READING HALLTHE DOORS OF WISDOM |
GERMANY AND THE WESTERN EMPIRE
CHAPTER XX. LEARNING AND LITERATURE TILL POPE SYLVESTER
II.
ONLY a few years before the
death of Bede, Alcuin was born, and in Alcuin we have the principal link
between the vigorous learning of these islands and that, hardly yet born, of
Central Europe. The main facts of the connection are familiar. Alcuin, educated
in the traditions of York, left England at about the age of fifty, on a mission
to Rome to receive the archiepiscopal pall for Eanbald of York, and in 781 met Charlemagne at
Parma and was invited by him to come to his court as soon as his errand should
be accomplished. With the exception of one interval spent in England, the rest
of Alcuin's life was passed on the Continent. It ended in 804.
Meanwhile England had begun
to be the prey of Danish invasion. Exactly when the library of York, which
Alcuin describes so glowingly in an often-quoted passage of his poem on the
Saints of the Church of York, was destroyed, we do not know; but that this was
a time of destruction, that a whole literature in the English vernacular was
wiped out, and that the stores of ancient learning, accumulated in the North by
Benedict Biscop and
in the South by Theodore and Hadrian, were scattered, is certain. Only waifs
and strays remain to attest the height which art and learning had attained
here, and the value of the treasures that had been imported. The Lindisfarne Gospels and the Ruthwell Cross on the one hand, and the
Codex Amiatinus (happily
retrieved by its parent country before the catastrophe) on the other, are
outstanding examples.
Between the departure of
Alcuin for the Emperor’s court and the revival of English letters under Alfred,
England, disunited and ravaged, makes no contribution to the cause of learning.
Paul the Deacon
Interest is centred upon that same court of Charlemagne. Here for
a time lived Paul the Deacon and Peter of Pisa, both representatives of Italy,
where learning, if inert, was not dead. Incomparably the more important figure
of the two is that of Paul, chiefly in view of two pieces of work, his
abridgment of the Glossary of Pompeius Festus,
and his History of the Lombards. Both are precious,
not for style, but for the hard facts which they preserve. About half of the
glossary of Festus, itself an abridgment of the work of Verrius Flaccus, has survived only in a sadly damaged
Naples manuscript : without it, and what Paul has rescued of the remainder, our
knowledge of archaic Latin would be far fuller of gaps than it is. His epitome
was a mine, too, for later writers, who drew from it strange forms to adorn
their pages. In virtue of his other great work, Paul has earned the name of the
Father of Italian history. Neither of these books was written at the instance
of the Emperor, who employed Paul in educational work and in the compilation of
a set of Homilies for use in church.
Paul was something of a
verse-writer, and some fables of his are by no means without merit; but both he
and Peter were chiefly valued by their patron as teachers of grammar. We have
writings of both of them on this subject, a subject touched by almost every one
of the great scholars of the period we have been and shall be reviewing; Aldhelm, Bede, Boniface, Alcuin,
not to mention a crowd of minor names, Irish and Continental. Especially in the
Carolingian age, when serious efforts were afoot to raise the standard of
education, were grammatical manuals of frequent occurrence. Their compilers
used the works of recent predecessors and of more ancient writers in varying
degrees, commonly contributing little of their own, save perhaps the order and
arrangement of the material. No detailed review of these writers will be
attempted in this chapter; but they deserve mention, and honorable mention, since they ministered to the first needs of a fresh and very numerous
generation of scholars.
In leaving Paul the Deacon,
it is worthwhile to remark that he expressly disclaims knowledge of Greek (and
Hebrew), and to note that Greek does not figure very conspicuously in the works
of most of the important scholars in Charlemagne’s own circle, though we can
see that it was known to more than one of them. There may have been some few
Greek books accessible to them : between 758 and 763 Pope Paul I had sent some
to Pepin; “the grammar of Aristotle, of Dionysius the Areopagite; a geometry,
an orthography” says the Pope, obscurely enough. But we do not fall on the
track of these again.
The knowledge that
Charlemagne revived education and learning in his empire is common property. I
shall not dwell upon his methods, but rather upon the individual men whom he
gathered about him to do the work, and upon the results they achieved. Three
have already been mentioned, and I do not think it is insular prejudice which
inclines me to regard Alcuin as the central figure.
