Some lies and errors of history

JOHN M. KELLY LIBRARY

f£L ;

Donated by

The Redemptorists of
the Toronto Province

from the Library Collection of
Holy Redeemer College, Windsor

University of
St. Michael's College, Toronto

H3LY REDEEMER LIBRARY, WlfltfSOR

SOME LIES AND ERRORS
OF HISTORY

BY

REV. REUBEN PARSONS, D.D.
Author of " Studies in Church History"

1 L ^homme est de glace aux veritist
11 est de feu pour le mtnsonge"

LAFONTAINE.

RBPRINTBD FROM THE "

TRITIUM.
TORONTO, CAN.

NOTRE DAME, IND.:

OFFICE OF THE " AVE MARIA,'

1892.

H9LVREDEEHER LIBRARY,

COPYRIGHT, 1892,
BY DANIEL E. HUDSON.

CASHMAN, KEATING & Co., Printers.
BOSTON, MASS.

PREFACE.

THE following essays, selected from among those
contributed by the author to the "Ave Maria" dur-
ing the last few years, include some subjects which,
though important, are seldom brought to the atten-
tion of any but the lovers of the recondite. For
the presentation of these no explanation need be
tendered; but others are introduced, the themes
of which have become trite, even to persons of no
extraordinary erudition. Perhaps, therefore, indul-
gence should be asked for an apparently reckless
augmentation of the mass of polemics already super-
fluous and tiresome. Nevertheless, such an apology
shall not be made. The fact that the indicated
errors are constantly being advanced, despite the
multifarious refutations which are at the command
of the sincere investigator ; the fact that these errors
too often meet with silence on the^part of those whose
highest interests demand their exposition; these

iii

iv Preface.

strange and saddening considerations justify our
action, and preclude any fear of its being ascribed to
a cacoethes scribendi. Again, while in some instances
the reader may find nothing new presented for his
reflections, the subject-matter may stand forth in a
new light, owing to the method of its treatment ; and
thus the author may gain his object — the elucida-
tion of a knotty question, or the manifestation of a
hideous lie, in a mind which other writers have not
influenced.

In choosing his subjects, the author has suffered
from an embarrassment of riches, and he has fancied
that he was about to imitate the child who tried to
clear away the ocean with a spoon. Several volumes
would be required for an exposition of merely the
most prominent of the Lies and Errors of History.
We do not threaten the libraries with any polemical
avalanche, but we do propose soon to put forth
another effort in the good cause. An endeavor to
dislodge the spirit of falsehood from the position to
which it has been elevated by those writers whom
De Maistre, with but little exaggeration, charges
with having entered into a deliberate conspiracy
against truth, may be an attempt to emulate the
labors of Sisyphus. But some measure of success
is attainable. " That error which precedes truth is

Preface. v

only an ignorance of it; that which follows is a
hatred of truth." They who form the first class of
the two into which Valery would thus properly
divide the victims of historical heterodoxy, are
amenable to conviction, and to their assistance this
volume is dedicated. R. P.

NEW YORK, Jan. 18, 1892.

CONTEN

S PATR1TIUM.
TORONTO

PAQE

Pope Alexander YI .1

The Alleged Ante-Mortem Funeral of Charles V. . 21

Bruno and Campanella ...... 33

St. Cyril of Alexandria and the Murder of Hypatia . 44

The Divorce of Napoleon and Josephine ... 54

Fenelon and Voltaire 68

Galileo 80

The Grey Cardinal 104

" I am the State! » —Did Louis XIV. Ever Say So? . 113
The Truth about the Inquisition . . . .121

Louis XL ; the Travestied and the Real . . . 159

Richelieu as an Ecclesiastic . 170

Louis XIII. as He Was 184

The Nature of Tasso's Imprisonment . . . 197

Wicked Venice 207

The Last Word on the Massacre of St. Bartholomew's

Day 221

The Middle Age Not a Starless Night . . .249

The Man With the Iron Mask . . . 271

The Holy Wars : Their Object and Results . . 286
The "Orthodox" Russian, and the Schismatic Greek

Churches 304

vii

SOME LIES AND ERRORS
OF HISTORY.

POPE ALEXANDER VI.

ACCORDING to the majority of authors, Pope
Alexander VI. had neither the virtues which befit
the Supreme Pontificate of Christendom, nor those
of any ordinary man. His name appears synonymous
with simony, treachery, cruelty, lust, avarice, and
sacrilege. Other memories, long contemned and
even accursed, have been rehabilitated ; but that of
Alexander VI. remains, to most men, foul and de-
testable. Are we, therefore, to take for granted all
that has been alleged against this Pontiff? Even
Roscoe contends that " whatever have been his
crimes, there can be no doubt but they have been
highly overcharged. . . . The vices of Alexander
were accompanied, although not compensated, by.
many great qualities which, in the consideration of
his character, ought not to be passed over in silence.
Nor, if this were not the fact, would it be possible to
account for the peculiar good fortune which attended
him to the latest period of his life ; or for the singu-

2 Pope Alexander VI.

lar circumstance recorded of him : that during the
whole term of his pontificate no popular tumult ever
endangered his authority or disturbed his repose ? "

To Burkhard, master of ceremonies in the court
of Alexander VI., we are indebted for most of the
information which blackens the character of the
Pontiff. But, granting that we possess the authentic
work of Burkhard, which is very uncertain,* of
what weight is his authority? A master of cere-
monies in a royal court does not fill a position which
would of itself imply a possession of accurate
knowledge of the court's secrets. He may, at times,
come into some kind of contact with great person-
ages. His master, with that shadow of intimacy
often affected with a superior servant, may conde-
scend, now and then, to display good-humor in his
presence. A foreign ambassador, during the inter-

* Until 1696 the " Diary " was known only by a fragment given
by Godefroy, in his "History of Charles VIII.," published in
1684 ; and by some vague citations of Rlnaldi in his continuation
of Baronio. But in 1696 Leibnitz published at Hanover a quarto
volume entitled "A Specimen of Secret History; or, Anecdotes
of the Life of Alexander VI. ; Extracts from the Diary of John
Burkhard." In his preface Leibnitz regrets that he could not find
the text of Burkhard ; but a few years afterward he thought that
he had found the true text in a MS. given him by Lacroze, and
would have published it had not death intervened. Eccard pub-
lished the "Diary" at Leipsic in 1732, in his "Writers of the
Middle Age," following a Berlin MS., which may have been the
one handed by Lacroze to Leibnitz. According to Eccard's own
admission, this MS. was very defective, and the editor had fre-
quent recourse to the extract of Leibnitz that order might be
established. In Leibnitz there are articles which are wanting
in Eccard, and toward the end the two become so dissimilar as
to appear utterly different works. Eccard wished that some one

Pope Alexander FT. 3

vals of a tedious levee, may deign to gossip with
him about unimportant matters. He may even be
a great dignitary in the eyes of the lackeys on the
staircase, or in the estimation of the dawdlers in the
antechamber, and thus he may pick up a deal of
tavern statecraft. His authority may be overwhelm-
ing when he decides on the proper color of a ribband,
or even in a question of precedency. But his
" Diary " can scarcely be regarded as testimony con-
cerning the secrets of the court.

Gregorovius,* the latest Protestant historian to
attack the memory of Alexander VI., has the
assurance to say that the "Diary" of Burkhard
" is, with the exception of the journal of Infessura,
which ends at the commmencement of 1494, the
only work concerning the court of Alexander com-
posed at Rome ; and it has even an official (!)

would discover a good copy of the " Diary " ; and finally Lacurne
de Sainte-Palaye found in the library of Prince Chigi at Rome a
IMS. in five quarto volumes, which seemed to contain the entire
work, — beginning December 1, 1483 (the date of Burkhard's ap-
pointment as master of ceremonies), and endiug May 31, 1500, a
year after his death, — which fact demonstrates that the diarist
had a continuator. In our day a third editor has appeared.
Achille Gennarelli (Florence, 1855) has thought to produce the
true text by uniting the dubious ones of Leibnitz and Eccard, and
some other MSS. He admits, and most ingenuously, that he has
filled up hiatuses with quotations from Summonte, Infessura, etc.,
etc. It is the opinion of the Abbe Clement (de Vebron) that all
the weight of erudition displayed by Gennarelli does not add one
particle more of authenticity to the " Diary." See " Les Borgia,"
Paris, 1882.

* " Lucretia Borgia, according to Original Documents and Con-
temporary Correspondence," 1876.

4 Pope Alexander VI.

character. . . . He never repeats mere rumors"
The " Diary " is before us, and there is scarcely
a page where we do not read : "If I remember
aright (si recte memini) " ; or " If the truth has
been told me (si vera sunt mihi relata) " ; or "It
is said (fertur)" Gregorovius opines that the
apologists of the Holy See would feel less con-
tempt for Burkhard if they would consult the
" Relations " of the Venetian ambassadors to their
government.* He presents the " Relation" of Polo
Capello (ambassador at Rome from April, 1499, to
September, 1500) as manifesting "the intrigues of
the court of Alexander VI., the long series of
crimes perpetrated therein, its exactions, the traffic
in cardinals' hats, etc."f But, setting aside the
numerous inexactnesses of this " Relation " of
Capello, and not a few gross errors, J we must re-
gard it as of little value in the premises ; since it
was written, not by Capello, but by the Senator

* Pasquale Villari, an editor of these "Relations," is not such
an apologist, and yet he says: " Doubts have been raised as to the
authenticity of the ' Diary' of Burkhard. New publications have
lessened, but have not put an end to, these doubts." See Villari's
" Dispatches of Giustiniani," vol. i, in preface. Florence, 1876.

t Loc. cit., vol. i, p. 326.

f For instance, it gives to Alexander a brother named Louis
del Mila, while no such brother, but a cousin — John del Mila, —
existed. It narrates that Capello, before his departure from Rome
on September 19, 1500, went to the Vatican to inform the Pontiff
of the surrender of Rimini and Faenza; but Rimini did not fall
until the end of October, while Faenza held out until the fol-
lowing April. It makes Sanseverino, instead of Ascanio Sforza,
vice-chancellor of the Roman Church.

Pope Alexander VL 5

Marino Sanuto,* who, while often furnishing us
valuable historical documents, causes one to smile
at his frequent credulity, and to hesitate to accept
him as an authority.f

After Burkhard, the great historian Guicciardini
is the chief source of the accusations against Alex-
ander VI. ; Guicciardini, of whom even the arch-
sceptic Bayle says that "he merits hatred" because
of his partiality, — " a fault of gazetteers," but one
" inexcusable in a historian "; whom even Voltaire
regards as mendacious ; and whose own conscience
caused him, when asked on his death-bed what dis-

* An old law of Venice had obliged her ambassadors, after their
term of office, to deposit in the Venetian chancery a "Relation "
of all they had learned; but toward the end of the fifteenth
century this law was almost entirely ignored, and was enforced
again only in 1538. Marino Sanuto, in his " Diaries " embracing
the period from 1496 to 1533, filled the hiatuses.

f The Venetian Senator Malipiero, in his " Chronicle," tells us
that Sanuto informed the Venetian Senate of the finding in the
Tiber, in January, 1496, of a monstrosity having the head of an ass,
a right arm like an elephant's trunk, a left arm like that of a man,
one foot like that of an ox, the other like that of a griffin, a
woman's bosom, and the lower part of the body like that of a
dragon. The creature emitted fire from its mouth. The Abb£
Clement thinks that these details came direct from Germany,
where, in 1524, Luther published his caricature of the " Pope-Ass.' '
Rawdon Brown, in his " Information on the Life and Works of
Marino Sanuto," Venice, 1837, says that it would seem that such
tales "were written for the Lutherans; but for historians, they
failed in their object." Nevertheless, says Clement, "certain
candid minds believe the narrations of these pamphletary chroni-
clers ; just as in Germany some persons, full of faith in Luther and
his works, believe in the finding of the Pope-Ass in the Tiber.
But one would suppose that Sanuto would not be so excessively
credulous. Read the ' Diaries' now made public, and you will
find the contrary."

6 Pope Alexander VI.

position should be made of his " History," then still
in manuscript, to reply : " Burn it." Cantu says
of this author : " He regards the success, not the
justice, of a cause. . . . He not only examines
and judges the Pontiffs as he does other rulers, but
he always finds them in the wrong." * Capefigue f
regards Guicciardini as " an impassioned colorist,"
who ever "breathes hatred of the Pope, the French,
the Milanese, and Sforza. Florence, a city of pleas-
ure, of libels, and of dissipation, loved the licentious
tales of Boccaccio, the policy of Machiavelli, and the
stories of poison and treason unfolded in the books
of Guicciardini." This historian was devoted to the
Colonna and the Orsini families, and was also a
partisan of Savonarola ; quite naturally, therefore,
he was a foe to the Borgias. Add to this that his
hatred served his interests ; for by exercising it he
pleased the Florentines, the Venetians, and all who
were then in opposition to the court of Rome.

The authority of Paul Jovius, Bishop of Nocera,
is of much less value than that of Guicciardini ; for,
being most venal, he is always either panegyrizing
or calumniating. One day he was reproved for hav-
ing narrated falsely, and he rejoined : u No matter ;
three hundred years hence it will be true." f Cantii

* "Heretics of Italy," Discourse IX. Turin, 1865.

t " History of the Church during the Last Four Centuries."
Paris, 1865.

J The Emperor Charles V. used to call Jovius and Sleidan
" his two liars," one of whom spoke too well of him, and the
other too ill.

Pope Alexander VI. 7

styles Jovius the " lying gazetteer of that epoch." *
Audin says that no historian ever " cared so little
for his reputation as Paul Jovius. He represents
himself as languishing with inertness, because no one
comes to purchase him."f Jerome Muzio asserted
that Jovius showed diligence "only in obtaining the
favors of the great, and he who gave the most was
the principal hero of his works." \ Vossius says
that "for money Jovius would furnish posterity with
a good character for any child of earth, but that he
would calumniate all who did not pay for his
services." §

Very little need be said of Tomaso Tomasi,
another of the sources used by the defamers of Alex-
ander VI. In his " Life " of Csesar Borgia he had
two objects in view: one was the favor of a princess
of the Rovere family, which favor he thought to
secure by decrying the Pontiff whom the Cardinal of
St. Peter's ad Vincula, her brother, had antagonized ;
the other was to exhibit in Caesar a type of mon-
strosity which would exceed the efforts of the
most rampant imagination. Even Gordon, to whom
Roscoe attributes the reduction of history to below
the level of romance, distrusts the authority of
Tomasi.

As for the manuscript notices upon which many
modern authors rely, they are of little or no value.

* Loc. cit., Discourse XIII. f " Leo X."

t Tiraboschi, " Ital. Lit.," vol. vii, p. 2.
§ " Art of History," c. 9.

8 Pope Alexander FT.

Very few of them bear the names of their authors,
and therefore they are unguaranteed. Most of
them are diatribes, not narratives. They are posi-
tive where matters are at least doubtful, and they
carefully avoid everything creditable to our Pontiff.
Many of them are needlessly prodigal with their
venom. Casting aside, therefore, all such alleged
authorities, and recurring only to facts and acts,
we find that Alexander VI. had many virtues of
a Pope and a sovereign ; that, especially as king,
he was more than ordinarily active and prudent,
and nearly always successful in his enterprises ;
that his people loved him, and his reign was pro-
foundly tranquil. One great fault he had, and
perhaps this one was the source of all the others :
he was passionately attached to the children — four
sons and a daughter — who are generally supposed
to have been born to him, but before he received
Holy Orders ; * and to aggrandize his family he
made too much use of his son Caesar ; and thus, in

* While yet following the profession of arras, according to most
authorities, he fell in love with a girl whom some called Catharine,
others Rose, but who is generally known as Vanozza. Tomasi
says that Roderick " regarded her as a legitimate wife " ; but if
any espousals were effected — which seems probable from the fact
of her being identified by Ribadeneira (" Life of F. Francis
Borgia," Madrid, 1605) as a Princess Farnese, one of a family not
likely to brook an insult even from a Borgia, — they were certainly
kept secret. In 1880 Leonetti, a religious of the Pious Schools,
published at Bologna an exhaustive work, highly commended
by Leo XIII., contending that Caesar, Lucretia, etc., were not
children of Cardinal Roderick Borgia, but either of some Borgia
especially loved by him, or of a brother who remained in Spain,
or of a son of his brother, the Perfect of Rome. When their father

Pope Alexander FT. 9

the eyes of posterity, he has shared the odium of
that son's crimes.

Roderick Llangol was born on January 1, 1431,
at Xativa, in the diocese of Valencia* in Spain.
When his maternal uncle, Alfonso Borgia, was ele-
vated to the papacy under the name of Calixtus III.
in 1455, the LlanQol family assumed the name and
arms of the Borgias, and only as such are they
known in history. The }roung Roderick was noted
for talent, and his first choice of profession was the
bar, but he soon entered on the career of arms.
Called to Rome by his uncle, and having evinced
great aptitude for the business of a court, Roderick
accepted offers of preferment, and was made suc-
cessively commendatory Archbishop of Valencia,
Cardinal-Deacon, and Vice-Chancellor of the Roman
Church. At this period, at least, his conduct must
have been exemplary; for a contemporary writes
that his fellow cardinals were "much pleased to
have in their midst one who surpassed all in an
abundance of gifts." * And Duboulai, who says that
" if the memory of Borgia had perished we would

had died, and Vanozza had remarried, these children were cared
for by Roderick. The arguments of Leonetti seem to us irrefut-
able. Certainly, the only plausible contradiction he experienced
— that of M. de PEpinois, in the Revue des Etudes Historiques for
April, 1881, — was triumphantly rebutted by the Canon J. Morel,
in the Univers of July 14, 1881. One thing, at any rate, is certain:
no proof can be given that Vanozza ever appeared in Rome during
Roderick's career there, whether as Cardinal or as Pope.

* " MS. Life of Roderick Borgia, under the Name of Alexander
VI., " in the Casanatensian (Minerva) Library at Rome.

10 Pope Alexander VI.

not know how corrupt a man can be," admits that
during his long cardinalate of thirty-five years
Roderick never gave any public scandal.* The rigid
Sixtus IV. (1471-84) appointed him legate in Spain
and Portugal ; and the Cardinal of Pavia, a man of
recognized sanctity, wrote to him during this lega-
tion: "I advise you to return . . . your influence
here is sovereign ... by your persuasion and wise
opposition you can render great service to the Holy
See." This same Cardinal of Pavia slightly blamed
Roderick for his ambition and a love of pomp, but
he predicted that he would become Pope.f

The manners of Borgia Avere grand and fascinat-
ing,:!: and even Guicciardini credits him with rare
powers of penetration, great tact and diplomatic
talent. Raphael and James of Volterra, and Peter
Martyr of Anghiera, § waste no praise on Roderick,
but they find in him vast genius and profundity of
thought. Egidius of Viterbo admires his eloquence
as natural and irresistible, his activity as indefatiga-
ble, and his sobriety as exemplary. || Tomasi declares
that whoever observed the Cardinal could see that
his genius marked him for empire. In 1476, having

* " Life of Alexander VI."

t Epist. 514, 670, 678, and in " Additions to Aldoin."

J Philip of Bergamo says that in him "there was a celestial
appearance very becoming to his name and office."

§ Not to be confounded with Peter Martyr ( Verrniglio ) of
Lucca, the Augustinian apostate who lectured at Oxford, 1547-63.

|| This sobriety is admitted by Roscoe, loc. cit. See also Paris,
" Diary," at year 1506.

Pope Alexander VL 11

been appointed Cardinal-Bishop of Albano, Roderick
received Holy Orders.

And here we must observe that if the reader has
imagined that the offspring born to Roderick before
this date (and there was none after it) was necessa-
rily sacrilegious, he has been deceived by the title of
cardinal, which the Pope now confers, in accordance
with the present discipline of the Church, only upon
persons in at least deacon's Orders. At the time of
which we are treating the cardinalitial scarlet did not
always presuppose sacred Orders ; Mazarin and many
other cardinals never received them. Nor did Rod-
erick's archiepiscopate of Valencia, conferred on him
in his youth, entail upon him the necessity of taking-
Orders. His prelacy was merely "commendatory,"
— that is, according to a detestable custom of the
day, he enjoyed the emoluments of the benefice.*

After the obsequies of Pope Innocent VIII.
twenty-three cardinals entered into conclave, and
after five days of deliberation raised Roderick
Borgia to the Chair of Peter, on August 11, 1492.
As the foes of Borgia have tried to fasten the stigma
of simony on this conclave, it is well to note its

* The acting beneficiary was supposed, of course, to be above
reproach ; the commendatory, especially in cases of royal patron-
age, was too often a scandal. The title of abbe, abbate, now
given on the European Continent to all secular priests, was in
those days adopted by a horde of perfumed gallants, who hung
around the court in the enjoyment or expectancy of some abbacy
" in commendam." One must therefore be careful not to credit
the priesthood with every curled darling of an abbe of whom he
reads in works of that time.

12 Pope Alexander VI.

members. The cardinal-bishops were : Roderick
Borgia, then Bishop of Porto ; Oliver Caraffa,
Archbishop of Naples, whom even Roscoe styles a
man of great integrity ; Julian della Rovere, the
future " Moses of Italy," as Julius II. ; Baptist Zeno,
Bishop of Tusculum, whose piety and independence,
according to Ciacconius, were remarkable; John
Michiele, Bishop of Palestrina and Verona, who,
says the Cardinal of Pavia, was learned, pious, and
the friend of the poor ; George d'Acosta, Archbishop
of Lisbon, and therefore, by national rivalry, a polit-
ical enemy of Borgia. The cardinal-priests were :
John dei Conti, venerated by all Rome;* Paul
Fregoso, Archbishop of Genoa, and thrice doge;
Lawrence Cibo and Anthony Pallavicini, Genoese ;
Scalefetano, Bishop of Parma ; Ardicino della Porta,
whose virtues even Infessura praises ; Gherardo,
Patriarch of Venice, — a holy Camaldolese monk, who
died at Terni on his way home, but whom Infessura
represents as having sold his vote to Borgia for five
thousand ducats, and as therefore deprived, on his
return to Venice, of all his benefices. The cardinal-
deacons were : Francis Piccolomini, afterward Pope
Pius III., lauded by Roscoe ; Raphael Riario, leader
of the Rovere party ; Ascanio Sforza, brother of the
Moro, Duke of Milan, and excessively praised by
Paul Jovius ; Frederick da San Severino ; Colonna ;
Orsini ; Savelli, and John dei Medici, afterward Pope
Leo X.

* Garimbertus, b. iv, ch. 3.

Pope Alexander VI. 13

The new Pontiff assumed the name of Alexander
VI., — a name famous, thought Roscoe, as "a scourge
of Christendom, and the opprobrium of the human
race." Probably no new Pontiff ever received so
much flattery as that accorded to Alexander VI., at
his coronation ; probably such wonderful deeds were
never expected from any Pope as those princes and
peoples awaited from him. The orators of the Italian
States all vied in their congratulations with Tigrini
of Lucca, who said that Christendom had a guar-
antee of its hopes in the Pontiff's many virtues and
profound learning ; and Nardi, a famous Florentine
historian, wrote shortly afterward that everywhere it
was thought uthat God had chosen this prince as
His peculiar instrument to effect something wonder-
ful in His Church, so great were the expectations
universally conceived." And yet Roscoe asserts
that " when the intelligence of this event was dis-
persed through Italy, where the character of Roder-
ick Borgia was well known, a general dissatisfaction
took place."

We cannot enter into the details of this eventful
pontificate, but we shall touch briefly on the reputed
simoniacal nature of Roderick's election, and 011
the charge that he met his death by poison — his
own weapon turned by Providence against himself.
Rinaldi, the continuator of Baronio, is chiefly re-
sponsible for the opinion prevalent, until very re-
cent times, concerning the purity of the conclave
of 1492. If, instead of blindly relying on Infessura

14 Pope Alexander FT.

and his copyist Mariana, this annalist had consulted
contemporary testimony less suspicious than that of
Infessura, he would have been less severe toward
this conclave. Michael Fernus, whom Gregorovius
calls " by no means a fanatical Papist," says that " in
electing this Pontiff the cardinals showed that they
had realized the appropriateness of the advice given
them by Leonetti " in his funeral sermon on Inno-
cent VIII.* It was Borgia's merit, therefore, and
not simoniacal practices, that procured, thought
Fernus, his elevation.

Sigismund dei Conti di Foligno tells us that " the
qualities of Cardinal Roderick caused his brethren
to esteem him as worthy of the Supreme Pontificate."
Hartmann Schedel, author of the "Nuremberg
Chronicle," published in 1493, ascribes the election
of Roderick to his " learning, excellent conduct, and
great piety." Porcius, a contemporary Auditor of
the Rota, says : " He was unanimously elected, unani-
mously confirmed. Concerning this election I shall
say only this : its principal authors were those same
cardinals who had hitherto resisted all of Roderick's

* Leonetti, Bishop of Concordia, had thus counselled the
Sacred College : " As yet we know not whom God calls to succeed
Innocent VIII. ; what man is destined to avert the dangers
menacing us. . . . Elect a man whose past life is a guarantee :
one who, according to the advice of St. Leo, has spent his days in
the practice of virtue, and who merits the elevation because of
his labors and the integrity of his morals ; one without ambition,
wise and holy ; in a word, one worthy of being the Vicar of Jesus
Christ." If it was following this advice to elect Borgia, then the
Borgia whom Fernus knew was not the acquaintance of Roscoe,
Gregorovius, etc.

Pope Alexander VI. 15

undertakings, both public and private."* Some of
these cardinals were devoted to Julian della Rovere,
Roderick's competitor in the conclave ; others were
on the brink of the grave ; but, with the exception
of five — who, according to Burkhard, had declared
that " votes should not be purchased," — none de-
nounced the alleged simony. And even these five
voted for Borgia. But Infessura tells us that " it is
said " that, in order to secure the votes of Ascanio
Sforza and his friends, Roderick sent, during the
conclave, four mules laden with treasure to Sforza's
palace. It is strange, remarks Clement, that the
indiscretion which revealed this transaction did not
betray it to the brigands who were, just then, in pos-
session of the streets of Rome. But Manfredo Man-
f redi, ambassador of Ferrara to the court of Florence,
writes to the Duchess Eleonora that it can not be
supposed that Cardinals Colonna, Savelli, and Orsini,
would have voted for Borgia unless seduced by
money ; and Manfredi supports his charge by de-
tailing the benefices given to these cardinals by
Alexander the very moment of his enthronization.
Well, where is the indication of simony in these
appointments ? The positions were necessarily to be
filled. The chancery, the abbey of Subiaco, given
respectively to Sforza and Colonna, had lost, the first
its titular, the second its commendatory ; and we do
not hear that the other benefices and fiefs were not

* " Commentary of Jerome Porcius, Roman Patrician and
A or of the Rota," 1493.

16 Pope Alexander VI.

vacant. Before dismissing this charge of simony we
must allude to a discovery made by some Protestant
polemics, and lately revived by a ministerial ranter
of some notoriety, to the effect that since the death
of Innocent VIII. there have been no legitimate
Pop^s, even according to Roman principles. A
papal decree nullifies any election procured by
simony; therefore, all appointments of cardinals
made by a simoniacal Pope are null ; therefore, there
has been no legitimate conclave since Alexander's
delinquency. A mare's-nest indeed ; for the adduced
decree was issued by Julius II. on January 19, 1505,
thirteen years after Alexander's alleged simony.

It has been asserted that both Alexander VI. and
Caesar Borgia were poisoned, the former fatally ;
that, through either error or treachery, they partook
of a deadly drug, which they had prepared for cer-
tain cardinals who were hostile to their projects.
Ranke, whom it is the fashion to praise as a wise
investigator, gives credence to this fable; Roscoe
rejects it. Now, in the Ducal Library of Ferrara
there is a manuscript history by Sardi, a contem-
porary of Guicciardini and Paul Jovius, wherein the
author speaks of ten letters written by their agents
to Duke Hercules of Ferrara and the Cardinal
d'Este, in which it is shown that our Pontiff died
of tertian fever, then rampant in Rome. " Attacked
by this fever on August 10 [1503], he was relieved
neither by bleeding nor by the use of manna, and he
expired on the night we mentioned [August 18].

Pope Alexander FT. 17

After death the body became swollen and blackened,
owing to the putrefaction of the blood ; and hence
there originated, among such as knew not the cause
of these appearances, a rumor that the Pope had
been poisoned."

In a manuscript " Diary " of Burkhard, preserved
in the Corsini Library, may be read the following:
" On Saturday, August 12, 1503, the Pope fell ill ;
and in the evening, about the twenty-first or twenty-
second hour, there came a fever which continually
remained. On Tuesday, August 15, thirteen ounces
of blood were drawn from him, and there super-
vened a tertian fever. On Thursday, August 17, at
the twelfth hour, he took some medicine ; and on
Friday, August 18, he confessed to the Lord Peter,
Bishop of Culm, who then celebrated Mass in his
presence, and after his own Communion gave the
Holy Eucharist to the Pope, who sat up in bed.
There* were present five cardinals. ... At the vesper
hour, having received Extreme Unction from the
Bishop of Culm, he expired."

And, strange to say, Voltaire is very firm in as-
cribing Alexander's death to natural causes. Speak-
ing of the report of poison,* the cynic says : " All
the enemies of the Holy See have believed this
horrible tale ; I do not, and my chief reason is that
it is not at all probable. The Pope and his son may

* "Complete Works," vol. xx ("Hist. Miscel.," vol. i), p. 241;
edit. Paris, 1818.— " Customs and Spirit of Nations," ib., p. 445.—
" Dissertation on the Death of Henry IV."

18 Pope Alexander VI.

have been wicked, but they were not fools. It is
certain that the poisoning of a dozen cardinals would
have rendered father and son so execrable that
nothing could have saved them from the fury of the
Romans and all Italy. The crime, too, was directly
contrary to the views of Caesar. The Pope was on
the verge of the grave, and Borgia could cause the
election of one of his own creatures ; would he gain
the Sacred College by murdering a dozen of its
members ? "

Again, contends Voltaire — on whom, for rarity's
sake, it is a pleasure to rely; — if after Alexander's
death the cause of the catastrophe had transpired,
surely it would have been learned by those whom
he had tried to murder. Would they have allowed
Csesar to enter peaceably into possession of his
father's wealth? And how could Csesar, almost
dying, according to the story, go to the Vatican to
secure the hundred thousand ducats ? They say
that Csesar, after the accident, shut himself in the
stomach of a mule ; for what poison is that a
remedy? Finally, Pope Julius II., an unrelenting
foe of the Borgias, held Cresar in his power for a
long time, and he never charged him with the sup-
posed crime. Well, therefore, did Voltaire exclaim :
" I dare to say to Guicciardini : Europe has been
deceived by you, as you were deceived by your
passion. You were an enemy of the Pope, and you
believed your hatred too readily."

And now a word on Alexander VI. as Pontiff.

Pope Alexander VI. 19

The assassination of the Duke of Gandia (1497) pro-
duced a profoundly religious impression on his mind ;
he even thought of abdicating the Pontificate in
order to conciliate the divine mercy. Deterred by
Ferdinand the Catholic, he resolved to become a
more worthy Pope, and as a first step he began to
correct many abuses which had crept into the eccle-
siastical administration. Among the abuses brought
to light by an apposite commission was a systematic
series of forgeries, or rather of supposititious issue of
dispensations in which rascality the chief offender
was found to have been the Archbishop of Cosenza,
Bartholomew Florida, the Secretary of Briefs.*
Much good was effected by this commission, as Paul
III. afterward indicated. Upon one point the zeal
of Alexander was worthy of his position. As a
defender of the faith, he was never remiss. One of
his first efforts was for the pacification of Bohemia,
then ravaged by the Hussites ; and it was owing to
the kindness which he substituted for the harshness
of his predecessors that soon the scourge vanished.

In 1501 Alexander issued his Bull, "Inter Mul-
tiplices" against the printing and reading of bad
books. One of the most important Bulls issued
by this Pontiff was the " Inter Ccetera" in 1493,
whereby he drew a line of demarcation, which was to
form, from pole to pole, the limit of the Spanish and

* Florida confessed his guilt, was deposed, degraded, and
imprisoned for life, on a diet of bread and water, in Castel San
Angelo.

20 Pope Alexander VI.

Portuguese possessions in the lately discovered New
World. It required no small amount of daring to
proclaim, as he thereby equivalently did, the rotun-
dity of the earth, — a truth which then, and for cen-
turies afterward, no scientific academy would have
unhesitatingly patronized. The enemies of the Holy
See have affected to regard this partition as a crime ;
indeed, Marmontel termed it " the greatest of all the
crimes of Borgia." But Alexander simply exercised
that right of arbitration which at that time all
Christendom admitted as resident in the incumbent
of the papal throne.*

* Many authors illustrate their theory of Pope Alexander's
immorality by alleging the revolting orgy said to have been
celebrated in honor of the prospective marriage of Lucretia
with the Duke of Ferrara — a banquet, etc., at which we are
asked to fancy as participants the aged Pontiff, Caesar, Lucre-
tia, and fifty respectable (honestae) prostitutes. Gordon quotes
from the true or false Burkhard as follows: "Dominica ultima
mensis Octobris in sero fecerunt coenam cum duce Valentinensi in
camera sua inpalatio Apostolico, quinquaginta meretrices honestae,
cortegianae nuncupatae. . . . Papa, duce, et Lucretia sorore sua,
praesentibus et aspicientibus." . . . Truly these females were
honestae beyond the wont of that ilk, and the favored servants
were gems indeed, when all Rome did not ring, the next day, with
the echoes of such bacchanalia. Excepting Burkhard, if indeed,
he speaks in the cited quotation, not one contemporary, not one
of those chroniclers who dilate so circumstantially on all the
festivities given at the Vatican in honor of Lucretia's espousals,
says a word of what would have been a mine of wealth to a gossiper.
And why such silence on the part of the Ferrarese envoys who
were then residing in the Vatican, awaiting the convenience of
Lucretia, to conduct her to their royal master as a bride ? They
wrote every day to their sovereign, and we have their despatches.
Why, again, silence on the part of the secret agent sent by the
Marchioness of Mantua, sister of the future bridegroom, who kept
his mistress informed as to the most trivial incidents of the papal
court ?

THE ALLEGED ANTE-MORTEM FUNERAL
OF CHARLES V.

THE thought of abdication first took possession
of the mind of Charles V. in 1535, after the
successful issue of his expedition against Tunis ;
and not, as is generally asserted, at a time when
reverses had disgusted him with human ambitions.
This is shown by his own remarks to Louren9O Pires
de Tavora, Portuguese envoy at his court,* and to
the monks of San Yuste.f He was then only forty
years of age, and at the height of his power. But
not until 1542 did he manifest his design to the
Cortes of Aragon,J and not before 1553 did he
begin the necessary preparations. From among
many places which seemed fitted, naturally, spirit-
ually, and artistically, to furnish his tired and then
ascetically inclined mind a soothing and profitable
retreat, he selected the Hieronymite Monastery of
San Yuste in Estremadura ; § and as he did not
propose to become a monk, or even to follow the

* Mignet, " Charles-Quint, son Abdication, et son Sejour an
Monastere de Yuste," p. 6, n. 1. Paris, 1854.

t Sepulveda, " Opera," vol. ii. b. 30; Madrid, 1740.

\ Ribadeneyra, "Vida del Padre Francisco de Borja," c. 13;
Madrid, 1005.

§ This Spanish congregation was approved by Pope Gregory XI.
in 1374. Its first members had belonged to the Third Order of St.
Francis, and they now adopted the rule of St. Augustine. Their

21

22 Alleged Ante-Mortem Funeral of Charles 'V.

community life, as is generally believed, and as he
could not expect the religious to associate familiarly
with his retainers, he gave orders, in 1553, for the
construction of a becoming habitation contiguous to
the monastery. In this edifice he could- preserve his
own independence, and, while respecting that of the
monks, he could occasionally enjoy their companion-
ship; while his proximity to the church enabled
him, when so disposed, to join in the offices of the
choir.

On October 25, 1555, Charles resigned his crowns
of Naples, Sicily, and Milan in favor of his son
Philip. On January 17, 1556, he ceded to the
same Philip the crown of Spain, and all his other
dominions in the Old and the New World ; and
on September 7 of the same year he resigned the
imperial sceptre, presuming, in defiance of the rights
of the Holy See, to do so in favor of his brother,
Ferdinand of Austria.* On February 3, 1557,
Charles arrived at San Yuste, accompanied by only
twelve domestics, and here he constantly resided
during the remaining nineteen months of his life.
He generally assisted at the Office, and at the High

chief houses are those of St. Lawrence at the Escurial, St. Isidore
in Seville, and this of St. Justus. Another congregation of
Hieronymites was founded in Italy in 1377 by the Blessed Peter
Gambacorti of Pisa.

* Pope Paul IV. refused to acknowledge Ferdinand's claim to
the crown of the Holy Roman Empire; for the consent of the
Pontiff, the suzerain of that Empire, had not been obtained by
Charles V. for his action. Ferdinand, like all presumptive heirs
to the Empire, had been elected " King of the Romans " (1532,)

Alleged Ante-Mortem Funeral of Charles V. 23

Mass which was celebrated every morning in the
church. He frequently communicated, and on the
Fridays of Lent he joined the monks in taking the
discipline. Much of his time was spent in the study
of mechanics and in clockmaking ; and it is narrated
that one day, when he had failed to make two
clocks agree, he moralized : " And how foolish it
was in me to think that I could produce uniformity
in so many nations, differing so much in race,
language, and character ! "

During the early summer of 1558 the health
of the Emperor caused disquiet to his attendants.
According to two Hieronymite chronicles, which
have been followed by most historians, and highly
embellished by Robertson, the last illness of Charles
V. was preceded, if not caused, by one of the most
extraordinary ceremonies which any mind, sane or
insane, could conceive. The Prior Martin de Angulo
narrates that the monarch observed one day to an
attendant that he could not devote two thousand
crowns, which he had saved, to a more worthy
object than his own funeral ; he added : " In travel-
ling it is better to have light in front of rather than

and had been confirmed by Pope Clement VII.; but Paul IV.
declared that a " King of the Romans " could succeed, ordinarily,
to the Empire only by the death of its incumbent. The cases of
resignation or deprivation, insisted the Pontiff, had always de-
pended on the will of the Holy See, and only the Pontiff could, in
such cases, name the new Emperor. Again, the resignation of
Charles was null, it not having been made in the hands of the
Pope. However, Pope Pius IV. deemed it prudent, in 1660, to
recognize Ferdinand as Emperor.

24 Alleged Ante-Mortem Funeral of Charles V.

behind one's self." It was then, says the Prior, that
the Emperor gave orders for the obsequies of his
wife, his parents, and himself. Here we must note
that Sandoval, whom historians generally cite in
proof of this strange event, does indeed report the
above remarks as made by Charles V. ; * but as he
says nothing about the anticipatory obsequies of the
Emperor having been celebrated, we may safely con-
clude that he gave no credit to the tale. In fact,
Sandoval tells us that part of these same two thou-
sand crowns saved by the monarch were ultimately
used to defray the expenses of the real funeral. But
there is another testimony which enters more into
details.

An anonymous Hieronymite, whose manuscript
was probably copied by Siguenzaf (another authority
adduced in favor of the truth of the story in ques-
tion), and published also by Gachard,J narrates that
while Charles was still in perfect health he caused
Requiems to be offered in his presence on three
successive days — August 29, 30, and 81, — for the
souls of his father, mother, and wife ; and that on
the last day he called for his confessor, Juan de
Regola, and asked him : " Do you not think, Father,
it would be well, now that I have done my duty by
my relatives, if I were to cause my own funeral to
be celebrated, and thus contemplate what will soon

* " Vida del Emperador Carlos V. en Yuste," vol. ii, §3.
t " Historia del Orden de San Geronimo," p. 3, b. i, c. 308.
| " Ketraite et Mort de Charles-Quint," vol. i, Appendix C.

Alleged Ante-Mortem Funeral of Charles V. 25

be my own condition ? " Father Juan replied in
an evasive manner ; but, continues the anonymous
monk, the Emperor pressed his confessor as to
whether the proposed obsequies would profit him,
even though still on earth. " Certainly, sire,"
Father Juan is represented as answering ; " for the
good works which one performs in life are of more
merit and much more satisfactory than those done
for him after his death. Would to God all of us
had such excellent intentions as those announced by
your Majesty ! "

Thereupon, continues the chronicler, "the Em-
peror commanded that everything should be made
ready to celebrate his obsequies that evening. A
catafalque, surrounded by torches, was arranged in
the church. All the attendants of his Majesty, in
full mourning, and the pious monarch himself, also
in mourning garments and with a candle in his hand,
came to celebrate his funeral and to see him buried.
The spectacle brought tears to the eyes of all, and
they could not have cried more if the Emperor had
really died. As for his Majesty, after his funeral
Mass he made the offering of his candle in the hands
of the celebrant, as though he had already resigned
his soul into the hands of God. Such symbolical
actions were customary among the early Christians.
Then, without waiting for the afternoon of August
31 to pass, the Emperor called his confessor, and told
him how happy he felt now that he had celebrated
his funeral." The anonymous monk then tells us

26 Alleged Ante-Mortem Funeral of Charles V.

how the imperial physician, Mathys, discouraged the
continuation of the meditation in which Charles was
buried, and how his Majesty suddenly experienced
a chill. " This was on the last day of August, at
about four of the night. Mathys felt the Emperor's
pulse, and discovered some change. Charles was
therefore borne to his chamber, and from that time
his malady rapidly gained force."

When a Hieronymite monk expects us to credit
this fantastical story, we need not wonder that Rob-
ertson (a Protestant of more than ordinary preju-
dices, and, what is more derogatory from any claim
to impartiality, a royal historiographer in England,)
repeats, colors, and renders it more acceptable to the
credulous y earners for papistical absurdities, by his
own exaggerations and even unwarranted additions.
" The English do not love Charles V.," remarks
Barthelemy ; " Protestants love him less ; and finally,
a writer is not a historiographer with impunity. In-
dependence and impartiality can scarcely be found
in one who fills that position." Again, Robertson is
too apt to deduce conclusions such as are formed by
the Voltarian school ; though he does not betray the
Satanic spirit of these gentry, "he has all their cold-
ness," observes Cantu, "and he reflects in the same
manner."* As to the reliability of his " History of

* " Storia Universale," b. xvii, c. 20. — We are surprised on
finding that Cantu receives this story as truth, comparing the
fantasy of Charles with the " melancholy " freak of the Emperor
Maximilian I., who, disgusted with his newly-built palace at

Alleged Ante-Mortem Funeral of Charles V. 27

Charles V.," one of the most impartial historical
writers our country has yet produced — Henry
Wheaton, a Protestant — has ably demonstrated that
it is full of errors.*

According to Robertson, the Emperor suffered
from gout so intensely about six months before his
death, that from that time there appeared scarcely
any traces of that healthy and masculine reasoning
power which had distinguished him; a timid and
servile superstition took possession of his* mind, and
he passed nearly all the time in chanting hymns
with the monks. Restlessness, diffidence, and that
fear which ever accompanies superstition, continues
Robertson, diminished in his eyes the merit of all
the good he had performed, and induced him to
devise some new and extraordinary act of piety,
which would draw upon him the favor of Heaven.
He resolved to celebrate his funeral before his death,
and caused a catafalque to be erected in the church.
His domestics repaired thither, carrying black cau-
dles in their hands, and he himself, wrapped in a
shroud, was laid in the coffin. The Office for the
Dead was chanted by both Charles and the assem-
blage, as well as the plentiful tears of all would
allow. At the end of the ceremony all, save the
chief participant in the coffin, left the church, and

Innsbruck, resolved on providing a better one; and accordingly
sent for a coffin and all the paraphernalia of a funeral, and kept
them always with him.

* See his letter to the Secretary of the National Institute at
Washington (1843).

28 Alleged Ante-Mortem Funeral of Charles F".

the doors were closed. Then the poor victim of
superstition emerged from his coffin and returned to
his apartments. Probably on account of the impres-
sion produced on his mind by the fancied contact
with death, he was seized, concludes Robertson, with
his fatal illness on the following day.

Were it not for the too pronounced bathos of
this Robertsonian climax of Charles coming out of
his coffin, climbing down the catafalque, and creep-
ing home stealthily, lest his too lively appearance
should dispel the impression supposed to have been
produced, this scene would furnish elements most
attractive for some ambitious playwright and en-
terprising manager. As for historical value, the
picture of Charles in his shroud and coffin, as well
as that of his being left alone in the church after
the ceremony, has none ; the Hieronymite chronicles,
the only sources on which Robertson can draw, are
precise in representing Charles as assisting at the
ceremony, candle in hand, and as giving his candle
to the celebrant at the close.

We shall merely allude to the assertion that
during the last six months of his life the Emperor
had lost his wonted mental acumen ; that, in fact,
he was little better than insane. Authentic docu-
ments are adduced by Mignet * to show that, to the
very last, Charles took an active and directive
interest in the affairs of his late Empire ; and that

* Loc. cit. — See also Stirling's " Cloister Life of Charles V.,"
1852.

Alleged Ante-Mortem Funeral of Charles P. 29

he was frequently consulted, especially as to Spanish
matters, by Philip II. Let us rather see whether
there is any truth in the presumed Hieronymite
narration. We say " presumed " ; for it seems
incredible that any Catholic writer could have
penned the tale. Protestant polemics regale us,
even unto nausea, with arguments against the re-
liability of " monkish chronicles " ; but if ever any
such chronicle merited distrust, nay, to be despised —
and there are such, — these by the Prior Angulo and
his anonymous Brother are in that category ; and if
they are authentic, their authors deserved whatever
severe punishment monastic discipline and the
proper tribunals — ecclesiastical and lay — could in-
flict on religious who elaborated a baseless charge of
sacrilege against an entire community.

To have sung the Office of the Dead for the
benefit of a living person would have been a solemn
mockery, a profanation ; but we are told that the
monks of San Yuste offered a Requiem Mass for
the repose of the soul of, and in the presence of, the
living Emperor.* However, this reflection on the
nature of the ceremony alleged to have been per-

* " How can we admit that this service was performed? The
Church reserves it for the dead, never applying it to the living.
Celebrated without an object, it would lose its efficacy with its
only motive, and would become a kind of profanation. The
Church prays for those who cannot any longer pray for them-
selves ; she offers-for their intention that Sacrifice in which their
condition will not allow them to take part. This pious and
solemn association with the soul in its passage from transient to
eternal life has its merit and grandeur only when it is real. More-

30 Alleged Ante-Mortem Funeral of Charles V.

formed would not, of itself, compel us to reject the
tale as a fabrication. But there are many good
reasons why this course should be taken. The
anonymous monk states that the Emperor caused
Requiems to be sung on August 29, 30, and 31, for
the souls of his father, mother, and wife ; that after
the last function he ordered everything to be pre-
pared for his own funeral service on that evening ;
and he expressly states that not only the Office was
chanted, but Mass was celebrated at that service.
Here, then, we have Mass celebrated, in the Western
Church in the sixteenth century, in the evening !
This is an absurdity. Nor can it be alleged that
probably the Office alone was recited at that time,
and that the Requiem was celebrated on the follow-
ing morning, September 1 ; for the writer says that
after the Mass the monarch experienced a chill, and
was removed to his apartments ; adding also that
" this happened on the last day of August, at about
four of the night." *

Another intrinsic evidence of falsity is furnished
by the magnitude of the sum — two thousand crowns,
— which the anonymous chronicler assigns for the

over, Charles V. well knew that it is much better for one's self to
pray than to be the object of another's prayers; much better to
appropriate to one's self the Holy Sacrifice by Eucharistic Com-
munion than to be indirectly associated with it by a merciful
attention of the Church. He had done so a fortnight before, and
he did so again very soon." (Mignet, loc. cit., p. 414.)

* "Four of the night" (that is, four hours after the evening
Angelus) would be, as moderns measure time, about eleven in
Spain, during Au ust and September.

Alleged Ante-Mortem Funeral of Charles V. 81.

expenses of the service in question. If we consider
the metallic value of the Spanish crown of that
day — eleven francs, — and then note its relative
buying capability, we must conclude that the alleged
funeral cost more than twelve thousand dollars,*
which is incredible. The only real expenses, since
there was no royal pomp, etc., would have been
that of candles and the honorarium. Sandoval says
that these "two thousand crowns, saved by the
Emperor," were afterward drawn upon for the real
funeral ; and that six hundred of them were sent,
just before the monarch's death 'and by his order,
to Barbara Blomberg, the mother of Don John of
Austria, f

A third reason for rejecting the fable of the mock
funeral is found by Mignet in the physical condition
of Charles V. at the time when it is alleged to have
been held. The letters of his physician and his
secretary all show that he could not have withstood
the fatigue of four consecutive functions. On the
15th of August, wishing to communicate, he had to
be carried to the church, and he received the Blessed
Sacrament in a sitting posture. On the 24th the
gout temporarily ceased from troubling him ; but an
eruption in the legs ensued, and he would scarcely
have been able to participate in the supposed
services of the 29th, 30th, and 31st. Charles V.

* Bartheleiny, " Erreurs et Mensonges," vol. iii, p. 142.

t Loc. tit., vol. ii., § 3. Letter of Quijada to Philip II., October
12, 1558.

32 Alleged Ante-Mortem Funeral of Charles F!

was not of such calibre, spiritually speaking, that he
would have forced weak nature to obey his pious
will, having himself carried to ceremonies at which
his presence would have been superfluous. He was
far removed from those saints who have asked to be
laid on ashes to meet their deaths. And his occu-
pations just at this time, as shown by his intimate
attendants, manifest no extraordinary detachment
from the affairs of earth ; still less do they indicate
any of that semi-insane religiousness by which
Robertson would account for the commission of the
freak under consideration. Down to the very day
before his fatal attack (September 1) he was engaged
in business of state and in matters of family in-
terest. Finally, neither the imperial physician nor
the secretary, whose letters enter into the most
trivial details of their master's life at San Yuste,
especially where his health or religious dispositions
are concerned, say anything about this ante-mortem
funeral.

BRUNO AND CAMPANELLA.

THE Italian Government has permitted the erec-
tion of a monument to Giordano Bruno in the capi-
tal of the Christian world. We understand that
the work is sufficiently artistic to bring no great
discredit on the mistress of the fine arts ; but,
since its sole reason for existence is based on an
insecure foundation, we are not surprised that the
details of its design are not all true to history. It
has been erected only because of the presumed fact
that Bruno was done to death by the Papal authori-
ties. To render it more impressive, and to illus-
trate the eventful career of its subject, it presents to
our contemplation some bas-reliefs of other alleged
'•martyrs to truth," such as Huss, Servetus, Arnold
of Biescia, and Campanella.

Now it is by no means certain that Bruno was put
to death. We know that in 1592 he was arrested
by the State Inquisitors of Venice on the charge of
heresy;* that after six years of imprisonment he

* His denouncer, Giovanni Mocenigo. to -whom lie luul taught
his system of artificial memory, accused Bruno of styling the
Trinity an absurdity; of calling Traiisubstantiation a blasphemy,
and of finding truth in no religious system. He had said that
Christ seduced the Jews, that He died unwillingly, and that
the apostles worked no miracles. According to him, there is
no distinction of Persons in God. The worlds are infinite and
eternal. There is no punishment for sin ; the soul, produced by

34 Bruno and Campanella.

was delivered to the Hoi}7 Office, or Roman Inquisi-
tion, tried, (and perhaps) condemned to the stake on
February 9, 1600. But was the sentence executed,
or, as frequently happened in similar cases, was
Bruno burnt merely in effigy ? A letter purporting
to be from an erudite German then in Rome, Gaspar
Schopp,* describes the execution, but many good
critics have denied the authenticity of this epistle.
Again, Schopp is alone in his assertion. The Vati-
can Archives contain documents of the trial, but not
of the condemnation, nor is there any account of the
execution ; whereas, in every similar case, both of
these are detailed. Again, the " Relations " of the
foreign ambassadors resident at the Holy See, which
never omitted any such items, say nothing of this
event. Not even in the correspondence of the Vene-
tian Ambassador, the agent of that Government
which must have felt an especial interest in the fate

nature, passes to another creature. This world shows ii<> true
religion; the Catholic is the best, but it needs a reformation ; and
he (Bruno) will effect this with the aid of the King of Navarre.
(Henry IV.)

* Convinced of his errors by the study of Baronio's " Annals,"
this Lutheran scholar became a Catholic. Invited to Rome by
Clement VIII., he wrote many pamphlets in defence of Catholi-
cism, the Papacy, etc. But he was very litigious, and was given
to paradoxes. In his presumed letter he says of Bruno's errors:
" The Inquisition did not impute Lutheran doctrines to him. He
was charged with having compared the Holy Ghost to the soul of
the world ; Moses, the prophets, the apostles, and even Christ, to
the pagan hierophants. He admitted many Adams and many
Hercules. He believed in magic, or at least he upheld it, and
taught that Moses and Christ practised it. "Whatever errors have

Bruno and OampaneUa. 35

of Bruno, since it had initiated his downfall, do we
find any allusion to the alleged catastrophe. *

Can tii cites a MS. of the Medicean Archives (No.
1608), dated at Rome on the very day of Bruno's
trial, which narrates the burning of an apostate friar
a few days before. Here some mention of Bruno's
condemnation would naturally occur, but there is
not a word. Finally, the celebrated Servite, Friar
Paul Sarpi, who never missed an opportunity of
attacking what he feigned to regard as Roman intol-
erance, Roman treachery, etc., although he continued
this course for many years after the trial of Bruno,f
and although his own position of antagonism with
the Roman Curia perforce kept him on the lookout
for instances which might inculpate Rome and jus-
tify the recent rebellious conduct of Venice toward
the Holy See, never alludes to the alleged fate of
Bmno. The same silence is found in Ciacconio,
Sandrini, Alfani, Manno, and Ossat, all of whom
would scarcely have omitted to notice so important

been taught by the ancient pagans or by the most recent heretics
were all advanced by this Bruno." (Cantu, " Illustri Italiani,"
art. "Bruno.")

* The "Relations" of the Venetian ambassadors to the home
government are rightly regarded by historians as the most
precious, both for detail and accuracy, of all available sources for
a knowledge of the events of the time.

I As late as December 6, 1611, we find Sarpi describing the
execution at Rome (by strangling) of the French Abbe Dubois,
for libels against the Jesuits, and claiming that the unfortunate
had received a safe-conduct before journeying to Rome. At the
same time he greatly decries Schopp, whom he describes as
" meriting a greater piinishment than burning in effigy."

