions left behind
in Germany. With more German soldiers and 8000 vexillarii from
the British legions,'®^ he followed his Ueutenants into Italy, learning
of the success at Bedriacum on his way. Spain had declared for
>•• Tac. Hist. i. 69. >•» Id. i. 31. '•» Id. u. 11, 24. ^ Id. ii. 31.
"•* Id. u 76. »•» Id. ii. 32. ^ Id. ii. 43. ^ Id. ii. 67.
Digitized by
Google
1887 FBOM AUGUSTUS TO SEVERUS 639
hiin, and the X legion was ordered by Cluvius Rufus the governor
to beat off a threatened attack from the Othonian governor of
Mauretania.^^ For the conquered legions Vitellius showed little
consideration. Many centurions were killed,*^ the legions were
scattered throughout Italy or mixed with the conquerors, while the
XrV, whose threatening attitude was most conspicuous, was sent
back to Britain in company with the Batavian cohorts, to keep
them in check. This nearly led to a battle between them, and
ultimately the legion returned to Britain alone."® I Adjutrix was
sent to Spain,*" and the XI and VIE sent back to their winter
quarters in Dalmatia and Pannonia, while XIII Gemina was ordered
to prepare amphitheatres at Cremona and Bononia for a gladiatorial
display."^
In the east, as we have seen, Vespasian with his three victorious
legions, X, V, XV, was just about to besiege Jerusalem when the
news arrived of the events in Italy. At first the armies of Judaea
and Syria acknowledged Galba, and then Otho,"^ but on the arrival
of Titus on the scene a change took place. Whatever jealousy
existed before between Mucianus and Vespasian was removed by
his skill. The oriental legions now began to reflect on their own
strength and to compare themselves with the German legions who
had taken on themselves to appoint an emperor. On the death of
Otho the oath to Vitellius, though taken, was taken in silence, and
they were evidently ready, if the word were given, to repudiate it.
The example was given from Egypt, where Tiberius Alexander the
prefect administered to his two legions the oath of fidelity to Ves-
pasian. This was in July, and a day or two afterwards the legions
of Syria and Judsea did the same, impelled to it partly by the
rumours spread by Mucianus that the oriental legions were to be
sent by Vitellius to Germany and the German legions to the east."*
Vespasian had thus two legions in Egypt, three in Judsea, and four
in Syria ; the Dlyrian legions, whose vexillarii had been conquered
at Bedriacum, were certain to support him, and of the Moesian
legions HI Gallica, which had formerly been in Syria, was looked
on as secure, while the other two would probably take the same
side."*
It was resolved that a part only of the eastern legions should be
sent against Vitellius, as the Illyrian and Moesian legions were not
without reason counted upon for help. Accordingly, Mucianus
started with VI Ferrata and 13,000 vexillarii from the other
legions."^
The Illyrian legions, however, did not wait for his arrival. The
III Gallica set the example to the other two Moesian legions,"^ and
»•• Tao. Hist ii. 58.
»" Id. u. 60.
»• Id. ii. 66.
"» Id,n,67,m.U.,
"« Id, ii. 67.
"« Id. ii. 6.
»" Id. ii. 80.
"» Id. 74, .
"• Id. 83.
»»^ Id. 85
Digitized by
Google
640 MOVEMENTS OF THE ROMAN LEGIONS Oct.
all three advanced to Aqnileia, at the same time inviting the
Pannonian legions, YII Gemina and Xni Gemina, to join ttiem.
These at once proclaimed Vespasian under the influence of Ante*
nius Primus, legate of the YII^^ a man of disreputable antecedents
but great energy."^ The Dalmatian legion, XI Claudia, followed
more slowly the example of the rest. At the same time Antonins
wrote letters to the XIV legion in Britain and the I Adjutrix in
Spain, which had both stood for Otho against Vitellius. Vitellius,
now in Bome, after vainly demanding fresh vexiUarii from Britain
and Germany, at last determined to send forward Valens and
, Gaecina ^^® with the now demoralised German legions. C»cina
marched first with V Alauda,^^ ^i^XH Primigenia, XXI Bapax, and
I Italica, and vexiUarii of the other four legions, while Valens, after
in vain trying to retain his part of the army, remained behmd iU.
Meanwhile, on the other side a council of war was held at Poetovio,
the winter quarters of the XTH legion, and, in spite of what seemed
more prudent plans, the advice of Antonius Primus for an immediate
advance was adopted ; while in order to protect Moesia from the
barbarian tribes the chiefs of the Sarmatse were entrusted with its
defence. Aquileia was seized, then Altinum and Patavium, to
which latter place the VII Gemina and XIII Gemina were pushed
forward, in spite of emphatic orders from Mucianus that no advance
should be made beyond Aquileia.'^^ Gsecina with his legions was
posted near Verona, and by a prompt attack might have over-
powered these two Flavian legions. He was, however, meditating
treachery towards his chief, and remained inactive. Soon the two
Pannonian legions were reinforced by III Gallica and VIII Augusta,'"
and Verona was surrounded. The German legions discovering
Csecina's treachery put him in chains and advanced to Cremona,
where XXI Bapax and I Italica already formed an advance guard.'"
Antonius, wishing to strike a decisive blow while the Vitellian army
was still without a general, advanced with his army to Bedriacum.
A cavalry skirmish between that place and Cremona ended in two
German legions, XXI and I, being repulsed, and the whole Flavian
army advancing to Cremona. A night battle followed.'** Antonius
had five legions, two from Pannonia, three from Moesia. On the
Vitellian side all the eight German legions were engaged and vexUr
larii from the three legions of Britain. The battle was confused
and obstinate, the VU Gemina losing no less than six of its chief
centurions. Victory, however, remained with Antonius. After the
rout of Cremona, the conquered legions were dispersed through
Dlyricum, and the victorious army continued its advance towards
Bome, strengthened by the XI Claudia, which had so tax kept aloof. '^
The news of the victory at once brought over to the victorious party
»» Tac. Hist ii. 86. »• Id. ii. 99. • »*» Id. ii. 100. «» !<«. iiL 8.
«« Id. iii. 10. « Id. iii 14, . "* Id. m. 22-25. »» Id. in. 60.
Digitized by
Google
1887 FROM AUGUSTUS TO SEVERUS 641
Spain with its three legions, X Gemina, VI Victrix, and I Adjutrix,*^
and Britain, where Vespasian was remembered as having once been
the legate of 11 Aagusta. In Mcesia, however, the Dacians took the
opportunity of passing the Danube, and would have destroyed the
legionary camps had not Mucianus appeared on the scene with VI
Ferrata, which he was leading, as we have seen, to Italy.*^^
At Eome Vitellius for the moment roused himself and ad-
vanced against the enemy, but returned to the city without at-
tempting to strike a blow. Antonius, joined now by Petilius
Gerealis, hastened forward eager to anticipate Mucianus, and Bome
was forcibly entered, the praetorian camp stormed, and Vitellius
murdered. On the subsequent arrival of Mucianus at Bome, serious
events in Germany at once claimed his attention ; but his first act
was to weaken the influence of Antonius by sending back his
former legion VU Gemina to Pannonia and III Gallica from its
temporary winter-quarters at Capua to Syria.^" Before long more
serious considerations involved greater changes. At the mouth of
the Bhine the Batavi had never been made a regular part of
the empire, though they had had to furnish auxiliaxies. Eight
cohorts of these Batavian forces had been attached to the XIV
legion in Britain, and had been among the forces present at the
first battle of Bedriacum on the side of the Vitellians. They had
not, however, heartily joined the German legions, and it was only
from motives of prudence that Vitellius had freed Civilis, one of
their chief men, from imprisonment on a charge of treason.** The
tribe remained disaffected after his release, and Antonius before
his invasion of Italy took advantage of this and wrote instructions
to Civilis by an appearance of revolt to detain the German
legions in their province. With this aim Hordeonius Flaccus, now
commanding in both provinces, was in secret agreement.**^ Ac-
cordingly the levy ordered by VitelUus was refused by the Batavians,
who persuaded the Caninefates to take up a similar attitude, and at
the same time CiviUs sent a message to stop the Batavian cohorts
who were at Mogontiacum under orders to proceed to Bome.*'*
Meanwhile an attack was made on the winter-quarters of the
Eoman auxiliaries stationed on the Lower Bhine. At so decisive
a step Hordeonius was alarmed, and sent two legions, V Alauda and
XV Primigenia, against Civilis. They, however, reduced in numbers
and largely composed of recruits, were obUged to retreat to their
winter-quarters at Vetera.*^ Hordeonius himself was at Mogon-
tiacum with the two legions of Upper Germany,*^ and when the
Batavian cohorts obeyed the sunmions of Civilis, making no at-
tempt to stop them himself, he ordered I Germanica stationed at
»« Tac. HUt iii. 44. '*' Id, 46. >» Id. iv. 39. »» Id. i. 59.
•~ Id. iv. 13. ^" Id. 15. »" Id. 18.
»s Tlie other two (XXI and I Italica) had marched entire with CsBoina.
VOL. n. — NO. vm. t t
Digitized by
Google
642 MOVEMENTS OF THE ROMAN LEGIONS Oct.
Bonna to do so. The legion^ however, unsupported by Hordeonias,
was repulsed, and the cohorts joined their countrymen. Thus rein-
forced Civilis advanced to besiege Vetera, a large camp intended
for two full legions but now guarded only by 5000 men.*** To
relieve the place Hordeonius sent forward Didius Vocula, legate of
the XXII Primigenia, with that legion and the IV Macedonica.
The soldiers, suspecting their leaders of collusion with Civilis, after
threats of mutiny proceeded as far as Bonna, where, joining the
I legion, still smarting under its recent repulse, they broke out
into open violence.*** Obedience was for the time restored and an
advance made to Cologne, where Hordeonius resigned his command
to Vocula. NovsBsium was next reached, where the XVI Gallica
was stationed, and once more the demoraUsed troops broke out
into mutiny, and Herennius Gallus, the legate of the legion, was
killed.**^ It was not, however, only the legionaries with their dogged
fidelity to ViteUius who were to blame. Vocula, instead of advanc-
ing at once with his four legions to the relief of Vetera, remained
stationary at Gelduba, and while he thus gave ground for suspicion
to his jealous troops, he allowed Civilis to send attacking parties
against the TJbii, the Treviri, and even as far as Mogontiacum itself.
At this point news arrived of the Vitellian defeat at Cremona, and
the legions sulkily took the oath to Vespasian. Civilis, however,
who had hitherto nominally fought for Vespasian, now threw
away the mask, and still refused to disarm. An attack on Gelduba
was victoriously repulsed by Vocula,**^ who even then, however,
neglected the chance of relieving Vetera, and when he did advance
there, he contented himself with strengthening its defences while
he took 1000 men from the two besieged legions and added them
to his own army.*** Then, finding his men more and more
mutinous, he retreated again to Novaesium, upon which Vetera was
finally cut oflf and surrounded. Not unnaturally after this speci-
men of generalship another mutiny followed. Hordeonius was
murdered, and it was only after a temporary separation of the
lower and upper legions that the two of Upper Germany, XXn and
IV, and I Germanica of the lower army, followed Vocula back to
Mogontiacum. ***
A fresh danger now threatened the Boman cause. The news
successively arriving of the destruction of the Capitoline temple,
the death of ViteUius, the invasion of Moesia by the Dacians, and
of native risings in Britain, induced the Gallic cantons to think of
throwing off the Boman yoke. Under the lead of Classicus and
Tutor, the auxiliaries of the Treviri and Lingones suddenly de-
serted Vocula, who, suspecting nothing, had once more advanced
to Cologne, and joined their cause to that of Civilis. Again Vocula
»* Tao. Hist. iv. 22. «» Id. iv. 26. »•• Id. 27.
»' Id. iv. 82. »•• Id. 86. >" Id. 87.
Digitized by
Google
1887 FROM AUGUSTUS TO SEVERUS 648
withdrew to NovaBsium; but the legions, since Vitellius was
dead, preferred even a foreign empire to Vespasian,^*^ and by a final
mutiny, Boman soldiers as they were, they took the oath of fidelity
to the so-called Galhc empire, Vocula paying the penalty for his
vacillation with his life. The V and XV legions in Vetera now de-
prived of all hope capitulated and took the same oath ; but their
compliance did not save their lives, and they were annihilated with
fire and sword.^** Of the other four legions two, XVI and I, were
sent to garrison the city of the Treviri,**^ '^Jiiie the other two, IV
and XXn, were probably kept by Civilis in Lower Germany. At
this point, however, the tide began to turn. Jealousy broke out
between the Gallic leaders and Civilis, who had not himself re-
cognised the Gallic empire, while the Sequani in Gaul formed the
centre of a Boman party there.
Mucianus meanwhUe, having provided for the safety of the
other provinces by dispersing the conquered Vitellian legions
through Ulyricum and sending the I Italica entire to Moesia to
support the VI Ferrata, had turned his eyes on Germany, and ap-
parently as a first step sent back XXI Rapax to Vindonissa. Before
mentioning his further dispositions it will be as well once more to
take a bird's-eye view of the present position of the legions.
Lower Germany: (V and XV destroyed) XXII Primigenia and IV
Macedonica under Civihs.
Upper Germany : XXI Bapax.
Ganil : I Germanica, XVI Gallica at Trier.
Pannonda : VQ Gemina and mixed troops of Vitellians.
Dahnatia : garrisons of Vitellians.
McBsia : I ItaUca, VI Ferrata, and Vitellian troops. >*'
Italy : XUL Gemina, XI Claudia, VII Gaudia, Vm Augusta.
Spain : VI Victrix, X Gemina, I Adjutrix.
Britain : U Augusta, XX Valeria Victrix, IX Hispana, XIV Gemina.
Syria : in Gallica, XTE Fulminata, IV Scythica.
Judcea : X Fretensis, V Macedonica, XV ApoUinaris.
Africa : HE Augusta.
Egypt : XXTT Deiotariana and in Cyrenaica.
To strengthen his demoralised forces ViteUius had apparently
followed the example of Nero, and created an irregular legion
from the fleet at Misenum.^^ This legion Mucianus in the
name of Vespasian formally enrolled under the name of the II
Adjutrix.^^ It was necessary to send an overwhelming force into
Germany, and accordingly he set apart for this purpose the XXI
Bapax, already probably in Vindonissa; this new legion 11 Adjutrix,
»«• Tac. Hist. iv. 64. "> Id. 60. »" Id. 62. »« Id. m. 46.
^** This is dear from Hist. iii. 55, where a Ugio e cJassicis is mentioned at a time
when the I Adjutrix was certainly in Spain. Ck>nt Hist, ii 67 and 86.
1^ Dion Cass. ly. 24 ; and a military diploma dated 7 March 70, granted to the
yeteraxis of the II Adjutrix, C. I. L. iii. 849 and 907.
T T 2
Digitized by
Google
644 MOVEMENTS OF THE ROMAN LEGIONS Oct
XI Claudia,"^ VHE Augusta, the VI Victrix, and X Gemina from
Spain and XIV from Britain,"^ while the command was to be given
to Petilius Cerealis, He, on his arrival at Mogontiacum,*** found
much of the work afready done. The concilium of the Gallic states
held at the city of the Bemi had declared against revolt, and on the
first advance of the XXI legion from Yindonissa the two legions I
and XYI had deserted the Gauls and joined it. Cerealis was thus
able to enter Trier without a struggle, where he pardoned the two *
penitent legions and united them to the XXI. Givilis and the
Gallic chiefs determined on an attack before the other advancing
legions could come up. ^^^ The attack was made, but in spite of care-
lessness on the part of Cerealis and misconduct on the part of the two
pardoned legions, the valour of the XXI gave the victory to the
Romans.**^ Cerealis, having now the VI Victrix and the II Adjutrix***
with him, advanced to Cologne, while the XIV legion from Britain
was led against the Treviri and Tungri.**^ Another successful
battle was fought at Vetera, the scene of so much Boman disgrace,
and then Civilis was forced into his own country and soon after
compelled to submit.
By this time Vespasian was on his way to Eome from Egypt,
where he had remained for some time. Titus was left to conduct
the Jewish war, and in the spring of 70 a.d. the long-delayed siege
was begun. In addition to the three legions which had served
under Vespasian, Titus led up the XII Fulminata from Syria and
some vexiUarii from the two Egyptian legions.*^ With these the
siege was pressed, ending after five months' obstinate resistance in
the fall of the Jewish capital.
On the conclusion of the Jewish and German wars are-arrange-
ment of the forces was to a certain extent necessary. In the east
Judaea could no longer be left without a regular legion, while the
events which led to Corbulo's campaigns had shown the advisability
of placing legionary rather than auxiHary forces in Cappadocia.
Accordingly the X Fretensis was left in Jerusalem,*** whilst the XII
Fulminata was led by Titus to Melitene in Cappadocia on the
Euphrates.*** Syria was still garrisoned by four legions, the VI
Ferrata sent back from Moesia, the HE Gallica ordered away from
Italy, as we have seen, by Mucianus, the IV Scythica, and a newly
organised legion called XVI Flavia Felix, which Vespasian formed
out of the remnants of the XVI Gallica now disbanded on account
of its behaviour in the German war.**®
On the Danube frontier important reinforcements were needed.
Both the Dacians and Sarmatse were becoming more and more
><• The reading YI must be wrong, as the VI Ferrata was certainly not sent into
Germany.
>" Hist iv. 68. »« Id. 71. >*• Id. 76. '»• Id. 78.
»»» Hist. V. 16 and 20. "» Hist. iv. 79. '" Hist. v. 1.
^ Josephos, BeU. Jud. i. 2. >» Josephas, ib» vn. i. 8. **• Dion Gass^lv. 24.
Digitized by
Google
1887 FROM AUGUSTUS TO SEVERUS 645
threatening, while the Mareomanni were showing signs of restless-
ness on the Pannonian frontier. It was therefore decided to leave
Dalmatia henceforth without a legionary force, but to place no less
than seven legions along the Danube between Carnuntum and its
mouth. Probably from this time Carnuntum, Vindobona, Brigetio,
Viminacium, Singidunum, and Durostomum became legionary
camps. To Moesia were sent back VII Claudia from Italy, the V
Macedonica from Judeea,^*^ and a new legion, IV Flavia Felix, which
had been created in place of IV Macedonica also disbanded.*^ We
have seen already that the I Italica had been sent hither by Mucianus.
To Pannonia two of its old legions were restored, XIII Gemina
which was probably moved from its old headquarters Poetovio to
Vindobona on the frontier,'*^ and the XV ApoUinaris, which for the
last seven years had been in the east, was stationed at Carnuntum, ^^
while in all probability the V Alauda, which had marched almost
entire into Italy,*^* was also sent to this province.^^*
From St)ain the VI Victrix and X Gemina had been sent
against Civilis, and their place was now filled by the VII Gemina, of
which traces are found in the province from this time onward,
especially at Leon its headquarters. Britain had sent the XIV
Gemina into Germany at the same time, but the province was not
yet completely conquered, and four legions were still necessary.
Accordingly the II Adjutrix was sent over from Germany, and pro-
bably stationed at Lindum,*®^ whilst the IX Hispaha was moved on
to Eboracum. For Lower Germany, whilst the I Germanica was
disbanded, three legions were considered enough after the reduction
of the Batavi, the VI Victrix being stationed at Vetera, the X
Gemina at Noviomagus,^®* and the XV Primigenia at Bonna. In
Upper Germany the Chatti were always a source of danger, while
the Mareomanni or Suevi might if necessary be attacked from this
quarter, and so for the present there seem to have been no less than
five legions placed here,^^ the XX Primigenia and XIV Gemina at
Mogontiacum,*^ the XI Claudia and XXI Bapax^^^ at Vindonissa, and
the Vin Augusta perhaps at Argentoratum.*^® For the present,
^" Conf. Orelli, 3458, where a oentnrion of that legion is rewarded by Vespasian.
»" Dion Cass. Iv. 24. >»» C. I. L. iii 580.
»« O. I. L. iii. 482. »« Tao. Hist i. 61.
"^ This is quite uncertain. It was probably the legion destroyed by the Sarmataa
under Domitian, Suet. Dom. 6, which was almost certainly a Pannonian legion.
»" C. I. L. vii. Nos. 185 and 186. '« Orelli, 3551, 2008, 2098.
>*^ This yiew is confirmed by two inscriptions, Bull. Epigr. 4, p. 66 (cited in
Marquardt, Staatsverw, ii. 449) in which vexilla are mentioned of I, Yin, XI, XIY, and
XXII. Marquardt reads XXI ; but this inscription must have been later than 88 a.d.
when Trajan led the I Adjutrix to Upper Germany, and the XXI Bapax was probably
disbanded at once after the rebellion of Satuminus. See below. Besides, the XXII
Primigenia was certainly in Upper Germany at this period.
'" Tac. Hist, y. 19. '" Insonpt, Helv. No. 248.
'" It was here in Ptolemy's time.
Digitized by
Google
646 MOVEMENTS OF THE ROMAN LEGIONS Oct*
therefore, there were four legions in Britain, eight along the Bhine,
seven on the Danube, and six in the east, while Spain and Egypt
had two legions each, and Africa one.
Lower Germany : VI Victrix, X Gemina, XV PrimigeniaJ^*
Upper Germany : XXII Primigenia, XIV Gemina, XI Claudia, Vm
Augusta, XXI Bapax.
Britain : 11 Augusta, XX Valeria Victrix, IX Hispana, 11 Adjutrix.
Pannonia : XIII Gemina, V Alauda, XV Apollinaris.
Moma : VII Claudia, IV Flavia Felix, I ItaUca, V Macedonica.
Spadn : YLL Gemina, I Adjutrix.
Syria : VI Ferrata, IV Scythica, XVI Flavia Felix, m Gallica.
JttdcBa : X Fretensis. Cappadocia : XH Fulminata.
Egypt : XXII Deiotariana, HE Cyrenaica. Africa : HI Augusta.
An important change which accompanied this Flavian redistribu-
tion of the legions was the virtual exclusion henceforth of Italians
from legionary service. Their pride of birth and feeling of superi-
ority seem to have been the causes of frequent acts of insubordination
and excess, and the lamentable fiasco of the Batavian war made a
reform of some kind inevitable. An incidental result of this was
the necessity to recruit the African army henceforth from the east
instead of from the west, as the exclusion of Italy threw a heavier
burden on the other western provinces.
These arrangements seem to have preserved peace on the fron-
tier during Vespasian's reign. Under Domitian was commenced a
fresh poUcy in Upper Germany, afterwards pursued and completed
by Trajan. Instead of keeping to the Bhine as the frontier, the
Neckar vaUey and the region called Decumates Agri was gradually
taken into the empire. Ultimately this considerably compacted the
frontier line, but at first it involved an expedition against the
formidable tribe of Chatti. This Domitian undertook in 88 A.D.,
and apparently with success. Five years later, however, Anto-
nius Saturninus, the legate of Upper Germany, with two legions,
rose against Domitian and entered into communications with the
Chatti, who were only prevented from entering the province by the
sudden break-up of the ice on the Bhine. Deprived of this assis-
>« Momin8en(i2^^. Oesch, y. 180) assumes that XV Primigenia and V Alandawere
disbanded after the affair of Givilis. There are several reasons against this view.
(1) This would have reduced the number of legions to 28, and the frontier relations of
the empire, after so much recent danger and confusion, were such as certainly did not
admit of a diminished army ; (2) in the case, at any rate, of the V the main portion of
the legion did not share in the disgrace, as it was in Italy {Hist, i. 61), and we know
that the two legions in Vetera only amounted to 5000 men, while these bravely held
out until the desertion of the other legions left them no hope ; (3) one legion was certainly
destroyed by the Sarmatae in Domitian's reign (Suet. Dom. 10), but none of the other
legions can be shown to have disappeared at that time ; (4) the two new legions of
Trajan, XXX and II placed in Lower Germany and Egypt, make the supposition of
Marquardt {Staatsverw. ii 460) and Grotefend (in Pauly, ReaUEncydop, p. 896) very
probable that Trajan amalgamated once more the two double legions XXII and XY
which were also in those two provinces.
Digitized by
Google
1887 FROM AUGUSTUS TO SEVERUS 647
tance, Satuminus was overpowered by L. Appius Norbanus, legate
of VIII Augusta.^^® This was followed by the disbandmg of one of
the two legions involved, XXI Kapax,^^ and the transference of the
I Adjutrix from Spain under the command of Trajan, who was then
its legate.^^^ To Britain Julius Agricola had been sent as legate in
78 A.D., and he at once and energetically pushed on the conquest of
the northern part. After the subjugation of the Silures, the camp
at Viroconium, where the XIV legion had been placed, was probably
given up, though Isca and Deva were still garrisoned by the II and
XX, while the II Adjutrix was at Lindum, and the IX Hispana at
Eboracum, In 84, Agricola, after conquering up to the Firths of
Forth and Gyde, was recalled, though the same considerations
which had made the conquest of Britain advisable might have been
urged for bringing both Ireland and the north of Scotland within
the empire. Domitian, however, whether from caution or jealousy,
decided against further conquest, and, either at this time or shortly
after, the defensive policy in Britain which Agricola's recall implied
was marked by the withdrawal of one of the four legions, the 11
Adjutrix, which was transferred to Pannonia. Here a war broke
out about this time against the Suevi or Marcomanni, who, forming
an alliance with the lazyges, a Sarmatian tribe, invaded Pan-
nonia. Our only knowledge of this war is derived from two inscrip-
tions,^^* which mention distinctions gained in beUo Suevico et Sarma-
tico by the II Adjutrix and XIII Gemina under Domitian ; and one
sentence in Suetonius,*^* which mentions the destruction of one
legion. This we have already seen ground for beUeving was the
V Alauda. To strengthen the frontier in this part Domitian
probably moved the I Adjutrix ^^* from Upper Germany to Brigetio
in Pannonia, and also sent to the same province a new legion, the
I Minervia.*^* In 86 a more important war was begun. Decebalus,
the new king of the Dacian tribes, crossed the Danube into Moesia
and defeated and slew Appius Sabinus the legate. Domitian hastily
collected an army, which Cornelius Fuscus, prefect of the praetorians,
commanded, but they shared a similar fate. Then Tertius Julianus
assumed the command, drove the Dacians across the Danube, and
defeated them at Tapse. In this victory the V Macedonica was
probably engaged.^^^ The results of this victory were greatly
modified by a defeat which Domitian himself met with from the
Marcomanni and Quadi in Pannonia. However, a peace was made,
*'• Be la Berge, Trajan^ p. 13, note 1.
"* The name of the XXI Bapax is found erased from an insoription at Vindonissa,
IrucripL Helv. 248 quoted by Marquardt, Staatsverw, ii. 450.
»" Pliny, Paneg, 14.
"» Henzen, 6766 and 6912. "* D(ymiL 6 ; Tac. Agric. i. 41.
*'* Henzen, 5489, proves that it was here under Nerva. *" Dion Cass. Iv. 24.
*'' Henzen, 6490. A certain J. Brocohus, tribune of the V Macedonica, is rewarded
for services in the Dadan war, the emperor's name being omitted, which would seem to
point to Domitian.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
648 MOVEMENTS OF THE ROMAN LEGIONS Oct.
and while Decebalus became nominally a vassal of Bome, Borne
became with greater reahty tributary to the Dacian.^^* There were,
therefore, at the end of Domitian's reign four legions in Moesia, I
ItaUca, Vn Claudia, IV Flavia Felix, V Macedonica, and four in
Pannonia, XIII Gemina, I Adjutrix, I Minervia,*^ and 11 Adjutrix,
while there were four in Upper Germany, the XIV Gemina, the XI
Claudia, the YIII Augusta, and the XXII Primigenia, and three in
Lower Germany, the X Gemina, the VI Victrix, and the XV Primi-
genia. Towards the close of Domitian*s reign Moesia was divided
into an upper and a lower province,^®® probably for the sake of keep-
ing a more effective check on the Dacians through two independent
commanders. During Nerva's short reign the Suevi and SarmataB
seem to have repeated their invasion of Pannonia. We learn from
an inscription ^^^ that the I Adjutrix distinguished itself, and it was
a victory from this quarter which Nerva was celebrating when he
adopted Trajan.*®^
Under Trajan important frontier changes took place, and for the
first time the traditional poHcy of Augustus was essentially modified.
When Nerva's death left him sole imperator, he was governor of
Upper Germany, engaged in carrying out the new frontier policy
there begun by Domitian. Taking in the Neckar vaUey, he com-
pleted a military road from Mogontiacum, through Heidelberg, to
Baden, in the direction of Offenburg,^^ to assist communications
with the Danube provinces ; at the same time proceeding with the
German limes which ran through Friedberg, Worth, and Milten-
berg to Lorch, where it joined the Bhsetian limes. To this fresh
frontier line it is true that no legions were pushed forward. The
castles were probably garrisoned by small detachments only, but
the frontier line of Upper Germany was considerably shortened by
the change, and from this time it was possible to decrease the
number of legions on the Bhine. In particular Vindonissa was
quite placed inside the line of defence, and probably the XI Claudia,
hitherto posted here, was at once transferred to the newly created
province of Lower Moesia, thus leaving Upper Germany with three
legions, of which one at least as late as Ptolemy's time was at
Argentoratum.
Leaving Germany thus thoroughly secured, Trajan had a most
important work to do on the Danube. The disgraceful state of
things in which Domitian had left the fortunes of the empire here
had at once to be retrieved. The details of the two Dacian wars of
>'• Pliny, Paneg. 12.
*'* I see no reason to suppose that this legion was sent first to Lower Germany,
where it no doubt afterwards was. If it took the plaoe of the legion destroyed by the
SarmatsB, it would naturally go to Pannonia ; while there was no reason for sending
another legion to Lower Germany, which was perfectly tranquiL
»" Henzen, 6431. >»^ Henzen, 6439. »« Pliny, Paneg. 8.
>•» Mommsen, Rdm, Oesch, voL v. 189,
Digitized by
Google
1887 FROM AUGUSTUS TO SEVERUS 649
Trajan are obscure, though no doubt much may be reconstructed
from inscriptions, and above all from the column of Trajan at Bome.
Into this, however, it is beyond our plan to enter here. As we have
seen, Trajan would have no less than nine legions along the Danube.
The I Adjutrix was at Brigetio, the I Minervia probably at Vindobona
with the Xni Gemina, and the 11 Adjutrix at Acumincum; the
VII Claudia at Viminacium,^®* the IV Flavia Felix at Singidunum,
the I Italica at Durostomum, the XI Claudia perhaps at Novab, and
the V Macedonica, perhaps not till the end of the war, at Troesmis.
Of these nine legions probably all served in one or other of the
wars which followed. In the first war certainly two armies marched
into Dacia, one from Pannonia under Q. GUtius Agricola, and one
from Mcesia under M. Laberius Maximus. Only five legions, how-
ever, are actually known from inscriptions to have taken part in
the wars, I ItaUca,i«« VH Claudia,i«« XHI Gemina,^*^ I Minervia,^»«
V Macedonica,i8» and IV Flavia Felix.i»«
As the result of the war Dacia was made into a province, and
the Xin Gemina was removed from Pannonia and posted first per-
haps at Sarmizegethusa, but afterwards at Apulum in the north. At
the same time the great camps in Lower Mcesia, especially Troesmis,
were now, if not before, completely estabhshed, while Pannonia was
like Mcesia divided into an upper and lower province.^^^ To supply
the place of the XIII Gemina, Trajan transferred the X Gemina
from Lower Germany ^^^ to Vindobona, while he brought the XIV
Gemina to Camuntum ^^^ from Upper Germany, and suppUed the
place of the X Gemina in Germany by the I Minervia. The XV
ApoUinaris which had hitherto been at Camuntum was probably
now moved to Cappadocia to strengthen the eastern frontier.***
After the Dacian wars, therefore, the legions were as follows : —
Lower Qermany : I Minervia, XV Primigenia, VI Victrix.
Upper Oermam/y : VIII Augusta, XXII Primigenia.
Britain : II Augusta, XX Valeria Victrix, IX Hispana.
Upper Pannonia : XIV Gemina, X Gemina, I Adjutrix.
Lower Pannonia : EL Adjutrix.
Upper Mcesia : VII Claudia, IV Flavia Felix.
Lower Mo^sia : I Italica, V Macedonica, XI Claudia.
Spain : VII Gemina. Africa : III Augusta.
Egypt: III Cyrenaica, XXIT Deiotariana.
»" C, L L. m, p. 264. >« Henzen, 5669. Or. 8464.
»«• Or. 3049 : Henz. 6863. »«^ Henz. 6863.
>•» Henz. 6448, 6930, Or. 3464. »•» Henz. 6461
^^ Or. 3049 ; this inBcription, however, does not make it qnite plain whether the
legion served in this war or not : bat see Dierauer, Qesch, TrajanSf p. 77.
^' Spart., HcuJr, 3., proves that in 107 Hadrian was legate of Lower Pannonia. The
lower province was of maoh less importance, and only had one legion.
^"^ This was certainly in Lower Germany at the beginning of Trajan's reign.
Brambach, C. J. Rh. 660, 662.
*" It was certainly here in Ptolemy's time, n. xviii. 3. '** C. I. L, iii. p. 688.
Digitized by
Google
650 MOVEMENTS OF THE ROMAN LEGIONS Oet.
Ca^padocia : XII Fulminata, XV Apollinaris.
Syria : IV Scythica, m Gallica, VI Ferrata, XVI Mavia Felix.
Jvdaa : X Fretensis.
Before the Dacian wars were over another province was added
to the empire. On the death of Agrippa II, the last tetrarch of the
Idmnsean dynasty, his territory was added to Syria, and this brought
the empire into direct relations with the turbulent and plundering
Arab tribes beyond, whom the Idumsean kings had hitherto had to
keep off. It now seemed advisable to annex this region, a task
which Cornelius Palma, legate of Syria, accomplished in 104. The
country was made into a province under the title of Arabia, and the
in Cyrenaica was removed from Egypt and posted henceforth at
Bostra.*^
Perhaps at this time a new legion was created for Egypt, the
n Trajana, while at some time previous to 107 a.d. Trajan seems to
have abolished the two duplicate legions XXII Deiotariana and
XV Primigenia, creating in the place of the latter another new
legion, the XXX Ulpia Victrix, which was posted at Colonia Trajana
a little below the old camp of Vetera. This left the number of
legions twenty-nine, though at the time when the XXX*** was formed
the XXIP* was probably not yet disbanded ; and so the number
thirty was completed by its creation.
If Trajan's policy of advance on the Danube was justified by
the attitude of the barbarian tribes, his aggression on the Parthian
frontier was open to much greater objections, and was far more
mixed with motives of personal ambition. Of the details of the
Parthian war we are imperfectly informed. Armenia was again
the cause of the war, and Trajan determined at last definitely to
reduce Armenia to the form of a province. Starting from Antioch
he marched to the Euphrates, and without difficulty occupied
Armenia, and in later campaigns, in order to make the frontier
scientific, and to bar the way to Armenia against the Parthian
armies, he made two other provinces beyond, which he called
Mesopotamia and Assyria. To carry out these successes Trajan,
as we have seen, had nine legions in the east, but of these, as
Fronto tells us, the Syrian legions were again as demoralised and
inefficient as Corbulo had found them in Nero's reign, and accord-
ingly Trajan summoned vexUlarii from the Pannonian legions to
help him. Of the oriental legions probably most were engaged in
the war, though we only have epigraphical evidence of the part
taken by X Fretensis,*^ XVI Flavia Firma^^^^ VI Ferrata,^«« and
in Cyrenaica.^^ Whatever new arrangements of the legionary
*** More aoourately Arabia was administered by the legate of Syria until Trajan's
Parthian war, when the province was definitely organised. Cohen, ii. 26.
»»• De la Berge, Essai sur le rdgne de Trajan^ p. xlvL
w Henzen, 6749. »" Henzen, 6466. »»» Orelli, 832.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 FROM AUGUSTUS TO SEVERUS 651
forces those fresh conquests would have involved, the need for
making them was obviated by the death of Trajan, and the relin-
quishment of the newly created provinces by Hadrian.
Under Hadrian the legions were mostly kept in the positions
which they occupied at the close of Trajan's reign. For this,
indeed, there was an additional reason in the fact that from this
time the legions were, as a rule, recruited from the provinces in
which they were stationed, an arrangement which would manifestly
render undesirable any but the most necessary changes of station*
Economy and greater facility in recruiting were no doubt partly the
causes of this change, but there was also the desire to have all
recruiting carried out in the imperial provinces, since senatorial
provinces, being garrisoned by no legions, were henceforth excluded.
Mommsen has shown with great force that the change gradually led
to a primacy of the Ulyrian nation, sincf from this time the premier
place in the Soman armies was held by the legions posted along
the Danube. The reign of Hadrian was, with few exceptions, a
peaceful one. The emperor adopted on the frontier the policy,
advantageous at first as long as it was backed by an efficient
army, but terribly liable to degenerate, of subsidising the barbarian
. tribes, and so partially handing over to them the protection of the
frontiers. By this means the Eoxolani were prevented from over-
running Dacia and MoBsia, while the tribes of the Caucasus were
many of them united by a similar bond to Kome. Besides this
a more systematic fortification of exposed points of the frontier
was a feature of Hadrian's reign, nowhere so well exemplified as
in the wall and vallum between Carlisle and Newcastle. These
precautions did not entirely prevent troubles with the barbarians.
The Alani, encouraged possibly by the king of the Iberi, after over-
running Media and Armenia, threatened to invade Cappadocia, and
made it necessary to mobilise the two legions, XH Fulminata and
XV Apollinaris, stationed in that province.^^ In Britain too trouble
was experienced. At the beginning of the reign we learn from
Spartian^^ that there was disaffection, and later the Brigantes
seem to have risen, and in all probability to have surprised the
camp of the IX Hispana at Eboracum and annihilated the legion.^
It at any rate disappears about this time, and its place was taken
by the VI Victrix from Lower Germany, which from later inscrip-
tions we know to have been placed at Eboracum, while an inscription
informs us that vexiUarii of the German legions were obliged to
take part in a British expedition during this reign.^^
^ The aocoant of this mobilisation is given in Arrian's smaller writings. See
Mommsen, ROm. Oesch. v. 405.
"* Spart. Hadrian, 6.
^^ Fronto, p. 217. Faber: Hadriano wnperiwn obtinente quantum miUtwn a
Britaiwm ccBsum, quoted by Mommsen, loc. cU. 171. Conf. also Juvenal, ziv. 196.
*• Henzen, 6456.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
652 MOVEMENTS OF THE ROMAN LEGIONS Oct.
A more Berious rising took place among the Jews. There had
been smouldering disaffection here since the conquest of Titus, and
Hadrian determined to turn Jerusalem into a Boman colony with
the name of ^lia Gapitolina. He at the same time moved another
legion, VI Ferrata, into the province. This provoked another de-
sperate rising. What was probably on Hadrian's part a measure of
precaution, was interpreted by the Jews as an attempt to extirpate
their religion. In the course of the campaign 900 villages, fifty-
one fortresses are said to have been destroyed, and 180,000 men
to have perished. Probably all the three Syrian and the two
JudfiBan legions were engaged, though the only detail we get from
inscriptions is that a veteran of the HI Gallica distinguished him-
self, and that the legate of the IV Scythica temporarily took charge
of Syria while the governor was commanding against the rebels.*^
Either at this time or a Uttle later the HI GaUica was transferred
to Trachonitis^ on the border of Arabia, but still within the
province of Syria. This was the position of the legions then at the
date of the inscription found on a column at Bome belonging to
some period between 120 and 170 a.d.*^
Britain : U Augusta, VI Victrix, XX Valeria Victrix.
Lower Germany : I Minervia, XXX Ulpia.
Upper Germany : VHI Augusta, XXH Primigenia.
Upper Pannonia : I Adjutrix, X Gemina, XIV Gemina.
Lower Pcmnonia : H Adjutrix.
Upper McBsia : IV Flavia Felix, VH Claudia.
Lower Mcesia : I Italica, V Macedonica, XI Claudia.
Dacia : XIII Gemina.
Cappadocia : XII Fulminata, XV Apollinaris.
Phcsnicia : HI Gallica. Syria : IV Scythica, XVI Flavia Felix.
JudcBa : VI Ferrata, X Fretensis. Arabia : HI Cyrenaica.
Egypt : H Trajana. Numidia : HI Augusta.
Spain : VH Gemina.
For sixty years after Trajan's Dacian war the Danube remained
undisturbed except by petty raids, and while the great mihtary
camps along the river grew into important towns, civic life and
prosperity developed in the interior of these provinces. But in 168,
pushed on probably by movements of free tribes behind, the Mar-
comanni, Quadi, and lazyges broke into Noricum, Bhsetia, Pannonia,
and Dacia with a rush, and even penetrated over the Julian Alps
into Italy. The Pannonian legions were naturally those principally
engaged, and the enemy not acting in concert, and under no settled
leaders, were soon driven back from the territory of the empire.
«* Orelli, 8671. »* Pauly, Real-EncyclapOdie, 877.
*** It was after the transfer of VI Victrix to Britain, and VI Ferrata to Jeni-
salem, and before Noricum and Bhastia were garrisoned by legionary troops, as the
names of the two legions afterwards posted here are added as a supplement C. /. X>
vi. 8492.
Digitized by
Google
1887 FROM AUGUSTUS TO SEVERUS 658
The I Adjutrix under its capable legate Pertinax cleared BhsBtia and
Noricum,^^ whUe the IV Flavia,a«» the H Adjutrix,^® and the VII
Claudia*^ from Upper Moesia are mentioned in inscriptions as
having distinguished themselves in this war. No doubt also the
Moesian legions, whose frontier was not so immediately threatened,
sent vexillarii after they had received back the detachments which
they had previously sent to the Armenian and Parthian war.*'**
In the course of the war which, with some interruption caused by
a rising in Syria, went on for seventeen years, two new legions
were formed, II and HE ItaHca, which were posted in Noricum and
Bhsetia, hitherto guarded only by auxiUary troops under a pro-
curator. Step by step the perseverance and resolution of M.
Aurelius drove back the enemy, compelling first the Marcomanni,
then the Quadi, and lastly the lazyges to submit, and when the
second war was begun in 178, no doubt the emperor had deter-
mined on completing the poUcy of Trajan by the addition of two
new provinces, Marcomannia and Sarmatia. His death, however,
and the succession of his unworthy son, put an end to this scheme,
but incomplete as the results of the war were left, they were yet
sufficient to assert the supremacy of Bome in this quarter, and
when the Boman frontier was finally violated by the Goths, it was
from the Lower not the Middle Danube that they proceeded.*'^
The same tendency to return to Trajan's frontier policy which
Marcus showed on the Danube, he had already shown in the east,
where quite early in his reign the affairs of Armenia had again led
to a serious Parthian war. The Gappadocian and Syrian armies
had been successively defeated, and it was by sending for important
reinforcements from the Moesian and German legions,*'* and by
sending two of the ablest Boman generals. Statins Priscus and
Avidius Cassius, that victory at last fell to the Bomans. Armenia
was again brought within Boman influence, while the western por-
tion of Mesopotamia was once more annexed to the empire. No
details with respect to the legions are known, except that, as on so
many previous occasions, the Syrian legions proved quite inadequate
to meet a resolute enemy. From an inscription in Africa we learn
that one of the Syrian legions (VI Ferrata?) was sent tempo-
rarily into that province to help to put down a rising of the
Mauri.*'*
Since the accession of Vespasian the legions on the frontier had
been content to accept the decision of Bome, and had set up no
military emperors of their own. On the murder of Commodus, how-
ever, a new period commenced. The disgraceful purchase of the
*^ Capitolinns, Pert. 2. *" Pauly, ReaUEncychpOdie, 878. »• Or. 3446.
sio MommBen, B0m. Oeaeh, v. 210, note 1. '" Mommsen, v. 215.
'" MommBen, i20m. Oesch, v. 406 ; and Benier, Milangea d* Epigraphies 123.
»* Mommsen, RGm, Oesch, v. 635.
Digitized by
Google
654 MOVEMENTS OF THE ROMAN LEGIONS Oct.
empire from the prsetorians by Didius Julianus aroused the anger
and disgust of the powerful armies of Britain, Upper Pannonia, and
Syria, each consisting of three legions. Syria was governed by
Pescennius Niger, Upper Pannonia by Septimius Severos, and
Britain by Clodius Albinus. The two former were proclaimed
emperor by their troops, but Septimius was the most prompt, and
by coming to a temporary understanding with Albinus, he kept
the British legions out of the contest, while the other legions of the
Danube provinces, as well as those of the Ehine, declared for him."^
One of his first acts constituted an important change in the
Boman army. He disbanded the old praetorian cohorts, and with
them the custom of enlisting them chiefly from Italy. Henceforth
they were to consist of picked veteran troops taken from the regular
legions, while the number was increased to 40,000. Like Trajan
he constantly used these troops in his oriental campaigns.
Meanwhile Pescennius had possession of the eastern provinces
and Egypt with their nine legions, while he was supported by Arab
chiefs and princes of Mesopotamia, and indirectly by the Parthian
king. Severus, however, after securing the com traffic from Africa
by sending thither one of his legions, marched with detachments
from the west across Thrace to Byzantium, which he besieged.
Three battles followed in Asia, at Cyzicus, NicsBa, and Issus, and
then after Niger's death, and while Byzantium was still being be-
sieged, Severus marched into Mesopotamia and took possession of
the whole as far as Chaboras,^** making Nisibis the capital of the
extended province, and creating two new legions to garrison it, I
and ni Parthica, while a third legion, U Parthica, probably enrolled
at the same time, was posted in Italy, hitherto without a military
force.2i«
But Albinus was still to be reckoned with in the west, and
Severus hastened back to Europe. At Viminacium he heard that
his rival had been declared Augustus by his troops, and so leaving
Garacalla in Pannonia, he himself, still with vexiUarii from his
numerous legions, pushed up the Danube into Upper Germany and
so into Gaul. What troops precisely the rival emperors had we
have no means of knowing. Dion Cassius, probably with consider-
able exaggeration, reckons the numbers on each side at 160,000
men. Albinus certainly had his three legions in Britain, and pro-
bably the two legions from the Lower Ehine and the X Gemina from
Spain. Severus may have had some of the Danube legions or
those of Upper Germany or Ehaetia or Noricum entire, but it is not
likely that he left the frontier in any part too weak for efficient
defence. The battle near Lugdunum was the first of importance
<|* Boberts, Les Ligions du Rhin ; also Cohen.
2» Mommsen, £dm. Oeseh, y. 410.
si« NumerooB inscriptions relative to the legion are found at Albano.
Digitized by
Google
1887 FROM AUGUSTUS TO SEVERUS 655
since Cremona in which Boman legions were opposed to one another,
and it may be regarded as the on^en and beginning of the dis-
union and anarchy in the empire which ultimately opened its gates to
the barbarian invaders.
News of disturbances in the east soon recalled Severus to that
part. In Arabia the legion quartered there, III Cyrenaica, had de-
clared for Albinus,^*^ while the Parthians had invaded Mesopotamia
and besieged Nisibis. No doubt western legions were again taken
into Asia for the campaign which followed. The oriental legions,
never very trustworthy, had all been in favour of Pescennius, and
his successful rival would certainly not have trusted to their
support alone. We have, however, meagre details, but the result
was that Mesopotamia was again secured, and Armenia thus lost the
ambiguous position between the two empires which had produced so
much friction during the past two hundred years.^*®
While Severus thus returned to Trajan's policy on the eastern
frontier, but with greater, or at least more permanent success, he
also followed in his steps in regulating that of the Lower Danube.
The numerous inscriptions in Dacia prove that he was almost a
second founder of that province. He did not indeed do anything
to support its outlying position by fresh annexation to the west-
ward, but he reorganised the province itself, and above all
strengthened it by an additional legion, the Y Macedonica, while
he moved from Troesmis to Potaissa.^^^ Obscure as the details are,
it is probable that the step was caused by the beginnings of that
movement to the north-east of Dacia which was soon to bring the
Goths within the Boman horizon.
The last years of his life Severus spent in Britain, where from
Eboracum, the capital of the province, and the headquarters
of the VI Victrix, he conducted several expeditions against the
northern barbarians, while both inscriptions and the partly in-
accurate statements of historians seem to prove that he restored the
wall and vaUum which Hadrian had built from the Solway to
the mouth of the Tyne.
His rule was more obtrusively based on military force than that
of any of his predecessors. The legions had now at any rate
thoroughly learned the lesson that imperators could be created else-
where than at Bome. Under Severus himself, in spite perhaps of
some want of miKtary skill, they were under strict discipline and in
efficient condition, but under Caracalla the decline had already
begun. The abolition of the distinction between citizens and pere-
grini by opening the legions absolutely to the whole Boman world
may have contributed to this, although this was only a development
of what we have seen to have been long the actual practice. A
"' Spart. 8w, 12. "« Mommsen, Riim. Oesch. v. 411.
«»• O. L L. iii. 160 and 172.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
656 MOVEMENTS OF THE ROMAN LEGIONS Oct.
more powerfal catiBe was the gradual extension of the system of
vicariiy which, begun under Trajan, received ever wider application,
until, contrary to the old maxim, the Boman armies became filled
with the barbarian coloni settled within the empire from all parts
of the frontiers, and only formally distinguished from those of purely
servile birth. A greater mischief still lay in the tendency which now
made rapid strides for the great miUtary provinces to struggle for
the privilege of appointing their own commanders to the empire.
That this result had not happened before was due to the era, unique
perhaps in the history of the world, of the ' good emperors,' when
for a hundred years a judicious system of adoption seemed to have
united the practical advantages and security of hereditary power
with the more ideal claims of elective empire.
Here we take leave of the Boman legions. After the death of
Severus a period of decline and anarchy soon set in ; there were
always stronger and more determined enemies from without, more
divided counsels, less efficient and worse disciplined troops within
the empire. Up to the reign of Alexander Severus, however, no
serious changes had taken place in the number and disposition
of the troops, and in the time of Dion Cassius they were still dis-
tributed as follows : —
Lower Germany : I Minervia, XXX XJlpia Victrix,
Upper Germany : VIII Augusta, XXII Primigenia.^***
Britain : 11 Augusta, VI Victrix, XX Valeria Victrix.
Upper Pannonia : X Gemina, XIV Gemina, I Adjutrix.
Lower Pa/nnonia : 11 Adjutrix.
Upper Mmsia : VII Claudia, IV Flavia Felix.
Lower M(Bsia : XI Claudia, I Italica.
Da^yia : XIII Gemina, V Macedonica.
Noricum : U Italica. Bhatia : HE Italica.
. Spain : VII Gemina. Gappadocia : XII Fulminata, XV ApoUinaris.
Judaa : X Fretensis, VI Ferrata.
Syria : IV Scythica, XVI Flavia Firma. Phcenicia : HL Gallica.
Arabia : HL Cyrenaica. Africa : m Augusta.
Egypt : II Trajana. Mesopotamia : 1 Parthica, HE Parthica.
Italy : n Parthica.
E. G. Hardy.
^ Dion Cassias (Iv. 24) does not mention the XXn Primigenia ; he apparently
thinks that there was another legion of the same name as the XX Valeria Viotrix in
Upper Germany. As a matter of fact the XXII Primigenia remained in Germany as
late as the time of Garansius. See Marqoardt, Staatsverw, ii. 452. The most acces-
sible authorities for the whole subject are Mommsen, Bfhn. Oesch. yoL ▼., EermsSt
Tax., and C. L L, iii. ; Marquardt, StacUsverwaltung, voL ii. ; Hiibner, Hermes, xvi. ;
and Grotefend in Pauly's Real-EncydopCidie, vol. iv. To which add Tac. Ann, iv. 5;
C. L L, vi. 3492 ; and Dion Cassias, Iv. 24.
Digitized by
Google
1887 657
Life of yustinian by Theophilus
FOB the last two centuries and a half historians have been
accustomed to quote, as an authority for several curious facts
connected with the emperor Justinian and his scarcely less famous
wife the empress Theodora, a life of Justinian by a certain Theo-
philus, described as an abbot and as the preceptor of Justinian.
One of these facts is the Slavonic origin of the family of Justinian,
a circumstance not only interesting in itself, but important as show-
ing that Slavonic tribes had settled in Upper Macedonia or Western
Thrace in, or soon after, the middle of the fifth century, a date
considerably earlier than we should otherwise be entitled to accept.
Another is the sojourn of the young Justinian as a hostage at
Eavenna in the court of Theodoric the Great, a sojourn from which
the future emperor must have derived a knowledge of the condition
of Italy under Ostrogothic rule of supreme value for his subsequent
war against the successors of Theodoric. A third is the opposition
made by the mother of Justinian to his marriage with Theodora,
and the fact that the graces and accomplishments of that lady did
not prevent her from being regarded as a source of danger to
Justinian and the empire. These points were all of historical
significance. But of the authority on which they rest, of
Theophilus himself, nothing has been known beyond the curt
statements of the undoubtedly learned writer who cites him, and
whom all subsequent historians seem to have followed as a sufficient
voucher for the genuineness and worth of the original Theophilus-
himself.
This learned writer is Nicholas Alemanni, scrittore in the Vatican
library. In 1628 he published at Lyons the first edition of the
* Anecdota ' or unpublished history of Procopius of Csesarea, which,
as all the world knows, treats of the life, acts, and character of
the emperor Justinian and the empress Theodora, of Belisarius
and his wife Antonina. In the preface which Alemanni prefixed^
and in the very full and valuable notes which he appended to his
edition, he refers several times* to a 'Life of Justinian' by &
1 These references are as follows (I give them by the numbers of the pages of
VOL. n. — ^No. vm. u u
Digitized by
Google
658 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS Oct.
person whom he calls 'Theophilus Justiniani prseceptor,' *Theo-
philus Abbas.'
Alemanni neither tells us where he found or read this * Life of
Justinian,' nor gives us any other clue whatever to it. In fact,
the extracts given in the footnote, together with the mention in the
preface of * Theophilus Justiniani prseceptor ' as a writer contem-
porary with Procopius, are all that he says regarding this personage,
who is not mentioned by any other writer.
It came to be supposed that as Alemanni was himself an official
of the Vatican library, and had printed the ' Anecdota ' from two
manuscripts which he found there, the manuscript of this ' Life of
Justinian ' by Theophilus must also be preserved in that library.
Bepeated searches were made, but failed to discover the book or any
trace of it. Later writers, however, assumed Theophilus to have
been what Alemanni's references implied him to be, a contemporary
and trustworthy authority ; and went on quoting from Alemanni the
statements regarding Justinian above given. I need refer to a few
only of the more important of these writers.
Ludewig, the famous jurist and chancellor of Halle, in his
elaborate ' Life of Justinian and Theodora ' ^ says of the ' Life ' by
Theophilus, after referring to Alemanni's extracts, cujus copia nobis
non est) and again, Nomen Bigleniza prodidit solus Theophilus,
Justiniani biographus ; cujus testimonium lavdamvs fide Alemanni,
qui ewm legit in Tuembranis Vaticanis (p. 128). (Alemanni, however,
did not say he read Theophilus in a Vatican manuscript.)
Alemanni's notes in the Bonn edition of the Anecdota) : A Justine et Jttstiwkuio
su^oerbissimum tempUim ad urbem Scodram Barhenamque fluvitim Sergio et Baocko
martyribus excitatvm frnt^ ut pluribus narravit Theophilus Justiniani prcsceptor
(p. 363). Theophilus Justiniani prcsceptor Ucet sub Zenone et Acacio patriarcha dicat
[JusHnianum natum], consulatum tamen reticet (p. 368). Sub finem AnastasU
dominatus Byzantium venisse JusHnianum trigenario m^orem, Theophilus ejus
prcBceptor affirmat (p. 369). Hoc ratione et fide (i.e. &8cX0oiri<rr£f) Justiniani fratsr
fuit Theodoricus OoUhorum rex, ut Theophilus Justiniani prceceptor explicat
(p. 371). Venit Bavennam Justimanus plane adolescens, eoque mAssus est obses ad
Theodoricum GoUhorum regem a Justine avwncuXo exercitus duce, ut Theophilus
Justiniani pracepto/r exponit (p. 883). Justiniani mater Bigleniea repugnahat
[sc, quominus Justiniano Theodora desponderetur]^ quod cum evincere Ula nequivisset,
ut Theophilus in Vita Justiniani affirmat^ mosrore contabtiit (p. 384). DuxU
Justinianus Theodoram egregiam puellam, licet reclamante matre Biglenisa, quippe
qucs indolem puellcs alioqui scitissimce et eruditissimce, sed levioris et tmrogantioris
ingenii aliquando obfuturam fortunes et pietati fllii pertimesceret^ prcesertim quia
vetuia qucedam divinatiombus addicta Theodoram futu/ram Damonodoram Bomano
imperio, inflexuramque rectitudinem Justiniani ex sortium augurio eonsulenti
Bigleniscs prcedixerat (p. 416). Bigleniea soror Justini, mater JusHniawi impera-
iofis. . . . Nam^n Biglenizce Theophilus in Vita Justiniani prodidit (p. 418).
Sabatvus Justiniani pater Istokus aj^llatus est ab lUyriensibus, Theophilus in
Vita Justiniani (p. 418). Justinianus imperator Uprauda a suis genHUbus dictus
est Idem Theophilus (p. 418). Antequam imperium caperet, a TheophHo ahbate
prcBceptore suo theologids jam erat studUs imbtUus Justinianus (p. 438).
* J. P. Ludewig, Vita Justiniani atque Theodores Augustorum; necnon Triboniani^
jurisprudentia Justinianecs proscenium, HaLe Salicffi, 1731.
Digitized by
Google
1887 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS 659
The learned Philippe Invernizi, in a note to the preface to his
book on the reign of Justinian, says : —
His [sc, scriptoribus] quondam Theophilum historicum addit Aleman-
nus, quern faisse Justiniani prsBceptorem Ludewigius putavit. Quia
autem nevus bic Tbeopbilus fuerit, semper est ignoratum: nee Lude-
wigius, nee Hoffmannus, nee, eujus fide creditur extare, Alemannus,
demonstrare id veterum auctoritate potuerunt. Quin etiam vir clarissimus
Guillelmus Otto Beitz in tertia adnotatione ad Historiam Theophili JCti
Joannis Henrici Mylii cap. I., soUde Alemannum refatavit. Quare ut
•opinor de bac re desitum est disputari. Est autem qui censeat banc
TbeopbiU Historiam Alemannum in Yaticana Bibliotbeca legisse; in
qua tamen cum diu et ab aliis et a me doctorum bominum et laudatsB
BibliotbecsB peritissimorum opera faerit quaBsita, nullus codex profecto in
•quo extaret Tbeopbih bistoria, nulla est pagina reperta.'
Gibbon (* Decline and Fall/ chapter xl.) assumes Theophilus
on the evidence of Alemanni. 'For this curious fact [that Jus-
tinian had Uved as a hostage at the court of Theodoric] Alemannus
quotes a manuscript history of Justinian by his preceptor Theophi-
lus.' (Alemanni, however, did not say that the history of Theo-
philus was in manuscript.) Gibbon quotes other statements, such
as the names Ypravda, Istok, Bigleniza, without hesitation.
More recent writers seem to have simply accepted and followed
Alemanni without further inquiry, taking the names he gives as
genuine, and endeavouring to explain their etymology. See among
others Schafarik ('Slavische Altherthiimer,* vol. ii. p. 160) and
Ujfalvy (' Imperator Justinianus Genti Slavic® vindicatus '), both
' Invernizi, Phil., De Rebus gesHs Justiniam Magm^ Bomffi, 1783. W. O. Beitz in
his edition of the paraphrase of Justinian's Institutes by the famous jurist Theophilus,
one of the authors of the Institutes, says (ii 1039, note 3 to Chap. I.) that he is sur-
prised that none of those who have written about the various Theophili has mentioned
Theophilus Abbas, the preceptor and biographer of Justinian. * I do not know,' he
proceeds, * whether this life of Justinian has ever been published or stiU lurks in the
Vatican library, for I cannot find it anywhere. I think that this abbot was not our
paraphrast, seeing that the latter died in a.d. 634, and could not have written the life of
Justinian who died in 568. Moreover, a preceptor could not have written the life of a
person who lived to the age of eighty-three. Forte igitur Alemanmcs humani aliquid
passtis est, qui abhatem hunc eidem Justimano cty'us vitam scripsit prcBceptorem
adsignaverity quum alium JusUfUanum magni Justiniani expatre nepotem {cujus pater
Oermanus fuit quique sub Justino secundo contra Persas feliciter pugnavit et deinde
Tiberio imperatori insidias fecerit) iUi abbati discipulum dare deberet.* Beitz, there-
fore, also accepts Alemanni's Theophilus as a good authority, though he desires to put
him a generation later than that to which his being the instructor of the emperor
Justinian would assign him.
So the learned Le Beau in his Histoire du Bos Empire (edition of St. Martin,
Paris, 1827) and M. Debidour in his very recent Dissertatio de Theodora Justinian
Uxore (Paris, 1877) and in his monograph UImp4ratrice Theodora (Paris, 1886) quote
Theophilus without hesitation as an indubitable authority. So also Mr. G. E. Mallet
in the number of this Beview for January 1887. At p. bb (note) of his monograph,
M. Debidour doubts whether this Theophilus the biographer of Justinian is or is not
to be identified with Theophilus the jurist and paraphrast of the Institutes.
17 V 2
Digitized by
Qoo^^
660 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS Oct.
of whom, like some writers of our own day, take the Slavonic origin
of Justinian as proved by these apparently Slavonic names. No-
one, however, explored the mystery of Theophilus and his Life ; and
the general beUef has, I think, been that Alemanni drew upon some
ancient manuscript of a real writer contemporary with Justinian,
which manuscript, then in the Vatican, has long since disappeared..
Theophilus had in fact passed into one of the minor riddles of
history, which there seemed no prospect of ever solving.
In January 1888, being engaged in studies relating to the
history of Justinian and especially to the Ostrogothic war, I visited
Eome, and inquired at the Vatican library regarding the supposed
manuscript of Theophilus. The officials of the library, whose
courtesy I desire to acknowledge cordially, informed me that it had
often been searched for, but in vain. After an examination of the
manuscripts of Procopius in the library, from which no light on the
subject could be gained, I determined to pursue my inquiries in
some of the greater private Ubraries of Eome, following in this the
advice given to me shortly before at Florence by the distinguished
head of the Laurentian library there, the Abate Anziani, and by
my friend Signer Giorgi, head of the Vittore Emanuele Ubrary in
Eome. Having heard that Nicholas Alemanni had been in intimate
relations with the Barberini family, I proceeded to the Ubrary in the
Barberini palace, and there, after a short search, found a manuscript
entitled * Vita Justiniani,' written on paper of quarto size and bound
up with some other manuscripts in a small book. I copied it out,
and here give the whole of it verbatim. It is written on paper in a
seventeenth century handwriting, 27 cent, long by 20 cent, wide
(about 10 inches by 8), is marked Barb. XXXVIII. 49, has a
modem binding on which, on the back, are the words Suares^
Opusctday and is described as follows in the catalogue of the Ubrary
made by the Ubrarian PieraUsi : Opuscvla quce erant inter 8cheda»
Josephi Maria Suarem alienis manibus exaratas. Cod. chart, in
r. sac. XVIL*
The * Life of Justinian ' which is bound up among these opusctda
is foUowed by a sort of commentary, which bears the heading
* ExpUcationes.' Both the Life and the explanations are contained
in two sheets of paper (folded), and are in the same handwriting*
I copied them out ; and the copy then made has been recently care-
fuUy coUated with the original by Signor Levi of the Eeale Societa
Eomana di Storia Patria, to whom my best thanks are due for this
service. I give here the text of the ' Life ' and notes in fuU before
proceeding to make some observations upon them.
* Joseph Maria Suares was bom at Avignon in 1599 and died at Borne 1666. He
was a man of considerable learning, and soon after 1622 was placed by Cardinal
Francis Barberini in charge of the library formed by this magnate. In 1633 Pop*
Urban Vin (uncle of the cardinal) named him bishop of Voison.
Digitized by
Google
1887 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS 661
JUSTINIANI VITA.''
Ex opnBculo continenti Vitam Justiniani Imperatoris scripto Uteris et
characteribus lUyricis usque ad annum imperii ejus 80 per Bogomilum
Pastorem seu Abbatem monasterii S. Alexandri martyris in Dardania
prope Prizrienam civitatem natale solum eiusdem Justiniani, quod opus-
culum asservatur in bibliotheea monacorum Illyricanorum regulam S.
Basilii profitentium in monte Atho seu sacro in Macedonia supra ^gS9um
mare. Hie Bogomilus cum diutius fuisset pedagogus Justiniani factus
est episcopus Sardieensis dictusque a Latinis et Graecis D D * vir magnee
sanctitatis et in eatholica religione tuenda constantissimus.
Natus est Vpravda (1)^ (nomen Justiniani gentili sermone) in Pri-
zriena (2) ^ sub imperio Zenonis Regis Constantinopolitani et Patriarchatu
Acacii nov8B Romae, postquam imperatores in veteri Roma esse desierunt :
quasi Deus vellet edere Regem qui recuperaturus esset occidentale impe-
rium et cum orientali in antiquum splendorem restituturus.
Pater ejus fuit Istok (8) ex progenie et familia sancti Constantini (4)
magni Regis Romanorum et maximi monarcharum Ohristianorum. Mater
vero Bigleniza (5) soror Justini qui regnavit in nova Roma. Istoki soror
fuit Lada, quae nupsit Selimiro (6) Principi Slavorum, qui complures Alios
habuit, inter hos Rechiradum quem singulari certamine, ut dicetur, inter-
fecit Justinianus.
Istok cum esset Unez,^ hoc est, Djnasta inter Dardanos, dedit filio
VpravdflB pedagogum egregium sanctum virum Bogomilum (7) pastorem
seu Abbatem monasterii S. Alexandri martyris, vitaa Justiniani scriptorem,
qui puerum summa diligentia sanctissimis moribus inde literis Latinis et
GrsBcis instruxit. Verum cum ab avunculo Justino enixe diligeretur, ab
eodem ad castra trahebatur, Bogomilo nunquam a latere adolescentis
abscedente.
Tyrocinium deposuit jubente Justino, qui jam pridem primos ordines
Bomanorum ductabat ; quo tempore idem Justinus contra Csesarides (8)
Zenonidas pro Anastasio rege decertabat, cum avunculo miles in Illyri-
cum revertitur ob Bulgaros Romanis cervicibus imminentes, a quibus cum
esset interfectusRastus (9) dux militiaa niyricanae cum primoribus Ducibus
Justinus Barbaris occurrens plus nimio insultantes repressit.
Et quia Bulgaris auxilio affuerat Rechirad (10) Selimiri filius, nee ullis
precibus aut promissis eum Justinus a societate Bulgarorum abstrahere
poterat, ob idque simultas gravissima inter Justinianum et germanum suum
Rechiradum exarserat, unde ad jurgia et probra in quodam colloquio
^ This title is written in a different hand from that of the MS., and- in different
ink.
• Possibly we ought to read Domnio ; see post^ p. 669.
' It is hard to say what the fifth letter of this word is, whether a ti or an n or a v,
for the writing in the MS. is obscure. But I believe it to be a v, and have consequently
printed the name all through as Vpravda. The numbers in brackets, which in the
original are placed over instead of after the words to which they belong, refer to the
Explicationes which follow.
" In the MS. the words aut Prizriota, or perhaps Prizrieta^ are interlined in a
-different hand.
* Bead Zner, which in Slavonic means a prince.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
662 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS Oct.
devenerant, res ad singulare certamen inter eos est dedacta, in quo certa>
mine Justinianas nondum vigesimum annum attingens adversarium mira
virtute ad ripas fluminis Muravse (is Latinis est Moschius) prostravit,
quas ob res ingentia mimera tum ipse tum dux militisB Justinus et ejus
milites Illyricani accepere. Quoniam autem periculosum vulnus in eo
certamine Justinianus acceperat, Oonstantinopolim curandus mittitur, ubi
Anastasio regi acceptissimus fuit, qui eum studuit a verse Eeligionis culta
abducere, quod ubi Bogomilus pedagogus ejus animadvertit, sollieitus de
salute adolescentis eundem ad Justinum in castra, mox in patriam ad
matrem viduam nuper ab Istoko relictam reduxit. Sed Justinianua
pertesus atrium domesticum brevi ad avuneulum rediit, quern ad Margum
Pannoniae oppidum reliquias exercitus Sabiniani Ducis a Gothis fusi col-
ligentem invenit, a quo ad Theodoricum regem Gothorum Analimiri*^
filium in Italiam mittitur, ad suorum Ducum, qui paulo ante Sirmiensem
Begionem Bulgaris abstulerant, auxilia impetranda, a quo benigne acceptus
et auxilia obtinuit et diutius tanquam obses Eavennae detentus quamdia
Justinus Gothorum militum opera usus est, habitusque est Theodorica
loco fratris, quin immo Illyrico more fratemitatis (11) vinculo sese colliga-
runt.
Ad avuneulum reversus cum Justinus nullam ex Vukcizza (12) conjuge
sobolem speraret, jubente eo connubio illigatur, ducta Bosidara (18) egregia.
"puella, licet reclamante Biglenizza, quippe qusB indolem puellsB alioquin
scitissimsB et eruditissimse sed sevioris et arrogantioris ingenii aliquando
obfuturam fortunse et pietati iilii pertimescebat, prsBsertim quia vetula
qusedam divinationibus addicta Bosidaram futuram Yraghidaram (14)
Eomano Imperio, inflexuramque rectitudinem Ypravdse, ex sortium augurio
consulenti BiglenizzaB prsedixerat. Yerumtamen mores tunc temporis
excultissimi variarumque scientiarum peritia cum eximia forma con*
junctte apud Justinum et ipsum Justinianum prsBvaluerunt, quamobrem
Biglenizza paulo post moerore consumpta e vivis excessit antequam
fratrem fastigium Eomani regni conscendisse gaudere potuisset.
Trigenario major cum Anastasius Eex Bogomilum ad Sardicensem
episcopatum favore Justini promotum cum multis aliis episcopis ol>
Catholicam Eeligionem Oonstantinopolim evocatos vexaret, Justinianus
cum avunculo Justino a Ducibus DlyricansB militisB destinantur [sic] ad
Anastasium obtestando nisi impetum tumultuantis militiaa vellet experiri
ab insectatione Catholicorum Antistitum desisteret, quorum libertate
deterritus cum subomasset delatores qui eos conjurationis in Eegium,
caput initaB accusarent, carceribus utrumque mancipavit, mox in eosdem
capitalem tulit sententiam. Yerum apparentibus ei in somnio Sergio et
Bacho martyribus quorum cultus insignis habetur inter Dardanos, ei
dira minitantibus si homines innocentes et imperio digniores quam ipse
foret perdere auderet, absolutos cum episcopis Oatholicis dimisit, oui
tamen brevi Justinus regno successit.
Sub imperio Justini Justinianus dignam principe viro ecclesiam ia
Ulyrico sub Scodrensi urbe supra Barbenam fluvium Sergio et Bacha
martyribus extructam dicavit. Idem auctoritate avunculi Ecclesiam olim
a Marciano oeconomo Oonstantinopolitansd ecclesisd Oonstantinopoli
Gothis concessam Oatholico ritu per Joannem Bomsa veteris pontificem.
** Ought to be Amalamiri,
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS 669
consecrari curavit, retento tamen psalmodicB et liturgife usu Gothico
sermone in gratiam susb gentis IllyriceB eandem lingaam com Gothis
colentis. Justino succedens templum ad imitationem illius quod in
Begia urbe divinse sapientisB dioaverat Sardicsa (15) in gratiam Episcopi
Bogomili sea Domnionis olim sni pedagogi condidit.
EXPLICATIONES quorundam nominum quaa leguntur in praecedenti
fragmento observatffi per Joannem Tomco Mamavich Canonicum
Sibensem ^* fragmenti interpretem.
1. Vpravda vox Illyrica derivata a Pravda, hoc est Justitia. Vpravda
autem cum ilia prsepositione V significat directam Justitiam, quo nomine
ab niyricis scriptoribus tam Justinianus quam uterque Justinus dicti
sunt.
2. Prizriena. Ita scribitur patria Justiniani tam ab antiquis quam
recentioribus Illyricis sita eo prorsus loco quo Procopius Tauresium ponit,
nimirum inter Dardanos super Epydamnum. Hoc Agathias de bello
Gothico Bederinam appellat et hodie sub Turcis inter fines antiqusB Dar-
danite et recentioris Hercegovinsa sen Ducatus Sancti Sabte visuntur
tam intra quam extra civitatem complura vestigia et rudera eximiorum
vestigiorum eadificiorum estque titulus nunc Petri Calitii episcopi nuper
cum missione Patrum Societatis Jesu ad curandas Christianorum rehquias
sub Turcica tyrannide per Macedoniam Dardaniam et Pannonias misere
gementum a S™<* D"<* N"> Paolo V destinati.
8. Istok vox Illyricana Orientem significans intra nomina nostratum
antiquis usitatior quam recentioribus, qui saepius nominibus sanctorum
virorum quam gentilibus appellare filios consueverunt.
4. Familiam Constantini professi sunt complures ex Illyricis principi-
bus usque quo a Turca sedibus pulsi cum familiis interierunt. Ita Beges
et DespotaB Servisa Beguli Scardi montis, Duces S. Sabs9, etc.
5. Biglenizza nomen Illyricum ab albedine ductum, Latinis Albulam
sonans.
6. Selimiri filii a Justiniano Bege ssBpius nomen regium super Dal-
matas petierunt nee unquam impetrarunt, eo quod Bechirad Selimiri filius
a Justiniano occisus a Bulgaris contra Bomanos stetisset.
7. Bogomilus Ulyrica vox Deo carum significans.
8. Cassarides Patronimicum nomen usitatissimum apud Illyricos apud
quos Zar Begem seu Imperatorem significat Zarevichi ut habet author
CaBsaridaB interpretantur.
9. Bastus nomen Illyricum Crescentem significans : hunc puto esse
quem Marcellinus Gomes Aristum appellat, Ductorem militiaa UlyricanaB.
10. Bechirad nomen Illyricum compositum a rechi, hoc est loqui, et
rad, hoc est cupidum, ita ut requirad loqui cupidum significet. Guius-
modi nomen aliquorum Begum Gothorum in Hispania fuit, quae tamen
nomina ab ignaris linguae Gothicae seu Illyricaa male per Precaredos**
eflferuntur et scribuntur.
11. Solemnitas vinculi fratemitatis ad hunc usque diem tanti fit apud
niyrioos ut non solum inter Christianos homines credatur vera jungi
fratemitas, sed etiam inter Christianos et Turoas habeatur validissima.
'* So apparently in the MS. Bead Sicensem, ** Or Procaredos.
Digitized by
Google
664 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS Oct.
12. Vukcizza nomen Ulyricum lupaa proprium. Unde Latini Gne-
<5ique authores scribunt uxorem Justini ubi is ad regnmn assumptus fait
Lupicinaa nomen in Euphemiam commutasse.
18. Bosidara nomen Ulyricum compositum a Bogh, idest Deo, et Dar,
hoc est dono, nt Bosidara nihil aliud sit nisi a Deo donata vel Dei donum,
quod idem est cum Graeco nomine Theodora.
14. Vraghidara nomen itidem Ulyricum, a Vrag, hoc est Diabolo vel
hoste, et dar, hoc est dono, compositum, ut Vraghidara sit diaboli vel
hostis donum oppositum Theodore.
15. Sardica progressu temporis a templo Justiniani SophisB nomen ad
hodiemum usque diem usurpavit. Ante fores dicti templi Justinianus
nobile sarcophagum Bogomilo seu Domnioni santissimo viro excitavit,
carminibusque super crustas marmoreas illustravit.^'
The discovery of this manuscript and an examination of its con-
tents give rise to several questions which I shall endeavour to dis-
cuss as briefly as possible.
I. The first of these questions is : Is this the * Life of Justinian '
by Theophilus which Alemanni quotes in the notes to his edition of
the * Anecdota ' of Procopius, and for whose existence he has hitherto
been the sole authority ?
On this it may be observed that all the facts which Alemanni
gives in his notes on the authority of Theophilus are found in this
manuscript. They are :
1. That a church was erected by Justin and Justinian at Skodra
(or Scutari) on the river Barbena (Boyana) (in northern Albania)
to SS. Sergius and Bacchus.
2. That Justinian was born in the reign of Zeno and patriarchate
of Acacius.
3. That Justinian was over thirty years of age when he came
to Byzantium near the end of the reign of Anastasius.
4. That Justinian contracted the rite of fratemitas with
Theodoric the Ostrogothic king.
5. That Justinian was as a youth a hostage at Bavenna with
Theodoric.
6. That Bigleniza, the mother of Justinian, opposed his be-
trothal to Theodora.
7. That Bigleniza distrusted the character of Theodora, having
been warned by an aged female soothsayer that she would prove
not a gift of God but a gift of the devil.
8. That the original names of the mother of Justinian, of Saba-
tius, his father, and of Justinian himself were Bigleniza, Istok, and
Vpravda respectively.
9. That Justinian before he ascended the throne was instructed
in theology by the abbot Theophilus.
** At the bottom of the last page of the MS. are the words, written in a different
hand from that of the MS., adprocopium AlemannuSt f. ^ ; a little lower, the words
missum ab urbe.