Alcuin
He was not a great writer:
interesting as are his letters and his poems, none of them can be rated high as
literature. But as an organizer and administrator, and as a personally
attractive man, he stands in the first rank. Socially we can see that he must
have been very acceptable; in the common phrase of today, he had a genius for
friendship. In promoting the revival of education he had this advantage over
his helpers, that alone among them he was possessed of the traditions and
methods of a long-established and thriving school.
The mass of writing for which
he is responsible is very large. There are Biblical commentaries, not more
distinguished for originality than those of Bede : treatises upon the Adoptionist heresy which
sprang up in his time in Spain, and upon the Trinity, accounted his best
theological work. There is a liturgical corpus, of great importance in the
history of worship, of which a Homiliary, a
Lectionary, and a Sacramentary are the chief members. Of a revision of the text
of the Latin Bible due to him there is a constant tradition which we need not
doubt, though we possess no record of the imperial order under which it is said
to have been undertaken, and there are few allusions to it in Alcuin’s own
writings. Moreover, the task of distinguishing the Alcuinian text from other current types is
beset with difficulties. There is also a series of educational manuals: we have
those on Grammar, Rhetoric, and Dialectic, and there seem to have been others.
They were not popular for long, and were not intrinsically very valuable.
Still, they were pioneer work, and as such they doubtless had an influence not
to be despised.
As to his own range of
reading, apart from the theology which ranked as standard in his time,
something must be said. The mass of verse which we have from him sh0ws his
knowledge of such authors as Virgil some study of whom may be assumed in the
case of everyone with whom we shall be concerned Statius, Lucan, and of the
Christian poets Juvencus, Prudentius, Arator, Sedulius and others who, like Virgil, were
read by all who read at all. His list of the writers who were to be found in
the library at York is instructive though incomplete (it omits, for example,
Isidore); but it contains few names which ceased to be familiar in later
centuries. Of theologians, Victorinus and Lactantius, of poets, Alcimus Avitus, of
grammarians Probus, Focas, Euticius Pompeius, Cominianus, are those who became
comparative rarities in and after the twelfth century. The most learned of
Alcuin’s letters are those that relate to astronomy, in which the Emperor was
interested. In one of them he asks for a copy of Pliny’s Natural History to
help him to answer certain queries, and elsewhere in his correspondence he
quotes Vitruvius and alludes to Dares Phrygius as if he knew the Trojan History
current under that name. He is also credited with the introduction of a few
texts to the Continent the spurious correspondences of Alexander the Great
with Dindimus, king
of the Brachmani, and
of St Paul with Seneca. If not very important, both of these became excessively
popular: more so than the Categoriae of
Augustine, the transmission of which is also due to Alcuin. His knowledge of
Greek is a matter of controversy, but at least he can quote the Psalter and the
Epistles to elucidate a point of grammar.
A remark may be permitted
here which is applicable to most of the individual cases we shall meet. Those
who had learnt the grammar and machinery of the Greek language were not few in
number (and I see no reason for excluding Alcuin's name from the list), but
when they had learnt it and were in a position to use Greek books, there were
no Greek books for them to use. Literally, as we shall see, hardly any beyond a
few copies of parts of the Bible Psalter, Gospels, Epistles. In other words,
there was very little matter which they did not already possess in a form
easier to be used and considered equally authoritative. Hence the study was
unpopular; it involved great laboUr, and had little
to offer save to those who coveted abstruse learning and took pleasure in the
process of acquiring it. For all that, the tradition of the supreme excellence
of Greek learning was slow to die; and in every generation some individuals
were attracted by it, though the difficulties they had to encounter increased
as time went on.
Alcuin’s abbey of St Martin
at Tours played a great part in the diffusion of that form of writing, the
Carolingian minuscule, which was the vehicle of transmission of the main bulk
of the ancient literature. Obscured for a time ousted, indeed by the Gothic
scripts of the later Middle Ages, it emerged again at the revival of learning,
took perhaps a more refined shape at the hands of the humanists, and became the
parent of the common ‘Roman’ type in which these lines will be read. That the
introduction of this clear and beautiful script is one of the most remarkable
and beneficial of the reforms of Charlemagne’s age, whoever has had to do with
Merovingian, Beneventan,
or Visigothic hands will readily allow. It would be
pleasant if we could point to it as an enduring trace of the influence of
Alcuin, as has been commonly done. The trend of expert opinion, however, is
against this attribution. The traditions of writing in which Alcuin was brought
up were insular, and so good an authority as Traube pronounces that the great Anglo-Saxon
scholar had no share in forming the hand of the scriptorium of Tours.
