the unseen world and other essays-第30部分

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


of　being　expressed　in　a　definite　formula；　we　have　classified　it　with　sufficient　accuracy。

For　an　analysis　of　the　characters　in　the　poem；　nothing　can　be　better　than　the　essay　by　Kuno　Fischer；　appended　to　the　present　volume。　The　work　of　translation　has　been　admirably　done；　and　thanks　are　due　to　Miss　Frothingham　for　her　reproduction　of　this　beautiful　poem。

　　　　　　June；　1868。


VIII。　HISTORICAL　DIFFICULTIES。＇29＇

＇29＇　Historical　Difficulties　and　Contested　Events。　By　Octave　Delepierre；　LL。　D。；　F。　S。　A。；　Secretary　of　Legation　to　the　King　of　the　Belgians。　8vo。　London：　Murray。　1868。


History；　says　Sainte…Beuve；　is　in　great　part　a　set　of　fables　which　people　agree　to　believe　in。　And；　on　reading　books　like　the　present；　one　certainly　needs　a　good　deal　of　that　discipline　acquired　by　long　familiarity　with　vexed　historical　questions；　in　order　to　check　the　disposition　to　accept　the　great　critic's　ironical　remark　in　sober　earnest。　Much　of　what　is　currently　accredited　as　authentic　history　is　in　fact　a　mixture　of　flattery　and　calumny；　myth　and　fable。　Yet　in　this　set　of　fables；　whatever　may　have　been　the　case　in　past　times；　people　will　no　longer　agree　to　believe。　During　the　present　century　the　criticism　of　recorded　events　has　gone　far　toward　assuming　the　developed　and　systematized　aspect　of　a　science；　and　canons　of　belief　have　been　established。　which　it　is　not　safe　to　disregard。　Great　occurrences；　such　as　the　Trojan　War　and　the　Siege　of　Thebes；　not　long　ago　faithfully　described　by　all　historians　of　Greece；　have　been　found　to　be　part　of　the　common　mythical　heritage　of　the　Aryan　nations。　Achilleus　and　Helena；　Oidipous　and　Iokasta；　Oinone　and　Paris；　have　been　discovered　in　India　and　again　in　Scandinavia；　and　so　on；　until　their　nonentity　has　become　the　legitimate　inference　from　their　very　ubiquity。　Legislators　like　Romulus　and　Numa；　inventors　like　Kadmos；　have　evaporated　into　etymologies。　Whole　legions　of　heroes；　dynasties　of　kings；　and　adulteresses　as　many　as　Dante　saw　borne　on　the　whirlwind；　have　vanished　from　the　face　of　history；　and　terrible　has　been　the　havoc　in　the　opening　pages　of　our　chronological　tables。　Nor　is　it　primitive　history　alone　which　has　been　thus　metamorphosed。　Characters　unduly　exalted　or　defamed　by　party　spirit　are　daily　being　set　before　us　in　their　true；　or　at　least　in　a　truer；　light。　What　Mr。　Froude　has　done　for　Henry　VIII。　we　know；　and　he　might　have　done　more　if　he　had　not　tried　to　do　so　much。　Humpbacked　Richard　turns　out　to　have　been　one　of　the　handsomest　kings　that　ever　sat　on　the　throne　of　England。　Edward　I。；　in　his　dealings　with　Scotland；　is　seen　to　have　been　scrupulously　just；　while　the　dignity　of　the　patriot　hero　Wallace　has　been　somewhat　impaired。　Elizabeth　is　proved　to　have　befriended　the　false　Mary　Stuart　much　longer　than　was　consistent　with　her　personal　safety。　Eloquent　Cicero　has　been　held　up　as　an　object　of　contempt；　and　even　weighty　Tacitus　has　been　said　to　owe　much　of　his　reputation　to　his　ability　to　give　false　testimony　with　a　grave　face。　It　has　lately　been　suspected　that　gloomy　Tiberius；　apart　from　his　gloominess；　may　have　been　rather　a　good　fellow；　not　so　licentious　as　puritanical；　not　cruel　so　much　as　exceptionally　merciful；a　rare　general；　a　sagacious　statesman；　and　popular　to　boot　with　all　his　subjects　save　the　malignant　oligarchy　which　he　consistently　snubbed；　and　which　took　revenge　on　him　by　writing　his　life。　And；　to　crown　all；　even　Catiline；　abuser　of　our　patience；　seducer　of　vestal　nuns；　and　drinker　of　children's　blood；whose　very　name　suggests　murder；　incest；　and　robbery；even　Catiline　has　found　an　able　defender　in　Professor　Beesly。　It　is　claimed　that　Catiline　was　a　man　of　great　abilities　and　average　good　character；　a　well…calumniated　leader　of　the　Marian　party　which　Caesar　afterwards　led　to　victory；　and　that　his　famous　plot　for　burning　Rome　never　existed　save　in　the　unscrupulous　Ciceronian　fancy。　And　those　who　think　it　easy　to　refute　these　conclusions　of　Professor　Beesly　had　better　set　to　work　and　try　it。　Such　are　a　few　of　the　surprising　questions　opened　by　recent　historical　research；　and　in　the　face　of　them　the　public　is　quite　excusable　if　it　declares　itself　at　a　loss　what　to　believe。