36 Bruno and Oampanella.

an event, had it really occurred. And how is it
that the old " Martyrology " of the Protestants is
also silent on this matter ? Truly, Bruno was less
a Protestant Christian than he was a Buddhist ; but
in those days, as in our own, any person of Christian
ancestry who antagonized Rome, and did not avow
himself a Jew or a pagan, was claimed for their own
by the Protestants.

The Bruno monument places Huss, Arnold of
Brescia, Servetus and Campanella, in the same cate-
gory with the Philosopher of Nola. There may be
some general reason for so treating the Bohemian
fanatic and the cut-throat of Brescia.* The com-
parison of Bruno with Servetus, the victim of Calvin,
may be tolerated, with a smile at the designer's
ungrateful disregard of the feelings of Protestants.
But Campanella and Bruno ! " Hyperion to a
satyr ! " Bruno was a Christian only by baptism ;
Campanella was ever a devout Catholic. Campa-
nella, a martyr to science ! His devotion to science
caused him no trouble more annoying than some
cloister squabbles ; politics, mere politics, involved
him in serious difficulty. As well ascribe the fate
of Savonarola to his zeal for morals. Campanella, a
victim of the Inquisition ! His only relations with
that tribunal came from its interposition to save him
from the Neapolitan courts, which would have con-

* See our article on Arnold of Brescia in THE " AVE MARIA,"
Vol. xxvii, No. 19.

Bruno and Campanella. 37

signed him to the scaffold for high treason to the
Spanish crown.

Campanella was born at Stilo, in the kingdom of
Xaples, in 1568. At the age of fourteen he entered
the Dominican Order, and in the course of time
became very distinguished in the public disputes on
philosophical questions, which were then the fashion
of the day in Italy. But his attacks on the peri-
patetics * procured him many enemies in his own
Order, and in 1590 he sought the protection of the
Marquis Lavello, one of his Neapolitan admirers.
During the next eight years we find him disputing
at Rome and Florence, and teaching in the Universi-
ties of Pisa and Padua. In 1598 he returned to Stilo,
and it was soon rumored that he was occupied in
projects for the subversion of the Spanish domina-
tion. He frequently preached, and wrote that the
year 1600 would unfold great changes in the king-
dom : that recent extraordinary inundations, earth-
quakes, and volcanic eruptions, prognosticated a
coming reformation in both civil and ecclesiastical
matters : that he was to be an instrument of Providence
in all this, for he " was born to abolish three great
evils — tyranny, sophism, and hypocrisy ; every-

* " Italy produced the first school of philosophy of a modern
character; for the school of Telesius soon followed that of the
platonist Marsilio Ficino, and that of the peripatetic Pomponaz/i.
. . . How is it that the names of Campanella and Bacon are so
diversely regarded: the latter as of one who opened the modern
era, and the former scarcely renierahered? Campanella devoted
himself to all the kuowable ; Bacon confined himself to the natural
sciences." Cantu, " Filosofia Moderna," §i.

38 Bruno and Campanella.

thing was in darkness when he struck the light." *
He reasoned on several recent astronomical discov-
eries, and announced that his studies showed him
the near advent of the reign of eternal reason in the
life of humanity, f Great revolutions, he said, occur
every eight centuries, the latest previous one having
been the Incarnation of the Word.

Whether Campanella was the instigator or a tool
was never made known ; but a conspiracy was formed
against Spanish rule, and four bishops and three hun-
dred friars of various orders were the leading spirits.
Of the three processes of the trial now extant, one
tends to show that the design was to establish a re-
public in Calabria ; the second insists that the king-
dom was to be given to the Holy See ; and the third
indicates a wish to hand the country over to the
Turks ; but it is noteworthy that in the process finally
extended in the Holy Office at Rome nearly all the
previous witnesses retracted. When the conspiracy
was discovered the viceroj^s forces captured nearly
all the leaders. The laics were hung, and the " priv-
ihgiumfori" consigned the ecclesiastics, Campanella
excepted, to the Inquisition ;$ the viceroy insisting on
this exception, probably at the instigation of Campa-
nella's private enemies. Confined in Castel Sant'

* " Poesie Filosofiche."

f " De Sensu Rerum et Magia," iv, 20.

\ Writing to Cardinal Farnese, Campanella says that his clerical
comrades pleaded guilty to the charge of " rebelling in order to be
free to become heretics." Had they answered only to the charge
of treason, he says, " all would have been executed, without any
appeal to the Pope."

jfrimo and Camp an ell a. 39

Elmo for twenty-seven years, the Holy See again and
again vainly endeavored to procure his release ; but
Pope Paul V., who sent Schopp to Naples for that
purpose, succeeded in obtaining permission for him
to correspond with his friends, and tor receive every
convenience for literary work. Finally, Pope Urban
VIII. availed himself of the accusation of magical
practices made against the philosopher, insisting that
such a charge placed the case within the sole juris-
diction of the Inquisition; and he succeeded in
obtaining the friar's extradition.

Campanella was at once enrolled in the Papal
household, and an annual pension was assigned to
him. Caressed by all that was learned in Rome, he
passed several years in happy study ; but in 1634 the
Spanish residents, who continued to detest his name,
made an open attack on the French Embassy where
he was visiting, and tried to obtain possession of
his person. He was saved by the Papal police, but
by the advice of the Pontiff he at once betook him-
self to France. Cardinal Richelieu received him with
open arms, and made him a counsellor of state. He
was also elected president of the French Academy,
lately founded by Richelieu. To the day of his
death, on May 21, 1639, he continually corresponded
with Pope Urban VIII. What is there in this
career to indicate the martyr to science, the victim of
papal tyranny ; in fine, the fit companion of Bruno
as that unfortunate receives the ignorant or diabolic
homage of so-called liberalism?

40 Bruno «n<i Campanalla.

We have said that Bruno is wrongly styled ;i
Protestant. We never find him representing himself
as either Calvinist, Anglican, or Lutheran. While he
resided in Geneva, the headquarters of Calvinism, he
attended, he says, uthe sermons of the Italian and
French religionists. But when I was warned that I
could not remain there long if I did not adopt the
creed of the Genevans, I went to Toulouse/' He
stayed but a short time in Toulouse, "the Rome of the
Garronne," only long enough to receive the doctor's
cap, and to surprise both the Catholics and the Cal-
vinists by his teachings. The year 1579 found him
at Paris, satisfying Henry III. that his phenomenal
memory was not the effect of magic, and lecturing at
the Sorbonne. As yet no sign of Calvinism. During
the three years that he spent in England he greatly
lauded Queen Elizabeth, " the unique Diana, who is
to us all what the sun is to the stars," but he mani-
fested no leaning to Anglicanism. At Oxford he
taught the movement of tlwearth ; and was obliged
to depart. Arriving in Germany, he was well received
at Wittenberg, and lie highly appreciated the toler-
ation accorded by the Lutheran professors to him,
"although of a different faith."* In fact, Bruno
taught everywhere the Pythagorean system of the
world, and an Eleatic pantheism dressed in Neo-
Platonic forms, advancing both with a pride, or
rather a vanity, which must have appeared ridiculous.

* "Non vestrse religionis dogmate probatum." Thus in his
work, " De lampade combinatorial'

Bruno <md Oampanella. 41

He announced himself to the Oxford dons as " doc-
tor of the most elaborate philosophy ; professor of the
purest and most harmless wisdom ; recognized by all
the principal Academies of Europe ; unknown only
to barbarians : the wakener of sleeping geniuses ; the
lamer of presumptions and recalcitrant ignorance ; a
universal philanthropist, as all his actions proclaim.
One who loves an Italian no more than an English-
man, a man no more than a woman, a mitre no more
than a crown, a lawyer no more than a soldier, the
hooded no more than the hoodless ; but who loves
him the most whose conversation is the most peaceful,
civil, and useful; one who cares not for an anointed
head, or marked forehead, or clean hands, but only
for the mind and for the cultured intellect ; one who
is detested by hypocrites and by the propagators of
insanity, but who is revered by -the upright, and
applauded by every noble genius." Could Cagliostro
have excelled this as an advertisement?

But if Bruno was neither Catholic nor Protestant,
his forced associate in the Roman monument was a
profound Catholic, albeit an exceedingly intolerant
one. He would have no disputes with an innovator.
He would ask : " Who sent you to preach, God or the
devil ? If God, prove it by miracles." And if he fails,
said Campanella, " burn him if you can. . . . The first
error committed (during the Lutheran movement)
was in allowing Luther to live after the Diets of
Worms and Augsburg ; and if Charles V. did so, as
they say, in order to keep the Pope in apprehension,

42 Bruno and Campanella.

and thus oblige him to succor Charles in his aspira-
tions to universal monarchy, he acted against every
reason of state policy ; for to weaken the Pontiff is
to weaken all Christianity, the people soon revolting
under pretext of freedom of conscience." * He coun-
selled the King of Spain to have always two or three
religious — Dominicans, Jesuits, or Franciscans, — in
his supreme council; and every commanding gen-
eral, he said, should have a religious adviser, f Such
sentiments must sound strange to the Italianissimi of
to-day; but they came naturally from Campanella,
who thought that " the same constellation which drew
fetid effluvia from the cadaverous minds of heretics,
brought forth balsamic exhalations from the exact
minds of the founders of the Minims, Jesuits, Capu-
chins, etc."f He advises all Governments to allow
no Lutherans within their limits ; because, he con-
tends, these sectarians deny the free-will of man,
and can excuse crime by the plea that they are fated
to sin.§ As for the Calvinist dogma of predesti-
nation, " it renders all princes wicked, the peoples
seditious, and theologians traitors." ||

The following passage,^[ if read by the committee
before it accepted Ferrari's design for Bruno's statue,
would probably have caused its rejection: "The

* "Civitas Soils," c. 27.— "Delia Monarehia Spagnuola," c. 27

t " Aforismi Politic!, "passim.

J Idem, 70.

§ Idem, 84, 87.

|| " Lettere," passim.

*h " Discorso II. sul Papato."

Bruno and Campanella. 43

Papacy belongs to no one in particular, but to all
Christendom, and whatever the Church possesses is
common to all. The Italians ought to encourage the
wealth of religious corporations, because it belongs
to them all, and lessens the strength of Italy's
rivals. . . . No Italian sovereign should aspire to
a rule over the others, but all, whenever the direct
line of succession becomes extinct, should proclaim
the Roman Church heir to their dominions. Thus
in course of time an Italian monarchy would be estab-
lished. The Italian republics ought to make a law
that whenever they fall under the rule of tyrants
their government devolves on the Roman Church."

In reality, Campanella aimed at a reformation of
the world, and by means of Catholicism. His en-
thusiasm descried a near conversion of the nations,
as prophesied by St. Bridget of Sweden, the Abbot
Joachim, Dionysius the Carthusian, St. Vincent Fer-
rer, and St. Catherine of Siena, the last of whom had
predicted that the sons of St. Dominic would carry
the olive of peace to the Turks.* He declared that
the day of Antichrist was near, if not already come,- -
"it is now here, or will come in 1630;" and he
" was born to combat the schools of Antichrist,"
which schools were everywhere active ; for u where
Mohammed and Luther do not rule, there dominate
Machiavelli and politicians."!

* Campanella's words as given in a contemporary account of
the Calabrese conspiracy, published in 1845 by Capialbi. — Cantu,
" lilustri Italiani," art. " Campanella."

1 " Letter to the Pope and Cardinals?."

ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA AND THE
MURDER OF HYPATIA.

A FEW years ago the Rev. Charles Kingsley, an
English writer of some reputation, saw fit to revive
an ancient but often exploded calumny against one
of God's saints. This author is a clergyman of the
English Establishment, and being presumably as
well as pretencledly a man of education, one would
have expected from his pen at least a moderately
appreciative treatment of the grand characters whom
he selected to illustrate an important, though little
understood, period of history. But, according to
him, the great Patriarch of Alexandria " has gone
to his own place. What that place is in history, is
but too well known ; what it is in the sight of Him
unto whom all live forever, is no concern of ours.
May He whose mercy is over all His works have
mercy upon all, whether orthodox or unorthodox,
Papist or Protestant, who, like Cyril, begin by
lying for the cause of truth ; and, setting off upon
that evil road, arrive surely, with the Scribes and
Pharisees of old, sooner or later, at their own
place. True, he and his monks had conquered ; but
Hypatia did not die unavenged. In the hour of
that unrighteous victory the Church of Alexandria
received a deadly wound. Jt had admitted and

44

Sf. Cyril «n<l llie Murder of Hyp at i a. 45

sanctioned those habits of doing evil that good
may come, of pious intrigue, and at last of open
persecution, which are certain to creep in where-
soever men attempt to set up a merely religious
empire, independent of human relationships and
civil laws ; to establish, in short, a 4 theocracy,' and
by that very act confess a secret disbelief that God
is ruling already."

Such was not- the judgment of Kingsley's fellow-
sectarian, Cave,* nor of the Lutheran, John Albert
Fabricius,f than whom Protestants have produced
no critics more erudite. But it is the opinion ex-
pressed by many Protestant polemics ; for St. Cyril
presided, in the name of the Roman Pontiff, at the
Council of Ephesus (431), which confirmed to the
Blessed Virgin the title of Mother of God.J It is
also the judgment of Voltaire and the entire school
of incredulists ; for St. Cyril triumphantly refuted
the work of the Emperor Julian against Christianity.

* " Lit. Hist.," article " Cyrillus."
t " Bibl. Gneca," pt. iv, b. 5.

$ Writing to the clergy and people of Constantinople, Pope St.
('destine said : " We have deemed it proper that in so important
a matter we ourselves should be in some sort present among you,
and therefore we have appointed our brother Cyril as our repre-
sentative." And, writing to St. Cyril, the Pontiff says: "You
will proclaim this sentence by our authority, acting in our place
by virtue of our power; so that if Nestorius, within ten days after
his admonition, does not anathematize his impious doctrine, you
will declare him deprived of communion with us, and you will at
once provide for the needs of the Constantinopolitan Church."
It is quite natural that Protestant polemics should be hostile to
the memory of the great " Doctor of the Incarnation," who thus

46 St. Cyril and the Murder of Hypatla.

In the early part of the fifth century the great
city of Alexandria in Egypt was still nearly one
half pagan, and the Jewish population also was very
large. No populace in the Empire was so turbulent
and seditious, and therefore the emperors had in-
vested the patriarchs with extensive civil authority,
although the force at the prelates' disposal was not
always sufficient to repress the disorders of the
mob. In the year 413 St. Cyril was raised to
the patriarchate, and was almost immediately in-
volved in difficulty with Orestes, the imperial pre-
fect. Often he conjured this officer on the Gospels
to put an end to his enmity for the good of the
city.

At this time the chief school of pagan philosophy
in Alexandria was taught by Hypatia, a beautiful
woman, and of irreproachable morals. Among her
hearers were many of the elite of paganism. The
celebrated Synesius* had been her pupil, and his
letters show that, although he had become a Chris-
tian bishop in 410 he still gloried in her friendship.

apostrophized the Blessed Virgin in the Council of Ephesus : "I
salute thee, Mother of God, venerable treasure of the entire
universe! I salute thee, who didst enclose the Immense, the
Incomprehensible, in thy virginal womb! I salute thee, by whose
means heaven triumphs, angels rejoice, demons are put to flight,
the tempter is vanquished, the culpable creature is raised to
heaven, a knowledge of truth is based on the ruins of idolatry! I
salute thee, through whom all the churches of the earth have been
founded, and all nations led to penance ! I salute thee, in fine, by
whom the only Son of God, the Light of the world, has enlightened
those who were seated in the shadow of death! Can any man
worthily laud the incomparable Mary? "

/St. Cyril and the Murder of Hypatia. 47

But her most important scholar was the prefect
Orestes. It is difficult to determine what was the
religion of this man. He himself, 011 the occasion
of an attack on his life by some monks from Mt.
Nitria, had proclaimed his Christianity, but his
general conduct would inspire doubt of his sincerity ;
and we may safely accept as probable the conjecture
of the English novelist, that he was ready to renew
the attempt of Julian the Apostate. The obstinacy
of Orestes in refusing a reconciliation with their
patriarch was ascribed by the whole Christian com-
munity to the influence of Hypatia; and one day
in the Lent of 415 a number of parabolani * and
laics, led by one Peter the Reader and some Nitrian
monks, fell upon the unfortunate philosopher as she
was proceeding to her lecture hall, dragged her from
her litter, hurried her to the great church of the
Csesareum, and there literally tore her to pieces.

Such, in a few words, is the substance of the
account of this horrible event as given by the
historian Socrates,f a writer contemporary with
the great St. Cyril, and whom Kingsley professes to

* These were an order of minor clerics, probably only tonsured,
who were deputed to the service of the sick both in hospitals and
at home. Their name was derived from their constant exposure
to danger. The first mention of them in a public document occurs
in an ordinance of Theodosius II., in 416 ; but they are here spoken
of as having been in existence many years, and probably they
\vere instituted in the time of Constantine.. In course of time
they became arrogant and seditious, and were finally abolished.
At Alexandria they numbered six hundred, and were all ap-
pointed by the patriarch.

t "Hist. Eccl.," b. vii, § 15.

48 tSt. Cyril and the Murder of

have scrupulously followed. But Socrates, hostile
though he ever shows himself to the holy patriarch,
does not once insinuate that this prelate was the
instigator of the crime ; while the Anglican minister
does imply that charge, and openly lays all 'responsi-
bility for the foul deed on St. Cyril.

Voltaire, the prince of incredulists, naturally
gloats over one of the most delicious morsels ever
furnished to his school. Having compared Hypatia
to Madame Dacier, a learned classicist of his day, he
asks us to imagine the French Carmelites contending
that the poem of "Magdalen," composed in 1668
by Peter de Saint-Louis, one of their Order, was
superior to the " Iliad " of Homer, and insisting that
it is impious to prefer the work of a pagan to that
of a religious. Let us fancy, then, continues the
Sage of Ferney, that the Archbishop of Paris takes
the part of the Carmelites against the governor of
the city, a partisan of Madame Dacier, who prefers
Homer to F. Peter. Finally, let us suppose the
Archbishop inciting the Carmelites to slaughter this
talented woman in the Cathedral of Notre Dame.
" Such precisely," concludes Voltaire, " is the his-
tory of Hypatia. She taught Homer and Plato in
Alexandria during the reign of Theodosius II. St.
Cyril unleashed the Christian populace against her,
as we are told by Damascius and Suidas, and as is
satisfactorily proved by the most learned moderns,
such as Brucker, La Croze, Basnage, etc." * And in

* In liis " DU'tioimalre Philosopliique "; article, " Hyi>atia."

St. Cyril and the Murder of Hypatia. 49

another place * Voltaire dares to ask : " Can any-
thing be more horrible or more cowardly than the
conduct of the priests of this Bishop Cyril, whom
Christians style St. Cyril? . . . His tonsured hounds,
followed by a mob of fanatics, attack Hypatia in the
street, drag her by the hair, stone and burn her, and
Cyril the Holy utters not the slightest reprimand."
Again : f " This Cyril was ambitious, factious, tur-
bulent, knavish and cruel. . . . He caused his priests
and diocesans to massacre the young Hypatia, so
well known in the world of letters. . . . Cyril was
jealous because of the prodigious attendance at the
lectures of Hypatia, and he incited against her the
murderers who assassinated her. . . . Such was Cyril
of whom they have made a saint." And as late as
1777, when the octogenarian cynic was already in
the shadow of death, he wrote : " We know that St.
Cyril caused the murder of Hypatia, the heroine of
philosophy." f

Since such is the judgment expressed by Voltaire,
at once the most shallow and most influential of
all modern writers on historical matters, it is not
strange that the masses have accepted the romance
of Hypatia as recounted by most of those fosterers
of shallowiiess, the encyclopaedias and dictionaries of
the day. Even in some of the least superficial of

* " Exameii Important de Milord Boliugbroke," chap. 34, " Des

Chretiens jusqu'a Theodosc."

t " DLsconrs de Julien centre la Secte des Galileens."

t " L'Etablissement dn Christianisme," chap. 24, " Exces de

Fanatisrne."

50 St. Cyril and the Murder of Hypatia.

these presumed authorities, such as the "Nouvelle
Biographic Ge'nerale " (Didot, 1858), and the
" Grand Dictionnaire Encyclope'dique du Dix-Neu-
vieme Siecle" (1873), the accusation against St. Cyril
is clearly put forth. In the former work we read
the following from the pen of a celebrated writer : *
"It is hard to believe that the hands of St. Cyril
were not stained in this bloody tragedy. The his-
torian Socrates, who gives its details, adds that the
deed covered with infamy not only Cyril but the
whole Church of Alexandria/' In the latter we are
told: "Hypatia was massacred by the Christian
populace, at the instigation of St. Cyril. . . . Accord-
ing to Damascius, St. Cyril, passing one day before
the residence of Hypatia, noted the crowd who Avere
waiting to hear the daughter of Theon, and he there-
upon conceived such jealousy of her fame that he
resolved to procure the death of the noble and
learned girl." f

* M. Aube, in vol. xxv, p. 712.

t Vol. ix. p. 505 — Cantu does not touch the question of St.
Cyril's responsibility for this crime. This is all that the great
historian says concerning Hypatia: " Theon, a professor in
Alexandria, commentated on Euclid and Ptolemy, but became
more famous on account of his beautiful daughter Hypatia.
Taught mathematics by him, and perfected at Athens, she was
invited to teach philosophy in her native city. She followed the
eclectics, but based her system on the exact sciences, and intro-
duced demonstrations into the speculative, thus reducing them
to a more rigorous method than they had hitherto known.
Bishop Synesius was her scholar, and always venerated her-
Orestes, Prefect of Egypt, admired and loved her, and followed
her counsels in his contest with the fiery Archbishop, St. Cyril.

St. Cyril and the Murder of Hypatia. 51

Voltaire tells us that the guilt of St. Cyril has
been proved by the most learned men of the eigh-
teenth century, "such as Brucker, La Croze,
Basnage, etc., etc.'' Let us pass, with a doubting
smile, this extravagant encomium on writers of very
ordinary calibre, and see how these Protestant
authorities arrive at their horrible conclusion. It is
by adducing the testimony of Socrates, Suidas,
Damascius, and Nicephorug Callixtus. But in vain
do they call on Socrates. This historian, although
very hostile to St. Cyril, as he constantly shows
himself, and although his Novatianism * would render
him very willing to incriminate an orthodox prelate,
does not charge the holy patriarch with either the
instigation or an approval of the murder. And, let
it be noted, Philostorgius, also contemporary with
Hypatia, and an historian of as much reliability as
Socrates, narrates her death, but does not even men-
tion the name of St. Cyril in connection -with it,
although, indeed, he inculpates the Catholics. The

It was said that it was owing to Hypatia's enthusiasm for pagan-
ism that Orestes became unfavorable to the Christians. Hence
certain imprudent persons so excited the people against her that
<>ur day, while slic was going to her school, she was dragged from
her litter, stripped and killed, and her members thrown into the
Hames." (" Storia Universale," b. vii, c. 23. Edit. Ital. 10,
Turin, 1862.)

* This heresy was an outgrowth o'f the schism of Novatian, who,
instigated by Novatus, a Carthaginian priest, tried to usurp the
pontifical throne of St. Cornelius in 251. Its cardinal doctrine
\vas that there were some sins which the Church can not forgive.
It subsisted in the East until the seventh century, and in the
West until the eighth.

52 St. Cyril and the Murder of Hypatia.

same may be said of Suidas. As for Nicephorus
Callixtus, this schismatic author should not be
brought forward in the matter, as he lived nine
centuries after the event, and could know nothing-
whatever concerning it, unless from Socrates and
Philostorgius. Furthermore, the best critics of
every school tax this writer with a fondness for
fables.

There remains, then, only Damascius, on whom
Voltaire and his latest copyist, Kingsley, can rely
for justification in their ghoulish task. But Damas-
cius was a pagan, a declared enemy of Christianity,
and it was the interest of his cause to besmirch the
fair fame of Alexandria's patriarch. And of what
value is his assertion, made a century and a half
after the death of Hypatia, when compared with the
silence of her contemporaries, Socrates and Phi-
lostorgius? Again, the very passage of Damascius
adduced by the foes of St. Cyril betrays the shallow-
ness of this author's information. He represents the
patriarch as surprised at the numbers awaiting the
coming forth of Hypatia, and as asking who it was
that could attract such a concourse. Is it possible
that St. Cyril, the best informed man in Alexandria
concerning even its most trivial affairs, the all-
powerful patriarch whose spies were everywhere (ac-
cording to Kingsley), did not know the residence of
the woman who disputed with him the intellectual
empire of the city? And Damascius makes still
more exorbitant demands on our credulity ; for he

Sf. Cyril and the Murder of Hypatia. 53

.gives us to understand that until St. Cyril saw that
crowd of her enthusiastic disciples, he had not even
heard a name which for years had been renowned in
Egypt.

We are not writing a Life of St. Cyril, still less a
hagiological essay; but we must remark that the
general tenor of this prelate's career, his exhibition
of constant zeal and virtue of a strikingly heroic
character, which caused his enrolment among the
canonized saints, would prevent us from supposing
that he could ever have been a murderer. Of
course, absolutely speaking, no metaphysical impos-
sibility is involved in the supposition of Voltaire,
Kingsley, etc. ; but if it were accepted, we should
expect to discover some trace of heroic repentance in
the after-life of the patriarch. Now, in the remain-
ing thirty years of his career, active and open to
inspection though it was, we can find neither the
slightest trace of such repentance nor even any
avowal of the crime. But we need say no more.
The charge is as gratuitous as it is malicious, and
will thus be considered by all fair minds until at
least one contemporary or gwow-contemporary author-
ity can be adduced in its support.

THE DIVORCE OF NAPOLEON AND
JOSEPHINE.

IN a brochure entitled " Napoleon and His Detrac-
tors," Prince Jerome Napoleon found fault, in 1887,
with Prince Metternich for having contended that
the Emperor Napoleon had never been sacramen tally
united to Josephine. The Austrian diplomat went
so far as to declare that he had heard from the
lips of Cardinal Consalvi that Pius VII., hy con-
ferring the imperial consecration on Josephine, an
unmarried wife, had sanctioned, as it were, her con-
cubinary status. It was quite natural that Metter-
nich should wish such to have been the case ; under
no other supposition could he uphold the honor of
Maria Louisa and of her family. If Josephine was
ever sacramentally united to Napoleon, the proud
Hapsburgs had simply handed over one of themselves
to be the concubine of the Corsican adventurer ;
as Catholics, the imperial family of Austria were
compelled to acknowledge this degradation of
their escutcheon. Now, says Prince Napoleon, the
Emperor and Josephine, fc< who had been only civilly
married in the time of the Directory, were united
religiously by Cardinal Fesch, in order to satisfy the
scruples of Josephine, in the evening preceding the
consecration, and in the presence of Talleyrand and

54

The Divorce of Napoleon and Josephine. 55

Berthier, in the chapel of the Tuileries. I know
this from the traditions of my family."

Whether because they really ignored the circum-
stances of Napoleon's marriage and divorce, or
because they dared not reveal displeasing details, the
memoirists of the First Empire — such as Bourrienne,
Marco Saint-Hilaire, Loriquet, Gallois, the Continu-
ator of Anquetil — have given us either travestied
information or none at all. Thiers and d'Hausson-
ville afterward narrated a part of the story. But in
1839 M. d'Avannes, vice-president of the tribunal of
Evreux, while preparing his " Sketches of Navarre."
and wishing to give some place to Josephine, who
had received the ancient kingdom as a kind of
appanage, asked permission to consult the documents
concerning our subject which were guarded in the
archives of the Ministry of Justice. He was allowed to
investigate, but not to copy them. In this emergency
he had recourse to the friendly offices of the Abbe
Rudemare, who had been promoter of the diocese of
Paris under the Empire ; and who, more liberal than
the state authorities, was able to furnish the investi-
gator with even more information than that hidden
in the archives. Add to this source the narration of
Rudemare himself, as given among the " justificative
pieces " in the " History of Cardinal Fesch," by the
Abb6 Lyonnet, and you have the means whereby to
construct the entire history of the Napoleonic matri-
monial complication.

When Napoleon married Josephine de Beauhar-

56 The Divorce of Napoleon <md Josephine.

nais, on March 9, 1796, it was a purely civil cere-
mony which, in accordance with the spirit, and law
of 'the Revolution, united the pair. At that time
the most hellish spirit of the Revolution had sub-
sided, and it would not have been difficult to find
a priest to bless their nuptials ; indeed, during the
worst days of the Terror few good Catholics entered
the matrimonial life under the sole auspices of the
State, dangerous though their fidelity generally
proved. Josephine passed for a virtuous woman,
and even showed a certain amount of religious
devotion ; on her part, therefore, this neglect may
have been a mere worldly weakness. But there is
good reason for supposing that Bonaparte was
actuated, if not from the very day of his betrothal,
at least from a period shortly posterior to it, by a
design to provide himself with a loophole for escape
from what might possibly become an inconvenient
burden. In vain did Josephine beg for a religious
authorization of their union ; this proved to be one
of the few matters in wdiich her influence over Napo-
leon was null. Eight years passed, and the time
came for the coronation of Bonaparte as Emperor
of the French. Pope Pius VII. came to Paris for
the great ceremony, and Josephine succumbed to the
influence of that mysterious prestige which ever sur-
rounds the Vicar of Christ. Her soul was in agony.
Could she bear to submit her head to the blessing of
the Supreme Pontiff of that Church whose laws she
was defying? Could she dare to receive an almost

Tin1 Divorce of Napoleon and Josephine. 57

sacramental consecration while living in the bonds
of sin ? And then there flashed into her mind the
prospect of being able to finally dissipate the cloud
which had so long hung over her otherwise happy
life. Her purely civil marriage might be annulled
by the powerful wish of that ambitious husband,
whose dearest hopes her continued childlessness so
terribly thwarted ; but would even Bonaparte suc-
ceed, where Philip Augustus had failed, in procuring
the dissolution of a Christian matrimony? She
had already told Bourrienne that from the day when
Napoleon commenced to plot for the imperial crown,
she had felt herself lost ; but now she could put an
end to this anguish. She would avow her trouble to
the Pontiff himself.

Trembling with emotion and shame, she made
her avowal on December 1, the day before that
appointed for the coronation. The Pontiff was
thunderstruck. In common with all of Josephine's
friends — nay, with all France — he had believed her
marriage to have been sanctioned by the Church.
His answer, says M. d'Haussonville, was full of ten-
derness for the weeping woman, and of consideration
for the unscrupulous man who would have deceived
him, while it manifested the tact of the priest and
the Pontiff. " Canonically, the situation of the
Emperor did not concern him ; that was an affair
to be arranged between the potentate's conscience
and himself. But now that he, the Pontiff, knew
the true state of affairs, he could not, much as he

58 The Divorce of Napoleon and Josephine.

lamented the fact, admit the Empress to a share
in the consecration, unless she were first united to
Napoleon before a priest." When Napoleon was
informed of Josephine's action and of the Pontifical
decision, his rage was terrific ; but what could he
do? Proceed with his own consecration, and ignore
the rights of Josephine? The scandal was not to
be thought of ; and the displeasure of the Pontiff,
whose friendship he sadly needed, was not to be
unnecessarily incurred. But one course was open
to the schemer : to consent to the proposed nuptial
benediction, and to devise some means for its nulli-
fication. According to the Canon Law, no Christian
matrimony was valid unless performed in the pres-
ence of the pastor of one of the contracting parties ;
clandestine matrimony, such as, although illicit, is
valid in most of the States of the American Union,
and in those lands where the Tridentine decree on
matrimony was never promulgated, was not recog-
nized by the Church in France. Here, then, the
astute Bonaparte imagined that his security was
found. His union with Josephine should be con-
tracted without the presence of the parish-priest
or of witnesses; there was 'no time for the one,
and necessary secrecy precluded the attendance of
the others, as he told his uncle, Cardinal Fesch,
on whose assistance and devotion he relied in his
dilemma. At first Fesch refused to countenance
what he rightly asserted would be a mere mockery
of a religious solemnization, and of no validity ;

The Divorce of Napoleon and Josephine. 59

but he yielded sufficiently to propose recurring to
the Pope for the powers necessary for his own .as-
sumption of the office of the cure* of the Tuileries,
and for the dispensation with witnesses. Can it be
possible that Napoleon did not perceive that this
action of his uncle promised to destroy his own
hopes ? Did he not realize that by recurring to the
Pontiff, the source of Canon Law, for a dispensation
from the provisions of that Law, he was cutting from
under his feet the only ground on which he could
securely stand, and on occupying which he had
just resolved ? The comedy which he had been en-
acting from the day of his marriage, which he was
now developing for the illusion of Josephine, of
the Church of France, of his future Empress, of the
august house of Hapsburg, was certainly threatened
with collapse. At any rate, the Cardinal proceeded
to the apartments of Pius VII., and at once broached
the subject of his quandary. " Most Holy Father,
it may be that in the exercise of my duties in this
matter, I shall need all the powers of your Holiness."
" Very well," replied the Pontiff ; u I accord them
all."

Here, then, is the solution of the entire question
as to the religious marriage of Napoleon and Jose-
phine, and consequently of the question of the
validity of the pretended divorce by an incompetent
ecclesiastical tribunal. With the action of the civil
tribunals we, of course, have nothing to do. The
sole ground for the acquiescence of the diocesan

60 The Divorce of Napoleon and Josephine.

tribunal of Paris in the imperial demands was the
non-fulfilment, at the religious marriage, of the con-
ditions prescribed as essential by the Canon Law.
But the Roman Pontiff had dispensed with these
conditions in this particular case; he had derogated,
in favor of Napoleon and Josephine, from the obli-
gatory force of those conditions, just as he does in
every case of clandestine matrimony, not otherwise
illegitimate, celebrated in these United States and
in other countries where the Trldentine decree was
not promulgated.

As soon as he had received full power to act in the
premises, Cardinal Fesch betook himself to the apart-
ments of the Empress, and there married the imperial
couple. Whether there were any witnesses or not
to the ceremony appears to be doubtful. Capefigue,
following Portalis, names that personage and Duroc.
Thiers at first mentioned Talleyrand and Berthier;
and then, on the testimony of certain original docu-
ments, denied their presence. The depositions of
Talleyrand and Berthier before the " officiality " say
nothing of their presence ; but of course it was to the
interest of their master that they should hide whatever
would strengthen the validity of the religious cere-
mony. Just before the coronation Pope Pius asked
Cardinal Fesch whether he had conferred the nuptial
benediction. " Yes," was the laconic reply. Two days
afterward Josephine asked the Cardinal to give her a
certificate of the marriage ; and although he at first de-
murred, for fear of offending the Emperor, he yielded

The Divorce of Napoleon and Josephine. 61

to her entreaties so far as to hand her a paper, the exact
contents of which have never been made known.

It was in 1809, after the treaty of Vienna, that
Napoleon first opened his mind clearly to Cambace'res,
archchancellor of the Empire, on the matter of the
divorce. A senatus-consultus was immediately pro-
mulgated (December 16) proclaiming the dissolution
of the Emperor's civil marriage. Napoleon had
nattered himself that the religious marriage would
give him no trouble whatever ; it was a secret among
the Cardinal his uncle, Josephine, and himself. But
when he learned that Fesch had indiscreetly mentioned
the ceremony to Cambaceres, and that he had even
given a certificate to Josephine, he found himself
compelled to seek from the ecclesiastical authorities
a declaration of the nullity of his union. Ignoring
the existence of the Pope, the proper judge in the
matrimonial causes of sovereigns, recourse was had
to the diocesan tribunal of Paris (not to a reunion
of bishops, as Thiers says), — a body established to
judge of similar causes between private individuals,
and one composed of the appellant's subjects. On
December 22. 1809, the Abb£ Rudemare, diocesan
promoter of Paris ; his colleague, M. Corpet ; and the
t\vo officials, MM. Lejeas and Boisleve, were sum-
moned to a conference with Cambaceres, in the
pivsciifi' of the Minister of AVorship.

••Tin.' Emperor."1 said Cambaceres, "can not
abandon the hope of leaving behind him an heir
who will assure the tranquillity, glory, and integrity

62 The Divorce of Napoleon and Josephine.

'of the Empire which he has founded. He intends
to marry again, and he desires to espouse a Catholic.
Hence his union with the Empress Josephine must
be annulled, and he wishes to submit the case to the
diocesan tribunal."

" But, my lord," returned the Abb6 Rudemare,
"such a cause as this is reserved, if not by law, at
least by custom, to the Sovereign Pontiff."

" I am not authorized to recur to Rome," replied
the archchancellor.

" You need not go to Rome : the Pope is at
Savona," said the promoter.

" I am not told to treat with him," answered
Cambace*r£s; "and it is impossible to do so under
present circumstances."

" There are several cardinals, my lord, in Paris ;
why not submit this affair to them?"

" They have no jurisdiction, M. TAbbe*," returned
the imperial confidant.

" But at least," insisted the promoter, " we have
here a commission of cardinals, archbishops, and
bishops, assembled for affairs of the Church."

" They do not constitute a tribunal," said Camba-
ce*res ; " whereas the ' officiality ' is one formed for the
cognizance of these very causes."

"; Yes, prince," returned the Abbe ; " but only for
those of private individuals. The dignity of the
parties here concerned prevents our tribunal from
regarding itself as competent in the premises."

u What ! " exclaimed the archchancellor. " Do you

The Divorce of Napoleon and Josephine. 63

mean to say that his Majesty has no right to present
himself before a tribunal established for his subjects,
and composed of his subjects? Who contests his
right?"

"He may present himself," acknowledged the
promoter ; " but such a course would be so contrary
to custom that we could not assume the responsibility
of acting as his judges unless the episcopal commission
decided in favor of our competency. Although dis-
posed to prove our devotion to his Majesty in every
possible way, we must take every means to shield our
own responsibility, and to insure the repose of our
consciences. In undertaking this case we become a
spectacle for angels and men."

" But this affair must remain secret," said Camba-
ce*res; "all the documents shall be deposited in the
cabinet of the Emperor. At any rate, the Minister
of Worship will see that you receive the approbation
that you desire."

The motives for the nullification of the religious
marriage having been submitted to the diocesan
tribunal, the promoter exclaimed : " But we all
thought, as did indeed the whole Empire, that the
marriage of their Majesties had been celebrated in
1796 with all the canonical forms."

" That is a mistake," observed Cainbace're^s. " Fore-
seeing what has now happened, his Majesty would
never receive the nuptial benediction. But on
Saturday, December 1, 1804, tired of the entreaties
of the Empress, he told Cardinal Fesch to give the

64 The Divorce of Napoleon a/it? Josephine.

nuptial blessing ; and he did so in the apartments
of the Empress, without any witnesses, and without
the presence of the cure*."

" Prince," asked the Abbe, " where is the record
of this marriage ? "

"There is none," replied the archchancellor, who
knew that Josephine had a certificate of the marriage,
if indeed the imperial familiars had not found means
to destroy it.

" This affair," remarked the promoter, " providing,
of course, that our competence is assured, must be
conducted precisely as though it were the case of
one of his Majesty's subjects."

" What ! Follow mere forms ? They take too
much time. I have been a lawyer, and I know."

" That may be," returned Rudemare ; " but forms
often lead us to a knowledge of the truth ; and,
besides, we can not ignore them without risk of
nullifying our proceedings. However, there is no
reason why this second question should not also be
submitted to the episcopal commission."

On January 1 Napoleon obtained from seven
prelates, who had no authority whatever in the
premises, a declaration that the diocesan tribunal was
competent to decide his matrimonial cause. These
prelates were the very same who afterward pro-
nounced the excommunication of Bonaparte null,
" because it had been launched in defence of tem-
poral interests " ; and who added to the sufferings of
the august prisoner of Savona by threatening, in the

The Divorce of Napoleon and Josephine. 65

name of the church of France, to provide for its
necessities if he did not yield to the schismatic
demands of Bonaparte. They were the Cardinal
Maury ; the Cardinal Caselli, bishop of Parma ;
de Barral, archbishop of Tours ; Canaveri, bishop of
Vercelli ; B curlier of Evreux, Manet of Treves, and
Duvoisin of Nantes. In accordance with the views
of this declaration, the tribunal of Paris listened,
on January 6, to the attestations, signed and sealed,
of Cardinal Fesch, Talleyrand, Berthier, and
Duroc, to the effect that the canonical conditions
had not been observed in the religious marriage of
the Emperor, and that his Majesty had intentionally
arranged this neglect ; for he could not dream, they
said, of binding himself irrevocably in this matter
at the moment when he was founding a new empire.
On January 9 the tribunal heard a development of
the further motive for dissolution which had been
hinted in this last clause. Napoleon, the master of
Europe, had been constrained in the exercise of his
free will. He had not consented to the marriage.
The official Peter Boisleve then delivered judgment
in favor of the imperial postulant, but with the
important reservation that the decision was pro-
nounced by him because of the difficulty of recur-
ring to the Supreme Pontiff, to whom such a case
should by right have been referred. The promoter
having appealed to the metropolitan " officially ",
its members confirmed the decision already given,
but referred the affair for final adjudication to the

66 The Divorce of Napoleon and Josephine.

primatial tribunal of Lyons. However, it was an
easy matter to ignore the responsibility thus thrust
upon this higher court. The Archbishop of Lyons
was Cardinal Fesch.

Such is the history of one of the most solemn
burlesques of justice ever perpetrated by a human
tribunal. An incompetent court, listening to testi-
mony evidently false as well as interested, and
ignoring the manifest suppression of what would
have given another aspect to the cause, slavishly
bent to the will of an autocrat, and passed over as
never having occurred a marriage sanctioned by the
Vicar of Christ ; and, turning to the civil union
which the Church had never recognized, pronounced
the contracting parties free to enter upon new nup-
tials. Had Josephine resisted the imperial will —
had she performed her duty as wife and woman,
and carried her case before its proper judge, — her
rights would have been proclaimed, even though the
brute force of her husband might have forced her to
yield her place to another. But she never appealed ;
sure of her husband's invincible determination to
repudiate her, she perforce found consolation in an
empty title and in a magnificent establishment.
It has been asserted that Josephine was cognizant
of reasons for preservation of silence ; it has been
declared that there was a real, though secret, imped-
iment, which invalidated her union with Napoleon,
and of which the Viennese court was informed
during the negotiations for the hand of Maria
Louisa. So say Thiers and Rohrbacher. But this

The Divorce of Napoleon and Josephine. 67

impediment could not have subsisted. The exist-
ence of Eugene and Hortense, taken in conjunction
with Josephine's own frequent anticipations, as
evidenced by her letters to her husband and her
friends, forbid such a supposition.

We would remark in conclusion that the term
" divorce " should not be used in treating of this
case. A divorce is granted only in a case where a
marriage is recognized as having existed. When
concubinaries are separated, they are not divorced :
they are simply declared not bound to each other,
and to have no right to live together in the conjugal
relation. Here a sycophant tribunal denied the ex-
istence of the religious marriage, and of course it
could not recognize the civil union. In this state
of affairs it pronounced the parties free from matri-
monial obligations. A divorce properly so called —
that is, the dissolution of an existing tie (quoad
vinculum) — can not and never has been granted
by the Catholic Church in the case of consummated
Christian matrimony ; and we know of no tribunal
calling itself Catholic, whether competent or incom-
petent, legitimate or illegitimate, ever having pre-
tended to accord such a separation. For an instance
of the inflexibility of the Holy See in this regard,
even in the case of the mighty ones of the earth,
the mind of Josephine had not to travel back six
centuries to Philip Augustus and Ingelburga, or to
search outside the annals of her husband's family.
The case of Jerome Bonaparte and his Baltimorean
Protestant spouse was of a recent date.

FENELON AND VOLTAIRE.

FEW modern critics will refuse to Voltaire the
title of champion historical liar of the world. He has
had hundreds of competitors, and perhaps scores of
them have surpassed him in barefacedly gratuitous
assertion ; but for a " thumping " lie, so well con-
cocted, so attractively dressed, as to be greedily
swallowed and easily digested by even the few
fastidious among the mob who yearn for pungent
historical titbits, the U8age of Ferney " need fear
no rival. Nearly all of his lies were exposed during
his life- time or soon after ; * but so true is his own
cynical remark as to the sticking qualities of plenti-
fully-thrown mud, that even in our day many of his
inventions are unwittingly credited by thousands
who know little or nothing about Voltaire himself ;
for, almost without exception, writers of the heter-
odox and freethinking schools have transmitted his
fictions from generation to generation as universally
admitted — nay, indisputable — facts.

* Prominent among the vindicators of truth were Nouotte, in
" Les Erreurs de Voltaire," 1762; Fonceinagne, in his " Lettre
sur le Testament Politique du Card, de Richelieu," 1750; the
" Dictionnaire Historique, Litteraire, et Critique," by the Abbe'
Barral and the Oratorians Guibaud and Valla, 1758: and Chaudon,
in his " Les Grands Homines Venges," 17G9.

FSnelon and Voltaire. 69

*4 The Age of Louis XIV." is, among all the works
of Voltaire, probably the most prolific of falsehood ;
scarcely one of the truly great personages of that
period is not covered with the cynic's venomous slime.
One is not thunderstruck when he reads the worse
than insinuations as to the sincerity of Turenne's
conversion to Catholicism ; but one is dazed when he
beholds Fenelon, the dove of simplicity, presented to
a hitherto venerating world as a probable hypocrite,
a freethinker, and a philosophist. Such is the guise
in which we are invited to regard the angelic
Archbishop of Cambrai, when his defamer tells us
that Ramsay, a pupil of our prelate, wrote to him
(Voltaire) that " if Fdnelon had been born in a free
country, he would have displayed his whole genius,
and given a full career to his own principles, never
known " (sic).*

Ramsay kad been intimate with Fe'nelon, and when,
despite the efforts of the best theologians of that
communion, he had become convinced of the base-
lessness of Anglicanism, in which system he had been
bred, he was saved by his friend from the shoals of
incredulity, and drawn into the haven of Catholicity
(1709). Such being the case, is it likely that
Ramsay would have proclaimed his religious mentor
as a mere time-server, a devotee of policy, a man
ready to abandon his convictions for petty interest?
Ramsay could not refute Voltaire's assertion ; for he

* In Preface, Voltaire himself quotes Ramsay's alleged original
English.

70 FSnelon and Voltaire.

had died in 1743, and the allegation was not made
until 1752. It is the opinion of Chaudon that if
Ramsay ever wrote the adduced letter, the quoted
passage alluded, not to Fe'nelon's religious prin-
ciples, but to those " of the author of ' Telemachus '
on the authority of kings. " At any rate, Ramsay's
Life of Fe'nelon * shows that, to use the words of
Sainte-Beuve, Mgr. de Cambray " was not of the
ordination of d'Alembert and Voltaire." f Barthel-
emy, the latest author, we believe, to touch on this
particular audacity of Voltaire, draws extensively
,on the work of Chaudon, who himself appeals to
Ramsay's acknowledged judgment on Fe'nelon, as
portrayed in his detailed account of his own argu-
mentation with that prelate. We submit to the
reader's attention a few passages of this interesting
conversation, which certainly indicates none of those
principles which Voltaire would attribute to Fe'nelon.
Having detailed certain objections concerning the
Natural Law and toleration which he had adduced
to the Archbishop, Ramsay gives the prelate's reply :
" If you would persist in your philosophical inde-
pendence, and if you would tolerate in some sort all
kinds of sects, you must necessarily regard Chris-
tianity as an imposture ; for there is no medium
between Deism and Catholicism." As this seemed a
paradox to Ramsay, the Archbishop explained : " In

* " Histoire de la Vie et des Ouvrages de Messire F. de S.
Fe'nelon." La Haye, 1723.

t " Causeries du Lundi" (1 Avril, 1850).

Fenelon and Voltaire. 71

renouncing all supernatural and revealed law, you
must limit yourself to Natural Religion, founded on
the idea of God ; but if you admit a revelation, you
must recognize some supreme authority ever prompt
and able to interpret it. Without such established
visible authority, the Christian Church would be like
a republic having wise laws, but no magistrates to
enforce them. What a source of confusion ! Each
citizen, a copy of the law in hand, disputing its
meaning! . . . Has not our Sovereign Legislator
provided better than this for the peace of His
republic and the preservation of His law ? Again,
if there is no infallible authority to say to all,
4 Behold the real meaning of Holy Writ,' how are
the ignorant peasant and the untutored artisan to
decide where even the most learned can not agree?
In giving a written law, God would have ignored
the needs of the immense majority of mankind, had
He not also furnished an interpreter to spare them a
task the performance of which would be impossible.
You must reject the Bible as a fiction, or submit to
the Church."

Ramsay impetously rejoined : " Monseigneur, you
want me to recognize an earthly tribunal as infal-
lible ? I have gone through most of the sects, and
permit me to say, with all due respect, that the
priests of all religions are frequently more corrupt
and more ignorant than other men." Fenelon
sweetly replied : u If we do not arise above what is

a-H<1

human in the most numerous assemblies of the
Church, we shall find there only what will revolt us
and nourish our incredulity ; we shall see only pas-
sions, prejudices, human imbecility, political schem-
ing, cabals. But we must the more admire the
divine omnipotence and wisdom, since they accom-
plish their designs by means which appear apt only
to frustrate those designs." Ramsay yielded to the
necessity of a living interpreter for a revealed law,
but still clung to his idea of Natural Religion, and
asserted that one need only to enter into one's self
to feel the truth of that religion. F^neloii inquired:
"And how many men are capable of so entering
into themselves as to consult pure reason ? Granted
that some, here and there, may enter on this purely
intellectual road, the rank and file can not, and they
need external aid." But hearken to the prelate's
r£sum6 of the fall of man and the economy of the
Redemption :

" Our first parents having abused their liberty in
a paradise of immortality and pleasure, God changed
their probationary state for a mortal one — one of
mixed good and evil, — in order that an experience
of the nothingness of creatures might prompt us to
constantly yearn for a better life. From that time
all men were born with an inclination to evil. . . .
We are born sick, but a cure is ever ready at hand.
The light which enlightens every one who comes
into the world is never wanting to any individual.

and Voltaire. 73

Sovereign Wisdom has spoken differently, according
to time and place ; to some by the supernatural law
and by the miracles of the Prophets, and to others by
the natural law and the wonders of creation. Every
person is judged by the law he knows, and not by
that he ignores. At length God himself assumed
flesh like our own, that He might satisfy for sin, and
to furnish us an example of the worship due Him.
God cannot pardon a criminal without also mani-
festing His horror for crime ; that manifestation He
owes to justice, and it can be given only by Jesus
Christ. . . . The religion of this Eternal Pontiff
consists of chanty alone ; the Sacraments, the priest-
hood, and ceremonies, are only aids to our weak-
ness, — only sensible signs to nourish in ourselves
and others the knowledge and love of our common
Father; in fine, they are means necessary to keep
us in order, in unity, and in obedience. One day
these means will cease, the figures will vanish, the
true temple will be opened ; our bodies will arise
glorious, and God will communicate eternally with
His creatures. Behold the general plan of Provi-
dence ; behold, so to say, the philosophy of the Bible.
Suppose that its truth could not be demonstrated.
Would you not wish it to be true ? "

In three different places * Voltaire descants upon
the scepticism of Fe'nelon, as manifested by certain

* In the " Siecle de Louis XIV.," in 1752; in the " Examen du
Tableau Historique," in 1763; and in a letter to Formey, perpetual
secretary of the Academy of Berlin, in 1752.

74 FSnelon and Voltaire.

lines * written by him, says the " Sage," toward the
end of his life. Here the prelate declares that he
has " arrived at old age, and foresees nothing " ;
therefore, concludes Voltaire, he was a sceptic.
Now, it is by 110 means certain that these verses
were composed by the Archbishop of Cambrai,
although Voltaire " swears before God," in letters
to Formey and to Courtivron, that the prelate's
nephew, the Marquis de Fe'nelon, sang them as
his uncle's production. The Marquis could not
deny this ; for he had been killed at the battle
of Rocoux in 1746, and the assertion was made in
1752 and 1755. Voltaire himself admits that the
verses are not to be found in the published editions
of Fe*nelon's works, because, he says, it was not
deemed desirable that the Jansenists should have an
opportunity to accuse, their great adversary of scep-
ticism ; but he does not indicate the libraries where
may be found any of the suppressed fifty copies of
" Telemaque " which, as he insists, do contain them.
But since Voltaire adduces the authority of the
Marquis de Fe'nelon, let us, with Barthelenry, quote
another nephew of the Archbishop, the pious Abb£
de Fe'nelon, the intimate companion of a great part
of his life.

The Abbe seems to admit his uncle's composition

* Jeune, j'e'tais trop sage
Etvoulais trop savoir;
Je ne veux en pai-tage

Que badinage
Et touche au dernier age

Sans rien pr^voir.

Fenelon and Voltaire. 75

of the verses, but interprets them in a way that would
not please Voltaire. "An historian, a bel esprit, but
not very accurate, has made it to appear that Fe'nelon
died like a ' philosopher,' yielding blindly to destiny,
with neither fear nor hope. He quotes in proof
certain verses which he presents Monseigneur de
Cambrai as repeating during his last illness ; but he
takes good care not to observe that these verses are
part of a canticle by M. de Fe'nelon, treating of the
simplicity of a holy and divine childlikeness, which
ignores human prudence and all inquietude for the
future, in order to abandon itself, without any useless
and often harmful surmises, to a trust in the mercy
of God and in the merits of Jesus Christ."* And
Lepan,f finding fault with Voltaire as a falsifier of
other men's literary productions, adduces these verses
as an instance ; showing that in this very poem,
Fdnelon, if its author, gave good proof of being
actuated by most Christian sentiments. Voltaire
shamelessly omitted to notice the stanza preceding
the proffered lines, and there it is proclaimed that
" human prudence is vain, that ignorance is the
writer's science, that Jesus and His simplicity are
his all." J In fact, the very title of this poem is

* " La Vie de Fenelon, ecrite par 1'Abbe, son neveu," prefixed
to the works, edit. 1787, vol. i, p. 749.

t See Lepan's " Vie Politique, Litteraire, et Morale, de Vol-
taire," 1817.

J Adieu, vaine prudence,
Je ne te doi3 plus rien;
Unc heureuse ignorance

Est ma science:
Je"su8 et son enfance
Est tout mon bien.

76 fiSneloft and Voltaire.

opposed to the " philosophy " of Voltaire: " A fare-
well to human wisdom in order to live like a child."