The pupils of Alcuin did not
fail to follow his methods and to propagate sound learning to the best of their
ability. We shall revert to them and their work. It is now time to leave the
great teacher and to notice a few other leading members of the court circle.
Einhard; Theodulf
Einhard, Theodulf, and Angilbert are three figures
of great interest. The Vita Karoli of
the first may be unhesitatingly named as the best piece of literature which the
Carolingian revival produced. As is well known, it follows the lines of an
ancient model, Suetonius’s Lives of the Caesars, and especially that of
Augustus. A copy of Suetonius, the parent, it seems, of all that we have, was
at Fulda : Servatus Lupus
of Ferrières writes
for a transcript of it in later years. This MS Einhard must have studied
closely and wisely; from it he derives the plan and proportions, and the method
of narration, in his biography. Succinct, clear, and picturesque, inspired with
a sagacious perception of the greatness of its subject, it is a really worthy
monument to the Emperor. “Nardulus”
is an attractive personality as revealed in this work, and in the letters and
poems of his friends. His own letters are rather jejune business-documents for
the most part. A mention of Vitruvius is almost the only detail of literary
interest; there is evidence, besides, of acquaintance with the letters of
Pliny, and, elsewhere, with the Germania of Tacitus. More characteristic than
the correspondence is his narrative of the translation or theft of the relics
of SS. Marcellinus and Peter, which he procured from Rome for his abbey
of Michelstadt. It is
the classical instance of these pious conveyances, and an early one in the
series. Of the documents which throw light upon Einhard’s personality
and his domestic relations, the best are the letters of condolence written to
him by Servatus Lupus
on the death of his wife. That Einhard took part in the compilation of the very
valuable Lorsch annals anonymous, as is
the rule with that class of records has been denied, but is affirmed by weighty
opinion. His poems, and his lost work on the Saxons, can have no more than a
bare mention here.
Theodulf, Spaniard by birth and education, ecclesiastic and statesman, Bishop of
Orleans and Abbot of Fleury, stands out as by
far the most skilful versifier I think I
would say poet of his time. He has an astonishing facility in the elegiac metre. A very large mass of his writing has survived,
though the only manuscript of the longer poems has disappeared since Sirmond printed them. If
one were asked to single out the most successful piece, perhaps that addressed
To Judges has the strongest claim. In this he describes an official journey of
inspection which he took with Leidrad (afterwards
Archbishop of Lyons) through Gallia Narbonensis. At one place he introduces an incident
which is rather characteristic of his manner. Some one who wishes to curry favour with him calls him aside and offers him a
piece of plate, evidently of antique workmanship : it is worn with age, and has
in the centre a representation of Hercules
and Cacus surrounded
with others which shew Hercules and the snakes and the Twelve Labours : on the outside are the fight with Nessus
and the deaths of Lichas and
Hercules, as well as the story of Antaeus.
Other suitors proffer Eastern fabrics with beasts woven upon them, and so
forth. I call this characteristic, for we find several similar descriptions of
works of art in the poems, as, for example, the Seven Liberal Arts depicted on
a dish, and a picture, designed by Theodulf himself,
of the Earth in the form of a woman suckling a child, and surrounded by many
symbolic attributes. These things are interesting in themselves and as
affording evidence of the survival of classical traditions and monuments.
Another ingenuity in which he
evidently took pleasure, is the introduction of place-names in large numbers.
Many distichs are
made up of these : here is one enumerating some of the rivers which watered
Charlemagne’s dominions :
Rura Mosella Liger Vulturnus Matrona Ledus
Hister Atax Gabarus Olitis Albis Arar .
He does not even shun Bagdad
:
Si veniat Bagatat, Agarenis rebus onusta.
As amusing as any is his poem on the court
(xxv), where he tells how Nardus (Einhard), Erkambald, and Osulf might serve (being
all of a size, and that not great) as the three legs of a table, and how, when
the poem is read aloud, a wretched Scot (possibly Clement the Irishman, the
palace schoolmaster) will be in a miserable state of temper and confusion.