These；　however；　are　cases　in　which　criticism　has　at　least　made　some　show　of　ascertaining　the　truth　and　detecting　the　causes　of　the　prevalent　misconception。　That　men　like　Catiline　and　Tiberius　should　have　had　their　characters　blackened　is　quite　easily　explicable。　President　Johnson　would　have　little　better　chance　of　obtaining　justice　at　the　hands　of　posterity；　if　the　most　widely　read　history　of　his　administration　should　happen　to　be　written　by　a　radical　member　of　the　Rump　Congress。　But　the　cases　which　Mr。　Delepierre　invites　us　to　contemplate　are　of　a　different　character。　They　come　neither　under　the　head　of　myths　nor　under　that　of　misrepresentations。　Some　of　them　are　truly　vexed　questions　which　it　may　perhaps　always　be　impossible　satisfactorily　to　solve。　Others　may　be　dealt　with　more　easily；　but　afford　no　clew　to　the　origin　of　the　popularly　received　error。　Let　us　briefly　examine　a　few　of　Mr。　Delepierre's　〃difficulties。〃　And　first；　because　simplest；　we　will　take　the　case　of　the　Alexandrian　Library。

Every　one　has　heard　how　Amrou；　after　his　conquest　of　Egypt；　sent　to　Caliph　Omar　to　know　what　should　be　done　with　the　Alexandrian　Library。　〃If　the　books　agree　with　the　Koran；〃　said　the　Caliph；　〃they　are　superfluous；　if　they　contradict　it；　they　are　damnable；　in　either　case；　destroy　them。〃　So　the　books　were　taken　and　used　to　light　the　fires　which　heated　water　for　the　baths；　and　so　vast　was　the　number　that；　used　in　this　way；　they　lasted　six　months！　All　this　happened　because　John　the　Grammarian　was　over…anxious　enough　to　request　that　the　books　might　be　preserved；　and　thus　drew　Amrou's　attention　to　them。　Great　has　been　the　obloquy　poured　upon　Omar　for　this　piece　of　vandalism；　and　loud　has　been　the　mourning　over　the　treasures　of　ancient　science　and　literature　supposed　to　have　been　irrecoverably　lost　in　this　ignominious　conflagration　Theologians；　Catholic　and　Protestant；　have　been　fond　of　quoting　it　as　an　instance　of　the　hostility　of　Mahometanism　to　knowledge；　and　we　have　even　heard　an　edifying　sermon　preached　about　it。　On　seeing　the　story　put　to　such　uses；　one　feels　sometimes　like　using　the　ad　hominem　argument；　and　quoting　the　wholesale　destruction　of　pagan　libraries　under　Valens；　the　burning　of　books　by　the　Latin　stormers　of　Constantinople；　the　alleged　annihilation　of　100；000　volumes　by　Genoese　crusaders　at　Tripoli；　the　book…burning　exploits　of　Torquemada；　the　bonfire　of　80；000　valuable　Arabic　manuscripts；　lighted　up　in　the　square　of　Granada　by　order　of　Cardinal　Ximenes；　and　the　irreparable　cremation　of　Aztec　writings　by　the　first　Christian　bishops　of　Mexico。　These　examples；　with　perhaps　others　which　do　not　now　occur　to　us；　might　be　applied　in　just　though　ungentle　retort　by　Mahometan　doctors。　Yet　the　most　direct　rejoinder　would　probably　not　occur　to　them：　the　Alexandrian　Library　was　NOT　destroyed　by　the　orders　of　Omar；　and　the　whole　story　is　a　figment！