The reader is probably familiar with Fenelon's
history, and therefore we shall spare him the par-
ticulars of the saintly prelate's quasi-exile from the
court of the great monarch. That he experienced
grief because of his separation from the Duke of
Burgundy — whom he had so carefully formed for
the throne, and who, had death not intervened,
would have proved a more than ordinarily worthy
successor of St. Louis, — no one can doubt ; but his
regrets were not, as Voltaire would regard them,
founded on a chagrin at being debarred from domi-
nation over his quondam pupil, or on a hankering
after the allurements of a court ; but rather on pure
affection, which naturally yearns for the society of
the beloved object, and for opportunity to benefit it.
Yet, our cynic says : " In his philosophical and hon-
orable retreat, Fenelon learned how difficult it is to
detach one's self from a court. He always mani-
fested an interest in the court, and a taste for it
which betrays itself amid all his resignation."

This charge is baseless; in not a line of the prel-
ate's correspondence can be found a single expres-
sion which would give even coloring to it. Ramsay
says that Louis XIV., having overcome the preju-
dices against Fenelon with which he had been
inspired, "thought seriously of recalling the Arch-
bishop ; he wished his aid in terminating an affair
(Jansenism) which agitated the Church of his king-

Fenelon and Voltaire. 77

dom. The Archbishop of Cambrai saw matters
shaping themselves for his return, but with senti-
ments very different from those an ordinary man
would have felt. He cherished only a desire for
retirement. Had he been compelled to return to
the court, he would have appeared there only to
manifest his views concerning the best way to give
peace to the Church, and would have retired imme-
diately on perceiving that union had been effected."
But listen to Fenelon in reply to those who,
afflicted by the prospect of schism in France, would
have called on his virtue, his sweetness, and his
genius, to banish the spectre. Had he been animated
by a desire to play a prominent part on the stage of
affairs, he would scarcely have answered: "I admit
that your propositions would be more readily enter-
tained by one possessing a taste for affairs. But my
opinion of myself is not sufficiently exalted to war-
rant me in supposing that I can restore peace to the
Church. I wish not to assume the grand role which
you design for me; it is the Cardinal de Noailles
who can give peace to the Church. I know no
secrets, but I dare to assert that he can effect union
when he wishes to do so ; the matter is entirely in
his hands. I wish for him all the glory, all the
merit before God and men ; and I would die content
if, from a distance, I could hear of his having per-
fected the great work." *

* When the dying Fenelon had received Extreme Unction, he
wrote to the royal confessor, saying, " I beg of his Majesty two
favors, which regard neither myself nor mine. The first is that

78 FSnelon and Voltaire.

But there is one fact that eloquently shows how
little rancor Fenelon's dismissal must have caused
in his gentle breast. When named for the archie-
piscopal see of Cambrai, he could have enjoyed,
in accordance with a detestable and too prevalent
custom of the time, the emoluments of his see, and
could have performed his duties by substitute, con-
tinuing to reside nearly always at court. He ac-
cepted his promotion, much as he loved his royal
pupils, only on condition that he might reside in his
diocese at least nine months of the year. *

Nor does the life led by Fe*nelon at Cambrai,
as depicted by himself in a letter to one of his
nephews — the Abbd de Beaumont, — indicate any
discontent with his lot. His gentleness as a man,
his watchfulness as a bishop, had plentiful scope in
a district constantly harassed by contending armies,
and all, — English, Germans, Hollanders, — rivalled
his own diocesans in veneration for the saintly
shepherd. His recreation, whenever dut}^ allowed
any, was a visit to the cabin of some peasant, where
he would console and instruct, and often join in the
simple feasts and meals of the poor. Well could he
write in 1710 : " I have no desire to change my situ-
ation. I never sought the court : I was forced to it.
I resided there for ten years without concerning

the King will give me a successor who is pious, and firm against
Jansenism, now so prevalent in these parts." (See Bausset,
" Histoire de Fe'nelon," 1817.)

* Bausset, loc. cit., vol. i, p. 318.

Fenelon and Voltaire. 79

myself about it — not taking one step for my own
interest, not asking one favor, intervening in no
schemes, and restricting myself to conscientious
replies when my opinion was asked. I have been
dismissed, and it is my duty to fill my present posi-
tion in peace. The best of the King's servants who
know me are well acquainted with my principles as
to honor, religion, the King, and my country ; they
know my profound gratitude for all the King's
favors. Other persons may easily be more capable
than I am, none can be more truly zealous." *

* Ib., vol. iii, p. 40. — According to Voltaire, the object of
Fenelon in writing his charming classic, " Telemachus," was to
satirize his sovereign, benefactor, and then friend, Louis XIV.
But when was " Telemachus " composed? If Fe'ne Ion's intention
was to satirize his king, the work must have been produced when
he was suffering from some real or fancied injury at the hands of
Louis. Certainly he would not have risked the royal resentment
when he was in full favor, and had everything to lose by such
action. But Fenelon himself tells us that this work was written
while he was in charge of the education of the king's grandson,
the Due de Bourgogne ; and during the entire period of his tutor-
ship the prelate was in the highest favor of his Majesty, as indeed
the very nature of his office would indicate. Again, the testimony
of Bossuet shows that Fenelon composed "Telemachus" in 1693
or '94, that is, when the two bishops were on terms of the most
intimate confidence. Bossuet says that Fenelon communicated
to him the first part of his MS., and it is scarcely to be supposed
that he would have done so, had he wished to attack the king in
any manner. At least this participation indicates that " Telem-
achus " was written before any coolness had arisen between
the two pix-hitx-.s ; that is, before the period (1699) when, and after
which only. Fenelon could have felt any chagrin toward Louis
XIV., and when he might have acted as a man of less noble
spirit than his own would have naturally done, if opportunity
permitted. Therefore Fenelon shall still remain for us the
"dove of Cambray " ; and the school of Voltaire shall not be
gratified by seeing the hawk assigned as his emblem.

GALILEO.
I.

SCHOOL-CHILDREN are frequently told that in a
time of most dense ignorance, Galileo, an Italian
astronomer, discovered that the earth moves around
the sun ; that this doctrine was contrary to that of
the Catholic Church, and that therefore the un-
fortunate scientist was seized by the Inquisition,
thrown into a dungeon, and tortured ; that finally
he retracted his teaching, but that, nevertheless,
even while ostensibly yielding, he muttered: "And
yet the earth does move." Very few Protestants
even suspect any exaggeration in these assertions ;
still fewer appear to know that Galileo did not
discover that the earth moves around the sun ;
that this doctrine was not contrary to that of
the Catholic Church; that the imprisonment of
Galileo was merely nominal, and that he was sub-
jected to 110 torture whatever; that the famous
remark u E pur si muove" is a work of imagination.

Galileo did not discover that the earth moves
around the sun. The ancient Greeks certainly knew
that the earth is round, that it is isolated in space,
and that it moves. Aristotle and Ptolemy under-
took to refute the last theory. According to Cicero,
Nicetas asserted the motion of the earth. Philolaus,

80

Galileo. 81

says Eusebius, thought that the earth moved around
the region of fire, in an oblique circle. Aristarchus
of Samos, says Archimedes, sustained the immo-
bility of the sun, and that the earth turned around
it as around a centre. Seneca thinks it "well to
inquire whether the rest of the universe moves
around a stationary earth, or whether the earth
moves in a stationary universe." * The Irish
Ferghil (Virgilius), Bishop of Salzburg in the
eighth century, taught the existence of the anti-
podes. Dante certainly believed in the antipodes
and in central attraction. f Copernicus himself
never pretended to be the author of the system
which bears his name, although to this humble
Polish priest belongs the glory of having precisely
formulated that system, and at a time when a
knowledge of it had almost vanished from among
men. Galileo needs not to be regarded as a prince
among astronomers in order to merit the homage
of the scientific : his greatest glory is that of a
mechanician.

The heliocentric system was not contrary to the
doctrine of the Catholic Church. She never has
proposed and she can not propose to her children
any system of merely physical science as a matter
of faith. Certainly, if any system contradicts her
teachings she exercises her right to condemn it.
Most churchmen of the early seventeenth century,

" Nat. Questions," vii, '2. f " Hull," canto 34.

82 Galileo.

quite naturally followers of the generally received
scientific theories of their day, rejected the idea of
a motion of the earth around the sun; but the
Church did not force them to such rejection. Had
such been the mind of the Church, Copernicus and
his many forerunners would not have been regarded
as good Catholics ; and Copernicus himself would
not have dedicated his " Revolutions of the Heavenly
Orbs " to Pope Paul III., saying, " If men who are
ignorant in mathematics pretend to condemn my
book, because of certain passages of Scripture which
they distort to suit themselves, I despise their vain
attacks." Calcagnini, who died in 1540, would not
have publicly taught at Ferrara that " the heavens
stand, but the earth moves."

But if the Church was not hostile to purely
scientific innovations, Luther and Melancthon were
not so liberal. In his "Table Talk" Luther says:
" Men pay heed to an astrologer who contends that
it is the earth that moves, and not the heavens or
the firmament, the sun and the moon. If a man
yearns for a reputation as a profound scientist, he
should invent some new system. This madman
would subvert the whole science of astronomy ; but
Scripture tells us that Joshua bade the sun, and not
the earth, to stand still." In his " Principles of the
Science of Physics," Melancthon says : " The eyes
testify that the heavens revolve every twenty-four
hours ; and nevertheless some men, either from love
of novelty or to parade their genius, insist that the

Galileo. 83

earth moves, and that the eighth sphere and the sun
do not revolve. Every true believer is obliged to
accept the truth as revealed by God, and to be con-
tented with it."

It is certain that for many years Galileo was ad-
mired and cherished by the most learned ecclesiastics
of Rome ; that three successive Pontiffs gave him
many tokens of esteem ; that he was one of the
most honored members of the celebrated Academy
of the Lincei. The Cardinal del Monte, writing to
the Grand Duke of Tuscany, says : " During his
sojourn at Rome Galileo has given much satisfaction,
and I believe that he has received the same ; for he
has enjoyed good opportunities to exhibit his in-
ventions, and the best-informed men of the Eternal
City regard them as most wonderful and accurate.
If we were living in the olden days of Rome, the
worth of Galileo, I think, would be recognized by a
statue on the Capitoline."

A famous scientist, the Carmelite Foscarini, pub-
lished in 1615 — only a year before Galileo's first
trouble with the Inquisition — a theological apology
for the philosopher and the Copernican system,
which was dedicated to Fantoni, General of the
Carmelites, and approved by the ecclesiastical au-
thorities of Naples. On May 15 of the same year
Mgr. Dini, a Roman prelate and an old pupil of
Galileo, writes that there is no fear that the Coper-
nican system will be condemned; and that as to
Galileo himself, " he should fortify his position

84 Galileo.

with arguments well-founded both in Scripture and
mathematics " ; and that in the meantime he may
be assured of the writer's own influence with
the Sacred College in his favor, and of the protec-
tion of Prince Cesi, the founder and president of
the Lincei. Indeed, as late as February 16, 1616,
Galileo wrote to Picchena that he found among
the highest ecclesiastical dignitaries much displeas-
ure because of " the diabolic opposition of his
persecutors."

Before approaching the main object of our article
we must reply to a question which naturally occurs
to one who observes that the Church of the seven-
teenth century was not hostile to the Copernican
system, and that so many churchmen were favorable
to Galileo. How happened it that Galileo found
himself cited before an ecclesiastical tribunal ? In
accounting for this fact little weight need be at-
tached to the sentiments and conduct of those who,
in his day as at all times, appear to be tolerated
by God for the trial of genius. Men who argued
against the movement of the earth because the earth
has no limbs, muscles, and sinews ; * men who
would decry the heliocentric system with the words,
" Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye looking up
to heaven ? " f — such persons could have had no

* Thus Chiaramonti of Cesena.

t Thus the Dominican Caccini, preaching the Advent course
in S. Maria Novella in Florence. But Marafti, General of the
Dominicans, writing to Galileo on January 10, 1(515, deplored the
extravagance of Caccini, who, he said, had previously been forced
to apologize in Bologna for other absurdities in the pulpit.

G-alileo. 85

influence upon the Roman Congregations. Nor
would these tribunals have exercised their power
merely because Galileo was contradicted by Tassoni,
Vieta, Montaigne, Bacon, Pascal, and other great
thinkers of the time. * The fault of Galileo con-
sisted in his confusing revealed truths with physical
discoveries, and in teaching in what sense Scripture
passages were to be taken, explaining them by
demonstrations of calculation and experience. Every
one admits with Dante f that the Scriptures adopt
popular ideas for the sake of perspicuity. But Gali-
leo said that in the Scriptures " are found propositions
which, taken literally, are false ; that Holy Writ
out of regard for the incapacity of the people,
expresses itself inexactly, even when treating of
solemn dogmas ; that in questions concerning natural
things, philosophical argument should avail more
than sacred."

These assertions unsettled all science, founded as

* Tassoni, a very independent thinker, thus reasoned : " Stand
still ^n the middle of a room, and look at the sun through a
window opening toward the south. Now, if the sun stands still
and the window moves so quickly, the sun will instantly dis-
appear from your vision." Vieta, a consummate algebraist,
thought the Copernican system derived irom a fallacious geom-
etry. Montaigne said that probably before a thousand years a
third system would supplant the two others. Descartes sometimes
denied the Copernican theory. Bacon derided it as repugnant to
natural philosophy. Pascal, in his " Thoughts," deemed it " wise
not to sound the depths of the Copernican opinion." As late as
1806 the Milanese Pini, in his " Incredibility of the Movement of
the Earth," sustained the Ptolemaic idea.

t " Paradise," iv, 43-45.

86 Galileo.

it then was on revelation ; " the earth," says Cantu,
" ceased to be regarded as the largest,, warmest,
and most illuminated of the planetary bodies. It
no longer enjoyed a pre-eminence in creation as the
home of a privileged being, but became one of many
in the group of unexplored planets and in no way
distinguished from the others. Fearing that science
was aggrandizing itself only to war on God, the
timid repudiated it. Only later did the better minds
understand that the faith fears no learning; that
historic criticism can be independent and impartial
without becoming irreligious. Then good sense
estimated at their true value the accusations
launched against the Church because of the affair
of Galileo ; it distinguished simple assertions from
articles of faith, positive and necessary prohibitions
from prudential and disciplinary provisions, the
oracles of the Church from the deliberations of a
particular tribunal. To such a tribunal a denun-
ciation was made that Galileo or his disciples had
asserted that God is an accident and not a substance,
a personal being ; that miracles are not miracles at
all. Then the Pontiff declared that, for the ter-
mination of scandal, Galileo should be cited and
admonished by the Sacred Congregation." *

In endeavoring to discover what followed on
Galileo's second summons before the Inquisition
(concerning his first trial in 1615 there is no ques-

* " Illustrious Italians," Milan, 1879.

G-alileo. 87

tion as to either imprisonment or torture), it would
appear to -us that no better source of information can
be desired than the original " Process." But since
Libri,* Perchappe,f Bertrand, $ and others insinuate —
according to what principles of criticism the reader
must judge — that as this record has been nearly
always in the hands of ecclesiastics, they may have
destroyed evidence of their own cruelty, we will here
adduce the testimony of the Tuscan Ambassador,
Niccolini. This evidence ought to be acceptable to
our adversaries ; for the writer was an intense par-
tisan of Galileo, and would not have hidden any-
thing likely to excite sympathy for his hero. Add
to this the fapt that these dispatches are directed
to Galileo's own sovereign, himself a warm admirer
of the philosopher. Galileo arrived in Rome on
February 13, 1633, and under date of March 13
Niccolini writes :

" The Pope told me that he had shown to Galileo
a favor never accorded to another, in allowing him
to reside in my house instead of in the Holy Office.
. . . His Holiness said that he could not avoid
having Galileo brought to the Holy Office for the
examination ; and I replied that my gratitude would
be doubled if he would exempt Galileo from this

* " History of Mathematical Science in Italy," Paris, 1841 ; vol.
iv, pp. 155-294.

t "Galileo: His Life and Discoveries," Paris, 1866.

t "Founders of Modern Astronomy," Paris, 1865. — "When
Napoleon invaded Rome in 1809, among the literary and historical
monuments which he stole was the original Process of Galileo.
The Holy See vainly demanded it from the government of the

88 Galileo.

appearance, but he answered that he could not do
so. ... He concluded with the promise to assign
Galileo certain rooms which are the most convenient
in the Holy Office." On April 16 the Ambassador
says : " He has a servant and every convenience.
The reverend commissary assigned him the apart-
ments of the judge of the tribunal. My own ser-
vants carry his meals from my house." . . .

About two months later (June 18) Niccolini con-
tinues : "I have again besought for a termination of
the cause of Galileo, and His Holiness replied that
the affair is ended, and that Galileo will be sum-
moned some morning of next week to the Holy
Office, to hear the decision. ... In regard to the
person of Galileo, he ought to be imprisoned for
some time, because he disobeyed the orders of 1616 ;
but the Pope says that after the publication of the
sentence he will consider with me as to what can be •
done to afflict him as little as possible." On June
26 : " Monday evening Galileo was summoned to
the Holy Office, and 011 Tuesday morning he pro-
ceeded thither to learn what was required of him.
He was detained, and on Wednesday he was taken

Restoration. While it was yet in France the astronomer Delambre
consulted it, but very negligently, as is evinced by the inexactness
of his quotations when writing to Venturi the letter published in
1821 by the latter. Delambre did not appreciate the Process very
highly, probably because, like Barbier (" Critical Examination of
Historical Dictionaries," Paris, 1820), he could find no proof of
his own assertion that Galileo had been tortured. The volume
was finally consigned to Count Rossi, to be restored to the Vatican
in 184G, and there it still remains.

G-alileo. 89

to the Minerva, before the lords-cardinals and the
prelates of the Congregation, where the sentence was
read, and he was forced to abjure his opinion. The
sentence includes the prohibition of his book, and
his condemnation to the prison of the Holy Office
during the pleasure of His Holiness, because, as they
declare, he disobeyed the order given him sixteen
years ago in this matter. * But this condemnation
was commuted by His Holiness to a residence in the
gardens of the Trinita dei Monti." On July 3 :
" His Holiness told me that although it was rather
early to diminish the penance of Galileo, he had been
content to allow him to reside at first in the gardens
of the Grand Duke, and that now he could proceed
to Sienna, there to reside in a convent or with my
lord the Archbishop." f

According, therefore, to Niccolini, the imprison-
ment of Galileo was merely nominal, and there is
no mention of any infliction of torture. But let us
examine further this question of torture. It is said
that the Process itself furnishes an indication of the

* Of the ten cardinals forming the tribunal, and all of whose
names are at the head of the preamble, three did not sign the
document. These were Gaspar Borgia, Zacchia, and Francis
Barberini, nephew of Urban VIII. One of the signers, Anthony
Barberiiii, a brother of the Pontiff and a Capuchin friar, tried
hard to obtain a remission of the entire penance.

I July 6 found Galileo at Sienna, dwelling with his old friend
and disciple, the Archbishop Ascanio Piccolomini. On December
16, the Cardinal Francis Barberini having obtained this favor, he
arrived at his own villa of Arcetri, and here he resided almost
constantly until his death on January 8, 1642.

90 Galileo.

infliction of torture ; that in the fourth interroga-
tory, on June 21, torture was menaced; that in the
sentence the judges declared that they had "deemed
it necessary to proceed to a rigorous examination " of
the accused. It is true that torture was threatened,
but the menace was not executed. In a decree
issued by Urban VIII. on June 16, 1633, and first
published by L'Epinois, it was ordered that Galileo
" should be questioned as to his intention [in pub-
lishing the 'Dialogue'], and that he should be
menaced with torture. If he does not yield to the
threat, he must be made to pronounce, in full session
of the Holy Office, an abjuration for strong suspicion
of heresy."

On June 21, in the fourth and last interrogatory,
but without any mention of the above decree,
Galileo was questioned as to his intention in the
" Dialogue " in regard to the Copernican system.
In reply he would only admit that, cherishing
his hypothesis, and feeling proud of the arguments
adduced for it before 1616, he had given in the
" Dialogue " more strength to the Copernican than
to the other opinion. Refusing, therefore, to avow
the imputed intention, he was threatened with tor-
ture. Then he replied — with what truth let his
ultra-admirers imagine : " I have not held the
Copernican system since I was ordered to abandon it
[seventeen years before]. But I am in your hands.
Do with me what you will." This refusal to
acknowledge the imputed intention had been fore-

Galileo. 91

seen by Pope Urban, and, as lie had provided for the
contingency, the tribunal did not fulfil the threat of
torture, but proceeded to the act of abjuration. As
for the words "rigorous examination" used in the
sentence, they do not necessarily imply that torture
had been inflicted; they can easily refer to the
threat pronounced in the fourth interrogatory.

Bat, according to the code of laws binding upon
the inquisitors, which are fully given in the " Direct-
ory " of Eymeric,* the official guide of the Holy
Office, torture could not have been inflicted on Gali-
leo. It is prescribed that when the accused denies
the charges, and they have not been substantiated,
and he has not yet furnished a good defence, he
shall ube put to the question, in order that the
truth may be reached,"- - provided, however, that
the consulters so advise. Now, Galileo was not
obstinate ; he had no inclination to become a martyr
for science. In his sentence the judges say : " We
deemed it necessary to proceed to a rigorous exami-
nation, and tliou didst reply like a Catholic —
respondisti Catholice." Having thus answered, he
could not be tortured. It is sad to hear him utter-
ing what his judges must have known to be a lie :
"For some time before the determination of the
Holy Office, and before I received that command

* " Directory for Inquisitors, by Friar Nicholas Eymeric, of the
Order of Preachers; Commentated by Francis Pegna, S. T. D.
and J. U. D., Auditor of Causes in the Apostolic Palace." Part
III., on the " Practice of the Inquisitorial Office," chapter on the
" Third Way of Ending a Trial for Faith." Venice, 1595.

92 Galileo.

[the order of 1616], I had been indifferent as to the
two opinions of Ptolemy and Copernicus, and had
held that both were disputable and that both could
be true in nature. But after the above mentioned
determination, being assured by the prudence of
my superiors, all my doubts ceased, and I held, a* I
now hold, the theory of Ptolemy as true, — that ?'.s-,
that the earth does not, and the sun does move" If
Galileo had undergone torture, he would scarcely
have omitted to mention it among his many griev-
ances, when, a few days after his departure from
Rome, on July 23, he wrote from Sienna to Gioli,
minister of the Grand Duke : "I address you,
prompted by a desire to escape from the long weari-
ness of a more than six months' imprisonment, and
from the trouble and affliction of mind of a whole
year, coupled with many inconveniences and bodily
dangers."

And now a few words as to the authenticity of
the "E pur si muove." In the formula of abjuration,
after having avowed that his " Dialogue " favors the
" false " doctrine of the movement of the earth
around the sun, and having admitted his violation of
the prohibition of 1616, Galileo " affirms and swears,
with his hand on the holy Gospels," that " with a
sincere heart and unfeigned faith he abjures, anathe-
matizes and detests the aforesaid errors and heresies,"
for which he has been justly condemned as " strongly
suspected of heresy." And he promises not only to
abstain hereafter from all heretical doctrine, but also

Q-alileo. 93

to denounce all heretics to the Inquisition or to the
ordinary of the locality. Motives of both personal
and general interest certainly decided an act of
apparent submission ; but in performing it Galileo
could not, without risk of destroying himself, have
given himself the questionable satisfaction of a
merely childish contradiction. Undoubtedly he
thought that the earth moved, and probably the
inquisitors knew that he so thought. But had he
made the famous remark, he would not have been
dismissed two days afterward.

If Galileo risked so much by the quoted ebullition
at so fatally decisive a moment, how comes it that
never after, either by speech or in writing, did he
expressly contradict his abjuration by openly pro-
fessing his system? Certainly, when writing in
confidence to some intimates, he would insist upon
his innocence from a religious point of view ; but in
all other instances his reticence was persistent.
Every opportunity and temptation to break this
imposed silence was presented when he wrote to
Diodati, then in Paris, on July 25, 1634, complain-
ing of the violence of his enemies toward himself
and his teachings, — a violence which he would
answer only by silence. Nor does he contradict his
abjuration in his letter written in 1637 to King
Ladislaus of Poland, whom he asks to compare his
u Dialogue " with the sentence pronounced against
its author, and to see if its doctrine is more perni-
cious than that of Luther and Calvin, as Urban

94 Galileo.

VIII. was said to believe. Nor, again, does he advo-
cate his system in his letter to Pieresc on February
21, 1636, in which he insists on the injustice of his
condemnation. When he writes to Rinuccini on
March 29, 1641, he evades a direct answer to an
attempt to obtain an avowal of his real mind.

II.

HAVING shown in the previous pages that the im-
prisonment of Galileo was merely nominal, and that
no torture was inflicted upon him, we must now
briefly examine the decisions of the Roman Con-
gregations in his case, with a view to their doctrinal
consequences. Protestant polemics gladly proclaim
these decisions as destructive of the Catholic doc-
trine of Infallibility. Certain Catholic writers have
enunciated views on the matter which can serve only
to confirm the opinion that the Church and science
are implacable foes. For instance, the Viscount de
Bonald, with that severity which is generally char-
acteristic of lay theologians, insists that the double
movement of the earth has never been and never can
be proved ; that even to-day he who defends the
Coperiiican system is " guilty of rashness " in con-
tradicting the natural sense of the Scriptures ; that
if the old system was an illusion, the Bible favors
said illusion.* This author would advise, therefore,

* " Galileo, the Holy Office, and the System of the World," in
the Correspondent of Dec. 25, 1854. See also this author's "Moses
and Modern Geologists," Avignon, 1835.

Galileo. 95

if he were logical, the Pope and the Roman In-
quisition to revoke the decree of toleration issued in
favor of the Galilean theory on September 17, 1822,
and would have them condemn the many scientific
ecclesiastics, like Secchi and Matignon, who " rashly
oppose the natural sense " of the Scriptures.*

Again, there are other Catholic critics whose
views, though far more moderate than those of De
Bonald, are almost equally untenable. Thus it is
quite common to hear that Galileo was always
allowed to teach his system "as an astronomical
supposition " ; whereas the official documents show
that our philosopher was prohibited, in 1616, to
uphold " said opinion in any way whatsoever " ;
and that in 1633 he was punished for having dis-
obeyed this injunction by publishing a work in
which there were no interpretations of sacred
texts. Among the critics of this class the most
eminent are the astronomer Lalande,f the Abbe
Berault-Bercastel,f Bergier, § and Feller, || — all of
whom copy the Protestant Mallet du Pan, whose
errors are carefully noted by Theodore Martin .^J

* In 1842 a certain Abbe Matalene published in Paris a book
entitled "Anti-Copernicus, a New Astronomy"; but his eccle-
siastical superiors sharply reminded him that he had no right to
compromise the clergy by such extravagancies.

t "Voyage in Italy," 1786. \ Eccl. Hist., 1778-85.

§ Diet. Theol. || Diet. Hist., art. " Galileo."

1 "Galileo and the Rights of Science," Paris, 1868. — Among
the errors of Mallet du Pan, which Martin with undue severity
stigmatizes as " lies," are to be noted his pretence that Bellarrnine
did not, in 1616, interdict any astronomical hypothesis; the as-
sertion that Galileo caused his apologetic letter to Christendom to

96 Galileo.

Other Catholic polemics, such as Alzog * and
Hoffler, f hold that the Copernican system, having
been advanced too soon, was dangerous to both
science and religion, and that this pretended fact
justifies the action of the Inquisition. But the
official records evince that the new system was con-
demned " as false and altogether contrary to Scrip-
ture," and not as a mere matter imprudently or
prematurely advanced. Nay, more : the sentence of
1633 expressly states that even though Galileo had
presented his system only as probably true, still he
would have offended; for, in the words of the de-
cree, " an opinion cannot be probable when it has
been declared and defined to be contrary to Sacred
Scripture."

M. Adolphe Valson J contends that the Coperni-
can proposition concerning the movement of the
earth was not condemned as " heretical," if taken by
itself ; and that in condemning the other Copernican
theory on the non-movement of the sun, the In-
quisition was right, since the sun has a movement of

be printed before his condemnation ; the declaration that no im-
primatur was really given for the publication of Galileo's " Dia-
logue." Pretending to give extracts from a certain dispatch of
Guicciardini, Mallet du Pan asserts that they show that Galileo
wished to force the Pontiff to make a religious dogma of his sys-
tem; whereas the reading of the dispatch causes one to almost
justify Martin when he says that Mallet "not only mistakes, but
is an impostor."

* Church Hist., Fr. transl., Paris, 1855, vol. iii, p. 249.

t Encyc. Diet. Theol. Cath., art. " Galileo."

J In the "Review of Christian Economy" for Dec., 1865, and
Jan. and Feb., 1866.

G-alileo. 97

its own. As to the first assertion, it is true that the
theory of the earth's movement was not condemned
as "heretical," but it was declared "false and alto-
gether contrary to Scripture." As to Valson's
second remark, there was no question of this special
movement of the sun ; this movement, toward the
constellation of Hercules, was utterly unknown at
that time ; but what the Inquisition forbade Galileo
to deny was the movement of the sun around the
earth.

Very different from the opinions of the above
critics is that of Tiraboschi,* who admits that vulgar
prejudices caused the prohibition of 1616, and the
condemnation of 1633, and declares that these de-
cisions were pronounced by a fallible tribunal, and
not by the Church. He shows that at first Galileo
found his discoveries favorably received in Rome,
but that the angry Peripatetics soon adopted the
Bible as a weapon against him. However, being
ignorant of the fact that the Preface to the con-
demned " Dialogue " had been written, not by Galileo,
but by the examiner Riccardi, Tiraboschi accuses
the scientist of bad faith. He declares that the
Congregations erred because of a too great devotion
to Peripateticism.

* " First Historical Memoir, on the First Advocates of the
Copernican System," read in the Modenese Academy del dls-
sonanti in 1792, inserted in the Venetian edition of the " Hist. Ital.
Litt.," 1796. "Second Memoir, on the condemnation of Galileo
and the Copernican System," read in 1793.

98 Galileo.

About the year 1825 Olivieri, General of the
Dominicans and commissary of the Holy Office,
wrote a dissertation on the affair of Galileo,* in
which he gave a very curious apology for the Con-
gregations. The teachings of Copernicus and Galileo,
said Olivieri, were not condemned because they did
not agree with the Bible, but because these two
scientists upheld them with bad arguments, which,
being contrary to sound philosophy, seemed there-
fore opposed to Scripture. If Galileo, continued
Olivieri, had known the gravity of the air, and had
not obstinately attributed the tides to a combination
of the diurnal and annual revolutions of the earth,
things would have gone differently ; for the Church
has ever encouraged any real progress — one which
is free from errors. Olivieri also contended that the
real cause of all the misfortunes of Galileo was his
having provoked the " vengeance " of Urban VIII. f

* Not edited until 1855, in the "Universite Catholique."
t In his "Dialogue on the Two Principal Mondial Systems,"
published in 1632 with the approbation of the Master of the Apos-
tolic Palace, Galileo assigns the exposition of his opinions to
his friend and pupil, Salviati of Florence, then some time dead.
Galileo himself is not named, but he is often indicated by the
title of Linceo. The part of an investigator, impartial and judi-
cious, is filled by the Venetian senator, Sagredo, another deceased
friend of the author. The defence of the Peripatetic system is
confided to one Simplicius, who uses absurd arguments and will
yield to none; who is, in fine, a fair representative of many of
Galileo's opponents. Whether or not Urban VIII. credited the
assertion of Galileo's enemies, that under the guise of Simplicius
he himself was held up to ridicule, it is certain that now he mani-
fested less sympathy for the philosopher. Just previous to this
period the Pontiff had declared to the Benedictine Castelli that if

G-alileo. 99

A decisive refutation of all these assertions has
been given by Govi.*

From the beginning of the affair of Galileo, re-
marks Theodore Martin, five courses were open to
the ecclesiastical authorities. The philosopher and
his friends would have been satisfied if, firstly, it
were acknowledged that the new system was not
contrary to Catholic faith ; secondly, if liberty of
discussion were allowed in its regard ; and, thirdly,
if both the Copernicians and Peripatetics were
forbidden to adduce Biblical texts in their debates.
Certainly ecclesiastical tradition as well as prudence,
both ever favorable to toleration in such matters,
would seem to have counselled one of these three
courses. Cardinal Matthew Barberini, afterward
Pope Urban VIII., Cardinal Bellarmine, and other
moderate Peripatetics, preferred a fourth course, —
namely, to leave liberty only to the Peripatetics,
and, while not deciding against the new system,
to interdict it as rash and dangerous under the
circumstances. In 1632 Urban VIII. adopted a fifth
course, — namely, to procure the condemnation of

it had depended on him, the decree of 1616 would not have been
issued. On March 16, 1630, Castelli wrote to Galileo that in an
interview with the celebrated Campanella, "his Holiness used
these very words : ' We never desired that decree ; and had it de-
pended on us it would not have been issued.' " This letter is
found in Alberi's edition of the " Works of Galileo," vol. ix, p. 196.

* " The Holy Office, Copernicus, and Galileo, considered in
reference to a posthumous dissertation of Father Olivieri," Turin,
1872.

100 Galileo.

the Copernican system as false in philosophy, errone-
ous in theology, and contrary to Sacred Scripture.

Now arises the question : By whom was the doc-
trine of the movement of the earth thus condemned?
Certainly, it was through the influence of Paul V.
and of Urban VIII., respectively, that the decisions
of 1616 and 1633 were rendered ; but neither their
authority as Pontiffs nor that of the Church was
implicated. As men these Popes were opposed to
the system of Galileo, bu^ as Popes their names are
not signed in the famous decisions. Both are pub-
lished only in the name of the Congregations. This
absence of the Pontifical ratification is remarked
by Descartes in three letters to Mersenne, and by
Gassendi.* The Jesuit Riccioli f invokes against
the teachings of Galileo the authority of " the Con-
gregations delegated by the Pope," but he does not
contend that the Pope can delegate his infallibility.
The absence of the Pontifical ratification in the
decisions against Galileo is noted by the Benedic-
tine Caramuel,^ who, after declaring that the new
system is absurd, asks himself what the Church
would do if, " which is impossible," the movement
of the earth were ever demonstrated. He replies
that the Church would declare that " the Roman

* "Impressed Motion," Lyons, 1658, vol. iii, epist. 2.

f " Almagestum Novum," Bologna, 1651, vol. i, pt. 2, p. 489.

J " Fundamental TkeologjV Lyons, 1676. The passages are
cited "by Bouix, in his " Condemnation of Galileo," Arras, 1866,
p. 25-29.

Galileo. 101

Congregations, having decided without the Papal
ratification, were mistaken."

In fine, let it be remembered that neither in 1616
nor in 1633 did the supreme authority of the Church
pronounce a decision concerning the Copernican
system. Muratori, writing in Italy a century before
the works of Galileo were removed from the Index,
says that the Copernican system was condemned
" not by an edict of the Supreme Pontiff, but by
the Congregation of the Holy Office. . . . To-day
this system is everywhere in vogue, and Catholics
are not forbidden to hold it." * Tiraboschi specially
insists on our admiring the "Providence of God in
favor of His Church ; since, at a time when the
majority of theologians firmly believed that the
Copernican system was contrary to the Sacred Scrip-
tures, the Church was not permitted to give a solemn
decision on the matter."f No Catholic will assert
that the Roman Inquisition has never committed
any errors ; and in the case of Galileo it was the
Inquisition that erred, and not the Pontiff; and
even though the Pontiff had erred, the decision was
not one concerning faith or morals, — one, that is,
which can form the object matter of Infallibility.

" Whenever," says Cantu, " there is opened a new
scientific, or philosophical horizon, even the most
elevated intellects are stricken with fright, as when
America was discovered, and when steam and elec-

.* " Annals of Italy," at year 1633. f " Memoir II.," loc. cit.

102 Galileo.

tricity were first applied. What wonder if contra-
diction befell the Copernicaii system, which appeared
to subvert the order not only of the physical but of
the moral world ; which seemed to threaten faith
and morals, just as it changed the reciprocal position
of the heavenly bodies ? What wonder if it seemed
impious and scandalous to subject man and his
habitation to the same laws which regulate the other
phenomena of nature ? Was it not for this reason
that, quite recently, Hegel denied the movement of
the earth ? When the Reformation had spread, and
men were substituting their individual for the canon-
ical interpretation of the Scriptures, churchmen were
frightened on seeing certain verses interpreted in a
new manner, and they went so far as to condemn
Galileo. Nor should we forget that until Faucolt
furnished it, in our own days, there was no physical
proof of the movement of the earth. Faucolt gave
it in the progressive deviation of the oscillating
plane of a pendulum suspended from a fixed point.
But no serious person will repeat the absurdities of
Libri,* of Arduini,f and of similar writers, confuted
by Biot,J Alberi, Martin, and by common-sense."

He who would understand the great catastrophe
in the life of Galileo must consult the writings of the

* LOG. cit.

t " The First Born of Galileo," Florence, 1864.

J In Micliaud's " Universal Biography," and in two disser-
tations in the Journal des Savants for March, July and October,
1858.

Galileo. 103

scientist, and the invaluable documents published
by Alberi in his great edition of the " Works." * It
is not true, as Libri and, after him, many Protestants
insist, that the officers of the Inquisition destroyed
or secreted nearly all the papers of Galileo. All
his principal works remain, and nearly all the minor
ones. A few of his MSS. were destroyed by one of
his grandsons, who felt some scruples about pre-
serving any writings of one condemned by the Holy
Office. Most of the important works and of the
correspondence were collected by Galileo's disciple,
Viviani, who bequeathed them to a nephew, Pan-
zanini ; the heirs of this nephew sold some of them
as waste-paper, but nearly all were recovered by
Giambattista Nelli, whose son Clement used them
and part of Viyiani's collection in his " Life of
Galileo," published in 1793. When publishing his
edition of the " Works," Alberi promised to give to
the world a Life based upon documents in his hands,
but he failed to do so. However, this Life would
not have been complete, as there were many docu-
ments which he could not procure. Thanks to
Father Theiner, Prefect of the Vatican Archives,
who communicated these papers to M. Henri de
1'Epinois, the world received, in 1867, much light
on the affairs of the great scientist, in the valuable
work of L'Epinois.f

* In sixteen large volumes, Florence, 1842-56.
t "Galileo: His Process and Condemnation, According to
Unedited Documents."

THE GREY CARDINAL.

As has been the case with nearly all great men,
Cardinal Richelieu had his alter ego, to whom he
perhaps owed much of his success and celebrity, and
to whom he was certainly indebted for aid in bearing
burdens such as probably have fallen to the lot of no
other Minister of State. During the greater part of
his official career, wherever was discerned the sheen
of the great Minister's cardinalitial red, not far off,
although generally in the background, was the ashen-
hued tunic of Friar Joseph. " I have lost my con-
solation and my support," moaned Richelieu when
death laid his hand on the Capuchin.

Few historians have given much time to Friar
Joseph. His constant devotion to the great Minis-
ter, his invariable connection with every political
act of that prelate, gave him the designation of
the Grey Cardinal — " son ^Eminence grise" — and
he was the red cardinal's familiar demon. This is
about all which is told us by Bazin * and by Henri
Martin,f who have dwelt more on this subject than
other writers. The impressive play of Bulwer is the
source of the ideas that most people have concerning
both Richelieu and his Capuchin secretary, and these
ideas are as just as would be an estimate of Joan of

* " Histoire de France sous Louis XIII," vol. iv, p. 115.
t " Histoire de France," 4me edit., vol. xi, p. 491.
104

The Grey Cardinal. 105

Arc derived from the absurd play of Schiller or the
obscene poem of Voltaire. According to Bulwer,
the friar-secretary was a man of low cunning — a
sneak, but at the same time ambitious, and he was
as ready to betray the secrets of the confessional as
his master was to use them.

In a future article we shall have occasion to speak
of the morality of Richelieu, but at present we would
ask the reader's attention to a brief sketch of the
career of the humble Capuchin, who may well be
numbered among the many celebrated statesmen
that have been found in the cloister. Although less
famous, because the subject of less attention, than
the two Abbots Suger, than St. John Capistrano,
than the Franciscans Calatagirone and Ximenes, his
career must be interesting, if only because of its
connection with that of the great Richelieu.

Francois le Clerc du Tremblay was born of noble
parents in 1577. From his sixteenth year he desired
to become a religious, but to please his family he
entered the army, and at the siege of Amiens was
noticed for his bravery by the Constable de Mont-
morency. When his relative, M. de Mesle de
Berzeau, was sent as extraordinary ambassador to
Elizabeth of England, the young Francois accom-
panied him, and the woes of the English Catholics
and the many devastations of heresy so excited the
zeal of the apostolate in his heart, that on his return
to France in 1599 he joined the Capuchin branch of
the Franciscan Order. He soon acquired fame as

106 The G-rey Cardinal.

a preacher and controversialist, and it was while
engaged in a mission at Poitou, in 1619 that he
formed his first relations with Armand du Plessis de
Richelieu, then Bishop of Lugon.

Friar Joseph (for such was the name adopted by
Du Tremblay in religion) soon became cognizant of
the sublime genius and extraordinary administrative
talent of the provincial prelate, and he drew the
attention of the Queen, Marie de Medici, to his dis-
covery. This was the starting point of Richelieu's
glorious career. But Friar Joseph had been known
as a zealous churchman and as an accomplished
diplomatist several years before he became connected
with Richelieu. In 1615 Rome had appreciated his
apostolic spirit, when, bearing letters of approba-
tion from Louis XIII., he laid before the Holy See
three grand projects — viz., the establishment of
permanent missions to combat heresy in France ; a
new crusade against the Crescent ; and the founda-
tion of the Daughters of Calvary, a society destined
to perpetual meditation on the woes of Mary at the
feet of her crucified Son.*

Joseph's first diplomatic achievement was the effect-
ing of the Treaty of Lou dun, in 1615, between the
court and the faction of the Prince de Conde*, with-
out that schismatic clause which the Third Estate —

* The Holy See accorded Friar Joseph full powers for the
establishment of missions in France. As for the crusade, the
Pontiff gave him briefs ad Jwc for the Kings of France and Spain,
and undertook to influence the Emperor, the Italian princes, and
the King of Poland, in the scheme. The crusade was a failure,

The Grey Cardinal. 107

then composed chiefly of heretics and bad Catholics
— wished to insert : i. e., that the King, being sover-
eign in his realm, could recognize in it no superior,
spiritual or temporal.* To compass the withdrawal
of this clause, the royal Minister Villeroi sought
the aid of our friar, then making his provincial
visitation to the houses of his Order in Poitou.
The Nuncio Ubadani also added his entreaties,
and Joseph, who had long ago gained the esteem of
Conde*, began a series of negotiations which finally
succeeded ; and thus was obviated a danger which
threatened France with the same horrors as those
experienced by England at the hands of Henry VIII.
That this blessing was due to the exertions of the
Capuchin Provincial, was openly acknowledged by
Villeroi, who entering Tours after the signature of
the treaty, cried out to the applauding citizens :
" Thank not me, but Friar Joseph ! "

Marie de Medici did not forget the warm recom-
mendation of the Bishop of Lugon proffered by the
humble Capuchin. It was through her influence
that Richelieu was raised to the cardinalate in 1622,
and two years afterward was made Prime Minister
of France. One of his first acts was to send the
following letter to Friar Joseph :

but the missions and the foundation of the Daughters of Calvary
succeeded. The name of one of the Boulevards of Paris perpetu-
ates to this day the memory of this pious foundation.

* Against this proposition Cardinal du Perron delivered one of
his most powerful discourses.

108 The G-rey Cardinal.

As you have been the chief agent used by God in according me
my present honors, I feel it a duty to inform you, before all others,
that the King has hearkened to the Queen's prayer to appoint me
his Prime Minister. I also beg you to make all possible haste
to come and share with me the management of affairs, some of
which are of such a nature that I can confide them to no other
person. Come, then, at once to receive the proof of the esteem
in which you are held by the CARDINAL DE RICHELIEU.

Joseph obeyed the summons, but as he never,
amid all his occupations, forgot his duty to his
Order, he prepared to journey to Rome to attend the
approaching General Chapter of the Franciscans.
The Cardinal Minister made no objections, but
availed himself of the opportunity to entrust his
secretary with the settlement of many difficulties
then troubling his Italian policy, notably the ques-
tion of the Yalteline — a knotty dispute between
the Grisons and Valtelins, principally owing to
religious differences. In this controversy were
involved the King of France and the House of
Austria-Spain, the Duke of Savoy and the Holy
See. So well did Joseph acquit himself of his
difficult task that he merited the encomiums of all
the disputants, and strengthened his influence for
evermore with Richelieu.

We can not, of course, follow the details of Friar
Joseph's political career, but we must not omit to
notice one of his most brilliant strokes of statesman-
ship — the reduction of La Rochelle. This bulwark
of Calvinism in France, this centre of rebellion and
constant menace against the integrity of French
nationality, had defied the crown for two hundred

The G-rey Cardinal. 109

years. From the day of its revolt against Louis XI.
in favor of his brother, the Duke of Guyenne, down
to the capture of Amiens by Henry IV., devotion
to France had been an unknown quantity to the
Rochellois ; and as soon as the latter event ceased
to impress their minds, they made war on Louis
XIII. Many good patriots deemed the reduction
of La Rochelle impossible ; many also thought that
Louis would do better by aiding Mantua and Mont-
ferrat against Spain than by warring against his
own subjects, rebels though they were. But Friar
Joseph realized, and he forced the King, Richelieu,
and the great Cardinal de Be*rulle to realize, that La
Rochelle was a hot-bed of discord for France ; that it
was a port of entry for hostile foreigners, especially
for the English, whose Queen had been convinced by
Blancard, the Rochellois deputy, that it was better
for her to lose Ireland than to permit the surrender
of La Rochelle to King Louis ; that Huguenot re-
bellion and Protestant arrogance would continue to
torment France so long as the formidable rock re-
mained the arsenal of treason.

The celebrated siege of La Rochelle was under-
taken, and Friar Joseph — present to the end — was
its moving spirit : advising with the engineers whom
he had employed to construct the famous dike ;
animating the spirits of the soldiers, and working
as indefatigably as did Angouleme or Bassompierre.
Of course Richelieu was also on the spot, and had
been entrusted by Louis XIII. with absolute com-

110 The G-rey Cardinal.

mand ; but so great was the part of the Capuchin
secretary in the siege, that after it had been brought
to a successful issue, the King publicly avowed that,
like Abraham, the friar had hoped against hope,
that God had rewarded his faith, and that history
would accord to him an equal share with the Cardi-
nal de Berulle of the glory attending the enterprise.

Friar Joseph has been called ambitious, and yet
he constantly refused many dignities offered him.
The See of Albi was tendered him in vain, as well
as the projected diocese of La Rochelle. Certainly
King Louis XIII. again and again named him to
the Holy See (firstly in 1635) for a cardinal's
hat,* but we know not whether, if accorded him,
he would have accepted the honor voluntarily ; he
always protested to Richelieu that the habit of St.
Francis was the dearest thing to him on earth. In
view of the prevalent idea that the friar-secretary
was an unscrupulous intriguer and an associate of
roysterers, it is curious to note that, according to
the records of the time, he was as faithful to his
monastic duties as any friar in the cloister.

We take from Barthe'lemy -\ a summary of our
friar's daily life at court. He arose at four, prayed
for an hour, and then recited the Office as far as
Sext with his constant companion, Father Ange.
Then he labored at his multifarious correspondence

* " Memorie Recondite dalP Anno 1601 fino al 1610," in the
Negociations du Mare'chal d'Estrees et Siri," Paris, 1677.
I " Mensonges et Erreurs Historiques," 6me edit., Paris, 1880.

The Grey Cardinal. Ill

with the French agents at foreign courts, generally
conducted in cipher ; and this work must have been
immense, for he received a duplicate of every dis-
patch sent to the King. At nine he gave audience
to ambassadors and to the secretaries of state, con-
ducting them, when necessary, to Richelieu. Only
at midday did he celebrate Mass, the Cardinal gen-
erally assisting. After breakfast — which, like all
his meals, was taken with Father Ange, and during
which some pious book was always read, — audiences
occupied him until four, when he finished the Office
and made a meditation. From five until eight he
shut himself in lu's library. At eight he supped or
dined, and the rest of the day was spent in the
cabinet of Richelieu ; and probably these final hours
were the most laborious of all.

Friar Joseph was sixty-one years of age when, a
stroke of apoplexy warning him to prepare for death,
he retired to a house of his Order in the Rue Saint-
Honor^, despite the solicitations of Richelieu. But
the Cardinal availed himself of an important busi-
ness conference with the Cardinal de Bichi to insist
on Joseph's return. The friar acquiesced, attended
the conference, but was seized the same day by a
second stroke, and died three days afterward, De-
cember 18, 1638. He was buried with all the
honors due to a cardinal, and was followed to the
tomb by the Parliament and all that was noble in
Paris. Richelieu composed the following epitaph,
which was engraved on the tomb :

112 The Grey Cardinal.

" In everlasting memory of the Rev. Father
Joseph le Clerc, Capuchin. — Here lies one whose
virtues will never be forgotten ; one who, in order
to bear the yoke of the Lord, abandoned in his youth
parents, titles, and wealth, and lived very poor in a
very poor Order. Made Provincial in that Order,
he benefited the Church by his writings and his
discourses. He filled many public offices, to which
he was providentially called by the Most Christian
King Louis, in a holy and a prudent manner ; care-
fully serving God, his prince, and his country, with
seraphic devotion and wonderful tranquillity of
spirit. He observed, to the last day of his life,
the entire rule to which he had dedicated himself ;
although, for the good of the Church, he had been
dispensed from it by three successive Pontiffs. By
his missions and his advice he resisted heresy in
France and in England, and he sustained the courage
of the Christians in the East. Amid the wealth
and the allurements of the court he led a life of
poverty and austerity, and before his death had been
named to the cardinalate."

"I AM THE STATE!" — DID LOUIS XIV.
EVER SAY SO?

" THE Guard dies, it never surrenders ! " Many
of us, in the days of our youth, have cherished this
saying; and when cold investigation proved that
Cambronne gave a much less theatrical, although
more military, reply to the English summons, we
felt something like real grief on our disenchant-
ment. And such has been the fate of many other
wordy sparks which served to shed a deceitful light
on our boyish conceptions of history. Now that we
are more ready to doubt, now that we realize that the
reality generally differs from the ideal, we hesitate to
accept as authentic many of the verbal scintillations
which some would-be historians ascribe to their
heroes. Of course, the world's great ones must
necessarily let fall some observations which are
really indicative of their role on the stage of life ;
but, alas ! too many of their imputed sayings have
no foundation better than the imagination of a
biographer ; or, at best, no better than that furnished
by the theories of partisans, who have fancied that,
in similar circumstances, they themselves would have
so spoken.

Take, for instance, the "ItfkcA — Jest moi"
ascribed to Louis XIV. So firmly are most moderns

113

114 "J am the State"

convinced that the great monarch was guilty of this
arrogance, that they adduce it as a verbal picture of
his entire reign ; and if perchance any one doubts
that the very words were uttered, they are at least
accepted, in accordance with the Italian proverb, as
"if not true, certainly well invented." But did
Louis XIV. ever use this phrase? ' Did the self-
contained, dignified, and gentlemanly sovereign of
then polite France descend so low as to use such
language, and in circumstances and with adjuncts
befitting a guard-room, perhaps, but assuredly not
appropriate in the presence of a parliament? Vol-
taire tells us that in 1655 the seventeen-year-old
King rushed into the parliament chamber, " in top-
boots, and whip in hand," and ordered the president
to put an end to such assemblages.* But Voltaire
gives no authority for this assertion, and, as has
been well observed, his own age renders it improba-
ble that he had heard of the event from an eye-
witness.f If he did, it is strange that not one
contemporary author mentions the supposed fact.
The younger Lacretelle, writing in 1820 in the
"Biographic Michaud" (vol. xxv), repeats the
story of Voltaire, and so does Sismondi in his
"History of the French" (vol. xxiv).

Henri Martin carefully notes the King's whip and
top-boots ; but it is strange that so grave an author

* " Sifccle de Louis XIV.," chap. 25.

f Bartlielemy : " Erreurs et Mensonges Historiques," vol. ii;
Paris, 1886, 5th edit.

"7 am the State" 115

should confound the "bed of justice" —a solemn
session of Parliament, during which the King sat on
a pile of cushions — with a piece of bedroom furni-
ture, and that he should find fault with the royal
uncouthness in going to bed with boots and spurs
unremoved.* Then Martin informs us that Louis
prohibited all self-initiated meetings of Parliament,
in "four words''; that is, this author insinuates
that the monarch cried, " I am the State," when the
president pleaded that the good of the country
might require such meetings. Lavale'e f and Bonne-
chose $ also harp on the boots, spurs, and whip of
the young King, "who could well say, <- IS JUtat —
c'est moi ' " ; that is, according to these writers, if he
did not use these very words, he might well have
done so ; " for they were the sincere expression of a
belief, and even the simple expression of a fact."

Dareste observes (" Histoire de France," vol. v, p.
353), that the first writer to mention the whip in
the hand of Louis on this occasion was the Abb£
Choisy, who wrote about the "year 1700; but who,
admits Dareste (who believes in the boots and
spurs), was by no means a reliable authority. But
Barthelemy says that he read and re-read the
" Memoirs " of the Abbe*, published in the " Collec-
tion Petitot" (series ii, vol. Ixiii), without finding
any mention of the whip. As for the top-boots

* "Histoire de France," vol. xii, p. 467; Paris, 1858, 4th edit.
| " Histoire des Fran9ais," vol. iii, p. 197; Paris, 1847.
t In the " Biographic Didot," article " Louis XIV."

116 "7 am the State."

which displease so many, and which Voltaire puts
on the King during his supposed outburst against
the Parliament in April, 1655, one of the most
impartial writers of modern France, A. Cheruel,
draws our attention to the fact that the King was
hunting when he suddenly resolved on facing his
Parliament; and that, at any rate, if he had not
gone in his carriage, he would necessarily have been
in top-boots, for these were then the habitual foot
gear of three-fourths of the population. And, after
reminding us that Paris still deserved its ancient
name, Lutetice, this author cites the commissary La
Mare, who says that " those of us who saw the com-
mencement of the reign of his Majesty Louis XIV.,
remember how the streets of Paris were so muddy
that it was necessary to wear top-boots." *

Now, there is no good foundation for this story
of whip, boots, and spurs ; nor is there any at all
for its adorning phrase, " I am the State." The
Duke de Noailles, who was the first to draw atten-
tion to this matter,f says : " Louis XIV., resolute in
abolishing the political pretensions advanced by the
Parliament after the Fronde, and in restricting that
body to its judiciary functions, may have shown
some passion in the execution of his task, but he

* "Traite de la Police." Cheruel: " Histoire de PAdministra-
tion Monarchique en France depiiis PAvenement de Phillippe
Auguste jnsqu' a la Mort de Louis XIV," vol. ii, p. 32; Paris, 1855.

t "Histoire de Mine, de Maintenon," vol. iii, p. 667; Paris,
184.8-58.