Two pieces of his verse, and
only two, were at all commonly copied in later centuries : an extract from his
Preface to the Bible finds a place in some thirteenth century Vulgates, and a
part of his Palm Sunday hymn, ‘Gloria, laus, et honor’, remains
in use in the original and in vernacular versions.
What has been said of his
facility in the writing of elegiac verse implies his close study of older
models, particularly of Ovid. His compatriot Prudentius was also a well-read source. But on the whole his range of classical reading
does not comprise unfamiliar names. We do not learn much from him about the
preservation of ancient literature.
A word in conclusion as to
his work on the revision of the text of the Bible. That he undertook a
recension of it is not to be doubted, and it is generally agreed that we have,
at Le Puy and at Paris (B.N. Lot. 9380),
two copies, more or less faithful, of that recension. That he made it by the
help of old Spanish manuscripts is also the prevailing view : it is probable
enough that fragments of some of these survive at Orleans, whither they came
from his abbey, Fleury. But neither was it a
very remarkable piece of work in itself, nor did it exercise upon the history
of the text an influence approaching that attributed to the contemporary Alcuinian revision.
Angilbert - Homer, as he was called - influential as he was personally,
takes on the whole a secondary place among the writers. If the fragment of an
epic poem on Charlemagne and Pope Leo, which contains a celebrated description
of the Emperor and his family out hunting, be not his (but it probably is)
there is not much to preserve his name as an author. But as Abbot of St Riquier he was zealous in
collecting books over 200 of them for his monastery, and, if we may judge by
the names of authors whom Mico had
at disposal, there was a strong contingent of Latin poets amongst them.
Only a systematic history of
literature could undertake to name the minor figures of this or of subsequent
periods. It must suffice here to select a few men and books that stand out from
a crowd which begins to thicken rapidly.
Agobard; Raban Maur
Alcuin, dying in 804, was the
first after Paul the Deacon to disappear. Einhard and the rest were
considerably younger men, and Einhard lived till 840. Before we take up the
direct line of succession to Alcuin, we will devote a few words to one who
stood outside the circle that has been engaging our attention, and who was just
about coeval with Einhard. This is Agobard,
Archbishop of Lyons (769-840). Like Theodulf he was a Spaniard. It is no part of
my purpose to trace his career or catalogue his many tracts : three points only
shall be noted as germane to the subject of this chapter. First, he was
instrumental in preserving, in a manuscript which he gave to a church at Lyons,
and which is now at Paris, a very large proportion of the extant works of
Tertullian. Next, though he shows no interest in classical learning, it is
curious to find that he had some knowledge of Jewish lore. In his fierce attack
on the Jews he quotes Rabbinic teaching about the seven heavens, and also some
form of the Jewish libel on our Lord which is commonly called the Toledoth Jesu. Lastly, two of his tracts have a bearing on
folklore : one of them denounces the current belief in Tempestarii, people who could produce storms at
will : the other tells of a mysterious epidemic which had induced people in the
district of Uzes to
revert to pagan observances. These, two of which are no doubt small matters,
are samples of the odds and ends of strange information which may be picked up
from the literature of the time. The most influential of the diadochi of Alcuin was
perhaps his pupil Magnentius Hrabanus Maurus (Raban)
(784-856), Abbot of Fulda for twenty years (822-842) and from 847 Archbishop
of Mayence. He was no
original genius, but a great channel of learning, which he transmitted through
compilations in the form of commentaries and of an encyclopaedia founded
on Isidore. The achievement which his contemporaries admired most was his book
In Praise of the Holy Cross. This too is closely modelled on an older book, the
panegyric on Constantine by Publilius Optatianus Porphyrius. Pages of capital letters in which some are
picked out in red, meet the eye, and it is realized that the red letters not
only have their proper part in the text, but also form some device or picture,
and that they make up some sentiment or verse independently. Such carmina figurata, of terrible
ingenuity and infinitesimal value, were popular throughout these centuries.
Raban Maur not only found a precious library
at Fulda, but increased it substantially. It can have had few rivals in quality
by the time he left it. To Fulda we owe, it appears, the preservation of
Suetonius, of Tacitus, of Ammianus Marcellinus, to name three leading examples
: it has been shown, too, that Raban had
access to Lucretius.
