1
10
15
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/1475a548da722f298870a78cf253f0e7.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=a8LoxNa3ID0aLLr0J%7Ehpyjf3GD1s3jgl5uc5dzkezbq1aSQt%7EGZwvRw2NggIdpf8D6uyuJt--eOSqcWFvMthPzkwiSyAGRpfUXLGJ8XrtBLOQBOq6N2fA61uCFSrIpot6HbVXfEIMBYdOMGzgCuqCrFDkQYgBGyE-cJd3-rWZYbUo9pELXIDBO44wFeANF4tENYY4Tl0-qfa0P-Ls3ao9aMN2CBGxJAvZWYH-FKf9hDfehYJM0LM9vaD4PMxWPKyNs2BiQ8-RgA6H1oVhsx6lkaCEaBaY-OmsAMcXRcMdnWLqZk84AziPZAd96qVkKuRSC2z-zxumyRc363hqZdQ7w__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
f01f82da3429e68b9a93b454f040ade0
PDF Text
Text
����������������
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Leith Hill and Wotton House
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [s.l.]
Collation: 9 p. ; 21 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Extensively annotated in ink (dated April 1871) and includes a letter folded and tipped inside the front cover headed 'Leith Hill and Wotton'.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[s.n.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1871
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT72
G5679
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
[Unknown]
Subject
The topic of the resource
Architecture
History
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Leith Hill and Wotton House), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Architecture
Conway Tracts
De Vere Wotton House
Leith Hill
Surrey
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/582ac85d2f34020dd35777cc1b0e1166.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=B1m3cNSraCnFdn9aGctkCZtxe18AZiYiXb-sn7XJxR3%7EmUOmbbatnN66s-7hYKv4-KGPCPOurKGmE0r%7EHW%7ESWqR4CsXeTVEc6LCDyorGOT9HHkOWUiPYj%7E3qXvpTKHg67jDWsBtvKyctVGfD-3qeIShbY95-20-AEl0qHB2yTiKHf6900eamqkLKPHmMVtHuauWBccuK6ocYIlNykhnuhwTcYts6DPwKsWcmg7LsdGsYmNcwpmATquMKov0ltrFqN4B-l9Yqoo0LsJPBnErx8uOApO9gc3iA6xhk5rDjhL1fUGqUOA7lre6AkNP6dSfVeNmPzMSPmIYrU8n%7EN7Zvbw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
768dc5e547f090ed4c8a5b9676aca073
PDF Text
Text
PUTNAM’S MAGAZINE
OF
LITERATURE, SCIENCE, ART,
AND
NATIONAL INTERESTS.
Vol. AL—MAY—1870.—No. XXIX.
OUR CELTIC INHERITANCE.
One of the oldest specimens of Gaelic
poetry tells how Oisin was once enticed
by fairies into a cavern, where, by some
of their magical arts, he was for a long
time imprisoned. To amuse himself
during his confinement, he was accus
tomed to whittle the handle of his spear,
and cast the shavings into a stream
which flowed at his feet. His father,
Finn, after many vain attempts to find
him, came one day to the stream, and,
recognizing the shavings floating on its
surface as portions of Oisin’s spear, fol
lowed the stream to its source and dis
covered his son.
The legend may illustrate the fate of
the people to whose literature it belongs.
It has been a perplexing question, what
became of that old Titan, who led the
van in the migrations of races west
ward, and whom Aristotle describes “ as
dreading neither earthquakes nor inun
dations ; as rushing armed into the
waves; as plunging their new-born in
fants into cold water ”—a custom still
common among the Irish—“ or clothing
them in scanty garments.”
Two thousand years ago, we know
from Ephorus and other classic geogra
phers, the Celts occupied more territory
than Teuton, Greek, and Latin com
bined. They were yronderful explor
ers; brave, enterprising, delighting in
the unknown and marvellous, they
pushed eagerly forward, over mountain
and river, through forest and morass,
until their dominion extended from the
western coasts of Ireland, France, and
Spain, to the marshes around St. Peters
burg and the frontiers of Cappadocia:
in fact, they were masters of all Europe,
except the little promontories of Italy
and Greece; and these were not safe
from their incursions. Six centuries
before Christ, we find them invading
Northern Italy, founding Milan, Verona,
Brixia, and inspiring them with a spirit
of independence which Roman tyranny
could never entirely subdue. Two cen
turies later, they descend from their
northern homes as far as Rome, become
masters of the city, kill the Senate, and
would have taken the capitol, had not
Camillus finally repulsed them. A cen
tury later, they pour into Greece in a
similar way, and would surely have
overrun that country, had not their pro
found reverence for the supernatural—
a characteristic not yet lost—led them
to turn back awed by the sacred rites
of Delphos. Their last and most formi
dable appearance among the classics
was in that famous campaign—a cen
tury before Caesar—when the skill and
bravery of Marius saved the Roman re
public.
Entered, in the year 1870. by G. P. PUTNAM & SON, in the Clerk’s Office of the District Court of the U. S. for the Southern District of
VOL. V.—34
N. T.
�514
Putnam’s Magazine.
[May,
Then the scales turn : the Romans be in the Anglo-Saxon the wonderful dis
come the invaders, and the Celts suffer coveries of modem science have made
I ruinous defeats. In that great battle so manifest, that men are beginning at
with Quintus Fabius Maximus, Csesar last to recognize them; and, during the
tells the Gauls two hundred thousand of past century, some of our most noted
their countrymen were slain. Through scholars have been patiently endeavor
nearly all the vast territory they once ing to trace them to their original
inhabited, the Roman empire became source.
supreme; and where Rome failed to
Philology, although one of the young
gain the supremacy, the persistent Teu est of our sciences, has been of the
tons, pressing closely on their rear, gen greatest service in putting us on the
erally completed the conquest. Every right track in our search after this pio
where, at the commencement of the neer of nations. By its subtle art of
Christian era,—except in the compara drawing from words—those oldest patively insignificant provinces of Ireland, limpsestic monuments of men, their
Scotland, Wales, and Armorica,—this original inscriptions—it has cleared up
great Celtic people vanish so suddenly many a mystery in which the old Celt
and so completely from history, that their seemed hopelessly enveloped. Those ad
former existence soon seems like one of venturous tribes who first forced their
the myths of a pre-historic age. In those way through the western European wil
regions where the Celts retained their derness, left memorials of their presence
identity, prolonged political and re which no succeeding invaders have been
ligious animosities have tended to throw able to efface, in the names they gave
into still greater oblivion all mementoes to prominent landmarks; so that “ the
of their early greatness. Their English mountains and rivers,”—to use a meta
rulers have treated them as members of phor of Palgrave’s,—“still murmur
an inferior race. Glorying in his popu voices ” of this denationalized people.
lar misnomer, the Anglo-Saxon has The Alps, Apennines, Pyrenees, the
generally ignored all kinship with those Rhine, Oder, and Avon,—all bear wit
Britons whom his ancestors subdued.
ness to the extensive dominion of the
“ Little superior to the natives of the race by whom these epithets were first
Sandwich Islands; ”—says Lord Macau bestowed. By means of these epithets,
lay in his positive way, and dismisses the the Celts have been traced from their
subject as unworthy farther notice. original home in Central Asia in two
“ When the Saxons arrived, the ancient diverging lines of migrations. Certain
Britons were all slain, or driven into tribes, forcing their way through north
the mountains of Walessay our com ern Europe, seem to have passed from
mon school histories. “ Aliens in the Cimbric Chersonese—or Denmark—
speech, in religion, in blood; ”—says into the north of Ireland and Scotland;
Lord Lyndhurst, with traditional viru others, taking a southerly route, finally
lence, in that speech which Sheil so ably entered the south of Great Britain from
answered.
the northern coasts of France and Spain.
Still, scraps from Oisin’s spear have The British Isles became thus the termi
been floating down the current of An nus of two widely-diverging Celtic mi
glo-Saxon life. In language, words grations.
have arisen; in politics, literature, and
Naturally, the different climatic influ
religion, ideas and sentiments have been ences to which they were subject dur
expressed, bearing unmistakably the ing their separate wanderings, tended
' impress of the old Titan, and showing to produce a variety of dialects and
conclusively that his spirit, although so popular characteristics. Those old Brit
long concealed, was still influencing and ons, however, whom Csesar first intro
inspiring even the descendants of Heng- duces to history, all belonged substan
ist and Horsa.
tially to one people. Zeuss, after a
These evidences of a Celtic presence patient drudgery of thirteen years in
�1870.]
Oue Celtic Inheritance.
515
investigating the oldest Celtic manu- names you find like Lewis, Morgan,
scripts, has proved beyond question, in Jenkins, Davis, Owen, Evans, Hughes,
his Grammatica Celtica, not only that Bowen, Griffiths, Powel, and Williams.
the Cymry, or modern Welsh, are of the Scarcely less numerous are the Gaelic
same family with the Gael or modem Camerons, Campbells, Craigs, Cunning
Irish and Scotch, but that all the Celtic hams, Dixons, Douglasses, Duffs, Dun
people are only another division of cans, Grahams, Grants, Gordons, Mac
that great Indo-European family out of donalds, Macleans, Munros, Murrays,
which the nations of Europe originally Reids, Robertsons, and Scotts.
sprang. More extensive philological in
Although the application of these
vestigations have indicated a still near surnames has been a custom only dur
er relationship between the Celt and ing the past four hundred years, still
the Anglo-Saxon. In Great Britain, they show that, at some period, we
Celtic names linger not only upon all must have received a large infusion of
the mountains and rivers, with scarcely Celtic blood.
an exception, but upon hundreds and
Physiology has also something to say
hundreds of the towns and villages, on this subject. A careful comparison
valleys and brooks, and the more insig of the different physical types has
nificant localities of the country.
shown that the Celtic is found almost
How frequently Aber and Inver, Bod as frequently among the English as the
and Caer or Car, Strath and Ard, ap Saxon. The typical Saxon of olden
pear in combination as the eye glances times had the broad, short oval skull,
over a map of England. Is not this fact with yellowish or tawny red hair. The
most naturally explained by the suppo old Celt had the long oval skull, with
sition that Briton and Saxon grew up black hair. Climate undoubtedly modi
together in the same localities so inti fied to some extent these types, the
mately, that the latter found it most northern tribes of the Celts possessing
convenient to adopt the names of places lighter hair than the southern; still,
which the former had already bestowed ? these were generally the distinguishing
The Celtic root with Saxon suffix or physical characteristics of the two
prefix, so often greeting us in any de races.
scription of English topography, cer
How, then, have these characteristics
tainly hints at a closer amalgamation been perpetuated ? Retzius, one of the
of the two races than school histories best Swedish ethnologists, after making
are wont to admit. So the language extensive observations and comparisons,
we daily speak, frequently as it has gives it as his opinion that the prevail
been denied, is found strongly impreg ing form of the skull found throughout
nated with Celtic words, and many of England is the long oval, or the same
these our most idiomatic and expres which is found still in Scotland, Ire
sive. Balderdash, banner, barley, bas land, and Wales. His statements are
ket, bicker, bother, bully, carol, cudgel, confirmed by many other ethnologists.
dastard, fudge, grudge, grumble, har Somehow, after crossing the German
lot, hawker, hoyden, loafer, lubber, Ocean, the broad, roundish-headed Sax
nudge, trudge,—may serve as speci on became “ long-headed.” And his hair
mens. The unwritten dialects which changed. Yellow, or tawny red, is by
prevail in so many parts of England, no means now the prevailing colof
give still more numerous examples of among the Anglo-Saxons. Any English
this Celtic element.
assembly will show a much greater pro
If we turn now to our family sur portion of dark-haired than light-haired
names, we shall also find indications people. Different habits and occupa
of a similar race amalgamation. The tions have undoubtedly contributed
Cymric Joneses are only equalled by the somewhat to effect this change. Ger
Saxon Smiths. Take any of our ordi mans and English have alike grown
nary directories, and how many Cymric darker during the past one thousand
�516
Putnam’s Magazine.
years; still, the marked difference which
to-day exists between the Anglo-Saxon
and his brethren on the continent is
too great to be accounted for,—except
through some decided modification of
the race relation. The Celts are the
only race to whom such modifications
can with any propriety be attributed.
Whence came, then, this popular opin
ion that the old Britons were either de
stroyed or expelled from the country by
their Saxon conquerors ? Are the state
ments of history and the conclusions
of modem science so contradictory in
this matter ? Let us see. At the Ro
man invasion, 55 b. c., Great Britain
seems to have been thickly settled.
Csesar says: “ The population is infi
nite, and the houses very numerous.”
Eh one battle, 80,000 Britons were left
dead on the field; and in one campaign
the Romans lost 50,000 soldiers. It
took the Roman legions nearly three
hundred years to bring the southern
portion of the island under subjection;
—and then that great wall of Severus—
seventy-four miles long, eight feet thick,
twelve feet high, with eighty-one cas
tles and three hundred and thirty tur
rets,—was erected to secure the conquest
from the warlike tribes of the north—a
stupendous undertaking, surely, to pro
tect a province so worthless as Macau
lay asserts!
Ptolemy enumerates no less than
twenty British confederacies—with great
resources—south of this wall, and eigh
teen upon the north. During the five
centuries of Roman dominion, they
steadily increased. There was not suffi
cient admixture of Latin blood to
change essentially the Celtic character
of the race. The Latins came to con
trol, not to colonize. When Rome, for
Her own protection, was obliged to recall
her legions, thus relinquishing the prov
ince which had cost so much time and
treasure to secure, we are distinctly told
most of the Latins returned, taking
their treasures with them.
What, then, became of the numerous
Britons who remained? Their condi
tion was deplorable. Accustomed to
rely upon Roman arms for defense and
[May,
Roman magistrates for the administra
tion of law, they were suddenly deprived
of both defenders and rulers. While
Latin civilization had developed their
resources enough to make them a more
tempting prize to their warlike neigh
bors, it had rendered them almost inca
pable of guarding the treasures they
had gained. They had grown unwar
like—had lost both weapons and their
use.
Moreover, a crowd of rival aspirants
at once began a contest for the vacant
throne. It is not difficult to believe
the statements of our earliest historians,
that many, thus threatened by external
foes and internal dissensions, were ready
to welcome as allies the Saxon maraud
ers, preferring to receive them as friends
than to resist them as foes. The Saxons
evidently were determined to come; and
the Briton,—with characteristic craft,—
concluded to array Pict and Saxon
against each other, hoping, doubtless,
both would thus become less formi
dable.
Those Saxons also came in detach
ments, and at different intervals. They
were generally warriors, the picked men
of their tribes. Finding a better coun
try, and a people without rulers, they
quietly determined to take possession
of both. Their final ascendency was
gained, not by superiority of numbers,
but by superiority of will and of arms.
It seems utterly incredible to suppose,
that, in their little open boats, they
could have transported across the Ger
man Ocean a multitude great enough to
outnumber the original British inhabi
tants. All accounts indicate that they
were numerically inferior. Nearly one
hundred and fifty years of hard fight
ing were necessary before Saxon author
ity could take the place of the Roman.
The Welsh historical Triads tells us
that whole bodies of the Britons entered
into “ confederacy with their con
querors”—became Saxons. The Saxon
Chronicle, which, meagre and dry as it
is, still gives the truest account we have
of those dark periods, states that whole
counties, and numerous towns within
the limits of the Heptarchy,—nearly five
�1870.]
Our Celtic Inheritance.
hundred years after the first Saxon in
vasion,—were occupied almost entirely
by Britons; and that there were many
■hsurrections of semi- Saxonized subjects
in the different kingdoms. Bede, speak
ing of Ethelfred as the most cruel of
the Saxon chieftains, says he compelled
the Britons to be “tributary,” or to
leave the country. The great mass of
the people seem to have chosen the for
mer condition, and to have accepted
their new rulers as they had done the
old. There is not the slightest evidence
of any wholesale extermination by the
Saxons, or of any extensive Celtic emi
gration, except two passages found in
Gildas, our earliest historian. In one
of these, he speaks of the Britons as
having been slain like wolves, or driv
en into mountains; and in the other, of
a company of British monks guiding
an entire tribe of men and women to
Armorica, singing,—as they crossed the
channel in their vessels of skin,—“ Thou
hast given us as sheep to the slaughter.”
Gildas’ statements are so contradic
tory and erroneous, as every historical
student knows, that they must be re
ceived with great allowance. He evi
dently hated the Saxons, and shows a
disposition, in all his descriptions, to
exaggerate the injuries his countrymen
had received. Undoubtedly the Saxons
often exhibited the savage ferocity com
mon in those days, killing and enslav
ing their enemies without much com
punction ; undoubtedly many of the
British, who had been Christianized,
fled from the pagan violence of their
conquerors to the more congenial coun
tries of Armorica and Wales; but that
most of them were obliged thus to
choose between a violent death or ex
ile, is sufficiently disproved, I think, by
the evidence already given.
The adoption of the Saxon language
is also sometimes cited as evidence of
the destruction of the old Britons;
but conquerors have very often given
language to their subjects, even when
the subjects were more numerous than
themselves.
Thus the Latin was
adopted in Gaul; thus the Arabic
followed the conquests pf the Mussul
517
mans. Yet there is nothing but this
argument from language and the state
ments of Gildas—which later histo
rians have so blindly copied—to give
any foundation to the common opin
ion of an unmixed Saxon population.
AU other historical records and infer
ences indicate that the Anglo-Saxon
—when that name was first applied, in
the ninth century—represented as large
a proportion of Celtic as of Teutonic
blood.
Future invasions effected little change
in this proportion. The Danes, indeed,
increased somewhat the Teutonic ele
ment, although they made fearful havoc
among the old Saxons; but the Nor
mans brought with them fully as many
Gauls as Norsemen; and since the Nor
man conquest, the Celtic element has
rather increased than diminished.
It is fitting that the Lia Fail, or stone
of destiny, which Edward I. brought
from Scotland, and upon which the
Celtic kings for many generations had
been crowned, should still form the
seat of the English throne, and thus
become a symbol—although undesigned
—of that Celtic basis which really un
derlies the whole structure of Anglo?
Saxon dominion.
If it be admitted, then, that the Celt
formed so large a proportion of those
races out of which the English people
were finally composed, it becomes an.
interesting question whether any ot
their spiritual characteristics became
also the property of their conquerors.
What were these old Celts ? Did their
blood enrich, or impoverish, the Saxon ?
Did they leave us any inheritance be
yond certain modifications of speech
and form ? ^An answer to these ques
tions may also serve to confirm the con
clusions already stated.
We do not get much satisfaction to
such inquiries from contemporary his
torians in other lands. The self-com
placent classic troubled himself little
about neighboring barbarians, provid
ed they did not endanger his safety
or tempt his cupidity. That they
traded in tin with the seafaring Phoe
nicians, three hundred years before
�518
Putnam’s Magazine.
Christ; that, in. the time of Csesar and
Augustus, they had many barbarous
customs, but had also their chariots,
fleets, currency, commerce, poets, and
an order of priests who were supreme
in all matters pertaining to religion,
education, and government;—these, in
brief, are the principal facts gleaned
from the meagre accounts of Greek and
Roman writers concerning the inhabi
tants of the Ultima Thule of the ancient
world. Saxon historians add little to
this information. From the time of
Gildas to Macaulay, they have generally
viewed the Celt through the distorted
medium of their popular prejudices.
The Celt, then, must be his own in
terpreter ; yet the Celt of to-day, after
suffering for so many centuries a treat
ment which has tended to blunt and
destroy his best talent, and after long
association with foreign thoughts and
customs, is by no means the best repre
sentative of his pagan ancestors.
In some way—through their own pro
ductions, if possible—we must get at
the old Celts themselves before we can
determine with any certainty how many
of our popular characteristics can be
attributed with any propriety to such a
source. Aside from their language,
which we have already alluded to, their
oldest works are those weird megalithic
ruins—scattered all over western Eu
rope, and most numerous in Brittany
and Great Britain. That these were of
Celtic origin, seems indicated both by
their greater number and perfection in
those countries where the Celt retained
longest his identity, and by certain cor
respondences in form and masonry with
the earliest known Celtic structures,—
the cells of Irish monks,4-and the fa
mous round towers of Ireland.
Those round towers,—after being vari
ously explained as fire-towers, astro
nomical observatories, phallic emblems,
stylite columns, &c.,—Dr. Petrie has very
clearly proved were of ecclesiastical ori
gin, built between the fifth and thir
teenth centuries, and designed for bel
fries, strongholds, and watch-towers.
Yet these cellsand towers alike exhibit
the same circular form and dome roof,
[May,
the same ignorance of the arch and ce
ment, which are revealed in many of the
older and more mysterious ruins.
If we suppose a mythical people of
the stone age preceded the Indo-Euro
peans in their wanderings,—and there
seems no need of such a supposition,
since it has been so clearly shown by
some of our best pre-historic archaeolo
gists, that the transition from imple
ments of stone to iron has frequently
taken place among the same people,—it
may still be said these ruins are entirely
dissimilar to the productions of such a
people in other lands: they mark a
higher degree of civilization, and show
clearly, in certain cases, the use of me
tallic instruments. Some of them re
veal also great mechanical skill, fore
thought, and extraordinary command
of labor. Most of these ruins are at
least two thousand years old. They
have been exposed constantly to the
destructive influences of a northern cli
mate ;—and any one who has noticed the
ravages which merely six centuries have
wrought upon even the protected stone
work of English cathedrals, can appre
ciate the power of these, atmospheric
vandals;—they have suffered even great
er injury from successive invaders; and
still few can gaze upon them to-day
without being impressed with their
massive grandeur.
Of the vast ruins of Carnac, in Brit
tany, four thousand great triliths still
remain; some of these are twentv-two
feet high, twelve feet broad, and six
feet thick, and are estimated to weigh
singly 256,800 pounds. Says M. Cam
bray : “ These stones have a most ex
traordinary appearance. They are iso
lated in a great plain without trees or
bushes ; not a flint or fragment of stone
is to be seen on the sand which supports
them; they are poised without founda
tion, several of them being movable.”
In Abury and Stonehenge there are
similar structures, not as extensive, in
deed, but giving evidence of much
greater architectural and mechanical
skill. They are found also in different
parts of Great Britain and the Orkney
Islands and the Hebrides.
�T870/]
Oub Celtic Inhebitanoe.
How were these immense stones transported—for there are no quarries within
seveml miles—and by what machinery
could the great lintels of Stonehenge,
for instance, have been raised to their
present position ?
We may smile incredulously at the
learned systems of Oriental mythology
which enthusiastic antiquaries have dis
covered in these voiceless sentinels of
forgotten builders, but can we question
the evidence they give of scientific pro
ficiency—superior to any ever attained
by a “ race of savages ” ?
' Their cromlechs, or tombs, exhibit
clearly the same massiveness. The Irish
people still call them f£ giant beds,” but
they give us no additional information
concerning the people whose skeletons
they contain ;—unless there be a sugges
tion in the kneeling posture in which
their dead were generally buried, of
that religious reverence which charac
terized them when alive.
In the Barrows—or great mounds of
earth—which they seem to have used at
a later period as sepulchres, we do get
a few more interesting hints concerning
their early condition. In these, large
numbers of necklaces, swords, and va
rious ornaments and weapons in gold
and bronze,—some of exquisite work
manship and original design,—have been
found, showing at least that they had
the art of working metals, and many
of the customs of a comparatively civil
ized life. All these relics, however,
although interesting in themselves, and
confirming the few statements of classic
historians, only serve to correct the pop
ular notion concerning the savage con
dition of the old Britons. They leave
us still in ignorance of those mental and
spiritual characteristics which we are
most anxious to discover.
By far the most extensive and valu
able material for determining the char
acter of the ancient Celt, although the
most neglected, is presented in their lit
erature. Few persons I imagine who have
given the subject no special investiga
tion, are aware how extensive this litera
ture is, as found in the Gaelic and Cym
ric tongues. In the library of Trinity
519
College, Dublin, there are one hundred
ajid forty manuscript volumes. A still
more extensive collection is in the Royal
Irish Academy. There are also large coll
lections in the British Museum, and in
the Bodleian Library and Imperial libra
ries of France and Belgium, and in the
Vatican;—besides numerous private col
lections in the possession of the nobility
of Ireland, Great Britain, and on the
continent.
To give an idea of these old manu
scripts, O’Curry has taken as a standard
of comparison the Annals of the Four
Masters, which was published in 1851,
in seven large quarto volumes contain
ing 4,215 closely-printed pages. There
are, in the same library, sixteen other
vellum volumes, which, if similarly
published, would make 17,400 pages;
and six hundred paper manuscripts,
comprising 30,000 pages. Mac Firbis’
great book of genealogies would alone
fill 1,300 similar pages; and the old
Brehon laws, it is calculated, when pub
lished, will contain 8,000 pages.
The Cymric collection, although less
extensive, still comprises more than one
thousand volumes. Some of these, in
deed, are only transcripts of the same
productions, yet many of them are
original works.
A private collection at Peniath num
bers upward of four hundred manu
scripts ; and a large number are in the
British Museum, in Jesus College, and
in the libraries of various noblemen of
England and Wales.
The Myvyrian manuscripts, collected
by Owen Jones, and now deposited in
the British Museum, alone amount to
forty-seven volumes of poetry, in 16,000
pages, and fifty-three volumes of prose,
in about 15,300 pages; and these com
prise only a small portion of the manu
scripts now existing. Extensive as are
these collections, we know, from trust
worthy accounts, the Danish invaders
of Ireland, in the ninth and tenth cen-d
turies, made it a special business to tear,
burn, and drown—to quote the exact
word—all books and records which
were found in any of the churches,
dwellings, or monasteries of the island.
�520
Putnam’s Magazine.
The great wars of the seventeenth cen
tury proved still more destructive to
the Irish manuscripts. The jealous
Protestant conquerors burnt all they
could find among the Catholics. A
great number of undiscovered manu
scripts are referred to and quoted in
those which now exist. From their
titles, we judge more have been lost
than preserved. So late as the sixteenth
century, many were referred to as then
in existence, of which no trace can now
be found. Some of them may still be
hidden in the old monasteries and cas
tles. The finding of the book of Lis
more is an illustration of what may
have been the fate of many. In 1814,
while the Duke of Devonshire was re
pairing his ancient castle of Lismore,
the workmen had occasion to reopen a
doorway which had been long closed, in
the interior of the castle. They found
concealed within it a box containing an
old manuscript and a superb old crozier. The manuscript had been some
what injured by the dampness, and por
tions of it had been gnawed by rat3.
Moreover, when it was discovered, the
workmen carried off several leaves as
mementoes. Some of these were after
ward recovered, and enough now re
mains to give us valuable additions to
our knowledge of Irish customs and tra
ditions. It is by no means improbable
that others, similarly secreted in monas
teries and private dwellings, may still
be discovered.
In O’Clery’s preface to the “ Succes
sion of Kings ’’—one of the most valu
able of the Irish annals—he says:
“ Strangers have taken the principal
books of Erin into strange countries
and among unknown people.” And
again, in the preface to the “ Book of
Invasions ”: “ Sad evil! Short was the
time until dispersion and decay over
took the churches of the saints, their
relics, and their books; for there is not
to be found of them now that has not
been carried away into distant coun
tries and foreign nations; carried away,
so that their fate is not known from
that time hither.”
When we consider, thus, the number
[May,
of literary productions which have been
either lost or destroyed, and the num
ber still remaining, we must admit that
there has been, at some period, great
intellectual activity among the Celtic
people. How far back these produc
tions may be traced, is a question which
cannot now be discussed properly, with
out transgressing the limits assigned to
this article. We can do little more, at
present, than call attention to the ex
tent of these writings, and their impor
tance. Many of them are unquestion
ably older than the Canterbury Tales;
they give us the clearest insight into the
character of a people once great and
famous, but now almost lost in oblivion;
and, although containing a large amount
of literary rubbish, they still comprise
numerous poems, voluminous codes of
ancient laws, extensive annals—older
than any existing European nation can ex
hibit in its own tongue, and a body of
romance which no ancient literature has
ever excelled, and from which modern
fiction drew its first inspiration.
Had this literature no special relation
to our own history, we might naturally
suppose it would repay investigation
for the curious information it contains
of a bygone age, and the intellectual
stimulus it might impart. The condi
tion of Ireland, to-day, is also of such
importance to England and America—
the Irish Celt, in this nineteenth cen
tury, enters so prominently into our
politics and questions of reform, that
every thing is worth investigating which
can reveal to us more clearly his charac
ter and capacity.
But these productions of his ances
tors have for us a still deeper signifi
cance. They are peculiarly our inheri
tance. Celt or Teuton, or both, we
must mainly be ; our ancestry can natu
rally be assigned to no other races.
Much in us is manifestly not Teutonic.
The Anglo-Saxon is quite a different
being from all other Saxons. Climate
and occupation may explain, in a meas
ure, the difference, but not entirely.
Some of the prominent traits which
Englishmen and Americans alike pos
sess, belong so clearly to the German,
�1870.1
The Tale
of a
Comet.
K21
I
or Teutonic people, in every land, that the sentiments of their people, then
we do not hesitate to ascribe them at these old manuscripts become of incal
once to our Saxon blood;—but what culable value in explaining our indebt
shall we do with others equally promi edness to those Britons, who, as history
nent, and naturally foreign to Teutons and science alike indicate, contributed
so essentially to our popular forma
everywhere ?
Were these found peculiarly charac tion.
On some future occasion, we may pre
terizing the Celts from their earliest his
tory, might we not—must we not—with sent such illustrations of their antiquity
equal propriety also ascribe them to our and general character, as will make it
appear still more clearly that the AngloCeltic blood 1
If, then, it can be shown—and we Saxon is—what we might expect the
think it can—that, not only before the offspring of two such varied races to
time of Gower and Chaucer, but also become—the union of the varied char
before Caedmon uttered the first note acteristics of Celt and Teuton, stronger,
of English song, Celtic wits and poets braver, more complete in every respect,
were busy expressing in prose and verse for his diverse parentage.
THE TALE OF A COMET.
IN TWO PARTS:
I.
“ Berum nature tsacra sun non simul tradit. Initiates nos credimus; in vestibulo ejus haeremus.”
Seneca. Nat. Quaest. vii.
young man, my dear Bernard, because I
have confidence in the evenness of your
The year in which the comet came I disposition, and the steady foothold you
was living by myself, at the windmill. have obtained upon the middle way of
Early in May I received from my friend life. He is an anomaly, and therefore
must be treated with prudence, and a
the Professor the following letter:
tender reserve such as we need not
“College Observatory, May 5.
exercise toward the rough-and-tumble
“Mv Dear Bernard.—I want to ask youth of the crowd. In fact, this young
a favor, which, if you please to grant it, I man Baimond Letoile is a unique and
honestly think will contribute sensibly perfect specimen of that rare order of
to the advancement of science, without beings, which, not being able to anato
causing much disorder to your bachelor mize and classify, owing to the infre
life. I want you, in fact, to take a pupil. quency of their occurrence, we men of
There has come to us a very strange Science carelessly label under the name
young man, who knows nothing but the of Genius, and put away upon our shelves
mathematics; but knows them so thor for future examination. Letoile is cer
oughly and with such remarkable and tainly a genius, and when properly in
intuitive insight, that I am persuaded he structed, I believe he will develop a
is destined to become the wonder of this faculty for the operations of pure science
age. His name is Raimond Letoile; he such as has no parallel, unless we turn
is about twenty years old, and his nature, to the arts and compare him with Ra
so far as I can determine upon slight ac phael and Mozart. He is a born mathe
quaintance, is singularly amiable, pure, matician. And when I say this, I do
and unsophisticated. His recommenda not mean that he simply has an extraor
tions are good, he has money sufficient for dinary power of calculation, like Colburn
all his purposes, and I think you will find and those other prodigies who have
him a companion as well as a pupil, proved but pigmies after all — I mean
who, while giving you but little trouble, that he possesses an intuitive faculty for
will reward you for your care by the the higher analysis, and possesses it to
contemplation of his unexampled pro such a wonderful degree that all of us
gress. I want you to take charge of this here stand before him in genuine amazeI.—THE rEOFBSSOB’s LETTER.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Our Celtic inheritance
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [New York]
Collation: [513]-521 p. ; 22 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. From Putnam's Magazine of Literature, Science, Art, and National Interests. Vol. V, No. XXIX, May 1870. Printed in double columns.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[G. P. Putnam's Sons]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1870
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5564
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<p class="western"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" name="graphics1" width="88" height="31" border="0" alt="88x31.png" /></p>
<p class="western">This work (Our Celtic inheritance), identified by <span style="color:#0000ff;"><span lang="zxx"><u>Humanist Library and Archives</u></span></span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</p>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
[Unknown]
Subject
The topic of the resource
History
Celts
Conway Tracts
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/e6f4eb734a710d7e16981fd2ac0b3c3d.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=TGkviAtsWhAd2sjnAHS-7anK37rGf9fHuqswonSHuP7dRLIwjnrYsCkF1XMM0xLuThQfNfH5SnbnIStjgalGseGX6Yuf8Ghn2pkC6r78o%7EgIyLTvRUfGfSHXZqFj5q-Gm5CWTP0RCXYEaLaX4RU3%7EeFZgLajBXncay0EXddIog2Rc9jfvvJd1GIwwBxRFfoQ8ZPX6Yk1z9kSDfGkOqYwj9I0YqQ3gBEmm-dqg5uOnZ20ruN%7EH35V1UB1dO-Wq2xntAP1tO9kIgU-xm89mKF5BzC8uHWE%7EzwlkJShE9GoIK8f7JxS0B7XBfA0fk41GdOdmsFgdc8aKR6%7Ea8x5PY-YTA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
13d9798d4abf4c244d9e9a8ac26c5e1f
PDF Text
Text
�����������������
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Thomas Henry Buckle
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [s.l.]
Collation: p. 361-377 ; 22 cm.
Notes: Includes bibliographical references. Annotations in pencil on page 361 "Frasers Mag". From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. From Fraser's Magazine, 21 (March 1880). Fraser's Magazine for Town and Country was a general and literary journal published in London from 1830 to 1882, which initially took a strong Tory line in politics.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[s.n.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1880
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT29
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
[Unknown]
Subject
The topic of the resource
History
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Thomas Henry Buckle), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Henry Thomas Buckle
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/30482e67f54cd0847c9723969e0ac3e1.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=XwQxjuEaCbLlYO8qGR7KBhgWiHF%7ETasPJzQuPXqIsZmCWmycP5E5KfJSCGn2WN5xAHx%7EcU7OIj-NdN0LzCbnJu83JKK5JQfCtwIKVcpcwcxBFira070C%7EBkSJa0itXWnITw8DcH2ZCb3ygNlIz7vPnbA-6YVYHW%7EHIuJFB1ADMflhRjFZl852iPf2yGU58wtYk2pHjbHhxjOHMrBHehrgxJuFwHIRXBAmePtUYiv5YesPei4Vt4VUboifnj2FleEbeyp7HBdjdcisyxfdAYnwpaeKyryRYxp7EPLnGjBNAgpD6r7i-f--iwgyME%7EiJBoECXBEZkegqjQ99Uos8b0Rg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
b43018419b5cfb7895a0adac43f575a6
PDF Text
Text
�������������������������������������������������������������
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Old and new London
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [s.l.]
Collation: 181-240 p. ; 27 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[s.n.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[n.d.]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5740
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
[Unknown]
Subject
The topic of the resource
London
History
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Old and new London), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
London (England)-History
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/04177c32d969fae07eddb2b51ea5f209.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=PCUse8SdLChNfI8Dha4DXbgS7-yCoukR4BbRhhBxpc5WBEwEeGfCUvOccM%7EXFUvdde4tsGkl-Sv%7EEIRfkIxbhESzhpez4LwnWnF-GvgWTqeD6WocqObW5jsj%7E%7ECcD9mMSsWN0lRyiLpw9LvCmoyHmYWjQaKPcg3mo9HpaVS%7EpoAkuae2LDSlhFOgNlfHbkycbmBI4Xmpy4D3gPHu-1-sqp%7E0xoTM94VoHxzrAoyd2wntboO5dAh%7EuiB5PjhJpg3GzrNUVi1J%7EzScx7U4UaJbqPKU2LsA54aVZcVyXofceuZi49%7E14J5a8BwwEuMGO1OO0yjAaijkGZ%7EVrgFxFwaqmw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
e1d154963375864700c0850440f0cf60
PDF Text
Text
f Wf
6^"
llnrtljtunlicrliinii gause anft tljc |trri)5.
When Hotspur treads the stage with passionate grace, the spectator
hardly dreams of the fact that the princely original lived, paid taxes,
and was an active man of his parish, in Aldersgate Street. There,
however, stood the first Northumberland House. By the ill-fortune
of Percy it fell to the conquering side in the serious conflict in which
Hotspur was engaged; and Henry the Fourth made a present of it
to his queen, Jane. Thence it got the name of the Queen’s Wardrobe.
Subsequently it was converted into a printing office; and, in the
course of time, the first Northumberland House disappeared altogether.
In Fenchurch Street, not now a place wherein to look for nobles,
the great Earls of Northumberland were grandly housed in the
time of Henry the Sixth; but vulgar citizenship elbowed the earls
too closely, and they ultimately withdrew from the City. The deserted
mansion and grounds were taken possession of by the roysterers.
Dice were for ever rattling in the stately saloons. Winners shouted
for joy, and blasphemy was considered a virtue by the losers. As
for the once exquisite gardens, they were converted into bowlinggreens, titanic billiards, at which sport the gayer City sparks breathed
themselves for hours in the summer time. There was no place of
entertainment so fashionably frequented as this second Northumber
land House; but dice and bowls were at length to be enjoyed in
more vulgar places, and “ the old seat of the Percys was deserted by
fashion.” On the site of mansion and gardens, houses and cottages
were erected, and the place knew its old glory no more. So ended
the second Northumberland House.
While the above mansions or palaces were the pride of all
Londoners and the envy of many, there stood on the strand of the
Thames, at the bend of the river, near Charing Cross, a hospital and
chapel, whose founder, William Marshal, Earl of Pembroke, had
dedicated it to St. Mary, and made it an appanage to the Priory of
Boncesvalle, in Navarre. Hence the hospital on our river strand
was known by the name of “ St. Mary Rouncivall.” The estate went
the way of such property at the dissolution of the monasteries; and
the first lay proprietor of the" forfeited property was a Sir Thomas
Cawarden. It was soon after acquired by Henry Howard, Earl of
Northampton, son of the first Earl of Surrey. Howard, early in
the reign of James the First, erected on the site of St. Mary’s
Hospital a brick mansion which, under various names, has developed
�190
NOKTIIUMBEELAND HOUSE AND THE PEECYS.
into that third and present Northumberland House which is about to
fall under pressure of circumstances, the great need of London* and
the argument of half a million of money.
Thus the last nobleman who has clung to the Strand, which, on
its south side, was once a line of palaces, is about to leave it for ever.
The bishops were the first to reside on that river-bank outside the
City walls. Nine episcopal palaces were once mirrored in the then
clear waters of the Thames. The lay nobles followed, when they
felt themselves as safe in that fresh and healthy air as the prelates.
The chapel of the Savoy is still a royal chapel, and the memories of
time-honoured Lancaster and of John, the honest King 'of France,
still dignify the place. But the last nobleman who resided so far
from the now recognised quarters of fashion is about to leave what has
been the seat of the Howards and Percys for nearly three centuries,
and the Strand will be able no longer to boast of a duke. It will
still, however, possess an English earl; but he is only a modest
lodger in Norfolk Street.
When the Duke of Northumberland goes from the Strand, there
goes with him a shield with very nearly nine hundred quarterings;
and among them are the arms of Henry the Seventh, of the sovereign
houses of France, Castile, Leon, and Scotland, and of the ducal
houses of Normandy and Brittany I Nunquam minus solus quam
cum solus, might be a fitting motto for a nobleman who, when he
stands before a glass, may see therein, not only the Duke, but also the
Earl of Northumberland, Earl Percy, Earl of Beverley, Baron Lovaine
of Alnwick, Sir Algernon Percy, Bart., two doctors (LL.D, and D.C.L.)
a colonel, several presidents, and the patron of two-and-twenty livings.
As a man who deals with the merits of a book is little or nothing
concerned with the binding thereof, with the water-marks, or with
the printing, but is altogether concerned with the life that is within,
thatjs, with the author, his thoughts, and his expression of them, so,
in treating of Northumberland House, we care much less for notices
of the building than of its inhabitants—less for the outward aspect
than for what has been said or done beneath its roof. If we look
with interest at a mere wall which screens from sight the stage
of some glorious or some terrible act, it is not for the sake of the
wall or its builders: our interest is in the drama and its actors.
Who cares, in speaking of Shakespeare and Hamlet, to know the
name of the stage carpenter at the Globe or the Blackfriars ? Suffice
it to say, that Lord Howard, who was an amateur architect of some
merit, is supposed to have had a hand in designing the old house in
the Strand, and that Gerard Christmas and Bernard Jansen are
said to have been his “ builders.” Between that brick house and the
present there is as much sameness as in the legendary knife which,
after having had a new handle, subsequently received in addition a
�NORTHUMBERLAND HOUSE AND THE PERCYS.^lOT
new blade. The old house occupied three sides of a square. The
fourth side, towards the river, was completed in the middle of the
Seventeenth century. The portal retains something of the old work,
but so little as to he scarcely recognisable, except to professional eyes.
From the date of its erection till 1614 it bore the name of
Northampton House. In that year it passed by will from Henry
Howard, Lord Northampton, to his nephew, Thomas Howard, Earl of
Suffolk, from whom it was called Suffolk House. In 1642, Elizabeth,
daughter of Theophilus, second Earl of Suffolk, married Algernon
Percy, tenth Earl of Northumberland, and the new master gave his
name to the old mansion. The above-named Lord Northampton was
the man who has been described as foolish when young, infamous
when old, an encourager, at threescore years and ten, of his niece,
the infamous Countess of Essex; and who, had he lived a few months
longer, would probably have been hanged for his share, with that niece
and others, in the mysterious murder of Sir Thomas Overbury. Thus,
the founder of the house was noble only in name; his successor and
nephew has not left a much more brilliant reputation. He was con
nected, with his wife, in frauds upon the King, and was fined heavily.
The heiress of Northumberland, who married his son, came of a
noble but ill-fated race, especially after the thirteenth Baron Percy
was created Earl of Northumberland in 1377. Indeed, the latter title
had been borne by eleven persons before it was given to a Percy, and
by far the greater proportion of the whole of them came to grief. Of
one of them it is stated that he (Alberic) was appointed Earl in
1080, but that, proving unfit for the dignity, he was displaced, and a
Norman bishop named in his stead! The idea of turning out from
high estate those who were unworthy or incapable is one that might
suggest many reflections, if it were not scandalum magnatum to
make them.
In the chapel at Alnwick Castle there is displayed a genealogical
tree. At the root of the Percy branches is “ Charlemagne ”; and
there is a sermon in the whole, much more likely to scourge pride
than to stimulate it, if the thing be rightly considered. However this
may be, the Percys find their root in Karloman, the Emperor, through
Joscelin of Louvain, in this way: Agnes de Percy was, in the
twelfth century, the sole heiress of her house. Immensely rich, she
had many suitors. Among these was Joscelin, brother of Godfrey,
sovereign Duke of Brabant, and of Adelicia, Queen Consort of Henry
the First of England. Joscelin held that estate at Petworth which
has not since gone out of the hands of his descendants. This princely
suitor of the heiress Agnes was only accepted by her as husband on
condition of his assuming the Percy name. Joscelin consented; but
he added the arms of Brabant and Louvain to the Percy shield, in
order that, if succession to those titles and possessions should ever be
�192
NORTHUMBERLAND HOTSE AND THE PERCYS.
stopped for want of an heir, his claim might be kept in remembrance.
Now, this Joscelin was lineally descended from “ Charlemagne,^ and,
therefore, that greater name lies at the root of the Percy pedigree,
which glitters in gold on the walls of the ducal chapel in the castle
at Alnwick.
Very rarely indeed did the Percys, who were the earlier Earls of
Northumberland, die in their beds. The first of them, Henry, was
slain (1407) in the fight on Bramham Moor. The second, another
Henry (whose father, Hotspur, was killed in the hot affair near
Shrewsbury), lies within St. Alban’s Abbey Church, having poured
out his lifeblood in another Battle of the Boses, fought near that
town named after the saint. The blood of the third Earl helped to
colour the roses, which are said to have grown redder from the gore
of the slain on Towton’s hard-fought field. The forfeited title was
transferred, in 1465, to Lord John Nevill Montagu, great Warwick’s
brother; but Montagu soon lay among the dead in the battle near
Barnet. The title was restored to another Henry Percy, and that
unhappy Earl was murdered, in 1489, at his house, Cocklodge, near
Thirsk. In that fifteenth century there was not a single Earl of
Northumberland who died a peaceful and natural death.
In the succeeding century the first line of Earls, consisting of six
Henry Percys, came to an end in that childless noble whom Anne
Boleyn called “ the Thriftless Lord.” He died childless in 1537. He
had, indeed, two brothers, the elder of whom might have succeeded to
the title and estates; but both brothers, Sir Thomas and Sir Tngram,
had taken up arms in the “ Pilgrimage of Grace.” Attainder and
forfeiture were the consequences; and in 1551 Northumberland was
the title of the dukedom conferred on John Dudley, Earl of Warwick,
who lost the dignity when his head was struck off at the block, two
years later.
Then the old title, Earl of Northumberland, was restored in 1557,
to Thomas, son of that attainted Thomas who had joined the
“ Pilgrimage of Grace.” Ill-luck still followed these Percys. Thomas
was beheaded—the last of his house who fell by the hands of the
executioner—in 1572. His brother and heir died in the Tower in
1585.
None of these Percys had yet come into the Strand. The brick
house there, which was to be their own through marriage with an
heiress, was built in the lifetime of the Earl, whose father, as just
mentioned, died in the Tower in 1585. The son, too, was long a
prisoner in that gloomy palace and prison. While Lord Northampton
was laying the foundations of the future London house of the Percys
in 1605, Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland, was being carried into
durance. There was a Percy, kinsman to the Earl, who was mixed
up in the Gunpowder Plot. Eor no other reason than relationship
�WOBTHUMBEKBEND HOUSE AND THE PEBCYS? 193
with the conspiring Percy the Earl was shut up in the Tower for
life, as his sentence ran, and he was condemned to pay a fine of thirty
thousand pounds. The Earl ultimately got off with fifteen years’ im
prisonment and a fine of twenty thousand pounds. He was popularly
known as the Wizard Earl, because he was a studious recluse,
company ing only with grave scholars (of whom there were three,
known as “ Percy’s Magi ”), and finding relaxation in writing rhymed
■satires against the Scots.
There was a stone walk in the Tower which, having been paved by
the Earl, was known during many years as “ My Lord of Northumber
land’s Walk.” At one end was an iron shield of his arms; and holes
in which he put a peg at every turn he made in his dreary exercise.
One would suppose that the Wizard Earl would have been very
grateful to the man who restored him to liberty. Lord Hayes
(Viscount Doncaster) was the man. He had married Northumber
land’s daughter, Lucy. The marriage had excited the Earl’s anger,
as a low match, and the proud captive could not u stomach ” a benefit
for which he was indebted to a son-in-law on whom he looked down.
This proud Earl died in 1632. Just ten years after, his son, Algernon
Percy, went a-wooing at Suffolk House, in the Strand. It was then
inhabited by Elizabeth, the daughter and heiress of Theophilus, Earl
of Suffolk, who had died two years previously, in 1640. Algernon
Percy and Elizabeth Howard made a merry and magnificent wedding
of it, and from the time they were joined together the house of the
bride has been known by the bridegroom’s territorial title of Northum
berland.
The street close to the house of the Percys, which we now know
as Northumberland Street, was then a road leading down to the
Thames, and called Hartshorn Lane. Its earlier name was Christopher
Alley. At the bottom of the lane the luckless Sir Edmundsbury
Godfrey had a stately house, from which he walked many a time and
oft to his great wood wharf on the river. But the glory of Hartshorn
Lane was and is Ben Jonson. No one can say where rare Ben was
born, save that the posthumous child first saw the light in Westmin
ster. “Though,” says Fuller, “I cannot, with all my industrious
inquiry, find him in his cradle, I can fetch him from his long coats.
When a little child he lived in Hartshorn Lane, Charing Cross, where
his mother married a bricklayer for her second husband.” Mr. Fowler
was a master bricklayer, and did well with his clever stepson. We
can in imagination see that sturdy boy crossing the Strand to go to his
school within the old church of St. Martin (then still) in the Fields.
Kt is as easy to picture him hastening of a morning early to Westmin
ster, where Camden was second master, and had a keen sense of the
stuff that was in the scholar from Hartshorn Lane. Of all the
figures that flit about the locality, none attracts our sympathies so
von. xxxviii.
o
�194 NORTHUMBERLAND HOUSE AND THE PERCYS.
warmly as that of the boy who developed into the second dramatic
poet of England.
Of the countesses and duchesses of this family, the most singular
was the widow of Algernon, the tenth Earl. In her widowhood she
removed from the house in the Strand (where she had given a home
not only to her husband, but to a brother) to one which occupied the
site on which White’s Club now stands. It was called Suffolk
House, and the proud lady thereof maintained a semi-regal state
beneath the roof and when she went abroad. On such an occasion
as paying a visit, her footmen walked bareheaded on either side of
her coach, which was followed by a second, in which her women were
seated, like so many ladies in waiting! Her state solemnity went so
far that she never allowed her son Joscelin’s wife (daughter of an
Earl) to be seated in her presence—at least till she had obtained per
mission to do so.
Joscelin s wife was, according to Pepys, “ a beautiful lady indeed.”
They had but one child, the famous heiress, Elizabeth Percy, who at
four years of age was left to the guardianship of her proud and wicked
old grandmother. Joscelin was dead, and his widow married Ralph,
afterwards Duke of Montague. The old Dowager Countess was a
matchmaker, and she contracted her granddaughter, at the age of twelve,
to Cavendish, Earl of Ogle. Before this couple were of age to live
together Ogle died. In a year or two after, the old matchmaker
engaged her victim to Mr. Thomas Thynne, of Longleat; but the
young lady had no mind to him. In the Hatton collection of manu
scripts there are three letters addressed by a lady of the Brunswick
family to Lord and Lady Hatton. They are undated, but they con
tain a curious reference to part of the present subject, and are
thus noticed in the first report of the Royal Com-mission
on Historical Manuscripts : “ Mr. Thinn has proved his marriage
with Lady Ogle, but she will not live with him, for fear of
being ‘rotten before she is ripe.’ Lord Suffolk, since he lost
his wife and daughter, lives with his sister, Northumberland.
They have here strange ambassadors—one from the King of Fez, the
other from Muscovett. All the town has seen the last; he goes to
the play, and stinks so that the ladies are not able to take their
muffs from their noses all the play-time. The lampoons that are
made of most of the town ladies are so nasty, that no woman would
read them, else she would have got them for her.”
“ Tom of Ten Thousand,” as Thynne was called, was murdered
(shot dead in his carriage) in Pall Mall (1682) by Konigsmark and
accomplices, two or three of whom suffered death on the scaffold.
Immediately afterwards the maiden wife of two husbands really
married Charles, the proud Duke of Somerset. In the same year
Banks dedicated to her (Illustrious Princess, he calls her) his ‘ Anna
�NORTHUMBERLAND HOUSE AND THE PERCYS. 195
Bullen,’ a tragedy. He says: “ You have submitted to take a noble
partner, as angels have delighted to converse with menand “ there
is so much of divinity and wisdom in your choice, that none but the
Almighty ever did the like ” (giving Eve to Adam) “ with the world
and Eden for a dower.” Then, after more blasphemy, and very free
allusions to her condition as a bride, and fulsomeness beyond concep
tion, he scouts the idea of supposing that she ever should die. “ You
look,” he says, “ as if you had nothing mortal in you. Your guardian,
angel scarcely is more a deity than youand so on, in increase of
bombast, crowned by the mock humility of “ my muse still has no
other ornament than truth.”
The Duke and Duchess of Somerset lived in the house in the
Strand, which continued to be called Northumberland House, as
there had long been a Somerset House a little more to the east.
Anthony Henley once annoyed the above duke and showed his own
ill-manners by addressing a letter “ to the Duke of Somerset, over
against the trunk-shop at Charing Cross.” The duchess was hardly
more respectful when speaking of her suburban mansion, Sion House,
Brentford. “ It’s a hobbledehoy place,” she said; ££ neither town nor
country.” Of this union came a son, Algernon Seymour, who in
1748 succeeded his father as Duke of Somerset, and in 1749 was
created Earl of Northumberland, for a particular reason. He had no
sons. His daughter Elizabeth had encouraged the homage of a
handsome young fellow of that day, named Smithson. She was told
that Hugh Smithson had spoken in terms of admiration of her beauty,
and she laughingly asked why he did not say as much to herself.
Smithson was the son of “ an apothecary,” according to the envious,
but, in truth, the father had been a physician, had earned a baronetcy,
and was of the good old nobility, the landowners, with an estate, still
possessed by the family, at Stanwick, in Yorkshire. Hugh Smithson
married this Elizabeth Percy, and the earldom of Northumberland,
conferred on her father, was to go to her husband, and afterwards to
the eldest male heir of this marriage, failing which the dignity was
to remain with Elizabeth and her heirs male by any other marriage.
It is at this point that the present line of Smithson-Percys begins.
Of the couple who may be called its founders so many severe things
have been said, that we may infer that their exalted fortunes and best
qualities gave umbrage to persons of small minds or strong prejudices.
Walpole’s remark, that in the earl’s lord-lieutenancy in Ireland “ their
vice-majesties scattered pearls and diamonds about the streets,” is good
testimony to their royal liberality. Their taste may not have been
unexceptionable, but there was no touch of meanness in it. In 1758
they gave a supper at Northumberland House to Lady Yarmouth,
George the Second’s old mistress. The chief ornamental piece on the
supper table represented a grand chasse at Herrenhausen, at which
o 2
�196 NORTHUMBERLAND HOUSE AND WE PERCYSl
there was a carriage drawn by six horses, in which was- seated an
august person wearing a blue ribbon, with a lady at his side. This
was not unaptly called “the apotheosis of concubinage.” Of the
celebrated countess notices vary. Her delicacy, elegance, and refine
ment are vouched for by some; her coarseness and vulgarity are
asserted by others. When Queen Charlotte came to England, Lady
Northumberland was made one of the ladies of the queen’s bed
chamber. Lady Townshend justified it to people who felt or feigned
surprise, by remarking, “ Surely nothing could be more proper. The
queen does not understand English, and can anything be more neces
sary than that she should learn the vulgar tongue ?” One of the
countess’s familiar terms for conviviality was “junkitaceous,” but
ladies of equal rank had also little slang words of their own, called
things by the very plainest names, and spelt physician with an “ f.”
There is ample testimony on record that the great countess never
hesitated at a jest on the score of its coarseness. The earl was dis
tinguished rather for his pomposity than vulgarity, though a vulgar
sentiment marked some of both his sayings and doings. For example,
when Lord March visited him at Alnwick Castle, the Earl of North
umberland received him at the gates with this queer sort of welcome:
“ I believe, my lord, this is the first time that ever a Douglas and a
Percy met here in friendship.” The censor who said, “ Think of this
from a Smithson to a true Douglas,” had ample ground for the excla
mation. George the Third raised the earl and countess to the rank
of duke and duchess in 1766. All the earls of older creation were
ruffled and angry at the advancement; but the honour had its draw
back. The King would not allow the title to descend to an heir by
any other wife but the one then alive, who was the true representative
of the Percy line.
The old Northumberland House festivals were right royal things
in their way. There was, on the other hand, many a snug, or uncere
monious, or eccentric party given there. Perhaps the most splendid
was that given in honour of the King of Denmark in 1768. His
majesty was fairly bewildered with the splendour. There was in the
court what was called “ a pantheon,” illuminated by 4000 lamps.
The King, as he sat down to supper, at the table to which he had
expressly invited twenty guests out of the hundreds assembled, said
to the duke, “ How did you contrive to light it all in time ?” “ I had
two hundred lamplighters,” replied the duke. “ That was a stretch,”
wrote candid Mrs. Delany; “ a dozen could have done the business
which was true.
The duchess, who in early life was, in delicacy of form, like one of
the Graces, became, in her more mature years, fatter than if the whole
three had been rolled into one in her person. With obesity came
“ an exposition to sleep,” as Bottom has it. At “ drawing-rooms ” she
�NOTTHUMBERLOTD EroWbrANDEn^ PEROVS? 197
no sooner sank on a sofa than she was deep in slumber; but while
she was awake she would make jokes that were laughed at and cen
sured the next day all over London. Her Grace would sit at a win
dow in Covent Garden, and be hail fellow well met with every one of
a mob of tipsy and not too cleanly-spoken electors. On these occa
sions it was said she “ signalised herself with intrepidity.” She could
bend, too, with cleverness to the humours of more hostile mobs; and
when the Wilkes rioters besieged the ducal mansion, she and the duke
appeared at a window, did salutation to their masters, and performed
homage to the demagogue by drinking his health in ale.
Horace Walpole affected to ridicule the ability of the Duchess as a
verse writer. At Lady Miller’s at Batheaston some rhyming words
were given out to the company, and any one who could, was re
quired to add lines to them so as to make sense with the rhymes
furnished for the end of each line. This sort of dancing in fetters
was called bouts rimes. “On my faith,” cried Walpole, in 1775,
“ there are loouts rimes on a buttered muffin by her Grace the
Duchess of Northumberland.” It may be questioned whether any
body could have surmounted the difficulty more cleverly than her
Grace. For example:
The pen. which I now take and
Has long lain useless in my
Know, every maid, from her own
To her who shines in glossy
That could they now prepare an
From best receipt of book in
Ever so fine, for all their
I should prefer a butter’d
A muffin, Jove himself might
If eaten with Miller, at
brandish,
standish.
patten
satin,
oglio
folio,
puffing,
muffin;
feast on,
Batheaston.
To return to the house itself. There is no doubt that no mansion
of such pretensions and containing such treasures has been so
thoroughly kept from the vulgar eye. There is one exception, how
ever, to this remark. The Duke (Algernon) who was alive at the
, period of the first Exhibition threw open the house in the Strand to
the public without reserve. The public, without being ungrateful,
thought it rather a gloomy residence. Shut in and darkened as it
now is by surrounding buildings—canopied as it now is by clouds of
London smoke—it is less cheerful and airy than the Tower, where the
Wizard Earl studied in his prison room, or counted the turns he made
when pacing his prison yard. The Duke last referred to was in his
youth at Algiers under Exmouth, and in his later years a Lord of
the Admiralty. As Lord Prudhoe, he was a traveller in far-away
countries, and he had the faculty of seeing what he saw, for which
many travellers, though they have eyes, are not qualified. At the
�198 NOETHUMBERLAND HOUSE AND THE’ KEHCyS.
pleasant Smithsonian house at Stanwick, when he was a bachelor, his
household was rather remarkable for the plainness of the female
servants. Satirical people used to say the youngest of them was a
grandmother. Others, more charitable or scandalous, asserted that
Lord Prudhoe was looked upon as a father by many in the country
round, who would have been puzzled where else to look for one. It
was his elder brother Hugh (whom Lord Prudhoe succeeded) who,
represented England as Ambassador Extraordinary at the coronation
of Charles the Tenth at Eheims. Paris was lost in admiration at the
splendour of this embassy, and never since has the hotel in the Eue
de Bac possessed such a gathering of royal and noble personages as
at the fetes given there by the Duke of Northumberland. His sister,
Lady Glenlyon, then resided in a portion of the fine house in the
Eue de Bourbon, owned and in part occupied by the rough but cheery
old warrior, the Comte de Lobau.
When that lady was Lady
Emily Percy, she was married to the eccentric Lord James Murray,
afterwards Lord Glenlyon. The bridegroom was rather of an
oblivious turn of mind, and it is said that when the wedding morn
arrived, his servant had some difficulty in persuading him that it was
the day on which he had to get up and be married.
There remains only to be remarked, that as the Percy line has
been often represented only by an heiress, there have not been wanting
individuals who boasted of male heirship.
Two years after the death of Joscelin Percy in 1670, who died the
last male heir of the line, leaving an only child, a daughter, who
married the Duke of Somerset, there appeared, supported by the Earl
of Anglesea, a most impudent claimant (as next male heir) in the
person of James Percy, an Irish trunkmaker. This individual pro
fessed to be a descendant of Sir Ingram Percy, who was in the Pil
grimage of Grace, and was brother of the sixth earl. The claim was
proved to be unfounded; but it may have rested on an illegitimate
foundation. As the pretender continued to call himself Earl of North
umberland, Elizabeth, daughter of Joscelin, “ took the law ” of him.
Ultimately he was condemned to be taken into the four law courts in
Westminster Hall, with a paper pinned to his breast, bearing these
words: “ The foolish and impudent pretender to the earldom of
Northumberland.”
In the succeeding century, the well-known Dr. Percy, Bishop of
Dromore, believed himself to be the true male representative of the
ancient line of Percy. He built no claims on such belief; but the
belief was not only confirmed by genealogists, it was admitted by the
second heiress Elizabeth, who married Hugh Smithson. Dr. Percy so
far asserted his blood as to let it boil over in wrath against Pennant
when the latter described Alnwick Castle in these disparaging words:
At Alnwick no remains of chivalry are perceptible; no respectable
�NOETHUMBERLAND HOUSE AND THE'PEED xS 199
|trainFof attendants; the furniture and gardens inconsistent; and
nothing, except the numbers of unindustrious poor at the castle gate,
excited any one idea of its former circumstances.”
“ Duke and Duchess of Charing Cross,” or “ their majesties of Mid
dlesex,” were the mock titles which Horace Walpole flung at the
ducal couple of his day who resided at Northumberland House,
London, or at Sion House, Brentford. Walpole accepted and satirised
the hospitality of the London house, and he almost hated the ducal
host and hostess at Sion, because they seemed to overshadow his
mimic feudal state at Strawberry I After all, neither early nor late
circumstance connected with Northumberland House is confined to
memories of the inmates. Ben Jonson comes out upon us from Hartshorn Lane with more majesty than any of the earls; and greatness
has sprung from neighbouring shops, and has flourished as gloriously
as any of which Percy can boast. Half a century ago, there was a
long low house, a single storey high, the ground floor of which was a
saddler’s shop. It was on the west side of the old Golden Cross, and
neariy opposite Northumberland House. The worthy saddler founded
a noble line. Of four sons, three were distinguished as Sir David, Sir
Frederick, and Sir George. Two of the workmen became Lord
Mayors of London; and an attorney’s clerk, who used to go in at
night and chat with the men, married the granddaughter of a king
and became Lord Chancellor.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Northumberland House and the Percys
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Doran, John
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [London]
Collation: 189-199 p. ; 23 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Article from Temple Bar magazine, May 1873; attribution from Virginia Clark catalogue.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[Bentley]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1873]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5572
Subject
The topic of the resource
Aristocracy
History
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Northumberland House and the Percys), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
London
Northumberland House
Percy Family
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/8016060819a37b3e707b00b9930daa74.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=SA8GiDnQIB9AVhpbYhwA0aGEF1nU2tHUm-H66Z0vaz8KLck7MBsNp63Ld5PhMPpU-7vrGWwClMWHaKtE61gQArl97EXq%7ENbRtLXrW2qGgKrTIIUG-gKbfl6UJGeN3ZUfEXDs0v82qbdGxgYhsZiqeV94%7EGr-kMXe1JtBniG-Tr19X5NEQKEyj69ixn1otmvNbEUrFn%7E5u-UmTFy8973facrwrHicqwHlnmYyQTtL8HW9LMhCHAI468wLKYMCBgfA3m6z2zxjhjQQYwVravFQcp1WUZpZwTNyYbXUy88wQsL0XumPQBMsRPaECQZQrf3iime6NJnKpcfiCbidORScRA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
04f04d025e64fdac4e5967e575e58296
PDF Text
Text
P.A. EXTRA SERIES.
NATIONAL
The Hammurabi
a_____ _
-4T1E OLDEST LAWS
IN THE
I
WORLD
By CHILPERlC EDWARDS
HAMMURABI ADORING THE SUN-GOD
WATTS & CO.,
17, JOHNSON’S COURT, FLEET STREET, LONDON, E.C.
ISSUED FOR THE RATIONALIST PRESS ASSOCIATION, LIMITED
<0 of this Series is “Religious Persecution
by E. S. P. Haynes
�All Liberal- Thinkers who
have- not already
joined
The RATIONALIST PRESS ASSOCIATION, Ltd.,
ARE EARNESTLY INVITED TO DO SO.
The Objects of the R. P. A. are to stimulate the
habits of reflection and inquiry, and the free exercise
of individual intellect; to promote a rational system
of secular education ; to assist in publishing the works
of capable thinkers, and in popularising the great
discoveries of modern science and scholarship ; to re
issue, in cheap form, notable books of a critical,
philosophical, or ethical character; and generally to
assert the supremacy of reason, as the natural and
necessary means to all such knowledge and wisdom as
man can achieve.
Membership of the R. P. A. can be secured by
payment of an annual subscription of not less than 5s.,
renewable in January of each year ; and the publications
are forwarded, as issued, to each Member to the full
value of his current year’s subscription, unless direc
tions to the contrary are given.
Full Particulars of the R. P. A., including the
latest Annual Report and any special information
desired, can be had gratis by applying to the Secretary,
Charles E. Hooper, 5 & 6, Johnson’s Court, Fleet
Street, London, E.C.
�THE OLDEST LAWS IN THE
WORLD
BEING AN ACCOUNT OF
THE HAMMURABI CODE AND THE SINAITIC LEGISLATION
WITH
A COMPLETE TRANSLATION OF THE GREAT BABYLONIAN
INSCRIPTION DISCOVERED AT SUSA
BY
CHILPERIC EDWARDS
AUTHOR OF “THE WITNESS OF ASSYRIA,” ETC.
{Issued for the Rationalist Press Association, Limited)
WATTS & CO.,
JOHNSON’S COURT, FLEET STREET, LONDON, E.C.
�CONTENTS
CHAP,
PAGE
I. The Discovery
II. The Legal System
III.
Hammurabi Code -
of the
5
-
8
of the
Babylonians
-
-
-
io
IV. The Text of the Inscription
-
-
13
V.
Hammurabi and his Reign
Code
-
-
-
-
33
VI. The Laws of Moses
-
-
-
-
43
Notes
on the
APPENDIX
A. The First Dynasty
B.
of
Babylon
55
Genesis XIV.
C. Relics of Earlier Babylonian Laws
57
-
60
General Index
62
Index
63
to the
Code
�PREFACE
The object of the present work is to provide a complete and careful
translation of the whole of the great Babylonian inscription containing
the Laws of Hammurabi, and to bring together in a brief form all the
known facts connected with the period of Babylonian history to which
it belongs. As, moreover, many persons will be interested in tracing
out the dependence of the Mosaic Laws upon the Babylonian legislation
a chapter has been devoted to that subject. Quite independently,
however, of its service in discounting extravagant claims in regard to
the originality or excellence of the Jewish Pentateuch, the Code of
Hammurabi is destined to be of the utmost value to the student of the
history of civilisation, and the evolution of Semitic Law. It may even
be found eventually that the influence of the Babylonian Code extended
beyond the Semitic boundary, and that it has modified the legal ideas
of distant peoples; but as yet it is too early to verify any such sugges
tion. In any case, however, the age, the extent, and the remarkable
state of preservation of this venerable monument of antiquity combine
to entitle it to the respect and consideration of every thinking being.
Some scholars have claimed that certain of the successors of Ham
murabi bore names which exhibited grammatical forms foreign to the
Semitic-Babylonian tongue; and they have argued that his dynasty must
therefore be of foreign origin. One school is anxious to connect the
line with Northern Arabia, the other with Canaan, and both adduce
linguistic reasons for their choice. Without entering into these pre
carious hypotheses, it may be sufficient to remark that we have no
evidence whatever as to the grammatical peculiarities of the languages
spoken in Arabia or Canaan during the era of Hammurabi—that is to
say, before 2000 b.c. The idioms of Arabic and Hebrew may have
been very different at that early date to what they became in their
classical periods. Furthermore, in most countries proper names exhibit
uncommon or obsolete grammatical forms, for the simple reason that
the names are handed down through several generations, and thus are
really relics of earlier modes of speech; so that the unusual form of
�4
PREFACE
some of the names of Hammurabi’s family may eventually prove to be
of this character, and there will be no excuse for doubting the Babylonian
origin of his race. Leaving such conjectures on one side, however, it
can hardly be disputed that the Laws themselves manifest their specifi
cally Babylonian origin. They contemplate a country with a numerous
settled population, where the art of writing is in common use, where
agriculture is associated with irrigation upon a large scale, and where
ships and navigation play an important part. These points are combined
in no other ancient Semitic land; they can only be referred to Baby
lonia. Mere questions of dynasty are consequently irrelevant. The
legislation is only intelligible as a product of Babylonian soil; and as
Babylonian culture was of ancient date, and was entirely derived from
the still earlier civilisation of the Akkadians, who themselves appear to
have had codes of law (see Appendix C), it seems quite unnecessary to
insist upon the obvious fact that Babylonian jurisprudence is prior to
all other Semitic law or custom of which we have any certain know
ledge.
It will be observed that the ensuing chapters are not besprinkled
with the name of “ Abraham.” The reasons for ignoring this patriarch
are stated in Appendix B.