"I am the State." 117

never acted in the cavalier fashion attributed to
him — a fashion so little consistent with his ideas of
the royal dignity, and with his respect for the great
bodies of the State. He executed his design, firstly,
in the session of December 22, 1665, with all the
solemnity of a 'bed of justice'; and, secondly, without
that solemnity, in the session of April 20, 1667. . . .
These were the only sessions at which Louis XIV.
assisted, and the 4 Journal ' of Olivier d'Ormesson,
which enters into minute details of them, makes no
mention of the arrogant speech which has been so
much censured." And it is to be noted that the
"Journal" cited by De Noailles is most favorable
to the parliamentary cause, and therefore it would
not have omitted to record any arrogance on the
part of the monarch.

Nothing can be more absurd than the supposition
fostered by our modern doctrinaires,, and almost
universally accepted, that all France was submis-
sive to the nod of Louis XIV. " When we see the
royal power so extensive and -so effective," says De
Tocqueville, " we might be led to believe that all
independence of spirit had disappeared with public
liberty, and that the French had become used to
subjection ; if so, we would be greatly mistaken, for
the old regime was not one of servility. Amid many
institutions already prepared for absolute power,
liberty survived." * Louis XIV. well knew, re-

* " Ancien Regime et la Revolution," chap. xi. ; Paris, 1856.

118 "J am the State."

marks De Carne,* "how to direct reform without
unchaining- revolution ; and he was always influ-
enced by the truly liberal ideas which had slowly
but surely made their way from the time of St.
Louis to that of Richelieu."

No ruler has ever been so much and perhaps so
extravagantly praised by the literary men of his day
as Louis XIV. ; but, to use the words of De Noailles,
the universal hymn was sincere, and it contained
many daring expressions which excluded all ser-
vility. The duties of a sovereign have seldom been
more clearly enunciated than they were by Kacine,
in his great play of "Athalie" (act 4, scene 3),
which was first presented, before the grand mon-
arch's whole court, in 1691 ; that is, at a period
when he was in the very zenith of his glory, and
therefore, as is presumed, at the culmination of his
arrogance. The same may be said of the address
of Boileau to the King, in 1669, one year after the
taking of Aix-la-Chapelle ; and of many sentiments
in the "Characters " of La Bruy£re. Let the reader
examine these passages, and then decide whether
it is at all probable that the monarch who per-
mitted, nay gladly acclaimed, such sentiments, would
have exclaimed : "UHltat — c'est moi."

While Louis XIV. was yet a boy, Cardinal Maz-
arin said of him that " he had in him the material

* " L'Ecole Administrative de Louis XIV.," in the Revue des
Deux Mondes, July, 1857.

"J am the State" 119

for four kings and an honest man "; * and if we
read the " Memoirs " which the King prepared for
the guidance of his heir, we shall not only find
much truth in the saying of the Cardinal-Minister,
but we will agree with the not too partial Sismondi
when he says that " these ' Memoirs ' give an exalted
idea of the extent and accuracy of the King's views,
and show us how hard he labored to perform his
duty as a ruler, and also how profound was the
moral sentiment which animated him. " f In these
" Memoirs," remarks Barthelenry, Louis shows us
the sense in which he would have used the famous
phrase, if it ever could have been uttered by him.
He would simply have meant to express the idea of
a community of interest subsisting between king and
country : " My son, we must think much more of
the welfare of our subjects than of our own. It
would seem that they are a part of ourselves, for
they are the members of a body of which we are
the head. It is only for their advantage that we
should make laws for them, and our power over
them should be exercised solely for their well being.
. . . The position of a king is great, noble, and
flattering, when the king feels that he can fulfil all
the engagements into which he has entered. . . .
When the king has the State before his mind, he
labors for himself : the welfare of one is the glory

* Saint-Simon: " Me'moires," vol. xxiv, p. 84, edit. 1840. See
Letters of Guy Patin," vol. ii, cited by Barthelemy, loc. cit.
t Loc. cit., p. 3.

120 "J am the State."

of the other. When the State is prosperous and
powerful, he who is the cause of all this is glorious,
and he consequently enjoys, even more than his
subjects, the agreeable side of life."

And Henri Martin admits that in these "Mem-
oirs", "Louis reveals himself entirely, as he was
during the first and best part of his reign. He
shows great good sense, an honesty which fails only
in some thorny paths of diplomacy, very religious
sentiments, and ideas as clear as his views are firm.
We realize that the man was truly born for empire
who could write such words concerning the severe
enjoyments of labor and of duty, and on the noble
pleasure of governing. He seemed to thoroughly
understand the obligations of the head of the
State, and that the national unity was personi-
fied in himself. He feared flatterers, and tried to
avoid them. The pride which sometimes manifests
itself in his grave and haughty language may be
accounted for by the testimony of his satisfied
conscience." *

* «' I have almost had to wait — J 'aifailli attendre ", is another
phrase which is often ascribed to the exquisitely polite Louis XIV.
Such a petitesse would not have escaped the notice of the crotchety
Duke de Saint-Simon, but he tells us, on the contrary, in his
"Memoires," vol. xii, that "the king never allowed an uncom-
plaisant word to escape him, and if he had to reprimand or correct,
which rarely happened, he always did so with more or less of
kindness, never with anger, and seldom with asperity".

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE INQUISITION.

I.

SINCE the Church is the sole depositary and inter-
preter" of revealed divine truth on earth, ought she
not use every legitimate means to prevent the propa-
gation of error? This is the most available argu-
ment wherewith to defend the Inquisition ; and its
force can be diminished only by insisting on the
illegitimacy of the tribunal, and of its methods, as
means to preserve the integrity of the Christian
body. In the Middle Age every person who impeded
the progress of religion, or who placed an obstacle
in his neighbor's path to heaven, was regarded as an
enemy to society. The civil law was supposed to
protect the faith as much as, if not more than, life
or property. The use of force to prevent a heretic
from sowing the seeds of religious dissension in a
united community, seemed to be no less legitimate
than resistance to a foreign invader or a domestic
highwayman. Nor did this idea first manifest itself
in the so-called Dark Ages : from the day when
Constantine gave liberty to the Church, we hear the
Fathers insisting that repression of error is a proper
defence against persecution and seduction. This
repression was not always exercised in the same
manner: it varied according to the exigencies of

131

122 The Truth About the Inquisition.

the public weal. We find instances of "conten-
tious " and coercive jurisdiction enforced by the
ecclesiastical authorities in the very first days of
Christianity. The lying Ananias and Saphira fall
dead at the imperious voice of St. Peter ; an inces-
tuous man is consigned to the vexations of the
demon ; St. Polycarp styles Marcion, who seeks Ms
friendship, the first-born of Satan ; * and St. Ignatius
commends the zeal of those Corinthians who so
detested heresy that they would not allow its pro-
fessors to pass through their territories. f In the
Code of Justinian we read many decrees of the early
Christian emperors in defence of the integrity of
the faith ; Constantine issued two, Yalentinian I.
one, Gratian two, Theodosius I. fifteen, Yalentinian
II. three. Constantine pursued the Donatists with
fines and confiscations, J and burned the books of
the Arians. Theodosius banished heretics, § and
Honorius ordered the scourging and imprisonment
of Jovinian and his followers, after their condemna-
tion by Pope Siricius.|| St. Augustine speaks of
having received from the deacon Quod Vult Deus
a copy of the proceedings of an inquisition held at
Carthage against certain Manicheans ; ^[ and he him-
self proceeded against the subdeacon Victorinus, a
Manichean, and after a formal trial degraded' him

* Irenaeus, b. iii, c. 3. f Epist. to Ephes.

J Optatus of Milevi, b. iii.

§ Baronio, y. 383, no. 34, || Idem, j. 390, no. 47.

t "Heresies," to Quod Vult Deus, c. 46.

The Truth About the Inquisition. 123

and procured his banishment from Hippo.* St.
Epiphanius gives an account of the process in-
stituted by the Patriarch of Alexandria against
Arius, which is interesting because of the close
resemblance of its forms to those used by the modern
Inquisition.f The same Saint tells us that he
endeavored to discover Gnostics, and that hence
"fifty were exiled, leaving the city free from their
thorns." J In fact, there occur, during the first cen-
turies of Christianity, so many instances of inquisi-
torial action against heretics, that the Franciscan
De Castro, writing at the time of the Reformation,
could well say that the system " was not introduced
only three hundred years ago, as Luther asserts : it
originated a thousand years ago, and we may infer
that it came down from apostolic times." §

The Inquisition never attempted to force a pro-
fession of Christianity on infidels or Jews ; in order
that heresy should be punishable, it was necessary
that a sufficiently instructed Christian should per-
severe in error, and manifest in action his opposition
to the authority of the Church. St. Thomas of
Aquin, asking whether infidels can be compelled to
accept the faith, replies that " they are in no way to
be forced to believe, for belief is from the will " ; ||
and he contends that the worship of heretics is to

* Epist. 236 alias 74. f " Heresies," 69.

J Ibi., 26, no. 17.

§ " Just Punishment of Heretics," Paris, 1565.

|| Summa Theol., q. 10, art. 8.

124 The Truth 'About the Inquisition.

be tolerated, just as God tolerates certain evils, that
man may not lose his liberty. Suarez gives as the
common teaching of theologians the doctrine that
" infidels who are not apostates ought not to be com-
pelled to embrace the faith, even though they have
acquired a sufficient knowledge of it." The Council
of Trent declares that " the Church judges no one
who has not entered her fold by Baptism." *

In the early ages of the Church the penalty of
death was seldom inflicted upon heretics. The
Emperor Maximus was the first Christian prince
to adopt this questionable method of preserving
religious unity. In 385 he put to death Priscillian,
Bishop of Avila, two priests, two deacons, the
poet Latronianus, and Eucrosia, a matron; and it
is to be noted that the bishops who took part
in this condemnation were reproved by their col-
leagues. Again, when the tribune Marcellinus was
about to condemn certain Donatists who had shed
Catholic blood, St. Augustine interceded for them ;
and when Honorius published a bloody law against
Donatists and Jews, the same Saint wrote to the
proconsul that if any death sentences were executed
no ecclesiastic would ever again denounce heretics. f
However, this holy Doctor afterward approved of
the imperial rigor, J and in his " Retractations " he
wrote : '* I composed two books against the Dona-
tists, in which I said that I did not like to see

* Sess. 4, c. 2. f Epist. 100. J Epist. 93.

The Truth About the Inquisition. 125

secular force used to compel schismatics to com-
munion ; for I had not yet discovered how impunity
adds to the audacity of evil, and how quickness of
punishment helps to ameliorate." * And elsewhere :
" See what they do, and what they suffer. They
kill souls, and suffer in their bodies ; they produce
eternal death, and complain of a temporal one. . . .
If thou hast suffered affliction from the Catholic
Church, oh, faction of Donatus ! thou hast suffered
like Hagar from Sarah. Return to thy mistress ! " f

The first modern law decreeing death as penalty
for heresy was promulgated by the Emperor Fred-
erick II., who, strange to say, was himself strongly
suspected of infidelity, and is lauded by our con-
temporary liberals as a model for anti-clericals. In
1220, at the time of his coronation, this monarch
declared that he " would use the sword received by
him from God against the enemies of the faith " ;
and he ordered that all heretics in Lombardy should
be burned, or deprived of their tongues. In 1231,
publishing his " Constitutions for the Kingdom of
Sicily," the same Frederick placed heres}r " among
other public crimes," and ranked it as more grievous
than high-treason.

It has been asserted that Pope Innocent III.
founded the Inquisition ; that he received the idea
from St. Dominic, and that this holy man was the
first inquisitor. Innocent III. certainly appointed

* B. ii, c. 5. f Tract on John, no. 15.

126 The Truth About the Inquisition.

Rainer and Guy as inquisitors of the faith during
the Albigensian troubles; but the Inquisition does
not appear as a recognized tribunal before the pon-
tificate of Gregory IX., and in the year 1229. As
for St. Dominic, he died in 1221, and the Preaching
Friars were not entrusted with the Inquisition until
1233. Again, Theodoric of Apolda tells us that the
Saint opposed the Albigensians with " words, exam-
ple, and miracles " ; and, finally, these heretics then
needed no Inquisition ; they were not occult, but de-
claimed their errors in public. The origin of the
Inquisition is found in the synod held at Toulouse
in 1229, under the presidency of the Cardinal Ro-
mano di Sant' Angelo, who had accompanied the
reconciled Count Raymond VII. to his restored
capital, in order to see that he fulfilled his promises.
The Cardinal ordained that the bishops should ap-
point, in each parish, a priest and two or three
laymen of good standing, who would swear to
" inquire for " heretics, and to make them known
to the magistrates; the harborers of heretics were
to be punished, and the houses in which they were
voluntarily received were to be destroyed. The in-
stitution of this tribunal was certainly an improve-
ment on the previous system ; for thenceforth an
inquiry was conducted by ecclesiastics, more learned
and less harsh than the civil authorities. The in-
quisitors admonished twice before they proceeded
to arrests. Whoever abjured was pardoned; fre-
quently moral punishment only was inflicted, whereas

The Truth About the Inquisition. 127

the secular tribunals would inevitably have imposed
corporal chastisement. At the- instance of St. Ray-
mond of Pennafort, Pope Gregory IX. deprived the
bishops of the right of inquisition, and conferred it
on the friars, whose power was felt not only by every
layman, but by all the clergy. When the inquisitor
arrived in a town, he convoked the magistrates and
caused them to swear to execute the decrees against
heresy ; in case of refusal, suspension from office was
the lot of the recalcitrant ; and if the people inter-
fered, an interdict was launched against the place.
The denunciations could not be anonymous, and a
period was accorded to the accused within which
to present himself at the tribunal ; if he did not,
he was cited. In the preparatory examination, the
witnesses were heard before a notary and two eccle-
siastics; if the accused appeared guilty, he was
arrested, his residence was searched, and his property
sequestrated.

In the " Maestruzza "- — a summary on the Sacra-
ments and Commandments, written in 1338 for the
use of the inquisitors, by the Dominican Barthol-
omew da San Concordio — we read : " According to
the civil law, soothsayers and witches should be
burned; but according to the Church, they should
be deprived of Communion, if their crime be notori-
ous ; if it is secret, they should receive a penance of
forty days (c. 42). The inquisitors can not inter-
fere with soothsayers and sorcerers, unless heresy is
plainly to be feared. Those who relapse into heresy

128 The Truth About the Inquisition.

after having abjured it, should be delivered to the
secular power (c. 91)." The crime, therefore, was
a civil one. The Church mitigated its punishment ;
for she absolved the penitent, and even tried to
regain the relapsed. The inquisitor had to declare
that the accused was really a heretic, and therefore
separated from the Church; from that moment he
was a criminal before the State ; and, as Cantu re-
marks, the State did not execute the sentences of the
Inquisition, but applied the penalties established by
the law.

In 1255 Pope Alexander III. established the
Inquisition in France, with the consent, or rather at
the request, of St. Louis ; and the office of grand-
inquisitor was conferred on the Dominican provincial
and on the guardian of the Franciscans of Paris.
According to the Bull of their institution, these
inquisitors were independent of the bishops ; but so
displeasing was the new jurisdiction to both the
ecclesiastical and civil authorities, th'at the friars
soon found themselves adorned with a useless title.*
In Venice the Inquisition was introduced in 1289 ;
but it should not be confounded with the Venetian
Inquisition of State, a purely political institution,
founded in 1454. The Inquisition in Venice was,
from its very commencement, dependent upon the

* Bergier, art. "Inquisition." — Bergier complacently congratu-
lates his countrymen upon their freedom from the obnoxious
tribunal, but he omits to state that the civil authorities of France
furnished the world with spectacular "acts of faith" in quite
modern times. Thus, on Feb. 17, 1525, in the Place Maubert at

The Truth About the Inquisition. 129

civil authorities ; and in the sixteenth century it
was prevented from undertaking any process what-
ever without the assistance of three senators. In
English history this tribunal does not figure, although
the English bishops, like all the other ordinaries
of Christendom, frequently exercised inquisitorial
power. In Germany it never obtained a foothold,
and consequently heresy was left to the rigors of the
imperial laws in those regions.

The " Supreme Roman Inquisition," or tribunal of
the " Holy Office," was created on July 21, 1542, by
a Bull, "Licet db initio" of Pope Paul III., and at
the suggestion of Cardinal Caraffa, afterward Pope
Paul IV. At Rome it was composed of Domin-
icans ; but in some countries, of Franciscans.
Paul IV. decreed that the Inquisition should here-
after depend, not from each bishop, but from this
Congregation, which was authorized to judge defin-
itively in all matters of heresy on both sides of the
Alps. Sixtus V. reorganized the Holy Office, con-
stituting twelve cardinals as its members, under the
presidency of the Pontiff. It received faculties to
inquire for heretics, or those suspected of heresy,
and their abettors ; to prosecute magicians, astrolo-
gers, etc. ; also to prosecute all abusers of the
Sacraments, all writers or possessors of prohibited
books, all who abstained from confession or who ate

Paris, the licentiate, Master William Joubert, after having made
a public recantation in the Church of St. Gene vie ve, was given to
the flames because of his former Lutheranism. Vanini suffered at
Toulouse on Feb. 19, 1618.

130 The Truth About the Inquisition.

forbidden food, polygamists, and many other offend-
ers. That the methods of the Holy Office were
only the customary ones of the time, and by no
means secret, is evident from its Code. We have
the "Directory for Inquisitors," by the Dominican
Eymeric (Rome, 1587) ; the " Duty of the Holy
Inquisition, and its Mode of Proceeding in Causes
of Faith" (Cremona, 1641), by Carena Cesare ; and
the " Compendium of the Art of Exorcism," by
Mengius. The " Directory " was translated in
1762, by Morellet, with intent to injure the Church;
but the celebrated Malesherbes said to him : " You
think that you have collected extraordinary facts,
unheard of proceedings. Know, then, that this
jurisprudence of Eymeric and of the Inquisition is
veiy nearly our own." * From these documents we
learn that the Holy Office allowed to each of the
accused a "procurator," who had full liberty to
communicate with his client, and to conduct his
defence ; but we must admit that sometimes the in-
quisitors did " not allow the notaries to give copies of
the Acts of the Holy Office, unless to the accused ;
and then without the names of the witnesses, and
without any particulars which might indicate the
names to the accused."! However, this now repre-

* Morellet says, in his "Memoirs," vol. i, 59: "I was con-
founded at this assertion, but afterward I found that he was
right."

t " Short Account of the Manner of Prosecuting the Causes of
the Holy Office, by the Rev. Vicars of the Holy Inquisition of
Modena," cited by Cantu, in his " Heretics of Italy," disc. 32,
note 63.

The Truth About the Inquisition. 131

hensible secrecy was common to all the tribunals of
those (kys; and the Protestant Jeremy Bentham
admits that, in many cases, such secrecy may be
absolutely necessary to public security.* The In-
quisition was extended also to the Jews, not to
persecute them, but to prevent them from propagat-
ing their errors, and from committing the alleged
crimes against which the credulous then raged, just
as to-day the credulous fume on recalling the
" atrocities " of the Holy Office. f

There is a great diversity of opinion, even among
Catholic authors, as to the severity or mildness of
the Roman Inquisition. Bergier says that "no
instance is known of an execution (for heresy) at
Rome." The late Archbishop Spalding, in an ad-
mirable refutation of Prescott's allegations against
the Spanish Inquisition, says that "though three
hundred years have elapsed since the establishment
of this court (the Holy Office), it would be difficult
to point to an instance in which it ever pronounced
sentence of capital punishment." De Maistre tells
us that "it is impossible to ascertain precisely at
what epoch the inquisitorial tribunal first pronounced
a capital condemnation. It is fully sufficient for
our purpose, however, to be convinced of an incon-
testable fact : that it never could have acquired this

* " Works," vol. ii, p. 191; and passim.

t The good Sadoleto, called the Italian Fenelon, in a letter to
Cardinal Farnese, laments that the Jews were treated too kindly
at Rome, and protected by Paul III.

132 The Truth About the Inquisition.

right until it became exclusively a royal or political
institution ; and that every judgment which affects
life in any degree was, is, and must ever be, most
conscientiously discountenanced by the Church. . . .
The Inquisition never condemns to death." But
Cantu gives many instances of capital punishment
awarded by the Roman Inquisition. Tiepolo,
Venetian ambassador at Rome, describes an " Act
of Faith " (auto da fe, atto di fede) performed in
that city on September 27, 1567, when the famous
Mgr. Carnesecchi, together with a friar of Belluno,
having persisted in heresy, were decapitated and
their bodies burned. Averardo Serristori, Florentine
ambassador, writes that the sentence of Carnesecchi
was pronounced by the Cardinals of Trani and of
Pisa, Paceco and Gambura.* Cantu cites another
dispatch of Tiepolo, describing an Act of May 28,
1569, when, in presence of twenty-two cardinals,
four impenitents were given to the flames. In a
dispatch of February 24, 1585, the Venetian resident
at Rome speaks of a " publication " of seventeen
inquisiti by the Holy Office in presence of many

* "Embassy of Averardo Serristori, ambassador of Cosimo I.
to Charles V. and at the Court of Rome," 1537-1568; Florence,
1853 — Carnesecchi had been excommunicated as contumacious by
Paul IV. ; under Pius IV. he defended himself so well that he was
absolved and acknowledged as a good Catholic. But he soon
became notorious as a teacher of the Reformed doctrines, and
Pius V. obtained his extradition from the Grand-Duke Cosimo I.,
whose subject he was. His process is very interesting, as furnish-
ing many particulars concerning Cardinal Pole, Victoria Colonna,
and others of the same school.

The Truth About the Inquisition. 133

cardinals ; three of the accused were condemned to
the stake. In fine, although many letters of the
time narrate alleged atrocities of the Holy Office
which are merely founded on the exaggerations of
the mob,* there seems to be no doubt that the
Roman tribunal condemned many heretics to death.
It is certain, however, that mildness was the general
characteristic of the Holy Office. Cousin, in his
" Memoire on Variini," shows that the friends of this
wretched hypocrite f tried to have his case trans-
ferred to the Roman Inquisition, feeling that thus
he would escape capital punishment. And history
furnishes many instances of criminals feigning guilt
of heresy, sorcery, or similar crimes, in order to pass
under the jurisdiction of the Inquisition. The case
of Campanella is celebrated. His clerical comrades
in the Calabrian conspiracy against the Spanish
crown escaped death by pleading guilty of heresy,
and being therefore consigned to the Inquisition ;
while he himself, after twenty-seven years of con-
finement, was saved by Pope Urban VIII. having
insisted on his trial on the charge of sorcery. J

The word " inquisition," as met in history, has
three very different significations. It may mean

* De Thou writes that during the reign of Sixtus V. Mureto
told him: "Whenever I awake I dread lest I shall hear that such
a one is no more." The assertion is false; for Mureto died in
1585, shortly after the election of Sixtus V., and De Thou was then
residing in France.

t Leibnitz deemed him insane.

J The great mathematician was acquitted ; he was enrolled in
the Papal household, and an annual pension assigned him. But

134 The Truth About the Inquisition.

either a religious, a political, or a mixed tribunal.
All bishops, as inquirers into the purity of faith
in their respective dioceses, exercise a religious in-
quisition. The political inquisition can meet with
no opposition, unless from those who decry every
species of government, even such as obtains among
savages; for all governments employ some sort of
police. But when there is question of the mixed
inquisition, such as Rome sanctioned from the begin-
ning of the 13th century, our ears are deafened with
clamor. When the Inquisition is condemned by a
Catholic, contending that the Gospel of love should
have prevented violent proceedings, the idea may
not be utterly unreasonable ; but we must remember
that intolerance seems to be inseparable from pro-
found belief. In the Middle Age faith was the
very life of society, the necessary and only tie which
constituted it ; it is not strange, therefore, that the
guardians of society proceeded to the last extremity
against the violators of the faith. Such is the
explanation which we tender to the Catholic who
condemns the Inquisition. But when a Protestant
attacks this tribunal, he betrays either ignorance
and misplaced complacency in his religious prede-
cessors, or a desire to prescribe one code of morality
for his own and another for the Catholic Church.

the Spanish residents having mobbed him several times, he
repaired to France, where he was received with open arms by
Cardinal Richelieu, and made a counsellor of state. He became
president of the newly founded Royal Academy of France.

The Truth About the Inquisition. 185

Luther, according to his enthusiastic apologist,
Seckendorf, would have imprisoned, banished, and
despoiled all the Jews, and would even have de-
prived them of the Bible. Calvin banished the
Carmelite apostate, Bolsec, because this unfortunate
proved that the heresiarch's doctrines made God the
author of sin ; and it was not Calvin's fault that the
daring man was not capitally punished as a Pelagian.
The death of Servetus at the stake ; the condem-
nation of Gentile to death, which he avoided for a
time by recantation ; the banishment of Ochino ;
the persecution of Biandrata ; and Calvin's own
book on the errors of Servetus, in which, according
to the title-page, "it is taught that heretics are to
be coerced by the sword," — all these facts should
cause the Protestant polemic to be less bitter in his
diatribes against the Inquisition.* The " gentle "
Melancthon hoped that some brave man would
merit glory by assassinating Henry VIII., and he
himself approved the execution of Servetus : " The
magistracy of the republic of Geneva gave, by put^
ting Servetus out of the way, a pious and memorable

* The reforming princes of Germany and Sweden were foes to
toleration ; they had arrogated to themselves all power in religious
matters, and would have hut one religion in their dominions.
There motto was Ejus religio cujus regio. Calvin, most stuhborn
of foes to a separation of Clnirch and state, invoked against dis-
senters the penalty of death, because, as he asserted, no one can
refuse to acknowledge the authority of princes over the Church
without injury to the governments established by God. Those
Protestants who would claim Savonarola as one of the precursors
of the Lutheran revolt should know that the friar was no friend

136 The Truth About the Inquisition.

example to all posterity." * Beza wrote a book in
defence of the thesis that " liberty of conscience is
a doctrine of the devil " ; and article 36 of the
" Helvetic Confession " reads : " Let the magistrates
draw the sword against all blasphemers, and coerce
the heretics." f But we do not wish, in this matter,
to reprove Protestants or to excuse Catholics ; we
rather say with Cantu : " We seek and explain the
truth ; and, reflecting that persecution was peculiar
to that time, as toleration is said to be peculiar to
ours, and that the fury of the persecutors attests
their sincerity, we lament the facts, and recur to
that principle which is infallible. The Council of
Trent speaks not of Inquisition or of stakes, though
it pronounces anathema on the unbeliever; but
whenever humanity carries out a great design, it
becomes prodigal of blood."

II.

WE now approach the subject of the Spanish
Inquisition, a tribunal which is often, and wrongly,
confounded with the Roman, and about which,
reprehensible though it was, there are probably as

to toleration. Disputing against astro legists, he exclaimed: "On,
ye foolish and insensate astrologists 1 the only way to argue with
you is the use of fire." (" Tract against Astrologers," c. 3.)

* " On Servetus," 1555. — " Corpns Reform," viii, 523; ir, 133.

t At this day, says Cantu, they show at Dresden the axe which
the Lutherans used against dissenters, and on it is inscribed :
,,£ut' bid), ©ofohuftJ4'

The Truth About the Inquisition. 137

many popular misconceptions as upon any matter of
history. The misstatements of all modern enemies
of the Church concerning this tribunal are traceable
either to Mme. d'Aunoy's Hispanophobic book, or
to Philip Limborch, or to John Anthony Llorente.
The falsehoods of Mme. d'Aunoy and of Limborch
were admirably refuted by De Vayrac,* and his
work is one of the most valuable ever written on the
subject. Hefele's book on " Cardinal Ximenes,"
etc., can not be too warmly recommended to the
student. Cantii is by no means sparing of the
Spanish tribunal ; but the thoroughly Catholic tone
of his philosophical reflections, and his evident
impartiality, render an attentive study of his views
on this subject more satisfactory, at least to our
mind, than that of any other author.

After 780 years of combat, the Spaniards had
saved their Catholicism and nationality — with them
the two were thoroughly identified — from the
Moors. At first the free exercise of their religion
was allowed to the conquered; but after they had
repeatedly revolted, and had made many attempts to
procure another Mohammedan invasion from Africa,
the Spanish sovereigns ordered, in 1501, that all
the Moors should leave Castile and Granada, sav-
ing those who would embrace Christianity. Most
of the Moors received baptism, but many secretly
apostatized, while others adulterated their Christian

* " Present State of Spain," Amsterdam, 1719.

138 The Truth About the Inquisition.

rites with Mohammedan practices. At this time the
Spanish government, which for more than a century
had resisted the popular demands for the banishment
of the Jews, resolved to acquiesce, alleging as a
reason a league of all the foes of Christianity against
the freedom of Spain. All good Spaniards yearned
for a means of cementing the religious and political
unity of the nation ; and that means seemed to be
offered by the Inquisition, which had been intro-
duced into Spain in 1480 in the following manner:
The island of Sicily having been added to the Span-
ish dominions in 1479, the Sicilian inquisitor, De
Barbaris, asked Ferdinand and Isabella for a confir-
mation of the right, granted by Frederick II. to the
Inquisition, to appropriate a third of all the prop-
erty confiscated from heretics. While urging his
demand, De Barbaris advised the sovereigns to intro-
duce the Inquisition into Spain, as a measure against
the Moorish and Jewish apostates, who, even at this
time, long before the decree of banishment, were
numerous, and about whom every infamy was nar-
rated. Isabella opposed the project until she was
persuaded that it would further the salvation of
souls ; Ferdinand saw in it a means to replenish his
treasury, and immediately consented. When Pope
Sixtus IV. heard of Ferdinand's action, he was so
displeased that he placed the Spanish ambassador
under arrest ; in retaliation, Ferdinand arrested the
papal envoy, and recalled all his subjects from the
Roman States.

The Truth About the Inquisition. 139

The Pontiff afterward yielded, and allowed the
Inquisition to be introduced into Castile and Ara-
gon (1480); later on, however, touched by the com-
plaints that reached him concerning the rigor of the
tribunal, he declared that the Bull of institution was
surreptitious. He admonished the inquisitors, order-
ing them to proceed only in accord with the bishops,
and not to extend their inquiries into the other pro-
vinces; he also instituted a papal judge to hear all
appeals from the Spanish tribunal, and he quashed
many of its indictments. Ferdinand and Isabella,
as well as their successor, Charles V., constantly en-
deavored to elude these provisions of the Holy See ;
but even Llorente admits that the papal appellate
judges often restored property and civil rights to
those whom the Inquisition had condemned ; and
that they often compelled the inquisitors to absolve
the accused privately, in order to save them from
legal punishment and public ignominy.

The Dominican friar Thomas de Torquemada,* of
Valladolid, was chosen to preside over, the Supreme
or Royal Council of the Inquisition of Castile and
Aragon, the members of which had a deliberative
voice in all matters of civil law, and a consultative
one in affairs of canon law. Seville, Cordova, Jaen,
and Toledo had dependent tribunals ; and the in-
quisitors, with two royal assessors, published a code

* Not to be confounded with his uncle, the great theologian,
John, Cardinal Torquemada, who died in 1468.

140 The Truth About the Inquisition.

of procedure.* From this time the cloak of re-
ligion covered many acts of tyranny in Spain. The
Roman Pontiffs frequently interfered ; indeed as far
back as the pontificate of Nicholas V. (1447-55) all
distinction between new and old Christians had
been condemned. Sixtus IV., Innocent VIII., and
Leo X. received appeals from the decisions of
the inquisitors, and reminded them of the prodigal
son. Julius II. and Leo X. dispensed many from
the obligation of wearing the sambenito, or peni-
tential sack, which the tribunal imposed on all
the reconciled ; and these Pontiffs, in several cases,
ordered the signs of reprobation to be removed
from the tombs of the condemned. Leo X., in

* The first three articles treated of the composition of the
tribunal in cities ; the publication of censures against heretics and
apostates, who did not voluntarily denounce themselves; and
prescribed a further terra of grace by which confiscation might be
avoided. IV. Voluntary confessions, made within the term of
grace, were to be written in answer to questions of the inquisitors.
V. Absolution could not be given in secret, unless the crime was
secret. VI. A reconciled person was deprived of every office of
honor, and could not use gold, silver, pearls, silk, or fine wool.
VII. Pecuniary penances were given to those who voluntarily
confessed. VIII. A voluntary penitent, presenting himself after
the term of grace, could not be exempted from the confiscation
incurred on the day of his apostasy or heresy. IX. Only a light
penance was given to voluntary penitents who were not yet
twenty years of age. X. The time of a penitent's first fall was to
be particularized, that it might be ascertained what proportion of
his goods should be confiscated. XI. If a heretic, confined by the
Inquisition, should demand absolution, being touched by sincere
repentance, it was to be granted ; but his penance should be
imprisonment for life. XII. The inquisitors were allowed to use
torture in the case of a reconciled person whose confession they
deemed imperfect, and whose penitence they deemed it necessary

The Truth About the Inquisition. 141

spite of Charles V., excommunicated the inquisitor
of Toledo in 1519. Paul III. encouraged the
Neapolitans to resist Charles V. when he wished
to introduce the tribunal among them ; and when
the learned Vives was condemned as suspected
of Lutheranism, the same Pontiff declared him
innocent. Mureto, the great Latinist whom the
Spanish Inquisition would have sent to the stake,
was called to Rome, and made a professor in the
University.

Diego Deza, successor to Torquemada, persuaded
the Spanish sovereigns to establish the tribunal also
in Granada, but Isabella insisted that it should be
confined to Cordova ; afterward, following the advice
of Ximenes, the sovereigns bought and emancipated

to stimulate. XIII. Torture was also permitted in the case of one
who had boasted of having concealed crimes in his confession.
XIV. A convicted person, persisting in a denial of guilt, was to
be condemned as impenitent. XV. If a person under torture
confessed, and afterward confirmed his avowal, he was to be
condemned as one convicted ; if he retracted, he was to be again
interrogated. XVI. It was prohibited to furnish the accused an
entire copy of the testimony against him. XVII. The witnesses
were to be questioned by the inquisitors themselves. XVIII. One
or two inquisitors were to be present at every examination. XIX.
An accused who did not obey a formal citation was to be con-
demned as a convicted heretic. XX. If his conduct, while living,
showed that any person, now dead, was a heretic; he was to be
condemned as such ; his body, if in consecrated ground, was to be
disinterred, and his property confiscated. XXI. The inquisitors
were ordered to exercise their powers over the vassals of the
lords, and to censure the latter if they resisted. XXII. A portion
of all confiscated property was to be given, as alms, to the heirs
of the condemned. The remaining six articles regarded the
conduct of the inquisitors among themselves and toward their
subordinates.

142 The Truth About the Inquisition.

all Moorish slaves who would become Christians, and
thus were obtained fifty thousand " new Christians."
Under Charles V. the Inquisition increased in activ-
ity, but under Philip II. it attained its greatest de-
velopment. When dying, Charles V. had earnestly
impressed upon the mind of his heir the necessity
of preserving the tribunal; and so well did Philip
fulfil his father's desire that the power of the Inqui-
sition became so great as to overshadow, in some re-
spects, that of Rome. This antagonism is illustrated
by the celebrated process of Carranza. Carranza
was a Dominican, and had greatly distinguished
himself in the Council of Trent. His merit caused
him to be promoted to the see of Toledo in 1557;
but his genius drew upon him the jealousy of many,
and he wa* accused of heresy. For this reason
Charles V. received him rather coldly when he
approached the monarch's death-bed to administer
the last Sacraments. The accusers of Carranza in-
sisted that after the death of the Emperor the Arch-
bishop lifted a crucifix and exclaimed : " Behold Him
who has saved us all ! Eveiything is forgiven through
His merits ; there is no longer any sin." For such
expressions, as though he excluded the co-operation
of man in the work of justification, he was arrested
on August 22, 1559, and confined in the inquisi-
torial prison of Valladolid. The Holy Office had
already placed on the Index his "Comments on the
Christian Catechism," although the book was dedi-
cated to Philip II., and had been approved by a com-

The Truth About the Inquisition. 143

mission of the Council of Trent. Pius IV., rigorous
though he was, disapproved of the conduct of the
Inquisition, and called the case to Rome. Philip,
however, declared that the first prelate of Spain
should be tried only in Spain, and the Pontiff com-
promised by sending a legate and two other judges to
conduct the examination. But the inquisitors con-
trived to prolong the investigation until St. Pius V.
ascended the papal throne. This Pontiff repeatedly
complained to Philip that he was not kept in-
formed of the progress of the cause; and finally,
by threatening the monarch with excommunication,
succeeded in having Carranza sent to Rome. This
was in May, 1567, after nearly eight years of im-
prisonment under the Spanish inquisitors.*

* Carranza was honorably lodged in Castel San Angelo. Four
cardinals, four bishops, and twelve theological doctors were
deputed for his trial. The Pope plainly manifested his indig-
nation at the conduct of the Inquisition ; he declared that far from
prohibiting the " Comments " of the Archbishop, he was much
inclined to approve of the work by a motu-proprio. But it appears
certain that Carranza had at least rendered himself liable to
suspicion. In 1539 he had assisted, as " qualificator " of the
Inquisition, at a general chapter of the Dominican Order at Rome,
and had become very intimate with Fiamiuius and other sus-
pects, and even with the noted heretic, Carnesecchi. The process
at Rome lasted three years ; three more were spent in the law's
delays, and only in 1576 was definitive sentence pronounced by
Gregory XIII. On his knees before the Pope, Carranza made an
abjuration of all heretical doctrine, and withdrew fourteen " evil-
sounding " propositions taken from his writings. He was sus-
pended from episcopal functions, and ordered to reside in a house
of his Order at Orvieto for five years, after having visited the
seven basilicas of Rome. However, he died a few days afterward,
and the Pope gave him a splendid funeral.

144 The Truth About the Inquisition.

Since the work of Llorente is generally adduced
as an authority in all matters concerning the Spanish
Inquisition, it is well to give some account of this
famous writer. Born of a noble family of Aragon
in 1756, he entered the priesthood in 1779, became
vicar-general of the diocese of Calahorrain 1782, and
was appointed secretaiy-general of the Inquisition
at Madrid in 1789. From his early manhood he
was a Freemason, and, of course, a " Liberal," which
term was then — as even now it sometimes is —
synonymous with anti-Catholic. When Napoleon
commenced his experiment of planting his own
dynasty on the throne of Spain, Llorente became an
enthusiastic Afrancesado, as all patriotic Spaniards
styled the adherents of the Josephine administration.
It has always been a favorite trick with usurpers to
ransack the archives of dispossessed princes, and to
publish to the world whatever might turn, or might
be twisted, to the discredit of the latter. In accord-
ance with this idea, the intruding Joseph Bonaparte
in 1809 commissioned Llorente, the ex-secretary (he
had been dismissed for sundry irregularities) to show
up the secrets of the Inquisition, that the Spaniards
might learn to love the tyranny-crushing rule of
a foreigner. When the venal Afrancesado 's work
appeared, it was found to be an insult to Rome, to
Spain, and to the Spanish Church. Hefele proffers
the following judgment on Llorente : "A promi-
nent feature in his writings is their great bitterness
toward the Church, and this sentiment impels him

The Truth About the Inquisition. 145

to many inexact and even false assertions. The shal-
lowness and inaccuracy of Llorente, as a historian,
are no less evident than his hatred of the Church.
In his ' Portraits * he informs us that Paul of Sa-
mosata embraced the heresy of Sabellius ; an asser-
tion the absurdity of which brings a smile to the
face of the veriest tyro in ecclesiastical history. He
also tells us that St. Justin (d. 167) wrote his works
before the time of St. Ignatius of Antioch (d. 107
or 116); that Apollonius of Tyana was a heretic,
etc. No less full of errors is his 'History of the
Inquisition.* However, this work is valuable, inas-
much as it furnishes us with numerous extracts
of original documents of the Inquisition ; and they
enable us to form, concerning the Spanish tribunal,
a more exact judgment than one could have formed
before Llorente wrote." The Protestant Ranke says
that Llorente " gave us a famous book on this sub-
ject; and if I may presume to say anything that
contravenes the opinion of such a predecessor, let
my excuse be that this well-informed author wrote
in the interest of the Afraneesadas of the Josephine
administration. In that interest ... he looks on
the Inquisition as a usurpation of the spiritual over
the secular authority. Nevertheless, if I am not
altogether in error, it appears, even from his own
facts, that the Inquisition was a royal court of judi-
cature, although armed with ecclesiastical weapons."
Relying implicitly on the authority of the salaried
sycophant of Joseph Bonaparte, many later writers

146 The Truth About the Inquisition.

regard the establishment of the Spanish Inquisition
as due to the influence of the court of Rome. They
assert that the severities of this tribunal were but
consequences of Catholic intolerance and of the
Roman mania for persecution ; they depict the In-
quisition in such lurid colors as to lead the reader
to believe it the monster, without a rival in cruelty,
among all tribunals, ancient or modern, civilized or
barbarous, — Christian, Mussulman, or pagan. Llo-
rerite is a great favorite with Prescott; consequently
when the latter treats of the Inquisition, many of
his facts are miscolored, and not a few perverted.
Now, nothing is more certain than that the Spanish
tribunal was mainly a political institution. The
king appointed the grand-inquisitor ; he confirmed
the nomination of the assessors, two of whom were
always taken from the supreme council of Castile ;
the tribunal depended from the sovereign, who thus
became master of the lives and property of his sub-
jects ; * the king reserved to himself a share of the
funds of the Inquisition, and often the inquisitors
had not enough for their expenses. The Protestant
Schrock, in his " Universal History," admits that
this tribunal was secular, and wonders that the

* Anthony Perez, pursued for his life by Philip II., and escap-
ing to France, published .some " Relations," in which he tells how
the papal nuncio disapproved of this notion of the royal power,
and adds: " While I was at Madrid a certain party, whom I need
not name, preaching before the Catholic King, asserted that ' kings
have absolute power over the persons and goods of their subjects.'
This proposition was condemned by the Inquisition; and the
preacher was compelled, in the same place, and with all the

The Truth About the Inquisition. 147

Pontiff allowed it to become such. But let us hear
Ranke on this matter : "In the first place, the in-
quisitors were royal officers. The kings appointed
and dismissed them ; among the various councils at
their court the kings had likewise one of the Inqui-
sition ; the courts of the Inquisition, like other mag-
istracies, were subject to royal visitation ; the same
men who sat in the supreme Court of Castile were
often accessaries of the Inquisition. To no purpose
did Ximenes scruple to admit into the council of
the Inquisition a layman nominated by Ferdinand
the Catholic. 4Do you not know/ said the king,
4 that if the tribunal possesses jurisdiction, it derives
it from the king?' ... In the second place, all
the profit of the confiscations by this court accrued to
the king ... It was even believed and asserted
from the beginning that the kings had been moved
to establish this tribunal more by a hankering after
the wealth it confiscated than by motives of piety.
• • • Segni says that the Inquisition was in-
vented to rob the wealthy of their property, and the
powerful of their influence.* As Charles V. knew

juridical formalities, to retract it. He did so in the same pulpit,
adding, ' Kings possess over their subjects only that authority
which is accorded them by divine and human law, and not any
derived from their own absolute will.' The delinquent was made
to repeat these words by order of Master Fernan del Castillo,
consultor of the Holy Office."

* Ranke might have stated that the Florentine historian adds :
" It was based on the omnipotence of the king, and it worked
everything to the profit of the royal power, to the detriment of
the spiritual. In its first idea and in its object, it is a political

148 The Truth About the Inquisition.

no other means of bringing certain punishment on
the bishops who had taken part in the insurrection
of the Communidades,* he chose to have them
judged by the Inquisition. . . . Under Philip it
interfered in matters of trade and of the arts, of
customs and marine. How much further could it
go, when it pronounced it heresy to sell horses or
munitions to France? ... In spirit, and above
all in tendency, it was a political institution. The
Pope had an interest in thwarting it, and he did so
as often as he could."f

In 1812 the Spanish Cortes, having assembled
to arrange a new constitution for the kingdom,
appointed a committee to report on the Inquisition.
This document shows that its authors were no
friends of the tribunal, but it asserts that the
Inquisition " was an institution demanded and
established by the Spanish monarchs in difficult
circumstances " ; and that, furthermore, the tribunal
" could decree nothing without the consent of the
king." Nay, according to this committee, " the
Inquisition is a royal authority, the inquisitor is a
royal agent, and all his ordinances are null and
void unless they have the royal sanction. The
king's power suspends and revokes at will every

institution. It is the interest of the Pope to put obstacles in its
way, and he does so whenever he can; but it is the interest of the
king to maintain it in continual progress."

* Alluding to the struggle of the Communes for their fueros,
or privileges, a struggle in which the clergy sided with the people.

t LOG. cit.

The Truth About the Inquisition. 149

member of the tribunal ; and the very moment royal
authority would disappear, the tribunal would accom-
pany it." The Calvinist Limborch, who is, after
Llorente, the most bitter of all polemics who have
written on the Inquisition, narrates a fact which also
proves that the Spanish tribunal was a local political
institution. When Philip II. sought to establish it
in Milan, the people revolted, declaring that " in a
Christian city, it would be tyranny to establish a
form of Inquisition designed for Moors and Jews."
The conduct of the Neapolitans, ever averse to the
introduction of the Spanish Inquisition, though they
willingly received the Roman, as well as the ordinary
Inquisition of their own bishops, also proves that the
Spanish tribunal was regarded as a royal one. Many
attempts, met by insurrection and bloodshed, had
been made by the viceroys of Charles V. and Philip
II. to introduce it; and in 1564, when several of the
friends of Victoria Colonna and Julia Gonzaga * had
been cited by the archiepiscopal vicar, and when two
others had been beheaded, the citizens demanded of
the viceroy, the Duke of Alcala, whether he intended
to force the obnoxious tribunal upon them. A
negative answer reassured them; and a few years
afterward the citizens sent deputies, " with orders to

* The Princess Victoria Colonna, born 1490, at Marino, a. fief
of her family, was one of the most distinguished women of her
day. Loved, after the manner of Petrarch, by Michael Angelo, and
intimate with Pole, Morone, Flamiuio, and other great spirits of
the time, she exercised more influence than any other one person
of her circle. Her correspondence, redolent of mysticism, is

150 The Truth About the Inquisition.

thank the illustrious Archbishop for his many demon-
strations against heretics and Jews, and to request
him to inform his Holiness that the entire city is
well pleased with the chastisement and extirpation
of such persons by the hand of our own ordinary,
as is quite proper ; this we have always prayed for :
that the canons should be observed, and that there
should be no interference of a secular court."

III.

WE must now say a few words in conclusion upon
the severity of the Spanish Inquisition. Many of
the apologists of this tribunal point to the words
"Mercy and Justice" emblazoned on its banner,
and insist on the fact that the consignment of a
culprit to the secular arm was always accompanied
by a strong recommendation to mercy. There is no
doubt that mercy was generally shown to the repent-
ant, and that in their case the auto da f6 consisted
in the burning of the candles which they held in
their hands. But we lay no stress on the recommen-
dation to mercy; we agree with those who regard
this phrase as a mere form. The inquisitors well
knew that their condemnation and their abandon-
orthodox ; but she did not escape the suspicion of heresy. Julia
Gonzaga, Countess of Fondi, another famous princess of the day,
had to bear the same accusation; but, as Pompeo Litta says
(" Celebrated Italian Families," no. 33), this was common to all
the learned personages who then contended for a reform of
ecclesiastical discipline.

The Truth About the Inquisition. 151

ment of the accused to the civil power was equiva-
lent to a sentence of death ; that all hope of mercy
rested with themselves alone. We prefer to confine
ourselves to an inquiry into the truth of the popular
estimate of the cruelties of the tribunal.

The reader may rest assured that in this exhibi-
tion, with which popular prejudice has long been
regaled, there is nothing behind the curtain that
might further satisfy the morbid; everything that
could contribute to render the scene more impressive
has been artistically presented. Outside of Spain,
few authors, Catholic or Protestant, have attempted
to explain, still fewer to defend, the Spanish Inquisi-
tion. In France, for a long time after the days of
Philip II., it was the fashion to ridicule everything
pertaining to Spain. In England, commercial rivalry
and religious rancor, aided by a consciousness of
England's own superior cruelty in religious persecu-
tion, caused those writers on whom moderns have
relied for information to misrepresent everything
emanating from his Catholic Majesty. In Germany,
until very recent times, the calumnies of the first
"reformers" had so firm a hold on the popular and
even on the cultivated mind, that no horror narrated
of a Catholic people or of a Catholic ruler appeared
incredible. But even Voltaire, of course an implac-
able foe of the Inquisition, admits that "without
doubt this justly detested tribunal has been charged
with horrible excesses that it did not always commit ;
it is foolish to clamor against the Inquisition because

152 The Truth About tJie Inquisition.

of doubtful facts, and still more foolish to search for
lies with which to render it hateful." * And hearken
to the opinion of Bourgoing, Minister of the first
French Republic to Spain, and, from the very nature
of his associations, an opponent of the Inquisition :
" I publicly avow, in order to pay homage to truth,
that the Inquisition might be cited, in our days, as
a model of equity. "f Even Limborch admits that
during a very long period only fifteen men and four
women were executed, and most of these for treason,
witchcraft, sacrilege, or other crimes different from
heresy 4 Llorente cites an auto da fe of 1486 at
Toledo, when seven hundred and fifty were con-
demned, but not one to capital punishment ; another
of nine hundred, also without a death ; another
where three thousand three hundred were con-
demned, but only twenty-seven suffered death. And
we must remember that, besides heresy, the Inquisi-
tion had jurisdiction over sins against nature,
solicitation in tribunate, blasphemy, robbery of
churches, and even over the furnishing of contra-
band goods to the enemy.

Let us examine the mode of procedure adopted
and constantly followed by the Spanish Inquisition.
According to Simancas,§ one of the first lawyers
of the sixteenth century, no one was arrested until

* In the French "Dictionary of Sciences."
f " A Voyage in Spain," by M. Bourgoing, reviewed in the
" Journal of the Empire," Sept. 17, 1805.
t Spalding, loc. cit.
§ " Catholic Institutions against Heresy," 1552.

The Truth About the Inquisition. 153

accused by three different witnesses, each of whom
swore that he was not acting in collusion with any
other, and that he was not actuated by malice.* So
careful was the tribunal to exclude malice, that both
witnesses and inquisitors were subject to excom-
munication if they yielded to it. When the accused
appeared, if he could disprove the charges, he was
released ; if he could not disprove them, but avowed
his repentance, he was, even then, released. Even if
he relapsed, and being again committed, repented, he
was again released. f Only on the third conviction,
and by three different sets of witnesses, each gen-
erally consisting of three (sometimes only two were
required), the accused was finally consigned to the
civil court for judgment. Much fault has been found
with the Inquisition for sometimes admitting the
evidence of disreputable persons, such as courtesans,
etc.; but all tribunals do so to this day ; and Siman-
cas says that such testimony was received only " for
what it was worth," and that, to condemn the ac-
cused, evidence " clearer than light" was required. J
So far, we think, the reader will find no fault
with the proceedings of the Inquisition, unless he
is violently affected by the fact of the crime being a
religious one, and therefore — as he may have been
accustomed to think — one beyond the cognizance
of a human tribunal. Let him remember, however,

* Ibi. tit. xliv.

t Limborch admits these two consecutive pardons.

J Loc. cit., tit. li.

154 The Truth About the Inquisition.

that positive law is conventional ; that " to-day
different crimes are punished, but this proves only
that social interests are not always the same ; those
of to-day have the advantage of being actual, while
those of the olden time have the disadvantage of
having passed away."* But the reader will probably
condemn the practice of torturing the convicted who
would not confess their guilt. The more enlightened
jurisprudence of our day recognizes the foolishness,
as well as the cruelty, of such a practice ; but at the
time of the Inquisition the custom of applying the
" question "f at the trial of imputed criminals was
universal, and had been recognized from the days
of Justinian. Men seem not to have perceived
its absurdity and inhumanity until a very modern
period; most of the European states continued its
use until the end of the last century. But there
are two points concerning the use of torture by
the Spanish Inquisition which are too frequently
ignored. Torture was applied by the civil, not by the
ecclesiastical court; and if, as we learn from Art.
18 of the code established by Torquemada, one or
two ecclesiastics were always present at the ques-
tion, they were there merely to witness the avowals,
and not — as popular fancy has pictured them — to
gloat over the agonies of their victims. Again, a

* Cantu, " Heretics of Italy," disc. 5.

t There were two kinds of " question," the ordinary and ex-
traordinary; the former being a mild use of the instruments em-
ployed " to elicit the truth," while the latter involved the utmost
extreme of torment.

The Truth About the Inquisition. 155

confession extorted by torture was of no avail to
the prosecution, unless it was voluntarily confirmed
three days afterward.

Concerning the number of the victims, whether
by death or by exile, of the Spanish Inquisition,
Balmes says that he defies England or France — the
two nations who now claim to be at the head of civ-
ilization — to show, and to compare with the Spanish,
their statistics on the subject of religious persecution :
" We do not fear the parallel." The Continuator of
Fleury gives us a discourse of the celebrated Chan-
cellor de 1'Hopital, who was strongly suspected of
Calvinism, which indicates that in the sixteenth
century the dreaded tribunal was not painted in
colors so sombre as it wears at present. At the
Colloquy of Poissy there was a debate on the pro-
priety of establishing the Inquisition in France ; and
the Chancellor avowed that he would vote for it,
"had not the evil of religious dissension already
taken so deep a root in his country, and were it
likely that France would secure that benefit of
unity of faith which Philip had secured for Spain
at the cost (during his reign) of forty-eight capital
executions." Llorente contends that, during its ca-
reer of three hundred and thirty years, the Spanish
tribunal put more than thirty thousand persons to
death ; but when we analyze his details, we find that
his figures are not to be trusted. Take, for instance,
the assertion that during the first year of its exist-
ence (1481) the sole tribunal of Seville burned two

156 The Truth About the Inquisition.

thousand, all of whom, he says, belonged to the dio-
ceses of Seville and Cadiz. In support of this charge
he cites Mariana ; but a consultation of that historian
will reveal that the number of two thousand includes
all the persons executed under Torquemada, and
throughout his entire jurisdiction — that is, in the
whole of Castile and Leon during his fifteen years
of inquisitorship. After narrating how Torquemada
founded inquisitorial tribunals in Castile, Aragon,
Valencia, and Catalonia, Pulgar, a contemporary
historian, justifies the remarks of Mariana: "These
tribunals summoned all heretics to present them-
selves ; and fifteen thousand having obeyed, they
were reconciled to the Church by penance. As for
those who waited for prosecution, the convicted were
consigned to the secular authority, and about two
thousand of them were burned at different times in
various districts."