Monastic libraries
The mention of this library
affords an occasion for speaking, though in the briefest terms, of the others
which competed with it on the Continent : Lorsch, Reichenau near Constance,
St Gall, Corbie in Picardy, St Riquier, Fleury on the Loire, Bobbio and Monte Cassino in Italy. These, I imagine, are all indisputably to be placed
in the first class. Of them be it remembered that Fulda, Reichenau, St Gall, and Bobbio owe their being to these islands : Boniface, Pirminius, Gallus, Columban were their founders. How much further our list
should stretch no two people would agree; but it would be absurd to omit the
libraries of Tours, Rheims, St Denis, Mayence, Cologne, Treves, Corvey in Westphalia (daughter of Corbie), Wurzburg, Laon, Liege; or that of Verona, to
which the archdeacon Pacificus (d.
846) added more than 200 volumes. Each of these had its importance as school or
storehouse, and some, like St Gall, Wurzburg, and Verona, have kept together a
surprisingly large proportion of their ancient possessions up to the present
day. Not so all those which were first named. The books of Fulda, of which we
have a catalogue, made late in the sixteenth century, have very largely disappeared. Lorsch is better represented, in the libraries of the
Vatican and elsewhere, Reichenau at Carlsruhe, Corbie at
Paris, Petrograd, and Amiens, Fleury at
Rome and Orleans, Bobbio at Rome, Milan, Turin,
Vienna and Bamberg. Among them these houses produced a great proportion of the
ninth century manuscripts which exist today, and anyone who will be at the
pains to examine Chatelain’s Paleographie des Classiques Latins or Sabbadini’s account
of the rediscovery of the classics at the Renaissance will realize how much of
what we have is due to the scribes who lived between, say, 800 and 950.
There are three Latin authors
of the first class, Virgil, Terence, and Livy, of whom the whole or a
considerable portion have survived in manuscripts of the classical period.
Neglecting fragments, it may be said that the earliest copies of Caesar,
Sallust, Lucretius, Juvenal, Persius,
both Plinies,
Tacitus, Lucan, Suetonius, Martial, the greater part of Cicero, all date from
the Carolingian Renaissance. There is, of course, something to be set against
this immense debt : what, we ask, has become of the archetypes which the
scribes of the ninth century used? It is to be feared that, once transcribed,
they were cast aside as old and useless, and few of them allowed to live on even
as palimpsests, for vellum was not so scarce as it had been. Still, the fact
remains that they were copied, and that in such numbers as attest a vivid and
widespread interest in the best literature that was accessible.
Walafrid Strabo
In Walafrid (Walahfridus) Straboor Strabus, the pupil of Raban Maur, we have
another scholar of the direct Alcuinian succession.
His career was not a long one (808-849), but the amount, and in some respects
the quality of his work, is remarkable. The Glossa Ordinaria, an abridgment of
patristic commentaries on all the books of the Bible, a predecessor of
the Synopsis Criticorum of
more modern times, was his great monument. In the twelfth century no monastic
library of any consideration lacked a set, and even the smallest owned a few of
the principal volumes. It is no more than a compilation, from sources which
still exist, but it was a source of primary importance to students of the Bible
for many years. Walafrid’s poetry
is more interesting to us than the gloss. There is a good deal of it, but only
two pieces shall be selected for special mention. De imagine Tetrici is notable for
its subject (which is the equestrian statue of Theodoric removed from Ravenna
to Aix-la-Chapelle by Charlemagne in 801), and also for its form; it is a
dialogue between the poet and Scintilla (roughly, his genius), which is
succeeded by a remarkable description of the Emperor Louis the Pious and his
train. De cultura hortorum is the first
of medieval Georgics. Those who have seen it will at least remember the
epilogue, addressed to Grimaldus of
St Gall, in which Walafrid says:
“Think of me when you are sitting in your walled garden under the shade of a
peach tree”.
The lines are not ‘great
poetry’, but the picture is pleasant.
A group of three writers
whose works bear on the preservation of Roman literature shall next be noticed.