Digitized by
Google
1887 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS 665
Alemanni does not quote Theophilus for a few other facts stated in
the manuscript. But these are mostly facts in themselves impro-
bable, which he may well have doubted, e.g. that * Istok,* father
of Justinian, was a prince among his own people, that Justinian
killed Eechirad in single combat, that Justinian's mother died after
his marriage with Theodora but before the accession of her brother
Justin. It might perhaps have been expected that he should
also mention that Theophilus calls the empress Euphemia, the
wife of Justin I, Vukcizza. But as Alemanni quotes Theodorus
Lector and Theophanes (p. 384 of his notes) for the statement
that her real name had been Lupicia, he may have thought it
undesirable to quote Theophilus for a less well-attested name,
although one which Marnavich, the fragmenti interpres, explains as
the Slavonic equivalent of Lupicina.
From this it may be concluded that Alemanni had before him
our present manuscript of Theophilus and nothing else. If any one
suggests that there may then have existed and been read by him a
full Kfe of Justinian bearing the name of Theophilus which has now
disappeared, and which contained all that the present manuscript
contains together with other matters, the answer is not only that
Alemanni would probably have quoted from it some of those matters,
not appearing in our manuscript, but also that the passage (beginning
licet reclaTnante) which he copies in full from Theophilus (p. 415
of his notes in Bonn edition) tallies word for word with the present
manuscript, except that Alemanni gives levioris where the word in
the manuscript (which is obscurely written) seems to be sevioris
or scevioris. Considering these facts, and considering that no trace
has ever been discovered of any other life of Justinian by any Theo-
philus, although repeated searches have been made, and consider-
ing also that the manuscript is of the same date as Alemanni, was
among the books belonging to Suares, the friend of Alemanni, and
was placed in the Ubrary of the Barberini, patrons of Alemanni, it
seems practically certain that we have here the materials, and all
the materials, which Alemanni possessed, and that no further
authority is therefore attributable to his statements quoted from
Theophilus than can be shown to belong to this present manuscript ;
although it is of course possible that Alemanni may have had
stronger grounds for attaching value to the manuscript than those
which we now possess. Apparently he did value it. He quotes it
with respect, and he seems to have rather expected that * Theo-
philus' would, like a regular historian, have given the date of
Justinian's birth by reference to the consul of the year {consu-
latum reticet Theophilus, see above, note 1, p. 658).
That is to say, we have in this manuscript the Theophilus of
Alemanni, the biographer of Justinian, and there is no other. If
there be any Theophilus who wrote Justinian's life, this is he.
Digitized by
Google
666 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS Oct.
n. The next question is : Who wrote our present manuscript ?^
It is all, both the text of the fragnientum and the notes (explica-
tiones) which follow the fragmetituvi, in the same ink and handwriting
and on paper of the same make and size. Moreover the explica-
tiones are stated to be by the person who translated the fragmentum
—fragmenti interpretem. The manner and substance of the frag-
mentum, and the fact that Bogomilus (the Slavonic equivalent of
Theophilus), who is called the author of the life, is nevertheless
always spoken of in the third person, make it clear that the
fragmentiim is not a literally translated extract from a book pur-
porting to be written by a person named Theophilus or Bogomilus,
but can only be an abstract of that book or parts of it. Even sup-
posing that the original book did not purport to be composed by
Bogomil in his own person, but to relate facts about him, as the
book of Deuteronomy (or at least large parts of it), although attri-
buted by the Jews to Moses, does not itself purport to be composed
by Moses, who is always spoken of in the third person, still the
character of the fragnientum is that of an abstract rather than of a
simple translation from an original treatise in another language.
It may therefore be taken that the text, no less than the notes,
is in its present form the work, and is probably actually written
by the hand, of the person described as author of the notes, who,
however, professes to be, as regards the text, nothing more than a
translator.
This person is John Tomco Marnavich, canon of Sebenico in
Dalmatia, and afterwards archdeacon of Agram and bishop of
Bosnia. Of him something must be said, because our estimate
of the worth of the fragmentum depends largely on our judgment
of him.
When I discovered the manuscript and found that it was
evidently from a Slavonic source, I applied at once for help to my
friend Mr. Arthur John Evans, keeper of the Ashmolean Museum at
Oxford, whose travels in Slavonic countries and writings on Slavonic
history and antiquities have won for him a deserved reputation.
In tracing the life and writings of Marnavich I have received
much help from him, as well as from the kindness of M. Constan-
tin Jireiek, the distinguished historian of the Bulgarians, and of
my friend Count Ugo Balzani. Help was the more needed because
Marnavich's books are scarcely to be found in England — the
Bodleian library containing only one of them, and that of no value
for the present purpose, the British Museum one only, and the
University library at Cambridge none at all. M. Jireftek has sent
me a valuable letter, which will be found at the end of this article,,
and for which my best thanks are due to him.
Ivan Tomko Marnavich (written in Serb Mernjaviid or Mmavid),.
a person of note in his day, was born in the episcopal city of Sebe-
Digitized by
Google
1887 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS 667
nico, then under Venetian rule, in 1579, being, according to his
own account, the scion of an ancient family of Bosnian nobles, but,
anyhow, the son of a customhouse ofl&cer in the Turkish service.*^
He went early to Eome, was educated there by the Jesuits, and
attracted, by his quick intelligence, the regard of some eminent
men, among others of Cardinals Baronius and Sacchetti, of Francis
Barberini, afterwards cardinal, and of Cardinal Pazmany, arch-
bishop of Gran and primate of Hungary.*^ His Kterary career
began with a book entitled *De Eegno Illyrico CsBsaribusque
Illyricis Dialogorum Libri Septem,' which is referred to by some
as having been printed and published at Eome in 1608, but which,
according to others, was not printed, but remains in manuscript.
Some years later he entered the service of Faustus Verantius, bishop
of Csanad in Hungary, and in 1614, on the recommendation of
this Dalmatian, was summoned to Eome to be employed in making
translations into and from the Croato-Serb language.*® In 1622
he was appointed archdeacon of Agram. In 1626 he aspired to
the bishopric of Sebenico, with the support of Cardinal Francis
Barberini ; but the Venetians, who disliked him as an adherent of
the Jesuits, prevented his nomination, alleging that he was a
Turkish subject. However, in 1631 the emperor Ferdinand HI,
king of Hungary, nominated him bishop of Bosnia and Diacova,
and the nomination was confirmed by Pope Urban VIII. (In the
same year he had received the honour of Eoman citizenship by
diploma.) He seems to have never visited his see, which, to be
sure, was in the hands of the Turks, but when not employed in
ecclesiastical missions to have lived at Eome, continuing his literary
labours.*^ We hear that his retention of the post of lector in the
^* The Ck)ant of Sebenico writes to Venice of Mamavich, in 1626 : Morlacco, nato
quit quando siw padre era qui datiario per il TurcOy poi cacciato 8uo padre per ordine
publicot alievo de' Gesuiti,
" He tells us (p. 147 of the Begice Sanctitatis lUyricance Fcecunditas) that
Baronius (who died in 1610) was so much moved by what he (Mamavich) told relating
to Constantine the Great, that tantus heros lacrymis prce pietate effusis, in meum
proruena complexum, magnas se mihi debere gratias, et a juvene imherhi talia
didicisse nwrvime pudere, disertis verbis rum solum sit protestatus, sed conscenso curru
ad easdem {nempe Constantini) sacras imagines adorandas statim sese contulit Was
this at hearing that the emperor Constantine was a Slav ?
'* M. Jire<^k remarks that at this time the Holy See favoured the use of the
national tongue in the South Slavonic countries, in order to combat the influence of
the books printed in Slavonic at Tiibingen by protestant Slavs from Dalmatia and Istria.
17 Among the works of Mamavich I find references to the following : Oratio vn
laudem Fauati Veraniii ep. Chanadiensis (Venet. 1617) ; Vita Peiri Berislavi
Bosnensis ep, Vesprimensis (Romte, 1620) ; Oratio in adventu ad urbem Sicensem
illustr. vvri Fr. Molinit sereniss. Beipublicce Venetca legati (Venet. 1623) ; Sacra
Columba ab importunis vindicata suceque origini restituta (Romie, 1625) ; Unica gentis
AurelicB Valerice Salonitanca DaVmaticce Nobilitas (Romae, 1628) ; Begice Sanctitatis
lllyricance Fcecunditas (BomsB, 1630) ; Indicia Vetustaiis et Nobilitatis famUice Marcice
mUgo Mamavitice Nissensis^ per Joannem Tomcum ejusdem generis (Rom®, 1632 ;
with portraits of the author and of Vukassin, king of Servia) ; S. Felix episcopus
Digitized by
Google
668 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS Oct.
chapter of Agram (which was deemed to imply residence) after he
had become titular bishop of Bosnia caused many heartburnings
between him and the other canons of that church. He died in
1689, probably in Eome, although the place of his burial is not
known.*®
As this manuscript describes Marnavich as canon of Sebenico
(a preferment he had received as early as 1609 or 1610), but not
as archdeacon of Agram, it would seem to be posterior to 1609,
and probably to 1614, but anterior to 1622. We have already
seen reason to think that Alemanni read it before 1623, the year
of the publication of the Anecdota of 'Procopius ; and this date is
confirmed by the reference in the explicationes to Pope Paul V as
the reigning pontiff — for Paul V was pope from 1605 to 1621.
Marnavich was evidently a fanciful or fraudulent genealogist,
and so ignorant of history and ethnology as to suppose the Goths —
the Visigoths of Spain, as well as the Ostrogoths — to have spoken
the same language as the Slavonic Serbs. But in these points he
was probably not below the average of learned men in his day:
Luccari, the historian of Eagusa, and other writers of that and the
following century identify the two races. Even in our own day we
see men otherwise intelligent commit incredible follies when they
enter the field of genealogy, while, as to philology, Victor Hugo
believed the language of the Basques and that of the Irish Celts to
be the same. Marnavich was obviously a wholly uncritical person.
Whether he was also untruthful we have no sufl&cient materials
for judging, and it is therefore hard to say how much weight is to
et martyr Spalatensi urbi vindicattis (Bomfls, 1634) ; Vita MagdalencB Modrussiensis
sanctcB mulieris (Bomse, 1635) ; Pro Sanctis Ecclesiarum omamentis et doTiariis
(Bomfe, 1G35. This is said to be the best of his works); Vita Beati AugusHm
Casotti ep. Zagrabiensis (Vindob. 1637) ; translation into Slavonic (* niyrian *) of the
Doctrina Christiana of Cardinal Bellarmin (RomBe, 1627) ; an Italian life of S.
Margaret, daughter of Bela, king of Hungary. He was also the author of sundry
dramatic and other poems in his vernacular tongue, which he wrote with some force
and spirit. A life of S. Sabbas, which he left in manuscript, was published by Ivan
Luci<5 at Venice in 1789.
** Further information regarding Marnavich may be found in Farlati, lUyrid
Sacrif tom. iv. pp. 80, 81 ; Engel, Fortgesetzte Litteratur der NehenUinder des ungari-
schen Reiches (Halle, 1798) ; Schafarik, Oeschichte der sUdslaivischen Litteratur
(Prague, 1865) ; Alberto Fortis, Viaggio in Dalmazia (Venice, 1774). This last-named
writer accuses (p. 146) Marnavich of having found in the papers of Bishop Yeranzio,
and published as his own composition, the life of Bishop Peter Berislav, which had
really been written by Antonio Veranzio a century before, * adding a few sentences to
it to make it appear to be his own, and leaving out the few lines which reveal the real
biographer, Antonio Veranzio.* This charge is doubted by G. G. Paulovich Lucid,
who, however, rebuts it only by saying that * our excellent Marnavich left such rich
and abundant fruits of his own genius that he did not need to steal from any one
else.* Its Latin is far better than that of Mamavich*s other works, a fact which
increases the suspicion. Professor Armin Pavi6 has written a full biography of Marna-
vich in the Acts of the Academy of Agram (vol. xzxiii. 1875), from which, as I cannot
read Serb, some interesting facts have been supplied to me by M. JireSek, Mr. Evans,
and Mr. W. R. MorfiU of Oxford.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS 669
be attached to his statement regarding the manuscript which he
declares to exist in the monastery at Mount Athos. His book,
*De Ceesaribus Illyricis,' may probably throw some Kght on the
contents of the present manuscript. But I have been unable to
procure a copy, and am informed that it is exceedingly rare.
M. Jirefiek says that the most learned Croatian bibliographer,
M. Kukuljevi<$, has never seen it.*^
in. From Marnavich who purports to translate an ancient
author, we naturally turn to that author himself, and ask : Was
there ever any person called Bogomil by those who spoke Slav and
Theophilus by those who spoke Greek, a person who was the
preceptor of Justinian, abbot of S. Alexander near Prizrend, and
preferred by the emperor Anastasius to the bishopric of Serdica ?
So far as I have been able to ascertain, no trace of any such
person exists in any author of the sixth or next succeeding centuries.
We hear of no preceptor of Justinian, of no contemporary biographer
of Justinian, of no Theophilus who in anywise answers to the account
given in the Barberini MS. of the author of the supposed Life.
The reader will have observed that the name Theophilus occurs
nowhere either in the fragmentum or in the explicationes. We
hear only of Bogomilus, and the only suggestion of Theophilus is
in the remark in the explicationes that Bogomilus =: Deo cams,
which would in Greek be Theophilus.^ The name Theophilus
would therefore seem due to Alemanni, who may have had his
doubts about this ' Illyric ' (i.e. Slavonic) name of Bogomil for a
bishop at the beginning of the sixth century, though he accepted
the * Illyric ' names of Justinian and his family.
The fragmentum, however, as well as the explicationes, identifies
Bogomil, the preceptor of Justinian, with Domnio, bishop of
Serdica (Sofia). Now Domnio is an authentic personage, men-
tioned by Marcellinus Comes {ad a.d. 516) in a passage to be
quoted presently. Is there any ground for believing that this
*' It is hard to make out whether this book was ever printed. The abate Alberto
Fortis (already quoted) says Marnavich wrote in 1603 un grosso manoscrittOy che si con-
aerva ancora^ quantunque sia un po^ mutilato. Perhaps the MS. is still in some Roman
library. Marnavich refers to it in one of his later books (the Oentis AurelicB Nobilitas)
as written by himself * olimt* but without saying whether it had been printed or not.
When in Bagusa some little time ago, I was informed that a copy existed there, but
it was said to have been sent to Pesth. My friend, Mr. Arthur J. Patterson, professor
of English literature in the university of Pesth, tells me that no copy can be found in
any of the three chief libraries of that city or in any of the libraries of Agram.
Dr. Eonrad Maurer tells me it is not in the university library at Munich ; and haa
kindly ascertained for me that it is not in the university library at Tubingen, which
is rich in Slavonic books of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
^ It is natural to fancy that the name Bogomil may have something to do with
the remarkable sect, bearing that name in Slavonic vernacular, who subsequently
arose in Bulgaria, and who are commonly known in history as Paulicians. There-
does not, however, seem to be anything to connect this manuscript or the legends it
refers to with that sect.
Digitized by
Google
670 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS Oct.
Domnio was the preceptor of Justinian, or was called either
Bogomilus or Theophilus ? I have not been able to find any, and
am led to conclude (on grounds which will appear later) that
Bogomil the preceptor and biographer of Justinian is a purely-
legendary personage, who at some date long subsequent to the
sixth century was identified with the historical Domnio. For the
purposes of our present inquiry Theophilus and Bogomilus are
mere names which it has pleased Alemanni and Mamavich to
attach to what they call a Ufe of Justinian.
IV. The next question is. What is the relation of our Bar-
berini library manuscript to the 'Life of Justinian' by Bogomil
(Theophilus), from which it purports to be extracted?
The only evidence we have for the existence of such a ' Life '
bearing the name of Bogomil is that which the manuscript itself
supplies, i.e. the evidence of Mamavich, who calls himself, in the
explicationesy ^fragmenti interpretem.' It is quite possible, and
consonant with what we know of other literary forgeries, that
Mamavich should have simply invented this Slavonic original in
the monastery on Mount Athos in order to provide a plausible
source and apparently historical basis for his legendary tales.
External evidence for the existence of the original there is none,
beyond that of the present Barberini MS., and a passage in a later
book of Marnavich's in which he refers to Bogomil as an authority
for the fact that the descendants of the emperor Constantine were
in his {i.e. Bogomil's) day still living * above the sources of the
Ehine between Italy and Germany,' adding that Bogomil is called
Theophilus by Alemanni in his notes to Procopius.^* But the
*^ In the dedication of his book Regies SanctitaHs IllyricaruB Foecunditas (Borne,
1630) to the emperor Ferdinand in, king of Hungary (who next year nominated him
bishop of Bosnia), Mamavich, wishing to prove that the honse of Habsborg is de-
scended from Constantine the Great, writes as foUows : Constantinum auiem gentis
ttuB conditorem exstitisse prater arUmi corporisque omnium tuorum genHlium dotes
a tot scBcuUs ipsum sanctissinU prindpis exemplar perpetuo prceferentium ipsimet in ea
tellure progenia qtUB urbem a Constantini posteritate utpote in eadem a decUnatione
Rom^ani imperii dominante Constantiam idcirco adhuc appellatur sub tuorum sceptris
continent^ facile conjecture concedunU turn quia nullus qui tua famUue Augustdlem
antiquitatem maturiori stylo prosequitur aliunde natales ejus quamexantedicta tellure
educitt turn Ju^tiniani magni Romani imperatoris infantice institutor ^usdemque
vitcB et maanma ex parte imperii scriptor, Ulyricis Bogomilus, Latinis et Qrceeis
Theophilus apud Nicolaum Alemannum in notis ad Procopii fragmenta appeUaius^
Constantini posteros suo tempore supra Rheni fontes intra Italia Oermaniaque
fines, longe a turbis superstites fuisse, potestate in vicinas gentes claros, est author.
On this passage (which I owe to the kindness of Count Ugo Balzani, the book
not being to be found in any English library) it may be observed : (1) The absence of
any reference to the Barberini MS. and to the (aUeged) original of Bogomil on Mount
Athos may be thought to cast doubt on Mamavich *s recollection of these two docu-
ments. But he did not need, in a passing mention of Bogomil, to say where his book
existed, and the Barberini MS. had never been published ; indeed, it may have been in
the hands of Alemanni or Suares, whereas Alemanni's edition of the Anecdota had
appeared in 1623. (2) Mamavich here refers to Alemanni only as an authority for
the name Theophilus. The name Bogomil is not in Alemanni, but is the name given
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS 671
internal evidence seems to me to point slightly the other way, and
to favour the view that Marnavich believed in some sort of an
original which he was using, however freely. He was not publishing
a book for which he sought to gain credence by representing it as a
translation of an extract from an ancient writing, for the present
manuscript bears no signs of having been intended for the world.
The ordinary motive for falsification is therefore absent. Nor is
there anything in the fragmentum which we can perceive Marnavich
to have had any personal reason for forging, as if, for instance, he
had endeavoured to support by it his derivation of his own family
from the gens Marcia. It may be said that we do not now know
for what purpose the fragmentum was composed. But, in fact,
it seems to have no special point or purpose. It is a collection of
scattered observations which, so far as can be discovered, have not
been put together for any of the objects usually contemplated by a
literary falsifier. These notices redound to no one's credit or dis-
credit. They prove nothing of any present interest to any party,
sect, or family. They have nothing that can be called Kterary
quality ; they have not even any literary or historical unity.** And
as to the * Notes ' they do not look as if the fragmentum had been
written with a view to them, so that they might develop it and
confirm its statements by references to other sources. One refer-
ence to an historical source there is which might have this aim
(see post as to Comes Marcellinus), but on the theory I am stating
we should have expected many ; and the impression made by the
^ Notes ' rather is that the writer is in good faith explaining names
and facts which he has somewhere read or heard, but has not
himself invented. Thus he justifies his translation * CsBsarides ' by
throughout the Barberini MS. (and, so far as I know, nowhere else) to our supposed
biographer. (3) The statement that the descendants of Constantine were living near
the sources of the Bhine is not to be found among Alemanni*8 citations from Theo-
philus. Neither is it in the fragmentum, which merely says that Justinian, bom at
Prizrend, was descended from Constantine. Was it then in some part of the
original (alleged) Bogomil which the fragmentum does not give, or is it an invention
of Mamavich's, attributed to his Bogomil? It is a statement not likely to have
formed a part of any Slavonic legend, which would not trouble itself about descendants
of Constantine far away in the north-western Alps, however desirous to find them in
Pindus or the Balkan. One naturaUy suspects that Marnavich is here using Bogomil-
Theophilus as a name upon whom to father statements for which he wishes to claim
authority. But be this as it may, the reference in this dedication not only confirms,
if that wanted confirming, the connexion between Marnavich and the Barberini MS.,
but shows that ten years or more after the date of the MS. he still believed, or pro-
fessed to believe, in his Bogomil. It is odd that, in the absence of all other clues to
the Theophilus of Alemanni, this clue, slight as it is, should not have been laid hold of.
" It may be thought that Marnavich, stimulated by Alemanni's discovery of the
Anecdota, wished to have a share in the fame and talk which that discovery was
likely to make, and volunteered his information about Justinian accordingly, to be
inserted in Alemanni*s notes. But Alemanni, though he quotes Theophilus, never
refers to Marnavich in any way. So that even the motive of a desire for notoriety
seems wanting.
Digitized by
Google
672 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS Oct.
reference to * Zarewichi/ ut habet author. Had he wished to give
these statements further verisimilitude, it would have been easy
for him to insert in the fragmentum things which he could in the
' Explanations ' show to fit neatly in with the statements of re-
cognised historical authorities.
It is therefore at least a possible view that Mamavich himself
believed in the existence of this *Life of Justinian/ written in
Ulyric (Slavonic) letters and characters, in the Ubrary of the
Basilian Slavonic monks on Athos. He had probably read some
old Slavonic writings even in his youth, when he produced the
* Dialogi de CsBsaribus Ulyricis ' and edified Cardinal Baronius by
stories about the emperor Constantine; and his position as
Slavonic translator at Rome after 1614 would give him oppor-
tunities of perusing many others, and doubtless also of meeting
persons who brought manuscripts to Rome from the East. It is
not likely that he ever visited Mount Athos — he does not even
himself profess to have done so — but he may have been shown what
purported to be copies of originals preserved there. And in another
of his works he refers, though indeed in disparaging terms, to
documents collected by the monks of Athos.® Moreover, we shall
see presently that there are traces in other quarters of some of the
legends and names referred to in the fragmentum. On the whole,
therefore, the probabiUties are that Mamavich has given in this
manuscript statements which he was not inventing, but was
drawing from some document or documents which he had seen, or
whose contents had been repeated to him. It is characteristic of
himself and of the school to which he belonged that he should be
utterly loose and uncritical, not only in accepting documents shown
him and reporting their substance, but also in giving the vaguest
indications of the source whence he derived them.
Be this as it may, the fragmentum has not the character of a-
direct translation from an ancient original couched in narrative
form. It is a series of detached notes; but whether the alleged
original consisted of such detached statements regarding Justinian
and the events of his time, or had the form of a regular narrative,,
we have no grounds for conjecture. The original, whatever it was,
was apparently short (it is called opuscidum), and may have con-
tained few facts of importance beyond those which the Barberini
fragmentum purports to give. As Alemanni in all probability knew
Mamavich at Rome between 1603 and 1623,** and had obtained
^ In the Vita 8, Sabba he says : Vita e^tts (i^. S. Sabbce) fusion stylo pros^-
quendcB non deftUt occasio ex iis monimentis qttcs a solitariis viris Athos incolentibus
coUecta ad memoriam posteritatis habentur transnUssat verum ctwi ea Oraoa fide
laborare non ambigamust utpote posterioribus temporibus conscripta quibus extinctt>
Latinorum imperio in OrcBcia latincs quoque sinceritatis puritas evanuitt Paksologis
regnantibtts prinoipibus, Ao. Cited by Pavid in the article mentioned above.
3« Alemanni, bom in 1583, had been secretary to Cardinal Scipio Borghese, who
Digitized by
Google
1887 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS 678
the statements which he quotes in the notes to the Anecdota either
from Marnavich directly or from this manuscript in which Mar-
navich is named, it may be assumed that Alemanni would desire
to get from Mamavich all possible information of historical value
for the illustration of the Anecdota.^ As Alemanni gives nothing
save what we find in the manuscript, we may conclude either that
the alleged original contained Uttle more, or that Mamavich re-
membered or possessed Uttle more drawn from that original.
There may, of course, have been abundance of semi-mythical
matter in the original, but this Alemanni, who was critical as well
as learned, would not transfer to his pages. It is an obvious
guess that Mamavich may have written our present manuscript
at the suggestion of Alemanni, and the latter, when he had done
with it, have placed it in the Kbrary of his patrons, the Barberini
which was then being formed, or given it to Suares, who was then
librarian in that Ubrary. Perhaps it contained whatever Mamavich,
interrogated by Alemanni, could recall to mind from what had been
shown him as a copy of the book in the Mount Athos Kbrary, or
could find in his notes made from that copy, and was put on paper
in this form for the purpose of Alemanni's notes to the Anecdota.
It is of course also possible, but perhaps less likely, that Mamavich
is simply romancing, that he is putting together a number of state-
ments drawn from various sources, fathering them upon one
original, and locaUsing that original on Mount Athos.^
The evidence we possess seems to me insufficient to enable us
to decide between several hypotheses which may be formed regard-
ing the relation of Mamavich to the fragmentutn and to the alleged
original. But whatever hypothesis be true — and this is the point
of practical consequence for the historical student — ^no greater
authority can be allowed to the fragmentumy even supposing it to
be a series of genuine extracts from a then existing Slavonic
original bearing the name of Bogomil, than would be due to a book
in which Mamavich should have recorded the Slavonic traditions
he had himself collected from such old manuscripts as he had
seen in Dalmatia or at Rome.
Does there now exist in a monastery of Slavonic monks pro-
fessing the rule of S. Basil on Mount Athos any such manuscript
relating to Justinian, and bearing the name of Bogomil, as the
fragmentum describes ? Mr. Arthur Evans, when he visited the
apparently finding him nnsnitable, got him a post in the Vatican library in 1614.
He died in 1626.
^ I am inclined to suspect that Mamavich got from Alemanni some of the learn-
ing with which he has enriched his expHcatumes^ e.g. the statement that * Latin and
Greek anthers ' gave the original name of the empress Euphemia as Lapicina, and
the reference to the name Bederina in Agathias. See Alemanni's notes at pp. S60,
867, 884 of Bonn edition.
** Cardinal Barberini, uncle of Francis, Mamavich's patron, became pope under
the title of Urban VIII in 1623, and reigned till 1644.
VOL. n. — NO. vm. x x
Digitized by
Google
674 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS Oct.
monasteries of Athos in 1885, made, at my request, inquiries regiurd-
ing the manuscripts preserved in the Slavonic monasteries there,
but was unable to discover any trace of such a book. But as
the contents of the Slavonic libraries are in great confusion, no
proper catalogue exists, except at the Bussian monastery, and the
monks do not seem to know what they possess, it is possible that
if it ever was there it may be there still. It may, however, have
been since the beginning of the seventeenth century transferred to
Bussia, whither many manuscripts from Athos have gone. Careful
inquiries ought to be made both in the Slavonic monasteries of
Athos and at Petersburg and Moscow.
It need hardly be said that the Athos manuscript referred to in
the fragTtientum could not possibly have been written in the Ufetime
of the alleged BogomU himself, for it is stated to be written in
Slavonic characters, and these were not invented till three centuries
after Justinian's time. Neither could any contemporary of Justinian
have used any Slavonic tongue for literary purposes. If there was
ever any Kfe of Justinian written by a contemporary ecclesiastic, it
must have been composed in Greek or Latin, and a Slavonic book
purporting to contain it could only be a translation from one of
those classical languages executed long afterwards.
V. What is the character of the contents of the Barberini
manuscript ? I do not now attempt to give a thorough examination
of these contents, reserving such criticism for a future occasion,
but confine myself to the following observations.
1. The fragmentum obviously betrays a Slavonic source.
Whatever is new in it relates to the Slavonic tribes, or personages
alleged to be Slavonic, including even Theodoric. Now in the days
of the supposed Bogomil the Slavonic tribes were fierce heathen,
dwelling on the northern frontiers of the empire, and frequently
ravaging it. A certain number of Slavs may possibly have already
settled within the empire, in northern Macedonia and Thrace.
These would, however, be still in a condition of great rudeness,*^ and
their language was not reduced to literary shape for centuries after-
wards. The great migration which slavonised the countries east
of the Adriatic falls in the first half of the seventh century ; there
^ There are a few, but only a few, names which seem to be of Slavonio origin in
the long list of forts built or repaired in the northern provinces which Prooopins
gives in the De ^dificHs, M. Jiredek, however, says (in a letter to me) : * Les noms
de certains chdteaux chez Procope orU une ressemblance avec les noms slaves, mais Hen
de pUis ; il y a aussi des explications du send (U thrace d*apris les recherches de man
colUgue, le professeur Wilhelm Tomaschek d Vienne, parait avoir 4U une langue
iranienne), et de Valbanais. Of. Erek, EinleUtmg in die slaw, Literaturgeschichte,
2^* 6d., p. 279. sqq.*
Schafarik {Slawische AlterthUmer, ii. 12-14) thinks that by the end of the fifth
or beginning of the sixth century the Slavonic tribes held the north bank of the Lower
Danube, and were beginning to settle quietly south of that river. But he does not
bring them in Upper Macedonia and Northern Albania till the seventh.
Digitized by
Google
1887 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS 675
seems to be no evidence of Slavonic settlements either at Prizrend
or Ochrida or Uskiub as early as the end of the fifth.
2. The romantic and indeed semi-mythical character of much
of the manuscript (fragmentuin) is palpable. For instance, Istok,
the father of Justinian, is presented as a chieftain among the
Dardanians, and as also a scion of the family of Constantine the
Great. Without necessarily accepting the statement of Procopius
in the Anecdota that the emperor Justin, the uncle of Justinian,
was a peasant, it is abundantly clear that if the father of the
emperor Justinian had been a prince and a descendant of Con-
stantine, that sovereign and his adulators (among others Procopius
in the De jEdificiis) would have recorded the fact.
The young Justinian, as befits the son of a prince, is accom-
panied even on his campaigns by a tutor, who occupies the intervals
of drill in giving theological instruction.
Justinian sustains his character of the young hero by encounter-
ing and killing in single combat his cousin, Prince Eechirad, son of
Selimir, prince of the Slavs. It need hardly be said that this
exploit, as well as the name of Eechirad, is unknown to authentic
history. (Pursuant to his identification of Slavs and Goths, Mama-
vich in his notes makes out the name to be the same as the West-
Gothic Recared.)
The Bulgarians are conceived as already near and dangerous
enemies to the empire. As we shall see presently, they are men-
tioned by Marcellinus as making an irruption in 602 a.d. (as also
in 499 and 580). In other authors, however, they do not appear
as being at this time formidable, and we hear nothing of Justin's
having held a command against them. Not only the whole family of
Justinian, but apparently even Theodora, are conceived of as Slavonic :
at least the name Bosidara (explained etymologically to be the * gift
of God ') is given as if her own original name, and Justin repre-
sented as the suggestor of her marriage with Justinian. It is im-
pHed that this marriage took place before the emperor Justin I
reached the throne, but we gather from Procopius that in reaUty it
occurred towards the close of Justin's reign.
There is a marked ecclesiastical flavour about the narrative.
Besides the prominence given to Bogomil (who is described as
abbot of the monastery of S. Alexander near Prizrend and bishop
of Serdica (Sofia), we are reminded of the heretical procUvities of
Anastasius (who leant to Monophysitism) ; he is presented as a
persecutor of catholic bishops, and a desire to pervert the orthodoxy
of Justinian is attributed to him when that young hero goes to
Constantinople to be cured of the wounds received in his single
combat with Eechirad. There is a mixture in this part of the narra-
tive of the reUgious tract with the fairy tale. Eeference is made
to the consecration as a catholic church of the Gothic {Le, Arian)
X X 2
Digitized by
Qoo^^
676 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS Oct
church at Constantinople by Pope John I, with the retention, how-
ever, of the Gothic, i.e. Slavonic, tongue in the liturgy.
Notice is taken of the foundation of two famous churches, the
monastery (cathoKc) of SS. Sergius and Bacchus near Skodra
(or Scutari) in northern Albania, and the church of S. Sophia at
Serdica. I do not say that the tales here related are to be con-
nected with these churches, though the apparition of SS. Sergius
and Bacchus may have something to do with the building of the
monastic church at Skodra ; but the mention of them points to an
ecclesiastical source.^
The most curious and novel feature of the manuscript is the
nomenclature which it supplies of the members of Justinian's family
— Istok, Bigleniza, Vukcizza, Lada, Vpravda, Rechirad.® Of these
Istok'® is not alleged to have any connexion with Sabatius, the
name which Procopius and Theophanes give as that of Justinian's
father, and which seems to be a genuine Thracian name, connected
with a Thracian solar deity akin to the Greek Dionysos. Bigleniza
may have been slavised from Vigilantia or Biglantia, which Ale-
manni conjectures to have been the name of Justinian's mother,
^ Mamavich in his notes refers to Bogomil as the person to whom there existed a
marble-cased monument with an inscription in the chorch of S. Sophia at Serdica
(Sofia), identifying him with Domnio, a bishop of Serdica mentioned by MarceUinns
Comes. I owe to the conrtesy of Mr. N. B. O'Conor, her Majesty's representative at
Sofia, the following information regarding the ancient cathedral there, which he has
obtained for me from some of the archaeologists of that city. * The rains of the old
cathedral church named S. Sophia stand over those of a smaller church bearing the same
name, which is said to have been built in the sixth century by Justinian. The local
traditions confirm these historical statements, and add that, the wife of Justinian
having found relief from a sickness for which she had come to Serdica to be cured, the
emperor erected the said church. The original church had not, however, the form of
the cathedral of S. Sophia in Constantinople, any more than such form can be dis-
covered in the ruins of the present church. The present building was erected in the
thirteenth century by one of the Comneni (?). It was converted into a mosque when
the Turks took the city. In the great earthquake of 1858 its minaret fell down, and
ever since it has remained abandoned. In the course of some diggings made in 1884
at the back part near the altar, there were found two sarcophagi of brown stone, which
are now in the building of the Gymnasium. The skeletons were far gone in decay.
No inscription is to be seen anywhere. Excavations have not been made at or round
the porch of the church.* M. Jire6ek, however, informs me that the existing church
belongs to the eleventh century, and thinks that it is the ruins of the apse that have
given rise to the belief that there was previously * a smaller church.' See his remarks
in an article on the antiquities of Bulgaria in the ArchOologisch-epigraphische
MiMheihmgen of Vienna for 1886, vol. x. He observes that the traditions of the
people began very early to connect this S. Sophia with the S. Sophia of Constantinople
and the old emperors.
^ It need hardly be said that the names of places in the fragmenium are some of
them obviously later than the sixth century. The whole fragmefUum is so evidently
long posterior to that age that it is not worth while to go into this point further.
** The name Istok appears in Luccari {Annali di Rausa) as that of a Karentine
of the twelfth century. It is said to be also the name of a river and of a town near
Prizrend. And Luccari also mentions a Herzegovinian, in a.d. 1464, who bears the
name Vpravda— Vpravda Eatunar di Dabar. This may be the same person as the
Badiz Oprouda mentioned in M. Jire2ek*s letter at the end of this article.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS 677
and which we know was the name of his sister, the mother of
Justin n. Vukcizza is said by Mamavich to have the same
meaning (she- wolf) in Slavonic as Lupicina, which Victor Tunu-
nensis and Frocopius (Anecdota)^ or Lnpicia, which Theophanes
and Theodoras Lector give as the original name of the empress
Euphemia; so it may be a Slavonic equivalent invented in the
same way as Bosidara for Theodora.
The same origin may be suggested for the name Vpravda,
which on the faith of this manuscript, or rather of Alemanni's
quotation from it, has been assumed to have been the original name
of Justinian —the notes to the manuscript say, of both the Justins
also. It is a Slavonic version of Justinus^ JustiniantiSy taken as
derived from jmtus, jttsHtia. For this name, however, another
authority may be cited, which, though nearly as late as the Bar-
berini manuscript, refers to an earlier source. Luccari in his
* Annali di Rausa,' published at Venice in 1605, two years after
Mamavich wrote his * Dialogi de Csesaribus Illyricis,* says (lib. i.) : —
Selemir dopo questo (come si vede nell* Efemeridi di Dioclea)" prese
per moglie la sorella d' Istok barone slavo, il quale avea per moglie Bi-
gleniza sorella di Giustiniano e madre di Giustino [Justin U] imperatori
romani, i quali, come ho vednto in un Diadario in Bulgaria in lingua slava,
sono chiamati Uprauda, che significa Giustiniano o Giustino.
Here we have the names of the Barberini manuscript, but Istok
is the brother-in-law, not the father, o{ Justinian, and Bigleniza is
the emperor's sister.
The Slavonic origin of Justinian seems to have been largely ac-
cepted by the Slavs in the middle ages, and was a natural beUef for
those who localised his birth-place either at Prizrend or Ochrida,
the Bulgarian tradition fixing on the latter spot, the Servian on the
former. So Mauro Orbini of Ragusa, in his book, * II Regno degli
Slavi' (Pesaro, 1601), says (p. 175) :—
Fu eziandio slavo Giustiniano primo di questo nome imperadore. H
quale (secondo il Platina ed il Bosen) nacque nella cittd. di Prizren, ch^ ^
nella Servia : o (come vole Niceforo Gallisto) nella cittd. di Achrida, la
quale, egli dice, fa ancora chiamata Giustiniana Prima ; e hoggi la chiamano
Ochrida.
It often happens that the descendants of an incoming people
appropriate, after a few generations have passed, the heroes of
those among whom they have settled. So the Celtic Arthur was a
sort of national hero to the Anglo-Normans of the middle ages.
And it is natural that the inhabitants of a place should give them-
selves the credit of any famous native of that place, though born
before their ancestors settled there ; for immigrations are after a
"* The name Istok does not appear in the version of Presbyter Diooleas which we
now possess. Lnocari probably read a different one.
Digitized by
Google
678 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS Oct.
time forgotten, and people assume that their predecessors were
their progenitors.
M. JireCek, whose authority is of course of the highest, informs
me (see his letter at the end of this article) that the names Ypravda,
Istok, Vukcizza, Vraghidara, Bigleniza, are all of them suspicious
from the point of view of Slavonic etymology, and can hardly be
referred to a date even so early as the middle ages, much less the
sixth century. It is of course possible that they may be late
forms, or corrupted forms, of genuine old Slavonic names. But it
seems more probable that they are not natural growths, but either
translations, more or less happy, of Latin and Greek names {e.g,
Justinianus, Lupicina, Theodora), or else Slavonic names of com-
paratively recent origin.
Mr. Arthur Evans suggests to me an ingenious theory regarding
these names, which may be stated as follows : —
Justinian's father was of Dardanian origin, and his name, as we
know from Procopius, was Sabatius. Now Sabatius is the name of a
Thracian god who, as Eoesler has shown, may from some points of
view be regarded as the sun god. Thracian was still a spoken
language in the sixth century, and the name might retain a solar
or kindred meaning— perhaps that of Oriens. Assuming that in
the land of Justinian's birthplace a Thracian population was
subsequently slavonised, the name, together with the glorious
traditions attaching to it, may have been taken over in a trans-
lated form as Istok, which, at least in the later Slavonic dialects,
means the East or the rising sun. So too Justinianus, who repre-
sents the romanised Thracian element, has been translated into
Vpravda. M. JireCek has observed that the words Istok and
Vpravda are not genuine and natural Slavonic name-forms. Some
explanation is therefore needed for them. But they appear as
names of persons, of Slavs in Dalmatia and Herzegovina, as early,
Istok as the twelfth century, Vpravda as the fifteenth (see note 30,
ante). May not this fact be explained by the existence of Slavonic
legends regarding Justinian and his family received before that
date from the earUer indigenous elements of the peninsula which
the Slavs had assimilated? These names, passing as those of
national heroes, would come to be bestowed on persons as proper
names.
It is anyhow clear that both names are anterior to Mamavich,
and not invented by him ; and this increases the likelihood that
the other names, with regard to which we have no clue at present,
are similarly not of his making, but taken from some pre-existing
source.
But any such source is plainly legendary and not historical.
There is no ground whatever for accepting the ascription to
Justinian of a Slavonic origin. He came from a region, whether
Digitized by
Google
1887 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS 679
Ochrida, or Prizrend, or Uskiub (as Hahn and Tozer and Evans
hold), in which we find Slavs established not long after his time.
But the probabilities are that his family were Thracians and not
Slavs.3«
The references to the wars between the empire^ the Slavs, and
the Goths, contained in the manuscript, seem drawn partly from
the narrative of Marcellinus Comes, partly from Slavonic legends,
some fragments of which are preserved in the chronicle of the
priest of Dioclea.^
MarceUinus says (ad ann. 499) : —
Aristus niyriciansB ductor militias ciun XV miUibus armatormn et cnm
DXX plaustris armis ad prseliandmn necessariis oneratis contra Bulgares
Thraciam devastantes profectus est. Bellimi juxta Zyrtum fluvium con-
sertimi, ubi plus quam millia IV nostrorum aut in faga aut in prsBcipitio
ripce fluminis interempta sunt. Ibique Ulyriciana virtus militum periit,
Nicostrato Innocentio et Aquiline comitibus interfectis.
He does not, however, mention Aristus as kiUed. Again, ad
ann. 505, Marcellinus describes the defeat of Sabinianus ductor
militia by Mundo (not Mundus) Geta (the Goth) on the banks of
the Margus. This seems to be the ground for the reference to the
reliquuB Sahiniani exerdtus a Ootids fusi. Selimir does not appear
in Marcellinus. But we find him in the chronicle of Presbyter Dio-
cleas, where he is described as king of Dalmatia and the adjoining
regions. According to this book (which I quote from the edition of
it in Latin subjoined to the *De Eegno Dalmatise' Joannis Lucii
(Frankfort, 1666), Totila and Ostroylus are two brother kings of the
Goths, who are Slavs. As they descend upon the empire, Totila
takes Italy for his share, which he ravages, passes into Sicily and
dies there.^ Ostroylus conquers Illyria and Dalmatia, being opposed
by the armies of Justinian. Ostroylus leaves a son Sevioladus or
Senudilaus, who reigns twelve years and is succeeded by his son
Syllimirus or Selemirus, who, though himself a heathen, is peaceful,
'^ To make Justin, the uncle of Justinian, a Slav, it would be necessary to suppose
the Slavs to have begun to settle in Western Thrace or Upper Macedonia as early as
A.D. 450. And if he and his nephew Justinian had belonged to a race of lately entered
and rude barbarians, whose tribes were perpetrating horrible cruelties and ravages on
the northern frontiers of the empire during Justinian's own time, Procopius would
probably in his Anecdota, where he seeks to heap every disgrace upon Justin and
Justinian, have availed himself of the fact as one discreditable to both sovereigns.
But that spiteful historian merely says that Justin was the unlettered son of a peasant
who came from his Dardanian home to Constantinople with nothing but a bag of
biscuits on his back.
" This chronicle is ascribed to the twelfth century. Dioolea is Dukli in Monte-
negro near the lake of Skodra.
** There is evidently in these legends a mixture of Totila and of Alaric. I found
another curious instance of the mixture when, in visiting Gaprara in Umbria, the
place where Totila probably expired after his defeat in the great battle of a.d. 552, I
was told by the inhabitants that a great barbarian king was buried beneath the channel
of the river.
Digitized by
Google
680 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS Oct.
and protects the christians ; he makes a treaty with them, and they
become his tributaries. He is succeeded by his sons, first by Bladi-
nus, then by Ratomir, who persecutes the christians. Here we have
legends different from those of Marnavich, because Selimir in the
latter is Justinian's uncle, while in Presbyter Diocleas he is the
grandson of an invading heathen enemy of Justinian.** Of Bechirad
I find no trace here, nor of Istok or Bigleniza, but Luccari tells us
that in his Presbyter Diocleas Selomir is the brother-in-law of
Istok, and Istok the brother-in-law of Justinian.
The story of Justin and Justinian rescuing the orthodox bishops
seems to refer to the event described by Marcellinus as follows
(ad ann. 516) : —
Laorentixun Lychnidensem [episcopom], Domnionem Serdicensem,
Alcissum NicopoUtanum, Gaianmn Nsusitanum et Evangelum Pantali-
ensem, catholicos Illyrici sacerdotes, sois Anastasius [Imperator] pras-
sentari jussit obtutibus. Alcissns et Gaianus episcopi apnd Byzantium
vita defancti sunt, Domnione et Evangelo ad sedes proprias, ob metom
niyriciani catholici militis, extemplo remissis.
Marnavich in his notes identifies the Bogomilus of the Barberini
manuscript with this Domnio. Bogomil may have been the legen-
dary name of the Serdican prelate whom a local tradition com-
memorated as the orthodox confessor who withstood the Monophysite
emperor, this tradition connecting itself with the inscription on the
tomb in front of the church at Serdica. Possibly we have here
the germ of the legend. When it was supposed that Justinian,
himself a Slav, rescued the pious Slavonic bishop, it would come to
be beUeved that the bishop had been the instructor in theology of
the champion of orthodoxy.
It is remarkable how httle there is in the manuscript of his-
torical interest or value beyond these new names, themselves, as
has been indicated, more than suspicious. The chief fact is the visit
of Justinian to the great Theodoric, his being received by the latter
into a species of artificial brotherhood {aSeX^oTrctrrla), and his sub-
sequent sojourn as a hostage at Ravenna. Unhappily the circum-
stances narrated as having led to these events are so questionable
as to throw great doubt on the events themselves. They are wholly
unconfirmed by other historians, and they assume an importance
both for Justin twelve years before he reached the throne and for
Justinian at the age of twenty (or a little more), which is in itself
improbable. Note that both the author of the manuscript and Mar-
navich (assuming them to be different) conceive of the Goths as
speaking Slavonic, and doubtless therefore of Theodoric as a Slav.
As already observed, the author of the fragmentum (or rather of
** Near the beginning of Laccsri*8 ArmaM di Battsa Selemir is presented to us as a
sort of eponymns of the Sonth Slavonio race, having three brothers, Lech (for the
Poles), Ceoh (for the Bohemians), and Buss (for the Bassians).
Google
Digitized by ^
iiJ
1887 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS 681
the statements contained in it) evidently knew the chronicle of
Marcellinus Comes, a book which had considerable value for the
catholic clergy of the middle ages in the Slavonic comitries, because
it has a certain Latin colouring.*
Mamavich in his notes refers to Marcellinus, to Procopius (the
De J^dificiis), and to Agathias. Whether, however, either the
author of the statements contained in the manuscript or Mamavich
(supposing them to be different persons) knew the Anecdota is not
clear. There are three passages in the manuscript which may have
been suggested by that book. One is the shadow which is felt to
rest on the empress Theodora. This, however, may be suflficiently
explained by the reputation of that lady for heterodoxy, which had
led to her being severely handled by ecclesiastical writers from
Victor Tununensis down to Cardinal Baronius. The second is the
opposition of the ladies of the imperial household to the marriage
of Justinian and Theodora, attributed by Procopius to the empress
Euphemia, Justinian's aunt, by our manuscript to his mother Bi-
gleniza, whom Procopius does not name.'^ The third is the legend
as to the imprisonment and deliverance from death of the emperor
Justin — an anecdote which recalls the story told in chap. 6 of the
Anecdota, though the colour of the narratives is different. But
instead of the dream by which John Crookback, the general in the
Isaurian expedition, was forbidden to put Justin to death, we hear
in the manuscript of an apparition of SS. Sergius and Bacchus.
Other writers (Zonaras, Cedrenus, Ephraemius) also tell the tale
of Justin's imprisonment and release ; and it is more likely that
the author of the manuscript drew from one of them, who give a
reUgious turn to the tale, than from Procopius.
If it be thought that these points of contact are sufficient to
show that the writer of the manuscript must have seen the Anec-.
dota, the argument will be strong that Mamavich was either the
author or the very free redactor of the manuscript, because the
Anecdota, although not unknown before their publication in 1628
(seeing that Suidas refers to them), were unlikely to have been
seen by any Slavonic author of the alleged ' Vita Justiniani ' of
** Although by that time monophysitism had quite died oat in the eastern church,
there was an opposition, strong down to and in our own days, between the catholics
looking to Borne, and the orthodox looking to Constantinople. In Marcellinus*s time
there was also an opposition, though one rather due to the fact that whereas the Latins
were all opposed to monophysitism, there was a considerable monophysite party (to
which, indeed, Anastasius and Theodora belonged) in Constantinople and the Greek-
speaking districts generally.
'^ The tale of the feminine opposition to Justinian's marrying Theodora certainly
seems to suggest the story in Procopius. But it must be remembered not only that
in Procopius the opposing person is difiFerent, but the events are differently con-
ceived altogether. Here Justin arranges the match, and does so before he comes to
the throne ; in the Anecdota Justin, being a weak and aged emperor, is induced to
consent to it, apparently at the end of his reign, and to change the law in order to
make it possible.
Digitized by
Google
682 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS Oct.
Mount Athos; whereas Mamavich in Eome might have learnt
about them from Alemanni before they were published in 162S.
But the presumption seems to be rather the other way. Had
Marnavich read the Anecdota, he would probably have referred in
his notes to several passages in it which would have suited him.
But he has not done so.
It is worth while to notice an omission singular in an author
desiring to claim Justinian and his family for the Slavonic race.
Nothing is said about Belisarius, who plays so great a part in the
wars of Justinian, who was undoubtedly of Thracian birth (he came
from Germania, near Serdica), and for whose name the plausible
Slavonic etymology of Beli Tsar or White Prince has been suggested,
and was, for a while, generally accepted. It is now, I believe,
rejected by Slavonic scholars on the ground that the word tsar is
itself later than the sixth century, being probably (though perhaps
not certainly) formed from Ccesar.
These observations on the contents of the Barberini manuscript
may be summarised as follows : —
The substance of the book is semi-mythical and romantic, and
in some points diverges widely from the truth of history.
The names given are apparently of comparatively late origin ;
and as regards those which have Greek or Latin equivalents, it is
far more probable that they have been formed by translating the
Greek or Latin names into Slavonic than that they are themselves
Slavonic originals from which the Greek and Latin names were
formed by translation.
The origin of the facts given is to be found partly in Slavonic
legends which had grown up round the famous name of Justinian,
partly in the conscious harmonising and working up together of
legend and of authentic history to be found in existing sources, some
of which, such as Marcellinus Comes, perhaps also Theophanes and
Zonaras, the author of the statements contained in the manuscript
knew.
V. We may now proceed to state the general conclusions to
which the foregoing inquiry seems to have led us. These conclu-
sions may be modified by further information as to Slavonic legends
of this order, possibly even by an examination of Marnavich's book
' De Csesaribus Illyricis,* if a copy of it can be found. So far as
present data enable us to go, we may, I think, adopt the following
propositions.
1. This Barberini manuscript of ours is the 'Vita Justiniani*
quoted by Alemanni, and which subsequent writers have quoted
from him.
2. This book is, however, not a life of Justinian, nor even an
extract from a life of Justinian, but an abstract from an original
(whether real or supposed), which, though called by the abstractor
Digitized by VjOOQIC
. ^J
1887 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS 683
a life, was more probably a collection of notices relating to Justinian
and the churches he founded.
3. The Barberini manuscript, as well as the explicationes which
follow it, was written by Marnavich, and probably at Eome, and
before 1621.
4. The existence of the original * Vita Justiniani ' said to exist in
the Basilian monastery on Mount Athos cannot be assumed, for we
have no evidence regarding it except that of Marnavich, and he is a
witness not above suspicion. On the whole, however, in the absence
of positive grounds for holding Marnavich to have invented it, there
seems reason to think that some book of the kind did exist, though
perhaps not on Athos, or at least that he believed in its existence.
6. There is nothing to show that there ever existed either a
preceptor of Justinian or a bishop of Serdica named Bogomilus
or Theophilus, the identification of such a person with the his-
torical Domnio being apparently arbitrary and baseless. Much
less then have we any ground for accepting the authorship of the
opmcidum on Mount Athos (assuming its existence) as that of this
alleged contemporary of Justinian.
6. Assuming this original on Mount Athos to have existed, it
cannot have been very old in the form in which Marnavich used it,
probably, to judge by the forms of the Slavonic names it contains,
not older than the fourteenth century.
7. The legends it contains may of course be older, but how much
older it is impossible to say in the absence of sufficient evidence
from other quarters regarding them. They have a marked ecclesi-
astical tinge, and may have arisen from local traditions connecting
the great and orthodox emperor with Prizrend and its churches on
the one hand, Serdica and its church on the other. The former
would be Servian traditions, the latter Bulgarian. There would thus
seem to be here a mixture, perhaps an intentional harmonising, of
Servian and Bulgarian legend.^ Both meet in Domnio-Bogomilus-
TheophUus, who is abbot at Prizrend and bishop at Serdica.
8. No veritable historical authority can be claimed for any one
of the statements of the manuscript. Even the assumption, made for
a long time past on the faith of Alemanni's citations from it, that
Justinian's true name was Vpravda, and he of Slavonic race, must
now be considered unfounded. He doubtless came from Thrace or
Macedonia, but to which of the races then dwelling in those
countries he belonged it seems impossible to determine ; for although
the name Vpravda is given also by the writer whom Luccari cites,
that writer is doubtless also the mere repeater of a tradition, and en-
titled to no more weight than this mysterious Bogomil of ours. The
name of his father, Sabatius, seems to point to the old Thracian stock.
^ It is noteworthy that Luccari also refers to a Bulgarian source (the IHadwrio)
as weU as a Serb one (Presbyter Diocleas)
Digitized by
Qoo^^
684 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS Oct.
What the manuscript does is to give us a glimpse into a sort of
cychis of Slavonic legends attaching themselves to the great name
of Justinian, as other Slavonic legends were connected with Alex-
ander the Great, as Aquitanian legends were connected with
Charlemagne, German legends with Theodoric and with Attila,
British legends with Arthur, Italian legends with Totila. Other
traces of such legends are found in the priest of Dioclea, and others
may possibly exist in Slavonic books which have not become known
to Western scholars.
One may feel inclined to regret that the results to which this
inquiry into the supposed biographer of the emperor has led us
should be so purely negative, teaching Uttle more than that Jus-
tinian had become a legendary hero among the South Slavonic
races. There is nevertheless some satisfaction in destroying as-
sumptions which we now find to be groundless, and in clearing up
what has been, since Marnavich and Alemanni launched their Theo-
philus upon the world two centuries and a half ago, one of the
standing puzzles of later Boman history.
James Brtob.
LeTTEB FBOM M. CoNSTAKTIN JlBB^EK.
Notices concemant la Vita Justiniani avec les explications de Marna-
vich dans un MS, de la BibL Barherini d Borne.
1. Le nom Upravda pour Tempereur Justinian ne se trouve dans
ancun des ouvrages historiques compiles ou traduits en slavon pendant
le moyen &ge, k ce qu'ils me sont connus et & ce qu'ils sont d^k public
et aocessibles.
2. L'auteur de la Vita Justiniani s'est servi 6videmment de la chronique
du Gomes Marcellinus. De Ik viennent Domnion, 6v^que de Serdica
(Marc, ad a. 616), slavish avec un second nom Bogomil, * Aristus Illyrici-
ansB ductor mihtise ' (ad a. 499, chang^ en ' Bastus dux mihtiaB Illyrici-
anse,' Sdbinianus avec la bataille de Margus (Marc, ad 505). ' Selimir
princeps Sclavorum ' est un personnage mythique, pris de la Chronique
du Diocleas, cap. IV, oA il figure comme roi de Dalmatie. Une source
dalmate se trahit par la mention du c^l^bre monast^re catholique (ordinis
Sti Benedicti) St. Sergii et Bacchic qui se trouvait sur la Boyana,
6 milles de Scutari, 18 milles de la mer, jusqu'au XVP si^cle un port
conunercial tr^s fr^quent^, Som Sergi des Italiens, Sveti Srgj des Slaves.
S. Alexandre, k qui la Vita attribue un couvent dans la contr^ de
Prizren, est le martyr romain de Drusipara entre Adrianople et Constanti-
nople, dont la l^ende se trouve dans les Acta SS. Boll. Mai HI 197.
L^^hse de St. Sophie k Sardica n'a pu Stre fondle par Justinien
* in gratiam Bogomili seu Domnionis olim sui pedagogi ; ' c'est un Edifice
byzantin d'une ^poque plus r^cente, apparemment de la mdme 6poque,
c. k. d. du XI® siScle, lorsqu'on a construit T^hse de St. Sophie d Ochrida^
qui a le m^me plan que ceUe de Sophia, opinion prononc^ d^k par le
voyageur russe V. Grigorovi6 en 1845.
8. II est int^essant de remarquer que Pauteur de la Vita fut Justinien
Digitized by
Google
1887 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS 685
originaire de Prizren. TL adopte ^videmment ropinion, prononc6e vers
1600 par les Dalmatins Orbini (' Regno degli Slavi/ 1601, p. 175) et Luccari
(* Annali di Bausa/ 1605, p. 61), que Justiniana Prima est Prizren. Les
indigenes et surtout le clerg6 de ces pays identifiaient au contraire Justi-
niana Prima toujours avec Ochriday id^e qui se maintient dans les actes
et les titres de T^lise d'Ochrida k partir du XTTT^ si^le.
4. Miklosich (*Bildung der slavischen Personennamen,' Wien, 1860)
n*a trouv6 aucun nom de personne fomi6 de pra/vda, justice. J*en connais
cependant un exemple, un gentilhomme herz^ovinien Badiz Oprouda
(sic), qui est mentionn^ dans les protocoUes du s^nat de Baguse, r6dig68
en latin et en italien, 1459, 1462, 1469-1471, 1476-1477, comme ambas-
sadeur du * herceg ' de la Herz^ovine Stefan et plus tard de son fils
Ylatko. La forme slave de oe nom, qui parait avoir ^t^ un sobriqtiet (diffe-
rent des patronymiqvss en -ich = -ic, avec lesquels sont ^rits les collogues
de oeIladi6 : Grupkovid, Paskanid&c), ^tait sans doute Opravda, du verbe
opravdati, opravditi, justum censere, justa ratione regere, purgare, de-
fendere, to justify, to vindicate, rechtfertigen (cf. Miklosich, ' Lex. palado-
slovenicum,' et Dani6i<5, * Diet, du vieux serbe,* U, 225).
D'aiUeurs le nom Opravda ne peut pas ^tre d*ancienne date ; au
moyen &ge pr6dominent les noms composes de deux thdmes : Bado-slav,
Vilko-drug, Slavo-mir (cf. les formes grecques 'AXil-ay^ptHj KaWi-Kpartfc,
ArjfiO'crOlvni:, et les anciens noms germaniques) ; les contractions, plus
fiftmili^res (le premier thdme avec un suffixe), ne commencent k se r6pan-
dre que vers la fin du moyen &ge.
5. Les autres noms de la Vita sont 6galement suspects. Le soi-disant
Istok est comme nom de personne un &7ra£ dprinirov de la 16gende sur
Justinien. Dans les dialectes slaves de la presqu'tle Balcanique istok au
moyen &ge signifie seulement fons, effluvium, ostium flvmimis ; il y a
aussi une rividre Istok en Serbie (au 14® siScle) ; VadjeciHistoSbnyfontarms,
Tfjyatoi, L'orient est au moyen &ge toujours vzstok, orientalis vistoihn ;
istok, oriens, istodm, orientalis, ne parait qu'au 15® si^le.
Vukdzza (nom qui se trouve aussi ailleurs, mais qui sonnait au
moyen &ge en serbe et bulg. Vlhdica), Bozidwra (dans les monuments
seulement le masc. Bozidar), Vraghddara (tout ^'fiait isol6) portent aussi
le type d'une ^poque r6cente. Vraghida/ra est, outre cela, mal form^
dans sa phon^tique, avec une consonne gutturale au lieu d'une palatale
{g avant i devient £) : de vrag, diabolus, on peut d^river seulement vra^-
dara, comme de bog, deus, hoiidar.
Yigilantia=Bigleniza n'a pu dtre compris comme slave ('Albula*
de Mamavich) en Dalmatie et Groatie que lorsqu'on y 6crivait, depuis
le 15 si^cle, gl pour le I mouilU ; cependant de hieli, albus (aux dialectes
bili), on peut s'attendre seulement k Bieleni9a, Bileni9a (un nom sans
parall^le) avec un I dur.
6. Ivan Tomko Mamamch (lisez Mmavid), n6 k Sebenico 1579, mort k
Borne 1689, ne m^rite pas beaucoup de confiance. Le prof. Armin Pavi<5
a public une biographic d^taill^e decet historien, hagiographe et podte, dans
les actes de Tacad^mie d' Agram ('Badjugoslavenskeakademije,'vol.xxxiii
(1875) pp. 58-127). Mamavich, qui avait aussi le d^faut deconstruire sa
g^n^alogie, en se d^larant lui-mdme descendant du roi serbe Vukalin
* Mmjav^evid ' (1366-1871) et m^me de la gens Marcia de Borne, et cela
naturellement en se basant sur des documents falsifies, a d6but6 k Bome en
Digitized by
Google
686 LIFE OF JUSTINIAN BY THEOPHILUS Oct.
1603, comme jeune homme encore, par la publication d'un livre De Illyrico
CcBsaHhusque Illyricis. Get ouvrage est cit6 par Valentinelli comme De
Illyrico Gasarihusque Illyricis Dialogorum libri septem 1608; mais ni
Kukuljevid, le premier bibliographe create de nos jours, ni Pavid lui-
mSme n'a eu la chance d*en trouver un exemplaire. U serait int^essant
de voir ce qu'il raconte Ik sur I'origine illyrique de Justinien.
n est difficile de dire si Luccari, qui a sign6 la preface de ses ' Annali
di Bausa ' (Venezia, 1606) le 1 Janvier 1604, a d6jft. pu avoir dans ses mains
ce livre, paru en 1608. II ne le nomme pas dans le catalogue des * auctori
citati nella presente opera.* H nous raconte (p. 8) qu'un *barone Slavo '
Istok 6t6ut p^re de Justinien, et que Justin et Justinien * com' ho veduto in
un Diadario in Bulgaria in lingim slava, sono chiamati Vjprauda (alore
tous les deux), che significa Gtinstiniano b Oiustino.' On pourrait aussi
supposer que Luccari a pris (peut-Stre dans quelque r6oit sur le r6ta-
blissement de Torthodoxie apr^s Anastase par Justin et Justinien, insure
dans une chronique slavonne) Taoriste opra/vdd (de opravdati 'justifier')
pour un nom d'homme, mais d'un autre c6t6 le nom Istok chez lui £ut
penser qu'il a puis6 d^j& d'une source semblable aux productions de la
fentaisie de Marnavich.'^ Conbtantin Jibe6ek.
Prague : 1 Janvier 1886.
Post'Scriptum.—lje gothisme ou la gothomanie, comme I'appellent les
historiens actuels de la Croatie, c'est k dire la confusion des Gothes avec les
Slaves, est tr6s vieille en Dalmatie. On la rencontre dejlt chez le presbyter
Diocleas (XII s.) et chez Thomas, archidiacre de Spalato (XIII s.). D'aprfis
I'analyse de I'historien create Ba5ki (president de I'acad^mie d'Agram)
dans sa dissertation sur les sources de I'histoire croate et serbe (en
create, Agram, 1865, p. 69) la premiere partie du Diocleas (chap. I-XIX)
n'est qu'un libellus Gothorwm^ qui est ant^rieur m^me k Diocleas, ^videm-
ment une composition indigene, faite en Dalmatie.
Licinius et sa femme, soeur de Constantin le Grand, figurent comme
aiicetres des Nemanjides serbes dans la biographic du despote Etienne
Lazarevid (1889-1427), 6crite par Constantin le * Philosophe ' en 1481 (pub-
liee par lagid dans le * Glasnik,' journal de la soci^t^ savante serbe, vol. 42),
et dans la seconde redaction des annales serbes, r6dig6e k la mSme ^poque.
La premiere reaction, de la fin du XIV s., ne connait pas encore cette
fantaisie g^n^logique, de meme que toutes les biographies des Neman-
jides compos^es aux XIII et XIV si^cles. C'est une traduction de la
chronique de Zonaras, faite en Serbie vers 1400, qui debute par I'identifi-
cation des Daces avec les Serbes, qui nomme Licinius un Serbe etc. Cf.
lagid, * Ein Beitrag zur serbischen Annalistik,* Archiv fiir slaw. Philolo-
gie, Bd. II.
Le voyageur Schepper en 1688 (M6m. de I'acad^mie de Bruxelles, t.
xxx, 1867) a re9u des moines du monast^re de MileSeva en Herz6govine la
m^me g^n^alogie de saint Sava, fils de Nemanja, descendant de Licinius.
Justinien, au contraire, ne joue aucim role remarquable dansces com-
positions.
Prague : 3 bxM 1887.
** II est & noter qn'Orbini (1601, p. 175) ne connait encore ni Istok ni Uprayda,
quoique il declare Justinien dtre Slave.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
Digitized by
Google
C
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 687
Charles I and the Earl of Glamorgan
I'^HOUGH the time has, I hope, arrived when it is possible to
examine the difficult questions arising out of the Glamorgan
treaty with complete impartiality, it must be remembered that these
questions are not to be solved even by the most impartial person
who approaches the subject from a purely antiquarian point of view.
An antiquary, indeed, may give useful information, to be received
with all due respect, but unless he is famihar with the history |iid
correspondence of the time, he does not know what is probable or
improbable, and is, therefore, almost certain to draw wrong inferences
from the facts which he has laboriously collected.
It is the more necessary at present to keep this in view, as the
latest contribution to the controversy, which has long been carried
on, is an article in the Academy for 8 Dec. 1883, by Mr. Bound,
who adduces the authority of the great antiquary Dugdale in
favour of the view that a patent of Charles I brought forward by
Glamorgan after the Bestoration, as creating him a duke, was a
forgery, from which Mr. Bound draws the further conclusion that
Glamorgan may very likely have also forged other documents pro-
duced by him as his warrant for entering into his notorious
treaty with the Irish in 1645.
With Mr. Bound I have no wish to enter into controversy. After
a good deal of friendly correspondence, he has, I think, been convinced
by my arguments that several if not all of his obiter dicta on this
matter will not hold water, and it will be better to state my own
view as I proceed rather than to controvert those which were ex-
pressed by him.
At all events, we have to thank Mr. Bound for drawing attention
to Dugdale's opinion.
This (says Dngdale, writing on 5 Aug. 1660, after Glamorgan had suc-
ceeded to the marquisate of Worcester of the patent referred to above)
being in truth suspected to be forged, there appearing no vestige of it at
the signet or privy seal, nor any other probable way, and my lord of
Hartford being prepared to make such objections against it as might have
tended much to the dishonour of my lord of Worcester before a committee
of lords — about three days since, the marquis of Worcester was pleased to
tell the lords that he must confess that there were certain private con-
siderations upon which that patent was granted to him by the late king,
Digitized by
Google
688 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN Oct-
which he performing not on his part, he would not insist thereon, bnt
render it to his majesty to cancel if he so pleased.
In estimating the value of this statement it must be remembered
that Dugdale was likely ta be biassed in two ways. In the first place
he was likely to think ill of a man whose whole story if true was
discreditable to the royal martyr. In the second place, as an official,
he was likely to think ill of a document which was not officiaUy
correct, and to suppose that the best explanation of its irregularity
was that it was forged in 1660. If it can be shown that there is
strong ground for supposing that in spite of the irregularity of the
document it heA actually passed under the eye of Charles I, we may
safely refuse to follow Dugdale in the inference which he drew, in
necessary ignorance of facts of which we are now cognisant.
In itself the question of the irregularity of this dukedom patent
would only indirectly concern an inquirer into the Glamorgan treaty ;
but it is closely connected with another patent granting to Glamorgan
a commission conferring on him very extraordinary powers to com-
mand an army in chief, and embodying the ' certain private con-
siderations ' referred to by Dugdale, and paving the way for his
subsequent employment in Ireland. It is, therefore, necessary to
come to some understanding on the history of both these patents
before proceeding to that of the later documents which Glamorgan
produced in Ireland. As Mr. Bound says, if both or either of these
were forged in 1660, there is an end of Glamorgan's credit, and the
warrants which he produced to justify his conduct in Ireland must
be regarded with grave suspicion. If, on the other hand, they were,
however irregular, produced at an earlier date with Charles's know-
ledge and by his orders, the whole argument is inverted, because
the extraordinary nature of the language in which they are couched
makes it likely that the later documents, extraordinary as they
were, were also produced with Charles's knowledge and by his orders.
The commission patent has been printed in CoUins's ' Peerage,'
ed. 1812, i. 285. The dukedom patent exists in copy in the Carte
MSS. cxxix. fol. 849, and in the original in the muniment room at
Badminton, to which I have been allowed access through the courtesy
of his grace the Duke of Beaufort. A hostile opinion of the former,
which is not now to be found at Badminton, by Anstis, garter king
of arms in the middle of the eighteenth* century, is embodied in
* The Case of the Eoyal Martyr' (p. 141), the authorship of which
is ascribed to Carte, and an opinion also by Anstis, less hostile but
decidedly unfriendly to the dukedom patent, follows the copy of it
in the Carte MSS.
Before examining the evidence of seals and signatures, let us fix
the dates of these two patents. The commission is granted plainly
' at Oxford on the first of April in the twentieth year of our reign,
and the year of our Lord one thousand six hundred and forty-four.'
Digitized by
Google
1887 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN 689
The dukedom is granted quarto die Mail anno regni nostri vicesimo
prima, that is to say 1645. Anstis, however, in whose hands the
original heA been, perceived that primo is written in different ink
from the rest of the date, and this is quite clear upon an inspection
of the document itself, the word being now quite black, whilst the
remainder of the writing has faded into brown. It may, therefore,
be taken for granted that the real date is 4 May 1644, rather more
than a month after the commission patent.
Waiving for the present all questions arising from the insertion
of the word primo, let us ask whether there is anything in the
documents themselves inconsistent with the date 1644. In this
inquiry it will be better to begin with the commission patent.
The principal concessions there made to Glamorgan are as
follows :
1. To be generalissimo of three armies, English, Irish, and
foreign, and admiral of a fleet at sea, with power to appoint ofl&cers.
2. To obtain the money needed for these purposes by contract-
ing for the sale of wardships, customs, woods, &c.
8. To distribute patents of peerages or baronetcies sealed in
blank * to ' persons of generosity,* as a means of making money.
4. Glamorgan's son is to receive in marriage the king's youngest
daughter, Elizabeth, with a portion of 800,000Z.
5. The title of duke of Somerset is to be given to him and his
heirs for ever, and also the garter.
No doubt these are startling concessions. The second and third,
however, were only means of raising money for the king ; and the
fourth, which is very startling indeed, is corroborated by a letter
written by the king to Glamorgan's father, the first marquis of
Worcester.
I will show (writes the kmg) my tender care of you and yours ; as by
a match propounded for your grandchild, you will easily judge, the particu-
lars of which I leave to your son, Glamorgan his relation.^
Of the dukedom I shall have more to say presently, but the point
of the greatest importance is the earl's appointment to command
by sea and land.
Here we have at least the advantage of hearing what Glamorgan
had to say for himself. On 11 June 1660 he addressed as marquis
of Worcester a letter to Clarendon, which is printed in the
' Clarendon State Papers ' (ii. 201). ' Your lordship,' he says, ' may
' The patent only says that the dates may be filled up, but it is obvious the names
would have to be filled up too, either by Glamorgan or the king.
' Diroks, Life of the second Marquis of Worcester, 103. He gives no date to the
letter. I quote the correspondence of Charles with Glamorgan and his father from
this book ; but the reader must be on his guard against Mr. Diroks's chronology. He
sometimes remembers and sometimes forgets that the year began on 25 March, and,
amongst other consequent mistakes, makes Glamorgan go to Ireland twice in 1645
instead of once.
VOL. n. — NO. vin. y y
Digitized by
Google
690 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN Oct.
well wonder, and the king too, at the amplitude of my commission/
He then explains how necessary it was, his majesty's design
being that one army of 10,000 men was to have come out of Ireland
through North Wales ; another, of a like number at least under my com-
mand in chief, have expected my return in South Wales, which Sir Henry
Gage was to have commanded as Heutenant-general ; and a third should
have consisted of a matter of 6,000 men, 2,000 of which were to have
been Liegeois, commanded by Sir Francis Edmonds, 2,000 Lorrainers to
have been commanded by Colonel Browne, and 2,000 of such French,
EngUsh, and Scots and Irish, as could be drawn out of Flanders and
Holland. And the 6,000 were to have been, by the prince of Orange's
assistance, in the associated counties ; and the governor of Lyne [King's
Lynn], cousin german to Major Bacon, major of my own regiment, was to
have dehvered the town unto them.
Worcester then goes on to say that the pope and catholic princes
were to support this army of foreigners, and that he had power to
treat with the pope and catholic princes by offering the remission
of the penal laws against the catholics.
One thing at least may be gathered from this letter. Glamorgan
could not possibly refer to a commission granted in 1645, because,
as everybody then knew, Sir Henry Gage was killed in January
164^. Here again, therefore, is an undesigned coincidence fixing
the date of the patent to 1644.
Were all these things, however, proposed by Charles to be done
in 1644 ? Here I have only negative evidence to offer. It would
be rash to assert that we know all of Charles's intrigues in 1645 ;
but thanks to the letters seized at Naseby and Sherbum, we know
a great deal, and we may fairly say that this plan of 1644 was like
that of 1645 with a difference. In 1645 there was an application
to the pope for money to support an army, there was a plan for
bringing an Irish army over, and another for bringing Lorrainers
over with the help of the prince of Orange, but there was no plan
for bringing Liegeois over, as there had been as early as in 1641,
and no plan for getting possession of Lynn, because by that time
the attempt had been made by Boger L'Estrange and had failed.
The plan, therefore, as explained in the letter to Clarendon, was
just the sort of one to have been entertained by Charles, and was
yet one which if entertained at all could not have been thought of
in 1645.
If, however, we have only Glamorgan's own evidence that such
a plan was thought of in 1644, we may at least ask whether there
is any reason to think it likely that it was so thought of. Curiously
enough the weeks between 1 April and 4 May, the dates of the two
patents, are the only weeks in the whole of 1644 in which Charles
was in a position to entertain a project of the kind.
The backbone of the whole scheme was the proposed Irish army
Digitized by
Google
1887 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN 691
of 10,000 men. The notion of sending it was not Glamorgan's.
It had come from the confederate catholics of Ireland, and its
realisation depended on Charles's consent to certain terms which
the agents of the catholics were to make at Oxford. These agents
arrived towards the end of March 1644, and presented their con-
ditions on the 29th. Writing on that day to Ormond,* Digby,
the secretary of state, expressed himself as doubtful, but not as de-
spairing of success. On 2 April, however, Sir G. Radcliflfe informed
the lord lieutenant ^ that the Irish had abated their demands. He
then adds :
There is nothing that is scandalous now, nor dishonourable for the
king to treat on. I hear by another hand, not so good, I confess, yet
reasonable good, that we shall have peace, and that they will submit
much to the king.
Surely, if Glamorgan forged his commission in 1660, he was singu-
leirly lucky in dating it on the day before this letter was written.
It is true that the amended propositions, as we know from a letter
of Digby's, were presented on the 2nd, not on the 1st, but the
agents were pretty sure to let the king know a day or two before of
their intention to amend them.
Again, it is only on 9 May, five days after the dukedom patent,
that Digby* writes that the feeling at Oxford is too strong against
the proposals of the cathoKcs to enable the king to grant their
wishes, and it is as late as the 16th before Sir George Radcliffe
abandons hope. ' I was till of late persuaded,' he writes,^ * that we
should have had peace. I now begin somewhat to doubt of it.'
The negotiation was soon after this remitted to Ireland. Once
more, if Glamorgan was a forger he chose his dates Well.
The weeks between 1 April and 4 May were, therefore, precisely
those when Charles was full of expectation of being able to come to
terms with the Irish agents, precisely those in which he wanted a
catholic commander for his expected new Irish army, and for any
other foreign levies whose co-operation he might hope to obtain.
He also wanted a commander who was rich enough to enable him
to start the financial operations which would form a necessary basis
for the miUtary enterprise. Such a man was Glamorgan, and it
must therefore be accepted as at least historically probable that his
story was a true one.
Such being the state of the case as far as historical evidence is
concerned, let us turn to the documents themselves. It is true
that there is no official evidence of their having been granted by
the king. They were neither preceded by a royal sign manual nor by
a privy seal, and they were not followed by enrolment on the patent
rolls. Even if everything else had been regular it would have been
' Carte's Ormond, vi. 81. * Ibid. 84. * lind, 109. « Ibid. 120.
tt2
Digitized by
Google
692 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN Oct.
difficult for the honse of lords in 1660, supposing the peers to have
been better disposed towards Glamorgan than they were, to get
over these defects. But this was not all. Not only was the English
of the commission patent very unofficial in its character, but its
seal was everything that it ought not to have been. As Carte
reports from Anstis, it is composed of two great seals clapped
together so as to inclose the label.^ Such a patent could not pos-
sibly be accepted as valid. This is, however, no more than Gla-
morgan himself acknowledged with respect to the commission
patent.
In like manner (be writes to Clarendon),® did I not stick upon having
this commission inrolled or assented to by the king's counsel, nor indeed
the seal to be put unto it in an ordinary manner, but as Mr. Endymion
Porter and I could perform it, with rollers and no screw-press.
Endymion Porter, it will be remembered, was believed to be asso-
ciated with a similar performance in affixing the great seal to &
document despatched to Ireland in 1641, just before the outbreak of
the Ulster rebellion.