Lloreiite himself shows, in another passage, that
his figures concerning the victims of the year 1481
are falsified ; for there he states that in that very
year the new tribunal executed two hundred and
ninety-eight persons. He perceived the contradic-
tion, and tried to escape by remarking that seventeen
hundred and two other victims belonged to other
places than Seville — " to the surrounding districts
and the diocese of Cadiz." But the forgetful his-
torian had already told us, and rightly, that before
1483 there was but one inquisitorial tribunal in all
Andalusia, and that it was at Seville, whither the

The Truth About the Inquisition. 157

accused were sent from all parts. So much for
Llorente's statistics of the first year of the Spanish
Inquisition, and nearly all his other calculations are
made with similar disregard for truth. Listen to
the following argument : " When the number of
tribunals was increased from three to eleven, the
number of executions must have increased in the
same proportion "; and then he builds up his figures.
Must we suppose that eleven tribunals necessarily
have eleven times the number of capital sentences
hitherto pronounced by one?

Again, the bad faith of Llorente is plain when he
says that his thirty thousand victims were all here-
tics,— "unfortunates, who had committed, perhaps,
no other crime than that of better interpreting the
Bible, and of having a faith more enlightened than
that of their judges." According to his own admis-
sion, the Spanish tribunal took cognizance of many
crimes besides heresy : of sins against nature ; of
ecclesiastical and monastic immoralities ; of blas-
phemy, usury, and sacrilegious theft; of all crimes
connected with the employees or affairs of the tri-
bunal ; of traffic in contraband of war ; and of every
kind of sorcery and superstition — which last crimes,
thanks to the Moors and Jews, caused more trouble
in Spain than all the others produced. Finally,
Hefele shows that at Nordlingen — a Protestant
town of Germany, having then a population of
six thousand — the Protestant authorities burned
in four years (1590-94) thirty-five sorcerers. Ap-

158 The Truth About the Inquisition.

plying these proportions to Spain, where sorcery
was then at least as prevalent, there should have
been, in four years, fifty thousand sorcerers executed
in that country ; that is, twenty thousand more than
Llorente assigns as victims of every kind to the
Spanish Inquisition during its career of three hun-
dred and thirty years. Let the reader reflect as
to the probable proportion of heretics in Llorente 's
thirty thousand victims.*

* Voltaire says of the Spanish Inquisition :

" Ce sanglant tribunal,

Ce monument affreux du pouvoir monacal,

Que I'Espagne a requ, mais qu'elle-meme abhorre

Qui venge les autels, mais qui les dishonors ;

Qui, tout couvert de sang, de flammes entoure".

Egorge les mortels avec unfersacre'."

And yet, this same Voltaire, becoming, to use the words of M. de
Maistre, "a remarkable monument of that good sense which per-
ceives facts, and of that passion which is blind to their causes",
does not hesitate to admit, in his " Essai sur PHistoire Ge'nerale",
vol. iv, ch., 177, that " In Spain, during the sixteenth and seven-
teenth centuries, there were none of those bloody revolutions,
those conspiracies and cruel visitations which were seen in the
other countries of Europe. In fact, were it not for the horrors of
the Inquisition, we could not reproach the Spain of that day with
anything". That is, observes M. de Maistre, the Sage avows that,
were it not for the horrors of the Inquisition, we could not reprove
that nation which, only by means of the Inquisition, escaped those
horrors which dishonor all the others. At the commencement of
the sixteenth century, adds the French publicist, the Spaniards
saw the rest of Europe in flames because of the wars of religion.
They sustained the Inquisition as a political means to prevent
those wars.

LOUIS XI.; THE TRAVESTIED AND
THE REAL.

AMONG the great calumniated of history a place
in the very front rank must be assigned to King
Louis XL, of France. Not only has he been visited
with what Macaulay would style historical decapita-
tion, but he has been utterly travestied until he
excites ridicule in schoolboy and philosopher alike.
One of the most salient characteristics of this mon-
arch was religious devotion, and it actuated itself
especially in regard to the Mother of God. Protes-
tant and freethinking writers have therefore endeav-
ored to render his memory odious. With the excep-
tion of his contemporary Commines, all historians,
down to our own day, have sinned in their treatment
of Louis XL : some having yielded to blind hatred,
others being victims of ignorance or of superficiality.
Claude de Seyssel, who has been justly styled the
mitred valet of Louis XII. , but obeyed the will of
his master in decrying the reign of that master's
enemy. Peter Mathieu thought that he could best
write for Henry IV. by writing against Louis XL
That writers of the calibre of Mezeray and Gamier
should blindly follow the crowd is to be expected ;
but one is pained on seeing Bossuet compromising
his great name by crediting the hideous story which
will form the main object of this article. When so

159

160 Louis XL; The Travestied and the Real.

great an aberration is encountered, no wonder that
the gentle author of " Quentin Durward " should
feel justified in exhibiting the enormities of Louis
XI. by the light of the burning human torches at
Plessis, and that Casimir Delavigne and Boucicault
should have transferred the bloody shower of the
scaffold of Nemours to the stage. But had Scott
written his entrancing novel some years later, we
doubt whether he would have represented Louis XI.
as a mocking Tiberius and a bloody Rabelais, as
a wolf in sheep's clothing, and as a superstitious
driveller. For the nineteenth century, redolent of
humbug as it is, has witnessed the revelation of
many historical shams, and, e converso, a number
of wonderful rehabilitations, among which not the
least striking is that of the man of Montlhery.

During the reign of Louis Philippe there appeared
a History of Louis XL, which would have been ex-
pected, because of its solidity, rather from the pen
of a Benedictine than from that of a professor of
the modern University of Paris. Its author, Urban
Legeay, had spent ten years in its composition ; and
his aim was to conduct his work just as Louis XL
presided over, nay made his monarchy, — seeing
nothing but its interest; so true is it that there are
often similarities between the subject and the worthy
writer of a history. M. Barbey d' Aurevilly, one of
the most judicious of modern critics, drawing atten-
tion lately to this unfortunately neglected work, sees
in the qualities of Louis XL, one of the most sensible

Louis XL; Tie. Trac<'*tt'<>,l and the Real. 161

of men, the most sure of his own actions, the " most
desirous of the one thing," an attraction " for all the
faculties of this Urban Legeay, who was also sensi-
ble, who also applied himself to his task, never turn-
ing off to side-issues ; and resembling Louis XI. also
by that which was wanting in that great man — for
the grandeur of Louis XL, equal, for him who knows
how to measure it, to that of Charlemagne, seems in-
ferior to the greatness of Charlemagne only in that
which captivates the imagination at a distance —
external eclat and poetry." * The work of Legeay
has yet to be appreciated ; he was no eagle, and
his style Avas ordinary. But the future historian of
Louis XL will find in his book the material for a
successful one. It is something more than a history
of Louis XL : it is a history of the histories of the
monarch, and his criticism of these confirms the
judgments emitted in his own. He presents to us
a Louis XL of whom we have not even dreamt, and
sets forth in all its merited grandeur a reign the
glory of which could not be, after all. entirely
abolished, since it left France prosperous and ag-
grandized ; whereas monarchs like Louis XIV. and

* M. d'Aurevilly says: "It is said that Montesquieu, at th<-
time of his death, had the intention of writing the Life of Louis
XI. Certainly it would have been more brilliant than the work
of M. Legeay: it would have shown more style, and even, of
t" iv.-ption. It would hare presented Montesquieu: but would 11
have bettor presented Louis XI.? Would it have shown more
historic reality ? That is doubtful." Cf. " CEuvres ct Hummers,"
vol. via.

162 Louis XL ; The Travestied and the Real.

Napoleon, whose greatness is not contested, left
her bleeding and diminished.

To proclaim the greatness of Louis XL, in face of
the universal contempt shown for him, as at least
equal to that of Charlemagne, wras to declare one's
fitness for a lunatic asylum ; but Legeay, very unlike
a modern universitarian, thought of nothing but
truth. He realized that Charlemagne had to do with
barbarians, whom he defeated and baptized ; Louis
XL had to do with civilized lords, many, of whom
were as powerful as himself. The glories of Charle-
magne had been prepared by Charles Martel and
Pepin, and above all by the Papacy, then all-power-
ful and unresisted, even in whispers ; Louis XL fol-
lowed immediately upon imbeciles, and was forced
to contend with memories of Cre'cy, Poitiers, Azin-
court, and of the murdered Maid of Orleans. During
his entire reign the great lords, no longer loyal chev-
aliers after the fashion of the Paladins, were allied
with the English and Burgundians, and leagued
in revolt against the crown ; but he defeated their
projects as Charlemagne never defeated his barba-
rians, by force of intellect. But although intellect-
uality was the special characteristic of the greatness
of Louis XL, he did not confine his sword to its
scabbard ; he was a thorough soldier, and he would
not have his sword forgotten when designing his
statue for his tomb in Notre-Dame de Clery. That
he could be brave even to audacity is shown by the
interview of Pe'ronne. Nor was Louis XL the mon-

Louis XL ; The Travestied and the Real. 163

ster of duplicity which history has depicted him as
being ; Legeay proves that among the rulers of his
time this sovereign was perhaps the only just one,
and the only one faithful to his word. Louis XI. was
every inch a king; a greater one than Louis XIV.,
who was more of a sultan, and more "the sun,"
but, to use the wwds of D'Aurevilly, less a king
in permanent action and incessancy of function.
Charlemagne in his old age cried at the window
from which he gazed on the river by which he
expected the Norman ships to arrive ; but when
dying, Louis XI. wept not at the thought of the
coming of those Valois who were worse than Nor-
mans for France, but counselled his son in regard to
the evils he foresaw. Charlemagne was the Empire,
Louis XI. was France. The grand monarque Louis
XIV. had many mistresses, and the most costly
of all, Versailles ; Louis XL had no mistress but
France ; he was without love, save for his state,
remarked Commines, who knew him well. Legeay
finds, and D'Aurevilly agrees with him, in Charle-
magne, St. Louis, Louis XIV., and Napoleon, an
imagination which frequently carries them away ;
but Louis XL was always master of himself.

We have been led to these reflections while mak-
ing some researches in reference to an almost uni-
versally credited charge against Louis XL, to the
effect that the children of the Duke of Nemours were
placed under the scaffold of their father, there to
receive on their white robes the trickling blood of

164 Louis XL; The Travestied and the Real.

the victim. Michelet admits that the historians con-
temporary with Louis XI., even the most hostile, do
not allude to such a horror. But such silence does
not prevent the champion liar of the universe, Vol-
taire, from accrediting the accusation. He says that
" all the grace accorded to this unfortunate prince
was that he might be buried in the habit of a Fran-
ciscan,— a grace Avhich was worthy of these atrocious
times, and which equalled their barbarity. But what
was not usual, and was introduced by Louis XL,
was the placing of the young children of the Duke
under the scaffold, to be covered there with their
father's blood. . . . The unheard-of torments suf-
fered by the princes of Nemours-Armagnac would
be incredible, if they were not attested by the re-
quest presented by the unfortunate princes to the
Estates, after the death of Louis XL. in 1483." *
And Duclos says : " The children of the culprit
were placed under the scaffold, in order that the
blood of their father should fall upon them."f One
would have expected better things of Gamier, but
he says : " By a barbarity hitherto unexampled in
our history, the unfortunate children of the Duke of
Nemours were placed under the scaffold, that the
blood of their father might flow on their heads." J

Before we refute this allegation, let us consult
Diiclos, an historian not suspected of devotion to

* " Essai sur les Mceurs," etc. See also letter to Linguet,
June, 1776.

f " Histoire de Louis XI., " vol. ii, p. 297.

| " Histoire de France," ed. 1768, vol. xviii, p. 339.

Louis XL ; The Travestied and the Real. 165

Louis XL, in order to learn the crime, the expiation
of which has furnished material to novelist and
dramatist for a superlatively harrowing scene. The
Duke of Nemours, in spite of the obligations binding
him to Louis XL, entered into nearly all the plots
against that monarch, and finally joined the faction
of the Count d'Armagnac, head of his house. " Ar-
magnac was one of those who prove that tyranny is
sustained by baseness, and that legitimate power,
when its possessor does not abuse it, is favorable to
the happiness of the people." The King, informed
of the excesses of the Count, and suspecting him of
relations with the English, entrusted the Count de
Dammartin with full powers for investigation. The
result was a declaration, on the part of the royal
council, that the Duke of Nemours having obtained
his duchy from the King, and having been loaded
with favors, had been one of the chief inciters of
civil war; and that having received pardon, and
having sworn to serve his Majesty against all per-
sons, he had again excited insurrection and had
joined the Count d'Armagnac. Consequently Ne-
mours was declared guilty of high-treason. But
Nemours begged the intercession of Dammartin ; and
Louis again pardoned the rebel Duke, "on condition
that if he again swerved in his fidelity he should be
punished for the crimes already committed. . . . He
was ungrateful, and was one of the first to declare
himself in the war of the ' Public Weal.' ' He even
sought the assassination of his sovereign. Finally,
Louis caused his arrest; he was condemned to de-

166 Louis XL ; The Travestied and the Real.

capitation, and executed in the Halles de Paris on
August 4, 1477.

" Lie, lie bravely : something will always remain.
Fling mud: some of it will stick." Voltaire was
never more fully actuated by his cynically daring
axiom than when, in his anxiety to asperse the mem-
ory of Louis XL, he said that " the unheard-of tor-
ments suffered by the princes of Nemours-Armagnac
would be incredible, if they were not attested by the
request presented by the unfortunate princes to the
Estates after the death of Louis XL, in 1483." The
request to which the Sage of Ferney alludes was
presented by the lawyer Masselin, and in the time of
Duclos and Garnier it was preserved in the Royal
Library at Paris ; these authors knew it well, and
the latter made a long extract from it in the nine-
teenth volume of his work. Now, in the pleading of
Masselin there is not a word such as Voltaire insin-
uates as existing, and which Duclos and Garnier
implicitly recognize as existent ; even the rhetorical
figures employed by the interested advocate to excite
sympathy for his unfortunate clients can not be
twisted so as to justify the anecdote so eagerly used
by the roman cists. Hence it is that Henri Martin,
the pet historian of modern freethinkers, whose
writings are marked by error, hatred, and prejudice,
in things both little and great, is compelled to reject
it. "It is a fable invented by the reaction against
the memory of Louis XL"* And Fournier admits :

* " Histoire de France," 4th ed., vol. vii, p. 135.

Louis XL ; The Travestied and the Heal. 167

" the execution of Nemours was very different from
that which is generally described ; the frightful de-
tails, the children kneeling under the scaffold, the
shocking deluge of blood, as Casimir Delavigne
represents it, form a mass of melodramatic para-
phernalia which must now be 'relegated to the
4 Crimes Celebres.' " * •

As to the crimes so freely ascribed to Louis XI.,
for which he is said to have begged pardon in
advance from the saints whose leaden images he
carried on his hatband, many of them are either
without any historical foundation, or, when properly
investigated, prove to have been not crimes, but
justifiable actions on the part of a monarch. Duclos
did not err on the side of devotion or in appre-
ciation of true devotional character ; but he had
enough good sense to remark: "I need not allude
to the monstrous alliance of cruelty and superstition
which is ascribed to Louis XI. in the charge that he
was wont to ask permission from the Blessed Virgin
for his assassinations ; those nonsensical tales merit
no refutation." f If there was one quality which
supereminently shone in Louis XL, one which
stamped him as a born ruler of men, it was that of
knowing how to choose his instruments. All those
whom he raised to eminent positions of trust were
men of great capacity. Some, like Cardinal Balue,
were traitors — for the fifteenth century, the moral

* " L'Esprit dans 1'Histoire," 2d ed., p. 113.
t LOG. cit., vol. ii, p. 514.

168 Louts XL : YV 7W**//W itn.1 Ihr Real.

decadence and vital end of the Middle Age, wax the
period of traitors, — but he who sought only the
<H-ood of France was never deceived as to their fit-
ness for their positions. Romancists like Scott may
be prodigal of sneers for Tristan 1'Hermite, " the
executioner " ; we are not astounded when we hear
the American journalist vituperate a President of
the United States as an " ex-hangman," on account
of his having been a sheriff of his county. But
when grave historians hold up Louis XL to ridi-
cule for his confidence in Tristan, they betray their
own unfitness to lift the torch of investigation.
This " hangman " was a brave officer, a master of
artillery, a tried servant of the crown, who had sub-
dued the men of Liege in 1457, and who, as the
executor of the high justice of the King, deserved
as much respect as any Minister of the Interior who
is responsible for the internal order of a nation.

Much has been said of the absolutism of Louis
XL, but the truth would be better consulted if we
were to say that for the mixture of feudality and
government by Estates, which had obtained in
France since the reign of Philip the Fair, he sub-
stituted a new form of government which may be
called a limited monarchy ; * a form Avhicli is as
essentially different from the absolute as from the
constitutional. The limited monarchv is different

* "By a limited monarchy we understand one in which the
national assemblies, convoked at long intervals, have neither
their own will nor action, and meet only to sanction the projects
of the ruler; one in which the head of the state possesses all the

Louts XL • The Travesti^ and the Real 169

from the constitutional, inasmuch as in the latter
the national assemblies, periodically gathered, enjoy
political rights, the exercise of which gives to the
nation a share in the conduct of public affairs. The
limited differs from the absolute monarchy, because
it respects the organic laws already issued by the
various powers of the state, because it tolerates
local liberties, such as provincial and municipal
privileges, etc. A few of the acts of Louis XI.
were violently despotic ; but he cannot be said to
have established a despotic monarchy, for he found
in the prerogatives of parliament and in the national
customs an impediment to the erection of the royal
will into a supreme law. His excesses remained
excesses, and not until the reign of Francis I.
(1515 — 47) did France see the royal will become
legality. During the reign of Louis XL the prog-
ress of the Third Estate was constant, and that by
the very nature of events. According as a greater
number of capable men were formed in its bosom,
its influence became more considerable, and the
administration passed, to a great extent, into its
hands. The policy of Louis XL contributed greatly
to this result: he diminished the power of the
nobles, whom he did not love, and proportionably
elevated the others. He augmented the liberties of
the communes, and was the real King of the people.

legislative and executive power, disposes of the public revenue
without rendering any account, and can levy taxes at his own
will." Poirson: "Precis de FHistoire de France pendant les
Temps Modernes." Paris, 1840.

RICHELIEU AS AN ECCLESIASTIC.

FEW of the world's great ones have been sub-
jected to such contrary judgments as those passed
on the character of the Minister of Louis XIII.
In his own day the flattery and hatred he experi-
enced were equally blind and equally interested;
many declared that he was the visible hand of
Providence exalting France, while many others saw
in him only an intriguer, a debauchee, and the evil
genius of Europe. He was an ecclesiastic as well
as a statesman; and in its criticism of churchmen
the world readily verifies that saying which La-
fontaine applied to the generality of its judgments.
It pays but little attention to favorable truth, but
eagerly credits any disparaging lie :

" L'homme est de glace aux verite's,
II est de feu pour le mensonge."

But upon whose authority do they rely who
decry the private character of Richelieu? Chiefly
on that of Henri de Lomeme, Comte de Brienne,
a writer who was not born at the time of the sup-
posed events he narrates, who adduces no proofs
whatever, and who, remarks the most painstaking
of all Richelieu's modern critics, probably wrote
his anecdotes in the prison of St. Lazare, in which
his other insane ebullitions had caused him to be

170

Richelieu as an Ecclesiastic. 171

immured.* Paul de Gondi, Cardinal de Retz, the
Jansenistic coadjutor of Paris, is also brought for-
ward; but the historical authority of this too fa-
mous " Frondeur " must be regarded as nil. In
his " Me'moires, " observes Sainte-Beuve, " where he
speaks so candidly of himself, he continually uses
such expressions as 4 theatre ' and « comedy ; ' he re-
gards everything simply as a play; and frequently,
when speaking of the principal personages with
whom he has to .deal, he treats them exactly as a
stage-manager would his actors. . . . He openly
presents himself as an able impressario, arranging
his work. . . . There are some passages in his
4 Me'moires ' where he seems to try to rival Moli£re
rather than to combat Mazarin. " f In Book I. he
tells us that when made coadjutor to his uncle,
he "ceased to frequent the pit, and went on the
stage." When this work — which so many regard
as an arsenal of weapons against Richelieu and
his policy — was read by the poet J. B. Rousseau,
he declared that it was " a salmagundi of good
and bad, written sometimes well and sometimes
miserably and very tedious. ... I am astonished
when I see a priest, an Archbishop, a Cardinal, a
gentleman, a man of mature age, describing him-
self, as he does, as a duellist, a concubinary, and,
what is worse, a deliberate hypocrite, — one who,

* Avenel: " Lettres, Instructions Diplomatiques, et Papiers
d'Etat., du Cardinal de Richelieu; " p. xcvii. Paris, 1853.

t " Causeries du Lundi," vol. v.

172 Richelieu as an Ecclesiastic.

during a retreat made in the seminary, took a res-
olution to be wicked before God and good Wore
the world." In 1675 the Duke de la Rochefou-
cauld, in his " Maximes," said of De Retz : " His
imagination, rather than his memory, supplies him
with facts." Mme. de Se'vigrie', writing to her
daughter concerning her correspondence with De
Retz, said : " If anything foolish drops from your
pen, he will be as much charmed as if it were
serious. " One or two exquisite morsels of this
famous authority will illustrate his honesty: "Scru-
ples and greatness have always been incompatible."
"The crime of usurping a crown is so grand that
it may pass for a virtue." Speaking of his con-
spiracy against the life of Richelieu (1636), he
said: "The crime appeared to me to be consecrated
by grand examples, and justified and honored by
great risks." Truly did De Retz say of himself
(B. I.) that he possessed "Vdm-e peut-etre la moinx
eccUsiastique qui ftit dam Vunivers." And let us
not forget that this precious intriguer was a youth-
ful abb£ at the time, and that it is very unlikely
that such secrets would have been confided to him
during the lifetime of Richelieu ; while if he knew
of them only after the great Minister's death, the
escapades in question could not have been so "no-
torious " as Voltaire would have us believe. Again,
De Retz himself tells us that Richelieu preserved
appearances — "// avait asses de religion pour h.
monde"

Richelieu as an Ecclesiastic. 173

Griff et, in his refutation of Voltaire's reasons
for denying the authenticity of Richelieu's " Polit-
ical Testament " (addressed to Louis XIII., and
a monumental proof of the Cardinal's sincerity and
wisdom), speaks of authentic records which detail
the complaints concerning Richelieu often made by
Louis XIII. to his confessor, F. Caussin. * The
King blamed the Cardinal for prodigality and love
of display, and was scandalized because his Emi-
nence had procured from the Holy See a dispensation
from the recitation of the Office; but not a word
did his Majesty drop in derogation from the moral
character of his Minister. Griffet quotes the " Me*-
moires" of the contemporary Montchal, Archbishop
of Toulouse, who says tjiat Richelieu "asked the
Holy See for a Brief authorizing him to prosecute
some dissolute bishops." Now, is it likely that the
Cardinal would have so acted if his own guilt was
" notorious ? " And it is to be noted that Montchal
shows great hostility to Richelieu ; nevertheless, he
fails to remark any such inconsistency. Voltaire
affected to disbelieve in the authenticity of Riche-
lieu's magnificent " Political Testament " to Louis
XIII., because of its eloquent exhortations to virtue,
"ostensibly" written by one who was "notoriously"
delinquent;! and, notwithstanding this assertion,

* " Traite des differentes sortes de preuves qui servent a
etablir la verite de 1'Histoire." Liege, 1770.

t " Doutes nouveaux sur le testament attribue au Card, de
Richelieu, et Arbitrage entre M. Voltaire et M. de Fonceraagne."

174 Richelieu as an ^Ecclesiastic.

the Sage of Ferney says elsewhere * that our Card-
inal's errors were " hidden weaknesses, which, in
spite of all the care taken to cover them, show
the littleness of greatness." We are, therefore,
justified in concluding that Richelieu was not an
immoral man. But we should like to draw the
attention of the reader to a point which is seldom
or never noticed — his character as a bishop.

Armand Jean du Plessis de Richelieu was born
in Paris on September 9, 1585. Like nearly all
persons whose mature age showed them to be truly
great, his childhood exhibited no precocity; he was
an ordinarily gifted boy. His first lessons were
received, under the eyes of his mother, from the
Prior of St. Florent de Saumur; and at the age of
twelve he was sent to the College of Navarre, then
one of the most famous in Paris. Having completed
the ordinary course, he entered the "Academy,"
or military school. Avenel speculates as to the
future of young Richelieu had he followed the

* "Histoire Universelle," vol. iv, p. 89.— The "Political
Testament," one of the most solid instructions ever addressed to
royalty, was drawn up by Richelieu in duplicate, — one copy
going to his Majesty, the other to the Cardinal's niece, the
Duchess d'Aiguillon, who, dying in 1G75, left it to her confidante,
Mme. du Vigean. It was published in 1688, went through many
editions, and finally, in 1749, Voltaire attacked its authenticity in
a dissertation subjoined — why he alone knew — to his tragedy of
" Semiramis." He afterward republished this dissertation, " Des
Mensonges Imprimes," in his "Essai sur 1'Histoire Generale."
Of the fifteen objections of which it consists, the one noticed
above is probably the strongest; but all were triumphantly
refuted by Foncemagne in 1750. The latest author of note to treat

Richelieu as an Ecclesiastic. 175

career for which he seemed destined. " He admired
the military profession, and in certain circumstances
he bore arms; he always superintended the direc-
tion of the army, its organization, its commissariat,
etc. Frequently he laid aside the red cassock and
donned the surcoat of the soldier; often he com-
manded in person ; and we constantly find, in his
papers, plans of battles and of fortifications designed
by him. In councils of war his opinion often pre-
vailed over that of experienced generals, — not
because of any deference to his rank, but because
of the conviction that his perceptions were just
and his judgment solid." *

However, the young cadet left the Academy when
eighteen years of age, and entered the theological
schools of the Sorbonne. In 1606 Henry IV. named
him for the bishopric of Lu^on, although he was
then only a deacon ; "and since the said Du Plessis,"
wrote the King to d'Halincourt, his ambassador to
the Holy See, " has not yet reached the age re-
quired by the canons, and since I am quite sure
that his merit and ability supply this defect, you
will beg his Holiness to grant the necessary dis-

of the "Political Testament" was La Bruyere, and he declared
that "the man who performed such wonders (as Richelieu did)
either never wrote at all, or he must have written this document."
Montesquieu agreed with La Bruyere. In fine, this work will
bear comparison with the similar ones composed by Fenelon and
Bossuet for the guidance of their royal pupils.

* "La Jeunesse de Richelieu," in the "Revue des Quest,
Hist.," 1869, vol. vi, p. 164.

176 Richelieu as an Ecclesiastic.

pensatioii ; for the said Du Plessis is in every way
capable of serving the Church of God." * The
royal request was granted, and the young abbe
was consecrated at Rome on April IT, 1607, and
immediately returned to the Sorbonne to take his
degrees. His assiduity in study had told on his
health, and he was unable to make the journey to
his diocese until December, 1608. Received as was
customary by the chapter and magistracy, he al-
luded to the Huguenots of Lucon in these words :
" Many there are who differ with us in belief ; I
trust that we sball all be united in affection.''
And while ever firm in insisting on the rights of
Holy Mother Church, his entire career at Luc,on
showed him the defender of those of Protestants ; f
although, as he was once forced to lament to a
Huguenot friend, his sentiments were seldom
reciprocated.

The diocese of LUQOII was one of the poorest in
France, and it is interesting to read Richelieu's
own description of some of his privations. Noblesse
oblige, and the new prelate, a member of one of
the first families in France, was expected to make
an appropriate entry into his episcopal city. But
he had no carriage, and it would have been in-

* Berger do Xivrey, " Lettres de Henri IV.,'' vol. vii. p. ."»:;.

t Cardinal Richelieu's impartiality was especially manifested
in his letters to Pontchartrain, secretary of state for Protestant
affairs, guaranteeing the fidelity of the famous ministers du
Plessy-Mornay and Chamier.

Richelieu as an Ecclesiastic, 177

decorous to use a hired one ; he therefore borrowed
an equipage from a friend. On arriving at the
episcopal palace, he found it uninhabitable and al-
most beyond repair, and he was compelled to hire
apartments and buy all necessaiy furniture. Even
the vestments of his pontifical office were wanting,
and he thought himself fortunate, after a time, in
procuring them in two colors. k* Certainly," he
wrote to a friend, " this is the most wretched bish-
opric in France ; but, then, you know what kind
of man the Bishop is." Richelieu <x>uld rely on
little or no revenue in a diocese poor at all times,
and then impoverished by war : and his own means
were small, for he was a younger son. He there-
fore, as he said, was as poor as a monk, though
without any vow of poverty ; and on one occasion
he was compelled by need to sell a valuable tap-
estry, a family heirloom. But, despite his small
resources, he was a father to the poor, and did all
he could to relieve their necessities.

Scarcely had he settled down in his new homo
when he made an episcopal visitation of the whole
diocese ; and he wrote to the Cardinal de la
Rochefoucauld, one of the most zealous bishops
of the time, that he found "ecclesiastical discipline
and authority everywhere weakened.'' To remedy
the evil he called on the Capuchins (whom the
famous Friar Joseph, the future " Grey Cardinal,"
was then exciting to renewed zeal ) for missions ;
and he immediately established, with his own money,

178 Richelieu as an ^Ecclesiastic.

a new seminary, saying to its president that "no
act of his life had afforded him so much pleasure."
The first establishment, after the mother-house, pos-
sessed by the famous Oratorians founded by De
Beguile, was given them in his diocese by Riche-
lieu, and he justly prided himself on this fact in
his " Me'moires." When a parish became vacant, he
invariably conferred it by concur sus ; but if, as was
often the case, some powerful laic held the right
of presentation, he insisted on a proper nomination.
A certain Madame de Sainte-Croix having presented
an unworthy candidate, he wrote to her : " I beg
you to properly regard my fulfilment of duty when
I refuse to entrust to this person the care of souls
redeemed by the Blood of Jesus Christ. By making
another selection, you will also set a good example
to others who enjoy the right of presentation."

Work wasi always a passion with Richelieu, and,
as the documents published by Avenel prove, when
he was not occupied in the public affairs of his
diocese, he was engaged in the direction of souls,
in settling quarrels and preventing duels, in con-
soling the afflicted, and in study. Those who have
never regarded him in any other light than that
of a courtier may smile at the idea of Richelieu
the student, and yet the future Minister's studious
habits were well known to his compeers. The fa-
mous Gabriel de 1' Aubespine (Albaspineeus), Bishop
of Orleans, certainly a competent judge,* wrote to

* De 1'Aubespine was, according to " Gallia Christiana," " vir
totius antiquitatis ecclesiastics peritissimus."

Richelieu as an Ecclesiastic. 179

him on one occasion : " I have always counted
much on your talent for ecclesiastical and spiritual
matters; and now that you study so unintermit-
tingly, my estimation is increased, and I feel that
you would not take such pains if you were not
meditating some great design."

Even the illustrious theologian, Cardinal Du-
perron, admired the zeal of the Bishop of Lugon.
In a letter written to Richelieu in 1610, when
the prelate was but twenty-five years of age, a
mutual friend said : " The Cardinal seizes every
occasion to manifest his esteem for you. A certain
person having praised you as eminent among
young prelates, his Eminence declared that you
ought not be mentioned among }roung prelates,
for the oldest might well yield you precedence ;
and, for his part, he wished to set the example."
Praise from Sir Rupert is praise indeed.

During his seven years' charge at Lugon, Riche-
lieu made several trips to Paris; but on all these
occasions he kept his episcopal position ever in
mind, and frequently he preached in the principal
pulpits of the capital. Aubery, who drew his in-
formation from the family of Richelieu, says that
the King and Queen often attended these sermons,
and that " they nearly always declared that no
preacher ever made more impression on their
hearts." The sermons of Cardinal Richelieu have
not come down to us, but we must suppose that,
whatever may have been his merits as a poet and

180 Richelieu as an Ecclesiastic.

playwright, they were good ones. He certainly
possessed, remarks a judicious critic, * the chief
requisites of a fine preacher — force of logic, ele-
vation of thought, and energy of expression.

The assiduity displayed by Richelieu in his
studies while Bishop of Lugoii was the more ad-
mirable because much of the time left him by the
cares of his diocese had to be given to an exten-
sive correspondence with many Roman cardinals
and with the Papal Nuncio at Paris. Again —
and this fact is worthy of note by those who
believe him to have been a debauchee, — from
his twenty-third year until his death in 1642,
Richelieu was nearly always in physical pain. The
first letter (1605) published by Avenel shows him
in a painful convalescence after a long illness ; and
so on through the entire series we find him gener-
ally a victim to bodily suffering ; his last attack
continued more than a year.

Richelieu resigned his diocese in 1616 to become
Prime Minister of France; and he himself, toward
the close of his life, well epitomized his later career
when he said to the King: "I promised your
Majesty that I would use all my ability, and all
the power you would give me, to crush the Hu-
guenot party, to lay low the pride of the nobles,
to force all your subjects to do their duty, and
to cause foreign nations to properly respect your

* Barthelemy, " Caractere de Richelieu."

Richelieu as an Ecclesiastic. 181

Majesty's name ; and to effect these ends I insisted
that I should have your entire confidence."*
Concerning this better known portion of the life
of Richelieu, we would merely remark that few
French historians have avoided either blind hatred
or blind praise in treating of it ; and foreigners,
especially Englishmen and Germans, can not allude
to it with equanimity; for, as Malherbe said in
1627, "the space between the Rhine and the Pyr-
enees appeared to Richelieu as a field too small
for the lilies of France : he wanted them to wave
on both shores of the Mediterranean, and wished
their odor to be wafted even to the farthest Orient."
From the " Me'moires " of Richelieu, published in
the collection of Petitot (Series II., vol. x), Paris,
1823, we take the following particulars of the Car-
dinal's daily life while Minister : He retired at
eleven o'clock, and, having slept three or four
hours, called for his dispatches, and then wrote
or dictated the replies. At six he slept again, and
at eight arose. After prayers his secretaries came
for instructions ; then he received the Ministers of
State until eleven. At midday he heard Mass, cel-
ebrated by Friar Joseph. Then he took a short
walk, giving audience to special arid important
parties. Then he lunched — fourteen covers being
laid at his own table, thirty for invited guests at
another, and a larger number at a third for his
pages and the officers of his household. After

* "Testament Politique."

182 Richelieu as an Ecclesiastic.

lunch he conversed for a couple of hours with his
familiars and with literary men, and the remainder
of the day he worked at affairs of state. In the
early evening he took a walk, meanwhile again
giving audiences. The evening hours were passed
with music, reading, or general talk, as the Cardinal
thought that sleep was better wooed by previous
conversation of a character neither sad nor rollick-
ing. He seldom said Mass, but he confessed every
week, receiving Holy Communion from his chaplain.
We may not dwell on the great Cardinal's career
as statesman, but we close our article with a pic-
ture of his final hours as man.* When it became
evident that Richelieu had but a short time to
live, the King paid him a farewell visit, and was
thus addressed by the dying man : " Sire, in taking
farewell of your Majesty I have the consolation
of knowing that I leave your kingdom in a more
glorious condition, and with a greater reputation
than it ever hitherto enjoyed. All your enemies
are humiliated. Only one reward for all my ser-
vices do I ask from your Majesty, and that is
your good-will and protection for my nephews ;
and I give them my blessing only on condition
that they are ever your faithful subjects." He

* " Recit de ce qui s'est passe un pevi avant la mort de M. le
Cardinal de Richelieu, arrivee le jeudi, 4 Dec., 1642, sur le rnidi "
(Bibl. Nat. MSS. Fonds Dupuy, vol. DXC, fol. 298, recto) ; Griffet,
"Histoire de Louis XIII.," vol. Ill, p. 576; Lettre d'Henri
Arnauld, Abbe de Saint-Nicolas, au president Barillon, Dec. 6,
1642 (Bibl. N&t. Fonds Fra^ais, vol. XX, DCXXXV) ; cited by
Barthelemy, loc. cit.

Richelieu as an ^Ecclesiastic. 183

then conjured his physician to tell him frankly
how long he might expect to live, and hearing
that in twenty-four hours he would be dead or
well, he demanded Extreme Unction. When the
parish priest of Saint-Eustache, approaching with
the holy oils, remarked that his high ecclesiastical
rank dispensed him from answering the customary
questions, Richelieu insisted on being treated " like
any ordinary Christian." The priest then recited
the principal articles of faith, and asked him if
he believed in them all. "Absolutely," he replied;
" and would that I had a thousand lives to give
for the faith and the Church ! " — "Do you forgive
all your enemies?" asked the priest. "With all
my heart," he answered ; " and I call God to wit-
ness that I have ever intended only the good of
religion and of the State." Being requested to
pray to God for his recovery, he protested : " God
forbid ! I pray only to do His will." In a few
hours the King heard of his bereavement, and ex-
claimed : " The enemies of France will not profit
by the death of Richelieu. I shall go on with all
he has begun."

PATRITIUM.
TORONTO, CAN.

LOUIS XIII. AS HE WAS.

HISTORY has involved the characters of some per-
sons in an obscurity as impenetrable to our inspection
as that mask with which the famous prisoner of Pig-
nerol and the Bastile was made to hide his identity
from not only his contemporaries, but, it would seem,
from all future investigators. One of these sub-
jects is Louis XIII. But critics have succeeded in
showing at least whom the iron mask did not con-
ceal, though they have failed in determining whom
it did; and just so we of the present - — provided, of
course, that we wish to see — can unmask the coun-
tenance of Louis XIII., and regard him, not as the
puppet of Richelieu, not as a mere nonentity among
kings, but as a monarch worthy of serious consider-
ation.

Louis XIII. had the misfortune of being born be-
tween two consummately great sovereigns: he was
the son of He my IV. and the father of Louis XIV. :
and we are tempted to discern, in all the grandeur
of his reign, either a continuation of the work of
the Bearnais or a preparation for the glories of the
(/rand inonarqne. At most, \vc echo the mass of his-
torians, and regard him as a Hoi Faineant, dropped
out of the eighth century, obeying a red-cassocked
Master of the Palace with all the nonchalance of a

184

Louis XIIL as He Was. 185

true Merovingian — albeit, not lolling in an oxen-
drawn car ; for his warlike qualities are never denied.
Again, while Henry IV., in comparison with Sully,
can hold his own in our estimation, the personality
of Louis XIIL is. nearly obliterated by that of
Richelieu ; and we forget that just as we think no
less of Sully because of the greatness of Henry IV.,
so the greatness of Richelieu should not lessen that
of Louis XIIL ; for in the case of each pair the two
chief constituents of true greatness were allies, not
rivals. Henry IV. was a man of genius, Sully one
of common-sense ; Louis XIIL possessed common-
sense, Richelieu genius.

Louis XIIL has been well styled the Just, and he
would have merited the title had lie been known
for nothing else than his steadfast confidence, in his
Cardinal-Minister. But his contemporaries inform
us that the monarch chafed under the yoke of the
great statesman whom he could not but admire.
We are told that he both envied and feared him
without whom, to use the words of Mme. de Motte-
ville (the first to affirm this aversion), " he could
not live, nor with him." La Rochefoucauld, another
contemporary, says that the King " bore the yoke im-
patiently ;" and that "he hated Richelieu,'' though
'•he never ceased to bend to the Cardinal's will."
Montglat is illogical enough to insist that although
Louis, after the deatli of his minister, assured the
mourning relatives that lie could never forget the
prelate's great services, nevertheless "he was very

186 Louis XIII. as He Was.

glad to be rid of him." * Omer Talon tells us that
" master and valet worried each other to death."
Pontis makes of Louis a man without gratitude ; for
he describes the King as coolly remarking, when he
heard of the Cardinal's demise, " A great politician
has gone ; " f and nearly all writers from Pontis to
Bulwer have consecrated the phrase as an illustra-
tion of the King's real appreciation of Richelieu.
Bazin goes so far as to proclaim that Louis XIII.
entertained no friendship whatever for the Cardi-
nal. £ Guizot would have us believe that " Louis
experienced an instinctive repugnance 'for his Min-
ister, and he never showed more than a reasonable
fidelity toward a servant whom he did not love. "
Well, if Louis XIII. felt all the jealousy for
Richelieu that these authors discern, if he was
merely what most small-minded men are in the
face of the great, then he exercised a magnanimity
toward his bete noir which ought to excite our ven-
eration. By keeping power in the hands of one
who dwarfed him, when by a word he could have
relegated him into obscurity; by sacrificing his
jealousy to the glory of France, he gained a victory
over self such as we may seldom find in the annals
of monarchy. But alas ! this picture is imaginary.
Louis XIII. was simply the friend of Richelieu.

* "Memoires de Montglat," idem.— Brienne uses almost the
same terms : " Le roi fut tout ravi d'en etre defait."

t " Memoires de Pontis," idem, vol. ii.

$ " Histoire de France sous Louis XIII.,." in preface, and in
vol. ii, p. 456. Paris, 1842.

Louis XIII. as He Was. 187

In 1875 M. Marius Topin published two hundred
and fifty-eight letters of Louis XIII. to Richelieu,
which he had dug out of the archives of the For-
eign Office at Paris, that immense sleeping chamber
of history. These letters are authentic in style,
orthography, and signature ; and they completely
destroy the common idea concerning the relations
of Louis with his great Minister, while they furnish
a view of the King's character which differs much
from that obtained, for instance, from the impressive
drama of Bulwer. They show us that Louis never
ceased to love the Cardinal, or to confide entirely
'in him. Every line manifests the fact that, while
their minds were of very unequal calibre, they were
equally devoted to the welfare of their country.
And what was the secret; demands M. Topin, by
which Richelieu ever preserved the full confidence
of his sovereign? He never acted but for the
good of the State, and he never kept the King
in ignorance of his projects. This is proved also
by the seven enormous volumes of the Cardinal's
letters, published by Avenel.

The most ambitious and able intriguer could
scarcely hope to supplant Richelieu in the heart of
him who was informed of every project immediately
on its conception. When separated far from each
other, even though, as was generally the case, the
Cardinal enjoyed unlimited powers, couriers were
constantly bearing from Richelieu to the King de-
tailed accounts of the public business. And we

188 Louis Xni. as He Was.

notice that generally it was Louis who formed the
decisive resolution, even though the genius of his
Minister may have prepared the royal mind for such
action. In fact, many reports of the Cardinal bear
marginal notes which indicate that Louis frequently
resolved on a course diametrically opposite to that
advised by the former. When the King was not
with the army, he assisted at every meeting of his
council, and clearly asserted his will.

" Richelieu," says Topin, after having carefully
examined these letters of both Cardinal and King,
"while charging himself with the execution of the
royal will, of course gave to it the imprint of his
own strength ; and hence he appeared as its origi-
nator to the governors, intendants, generals, ambas-
sadors, etc., to whom he communicated his develop-
ment of the royal opinion. Doubtless the salient
traits of the royal policy were the Cardinal's own
insinuation, and it was nearly always his genius
which discerned the means most adapted to secure
the end in view. But for persistence in following
the path once chosen, for firmness and energy in
maintaining their common system, we must place
Louis XIII. alongside his Eminence."

It might interest the reader were we to quote
extensively from the correspondence so fortunately
rescued from oblivion by the researches of M. Topin,
but our space confines us to one letter. In 1626 the
French court was divided as to the feasibility of a
marriage which had been projected by Henry IV.

Louis XIII. as He Was. 189

between Gaston d' Orleans, the brother of Louis, and
Mile, de Montpensier. Richelieu and the King
favored this union, while the Cardinal's foes per-
suaded Gaston that his own treacherous ambition
would be better advanced by an alliance with some
foreign princess. As a coup de main, Richelieu ten-
dered his resignation, whereupon Louis wrote thus :
tw My cousin,* I have read your reasons for seeking
repose. I desire your comfort and health more than
oven you can desire them, provided that you find
them in the guidance of my affairs. Since you have
been with me all has gone well, under the divine
blessing, and I have full confidence in you. Never
have I been served so well as by you. Therefore I
beg of you not to retire. ... Be assured that I shall
protect you against all persons whomsoever." Nor
was his promise mere empty words; Louis XIII.
could enforce respect to his will. " It is enough that
it is I who wish it," he once said to the Cardinal,
when making a similar promise. We shall give
another instance of the King's solicitous affection
for Richelieu.

The war for the Maiituan succession, begun in
1629, was at its height when the King was seized
by a dangerous illness. During the crisis of the
inn lady all the anxiety of Louis was for his Minister.
Thv1 enemies of Richelieu, headed by the queen-
mother, Marie del Medici, were making every effort

* This was the style in which the kings of France always
wrote to cardinals, as well as to marshals.

190 Louis XIII. as He Was.

to unseat him ; but Louis was indomitably faithful
to the interest which he felt to be that of France.
On the decisive day of his illness he sent for the
Duke of Montmorency and said to him: "I have
two favors to ask of you. One is that you continue
to show your wonted interest in the State ; the
other, that for love of me you love the Cardinal
Richelieu." * And the affection of Louis XIII. for
his Minister survived the life of its object. Witness
the following letter written by the monarch on the
day after the Cardinal's death (1642). and compare
the impression produced by it to that conveyed con-
cerning the shallowness of Louis by the drama of
Bulwer.

" M. the Marquis de Fontenay : As everyone
knows the signal services rendered me by my
cousin the Cardinal-Duke de Richelieu, and the
many advantages which, by God's blessing, I have
obtained through his counsels, no one can doubt that
I grieve as I ought for the loss of so good and faith-
ful a Minister. But I wish the world to know, by
means of my own testimony on every possible occa-
sion, how dear his memory is to me. ... I have
resolved to retain in office all the persons who have
served me under the administration of my cousin the
Cardinal de Richelieu, and to call to my assistance
my cousin the Cardinal Mazarin, who has given me
so many proofs of his capacity and fidelity on the

* Ducros, "Histoire du Due de Montmorency," vol. i, ch. 22.

Louis XIII. as He Was. 191

many occasions when I have employed him, — proofs
of a devotion as great as though he had been born
my subject. . . . You will communicate all the fore-
going to our Holy Father the Pope, that he may
know that the affairs of this kingdom will continue
in the same course they have so long followed."

And this devotion to the memory of Richelieu
was proved not only by the appointment of Mazarin,
whom he had 'desired as a successor, but was evinced
by Louis XIII. when death called upon him. When
he found that his life was drawing to a close, he
actuated the design of Richelieu, by appointing the
Queen, Anne of Austria, regent indeed of the king-
dom, but with Mazarin as guide, that the policy of
the great Minister might continue in force.

Besides the letters of Louis XIII. to Richelieu, the
French Archives disgorged, a few years ago, another
important historical monument which administrative
imbecility had hitherto hidden from the student.
M. Paul Faugeres, like a Benedictine in miniature,
disinterred from the dust of centuries and published
an unedited work of the Duke de Saint-Simon,
nothing less than a " Comparison between the First
Three Bourbon Kings." Saint-Simon was seventy-
two years old when he began this work; age had
somewhat mollified the irritated passions of the
"great disdained" of Louis XIV., but had not les-
sened the talent of probably the most accomplished
delineator who ever came to the aid of history. He
had not been personally acquainted with Louis XIII.,

192 Louis XIII. as He Was.

as he was with the more glorified son ; but his own
father, who owed everything to the former monarch,
had imbued his young mind with sentiments of
ardent admiration for one whom he rightly regarded
as pre-eminent among the misunderstood of history.

Saint-Simon saw Henry IV. and Louis XIV. re-
splendent with a glory which was undeniable, even
in the face of hatred, while Louis XIII. was almost
effaced by the proximity of his father and his son.
To draw his own father's benefactor forth from an
unmerited obscurity became the ambition of the great
portrayer; and they who have been accustomed to
recur to his " Memoirs " for most of their knowledge
of the period in which he lived, have now the oppor-
tunity of contemplating a restored Louis XIII., — a
figure, strange to say, even more resplendent than
those which have hitherto attracted exclusive admi-
ration. A contemporary critic of great acumen, M.
Barbey d'Aur evilly, is enthusiastic in his praise of
the manner in which Saint-Simon fulfilled his task :

" The part of genius in history is to discover. In
history, where nothing is created (for otherwise it
would not be history) ; in history, where the imagi-
nation has the right only to depict, but not to invent,
as it may in many other spheres of human activity,
— genius can only play the part of a superior faculty
in discovering, in men and things as they were, new
but real points of view until then unknown and even
unsuspected. The more of these points of view that
are discovered, the greater is the genius. It is this

Louis XIII. as He Was. 193

power of genius, equal in history to the power of
creation in the other domains of thought, which
shines in all its fulness and strength in this parallel
of the first three Bourbon kings, as it is styled by
Saint-Simon, in his special and singular language.
In this long comparison he speaks admirably of the
two whom we knew ; but he has discovered the
third, of whom we knew nothing, at least in his com-
plete and sublime entireness. . . . The violent and
irritated soul of this man baffled in his ambition, of
this 'despised one' of Louis XIV., 'this soul whose
rage may have produced its genius, promised itself,
as a supreme duty and a last satisfaction, to some
day narrate that life of Louis XIII. which he knew
from his father, and to compare it with those of the
two glorified kings between whom his favorite had
been buried in insignificance. Such was to be the
swan's song of that man who was anything rather
than a swan ; who was rather an eagle, — the cruel
eagle of history, which in his 4 Memoirs ' he so often
lacerated.

" And this tardy justice, rendered to the memory
of a man who had disappeared behind the intersect-
ing rays of his father's and his son's glory, produces
*two novelties. It gives us a Louis XIII., we must
admit, greater than the men who caused him to be
forgotten ; and a Saint-Simon whose genius attains
its fulness in an emotion of the heart, and who
reaches, for the first time, to the divine in tender-
ness. ... Of course the crushing club of Hercules,

194 Louis XIII as He Was.

used of old in the 'Memoirs,' falls as furiously as
ever on all that Saint-Simon hates ; but it is rather
for their qualities than their faults that he compares
the three kings whom he judges ; and it is his serene
manner of comparison which endows his book with
an imposing sweetness of impartiality. . . ." *

After a study of the parallel by Saint-Simon and
of the correspondence unearthed by M. Topin, one
finds that our pleasing dramatist, Bulwer, is guilty
of gross injustice to the moral character of Louis
XIII. The whole underplot of his play, some of its
most impressive situations, and many of its most
elevated sentiments, turn on the supposed libertinism
of the monarch. Now, he was pre-eminently a
chaste man ; so much so that he excited ridicule in
a court too often the resort of mauvais sujets. One
of the chief reasons for the extravagant admiration
felt for Henry IV. by Frenchmen is the fact that he
was a lady's man, the vert galant. A people over-
given to gallantry and raillery may admire the virtue
of a St. Louis or a St. Edward the Confessor —
a virtue which is the development of religious
heroism in conflict with passion — but they will
scarcely respect mere frigidity of temperament, which,
according to common report, was the source of the
virtue of Louis XIII.

Behold, then, one reason, for the relegation of this
monarch to obscurity. As the idea is expressed by

* " Les CEuvres et Les Hommes du XlXine Siecle: Sensations
d'Histoire," vol. viii, p. 60. Paris, 1887.

Louis XIII. as He Was. 195

Aurevilly, Louis XIV. could say to La Valli£re, like
Hamlet to Ophelia, " Get thee to a nunnery ; " but
it was when too late. Louis XIII. might have said
so to Mile. La Fayette, but before the catastrophe.
As for the assertions concerning the morality of
Louis XIII., they are perverse even unto indecency ;
but at most they assign to Louis accomplices Avho
are very uncertain.

We have shown that we are not obliged to accept
our view of the character of Louis XIII.,. or of his
relations with Richelieu, from the olden historians or
from modern romancists and playwrights. To obtain
a view of Louis it is not necessary to peer over the
shoulders of his Minister. Richelieu did not absorb
in his own the very personality of his sovereign,
but rather, to use his own language, was the most
passionately devoted of subjects and servants. In
fine, Richelieu existed as Minister only by the will of
Louis ; and it is to the glory of that monarch that he
never dismissed him whom a recalcitrant and jealous
nobility, a cowardly and treacherous brother, and an
unscrupulous and soulless mother, united in opposing
even to the death. Each was the complement of the
other; and the reign of Louis XIII. may well be
called that of Richelieu, the ministry of Richelieu
that of Louis XIII.

The death of this so long misunderstood monarch
occurred on May 14, 1643, and it was one befitting
a sovereign whose devotion to Our Lady had caused
him to institute as the national feast of France the

196 Louis XIII. as He Was.

festival of her glorious Assumption. * The great
Protestant jurisconsult, Grotius, then Swedish ambas-
sador to the French court, wrote of the edifying
scene : " I do not believe that we can find an instance
of any king — nay, of any Christian — disposing
himself for death with greater piety." Well may
Cardinal Mazarin have written, during the King's
illness, to the Cardinal- Archbishop of Lyons, a
brother of the great Minister, his predecessor :

" I would be wanting in gratitude were I wanting
in sadness. The beautiful and wonderful circum-
stances attending the King's illness increase this
sentiment, although in some sense they lessen it ; and
I cannot contemplate them without a kind of pleas-
ure, seeing as I do that they must add to his glory.
Nor can I behold them without a fuller realization of
the extent of our imminent loss. In fact, it is
impossible to imagine a greater force of soul in so
much Aveakness of body than his Majesty has shown.
No one in his condition could have arranged his
affairs more clearly or more judiciously. No one
could regard death more calmly, or show more resig-
nation to the will of God. In a \vord, if Providence
has decreed that this malady shall take the King
from us, Ave shall be able to say that no career Avas
ever more Christianly, more charitably or more
bravely fulfilled."