The first part of the ninth
century (805-862) is covered by the life of Servatus Lupus, Abbot of Ferrières, whose letters, not
uncelebrated, are by far the most remarkable of his writings. The frequent
requests he makes for books, and especially classical books, have long since
attracted attention. From Einhard he borrows Aulus Gellius and
the rhetorical works of Cicero; from Altsig of York, Quintilian; from another he
tries to get Livy; from the Abbot of Fulda, Suetonius in two small volumes. He
owns and has read Caesar; he quotes Horace, and may have had some other Latin
lyrics. A line which he cites as Horace’s is not to be found in Horace now.
Mico of St Riquier seems
to have compiled his work on prosody about the year 825. It is a collection,
arranged alphabetically, of lines from upwards of thirty poets, pagan and
Christian, exemplifying the scansion of particular words, the name of the
source being written beside each. One could hardly have a more convenient key
to the contents of the St Riquier library
as regards Latin verse. The list need not be set out in full here, but a few
remarks may be made. The Aratea both
of Cicero and of Germanicus and the
medical poem of Q. Serenus Sammonicus, to which Lucretius
may be added, count as rarities. We miss Calpurnius and Nemesianus, who were known to the Carolingian
court, and Macer perhaps last mentioned as
extant by Ermoldus Nigellus, a notable court-poet.
The absence of Catullus, Tibullus and Propertius is not surprising; the first
and last evidently did not emerge till a good deal later: Tibullus, however,
does occur in an interesting ninth-century list of books written in a
grammatical manuscript at Berlin (Santen. 66).
Hadoardus gives another aspect of the picture. We know nothing of him but
that he calls himself a presbyter and obviously lived in an establishment most
likely monastic where he had a good library at command. He put together a
collection of moral, religious and philosophical excerpts which has survived in
one manuscript. Its distinguishing feature is that a large part consists of
extracts from the philosophical writings of Cicero. Hadoardus had no more of these than we have;
the Republic was not known to him. Cicero is useful to him merely as a
moralist, and he expunges from his extracts the personal and historical
allusions, so that what we thank him for is little more than the evidence he
supplies as to the existence in his time of the collected philosophical works
in very much their present shape.
Classical knowledge; Spain
It is long since I have made
any reference to Spain. The little that can now be said must be confined to the
Christian writers: I cannot touch on the great literary and scientific
achievements of the conquering Moors. And the Christian writers were not very
remarkable. A mass of matter connected with the Adoptionist heresy appeared at the end of the
eighth century. The question at issue (recalled by the Filioque clause) : Was the Son of God Son by
adoption, as opposed to eternal generation? was affirmed by Felix of Urgel and Elipandus of Toledo and, outside Spain, denied by Alcuin.
Within the country Beatus wrote against Elipandus, but he would hardly have been remembered for that
alone. He is remembered, however, both by patristic students and by those
interested in art, as the compiler of an immense commentary on the Apocalypse
from sources which are some of them lost and valuable. Copies of this (to which
Jerome on Daniel is almost always added), profusely illustrated, are the chief
monuments of Spanish art for the ninth and following centuries. The designs of
the pictures were transmitted with almost Chinese fidelity from one scriptorium
to another: among them is a map of the world which has a special place of its
own in geographical history.
In the middle of the ninth
century a pair of Cordovan writers emerge to whom a few words must be devoted:
Paulus Albarus, a
converted Jew, and Eulogius (Eulogio), Archbishop of Toledo,
who died a martyr in 859. The writings of Eulogius are chiefly concerned with the
martyrs of his own time, and with polemic against the Prophet; those of Paul
include a life of Eulogius and
a good deal of indifferent verse. Their main importance is, no doubt, for
Spanish history, and they are mentioned here principally in virtue of a passage
in the life of Eulogius which
bears on general literature. In 848, says Paul, Eulogius brought back from certain monasteries
a number of books. Virgil, Horace, Juvenal, Avienus are specially named, and also the
epigrams of Adelelmus,
who is no other than our English Aldhelm.
The fact that Aldhelm was
read in Spain in the ninth century is worth noting. We remember how Aldhelm himself at the end
of the seventh century read Julian of Toledo and Engenius.
A chapter of history yet
unwritten will most likely disclose many unsuspected threads of connexion between Ireland, Britain, and Spain. In the
making of it the role of the liturgiologist will
be an important one,
John the Scot
We return to Central Europe.