Is there any vaUd reason for supposing that this story is untrue ?
Glamorgan, according to the hypothesis, was about to be employed
in a secret mission. He wanted powers to enable him to fulfil it,
and he wanted a reward after it had been fulfilled. Whether the
documents which gave him what he needed would satisfy judges
or parliaments, he did not care a straw. If he succeeded, he would
have done that which would reduce judges and parliaments to
impotence. What he wanted was, in the case of the commission,
something to convince those with whom he was about to treat that
he was authorised to treat, and this was precisely what he got, as
the people with whom he had to deal in Ireland or on the con-
tinent were not likely to know whether his commission had been
enrolled, or whether it had been preceded by a warrant or not, and
not likely to examine the form of the seals very closely. As to the
dukedom patent, it was equallv without preceding sign manual or
privy seal or subsequent enrolment, but the seal, which is now at
Badminton, appears to be perfectly in order, and Anstis, who does
not say that there was any fault with it, allows that Willis, who
countersigned it, was the proper officer to do so. I should gather
from this that though Charles wished the dukedom to be kept secret,
there was no reason for such absolute privacy as in the case of
the commission, and that Willis, if, as was probably the case, he was a
trusty person, might be allowed so far to participate in the afifiair as
to be present at the sealing of the patent.
Having reached this point, I must remind my residers that I
have not undertaken to give positive proof that these patents were
» The Case of the Royal MarPyr, 142, 148. • Clar. St P. ii 202.
Digitized by
Google
1887 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN 693
genuine. I have only attempted to show that the objections to
them cannot be sustained, whereas the objections to the theory
that they were forged in 1660 are very great indeed.
Let us now take up another objection which has been urged
against the dukedom patent. Why, it is said, if it was really
granted by Charles, was nothing heard of it for sixteen years ? To
some extent I am inclined to accept Glamorgan's answer that the
dukedom was granted conditionally on the service being performed,
and that as the service was not performed, he did not claim the
reward. Yet, though I think this is the truth, it is, I suspect, not
the whole truth. As Carte has observed, the remainder in the
patent of dukedom was not as usual to the heirs of Glamorgan's
body, but to his heirs male, implying that in case of his own sons
predeceasing him the title was to go to his father or his brother.
Is it not possible that the grant of a dukedom to Glamorgan
roused some antagonism between himself and his father, who,
according to a well-known anecdote, was apt to disapprove of any
attempt of the young man to take the lead in his household ? As
early as 19 June 1643 there appears to have been some thought
of conferring the dukedom on the father. Charles heA written to
Worcester on that date ® * concerning the changing of your title.'
There are signs after the grant of the dukedom to Glamorgan on
4 May 1644, that the old man was not well satisfied. On 2 Aug.
1644, Charles writes to Worcester,^® that he is to have the first
vacant garter; the garter, it will be remembered, having before
been promised to the son. Then on 13 Aug." Glamorgan writes
a letter of affectionate tenderness to his father, from which it is
evident that there had previously been some falling out between
them, aind after this comes an undated letter from Charles to
Worcester, in which is the mention of the marriage for the mar-
quis's grandchild already referred to, and also a reference to an
inclosure, the contents of which are to be kept secret for the
present. Probably the inclosure was a warrant — which is printed
in Dircks's Life— to the attorney or solicitor general to prepare a
bill for the king's signature creating Worcester, not Glamorgan,
duke of Somerset.^* It is dated 6 Jan., the twentieth year of the
reign, that is to say 164|^.
All this looks as if there had been something approaching to a
family quarrel. Is it too much to suppose that Glamorgan, who,
excitable as he was, was an attached and obedient son, had got the
king to transfer the dukedom to his father ? If this is so, we can
understand not only why Glamorgan did not present his patent of
dukedom for sixteen years, but why he produced it then. As long
as his father lived, the old man had only to send the warrant in
his own favour to one of the law ofl&cers and to see that the bill
• Dircks, 64. >• Ibid. 103. " Ihid. 76. " Ibid. 104.
Digitized by
Google
694 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN Oct.
drawn out by them was signed by Charles. A patent would follow
in due official course. As soon as Worcester died, the warrant,
being granted to him personally, died with him. When Charles II
returned, Glamorgan, now marquis of Worcester, must either give
up all hopes of the dukedom or produce the suspicious patent of
4 May 1644. He chose the latter course and signally failed.
There is, indeed, a subsequent letter from Charles to Glamorgan
which is not very easy to understand.
What I can farther think at this point (wrote Charles on 12 Feb.
164J) ** is to send you the blue ribbon, and a warrant for the title of
duke of Somerset, both which accept, and make use of at your discretion ;
and if you should defer the publishing of either for a while to avoid envy
and my being importuned by others, yet I promise your antiquity for the
one and the patent for the other shall bear date with the warrants.
It is possible that the father may have given way, and turned
the honours over to his son," or it is possible that Charles, foreseeing
the likelihood that Worcester might die before he was himself in a
position to grant the dukedom, openly wished to assure it to
Glamorgan as well. If this is the explanation, Charles's subsequent
misfortunes and the failure of the Irish design put it out of
Glamorgan's power to convert the warrant into a patent in the king's
lifetime. In any case the interpretation of this letter is immaterial
to the main question at issue.** Hitherto I have treated of the
dukedom patent irrespective of the change of date implied in the
insertion of the word primo. In this it is as difficult to repel the
charge of forgery, as it is to maintain it in respect of the body of
the document. I cannot imagine that the insertion can have been
made except for a purpose ; nor is it easy to suggest a purpose
except Glamorgan's anxiety to obtain credit for the patent. To
the later investigator, to myself even more than to Anstis, 1645 is
an impossible date ; but to the lords of 1660, 1644 was a date
which could only have been made credible if Glamorgan had chosen
publicly to reveal what he, after his rebuff, made known to
'" Dircks, 74.
^* Tet Glamorgan sabseqaently informed Binaooini that the dukedom was to be his
father's. I draw this information from p. 1100 of the MS. which is usually known as
the Binticdni Memovrs^ which Lord Leicester has kindly aUowed to be deposited in
the British Museum for my use.
>' It is also unnecessary to go at length into the question of the grant of the
earldom of Glamorgan. The one solid fact is that a signed bill granting the earldom
was received at the signet office in April 1645, and that nothing further was done in
it. At what previous date the signed bill was granted, we have no means of knowing.
If my contention that the commission of 1 April 1644 is genuine be accepted, it must
have been before that date. The position of the earldom was a matter of pubUo
notoriety. In a catalogue of * new lords created by the king,* printed in London in
November 1645 (Ciml Ww Tracts, Brit. Mus. Press-mark E 308, 80), we find ' the
lord Herbert, son to the marquis of Worcester, created earl of Glamorgan by biU
signed.' The earl of Lichfield was in the same position. He was kiUed at Bowton
Heat^ before he could fin4 money to pay the fees of the patent offioe.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN 695
Clarendon in the letter quoted in an early part of this article.
The date of 1645, on the other hand — the date when his Irish
mission was actually carried out — would seem to the lords to be an
exceedingly probable one. We have here, I suspect, the full extent
of Glamorgan's forgery. There is no wholesale invention of docu-
ments ; but there is an insertion of a forged word to gain easier
credence for what was otherwise a true tale. If Glamorgan had
forged the whole patent, he would hardly have directed the clerk
who copied it to change his ink at the last word.
I now turn from this preliminary investigation to the main
question at issue, Glamorgan's actual mission to Ireland in 1645.
It is well known that in the course of that year he signed a peace
with the Irish the particulars of which he did not communicate to
the lord Ueutenant, and that he produced to them certain documents
signed by Charles which, as he contended, authorised him to enter
upon a secret negotiation. On one side it has been held that these
documents were forged by Glamorgan, but the prevailing opinion
has been that Charles really authorised him to conclude the secret
treaty and mendaciously disavowed him when the truth lurked out.
I now propose to show that neither of these views is correct, and that
all the evidence consistently points to an explanation of a different
character from either.
Up to the last days of 1644 we hear nothing of any attempt to
employ Glamorgan in any negotiation for a peace in Ireland. The
commission of 1 April of that year had reference solely to the
command of an army and to the raising of the requisite funds for
a military undertaking. On 27 Dec. 1644 Charles wrote to
Ormond*^ that Lord Herbert, i.e. Glamorgan, was coming to Ireland
on private business.
I have thought good to use the power I have, both in his affection
and duty, to ingage him in all possible wayes to farther the peace there :
which he hath promised to doe. Wherfore (as you fynd occasion) you
may confidently use and trust him in this, or any other thing he shall
propoimd to you for my service ; there being none in whose honnesty
and zeale, to my person and crowne, I have more confidence.
Then follows the well-known ciphered postscript :
His honesty or affection to my service will not deceave you ; but I
will not answer for his judgement.
This postscript has been urged against the view that Charles at
this time contemplated the employment of Glamorgan in a dehcate
negotiation ; and though it is true that Charles frequently trusted
persons for whose judgment he would have declined to answer, yet
it seems hardly conceivable that if this was his opinion of Glamorgan
he should have sent him to Ireland to carry on a secret treaty with
" Carte*8 Ormond, v. 7.
Digitized by
Google
696 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN Oct.
the confederates behind the back of the lord lieutenant. If,
however, he merely meant him to assist the lord lieutenant, and
to use his own zeal and opportunities as a catholic with the
confederates whilst he was guided by Ormond's judgment, the
objection would fall to the ground ; and that this was the true state
of the case I hope to be able to show.
In the first place the idea of sending Glamorgan otherwise than
as a soldier may be traced to a paper to which, as far as I know,
no reference has been made by any previous investigator, but
which contains the instructions which Ormond gave on 14 Nov.
1644,*^ to his cousin Barry, whom he then sent on a private mission
to the king. Barry is there ordered to offer Ormond's resignation
of the lord lieutenancy partly on account of his extreme poverty
but also for another reason which concerns us here. Barry is told
to beseech his majesty to consider what I am or may be forced to do,
by way of compliance with the Irish for his service or by his commands,
is more subject to misconstruction and in more danger to be disobeyed,
then if any other that hath no interest in the kingdom nor any kindred
among the Irish should do things of greater favour to them, there being
no possibility to asperse such a man of favouring them for any other
reason than for the king's service and the preservation of the kingdom.
It therefore follows that when the king wrote on 27 Dec. to
Ormond announcing Glamorgan's coming, Ormond had already
written asking to be superseded by an EngUshman. Charles, who
declined to accept his resignation, sends him an Englishman to
assist him. Further, we see that Ormond disliked being personally
concerned in making certain concessions to the Irish, and thought
that an Englishman would be a better person to take this business
on himself. If Glamorgan was to do this Ormond might, as he
desired, keep in the background and guide Glamorgan with that
judgment in which Charles acknowledged his new emissary to be
deficient.
Such, at least, is what I should expect, if I had to rely on these
papers alone. This, however, is far from being the case. We now
come on a series of remarkable documents, which have been
examined over and over again, but which it is necessary for us to
examine once more.
First come the king's instructions to Glamorgan,'® dated
2 Jan. 164|^. A great part of them is concerned with matters
relating to the army which Glamorgan was to command, and to the
peerages which he was to grant. These clauses need only be men-
*' Carte MSS. xlii. fol. 162. This is the draft and is undated. In vol. xvi.
fol. 211 is a later copy dated 14 Nov. 1645. The year is plainly wrong, as we know
that Barry went to England at the end of 1644 ; but the day of the month may be
safely adopted. See the king's letter to Ormond, which is a duplicate of one written
on 16 Dec. Carte's Ormond^ v. 9.
" Dircks, 73.
Digitized by
Google
1887 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN 697
tioned here as singularly confirmatory of the genuineness of the
commission of 1 April 1644. It is the first clause with which we
have to do, as bearing upon the peace negotiation. It runs as
follows :
First, you may engage your estate, interest, and credit, that we will
most really and punctually perform any our promises to the Irish, and as
it is necessary to conclude a peace suddenly,*^ whatsoever shall be con-
sented unto by our heutenant, the marquis of Ormond, we will die a
thousand deaths rather than disannul or break it ; and if upon necessity
anything be to be condiscended unto and yet the lord marquis not willing
to be seen therein, or not fit for us at the present pubhcly to own, do you
endeavour to supply the same.
Even taking this by itself, it may safely be said that it contains
no one word authorising Glamorgan to treat independently of
Ormond. Yet if there could be a doubt, it vanishes upon compari-
son of this part of the instructions with Barry's paper. We have
the king's mode of answering Ormond's own proposal. Glamorgan
is not to supersede him, but to assist him.
The next document is a commission dated 6 Jan., of which
we have only a Latin translation given by the author of Lord
Leicester's manuscript.** This, however, does not relate to the
negotiation, but authorises Glamorgan to levy troops vel in nostro
IbemuB regno, aut aliis quibtisPis partibus transinannis, the levy of
foreign troops with money advanced by French catholics being at
this time, as we know from other sources, an object of the queen's
diplomacy.
This commission, according to the author of the manuscript, was
sealed with the great seal and countersigned Willis, being in this
respect similar to the dukedom patent of the preceding year.
Next come the often-quoted powers of 12 Jan. : ^^
So great is the confidence we repose in you, as that whatsoever you
shall perform, as warranted imder our sign manual, pocket signet, or pri-
vate mark, or even by word of mouth, without further ceremony, we do
on the word of a king and a christian, promise to make good to all
intents and purposes, as effectually as if your authority from us had been
under the great seal of England, with this advantage, that we shall
esteem ourself the more obliged to you for your gallantry, in not standing
upon such nice terms to do us service, which we shall, God willing,
reward. And, although you exceed what law can warrant, or any powers
of ours reach unto as not knowing what you have need of ; yet it being
for our service, we obhge ourself not only to give you our pardon, but to
maintain the same with all our might and power.
That these words are perilously wide is beyond question ; but is
there any reason to beheve that they had anything to do with the
Irish peace ? Not only do they seem much more appropriate to
" Le. soon. » Lord Leicester's MS, fol. 713. « Diroks, 79.
Digitized by
Google
698 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN Oct.
the negotiations which Glamorgan would have to carry on with
foreign powers for the money with which the foreign levies were to
be paid, but the document in which they occur was not adduced by
Glamorgan himself as the ground on which his treaty with the
Irish was founded.
Here is what Glamorgan subsequently wrote to Clarendon ^ in
explanation of certain parts of the commission of 1644 :
The maintenance of this army of foreigners was to have come from
the pope and such catholic princes as he should draw into it,^ having
engaged ^* to afford and procure 80,000^. a month ; out of which the foreign
army was first to be provided for ; and the remainder to be divided among
other armies. And my instructions for this purpose and my powers to
treat and conclude thereupon, were signed by the king under his pocket
signet, with blanks for me to put in the names of the pope or princes, to
the end the king might have a starting hole to deny the having given me
such commissions, if excepted against by his own subjects ; leaving me
as it were at stake, who for his majesty's sake was willing to' undergo it,
trusting to his word alone.
After this, I feel httle doubt that the powers of 12 Jan. were
not connected with the Irish negotiation, but with the financial
arrangements with the pope and catholic princes.
The really important document for our purpose is that of
12 March, as it was this which was produced by Glamorgan as the
basis of his treaty with the confederate catholics.
We ... do by these (as firmly as under our great seal to all intents
and purposes) authorise and give you power, to treat and conclude with
the confederate Roman catholics in our kingdom of Ireland, if upon neces-
sity any be to be condescended imto, wherein our heutenant cannot so
well be seen in, as not fit for us at present pubUcly to own. Therefore
we charge you to proceed according to this our warrant, with all possible
secrecy ; and for whatsoever you shall engage yourself, upon such valu-
able considerations as you in your judgment shall deem fit, we promise
on the word of a king and a christian, to ratify and perform the same,
that shall be granted by you, and under your hand and seal ; the said
confederate catholics having by their supplies, testified their zeal to our
service.
That this document was genuine there can be no reasonable
doubt. It was formerly in the hands of Lingard and afterwards in
those of Canon Tierney. What became of it afterwards I have been
unable to discover, but I have in my possession a photograph taken
of it by Mr. Bruce whilst it was in Canon Tiemey's possession. The
highest authorities assure me that there can be no doubt about its
being actually signed by Charles, and the only question is whether
« Clar, St. Papers, ii. 202.
^ There is nothing startling in this to those who know the proposals made with
the queen's aathority to the pope by Sir Eenelm Digby in 1645.
" Le» I having engaged.
Digitized by
Google
1887 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN 699
the body of the document is not also in Charles's handwriting.
Unfortunately, the photograph itself is now too faded to admit of
reproduction by photography, but a facsimile, prepared by the
ordinary process, is pubhshed with the present article.
Of this document, it might be enough to say that powers are
limited by instructions, and that however enormous is the authority
conveyed, Glamorgan would be bound only to use them in assisting
Ormond as he was there directed to do : yet it may be observed in
passing that these powers of 12 March agree with the instructions
of 12 Jan. in contemplating a co-operation with Ormond, not an
action taken behind his back.
If, however, it be acknowledged that these powers do not con-
template any action independent of the lord heutenant, it may be
said that it is immaterial whether they do or not. The real point
at issue, it will be urged, is whether or not Charles gave verbally to
Glamorgan secret instructions to proceed independently. It will
narrow the inquiry into this suggestion if we remember that the
concessions in Glamorgan's subsequent treaty, which were not in
accordance with those which Ormond was ready to make, were two :
(1) the surrender to the cathoUcs of the churches in their posses-
sion, and (2) the abandonment of the jurisdiction of the protestant
clergy over the catholics.
In the spring of 1645 the question of the churches had not been
even mooted, and as to the question of jurisdiction it was being
fought out on quite different lines, the point at issue being the
jurisdiction of the king, which the Irish wished to overthrow by the
repeal of the acts of premimire and appeals. It is, therefore, hard
to understand how Charles could have verbally authorised Gla-
morgan to make concessions which were not yet demanded, though
he may have given him a wide latitude to act as occasion served.
Of the probabilities of this latter supposition we shall see more if
we trace the king's policy as revealed in his correspondence with
Ormond.
On 15 Dec. 1644 ^ Charles had informed Ornxond that he was
ready to agree to the immediate suspension of the penal laws in
Ireland, and even to their repeal whenever he was restored to his
rights with the aid of Irish arms. *But all those,' he added,
' against appeals to Bome and premunire must stand.'
How staunch he was in this matter of jurisdiction appears from
his letter of 27 Feb. in which he announces to Ormond his readi-
ness, if it is absolutely necessary, to consent to an immediate repeal
of the penal laws instead of waiting till a victory had been gained.
I think (he writes '^) myself bound in conscience not to lett sUpp the
meanes of settleing that Idngdome, if it may be lawfully, under my obe-
dience, nor loose that assistance which I may hope from my Irish subjects,
" Carte's Omumdy v. 9. *• Ibid, vi. 268.
Digitized by
Google
700 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN Oct.
for such scruples, as in lesse pressing condition might reasonably be
stucke at by me for theire satisfebction : I doe therefore commaunde yoa
to conclude a peace with the Irish, whatever it cost ; soe that my pro-
testant subjects there may be secure, and my regall authority preserved.
But for all this, you are to make me the best bargaine you cann, and not
to discover your enlargement of power till you needs must. And though
I leave the manageing of this greate and necessary woorke entirely to
you, yett I cannot but tell you, that if the suspention of Poinings* act for
such bills as shal be agreed uppon betweene you there, and present take-
ing of the penall lawes against papistes by a lawe will doe it, I shall not
think it a hard bargaine.
The important thing here is not that Charles had gone a step
further than he had gone in December by offering the immediate
taking away of the penal laws, but that he evidently contemplates
this offer as the extreme limit of concession. Ormond is to drive
as good a bargain as he can — that is to say, is not to go so far as
that if he can help it, and even in giving these orders he throws
out a reminder that his regal authority is to be preserved, or in
other words that the acts of premunire and appeals were to be un-
touched. Is it to be supposed that he was at the same time pri-
vately authorising Glamorgan to purchase a peace at any price ? If
so, why did he pile up difficulties for himself by asserting to Ormond
that he was not to be induced to give way on that point ? If his
letter to Ormond had been a public document the double language
would have been intelligible. It is the fact that it was not a public
document which creates the difficulty.
On my supposition that Glamorgan was to assist Ormond in
urging the confederates to be content with this proposed repeal of
the penal laws, there is no difficulty at all, especially as on 27 Feb.
and even on 12 March Charles was still in ignorance of the way in
which Ormond would take the rejection of his proposed resigna-
tion.^ Glamorgan, as is well known, sailed from Carnarvon for
Ireland on 25 March, but being driven by a storm on the Lanca-
shire coast, made his way across country and sought refuge in
Skipton castle.
Here arises a fresh question, which has been often asked but
never answered. Why is it that if Glamorgan was trusted with a
secret mission of such tremendous importance, he was allowed to
stay in England for three months after his shipwreck, apparently
without the slightest attempt being made to hasten his departure ?
I, at all events, find no difficulty. As soon as Charles became
aware that Ormond did not insist on resigning and was quite ready
to take up the negotiation on Charles's terms, there was no imme-
diate necessity for Glamorgan's presence in Dublin. I must leave
2' Barry did not reach Dublin on his return from England till 6 March. Ormond
to Digby, 28 March, Carte's Ormond, yi 272
Digitized by
Google
1887 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN 70X
it to those who think that Glamorgan was to have given a secret
consent to much more than this to explain his delay as best they can.
It was not for some weeks that any hitch in Ormond's negotia-
tion appeared. On 8 May the lord Ueutenant informed the king of
the state of affairs.^ From this letter it appeared that though
Ormond had taken up the negotiation, he shrank from carrying it
on further without the approbation of the privy council at Dublin,
' without whoes approbation all further concessions to the Irish, as
I humbly conceive, will be dangerous and ineffectual to all your
majesty's purposes.' He said that he had read to the coimcil the
dupUcate of the letter of 15 Dec, but he had not read to them
another letter enlarging his powers, which was no doubt that of
27 Feb. He had given dissatisfaction to the catholic agents by trying
to carry out the king's instructions to hold back his final offer of the
immediate repeal of the penal laws, and it was perhaps his wish to
conceal that he was permitted to offer this, before he was actually
driven to do so, that led him to withhold the letter which contained
the permission from the privy council.
At all events this despatch from Ormond made it finally plain
that if Charles's business was to be done, Ormond was not the man
to do it. He was too honourable and straightforward to make
a good diplomatist of the kind Charles needed, and it maybe added
that he had too Uttle intellectual originality to convey any positive
recommendations of the kind which Charles had once been in the
habit of receiving from Strafford.
Ormond's despatch of 8 May was received by Charles on or
shortly before 21 May.^ When it arrived Charles was in the thick
of the Naseby campaign, and it is no wonder that he merely ex-
pressed his confidence in Ormond without immediately taking any
further steps in consequence of what he had heard. On 14 June,
however, he suffered the crushing defeat of Naseby, when his
cavalry was routed, and his infantry was almost entirely destroyed.
It then became of more pressing importance than before to hurry
on the Irish treaty in order that 10,000 Irish soldiers might land
in England. Accordingly we have a letter from him on 28 June,*^
expressing his pleasure that Glamorgan was already * gone for
Ireland.' The letter requesting him to go must have been written
some days before.
Whether Charles gave any fresh instructions to Glamorgan we
cannot say certainly, but no word of information has reached us to
show that he was in Charles's presence at any time since March, and
if there had been instructions in writing they would surely have been
produced to the Irish negotiators, and we should have heard of them
from that side. Curiously enough Glamorgan was not the only secret
•-^ Carte's Ormond, vi. 278.
» Digby to Ormond, 21 May, Carte's Ormond, vi. 287. «» Dircks, 82.
Digitized by
Google
702 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN Oct.
negotiator despatched at this time to forward the treaty. Colonel
Pitzwilliams, who had come from France recommended by the queen,
was sent over at the same time, and it is to be observed that in con-
versation with him ^^ Ormond, in compliance with the king's latest
direction to him to bargain, absolutely denied that he had been in-
structed even to take off the penal laws. Fitzwilliams's letter is also
interesting in showing that a new point had been raised. He had
been authorised to offer * free use of religion, a free parliament, and
the penal laws to be taken off.' The Irish now told him that they
understood these to include the retention for the catholic church of
the churches which they actually held, that is to say about nine-
tenths of the churches in Ireland. This subject, as we know from
another source, had been discussed in May at Kilkenny;'* and
though there was some difference of opinion as to the mode in
which the claim was to be made, all were of opinion that it must be
enforced. What is equally to the purpose is that the claim for the
release of the Irish catholics from the jurisdiction of the protestant
clergy made its appearance in a paper presented at Dublin on 20
June, and it therefore follows that on this head, as well as on that
of the churches, Charles could not, even when Glamorgan finaUy
started, have been in a position before 23 June to instruct
Glamorgan either verbally or in writing to give way on two points of
the raising of which he was at that time ignorant.® Yet it was the
acceptance of these very two points in the subsequent Glamorgan
treaty, which distinguished it from that which Ormond, by the
king's instructions, was prepared to sign. We have now, therefore,
conclusive evidence that if Glamorgan carried out the king's wishes,
it could not have been in consequence of verbal instructions given
him in June.
When Glamorgan arrived at Dublin in August he found the
negotiations almost at a standstill. In a discussion held on 22 July
the Irish agents had insisted
that their rehgion being made by bull from the pope in this kingdom
might be free from the danger of the ancient statutes made before the
twentieth year of Henry VHI and the statutes made since ; that their
bishops might exercise jurisdiction over their clergy and people as to cor-
rect manners, and that if two or more of their priests were in competition
about their rights to any parish, their bishops might have power to deter-
mine controversy of that kind ; that their party might be exempt from
the jurisdiction of the protestant clergy ; that the probate of wills, certify-
ing of matrimony, bastards, and matters of tithes, may be decided by
commission derived from his majesty ; that the tithes of the clergy might
be wholly employed for his majesty's service during the wars ; that the
Roman cathohc subjects might enjoy the churches within their quarters.
»' FitzwiUiams to Digby, 16 July, Sf.P. Dom, « Lord Leicester's MS. p. 290 b.
^ Bequests of his majesty's Boman catholic subjects, 20 June, Carte MSS, xv.
fol. 92.
Digitized by
Google
1887 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN 703
The request for the abolition of the jurisdiction of the king or of
the clergy, and for the retention of the churches, Ormond refused
to grant.
With respect to the churches Charles was peremptory. On
81 July Charles wrote to Ormond** that he would make no new
concessions in matters of religion further than to allow the erection
of Eoman cathoUc chapels in parishes where * the much greater
number are papists.'
But (he added) I will rather chuse to suffer all extremity then ever to
abandon my religion, and particularly either to EngHsh or Irish rebells ;
to which effect I have commanded Bigby to write to their agents that
were employed hither.
Digby's letter to the agents** is in the strongest possible terms.
It is difficult to suppose that Charles would have expressed himself
as he did to Ormond, if he had already privately authorised
Glamorgan to conclude a treaty granting what he now said it was
hopeless to expect of him.
So far we have been concerned with the probabilities of the
case on Charles's side. Let us now turn to watch Glamorgan's
proceedings. Of his part in the negotiations which Ormond was
still carrying on when he arrived in Dublin we know nothing, but
on 11 Aug. Ormond gave him a most flattering letter of introduction
to Lord Muskery,*^ who with the other agents had returned to
Kilkenny to be present at the meeting of the general assembly, to
which Glamorgan quickly followed them.
The result of this mission was the celebrated Glamorgan treaty,
signed 25 Aug., in which Glamorgan engaged in the king's name, in
addition to the concessions which Ormond had already made, to
abandon the churches, and to grant, not indeed the repeal of the
acts of premunire and appeals, but a freedom of Boman cathoUcs
from the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the protestant clergy. In con-
sideration of this the confederate catholics were to send over 10,000
men to serve the king under Glamorgan himself.
The authority which Glamorgan produced was the warrant of
12 March. I have already given reasons for beUeving that that
warrant was not intended to authorise him to make these two con-
cessions, and I need not repeat them here. It is enough now to ask
whether Glamorgan acted as if he believed himself to be so autho-
rised. From this point of view it is remarkable that the first thing
he did after signing the treaty was to sign the following protesta-
tion : 3^
I Edward Earl of Glamorgan do protest and swear fEuthfully to
acquaint the King's most excellent Majesty with the proceedings of His
»* Carte's Ormondf vi. 306.
** Digby to Muskery and others, 1 Aug., Carte's Ormond^ vi. 809.
*« Birch's Inquiry, 62. " Cox, Uib. Anglicana, i. app. 117.
Digitized by
Google
704 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN Oct.
Kingdom in order to his service, and to the indearment of this nation,
and punctual performance of what I have (as authorised by His Majesty)
obliged myself to see performed, and in default not to permit the arm j
intrusted into my charge to adventure it self, or any considerable part
tliereof, until conditions from His Majesty, and by His Majesty be per-
formed. GliAMOBOAN.
This might be interpreted as simply intended to appease the
confederates, but the same cannot be said of the defeasance which
follows and which was signed on 26 Aug.
After stating that an agreement has been concluded, the document
proceeds as follows :^
Yet it is to be imderstood that by the said agreement the B^ Hon^^®
Edward Earl of Glamorgan doth no way intend to obhge his most excel-
lent Majesty, other than he himself shall please, after he hath received
these 10,000 men, ... yet the said Earl of Glamorgan, doth fjEuthfully
promise upon his word and honour, not to acquaint his most excellent
Majesty with this defezance until his Lordship hath endeavoured, as fax
as in him hes, to induce his Majesty to the granting of the particulars in
the said articles of agreement, but that done, according to the trust we
repose in our very good Lord the Earl of Glamorgan, we the said Richard,
Lord Viscount Mountgarret &c. and every of us, for, and in behalf of the
Confederate CathoHcks of Lreland, who have intrusted us, do discharge
the said Earl of Glamorgan, both in honour and conscience, of any farther
ingagement to us herein, though His Majesty be not pleased to grant the
said particulars in the articles of agreement mentioned ; and this we are
induced to do by the particular trust and confidence, the said Earl of
Glamorgan hath reposed in us for the draught of the Act of Parhament ;
. . . and we are also induced hereunto, in regard the said Earl of Gla*
morgan hath given us assurance upon his word and honour, and upon a
voluntary oath of his, that he would never to any person whatsoever dis-
cover the defezance in the interim, without our consents : and in confidence
thereof we have hereunto set our hands and seals &c.
Even more striking than the contents of this curious document
is the omission of that which one would most expect to find there.
Glamorgan is quite ready to give his word and honour upon various
points, but there is no hint here or anywhere else that he gave his
word and honour that the king had verbally authorised him to make
the two concessions which form the backbone of the secret treaty ;
and if he did not, what other conclusion is possible, except that
Charles never had done so ?
Having thus shown the difficulties in the way of the conclusion
either that Glamorgan forged the documents which he produced, or
that he was verbally instructed to make the treaty of 25 Aug., I
may ask whether we may not solve the problem by a very simple if
conjectural explanation.^
»• CJox, Hib, Anglicana^ i. app. 117.
** I have taken no notice of a letter from the king presented by Glamorgan to
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN 705
Glamorgan, according to my view of the case, was sent over in
March to take command of an army composed of Irish and others,
and also to smooth the way for Ormond's negotiation of a treaty
of peace by assuring the Irish that Charles would really grant them
relief from the penal laws. When he reached Dublin in August he
had the same mission ; but he soon found that the conditions of
success were changed. Unless the two points above mentioned were
granted there would be no peace, and no army for him to bring over
to England. Ormond, if he had been in his case, would have
stopped the negotiations for further instructions. Is it so very
unlikely that Glamorgan preferred to draw instructions which he
had never received out of the almost boundless powers which he
actually possessed, just as in 1660 he did not scruple to add primo
to the date of his patent, not to obtain something which the king
had not granted, but to make it easier for him to obtain that which
had actually been intended for him. Charles was being ruined in
England, and Glamorgan — who being a catholic would be imable
to understand Charles's religious scruples, and who had the double
object before him of sa>dng the monarchy and exalting his own
church — would save him in spite of himself. When once there was
an Irish army in England, and perhaps an army of continental
catholics as well,^® Charles would forget his scruples.
In proposing this explanation, I have been not unmindful of
Glamorgan's character as it is revealed in his correspondence with
Ormond, a great part of which lies still unpublished amongst the
Carte MSS. His further proceedings would form a not uninterest-
ing story, but to recount them would make too long an already
lengthy article. It will be sufficient if I show from other sources
that Glamorgan was apt to act in the king's name without any
attempt to ascertain the king's wishes.
In December 1645, after his treaty had been discovered and
denounced by Ormond, Glamorgan was at Kilkenny, hoping that the
supreme council would hasten the levy of the army to be placed
under his command. The council was by this time ready to accept
Ormond's terms, in the expectation that they would be supplemented
by Charles's acceptance of Glamorgan's treaty. The nuncio Einuc-
cini, who had arrived in Kilkenny since the signature of that treaty,
the nuncio. It has been oorreotly said that its language and its date are inconsistent
with the supposition that it proceeded from Charles himself. The obvious explanation
is that it was written by Glamorgan's secretary on a blank signed by the king. Some
criticisms on the language of this and other documents connected with this affair
would lead one to suppose that those who make them imagine that Charles wrote
formal documents with his own hand. The flowery language of the patents is no
doubt traceable to Glamorgan ; but that is only what is to* be expected.
* Dumoulin, the French agent, in his despatch of March ^^ 1646 (Archives des
Aff, Etrang^res), asks Mazarin at Glamorgan's request for 2,000 Li6geois. This, it will
be remembered, is the number mentioned in Glamorgan's letter to Clarendon, another
undesigned coincidence bearing testimony to its accuracy.
VOL. II. — NO. vni. Z Z
Digitized by
Google
706 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN Oct.
was dissatisfied, and wished Charles to make further concessions
still. As he could not move the supreme council to ask for them,
he applied to Glamorgan, and Glamorgan's answer was as follows:^'
Anno Salntis 1645, 20 Deoembris.
1^. Modo Pax publico edicto promulgetur ac decern millia militum
transmittantur in Angliam, articuli nuUi evulgabnntur donee privatse
concessiones ^^ a Rege ratsB habeantnr. Quod fiet quam primum terrain
attigerint praedicti milites absque ulteriore ullo eventus discrimine, nisi
quod fretum viginti quatuor horarum spatio trajicere debeant.
2®. Cum Marchio Ormoniee tarn Commissarius Regius, quam Prorex
sit, cumque duplex ilia potestas oonjungi debeat ut Pacis articuli effectum
consequantur, rem totam funditus destruet si nunc vel mentio fiat de
Catholico Prorege. Postea vero ex me suscipiam, Deo favente. Begem,
initio a me vel ab alio Catholico sumpto, privatim se obligaturum alium
quam CathoHcum Proregem deinceps nullum ia hoc Regno nominandum,
atque Episcopos Cathohcos, tum etiam in Parlamentum admittendos,
eumque in finem confestim Parlamentum convocandum : quod soavius et
facihus fieri poterit, ubi leges hujus Regni, quibus Cathohci redduntnr
regiminis incapaces, quseque adhuc vim suam obtinent, abrogatas fuerint,
quod in se Marchio recipit prsBstandum quodque melius et efficacius pro-
curare potent, quam si Catholicus esset.
8^. Statuta seu leges Academiaa OrthodoxsB erunt et CathoUcsB.
i^. Post conclusionem et ante confirmationem articulorum, si interim
confoederatorum CathoUcorum armis locus uUus ab hoste recnperetur,
quod ad religionem Catholicam spectat, eadem ratio habebitur, quam
nunc ineunt in ditione sibi subjects.
Ultimo quod ad regiminis modum attinet, consiUi supremi corpus
integrmn permaneat, cum e& jurisdictione quam nunc habet, et D. Prorex
nullam jurisdictionem aut acquirat aut exerceat, quam nunc non habet
vel exercet, donee privatse concessiones rat© habeantur.
Prsedictas omnes condiciones fideUssime prsBstans enitar Deumque
tester nisi Illustrissimus et Reverendissimus Nuntius adesset, nuUis ex
hisce conditionibus assentiri me potuisse.
QuflB vero rudiore jam formd et indigestd exposui ubi per Uberius otimn
Hcuerit in ordinem accuratiorem redigi curabo.
Hisce interim tanquam summis rerum capitibus strictim propositis
subscribe. Glamobganxjs.
This second secret treaty of Glamorgan, which did not see the
light, explains much in the first secret treaty which was soon to be
made public. Written on the spur of the moment, and certainly
without time to consult the king, it can only have been founded, if
it was founded on anything except Glamorgan's zeal for his church,
on a general power from the king to act as he saw fit. This is pre-
cisely what Glamorgan claimed to have. He laid before the nuncio
a summary of the powers given him by the king, amongst which is
the following : ^'
*» Lord Leicester's MS. fol. 1024 b. « Le. the Glamorgan treaty.
*» Lord Leicester's MS8. p. 1004.
Digitized by
Google
1887 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN 707
Est mihi potestas in Ibemid faciendi concessiones (in Proregis sup-
plementum) Catholicomm gratis juxta obsequium quod nunc suae Majes-
tati me interveniente prsestiterint, aut secundum auxilium ab ullo alio
Principe Catholico in eorum gratiam in Anglia subpeditandum, idque sine
relatione ad uUum alium, ea lege ut negotium secretum teneant donee
copise mesB apparuerint.
This evidently refers to the powers of 12 March. As we have
already seen, if they are taken by themselves those powers might
authorise Glamorgan to do anything. Taken with the instructions
they authorised him to do anything of which Ormond approved.
Glamorgan acted on his powers, but gave no heed to his instruc-
tions.^^
Turning back again from Glamorgan to Charles, let us finally ask
what the king had to say about the matter. Of his public announce-
ment, or even of his letters to Ormond, it is unnecessary to speak ;
but if we want to know the real truth about Charles, we naturally
turn to his letters to his wife. From her he had no secrets, and in
writing to her no reason to paint himself other than he was. When
he tells her that a thing is so and so, we may conclude that it was
so, except so far as we may allow a margin for his habit of self-
deception. What he told his wife, let the following extracts show.^*
March 3, 164^. — And now I come to answer the particular concerning
the E. of Glamorgan, the conclusions whereof are so strangely raised upon
the premises that I know not what to say to them, they are so much against
the way of my reason. For must I be thought an enemy to the Eoman
Catholicks, because I will not consent to the destruction of the Protestants
in Ireland ; or, because I have disavowed that which is directly against my
constant professions, am I therefore likely to disavow thee ? In a word,
my answer is this, that the same reason which made me refuse my con-
sent to the establishing of the Presbyterian government in England, hath
** It can hardly be thoaght necessary to addace farther proof of Glamorgan's
headlong character. Yet it is not without interest to note that at the end of January
164§ Binuocini received from Borne a copy of certain articles which had been pro-
posed to Sir Kenelm Digby by Pope Innocent X. (Rinucoini, Numiatura^ 459.) Ac-
cording to these, not only the churches in the hands of the confederates, but all the
churches in Ireland were to be restored to the catholics, and Dublin together with all
the places held by Ormond were to be surrendered to them, Ormond himself resigning
his post to a new catholic lord lieutenant. Glamorgan at once, at Kinuccini*s
instance, proposed to send his brother Lord John Somerset with a copy of these
articles to the king non alid formd quam si inter Dominationem vestram IlltistriS'
simam et me initcB fuissent vvrtute cmctoritatis mihi facta a rege et securitaUs Domma-
iioni vestrcB UlustrissimcB datce per propriam regis epistolam^ ita ut Jub pactiones a
rege confirmentur antequam necessum sit ut alia militum septena miUia transmittantwr,
(Glamorgan to Rinuccini, Feb. 6, 164§, Lord Leicester's MS, fol. 1069.) In other words,
just as he had promised to urge the king to accept the treaty of August 1645 as
having been drawn up in consequence of the powers given to him, he was now to urge
the king to accept this preposterous arrangement agreed to by Sir E. Digby and the
pope, as if it had been hatched in Ireland as the outcome of the same power. Here
again we see the work of the man who subsequently added the word primo to a patent.
** Charles I in 1646, Camd. Soo. pp. 21, 25, 27.
Digitized by
Google
708 CHARLES I AND EARL OF GLAMORGAN Oct-
likewise made me disavow Glamorgan in his giving away the Chnrch
lands in Ireland, and all my eoclesiastioal power there, besides my ex-
posing all my friends to ruin, both being equally and directly against my
conscience, which when I shall forfeit, by giving up the Ghuroh of
England to either Papists or Presbyterians, I must not expect to be
esteemed by honest men, or (which is worse) ever to enjoy 6od*s blessing.
Ma/rch 12. — I believe I did weU in disavowing Glamorgan (so £eu: as I
did) : for though I hold it not simply ill, but even most fit, upon such a
conjuncture ^^ as this is, to give a toleration to other men's consciences
that cannot make it stand with mine to yield to the ruin of those of mine
own profession, to which if I had assented, it then might have been
justly feared, that I, who was careless of my own religion, would be less
careful of my word.
March 22. — I find that Sir Edw. Nicholas his gloss upon the Lord
Glamorgan's business hath made thee apprehend that I had disavowed
my hand, but I assure thee I am very free from that in the understand-
ings of all men here, for it is taken for granted the Lord Glamorgan
neither counterfeited my hand, nor that I have blamed him for more than
for not following his instructions, as Secretary Nicholas will more at large
show thee.
Equally to the point is Charles's language to Glamorgan himself-
Writing on 8 Feb. 1646 he says : ^^
I must clearly teU you, both you and I have been abused in this busi-
ness ; for you have been drawn to consent to conditions much beyond
your instructions, and your treaty hath been divulged to all the world.
If you had advised with my Lord Lieutenant (as you promised me) all
this had been helped.
These extracts ought to settle the question. Charles, writing
under circumstances which bound him specially to truthfulness,
gives precisely the same explanation as that which has been drawn
&om the negotiation itself.
Of the way in which Charles disavowed Glamorgan much might
be said if the purpose of this article were to discuss Charles's cha-
racter. It is enough to remember that Glamorgan personally was
not a sufferer, except so far as the failure of his plans made him
one. Charles did not — as Elizabeth punished Davison — punish a
faithful servant who had exceeded his instructions in reliance on
the vague and unlimited powers with which he had been entrusted.
Samuel B. Gabdinbb.
*• • Conjecture • in MS. « Diroks, 184.
Digitized by
Google
1887 709
The Employment of Indian Auxiliaries
in the Am£rican War
AT the outbreak of hostilities between Great Britain and the
American colonies in 1775, it was evident to all thoughtful
persons on both sides of the Atlantic, that unless the contest
should be speedily decided, the natives would be employed as auxi-
liaries upon the one side or upon the other, perhaps upon both.
In all the previous wars on this continent between the French and
the EngUsh, Indians had thus been made use of. Custom had
familiarised colonists and soldiers with their co-operation in mili-
tary movements, and experience had taught the improbability of
being able to carry on important campaigns which should trespass
upon Indian territory, without securing the consent of the natives by
alliance, or arousing their hostiUty by invasion. The Indian popu-
lation at that time, east of the Mississippi and within the borders
of the territory which now constitutes the United States, was not
far from 150,000 persons. The total number of warriors who
could be brought into the field was about 86,000. Two-thirds of
these gun-men, as they were called by some writers, lived so far
from the probable scene of action that they were not likely to be
drawn into the contest. What position the other third would take
was a matter of great interest to the colonies. The policy which
was to govern the 2,000 warriors of the Six Nations was of especial
importance. This importance arose from the supremacy of this
confederacy among the Indians Uving within the borders of the
colonies ; from the proximity of their homes to settlements in New
York and Pennsylvania, and from the fact that if Great Britain
should retain control of Canada, it was probable that movements
of troops would take place within the limits of what was recognised
as their country.
Of scarcely less importance was the question what position
would be assumed by the tribes which inhabited the region about
Detroit and the central portion of Ohio. The relations of the 8,000
warriors of this confederacy to the possible war were inferior in
importance to the relations of the Six Nations to the same question,
Digitized by
Qoo^<^
710 EMPLOYMENT OF INDIAN AlfXILIARIES Oct.
because the tribes of the Miami confederacy, or many of them,
were conquered tribes and dependent upon the Six Nations, and
because military movements by the English in that part of the
country could not readily be conducted without alliance with the
Six Nations. On the other hand, if that confederacy should take
the side of Great Britain, then access to the post at Detroit would
remain open by way of the St. Lawrence and the lakes ; the post
could easily be maintained, and through the aid of Indian auxilia-
ries the colonies could be threatened in the rear.
The warriors of the Choctaws, Creeks, Cherokees, and Catawbas,
who came in contact with the colonists along the borders of North
and South Carolina and Georgia, numbered 9,500 men.* What
they would do was of importance ; but though their numbers were
greater than those of either of the confederacies already mentioned,
the geographical situation of their homes deprived them of political
power.
I think it may fairly be said that the natural gravitation of all
the Indian tribes was towards Great Britain, and not towards the
colonies. The British government, as represented by the superin-
tendents of Indian affairs, had been more just in dealing with the
natives than had the colonists. Indeed, the main duties of the
superintendents had been to protect the various tribes from acts of
settlers. After the failure of Pontiac's conspiracy, the boundary
line had been formally adjusted between the Indians of the northern
department and representatives of the British government. It was
agreed that the whites should have possession of the country east
and south of a line drawn from Oneida lake to the junction of the
two branches of the Susquehanna ; thence up the west branch of
that river and over the mountains to the Alleghany river ; thence
down that river and the Ohio to the mouth of the Tennessee river.
No consideration was taken in this agreement of the rights of the
southern Indians to their hunting grounds in Tennessee and
Kentucky.
Sir WiUiam Johnson was at that time in charge of the northern
department of Indian affairs. He had built for himself a comfort-
able mansion in the Mohawk valley, and he Uved in the midst of
the tribes whom he laboured to protect. They listened to his
counsel. They believed that he was their friend, and their affec-
tion for him extended to the various members of his family.
Within the reach of his personal supervision the Indians were
reasonably free from many of the trials to which they were else-
where subjected. His department ran from the valley of the
Mohawk to the banks of the Mississippi, and from the Ohio river
to the shores of Lake Superior. He could hold in restraint the
Germans and the Dutch in the neighbourhood of his home, but
» Georgia Hist. Coll. Savannah, 1S73, iii. 169.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 IN THE AMERICAN WAR 711
his deputy had little control over the frontier population which was
pressing westward into the valley of the Ohio. Between Virginia
and Pennsylvania a dispute was in progress as to which colony had
jurisdiction over a portion of this valley, a dispute which carried
with it the consequence that for many years the settlers in western
Pennsylvania and in north-western Virginia had no knowledge as
to which colony was entitled to their allegiance, and no way of
finding out what laws, if any, governed the localities which they
had selected for their homes. Land companies and individuals
were at that time eager to secure titles in the valley of the Ohio.
Washington was anxious to get for his soldiers the land bounties
offered by Dinwiddie during the French war. He was himself
entitled to some land in his own right, and to more through
rights of others which he had purchased. He employed an agent
whom he urged to secure stLQ more, saying to him, * My plan is to
secure a good deal of land.' ^
Notwithstanding the fact that the Fort Stanwix treaty lodged
the title to the lands south of the Ohio in Great Britain, the Indians
in that region told Washington, when he was there in 1770, that
they looked upon the settlements of the whites with a jealous eye,
and that they must be compensated for their rights if the settlers
were to remain, without regard to the cession by the Six Nations.
It was not alone movements of emigrants upon lands to which there
was by treaty a certain foundation of right that alarmed the Indians
of that vicinity. The fascination of danger in border life and its
freedom from restraint attracted to the frontier men who cared
nothing for treaties and whose object was to get beyond the reach
of law. Many of these reckless characters, taking their lives in
their hands, penetrated the country reserved by the Indians for
their hunting grounds, and took up claims there which they called,
in the vernacular of the frontier, * tomahawk rights,' and which
they hoped might at some future time have value. The danger
from the presence of these people in Indian territory became so
conspicuous in 1772, that General Gage issued a proclamation
ordering them all to leave that region and to take refuge in some of
the colonies. The government, however, was powerless to enforce
such a proclamation. It was, in fact, dependent upon these very
men in times of Indian outbreak for its defence, and there were
some among them who fully appreciated their own value in the
military situation. The power of the superintendent to preserve
peace was still further strained by claims which were occasionally
set up by whites, of titles to land by piurchase from the Indians.
Against these transactions laws had been passed in most if not in
all of the colonies. In addition, the purchase of land from the
natives by private persons had been forbidden by royal procla-
'^ Sparks's Washington, ii. 848.
Digitized by
Google
712 EMPLOYMENT OF INDIAN AUXILIARIES Oct.
mation. Such parchases were nevertheless a source of danger
which occasionally obtruded itself.
The natives had a knowledge of the ownership of land^ and
while they knew nothing concerning technical rules or methods for
passing title as between themselves, there were circumstances under
which they understood that the relinquishment of their rights had
been accomplished. The ownership of their homes and hunting
places was supposed to be vested in the whole tribe. No assign-
ment or deed would be voluntarily assented to which had not been
carefully considered by all who were interested. In many cases
the women as well as the men were entitled to be heard before the
transaction could be considered as complete. It was an easy matter
for designing whites to secure from Indians who had no right what-
ever to make them deeds which even though repudiated by the
true owners of the land were powerful as sources of annoyance and
irritation when held as threats over the tribes who, it was claimed,
had executed them. There were instances on record where the
Indians acknowledged that they had executed certain instruments,
but claimed that the signers of the deeds had first been completely
intoxicated. In other cases they claimed that the territory con-
veyed by the deed far exceeded what they had intended to grant.
To protect the natives against transactions of this sort Sir William
Johnson had put forth every exertion. Furthermore he had always
recognised the danger to which the natives were exposed from the
lawlessness of the trespassers on Indian territory. By these means
his influence among them had been powerful enough, notwith-
standing the danger of the situation, to preserve peace along the
border from the time of Pontiac's conspiracy down to the outbreak
at Point Pleasant, Virginia, in 1774.
The foregoing brief recapitulation of the state of affairs along
the border during the years just before the revolution sufficiently
illustrates why the Indians naturally looked upon the colonists as
more aggressive than the British government, and also shows the
foundation for Sir William Johnson's influence with the natives.
There was still another circumstance which increased the influence
and riveted the power of the superintendent. The government
was accustomed to make an annual distribution of presents to the
natives, and the superintendent was the officer through whom these
presents were distributed. The Indians had come to rely upon this
annual source of supply, and it was of importance to them that it
should not be interrupted. The colonies could not expect to ofifeet
this source of influence except by pursuing the same course.
The death of Sir William Johnson, in 1774, relieved that re-
markable man from the struggle to which he would have been sub-
jected from his affection for the home of his adoption and his
loyalty to the crown. The office of superintendent devolved upon
Digitized by
Google
1887 IN THE AMERICAN WAR 718
Guy Johnson, his don-in-law. The success of the latter in restrain-
ing the Six Nations from outbreak at that time showed that he had
inherited the good will of the Indians, and that the ofl&ce of super-
intendent was still powerful for good or evil. Guy Johnson was
loud in professions of friendship for his neighbours, open and
above-board in avowals of loyalty to the crown, and prompt in
action against those whom he considered rebels, when instructed
thereto by General Gage.
In the south, John Stuart had charge of the Indian department.
He, also, professed friendly feelings towards the colonists, and was
evidently unwiUing to make use of the Indians against them. Yet
when he received orders from head-quarters to spare no eflforts to
harass the colonists, he yielded ready obedience.
In Great Britain there was undoubtedly a strong feeling of
abhorrence aroused in the public mind at the idea of making use of
Indians in a war against a people who were still regarded as fellow-
subjects. This feeling was made the most of in parliament by the
opposition, when at a later period it was understood that the
government was fully committed to the step.
In America it may well be doubted whether this feeling of
abhorrence was so common. The danger to be apprehended from
the natives was fully appreciated ; but it was also understood that
unless Canada could be secured, the Indians would have a hand in
the war. Nevertheless, it is evident from the language used in the
address to the people of Ireland and in the declaration of indepen-
dence, that the Americans felt that the publication of the charge
that the king was making use of savages in his efforts to subdue
his revolted subjects, would appeal to the prejudices and excite the
sympathies of those who should read the documents.
From the outset each side apparently endeavoured to cast upon
the other the responsibility of having first made use of Indians as
auxiliaries in the struggle. In June 1776 the continental congress
declared that Governor Carleton was making preparations in Canada
to invade the colonies, and was instigating the Indian nations to take
up the hatchet against them. The same month that congress made
this assertion, General Gage wrote to the earl of Dartmouth that the
acts of the rebels would justify General Carleton in raising bodies
of Canadians and Indians. ' We need not be tender of calling on
the savages,' he added, 'as the rebels here have shown us the
example by bringing as many Indians down against us here as
they could coUect.* ^ In the instructions which Gage, just before he
left Boston, issued to Stuart, this statement was repeated with
additions as follows: 'They have brought down all the savages
they could against us here, who, with their riflemen, are continually
firing upon our advanced sentries.' *
' Am. Archives, 4th series, ii. 968. * Bancroft, viii. 88.
Digitized by
Google
714 EMPLOYMENT OF INDIAN AUXILIARIES Oct.
American writers of history have done full justice to the memory
of Carleton. It is known through their pages that he was averse
from the use of savages in aggressive movements. He was anxious
to conciUate them, and willing to use them for defensive purposes,
but would not consent that those who had been employed under
his immediate supervision should be used outside the Umits of his
province. The same writers have not, however, done equal justice
to General Gage. Bancroft, commenting on the first of the letters
to which I have referred, says : * —
* We need not be tender of calling upon the savages,' were his words
to Dartmouth ; some of the Indians, domiciled in Massachusetts, having
strolled to the American camp to gratify curiosity or extort presents, he
pretended to excuse the proposal which be bad long meditated, by fialsely
asserting that the Americans ' had brought down as many Indians as they
could collect/
Was this assertion of Gage's false ? If not, then much of the
feeling which has been directed against Gage is ill-founded, and the
orders issued by Dartmouth in the fall of the same year, to enlist
Indians because the Americans were doing the same thing, are not
without the justification upon which they were based. Gage's
statement has always been classed with Lord Dunmore's proposal
to raise in May a force of Indians, negroes and others, with which
he hoped to be able, if not to subdue rebellion, at least to sustain
government. If Gage's statement was true, it makes the brutaUty
of Dunmore's proposition all the more conspicuous in its solitary
disregard of pubUc estimate of methods.
The answer to this question is to be foimd in the * Proceedings
of the Provincial Congress of Massachusetts Bay,' from which it
appears that even before the battle of Lexington some of the
Stockbridge Indians had been enKsted as minute-men. This fact
is stated in the preamble to a resolution reported by the committee
on the state of the province, on 1 April 1775.^ In pursuance of
the recommendations of this committee, it was ordered that a letter
to the Eev. Mr. Kirkland and an address to the Mohawk tribes be
drafted. Eirkland was a missionary who was familiar with the
Indian dialects in use in the Mohawk valley. He had spent several
years in that vicinity, and had acquired great influence over the
Oneidas. The letter which was prepared in pursuance of this
order requests Mr. Kirkland to use his influence with the Six
Nations * to join with us in the defence of our rights,' but if he
could not ' prevail with them to take an active part in this glorious
cause,' he was * at least to engage them to stand neuter.' The
address to the Mohawks calls upon them to ' whet their hatchet and
» Bancroft, vii. 392.
" Am. ArchiveSy 4th series, p. 1347. Journals of each Provincial Congress of Mass.
Boston, 1838, p. 114.
Digitized by
Google
1887 IN THE AMERICAN WAR 715
be prepared with us to defend our liberties and lives.' ^ Through
the same channel of information, we learn that fondness for liquor
brought these erJisted Indians very soon into trouble. Whereupon
seventeen of them petitioned the provincial congress that liquor
might be kept out of their way. This petition was duly granted
and measures taken to carry it into effect.
It will be remembered that Gage in his letter to Stuart, which
has been already alluded to, spoke not only of the presence of
Indians in the American camp, but also complained that they and
the riflemen shot his sentries. From several sources we learn
that this was true. Frothingham, in his * Siege of Boston,' speaks
of the Stockbridge Indians as follows : * A company of minute-men
before the 19th of April had been embodied among the Stockbridge
tribe of Indians, and this company repaired to camp. On June
21, two of the Indians, probably of this company, killed four of
the regulars with their bows and arrows, and plundered them.'
The same author mentions the following incidents which happened
during the siege : * June 25 : This day the Indians killed more
of the British guard. June 26: Two Indians went down near
Bunker Hill and killed a sentry.* ® He also gives the following :
* A letter of July 9 says : " Yesterday afternoon some barges were
sounding the river of Cambridge (Charles) near its mouth, but
were soon obliged to row off by our Indians (fifty in number), who
are encamped near that place." ^ Lieut. William Carter, of the 40th
regiment of foot, imder date of 7 July 1775 wrote : * Never had
the British army so ungenerous an enemy to oppose ; they send
their riflemen (five or six at a time), who conceal themselves behind
trees &c. tUl an opportunity presents itself of taking a shot at our
advanced sentries, which done they immediately retreat. What
an infamous method of carrying on a war ! ' *® The Boston Gazette
of 7 Aug. 1775 says : * Parties of riflemen together with some
Indians are constantly harassing the enemy's advanced guards, and
say they have killed several of the regulars within a day or two
past.' The issue of 14 Aug. says : ' We hear that last Thursday
afternoon a number of riflemen killed two or three of the regulars
as they were relieving the sentries at Charlestown.'
Candour compels the admission that Gage's statement that the
rebels were bringing down all the Indians that they could, and that
' Am, Archives^ 4th series, p. 1350. Journals of each Provincial Congress of Mass,
p. 118.
" These incidents are taken by Frothingham from the diary of John Eettel, a
well-known resident of Charlestown. Through the ooortesj of Thomas G. Frothing,
ham, I have had an opportunity to examine the entire diary and verify the quotations.
• Siege of Boston, pp. 212-18.
'** A Oenttme Detail of the Several Engagements, dc, with cm Account of the
Blockade of Boston, dtc, in a Series of Letters to a Friend, by William Carter, late a
lieutenant of the 40th Begiment of Foot. London, 1784.
Digitized by
Google
716 EMPLOYMENT OF INDIAN AUXILIARIES Oct.
they and the riflemen were shooting his sentries, was not mere
gasconade. His indignation was founded on facts. In asserting
that the Americans were bringing down all the Indians that they
could, he probably stated more than he knew, but even in that
assertion he seems to have been within the lines of truth. We
have already seen that eflforts were put forth by the provincial
congress in April to secure if possible the services of the Mohawks,
or at least to keep them neutral. Further efforts were apparently
made about the same time to obtain more recruits from the Stock-
bridge Indians. This is shown by a letter dated April 11, from
their chief sachem to the president of the provincial congress, in
answer to a communication received by him. In this letter he
offers to visit the Six Nations and find out how they stand. * If
I find that they are against you,' he says, ' I will try and turn
their minds.' * One thing I ask of you, if you send for me to fight,
that you will let me fight in my own Indian way.' " To the east-
ward, in Nova Scotia, there was a body of Indians from whom
recruits might be drawn. To them a communication was sent by
the provincial congress of Massachusetts Bay, in which they were
addressed as ' friends and good brothers,' and told that ' the
Indians at Stockbridge all join with us and some of their men have
enlisted as soldiers.' ^^ Captain Lane was sent down among them, and
they were told that he would show his orders for raising one
company of their men, who were, as the committee phrased it, * to
join with us in the war with your and our enemies.' Nothing of im-
portance came of this attempt. Captain Lane made his trip, and in
June returned, bringing with him one chief and three young men.
During the period covered by the foregoing events provincial
officers had made similar propositions to the Indians. Some of
these proposals were perhaps unauthorised, but some were appa-
rently made by authority. On 24 May Ethan Allen addressed a
letter to several tribes of Canadian Indians, asking their warriors
to join with his warriors, * like brothers, and ambush the regulars.*
This proceeding he reported to the general assembly of Con-
necticut two days afterward.^* On 2 June, Alien proposed to the
provincial congress of New York an invasion of Canada, urging as
one reason therefor that iliere would be Uhis unspeakable ad-
vantage, that instead of turning the Canadians and Indians against
us, as is wrongly suggested by many, it would unavoidably attach
and connect them to our interest.' From Newbury Colonel Bayley
on 28 June addressed the northern Indians as follows : ' If you
have a mind to join us, I will go with any number you shall bring
to our army, and you shall each have a good coat and blanket &e.
" Am, Archi/ves, 4th Series, u. 816, where it is styled * Speech delivered by Captain
Solomon Uhhaonauwaonmat/ <fto.
»« Ibid. 610, 611. »« Ibid. 714.
Digitized by
Google
1887 IN THE AMERICAN WAR 717
and forty shillings per month, be the time longer or shorter.' **
In September, Arnold started on his march through the wilder-
ness for Quebec. At Sartigan the troops were joined by a number of
Indians, to whom Arnold offered ' one Portuguese per month, two
doUars bounty, their provisions and the Uberty to choose their own
officers.' About fifty of them took their canoes and proceeded with
the invading column.*^
The results of these efforts of the provincial congress of Massa-
chusetts Bay and of the officers in the field to secure recruits
from the Indians, were insignificant. So few were the numbers of
the natives in the American force that their presence there has
been ignored and even denied by historians. The voice of the
continental congress as heard in the address to the people of Ireland
and in the declaration of independence has been accepted as authority
for the opinions of the people of the colonies ; and it has in many
instances been assumed that the acts of the people were consistent
with the opinions thus attributed to them. To Gage, penned in
upon the peninsula of Boston, it mattered little what position
the continental congress either had taken or would take upon the
subject. Massachusetts Bay was the province where rebelhon had
first hoisted its standard, and Massachusetts Bay had enlisted
Indians whose presence had been made manifest to him by their
killing his sentries. As events rolled on, the army began to assume
a national aspect, and Massachusetts lost her pre-eminence in mili-
tary affairs. The attempt of that province to secure Indian recruits
was buried from observation beneath its practical failure. It is not
strange that the few Indians in the American army were lost sight
of, and that their presence in the field in the northern department
during the ensuing campaigns is only occasionally alluded to. The
more conservative position of the continental congress has com-
pletely overshadowed the previous acts of Massachusetts Bay in
the eye of historians.
The journals and the secret journals of the continental congress
were pubUshed many years ago. A chronological review of the
legislation bearing upon the employment of Indians, which is re-
corded in those journals, will better enable us to estimate the true
extent of the conservatism of that body on the subject.
In June 1775, congress asserted that Carleton was ' instigating
the Indian nations to take up the hatchet against the colonies.' ^^
" Am. Archives J 4th Series, ii 1070.
'^ The Journal of Isaac Senter, published by the Historical Society of Pennsylyania,
Philadelphia, 1846, p. 24.
'" In attempting to measure the weight which ought to have been giyen to ramonrs
of this sort, we must not overlook the fact that the knowledge which we have of the
situation of affairs is much more comprehensive than that which prevailed among
those who were directly in contact with events. Suspicion had from the outset been
directed against Carleton. It was founded not so much upon personal distrust as
Digitized by
Google
718 EMPLOYMENT OF INDIAN AUXILIARIES Oct.
As a matter of fact, Guy Johnson in the latter part of that month
did hold a conference at Oswego, at which he secured promises of
co-operation from a portion of the Six Nations, and in July he held
another conference at Montreal, at which similar promises were
obtained from the Indians who were present. Of these conferences,
congress at that time knew nothing. The Americans who were
then in correspondence with our emissaries in Canada were full of
hope that the Canadian Indians would prove friendly to the Ame-
rican cause. It was not perhaps fully appreciated at the time, but
it is known to us to-day from complaints in Guy Johnson's letters,
that Carleton, the governor of Canada, was opposed to raising Indians
in Canada for use outside that province. The colonies had not much
cause to fear invasion from a force of Indians believed to be friendly,
to be raised by a governor who was opposed to their being used out-
side the limits of his province. It is not improbable that the passage
of a resolution to this effect was secured by those who favoured
employing Indians as soldiers, for the purpose of consoUdating
opinions within the continental congress. Among the members
there were men who were appointed from communities which would
be exposed in case of an Indian uprising. Such men were naturally
reluctant to commit themselves on the subject. There were
undoubtedly some members of the congress who would have re-
fused to initiate the employment of Indians in the army so long as
hopes existed of keeping them out of the contest, but who would
not have hesitated to avail themselves of their services if they saw
clearly that the natives would otherwise be employed by the English.
By recording this positive expression of opinion in congress the
foundation was laid for the decisive steps afterwards taken. That
the danger from this source was exaggerated is plain. It may well
be doubted whether those who were in correspondence with the
upon the comprehenBive powers given him in his commission to levy troops -without
limitation as to their character, and to subdue rebellion even outside the limits of his
province. At a period of such excitement, it was not possible that men should stop
to ask how such language came to be used. It was assumed that the powers conferred
upon him were bestowed on account of the impending crisis, and every conference
that he held with Indians was watched with suspicious eye. There was, however, no
especial reason for suspecting Carleton, nor was the language used in the commission
cause in itself for suspecting the intentions of the home government. Eleven years
before Carleton was appointed, the same language was inserted in the commission of
his predecessor. Had Murray remained at Quebec, no especial argument could have
been founded on the language of a commission issued in 176B. Similar language was
made use of in the commission of Sir Dan vers Osborn in 1754, when he was appointed
governor of New York. Indeed, the objectionable phrases seem to have been mere
forms of words, which were copied from some of the colonial charters. They are to
be found in the charter of Maryland and in the first and second charters of Carolina.
It is easy to conceive what powerful arguments could have been based upon the
language of the commission. Men could not stop to hunt up the precedents upon
which the commission was founded. The powers conferred by it were supposed to
have been created for the emergency, and Carleton was believed to be about to make
use of them.
Digitized by
Google
1887 IN THE AMERICAN WAR 719
American emissaries in Canada believed in it. Public opinion was
at that time often influenced by publications prepared for the pur-
pose. Of the truth of some of them, the authors, according to Judge
Marshall, were not always mindful.*^ It would not be surprising if
the continental congress was swayed in this instance by means of
this sort.
The next step taken by congress which bears upon the subject
was, on 80 June, to instruct the committee on Indian affairs * to
prepare proper talks to the several tribes of Indians for engaging
the continuance of their friendship to us, and neutrality in our
present unhappy dispute with Great Britain.' On 1 July it was
resolved, * that in case any agent of the ministry shall induce any
Indian tribes, or any of them, to commit actual hostilities against
these colonies, or to enter into an offensive alliance with the British
troops, thereupon the colonies ought to avail themselves of an alli-
ance with such Indian nations as will enter into the same, to oppose
such British troops and their allies.* On 6 July the statement that
Carleton was * instigating the Indians to fall upon us ' was repeated.
If Carleton had met with any success in these efforts, the contin-
gency had already occurred which made it the duty of the colonies
to avail themselves of an alliance with such Indian nations as would
enter into the same. That congress had no knowledge of any suc-
cess on Carleton's part may be inferred from the action taken when
the Indian departments were formed in the same month. At that
time, notwithstanding the resolution of the first, the commissioners
were authorised to treat with the Indians for the preservation of
peace and friendship. A formal address was made at the same
time to the Six Nations urging them to keep the peace, and the
commissioners of the northern department were recommended to
employ the services of Mr. Kirkland in this behalf.
Congress had apparently resisted the pressure brought to bear
upon the members in the form of rumours from Canada. All that
they were prepared to do was to put forth an earnest effort to retain
the Six Nations neutral. Meantime Washington had been appointed
to the command of the army. His instructions were, * not to dis-
band any of the men you find raised until further directions from
congress.' *® By the terms of these instructions he was compelled to
retain the Stockbridge Indians, although it is probable that but few
members of the congress were aware of that fact. The camp at
Cambridge was visited during the fall of 1775 by representatives of
the Canadian tribes, and from them Washington received assurances
of the friendly disposition of those Indians. On 4 Aug. he reported
" See letter of Marshall in Miner's Wyoming^ p. 257.
'■ Secret Journals of the Acts and Proceedings of Congress, Boston, 1821, L 17.
The chronological review of the Acts of Congress can be readily verified in the Journals
and the Secret Journals of Congress.
Digitized by
Google
720 EMPLOYMENT OF INDIAN AUXILIARIES Oct-
to congress that he had received assurances from a Gaghnawaga
chief, 'that if an expedition against Canada was meditated, the
Indians in that quarter would give all their assistance.* '* On 21 Sept.
he reported that, ' encouraged by the repeated declarations of
Canadians and Indians, and urged by their requests/^ he had
despatched the Arnold expedition. Montgomery was already in
Canada, and even before Washington wrote this letter the American
advanced guard had been attacked near St. John*s by a band of
Mohawks. It is a singular fact that this act, which was probably
a result of one of Guy Johnson's conferences, does not appear to
have had any weight in forming pubUc opinion. Montgomery was
joined by some Canadians. Carleton wrote that many Indians had
gone over to him, but Montgomery himself said, * The Caghnawagas
have desired a hundred men from us. I have complied with their
request, and am glad to find that they put so much confidence in
us and are so much afraid of Mr. Carleton.'
The next step taken by congress was on 2 Dec, when it was
resolved that the Indians of the St. Francis, Penobscot, Stockbridge,
and St. John's, and other tribes may be called on in case of real
necessity. This was apparently a concession to the party which
was urging the employment of Indians. Practically it amounted
to nothing. From Cambridge, Washington on 24 Dec. wrote to
Schuyler : * The proofs you have of the ministry's intention to engage
the savages against us are incontrovertible. We have other confir-
mations of it, by several despatches from John Stuart, the superin-
tendent for the southern district, which luckily fell into my hands.' ^
Two things will be noticed in this letter : 1st. That Washington
lays no stress on the information which had been current so long,
and which had appeared sufiGicient for congress to assert twice that
Carleton was stirring up the Indians. 2nd. That he makes no
allusion to the positive proof which Montgomery had received that
some of the Indians were already in arms against the colonies. I
know of no explanation for this which is founded in contempo-
raneous records, but it seems to me improbable that Schuyler would
have paraded proofs gathered from Montreal, and that Washington
would have dwelt upon intercepted despatches from the south, if it
had been known at that time that the Indians who attacked
Montgomery were Mohawks. The collision was probably regarded
as an encounter with some band of Canadian Indians who were
not embraced within the friendly influences of the Caghnawagas,
and no especial significance was attached to it. From what Wash-
ington had already said to congress, it may be inferred that even
before the incontrovertible proofs referred to were submitted to
him he was not averse to the use of Indians as auxiliaries. On
27 Jan. 1776 he wrote to General Schuyler that he considered the
. »• Sparks'a WashmgUm, iii. 65. » Ibid, 102. «' Ibid. 210.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 IN THE AMERICAN WAR 721
important period had arrived * when the Canadians, and conse-
quently their Indians, must take a side.* As to the Caghnawagas,
he said : ' I am sensible that if they do not desire to be idle, they
will be for or against us. I am sensible, also, that no artifices wiU
be left unessayed to engage them against us.' " Whether he com-
municated these views to congress at that time does not appear,
but on 8 March congress resolved that ' Indians be not employed
as soldiers in the armies of the united colonies before the tribes to
which they belong shall in a national council, held in a customary
manner, have consented thereto, nor then without express appro-
bation of congress.'
On 19 April 1776, Washington wrote an urgent letter to the
president of congress, in which he expressed himself concerning the
employment of Indians.** * In my opinion,' he said, * it will be im-
possible to keep them in a state of neutrality ; they must, and no
doubt will, take an active part either for or against us. I submit to
congress, whether it will not be better immediately to engage them
on our side.' In May, Washington was summoned to Philadelphia
for consultation concerning military matters. He arrived there on
the 27th, and the next day after his arrival congress resolved * that
it is highly expedient to engage the Indians in the service of the
united colonies.' The suggestion has been made that this vote was
brought about in congress by the reception of news of the slaughter
of prisoners by the Indians, which took place after the aflfair of the
Cedars in Canada. This, however, was impossible. Washington
did not receive news of this event until 9 June, in New York. His
letter of 19 April, aided perhaps by his presence in Philadelphia,
may have influenced the decision of congress.
On 8 June authority was conferred upon General Washington
to employ in Canada a number of Indians not exceeding two
thousand, and on the 6th of the same month instructions were
given to the standing committee on Indian affairs to devise ways
and means for carrying into effect the resolution of the 8rd. On
14 June the commissioners of the northern department were in-
structed to ' engage the Six Nations in our interest on the best terms
that can be procured.' On the 17th the restrictions in the resolu-
tion of the Brd, which limited to Canada the use of the Indians to
be raised, were removed, and the general was permitted to employ
them in any place where he should judge they would be most useful.
He was further authorised ' to offer a reward of one hundred dollars
for every commissioned officer, and thirty dollars for every private
soldier, of the king's troops, that they should take prisoners in the
Indian country or on the frontier of these colonies.' From time
to time thereafter during the war resolutions were passed by con-
gress bearing upon the subject, and consistent with the position
« Sparks's Washmgton, iiL 261-8. « Ih. p. 864.
VOL. n. — NO. vin. 8 a
Digitized by
Google
722 EMPLOYMENT OF INDIAN AUXILIARIES Oct.
which congress had finally assumed. It is not important to reca-
pitulate these in detail, but one of them is entitled to special notioe.
In 1779 it was resolved that twelve blank commissions be fumished
the commissioners of the northern department for the appointment
of as many Indians, the name and the rank in each commission to
be filled at the discretion of the commissioners.
The struggle of opinions in congress had cidminated, a few days
before news of the battle at the Cedars reached Philadelphia, with
the passage of the resolution of 26 May. The several resolutions
passed in Jime were probably caused by the indignation aroused by
the slaughter of prisoners after the battle. The next expression of
opinion in congress on the use of Indians as auxiliaries is to be
found in the declaration of independence, in which the king is
arraigned because ' he has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants
of our frontiers the merciless Indian savages whose known rule of
warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes, and
conditions.' Four days after the promulgation of that document,
Washington was authorised to call forth and engage the Indians of
the St. John's, Nova Scotia, and Penobscot tribes. On the 28th of
the same month the address to the people of Ireland was agreed
to. In this it is asserted that 'the wild and barbarous savages
of the wilderness have been solicited by gifts to take up the hatchet
against us, and instigated to deluge our settlements with the blood
of defenceless women and children.' Setting aside all question of
the responsibility of the continental congress for acts of the Massa-
chusetts provincial congress, and putting out of the discussion
the suggestions that have been made as to the truth or falsity of
General Gage's assertion that the rebels had first employed Indians,
it must still be admitted that the vigorous language used by the
continental congress in the declaration of independence and in the
address to the people of Ireland was inconsistent with the position
which they had already taken in the premises, and was calculated
to deceive those who were ignorant what that position was.
I have said that the familiarity of Americans with the employ-
ment of Indians in previous wars, and the belief that the natives
must be drawn into the contest unless we could secure Canada,
probably caused our own people to look rather at the practical than
the sentimental side of the question. With a complete knowledge
of the ferocity manifested by Indians in their waarfare, to which
Americans alone would be exposed if Indians participated in the
war, there was at the same time so general a beUef in the proba-
bility of their being made use of on the one side or the other, that
the efforts of the Massachusetts provincial congress and of the
English leaders to gain them over were probably looked upon by
those who knew what was going on as perfectly natural. This is
partly inference and partly deduced from the acts of Allen and
Digitized by
Google
1887 IN THE AMERICAN WAR 728
Bayley and Arnold. Washington's letters show how he felt upon
the subject. From the ' Familiar Letters ' of John Adams we learn
that Adams was present at a state dinner given by Washington at
Cambridge, at which the Caghnawaga chiefs and their squaws
were among the guests.^ The view that John Adams took of the
subject is to be found in a letter to Gates. * We need not be so
deUcate/ he said, ' as to refuse the assistance of Indians, provided
we cannot keep them neutral.' General Warren, in a letter to
Samuel Adams, dated 14 May 1775, said : ' It has been suggested
to me that an application from your congress to the Six Nations,
accompanied with some presents, might have a very good eflfect.'
The correspondence of prominent men of the period furnishes but
scant gleanings from which to determine the opinions of the writers,
but the newspapers of the time contain extracts from letters which
illustrate the hopes, and at the same time indicate to some extent
popular opinion, on the subject. From Worcester, on 10 May 1775,
we have a rumour tiiat the Senecas, one of the Six Nations, are
determined to support the colonies. From Pittsfield, 18 May, we
learn that ' the Mowhawks had given permission to the Stockbridge
Indians to join us, and also had five hundred men of their own in
readiness to assist.' From all sides there were statements that
Garleton was unsuccessful in his attempts to persuade the Canadian
Indians to join his troops. In August it was stated that 'the
Indian nations for a thousand miles westward are very staunch
friends of the colonies.' In December the Boston Oazette as-
serted that 'last week his excellency the commander-in-chief re-
ceived some despatches from the honourable continental congress
by which we have authentic intelligence that several nations of the
western Indians have offered to send three thousand men to join
the American forces whenever wanted.' The very improbability of
some of these rumours betrays that they sprang out of the hopes of
the people. Their publication without disapproving comment shows
that if they had proved true the colonists would not have been
shocked.
For the more complete understanding of the subject a few words
are required concerning the position of British officers who came in
contact with the question. Lord Dunmore stood ready in May 1775
to raise the slaves in Virginia and to stir up the Indians. He was
not only willing to take the initiative in the matter, offering no
apology for it, but in the summer he sent an agent to General
Gage to secure the necessary powers for doing so. Guy Johnson
asserted that his own proceedings in the valley of the Mohawk
** Familiar Letters, New York, 1876, p. 181 : * I dined at colonel Mifflin's with
the general and lady and a vast collection of other company, among whom were six
or seven sachems and warriors of the French Caghnaway Indians with several of their
wives and children.'