* " L'idee d'une belle mort cm d'une mort Chretienne dans le
recit de la fin heureuse de Louis XIII., surnomme le Juste, roi de
France et de Navarre, tire des Memoires de feu Jacques Dinet,
son confesseur, etc.," in the Lib. Nat., cited by Barthelemy,
loc. cit.

THE NATURE OF TASSO'S IMPRISON-
MENT.

THAT Torquato Tasso was insane during a
long period of his life, and that he was. subjected
to restraint, although with all due consideration,
is evident from his own letters. But that he
was a victim of unfortunate love and of princely
tyranny, and imprisoned in the ordinary sense
of the term, is untrue.* Credulous and perhaps
sympathetic travellers yet continue to fee the
lachrymose cicerone who shows them the Ferrarese
dungeon, in which the poet is said to have alter-
nately raved and • languished. Byron, Lamartine,
and many other romanticists — sincere and affected,
— have fixed their autographs on the walls of the
cell, in sign of fraternal commiseration. The
municipal authorities, with a prudent desire to
add to the attractions of their city, yet allow the
inscription " Entrance to the Prison of Torquato
Tasso " to entice the open-mouthed tourist of
average calibre. Nevertheless, the confinement of
Tasso was scarcely more of an imprisonment than
that of Galileo, and* one can account for the

* Cf. Valery, " Curiosites et Anecdotes Italiennes," Paris,
1842.

197

198 The Nature of Tasso' s imprisonment.

obstinate hold of the tradition only in the words
of the poet — that man is ice for truth, but fire
for lies. *

None of the educated inhabitants of Ferrara
believe the aforesaid prison to have been occupied
by Tasso during his confinement in their city.
How would it have been possible, they ask, for
a man of gigantic stature, such as Tasso was,
to have dwelt for several years in quarters so
restricted, and yet to have been able to engage
successfully in literary labor? The dungeon in
question is only six feet high, and yet it is cer-
tain that during his restraint the poet revised
his great work, and composed, among others, his
several philosophical Dialogues. Madame de Stael,
so given to commiserating illustrious misfortune,
remarks Barthe'lemy, did not credit the story.
Goethe, says Ampere, f made many careful re-
searches on this subject, and concluded that the
alleged dungeon of the poet is not authentic.
Again, none of the important personages, notably
Scipio Gonzaga, who visited Tasso in his time
of trouble, allude to any physical inconvenience
entailed or aggravated by the condition of his
domicile. As to the poet's treatment by his cus-
todians, it could not have been very severe, since
his only important complaint was that he did

* «• L'homme est de glace aux ve"rit6s,
II est de feu pour le mensonge."

t In a letter from Weimar, May 9, 1827.

The Nature of Tasso's Imprisonment. 199

" not have sufficient fine sugar for the morrow's
salad"; and -that his nightcaps were less elegant
and dainty than those he had hitherto worn.*

At the age of twenty-two Tasso was received
into the magnificent court of Alfonso d' Este,
Duke of Ferrara, to whose brother, the Cardinal
Louis, he had already dedicated his "Rinaldo."
He soon rose to great favor. The Duke appointed
him to the chair of geometry in the University,
and entrusted him with the continuation of the
14 History of the House of Este," begun by the
famous Pigna, his late secretary. It is said that
he was beloved by Eleonora, the Duke's sister.
"Is it possible," asks Cantu, "that envy should
not pursue him, and therefore also calumny?
More than alive to his own merits, he fancied
that the lackeys insulted him, and that he was
opposed in his affections. Mistrust became habit-
ual to him. He imagined that his letters were
intercepted and that his desk was rifled. Scipio
Gonzaga holds reunions of his friends, and he
suspects that they meet in order to ridicule his
poetry; he distrusts Count Tassoni, who welcomes
him to Modena; he doubts the sincerity of Cardi-
nal dei Medici, who offers him protection if the
Duke should ever abandon him. The servants
laugh at his absurdities, while the courtiers take
pleasure in compassionating one whose genius

* Unedited Letters, Nos. 79 and 83..

200 The Nature of Tasso's Imprisonment.

mortifies themselves. Then he cuffs them all,
even uses his dagger, and bursts into tirades
against the Duke." *

Convinced of the poet's insanity, Alfonso placed
him under medical care, and forbade him to write.
But Tasso imagined all sorts of dangers, and fled
in disguise to Naples, then to Venice, Padua, f
and other places. Finally worse befell him. Some
time before, he- had applied to the Inquisitor at
Bologna, and accused himself of doubts concerning
the Incarnation ; and the reply had been : u Sick
man, go in peace." Now he again felt these
scruples, and having once more applied to the
Holy Office, was dismissed with encouragement.
But the unfortunate continued to be a burden to
himself and his friends ; and at length the Duke,
regarding his reason as irretrievably lost, consigned
him to the Hospital of St. Anna, in March, 1579.

Few men have talked more about themselves
than Tasso ; but he does not reveal the real secret
of his troubles, although he plainly admits that

* "Illustri Italian!," vol. i, p. 414. Milan, 1879.

t The famous General, Sforza Pallavicino, happened to be in
Padua during Tasso's visit, and expressed a desire to meet him.
"When Tasso waited upon him, accompanied by four friends,
Pallavicino drew a chair near to himself (he was suffering from
gout), and begged the poet to be seated. Tasso ran out of the
room, and afterward excused himself to his companions, saying,
" We must sometimes teach politeness to these people. Why did
the man show that attention only to me? "

The Nature of Tasso's Imprisonment. 201

he was at one time crazy. Writing on December
25, 1581, to Cattaneo, he says : " One of my letters
has disappeared, and I think that a goblin has
taken it; ... and this is one of the wonders that
I have seen in this hospital. . . . But amid all
these terrors I have seen in the air the image of
the glorious Virgin with her Son in her arms. . . .
And although these may be fancies — for I am a
lunatic, and am troubled nearly always by infinite
melancholy and by various phantasms, — by the
grace of God I yield no consent to these
things. ... If I mistake not, my lunacy was
caused about three years ago, by certain sweets
I had eaten. . . . My disease is so strange that
it might deceive a physician, and hence I deem
it the work of a magician ; and it would be a
mercy to take me from this place, in which en-
chanters are allowed to exercise such power over
me. ... I must tell you something more about
this goblin. The little thief has stolen from me
I know not how much money. . * . He upsets my
books, opens my boxes, and steals my keys."

The unfortunate tried many remedies. Endeav-
oring to discover why he was so " persecuted,"
he examines every accusation which could, rightly
or wrongly, be brought against him, and then
lie turns to God and excuses himself for infi-
delity. "Both within and without I am infected
with the vices of the flesh and the darkness of
the world; and I have thought of Thee in the

202 The Nature of Tasso's Imprisonment.

same way in which I used to think of the ideas
of Plato or of the atoms of Democritus, and
such like matters of the philosophers, which are
rather creatures of their fancy than of Thy
hands. ... I have doubted whether Thou didst
create the world, or whether it was independent
of Thee from all eternity; whether Thou hast
given to man an immortal soul, and whether
Thou didst descend to earth in order to put on
our humanity. . . . And yet it pained me to doubt,
and I would have compelled my intellect to be-
lieve of Thee what our Holy Church believes. . . .
I confessed and communicated as Thy Roman
Church commands, . . . and I consoled myself
with the belief that Thou wouldst pardon the
unbelief of those whose deficiency was not en-
couraged by 'obstinacy or malignity. . . . Thou
knowest how I have ever abhorred the name of
Lutheran or heretic as a pestiferous thing."

It was while he was thus afflicted that Tasso re-
ceived a shock which none but an author can ap-
preciate. He was just about to revise and give the
finishing touches to his " Jerusalem Delivered" when
he learned that the poem had appeared in Venice
(1580), and that it was by no means what he had
intended it should be ere it would be given to the
public. The negligence of a friend had permitted a
speculator to obtain an original draft of the work ;
and now the world was criticising, as by the author
of the admired " Rinaldo," a poem filled with merely

The Nature of Tassels Imprisonment. 203

tentative and temporary expressions, and distorted,
perhaps, by innumerable lacunae. To make the mat-
ter worse, the presses of all Italy and of France soon
multiplied editions of this imperfect publication ; for
the impatience to read anything new by Tasso was
universal. The famous Academy of the Crusca,
which then, as for a long time since, exercised an
almost tyrannical influence in literary matters, and
which, Cantu somewhat bitterly says, " like all
Academies, availed itself of the dead, who inspire no
jealousy, to mortify the living," was very severe on
the new poem. This and other criticisms, especially
one by Leonardo Salviati, of course irritated the
unsettled mind of Tasso ; but a visit to Marfisia
d'Este, Princess of Massa, which the Duke allowed
him to make during the summer, greatly restored
him.

Manfredi, another famous poet, visited Tasso in
1583, and submitted for his judgment his own trag-
edy of " Semiramis." He found the invalid in fair
mental condition. Many other persons of note also
visited our poet, among whom the most acceptable
appears to have been the Benedictine lyric writer,
Angelo Grillo, who returned again and again to pass
entire days with his friend. Meanwhile all Europe
was compassionating Tasso's misfortune ; from all
quarters he received verbal encouragement, and in
many instances substantial tokens of sympathy in
the shape of valuable presents. Many believed that
freedom would contribute to his restoration more

204 The Nature of Tassels Imprisonment.

than confinement; and hence we find requests to
Duke Alfonso from Popes Gregory XIII. and Sixtus
V., from the Cardinal Albert of Austria, the Em-
peror Rudolph, the Grand-Duke of Tuscany and his
consort, the Duke of Urbino, the Duchess of Mantua,
and the municipality of Bergamo, for his release.
On July 6, 1586, Alfonso delivered him to the care
of the Prince of Mantua, and he was once again a
free man. Cardinal di Gonzaga gave him hospitality
in his own palace at Rome, and the Pope assigned
him a yearly revenue of two hundred golden scudi.
Genoa invited him to explain Aristotle in her Uni-
versity, assigning him four hundred scudi as regular
salary, and as much more in perquisites. But noth-
ing could induce Tasso to lead a regular life : he
wandered here and there, until finally he sought an
asylum in the hospital of the Bergamaschi in Rome.
Often he suffered from want of ready money, and
frequent were his applications to the pawnshops.*

In 1594 our poet learned that Pope Clement VIII.,
at the instance of his nephew, the Cardinal Aldo-
brandini, had decreed him the honors of a triumph
at the Capitol. "They are preparing my coffin," he
replied; but as no poet would dream of declining
the laureate, he set out for the Eternal City. On

* There is yet extant a receipt as follows: "I the undersigned
declare that I have received from Abraham Levi the suui of
twenty-five lire, for which he holds in pledge one of rny father's
swords, six shirts, four bed-sheets, and two towels. March 2, 1570.
Torquato Tasso."

The Nature of Tasso's Imprisonment. 205

the way from Naples, where he had been residing
for some time, he stopped three days with his beloved
Benedictines of Montecasino. "If misfortune come
to you," said the abbot, "come to us. This monas-
tery is used to giving hospitality to the unhappy."
Tasso answered : " I go to Rome to be crowned
laureate on the Capitol, taking as companions of my
triumph sickness and poverty. However, I go will
ingly ; for I love the Eternal City as the centre of
the faith. My refuge has always been the Church,
— the Church, my mother, more tender than any
mother."

Arriving at the gates of the Catholic metropolis,
Tasso found an immense multitude — prelates, nobles,
knights, and citizens — waiting to salute him and
to escort him to the Vatican. The Cardinal Aldo-
brandini took him in his own carriage to the palace,
where the Pontiff welcomed him, saying, "We are
about to confer upon you the crown of laurel, which
you will honor, whereas hitherto it has honored those
who have worn it." His reception over, his cardinal
protector would have taken Tasso to his own palace
to wait for the coronation ceremonies ; but the poet
felt that his^end was drawing near, and begged to be
allowed to lodge in the Hieronymite convent of Sant'
Onofrio on the Janiculum.

In this home of peace, and often reposing under
the branches of the oak which, only a few days
before,* had sheltered St. Philip Neri and his class

* St. Philip died just one month before Tasso.

206 The Nature of Tasso's Imprisonment.

of little Romans, the wearied genius hearkened to
the gentle Hieronymites as they prepared him for
his last journey. Toward the end he wrote to a
friend : " The world has so far conquered as to lead
me, a beggar, to the grave ; whereas I had thought
to have had some profit from that glory which, in
spite of those who wish it not, will attend my writ-
ings." He made a holy death, in his fifty-second
year, on April 25, 1595. During his magnificent
funeral ceremonies, which were attended by the en-
tire pontifical court, the laurel crown was placed on
his brow. The monument which Cardinal Aldobran-
dini had designed to erect over the remains of his
protege was, for some reason, never undertaken ;
but Cardinal Bevilacqua, of Ferrara, disinterred
them, and placed them in a small mausoleum in
Sant' Onofrio. Afterward the late Pontiff, Pius
IX., at his private expense, erected a magnificent
monument, and placed the remains therein (1857),
in a beautifully renovated chapel of the same church.

WICKED VENICE.

To the average mind the history of Venice is
a bloody and lurid melodrama. Dungeons under
the canals, cells exposed to the fury of an almost
torrid sun, hidden doors ever menacing an egress of
spies and assassins, virtue and valor ever succumbing
to dagger or to poison ; and all these under the
aegis of a Government proclaiming itself Christian
and popular.

Such is the picture arising before him who
reads the current tales of Venice, or who gazes
on a stage representation of Venetian story. Until
the nineteenth century had dawned, this idea of
Venice was mainly one of English and Protestant
creation. Heretical hatred and commercial rivalry
had combined to foster prejudice against that
Catholic republic, which had been for centuries
the wealthiest among the great states of Europe.
But with our century came the necessity, on the
part of France, of justifying a great national
crime. Fair Venice lay a corpse at the feet of
the French revolutionary tiger, and it was but
natural that her murderers should insist that she
had merited her fate. Behold, then, French
writers of serious calibre heaping obloquy on the
memory of the Queen of the Adriatic ! Of course

207

208 Wicked Venice.

German authors swelled the chorus, for a German
power had profited by the crime of France ; and
a trade in peoples had to be justified, if nothing
else would do it, by the supposed vileness of the
bartered. Nearly universal, therefore, has been the
cry against Venetian cruelty, dishonesty, tyranny,
and malignant cunning.

One of the most noted illustrations of the
mysteries of Venice is the drama of "Angelo,"
by M. Victor Hugo. The poet had used the
poison and daggers of the Ten, the secret pas-
sages, loathsome dungeons, etc., to the utmost ;
and certain critics ventured to challenge the
probability of his mise en scene. In one of the
notes of his published drama, Hugo appealed
to the authority of Count Daru, the historian of
the First Empire, and to the " Statutes of the
State Inquisition " * of Venice, furnished by that

* The " Inquisizione di Stato " of Venice must not be con-
founded with either the Roman (Holy Office) or the Spanish
Inquisition. The Roman was an ecclesiastical tribunal, the
Spanish a royal one ; but both took cognizance of heresies and
similar crimes. The Venetian tribunal, made permanent in 1454,
was purely political, and was composed of three persons — two
chosen from the Ten, and one from the council of the doge.
Its jurisdiction was universal, not eA^en the doge being excepted.
Originally it was called the "Inquisizione dei Dieci," but in 1610
the style was changed to that of " Inquisizione di Stato." Its
power was unlimited in all affairs of state and of police. It
disposed of the treasury, gave instruction to ambassadors, etc.,
and on occasion deposed the doge. "When, however, it undertook
to judge the Doge Marino Faliero, it called a giunta of twenty
nobles, which body remained permanent until 1582,

Wicked Venice. 209

writer. We give a synopsis of these statutes,
which, according to Daru, bear the date of
June 12, 1454:

In the sixteenth it is decreed that when the
tribunal deems it necessary to put any one to
death, the execution must not be public ; the
condemned must, if possible, be drowned in the
Canal of the Orphans (Canal Orfano). The
twenty-eighth establishes that if any Venetian
noble reveals that he has been corruptly ap-
proached by a foreign ambassador, he shall be
authorized to enter into the proposed relations;
when the affair has culminated, the intermediary
agent is to be drowned, providing, however, that
he be not the ambassador himself or some person
generally known. The fortieth provides for the
institution of spies, not only in the capital, but
in all the principal cities of the republic. These
agents will report in person to the tribunal, twice
a year, as to the conduct of the officers in their
respective districts. In a supplement to the stat-
utes, provision is made to the effect that any one
who so talks as to promise public disturbance,
shall be warned; if he continues the practice, he
may be drowned. The twenty-eighth provision is
for ridding the state of any prisoner whom it
may be impolitic to punish openly. A jailer is to
feign to sympathize with him, and, having previ-
ously administered to him a slow and untraceable
poison, he must allow the victim to escape.

210 Wicked Venice.

Daru tells us that he found these statutes,
hitherto unknown,* in the Royal Library of
Paris. They were bound in a quarto volume,
together with another work which bore the title,
" Opinion of Father Paul, Servite, Councillor of
State, as to the best manner of governing the
Venetian Republic, both as to internal and ex-
ternal affairs, that it may enjoy perpetual pros-
perity." The Servite priest was no other than
Paul Sarpi, the celebrated adversary of the Holy
See whenever its temporal claims came into
collision with the pretensions of Venice ; and
Daru, who was naturally of the opinion that Sarpi
was to be revered as an authority, gladly embraced
the idea that the juxtaposition of the statutes,
in one volume, with the advice on Venetian
government, was a proof that the Servite had also
published the statutes.

We would be willing to accept the authority
of Sarpi in this matter, but we are forced to yield
to the arguments which show that he was the
author of neither one of the works enclosed in
Daru's treasure-trove. f But, granting the value
of Sarpi in the premises, there are several good
reasons for rejecting these statutes as un authentic.

* "I know of no writer," says Daru, "even among the
Venetians, who has spoken of these statutes." See " Histoire de
la Re'publique de Venice," edit. 1821, vol. vi, p. 385.

t See an excellent article in the British Review for October,
1877, p. 337. The falsity of these statutes, and of many of Darn's
assertions concerning Venice, was perfectly demonstrated by
Count Tiepolo in his " Discorsi sulla Storia Veneta," Udine, 1828.

Wicked Venice. 211

In the first place, how is it that no investigator
has ever found any allusion to these provisions
in any document of an age anterior to Dam's
manuscript? According to the very constitution
of the Venetian Government, such measures
could not have been decreed without the sanction
of the Great Council, and after having passed
through all tke formalities of registration in the
archives of the Ten. And no search has yet dis-
covered them.

Again, the alleged statutes are full of errors
such as no Venetian jurisconsult of the fifteenth
century could have committed. Thus, at that
period all the judicial and official documents of
the republic were drawn up in Latin, whereas these
alleged statutes are couched in the Venetian
dialect, which did not come into vogue until a
century afterward. Again, these decrees are pro-
nounced in the name of the " State Inquisitors,"
a title not given to these magistrates before 1610.
Finally, in these ordinances the Inquisitors assert
jurisdiction over the prisoners in the P iambi,
whereas these apartments were not used as
prisons until 1594. These statutes, therefore, are
apocryphal; and, so far as they are the founda-
tion of the accusations against Venice, we must
banish from our minds all the pictures which have
been designed to represent the Venetian legislature
as a congregation of demons, rather than an assem-
bly of grave and reverend lords.

212. Wicked Venice.

How do the calumniators of Venice wish us to
account for the internal peace which reigned in
the republic for so many centuries ? We find no
rebellions either at home or in the colonies ; and
this in spite of frequent famines, plagues, wars,
and excommunications. Had such a cancer as the
foes of Venice suppose existed, and in the very
heart of the nation, devouring by degrees every
vestige of liberty and destroying all sense of
security, would the republic have remained so
uniformly contented and prosperous? It was in
1468, fifteen years after the supposed statutes
had been put in force, that the illustrious Cardinal
Bessarion, Patriarch of Constantinople, when pre-
senting his valuable library to the republic, thus
expressed himself : " What country offers one so
sure a refuge as yours, governed by equity, integrity,
and wisdom? Here virtue, moderation, gravity,
justice and good faith have fixed their abode. Here
power, even though great and extensive, is as just
as gentle. Here the wise govern, the good command
the perverse, a.nd particular interests are ever sacri-
ficed to the general welfare."

Such reflections as these caused Valery (one of
the most noted of French travellers, and better
acquainted with Italy than most foreigners are) to
write in 1838: "I have abandoned my prejudices
concerning the Venetian Inquisitors, and I did
so with great satisfaction ; for it is refreshing to
find at least fewer oppressors in history. It is to

Wicked Venice. 213

be regretted that an enlightened historian like Dara
should have believed in the pretended statutes of
the 4 State Inquisition,' which he found in manuscript
in the Royal Library, and which are regarded by all
educated Venetians as apocryphal and as fabricated
by an ignorant enemy of the republic. The State
Inquisitors were guardians of the laws, and silent
tribunes dear to the people. The Inquisitors de-
fended the people against the excesses of aristocratic
power." *

It has been remarked that modern Venetians seem
to have no fear of any thorough investigations into
the early 'history of their country. They rather
court it, as is evidenced by the zeal with which they
began, immediately after the close of the Austrian
domination, to publish the most important treasures
of their hitherto impenetrable archives. Among
these is a collection of documents referring to the
history of the palace of the doge. It contains the
minutes of the sittings of the Council of Ten from
1254 to 1600; and we can not find in it the least
trace of, for instance, the drownings said to have
been decreed in the alleged statutes. As well look
for indication of some burning at the stake in Venice,
— in that country which, alone among all European
lands, never witnessed that horror. As to the name
of the Canal Orfano, in which so many victims of a
wicked statecraft are said to have been remorselessly

* " Voyage en Italie," vol. i, p. 314.

214 Wicked Venice.

drowned, that designation is not necessarily derived
from the fact of so many orphans having been made
in it by order of the Inquisitors ; for modern Vene-
tians believe that this canal was so called centuries
before the State Inquisition came into existence.

Much has been said about the convenient oppor-
tunity afforded to malignity by the provision of a
receptacle for anonymous denunciations to the In-
quisitors. Certainly there was no more connection
between this "Lion's mouth" and tyranny, than
there is between tyranny and the P. O. boxes hang-
ing from our lamp-posts. And as to the anonymous
letters addressed to the Inquisitors, a law of 1387
decreed that they should be immediately burned.
And when, toward the end of the sixteenth century,
such demonstrations were sometimes admitted, no
proceedings could be taken against the accused
without a vote of four-fifths of the Council. And
it is to be noted that the precautions taken against
false testimony and false accusations were greater in
Venice than in any other land.

It has been said that the main reservoir was so
situated in the precincts of the ducal palace that the
authorities could at once quell a rebellion by shutting
off the supply of water. But besides the two mag-
nificent reservoirs in the palace court, there were
many others in other places, and nearly eveiy pri-
vate house had its own well or cistern. Documents
as old as 1033 speak of a board of magistrates simi-
lar to one aqueduct commissioners, whose first duty

Wicked Venice. 215

was to see that every new house was supplied with a
well.

And now a word on the Piombi, those cells of
alleged torture in the uppermost story of the ducal
palace, immediately under the leaden roof. It will
be interesting to quote the testimony of Daniel
Manin, the patriotic dictator during the Venetian
revolution of 1848, concerning these supposed inven-
tions of human malignity. A Parisian critic having
occasion to review a work which bemoaned the
"mysteries of Venice," and dilated pitifully on the
"Bridge of Sighs," on the "horrible Piombi" etc.,
he showed his article to the patriot. Having read
it, Manin thus addressed him : " Can it be possible
that you, an educated and serious man, believe these
nonsensical yarns ? Do you still credit the tales of
your nursery days ? I know these Piombi and these
Pozzi ; I have been confined therein, and I can assure
you that they are by no means uncomfortable lodg-
ings. Believe me when I say that all this talk about
the cruelties of Venice is an old wife's tale."

Then Manin showed his astonished friend how the
Most Serene Republic could not have survived so
gloriously for so many centuries had its government
not been indulgent and popular.* In fact, to this day
the Venetians preserve an affectionate remembrance
of that government; and hence it was that they
so gladly proclaimed and sustained their republic

* J. Morey,inthe " Illustrations et Celebrites duXIXe Siecle,"
vol. v. Paris, 1884.

216 Wicked Venice.

of 1848, whereas elsewhere the Italian movement
was merely the work of a revolutionary faction.
These Piombi could not have been glaciers in winter
and furnaces in summer, when Howard, the great
English prison reformer, avowed their healthfullness.*
Again, it is not true that they were located imme-
diately under the roof of the palace. Ruskin
carefully measured the space between the prison
cells and the roof, and he found it was in some
places nine metres high, and in others never less
than five, f

Twelve years before the fall of the Venetian
Republic the celebrated astronomer Lalande said
of the State Inquisitors: "They are distinguished
more for their wisdom than for talent. They are
chosen from among men whose age guarantees free-
dom from passion and from the dangers of prejudice
or of corruption. Rarely indeed is there any abuse
of the absolute powers confided to them." J The
reader wrill remember that this praise comes from a
" philosopher." The eminent historian Botta says:
" Venice was without serious trouble for many cen-
turies. She was the object of attack for the most
powerful nations — the Turks, the Germans, and
the French. She was in the road of barbarous
conquerors, and in the midst of revolutions of the

* " State of the prisons in England and Wales, with preliminary
observations and an account of some foreign prisons." London,
1777.

t " Stones of Venice," vol. ii, p. 293; note. London, 1852.

t "Voyage en Italic, Conteuant PHistoire et les Anecdotes les
plus Singulieres de PItalie." Paris, 1786.

Wicked Venice. 217

peoples. Yet she came safe and sound from every
political tempest ; and such was the perfection of her
ancient laws, so deep had struck the roots given
them by time, that she never needed to change their
character. It is my firm conviction that there has
never existed a wiser government than that of Ven-
ice, whether we consider its own preservation or the
happiness of its subjects. For this reason Venice
never had any dangerous factions in her bosom, and
for the same reason she never entertained any fear
of new ideas. ... I do not know whether pity or
indignation should be felt for those who declaim so
fiercely against the Inquisition of Venice, and who
affect to regard the existence of that tribunal as a
justification for the death inflicted on the ancient
and sacred republic." *

The chief reason for the hostility displayed by so
many moderns toward the memory of the Venetian
Republic is the fact that it was pre-eminently " cleri-
cal," as it is the "liberal" fashion nowadays to style
everything not positively hostile to the Catholic
Church. According to the clamorous philosophists
of the liberal school, " clericalism " is a scoffing at
reason, a denial of the sun's light, a cursing of lib-
erty, an exaltation of despotism, a subordination of
all civil power to a theocracy, an ignoring of all the
conquests of modern science, a trampling on human
dignity ; in fine — and this sums up all the iniquities
of "clericalism" — it is a return to the Cimmerian

* " Storia d'ltalia da 1789 a 1814." Florence, 1816.

218 Wicked Venice.

darkness of the Middle Age. Melancholy indeed to
a radical is the spectacle furnished by a capital city
panting under the incubus of two hundred churches,
thirty religious establishments for men, thirty-five
nunneries, and confraternities innumerable. And,
sadder still to relate, every one of these monuments
of Venetian religious devotion owed its origin to
some vow in recognition of a favor obtained from
God.

Well did the republic merit the title of Very
Christian, given to it by Pope Honorius in the
seventh century, the third of its existence. Thirty-
nine times in the year the capital beheld the doge
and senate proceeding in full state, gran gala, to
some church,* in accordance with some vow made
on an occasion of peril to the state. Foreign ob-
servers were always edified by the piety manifested
in the accomplishment of this duty. Commines
wrote in 1494 : " Venice is the most glorious city I
have ever seen, and it is the most wisely governed.
The worship of God is conducted here more worthily
than elsewhere ; and although the Venetians may
have their faults, I believe that God helps them on
account of their reverence for the Church."f

And when the republic was twelve centuries old,

* The ceremonies of Holy Week were especially splendid.
Saint-Didier, in his " La Ville et Bepublique de Venice," written
in 1679, says of the illuminations in Venice on Good Friday night
that then the city was wont to consume more white wax than was
used in all the rest of Italy in a year.

t " Memoircs," b. vii, ch. 8, at year 1494.

Wicked Venice. 219

this spirit was as strong as when the dubious pros-
perity of its infancy drew it to the altars of God.
Albrizzi wrote in 1771 : " The most noteworthy
characteristic of this august republic is its firm and
inviolable attachment to the Catholic Church. The
commanders of her armies, the governors of her fort-
resses, in their wars with the Turks, have defended
the faith with their blood, and often amid most cruel
tortures. In most critical times this wise goveyi-
ment has paid the greatest attention to a preservation
of the faith of Jesus Christ in its purity. . . . The
same zeal is shown to-day. . . . The most conspicuous
monuments of Venice prove the piety of its govern-
ment at eveiy period of its existence. The souvenir
of the many victories of Venice is renewed every
year by some religious ceremony, performed with as
much majesty as appropriateness. The doge, at the
head of the senate, fulfils this pious duty. . . . Hence
we may say that the Venetians are very assiduous
in the practice of their religious duties ; for on every
feast-day, and especially on the festivals of the Holy
Virgin, their protectress,* the churches are filled
with people of every class and condition, all wrapped
in recollection."!

Like other countries, Venice passed through many
struggles with the Holy See, but these were never
concerning matters of faith. Even during her ter-

* The Feast of the Annunciation is the anniversary of the
birth of the capital city. Hence on the pavement of the Church of
Santa Maria della Santk we read: " Unde origo, inde salus."

t II Forestiere Illuminate della Citta di Venezia." Venice, 1771.

220 Wicked Venice.

rible alienation from Rome in the pontificate of Paul
V., the interdict launched by that Pontiff did not
throw her, as the Reformers predicted, into the ranks
of Protestantism. How could such a defection have
been possible, demands Cantu, " when Venice was
thoroughly Catholic ? Her origin, her patrons, her
national festivals, the fine arts, all proclaimed her
such. . . . And," he continues, "let any person of
judgment tell us whether that religion was likely
to perish which was just then erecting so many
sumptuous churches. When the public spirit was
so identified with Catholicism, could an eminently
conservative government have dreamed of so radical
a revolution ? We have studied many documents
concerning the interdict of Venice, and while we
have found much boldness and much discontent, we
have always discerned Christian submission and a
desire for reconciliation." *

But this Christian spirit is displeasing to the lib-
erals of our day, and hence they have re-echoed the
accusations made against Venice by Bonaparte, the
chief author of that great crime by which the ancient
republic was obliterated from the list of nationalities.
Let the reader judge whether these charges were
true ; whether among all governments, that one in
which equality before the law most flourished, that
one which was the most patriotic in all Christendom,
and that one which lived the longest, was precisely
the one which all good people should the most
detest.

* " Gli Eretici d'ltalia," vol. iii, p. 188. Turin, 1866.

THE LAST WORD ON THE MASSACRE
OF ST. BARTHOLOMEW'S DAY.

" ExciDAT ilia dies cevo, nee post era credant
soecula. — Let this day be lost from time, and
posterity ignore the event." Whether these words
of Statins were applied to this fatal day by the
Chancellor de l'H6pital, as Voltaire asserts, or by
the President de Thou, as some contend, no
Catholic will refuse to re-echo them; but, if well
informed, he will not deem himself obliged to
add with the poet, " Nos eerie taceamus." And
nevertheless, it is comparatively but a short time
since Catholic polemics essayed to answer the
allegations of Protestant writers concerning this
event, so fearful were they lest they might be sus-
pected of a wish to apologize for a horrible crime.
We hear much of La Barthe'lemy, but nothing of
La Michelade, that frightful massacre at Nimes on
St. Michael's Day of 1567, when the Protestants an-
ticipated by more than two centuries the horrors
of the Cannes and of the Abbaye (September 2,
1792). Now we propose to demonstrate, firstly,
that religion had nothing to do with this mas-
sacre ; secondly, that it was a matter of mere
worldly policy ; thirdly, that it was not intended
that it should extend beyond Paris ; fourthly,

221

222 On the Massacre of St. Bartho lometv's Day.

that it was not long premeditated, but was the
effect of impulse; and fifthly, that the number
of its victims has been enormously exaggerated.

I.

Religion had nothing to do with this massacre.
In this matter historians have erred in espousing
the cause of either Protestants or Catholics ; to
use the words of Cantu, "Varillas and Voltaire,
equally unjust, have provoked the judgment of
impartial posterity, which weighs them in the
same scale, and which sees on both sides swords
dripping with blood, recognizing in this deadly
struggle not the crimes of a sect or the follies
of a court or the instigations of fanaticism, but
the constant passions of humanity." In the first
place, one would be led to suspect that zeal
for the Catholic faith was not the motive for
the Barthelemy, from the fact that many Cath-
olics were numbered among the victims, having
succumbed to personal hate or to avarice. " The
possession of wealth," says Me*zeray, "an envied
position, or the existence of greedy heirs, stamped
a man as a Huguenot." The governor of Bor-
deaux systematically ransomed wealthy Catholics
as well as Protestants. At Bourges a priest
was murdered; at La Charite*, the wife of a
Captain Landas ; at Vic, the governor ; at Paris,
Bertrand de Villemer, maitre des requetes, and

On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day. 223

John Rouillard, a canon of Notre-Dame. Again,
the characters of Catherine dei Medici and her
son, Charles IX., were not those of zealots for
the faith ; a critical and impartial historian * has
been obliged to admit that if it had become
necessary for the recovery of power, they would
have declared themselves Protestants. But there
is more than mere suspicion to justify our as-
sertion. We know, from the very " Martyrology"
of the Calvinists, what motive actuated the mur-
derers. They would show the corpses of their
victims, saying, " These are they who would have
killed the king." And " the courtiers laughed
exultantly, saying that at length the war was
ended, and they could live in peace." The same
author tells us that after the massacre, "the
parliament of Toulouse published the will of
the king that no one should molest those of
the religion, but should rather favor them " ;

* Cantu, " Storia Universale," b. xv, Note O. " Catherine dei
Medici, a woman on whom weighs all the hatred of the French,
who saw incarnated in her Italian cunning and ferocity, calculated
corruption, cold cruelty, and an egotistic policy, had been raised
among the factions of Tuscany; married for policy, unloved by
a husband who preferred his mistress to her; suddenly exalted
above her long debasement; beautiful, majestic, in the vigor of
life ; instructed by misfortune, irritated by humiliation ; absolutely
ruling, yet loved by her children ; unequalled in the art of fasci-
nating the souls of men. She did not study the good of a kingdom
to which she was foreign, nor the preservation of a faith which she
had not in her heart, but only her own power. Nevertheless, she
preserved France from falling to pieces, or from succumbing to a
tyranny which afflicted *Spain. She always wore the widow's

224 On the- Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day.

and we know that on August 26 a similar edict
was issued in Paris. Again, Charles IX. needed
no religious motive to render him furious against
the Huguenots. They had plotted to kidnap
him; they had drawn entire provinces into re-
bellion, and they had introduced foreign troops
into France.

But it is said that Roman cardinals prepared
the massacre ; the names of Birague and De Retz
are mentioned. The Roman purple is easily
cleared of this stain. The former prelate was
made a cardinal six, and the latter fifteen years
after the Barthe*lemy. The poet Chenier, of the
school of Voltaire, represents, on the operatic
stage, the Cardinal of Lorraine as blessing the
poniards destined for the massacre ; but at that
time this prelate was in Rome, having been one of
the conclave which had chosen a successor to St.
Pius V. Again, much stress is laid upon the

weeds ; and although she tolerated immorality in others, not even
the calumnious Brantome ever reproaches her on this score. She
was so little hostile to the reformed doctrines that during her
meals she often listened to Calvinist sermons. (See Letter of the
Nuncio Santa Croce, November 13, 1561.) But since Philip II.,
the great enemy of France, was head of the Catholic party, France
should be allied with the Protestants — a policy adopted, in fact,
by the last few French monarchs. But the Calvinists ceased to
be a school, and became a dangerous faction ; hence Catherine
felt that she could save the country only by siding with the
Catholic majority. Although she hated the Guises, she joined
hands with them to supplant the constable Anne and Diana.
The latter was banished ; Anne went over to the Bourbons ; the
King of Navarre received a cool treatment which his weakness
deserved, and the Guises obtained the highest posts." Ib., c. 24.

On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew' '« Day. 225

conduct of the Roman court when it heard of the
catastrophe. Gregory XIII. proceeded processionally
to the church of St. Louis, and rendered thanks
to Heaven ; he proclaimed a Jubilee, and struck
medals commemorative of the event. The famous
Latinist, Mureto, pronounced an encomium on
the slaughter before the Sovereign Pontiff. But
the words of Pope Gregory writing to the king
in congratulation for his escape, the words of
Mureto also, show that the Roman court thanked
Almighty God merely for the escape of the royal
family from a Huguenot conspiracy.

Finally, throughout France, in Paris itself, the
Catholic masses acted on this occasion in a
manner which showed that their religion was
not a prime agent in the affair. On the very
night of the massacre, Charles IX. sent orders to
all the governors of provinces and of cities, to
take measures to prevent any occurrences like
those which had just stained the capital. At
Lyons, as even the Calvinist Martyrology informs
us, many of .the Huguenots were sent for safety
to the archiepiscopal prison and to the Celestine
and Franciscan convents. And if we are told
that some of those who were consigned to the
archiepiscopal prison fell victims to their enemies,
we reply, with the same Calvinist author, that
this outrage was committed during the absence
and without the knowledge of the governor; that
on his return he put a stop to it, and offered a

226 On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day.

reward of a hundred scudi for the names of the
criminals. This author also tells us that "the
Calvinists of Toulouse found safety in the con-
vents." At Lisieux the bishop saved many, as
the martyrologist admits ; * and he also says that
"the more peaceable Catholics saved forty out
of sixty who had been seized at the town of
Romans ; of the twenty others, thirteen were after-
ward freed, and only seven perished, they having
many enemies, and having borne arms." Even
at Nimes, where the Huguenots had twice mas-
sacred the Catholics, in cold blood (in 1567 and
1569), the latter abstained from revenge, f. Paris
also furnished many examples of compassion.
The Calvinist historian, La Popelini£re, a con-
temporary author, records that "among the French
nobles who distinguished themselves in saving
the lives of many of the confederates, the greatest
good was effected by the dukes of Guise,
Aumale, Biron, Belli^vre. . . . When the people
had been told that the Huguenots, in order to
kill the king, had attacked his body-guards and
killed over twenty, a further slaughter would have
been perpetrated, had not many nobles, content
with the death of the leaders, prevented it ; even
many Italians, armed and mounted, scoured the

* Cf. also M. de Falloux, in the Correspondant of 1843, pp.
166-168.

t Menard: " Histoire Civile, Eccl., et Lit., de Nimes"; vol.
v, p. 9.

On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew** Day. 227

city and suburbs, and gathered many fortunates
into the security of their own houses." * In fine,
instead of religion having caused this massacre,
we may conclude with Count Alfred de Falloux
that, considering the state of men's minds at
that time, religion alone could have prevented it.
u Instead of a court full of intrigues and adul-
teries, suppose that then there was one influenced
by the Gospel ; that the law of God guided the
powerful ; that instead of a Catharine and a
Charles IX., there had reigned a Blanche and
a St. Louis ; in such a case let us ask our con-
sciences whether this slaughter would have been
possible." f

II.

The massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day was an
affair of worldly policy. The Huguenots had cer-
tainly been guilty of high-treason. As to Coligny,
the journal of his receipts and expenses, laid before
the royal Council and the Parliament, and his other
papers seized after his death, revealed deeds and
projects which would have ensured his capital con-
demnation in any country of Christendom. Con-
cerning these papers Bellievre said to the deputies
of the Thirteen Cantons: 4»The king learned from
them that the admiral had established, in sixteen

"Histoire de France de 1550 jusqu'a 1557"; edit. 1581; b
xxix, p. 67.

f Discourse at* a scientific congress held at Angers in 1843.

228 On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew '« Day.

provinces, governors, military commanders, and a
number of counsellors charged with the task of
keeping the people armed, and of assembling them
together at his first sign." Charles IX. wrote to
Schomberg^ his ambassador to Germany, that Coligny
had more power, " and was better obeyed by those of
the new religion than I was. By the great authority
he had usurped over them, he could raise them in
arms against me whenever he wished, as indeed he
often proved. Recently he ordered the new religion-
ists to meet in arms at Melun, near Fontainebleau,
where I was to be at that time, the third of August.
He had arrogated so much power to himself that
I could not call myself a king, but merely a
ruler of a part of my dominions. Therefore, since
it has pleased God to deliver me from him, I may
well thank Him for the just punishment He has
inflicted upon the admiral and his accomplices. I
could not tolerate him any longer, and I determined
to give rein to a justice which was indeed extraor-
dinary, and other than I would have wished, but
which was necessary in the case of such a man."*
Brant6me, Tavannes, and Montluc, all courtiers of
Charles, speak of his fear of Coligny : and Bellievre
says that " his Majesty told some of his servants,
myself among the number, that when he found
himself so threatened, his hair stood on end." Is

* Villeroy : " Memoires Servant a PHistoire de Notre Temps " ;
vol. iv. The letter to Schomberg is of September 13, 1572.

On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day. 229

it likely that any monarch would tamely submit to
such dictation as Coligny uttered ? " Make war on
Spain, sire, or we wage war against you." * Ta-
vannes informs us that the king, speaking one day
concerning the means at his disposal for a campaign
in the Netherlands, said that one of his subjects
(Coligny) had offered him ten thousand men for
that purpose. Then Tavaniies replied : " Sire, you
ought to cut off the head of any subject who would
use such language. How dare he offer you what is
your own ? This is a sign that he has corrupted
these men ; that he has gained them over to use
them, one day, against your Majesty."

Many Protestant writers are prone to dilate on
the virtues of Coligny, but they have not freed him
from the imputation of having directed the assassin's
blow against Duke Francis of Guise. Not merely
by the deposition of the wretched Poltrot, but by
the very avowals of the admiral, we are led to
regard the latter as the instigator of the crime. In
a letter to the queen-mother, he admitted that " for
the last five or six months he did not strongly "
oppose those who showed a wish to kill the Duke ;
and he gave as a reason for his non-opposition, that
certain persons had tried to kill himself. He did

* Tavannes: " Memoires depuis Tan 1530 jusqu' a Sa Morten
1573, Dresses par Son Fils " ; Paris, 1574. — The quotations that
follow are taken from the " Memoires de Conde, depuis la Mort de
Henri II., jusqu' au Commencement des Troubles en 1565"; vol.
iv, p. 303; Paris, 1741.

230 On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day.

not name these persons in the course of his justifica-
tion, but said that he " would indicate them at a fit-
ting time." In his answers he admitted that "Poltrot
told him that it would be easy to kill the Duke of
Guise, but that he (Coligny) made no remark,
because he deemed the matter frivolous;" in fact,
he "said nothing as to whether he regarded the
design as good or evil." In another letter to Cath-
arine, he spoke of the death of the Duke as " the
greatest benefit that could accrue to the kingdom
and to the Church of God, and a personal advantage
to the king and to the whole family of Coligny."
And finally, his course in claiming the right of pre-
scription, when he fell back on the privileges of the
Edict of Pacification, would not indicate a conscious-
ness of innocence.

III.

It was not intended that the massacre should ex-
tend beyond Paris. We learn from Tavannes that
the popular fuiy rendered the massacre general, " to
the great regret of its advisers, they having resolved
on the death of only the leaders and the factious."
They who hold that orders to slaughter the Hugue-
nots had been sent into the provinces, adduce in
proof only two letters: one from the Viscount d'Or-
thez, governor of Bayonne, to Charles IX. ; and one
from Catharine to Strozzi, who was watching for an
opportunity to surprise La Rochelle, one of the four

On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew 's Day. 231

cities accorded to the Calvinists. Now, there is very
good reason for regarding both these letters as un-
authentic, and no argument can be urged in their
favor. The first letter, whatever some authors may
say, is not found in De Thou, not even in the
Geneva edition of 1620 ; and this writer's Huguenot
proclivities and his aversion to Charles IX. would
not have allowed him to overlook it, had he deemed
it authentic. It is given only by the malevolent
D' Aubigne' in these words : "I commence with Bay-
on ne, where a courier arrived with orders to cut in
pieces the men, women, arid children of Dax, who
had sought refuge in the prison. The Viscount
d'Orthez, governor of the frontier, thus replied to
the king : * Sire, I have communicated the order of
your Majesty to the inhabitants and soldiers of the
garrison ; and have found them to be good citizens
and brave warriors, but not executioners. Therefore
they and I supplicate your Majesty to* employ them
in any possible, even though hazardous, matters,' '
etc. But the Calvinist martyrologist furnishes us
with reasons for supposing that no such orders as
the above were expedited, either to d'Orthez or to
any other governors in the provinces. This author,
whose work is a veritable " Lives of the Saints " for
French Protestants, says nothing, save in one case,
of such instructions ; and certainly he was interested
in chronicling them, had he known of them. But,
on the contrary, he tells us that the murderers " at
Orleans resolved to put their hands to the work

232 On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew '« Day.

without any orders from the governor, D'En-
tragues ; " that those of Bourges " sent Marueil in
haste to the court, but he returned bearing no com-
mands;" that Charles IX. wrote many letters to
Bordeaux to the effect that he " had not intended
that execution to extend beyond Paris." The ex-
ception to which we have alluded is. that of Rouen,
the Governor of which city, says the martyrologist,
received orders " to exterminate those of the relig-
ion ; " but this assertion is contradicted, observes
Barthelemy,* by the inactivity of the governor, and
by the date of the Rouen murders, which occurred
nearly a month after tljose of Paris.

As for the second letter, that of Catharine to
Strozzi, no French contemporary or ^tmsi-contempo-
rary historian speaks of it ; not even BrantQme, who
was then at Brouage with Strozzi ; and there are in-
trinsic arguments for its rejection. It is supposed
that six months before the massacre, the queen-
mother wrote to Strozzi, enclosed in another to be
read at once, a letter which was not to be opened
until August 24, the fatal day. In this reserved
document Catharine is said to have written :
" Strozzi, I inform you that to-day, August 24,
the admiral and all the Huguenots here present
were killed. I earnestly request you to make your-
self master of La Rochelle, and to do as we have
done to all the Huguenots who fall into your hands.

* " La Saint-Barthelemy," in his " Erreurs," vol. i; Paris, 1865.

On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day. 233

Beware of backwardness, as you fear to displease
the king, my son, and me." Now, he who would
regard this letter as genuine must ascribe to Cath-
arine a gift of prophecy such as few of the saints
have received. She must have foreseen that Jane
d'Albret, * Queen of Navarre, an ardent Hugue-
not, would consent to the marriage of her son,
Henry de Bourbon, with Margaret de Valois.
She must have known that Pope St. Pius V.,
who would not grant the necessary dispensation,
would soon die, and that Gregory XIII. would con-
cede it. She must also have seen Coligny and his
followers madly confiding in the affectionate disposi-
tion of Charles IX. ; the admiral ignoring the warn-
ings of the Rochellois and other Huguenots ; the
crime of Maurevert failing to cause the flight of the
future victims ; and, finally, the certainty of no im-
prudence on the part of Strozzi, or perhaps his death,
revealing her letter to the Calvinists. We decline,
therefore, to accept as authentic either the letter
from d'Orthez or that to Strozzi.

* Jane d'Albret, Queen of Navarre, married in 1548 Anthony
de Bourbon, Duke of Vendome, a lineal descendant of Robert,
Count of Clerrnont. son of St. Louis; this latter having married
Beatrice, daughter of Archambanlt de Bourbon. On the death of
Anthony, in 1562, Jane embraced Calvinism. Her son, the great
Henry of Navarre, becoming Henry IV. of France in 1589, defi-
nitively united France and Navarre.

234 On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew^ Day.

IV.

The massacre was not the result of long premedi-
tation. The rejection of the aforesaid letters does
away with one of the strongest arguments which
militate against this position. The contemporary
historians, Capilupi, Masson, Tavannes, Castelnau,
and others, are said to declare that the massacre was
planned at the conference held at Bayonne in 1565,
between Catharine and the Duke of Alva. But
these authors speak only of a general agreement
as to mutual aid in extirpating heresy; when any of
them mention any sanguinary advice on the part of
Alva, it is to be noted that they do not say that he
counselled a massacre, but that the Huguenot leaders
should be " arrested and executed." Now listen to
the testimony of Queen Margaret, sister of Charles
IX. In her " Me*moires " she says that the massacre
was designed because of the Huguenot resolution
to avenge the wounding of Coligny ; and that her
brother was with difficulty persuaded to consent to
it, and only when " he had been made to realize that
otherwise his crown and life were lost." Then we
have the testimony of the Duke d'Anjou, the king's
brother, drawn from a MS. of the Royal Library by
Cavairac. This prince had been elected King of
Poland in 1573, and while on his way thither he was
often insulted by Huguenot refugees. He was so
affected by their curses that he could not sleep, and
on one occasion the horrors of St. Bartholomew's

On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day. 235

Day so oppressed him that he summoned his physi-
cian and favorite, Miron, that he might relieve his
mind. Then the duke detailed all the circumstances

>r3

of the massacre, and plainly showed that it was a
sudden conception. We " give a synopsis of this
testimony. " I have called you," said the prince to
Mii-on, uto share my restlessness, which is caused
by my remembrance of the Barthelemy, concerning
which event perhaps you have never heard the
truth." Then the duke narrated how he and the
queen-mother had observed that Coligny had preju-
diced the kiog's mind against them ; that when,
after any audience accorded to the admiral, they ap-
proached his Majesty, " to speak of business or even
of his own pleasures, they would find him with a
forbidding countenance," and he would show no
respect to his mother and no kindness to Anjou.
One day the prince approached the monarch just as
Coligny had withdrawn ; and Charles would not
speak to him, but walked furiously up and down
with his hand upon his dagger, looking askance at
the prince, so that the latter feared for his life, uand
deemed himself lucky to get safely out of the room."
Anjou now consulted Catharine, and " they resolved
to rid themselves of the admiral." They took Mme.
de Nemours into their confidence, " on account of
her hatred for Coligny ;" and they sent at once for
a certain Gascon captain, but did not make use of
him, because he assured them too readily of his
good-will, " and without any reservation of persons."

236 On the Massacre of St. Bartholomews Day.

Then they thought of Maurevert, as " one experi-
enced in assassination ; " but they could influence him
only by representing that the admiral was bent on
avenging the death of Moul, whom Maurevert had
lately murdered. Mme. -de Nemours put one of her
houses at their disposal ; and when the attempt
failed, " they were compelled to look to their own
safety." When Charles wished to see the admiral,
they determined to be present at the interview ; and
the wounded man having been admitted to a private
conference with the king, " they retired to a distance,
and became very suspicious., especially since they
saw themselves in the midst of over two hundred of
the admiral's followers, who, with ferocious counte-
nances, constantly passed them with little show of
respect." Catharine soon put an end to the colloquy
under the specious pretext of care for Coligny's
health, and then tried to learn from her son the
purport of the admiral's remarks. At first Charles
refused; but, being pressed, he swore "by death,"
and brusquely declared that " all Coligny had said
was true," and that he had reproached the king with
being a mere cipher in the hands of his mother.
" This touched them to the quick," and the queen-
mother " feared some change in the government of
the kingdom;" but ufor some hours they could
come to no determination." The next day Anjou
and his mother deliberated "as to the means of get-
ting rid of the admiral." After dinner they waited
on Charles, arid Catharine " told the king that the

On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day. 237

Huguenots were rising in arms ; that the leaders
were enrolling troops in the provinces ; that Coligny
had procured ten thousand cavalry from Germany
and as many Swiss ; that these dangers could be
obviated only by the death of the admiral and of
the chief leaders of the Huguenot faction." Ta-
vannes, Birague, and De Nevers corroborated these
assertions ; and the king u became furious, but never-
theless would not at first hear of any injury to
Coligny." He asked each one for his individual
opinion ; and all agreed with Catharine " except the
Marshal de Retz, who deceived our hopes," saying
that " if any one ought to hate the admiral, he was
one, since Coligny had defamed his race throughout
Europe ; but that he would not revenge himself by
means dishonorable to the king and country." But
no one seconded De Retz, and " we soon observed a
sudden change in the king." The rest of the day
was devoted to the details of the terrible enterprise.
The Duke of Guise was entrusted with the death
of Coligny. Toward the dawn of day, the king,
Catharine, and Anjou were standing at a window,
when they heard the report of a pistol, and fell back
in horror. They sent to revoke the order given to
Guise, but it was too late.*

Such, according to the Duke of Anjou, is the
inner history of the Barthelemy ; and although this
prince was brother to Charles IX., we hold that his

* Cavairac: "Dissertation sur la Journee de la Saint-Bar-
thelemy " ; 1758.

238 On the Massacre of St. Bartholomeitf s Day.

testimony is valuable. No one will deny that he
knew all the circumstances of the massacre ; and
what had he to gain by deceiving Miron ? Certainly
not self-justification ; for he painted himself in the
darkest colors. And he could not have wished to
conciliate the Poles, his future subjects ; for Miron
could not effect such conciliation ; and, again, the
Polish representatives had already shown by their
unanimous vote that such a course was superfluous.
And now to the testimonies of Margaret and Henry
de Valois add those of three celebrated contemporary
historians — the hostile Bran t6me, the Protestant La
Popelini£re, and Mathieu. Brantdme, when treating
of Catherine dei Medici, says of Coligny's aspersions
against that queen : " Behold the cause of his death,
and of that of his followers, as I learned it from
those who knew it well ; although many believe that
the fuse was laid sometime previous." La Popeli-
niere gives the arguments for and against the suppo-
sition of premeditation, and inclines to the latter
view. Mathieu says that he understood from Henry
IV. that Catherine informed Villeroy, her confidant,
that the massacre was unpremeditated. Finally, it may
be observed with Cavairac that, if long prepared,
this tragedy would have been executed simultane-
ously, or nearly so, throughout France ; and most
Protestants believe that it was so effected. But at
Meaux the slaughter happened on August 25, at La
Charit^ on the 26th, at Orleans on the 27th, at
Saumur and Angers on the 29th, at Lyons on the

On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day. 239

30th, at Troyes on September 2, at Bruges on the
14th, at Rouen on the 17th, at Romans on the 20th,
at Toulouse on the 25th, at Bordeaux not until
October 23.