In regard to the question of chronology, the author has, in Appendix
A, quoted all the evidence that exists for determining the date of Ham
murabi. It will be seen that this evidence does not enable us to fix the
exact year of that monarch; but it is sufficient to indicate the general
period at which he flourished.
C. E.
�THE OLDEST LAWS IN THE WORLD
Chapter I.
THE DISCOVERY OF THE HAMMURABI CODE
Our first introduction to the legal
practice of the ancient Babylonians
was in 1854, when Mr. W. K. Loftus
disinterred a number of clay tablets
from the mound of Tell Sifr, which
covers the remains of some old city
whose name is still unknown. These
tablets were found to be “contracts”—
that is to say, records of business
transactions, effected during the reigns
of three monarchs, Rim-Sin, Hammu
rabi, and Samsu-iluna; but it was many
years before the scholars of Europe
could thoroughly explain these records,
for the cuneiform writing was of a
peculiar type, and the language was
full of unknown technical expressions.
It was not until the Berlin Congress of
Orientalists, in 1882, that Dr. P. Strassmaier gave a really satisfactory ren
dering of them. Meanwhile material
has accumulated. The British Museum
in London, the Louvre at Paris, and
the Museums of Berlin, Constantinople,
and Philadelphia, all contain large col
lections of “ contract tablets,” besides a
great many scattered in private hands.
The efforts of scholars have been chiefly
directed to the elucidation of the his
torical texts, which are not only easier,
but also of more immediate interest;
and the polite literature of the Baby
lonians has also been largely studied
Of late years, however, Babylonian
jurisprudence has been receiving the
attention of a small but enthusiastic
band of workers, among the best known
of whom are the late Dr. Oppert, Dr.
F. E. Peiser, and Dr. Bruno Meissner,
the results of whose labours have been
summarised in an able (though some
what highly coloured) fashion by Pro
fessor G. Maspero in the ninth chapter
of his Dawn of Civilisation (London,
1894).
In the British Museum there are
three or four fragments of tablets from
the library of Assurbanipal, king of
Assyria (668 to 626 b.c.), which
appeared to contain portions of a code
of laws. These fragments had long
been remarked, and had even been
spoken of as the Code of Assurbanipal.
Dr. Meissner, however, who had sub
jected the fragments to considerable
study, was struck by their agreement in
style and language with the remains of
the early Babylonian period; and in
1898 he suggested that the “ Code” to
which these tablets belonged would
probably be found to go back to the
time of the first Babylonian dynasty.
In February, 1899, the celebrated Dr.
Delitzsch, in discussing Meissner’s
�6
THE DISCOVERY OF THE HAMMURABI CODE
remarks,1 wrote as follows:—“That the
collection of laws in question originated
in the period of the first Babylonian
Dynasty is certainly a legitimate as
sumption of Meissner’s. It may further
be conjectured that no other than Ham
murabi himself, the founder of the
Babylonian Empire, gave the command
to unify the laws and ordinances then
current into one Code of Law. Were
the tablets from the library of Assurbanipal complete, they would undoubt
edly be of extreme value for the history
of comparative law.”
This was written in the early part of
1899; and in the course of the article
he called the presumed collection of
Babylonian laws the Code Hammourabi, in allusion to the famous Code
Napoleon, which has had such an
enormous influence upon modern
European Law. Within three years the
conjecture of Dr. Delitzsch was con
verted into a certainty by the discovery
of the complete Code of Laws, with
the original proclamation of King Ham
murabi.
The laurels of this discovery fall to
the French.
In 1897 the French
Government deputed M. J. de Morgan
to open excavations upon the site of
Susa, the ancient city of the Persian
kings, for purposes of historical investi
gation. A day or two before the end
of December, 1901, the workmen came
upon a large fragment of black diorite.
A few days later two other fragments
were unearthed, and the three pieces,
when joined together, were found to
form a round pillar in the shape of an
elongated sugar-loaf, 7ft. 4m. high, 5ft.
4m. in circumference at the top, and
6ft. 2in. at the bottom. The illustra
tion upon the cover shows the upper
part of this pillar, which, it will be seen,
bears a bas-relief 26m. high and 24m.
broad, representing Hammurabi stand
ing in the presence of Shamash, the
Babylonian God of the Sun. The back
and front of the pillar are covered with
columns of writing in what is called the
Archaic Cuneiform character—that is to
say, the ancient Babylonian hierogly
phics executed in wedge-shaped lines.
In the time of Hammurabi this style of
writing was only employed for sculptures
and formal inscriptions. The contract
tablets and the correspondence of the
period wrere written in a simplified style
called the Old Babylonian Cursive, very
similar to the Assyrian Cuneiform
usually met with in printed books. The
clay tablets appear to have been
written and read in horizontal lines,
running from left to right. But the in
scription of Hammurabi is in rows of
short columns, the characters in the
columns being read from top to bottom,
and the columns themselves running
from right to left. In fact, the direction
of the writing is exactly the same as in
Chinese, to which the Archaic Cunei
form bears a certain resemblance. The
hard stone of which the monument is
composed has preserved the original
writing with extreme sharpness, and the
three fragments fit together so closely
that very little is lost by the fractures.
The greatest damage has been done to
the inscription, not by accident, but by
design, for the last five rows of columns
upon the front have been purposely
scraped out. This erasure was not
made because any of the laws were
objected to, but because the monarch
1 “ Zur juristischen Litteratur Babyloniens,”
von Friedrich Delitzsch—Beitrage zur As- who removed the pillar from Babylonia
syriologie, Band iv. (February, 1899), p. 80.
to Susa wished to engrave his own
�THE DISCOVERY OP THE HAMMURABI CODE
name upon it as a trophy of victory.
As that portion of the inscription is now
irretrievably lost, it is a pity that he did
not carry out his design, and thus leave
us a record of the vicissitudes and
wanderings of the monument. We can,
however, form a pretty close guess at
the culprit, for M. de Morgan also
found on the acropolis of Susa no less
than five monuments of Babylonian
kings which had been defaced, and the
name of Shutruk-Nakhunte added upon
them. This individual was king of
Elam about noo b.c. ; and he appears
to have overrun Babylonia and sacked
several important cities. Thus M. de
Morgan had evidently come upon the
museum of Shutruk-Nakhunte, where
that monarch exhibited the trophies he
had brought back from Babylonia in
the shape of the most revered me
morials of the Babylonian sovereigns.
A fragment of another pillar bearing a
few lines of the Code was unearthed
at the same place.
If the Elamite had completed his
design of placing his own name upon
Hammurabi’s pillar, he might have
settled the important question of its
original location. The inscription is
not quite clear upon this point; for
although in the early part of the epi
logue Hammurabi says, “In Bab}Ion
....... in E Saggil........I have written my
precious words upon my pillar; and
before my image as King of Justice I
have placed it ” (xxiv. 63-78), yet at the
end we read of “ the circuit of this
temple of E Babbara ” (xxviii. 76).
Both Sippara and Larsam possessed
temples to the Sun-God, and both
temples bore the name of E Babbara,
“ the House of Light ” (in Semitic, Bit
Uri). The explanation seems to be
that the original Code of Hammurabi
7
was erected at Babylon, in the great
temple of Merodach called E Saggil ;
but copies were placed in other temples,
and this particular pillar, discovered at
Susa, was set up either at Larsam or at
Sippara.
At any rate, after journeying from
Babylon to Susa, the pillar has made a
still longer voyage ; and it now stands
in Paris, as one of the greatest treasures
of the Louvre. The French Govern
ment, recognising the importance of the
find, has had the whole of the text
published in heliogravure, in a mag
nificent volume entitled Textes Elamitiques-Semitiques, par V. Scheil, O.P.
(Paris, 1902), being tome iv. of the
Memoires de la Delegation en Perse.
The eight plates in this volume are so
exquisitely executed as to place scholars
in the same position as if they had the
actual inscription before them. Father
Scheil transcribed the text, and rendered
it into French in the remarkably sh< rt
space of ten months from its discovery.
As already remarked, five rows of
columns are now missing from the baseof the monument; and Father Scheil.
estimates that these contained some
t
thirty-five ordinances. From the re
mains of the Assyrian copies of the
Code in the British Museum, however,,
he has been able to restore three of
these. And it may be of statistical
interest to remark here that the frag
mentary tablets from the Library of
Assurbanipal contain portions of Sec
tions 57, 58, 59, 103, 104, 107, hi,
112, 113, 114, nJ, II9> I2O> 277-280,
according to Father Scheil’s enumera
tion ; and about eighty lines of Ham
murabi’s epilogue.1 The Berlin Museum
1 The latter was only published by the British
Museum authorities at the end of 1901. Proc.
Socy. Bib. Arch., vol. xxiv., p. 304.
�TIIE LEGAL SYSTEM OF THE BABYLONIANS
has two small fragments of the Later these fragments are legible, they agree
Babylonian period (about 550 b.c.), con almost exactly with the text of the
taining portions of Sections 147, 148, Susian pillar.
i52j *3>
5
J54, 159. 171- So far as
Chapter II.
THE LEGAL SYSTEM OF THE BABYLONIANS
In ancient Babylonia the business of
the law was almost exclusively in the
hands of the priesthood, for they in
cluded in their ranks the scribes,
without whom there could be no books
and no records. The halls of justice
were usually at the gates of the temples,
and there the judges, the scribes, and
the “ elders ” assembled. The “ elders ”
appear to have been a permanent body
of officials, for the same names appear
again and again upon tablets of about
the same date; and we may even
recognise a gradual rise, or promotion,
of individuals to higher ranks.1 They
played much the same part as the
“ elders ” of the Old Testament (as,
for instance, Ruth iv. 2, 9), and acted
chiefly as official witnesses to the trans
actions which took place before them.
The judges were appointed by the
sovereign, who exercised a rigid super
vision over them. Their duties were
extremely varied, ranging from the
highest criminal trials to the registration
of business documents. We may see
by the Code that only written deeds
were recognised, and the activity of the
1 Assyrian Deeds and Documents, by the
Rev. C. H. W. Johns, M.A. (Cambridge, 1901),
vol. ii., p. 47, § 76.
courts of registration is evidenced by
the enormous numbers of contract tablets
which are being continually brought to
light. These tablets show the official
hand of the scribe, and are usually
couched in set technical terms. The
nature of the transaction is briefly and
clearly recited; it is stated that the
parties understand the conditions of the
deed, and have taken oath by certain
gods; the deities usually being the
tutelary gods of the land and the city,
accompanied by the name of the reigning
sovereign as their earthly representative
and the supervisor of the law—in some
cases the monarch has even the deter
minative for deity prefixed to his name.
Then follow the names of the elders;
or, as they are usually styled by Assyriologists, the “ witnesses ”; and the docu
ment is completed by the addition of
the date. In later times the year of the
reigning monarch gave the date; but in
the early period, to which Hammurabi
belongs, they dated the contracts by the
most noteworthy incident of the year,
as the building of a temple, an inunda
tion, or a battle. Such a tablet, executed
in clay by one of the attendant scribes,
sometimes further authenticated by seals,
or the thumb-nails of the contracting
�THE LEGAL SYSTEM OF THE RABYLOXIANS
parties, and baked in a small oven for
better preservation, thus became a legal
record, producible in any court as evi
dence of the transaction.
In actions at law the contending
parties presented themselves at the gate
of the temple. We do not know whether
there was any power of arrest. The
Roman Law of the Twelve Tables
directed the plaintiff to summon the
defendant in the open street, and,
if he did not answer the summons, to
convey him before the judge by force :
but whether a private Babylonian could
do the same is not clear. In the royal
correspondence the king often directs
the apprehension of certain persons and
their conveyance under custody; but
apparently there was no organised police
to undertake such a duty, though there
must have been officials to carry out the
sentences of the courts. When the
parties to the action appeared before
the judges, it was usual for them to
bring with them the object in dispute
and lay it before the god, as in the old
Roman legis actio Sacramento.
*
If the
object were not portable, then it was
represented by a part of it—a clod
of earth would represent an estate, or a
brick a house. Oaths were taken, and
witnesses examined, and the judge gave
his decision, which was usually recorded
upon a tablet, and copies delivered to
the disputants. A few such legal
decisions have been discovered, but
hardly sufficient to give us more precise
details of the practice of the Babylonian
courts. Difficult cases were referred to
special functionaries, or presidents, and
the sovereign was always the ultimate
court of appeal. In fact, any citizen
’ Beifragt turn
Brivatnecbt, von Bruno
Meissner (Leipsic, 1S93).
had the privilege of appealing direct to
the king for justice if he considered
himself to have any legitimate grievance;
and from the correspondence of Ham
murabi it would appear that such appeals
were always treated with consideration.
The letters prove Hammurabi to have
been an impartial judge, who tolerated
no corruption in his officials. Ever
vigilant for the efficient administration
of justice in his realm, he immediately
remitted particulars of any complaint to
the viceroy of the district, with direc
tions to investigate the matter on the
spot, and to send the guilty party to
Babylon for chastisement. In one case
we see him supporting the claim of a
merchant against a s&aMana&u, or
governor, for the repayment of a loan,
so that the king was no respecter of
persons where justice was concerned.
It must not be supposed, however, that
Hammurabi was any exception in this
respect. We have evidence that his
example was followed by his successors,
for there is in the British Museum a
letter in which two men have appealed
to his grandson Abi-eshu’, to the effect
that they cannot obtain justice in
Sippara; arid therefore the king has
immediately ordered the trial of their
case at Babylon/ It may be assumed
that the monarch himself tried the
majority of cases brought before him,
and that he took steps to have his judg
ments carried out. In the cases of
parties living at a distance from the
capital, the king’s decisions were com
municated to the governor of the district
in which the disputants dwelt.
There was thus every provision for the
administration of justice in Babylonia,
1 Tbe Letters ami /nstriftions afHamnmraii,
by L. W. King (London, 1900), vol. iii., p.
�IO
HAMMURABI AND HIS REIGN
and adequate and efficient machinery
was provided for this purpose throughout
the Babylonian dominions. The legal
system was of great antiquity, for we
have contracts, etc., dated in the reigns
of the kings of Ur, who preceded Ham
murabi’s dynasty by many centuries;
and a few laws have been preserved
which, as they are written in the Akka
dian language, must be relics of a very
ancient body of legislation (see Appendix
C). Consequently, although the Code
of Hammurabi was probably a great
advance in Babylonian jurisprudence,
yet the laws themselves were not inno
vations, but a digest of previous custom.
Chapter III.
HAMMURABI AND HIS REIGN
Considering the immense amount that
has been written about Hammurabi
during the last thirty years, it is remark
able how little is really known about
him or his reign. The date when he
lived is quite uncertain, the only approxi
mation to it being derived from two
inscriptions of the Babylonian monarch
Nabonidus, who reigned from 555 to
538 b.c. This king rebuilt the Temple
of the Sun at Sippara; and in his
foundation inscription he tells us that
the edifice had previously been rebuilt
by Shagashalti-Buriash, the son of KudurBel, 800 years before ; that is to say,
about 1350 b.c. Another inscription of
Nabonidus informs us that BurnaBuriash, king of Babylon, rebuilt the
great temple of Ur 700 years after
Hammurabi. Burna-Buriash seems to
have been an earlier monarch than
Shagashalti-Buriash ; but there is nothing
to show what distance of time separated
them. Assuming that it was fifty years
(a very moderate estimate), then Ham
murabi will have preceded ShagashaltiBuriash by 750 years, and have flourished
about 2100 b.c. Most Assyriologists,
however, consider this too late by at
least a century; and further particulars
of the chronology of the period will be
found in Appendix A.
Hammurabi was the sixth member of
what is called the “ First Dynasty of
Babylon.” His five predecessors bore
Semitic Babylonian names. His family
had ruled in the city of Babylon over a
hundred years. It should, therefore, be
unnecessary to add that Hammurabi
was undoubtedly a Semitic Babylonian
by race. The events of his reign are
known chiefly from the dates upon his
contract tablets. In those days people
did not habitually date by any era; they
did not even reckon by the years of the
king’s reign. They recorded each year
by the principal event which happened
in it, whether it were an inundation or a
battle, or the building of a temple or
the excavation of a canal. Information
from such sources is naturally limited in
its character. One event per annum
tells us very little about a monarch’s
reign ; and for a long time we were quite
�HAMMURABI AND HIS REIGN
ii
in the dark as to the chronological order
of the few events of which records
existed. In 1891, however, Dr. Budge
deposited in the British Museum a
tablet he had acquired in the East,
giving a list of the names of the years
by which contracts were dated; and
when this tablet was published by Dr.
Pinches in 1898 scholars were at last
able to construct something like a con
nected history of Hammurabi and his
ancestors; although the tablet was
badly damaged and only half legible.
Hammurabi’s father, Sin-muballit,
spent the greater part of his twentyyears reign in peace, building city walls,
digging canals, and decorating temples.
But in his fourteenth year he defeated
the army of the city of Ur; in his
seventeenth year he stormed the city of
Isin; and in his twentieth year he
defeated the army of Larsam. He was
then succeeded by his son, Hammurabi.
We know very little of the first thirty
years of the reign of Hammurabi. His
first task appears to have been to tranquillise his dominions, for his second
year is recorded on the contracts as
being “ the year in which Hammurabi
established the heart of the land in
righteousness.”1 For many subsequent
years we have merely fragmentary records
of canals and buildings, etc.; but in his
thirtieth year he began the series of
campaigns which made him master of
the whole of Babylonia; for up to this
time he had only held the northern half,
and his ancestors had merely been rulers
of the city of Babylon and the sur
rounding districts.
At the accession of Hammurabi
Southern Babylonia formed a separate
State, of which the capital was the city
of Larsam. Some years previously the
district had fallen under the dominion
of an Elamite, Kudur-Mabug, the son
of Simti-silkhak. Kudur-Mabug did
not style himself “ king,” but only
prince of Emutbal and Martu (Emutbal
was a borderland between Babylonia
and Elam, while Martu was a name for
Southern Babylonia). His son and
successor, however, called himself “ RimSin, the exalted shepherd of Nippur,
the preserver of Ur, king of Larsam,
king of Sumir and Akkad,” and he
reigned at least thirty-seven years.1 We
learn from the tablet dates that he
rebuilt the cities of Nippur and Ur,
which had evidently been partially
ruined by war; he regulated part of
the channel of the Euphrates and part
of the channel of the Tigris. He
founded (or rebuilt) the city of Kishurra,
and destroyed Duran-ki (which is men
tioned by Hammurabi in connection
with Sippara). This clearly points to
wars with the king of Babylon, probably
Sin-muballit, in which Rim-Sin was
occasionally successful. One of his
dates reads “ the year when Rim-Sin,
the king, the goddess Nintu in the
temple of the city of Kesh called
Te-an-ki-bi-da 1 the dominion of the
world ’ abundantly and mightily elevated,
and the wicked foe against the land did
not fight.” The nakru limnu or “wicked
foe” appears again to be the king of
Babylon. But the great event of the
reign of Rim-Sin was the destruction of
the city of Isin, which we have already
seen was in the possession of Sin-muballit
in his seventeenth year. We have tablets
dated in “the year when, with the
1 The Letters a nd Inscriptions of Hammurabi,
by L. W. King (London, 1900), vol. iii., p. 230.
1 “Die Datenliste der ersten Dynastie von
Babylon,” von Ernst Lindl—Beitrage zur
Assyriologie, Ear.d iv. (1901), p. 3S2.
�I2
HAMMURABI AND HIS REIGN
powerful aid of Anu Bel and Ea, the
royal city of Isin was captured.” Then
“the year after the capture of Isin”;
and so on up to “ the thirtieth year after
the capture of Isin.” This city was an
important one, and its rulers at one time
reigned over the greater part, if not the
whole, of Babylonia. For thirty years,
therefore, no action of Rim-Sin’s is
recorded except the taking of Isin.
In the thirtieth year of Hammurabi
the king of Babylon defeated an army
of Elamites. The next year the people
of Southern Babylonia dated their con
tracts in “the year of Hammurabi, the
king, in which witn the help of Anu and
Bel he established his good fortune, and
his hand cast to the earth the land of
Emutbal, and Rim-Sin, the king.” Evi
dently Anu and Bel had at last proved
false to Rim-Sin, and had transferred
their assistance to his adversary.
Two other royal names appear in
connection with Larsam at this period.
They are Nur-Ramman [or Nur-Adadi]
and his son, Sin-iddinam. Of the
former we know nothing except that a
contract-tablet records an oath by
“ Nannar and king Nur-Ramman”;
there is nothing to show if he were a
temporary antagonist of Rim-Sin or a
vassal king set up by Hammurabi. Of
Sin-iddinam we had a contract-tablet
dated in the year when the temple of
Eridu was finished and decorated with
gold. Also two inscriptions which
recorded the building of a couple of
temples and the construction of a canal.
But a few years ago the diggers in the
mounds of Senkereh (which now cover
the site of Larsam) came across a large
collection of tablets, that are now pre
served partly at Constantinople and
partly at the British Museum, the latter
collection having been published by Dr.
L. W. King. These tablets proved to
be the actual letters which Sin-iddinam
had received from Hammurabi. Evi
dently, after the overthrow of Rim-Sin,
Hammurabi had set up Sin-iddinam as
a vassal-king in Larsam ; and the corre
spondence indicates the complete subor
dination of the latter. Sin-iddinam’s
territory included Larsam, Ur, and
several other cities; and his official title
is given in one of the documents as
Gal Martu—that is, “ Governor of
Martu.”1 This ought to settle the long
controversy as to the exact locality of
Martu, which is thus proved to be
South-western Babylonia.
After a reign of forty-three years
Hammurabi died, and left his dominions
to his son Samsu-iluna.
Whatever more we may learn of his
history in years to come, his greatest
monument will ever be the Code of
Laws which has been so signally re
covered at Susa. This Code must have
been promulgated late in his career, for
in the introduction to it he refers to
Eridu, Erech, Ur, Larsam, and other
cities that did not fall into his posses
sion until his thirty-first year; and in
two passages of the epilogue he alludes
to his advanced age. The extension of
his territories had evidently forced upon
him the necessity of establishing a
uniform system of law as the surest
method of organising and consolidating
his kingdom; and the next chapter will
give a complete translation of this
remarkable inscription.
1 King, Letters of Hammurabi, vol. iii.,
p. 169.
�THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
13
Chapter IV.
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
When Anu, the supreme, the king of
the Anunnaki, and Bel, the lord of
heaven and earth, who fixes the destiny
of the universe, had allotted the multi
tudes of mankind to Merodach, the
first-born of Ea, the divine master of
Law, they made him great among the
Igigi; they proclaimed his august name
in Babylon, exalted in the lands, they
established for him within it an eternal
kingdom whose foundations, like heaven
and earth, shall endure.
Then Anu and Bel delighted the flesh
of mankind by calling me, the renowned
prince, the god-fearing Hammurabi, to
establish justice in the earth, to destroy
the base and the wicked, and to hold
back the strong from oppressing the
feeble: to shine like the Sun-god upon
the black-headed men, and to illuminate
the land.
Hammurabi, the elect shepherd of
Bel, am I, dispenser of riches and
abundance, completing all things in
Nippur and Duranki, generous provider
of E Kur.
The hero king who has restored
Eridu to its original state, purifier of
the cult of E Absu.
Invader of the Four Quarters, exalter
of the fame of Babylon, rejoicer of the
heart of his lord, Merodach, whom he
daily serves in E Saggil.
The royal offspring created by Sin,
who loads the city of Ur with blessings,
the humble suppliant who brings abun
dance to E Nernugal.
The prudent king, favoured of Sha
mash the powerful, the founder of
Sippara, who has clothed with verdure
the cenotaphs of Malkat; builder of
E Babbar like heaven’s throne.
Avenging warrior of Larsam, restorer
of E Babbar for the glory of Shamash,
his helper.
The prince who has given life to
Erech by bringing abundant waters to
its inhabitants, who has raised the head
of E Anna, who has shaken out abun
dance over Anu and Nana.
The protector of the land, who has
reassembled the dispersed citizens of
Isin, who has made riches to abound in
E Galmakh.
Guardian king of the city, brother of
the god Zamama, who has established
the colony of Kish, who has enveloped
E Meie-ursag with splendour. Decorator
of the great sanctuaries of Nana, sacris
tan of E Kharsagkalama.
The grave of the foe, by whose help
victory is attained, who has enlarged
Kutha, and amplified everything in
E Shidlam.
The impetuous bull that overthrows
the enemy, the darling of Tutu, the
desire of Borsippa ; the august, the
tireless for E Zida.
The divine urban king, the wise, the
prudent, who has expanded the planta
tions of Dilbat, who has accumulated
corn for Ninip, the mighty.
Possessor of sceptre and crown, whom
the wise Mama has created, who has set
out the boundary of Kesh, who lavishes
holy food for Nintu.
�x4
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
The far-seeing one, who has carefully
provided pasture and drinking-places for
Shirpurla and Girsu, who has made
rich offerings to E L.
The taker of enemies, the chosen of
Telitim, accomplisher of the oracles of
Khallabi, who rejoices the heart of
Anunit.
The pure prince whose prayers are
heard by Adad, who contents the heart
of Adad the warrior in Karkar, who has
set out the vessels of E Udgalgal.
The king who has given life to Adab,
the prelate of the temple of E Makh.
The royal prince of the city, wrestle
without rival, who has given life to
Mashkanshabri, who has made [the
temple of] Shidlam drink of abundance.
The wise, the active, who has struck
down the bandits, who has sheltered the
people of Malka during troubles, and
has established their habitations in abun
dance. Who has instituted pure offerings
for ever for Ea and Damgalnunna, because
they have exalted his sovereignty.
The royal ruler of the city who has
subjugated the districts on the river
Euphrates, by the power of Dagan, his
creator, who has rewarded the men of
Mera and of Tutul.
The renowned potentate, who has
made the face of Nana to shine, who
has placed pure food before Ninazu, who
fills his people during dearth, and assures
them their goods in peace in the suburbs
of Babylon.
The shepherd of men, the servant
who pleases Anunit, who installed Anunit
in E Ulmash in the suburbs of Agade.
The promulgator of justice, the guider
of the people, who has restored its
tutelary deity to Assur.
The crusher of enemies, who has
glorified the name of Nana [Ishtar] in
Nineveh in E Dupdup.
The exalted one, who humbles him
self before the great gods, the descendant
of Sumula-ilu, the mighty son of Sinmuballit, the eternal scion of royalty,
the powerful king, the sun of Babylon,
beaming light over Sumir and Akkad,
the king who is obeyed in the four
quarters, the darling of Nana am I.
When Merodach had instituted me
governor of men, to conduct and to
direct, Right and Justice I established
in the land, for the good of the people.
r. If a man has laid a curse upon
another man, and it is not justified, the
layer of the curse shall be slain.
2. If a man has thrown a spell upon
another man, and it is not justified, he
who has suffered the spell shall proceed
to the holy river: into the holy river
shall he plunge. If the holy river seize
him, the layer of the spell shall take his
house. If the holy river holds him
guiltless, and he remains unharmed, the
layer of the spell shall be slain. He
that plunged into the holy river shall
take the house of the layer of the spell.
3. If in a lawsuit a man gives damna
tory evidence, and his word that he has
spoken is not justified; then, if the suit
be a capital one, that man shall be slain.
4. If he has given evidence concerning
corn or silver; then, whatever the penalty
of that lawsuit, he shall suffer it.
5. If a judge has heard a case, and
given a decision, and delivered a written
verdict, and if afterwards his case be
disproved, and that judge be convicted
as the cause of the misjudgment; then
shall he pay twelve times the penalty
awarded in that case. In public assembly
he shall be thrown from the seat of
judgment; he shall not return ; and he
shall not sit with the judges upon a case.
6. If a man steal the goods of a god,
�THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
or a palace, that man shall be slain.
And whoever receives the booty at his
hand shall be slain also.
7. If a man has bought silver, or
gold, or man slave, or woman slave, or
ox, or sheep, or ass, or anything else,
from the hands of a child, or slave of
another man, without elder or contract,
or receives them on deposit, that man
shall be considered a thief: he shall be
slain.
8. If a man has stolen an ox, or a
sheep, or an ass, or a pig, or a boat,
either from a god or a palace, he shall
pay thirty-fold. If he is a plebeian, he
shall render ten-fold. If the thief has
nothing to pay, he shall be slain.
9. If a man has lost anything, and
finds it in the hands of another ; if the
holder says, “ A seller sold it me ; before
the elders I bought it.” And if the
claimant says, “ I can produce witnesses
who will recognise my property.” Then
the purchaser shall bring the vendor who
gave it him, and the elders before whom
he bought it; and the claimant the wit
nesses recognising his lost property.
The judge shall weigh their evidence.
The elders before whom the purchase
was made, and the witnesses recognising
the property, shall affirm before God
what they know. The seller shall be
held for a thief, and slain : the claimant
shall receive back his lost property ; and
the purchaser shall receive back the
money he paid from the house of the
seller.
10. If the purchaser has not produced
the seller from whom he received it, and
the elders before whom he bought it;
but the claimant has brought witnesses
recognising the property; then the pur
chaser shall be held for a thief, and
slain; and the owner shall take his lost
property.
11. If the claimant has not brought
his witnesses recognising the property,
he has acted in bad faith, he has calum
niated ; he shall be slain.
12. If the seller has gone to his fate,
then from his house the purchaser shall
claim five-fold as the penalty in the
case.
13. If that man has not the elders at
hand, the judge shall give him a time,
up to six months. If in six months his
witnesses do not appear, he has acted in
bad faith; the penalty of that case he
shall bear.
14. If a man has stolen a man’s son
under age, he shall be slain.
15. If a man has brought a male or
female slave of the palace, or the male
or female slave of a plebeian, to pass
out of the gate, he shall be slain.
16. If a man has harboured in his
house a fugitive male or female slave of
the palace, or of a plebeian; and has
not brought them to the order of the
commandant, that householder shall be
slain.
17. If a man has seized in the field a
fugitive slave, male or female, and has
brought him back to his lord, the owner
of the slave shall pay him two shekels of
silver.
18. If that slave will not name his
owner, to the palace he shall be brought,
his past shall be investigated, to his lord
he shall be delivered.
19. If that slave be hidden in his
house, and be arrested in his hands, that
man shall be slain.
20. If a slave has escaped from the
hand of his captor, the latter shall swear
by the name of God to the owner of the
slave, and shall be guiltless.
21. If a man has broken into a house,
before the breach shall he be slain, and
there buried.
�i6
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
22. If a man has perpetrated brigan his house, and works them for three
dage, and has been caught, that man years ; if he returns and desires to till
shall be slain.
his field, his garden, and his house, they
23. If the brigand has not been taken, shall not be given him. He that has
the man plundered shall claim before taken and worked them shall continue
God what he has lost; and the city and to use them.
sheriff in whose land and boundary the
31. If one year only he had neglected
theft has taken place shall restore to them, and he returns ; field, garden, and
him all that he has lost.
house shall be restored to him, and he
24. If a life, the city and sheriff shall shall work them.
pay one mina of silver to his people.
32. If a captain or a soldier has been
25. If a fire break out in a man’s taken prisoner on “ the way of the king,”
house, and another man has gone to and a merchant ransoms him, and brings
extinguish it, and has lifted his eyes him back to his city; then, if his house
upon the goods of the householder, and contain sufficient for his ransom, he
has taken the goods of the householder; personally shall pay for his liberation.
that man shall be thrown into the same If his house do not contain sufficient,
the temple of his city shall pay. If the
fire.
26. If a captain or a soldier has been temple of his city have not the means,
ordered upon “ the way of the king,” the palace shall ransom him. His field,
and has not gone, but has hired a sub his garden, and his house shall not be
|
stitute, that captain or soldier shall be given for his ransom.
33. If a prefect or a general permits
f
slain. The substitute shall take his
evasion of service, and accepts a hired
I
house.
27. If a captain or a soldier has been mercenary to go on “ the way of the king,” I
1
taken in a “ misfortune of the king,” that prefect or general shall be slain.
34. If a prefect or a general has taken I f
and his field and garden have been
given to another to administer; when he away the property of a captain, has i g.
returns and regains his city, he shall injured a captain, has given a captain II &
receive back his field and garden and for hire, has abandoned the captain to a I
superior in a lawsuit, or taken away from 11
shall administer them.
28. If a captain or a soldier has been the captain a gift of the king, that prefect I
I
taken in a “ misfortune of the king,” or general shall be slain.
35. If any man purchase cattle or g iq
and his son can work them; field and
garden shall be given him, and the affairs sheep that the king has given to a captain, I
he shall lose his money.
i
of his father he shall administer.
36. Neither field, nor garden, nor Iron'
29. If his son be under age, and
unable to administer his father’s affairs ; house of a captain, or soldier, or vassal I fsgaj
I
then a third part of the field and garden shall be sold separately for silver.
37. If a man has bought the field,
shall be given to his mother, and his
garden, or house of a captain, a soldier, j wjjg
mother shall bring him up.
30. If a captain or a soldier has or a vassal, his contract-tablet shall be pd 7
neglected his field, his garden, and his broken, his money shall be forfeited,
house, instead of working them; and and the field, garden, or house shall be
another takes his field, his garden, and returned to the owner.
�THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
38. A captain, a soldier, or a vassal
may not assign his field, or garden, or
house to his wife or his daughter; neither
can they be assigned for debt.
39. He may bequeath in writing to
his wife or daughter a field, a garden, or
a house that he may have bought, and
may assign it for debt.
40. But he may sell his field, his
garden, or his house to a merchant or
another official; and the purchaser may
work the field, garden, or house that he
has bought.
41. If a man has enclosed the field,
garden, or house of a captain, soldier, or
vassal, and has provided the stakes; if
the captain, soldier, or vassal returns into
the field, garden, or house, he shall pay
for the stakes that have been provided.
42. If a man take a field to farm, and
grows no corn on the field, he shall be
accused of neglecting to work the field;
and he shall give to the lord of the field
an amount of corn according to the
yield of the district.
43. If he has not cultivated the field,
but has let it lie fallow, he shall give
corn like its neighbour to the lord of
the field. And the field that lay fallow
he shall hoe and sow, and to the lord of
the field restore it.
44. If a man lease unreclaimed land
for three years for cultivation, but has
been lazy and has not worked the field;
in the fourth year he shall break up the
field, hoe it, and sow it, and to the lord
of the field restore it. And he shall
measure out to him ten gur of corn for
each ten gan.
45. If a man has let his field to a
cultivator for a rental, and has received
the rental; and if afterwards the god
Adad \i.e., a thunderstorm] has flooded
the field and destroyed the harvest, the
loss is to the cultivator.
*7
46. If he has not received the rental
of his field, or has let it for one-half or
one-third of the crop; then the cultivator
and the lord of the field shall take their
proportions of the corn that is left in the
field.
47. If the cultivator, because he had
made no profit in the preceding year,
has sub-let the field for tillage, the lord
of the field cannot condemn the culti
vator. His field has been tilled, and at
the harvest he shall take corn according
to his contract.
48. If a man is liable for interest,
and the god Adad has flooded his field,
or the harvest has been destroyed, or
the corn has not grown through lack of
water; then in that year he shall not
pay corn to his creditor. He shall dip
his tablet in water, and the interest of
that year he shall not pay.
49. If a man has received silver from
a trader, and has given to the trader a
cornfield or sesame field, saying “Plant
the field with corn or sesame; take and
reap whatever there is,” then, when the
cultivator has grown corn or sesame on
the field, the lord of the field shall take
corn or sesame, whatever is upon the
field at the harvest; and shall give to
the trader corn for the silver he has
received from the trader, and for its
interest; and sustenance for the culti
vator.
50. If an already planted field, or a
field already planted with sesame, has
been given; the lord of the field shall
take the corn or sesame which is in the
field, and he shall render silver and
interest to the trader.
51. If he has not silver to pay back,
he shall give to the trader sesame accord
ing to the value of the silver he has
received, with its interest, at the royal
tariff.
c
�i8
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
52. If the cultivator has not grown
corn or sesame in the field, his contract
shall not be annulled.
53. If a man has been too lazy to
strengthen his dyke, and has not
strengthened the dyke, and a breach
has opened in the dyke, and the ground
has been flooded with water; the man
in whose dyke the breach has opened
shall reimburse the corn he has destroyed.
54. If he has not corn to reimburse,
he and his goods shall be sold for silver,
and it shall be divided among those
whose corn has been destroyed.
55. If a man has opened his irrigation
ditch, and, through negligence, his
neighbour’s field is flooded with water,
he shall measure back corn according to
the yield of the district.
56. If a man has opened the waters,
and flooded the planted field of his
neighbour, he shall measure back ten
gur of corn for each ten gan.
If a shepherd has put his sheep
to grass without an understanding with
the lord of the field; and, unknown to
the lord of the field, it has been grazed
by the sheep; then the lord shall reap
his field, and the shepherd who has
grazed his sheep unknown to the lord of
the field shall pay to the latter in addi
tion twenty gur of corn for every ten
gan.
58. If, after the sheep have left the
pasture, and been folded by the gate, a
shepherd allows his sheep to remain in
the field and graze; then that shepherd
shall take that field which has been
grazed, and at the harvest he shall
measure sixty gur of corn for each ten
gan to the lord of the field.
59. If a man, unknown to the lord of
the orchard, has cut down a tree in
another man’s orchard, he shall pay half
a mina of silver.
60. If a man has leased a field to a
gardener to be converted into a garden,
and the gardener has planted it; for
four years he shall attend to it; in the
fifth year the lord of the orchard and
the gardener shall share equally. The
lord of the orchard shall choose his
share and take it.
61. If the gardener has not planted
all the field, but leaves a waste, the waste
shall be put in his portion.
62. If the field entrusted to him has
not been planted as a garden, but is
cornland; the gardener shall measure
back to the lord of the field the produce
of the field according to the yield of the
vicinity during the years he has neglected
it. And he shall prepare the field and
return it to the lord.
63. If it be waste land, he shall pre
pare it, and restore it to the lord of the
field, and he shall measure ten gur of
corn per ten^zz/z for each year.
64. If a man has leased an orchard
to a gardener to cultivate it; the gardener,
as long as he holds it, shall give twothirds of the produce to the lord of the
orchard, one-third he shall keep himself.
65. If the gardener has not cultivated
the orchard, and the crop has diminished;
the gardener shall measure out according
to the yield of the vicinity.
[Five rows of cuneiform columns have
here been erased. It is estimated that
some thirty-five sections have thus been
obliterated. The British Museum, how
ever, possesses two fragments of clay
tablets brought from the library of the
Assyrian king Assurbanipal (reigned
668-626 B.c.) at Nineveh, which are
the remains of copies of the Code.
From these tablets the following three
sections have been restored :—
a. If a man has received silver from
�THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
a trader, and has pledged his date-garden
to him, saying, “ The dates in my garden
take for thy silver,” and the trader has
not consented; then the lord of the
garden shall gather the dates which are
in the garden : the silver and its interest
according to the tenour of his tablet he
shall pay to the trader; and the remainder
of the dates which are found in the
garden shall be taken by the lord of the
garden.
b. If a tenant has paid to the landlord
his full rent for a year, and the landlord
orders the tenant to go out before the
days are completed, then because the
tenant has not completed his days, and
has left the house, the landlord shall
return the silver which the tenant has
paid him.
c. If a man owes corn or silver, but
has neither corn nor silver to pay with,
then shall he produce before the elders
whatever property he has in his hands :
to the trader he shall give it. The trader
must accept it, and must not refuse.]
ioo.......... interest for the silver, as
much as he has received, he shall write
down; they shall reckon his days, and
he shall pay to his trader.
101. If in the place where he has
gone he has found no opportunity, the
retailer shall give back in equal amount
to the trader.
102. If a trader has lent silver to a
retailer for an undertaking, and where
he has gone he has suffered loss, he
shall return the capital sum to the
trader.
103. If the enemy has taken from
him whatever he carries upon the road,
the retailer shall swear by the name of
God, and shall be absolved.
104. If a trader has entrusted corn,
wool, oil, or any other goods to a retailer
to trade with, the retailer shall write
t-9
down the price and give it to the trader.
Thus shall the retailer take back the
seal of the silver which shall be given to
the trader.
105. If the retailer is negligent, and
the seal of the silver has not been given
to the trader, the silver that is not sealed
shall not be carried to account.
106. If a retailer has received silver
from a trader, and disputes with the
trader; then the trader shall call the
retailer before God and the elders,
regarding the silver received; and the
retailer shall restore three-fold the silver
he has received.
107. If a trader has wronged a retailer,
and the retailer has repaid to the trader
all that the trader gave him, and the
trader contests what has been given to
him; then that retailer shall call the
trader before God and the elders; and
because the trader has contested with
his retailer, he shall pay to the retailer
six-fold of all that he has received.
108. If a (female) wine-seller has not
accepted corn as the price of drink, but
silver by the grand weight has accepted,
and the price of drink is below the
price of corn; then that wine-seller
shall be prosecuted, and thrown into the
water.
109. If rebels meet in the house of a
wine-seller and she does not seize them
and take them to the palace, that wine
seller shall be slain.
no. If a priestess who has not
remained in the sacred building shall
open a wine-shop, or enter a wine-shop
for drink, that woman shall be burned.
hi. If a wine-seller has given sixty
qa of usakani for refreshment, at the
harvest she shall receive fifty qa of corn.
112. If a man goes on a journey and
gives to another man silver, gold, gems,
or portable goods, that they may be
�20
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
carried home, and that man has not
carried and delivered all that was given
him to carry, but has kept them; then
the owner shall prosecute that man for
all the things carried, but not delivered,
and that man shall pay five-fold to the
owner for all that was given him.
113. If a man has a claim for corn or
silver upon another man, and without
the knowledge of the owner has taken
corn from the granary or store; that
man, because he has taken corn from
the granary or store without the know
ledge of the owner, shall be prosecuted.
The corn he has taken shall be returned,
and all that he should have received he
shall lose.
114. If a man has no claim upon
another man for corn or silver, but
levies distraint upon him, for each dis
traint he shall pay one-third of a mina
of silver.
115. If a man has a claim upon
another man for corn or silver, and takes
distraint, if the distrained go to his fate
in the house of the distrainer [by a
natural death], then that case has no
further claim.
116. If the distrained die in the
house of the distrainer through blows
or ill-treatment, the distrainer shall call
his trader to account. If he be free
born, his son shall be slain; if a slave,
he shall pay a third of a mina of silver;
and all that he should have received he
shall lose.
117. If a man has contracted a debt,
and has given his wife, his son, his
daughter for silver or for labour, three
years they shall serve in the house of
their purchaser or bondsmaster; in the
fourth year they shall regain their original
condition.
118. If he has assigned a male or
female slave for labour, and the trader
sends them out, and sells them for silver,
there is no claim.
119. If a man has contracted a debt,
and has sold for silver a slave who has
borne him children; the lord of the
slave shall pay back the silver the trader
has given him, and the slave shall be
free.
120. If a man has stored his corn in
the house of another man, and the store
has been damaged, or the householder
has opened the granary taking corn, or
he disputes the quantity of the corn
heaped up, then the owner of the corn
shall pursue his corn before God, and
the householder who has taken the corn
shall replace it and give it to the owner.
121. If a man has stored corn in the
house of another man, he shall pay five
qa of corn per gur per annum for ware
housing.
122. If a man desires to deposit with
another man silver, gold, or anything
else, he shall exhibit all before the elders,
draw up a contract, and then make the
deposit.
123. If he has given on deposit with
out elders or contract, and where he has
given they contest it, there is no claim.
124. If a man has deposited silver or
gold or anything else with another man
before the elders, and if that man denies
it, he shall prosecute him, and all that
he contests he shall replace and restore
double.
125. If a man has given his goods
on deposit, and in the place of deposit,
either by breaking in or by climbing
over, anything has been lost, together
with property of the householder; then
the householder in question shall make
good all that was deposited with him
and lost, and shall restore it to the
owner. The householder shall pursue his
stolen goods and recover from the thief.
�THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
126. If a man has not lost everything,
but says everything of his is lost, exag
gerating what is lacking; then, as he
has not lost everything, his lack he shall
bring before God. All that he sub
stantiates shall be made up; what he
lacks shall be restored.
127. If a man has pointed the finger
against a priestess or the wife of another
man unjustifiably, that man shall be
thrown before the judge, and his brow
shall be branded.
128. If a man take a wife, and a
contract has not concluded, then that
woman is no wife.
129. If the wife of a man is found
lying with another male, they shall be
bound and thrown into the water; unless
the husband lets his wife live, and the
king lets his servant live.
130. If a man has forced the wife of
another man, who has not known the
male, and who still resides in the house
of her father, and has lain within her
breasts, and he is found, that man shall
be slain; that woman is guiltless.
131. If a man’s wife is accused by
her husband, but has not been found
lying with another male, she shall swear
by the name of God and return into her
house.
132. If the finger is pointed against a
man’s wife because of another male, and
she has not been found lying with
another male; then she shall plunge for
her husband into the holy river.
133. If a man has been taken prisoner,
and there is food in his house, and his
wife forsakes his house, and enters the
house of another; then because that
woman has not preserved her body, but
has entered another house, then that
woman shall be prosecuted, and shall be
thrown into the water.
134. If a man has been taken prisoner,
21
and there is no food in his house, and
his wife enters the house of another;
then that woman bears no blame.
135. If a man has been taken prisoner,
and there is no food before her, and his
wife has entered the house of another,
and bears children, and afterwards her
husband returns and regains his city;
then that woman shall return to her
spouse. The children shall follow their
father.
136. If a man has abandoned his
city, and absconded, and after that his
wife has entered the house of another;
if that man comes back and claims his
wife; because he had fled and deserted
his city, the wife of the deserter shall
not return to her husband.
137. If a man has set his face to
divorce a concubine who has borne him
children, or a wife who has presented
him with children; then he shall give
back to that woman her dowry, and he
shall give her the usufruct of field,
garden, and property, and she shall
bring up her children. After she has
brought up her children, she shall take
a son’s portion of all that is given to
her children, and she may marry the
husband of her heart.
138. If a man divorce his spouse who
has not borne him children, he shall give
to her all the silver of the bride-price,
and restore to her the dowry which she
brought from the house of her father;
and so he shall divorce her.
139. If there were no bride-price, he
shall give her one mina of silver for the
divorce.
140. If he be a plebeian, he shall
give her one-third of a mina of silver.
141. If a man’s wife, dwelling in a
man’s house, has set her face to leave,
has been guilty of dissipation, has
wasted her house, and has neglected her
�22
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
husband; then she shall be prosecuted.
If her husband says “she is divorced,” he
shall let her go her way; he shall give
her nothing for divorce. If her husband
says “she is not divorced,” her husband
may espouse another woman, and that
woman shall remain a slave in the house
of her husband.
142. If a woman hate her husband,
and say “ Thou shalt not possess me,”
the reason for her dislike shall be
inquired into. If she is careful, and
has no fault, but her husband takes
himself away and neglects her; then
that woman is not to blame. She shall
take her dowry and go back to her
father's house.
143. If she has not been careful, but
runs out, wastes her house and neglects
her husband; then that woman shall be
thrown into the water.
144. If a man has married a wife, and
that wife has given to her husband a
female slave who has children; then if
that man has set his face to marry a
concubine, he shall not be permitted;
he shall not marry a concubine.
145. If a man has married a wife and
she has not presented him with children,
and he has set his face to marry a con
cubine ; if that man marries a concubine
and brings her into his house, then that
concubine shall not rank with the wife.
146. If a man has married a wife, and
she has given to her husband a female
slave, who bears children; and after
wards that slave ranks herself with her
mistress, because she has borne children,
her mistress shall not sell her for silver.
She shall be fettered, and counted
among the slaves.
147. If she has not borne children,
her mistress shall sell her for silver.
148. If a man has married a wife,
and sickness has seized her, and he has
set his face to marry another; he may
marry; but his wife whom the sickness
has seized he shall not divorce. She
shall dwell in the house he has built,
and he shall support her while she lives.
149. If that woman is not content to
dwell in the house of her husband, he
shall return to her the dowry she brought
from her father’s house, and she shall go.
150. If a man has given to his wife
field, garden, house, or goods, and has
given her a sealed tablet; then after her
husband [has gone to his fate] her chil
dren have no claim. The mother can
give what she leaves behind to the chil
dren she prefers. To brothers she shall
not give.
151. If a woman who dwells in a
man’s house has bound her husband
not to assign her to a creditor, and has
received a tablet; then if that man had
a debt upon him before he married that
woman, his creditor may not seize his
wife. And if that woman had incurred
debt before she entered the man’s house,
her creditor may not seize her husband.
152. If, after that woman has entered
the man’s house, they incur debt, both
of them must satisfy the trader.
153. If a man’s wife, because of
another male, has killed her husband,
that woman shall be impaled upon a
stake.
154. If a man has known his daughter,
that man shall be banished from his
city.
155. If a man has betrothed a bride
to his son, and his son has known
her; and afterwards he has lain in her
breasts, and he is found; that man shall
be bound and thrown into the water.
156. If a man has betrothed a bride
to his son, and his son has not known
her, and he has lain in her breasts, he
shall pay half a mina of silver; and all
�THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
that she brought from her father’s house
shall be returned to her, and she may
marry the husband of her heart.
157. If a man after his father has lain
in the breasts of his mother, both of
them shall be burned.
158. If a man after his father is dis
covered in the breasts of his lady, who
has borne children, that man shall be
cut off from his father’s house.
159. If a man has brought goods into
the house of his father-in-law, and has
given the bride-price, and has looked
upon another woman, and has said
to his father-in-law, “ Thy daughter
I will not marry”; then the father of
the girl shall retain all that has been
brought.
160. If a man has brought goods into
the house of the father-in-law, and has
given the bride-price, and the father of
the girl says, “ I will not give thee my
daughter”; he shall equal all that has
been brought him and repay it.
161. If a man has brought goods into
the house of his father-in-law, and has
given the bride-price, and his friend has
slandered him, and the father-in-law has
said to the husband of the wife, “ My
daughter thou shalt not marry ”; he shall
equal all that has been brought him and
repay it; and his wife shall not marry
his friend.
162. If a man has married a wife,
and she has borne children, and that
woman has gone to her fate; then her
father has no claim upon her dowry.
The dowry is her children’s.
163. If a man has married a wife,
and she has presented no children to
him, and that woman has gone to her
fate; if the bride-price which that man
brought to the house of his father in
law has been returned to him by his
father-in-law, then the husband has no
23
claim upon that woman’s dowry. The
dowry is to her father’s house.
164. If his father-in-law has not re
turned the bride-price in her dowry;
then he shall deduct all her bride-pr^e,
and shall give back her dowry to her
father’s house.
165. If a man has made a gift of
field, or garden, or house, to his son,
the first in his eyes, and has sealed him
a tablet; then, after the father has gone
to his fate, when the brothers divide he
shall retain the father’s present which
he has given him over and above the
equal part that he shares in the posses
sions of his paternal house.
166. If a man has married wives to
the children he has had, but has not
married a wife to an infant son; then
after the father has gone to his fate,
when the brethren share the possessions
of the paternal house, they shall give
silver for a bride-price to their infant
brother who has not married a wife,
besides his share; and he shall be
married to a wife.
167. If a man has married a wife, and
she has borne him children, and that
woman has gone to her fate; and after
her he has married another woman who
bears him children; then, after the
father has gone to his fate, the children
shall not share according to the mothers;
but they shall take the dowries of their
own mothers. The possessions of their
paternal house they shall share equally.
168. If a man has set his face to
disown his son, and has said to the
judge, “I disown my son,” then the
judge shall look into his reasons. If the
son has not borne a heavy crime which
would justify his being disowned from
filiation, then the father shall not disown
his son from filiation.
169. If he has borne against his
�24
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
father a heavy crime justifying his being leave the house, the judge shall look
disowned from filiation, then for his into the reasons ; and if the children be
first offence he shall turn aside his face. in fault, that woman shall not leave her
If he bear a heavy crime the second husband’s house.
time, the father shall disown his son
172Z. If that woman has set her face
from filiation.
to depart, she shall surrender to her
170. If a man whose spouse has
children the settlement which her hus
borne him children, and whose female band made her. She shall retain the
slave has borne him children, and the dowry from her father’s house, and she
father in his lifetime has said to the may marry the husband of her heart.
children of the female slave “ my
173. If that woman where she has
children,” and has counted them with gone bears children to her later husband,
the children of his spouse, and after and afterwards the woman dies; her
that the father has gone to his fate; former and her latter children shall
then the children of the spouse and the share her dowry.
children of the female slave shall share
174. If she bears no children to her
the possessions of the paternal house later husband, the children of her former
equally. The sons that are children of consort take her dowry.
the wife shall choose and allot in the
175. If either a palace slave, or the
division.
slave of a plebeian, marry the daughter
171a. And if the father in his lifetime of a free man, and she bears children;
has not said to the children whom the the owner of the slave has no claim for
female slave has borne him “ my chil service upon the children of the free
dren,” and afterwards the father has man’s daughter.
gone to his fate; the children of the
176a. And if a palace slave or slave
female slave shall not share with the of a plebeian marry the daughter of a
children of the spouse; but the slave free man, and when she marries she
and her children shall be emancipated, enters the house of the palace slave or
and the children of the spouse shall the plebeian’s slave with a dowry from
have no claim for service upon the chil the house of her father; and when they
dren of the slave.
are settled and have founded a house
171Z'. The spouse shall take her they have acquired property, and after
dowry, and the settlement which her wards the palace slave or the slave of
husband made her and wrote in a tablet the plebeian has gone to his fate; then
for her, and she shall dwell in the the daughter of the free man shall take
domicile of her husband. While she her dowry; and all that her husband
lives she shall enjoy it; she may not and herself have acquired since they
sell it for silver, but after her it is her settled shall be divided into two parts;
children’s.
the owner of the slave shall take half,
172a. If her husband has not made and the free man’s daughter shall take
her a settlement, her dowry shall be half for her children.
returned to her, and she shall receive a
176A If the free man’s daughter had
portion of the possessions of her no dowry; all that her husband and
husband’s house equal to that of a son. herself have acquired since they settled
If her children annoy her, to make her shall be divided into two parts: the
�THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
owner of the slave shall take half, and
the free man’s daughter shall take half
for her children.
177. If a widow who has infant
children has set her face to enter a
second house, she shall not enter with
out [consent] of the judge. When she
would enter the second house the
judge shall inquire into the residue of
her former husband’s house. The house
of her former husband and that woman
shall be entrusted to the house of her
later husband, and a tablet shall be
delivered to them. They shall maintain
the house and bring up the infants.
They may sell nothing for silver. The
purchaser who buys any vessel belonging
to the widow’s children shall lose his
silver, and the property shall return to
its owner.
178. If a priestess, or a devotee, her
father has given her a dowry, and has
written a tablet; but has not written in
the tablet that what she leaves behind
her she may give as she sees good, and
has not allowed the fulness of her heart;
and afterwards the father has gone to
his fate; then her brothers shall take
her field or her garden, and according
to the value of her share they shall give
her corn, oil, and wool, and her heart
shall be satisfied. If her brothers have
not given her corn, oil, and wool
according to the value of her share, and
her heart is not satisfied, then her field
or her garden shall be entrusted to the
cultivator whom she sees good, and her
cultivator shall sustain her. While she
lives she shall enjoy field and garden
and everything which her father has
given her; but she may not sell for
silver nor alienate to another. Her
filiation is to her brothers.
179. If a priestess or devotee her
father has given her a dowry, and has
25
written a deed, and has written in the
tablet that what she leaves behind her
she may give as she sees good, and has
allowed the fulness of her heart; then after
her father has gone to his fate she may
give what she leaves behind to whom
she sees good. Her brothers have no
claim.
180. If the father has not given a,
dowry to his daughter who is a Kallati
or a devotee ; then after the father has
gone to his fate, she shall take out of
the possessions of the paternal house
the portion of one son. She shall enjoy
it during her life.
What she leaves
behind is to her brothers.
181. If the father has consecrated a
Qadishtu or a virgin to God, and has
not given her a dowry; after the father
has gone to his fate she shall take out
of the possessions of the paternal house
one-third of the portion of a son. She
shall enjoy it during her life. What
she leaves behind is to her brothers.
182. If the father has not given a
dowry to his daughter, a “ wife of Merodach of Babylon,” and not written a
deed ; then after the father has gone to
his fate she shall take out of the
possessions of the paternal house onethird of the portion of a son with her
brothers. She shall not have the man
agement. The “ wife of Merodach ”
may give what she leaves behind to
whom she sees good.
183. If the father has provided a
dowry for his daughter by a concubine,
has found her a husband, and written
her a deed; then after the father has
gone to his fate she shall not share in
the possessions of the paternal house.
184. If the father has not provided a
dowry for his daughter by a concubine,
and has not found her a husband; then
after the father has gone to his fate her
�26
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
brothers shall provide her a dowry
according to the wealth of the paternal
house, and find her a husband.
185. If a man has taken an infant to
adopt into his own name, and brought
him up; that adopted son may not be
reclaimed.
186. If a man has adopted an infant,
and when he has taken him he injures
his father and his mother; then that
adopted son shall return to his father’s
house.
187. The son of a Nersega, a guard
of the palace, or the son of a devotee
may not be reclaimed.
188. If a son of the people has taken
a child to adoption, and has taught him
his handicraft, he may not be reclaimed.
189. If he has not taught him his
handicraft, that adopted son shall return
to his father’s house.
190. If a man has adopted an infant
as a son, and brought him up, but has
not reckoned him with his children;
then that adopted son shall return to
his father’s house.
191. If a man has adopted an infant
as a son, and brought him up, and has
founded a household, and afterwards
has had children, and if he has set his
face to disown the adopted son; then
that child shall not go his way. His
foster-father shall give him out of his
possessions one-third of the portion of
a son, and then he shall go. Of field,
or garden, or house, he shall not give
him.
192. If the son of a Nersega, or the
son of a devotee, to his foster-father or
his foster-mother, has said, “ Thou art
not my father,” or “ Thou art not my
mother ” ; his tongue shall be cut out.
193. If the son of a Nersega, or the
son of a devotee, has come to know his
father’s house, and he despises his foster
father and his foster-mother, and goes
to the house of his father; his eyes
shall be torn out.
194. If a man has given his child to
a nurse, and the child dies in the hand
of the nurse, and the nurse without the
knowledge of his father and his mother
substitutes another child; she shall be
prosecuted, and because she has sub
stituted another child without the know
ledge of his father and his mother, her
breasts shall be cut off.
195. If a son has struck his father,
his hands shall be cut off.
196. If a man has destroyed the eye
of a free man, his own eye shall be
destroyed.
197. If he has broken the bone of a
free man, his bone shall be broken.
198. If he has destroyed the eye of a
plebeian, or broken a bone of a plebeian,
he shall pay one mina of silver.
199. If he has destroyed the eye of a
man’s slave, or broken a bone of a man’s
slave, he shall pay half his value.
200. If a man has knocked out the
teeth of a man of the same rank, his
own teeth shall be knocked out.
201. If he has knocked out the teeth
of a plebeian, he shall pay one-third of
a mina of silver.
202. If a man strike the body of a
man who is great above him, he shall
receive sixty lashes with a cowhide whip
in the assembly.
203. If a man strike the body of the
son of a free man of like condition, he
shall pay one mina of silver.
204. If a plebeian strike the body of
a plebeian, he shall pay ten shekels of
silver.
205. If a man’s slave strike the body
of the son of a free man, his ear shall
be cut off.
206. If a man has struck another
�THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
man in a dispute and wounded him,
that man shall swear, “ I did not strike
him knowingly ”; and he shall pay for
the doctor.
207. If he die of his blows, he shall
swear likewise ; and if it be the son of
a free man, he shall pay half a mina of
silver.
208. If he be the son of a plebeian,
he shall pay a third of a mina of silver.
209. If a man strike the daughter
of a free man, and cause her foetus to
fall •, he shall pay ten shekels of silver
for her foetus.
210. If that woman die, his daughter
shall be slain.
211. If he has caused the daughter
of a plebeian to let her foetus fall
through blows, he shall pay five shekels
of silver.
212. If that woman die, he shall pay
half a mina of silver.
213. If he has struck the slave of a
man, and made her foetus fall; he shall
pay two shekels of silver.
214. If that slave die, he shall pay
a third of a mina of silver.
215. If a doctor has treated a man
with a metal knife for a severe wound,
and has cured the man, or has opened
a man’s tumour with a metal knife, and
cured a man’s eye; then he shall receive
ten shekels of silver.
216. If the son of a plebeian, he
shall receive five shekels of silver.
217. If a man’s slave, the owner of
the slave shall give two shekels of silver
to the doctor.
218. If a doctor has treated a man
with a metal knife for a severe wound,
and has caused the man to die, or has
opened a man’s tumour with a metal
knife, and destroyed the man’s eye; his
hands shall be cut off.
219. If a doctor has treated the slave
27
of a plebeian with a metal knife for a
severe wound, and caused him to die ;
he shall render slave for slave.
220. If he has opened his tumour
with a metal knife, and destroyed his
eye, he shall pay half his price in
silver.
221. If a doctor has healed a man’s
broken bone or has restored diseased
flesh, the patient shall give the doctor
five shekels of silver.
222. If he be the son of a plebeian,
he shall give three shekels of silver.
223. If a man’s slave, the owner of
the slave shall give two shekels of silver
to the doctor.
224. If a doctor of oxen or asses has
treated either ox or ass for a severe
wound, and cured it, the owner of the
ox or ass shall give to the doctor onesixth of a shekel of silver for his fee.
225. If he has treated an ox or an
ass for a severe wound, and caused it to
die, he shall give the quarter of its
price to the owner of the ox or the ass.
226. If a brander, unknown to the
owner of a slave, has branded him with
the mark of an inalienable slave, the
hands of that brander shall be cut off-.
227. If a man deceive a brander into
branding with the mark of an inalien
able slave, that man shall be slain and
buried in his own house. The brander
shall swear “ I did not brand him with
knowledge,” and he shall be guiltless.
228. If a builder has built a house for
a man, and completed it, he shall give
him for his pay two shekels of silver for
each sar [of surface] of the house.
229. If a builder has built a house
for a man, and his work is not strong,
and if the house he has built falls in and
kills the householder, that builder shall
be slain.
230. If the child of the householder
�28
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
be killed, the child of that builder shall
be slain.
231. If the slave of the householder
be killed, he shall give slave for slave to
the householder.
232> If goods have been destroyed,
he shall replace all that has been des
troyed ; and because the house that he
built was not made strong, and it has
fallen in, he shall restore the fallen
house out of his own personal property.
233- If a builder has built a house for
a man, and his work is not done pro
perly, and a wall shifts; then that builder
shall make that wall good with his own
silver.
234. If a boat-builder has built a
sixty-ton boat for a man, he shall give
him two shekels of silver for his pay.
235- If a boat-builder has built a boat
for a man and his work is not firm, and
in that same year that boat is disabled
in use ; then the boat-builder shall over
haul that boat, and strengthen it with
his own material, and he shall return
the strengthened boat to the boat
owner.
236. If a man has given his boat on
hire to a boatman, and the boatman is
careless, and the boat is sunk and lost;
then the boatman shall replace the boat
to the boat-owner.
237- If a man has hired boatman and
boat, and laden her with corn, wool, oil,
dates, or any other kind of freight, and
if that boatman is careless and sinks the
boat, and her cargo is lost; then the
boatman shall replace the boat he has
sunk and all her cargo that he has lost.
238. If a boatman has sunk a man’s
boat, and refloated her, he shall give
silver to half her value.
239- If a man hire a boatman, he
shall give him six gur of corn per
annum.
240. If a makhirtu boat has run into
a mukkielbitu boat and sunk her, the
owner of the sunken boat shall pursue
all that was lost in his boat before God.
The makhirtu shall replace to the
mukkielbitu boat that was sunk his
boat and all that was lost in her.
241. If a man distrain an ox, he
shall pay a third of a mina of silver.
242. If a man hires for a year, the
fee for a draught ox is four gur of corn.
243. The fee for a milch-cow is three
gur of corn given to the owner.
244. If a man has hired an ox or an
ass, and a lion has killed it in the open
country, then it is to the owner.
245. If a man has hired an ox, and
by neglect or by blows has caused its
death, he shall replace ox by ox to the
owner of the ox.
246. If a man has hired an ox and
broken its foot or cut the nape of its
neck, he shall replace ox by ox to the
owner of the ox.
247. If a man has hired an ox, and
has knocked out its eye, he shall give
silver to the owner of the ox for half
its value.
248. If a man has hired an ox, and
has broken off its horn, or cut off its
tail, or damaged its muzzle, he shall give
silver for a quarter of its value.
249. If a man has hired an ox, and
God has struck it, and it has died; then
the man who hired the ox shall swear by
the name of God, and shall be guiltless.
250. If a mad bull has rushed upon a
man, and gored him, and killed him;
that case has no remedy.
251. If a man’s ox is known to be
addicted to goring, and he has not
blunted his horns, nor fastened up his
ox; then if his ox has gored a free
man and killed him, he shall give half
a mina of silver.
�THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
252. If it be a man’s slave, he shall
give a third of a mina of silver.
253. If a man has let his field to
another man to dwell upon its face, and
has given him seed corn and entrusted
him with draught oxen, and has con
tracted with him to cultivate the field;
and if that man has stolen seed or
plants, and they are found in his hands,
his hands shall be cut off,
254. If he has received the seed, but
worn out the oxen, he shall replace by
hoed corn.
255. If he has given the man’s
draught oxen on hire, or stolen the
seed-corn and not grown it in the
field, that man shall be prosecuted, and
he shall measure out sixty gur of corn
for every ten gan,
256. If his prefect will not advance
the compensation, he shall be placed
with the cattle in the field.
257. If a man hire a field-labourer,
he shall give him eight gur of corn per
annum,
258. If a man hire a herdsman, he
shall give him six gur of corn per
annum,
259. If a man has stolen a water
wheel from the estate, he shall give five
shekels of silver to the owner of the
wheel.
260. If he has stolen an irrigating
bucket or a harrow, he shall pay three
shekels of silver.
261. If a man hire a pasturer for
cattle and sheep, he shall give him
eight gur of corn per annum.
262. If a man either ox or sheep.......
[defaced].
263. If he has lost ox or sheep that
has been entrusted to him, he shall
replace ox by ox, sheep by sheep, to
the owner.
264. If a herdsman who has had
29
cattle or sheep given him to pasture,
and has been paid his wages as agreed,
and his heart is satisfied; and if the
cattle he has made to diminish, or the
sheep he has made to diminish, and has
made the progeny to decline; then he
shall give progeny and number accord
ing to his agreement.
265. If a herdsman to whom cattle
and sheep have been given to pasture
has lied, and has altered the bargain,
and sold for silver; then he shall be
prosecuted. He shall restore cattle or
sheep to their owner tenfold what he has
stolen.
266. If a stroke of God has occurred
in a fold, or a lion has slain, then the
herdsman shall clear himself before God,
and the owner of the fold shall meet the
disaster to the fold.
267. If the herdsman is in fault, and
has been the occasion of the loss in the
fold; then the herdsman shall restore
the cattle and sheep which he has caused
to be lost in the fold, and shall give
them back to the owner.
268. If a man has hired an ox for
threshing, twenty qa of corn is its hire.
269. If an ass has been hired for
threshing, ten qa of corn is its hire.
270. If a young animal has been
hired for threshing, one qa of corn is
its hire.
271. If a man hire cattle, wagon, and
driver, he shall give 180 qa of corn per
diem.
272. If a man has hired a wagon by
itself, he shall give forty qa of corn per
diem.
273. If a man hire a workman, then
from the beginning of the year until the
fifth month he shall give six grains of
silver per diem. From the sixth month
until the end of the year he shall give
five grains of silver per diem.
�3»
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
274. If a man hire a son of the
people,
(«) Pay of a.......
five grains of silver,
(^) Pay of a potter five grains of silver,
0 Pay of a tailor five grains of silver,
(d) Pay of a mason ... grains of silver,
(e) Pay of a.......
............... of silver,
(/) Pay of a.......
............... of.. silver,
(g) Pay of a carpenter
four grains of silver,
(^) Pay of a rope
maker
four grains of silver,
(?) Pay of a..................grains of silver,
(7) Pay of a builder ... grains of silver,
he shall give per diem.
275« If a man hire a....... , her hire is
three grains of silver per diem.
276. If a man hire a makhirtu, he
shall give two and a-half grains of silver
per diem for her hire.
277. If a man hire a sixty-ton boat,
he shall give a sixth part of a shekel of
silver per diem for her hire.
278. If a man has bought a slave
male or female, and before his month
has expired the bennu sickness has
fallen upon him ; then he shall return
him to the vendor, and the buyer shall
receive back the purchase-money.
279. If a man has bought a slave,
male or female, and there is a claim
then the vendor shall answer the claim.
280. If a man has bought another
man s slave, male or female, in a foreign
land, and when he has come into the
midst of the country the master of the
slave recognises his male or female
slave; then, if they are children of the
land, they shall receive their freedom
without price.
281. If they are children of another
land, the purchaser shall take oath before
God as to the silver he has paid; and
the owner of the slave, male or female,
shall give to the trader silver that he has
paid; and shall recover his male or his
female slave.
282. If a slave shall say to his master,
“Thou art not my master,” he shall be
prosecuted as a slave, and his owner
shall cut off his ear.
The judgments of justice which Ham
murabi, the mighty king, has estab
lished, conferring upon the land a sure
guidance and a gracious rule.
Hammurabi, the protecting king, am
I. I have not withdrawn myself from
the blackheaded race that Bel has en
trusted to me, and over whom Merodach
has made me shepherd. I have not
reposed myself upon my side; but I
have given them places of peace.