8 A 2
Digitized by
Google
724 EMPLOYMENT OF INDIAN AUXILIARIES Oct.
were predicated upon secret instructions received from Greneral
Gage. What those instructions were we have no means of dis-
covering. The first trace, after the outbreak, of Gage's opinions is
to be found in the letter of 12 June, from which I have abeady quoted
the clause referring to the Indians in the American camp at Cam-
bridge. Bancroft, however, quotes from a letter to Carleton written
in the fall of 1774, in which Gage asks Garleton's opinion as to
'what measures would be most efficacious to raise a body of
Canadians and Indians, and for them to form a junction with the
king's forces in this province.' It is probably doing Grage no
injustice to say that he took the military view of the matter, and
was ready to act whenever opportunity occurred. The earl of
Dartmouth told Johnson on 5 July 1775 ' to keep the Indians in
such a state of affection and attachment to the king, that his
majesty may rely upon their assistance in any case in which it may
be necessary.' ^ On the 24th of the same month Dartmouth again
wrote: 'The intelligence his majesty has received of the rebels
having excited the Indians to take a part, and of their having
actually engaged a body of them in arms to support their rebellion,
justifies the resolution his majesty has taken of requiring the assist-
ance of his faithful adherents the Six Nations. It is therefore his
majesty's pleasure that you do lose no time in taking such steps as
may induce them to take up the hatchet against his majesty's
rebellious subjects in America, and to engage them in his majesty's
service, upon such plan as shall be suggested by General Gage.'*
It is not probable that any orders were issued from London for the
employment of Indians prior to the reception of Gage's letter say-
ing that it would be justifiable ; and even if we accept the theory
that the orders given to Johnson were positive to raise the Indians,
that order could not have antedated the acts of the provincial con-
gress of Massachusetts Bay. In the southern department Stuart
asserted with apparent truth, as late as 18 July, that he had never
received any orders from his superiors 'which by the most
tortured suspicion could be interpreted to stir up or employ the
Indians to fall upon the frontier inhabitants, or to take any part in
the dispute between Great Britain and the colonies.' Shortly after
this date he received the orders from Gage which formed the basis
of the correspondence that fell into Washington's hands, and fur-
nished the general with the proofs to which he alluded in his lett^
to Schuyler.
In view of these facts, it may be doubted whether Gage's orders
to Johnson in May went to the length of authorising Johnson to
raise Indians for purposes of general warfare. Johnson reported
that at Oswego the 'Indians agreed to defend the communica-
tions and assist his majesty's troops in their operations.' From
*» New York Colonial Documents, vii. 692. *■ lb. 596.
Digitized by
Google
1887 IN THE AMERICAN WAR 725
the same place he wrote to the New York provincial congress, pro-
testing against the charges brought against him. ' I trust/ he said,
' I shall always manifest more humanity than to promote the de-
struction of the innocent inhabitants of a colony to which I have
always been warmly attached.' This language in the letter to the
provincial congress is inconsistent with any open agreement with
the Indians at that time to take up arms against the colonies, but
is entirely in harmony with the statements made by the friendly
Indians at the conference at Albany that the superintendent's
advice to them at Oswego was to preserve neutrality. At the
Montreal conference ' the services of the Indians were secured for
the king.' Here there was probably a direct agreement to take up
arms. At Oswego there were present Indians who were known to
be friendly to the Americans. At Montreal the Oneidas were not
present, and the conference was held in a colony where rebellion
had not raised its head. Johnson's conduct and his letter can to a
certain extent be reconciled by the theory that his efforts with the
Six Nations were exclusively directed towards securing from those
Indians pledges to protect the carrying places from American occu-
pation, and that the conference in Montreal was for the purpose of
gaining the Indians to defend the province of Canada from invasion.
If this were true he might, by special pleading, defend the language
of his letter, and say that he had not raised the Indians against bis
neighbours. He must have known, however, that self-protection
demanded that Fort Stanwix should be held by the Americans, and
that any attempt on the part of the Indians to prevent it would
inevitably bring them in hostile contact with his old neighbours.
That he acted in this disingenuous manner appears probable from
the fact that the friendly Indians, who at the conference at Albany
reported that he advised neutraUty, themselves insisted with the
American commissioners that their communications should not be
disturbed. So far as the Montreal conference was concerned. Brant,
the Mohawk chieftain, stated that, from the date of its meeting, the
Indians who were present did all that they could for the king.
With regard to this date for the alliance of the Six Nations, which
was fixed by Brant from memory in an after statement of affairs, if
it is to be relied upon, it militates against the theory that the result
of the Montreal conference was to secure the Canadian Indians for
defensive purposes alone.
It must be remembered, however, that Brant was thoroughly
loyal to the king, and would naturally seek to make as much out
of the services of the Indians as possible. This well-known chief-
tain had received an education at the Eev. Dr. Wheelock's school.
He had been in London, and had been received by the king. By
an adroit stroke of policy the superintendent appointed him as his
private secretary, and thereby secured his powerful influence with
Digitized by
Google
726 EMPLOYMENT OF INDIAN AUXILIARIES Oct.
the Mohawks. He was intelligent; and statements of this sort
from his Ups are to be weighed as coming from a man of fair
standing.
The efforts put forth by the American commissioners of the
northern department in the fall and early winter of 1775 were
exclusively in behalf of peace. To oflfeet the power and influence
of Guy Johnson and Brant, they could only bring the influence of
the missionaries. In the early part of the summer, Johnson had
already done what he could to weaken Eirkland's hold upon the
affection of the Oneidas. Notwithstanding the powerful combina-
tion of circumstances against the commissioners, they were able to
divide the Six Nationi^ and to hold a portion of the Oneidas and a
few Tuscaroras to friendly relations with the colonists. The in-
fluence of these friendly Indians was powerful enough to secure
the surrender of the war belt given by Guy Johnson at Montreal,
and to restrain the hostile faction from outbreak for many months.
The Indians in the neighbourhood of Detroit appear to have
drifted bodily over to the English.
It is not my purpose to follow the movements of the natives in
connexion with the different campaigns of the war. The san-
guinary affair at the Cedars, the outbreak of the Cherokees in 1776
in South Carolina, the battle of Oriskany, the movements of the
Indians in company with Burgoyne, the massacres of Wyoming
and of Cherry Valley, the marches and countermarches in the
valley of the Ohio, the devastation of the Mohawk Valley, and the
many minor raids aU along the border, have been fully described
by historians. Except so far as they show the overwhelming
influence of the English among the Indians, and illustrate the
cruelty of the natives when under the influence of transports of
passion, they form no part of the subject which I have especially
under consideration.
When in June 1776 the continental congress, by the passage in
quick succession of the several resolutions authorising the employ-
ment of Indians, showed that it had awakened to the necessity for
action, the time was inopportune for securing the services of the
natives. The force of the temporary success in Canada was broken,
and it was evident nothing but disaster was in store for us in that
quarter. About this time, however, some of the eastern Indians
put in an appearance at Watertown. Washington had just trans-
mitted to the provincial congress the resolution authorising the
employment of the eastern Indians. The delegation was duly
received, and at the conference which was held with them they
said : * We shall have nothing to do with Old England, and all
that we shall worship, or obey, will be Jesus Christ and George
Washington.' These Indians cheerfully executed a treaty whereby
they agreed to furnish 600 recruits to a regiment which was
Digitized by
Google
1887 IN THE AMERICAN WAR 727
to be oflScered by whites and to have in addition to the Indians
250 white soldiers. Out of all this talk seven Penobscot Indians
were subsequently enlisted for one year, and a few from other
tribes were secured for the continental service. The Indians of the
eastern tribes repudiated the treaty, and said that the young men
who made it had no authority for doing so. We hear of some of
the Catawbas being with General Eutherford's command during
the invasion of the Cherokee territory in 1776. We fibad occasional
mention in contemporaneous records of Indians in connexion with
the military movements of the Americans in the northern depart-
ment. They were, however, so few in number, that their services
were of Uttle value.
Whatever there was of real value to be derived from Indian
auxiliaries was gained by Great Britain. Whatever benefit there
may be to the reputations of the king and of the earl of Dartmouth
in the fact that the provincial congress of Massachusetts Bay first
employed Indians in military service in the war of the revolution,
to that are they entitled. Whatever consolation may be drawn by
Americans from the fact that the continental congress moved
slowly in the matter, and finally resolved with evident reluctance
that it was expedient to employ Indians, will be freely conceded by
any person who reads the record. That it would have been im-
possible to keep the Indians out of the fight, in the northern
department, by any other method than the conquest of Canada,
seems to be a just conclusion. That the true basis for criticism of
the EngUsh for their acts in the premises is to be found, not in
the priority of their employment of Indians, but in the despatch of
expeditions in which the numbers of the natives so far prepon-
derated that the ofl&cers in command could not control them, will
probably be the judgment of any dispassionate reader, who sets
aside the heated contemporaneous accounts and reaches facts.
If we grant that the Americans anticipated the English in the
employment of Indians as auxiliaries; if we admit that they
stand convicted, through extracts from their newspapers, of being
hopeful that the natives might be secured upon our side; if we
concede that the argument used by Suffolk when he justified the
course of England was substantially the same as that used by
Washington when speaking of the relations of America to the same
subject, still a terrible responsibility rests upon the shoulders of
the English leaders. They cannot plead ignorance of the dangers
to which the inhabitants of the frontiers of the colonies were
exposed by the use of Indians upon mihtary expeditions. The
merciless denunciation by Chatham, in 1777, of the ministry, even
before the atrocities committed at Wyoming and at Cherry VaUey
had caused a thrill of horror to run through the whole of Christen-
dom, contained in its piled-up invectives a prophecy of what might
Digitized by
Google
728 INDIANS IN THE AMERICAN WAR Oct.
be expected from engaging auxiliary forces of such a character. In
scathing language he charged the ministry with turning forth ' into
our settlements, among our ancient connexions, friends, relations,
the merciless cannibal, thirsting for the blood of man, woman, and
child ; ' and of sending forth * the infidel savage — against whom ?
Against your protestant brethren ; to lay waste their country, to
desolate their dwellings, and extirpate their race and name, with
these horrible hell-hounds of savage war.' The dangers to be
apprehended from the loss of control of the Indians when on the
war path were fully understood.
Common feelings of humanity demanded that allies of such a
character should only be used when associated with bodies of
disciplined troops, whose numbers should be so far superior to
those of the Indians that control over their actions should never
be in question. A violation of this plain duty on the part of the
Enghsh leaders led to the horrors of that terrible night in Wyoming
Valley, when the naked prisoners were ' driven around a stake in
the midst of a circle of flames,* while the savages, mad with excite-
ment, danced around them, greeting their piteous groans with yells
of delight, and with thrusts of their spears prodded their victims
on to still greater efforts in their hopeless struggle. ' It is not in
my power to help it,' said the leader of the expedition, and this was
unfortunately too true. The shocking details of the slaughter of
women and children at Cherry Valley are chargeable to the doors
of the English leaders on the same grounds. With a full knowledge
of what was to be expected from such allies, the English employed
them upon expeditions where the opportunity was afforded them of
displaying in full force the most revolting features of their barbarous
methods of warfare. The earl of Suffolk had justified the use of
the natives as auxiliaries on the ground that the Americans first
endeavoured to raise them on the other side, and would have gained
them if the English had not. If the Americans had succeeded,
upon them would have rested the responsibility of so using their
allies that history should not shrink from recording their deeds.
America practicaUy failed in her efforts. England succeeded. The
responsibility thus assumed by England was far greater than that
which success would have imposed upon her opponent. As aUies of
the American forces, the savages would have been able to vent their
passions only on soldiers. Acting as auxiliaries of the English, the
homes of hundreds of border settlers were exposed to their raids.
It was to prevent America from securing the miUtary benefit of an
Indian alliance that England employed the natives. By doing so
she accepted responsibility for their acts, a responsibility which was
neither increased nor diminished by the fact that America was
willing to take the same responsibility on her shoulders.
Andbbw McFabland Davis.
Digitized by
Google
1887 729
Notes and Documents
THB OBIGIN OF THE SBMIBAinS LEGEND.
Mb. Bobebtson Smith in an interesting article, p. 808 Bg. in the present
volume of this Beview, on ' Gtesias and the Semiramis Legend,' has some-
what mifavonrably criticised some views which I expressed in an article
which appeared at p. 97 of the same volume. It may seem presumptuous for
me to attempt to controvert the opinions of so distinguished a scholar,
yet I feel bound to say that I cannot see that his arguments have shaken
the positions I sought to maintain. Most of the evidence he adduces I
was already acquainted with, and I cannot think that it is sufi&cient to
justify the conclusions he draws from it.
Mr. Freeman, in his ' Methods of Historical Study,' has warned us by
a striking example against the danger of writing history by putting two
and two together; but when we are dealing with a remote and little
known epoch like the eighth century b.o. there is no other course open to
us, and the practice seems legitimate provided we at the same time sub-
mit the evidence on which our conclusions rest. I was far from contend-
ing that the views I adopted were certain ; but I thought, and still think,
that the weight of evidence is in their favour. I shall now proceed to
examine Mr. Smith's paper in detail so far as it deals with the same sub-
jects as my own.
Following some high authorities, I asserted the identity of the
Semiramis of Herodotus, i. 184, with Sammuramat, a royal lady who is
mentioned in an Assyrian inscription. Herodotus says Semiramis, a
queen who engaged in certain engineering works at Babylon, lived about
five generations before Nitokris, whom he apparently regards as the wife
of Nabopolassar (b.o. 626-605) or Nebuchadrezzar (b.o. 605-562). This
brings us to the first half of the eighth century b.o. Sammuramat was a
queen (probably more than a mere queen consort, as she is mentioned in
an inscription) who, even according to Mr. Smith (p. 808), was ' connected
with the first introduction at Niniveh of the Babylonian worship of Nebo,'
and who lived about B.C. 783. We cannot prove the identity of these
two, but the circumstantial evidence for it is strong. I further maintained
that the popular Greek account of Semiramis originated with Etesias, who
engrafted on the little that he knew of the real queen mentioned by
Herodotus, materials derived partly from Babylonian popular mythology,
partly from his own imagination ; Mr. Smith, on the contrary, looks on
the Etesian account as older than Etesias, and considers that it is to it
Herodotus refers, and further that it rests almost entirely on Persian
Digitized by
Qoo^<^
780 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct.
recensions of myths relating to the Asiatic love goddess ; myths which in
some form certainly play a large part in Ktesias' narrative. To prove
the identity of the Semiramis of Herodotus with Ishtar rather than
Sammuramat, he asserts that the name Semiramis represents not Sam-
mmramat but Sh^mlram, a supposed appellation of Astarte ; but it cer-
tainly might represent Sanmiuramat ; and if Astarte really bore a name
which to the Greeks sounded somewhat similar, that is merely an
additional reason why Ktesias should incorporate her legends into the
history of the real queen. Mr. Smith's discovery (for the reasons in sup-
port of which I must refer to his own article, pp. 808-805) thus fits in
admirably with the view he opposes. Mr. Smith further says that the
Semiramis of Herodotus is in all respects identical with the personage
described by Ktesias, because both erected earthworks ; and that both are
identical with Astarte, because some of those erected against inundations
by Etesias' Semiramis are said by a Byzantine writer to have been really
the tombs of her lovers, who belong to the part of her history which
comes from the myths relating to Ishtar or Astarte. By this method of
reasoning, however, we could equally well prove that Nitokris was a form
of the goddess ; I prefer to suppose that Herodotus refers (as we should
certainly conclude from his description) to a real embankment along the
Euphrates, which he was — very probably correctly — told was erected by
Sammuramat or her husband, and that Ktesias acting on this hint
ascribed to her most of the public works in Babylonia erected by a whole
series of kings. In the genuine narrative of Ktesias as preserved by
Diodorus * (ii. 14), the tumuli of Semiramis' lovers are carefully distin-
guished from the works at Babylon which are described in Diod. ii. 8
sq. and by Herodotus. Mr. Smith endeavours to support his case by the
opinion of certain commentators who see in the (rviETtaripri of Herodot. L
184 a reference to the immorality of Ktesias' Semiramis, but I am not
aware of any instance in which /ryi «roc=<rw<^i' in the sense of * modest '
which this interpretation requires. Herodotus evidently merely means
to say that Nitokris' engineering efforts were better directed.
Mr. Smith cites the names of certain places in Armenia and countries
still more to the east, as evidence that the character in which Semiramis
appears in Ktesias was not invented by him. These, however, prove at
most that there may have been a goddess called Shemiram, which, as I
have already said, does not in the least interfere with the view I am
endeavouring to maintain, but in most cases the resemblance of name is
slight and probably accidental. The appellation of Shamlramagerd given
to Van only dates from a period when the Armenians had been familiarised
with the account of Ktesias, which with some modifications, drawn chiefly
from the Bible, has supplied the outline of the earUer portions of the
narratives of the Armenian historians such as Moses of Ghorene, a few
native legends being interwoven. Of one of these, that of Arai, son of
Aram, which in Moses, i. 14 is brought into connexion with Semiramis,
we have an earlier form in Plato, * Bep.' x., Plutarch, * Symp.' xi. 7, and
Macrobius, ' Somn. Scip.' i. 1, in which no connexion with the Assyrian
queen or with Astarte is hinted at.
1 I cannot agree with Mr. Smith in preferring the Byzantine version.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 781
As to the argument that the narrative of Deinon (frag. 1) implies the
existence of the fully developed Semiramis legend before the appearance
of the ' Persika ' of Etesias, I should be more inclined to hold that Deinon
had the account of the latter before him and deliberately applied himself
to eliminate the marvellous and poetical elements in it.
' If Etesias had been inventing history for the Greeks instead of re*
counting a legend, he would never have given the first and third parts of
his story,^ and the conclusion is therefore inevitable that in eastern legend
Semiramis was a goddess and a form of Astarte * (Mr. Robertson Smith in
the English Histobioal Review, p. 805). He was in part relating a
legend, but he was using it to embeUish history. The argument might
equally well be retorted by saying that if Etesias had been only recounting
a legend he would never have given the second part of his story. Mr.
Smith endeavours to meet this by adopting a theory put forward by
Jacobs (whose article in the Bheimsches Museum for 1855 I am unfortu-
nately unable to consult) that the history of Etesias was only known to
Diodorus in a recension by Eleitarchus, in which the account of the con-
quests of Ninus and Semiramis was modified with reference to those of
Alexander. This is possible, but it is to be observed, (1) that for these con-
quests Diodorus (who in some passages refers to Eleitarchus) expressly
quotes Ktesias (ii. 2, Ta T iirttrrjfiSraTn TUfV idiQy aKoXoudutQ Kriy/r/^ r^
Kri^l^ TTiipafTOfAeda (rvyrofjLwq Ivilpafxtiv), (2) The nations enumerated are
almost exactly the same as those subject to Artaxerxes n. (8) The name of
the Baktrian king Oxyartes which offers a point of contact with the history
of Alexander (Arrian, * Exped. Alex.' iv. 19 ; Diodorus, xviii. 8) appears to
be a faJse reading in Etesias, frag. 6. The manuscripts of Diod. ii. 6 vary
greatly in the name ; and Amobius, who also quotes the fragment, has
Zoroastres instead. As to the allusion in Etesias, frag. 11, to monuments of
Semiramis at Behistun the reference is probably not to the feonous rehef
and inscription of Darius I, but to some older Assyrian works. The
description as preserved by Diodorus suggests a stele containing the
figure of a monarch such as the Assyrians were in the habit of sculp-
turing on the borders of their empire, accompanied by other figures ;
it is said that on the upper part of the principal mass of rock are the
remains of three figures and above them traces of characters.
I certainly never contended that * the Semiramis and Ninus story
formed ' part of the ' official historical traditions of the Assyrian and
Babylonian priests ;* alll maintained was that Etesias heard accounts,
probably exaggerated, of the greatness of Queen Sammuramat, and also
some of the myths relating to Ishtar, and then put them together. The
evidence in support of this is not absolutely conclusive, but that brought
forward by Mr. Robertson Smith for the Iranian origin of the legend is
weak in the extreme. As far as I can follow his remarks on the subject,
it is somewhat as follows. Zela in Pontus is said by Strabo (xii. 8) to
have been situated on a mound erected by Semiramis, to whom, or to
Sesostris, most of the ancient works in Asia Minor, of Assyrian or Hittite
origin, were ascribed by the later Greeks. He further says that before the
time of Pompey, o\ fiaaiXilg ohx, wc Tfokw, nXX* wv Ufjoi' ii^icovy TiaiV n</i-
' Those relating to the birth and death of Semiramis, the seoond part being the
aocoont of her conqaests, and, I suppose, of her buildings.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
782. NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct-
triKQy deHy ra Z^Xa. In another place (xv. 8) he says that the magi per-
formed certain rites in the temple of Anaitis (i.e. the Mazdean female
angel Ardvisura — Anahita) and in that of Omanus, and that the image
of the latter was carried in procession. Artaxerxes 11 first set up
statues of Anahita (Berosus, iii. frag. 16), and by process of corruption her
rites became in some places, especially in the west, assimilated to thoee
of Astarte, with which they had properly nothing to do. Mr. Smith con-
cludes that in the time of Artaxerxes II the Persians related of Anahita the
myths which Etesias has connected with the name of Semiramis, because
the ' Persian gods ' (of whom Anahita was not improbably one) were
worshipped at a place standing on one of the many mounds attributed to
Semiramis, and because her worship is in another place mentioned along
with that of Omanus, whose image was carried in procession, as was
that of Adonis, from which he infers the identity of these two deities, and
tiie Adonis myth is of the same class as some of the legends of Astarte
which have been incorporated in Ktesias' account of Semiramis. But in
the first place Omanus is the Mazdean archangel Vohumano, ' the Oood
Mind,* who has a close connexion with Anahita, but none whatever with
Adonis ; and in the second place the carrying of images in procession was
not peculiar to the ritual of Adonis, but was practised by most heathen
nations in that of a number of their gods, a &.ct so well known that it
would be a waste of space to cite examples.
Mr. Smith presses into service the statement of some Greek vnriters
that at Susa, which was one of the seats of the worship of Anahita, there
was a tomb (most of his authorities say a palace or fortress, see Hero-
dotus, V. 58 ; Etesias, frag. 18 ; Diodorus, ii. 22 ; Strabo, xv. 8. p. 817,
compare Hyginus, 228) of Memnon, whom he also identifies with Adonis.
It seems simpler to suppose that the Greeks looked for Memnon in Susiana
for the same reason as on the Nile, because the poets had described
him as an Ethiopian, and they were not ignorant of the Ethiopian (Gushite,
Eissian) character of the Elamites (iEschylus, ' Psychostasia,' frag. 279 ;
Strabo, xv. 8. p. 817 &c.) As those who had made up their mind that he
came from the banks of the Nile found evidence of the &.ct in the statue
of Amenophis HI, and the palace-temple of Bameses Miamwn, so those
who, like Etesias, looked for him at Susa were satisfied with vague tra-
ditions and similar verbal coincidences.' Mr. Smith's ingenious suggestion
that Memnoneia=places of Naaman 'the beloved one' (i.e. Adonis)
furmshes an analogous and excellent explanation of the numerous Syrian
Memnoneia, but it does not meet the cases of those at Thebes and Susa.
Etesias in no way connects the legend of Memnon with that of Semi-
ramis, which he would have done if Mr. Smith's view be correct.
The third proof alleged in support of the Iranian character of the
Semiramis legend is the statement of Strabo (xi. 18) that Medea invented
the Median dress which Etesias (ap. Diod. ii. 6) ascribes to Semiramis ,*
both these statements are evidently mere guesses of the Greeks of no
value whatever; we need not, therefore, trouble ourselves to inquire
whether the heroa which they supposed were dedicated to Jason and Medea
belonged to Astarte and Adonis.
' Sayoe {Records of the Past, rii. p. 83) suggests that Susa may have been known
as Ununan-Amman = ' honse of the god Amman ' in Elamite.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 788
But the strongest evidence against the Persian origin of Etesias*
statements is that, though we have abundant remains of Iranian
legendary lore both in the Zendavesta (parts of which, especially the
Yashts, which are the portions richest in matter of this kind, belong pro-
bably to a period not far removed from the reign of Artaxerxes U) and in
the traditions collected by Firdusi, there is not a trace of anything resem-
bling what Etesias tells us about Semiramis, though there are legends
resembling those which embellish the Median portion of his work. The
nearest approach to a Persian legend on the subject is that occurring in
Hellanikus, frag. 168, which tells of Atossa, a Persian (not an Assyrian),
queen daughter of King Ariaspes, who assumed male attire and conquered
many nations. Etesias was doubtless acquainted with this story, and it
may have given him some hints.
Mr. Robertson Smith says that the legend of Semiramis is really of
AramsBan origin, and has nothing to do with Assyrian history. In
support of this proposition he adduces (1) the legend of her birth, in
which occurs the name Derketo, which according to Strabo, xvi. 4. p. 412 is
equivalent to Atargate or Atargatis, the first part of which is the Aramasan
(Hittite ?) form of Ishtar, and which he says could not have been used at
Babylon. It is possible that Etesias, who used materials drawn from
several different sources, may have here utilised an Aramaean myth, but
the occurrence in this part of the story of the name Onnes or Cannes,
which belongs to Babylonian mythology, makes it more probable that he
heard the whole from some of the Babylonian priests. The Assyrians seem
to have recognised the identity of the great goddess of Garchemish, the
city which Hierapolis represented, with their own Ishtar, and the process
of religious syncretism which went on under the Persians may have
caused a Hierapolitan myth to be incorporated into the unofficial creed of
Babylon, where there was a large Aramsaan population.
It is, however, exceedingly difficult to arrive at what Etesias really
said. This passage of his work is preserved not only in Diodorus' epitome
of his first six books (Diod. ii. 4), but also by Eratosthenes, Hyginus, and
the anonymous writer on women famous in war, and their versions of it
differ greatly, not even agreeing as to the scene of the events related,
which was Askalon according to Diodorus, Bambyke or Hierapolis accord-
ing to Eratosthenes ; probably Etesias merely said Syria. Aphrodite in
his narrative is distinguished from and represented as hostile to Derketo,
which would scarcely have been the case if he had derived his information
direct from the Hierapolitans. From the way in which the Oannes legend
is used it is evident that he allowed himself great freedom in dealing
with the myths he heard, when working them into his history.
(2) As farther evidence of the Aramaean origin of the legend, Mr. Smith
endeavours to prove that the city Ninus of Etesias is not Niniveh but
Hierapolis. It is for typographical reasons impossible adequately to discuss
in these pages the question whether the Assyrians really called Hercules
Nin, but probability is in favour of their having done so, an opinion held
not merely by Rawlinson, as Mr. Smith seems to imply, but by other
eminent scholars also. By the tomb of Ninus, Etesias probably meant
the ziggurat or sacred tower at Ealah* (Nimrud), which was included in
* Or possibly the whole mount of Nimrud.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
784 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct.
what he understood by Niniveh, adjoining a temple supposed by Bawlinson
(Herodotus, i. p. 147) to have been Bit-zira, one of the temples known to
have been dedicated to Nin at that place. Its remains are still a con-
spicuous object in all views of the mount of Nimrud, and it is mentioned by
Xenophon, 'Anab.' iii.4, ?ro|9a ravTrjv rrji'itoXiv (Larissa) ^i' irvpafiig \1Oi9njf
TO fiiv evpockyoc vXidpov^ to Bi v\l^£ hvo wXidputv. The exaggerated dimensions
given by the Knidian historian are characteristic of him. With regard to
the statement that he places ' Ninus * on the Euphrates, that is just snoh
a stupid blunder as we frequently find in Diodorus : the true reading is
preserved in Nikolaus of Damascus, frag. 9 (a passage which Mr. Smith
seems to have overlooked), which comes from Etesias. There can be no
doubt that the latter regarded the capitals of Ninus and Sardanapalus as
identical.
As to the passages of Philostratus, Ninus was certainly not the
%i8ual name of Hierapolis in his time. It is clear that the use of Niniveh
and Ninivite for the city and its inhabitants could only be due to a pedantic
antiquarianism. The critical conjectures of a Greek antiquary of the third
century of our era on a point of this kind are not worth much. As to the
evidence of Ammianus, Mr. Smith himself discredits it. The name of
Niniveh was applied in a general way by pedantic writers to various cities
in its neighbourhood. Eusebius applies it to Nisibis, Moses of Chorene
(i. 8) to some Parthian city.
There thus appears to be no reason for abandoning the view almost
universally held, that Ninus in Etesias means the same city as the Niniveh
of the Bible and the Assyrian monuments. John Gilmobb.
BOMAK DAOIA.
In the present volume of this Beview (pp. 10(>-108), Mr. Hodgkin discusses
the size of the Boman province of Dacia, and concludes that it was &r
smaller than is usually represented on maps. I venture to offer one or
two remarks on his arguments.
1. His main point is that when Ptolemy (iii. 8) describes Dacia, he
means the land of the Daci, not the Boman province. Some sort of
support for this view can be found in Ptolemy himself. The geographer,
when describing a Boman province, almost always alludes to the Boman
legions and colonies. In this case no legions or colonies are mentioned,
while Sarmizegetusa itself is called fiatrlXeiov. It must be confessed,
iudeed, that four towns appear with Boman names, Ulpianum, Salinie,
PrsBtoria Aug., and Aqusa (ad Aquas), and Ptolemy can hardly have
written before the Boman conquest.
2. Dr. Hodgkin rejects the Tibiscus as the west boundary of Boman
Dacia, because ' a strategist like Trajan would not have left unoccupied
the long and narrow strip between Danube and Theiss.' But the Tibiscus
must be the Temes, and the interval between the latter river and the
Danube is considerable.
8. He substitutes for the Tibiscus, ' the vallum which runs,' he says,
* from near Temesv^ to the Danube near Eostolatz (Viminacium) and
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 735
this,* he adds, ' is admitted by the general (though not unanimous) consent
of map makers.' I venture to think the consent is not very general : the
map attached to the * Corpus ' (vol. iii.), for example, entirely ignores the
vallum. In any case it should be remembered that there are a great
many of these ' Bomerschanzen ' in the district imder consideration.
Torma and Gooss have traced three in western Dacia, one running N.E.
from the Theiss to the Simand, one from Kostolatz to the Temes, and
one partly parallel to the second, but continuing northwards through
Temesvdr to the Maros river (see Gooss, ' Programm des evangelischen
Gymnasiums zu Schassburg,' Hermannstadt, 1874). A fourth, which is
marked in the * Corpus ' map, exists near Porohssum (Moigrad), and,
according to Gooss {op, ciL p. 28), strongly resembles our own Hadrian's
wall. There are other valla between the Theiss and the Danube, and
others again on the right bank of the latter river. Schuchhardt has
investigated others in Boumania. Besides the well-known hnes running
from Cemawoda through the Dobrudscha to the Black Sea, there are also
(1) lines running eastwards from near Tecutsch ; (2) one near Galatz ;
(8) one to the north of Giurgevo ; and (4) one running from the Danube
just below Tum-Severin (DrobetsB) towards Bucharest. How many of
these ' valla ' are Boman is as yet unknown. That near Porohssum may
probably be so, but Bohm declares that the others which exist in western
Dacia are due to Dacians {Arch. Epigr, Mitteihmgen, iv. 188).
4. But while slightly disputing Dr. Hodgkin's western frontier, I think
the arguments for his eastern limit, the Carpathians, might be strength-
ened. He notes how the Peutinger table shows roads running up into
the roots of the Carpathians, but never crossing them. The object of
these roads would probably be the mines and their end would not neces-
sarily be the end of Boman dominion. But Gooss has pointed out {Arch.
Epigr. Mitteihingen, i. 81) that these roads often lead to fortified places
which seem to guard the valleys by which barbarians could enter Dacia.
With respect to the actual frontier, it seems hardly necessary to be
very pyecise. We know perfectly well that settled Dacia lay (as has often
been said) between the Danube, the Aluta, the Carpathians and a line
drawn from the Temes to the Szamos near Porohssum, and that of this
district. Eastern Transylvania contained only soldiers, while the Banat,
the rest of Transylvania and * Little WaUacbia ' (probably), had an active
municipal life {Archiv filr Siebenbii/rgische Landeskunde, xii. 1874,
p. 188). So far, one is only inclined to doubt whether Little Wallachia
should be included, for there are as yet few instances of ' finds ' between
the Csema and the Aluta. But (1) the position of Dacia was, as
Mommsen says, strategically eccentric. It lay outside the regular line of
defence, the Danube, and it has been thought to be also, in some way,
outside the Boman customs union. It had not, therefore, the same need
of an accurate frontier, as had, e.g., Moesia or Pannonia. (2) The
inscriptions mention a district and colony * Malvensis (* C.I.L.' iii. 160),
the situation of which is unknown, and Ptolemy mentions a host of towns
which it is totally impossible to * locate * with any certainty, but which
seem to lie outside of the limits indicated above as settled. If conjectures
have to be made, one might conjecture that Trajan conquered the Dacia
of our maps, and that some later emperor withdrew from the extremities.
Digitized by
Google
786 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct.
Hadrian certainly thought of something of the sort, and the Porolissnm
vallum would fit aptly an emperor who built the Eoman wall in England
and was certainly concerned in the limes imperii in Germany.
F. Havbbfield.
THE PEOPLE OF THE OHANKBL ISLANDS.
Mr. Eeene, in his article on 'The Channel Islands, V in the present
volume of this Keview (p. 28), puts forward the theory that the people of
those islands are now of Breton and not of Norman blood.
Mr. Keene supports his view by — among others — the two following
arguments. One, the fact that the name Nonnand is used in the islands
as a term of reproach. Surely the explanation of this, given by old Falle,
the Jersey historian, is equally probable : that this usage dates from the
time when insular Normandy, having to choose between allegiance to
John or to Philip Augustus, declined to follow the example of the
continental Normans in their submission to French rule. The second
argument is that there is little Norrrum architecture in the islands. It
might really be a sufficient answer to say that there is no Breton archi-
tecture at aJl. Mr. Eeene does not, perhaps, realise that Norman, in its
architectural sense, designates a style by no means peculiar to Normandy,
and now, indeed, generally known by the more correct title of Roman-
esque. During the period in which it obtained, its use was general in
Europe, and its disuse in Normandy coincided with its disuse in England
and France. Had Mr. Eeene seen the Jersey churches forty years ago,
before their restoration^ or if he could see what remains even now, hidden
xmder new plaster, at St. Heliers and elsewhere, he would be convinced
that in most, if not in all, cases, Norman has been their original
style.
Nor do the inferences to be drawn from linguistic and ethnological
data at all bear out Mr. Eeene's theory. As regards the appearance of
the people, the type of features dominant in Brittany, and common in
central France, is entirely lacking in the islands. The bulk of Jerseymen
— and the same would be true of the inhabitants of lower Normandy — if
transplanted to Norway, Denmark, or Holland, would not be found to
differ, in their looks, very materially from their new neighbours. This
could not be said if Bretons or Berrichom were in question. The
immense influx of Breton labourers into Jersey for a few weeks in each
spring, due to the high wages obtainable during the potato harvest, gives
then a marked Breton appearance to the island, and may possibly have
helped to mislead Mr. Eeene. But this element disappears altogether
before autumn.
Then as to language : in Brittany, exposed as it has been for centuries
to French influences, and without any natural barrier between itself and
France, Breton remains the language of, at least, half the duchy, and
even in the French-speaking part, the Celtic place-names have been
almost universally retained. On Mr. Eeene's theory, the islanders, de-
barred as they were by the sea from outer influences, ought, aforiioHy to
have retained alike Breton speech and place-names. But there is certainly
Digitized by
Google
5k 1
? Danish: stac.
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 787
no survival whatever of the Breton tongue in the islands now, and no
trace exists of it ever having been the insular speech since the union— or
reunion — of the islands to the diocese of Ooutances ; if indeed they were
ever really annexed to Dol and severed, for a season, from that Pagus
Constantinus of which they formed, alike ethnologically and politically,
a part, from Eoman to Angevin days. The only traces of a Celtic popula-
tion are two or three place-names of striking natural objects. Many more
are Teutonic : such are the names of the islands themselves ; so are many
maritime and fishing terms and some agricultural terms, of which the
following may serve as examples.
Albecq, the eel-brook . . . Scandinavian : aal-hech.
home (dim : hommet), an islet, a 1 ^ .. . , .
rounded mass of rock . J Scandinavian : AoJm.
etac, a conical mass of rock'
(Hebrides stack)
vicq, a creek . . . , Scandinavian : vik.
berg, a rock .... Scandinavian : berg,
, , - f Icelandic : grun,
grune, a rocky shoal . . . | gj^^^j^^ . J^^
z. J -c u u 1. / Norwegian : haa.
hm, a dogfish or shark . . | ^^^^ ^^^ g^^^j^^ . ^
. , , f Icelandic : hatist-gardr.
Jumtgard, or Ju>gwrd, a nek yard | j^^^^ . j^.^^^^^
alputre, a rockling . . . Dutch : aaVpuyt (the river species).
'hou, 'ho, or -o, an island . . Norwegian : oe ?
This last may, however, be a contraction of holm, e.g. in a document
dated 1091, Jethou is referred to as insula qiuB vulgo Keikhulm vocatur.
Q. F. B. DB Gruohy.
TWO BISHOPS OP 8I0N IN ENGLAND.
Most travellers in Switzerland visit the canton of the Valais at some
period of their trip, and pass in the railway through the chief town, Sion
or Sitten. They look up at and admire the twin heights of Tourbillon and
Valeria, crowned, the one with a castle, the other with a castle and a
church, but few, perhaps, realise that the bishops of Sion have a long and
very interesting history. The see was founded in the fourth century by
S. Theodulus (from whom the well-known pass near Zermatt takes its
name), who is still the patron of the diocese ; but it was not till 580
that it was finally settled at Sedunum, having previously wandered from
Octodurus (Martigny) to Agaunum (S. Maurice) and back again. In 999,
Budolf III, king of Transjurane Burgundy, gave to the bishop the title of
coimt, and the temporal jurisdiction. The rights were exercised till
1798. After that the title became a mere form ; the bishop still bears
that of a prince of the Holy Eoman Empire. When the independence of
the Valais was restored in 1815, and it became one of the Swiss cantons,
VOL. n. — NO. VIII. 8 B
Digitized by
Google
788 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct.
the bishop was given (besides his seat) four votes in the local diet, reduced
in 1889 to the mere right of sitting in person, this last relic of his former
power being taken away in 1848.^
The history of the see is closely connected with the local history of the
Valais — the struggle of the ' tithings * in the Upper Valais for freedom, and
the conquest in 1475-6 of the Lower or Savoyard Valais by the bishop and
' tithings ' combined. Two, however, of the bishops who have sat on the
throne of S. Theodulus became known beyond the limits of their remote
diocese, and, curiously enough, both came to England— one as a papal
legate, the other as an imperial ambassador.
The former of these, Hermanfred, or Armenfrid, or Ermenfrid (bishop
1055 to 1084) is frequently mentioned in the pages of Mr. Freeman's
* Norman Conquest,* in which the words of the original authorities are
given. He presided as papal legate at the Council of Lisieux in 1055
(Freeman, iii. 96) which deposed Malger, the archbishop of Eouen. In
1062, again as papal legate, he spoke in the Witenagemot in favour of
the confirmation of the election of Wulfstan to the see of Worcester, as
he had enjoyed his personal acquaintance, and the legate induced the
reluctant saint to accept the see, on the ground that he owed obedience to
the pope whom Ermenfrid represented (Freeman, ii. 458-462).
Finally, in 1070 Ermenfrid came again to England in the same
capacity. He was present on 4 April at the council of Winchester, and
placed the crown on the head of King William, as a sort of papal sanction
of the success of the crusade to England, which had set forth with
Alexander's special blessing. At the same council (11 April) Stigand
was deprived of the primatial see of Canterbury (Freeman, iv. 829-888),
and other business was transacted, though the decision on St. Wulfstan's
appeal for the restoration of the estates belonging to his see was deferred
by both the king and legate (Freeman, iii. 889-840). On 24 May,
Ermenfrid held a synod at Windsor, and on 80 May consecrated Walkelin
the king's chaplain to the see of Winchester; because, as Florence of
Worcester tells us, Canterbury and York were at that moment vacant.
A short time affcer Ermenfrid went over to Normandy to press, and to
press successfully, the see of Canterbury on Lanfrranc of Beo (Fireeman,
iv. 845). Now, as among the eight bishops who on 29 August consecrated
Lanfranc to the primacy, we find the name of Walkelin, whose sole con-
secrator, so far as is known (see Bishop Stubbs's 'Begistrum Sacrum
Anglicanum,' p. 21), was Ermenfrid, and as all persons now in holy orders
of the English church trace their spiritual descent from Lanfranc, the
act of Ermenfrid on 80 May, 1070, becomes one of very great historical
and theological interest. We learn from Orderic that Alexander II sent
Ermenfrid and two other legates at the express request of William;
Ermenfrid stayed longer in England than his colleagues, according to
Florence, and it is to him especially that the following words of Orderic
apply: Apud se annwo ferme spatio retiivwit, a/udiens et honorans eos
tamquam angelos Dei. In diverds locis, in phmmis negotiis, sic egere^
stent indigos ccmomca examinatioms et ordinationis regiones iUat
dimovere (Freeman, iv. 880 and notes).
* I have not mentioned the donation of temporal rights to the bishop alleged to
have been made by Charles the Great, for it is not generally held to be authentie.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 739
According to the historian of the Valais, Father Furrer (* Geschichte
von Wallis,' i. 65-67, published 1862) and the first volume of the docu-
ments published by the abb^ Gremaud under the title, * Documents relatifs
k rhistoire du Vallais ' fvol. xxix., published 1875, of the * M^moires et
documents de la soci^t^ d histoire de la Suisse romande '), Ermenfdd was
frequently employed by the popes on other missions than those mentioned
above, extending from 1059 to 1072. So on 28 May 1059 he was
present officially at the coronation of Philip I of France, at Beims, and
in 1068 and 1072 at councils held at Ch&lons. In 1071 he assisted at the
council of Mayence, in 1076 he was at Worms. Thus he seems to have
been much away from home. Yet we have several traces of him in his
own diocese. He became (in 1082) the chancellor of Burgundy, and was
a special friend and favourite of the Emperor Henry IV, who, in 1079,
gave him the districts of Leuk and Naters, both well known to all
travellers in the Yalais. Furrer goes further, and makes out that it was
through his friendship that Henry, on his way to Canossa, succeeded in
crossing the Great St. Bernard, which was in the bishop's territories.
Unluckily Lambert of Hersfeld says expressly that Henry crossed the
locvm qui Cinis dicitur, or Mont Cenis, but one cannot help regretting
that this famous winter journey to Canossa (January 1077) owed nothing
to Ermenfrid's influence. Furrer throws out the suggestion that Ermen-
frid was himself of Norman origin. However this may be, his career
is interesting to students of early Swiss as well as of early English
history.
It could scarcely have been expected that another successor of S.
Theodulus would play a conspicuous part in English diplomacy, and yet
this came to pass in the case of Matthew Schinner, who, from 1499 to
1522, by right, occupied the see, though several times expelled. Schinner
was bom about 1456 at the little hamlet of Miillebach in the parish of
Aemen, just opposite Viesch, now so much visited by travellers, as it is the
starting-point for the Eggischhom. He became a canon of Sion in 1496,
and next year dean on the election of his uncle to the see. In 1499 his
uncle made him his vicar-general and then resigned in his favour, the
chapter electing him and the pope confirming their choice. Besides being
a considerable classical scholar, he was also an energetic bishop. He
completed the repairs of his cathedral church, much damaged by the
siege of 1475, and restored the church at Leukerbad, where, too, he built
two splendid bath-houses and three inns, so that the springs became much
frequented. Unluckily a great avalanche in 1518 did a great deal of
harm. In 1518, too, he procured from Julius H the privilege that the
see of Sion should henceforth depend immediately on the pope, and not
form part of the ecclesiastical province of Moiitiers Tarentaise — a privilege
which it enjoys to this day. He was, however, much troubled by turbu-
lent barons who drove him out several times and he died in exile. He
became a very important person in European politics as securing in 1510
to Julius n, in his war against the French, a force of Swiss mercenaries,
and henceforth he is the principal agent to whom princes apply for the
services of these renowned warriors. (For this first service Julius made him
in 1511 bishop of Novara and a cardinal.) It was in this way that he
became connected with English pohtics. Furrer (i. 250) states that he
3 B 2
Digitized by
Qoo^^
740 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct.
visited England in 1514 ; but though Swiss envoys did come to London
that year, Schinner was not among them, as has been pointed out bj
Herr W. Gisi, who has published (* Archiv fur Schweizerisohe Geschichte,*
XV., issued 1866) a most interesting account of the Swiss negotiations
with England 1515-1617, based on Mr. Brewer's great calendar of
* Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, in the Reign of Henry VIII.'
Schinner was, however, in communication with the English envoys abroad,
for we find (Brewer, i. no. 5266) that he asked Knight, on July 22, 1514,
to recommend him for the see of York, vacated by the recent death
of Cardinal Bainbridge. Despite the great defeat of the Swiss by the
French at the battle of Marignano (Sept. 14-15, 1515), the feune of the
Swiss footmen was so high that their services were still eagerly sought.
Hence Schinner met Pace at Innsbruck in November 1515 and n^otiated
with him in the name of the Emperor. A crowd of references to
Schinner will be found in Mr. Brewer's calendar (especially vol. ii.) bat
Mr. Brewer treats him rather badly in his prefaces, calling him * a poor
mountaineer bishop and a needy follower of the penniless Maximilian '
(Brewer, * Reign of Henry VIII,' i. 163). It was to procure money from
the wealthy Henry YIH in order to employ Swiss mercenaries that
Schinner was sent to England in 1516 by Maximilian. He arrived in
London according to one account before Oct. 18 (Brewer's ' Calendar,' iL
No. 2444), or on Oct. 15 according to Giustinian, the Venetian envoj
{ibid. No. 2449). On 16 Oct. he dined with Wolsey {ibid. No. 2449) and
on the 18th went to Greenwich, where he had a long consultation with
the king and Wolsey, after which Wolsey dined with Schinner, and came
away extremely angry, which Giustinian thinks may be due to a dispute
between the two owing to the insolence of the CardinfiJ of Sion {ibid. No.
2464). Schinner, however, succeeded in the main object of his mission
and obtained 40,000 crowns for the defence of Verona {ibid. No. 2501 and
2508, compare the draft terms in No. 2468). He left London on Nov. 8,
receiving presents from the king worth 8,000 ducats {ibid. No. 2548. See
p. 1478, where the sum is put at 6662. 18^. id. for Sion, and 40Z. for his
servants), and from the cardinal one worth 1,000 {ibid.). He writes to
Wolsey from Canterbury on 9 Nov., saying that he is waiting for a fail
wind, and that he hears that the French are lying in wait to catch him :
he begs for an annual pension and the next vacant bishopric or other
promotion {ibid. Nos. 2527-8). But though the money was paid over,
Verona was in the space of ten days passed from the emperor to the
king of Spain, from the latter to Francis I, and from Francis I to the
Venetians {ibid. No. 2869). There seems to have been a bit of sharp
practice here.
In May, 1517, SpineUy, the English resident in Flanders, reported to
Henry VIII that Schinner was coming again to England {ibid. No. 8246),
but this second visit never came off.
In 1519 (22 May, Brewer, iii, Nos. 257-8), he writes to Henry promising
to do all he could to prevent Francis I from being elected to the empire.
The two latest letters from him which appear in Mr. Brewer's * Calendar*
are dated 11 Jan. and 6 March 1522. In the former he explains that
he had strenuously supported Wolsey in the conclave, but that in the end
Hadrian VI had been unanimously chosen. He remarks that Wolsej's
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 741
turn may come yet, as the new pope is an old man, and begs for a pension
because of his misfortunes and exile. Some authorities state that
Schinner commanded ten votes in the conclave. In the latter he asks for
extra aid, over and above his pension ; Sion had been stripped ; and he
expresses a confident hope that Wolsey will have approved of his conduct
in the conclave. Schinner died in exile on 80 Sept. 1522. His life had
been spent in working against the growth of French influence, whether
in the Yalais in the person of George Supersaxo, or in Europe in the
persons of Louis XII and Francis I.
There is a curious document published by Toland at Amsterdam in
1709 under the title of ' Oratio Philippica ad excitandos contra Galliam
Britannos,* which purports to be a speech delivered to the Enghsh
parhament by Schinner ; but Toland allows that the delivery is very
doubtful, and that the attribution of the speech to Schinner is only a
conjecture of Sir Bobert Cotton's (see Daguet's ' Histoire de la Suisse,'
7th edition, i. 413 note ; Furrer, i. 250).
It is perhaps unprecedented that two bishops of a comparatively
unknown see should have been entrusted with such important business
for a pope and an emperor in England. Like all wanderings in the
byways of history, we come across curious, if not very important, links
between persons and places which we do not usually associate with each
other.
Of course, Ermenfirid could in no sense be a Swiss bishop, as the
Confederation was not formed till 1291. Schinner too would be wrongly
described by such a name, for the Upper Valais (as distinguished from
Lower or Savoyard Valais) did not become * allied ' with the Forest
Cantons — the inner circle of the Confederation — till the fourteenth
century, and more formally in 1416-7, while the Valais did not become a
Swiss canton till 1815. W. A. B. Coolidge.
ON TWO PETITIONS PRESENTED BY PABLIABiENT TO QUEEN ELIZABETH
TOUCHING HEB MABBIAQE AND THE BUCCEBBION, AND THE QUEEN'S
AN8WEBS THEBETO.
Sib Simonds D'Ewes, whose journal of Elizabeth's parliament is
one of the most valuable sources of information for that reign, is a very
careful and honest compiler, but he sometimes corrects or supplements
his authorities in such a way as to raise a doubt in the mind of his reader
how far he is to be relied on. It must be remembered that the official
journals during this period are very meagre and defective ; it can hardly
be supposed that the private records from which D'Ewes supplemented
their deficiencies are always correct. Occasionally, where D'Ewes thinks
them wanting, he is not above correcting them or filling up the gaps by
the aid of his imagination. For instance, on pp. 16, 42 (ed. 1682), he
gives an abstract of Speaker Gargrave's speech at the opening of Elizabeth's
first parliament. Li the course of this speech, we are told, the speaker
claimed, among other parliamentary privileges, the freedom from arrests
and suits. Nothing is there said to show that this statement is not
drawn direct from the authorities. But a little later D'Ewes, after
Digitized by VjOOQIC
742 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct.
remarking that members of parliament had long enjoyed this privilege,
goes on to say (p. 48) that he caused the claim * to be inserted into the
preceding abstract of Sir Thomas Gargrave's speech, because he either
did petition for freedom from suits, as well as for freedom from arrests,
or he ought to have done so.' Unfortunately, even a speaker does not
always act as he ought, and at this time his duty was not so clear, for
the form of petition for parliamentary privileges did not become regular
till after 1571. Again, at the opening of parliament in 1598, Speaker
Coke is said (p. 460) to have petitioned, among other things, for the * royal
assent to the things that are agreed upon.' 'But this last petition,'
D'Ewes continues, * seems to have been mistaken by that Anonymus, out
of whom this said speech is transcribed,' for it is a request made at the
end, not the beginning of a session. ' And doubtless the third petition,
which should have ensued here, was for freedom from arrests . . . which
being wholly omitted, I have before caused to be inserted in its proper
place.' These somewhat n^ve confessions lead one to doubt whether he
may not in other cases have manipulated his authorities and forgotten to
confess it. Whether this be'so or not, it seems clear that in one case, at
all events, this process has led him into error.
No question was more deeply interesting to the early parliaments of
Elizabeth than that of the queen's marriage and the settlement of the
succession. But it was a question which required very delicate handling,
for there was no point on which the queen was so sensitive, unless it
were perhaps that of her ecclesiastical supremacy. All attempts to dic-
tate to her, or even to deprive her of her initiative in these matters, she
firmly and sometimes angrily put down. The occasions on which such
attempts were made are therefore of considerable interest. D'Ewes has,
I believe, confused the history of two of these attempts, and he has been
followed by later writers, as Hallam, Froude, and the compilers of the
* Parliamentary History.'
On pp. 81, 105, D'Ewes gives the text of two petitions, which I will
call A and B, the former purporting to come from the commons, the
latter from the lords. Petition A is said to have been presented by
Speaker Williams on 28 Jan. 1568 ; petition B by Lord Keeper Bacon on
5 Nov. 1566. On pp. 76, 107, D'Ewes gives the text of two answers by
the queen to petitions about her marriage, which I will oaU a and (i.
The former is stated to have been made on 10 April, 1568 ; the latter on
5 Nov. 1566, the day on which petition B was presented. Camden (Eliza-
beth, ed. 1688) does not give the text of either petition or answer, nor
does he allude to any such petition under the year 1568. He gives, how-
ever (pp. 88, 84), an abstract of petition B, which he says was presented
by the mouth of Lord Keeper Bacon, speaker of the upper house, in 1566,
and he states briefly the purport cf the queen's answer.
My purpose is to show (I.) that petitions A and B were both presented
in 1568 ; (II.) that answers a and /3 are two versions of the same document,
which belongs to 1568, and is an answer to the above petitions.
I. To take the petitions first : — Sir S. D'Ewes (p. 81) says of petition
A, ' As touching the petition deUvered to her Majesty this afternoon (28
Jan. 1568). ... it is not at all contained in the original journal-book of
the house of commons ; and therefore, having a copy of it by me, which I
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 743
gather by all concurring circumstances to be the very same here men-
tioned, both in respect of the time and matter, I have caused it to be
inserted at large. I am not ignorant that in divers copies of this speech
another petition also is joined with it, as preferred hkewise by the lords
to her majesty at this time for the same causes, which in truth happened
not until the second session of this parliament.' Now for petition B.
After stating that the queen summoned thirty members of each house to
meet heron 5 Nov. 1586, and explaining the causes of anxiety with respect
to the succession, he continues (p. 104) : * All these premisses being duly
weighed by both houses of parliament, it made them to be more earnest in
petitioning her majesty at this time to the same effect ; although it
seemeth that the petition delivered at this time was chiefly preferred in the
name of the lords of the upper house, as that other petition had formerly
been preferred in the name of the commons . . . whence it hath come to
pass ttiat neither of these petitions being set down in the journal-book
. . . the times of their delivery have been confounded together in all such
several copies as I have perused of them ; in which, as also in Sir Bobert
Cotton's first volume of the * Journals of Parliament ' of the queen's time
. . . they are erroneously entered to have been both delivered in anno
1568. . . . But whether the lords preferred their said petition this after-
noon [i.e. on 5 Nov.], or whether they had supplicated her majesty any
time before, doth not anywhere certainly appear . . . and so it is most
probable that, though her majesty had notice before what their petition
was, yet it was not preferred till this afternoon.' The petition itself is
introduced by the words : * Therefore the said petition doth here first
ensue, which the lord keeper pronounced in these or the like words
following ' (p. 105) — a phrase which throws doubt on the exactitude of the
report.
On this I observe (1) that the above extracts make iiprimd facie pro-
bable that both petitions were presented at the same time, since they
occur together in all the copies which D'Ewes had seen. In one copy,
that of Sir B. Cotton, they are both entered under the year 1563. (2) In
both cases the queen's recent illness is made the immediate occasion of
the petition. Petition A speaks of God having, * to our great terror and
dreadful warning, lately touched your highness with some danger of your
most noble person by sickness.' Petition B says, ' The lamentable • . .
condition wherein all your nobles and councillors of late were, when it
pleased Ood to lay his heavy hand upon you ... is one cause of this
their petition.' Now the queen was seriously ill of the small-pox in October
1562 ; her illness had filled the nation with anxiety, and brought to light
dangerous differences of opinion in the council. The allusions, therefore,
seem to point to 1563 as the date of both petitions. (3) Lord Keeper
Bacon is said by D'Ewes (p. 105) to have * pronounced ' petition B. He
is not named in the journals in the list of those peers who were appointed
to wait on the queen on Nov. 5, 1566, and it is nearly certain that he was
absent from parliament at this time, owing to a fit of the gout. On
25 Oct. Sir Bob. Catlin had been appointed speaker of the lords in his
place, and Bacon was not reinstated as speaker till 9 Nov. Moreover,
Bacon's name appears as attending the house on 24 Oct. and 11 Nov.,
but on no day between ; while on 6 Nov. as well as on other days during
Digitized by
Google
744 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct-
the interval, Sir B. Catlin appears as locum tenens (Lords' Journals). It is
therefore almost certain that Bacon was hors de combat on 5 Nov. and
could not have been present at court. If the petition was read by him,
it was not presented on that day. D'Ewes notices the difficulty, but,
having convinced himself that the petition was presented on 5 Nov.,
simply says that Bacon must have been there that day. (4) All the
negotiations between the houses, from 18 Oct. 1566, when the question
was first raised in the commons, to 5 Nov., point to a great effort having
been made to effect a combination of the two houses. On 26 Oct. the
lords agreed to join with the commons. On Saturday, 2 Nov., there was a
conference on the subject between committees of the two houses. The
discussion was apparently not concluded, for there is no mention of the
matter in the journals for Monday, 4 Nov., and next day the houses were
summoned before the queen. It is probable that no formal petition was
presented, for there was hardly time between Saturday and Tuesday to
draw one up ; nor is it likely that it would have been presented without
having been before the houses, and of this there is no mention in the
journals. At all events, any petition then presented must have been a
joint petition, which petition B is not. Mr. Froude says (viii. 818), * The
two houses desired to express their wish,' &c. But petition B, as we
have it, comes from the lords alone — ' all your lords both spiritual and
temporal assembled in parliament in your upper house ' — and there is no
mention in it of any share taken by the commons. How should such a
petition have been presented by a deputation composed equally of members
of the two houses ? (5) Besides the allusion to the queen's illness, there
are many points of similarity between the two petitions, which make it
likely that they were drawn up at the same time — e.g. the allusions to the
break-up of Alexander's empire after his death, to the wars of the Hoses,
to thd good results of declaring the succession in France, and other
coincidences, which can hardly have been accidental.
On these grounds I beheve (1) that petition B was not presented on
5 Nov. 1566 ; (2) that both petitions were presented about the same time ;
(8) that the time was the spring session of 1568. It must be observed
that this result is directly opposed to the authority of Camden, whom
D'Ewes (p. 105) follows in attributing petition B to the year 1566, but
fkgainst the authority of Camden we may set that of Sir B. Cotton.
n. I come now to answers a and fi. D'Ewes (p. 75) says that, at the
time of prorogation, on 10 April, 1568, after an address from Speaker
Williams, Lord Keeper Bacon made a reply on behalf of the queen, at the
end of which he said, * Touching your request before this made unto her
for her marriage and succession, because it is of such importance ... I
desired her majesty that her meaning might be written, which she hath
done and delivered to me, to be read as followeth ; ' and then follow the
words, ' Since there can be no duer debt,' &c. ' These foregoing speeches'
(says D'Ewes) are ' transcribed out of the very autograph or original
memorial of them.' On p. 107, after giving the text of petition B, he
says, * Now in the next place must follow her majesties answer, which
wafi without all doubt given this afternoon ' (5 Nov. 1566). But, as the
text of the answer is not to be found in the journals, he compares Camden's
account of it with the report in the Commons' Journals for 6 Nov. 1566,
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 745
and deduces the conclusion ' that that answer of her maj. of which
I had a copy by me being erroniously placed, as also that of Sir Bob.
Cotton's is in the first volume of his Pari. Journals . . . amidst the
passages of the parliament of 1568, that that copy, I say, contains the
answer which her maj. gave at this time . . • being as followeth : save
only that through often transcribing without comparing, it should seem
it is somewhat defective.' Then follows the answer, beginning, ' Since
there can be no duer debt,' &c., as before.
On this I would observe : (1) That the two answers given by D'Ewes
are clearly one and the same. This is evident on the most cursory view.
The opening and concluding words are almost identical ; the purport of
both answers, so far as it can be gathered from the involved and hope-
lessly ungrammatical phraseology, is the same ; in short, a comparison of
the two answers shows throughout so much similarity as to make it
certain either that a is a compressed report of /3, or /3 an expanded edition
of a. D'Ewes appears not to have observed any resemblance. (2) That
answer fl was given in 1668 is made d priori probable (as in the case of
petition B) by its position in Sir B. Cotton's journals. Further, it agrees
very nearly, except for a few verbal variations, with the copy of the queen's
answer to a petition or petitions of marriage and succession which is pre-
served at Hatfield. This copy is quoted by Mr. Froude (vii. 608), and is
stated by him to be dated 10 April 1568. Lastly, answer /3 alludes to
< two petitions,' which D'Ewes explains as referring to the two requests of
petition B, but which may be more probably taken as referring to the two
petitions, A and B, presented in 1663. (8) That answer /3 is not the
answer made in 1566 appears to me to be clear from that very comparison
of the reports in Camden and in the Commons' Journals, whence D'Ewes
draws the opposite conclusion. Camden says (p. 85) that the queen in
1566 summoned a deputation from both houses before her, * whom with
gentle reprehension she qualified . . . promising not only the care of a
prince but also the affection of a mother.' There is nothing corre-
sponding to this in either answer a or ^. The Commons' Journals
(6 Nov. 1566) say that notes of the queen's answer were read by Mr.
Secretary that day, involving a promise to marry, and stating that, owing
to the perils to her person, the time was inopportune for treating of the
succession. This report is equally inconsistent with answers a and (3,
(4) Whether n or /3 is the original is not easy to say. The fact that the
longer version is preserved at Hatfield seems to render it probable that it
is Cecil's draft, which may have been cut down by the queen before its
delivery by the lord keeper. On the other hand, answer a may be an im-
perfect report of the speech, and answer /3 the form in which it was
actually delivered. And this seems the more probable hypothesis.
I conclude, then, (1) that answers a and fi are two versions of the same
document ; (2) that this document belongs to the year 1568 ; (8) that it
is the answer made to petitions A and B.
But what about the petition or petitions presented in 1566 and the
queen's answer made on that occasion ? I have already shown reason for
supposing that no formal petition was presented in that year : at all
events it has not been preserved. But the queen's answer appears to be
extant, though attributed to a wrong date.
Digitized by
Google
746 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct.
Hallam (' Const. Hist/ i. 250, note) refers to a speech of Elizabeth,
given in Hanngton's ' Nugsa AntiqnsB/ i. 80, and says that this is the
answer made in 1568. The speech in question is headed, ' The Qneen's '
answer to the Speaker,' and begins, ' Williams, I have heard by you the
common request of my commons,' &c. It is hardly conceivable that
even Elizabeth should have begun so unceremoniously. The word
* Williams ' clearly belongs to the heading, and not to the speech. If the
heading be correct, it would doubtless fix the date as 1568, for Speaker
Williams died before the session of 1566. There is, moreover, an allusion
to a severe illness from which the queen had lately recovered, which was
the case in 1568. The queen may, however, have been ill again; Mr.
Froude (viii. 818) says distinctly, though I do not know on what authority,
that she was so. On the other hand, Camden, as quoted above, states
that the queen, while refusing the petition, promised that she would show
the petitioners ' the affection of a mother.' The speech given in
Harington ends thus: 'Though after my death you may have many
step-dames, yet you shall never have a more natural mother than I mean
to be to you all.' This seems to make it clear that the document in
Harington belongs to 1566 and not to 1568. 0. W. Pbothbbo.
OOLLEOTIONS BY I8AA0E WALTON FOB THE UFE OF
JOHN HALES OF ETON.
In the life of Walton prefixed by Zouch to the * Lives ' in the edition of 1796,
we are told that Mr. Farringdon ' had collected materials with a view to
write the life of John Hales, and that on his death, *his papers were
consigned to the care of Mr. Isaac Walton, by Mr. William Fulman, of
Corpus Christi College, Oxford, who had proposed to finish the work, and
on that occasion had applied for the assistance of our biographer.'
This explains Isaack Walton's relation with the paper now printed
firom the Walker MSS. in the Bodleian library, vol. ii. No. 414. The
first part, written in a fair hand, is, I gather, not Walton's but Farring-
don's, the subsequent notes being part of Walton's collections. The letter
of Dean Stradling which is prefixed to it is in the same volume. No. 413.
The whole was made use of in the Life of Hales in Walker's ' Sufferings
of the Clergy,' pt. ii. p. 98. Samuel B. Oabdineb.
Dr. Stradling, Dean of Chichester, to Isaack Walton.
Chiohester, June 22, — 73.
S*" — According to y*^ comand I have delivered y*^ letter to M*^ King. I
am sorry I can give you noe better an accoumpt of M*" Hales then this
short lame one, w^^ 1 have pickt out of my wife (for my Mother is silent)
That hee was a person we highly estemd abroad for his great abilities of
learning that scarce a weeke passt wherin some letters came not to h\m
from some eminent persons beiond seas to crave his judgem^ in several!
abstruse points. A hard student hee continued to his last, and a great
mortifier of himselfe hee was, it being his constant custome to fast from
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 747
Thursday dinner to Saturdays. Though hee was soe excellently knowing,
yet was hee withall soe modest, that he w^ patiently heare the Table
discourse of ordinary and mean skilld persons in learning that started
controversies there with^ interposing or speaking one word till earnestly
desired by the company, who w^ still bee concluded by what hee said.
Soe much did hee value quiet and retirednes that hee was seldome seen
but at dinner & prayers, & being invited by a considerable person to his
house, (S' Charles Sidley, but you are desird to conceale his name) with
y^ profer of 100* per annum & the keeping of a serv^ & 2 horses, hee
refused, chusing rather to bee with my Mother * Salter & accept of a salary
of a quarter of that summe for tut'ing her sonne Will. Salter. How
upright & just he was in his dealing, will appeare by this instance (w^^
my wife had from her brother, as hee from Mr Hales himselfe) that when
hee was ^ursar of Eaton Colledg & had chanced to receave some bad coyne,
hee w^ exchang it for good of his own to pay other with, in soe much
that sometimes hee has stood to the losse of 20 or 80 pounds, w^ hee
w^ throw into y* river, that noe body might ever bee y« worse for y* bad
money.
The Parlament had given his fellowship to one Penwam, who being
toucht in conscience for y^ wrong hee had done soe worthy a person, &
offering to resign it up again to him, hee refused it, telling him that
hee w^ not bee put in again by y^ Parlament ; and being by an order
thereof outed of his small employment at Richkings,*my mother could by
noe meanes persuade him to stay with her, for feare of drawing any trouble
or inconvenience upon her or her family. Soe hee left her and not many
days after this life, giving order a little before his death that hee must bee
buried not in the church but in the churchyard. This is aU the accoumpt
I can give you of this great little man, w^^ possibly may serve to fill up one
page of his life, if you or y' friend think it materiall. My mother. Aunt,
and wife present their service to you the later whereof and my selfe desire
you to give ours also to M" Neale
lam S""
Y^ dutifull Sonne and fedthfull serv^
Geo Stbadling:
As yet I cannot but shall speedily send you M' H. Kings Epitaph.
Addressed : * For M' Isaaok Walton at M'
GrinseU*8 honse a Grocer in
King's Street in Westmin-
ster,
London.'
Indorsed : * To be returned to Archdeacon
Davies.*
The Authours Life. [By Mr. Walton^ the scrawl his own hand.^]
Not soe much to honour the Dead (which cannot adde one grain to that
weight of glory which he now enjoys) as to set up a picture for the living
to look on, and draw out in themselves, doe we heere present him in that
^ I.e. Mother-in-law. * Lady Salter's house near Eton.
* The words in brackets are in a different hand from that of ' The Anthoors Life.'
Digitized by
Google
748 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct.
shape and proportion (as neere as we could take him) which made him
the Delight of those with whome he walked in this Land of the Living,
and hath now lifted him up to the converse, to that joy and peace which
makes him like to the Angells in Heaven. And indeed those dutys which
we owe to the Dead, we pay to the hving, who only can receive them in
kind : for he who would he soe much below himself while he lived, is
now removed as far above the prayse of men as he is from their Mortality,
and barkens after noe Trumpet but the last and the soules of just men
made perfect look not back neither on our Lnagery nor our worship, but
shine as starres, which are not seene, but by that hght which streames
forth in the memory of those virtues which raysed and fixt them theere ;
but see noe more of us, then those starres (to which they are likened)
doe, when we move and walk by theire light.
I know well one exception there is, which may peradventure be put
up against me and that it may be sayd that every mans life will not
make a Legend nor is it fit matter for story or to be read in the monu-
ments of fame, which seldome shews any to posterity but those, who
stood high either in the Church or Common-wealth, and grew up in
reputation for poHty, or power, or wealth, which enabled them to build
Churches, found Colleges, modell commonwealths, quench confusions,
subdue rebeUions, which are the actions of men of working and publick
spirits and not within the reach of those, whoe are not willing to be seene
on the common stage, but withdraw, and bury themselves in theire study
and privacy : which opinion though it may find many that will favour it,
yet hath it not any passe from reason, which may commend it to those
who are truly wise, but savours more of the world (which soe much
pleases and soe much deceives us) than of that rich faith [which] over-
comes it, and can discover virtue under the students gowne in as much
lustre and glory, as under the ri[ch] mantle of state or robe of honour.
And this may be the reason why soe many faire Examples are lost to
the world, which might have been seene with as much advantage, as those
we now behold with more admiration then love, but are now raked up in
oblivion with them that gave them, which moving in a Lower Begion,
moved as Meteors doe with some observation for a while, gave some light
and vanish't as the Junior Pliny hath observed. Dicta factaque illustrium
virorum aha clariora, aha illustriora ; Some examples have beene greater
and some more lasting ; nor have the best men had the greatest name and
credit in the world, because they found none who would transmitt their
memory to posterity but soe they dyd and their workes followd them and
left noe impression or signe behind them by which we might know them,
and soe are to us as though they had never been.
For their sakes therefore who love vertue wheresoever it is and can
behold it under the courser goune of a student in as greate lustre and
brightnesse as under the richest mantle of state or Bobe of honour, and
noe lesse for theirs who knew and honoured him ; and have already what-
soever I can put in paper written in their minds, and soe can witnesse to
the world that he was the man in every part and Lineament, as wee
present him, I have yeilded to the labour which yet hath pleasure in it
to look back upon this worthy man, to assay and examin my memory,
where this worthy hath a place though unworthy of him, and out of that
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 749
gather together those partioolars which may make up a fedre example,
which may characterize others, and work and fashion them to his like-
nesse, or help to advance them above it, which is that honour which is
due mito the Saincts and the best that we can give them.
If the place of our Birth be a Circumstance any way at all consider-
able (for good men as well as bad may grow up in any soile) we find he
was borne in the Ancient city of Bath of religious and honest parents of
the rank and order of Gentlemen, wel knowne and as well esteemed of all
the neighbourhood : His fathers seate and Demeanes was two miles dis-
tant from the City in a village called High-Church which was derived to
him by many descents, which he kept entire neither bettered nor impaired ;
for it seemes his designes and possessions were confined within the
same Hedge and boundary and reached ^ noe further.
He had many sonnes and he made good his relation to them as for as
his care in their Education, and humane providence could reach [p]laoing
every one of them in that way of life, which he thought him fittest to
move in, with most faciUty and ease. But this he designed for the gowne
resolving to make him a Schollar, out of a hope which had something of
Divination in it, that he was made for one : And indeed time and Event
made it good even beyond his hopes, which he outlived and saw it filled,
with more than it did look on : For though his Naturall endowments,
which were more than ordinary fell unhappily under the Mannage of weak
instructors, who taught him but little, or that which he was to unleame,
and soe were at a stand, not betterd much yet still the same as plants
which in some kind of soyle neither bloome nor dye, but retaine the vege-
tative power as some men doe their Eational, only as an argument that
they had,' but meeting afterwards with a better ayre, and falling under the
Eye and care of those who could better disceme and better cherish them,
they did put forth and in 3 or 4 years redeem 'd the losse of 6, and thrived
soe fast, that as it was sayd of Cyprian, he might seeme to have been per-
fect, wel neere as soone as hebegunne.
gr,6 This above is writ from m*" Paringdons Copie as perfectly as it
Could be transscrib'd : for it was very foxde writ, and much interlined.
And you may note that what follows will not be set downe in order, but
backward and forward, as I have Colected them in my queries and
possibly twice.
You may note that the letter to me and now to you is from the now
deane of Chichester, who marryed the lady Salters daiter wich lady in the
time of the long parliament dwelt at Bichking^, a fiure bowse (then hers)
about 3 miles from Eaton Collage, with this lady (who is an exilent lady,
and still lives) m'' Hales had an intire freindship, long before the long
parliament, and his distres by it.
After doctor king late Bp. of Chichester was sequesterd and plunderd,
he, his 2 sons, a brother. Sir Bichard Hubert who marryed one of his
sisters, and an other of the Bishops sisters then the widow of m'' Dutton
* * and reached reached * in the same writing ; of this * and reached ' is struck oat,
and * and wher * substituted in the hand of the writer of the later part of this paper.
» ? * it ' omitted.
* The remainder is in the writing likely to be that of Isaack Walton.
Digitized by
Google
750 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct.
of Sherborne (now wife to Sir Bichard How) and 2 or 8 gentlemen of
note (sons of the Church) made some Contraokt with the Lady Salter to
Cohabit in her house : to which end they got a steward and a Chaplin
(which was their freind m*" Hales) and their they made a kinde of
Collage as to praying the Church prayers, rec[eiving] the Sacrament and
= and =
m' Hales sould his bookes q. before or after his sequestration ?
he had for them — q 7B0li. in that time when learning was decried
and bookes an extreme dreg.
this mony he parted with by degreies to many scollers, sequesterd
minesters, and others that were dejected and in want ; insomuch that
within q. how many years soxdd before his deth.
about 2. or 8. montiis before his deth m' Antony Faringdon went to
se him at the towne of Eaton wher he fownd him gravely Cherfull at the
howse of mrs. or gooddy powny where a very mene lodging Contented
him. this woman was the widow of powny some time m*" Hales his
servant, but he dyed before m' Hales was in his distres, and she was
affectionately dilligent to atend him in aU his necessities and at her poore
howse the good man dyed.
but I retume to what m'' Faringdon (whose learning and fortitude
exprest in his exilent sermons speake him a man worthy the friendship of
m' Jo. Hales) told me.
but first I must tell that m*" Far[ingdon] had a wife and 7 Children
when he was sequestred out of his parsonage of Bray about 8 miles from
Eaton, after he had beine som years sequestred and poore to an ex-
tremitie he got to be preacher in a Ch[urch] in milk streite london where
he obtained so Char[ita]ble a reward for his exilent sermons as lessond
m ^ [leaf torn here] his Care and Charg which had prevent[ed] his wife
and Children from extreme want or misery.
now I say m' Far[ingdon] got to be preacher [in Milk] streite and in
the height of his great [reputajtion and freindship and profit ther [leirf
torn] sends out order by procHmation or other [leaf torn] or se-
questerd minester shood after the 24 day of June next prech in any
parish Church or other place within london or nere to it by — q.— miles,
but m' Far[ingdon] who had the most learned and best cong[r]egation that
1 think ever was in any parish Church in England, was perswaded to lette
2 frends hold basons at the Church dores the two Sundays before the said
24° of June and their was given him I think 400" (q. m*" Marryot if not more)
And now I come to tell you that m' Faring[don] told me that at his
seing m'^ Hales at the said m" pownyes after they two had eaten some
litteU thriftie diner and talked of freinds and the sad times : m"" Ha[le8]
asked ffor to walke with him into the Church yeard, and at their being their
m*" Hajles] said I have hv'd to sell my library, aU, but a very few that I
have given away and 6 or 8 bookes of devotion that ly on the Cupbords
hed in my Chamber, of a very small valew, and for mony I have but
this in all the world, shewing him 7 or 8*' and I doubt I am in debt for
my lodging and washing, at the hering of which m' Far[ingdon] Startled
and said Sir I am now full of mony and will tomorrow pay you 50" — in part
of the many somes that I and my poore wife have had from you in our
» « much * ?
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 751
greate necessities and more sodainly as you shall neide it — ^to which m'
Hajles] answard noe you doe not owe me a penny, and if you doe I doe
here forgive you, for you shall never pay me a penny. I Imow you and
yours will have ocations for much more than what you have lately gotten.
So he ? and begge.
But if you know any other freind that hath too full a purse and will
spare some of it to me, I will not refuse that, and when I dye which I
hope is not far of. for I am wery of this vncharitable world, I desyre you
se me buried in [leaf torn] [some ?] place of the Church yard, (poyn[ting]
to the place.) To which his [answ]are was why not in the Church
wher [leaf torn] proust Sir, Har. Woton and many [of his ?]
friends and predicessors lye buried ? to which his an[swer was] he was
no fownder nor had ever [been a?] benifactor to it and was now sure he
shood [not lie there ?] and wood not theirfore be buried in it. (This which
is last writ shood have beine kept for the last informations if I had kept
order.)
severall have told me of his greate abstinance that is from Thursday
noone to Satterday noone without taking a bit of bread or drinking a
spoonfoll of drinke, and he wood somtime fast till Sunday 12 a Clock, in
this time of his abstinance he was desyrose to be private unles he were
told his Company wood doe the family good or make them CherfuU, and
that wood draw him into a Converse with them, and thus he wood Com-
ply to satisfie others with a Cherfall willingnes.
He was never unwilling to satisfie any that were scrupled in Contience,
and wood somtime Clere their owne perplext thoughts to them, and send
sad people from him rejoying and himselfe as glad as they for that he
had done good to them.