But in reply to all the above proofs of the non-
premeditation of the massacre, it has been alleged
that Sir Henry Austin Layard, President of the
London Huguenot Society, discovered facts which
caused him to come to the conclusion that "there
can not be a doubt that Pius V. had instigated
Charles and the queen-mother to exterminate the
Huguenots, and that Salviati had been instructed
to press the matter upon them." Thus the Hon.
John Jay, addressing the American Huguenot Society
in its annual meeting on April 13, 1888. But long
before Layard was heard of, Lin gar d had investigated
the real connection of the nuncio Salviati with the
massacre, and had judged that the event was not
premeditated. While Chateaubriand was ambassa-
dor at the papal court (1828-30) he procured a
copy of the correspondence of Pope Gregory XIII.
with his nuncio Salviati, and sent it to Mackintosh,
who used it in his " History of England." This
correspondence proves that at the time of the
massacre Salviati knew nothing of the designs of
the French court. We transcribe Lingard's synop-
sis of these letters : " On August 24 he (Salviati)
wrote an account of the occurrence in ordinary
characters (evidently under the notion that in such
circumstances his dispatch would probably be inter-

240 On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day.

cepted and opened on the road) ; but to this he
added another and real statement of the case in
cipher : that the queen-regent, in consequence of
the ascendency which gave to Coligny in a manner
the government of the kingdom (quasi governava),
consulted with the Duchess of Nemours, and re-
solved to rid herself of his control by the assassina-
tion of the admiral. The Duke of Guise provided
the assassin ; the Duke of Anjou, but not the king,
was privy to the attempt. The queen, however,
when she saw that the admiral would not die of his
wound, and considered the danger to which she was
now exposed, alarmed also by her own consciousness,
and by the threatening speeches of the whole body
of the Huguenots, who would not believe that the
arquebuse had been discharged by an assassin em-
ployed by the Duke of Alva, as she had persuaded
herself that she could make them believe, had
recourse to the king, and exhorted him to adopt
the plan of the general * massacre which followed.
It appears that the cardinal-secretary, in his answer
to this dispatch, probably on account of the different
reports current in Rome, put to the nuncio several
questions respecting the cause, the authors, and the
circumstances of the massacre. Salviati, in reply,
wrote two notes on September 22. In the first he
says: 'With regard to the three points : (1) who

* The words of Salviati do not necessarily imply, as Lingard
would infer, that the slaughter was to be " general,"

On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew^ Day. 241

it was that caused, and for what reason that person
caused, the arquebuse to be discharged at the
admiral ; (2) and who it was to whom the subse-
quent resolution of so numerous a massacre must be
ascribed ; (3) and who were the executors of the
massacre, with the names of the principal leaders ;
I know that I have already sent you an account, and
that in that account I have not fallen into the least
error. If I have omitted to mention some other
particulars, the chief reason is the difficulty of
coming at the truth in this country.' This passage
was written in ordinary characters ; but he wrote the
same day in cipher the following repetition of his
former statement : ' Time will show whether there
be any truth in all the other accounts which you
may have read, of the wounding and death of the
admiral, that differ from what I wrote to you. The
queen-regent, having grown jealous of him, came to
a resolution a feiv days before, and caused the arque-
buse to be discharged at him without the knoivledge
of the king, but with the participation of the Duke
of Anjou, of the Duchess of Nemours and of her
son, the Duke of Guise. Had he died immediately,
no one else would have perished. But he did not
die, and they began to expect some great evil ;
wherefore, closeting themselves in consultation with
the king, they determined to throw shame aside,
and to cause him (Coligny) to be assassinated with
the others ; a determination which was carried into
execution that very night.' Evidence more satisfac-

242 On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day.

tory than this we can not desire, if we consider
the situation of the writer, the object for which
he wrote, and the time and opportunity which he
possessed of correcting any error which might have
crept into his previous communication ; and from
this evidence it plainly follows that the general
massacre was not originally contemplated, but grew
out of the unexpected failure of the attempt already
made on the life of the admiral."

Mr. Jay introduces his arguments under the
auspices of Baron Acton, whom he carefully notes
as "a very distinguished Roman Catholic historian,
who so admirably represents the honorable mem-
bers of that .faith who reject the doctrines and
methods of the Jesuits." * He tells us that Acton
furnished the London Times of November 26,
1874, with a translation of some Italian letters
from Salviati to his Roman superiors, which prove
that religion had very much to do with the
massacre. On September 22, 1572, a month after
the tragedy, the nuncio is represented as commu-
nicating to the king the desire of his Holiness,

* Since many very good Catholics have rejected certain teach-
ings of certain Jesuits, just as other good Catholics have rejected
certain teachings of other schools, this remark might be allowed
to pass. But coming from Mr. Jay, this sentence would indicate,
even to those who are unacquainted with Acton's career, that his
"liberal Catholicism" was impatient of all control. And at the
time of his letter to the London paper, the quondam Catholic
editor had thrown off his allegiance to the centre of unity, had
joined the " Old Catholic " heresy, and was no more of a Catholic
than is Mr. Jay himself.

On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day. 243

" for the great glory of God, and the greatest
welfare of France, to see all the heretics of the
kingdom exterminated." And on October 11 the
same Salviati is said to have declared that the
Pope had experienced "an infinite joy and great
consolation in learning that his Majesty had com-
manded him (Salviati) to write that he hoped that
in a little while France would have no more
Huguenots." Well, what does all this prove?
One who is acquainted with the epistolary style
of the Roman Curia will not be frightened at the
use, in the first dispatch, of a word which Acton
translated into "exterminated." Every bishop is
sworn "to extirpate heresy;" but who believes
that the American hierarchy is ready, if it had
the power, to inaugurate another Barthelemy ?
We, too, sincerely pray that the day will soon
come when this Republic will have no more Prot-
estants ; but is not the American priesthood full
of that material out of which the Catholic Church
forms a St. Vincent de Paul, a St. Philip Neri,
and a Don Bosco ?

V.

The number of the victims of the massacre has
been greatly exaggerated. It is remarkable that in
proportion to their distance in time from this event,
authors increase the number of the slaughtered.
Thus, Masson gives it as 10,000 ; the Calvinist

244 On the Massacre of St. Bartholomeitfs Day.

martyrologist as about 15,000 ; the Calvinist, La
Popeliniere, as more than 20,000; De Thou, the
apologist of the Huguenots, as 30,000 " or a little
less;" the Huguenot Sully as 70,000; Pe're'fixe,
a Catholic bishop, as 100,000. From this teist
number to 2,000, the figures established by Cavairac,
the difference is immense. Now, if we will com-
pare the authority, in this particular matter, of
Masson with that of Pe're'fixe, we shall opine that
the former's estimate is the correct one. Masson
did not wish to hide from posterity the true num-
ber of the slain ; he openly laments that Calvinism
was not destroyed by this great blow ; he labors
much in gathering apparent proofs that the mas-
sacre was long premeditated. Therefore he would
have cheerfully recorded a larger number of victims,
if truth had allowed him. Pe're'fixe, however, had
an interest in exaggerating the effects of a policy
of cruelty; preceptor to the young Louis >XIV.,
he might, remarks Barthe'lemy, have too readily
accorded credence to the largest estimate of the
victims of an event which he offered to the exe-
cration of his pupil. But our attention is princi-
pally claimed by the calculations of the Calvinist
martyrologist. When this interested author speaks
in general terms, he puts the victims at 30,000 ;
when he goes into details, he presents us 15,168 ;
when he gives their names, he can furnish only
786. Now, we must suppose that this writer,
engaged upon the pious \vork of perpetuating the

On the Massacre of St. Bartholomeitf s Day. 245

memory of those whom he regarded as martyrs
for "the religion," as his title-page announces,
took every care to discover their names; and the
zeal and vanity of their friends would have helped
him. Nevertheless, he could name only 786. We
do not believe that this number includes all the
victims of the massacre ; but AVC do contend that
the nmrtyrologist's estimate by cities and villages,
15,168, is an exaggeration. He designates the
victims in Paris as 10,000, but his details show
only 468 ; it is not unlikely therefore, conjectures
Barthelemy, that a zero slipped into his Paris
total, and that it should be made 1,000. This,
indeed, is the opinion of the Calvinist La Popeli-
niere, and it" is confirmed by a bill at the Hotel
de Ville of Paris, which indicates that 1,100 were
buried in the suburbs. We regard, therefore, as
nearly correct the assertion of La Popeliniere that
the victims in Paris were about 1,000 in number ;
and since it is generally conceded that the slain in
all the other parts of France together were less num-
erous than in Paris, it would appear that Cavairac
did not err when he declared that all the victims
of St. Bartholomew's Day amounted to about 2,000
persons.

The reader will doubtless expect us to allude
to the charge made against Charles IX., of having
taken an actively personal part in the massacre.
Voltaire makes much of the accusation that the
monarch fired on the Huguenots from a balcony

246 On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day.

in the Louvre.* Prudhomme represents Charles
as leaving a game of billiards for this purpose, f
This charge is founded only on the assertions of
Brant6me, who, according to his own admission,
was a hundred leagues from Paris on the day
of the massacre ; J and of D'Aubigne*, who says
that he left the capital three days before the
event. § Sully, a Calvinist who was present and
barely saved his life, says nothing in his u Me-
moires " of the king's intervention. Again, that
part of the Louvre from which Charles is said
to have fired an arquebuse, and to mark which
with infamy the Commune of 1793 erected " un
potean infamant" was not built until nearly the
end of the reign of Henry IV., over thirty years
after the Barthelemy. Finally, the accusation
against Charles IX. is refuted -by a Huguenot
pamphlet of 1579 — that is, written twenty-five
years before the narrative of Brant6me, and
thirty-seven before that of D'Aubigne*. In this
work, entitled " A Tocsin against the Murderers
and the Authors of Discord in France," || we
read : " Although one might suppose that so
great a carnage would have satiated the cruelty
of the young king, of a woman, and of many of

* " Essay on the Civil Wars " — " Henriacle," in the Notes.

f " Revolutions de Paris."

t " CEuvres," edit. 1779, vol. i, p. (52.

§ " M^moires," edit. Lalanne, p. 23.

|| Published in the " Archives " of Cimber & Danjou.

On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day. 247

their courtiers, they seem to have grown more
savage as the work approached their own eyes.
The king showed no diminution of zeal; for al-
though he did not use his oion hands in the massacre,
nevertheless, being at the Louvre, he ordered that
according as the work advanced in the city, the
names of the killed and of the prisoners should
be brought to him, that he might decide as to
whom to spare." And Brant6me himself shows
the small value of his assertions concerning the
massacre, when he tells us that the king " wished
only Master Ambrose Pare*, his chief surgeon, to
be spared." * We know from the " Me*moires "
of Margaret de Valois that Charles wished to spare
La Noue, Teligny, La Rochefoucauld, and even
Coligny ; and the writings of Pare* show that this
surgeon was a devout Catholic, and that therefore,
there was no need for anxiety in his regard on
the part of the king. The Catholicism of Pare* is
also proved by the fact of the interment of his
body in the church of St. Andr^-des-Arts, of which
the famous leaguer Aubry was pastor, f

In conclusion, we would say with Louis Veuillot
that Catholics generally adduce the extenuating
circumstances of the Barthe'lemy with too great
timidity. Catharine dei Medici was a freethinker
of the Macchiavellian school, provoked by Calvinist

* " Hommes Illustres," in the Discourses on " Coligny " and
Charles IX."

f See the introduction of Malgaigne to the " CEuvres" of Pare.

248 On the Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day.

sedition; and since she could not otherwise pre-
serve her power or even save her head, she
adopted the policy of assassination. In the whole
affair the Catholic faith was conspicuous for its
absence ; the executioners were no more influenced
by it than the victims. God, says Bossuet, often
chastises crimes by other crimes. The ninth
Thermidor, says M. de Maistre, witnessed the
slaughter of certain monsters by others of the
same sort. Just like the ninth Thermidor, the
Barthelemy was a human wickedness and a divine
justice.

THE MIDDLE AGE NOT A STARLESS
NIGHT.

WE frequently hear that in the Middle Age the
clergy systematically kept the laity in ignorance ;
that even the nobility were so uncultivated, that
in the public records of those times it is quite
common to meet the clause : tk And the said lord
declares that he knows not how to sign [his name],
because of his condition of gentleman.'" Charlemagne
himself, it is said, could not write. But are these
allegations true ? In the early period of the Mid-
dle Age, ignorance was undoubtedly the lot of the
warriors who became the progenitors of most of
the European nobles ; but when these barbarians
had become Christians and members of civilized
society, is it true that they generally remained in
that ignorance ?

The learned Benedictine, Cardinal Pitra, * has
proved that in nearly all monasteries there were
two kinds of schools — the internal, for the youth
who wished to become religious ; and the external,
for the children who showed no such vocation.
And do we not know how Abelard's retreat, the
Paraclete, was filled with hundreds of young lay-
men, zealous for knowledge ? Vincent of Beauvais

* In his "Histoire de St. Leger."

250 The Middle Age Not a Starless Night.

( y. 1250) writes that " the sons of the nobility
need to acquire expensive learning;" and Giles
of Rome (1290) says that " the children of kings
and of great lords must have masters to teach
them all science, and especially a knowledge of
Latin." The nobles are said to have despised
learning, but we know that they were very zealous
in founding schools. Thus at Paris alone six col-
leges were established by noble laymen : that of
Laon, in 1313, by Guy of Laon and Raoul de
Presles; that of Presles, in 1313, by this Raoul;
that of Boncourt, in 1357, by Peter de Ftechinel;
that of the Ave Maria, in 1336, by John of Hu-
baut; that of La Marche, in 1362, by William de
la Marche; that of the Grassins, in 1369, by Peter
d'Ablon. The researches of DuBoulai, of Crevier,
and in our own day, of Beaurepaire, show how
untrue is the assertion that the mediaeval laity
were plunged in woful ignorance. In the thirteenth
century, at least, all the peasants of Normandy
could read . and write, carried writing materials at
their girdles, and many of them were no strangers
to Latin. Bertrand de Born, William of Aquitaine,
and Bernard of Ventadour, bear witness that then
at least the nobles of France were no more hostile
to letters than the peasants were, and that they
shared in the poetical movement of the South.
The first chroniclers who wrote in French were
nobles and laymen -- Villehardouin and Joinville.
In 1337 we find the scions of the first families

Tie Middle Age Not a Starless Night. 251

following the courses of the University of Orleans.
As to the documents which they are said to have
been unable to sign, " because of their condition
of gentlemen," such papers do not exist, and no
paleographer has yet unearthed one containing the
alleged formula. Certainly, in order to obtain some
proof of this mediaeval ignorance, some have had
recourse to the crosses traced at the foot of doc-
uments of the eleventh and twelfth centuries,
and to the absence of signatures in those of the
thirteenth. " But this pretended proof can not
stand the tests of diplomatic science," remarks
M. Louandre. " In those days deeds were not
authenticated by written names, but by crosses
and seals. The most ancient royal signatures are
of no earlier date than that of Charles V. (of
France)," who died in 1380.*

Even in the early Middle Age every cathedral,
and nearly every monastery, had its school and
library, in accordance with canonical enactments,
llallam admits that " the praise of having originally
established schools belongs to some bishops and
abbots of the sixth century ; " but — at least so
far as Ireland is concerned — it is certain that
her schools were celebrated throughout Europe in
the fifth century. As to the Continent, we find
the Council of Vaison recommending, in 529, the
institution of free parochial schools. To mention

* In the " Revue ties Deux Momles " for Jan. 15, 1877, p. 452.

252 The Middle Age Not a Starless Night.

only a few of similar decrees, there is a canon
of the Third General Council of Constantinople,
in 680, commanding priests to have free schools
in all country places; one of a Synod of Orleans,
in 800, ordering the parochial clergy " to teach
little children with the greatest kindness, receiv-
ing no compensation, save the voluntary offerings
of parents ; " one of Mentz, in 813, commanding
parents to send their children " to the schools in
the monasteries or in the houses of the parish
clergy ; " one of Rome, in 826, prescribing schools
in every suitable place.

As to higher education, not only was it not
neglected, but the most celebrated universities
were founded and perfected in the " dark " ages.
Most renowned was the Irish school of Benchor
(Bangor) with its thousands of scholars, and the
other Irish establishments at Lindisfarne in Eng-
land, at Bobbio in Italy, at Verdun in France, and at
Wurzburg, Ratisbon, Erfurt, Cologne, and Vienna,
in Germany. The great University of Bologna, an
outgrowth of the school for law there established
by Theodosius II. in the fifth century, became
so famous under Irnerius (d. 1140 ) that of for-
eigners alone more than ten thousand thronged
its halls.* The University of Padua frequently

* The University of Bologna was a corporation of scholars who
were divided into two great " nations " — Cismontanes (Italians),
and Ultramontanes (foreigners) — each having its own rector, who
must have taught law for five years and have been a student of the
University, and could not be a monk or friar. The students elected

The Middle Age Not a Starless Night. 253

numbered eighteen thousand students. Famous also
were the Universities of Rome, Pavia, Naples, and
Perugia ; of Paris ; of Alcala, Salamanca, and Val-
ladolid ; of Oxford and Cambridge. In Germany
the thirteenth century was an unfortunate one for
letters. Leibnitz says that the tenth was golden
compared with the thirteenth ; Heeren calls it most
unfruitful ; Meiners constantly deplores it ; Eichorn
designates it as " wisdom degenerated into bar-
barism." But the fourteenth century brought a
change to the Germans. The University of Vienna
was founded in 1364 ; that of Heidelberg in 1386 ;
of Erfurt, 1392 ; of Leipsic, 1409 ; of Wiirzburg,
1410 ; of Rostock, 1419 ; of Louvain, 1425 ; of
Treves, 1454 ; of Freiburg, 1456 ; of Basel, 1459 ;
of Ingolstadt, 1472 ; Tubingen and Metz, 1477 ;
Cologne, 1483. Gerard Groot, a student of Paris,
founded in 1376, at Deventer, his birthplace, an
order whose members were sworn to help the poor,
either by their manual labor or by gratuitous instruc-
tion. "Very soon this order," says Cantu, "associ-
ating thus the two passions of that time — piety
and study, — taught trades and writing in those
monasteries which were called of St. Jerome, or of
the Good Brethren, or of the Common Life ; while
in other places it kept schools of writing and of

this rector, and none of the professors had a voice in the assembly
unless they had previously been rectors. However, in the faculty
of theology the professors governed. Popes Gregory IX., Boniface
VIII., Clement V., and John XXII., addressed their Decretals
"to the doctors and scholars of Bologna."

254 The Middle Age Not a Starless Night.

mechanics for poor children. To others it taught
Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Mathematics, and Fine Arts.
In 1433 it had forty-five houses, and in 1460 thrice
that number. Thomas a Kempis transported the
system to St. Agnes, near Zwolle, where were
formed the apostles of classic literature in Ger-
many : Maurice, Count of Spiegelberg, and Rudolph
Langius, afterward prelates ; Anthony Liber, Louis
Dringenberg, Alexander Hagius, and Rudolph
Agricola."

As to the pretended ignorance of Charlemagne,
we prefer more ancient and more reliable authority
than that of Voltaire, the author of this assertion.*
In the " Acts " of the Council of Fisme, held in
881, we read that the members exhorted King
Louis III. " to imitate Charlemagne, who used to
place tablets under his pillow, that he might take
note of whatever came to his mind during the
night which would profit the Church, or conduce
to the prosperity of his kingdom." It was the
celebrated Hincmar who, in the name of the Coun-
cil, drew up these "Acts" of Fisme; and certainly
he is good authority in this matter, for he had
passed much of his life in the society of Louis
the Compliant, a son of Charlemagne. But is not

* Voltaire makes this charge four different times, but in contra-
dictory terms. In his " Essai sur les Mceurs," in the Introduction,
he says that Charlemagne " did not know how to write his name."
In chapter xix he adduces Eginhardto this effect. In the " Annales
de PEmpire" he says that "it is not likely that this Frankish
King, who could not write a running hand, could compose Latin
verses " ; and in another place of the same work he says that the
monarch " could not write his name well."

The Middle Age Not a Starless Night. 255

the testimony of Eginhard, son-in-law of Charle-
magne, to be preferred to that of the prelates of
Fisme ? Sismondi, who admits the extraordinary
learning of the great Emperor, is so impressed by
the words of Eginhard, that he concludes that the
monarch acquired his knowledge by means of oral
teaching. We would prefer the authority of the
bishops of France headed by Hincmar, to that of
Eginhard ; but the two testimonies do not conflict.
Eginhard says : " He tried to write, and he used to
keep tablets under the pillows of his bed, so that,
when time permitted, he could accustom his hand
to the forming of letters ; but he had little success
in a task difficult in itself, and assumed so late
in life." * Eginhard admits, then, that Charle-
magne had some success in his endeavors. We
know, too, that he could form his monogram ; f

* "Tentabat et scribere, tabellasque et codicillos ad hoc in
lecticulo sub cervicalibus circumferre solebat, ut cum vacuum
tempus esset, inanum effigiandis litteris assuefaceret ; sed parum
prospere successit labor prseposterus ac sero inchoatus."

t In the space occupied by a K he put the other letters of his
name, " Karolus" :

L

In Papal letters of the Middle Ages we often meet the mono-
gram of " Bene valete " :

256 The Middle Age Not a Starless Night.

and Lambecius, the erudite secretary of Christina
of Sweden, speaks of a manuscript of St. Paul's
Epistle to the Romans " corrected by the Emperor's
own hand." * We are therefore led to accept
that interpretation of Eginhard's remark which
is given by Lambecius, and since that critic's time
by the best commentators, such as Michelet, f
Henri Martin, J and Guizot ; § to the effect that
there is therein no question of writing in general,
but merely of a running hand. In fine, Charle-
magne could write by means of what we style
square or printed characters ; he found it difficult
to write a running hand ; in other words, he could
write, but he was not a caligrapher. Ampere
opines that the monarch tried to excel in the art
of illuminating manuscripts, — that is, of painting
the majuscule letters which so excite the admira-
tion of moderns.

Since Eginhard is adduced to prove the ignorance

* " Commentaria in Bibl. Caes. Vindob.," b. ii, c. 5. Vienna,
1655.

t " Histoire de France," edit. 1835, vol. i, p. 332.

| "Histoire de France," edit. 1855, vol. ii, p. 292.— "It would
be strange indeed if this great man, who was versed in astronomy
and in Greek, and who labored to correct the text of the Four
Gospels, was unable to write."

§ " Histoire de France, Racontee a Mes Petits-Enfants," vol. i,
p. 228. Paris, 1872. — "It has been doubted whether he could
write, and a passage of Eginhard might authorize the doubt; but
when I consider other testimonies, and even this very remark
of Eginhard, I incline to the belief that Charlemagne wrote
with difficulty and not very well."

The Middle Age Not a Starless Night. 257

of Charlemagne, it is well to note what this chronicler
tells us, in the same chapter, about the Emperor's
learning. Charlemagne spoke Latin fluently and
with elegance ; Greek was familiar to him, although
his pronunciation of it was defective. He was
passionately fond of the fine arts. He drew to
his court the wisest men of the day — e. g.,
Peter of Pisa and Alcuin, — and very soon he
nearly equalled his masters in their respective
branches. He began the composition of a Teu-
tonic grammar, and he undertook a version of the
New Testament based on the Greek and Syriac
texts. He understood perfectly the intricacies of
liturgy, psalmody, the Gregorian Chant, etc. Dur-
ing his meals he listened to the reading of histories ;
he was especially fond of St. Augustine's " City
of God." He preferred to attend the schools he
had founded, rather than any kind of amusement.
Furthermore and finally, he compelled his daugh-
ters, as well as his sons, to cultivate the fine arts.

In this so badly understood epoch, flourished
Abelard, Dante, Albert the Great, Thomas Aquinas.
It is true that the hunting and soldiering bar-
barians at first disdained the peaceful triumphs of
letters, and regarded the fine arts as a disgraceful
inheritance of the people they had conquered ; that
for a time even the olden subjects — of the secular
order — of Koine lost taste for the sublime and the
beautiful. But then science found friends in the
sanctuary and in the cloister ; and the clergy

258 The Middle Age Not a Starless Night.

preserved, as a sacred deposit, the traditions of liter-
ature and art. As for moral science, have modern
times surpassed SS. Anselm and Peter Damian,
Lanfranc or Peter Lombard ? As for practical
science and the arts, are we much more advanced
than our mediaeval ancestors ? We will here men-
tion a few of the inventions and improvements
which we owe to these compassionated men :

I. — The paper on which we write (linen) is,
according to Hallam, an invention of the year
1100 ; and cotton paper was used in Italy in the
tenth century. Casiri, drawing up a catalogue
of the Escurial Library, says that most of its
mediaeval manuscripts are of rag-paper, or charta-
ceos, as he styles them in contradistinction to the
membranous and cotton ones. He cites the u Apho-
risms " of Hippocrates in a paper codex of the
year 1100, but does not deem it remarkable.
Venerable Peter of Cluny, in a treatise against
the Jews, speaks of books made from the shreds
of old cloths.

II. — The art of printing, or rather the press,
was invented in 1436, either by Lawrence Coster,
a priest of the Cathedral of Harlem and a xylo-
graph printer, or by the artist Gansfleish, called
Gutenberg ; * but printing by hand was done in

* The Abbele Noir, in his rearrangement of Bergier's " Diction-
ary," analyzes the known facts concerning this invention, and
thus concludes: " Coster, we believe, invented and first employed
movable types. Gutenberg came across Coster's plans, perfected
them, and with invincible patience tried to execute them on a

The Middle Age Not a Starless Night. 259

the tenth century. The " Chronicles of Feltre "
tell us that Panfilio Castaldi, a humanist of that
city, taught his disciple Faust, in 1436, the use of
movable types. Stereotyping, now the perfection
of printing, was practised by Coster ; though of
course he knew of no way of casting the plates.

III. -- That music may now be called a science
is due to an Italian monk, Guido of Arezzo, who
determined the scale, hitherto uncertain, in 1124.
His " solmization " — -or the use of the ut, re, mi,
fa, sol, la — was signified by means of the words
of the first verses of the Vesper hymn for the
Feast of St. John the Baptist. Before the time
of Pope Gregory the Great (el. 590), the Italians
used an alphabetical notation composed of the
first fifteen letters ; but that Pontiff reduced them
to the first seven for the diatonic scale, distin-
guishing the octaves by capitals for the lower,
and small letters for the upper. Ughelli proves,
in his "Sacred Italy," that the Italians used
pneumatic organs in the ninth century.

IV. — In the twelfth century, the mariners of
Amalfi first applied the knowledge of the load-
stone to navigation, thus enabling subsequent
Italian navigators to prosecute geographical dis-
covery.

V. — It is amusing to learn that in those days

grand scale. But, constantly needing funds, he was forced to put
himself into the hands of an adroit banker, Faust, who played
upon him the trick he himself had played upon Coster : appropri-
ated the invention and gathered the profits."

260 The Middle Age Not a Starless Night.

of alleged ignorance, and hence of presumed
neglect of study, one of the most important aids
to study should have been invented. To enable
persons of defective eyesight to read, the ancients
used a sphere filled with water ; but about 1285
a monk of Pisa, named Salvino d' Annato, in-
vented spectacles. In a sermon preached in
Florence on February 23, 1305, the celebrated
friar, Giordano di Rivalta, said : " Only twenty
years ago were spectacles invented; I knew and
conversed with the inventor."

VI. — By a people's language we can surely judge
of their refinement and intellectual calibre. Hum-
boldt may have erred when he pronounced that
grammatical forms are not the fruit of the progress
made by a nation in the analysis of thought ; but he
was right in saying that these forms " are results of
the manner in which a nation considers and treats
its language." And we are asked to believe that the
densest ignorance and the grossest sentiments were
the portion of those times which produced the sweet
and philosophic Italian, the majestic Spanish, the
graceful French, and the forcible English and Ger-
man tongues. When the decay of the Roman Em-
pire and of Roman civilization had entailed that of
the Latin language, the succeeding jargons could not
be termed languages ; but Christianity took hold of
the raw material, and, to use the words of Gioberti,
" placed therein the embryonic principles of new
organizations, and fecundated them with the hieratic

* The Middle Age Not a Starless Night. 261

word, pei-forming the two duties symbolized by the
Oriental myths of the cosmic egg and androgynism.
Thus the modern idioms were born from the material
of the old, informed and organized by the religious
idea and by the sacerdotal word. At first each
of these idioms was a mere dialect, — that is, a
vulgar speech, rude, ignoble, private, unfit for public
use and for writing ; not yet possessed of a life of its
own, independent of the mother's. And just as the
fetus becomes a man, the human animal an infant,
coming out into the light, and entirely separating
from the maternal body, so a dialect is transformed
into an illustrious language, fit to signify ideal
things through the work of noble writers, who divert
it from popular usage, and introduce it into the
forum, the temple, the schools, and the conversation
of the learned." *

VII. — Have the modern times rivalled the Middle
Ages in architectural skill and taste? With the ex-
ception of St. Peter's at Rome — itself a result of
the spirit of that despised period, — all the most
magnificent structures of Europe, all the real
triumphs of architecture, are of mediaeval conception
and execution. Glass windows, too, introduced in
the fourth century, commenced to present beautiful
colors in the early Middle Age ; and in the twelfth
century the Church, by means of those wonderful
window-pictures, developed her plan, begun in the

* " Primato Civile e Morale degli Italiani," Capolago, 1846,
vol. ii, p. 275.

262 The Middle Age Not a Starless Night.

Catacombs of Rome, of reaching the hearts and in-
tellects of such of her children as, perchance, were
not penetrated by the words of her preachers.

VIII. — In 650 windmills were invented; in 657,
organs ; Greek fire in 670 ; carpet-weaving in 720 ;
clocks in 760 ; in 790 the Arabic numerals were in-
troduced ; in 1130 the silkworm was first cultivated
in Europe ; in 1278 gunpowder was invented ; en-
graving in 1410 ; oil-painting, though many ascribe
it to Van Eyck, was in use in 1415.

As for the science of criticism, which many regard
as a peculiar pride of our century, it is generally
supposed to have been so little understood as to
indicate by its absence the intellectual inferiority of
the Middle Ages. And yet modern critics can point
to very few questions, agitated by themselves, which
were not raised during that period. It is a remark-
able fact that while the critics of the Golden Age of
Leo X. credited the tales of Annio of Viterbo (the
Chatterton of the fifteenth century), and while even
the skeptics of the " Encyclopedia " believed in
Ossian, the darkest century of the Middle Ages -
the eleventh — disputed the authenticity of the false
" Decretals" of Isidore Mercator. Centuries before
the Protestants of England and America gave up
their persecution of witches, Bishop Agobard and
King Luitprand had condemned such absurdity
(ninth century) ; and the former had protested
against trials by combat, and against ordeals by fire
and water. Nor can modern times claim the credit

The Middle Age Not a Starless Night. 263

of having discovered what is called the Copernican
system ; for Bishop John of Salisbury (d. 1180), and
four centuries before him the Irish monk, Virgilius
(Ferghil), had taught the correct mundane system
and the existence of the antipodes.

Never in modern days have the pretensions of
sovereigns been more jealously watched and more
heartily resisted by the peoples than in the days so
generally supposed to have been a period of prostra-
tion before royal caprice. Whereas the legislation
of ancient Rome had established the sole will of the
prince as the reason of all law, the Canon Law of
the Church, a crowning glory of the Middle Ages,
taught that law supposes the consent of the people,
and has for its end only the good of the community.
As far back as the eighth century Rattier, Bishop of
Verona, proclaimed that human nature is ever equal
to itself, and that therefore no man has received
from God the right to command his neighbor. The
science of government has never been laid down bet-
ter than by the Angelic Doctor, that light sufficient
of itself to dissipate the darkness of an entire epoch.*

No modern abolitionist has more earnestly pleaded
in favor of universal freedom than did the monk

* " Two things are necessary to found a durable order of
things in the state. All must be participants in the general
government, so that all may have an interest in maintaining the
public peace. That form must be adopted which combines all
powers most happily. The happiest combination is that which
places at the head a virtuous ruler, who will surround himself
with a number of notables who will rule according to equity;
and who, being taken from every class by means of a universal

264 The Middle Age Not a Starless Night.

Smaragdus in the eighth century. The masses were
no more content in those days than they are now to
quietly accept whatever they found at hand. " Every
dogma, rite, and system," observes Cantu, " found
champions and opponents ; and the political heresies
of Arnold of Brescia and of Friar Dolcino, the
philosophical ones of Origen and of Abelard, the
religious ones of Photius and of the Albigenses, left
nothing new for Luther and Socinus to pronounce.
And what if we reflect that these rude ancestors of
ours civilized half the world; that by the transla-
tion of the Bible modern languages were formed ;
that hymns were composed which were sung by the
most refined centuries ; that entire nations were
withdrawn from licentious and ferocious supersti-
tion ? Undoubtedly, much was wanting ; but deny,
if you can, to Alexander the title of consummate
general because he would not have been able to con-
quer at Leipsic or to reduce Antwerp ; or the title of
poet to Homer because he was -ignorant of geography
and astronomy."

In the Middle Ages the science of government
had already been able to abolish that system of cen-
tralization which in later times became, and is yet,

suffrage, will thus associate the entire people in the cares of
government. In its beneficent organization such a state would
combine royalty, represented by its one head ; aristocracy, in its
magistrates chosen from among the best citizens ; and democracy,
manifested in the election of the magistrates, effected in the
ranks and by the voice of the people." (See Ch. Jourdain's
" La Philosophic de St. Thomas d'Aquin," vol. i, p. 407. — " Sumina
Theol.," p. 1, 2, q. 2, c. 8, a. 7.)

The Middle Age Not a Starless Night. 265

the curse of modern Europe. In England, then per-
fectly Catholic, parliamentary government was de-
veloped, at least as to its essentials ; for the English
liberties date from the Charter of Henry I. in
1103 ; and above all from the great Charter of John
Lackland in 1215 ; and the Provisions of Oxford in
1258, the source of the House of Commons. Spain
had her liberties developed in her cortes, and Ger-
many in her diets. In France political life was nour-
ished by the Champs de Mars and of May, and then
by the Estates. And in Italy, where the influence
of the Papacy was the most immediately exercised,
the most favorable ground for republican institutions
was found and cultivated ; the glories of the mediae-
val republics of Genoa, Pisa, Sienna, Florence and
Venice, need no description. This last point is
beyond contestation ; political liberty existed in the
" dark" ages, and under the full domination of the
Catholic Church.*

* Balmes says: " The greatest development of the royal power
in Spain occurred on the appearance of Protestantism. In Eng-
land, commencing with Henry VIII., it was not monarchy that
prevailed, but a cruel despotism, the excesses of which could not
be disguised by a vain shadow of representative forms. In
France, after the wars of the Huguenots, the royal power was
more absolute than ever. In Sweden, Gustavus mounts the
throne, and from that moment the kings exercise almost unlimited
power. In Denmark, the monarchy perpetuates and strengthens
itself. In Germany, the kingdom of Prussia is formed, and abso-
lutism generally prevails. In Austria, the empire of Charlemagne
retains all its power and splendor. In Italy, the little republics
disappear, and the peoples recur to the domination of princes.
In Spain, the ancient cortes of Castile, Aragon, Valencia, and
Catalonia, fall into abeyance."

266 The Middle Age Not a Starless Night.

Well might Augustine Thierry call the Middle
Ages the real epoch of liberty. Even in the Papal
States, the government of which at this period
might naturally be supposed to have been redolent
of absolutism, the Popes of those days carried on
their government in union with their people, — that
is, with the " Roman Republic." It was not until
1353 that Cardinal Albornoz, legate of Pope Inno-
cent VI. (residing at Avignon), tried to introduce a
sovereignty like that in other monarchies by destroy-
ing the petty lords ; but even he guaranteed many
of the ancient privileges by his " Egidian Constitu-
tions," which for centuries remained the real public
law of the Romagna ; and down to the revolution of
1797 the pontifical sovereignty remained rather nom-
inal than despotic. In fact, not before the Congress
of Vienna, in 1815 — the royal members of which,
says Cantii, wished that all mediate jurisdiction
should cease, and that, especially in Italy, no written
rights of the people should exist, — did absolutism
in any sense prevail in the Papal States.*

Nor was the will of a nation, as to its choice of a
ruler, a thing generally ignored in the Middle Ages.
In England the early kings mounted the throne only
with the consent of the " witans," or great ones ;

* " Absolutism was an entirely new thing in the Papal States,"
says Cantii; "and when Pius IX. initiated and blessed the
Italian movement, he protested, in his Constitution of March 14,
1848, that he did nothing but ' restore some ancient institutions
which were for a long time the mirror of the wisdom of our august
predecessors ' ; and that ' in the olden time our Communes had the

The Middle Age Not a Starless Night. 267

and the olden writers ordinarily speak of election as
the title to reign of their sovereigns. Even after
the Norman Ot>nquest, William and his first succes-
sors rested their claims on the national will. After
the death of the Lion Heart, it was the great council
of England, assembled at Northampton, which defin-
itely settled the crown on John Lackland ; and at
the coronation at Westminster the primate justified
the exclusion of Arthur by alleging the right of the
nation to choose, from among the royal princes, him
who seemed to be most worthy of the sceptre. In
Germany, after the death of the last descendant of
the German branch of Charlemagne, an assembly of
the lords placed Conrad I. on the throne, — subject,
of course, as was ever the case, to confirmation by
the Roman Pontiff. This right to choose .the em-
peror of the Holy Roman Empire afterward passed
to the ten, and then to the seven Electors. In France,
from the very origin of the monarchy, the nation
participated in the inauguration of the supreme
power. Under the Carlovingian dynasty the sover-
eign was proclaimed in a general assembly, and then
raised on a buckler supported by the chiefs of the
nation. And these notables exercised, down to the
fall of the Merovingian dynasty, the right to depose
unworthy kings ; thus, Childeric I. was deposed

privilege of governing themselves, under laws chosen by them-
selves, with the sovereign sanction.' Behold one of the thousand
proofs that liberty is old and despotism new. But to-day, all
moral and political sense being lost, the name of one is bestowed
on the other." (" Heretics of Italy," dis. viii.)

268 The Middle Age Not a Starless Night.

because of his oppressions, and Childeric III. on
account of imbecilty.

When Charlemagne divided his states among his
three sons, he decreed that "if one of the three
brothers thould have a son whom the people would be
willing to elect to the kingdom of his father, his
uncles should consent." Similar dispositions were
made by Louis le Debonnaire in his two successive
divisions of the empire. When Louis le Begue was
crowned at Compi£gne, he styled himself " King, by
the mercy of God and the choice of the people."
On the death of Louis V., his successor by heredity
should have been his uncle, Charles of Lorraine ; but
as that prince had alienated the hearts of the people,
the prelates and lords met at Senlis in 987, and gave
the crown of Charlemagne to Hugh Capet. Nor can
it be said that the people were ignored in all this
development of the exercise of political right; for
the Third Estate — all of the nation that was not
clergy or nobility* — shows itself during the Middle
Ages ever vigorous and aggressive. In France, at
least, the political life of the Third Estate began
with the monarchy. After the king came his

* Some have held that the Third Estate comprised only the
middle class, what we now call the bourgeoisie; but this opinion
is historically false. The ordonnance of Louis XVI., convoking
the Estates of 1789, speaks of the immemorial right of attending
the Third possessed by " all the inhabitants who are French by
birth or naturalization, of twenty-five years of age, domiciled,
and subject to taxation."

The Middle Aye Not a Starless Night. 269

"leudes," or great vassals, who were the source of
the nobility, or "grande noblesse;" then came the
people, composed of freemen ("ingenui ") and serfs.
The freemen, possessors of their own lands (called
"allodiales "), were obliged to military service.
These men voted in the general assemblies of the
nation or the Champs de Mars or of May. Behold
the origin of the Third Estate. But with the twelfth
century began the great influence of this body.
Louis le Gros emancipated the Communes, gave
liberty to the cities, and thus started municipal life.
The Benedictine Abbot Suger — the greatest states-
man of his age, who ruled France under Louis
le Jeune, — developed these liberties, and very soon
serfdom disappeared in the greater part of the king-
dom. Under the Capetian kings, the Estates Gen-
eral, properly so called, succeeded the old assemblies
of the nation, the first solemn reunion being held
under the arches of Notre Dame de Paris in 1302,
and the people having their votes and cahiers equally
with the clergy and nobility. And the resolutions
of this assembly surpass, in some respects, the mod-
ern guarantees of constitutional government.*

Montesquieu, that genius whom Cantu appropri-
ately characterizes as " imprisoned in his own cen-
tury," was constrained, despite his prejudice as to
the " barbarism " of mediaeval law, to avow that gov-
ernment was then " well moderated ; " and precisely

* See Augustin Thierry's " Essai sur PHistoire de la Formation
du Tiers-Etat," ch. 2, Paris, 1853.

270 The Middle Age Not a Starless Night.

because " the civil liberties of the people, the prerog-
atives of the nobility and clergy, and the power of
the sovereign, moved in concert." When even the
positivist Augustin Thierry declares that the Middle
Ages formed " the true epoch of freedom," one is
prepared to hear Montalembert — who, with the sole
exception of Cantu, penetrated the spirit of this
calumniated period better than any other modern
publicist — announcing his conviction that " the
Middle Ages were the era of really representative
government, of institutions more sincerely and effica-
ciously representative than any which have been
imagined since that time. Yes, representative gov-
ernment was born in the Middle Ages, and belongs
to them. It was born of a natural combination of
the elements which then constituted society ; it came
from the common action of the Church, Catholic
royalty, the owners of the land, and the emancipated
municipalities."

THE MAN WITH THE IRON MASK.

AMONG the many romances which contributed,
more than any real historical merit, to the vogue of
Voltaire's "Age of Louis XIV.," one of the most
famous is that of the Man with the Iron Mask. But
in 1745, seven years before the publication of the
cynic's much-vaunted travesty on the history of a
great period, there had appeared at Amsterdam a
fantastic description of the court of France, in which,
under imaginary names, were represented the chief
celebrities of that brilliant galaxy, a gloomy promi-
nence being given to the mysterious man of the
hidden face. This work, styled " Secret Memoirs
in Illustration of the History of Persia," had been
issued anonymously; but there are not wanting
arguments to show that Voltaire, jealous of the fame
accruing to Montesquieu from his " Persian Letters,"
was its author. Be this as it may, the Sage of
Ferney adopted the clandestine writer's version of
the story which then, and for many years afterward,
^agitated the curious throughout Europe. In his
first edition of the "Age of Louis XIV." (two vol-
umes in 12mo), Voltaire gave no details concerning
the Iron Mask ; but in the enlarged editions, issued
in and after 1753, he spoke more explicitly than any
other writer had hitherto done, even drawing the
portrait of the victim, describing his mask with

271

272 The Man With the Iron Mask.

hinges at the mouth, and assigning the date of his
first imprisonment and of his death.

According to the fantastic "Persian Memoirs,"
Shah Abas ( Louis XIV.) had two sons : one legiti-
mate, named Sephi Mirza ( Louis, dauphin of
France) ; and one illegitimate, Giafer ( Count de
Vermandois, by Mile, de La Valliere). These two
princes hated each other, and one day Giafer struck
his brother in the face. Shah Abas informed his
council of this outrage, which, according to the
Persian law, was punishable with death; but it
was resolved to send Giafer to the army, then acting
on the frontiers of Feldran (Flandre), and to repre-
sent him as killed ; then he was to be secretly trans-
ferred to the citadel of the island of Ormus (Isles
Sainte-Marguerite), and there perpetually confined.
Only one of Giafer 's servants was intrusted with this
state secret, and he was killed by the escort during
the journey to Ormus. The commander of Ormus
treated his prisoner with great respect, himself bring-
ing his meals and waiting at his table, and no other
person was ever allowed to see his face. One day
the prince scratched his name on a plate, and when
the dish was handed to the commander by the slave
who had observed the writing, the unfortunate dis-
coverer was put to death. After many years of
confinement at Ormus, the prisoner was transported
to the citadel of Ispahan (the Bastile), remaining
in charge of the same commander, now promoted to
the governorship of the latter fortress. Throughout

The Man With the Iron Mask. 273

his entire imprisonment, which lasted until his death,
Giafer was forced to wear a mask whenever sickness
or any other important reason compelled him to be
seen by others than his jailer. Such persons re-
ported that the governor always treated his mysteri-
ous charge with scrupulous respect, and that the
prisoner showed great familiarity with the com-
mander, always addressing him as " thou." The
author of the " Persian Memoirs " represents Giafer
as yet living in 1723 ; for he states that Ali-Homajou
(the Duke of Orleans) died shortly after a visit to
the prince, and we know that Orleans died in 1723,
eight years after the death of Louis XIV.

Such, then, is the substance of all the legends
concerning the Iron Mask, which have appeared
from the " Persian Memoirs " to the famous novel
of the elder Dumas. Louis XV. once said, when
pressed, as he often was concerning this strange
episode in the reign of the grand monarch : " Let
people dispute about it; as yet no one has told the
truth concerning it." And once, in a moment of
confidence, he said to Laborde, his first valet de
chambre : " You wish me to tell you something
about the Iron Mask? Well, this much more than
any one else you may learn : the imprisonment of
that unfortunate hurt no one but himself."

For many years seven theories were presented as
to the identity of this personage. Various investi-
gators or romancists discerned him in the Count de
Vermandois, a natural son of Louis XIV. by Mile.

274 The Man With the Iron Mask.

de La Vallie^re ; in a son of A nne of Austria by De
Richelieu ; in the Duke of Beaufort, high-admiral of
France, confined, it is supposed, lest he might have
interfered with the projects of Colbert, then Minister
of Marine ; in Arwedicks, schismatic patriarch, cap-
tured and imprisoned, it was said, at the instigation
of the Jesuits ; in the Duke of Monmouth, not
executed therefore by James II. ; in Henry Cromwell,
second son of the Protector ; and finally in Mattioli,
secretary of the Duke of Mantua, whose political
influence Louis XIV. feared. Let us briefly examine
the arguments adduced for each of these parties.

The theory that the Count de Vermandois was the
Man with the Iron Mask was patronized not only
by Voltaire, but by Griff et,* a Jesuit writer who
had been confessor at the Bastile for nine years,
and had enjoyed exceptional advantages as an inves-
tigator of this question. He cites the manuscript
Journal of Dujanca, governor of the Bastile in 1698,
and the mortuary registers of the parish of St. Paul
in Paris ; and from these documents he proves that
the masked prisoner arrived at the Bastile from
Pignerol on September 18, 1698, and that he died
on November 19, 1703. He leans toward the sup-
position that the prisoner was Vermandois, f merely

* " Traite des differentes sortes de preuves qui servent k
e'tablir la verite dans 1'histoire." Liege, 1769.

t Griffet does not wish "to come to a decision," because of his
uncertainty as to the date of the prisoner's arrival at Pignerol.
In his day this date was unknown, but it is now certain that it
was previous to September, 1681.

The Man With the Iron Mask. 275

because the date of the presumed death of that
prince on the Flemish frontier coincides with the
one which he fixes for the commencement of the
masked person's captivity, — that is, 1683. But
Griffet gives no reason for assigning this year rather
than the one preferred by Voltaire, 1661 ; or rather
than 1669, the one adopted by Lagrange Chancel;*
or rather than 1685, the one selected by Saint-Foix.f
However, Griffet was refuted by Saint-Foix, who
found proof in the registers of the cathedral chapter
of Arras, that Louis XIV. had buried his son in the
vault of Elizabeth de Vermandois (wife of Philippe
d'Alsace, Count of France), who died in 1182;
while the registers of St. Paul's state that the
masked prisoner was interred in the cemetery of
that parish. The registers of the chapter of Arras
show that great respect was paid to the remains of
Vermandois, whereas M. de Palteau, a descendant of
Saint- Mars (the custodian of our prisoner), informed
Saint-Foix that it was a tradition in his family that
chemicals had been placed in the coffin of the un-
known, for the quicker destruction of the body.J
And, what is more conclusive of all, there exists
a letter of Barbezieux to Saint-Mars, written on
August 13, 1691, in which the masked individual
is described as having been already in the officer's
custody u for twenty years ; " whereas it is certain
that the Count de Vermandois died, or (according to

* " Annee Litteraire." Paris, 1758.
t Idem, 1768.

276 The Man With the Iron Mask.

Voltaire and Griff et) disappeared, as lately as
1683.*

As to the theory that the mysterious personage
was an illegitimate f son of Anne of Austria, Queen
of Louis XIII., by the Cardinal de Richelieu, there
is no need to soil these pages with any detailed
refutation. Elsewhere we have dwelt at some length
on the character of the great statesman, and con-
clusively shown that no valid charges have been
brought against his morality; while as to the in-
culpated Queen, not one argument has ever been
adduced to prove either her guilt in this particular
case, or any departure whatever from conjugal duty.
One observation alone will suffice to relegate the
present charge to oblivion. On November 17, 1697,
Barbezieux wrote to Saint-Mars that he should
"never inform any person whomsoever as to what
the prisoner had done." He would not have used
such language, had the only fault of the masked one
been that of his birth.

In 1758, M. Lagrange-Chancel, who had been
confined in the citadel of Sainte-Marguerite in 1718,
and who had collected there much traditionary evi-

* Mile, de Montpensier, a well-inforrned contemporary, nar-
rates that the prince arrived at the camp before Courtray in the
beginning of November, 1683 ; that on the 12th he was attacked by
fever, and died on the 19th.

t Some have made the Iron Mask a legitimate son of the
Queen. Thus, in 1790, Soulavie published an account of two
shepherds announcing to Louis XIII. that Anne would give birth
to twins, whose rivalry would cause great harm to France ; and
he added that Louis imprisoned the second son.

The Man With the Iron Maslc. 277

deuce concerning the masked prisoner detained in
the citadel not many years before, published a refu-
tation of the lies and errors in the "Age of Louis
XIV. ; " and among other things bearing on the Iron
Mask, declared that M. de Lamotte-Gue'rin, governor
of the Isles, had assured him that the prisoner was
the Duke of Beaufort, admiral of France, generally
supposed to have been killed at Candia, but confined
by Colbert as a precautionary measure. But, as
Griffet observed, Beaufort was incapable of inter-
fering with the projects of Colbert for -the good of
his country ; and even had he been so disposed, he
had not the power, since his functions were limited
to those of " grand master, and superintendent of
navigation and commerce," the post of high-admiral
having been suppressed by Richelieu. And modern
historians are well satisfied that Beaufort was killed
at Candia.

In 1825 M. de Taules published a pamphlet in
which he accused the Jesuits of having caused the
abduction and imprisonment, first at the Isles Sainte-
Marguerite, and then in the Bastile, of Arwedicks,
a schismatic patriarch, who was, he says, " a mortal
enemy of our religion, and a cruel persecutor of the
Armenian Catholics." De Taules identified Anve-
dicks with the Iron Mask, and says that he died in
the Bastile.* But documents in the Foreign Office

* " L'Homine au Masque de Fer, memoire historique oil 1'on
refute les differentes opinions relatives a ce personage mysterieux
et oil 1'on deniontre que ce prisonnier fut une des victimes des
Je"suites."

278 The Man With the Iron Mask.

at Paris prove that Arwedicks was removed from
Turkey, " during the embassy of M. Feriol at Con-
stantinople," * which began in 1699. Now, Saint-
Mars brought his masked prisoner to the Bastile in
1698, and he had already been in captivity many
years. Again, Arwedicks joined the Roman com-
munion, was liberated, and died in freedom, f

The theory of Saint-Foix, identifying the mask
with the Duke of Monmouth, a natural son of
Charles II., decapitated for repeated rebellions, on
July 15, 1685, obtained great favor among lovers of
the marvellous. But how could a substitution have
been effected successfully in the case of one con-
demned to public execution, and whose appearance
was so familiar to the officers and guards of the
Tower, and to the whole people of London? Again,
granting this to have been possible, would not the
existence of Monmouth, in French custody, have
transpired after the English revolution of 1688 ?
But the letter of Barbezieux to Saint-Mars in 1691,
speaking of the latter officer's prisoner as having
been already in his custody for twenty years, de-
stroys the hypothesis of Saint-Foix.

As to Henry Cromwell, second son of the Pro-
tector, there is not a shadow of probability in favov
of his having been the mysterious prisoner. Why

* " Memoire inanuscrit de M. de Bonac, nrubassadeur de
France a Constantinople, 1724."

t Thus says the official report of his death in the archives of
the Foreign Office.

The Man With the Iron Mask. 279

should the French Government have disturbed his
repose, while allowing his brother Richard, the quon-
dam successor of Oliver, perfect freedom in France ?

Nor can Mattioli, secretary of the Duke of Man-
tua,'have been the disputed individual; for he
certainly died in 1681. Again, all authors agree in
accepting the abundant' and indisputable evidence
that the famous prisoner was always treated with
the greatest respect compatible with his isolation
from the outside world, while the correspondence of
the royal ministers and officers concerning Mattioli
is redolent of contempt for that person. Thus Cati-
nat writes to Louvois about " that knave ; " and
Louvois admires the patience of Saint-Mars in not
treating " that rogue as he merits, when he is want-
ing in respect to the governor."

Who, then, was this man with the Iron Mask ?
Very strong, if not most conclusive, arguments are
adduced by M. Paul Lacroix in his apposite work,
and strengthened by Barthelemy, to show that he
was no other than the celebrated Fouquet, superin-
tendent of finance under Louis XIV., who was
condemned in 1664 to perpetual imprisonment for
malfeasance in office, peculation, and projected high-
treason.

Firstly, the precautions taken in guarding Fouquet,
while at Pignerol, were very like those used in
regard to the masked prisoner of Sainte-Marguerite
and the Bastile. When the Chamber of Justice had
condemned Fouquet to perpetual exile, the King, we

280 The Man With the Iron Mask.

read in the "Defenses de M. Fouquet," judging
that there " was great danger in allowing the said
Fouquet to leave the kingdom, because of his inti-
mate knowledge of many affairs of state," deemed
it prudent to change the punishment to perpetual
imprisonment. The culprit was placed in a carriage
with four guards, and in custody of M. de Saint-
Mars, and escorted by one hundred musketeers, was
conducted to the castle of Pignerol. His physician
and valet were subjected to the same confinement as
their master, "lest they might be a means of commu-
nication between him and his friends." And in the
"Instruction" given to Saint-Mars for his guidance
in the care of Fouquet, which paper was signed
by Louis XIV., he is forbidden to allow Fouquet
to have any communication with any living person
other than Saint-Mars himself, "either by speech,
writing, or visit ; " and the culprit must never leave
his apartment, " even for a walk." Saint-Mars can
furnish him with books, but " only one at a time ;
and he must carefully examine each book when he
removes it, lest any writing or cipher be therein
hidden." The prisoner, of course, was to have no
paper, ink, etc. He could have a confessor when he
so desired ; but " the priest must be notified only
the moment before hearing the said Fouquet, and he
must always have a different confessor." And Saint-
Mars was to " keep his Majesty informed as to what
the prisoner did." Now, all these exceptional pre-
cautions, and those indicated in the numerous letters

The Man With the Iron Mask. 281

of Louvois to Saint-Mars, exactly correspond with
those adopted in the case of the Iron Mask.