Difficult points have I made smooth,
and radiance have I shed abroad.
With the mighty weapon that Zamama
and Ishtar have lent me; with the
penetration with which Ea has en
dowed me; with the valour that Mero
dach has given me, I have rooted out all
enemies above and below; and the
depths have I subjugated. The flesh
of the land I have made rejoice : the
resident people I have made secure; I
have not suffered them to be afraid. It
is I that the great gods have elected to
be the Shepherd of Salvation, whose
sceptre is just.
I throw my good
shadow over my city. Upon my bosom
I cherish the men of the lands of Sumir
and Akkad. By my protecting genius,
their brethren in peace are guided : by
my wisdom are they sheltered. That
the strong may not oppress the weak;
that the orphan and the widow may be
counselled ; in Babylon, the city whose
head has been lifted up by Anu and
Bel; in E Saggil, the temple whose
foundations are as solid as heaven and
earth : to proclaim the law of the land :
to guide the procedure of the land :
�THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
and to sustain the feeble; I have
written my precious words upon my
pillar, and before my image as King of
Justice I have placed it.
I am the monarch who towers above
the kings of the cities. My words are
well weighed; my valour has no equal.
By command of Shamash, the great
judge of heaven and earth, my justice
shall glisten in the land. By direction
of Merodach, my lord, my monument
shall never see destruction.
In E
Saggil that I love, my name shall ever
be spoken. The oppressed, who has a
lawsuit, shall come before my image as
king of justice. He shall read the
writing on my pillar, he shall perceive
my precious words. The word of my
pillar shall explain to him his cause,
and he shall find his right. His heart
shall be glad [and he shall say] “ The
Lord Hammurabi has risen up as a true
father to his people; the will of Mero
dach, his god, he has made to be
fearedj he has achieved victory for
Merodach above and below. He has
rejoiced the heart of Merodach, his
lord; and gladdened the flesh of his
people for ever. And the land he has
placed in order.” Reading the mandates,
he shall pray before my lord Merodach
and my lady Zarpanit with a full heart;
and the guardian spirits, the deities, who
reside in E Saggil within E Saggil, shall
daily intercede before Merodach my
lord, and Zarpanit my lady.
In after days, and for all time, the
king who is in the land shall observe
the words of justice which are written
upon my pillar. He shall not alter the
law of the land which I have formulated,
or the statutes of the country that I
have enacted: nor shall he damage my
sculptures. If that man has wisdom,
and strives to keep his land in order, he
3i
will heed the words which are written
upofi my pillar. The canon, the rule,
the law of the country which I have
formulated, the statutes of the country
that I have enacted, this pillar shall
show to him. The black-headed people
he shall govern; their laws he shall
pronounce, their statutes he shall decide.
He shall root out of the land the per
verse and the wicked; and the flesh of
his people he shall delight.
Hammurabi, the king of justice, am
I, to whom Shamash has granted recti
tude, My words are well weighed : my
deeds have no equal, above and below
I am the whirlwind that scours the
depth and the height. If that man
heeds my words that I have engraved
upon my pillar, departs not from my
laws, alters not my words, changes not my
sculptures, then may Shamash make the
sceptre of that man to endure as long as
I, the king of justice, and to lead his
people with justice.
But if that man heeds not my words
that I have written upon my pillar; if
he has scorned my malediction, nor
feared the curse of God; if he has
annulled the law that I have given, or
altered my words, or changed my
sculptures, or erased my name in order
to write his own. Or if, from fear of
these curses, he has commissioned
another; then that man, whether he be
king, or lord, or feudatory, or citizen,
whatever his title, may the great Anu,
the father of the gods, who has decreed
my reign, may he extinguish the splen
dour of his royalty, may he shatter his
sceptre, may he curse his end.
May the lord Bel, who fixes fate,
whose word is inalterable, and who has
magnified my royalty ; may he allot him
a rebellion which his hand cannot quell:
the breath of his ruin may he breathe
�32
THE TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION
upon his throne: years of sighing:
fewness of days: years of famine:
darkness without light: and a death
with open eyes. May his deep mouth
decree him the overthrow of his city,
the dispersion of his people, the removal
of his royalty, and the annihilation of
his name and memory in the land.
May Beltis, the great mother, whose
word is great in E Kur, the lady who
gives ear to my desires in the place of
justice and statutes before Bel; may she
make his cause bad before Bel; may
she put in the mouth of Bel, the king,
to devastate his land, to annihilate his
people, and to pour out his soul like
water.
May Ea, the great prince, whose
decisions take first place, the divine
thinker, the omniscient, who has length
ened the days of my life ; may he take
understanding and prudence from him ;
may he plunge him in forgetfulness,
obstruct his rivers at their sources, and,
prevent the growth of corn,1 the life of
men, in his land.
May Shamash, the great judge of
heaven and earth, who maintains all
living creatures, the lord who gives con
fidence ; may he cut short his kingship,
misjudge his law, obstruct his path,
arrest the march of his troops, give
him unpropitious visions of the uproot
ing of the foundation of his rule, and
the ruin of his land. May the decree of
Shamash hasten after him; may he lack
life on earth; may he lack water among
the spirits under the earth.
May Sin, the lord of the heavens, my
divine creator, whose crescent shines
among the gods ; may he take from him
diadem and throne of royalty; may he
lay heavy sin upon him, with a penalty
which shall never depart out of his
body; may he complete the days of the
months, the months of the years of his
reign in sighs and tears; may the cares
of government be multiplied to him :
may he destine him a life which is a
struggle with death.
May Adad, the lord of fertility, the
prince of the heavens and the earth, my
helper; may he take away from him the
rains of heaven, and dry up the outflow
of springs; may he waste his territory
with want and famine; may he thunder
his anger against his city ; may he turn
his dominions into ruins by tempests.
May Zamama, the great warrior, the
eldest son of E Kur, who marches at my
right hand upon the field of battle; may
he break his weapons ; may he convert
his day into night, and cause his foe to
triumph over him.
May Ishtar, the mistress of battles
and combats, who wields my weapons,
my guardian angel, who loves my reign ;
may she in her passionate heart, in her
deep anger curse his royalty, turning her
favours into evils; may she shatter his
weapons upon the field of battles and
combats; may she bring tumult and
rebellion upon him ; may she overthrow
his warriors, soaking the earth with their
blood; may she strew the corpses of
his armies in heaps over the plain,
giving them no quarter; may he be
delivered into the hand of his foes, a
prisoner in the enemy’s land.
May Nergal, the mighty among the
gods, whose onslaught none can with
stand, who has granted me victory; with
his mighty force may he burn up his
people like a wisp of rushes; with his
powerful weapons may he lop off his
limbs, and shatter him like an image of
clay.
1 Literally “ Ashnan,” the deity who presided
May Nintu, the sublime lady of tie
over the growth of corn.
�NOTES ON THE CODE
lands, my creative mother; may she
deny him offspring, and leave him no
name, and create no seed of mankind in
the habitations of his people.
May Nin-Karrak, the daughter of
Anu, the herald of my mercy in E Kur;
may she let loose in his members a
violent sickness, a noisome pestilence, a
fearsome wound which cannot be cured,
whose nature no doctor can tell, that
cannot be assuaged by bandage, which
—like the bite of death—cannot be
33
avoided, until she conquer his life;
and over the loss of his vigour he shall
groan.
May the great gods of heaven and
earth, the Anunnaki in their assembly,
the circuit of this temple of E Babbara;
may they all curse him with deadly
curses, his seed, his land, his officers,
his people, and his soldiers.
May Bel, whose word is irrevocable,
may he curse him with a mighty curse,
which shall immediately take effect.
Chapter V.
NOTES ON THE CODE
In order to avoid breaking up the text
of the inscription with notes, all remarks
upon it are relegated to this chapter;
and, as it may be useful to compare the
Babylonian Laws with another Code
that is undoubtedly independent of
them, occasional references are made to
the early Roman legislation called the
Laws of the Twelve Tables. It is true
that the XII. Tabula, were not formu
lated until 450 b.c. ; but, as geographical
and historical considerations render nu
gatory all suggestions of Babylonian
influence, there can be no doubt of
their entire independence. The Rome
of the Decemvirs was in a more bar
barous stage than the Babylon of Ham
murabi ; hence the laws were in many
cases more crude; but we may at least
recognise that very similar problems
confronted the jurists of Italy and of
Babylonia.
First of all, perhaps, attention should
be directed to the bas-relief upon the
top of the pillar. This represents Ham
murabi adoring Shamash, the Sun-god.
We know it is Shamash by the Cultus
tablet of Sippara, dedicated by Nabupaliddina about 870 b.c., which bears
the same figure.1 We know the king is
in the attitude of adoration from the
same sculpture, and from the innumer
able seal-cylinders with similar subjects..
Several commentators have said that
Hammurabi’s pillar represents the king
as receiving his laws from Shamash;
but such statements are in direct conflict
with the inscription, which consistently
claims that the laws were originated by
Hammurabi himself.
The epilogue
commences with the words, Dinat misharim ska Hammurabi sharrum lium
1 Babylonian Religion and Mythology, by
L. W. King (London, 1899), p. 19.
D
�34
NOTES ON THE CODE
ukinnuma—“The judgments of justice
which Hammurabi, the mighty king, has
established” {verso xxiv. 1-5). Later
on it makes Hammurabi speak of the
law of the land which he has formu
lated, and the statutes of the country
that he has enacted (xxv. 64-83), and
it is impossible to make him claim the
authorship of the Code in stronger
slanguage. It is true that he refers
^several times to the god Shamash, “ the
/great judge of heaven and earth,” as the
■ source and the supporter of law and
justice ; but that is quite another thing
• to claiming that the Code was dictated
by the Sun-god.
Shamash is represented upon the basrelief seated upon a throne, with his
feet resting upon the rows of cones
which, in Babylonian art, represent
rocks or mountains; and one of the
names of the Sun-god was II Shadde, or
“god of mountains,” which has been
compared with the Hebrew El Shaddai.
The deity is draped in the usual
flounced dress : from his shoulders rise
wavy lines—intended to symbolise rays
of light; and on his head he wears a
lofty four-horned tiara. In his right
hand he holds an object that looks like
the cheek of a snaffle-bit, but which is
best explained as a ring and a stylus.
The ring symbolises the circle of the
year; the stylus is the implement of the
recording judge; because, as in most
mythologies, the sun is the god of
justice. The consort of Shamash was
Malkat, “ princess ”; and his two sons
were Kettu, “ Law,” and Mesharu,
“Justice.” The Sun-god was a favour
ite subject upon the ancient Baby
lonian seal-cylinders, where he is often
represented as rising up from the
Mountains of the East, while the
attendant genii throw open the doors of
the Dawn before him.1 On a remark
able cylinder illustrated by Dr. Delitzsch2
we have Shamash seated, with all his
attributes, upon a curious boat whose
two ends taper off into human forms;
this boat being the craft which takes the
god across the waters of the under
world during the night in order that he
may rise from the eastern horizon in the
morning.
Underneath the bas-relief the inscrip
tion commences with the words Ninu
Anu £irum, “ When Anu the supreme ”;
and, in accordance with Babylonian
custom, these three words became in
later times the title, or heading, of the
whole code;3 for, as we have already
remarked, the Code of Hammurabi was
the authoritative law-book of Baby
lonia down to the latest period, and it
existed in the cuneiform libraries as a
series of fifteen clay tablets bearing the
above title. The second word is simply
written with the cuneiform sign An,
which stands indifferently for the name
of the god “Anu,” and the word ilu,
“god.” As, however, the sign frequently
figures alone upon the contracts of the
period as the name of Anu, we are
justified in accepting it as bearing this
reading in the inscription. Moreover,
the next phrase contains the special
title of Anu, “ King of the Anunnaki ”
(or spirits of the heavens), so that it is
immaterial whether we render “ When
the supreme God, the king of the
Anunnaki,” or “ When Anu, the
supreme, the king of the Anunnaki ”;
for the phrases would be of identical
mythological import.
The Igigi were the heavenly gods.
1 King, Babylonian Religion, p. 32.
2 Babel and Bible, translated by C. H. W.
Johns, M.A. (London, 1903), p. 74, fig. 49.
3 Proc. Soc. Bib. Arch., vol. xxiv., p. 304.
�NOTES ON THE CODE
35
The black-headed men* were the
**
inhabitants of Babylonia, the phrase
going back to Akkadian times.
In the list of places which follows we
have put the names of the cities in
small capital letters, for more easy
reference. Each city is accompanied
with the title of its chief temple, which
we have put in italic type. The temple
may also be recognised by the prefix E,
an old Akkadian word meaning “ house ”
^Semitic Babylonian bit., the Hebrew
beth\
Thus E Kur is “ the
house of the land”; E Absu 11 the
house of the abyss,” etc.
In Sippara the chief temple was E
Babbar, “ the house of light,” dedicated
to Shamash. His consort Malkat (in
Bkkadian A a) was the Persephone of
the Babylonian pantheon, and it appears
that her grave was shown in the temple
covered with green turf, for she repre
sented Nature in her winter sleep, from
which! she is revived by the summer
sun. Consequently, her symbol in the
great temple of Sippara was the “ ver
dant cenotaph ” restored by the pious
bare of Hammurabi.
The city of Isin had been destroyed
by Rim-Sin, and lay in ruins for thirty
years, until Hammurabi made himself
piaster of southern Babylonia and re
fettled the city with its old inhabitants.
®fergal, the god of the dead, was the
tutelary deity of Kutha, which, accordingly, was the centre of an enormous
pemetery. Therefore, Hammurabi ap
propriately styles himself “ the grave of
the foe ” when he refers to this city and
its temple.
The chief temple of Shirpurla1 was
Benoted by the two characters E and 50.
It is the usual practice of Assyriologists
to transcribe the Babylonian numerals
by the Roman, to which they bear great
analogy. Thus E L would be the
“ house of the Fifty,” or the “house of
the god Fifty ”—i.e., Bel.
Khallabi was the Semitic name of
an important city of Southern Babylonia
called Zariunu in Akkadian. It stood
in the vicinity of Sippara. The British
Museum has a tablet of Rim-Sin record
ing the erection of a temple to the
goddess of this city, and also another
tablet recording that Hammurabi rebuilt
the same temple.1 Evidently the edifice
was commenced by the one and finished
by the other.
It is interesting to note the name of
Nineveh at the end of the list, for this
is the first known mention of the city
that afterwards became so celebrated as
the capital of the realm of Assyria,
which took its name from Assur, the
cradle of the Assyrian power.
Hammurabi’s list of cities is enough
to prove that his was not a world
empire. His kingdom extended from
Nineveh to the Persian Gulf, and em
braced a territory slightly larger than
Italy. Most of the places named are
well known in early Babylonian history,
some of them being at one time the
centres of independent States. The
mention of Nippur, Ur, and Larsam is
noteworthy, for this shows that the in
scription is later than the conquest of
southern Babylonia. That is to say, it
cannot have been set up before Ham
murabi’s thirty-first year.
The king
lived for twelve years after his over
throw of Rim-Sin,■ and the Code must
have been formulated in the interval.
* Girsu was merely the sacred quarter of the
city. See Records of the Past, New Series,
vol. i., p. 47.
1 King, Letters of Hammurabi, iii., p. 185.
�36
NOTES ON THE CODE
The Three Estates of Babylonia.
Before considering the individual pre
cepts it will be necessary to say some
thing regarding the three classes of
people presupposed by the Code, We
have, first, the slave; secondly, the free
man; thirdly, the Mushkenu.
The
status of slavery offers no particular
difficulty, and the provisions regarding
it can be easily understood. The status
of free man is less decisive. Most of
the sections begin with the words
shumma amelu, “If a man”; and in
most cases the amelu must be a man of
any degree. But, e.g., § 207, mar ameli
can only mean “son of a free man”;
and § 209, marat ameli, “ daughter of
a free man,” because there are other
penalties for the sons and daughters of
other classes of society. The context
is practically our only guide in deter
mining when amelu means a man in
general, and when it is limited to a free
man, or full citizen.
The real difficulty of the Code lies in
the third class. All through the Code we
have definite regulations regarding Mush
kenu (the Hebrew
adopted into
the Italian as meschino ; and thus into the
French mesquin, “mean” or “shabby”).
The Mushkenu, however, was by no
means a pauper. He possessed silver,
§ 140; and he owned slaves, §§ 15, 175,
219; and his slaves were sometimes
sufficiently well-off to marry free women,
175, 176. A mere artisan, or man
who lives by his labour, is not a Mush
kenu ; he is styled a mar ummia, or
“son of the people,” §§ 188, 274; and
the “ son of the people ” was evidently
a free man, like the other persons who
served for wages and are mentioned in
§§ 239> 257, 258, 261, and 271. A
slave could be emancipated; but there
is nothing in the Code to show how a
Mushkenu could change his condition.
His status depended upon birth, for §§
208, 216, 222 deal with the son of a
Mushkenu, and §211 with a daughter of
the same. The Mushkenu’s life and
limb were valued at less than those of a
free man, and more than those of a
slave, §§ 198, 201, 204. Consequently,
he stood midway between the class of
full freeman and the class of full slave,
and the term “plebeian” would seem
best to express his condition. When
§ 15 wishes to express the idea of “ the
slave of a man of high degree, or the
slave of a man of low degree,” it uses
the terms, “ slave of the palace or slave
of a plebeian”; therefore, the plebeian
was the humblest individual who could
be thought of as possessing slaves.
Semitic Idioms.
The translation of the Code has been
made as literally as possible consistent
with intelligibility ; hence idiomatic
expressions are left as in the original.
These need not offer any difficulty, for
some are familiar from the Old Testa
ment, and the others are easily com
prehensible. The following are a few
examples:—
§ 137. “Set his face” — has a design
to.
§169. “Turn aside his face” =
change his intention.
§ 162. “ Gone to her fate ” = has died.
Shimtu means “fate,” or “destiny,” or
“lot”; and, as death is the common lot
of humanity, the Babylonian idiom ex
pressed it as going to one’s destiny.
§ 137. “The husband of her heart”—
i.e., of her own choice.
§ 194. “In the hand of” — in the
possession of; etc.
�NOTES ON THE CODE
Of Sorcery.
The Babylonians distinguished two
kinds of witchcraft—viz., nertu and
kispu, which we have here translated
by “ curse ” and “ spell.” A man who
considered himself bewitched would
resort to the village Asu. The Asu
(translated in this Code by “doctor”)
combined in himself the offices of
exorcist, medicine man, physician and
surgeon. His method of procedure
was usually to pronounce a counter
spell upon the suspected wizard. Such
a suspicion, however, might be without
foundation, and a perfectly innocent
man might find himself in the un
pleasant predicament of being de
nounced before his neighbours as a
wizard, and himself the subject of the
village magician’s exorcism, carrying
with it unknown perils to the super
stitious mind.
The Code, therefore,
gives the suspected party the right of
challenging the exorcism ; and we know
from African examples that a native will
face any ordeal to clear himself from the
suspicion of witchcraft. The Code does
not inform us how nertu was to be
justified—perhaps that could be made
the subject of judicial inquiry ; but the
sufferer from kispu could claim the
ordeal by water, and the “River-God”1
decided the case. Not only did the
Babylonians consider sorcery an actual
thing capable of being dealt with
legally, but the Romans, who are usually
considered a practical, hard-headed
people, were fully convinced of the
reality of magic, and the XII. Tables (viii.
8) forbid a man to remove his neigh
bour’s crops from one field to another by
incantation, or to conjure away his corn.
1 In the inscription the word for “river” has
the sign for divinity prefixed to it.
37
§ 4. Silver and corn formed the cus
tomary currencies of Babylonia. The
silver was in the form of bullion, for
coined money was not introduced until
the reign of the Persian king Darius
Hystaspes. The table of weight was as
follows :—
180 grains
= 1 shekel
60 shekels = 1 mina
60 minse
= 1 talent
(The Babyloniangrain was somewhat
heavier than the English.)
The corn measure ran :—
60 gin — 1 qa
300 qa = 1 gur
No certain English equivalents of
these weights and measures can be
given. See notes on § 42 and § 234.
§ 5. The XII. Tabb, (ix.) directed
the execution of any judge convicted of
taking a bribe. The Babylonian goes
further, and degrades the judge who
gives an unjust verdict, though there is
no question of bribery.
§ 6 only speaks of the goods of god
or palace; but it appears from the
context of §§ 7, 9, 10 that the theft of
private property was visited with the
same penalty. The “goods of a god ”
are, of course, the temple property.
Throughout the Code we find the word
ilu, “ god,” used indefinitely, as “ a
god.” Such a practice no more implies
that the Babylonians were monotheists
than such names as Theodorus or Theo
philus prove the ancient Greeks to have
been monotheists. The “palace” is
Ekal in the original, and the Ekal is not
necessarily the residence of the king.
In one of Hammurabi’s letters, for
example,1 a revenue official speaks of
the “palace” as the recipient of the
local taxes. Consequently, the Ekal
1 King, Letters of Hammurabi, iii., p. 49.
�38
NOTES ON THE CODE
must be the residence of the governor
of the locality. In § 176 “slave of the
palace ” is first mentioned, and then
“ the owner of the slave,” so that it is
not an edifice, but a person, that the
legislator has in view.
§ 8. A boat is reckoned as a living
thing, and is mentioned together with
animals. The Roman Law of theft in
the XII. Tabb. (viii. 16) limited the
penalty to double the value of the pro
perty stolen; but if the thief were taken
in the act, and found to be a free man,
he was scourged and sold into slavery;
if already a slave, he was hurled from
theTarpeian rock.
§ 9 shows the importance attached to
written documents.
§ 21. The XII. Tabb. (viii. 12, 13)
prescribe that a thief may lawfully be killed
if taken in the act at night; but not by
day, unless he be armed and resists
capture.
§ 24. The locality had to pay blood
money to the relatives of a murdered
man if the murderer could not be found.
This clause and § 153 are the only
places where murder is mentioned in the
Code.
§ 25. The XII. Tables (viii. 10)
directed that if a man set fire to a
house, or a stack of corn near a house,
the incendiary was to be bound, scourged,
and burned alive.
Of Military Service.
the king,” as Dr. Winckler1 remarks,
reminds us of the Arabic “Way of
Allah,” meaning a campaign. In Islam,
Allah has taken the place of the king as
director of the war. A defeat of the
Babylonian army is euphemistically
styled “ a misfortune of the king.”
§ 32 shows that the temple played a
part in the village organisation similar
to that of a medieval parish church.
The soldier who could not pay his own
ransom could claim it from his local
temple. But if from poverty, or invasion,
or the number of similar claims, the
temple was unable to provide the money,
then only did “ the palace ” intervene as
a last resort.
§ 42. Three gur of corn was reckoned
an average yield for a gan of land; and
the yearly rent of a gan was usually one
gur of corn. Our knowledge of Baby
lonian metrology, however, is not suffi
cient to enable exact equivalents of these
measures to be given;2 but the propor
tions stated will enable one to gauge
roughly the onerousness of the various
penalties set down in the Code.
§ 45. The Babylonians looked upon
most of the operations of nature as due
to the direct interference of the gods;
thus §§ 45, 48, speak of the god Adad
as flooding the fields. Adad was the
deity of storms and thunder; hence in
this place his name is to be read as the
equivalent of “thunderstorm.” There
is a similar expression, “ stroke of God,”
in § 266.
§ 48. The dipping of the tablet in
water was a symbolical act.
§§ 57, 58. The XII. Tabb. (viii. 6, 7)
The Babylonian kings (and also the
Assyrians) provided themselves with
soldiers by a kind of feudal system.
Portions of the royal domains were
allotted to individuals, who were bound
to serve in the army when called upon.
1 Die Geseize Hammurabis, von Dr. H.
A vassal summoned on “ the way of the Winckler (Leipsic, 1903), p. 13, n. 1.
2 Assyrian Deeds and Documents, by Rev.
king ” was executed as a deserter if he
C. H. W. Johns (Cambridge, 1901), vol. ii.,
did not appear. The phrase “way of cap. iii.
�NOTES ON THE CODE
prescribe that a quadruped that has
(femaged a neighbour’s land shall be
given to the aggrieved party, unless the
owner make compensation. And he
that pastures his animals on a neigh
bour’s land is liable to an action.
f 59. XIE Tabb. (viii. 11). “If a
man wrongly fell his neighbour’s trees,
he shall pay a penalty of twenty-five
ases of bronze in respect of each tree.”
The Erasure
upon the
Pillar.
After § 65 comes the erasure already
mentioned. In the Kouyunjik collec
tion of the British Museum, however,
there is a tablet, No. R.M. 277, which
contains in its first column of writing a
complete copy of § 58 of the Hammu
rabi Code, preceded by a fragment of
§ 57, and followed by the commencement
of § 59. In the second column of this
tablet is another law which we have
transcribed as § a. The reverse of this
same tablet, although very much muti
late^ exhibits detached fragments of
Hammurabi’s Sections 107, 113, 114,
115, 119, and 120. There can thus be
nt® doubt that the intermediate para
graph (a) belonged to the now obliterated
portion of the Code.
Another British Museum tablet, No.
D.T. 81, bears on its face the law we
have transcribed as § b, and on its reverse
| c, together with fragments of Sections
gogj 104, iii, and 112. So that here
again it is clear that we have another
Copy of the Code which has preserved to
ut obliterated parts of the pillar. If
these two tablets were in good condition,
they would have given us the whole of
the missing ordinances; but, unfortu
nately, they are both badly mutilated.
§ loo. When the column again be
comes legible, it is found to be dealing
39
with trading affairs. The Babylonian
principal {Tamkar, “trader”) stayed at
home and looked after his warehouses
and accounts. Agents, or pedlars, were
entrusted with the duty of travelling
about the country and making sales or
purchases. The agent (Shamallu) we
translate as “ retailer.”
§ 108. The Babylonian wine was pre
pared from dates, as the grape-vine is
not indigenous to the country. The
term “ wine-seller ” is preceded by the
determinative for “ woman,” so that the
wine-seller was evidently a female. The
Assyrians and Babylonians had two
systems of metronomy—viz., by the
“heavy mina” and the “light mina,”
the one being twice the weight of the
other; but there is nothing to show that
the abnu rabitu, or “ grand weight,” of
the Code had anything to do with this.
The abnu cikhritu, or “little weight,”
was a third of a shekel. Mr. C. H. W.
Johns has suggested that, as the “ little
weight ” was sixty grains, the “ grand
weight” may have been 120 grains.
§ 109. The XII. Tabb. (viii. 26}
forbade seditious nocturnal assemblies.
§110. See the section “Of Priest
esses.”
§ 115. The XII. Tables (iii.) direct
that, if a debtor cannot meet his liabili
ties, the creditor may arrest him and
bind him with thongs, or put upon him
fetters not exceeding i51bs. weight,
The debtor may live on his own means,
or, if he is unable to do so, the creditor
may allow him at least one pound of
bread per diem. If the claim were not
settled within sixty days, the debtor
might be put to death or sold beyond
the Tiber, after being paraded in the
comitium on three market-days and the
amount of debt proclaimed. “After the
third market-day the creditors may cut
�40
NOTES ON THE CODE
their several portions of his body, and to have been accidentally omitted from
anyone that cuts more or less than his the inscription.
just share shall be held guiltless.”
§ 158. This refers to incest with a
father’s wife who is not the mother of
Of Marriage.
the offender.
Babylonian marriage was by contract
§ 165. A father’s property was divided
(§ 128). Many of the contract tablets equally among his sons. He had no
deal with this subject, and the virginity testamentary power, though he could
of the bride is frequently guaranteed. disinherit an undutiful son (§§ 168, 169),
Consequently, the stories of Herodotus but only under judicial direction.
about the Babylonian women may be Daughters were provided for by their
dismissed as idle and absurd inventions, dowries. Deeds of gift made during a
like his other fables about Babylon / man’s lifetime were valid against any
and the Code shows the importance claim made by an heir. The Code
attached to female reputation in Baby makes no provision in cases where there
lonia.
The Babylonian woman was are no sons ; but it may be taken that
given in marriage by her father or in such a situation the wife would
brothers (§ 184).
The suitor or his inherit (§§ 172, 176).
family paid a certain sum as “ bride
§§ 171, 172. These paragraphs appear
price,” the amount being often handed to have been incompletely divided by
over in instalments (Sections 159-61). Father Scheil; but it would lead to
The bride’s father gave her a “ dowry ” confusion to alter the numeration.
{Sheriqtu), which usually, but not neces
§§176. By a printer’s error in Father
sarily, included the “bride-price” (fTirk- Scheil’s work, two succeeding paragraphs
hatu).
The bridegroom might also have the same number prefixed to them.
make
his bride a “ settlement ”
§ 177. The word in brackets appears
\Nudunmi).
to have been accidentally omitted from
The status of the “ concubine ” is not the inscription.
•clear. She does not seem to be neces
Of Priestesses.
sarily of lower rank, like the Roman, but
was a secondary spouse (§ 145). Like
§§ 178-82 relate to women under
the chief wife, she carried bride-price religious vows. Four of the words used
and dowry, and we may assume that she are preceded by the determinative for a
possessed the same rights as the chief married woman. They are :—
wife in regard to maintenance and par
Nin-an = Priestess
ticipation in the husband’s estate.
Kallati = An undowered priestess
Qadishtu = An inferior priestess
§ 144. The cuneiform sign here trans
Wife of Merodach = An inferior
lated “ wife ” is the one used throughout
priestess.
the Code to denote a married woman.
The precept, therefore, applies to any Two of the titles have merely the prefix
married woman.
for “ woman,” and they were therefore
§ 150. The words in brackets appear unmarried. They were the Zikru and
1 The Laws of Moses, by Stanley A. Cook, the “ virgin.”
M.A. (London, 1903), p. 101.
|
The priestesses of Carthage were
�NOTES ON THE CODE
always married; and on the Cartha
ginian tombstones the husband of the
priestess is invariably mentioned byname.
It is therefore to be expected that the
Babylonian priestesses were also married.
§ 181 mentions virgins, but they were
evidently of low rank in the hierarchy.
The principal priestess is denoted by the
signs Nin-an, “Divine Lady.” She was
expected to lead a blameless life. She
might not open a tavern, or even enter
one (§ no); and slander against a Ninan was severely punished (§ 127).
The priestess (Nin-an) received a
dowry from her father (§§178, 179).
Where no dowry was given (§ 180) the
Nin-an is replaced by the Kallati; so
that the Kallati is a dowerless priestess.
A Qadishtu is in the same predicament;
but, being of lower rank, she only takes
the usufruct of a third of a son’s share,
whereas a Kallati has the usufruct of a
complete son’s share. The “ Wife of
Merodach ” ranked with a Qadishtu,
except that she had the power to bequeath
her share of her father’s estate.
The virgin ranks with a Qadishtu.
The unmarried Zikru “ devotee ” may
receive a dowry upon entering a religious
life (§§ 178, 179), or she may not (§ 180).
Her children were not acknowledged
(§§ *7, 192, 193). Zakaru is a root
8
found in Syriac, Hebrew, and Arabic, as
well as in Assyrian, with the meaning of
“male,” “name,” or “memorial.” Father
Scheil takes it with its determinative
prefix, reads zinnishat zikru, and renders
“ female of the male,” though in such
case it should be zinnishat zikri. Dr.
Winckler makes it “courtesan.” The
Rev. Mr. Johns, of Cambridge, reads
zinnishtu zikru (which is more in accor
dance with the text), and renders it
“vowed woman.” This is practically
the same as our rendering “ devotee.”
41
§ 187. Ner-se-ga is an unknown class.
From § 193 it appears to have been a
man ; from § 187 he was attached
to the governor’s palace. His children
were not acknowledged, nor allowed
to recognise their parentage (§§ 192,
!93)§ 188. A “son of the people,” mar
ummia, was an artisan (see § 274).
§§ 196, 197, 200. This is the Lex
talionis. The XII. Tabb. (viii. 2) “ If a
man breaks another’s limb, and does
not compromise the injury, he shall be
liable to retaliation.” (viii. 3) “ For
breaking a bone of a free man the penalty
shall be 300 ases of bronze; of a slave,
150 ases.”
§202. The word translated “body”
may mean a part of the viscera, or, as
Father Scheil renders it, “ brain.” The
Section maybe compared with XII. Tabb,
(viii. 4), which prescribe a penalty of
twenty-five ases of bronze for a personal
injury or affront.
§215. The word nagabti, translated
“ tumour,” is of uncertain significance,
though, as the root has the meaning of
“hollow,” it is most likely to be con
nected with an abscess, ulcer, or tumour.
Father Scheil suggests that, as the word
is several times used in connection with
the eye, it may refer to the operation
for cataract; but a successful operation
for cataract does not always completely
restore the sight of the eye, owing to the
necessary removal of part of the cornea,
and the Babylonians had no lenses to
correct such a defect. The patient
might consider his eye destroyed because
he was unable to see as well as before, and
the surgeon would thus be blamed for
a perfectly successful operation.
It
would, therefore, seem better to under
stand nagabti as a tumour. Where the
tumour involved the eye the surgeon
�42
NOTES ON THE CODE
could claim his fee on the higher scale
for a successful operation.
§ 226. The gallabu. combined the
professions of barber and brander. His
services were sometimes required in
courts of law (§ 127).
§ 234. The tonnage of Babylonian
boats was expressed in gur, the gur
being about a ton and a fifth. Boats
were built from five gur upwards, and in
one of his letters Hammurabi speaks of
a ship of seventy-five gur, which must
have been nearly equal in size to a
modern vessel of 100 tons burthen. The
boat in the text is of sixty gur, and we
have translated “sixty-ton boat” for
brevity.
§ 236. The word uttebi evidently
means “ sunk,” not merely “run aground”
(see § 238).
§ 240. It being quite uncertain what
these terms signify, they are left un
translated. By § 276 a makhirtu was
a small vessel, for it could be hired for
grains of silver; whereas a sixty-ton
boat earned thirty grains of silver a day.
§ 241. Oxen were exempted from
distraint as being absolutely necessary
for agriculture ; therefore, the same
penalty is inflicted as in the case of
illegal distraint (§ 114).
§ 249. Mundane events being under
the control of the gods, anything inex
plicable was put down to the stroke of a
god (compare §§ 45, 48).
§ 2 54. If the metayer has ill-used the
oxen so that they cannot do the work,
he must execute the field labour with
the marru, a kind of hoe still in use in
Mesopotamia under the same name.
This would entail great manual exertion
on his part.
§ 256 shows that a man’s superior was
usually expected to assist him in fines
and liabilities. In fact, the penalties
laid down in the Code could be met in
no other way, for they would be quite
beyond the means of labourers and small
farmers. Mr. Stanley A. Cook shows
from actual contract-tablets that when a
man hired himself out he had to find a
guarantor.1 Dr. Winckler supposes the
law to indicate a man’s “village com
munity”; but it does not appear that
such communities existed in Babylonia
—in fact, the whole tenour of the Code
is opposed to such a theory, for it only
contemplates that the landholder will
make bargains with individual tenants
and workpeople.
§§ 259, 260. The objects mentioned
in these two paragraphs refer to irrigating
machines, not mill wheels.
§ 273. The Babylonian year began in
Nisan, or April, and the fifth month was
Ab, or August. Consequently, the first
five months were the period of the
hardest agricultural work, and the work
man (literally “ man of hire ”) received
increased pay.
§ 274. Just at this point there is a
fissure in the stone where the pillar was
broken across, and the columns of cunei
form characters are badly mutilated.
280. “Children of the land ” would
mean natives of Babylonia. As a Baby
lonian could only be held in bondage
three years (§ 117), he was emancipated
under the circumstances stated in the
text.
§ 282. The loss of an ear was the
usual punishment of a refractory slave
(see § 205).
In his final peroration Hammurabi
says, “ I have not reposed myself upon
my side ”—i.e., he had not given himself
up to sloth, but had been active for the
1 Laws of Moses, p. 174.
�THE LA WS OF MOSES
good of his people. Then, as is usual
in monuments of antiquity, the king
threatens with the most frightful curses
anyone who alters or damages the pillar.
Of Homicide.
/
It is worthy of note that the Code
makes no provision for wilful homicide
except in §§ 24 and 153. It would
therefore appear that this crime was
treated as extra-judicial. In § 153 it is
enacted that a woman guilty of murder
ing her husband shall be impaled ; but
this may merely mean that her body
was to be impaled, and gives us no
information as to the method or rule of
execution. In § 24 the relatives of a
man murdered by bandits receive one
mina of silver (twice the price of
accidental homicide, § 207). This would
seem to show that the institution of
blood-money was recognised in Baby
lonia. On the other hand, manslaughter
rendered a man subject to the lex talionis
(§§ 229, 210, 230), and this certainly
indicates that among the Babylonians,
as among other ancient peoples, homicide
was dealt with by the vendetta. In the
Old Testament it was one of the duties
of the go el, the next-of-kin, to avenge
43
murder; and the Pentateuch is quite un
compromising upon the subject. Exodus
xxi. 12, 14, denies all sanctuary to the
murderer. Deut. xix. 12 shows that the
Hebrew judicial authorities had nothing
to do with homicide except to hand over
the criminal to the vengeance of the
goelha-dam. And Num. xxxv. 19, 21, 31,
reiterates the command that the “avenger
of blood” shall slay the murderer when
ever and wherever he may meet him,
and that no compensation is to be
accepted. In the same way, therefore,
it is pretty certain that in Babylonia wilful
homicide was a family matter, with which
the judicature was not allowed to interfere.
If it had been customary to compound
for the crime, we may be sure that the
legislator would have made some attempt
to regulate the blood-price, as is done
in the other cases. The silence of the
Code, therefore, is significant. The El
Amarna letters demonstrate the existence
of the blood-feud in Babylonia, for
Burna-Buriash writes to Amenophis IV.
that, if the blood of his messengers who
have been slain in Canaan is not requited,
then Egyptian messengers may be slain
in retaliation.1
1 Records of the Past, New Series, vol. iii, p. 66.
Chapter VI.
THE LAWS OF MOSES
The Sacred Books of the Jews are Palestine ; for the inscription of Mesha,
written in the language called “ Hebrew.” king of Moab (about 850 b.c.), is a
' This language was not confined to the specimen of Hebrew, as are also the
Jewish community, but was the common lapidary memorials of the Phoenicians, who
tongue of all the ancient inhabitants of dwelt on the coast of the Mediterranean.
�44
THE LA WS OF MOSES
The earliest independent references to
the land of Palestine are to be found
upon the monuments of the Egyptian
kings Thothmes III. and Rameses II.1
These monuments contain lists of names
of Syrian localities; and, as far as
Palestine is concerned, these names
agree in character with the later nomen
clature of the country—that is to say,
they are to be explained by the Hebrew
language. The Hebrew-speaking peoples,
therefore, must have been settled in
Palestine for a very long period to have
so completely coloured the topography
in this way; in fact, we are justified in
saying that Hebrew had been spoken in
the country from time immemorial.
In the year 1887 a discovery was made
at Tell-el-Amarna, in Egypt, of a large
number of clay tablets, inscribed with
cuneiform characters.
These tablets
proved to be communications addressed
to the Egyptian kings Amenophis III.
and Amenophis IV. The correspondents
of these monarchs comprised Assuruballit, king of Assyria, Burna-Buriash,
king of Babylonia, and a number of
Syrian notables. It need hardly be said
that the language employed on the
letters of the kings of Assyria and Baby
lonia was the one known as SemiticBabylonian. But there were a number
of the tablets addressed from places in
Palestine ; and these Palestinian tablets
were in Semitic-Babylonian also ! We
have just seen that the indigenous
language of Palestine was Hebrew. How
comes it, therefore, that these Palestinian
letters were written in a foreign tongue ?
The only reply can be that Hebrew was
at that time an illiterate language. If
there had been any means of writing
1 Records of the Past, New Series, vol. v.,
p. 54 ; vol vi., p. 19.
Hebrew, we may be sure that the princes
of Palestine would never have gone to
the trouble of getting their messages
translated into Babylonian, and written
down in the intricate and difficult cunei
form script.
In other cases where
previously illiterate nations came into
contact with the cuneiform method of
writing, and adopted it, they did not
employ the foreign language very long,
but very quickly adapted the cuneiform
syllabary to their own tongue. A notable
instance of this is met with in the Proto
Armenian inscriptions of Van.1 In the
Tell-el-Amarna correspondence the king
of Mitanni (a district in Mesopotamia
near Carchemish) occasionally employed
his own language as well as Semitic;
and the Persians at a later period not
only appropriated the Babylonian style of
writing, but developed a new system of
cuneiform of their own. The inference
is, therefore, that the Hebrew princes
had not been familiar with cuneiform
very long, or they would have applied it
to their own language in similar fashion
to other nations. The oldest known
specimens of written Hebrew are the
Baal Lebanon Bronzes.2 These are in
alphabetic writing. It is obvious that
1 “ Since the publication of my Memoir on
‘The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Van Deciphered
and Translated ’ in the Journal of the Royal
Asiatic Society, xiv. 4, 1882, we have begun to
learn something about a race of kings who ruled
on the shores of Lake Van in Armenia, from the
ninth to the seventh centuries before our era.
The founder of the dynasty, Sarduris I., the soft
of Lutipris, who reigned B.c. 833, introduced
the cuneiform system of writing as well as other
elements of Assyrian culture into the country
over which he was king. The inscriptions he
has left us are in the Assyrian language ; but
his successors discontinued the use of a foreign
tongue, and the language of their texts is
invariably their native one.”—Prof. A. H.
Sayce, in Records of the Past, New Series,
vol. i., p. 163.
1 The History of the Alphahet, by Isaac
Taylor, vol i., p. 213.
�THE LA WS OF MOSES
no people that once employed the
alphabetic character would ever abandon
it for the cumbrous cuneiform; and
therefore the alphabet cannot have been
known in the Tell-el-Amarna period.
And when once it was introduced we
may be sure that there was no further
possibility of cuneiform being applied
for the writing of Hebrew.
There is one thing, however, which
the tablets of Tell-el-Amarna make quite
clear, and that is that at the time they
were written there were no such people
as the Israelites in Palestine ; for the
data they furnish cannot be squared
with the statements of the books of
Joshua and Judges. It has been pointed
out in Chapter III., p. io, that, according
to the testimony of Nabonidus, BurnaBuriash reigned over Babylon 700 years
after Hammurabi; and as Burna-Buriash
was the author of some of the Tell-elAmarna letters it follows, therefore, that
Hammurabi must have lived at least 700
years before the appearance of the Jews
in Canaan.
It is hardly necessary nowadays to
insist upon the fact that the well-known
narratives of Genesis, such as the two
accounts of the Creation and the stories
of the Flood, are merely excerpts from
Babylonian cosmogony and Babylonian
mythology. The discovery of the great
Code raises the very natural question as
to whether the legislation of the Penta
teuch is not also of Babylonian origin.
It is true that the Jews attributed their
legislation to Moses; but Moses (if he
ever had any real existence) must have
lived seven centuries later than the
Babylonian lawgiver. Even in the life
legend of the Hebrew legislator we are
confronted with Babylonian elements,
for the story told of the infancy of Moses
is also related of the famous Babylonian
45
monarch Shargani-shar-ali, or Sargon of
Agade, who flourished about 3800 b.c.,
and who is said to have been exposed in
an ark of bulrushes upon the River
Euphrates, whence he was rescued, and
grew up to be ruler of all Babylonia.
Modern scholarship ha« dissected the
Hebrew Pentateuch into several super
posed layers, ranging in date from about
the eighth century b.c. to the time of
Alexander the Great. The details of
this dissection have been stated with
great caution and moderation by Dr. S. R.
Driver,1 and need not be repeated here;
but they establish the existence in the
so-called Books of Moses of at least four
systems of legislation, in the following
order :—
The Book of the Covenant — Exod.
xx.-xxiii. 33 (to which is related Exod.
xxxiv. 11-26).
The Book of Deuteronomy.
The Law of Holiness =■ Levit. xvii.—
xxvi.
The Priests'1 Code = The balance of
the “ Mosaic ” legislation.
The Priests' Code is the latest and
most important constituent of the Penta
teuch. It cannot be earlier than the
time of Ezra, while it received additions
at even later dates.
The Law of Holiness is a distinct
Code in itself, resembling the other two.
previous codes by opening with sacri
ficial instructions, and closing with a
parenetic exhortation.2
The closest
affinities of this stratum of the Penta
teuch are with the prophet Ezekiel, to
whose time it probably belongs.
Deuteronomy is evidently the “ Book
of the Law ” which Hilkiah, the Highpriest of Jerusalem, professed to have
1 An Introduction to the Literature of theOld Testament, fifth edition (Edinburgh, 1894)..
2 Driver, p. 44.
�46
THE LA WS OF MOSES
found in the Temple in the eighteenth
year of Josiah ( ., 621 b.c.).
>
*
This leaves us with the Book of the
Covenant as the earliest extant example
of Hebrew legislation. Professor W.
Robertson Smith1 styled Exod. xx.xxiii. “the First Legislation”; later
critics have preferred the term Bundesbuch, or “ Book of the Covenant.” This
“ book ” appeared so important to the
author of Exodus that he represented it
as having been dictated to Moses by
Yahveh himself from the mount of
Sinai, to the accompaniment of smoke,
fire, trumpets, thunders and lightnings,
and every circumstance that could con
tribute to the awful and solemn char
acter of the revelation. This reverence
for the “ book,” however, was not shared
by other Israelites, for the author of
Deuteronomy had no scruple whatever
in endeavouring to supersede it by a
rival code, and Professor W. R. Smith
gave a table to show “how completely
Deuteronomy covers the same ground
as the First Legislation.”13 Even in
2
Exodus itself we see that the scribes
had no hesitation in tampering with the
text, for it is obvious that xx. 18 follows
immediately after xix. 25, the inter
mediate “ Ten Words ” being an inter
polation.
Furthermore, if the Ten
Words had formed part of the original
text of Exodus, there would have been
no necessity for xx. 23, which simply
repeats xx. 4. In the same way xxiii.
12 would be redundant in face of xx. 9,
10. There have been interminable dis
cussions upon the date and origin of
the Ten Commandments, which are now
1 The Old Testament in the Jewish Church
(Edinburgh, 1881), p. 316.
3 O. T. J. C., p. 432. See also Hastings’
Dictionary of the Bible, article “ Deutero
nomy.”
inserted in the twentieth chapter of
Exodus. As, however, the phrase “the
stranger within thy gates ” (xx. 10) is
distinctly Deuteronomic, we must take
it that these commandments are later
than Deuteronomy. As, furthermore,
xx. 11 refers to the six days of creation,
the passage must be later than the first
chapter of Genesis,1 which is part of the
Priests’ Code, and therefore compara
tively modern. The Ten Command
ments must therefore be eliminated, and
the speech of Yahveh commences at
Exod. xx. 22, and extends to xxiii. 33.
It consists essentially of a code of laws,
mingled with exhortations.
The question now arises as to the
originality of this Sinaitic legislation.
In view of the Hammurabi Code, it was
clearly unnecessary for Moses to seek
for any supernatural guidance in framing
a body of laws, seeing that such an
excellent system had been worked out
700 years before, and the Israelites were
on the eve of entering a land where the
Babylonian legislation was in all prob
ability well known. Assuming, however,
1 “The six days of creation” is not a Baby
lonian idea, nor is it found upon the “ Creation
Tablets” which describe the overthrow of
Tiamat by Merodach and the subsequent
formation of the universe. As Delitzsch and
Martineau have pointed out, an attentive
perusal of the first chapter of Genesis reveals
the fact that the days of creation were no part
of the original Hebrew narrative. The Elohist
account originally made the creation to take
place by eight stages—viz., Gen. i. 3, 6, 9, 11,
14, 20, 24, 26. Each of these sections origi
nally began with the words “and God said,”
and ended with “and God saw that it was
good”; but the latter phrase has dropped out
of the second section, probably by a clerical error,
though the Talmud assures us that the words
were intentionally omitted because hell . was
created on that day. Consequently, the division
of the creation among the six days of the week
musthavebeentheworkof some late Sabbatarian,
who thought by that means to give a greater
authority to the old Babylonian institution of
the Sabatiu, or sabbath.
�THE LA WS OF MOSES
that modern criticism is right, and
that the laws in Bxodus are no earlier
than the prophets Hosea, Amos, and
Micah (f <?., the eighth century b.c.), we
are so much the further removed from
the time of Hammurabi, and so much
the closer to the fresh wave of Baby
lonian influence which was rapidly
spreading westward owing to the Assyrian
conquests, It may be remarked that
the arrangement of the Book of the
Covenant bears a superficial resem
blance to that of the Code of Ham
murabi. The “ Book ” begins with
directions as to how Yahveh is to be
worshipped; then follow the laws ; and
finally there is an exhortation to observe
these laws. The Code opens with a
declaration of the greatness of Hammurabi; then come the laws; and
lastly there is an appeal to posterity to
respect his monument and legislation.
In any case, however, if there be any
relationship between the Hebrew and
the Babylonian legislations, there is only
oae possible conclusion, and that is that
the Hebrew was borrowed from the
earlier Babylonian.
Th® Three Estates
of
Israel.
We have already seen that the Baby
lonian Code deals with three classes of
persons—the free man, the slave, and
the Mushkenu.
In like manner the
Hebrew legislation is concerned with
three classes—viz., the free man, the slave,
and the Ger (translated “stranger” in the
English version). The Ger (= “client” or
“sojourner”) was a person intermediate
between a slave and a full citizen. The
pious Israelite sometimes described him
self as a Ger of Yahveh (Ps. xxxix. 12),
and on the Phoenician monuments we
have such .names as Ger-Melek, GerAstarte, Ger-Melqarth, etc. But while
47
the Mushkenu has clearly defined rights
in Babylonian Law, the Book Of the
Covenant merely recommends that the
Ger shall not be wronged or oppressed
(Exod. xxii. 21, xxiii. 9). There is a vast
difference between giving a man a legal
standing and simply recommending him
to mercy. In Deuteronomy the Ger is
still the object of a semi-contemptuous
pity; and while the Book of the Cove
nant (Exod. xxii. 31) directs that flesh
torn by wild animals is to be given to
dogs to eat, the more frugal Deuteronomist allows unclean food to be given to
the Ger. The Priests’ Code, however,
shows the Ger on the high road to
amalgamation or emancipation, for it
directs that there shall be one law for
the Ger and for the freeborn Israelite
(Lev. xxiv. 22 ; Num. xv. 15).
The Jewish Tribunal.
The Code of Hammurabi may be con
sidered to have definitely settled the
true meaning of Exod. xxi. 6, xxii. 8, p.
The Code regularly directs that a case
shall be taken makhar ili—i.e., “ before
God” (or ‘ before a god,” for the Baby
lonians were not so poverty-stricken that
they only had one God). The Book of
the Covenant .n one place directs that a
slave shall be brought “ unto God,” and
in the other passages that litigants shall
come near unto “ God.” Commentators
and translators with a dread of anthropo
morphism have been puzzled over
these passages, and have suggested that
the word Elohim here means “judges,”
as we may see by the margin of the
Revised Version. But, in view of the
Babylonian Code, there can be no doubt
whatever that what is meant is the local
altar of the deity; and in 1 Sam. ii. 25
we read of Elohim judging between man
and man, so that the author of this part
�48
THE LA WS OF MOSES
of Samuel at any rate was familiar with
the idea of bringing cases “before God.”
The best way to determine the relation
ship of the Book of the Covenant is to
compare it verse by verse with the Code
of Hammurabi; and, as Exod. xx. 2226 is merely of a ritual character, we
must commence our comparison with the
twenty-first chapter.
Exod.
§H7- The principle of the
xxx.2-11 Babylonian and Hebrew enact
ments is the same. In both cases
the free native cannot be held in
perpetual slavery. But while the
Babylonian law limited the period
of bondage to three years, the
Hebrew extended it to six; and
even this was eventually found to
be too short a time to enable the
average debtor to repay his debt.
Therefore, in the Priests’ Code
(Lev. xxv. 39-41), the period of
servitude is extended to forty-nine
years, or the year of Jubilee.
The lengthened period of servitude
sanctioned by Hebrew law gave
rise to complications not met with
in the Code of Hammurabi. The
latter does not anticipate that
the bondmaster will find a wife for
a bondsman, or that the bond
master will seek to marry the
debtor’s daughter to himself or his
relations. The Hebrew slave could
not be sold into a foreign land, and
§ 280 emancipates slaves that have
been conveyed into another
country. The Babylonian Code is,
however, more completely on the
side of freedom than the Hebrew.
By § 175 children of a free mother
are free; by §171 children of a
free father are free; it was only
when both parents were slaves that |
the children remained in the same
status.
v-12
The Babylonian Code made no
provision for wilful homicide.
v- J3
The Code § 207 inflicts a fine of
thirty shekels for accidental homi
cide.
vSee v. 12.
v- 15
§ 195 prescribes that a son who
strikes his father loses his hand.
The Hebrew law is more severe.
v-16
§ 14. Hebrew and Babylonian
are in agreement.
v- J7
§ 192. The foster - child who
denied his foster-parents lost his
tongue.
v. 18,19 § 206. Both codes are iden
tical.
v. 20,21 The Babylonian Code only
contemplates injuries to slaves by
third parties. In § 217, however,
the owner is liable for fees for
medical attendance on a slave.
v- 22-25 gg 209-14 are more detailed
than the Hebrew, and, as the
Code only recognises the lex
talionis in the case of equals
(§ 200), the law of retaliation only
comes into force in case of the
death of a free woman.
v. 26,27 The Hebrew assesses eye or
tooth of slave at full value; the
Babylonian at only half (§ 199).
v-28
§ 250. Both legislations acquit
the owner of a goring ox; but
the Hebrew has superposed the
Bedaween idea that the animal is
accursed. The ox is to be stoned
to death, and its flesh may not be
eaten.
v. 29-32 § 251. The Hebrew law lays the
owner of a vicious ox open to the
vengeance of the relatives of the
deceased, though they are allowed
to accept a ransom if they so
�THE LA WS OF MOSES
choose. The Babylonian fixes a
penalty of thirty shekels in case of
a free man; twenty shekels for a
slave. The Hebrew assesses the
slave at thirty shekels ; and in all
cases directs the ox to be stoned.
v. 33-36 Although the Babylonian Code
does not provide for these specific
instances, §§ 53-56 make a man
responsible for injuries done to
the property of others.
xxii. 1
§ 262 would probably deal with
this if it were entire. § 8 inflicts a
thirty-fold penalty in the case of a
free man, ten-fold in the case of a
plebeian, for animals stolen from
palace or temple.
v- 2-4
§ 21. Both direct a thief caught
in the act to be slain; but the
Hebrew (like the XII. TabbS)
limits this to robbery by night.
v-5
§ 57. In both Codes trespass is
to be paid for in kind.
v- 6
See note to xxi. 33-36.
v‘7
§ 125. Both laws agree, and
both leave to the depositee the
duty of recovering the loss from
the thief.
v-8
§ 120. In both laws the sus
pected depositee has to clear him
self by oath “ before God.”
v- 9
§§9~i3- The Babylonian is the
more detailed in directing inquisi
tion into claims for lost property.
But while the Code is concerned
in tracing out and identifying the
original thief, the Hebrew legislator
merely orders the receiver or holder
of the stolen goods to refund
double.
v. 10,11
§ 266. Both laws are identical;
and in both the shepherd clears
himself by oath.
v-12
§263. The laws again agree.
v§ 244. The laws again agree.
49
v- J4
§§ 245-48. The laws agree, but
the Babylonian is more detailed.
v- 15
The Babylonian law makes no
mention of such a case as injury to
an animal in charge of its owner.
But it would probably take the
same view. The Hebrew gloss is
not very enlightening (glosses
seldom are); but it probably means
that the owner, having voluntarily
put theanimalto the work, he had no
grievance if any ill result followed.
v. 16,17 § 130. The Code agrees more
fully with Deut. xxii. 25, 26. The
regulation in Exodus implies that
the Hebrew father exacted a higher
bride-price for a virgin daughter.
Seduction rendered her less sale
able, and therefore he was given
the right to compel the seducer to
marry the girl at the full price, or
pay the difference in her value.
v. 18.
The Book of the Covenant only
inhibits a female sorcerer
From Jer. xxvii. 9 it appears that
male sorcerers were recognised in
Israel even after the publication of
Deut. xviii. 10, which forbade
them. In Isaiah iii. 3, which is
probably pre - Deuteronomic, the
cunning charmer and the skilful
enchanter are reckoned among the
notables, and the deprivation of
the services of these sorcerers is
held up as a terrible punishment.
vNot in Babylonian Code.
v-20
The Babylonian Code nowhere
inculcates religious persecution.
v-2r
The Hebrewmerelyrecommends
the Ger to the mercy of the
Israelite, while the Babylonian
Code contains a series of regula
tions in regard to the rights of the
Mushkenu.
v- 22-24 Widows and orphans are left in
E
�50
THE LA WS OF MOSES
the Hebrew to the mercy of rela
tions, and it appears from the
complaints of the prophets, Isaiah
i. 23, Ezek. xxii. 7, Mai. iii. 5, etc.,
that these unfortunates received
scant justice in Israel.
v. 25-27
§ 241. The Hebrew forbids
distraint upon necessary clothing,
but inflicts no penalty in case of
infraction. Deut. xxiv. 6 forbids
distraint upon a quern or quern
stone, but likewise inflicts no
penalty. The Babylonian extends
the provision to plough oxen, and
enforces the regulation by fine.
v. 28-31 Thereare no religious ordinances
in the Babylonian Code.
xxiii. 1-3, §§ 3,4, and 5. While the Hebrew
6-8
is merely rhetorical, the Babylonian
makes practical provisions.
The rest of Exod. xxiii. is either
religious or aphoristic, and therefore
presents no analogy with an established
code of legislation.
There is no need to suppose that the
promulgation of the Book of the Cove
nant put a stop to the influence of
external codes upon Hebrew law, and
we actually find precepts in the later
legislation of the Pentateuch which
recall ordinances of the Hammurabi
Code that are neglected in Exodus.
Thus :—
§ 3 is in greater agreement with Deut.
xix. 15-21 than Exod. xxiii. 1-8, to
which we have compared it.
§ 59 may have inspired Deut. xx. 19.
§ 60 prescribes that, when an arbori
culturist undertakes to plant an orchard,
he is to enjoy the fruit for four years,
and in the fifth year the owner comes in
and takes his share. Lev. xix. 23-25
reads very much like a blundering
reminiscence of this ordinance. For
three years the yield of the orchard is
tabu, the fourth year’s crop is sacred,
and not until the fifth year (as in the
Babylonian) does the owner appropriate
the fruit.
§ 129 agrees with Deut. xxii. 22.
§ 132. Numb. v. n-31 is essentially
the same j and in both cases the woman
is directed to undergo an ordeal by
water. The Babylonian Holy River,
however, was out of the question, for
rivers are rare in Palestine. It is
therefore replaced by the “ water of
jealousy.”
§§ 154-58. The Hebrew laws of incest,
omitted in the Book of the Covenant,
are to be found in Deut. xxvii. 20, 22,
23, and Lev. xviii. 6-18.
Several of the usages referred to in
the legends of the Hebrew patriarchs
are now seen to be in accordance with
the Hammurabi Code. Thus in Gen.
xvi. 3 the barren Sarai gives her maid
Hagar to Abram for the purpose of
raising children. In Gen. xxx. 3 Jacob’s
wife Rachel acts in the same manner;
while xxx. 9 relates the same thing of
Leah. All this is in strict conformity
with §§ 144-46 of the Code. In
Gen. xvi. 4-16 Hagar plumed herself
upon her superiority to her mistress, as
in § 146, and Sarai “ dealt hardly with
her,” as she was entitled to do by the
Code. Hagar ran away, and was sent
back home by the “ angel of the Lord,”
who directed her to submit herself to
her mistress. If the angel had been a
police officer of Hammurabi, he could
hardly have acted otherwise.
When Jacob kept the flocks of Laban
(Gen. xxxi. 38-40) he prided himself
upon having observed the Babylonian
laws laid down in §§ 262-67, and upon
the fact that he had not availed himself
of § 266 for the purpose of clearing
himself by oath in the case of damage
�THE LA JI'S OF MOSES
by wild animals. Laban, however, did
not regulate his wages by § 261.
The marriage customs of the Hebrews,
though not expressly regulated by law,
are in general agreement with Baby
lonian ideas. Exod. xxii. 15 speaks of
the bride-price, or Mohar (mistranslated
“ dowry ” in the English version). The
enamoured Shechem understood per
fectly well that a bride-price would be
expected for Dinah (Gen. xxxiv. 12),
and offered any desired amount. And
in 1 Sam. xviii. 25-27, Saul having
desired a peculiar bride-price for his
daughter Michal, David duly procured
it, and wedded the lady.
In Jud. i. 15, and the parallel
narrative in Josh. xv. ig, we have the only
mention in the Old Testament of a
dowry given with a daughter, it being
called a berakah or “ blessing,” and not
being very clearly distinguished from a
mere gift from a father to his daughter.
Lastly, in Gen. xxxiv. 12 Shechem
promises a matthan, or “gift,” corre
sponding with the Babylonian nudunnu
—i.e., a marriage settlement. It seems,
therefore, that all the ordinances of
Babylonian marriage were recognised in
Israel, although the bride-price was the
only one that received any great amount
of attention.
51
with the Babylonian, most being practi
cally identical, and the others being
quite in the Babylonian spirit. The in
ference is, therefore, that the Hammurabi Code must have been the immediate
or remote progenitor of the Hebrew legal
system.
For the sake of simplicity we have so
far regarded the “ Book of the Cove
nant ” as though it were a homogeneous
composition; but it must be evident to
every attentive student that it is nothing
of the kind. The differences of style
observable in it have been investigated
by several eminent critics, whose con
clusions have been summarised by Pro
fessor G. F. Moore.1 For our purpose,
however, it will be sufficient to indicate
merely a few of the peculiarities of the
“Book.” The way in which chapter
xxi. commences would lead one to
expect a carefully-digested corpus of law.
First we have stated the hypothetical
case of the purchase of a Hebrew slave,
and then comes an orderly considera
tion of the various contingencies arising
therefrom.
But this complete and
methodical treatment is not maintained.
The laws are mixed confusedly to
gether, so that xxi. 22-25 has become
inserted in the middle of a section
dealing with an entirely different sub
ject (verses 20, 21, and 26, 27), and
after xxii. 17 the ordinances become a
mere jumble. In fact, these three
chapters of Exodus look more like the
wreck of a code than an orderly state
ment of one.
There is also some difference in the
way in which the several laws are stated.
The greater part are put hypothetically,
as in the Code of Hammurabi (for the
These resemblances should be de
cisive. In our notes on the Ham
murabi Code we took occasion to com
pare it with an independent system of
legislation, the Laws of the Twelve
Tables; and the similarities discovered
were neither numerous nor striking. On
the other hand, in the comparison of the
Hebrew Book of the Covenant with the
Babylonian Code, the resemblances are
1 See his
simply overwhelming. Out of thirty- Encyclopediaarticle “Exodus (Book)” in the
Biblica, edited by the Rev.
two ordinances, twenty-one are in accord T. K. Cheyne, vol. ii. (London, 1901).
�THE LA WS OF MOSES
Babylonian shumma amelu, “ if a man,”
answers pretty closely to the Hebrew
'O'b “and if a man”), but in other
instances they are categorical. Thus
xxii. 18 commences “thou shalt not,”
and xxii. 19 “whosoever lieth,” in an
entirely different style to the hypotheti
cally stated enactments. Even these
latter are stated variably, some being
addressed to the pronoun of the second
person, and others (in the style of the
Babylonian Code) being referred to the
third person. Thus xxii. 25, “If thou
lend money,” should be contrasted with
xxii. 1, “If a man shall steal an ox.”
A further peculiarity in these two hypo
theses is that in the one God is repre
sented as speaking directly, while in the
other he is referred to as a third party.
Thus xx. 25, “If thou make me an altar
of stone”; but in xxi. 6, “his master
shall bring him unto God.” If, now, we
separate the sections which speak of the
third person, in the Babylonian style,
we shall find they consist of the follow
ing : xxi. i-n, 14, 18-36; xxii. 1—17 ;
and these are the passages that agree
best with the Code of Hammurabi!
It is evident, therefore, that the verses
in question are fragments of an early
Hebrew book of laws which was derived
from the Babylonian Code. The frag
ments are preceded and introduced by
the words, “ And these the mishpatim
which thou shalt set before them.” The
word
mishpatim, “judgments,”
answers to the Babylonian dinani, for
the Semitic root
to judge, only
exists in Hebrew in poetical passages,
being replaced for ordinary purposes by
which is peculiar to the Phoenician
branch. Hammurabi calls his Code
Dinani mesharim, “ judgments of
justice”; the Hebrew legislator calls
the old Hebrew Code mishpatim, “judg
r=
ments ”; and the Psalmist speaks of the
’’ZOOtDO, “judgments of justice,”
just like the Babylonian (Ps. cxix. 7, 62,
164); so that the technical phrases are
practically identical.
The discovery of the Code of Ham
murabi, therefore, enables us to place
the criticism of the Book of the Covenant
upon a fresh and sound basis. It is
now perfectly clear that the compiler of
the “ book ” adopted such of the older
laws as suited his purpose, and added
to them sundry regulations of a ritual
character, together with precepts of the
kind that have been popular with
moralists of all ages, from the counsels
of Ptah-hotep1 (3500 b.c.) to the copy
books of the twentieth century. The
science of jurisprudence must have been
at a very low ebb in Palestine when
such a compilation as the Book of the
Covenant was possible. The laws them
selves are treated as quite subordinate,
and the interest of the compiler centres
in theological matters, such as the proper
methods of sacrifice and the regulation
of the periodic festivals. In the later
systems of Pentateuchal legislation this
tendency is progressively increased.
The Book of Deuteronomy cannot
conceal its entire dependence upon the
Book of the Covenant for its legal
matter; and the additions made are
merely religious and sermonistic. Even
Canon Driver sums up the characteristics
of the later codes as follows :2
“From a literary point of view Deu
teronomy (disregarding the few short
passages belonging to P, and the two
poems in chs. 32, 33) consists of a code
1 The Precepts of Ptah-hotep: the Oldest Book
in the World, by M. Phillipe Virey. Records of
the Past, new series, vol. iii., p. 16.
a Article “ Law ” in the Dictionary of the
Bible, edited by Tames Hastings, vol. iii. (Edin
burgh, 1900).
�THE LA WS OF MOSES
of laws accompanied by hortatory intro
ductions and comments.”
“We come next to the Law of Holi
ness (H) (Lv. 17-26). This consists
substantially of an older body of laws,
which have been arranged by a later
editor in a parenetic setting, the whole
thus formed being afterwards incor
porated in P, with additions and modi
fications, designed for the purpose of
harmonising it more completely with the
system and spirit of P........ The original
nucleus of H, when compared with the
Book of the Covenant, will be seen to
deal very much less fully with civil and
criminal law. The only regulations
relating to criminal law are those in
2417-21. Those in ch. 25 might be classed
as belonging formally to civil law, but
they are regarded more properly as
expressions of religious or humanitarian
principle.”
“ The legislation of the Priests' Code
properly so called (P) is confined almost
entirely to ceremonial observances, espe
cially those relating to sacrifice and
purification.”
In other words, the successive codes
of the Pentateuch display greater and
greater sacerdotalism as time goes on.
It was entirely owing to the influence of
the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi
that the religious system of the Old
Testament was cast into a legal form at
all. The Hebrew language itself bears
witness to the knowledge of codes of
law engraved upon stone, like the pillar
found by M. de Morgan at Susa. Dr.
Driver,1 who of course knew nothing at
that time of the Hammurabi Code,
points out that the Hebrew pn, khoq,
and Hpn, khuqqah, “statute ” or “ ordi
53
nance,” are derived “ from ppPT, to cut
in, inscribe, engrave, and therefore denote
properly something engraven on stone or
other durable surface, though applied in
usage to any kind of fixed ordinance.
It was a common practice in antiquity
to engrave laws upon slabs of stone or
metal and to set them up in some public
place—and the same custom is pre-supposed
in the use of these two words in Hebrew.”
Hence, therefore, when the Elohist
writer of Exodus wished to describe the
legislation which he alleged had been
supernaturally delivered to Moses, the
legislation presented itself to his mind
as something engraven upon stone, upon
“ the two tables of the testimony,” as
the English Version calls them—though
HT-IV is more correctly “ precept ” or
“ law.” “ Tables that were written on
both their sides; on the one side and
on the other were they written. And
the tables were the work of God, and
the writing was the writing of God ”
(Exod. xxxii. 15, 16).
The Israelites did not preserve all the
Babylonian laws; some were inappli
cable, others implied a more advanced
state of civilisation and morality than
was to be found in the kingdoms of
Israel and Judah.
The military regulations (§§ 26-41)
did not obtain in Israel, because, as far
as we know, the kings had no bodies of
feudal vassals settled upon crown lands;
although they did have bands of foreign
mercenaries in their pay (2 Sam. xx. 7).
Every able-bodied Israelite was expected
to serve as a soldier, and to appear fully
armed whenever called out by general
levy (1 Sam. xi. 7).
The land regulations (§§ 42-56) are
not represented in the Pentateuchal
1 Article “Law” in the Dictionary of the legislation, although there were large land
Bible.
holders (Is. v. 8) who must have farmed
�54
THE LA WS OF MOSES
out their estates; and there was some
amount of irrigation, though, of course,
not on the scale practised in the valley
of the Euphrates. §§ 60-65 have also
disappeared from Hebrew jurisprudence,
with the exception of the apparent
reminiscence in Lev. xix. 23-25, of
which we have already spoken.