He had from foraine parts many letters sent from unknowne scollers for
solutions of learned questions, which were so satisfactory that they ended
not their queries till deth ended his life, in which nomber H. grotiti^ was
one 'twixt whome and him their past many. I have beine shewed by him
the picture of grotius which he kept in his study, and to me he spake
highly of his greate and usefuU learning.
Concerning his booke of scisme you may note that whatever his
opinion was he kept it to himselfe as to the Controverted parts of it,
espetially toward his age. that booke was got from him I have heard by
the old Lord Say and when Contrary to promise 'twas by him Comuni-
cated, he was much displeas'd saying often he shood much lament if he
shood be borne to beget trobles or Controversies in that Church in which
he was babtis'd.
Concerning this vew doctor parkers last booke folio -186. and you are
to reade doctor pearson his preface to Mr. Hales his sermons and frag-
ments, and in probabillitie that he was of an other opinion nerer his end.
Concerning scisme you may when you mention that treatise note what
followes — one Comes into his studdy not long before his sequestration and
find^ him reading Calvins institutions and asked him pleasantly if he
were not yet past that booke, to which his answare was that in his yonger
dayes he reade him for his information, and did now reade him to re-
forme him.
You may note that when the Lady Salter wood have had him stay
Digitized by
Google
752 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct.
longer, he said it might bring her in danger of a violation of the protectors
proclamation or and that wood shorten his life and in the menetime
fill it with fere and so make it uncomfortable.
I have told
LETTEB FBOM GEOBGE HIOKEB, D.D., DEAN OF WORGESTBB.
The following letter from Dr. George Hickes, dean of Worcester, eminent
aUke as scholar and nonjuror, will be read with much interest. It relates
to his brother, John Hickes, the nonconformist minister on whose account
Alice Lisle suffered so cruelly and who was himself executed at Glaston-
bury on 6 Oct. 1685 for sharing in Monmouth's rebellion. Of hinn we are
told by Galamy that he was ejected in 1662 from Stoke Damerel in Devon-
shire, and then settled at Portsmouth. His dying speech, together
with three letters to his wife and one to a nephew, is printed in the ^ New
Martyrology ; or, the Bloody Assizes,* written by JolmTutchin but published
anonymously ; of which, however, the fourth edition, issued in 1698, bears
the name of Thomas Pitts as author. The speech is also given in Will.
Turner's * History of the most remarkable Providences,' pubhshed in 16OT.
It furnishes some interesting particulars of his life ; that he was educated
at Dublin ; was acquainted with colonel Blood after 1671, but was not
engaged in any of his plots, although Blood procured a pardon for him
from the king when * involved in great trouble of another nature,' of which
he says he had given a narrative to the world ; that when the duke of
Monmouth landed, he went directly to him at Shepton MaUet from the
east country ; that he was betrayed by one Barter of Lisnel [?], who was
' such a traitor ' to the duke, ' his old and intimate friend ; ' that he joined
the duke, believing in his legitimacy and his title to the crown ; and that
he died * owning my ministry, ncmconformity, for which I have suffered
so much, and which doth now obstruct the khig's grace and mercy to be
manifested and extended to me,' but disclaiming aU rebellious principles.
On turning to the Dublin ' Catalogue of Graduates ' (printed in 1869), I
find that John Hickes took the degree of B.A. 4 May 1655.
With all allowance for strong differences in religious and political views,
and probable consequent separation in life, the tone of the dean's letter
seems somewhat hard; and one is glad, therefore, to learn from John
Hickes' letters that his brother made some attempt to save him.
In his letter to his nephew on 5 Oct. he says : * I wrote last Satur-
day was a sevennight to my brother George, but whether he is
at London or Worcester, I know not ; I wrote to him to desire him to
petition the king, that some favour and mercy might be shewed me, if he
thought fit ; ' and then in one of the letters to his wife he says, * Monday
last my brother ' (no doubt his brother George) * went to London to tiy
what could be done for me ; what the success will be, I know not.'
He was, however, as unyielding in his own principles as was the dean ;
he says to his wife, ' I bless God who hath kept me from all temptations
to conformity,' and asserts that it is his courage and public spirit for the
protestant religion and the English liberties that have brought him to this
end. He mentions his two children, James and Betty.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 768
A singnlarly hard £Ebte attended the consistency of the two brothers :
the one ejected for nonconformity to the church, and executed for rebellion
against the king ; the other, ejected for unyielding conformity to what he
conceived to be the true church principles of obedience, and suffering loss
of all preferments and worldly wealth for staunch loyalty to the very same
king but five years afterwards.
The notice of Bishop Ken's pious charity will not escape readers.
The original of the letter is now in the Bodleian Library, having been
given in the present year by Mrs. Arthur Evans, at whose disposal it was
placed by the owner, Mr. Frederick Locker-Lampson. It could not be in a
more suitable place of deposit, since the Library possessed already many
of the dean's letters and papers. William Dunn Macbay.
Worcester Oct. 17**» 86.
Much hon<* S*"
At my return to the Deanery from visiting the manors belonging
to our church 2 dayes ago, I found your very kind letter, for w<* I return
you my most hearty thanks and will ever acknowlege your great charity,
and respects towards my late wretched brother, w<^ diall remain a debt
upon my account, as long as I live.
I must also entreat you to return my most humble duty and thankes
to my good Lord Bishop for his eminent condescenscion, and charity
towards him in praying w*^ him, and for him, and for suffering so un-
worthy a body to be interred in Glassenbury-Church.
I take this last great respect of my Lords to be don to myself, and
desire in a particular maimer to be thankfull for it. I am glad he made
such professions of his loyalty, and gave the people such good exhorta-
tions to be true, and faithfull to their lawfull soveraign, and to detest all
manner of rebellion, but am very sorry y^ he persisted in justifying his
nonconformity : this part of his last behaviour filles my heart w^ greif,
tho' I was prepared to expect it, as knowing very well how ignorant he
was of the true nature of church-communion, and how much he was pre-
possessed w^ false notions and principles in matters relating to church-
discipline and government.
I humbly intreat you to send on the paper he delivered to you, you
may direct it to me at the Deanery in Worcester, and I also pray you to
let me know, whether he left any charge, or message to his children in
word or writeing, y* they should live in the communion of our church and
whethei he desired, and received the holy sacram^, and if not, whether he
refused it, or it was refused to him, as might justly have been don to a
man persisting in schisme. I also desire to know, whether his body was
dehvered whole to his friends, and if so, whether it was don by order from
my Lord Ch. Justice : I wrote to his Lord? to beg so much mercy of him,
and if he granted my petition, it is fit I should know it, and give him
thankes.
I should be also glad to know what my Lord said to him at his tryall,
and condemnation, and whether he said anything to the people in justifi-
cation of his nonconformity at tiie time of his execution, and if he ac-
knowleged his punishment to be the righteous judgm^ of Ood for his sin
of rebellion.
VOL. n.— NO. vni. 8 o
Digitized by
Google
764 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct.
There is a worthy gentleman of the church of Welles, to whome I
beseech you give my humble service, and particular respects, I mean IK
Greighton, and to the good Dean, if he be there.
I doubt my curiosity hath made me too troublesome to yoo, bat I
assure you, you may in requiteall command me any service, for I am in
all sincerity
dearS'
Your most obliged, affect, and humble serv^
Geobgb Hjokbs.
Addressed: 'For the Beverend M' Robert
Eyre Chaplain to my Lord
Bishop of Welles at the pal-
lace in
Welles
Somersets.'
Postmark, * in all 6^'
LOBD MAOAULAY AND THB ASSAULT OF NAMUB*
Considering the reputation as a historian in which Lord Macaulaj is
held, it is well to point out any important inaccuracies that may have oc-
curred in his picturesque descriptions. The subject to which the present
remarks refer is his account of a prominent historical event, viz. the
assault of Namur citadel in 1695,
Jt was during the war in which Great Britain, Holland, Spain, and the
Empire were in conflict with France, that, in July 1695, the strong fortress
of Namur in the Netherlands, then in the hands of Louis XTVt was
invested and besieged by the aUies under the personal command of William
m. After an attack of nearly two months' duration, when the Due de
Boufflers had effected a skilM and vigorous defence, but Yilleroy, who
with a French army had intended to relieve him, was obliged to retreat,
the crowning act of the siege was resolved upon. This was the
general assault of the covered way (or counterscarp, as the expression
then ran) of the citadel, and of the breaches which had been made in the
Terra Nova and Coehom outworks. Of the share taken by the English
troops in this hard-fought operation the following is the account given by
Lord Macaulay : — [1] * The truth is that most of the [English] regiments
which had seen service had marched with William to encounter Yilleroy.
[2] Cutts at the head of a small body of grenadiers marched first out of
the trenches with drums beating and colours flying. [8] This gallant
band was to be supported by four battaUons which had never been in
action, and which, though full of spirit, wanted the steadiness which so
terrible a service required. . . [4] The raw recruits [on Cutts being
wounded], left almost without direction, rushed forward impetuously till
they found themselves in disorder and out of breath. . . • They lost heart
and rolled back in confusion till Cutts • • • succeeded in rallying them '
(Macaulay*s * History of England,' iv. 594).
Among the contemporary records of this event, Auvergne's ela-
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 756
borate history is clearly the standard. It is the only work treating
solely of the war in question ; it was published in successive volumes
during the progress of that war (thus the events of 1696 were given to
the world in 1696); whilst on its descriptions of the campaigns of
William III the accounts given by every English history of the eigh-
teenth century have been founded, and the official records of the British
army have been based. But in addition to Auvergne's work there is
the following important confirmatory testimony: — the London Gazette
of 29 August, 1696 ; the * Exact Journal of the Siege of Namur,' pub-
Hshed in 1696 ; the ' Campaigns of King William and the Duke of
Marlborough,' by Brigadier-General Richard Kane, who actually took
part in the assault of Namur, though his work was not published till
after his death in 1746 ; and Bishop Kennet's ' Complete History of
England to the Death of his Majesty King William UI,* published
in 1706. There is also Boyer's 'History of William III,' published
in 1703, but owing to there being no copy of this work in the British
Museum the present writer has been unable to peruse it. Even if it
differ from Auvergne it cannot compare with that history in point
of authority. But the evidence furnished by later writers of the eigh-
teenth century — i.e. of Ealph, Smollett, and Tindal, who doubtless had
seen Boyer's account — goes to show that nothing in it is antagonistic
to the statements of Auvergne, Kane, and Kennet.
Having tested Lord Macaulay's version by the light of these records,
we will reply to it in detail, taking separately each numbered group of
assertions.
(1) When the assault was delivered, ' most of the regiments which
had seen service ' had not marched with William to encoimter Villeroy,
for the force which had been actually detached from the besieging army
imder William's personal command, to strengthen the covering army of
the Prince of Vaudemont in opposing Villeroy, only included the follow-
ing nine English battalions, viz. : — five battahons of the brigade of Guards,
Columbine's regiment (6th), Stanley's (16th), Seymour's (24th), and
Lauder's ; the majority of the regiments which had seen service, num-
bering thirteen battalions, having been left behind. But even the nine
detached battalions had only proceeded as far as Masy — a distance of no
more than six miles — ^where lay the prince's camp. Moreover, each of
these nine battalions famished a body of grenadiers to take part in the
assault, and William himself was actually present thereat. It was owing
to Yilleroy's retreat from before Masy that the king ordered the assault
to be made ; and, so feu: as can be seen, its unsuccessful result was. in
nowise brought about, or even conduced to, by this detachment of some
of the regiments to Masy.
(2) The ' small body ' of grenadiers, as Lord Macaulay styles them,
numbered at least 700 men, and constituted the troops who practically
delivered the assault. In addition to the nine battalions already men-
tioned, the following nine also supplied grenadiers, viz. : — ^the Royals,
Selwyn's (2nd), Trelawny's (4th). Royal Fusiliers (7th), Tidcomb's (14th),
Ingoldsby's (23rd), Maitland's (26th), CoUingwood's and Saunderson's.
In fact, the brunt of the assault was effected by these picked troops of the
English army. But they were not headed or accompanied by drums
3 c 2
Digitized by
Google
756 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct.
and colours whioh belonged to the complete regiment fonnmg the
supports.
(3) The supports consisted solely of one battalion — Courthope's
(17tib) — ^numbering about 500 men. It had been intended that Mackay's
(Scots) regiment of about equal strength should have accompanied
Courthope's, but on account of the crowded state of ihe advanced
trenches, Mackay's had to be drawn up with the reserves at Salsines
Abbey, some distance in rear, and half a mile from the breach ;
and accordingly it acted with them. Altogether the reserves (whom
Lord Macaulay confuses with the supports) numbered three battalions, or
about 1,500 men, the other two regiments being Frederick Hamilton's
Irish (18th) — in which Eane served — and Buchan*s Scots. As re-
gards the assertion that these four regiments, constituting the supports
and reserves, * had never been in action,' it is to be noted that, though
apparently Oourthope's and Hamilton's had not yet shared in any great
battle or siege operation, yet they had but recently taken part in Yande-
mont's arduous campaign against Yilleroy, and especially in the prince's
celebrated retreat in the fietce of the enemy from Aarseele to Marykirk.
But Mackay's had actually fought at the great battles of Steinkirk (1692)
and Landen (1698), whilst in June of this very year 1696 Buchan's had
fought imder the duke of Wiirtemberg in the bloody and unsuccessful
assault made on Fort Knocque. The alleged ' want of steadiness ' of
these four regiments will be considered under our next head.
(4) It will be noticed that Lord Macaulay, having dismissed his ' small
body of grenadiers,' now fathers the main action of the assault on the
* raw recruits,' into whom (apparently on accoimt of the supposition that
they ' had never been in action ') he has converted his four supporting
battalions. These troops, we are told, ' wanted the steadiness which so
terrible a service required,' ' found themselves in disorder,' ' lost heart '
and ' rolled back in confusion.' Let us now look at the facts. The assault
was delivered by a strong force of grenadiers, supported by Courthope's
regiment of considerably less strength. Amidst a deadly fire both
in front and in flank, these devoted men advanced to the storm most
resolutely and steadily, and, so far as can be accurately gathered,
most of them were placed hors de combat before they even reached the
foot of the breach. The loss in officers especially was immense. Through
a mistake in the signals the three reserve battalions at Salsines Abbey
were not ordered to advance sufficiently soon after the main body to
render efficient assistance. They marched forward equally bravely and in
like good order ; but on account of the loss of time in starting, and the
distance they had to pass over, their advance constituted a distinct
second assault, which was equally unsuccessful with the first, though
Hamilton's Irishmen managed to gain the summit of the breach before
they were repulsed. In neither of the attacks did the soldiers evince
the slightest 'want of steadiness,' nor was there any 'disorder' apart
from what is inseparable from the effects of a murderous fire closely
directed on advancing columns of troops ; not a single officer or soldier
' lost heart ; ' nor was there any ' rolling back in confusion,' unless
this be the proper literary phrase by which to denote the retreat of
the remnants of a brave storming party. It was under the eyes of the
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 757
king (whom Lord Macaulaj states to have heen at the time confronting
Villeroy) that this assault took place ; and so pleased was he at the
excellent conduct of Hamilton's men that he gave them the title of ' the
Boyal Begiment of Foot of Ireland ' (afterwards changed to ihe Bojal
Irish Begiment), his own arms, the lion of Nassau, with the harp and
crown, and the motto Virtutis Namurcencis Pramiwn, all of which
distinctions they bear to this day. [Auvergne (1696), 141-165 ; Eane,
28-25; Kennet, iii. 697; London Gazette, 29 Aug. 1695; 'Exact
Journal,' 26; Balph, ii. 604; Smollett, i. 257; Tindal, xiv. 287; Cannon's
* Official Becords,' 17th and 18th regiments ; Hamilton's * Ghrenadier
Guards,' i. 400-402.] Abthub Pabnbll.
SPANHEIM'S AOCOUNT OF THE EKGLIBH COUBT.
EzEOHiEL Spanheim was bom at Geneva, December 7, 1629, and died
in London, November 14, 1710. In the service of the Elector-Palatine,
Charles Lewis, and afterwards for many years as ambassador of the Great
Elector of Brandenburg and of Frederick, the first king of Prussia, he
displayed a vigorous diplomatic activity in the scenes of high European
policy. A valuable witness to the keenness of his observation and the
impartiality of his description exists in the ' Belation de la Gour de
France ' of the year 1690, which has recently been carefully edited by
M. C. Schefer.* But it has not hitherto been known that the am-
bassador also drew up a ' Belation ' on the English court. Banke himself
makes no mention of it, though he has used Spanheim's accounts. No
doubt this 'Portrait,' both in dimensions and in content, is inferior
to the ' Belation de la Gour de France.' Still in its characterisation of
queen Anne, in its statement of the relations of the princess towards
queen Mary and her consort, in its picture of the duke and duchess of
Marlborough, we see throughout an endeavour to do justice to the persons
' Relation de la Cour de France en 1690, par 6e4chiel Spanheim. Par M. C.
Schefer (Paris, 1882). The form of the text given in this edition cannot, however, be
regarded as definitive (of. Edcher, in SybePs Historische Zeitschrift^ Iv. 316). M.
Schefer had, onfortonately, no knowledge of a second manasoript in the Geheimes
Staatsarohiv ; and an exact collation of the four existing redactions of the work might
lead to new results. In my opinion Dohm's text (MateriaUen filr die Statistik und
neuere Staatenkunde, iii. 163-286, v. 1-218; Lemgo, 1780, 1785) is based upon a
draft which does not contain Spanheim's corrections and additions. Of the two
manuscripts in the Geheimes Staatsarohiv at Berlin, one (B. 94) presents, besides the
original composition which is for the most part still recognisable, numerous autograph
improvements and additions by Spanheim ; while the other (B. xi : cf. Schefer, Lc,
intr. pp. XXXV. xxxviii.) is a fair copy with less numerous notes of Spanheim*s, and
has the additions, to which we have referred already, incorporated in the text. Both
copies contain the Consid^atione sur la situation priaente (Schefer, pp. 346-388),
which are not in Dohm. The manuscript in M. Schefer's possession contains on the
one hand — corresponding to the first Berlin copy — autograph additions by Spanheim,
while it lacks certain pieces (indicated by Schefer, pp. 432-444), which are to be found
at least in part in the three other redactions, and are, moreover, mostly distinguished
by brackets in the first Berlin manuscript. Ck>n8equently it is likely that M. Schefer's
copy is a transcript abridged according to Spanheim's choice, and furnished by him
with additions.
Digitized by
Google
758 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct*
and circumstances portrayed, together with a temperate judgment, result-
ing from the experience of a long life. It is a relation, too, in which the
author is guided by a conscientious desire for accuracy and sense of truth.'
The 'portrait' is preserved in the Geheimes Staatsarchiv at Berlin,
and consists of thirteen leaves in foHo. It may be questioned whether
this, the only manuscript known to exist, contains the work in its entirety,
In one place (p. 764), Spanheim mentions a section dealing with the queen's
relations with foreign ambassadors, which is nowhere to be found. The
account, too, ends without any appropriate conclusion. And yet the
character of the manuscript — a fair copy with autograph additions and
corrections by the ambassador— does not permit the assumption that it is
a fragment.
As for the origin of the ' Eelation ' we have more exact information than
in regard to that of the year 1690. On August 7, 1704, an order of king
Frederick I was addressed to Spanheim with these instructions : — AU
(UetQeil Wir cmch von derjetzigen Konigin von England Persohn^ natnird
und qualitdten gem gencme Nachricht haben mogten und Jhr vor Zeiten
von dem Konige in Frankreich und dehnen vo^Tiehmsten Persohnen seines
Hauses und Hoffes dergUichen woll eingerichtete Portraite gemacht und
ubergeben habet, so wollt Jhr auch eins von gedachter Konigin zu Papir
bringen. On the ^ August Spanheim reports : Gomme d'un coU, Sire,
je me trcywve bien glorieux dAi t&moignage avantageux qu'il luy plaist de
rend/re cmx Portraits swrmentionn6s du Boy de France et des Personnes de
sa Maison, je ne pourrai de V autre que m^acqwitter avec autant de zele,
de promtitude et de confia/nce de ceVuy, qu'Elle desire que je fasse de cette
Beine, C'est aussi a quay je ne manquerai pas de traoailler incessem-
ment. On October 10 follows the king's acknowledgment : Das portrait
80 Jhr von I. M, gemacht und Uns eingesandt, hat die estime so Wir vor
diselbe jeder Zeit gehdbtj nicht wenig bei Uns vermeh/rt und finden Wif
selbiges sehr woll eingerichtet.
After the example of M. Schefer we give the text word for word,
retaining all pecuharities of language as well as the punctuation corrected
by Spanheim himself. B. Doebneb.
Berlin.
Portrait de la Beine d'Angleterre.
Vostre Majesty m'ayant ordonn6 de luy faire le Portrait de la Beine
d'Angleterre aujourd'huy regnante, le plus naif et le plus ressemblant,
qu'il se pourroit, je ne puis que tasch^r k m'en aquitter, avec toute
I'attention et la soumission requise. Ce qui ne pourra que donner lieu k la
representer dans la constitution de sa personne ; dans ses qualit^s et
ses inclinations, et ainsi ' le veritable caractere de son esprit ; dans sa
conduite domestique, ou k I'^gard du gouvemement et des affaires ; dans
la consideration de ses Ministres, k qui Elle s'en rapporte le plus,^ et qui
ont le plus de part k sa confidence et k son estime ; ou des Dames, en
qui Elle a le plus de cr6ance ; enfin dans ce qui pent regarder I'estat
present de sa Cour, et particuHerement par rapport aux Ministres strangers,
qui y sont envoy^s. H y a quelques autres circonstances k regard de aa
* Compare the preface to the Relation of 1690, Schefer, Lc, intr. p. xzzv.
■ Ainsi added by Spanheim.
* Spanheim has corrected U plus instead of davtmtage.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 759
naissance, de son Age, et de son estat pr^c^dent en quality de Princesse de
Dennemarc, qu'il sera k propos de toucher ioy par avanoe et sommaire-
ment.
De la Beine d'Angleterrei a/oant son a/oenement d la Couronne^ de sa
naissance, etdela Duchesse d'Torc sa Mere.
La Beine d'Angleterre aujoordhuy regnante, est nige le 26 Fevrier
en 1666, soivant le Calendrier d'Angleterre, qui ne commence Tann^e
qu*au 25 de Mars, ou en 1667, suivant le Calendrier de deUl la mer. EUe
est fille, comme on scait, du feu Boy Jacques 11, alors Due d'Yorck,
appellee la Princesse Anne, et soeur cadette de son aisn^, la Princesse
Marie, en suite Princesse d'Orange, et depuis Beine d'Angleterre avec le
feu Boy Guillaume son Epoux. Lcur Mere ^toit feu la Duchesse d'Yorck,
Anne Hyde, premiere femme de ce Luc, fiUe du Chancelier d'Angleterre
Clarendon que ce mesme Due frere du Boy Charles 11 avoit ^pous^e
secretement, durant leur retraite dans les pays strangers, du vivant de
Cromvel. H declara son manage apres le retablissement du dit Boy son
frere sur le Throne d'Angleterre, en Tannic 1660. Quant au Chancelier
d'Angleterre, Comte Clarendon, Pere de la Duchesse, il ^toit n6 d'une
condition de simple Oentilhomme, appell^ Henry Heyden, Docteur aux
Loix de sa profession, et qui sous le regno de Charles I s'estoit attache
au parti de la Cour, dans le long Parlement qu'il y eut, et en soutint les
interSts dans la Chambre des Communes, dont il estoit membre. Comme
il suivit Charles 11, alors Prince de Gales dans sa retraitte, hors d'Angle-
terre, il y demeura attach^ & sa personne, et & son service, et comme son
principal Conseiller, en fut d^clar^ Chancelier. Apres le retablissement
du dit Charles 11 sur le Thrdne, il fat conserve ou ^tabli dans la dite
charge de Chancelier d'Angleterre ; cre6 Mylord Baron en la mesme ann6e
1660 et Comte Tannic suivante 1661. Le manage de sa fiUe avec le Due
de Yorck, le presomptif h^ritier de la couronne [veu le peu d'apparence que
le Boy Charles U vint h, avoir des enfemsde la Beine son Spouse, et encore
vivante en Portugal] et ainsi & pouvoir devenir Beine d'Angleterre, ne
manqua pas d'attir^r I'envie et le bl&me contre le dit Chancelier. A quoy
servit de pretexte ou de fondement, le manage du Boy avec une Princesse
Cdtholique Bomaine et sterile, comme estant^ procur6 k dessein d'en
favoriser I'el^vation de sa fille k la quality susdite de Beine ; et ensuite
la vente de Dimquerque k la France, pour quatre millions de livres de
France, et qu'on attribuoit aux conseils du dit Chancelier, comme alors le
premier et plus accredits Ministre du Boy Charles U. Le dit Boy s'etant
d^oust^ dans la suite de ce Ministre ; et entr'autres ayant S9eu qu'il
auroit sous main port^ une Dame,^ que le Boy aimoit, k preferer le parti
d'epousdr secretement le Due de Bichemont, im des premiers Seigneurs
du Boyaume, k celuy d'estre sa Maistresse, il abandonna le dit Chan-
celier k la haine, ou envie de ses ennemis. Ce qui donna lieu k ce Mini-
stre de chercher sa seuret6 hors du Boyaume, et k se retirer en France,
ok il est mort. H laissa deux fils en Angleterre, tous deux encore en vie ;
^ Estant, added by Spanheim.
* Marginal note by Spanheim : C'estoU tme Demoiselle nomm4e MaHe Sheart et gui
est morte seulement {?) icy d Londres dqmiapeu de moy en ga.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
760 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct-
run qui porte son titre de Comt6 de Clarendon ; et Tautre, oeluy de Gomte
de Bochester, k quoj il a est^ fley6 par le feu Boy Charles, en 1682.
Pour la Duchesse d'Yorok Mere de la feu Beine Marie, et de la Beine
Anne regnante, elle mourut sans avoir laiss6 dautres enfans ni ainai
aucun fils masle, Elle se declara Catholique Bomaine au liet de sa mort,
J ayant est^ port^, comme on pent oroire, par le Due son Epoux ; et qui
depuis qu'il s'est retir6 en France, et peu de terns avant sa mort, y fit
imprimer les circonstances de cette declaration de feu la dite Duchesse
son Epouse, de mesme que ^ celle du feu Boy Charles 11 son frere, fiaite
pareillement avant su mort,
De Veducation de cette Pri/ncesse et de son mariage avec le Prince
de Dannema/rc.
La Princesse Anne fdt elev6e avec la Princesse Marie son aisn^e au
Cokpit, qui est consider^ comme une partie de Whitehall, regardant sur
le Pare de S. Jemes, et dans le mesme appartement, qui m'y fiit assign^
& mon d^frayement, ensuite de mon entre^ puhlique & Londres, en quality
d'Amhassadeur Extraordinaire de V'® Majesty.® L'Mucation de ces
deux Princesses se fit avec peu de pompe, et sous la conduite de leurs
Gouvemantes. J*y eus I'honneur d'en avoir audiance, en mon premier
envoy en Angleterre en 1675 ^ de la part du feu Electeur Palatin Charles
Louys. La Princesse Marie estant marine Tann^e 1677,^® avec le Prince
d'Orange son cousin germain, et depuis Boy d' Angleterre Guillaume HE,
la Princesse Anne resta au dit Cokpit jusques en 1688,^^ qu*Elle fust
marine avec le Prince George de Dennemaro. Ce mariage fat mis sur le
tapis et negoti^ par la France, qui ^toit alors dans une grande liaison avec
le Dennemarc, de meme ^^ qu'avec le Due d'York. Comme j*estois alors
Envoy^ de la part de feu Sa Serenissimet^ Electorale de glorieuse
memoire en la dite Cour de France, je me souviens que feu le Marquis de
Croissy, alors Ministre et Secretaire d'Estat des afiEiedres 6trangeres, en fit
confidence k TEnvoy^ de Dennemarc, qui est encore en la dite Cour, Mr.
de Meyercroon. Sur quoy je dirai que comme j'avois est4 renvoy6 en
Angleterre en 1678, et oii je restai jusques au commencement de 1680,
que je fas Envoy6 en France de la part de feu Sa Serenissimet^ Electorale
(apres avoir d^ja est^ substitu6 par ses ordres au Comte, alors Baron de
Schwerin, son Envoy6 en Angleterre) aussi durant mon dit s^jour k
Londres plusieurs y ayoient en veue de marier la dite Princesse Anne avec
le Prince d'Hanovre Vaisn^, aujourdhuy Electeur de Brunswic,*' dailleurs
fils d'une Princesse ** du Sang d' Angleterre, et appellee depuis k la suc-
cession k la Couronne. Et comme on S9avoit que j'avois Thonneur d*estre
en quelque commerce de lettres avec la dite Serenissime Princesse sa
Mere, je fas requis de quelques personnes de consideration en la Cour
d' Angleterre, de luy en 6crire, et k ce que le Prince son fils fiit envoy^ en
Angleterre k ce sujet, pour s'y faire connoistre. Et sur ce que je pris une
fois la liberty de luy toucher quelque chose en passant, dans une de mes
lettres, de ce qu*on m'en insinuoit k Londres, la dite Altesse, aujourdhuy
' Que added by Spanheim. • 1702.
* Correoted by Spanheim out of ' 1685,' as it seems. '* Nov. 4.
" Aug. 7. *' De meme . . . York^ marginal note by Spanheim.
'* George Lewis, afterwards King George I of England. ** The Eleotress Si^ihia.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 761
Electrioe de Bnmswio zne fit connoistre par sa reponse, qu*on n*j estoit
gueres dispose k Hanovre, et entr'autres veu la naissance de la Princesse
Anne du oost^ de sa Mere, n6e d'une famille fort mMiocre. Aussi oe
znesme Prinoe son fils, que j*eus Thonneiir de trouv^r k Paris k mon
arrived en 1680, estant pass6 de \k en Angleterre, sur la fin de la mesme
ann^e, y t^moigna pea d'attention k un mariage aveo la dite Princesse ;
et en partit en sorte qu'on jugeoit bien, qu'il n*aaroit pas lieu ; et ce que
la dite Princesse Anne, k ce qui m'a est^ dit plus d'une fois, et d'assez
bon lieu n'auroit pas oubli^. Ce qui apres tout donna occasion k la Cour de
France, de songer en suite k T^tablissement de cette Princesse, et pour au
besoin entraverser en Angleterre les pretensions ou le parti, que le Prince
d'Orange, Mari de la Princesse aisn^, pourroit j avoir, et centre lequel
on estoit fort pr^venu en la dite Gour. La Princesse Anne, depuis son
mariage, v^ut en grande concorde et union avec le Prince son Epoux.
II s'y trouva mesme quelque conformity d'humeur, k aimer plust6t le
particulier et la retraite, que le grand monde, et les divertissemens d*^lat.
Lors que je fus envoj^ en Angleterre en 1685 k faire les complimens au
Boy Jaques son Pere, sur son av^ement k la Couronne, Elle avoit pour sa
Dame d*honneur la Comtesse de Clarendon, Dame de merite, et de vertu,
et femme du frere aisn^ de feu la Duchesse sa Mere.
De la naissance d/u Due de Olocester son Fils.
Cette Princesse vint k estre plusieurs fois enceinte, mais sans porter
ses enfjEtns k terme, et ainsi k faire des fausses couches, jusques au nombre
de quatorze. Ce ne fut qu*au mois de Juillet de Tannic 1689, et ainsi
apres la revolution, qu'Elle accoucha k Hamptoncourt, d'un Prince en
1689 rest^ en vie, appell6 du nom du Due de Olocester et qui a vescu
jusques k Tannic 1700,^^ qu*il mourut k Windsor, &g^ de onze ann6es et
quelques mois.
De la BefooVuUdn (vm/o6e en Angleterre^ et du parti qu'Elle prit avec le
Prince son Epotcx.
La Reine d*Angleterre,'^ Epouse du Roy Jaques, Catholique
Bomaine, et n6e Princesse de la Maison du Due de Modene en Italie, se
trouvoit aussi sans enfans, jusques k la mesme anne^ 1688, qu*on la
publia enceinte, et estant venue k terme d'accoucher, d'estre heureuse-
ment d^vre^ d'un Prince, appell^ suivant la coustume des Heritiers de
la Couronne, du nom de Prince de Gales. Je n'entrerai pas icy dans la
discussion de la verit6, ou supposition de cette naissance; ce qui ne
regarde pas le sujet, dont V"» Maj*« m*a command^ de luy rendre compte.
Je dirai seulement pai^ rapport k la Princesse de Danemarc, que s'estant
trouve^ aux Bains de B^th au temps de la naissance veritable ou pr^tendue
de ce Prince de Gales, Elle fut pr^venue qu'il y avoit du mystere et du
manege dans la naissance de ce pr^tendu Frere, et contribua k affermir
la Princesse d'Orange sa soeur dans la mesme cr^ance. En sorte que d^s
rarrive6 du Prince d'Orange en Angleterre en Novembre 1688, Elle prit
le parti de se laisser enlev^r par TEvesque de Londres, qui avoit est6
autrefois Capitaine de Cavalerie, et peu affectionn^ au Boy Jaques ; et
>» The MS. has 1670, cf. pag. 771. »• Mary Beatrix Eleonora.
Digitized by
Google
762 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct.
que le Prince de Dennemarc prit aussi celuy,^^ de quitter le Boy son Beau
Pere, et se rendre vera le Prince d'Orange.
La revolution d'Angleterre ^tant ensuite arriv^e, par la retraite da
Boy Jaques en France, pr6ced6 d6ja auparavant de oeluy de son EpooBe
et du pr^tendu Prince de Gales ; et le Prince d'Orange et la Princesse
Marie son Epouse d^clar^s Boy et Beine d'Angleterre, en Fevrier 1689, la
dite Princesse passa de la Haye oii Elle estoit rested jusqaes ]k en Angle-
terre. Ce qui donna lieu k I'entrevue des deux soeurs, qui ne s*eatoit
pas fait ^^ depuis douze ann^es, qui fut celle du Manage de la Princesse
d'Orange en 1677.
D'une desunkm arrivie entre le feu Boy et Beine d'Angleterre et entre
la dite Princesse.
Le Prince et la Princesse de Danemarc y^curent depuis dans une
assez grande d^pendance du nouveau Boy et Beine jusques k une desunion,
qui arriva entre les deux Soeurs, k Toccasion de la Dame d*honneur de la
Princesse. C'estoit la Comtesse, aujourd*huy Duchesse de Marlborough,
dont il y aura lieu de parler cy-apres. Je me contenterai de dire icy, que
cette Dame avant son Manage avoit est6 fille d'honneur de la Princesse,
et pris des lors un grand ascendant sur son esprit : Qu'ayant 6pous^ en
suite Mylord Churchill, aujourd'huy Due de Marlborough, qui estoit en
grande faveur aupres du Boy Jaques, tant par son merite, que pour estre
frere de la maitresse de ce Boy,^^ Elle fut &ite premiere Dame d'honneur
de la dite Princesse. Ce qui ayant augments sa consideration et son credit
sur Tesprit de sa maistresse, en sorte qu'il paroissoit qu'Elle s*en laissoit
entierement gouvemer, donna lieu au Boy et k la Beine, qui le ^^ voyoient
avec d^plaisir, et en craignirent les suites, de desirer de la Princesse,
qu'EUe congediast sa dite Dame d'honneur, et en prit une autre k sa place.
Mais quelque instance, qui luy en fdt faite de leur part, Elle ne voulut
point y donner lieu ; et pr^fera de s*expos6r k leur disgrace, et k tout le
ressentiment, qu'ils en auroient. Ce qui alia aussi si loin, qu'on osta
les Gardes k la dite Princesse, qu'Elle se crut obUg^e d*abandonner son
logement k la Maison Boyale de S. Jemes, et de se loger avec ^^ le Prince
son Epoux dans ime maison particuli^re, et occupe^ aujourd'Huy par le
Due Devonshire. Elle ^^ demeura aussi quelque temps dans une maison
de campagne, k quelques milles de Londres, qu'on appelle Sion, et qui
appartient au Due de Sommerset. Cette desunion dura deux ann^es
entieres, sans que les deux soeurs, la Beine, quoy que demeurant k
Londres, et la Princesse se soient veues depuis, ni mesme k la maladie de
la Beine dont Elle mourut. Ce qui estoit arriv^, depuis que la Beine estant
all6 visiter la Princesse sa soeur, attaque6 ^' d'une assez grande maladie,
en suite d'une &us8e couche, et luy parlant encore d'oster la Comtesse de
Marlborough d'aupres d'EUe, la Princesse luy auroit dit, que si la
'' CeVwy written by Spanheim instead of la parti.
*" Corrected by Spanheim instead of 8*etoient pas veues.
** After Boy the MS. has et duquel U y aura Ueu aussi de parler dans la suite
blotted out.
^ Le altered from la. *' Avec le Prince eon Epoux, addition of Spanheim
^ Elle . . . Sommerset marginal addition by Spanheim.
** Altered from dans une.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 768
Beine ne venoit la yoir, que poiir luy parler oontre la dite Dame, Elle
poorroit se dispenser de revenir une autre fois, et en se tonmant ^^ en
mesme temps, k oe qa*on ajotlte, de Taatre cost6 de son liet.
De sa condmte depuis la mort de la Beine sa soeur et jtcsques d celle
du feu Boy.
Apres la mort de la Beine arrived en 1695, le Prince et la Princesse
enrent permission du feu Boy de reprendre leur logement an Palais de
S. Jemes. lis y ontyteu jusques k sa mort^ dans une grande tranquillity,
sans beaucoup d'eclat, avee une Gour assez mediocre, et sans avoir ni
pretendre quelque part dans le gouvemment, ou en avoir aucune dans la
confidence du feu Boy, qui visitoit rarement la Princesse, et ne donnoit
aussi gueres lieu au Prince de Tentretenir. H est difficile, s'il m'est
permis de dire, avec tout le respect deu k la m6moire du feu Boy, de
donner bonne raison de cette froideur et indifference, dont on voyoit qu'il
usoit en leur endroit ; quoy que la dite Princesse sa belle soeur deut
heritor de ^ ses trois couronnes apres sa mort, que la constitution infirme du
mesme Boy faisoit ^"^ craindre que cela n'arrivast bien tost ; et ainsi ce qui
auroit ^A ce semble donner lieu, k en t^moign^r plus de consideration
etre dailleurs veu que la dite Princesse et le Prince vivoient ^ dans une
espece de retraite, quoy que dans une grande ville, et avec une conduite,
qui ne pouvoit pas donner le moindre ombrage. II y eut une occasion en
la demiere ann6e de la mort du Boy, qui piit contribuer k cette froideur.
G'est qu'ayant est6 adverti, que la Princesse auroit receu une lettre du
Boy Jaques son Pere, sans en parler, ou la produire, il I'alla trouver pour
luy demander k la voir. Ce qu'Elle auroit 6vit6, en avouant de Tavoir receu,
mais de Tavoir brusl^. . Le feu Boy en auroit aussi parl6, et en des termes
assez forts, k la Comtesse de Marlborough, dont la soeur, Duchesse de
Tirconnel,^^ (qui a eu permission sous ce Begne, de retoumer en Irlande, et
vient d'en fedre un tour icy k Londres) estoit alors Dame d'honneur k
S. Germain de la Beine Epouse du Boy Jaques. Le Prince de Danemaro
estant venu k Einsington pour voir le Boy dans les demiers jours de sa
maladie, et qu'on craignoit, ce qui en arriva ; k peine luy donna-t-on lieu
d'entrer dans la Chambre du Boy, etluy faisant connoistre qu'il feroit bien
de n'y gueres rester ; en sorte qu'il ne fit presque qu'y entrer, et sortir.
Pour la Princesse, Elle t^moigna aussi d*avoir dessein de se rendre k
Einsington, et en tout cas qu'EUe resteroit dans TAntichambre.
De son avenement d la Couronne.
La mort dufeu Boy, ariv6e^^ en ^ffet au dit Einsington, un Dimanche
matin ^ Mars 1702, donna lieu k voir la Princesse de Dennemarc re-
connue en mesme temps Beine des trois Boyaumes; prodam^e telle
solemnellement par la ville de Londres d^s le mesme jour apres midy ; et
complimented en cette quality de la part des deux Chambres du Parlement,
** Thus oorreoted by Spanheim instead of trov/oatU.
*^ Spanheim has corrected la mort dufeu Boy,
^ De marginal note by Spanheim. ^ Faisoit corrected by Spanheim.
" Vivoient corrected by Spanheim instead of vecussent.
** Qui . . . Londres and Tirconnel by Spanheim.
^ Ck>rrected by Spanheim instead of estant en iffet arriv4e.
Digitized by
Google
764 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct.
qui s'estoient Ik dessus assemblers extraordinairement le mesme jour ; et
du Maire et des Echevins de la ville de Londres.
Je n*ay pi^ que toucher en premier lieu et sommairement les oir-
Constances susdites, quoy que dailleurs assez connues qui regardent la
personne de la Seine, en quality de Princesse Anne et en suite de Princesse
de Dennemarc, avant son av^ement k la Couronne. II s*agit maintenant
de la oonsiderer depuis qu'EUe est monte6 sur le Throne de trois Boyaumes,
abandonn^s par le feu Boy Jaques 11 son Pere. Etd.ce sujet il y aura
lieu de reflechir sur les considerations, que j'ay allegue^ des I'entre^ de
c^t Ecrit ; k 89avoir, de la constitution de sa Personne, de ses quality, et
inclinations, et ainsi du veritable caractere de son Esprit et de son naturel ;
de sa conduite dans le domestique, et k regard du gouyemement et des
a&ires ; des Ministres, ou dailleurs des Dames, qui ont le plus de part en
sa confidence, et^' en son amiti^, et ainsi les plus accredit^s et autorise^s
aupres d'Elle, enfin de Testat present de sa Cour, particulierement par
rapport aux Ministres strangers qui y sont envoy6s.
De la comtituiion de sa personne?^
La Beine seroit d'assez belle taille, hors qu*Elle est accompagne^ de
trop d'embonpoint ; bien prise au reste en sa personne ; les cheveux noirs,
les yeux bleuds, le nez, la bouche, la gorge, les bras et les mains belles.
Le teint du visage est souvent brouill^, et accompagn^ de quelques
boutons. Son air est naturellement serieux, mais dailleurs qu*Elle prend
k tasche de rendre affable et gracieux envers les personnes, qui ont Thonneur
de Taborder, ou qu'EUe honore de son entretien ; et en quoy Elle conserve
tous les differens ^gards, que le rang, ou le merite des personnes pent
demander. Elle est fort propre en ses ajustemens, quoy que sans affec-
tation, recherchant plus la bienseance et le bon goust, que I'eclat et
Tostentation. Aussi ne porte Elle pas d*autres joyaux sur Elle, hors des
occasions extraordinaires de c^r^monie, que ceux qui accompagnent le
S. George, qu'EUe porte attach^ k un ruban bleu au haut de son corps
de jupe, et comme en place d'agraphe de diamans. Sa coiffure est
fort naturelle, et son maintien agreable. Son temperamment paroist
assez robuste, hors le malheur qu'Elle a eu de faire tant de fausses
couches ; et que depuis quelques ann^es, Elle se trouve sujette k des
atteintes de goute k la main et aux genoux,^^ quoy que sans grande douleur,
et qui Tobligent seulement k garder la chambre. Elle y a cherch^ du
soulagement ces deux anne6s passers par Tusage des eaux chaudes de
Bath, qu*Elle y est all6 boire vers TAutonme, et dont Elle a creu de s'estre
bien trouv6. Elle est sobre dailleurs dans son manger et dans sa boisson ;
bien qu'on ait debits quelque fois dans les pays Strangers et k tort,
comme si Elle avoit du penchant k des exc6s k boire, et qui auroient
contribu6 k ses fausses couches, et k ses atteintes de goute. Enfin il y a
lieu de juger par sa constitution, qu*Elle pent encore remplir une longue
carriere, avant que de donner lieu k un successeur; k moins que ses
acc^s de goute ne devinssent plus frequens, et plus fEU^heux, qu'ils n'ont
M jusques icy.
'* Et added by Spanheim. '^ This title is not by Spanheim.
" Altered from piedi.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 765
De ses qualit68 et inclinations.
A regard de ses qualit6s personnelles, et de ses inclinations on pent
dire, qu'Elle a natureUement dans TAme de la bont^, de la douceur, de la
retenue, de la franchise, et de I'honnestet^, si on pent se servir de ce
dernier mot, en parlant ^ d'une grande Beine. Je ^ dois ajonter qa*en
premier lieu, Elle a beaucoup d*attachement k la Beligion; k assister
r^gulierement tons les jours aux exercices de devotion de TEglise Anglicane ;
et k communier tous les premiers Dimanches de chaque mois. Qu'ainsi
Elle est ^memie de toute profanation et de libertinage en matiere de
Beligion, ou autrement : qu*Elle n'est pas moins bonne Femme, que bonne
Chrestienne, ayant toujours y6cu, comme il a d^ja est6 remarqu6, dans
une grande Union avec le Prince son Epoux ; et qui continue avec la mesme
force et sur le mesme pied, que lorsqu'Elle n*estoit que Princesse, gar-
dant^^ toujours pour luy les memes 6gards : en sorte qu'ils sont comme
inseparables, et se trouvent toujours dans un mesme lieu. O'est dont Elle
a encore donn^ des marques, depuis qu'EUe est Beine, assez 6clatantes et
assez publiques, en fidsant donner la charge de Orand Admiral, la plus
considerable en Angleterre, et surtout dans le temps d'une grande guerre
et d'aussi grosses flotes sur pied, dailleurs en portant le Parlement k luy
assigner une aussi grosse pension, que celle de *^ Livres Sterl. annuels en
cas qu'il vienne k survivre k la Beine. On pent juger que la conformity
d'humeur et d'inclination k aimer plus le particulier et la retraite, que le
grand monde, y contribue. Aussi n'y a-t-il, que certains jours dans la
semaine, oik la Beine a coustume de se rendre visible, et de tenir cercle ;
et au reste ^^ ne donne gueres lieu au spectacles et aux divertissemens
publics de danse, de musique, ou de com6die, qu'en des jours extraordi-
naires, et qui y sont comme destines par la coustume. EUe a aim^ autre-
fois la danse et la musique : dansoit Elle mesme avec beaucoup de justesse ;
mais y a renonc6 depuis qu*Elle a commence k grossir, et avoir des
atteintes de goute. Les divertissemens dailleurs se sont rendus moins
frequens k sa Gour, et n'estant encore que Princesse de Dennemarc depuis
la mort du Due de Glocester son Pils, et qui devoit estre son successeur k
la couronne. En sorte que ces divertissemens ordinaires icy k Londres
se reduisent au jeu de la Bassette, k quoy Elle donne lieu les soirees
destine^s k tenir Cercle.
Ce que je viens de dire fait au reste, que pour une cour telle que
celle d* Angleterre, et dans une aussi grande ville, et remplie, surtout
rhyver, de personnes de quality des deux s6xes, comme de Mylords,
Pairs '^ ou Pairesses du Boyaume, elle ne repond pas, quand on la voit, k
I'attente des strangers, ni k Tinclination de la Nation, qui voudroit la voir
ordinairement plus grosse, et ofl il y eut plus d'6clat et de divertissement.
A ^ quoy contribue d'ailleurs le s^jour que la Beine fait tout rEst6, et
** Gorreoted by Spanheim instead of d VSgarcL
*^ Je dois qjotUer qu*ent marginal note of Spanheim instead of Qu*en of the text.
^ Oardant . . . igards marginal note by Spanheim.
^ Au reste by Spanheim instead of que dailleurs EUe.
^ Pairs ou Pairesses du Boyaume added by Spanheim.
* A quoy le , . . que la Beine by Spanheim, instead of Ce que . 1 • ou sedour
qu'Elle of the first text.
Digitized by
Google
766 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct.
partie de rAutomne k Windsor, oil la Goar est fort petite, hors le Meroredi
avant disner, et particiilierement le Dimanche, qui est le jour du Conseil
da Cabinet, et ainsi que les Ministres, qui en sont, ont ooustume de s'y
rendre. Ge sont daiUeurs les deux jours, que les Damea de quality de
Londres, ou du voisinage, ou autres personnes, qui ont quelque relation
ou a£faires en cour, prennent, pour 8*y rendre et s'y faire voir. La Beine
de son cost6 n'y prend gueres d'autre divertissement, que celuy de la
promenade, et de la chasse dans la Forest de Windsor, et dailleurs, comma
j'ay dit, oeluy du jeu de la Bassette.
Du caractere de son Esprit,
On pent d^ja aucunement juger, par oe que dessus,^^ que le veritable
caractere de Tesprit de la Eeine, est plustot de Tavoir port6 k la justice,
k requite, k la douceur, aux ^ards et menagemens requis, oA il en fa,ni
avoir, envers les Mylords et Dames de la Nation, ou des Ministres
strangers ; que d'avoir im tour d*esprit brillant, qui aime k se produire, et
k se faire valoir par la conversation, et des entretiens soustenus, et de
quelque dur6e/^ D'oA on pent recueillir, qu'EUe parle peu et avec manage*
ment, dailleurs avec agr^ment et biens^ance. Qu'au reste Elle a de la
docility, pour se conformer aux advis des personnes ^laire^s, et en qui
Elle a de la confiance ; et d*autrepart de la fermet^ dans ses inclinations»
envers les personnes, qui en sont honore6s, et en qui Elle a pris quelque
cr^ance particuliere : Que cela se peut d6ja assez reconnoistre, de ce qui
a est6 touch6 cy-dessus, estant Princesse de Danemaro, sur le sujet de la
Gomtesse k present Duchesse de Marlborough sa Dame d'honneur, et de
laquelle ^^ il y aura lieu encore de parler dans la suite.
Ce ^' caractere de Tesprit et du naturel de la Eeine paroist 6galement
dans sa conduite domesdque, aussi bien que dans celle k Tegard da
gouvemement et des affaires. Conmie il a d^ja est^ remarqu6 qu'Elle se
plaist davantage dans le particulier, que dans le grand monde, cela bat
aussi qu'EUe ne se communique gueres £amilierement, qu'avec les
personnes qu'Elle a k son service, et pres de sa personne, et qui sont de
trois sortes ; ses Dames d*honneur, ses Filles d'honneur, et ses Femmes
de Ghambre, qui suivant la coustume d*Angleterre, sont des Filles ou
Femmes (y en ayant des deux sortes en cette^^ fonction) de bonne
maison, et bien apparent^es. Mais c'est dont il sera parU cy-apres.
De ses occupations, de son Conseil d/a Cabinet et de ses
principaux Ministres,
Cette mesme inclination de la Beine, fait qu'Elle passe la pluspart
du tems parmi son domestique, hors ^^ celuy qu'Elle est obhge6 de donner
aux affaires du dedans ou du dehors de ses Boyaumes, k Tentretien de
Tun ou de Tautre de ses Ministres, et aux Conseils, qui se tiennent devimt
Elle. G'est k quoy Elle s'occupe aussi souvent, et autant de fois, que le
besoin et les affaires le requierent. II est vray, et surtout durant le
^ Que dessus oorrected by Spanheim, instead of queje viens de dire.
*^ Durie oorrected instead of duret4, ^ De laqueUe by Spanheim, instead of dont.
** Ce . . p dela Beine, Spanheim, instead of C^est aussi ce quL
** En citte fonction^ marginal note by Spanheim.
** Hors added by Spanheim above the line.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 767
s^jour qu*Elle fait k Windsor, que hors *® les cas, qui surviennent k la
traverse, il ne se tient gueres de Oonseil du Cabinet devant Elle, que
les Dimanches au soir. H y a mesme qnelque fois des Dimanches, que
par le retard des ordinaires de del& la mer, ou autre raison, qu'il ne s*en
tient mesme point au dit jour. Les stances de^^ ce Conseil sont
ordinairement plus frequentes dans le temps de la teneur d'un Parle-
ment ; veu les inoidens, qui y surviennent, et qui ne peuvent qu'y donner
lieu, n n*intervient dailleurs k ce Conseil, que les Ministres, qui y sont
appell^s par la Beine, et qui lors qu'ils sont tous en ville, ou au
voisinage, se reduisent k TArchevesque de Cantorbery ; au Garde des
Sceaux ; au Grand Thresorier d'Angleterre, Mylord Godolphin ; au
Comte de Pembrock, President du Conseil, k S9avoir du Conseil Priv6,
qu'on appelle, ou Grand Conseil; au Due de Normanby, Garde des
Sceaux priv^ ; au Due de Devonshire, Grand.Maistre de la Maison de la
Beine ; au Due de Sommerset, Grand Escuyer ; au Due de Marlborough,
quand il est en Angleterre ; au Due d'Ormond, quand il est k Londres,
comme Viceroy d'Irlande ; au Comte de Bochester, qui a est6 son
Pr^decesseur en cet employ, mais qui affecte depuis plus d'un an en 9a de
ne s'y point trouver; et aux deux Secretaires d'Estat, aujourd'huy le
Chevalier Hedges, et TOrateur de la Chambre des Communes, Bobert
Harley. C'est dans ce Conseil, qu'on traite les affaires secretes, soit du
dedans ou dehors du Boyaume ; quil se fait^^ la d^laration des chaises ou
changemens des Officiers de la Couronne, ou de la Maison de la Beine ;
du choix des Ministres au dehors, de leurs Instructions, et des rapports
qu'ils peuvent avoir fail par leurs lettres aux deux Secretaires d'Estat,
suivant leurs deux differens d^partemens: Et ainsi en general des
Traitt^s ; des Alliances ; des Memoires ou remonstrances £aites de la part
des Ministres strangers en cette Cour ; enfin, avant et durant le temps de
la convocation d'un Parlement, k diger^r les cas et les affaires, qu'on y
doit proposer, appui^ ou detoumer de la part de la Cour. II arrive
quelquefois, suivant les occurrences et les affaires, qu'il n'y a qu'une
partie de ces Ministres susdits, et les plus affid^s, qui sont appell^s au dit
Conseil.'*^ Dailleurs il y a bien des affaires, et surtout cellos qui peuvent
regard^r le dedans de la Cour, la disposition des charges, les m^nagemens
entre les deux partis des Thorys, et des Wights, les graces et les bienfaits
de la Beine, dont EUe ne se rapporte qu'& ses Ministres les plus consider^s
et les plus accr6dit6s, comme sont le Grand Thresorier Mylord Godolphin,
et le Due Marlborough, lorsquil est en Angleterre.
Sur quoy et au sujet de ces deux partis, qui font assez de bruit et au
dedans et au dehors de I'Angleterre, je dois remarquer qu'ils se fomen-
terent et avec peu de menagement I'un envers I'autre sous le Begne du
feu Boy Guillaume. Que le nom de Thorys, qui s'estoit donn^ aux
partisans les plus zeles de I'Eglise Anglicane, et pour Taffermissement
de I'autorit^ Boyale en Angleterre, se communiqua en suite k ceux
d'entr'eux qu'on crut peu affectionn^ k la personne et k Tadministration
du feu Boy, qui mettoient en doute la validity de son droit et avenement
k la Couronne, et dailleurs ^toient peu enclins, et k entrer dans tous les
^ Que hors corrected by Spanheim, instead of hors.
*'' De ce Conseil corrected by Spanheim, instead of en.
^ Quil se fait added by Spanheim. ^ Corrected from aux dits Conaeils,
Digitized by
Google
768 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct.
engagemens, qui tendoient k toute exclusion du pr^tendu Prince de GkJes,
ou k s'interesser aussi avant dans les guerres de delk la mer. Le parti
des Wights dautre part, estoit celuy en general qui avoit eu le plus
de . . . .*«
De Mylord OodoVphin Orand Thresorier d'Angleterre et le ca/ractere
de sa persorme,
Mylord Godolphin est d'une bonne et ancienne fieunille d'Angleterre,
quoy que le premier Mylord de ce nom. D se fit d6ja oonnoistre et dis-
tinguer par son merite sous le regne de Charles II ; et depuis sous celuy
du Boy Jaques, sous lequel il fut fait Mylord Baron et Pair du Boyaume.
D fut employ^ sous son Begne dans Tadministration des Finances, en
quality de Gommissaire de I'Echiquier, comme on les appelle en Angle-
terre, et par la grande et partiouliere habilet^, qu'il y fit paroistre, fast
continue dans cette mesme fonotion sous le feu Boy Guillaume, et mesme
6tabli le Chef, ou le premier des Commissaires de TEohiquier. Ce qui a lieu,
lors qu'il n'y a point de Grand Thresorier d'Angleterre, comme il n'y en a
point eu durant tout le regne du dit Boy, et qu'en ce cas 1&, I'administra-
tion des finances est mise en commission de quelques personnes, k qui on
en donne le soin, et parmi les quels il y en a un, qui en est 6tabli le
Chef, et ainsi en cette quality a '^ la principale direction, mais au reste sans
avoir le rang, les apointemens,^^ ni la consideration de Mylord Thresorier,
ni aussi en porter le nom. Ce ne fut que deux ou trois mois ayant la mort
du feu Boy, qu'ayant resolu de casser le Parlement, qui devoit se rassem-
bier dans ce mesme mois de Decembre, et compost la plus grande partie
du parti des Thorys, le dit Mylord Godolphin, pour ne pas deyenir suspect
au mesme parti, et dont il a toujours est6, vint resigner au feu Boy sa
commission de Chef de TEchiquier, et sans la vouloir garder, quelque
instance que le Boy luy en fit.
La Beine peu de temps apres son avenement k la Couronne le d6clara
Grand Thresorier d'Angleterre, qui est consider6e pour la plus grande
charge de la Cour et du Boyaume, et luy donne aussi le premier rang,
apres TArchevesque de Cantorbery, et le Chancelier ou Garde des Sceaux,
et tire ordinairement apres soy la consideration de Premier Minlstre,
bien que sans en porter le titre. D n'y eut que le Comte de Bochester,
frere comme il a est6 dit de feu la Duchesse d'Yorck mere de la Beine,
qui avoit d^ja exerc6 cette charge dans les premieres ann^s du Begne du
feu Boy Jaques II, et qui s'attendoit de rentrer dans cette importante
charge, lequel en con9eut un d6plaisir sensible, et s'est abstenu depuis de
prendre paxt aux affaires. Ce choix, eut dailleurs I'approbation generale et
mesme du parti des Wights, aussi bien que des Thorys ; veu la grande
habilet^ connue du dit Mylord, joint k son grand desinteressement, pour
Texercice de la dite charge, et la reputation 6tablie, que personne n'en
estoit plus capable que luy. Ce qui a aussi est^ confirm^ jusques icy, par le
bon estat, oii il a mis les finances de la Beine ; trouv6 moyen de foumir
aux depenses extraordinaires, k quoy les conjonctures publiques durant la
presente guerre, surtout Talliance avec le Portugal et ses suites, les assis-
tances d'argent k TEmpereur, aux deuxCeroles de Franconie et du Suabe,
M Sic. *' MS. d. ** Gorreoted from apartemena.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 769
et *• autres ont donn6 lieu, et avoir encore des fonds de reste, an bout de
Taim^e. En sorte que le caractere du dit Mjlord Godolphin est d^avoir
une grande Exactitude et application, pour Texercice de cette importante
charge : d*evit6r k ce sujet ce qui pourroit Ten distraire ; et ainsi k ne
paroistre pas d'entrer dans le detail des autres affaires de la Cour et du
gouvemement, quelque bonne part dailleurs qu'il y ait par son credit,
et par sa confidence et liaison aveo le Due et la Duchesse de Marl-
borough, et par 1^ ne donner gueres lieu k estre visits des Ministres
strangers, ni ^^ s'en entretenir avec eux. II est ^ ennemi de tout &ste
et de toute parade ext^rieure en son domestique, en son train, et en
toute sa conduite, et pent estre jusques k TexcEs, dans le haut poste o& il
se trouve ; et bien que le premier en ** rang par sa charge, entre les Pairs
seculiers du Eoyaume, se contentant jusques icy de la demiere quality des
Mylords, qui est celle de Baron, et ayant consenti avec peine k estre fioit,
comme il vient Testre depuis quelques semaines. Chevalier de la Jarretiere.
II parle pen et avec beaucoup de retenue. Apres tout il ne laisse pas de
conservEr une passion, qu'il a toujours eue, pour le jeu ; et ainsi d*y donner
les heures d*apres disner ou du soir, qu'il en peut trouvEr le loisir. II
aime aussi beaucoup le divertissement des courses de chevaux, qui se
font en Angleterre avec plus d'attachement et de depense qu'ailleurs, et
ne manque jamais de se trouver k celles, qui se font deux fois Tann^e en
Printemps et en Automne, k Neumarcket. II *^ est li6 particulierement
d*une ancienne et Etroite amitiE, comme ^^ il a deja est6 remarqu6, avec
le Due et la Duchesse de Marlborough depuis longues anne^s, et qui s'est
augmented par le manage de son Fils aisn6, avec la Fille aisne6 de ce
Due. En sorte que le Due de Marlborough se trouvant sans fils masle,
depuis la mort de celuy qu'il avoit, il y aura un an et demi pass6, on croit
que son titre et dignity de Due, pourra passer apres sa mort k son Gendre,
fils aisn6 du Mylord Godolphin. G'est dailleurs cette mesme liaison, qui
peut estre n'a pas peu contribu6 k mettre ce Mylord dans la confidence
particuliere de la Beine, et & la charge de Grand Thresorier d'Angleterre
plustot que le Oomte de Bochester, son oncle matemel, et qui y aspiroit ;
comme il a est^ dit cy-dessus. Au reste ce Mylord est du nombre des
Thorys moderns, fort port^ dailleurs k la poursuite de la guerre presente,
avec vigueur ; ^^ au maintien des Alliances faites k ce sujet, et k la
solitenir.
Du Dtic de Marlboroug, du degrds de son elevation et du caractere de
sa personne.
Quant au Due de Marlborough, il a d6ja Thonneur d'estre connu
personnellement de V** Maj*^, pour me pouvoir dispenser d'en faire icy le
portrait ; outre que les grandes et glorieuses actions de cette campagne,
qu'il vient de faire vers le Danube, contribuent k en faire les plus beaux
" Et , , , VamUe added in margin by Spanheim.
*^ Ni corrected by Spanheim.
^ Hest written by Spanheim instead of Aussi est il,
** En added by Spanheim.
*' Corrected by Spanheim from Au reste U,
^ Comme . . . remarqud added by Spanheim.
"* Avec vigueur marginal note by Spanheim.
VOL. n. — NO. vm. 8 d
Digitized by
Google
770 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct.
traits. Je dirai seulement, que sa &mille est Chnrchill ; qu'il est fils
d'un Pere de ce nom, qui estoit Chevalier Baronnet ; et qui fdt Envoj^
en Dennemarc sous les regnes pass6s : Que son Grand Pere du coste
matemel estoit un des freres cadets du premier Due de Buckingham, £avori
du B07 Jaques I, et par o& le dit Mylord se trouve proche alli6 de tons
ceux de la famille des Villers, dont estoit ce Due. Mylord Pembrook
President du Conseil m'a dit, que sa Grand mere du cost6 matemel estoit
soeur du Grand Pere du Due Marlborough et ainsi soeur pareillement du
Due susdit de Buckingham, elev6 ®^ k cette dignity par la favour du Boy
Jaques I. D'oii il resulte, que le Due de Marlborough, n'est pas veritable-
ment d'une extraction de famille de Mylord d'Angleterre, mais apres tout
n'est pas d*une naissance aussi obscure, que ses envieux ou ses ennemis
le veulent faire croire par deca.^* II naquit veritablement sans beaucoup
de biens de fortune, et k ce qu'on pretend, fut redevable de la premiere
qu'il eut, k Tinclination pour luy de la Duchesse de Cleveland, maistresse
du feu Boy Charles II, et dont il auroit eu une gratification de ^ Livres
Sterl., qui font plus de ^ escus de France. II prit le parti des armes des sa
premiere jeunesse, et Ait Lieutenant dans les Gardes du Boy susdit
Charles. Sa soeur Churchill estant devenue ensuite la Maistresse du Due
d'Yorck depuis Boy Jacques II, et dont il eut deux fils le Duo de Berwicb,
qui commande aujourd'huy en Espagne, et le Due d' Albemarle, comme
on Tappelloit k S. Germain et & la Cour de France, d6c6d6 au commence-
ment de cette guerre en 1701 et une fiUe presentem[ent] k Londres, cela
contribua k avancer le dit Due de Marlborough son frere. En sorte qu'il
fat fEiit Mylord Baron d'Angleterre, en suite de Tavenement du Duo de
Yorck k la Couronne sous le nom de Jaques II, en fut envoy6 en France,
y ferire des complimens, durant mon s6jour precedent en la dite Cour, en
1685, et se trouvoit fort avant dans les bonnes graces de ce Boy. Ce qui
n'emp^cha pas que vers le temps de la revolution, et en suite de Tarrivee
du Prince d'Orange en Angleterre en Novembre 1688, ce Mylord voyant,
que le Boy Jaques s'etoit opim&tr6 k prendre un m^chant parti, contre
la Beligion et Tinterest de la Nation, et qu'il alloit estre abandonn6 de
son arme6, ne prit aussi celuy de le quitter et de passer du cost^ du Prince
d' Orange, qui dans les premieres creations qu'il fit d^s qu'il fut d^lar^
Boy d' Angleterre, donna la quaHt6 de Comte au dit Mylord, qui n'avoit
eu jusques Ik, que celle de Baron d' Angleterre, et d^eurs celle d'un
des Gentilshommes de la Chambre. Aussi servit il dans les premieres
oampagnes^^ qu'il se firent^^ au Pais has, en suite de la dite revolu-
tion, et y fut d^s lors fort estim6 par le Prince de Waldeok,^ parti-
culierement pour son bon sens et habilet6, qu'il fit paroistre dans
les Conseils de guerre. Estant de retour en Angleterre, il se fit rapport
au feu Boy, de quelques discours desavantageux de sa personne et
de son gouvemement, que ce Mylord auroit tenu, et qui le touch^rent
si fort, qu'il luy osta sa charge de Gentilhonmie de la Chambre, et
I'envoya k la Tour. Le Boy mesme doit avoir dit dans ce temps Ik
que s'il n'estoit que Gentilhomme, il faudroit qu'il se vit I'ep^ k la
** Elevi . . . Jaques I marginal note by Spanheim.
•* Par deca written by Spanheim for icy en Angleterre.
« The MS. has campagne, •■ Firent corrected by Spanheim out of fiL
** Oeorge Frederick, oouit of Waldeok.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 771
main, aveo ce Mylord. n sortit de la Tour quelque temps apres,
mais sans rentrer dans sa charge aupres du Eoy, ni dans sa faveur. Ge
qui fit que ce Mylord ne continua pas de servir dans les campagnes
suivantes, et qu*il resta en Angleterre, o& dailleurs luy et la Duchesse
sa femme, Dame d*honneur de la Princesse de Danemarc, aujourd-
huy Beine, tenoient aupres d'EUe le premier rang de credit et de
faveur. Le Due de Glocester fils unique de la dite Princesse, et son sue-
cesseur apres EUe k la Oouronne, ayant est^ tir^ des mains des femmes,
Mylord Marlborough luy fut donn6 pour Gouvemeur, du vivant du feu
Boy ; mais ce qui ne fut pas de longue dur6e, par la mort de ce jeune
Prhice survenue, comme il a est6 dit cy-dessus,** en 1700. En 1701 la
guerre ayant est^ resolue contre la France et TEspagne, et ^ ce sujet, k
conclurre les Alliances qui estoient sur le tapis, avec les Etats Generaux,
I'Empereur et autres Puissances: Mylord Marlborough fut nomm6
du choix et consentement du feu Boy, pour commander les troupes
destinies k passer de deU la mer, au secours des Etats, et en mesme
tems pour TAmbassadeur et Plenipotentiaire d'Angleterre aux dits Etats,
et pour leu Traitt^s qu'il ^herroit de faire conjointement avec eux, au
sujet de la guerre presente. Comme ce choix se fit durant la teneur du
Parlement en Est6 Tannic 1701, que je me trouvois en Angleterre
Envoy6 au feu Boy, je puis aussi remarquer, que le parti des Wights n*en
fut gueres satisfait ; et ce dans la prevention, que ce Mylord estoit un des
z616s Thorys, ainsi peu afifectionn^ au parti de la guerre, et dailleurs n*en
auroit pas continue le mestier depuis plusieurs ann^s en 9a. La suite a
assez fjEhit voir que leurs pr6jug^s ou craintes 1^ dessus 6toient assez mal
fondles, et a justifi^ amplement le choix qu'en fit le feu Boy. Aussi peut-
on juger, que deux motifs concoururent k Vj porter : Pun son juste dis-
cemement, qui luy avoit fait remarquer, et dailleurs sans aucune preven-
tion en sa faveur, comme on pent jug6r par ce que dessus, les bonnes
qualit^s de ce Mylord du cost^ de Tesprit, de la conduite, du g^nie pour
la guerre, et pour le menagement des affaires, et ainsi pour n*en voir pas
de plus propre parmi les Mylords Anglois, k remplir dignement ces deux
postes. L'autre motif, que cela contribuoit k la confiance du parti des
Thorys, et k les engager dautant plus dans les mesures k prendre, au
sujet de la grande guerre, oii on alloit entrer. A quoy se pouvoit joindre
encore la deue consideration, veu la sant^ infirme du feu Boy, et qui ne
pouvoit pas luy promettre une longue vie, ni ainsi autant que cette mesme
guerre pouvoii durer, que^^ par le choix de ce Mylord, pour remplir
6galement ces deux fonctions de General des troupes d' Angleterre, et de
Ministre pour la negotiation des Alliances, et veu tout Thonneur et les
grands avantages, qui luy en revenoient, on engageoit indirectement la
Princesse de Danemarc, qui devoit succeder au feu Boy, au soustien
apres sa mort des mSmes interSts et engagemens dans la guerre presente ;
et ce veu ce qui estoit connu et public du grand credit et pouvoir de ce
Mylord et de la Comtesse sa femme sur Tesprit de la dite Princesse.
L'evenement a aussi amplement justifi^ tout ce que je viens d*en dire, et
au deli mesme de ce qu'on en pouvoit attendre. V" Maj** en est suflB-
samment instruite, aussi bien que des qualit^s personnelles et du caractdre
•» Pag. 761. •• Que added by Spanheim.
8 D 2
Digitized by
Google
772 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS Oct.
d'esprit de oe Mylord, qui pour n'avoir pas daiUeurs est6 cultiv6 pax de
grands avantages du cost6 de sa naissanoe, ou de Teducation, ne se trouve
pas moins judicieux, solide, adroit, ferme, et a&ble en mesme terns;
solitenu dailleurs par un dehors avantageux et une belle presence, oonune
on parle. J*ay pti remarquer dans le cours de la negotiation avec lay des
Traitt^s d* Alliance des ^ hommes ®^ de V. M*^, que pour une personne,
qui n'avoit pas dailleurs est6 nourrie dans les affaires publiques, et ne
commen9oit que d'y entrer, qu'il avoit un discemement fort juste, one
maniere insinuante, qui alloit h son but, sans presque paroistre de le
faire, et en soutenant son advis avec beaucoup de management et de cir-
conspection. II a au reste Tinclination port6e naturellement k I'^pargne,
plust6t qu'^ la depense ; la quelle inclination, si Ton en croit particuliere-
ment ses envieux iroit k Texc^s, le rendroit trop interess6, et le seal
defiant que Ton trouveroit a luy reprocher. II a fait une perte irreparable,
dans une grande Elevation et haute fortune, o^ il se trouve, d'avoir perdu,
comme il a est6 dit cy-dessus, un fils unique tres agr^able et bien £ait de
sa personne, de grande esperance, et qui devoit heritor apres luy de sa
nouvelle quality de Due, et des grands biens, qu'il n'auroit pA que luy
laisser. II a dailleurs quatre fiUes en vie toutes belles,^^ dont il y en a
trois de marines ; Taisn^e, comme il a est6 dit, au fils aisn6 de Mylord
Godolphin ; I'autre, au Comte ^^ de Sunderland ; la troisieme au Comte
Bridgewater, qui a est6 k Berlin, il y a deux ans passes ; la quatrieme est
promise k Mylord Montalmar, fils unique du Comte de Montaigu, un des
plus riches Seigneurs d'Angleterre. Je n'ay pas besoin d'ajout^r, que oe
Due est aussi entierement port^ pour soustenir la guerre presente, et les
Alliances qui s'y rapportent; apres toutes les grandes et 6olatantes
preuves, qu'il vient encore d'en donner.
De la Duchesse de Ma/rlborough et de son credit.
La Duchesse de Marlborough sa Femme, est d'une extraction assez
mediocre ; fut mise cependant pour Fille d'honneur aupres de la Princesse
Anne, depuis Princesse de Danemarc, et aujourd'huy Beine ; et s'insinua
si bien dans son esprit, qu'elle en devint bien tost la &vorite, et ensuite
sa Dame d'honneur, sous le Begne du Boy Jaques, apres son Mariage
avec Mylord Churchill, aujourdhuy Due de Marlborough. Ce qui aug-
menta dans la suite, et s'affermit en sorte, que tout le cr^t du feu Boy
et de la Beine, soeur de la Princesse, ne pust pas Toblig^r k 61oign6r sa
dite Dame d'honneur ; et qu'EUe aima mieux, conmie il-a este dit cy-
dessus,^^ ^ssuy^r toute leur disgrace durant deux anne6s de suite, que d'y
donner lieu. C'est dans le mesme poste de credit et de consideration
aupres de la Beine, o& cette Dame se trouve encore aujourdhuy, et dans
la fonction de sa premiere Dame d'honneur, dailleurs qui garde la bourse
privet. EUe passe dailleurs dans Tesprit de la Nation, pour avoir la
premiere et plus grande part dans la distribution des graces, bien£uts, et
charges, dont la Beine dispose; et pour n'y n6glig6r pas ses interdts
particuliers. Ce qui tout ensemble ne pent que luy attir^r Tenvie, et luy
^ Treaty between England, Prussia, and the General States, dated London 1702,
9>19 Jan., The Hague 1701, SO Dec.
•• Corrected from bienfaites, •• Comte . . . troinime au added by Spanheim.
'• Pag. 776.
Digitized by
Google
1887 NOTES AND DOCUMENTS 773
imput^r mesme beaucoap de choses k ce sujet, qui peuvent estre mal
fonde6s. En sorte qa*on pr6tendoit mesme, que cette grande faveur et
pouvoir du Due et de la Duchesse aupres de la Beine, suivant Tesprit et
rhumeur de la Nation, ne manqueroit pas de donner lieu k les attaquer
dans un prochain Parlement, ainsi qu*on a veu qu'il s'est toujours pratti-
qu6 en pareil cas, sous les Begnes passes. Mais apres tout il y a lieu de
oroire, que ces grandes et glorieuses victoires vers le Danube, et la
demiere entr'autres vers Hochstet,^* remport^es par la conduite et la
valeur du Due de Marlborough, et qui font autant d*honneur au Begne de
la Beine, et k la Nation, convertiront de pareilles intentions en des re-
merciemens et en des ^loges du mesme Due ; fermeront la bouche k ses
envieux et k ses ennemis ; et contribueront k affermir son or^t et sa
consideration dans Tesprit de la Beine, et de la Nation.
On pent juger de ce que dessus de la disposition presente de la Gour
de la Beine, par rapport k Sa Boyale Personne; k celles en qui EUe a le
plus de confiance ; et ainsi k ce qui regarde sa conduite particuli6re ; celle
k regard du gouvemement et de la Nation, on ses Alliances au dehors,
n est constant qu'en toutes rencontres la dite Beine t^moigne beaucoup de
consideration pour Vostre Maj^ ; et en use d'une maniere fort obligeante
envers son Ambassadeur en cette Cour, et les personnes qui luj appartien-
nent, lors qu'elles ont Thonneur de luy faire leur Cour.
Au reste les Ministres strangers pour le cours ordinaire des negotia-
tions, qu'ils peuvent avoir k traiter par de9a, pour les affaires pubHques
et inter^ts de leurs Pnncipaux, ont k s'adresser au Secretaire d*Estat de
leur d^partement.
" 13 Aug. 1704.
Digitized by
Google
774 Oct.
Reviews of Books
England under the Angevin Kings, By Eatb Noboate. 2 vols.
(London : Macmillan & Go. 1887.)
The addition of a new member to the company of those who are reading'
and writing history in the right way is indeed a thing to be glad at. And
the gladness is certainly not lessened when we find of whom Miss Norgate
is the intellectual daughter, still less by the fact that she is the daughter
and not the son. Miss Norgate dedicates her book ' to the memory of
her dear and honoured master John Richard Green.' There was a time
when many of her master's friends expected the History of the Angevin
Kings from his own hand, and it is his work that the phrase of ' Angevin
kings ' has in some measure displaced the ' Plantagenets ' of our youth.
We still need a name to distinguish the later members of the house, and
we should be glad to know why the dukes of York in the fifteenth century
took to themselves the name of ' Plantagenet ' as a surname, rather than
any other nickname of any other remote forefather. But these questions
do not concern Miss Norgate ; she has to deal with a time when the name
of ' Angevin ' is undoubtedly the best name for the royal house ; she stops
when the counts oi Anjou cease to be also kings of England, and the
kings of England to be also counts of Anjou. Name and thing she has
inherited from her ' master,' and she has shown herself worthy of the
inheritance. In many things indeed she has improved on her master ; her
work, if less brilliant, is inmieasurably more sound. There are no signs in
her of the inborn caprice and love of paradox which make Green's writings
dangerous to those who have to take things on a modem writer's word.