The　very　pithiness　of　it；　so　characteristic　of　the　excellent　but　bigoted　Omar；　is　enough　to　cast　suspicion　upon　it。　De　Quincey　tells　us　that　〃if　a　saying　has　a　proverbial　fame；　the　probability　is　that　it　was　never　said。〃　How　many　amusing　stories　stand　a　chance　of　going　down　to　posterity　as　the　inventions　of　President　Lincoln；　of　which；　nevertheless；　he　is　doubtless　wholly　innocent！　How　characteristic　was　Caesar's　reply　to　the　frightened　pilot！　Yet　in　all　probability　Caesar　never　made　it。

Now　for　the　evidence。　Alexandria　was　captured　by　Armrou　in　640。　The　story　of　the　burning　of　the　library　occurs　for　the　first　time　in　the　works　of　Abulpharagius；　who　flourished　in　1264。　Six　hundred　years　had　elapsed。　It　is　as　if　a　story　about　the　crusades　of　Louis　IX。　were　to　be　found　for　the　first　time　in　the　writings　of　Mr。　Bancroft。　The　Byzantine　historians　were　furiously　angry　with　the　Saracens；　why　did　they；　one　and　all；　neglect　to　mention　such　an　outrageous　piece　of　vandalism？　Their　silence　must　be　considered　quite　conclusive。　Moreover　we　know　〃that　the　caliphs　had　forbidden　under　severe　penalties　the　destruction〃　of　Jewish　and　Christian　books；　a　circumstance　wholly　inconsistent　with　this　famous　story。　And　finally；　what　a　mediaeval　recklessness　of　dates　is　shown　in　lugging　into　the　story　John　the　Grammarian；　who　was　dead　and　in　his　grave　when　Alexandria　was　taken　by　Amrou！

But　the　chief　item　of　proof　remains　to　be　mentioned。　The　Saracens　did　not　burn　the　library；　because　there　was　no　library　there　for　them　to　burn！　It　had　been　destroyed　just　two　hundred　and　fifty　years　before　by　a　rabble　of　monks；　incited　by　the　patriarch　Theophilus；　who　saw　in　such　a　vast　collection　of　pagan　literature　a　perpetual　insult　and　menace　to　religion。　In　the　year　390　this　turbulent　bigot　sacked　the　temple　of　Serapis；　where　the　books　were　kept；　and　drove　out　the　philosophers　who　lodged　there。　Of　this　violent　deed　we　have　contemporary　evidence；　for　Orosius　tells　us　that　less　than　fifteen　years　afterwards；　while　passing　through　Alexandria；　he　saw　the　empty　shelves。　This　fact　disposes　of　the　story。

Passing　from　Egypt　to　France；　and　from　the　seventh　century　to　the　fifteenth；　we　meet　with　a　much　more　difficult　problem。　That　Jeanne　d'Arc　was　burnt　at　the　stake；　at　Rouen；　on　the　30th　of　May；　1431；　and　her　bones　and　ashes　thrown　into　the　Seine；　is　generally　supposed　to　be　as　indisputable　as　any　event　in　modern　history。　Such　is；　however；　hardly　the　case。　Plausible　evidence　has　been　brought　to　prove　that　Jeanne　d'Arc　was　never　burnt　at　the　stake；　but　lived　to　a　ripe　age；　and　was　even　happily　married　to　a　nobleman　of　high　rank　and　reputation。　We　shall　abridge　Mr。　Delepierre's　statement　of　this　curious　case。

In　the　archives　of　Metz；　Father　Vignier　discovered　the　following　remarkable　entry：　〃In　the　year　1436；　Messire　Phlin　Marcou　was　Sheriff　of　Metz；　and　on　the　20th　day　of　May　of　the　aforesaid　year　came　the　maid　Jeanne；　who　had　been　in　France；　to　La　Grange　of　Ormes；　near　St。　Prive；　and　was　taken　there　to　confer　with　any　one　of　the　sieurs　of　Metz；　and　she　called　herself　Claude；　and　on　the　same　day　there　came　to　see　her　there　her　two　brothers；　one　of　whom　was　a　knight；　and　was　called　Messire　Pierre；　and　the　other　'petit