The Jew’s of the Old Testament were
not a mercantile race, hence §§ 100-10 7
were unnecessary. Agriculture was the
staple industry, and all commerce was
in the hands of the Phoenicians ; Isaiah
xxiii. 8 even using the word “Canaanite”
as a synonym for merchant.
The most noteworthy omission, per
haps, is in regard to the laws of in
heritance. The provisions of the Ham
murabi Code seem very complete and
very equitable ; but the Hebrew laws are
just the reverse. We can only learn that
Israelitish sons divided the paternal
possessions equally among themselves,
except that the eldest-born took a double
share (Deut. xxi. 15-17). Daughters
-only inherited upon failure of sons : and
if there were neither sons nor daughters,
then the brother of the deceased suc
ceeded (Num. xxvii. 4-11). In any
<ase, the widow had no claim on the
estate. In early times, at any rate, she
was herself considered part of the pro
perty of the deceased, and dealt with
accordingly; as was the custom among
the heathen Arabs down to the advent
of Muhammad (2 Sam. xvi. 20, iii. 7),
and the tenth commandment enumerates
the wife together with the house, the ox,
the ass, and the other property of one’s
neighbour. Even the Book of the
Covenant has no provision for the widow
and the orphan—they are merely recom
mended to mercy (Exod. xxii. 22), like
the Ger or stranger ; and we may see by
the frequent prophetical denunciations
that the condition of the widow and the
fatherless was a standing grievance in
Israel. A comparison of Babylonian
law with Hebrew custom will show how
far the Jews had fallen below the moral
standard of the subjects of Hammurabi.
Adoption, which occupies such a large
place in the Code (§§ 185-193), is not
referred to in the Jewish Law; but is
replaced by the curious provision of the
Levirate, which treats the wife as a mere
child-bearing machine (Deut. xxv. 5-10).
The Navigation Laws (§§ 234-240)
were, of course, useless to the Israelites,
who were not a maritime people. And
the scales of fees and wages would be
unenforceable out of Babylonia itself.
As already indicated, the additions of
the Hebrew legislators were almost
entirely of a theological character. The
basic ideas of the Hammurabi Code are
civil right and solid justice; and, con
sidering the times and the circumstances,
these are very well realised by the Code.
The king makes much of his devotion to
the gods and the blessings they have
bestowed upon him; but theology is
rigidly excluded from the Code itself.
The deities are only called in to decide
by the Ordeal in cases where human
insight fails (§§ 2 and 132), or to
guarantee an oath where human evidence
is wanting. In the Pentateuch, on the
other hand, the theological interest is
paramount. The principle of religious
persecution is introduced from the very
first, being inculcated even in the Book
of the Covenant; whereas religious per
secution was entirely unknown in Baby
lonia, not only in the Code of Hammu
rabi, but throughout the whole range of
cuneiform literature, as far as we are
acquainted with it at present. Num.
xxxi. 17-24 is a typical instance of the
ideal Pentateuchal combination of blood-
�Sag
gE
THE FIRST DYNASTY OF BABYLON
thirstiness and ceremonial zeal; and one
of the objects of the completed Torah is
the establishment of a theological reign
of terror. The same penalty is prescribed
for petty infractions of ritual as for the
gravest crimes ; and the Priests’ Code is
a wearisome litany of “ that soul shall be
cut off from his people.” Unauthorised
compounding of oil or incense is punish
55
able with death (Exod. xxx. 33, 38), so
is neglect of the Passover (Num. ix. 13),
Sabbath-breaking (Exod. xxxv. 2), or
even doing “ aught with an high hand ”
(Num. xv. 30). The fierce and senseless
intolerance of the Laws of Moses forms
a significant contrast to the judicial
dignity of the Laws of Hammurabi.
Appendix A.
THE FIRST DYNASTY OF BABYLON
Although we call the Southern
Euphrates Valley by the name of
Babylonia, Babylon was not always the
capital of the country, In the earliest
period the great cities were more or less
independent, and every now and then
one or other rose to pre-eminence, and
acted as suzerain over the others for a
greater or lesser period of time. These
Struggles eventually resulted in the
supremacy of the king of Babylon ; and
we have described in Chapter III. how
this supremacy was finally established by
the overthrow of Rim-Sin by Ham
murabi. Babylon thereafter remained
the capital of the country until 538 b.c.,
when Nabonidus, the last native
monarch, was deposed by Cyrus the
Great.
In 1881 Dr. Pinches published a
cuneiform tablet which, in its complete
state, gave lists of the kings of the
various Babylonian dynasties. It was
then found that Hammurabi was not the
founder of a dynasty, but was the sixth
member of a line of kings reigning in
the city of Babylon. The family of
Hammurabi is therefore styled the First
Dynasty of Babylon.1 This dynastic
tablet has, however, been supplemented
by other records, detailed by Dr. King
in Vol. iii. of his Letters of Hamm/urabi.
Although the succession of the First
Dynasty of Babylon and the lengths of
the individual reigns are thus deter
mined, there is as yet no certainty as to
the dates when these kings flourished.
The nearest approximation is to be
derived from an inscription of the
Assyrian king Assurbanipal (668-626
b.c.),2 and two inscriptions of Nabonidus,
the last king of Babylon (555-538 B.c.p
Assurbanipal informs us that, in the
early part of the year corresponding with
1 Records of the Past, New Series, vol. i.,
P- *3
2 History of Assurbanipal, by George Smith
(London, 1871), p. 250 and p. 381.
3 Historische Texte des neubabylonischen
Reichs. Schrader’s Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek (Berlin, 1890), Band iii., 2 Halfte, pp. 91
and 96.
Bg
w
8£
8
&
n
is
�56
THE FIRST DYNASTY OF BABYLON
652 B.c., he sent an embassy to the king son of Kudur-Bel, no king had built, its
of Elam, demanding the restitution of a old foundation-stone I sought, and I
venerated image of Nana, the goddess of saw, I examined; and upon the founda
Erech, which had been carried away to tion-stone of Shagashalti-Buriash, the
Susa 1,635 years before by “ Kudur- son of Kudur-Bel, I laid its foundation
Nankhundi, the Elamite, who the and made firm its brickwork. This
worship of the great gods did not fear.” temple I built anew, I completed its
The deportation of Nana thus took design.”
place' in 2287 b.c., and therefore a
Thus Shagashalti-Buriash lived 800
serious invasion of Southern Babylonia years before Nabonidus—say, 1345 B.c.
must have been made by the Elamites He was a member of a dynasty of
in that year. It is tempting to link this Kassite kings which ruled in Babylon
event with the fact that Rim-Sin was of some five or six hundred years.
Elamite descent. His father, KudurAnother monarch of the same dynasty
Mabug, was “ adda” of Emutbal and is mentioned in a further inscription of
Martu. Emutbal was a province of Nabonidus, discovered at Ur: “The
Elam; but he could only have gained foundation-cylinder of Hammurabi, the
the dominion over Martu (Southern ancient king, who, 700 years before
Babylonia) by conquest. As Rim-Sin Burna-Buriash had built E Babbara, and
reigned at least thirty-seven years (see the tower, upon the old foundation for
p. 11), and was overthrown in the thirty- Shamash, I looked upon it and I feared.”
first year of Hammurabi, he must have
Burna- Buriash, therefore, lived 700
commenced his sovereignty seven years years after Hammurabi; but the question
before the latter monarch. To this remains, what was the date of Burnamust be added the princedom of his Buriash ? We can only say that this
father; but we have no knowledge as to monarch was one of the correspondents
how long Kudur-Mabug ruled over of Amenophis III. and Amenophis IV.
Martu. From the lack of monuments it in the Tell-el-Amarna tablets, and these
may have been only a few years.
Egyptian kings reigned about 1450 b.c.
Nabonidus, the last king of Babylon, Consequently, the date of Hammurabi
devoted himself very largely to reno was somewhere about 2150 b.c. Nabo
vating the ancient temples of his nidus speaks in round numbers, and we
dominions. Among others, he rebuilt cannot be absolutely certain for a year or
the temple of Anunit at Sippara, and we two. This date of 2150 b.c. does not
may quote from his cylinder inscription : synchronise with the figures derived
“ For Anunit, the mistress of battle, from the invasion of Kudur-Nankhundi
bearer of the bow and quiver, who in 2287 b.c.; but at the same time it
fulfils the command of Bel, her father, must be admitted that the chronology of
who sweeps away the foe, who destroys this period is so entirely hypothetical
the wicked, who marches before the that the latter date is by no means
gods, who at sunrise and sunset has excluded.
blessed my endeavours, E Ulbar, her
Nabonidus seems to have been in
temple which is in Sippara of Anunit, possession of trustworthy information in
which for 800 years, since the time of regard to the reigns of his predecessors
Shagashalti-Buriash, king of Babylon, from very early times, and where it has
�GENESIS XIV.
been possible to check his figures the
dates mentioned in his inscriptions have
proved correct.
The Assyrian king
Assurbanipal must also have had
equally good authority for his chrono
logical calculations ; and it may, there
fore, be expected that further discoveries
will enable us to settle the exact period
of Hammurabi’s reign.
But for the
present it will be seen that the data are
much too vague.
However, if we assume that the reign
of Hammurabi ended in 2150 b.c., we
get the following scheme for the first
dynasty of Babylon, premising only that
the dates b.c. are theoretical, and are
57
merely given for convenience in reckon
ing
B.C.
2295 Sumu-abu, founder
of the dynasty,
reigned 14 years
2281 Sumu-la-ilu,
his son,
36 J)
n
his son,
2245 Qabium,
»
14 J,
2231 Apil-Sin,
his son,
18 5,
2213 Sin-muballit,
his son,
2<y 5 9
n
his son,
2193 Hammurabi,
43 99
2150 Samsu-iluna,
his son,
>>
38 99
2112 Abi-eshu’,
his son,
28 99
2084 Ammi-ditana,
his son,
37 99
22 99
2047 Ammi-zaduga, his son,
n
2025 Samsu-ditana, his son,
3i 99
11 kings of the First Dynasty
of Babylon reigned 301 years
Appendix B.
GENESIS XIV.
The earlier school of Assyriologists were
led into many errors through paying too
much regard to the fables of classical
writers such as Ctesias and Herodotus.
But though these authors have long been
given up as misleading, the ignis fatuus
of the fourteenth chapter of Genesis still
flickers over the field of Assyriology. If
it were not for Gen. xiv., many com
monly-made assertions would never have
been invented, and Babylonian history
would have been more sober and less
imaginative. It is difficult to under
stand why this chapter should have had
such a hypnotising effect, for its fictitious
nature is its most obvious characteristic.
The well-known Orientalist Professor
Noldeke demonstrated its unhistorical
nature half a century ago, and his con
clusions have never been refuted? In
fact, it is somewhat a slur on one’s intel
ligence to have it presented as possessing
any historical value whatever. The
string of awe-inspiring names which it
offers in the English version is largely
due to the fact that the Hebrew is left
untranslated. By rendering all the un
intelligible words, as is done in the
following, the real character of the narra
tive may be better appreciated.
“ And it was in the days of Amraphel,
king of Shin‘ar, Ary ok, king of Ellasar,
Kedorla'omer, king of Elam, and Tid'al,
1 “ Die Ungeschichtlichkeit der Erzahlung
Gen. xiv.” Untersuchung zur Kritik des Alten
Testaments, von Theodor Noldeke (Kiel, 1869).
�58
GENESIS XIV.
king of nations, they made war upon
Son-of-Evil,1 king of Sedom, and upon
Son-of-Wickedness, king of ‘ Amorah,
Tooth-of-the-Father, king of Earth,
Shmeber, king of hyaenas and king of
devouring (she is small). All these con
federated to the Plain of Demons (it is the
Salt Sea). Twelve years they served Kedorla'omer, and thirteen years they rebelled,
and in the fourteenth year came Kedorla'omer and the kings who were with
him, and they smote the Shades in
Astarte of the two horns and the Zuzes
in them, and the Terrors in the Plain of
the Cities, and the Cave-dwellers in the
high rough mountain [or, high mountain
of the Satyr] until the Oak of Paran
which is above the desert. And they
returned, and they came to the Well of
Judgment (it is holy), and they smote
all the field of the Amalekites and also
the Amorites, the dwellers in the
Pruning of the Palm-tree.”
Dr. Noldeke points out that the Sa
maritan Pentateuch, instead of Shmeber,
has
= “ the name is lost,” a
somewhat significant reading if it be the
true one. There are other variations
in the Septuagint; but they probably
merely indicate that the LXX. trans
lators were puzzled over the outlandish
names.
The scene in the story is laid in the
Vale of Siddim. This should most
probably be Shedim (the difference in
the Hebrew is merely a dot on the UJ)
—i.e., “demons,” as in Deut. xxxii. 17,
and Psalm cvi. 37. The foes smitten
by Chedorlaomer are of a suspiciously
eschatological character. The Rephaim
are the Shades of the Dead, as in Isa.
xiv. 9, Ps. lxxxviii. 10, etc. The Emim
are the “Terrors of Death,” as in Ps.
lv. 4. And as the sepulchres of Pales
tine are almost universally rock-hewn
tombs, the “cave-dwellers” would be
the dead lying in such receptacles. The
two-horned Astarte and the Plain of the
Cities remind us that the ruler of the’
Babylonian Hades was the Queen
Allatu, who resided in a great city, or
rather seven concentric cities with
separate gates, through which the dead
must pass. Shmeber, king of hyaenas
and the king of devouring, gives a
ghoulish suggestion of Oriental grave
yards ; and the Zuzim and Paran and
Sodom and Gomorrah would probably
be more intelligible if we possessed a
completer knowledge of Hebrew es
chatology. The Seir of verse 6, in
company with the other mythological
surroundings, is probably the Satyr of
Lev. xvii. 7, Isa. xxxiv. 14, etc.
The forces led by Abram against
these vanquishers of phantoms were not
large. “ Three hundred and eighteen ”
born in his house. And these 318 can
be reduced to one—the famous Eliezer
(Gen. xv. 2).
The letters of the
Hebrew alphabet have each a numerical
value; and if we write down the name
Eliezer in Hebrew characters, and add
up the numerical values of these char
acters, the result is 318 !
£
=
X
7
=
3°
1
=
10
V
=
7°
T
=
7
—
200
318
In view of all these facts, it would require
a great amount of evidence to prove that
1 The Jewish doctors themselves recognised there was anything of an historical
that the *1 of Bera and Birsha was the contrac
nature in Gen. xiv.; and it is somewhat
�GENESIS XIV.
heedless to add that no evidence has yet
been offered for the historicity of this
chapter. The section belongs to the
Priests’ Code—that is, the latest stratum
of the Pentateuch; and the narrative
was constructed by someone familiar
with the Hebrew alphabet, for the names
of th© foreign kings in verse i are care
fully arranged in the order of that
alphabet; and Bera and Birsha, and
Shinab and Shemeber, are coupled
together because they begin with the
same letter. As these people are there
fore artificial in their arrangement, they
are probably equally artificial in their
origin; and it is a mere waste of time to
seek for them in the field of history.
The kernel of the chapter is in the
twentieth verse, “And he gave him a
tenth of all ”; and its object was thus to
support the priestly impost of tithes.
Nevertheless, ever since scholars began
to decipher the cuneiform inscriptions it
has been a favourite, though futile,
amusement to seek for names upon the
monuments bearing some remote resem
blance to those in Gen. xiv.; and
schemes of chronology have even been
framed to bring these names into accord
with the age of Abraham. Seeing, how
ever, that the age of Abraham is an
exceedingly uncertain quantity, such
chronologies have not been found to be
of any value.
It has occasionally been announced
that “ Chedorlaomer, king of Elam,” has
been found upon the monuments; but
up to the present all such discoveries
have proved to be errors in reading the
cuneiform.1
Arioch, king of Ellasar, has been at
various times identified with several
eastern potentates who have eventually
59
had to be acquitted of any connection
with him. The present fashion is to
equate him with Rim-Sin of Larsam. It
requires the eye of faith to perceive the
likeness between Ellasar and Larsam.
The name we transcribe “ Rim-Sin ” is
somewhat of a cuneiform puzzle. It is
found written Rim-En-zu, Rim-Agu,
Arad-En-zu, and Arad-Agu ; and it was
at one time maintained that these were
all different people, until Mr. George
Smith established their identity. En-zu,
“lord of wisdom,” and Agu, “crowned,”
are both appellations of the Moon-god,
Sin. In Semitic Babylonian En-zu is
always read as Sin, the Moon-god; and
it is to be presumed that Agu is to be
treated in the same way. We are thus
left with Rim-Sin and Arad-Sin. As the
cuneiform interchanges Rim with the
character for “ servant ” (in the Semitic
construct case arad), it would appear
that in this particular case rim is syno
nymous with “servant.” For the purpose
of comparing the name with Arioch, the
first element has been read as Eri or Iri,
and this procures the form Eri-Agu (or
Eri-Aku), but ignores the second form
of the divine name, for no one has pro
posed to read Eri-En-zu. It will be
seen, therefore, that the reading Eri-Aku
is in the highest degree precarious, and
in the present state of Assyriological
knowledge the only safe rendering
appears to be Rim-Sin.
As Shinar is several times used in the
Old Testament for Babylonia, or some
part of it, sundry kings of Babylon have
been equated with Amraphel. Ham
murabi is the chief favourite at present.
The first consonant of his name is the
German Ch, very often transcribed Kh.
Thus we get the form Khammurabi.
1 For a recent instance see King’s Letters of Orientalists, however, prefer the phone
Hammurabi, vol. i., p. xviii.
tically superior method of employing
�6o
RELICS OF EARLIER BABYLONIAN LA WS
one letter only for each sound, and
write Kh as /z, with a diacritical mark
beneath. Hence Hammurabi, which
need offer no difficulty if we remember
that the Assyrian h was a guttural. In
one single case a tablet has been found
to spell Hammurabi as Ammurabi.
This, of course, is merely one of the
many instances of reckless spelling on
the part of the cuneiform scribes, who
had no standard etymological dictionaries
to guide them. But upon this slender
basis is built the theory that Amraphe(l)
is Ammurabi in disguise, the I having
been tacked on in some unaccountable
manner.
It is the fourteenth chapter of Genesis
which influences the bringing into the
neighbourhood of the Mediterranean of
the names of some of the places men
tioned on Babylonian inscriptions. Many
of these names are difficult to decipher,
and still more difficult to locate. The
father of Rim-Sin is called adda Martu,
presumed to mean “ lord of the West
land.” There was a Babylonian deity
named Martu, so that it is improbable
that the “ West-land ” was far from
Babylonia. But we often find in modern I
books that Martu is translated as
“ Phoenicia ” or “ Syria ” without a word
of explanation; and the uninstructed
reader is misled into the idea that there
is some certainty in making Martu the
Far West. There is, however, nothing
in the cuneiform inscriptions themselves
to preclude the idea that Martu was
simply south-western Babylonia; and
when we find, as noted on p. 21, that
Siniddinam, the vassal king of Larsam,
was officially styled Governor of Martu,
there is hardly need to seek for the place
elsewhere.
It is, therefore, quite unnecessary for
us to trouble ourselves about the asser
tions that have been so freely made as
to the alleged contemporaneity of Abram
and Hammurabi; or the presumed rela
tions of the early Babylonian kings with
Palestine. It has yet to be shown that
the author of the Priests’ Code (about
the 5th century b.c.) possessed any
knowledge of the early Babylonian
history of 1,500 years before his time;
or that the kings of Elam made ex
peditions to smite Rephaim in this
world, whatever they might do in the
next.
Appendix C.
RELICS OF EARLIER BABYLONIAN LAWS
The Akkadian language ceased to be
spoken in Babylonia about 2000 b.c.,
but as its literature was the foundation
of the Semitic-Babylonian culture, and
as Akkadian had become a kind of
sacred tongue, it was studied and
taught as long as the Babylonian
religion and civilisation lasted. The
great text-book of the language was a
series of ten or twelve tablets entitled
Ana ittishu, “ In his station,” from the
opening words of the first volume.
�RELICS OE EARLIER BABYLONIAN LA WS
The work consisted essentially of speci
mens of the Akkadian language, accom
panied by a Semitic-Babylonian trans
lation.
Among the specimens are
several paragraphs which are evidently
ancient legal enactments, their antiquity
being guaranteed by the fact that they
are in the Akkadian language.
The
tablet containing these fragments of laws
is numbered K 251 in the British
Museum collection, and has been fre
quently translated and published.1 The
following version will serve to show the
character of this primitive Akkadian
legislation:—
1. If a son says to his father, “Thou
art not my father,” they shall brand him,
and fetter him, and sell him as a slave
for silver [compare Hamm. Code, §§
192, 226, 146].
2. If a son says to his mother, “ Thou
art not my mother,” his face they shall
61
brand, from the city they shall banish
him, from the house they shall drive
him.
3. If a mother says to her son, “ Thou
art not my son,” house and goods shall
she forfeit.
4. If a wife hates her husband and
says, “Thou art not my husband,”
into the river they shall throw her
[compare H. Code, §§ 142, 143].
5. If a husband says to his wife,
“Thou art not my wife,” half a mina
of silver he shall weigh out to her
[compare H. Code, §§ 137-40].
6. If a man hires a slave, and he
dies, or is rendered useless, or is caused
to run away, or is caused to rebel, or
is made ill, then for every day his
hand shall measure out half a qa of
corn [compare H. Code,
245-48, 199,
252].
1 Trans. Socy. Bib. Archceology, vol. viii., p. 230.
�GENERAL INDEX
Adad (God), 38
Adoption, 54
Akkadian, 10, 60
Alphabet, 44, 58
Amraphel, 57, 59
Anu (God), 34
Anunnaki, 34
Appeal, 9
Arioch, 57, 59
Army, 38
Arrest, 9
Artisans, 41
Assur, 14, 35
Assurbanipal, 5, 7, 55, 57
Fate, 36
Feudalism, 38
Fragments of Code, 5, 7, 39
Free man, 36
Ger, or stranger, 47, 49
God, Before, 47, 49
Goring ox, 48
Guarantors, 42
Hammurabi, 9, 10 ff, 45,
55 ff> 59
Hebrew language, 43, 52, 53
Herodotus, 40, 57
Holiness, Law of, 45, 53
Homicide, 43, 48
Babylon, 7, 11, 13, 14, 3°, 55
Black-headed men, 13, 30, 35
Idioms, 36
Blood-feud, 43
Incendiary, 38
Boat, 38, 42
Incest, 40, 50
Bondage, 48
Inheritance, 40, 54
Branding, 42
Bribery, 37
Jubilee, 48
Bride-price, 40, 49, 51
Judges, 8, 9
Burna-Buriash, IO, 44, 45, 5^
Carthage, 40
Cataract, 41
Chedorlaomer, 57, 59
Chronology, 10, 45, 55-57
Commandments, 46, 54
Contract tablets, 5, 8
Corn, 32, 37, 38
Correspondence of Babylonian
monarchs, 9, 12, 44
Covenant Book of, 45-51
Creation,, 46
Cuneiform, 1, 2, 44
Currency, 37
Dating, Systems of, 8, 10, 11
Debtors, 39
Deposit, 49
Destiny, 36
Deuteronomy, 45, 52
Distraint, 42, 50
Dowry, 40, 51
Elam, 7, 56, 57
Elders, 8
Eliezer, 58
Emutbal, II, 12, 56
Erasure on pillar, 6, 7, 39, 42
Estates of Babylonia, 36
----- of Israel, 47
Khallabi, 35
Kingdom of Hammurabi, 35
Kudur-Mabug, II, 56
Kudur-Nankhundi, 56
Labourer, 36
Larsam, 7, 11 ff, 13, 59
Law, 9 ff, 34
Lawsuits, 9
Levirate Law, 54
Marriage, 40, 51, 61
Martu (South-western Baby
lonia), 11, 12, 56, 60
Measures, 37, 38, 39
Military service, 38, 53
Monotheism, 37
Morality, 53, 54
Navigation, 54
Nineveh, 14, 35
Oaths, 8, 9
Orchards, 50
Ordeal, 37, 50, 54
Orphans, 49, 54
Palace, 37
Persecution, 49, 54
Pillar of Susa, 6
Plebeian, 36
Priestesses, 40
Priesthood, 8
Priests’ Code, 45, 53, 59, 60
Procedure, 8-10
Ransom, 38
Rent, 38
Rephaim, 58-60
Repudiation, 61
Retaliation, 41, 48
Rim-Sin, 5, n, 12, 55 ff, 59
Samsu-iluna, 5, 12
Satyr, 58
Scribes, 8
Settlement, Marriage, 40, 51
Shaddai, 34
Shagashalti-Buriash, 10, 56
Shamash, 6, 34
Shemeber, 58
Shutruk-Nakhunte, 7
Siddim, Vale of, 58
Silver as currency, 37
Sin-iddinam, 12, 60
Sin-muballit, II, 14
Sippara, 7, 13, 33, 35, 56
Six days of Creation, 46
Slaves, 36, 42, 48, 61
Sorcery, 37, 49
Stroke of God, 42
Supervision of justice, 9
Symbols, 38
Temple, 35, 38
Theft, 38, 49
Thunder, 38
Tithes, 59
Tonnage, 42
Trade, 39
Trees, 39
Trespass, 39, 49
Tribunal, Jewish, 47
Tumour, 41
Twelve Tables, 9, 33, 37-39
4i, 5i
Weights and measures, 37-39
Widows and orphans, 49, 54
Wine, 39
Witness, see “ Elders ”
�INDEX TO CODE
(The figures refer to the Sections of the Code, PP- 13-33)
Deposit, 122-6
Harrow, 260
Desertion, 133, 136, 193
Herdsmen, 258, 261-7
Devotee, 178-80, 192, 193
Highway robbery, 22
Disinheritance, 158, 168, 169, Hire {see also “ Wages ”), 2429, 268-72
191
Distraint, 114-16, 120, 241
Homicide, 24, 153
Divorce, 137-41, 148
Horticulture, 59-65
House-breaking, 21, 125
Doctor, 206, 215-221
Dowry, 137, 138, 142, 149,162- Husband, see “Marriage”
4, 167, 171^-176^, 178-84
Drought, 48
Illegal distraint, 113, 114
Banishment, 154
Drowning, 109, 129, 133, 143, Illicit sales, 7
Bastinado, 202
Impalement, 153
155
Bennu sickness, 278
Inalienability, 37
Bequest, 38, 39, 150, 178, 179, Ear, Amputation of, 205, 282
Incest, 154-8
182
Elders, 3, 4, 7, 9, 13, 122
Ingratitude, 186, 192, 193
Bigamy, 135, 144, 145, 148
Enclosure, 41
Inheritance, 165-7, 173, 174,
Boat-builder, 234, 235
Enfranchisement, 117,119,1710
176a, 176b, 178-82
Boatman, 236-9
Enslavement of free persons, Interest, 48-51
Boats, 8, 234-40, 275-7
14, 54, 115-17, 141
Intimidation, 3
Branding, 127, 226, 227
Exchange, Rate of, 51, 111
Breach of promise, 159-61
Exile, 154
Judge, 5, 9, 127, 167, 168,
Breasts, amputation of, 194
Eye, 193, 196, 215, 218, 220
172a, 177
Bribery, 4
Bride-price, 138, 139, 159-61, Fallow, 43
Kallati (literally spouse}, 180
163, 164, 166
False witness, 3, 4
Brigandage, 22, 23
Farming, 42-56, 59-65, 253-6 Kidnapping, 14
Bucket, 260
Favourite son, 165
Landlord, b
Builder, 228-33, 274
Fees, 206, 215-7, 221-4
Lawsuits, 3, 4
Burglary, 21
Fiefs, see “ Military Law”
Burial in the house, 21, 227
Fines, 8,12,24,57,58, 112,114, Legal tender, c
Burning, 25, no, 157
116, 156, 160, 161, 203, 204, Legitimation, 170, 1710, 190
207-9, 211-14, 220, 225,241, Lion, 244, 266
Capital punishment, 1-3, 6247, 248, 251, 255, 259, 260 Loans, 49-52, 100-2, 106, 107
Loss by enemy, 103
n, 14-16, 19, 21, 22, 25, 26, Fire, 25
Lost property, 9-13
109, 130, 143, 153, 155, 157, Flood, 45, 46, 48, 53, 55, 56
227, 229
Flooding, 53, 55, 56
Captives, 27, 28, 32, 133-5
3
Forfeiture, 35, 37, 113, 159, 177 Maintenance, 133-5, *7
Makhirtu, 240, 276
Cattle-doctor, 224, 225
Fosterage, see “ Adoption”
Collision, 241
Malediction, 1
Foster-mother, 194
Manslaughter, 116, 207, 208
Compensation, 23, 42, 43, 54- Fraud, 265
7, 62, 63, 113, 219, 220, 225, Fugitive slaves, 15-20
Marriage, 38, 127-36, 141-53,
166, 175-7
232, 245-8, 263, 267
Metayer tenure, see “ Farm
Concubinage, 137, 144, 145, Gift, 165
183, 184
ing ”
God, Before, 8, 23, 106, 107,
Military law, 26-41
Conjugal rights, 142
120, 126
Conspiracy, 109
Minors, 7, 14, 29
Goring, 250-2
Curse, 1
Miscarriage, 209-14
“ Misfortune of the King,” 27,
Handicraft, 189
28
Damage, 120, 232, 245-8^
Hands, Amputation of, 195, 218,
Mother, 29, 177
Debt, 38, 39, 48-52, «, c, 113,
226
115, 119, 151, 152
Mukkielbitu, 240
I Harbouring, 16, 19, 20, 109
Absconder, 136
Acknowledgment of paternity,
170, 171CZ
Act of God, 249, 266
Adad (God), 45, 48
Adoption, 185-93
Adultery, 129, 133
Artisan, 188, 274
Assault, 195-214
Assignment for debt, 38, 39, 151
�64
Negligence, 42-4, 53, 55, 56,
61-3, 65, 264
Nersega, 187, 192, 193
Nurse, 194
Oath, 9, 20, 23, 103, 120, 126,
131, 240, 249
Ordeal, 2, 132
Orphan, 177
INDEX TO CODE
Repudiation, 192, 282
Respite, 13
Restitution, 9
Retaliation (lex tallows'), 4, 13,
116, 196, 197, 200, 210, 219,
230, 231
Reward, 17
Settlement, Marriage, 150,
171#, 1720, 172$
Shepherds, 57, 58, 261-7
Palace, 18, 32, 109
Ships, see “ Boats ”
Pardon, 129
Sickness, 148
Paternity, 170, Vjia
Slander, 3, n, 12, 109, 127,
Penalty, 4, 5, 12
People, Son of the, 188, 274
I32, 161
Slave, 15-20, 118, 175, 176,
Planting, 60-3
199, 205, 217, 219, 220, 223,
Plebeian, 8, 15, 16, 140, 175,
2^6, 227, 231, 252, 278-82
176a, 198, 201, 204, 208, 211,
•----- Female, 15-17, 118, 119,
216, 219, 222
141, 144, 146, 147, 170,
Pledge, 49-520
171a, 213, 214, 278-81
Priestess, no, 127, 178-82
Sorcery, 1, 2
Purchase, Illicit, 7
Spell, 2
Stolen property, see “Lost
Qadishtu, 181
property ”
Storm, 45, 48
Ransom,32
Substitution, 26
Rape, 130, 156
Sub-tenancy, 47
Rebels, 109
Receiving stolen goods, 6, 7, 10 Suspicion, 131, 132
Reclaiming land, 44, 63,
Tariff, 51, in
Rent, 45, 46
Temple, 6, 8, 32
Tenant, b
Theft, 6, 8, 25
Tongue, Amputation of, 192
Trade, 100-7
Trader, 40, 49, a, c, 100-7, 116,
118, 119, 152
Trees, 59
Trespass, 57, 58
Trust, 112, 120, 122 •
Tumour, 215, 218, 220
Unjust judge, 5
Unknown murderer, 24
Vassal, see “ Military Law”
Veterinary surgeon, 224, 225
Virgin, 181
Wages, 257, 258,261, 273, 274
Ward, 177
Warehousing, 120-26
Water-wheel, 259, 240
“Way of the King,” 26, 32. 33
Weather, 45, 48
Widow, 171^-174, 177
Wife, see “ Marriage ”
“Wife of Merodach,” 182
Wineseller, 108-10
Witchcraft, 1, 2
Witness, 3, 4, 7, 9, 13, 122
�Published by T. & T. CLARK, Edinburgh.
Sixth Edition now ready. Crown 8vo, cloth, is. 6d. net.
THE OLDEST CODE OF LAWS IN THE WORLD. The Code of Laws pro
mulgated by Hammurabi, King of Babylon, b.c. 2285-2242. Translated,
with Introduction and full Index, by C. H. W. Johns, M.A., Lecturer on
Assyriology, Queens’ College, Cambridge.
“The discovery and decipherment of this Code is the greatest event in Biblical Archaeo
logy for many a day. A translation of the Code, done by Mr. Johns, of Queens College,
Cambridge, the highest living authority on this department of study, has just been published
by Messrs. T. & T. Clark in a cheap and attractive booklet.”—Expository Times.
BABYLONIAN AND ASSYRIAN LAWS, CONTRACTS, AND LETTERS. By
Rev. C. H. W. Johns, M.A., of Queens’ College, Cambridge. Large 8vo,
Y 12s. 6d. net.
“ In Mr. Johns’ Babylonian and Assyrian Laws, that book which has given so promising
a start to the ‘ Library of Ancient Inscriptions,’ there is more matter for the interpretation
of the early books of the Bible than in any commentary that has been issued for many a day
—apart, perhaps, from a Gunkel or a Driver.”—Dr. James Hastings.
THE MIRACLES OF UNBELIEF. By Rev. Frank Ballard, M.A., B.Sc.
(London). Sixth (Popular) Edition, Revised throughout. Post8vo, 2s. 6d. net.
“No book has hit the Rationalist so hard. Its very title is a victory for Christ.”—
Expository Times.
Edinburgh : T. & T. CLARK, 38, George Street.
London Simpkin Marshall, Hamilton, Kent, & Co., Ltd.
NOW READY.
80 pp., paper covers, 6d., by post 7|d.; in cloth covers, is., by post is. 2d.
THE
AGNOSTIC ANNUAL
FOR 1907
CONTENTS;—
.MERELY RELATIVE. By Eden Phillpotts.
f FORE-GLEAMS OF HUMANISM IN DANTE. By
Joseph McCabe.
THE UNFAITH OF THE CHURCHES.
By Dr.
THE MORAL FUTURE.
Charles Callaway.
By F. J. Gould.
THE FAITH OF A PANTHEIST. By J. Allanson
PlCTON.
SOCIAL MORALITY AND RELIGION: An Instance
of their Relation. By Professor A. C. Haddon.
Dr. JOHNSON AND THE COCK LANE GHOST.
By Edward Clodd.
THE CONVERSION OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE TO
CHRISTIANITY. By A. W. Benn.
BIBLE FOLK-LORE.
Bonner.
By Hypatia Bradlaugh
THE HISTORICITY OF JESUS.
By John M.
Robertson.
London : Watts & Co., 17, Johnson’s Court, Fleet Street, London, E.C.
�Watts & Co.’s
Sixpeppy
-x
Publication
R.P.A. Cheap Reprints.
1. HUXLEY’S LECTURES AND ESSAYS. (A
Selection.) With Autobiography.
2. THE PIONEERS-OF EVOLUTION. By Edward
Clodd.
3. MODERN SCIENCE & MODERN THOUGHT.
Bv Samuel Laing. With Illustrations.
4. * ITERATURE AND DOGMA. By Matthew
L
Arnold.
15. * N AGNOSTIC’S APOLOGY.
A
Stephen.
.
16. LIFE OF JESUS. By Ernest fcfcN
17. A MODERN ZOROASTRIAN. 1
Laing.
18. AN INTRODUCTION TO THE PHIL
OF HERBERT SPENCER. By Profc
Hudson.
5. THE RIDDLE
OF
THE
UNIVERSE.
By
Ernst Haeckel.
6. * DUCATlON : Intellectual, Moral, and Phy
E
sical. By Herbert Spencer.
7. THE EVOLUTION OF THE IDEA OF GOD.
By Grant Allen.
8. HUMAN ORIGINS. By Samuel Laing.
9. THE SERVICE OF MAN. By J. Cotter
’ Morison.
10. TYNDALL’S LECTURES AND ESSAYS. (A
Selection.) With Biographical Sketch.
11. THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES.
*
By Charles
Darwin.
12. EMERSON’S ADDRESSES AND ESSAYS.
13. ON LIBERTY. By John Stuart Mill.
14. * HE STORY OF CREATION. By E. Clodd.
T
19. THREE ESSAYS ON RELIGION.
Stuart Mill.
CREED OF CHRISTENDOM. By
THE APOSTLES. By Ernest Re:
PROBLEMS OF THE FUTURE. I
WONDERS OF -LIFE. By Ernst l
JESUS OF NAZARETH. By Edwa.
G
* OD AND THE BIBLE. By Matthe «
THE EVOLUTION OF MAN,
I
Haeckel. Vol. I.
27. THE EVOLUTION OF MAN. Vol. II
28. HUME’S ESSAYS : I—An Inquiry <
Human Understanding. II.—An Inq
cerning the Principles of Morals.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
R.P.A. Extra Series.
1. JESUS CHRIST: His Apostles and.Disciples in
the Twentieth Century. By Count Camille de
Rijfps.SE.
2. HAECKEL'S CRITICS ANSWERED.
By
6. A NEW CATECHISM. By M. M. Mang
7. 'THE RELIGION OF WOMAN. By J
8. THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES
POSITIVE PHILOSOPHY. ByAuous
Joseph McCabe.
3. SCIENCE AND SPECULATION. Being the
Prolegomena to “The History of Philosophy.”
By G. H. Lewes.
4. NEW LIGHT ON OLD PROBLEMS. By John
Wilson, M.A.
5. ETHICS OF THE GREAT RELIGIONS. By
C. T. Gorham.
9. ETHICAL RELIGION. By W. M. Sal
10. RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION.
By
Haynes.
11, THE OLDEST LAWS IN THE WO’
Chilperic Edwards.
Various.
THE FUTURE PEACE OF THE ANGLO-1
By Major Stewart L. Murray. Wit
by Field-Marshal Earl Roberts, K. G.
HAECKEL’S CONTRIBUTION TO RELIG1
A. S. Mories.
DO WE BELIEVE? An Analysis of a Grea
Vaughan.
spondence. By J. A. HedderwiCK.
INGERSOLL’S LECTURES AND ESSAYS. First
CHRISTIANITY AND RATIONALISM ON
Series. 160 pp.
The Christian Defences Answered. By
INGERSDLf S tECTURES AND ESSAYS. Second
McCabe, J. M. Robertson, F. J. Gould, a>.
Series. 160 pp.
writers.
ON THE NATURE OF KNOWLEDGE; and
THE TRUTH ABOUT SECULAR EDUCATIO
Kindred Inquiries. By Frances Wright.
History and Results. By Joseph McG
CHAMBERLAIN : A Study. By J. M. Robertson.
RIGHTS OF MAN. By Thomas Paine.
THE ORIGIN OF LIFE. A Reply to Sir Oliver Lodge.
A FEW FOOTPRINTS. By J. Passmore Eda
By JosepiT McCabe.
SOCIALISM : ITS FALLACIES AND DANGEF
Collection of Papers edited by Frederick M
THE BIBLE IN SCHOOL. By J. Allanson Picton.
*
■ The whole of the above list, with the exception of those marked with an asterisk, are supplied in doth
THE CHILDREN’S BOOK OF MORAL LESSONS.
By F. J. Gould. First Series.
THE AGE OF REASON. By Thomas Paine. With
Introduction by J. M. Robertson.
EARLY SHELLEY PAMPHLETS. By Percy
WATTS & CO,, i7, JOHNSON’S COURT, FLEET STREET, LONDON,
printed by watts and co.,
17, Johnson’s
court, fleet street,
London,
e.c.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The oldest laws in the world : being an account of the Hammurabi code and the Sinaitic legislation, with a complete translation of the great Babylonian inscription discovered at Susa
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Edwards, Chilperic
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 64 p. ; 22 cm.
Series title: R.P.A. Extra Series
Series number: No. 11
Notes: Front cover features illustration of Hammurabi adoring the Sun-god. Printed in double columns. Includes bibliographical references and index. Issued for the Rationalist Press Association, Ltd. Publisher's lists inside and on back cover. Appendix A:The First Dynasty of Babylon. B: Genesis XIV. C: Relics of Earlier Babylonian Laws. Published pseudonymously. Author believed to be Edward John Pilcher. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Watts & Co.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1906
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N205
Subject
The topic of the resource
History
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The oldest laws in the world : being an account of the Hammurabi code and the Sinaitic legislation, with a complete translation of the great Babylonian inscription discovered at Susa), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Hammurabi Code
NSS
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/afdee4e12b02c1b59055ecd275bc4547.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=awIPIeErKB7DNGj6sfZopZaveqq8COxSMltdXzfHcOJJXJmqKf9bzSVgYdtAbzW5RiKyQpjdqLfZfA%7EZqYjHEOF6k0RffOXges8Jq-AyuX0a1erLg2yasLP6MylqnrxXkCKGL0sviEW3K6jP1j9ilG4TTLWxVG6B8MdvRWy-PMEBncAiLMPBWf7J99vcOhPtZtgtJk-%7EeohAyD0IhNUFXxGl-a5PMjX8aIproJgXVVagqxCerglxpjt3DIvnh6tZNubjePdNijySSQ%7Ew%7E-g6A-U2sR9yc6aKU5aVH66pxIAFj6HqkDbu7hQHHPYyU5tfjyUctNlVcyPZ8VYP5KY9uQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
3e242d799a8ccc02addc5d889972b0ca
PDF Text
Text
��CROSBY HALL,
ITS EARLY HISTORY AND PRESENT RESTORATION.
is one of the most interesting buildings
in the Metropolis, and may be said to be the only
authentic example of Gothic domestic architecture
belonging to that period when the merchant princes
began to take rank with the nobles of the Court. The Great
Hall at Westminster is perhaps the finest existing specimen of
the public buildings of ancient London, (omitting of course
ecclesiastical edifices), and Crosby Hall is the most striking
and splendid of those palatial residences, only a few of which
were erected in the City.
It is remarkable, considering how closely this grand old building
has been identified with the history of the country, that it should
have been permitted to undergo such strange vicissitudes in its
own fortunes, and it is yet more wonderful that notwithstanding
those vicissitudes it should have been spared from the alterations
and adaptations which too often deface and destroy some of the
most beautiful structures of a past age. The truth seems to be
that Crosby Hall was so nobly planned and built as to restrain
by the force of its own beauty the unhallowed hands which might
otherwise have desecrated it; while its history and associations
were in themselves so interesting that they secured its public
recognition, and forbade the destruction of a building that had
been able to defy the touch of Time himself, and seemed only to
have mellowed into a more solemn beauty as the years went by.
Not that the entire edifice, which was originally called Crosby
Place or Crosby House, remains standing. The less important
portion exists no longer, and the building which has for so long
been known as Crosby Hall is in fact the Grand Banqueting
Room, the Council Chamber, the State Reception Room, and
rosby hall
B
�4
some other apartments belonging to the Palace, Court-yard, and
Garden, which once occupied the site of what is now Crosby
Square.
This splendid mansion of Crosby Place was built in 1466 by
Sir John Crosby, on the ground leased from Dame Alice Ashfield,
Prioress of the Convent of Saint Helene. For this ground, which
had a frontage of no feet in the “King’s Road of Bishopsgate
Streete,” he paid £11 : 6: 8 a-year, no small sum in those days,
and immediately set about the erection of the hall and dwelling
house, which was afterwards described as being “ye highest and
“ fairest in ye Citie.”
Sir John Crosby, Member of Parliament for London, Aiderman,
Warden of the Grocer’s Company, and Mayor of the Staple of
Calais, was the eminent grocer and woolstapler, who with eleven
others received the honour of knighthood in the field for their
gallantry in resisting the attack made by the Bastard Falconbridge
on the City. Sir John Crosby died in 1475, four years after the
completion of the building to which he gave his name, and was
buried in the Church of Saint Helen, where his tomb may still be
seen, bearing upon it the recumbent figures of himself and his
wife. The knight is fully armed, but wears over his armour his
Alderman’s mantle, and round his neck a collar of suns and roses,
the badge of the House of York.
In the following year, 1476, Crosby House became a palace in
name as well as in reputation, in consequence of the widow of
Sir John Crosby parting with it to Richard, Duke of Gloucester,
afterwards Richard the Third. Then Crosby Place, like the less
important Baynard’s Castle, became the scene of those intrigues
by which the wily Richard obtained the Crown, and must
have been peculiarly convenient to him as a residence, both from
its contiguity to the Tower, where first King Henry VI., and
afterwards the Princes were confined, and from its occupying a
prominent place in the City, where he had influential and doubtless
sincere supporters, and where he was anxious to obtain the suffrages
of the people. The choice of Crosby House as a Palace may
indeed be included among those devices by which Richard achieved
success ; for in its magnificent apartments he was able to hold a
sort of regal state, and having, as Sir Thomas More says, “ lodged
“ hymself in Crosbye’s Place, where, by little and little, all folks
“ drew unto, so that the Protector had the Court, and the King was
“ in a manner left desolate;” he began at once to aspire to the
Crown, which in 1483 was offered to him in the Council Chamber
of Crosby Hall by the Mayor, Sir Thomas Billesden, and a
deputation of citizens.
We are most of us familiar with the story of Richard’s treachery
during his residence at this City Palace, and not a few of us have
learnt by heart that most familiar of all the plays of Shakspeare in
which the story is told. Crosby Hall occupies a conspicuous
position in the drama of Richard the Third, and it is evident that
the Poet had ample opportunities for studying the building itself;—
�5
probably the play was written in the immediate vicinity of the
building, or possibly even next door, for we know from the Parish
Assessments that he was a resident in Saint Helen’s in 1598, and
from the amount of the sum levied must have occupied a house of
some importance.
It is in the Third Act of Richard the Third that the allusions to
Crosby Place occur, and in that most enthralling portion of the
play where the Duke is plotting with awful dissimulation to win at
once a queen and a crown, to both of which he had been a traitor.
It was the last achievement of his triumphant falsehood to induce
Anne to await at Crosby Place his return from the funeral of the
King his father-in-law. The wonderful chain of lies winds up with
the words:—
“ And if thy poor devoted servant may
“ But beg one favour at thy gracious hands,
“ Thou dost confirm his happiness for ever.”
Anne (who is already yielding to his serpent’s tongue), says
“ What is it ?”
and he replies
“ That it may please you leave these sad designs
“ To him that hath most cause to be a mourner,
“ And presently repair to Crosby Place.”
In the following scene the action is still laid in reference to
Crosby Place, where the murderers who have been commissioned
to destroy Clarence in the Tower are to meet Richard after they
have accomplished their evil work.
“ Gloucester—Are you now going to despatch this thing ?
“ First Murderer—We are, my lord ; and come to have the warrant,
That we may be admitted where he is.
“ Gloucester—Well thought upon : I have it here about me.
\Gives Warrant^.
When you have done repair to Crosby Place.”
Again, in the Third Act, where, after the meeting of Gloucester
with the Prince of Wales, the Cardinal, and the nobles in a
street in London, and when Buckingham and Richard send Catesby
to tamper with the wretched Hastings, Gloucester says :—
,
“ Shall we hear from you, Catesby, ere we sleep ?”
“ Catesby—You shall, my lord.”
“ Gloucester—At Crosby Place there you shall find us both.”
During the time of Shakspeare’s residence in the parish, Crosby
Hall was in the occupation of Sir John Spencer, a London mer
chant, known by, what to some people would be the enviable name,
of “ the rich ” Spencer. In 1594 he bought the palace for/'256o,
and afterwards held his Mayoralty there in splendid style, the
celebrated Duke of Sully, then French Ambassador to the English
Court, being one of the guests, who were lodged and entertained
�6
in right royal fashion. Sir John Spencer’s daughter was married
to the first Earl of Northampton, and the wealth of the great
London merchant served to increase the revenues of the succeeding
marquises.
Between the time when the Duke of Gloucester became King
Richard the Third and the year in which Shakspeare wrote his noble
drama, Crosby Hall had been in possession of several masters.
The palace seems at once to have been recovered by the then
Lord Mayor of London as the appropriate residence of the chief
magistrate of the Metropolis, and in 1501 Sir Bartholomew Reade
took possession of it, and during his mayoralty entertained and
lodged the ambassadors who came from.Maximilian of Germany.
The famous Banqueting Hall was in full occupation at this time;
and in reference to the distinguished guests received there,. Stowe
himself thinks one feast worthy of record for its great magnificence.
Fifteen years afterwards (in 1516) we find Sir John Rest installed
at Crosby Hall, after one of the most remarkable “ Lord Mayor’s
Shows” on record, in which there appeared, according to the
veracious chronicler, four giants, one unicorn, one dromedary, one
camel, one ass, one dragon, six hobby-horses, and sixteen naked
boys.
What was the symbolical significance of these remarkable
objects we are not informed, but it may be remembered that the
display had very little moral effect on the London ’prentices, for it
was in that very year that the disturbances began which ended in
the tragedy of what has ever since been known as “ The evil May
day,” when the ’prentices and journeymen determined to assault
the foreign artisans and merchants.
The cry of “ down with the Lombards” was heard on the night
of the 30th of April, when the young men were at buckler play in
Chepe, and the mischief began by an attack on a calender of
worsted, a native of Picardy, who lived near Leadenhall. Very
soon 'a general attack was made in several quarters upon the
foreign dealers and workmen, who fled for their lives, leaving their
goods to be destroyed. The gaol of Newgate was broken open,
and some of the assailants who had been imprisoned there were
released ; the work of destruction went on all night, and when
the May-day morning broke there was still a crowd in. the streets,
especially near the church of St. Andrew Undershaft, which
' occupied an open space in Leadenhall Street, where Lime Street
now stands. Here the “ Great Shaft of Cornhill,” the mighty
maypole, which had given the very church its name, was being
set up, its top reaching above the steeple; but there were no
^Iay-day revels that morning, for the shout of the crowd of rioters
was echoed by an answering shout, and an armed force from the
Tower bore down upon the ’prentices and carried them off to
that stronghold to be tried for their lives. Fifteen unhappy
creatures were executed, and the rest went to Westminster Hall,
half naked and tied together with ropes, each with a halter about
his neck. There they besought the mercy of the King, and were
�7
pardoned. But the first of May, 1517, has ever since been known
as the evil May-day, and the Great Shaft was reared nevermore,
but hung on hooks under the pent houses of Shaft Alley for thirtytwo years, until the Reformation, when it was denounced as an
idol by some zealous preacher, whose hearers, as Stow says, “ after
they had well dined to make themselves strong,” sawed it in
pieces and divided the logs amongst them.
Long before that, however, Crosby Hall had passed into
new hands. No less distinguished a person than Sir Thomas
More, Under Treasurer, and afterwards Lord High Chancellor
of England, became its occupant. Here he received the visits
of Henry VIII., and here he doubtless wrote some of those
works which have contributed so much to his fame. Erasmus,
who was his intimate friend and frequent guest, thus speaks
of the domestic life of the author of “Utopia”:—“With him
“ you might imagine yourself in the academy of Plato ; but I
“ should do injustice to his house by comparing it to the academy
“ of Plato, where numbers and geometrical figures, and sometimes
“ moral virtues, were the subjects of discussion ; it would be more
“ just to call it a school and an exercise of the Christian religion.
“ All its inhabitants, male and female, applied their leisure to
“ liberal studies and profitable reading, although piety was their
“ first care. No wrangling, no idle word, was heard in it; every
“ one did his duty with alacrity, and not without a temperate
“ cheerfulness.” Surely these were the palmy days of Crosby
Hall.
On being made Speaker of the House of Commons in 1523, Sir
Thomas More sold Crosby Hall to his “dear friend” Antonio
Bonvici, a merchant of Lucca, to whom the Chancellor sent that
well-known letter from the Tower, written with a piece of charcoal
the night before his execution. After the dissolution of the convent
of Saint Helene, Bonvici purchased the property of the King for
^207 : 18 :4, and so Crosby Hall became a freehold, though not
much to his immediate advantage, for in 1549 he forfeited the
property “by illegally departing the kingdom,” in consequence of
the persecution, and Henry VIII., with his usual indifference to
the rights of others, granted it to Lord Daryce of Chule. This
nobleman, however, was induced, for “ divers good causes,” to
restore it to its proper owner on the accession of Queen Mary in
1553. It remained without any remarkable change until 1560,
when we find it occupied by German Cioll, who had married a
cousin of Sir Thomas Gresham. A weekly bequest of this lady,
Mistress Cycillia Cioll, is still distributed in Saint Helen’s Church.
Again, in 1566, CroSby Hall changed hands, and became the
residence of Aiderman Bond, the inscription on whose tomb in
Saint Helen’s Church describes him as “a Merchant Adventurer,
“ and most famous in his age for his great adventures by both sea
“ and land.”
It was at Crosby Hall that D’Assenleville, the Spanish Ambas
sador, was entertained by this civic Sindbad, and after the Alder
�8
man’s death, when his sons occupied the palace in 1586, the Danish
Ambassador, Ramelius, was made an honoured guest there, and
treated with all the sumptuous hospitality that belonged to the
Elizabethan age. It was during the time of “ the rich Spencer,”
however, that Crosby Hall was probably most distinguished, for
the splendour of that mayoralty is traditional; and we might, in
imagination, repeople the old- hall with the brilliant guests that
came and went; their very names a roll-call of the history of
England during the period of England’s growing fame and honour.
Raleigh, Spencer, Sidney, Grenville, perhaps Drake and Hawkins,
and the rest of those great men, all of whom were in sympathy
with “ merchant adventurers,” in days when Richard Hakluyt was
at Oxford, and Edward Osborne, clothworker and ancestor of the
Dukes of Leeds, had but six years before served his mayoralty,
with Spencer for sheriff, and the mercantile navy of Great Britain
had founded the empire of the sea. It was six years after the
defeat of the Spanish Armada that Sir John Spencer lived at
Crosby Hall. Need one say more in order to conjure up a scene
that may well make the heart heave and the eye brighten ? And
yet four years afterwards a man lived close by whose name is more
potent than that of any in that brilliant assembly; a man who
stands first, not only in the muster-roll of that period of English
history, but who stands in the very foremost rank among the
thinkers of all time,—William Shakspeare. The great dramatist
had at that time become a joint proprietor in the theatre at
Bankside, and doubtless found it convenient to live in this quiet
courtly nook of the city.
In 1603 Shakspeare probably assisted at the entertainment of
the Ambassadors from Holland and Zealand, who lodged at
Crosby Hall at that time, but in 1609 he had gone to live at
Stratford, while his friend, Ben Jonson, was in London, perhaps
waiting on the Dowager Countess of Pembroke, who then occupied
the City Palace. Most of us remember Jonson’s celebrated epitaph
on this distinguished woman :—
“ Underneath this sable hearse
Lies the subject of all verse,
Sidney’s sister, Pembroke’s mother :
Death ! ere thou canst find another,
Good and fair, and wise as she,
Time shall throw a dart at thee.”
Jonson, who survived Shakspeare, was perhaps a guest at
Crosby Hall when, in 1630, it came into possession of Spencer,
Earl of Northampton, who inherited it by the marriage of his
father with the only daughter of the Sir John Spencer already
referred to. This nobleman was killed .fighting by the side of
Charles I. at the battle of Hopton Heath, in 164.2. He had then
leased Crosby Hall to Sir John Langham, Sheriff of London,
and the king’s cause having been defeated the Great Hall was used
as a prison in which royalists were detained for trial. An order of
the House of Commons, dated 7th December, 1642, directs the
�9
removal of ten prisoners from Crosby Place to Gresham College,
and thence, on the 19th, to Lambeth House. The vicissitudes of
this grand old building may be said to have commenced from that
period, though strange to say it escaped the great calamity of the
fire of London ; the house alone being injured, and the hall itself
remaining unscathed.
For the next twelve years there is nothing very remarkable to
record. The “ Merry Monarch” spent his subjects’ money merrily
in the midst of his “ merry Court,” and the City lost its old
influence. All England lost its influence, and public honour and
virtue seemed about to wither under that “ Merry Monarch ” of
misrule. It must be said in Charles’s favour, however, that he
was no persecutor, and there was a leaven in the nation which
did suffice to leaven the whole lump, a leaven associated with
the word patriotism, but which will be also found in the lives
and works of those eminent teachers, preachers, and politicians,
known as the Puritan Divines.
It is in connection with these that we discover Crosby Hall
in 1672 with a floor put into the Great Hall, so that the upper
part of it, from the level of the minstrel’s gallery, might be
used for a Nonconformist meeting, under licence of the indulgence
act. For ninety-seven years it was devoted to this purpose, and
during that time twelve different ministers succeeded each other,
some of them men of high distinction indeed, the first being
Thomas Watson, previously Rector of Saint Stephen’s, Walbrook,
and the author of the tract “ Heaven taken by Storm,” which
is said to have been the means of the conversion of the celebrated
Colonel Gardiner. A numerous and wealthy congregation assem
bled at Crosby Hall, and Thomas Watson was succeeded by
the more celebrated Stephen Charnock.
The ministers who officiated there after Charnock were Samuel
Slater, M.A., John Reynolds, Daniel Alexander, Benjamin Gros
venor, D.D., Samuel Wright, D.D., John Barker, Clerk Oldsworth,
Edmund Calamy, Jun., John Hodge, D.D., and Richard Jones.
Two years after the adaptation of the building to this purpose,
that is to say, in 1674, the dwelling house, which adjoined the
hall, and occupied the present site of Crosby Square, was burnt
down, but the hall remained still uninjured.
For some time afterwards the grand old building remained unas
sociated with any especial public event, although the Mercury of
May 23rd, 1678, advertises a public sale at Crosby Hall, where
“ ye late general post office was kept,” the articles for sale including
“ tapestry hangings, a good chariot, and a black girl about fifteen
“ years of age.” In 1692 the property was purchased by the family
in whose possession it still remains, and the lower part of the hall
was let as a wholesale warehouse ; and in 1700 it seemed about to
take rank again as an important public building, for the Council
Chamber and Throne Room were occupied by those “ Merchant
Adventurers” trading to the East Indies, who afterwards formed the
East India Company, and obtained their privileges by Royal Charter.
�IO
This was probably only during the building of the India House,
however, for we hear little of Crosby Hall until sixty-nine years
afterwards, when it was disused as a meeting house, the last sermon
being preached on the ist of October, 1769, by the Rev. Richard
Jones, the congregation removing to Maze Pond.
There was indeed great fear that this magnificent hall would be
utterly wrecked, for it was let to private individuals whose adapta
tions were likely to do it serious damage. It was greatly owing to
the public spirit of Miss Hackett, a lady who lived beside it, that
this almost unique example of domestic Gothic architecture was
ultimately preserved. In 1831 this lady made strenuous efforts for
its conservation, assisted by a few of the residents, some of whom
still remain in the neighbourhood; and in 1836 it was reinstated
and partially restored by public subscription, after which it was
re-opened by the Lord Mayor, W. T. Copeland, Esq., M.P., a
banquet in the old English style being held on the occasion. In
1842 the entire premises were occupied by a Literary and Scientific
Institute, under the presidency of the Rev. C. Mackenzie, the
hall being let from time to time for Lectures and Concerts ;
but in i860 this society came to an end, and the place was then
taken by Messrs. H. R. Williams & Co., the well-known Wine
Merchants. In Mr. Williams’s hands Crosby Hall underwent
no damaging alteration, and although it was used for purposes
of business due regard was had to its historical reputation and
its intrinsic beauty. It is only just to add that its late occupiers
fully appreciated and carefully preserved it from injury; but we
may be forgiven for saying that there were no conditions under
which it was possible really toz restore it to its original beauty,
except those which included its restoration to its original purpose.
We trust that both these objects have been attained, and that as
the City Banqueting Hall of the present the public will recognise
and admire the Crosby HAll of the past.
�CROSBY HALL
THE RESTORATION OF THE GREAT BANQUETING
ROOM, THE THRONE ROOM, AND THE
COUNCIL CHAMBER.
T is believed that the restoration of this magnificent
building to its original purpose of a Great Banqueting
'
Hall will secure it from decay or demolition, and pre
serve to the City one of the most attractive objects
which have been spared by the necessities of modern
innovation. At the same time by securing Crosby
Hall as a Public Dining Establishment, the Proprietor
is satisfied that he will be able to meet one of the
most pressing and constant requirements of City life,
by enabling employes engaged daily in mercantile pursuits to
obtain their principal meal in comfort and even with elegance,
at a price consistent with the strictest economy.
It has hitherto been almost impossible to provide even for a large
number of customers a dinner which should combine excellence of
quality, prompt and comfortable service, convenient and elegant
appointments, and at the same time should not cost more than the
majority of those who wished to avail themselves of it could afford.
The difficulty has arisen first from the fact that the City Dinner
hour is mostly the middle of the day, and in connection with this,
that it is almost impossible to obtain spacious premises on a
“ground floor” that are suitable for a Dining Hall.
The proprietor of Crosby Hall has overcome these disadvantages
by securing this splendid and spacious building, and he is confident
that long and constant experience will enable him to inaugurate a
new system of City Dinners which may it is to be hoped supersede
the delay and discomfort to which those who frequent many of the
public dining rooms are so often subjected. The reinstatement
and restoration have been completed by Messrs. Wallace, Gordon
& Co., under the superintendence of Messrs. F. & H. Francis, the
eminent Architects. The decorations and stained glass are the
work of Mr. Alexander Gibbs, of Bedford Square.
I
THE LOBBY
is reached by the entrance in Bishopsgate Street, the Wine Office
occupying the niche on the left of the doorway. This entrance
�12
has been entirely refitted in a manner worthy of the building to
which it leads, from designs by the Architects, while the decorations
of the ceiling are considered very fine examples of that particular
branch of art.
THE COUNCIL CHAMBER.
This fine and lofty apartment is entirely devoted to the Great
Luncheon and Refreshment Bar which nearly surrounds it,
and the ample accommodation afforded by this arrangement enables
the proprietor to consult the convenience of the large number of
his customers who dine at home, but require light refreshment in
the middle of the day. The Council Chamber is one of the
handsomest Halls in the City of London; the historical wall
paintings are themselves worth a visit, and from the large space at
disposal the surrounding counters, even when they are fully occupied
by gentlemen at luncheon, leave complete access to
THE GREAT BANQUETING HALL,
A large and lofty building which is in reality “ Crosby Hall.”
This room is unequalled in London for beauty, its noble height
and superb Gothic roof being in perfect accordance with its large
proportions and those beautiful architectural decorations which
Lave been preserved and restored.
As a matter of policy the proprietor might have been induced
to fit this truly grand Hall with a series of “ boxes,” but to use a
common expression he “ could not find it in his heart to do it.”
He believes, however, that he has best consulted the comfort and
the tastes of his customers by furnishing it with dining tables and
chairs of a fashion in accordance with the general design of the
building; and he sincerely hopes that even in the table appoint
ments the same character has been preserved as far as is consistent
with complete convenience.
THE THRONE ROOM,
though of less noble proportions, is in some respects more beautiful
than the Banqueting Hall, and is decorated in the same style
of architecture. Its ancient ornamentation has been carefully pre
served, and as few adaptations as possible have been introduced.
It is devoted to the convenience of those who desire to enjoy select
dinners ;—select, that is to say, not by the superiority of the viands,
for these are of one uniform quality throughout the Establishment;—
but apart from the greater business of the large Hall, and with a
slight superiority in the appointments of the table and the general
luxury of the service.
Both here and. in the great Banqueting Hall there is a large
Grill for supplying Hot Chops and Steaks ; but the capacious
fire-places have been so adapted as to keep out all smell of
cooking from the rooms. -
�X
■
\
amfnrtnblp and lofty apartment,
little abov&.and at the
back of\he Throne Rocm. Here everi^comfort ma^be found.
The table\are supplied wi Chess, Draughts, and thX leading
Periodicals \the attendant spd^s French arf^ German, as^vell as
English ; an
ea, Coffee, or a
at the same pri
as at the Lu
one uniform quality and of guarantee! excellence!
THE LAVATORY AND RETIRING <OOMS
for Gentlemen are near the Smoking Room, and will be found
replete with every accommodation, including clean towels, and all
the usual accessories.
THE LADIES’ BOUDOIR AND RETIRING ROOMS
are in a separate part of the building, and accessible only to Ladies,
by a distinct staircase leading from the lobby in Bishopsgate Street,
The proprietor of Crosby Hall believes that Ladies dining in the
City will appreciate the comfort of other bever&ae in the Throne
a select table will be s
Room or the Banqueting Hall, especially as waitresses and not
heon Bar.
waiters are employed. The Boudoir and Lavatories are ad
mirably contrived, and are furnished with every convenience for
the toilette, under the charge of a special female attendant.
THE KITCHENS AND STORE ROOMS
occupy the upper part of the building, so that the odour of the
preparation of food will not enter the public part of the Establish
ment. The whole of the culinary apparatus has been fitted by
Messrs. Benham & Sons, whose names are a guarantee of efficiency
in this department. With respect to the kitchens the proprietor
desires to say a word to his customers on the subject of a very
prevalent fallacy. It is frequently surmised that the soups, stews,
ragouts, &c., in large dining establishments are helped out with, if
not composed of, the scraps and remainders from the dining tables.
The proprietor believes that this opinion is altogether unfounded
as far as it relates to any of the more respectable dining rooms.
It is true as regards the cheaper Parisian and Viennese Restaurants,
and the use of such ingredients may be possible in the inferior
French cuisine; but it would be quite impossible in the broths,
stews, and soups most in request in England.
The mere mention of this subject involves the announcement
that all the remainders of food at Crosby Hall will be carefully
and cleanly set aside, and since they afford a good and nutritious
material for certain kinds of soup, hash, or stew, arrangements
have been made for their proper distribution to the poor, either
for “ relief kitchens,” or to help to feed hungry children.
The proprietor of Crosby Hall invites his customers to inspect
the kitchens of the Establishment, that they may see for them
selves in what mariner the food is prepared. At any reasonable
�time he will be glad to accompany them all over the Building, and
as Crosby Hall is the state part of one of the most interesting
of our old English Palaces, he will at any time be happy to receive
visitors, quite irrespective of their being also customers.
PROVISIONS.
It has often been asked why the cheap, varied, and well-served
dinners of the great French Restaurants cannot be imitated in
London, and the question is one well worth considering, especially
as so many of us had an opportunity of making experiments during
our visit to the Paris Exhibition.
The proprietor of Crosby Hall has given the subject his most
careful attention, and with considerable knowledge of the great
French and German Establishments, as well as a long experience
of English tastes and habits, has come to the conclusion that
while much may be done in adopting the methods of “ service,”
the variety of choice, and the regard to economy observed in
the best foreign Restaurants, a complete revolution would have
to take place in English tastes before they could accommodate
themselves to an ordinary Parisian dinner, day after day.
During a week’s visit to a foreign Capital where everything,
including the climate, is new and strange, and where that very
newness constitutes the great holiday charm, we may thoroughly
enjoy a series of experimental meals, but it would be quite another
thing to adopt the same way of living at home. Indeed it is quite
certain that the few distinctly French and.German Restaurants
which have been established in London, either depend upon
their native customers, or soon adopt a “ Carte ” including several
of our well-known English dishes.
At Crosby Hall, therefore, there will be a Bill of Fare
containing entrees and viands of a recherche character, but in which
the simplicity of an English dinner will be most obvious. The
employment of first-rate cooks, and the completeness of all the
culinary arrangements, will however ensure the best method of
preparing every article of food, so that the superior quality of our
national materiel will have the advantage that properly belongs to it.
BEVERAGES.
The system, too often adopted, of urging every customer to
partake of wine or ale with his dinner, is so repulsive, that the
proprietor of Crosby Hall wishes it to be thoroughly understood
that nobody will be expected to order anything “ for the good of
the “ house.” Both the Luncheon Bar and the dining tables are
supplied with pure filtered water, and as all the Wines, Spirits, and
Malt Liquors are of the best description, they will recommend
themselves. Tea and coffee are always ready at the Refreshment
Counter, as well as the usual aerated waters.
The Ale and Beer are supplied precisely, as they are furnished by
the best brewers, and will be so drawn as to ensure their being in
fine condition, clear and sparkling.
�i5
With regard to Wii^es it is necessary to say a few words, not in
the way of advertisement, for “good Wine needs no Bush but in
order to call attention to the fact that the proprietor is determined
to give the public the full benefit of the remission of the duty by
selling Light Wine of excellent character and perfect purity at a
price to bring it within the means of all his customers. He has
made arrangements by which a Bordeaux of excellent vintage,
pure, sound, and of admirable quality, can be supplied at fifteen
pence a bottle, or eightpence the hfllf bottle ; a large glass of the same
Wine may be had for twopenc£, and threepence is the charge for a glass
of sound, pure, and wholesome Sherry. The Crosby Hall Wines
are specialities to which reference may be made without undue
praise, since the prices at which they are offered preclude any very
remunerative profit. The proprietor relies on their excellent
quality for obtaining a large demand, and he is confident that they
will be fully appreciated.
First-class vintage Wines will be found in the Wine List, many
of them of rare selection and great maturity; while the Spirits and
Liqueurs are of the most celebrated brands.