On the other hand, she has profited not a little by those higher quaUties
of her master of which his caprice and love of paradox were after all only
the occasional exaggeration. She has learned from him, as I learned
from him, that the historian must be, in no small measure, a topographer ;
and in some lands she has well practised the lesson. And she has learned
from him the habit of steady working at original authorities which Green
knew so well to reconcile with the many temptations of brilliancy like
his. Her book is emphatically scholarly ; she has a clear sight and a
strong grasp of things, and she is not carried away by &ncies. She has
by her first effort made good her place among genuine historical scholars.
I have before me a somewhat curious document, a newspaper review of
Miss Norgate's book by a writer who professes, what under some circum-
stances comes very naturally, a rooted dislike to facts. But it is some-
thing that her book should have taught her critic that the Angevins
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 775
' were not even Englishmen/ and there is no denying the justice of the
criticism that ' the book before us is a history rather of the house of Anjou
than of England under the Angevin kings/ So it is. Miss Norgate,
everywhere careful and scholarly, is much stronger, clearer, and more
animated, in some parts of her subject than in others. She is always at
her very best in Anjou and the other lands of the counts of Anjou ; she
is not, as a rule, at her very best in England, neither is she at her very
best in Aquitaine. The reason of this, in a pupil of John Bichard Green's,
is not far to seek. Nowhere was Green more at home than in Anjou.
Speaking for myself, I would give up all that he actually wrote — save a
great deal in the ' Making ' and some things in the ' Conquest 6f
England ' — to have the Angevin history which he once promised me, and
which would assuredly have been a masterpiece indeed. I have travelled
with him in Anjou ; I have seen how Angers and Fontevrault and Chinon
spoke to him. In truth there was something Angevin in Green himself ;
he could enter into the spirit of the Fulks and Geoffreys — at some
moments there would have been no need to leave out the good canon of
Saint Martin's — as one who had a touch of their kin in him. He never did
much Gaulish work south of Loire, but I feel sure that he would have
been at home also at Poitiers and at Toulouse. The counts of both cities,
if neither of them were quite so marked a race as the Angevins, were both
marked races, who would have suited him well. Miss Norgate has also been
in Anjou, though, I fancy, never in Green's company ; but she has dnmk
in a good deal of his Angevin lore and she has made good use of it on the
spot. Her treatment of Anjou and the Angevins is all alive; in Aquitaine
it gets comparatively cold and dead. I believe she has not travelled there
at all ; at any rate she could not have had the same guidance from the
spirit of her master. In England all is good and sound; some parts,
specially the fights of Northallerton and Lincoln, are a great deal more ;
but a g^eat deal of the English part is hurried, and there are some odd
omissions. We begin to understand what the Uterary gentleman means
when he charges Miss Norgate with * a morbid appetite for /acts,' what
he goes on to define, in the grand style, as 'a plethora of circum
stances, a bewildering profusion of particulars.' There is not really a
fact too much ; very often there are not facts enough : but in some parts
of the book the facts are wedged too close together ; they are not allowed
room to show themselves or their meaning. Some whole subjects are
strangely left out, as the close connexion between England and Sicily
during the greater part of the twelfth century. And it is no reason for
leaving out the last scene of the tale of Thomas of London and Canterbury,
that it has been often told before. It is an essential part of the story, and
it has never been told by one so free as Miss Norgate has shown herself
from any tendency either to worship or to depreciate. Her telling of the
whole tale of Henry and Thomas is far too hurried ; but, as she thoroughly
understands the joint work of the great king and the great chan-
cellor, so she can understand the position of both the two former yoke-
fellows, when one had thrust the other against his will into a post for
which his merits no less than his faults disqualified him.
There is another point on which I must speak, though it is a little
unpleasant to do so. It is manifest that any long piece of history will
Digitized by
Google
776 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Oct.
bring both writer aaid reader across some things with which an old man
can deal with less shrinking than a young woman. But, if history is to
be written at all, facts must be looked in the face. Surely Saint Lacy
and Saint Agatha themselves would not have scrupled on occasion to call
a spade a spade and to speak of William the Bastard. Miss Norgate's
period does not call for quite such plainness of speech, but it does not do
to call Robert earl of Gloucester the * eldest son ' of Henry I without
some explanation. Most Ukely few will read Miss Norgate's book without
enough knowledge of the main facts to give the explanation; still
there might be such a reader, say an intelligent Japanese ; and such an
one would certainly ask how it came about that, when King Henry left
a son, his crown came to be disputed between his nephew and his
daughter. So again, anybody would think that Lewis VII divorced
Eleanor of Aquitaine without any reason, or simply out of zeal for the
canonical degrees. Li Henry n*s time, Geoffi*ey, afterwards archbishop of
York, comes in at vol. ii. p. 155 as ' the king's eldest son.' At p. 301 we
read:
*For thirty-five years Geoffrey had been the eldest living child, if
indeed he was not actually the first-bom, of Henry Fitz-Empress ; bat
of the vast Angevin heritage there fell to his share nothing except the
strong feelings and fiery temper which caused half the troubles of his life.'
The intelligent Japanese would surely be a little puzzled at this ; and
we are not certain whether things would be made clearer or darker by a
hint in a note that Geoffrey was not the son of Queen Eleanor, or by a
discussion a few pages on as to the nationaUty of his real mother. And
it is really misleading to speak of Richard I as if he was a crusader of the
same pattern as Saint Lewis. But Miss Norgate is a little bewitched by
the chivalrous extortioner, stained with every crime, who saw in England
only a land from which to screw the uttermost farthing. It is, I think, the
only trace in her two volumes of anything that can be called feminine
weakness.
Li point of historical scholarship it is rarely indeed that Miss Norgate
gives anything to complain of. What strikes us before all things is her firm
grasp of facts and authorities ; there is nothing that suggests the novice,
no timid or clumsy or even unfamiliar handling of anything. It is rarely
indeed that one comes to a word that one could wish to change. But we
must give up a passage in the very first page which says that ' the green
tree of the West- Saxon monarchy had fallen beneath Duke WiUiam's
battle-axeJ' Undoubtedly the axe is a more convenient tool for dealing
with a green tree than sword, lance, bow, or mace ; still the weapon of
Onut and Harold, though worthily wielded by Stephen at Lincoln, is the
very one which must not be put into the hand of William on Senlac. It
was one of Green's odd fancies to write ' northmen ' with a small n, as
GKbbon wrote 'jews ; ' and in this odd &ncy his pupil follows him. It
becomes singularly grotesque when Miss Norgate gets into Ireland, and
the same people in their character of ' northmen ' still keep the small n,
while as ' Ostmen ' they rise to the dignity of an Omega. It is more
serious when Miss Norgate is led away by the very recent fEishions of the
newspapers to talk about the 'Angevin empirCy and there is a passage
about the real empire (ii. 878) which needs a very favourable construction
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 777
to force it into agreement with accuraoy. It is misleading, to say the
least, to say that Otto was ' elected emperor of the Eomans ' and ' crowned
king of the Germans.' There is moreover one bit of English history in
Miss Norgate's first volume of which I can make nothing. It nms ^us
(i. 21). She is speaking of the justiciar.
' This office, of which the germs may perhaps be traced as fEur back
as the time of Alfred, who acted as '' secundarius " under his brother
iEthelred I, was directly derived from that which ^thelred II had insti-
tuted under the title of high-thegn or high-reeve, and which grew into a
permanent vice-royalty in the persons of Godwine and Harold under Cnut
and Eadward and of Balf Flambard under WiUiam Bufus.'
I have read this over two or three times, and I am less and less
able to understand ii There is no reference. I feel sure that it comes
from Green in some shape ; but I feel equally sure that, if it had come
from any other source. Miss Norgate would have at once seen its utter
lack of authority or even of meaning.^
But these are wonderfully small matters to set against the general
thoroughness and value of the book. I have, as is the reviewer's duty,
looked back, after my first reading of the two volumes, to some special
passages. That the first volume is the better I have implied abeady ;
it is the more Angevin. But the opening chapter, ' The England of
Henry I,' is admirable. Only it makes me personally regret that Miss
Norgate's detailed narrative does not begin where my own leaves off. Of
Henry the First I have done in full only a few years at the beginning of
his reign; she has done only a few at the end; there is still a gap.
Then comes the purely Angevin part, the reading of which to one who
knows the land, its rulers, and its buildings, is a matter of simple delight.
The portraits of the counts — and every count of Anjou has a portrait —
stand out in full life, and there is the most thoroughly scholarlike dealing
with the authorities. I would point out a note at vol. i. p. 168 as a
charming little bit of criticism. When Henry Fitz-Empress comes into
England, we get several thoroughly good chapters, especially that
headed, * The Last Years of Archbishop Theobald.' We get into the
second volume, and there is a certain fEdling off. I said that the account of
Thomas of London, and much else in this volume, is * hurried.' Looking
at it a second time, I cleave to the word. It is not hurried in the sense
of being hastily or carelessly done — quite the contrary ; but there is not
room enough taken for the story ; the facts are jammed together as in a
Macedonian phalanx ; they do not stand free, each to do its own work,
like a Boman legionary. In the chapter headed ' The Angevin Empire,'
though I could wish another title for it, Miss Norgate's foot is on her
native heath, and we have her again at her best. Her master's strength
without his weakness comes out in such a passage as this, one of a crowd
which I should like to copy.
' The prophecy said to have been made to Fulk the Good was now
literally fulfilled. The dominions of his posterity reached to the utter-
most bounds of the known world. In the hx east, one grandson of Fulk
V ruled over the Uttle strip of Holy Land which formed the boundary of
Christendom against the outer darkness of unexplored heathendom. In
* See note on p. 780.
Digitized by
Google
778 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Oct.
the far west, another of Folk's grandsons was, formally at least, acknow-
ledged overlord of the island beyond which, in the belief of those days,
lay nothing but a sea without a shore. Scarcely less remarkable, however,
was the fulfilment of the prediction in a narrower sense. The whole
breadth of Europe and the whole length of the Mediterranean Sea parted
the western from the eastern branch of the Angevin house. But in Oaal
itself, the Angevin dominion now stretched without a break from one end
of the land to the other. The Good Count's heir held in his own hands
the whole Gaulish coast-line from the mouth of the Sonmie to that of
the Bidassoa, and he could almost touch the Mediterranean Sea through
his vassal the count of Toulouse. Step by step the lords of the little
Angevin march had enlarged their borders till tiiey enclosed more than
two-thirds of the kingdom of France.*
This is the way to use geography ; but geography becomes a yet more
living thing in the passage which goes immediately before. Miss Norgate
had been pointing out the twofold position of Henry EL, insular and con-
tinental. He had no thought of making England a dependency of Anjou.
He strove to ' make England a strong and independent national state,
with its vassal states, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland, standing around it
as dependent allies.' That is to say, he would be, like his predecessors,
totitis BritannuB et omrmim circwmjacentiwrn insularwm Imperator et Bo-
sileus. It is odd that Miss Norgate did not see that it waa to this insular
dominion, the supremacy of a patnXevc over many pfiytQ, not to the conti-
nental dominion in every inch of which he had a lord over him, that the
Imperial style belongs ; but this fault of expression does not alter the
depth and truth of the sayings that follow.
* Henry certainly never at any time contemplated making his conti-
nental empire a mere dependency of the English crown. It was distinctly
an Angevin empire, with its centre in the spot where an Angevin count
had been promised of old that the sway of his descendants should spread
to the ends of the earth. Henry in short had another work to carry on
besides that of Cnut and William and Henry I. He had to carry on also
the work of Fulk the Black and Geofl&rey Martel and Fulk V, and although
to us who know how speedy was to be its overthrow that work looks a
comparatively small matter, yet at the time it may well have seemed
equally important with the other in the eyes both of Henry and of his con-
temporaries. While what may be called the English thread in the some-
what tangled skein of Henry's life runs smoothly and uneventfully on
from the year 1175 to the end, it is this Angevin thread which forms the
due to the political and personal, as distinguished from the social and con-
stitutional interest of all the remaining years of his reign. And from this
interest, although its centre is at Angers, England is not excluded. For
the whole continental relations of Henry were coloured by his position as
an English king ; and the whole foreign relations of England, from his
day to our own, have been coloured by the fact that her second King
Henry was also head of the Angevin house when that house was at the
height of its continental power and glory.*
This is strong writing and true. Then comes the chapter headed
' The Last Years of Henry H,' ending with the flight from Le Mans, the
death at Chinon, the burial at Fontevrault, the blood that gushed forth
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 779
when the parricide Bichard drew near to his father's body. The
remaining chapters are, as a whole, hardly on the same level ; but it is not
many among so-called writers of history who could reach to their level.
The continental part is throughout better than the English. At Ghftteau-
Oaillard — whence she does not seem to have seen Bunnymede any more
than I did when I stood by him who did see it — Miss Norgate can with
great skill besiege and take a castle in Normandy as well as in Anjou.
The last chapter is * The New England.' The title savours somewhat of
Green's * New Monarchy ; ' it is the most hurried of all — again in no sort
carelessly done, but done as if a certain number of pages only were
allowed. Plain truth compels one to say that the ending of the book is
not quite equal to the beginning.
But it is a sterling book, one which places its writer very high indeed
in the ranks of real scholars. As regards its relation to Miss Norgate's
' master,' it is easy to see that his influence has been wholly good when-
ever he has been simply a source of inspiration, not quite so good when
there has been anything like conscious following. What might be gained
by intimate consort with that brilliant and wayward genius no man can
know better than I ; but he is dangerous to copy or even to follow. On
the whole the pupil reproduces the master on his stronger side only. She
has shown that she can indeed go on without help from him or from
any one. But in what path shall she go 7 Miss Norgate has, I trust,
before her many years of historical study and of historical writing.
How can they best be spent? The whole field of English history is
open to her, till she reaches the times that Mr. Gardiner has made
his own. Unless we except the few years of Henry VIII which Mr.
Brewer undertook, no part after her own has been done in full by any
writer at all of her own measure. But on the whole I would rather bid
her stay beyond the Channel. She is so thoroughly at home by the
Loire that she would not find herself out of place by the Garonne or the
Bhone. There is much yet to be done in the history of southern Gaul in
its relations to both England and France, and there is much in that history
which is better understood by an English than by a French mind. And
there is one special line of thought which I would recommend to her.
Since the short day of Angevin greatness, the world has seen two other
powers of exactly the same nature, two powers founded on no basis of
national life, made up in the same way of lands which have no actual
connexion, but which have been brought together by every form of acci-
dent. Such was the power of the house of Burgundy ; such is the power
of the house of Austria. Only the Burgundian power was hardly more
lasting than that of Anjou, while the Austrian power has lasted for many
generations. Why is there this difference ? If we compare Burgundy
with Austria, we might give as the reason that the power of the house of
Austria, though not the power of a nation, has a nearer approach to a
national basis. The national kingdom of Hungary is part of it, while
the power of Burgundy was wholly made up of scraps, High-Dutch, Low-
Dutch, French, and Walloon. But of the Angevin power the national
kingdom of England was also a part, and this approach to a national basis
did not save it from that breaking asunder which soon fell on the power
of Burgundy, but which has not yet fallen on the power of Austria. Or
Digitized by
Google
780 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Oct.
can it be because neither Anjou nor Burgundy gave itself out as the
continuation of something else in the way that Austria does 7 Or is it
the homelier reason that one can walk from Austria into Hungary, while
one cannot walk from Anjou into England ? Or is the reason something
very much deeper than any of these which he on the surface, something
which may need the philosophy of history to explain it ? Miss Norgate
does not write as if she had troubled herself greatly with the philosophy
of history ; but I am sure that she is folly capable of dealing with such
a question as far as a sound study of facts and a habit of making reason-
able inferences from facts can carry her. But such an inquiry as this is
work only for an essay. If I were set up as taskmaster, I would give her
as the work of her life to carry on the history of southern Gkbul, down to
the day when they of Bordeaux sent forth their last cry to them of
England to save that local independence which they knew to be more safe
under the more distant sovereign. Edwabd A. Fbeeman.
* I haye since found the source of Miss Norgate*s theory of the origin of the
office of justiciary. What Miss Norgate here says comes from three passages in
the ' Conquest of England/ pages 394, 429, and 543. In the first, Green speaks of
* iBthelred raising a new favourite, ^fic, to the post of High Beeve, in which we may
perhaps again see a foreshadowing of the coming justiciary.' The second passage is
more positive and more detailed. ' The appearance of a new officer at court, the EUgh
Thegn marked the beginning of an attempt on the part of the king to supersede the
traditional and constitutional advisers by ministers of a more modem type chosen
by and dependent on himself. . . . The office indeed was not only continued by
C^ut, but raised by him into a predominance which it never afterwards lost. The
transformation of the head thegn into a * Secundarius Begis ' in the person of God wine
marked a step towards the erection of the later justiciary and of the ministerial system
which lasted on to the close of the Angevin reigns.*
All this, I venture to say, is a pure dream. It is a wonderful example of the way
in which Green would put forth, as a matter of absolute certainty, imaginings of his
own which plain people find it hopeless to look for in contemporary writers. For
the first passage he quotes two authorities. One is the Chronicle for 1002, where
^fic undoubtedly appears as * I'ses cynges heahgerefa.' But there is nothing to show
that * heahgeref a ' was a new title or denoted a new office. It had been used — rather
strangely certainly — as the title of lords of Bamburgh fifty years earlier (see Cod.
Dipl. ii. 292). And at this very time it is used of other persons besides £fic. If he
is ' heahgeref a ' in 1002, in the year before, 1001, we find in another copy of the
Chronicles, two other men, ^thelweard and Leofwine, both spoken of by Uie same
title. When I wrote vol. i. p. 308 of the Norman Conquest, I took them for simple
sheriffs, and I take them for such still. The second reference is to Cod. DipL iii.
365, where, in a piece of most flowery Latin, ^thelred calls iEfic * praefectus meos,
quem primatem inter primates meos taxavi.* This flourish, which may mean anything,
is surely a dangerous foundation on which to build a theory of the constitutional
growth of England for several centuries.
Still the High Beeve is to be found ; or rather three High Beeves, two too many
for the theory, are to be found at once. Green's second passage quotes no authorities
at all. Here the ' High Beeve ' has turned into a * High Thegn,* and of the High
Thegn I have found no mention anywhere else. I have worked with some zeal at
Earl Godwine and all belonging to him, but I have nowhere found him called
* Secundarius Begis.*
The third passage, for which (see p. 542) Green may not be fully answerable, is
more wonderful than all. Here we go back from the * High Thegn * to the * High
Beeve ; * but we get a good deal besides. * A second stage in the progress of kingly
rule was marked by the creation under iBthelred of the High -reeve, the first e£fort of
the crown to create a minister of state, a deputy of its executive and judicial power
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 781
The Forty-sixth Annual Beport of the Deputy Keeper of the Public
Becords. (London : Published under the direction of the Master of
the RoUs. 1886.)
This is the last report of the late William Hardy, and not less interesting
than its predecessors. Its main contents are the Lists of Presentations
temp. Car. U, compiled by Mr. A. T. Watson; and the Calendar of Patent
Rolls 6 Ed. I. (continued from the Forty-fifth report). Mr. W. B.
Sanders describes two new Old English charters — a grant by K. Eadwig
to his thane Eadwig of eight hides in Brantestune [Branston near
Burton-on-Trent], 956 ; and a charter of gift by -Slthelred to Burton
Abbey, 1004 ; this last vellum also contained the will of Wulfric (entirely
in English) and three endorsements, one a list of abbey lands which Mr.
Sanders suggests may be the original description of the Burton Abbey
lands obtained for William's Domesday commissioners. Both documents
are added to the third part of the facsimiles of Anglo-Saxon manuscripts,
and belong to Major-General Wrottesley. M. Baschet calendars a number of
volumes of despatches in Paris from various envoys to the French king —
Le comte de Tilli^res. 1621-28 ; M. de Barillon, 1677-80 ; Le oomte
de TaUard, 1700-1 ; M. d'Iberville, 1714. Mr. W. H. Bliss has been
working in the Vatican archives and the Stockholm archives. The Rev.
W. D. Macray sends home an interesting report from the Copenhagen
royal library and archives. He has calendared or copied letters of
James I, 1608-25, Henry and Charles, princes of Wales, 1602-24,
Elizabeth of Bohemia, 1624-1660, and Anne of Denmark, 1591-1618 ;
correspondence between Frederic U and Christian IV of Denmark and
England, 1564-1625, falcons, bloodhounds, piracy, commercial regula-
tions, safeconducts, the Iceland fishery, iron cannon, cloth, and levying of
hired soldiers, being the chief subjects of the letters. The ' pirates ' men-
tioned are Blackadder, Thomas Clarick, and Anthony Niport [Newport],
both the last equipped by Henry Seckfort, Elizabeth's gardener, Thomas
Priesser, Digory Piper, Captain Fox, John de Mheer [sic], Wicks, Wodd,
Strangwich [upon whom there is a curious ballad printed in one of the
Percy Society collections], John Duffelt [Duffield], Will Spark of Ply-
mouth, Henry Chanter of Southampton and Olaf Mestor of London, Peter
Maar of Wells, Will Maris [Morris] of Youghal, Norland Manfeld of Stone-
house. Sir Walter Baalle [Balegh] is spoken of, and the Armada. In the
besides the hereditary eaJdormen, <fto. Fiercely opposed, this institution became per-
manent under Gnut in the ** viceroyalty *' of Godwine ; under the Confessor in that of
Harold ; and from it under the Norman kings sprang the Justiciar.'
One feels as Lord Melbourne did towards Maoaulay ; if one could only be so
cocksure of anything as all this. But then I never heard of the * viceroyalty * of
Godwine, unless it lurks in the rhetorical phrase of Eadward's biographer, *totius
pene regni dux et bajulus.' (See Norman Conquest, voL i. p. 732.) The * viceroyalty '
of Harold I can admit. He was ' subregulus,* and as * subregulus,* I long ago likened
him (Norman Conquest, ii. 686) to Alfred as * secundarius.' But I know of nothing
like it between the two.
It is perhaps a pity that a great deal of Green's ' Conquest of England ' was ever
printed. The danger of putting forth notions which are at the most ingenious
guesses as if they were absolutely ascertained facts was never more clearly shown
than when we see such an one as Miss Norgate led away by a simple imagining, stated
with all the confidence of a mathematical demonstration.
Digitized by
Google
782 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Oct.
miscellaneous correspondence following is a table of the monthly cost of
ships and crew of various size in 1611. The Trades Increase of 1,000
tons had a crew of 400 men, and her monthly expenses were S50L The
Scottish papers in Denmark 1460-1660 have notices on the gipsy king,
Anthony Gagino, 1606, Andrew and Robert Barton, the famous Scottish
sailors, 1609-1611, and James Skee of Orkney. In the Hbrary Mr. Bliss
notices a twelfth century manuscript of Eadmer ; a twelfth century manu-
script of Bede's commentary on the gospel of S. Mark, a book of hoars
written for Mary de Bohun first wife of Henry IV, some works on alchemy,
the rules of the English Mint, 1606 ; and a good series of travels in
England in 1601, 1608, 1606, 1630-1, 1661-8, 1677-8, 1679, 1688, 1698,
1714, 1766, 1770, 1777, 1788, some of which would certainly be worth
pubhshing here. There are accounts of Irish affairs 1690-2 and 1761—4,
and a volume of Irish poems written c. 1600, which is, I believe, known
to Celtic scholars in England.
Lastly, Mr. Bawdon Brown's bequest of Venetian manuscripts is here
catalogued (many from the Tiepolo-Contarini collection). These are of
high value ; there are relazioni from the envoys of the republic, reports
or news letters, ducali, and letters. The ckicali (ducal commissions) are
nine beautiful miniatures, 1471-1666, containing portraits of various
governors by good painters such as Giuho Clovio (1498-1678) and
Giorgio Colonna, and fill a gap in our English collections of Italian art.
There are memoranda relating to the Venice players in England 1608, of
Lord Suffolk's players 1610, of Arabella Stuart being put on the stage to
her great discontent during her lifetime. There are also orations,
pamphlets, a note by H. C. Barlow on * Inferno * v. 69 ; a note on Oliver
Goldsmith having had Venetian kinsfolk and perhaps blood, and all kinds
of miscellaneous documents going down as late as 1762. Mr. Bawdon
Brown's epigraph on Sanuto is too good not to reproduce :—
* Caressed by Sabellico, correspondent of Giovio, contemporary of
MachiaveUi and Guicciardini, travestied by Bembo, esteemed by Aldo,
mutilated by Muratori, praised by Foscarini, recovered by Donate, valued
and illustrated by those &mous scholars D. Jacobo MoreUi, D. Pietro
Bettio, and my most dear and onmiscient friend the author of the
** Inscrizioni Veneziane." * F. York Powbll.
Yea/r Books 18 and 14 Edward IIL Edited and translated by Luke
Owen Pike, M.A. (London : Longmans & Co. 1886.)
In the editing of this, the second instalment of the unprinted yestr books
of the reign of Edward III, Mr. Pike has maintained the high standard
of excellence reached in his previous volume. He has expended so much
labour upon the preparation of his text and the provision of apparatus
that the work of his predecessor in this task appears perfunctory by the
side of his. For the first time we have texts founded upon a collation of
the various manuscript year books. This alone is a vast improvement. But
Mr. Pike has not been satisfied with this. He has followed up, with
marvellous patience, the faint clues given in the year books to the iden-
tification of the actions therein reported, and by comparing the reports
with the enrolments of the suits on the plea rolls he has cleared up
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 788
many obscure points in the reports. The editing of these year books is no
easy task. Probably no class of our medieval records presents greater
difficulties or is beset with more pitfalls for an unwary or ill-equipped
editor. The manuscripts, besides being written in the so-called ' Norman-
French/ abound with such violent and arbitrary contractions that they
give one the impression that they are private note books written in a
species of shorthand. They hardly favour the view of Bacon and Plowden
that the year books were official compilations, and the frequent qucere
tamen'B and credo^s, which express the dissent or doubt of the reporters,
do not seem compatible with an official character. Yet if they were pri-
vate notes, it is difficult to understand why the whole of the routine busi-
ness of the eyre is fully recorded in some of them.
Following the example of Mr. Horwood, Mr. Pike utilises his intro-
ductions for the discussion of various subjects suggested by his text.
Thus in his first volume he has given an intelligible explanation of the
process assisa vertitur in juratam, and in this volume he gives an
equally valuable explanation of the dwindling of the secta from a most
important part of the proceedings down to a mere formal phrase in the
count, representing no more flesh and blood than did the plegii de prose-
qvsndo in the days of John Doe and Richard Eoe. He also discusses the
best English translation of recognoscere as applied to the functions of
an assize. He decides in favour of ' make known.' This and Bigelowe*s
* report ' do not sufficiently refer to an important part of the duties of an
assize — examination and inquiry. Probably the best translation of recog-
noscere would be a compound phrase such as * investigate and report.'
Mr. Pike utters a useful caution against reading later technical mean-
ings into early phrases that originally had no such hard-and-fast significa-
tion. Powerful as is the conservative tendency of legal phraseology, it
has proved unequal to the task of preventing words developing fresh
meanings. Even the province of law is not exempt from the operation
of the great philological forces of the generalisation of the special and
the specialisation of the general. Fortescue (' De Laudibus Legum
Angliffi,* c. 48) justified the retention of Anglo-French in legal proceed-
ings on the ground that it was superior to Enghsh as a vehicle for con-
veying technical terms. Probably he felt the same difficulty that we do
in attempting to translate the terms of art of the law system of his day.
But experience has shown that his plea is almost as worthless as his idea
that the Anglo-French of his day was superior to the * French of Paris '
because the latter was vulgariter quadam ruditate corrupta ; quod fieri
non accidit in sermone Gallico infra Angliam usitato, cum sit semw ille
ibidem scepius scriptus qua/m locutus. It is evident from the blunders of
the later text writers that many of these technical terms came down to
them as verbal fossils, and it was easier to leave them undisturbed in the
strata of the writs and records than to dig them out and explain them.
We have a good instance of this in the vain attempts made to explain
arrainiare as apphed to the institution of an assize. We now know that
this arrainiare arose through a misreading of arrarrdare,^ which has no
connexion whatever with arraign. This misreading originated the
entirely false technical phrase ' to arraign an assize.'
* Mr. Pike writes arrarmare^ agreeing in this reading with the editor of Fleta,
Digitized by
Qoo^^
784 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Oct.
Space will not permit me to refer to the other interesting points dealt
with by Mr. Pike in his introduction. I cannot, however, refrain from
drawing attention to his valuable notes upon the growth of copyhold
tenure. Mr. Pike seems doubtful about the practice of grafting being^
known in England at this period. It was known long before the days of
Edward DI. There is a twelfth century description of the process in
Reginald of Durham's *Vita Sancti Godrici,' c. 89, § 86 (p. 96), and
a reference to it occurs in Neckham's * De Naturis Rerum,' a 76. The
socage custom that fixed a widow's dower at one-half is referred to hj
* Fleta,' lib. v. c. 24, § 6, and is frequently met with in the records of
our ancient boroughs. There is another custom, mentioned in Mr. Pike's
previous volume, p. 287, that occurs in borough records even oftener than
this. I refer to the strange custom that decided that a child had attained
its majority when it knew how to measure cloth and could count twelve-
pence. Well might Justice Shardlow, in spite of the medieval respect
for local customs, adjudge this custom contrary to law qar asqune homme
est de XX, aunz devanint qe il seit auner, et asqune le seit quant il est de
vij.^ W. H. Stevenson.
Doria et Barherousse, Par le Vice-Amiral Jureen de la Gbavu&bb,
membre de rinstitut. (Paris: Plon. 1886.)
Les Corsaires ha/rharesques et la marine de Soliman le grand. Par le meme
Auteur. Ouvrage accompagn^ de quatre cartes. (Paris : Plon. 1887.)
Admibaii Jubien de la Gbavi&be's last two volumes are in a way dis-
appointing. They are indeed thoroughly interesting ; the reader is carried
on from the beginning to the end without an e£fort of his own ; for the
learned admiral possesses in a high degree that peculiar lightness of touch
which appears to be the special secret of the French literary genius. Nor
can he be accused of superficiality, for he is obviously master of his sub-
ject, and knows his Brant6me and Saildoval and Capelloni by heart.
And throughout we feel that there is nothing amateurish about Uie criti-
cism ; it is the judgment of a seaman who knows his business, and is able
to take a practical estimate of the naval affairs of which he writes. His
remarks on the necessary conditions of a corsair navy, on the contrasts
between the Ottoman and the Barbary fleets, on the lessons to be learned
from the battle of Prevesa, and the like, are examples of the value of an
expert's opinion. But interesting, sound, and professional as are these
volumes, they are not what they might have been, a final history of the
Mediterranean navies in the middle ages. M. Jurien de la Gravid
knows the subject so well that he is marked out for the task. He has
gone near it, but has just stopped short, not for want of materials or
knowledge, but merely for want of thought. To write a continuous and
comprehensive history would naturally demand more mental effort than
to put together a series of graphic sketches, and unfortunately the admiral
has chosen the easier feat. Witli every power to give us an authoritative
' One report says that this was a Hereford case, and another that it arose in
Gloucester. If it was in Hereford it is singolar that the counsel should have omitted
the important qualification that the child must also have attained the age of fourteen.
See the Hereford Consuetudines in Wooton's Leges WalUca, App. No. I.
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 786
aoconnt of the naval wars of the Mediterranean during the period of
Turkish supremacy, he has nevertheless confined himself to writing a
number of very brilliant paragraphs on the chief events in those wars.
He has a talent for detail : his descriptions of sea fights, of storms, of
sieges, are lifelike ; the disastrous attack on Algiers by Charles V in 1541
has never had a more graphic chronicler. But a mass of imdigested
details does not make a history. In these volumes, notwithstanding the
ease and charm of the style — indeed, perhaps on the very account of the
unconquerable levity of French historical writing of this sort — it is ex-
tremely difficult to gain a connected view of the subject. We seem to be
reading hundreds of sparkling *' Occasional Notes,' and find oursdves
wondering what links them together. We miss the power of generalisa-
tion which places these crowded details in their proper relations to each
other.
Nevertheless, while we certainly desire more fix)m Admiral Jurien
de la Oravidre than these collections of dramatic sketches, we must be
grateful for what he has given us. As we have said, his facts may be
depended upon, and that is a great thing in historical writing. In the
next place the period he has chosen is full of interest, and he has known
how to bring out the most attractive points in the most telling manner.
' Doria et Barberousse ' traces the rise of the Turkish naval power upon
the ruins of the rival armaments of Genoa and Venice, and carries the
story to the time when the fleet of Suleyman the Great, under the inspir-
ing leadership of Barbarossa, won its crowning triumph over Doria at
Prevesa in 1588. ' Les Corsaires barbaresques ' takes up the narrative at
this point, and ends with the death of Doria in 1560. The second volume
is on the whole more sustained and less sketchy than the first, and the
notes and piices justificatives are valuable features which are wanting
in • Doria et Barberousse.* The central figure in both is Doria, and of
him M. Jurien de la Gravidre has succeeded in drawing a finished pic-
ture which cannot fail to charm every reader. The great admiral of
Oharles V is a fine study, and his biographer has a warm admiration for
bJTn ; but he does not place him in the first rank of seamen. Doria's
iron endurance and undying energy up to the age of ninety, his unflinch-
ing patriotism as a Genoese, and his political sagacity, find a warm eulo-
gist in M. de la Gravidre ; but he is critical on other points in his charac-
ter. La bravoure de Doria — ceci n*a jamais fait doute — ne peut Sire con-
testie ; ses combirumons deviennent, en mainte occasion, irop ing&nieuses.
Uhistovre nous pr^ente heaucowp de grands marins ; elle n'offre d noire
admvration que trots grands hommes de mer, Je les nommerai dans
Vordre oH, mon estime les place : ces trois hommes sont Buyter, Nelson et
Suffren. Barbarossa, as is natural, appears in these pages a much more
shadowy personality than Doria ; it is always difficult for a Frenchman
to portray an oriental, and especially a man with whom the writer has no
sympathy. M. Jurien de la Gravi^re can see nothing admirable or heroic
in an * infidel,' and the exploits of the Turkish arms, whether by sea or
on land, are to him merely so many triumphs of barbarism. He has no
word of admiration for Barbarossa or Sinan or Piale, though he cannot
conceal his professional esteem for their seamanship. Among the cor-
sairs Dragut is drawn with most vigour, and he may properly be taken
VOL. n. — NO. vm. 8 e
Digitized by
Google
786 HEVIEWS OF BOOKS Oct
as the type of his remarkable class. It is diffionlt to write on such a
subject -without taking a side, and the French admiral does not hide his
prejudices. We must go elsewhere to find justice for the Turkish
admirals; but for a series of vivid scenes in the naval history of the
sixteenth century, and a fedthful picture of the greatest figure among the
Christian seamen, we cannot do better than read M. Jurien de la Gra-
vidre's charming vplumes. S. Lanb-PooIiB.
Les Hugtienots et les &ueux: Htude Historique 8ur vingt-dnq armies
thirXVI*^ sidole (1660-1686). Par M. le baron Kebvyn db liBTTEN-
HOVE. (Bruges : Bezaert-Storie. 1888 to 1886.)
This would be a better book if it had a better title and a better preface.
The reader will learn little about the Huguenots, and not as much as he
would wish about the Gueux ; but he will find what is, subject to certain
deductions, an excellent account of the international history of the least
religious portion of the wars of religion. The author undertakes to show
the identity of the principles of the reformation with those of the revolu-
tion. He would prove that the outbreaks in France and the Netherlands
were due ta one and the same movement, that they were both as anti-
national as they were revolutionary. This is undoubtedly the purport of
the first two volumes, but the conclusion to be drawn from the last four
volumes is that the religious element, though never unimportant, was
outweighed or utilised by poUtical or national agencies, which were at
work long before its introduction, and which were only momentarily
interrupted by it. Toleration is not in the sixteenth century necessarily
to be regarded as a virtue, and it may therefore safely be suggested that
the principle of personal toleration is represented by William of Orange,
and that of national toleration by the royal fEunily of France, and mainly
by Catherine de' Medici and the duke of Alen9on. In the first two
volumes, Orange and Catherine are on the stage, but are playing minor
parts ; in the last four. Orange and Alen9on become the heroes or, rather,
the villains of the play. Their respective deaths, which are almost simul-
taneous, form the climax. The remainder of the sixth volume contains
the epilogue and the moral. In our opinion, the attempt of Alen9on
on Antwerp would have formed a d&nouement more artistic and more
historical. Both the villains meet with their just retribution, and at
each other's hands. The political play is over ; the religious play begins.
That event did, indeed, prove that pent-up religious passions must have
vent ; that the religious dualism must be treated in the Netherlands by
separation, and in France by fighting to the point of exhaustion. The
afbir of Cologne, previously unimportant, steps into the foreground as
being a purely religious question. Not only Alen9on, but the court of
France, suffers eclipse from the rise of Ouise. And Orange, though the
author would induce us to believe that he was implicated in Alen9on's
attempt, was ruined by it. He had helplessly to look around for the
purely religious support which he had previously avoided. It is difficult
to believe with the author that his death saved his waning reputation,
and stimulated the resistance of the northern provinces ; but it is equally
difficult to agree in the view of Motley and Wenzelbui^er that his life
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 787
!~ would have implied a united Netherlands. He and the coolheaded
^ Languet never believed that winning was possible with a religious pro-
"^ gramme and without the help of the French, crown.
This connexion with the French crown is the chief of the many
^ indictments which the author brings against Orange. A Belgian may be
' pardoned for sensitiveness on this subject, but to impartial judges it
^ seems neither right nor wrong, but a matter of absolute necessity. The
alternative was not benevolent neutrahty, but active hostility with a view
s to the extirpation of heresy. Orange urged this to John of Nassau in
? 1574 ^ and it was his apology for the renewal of negotiations with Alen9on
after the French attack on Antwerp. Urget Alenconvus, writes Du Plessis
Momay in 1578, amicvm an hostem maUnt, sibi an Austriaco adjtmcPumJ^
^ Orange himself, and both catholic and reformed dissidents, would have
^ preferred a connexion with Germany, except indeed Hainault and Artois,
^ which from the first gravitated towards France.' The Austrian Habs-
^ burgs, however, could bring no material aid. The Saxon connexion,
' with which the troubles began, and of which there was an idea as late as
' 1580,^ was displeasing to both Calvinists and catholics. The intervention
t of the Palatinate drove every catholic to arms. It is hard to enter into
t the author's sentiment for a Spanish connexion that should be merely
nominal. Eepeatedly he dwells upon the schemes for a separate govem-
E ment by a Spanish prince, ultimately realised by the rule of Albert and
I Isabella. These schemes he believes were checked by Orange, and Orange
alone, on many occasions — by his early intrigues before the outbreak, by
I his attitude at Breda, at Gertruydenberg, and at Cologne. But people
were fighting not for sentimental reasons, but partly for freedom of reli-
i gion and partly for the suppression of a centralised system of administra-
tion which was alien to the feelings of the people, and was moreover dis-
astrously incompetent. Orange on each occasion pointed out that as yet
there were no guarantees at all on the religious question, and no adequate
guarantees for the promised self-government. And it is impossible to
read the correspondence of Don John, of Philip n, and even of Granvelle,
and not to feel that he was right. Temporary moderation was due to
temporary difficulties. Moreover, one section of the Netherlands could
not trust the other. Depuis sept ans le parti des malcontents lutte pov/r
assoder le maintien de lafoi catholique et les libertis du pays.^ Else-
where the author, following the prince of Parma, gives a less complimen-
tary estimate of the Malcontents.^ At all events, in the Malcontent
estates of Artois the struggle for national liberty took the form of a
unanimous vote for the retention of the Spanish troops.^ Satisfactory
guarantees were at last obtained, but these consisted in the independence
of the northern provinces, in the renewal of the rupture between France
and Spain, and in the permanent exhaustion of the latter. In the inde-
pendence Orange, with whatever motives, had his full share ; the rupture
with France was the result, reaUsed only after his death, of years of
^ Groen van Prinsterer, iv. 889.
' Bezold, Briefe des PfaUgrafen Johann Casiimr, i. 801.
* Hist^des Troubles dee Pays-Bos, by Benon de France, p. 80. Doc. m6d. Beiges.
^ Bezold, Briefe des PfaUgrafen Johann Casvnwr, L 363.
» Kervyn de Lettenhove, vi. 638. * J&. vi. 26, 26. ^ Ih. vi. 243.
8 s 2
Digitized by
Qoo^^
788 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Oct.
dogged diplomacy. No exception can be taken to the author's description
of the golden age of the Spanish Netherlands. Dans lea provinces mfyri-
dionales . . . desjov/rs meillewrs viendront d kidre, Les liens d^wie sujition
disormais impossible d VEspagne seront bris^, et le rigne d* Albert et
d'Isobbelle marquera une p&riode oil le premier symptdme de la prospSritS
renaissante d/u pa/ys sera un merveilleux ^panouissement des lettres et des
a/rts.^ But it is worth while to read also the words of a writer— on this
occasion contemporary — whose opinion the author will respect. Oaspard
de Saulx, in criticising the peace of Yervins, writes : Le second point est
Vexemple de Urns les Pats-Bos, lesquels maintenant les Espoffnols
n'oseroient plus charger d*a/ucuns impots wy subsides, ny mesme faire
payer les a/ndens : OAitrement ils peuvent dire quHls ne sont non plus
a/u, ray d*Espagne que VOlande et la Zelande, etsmvront leur exemple s*%2s
veulent, et ne faut plus faire estat de regner sur eux dbsolwment, ains de
les flatter hontetisement, Et pour le troisi^ne, que dirons-nous de ces
gens qui a/ooient appvn/6 leu/r courorme swr la religion catholique et sur
Vinquisition, qm madntenoient quHl ne falloit jamais traioter avec les
heretiques t Avoir rendni les heretiques en exeroice de leur heresie, les
avoir faicts sou/oerains, plants et affermy leur religion par le traicti^
c'est estre decheuz de ce poinct, vraiement cathoUques,^
Whatever may be the merits of the connexion between the revolt in
the Netherlands and the crown of France, these volumes prove conclu-
sively that it is the dominating fact, and that the relations between the
Gueux and the Huguenots shrink into insignificance. Even the union
between Louis of Nassau and the Huguenot chiefis at La Bochelle, which
is admirably described, ^^ ends in union with the crown. The author
fights hard to redeem his promise. All sorts and conditions of men are
termed Huguenots — anyone, in fEkct, whom he dislikes. The Huguenots are
described as attacking the cardinal of Lorraine in Paris in Jan. 1565.'*
These Huguenots consisted of Montmorenci, who was acting in execution
of his orders as governor, while his train comprised gentlemen of both
religions.^^ The cathoUc politiquss of the south of France are invariably
treated as Huguenots. It is true that contemporaries speak of Huguenots
d'estat et Hugv>enots de religion, but in this case what becomes of the
inseparable connexion between reform and revolt ? The court, when con-
trolled by the Mignons, is called Huguenot,*' apparently because it was
anti-Guisard. The description of the misconduct of Alen9on's soldiers in
1578 ends thus : Tel ^tait le contingent que les Huguenots envoyaient aux
Oueux}^ The &cts are that Alen9on was originally invited by the catho-
lics, that his attempt to levy troops in the Huguenot districts had been a
fiEulure, and that while his Scotch and English troops deserted to John
Oasimir, his French troops slipped away to the catholic headquarters.*^ All
French soldiers were equally given to plunder. La None complains of
his Huguenot horse, Guillaume Tavannes of his catholic gendarmerie.
Mansfeldt had to disband his French catholic auxiliaries on account of
* Eervyn de Lettenhove, ri. 688.
* Mim. de Gaspard de Saulx, in Petitot, zxv, 816.
" Kervyn de Lettenhove, ii. oh. xiv. et seq. " lb. L 223«
»« Calendar of State Papers, Foreign, 1564-5, p. 287.
" Kervyn de Lettenhove, vi. 547. ** lb, v. 214. " Bezold, L 822.
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 789
their misconduct J ^ The want of connexion between the co-religionists
was due partly to geographical causes. The first two wars of religion
had almost cleared Picardy and Champagne of Huguenots, while Burgundy
was strongly held by Tavannes. In 1567 Gond^ complained that he had
no gate into the Netherlands. Neither he nor his son could recover a
hold upon Picardy. But it was also due to the essential difference between
the two movements which the author fails to realise. There were of
course resemblances obvious to contemporaries. Similar causes produced
the hostility to Granvelle and Lorraine. Glough fancifully compares the
feud of Meghem and Brederode to that of the great French houses.^^ An
almost exact parallel exists between the revolt of the gentry in both
countries. But the rank and file of the Huguenots differed entirely in
its composition from that of the Gueux. The former consisted of the
well-to-do bourgeoisie, the latter of the starving artisans. The revolt of
the latter was eminently offensive, at times almost socialistic ; ^^ that of
the former was strictly defensive, when once the preponderance of the
military element, which had accidentally been forced into the movement,
had declined. This is obviously the case after St. Bartholomew ; but,
notwithstanding the author's belief to the contrary, we have the evidence
of Marshal Tavannes, ^^ of Gaspard de Saulx, and of Correr that it is true
of the war of 1568. To prove the revolutionary character of the Huguenot
outbreak, a passage is quoted ^^ (without reference) from Gaspard de Saulx,
which really relates to the legal condition of the party after the edict of
Nantes.^^ The agrarian outbreak which is described by Monluc ^^ was
purely exceptional, the peasantry being almost invariably catholic.
The author labours under the dif&culty which every historian feels who
is obliged to show that his own party has the exclusive possession of all
virtues, his opponents the monopoly of all vices. Bevolution, theories of
social contract, feudalism, anti-nationalism, misgovemment, are all bad,
and therefore Huguenot. Loyalty tempered by constitutionalism is good,
and necessarily confined to catholics. The most remarkable instance of
this point of view occurs in the description of the estates of Blois of 1576.
The estates of Orleans and Pontoise, in which Huguenot views prevailed,
are not even mentioned, the estates of Brabant, when demanding the
withdrawal of Spanish troops and the assembly of the states-general, are
stigmatised as organe dee passions populavres, ^' No language is hard
enough for the estates of Holland and Zealand. But the estates of Blois
of 1576 are the cradle of French liberties. Tandis que les ambitions
fiodaUs dominaient chez les capitaines h/ugu^etiots, les vi/vaces traditions
de la liberU itaient propagies et soutemies par les chefs cathoUques, et
c'itait Tavannes qui viwoquait Vexemple de VAngleterre afin de placer
dans la representation des Etats la phis soUde garantie du droit et de la
prosp&ritd des nations*^^ Then follows a quotation (without reference)
*" Saraoini, 26 March, 1578, in ]>e8jardin3' Belations de la France avec la Toacane,
" Belations diplomatiques des Paya-Bas avec VAngleterre^ p. 313. Doo. in^d.
Beiges.
" Eervyn de Lettenhove, v. 337 ; also Gachard, Correspondamce de OtUlUmme le
Tacittume^ ii. 214.
^ Pingand, Corr* des SaiikC'Tavannes, p. 260. " Eervyn de Lettenbove, i. 32.
2^ The passage is from MSm. de Qaapard de SaidXt Petitot, zxv. 240.
•^ Kervyn de Lettenbove, L 33. » Jb, iv. 105. " Jb. iv. 95.
Digitized by
Google
790 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Oct.
from the memoirs of Gaspard de Saulx.^^ This is strangely uncritical.
Marshal Tavannes died in May 1578. The only evidence as to his con-
stitutional views is that he advised the king to suppress the free eleotion
of the mayors in the Burgundian towns.^® The passage quoted is a poli-
tical commonplace, written by his son in the seventeenth century, relating
to estates in general. What he actually says of the estates of Blois is
that they were never intended to be genuine, et que la reformation qu'on
pretendoit fonr les estats Umrna en fumSe.^ The abstention of the
Huguenots is severely criticised by the author. The Tuscan ambassador
considered that the intention of the Guises to overawe the estates with a
large force,^® and the treasonable surprise and capture of Thor6 — himself
a catholic — at Pont St.-E8prit,^* were sufficient reasons. But it was not
so much the Huguenots who abstained as the southern provinces. The
catholics were no more represented than the Huguenots. They had
established a modnis vivendi, they had a working constitution of their own,
they voted their own taxes, which they were prepared to hand over to the
crown under proper guarantees.'^ The catholic provinces had complained
che quelU che stanno sotto laprotezione degU ugonotti sono megUo traMati,*^
This incident has been dwelt upon because it is characteristic of the
author's method. He £eu1s to realise that every great spiritual movement
serves as a medium of expression to inarticulate material grievances. It
may be reform, or it may be the catholic revival. He cannot see that the
religious wars in France were the epitome of all previous, and the prefisioe
to all subsequent, discontents ; that each party suffered from the same
abuses, pressed the same reforms, and carried them to the same excesses.
The author's description of the revolt in the Netherlands is more
satisfactory, because the movement here did take extreme forms, and the
brutalities which in France were chiefly due to the catholics were here,
leaving out of the question the foreign soldiery, almost confined to the
new religion. He is disposed, however, to depreciate the importance of
the religious factor, to attribute its origin to foreign influences, and its
revival after the suppression of the first disturbance to artificial stimu-
lants. The movement was doubtless educated and organised by the
influx of French, Genevan, and Palatinate preachers in 1566,'^ but it is
difficult to forget the statement that if in 1525 the peasants had marched
on the Netherlands they would have been joined by 20,000 artisans from
Antwerp.^ The condition of the Netherlands had made the anabaptist
rising at Miinster a matter of grave anxiety. There was a large indeter-
minate mass of indigenous sectarianism ready to take the shape of
Calvinism or anabaptism as circumstances favoured. Material suffering
caused religious schism to take acute forms. The universal hostility to
Granvelle might be sufficiently explained by his Burgundian origin. The
Franche-Comtois was the Scotsman of the Low Countries. The author's
chivalrous devotion to Margaret of Parma makes him overlook the fact
s* M&m, de Gaspard de Satdz, Petitot, zziv. 274.
« Pingaud, Corr, des SatUX'Tavawnes, p. 99. »* Petitot, xxv. 417.
« Saracini, 22 Aug. 1676, in Degjardins. » Id. 28 Dec 1676.
^ JUamanni, Jan. 1676. Saraoini, 16 Deo. 1676. *< Alamanni, May 1576.
*> Eeryyn de Lettenhove, i. 328.
** CoZ. of State Papers, Venetian, 1624-6, p. 488.
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 191
that the loyal catholic Benon de France represents her admmistfation as
being incompetent up to the point of commercial ruin and general starva-
tion. It is to her that he ascribes the commencement of the bad habit of not
consulting her council.'^ The popular objection to the new episcopate and
the feturs as to the inquisition are lightly treated, and the past action of the
office miiiimised by the diversion of attention '•' to its history in Brabant,
where it had never legally existed at all. But the danger really consisted
in bringing a reinforced inquisitorial system into working connexion with
the civil authorities, whose duty it was to execute the police regulations of
the placards. It was no mere bogus which drove 60,000 souls, according
to Granvelle's estimate, to England and a larger number to Germany.
As to the violent recrudescence of heresy in the southern provinces after
the retirement of Alva, it is reasonable to agree with Benon (p. 280), who
says that, after the suppression of the Oueux and sectaries, ce quHl restoit
contimunt en son mcmvaix vouloir et emprmse, ne cherohant qu'occasion
de recommencer. With regard to Holland, the proportions of Catholicism
and Calvinism are hard to determine. The author is anxious to prove
that the vast majority of the population was catholic. He adduces the
demand for the restoration of catholic worship by the rebel assembly of
Dordrecht ; ^ but stronger still is his statement as to the estates of Holland
in 1574. Deux points sont mis en avant : le d&pa/rt des soldats espagnols
et la con/vocation des Etats g^n&raux. II n'y a pas un mot pour la Ubertd
de conscience, ce qui d&montre que m>Sme cm sein des Etats de Hollande, la
Biforme n^avait point encore jeti de profondes racines.^'' He must surely
be aware that their originid demands insisted strongly on liberty of
worship, and that they were with difficulty persuaded by Orange to leave
this question to the determination of the states-general, which he knew
could not force Catholicism on Holland. Groen van Prinsterer points out
that the rehgious question is at this period always fax more prominent in
the documents of the estates than in the demands of Orange.^ The
latter in his most private letters constantly asserts that the religious
question will be the difficulty. With regard to Orange's position in
general, the author delights to show that he was perpetually in a condi-
tion of isolation, and that he held the country down by his foreign
mercenaries. That his mercenaries were sufficiently unpopidar is certain.
The sixteenth century had not learnt to doat upon the military. But
Benon's chapter (xlvi.) on his bourgeois and peasant volunteer troops
conclusively disposes of such theories. Catholic and protestant contem-
poraries afford overwhelming evidence that after 1574 the population of
Holland and Zealand, except the inhabitants of the most country districts,
became rapidly reformed. The troublesome municipal governments which
encroached upon the power of Orange and the nobles '* certainly did not
consist of catholics. The catholic opposition of which Lettenhove speaks ^^
came from Amsterdam and Haarlem, which were garrisoned by the royal
government, and in which the magistracies were carefully manipulated.
Events proved at Amsterdam that the Calvinists were in a decided
majority, and the opposition which Orange met in this town came from
»* Renon, p. 489. •* Kervyn de Lettenhove, i. 283.
" Cf . Benon, p. 487. ■* Keryyn de Lettenhove, iii. 406.
■• Groen van Prinsterer, v. 69. " Ih, v. 90-1. ^ Kervyn de Lettenhove, vi. 486.
Digitized by
Google
792 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Oct
the consistories and not from the catholics. Orange had warned Margaret
firom the first that the religious question was here con^>licated by a £eud
of eighteen years* standing between the governing body and the town/^
The author's description of Orange's relations to the northern provinces
is, however, very slight. He prefers to dwell upon his connexion with the
turbulent democracies of Flanders and Brabimt. Here the upper boiar-
geoisie on which Orange rested in the north were chiefly catholic, and he
was forced to have resort to the ultra-Calvinist party of union, but his
views as to their religious proselytism is expressed in a sentence : Ce$
esmeutes de la Flandre gastent enticement nos affmres^^
The great merit of the Baron Eervyn de Lettenhove's book undoubtedly
consists in the wealth of illustration from contemporary sources. The
author might fairly claim that he makes no statement for which he does |
not produce a voucher. Adequate criticism is, therefore, impossible with- j
out entering more fully into the question of authorities than is possible in
a short review, and without the unequalled opportunities which the
author possesses for the examination of unpublished Belgian documents.
The old collections of Bor, the correspondence of the house of Nassau by
Groen van Prinsterer, and that of Philip 11 and the prince of Orange by
Gachard, still form the foundation on which any historian of this period
must build. But the author has largely used the correspondence of
Oranvelle, the publication of which was commenced by the late M.
Poullet, and continued by M. Piot The letters of Morillon to Oranvelle
are of extreme interest, though it is to be remembered that they entirely
adopt the Oranvelle point of view, which, however intelligent, was not
representative of the feelings of any important section of the Netherlands.
The history of the Netherland troubles by Renon de France, of which the
first part was edited in 1886 by M. Plot, is not perhaps quoted as frequently
as it deserves. It is impossible, however, not to be struck by the identity of
feeling between this old catholic Artesian historian and the Baron Eervyn
de Lettenhove, though the advantage of moderation is on the side of tiie
former. The baron himself has done admirable service by editing the
papers relating to diplomatic and commercial intercourse between England
and the Low Countries, which incidentally throw much hght on the
causes of discontent, more especially at Antwerp. In addition to this,
his volume of unedited documents relating to the sixteenth century con-
tains the valuable reports of Alava, the Spanish minister at Paris, on the
condition of France and the Netherlands. The papers of the Tuscan and
Venetian legations at Paris, edited by Dosjardins and Baschet, have been
fully worked, and the author properly expresses his obligations to the
Baron de Buble for his edition of the memoirs of La Huguerye. English
archives, public and private, cannot complain of neglect. On the other
hand, singularly Uttle use seems to have been made of German sources.
The work of Bezold, in particular, on the correspondence of John Casimir
is of extreme value as illustrating some of the more difficult periods and
questions of the rehgious troubles in France and the Netherlands.
Everything, however, depends on the use made of these and countless
other authorities, and all that can be done here is to indicate some lines
" Gaohard, Corr, de OuUlaume le Tacitumey ii. 9l8.
" Kervyn de Lettenhove, v. 446, note.
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 798
of criticism. Every writer whose mam object is to prove a point, and
especiallj a religions point, is subject to Uie temptation of partial and
faulty selection, and it is impossible to acquit the author on this count.
A few examples may be given. William the Silent is held to be guilty of
a most cruel persecution in his principality of Orange, and a letter from
Philip n to the pope is quoted as proving his zeal.'*^ Beference is also
made to letters in Groen van Prinsterer. These contain, indeed,
commonplace assurances of orthodoxy, and a desire for the suppression of
heresy, Uiough there is a shadow of discontent at the papal action. But
for the real explanation, resort should be had to the letters given by
Gachard,^^ and the omission of reference to these is hardly pardonable.
Orange being practically an encla/ve in French territory, it was impossible
to apply to it an independent religious policy, whUe it was important to
exclude direct French interference. Orange, therefore, addressed himself
to the papal authorities at Avignon. The brutal persecution was entirely
due to them. The barbarities were altogether in excess of their instruc-
tions, and were described in no measured terms by the prince. Hence
arose considerable tension between Orange and the pope, and hence Philip's
letter, which was intended as an apology for a subject whose favour he
was anxious to retain.
In the description of the massacre of Vassi the statements made by
the duke of Guise in his apology are accepted without criticism. It should
at least have been mentioned that other contemporary accounts directly
contradicted this, to say nothing of the improbability of a congregation
which made no resistance attacldng an armed detachment which slaugh-
tered them like sheep. Tavannes* opinion was that it was deliberately
intended to force a war before all France became Huguenot.^^
On Cond6*s occupation of St. Denis the gossip as to his intended usur-
pation of the crown is gravely accepted.** The Duke of Alva is quoted as
writing, Le prince de Condi 8*est fait appeler roi Louis XIII jpa/r U
pewple de St. Devds. But Benieri, who was resident in Paris, gives another
account : Oggi dicono che si grida/oa Viva U re e Luigi di BoK/rbon,*''
The two versions of Condi's celebrated coin, Ludovicms XIII dc. are
given,*® but there is no hint that it has been regarded as a forgery. The
author is very hard on his opponents for such omissions. He considers
most of the so-called intercepted letters which came into Orange's hands
to be forgeries, but with regard to the supposed sentence of the inquisi-
tion condemning the whole of the Netherlands, he writes : Un document
qu'une certaine ioole historique, ma/rclumt dans la mime vote que Us
fa/ussavres du XVI^ siicle, se plait encore a introduire dans ses rioits.^^
Motley did indeed swallow this document, the more judicious Prescott
rejects it ; but after all Motley does but follow in the wake of the unim-
peachably orthodox M^zeray, and if it did not issue officially, and from
Madrid, yet Vargas, who swayed the council of troubles, used a phrase
suspiciously akin to the terms of the ban : Mali fraxerunt templa, boni
** Kervyn de Lettenhove, i. 50.
" Cwr. de OuiMaume le Tacitwme, ii. 14-22, 53-56.
^^ M&m, de Oaspard de Saulx, Petitot, xziv. 325.
<« Kervyn de Lettenhove, ii. 76. . *' Desjardins, iv. 8 Oct. 1567.
* Kervyn de Lettenhove, ii. 77. ** Ib,u. 95.
Digitized by
Google
794 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Oct.
nihdl fecerunt contra; debent orimes patibulari.^ It may be worfli
remaxking that even where the intercepted letters are probably not
genuine, their general purport is substantially correct. Benon de France,
who had good sources of information on such points, a|>pear8 to accept the
intelligence received by Orange as correct, and attributes it to constant
correspondence with Philip's secretary Caias.^^ The execution of a priest
on Goligni's order is given as an example of the admiral's intolerant
cruelty; ^^ it should be added that he was executed not as a priest, but as
a spy. So, too, the authorities of Bochelle are reprobated for the execution
of Besme, the assassin of Goligni, yet it is stated by Alamanni (August
1575) to be a definite act of reprisal for the murder of the celebrated
chief Montbrun when a prisoner of war.
To confirm the criticisms on Orange by the not altogether impartial
Del Bio, two quotations are welded together from Languet : LomguetyO/mi
et conseiller du Tadtume, confirme dans une certame mesure ces reproches
et ce jugement. Populus conqiieritur de eo et dicit se ah eo contemm;
nobilitas vero dicit eum esse infestissimo animo in nobilitatem. • . . *•
Languet's unquoted conclusion to this sentence is Qtuisi v ddcebat mihi^
ego swn patre rustico natus ; while he begins it with Id ei pUme accidit
quod moderatis vvris plerwmque accidere solet, nempe ut utrinque
vapuUnt,^^
Again, the author hardly shows sufficient discrimination as to the value
of his authorities. It is stated in the text that Elizabeth meditated a St.
Bartholomew for the English catholics.^^ The authority for this is
Yasquez (' Gosas de Fland^s '). An ' ancient historian,' whose name is not
mentioned, is a sufficient guarantee for the fact that EUzabeth died de rage
et de d^sespoir.^ The usual Coligni legends are altogether rejected ; but
imphcit faith seems to be placed in an anecdote of M^zeray's with respect
to his barbarities at Angouldme.^^ Moreover, the same authority is not
always equally valuable for all purposes. Morillon, writing firom Antwerp,
is not satisfactory evidence for the last words of Hoogstraeten dying near
Bheims.^^ La Huguerye is most frequently quoted with a view of illus-
trating the author's conception of the selfish designs of Orange. But La
Huguerye had a personal grudge against the prince, partly because he con-
sidered that he had not been liberally treated in pecuniary matters, partly
because the prince set his tsuoe against La Huguerye's intrigues for an ultra*
Calvinist coalition, in which John Gasimir and Gond6 were to play the
leading parts. His statements with regard to Orange and Navarre are to
be received with great caution, but he is a first-rate authority on the
curious negotiations of Gond6 and John Gasimir between 1575 and 1580,
and his evidence usually finds corroboration from the correspondence
pubHshed by Bezold. Yet here the author does not follow him sufficiently
closely except in his confusion of the treaty between Gond6 and John
Gasimir of 1575 and the draft of 1574. Gond6 did not, as Lettenhove
asserts,^^ guarantee the alienation of the three bishoprics, but only their
government for life, while their garrisons were to consist exclusively of
•• Kenryn de Lettenhove, ii 106. " Benon, p. 488.
" Kervyn de Lettenhove, i. 85. " lb. v. 299.
^ Languet, Ep. ad SydruBumt 75. ^ Eervyn de Lettenhove, iv. 893.
»• lb, vi. 634. »» lb, ii. 688. »• lb. u. 162. *• lb. iii. 687, 668.
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 795
French protestants.^^ In this period, folly as it is treated, there is a good
deal of work that is not quite careful. The rejoicings with which Alen-
9on's pronundamientos were regarded by the Huguenots are exaggerated.
La Huguerye and Alamanni both testify to the suspicions with which his
negotiations were viewed. John Casimir is represented as retiring after
the truce of Champigny^^ (whereas he had never advanced), and as accept-
ing the truce while Cond6 rejected it. The reverse would be nearer the
truth.®^ The account of La Paix de Monsieur is unsatisfekctory. The
chief cause which induced John Casimir to accept the peace is omitted,
possibly because it is creditable to a leader of the protestant party.
This was the pressure exercised by the Elector Palatine, who was unwiUing
that religious concessions to the Huguenots should be imperilled by
demands for territorial aggrandisement. The passage from La Huguerye,^'
to which reference is made, is most strangely misread ; the rewards stated
to be given by Alen9on to La Huguerye were really conferred by John
Casimir.*^ The terms granted to John Casimir are incompletely given.
If Cond6 was willing to guarantee territorial accessions the crown
actually made them. Again, in 1579 it is very doubtful if the seizure of
Cambrai in Alen9on's interest and the occupation of La Fdre by Cond6
were parts of a concerted movement, and Alen9on and Orange were not
the heads of a combination which included Cond6 and Navarre.^^ The
occupation of La F^re was really intended to secure Gond6 in Picardy
against both the crown and Navarre, and to favour the designs of the
advanced Calvinists against both Alen9on and Orange. La Huguerye
goes so far as to say that the guerre des Arrurwreux was a got-up afElair to
draw Cond6 from La F6re and to facilitate Alen9on's entry to the Nether-
lands.®* This was certainly its result. Baron Kervyn de Lettenhove states
that Cond6 deceived the king by saying that he left La Fdre for Germany,
whereas he went to England.®^ The fact is that he left La F&re for Lautem,®*
and went thence to England in the hope of breaking off the negotiations
for Al6n9on's marriage. Far from acting in concert with Navarre, he
was really engaged in counteracting his influence.*^
The most flagrant instance of a want of discrimination in the value of
authorities occurs in the apology for the massacre of St. Bartholomew,
qm^ en pr^ence d'tm compht odieux, ne fut qu*un moyen de defense phia
odi&ux encore mats jug& rUcessan/reJ^ It is necessary to prove the
existence of a Huguenot plot for the massacre of the royal family. Les
d&pSches italiennes et espagnoles le mettent hors de doute, especially as
they are supported by statements of Margaret of Valois, the duke of
Anjou and Marshal Tavannes. The Spanish account on which reliance,
is placed on p. 561 is rejected as worthless on p. 582, because it implicates
the duke of Guise in the murder of Coligni. The official reports of the
Italian ambassadors, invaluable as they often are, are here worthless.
The mission of the Tuscan ambassador was to counteract the influence
of Coligni. Both he and the Venetian ambassador were under the in-
* Bezold, i. 164. •» Kervyn de Lettenhove, iii. 546. * Bezold, i. 167.
" Kervyn de Lettenhove, iii. 628. La Huguerye, i. 419.
** Kervyn de Lettenhove, iii. 688. "» lb, v. 469. «• La Huguerye, ii. 48.
•' Kervyn de Lettenhove, v. 489. " La Huguerye, ii. 67.
• lb. ii. 62. '• Kervyn de Lettenhove, ii. 669.
Digitized by
Google
796 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Oct.
fluence of Catherine, and the papal nuncio had reasons of his own. But
the author himself provides the material for controverting his belief. The
Huguenot plot was only mentioned to the king when all other means of
persuasion £Euled. It was known to be fixed for 4 a.m7^ on 28 Aug.; yet
the catholic massacre was not to begin till dawn,^^ though it accidentidly
commenced earlier.^' The Huguenot conspirators were in three bodies,
separated by hostile districts of Paris. Two of these would have been
powerless before the slightest resistance, and both, though they were to
have been at work at dawn, were surprised between 2 and 8 a.m., while
the disturbance gave time to the third party to mount, but not to resist.^^
La Rochefoucauld, who is represented as leaving the king because he had
to be up early ,^^ retired to more congenial company, and his gentlemen
were sent to sleep in a separate house.^^ The author states that the plot
is only denied by Tavannes (Gaspard de Saulx) J^ It is doubtful if any
one in Europe believed it.
Another regrettable feature in the volumes before us is a certain reck-
lessness as to dates. In some cases this is merely due to want of care.
In vol. i. p. 457, Benieri's letter, assigned to 25 June 1580, obviously
belongs to 1567. Letters ^® written by Languet on 11 and 16 March, 1677,
could not describe events which happened in 1579. In vol. iii. p. 620,
1565 is evidently a mistake for 1576. A more doubtftd case occurs in
vol. iii. p. 611, where a letter of Alen9on's dated 10 Sept. 1575, is quoted
as sealing the reconciliation with the king. But the rupture only took
place on 15 Sept., and the reconciliation to which reference is made is
the truce of Ghampigny of 21 Nov. 1575. In vol. i. p. 228, three separate
people describe in January 1564 an event which happened in January
1565.
More objectionable is a habit of transposing the sequence of events,
and of proving statements by documents which do not refer to them. In
vol. iv. p. 856 we read, Dds le 2^ Janvier {1571) Je prince de Condi protestaiL
» • • Ci/nq jowrs wpr^ il partait de la Bochelle. The departure from
La Bochelle is mentioned in a letter of 81 Dec. 1576. On 12 April, 1581,
Parma wrote a letter to Philip 11 describing the deplorable condition of
the Netherlands. The author adds, Qtumd ces nouvelles amvadent d
Madrid, Philip II icrivait . . . ; ^^ and he then quotes a letter from the
archives of Brussels, dated 18 Jan. 1581. In October and November of
1575 Orange is engaged in negotiations with Catherine de' Medici. Le
dernier mot de cette intrigue est prononU par le landgra/ve de Hesse.^
The landgrave's letter belongs to June 1575, and refers, not to these par-
ticular intrigues, but to Orange's marriage with Charlotte de Bourbon.
The author is anxious to prove that in the spring of 1575 Orange was
desirous of a simultaneous reconciliation with Philip and the pope. He
states that, early in April, Orange absolutely declined the overtures made
through Mondragon, but by 20 April he changed his mind. II eM M
hewreux d'en recevoir non seulement de PkiUp II mais mime du pape, car
en ce moment il faisait proposer d Origoire XIII de ltd cider saprinci-
" Kervyn de Lettenhove, ii. 666. " J&. ii. 678. ^ Ib.iL 679.
»• 16. u. 688. '* 16. ii 674. '• Uim. de Merg^, Petitot, xxxiv. 66.
" Kenryn de Lettenhove, u. 666. *• J6. v. 337.
'• 26. vi. 87. » 16. liL 628-9.
Google
Digitized by ^
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 797
pcmU d'Orange.^^ This latter negotiation took place in March, when
Orange was opposed to all reconciliation with the king ; it was absolutely
distinct, and was merely with the view of raising fdnds.
In vol, i. pp. 187-9 there is a complete jumble of dates, the events of
March and April 1568 being described as the results of those of July and
August 1668.
The least pardonable case, however, is in connexion with the unions
of Utrecht and Arras. It is desirable to prove that the separation of
Hainault and Artois from the estates-general was due to the separatist
action of the northern provinces. With this view, the chapter upon the
union of Arras is placed after that upon the union of Utrecht, and is repre-
sented as being its consequence. La scission protestante entratne la
scission cathoUque.^^ The union of Utrecht was signed 28 Jan. 1579, and
proclaimed 29 Jan. The union of Arras was arranged in Oct. and Nov.
1578,^ and was concluded on 6 Jan. 1579. Moreover, the author fieuls to
see that if the union of Utrecht was merely the work de quelques tmmstres
isoUsy^ and if it was only accepted in Holland by two towns, the formal
separation of two whole provinces loses its justification on this ground.
The justification for the union of Arras lay not in the union of Utrecht,
but in the hopelessness of agreement between two aristocratic and catho-
lic provinces with the ultra-Oalvioist democracies of Flanders and Bra-
bant. Any reader of Commines will recognise the &ct that the causes of
schism were antecedent by at least a century to the union of Utrecht*
The author's inaccuracy is unfortunately not confined to dates, though it
is fEdr to say that mistiJkes more often occur on the outskirts of his sub-
ject, and are agam at times the result of mere want of revision. He is
aware of course that there was no Elector of Hesse, and that at one and
the same moment there was only one Elector Palatine, but orthodox
Lutherans would have been surprised to read that le champion le plus re-
doutahle du protesta/ntisme ^^ was ce due Maurice de Saxe qui da/ns les
champs de Muhlberg, luttant drapea/u centre drapeau, faillit balancer la
fortmie de Charles-Quint. So eloquent a passage hardly atones for the
confusion of John Frederick with Maurice, which unpUes much more than
a mere mistake as to names.
In vol. vi. p. 147 it is thought advisable to point a moral from the
£edl of a successor of Queen Elizabeth, and to introduce this an entirely
novel genealogy is invented for Oliver Cromwell. Biron's lame leg is
hardly a matter of general interest, but in face of the celebrated joke
respecting la paix hoiteuse of 1570 the origin of the nickname should not
be ascribed to his misfortune at Bergen-op-Zoom in 1588.^ The author
is scandalised at the action of the states in selecting for their
general Biron, who dirigeait centre Anvers la plus odieuse tentative. He
forgets that Biron was regarded as half a protestant, that he was the
intimate friend of La Noue, and above all that we have Busbeoq's
authority for the fact that the reason of his selection was the discovery
of his papers, showing that he had strongly protested against Alen9on*s
attack.^^ The account of the assembly at Delft is somewhat inexplicable.
It consisted of twenty-one members, of whom nineteen sat for the towns,
•' Kenryn de Lettenhove, ill. 468. " lb. v. 818, " lb. v. 826.
•« lb. V. 818. » J&. L 66. •• lb. vi. 421. •» Busbecq, 1 June 1688.
Digitized by
Google
798 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Oct.
two only for the nobilitj.^^ But the act of union was signed by sixteen
deputies for the towns, and five for the nobility.^' Can it be that as Orange
claimed as pope ^^ to forgive sins, so also as king he conferred patents of
nobility ? The abstention of the nobility of Holland is a constant theme
with the author. Eenon also mentions it, but adds that the nobles had
always been ra/res et peu prwiUgUs entre les ma/rchans^ pescheurs, gens de
mestier et a/rtisans dont le pais est compos6?^
In a work where there is so much that is new it is ungrateful to com-
plain of twice-told tales. Yet the repetitions are somewhat tiresome, and
it would have been well to state once for all that all the leaders of the
reformed party were on all occasions characterised by fkfeinte hypocrisie.
Every tourist has realised that Elizabeth's memory revit dans les cachots
de la Tov/rry?^ Every student of statistics must be aware that her persecu-
tion of the catholics was phis crueUe que lefut jamais celle de Philippe II
ou du due d'Albe.^^ This is a favourite comparison. Le Tacitume oppose
d la representation Ugale du pays la force brutale dont il dispose. Jamais
les v6t&rans d/vb due d'Albe eux-m&mes ont pes& a/assi violemment sur les
populationsry.^^ It would be useless to hope for no scandal about Queen
Elizabeth. Every trumpery tale is raked up. FUle d*un bourreau et
d*une mctime?^ EUsaheth prdtendadt itre la S&mvramis de son temps ;
elle n^en renov/oela que les vices.^^ Nevertheless the book is, notwith-
standing prejudices and inaccuracies, thoroughly enjoyable by the general
reader and full of new information for the student. Even the repetitions
have their use. The most careless or most forgetful reader can hardly &il
to remark and to remember that Dathenus had a red beard and the Pirince
of Orange a bastard. E. Abmstbong.
Old Herbert Papers at Potois Castle and in the British Museum. Extra
Volume (Vol. XX,) of the Collections, Historical and Archteologica!,
relating to Montgomeryshire and its Borders. Issued by the Powys-
land Club for the use of its members. Privately printed. (London :
1886.)
The earl of Powis has in this volume presented the Powys Land Olub,
over which he presides, with im interesting and entertaining selection from
the Herbert MS8. at Powis castle, recently collected in consequence of
the visit of the Historical MSS. commissioners, and firom those given
to the British Museum in 1829 by a certain Mr. W. R. Stokes, otherwise
unknown to fame. The earlier series of the Powis castle MSS. is very
miscellaneous, and ranges from 1586 to 1785, commencing with a long
narrative, probably composed by an actual witness, of the judicial pro-
ceedings (if they are to be called such) against Mary queen of Scots at
Fotheringhay Castle, called Fotheringham by the editor for some reason
of his own. (Elsewhere, on p. 115, Hanau is misprinted Nanau, and
on p. 147 Ciistrin becomes Ciistria.) Among the letters following is one,
dated London, 18 Aug., and referred to the year 1685, from the first Lord
Craven to his sister Elizabeth, the wife of Percy, second Lord Powys.
" Kervyn de Lettenhove, iv. 48. •• lb. iv. 46. •• lb. ii. 161.
•* Renon, p. 487. ** Kervyn de Lettenhove, i, 18.
»• lb. vi. 218. •* lb. vi. 46. •* lb. vi. 219. •• 15. ii. 267.
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 799
From this letter it appears tbat, much to the chagrin of the champion
of fagitive protestant royalty, his sister had, like so many ladies and
gentlemen of her times, become a convert to Home ; and the contingent
promise contained in the following is thoroughly in keeping with the
loyal simplicity of the writer :
< My desire is to speake w'th you & to bring one w' me, y^ I may
make it appeare to you y^ you aughte not to have altered yo'r religion,
&c, y^ there is more safety to be founde in this w'ch wee professe, if
these thinghs bee not made apparente, to any body y^ will resolve not
to be partiall oute of rassion [? passion] on any other cide whatsoever
but to cleave to y't for w'ch shall be most apparante of truth & reason I
will forthw' beecome a roman Catholic. . . .'
An anonymous letter from London, dated 8 Sept. 1640, adds another
to previously known accounts of the misconduct and cowardice which de-
livered Newcastle without a blow into the hands of the Scots^ and nearly
broke Strafford's heart on the eve of his own catastrophe. From the
first year of the Oonunonwealth we have the original order of the parlia-
ment for the demolition of Montgomery castle ; but the doom of ' Bed
Castle in Wales ' is solemnly revoked in another document, bearing date
just a month before the king's restoration. Several letters follow from
Andrew Newport, upon whom were fathered the * Memoirs * which, according
to Mr. M. C. Jones, the editor of these ' Papers,' are among the romances
of De Foe. The important letter from Father Petre recording the entire
trust placed by King James n in the Jesuit order has, as Mr. Jones
reminds his readers, already been printed in * Somer's Tracts.' The news-
letter dated 28 Oct. 1688 furnishes the minutest evidence hitherto pub-
lished concerning the actual birth of the unfortunate prince of Wales, as
to whose genuineness his own half-sisters were so hard to convince.