Secondly, most of the traditions concerning this
individual can easily be accommodated to Fouquet.
Take, for instance, that of the plate with writing-
scratched on it, flung from a window and found by
a slave. According to Papon,* who heard this from
the son of one of the guards of the mask, it was not
a plate, but a shirt, on which the prisoner had
written "from one end to the other." Now, this
story reminds us of two passages concerning Fou-
quet in letters from Louvois to Saint-Mars — "I
have received your letter, as well as the napkin on
which M. Fouquet wrote ; " and, " You may tell
him that if he turns his table linen into writing-
paper, he need not be surprised if you give him no
more." Again, all the tokens of respect, the many
courtesies of refinement, the elegant furniture, etc.,
accorded to the mysterious man of Sainte-Marguerite
and the Bastile were extended to Fouquet at Pig-
nerol.

Thirdly, it is far from certain that Fouquet
died in 1680, as was reported. The contradictions
of his contemporaries on this subject are strange,
and there is an almost entire absence of docu-
mentary evidence.

Fourthly, political reasons might have easily
induced Louis XIV. to cause the spread of a
report of the death of Fouquet. It has been the

" Voyage en Provence."

282 The Man With the Iron Mask.

fashion among most modern historians to sym-
pathize with, if not to laud, Fouquet as much
as they have decried his successor, Colbert. The
modern " liberal " school could not be expected
to see willingly any good in him who was be-
queathed to his sovereign by the dying Mazarin,
any more than they do in the latter, recommended
as his own successor by the moribund Richelieu.
But an inspection of the report of Fouquet's
trial must satisfy any impartial mind that the
famous superintendent merited the extreme dis-
pleasure of Louis XIV. as a reckless prodigal of
the public money, and an arch-conspirator against
the crown.

Another reason for the monarch's aversion is
sometimes found in the supposed audacity of
Fouquet in pretending to rival Louis in the
affections of Mile, de La Vallie're; but that view
of the character of the grand monarch, which
ever espies the lover behind the king, is essen-
tially absurd. One need only read that criminating
document, written entirely by the hand of Fouquet,
and found hidden at the back of a mirror in his
apartment, to become convinced of his transcendent
guilt. "In reading this paper," says the impartial
Peter Clement, * " one can not tell whether he
should be more astonished at the extraordinary
levity of the writer, or at his seemingly ingenuous
confidence in the devotion to himself of those men

* " Histoire de Colbert."

The Man With the Iron Mask. 283

whom he had deluged in money, or at the crazy
notion he had conceived as to his own impor-
tance in the state. ... In every line is evidence
of his malfeasance, of his abuse of the public
treasury in order to attach creatures to himself to
the injury of the state, and of his programme of
civil war." * In consigning Fouquet to perpetual
imprisonment, Louis XIV. executed a judicious
stroke of statesmanship ; and if, as we suppose, he
gave out that the still influential criminal had died,
he deprived the opposition cliques of their most
powerful pretext.

Fifthly, Saint Mars and Louvois, whenever writing
about Fouquet before the date of his alleged death,
always use the same significant phrase, "my" or
"your prisoner," although the former had many

* Among the papers of Fouquet was found the following
document: "I promise to give my loyalty to Monseigneur the
Procurator-General, Superintendent of Finances, and Minister of
State ; to belong to no person but himself, giving myself and
attaching myself to him with my utmost zeal, and promising to
serve him in all things, against every person without exception; and
to obey no person but him ; and to hold no relations with any
whom he may prohibit tome, and to resign the post of Concarneau,
which he has given to me, whenever he may demand it. I promise
to sacrifice my life for him, against all whom he may name, be they
of any quality or condition whatever, without excepting any person
in the world. As assurance of this I give these presents, written
and signed by my hand. Done at Paris, June 2, 1658, Deslandes."
Deslandes was commander of the citadel of Concarneau, which
belonged to Fouquet. But the document which ruined Fouquet
was nothing less than a detailed plan of rebellion, addressed to
his friends, and to be actuated in case Cardinal Mazarin, then
become suspicious of Fouquet's honesty, and designing to sub-
stitute Colbert in his place, should order his arrest.

284 The Man With the Iron Mask.

other prisoners in charge ; and after the first appa-
rition of the mask, both Louvois and Barbezieux
adopt this phrase.

As to the death of the mysterious prisoner, we
learn from the diary of M. Dujunca that it oc-
curred on November 19, 1703, and that he was
buried on November 20, in the cemetery of St.
Paul's. The parochial register states that "on
November 19, 1703, Marchialy, aged about forty-
five years, died in the Bastile, and his body was
interred in the cemetery of St. Paul's, his parish."
Marchialy is the name by which tradition has
nearly always described this personage, but why
we can not discover. It is certain, however, that
in those days, as in ours, prisoners were generally
called by other names than their own, and that
these pseudonyms were frequently changed, in
the case of state offenders, to baffle the schemes
of their friends.

When the Bastile fell into the hands of the
raging mob, on July 14, 1789, search was made
at once for some evidence as to the identity of
the masked charge of SaintxMars. A periodical
of the day informs us that there was found
a paper marked 64, 389, 000, and the words,
"Foucquet,* coming from the Isles Sainte-Mar-
guerite, with an iron mask." Then followed,
X. X. X., and underneath, " Kersadion." When
this discovery was made known, people recalled

* So the name was written in those days.

The Man With the Iron Mask. 285

to mind a saying in the supplement to the "Age
of Louis XIV.," to the effect that Chamillart,
Minister of State, had said that the Iron Mask
"was a man who possessed all the secrets of
Fouquet." Unfortunately, however, for any pros-
pect of certainty in the question we have been
examining, the interesting paper just mentioned
no longer exists.*

* Drawing attention to the contradictions of contemporaries
concerning the death of Fouquet, and commenting on Louvois'
acknowledgment, only on April 3, of Saint-Mars' letter of infor-
mation, whereas Mme. de Sevigne knew of the event several days
before, Paul Lacroix asks how the special despatches of the state
were over fourteen days on the road, while the postal courier of
Pignerol covered the route in less than eight days. And how can
we explain the silence of the "Mercure Galant", a journal most
precise in recording the principal deaths of every month ? A strange
death, says Lacroix, which occurred at Pignerol on March 23, and
was known at Paris on the 25th. "And not an authentic document
to establish the death of a man whose fortune and disgrace had
caused such wonder! Nothing to impose silence on the rumors
ever insinuating crime when death in a state-prison is mysterious !
Only an enigmatical despatch of the Minister of War, the trans-
mission of a coffin, and an extract from a convent register showing
a burial a year afterward! " Is it not strange that Lafontaine, who
could so plaintively lament the fall of "Oronte", had no regrets
for his Maecenas? asks Barthelerny. And Gourville, who kept up
a correspondence with his friend Fouquet to the very last, makes
no mention of the time or place of his death. Even the family of
Fouquet were uncertain as to his end. Nor can we forget that the
diary of M. Dujunca informs us that "the olden prisoner whom
Saint-Mars had guarded at Pignerol" was yet in that fortress at
the end of August, 1681, when Saint-Mars passed as governor to
Exiles, seventeen months after the presumed death of Fouquet,
taking with him the Iron Mask and one other prisoner, whose
name we ignore. Nor is it insignificant that whereas Louvois
uses the phrase " the deceased M. Fouquet," when writing to
Saint-Mars during the month after the alleged death, he ever after
omits that qualification.

THE HOLY WARS: THEIR OBJECT
AND RESULTS.

DURING the first years of Islamism the Christian
nations felt little reason for concern as to their
own future. Regarding the new religionists as a
mere horde of children of the desert, they could not
realize that their own peace, still less their indepen-
dence in the political order, would ever be seriously
threatened from that quarter. And even if they had
foreseen the great spread of Mohammedanism, and
all the baneful consequences thence, of necessity, to
ensue, they were just then in no condition to fore-
stall the enemy's attack. As yet Christendom was
not united in the Western Empire, and when, in
time, that effort of pontifical statesmanship opened
a new era of strength and prosperity to Europe, the
arrogance, and afterward the schism, of the Greeks
prevented any unanimous action against the enemies
of the Christian name. But in the eleventh century,
the invasion of the Seljuk Turks, who had abandoned
the religion of Zoroaster for Islamism, infused a
northern ferocity into the comparatively soft nature of
the Arabs, and during the pontificate of St. Gregory
VII. the Crescent was frequently seen from the
towers of Constantinople. From time to time
Europe was horrified by accounts of the fearful

The Holy Wars,: Their Object and Results. 287

oppression endured by the Christians of Palestine ;
of bishops and priests being dragged from the altar
to prison ; of brutal outrages upon persons of both
sexes and of every age.

The schismatic arrogance of the Greeks was
compelled to yield, and the Emperor Michael Ducas
(Parapinax) begged for aid from the detested Latins.
St. Gregory VII. heeded the cry, and, although he
knew that the promise was extorted by dire temporal
necessity, and not by regard for religious unity,
he was disposed to believe that Ducas was sincere in
the avowed intention to put an end to the schism.
All Christendom was invited to raise an army for
the service of God, and the Pontiff declared in a
letter to King Henry IV. of Germany that he hoped,
" having pacified the Normans, to himself proceed
to Constantinople, in aid of the Christians." Fifty
thousand warriors promised to follow him, but other
interests prevailed, and the great enterprise was post-
poned, until Pope Victor III. had the satisfaction, in
1088, of seeing the Genoese, Pisans, and other
Italians, receive from his hands the standard of St.
Peter, and set out to fight for the Cross and for
civilization. This first expedition to check the
inroads of Mohammedanism was comparatively suc-
cessful. Landing in Africa, it destroyed or disabled
more than a hundred thousand Saracens, burned a
city, imposed tribute on a Moorish king, and returned .
to Italy with many rich spoils, which were used to
decorate the churches of the victors.* But this inroad

* Leo of Ostia (Marsicanus): in Baronio.

288 The Holy Wars : Their Object and Results.

into the domains of Islam was merely a prelude to
the great Crusades.

The impulse to the first Crusade (1096-1100)
was given by an obscure individual, rude in feature
and in manner, but who had been raised by solitude
and prayer to such sanctity, that he was popularly
supposed to enjoy direct communication with Heaven.
Known' only as Peter the Hermit, he left his native
Amiens in 1093, and made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem.
Touched to the quick by the melancholy condition
of the holy places, he seemed to hear, while prostrate
before the Holy Sepulchre, the voice of Jesus com-
manding: "Arise, Peter; go and announce to My
people the end of their oppression. Let My servants
come, and the Holy Land shall be freed." He
returned to Europe, and falling at the feet of Pope
Urban II., he urged that Pontiff to carry out the
design of his predecessors. The Pope blessed him,
and commissioned him to preach a Crusade ; he
did so throughout Europe, travelling barefooted and
bareheaded, clothed in sackcloth, crucifix in hand,
and mounted on a mule. William of Tyre (oh.
about 1180) tells us that Peter was "insignificant in
person, but his eye was keen and pleasing, and he
possessed an easy flow of eloquence." Everywhere
he astonished people by his austerities, and moved
their sympathies by his graphic picture of the woes
of Palestine. He cried to sinners : " Soldiers of the
demon, become warriors of Christ;" and all who
had crimes to expiate or injuries to repair seized on

The Holy Wars : Their Object and Results. 289

this means of reconciling themselves with God.
The feudatories, the younger sons of reigning fam-
ilies (all trained to war, and having scarcely any
other means of occupying their time), joyfully
volunteered.

While Peter was thus engaged, there came from
Constantinople letters from the Greek Emperor,
Alexis Comnenus, begging aid from the Latins, as
the " new Rome " was in imminent danger of falling
into the hands of its enemies. In 1095 Urban II.
convoked a council at Piacenza to devise ways and
means. Over 200 bishops, 4,000 priests, and 80,000
laymen, listened to the Pontiff's discourse, which
was delivered in the open air. Another assembly
was ordered to convene at Clermont in Auvergne,
and on November 18 of the same year, 238 bishops
obeyed the summons. Here the Pontiff made use
of every argument, religious and political, to further
the cause. From his discourse, not as embellished
by Michaud, but as it was recorded in its simplicity
by William of Malmesbury,* who was present at its
delivery, we take the following passages :

" Go, my brothers, go with confidence to attack
the enemies of God, who — oh, shame to Christians !
— are so long in possession of Syria and Armenia.
Long since they mastered all Asia Minor ; and now;
they have insulted us in Illyria and all the neighbor-
ing regions, even so far as the Straits of St. George.
And they have done worse : they have robbed us of

* " Deeds of the English Kings," b. 4, y. 1095.

290 The Holy Wars : Their Object and Results.

the tomb of Jesus Christ, that wonderful monument
of our faith ; they sell to our pilgrims permission to
enter a city which would be open to Christians alone,
if we had only a little of our ancient valor. Ought
not our faces to be suffused with blushes of shame ?
Who, unless they who envy the Christian glory, can
suffer the indignity of not being able to share with
the infidels at least a half of the world ? Christians,
put an end to your own misdeeds, and let concord
reign among you while in these distant lands. Go,
then, and in this most noble enterprise show the
valor and prudence you now display in your intes-
tine contests. Go, ye warriors, and your praises will
everywhere be heard. Let the well-known bravery
of the French be shown in the van ; followed by the
allies, their very name will terrify the enemy. . . .
If necessary, your bodies will redeem your souls.

" Do you, men of courage and of exemplary intre-
pidity, fear death? Human wickedness can invent
nothing to injure you winch is to be compared with
celestial glory. Do you not know that life is a
misery to man, and that happiness is in death ? The
sermons of priests have caused us to receive this
doctrine with our mother's milk ; and the martyrs,
our ancestors, sustained this doctrine with their
example. . . . The sanctuary of God repels the
spoiler and the ribald, and welcomes the pious man.
Let not the love of your relatives impede you ; prin-
cipally to God does man owe his love. Let not your
progress be arrested by your affection for your native

The Holy Wars : Their Object and Results. 291

land ; for the entire world may be regarded as a
place of exile for Christians, and their country as the
entire world. Let no one remain at home because of
his riches ; for greater wealth is promised him — a
wealth composed, not of those things which soften
our misery only with vain expectation, but of those
which perpetual and daily instances show us are the
only true riches. . . . These things I publish and
command, and for their execution I appoint the end
of the coming spring."

Throughout the assembly was then heard the cry
which the Crusaders were to render famous, " God
wills it ! " A cardinal recited the formula of general
confession; all repeated it, and received absolution.
Ademar de Monteil, Bishop of Puy, received the
cross as Papal Legate, and this emblem of the Cru-
sade was then given to nearly all the barons and
even to many bishops.

The first Crusade lasted from 1096 to 1100; the
second, from 1147 to 1149; the third, from 1189 to
1193 ; the fourth, from 1202 to 1204; the fifth and
sixth, from 1218 to 1239; the seventh and eighth,
from 1248 to 1270. Frequent attempts were after-
wards made to renew these holy wars, and many
isolated expeditions were undertaken; but, as Pom-
ponne, Minister of Louis XIV., remarked to Leibnitz,
" since the time of St. Louis, such things have been
out of fashion." Bacon wrote a dialogue on the
Holy War. Mazarin left 600,000 livres to help a
Crusade. The famous Friar Joseph, the Franciscan

292 The Holy Wars : Their Object and Results.

counsellor of Richelieu, composed on this subject a
Latin poem which Pope Urban VIII. called the
Christian ./Eneid. In 1670 Leibnitz tried to induce
Louis XIV. to conquer Egypt, and in his design,
reduced to writing, he said :

" Then Europe will rest, will cease to tear her own
bowels, and will fix her attention where she may find
honor, victory, advantage, and wealth, with a good
conscience, and in a manner pleasing to God. Then
men will not rival one another in robbery, but in
reducing the power of the hereditary foe ; each one
will strive to extend, not his own kingdom, but that
of Christ. . . . Let us suppose that the Emperor,
Poland, and Sweden, proceed together against the
baibaiians, and seek to widen the limits of Christen-
dom, having no other designs, and fearing no enemies
in their lear: how the blessing of God would show
itself in favor of so just a cause ! On the other
hand, England and Denmark would find themselves
in fiont of North America; Spain, before South;
Holland, befoie the West Indies. Fiance is destined
by Providence to be the guide to Christian aimies in
the East, to give to Christendom her Godfreys, her
Baldwins, and especially her SS. Louis, who will
invade that Africa just opposite her shores, to de-
stroy a nest of pirates and to conquer Egypt — she
wants neither the soldieis nor the money necessary
to become the mistress of that land. . . . Behold a
way to acquire a lasting glory, a tranquil conscience,
universal applause, certain victoiy, immense advan-

The Holy Wars : Their Object and Results. 293

tages. Then will be attained that hope of the
philosopher, that men will make war only on wolves
and other wild beasts, to which the barbarians and
infidels may now be compared." *

Those who desire, in the matter of the Crusades,
details of fact, causes, and effects, should consult the
" Deeds of God through the Flanks," by William of
Tyre; and the Histoiy written by the Imperial
Anna Comnena. Among modems we may read
with profit the ''Spirit of the Ciusades," by De
Maillet; and the "History of the Ciusades," by
Michaud, which, although full of piejudice, is the
most complete of all works on this subject. Much
information may also be gained from the "Life of
Innocent III.," by Hurter ; and from Prat's "Peter

* Dissertation by Guhrauer, in " Memoires of the Institute of
France," Vol. I. — Cantu agrees with Leibnitz: "Suppose that the
lion of St. Mark and the dragon of St. George had made a perma-
nent home on the hanks of the Bosphorus, the Jordan, and the
Tigris. A civilized population would now enjoy that beauty
which of old made them envied centres of culture ; Seleucia,
Antioch, Bagdad, would be the London and Paris of Asia; where
now a pasha, with Hail and scimitar, bends the peoples before the
caprices of a despot, and where the Bedouins practise robbery and
piracy with impunity, would now flourish governments founded
in order and liberty ; from the most beautiful city under the sun
would flow streams of culture and of love over Asia and Europe,
united in affection and in progress, to improve the North, and
spread the light of truth in the heart of Africa and in the farthest
regions of the East. If a hermit had not raised that cry, if the
Popes had not taken it up, the growing civilization of Europe
would have succumbed to the Arabs; the religion of love and of
liberty would have yielded up our countries to one of blood and
of slavery, and over the beautiful lands of Italy and France would
reign a brutal domestic and political tyranny, a haughty im-
mobility, a fatal indifference, a systematic ignorance."

294 The Holy Wars : Their Object and Results.

the Hermit and the First Crusade." The French
Academy of Inscriptions published, in 1841, a col-
lection of all the Latin, Greek, and Oriental histo-
rians of the Crusades ; the Greek portion being
composed of fragments of Nicephorus Briennius,
Anna Comnena, Nicetas Coniates, John Phocas, and
Michael Attaliates. As for the modern English
authors who have written on the Crusades, some are
pretentious, few recommendable. Of all who, in
any language, have treated this subject, Cantu is the
most impartial, and the most appreciative of the
spirit which prompted and sustained one of the most
salient features of the Middle Age ; he will also
fully satisfy the reader's curiosity as to chivalry,
tournaments, " courts of love," the oaths customary
at the time, the military religious orders, the trova-
tori — an acquaintance with all of which matters
will greatly facilitate a comprehension of the events
of the Crusades.

Many causes have contributed to an unjust appre-
ciation of the value of the Crusades, but they may
be all referred to the difficulty experienced by the
average modern mind in understanding the spirit of
the Middle Age. Add to this the fact that these
Holy Wars were pre-eminently the work of the
Roman Pontiffs, and, therefore, a natural object of
carping criticism to all the foes of Catholicism, and
you will be surprised when you find, now and then,
a Protestant or an infidel writer who can see in them
aught else than cruel injustice to both Christian and

The Holy Wars : Their Object and Results. 295

Islamite ; or, at best, anything better than sublime
folly. In defending the policy that prompted these
Crusades, in upholding their justice, in contending
that they were necessary, humanly speaking, to the
very existence of Christianity, we do not apologize
for each and every action of their leaders, or of the
rank and file of their participants ; it is but too true
that, as in other noble designs, many of the instru-
ments were found to be full of flaws. We must
distinguish the motives of the Crusaders.

The Popes, most of the kings and princes, and
nearly all the leaders, who took part in these expe-
ditions, were impelled by the desire of banishing the
infidel from the places sanctified by the life and
death of the God-Man — by the desire of freeing a
Christian people from a slavery that was cruel to the
body and threatening to the soul. They felt the
necessity of arresting the progress of an inexorable
and barbarous enemy, who was menacing that
Christian civilization which the Catholic Church had
developed in nearly the whole, and was then planting
in the rest, of Europe ; they knew tha^t the most
efficacious means of doing this was by carrying war
into Asia and Africa, by convincing Islam that
Christendom could fight as well as pray. These
motives were certainly noble. But among the masses,
while the religious motive undoubtedly predominated
with the immense majority, so that it may truly be
said to have furnished the life and soul of the expe-
ditions, other motives were sometimes mingled —

296 The Holy Wars : Their Object and Results.

some of them base, some indifferent. Many who
groaned at home under the feudal system hoped to
find another lot awaiting them in the East; some
were impelled by a curiosity to see those lands about
which pilgrims had told such wonderful stories;
some, undoubtedly, were incited by mere love of
adventure. If these latter classes were guilty of
excesses — nay, if even some of the leaders acted
more like condottieri than like soldiers of Christ —
the good name of the cause should not suffer.

Those who affect horror at the sacrifice of two
millions of Christian lives during the two centuries of
the Crusades, do not, as a general thing, descant upon
the great loss of life that purely secular wars have
entailed, and yet entail, upon mankind. And how
great is the difference between these and the Holy
Wars, both as to causes and effects ! In the former,
in nearly every case, men are taken from their fire-
sides to kill and be killed without knowing the
reason for it; in the latter, they knew, thoroughly
appreciated, and heartily applauded the reason. But,
we are told, this knowledge, this appreciation, was
that of superstition, and the hope of success was a
folly. The Crusaders were certainly guilty of super-
stition, if a vivid and life-sacrificing devotion to our
faith, if a hearty reverence for everything connected
with that faith, be superstition. We need not pause
here to show that Christianity, felt and outwardly
professed, is not superstition.

But what about the folly of these wars ? Not

The Holy Wars : Their Object and Results. 297

that supernatural effervescence which is known as
the folly of the Cross — for if that be understood,
the Crusades were a folly — but a sheer absurdity is
here intended. Well, now that the holy fever is at an
end, and we can calmly criticise each and every one
of its symptoms and consequences, many errors of
management are discoverable ; but at the time the
attack on the strongholds of Islam was decreed, every
reason, military and political, could be adduced for
the success of the project. Common sense assured
the Western nations that the Byzantine Emperor,
bearing, as he did, the first brunt of the Mussulman
attack, would cordially and gratefully assist the
enterprise ; who could have foreseen the insane
treachery of the entire schismatic tribe ?

But what of the justice of the Crusades? The
Islamites were pronounced religious and political
enemies of the European nations. It was of the
very essence of their religion — and too well did
they practise it — to spread their faith by fire and
sword, to enjoy the earth and its fulness. They
had already subjugated the once flourishing Chris-
tian states of the East, and in many of them had
almost destroyed every vestige of the Christian
religion ; they had conquered a great part of the
Iberian Peninsula ; they had devastated a large
portion of Italy, and, for a time, had even threat-
ened France ; in fine, to the Mussulman every war
against a Christian state or community was holy.
Where was the injustice of warring against such

298 The Holy Wars : Their Object and Results.

a race of men? Consider also that war, and war
d V entrance, was the only means by which Europe
could save herself from barbarism, her women from
degradation, her children from slavery.

Our age affects to detest mere sentiment, and
is pre-eminently utilitarian. For this very reason
it should admire the Crusades. The first great
advantage they brought to Europe was frequent
internal peace where intestine war had been the
order of the day ; the Christian swords that had
so often crossed one another in unworthy strife
were now turned against the common enemy of the
Christian altar and of every Christian government.
The Normans and other ferocious Northerners,
who would have impeded the progress of civilization
along the shores of the Baltic and the German
Ocean, found an outlet for their warlike enthusiasm
in distant Asia; and uthis expedition" (the second
Crusade) says Krantz ("Sax.," c. 13) " at least
effected the freeing of Germany from a set of men
who lived by robbing others." Many a district
hitherto living in awe of some petty tyrant, who,
like an eagle from his eyry, had been wont to
pounce down upon it on an errand of rapine,
thanked the campaigns of Asia and Africa for
affording such men an opportunity of satisfying
their tastes away from home. Thousands of serfs,
by taking the Cross, threw off the yoke of what
was little less than slavery ; for the Crusader
became a servant of God and of the Church, and

The Holy Wars : Their Object and Results. 299

a freeman. Strangers who took up their abode in
the domains of some petty lord, used to become his
serfs : now the pilgrim was sacred.

Industry was advanced by means of the Crusades.
The silks of Damascus were coveted by the West-
erns, and Palermo, Lucca, Modena, and Milan be-
came noted for the fabrics they wove for the lords
and ladies who were no longer satisfied with the
skins of beasts for clothing. The glassware of
Tyre was introduced by the Venetians, and soon the
ingenious sons of the Republic manufactured the
beautiful and delicate crystals which have given
its artisans celebrity to our own day. Wind-mills,
till then not used, if at all known, in Europe,
were copied from those in Asia Minor, where they
were necessary, owing to the want of running
waters. The goldsmith's art received an impetus
from the numerous relics and gems brought from
the Orient, and which had to be richly set and
mounted.

Another advantage of the Crusades was the
better administration of justice ; when intestine
war had become rare, order reappeared ; the great
ones of the earth commenced to consider their
followers as their poor ones — pauperes nostri,—
for these inferiors were now freed from local ser-
vitude, and began to unlearn the customs of
hereditary serfdom. Government was better devel-
oped; communes and republics came into existence,
and gave equal laws even to the lands of the

300 The Holy Wars : Their Object and Results.

absent barons, elevating public over private power.
The common people, during the long absences of
the lords, depended upon the superior power of
the kings ; and thus was prepared, for the ultimate
good of the nation, the fall of feudalism. The
roya authority was constantly being increased by
the acquisition of fiefs, either made vacant by
death, or sold to the crown that their lords might
obtain money for the Holy Wars.

Still another advantage of the Crusades is thus
described by Cantii : " In the fragmentary society
of feudalism, each one's country was bounded by
the hedge that inclosed his field ; it was expensive
and dangerous to cross the bridge that spanned
the neighboring little torrent, in sight of the
castle of the next proprietor. But suddenly the
barriers fall, and whole nations enter on roads
hitherto closed. Then the Northerners beheld in
Italy, the relics of ancient, and the commencement
of a new, civilization ; at Bologna, they heard
lectures on the Pandects; at Salerno and Monte
Cassino, they attended medical academies ; at Thes-
salonica, they visited schools of fine art; at Con-
stantinople, they inspected libraries and museums.
James de Vitry expresses his wonder at finding
the Italians 'secret in counsel, diligent, studious,
of public utility, careful for the future, detesting
the yoke of another, ardent defenders of their
liberties.' In Sicily and in Venice, whither they
came to embark, they found more regular forms

The Holy Wars : Their Object and Results. 301

of government, and their astonishment on seeing
all the citizens of Venice convoked to give assent
to the decrees of the doge, inspired ideas of a
liberty very different from the German. When
they were established on the new soil, they gave
attention to a proper jurisprudence, which should
not be imposed by force, but should be discussed
by the reason of nations who deemed themselves
equal, and who desired their own real advancement.
The 4 Assizes ' that were then compiled became
models for princes and communes ; St. Louis
profited by them for his c Establishments,' and
perhaps the English found in them the idea of
their boasted jury. From the method of gathering
tithes, then imposed by the Church, kings learned
a regular system of taxes, which, if they became
perpetual, at least ceased to be arbitrary and
multifold."

With reference to the effects which the Crusades
produced on the arts and letters of Europe, the
same author says : " Since it is certain that the
Crusades retarded the fall of Constantinople, I
believe that literature profited by them ; for Europe
was not yet sufficiently mature to receive the
classics there preserved, as she did in the fifteenth
century. In fact, of two rich libraries which then
perished, no chronicler makes any mention, of so
little account were they deemed ; masterpieces of
art were brutally ruined, unless when the Italians,
especially the Venetians, preserved them to dec-

302 The Holy Wars : Their Object and Results.

orate their own cities. Look at Pisa, Genoa, and
the Norman edifices in Italy, and you will find
them rich in columns and statues transferred from
the East, — a fact which reveals a resurrection
of the sentiment of the beautiful, and explains
the sudden development of the arts among us.
Literature came forth from the sanctuary when
all took part in universal enterprises; style was
elevated when history passed from municipal
events to prodigies of valor ; poetry found in
reality that at which, by mere imagination, it
would never have arrived."*

The Crusades were also of great benefit to com-
merce. The commercial cities of Italy made
immense profits by transporting warriors and pil-
grims ; and they obtained great privileges in the
conquered lands, establishing banks in Syria and
along the Ionian and the Black Sea. Then began
the commercial prosperity of what are now Belgium
and Holland, of the south of France, of Bremen
and Lubeck. Citizens became wealthy, and were
soon so powerful that they were able to exact
rights and privileges. The sugar cane used by
the Crusaders at Lebanon to assuage their terrible
thirst, was transplanted to Sicily, thence carried
by the Saracens to Granada, and from there taken
by the Spaniards to America. Europe became
acquainted with alum, indigo, and many other
valuable drugs and spices ; afterwards, while en-

* " Storia Univ.," b. xii, c. 18.

The Holy Wars : Their Object and Results. 303

gaged in a search for a quick passage to the land
that produced them, an Italian navigator discovered
a new world.

The Crusades failed of their main object — the
freedom of the Holy Land, — but they checked
the progress of Mohammedanism, and permitted the
continuance of the work of civilization in Europe.
They need no apology ; had they fully succeeded,
Europe, Asia, and Africa would now, in all proba-
bility, be entirely Christian. Their main idea was
both politic and just. It was certainly good
policy to give rest to a state by transporting its
disturbers beyond the seas ; to turn this fury
against the barbarians. It was certainly just to
combat a ferocious people, an article of whose
religion was to exterminate Christians, and who
had already ravaged all Southern Europe.*

* Was not that system of solidarity, which in the Middle Age
bound the Catholic nations together by the principles of a com-
mon faith, at least as just and respectable as that modern inter-
national solidarity, styled European balance of power, which is
based on a shifting policy, and on merely earthly interests? Otto-
man barbarism everywhere rampant under the Crescent ; Christian
civilization on the defensive under the Cross ; Islamism menacing
the world with its impure torrents, and Christianity striking home
at its implacable enemy — behold, in its most natural and philo-
sophical aspect, the entire history of the Crusades. (Berault;
"Hist. Gen. de 1'Eglise," vol. xii, p. 596.)

THE "ORTHODOX" RUSSIAN, AND THE
SCHISMATIC GREEK CHURCHES.

THE Atlantic cable informs us that "the Pope
and the Czar are negotiating with a view to the
reunion of the Greek and Latin Churches ; and
that, as the Pope is willing to let the Greek Church
retain its own manner of worship, it is expected
that the negotiations will be successful." * Good
news certainly, and most consoling, if the history
of past " negotiations " did not warn us not to be
over sanguine as to the result of future ones.

In many minds the Russian, or, as it styles itself,
the " orthodox " Church, is synonymous with the
schismatic Greek Church; but it is not schismatic
Greek in origin, nor is it Greek in language, polity,
or government. The schismatic Greek Church is
composed of those Christians who recognize the
spiritual jurisdiction of the Greek Patriarch of Con-
stantinople, and is confined to the territories once
embraced in the Byzantine (now known as the
Ottoman) Empire, f with its vassal (now only quasi
vassal) States — Egypt, Nubia, etc. The Russian
Church communicates with the schismatic Greek,

* June, 1887.

t In 1833 the hierarchy of the new Kingdom of Greece declared
its independence of the patriarch, and in 1868 that prelate rec-
ognized its autonomy.

304

The Russian and G-reek Churches. 306

and, in spite of its own liturgy, which stoutly asserts
the primacy of the Roman See,* agrees with the
schismatic Greeks in rejecting the authority of the
Roman Pontiff ; but it is, in every respect, a national
church. It recognizes no earthly authority over
itself but that of the "Holy Synod," a body en-
tirely dependent on the Czar. Originally, the metro
politan of Russia was nominated by the sovereign,
and consecrated by the Constantinopolitan patriarch ;
but after the schism the czars began to act, more
and more, as heads of the Church. In 1589, the
Patriarch Jeremiah II. recognized Job, metropolitan
of Moscow, as Patriarch of Russia, and as next in
rank to him of Alexandria. In the reign of Alexis
Michaelovitch, father of Peter the Great, Nikon of
Moscow rejected the authority of Constantinople ;
and in 1667, Nikon having offended Alexis, he was
deposed, and the power of his successors became
nominal. Peter the Great finally, in 1721, placed
the government of the Russian Church in a " Holy
Synod," every member of which swears obedience
to the Czar as " supreme judge in this spiritual
assembly."

* The Russian liturgical books, written in Old Slavonic, are
full of such testimonies. Thus, Pope St. Sylvester is called "the
divine head of the holy bishops." Pope St. Leo I. is styled " the
successor of St. Peter on the highest throne, the heir of the im-
pregnable rock." To Pope St. Martin is said: " Thou didst adorn
the divine throne of Peter, and, holding the Church upright on
this rock which can not be shaken, thou didst honor thy name."
Pope St. Leo III. is thus addressed : " Chief pastor of the Church,
fill the place of Jesus Christ." St. Peter is called the sovereign
pastor of all the Apostles — "pastyr vladytchnyi vsich Apostolov."

306 The Russian and Greek Churches.

The language of the Russian Church is not the
Greek, but the Slavonic ; and not the vernacular,
but the Old Slavonic, with which the people are
not familiar. Protestants are much mistaken when,
reading that the Greeks, Syrians, Copts, etc., cele-
brate their services in Greek, Syriac, Coptic, etc.,
they imagine they discover an example for their own
use of the vernacular. The languages used in the
rituals of these peoples are very different from those
in daily use. Nor do the Russians owe their con-
version to the Greek schismatic Church. This
conversion was effected by the Roman Catholic
Apostolic Church ; for whether, as we learn from
Constantine Porphyrogenitus, the first missionaries
to Russia were sent by the Catholic Patriarch Igna-
tius (867), or, as Nestor asserts, they were sent by
the schismatic Photius (866), it is certain that no
real impression was made upon the Russian masses
until toward the end of the tenth century,* when
the Grand Duke Vladimir, called " the Apostolic,"
embraced Christianity ; and at that time the Greeks
were in communion with Rome. The revival of
the schism, by Michael Cerularius, did not much

* About the year 945 Olha, Olga, or Elga, widow of a grand
duke (or king) of Russia, made a journey to Constantinople, and
was there baptized. Returning to Russia, she vainly endeavored
to convert her countrymen*. But her grandson, Vladimir, having
married Anna, sister of the Greek Emperor Basil II., was bap-
tized in 988, and in a few years nearly all the Russians received
the Faith. Those authors who assign the conversion of Russia
to the ninth century, remarks Bergier, confuse the reign of
Basil II. with that of Basil the Macedonian.

The Russian and Greek Churches. 307

affect the Russians. Not until the twelfth century
were they entirely seduced from the Roman obe-
dience. Then, with the exception of the Church
of Galicia,* most of the Russians ceased to be
Catholics. However, at the time of the Council
of Florence (1439) there were as many Catholics as
schismatics in Russia. (Bollandists : " September,"
v. 41.) About the middle of the fifteenth century,
a second Photius, Archbishop of Kiev, extended
the schism throughout the land.

Some authors opine that the schism of Cerularius
did not affect even the entire Greek Empire in the
eleventh century. Certainly, Pope Alexander II.
sent Peter, Bishop of Anagni, as apocrisiarius
(agent, not legate) to the Emperor Michael Ducas
in 1071, and he continued as such for a whole year.
When, in 1078, St. Gregory VII. excommunicated
Nicephorus Botoniates, it was only because of his
having dethroned Ducas, who was in communion
with the Holy See. Pope Paschal II. sent Chryso-
lanus (or, as some write the name, Grosolanus, or
Proculanus) as legate to Alexis Comnenus. Alex-
andre and Mansi hold that there was communion
between the West and East for some time after the
excommunication of Cerularius and his pretended
retaliation of the same. It is noteworthy that

* Galicia, or Red Russia, returned to the Fold of unity under
Pope Honorius III. (1216-27.) The two millions of Ruthenians,
as they are called, use the Slavonic liturgy, and their secular
clergy may marry before receiving Holy Orders.

308 The Russian and Greek Churches.

Euthymus Zygabenus, who, by order of Alexis
Comnenus, collected the sayings of the Fathers
against each and every heresy, makes no mention of
the Latins as heretics. Even in the twelfth century
there were many Greeks in communion with Rome,
as we learn from the many narratives of the Cru-
sades, from the " Alexias " of Anna Comnena, from
the "Life of Manuel" by Nicetas Choniates, and
from the letters (B. IV., Nos. 39, 40) of the Vener-
able Peter of Cluny to the Emperor John Comnenus
and to the Patriarch of Constantinople.

The following remarks of Father Gagarin, than
whom the reader will find no better authority on
matters concerning the Russian Church, are worthy
of attention : " It was only in a very indirect
manner that the Russian Church was drawn into
schism. The metropolitans of Kiev depended, in the
hierarchical order, upon Constantinople. When the
rupture between Rome and Byzantium took place,
Kiev found itself separated from the centre of
unity ; but for a long time the Russians did not
share the passions of the Greeks, and it may be
said that, for a long period, merely a material schism
subsisted between Rome and the Russian Church.
But the clergy of Constantinople endeavored to
imbue the Russians with their own prejudices and
with their hatred of the Latins. They succeeded,
and when the princes of Moscow manifested a
design of attacking the independence of the Russian
Church, this body could rely on itself alone.

The Russian and Greek Churches. 309

" As yet no one has written the sad and touching
history of the struggle which this Church, isolated
from the West, and betrayed by the East, sustained
against the growing ambition of the grand dukes
and czars of Moscow. And, nevertheless, that
history has some beautiful pages. If the Russian
Church succumbed, it was not without combat or
without glory. Ivan III., if not from conviction,
at least ostensibly, belonged to a sect which de-
signed to substitute Judaism for Christianity. The
metropolitan of Moscow had been seduced, but the
Russian Church preserved sufficient strength and
independence to condemn the impure doctrines.
When Ivan IV., who much resembled Henry VIII.
of England, shed the blood of his subjects in
torrents, and trampled on the authority of the
Church to gratify his passions, Philip, metropolitan
of Moscow, spoke to him with apostolic liberty,
and sealed his remonstrances with his blood. But
the Church continued to lose ground, and when
Boris Godounov transformed the metropolitan of
Moscow into a patriarch (1588), that elevation
was, in his mind, for the purpose of furnishing the
Czar with a willing tool." *

Although the "orthodox " Russians and schismatic
Greeks, like the Nestorians and Jacobites, are wit-
nesses to the antiquity of many dogmas which
Protestants regard as modern human innovations,

* " La Russie, Sera-t-elle Catholique ? " Paris, 1856.

310 The Russian and Greek Churches.

Protestant polemics ever show much sympathy for
the aversion cherished by these schismatics toward
the Holy See. The children of the Reformation
have often endeavored to enter into communion
with these separatists, but their efforts have re-
sulted, each time, only in a formal condemnation of
Protestant tenets by the progeny of Photius and
Cerularius. Two of these attempts at union be-
tween the Eastern and Western opponents of Rome
merit attention.

In 1574 Stephen Gerlach, a Lutheran, and preacher
to the imperial embassy at Constantinople, was
urged by many of his co-religionists to obtain from
Jeremiah II., Patriarch of Constantinople, an en-
dorsement of the " Confession of Augsburg " as
consonant with the faith of the schismatics. But
Jeremiah combated the " Confession " as heretical,
with tongue and pen. In 1672 Dositheus, schismatic
Patriarch of Jerusalem, convoked a synod to con-
sider the doctrines of Calvin, and the synodals said
of the Lutheran overtures to Jeremiah : " Martin
Crugius, and others well versed in the new doctrines
of Luther, sent the articles of their ' Confession '
to him who then sat on the throne of the Catholic
Constantinopolitan Church, that they* might learn
whether they agreed in doctrine with the Oriental
churches. But that great patriarch wrote to them
— yea, against them — three learned discourses, or
replies, wherein he theologically and Catholicly re-
futed their entire heresy, and taught them the

The Russian and Greek Churches. 311

orthodox doctrines which the Oriental Church
received from the beginning. However, they paid
no attention ; for they had bidden farewell to all
piety. The patriarch's book was issued, in Greek
and Latin, at Wittemberg in Germany, in the year
of salvation 1584; but before the time of Jeremiah,
the entire doctrine of the Oriental Church had been
more fully set forth by the priest John Nathaniel,
procurator of Constantinople, in his l Treatise on
the Sacred Liturgy ' ; and after the said Jeremiah,
this was also done by Gabriel Severus Moreanus,
Archbishop of our brethren of Crete, in his book on
4 The Seven Sacraments of the Catholic Church.' " *
Another and more celebrated attempt to unite
the Western innovators and the Eastern schismatics
was made in the seventeenth century. Cyril Lucar,
a Candiot, was sent to the University of Padua
when a youth, where he studied under the famous
Margunius, Bishop of Cythera. After his gradua-
tion he travelled in Germany, and became infected
with the new doctrines. Nevertheless, on his re-
turn among the Greeks he received the priesthood,
and in time became Patriarch of Alexandria. In
1621, having bribed the Grand Vizier with money
furnished by the Calvinists of Holland, he was
appointed Patriarch of Constantinople. He began
immediately to teach Calvinism ; the clergy revolted ;

* We have followed the Latin version of this Synod of Jeru-
salem (or of Bethlehem), made by an anonymous Benedictine of
St. Maur, and first published at Paris, in 1676.

312 The Russian and Cf-reek Churches.

Cyril was exiled to Rhodes, and Anthimius of
Adrianople was placed on the patriarchal throne.
However, the intrigues of the English ambassador
caused the Porte to recall Cyril, and he soon
published a " Confession of Faith " of the most
Calvinistic type. In 1636 the indignation of the
Greeks compelled the Porte to again banish the
innovator, but after three months he was once more
recalled — only to be bow-stringed, by order of the
Porte, in 1638.*

Lucar's " Confession of Faith " appeared in Hol-
land in 1645, and was gladly welcomed by Protes-
tants as a harbinger of their recognition by the
Mstorically venerable churches of the East ; but
the consequent publication of the justly celebrated
"Perpetuity of the Faith of the Catholic Church
concerning the Eucharist " demonstrated the fal
laciousness of their hopes, f They soon found that
the Greeks admitted /their agreement with Rome
concerning most of the Catholic dogmas. Indeed,

* Spondanus : y. 1627, no. 9 ; y. 1638. no. 14 ; y. 1639, no. 12.—
Claude: "Reponsea La Perpetuite de la Foi," La Havre, 1670.—
Hottinger: " Analecta Hist. Theol."— Du Pin: " Bibliotheque des
Auteurs Ecclesiastiques."— Thos. Smith; "Life of Cyril Lucar."

t In the five quarto volumes of which this work consists, are
collected testimonies of all the Greek ecclesiastical authors who
wrote after the schism of Photius; the professions of faith of
many patriarchs and bishops ; declarations of many synods ; the
liturgies, etc., of the East. It is proved that in all ages, just as
to-day, the Orientals admitted seven Sacraments, and held that
these produce ( ?) grace ; that, as now, they believed in Transub-
stantiation ; that, as now, they prayed to the saints, prayed for
the dead. It is also shown that Lucar manifested, not the senti-

The Russian and Greek Churches. 313

as soon as Lucar's " Confession " appeared in Con-
stantinople, the author was synodically deposed,
and Cyril of Berea was made patriarch. This
prelate convoked a synod in 1638, and a condem-
nation of Lucar's " Confession " was signed by the
three schismatic patriarchs (of Constantinople, Alex-
andria, and Jerusalem), and by twenty-three bishops.
Soon after, bribery and intrigue procured the
patriarchal chair for Parthenius of Adrianople,
who in 1642 held another synod, which again
reprobated Lucar's teachings. In 1672 Dositheus of
Jerusalem celebrated the synod already mentioned,
which confirmed the decisions of the other assem-
blies.

In the " Acts " of this assembly we read that
the Greek schismatics accused the Calvinists (whom
they styled "liars, innovators, heretics, mendacious
architects, apostates, who, like all heretics, are arti-
ficial explainers of Scripture and of the Fathers,")
of calumniating the Orientals by the assertion that
the said Orientals held Calvinistic doctrine. And
this assertion was made, say the bishops, in spite

merits of his Church, but his own opinions — a fact proved by
himself when he proposed his doctrine as one he would like to
introduce among the Greeks. In the last two volumes of the
" Perpetuity," the doctrine of the Catholic and schismatic Greek
Churches is compared with that of the Nestorians, who separated
from Rome in the fifth century, and with that of the Eutychiaus,
or Jacobites, who became schismatics in the sixth. Then follows
an exposition of the belief and of the discipline of the Ethiopians,
Egyptian Copts, Maronites, and of the Nestorians scattered
throughout Persia and India.

314 The Russian and Greek Churches.

of so many declarations of Greek patriarchs ; in
spite of the publication of the " orthodox " belief ;
in spite of the lucid treatises of many Greek doctors.
Then follow eighteen chapters, in which the synodals
declare that man's free-will was not destroyed by
the fall of Adam ; that faith alone will not justify ;
that there are seven Sacraments ; that Baptism
cleanses from original sin ; that in the Eucharist
the substance of the bread and wine is really
changed into the substance of the Body and Blood
of Christ ; that the saints are to be invoked as
friends of God; that their images are to be ven-
erated; that we must receive all traditions given
us by the Church, which, being taught by the
Holy Ghost, can not err.

Disappointed in their hopes of union with some
ecclesiastical body of comparative antiquity, the
Calvinists accounted for the adverse action of the
schismatic synods by the supposition of Latin
bribery. Thus, in 1722, appeared the book of
Cowell, an Englishman, who tried to prove that
fraud was behind the apparent agreement of the
Roman and schismatic doctrines. Mosheim affects
to discover, in the history of the Lucar affair, that
Catholic polemics do not scruple at dishonesty
when disputing with heretics. Now, it is false
that the Greek bishops who condemned the Western
u reformers " were partial to the Latins. Cyril of
Berea, like many other schismatic prelates and

The Russian and Greek Churches. 315

priests of his time, may have died, as Mosheim
asserts, in the Roman communion, but the dominant
spirits of the synods in question would have rivalled
a Scotch covenanter in hatred of Rome. Nec-
tarius, an ex-patriarch of Jerusalem, composed an
energetic diatribe " Against the Primacy of the
Pope." Dositheus, the president of the Synod of
Jerusalem, published, in 1683, many works of
Simeon of Thessalonica, in which this writer se-
verely upbraids the Latins. Again, if these Greek
adversaries of the " Reformation " were actuated by
a desire of pleasing Rome, why did they, in these
very synods, so strenuously assert their peculiar
dogma concerning the Procession of the Holy
Ghost? Finally, how is it that the Greeks, so
bitter against the Holy See, so tenacious of their
own distinctive doctrines, did not depose Dositheus,
Nectarius, Parthenius, etc. ?

From the day of her separation from Rome, the
Greek Church, once so active, has been in a state
of lethargy, displaying none of that fecundity
which Christ promised to His own spouse. " The
prodigious ignorance and stupid superstition," says
Feller, " in which the priests and people of this
isolated Church are involved, necessarily entail the
great abuses and enormous disorders with which
they are reproached. For centuries the Greeks
can show no celebrated doctor, no council worthy
of attention. Their latest sages — Bessarion, Al-

316 The Russian and Greek Churches.

latius, Arcudius, etc., — all belonged to the Church
of Rome." *

And now a few words as to the probability of a
submission of the Russian " orthodox " Church to
the Roman jurisdiction. The Czar may devoutly
wish for union with Rome. If he is a statesman,
he must realize that the activity and zeal of a
Papal clergy would be a great check to the growth
of Nihilism. The more learned and more pious
of the "orthodox" clergy — too few, alas! in
number — may yearn for unity. But there is one
obstacle, which, apparently, neither the once power-

* Again we call the reader's attention to some reflections of
Gagarin: " Byzantism pretended to have for its object the exal-
tation and triumph of the Greek Church, Empire, and nationality.
It sacrificed the unity and independence of the Church to that
object, and what has been the result of the conflict which it
provoked? The ruin of the Greek Church, and consequently of
the Greek Empire and nationality. But God did not wish that
this ancient and glorious Church should perish. He raised up a
new people, who seem to have the mission of re-establishing her
in her pristine splendor. That people is the Slavic, and three-
fourths of them belong to the Oriental rite, with this difference,
that their liturgical language is the (Old) Slavonic. One can
not avoid being struck by the contrast between the Slavonic
and Greek branches of the Oriental rite. The former possesses
numbers, force, vigor, while the latter exhibits only feebleness
and decrepitude. Laying aside every other argument, the figures
will make this difference palpable. It is estimated that all the
Oriental Christians — Slavs, Greeks, Moldo-Wallachians, or Eou-
manians, Georgians, etc., — number about seventy million souls,
of whom nearly sixty millions are Slavs. If from the ten or
twelve remaining millions we deduct those who are not Greeks,
we see to how small a number the Greeks are reduced. Now,
the Slavs of the Oriental] rite are nearly all subjects of the
Kussian Empire."

The Russian and Greek Churches. 317

ful inclinations of a Czar nor the fast-decreasing
influence of a corrupt clergy can overcome. When
England shall have learned the wisdom of doing
justice to Ireland, there may be hope that Russia
will commence to doubt the wisdom of her policy
toward her Ireland — unfortunate, noble, and ex-
hausted Poland. But as yet, to the average Russian
mind, Poland is a subject only for the iron heel ;
and Catholicism, to this mind, means Latinism,
— i. e., Polonism. The Russian " patriot," there-
fore, regards any progress of Catholicism in " Holy
Russia" as a progress of Polish nationality.

Again, the Russian clergy have always system-
atically inculcated the idea that a reunion with
Rome means the abolition of several institutions
dear to the Russian heart — viz., Communion under
both species, the use of fermented bread in the
Sacrifice of the Mass, the Old Slavonic liturgy,
and the marriage of the secular clergy. And here
we must note that nothing can be more* false than
the idea entertained by most of the Eastern schis-
matics that whenever there has been a question of
reunion with Rome, the Holy See has designed
to force them to adopt the Latin rite and discipline.
While it is true that in the Ottoman Empire all of
the United or Catholic Greeks, excepting the Syrian
Melchites ; and that in Poland, very many members
of the Greek rite have passed over to the Latin rite ;
the Holy See cannot be justly blamed for these
facts since they are to be ascribed to causes com-

318 The Russian and Q-reek Churches.

pletely foreign to the actions of the Catholic mis-
sionaries.* In refutation of this idea of the Papal
intentions, Benedict XIV., in his Bull Allatce sunt,
quotes the words of Pope Innocent IV., who cited
two Constitutions of Popes Leo X. and Clement
VII., in which these Pontiffs vehemently reproved
those Latins who blamed the Greeks for their ob-
servance of certain customs approved by the Council
of Florence. The same Benedict XIV., speaking of
those who were laboring for reunion, resumes their
obligations as follows : (1.) They should disabuse
the schismatics of those errors which their ances-

* "In Turkey," says Gagarin, "until the halti-houmayoum of
Feb. 18, 1856, all the Christians of the Greek rite \vcre placed under
the (civil) authority of the Patriarch of Constantinople ; and when
one of them renounced that prelate's communion to enter that 0f
the Pope, it is evident that he was exposed to vexation by the for-
mer personage, who, though no longer his spiritual, was still his
temporal ruler. He had only one way of escaping persecution, and
that was a withdrawal from the patriarch's civil jurisdiction when
he left the schismatic communion. To effect this withdrawal, he
had to join the Latin rite. These few words ought to explain how,
in Greece and the Archipelago, all the Catholic Greeks have been
led to abandon the Greek rite. The concessions made by the
Sultan Abdul-Mejid, on Feb. 18, 1856, deprived the patriarch of
his civil authority over his co-nationals ; but it has not yet been
shown that the Greeks who were desirous of joining the Roman
communion, and who still preferred to cling to their old rite, could
do so with impunity. Let us judge, then, whether they could
have done so a century or two ago. In Poland the circumstances
were different, but the United Russians passed to the Latin rite
because of similar influences. In the Republic of Poland there
were two rites, two languages, and two nationalities. The superi-
ority was with the Poles ; and when the convert adopted the Latin
rite, he assumed Polish nationality, and entered the ranks of the
dominant people. Does not this state of things explain the facts
opposed to us ? "

The Russian and Greek Churches. 319

tors introduced in order that they might have a
pretext for withdrawing from the obedience of the
Sovereign Pontiff. As an easier method of con-
verting said schismatics, the greatest stress should
be laid upon the writings of the early Fathers of
the Greek Church, who are in perfect accord with
the Latin Fathers. (2.) To bring the Eastern schis-
matics into the fold of the true Church, it is not
necessary to attack their rites. On the contrary, as
the Apostolic See has always insisted, they must not
be urged to follow the Latin rite. And in our own
day Pope Pius IX., in an Encyclical addressed to
the Orientals, under date of Jan. 6, 1848, uttered
the same sentiments. Nevertheless, the idea is firmly
fixed in most Russian minds that union with Rome
means the loss of their loved rite. This, added
to their present sentiments as to the burning
question of Poland, would seem to indicate that
there is little probability of a speedy submission
of the Russian Church to the Holy See.

D 24 .P3 1892 SMC

Parsons, Reuben,

1841-1906.
Some lies and errors of

history.
AWO-8325