It is necessary to mention that the system of giving Standard
measure has been adopted at Crosby Hall. Every ale and beer
glass in the Establishment holds an imperial half-pint. Draught
wines will also be served by Imperial Measure. Bottled wines will
be brought up in the original bottles by the Cellarer, who will not
decant them unless he be requested to do so.
ATTENDANCE.
The system adopted at Crosby Hall being designed to overcome
one of the most serious difficulties of daily occurrence to those who
are engaged in the City, it became necessary to ensure, not only a
good and economical dinner, but such prompt and careful attendance
as should at once save valuable time and secure general comfort.
Careful consideration of this subject resulted in the conviction
that in such a large and at the same time such a compact
establishment an unusual opportunity would arise for the employ
ment of women in one of the very few avocations which remain
open to them in this country.
■ It is obvious that in no occupation can they be more properly
employed than in that kind of domestic attendance which includes
waiting at table, and it was therefore determined to employ
Waitresses instead of Waiters at Crosby Hall.
This is not mentioned as a first experiment, for there are already
establishments where the plan has been partially adopted, and has
been found eminently successful. The proprietor of Crosby Hall
has had considerable opportunities of obtaining the opinions of
gentlemen dining in the City, and they bear almost unanimous
testimony to the civility, quietude, and obliging attention, as well as
to the promptitude of Waitresses wherever they have been employed.
It only remains to say that all the attendants at Crosby Hall
have furnished ample evidence of character and competency; and
�i6
as they will be engaged fully in their daily business no doubt
is entertained that they, will be treated with that respect and
consideration which gentlemen accord to the female attendants
whose duty it may be to wait on them at the houses at which they
may be invited guests.
As every one employed at Crosby Hall receives liberal wages,
fees for attendance are not permitted. A definite charge is made
of a penny for each person in the Banqueting Hall, and of
twopence in the Throne Room, and will be received with the
amount of the bill as the customer leaves the Establishment.
It is requested that any negligence on the part of the attendants
be at once mentioned to the proprietor, who will guard against its
recurrence.
WHOLESALE WINE DEPARTMENT.
As the Wines supplied at Crosby Hall,—and particularly the
light Wines, to which allusion has already been made,—are highly
appreciated by a numerous class of customers, arrangements have
been made for supplying them, either by the single bottle or in any
larger quantity, for home consumption. To suit the requirements
of a large section of the public a single bottle is charged only at
the same rate as at per dozen. Orders given at the Wine Office
in the lobby at the entrance in Bishopsgate Street will receive
immediate and careful attention.
PURVEYING DEPARTMENT.
As the provision for an establishment on the scale of Crosby
Hall is necessarily very considerable, it is intended to give
customers the advantage to be derived from large purchases in the
various Metropolitan Markets, by supplyift^ them, whenever they
please, with meat, poultry, game, and other articles of consumption
for their householdSx^at such a merely nominal addition to the
wholesale cost as wilXcover the expense of packing, &c. Any
gentlemen wishing to secure this advantage have only to give a
week’s notice of what will oe required for the following week, and
they will be punctually and carefully supplied. It is purely unne
cessary to remark that such an arrangement will enable^urchasers
to effect a considerable saving during the year; and though the
proprietor of Crosby Hall has n© desire to interfere with the
legitimate profits of other tradespeople, the present disparity
between the wholesale and retail prices of all description^ of
provisions is ample reason for his givmg his customers thbse
advantages to which they are justly entitled.
In conclusion,
“ When you have done, repair to Crosby Place.”—Shakspeare.
Marchant Singer & Co., Printers, Ingram Court, Fenchurch Street, E.C.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Crosby Hall: the ancient city place and banqueting hall, it's history & restoration
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Frederick Gordon & Company
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [London]
Collation: 16 p. ; 21 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Printed by Marchant, Singer & Co., London E.C. Annotations in ink; some paragraphs crossed through. Date of publication and author attribution from WorldCat.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[s.l.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1876?]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5568
Subject
The topic of the resource
History
Architecture
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Crosby Hall: the ancient city place and banqueting hall, it's history & restoration), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Crosby Hall
London
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/bfbc17ef175606c8b608e4ce975f4e2a.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=nSk7izz0krM04YC7fYKRTxlvCRYRpoDywVDUrOsz605r4EdnEzDXdEhdKpMxnMHvM9%7EXMf%7E%7E3bYDeKwPoF7OLIp8dtQN4aL4KHjW6IoYAmd8fpZR2MmSsSK0u8nY-NH7Qru56OWFzqhiZm79UF2QR%7EPT6S3Bc8MgV6YSpMxzAB43uTWuPQOA4Uq%7Efv8DDiDL%7EwNJlQr5IQP4v6EkxwiMbiYu8YrpxBXnXcTabwFto0eVXrEUwH8-ZgGGla-ixtLMjtKwahVJbHiv0ccc1gQrmNT-mdeuMg-uAquQBxsegbn09I0uH47nSz0VrzN8hmTjK4yIL%7E4zRM-rN34s%7Eu75og__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
4b81ce2b4db8670fb5847029737a887c
PDF Text
Text
NATIONAL SECULAR SOCIETY
THE
MEANING OF HISTORY.
BY
,
FREDERIC HARRISON, M.A.
LONDON:
TEUBNER AND CO., 60, PATERNOSTER ROW.
AlDCCCLXII.
��WUL....JL
.
. ,:i- -i*
THE
MEANING OF HISTORY.
too States.
BY
FREDERIC HARRISON, M.A.
.LONDON:
TREBNER AND CO., 60, PATERNOSTER ROW.
mdccclxii.
�HABBILD,
�PREFACE.
contain two lectures recently addressed
to a mixed audience in London, as an introduction to a
course of teaching in History, which was subsequently com
menced by the writer. They are printed (nearly as they
were spoken) at the request and chiefly for the use of
those who heard them. It will be seen that they belong
to the most elementary kind of popular instruction, and
they will have little interest for the general reader, much
less for the regular student of history. I was led to
attempt the course of lectures, and afterwards to print
these pages, by my conviction that the first want of our
time is the spread amongst the intelligent body of our
people of solid materials to form political and social
opinion. To stimulate an interest in history seems to me
the only means of giving a fresh meaning to popular
education, and a higher intelligence to popular opinion.
I am aware that nearly every sentence in this outline,
were it not too slight, might give room for serious question,
and possibly for severe criticism. But if opposite opinions
are not noticed, they have still been carefully weighed.
If I have spoken of many still debated topics almost
as though they were decided, it is only because in such a
plan as this any sort of controversy is out of place, not
that I forget or slight all that has been urged on the other
side. But discussion, like research, must have an end
The following pages
�PEEFAGE.
somewhere, and the great need now is not to increase bnt
to use our stores of historical learning. After all, the
only real answer to any theory of history, professing to
be complete and not manifestly inconsistent, is the pro
duction of a counter theory at once more complete and
consistent. The view of history here put forward it will
be seen is in no sense my own. It is drawn with some
care from the various writings of Auguste Comte. Al
though far from being able to adopt all his philosophical
and religious conclusions, I am persuaded that the concep
tion of the past, which is embodied in his works, and the
political and social principles of which that conception
forms the basis, point out the sole path towards all future
improvement.
F. H.
�THE MEANING OH HISTORY.
LECTURE8.
THE USE OF HISTORY.
The question for which we are about to seek an answer
is this :—What is the nse of historical knowledge ? Is an
acquaintance with the events, with the men, with the ideas
of the past, of any real use to us in these days ? has it any
practical bearing upon the happiness and conduct of each
of us in life ?
Now, it must strike us at once, that two very different,
nay, contradictory answers may be given, in fact, are very
frequently given, to this question. But, opposite as they
are, I hardly know from which I more thoroughly dissent.
Some persons tell you roundly, that there is no use at all.
We are, they would say with Bacon, the mature age of the
world ; with us lies the gathered wisdom of ages. To waste
our time in studying exploded fallacies, in reproducing
worn-out forms of society, or in recalling men who were
only conspicuous because they lived amidst a crowd of
ignorant or benighted barbarians, is to wander from the
path of progress, and to injure and not to improve our
understandings. What can be the good to us, they ask,
of the notions of men who thought that the sun went round
the earth; who would have taken a steam-engine for a
dragon or a hippogriff, and had never even heard of the
rights of man ? On the other hand, the other class of
B
�2
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
persons would say of historical knowledge, that it has
fifty different uses. It is very amusing to hear what
curious things they did in by-gone times. It is highly
entertaining to know about forefathers of our own who
were nearly as funny as Chinese. Then, again, it is very
instructive as a study of character; we see in history the
working of the human mind and will. Besides, it is neces
sary to avoid the blunders they committed in past days :
there we collect a store of moral examples, and of political
maxims; we learn to watch the signs of the times, and to
be prepared for situations whenever they return. And it
cannot be doubted, they add, that it is a branch of know
ledge, and all knowledge is good. To know history, they
conclude, is to be well-informed, is to be familiar with some
of the finest examples of elegant and brilliant writing.
Now, between the two, those who tell us plainly that
history is of no use, and those who tell us vaguely that
history is of fifty uses, I do not see much to choose. I
thoroughly disagree with them both, and of the two I
would rather deal with the former. Their opposition, at
any rate, is concentrated into a single point, and may be
met by a single and a direct answer. To them I would
say, Are you consistent ? Do you not in practice follow
another course ? In rejecting all connection with the facts
and ideas of the past, are you not cutting the ground from
under your own feet ? You are an active politician and a
staunch friend of the principles of the liberal party. What
are the traditional principles of a party but a fraction,
small, no doubt, but a sensible fraction of history ? You
are a warm friend of free trade. Well, but free trade has
a history of its own ; its strength lies in the traditions of a
great victory achieved by right over might. You believe
in the cause of progress. But what is the cause of pro
gress but the extension of that civilization, of that change
for the better which we have all witnessed or have learned
to recognize as an established fact ? Your voice is always
�THE USE OF HISTORY.
3
heard for freedom. Well, but do you never appeal to
Magna Charta, to the Bill of Rights, to the Reform Bill,
to American Independence, or the French Revolution ?
You will suffer no outrage on the good name of England.
You are ready to cover the seas with armaments to uphold
the national greatness. But what is the high name of
England if it is not the memory of all the deeds by which,
in peace or war, on sea or land, England has held her own
amongst the foremost of the earth ? Nor is it true that you
show no honours to the men of the past, are not guided by
their ideas, and do not dwell upon their lives, their work,
and their characters. The most turbulent revolutionary
that ever lived, the most bitter hater of the past, finds
many to admire. It may be Cromwell, it may be Rousseau,
■or Voltaire, it may be Robert Owen, it may be Thomas
Paine, but some such leader each will have ; his memory
he will revere, his influence he will admit, his principles he
will contend for. Thus it will be in every sphere of active
life. No serious politician can fail to recognize that, howover strongly he repudiates antiquity, and rebels against the
tyranny of custom, still he himself only acts freely and con
sistently when he is following the path trodden by earlier
leaders, and is working with the current of the principles
in which he throws himself, and in which he has confidence.
For him, then, it is not true that he rejects all common
purpose with what has gone before. It is a question only
of selection and of degree. To some he clings, the rest he
rejects. Some history he does study, and finds in it both
profit and enjoyment.
Or, again, let us suppose such a man to be interested in
any study whatever, either in promoting general education,
or eager to acquire knowledge for himself. Well, he will
find, at every step he takes, that he is appealing to the
authority of the past, is using the ideas of former ages,
and carrying out principles established by ancient, but not
forgotten thinkers. If he studies geometry he will find
�4
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
the first text book put into his hand was written by a
Greek two thousand years ago. If he takes up grammar,
he will be only repeating rules taught by Roman school
masters and professors. Or is he interested in art ? He
will find the same thing in a far greater degree. He goes
to the Museum to see the stuffed birds or the fossil reptiles,,
and he walks into a building- which is a good imitation of a
Greek temple. He goes to the Houses of Parliament tohear a debate, and he enters a building which is a bad imi
tation of a mediaeval town-hall. Or, again, I might say to
him, does he never read his Shakespeare or Milton ; feel
no respect for the opinions of Bacon or of Hume, or Adam
Smith ? I know that he does. I know that such a man
the moment he takes a warm interest in anything—in
politics, in education, in science, in art, or in social im
provement—the moment that his intelligence is kindled,
and his mind begins to work, that moment he is striving
to throw himself into the stream of some previous human
efforts, to identify himself with others, and to try to under
stand and to follow the path of future progress which has
been traced out for him by the leaders of his own party or
school. Therefore, I say that such a man is not consistent
when he says that history is of no use to him. He does
direct his action by what he believes to be the course laid
out before him; he does follow the guidance of certain
teachers whom he respects.
I have then only to ask him on what grounds he rests his
selection; why he chooses some and rejects all others; how
he knows for certain that no other corner of the great field
of history will reward the care of the ploughman, or bring
forth good seed. In spite of himself, he will find himself
surrounded in every act and thought of life by a power
which is too strong for him. If he chooses simply to stag
nate, he may, perhaps, dispense with any actual reference
to the past; but the moment he begins to act, to live, or to
think, he must use the materials presented to him, and,
�THE USE OF HISTORY.
5
so far as he is a member of a civilized community, so far
as he is an Englishman, so far as he is a rational man, he
can as little free himself from the influence of former gene
rations as he can free himself from his personal identity ;
unlearn all that he has learnt; cease to be what his pre
vious life has made him, and blot out of his memory all
recollection whatever.
Let us suppose for a moment that any set of men could
succeed in sweeping away from them all the influences of
past ages, and everything that they had not themselves
discovered or produced. Suppose that all knowledge of
the gradual steps of civilization, of the slow process of
perfecting the arts of life and the natural sciences were
blotted out; suppose all memory of the efforts and strug
gles of earlier generations, and of the deeds of great men,
were gone ; all the landmarks of history; all that has dis
tinguished each country, race, or city, in past times from
others ; all notion of what man had done, or could do ; of
his many failures, of his successes, of his hopes; suppose,
for a moment, all the books, all the traditions, all the
buildings of past ages, to vanish off the face of the earth,
and with them the institutions of society, all political forms,
all principles of politics, all systems of thought, all daily
customs, all familiar arts ; suppose the most deep-rooted
and most sacred of all our institutions gone ; suppose that
the family and home, property, and justice, were strange
ideas without meaning—in a word, that all the customs
which surround us each from birth to death—aye, and
beyond death, in the grave—were blotted out; suppose a
race of men whose minds, by a paralytic stroke of fate had
suddenly been deadened to every recollection, to whom the
•whole world was new—can we imagine, if we can imagine
it, a condition of such utter helplessness, confusion, and
misery—such a race might retain their old powers of mind
and of activity, nay, both might be increased tenfold, and
yet what would it profit them ? Can we conceive such a
�6
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
race acting together, living together, for one hour ? They
would have everything to create. Would any two agree to
adopt the same custom, and could they live without any ?
They would have all the arts, all the sciences, to- reconstruct
anew ; and how would their tenfold intellect help them
there ? Even with minds of the highest order it would be
impossible to think, for the world would present one vast
chaos; even with the most amazing powers of activity,
they would fall back exhausted from the task of recon
structing, reproducing everything around them. Had they
the wisest teachers or the highest social or moral purposes,
they would all be lost and wasted in an interminable strife,
and continual difference ; for family, town, property, society,
country, nay, why not language itself, would be things
which each would be left to create for himself, and each
would create in a different manner. It would realize, in
deed, the old fable of the tower of Babel ■ and the insane
pride of self be followed by shameful confusion and dis
persion, and a race with ten times the intellect, twenty
times the powers, and fifty times the virtues of any race
that ever lived on earth would end, within a generation, in
a state of hopeless barbarism; the earth would return tothe days of primeval forests and swamps, and man descend
almost to the level of the monkey and the beaver.
Now, if this be true, if we are so deeply indebted and
so indissolubly bound to preceding ages, if all our hopes of
the future depend on a sound understanding of the past, I
cannot fancy any knowledge more important, nay, so im
portant, as the knowledge of the way in which this civiliza
tion has been built up. If at once the destiny of our race
and the daily action of each of us are so completely directed
by it, surely the useful existence of each depends much upon
a right estimate of that which has so constant an influenceover him, will be advanced as he works with the working of
that civilization, above him, and around him, will be checked
as he opposes it; it depends upon this that he mistakes none
�THE USE OE HISTORY.
7
of the elements that go to make up that civilization as a
whole, and sees them in their due relation and harmony.
And now this brings me to that second class of objec
tors of whom I spoke; those who, far from denying the
interest of the events of the past, far from seeing no use
at all in their study, are only too ready in discovering a
multitude of reasons for it, and at seeing in it a variety of
incongruous purposes. If they tell us that it furnishes us
with parallels when similar events occur, I should say that
similar events never do and never can occur in history.
The history of man offers one unbroken chain of constant
progress and change, in which no single situation is ever
reproduced. The story of the world is played out like a
drama in many acts and scenes, not like successive games
of chess, in which the pieces meet, combat, and manoeuvre
for a time, and then the board is cleared for another trial,
and they are replaced in their original positions. Political
maxims drawn crudely from history may do more harm
than good. You may justify anything by a pointed example
in history. It will show you instances of triumphant
tyranny and triumphant tyrannicide. You may find in it
excuses for any act or any system, What is true of one
country is wholly untrue of another, What led to a cer- tain result in one age, leads to a wholly opposite result in
another. Then as to character, if the sole object of study
ing history is to see in it the workings of the human heart,
why that is far better studied in the fictitious creations of '
the great masters of character, in Shakespeare, in Moliere,
in Fielding, and Scott. Macbeth and Richard are as true
to nature as any name in history, and give us an impres
sion of desperate ambition more vivid than the tale of any
despot in ancient or modern times. Besides, if we read
history only to find in it picturesque incident or subtle
shades of character, we run as much chance of stumbling
on the worthless and the curious as the noble and the
great. A Hamlet is a study in interest perhaps exceeding.
�THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
all others in fiction or in fact, but we shall hardly find that
Hamlets have stamped their trace very deep in the history
of mankind. There are few lives in all human story more
romantic than that of Alcibiades, and none more base.
Some minds find fascination in the Popish plots of Titus
Oates, where the interest centres round a dastardly ruffian,
The bullies, the fops, the cut-throats, and the Jezebels who
crowded the courts of the Stuarts and the Georges, have
been consigned to permanent infamy in libraries of learned
and of brilliant works. Brilliant and ingenious writing,
alas, has been the bane of history; it has degraded its
purpose, and perverted many of its uses. Histories, aye,
famous histories, have been written, which are little but
minute pictures of scoundrelism and folly triumphant.
Wretches, who if alive now would be consigned to the
gallows or the hulks, have only to take, as it is said, a place
in history, and generations after generations of learned
men will pore over their lives, collect then- letters, theft
portraits, or their books, search out every vile fact in theft
lives with prurient inquisitiveness, and chronicle their ras
calities in twenty volumes. Such stories, some may say,
have a human interest! Well, so has the Newgate Calendar
a human interest of a certain kind. Why, I should like to
ask, is it supposed to show a low taste to enjov the ex
ploits of Dick Turpin and Jonathan Wild, and yet it should
be thought a highly refined and useful pursuit to be deep
in the mysteries of all the masquerades in which some
crowned wretch like Charles II. or Louis XV. passed his
nothingness ? Brilliant writing, indeed, is a most delusive
guide. In search of an effective subject for a telling pic
ture, men have wandered into strange and dismal haunts.
We none of us choose our friends on such a plan. Why,
then, should we choose thus the friends round whom our
recollections are to centre ? We none of us wrish to be
intimate with a man simply because he is a picturesquelooking villain, nor do we bring to our firesides men who
�THE USE OF HISTORY.
9
have the reputation of being the loudest braggarts or
keenest sharpers of their time. Well, let it be the same in
our reading’. Let us drive out from about us those whose
only merit is that they are strange or picturesque. Let
not our histories be polluted by their presence, let not
these unholy figures intrude into the worthy fellowship of
the good and great of former days, who we may almost
fancy sit “holding high converse” in grave and solemn
conclave together. No, history read upon such a plan is
worse than nothing. You are quite right if you pass by
untouched these piles of memoirs of the unmemorable—
these lives of those who never can be said to have lived.
Pass them all by in contempt and pity—these riotings
and intrigues, and affectations of worthless men and worth
less ages. Better to know nothing of the past than to
know only its follies, though set forth in eloquent language
and with attractive anecdote. What good can come of
such a knowledge ? What can it profit you in your daily
life, how are you a better or a happier man, because
you know the names of all the kings that ever lived, or
let me say rather existed, and the catalogue of all their
whims and vices, and a minute list of their particular
weaknesses, with all their fools, buffoons, mistresses, and
valets ? You had better learn the Peerage by heart, and
know the names of the grandfathers and grandmothers of
our hereditary rulers. Why not be able to repeat the
■Court Circular? Why is not such knowledge just as
human, and just as valuable, and far more harmless than
that contained in histories in which the foreground is
filled by any villain that wore a crown or a coronet, and
.the brightest colours of the palette are lavished on a
pantaloon whose buffooneries have attracted the eyes of a
crowd ? Or, again, some odd incident becomes the subject
of the labour of lives, and fills volume after volume of
ingenious trifling. Some wretched little squabble is ex
humed, utterly unimportant in itself, utterly unimportant
�10
THE MEANINCr OF HISTORY.
for the persons that were engaged in it, utterly trivial in its
results. Lives are spent in raking up old letters to show
why or how some parasite like Sir T. Overbury was mur
dered, or to unravel some plot about a maid of honour,
or a diamond necklace, or some conspiracy to turn out a
minister, or to detect some court impostor. Why, libraries
could be filled with all the dreary wrangling as to who
was the Man in the Iron Mask, or who was the author
of Junius, oi’ who was Pope Joan? Who in the world
wants to know ? Why do men not exercise their in
genuity on something worth knowing ? Why not discover
the author of the last mysterious murder, or unveil the
secrets of some public job ? There are plenty of things to
find out, or if people are afflicted with a morbid curiosity,
there are surely Chinese puzzles or chess problems left for
them to make out without ransacking the public records
and libraries to find out which out of a nameless crowd
was the most unmitigated scoundrel, or who it is that
must have the credit of being the author of some pecu-'
liarly venomous or filthy pamphlet ? Why need we have
six immense volumes to prove to the world that you have
found the villain, and ask them to read all about him,
and explain in brilliant language how some deed of dark
ness, or some deed of folly really was done ? Why all
this ? Let it be unknown—let the dark thing remain dark
—let them all rot together.
And they call this history. This goodly serving up in
spiced dishes of the clean and the unclean, the wholesome
and the noxious; this plunging down, without a lamp to
guide them, into the charnel-house of the great graveyard,
of the past, and stirring up the decaying carcases of the
outcasts and malefactors of the race. What good can
come of such a work F Without plan, without purpose,
without breadth of view, and without method ; with
nothing but a vague desire to amuse, and a morbid
craving for novelty. Do you suppose such a knowledge
�THE USE OF HISTORY.
11
can teach yon anything ? Do yon think it can tonch the
heart ? Do yon gather from it incentive to action ? Do
yon not feel yon might as well be reading bad novels or
trashy newspapers ? Wonld yon not learn as much from
a trial for murder or a trial of divorce? I would call all
such, not histories, but police reports. I would call such
writers, not historians, but paragraph writers. Have
nothing to do with such. If there is one common
purpose running through the whole history of the past,,
if that history is the story of man’s growth by one un
ceasing progress in dignity, and power, and goodness, if
the gathered knowledge and the gathered conscience of
past ages does control us, support us, inspire us, then is
this trifling with the blots and flaws of this great whole,
this commemorating these parasites and offscourings of
the human race worse than pedantry or folly. It is filling
us with an unnatural contempt for the greatness of the
past, it distorts our conception of that greatness, it is
committing towards oui' spiritual forefathers the same
crime which Ham committed against his father Noah. Is
it not a kind of sacrilege to the memory of the great men
to whom we owe all we prize, that we waste our lives in
poring over the acts of the puny creatures who only en
cumbered their path, who were traitors to them, to us, and
to our kind? Is it not the most wanton ingratitude and
meanness to feel no thought for, no reverence for, those
long labours, those great deeds of daring, endurance,,
magnanimity, and genius, by which the earth has been
smoothed for us, and civilization age after age wrought out
for us, and to think only of some puerile wrangle which
has dishonoured or retarded the great work ? Men on the
battle-field or in their study, by the labour of then brains
or of their hands, have given us what we have, and made
us what we are; a noble army who have done battle with
evil barbarism and the powers of nature, martyrs often
to their duty; yet are we to turn with indifference from
�12
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
the story of their long march and many victories, and find
amusement amidst the very camp followers and sutlers
who hang npon their rear. If history has any lessons, any
unity, any plan, let us turn to it for this and for this alone.
Let this be our test of what is history and what is not,
that it teach us something of the great advance of human
progress, that it tells us of some of those mighty spirits
who have left their mark on all time, that it shows us the
nations of the earth woven togethei’ in one purpose, or is
lit up with those great ideas and those great purposes
which have kindled the conscience of mankind. If not,
we shall be like him in the Pilgrim’s Progress, who is seen
raking amidst straw and litter, whilst an angel is offering
him a crown he will not reach forth his hand to take.
It is in a very different spirit, I know, that you are
prepared to look at history. You want to see how it may
be made a part of education—the m oral training of a
rational man. About the importance, the meaning, and
duty of education we surely shall all agree. It is to a
wise education to which men turn in the break up of all
old systems, creeds, and parties. Why else are we here
to-night ? You have not come here to pass an idle hour.
I have not the wish if I had the power to make it pass
pleasantly, unless we both came with a purpose. Your
presence, then, our presence together in a place of
education, a place designed to extend the benefit of wider
popular education, witnesses that this is the end to which
we look. Why are we here, except it is that we all share
the conviction which grows stronger day by day, that only
as education grows amongst us, wider, more universal,
more sound, more moral, with higher aims and broader
foundations, will true progress in public or private life be
won. Have you not all, in the failure of your most ardent
hopes, in the baffling of your best efforts, in the conscious
ness of want of true knowledge and guidance, in despair
over social miseries and social wrongs, have you not often, I
�THE USE OK HISTORY.
13
say, turned back and felt within you. that, until better and
truer knowledge was spread abroad to all, all hopes were
deceitful and all efforts in vain ? Has not every one of
you who ever believed in or laboured for a political cause
or a public measure, who has stood by some principle of
social good, some temperance movement, some sanitary
scheme, some educational plan, who has ever longed for or
worked for a happier feeling to spring up between the
classes of employers and employed, or rich and poor, still
more each one of you who has ever thought to see old
superstitions fall, and the strife of sects, churches, and
creeds end in a fraternal union of men in one common
work ; has not every one who has ever done or felt this,
had from time to time the bitterness of seeing that his
political principles made no way, that misunderstanding
still abounded, that bigotry, spite, intolerance, ignorance,
brutal ignorance or coarseness, old prejudices, new jealous
ies, and general apathy, divergence, and confusion were
not so easily to be done away ? Has he not felt that acts
of parliament, movements, plans, and societies of all sorts
were paralyzed and helpless until a truer knowledge could
bring men to closer agreement, until a higher moral
standard had set in, until the principles both of those who
sought to change and of those who sought to retain could
be tested by some system of truer science and philosophy,
until, in short, education became general, and sound, and
moral and universal.
I have felt this, and therefore only am I here. In this
spirit, for this purpose only, do I suppose that you have
come. In this spirit, and this spirit only, let us seek to
comprehend the use and meaning of history.
How, if this is what we mean when we speak of edu
cation, let us consider how a knowledge of history forms
any part of it, otherwise it will be better to leave it alone.
Do we ever ask ourselves why knowledge of any kin d is
useful ? It is not so very easy a matter to give a satisfac
�14
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
tory answer after all. It is certainly not true that a know
ledge of facts, as facts, is desirable. Facts are infinite,
and it is not the millionth part of them that is worth
knowing. What some people call the pure love of truth
is after all a very poor affair if we come to think of it. It
often means only a pure love of intellectual fussiness. A
statement may be true, and yet wholly worthless. It
cannot be all facts which are the subject of knowledge.
For instance, a man might learn by heart the Post-Office
Directory, and a very remarkable mental exercise it would
be; but he would hardly venture to call himself a wellinformed man. No ; we want the facts only which add to
our power, or will enable us to act. They only give us know
ledge—they only are a part of education. For instance,
you begin the study of mathematics ; of algebra, or
geometry. What do you do this for ? You hardly expect
to turn it to practical account. You are not like Hudibras,
who could “ tell the clock by algebra,” nor do you find
Euclid’s geometry help you to take the shortest cut to your
own house. No, this is not your object. Your object is to
know something of the simplest principles which underlie
all the sciences. You want to understand practically what
mathematical demonstration means. You want to bring
home to your minds the conception of scientific axioms.
All men count—all men work out calculations—all men
measure something. Well, you want to know what this
counting means ; what rules will serve all calculation and
all m casn rements. You want to know what they call the
abstract laws of the human understanding. You want, in
short, to improve the mind. Again, you study some of the
physical laws of nature ; you read or hear plain facts about
gravitation, or heat, or light. Well, you don’t expect to
be able to become a practical discoverer, or to take out a
patent for a new balloon, or a new stove, or a new lamp.
No, what you want is to be able to know something of
what our modern philosophers are talking about. You
�THE USE OF HISTORY.
15
want to know why Faraday is a great teacher. You want
to know what it is which seems to affect all nature equally;
which brings you down heavily upon the earth if you
stumble, and keeps the planets in their orbits. You want
to understand what are laws of nature. Again, you want
to improve your mind. You take up such pursuits as botany
or geology ; but then, again, you don’t expect to discover
a new medicine, or a gold-field, or a coal-mine. No, you
want to know something of the mystery around you. You
want to see intelligible structure, consistent unity, and
common laws in the earth on which we live, with the view,
I presume, of feeling more at home in it, of becoming more
attached to it, of living in it more happily. Some of you,
again, study physiology—that is, you take interest in the
structure of the human body, especially of the human
brain, and its relation to the body, and its relation to the
mind and will. Well, why is this ? Again, you do not
expect to discover the elixir of life, like an eminent novelist
of the day, and you hardly expect to dispense with the aid
of the surgeon. Is not the interest you take in all this,
that you want to get a glimpse of that marvellous frame
work of the human form, some notion of the laws of its
existence, some idea of the powers which affect it, which
depress or develope it, some knowledge of the relation of
the thinking and feeling process, and the thinking and feel
ing organ. Well, then, you seek to know something of the
influences to which all human nature is subject, to be able
to understand what people mean when they tell you about
laws of health, or laws of life, or laws of thought. You
want to be in a position to decide for yourself as to the
trustworthiness of men upon whose judgment you depend
for bodily existence.
Now, in this list of the subjects of a rational education,
does it not strike you that something is wanting ? Is it
not like the old saying about the play of Hamlet with
Hamlet left out ?
�16
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
“ The proper study of mankind is man.”
And where in this outline is Man ? Does it not strike you
that whilst this object is wanting, all the rest remains vague
and incomplete, and aimless ? Dor instance, when you are
learning arithmetic or geometry, you are not seeking to
perform feats of memory. You do not want to turn your
self into one of Babbage’s calculating machines. Mathe
matics would indeed be only a jumble of figures if it ended
in itself. But the moment you come to learn the influ
ence which some great discovery has had on the destinies
of man; the moment you see, for instance, how all bn man
thought was lighted up when Galileo saw that the sun, and
not the earth, was the centre of our world; the moment
you feel that the demonstrations of Euclid are things
in which all human minds must agree—indeed, are almost
the only things in which all do agree—that moment the
science has a meaning, and a clue, and a plan. It had
none so long as it was disconnected with the history and
the destiny of man—the past and the future. It is the
same with every other science. What would be the mean
ing of laws of nature unless by them man could act on
nature ? What would be the use of knowing the laws of
health, unless we supposed that a sounder knowledge
of them would ameliorate the condition of men ? What,
indeed, is the use of the improvement of the mind ? It is
far from obvious that mere exercise of the intellectual
faculties alone is a good. A nation of Hamlets (to take a
popular conception of that character) would be more truly
miserable, perhaps more truly despicable, than a nation of
Bushmen. What, then, is it that we mean when we say a
cultivated mind, a mental training, a sound education.
We mean, if we mean anything good, a state of mind by
which we shall become more clear of our condition, of our
powers, of our duties towards our fellows, of our true
happiness, by which we may make ourselves better citizens
and better men, more forbearing to others, more loyal
�17
THE USE OF HISTORY.
towards true teachers, more zealous for social harmony,
more civilized, in short. Well, then, all these preceding
studies have been but a preparation, as it were. They
have been only to strengthen the mind, and give it mate
rial for the true work of education—the inculcation of
human duty.
All knowledge, then is imperfect, we may almost say
meaningless, unless it tends to give us sounder notions of
our human and social interests. And how, then, are we to
prepare ourselves for this ? What we need, are clear prin
ciples about the moral nature of man as a social being;
about the elements of human society; about the nature
and capacities of the understanding. We want safe land
marks to guide us in our search after worthy guides, or
true principles for social or political action. We want, in
short, a general clue to public and private conduct. Few
here, I imagine, will expect to learn this in any other
method than by an acquaintance with human nature. But
human nature is unlike physical nature in this, that its
varieties are infinitely greater, and that it shows continual
change. The earth rolls round the sun in the same orbit
now as in infinite ages past • but man moves forward in a
straight line of progress. Age after age developes into new
phases. It is a study of life, of growth, of variety. One
generation shows one faculty of human nature in a striking
degree; the next exhibits one different to it. All, it is
true, leave their mark upon all succeeding generations, and
civilization flows on like a vast river, gathering up the
waters of its tributary streams. Hence it is that civi
lization, being not a fixed or lifeless thing, cannot be
studied as a fixed or lifeless subject. We can see it only in
its movement and its growth. One year is as good as
another to the astronomer, but it is not so to the political
observer. He must watch successions, and a wide field,
and compare a long series of events. Hence it is that in
all political, all social, all human questions whatever, hisc
�18
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
tory is the main resource of the inquirer. To know what
is most really natural to man as a social being, man must
be looked at as he appears in a succession of ages, and in
very various conditions. To learn the strength or scope
of all his capacities together, he must be judged in those
successive periods in which each in turn were best brought
out. Can any one suppose that he will find all the human
institutions and faculties equally well developed, and all in
their due proportion and order, by simply looking at the
state of civilization now actually around us ? Is it not a
monstrous assumption that this world of to-day, so full of
misery and discontent, strife and despair, ringing with
cries of pain, and cries for aid, can really embody forth to
us complete and harmonious man ? Are there no faculties
within him yet fettered, no good instincts stifled, no high
yearnings marred ? Have we in this year reached the pin
nacle of human perfection, lost nothing that we once had,
gained all that we can gain ? Surely, by the hopes within
us, No! And where are they to be found if not in the
history of the past ? There, in the long struggle of man
upwards, we may watch him in his every mood, and see in
him often some now forgotten power, capacity, or art yet
destined to good service in the future. One by one we
may light on the missing links in the chain which connects
all races and all ages in one, or gather up the broken
threads that must yet be woven into the complex fabric of
life.
But there is another side on which history is still more
necessary as a guide to consistent and rational action. We
not merely need to know what the essential qualities of
civilization and of our social nature really are; but we re
quire to know the general course in which they are tending.
The more closely we look at it the more distinctly we see
that progress moves in a clear and definite path; the deve
lopment of man is not a casual or arbitrary motion : it moves
in a regular and consistent plan. Each part is unfolded
�THE USE OF HISTORY.
19
in due order,—the whole expanding like a single frame.
More and more steadily we see each age working out the
gifts of the last and transmitting its labours to the next.
More and more certain is our sense of being strong only as
we wisely use the materials and follow in the track provided
by the efforts of mankind. Is it possible to mistake how
completely that influence surrounds us. Take our material
existence alone. Well, the earth’s surface has been made,
as we know it, mainly by man. It would be uninhabitable
but for the long labours of those who cleared its primeval
forests, drained its swamps, first tilled its rank soil. All
the inventions on which we depend for existence, the in
struments we use were slowly worked out by the neces
sities of the childhood of the race. We can only modify or
add to these. We could not discard all existing machines
and construct an entirely new set of industrial implements.
Take our political existence. There again we are equally
confined in limits. Our country as a political whole has
been formed for us by a long series of wars, struggles, and
common efforts. We could not refashion England, or
divide it in half, if we tried for a century. Our great
towns, our great roads, the very local administrations of our
counties, were formed for us by the Romans fifteen centu
ries since. Could we undo it if we tried and make London
a country village, or turn Birmingham into the metropolis ?
Some people think they could abolish some great institu
tion, such as the House of Lords, for instance, if they tried
very hard indeed ; but few reformers in this country have
proposed to abolish the entire British Constitution. Most
people look with repugnance on our existing system of the
law of real property. Such as it is it was made for us by our
feudal ancestors misreading Roman texts. Well, incubus
as it is, we must endure it and attempt to improve it. Rew
people would expect to sweep it away at once as a whole.
Turn which ever way you will, we shall find our political sys
tems, laws, and administrations to have been provided for us.
�20
THE MEANING OK HISTORY.
And is not this the case more strongly in all moral and
intellectual questions ? Are we to suppose that whilst our
daily life, our industry, our laws, our customs, are controlled
by the traditions and materials of the past, our thoughts
our habits of mind, our beliefs, our moral sense, our ideas
of right and wrong, our hopes and aspirations, are not just
as truly formed by the civilization in which we have been
reared ? We are indeed able to transform it, to develope it,
and to give it new life and action; but we can only do so
as we understand it. Without this all efforts, reforms, and
revolutions are in vain. A change is made, but a few years
pass over, and all the old causes reappear. There was some
unnoticed power which was not touched, and returns in full
force. Take an instance from our own history. Cromwell
and his Ironsides, who made the great English Revolution,
swept Monarchy, and Church, and peers away, and thought
they were gone for ever. Their great chief dead, the old
system returned like a tide, and ended in the orgies of
Charles and James. The Catholic Church has been, as it
were, staggeringin its last agonies now for many centuries.
Luther believed he had crushed it. Long before his time it
seemed nothing but a lifeless mass of corruption. Pope
after Pope has been driven into exile. Four or five times
has the Church seemed utterly crushed. And yet here in
this nineteenth century, it puts forth all its old pretensions,
and covers its old territory. In the great French Revolu
tion it seemed, for once, that all actual institutions had been
swept away. That devouring fire seemed to have burnt
the growth of ages to the very root. Yet a few years pass,
and all reappear,—Monarchy, and Church, peers, Jesuits,
and Prsetorian guards. Again and again they are over
thrown. Again and again, after seventy years, they rise in
greater pomp and pride. Turn to the memory of many of
us here. They who, with courage, energy, and enthusiasm,
too seldom imitated, once carried the Reform of Parlia
ment and swept away with a strong hand the stronghold of
�THE USE OF HISTORY.
21
abuse and privilege, believed that a new era was opening
for their country. What would they think, what do they
think, now ? When they abolished rotten boroughs, and
test acts, and curtailed expenditure, did they think that
thirty years would find their descendants wrangling about
the purchased votes of some miserable constituency, about
church rates, and acts of uniformity, and spending seventy
millions a year. Does not the experience of every one who
was ever engaged in any public movement whatever remind
him that every step made in advance seems too often wrung
out from him by some silent and unnoticed power ? Has he
not felt enthusiasm give way to despair, and hopes become
nothing but recollections ? What is this unseen power
which seems to baffle and undo the best and strongest
human efforts, that seems to be an overbearing weight
against which no man can long struggle ? What is this ever
acting force which seems to revive the dead, to restore what
we destroy, to renew forgotten watchwords, exploded fal
lacies, discredited doctrines, and condemned institutions ;
against which enthusiasm, intellect, truth, high purpose,
and self-devotion seem to beat themselves to death in vain,
which breaks the heart of the warm, turns strong brains
into peevish criticism, and scatters popular union in angry
discord. It is the past. It is the accumulated wills and
works of all mankind around us and before us. It is civi
lization. It is that power which to understand is strength,
to repudiate which is weakness. Let us not think that
there can be any real progress made which is not based on
a sound knowledge of the living institutions, and the active
wants of mankind. If we can only act on nature so far as
we know its laws, we can only influence society so far as
we understand its elements and ways. Let us not delude
ourselves into thinking that new principles of policy or
social action can be created by themselves or can recon
struct society about us. Those rough maxims, which we
are wont to dignify by the name of principles, may be, after
�22
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
all, only crude formulas and phrases without life or power.
Only when they have been tested, analysed, and compared
with other phases of social life, can we be certain that they
are immutable truths. Nothing but a thorough knowledge
of the social system, based upon a regular study of its
growth, can give us the power we require to affect it. For
this end we need one thing above all,—we need history.
But perhaps I may be told : ¥es, all this may be very
useful for statesmen, or philosophers, or politicians; but
what is the use of this to the bulk of the people ? They are
not engaged in solving political questions, or devising
schemes to improve society. Well, I am not sure of that.
The bulk of the people, if they are seeking to live the lives
of rational and useful citizens, if they have any self-respect
and self-reliance, if they only wish to do their duty by their
neighbours, are really and truly politicians and reformers.
They are solving political problems, and are affecting society
very deeply. Aman does not need even to be a vestryman,
he need not even have one out of the 20,000 votes for
Marylebone in order to exercise very great political influ
ence. A man, provided he lives like an honest, thoughtful,
truth-speaking citizen, is a power in the state. He is
helping to form that which rules the state, which rules
statesmen, and is above kings, parliaments, or ministers.
FT» is forming public opinion. It is on this, a public opinion,
wise, thoughtful, and consistent, that the destinies of
our country rest, and not on acts of parliament, or move
ments, or institutions, useful as these often are. He who
is forming this is really contributing to the greatness of his
country, though timid statesmen dare not trust him with a
vote, and ignorant agitators may tell him he is a slave.
Every one of us may do this, every one of us may boldly
form and utter his opinion. Every one of us may read his
newspaper, and may give his voice for the right and against
the wrong-, a voice which is not lost, though iu be nob regis
tered on the hustings, or deposited in a ballot-box. Many
�THE USE OE HISTORY.
23
around us are doing this. Many, in a quiet way, not useless,
though unseen, are working out some useful social scheme,
and supporting some well-meant effort. Many are struggling
like men through darkness, through superstition, cant, and
intolerance, towards some more wholesome way of truth
and life, to find something they can believe, something they
can trust, and understand, and live by.
Are there not many amongst us, many here whose lives
are spent in searching for light, in battling with old forms
of error, in looking for some sound bond of union amongst
men ? If there are such, I would ask them, how they can
hope to succeed unless they start armed with some know
ledge of the efforts that men have made towards this end
age after age; unless they know something of the systems
of faith which, in turn, have flourished and fallen, and
know why they flourished and why they failed, and what
good end they served, and what evil they produced ; unless
they know something of the moral and spiritual history of
mankind ? The very condition of success is to recognize
the difficulty of the task. The work is half done when
men see how much is required to begin. Is it not a sort of
presumption to attempt to remodel existing institutions,
without the least knowledge how they were formed, or
whence they grew; to deal with social questions without a
thought how society arose; to construct a social creed
without a dream of fifty creeds which have risen and
vanished before ? Few men would, intentionally, attempt
so much; but many do it unconsciously. They think they
are not statesmen, or teachers, or philosophers ; but, in
one sense, they are. In all human affairs there is this pecu
liar quality. They are the work of the combined labours of
many. No statesman or teacher can do anything alone.
He must have the minds of those he is to guide prepared
for him. They must concur, or he is powerless. In reality?
he is but the expression of their united wills and
thoughts. Hence it is, I say, that all men need, in some
�24
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
sense, the knowledge and the judgment of the statesman
and the social teacher. Progress is but the result of our
joint public opinion; and for progress that opinion must
be enlightened. “ He only destroys who can replace.”
All other progress than this—one based on the union of
many minds and purposes, and a true conception of the
future and the past—is transitory and delusive. Those who
defy this power, the man, the party, or the class who forget
it, will be beating themselves in vain against a wall;
changing, but not improving; moving, but not advancing;
rolling, as the poet says of a turbulent city, like a sick man
on the restless bed of pain.
And now, if the value of some knowledge of past history is granted, and I am asked how it is to be acquired,
whence it is to come, I admit the difficulty of the ques
tion. I know the sea of facts, the libraries of books it
opens to the view, yet I do not despair. After all I have
said none will suppose I recommend a lifeless catalogue
of names, or a dry table of dates. No; it is possible
to know something of history without a pedantic eru
dition. Let a man ask himself always what he wants to
know. Something of man’s social nature ; something of
the growth of civilization. He needs only to understand
something of the character of the great races and systems
of mankind. Let him ask himself what the long ages of
early empires did for mankind; whether they established
or taught anything ; if fifty centuries of human skill, labour,
and thought were wasted like an autumn leaf. Let him
ask himself what the Greeks taught or discovered. Why
the Romans were a noble race, and how they printed their
footmarks so deeply on the earth. Let him ask what was the "
original meaning and life of those great feudal institutions
of chivalry and Church, of which we see only the rotting
carcases. Let him ask what was the strength, the weakness,
and the meaning of the great revolution of Cromwell, or
the great revolution in France. A man may learn much
�THE USE OF HISTORY.
25
true history by a little thinking, without any very ponderous
books. Let him go to the Museums and see the pictures,
the statues, and buildings of Egyptian and Assyrian times,
and ask himself what was the state of society under which
men in the far [East reached so high a pitch of industry,
knowledge, and culture, three thousand years before
our savage ancestors had learned to use the plough. A
man may go to one of our Gothic cathedrals, and seeing
there the stupendous grandeur of its outline, the exquisite
grace of its design, the solemn and touching expression
upon the faces of its old carved or painted saints, kings, and
priests ; may ask himself if the men who built that could
be utterly barbarous, false-hearted, and tyrannical; or if the
power which could bring out such noble qualities of the
human mind and heart must not have left its trace upon
mankind. Indeed, it does not need many books to know
something of the life of the past. A man who has enjoyed
the best lives in old Plutarch knows not a little of Greek
and Roman history. A man who has caught the true spirit
of Walter Scott’s novels knows something of feudalism and
chivalry. But is this enough ? Ear from it. These desul
tory thoughts must be connected. These need to be com
bined into a whole, and combined and used for a purpose.
Above all, we must look on history as a whole, trying to
find what each age and race has contributed to the common
stock, and how and why each followed in its place. Looked
at separately, all is confusion and contradiction; looked at
as a whole, a common purpose appears. The history of the
human race is the history of a growth. It can no more be
taken to pieces than the human frame can be taken to
pieces. Who would think of making anything of the body
without knowing whether it possessed a circulation, a ner
vous system, or a skeleton. History is a living whole. If one
organ be removed, it is nothing but a lifeless mass. What
you have to find in it is the relation and connection of the
parts. You must learn how age developes into age, how
�26
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
country reacts upon country, how thought inspires action,
and action modifies thought. Once conceive that all the
greater periods of history have had a real and necessary
part to fulfil in creating the whole, and you will have done
more to understand it than if you had studied some portion
of it with a microscope. Once feel that all the parts are
needed for the whole, and the difficulty of the mass of
materials vanishes. You will come to regard it as a compo
sition or a work of art which cannot be broken up into
fragments at pleasure. You would as soon th ink of divid
ing it as of taking a figure out of a great picture, or a pas
sage out of a piece of music. Most of you have listened to
one of those noble choruses of Handel, such as that “ Unto
us a son is born,” and have heard the opening notes begin
simple, subdued, and slow, until they are echoed back in
deeper tones, choir answering to choir, voice joining in with
voice, growing fuller and stronger with new and varying
bursts of melody, until the whole stream of song swells into
one vast tide of harmony, and rolls on exulting, wave upon
wave in majestic unity and power. Something like this
complex harmony is seen in the gathering parts of human
history, age taking up the falling notes from age, race
joining with race in answering strain, until the separate
parts are mingled in one, and pour on in one movement
together. Let us shrink from breaking this whole into
fragments, nor lose all sense of harmony in attending to
the separate notes.
Lastly, if I may give a word of practical advice, there
is one mode in which I think history may be most easily
and most usefully approached. Let him who desires to
find profit in it, begin by knowing something of the lives
of great men. Not, I mean, of those most talked about,
not of names chosen at hazard ; but of the real great ones
who can be shown to have left their mark upon distant
ages. Know their lives, I mean, not merely as interesting
studies of character, or as persons seen in a drama, but
�THE USE OF HISTORY.
27
solely as they represent and influence their age. Not for
themselves only must we know them, but as the expression
and types of all that is noblest around them. Let us know,
then, those whom all men cannot fail to recognize as great
—the Caesars, the Charlemagnes, the Alfreds, the Crom
wells, great in themselves, but greater as the centre of the
hearts of thousands.
We have done much towards understanding the past
when we have learned to value and to honour such men
truly. Better to know nothing of history than to know
with the narrow coldness of a pedant a record which ought
to fill us with emotion and reverence. Of all the faults of
the character, surely none is so base as heartless indiffer
ence to benefactors. And have we any benefactors like
these men ? Our closest friends, our earliest teachers, our
parents themselves, are not more truly our benefactors than
they. To them we owe what we prize most—country,
freedom, peace, knowledge, art, thought, and higher sense
of right and wrong. Have we received from any services
like these ; not we only, but all equally in common : and
have any services been given at so great a cost ? What a
long tale of patience, courage, sacrifice, and martyrdom is
the history of human progress ! Should it not affect us as
if we were reading in the diary of a parent the record of his
struggles for his children. For us they toiled, endured,
bled, and died; that we by their labour might have rest,
by their thought might know, by their death might
live happily. We know the devotion with which the
believers in every creed have felt for the authors of their
faith. Intolerant and narrow as this has often been, it yet
bears witness to a sense of one of the deepest and best of
our emotions. The feeling may become too often partial
and bigoted; yet let us beware of neglecting it. Let us
dread, above bigotry itself, a temper of irreverence and
ingratitude. For whom did these men work, if not for us ?
Not for themselves, when they gave up peace, honour, life,
�28
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
reputation itself—as when the great French republican
exclaimed, ££ May my name be accursed, so that France be
free ; not for themselves they worked, but for their cause,
for their fellows, for us. FTot that they might have fame,
butthat they might leave the world better than they found
it; that there might be more good, less evil, abroad in it;
that the good time might come. What else but this sup
ported Milton in his old age, blind, poor, and dishonoured,
when he poured out his spirit in solitude, fall of grace,
tenderness, and hope, amidst the ruin of all he loved and
the obscene triumph of all he despised ? Or what else sup
ported Dante, the poet of Florence, when an ontlaw and an
exile he was cast off by friends and countrymen, and wan
dered about begging his bread from city to city, pondering
the great thoughts which live throughout all Europe ? Was
not this spirit, too, in one, the noblest victim of the French
Revolution, the great philosopher Condorcet; who, con
demned, hunted to death, dying of hunger and suffering,
•devoted the last few hours of his life to the service of
mankind; and, whilst the pursuers were on his track, wrote
in his hiding-place that noble sketch of the progress of the
human race.
It would be base indeed to see in this nothing but a
selfish love of fame. It was at bottom in them all a native
love for right, an inborn desire for the good, the instinct of
duty, which possessed them. To us, indeed, no similar
powers are given, nor on us are similar tasks imposed.
Our path is smooth, because theirs was so rough; our
work is easy, because theirs was so hard; yet the work of
-civilization, of progress, and truth, begun by them, must
be carried on by us; by all, not by some ; for all, not for
¿ome ; and will best be carried on by knowing what they
have done for us, what they could not do, and why and
where they failed.
>,
�THE CONNECTION OF HISTORY.
29
LECTURE Bl.
THE CONNECTION OF HISTORIC
On the last occasion we asked if the history of mankind
thronghont past ages might not have some meaning and
uses for us here to-day ? We saw grounds to believe that
in its right knowledge, there are some lessons for us all.
We saw that our daily life and action in any high sense
depends upon our truly comprehending the movement of
that great stream of human civilization on which we are
borne. We saw that to conceive history aright we must
approach it in no pedantic, narrow, or ungenerous spirit.
That we must look into it for its mighty deeds and its
great men, believing that they who have slowly built up
the world of to-day and surrounded our life with infinite
creations of thought and toil, wisdom and skill, are worthy
of memory, and sympathy, and reverence—a reverence not
narrowed to a few ages, or squandered without thought,
but one which can reach back into the twilight of our race,
and embrace all its true teachers and guides. We saw,
too, how history shows us one continuous march of pro
gress, checked and obscured at times, but never stagnant
—how age hands on its work to age—nation beckons
across sea or desert to its brother nation—race gives to race
the choicest product—thinker hands down to thinker ideas
and truths long husbanded and stored as heirlooms of
mankind, until at last generation after generation, and
people with people take up the tale in the yet half-told
drama of the world, of which the catastrophe and issue
rest with us and our lives.
�30
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
Let us now try to sketch the outline of this story, link
century to century, continent to continent, and judge
the share each has in the common work of civilization. To
do so, we must go back to ages long before records began.
It is but of the latter and the shorter portion of the duration
of progress, that any record has been made or preserved.
Yet for a general view materials of certain knowledge
exist. If we write the biography of a man we do not
begin only with the year of his life in which his diary
opens ; we seek to know his parentage, education, and
early association. To understand him we must do so. So,
too, the biography of mankind must not confine itself to
the eras of chronological tables, and of recorded specific
events. Let us remember also that in all large instances
the civilization of an epoch or a people has a certain unity
in it—that their philosophy, their policy, their habits, and
their religion must more or less accord, and all depend at
last upon the special habit of their minds. It is this central
form of belief which determines all the rest. Separately no
item which makes up their civilization as a whole, can be
long or seriously changed. It is what a man believes,
which makes him act as he does. Thus shall we see that
as their reasoning powers develope all else developes
likewise, their science, their art break up or take new
forms; their system of society expands; their life, their
morality, and their religion gradually are dissolved and
reconstructed.
Let us then place ourselves back in imagination at a
period when the whole surface of the earth was quite
unlike what it is now. Let us suppose it as it was after
the last great geologic change—the greater portion of its
area covered with primeval forests, vast swamps, dense
jungles, and arid deserts. Let us not think the earth had
always the same face as now. Such as it is it has been
made by man—the rich pasturages and open plains have
all been created by his toil—even the grain, and fruits, and
�THE CONNECTION OF HISTORY.
31
flowers that grow upon its soil have been made what they
are by his care. As yet the now teeming valleys of the
great rivers, such as the Hile, or the Euphrates, or the Po,
were wildernesses or swamps. The rich meadows of our
own island were marshes, where its corn fields stand now
were trackless forests. As yet such countries as Holland
were swept over by every tide of the sea, and such coun
tries as Switzerland, and Norway, America, or Russia, were
submerged beneath endless pine woods. And through
these forests and wastes ranged countless races of animals,
many, doubtless, long extinct, in variety and numbers more
than we can even conceive. And where in this terrible
world was man ? Scanty, perhaps, in number, confined to
a few favourable spots, helpless, dispersed, and alone, man
sustained a precarious existence, not yet the lord of crea
tion, inferior to the brutes in strength, only just superior
to them in mind,—nothing but the first of the animals. As
are the lowest of all savages now, perhaps even lower, man
once was. Conceive what Robinson Crusoe would have
been had his island been a dense jungle overrun with
savage beasts, without his gun, or his knife, or his know
ledge, with nothing but his human hand and his human brain.
Ages have indeed passed since then—perhaps some twenty
thousand years—perhaps far more—have rolled by. But
they should not be quite forgotten, and all recollection
perish of that dark time when man waged a struggle for
life or death with nature. Let us be just even to those
who fought that fight with the brutes, hunted down and
exterminated step by step the races too dangerous to man,
and cleared the ground of these monstrous rivals. Every
nation has its primeval heroes, whose hearts quailed not
before the lion or the dragon. Its Nimrod, a mighty
hunter before the Lord ; its Hercules, whose club smote the
serpent hydra; its Odin, who slew monsters. The forests,
too, had to be cleared. Step by step man won his way
into the heart of those dark jungles ; slowly the rank vege
�32
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
tation was swept off, here and there a space was cleared,
here and there a plain was formed which left a patch of
habitable soil. Everywhere man began as a hunter, a
savage hunter, of the woods or the wilderness, without im
plements, without clothing, without homes, perhaps with
out the use of fire. Man’s supremacy over the brutes was
first asserted when his mind taught him how to make the
rude bow, or the flint knife, or to harden clay or wood by
heat. But not only were all the arts and uses of life yet
to be found, but all the human institutions had to be
formed. As yet language, family, marriage, property,
tribe, were not, or only were in germ. A few cries assisted
by gesture, a casual association of the sexes, a dim trace
of parentage or brotherhood, were all that was. Lan
guage, as we know it, has been slowly built up, stage after
stage, by the instinct of the entire race. Necessity led to
new sounds which use developed, sounds became words,
words were worked into sentences, and half-animal cries
grew into intelligible speech. We must remember this
with gratitude, and with no less gratitude those whose
higher instincts first taught them to unite in permanent
pairs, to cling to the children of one home, to form into
parties and companies, to clothe themselves, and put checks
upon the violent passions. Surely they who first drew
savage man out of the life of unbridled instinct and brutal
loneliness ; who first showed the practices of personal de
cency and cleanliness ; who first taught men to be faithful
and tender to the young and the old, the woman, and the
mother; who first brought these wild hunters together
and made them trust each other and their chief—surely
these were the first great benefactors of mankind ;—surely
this is the beginning of the history of the race.
And if this was the material and moral condition of man,
what was his intellectual; what was his knowledge, his
worship, and his religion ? Turn to the earliest traditions of
men, to the simple ideas of childhood, and especially to the
�33
THE CONNECTION OF HISTORY.
savage tribes we know, and we have the answer. Man’s
intellect was far feebler than his activity or his feelings.
He knew nothing, he rested in the first imagination. He
reasoned on nothing, he supposed everything. He looked
upon nature, and saw it full of life, motion, and strength.
He knew what struggles he had with it, he felt it often
crush him, he felt he could often crush it, and he thought
that all, brutes, plants, rivers, storms, forests, and moun
tains, were powers, living, feeling, and acting like himself.
Is it hard to conceive this ? Do not the primeval legends,
the fairy tales of all nations, show it to us ? Does not the
child punish its doll, and the savage defy the thunder, and
the horse start at a gnarled oak swaying its boughs like
arms in the wind. Man then looked out upon nature, and
thought it a living thing—a simple belief which answered
all questions. He knew nothing of matter, or elements, or
laws. His celestial and his terrestrial philosophy was
summed up in this—things act so because they choose.
He never asked why the sun or moon rose and set. They
were bright beings who walked their own paths when and
as they pleased. He never thought why a volcano smoked,
or a river overflowed, or thought only that the one was
wroth and roared ; and that the other had started in fury
from his bed. And what was his religion ? What could
it but be ? Affection for the fruits and flowers of the earth
—dread and prostration before the terrible in nature—
worship of the bright sun, or sheltering grove or moun
tain—in a word, the adoration of nature, the untutored
impulse towards the master powers around such as we see
it in the negro or the Chinese. As yet nothing was fixed,
nothing common. Each worshipped in love or dread what
most seized his fancy—each family had its own fetishes—•
each tribe its mountains ; often it worshipped its own dead
—friends who had begun a new existence. Such was their
religion, the unguided faith of childhood, exaggerating all
the feelings and sympathies, stimulating love, and hatred,
D
�34
THE MEANING OE HISTORY.
and movement, and destruction, but leaving everything
vague, giving no fixity, no unity, no permanence. In such
a condition, doubtless, man passed through many thousand
years, tribe struggling with tribe in endless battles for
their hunting grounds, often, we may fear, devouring their
captives, without any fixed abode, or definite association,
or material progress, yet gradually forming the various
arts and institutions of life, gradually learning the use of
clothes, of metals, of implements, of speech—a race whose
life depended solely upon the chase, whose only society
was the tribe, whose religion was the worship of natural
objects.
Now in this first struggle with nature man was not
alone. Slowly he won over to his side one or two of the
higher animals. Was not this a wonderful victory, assur
ing his ultimate ascendancy ? The dog was won from his
wolf-like state to join and aid in the chase. The horse
bowed his strength in generous submission to a master.
Do we reflect enough upon the efforts that this cost ? Ai e
we forgetful of the wonders of patience, gentleness, sym
pathy, sagacity, and nerve, which were required for the
first domestication of animals ? Do we sufficiently think
upon the long centuries of care which were needed to
change the very nature of these noble brutes, without
whom we should indeed be helpless ? By degrees the ox,
the sheep, the goat, the camel, and the ass were reared by
man, formed part of his simple family, and became the
lower portion of the tribe. Their very natures, their
external forms were changed. Milk and its compounds
formed the basis of food. The hunter’s life became less
precarious, less rambling, less violent. In short, the second
great stage of human existence began, and pastoral life
commenced. Surely this was a great advance! Larger
tribes could now collect, for there was now no lack of
food; tribes gathered into a horde; something like society
began. It had its leaders, its elders, perhaps its teachers,
�THE CONNECTION OF HISTORY.
35
poets, and wise men. Men ceased to rove for ever. They
stay upon a favourable pasture for long together. Next pro
perty, that is stored up subsistence, began; flocks and herds
accumulated; men were no longer torn daily by the wants
of hunger; and leisure, repose, and peace were possible.
The women were relieved from the crushing toil of the
past. The old were no longer abandoned or neglected
through want. Reflection, observation, thought began,
and with thought religion. As life became more fixed
worship became less vague and general. Some fixed great
powers alone were adored, chiefly the host of heaven, the
stars, the moon, and the great sun itself. Then some
elder, freed from toil or war, meditating on the world
around him, as he watched the horde start forth at the
rising of the sun, the animals awakening and nature open
ing beneath his rays, first came to think all nature moved
at the will of that sun himself, perhaps even of some
mysterious power of whom that sun was but the image.
From this would rise a regular worship com mon to the
whole horde, uniting them together, explaining their course
of life, stimulating their powers of thought. With this
some kind of knowledge commenced. Their vast herds
and flocks needed to be numbered, distinguished, and
separated. Arithmetic began; the mode of counting, of
adding and subtracting was slowly worked out. The
horde’s course, also, must be directed by the seasons and
the stars. Hence astronomy began. The course of the
sun was steadily observed, the recurrence of the seasons
noted. Slowly the first ideas of order, regularity, and
permanence arose. The world was no longer a chaos of
conflicting forces. The earth had its stated times, all
governed by the all-ruling sun. How, too, the horde had a
permanent existence. Its old men' could remember the
story of its wanderings and the deeds of its mighty ones,
and would tell them to the young when the day was over.
Poetry, narrative, and history had began. Leisure brought
�36
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
the use of fresh implements. Metals were found and
worked. The loom was invented; the wheeled car came
into use; the art of the smith, the joiner, and the boatbuilder. New arts required a subdivision of labour, and
division of labour required orderly rule. Society had
begun. A greater step was yet at hand. Around some
sacred mountain or grove, in some more favoured spot,
where the horde would longest halt or oftenest return,
some greater care to clear the ground, to protect the
pasture, and to tend the plants was shown; some patches
of soil were scratched to grow some useful grains, some
rude corn ears were cultivated into wheat, the earth began
to be tilled. Man passed into the third great stage of
material existence, and agriculture began. Agriculture
once commenced a new era was at hand. Now organized
society was possible. Do we estimate duly this the
greatest effort towards progress ever accomplished by
mankind ? Do we remember how much had to be learnt,
how many arts had to be invented, before the savage
hunter could settle down into the peaceful, the provident,
and the intelligent husbandman ? What is all our vaunted
progress to this great step ? What are all our boasted
inventions compared with the first great discoveries of
man, the spinning-wheel and loom, the plough, the clay
vessel, the wheel, the boat, the bow, the hatchet, and the
forge ? Surely, if we reflect, our inventions are chiefly
modes of multiplying or saving force; these were the
transformations of substances, or the interchange of force.
Ours are, for the most part, but expansions of the first
idea; these are the creations.
Since it is with agriculture that organized society alone
can start, it is with justice that the origin of civilization is
always traced to those great plains where agriculture alone
was then possible. It was in the basins of the great Asian
rivers, the Euphrates, the Tigris, the Ganges, and in that
of the Nile, that fixed societies began. There, wh^ -eirriga-
�THE CONNECTION OF HISTORY.
37
tion is easy, the soil rich, and country open, cultivation
arose, and with cultivation of the soil, the accumulation of
its produce, and with more easy sustenance, leisure, thought,
and observation. Use taught man to distinguish between
matter and life, man and animal, thought and motion.
Men’s eyes were opened, and they saw that nature was not
alive, and had no will. They watched the course of the
sun and saw that it moved in fixed ways. They watched
the sea, and saw that it rose and fell by tides. Then, too,
they needed knowledge and they needed teachers. They
needed men to measure their fields, their barns, to teach
them to build strongly, to calculate the seasons for them,
to predict the signs of the weather, to expound the will of
the great powers who ruled them. Thus slowly rose the
notion of gods, tbe unseen rulers of these powers of earth
and sky, a god of the sea, of the river, of the sky, of the
sun, and between them and their gods rose the first priests,
the ministers and interpreters of their will, and polytheism
and theocracies began. Thus simply amidst these great
settled societies of the plain began the great human insti
tution—the priesthood—at first only some wiser elders
who had some deeper knowledge of the arts of settled life.
Gradually knowledge advanced; knowledge of the seasons
and of the stars or of astronomy, of enumeration or arith
metic, of measurement or geometry, of medicine and surgery,
of building, of the arts, of music, of poetry ; gradually this
knowledge became deposited in the hands of a few, and
transmitted and accumulated from father to son. The in
tellect asserted its power, and the rule over a peaceful and
industrious race slowly passed into the hands of a priesthood,
or an educated and sacred class. These were the men who
founded the earliest form of civilized existence; the most
complete, the most enduring, the most consistent of all
human societies, the great theocracies or religious societies
of Asia and Egypt. Thus for thousands of years before the
earliest records of history, in all the great plains of Asia and.
�38
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
along the Nile, nations flourished in a high and elaborate form
of civilization. We will examine one only, the best known to
us, the type, the earliest and the greatest—the Egyptian.
The task to be accomplished was immense. It was
nothing less than the foundation of permanent and or
ganized society. Till this was done all was in danger.
All knowledge might be lost, the arts might perish, the
civil community might break up. Hitherto there had been
no permanence, no union, no system. What was needed
was to form the intellectual and material framework of a
fixed nation. And this the Egyptian priesthood undertook.
The spot was favourable to the attempt. In that great,
rich plain, walled off on all sides by the desert or by the
sea, it was possible to found a society at once industrial,
peaceful, and settled. They needed judges to direct them,
teachers to instruct them, men of science to help them,
governors to rule them, preachers to admonish them,
physicians to heal them, artists to train them, aud priests
to sacrifice for them. To meet these wants a special order
of men spontaneously arose, by whose half-conscious efforts
a complete system of society was gradually and slowly
formed. In their hands was concentrated the whole intel
lectual product of ages, this they administered for the
common good. Gradually by their care there arose a
system of regular industry. To this end they divided out
by their superior skill all the arts and trades of life. Each
work was apportioned, each art had its subordinate arts.
Then as a mode of perpetuating skill in crafts, to insure
a sound apprenticeship of every labour, they caused or
enabled each man’s work to become hereditary within
certain broad limits, and thus created or sanctioned a definite
series of castes. Then to give sanction to the whole, they
consecrated each labour, and made each workman’s toil a
part of his religious duty. Then they organized a scheme of
general education. They provided a system of teach
ing common to all, adapted to the work of each. They
�THE CONNECTION OF HISTORY.
39
provided for the special education of the sacred class m the
■whole circle of existing knowledge ; they collected observa
tions, they treasured up discoveries, and recorded events.
Next they organized a system of government. They esta
blished property, they divided out the land, they set up
landmarks, they devised rules for its tenure, they introduced
law, and magistrates, and governors ; provinces were divided
into districts, towns, and villages ; violence was put down, a
«trict police exercised, regular taxes imposed. Next they
organized a strict system of morality, the social, the domestic,
.and the personal duties were minutely defined; practices
relating to health, cleanliness, and temperance, were en
forced by religious obligations, every act of life, every
moment of existence was made a part of sacred duty.
Lastly, they organized national life by a vast system of
common religious rites, by imposing ceremonies which
awakened the imagination and kindled the emotions,
bound up the whole community into an united people, and
gave stability to their national existence, by the awful
majesty of a common and mysterious belief.
Do we want to know what such a system of life was
like ? Let us go into some museum of Egyptian antiqui
ties, where we may see representations of their mode of
existenceZ carved upon their walls. There we may see
nearly all the arts of life as we know them—weaving and
spinning, working in pottery, glass-blowing, building,
-carving^ and painting, ploughing, sowing, threshing, and
gathering into barns, boating, irrigation, fishing, wine
pressing, dancing, singing, and playing—a vast community,
in short, orderly, peaceful, and intelligent; capable of
gigantic works and of refined arts, before which we are
lost in wonder ; a civilized community busy and orderly as
a hive of bees, amongst whom every labour and function
was arranged m perfect harmony and distinctness ; all this
may be seen upon monuments at least 5000 years old.
Here, then, we have civilization itself. All the arts of
�40
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
life had been brought to perfection, and indelibly im
planted on the mind of men in a way that they could never
be utterly lost. All that constitutes orderly government,
the institutions of society, had been equally graven into
human existence. A check had been placed upon the end
less and desultory warfare of tribes; and great nations
existed. The ideas of domestic life, marriage, filial duty,
care for the aged and the dead, had become a second nature.