The second series of the Herbert MSS. consists of the correspondence
of the celebrated Lord Herbert of Cherbury, chiefly during the period of
his embassy in France. This correspondence, the record of a very
chequered chapter of diplomacy, includes a letter from the elector pala-
tine, dated 11 July 1619, and protesting his pacific desires, with another,
two months later in date, of a more defiant nature from the same hand.
A few days later Sir Edward Herbert writes from France that * for the
busines of Bohemia I understand this E'g hath written to the King my
M'r and the Palatine to diswade the £u;ceptance of that Crowne at which
some of this Court take occasion to Laugh.' He adds in a letter of
24 Nov. that * for the i^ewes of their High'ses crowning in Bohemia it
was receeved here with incredible ioy of all those of the Beligion, and of
every one, not of the Beligion whome they call bons Fi*an9ois among
which the Ministers of those of the Beligion have been so Zealous, that
in generall terms they have publiquely prayed for their prosperity in this
great cause.' This passage effectively illustrates the vitality of the party
of the politiqties, afterwards called le tiers pa/rti, in France.
The British Museum MSS. here published consist of Herbert's
despatches from Paris in the year 1619, big with the presages of a
momentous conflict. Some of ihese need not have been included in this
volimie, as they had been already published by Mr. Gardiner in his
' Letters and Documents illustratii^ the Belations between England and
Digitized by
Google
800 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Oct.
Germany 1618-9 ' (Camden Society, 1866-8). The letter in which H«r.
bert judiciouBly seeks to frighten James I by informing him of a Jesuit
conspiracy against his life should perhaps not be left out of account in
any considerate inquiry into the king's self-exercisings. It belongs to
the time, or very nearly so, when, according to Mr. Gardiner, James
was beginning to drop his reminiscences of the hunting field, and to
think about the crown of thorns. A. W. Wabd,
Oliver Cromwell und die pwritamsche Bevolution, Von Moritz Brosch.
(Frankfort-on-Main : Butter & Loning. 1886.)
Hebb Bbosoh, in his prefekce to his ' OUver Cromwell,' informs us that
his book is based chiefly upon contemporary records and memorials, and
in particular upon the English state papers and the materials collected
by Carlyle; and in the second place upon the despatches of Yenetiaii
ambassadors resident in England, France, Spain, and Holland. He has
of course made use of the later literature of the subject ; but he takes his
stand on contemporary literature, and must be judged by his use of this.
The result is a judicious and sensible book well calculated to make the
history of the period intelligible and interesting to the reading public of
Germany. It is not a deeply learned work, and it propounds no new and
startling views of Cromwell himself or of any of his contemporaries.
With the exception of the information derived from the Venetian archives,
the reader who is acquainted with Clarendon, Banke, Carlyle, and Guizot
wiU not find much that is new, nor do we think that he will find much
fresh light thrown on the many problems presented by the history of tiie
time. The author's estimate of Cromwell's character and position is that
which will probably be accepted ultimately, and supersede both the hero-
hypocrite theory and the impossible character imagined by Carlyle. It is
in fact Banke's estimate — more appreciative than that of Guizot, more
sober and critical than that of Carlyle. Cromwell was one of the greatest,
probably not one of the most virtuous, of men — ^not a combination of oppo*
sites, but a sincere patriot placed in an impossible position ; able to con-
trol a revolution, but not to establish a commonwealth ; dealing with
antagonistic forces too strong for him to reconcile — a man into whose
hands supreme power fell almost without his wishing it, but who had lost
the self-control, so rare in men of despotic temper, which would have
enabled him to guide where he conunanded, and reconcile the antagonists
whom he fought with both hands. Hence it came that his power began
and ended wiUi himself. But England owes to him, in conmion with his
companions in arms, and more than to any one of them, that the revolution
of 1640 did not need to be repeated. He destroyed power but he upheld
law ; he showed England what was meant by equal justice and toleration
in religion ; and, in fine, his place as a statesman is more important than
the exact balance in his personal character of religion and self-deceit, of
ambition and patriotism, of craft and generosity.
The earlier part of the work contains a well- written summary of the
growth of Puritanism in England and its relation to the proteetant spirit
on the continent — a relation which has been too much left out of sight in
later histories of the period. The faults of Charles I's eduQation» combined
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 801
.^ with the faults of his character, are well pointed out, and it is made clear
- how inevitably they led to the catastrophe to which, whether Cromwell
^ had existed or not, Charles was destined. It is well known, though not
- always remembered, that the government of Charles I was condemned by
^ the English nation before Cromwell came into notice ; without CromweU
^ the military history of the civil war might have had a different condu-
- sion, but the common sense of the English people would have prevented
the restoration of the government of Charles's earlier years. Henry III
^ was victorious in the field, and established his government in peace;
but the principles for which the barons had fought survived their defeat ;
and a nation which could win liberties in the middle ages against so
- strong a king as Edward I could never have been humbled by a Stuart
- king.
!* It is difficult for a foreigner to understand how much Ucense to do
u wrong was practically conceded to an English king, if in the main his
i wishes were those of his people, and how quick the Enghsh were to per-
: ceive and resent any system of government which did not respect and
I generally obey the tradition of government which the governed approved.
: Herr Brosch is not fully aware that what was permitted to Elizabeth and
even tolerated in James was never accepted as good government. The
t opposition which Charles I met was no new precedent. The Petition of
E Bight was no novelty. It was the natural and constitutional expression
F of national grievances. What gave it point and bitterness was the hatred
r of a favourite. Whether justly or not, the English have never endured
L ministers who carried out too faithfully the sovereign's idea of govem-
I ment ; it was so in. the case of Strafford as well as in that of Bucking-
[ ham. Compare Strafford with Burleigh, and the difference is seen at
once. Strafford was as honest and as able as Burleigh, but he belonged
to the class of ministers who will not be endured, and whose virtues are
as odious to the nation as their vices. What was new in the quarrel
between Charles and his parliament was, as Herr Brosch points out, the
religious question — a question which embroiled the whole situation and
rendered the ordinary methods of constitutional warfEure insufficient. For
the first time in EngUsh history the bitterness of religious feeling trans-
ferred itself to political debate ; and the sense of duty on either hand,
raised above the region of political expediency and compromise, made the
party differences irreconcilable. It was the belief that the king and
queen were playing the game of Home, which made Laud's meddling so
odious. Eleven years of irresponsible government might have been borne,
though England was sinking to the rank of a third-rate power, if religion
had been left alone. Yet Charles might fedrly think, as Cromwell thought
after him, that the presbytenan system was no Mend to liberty ; and the
event showed that as a' system it had no deep root in English habits and
sympathies. On the other hand, there was no stronger feeling in the
country at this time than that disUke of high church doctrine and practice
of which the presbyterians were the chief exponents.
The author sees each line of events plainly : he does not always succeed
in concentrating them so as to show their combined effect. It was not
the attack upon civil Uberties alone, nor the distrust of the queen, nor the
hatred of ' stone-dead ' Strafford, nor the supposed attempt to estabUsh
VOL. n. — NO. vni. 3 f
Digitized by
Google
802 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Oct.
an idolatrous religion, nor the assnmed complicity of Charles I with the
Irish outbreak, nor the fear of army plots in Scotland and Ireland, nor
the appointment of cavaliers as commandants of strong places, but all of
these together, which made the leaders of the popular party believe that
Charles I meditated an attack in arms upon the rights which his govern-
ment had unsuccessfully undermined. It was this policy which at onoe
justified and gave importance to the Grand Remonstrance. Herr Brosoh
is mistaken in calling this a puritan manifesto, not a national worL^ It
is true that it was the work of but half the nation ; but the narrow
majority by which the Bemonstrance was passed is the measure of its
importance as a critical point in English history. It was intended by its
promoters, and it was so understood both by them and by the king, as
a final challenge. If Charles thought himself strong enough to draw the
sword, here was his warrant. The passing of the Bemonstrance made
it necessary for Charles to take up a line of action : the smallness of the
majority gave him, and justly, a fair hope of success.
In the same manner we miss in the account of the second decisive
move, the Self-denying Ordinance, a full appreciation of the motives which
led to the passing of that most important act, and of its results to the
moderate party. So extreme and revolutionary a resolution was not the
result of party compromises, still less an accident of debate. It was a
deliberate scheme to transfer the conduct of afiEiairs from one party to
another. It coincided in time with an attempt of the presbyterian * gran-
dees ' to set Cromwell aside (met by his own attack upon Lord Manchester),
and with the proposals for a treaty with the king, the irt)ortive treaty of
Uxbridge. The question was whether the war was to be prosecuted
vigorously, or a compromise with the king entered into. Herr Brosoh
puts it down as a mihtary measure, and so no doubt it was ; but no one
knew better than Cromwell its political bearing, and that to make the
army independent of the parliament was to make it the master, not
the servant, of the parliament. The political importance of the step must
have been evident to some at least of those who gave their votes for it ;
and the contemporary history of this crisis goes to show that it was un-
derstood as a trial of strength between the presbyterian and independent
factions. The presbyterian majority obstinately believed themselves to
have the power, and were willing to let the army leaders try their hand
at remodelling the army. Cromwell, at any rate, knew that after this
he would be able by means of the army ' to give the law to both king
and parliament ; ' and there is as much reason to wonder at the simplicity
of his dupes as at his own foresight and practical action.
Cromwell's dark policy in 1646-7, when the king's army was beaten out
of the field, and the army, the parliament, the king, and the Scots were
four factors the combination of which might lead to unexpected results,
is not cleared up by Herr Brosch. He thinks it probable that Cromwell
was not wholly free from personal ends, but justifies him in thinking that
the safety of the puritan cause was in the army, not in the parliament. Of
the Scots Cromwell never took much account ; his dealings with the king
must always remain a mystery. But it is on the whole probable that Heir
' P. 225 : eine PartMkundgebung der Puritaner, nicht em nationalea Werk,
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 808
Broach's view of the transacidon is correct — that Cromwell and Ireton
tried to make terms with the king on the basis of control of the militia
and liberty of conscience, and that they retired from the attempt partly
because they fomid that Charles was not to be trusted, and partly because
(as is certain) their own influence in the army was endangered by the
suspicion that they were not dealing honestly. In the obscure question
as to the moment and the cause of Cromwell's change of attitude towards
the king, our author abstains from dogmatising. He thinks it probable
that some intercepted letter may have cleared away whatever illusions
Cromwell and Ireton still cherished, and brought them to consider the
whole question afresh. But when he relegates to ' the depths of mysti-
cism ' so plain and biblical an account of the prayer meeting at Windsor
as that given by Allen, we think that he mistakes the character of the
English puritan, which was always apt to err rather on the side of the
letter than on that of the spirit. EngUsh religion has always been of a
practical sort. The army leaders assembled at Windsor Castle — strange
place to be the judgment-seat before which EngHsh royalty was con-
demned— saw plainly before them on the one side a king guilty of the blood
of his subjects and actively engaged in stirring up a new wi^ and on the
other the judgments of God upon Agag. No one of them was more
inclined to see * judgments' and * mercies' in common events than
Cromwell ; and it is not to be wondered at nor to be set down to hypocrisy
— surely of the most hateful kind — that Cromwell and his companions
saw a clear duty before them, that of bringing the Grand Delinquent to
justice.
When Edward IV came up to London on 20 May 1471, and King
Henry YI died in the Tower the next day, it was not difficult to draw an
inference from the coincidence of date. When Cromwell appeared in
parliament the day after Pride's purge and accepted what had been done
as a thing not to be undone, it was generally believed that what he had
not forbidden had been suggested by him. Herr Brosch, who puts down
Joyce's deed to Cromwell, might have seen his hand in this iJso. It is
noticeable that some time before Pride's purge took place Cromwell was
accused publicly by Major Huntingdon of a design * to purge the houses,
and support the remaining party by force everlastingly.' Cromwell,.it
would seem, not unfrequently acted by means of hints addressed to suit-
able persons ; if he did so in the present case he was not disappointed in
the result. Cromwell accepted fully the responsibility for the king's
death, tmd whilst justifying it, as our author says, by Charles's guilt
and the sanction of the Old Testament, probably considered it as an act of
less magnitude than it appeared to the EngHsh people at large, and (as
subsequent events showed) really was.
Herr Brosch's account of the breaking up of the Bump Parliament
is inadequate. He appUes no moral judgment whatever to the action,
which, right or wrong, was not indifferent. It was an action which con-
tradicted the whole course of English history. If it had led to a peacefrQ
settlement of the kingdom and a reconciliation of hostile parties, it would
have been justified by success, for it would have been proved to be in
accordance with the wish of the people. But, in fetct, it led to five years
of splendid but barren despotism, and the Bestoration at the end of it.
8 F 2
Digitized by
Google
804 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Oct.
The aocount of Cromwell's government as Protector hardly does justice
to that strange and eventful period, one of the most interesting in English
history for the Ught it throws both on Oromwell's personal character
and on that of the nation which he ruled as a general rather than as a
statesman. The greatest mlers of England, Henry U, the Tudors,
William III, have known how to yield to the follies and prejudices of the
nation which trusted them, and have never carried self-will too £Eur.
Cromwell ruled as a soldier, and took little account of the growing sum
of discontent which shattered the fabric of his government as soon as he
himself was removed. He was wiser than the nation ; but he had not
the supreme wisdom which * suffers fools gladly.' If he had Uved ten
years longer he might have founded a dynasty. He might have done
so if he had thrown himself more upon the confidence of the nation. But
opposition angered him, and his anger took the form of violent interference
with law and liberty. The vice of a despotic temper, under intolerable
provocation it is true, ruined all. Yet Cromwell's nature was in many
respects conservative ; and we may say with our author * that which has
made England great and free was better understood and more practically
advanced by Cromwell than by those puritan repubhcans who hated and
opposed him; what damaged the liberties of England, lowered her, and
made her contemptible, a dependent state, sold by her own sovereign to
the haughty Bourbon monarch, the rule of the house of Stuart — ^to combat
and depress this was the work of his life.' F. W. Cobnish.
Na/rratwe and Critical History of America. Vols. HI, IV. Edited by
Justin Winsor. (Boston : Houghton, Mifflin, k Co.)
The object and nature of this book have been already explained in a
prospectus. It is there described as ' a series of co-operative monographs
of which each shall be a complete monograph, while the succession of
volimies will constitute a homogeneous work.' The whole book when
complete is to be a history of the American continent down to the year
1850. The first and second volumes have yet to appear. The first is to
be pre-Columbian; the second is to deal with Spanish discovery and
conquest. Of the volumes now before us the third is a history of
English colonisation in North America during the sixteenth and seven-
teenth centuries. It does not, however, deal with that subject exhaus-
tively, since the Carolinas find no place. The next volume treats of the
American colonies of France, Sweden, and Holland during the same
time.
No one can read this book and fail to see that the various writers are
each master of his own subject, while at the same time each is enough
of a trained historian to know his own subject, not merely from within,
but from without ; to understand the relations of the sectional conmiunity
with which he is dealing to the whole American nation. It is clear too
that if any field of history admits of being thus broken up into depart-
ments, that of North America does. Of the English colonies each has a
constitutional history and a literature of its own. Each has its own
archives, its own set of documents in the English Record Office. With
hardly an exception each has its own historical society laboriously
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 805
aocumolating materials for the historian. When we pass beyond the
states of English origin to take in, as a complete history of North
America must take in, Oanada and the New Netherlands, to say nothing
of the Spanish settlements in Florida, and of the attempts of the Swedes
by the Delaware, fresh fields of labour are at once laid open. The ideal
American historian must be a linguist and a cosmographer. Dutch con-
stitutional history and the doings of French Jesuits must be familiar
ground to him.
It is clear that if all this is to be brought within the reach of human
powers, there must be some co-operation, formal or otherwise, some
division of labour into departments. That may be done in either of two
ways. An historian may deal with the subject as a whole, telying on the
previous labours of specialists, using those labours so that they may clear
the ground for his own work. He may accept the authority of local
historians, of those who have written monographs on states, counties, and
towns each for his own subject. Or, as in the present book, the work may
be put in commission, handed to a band of specialists all working on a
common system and to some extent under common supervision. The
objections to the former system are obvious. The historian is in perpetual
danger of degenerating into a compiler ; his responsibilities are increased
by the need for perpetual watchfulness against carelessness or dishonesty
on the part of his authorities. Yet after all these difficulties exist in every
case : every historian must depend largely on second-hand evidence — even
so-called original documents are largely tinged by motives for which it is
needful to make due deduction. An historian worthy of the name will be
able to use the labours of specialists so far as is required by necessary
economy. The objections to the other plan are no less obvious. I cannot
help thinking that with all its merits this book confirms these objections.
If there be any need for a history to be written as a single book, if it is more
than a set of separate histories bound together for convenience, there
must be one connected thread running through it. The very fact that the
connexion between its parts seems loose, that there is a lack of union
and continuity, is rather a reason why the real underlying unity needs to
be brought out as it only can be brought by applying to the work one
connected mode of thought. As in architecture, the discord of the parts
makes some central and manifest symbol of unity all the more necessary.
Moreover, this method tends, I think, to make men lose sight of the
truth, rather in danger of being forgotten, that a history is a work of art,
not an epitome of official documents. A writer who knows that he is
merely dealing with a section of his subject can hardly throw himself into
his work with the same freedom, he can hardly judge of men and events
with the same definiteness and independence, as one who feels that he is
fighting for his own hand. The present methods of historical study, as it
is, are calculated rather to throw the biographical side of history into the
background. The new system would increase this tendency. There
would be little inducement to draw with a firm or bold hand when the
figure had to be transferred half complete to be finished by a successor.
And no history, be it remembered, unless, as I said before, it is in reality
a collection of separate histories, can be cut into detached sections, no
one of which shall overlap another. All these inherent disadvantages
Digitized by
Google
806 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Oct.
seem to me to outweigh the merits of the system. One is glad that the
experiment should have had a £air trial, just as one is glad that four
eminent novelists combined to write the 'Croix de Bemy/ But in
neither case does the measure of success attained make one wish to see
the older and more customary method superseded.
There is another peculiarity in the arrangement of this book open
to question. Each chapter is followed by what is entitled 'a critical
essay on the sources of information.' This essay is in several instances
longer than the chapter to which it is appended. Surely history is one
thing, the bibliography of history another, and the two are better kept
distinct. An historian should no doubt indicate who and what his autho-
rities are. He should so do it that every one may if he pleases be able to
check and test all statements of a controversial nature, and that any one
who wishes to pursue the same subject as a special study may form some
notion of the line which he must take. To the special student no detail
is unimportant, because the accuracy of his general view will depend on
the care with which he has studied and the accuracy wherewith he has
mastered every detail. But to the man who studies history not because
he is going to write history, but because it is a needful form of training
for the human mind, it is not the minute details, but the broad and com-
pr^ensive views which are formed out of those details, that are important.
In other words, though the historian constantly needs the services of the
antiquary, though he must be in his own department an antiquary, yet
history is not antiquarianism. That is a truth which I cannot help think-
ing is in danger of being sometimes forgotten in this book.
I should be sorry, however, if from what I have said I appeared to be
insensible to the very great merits of the book. If we look on it not as
in the ordinary sense a history, but rather as a dictionary of American
history in which all the available information is to be found, sifted and
arranged with clearness and method, then the book is beyond all praise.
And there are portions of it which deserve higher praise, portions which
as historical monographs leave Uttle to be desired by way of insight into
events and characters. It is of course impossible to criticise the style and
the mode of thought of such a book as one criticises the work of a single
writer, since (happily) the system of collaboration has not extinguished
individual peculiarities. The book undoubtedly labours under one dis-
advantage. It is difficult not to think that some of the writers have felt
hampered by the labours of their predecessors. For example, the first
twenty years of Virginian history, years which do not lose their life and
interest even under the somewhat cumbrous handling of Smith, are swept
off in twenty pages. Connecting the general scale 'of the work, this
seems scanty measure. Probably the writer feels that John Smith has
become such a stock character that the less said about him the better.
Yet surely the storms which raged round the cradle of Virginia, the deter-
mination of Gondomar and his English accompUces that the colony should
come to nought, the determination of English noblemen and traders
that it should live and prosper, the measure of success which attended
each, these surely deserve something more than the bare and cold sum-
mary which we have here. And coming to the later history of Virginia,
one would gladly exchange some of the researches, admirable of their
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 807
kind, with early maps and oosmographical difficulties, for a fuller and
more vivid picture of political and social life in that colony which fur-
nished the young republic with so many of its wisest counsellors.
The same criticism applies in a measure to the history of Massachu-
setts and her offshoot Connecticut. Mr. Deane's name is a sufficient
guarantee both for accuracy and for minute research. Of the many
laborious students of early New England history whom America has pro-
duced, no one, not even Mr. Savage, has done more to explore new sources
of information, and to harmonise and sifb the information thus obtained.
But one hardly feels that the political and intellectual life of New Eng-
land, the former so varied and expansive, the latter so monotonous and
sterile yet so unique, has been adequately reproduced here. There is
nothing to show how the New England of Winthrop and Endacott,
strenuous and bigoted, a christian bparta in its pitiless discipline, passed
into the prosperous, indifferent, and somewhat worldly New England of
Phipps and Sewell, with its conventional easily worn puritanism. Mr.
Deane may have felt that his subject had become so hackneyed that all
interest had been threshed out of it. Yet one cannot but think that
there was room here for something more precise than the picture of New
England given by Mr. Bancroft, more discriminating than that given by
Mr. Palfrey. r.
On the other hand, there are instances where this book fills a gap in
American history, not merely in an adequate fashion, but with a skill and
vigour which leaves little to be done by a successor. Such, for instance,
is Mr. Whitehead's exceedingly clear account of that most intricate subject,
the early history of New Jersey, with its puzzling succession of proprietary
rights. Yet even here one is occasionally reminded that the subject loses
by being thus broken up in sections. Mr. Whitehead tells, at p. 425, of
certain emigrants who in 1666 went from New Haven to the banks of the
Delaware. He says nothing, however, of the circumstances, striking enough,
under which that emigration was made. Connecticut had just carried
out, in obedience, it may be, to a political necessity, but in an ungenerous
spirit and with harsh methods, the annexation of New Haven. Thereby
the confederation of the four colonies, the pride of early New England
statesmanship, was shattered ; New Haven, of all the puritan colonies
the most complete embodiment of the union of church and state, was no
more ; in the words of her own divines, ' a candlestick was extinguished.'
Among those who, in their despair, emigrated to the Delaware, were the
citizens of Branford. They, in the spirit of the men of Phocaaa, embarked
not only their households and their goods, but the records of church and
town, aJl that made up the corporate life of the place, and left their old
home to be for more than twenty years without a tenant. No incident
could illustrate more strongly the self-conscious life of the city state, in
which puritan New England, so unlike in all things else, rivalled ancient
Hellas.
Another admirable chapter is that in which Mr. Keen deals with the
unsuccessful attempt of the Swedes to settle on the Delaware. He, like
Mr. Whitehead, feeling perhaps that he was more or less upon untrodden
ground, has written somewhat more fully than some of his colleagues.
Mr. Deane's chapter on New England, dealing with Massachusetts, Con-
Digitized by
Google
808 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Oct.
necticut, and Bhode Island, from their origin to the revolution, only
occupies forty-five pages. Mr. Keen allows himself precisely the same
space. The result is that he is able to deal with his subject without
undue curtailment or compression. Moreover, the subject is one which
is specially fitted for treatment in a monograph. An historian of the
English colonies would probably have been glad to banish it to an ap-
pendix. If hie had endeavoured to incorporate it with his narrative, he would
probably have found it rather an unmanageable episode. The Swedish
colony did not preserve any distinct political character ; it was wholly
absorbed, first by Dutch, then by English conquest. Yet the merits of
the Swedish colonists would in any case have deserved more than passing
notice. Their steady perseverance under discouragement and neglect,
the resolute spirit with which they upheld their own territorial rights,
their sober forbearance in all dealings with civilised or savage neighbours,
fully entitle them to such commemoration as they receive from Mr.
Keen.
Another excellent piece of work is the introductory chapter to the
fourth volume. In this Mr. Shaler sketches the physical conditions of
North America, and points out how they have influenced the inhabitants.
His sketch has two special merits. He steers clear of needless scientific
technicahties, and does not deal with ' isothermal zones ' and the like,
hard to be understood of plain men. Nor does he press his theories too
fax. He never forgets that soil and climate are feu^tors working with
other factors to mould a population. Thus, for example, Mr. Shaler points
out that, as far as soil and climate went. North Carolina was as well
situated as Virginia. The difference lay in the stuff of which each set of
colonists was made. As he says of the North Carolina settlers, * They
were from a great variety of places — a part from England, another from
the banks of the Ehine, others again from Switzerland. There was a great
mass of human driftwood in Europe at the close of the seventeenth cen-
tury, the wreck of long-continued wars ; so it was easy to bring emigrants
by the shipload if they were paid for. But the material was unfit to be the
foundation of a state.' One remarkable fact is mentioned by Mr. Shaler.
He states, and quotes as his authority a distinguished physiologist, ' that
the American body, be it that of man or beast, is more enduring of wounds
than the European ; that to make a given impression upon the body of a
creature in America it is necessary to inflict severer wounds than it would
be to produce the same effect on a creature of the same species in Europe.'
If this peculiarity were limited to the western states, where bowie knives
are plentiful, one might be tempted to see in it a striking illustration of
the doctrine of natural selection.
Excellent though Mr. Shaler's work undoubtedly is, yet I cannot help
thinking that one sees in it an illustration of the drawback to this co-
operative mode of writing history. One wishes that Mr. Shaler's conclu-
sions should run through the whole book ; that as they are sketched in a
broad general way, so at each stage, and in dealing with each successive
state, they should be appUed in detail. It may be said, they will be so
appUed ; each writer is bound by the conclusions of his colleagues. But
doctrines exercise a widely different influence on the work of a man who
has thought them out for himself, and of one who accepts them from a
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 809
teacher. That indeed is, I ventiire to think, the error of the system on
which this hook is composed. It endeavours to do by a mechanical
arrangement what could really be done only by the action of an individual
mind.
I may have seemed condemnatory. I may seem to have dwelt rather
on the defects of conception than on the undoubted merits of execu-
tion. If so it is only because I have measured the book by a high
standard. I should be the last to underrate the accuracy, the labour, the
sobriety of tone, which marks each separate part of the book, or the per-
manent value which each has as a contribution to the literature of its own
special subject. J. A. DoyiiB.
A History of England from the Conclusion of the Great Wa/r in 1816.
Vols. IV, V. By Spencer Walpolb. (London : Longmans & Co.
1886.)
With the completion of the fifth volume, Mr. Walpole's useful work
reaches its close, bringing the reader down to the peace of Paris in 1856,
and the suppression of the Indian mutiny in the following year. The
fourth volume starts from the formation of Peel's second ministry in 1841.
After a preliminary review dealing with various aspects of English social
and political life at the epoch of the reform bill, the author proceeds with
a narrative which is in the main parliamentary, entering with much detail
into Peel's earlier financial measures — measures which Peel may be said
to have originated of his own free will, and without the pressure from
outside which, a year or two later, brought him over to the pohcy of the
anti-com-law league. Mr. Walpole, though the bias of his own mind is
towards a rather advanced Uberalism, does more than justice to Peel,
who is in fact the hero of the later part of his work. He does not,
however, conceal the backwardness or timidity of the minister in the
matter of the factory acts, which would never have been carried had
there not been men in this country whose human sympathies and
religious earnestness opened to them things that were hid from the
wise and prudent among politicians. Mr. Walpole does well to bring
the factoTj acts to the front in his history ; his statement of their vital
importance to the EngUsh people is not at all too strong; and the
impression which his narrative will leave, that there never was a case
where one side was so wholly in the right and the other side so wholly in
the wrong, is thoroughly warranted by all that has happened since in
England. Nor is Mr. Walpole's treatment of Irish events less honest and
straightforward ; he has a miserable story to tell, and he tells it without
prejudice towards either side. If any one is entitled to complain of hard
treatment, it is perhaps O'Gonnell, whose patriotism Mr. Walpole calls in
question on the double ground that O'Gonnell was in love with a young
lady at a time when all his thoughts ought to have been given to Ireland,
and that he directed by his will that his heart should be interred at Home.
Surely there may be tides of religious as well as earthly emotion in a
nature like that of O'Gonnell, which are not to be adjusted to the Saxon
standard of a legal M.P.'s range of feeling. In dealing with the conse-
quence of the repeal of the com laws, it may be thought that Mr. Walpole,
Digitized by
Google
810 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Oct.
whose strong point is really financial history, might have entered more
folly into the effect of that measure on prices and on agricultnre. He
shows indeed that, so isar from disappearing, rents rose largely in England
during the thirty years between 1846 and 1877 ; at the same time he
speaks as if the expectation of low prices from free trade in com had been
fully realised. We are not charging Mr. Walpole with inaccuracy in his
figures ; but he ought to have explained, or at any rate to have asked, how
it was possible that, if prices fell, rents could nevertheless rise. It may
be remarked that the Crimean war made wheat for some years much
' dearer than it had been before 1846 ; that an enormous quantity of land
was brought into cultivation between 1846 and 1877, so that, even if rent
per acre had fallen, the gross rent of 1877 would nevertheless have been
greater than that of 1846 ; and that circumstances operating over other
countries besides our own appear to have postponed the full effects of Peel's
legislation on English a^culture until the present time, when it is again
an open question whether EngHsh corn-growing will not succumb before
free trade. By concluding a survey at any arbitrary date, like 1877, any
conceivable position may be established. The agricultural Oassandras of
1846, if any of them survive to read Mr. Walpole's work, will with some
justice compare Mr. Walpole to a physician who speaks of a dying man
as in full health because he left him in robust condition ten years ago.
Mr. Walpole is not an admirer of Lord Palmerston*s blustering mode
of conducting the business of the foreign office. His sympathies are rather
with the friendly and considerate metiiods of Lord Aberdeen, though it is
scarcely disputed that this gentleness of demeanour gave to the emperor
Nicholas the impression that, with Aberdeen in office, England would
never go to extremities, and so occasioned the Crimean war. Jn his
review of English foreign policy between 1841 and 1851, Mr. Walpole has
at any rate taken the trouble to form his opinions for himself; and in one
question, that of the Spanish marriages, he has come to a conclusion
opposed to that which is usually accepted. It is well known that Louis
Phihppe had undertaken, on the English government consenting to the
marriage of his son Montpensier to the sister of the queen of Spain, that
this marriage should not take place until the queen of Spain should her-
self have been married and have borne children. The two marriages
were, however, solemnised simultaneously, to the great indignation of
England ; and the judgment of almost all historians has been tiiat Louis
Philippe was guilty of an act of gross treachery towards his ally. Mr.
Walpole defends Louis Phihppe on the ground that Palmerston, who had
just come into office, intended to repudiate the understanding made by
Aberdeen, that the queen of Spain should marry a Bourbon, and meant
to support the candidature of a Coburg instead. Whether the documents
cited by Mr. Walpole in support of this contention will fully sustain his
own view is a matter on which readers of his book who refer to the
originals will perhaps have some difficulty in making up their minds;
but in this question, as in others, Mr. Walpole is rightly anxious to avoid
partiahty on the side of England.
The least satisfetctory chapter in these volumes is that on what may
be called the rehgious history of the period. Whether it was necessary
for the historian to go much into the details of the Tractarian movement
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 811
at Oxford may be matter of opinion ; but surely all the dismal chronicle of
the Hampden case might have been left to rot in the dull books which are
fall of it. It is, however, in subjects of this kind that Mr. Walpole's
limitations are most apparent. As an annalist or chronicler he is excel-
lent ; and he goes beyond this, for his political and social generalisations
at the end of the volume are both sound and definite ; but in the larger
range of thought and knowledge, the background, so to speak, formed by
an historian's whole mental habit and experience, he is, it must be con-
fessed, fEur from impressive. This comes out curiously in his estimates of
men and his comparisons between them. Thus he twice speaks of Peel
as a greater statesman than Pitt ; and he actually says that in capacity
Wellington * was not, possibly, superior to Moore.' Coming to minor
men, he speaks of Newman and Dr. Hampden as if the two were much
on a level. Mr. Walpole is of course within his rights when he says
that he has nothing to do with Wellington's military career ; but the
logical conclusion would have been to refrain from offering any general
estimate of Wellington's powers. If a man is to be weighed, account ought
to be taken of his whole life and work. Had Wellington died before he set
foot in the Spanish peninsula, the record of his Indian career as a war-
rior and an administrator would by itself have stamped him as a man of
great genius. In 1815, and again in 1822, he showed himself the best
diplomatist and one of the most prescient statesmen in Europe. To
speak of him as merely a man of unusual judgment, who, as a general,
made fewer mistakes than other generals, is like speaking of Milton as a
well-balanced writer of English who made fewer bad rhymes than most of
his contemporaries. The same absence of severe and comprehensive
mental discipline appears in Mr. Walpole's too frequent rhetorical exagge-
rations, as where he says that, while Palmerston was quarrelling over the
Spanish marriages, no statesman ' thought it worth while to convey a few
words of pity or of hope to twenty millions of Poles.' Had there been not
twenty, but two, millions of Poles who cared anything whatever about
Polish independence, Poland would not have vanished. Yet Mr. Walpole
when he is in an optimist mood tells us that * vain are all the measures
of repression,' and that ' a great movement never perishes for want of a
leader ; ' as if half the history of the human race did not consist of
instances of the opposite. This undisciplined habit of mind appears again
in Mr. Walpole's excursions over literary and scientific ground, as where,
in leading up to the Tractarian and the Scotch disruption movements, he
gives two pages to a comparison between the theologies of Homer and
Milton. In narrating the discovery of the electric telegraph he goes back
to Thales, and in expounding the importance of petroleum he quotes
Nehemiah. It is impossible for a writer to indulge in proclivities of this
kind without diminishing the respect due to his work. The truth is that
the correction of Mr. Walpole's book would be the affair of the scissors
more than of the pen. If all the occasional rhetoric and all the super-
fluous passages which have been written rather with the hand than with
the mind were €ut out, the book would be greatly improved, and there
would remain, instead of five volumes largely debased with alloy, three or
four volumes of good and sterling work. G. A. Fyffe.
Digitized by
Google
812 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Oct.
Two volumes of the series of Epochs of Chwrch History, Dr. Plummer's
The Chu/rch of the Early Fathers, and Mr. Carr's The Chu/rch and the
Boman Evvpvre (London : Longmans), are of unequal merit. Dr.
Plummer has written a little book as a condensation of large knowledge,
while Mr. Carr has contented himself with gaining a little knowledge to
write a Httle book. Both volumes are useful handbooks; but Mr. Carr
has written a readable condensation of Gibbon and Milman, while Dr.
Plummer, writing from contemporary sources, has given freshness to bis
sketch of the extension of the church and the nature of its literature in
the ante-Nicene period, and has produced a little book which all students
will read with pleasure.
We have received from Messrs. Weidmaim the second edition of
Waitz's convenient collection of Urkunden zur deutschen Verfassungs-
geschichte, ranging from 959 to 1151. It does for German history, within
the limits of the tenth and twelfth centuries, much what Bishop Stubbs's
Select Charters do for our own constitutional history, except that the
editor's comments are more succinct and are addressed to a more
advanced class of students. The little volume has a peculiar interest,
since the preface is dated just six weeks before the editor's sudden and
lamented death in May of last year.
The fourteenth edition of Hook's Chwrch Dictionary, edited by W.
Hook and W. R. W. Stephens (London : Murray), is the result of such a
thorough revision as to be almost a new book. The original plan remains,
it is true, but most of the articles have been rewritten and many new
ones are inserted, but the scale of the book is not materially changed and
it still keeps its character as a popular handbook rather than a guide for
scholars. But within its Hmits it is excellent ; the information given is
clear and precise, though perhaps an increased number of references
would have added to its usefulness, and the tone on disputed questions
is moderate and judicious. The limits of the book make the historical
articles of necessity very brief— so brief that some of them might have
been omitted. The architectural and legal articles, which are mainly
written by Lord Grimthorpe, are certainly the best reading in the volume
and have a freshness and directness peculiarly their own.
Mr. Bullen's edition of The Works of Marston (London : John C.
Nimmo) is marked by the same care which has characterised the previous
volumes of this excdlent series of the works of the English dramatists.
We are only sorry that Marston's works do not repay better the pains which
his editor has taken. It must, however, be admitted that Mr. BuUen, in
his introduction, does not make any undue claims for his author, whoee
bombast is inexcusable, and whose extravagances areonly rarely redeemed
by any feUcity of expression or grasp of character. A series must
presumably be complete, and as Marston wrote he has to be edited, but
we wish that Mr. BuUen had been better employed.
Clarendon's History of the BebelUon. Book VI. Edited with In-
troduction and Notes by Thomas Abnold, M.A. (Oxford : Clarendon
Digitized by
Google
1887 REVIEWS OF BOOKS 818
Press.) This little book forms one of the series of English classics pub-
lished by the Olarendon press. Mr. Arnold's prefetce gives a brief sketch
of Clarendon's life and an account of the circumstances under which his
history was composed. The notes are chiefly biographical or explanations
of obsolete words in the text. There is also a long and valuable account
of the battle of Edgehill, illustrated by a plan (pp. 269-277). The bio-
graphical notes are not free from errors. For instance, the battle of
Langport took place on 10 July 1645, and not, as stated, in 1646 (p. 255) ;
the battle of Homcastle was in 1648, and not in 1644. In the note on
p. 800 two Sir John Borlases are confounded. Sir Nicholas Biron was
uncle, not brother, of Six John Biron (p. 264), and Sir John Digby, sheriff
of Nottinghamshire, is not the Sir John Digby brother of Sir Kenelm
(p. 247). In the prefetce (p. ix) it is stated that Hyde joined the king in
August 1642. Hyde left the parliament in May, and after staying a few
days at Nostall, near York, joined the king at York eariy in June. Mr.
Arnold states that Hyde ' seems like Hampden to have had nothing to
do with the bill of attainder against Strafford ' (p. vi). But Hampden
certainly voted for it, and all the feusts seem to show that Hyde did the
same. His name is not in the list of the members who voted against it.
Falkland voted for it, and we are assured by Hyde that a disagreement
between himself and Falkland, which took place later, was their first
difference of opinion.
The title of Mr. C. P. Lucas's Introchiction to a Historical Geography
of the British Colonies (Oxford : Clarendon Press) is misleading. It is
an introduction to ek future work on the subject, and only a third part of
it has anything to do with the British colonies themselves. The book is
really a short treatise on the motives and methods of colonisation in the
ancient and modem world ; it is carefully written and clearly arranged,
and it promises well for the subsequent volumes dealing with the British
colonies in detail. A good account of the territorial stages by which our
possessions oversea grew to their present magnitude is certahily wanted,
and Mr. Lucas, from his position in the colonial office, ought to have
special advantages for writing it. But we trust that in future instalments
he will take more pains about his maps. It is inexcusable in a work on
historical geography to make a modem map, with modem names and
divisions and submarine telegraphs, serve for all times by merely colouring
it differently ; and the maps in themselves are confused and carelessly
drawn.
Mr. T. Dunbar Ingram's History of the Legislative Union of Great
Britain and Ireland (London : Macmillan k Co.) is written for a purpose,
and this fact makes it difficult to treat the book here with the attention it
deserves, especially since approval or disapproval of the policy of the union
has unluckily become a question not of history, but of party. That such
should be the case after a lapse of three generations is at once deplorable
and ridiculous, and Mr. Ingram has done his best to show that the
discussion can be conducted fedrly and can lead to a definite historical
conclusion. At the same time it may be argued that he has relied too con-
fidently on the information supplied to Lords Comwallis and Castlereagh,
Digitized by
Qoo^^
814 REVIEWS OF BOOKS Oct.
and has neglected other accessible materials. What Mr. Ingram has
made out most successfolly is the fact that the onion was effected at the
desire of the cathoUcs, and that the main resistance came from the
protestants, whose property in seats, and whose interest in keeping the
centre of a&irs at Dublin, were threatened by the proposed change.
Economic Aspects of State Socialism. By H. H. Smith. (Oxford :
Blackwell, 1887.) The Oxford Cobden Prize Essay for 1886 deals chiefly
with modem theories and modem experiments in reducing them to
practice, but it includes a brief sketch of the different systems of industrial
poUcy which have been in vogue in Europe since the Middle Ages. These
are clearly and fairly delineated, though the treatment is necessarily
slight and sketchy; the doctrines of the Physiocrats deserve a more
careful examination than the author seems to have bestowed on them, as
there is Httle ground for the insinuation that they were only half in
earnest about their main principles. There is some want of caution too
in ascribing modem scientific socialism so very directly to Hegel, as his
own doctrine of property and his indications of opinion on various
economic points show clearly that he would not have recognised either
the writings of Lassall or those of Earl Marx as legitimate developments
of his teaching.
Digitized by
Google
1887
815
List of Historical Books recently published
I. GENERAL HISTORY
(Inoluding works relating to the allied branches of knowledge and works
of misoellaneous contents)
Acton (lord). Die neuere deutsche Ge-
Bchicntswissenschaft ; eine Skizze.
Translated by J. Imelmann. Pp. 60.
Berlin : Gaertner. 1*40 m.
BoBOBAU (G.) Histoire du plebiscite : Le
plebiscite dans Tantiquit^; Gr^ce et
Rome. Pp. 200. Lyons: Georg.
8-501
BuDiNGEB (M.) Zeit and Schicksal bei
Bdmem und Westariem. Eine univer-
salhistorische Studie. Pp.33. Vienna:
Gerold. 1-60 f.
Dblbbuok (H.) Die Perserkriege und
die Burgnnderkriege : zwei kombinirte
kriegsgeschichtliche Studien, nebst
einem Anhang iiber die rdmisohe
Manipular-Taktik. Berlin: Walther
& Apolant.
Hbiokl (E. T.) Historische Vortrage
und Studien. Dritte Folge. Pp. 365.
Munich : Bieger. 7 m.
SoHHiDT (Max 0. P.) Zur Geschichte
der geographischen Litteratur bei
Grieohen und Bdmem. Pp. 37. Ber-
lin : Gaertner. 4to. 1 m.
TuBNEB (C. J. Bibton). A history of
vagrants and vagrancy, and beggars
and begging. Pp. 734, illustr. Lon-
don : Chapman <& HalL 21/.
Ulbich (W.) Bilder aus der Geschichte,
der Kulturgeschichte, und dem lit-
terarisohen Leben der Vdlker. Pp. 318.
Leipzig : Unflad. 4*50 m.
Vebo (Y. di). La storia, la scienza, e la
rivoluzione: studl critici. Pp. 221.
Naples : tip. dell' Iride. 4 1.
Zbbffi (G. G.) Studies on the science
of general history. lY. London:
Hirsohfeld. 2/6.
n. ORIENTAL HISTORY
Amkuneau (E.) Etude historique sur
saint Pachome et le c^nobitisme
primitif dans la haute Egypte d*apr^
les monuments coptes. Paris : Leroux.
8-60 f . (From the * Bulletin de Plnstitut
6gyptien.')
BsiaoNi (V.) L' AfFrica biblica : saggio
di geografia fisica e politica dell* Af^ca
primitiva. Pp. 69. Perugia : Santucci.
16mo. 1 1.
Bebo (L. W. G. van den). Le Hadhra-
mout et les colonies arabes dans
TArchipel indien. Pp. 292, plates and
map. The Hague : Nijhoff. 3 fl.
Cabseii (D.) Die Armen-Yerwaltung im
alten Israel; Yortrag. Pp. 25.
Schrimm : Schreiber. 50 pf.
Debenboubo (H.) OusAma Ibn Moun-
kidh ; un ^mir syrien au premier sidde
des croisades [1095-1188] : Note sur
quelques mots de la langue des Francs
au xii* si^le, d'aprds Tautobiographie
d*Ous&ma Ibn Mounkidh. P^). 20.
Paris : imp. Lanier.
Edsbsheim (A.) History of Israel and
Judah, from the decline of the two
kingdoms to the Assyrian and Baby-
lonian captivity. (Bible history, YII.)
London : Beligious Tract Society. 8/.
GiLMAN (A.) The Saracens, from the
earliest times to the fall of Bagdad.
(Story of the Nations.) Pp. 516, illustr.
London : Fisher Unwin. 5/.
Gbahmont (H. D. de). Histoire d* Alger
sous la domination turque [1515-1880].
Paris : Leroux. 8 f .
Eebne (H. G.) The fall of the Moghul
empire of Hindustan. New ed., with
corrections and additions. Pp. 310.
London : Allen. 7/6.
Lenobmant (F.) <& Babelon (E.) His-
toire ancienne de I'Orient jusqu*aux
guerres m^diques. Y: La civilisation
assyro-chald^enne ; les M^es et les
Perses. Pp. 527, illustr. Paris: A.L6vy.
18 f.
MuLLEB (A.) Der Islam im Morgen- und
Abendland. H. (Oncken*s Allgemeine
Geschichte in Einzeldarstellungen.)
Pp. 685, illustr. Berlin : Grote.
Digitized by
Qoo^<^
816 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED Oct.
OzFORo (A. W.) A short introduction to
the history of ancient Israel. Pp. 148.
London : Fisher Unwin. 2/6.
CJoBPus inscriptionom Semiticamm ab
Academia inscriptionum et litteranun
homaniormn oonditom atqne cUgestnm.
Pars prima, inscriptiones Phoenioias
continens. I. Pp. 456, 57 plates. Paris:
Klincksieck. 4to. 25 f.
Bapson (E. J.) The struggle between
England and France for supremacy in
In£a. Pp. 120. London : Triibner.
4/6.
Beinaoh (T.) Les Mudes d'histoire juive
pendant Pannde 1886. Pp. 22. Paris :
Durlaoher.
Beinaoh (T.) Essai dans la nnmisma-
tique des rois de Cappadoce. Pp. 91,
4 plates. Paris : BeiUier & Feuardent,
(From the * Bevue Numismatique.*)
Bevillout (E. & y.) Les obligations en
droit dgyptien compare aox autres
droits de I'antiquit^, suivies d'lm ap-
pendioe sur le droit de la Ghald^ an
yingt-troisidme sidole et au seizidme
sidcle avant J^sus-Christ. Pp. Ixxxili,
531. Paris : Leroux. 10 f.
BcALA (B. von). Yortrag fiber die wioh-
tigsten Beziehungen des Orientes zmn
Occidente in Mittelalter and Neozeit.
Pp. 46. Leipzig : Fock. 1 m.
Stade (B.) Oeschichte des Yolkes IsraeL
I. ^Oncken*s Allgemeine Gteschiehte
in EinzeldarsteUungen.) Pp. 710,
illustr. Berlin: Grote.
ViMOTaiNisB (A.) Soliman Paoha, g^6-
ralissime des armies ^gyptiennee: oa
histoire des guerres de PEgypte [1820-
I860]. Pp. 590, portrait Paris:
Firmin-Didot. 10 f.
m. GREEK HISTORY
Belseb (professor). Die attischen Stra-
tegen im filnften Jahrhundert. Pp. 37.
Tubingen : Fues. 60 pf .
OxTBTins (E.) Griechische Geschiohte.
I : Bis zum Beginne der Perserkriege.
6th edition. F^. 701. Berlin : Weid-
mann. 8 m.
DuBUT (Y.) Histoire des Grecs depuis
les temps les plus recul^s josqu'i la
reduction de la Gr^ en proTinoe
romaine. I : Formation du peuple grec.
Pp. 827, 808 illustr. Paris : Haohetie.
25 f.
Eaebst (J.) Forschungen zur Geschiohte
Alexanders des Grossen. Pp. 144.
Stuttgart: Eohlhammer. 1*80 m.
IV. ROMAN HISTORY
Blad^ (J. F.) Le sud-ouest de la Ganle
sous le haut et le bas empire. Pp. 35.
Agen : Lamy.
Geppebt (P.) Zum Monumentum Anoy-
ranum. Pp. 18. Berlin: Gaertner.
4to. 1 m.
HAXJiiEB (E.) Neue Bruchstucke zu Sallusts
Historien. Pp. 66. Yienna : Gerold.
Landucoi p[j.) Storia del diritto romano
dalle ongini fino a Giustiniano. Pp.
384. Padua : Saochetto. 7*50 1.
Lemonni^b (H.) !^tude historique sur la
condition priv6e des affranchis auz
trois premiers sidles de Tempire
romain, Paris : Hachette. 6 f.
Matbbhoefbb (A.) Gesohichtiioh-topo-
graphische Studien fiber das aJte Bom.
Pp. 115, map. Munich: Lindaaer.
2 m.
Sroccm (G.) Due studl di storia romana.
I : La guerra di M. Grasso nella Meso-
potamia, .11 : Gommio Atrebate. Pp.
139. Florence : Booca. 16mo. 2 L
Stbeit (W.) Zur Geschiohte des zweiten
punischen Erieges in Italien nach der
Schlacht Yon Gamue. (Berliner Studien
fur dassische Philologie und Arohao-
logie, YI. 2.) Pp. 57. Berlin: Cal-
vary. 2 m.
V. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY
AuDiAT (L.) Saint Eutrope, premier
6v^ue de Saintes, dans Thistoire, la
l^ende, I'arch^ologie. Pp. 220. Paris :
Picard. 6 f .
Babbieb (P.) Yie de saint Hilaire,
6v6que ae Poitiers, docteur et pdre de
P^glise. Pp. 461. Paris : Poussielgue.
18mo. 3*75 f.
Batme (P.) Martin Luther, his life and
work. 2 vol. Pp. 1 102. London:
Gassell. 24/.
Chantepib de la Saussaye (P. D.) Lehr-
buch der Beligionsgeschichte. L Pp.
465. Freiburg : Mohr. 9 m.
CouAMiEB DE Launay (E. L.) Histoire
des religieuses hospitalidres de Saint-
Joseph (France et Canada). Pp. Ix, 303,
415. Paris: Palm6. 10 f.
CuissABD (C.) Les premiers ^ydques
d'Grl^ns : examen des diflSoult^s que
pr^sentent leurs actes. Pp. 302.
Grl^ns : Herluison. 6 f.
DioABD (G.), Faucon (M.), & Thomas (A.)
Les registres de Boniface YIII : Becueil
des buUes de ee pape publi^es on ana-
lys^es. 3* fasc. Paris : Thorin. 4to.
7*20 f.
Dbews (P.) Wilibald Pirkheimers Stel-
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED 817
lang zar Reformation ; ein Beitrag znr
Beurteilxmg des Yerhaltnisses zwischen
Hamanismns and Beformation. Pp.
138. Leipzig : Grnnow. 2*50 m.
Eou (E.) Die St. GkiUer Taufer, ge-
sohildert im Bahmen der stadtischen
Beformationsgesohiohte : mit Bei-
tragen zur Vita Yadiani. Pp. 67.
Zurich : Sohulthess. 1*60 f.
Glassbebobb (N.) Chronica edita a
patribns oollegii s. BonaventnrsB.
(Analeota francisoana, sive chronica
aliaqne varia docuznenta ad historiam
fratrum minorum speotantia. 11.) Pp.
zxxvi, 615. Ad Claras Aqnas ex typ.
collegii s. Bonaventurse. 12 1.
HoFLEB (C, Bitter von). Bonifatias, der
Apostei der Deutschen, und die Slaven-
apostel Eonstantinos [Cyrillus] nnd
Methodios : eine historisohe Parallele.
Pp. 64. Prague : Dominicus.
HoBNiNO (W.), Brief e von Strassburger
Beformatoren, ihren Mitarbeitern und
Freunden fiber die Einfiihrung des
» Interims ' in Strassburg [1648-1554],
edited by. Pp. 52. Strassburg : Vom-
hoff. 75 pf.
Knbbbl (Johannis), capellani ecclesife
Basiliensis, diarium [1476-1479] . (Bas-
ler Chroniken, III, edited by W. Visch-
er.) Pp. 685. Leipzig : Hirzel.
LoEWE (H.) Die Stellung des Kaisers
Ferdinand I zum Trienter Konzil yom
Oktober 1561 bis zum Mai 1562. Pp.
85. Bonn : Cohen. 2 m.
Mabignan (A.) Le triomphe de TEglise au
quatridme si^e ; m^moire pour servir
£ Phistoire de la civilisation en France.
Pp. 57. Paris : Picard. 2-50 f.
Mabtbns (W.) Die Besetzung des papst-
lichen Stuhls unter den Eaisem Hein-
rich III und Heinrich IV. Freiburg:
Mohr.
MussAFiA (A.) Studien zu den mittel-
alterlichen Marienlegenden. I. Pp.
80. Vienna: Gerold.
MuNTZ (E.) <fe Fabbb (P.) La Biblio-
th^ue du Vatican au quinzidme si^le
d'aprds des documents in^dits : contri-
butions pour servir k Thistoire de I'hu-
manisme. (Bibliothdque des Ecoles fran-
Qaises d'Athdnes et de Borne, XL VIII.)
Pp. 384. Paris : Thorin. 12-50 f .
PoTzscH (W.) Viktor von Vita und die
Eirchenverfolgung im Wandalen-
reiche. Pp. 42. Ddbeln : Schmidt. 4to.
Beusch (F. H.) Die 'Indices Librorum
prohibitorum ' des sechzehnten Jahr-
hunderts gesanmielt und heraus-
gegeben. Pp. 595. Tiibingen : Litera-
rischer Verem.
Stubmhobfel (E.) Der geschichtliche
Inhalt von Gerhohs von Beichersberg
erstem Buche uber die Erforschung des
Antichrists. I. Pp. 24. Leipzig :
Hinrichs. 4to. 1 m.
Teule (E. de). Chronologic des docteurs
en droit civil de l'universit6 d*Avignon
[1303-.1791]. Paris : Lechevalier. 7*50 f.
TiscHHAUSEB (C.) Handbuch der Eirchen-
geschichte. Pp. 688. Basle: Detloff.
12 f.
VoLKBfAB (G.) Paulus von Damascus bis
zum Gkklaterbrief. Pp. 120. Ziirich:
Schrdter A Meyer.
Weizsaoebb (C.) Das apostolische Zeit-
alter der christlichen Eirche. Pp. 698.
Freiburg: Mohr.
VI. MEDIEVAL HISTORY
Abdt Hj. F.) Bomani e longobardi:
contribute ad una storia deUe relazioni
fra i Longobardi e la Chiesa. Pp. 27.
Genoa: Guninago.
Bbock (J.) Die Entstehung des Fehde-
rechtes im deutschen Beiche des Mittel-
alters. Pp. 35. Berlin : Gkiertner. 4to.
Cboisades, Becueil des historiens des,
public par TAcad^mie des inscriptions et
belles-lettres. Historiens orientaux. 11,
1. Pp. 275. Paris : imp. nationale. Fol.
DuHBiLEB (E.) Geschichte des ostfran-
kischen Bieiches. I : Ludwig der
Deutsche bis zum Frieden von Eoblenz
860. (Jahrbiicher der deutschen Ge-
schichte.) 2nd ed. Pp. 463. Leipzig :
Duncker & Humblot. 10 m.
Fedbbico I in Italia, Gesta di, descritte
in versi latini da anonimo contempo-
raneo, ora pubblicate secondo un MS.
della Vaticana a cura di E. Monaci.
(Fonti per la storia d Italia pubblicate
daJr istituto storico italiano : Scrittori,
secolo XII, 1.) Pp. xxxii, 138, plates.
Borne : tip. Forzani. 7 1.
VOL. n. — NO. vin.
Ganxtti (F. F.) The siege and fall of Con-
stantinople. Pp. 88. Pittsburg, Penn-
sylvania : Pruler. 24mo. 25 cents.
Giambelli (C.) Di Vincenzo Bellova-
cense: nota. Pp. 31. Bome: tip. dei
Lincei. 4to. (From the *Bendioonti
della B. Academia dei Lincei.*)
Magni (abb6 A. B.) Histoire de Jean de
Lastic, grand maitre des chevaliers de
Saint Jean de Jerusalem, k Bhodes,
traduite de Bosio ou extraite de divers
auteurs et documents. Pp. 336, iUustr.
Moulins: Auclaire.
Banke (L. von). Weltgeschichte. VII:
H5he und Niedergang des deutschen
Eaiserthums ; Die Hierarchie unter
Gregor VII. Leipzig : Duncker &
Humblot.
Savio (F.) I primi conti di Savoia;
ricerche storiche. (From the * Mis-
cellanea di storia siciliana,* ser. II, xi.)
Pp. 90. Turin : Bocca.
Thevemin (M.) Textes relatifs aux insti-
tutions priv^s et publiques aux 6poques
mSrovingienne et carolmgienne. Insti-
Sg
Digitized by
Qoo^^
818 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED Oct.
tutions priv^. (Ck>lleotion de textes
pour servir k T^tude et k renseigne-
ment de Phistoire. III.) Pp. 271.
Paris: Pioard. 6-601.
ToBR (0.) Rhodes in modem times.
Pp. 100, 3 plates. Cambridge : XJniTCT-
sity Press. 8/.
TosTi (L.) Storia di Abelardo e de' sooi
tempi. Borne: tip. della Camera dei
Deputati. Pp. 302. 4*50 L
Vn. MODERN fflSTORY
BiiLLBU (P.), Preussen und Frankreioh
[1795-1807] ; diplomatisohe Correspon-
denzen, edited by. II: [1800-1807].
(PublikjEttionen aus den kdniglic^
prenssisohen Staatsarchiven, XXIX.)
Pp. Izzzyii, 657. Leipzig : Hirzel.
16 m.
BenoIt (A.) Les protestants lorrains sons
le roi Stanislas [1737-1766]. Pp. 140.
MtLhlhaasen: Bader.
Blanokabt (C. de). Histoire modeme
[1860-1880]. n. Pp. 460. Li^e:
Demarteaa.
Bbitnbt de L'ABOENTiiRB. M6moire de
la gnerre sur les frontidres da Dauphin6
et de Savoie [1742-1747]. Pp. 91.
Paris : Bureau du Speotateur Militaire.
GiPOLLA (C.) Un Italiano in Polonia e
nella Svezia tra il XYI e il XVII secolo :
notizie biografiche. (From the *Mis-
c^lanea di Storia Italiana,' 2nd ser.,
XI.) Pp. III. Turin: Paravia.
Fbanklyn (H. B.) The great battles of
1870, and blockade of Metz. Pp. 320.
London: Triibner. 15/.
GopdETid (S.) Eriegsgesohichtliche Stu-
dien. I : Beitrage zur neueren Eriegs-
gesohichte der Balkan-Halbinsel. II:
Studien iiber aussereuropaiBohe Eriege
jiingster Zeit. Pp. 245, 388, maps
and plans. Leipzig : Elisoher. 4*50 &
7-50 m.
Gbethen (B.) Die politischen Bezie-
hungen Clemens* VII zu Earl V in den
Jahren 1523^1527. Pp.187. Hanover:
Brandes. 3 m.
HooPBB (G.) The campaign of Sedan,
the downfall of the second empire
[August-September 1870]. Maps and
plans. London: Bell. 14/.
Loewe (H.) Die Stellung des Eaisers
Ferdinand I zum Trieuter Eonzil vom
Oktober 1561 bis zum Mai 1562. Pp.
85. Bonn : Cohen. 2 m.
LuoAS (C. P.) Introduction to an histo-
rical geography of the British colonies.
Pp. 142. Oxford : Clarendon Press. 4/6.
MoBsoLDf (B.) II oongresso di Verona
[1822]: ricordi e aneddoti da on oar-
teggio privato. Pp. 40. Vioenza : tip.
Burato. 16mo.
MiTLLBB (W.) Politische (leschichte der
Gegenwart. XX : Das Jahr 1886. Pp.
314. Berlin : Springer. 4 m.
PiCABD Hj.) Lemons d'histoire et de geo-
graphic militaires [1854-1886]. I :
Guerre franco- allemande [1870-1871'.
11: Guerre russo-turque [1877-1878].
Ac. Pp. 411, 387, maps. Sammir:
MUon. 12 f.
BoBLiN (G.) Notice historique et g6o-
graphique sur la bataille de Fontenoy.
Pp. 44, map. Auzerre : Gallot.
BoTHAN (G.) Souvenirs diplomatiqnes :
la France et sa politique ext^enre eo
1867. II. Pp. 470. Paris : Cahnann
L6vy. 7-501
BonssET (C.) Les commencements d'one
oonqudte: PAlg^e [1830-1840]. Pp.
41 1, 499, 12 plates. Paris : Plon. 20 f.
Stibb (C. G.) Vlamischer Bericht nbo*
Vasco da Gama's zweite Beise [1503-
1503]. Pp. 42. Brunswick : Sohwet-
schke.
Stoebk (F.) Nouyeau recueil g6n6ral de
trait6s et autres actes relatifs aox rap-
pNorts de droit international. Continiui-
tion du grand recueil de Martens, XI,
1. Pp. 460. Gdttingen : Dieterich.
Tbinius (A.) Geschichte des Erieges
gegen Frankreich. I. (Geschichte der
Einigungskriege, nach aen vorzdglioh-
sten Qudlen geschildert, IIL) Pp. 602.
Berlin : Diimmler. 8 m.
Wihpffen (g^n. de) & Cobba (E.) Ia
bataille de Sedan; les y^ritables 00a-
pables: histoire complete, politiqiie
et militaire, d*aprds des mat^riftox
in6dits. Pp. li, 328. Paris Ollendorff,
18mo. 3-50 f.
Vm. FEENCH fflSTORY
AvAUx, correspondance in^dite du comte d*
(Claude de Mesmes), avec son pdre
Jean-Jacques de Mesmes, sieur de
Boissy [1627-1642], publi6e par A.
Boppe. Pp. 305. Paris : Plon. 6 f .
Babbaza (L.) Annales de la ville de
Castres depuis les origines jusqu'4 la
reunion du comt^ de Castres au do-
maine de la couronne. Pp. 304. Cas-
tres : Granier. 18mo.
BABTHiciEMT (C.) Hlstoirc dc la mouarolue
de juillet [1830-1848]. Pp.287 Paris :
Gautier. 18mo. 3 f .
BiuBENBT (E.) Histoire de la yflle
d'Orl^ans. m. Pp. 486. Orleans :
Herluison. 6 i
Bbi^le (E.) Collection de documents
pour servir k Phistoire des hdpitaux de
Paris. IV : Fin des comptes et dons
et legs f aits avant 1789 auz hd^taax
Digitized by
Google
1887 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED 819
et hospices. Pp. 419. Paris: Pioard.
4to. 10 f.
Briyes-Cazes (£.) Origines dn parlement
de Bordeaux [1370-1462]. Pp. 214.
Bordeaux : Qounouilhou. 4 f .
Gastonnet des Fosses (H.) L'^tat des
personnes en France avant 1789.
Pp. 117. Nantes: Forest & Grimaud.
Gluseret (g^.) M6moires: le second
si^e de Paris [1870-71]. 2 vol. Paris :
J. L6vy. 12mo. 3 f.
GoBBitEBE (P.) De Torganisation politique
du parti protestant arrdt^ k Tassem-
bl6e g^^rale tenue k Millau [d6cembre
1573]. Pp. 50. Montpellier : Boehm.
4to.
GoYiLLE (A.) Les 6tats de Normandie,
au commencement du rdgne de Gharles
VI [1380-1382]. Pp. 24. Gaen : Valin.
Debbien (I.) Les Fran9ais k Oran
depnis 1830 jusqu*ik nos jours. I : Oran
militaire [1830-1848]. Pp. 248, plates.
Aix : Nicot. 5 f.
Febby (G.) luYentaire historique des
archives anciennes de la ville d'Epinal.
in: S6rie CG. Pp. 524. Epinal :
Fricotel. 6 f.
Gbosjean (G.) La revolution franpaise
[1789-1799], d'apr^s les .t6moignages
oontemporains et les historiens mo-
demes. Preface par G. Bigot. lUustr.
Paris : Picard & Eaan.
Gboucht (vicomte de) & Mabsy (comte
de). Un administrateur au temps de
Louis XIV : Thomas de Grouchy, sieur
de Bobertot, conseiller au parlement
de Metz [1610-1676]. Pp. 482, plates.
Ghent : Vanderhaeghen.
Hardy (M.) La mission de Jeanne d'Arc
pr6ch6e 4 P^rigueux [1429] ; t6moignage
d'un contemporain publil p'^nr la pre-
miere fois. Pp. 8, illustr. P^rigueux :
Hkrisson (comte d'). Le cabinet noir:
Louis XVII, Napol^n, Marie-Louise.
Pp. 350. Paris : Ollendorff. 18mo.
3-60 f .
The black cabinet. Translated by
C. H. F. Blackith. Pp.348. London:
Longmans. 7/6.
Jadabt (H.) Jeanne d'Arc k Reims ; ses
relations avec Reims, ses lettres aux
B^mois. Pp. 135, illustr. Reims:
Michaud. 5 f.
Laooste (G.) Histoire g^n^rale de la
province de Quercy. Publi^e par L.
Gombarieu et F. Gangardel. m. Pp.
473. Gahors : Girma. 8 £.
Lanolois (G. V.) Le rdgne de Philippe
in le Hardi. Pp.474. Paris: Hachette.
7-60 £.
Ledieu (A.) Etudes d'histoire locale;
deux ann^es d'invasion en Picardie
[1636-1637]. Pp.320. Paris: Picard. 6f.
Lemibe (G.) Un marshal et un conn6-
table de France ; le Barbe-Bleue de la
l^ende et de Phistoire. Pp. 92, illustr.
Paris : Leroux. 3 £.
Leboy (T.) Lectures sur l*histoire de
France et I'unit^ franpaise, de 1789 k
nos jours. Pp. 700. Paris: Belin.
12mo. 4 f.
Mabib-Loxtise, Gorrespondance de
[1799-1847]. Lettres intimes et in^-
dites k la comtesse de GoUoredo et k
Mademoiselle de Poutet, depuis 1810
comtesse de Grenneville. Pp. 345, por-
traits. Vienna : Gerold.
"Mavidal (L.) <fe Laxtbent (E.) Archives
parlementaires de 1787 k 1860. Seconde
s^rie. LXIV : [2 octobre-3 d6cembre
1830]. Pp.814. Paris: Dupont. 20 f.
Mazabin ^cardinal). Lettres recueillies
et pubh6es par M. A. Gh6ruel. IV.
[Janvier — d^cembre 1661]. Pp. 845.
Paris : Impnmerie nationale. 4to. 10 f .
Na2?te8, 6dit de. Facsimile de P^dit
portant revocation de 1' [octobre 1685],
d'aprds 1 'original des archives natio-
nales. Pp. 8. Strassburg : Heitz. 4to.
3-50 m.
NoBDENFLYCHT (F. O. vou). Die franzd-
sische Bevolution von 1789 : Darlegung
ihrer Anlasse, ihrer Ziele, und 3irer
Mittel. Pp. 226. Berlin: Wiegandt
& Grieben.
Palustbe (L.) La renaissance en France.
Xm : Maine et Anjou. Illustr. Paris :
Quantin. 4to.
Reuss (R.) Louis XIV et P^glise pro-
testante de Strasbourg au moment de
la revocation de T^dit de Nantes
[1685-1686], d'aprds des documents
in6dit8. Paris : Fischbacher. 12mo. 3 f.
RoBiQUET (P.) Paris et la Ligue sous le
regne de Henri HI. Paris : Hachette.
7-60 f.
Stbassbubo. — Inventaire sommaire des
archives communales de la ville de
Strasbourg anterieures k 1790. Edited
by J. Brucker. Series A A : Actes
constitutifs et politiques de la com-
mune. IV. P^. 297. Strassburg :
Triibner. 4to. 14 m.
Vidal (P.) Histoire de la revolution
fran^aise dans le d^partement des Vy-
renees-Orientales, d'aprds des documents
inedits [1789-1800]. II. Pp. 437, illustr.
Perpignan : Julia. 10 f.
VnjiABs (marechal de). M^moires: pu-
blics d'apr^s le manuscrit original, par
le marquis de Vogiie. II. Pp. 384.
Paris : Laurens. 9 f .
ZEiiLER (B.) Le r^gne des mignons, le
due d*Alen(?on, et les Pays-Bas [1578-
1587] : extraits des m^moires de TEs-
toile, de THistoire d'Aubigne, des
m^moires de Marguerite de Valois, des
lettres missives de Henri IV, des Econo-
mies royales, &c. Illustr. Paris :
Hachette. 16mo. 50 c.
Les trois Henri, le Valois, le
Lorrain, le B^amais [1587-1689]. Ex-
traits des m^moires de TEstoile, des
lettres missives de Henri IV, etc.
Illustr. Paris : Hachette. 16mo. 60 c.
3 o 2
Digitized by
Qoo^^
820 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED Oct.
IX. GERMAN HISTORY
(Inolading Austria)
Bach (T.) Denknisse and Erinnertingen
aus der Zeit der Erhebang Preussens,
aus T. G. yon Hippels handsohrift-
lichem Nachlasse mitgeteilt. Pp. 24.
Berlin : Gaertner. 4to. 1 m.
Brandbnbubo. — Urknnden and Akten-
stiioke zar Gesohiohte des Earfiirsien
Friedrioh Wilhelm von Brandenborg.
XI. (Politische Verhandlungen, VII,
edited by F. Hirsoh.) Pp. 789. Berlin :
Beimer. 15 m.
Bbock (J.) Die Entstehang des Fehde-
rechtes im deatsohen Beiohe des Mittel-
alters. Pp. 35. Berlin : Gaertner.
4to. 1-60 m.
BRmmEB (H.) Deatsohe Bechtsgesohichte
(Systematisches Handbaoh der deat-
sohen Bechtswissenschaft). Zweite
Abtheilang. 1,1. Pp.412. Leipzig:
Dancker & Hamblot. 9*60 m.
DoLi^czEK (A.) Geschichte der dster-
reichischen Artillerie von den friihesten
Zeiten bis zur Gegenwart. 2 vol. Pp.
734« portraits. Vienna : Seidel.
Dresemann (0.) Die Jaden in Aachen;
historische Uebersicht. Pp. 24. Aix-
Ia-Chapell6 : Jaoobi. 50 pf.
Friedensbdbo (W.) Der Beichstag za
Speier [1526] im Zasammenhang der
politischen and kirchlichen Entwiok-
lang Deatsohlands im Beformations-
zeitalter. (Jastrow's Historische
Untersachangen, V.) Pp. 602. Ber-
lin : Gaertner. 15 m.
Giesebrbcht (W. von). Gedaohtnissrede
aaf Leopold von Banke. Pp. 32.
Manich : Franz. 4to. 1 m.
Hameln, Urkandenbach des Stiftes and
der Stadt, bis zam Jahr 1407 ; mit
einer gescbichtlichen Einleitang von
O. Meinardas. (Qaellen and Darstel-
lungen zar Geschichte Niedersachsens,
II.) Pp. Ixxxviii, 759, plates. Hanover:
Hahn. 16 m.
HoFFMEisTBB fW.) Das Kdulgtam im
altgermaniscnen Staatsleben. Pp. 22.
Leipzig : Fock. 4to. 75 pf.
Enoke (F.) Die Eriegsziige des Ger-
manicas in Deatschland. Pp. 566, maps.
Berlin : Gaertner. 15 m.
Lehmqbubnbb (H.) Benzo von Alba, ein
Verfechter der kaiserlichen Staatsidee
anter Heinrich IV : sein Leben and der
sogenannte * Panegyrikas.' (Jastrow's
Historische Untersachangen, VI.) Pp.
156. Berlin : Gtiertner. 4 m.
Lenz (M.), BriefwechselLandgraf Philipp*8
des Grossmiithigen von Hessen mit
Bacer, edited by. II (Pablikationen
aas den koniglich preassischen Staats-
archiven, XXVIII.) Pp. 506. Leipzig :
Hirzel. 14 m.
LuscHiN VON Ebenoreuth (A.) Qaellen
zar Geschichte deatscher Bechtshdrer
in Italien. I : in Italienischen Arohiven
and Sanmilangen. Pp. 50. Vieni^a:
Gerold.
MoNUHBNTA GermanicB historica inde ab
anno Christi D asqae ad annam MD,
edidit Societas aperiendis fontibas re-
ram germanicarom medii sbvL Sori-
ptoram tomi XV pars 1. Pp. 574, plate.
Hanover : Hahn. Fol. 28 m.
Muller (J. P.) Die Mennoniten in
Ostfriesiand vom sechzehnten bis zom
achtzehnten Jahrhandert; Aktenmss-
sige kaltargeschichtliche Darstellong.
I. Pp. 231. Emden : HayneL 4 m.
Nassau. — Codex diplomaticus Nassoieos.
Nassaaisches Urkandenbach. Edited
by E. Menzel and W. Saaer. I, 3 : Die
Urkanden des ehemals karmainzischen
Gebiets, einschliesslich der Herr-
schaften Eppenstein, EOnigstein, and
Falkenstein ; der Niedergraf schaft Eat-
zenelenbogen and des karpfalziscben
Amts Gaab. Ed. by W. Saaer. Pp. 40a
Wiesbaden : Niedner. 22 m.
Neuboubg (H.) Die Oertlichkeit der
Varasschlacht, mit einem vollstandigen
Verzeichnisse der im Fiirstenthom
Lippe gefandenen rdmischen Monzen.
Pp. 70. Detmold : Meyer. 1*20 m.
Porta (W. de). Die Devisen and Motto der
Habsburger. Pp. 70. Vienna : Hdlder.
BiCHTER (G.) Annalen der deatsohen
Geschichte im Mittelalter, von der
Griindang des franldschen Beichs bis
. zam Untergang der Hohenstaafen,
mit darchgangigen kritischen Erlaute-
rangen aas den Qaellen and Litterator-
angaben. U : Annalen des franldschen
Beichs im Zeitalter der Earolinger.
2: Von der Thronbesteigang Ladwigs
des Frommen bis zam Tode Ladwigs
des Eindes; Eonrad [I] von Franken.
By H. Eohl. Halle: Bachhandlang
des Waisenhaases. 10 m.
ScHEiD (E.) Histoire des jaifs d*Alsace.
Pp. 424. Paris : Darlacher. 18mo. 6 fr.
Schneider (J.) Die alten Heer- and
Handelswe^e der Germanen, B5mer, and
Franken im deatsohen Beiche. Nach
drtliohen Untersachimgen daiigestellt
V. Pp. 23, map. Leipzig : Weigel. 5 m.
SoHBODER (B.) Lehrbach der deatsohen
Bechtsgeschichte. I. Pp. 256, maps.
Leipzig : Veit. 16 m.
Seipoldt (E.) Die Begentsohaft der
Eaiserin Agnes von Poitiers. Pp. 28.
Berlin : Gaertner. 4to. 1 m.
Tiefvenbach (B.) Die Streitfrage zwi-
schen Ednig Heinrich IV and den
Saohsen. Pp. 36. Ednigsberg: Eoch
& Beimer. 4to. 1 m.
Trautenberoeb (G.) Earzgefasste Ge-
schichte der evangelischen Eirohe in
Oesterreich. 2nd ed. Pp. 108. Vienna :
Elagenfart. 160 m.
Wekck (W.) Deatschland vor handert
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED 821
Jahren : Politisohe Meinongen and
Stimmungen bei Anbruoh der Bevoln-
tionszeit. Pp. 276. Leipzig : Granow.
5 m.
Wyneken (W.) Die Landfrieden in
Deutschland von Rudolf von Habsburg
bis Heinrioh VII. Pp. 102. Hanover :
Gmse. 1 m.
X. HISTORY OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND
Abbey (C. J.) <fe Ovebton (J. H.) The
English church in the eighteenth
century. New ed., revised and abridged.
Pp. 480. London: Longmans. 7/6.
Ashley (W. J.) Edward III and his
wars [1327-1360]. Extracts from the
chronicles of Froissart, Jehan le Bel,
Knighton, Adam of Murimuth, state
papers, and other contemporary records,
^nghsh History by Contemporary
Writers.) London: Nutt. 18mo. 1/.
Cantuarienses, LitersB : The letter books
of the monastery of Christ Church,
Canterbury. Edited by J. B. Sheppard.
I. Pp. zciii, 528. London : Publiished
under the direction of the master of the
roUs. 10/.
Chalmers (George). Caledonia; or, a
historical and topographical account of
North Britain, from the most ancient
to the present times ; with a dictionary
of places. New ed. I. Pp. 440, maps.
Paisley: (Gardner. 4to. 25/.
Ghables I. — Calendar of state papers.
Domestic series. XVIH : [1641-1648].
Edited by W. D. Hamilton. London:
Published under the direction of the
master of the rolls. 15/.
Cornwall, Visitations of; comprising the
heralds' visitations of 1530, 1573, and
1620. With additions by lieutenant-
colonel J. L. Vivian. Pp. 672. Exeter :
Pollard. 4to. 84/.
Daly (J. B.) Ireland in the days of dean
Swift. (Irish Tracts, 1720 to 1734.)
Pp. 280. London : Chapman & Hall. 5/.
Du Boys (A.) L*6glise et T^tat en Angle-
terre depuis la conqudte des Normands
jusqu'4 nos jours. Pp. 415. Paris:
Delhomme & Briguet. 18mo. 3*50 f.
Fbboubon (J.) Robert Ferguson the
plotter ; or the secret of the Rye -house
conspiracy and the story of a strange
career. Pp. 494. Edinburgh : Douglas.
15/.
Galton (A.) The character and times of
Thomas Cromwell : a criticism of the
first ten years of the English Reforma-
tion. Birmingham : Cornish. 7/6.