The wholesome practices of social life, of which we think
so lightly, had all been invented and established. The
practice of regular holidays, and social gatherings, and
common celebrations began—the record and division of past
ages, the exact times of the seasons, and of the year, the
months, and its festivals; the great yet little prized
institution of the week. Nor were the gains to thought
less. In the peaceful rolling on of those primeval ages,
observations had been stored up by an unbroken succes
sion of priests, without which science never would have
existed. It was no small feat in science first to have de
termined the exact length of the year. It needed obser
vations stretching over a cycle of 1500 years. But the
Egyptian priests had enumerated the stars, and could cal
culate for centuries in advance the times of their appearance.
They possessed the simpler processes of arithmetic and
geometry ; they knew something of chemistry, and much
'of botany, and even a little of surgery. There was one
invention yet more astonishing; the Egyptians invented,
the Phenicians perfected, the art of writing, and transmitted
the alphabet—our alphabet—to the Greeks. Do we rightly
estimate the amazing intellectual effort required for tha
formation of the alphabet; not to shape the forms, but
first to conceive that the sounds we utter could be classi
fied, and reduced down to those simple elements we call
the letters. Truly I can imagine hardly any effort of ab
stract thought more difficult than this, and certainly none;
more essential to the progress of the human mind.
�THE CONNECTION OF HISTORY.
41
They were indeed great minds who did all this ; great
because they not so much promoted civilization as created
it. Never perhaps before or since have single minds ever
received this universal culture ; never perhaps have shown
this many-sided activity and strength. Never before or
since has such power been concentrated in the same hands
—the entire moral and material control over society. They
were great minds, great souls also who could conceive
and carry through such a task, greater perhaps in this that
they did not care to celebrate themselves for posterity, but
passed away when their work was done, contented to have
seen it done, as Moses did when he went up alone to die in
secret, that no man might know or worship at his tomb.
The debt we owe these men and these times is great. It
is said that man learns more in the first year of his child
hood than in any year subsequently of his life. And in this
long’ childhood of the world, how many things were learnt.
Is it clear that they could have been learnt in any other
way ? Caste, in its decline, is the most degrading of human
institutions. Can we be sure that without it the arts of lifecould have been taught and preserved in those unsettled ages
of war and migration. We rebel justly against all priestly
tyranny over daily life and customs. Are we sure that
without these sanctions of religion and law, the rules of
morality, of decency, and health could ever have been im
posed upon the lawless instincts of mankind. We turn
with repugnance from the monotony of those unvaryingages, and of that almost stagnant civilization ; but are we
sure that without it, it would have been possible to collect
the observations of distant ages, and the records of dynas
ties and eras on which all science and all history rest : would
it have been possible to provide a secure and tranquil field
in which the slow growth of language, art, and thought
could have worked out generation after generation, their
earliest and most difficult result ?
No form of civilization has ever endured so long ; its
�42
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
consequences are stamped deeply still upon our daily life ;
yet the time came when even these venerable systems must
die.
Their work was done, and it was time for them to pass
away. Century after century had gone by teaching the
same lessons, but adding nothing new. Human life began
to be stifled in these primeval forms. The whole empire
of the priests grew evil and corrupt. We know them
chiefly in their decline, when kings and conquerors had
usurped and perverted the patient energies of these longtutored peoples. These great societies passed from indus
trial and social communities into stupendous tyrannies,
made up of cruelty and pride. It was the result of the
great and fatal error which lay beneath the whole priestly
.system. They had misconceived their strength and thenknowledge. They had undertaken to organize society
whilst then- own knowledge was feeble and imperfect.
They had tried to establish the rule of mind, of all rules
the most certainly destined to fail; and they based that
rule upon error and misconception. They pretended to
govern society instead of confining themselves to the only
possible task, to teach it. 1 hey who had begun by securing
progress, now were its worst obstacles. They who began
to rule by the right of intelligence, now dreaded and
crushed intelligence. They fell as every priesthood has
fallen, which has ever based its claims upon imperfect
knowledge, or pretended to command in the practical affairs
of life. Yet there was only one way in which the night
mare of this intellectual and social oppression could be
shaken off, and these strong systems broken up. It was
no. doubt by the all-powerful instinct of conquest, and
by the growth of vast military monarchies that the change
was accomplished. Those antique societies of peace and
irirhi stry degenerated at last into conquering empires,
.and, during 1000 years which precede the Persian empire,
Asia was swept from side to side by the armies of Assyrian,
�the connection of history.
43
Median, Babylonian, and Egyptian conquerors. Empire
after empire rose and fell with small, result, save that they
broke the death-like sleep of ages, and brought distant
people from the ends of the earth into contact with each
■other.
The world seemed in danger of perishing by exhaus
tion. It needed a new spirit to revive it. But now another
race appears upon the scene ; a branch of that great Aryan
people, who from the high lands of central Asia have swept
over Assyria, India, and Europe, the people who as Greeks,
Romans, Gauls, or Teutons have been the foremost of man
kind, of whom we ourselves are but a younger branch.
Now, too, the darkness which covered those earlier ages of
the world rolls off, and accurate history begins, and the drama
proceeds in the broad light of certainty.
It is about 550 B.C. that the first great name in general
history appears, and Cyrus founds the Persian empire.
Eor ages along the mountain slopes between the Himalayas
and the Caspian Sea, the Persian race had dwelt, a simple
race of wandering herdsmen, apart from the vast empires
of Babylon and Nineveh in the plains below. There they
grew up with nobler and freer thoughts, not crushed by
the weight of a powerful monarchy, not degraded by
decaying superstitions, nor enervated by material riches.
They honoured truth, freedom, and energy. They had
faith in themselves and their race. They valued morality
more than ceremonies. They believed in a Supreme
Power of the universe. Just as the northern nations after
wards poured over the Roman empire, so these stronger
tribes were preparing to descend upon the decaying re
mains of the Asiatic empires. They needed only a captain,
and they found one worthy of the task in the great King
Cyrus. He, marshalling his mountain warriors into a solid
army, swept down upon the plains, and one by one the
empires fell before him, until from the Mediterranean to
the Indus, from Tartary to the Arabian Gulf, all Asia
�44
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
submitted to his sway. His successors continued his work,
pushing across Arabia, Egypt, Africa, and Northern Asia
itself. There over that enormous tract they hnilt up the
Persian monarchy, which swallowed up and fused into one
so many ancient empires. The conquerors were soon ab
sorbed, like the Northmen, into the theocratic faith and
life of the conquered, and throughout half of the then
inhabited globe one rule, one religion, one system of life
alone existed. But the Persian kings could not rest whilst
a corner remained unconquered. On the shores of the
Mediterranean they had come upon a people who had defied
them with strange audacity. Against them the whole
weight of the Asian empire was put forth. Bor ten
years fleets and armies were preparing. There came
archers from the wastes of Tartary and the deserts of
Africa; charioteers from Nineveh and Babylon; horsemen,
clubmen, and spearmen; the mailclad footmen of Persia ;
the fleets of the Phenicians; all the races of the East,
gathered in one vast host, and as men said, 5,000,000 men
and 2000 ships poured over the Eastern seas upon the de
voted people.
And who were they who seemed thus doomed F Along
the promontories and islands of the eastern Mediterranean
there dwelt the scattered race whom we call Greeks, who
had gradually worked out a form of life totally differing
from the old, who had wonderfully expanded the old arts
of life and modes of thought. With them the destinies of
the world then rested for all its future progress. With
them all was life, change, and activity. Broken into sec
tions by infinite bays, mountains, and rivers, scattered over
a long line of coasts and islands, the Greek race, with
natures as varied as their own beautiful land, as restless as.
their own seas, had never been moulded into one great
solid empire, and early threw off the weight of a ruling
caste of priests. No theocracy or religious system of
society ever could establish itself amidst a race so full of'
�THE CONNECTION OF HISTORY.
45
life and motion, so exposed to influences from without,
so divided within. They had borrowed the arts of life
from the great Eastern peoples, and, in borrowing, had
wonderfully improved them. The alphabet, shipbuilding,
commerce, they had from the Phenicians; architecture,
sculpture, painting from the Assyrian or Lydian empires.
Geometry, arithmetic, astronomy, they had borrowed from
the Egyptians. The various fabrics, arts, and appliances of
the East came to them in profusion across the seas. Their
earliest lawgivers, rulers, and philosophers, had all tra
velled through the great Asian kingdom, and came back to
their small country with a new sense of all the institutions
and ideas of civilized life. But the Greeks borrowed, they '
did not imitate. Alone as yet, they had thrown off the
tyranny of custom, of caste, of kingcraft, and of priestcraft.
They only had moulded the ponderous column and the
imcouth colossus of the East into the graceful shaft and
the life-like figure of the gods. They only had dared to
think freely, to ask themselves what or whence was this
earth around, to meet the great problems of abstract
thought, to probe the foundations of right and wrong.
Lastly, they alone had conceived the idea of a people not
the servants of one man or of a class, not chained down in
a rigid order of submission, but the free and equal citizens
of a republic, for on them had first dawned the idea of a
civilized community in which men should be not masters
and slaves, but brothers.
On poured the myriads of Asia, creating a famine as
they marched, drying up the streams, and covering the
seas with their ships. Who does not know the tale of
that immortal effort—how the Athenians armed old and
young, burned their city, and went on board their ships
—how for three days Leonidas and his three hundred held
the pass against the Asian host, and lay down, each warrior
at his post, calmly smiling in death—how the Greek ships
lay in ambush in their islands, for the mighty fleet of
�46
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
Persia—how the unwieldy mass was broken and pierced
by their dauntless enemy—how, all day, the battle raged
beneath the eyes of the great king himself, and, at its close,
the seas were heaving with the wrecks of the shattered
host. Surely, of all the battles in history, this one of
Salamis was the most precious to the human race. Ko
other tale of. war can surpass it. Do we enough estimate
the heroism, the genius, the marvellous audacity by which
these pigmy fleets and armies of a small, weak race, with
stood and crushed the entire power of Asia, and preserved
from extinction the life and intellect of future ages.
Victory followed upon victory, and the whole Greek
race expanded with this amazing triumph. The whole of
the old world had been brought face to face with the intel
lect which was to transform it. The Greek mind, with the
whole East open to it, exhibited inexhaustible activity. A
century sufficed to develope a thoroughly new phase of
civilization. They carried the arts to a height whereon
they stand as the types for all time. In poetry they ex
hausted and perfected every form of composition. In
politics they built up a multitude of communities, rich
with a prolific store of political and social institutions.
Throughout their stormy history stand forth great names.
Now and then there arose amongst them leaders of real
genius. For a time they showed some splendid instances of
public virtue, of social life, patriotism, elevation, sagacity, and
energy. For a moment Athens at least may have believed
that she had reached the highest type of political existence.
But with all this activity and greatness there was no true
unity. Wonderful as was their ingenuity, their versatility
and energy, it was too often wasted in barren struggles
and wanton restlessness. For a century and a half after
the Persian invasion, the petty Greek states contended in
one weary round of contemptible civil wars and aimless
revolutions. One after another they cast their great men
aside, to think out by themselves the thoughts that were
�THE CONNECTION OF HISTORY.
47
to live for all time, and gave themselves up to be the vic
tims of degraded adventurers. For one moment only in
their history, if indeed for that, they did become a nation.
At last, wearied out by endless wars and constant revolu
tions, the Greek states by force and fraud were fused in one
people by the half-Greek Macedonian kings, and by them,
instead of by true Greeks, the great work so long postponed,
but never through their history forgotten, was at length
attempted—the work of avenging the Persian invasion, and
subduing Asia. Short and wonderful was that career of
conquest, due wholly to one marvellous mind. Alexander,
indeed, in military and practical genius seems to stand
above all Greeks, as Caesar above all Romans ; they two
the greatest rulers of the ancient world. No story, per
haps, in history, is so romantic as the tale of that ten
years of victory when Alexander, at the head of some thirty
thousand veteran Greeks, poured over Asia, crushing army
after army, taking city after city, and receiving the homage
of prince after prince, himself fighting likq a knight-errant:
until subduing the Persian empire, and piercing Asia from
side to side, and having reached even the great rivers of
India, he turned back to Babylon to organize his vast em
pire, to found new cities, pour life into the decrepit frame
of the East, and give to these entranced nations the arts
and wisdom of Greece. For this he came to Babylon, but
came thither only to die. Endless confusion ensued ; pro
vince after province broke up into a separate kingdom, and
the vast empire of Alexander became the prey of military
adventurers. Yet though this attempt of his, like so much
else that Greece accomplished, was, indeed, in appearance
a disastrous failure, still it had not been in vain. The
Greek mind was diffused over the East like the rays of the
rising sun when it revives and awakens slumbering nature.
The Greek language, the most wonderful instrument of
thought ever composed by man, became common to the
whole civilized world; it bound together all educated men
�48
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
from the Danube to the Indus. The Greek literature,
poetry, history, science, philosophy, and art, was at once
the common property of the empire. The brilliance, the
audacity, the strength of the Greek reasoning awoke the
dormant powers of thought. The idea of laws, the idea of
states, the idea of citizenship, came like a revelation upon
the degenerate slaves of the Eastern tyrannies. Nor was
the result less important to the Greek mind itself. Now,
at last, the world was open without obstacle. The philo
sophers poured over the new empire ; they ransacked the
records of primeval times; they studied the hoarded lore
of the Egyptian and Chaldean priests. Old astronomical
observations, old geometric problems, long concealed, were
thrown open to them. They travelled over the whole con
tinent of Asia, studying its wonders of the past, collecting
its natural curiosities, examining its surface, its climates,
its production, its plants, its animals, and its human races,
customs, and ideas. Lastly, they gathered up and pon
dered over the half-remembered traditions and the half
comprehended mysteries of Asian belief, the conceptions
which had risen up before the intense abstraction of Indian
and Babylonian mystics, Jewish and Egyptian prophets and
priests, the notion of some great principle or thought, or
Being, utterly unseen and unknown, above all gods, and
without material form. Thus arose the earliest germ of
that spirit which, by uniting Greek logic with Asian or
Jewish imaginations, prepared the way for the religious
systems of Mussulman and Christian.
Such was the result of the great conquest of Alexander.
Not by its utter failure as an empire are we to judge it;
not by the vices and follies of its founder, or the profli
gate orgies of its dissolution, must we condemn it. We
must value it as the means whereby the effete world of
the East was renewed by the life of European thought,
by which the first ideas of nature as a whole and of
mankind as a whole, arose, by which the ground was
�THE CONNECTION OF HISTORY.
49
first prepared for the Roman empire, and for Christian
and Mahometan religion. And, now, what was the gift of
Greece to the world ? As a nation the Greeks had estab
lished little that was lasting. They had changed mnch;
they had organized hardly anything. As the great Asian
system had sacrificed all to permanence, so the Greek
sacrificed all to movement. The Greeks had created no
majestic system of law, no solid political order, no com
plex social system. If civilization had stopped there it
would have ended in ceaseless agitation, discord, and dis
solution. Their character was wanting in self-command
and tenacity, and their genius was too often wasted in
intellectual license. Yet if politically they were unstable,
intellectually they were great. The lives of their great
heroes are their rich legacy to all future ages; Solon, Peri
cles, Epaminondas, and Demosthenes stand forth as the
types of all that is great in the noble leader of men. The
story of their best days has scarcely its equal in history. In
art they gave us the works of Phidias, the noblest image of
the human form ever created by man. In poetry, the
models of all time—Homer, the greatest and the earliest
of poets ; Hlschylus the greatest master of the tragic art;
Plato, the most eloquent of moral teachers; Pindar, the
first of all in lyric art. In philosophy and in science the
Greek mind laid the foundations of all knowledge, beyond
which, until the last three centuries, very partial advance
had been made. Building on the ground prepared by
the Egyptians, they did much to perfect arithmetic,
raised geometry to a science by itself, and invented that
system of astronomy which served the world for fifteen
centuries. In knowledge of animal life, and the art of
healing they constructed a body of accurate observations
and sound analysis; in physics, or the knowledge of
the material earth, they advanced to the point at which
little was added till the time of Bacon himself. In abstract
thought their results were still more surprising. All the
�50
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
ideas that lie at the root of our modern abstract philosophy
may be found in germ in Greece. The schools of modern
metaphysics are little but developments of theirs. They
analysed with perfect precision and wonderful minuteness
the processes employed in language and in reasoning ;
they invented grammar and logic, and rhetoric, and music :
they correctly analysed the human mind, the character,
and the emotions, and invented the science of morality
and the art of education ; they correctly analysed the ele
ments of society and political life, and invented the science
of politics, or the theory of social union. Lastly, they
criticized and laid bare all the existing beliefs of mankind;
pierced the imposing falsehood of the old religions ; medi
tated on all the various answers ever given to the problem
of human destiny, of the universe and its origin, and slowly
worked out the conception of unity through the whole
visible and invisible universe, which, in some shape or
other, has been the belief of man for twenty centuries.
Such were their gifts to the world. It was an intellect
active, subtle, and real, marked by the true scientific
character of freedom, precision, and consistency. And, as
the Greek intellect overtopped the intellect of all races of
men, and combined in itself the gifts of all others, so were
the great intellects of Greece all overtopped and concen
trated in one great mind—the greatest, doubtless, of all
human minds—the matchless Aristotle; as the poet says,
“ The master of those who know,” who, on all branches of
human knowledge, built the strong foundations of abiding
truth.
Let us pause for a moment to reflect what point we
have reached in the history of civilization. Asia had
founded the first arts and usages of material life, begun
the earliest social institutions, and taught us the rudiments
of science and of thought. Greece had expanded all
these in infinite variety and subtlety, had instituted the
free state, and given life to poetry and art, had formed fixed
�THE CONNECTION OF HISTORY.
51
habits of accurate reasoning and of sytematic observation.
Materially and intellectually civilization existed. Yet in
Greece we feel that, socially, everything is abortive. The
Greeks had not grown into an united nation. They split
into a multitude of jealous republics. These republics
split into hostile and restless factions. All that we asso
ciate with true national existence was yet to come, but the
noble race who were to found it had long been advancing
towards their high destiny. Alexander, perhaps, had
scarcely heard of that distant, half-educated people, who
for four centuries had been slowly building up the power
which was to absorb aud supersede his empire. But far
beyond the limits of his degenerate subjects, worthier suc
cessors of his genius were at hand—the Romans were
coming upon the world. The Greeks founded the city,
the Romans the nation. The Greeks were the authors of
philosophy, the Romans of government, justice, and peace.
The Greek type was thought, the Roman type was law.
The Greeks taught us the noble lesson of individual free
dom, the Romans the still nobler lesson, the sense of social
duty. It is just, therefore, that to the Romans, as to the
people who alone throughout all ages gave unity, peace,
and order to the civilized world, who gave us the elements
of our modern political life, and have left us the richest
record of acts of public duty, heroism, and self-sacrifice ; it
is just that to them we assign the place of the noblest
nation in history. That which marks the Roman with his
true greatness was his devotion to the social body, his
sense of self-surrender to country; a duty to which the
claims of family and person were implicitly to yield, which
neither death, nor agony, nor disgrace could subdue;
which was the only reward, pleasure, or religion which a
true citizen could need. This was the greatness, not of a
few leading characters, but of an entire people. The
Roman state did not give birth merely to heroes, it was
formed of heroes; nor were they less marked by their
�52
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
sense of obedience, submission to rightful authority where
the interest of the state required it, submission to order
and law. They had too deeply a sense of justice. They
did not war to crush the conquered ; once subdued, they
dealt with them as their fellows, they made equal laws and
a common rule for them ; they bound them all into the same
service of their common country. Above all other nations
in the world they believed in a mission and a destiny.
They paused not century after century in one great object.
No prize could beguile them, no delusion distract them.
Each Roman felt the divinity of the Eternal City, destined
always to march onwards in triumph: in its service every
faculty of his mind was given• life, wealth, and rest were as
nothing to this cause. In this faith they could plan out
for the distant future, build up so as to prepare for vast
extension, calculate far distant chances, and lay stone by
atone the walls of an enduring structure. Hence each
Roman was a statesman, for he needed to provide for the
future ages of his country; each Roman was a citizen of
the world, for all nations were destined to be his fellow
citizens ; each Roman could command, for he had learnt to
obey, and to know that he who commands and he who
obeys are but the servants of one higher power—their
common fatherland.
Long and stern were the efforts by which this power was
built up. But deep as is the mystery which covers the origin
-of Rome, we can still trace dimly how, about the centre of the
Italian peninsula, along the banks of the Tiber, fragments of
two tribes were fused by some heroic chieftain into one ; the
first more intellectual, supple, and ingenious, the second
more stubborn, courageous, and faithful. We see more
clearly how this compound people rose through the strength
of these qualities of mind and character to be the foremost of
the neighbouring tribes; how they long maintained that
religious order of society which the Greeks so early shook
off; how it moulded all the institutions of their life, filled
�THE CONNECTION OF HISTORY.
53
them, with reverence for the duties of family, for their
parents, their wives, for the memory and the spirit of their
dead ancestors, taught them submission to judges and
chiefs, devotion to their mother city, love for her com
mands, her laws, and her traditions, trained them to live
and die for her, indeed compassed their whole existence
with a sense of duty towards their fellows and each other ;
how this sense of social duty grew into the very fibres of
their iron natures, kept the State through all dangers rooted
in the imperishable trust and instinct of a massive people ;
then how this well-knit race advanced step by step upon
their neighbouring tribes, slowly united them in one, gave
them their own laws, made them their own citizens ; step by
step advanced upon the only civilized nation of the penin
sula, the theocratic society of Etruria, took from them the
arts of war and peace; how the hordes of Northern bar
barians poured over the peninsula like a flood, sweeping
all the nations below its waters, and when they emerged,
Rome only was left strong and confident; how, after four
centuries of constant struggle, held up always by the sense
of future greatness, the Romans had at length absorbed
one by one the leading nations of Italy, and by one
supreme effort, after thirty years of war, had crushed their
noblest and strongest rivals, their equals in all but genius
and fortune, and stood at last the masters of Italy, from
shore to shore. And now came the great crisis of
their history, the long wars of Rome and Carthage. On
one side was the genius of war, empire, law, and art, on
the other the genius of commerce, industry, and wealth.
The subjects of Carthage were scattered over the Medi
terranean, the power of Rome was compact. Carthage
fought with regular mercenaries, Rome with her disciplined
citizens. Carthage had consummate generals, but Rome
had matchless soldiers. Long the scale trembled. Not
once nor twice was Rome stricken down to the dust. Punic
fleets swept the seas. African horsemen scoured the
�54
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
plains. Barbarian hordes were gathered np by the wealth
of Carthage, and marshalled by the genius of her great
captain. For her fought the greatest military genius of
the ancient world, perhaps of all time. Hannibal, himself a
child of the camp, training a veteran army in the wars of
Spain, led his victorious troops across Gaul, crossed the
Alps, poured down upon Italy, struck down army after
army, and at last, by one crowning victory, scattered the
last military force of Rome. Beset by an invincible army in
the heart of Italy, her strongholds stormed, without gene
rals or armies, without money or allies, without cavalry or
ships, it seemed the last hour of Rome was come. Now, if
ever, she needed that faith in her destiny, the solid strength
of hei’ slow growth, and the energy of her entire people.
They did not fail her. In her worst need her people held
firm, her senate never lost heart, armies grew out of the
very remnants and slaves within her walls. Inch by inch
the invader was driven back, watched and besieged in
turn. The genius of Rome revived in Scipio. He it was
who, with an eagle’s sight, saw the weakness of her enemy,
swooped, with an eagle’s flight, upon Carthage herself, and
at last, before her walls, overthrew Hannibal, and with
him the hopes and power of his country and his race.
It is in these first centuries that we see the source of
the greatness of Rome. Then was founded her true
strength. What tales of heroism, dignity, and endurance
have they not left us ! There are no types of public virtue
grander than those. Brutus condemning his traitor sons
to death ; Horatius defending the bridge against an army ;
Cincinnatus taken from the plough to rule the State, return
ing from ruling the state again to the plough ; the Decii,
father and son, solemnly devoting themselves to death to
propitiate the gods of Rome ; Regulus the prisoner going
to his home only to exhort his people not to yield, and
returning calmly to his prison; Cornelia offering up her
children to death and shame for the cause of the people;
�the connection oe history.
55
great generals content to live like simple yeomen; old and
young ever ready to marcli to certain death ; hearts proof
against eloquence, gold, or pleasure; nohle matrons fram
ing their children to duty; senates ever confident in their
country; generals returning from conquered nations in
poverty; the leaders of triumphant armies becoming the
equals of the humblest citizens.
Carthage once overcome, the conquest of the world fol
lowed rapidly. Spain and the islands of the Mediterra
nean Sea were the prizes of the war. Lower Gaul, Greece,
and Macedon, were also within fifty years incorporated in
Rome. She pushed further. The whole empire of Alex
ander fell into her hands, and at length, after seven hun
dred years of conquest, she remained the mistress of the
civilized world. But, long before this, she herself had be
come the prey of convulsions. The marvellous empire, so
rapidly expanded, had deeply corrupted the power which
had won it. Her old heroes were no more. Her virtues
failed her, and her vast dominions had long become the
prize of bloody and selfish factions. The ancient republic,
whose freemen had once met to consult in the TTorum, broke
up in the new position for which her system was utterly unfit.
Bor nearly a century the great empire had inevitably tended
towards union in a single centre. One dictator after another
had possessed and misused the sovereign power. At last it
passed to the worthiest, and the rule over the whole ancient
w’orld came to its greatest name, the noble Julius Csesar.
In him were found more than the Roman genius for govern
ment and law, with a gentleness and grace few Romans
ever had; an intellect almost Greek in its love of science,
of art, in reach and subtlety of thought; and, above all
this, in spite of vices and crimes which he shared with his
age, a world-wide breadth of view and heart, a spirit of
human fellowship and social progress peculiar to one who
was the friend of men of different races, countries, and
ideas—at once general, orator, poet, historian, ruler, law
�56
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
giver, reformer, and philosopher; in the highest sense the
statesman, magnanimous, provident, laborious, largehearted, affable, resolute, and brave. With him the
Roman empire enters on a new and better phase. He first
saw and showed how this vast aggregate of men must be
ruled no longer as the subjects of one conquering city, but
as a real and single State governed in the interest of all,
with equal rights and common laws; and Rome be no
longer the mistress, but the leader only of the nations. In
this spirit he broke with the old Roman temper of narrow
nationality and pride ; raised to power and trust new men
of all ranks and of all nations ; opened the old Roman
privileges of citizenship to the new subjects; laboured to
complete and extend the Roman law ; reorganized the ad
ministration of the distant provinces; and sought to ex
tinguish the trace of party fury and hatred. And when
the selfish rage of the old Roman aristocracy had struck
him down, before his work was half complete, by a wanton
and senseless murder, yet his work did not perish with him.
The Roman empire at last rose to the level which he had
planned for it. Tor some two centuries it did succeed in
maintaining an era of progress, peace, and civilization—a
government, indeed, at times frightfully corrupt, at times
convulsed to its foundations, yet in the main in accordance
with the necessities of the times, and rising in its highest
types to wise, tranquil, and prudent rule, embracing all, open
to all, just to all, and beloved by all. Then it was, during
those two centuries, broken as they were by temporary con
vulsions, that the nations of Europe rose into civilized life.
Then the Spaniard, the Gaul, the Briton, the German, the
people that dwelt along the whole course of the Rhine and
the Danube, first learnt the arts and ideas of life; law,
government, society, education, industry, appeared amongst
them ; and over the tracts of land trodden for so many
centuries by rival tribes and devastating hordes, security
first appeared, turmoil gave place to repose, and there rose
�THE CONNECTION OF HISTORY.
57
the notion, not forgotten for ten centuries, of the solemn
Peace of Rome.
And now, what was it that the Roman had given to the
world? In the first place, his law—that Roman law, the most
perfect political creation of the human mind, which for one
thousand years grew with one even and expanding life—the
law which is the basis of all the law of Europe, including
even our own. Then, the political system of towns. The
actual municipal constitution of every town in Western
Europe, from Gibraltar to the Baltic, from the Hebrides to
Sicily, is but a development of the old Roman city, which
lasted through the middle ages, and began modern indus
trial life. Next, all the institutions relating to administra
tion and police which modern Europe has developed had
their origin there. To them in the middle ages men turned
when the age of confusion was ending. To them again
Tn en turned when the middle ages themselves were passing
away. The establishment of elective assemblies, of gradu
ated magistracies, of local and provincial justice, of
public officers and public institutions, free museums, baths,
theatres, libraries, and schools—all that we understand by
organized society, in a word, may be traced back to Rome.
Throughout all Western Europe, from that germ, civiliza
tion raised its head after the invasion of the Northern
tribes. Erom the same source too arose the force at once
monarchic and municipal, which overthrew the feudal
system. It was the remnant of the old Roman ideas of
provincial organization which first formed the counties
and duchies which afterwards coalesced into a State. It
was the memory of the Roman township which gave
birth to the first free towns of Europe. It was the
tradition of a Roman emperor which, by long interme
diate steps, transformed the Teutonic chieftain into the
modern king or emperor. London, York, Lincoln, Win
chester, Gloucester, and Chester were Roman cities, and
formed then, as they did for the earlier periods of our hi&-
�58
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
tory, the pivots of our national administration. Paris,
Rouen, Lyons, Marseilles, Bordeaux, in France; Constance,
Basle, Coblentz, Cologne, upon the Rhine; Cadiz, Barce
lona, Seville, Toledo, Lisbon, in the Spanish, Genoa, Milan,
Verona, Ravenna, Rome, and Naples, in the Italian penin
sula, were in Roman, as in modern times, the great national
centres of their respective countries. But, above all
else, they gave not the notion merely, but the reality of
a state, a permanent system of free obedience to the laws
on the one hand, and a temperate administration of them
on the other; the constant sense of each citizen having his
place in a complex whole.
The Roman’s strength was in action, not in thought;
but in thought he gave us something besides his special
creation of universal law. It was his to discover the
meaning of history. Egypt had carved on eternal rocks
the pompous chronicles of kings. The Greeks wrote pro
found and brilliant memoirs. It was reserved to a Roman
to conceive and execute the history of his people stretch
ing over seven hundred years, and to give the first proof of
the continuity and unity of national life. In art the Roman
did little but develope the Greek types of architecture
into stupendous and complex forms, fit for new uses, and
worthy of his people’s grandeur. But the great triumphs
of his skill were in engineering. He invented the arch, the
dome, and the viaduct. The bridges of the middle ages
were studied from Roman remains. The great domes of
Italian cathedrals, of which that of our own St. Paul’s is but
a feeble imitation, were formed directly on the model of a
temple at Rome. But in thought, the great gift of Rome
was in her language, which has served as an admirable
instrument of religious, moral, and political reflection, and
forms the base of the spoken dialects of three of the great
nations of Europe. Then it was, under that Roman em
pire, that the stores of Greek thought became common to
the world. As the empire of Alexander had shed them
�THE CONNECTION OE HISTOBY.
59
over the East, the empire of Rome gave them to the West.
Greek language, literature, poetry, science, and art, became
the common education of the civilized world , and from
the Hebrides to the Euphrates, from the Atlas to the Cau
casus, for the first and only time in the history of man,
Europe, Asia, and Africa formed one vast whole. The union
of the oriental half, indeed, was mainly external and material,
but throughout the western half a common order of ideas
prevailed. Their religion was the belief m many gods a
system in which each of the powers of nature, each virtue,
each art, was thought to be the manifestation of some
separate god. It was a system which stimulated activity,
self-reliance, toleration, sociability, and art, but which left
the external world a vague and unmeaning mystery, and
the heart of man a prey to violent and conflicting passions.
It possessed not that idea of unity which alone can sustain
philosophy and science, and alone can establish in the
breast a fixed and elevated moral conscience.
The Roman system had its strong points, but it had
also the weak. They were in the main three. It was a
system founded upon war, upon slavery, upon a false and
vague belief. Now as to war, it is most true that war was
not then, as in modern times, the monstrous negation of
civilization. It seems that by war alone could nations then
be pressed into that union which was essential to all future
progress. Whilst war was common to all the nations of an
tiquity, with the Romans alone it became the instrument of
progress. The Romans warred only to found peace. They
did not so much conquer as incorporate the nations. Not
more by the strength of the Roman than by the instinctive
submission in the conquered to his manifest superiority,
was the great empire built up. Victors and vanquished
share in the honour of the common result—law, order,
peace, and government. When the Romans conquered, it
was once for all. That which once became a province of
the Roman empire rested thenceforth in profound tran
�60
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
quillity. No standing armies, no brutal soldiery, overawed
the interior or the towns. Whilst all within the circle of
the empire rested in peace, along its frontiers stood the
disciplined veterans of Rome watching’ the roving hordes
of barbarians, and protecting the pale of civilization.
Still, however useful in its place, it was a system of
war ; a system necessarily fatal in the long run to all pro
gress, to all industry, to all the domestic virtues, to all the
gentler feelings. In a State in which all great ideas and
traditions originated in conquest, the dignity of labour, the
arts of industry, were but slowly recognised or respected;
the work of conquest over, the existence of the great
Roman became in too many cases purposeless, idle, and
vicious. Charity, compassion, gentleness, were not easy
virtues. The home was sacrificed. The condition of
woman in the wreck of the family relations sank to the
lowest ebb. In a word, the stern virtues of the old
Roman private life seemed ending in inhuman ferocity
and monstrous debauchery.
Secondly, the Roman was a system of slavery. It
existed only for the few. True industry was impossible.
The whole industrial class were degraded. The owners of
wealth and its producers were alike demoralized. In the
great towns were gathered a miserable crowd of poor free
men, with all the vices of the “ mean whites ” of Ame
rica. Throughout the country the land was cultivated, not
by a peasantry, not by scattered labourers, but by gangs of
slaves, guarded in workhouses and watched by overseers.
Hence the whole population and all civilization was
gathered in the towns. The spaces between and around
them were wildernesses, with pasturage and slaves in place
of agriculture and men. Thirdly, it was a system based on
a belief in a multitude of gods, a system without truth, or
coherence, or power. There was no single belief to unite
all classes in one faith. Nothing ennobling to trust in, no
standard of right and wrong which could act on the moral
�THE CONNECTION OE HISTORY.
61
nature. There were no recognised teachers. The moral
and the material were hopelessly confused. The politicians
had no system of morality, religion, or belief, and were
void of moral authority. The philosophers and the moral
ists were hardly members of the State, and taught only to
a circle of admirers, and exercised no wide social influence.
The religion of the people had long ceased to be believed.
It had long been without any moral purpose ; it became a
vague mass of meaningless traditions. With these threefold
sources of corruption, war, slavery, false belief, the Roman
empire so magnificent without, was, within, a rotten fabric.
Politically vigorous, morally it was diseased. Never perhaps
has the world witnessed cases of such stupendous moral
corruption, as when immense power, boundless riches, and
native energy were left as they were then without object, con
trol, or shame. Then, from time to time, there broke forth
a very orgy of wanton strength. But its hour was come.
The best spirits were all filled with a sense of the hollow
ness and corruption around them. Statesmen, poets, and
philosophers, in all these last eras were pouring forth their
complaints and fears, or feebly attempting remedies. The
new element had long been making its way unseen, had
long been preparing the ground, and throughout the civil
ized world there was rising up a groan of weariness and
despair.
Por three centuries a belief in the existence of one God
alone, in whom were concentrated all power and good
ness, who cared for the moral guidance of mankind, a
belief in the immortality of the soul and its existence in
another state, had been growing up in the minds of the
best Greek thinkers. The noble morality of their philoso
phers had taken strong hold of the higher consciences of
Rome, and had diffused amongst the better spirits through
out the empire new and purer types. Next the great em
pire itself, forcing all nations in one State, had long inspired
in its worthiest members a sense of the great brotherhood
�62
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
of mankind, had slowly mitigated the worst evils of slavery,
and paved the way for a religions society. Thirdly, another
and a greater cause was at work. Through Greek teachers
the world had long been growing familiar with the religious
ideas of Asia, its conceptions of a superhuman world,
of a world of spirit, angel, demon, future state, and over
ruling Creator, with its mystical imagery, its spiritual
poetry, its intense zeal and fervent emotion. And now,
partly from the contact with Greek thought and Roman
civilization, a great change was taking place in the
very heart of that small Jewish race, of all the races of
Asia known to us, the most intense, earnest, and pure :
possessing a high sense of personal morality, the truest
yearnings of the heart, and the deepest capacity for
spiritual fervour. In their midst arose a fellowship of
true-hearted brethren, gathered around one noble and
touching character, which adoration has veiled in a mys
tery which passes from the pale of definite history. On
them had dawned the vision of a new era of their national
faith, which should expand the devotion of David, the
high purpose of Isaiah, and the moral excellence of
Samuel, into a gentler, wider, and more loving spirit.
How this new idea grew to the height of a new reli
gion, and brightened, and was shed ovei’ the whole earth by
the strength of its intensity and its purity, is to us a familiar
and enchanting tale. We know how the first fellowship of
the brethren met; how they went forth into all lands with
words of mercy, love, justice, and hope; their self-denial,
humility, and zeal; their heroic lives and awful deaths;
their loving natures and their noble purposes; how they
gathered around them wherever they came the purest and
greatest; how across mountains, seas, and continents, the
coTmmrnion of saints joined in affectionate trust; how from
the deepest corruption of the heart arose a yearning for a
truer life; how the new faith, ennobling the instincts
of human nature, raised up the slave, the poor, and the
�THE CONNECTION OF HISTORY.
63
humble to the dignity of common manhood, and gave new
meaning to the true nature of womanhood • how, by slow
degrees, the church, with its rule of right, of morality,
and of communion, arose ; how the first founders and
apostles of this faith lived and died, and all their gifts were
concentrated in one, of all the characters of certain history
doubtless the loftiest and purest,—the -unflinching, the
unselfish, the great-hearted, the loving Paul.
But deeply as this story must always interest us, let us
not forget that the result was due not to one man or to one
people, that each people gave their share to the whole ;
Greece, her thought and gentleness ; Borne, her social in
stinct, her genius for discipline ; Asia, her intensity of belief
and personal morality. The task that lay before the new
religion was immense. It was, upon a uniform faith, to found
a system of sound and common morality, to reform the
deep-rooted evils of slavery; to institute a method which
should educate, teach, and guide, and bring out the ten
derer and higher instincts of our nature. The powers of
mind and of character had been trained by Greece and
Borne, to the Christian church came the loftier mission of
-ruling the affections and the heart.
Brom henceforth the history of the world shows a new
character.
Now and henceforward we see two elements in civiliza
tion working side by side—-the practical and the moral.
There is now a system to rule the State and a system to
act upon the mind ; a body of men to educate, to guide and
elevate the spirit and the character of the individual, as well
as a set of rulers to enforce the laws and direct the action of
the nation. There is henceforward the State and the Church.
Hitherto all had been confused; statesmen were priests
and teachers; public officers pretended to order men’s
lives by law, and pretended in vain. Henceforward our
view is fixed on Europe, on Western Europe alone: we
leave aside the East, we leave the half Bomanized, the
�64
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
half Christianized East to the empire of Mohammed, to the
Arab, the Mongol, and the Turk. We turn solely to the
heirs of time, the West, in which is centred the progress
and the future of the race. Henceforward, then, for the
ten centuries of the middle ages which succeeded in Wes
tern Europe the fall of the Roman Empire, we have two
movements to watch together—Feudalism and Catholicism
—the system of the State and the system of the Church : let
us turn now to the former.
The vast empire of Rome broke up with prolonged con
vulsions. Its concentration in any single hand, however
necessary as a transition, became too vast as a permanent
system. It wanted a rural population; it was wholly with
out local life. Long the awe-struck barbarians stood pausing
to attack. At length they broke in. Ever bolder and more
numerous tribes poured onwards. In wave after wave
they swept over the whole empire, sacking cities, laying
waste the strongholds, at length storming Rome itself;
and laws, learning, industry, art, civilization itself, seem
swallowed up in the deluge. For a moment it appeared that
all that was Roman had vanished. It was submerged, but
not destroyed. Slowly the waters of this overwhelming
invasion abate. Slowly the old Roman towns and their
institutions begin to appear above the waste like the highest
points of a flooded country. Slowly the old landmarks
re-appear and the forms of civilized existence. Four centu
ries were passed in one continual ebb and flow; but at
length the restless movement subsided. One by one the
conquering tribes settled, took root, and occupied the soil.
Step by step they learned the arts of old Rome. At
length they were transformed from the invaders into the
defenders. King after king strove to give form to the
heaving mass, and put an end to this long era of confusion.
One, at length, the greatest of them all, succeeded, and
reared the framework of modern Europe. It was the imperial Charlemagne, the greatest name of the middle ages,
�65
THE CONNECTION OF HISTORY.
who, like some Roman emperor restored to life, marshalled
the various tribes which had settled in France, Lrermany,
Italy, and the north of Spain, into a single empire, beat
back, in a long life of war, the tide of invaders on the west,
and north, and south, Saxon, Northman, and Saracen, and
awakened anew in the memory of nations the type of civil
government and organized society. His work in itself was
but a single and a temporary effort ; but in its distant con
sequences it has left great permanent effects. It was like a
desperate rally in the midst of confusion ; but it gave man
kind time to recover much that they had lost, In his
empire may be traced the nucleus of the state system of
Western Europe ; by the traditions of his name, the modern
monarchies were raised into power. He too gave shape
and vigour to the first efforts of public administration. But
a still greater result was the indirect effect of his life and
labours. It was by the spirit of his established rule that
the feudal system which had been long spontaneously grow
ing up from beneath the débris of the Roman empire, first
found strength to develope into a methodical form, received
an imperial sanction to its scheme, and the type of its
graduated order of rule. And now what was this feudal
system, and what were its results ?
In the first place, it was a system of local defence.
The knight was bound to guard his fee, the baron his
barony, the count his county, the duke his duchy. Then it
was a system of local government. The lord of the manor
had his court of justice, the great baron his greater court,
and the king his court above all. Then it was a system of
local industry ; the freeholder tilled his own fields, the
knight was responsible for the welfare of his own lands.
The lord had an interest in the prosperity of his lordship.
Hence slowly arose an agricultural industry, impossible in
any other way. The knight cleared the country of robbers,
or beat back invaders, whilst the husbandman ploughed
beneath his castle walls. The nation no longer, as under
F
�66
THE MEANING ON HISTORY.
Greece and Rome, was made up of scattered towns. It had
a local root, a rural population, and complete system of
agricultural life. The monstrous centralization of Rome
was gone, and a local government began. But the feudal
system was not merely material, it was also moral; not
simply political, it was social also. The whole of society
was bound by it together by a long series of gradations.
Each man had his due place and rank, his rights, and his
duties. The knight owed protection to his men; his men
owed their services to him. Under the Roman system,
there had been only citizens and slaves. Row there was none
so high but had grave duties to all below ; none so low, not
the meanest serf, but had a claim for protection. Hence,
all became, from king to serf, recognised members of one
common society. Thence sprung the closest bond which
has ever bound man to man. To the noble natures of the
northern invaders was due the new idea of loyalty, the
spirit of truth, faithfulness, devotion, and trust, the lofty
sense of honour which bound the warrior to his captain, the
vassal to his lord, the squire to his knight. It ripened into
the finest temper which has ever ennobled the man of action,
the essence of chivalry; in its true sense not dead, not des
tined to die, the temper of mercy, courtesy, and truth, of
fearlessness and trust, of a generous use of power and
strength, of succour to the weak, comfort to the poor, reve
rence for age, for goodness, and for woman; which revolts
against injustice, oppression, and untruth, and never listens
to a call unmoved. Is it possible that this spirit is dead ?
This which watched the cradle of modern society, and is the
source of all our poetry and art, does it not live for future
seivice, and new beauty, transiormed from a military to a
peaceful society ? May it not revive the seeds of trust
and duty between man and man, inspire the labourer with
dignity and generosity, raise the landlord to a conscious
ness of duty, and renew the mysterious bond which unites
all those who labour in a common work ?
�THE CONNECTION ON HISTORY.
67
- We turn to the Church, the moral element which per
vades the middle ages. Amidst the crash of the falling
empire, as darker grew the storm which swept over the
visible state on earth, more and more the better spirits
turned their eyes towards a kingdom above the earth. They
turned, as the great Latin father relates, amidst utter cor
ruption to an entire reconstruction of morality ; m the
wreck of all earthly greatness, they set their hearts upon
a future life, and strove amidst anarchy and bloodshed to
found a moral union of society. Hence rose the Catholic
Church, offering to the thoughtful a mysterious and inspir
ing faith ; to the despairing and the remorseful a new and
higher life ; to the wretched comfort, fellowship, and aid;
to the perplexed a grand system of belief and practice—m
its creed Greek, in its worship Asiatic,, in its constitution
Boman. In it we see the Roman genius for organisation
and law, transformed and revived. In the fall of her
material greatness Rome’s social greatness survived.
Rome still remained the centre of the civilized world. Latm
was still the language which bound men of distant lands
together. From Rome went forth the edicts which were
common to all Europe. The majesty of Rome was still the
centre of civilization. The bishops’ court took the place of
that of the imperial governor. The peace of the Church
took the place of the peace of Rome. The barbarian
invaders who overthrew the hollow greatness of the empire,
humbled themselves reverently before the ministers of reli
gion. The Church stood between the conqueror and the
conquered, and joined them both in one. She told to all
Roman and barbarian, slave or freeman, great or weak—
how there was one God, one Saviour of all, one equa sou
in all, one common judgment, one common life hereafter.
She told them how all, as children of one Father, were in His
eyes equally dear; how charity, mercy, humility, devotion
alone would make them worthy of His love ; and at these
words there rose up in the fine spirits of the new races a
�68
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
sense of brotherhood amongst mankind, a desire for à higher
life, a zeal for all the gentler qualities and the higher duties,
such as the world had not seen before. Thus was her first
task accomplished, and she founded a system of morality
common to all and possible to all. She spoke to the slave
of his immortal soul, to the master of the guilt of slavery.
Master and slave should meet alike within her walls, and
lie side by side within her tomb ; and thus her second task
was accomplished, and she overthrew for ever the system
of slavery, and raised up the labourer into the dignity of
a citizen. Then she told how their common Master, of
power unbounded, had loved the humble and the weak.
She told of the simple lives of saints and martyrs, their
tender care of the poorer brethren, their spirit of benevolence, self-sacrifice, and self-abasement ; and thus the third
great task was accomplished, when she placed the essence
of practical religion in care for the weak, in affection for
the family, in reverence for woman, in benevolence to all
and in personal self-denial. Next, she undertook to edu
cate all alike. She provided a body of common teachers ;
she organized schools; she raised splendid cathedrals,
where all might be brought into the presence of the beauti
ful, and see all forms of art in their highest perfection
architecture, and sculpture, and painting, and work in
glass, in iron, and in wood, heightened by inspiring ritual
and touching music. She accepted all without thought of
birth or place. She gathered to herself all the knowledge
of the time, though all was subordinate to religious life.
The priests, so far as such were needed, were poets, histo
rians, dramatists, musicians, architects, sculptors, painters,
judges, lawyers, magistrates, ministers, students of science,
engineers, philosophers, astronomers, and moralists. Lastly,’
she had another task, and she accomplished even that. It
was to stand between the tyrant and his victim ; to succour
the oppressed, to humble the evil ruler, to moderate the
horrors of war ; above all, to join nation to nation, to
�THE CONNECTION OE HISTORY.
69
mediate between hostile races, to give to civilised Europe
some element of union and cohesion.
. .
Let us think of it as it was in its glory, not in its decay.
Letusrememberitasa systemoflife which for ten centuries
possessed the passionate devotion of the foremost spin s o
their time ; one which has left us a rich store of thought
and teaching, of wise precept, lofty poetry, and matchless
devotion; as a system which really penetrated and acted
on the lives of men. Let us think of it as it was m essence,
truly the union of all the men of intellect and character
of their age towards one common end; not like Egyptian
priests, pretending to govern by law ; not like Greek philo,
sophers, expounding to a chosen sect; not like modern
savants, thinking for mere love of thought, or mere ove
fame, without method or concert, without moral guidance,
without social purpose ; but a system in which the wises
and the best men of their day, themselves reared m a com
mon teaching, organized on a vast scale, and direc e . y
one general rule, devoted the whole energies of their brains
and hearts in unison together, to the moral gui nee o
society ; sought to know only that they might eac , o
teach only to improve, and lived only to instruct to raise,
to humanize their fellow men. Let us think of it us as i
was at its best ; and in this forget even the cruelty, the
imposture, and the degradation of its fall ; let horror for its
vices and pity for its errors be lost in one sentiment of admi
ration, gratitude, and honour, for this the best and the las
of all the organized systems of human society ; of ail the
institutions of mankind, the most worthy of remembrance
and regret.
n • <But if we are generous in our judgment let us be jus .
The Catholic system ended, it is most true, in disastrous
and shameful ruin. Excellent in intention and m method, it
was from the first doomed to inevitable corruption from t e
inherent faults of its constitution. It had worthily trame
tod elevated the noblest side of human nature-the reh-
�70
THE MEANING OE HISTORY.
gious, the moral, and the social instincts of our being; and
the energy with which it met this the prime want of men,
upheld it through the long era of its corruption, and still
upholds it in its last pitiable spasm. But with the intellec
tual and with the practical sphere of man’s life, it was by
its nature incompetent to deal. In its zeal for man’s moral
progress it had taken its stand upon a false and even a prepos
terous belief. Burning to subdue the lower passions of man’s
nature, it had vainly hoped to crush the practical instincts
of his activity. It discarded with disdain the thoughts and
labours of the ancient world. It proclaimed as the ideal of
human life, a visionary and even a selfish asceticism. For
a period, for a long period, its transcendent and indispensa
ble services maintained it in spite of every defect and vice ;
but at last the time came when the outraged instincts
reasserted their own, and showed how hopeless is any reli
gion or system of life not based on a conception of human
nature as a whole at once complete and true. The Church
began in indifference towards philosophy and contempt for
material improvement. Indifference and contempt passed
at length into hatred and horror; and it ended in denounc
ing science, and in a bitter conflict with industry. At last
it had become, in spite of its better self, the enemy of all
progress, all thought, all industry, all freedom. It allied
itself with all that was retrograde and arbitrary. It fell
from bad to worse, and settled into an existence of timid
repression. Hence it came that the Church, attempting1 to
teach upon a basis of falsehood, to direct man’s active life
upon a merely visionary creed, to govern a society which
it only half understood, succeeded only for a time. It was
scarcely founded before it began to break up. It had
scarcely put forth its strength before it began to decay. It
stood like one of its own vast cathedrals, building for ages
yet never completed; falling to ruin whilst yet unfinished;
filling us with a sense of beauty and of failure; a monu
ment of noble design and misdirected strength. It fell like
�the connection on history.
71
the Roman empire, with prolonged convulsion and corrup
tion, and left us a memory of cruelty, ignorance, tyranny,
rapacity and vice, which we too often forget were hut the
symptoms and consequences of its fall.
And now we have stood beside the rise and fall of four
great stages of the history of mankind. The priestly
systems of Asia, the intellectual activity of Greece, the
military empire of Rome, the moral government of Catho
licism, had each been tried in turn, and each had been
found wanting. Each had disdained the virtues of the
others; each had failed to incorporate the others. With
the fall of the Catholic and feudal system, we enter upon
the age of modern society. It is an age of dissolution, re
construction, variety, movement, and confusion. It is an
era in which all the former elements re-assert themselves
with new life, all that had ever been attempted is renewed
again ; an era of amazing complexity, industry, and force,
in which eveiy belief, opinion, and idea is criticised, trans
formed, and expanded. Every institution of society and
habit of life is thoroughly unsettled and remodelled; all the
sciences constructed—art, industry, policy, religion, philo
sophy, and morality, developed with a vigorous and con
stant growth; but, withal, it is an era in which all is
individual, separate, and free, without any system, or regu
larity, or unity, or harmony.
First, the feudal system broke up under the influence of
the very industry which it had itself fostered and reared.
The great fiefs as they became settled, gradually gathered
into masses ; one by one they fell into the hands of kings,
and at length upon the ruins of feudalism arose the great
monarchies, and the feudal atoms crystallized into the
actual nations of Europe. The variety and dispersion of
the feudal system vanished. A central monarch established
one uniform order, police, and justice ; and modern political
society, as we know it rose. The invention of gunpowder
made the knight helpless, the bullet pierced his mail, and
�72
THE MEANING OE HISTORY.
standing armies took the place of the feudal militia, The
discovery of the compass opened the ocean to commerce.
The free towns expanded with a new industry, and covered
the continent with infinitely varied products. The knight
became the landlord, the man-at-arms became the tenant,
the serf became the free labourer, and the emancipation of
the worker, the first, the greatest victory of the Church
was complete.
Thus, at last, the energies of men ceased to be occupied
by war, to which a small section of the society was per
manently devoted. Peace became in fact the natural, not
the accidental state of man. Society passed into its final
phase of industrial existence. Peace, industry, and wealth
again gave scope to thought. The riches of the earth were
ransacked, new continents were opened, intercourse in
creased over the whole earth. Greeks, flying from Con
stantinople before the Turks, spread over Europe, bringing
with them books, instruments, inscriptions, gems, and
sculptures; the science, the literature, and the inventions
of the ancient world, long stored up and forgotten on the
shores of the Bosphorus. Columbus discovered America,
The Portuguese sailed round Africa to India; a host of
daring adventurers penetrated untrodden seas and lands ;
man entered at last upon the full dominion of the earth.
Copernicus and Galileo unveiled the mystery of the world,
and made a revolution in all thought. Mathematics,
chemistry, botany, and medicine, preserved mainly by the
Arabs during the middle ages, were again taken up almost
where the Greeks had left them. The elements of the
material earth were eagerly explored. The system of ex
periment (which Bacon reduced to a method) was worked
out by the common labour of philosophers and artists.
For the first time the human form was dissected and ex
plored. Physiology, as a science, began. Human history
and society became the subject of regular and enlightened
thought. Politics became a branch of philosophy. With
�THE CONNECTION OF HISTORY.
all this th© new knowledge was scattered by the printing
press, itself the product and the stimulus of the movement,
in a word, the religious ban was raised from off the human
powers. The ancient world was linked on to the modern.
Science, speculation, and invention lived again after twelve
centuries of trance. A fresh era of progress opened with
the new-found treasures of the past.
Next, before this transformation of ideas, the Church
collapsed. Its hollow dogmas were exposed, its narrow
prejudices ridiculed, its corruptions probed. Mens’ con
sciences and brains rose up against an institution which
pretended to teach without knowledge, and to govern
though utterly disorganized. Convulsion followed on con
vulsion ; the struggle we call the Reformation opened, and
for a century and a half shook Europe to its foundations.
At the close of this long era of massacre and war, it was
found that the result achieved was small indeed. Europe
had. been split into two religious systems, of which neither
one nor the other was fit for its duty, Admiration for the
noble characters of the first Reformers, for their intensity,
truth, and zeal, their heroic lives and deaths, the affecting
beauty of their purposes and hopes is yet possible to us,
whilst we confess that the Protestant, like the Catholic
faith, had failed to organize human industry, society, and
thought; that both were alike hollow, bigoted, and weak,
and both had failed to satisfy the wants and hopes of man.
More and more has thought and knowledge grown into
even fiercer conflict with authority of Book or Pope ; more
and more in Catholic France as in Protestant England, does
the moral guidance of men pass from the hands of priests,
or sect, to be assumed, if it be assumed at all, by the poet,
the philosopher, the essayist, and even the journalist; more
and more does Church and sect stand dumb and helpless
in presence of the evils with which society is rife.
Side by side the religious and the political system
tottered in ruin together. From the close of the fifteenth
�74
THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
century, now one/now the other was furiously assailed.
Foi’ the most part both were struck at once. The long
religious wars of Germany and France ; the heroic defence
of the free Republic of Holland against the might of
Spain ; the glorious repulse of its Armada by England ; the
immortal revolution achieved by our greatest stateman,
Cromwell; the struggle of his worthy successor, William
of Orange, against the oppression of Louis XIV., were all
but parts of one long struggle, which lasted during the
whole of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, a struggle
in which religion and politics both equally shared, a struggle
between the old powers of Feudalism and Catholicism on
the one side, with all the strength of ancient systems,
against the half-formed, ill-governed force of freedom, in
dustry, and thought; a long and varied struggle in which
aristocracy, monarchy, privileged caste, arbitrary and mili
tary power, church formalism, dogmatism, superstition,
narrow teaching, visionary worship, and hollow creeds,
were each in turn attacked, and each in turn prostrated.
A general armistice followed this long and exhausting
struggle. The principles of Protestantism, Constitution
alism, Toleration, and the balance of power, established a
system of compromise, and for a century restored some
order in the political and religious world. But in the world
of ideas the contest grew still keener. Industry expanded
to incredible proportions, and the social system was trans
formed before it. Thought soared into unimagined regions,
and reared a new realm of science, discovery, and art..
Wild social and religious visions arose and passed through
the conscience of mankind. At last the forms and ideas
of human life, material, social, intellectual, and moral, had
all been utterly transformed, and the fabric of European
society rested in peril on the crumbling crust of the past.
The great convulsion came. The gathering storm of cen
turies burst at length in the French Revolution. Then,
indeed, it seemed that chaos was come again. It was as if
�THE CONNECTION OE HISTORY.
75
an earthquake had come, blotting out all trace of what
had been, engulfing the most ancient structures, destroy
ing all former landmarks, and scattering society in confu
sion and dismay. It spreads from Paris through every
comer of Prance, from Prance to Italy, to Spain, to Ger
many, to England; it pierces, like the flash from a vast
storm-cloud, through every obstacle of matter, space, or
form. It kindles all ideas of men, and gives wild energy
to all purposes of action. For though terrible it was not
deadly. It came not to destroy but to construct, not to
kill but to give life. And through the darkest and bloodiest
whirl of the chaos there rose up clear on high, before the
bewildered eyes of men, a vision of a new and greater era
yet to come—of brotherhood, of freedom, and of union,
of never ending progress, of mutual help, trust, co-opera
tion, and goodwill; an era of true knowledge, of real
science, and practical discovery; but, above all, an era of
active industry for all; of the dignity, and consecration of
labour, of a social life, just to all, common to all, and
beneficent to all.
That great revolution is not ended. The questions it
proposed are not yet solved. We live still in the heavings
of its shock. It yet remains with us to show how the last
vestiges of the feudal, hereditary, and aristocratic systems
may give place to a genuine, an orderly, and permanent
republic ; how the trammels of a faith long grown useless
and retrograde may be removed without injury to the
moral, religious, and social instincts, which are still much
entangled in it; how industry may be organized, and the
Workman enrolled with full rights of citizenship, a free, a
powerful, and a cultivated member of the social body.
Such is the task before us. The ground is all prepared, the
materials are abundant and sufficient. We have a rich
harvest of science, a profusion of material facilities, a vast
collection of the products, ideas, and inventions of past
ages. Every vein of human life is full; every faculty has
�THE MEANING OF HISTORY.
been trained to full efficiency; every want of our nature is
supplied. We need now only harmony, order, union ; we
need only to group into a whole these powers and gifts; the
task before us is to discover some complete and balanced
system of life; some common basis of belief; some object
for the imperishable religious instincts and aspirations of
mankind; some faith to bind the existence of man to the
visible universe around him; some common social end for
thought, action, and feeling; some common ground for
teaching, studying, or judging. We need to extract the
essence of all older forms of civilization, to combine them,
and harmonize them in one, a system of existence which
may possess something of the calm, the completeness, and
the symmetry of the earliest societies of men; the zeal
for truth, knowledge, science, and improvement, which
mark the Greek, with something of his grace, his life, his
radiant poetry and art; the deep social spirit of Rome,
its political sagacity, its genius for government, law and
freedom, its noble sense of public life; above all else, the
constancy, earnestness, and tenderness of the mediseval
system ; its sense of the surrender of self to a Power above,
its undying zeal for the spiritual union of man kind ;—and
with all this the industry, the knowledge, the variety, the
activity, of modem life.
THE END.
-
Habbild, Printer, Lohdos.
/ •
♦ W.SS*’
Ji*/-
��■«”—
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The meaning of history : two lectures
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Harrison, Frederic [1831-1923]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 76 p. ; 19 cm.
Notes: Printed by Harrild, London. Date in Roman numerals. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1892
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N299
Subject
The topic of the resource
History
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The meaning of history : two lectures), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
History
NSS
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/b34d0544de239037aa7c3d912933884d.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=lnMpzbR1Mz-K9xAHlVbFPiOSo%7EmnXxCeH2eG%7EotY7uINdwlw4A1R6Xwj5GiaLLiUkWnU9M9OLvypBy77IBV3K4orLdnbC3XVnlexp%7E7ZEhwhdGeQTqZ1DOfb4yTEetOHrYl3bSqYCLTRhiwad2P9cvQE4hKTdXuC0dBU2S-AHynBF35tX%7EsjEMdGWbPwcCoQHhDCo4nCKldcsNzEHW6VLFMmwB9dWs96ME-KYffLYvS%7EhhwNkxZEOIbJID-A7PE5J8TAU-7fqVDJb556RnG5tlEoAUQdrCCeJBNGecQ3ZH2YLTHVT%7ElGBnoQlsaMAWAe4gfWOe9e3RsYETGnpJf2AQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
060c030f8b49f49278ea2e7093583363
PDF Text
Text
^onalsecularsociety
ABRAHAM
LINCOLN
AN ORATION
BY
COLONEL R. G. INGERSOLL.
Price Threepence.
LONDON:
R. FORDER, 28 STONECUTTER STREET, E.O.
1893.
�LONDON .*
PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY G. W. FOOTE,
AT 14 CLERKENWELL GREEN, E.C.
�N) 3
4
ORATION ON ABRAHAM LINCOLN.
EiGHTY-FOUR years ago to-day, two babes were born—
one in the woods of Kentucky, amid the hardships and
poverty of pioneers ; one in England, surrounded by
wealth and culture. One was educated in the University
of N ature, the other at Oxford.
One associated his name with the enfranchisement
of labor, with the emancipation of millions, with the
salvation of the Republic. He is known to us as
Abraham Lincoln.
The other broke the chains of superstition and filled
the world with intellectual light, and he is known as
Charles Darwin.
Because of these two men the nineteenth century is
illustrious.
A few men and women make a nation glorious—
Shakespeare made England immortal ; Voltaire civilised
and humanised France ; Goethe, Schiller, apd Hum
boldt lifted Germany into the light ; Angelo, Raphael,
Galileo, and Bruno crowned with fadeless laurel the
Italian brow ; and now the most precious treasure of
the Great Republic is the memory of Abraham Lincoln.
Every generation has its heroes, its iconoclasts, its
pioneers, its ideals. The people always have been and
still are divided, at least into two classes—the many,
who with their backs to the sunrise worship the past ;
and the few, who keep their faces towards the dawn—
the many, who are satisfied with the world as it is ;
the Jew, who labor and suffer for the future, for those
�( 4 )
to be, and who seek to rescue the oppressed, to destroy
the cruel distinctions of caste, and to civilise mankind.
Yet it sometimes happens that the liberator of one
age becomes the oppressor of the next. His reputation
becomes so great, he is so revered and worshipped»
that his followers, in his name, attack the hero who
endeavors to take another step in advance.
The heroes of the Revolution, forgetting the justice
for which they fought, put chains upon the limbs of
others, and in their names the lovers of liberty were
denounced as ingrates and traitors.
In our country there were for many years two great
political parties, and each of these parties had con
servatives and extremists. The extremists of the
Democratic party were in the rear and wished to go
back; the extremists of the Republican were in the
front and wished to go forward. The extreme Democrat
was willing to destroy the Union for the sake of
slavery, and the extreme Republican was willing to
destroy the Union for the sake of liberty.
Neither party could succeed without the votes of its
extremists.
This was the political situation in 1860.
The extreme Democrats would not vote for Douglas,
but the extreme Republicans did vote for Lincoln.
Lincoln occupied the middle ground, and was the
compromise candidate of his own party. He had
lived for many years in the intellectual territory of
compromise—in a part of our country settled by
Northern and Southern men—where Northern and
Southern ideas met, and the ideas of the two sections
were brought together and compared.
The sympathies of Lincoln, his ties of kindred, were
with the South. His convictions, his sense of justice,
and his ideals, were with the North. He knew the
horrors of slavery, and he felt the unspeakable
�(5 )
ecstacies and glories of freedom. He had the kind
ness, the gentleness, of true greatness, and he could not
have been a master; he had the manhood and
independence of true greatness, and he could not have
been a slave. He was just, and incapable of putting a
burden upon others that he himself would not
willingly bear.
He was merciful and profound, and it was not
necessary for him to read the history of the world to
know that liberty and slavery could not live in the
same nation, or in the same brain. Lincoln was a
statesman. And there is this difference between a
politician and a statesman. A politician schemes and
works in every way to make the people do something
for him. The statesman wishes to do something for
the people. With him place and power are means to
an end, and the end is the good of his country.
The Republic had reached a crisis.
The conflict between liberty and slavery could no
longer be delayed. For three-quarters of a century
the forces had been gathering for the battle.
After the Revolution, principle was sacrificed for the
sake of gain. The Constitution contradicted the
Declaration. Liberty as a principle was held in
contempt. Slavery took possession of the Government.
Slavery made the laws, corrupted courts, dominated
presidents and demoralised the people.
In 1840, when Harrison and Van Buren were candi
dates for the Presidency, the Whigs of Indiana issued
a circular giving reasons for the election of Harrison
and the defeat of Van Buren. The people of Indiana
were advised to vote against Van Buren because he,
when a member of the New York Legislature, had
voted to enfranchise colored men who had property to
the extent of two hundred and fifty dollars. This was
the crime of Van Buren.
�( 6)
The reason why the people should support Harrison
was that he had signed eleven petitions to make
Indiana a slave State.
Mr. Douglas voiced the feeling of the majority when
he declared that he did not care whether slavery was
voted up or down.
From the heights of philosophy—standing above the
contending hosts, above the prejudices, the senti
mentalities of the day—Lincoln was great enough and
brave enough and wise enough to utter these prophetic
words : “A house divided against itself cannot stand.
I believe this Government cannot permanently endure
half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union
to be dissolved ; I do not expect the house to fall; but
I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become
all the one thing or the other. Either the opponents
of slavery will arrest the further spread of it, and
place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief
that it is in the course of ultimate extinction, or its
advocates will push it further until it becomes alike
lawful in all the States, old as well as new, North as
well as South.”
This declaration was the standard around which
gathered the grandest political party the world has
ever seen, and this declaration made Lincoln the leader
of that vast host.
In this, the first great crisis, Lincoln uttered the
victorious truth that made him the foremost man in
the Republic.
The people decided at the polls that a house divided
against itself could not stand, and that slavery had
cursed soul and soil enough.
It is not a common thing to elect a really great man
to fill the highest official position. I do not say that
the great presidents have been chosen by accident.
�( 7 )
Probably it would be better to say that they were the
favorites of a happy chance.
The average man is afraid of genius. He feels as
an awkward man feels in the presence of a sleight-ofhand performer. He admires and suspects. Genius
appears to carry too much sail—lacks prudence,
has too much courage. The ballast of dullness inspires
confidence.
By a happy chance Lincoln was nominated and
elected in spite of his fitness—and the patient, gentle,
and just and loving man was called upon to bear as
great a burden as man has ever borne.
II.
Then came another crisis—the crisis of Secession,
and Civil War.
Again Lincoln spoke the deepest feeling and the
highest thought of the Nation. In his first message
he said : “ The central idea of secession is the essence
of anarchy.”
He also showed conclusively that the North and
South, in spite of secession, must remain face to face
—that physically they could not separate—that they
must have more or less commerce, and that this com
merce must be carried on, either between the two
sections as friends, or as aliens.
This situation and its consequences he pointed out
to absolute perfection in these words : “ Can aliens
make treaties easier than friends can make laws ? Can
treaties be more faithfully enforced between aliens
than laws among other friends ?”
After having stated fully and fairly the philosophy
of the conflict, after having said enough to satisfy any
calm and thoughtful mind, he addressed himself to the
hearts of America. Probably there are few finer
passages in literature than the close of Lincoln’s
inaugural address : “ I am loth to close. We are not
�(«)
enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies.
Though passion may have strained, it must not break,
our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory
stretching from every battle-field and patriotic grave
to every loving heart and hearthstone all over this
broad land, will swell the chorus of the Union when
again touched, as surely they will be, by the better
angels of our nature.”
These noble, these touching, these pathetic words,
were delivered in the presence of rebellion, in the
midst of spies and conspirators—surrounded by but
few friends, most of whom were unknown, and some
of whom were wavering in their fidelity—at a time
when secession was arrogant and organised, when
patriotism was silent, and when, to quote the expres
sive words of Lincoln himself, “ Sinners were calling
the righteous to repentance.”
When Lincoln became President, he was held in
contempt by the South—underrated by the North and
East—not appreciated even by his cabinet—and yet he
was not only one of the wisest, but one of the shrewdest
of mankind. Knowing that he had the right to enforce
the laws of the United States and Territories—knowing,
as he did, that the secessionists were in the wrong, he
also knew that they had sympathisers not only in the
North but in other lands.
Consequently he felt that it was of the utmost
importance that the South should fire the first shot,
should do some act that would solidify the North and
gain for us the justification of the civilised world. He
so managed affairs that while he was attempting simply
to give food to our soldiers, the South commenced hos
tilities and fired on Sumter.