GifBisT (R.) The student's history of the
English parliament in its transforma-
tions through a thousand years : a
popular account of the growth and
development of the English constitu-
tion from 800 to 1887. New English
ed., rewritten, with a complete index,
by A. H. Eeane. Pp. 462. London:
Grevel. 9'.
Haldane (R. B.) Life of Adam Smith.
(Great Writers.) Pp. 162. London:
W. Scott. 12mo. 1/.
Henry VIH. — Calendar of letters and
papers, domestic and foreign. X:[1536].
Edited byJ. Gairdner. London: Pub-
lished under the direction of the master
of the roUs. 15/.
Herbert (Jane E.) A short history of
Ireland [400-1829]. Pp.158. Dublin:
Herbert. 3/6.
Historical Mamuscripts Commission.
Eleventh report. Appendix. I: Manu-
scripts of H. D. Skrine. U : Manuscripts
of Uie house of lords. London : H.M.
Stationery Office. 2/ A 1/1.
HoENio (F.) Oliver Cromwell. I [1599-
1642]. Pp. 224. Berlin : Luokhardt.
6 m.
HuTTON (W. H.) The misrule of Henry
O; extracts from the writings of
Matthew Paris, Robert Grosseteste,
Adam March, <ftc (English History
by Contemporary Writers.) Pp. 156.
London: Nutt. 18mo. 1/.
Lbfevre (G. S.) Peel and O'Connell : a
review of the Irish policy of parliament
from the act of union to the death of sir
Robert Peel. Pp. 354. London : Paul,
Trench, & Co. 10/6.
London marriage licences. [1521-1869].
Edited by J. Foster, from excerpts by
the late colonel Chester. With memoir'
and portrait. Pp. 831. London :
Quaritch. 63/.
Manchester, A genuine account of the
siege of [Sept. and Oct. 1642], by
an eye-witness. Pp.19. Manchester:
Hey wood. 8d.
Montagu (Lady Mary Wortley). Letters
and works. Edited by her great-
grandson. Lord Whamcliffe, with
additions, (fee., and a memoir by W.
Moy Thomas. New ed., revised. 2
vol. London : Bell <& Sons. 10.
Morris (M.) Claverhouse. (English
Worthies.) Pp. 222. London : Long-
mans. 2/6.
Norwich, The Walloon church of; its
registers and history, edited by W. J.
C. Moens. (Publications of the
Huguenot Society of London, I, 1.)
Pp. 252. Lymington : Printed for the
Society. 4to.
OoDEN (J.) Manchester a hundred years
ago : being a reprint of a description of
Manchester by a native of the town,
published in 1788. Edited, with an
introduction, by W. E. A. Axon. Pp.
94. London: Heywood. 12mo. 6d.
Prendbroast (J. P.) Ireland from the
restoration to the revolution [1660-
1690]. Pp. 226. London : Longmans.
6/.
Digitized by
Qoo^^
822 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED Oct.
Ransoms (G.) A short history of England
from the earliest times to the present
day. Pp. 806, maps. London :
Bivingtons. 12mo. 3/6.
BoBEBT of Gloucester, The metrical
chronicle of. Edited by W. Aldis Wright.
2 parts. Pp. xlviii, 1018. London :
Published under the direction of the
master of the rolls. 20/.
St. Cjjjb. (W. J.) Jonn Laird Main
Lawrence, viceroy of India. Pp. 266.
London : Hamilton. 6/.
Saintsbuby (G.) Manchester: a short
history. Maps. London: Longmans.
3/6.
Scotland. — Botuli scaccarii regum
Scotorum ; exchequer roUs of Scot-
land. X [1488-1496]. London : H.M.
Stationery Office. 10/.
View of the political state of Soot-
land in the last century : a confidential
report on the political opinions, family
connections, or personal circumstances
of the 2662 county voters in 1788.
Edited, with an introductory account of
the law relating to county elections,
by sir G. E. Adams. Pp. 384. Edin-
burgh : Douglas. 5/.
Stephen, Henry U, and Bichard I,
Ghronicles of the reigns of. Edited hj
B. Hewlett, m. London : Published
under the direction of the master of the
rolls. 10/.
Stephen (L.) Dictionary of national
biography. XII : Conder — Craigk,
London : Smith & Elder. 12/6.
Stibuno, Extracts from the records of the
royal burgh of [1519-1666] ; with
appendix [1295.1666]. Glasgow :
Printed for the Glasgow Stirlingshire
Society.
Thobnton (P. M.) The Brunswick acces-
sion. Pp. 248. London : Bidgeway. 6/.
Venn (J. <fe 8. G.) Admissions to Gonville
and Gaius college in the university of
Gambridge. [March 1558-9 to Jan.
1678-9]. Gambridge: University Press.
10/.
XI. ITALIAN HISTORY
Aobioentum. — Studt e document! relativi
alle antichit^ agrigentine. I. Pp. 60,
illustr. Palermo: tip. dello Statute.
4to. 4 1.
Axt (professor). Zur Topographic von
Bhegion und Messana. Pp. 36.
Grimma : Gensel. 4to. 1 m.
Gali (A.) Taormina a traverse i tempi.
Pp. 216, plates. Gatania: Giannotta.
16mo. 2*50 1.
Galisse (G.) Storia del parlamento in
Sicilia dalla fondazione alia caduta
della monarchia. Pp. 372. Turin:
Unione tipografico-editrice. 8 1.
Ganalb (M. G.) Della spedizione in
Oriente di Amedeo YI di Savoja, detto
il conte Yerde, e suo trattato di pace,
come arbitro, conchiuso tra veneziani
e genovesi add! 8 agosto 1381 in Torino
dopo la guerra di Ghioggia. Pp. 47.
Genoa: Giminago.
Gecconi (G.) La genesi deU* Italia. Pp.
296. Florence : Barbara. 16mo. 2*50 1.
Glabetta (G.) I Genovesi alia corte di
Boma negli anni luttuosi delle loro con-
troversie con Luigi XIY [1678-1685] :
nota storica ed aneddotica. Pp. 26.
Genoa : tip. dell' Institute Sordomuti.
(From the * Giomale ligustico,* January
and February 1887.)
Gomba (E.) Histoire des Yaudois d'ltalie,
depuis leurs origines jusqu'd nos jours.
I : Avant la r6forme. Pp. 378. Paris :
Fischbacher. 6*50 f.
GusuMANO (Y.) Storia dei banchi della
Sicilia: I banchi privati. Pp. 315.
Bome : Loescher. 5 1.
DoLFiN (A.) Belazione al doge, letta il
21 maggio 1625. — Belazione del capi-
tano Gerolamo Dolfin, letta il 28
novembre 1645. Pp. 31. Padua:
Prosperini.
FiLiPPi (G.) II oomune di Firenze ed il
ritorno della Santa Sede in Boma nell*
anno 1367. Pp. 42. Turin : Paravia.
(From the * Miscellanea di storia
italiana,' 2nd series, XI.)
Gbaf (F.) Die Griindung Alessandrias;
ein Beitrag zur Geschlchte des Lorn-
bardenbundes. Pp. 57. Leipzig:
Fock. 20 m.
Lozzi (G.) Biblioteca storica dell* antica
e nuova Italia: saggio di bibliografia
analitico comparato e critico, compilato
Bulla propria collezione, con un discono
proemiale. 11. Pp. 503. Imola: tip.
Galeati.
LuNoo (I. del). Dino Gompagni e la sua
Gronica. in : contenente gli indiei
storico e filologico a tutta Toperaeil
testo della Gronica, secondo il codice
Laurenziano Ashbumhamiano. Pp.
219. Florence : Le Monnier. 7*50 L
Pascal (G.) Machiavelli presso il duoa
Yalentino : appunti. Pp. 26. Naples :
tip. della University. 1 1.
Ouvi (L.) Delle nozze di Ercole I d'Este
con Eleonora d*Aragona. Pp. 5^
Modena : tip. della Society tipografiea.
^rom the * Memorie della B. Academia
di Scienza, Lettere, ed Arti di Modena,*
Sezione di lettere. Serie IL Y.)
PooLiANA (M.) Belazione e disoorso
all* illustrissimo signore Girolamo
Mocenigo, capitano di Yicenza, intorno
ai siti, confini, e passi delle montagne
vicentine e del modo della loro sicuiezza
e difesa [1615]. Pp. 12. Bassano:
Boberti.
Battazzi (Madame de). Battazzi et son
temps : Documents InMits ; oor-
respondance: souvenirs intimes. II>
Paris : Dentu. 8 f.
Bioci (G.) — I primordl dello studio bolo-
Digitized by
Google
1887 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED 828
nota storioa. Pp. loa Bo-
logna : tip. Monti.
Ck>BBNTiNO (G.) Le infanti Margherita e
Beatrice, sorella e figliaola del re Pietro
n. Pp. 20. Pfdermo: tip. dello
Statuto. (From the * Arohivio Storico
Siciliano,* N.S., XI, 3.)
Salomone-Mabino (B,) Spigolature sto-
riche siciliane dal seoolo XIY al secolo
XIX. Pp. 316. Palermo: LaurieL
61.
SnuouBA (G. B.) n regno di Gnglielmo I
in Sioiiia, illnstrato con nnoyi docu-
menti. 11. Pp. Ixyi, 164. Palermo :
tip. dello Statnto. 8*50 1.
TiiiUBB (I. B. de). Historique de la
valine d'Aoste : histoire gdn^rale. Pp.
142. Aosta : L. Mensio.
ViLLBNEuvB (L. do). Beoherohes sur la
famille della Bovere : contribution poor
Bervir k I'histoire dn pape Jules H.
Pp. 71. Borne : Befani.
Xn. HISTORY OF THE NETHERLANDS
Babtblaeb (A. van). CJoUeotion des aotes
de francnises et privileges, octrois,
ordonnances, r^lements, etc., donnas
spScialement k la ville de Charleroi,
par ses sonverains, depais sa f ondation.
YII : B^publique et Empire. Pp. 286.
Mons : Manceauz. 5 f .
Belgium. — Biographic nationale pnbli6e
par rAcad6mie royale de Belgique.
IX, 2 : HeuschUng^Huerter. Pp. 160.
Brussels : Braylant-Ghristophe. 3 f.
OouGNT (Louise de, princesse d'Orange),
Correspondance de [1555-1620], re-
cneillie par P. Marchegay. Pnbli^e avec
introduction biographiqne et notes par
L. Marlet. Paris : Picard. 10 f.
Jameson (J. F.) William Usselinx,
founder of the Dutch and Swedish
West India companies. Pp. 234. New
York.
Matthteu (E.) La connaissance par les
Etats de Hainaut de Gharles le T6m6-
raire comme h6ritier du comt^ en
1465. Pp. 20. Brussels : Hayez. 1 f.
(From * Bulletins de la Commission
royale d'histoire de Belgique,* 4th
series, Xm, 3.)
Mtteuen (J. C. van der). De registers der
graven in de Eloosterkerk te's Graven-
nage. Pp. 151, plates. The Hague:
Genealogisch-heraldische Archief. 4to.
8fi.
NooBDZiEK (J. J. F.) Geschiedenis der
beraadslagingen, gevoerd in de Eamers
der Staten-Generaal. Zittingjaar 1828-
1829. 4 pts. The Hague : Nijhoff. 8 fl.
Thbal (G. McC.) History of the Boers
in South Africa; or. The wanderings
and wars of the emigrant farmers,
from their leaving the Gape Colony
to the acknowled^ent of tiieir inde-
pendence by Great Britain. Pp. 414,
maps. London: Sonnenschein. 15/.
Vamdeb Haeohen (Y.) Inventaire des
archives de la viUe de Gand. I.
Ghent : Annoot-Braeckman. 2*50 f.
xm. SLAVONIAN AND LITHUANIAN HISTORY
(Together with Boumania)
Dalton (H.) Yerfassungsgeschichte der
evangelisch-lutherischen Eirche in
Kussland. I. Pp. 344. Gotha :
Perthes. 6 m.
FouBNiBR (A.) Handel und Yerkehr in
Ungam und Polen um die Mitte des
achtzehnten Jahrhunderts ; ein Beitrag
zur Geschichte der Osterreichischen
Commerzialpolitik. Pp. 165. Yienna:
Gerold.
HUBMT7ZAKI (E., Frcihcrr von). Fragmente
zur Geschichte der Bumanen. lY, Y.
Pp. 395, 473. Bucharest : Sotschek.
Jackson (T. G.) Dalmatia, the Quamero,
and Istria, with Cettigne in Monte-
negro, and the island of Grado. 3 vol.
illustr. Oxford : Clarendon Press.
42/.
Keussleb (J. von). Zur Geschichte und
Eritik des bauerlichen Gemeinde-
besitzes in Bussland. III. Pp. 374.
St. Petersburg : Bicker.
Klaus (A.) Unsere Eolonien : Studien
und Materialien zur Geschichte und
Statistik der auslandischen Eolonisa-
tion in Bussland, aus dem Bussischen
ubersetzt von J. Tdws. Pp. 336, 163.
Odessa: Stadelmeyer.
EupEZANKo (G.) Die Schicksale der
Buthenen. Pp. 195. Leipzig: Fried-
rich. 4 m.
PnsRLiNo (le P.) Bathory et Possevino.
Documents in^dits sur les rapports du
Saint-Si^e avec les Slaves. Pp. 263.
Paris: Lerouz. 10 f.
Poland. — Acta historica res gestas PoloniiB
illustrantia. Editio coUegii historici
academic literarum Cracoviensis. X :
Lauda conventuum particularium terns
Dobrinensis. Pp. 466. Cracow : Fried-
lein.
Ynatchali6 Ehristianstva v Polvchi6
(Du commencement du christianisme
en Pologne). Pp. 53. Kiev: Eortchak-
Novitskago.
Sattleb (C.) Handelsrechnungen des
deutschen Ordens. Pp. xlvi, 629.
Leipzig : Duncker & Humblot. 12 m.
(Publication des Yereins fflr die Ge-
schichte von Ost- und Westpreussen.)
SiLESLS, Codex diplomaticus. XH :
Schlesiens Miinzgeschichte im Mittel-
Digitized by
Google
824 HISTORICAL BOOKS RECENTLY PUBLISHED Oct.
alter. I: Urkondenbaoh and MfLnz-
tafeln. Edited by F. Friedeneburg.
Pp. 112. Breslan : Max. 4to. 4 m.
VBBAMid (K.) Geschiohte der Booohe di
Cattaro mit besonderer Beraoksiohti-
gong der beiden Insurreotions-Eriege
in den Jahren 1869 nnd 1881-1883.
Pp. 136. Agram: Hartman.
Woi<kan(B.) Beitrage zu einer Geschiohte
der Beformation in Bdhmen. I : Das
Dekanat Aossig. Pp. 81. Prague :
Calve.
XIV. HISTORY OF SPAIN AND PORTUGAL
(Including South Ambbica and Mexico)
Balagueb (Y.) Historia de Cataluna. X.
Pp. 520. Madrid: Telle. 4to. 11
pes.
BiABos DB Abana (D.) Historia general
de Chile. YI. Pp. 482. Santiago :
Jover. 4to. 16 pes.
BoNoi (S.) II principe Don Carlo e la
regina Isabella di Spagna, secondo i
docomenti di Lucca. Pp. 107. Luooa :
GiustL (From the ' Atti deUa B. Aoa-
demia luoohese di Scienze, Lettere, ed
Arti.')
Cola t Gom (J.) L*6migration vasoo-
navarraise. Transl. by A. Plants. Pp.
157. Pau: Lalheugue. 16mo.
Coleoci6n de documentos in^tos para
la historia de Espana por el marqu6s
de la Fuensanta del YaUe, J. S. Bay6n,
y F. Zabalburu. LXXXVni: Esioria
de los Godos del arzobispo D. Bodrigo ;
Yida del serenisimo principe D. Juan n
rey de Arag6n, que compuso Gonzalo
Garcia de Santa Maria ; Belaci6n his-
t6rica del serenisimo senor principe
D. Carlos de Yiana, por el padre Jos^
Queralt y Huet, &o. Pp. 528. Madrid :
Ginesta. 13 pes.
loAZBALCETA (J. G.) Nucva coleoci6n de
documentos para la historia de M^jioo.
I : Cartas de religiosos de Nueva-
Espana [1589-1594]. Pp. xxxix, 198.
Madrid : S&nchez. 4to. 11 pes.
Medina (J. T.) Historia del tribunal del
santo oficio de la inqui8ici6n de Lima
[1669-1820]. I. Pp. 351. Madrid:
Murillo. 4to. 16 pes.
XV. SWISS HISTORY
Dbschwakdbn (J.), Die eidgendssischen
Abschiede [1549-1555], edited by.
(Kaiser's Amtliche Sammlung der al-
tem eidgendssischen Abschiede, lY, 1.)
Pp. 1545. Basle: Schneider. 4to.
HoTTiNOEB (J. J.) Yorlesungen iiber die
Geschiohte des Untergangs der schwei-
zerischen Eidgenossensohaft der drei-
zehn Orte und die Umbildung derselben
in eine helvetische Bepublik. Pp. 416.
Zilrioh : H6hr. 6 f .
Kaiseb (J.) Bepertorium der Abschiede
der eidgendssischen Tagsatzungen
[1803- 1813]. (Kaiser's Amtliche Samm-
lung der neuem eidgendssischen Ab-
schiede, I.) 2nd ed. Pp. 844. Baale :
Schneider. 4to.
Bambau (B.) Le Yalais historique ; Cha-
teaux et seigneuries ; avec une preface
de J. Gremaud. Pp. 126. Sion :
GalerinL 4to. 3 f .
XVI. HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
AUiiMBON (E. p.) a Penrose (B.) Phila-
delphia [1681-1887] : a history of
municipal development. Pp. li, 392.
Baltimore: Murray.
BouBiNOT (J. G.) Local government in
Canada: an historical study. (Johns
Hopkins University Studies in Histo-
riciJ and Political Science, 5th ser.
Y, YI.) Pp. 72. Baltimore: Murray.
50 c.
Dexteb (F. B.) Sketch of the history of
Yale university. Pp. 108. New York :
Holt. 16mo. gV26.
Gbasset (£.) La guerre de secession
[1861-1865J. n. Pp. 386. Paris:
Baudoin. 18mo. 4 f.
Jameson (J. A.) A treatise on constitu-
tional conventions ; their history,
powers, and modes of proceeding. Pp.
684. Chicago: Callaghan. ^5*25.
Johnston (A.) Connecticut: a study of
a commonwealth-democracy. Pp. 409
map. Boston. 16mo.
Long (A. L.) Memoirs of Bobert E. Lee ;
his military history and campaigns,
<fec. Pp. 707, illustr. New York.
Poole (W. F.) Anti-slavery before 1800 ;
an essay. Pp. 82, 20. Cincinnati:
Clarke. 75 c.
ScHABv (J. T.) History of the Confede-
rate States navy, from its organisation
to the surrender of its last vessel.
Pp. 824, illustr. New York.
ScHURz (C.) Henry Clay. (* American
Statesmen.') 2 vol. Boston: Hough-
ton, Mifflm, A Co. 16mo. ^'60.
Shea (J. G.) The catholic church in
colonial days: The thirteen colonies;
the Ottawa and Illinois country,
Louisiana, Florida, Texas, New Mexico,
and Arizona [1521-1763]. Portrait
and maps. New York.
Digitized by
Google
1887
825
Contents of Periodical Publications
I. FRANCE
BeTue Historique, zxziy. 2.— July —
M. Philippson : Studies in the history
of Mary Sttuurt; the casket Utters
[argaing their entire sporiousness from
the nmnerous discrepancies and con-
tradictions in the statements made
about their character and contents].
A. LncHAnm gives an account of
an unpublished late transcript [Bibl.
Nat., Lat. 5949 a] of a lost chronicle
of France^ composed not earlier than
the middle of the fourteenth century,
apparently by a monk of Saint-Denis.
B. DB Mauldb : Serfage in Sologne
[in the Orl^annais] in the fifteenth
century. A. Baueb : Survey of works
on Greek /itfitor^ published in Q«rmany
and Austria [1884-1885]. E. Maecks :
KervyndeLettenhove's *Les Htiguenots
et les Queux' [decided to be * un travail
pr^paratoire pour une veritable histoire
de cette 6poque, travail dont mal-
heureusement toutes les parties devront
dtre soumises k un nouvel ezamen
attentif, et, je le crains, k une refonte
complete ']. £. Boxjboeois : Lowvois
a/nd Colbert de Croissy^ and the esta-
bUshment of the * charnhres de ronton '
[arguing, chiefly from Spanheim*8
*Belation,' that the idea was Croissy's].
Bevue des Questioni Historiques, zU. 8.
JtUy — Ck)mte A. db Gibcourt : Louis
of Orlians [a minute study of his early
career and of the contest with Bur-
gundy down to 1391] Comte db la
Ferrij&rb: La troisiime guerre civile
et Ic^ paix de SavnUQermain [1568-
1570] Comte £. de Babth£Lbicy:
The trial of Charlotte-Catherine de la
Tremoille^ princesse de Condi [1588],
Bibliotheque de rEcole des Chartes, zlviii.
1-8. — J. Havet: Questions m^rovin-
giennes, IV: The charters of Sadnt-
Calais in Maine [rejecting a large
number of them as spurious, and ex-
plaining the reason of their forgery in
the middle of the ninth century. The
writer has made use of an unpublished
transcript of the lost chartulary of the
abbey, which he prints in extenso in an
appendix. Some of the documents
have been hitherto unknown] J.
GuiFFREY prints an inventory of the
* tapisseria ' of Charles VI^ sold by the
English in 1422 P. Guilhiebmoz:
On Saint Louis^^ ordinances with
respect to the wager of battle and civil
procedure, L. Deliblb: On ddplo-
matic distinctions in papal letters of
the thirteenth century. Account of
a charter of Bobert Curthose [1106]
lately presented to the town of Bayeux.
C. V. Lanolois : Rouleaux d'arrits
de la cour du rai au treizi&me sOcle
[relating to Carcassonne]. A. lb
Yavassbur continues from the previous
volume his criticism of the historiccU
value of Ouillaume QrueVs * Chronicle
of Arthur of Richemont^ constable of
France and Duke ofBritanny ' [dealing
with the years 1434-1458]. A.
MoLiNiEB argues from a notice in the
Paris manuscript, Lat. 12710, that the
earlier part of the ' Historia Ludovici
VII' [down to 1152] was written by
the abbot Suger,
Bevne d'Hiitoire Diplomatiqiie, i. 2.
A. Fbamok: The part of war in the
formation of nations and of society in
general. D. Bikelas: The formation
of the Greek state and its frontiers
[1840-1881] E. BoTT : PhiUp III
and the duke of Lerma. Comte de
Babbal: Two marriages of the house
of Braganea [the marriage of Pedro I
of Bra^ and the Princess Amelia of
Leuchtenberg, 1829, and that of Isabella,
daughter of Pedro II, and the Count of
Eu, 1864]. T. Funok-Brentano : Di-
plomacy and political economy [holding
that political economy springs rather
from the diplomacy of the sixteenth
than from the philosophy of the eigh-
teenth century, and supporting the view
by an analysis of Montchr^tien's * Traits
d'Economie politique,' 1615] .^ Baron
Kervym de Lettenhove: Talleyrand
[extracts from Talleyrand's letters to
the duchess of Courland and her
daughter, January-May 1814] A.
von Sohlossbebobb : The king of
WUrtemberg in 1813-1814 [contains
two important letters from King Frede-
rick to Napoleon, one describing the
losses of the Wiirtemberg contingent
in the Bussian campaign, the other
announcing his secession from the
French alhance, 14 Oct. 1813; also
letters to his daughter Catherine, wife
of Jerome Bonaparte]. C. Sohefeb
Digitized by
Google
826 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS Oct.
prints a memoir on the state of the court
of Brandenburg in 1694, by M. de la
RosUrey first part Comte dk Mas
Latbie : Letters of the Princess Char-
lotte de Rohan to the king of Sweden
after the death of the duke of Enghien
[1804]. R. DE Maulde : Secret report
to cardinal du Bellay on the state of
Siena in 1646. L. Thuasne : Ojjicial
account of the submission and absolu-
tion of the Florentines in 1480, drawn
up by cardinal Bodrigo Borgia, yioe-
ohanoellor of the Saored College.^=
8. — R. Lavoll^ : International umons
[tracing the development of interna-
tional unions from the conventions for
the suppression of the slave trade to
the telegraphic, postal, and monetary
unions of recent years ; their rapid
multiplication forming one of the most
encouraging signs of progress in the
nineteenth century], E. Rott :
Philip III and the duke of Lerma
[conclusion]. Baron A. de Rxtble:
The treaty of Cateau-Canibrisis
Report on the state of the court of
Brandenburg in 1694, concluded [witn
an account of the court of Hanover,
pp. 417-423]. Baron Eebvtn db
Lettemhove: The candidature of the
duke of Leuchtenberg to the throne of
Belgium [1831] Comte £. db Bab-
THKLEMY : A despatch from the baron
de Breteuil describing a supper given
by Peter III of Russia^ 1762 [curious].
J. Yaesen : The right of occupa-
tion of a country without a lord [on
Louis XI and his occupation of Per-
pignan, 1462]. M. Jambtel : An in-
scription commemorating the murder of
two Chinese ambassadors in Thibet
[1752]. A. Leval prints a letter of
Joawnikios 11^ patriarch of Constanti-
nople, in favour of a French capuchin
[1653]. Ck)mte de Mas Latbie : A
fourth letter of the princess de Rohan
on the murder of the duke of Enghien.
Bulletin de la Socle te de rHistoire du
Protestantifme Fran^aii, xzzvi 4-7.
April- July — E. Picot : Les moraUtis
poUmiques ou la controverse religieuse
dans Vancien thMtre frangais [15th
and 16th centuries], three articles.
A. J. Ensoh^e : Documents on
the refugees in Holland [1688] con-
tinued. G. Read prints papers con-
cerning hugtienot and foreign burials in
Paris in the eighteenth century, three
articles, concluded. N. Weiss : List
of protestants in the viscounty of Cou-
tances [1588] The Same: Etienne
Lecourt, burnt at Rouen [1533].— J.
BiANQUis : Account of the state of the
protestants in Rouen, with extracts
from documents [1783-1791].
Comptes Benduf de rAcademie dei Ini-
cxiptioiLB et Belles-Lettret. — December
1886 — H. d'Abbois de Jubaimvillb :
Une vieille itymologie du nom de Lyon.
A. LuoHAiBB : Sur deux mono-
grammes inSdits de Louis le Oros,
La Controverte et le Contemporain.—
May, July — Mgr. Ricabd : Uabhi
Maury et Mirdeau, continued.==
August — Lajxtdib : 3f . Emery et Viglise
de France sous la revolution et Vem-
pire,
Le Oorrespondant. — May 10, 25 — Matol
DB LupI : Un pape prisonnier (Rome,
Savone), two articles, ooncluded.==
June 10— P. Thubeau-Danoih : La
politique fran^aise en Italie ctu lende-
main de la Revolution de juiUet^=^
July lO^August 10— H. Fobnebob : Les
emigris et la sociiU fran^ise sous le
rigne de NapolAm J, tiiree articles.
Houvelle Bevue.— May 1, August 1— J.
Zblleb: Rodolphe de Habsbourg, em-
per&ur allemand et fondateur de la
maison d'Autriche, continued.
Houy^e Bevue historique du Droit.-
March— Z. Tabdif : La date et le
carckctere de Vordonnance de Saint
Louis sur le duel judidaire R. db
Maulde : Les rachats de servage en
Savoie au XV* siecle.z=March^May
L. Bbauchet : La loi de Vestrogothie,
two articles.==Jlfay— H. d'Abbois di
JuBAiNVHiLE : Origine de la propriitd
fonciire en France, L. Stouff :
Etude sur la formation des oontrats
par V4criture dans le droit des formules
du V* au XII* si^le.
La Bevolution Fraufaiie. — May-June
— P. Gaffabel : L'opposition militaire
sous le consulate concluded.==JttfM —
E. Champion : La revolution et la
riforme de VEtat civile, F. A. Au-
LABD : Les agents secrets en 1793.
Beyue Critique d'Histoire et de Littera-
tuTe.-<7un« 20— S. Beinach : Penkd't
^Herkunft der Aryer* [rejecting his
main conclusions]. Roman inecrM-
tions [one from Algeria containing the
title * Tribunus et ordine lectus'].==
27 — H. d'Abbois de Jubainvillb :
Olasson*s * Gaule celtique,* ==^Ju!if
4— T. DE L.: Burrows's * Family of
Brocas ' [highly appreciative] .==lft—
G. GiiEBMONT-GANNEAU : Cosar and ike
Punic name for the el^hant [treat-
ing the connexion with ue^^ as a
• volksetymologie *]. Phcenician in-
scription discovered by Hamdy Bey.
s=Augustl — A.Chtjquet: Works on
the French in the east in the eighteenth
century, ■= September 6 -L. Faboks:
Hanotaux' * Etudes Historiques,*
Bevue Celtique. — January-April — H.
d*Abbois de Jubaimville: Recherches
sur Vorigine de la propri4t4 foncHre et
des noms de Ueu en France. H.
Gaidoz : La vie tripartite de saM
Patrice.
Bevue des Deux Xondes. — April 15-
June 1 — Due de Bboglib : La seconds
hitU de Frederic II et deMarie-Therese,
four articles.= Ifay 1— G. Boussbt:
La rupture du traite de la Tqfna et
le col de la Mouzaia (conquHe de
VAlgerie).==July 1— G. de Maiadb:
Un chanceUer d'ancien regime: M. d$
Digitized by
Google
1887 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS 827
Mettemich et la saints alliance. La
politique du chancelier d Carlsbad,
La giterre d^ Orient en 1828.
Bevue de Geographie. — May- June -
AuguAt—V. Gapfarel: La decouverte
du Canada par les Fran^ais^ continued.
==zMay—J. Colette : La question de
Dunkerque sous le ministire deMaearvn,
Eevne des Etudes Jmvet,— April — I.
LoEB : Le nomhre des juifs de Casiille
et d*Espagne au moyen Age, The
Same : Notes sur Vhistoire des juifs
en Espagne.
Bevne du Xonde Latin.— Jtfo^—M. Bons-
seau : Le comte d'Egrrumt et les Espa-
gnols en Flandre,
Bevue de la "BJtYolutioiL— May-July —
H. Tadce : La Provence en 1790 et
1791 [continued]. == June—'E. de
BEAUBBPAntE : La Normandie en 1792.
B. d'Aooubs: La Corse en 1800
G. DE K. : Correspondance d^un
espion corse avec Hudson Lowe [1807].
==zJuly - G. BoRD : M&moire sur la
Vendee; M&moire sur la defense de
Mayence et sur sa reddibion.
n. GERMANY AND AUSTRIA
Sybel's Historisehe Zeitsohrift, Iviii. 1.
Munich. — F. Kbdnbb: Bethlen Qabor^
prince of Transylvania [1580-1629].
E. WiNKELMANN : On the history of
the emperor Paul [with extracts from
contemporarj memoirs of an Esthonian
nobleman]. M. L. prints four re-
ports of Schamhorst [28 January-
22 November 1810] on the military
condition and policy of Pru88ia.=^
2.— G. VON Below: On the origin of
German town government^ I [maintain-
ing that the movement which brought
it into existence was one exclusively of
freemen, not of the unfree, nor of the
free and unfree together, and arguing
that neither towns nor guilds originated
in hofrecht]. H. von Stbel : Cownt
Brandenburg in Warsaw [1850, relat-
ing the negotiations between Prussia
and Austria in that year on the ques-
tion of the constitution] H. Bbuok-
NEB : Contributions to the history of
Catherine II [from recent Bussian
publications]. L. Weiland defends
the method of editing adopted in the
* Monumenta Qermanice Historica *
against 0. Lorenz's criticism. — Memo-
randum of Mettemich on the Oerman
confederation [10 Nov. 1856].
Historiiehes Jahrbuch der CHirreB-Oesell-
ichaft, yiii 8. Munich. — G. Huffeb :
The beginnings of the second crusade
[showing that it originated at the peti-
tion of the Christians of Syria, and
emphasising the share taken in its
promotion by Eugenius III] J. B.
Sbidenbeboeb : The conflict of the
Menie guilds with the spiritual power
and that of the great fcmiilies in the
fourteenth century. H. FnnoE : On
some of the materials for the history of
the council of Constcmce [studies in
detail]. H. V. Sauebland describes
a Bamberg missal of the beginning of
the eleventh ceniwry^ now at Treves
[with the kalendar and necrology].
G. Ebleb : A volume of the register of
sur^lications of Benedict iX, now at
Eichstatt.
Heues Arehiv der Oesellschaft f^x Altera
Deutsohe Oeschichtskande, xiii. 1.
Hanover. — 0. Holdeb-Eogeb : Oozwin
and Oozechinf scholastics of Mentz
cathedral in the latter part of the
eleventh century [identifying the two] ;
8S, Marinv>s and Annianus [examining
legendary accounts of them as pre-
served in Bavarian manuscripts] ; and
Adalbert of Egmond [the same with
abbot Adalbert of Echtemach, the
companion of S. Willibrord. L. von
Heinemann discovers in a manuscript
collection of extracts, made at Bruns-
wick and now preserved at Wolf enbiittel,
traces of a lost Saxon book of annals
reaching dovm to about 1164, and com-
piled probably in the diocese of Hal-
berstadtor at Brunswick itself. The
same writer argues in favour of the
existence of Hungarian annals^ now
lost, which were based upon Begino
and his continuator, and the * Annales
Altahenses,' and which furnished
materials to the Hungarian chroni-
clers of the thirteenth and fourteenth
centuries. P. Eehb prints the text
of the treaty of Anagwi [1176], long
desiderated and recently discovered in
a contemporary copy in the Vatican,
together with that of the treaty of
VenicCj to which it was preliminary
[with a detailed account of the nego-
tiations between Frederick I and Alex-
ander III] Widmann: TheEberbach
chronicle of the archbishops of Mentz
[printing a new text, with introduction].
M. Peblbach prints extracts from
a lost * Codex TVaditionum ' of the
Milnsterkirche of SS, Cassius and
Florentius at Bonn, L. von Heine-
mann gives an account of the Oerman
chronicle of Dietrich Engelhus^ pre-
served in manuscript at Wolfenbtittel.
£. DcuMLEB prints an admonitory
writing addressed to some Caroling ^ the
grandson of Charles [probably the
Bald]. M. Manitius explores the
literary connexion subsisting between
various Oerman historical writers from
the sixth to the eleventh century.
H. Bbesslau prints a diploma of
Henry V [20 June, 1107]. F. Liebeb-
MANN gives notes on the relations of
Frederick II with Ireland^ and prints
two letters of Richard of Cornwall
[1267] and an address to him from the
city of Borne B. Gebhabdt : On the
chronicle of Dietrich of Niem,
K. B. Akademie der Wissenachaften sn
Digitized by
Google
828 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS Oct.
XHnohen : Sitznngsberiohte der philos.-
philol. und hist. Giasse, 1887, 8. —
Ohlenschlaqeb : Roman inscripHons
in Bavaria. M. Lobsbn : The * Vin-
dicuB contra Tyrannos^ Stephano Jtmio
BrtUo auctore ' [arguing that Philippe
Da Plessis-Momay, and not Hubert
Languet, was the author] . ^W. von
GiESEBREOHT : Ohituo/ry notices of
Qeorg WaiU and Max Duncker,
Treitsohke ft Delbrflek*s PreuisUohe Jahr-
biioher, Iz. 2, 8. Berlin.— G. Bosslbb :
Ranke's * Weltgeschichte,' V-VIL
E. MuLiiEB : On the chronological divi-
sion between the ancient arid medieval
church [placing the crisis between the
end of the sixth and the middle of the
seventh century]. -- G. Dehio : On
the place of the history of art among
general historical studies A. v. d.
LiMDE : Calvin and the ' Institutio,*
Mittheilungen des Instituts fttr Oester-
reichische Geschichtsforschung, viii. 8.
Innsbruck.— P. Sohbffeb-Boichobst :
The controversy respecting the pragmatic
sanction of St Louis [giving a sum-
mary of the history of the case, and
arriving at the conclusion that the
document was forged for a special
purpose in 1438] The Same: On
Oertnan-Italian history [1120-1130,
with documents]. — The Same : Flo-
doard of Rheims and his indebtedness
to papal epitaphs, A. Kieol: An
Angevin prayer-book [of the fourteenth
century] in the Vienna Hofbibliothek
[with Italian miniatures] G. Paoli
prints documents for the history of
the guild of German cordwainers at
Florence. W. von Siokkl accepts
O. Kettner*s interpretaHon of Tacitus,
* Oerm.* xiii. [maJdng the passage as
far as * adgregantur * refer to the class
of 'principes,* and the following only
to the * comites ']. M. Manitius :
On the character of Cosmos of Prague,
Theologisohe Quartaltohrift, Izix. 2.
Tubingen. — F. X. Linsenmann : On the
worship of the Virgin and the saints in
the Christian church, concluded.
F. X. Funk: On the Didache and the
Apostolic CoTistitutions.
Zeitichrift fdr Katholische Theologie, xi.
8. Innsbruck. — H, Gbisab : The * Liber
PoTUiflcaUst^ attributed to Anastasius
the Librarian [following abb^ Duchesne
in dating the first stage of its composi-
tion in the time of Boniface H, before
582, and distinguishing the several
continuators].
HUgenfeld's Zeitsehrift ftir wiMenfohaft-
liche Theologie, xxx. 8. Leipzig. —
F. Gt)BBE8: Constantine^s murder of
his kinsfolk [taking the two cases of a.d.
810 and 314 and the period 323-326
separately, and attempting to estimate
the extent of the emperor's chaigeable-
ness in these executions, and the cir-
cumstances in which they were carried
out].
m. GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND
ArohflBological Journal, xliv. 1. — A.
Habtshobne : Blythhorough Church,
Suffolk G. W. Shbubsole : On the
age of the city walls of Chester [no part
certainly earlier than the seventeenth
century]. J. T. MiOKiiETHWAiTE on
the remains of an ankerhold at Bengeo
Church, Hertford W. M. F. Petbie :
The finding of Daphne [Tahpanhes],
G. EsDAiLE : On the Roman occu-
pation of Britain [dealing with Roman
camps.] J. G. L. SxAuiiSCHMiDT prints
an assessment of the city of London
[1412] for a grant of half a mark on
every twenty pounds of annual rent
[with full list of names].
Chorch Quarterly Beview. Ho. 48.^
July — A French diocesan [bishop
Dupanloup]. The church in Eng-
land from William III to Victoria
[review of works by Hore, Abbey, and
Overton] Lectures on history at
Oxford [dealing with those of bishop
Btubbs and professor Freeman].
Contemporary Beview, liL l.—July —
GoiiDWiN Smith: The Canadian con-
stitution. H. MoBSE Stephens :
Modem historians and their influence
on small nationalities.=August—C,
Glebmont - Gannbau : The Moabite
stone [rejecting Loewy's criticism].
Dublin Beview. 8rd Series. Ho. zxxv.
July — F. A. Gasquet : Richard
last abbot of Glastonbury
[a biography, partly from manuscript
sources]. T. B. Scannell : Pius VLT
at Savona [review of Ghotard*s work],
^A. H. Attebidge: Count BeusVs
memoirs.
Edinburgh Beview. Ho. 839.— JuZy—
Ettrick Forest and the Yarrow [based
especially on Mr. Graig-Brown's * His-
tory of Selkirkshire *]. Political as-
sassination [examining the practice of
the council of ten at Venice as to the
use of poison, with quotations from
documents recently published].
Madame de Maintenon [from Geffroy*s
collection of her letters]. Life and
works of Giordano Bruno. Whar-
ton's * Digest of the international law of
the United States.' Sorel's 'L'Eu-
rope et la revolution fran^aise.'
Professor Burrows' s * Family ofBrocas. '
Fortnightly Beview. Hew Series. Ho.
xlii. l.—July—K. Blind: General
Langiewics and the last Polish rising
[1863] J. R. Seelby : The Georgian
and Victorian expansion [the Bede
Lecture, 1887].
Law Quarterly Beview. Ho. 11.— July-
E. A. Fbeeman : The case of the deanery
of Exeter [1839-1840, deaOing with the
question of crown appointments]
G. F. Bandolph : The eminent domain
[concerning the nature and growth of
Digitized by
Google
1887 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS 829
the power of the state over private pro-
perty]. F. Pollock: The law of
England, 1-60 Vict.
The Month. Ho. 217. ~ July— TJie round
towers of Ireland, — -J. Mobbis:
Adrian Fortescue, maxtyr.=^August
— Thb Samb : Prince Charles in 1746
[from manusoript recollections of father
Cordara] P. Fitzgerald : Ely
Chapel, Holbom. September — J.
Morris : Edmund Campion at Douay,
Quarterly Be view. No. S%9.—July—
Lecky*s * History of England * [review
of vols, v., vi.]. Great men and
evolution [on W. S. Lilly's ' Chapters
in European History ']. Charles
MordaurUf earl of Peterborough.
Scottish Beview. No. six. — July— The
coronation of Charles II at Scone
[chiefly from a printed tract of the
time] The bwrmngof Frendraught
[an accoont of a feud in the Gordon
country in the early part of the seven-
teenth century].
IV. HOLLAND AND BELGIUM
Bijdrageii voor Yaderlandsche Geschie-
denis en Ondheidknnde. 3rd Series,
vol. iv. 1. The Hague.— R. Fbuin :
Points in the legal procedure of Hol-
land and Zeeland in the middle ages
[dealing with waarheid, kenning, and
zeventuig, and showing analogies with
the English jury system, especially
in the case of the verdict of the seven].
W. P. Sautun Kluit : The * Duin-
kerksche Historische Courant ' [a publi-
cation which appeared in 1791-2].
ICessager des Sciences Historiqnes de
Belgiqne, 1887, 2. Ghent.— T^ an-
cient castle of the counts of Flanders
at Ghent [illustrated] P. Glabts <fc
J. Geerts : The ancient fortifications
of Ghent. Ill [with plates] J. db
YiLLBRS : The early life of JacqueUne
of Bavaria, wife of John, duke of
Towraine, afterwards dauphin, con-
tinued [giving documents of the time
of her marriage and down to the death
of her husband in 1417] V. Vandbb
Habohen prints documents from the
city archives relating to the Jesuits in
Ghent in 1690. Ordinance of
Charles V to the town of Ypres [June
3, 1661].
V. ITALY
Archivio Storico Italiano, 4th ser. six. 2.
Florence. — G. Mazzatinti prints poli-
tical letters of Vincemo Armanni [from
June 21, 1643, to the beginning of the
following year] in continuation of those
already published in the *Archivio.*
[The letters are dated from Cologne,
and contain, inter alia, accounts of the
progress of the English civil war].
G. Mancini prints documents rela-
tive to the life and writings of Leon
Battista Alberti. P. D. Pasouni :
The historians of the crusades. G.
Sforza : Episodes in the history of
Rome in the eighteenth century [from
the despatches of the agent from the
city of Lucca at the papal court], con-
tinued] Description of historical
documents relating to the Terra
d'Otranto [from Brindisi], continued.
Calendar of the Strozzi charters
[among the state archives at Florence],
continued.
Archivio Storico Lombardo, ziv. 2. Milan.
L. Frati : The war of Gian GdUaazo
Visconti against Mantua [1397], with
docimients from Bologna E.
Motta: Musicians at the court of the
5/orra^ continued. C. Cant6: The
entry of Maria Arma, daughter of
Ferdinand III, into Milan [1649].
G. B. Intra : The Bosco della Fontana
at Mantua.
Archivio Storico per le Province Napole-
tane, zii. 1. — N. Baronb prints notices
hearing on the official history of Charles
of Durazzo [26 Sept. 1381-29 Oct.
~l], from the registers of the Nea-
politan chancery F. Tocco prints a
copy of the depositions in the process
for heresy against Luigi di Durazzo
[1362] F. BoNAZzi : The surrender
of Sorrento to Filippo Doria [printing
the protocol of surrender, dated 3 May
1628, and inferring that the naval
engagement took place on April 28].
M. ScHiPA : History of the Lom-
bard principality of Salerno [I. under
the princes of Benevento; II. The
war of separation, 839-846; III. The
princes of Salerno, 846-880]. G.
Abioitbnte prints ordinances of Joanna
I and Lewis relative to the city of
CasteUabate [1363]. E. Motta :
Earthquakes at Naples [1466 and
1466] Description of eighteen char-
ters [1194-1196] formerly belonging to
the family of Fusco.
Archivio della B. Society Bomana di
Storia Patria, x. 1, 2.— G. Galissb :
The prefects Di Vico [a history of the
family down to the fourteenth century].
J. Bbycb: The Ufe of Justindan
by Theophilus Abbas [substantially
identical with the article published,
supra, p. 667 ; but the latter has re-
ceived considerable additions] G.F.
Gamurbini prints letters and other docu-
ments from a manusoript in the Ange-
lica library at Rome [thirteenth and
fourteenth cent.] E. Teza prints
Spanish verses on the sack of Rome
[1627], Ac G. CoLETTi; Calendar of
deeds of the family of Anguillara [1120-
1686] L. FuMi : Cardinal Cecchini,
according to hia autobiography A.
Digitized by
Google
880 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS Oct.
Gabriblli : Calendar of letters of Cola
di Rieneo.
Arohiyio Storioo Sioiliano. New Series,
xi. 8. — V. DI Giovanni: On the topo-
graphy of Palermo from the twelfth to
the fifteenth century [with an appendix
of evidence from records]. P.
LioNTi : Notes on the Sioilian succession
at the death of Frederick 11. G.
CosENTiNo : The infanti Margaret and
Beatrice, sister and daughter of Peter
II [with a grant in aid of their dowry,
June 7, 1344, and another document,
both illustrating the commercial condi-
tion of the time]. A — M. Amabi :
On the supposed tomb of Galen at
Cawnita [giving the Arab evidence].
y. Bellio describes a chart made at
Messina in 1653 8. B. liAOumNA
prints an Arab inscription [1130] found
at Salaparuta, and a Hebrew one from
Trapani, with photographs. P. M.
RoccA : On certain grants to Bonifato
and Alcamo [1382 & 1899] The
Same : Additions to previous article on
Castellamare del Golfo G. Pipitosk
FxDBBico prints two hymns referring to
the plague of Messina in the middle of
the fourteenth century [with observa-
tions on the religious accompanimeints
of pestilence in tiie middle ages].
Arohiyio Yeneto, xzziii 1. — Y. Mabohssi :
The relations between the Venetian
republic and Portugal [1622-1797],
firat article. A. Valentini : Hie
defeat of the duke of Calabria at
Campomorto [1482], printing a new
account of the engagement by Pandolfo
Nassino with list of prisoners, Ac
G. GiuBiATo : Venetian menioriaXa tm
Roman m>owumentSy continued. C.
Cipolla: Statutes of the country of
Verona [of the thirteenth and four-
teenth centuries]. Rabbi L. Luz-
ZATTO : Sumptuary laws for the Jews
at Venice [Feb. 1697].
VI. RUSSIA
(Ck>mmunioaied by W. R. Mobfill)
The Antiquary (Starina).— Jwn«— D. A.
KoBSAKOv : Vasilii Nikitich Tatistchev,
1686-1760 [the first Russian historian.
The essay is based upon a speech
delivered in 1886 on the bicentenary of
his birth]. A. Bbijckneb: Corre-
spondence of Catherine II with Dr,
Zimmermann^ concluded. A. Jub-
OENBOM : Remarks on Manstevn's
memoirs of Russia. A. A. Chu-
lOKOv: Prince Mettemich challenged
to a duel by the emperor Alexander I
[the story is told by Talleyrand, as
having occurred at the congress of
Yienna: the emperor accused Metter-
nich of insolence in opposing his plans
with reference to Poland] Reforms
of the emperor Alexander II in the
military schools [1866-1870], concluded.
P. N. VoBONov: Remarks on the
article *The Battle of Plevna," 10
July (O.S.) isn.== June- August^
S. SoBOLEv: The Russo-Turkish war
[1877-1878] from the account of a
volunteer [many interesting details].
— -July—.! MoBosHKiN : Thsodosius
Yanovskij archbishop of Novgorod [a
favourite of Peter the Great disliked by
the people on account of his Lutheran
tendencies]. — The memoirs of Ad-
miral ChichagoVf continued. The
deputation from the city of Pskov to
the army in 1812 [communicated by
an old inhabitant of the city from
local tradition. The deputation was
sent to congratulate Prince Witt-
genstein]. July — Alexander I at
Pulaioy [a sketch of the relations
between Alexander I and the Gzar-
toryski family. The article was sug-
gested by the appearance of the work
of L. Dembicki, published last year at
Lemberg]. 0. Heufe^dbb: A sur-
geon's recollections of M. D. Skcbelev.
July- A ugust — Correspondence c/
the empress Catherine II with Dr,
Zimmermawn [thirty-five additional
letters now published for the first
timfl] A itrpijit — A. S. Figneb: a
partisan in the war of the fatherland^
1812 [ari account of the exploits of a
daring cavalry officer, who was killed
at the age of twenty-six] P.
RoBiANovicH : Stories about Count
Arakcheyev by former members of the
military colonies [illustrating the
caprice and despotism of this mis-
chievous man] . -.August — A. Man-
• 8UB0V : Alexander V. Oolovnin in his
relations to the Zemstvo [1866-1874].
— —August — P. Raspopov : The lament
of the Khirgie [translation of a poem
in the Tatar language composed on
the promulgation of the new laws
affecting them in 1868].
Yieitnik Istoriohetki (The Hifltorieal
ICeisonger).— JufM— A. Malshinski :
Our press m its historico-ecofiomical
development [continued]. A- A.
TiTOV : The Makarievski monastery
in the government of Nithni-Novgorod
[an account of an ancient monastery
founded in the early part of the
fifteenth century]. D. Evabnttzu:
The first governor of Yekaterinoslav
[Ivan Maksimovich Sinelnikov, in the
reign of the empress Catherine II].
A. MoLCBANOv : The memoirs of Count
von Beust. :zJuly — N. Oolobldi :
Theodosius archimandrite of Viagma^
[a somewhat unfavourable sketch of
monastic life in Russia at the close
of the seventeenth century] D.
EvABNiTZKi : The graves of two
hetmums of the Cossacks [Sirka and
Golovka : the former died in 1680, the
Digitized by
Qoo^^
1887 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS 831
latter was one of the followers of
Mazeppa]. M. Gobodbtzki : Me-
morials of old orthodox worship in
the district of Mazovettkoe [on the
frontiers of the old kingdom of Po-
land, traversed by the railway from
St. Petersburg to Warsaw]. !•
DuBAsov : A CaMlme of Tambov [a
story of incendiarism in that govern-
ment in the year 1816].==:«7wZy-
AugiMt—Hi. MoLCHANov: English his-
tortoaX works on Rtissia [memoirs of
Lord Bloomfield, &c].-==Atigust —
Obituary notice of N, M. Katkov,
D. A. EoRSAKov : N, Kudriavtzev and
hie posterity [memorials of a Russian
statesman in the earlier part of the
eighteenth century]. Le due de
Richelieu [an imigr^y the first governor
of Odessa and a great benefactor to his
adopted country. He returned to
France on the restoration of the
Bourbons. His monument may be
seen at Odessa ; it suffered from the
shots of the British fleet while attack-
ing that place]. T. A BIchkov :
The memoirs of Favier [secretary to
the French embassy at St. Petersburg
in the last years of the reign of the
empress Elizabeth and the beginning
of the reign of Peter HI].
Vn. SPAIN
Boletin de la Boal Academia de la
Historia, x. 4. — April — Latin sepul-
chral inscription from Denia.
Gnostic stone with Greek inscription
and open hand from Astorga, the centre
of Priscillianism [with plate] Docu-
ments from Barcelona relating to the
viceroyalty of Francisco de Borja in
Catalonia [including three letters of the
emperor Charles V, 1639 and 1541].
Extracts from the municipal archives
of Barcelona [insisting on the main-
tenance of privileges, describing the
entry of Francisco de Borja, giving the
minutes of town regulations, Ac.].
F. Fita: On a christian sarcophagus
from idja in the old diocese of Artigi
[with plate. The names are in Greek, a
rarity in Spain. It belongs to the fourth
or fifth century, and is possibly that of
St. Crispin, first bishop of Ecija]
M. Danvila prints the order relating
to the simultaneous disarmament of the
Moriscos of the kingdom of Valencia
[1663] and a schedule of 415 parishes,
[the registered houses numbering
16,377] Ac F. Fita contributes
documents relating to tJhe purchase
of the dtichy of Oandia by Pedro
Luis de Borja [December 1485].=
5. — May — Among documents from
the municipal archives of Carmona are
letters of Cervantes [12 Feb. 1690], of
Argote de Molina [giving intelligence of
Drake's defeat at Grand Canary. 20 Oct.
1696], of Don John of Austria from
Granada [29 April 1569], two letters of
PUUp II [16 April 1670, 12 May 1670,
announcing a visit to Carmona].
From Jerez de la Frontera, a chris-
tian inscription of the seventh century
[with plate] From Seville, from the
Basilica of Honoratus, the dedication of
an altar to the three brothers Fausto,
OenarOj and Marcial [a.d. 67(5)].
From Toledo two sepulchral inscrip-
tions [A.D. 60(9) and 600] F. Mateos
Gaoo contributes the inscription of a
Jewish seal [style of fourteenth cen-
tury], of a Latin cippus from Merida,
and of a sepulchral altar from Yilla-
franca de los Barros (province of
Badajoz). M. Pazos gives a sepul-
chral inscription [apparently of the
first century] from Madrigalejo. J.
G6]ifEz DE Abteohe: On J. Santa
Marians work on the siege of Gibraltar
of 1782 [dealing principally with the
episode of Arson's floating batteries.
The failure is attributed to the French
general Crillon. The reviewer enters
into the siege of 1704, presenting an
apology for the Marques de Villadarias
and inculpating De Tess6] B. Beer
describes the discovery of verses by
BenalVus of Barcelona and Oerona at
the end of a collection of eleventh
century canon laws [which has been con-
sequently falsely attributed to him by
Torres Amat, * Dice, de los escritores Ca-
talanes '] Latin inscriptions from
Carmona and from Iruna.==6. — June
— Latin sepulchral inscriptums [unpub-
lished by Hiibner] from the museum of
Santiago Contemporary description
of the death (let. 88) and of the career of
Mariana [the date previously disputed
is given as 16 Feb. 1624] F. Fita :
Latin sepulchral inscriptions. L.
Jimenez de la Llave : On three cippi
from Belvis de Monroy [one of which
contains the crescent common in the
sepulchral inscriptions of northern
Spain]. J. Bonsob: Arabic inscrip-
tion from Carmona. F. Codeba :
Thirteen Arabic copper coins F.
DuBO (from facts given in an article
in ' Bibl. de I'Ecole des Chartes,' 1883,
on a MS. at Besan<;on, formerly be-
longing to cardinal Granvelle) ascribes
the chronicles of Spain translated for
Charles V of France by Jehan Ooulain
to Oonealo de la Finojosa^ bishop of
Burgos [1313-1327]. A. F. Guebra :
On the testatory monuments of L,
Mmiliu^s Rectus [temp. Hadriani, who
left sums to the six towns which had
conferred citizenship upon him, viz.
Carthago Nova, Sicelli, Asso, Lacon,
Argos, and Basti. Hiibner confuses the
monument of Cartagena now at Madrid
with that at Caravaca, which came from
the ruins of Las Cuevas de los Negros,
and which fixes the position of Asso,
Digitized by
Qoo^^
882 CONTENTS OF PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS Oct.
which Hiibner regards as unknown. A
fragment discovered at La Vereda on the
ArgOB near Caravaca may serve to fix
the position of Argos, which Hiibner
believed to be probably the Greek
Argos] F. FiTA gives from a MS.
of 1S38, a copy of an original of 1266,
a detailed description- of the Jewry of
Jerez de la Frontera at the time of its
conqnest by Alfonso X [with a list of
its tenements and inhabitants].
Bevista de Ciencias Histtfricas, 1887,
2. — P. F. Makubl Cxtndabo : Historic
poliHco-oriHco-militar de la pla$a de
Gerona J. Fabtenbath : El prin^
cipe obispo Julio Eehter de Mespel-
brunut dtique de Franconia,
Beyista Contemporanea.— 3fa^ 15-80 —
A. DB Sandoval : Estudios acerea de la
edad media, conoladed.^==Jt<fM 15 —
M. JnfBNEz DB LA EsPADA : Jtutu de
Castellanos y eu historia del nu&vo
reino de Oranada,
Vm. SWITZERLAND
Bibliothdqiie TTniyerselle et Boyne Snif se.
Geneva. Ma/rch-May — E. Sayous : La
croisade de Constantinople,^^=June —
F. Dbcrub : La cour de France et la
80ci6t4 au seieiime si4cle,
Jahrbnch fdr Sohweiseriiche Oesohichte,
xii. Ziirich.—F. Dinner: T^ de/ence
of the Swiss frontier [1792-1796], with
documents Contributions to Ra-
tian history from materials prepared
by the late C. Kind [giving particulars
of the household of the bishop of Cur
in the fifteenth century, and describing
the conflict between the bishops and
the town, 1725-1754] A. Stern:
Note on the so-called chronicle of
Brennwald, and its account of the
origin of the Schwytters and the rise of
the confederation [examining its relation
to Stumpf 's chronicle] L. Tobleb :
The SwisS'Oerman dialect from an
ethmographicaX point of view A. Db-
nieb: Religious houses at Seedorf^ on
the south of the lake of Lucerne [from
the thirteenth century onwuds].
IX. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Century, TX.:trr,—June-S^temher—3, G.
NicoLAY & J. Hay : Abraham Lincoln,
a history [these instalments deal with
the attack on Sumner, the Dred Scott
case, the Douglas debates, Lincoln's
Cooper's Institute speech and his
nomination and election to the presi-
dency] .==c7''wn^—C. N. Galloway:
Hand-to-hand fighting at Spotsylvania.
July,—Q. Bancroft : An inci-
dent in the life of John Adams,
General O. O. Howard : The struggle
for Atlanta General W. T. Sher-
man : Sherman and the * March
to the Sea.*^^=Augu8t—GenerBX J.
E. Johnston : Opposing Sherman's
advance to Atlanta [in this and general
Howard's article the campaign is
discussed from both sides] .==5«p-
tember—J, B. McMaster : The framers
and framing of the constitution^
W. H. Powell: The tragedy at the
Crater [before Petersburg],
Baum's Church Beview, xliz. 17S-
176. — June August — Right rev. W.
S. Perry : The life, times, and corre-
spondence of bishop White [giving the
iiife of the first bishop of Pennsylvania,
down to 1784]. =«7ttZy— Rev. L. Ck>LE-
MAN : The removal of the bishops by
Mary and Elizabeth.==zAugusU — J. G.
Hall, junior : The history of the papacy
during the Reformation [a review of
Creighton's latest volumes].
Harper's Monthly, No. 445. — June — J. M,
Brown : The Kentucky pioneers,
ICagasine of American History, xyU. 6-9.
June — M. D. Conway: Fredericks-
burg first and last [second paper].
J. G. Bourinot: Canada during the
Victorian era [second and concluding
paper] E. D. Mill: Sir Thomas
Dale's Indians in Ijondon,=July
— Martha J. Lamb : Henry Laurent in
London Tower, Justin Winbob :
Manuscript sources of American his-
tory.^== August — W. A. Wood: La-
fa/yette's visit to Missouru=,Sep'
tember—A, B. Gardiner : OenenU
James Vamum of the continental
army H. H. Bancroft : How CaM-
fomia was secured [disposing of some
popular errors].
Magaiine of Western History, tI &-4.—
July — B. A. Hinsdale : The ordinance
of 1787.
HewEnglander.— iiii^us^— J. B. Tuckbb:
The history of the federal convention
of 1787 and its work.
Hew Princeton Boyiew, iv. 2.— September
— ^A- Johnston: The first cerUury of
the constitution.
North American Beiiew, 146, No. S. —
September— JvFTEBSon Davis : John C.
Calhoun,
Penniylvania Magaiine of History, zL
2. ~ July — E. Devebeux : Andrew
Elliot, Ueutenant-govemor of the pro-
vince of New York, Uiymblished
mimites of the provincial council of
Pennsylvania Letters of Siku
Deane,
Soribner'i Magaiine, ii. l-8.-~JtiZy —
J. G. Roper : Some iUustrations of
Napoleon and his times [second paper].
September — M. D. Conway : An
unpublished draft of a national con-
stitution by Edmund Randolph [found
among the papers of George Mason].
Digitized by
Google
INDEX
TO
THE SECOND VOLUME
ARTICLES, NOTES. AND DOOUMENTB
Ainus and Bonilaoe : by E. A Free-
man, 417
Alexander the Great, The deification
of: bj D. G. Hogarth, 817
Alexander VI, pope, A boll of [1494] :
by the Rev. N. Pooook, U2
America, Early explorations of, real
and imaginaiy : by A B. Bopes, 78
American war, The employment of
Indian auxiliaries in the: by A
MoF. Davis, 709
Anne, qneen, Spanheim's account of
the Court of : edited by B. Doebner,
767
Btbantudi palaces : by J. T.Bent, 466
CUbourb, Queen, of Naples : by 0.
Browning, 482
CQiannel islands, ^Rie: by H. O.
Eeene,31
— The people of the: by O. F. B.
de Gmchy, 786
Charles I and the earl of Glamorgan :
by 8. B. Gardiner, 687
duurles n. Petitions to : edited by the
Bev. W. D. liacray, 848
Cromwell, Oliver, Unpublished letters
of: edited by C. H. Firth, 148, 897
Ctesias, The sonrces of the Assyrian
history of : by J. Gilmore, 97
— and the Semiramis legend: by W.
Bobertson Smith, 808
Daou, The Boman province of : by T.
Hodgkin,100
— by F. Haverfield, 784
Dnrler's, M. de, account of the defence
of the Toileries [10 Aug. 1792]:
edited by H. M. Stephens, 860
BooBHiUi, The battle of: by T.
Arnold, 187
— by Major W. G. Boss, 688
Elizabeth, Qneen, and the Valois
princes: byMissASl-F.Bobinson,
40
—Two petitions to : by G. W. Prothero,
741
England:— The history of 1862-60
and Greville's latest journals : by
the right hon. W. E. Gladstone, 281
Ethelwulf , The house of : by the Bev.
W. H. Simcox, 620
VOL. n. — NO. vra.
GiiicoBaAi?, The earl of, and Charles I :
by S. B. Gardiner, 687
Gkistavus m of Sweden, The assassi*
nation of : by B. N. Bain, 643
Halbs, John, Isaack Walton's CoUeo*
tions for the life of, 746
Heresy, Confiscation for, in the middle
ages : by H. C. Lea, 286
Hickes, George, Letter from: edited
by the Bev. W. D. Maoray, 762
Ibuand :— The depositions relating to
the massacres of 1641 : ^ifiss M.
Hiokson, 188, 627
by B. Dunlop, 888
— The forged commission 011641: by
B. Dunlop, 627
JisuiTs, The renaissance and the : by
W. S. Lilly, 114
— by P. F. WiUert, 886
Julian, Letters of the empecor: by
Miss A. Gardner, 618
Justinian, Theophilns's Life of : by J.
Bryce,667
LioioRs, The movements of the Boman,
from Augustus to Severus : by B.G.
Hardy, 626
Macaulat, Lord, and the assault of
Namur : by Colonel A Pamell, 764
MolmenandMolland: by J. H. Bound,
108
— by W. H. Stevenson, 882
Naplks, Queen Caroline of: by 0.
Browning, 482
PoBu, A medieval Latin : edited by 8.
G. Owen, 626
Banult Flambard and his sons : b T.
A. Archer, 108
Boman legions. The movements of the,
from Augustus to Severos : by S. G.
Hardy, 626
The legend of: by W.
Bobertson Smith, 808
— by J. Gilmore, 729
Sion, Two bishops of, in England : by
the Bev. W. A B. Coolidge, 787
Digitized by
Google
884
INDEX TO THE SECOND VOLUME
Spanheim, Ezeohiel, Aoooant of the
ooort of queen Anne by, 767
Squire papers, The : by W. Squire, 142
— by W. Rye, 842
Sweden, Gustayus in of. The assassi-
nation of : by B. N. Bain, 543
Tbxodoba, The empress: by C. £.
MaUet, 1
Theophilus, The Life of Justinian by :
by J. Bryoe, 667
Toleration, A soheme of, propounded
at Uxbridge [1646]: edited bj S.
B. Gardiner, 340
Tuileries, The defence of the [10 Aug.
1792]; M. de Durler's aoooant:
edited by H. M. Stephens, 350
Turenne : by W. 0*C. Morris, 260
VxBOATA, The : by J. H. Bound, 829
Yisigothic Spain : by T. Hodgkin, 209
Walton, Isaack, GoUectionB of, for
the Life of John Hales, 746
LIST OF REVIEWS OP BOOKS
Aloubilla (M. M.) Cddigos de Es-
patia, edited by : by H. G. Lea, 566
AUmeyer (J. J.) Les prdcursewrs de la
rtforme aux Pays-Bos : by H. C.
Lea, 164
Axon (W. E. A.) Awnals of Man-
Chester, 394
Baowell (B.) Ireland under the
Tudors : by S. L. Lee, 378
Banmgarten (H.) Oeschichte Karls F,
ii. 1: bv A. W. Ward, 681
Bazin (EL) De Lycurgo : by J. Adam,
163
Boswell (J.) Life of Johnson, edited
by G. B. Hill. 607
Broiglie (le feu duo de) Souvenirs,
[1786-1870], i^iu. : by 0. A. Fyflfe,
188
BroBoh (M.) OlMser Cromwell tmd die
puHtawische BevohUion : by F. W.
Cornish, 800
Brushfield (T. N.) Sir W. Balegh, a
pUafor a surname, 190
Bulen (A. H.) Lyrics from the song-
books of the Elizabethan age, 190
Burrows (MJ> The family of Broc<is :
by E. M. Thompson, 371
Oampbll (Ulrioh) Rustics alpestris
tqpograpnica descrippio, 397
Carr (A.) The church and the Roman
empire, 812
Oassiodorus, Letters; translated byT.
Hodgkin : by H. M. Gwatkin, 362
Clarendon (Lord) History of the rebel-
lion, vi., edited by T. Arnold, 812
Collection de textes pour servir k
r^tude et 4 Tenseignement de
Phistoire, 606
Creighton (M.) History of the papacy,
iii. iv. : by Lord Acton, 571
Dalton (G.) Life and times of Sir
Edward Cecil, viscount Wim-
bledan: by C. H. Firth, 171
Desjardins {O^Le Petit-Trianon : by
Miss E. B. Hamilton, 177
Deutschen Gesohiohte, Forschungen
zur, 897
Devas (C. S.) Studies of family life :
by the Bev. W. Cunningham, 360
Dixon (B. W.) History of the church
of England, iii. : by the Bev. O. G.
Perry, 166
Domesday commemoration : Notes on
the manuscripts exhibited at the
Public Becord Office, 189
Doyle (J. A.) The English in America /
the Puritan coUmies : by E. Chan-
ning, 687
Droysen (J. G.) AUgemeiner historic
scher Handatlas, 392
Dussieux (L,) Le chdteau de Ver-
sailles: oy Miss E. B. Hamilton,
177
Edward HI, Tear Books of, xiii. xir. ;
edited by L. O. Pike: by W. H.
Stevenson, 782
Estcourt (E. E.) & Payne (J. O.) Ths
English cathoUc nonjurors: by C.
E. Doble, 386
Eyre (Archbishop) History of Saini
Cuthbert, 607
FzsTXR (B.) Die armirten StSnde tmd
die Rdchsverfassung [1681-1697]:
by A. W. Ward, 176
Freeman (E. A.) Methods of histori-
cal study, by A. W. Ward, 368
— Exeter (* Historic Towns % 394
— Historical geography of Europe
French translation by G. Lefebvre,
188
Gardineb (S. B.) History of the greal
dvU war [1642-1649], x. : by A. W.
Ward, 381
Gneist (B.) The English parUameni:
by the Bev. C. W. Boase, 559
Gk)eje (M. J. de) Mimoires d*histoir$
et de geographic orieniaiUsi by 8.
Lane-Poole, 554
Goldschmidt (S.) Oeschichte der Judm
in England : by L. Wolf, 363
GoBse (E. W.) Raleigh, 189
Gregory of Tours. HistoriaFranoorum,
edited by H.Omont : by B. L. Poole,
606
Herbert of Gherbury (Edward, lord)
Autobiography; edited l^ S. L. Lee,
394
Herbert papers at Powys castle, Ao. :
by A. W. Ward, 798
Digitized by
Google
.J
INDEX TO THE SECOND VOLUME
885
Hobart pasha. Sketches from my Uftt
191
flook (W. F.) Cliwrch dictionary^
edited by W. Hook and W. R. W.
Stephens, 812
Hunt (W.) Bristol (* Historic Tovms '),
394
Newcastle (Margaret, dachess of)IAfe
of WUliam Cavendish, duke of
Newcastle ; edited by C. H. Firth :
by S. B. Gardiner, 172
Norgate (E.) England under the
Angevin kings : by E. A. Freeman,
776
iMBEBTde Saint- Amand. Marie Louise;
by Miss E. B. Hamilton, 389
Ingram (T. D.) History of the legis-
lative union of Great Britain and
Ireland, 813
JiYONS (F. B.) The development of
the Athenian democracy : by W. W.
Fowler, 553
Johnson (S. O.) & Stevenson (W. H.)
Records of the borough of Notting-
ham, edited by : by J. H. Boond, 366
Jorien de la Ghravidre (Admiral) Doria
et Barberousse and Les corsaires bar-
baresques et la marine de SoUman le
Grand : by S. Lane-Poole, 784
Ealonsee (Professor) Diary of an em-
bassy of George Pobiebrad [1464],
607
Eeene (H. G.) Sketch of the history of
Hindustan : by S. Lane-Poole, 180
Eervyn de Lettenhove (Baron) Les
Huguenots et les Gueux: by E.
Armstrong, 786
Eitohin (G. W.) Winchester cathedral
recordSfil, 393
Lanfbet (P.) History of Napoleon,
new edition, 191
Langland (W.) The vision coTiceming
Piers the plowman, edited by W. W.
Skeat, 395
Laogel (A.) Fragments d'histovre : by
P. F. Wmert, 379
Loftie (W. J.) Londfin ('Historic
Towns '), 396
Lncas (C. P.) Introduction to a
histoncdl geography of the British
colonies, 813
Maobat (W. D.) The pilgrimage to
Parruissfus, and The return from
Parnassus, edited by, 396
Magnus (Lady) OtUUnes of Jewish
history: by A. N., 161
Marston's works, edited by A. H.
BuUen, 812
Mary, queen of England, Memoirs
[1689-1693] ; edited by B. Doebner :
by O. Airy, 173
Maulde (M. de) Les Juifs dans les
itats frangais du Saini-Siige au
moyen dge : by A. N., 161
Moberly (aE.) The Early Tudors, 393
Mommsen (T.) The Provinces of the
Roman Empire-, translated by W.
P. Dickson, 393
Morris (E. E.) The Early Hanoverians:
by M. BurrowB, 181
OuPHAirr (T. L. K.) The new English,
396
Peabs (E.) The fall of Constantinople :
by G. Oman, 166
PeoKham (Archbishop) Registrum
Epistolarum, edited by G. T. Martin :
by T. F. Tout, 656
Plmnmer (A.) The church of the early
fathers, 812
Preston (H. W.) Documents iUustrative
of American history, 607
Becobds, Deputy Keeper of. Forty-
Sixth Report: by F. Y. Powell, 781
Bevue d'Histoire diplomatique, 396
Bhfs (J.) Celtic Britain, 187
Bicoi (O.) Gli Spagnuoli e i Veneziani
in Romagna [1527-1629J ; by J. B.
Bury, 374
Bobinson (A. M. F.) Margaret of
Navarre : by E. Armstrong, 169
Bodulf Glaber. Historice, eclited by
M. Prou : by B. L. Poole, 606
Bopes (J. 0.) The first Napoleon : by
Lord Acton, 693
Boyce (J.) CaUfomia : by J. A. Doyle,
391
Bussian periodicals. Notices of: by
W. B. Morfill, 207, 413, 623, 830
Seelby (J. B.) Short history of Napo-
leon the First : by Lord Acton, 593
Simon (J.) Les Juifs de Nimes au
moyen dge: by A. N., 161
Smith (H. LI.) Economic aspects of
state socialism, 814
Stephens (H. LI.) History of the
French revolution: by the Bev.
A. H. Johnson, 387
Stevenson (J.) The truth about John
WicUf: by the Bev. J. P. Whitney,
668
— fW. H.) The Domesday survey of
Nottinghamshire and Rutland,
edited by, 395
Stubbs (W.) Seventeen lectures on the
study of medieval and modem
history : by the Editor. 369
Sweetman (H. S.) and Handcock
(G. F.) Calendar of documents re-
lating to Ireland [1302-1307]: by
T. F. Tout, 168
Symonds (J. A.) The renaissance in
Italy : the catholic reaction, by the
Editor, 582
TsssiEB (J.) Quatriime Croisade : la di-
version sur Zara et Constantinople :
by 0. Oman, 165
Digitized by
Qoo^^
vy
886
INDEX TO THE SECOND VOLUME
VATTnEB (V.) John Wycclyffi by the
BeT. J. P. Whitney, 568
Vitzthom von Eckstadt (0. F., Graf)
8L Petersburg und London [1853-
1864] : by A. W. Ward, 608
Yoga6 (Vioomte E. M. de) Le roman
russe, 190
Waits (Q.) Urkunden tur deutsehsn
VerfassungageschichUt 2nd ed^ 818
Walpole (Spencer) HUiory of England
from 1815, iv. T.: byO.A.^yfle,809
Wheeler (J. Talboys) India umd§r
BriHshruU,d9B
Winsor (J.) NamUkm and antical
history of America, edited by; iiL
iv. : by J. A. Doyle, 804
Witt (P. de) Une inwuion pruaaienns
en HoUande [1787] : by R. Lodgo,
584
LIST OP WEITEBS
AoTON, Lord, 571, 598
Adam, J., 153
Airy, Osmond, 178
Aroher, T. A., 108
Armstrong, E., 169, 786
Arnold, Thomas, 187
Bain, B. Nisbet, 548
Bent, J. Theodore, 466
Boase, Bev. 0. W., 559
Browning, Osoar, 482
Bryoe, James, D.OJi., M J., 657
Borrows, Montago, 181
Bory, J. B., 874
CHAMNiira, Edward, Ph. D., 587
Ooolidge-, Bev. W. A. B., 787
Oomii^ F. W., 800
Oreighton, Bev. M., LL JD., 869, 582
Oonningham, Bev. W., 860
Davib, Andrew MoFarland, 709
Doble, 0. E., 386
Doebner, B., 757
Doyle, J.A., 891, 804
Donlop, B., 888, 527
FiBTB, 0. H., 148, 171
Fowler, W. Warde, 558
Freeman, Edward A., D.Olk, 417, 775
FjUe, C. A., 183, 809
Gabdisbb, & B., LLJ)., 172, 840, 687,
746
QiBurdner, Miss Alice, 518
Gibnore, John, 97, 729
Gladstone, right hon. W. E., MJP.,
281
Graohy, G. F. B. de, 786
Gwatkin, H. M., 862
Haihutom, Miss E. Blanche, 177, 889
Hardy, E. G., 625
Haverfield, F., 784
Hickson, Bfiss Mary, 188, 527
Hodgkin, Thomas, D.OJL, 100, 209
Hogarth, D. G., 817
Johnson, Bev. A. H.^ 887
Ebbne, H. G., CIJ:., 21
liANS-PooLE, 8., 180, 554, 784
Lea, Henry C, 164, 285, 566
Lee, S. L., 378
Lilly. W. S., 114
Lodge, B., 584
Maobat, Bev. William Donn, 848, 752
MaUet, C. E., 1
Morfill, W. B., 207, 418, 628. 880
Morris, W. O'Connor, 260
Neobaoer, A., 161
Oman, C, 155
Owen, S. G., 525
Pabnxll, Colonel Arthur, 754
Perry, Bev. G. G., 165
Pocock, Bev. Nicholas, 112
Poole, Beginald L., 606
Powell. F. York, 781
Prothero, G. W., 741
BoBiNSON, Bfiss A. Mary F., 40
Bopes, Arthor B., 78
Boss, Major W. G., BJB., 588
Boond, J. H., 108, 829, 866
Bye, Walter, 842
Smooz, Bev. William Henry, 520
Smith, W. Bobertson, LLJ)., 808
Sqoire, W., M.D., 142
Stephens, H. Morse, 850
Stevenson, W. H., 882
Thompson, E. Maonde, LLJ)., 871
Toot, T. F., 158, 555
Wabd, a. W., Litt D., 176, 868, 881,
581, 608, 798
Whitn^, Bev. J. P^ 568
Willert, P. F., 886, 879
Wolf, Loeien, 368
Ebbata.^P. 425 note 19, fdr Ep. 70 read Ep. 220 (or 70) ; p. 448 note 95, for * any
Boniface ' read * oor Boniface ; ' p. 449 L 11, for * For lof^ plaoe ' read * From lofty
place ; ' and p. 456 note 107, f^ Bp. Ivii read Ep. 187 (or 57).
END OF THE 8E00ND yOLUMB.
SpoMmoodi ^ 09. Melnvt NnhUkHt apiert, XoMiPfi,
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11