This course was pursued by Lincoln in spite of the
advice of many friends, and yet a wiser thing was
never done.
�( 9 )
At that time Lincoln appreciated the scope and con
sequences of the impending conflict. Above all other
thoughts in his mind was this : “ This conflict will
settle the question, at least for centuries to come,
whether man is capable of governing himself, and con
sequently is of greater importance to the free than to
the enslaved.’*
He knew what depended on the issue and he said :
“ We shall nobly save, or meanly lose, the last, best
hope of earth.”
III.
Then came a crisis in the North.
It became clearer and clearer to Lincoln’s mind, day
by day, that the rebellion was slavery, and that it was
necessary to keep the border States on the side of the
Union. For this purpose he proposed a scheme of
emancipation and colonisation—a scheme by which the
owners of slaves should be paid the full value of what
they called their “ property.” He called attention to
the fact that he had adhered to the Act of Congress to
confiscate property used for insurrectionary purposes
—that the Union must be preserved, and that, there
fore, all indispensable means must be employed to
that end.
If, in war, a nation has the right to take the property
of its citizens—of its friends—certainly it has the
right to take the property of those it has the right to
kill.
He knew that if the border States agreed to gradual
emancipation, and received compensation for their
slaves, they would be for ever lost to the Confederacy,
whether secession succeeded or not. It was objected
at the time, by some, that the scheme was far too
expensive ; but Lincoln, wiser than his advisers—far
wiser than his enemies—demonstrated that from an
economical point of view, his course was best.
�( 10 )
He proposed that 400 dols. be paid for slaves,
including men, women, and children. This was a
large price, and yet he showed how much cheaper it
was to purchase than to carry on the war.
At that time, at the price mentioned, there were
about 750,000 dols. worth of slaves in Delaware. The
cost of carrying on the war was at least two millions
of dollars a day, and for one-third of one day’s expenses
all the slaves in Delaware could be purchased. He
also showed that all the slaves in Delaware, Kentucky,
and Missouri could be bought at the same price for
less than the expense of carrying on the war for eighty
seven days.
This was the wisest thing that could have been pro
posed, and yet such was the madness of the South,
such the indignation of the North, that the advice was
unheeded.
Again, in July, 1862, he urged on the Representa
tives of the border States a scheme of gradual com
pensated emancipation ; but the Representatives were
too deaf to hear, too blind to see.
Lincoln always hated slavery, and yet he felt the
obligations and duties of his position. In his first
message he assured the South that the laws, including
the most odious of all—the law for the return of
fugitive slaves—would be enforced. The South would
not hear. Afterwards he proposed to purchase the
slaves of the border States ; but the proposition was
hardly discussed, hardly heard. Events came thick
and fast; theories gave way to facts, and everything
was left to force.
The extreme Democrat of the North was fearful that
slavery might be destroyed, that the Constitution
might be broken, and that Lincoln, after all, could not
be trusted; and at the same time the radical Repub-
�(11)
lican feared that Lincoln loved the Union more than
he did liberty.
The fact is that he tried to discharge the obligations
of his great office, knowing from the first that slavery
must perish. The course pursued by Lincoln was so
gentle, so kind and persistent, so wise and logical, that
millions of Northern Democrats sprang to the defence,
not only of the Union, but of his administration.
Lincoln refused to be led or hurried by Fremont or
Hunter, by Greeley or Sumner. From first to last he
was the real leader, and he kept step with events.
IV.
On July 22, 1862, Lincoln called together his cabinet
for the purpose of showing the draft of a Proclamation
of Emancipation, stating to them|that he did not wish
their advice, as he had made up his mind.
After the Proclamation was signed Lincoln held it,
waiting for some great victory before giving it to the
world, so that it might appear to be the child of
strength.
This was on July 22, 1862. On August 22 of the
same year Lincoln wrote his celebrated letter to Horace
Greeley, in which he stated that his object was to save
the Union ; that he would save it with slavery if he
could; that if it was necessary to destroy slavery in
order to save the Union, he would; in other words, he
would do what was necessary to save the Union.
This letter disheartened, to a great degree, thousands
and millions of the friends of freedom. They felt
that Mr. Lincoln had not attained the moral height
upon which they supposed he stood. And yet, when
this letter was written, the Emancipation Proclamation
was in his hands, and had been for thirty days,
waiting only an opportunity to give it to the world.
Some two weeks after the letter to Greeley, Lincoln
was waited on by a committee of clergymen, and was
�( 12 )
by them informed that it was God’s will that he should
issue a Proclamation of Emancipation. He replied to
them, in substance, that the day of miracles had passed.
He also mildly and kindly suggested that if it were
God’s will this Proclamation should be issued, certainly
God would have made known that will to him—to the
person whose duty it was to issue it.
On September 22, 1862, the most glorious date in
the history of the Republic, the Proclamation of
Emancipation was issued.
Lincoln had reached the generalisation of all argu
ments upon the question of slavery and freedom—a
generalisation that never has been, and probably never
will be, excelled : In giving freedom to the slave, we
assure freedom to the free.
This is absolutely true. Liberty can be retained,
can be enjoyed, only by giving it to others. The
spendthrift saves, the miser is prodigal. In the realm
of Freedom, waste is husbandry. He who puts chains
upon the body of another shackles his own soul. The
moment the Proclamation was issued, the cause of the
Republic became sacred.
From that moment the
North fought for the human race. From that moment
the North stood under the blue and stars, the flag of
Nature—sublime and free.
In 1831 Lincoln saw in New Orleans a colored girl
sold at auction. The scene filled his soul with
ndignation and horror.
Turning to his companion, he said, “ Boys, if I ever
get a chance to hit slavery, by God I’ll hit it hard I ”
The helpless girl, unconsciously, had planted in a
great heart the seeds of the Proclamation.
Thirty-one years afterwards the chance came, the
oath was kept, and to four millions of slaves, of men,
women, and children, was restored liberty, the jewel
of the soul.
�( 13 )
In the history, in the fiction of the world, there
is nothing more intensely dramatic than this.
Lincoln held within his brain the grandest truths,
and he held them as unconsciously, as easily, as
naturally as a waveless pool holds within its stainless
breast a thousand stars.
Let us think for one moment of the distance
travelled from the first ordinance of secession to the
Proclamation of Emancipation.
In 1861 a thirteenth amendment to the Constitution
was offered to the South. By this proposed amend
ment slavery was to be made perpetual. This com
promise was refused, and in its stead came the
Proclamation. Let us take another step.
In 1865 the thirteenth^ amendment was adopted.
The one proposed made slavery perpetual. The one
adopted in 1865 abolished slavery and made the great
Republic free forever.
The first state to ratify this amendment was Illinois.
v.
We were surrounded by enemies. Many of the
so-called great in Europe and England were against us.
They hated the Republic, despised our institutions,
and sought in many ways to aid the South.
Mr. Gladstone announced that Jefferson Davis had
made a nation and he did not believe the restoration of
the American Union by force attainable.
From the Vatican came words of encourgement for
the South.
It was declared that the North was fighting for
empire and the South for independence.
The Marquis of Salisbury said : “ The people of the
South are the natural allies of England. The North
keeps an opposition shop in the same department of
trade as ourselves.”
�( 14 )
Some of their statesmen declared that the subjuga
tion of the South by the North would be a calamity to
the world.
Louis Napoleon was another enemy, and he endea
vored to establish a monarchy in Mexico to the end
that the great North might be destroyed. But the
patience, the uncommon common sense, the statesman
ship of Lincoln—in spite of foreign hate and Northern
division—triumphed over all. And now we forgive
all foes. Victory makes forgiveness easy.
Lincoln was, by nature, a diplomat. He knew the
art of sailing against the wind. He had as much
shrewdness as is consistent with honesty. He under
stood, not only the rights of individuals, but of nations.
In all his correspodence with other governments he
neither wrote nor sanctioned a line which afterwards
was used to tie his hands. In the use of perfect
English he easily rose above his advisers and all his
fellows.
No one claims that Lincoln did all. He could have
done nothing without the great and splendid generals
in the field ; and the generals could have done
nothing without their armies. The praise is due
to all—to the private as much as to the officer ; to the
lowest who did his duty, as much as to the highest.
My heart goes out to the brave private as much as
to the leader of the host.
But Lincoln stood at the centre and with infinite
patience, with consummate skill, with the genius of
goodness directed, cheered, consoled, and conquered.
VI.
Slavery was the cause of the war, and slavery was
the perpetual stumbling-block. As the war went on
question after question arose—questions that could not
be answered by theories. Should we hand back the
�( 15 )
slave to his master, when the master was using his
slave to destroy the Union? If the South was right
slaves were property, and by the laws of war anything
that might be used to the advantage of the enemy
might be confiscated by us. Events did not wait for
discussion. General Butler denominated the negro as
a “ contraband.” Congress provided that the property
of the rebels might be confiscated.
Lincoln moved along this line.
Each step was delayed by Northern division, but
every step was taken in the same direction.
First, Lincoln offered to execute every law, including
the most infamous of all ; second, to buy the slaves of
the border states ; third, to confiscate the property of
rebels ; fourth, to treat slaves as contraband of war ;
fifth, to use slaves for the purpose of putting down the
rebellion ; sixth, to arm these slaves and clothe them
in the uniform of the Republic ; seventh, to make them
citizens, and allow them to stand on an equality with
their white brethren under the flag of the Republic.
During all these years, Lincoln moved with the
people—with the masses, and every step he took has
been justified by the considerate judgment of mankind.
VII.
Lincoln not only watched the war, but kept his hand
on the political pulse. In 1863 a tide set in against the
administration. A Republican meeting was to be held
in Springfield, Illinois, and Lincoln wrote a letter to
be read at this convention. It was in his happiest vein.
It was a perfect defence of his administration, including
the Proclamation of Emancipation. Among other
things he said: “ But the proclamation, as law, either
is valid or it is not valid. If it is not valid it needs no
retraction, but if it is valid it cannot be retracted, any
more than the dead can be brought to life.”
�( 16 )
To the Northern Democrats who said they would not
fight for negroes, Lincoln replied: “ Some of them
seem willing to fight for you—but no matter.”
Of negro soldiers : “ But negroes, like other people,
act upon motives. Why should they do anything for
us if we will do nothing for them? If they stake
their lives for us they must be prompted by the
strongest motive—even by the promise of freedom.
And the promise, being made, must be kept.”
There is one line in this letter that will give it
immortality: “The Father of waters again goes un
vexed to the sea.” This line is worthy of Shakespeare.
Another: “ Among freemen there can be no suc
cessful appeal from the ballot to the bullet.”
He draws a comparison between the white men
against us and the black men for'Us : “And then there
will be some black men who can remember that with
silent tongue and clenched teeth and steady eye and
well-poised bayonet they have helped mankind on to
this great consummation ; while I fear there will be
some white ones unable to forget that with malignant
heart and deceitful speech they strove to hinder it.”
Under the influence of this letter, the love of
country, of the Union, and above all the love of liberty,
took possession of the heroic North.
The Republican party became the noblest organisa
tion the world has ever seen.
There was the greatest moral exaltation ever known.
The spirit of liberty took possession of the people.
The masses became sublime.
To fight for yourself is good.
To fight for others is grand.
To fight for your country is noble.
To fight for the human race, for the liberty of land
and brain, is nobler still.
�( 17 )
As a matter of fact, the defenders of slavery had
sown the seeds of their own defeat. They dug the pit
in which they fell. Clay and Webster and thousands
of others had by their eloquence made the Union
almost sacred. The Union was the very tree of life,
the source and stream and sea of liberty and law.
For the sake of slavery millions stood by the Union,
for the sake of liberty millions knelt at the altar of the
Union ; and this love of the Union is what, at last,
overwhelmed the Confederate hosts.
It does not seem possible that only a few years ago
our Constitution, our laws, our Courts, the Pulpit and
the Press defended and upheld the institution of
slavery—that it was a- crime to feed the hungry, to give
water to the lips of thirst, shelter to a woman flying
from the whip and chain !
The old flag still flies, the stars are there—the stains
have gone.
VIII.
Lincoln always saw the end. He was unmoved by
the storms and currents of the times. He advanced
too rapidly for the conservative politicians, too slowly
for the radical enthusiasts. He occupied the line of
safety, and held by his personality—by the force of
his great character, by his charming candor—the
masses on his side.
The soldiers thought of him as a father.
All who had lost their sons in battle felt that they
had his sympathy—felt that his face was as sad as
theirs. They knew that Lincoln was actuated by one
motive, and that his energies were bent to the attain
ment of one end—the salvation of the Republic.
Success produces envy, and envy often ends in
conspiracy.
In 1864 many politicians united against him. It is
not for me to criticise their motive or their actions®
�.
( 18 )
It is enough to say that the magnanimity of Lincoln
towards those who had deserted and endeavored to
destroy him, is without parallel in the political history
of the world. This magnanimity made his success not
only possible, but certain.
During all the years of war Lincoln stood, the
embodiment of mercy, between discipline and death.
He pitied the imprisoned and condemned. He took
the unfortunate in his arms, and was the friend even
of the convict. He knew temptation’s strength—the
weakness of the will—and how in fury’s sudden flame
the judgment drops the scales, and passion—blind and
deaf—usurps the throne.
Through all the years Lincoln will be known as
Lincoln the Loving, Lincoln the Merciful.
Lincoln had the keenest sense of humor, and always
saw the laughable side even of disaster. In his humor
there was logic and the best of sense. No matter how
complicated the question, or how embarrassing the
situation, his humor furnished an answer, and a door
of escape.
Vallandingham was a friend of the South, and did
what he could to sow the seeds of failure. In his
opinion everything, except rebellion, was unconstitu
tional.
He was arrested, convicted by a court martial, and
sentenced to imprisonment in Fort Warren.
There was doubt about the legality of the trial, and
thousands in the North denounced the whole proceed
ings as tyrannical and infamous. At the same time
millions demanded that Vallandingham should be
punished.
Lincoln’s humor came to the rescue. He disapproved
of the findings of the court, changed the punishment,
and ordered that Mr. Vallandingham should be sent to
his friends in the South.
�( 19 )
Those who regarded the act as unconstitutional
almost forgave it for the sake of its humor.
Horace Greeley always had the idea that he was
greatly superior to Lincoln, and for a long time he
insisted that the people of the North and the people of
the South desired peace. He took it upon himself to
lecture Lincoln, and felt that he in some way was
responsible for the conduct of the war. Lincoln, with
that wonderful sense of humor, united with shrewd
ness and profound wisdom, told Greeley that, if the
South really wanted peace, he (Lincoln) desired the
same thing, and was doing all he could to bring it
about. Greeley insisted that a commissioner should
be appointed, with authority to negotiate with the
representatives of the Confederacy. This was Lincoln’s
opportunity. He authorised Greeley to act as such
commissioner. The great editor felt that he was
caught. For a time he hesitated, but finally went, and
found that the Southern commissioners were willing
to take into consideration any offers of peace that
Lincoln might make. The failure of Greeley was
humiliating, and the position in which he was left
absurd.
Again the humor of Lincoln had triumphed.
Lincoln always tried to do things in the easiest way.
He did not waste his strength. He was not particular
about moving along straight lines. He did not tunnel
the mountains. He was willing to go around, and he
reached the end desired as a river reaches the sea.
IX.
One of the most wonderful things ever done by
Lincoln was the promotion of General Hooker. After
the battle of Fredericksburg, General Burnside found
great fault with Hooker, and wished to have him
removed from the Army of the Potomac. Lincoln
disapproved of Burnside’s order, and gave Hooker the
�( 20 )
command of the Army of the Potomac. He then wrote
Hooker this memorable letter : “ I have placed you at
the head of the Army of the Potomac. Of course I
have done this upon what appears to me to be sufficient
reasons, and yet I think it best for you to know that
there are some things in regard to which I am not quite
and ^175
L0U*
1 b61ieVe
t0 b* a brave
and skilful soldier—which, of course, I like. I
a so. believe you do not mix politics with your profession-m which you are right. You have confidence
which is a valuable, if not an indispensable, quality.
You are ambitious, which, within reasonable bounds
does good rather than harm; but I think that during
General Burnside’s command of the army you have
taken counsel of your ambition to thwart him as much
as you could in which you did a great wrong to the
country and to a most meritorious and honorable
brother, officer. I have heard, in such a way as to
believe
of your recently saying that both the army
and the Government needed a dictator. Of course it
was not for this, but in spite of it, that I have given
you command. Only those generals who gain
successes can set up dictators. What I now ask of you
is military successes, and I will risk the dictatorship.
The Government will support you to the best of its
ability, which is neither more nor less than it has done
and will do for all commanders. I much fear that the
spirit which you have aided to infuse into the army
of criticising their commander and withholding con
fidence in him, will now turn upon you. I shall assist
you, so far as I can, to put it down. Neither you, nor
Napoleon, if he were alive, can get any good out of
an army while such a spirit prevails in it. And now
beware of rashness. Beware of rashness, but with
energy and sleepless vigilence go forward and give us
victories.”
�( 21 )
This letter has—in my judgment, no parallel. The
mistaken magnanimity is almost equal to the pro
phecy t “ I much fear that the spirit which you have
aided to infuse into the army of criticising their com
mander and withholding confidence in him, will now
turn upon you.”
Chancellorsville was the fulfilment.
Mr. Lincoln was a statesman.
The great stumbling-block—the great obstruction
in Lincoln’s way, and in the way of thousands, was
the old doctrine of States Rights.
This doctrine was first established to protect slavery.
It was clung to to protect the iner-State slave trade.
It became sacred in connection with the Fugitive
Slave Law, and it was finally used as the corner-stone
of Secession.
This doctrine was never appealed to m defence of
the right—always in support of the wrong. For many
years politicians upon both sides of these questions
endeavored to express the exact relations existing
between the Federal Government and the States, and I
know of no one who succeeded, except Lincoln. In
his message of 1861, delivered on July 4, the definition
is given, and it is perfect: “Whatever concerns the
whole should be confined to the whole—to the General
Government. Whatever concerns only the State should
be left exclusively to the State.”
When that definition is realised in practice, this
country becomes a Nation. Then we shall know
that the first allegiance of the citizen is not to hi&
State, but to the Republic, and that the first duty of
the Republic is to protect the citizen, not only when in
other lands, but at home, and that this duty cannot be
discharged by delegating it to the States.
�( 22 )
„ Lincoln believed in the sovereignty of the people_
in the supremacy of the nation—in the territorial
integrity of the Republic.
XI.
A great actor can be known only when he has
assumed the principal character in a great drama,
ossibly the greatest actors have never appeared, and
it may be that the greatest soldiers have lived the lives
of perfect peace. Lincoln assumed the leading part
m the greatest drama ever acted upon the stage of a
continent.
His criticism of military movements, his correspon
dence with his generals and others on the conduct of
the war, show that he was at all times master of the
situation—that he was a natural strategist, that he
appreciated the difficulties and advantages of every
kind, and that in “ the still and mental ” field of
war he stood the peer of any man beneath the flag.
Had McClellan followed his advice, he would have
taken Richmond.
# Had Hooker acted in accordance with his sugges
tions, Chancellorsville would have been a victory for
the Nation.
Lincoln’s political prophecies were all fulfilled.
We know now that he not only stood at the top,
but that he occupied the centre, from the first to the
last, and that he did this by reason of his intelli
gence, his humor, his philosophy, his courage, and
his patriotism.
In passion s storm he stood unmoved, patient, just
and candid. In his brain there was no cloud, and
in his heart no hate. He longed to save the South
as well as the North, to see the Nation one and
free.
He lived until the end was known.
�( 23 )
He lived until the Confederacy was dead until
Lee surrendered, until Davis fled, until the doors of
Libby Prison were opened, until the Republic was
supreme.
A
He lived until Lincoln and Liberty were united
for ever.
n
.
He lived to cross the desert—to reach the palms
of victory—to hear the murmured music of the wel
come waves.
He lived until all loyal hearts were his—until the
history of his deeds made music in the soul of men
—until he knew that on Columbia’s Calendar of
worth and fame his name stood first.
He lived until there remained nothing for him to
to do as great as he had done.
What he did was worth living for, worth dying
for.
.
He lived until he stood in the midst of universa
Joy, beneath the outstretched wings of Peace the
foremost man in all the world.
And then the horror came. Night fell on noon. The
Savior of the Republic, the breaker of chains, the
liberator of millions, he who had “ assured freedom to
the free,” was dead.
Upon his brow Fame placed the immortal wreath.
For the first time in the history of the world a Nation
bowed and wept.
The memory of Lincoln is the strongest, tenderest
tie that binds all hearts together now, and holds all
States beneath a Nation’s flag.
XII.
Strange mingling of mirth and tears, of the tragic
and grotesque, of cap and crown, of Socrates and
Democritus, of ^Esop and Marcus Aurelius, of all that
is gentle and just, humorous and honest, merciful,
�( 24 )
wise, laughable, lovable and divine, and all consecrated
to the use of man ; while through all, and over all
were an overwhelming sense of obligation, of chivalric
loyalty to truth, and upon all, the shadow of the tragic
Nearly all the great historic characters are impossible
monsters disproportioned by flattery, or by calumny
deformed. We know nothing of their peculiarities, or
nothing but their peculiarities. About these oaks there
clings none of the earth of humanity.
Washington is now only a steel engraving. About
the real man who lived and loved and hated and
schemed, we know but little. The glass through which
we look at him is of such high magnifying power that
the features are exceedingly indistinct.
Hundreds of people are now engaged in smoothing
out the lines of Lincoln’s face—forcing all features to
the common mould-so that he may be known, not as
he really was, but, according to their poor standard, as
he should have been.
Lincoln was not a type. He stands alone-no
ancestors, no fellows, and no successors.
He had the advantage of living in a new country of
social equality, of personal freedom, of seeing in the
horizon of his future the perpetual star of hope He
preserved his individuality and his self-respect* He
knew and mingled with men of every kind ; and, after
all, men are the best books. He became acquainted
with the ambitions and hopes of the heart, the means
used to accomplish ends, the springs of action and the
seeds of thought. He was familiar with nature, with
actual. things, with common facts. He loved and
appreciated the poem of the year, the drama of the
seasons.
In a new country a man must possess at least three
virtues—honesty, courage, and generosity. In culti-
�( 25 )
vated society, cultivation is often more important than
soil. A well-executed counterfeit passes more readily
than a blurred genuine. It is necessary only to observe
the unwritten laws of society—to be honest enough to
keep out of prison, and generous enough to subscribe
in public—where the subscription can be defended as
an investment.
In a new country, character is essential : in the old,
reputation is sufficient. In the new they find what a
man really is ; in the old, he generally passes for what
he resembles. People separated only by distance are
much nearer together than those divided by the walls
of caste.
It is no advantage to live in a great city, where
poverty degrades and failure brings despair. The
fields are lovelier than paved streets, and the great
forests than walls of brick. Oaks and elms are more
poetic than steeples and chimneys.
In the country is the idea of home. There you see
the rising and setting sun; you 1 become acquainted
with the stars and clouds. The constellations are your
friends. You hear the rain on the roof and listen to
the rhythmic sighing of the winds. You are thrilled
by the resurrection called Spring, touched and sad
dened by Autumn—the grace and poetry of death.
Every field is a picture, a landscape ; every landscape
a poem ; every flower a tender thought, and every
forest a fairyland. In the country you preserve your
identity—your personality. There you are an aggre
gation of atoms ; but in the city you are only an atom
of an aggregation.
In the country you keep your cheek close to the
breast of Nature. You are calmed and ennobled by
the space, the amplitude and scope of earth and sky—
by the constancy of the stars.
�(
)
Lincoln never finished his education. To the night
■of his death he was a pupil, a learner, an inquirer,
a seeker after knowledge. You have no idea how
many men are spoiled by what is called education.
For the most part, colleges are places where pebbles
are polished and diamonds are dimmed. If Shake
speare had graduated at Oxford, he might have been a
quibbling attorney, or a hypocritical parson.
Lincoln was a great lawyer. There is nothing
shrewder in the world than intelligent honesty.
Perfect candor is sword and shield.
He understood the nature of man. As a lawyer
he endeavored to get at the truth, at the very heart of a
case. He was not willing even to deceive himself.
No matter what his interest said, what his passion
demanded, he was great enough to find the truth and
strong enough to pronounce judgment against his own
desires.
Lincoln was a many-sided man, acquainted with
smiles and tears, complex in brain, single in heart,
direct as light; and his words, candid as mirrors^ gave
the perfect image of his thought. He was never
afraid to ask—never too dignified to admit that he did
not know. No man had keener wit, or kinder humor,
It may be that humor is the pilot of reason. People
without humor drift unconsciously into absurdity.
Humor sees the other side—stands in the mind like a
spectator, a good-natured critic, and gives its opinion
before judgment is reached. Humor goes with good
nature, and good nature is the climate of reason.
In anger, reason abdicates and malice extinguishes the
torch. Such was the humor of Lincoln that he could
tell even unpleasant truths as charmingly as most men
can tell the things we wish to hear.
He was not solemn. Solemnity is a mask worn by
�( 27 )
ignorance and hypocrisy—is is the preface, prologue,
and index to the cunning or the stupid.
He was natural in his life and thought—master
of the story-teller’s art, in illustration apt, in application
perfect, liberal in speech, shocking Pharisees and
prudes, using any word that wit could disinfect.
He was a logician. His logic shed light. In its
presence the obscure became luminous, and the most
complex and intricate political and metaphysical knots
seemed to untie themselves. Logic is the necessary
product of intelligence and sincerity. It cannot be
learned. It is the child of a clear head and a good
heart.
Lincoln was candid, and with candor often deceived
the deceitful. He had intellect without arrogance,
genius without pride, and religion without cant—that
is to say, without bigotry and without deceit.
He was an orator—clear, sincere, natural. He did
not pretend. He did not say what he thought others
thought, but what he thought.
If you wish to be sublime you must be natural—you
must keep close to the grass. You must sit by the
fireside of the heart : above the clouds it is too cold.
You must be simple in your speech : too much polish
suggests insincerity.
The great orator idealises the real, transfigures the
common, makes even the inanimate throb and thrill,
fills the gallery of the imagination with statues and
pictures perfect in form and color, brings to light the
gold hoarded by memory the miser, shows the glittering
coin to the spendthrift hope, enriches the brain,
ennobles the heart, and quickens the conscience.
Between his lips words bud and blossom.
If you wish to know the difference between an
orator and an elocutionist—between what is felt and
what is said—between what the heart and brain can
�( 28 )
do together and what the brain can do alone—read
Lincoln’s wondrous speech at Gettysburg, and then the
speech of Edward Everett.
The oration of Lincoln will never be forgotten. It
will live until languages are dead and lips are dust.
The speech of Everett will never be read.
The elocutionists believe in the virtue of voice, the
sublimity of syntax, the majesty of long sentences,
and the genius of gesture.
The orator loves the real, the simple, the natural.
He places the thought above all. He knows that the
greatest ideas should be expressed in shortest words_
that the greatest statues need the least drapery.
Lincoln was an immense personality—firm but not
obstinate. Obstinacy is egotism—firmness, heroism.
He influenced others without effort, unconsciously;
and they submitted to him as men submit to nature—
unconsciously. He was severe with himself, and for
that reason lenient with others.
He appeared to apologise for being kinder than his
fellows.
He did merciful things as stealthily as others com
mitted crimes.
Almost ashamed of tenderness, he said and did the
noblest words and deeds with that charming con
usion, that awkwardness, that is the perfect grace of
fmodesty.
As a noble man wishing to pay a small debt to a
poor neighbor, reluctantly offers a hundred dollar bill
and asks for change, fearing that he may be suspected
either of making a display of wealth or a pretence of
payment, so Lincoln hesitated to show his wealth of
goodness, even to the best he knew.
A great man stooping, not wishing to make his
fellows feel that they were small or mean.
�( 29 )
By his candor, by his kindness, by his perfect free
dom from restraint, by saying what he thought, and
saying it absolutely in his own way, he made it not
only possible, but popular, to be natural. He was the
■enemy of mock solemnity, of the stupidly respectable,
of the cold and formal.
He wore no official robes either on his body or his
soul. He never pretended to be more or less, or other,
or different, from what he really was.
He had the unconscious naturalness of Nature's self.
He built upon the rock. The foundation was secure
and broad. The structure was a pyramid, narrowing
as it rose. Through days and nights of sorrow, through
years of grief and pain, with unswerving purpose,
‘ with malice towards none, with charity for all,” with
infinite patience, with unclouded vision, he hoped and
toiled. Stone after stone was laid, until at last the
Proclamation found its place. On that the goddess
stands.
He knew others, because perfectly acquainted with
himself. He cared nothing for place, but everything
for principle ; nothing for money, but everything for
independence. Where no principle was involved,
easily swayed ; willing to go slowly, if in the right
direction ; sometimes willing to stop ; but he would not
go back, and he would not go wrong.
He was willing to wait ; he knew that the event was
not waiting, and that fate was not the fool of chance.
He knew that slavery had defenders, but no defence,
and that they who attack the right must wound them
selves.
He was neither tyrant nor slave ; he neither knelt
nor scorned.
With him, men were neither great nor small—they
were right or wrong.
�( 30 )
Through manners, clothes, titles, rags and race he
saw the real—that which is. Beyond accident, policy,
compromise and war he saw the end.
He was patient as Destiny, whose undecipherable
hieroglyphs were so deeply graven’on his sad and
tragic fate.
Nothing discloses real character like the use of
power. It is easy for the weak to be gentle. Most
people can bear adversity. But if you wish to know
what a man really is, give him power. This is the
supreme test. It is the glory of Lincoln that, having
almost absolute power, he never abused it, except on
the side of mercy.
Wealth could not purchase, power could not awe
this divine, this loving man.
He knew no fear except the fear of doing wrong.
Hating slavery, pitying the master—seeking to conquer,
not persons, but prejudices—he was the embodiment of
the self-denial, the courage, the hope, and the nobility
of a Nation.
He spoke not to inflame, not to upbraid, but tn
convince.
He raised his hands, not to strike, but in benediction.
He longed to pardon.
He loved to see the pearls of joy on the cheeks of a
wife whose husband he had rescued from death.
Lincoln was the grandest figure of the fiercest civil
war. He is the gentlest memory of oui* world.
��WROKS BY COL. R. G. INGERSOLL.
s. d.
MISTAKES OF MOSES
1 0
Superior edition, in cloth
1 6
DEFENCE OF FREETHOUGHT
0 6
Five Hours’ Speech at the Triai of C. B.
Reynolds for Blasphemy.
REPLY TO GLADSTONE. With a Biography by
J. M. Wheeler
0 4
ROME OR REASON ? Reply to Cardinal Manning 0 4
CRIMES AGAINST CRIMINALS
0 3
AN ORATION ON WALT WHITMAN d
0 3
ORATION ON VOLTAIRE
..
0 3
THE THREE PHILANTHROPISTS
0 2
TRUE RELIGION ...
0 2
FAITH AND FACT. Reply to Rev. Dr. Field
0 2
GOD AND MAN. Second Reply to Dr Field
0 2
THE HOUSEHOLD OF FAITH
...
0 2
LOVE THE REDEEMER. Reply to Count Tolstoi 0 2
THE LIMITS OF TOLERATION
0 2
A Discussion with Hon. F. D. Ooudert and
Gov. S. L. Woodford
THE DYING CREED
0 2
DO I BLASPHEME ?
0 2
THE CLERGY AND COMMON SENSE "
0 2
SOCIAL SALVATION
0 2
MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE ...
0 2
GOD AND THE STATE
0 2
WHY AM I AN AGNOSTIC?
0 2
WHY AM I AN AGNOSTIC? Part II”'
0 2
ART AND MORALITY
0 2
CREEDS AND SPIRITUALITY
0 1
CHRIST AND MIRACLES
0 1
THE GREAT MISTAKE
0 1
LIVE TOPICS
0 1
MYTH AND MIRACLE
0 1
REAL BLASPHEMY
0 1
REPAIRING THE IDOLS
0 1
Read THE FREETHINKER, edited by G.W. Foote.
Sixteen Pages.
Price One Penny.
Published every Thursday.
R. Forder, 28 Stonecutter-street, London, E.C.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Abraham Lincoln : an oration
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Ingersoll, Robert Green [1833-1899]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 30 p. ; 19 cm.
Notes: "Wroks [sic] by Col. R.G. Ingersoll" listed on back cover. No. 3a in Stein checklist. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
R. Forder
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1893
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N323
Subject
The topic of the resource
USA
History
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Abraham Lincoln : an oration), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Abraham Lincoln
NSS
United States-History
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/366e1af2f38c7b24510a2e667f6db8c1.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=RdTwQ8-U8jsCMtg3bnQCo3zrWyqSaZ8EKOGXLlxjpuwn1kZBIIFacGxr9d5UC6t7GXPJ2bDOhBoqdappD74blHdO-9ej3RNfyyNC3d1r21GDTXTKva84x1IFauy3fzNHv1WoBfk--g5kNFUvokbImIfAW1EXRkXlJxT2O%7EfwVXK19hNRijVMJzImg73tTh1L8uOuOsqDXT8oZygtN3V0c0codbDdue20BF3u6QLFtg-S56swb0XjPZnxZ7KB4PwfjCWtUMfAe9qmjbkJWmf8Rh1-cn70leTg2rWzPSJWxoCWIb1hLaTQ0vIsrDxZxgehxHz3A4gGeWtTlDXLhshh9g__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
ef1e842ff23313a161ad00e978e21d85
PDF Text
Text
I LES CAVEAUX
DE NOTRE-DAME DE BON-SECOURS
PROCÈS-VERBAUX DE 1803 & 1814
RELATIFS A LA CONSERVATION DES RESTES MORTELS
DE STANISLAS
Par Henri LEPAGE
Archiviste du département, résident de la Société d’Archéologie lorraine, etc.
1 suivis
D’UNE PETITE NOTICE SUR L’ÉGLISE
N ANC y,
IMPRIMERIE DE A. LEPAGE, GRANDE-RUE, 14.
18G8
��\
I
Sc. par Vassé et Lecomte.
MAUSOLÉE DE STANISLAS
ROI DE POLOGNE
Duc
1
cl e
Lorraine
et
de
Bar.
�D.
O.
M.
A DIEU
TRÈS-BOA' TRÈS-GRAND.
IIic Jacet Stanislaus I.
cognomine Beneficus. Per
varias sortis humana; vi
ces jactalus, non fraclus,
ingens'orbi spectaculum
ubique vel in exilio Rex,
beandis ubique populis
natus, Ludovici XV Ge
neri complexa exceptas,
Lotharingiam Patris non
Domini rifu rexit, fovit,
exornavit; hunc pauperes
quos aluit, urbes quas instauravit, Religio quam
exemplis inslituit, scriplis
eliam luíalas, insolabiliter luxuere, obi it xxjii
Febr. anno mdcclxvi Ora
lis LXXXVIII.
In modicis opibus splen
dida parcimonia nines,
Omnia publica; rei pro
futura prudente)' excogiluvit, animose suscepit,
magnifica; perfecit.
Ici repose, Stanislas Ier,
surnommé le bienfaisant,
éprouvé, non abattu par di
verses vicissitudes de la des
tinée humaine, sujet étonnant
d’admiration à l’univers, par
tout roi, même en exil, né
pour faire en tout lieu le bon
heur des peuples, accueilli
avec tendresse par Louis XV,
son gendre ; il gouverna,
pourvut, embellit la Lorraine
à la manière d’un père, non
d’un maître. Les pauvres
qu’il nourrit, les cités qu’il
créa, la religion qu’il édifia
par ses exemples et même
qu’il défendit par ses écrits,
l’ont pleuré inconsolables. Il
mourut le 23 février 17GG,
à l’âge de 88 ans.
Avec peu de richesses, ri
che d’une économie où bril
lait la splendeur, il conçut
avec sagesse mille sujets pour
le bien public, les entreprit
avec ardeur, les exécuta avec
magnificence.
�LES CAVEAUX
DE NOTRE-DAME DE I! <> N-S l<0 II H S
PROCÈS-VERBAUX DE
1803 ET 1804-
BELATIFS A LA CONSERVATION DES RESTES MORTELS DE
STANISLAS.
I.
L’église de N.-D. de Bon-Secours occupe un des pre
miers rangs parmi les édifices historiques de Nancy, nonseulement à cause des souvenirs qui s’y rattachent et du
pèlerinage dont elle est l’objet, mais encore à cause des
monuments précieux qu’elle renferme. Personne n’ignore
qu’elle a été construite sur l’emplacement d’une ancienne
chapelle dite aussi de Notre-Dame-de-la-Victoire ou des
Rois, et vulgairemcntdcs Bourguignons1, parce que René II
l’avait fait ériger, en 1484, à l’endroit où, après la ba
taille de Nancy, livrée dans le voisinage, près de 4,000
soldats, tant de son armée que de celle de Charles-IeTcméraire, avaient reçu la sépulture.
1. Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours est le litre officiel donné par le
fondateur René II, et conservé à l’église dans l’acte de son érection
en succursale, le 5 mai 1844.
�— 6 —
Toutes les particularités relatives à ce peiit sanctuaire
national ont été consignées dans un opuscule1 qui au
2
jourd’hui peut-être est oublié. Nous le rappelons seule
ment afin d’avoir occasion d’y ajouter, avant de parler
des caveaux de l’église, une page, qui, si elle était au
thentique, ne serait pas la moins curieuse de son his
toire. C’est « l’épitaphe » qui, suivant un écrivain mo
derne3, se lisait dans la chapelle des Bourguignons :
Seigneurs, venans en lorrain territoire
Qui les Nancey rompistes par victoire,
L’entreprinse qu’avons conceu en cueur,
Donez des biens en ce poure oratoire
Pour nos aymes tirer de Purgatoire,
Levez aux cieux ceulx qu’en terre couchaistes !
Lorsqu’au besoing Dieu pour ayde huchastes
Et le bon sainct plecteur du pays (saint Nicolas).
Mais quoy qu’à droit vous nous avez hays
Ne nous en soit donc d’aulmùne amendry.
Sous de croix double et de croix sainct Andry,
Secourez-nous par commune pitié,
Augures de paix, vide d'inimitié ;
Mais vous attrait de notre nation,
Faisant par icy pérégrination,
Plus qu’aultres gens nos soyez aulmôniers
Et libéraulls de vos biens et deniers.
Que des princes feu Charles et René
Soit aboly le discort d’enfer né !
Qui l’ancienne aliance blessa,
Laissant la terre où Charles la laissa.
1. Celle dénomination s’était conservée à l’espèce de petite cha
pelle près de la tour, où sont maintenant les chaises, de même que
la petite chapelle à l’opposé s’appelait chapelle des Princes.
2. La Chapelle de Bon-Secours ou des Bourguignons, notice
insérée dans l’Annuaire de 18B2, et tirée à part.
3. M. de Bussierre, Histoire de la ligue contre Chailes-le
Téméraire, p/467.
�— 7 —
H.
Après celte courte digression, destinée à nous servir
d’entrée en matière, revenons aux caveaux1 dont nous
avons spécialement à nous occuper. L’ouverture récente
de celui de la nef a fait faire plusieurs découvertes inté
ressantes, et les procès-verbaux de reconnaissances qui
ont eu lieu auparavant du caveau royal contiennent des
détails qu’il est bon de recueillir, afin de détruire des er
reurs qui se sont propagées jusqu’à nous.
On savait que, sous la nef de N.-D. de Bon-Secours,
il existait un caveau voûté, et que ce caveau avait servi,
avant la Révolution, de sépulture à plusieurs religieux
Minimes, dont le couvent avait été fondé en 1609, et à qui
était confiée l’administration de la chapelle. On savait
aussi que l’ouverture de ce caveau était près du confes
sionnal à gauche en entrant dans l’église.
Le 12 octobre 1866, le petit carré de marbre qui couvre
la clef de la pierre d’entrée2, s’étant détaché cl ayant
laissé la clef à découvert, on a levé la pierre et on est
descendu dans le caveau. L’escalier par lequel on y des
cend a seize marches, de 0,21e de hauteur de pas sur
0,50e de giron; la largeur de la cage d’escalier est d'un
mètre 20 cent.
Le caveau est un carré de 12 mèt. 20 cent, de côté,
1. Ce qui a rapporta la description des caveaux est emprunte à
des notes de M. l’abbé Morel, curé de N.-D. de Bon-Secours, et de
M. l’abbé Marchai, chanoine honoraire de Nancy, lesquels ont com
plété les documents que nous publions ci-aprcs par plusieurs notes
et communications très-intéressantes.
2. A côté de celte pierre se trouve agencée également une autre
pierre à clef qui donne accès à la totalité de l’escalier ; c’est par l’ou
verture pratiquée au-dessus de cet escalier que les Minimes introdui
saient les cercueils dans leur caveau.
�divisé en quatre voûtes surbaissées en arc de cloître, avec
un pilier central qui les soutient et les relie. Partant, au
dehors, des pilastres de l’église où sont les statues de
saint François-Xavier et de saint Antoine de Padoue, ce
caveau s’étend jusque près du palier des petits autels, ou
plutôt jusqu’environ 50 centimètres au delà du balustre
de communion. Ainsi, le pilier central des quatre voûtes
du caveau n’est pas au milieu de la nef, c’est-à-dire ne
correspond pas au centre du médaillon de l’Assomption,
mais se trouve un peu plus avancé vers le chœur. Un puits,
placé à peu près au-dessous du monument des Polonais,
de 1814, et profond d’environ 4 mètres, reçoit un petit ca
nal qui traverse le caveau en diagonale et semble corres
pondre avec le canal établi le long du caveau royal, au
tombeau de la reine, pour se jeter dans le ruisseau de
Jarvillc, près du pont.
Dans ce caveau sont trois petites croix en pierre, sor
tant simplement de terre, et portant les inscriptions :
Cy gist messire Antoine de la Chausse, chevalier
décédé le 19e aoust 1742. — Hic jaefft R. P. À. Ceny
ex Provincialis, obiit die 19a 8bni 1754. — Hic jacèl
R[evereri\dus admodùm Pater Joannes Carolus Bru
ges Provincialis, obiit die 15 m. aprilis 1779.
On lit sur les piliers de la voûte, écrites avec du char
bon, en lettres cursives assez mal faites, les sept épitaphes
qui suivent :
Clauticrs Thiebault 1780. — Le R. P. Bourgeois,
mort le 20 8bre 1780. — P. Mengin, 1er nov. 1785. —
P. Goûte, décédé le 1er février 1785. — R. P. V.
Prelo, 25 aoust 1785. — R. P. Sglyhlt, le 7 nov. 1790.
— Joseph Thiebault 1790.1
1. Dans la chapelle des fonts baptismaux, se trouve encore un
petit caveau où repose Mmc la baronne de Méncval. Voir la petite
notice, année 1839.
�9 —
Enfin, au fond du caveau, à droite, à peu près sous la
porte du balustre qui conduit à la sacristie, se trouve une
grande quantité d’ossements et de crânes jetés pèlc-mèlc
en monceau.
Le caveau royal de N.-D. de Bon-Secours1 n’a pas la
meme largeur que le chœur de l’église ; il est construit au
milieu de ce dernier, en sorte qu’il y a un intervalle entre
le mur de fondation du chœur et la muraille mémo du
caveau. Celui-ci, au dire des personnes qui y ont péné
tré, est un carré d’environ 4 mètres de côté, formant une
seule arcade de voûte, en forme de cloître. Il est pavé de
dalles Planches et noires, comme la nef. Un petit autel,
avec ornements et chandeliers en plomb, se trouve dans le
fond, à peu près au-dessous du palier de l’autel actuel du
chœur, et devant cet autel étaient les deux cercueils en
plomb contenant les restes du Roi et de la Reine de Po
logne. Un escalier assez large, à pente très-douce, qui
commence à environ un mètre du balustre, conduit dans
•
1. Stanislas venait habiter son château de la Malgrange à l’occa
sion de chacune des fêtes de la Sainte-Vierge, car il n’en laissait
passer aucune sans communier dans l’église de N.-D. de BonSecours. Quelques jours avant l’accident qui fut cause de sa mort, le
1er février <766, veille de la fête de la Purification, le Roi, avant de
se rendre à la Malgrange, voulut entrer dans l’église. Il remarqua que
son prie-Dieu était posé au-dessus de la partie du caveau où il avait
ménagé la place de sa sépulture, et pria plus longtemps que de cou
tume. En sortant, il dit à celui qui avait l’honneur de l’accompagner :
<i Savez-vous ce qui m’a si longtemps retenu aujourd’hui dans l’é
glise ? Je pensais que, dans très-peu de temps, je serais trois pieds
plus bas que je n’étais t>. Le 4 février, le Roi retourna à Lunéville ;
le 5, eut lieu l’accident du feu qui prit à ses vêtements ; le 23, il ren
dit son âme à Dieu. Les funérailles furent célébrées à N.-D. de BonSecours, en grande pompe, le 4 mars suivant.
�— 10 —
le caveau, qui a une ouverture cintrée fermée par une
porte en fer.
Lorsqu’on 1814, on fit courir le bruit que le général
Sokolnicki avait emporté les restes de Stanislas1, la mu
nicipalité de Nancy fil descendre dans le caveau, pour y
constater la présence du corps du roi, et, pour empêcher
que de pareilles suppositions d’enlèvement pussent se
reproduire, elle ordonna d’élever un mur devant la porte
de fer ; on combla le tout et on établit le dallage qui sub
siste encore aujourd’hui.
A une époque antérieure2, l'autorité avait déjà dû faire
procéder à la reconnaissance des restes des personnages
inhumés dans le caveau royal de N.-D. de Bon-Secours,
1. Nous parlerons plus loin de ce prétendu enlèvement du corps
du Roi de Pologne.
2. ji Des mains sacrilèges (1793) l’arrachent, dit M. Blau, à son
cercueil de plomb, dont les débris doivent se convertir en balles
meurtrières, et le relèguent au fond d’une voûte obscure, où il gît
abandonné. De vils émissaires, qui se paraient du nom de Marseillais,
envahissent notre cité...... et courent à l’église dépositaire des victi
mes signalées à leur vengeance. Mais le gardien de l’édifice sacré, feu
M. Michel, marbrier, les avait prévenus. Jaloux de sauver d’une des
truction imminente les mausolées remis à sa vigilance, il se hâte de
les dépouiller de tous les attributs de la royauté et d’armer la main de
Stanislas d’un drapeau tricolore. Puis, se présentant avec calme à ces
vandales, il leur ouvre les portes du temple et les introduit devant les
tombes dont ils avaient juré la ruine. Il affirme hardiment qu’elles
renferment de bons patriotes......
» Cependant... son mausolée (de Stanislas) et celui de son épouse,
transportés dans un musée de sculpture, demeurent confondus avec
les statues livrées à l’élude des artistes... » (P. G et 7 de la Notice
historique sur Stanislas-le-Bicnfaisant, par M. Blau, inspecteur de
l’Académie de Nancy, membre de la Société royale des sciences, let
tres et arts de la même ville. Nancy, chez Vidai t et Jullien, libraires,
au Pont-Mouja, 1831.)
�— 11 —
et elle avait pris soin de faire dresser des procès-verbaux
authentiques des opérations prescrites par elle, dans un
but qui témoigne du respect qui s’attachait à la mémoire
du dernier de nos souverains.
Ces documents officiels1 n’ont pas encore été mis au
jour, bien qu’ils renferment diverses particularités inté
ressantes ; aussi nous ont-ils paru mériter d être publiés,
autant pour faire connaître ces particularités, que pour
rétablir certains faits dans toute leur exactitude.
Reconnaissance du corps de Stanislas, etc.
1805.
Cejourd’hui seize ventôse an onze (7 mars 1805) de
la République française, dix heures du matin,
Nous Joseph-François-IIubert Thierry, adjoint à la
mairie de Nancy, instruit par le citoyen Krantz père, fer
blantier en cette ville, que les ouvriers du citoyen Mourot, brasseur au faubourg de la Constitution2, adjudica
taire au ci-devant district de Nancy, du chœur de l’église
des cx-chanoinesscs de Bouxiércs, qui avait été construit
à la suite de la chapelle de Bonsecours, en fouillant dans
la partie du caveau qui faisait une dépendance de son
adjudication, avaient trouvé ccs corps inhumés ; me suis
transporté, ensuite de l’invitation du maire, sur les lieux,
pour en faire la reconnaissance, et, après avoir fait placer
un factionnaire pour empêcher rentrée du caveau, j’ai
1. Ils se trouvent, en originaux et en copies, aux Archives de la
ville de Nancy et dans celles du département
2. Le faubourg Saint Pierre.
�— 12 —
remarqué, d’après renseignements pris, que ce caveau se
trouvait pour les cinq sixièmes, à peu près sous le chœur
de l’église de Bonsecours, et l’autre sixième sous le chœur
de l’église des cx-chanoincsses de Bouxières, qui avait
été adjugé audit Mourot1; que Stanislas, roi de Pologne,
avait fait construire ce caveau pour y recevoir son tom
beau, le cœur de la reine de France, sa fille, épouse de
Louis XV, et les tombeaux du duc et de la duchesse Ossolinski, scs parents ; que l’on communiquait autrefois à
ce caveau par un escalier qui était dans le chœur de l’é
glise de Bonsecours, et qui se trouvait scellé en ce mo
ment ; que l’ouverture qui se présentait à l’extérieur
avait été pratiquée, par ledit Mourot, dans la partie com
prise dans la dépendance des lerrcins qui lui avaient été
adjugés par le ci-devant district de Nancy ; étant des
cendu dans le caveau, au moyen d’une échelle et dans la
partie adjugée audit Mourot, aurions reconnu que le pavé
en pierres de taille était ehlevé, et qu’on avait creusé
d’environ un demi-pied dans l’endroit où se trouvaient
les corps. Ayant pris des renseignements pour connaître
la personne qui les avait inhumés, on nous a dit que le
1. Léopold Jforoi avait également acquis les bâtiments des Mini
mes et l’église, celte dernière pour la somme de trois millions cinq
ccnt cinquante-deux mille francs, dont un dixième seulement
payable en numéraire. Quel motif avait pu l’engager à faire uuc acqui
sition si onéreuse ? nous l’ignorons ; ce qui s’est parfaitement con
servé dans la mémoire des anciens habitants du faubourg, c’est que,
quand Morot voulut commencer la démolition de l’église, les premiers
témoins de cet acte de vandalisme allèrent jeter le cri d’alarme daus
la ville et y excitèrent une espèce de soulèvement populaire. Eu pré
sence de ces manifestations, le district envoya, dit on, deux officiers
municipaux pour rassurer le peuple cl lui déclarer que la vente de
1 église serait résiliée, d’autant plus que l’acquéreur n’avait pu effec
tuer son premier paiement.
'
�15 —
citoyen Husscnet, charcutier au faubourg de la Constitu
tion, n° 145, nous donnerait toute indication à cet égard ;
aussitôt nous aurions fait appeler ce particulier, qui nous
a déclaré reconnaître ces corps pour être ceux de Stanis
las, roi de Pologne, et de son épouse, du duc et de la
duchesse Ossolinski, qu’il avait fait inhumer dans la
même fosse en l'an deux, par ordre du ci-devant district
de Nancy ; qu’à cette époque, il n’y existait plus que les
ossements du duc et de la duchesse et de l’épouse de
Stanislas ; mais que le corps de ce roi était encore dans
son entier ; que les tombes en plomb et chêne qui ren
fermaient ces ossements et ce corps, ainsi que les bijoux
précieux qui y étaient, de même que la boëte d’argent
qui contenait le cœur de la reine de France, avaient dû
être enlevés lors de l’inhumation par la même autorité.
Aussitôt avons fait lever le corps de Stanislas, qui nous
a été indique être dessus, et avons remarqué, en pré
sence d’un grand nombre de personnes, que la tête
était détachée du corps1, entièrement décharnée et en
deux parties, que le buste était en entier, que les bras,
les cuisses, jambes et pieds étaient tombés en dissolution,
de manière qu’il n’existait plus que des ossements; avons
fait aussi enlever les autres têtes, qui étaient également
décharnées, ainsi que les ossements qui étaient dessous
ce corps, et avons fait fouiller jusqu’à prés de quatre
pieds de profondeur, où il ne s’y est plus trouvé aucuns
1. Scion le 'dire de personnes honorables et bien informées, la
tète de Stanislas aurait été violemment détachée du tronc, lors de la
violation du caveau royal de N.-D. de Bon-Secours en 1793, par un
ouvrier, lequel, animé de l’esprit haineux de ce temps déplorable, se
serait servi de sa bêche en disant : u En voilà encore un qui n’a pas
été guillotiné ! »
�— 14 —
vestiges de corps ou d’ossements; avons fait laver le
corps de Stanislas, qui était encore rempli d’aromates,
ramassé avec soin toutes les têtes et ossements, et les
avons fait recueillir dans un cercueil en chêne d’environ
deux métrés de longueur, et avons fait déposer le cer
cueil, après avoir fait clouer le couvercle dans une partie
du caveau au-dessous du chœur de l’église de Bonsecours,
à côté de l’escalier, après avoir pris la précaution de le
faire élever aux deux extrémités, pour sa conservation,
sur des pierres, à la hauteur de 10 centimètres, audessus du pavé dudit caveau ; avons ensuite fait cons
truire un petit mur d’élévation jusqu’à la voûte, pour
enfermer ce cercueil, et fait poser une pierre dans le mi
lieu, avec cette inscription gravée : Tombeau de Sta
nislas Leczinski, roi de Pologne, duc de Lorraine,
mort à Lunéville le 25 février 1766 ; de Catherine
Opalinska, son épouse, morte en 1747 ; du cœur de
Marie Leczinska, leur fille, reine de France, épouse
de Louis XV, morte en 1768 ; du duc et de la du
chesse Ossolinski, morts tous deux en 1756.
J’ai cru devoir prendre cette mesure, qui paraissait
être dans l’opinion des assistants, pour transmettre à la
postérité le souvenir d’un prince qui a comblé celte ville
et la ci-devant province de Lorraine de ses bienfaits.
11 nous a été présenté une espèce de médaille qui avait
été trouvée en levant les ossements, et, après l’avoir lait
examiner, il a été reconnu qu’elle était attachée à un pe
tit cordon en soie et cheveux, que le cercle était en argent
doré, entouré de cailloux du Rhin, le derrière était garni
en cheveux tressés, dans le milieu s’est trouvé un petit
morceau de bois que l’on présume être de la vraie croix ;
il était couvert d’un verre, qui parait être de cristal. Je
�— la —
nie suis nanti de celle médaille, en me réservant de la
remettre à la mairie, pour en faire, par le citoyen préfet,
la destination qu’il croira convenable.
Avons requis le citoyen Mourot, conformément au
procès-verbal de son adjudication, d’élever au plutôt le
mur séparatif de sa propriété d’avec le caveau dépendant
de l’église de Bonsecours.
De tout quoi j’ai dressé le présent procès-verbal, au
bureau de la mairie, sur les six heures de relevée, les
jour, mois et an avant dits, et ai signé.
Thierry, adjoint.
Mander.
Liberté. Egalité.
Nancy, le 17 ventosean onze de la République française.
Le Maire de la ville de Nancy au citoyen Préfet du dé
partement de la Meurthe,
Citoyen Préfet,
L’ancien gouvernement ayant autorisé la translation du
chapitre des ci-devant chanoincsses de Bouvières à Bonsecours, on avait cru convenable de construire à la suite
de la chapelle de Bonsecours le chœur de leur église ; la
révolution ayant dérangé le projet de translation, les bâ
timents qui avaient été construits, ainsi que les terreins
en dépendants, ont été vendus comme domaine national,
mais on a réservé, dans le contrat de vente, que l’ouver
ture qui avait été faite dans la chapelle de l’église de
Bonsecours, serait fermée par un mur que l’adjudicataire
serait tenu d’élever. 11 résultait de celte clause que le
sixième, à peu près, du caveau que Stanislas avait fait
�16 —
construire sous le chœur de l’église, s’était trouvé com
pris dans la dépendance du terrain vendu. C’est dans
celte partie que l’ouverture du caveau a été faite par l’ad
judicataire, qui, voulant faire tourner à son profit la pierre
de taille qui y était, s’est aperçu qu’il y avait des corps
inhumés.
Ayant été averti, le 15 courant, à cinq heures du soir,
de ce fait, qui avait attiré un grand nombre de personnes,
j’ai pris à l’instant toutes mesures de police pour empê
cher l’accès du caveau, et prévenir par là tout esprit de
fanatisme ou de malveillance.
Je me suis rendu, le lendemain 16, sur les lieux, et ai
reconnu, d’après les renseignements qui m’ont été trans
mis, que c’étaient les dépouilles de Stanislas, roi de Po
logne1, du duc et de la duchesse Ossolinski. J’ai fait ras
sembler ccs dépouilles, ainsi que tous les ossements, et
les ai fait recueillir avec soin dans un cercueil de chêne,
que j’ai fait faire, et qui a été déposé dans la partie se
trouvant au-dessous du chœur de l’église réservée de la
vente.
J’ai donné des ordres pour qu’on élevât un petit mur
de clôture, et ai fait placer dans le milieu de ce mur une
pierre de deux pieds carrés avec une inscription qui put
rappeler à la postérité le souvenir d’un prince qui a com
blé cette ville et la ci-devant province de Lorraine de ses
bienfaits. Outre que cette reconnaissance était duc à sa
mémoire, j’ai cru devoir, dans cette circonstance, secon
der l’opinion de toutes les personnes qui étaient pré
sentes, et qui m’ont engagé à prendre cette mesure pour
1. On oublie sans doute la Reine de Pologne, dont il a été question
ci-dessus.
�— 47
conserver le tombeau de ce prince et les restes de sa
famille.
Plusieurs citoyens avaient paru désirer que le cercueil
fût porte à l’église de Bonsecours pour faire faire des ob
sèques ; mais je leur ai observé que les corps n’étant pas
dans le cas d’étre transportés dans un local, mais seule
ment d’une place du caveau à une autre, je ne pourrais
céder à leur demande, attendu que toutes les cérémonies
religieuses avaient été observées dans le temps, lors du
dépôt des corps au caveau.
Je pense, citoyen Préfet, que vous adopterez toutes les
mesures que j’ai prises, persuadé de vos intentions à
perpétuer le souvenir des personnages importants qui ont
illustré leur pays, soit par leurs actions, soit par leurs
talents et leurs lumières, soit enfin par des actes de bien
faisance.
Il m’a été rapporté, sur les lieux, que les cercueils en
plomb qui servaient de tombeaux à ces corps, avaient été
enlevés en l’an deux, par le ci-devant district de Nancy,
et fondus pour cire convertis en balles ; que la boëte d’or
ou d’argent qui contenait le cœur de la reine de France,
épouse de Louis XV, ainsi que les objets précieux qui
étaient aussi renfermés dans les tombes, avaient égale
ment été enlevés par la même autorité.
Il m’a seulement été représenté une médaille qu’on a
trouvée et qui était attachée à un cordon en cheveux ; je
vais la faire examiner et vous en rendrai ensuite compte,
pour savoir la destination que vous désirez lui donner.
Tel est le récit exact des faits qui se sont passés.
Salut et respect.
Lallemand, maire.
t
•
w*
�48 — .
Nancy, le 49 ventôse, 11e année de la République fran
çaise.
Le Préfet du département de la Meurlhe au maire de
la commune de Nancy.
Citoyen,
J’ai reçu votre lettre du 47 du courant, par laquelle
vous me rendez compte que l’adjudicataire des terreins
contigus à l’église de Bonsecours, en faisant creuser pour
élever un mur de séparation avec la même église, avait
découvert le caveau dans lequel sont déposés les corps
du roi Stanislas et des duc et duchesse d’Ossolinski.
Je ne puis qu’approuver les mesures que vous avez
prises pour réunir et conserver d’une manière décente,
dans la partie du caveau qui règne dans le chœur de l’é
glise, les restes d’un prince dont le souvenir doit être si
cher à la ci-devant province de Lorraine, et plus particu
lièrement encore à la ville de Nancy qui offre tant de mo
numents de sa bienfaisance et de son amour éclairé pour
les arts.
Quant à la médaille trouvée avec les corps, mon inten
tion est qu’elle soit, ainsi que le cordon de cheveux au
quel elle était attachée, replacée dans le cercueil, comme
les seuls objets qui soient échappés à la spoliation odieuse
qu’on a exercée en l’an 2 dans ce même tombeau, que
tant de considérations eussent dû faire respecter.
Vous voudrez bien me donner l’assurance de l’exécu
tion de cette dernière disposition.
Je vous salue,
Marquis.
�— 49 —
Nancy, le 20 ventôse, l’an onze de la République fran
çaise.
Le maire de la ville de Nancy au citoyen Préfet du dé
partement de la Meurthe.
Citoyen Préfet,
J’ai l’honneur de vous adresser copie du procès-verbal
de reconnaissance et levée des restes de Stanislas, roi de
Pologne ; de la reine, son épouse, du duc et de la du
chesse Ossolinski, dressé par le citoyen Thierry, adjoint.
Je viens de recevoir l’honneur de votre lettre, en date
du jour d’hier, par laquelle vous m’annoncez que vous
approuvez toutes les mesures de police qui ont été prises
pour réunir et conserver les restes de ce prince et de sa
famille ; vous m’invitez, néanmoins, à replacer dans le
cercueil la petite médaille qui a été trouvée parmi les
ossements ; je vais la faire déposer à l’instant dans le cer
cueil et en ferai dresser procès-verbal.
Salut et respect,
Lallemand, maire.
Nancy, le 20 ventôse an 11.
Le Préfet de la Meurthe au Grand-Juge et Ministre de
la justice.
Citoyen Grand-Juge,
Je crois devoir vous informer d’un événement qui a
fait ici quelque sensation et qui, dès lors, pourrait parve
nir à votre connaissance avec des détails plus ou moins
inexacts.
Je veux parler de l’ouverture du caveau dans lequel
étaient déposés le corps de Stanislas-le-Bienfaisant, roi
de Pologne, etc., et ceux du duc et de la duchesse Ossolitiski.
�— 20 —
J’ai, en conséquence, l’honneur de vous adresser copie
du compte que le Maire m’a rendu de ce fait.
Ce compte vous fera connaître ce qui a donné lieu à
l’ouverture du caveau et les mesures que la mairie a
prises pour conserver d’une manière décente les restes
d’un prince dont la mémoire doit être si chère à la cidevant province de Lorraine et particulièrement à la ville
de Nancy.
Vous remarquerez aussi qu’on a trouvé avec les corps
une médaille attachée à un cordon en cheveux. J’ai donné
au maire l’ordre de rétablir dans le cercueil cette médaille
qui se trouve aujourd’hui le seul objet échappé à la spo
liation odieuse qu’on a exercée en l’an 2, dans ce tom
beau, que tant de considérations eussent dû faire res
pecter.
Salut et respect,
Marquis.
Ccjourd’hui vingt-un ventôse, an onze de la Répu
blique française, quatre heures de relevée,
Nous Joseph-François-Hubert Tierry, adjoint à la mai
rie de Nancy, ensuite de l’invitation du Maire et pour
1 exécution de la lettre du Préfet du département de la
Meurthc, du 19 courant, portant que la médaille trouvée
avec les restes de Stanislas, de son épouse, du duc et de
la duchesse Ossolinski, ainsi que le cordon en soie et
cheveux, auquel elle était attachée,.serait replacée dans
le cercueil qui avait reçu ces corps ; nous sommes trans
porté, assisté du citoyen Marc, architecte de la commune,
dans le caveau existant au-dessous du chœur de l’église
de Bonsecours, et là avons fait desceller une partie du
mur de clôture que nous avions fait élever pour enfermer
�— 21
ce cercueil, afin que personne ne pût y toucher ; avons
ensuite fait faire l’ouverture de ce cercueil, en présence
de beaucoup de personnes, cl y avons placé une petite
boite de plomb contenant ladite médaille et le cordon ;
avons ensuite fait rétablir le couvercle dudit cercueil de
la manière la plus solide, et avons fait reboucher l'ouver
ture pratiquée dans le mur de clôture.
De tout quoi, avons dressé le présent procès verbal, à
notre retour à la mairie, sur les cinq heures de relevée,
les jour, mois et an ci-dessus et avons signé.
Thierry, adjoint.
Mandel.
Nancy, le 25 ventose, l’an onze de la République fran
çaise.
Le maire de la ville de Nancy au citoyen Préfet du dé
partement de la Meurthe.
Citoyen Préfet,
J’ai l’honneur de vous adresser copie d’un procèsverbal constatant le replacement, dans le cercueil de Sta
nislas. de la médaille trouvée avec les corps, en exécution
de votre lettre du 19 courant.
Salut et respect,
Lallemant, maire.
Paris, le 7 germinal, l’an 11 de la République.
Le Grand-Juge, Ministre de la justice, au Préfet de la
Meurthe.
J’ai reçu, citoyen Préfet, avec la lettre que vous m’a
vez écrite, le 20 du mois dernier, la copie qui y était
jointe de celle que vous avait adressée le maire de Nancy,
sur l’ouverture du caveau de l’église de Bonsecours, où
�— 22 —
se sont trouvés les restes des dépouilles du roi Stanislas,
duc de Lorraine. J’approuve toutes les mesures qui ont
été prises.
Je vous salue.
Regnier.
Le jour de la réparation commençait enfin à se lever.
Le 25 août de la mémo année 1805 (an XI de la Répu
blique), dans une séance solennelle de F Académie, M.
Blau eut le courage d’émettre publiquement le vœu que
le mausolée de Stanislas fût rendu à l’église de N.-D. de
Bon-Secours, et sa motion, accueillie avec enthousiasme,
reçut trois salves d’applaudissements.
Bientôt on se mit à l’œuvre ; des quêtes pieuses surent
créer des ressources et faire disparaître toutcs' les traces
de la profanation1.
Lorsque, en 1806, les mausolées, déposés, depuis
1795, dans l’ancienne chapelle de la Visitation, aujour
d’hui chapelle du Lycée, reprirent le chemin de N.-D. de
Bon-Secours, les voitures de transport étaient précédées
de la musique, et ce fut un jour d’allégresse et de fêle
publique pour toute la ville. Les travaux de réintégration
des deux mausolées et des deux cartouches de Marie
Lcszczinska et du duc Ossolinski furent terminés en
18072.
1. Le compte des recettes et dépenses de l’église porte, à la. date
du 25 juin 1804 : u Paié au nommé Ferri et son ouvrier pour avoir
chargé et déchargé les autels de marbre qu’on a conduit à Bonsecours
six livres quinze sols, etc. » La reconstruction des autels, en 1804 et
1805, a coûté mille francs.
2. Par une lettre du 17 janvier de celte année (1807), adressée au
Préfet de la Meurlhe, le Ministre de l’intérieur avait autorisé les
�— 23 —
« Les choses se trouvaient dans cet état satisfaisant,
dit M. Blau, lorsque des désastres, aussi extraordinaires
que nos victoires, opèrent, en 1814, une révolution pro
digieuse et amènent à Nancy les cadres de l’armée polo
naise commandes par le général Sokolnicki......Lachapelle
de Bonsccours est préparée pour une cérémonie funèbre.
Tous assistent, dans un religieux silence, au service so
lennel, qu’accompagnait une musique lugubre, etfquc cé
lébrait M. d’Osmond, évêque de Nancy. »
111.
4814.
Les documents qui suivent* sont relatifs au soi-disant
enlèvement des restes de Stanislas par le général Sokol
nicki, conduisant les débris de l’armée polonaise, qui
voulut consacrer le souvenir de son passage à Nancy par
l’inscription qui se lit sur une table de marbre noir fixée
au mur de la nef de l’église de N.-D. de Bon-Secours,
à droite en entrant.
Pendant le temps qu’il séjourna dans notre ville, le
général prit soin de recueillir tout ce qui concernait le
souverain à la famille duquel il appartenait. II fit faire
un modèle, en fer blanc, du cercueil du Roi, tel qu’il était
au caveau de N.-D. de Bon-Secours ; on lui donna un
carreau de marbre noir du foyer de l’appartement où
Stanislas s’était brûlé, un lambeau de sa robe de chamfabriciens de t’oraloire de Bon-Secours à replacer à leurs frais, dans
celte église, les mausolées de Stanislas et de la Reine.
I. Ils sont exclusivement empruntés aux Archives delà ville de
Nancy, moins la correspondance du Moniteur, signée Sauvo.
�—
bre, portant l’empreinte de la flamme, un morceau du
sceptre de son mausolée et un étendard de sa garde. Mais
le général désirait surtout emporter avec lui quelque
chose des précieux restes du corps royal.
Une dame, qui demeurait près de l’église, et qui avait
consacré une partie de sa fortune à la restauration du
chœur et des mausolées, M,nc de Bourgogne, pour satis
faire aux vœux si légitimes du général, obtint d’un ma
çon, l’un de ses voisins, nommé Léopold Lamarche, une
portion d’os que celui-ci disait provenir de la mâchoire
inférieure de Stanislas, et qu’il avait recueillie lorsque,
à la violation des tombeaux, fut donné le coup de bêche
dont nous avons parlé1. Le tout fut religieusement ren
fermé dans une caisse, pour être déposé dans un monu
ment que le général se proposait d’élever parmi les sé
pultures royales de son pays.
Le 5 août suivant, le général fit célébrer un service
solennel pour le repos de l’àme de Stanislas, à la cathé
drale de Poscn, dans la grande Pologne. Le lendemain,
il envoya, sur cette cérémonie, un article où il parlait de
la possession d'une partie de la dépouille mortelle du
Roi. Le Moniteur inséra l’article le 6 octobre 1814 et
omit, à 1 impression, comme l’avait fait le journal de Posen, les mots une partie de, que portait, ainsi qu’il fut
ensuite constaté, la lettre originale du général ; d’où les
erreurs dont cette omission a été la source.
La ville de Nancy ne pouvait laisser s’accréditer une
pareille nouvelle, si injurieuse à son honneur et si con
traire «à la vérité, De là les protestations énergiques du
Corps municipal, consignées dans les délibérations qu’on
va lire.
1. V. la note de la page 13.
�— 25 —
Cejourd’huy 29 août mil huit cent quatorze.
Le Corps municipal de la ville de Nancy extraordinai
rement convoqué, il a été donné lecture, notamment, de
l’article Pologne du Journal des Débals1, du 26 août
1814, ainsi conçu :
« Posen, 6 août.
» Le général de division Sok'olnicki a fait transporter
» ici de Nanci la dépouille mortelle du Roi de Pologne
» Stanislas Lecszinsky, qui fut depuis duc de Lorraine et
» de Bar. Une partie de ces restes a été déposée hier avec
» solennité dans la cathédrale de cette ville, en présence
» des autorités civiles et militaires et d’un grand nombre
» d’habitants. L’autre partie sera envoyée, à Cracovic
» pour y être placée à côté des tombeaux de nos rois
» (Stanislas Lecszinsky avait été woyxvode de Posen
» avant son avènement au trône). »
Le Corps municipal ne peut se persuader que M. le
général polonais Sokolnicki aurait pu pénétrer dans les
caveaux où reposent les dépouilles mortelles de S. M. le
roy Stanislas le Bienfaisant, dont la mémoire ne peut
cesser d’étre chère aux Lorrains, jaloux de conserver un
dépôt aussi précieux, confié à la reconnaissance publique.
Voulant cependant s’assurer si quelques tentatives n’a
vaient pas été faites avant, pendant et après le séjour à
Nancy de M. le général Sokolnicki, le Corps municipal
s’est de suite tiansporté en l’église de Bonsecours, ac
compagné de M. Mique, père, architecte de la ville, oû,
après avoir visité l’intérieur et l’extérieur de ladite église,
1. L’article du Journal des Débats était emprunté au Moniteur
universel ; aussi est-ce avec celte dernière feuille que la mairie de
Nancy a établi la correspondance dont il est question plus loin.
�— 26 —
il s’est convaincu qu’aucune effraction, changement, n’a
vaient clé faits pour pénétrer dans les souterrains.
Mais, désirant constater plus spécialement l’existence
de ce dépôt, afin de convaincre M. le général Sokolnicki
de son erreur, pour ne pas dire plus, le Corps municipal
nomme M. Mandel, jeune, officier municipal, qui, au
mois de ventôse de l’an XI, est parvenu à recueillir ces
précieuses dépouilles, pour, conjointement avec M. Drouot
et M. Vidil, fils ainé, officiers municipaux, procéder à
celte reconnaissance et vérification intérieure desdits ca
veaux, en dresser procès-verbal qui sera déposé au se
crétariat de la mairie, être pris tel parti il sera jugé con
venable.
Fait et délibéré les an, mois et jour susdits.
29 et 50 août 1814.
Nous Sébastien-François Mandel, François-Hyacinthe
Drouot et Jean-Pierre-Romain Vidil, fils ainé, tous trois
officiers municipaux et commissaires délégués par le
Corps municipal de la ville de Nancy, à l’effet de consta
ter le dépôt des corps et dépouilles mortelles de S. M. le
roi Stanislas Lccszinsky, étant en l’église de Bonsccours,
avons invité M. Mique, père, architecte, de faire ouvrir
le caveau, dont l’entrée est dans le chœur de l’église de
Bonsccours, devant la grille ; ce qui a été exécuté avec
précaution.
Nous commissaires susdits, munis du procès-verbal
du 16 ventôse an XI et pièces jointes, sommes descendus
dans le grand caveau, aussi avec M. Simonin, père, chi
rurgien en chef de Nancy.
Nous avons remarqué, à droite de l’escalier, l’autre
�— 27 —
polit caveau, que nous avons reconnu intact, sans aucun
indice qu’il y ait été fait aucun changement depuis cette
époque, 16 ventôse an XI, où il a été construit.
Cédant au désir spontané de visiter ce petit caveau,
autant pour constater la présence des dépouilles précieuses
qui y reposent, que pour s’assurer de l’état dans lequel
elles se trouvent, et si le cercueil en chêne avait encore
assez de solidité,
Nous avons fait faire une ouverture du côté dudit es
calier, et immédiatement après avons observé avec soin
qu’on n’a pu toucher ce cercueil, bien entier, dont la tête
est placée à l’occident, le pied à l’orient.
Nous nous sommes assurés que le cercueil n’avait plus
sa première solidité, parce qu’il a été renfermé dans ce
petit caveau, dont la clôture est absolue, jusques la voûte,
et où l’air n’a pu pénétrer.
M. Simonin, père, chirurgien, après avoir ouvert une
partie du cercueil, a reconnu que ces dépouilles mortelles
réunies n’avaient pas été vues, ni touchées depuis leur
dépôt ; ce dont nous avons pareillement été convaincus
encore par les chancissures légères qui les couvrent.
Nous avons de suite autorisé M. Mique, architecte, de
faire faire un cercueil de plomb pour les renfermer avec
toutes les précautions convenables, nous réservant d’as
sister à celte mutation.
Nous commissaires susdits avons, sans désemparer,
fait refermer ce petit caveau provisoirement par une porte
de chêne bien pattée, sur laquelle nous avons apposé les
scellés nécessaires pour en interdire l’accès jusqu’après
la confection prompte de ce cercueil de plomb.
Nous avons invité les assistants de sortir du grand ca
veau, sur l'ouverture duquel nous avons fait ensuite re
�— 28 —
placer provisoirement les pierres et établi deux gardiens
sédentaires.
De là nous nous sommes rendus près de M. le général
comte d’OUonc, commandant du département, qui, sur
notre exposé et notre invitation, a donné les ordres né
cessaires pour le placement d’un corps de garde près
Bonsecours, et d’une sentinelle à l’ouverture du grand
caveau, ayant pour consigne d’en interdire l’entrée ; ce
qui a été exécuté.
De tout quoi avons dressé le présent procès-verbal les
2!) et 50 août 1814.
Vidil fils aîné.
Simonin.
Drouot.
Mandel.
L.-F. Mique.
Cejourd’hui trois septembre 1814, sept heures du
matin.
Le Corps municipal assemblé, après avoir concerté
avec Monseigneur l’évèque de Nancy les mesures à pren
dre pour la célébration du service funèbre à faire aujour
d’hui en l’église de Bonsecours, à la mémoire de Stanislas
le Bienfaisant, à raison du déplacement de ses dépouilles
mortelles du petit caveau rappelé dans le procès-verbal
du IG ventôse an XI, pour les rétablir dans le grand ca
veau, où elles étaient primitivement sous la même église
de Bonsecours.
Le Corps municipal s’est rendu là à l’effet d’assister
avec Messieurs les commissaires délégués et rappellés ez
procès-verbaux des 29 et 30 août derniers, au même pla
cement de ces dépouilles mortelles de Stanislas, de la
reine son épouse, du cœur de leur lille Marie Lecksinska,
reine de France, du duc et de la duchesse Ossolinski,
�— 29 —
dans le nouveau cercueil de plomb préparé à cet effet,
attendu la vétusté du cercueil de chêne renfermé en l’an
XI dans ce petit caveau, inaccessible à l’air.
En conséquence, M. Mandel, jeune, ancien magistrat,
qui a efficacement concouru à recueillir les dépouilles
mortelles; MM. Drouot et Vidil, officiers municipaux
actuels, ont, en présence d’un grand nombre d’assistants,
de M. Mique, architecte, de M. Bcrnel, curé de SaintPierre, reconnu que les scellés apposés sur l’ouverture
du caveau, étaient sains et entiers ; ils ont été levés par
M. Mandel, jeune.
Le cercueil en chêne renfermant ces dépouilles mor
telles a été trouvé entier, mais d’un déplacement difficile
à raison de sa presque dissolution, résultante du lieu se
cret où il était placé, quoiqu’il lui ait été donné quelques
pouces d’élévation au-dessus du sol.
Toutes les précautions jugées convenables ont été
prises pour le sortir de ce petit caveau. Tout ce que ren
fermait ce cercueil de chêne a été trouvé intact et ainsi
comme cela est détaillé dans le procès-verbal du 46 ven
tôse an XI.
Seulement, ces dépouilles mortelles avaient pris une
teinte noire et au premier tact faciles à se diviser, et ce
pendant transportables d’un cercueil à l’autre, avec quel
ques précautions.
Aussitôt, et sans aucun retard, elles ont été replacées
dans le même ordre qu’elles étaient et arrangées de même
dans le cercueil de plomb, par M. Simonin, chirurgien
en chef de l’hôpital militaire, et de deux de ses élèves1.
Le corps de Stanislas, mieux conservé, plus entier,
1. MM. J.-B. Simonin et Charles Richy.
�— 50 —
depuis le col jusqu’aux hanches, a été placé en tète du
cercueil, dans la partie la plus large. Sa tête, décharnée,
séparée du corps, est à sa droite ; elle est divisée en deux
parties. La tète de la reine son épouse est du côté gau
che, en dessous du cœur du roy.
Celui de Marie Lecksinska, leur fille, a été placé à côté
de la tète de sa mère.
Les ossements, ainsi que ceux du duc et de la duchesse
Ossolinski, comme leurs têtes, sont dans la même partie
inférieure de ce cercueil.
On y a joint tous les fragments de linceul comme
partie de la robe de Stanislas, lors de son inhumation,
ainsi que partie du cordon bleu ; mais ces fragments se
sont trouvés très-endommagés, tant par leur séjour dans
le petit caveau, et principalement pour avoir été enfouis
dans une fosse pratiquée dans ce caveau, lors de la vio
lation indécente qu’on a commise sur ces tombeaux au
commencement de la Révolution.
Toutes ces dépouilles mortelles, ainsy disposées avec
autant de méthode qu’il a été possible, il a été répandu
sur leur surface des aromates en quantité suffisante.
On a fait de nouvelles recherches dans les débris du
cercueil de chêne ; on y a trouvé (à ce qu’il a paru) la
tresse en cheveux rappelée dans le procès-verbal dudit
jour 16 ventôse an XL Celte tresse a été renfermée dans
»
du papier, cacheté, scellé et déposé sur le côté gauche
de Stanislas.
Après quoi le couvercle du cercueil en plomb a été
scellé, soudé par les ouvriers à ce appellés ; le cercueil a
été placé au milieu du grand caveau, avec les précautions
usitées et sur une élévation de 20 pouces au moins, la
tête au septentrion, en face du principal autel.
�— '51
Sur ce cercueil ont été appliquées des lames de plomb
portant les inscriptions ci-après, d’un côté en langue fran
çaise, et de l’autre en latin.
« Tombeaux de Stanislas Lecsinski, roy de Pologne,
» duc de Lorraine et de Bar, décédé le 25 février 4766.
» De Catherine Opalinska, son épouse, morte en 1747.
» Du cœur de Marie Lecsinska, leur fille, reine do
France, décédée en 1768.
» Du duc et de la duchesse Osolinski, morts en 1756.
» Ces dépouilles mortelles ont été recueillies avec soin,
» suivant le procès-verbal du 16 ventôse an XI.
» Elles ont été déposées de nouveau dans ce tombeau,
» comme l’attestent les procès-verbaux des mois d’août
» et septembre 1814,
» Par le Corps municipal de Nancy, le 5 septembre
» 1814. »
« Hic jacent »
» Stanislaus Leszczinski, Rex Poloniæ, dux Lotharin» giæ et Barri, die 25a februarii anno 1766, defunctus.
» Catharina Opalinska, uxor ejus, anno 1747 defuncta.
» Quas reliquias diligenter collectas, ut comprobat pu-.
» blicum scriplum, die 16a venlosi an XI confectum (7a
» die Martii anno 1805).
» lterum in hoc tumulo sepultas esse testantur publica
» scripta, mensium Augusti et septembris anni 1814.
» Hoc monumentum dicavére die 5a septembris anno
» 1814 Nanceii municipales magistraUis. »
/
Les délégués du Corps municipal ont jugé convenable :
Io De faire placer sur ce cercueil les attributs de la
royauté ;
�— 32 —
2° De faire faire une porte de fer en barre à rentrée du
grand caveau, au bas de l’escalier ;
5° Un fort grillage au seul jour qui est à l’orient ;
4° Enfin, un autre grillage à la niche à gauche, près de
ce jour, dans laquelle avait été déposé (dans le temps) le
cœur de la reine de France, fille de Stanislas. M. Mique
a été chargé d’ordonner ces travaux.
11 a été apposé des scellés sur le cercueil en plomb,
d’autres scellés sur la clôture extérieure du caveau ; jus
qu'après la confection de ces travaux, il a été placé des
gardiens des scellés.
Dix heures étant sonnées, le Corps municipal et scs
délégués ont assisté au service funèbre, chanté en pré
sence d’un grand concours d’habitants de Nancy et des
environs.
De tout quoi il a été dressé le présent procès-verbal,
déposé au secrétariat de la mairie, ledit jour trois sep
tembre mil huit cent quatorze.
Cejourd’huy dix-sept septembre mil huit cent quatorze.
« Nous officiers et conseillers de l’Hôtel-dc-Ville de
Nancy, délégués par le Corps municipal, accompagnes
de M. Mique, architecte, de M. Bernel, curé de S'-Picrre,
Nous sommes transportés en l’église et caveau de
Bonsecours, à l’effet d’assister aux travaux ordonnés et
détaillés au procès-verbal du 5 de ce mois.
Après avoir examiné les scellés apposés sur la clôture
extérieure dudit caveau, ils ont été trouvés sains cl en
tiers et levés par M. Mande!, le jeune, l’un de nous.
Sommes ensuite descendus dans le caveau ; avons pa
reillement remarqué que les scellés dont était environné
�— 55
le cercueil de plomb, où reposent les dépouilles mortelles
de Stanislas et de sa famille étaient également sains et
entiers, sans aucun bris, altération ni effraction quel
conque.
Les ouvriers ont, en notre présence et sous la direction
de M. Miquc, fixé, scellé et soudé sur la tête du cercueil
en plomb : 1° un coussin avec ses ornements, sur lequel
ont été également assurés ; 2° un sceptre ; 5° un main
de justice, le tout surmonté d’une couronne royale, du
mémo métal.
Ensu'te M. Bernel, curé de Saint-Pierre, nous a re
présenté un cœur en plomb, renfermant celui de Ilenry
de Lorraine, né le 7 may 1602, et mort le 20 avril 1611,
En nous observant que, le 11 juin dernier, on l’avait
provisoirement placé dans l’église, sur le mauzolée de
Stanislas, et cependant avec toutes les sûretés néces
saires, jusqu’à ce qu’il serait possible de le déposer dans
un caveau ; que la relation en avait été faite ledit jour,
11 juin dernier, sur le registre mortuaire de la paroisse
Saint-Pierre de cette ville.
Que ce cœur avait été trouve sous le maitre-autel des
pères Minimes de Nancy, sous une pierre de taille, qui
nous a aussi été représentée cl remise, sur laquelle avons
remarqué le millésime 1611, au bas d’un cœur tracé sur
sa surface ; que M. Michel-Hubert Oudinot a acheté et
recueilli ce cœur et cette boëte.
Nous avons remarqué que cette boëte de plomb porte
pour inscription, d’un côté :
Henrico primogeniti
Excell. Francisci a Lotliar.
Marc h i o n i s Ha ttonis-Castri
Comit. Vadem. et Salm.
tenellum cor.
�De l’autre côté :
Obiil œ latís suœ
Anno 9, 11 kal. may.
4644.
Mondit sieur curé nous a invités à placer ce cœur dans
le caveau ; ce qui a eu lieu au même instant, dans la
niche où avait été déposé celui de Marie Lccszinska, après
avoir fait enchâsser la pierre ci-dessus, au-dessus de la
quelle il est suspendu à l’aide d’un anneau fixé à la partie
supérieure.
A celte niche est placé un grillage en fer, fermant à
clef, dont nous nous sommes saisis, pour être déposée
au secrétariat de l’Hôtel-de-ville.
A la partie extérieure de cette grille, avons, sur une
plaque de plomb, fait graver la même inscription que
celle ci-dessus.
Les ouvriers ont fixé les battants de la porte de fer en
barre, au bas de l’escalier, arrêté et scellé un grand bras
de fer.
Nous avons définitivement clos ledit caveau par ces
portes de fer, fermant, tant à l’aide de ce bras que d’une
forte serrure à clef, qui, réunie à la première ci-dessus
rappelée, ont été déposées audit secrétariat de la mairie.
Le tout après qu’en notre présence les grosses pierres
formant clef de voûte, au-dessus dudit escalier ont été
remises à leur place, ainsi que les marbres qui ornent le
chœur de Bonsecours.
Fait à Nancy, les an, mois et jour susdits, et ont signé
avec nous commissaires délégués, MM. Mique et Bernel.
Mandel.
�— 55 —
Du 42 octobre 4814.
Le Corps municipal de Nancy, extraordinairement as
semblé, et instruit par la voie des journaux, à l’art. Posen, que le général Sokolnicki prétend avoir remporté
de ladite ville de Nancy la dépouille mortelle de Stanislas
le Bienfaisant, roi de Pologne, duc de Lorraine et de
Bar, croit qu’il est important de détruire un fait controuvé, à l’appui duquel il est impossible de présenter
aucun acte authentique.
Chargé par ses attributions de veiller à la garde des
cendres de Stanislas, il ne s’est jamais dessaisi en faveur
de M. Sokolnicki d’un dépôt si cher et si précieux ; il ne
le pouvait pas, et, quand même il n’en eût pas été res
ponsable, la vénération et le respect qui existent à jamais
dans tous les cœurs pour la mémoire d’un prince bien
faiteur des Lorrains, lui eût interdit une démarche en
quelque sorte impie.
Inquiété cependant par l’assurance que M. Sokolnicki
montre dans sa conduite, il s’empressa de visiter en
corps, avec des gens de l’art et en présence d’un grand
nombre de personnes, l’état des lieux où reposent les
cendres de Stanislas ; il fut trouvé tel qu’il avait été cons
taté en 4805, époque où elles avaient été recueillies et
déposées d’une manière authentique dans le caveau de
l’église de Bonsecours.
Après le dernier procès-verbal qu’exigeaient ces bruits
injurieux, semés par l’erreur, le Corps municipal de
Nancy proteste avec vérité contre le fait avancé et soutenu
par M. Sokolnicki.
Il déclare que jamais il ne lui a été abandonné la dé
pouille mortelle de Stanislas, qu’elle n’est pas entre ses
mains, et que les habitants de cette ville ont toujours le
�bonheur de la posséder et d’aller tous les jours lui porter
le tribut de leur reconnaissance et verser des pleurs d’atlendrissemcnt sur la tombe qui la renferme.
Arrête, en conséquence, que la présente délibération
sera adressée à MM. les rédacteurs du Moniteur, du
Journal des Débats, de la Quotidienne et de tous au
tres qui auraient fait ou feraient mention des faits énoncés
en la présente, avec invitation d’en insérer les dispositions
dans un des premiers numéros.
Si fondées qu’elles fussent, les réclamations du Corps
municipal ne furent pas acceptées sur-le-champ par les
journaux de Paris, notamment par le Moniteur, et il
s’engagea, entre le Maire de Nancy et son représentant
à Paris, M. Giroust, avocat, d’une part, et M. Sauvo,
censeur royal, rédacteur en chef de cette feuille, d’autre
part, une correspondance de polémique1, dont nous allons
donner la substance.
Voici d’abord le premier article du Momietir (nn du
G octobre 1814), qui a donné lieu à l’erreur relevée par
la Municipalité de Nancy :
« Pologne.
» Posen, le 8 août.
» Le 5 de ce mois, a eu lieu, dans l’église cathédrale de
1. M. l’abbé Marchai possède, dans sa collection lorraine, cette
correspondance originale de M. Sauvo avec la mairie de Nancy. Il se
rait trop long de transcrire en entier un pareil dossier, et nous nous
contentons de citer ce qui est le plus important. Signalons ici,
pour mémoire, que, dans une lettre, adressée, de Paris, u 18 octobre
1814 h, à M. le Maire de Nancy, et signée u Pour M. Giroust, ab
sent, l’abbé de Champlois i>, se trouve le post scriplum suivant :
n P. S. Je sors des bureaux de l’Université, il n’y a encore rien de
nouveau concernant les facultés en droit et de médecine. »
�— 57
notre ville, la cérémonie funèbre de Stanislas Leszczinski,
roi de Pologne, duc de Lorraine et de Bar, dont la dé
pouille mortelle fut inhumée à côté des deux autres rois
de Pologne, Boleslas Chrobry et Mieczyslow. Cette ac
quisition inappréciable, ainsi que celle d’un drapeau en
voyé par la ville de Dantzig au roi Stanislas, à Lunéville,
pour le régiment de sa garde, sont des souvenirs qui se
ront liés ineffaçablement dans les coeurs des Polonais. Ils
reconnaîtront les services signalés que Son Excellence le
général de division Sokolnicki a déjà rendus en divers
temps à sa patrie ; ses talents militaires, son intégrité,
l’estime des ennemis mêmes qu’il a eu à combattre ne
peuvent qu’honorer notre pays. Lorsque l’existence de la
Pologne sera assurée, le général se réserve de déposer,
sur l’autel de la patrie, le drapeau représentant un aigle
qui, du milieu d’un nuage épais, s’élève jusqu’au soleil,
avec cette inscription latine : Turbine, discusso. par,
summis. ferre, serenum1.
1. Dans une notice sur les drapeaux de N.-D. de Bon-Secours,
insérée dans les journaux de Nancy le 26 juin 1866, on lit :
n Quant au petit drapeau dressé près du mausolée de Stanislas,
n c’est le guidon du régiment des Gardes du Roi de Pologne. II est,
en petit, la représentation exacte du grand drapeau envoyé par la
» ville de Dantzig au même régiment, ou plutôt à Stanislas, à Lunéi! ville. On sait que, après le service solennel célébré à Notre-Dame
n de Bon-Secours pour le Roi et la Reine de Pologne, le 11 juin 1814,
» la ville de Nancy fut forcée, par ordre de l’autorité supérieure,
h d’abandonner le grand drapeau au général Sokolnicki, qui était
« passé par notre ville pour rendre hommage à la mémoire de
n Stanislas et rentrait dans sa patrie avec les cadres de l’armée
h polonaise.
u L’étendard du guidon est en soie brodée à la main. Il est bordé
» d’arabesques qui, aux angles, enroulent, d’un côté, l’écu de clievau lier, avec casque, cuirasse, etc. ; de l’autre, les initiales enlacées
’> S L P L R {Stanislas. Leszczinski. Poloniœ. Lotharingiœ.
�— 38 —
» G’est un trophée acquis sur l’estime des Lorrains
envers les Polonais, et une preuve de leur considération
particulière pour Son Excellence le général Sokolnicki,
à qui ces objets précieux ont été remis solennellement
par les autorités de Nancy, lors de son dernier passage. »
Après plusieurs lettres d’observations, échangées entre
le Maire de Nancy et M. Sauvo, qui disait être instam
ment prié, de la part de plusieurs officiers polonais, de
ne rien changer à la version de l’article qui précède, le
rédacteur en chef adressa enfin au Maire, le 18 octobre,
les explications suivantes :
« Monsieur le Maire,
» Je viens de faire les recherches et les vérifications
dont j’ai eu l’honneur de vous entretenir par ma lettre
d’hier.
» L’article Posen, inséré au n° du Moniteur du 6 de
ce mois, et les deux autres datés de la même ville, qui
ont paru en même temps, m’ont été présentés par des
officiers polonais. J’en ai trouvé la date fort arriérée, et,
sans les avoir refusés, je ne les publiais pas, lorsque la
sœur du général Sokolnicki a fait auprès de moi une dé
marche pressante, et m’a vivement sollicité de publier
ces articles ; ils l’ont été.
h Bex.}, surmontées d’une couronne royale. Le fond de l’étendard est
»» une peinture, également brodée en soie de diverses couleurs. Sur
h le terrain, accidenté de montagnes, se trouve, au premier plan, un
n grand arbre dont la moitié des branches est brisée par la tempête.
h Dans les airs s’élève un aigle couronné, aux ailes déployées,
n qui sort d’un nuage épais et qui dirige son regard et son vol vers
n le soleil brillant et rayonnant au sommet. L’exergue, qui encadre
n la partie supérieure du tableau, porte ces mots : turbine . discusso.
n par . summis . ferre . serenum. Daigne le ciel donner le calme
n après la tempête, n
�— 59 —
» Mais je viens de vérifier qu’il a été commis wne
faule d'impression très-essentielle. Elle justifie, jusqu’à
un certain point, le général Sokolnicki, et elle me parait
apporter beaucoup de changement à l’état de la ques
tion.
» Sur la note manuscrite qui m’a été remise par les
officiers polonais et par la sœur du général, il y avait :
une partie de la dépouille mortelle; ces mots, une
partie, ont été omis à l’impression, il n’est resté que
ceux-ci : la dépouille mortelle; ce qui entraîne l’idée
d’un enlèvement total. Je n’ai point remarqué cette faute,
et je n’ai pu la rectifier le lendemain par un erratum; la
chose n’a fait aucune sensation ici, mais elle a dû en faire
beaucoup à Nancy, et le Corps municipal a dû prendre
son arrêté ; on ne peut trop applaudir au sentiment qui
l’a dicté.
» Mais, après l’explication que je viens de vous don
ner, Monsieur le Maire, cet arrêté peut-il être maintenu
dans la rigueur de scs dispositions et de sa rédaction
contre le général Sokolnicki ? Il est probable que je vais
recevoir de lui une lettre dajis laquelle il relèvera l’erreur
commise, qui a dû être aperçue surtout par lui comme
par vous, Monsieur le Maire, parce que la chose vous in
téresse également.
» Il va m’écrire, dis-je, que les mots : dépouille mor
telle donnent trop d’extension à sa pensée, et qu’il n’a
recueilli qu’wne partie de cette dépouille.
Et ici se présente une autre question, quelle est cette
partie? Le Corps municipal ou toute autre autorité en
ont-ils permis l'enlèvement ou fait la remise au gé
néral? Cette remise a-t-elle eu lieu en même temps que
celle du drapeau dont sa note parle également. 11 y est
�— 40 —
dit que ces objets précieux ont été remis authentique
ment au général Sokolnicki par les autorités de
Nancy lors de son dernier passage; quels sont donc
ces objets précieux? En quoi consistait la partie de la
dépouille importée en Pologne? Quelle est l’autorité qui
en a fait la remise au général Sokolnicki ?
» Vous voyez, Monsieur le Maire, qu’avant de publier
l’arrêté que vous m’avez fait l’honneur de me faire re
mettre par M. Giroust, il convient que le Corps munici
pal que vous présidez prenne connaissance de la présente
lettre, et remette cette affaire dans l’ordre de ses délibé
rations.
» Si le général Sokolnicki n’a, en effet, emporté qu’une
partie de la dépouille mortelle de Stanislas, avec autori
sation des magistrats, sa note est sans reproche, elle est
régulière, et le Moniteur doit réparer son erreur en in
sérant une rectification où l’erreur sera clairement énon
cée, où les intérêts de Nancy seront complètement con
servés et où il sera dit que la ville de Nancy est toujours
en possession des restes précieux du roi dont elle chérit
la mémoire.
»
» Je vous prie à cet égard, Monsieur le Maire, de
compter sur mes soins et sur mon exactitude.
» J’attendrai, Monsieur le Maire, que vous ayez la
bonté de me répondre à ce sujet.
» Je vous prie d’agréer, etc.
» Sauvo. »
Dans une minute de réponse à M. Sauvo, en date du
22 octobre, le Maire déclare que le Conseil municipal ne
peut se déterminer à modifier sa délibération ; qu’une
simple note iïerratum, proposée dans une lettre précé-
�41 —
dente, ne suffirait point à démentir un fait controuvé,
et qu’on ne peut laisser croire à la Pologne et à la
France entière que le Corps municipal aurait pu concé
der au général Sokolnicki la moindre portion d’un dépôt
aussi précieux. Qu’importe, après tout, ajoute le Maire,
dans la même réponse, que le général ait pu se procurer
quelques lambeaux de vêtement de Stanislas. J’ai bien
appris qu’un individu de celte ville, prétendant en possé
der un morceau, avait consenti à le partager ou à l’a
bandonner au général polonais, mais il reste toujours à
savoir jusqu’à quel point on peut ajouter foi à une pa
reille assertion; rien ne prouve que M. Sokolnicki pos
sède réellement quelques débris des vêtements ou osse
ments de la dépouille mortelle de Stanislas, le Corps
municipal ne lui ayant jamais fait aucune concession à
cet égard.
Quant au drapeau dont il est fait mention, nous gar
derons le silence, parce que nous sommes assurés qu’il a
été effectivement abandonné à ce général par une autorité
supérieure*.
Le 2 novembre suivant, M. Sauvo écrivait au Maire :
« Monsieur le Maire,
» L’extrême abondance des matériaux officiels m’a
empêché, jusqu’à ce jour, de donner connaissance de
l’arrêté du Corps municipal de Nancy, mais je ne l’ai
point oublié et je satisferai au désir du Corps municipal
et au vôtre, au premier moment que la chose me sera
possible.
» J’ai l’honneur, etc.
» Sauvo. »
1. Probablement par ordre du comte d’Artois, depuis Charles X.
�—
Nonobstant cette promesse formelle, le Moniteur n’in
séra pas la délibération entière du Conseil municipal ;
mais, à l’occasion du passage de Monsieur, comte d’Ar
tois, il se contenta d’ajouter, dans son n° du 18 novem
bre, les lignes suivantes au récit de l’événement dont il
parle :
« Nous saisissons cette occasion favorable de men
tionner un acte du Corps municipal de Nancy relatif aux
restes du roi Stanislas dont cette ville est demeurée l’ho
norable et fidèle dépositaire. On a lu dans plusieurs jour
naux étrangers et français un article Posen qui tendrait
à faire croire que la ville de Nancy se serait dessaisie de
ce dépôt précieux, qu’un officier polonais aurait remporté
dans sa patrie. Le Corps municipal de Nancy, par arrêté
du 11 octobre dernier, a démenti cette assertion ; il a
déclaré que la vénération et le respect qui existent à ja
mais dans tous les cœurs pour la mémoire d’un prince
bienfaiteur de la Lorraine eussent suffi, indépendamment
de sa responsabilité, pour lui interdire toute démarche
de celte nature ; que l’état des lieux où reposent les cen
dres de Stanislas a été de nouveau vérifié ; qu’il a été
trouvé tel qu’il avait été constaté en 18061, époque où
ces cendres avaient été recueillies et déposées (replacées)
d’une manière authentique dans le caveau de l’église de
Bon-Secours ; que les habitants de cette ville ont tou
jours le bonheur de les posséder et d’aller tous les jours
lui porter le tribut de leur reconnaissance et de leur res
pect religieux. »
1. C’est en 1806 qu’ont été replacés à Bon-Secours les mausolées
du Roi et de la Reine de Pologne; mais il n’y a eu, à cette époque, au
cune reconnaissance de leurs tombeaux ; elle a eu lieu en 1803 et en
1814, comme on l’a vu ci-dessus.
�— 43
Tel est, d’après des documents authentiques, l’exposé
des faits. Il en résulte que le Conseil municipal de Nancy
a montré, dans cette affaire, la plus louable sollicitude
pour sauvegarder l’honneur de la cité et la disculper du
reproche d’ingratitude qu’elle eût mérité. Mais, lors
qu’une erreur s’est propagée, la vérité a de la peine à
reprendre ses droits. Plusieurs Polonais ont persisté à
croire que le corps de Stanislas n’était plus dans notre
ville, mais qu’il avait été transporté à Poscn, à Varsovie
et de là à Saint-Pétersbourg. Ainsi, en 4857, on écrivait
de Lemberg, au czas de Cracovie, que les restes mortels
du roi Stanislas Leszczinski venaient d’être enterrés à
Saint-Pétersbourg. Voici comment le journal et la cor
respondance Ilavas prétendaient expliquer ce fait, qui
leur paraissait à eux-mêmes étrange :
« Lorsque les légions polonaises retournèrent dans leur
pays après la paix de Paris, elles emportèrent de Nancy
les ossements du roi Stanislas pour les déposer dans le
caveau des rois de Pologne. Le cercueil fut déposé au
local de la Société des Amis des Sciences à Varsovie ;
mais l’exécution du projet traîna en longueur, sans doute
parce qu’on attendait un moment plus favorable. Arrivè
rent les années 1850 et 1851, les collections des Amis des
Sciences furent transférées à Saint-Pétersbourg et avec
elles la caisse qui contenait le cercueil du Roi. Ce n’est
que cette année-ci, en déballant les livres, les manuscrits
et autres objets que renfermaient les autres caisses, qu’on
s’aperçut du contenu de celle-là, et qu’on déposa les
restes de Stanislas Leczinski à côté de ceux d’Auguste
Poniatowski. »
Evidemment le prétendu cercueil déposé au local de la
Société des Amis des Sciences de Varsovie ne peut être
�— 44
autre que la caisse où le général Sokolnicki avait en
fermé, lors de son passage à Nancy, les objets que nous
avons mentionnés, et qui ne sont point les restes mortels
de Stanislas. Du reste, les Polonais, qui ont.fait placer
dans l’église de N.-D. de Bon-Secours une inscription1
commémorative de la cérémonie de 1814, ne pensaient
guère emporter et posséder ces restes, puisqu’ils leur
disaient, en pleurant, un éternel adieu.
Henri LEPAGE.
1. En voici la traduction :
A DIEU TRÈS-BON TRÈS-GRAND.
■m
Les débris de l’armée polonaise, ayant cherché par le monde, avec
l’aide des Français, une patrie qu’ils ont méritée par leur persévé
rance et par leur courage, rassemblés par la bienveillance d’ALEXANDRE
le pacificateur, regagnant leurs pénales, sous la conduite de Michel
Sokolnicki, aux cendres de Stanislas Leszcinski père bienfaisant,
bisaïeul du roi très-chrétien, et à cette nation hospitalière, disent en
pleurant un éternel adieu.
Le xi juin 1814.
1
�Sc. par Sébastien Adam.
MAUSOLÉE DE CATHERINE OPALINSKA
REINE DE POLOGNE
Duchesse
de
Lorraine
et
de
Bar.
�D.
0.
M.
A DIEU
TRÈS-BON TRÈS-GRAND.
Hic jacet, Regina coeloRUM AD PEDES,
Ici
repose, aux pieds de la
Reine
des cieux,
Regibus orta atavis avia
Regum Catharina Opalinska, Regina Poloni.®,
Magna Ducissa Lithuanle,
Ducissa Lotharingi.e et
barri , pietate in Deum,
misericordia in pauperes,
morum integritate, et re
gii celsitudine animi supra modum mirabilis, va
ria in fortuna semper eadem, spiritu magno quo
prospera tulit et adversa
vidit ultima, die 19 martii, annosalutis mdccxlvii,
cetatis suce lxvii.
La fille et la mère des rois,
Catherine Opalinska , reine
de Pologne, grande duchesse
de Lithuanie, duchesse de
Lorraine et de Bar, émi
nemment remarquable par sa
piété envers Dieu, sa charité
pour les pauvres, la pureté
de ses mœurs, l’élévation de
son caractère royal, toujours
égale dans l’une et l’autre
fortune ; avec la même gran
deur d’âme qu’elle supporta
la prospérité et l’adversité,
elle vit ses derniers moments,
le 19 mars, l’an de grâce
1747, de son âge 67.
Dulcissimce Conjugi
Stanislaus I. Rex Poi.
Magnus Dux Lith. Dux
Loth. et Barri luctùs sui
et publici monumentum
bene inerenti piè posuit.
Stanislas I, roi de Polo
gne, grand duc de Lithuanie,
duc de Lorraine et de Bar,
a, dans sa piété, élevé ce mo
nument de sa douleur et de
celle de son peuple à qui en
était si digne, son épouse
bien-aimée.
�PREMIÈRE CONSTRUCTION A NANCY d’üNE CHAPELLE EN
L’HONNEUR DE NOTRE-DAME DE BON-SECOURS.
L’église Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours a pour fondateur
RENÉ 11, Roi de Sicile et de Jérusalem, Duc de Lorraine
et de Bar.
Les princes de Lorraine se sont toujours distingués
par leur dévotion envers la sainte Vierge. RENÉ, lors de
la bataille de Nancy1 (1477), se plaça d’une manière
1. La bataille de Nancy, qui a donné naissance à la chapelle de
Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours, est fameuse dans l’histoire, à raison,
�— 48 —
spéciale, lui et ses Etats, sous la protection de la Mère
de Dieu, et, pour le combat, fit marcher en tète de
ses troupes un étendard de satin blanc, sur lequel était
surtout, de ses conséquences. La défaite et la mort de Charles-leTéméraire affermirent, eu effet, la couronne sur la tète du Duc de
Lorraine, et Louis XI, roi de France se trouvait également délivré
du plus redoutable de scs ennenrs. Rappelons le fait, en quelques
mots.
Nancy était assiégé et serré de près par le Duc de Bourgogne, dont
l’injuste ambition ne connaissait plus de bornes. L’excellent Duc de
Lorraine, René II, menacé de la perte de tous ses Etats, veut tenter
un effort suprême. Il raliie a sa cause les Suisses, qu’il avait luimême secourus contre Charles, à la bataille de Morat, et réunissant
toutes ses troupes, il arrive à Saiul-Nicolas-du-Port à deux lieues de
sa capitale, qui l’attend cl compte sur lui. Là, il ne perd point de
temps et prend ses dispositions pour fondre sur l’ennemi et délivrer
sa bonne Ville le lendemain même.
C’était le dimanche, 5 janvier 1477, veille de la fêle des Rois. Dès
le malin, plusieurs messes sont célébrées et chantées en différents
endroits du bourg ; toute l’armée y assiste, puis se met immédiate
ment en marche. Parvenu, vers dix heures, sur la petite hauteur qui
domine le ruisseau d’Heillecourl et le village de Jarville, hauteur ap
pelée aujourd’hui Renémont, le Prince libérateur trace son plan d’at
taque. De son côté, le Duc de Bourgogne, appuyant sa gauche contre
la rivière de Meurlhc et devant le Rupt de Jarville, établit son centre
de bataille et son artillerie sur l’emplacement où s’élève aujourd’hui
Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours. Les ordres étant distribués, l’armée
lorraine, 18 à 20,000 hommes, traverse le premier ruisseau qui
la sépare de l’ennemi, u tous les malchaussés, dit la chronique de
Lorraine, par dessus puisirent pleins leurs souliers, » et va
se porter sur le plateau de la Malgrange qui était alors une ferme.
Là, dit la même chronique de Lorraine, un prêtre Allemand, revêtu
d’un surplis et d’une élole, monte sur un petit tertre pour être mieux
vu et entendu, et tenant entre ses mains une hostie consacrée, il
exhorte les soldats à la confiance, les excite au repentir de leurs fau
tes, et invoque le Dieu des batailles, vengeur du bon droit. Tous
alors, pour témoigner de leurs dispositions chrétiennes, se précipitent
à genoux, et traçant une croix sur la terre blanchie par la- neige, ils
la baisent, et se relèvent pleins de courage et d’espérance. D’après
�— 49 —
peinte une Annonciation. En reconnaissance de la vic
toire qu’il avait remportée sur Charles-le-Téméraire,
les ordres de René, on devait tourner l’ennemi, tout en simulant une
attaque de front, le séparer de l’armée de siège et le surprendre tout à
la fois à dos et en flanc. Charles, avec les 6 ou 8,000 hommes dont il
pouvait seulement disposer en dehors des troupes de siège, avait
voulu, contre l’avis de son conseil, se porter en avant ; il comptait
sur son artillerie, sur les avantages de sa position et sur la valeur bien
connue de ses troupes. Cependant les mouvements de l’armée lor
raine se combinent et s’exécutent rapidement, on s'échelonne le long
du bois de Saurupt, appelé, depuis, bois de Brichambaut, et une
demi-heure ne s’est pas écoulée que, le signal d’attaque étant donné,
la mêlée commence et se poursuit avec acharnement sur le territoire de
Nabécor, au lieu occupé aujourd’hui par le pensionnat des Dames du
Sacré-Cœur. Les chefs des deux partis firent des prodiges d’intrépidité
et d’audace. Charles, après avoir rétabli plusieurs fois le combat, ne put
éviter d’être enveloppé, et voyant la déroute entière de ses soldats,
prit la fuite pour se soustraire à une mort imminente, u Luy, dit
Commines, qui n’avait oncqnes veue la peur au visage, » voulut re
joindre le camp de Bourgogne placé à la Commanderie de Saint-Jean
du Viel-Aitre ; mais en traversant la partie occidentale de l’étang, il
laissa son cheval s’enfoncer dans le marais, et périt misérablement,
percé de plusieurs coups de lance. Le jour commençait abaisser;
René rentrait victorieux dans sa capitale. Pour arc de triomphe et
comme témoignagne de leur fidélité à toute épreuve, les bourgeois de
Nancy dressèrent un trophée singulier avec les os des vils animaux
dont ils s’étaient nourris pendant le siège. Quelques jours après,
René, aussi généreux dans le succès que terrible au combat, allait
jeter de l’eau bénite sur le corps de son infortuné cousin, à qui il fît
ensuite de magnifiques funérailles. —Les détails de celle bataille mémo
rable ont été traités de la manière la plus intéressante par le capitaine
Ferdinand de Lacombe, dans une brochure intitulée Le siège et la
bataille de Nancy, éditée en 1860.
En action de grâces de la victoire, et pour en perpétuer le souve
nir, René avait ordonné, que chaque année, le 5 janvier, se ferait,
dans sa capitale, une procession solennelle suivie d’un Te Deum,
auquel assistaient le souverain et tous les ordres de l’Etat. Dans
cette procession étaient étalés tous les trophées de la victoire ; les
armes du Duc de Bourgogne étaient portées par les plus grands sei-
�Duc de Bourgogne, il érigea une chapelle sous l’invoca
tion de Noslre-Dame de Bon-Secours, et fit don de la
statue qu’on vénère encore aujourd’hui.
Celte statue, presque de grandeur naturelle, est une
vierge auxiliatrice, étendant son manteau protecteur sur
vingt personnages agenouillés, qui élèvent vers elle des
mains suppliantes. Les dix personnages, formant le
groupe de gauche, représentent l’ordre laïc, princes,
magistrats et peuple ; le groupe de droite représente
l’ordre ecclésiastique, cardinaux, évêques, religieux de
différents ordres et même un Pape, qui, peut-être, dans
la pensée du fondateur, était Léon IX, de la famille des
ducs héréditaires de Lorraine, lequel signait Léon, évê
que de Toul et Pape.
La statue commandée par René 11 au sculpteur Mansuy Gauvain, imagier menuisier de Son Altesse, a été
peinte aux frais de Philippe de Gueldres, épouse de ce
prince.
Les Ducs successeurs de René avaient coutume de
placer dans leur palais un tableau de Notre-Dame de
Bon-Secours et faisaient peindre leur propre famille
sous le manteau de la Vierge.
gneurs de la cour : l’épée par M. de Beauvau et le casque par M. de
Gerbéviller.
Quand fut détruite l’église de la collégiale Saint-Georges, où se
célébrait la cérémonie, un grand nombre de Lorrains, disent les
mémoires pour servir à l’histoire de Lorraine, allaient à la messe
à Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours, chapelle érigée par René II sur
le lieu même où les Bourguignons avaient combattu et où ils
étaient enterrés.
�i
SECONDE CONSTRUCTION AJOUTÉE A LA CHAPELLE.
L'affluence toujours croissante des pèlerins, qu’attirait
la réputation des grâces obtenues par ¡’intercession de
Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours, rendit bientôt nécessaire
l’agrandissement de la première chapelle, et, en 1650, le
duc Charles IV1 ajouta à celle-ci une nef de 60 pieds de
longueur.
Déjà, depuis quelques années, le pèlerinage était des
servi par la Congrégation des R. P. Minimes, qui, instal
lés par le Duc Henri II, entendaient les confessions, célé
braient la sainte Messe et acquittaient les fondations déjà
établies soit en faveur du culte, soit en faveur des pauvres.
Ce qui faisait la beauté de ces deux premiers sanc1. u Les grands, fréquents et admirables miracles qui se font en la
Chapelle de Nostre Dame... ladite Chapelle estant trop petite et trop
eslroite, la plupart d’yceux (pèlerins), demeure hors à la porte....
Avons loué et approuvé l’aggrandissement de ladite... afin d'y estre
Dieu beny et servy et sadite Mère honorée, invoquée et révérée... et
ponr attirer les grâces et bénédictions de Dieu snr nous, sur nos
pays et particulièrement sur nostredite ville de Nancy.... «Tiré des
lettres patentes du Duc Charles IV, en date du 29 juin 1629. Voir
Annuaire de la Meurthe, 1852, par H. Lepage, p. 110 et 111.
�tuaires, c’étaient les nombreux cx-voto qui en tapissaient
les murs, ainsi que six drapeaux1 suspendus à la voûte,
trophées des victoires remportées, sur les ennemis du
nom chrétien, par les ducs de Lorraine et dont ceux-ci
faisaient hommage à Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours.
Durant les nombreuses calamités qui affligèrent le
pays sous Charles IV, la ville de Nancy, désolée par la
guerre, la famine et la peste, se consacra, par un vœu2
solennel, à Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours, afin d’obtenir
la cessation du fléau, et recommander à son intercession
puissante ceux qui avaient succombé. Ce vœu fut con
firmé en 1742, à l’érection de la nouvelle église, et le
texte en est gravé sur le marbre qui se trouve placé
contre le pilastrefvis-à-vis la chaire.
1. Quatre de ces drapeaux existent encore aujourd’hui. Ils ont été
pris sur les Turcs, dans les dernières croisades des xvnc et xvm®
siècles, aux journées de Saint-Golhard, 1663, de Mohatz, 1687, de
Péterwaradin, 1716, et de Méradia, 1738.
2. Vœu à la Vierge des Vierges...... O puissante Mère de Dieu !
Moi, ville de Nancy, pour accomplir mon vœu, j’ai fait élever ce mo
nument éternel de ma reconnaissauce envers vous, pour les bienfaits
dont vous m’avez comblée. Ayant depuis longtemps ressenti les effets
de votre puissante protection, je m’étais engagée à votre service ;
mais depuis ces derniers jours, j’ai voulu, comme je le devais,
m’y consacrer encore plus fortement par un vœu solennel ; afin
que quand la justice divine, que rien ne peut arrêter, fait tomber
du ciel sur nous, pour se venger de nos crimes, le terrible fléau de
la peste, vous en arrêtiez le cours, et qu’après avoir apaisé votre di
vin fils (vous seule usez ordinairement en ce cas des droits que vous
donne sur lui la qualité de sa mère), vous désarmiez son bras vengeur.
Pour cela, je ferai monter chaque semaine, à votre autel, un mi
nistre pour vous supplier d’agréer les vœux de mes citoyens, et qui,
le lendemain de votre glorieuse Assomption dans le ciel, priera,
dans un service funèbre, pour ceux que la contagion aura effacés de la
liste de mes habitants.
O Vierge sainte, qui pouvez faire cesser tous les maux, daignez
écouler ma prière, et recevoir favorablement mon vœu.
(Trad. de Lionnais, Hist. de JVancy.)
�TROISIÈME CONSTRUCTION. — ÉGLISE ACTUELLE DE
NOTRE-DAME DE BON—SECOURS.
1758. Cependant l’église et le .couvent de Bon-Secours
étaient des monuments peu dignes de la célébrité Mu pè
lerinage et de la magnificence d'une ville telle que Nancy ;
ils tombaient d’ailleurs de vétusté*. Stanislas releva le
couvent et voulut rebâtir l’église dans une forme et avec
une splendeur qui répondissent à sa piété. Les artistes
1. Les arrangements de la paix de <736 déterminèrent le mariage
de François lit (dernier duc de Lorraine et de Bar, de la famille'des
Habsbourg), avec Marie-Thérèse d'Autriche, fille et héritière de Pern-
�lorrains les plus distingués, les Adam, les Provençal, les
Lamour furent appelés à enrichir le nouveau sanctuaire
de leurs plus belles œuvres de sculpture, de peinture et
de serrurerie, sous la direction de l’architecte Ileré1. En
1741, l’église fut consacrée avec une grande solennité,
en présence du Roi et de la Reine de Pologne, de la cour,
de la magistrature et de la noblesse lorraine.
L’église Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours est bâtie dans le
style de la Renaissance italienne, comme la chapelle du
palais de Versailles, avec une galerie intérieure au pour
tour. Ses murs sont entièrement couverts de stucs, de
peintures et de sculptures dorées. La voûte, restaurée
depuis quelques années, a été peinte par Joseph Gilles,
dit Provençal. La frise de l’entablement, au-dessous de
la galerie, est ornée d’emblèmes sculptés qui symbolisent
les Litanies de la sainte Vierge. Prés du sanctuaire, à
l’un des pilastres qui soutiennent l’entablement, est agra
fée une élégante chaire à prêcher ; les huit autres pilas
tres sont décorés de statues polychrômées2.
pereur Charles VI. D’un autre côté, Stanislas Ier, roi de Pologne et
grand-duc de Lithuanie, donnait la main de sa fille Marie Lesczinska
au roi Louis XV, et recevait, lui, si digne de succéder aux René, aux
Antoine, aux Charles III, aux Charles IV et aux Léopold, le gouver
nement du duché de Lorraine, lequel devait ensuite être uni à la
France. *
1. Par la reconstruction de Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours, Stanislas
accomplissait, du reste, un vœu qu’il avait fait, et il choisit le chœur
de la nouvelle église pour être le lieu de sa sépulture. Pendant les
29 ans que le Roi gouverna la Lorraine, il ne manqua jamais, quelle
que fût la nécessité des affaires, de venir, à Notre-Dame de BonSecours, assister aux offices divins et recevoir la sainte communion,
les jours de fête de la sainte Vierge. (Voir la note de la page 9.)
2. Ces statues, plus grandes que nature, et d’un travail remar
quable, sont : aux pieds-droits de l’arcade triomphale : saint Joseph,
�— 55 —
Au cote gauche de la chaire se trouve l'inscription
commémorative de l'offrande faite à Notre Dame, par le
Due Charles V, d'un drapeau qu'il avait arraché des
mains d'un musulman à la bataille de Saint-Gothard : en
face. le vœu de la ville de Nancy ; puis les inscriptions
rappelant le passage des Polonais en 1814 et 1853.
Dans le sanctuaire, on remarque, en outre de la
statue vénérée de la Vierge, le mausolée1 de la Reine
de Pologne ( 1745 ), chef-d'œuvre de Nicolas-Sébas
tien Adam : le mausolée5 du Roi (1766), sculpté par
partant Fenfant Jésus sur son bras, et saint Jean Népomucène, mar
tyr de la confession (1330), patron de la Bohème et en grande vé
nération dans la Pologne ; dans la nef, sainte Reine, patronne de la
Boursosne : saint Gaétan, héros de la chanté, en Italie, au xvne
siècle ; saint François-Xavier, apôtre des Indes et du Japon ; saint
Antoine de Padoue, de l’ordre des Frères-Mineurs ; saint François
de Paule, fondateur des Minimes : et saint Michel-Archange, terras
sant le serpent infernal et pesant les âmes au Jugement dernier, em
blèmes sous lesquels il est représenté à l'entrée de la plupart des an
ciennes basiliques.
1. La pyramide du mausolée de Catherine Opalinska, reine de
Pologne, duchesse de Lorraine et de Bar, est surmontée de ses armes,
qui sont comme celles du Roi son époux, les armes ordinaires des
rois de Pologne, dues de Lithuanie, avec l’écusson de Notre-Dame
de Bon-Secours placé sur le tout, c’est à-dire, d'azur, au vaisseau vo
guant, d’argent. (Voir la fin de la notice.)
2. Les armes du Roi Stanislas, duc de Lorraine et de Bar, sur
montent aussi ¡a pyramide de son tombeau. Elles se composent
(comme il était d’usage, pour les Rois ses prédécesseurs), des quar
tiers de Pologne et de Lithuanie, et sur le tout, l’écusson des armes
de sa familie. Ainsi l'écu est : écartelé au 1er et 4e, de gueules, à
l’aigle éployé d’argent, becqué, langué, membré et couronné d’or,
qui est de Pologne ; au 2e et 3e, de gueules, au cavalier d'argent,
tenant de la main droite une épée de même, et de la gauche un
bouclier d’azur charge d’une croix patriarchale d’or, qui est du grand
�— 56
Vassé et Lecomte ; enfin les deux petits monuments,
renfermant, l’un, le cœur de Marie Lesczinska, fille de
Stanislas et épouse de Louis XV, l’autre, les restes du
Duc d’Ossolinski.
Le pèlerinage fut de plus en plus florissant jusqu’à
l’époque de la Révolution de 4789. Lorsque, dans les
jours de fête, ou dans les intervalles de la cessation des
travaux de la campagne, il se joignait à l’affluence ordi
naire le concours simultané de quelques paroisses de la
Montagne, (ce qu’on appelait vulgairement la descente des
Vosges), alors les auberges du faubourg Saint-Pierre
devenaient insuffisantes au logement de la foule, et, pour
le repos de la nuit, on étendait de la paille devant l’église
et entre les contreforts collatéraux.
Aux plus mauvais jours de la Terreur, le recours à
duché de Lithuanie ; sur le tout,
d’or, au rencontre de buffle de sa
ble, bouclé de même, qui est de
Lesczinski.
Quelquefois on rencontre l’écu de
Stanislas, écartelé de Pologne, de Li
thuanie, de Lorraine et de Bar, et sur
le tout l’écusson de Sa Maison. En
ce cas, il est : écartelé, au 1er, de
gueules, à l’aigle éployé, d’argent,
... couronné d’or; au 2e, de gueules,
au cavalier d’argent, armé d’une épée, de même et portant un bou
clier d’azur chargé d’une croix palriarchale d’or ; au 3e, d’or, à
la bande de gueules, chargée de 3 alérions d’argent ; au 4e d'azur,
semé de croix recroisetées, au pied liché d’or, et deux Bars adossés
de même ; sur le tout, d’or, au rencontre de buffle de sable, bouclé
de même.
�— 57 —
l’intercession de Notre-Dame était encore populaire et
empressé, puisque, en 1795. une nouvelle édition de la
neuvainc à Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours s'imprimait à
Nancy.
Maïs ni la vénération publique attachée au pieux sanc
tuaire, ni le respect des chefs-d’œuvre d’art qu'il conte
nait, ne pouvaient suffire à le sauver des coups et delà rage
des démolisseurs. Condamné, à raison des souvenirs de
royauté qu’il rappelait, l'édifice fut vendu ; les sépultures
de Stanislas et de son épouse furent violées et pillées.
Déjà on avait arraché les grilles intérieures ; une des sta
tues avait été abattue, les autres mutilées, l'œuvre géné
rale de destruction avait commencé pendant une nuit,
lorsque le cri d'alarme fut jeté dans la ville dès le malin
et excita un soulèvement populaire en faveur de Bon-Se
cours. En présence de cette manifestation, le district
envoya deux officiers municipaux pour rassurer le peuple
et lui déclarer que. puisque telle était sa volonté, le con
trat de vente serait résilié et l'église conservée. (Voir
page 12.
Aussitôt que l'aurore de meilleurs jours se leva pour
la France, les pertes du sanctuaire se rouvrirent aux fiois
du peuple qui venait demander à Dieu, par l’intercession
de h sainte Vierge, le pardon et la paix.
Après le Concordat, (1805J, le conseil municipal et la
magi^rMnre de Nancy vinrent, comme fl a été dit
précédemment, reconnaître les dépouillés royales du
eaveau. — MM. les curés de la paroisse Saint-Pierre,
qui étaient alors administrateurs de Notre-Dame de
Bon-Secours, déployèrent, avec le concours de Ma
dame de Bourgogne, d'honorable mémoire, le plus grand
zélé pour réparer les dégradations et rétablir I édifice dans
un eut aussi convenable que possible.
�— 58
En 1814, Monsieur, comte d’Artois, depuis, Charles X,
— en 1828, Madame la Dauphine, fille de Louis XVI, —
et en 1851, le Roi Louis-Philippe, sont venus, en visite
solennelle, prier dans l’église Notre-Dame de BonSecours.
En 1841, fut établie, près de l’église et sous le titre
ecclésiastique de Collégiale de Notre-Dame de Bon-Se
cours, la maison de retraite des prêtres du diocèse, les
quels, ayant rang de chanoines honoraires, devaient des
servir le pèlerinage.
En 1844, Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours, tout en conser
vant les avantages précédents, fut érigée en église parois
siale ; mesure importante qui assurait à l’édifice une
existence légale et des moyens de conservation. Dès lors,
on put entreprendre sérieusement la restauration d’un
monument également cher à la religion, aux arts et à
l’histoire, et lui rendre, à l’aide des pieuses largesses des
fidèles, une partie de son ancienne splendeur.
1854. Le 50 juillet, une foule considérable et pieuse se
presse dans l’intérieur et aux abords de Notre-Dame de
Bon-Secours, pour demander à Dieu par l’intercession
de Marie, secours des chrétiens^ la cessation du choléra,
dans des prières publiques présidées par Msr Mcnjaud,
évêque de Nancy et de Toul.
En 4859, M. le Baron de Méneval, alors ministre plé
nipotentiaire de France près la cour de Bavière1, ayant
perdu son épouse après quelques jours de maladie, vou
lut, en mémoire de l’affection de la défunte pour le sanc1. Entré depuis dans les ordres sacrés.
�uaire de Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours, se charger de
¡’ornementation complète de la chapelle des fonts baptis
maux, et il y plaça un monument funèbre sculpté par
Jouffroy, membre de l’institut.
1862. Les murs de la nef s’enrichissent d’un chemin
le croix en émail et bronzes dorés, du plus gracieux
effet.
1865. Par un Bref du 27 mai 1864, le Souverain-Pon
tife Pie IX avait décidé qu’une couronne, dont sa Sainteté
Elle-même faisait présent, serait placée solennellement
sur la tête de la statue vénérée de Notre-Dame de BonSecours de Nancy. Lorsque la réédification du chœur de
l’Eglise sur ses premiers fondements1 fut terminée, et
après l’entier achèvement de la niche de la Vierge, la cé
rémonie du couronnement fut célébrée avec le plus grand
éclat par S. Em. le cardinal archevêque de Besançon,
assisté de N N. SS. les évêques de Nancy et de Metz. Les
décorations de verdure et d’emblèmes qui pavoisaient
toutes les maisons du faubourg Saint-Pierre, dix arcs
de triomphe d’une élégance majestueuse, un immense
1. Le chevet du chœur de l’église de Bon-Secours avait été dé
moli quelques années avant la Révolution, pour bâtir, à sa place et en
prolongement, la chapelle des Dames chanoinesses, transférées de
Bouxières à Nancy, puis le projet de prolongement fut abandonné. Ce
fut seulement en 1806 que l’on reconstruisit, en simples moellons, et
dans de moindres proportions, ce qui avait été renversé. Cettepartie du
chœur, grâces au don du terrain et à des avances d’argent faits par
MM. Saladin, voisins de l’église, a été agrandie et réédifiée, de
puis quelques années, en pierres de taille comme elle était ancien
nement. La niche de la Vierge et l’ornementation générale de l’ab
side sont dues à M. Jules Laurent, architecte, statuaire, qui, sous la
direction de M. Morey, architecte de la Ville, a déployé dans les tra
vaux autant de zèle que de talent.
�concours de prêtres et de fidèles, ont fait de cette céré
monie et de la procession qui l’a précédée, une des
plus belles manifestations religieuses qu’on ait vues de
notre temps.
1866. Du 23 février, anniversaire centenaire de la mort
de Stanislas le Bienfaisant, au 4 mars, époque où ses res
tes ont été déposés dans le caveau royal, une affluence
considérable est venue prier devant le tombeau du Roi.
Tout le chœur et une grande partie de la nef étaient revê
tus de tentures noires et violettes, ornées de nombreux
écussons aux armes du roi de Pologne. Le 4 mars, l’édilité nancéienne, l’élite de la population, le collège de
la Malgrange, un grand nombre de Polonais, assistaient
à un service très-solennel, présidé par M-r Lavigeric, et
témoignaient ainsi du pieux souvenir, que les qualités et
les bienfaits du dernier duc de Lorraine avaient gravé
dans tous les cœurs.
La même année 4866, à l’occasion des fêtes commémo
ratives1 de l’annexion de la Lorraine à la France, le por1. La sonnerie de Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours avait été complé
tée pour l’époque de ces fêles. La cloche qui a eu pour parrain et
marraine (7 septembre 1741) le Roi et la Reine de Pologne, et qui
pèse environ trois cents kilogr., ayaut été heureusement conservée
pendant la Révolution, deux autres plus petites y avaient été ajoutées
en 1810 (données par MM. Bernel et de Bourgogne). Neuf cloches
nouvelles, s’harmonisant avec le ton des premières, ont été fournies,
dans ces dernières années, par M. Perrin-Martin, fondeur à Robécourt
(Vosges) ; la plus forte sonne le mi-bémol et pèse mille quarante kilo
grammes ; la plus petite ne pèse que quarante-cinq kilogrammes.
Celle-ci, fondue seulement en 1867, porte pour toute inscription :
Pie IX, Pape; Napoléon III, Empereur; J.-A. Foulon, Evêque; Podevin, Préfet; A. Buquet, Maire de Nancy; Gouy de Bcllock, Maire de
Jarville; Saladin, Président du Conseil de fabrique; Morel, Curé;
Genet, Trésorier; Lebon, Chanoine; Marquis de Vaugiraud ; Ilenrion,
Secrétaire; Gucrquin, Vicaire. Un clavier de 12 notes est disposé pour
les carillons.
�— 61
tail et Vintérieur de l’Eglise étaient décorés d’oriflammes
et de guirlandes de fleurs. C’est le 17 juillet que S. M.
l'impératrice Eugénie, accompagnée de Son Altesse le
Prince Impérial, est venue faire son pèlerinage à la Vierge
vénérée des Lorrains.
L’année suivante, le 22 octobre 1867, Bon-Secours
recevait également dans son enceinte d’augustes visiteurs,
Sa Majesté l’Empereur François-Joseph d’Autriche, ac
compagnée des deux Archiducs ses frères.
Avant l’hiver de la même année 1867, MM. Ledru et
de Bournonville ont appliqué avec succès à l’église
Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours leur système de calorifère.
Ainsi, avec des frais relativement minimes, une seule
bouche de chaleur, ouverte derrière le rideau du sanc
tuaire, chauffe les sept mille mètres cubes d’air que me
sure l’église. Le foyer du calorifère, construit contre le
chœur, est couvert par un petit bâtiment en pierres de
taille, qui donne en meme temps un local pour le place
ment des ex-voto.
En ce moment, janvier 1869, M. Çuviller, fils, cons
truit, â la tribune de Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours, un
orgue de 16 pieds, entièrement neuf. La soufflerie, établie
dans un étage supérieur, est à différentes pressions et
à deux réservoirs ; elle donne deux mille litres d’air.
L’orgue a 40 jeux complets, savoir : 12 jeux au grand
orgue, 10 au positif, 11 au récit avec boite d’expression,
et 7 à la pédale.
Enfin, dans le cours de 1869, doivent être posés les
deux grands vitraux, donnés, pour le chœur de Notre-
�— 62 —
Dame de Bon-Secours, par LL. MM. l’Empereur et l’im
pératrice. Ces vitraux, accordés à la recommandation de
M. l’abbé de Méneval et en souvenir du pèlerinage de
S. M. l’impératrice Eugénie et de S. A. le Prince Impé
rial, ont été confiés par l’initiative de S. M. l’impéra
trice1, au talent de M. Maréchal, de Metz, et sont aujour
d’hui en voie d’exécution. Comme, de temps immémo
rial, à Nancy, les jeunes époux, immédiatement après la
cérémonie de leur mariage, viennent à Bon-Secours prier
la sainte Vierge de protéger leur union ; comme, d’un
autre côté, les enfans de la ville et des campagnes envi
ronnantes viennent aussi, le lendemain de leur première
communion, se consacrer à Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours,
les sujets des deux vitraux ont été choisis comme mé
morial de ces pieux et antiques usages, et ils repré
sentent, l’un, le mariage de la sainte Vierge, l’autre,
la Présentation de Jésus au Temple.
Ainsi, chaque année apporte son hommage de vénéra
tion et son tribut d’offrandes à un sanctuaire qui, au point
de vue des arts et des souvenirs nationaux, comme au
point de vue de la dévotion envers la sainte Vierge, est
une gloire de la Lorraine.
1. Aussitôt que M. le Bon Buquet, Maire de Nancy et Député, eut
appris la faveur Impériale, il s’empressa d’aller remercier S. M. l’im
pératrice. Sa Majesté, voyant arriver M. Buquet, le prévint et lui dit :
u Eh bien, M. Buquet, je viens d’accorder des vitraux à votre église
de Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours.—Je le sais, Madame, répondit
M. le Baron, et je venais en témoigner ma reconnaissance à Votre
Majesté. — Je désire, reprit l'impératrice, que le travail en soit
confié à M. Maréchal. — Madame, répondit M. Buquet, les désirs de
Votre Majesté sont des ordres ; que Votre Majesté me permette
d’ajouter que rien ne pouvait nous être plus agréable que le choix de
l’artiste désigné par Elle. »
�C’est René II qui a blasonné sous l’écusson de Lorraine les huit
quartiers des alliances de Sa Maison, et qui a ainsi fixé les armes
pleines de Lorraine.
parti de trois et coupé d’un, qui font
8 quartiers : 4 royaumes et 4 duchés ;
au l‘r, burrelé d’argent et de gueules
de 8 pièces, qui est de Hongrie ; —
au 2e, semé de France, au lambel de
gueules, qui est de Naples Sicile ; —
au 3e, d’argent, à la croix potencée
d’or et cantonnée de 4 croiseltes de
même, qui est de Jérusalem ; — au
4e, d’or à 4 pals de gueules, qui est
d’Arragon ; — au 5e, semé de France
à la bordure de gueules, qui est d’Aojou ; — au 6e, d’azur au lion
contourné d’or, armé, lampassé et couronné de gueules, qui est de
Gueldres ; — au 7e, d’or, au lion de sable, arme et lampassé de
gueules, qui est de Juliers ; - au 8«, d’azur, semé de croix recroiselées au pied fiché d’or et deux bars adosses de meme, qui est de
Bar ; sur le tout, d’or, à la bande de gueules, chargée de 3 alenons
d’argent, qui est de Lorraine.
Après sa victoire sur le duc de Bourgogce, René récompensa di
gnement les capitaines et les soldats qui avaient si vaillamment com
battu pour lui. Les villages de Laneuveville, Villers, Laxou et la
contrée du Vermois, - six villages - furent exempts de tailles
pour douze ans.
,
Quant à sa bonne ville de Nancy, non seulement il fil bâtir près de
son enceinte la chapelle de Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours, témoin de
sa valeur, mais il confirma ses privilèges, augmenta scs exemptions
.Uiivm des lettres d’affranchissement à ses bourgeois, et donna a la
�fidélité constante des habitants, permit à la ville de surmonter ses
armes de l’écusson même de Lorraine.
Ainsi les armes de Nancy sont :
d’argent, au chardon ligé, arraché et
verdoyant, arrangé de deux feuilles
piquantes au naturel, à la fleur purpu
rine, et en chef, d’or, à la bande de
gueules, chargées de 3 alérions d’ar
gent.
Comme nous l’avons dit dans la note de la page 55, les armes de
l’église Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours sont :
d’azur, au vaisseau voguant, d'argent.
Ces dernières armes sont attribuées
en effet à l’église Notre-Dame de BonSecours, parce qu’elles symbolisent la
bataille navale de Lépaute, après la
quelle l’invocation Auxilium Christianorum, ora pro nobis, secours
des chrétiens, ou Notre-Dame de
Bon-Secours, priez pour nous, a
été ajoutée aux litanies de la sainte
Vierge par le Pape saint Pie V, en
1571. On ne sait pas si les paroles en étaient inscrites sur quelque
monument dans l’ancienne chapelle de Bon-Secours ; mais, dès 1742,
elles étaient gravées au couronnement qui surmonte le tableau du
vœu de Nancy, et elles sont devenues l’invocation habituelle des
fidèles qui viennent prier dans l’église de Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours.
Notre Dame de Bon-Secours, priez pour nous.
Nancy. — lmp. de A. Lepage, Grande-Rue (Ville-Vieille), 14.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Les caveaux de Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours proces-verbaux de 1803 & 1814 relatifs a la conservations des restes mortels de Stanislas, suivis d'une petit notice sur l'eglise
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Lepage, Henri
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: Nancy
Collation: 64 p. : ill. ; 21 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Includes bibliographical references.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
A. Lepage
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1868
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5567
Subject
The topic of the resource
Poland
History
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Les caveaux de Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours proces-verbaux de 1803 & 1814 relatifs a la conservations des restes mortels de Stanislas, suivis d'une petit notice sur l'eglise), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
French
Church of Notre-Dame de Bon-Secours
Conway Tracts
King of Poland
Nancy
Stanislaw Leszczynski