A good deal of space in the last chapter was devoted to Greek learning and to
Irish culture. Now that we have passed to the middle years of the ninth
century, both subjects come before us again. Their representatives are in the
first instance Johannes Scottus Erigena
and Sedulius Scottus, but these are only the
protagonists. There was a crowd of minor personages, some few of whom will
claim separate notice. The testimony of the time is that imperial and royal
courts and the palaces of the great ecclesiastics were thronged with needy ‘Scotti’, all learned in their various ways, all willing to
teach, and all seeking (not always in the most dignified terms) shelter and
maintenance. Heiric of Auxerre, writing about 876, represents the influx of Irish
scholars as due to the enlightened liberality of Charles the Bald. Ireland,
despising the dangers of the sea, is migrating almost en masse with her crowd of
philosophers to our shores, and all the most learned doom themselves to
voluntary exile to attend the bidding of Solomon the wise. But this was not the
sole or even the chief reason. As the rhetoricians of Gaul had been driven into
Ireland by one set of invasions, so now the Irish were driven out of it by
another, that of the Scandinavian pirates who had already done so much mischief
in England. We cannot doubt that lamentable destruction of books took place in
Ireland too, but we know little or nothing about established libraries there.
We first hear of John the
Scot at the court of Charles the Bald in 845, and his first continental writing
was on predestination against Gottschalk (851). Not very long after, in
858-860, he made his first important translation from Greek, of the works called
of Dionysius the Areopagite. The copy he used was most likely one which in 827
the Greek Emperor, Michael, had given to the Abbey of St Denis. Hilduin, Abbot of that house,
had done his best to establish the identity of the patron of the Abbey with the
Areopagite, and the identification was commonly accepted throughout the
medieval period.
It is generally agreed that
John knew Greek before he left Ireland. This would make it natural to commit to
him the task of rendering the very difficult language and matter of Dionysius
into Latin. But the contents were such as were certain to attract him. He was a
philosopher born, and the blend of Neo-Platonism and Christianity in these
writings was exactly suited to his temperament. He performed his work in a way
that excited the wonder of a very competent scholar at Rome: for in 860 the
translation was sent to Pope Nicholas, and he referred it for an opinion to his
librarian Anastasius, who had done much work of the
kind. Anastasius marvels how a man from a remote and
barbarous land could have attained such mastery of Greek; Irish learning was
evidently an unknown thing to him.
In his dedications of his
version to the Emperor, and also in a good many of his occasional poems, John
ventures upon original Greek verse composition: here he is at his weakest, both
as poet and as prosodist;
the scansion is surprisingly bad. The Dionysius was followed by the Ambigua of Maximus, also a
difficult text to translate and not one of much importance. Most likely no
other philosophical text (if we except the Sohitiones of Priscianus Lydus, as to which there is doubt) came into John's
hands. He made no other translations, but turned to the composition of his last
and greatest work, to which he gave a Greek title. Little copied, for it soon
became suspect of pantheism, it is the most original piece of speculative
thought which these centuries have to show. Nothing so remarkable probably was
put forth until Anselm came. Other works by John to which no precise date has
been assigned are his excerpts from Macrobius on the verb, which preserve all we
have of a very valuable book, a fragmentary commentary on St John’s Gospel in
which he makes use of the Greek text, and commentaries on Martianus Capella and
Boethius. We still await a critical edition of the whole of the works of this
very marked scholar and thinker. It is unfair to judge of his personality from
silence, but the fact remains that there is no written tribute to any but his
intellectual gifts.
Sedulius Scottus is
found at Liege about 848, and after a lapse of ten years becomes untraceable.
In him we have no original thinker, but a writer of some skill, a most
industrious compiler and transcriber, and a lover of ancient literature. His
book De rectoribus Christianis addressed
to Lothar II, interspersed with pieces of
verse in many metres (after the fashion of
Boethius) and with copious quotations from the Proverbia Graecorum, is his best original composition.
There are, too, many fugitive pieces of verse, some addressed to his patrons,
one or two to his Irish companions, others descriptive of works of art, for
example, a silken pall embroidered with a long series of scenes from the life
of St Peter. Under the head of compilations we reckon his collections on St
Matthew and on the Pauline Epistles (the former as yet unprinted) and his
Commentaries on grammatical works, Priscian, Donatus, Eutychius. In the last-named,
which was very likely written in Ireland, he uses that tract of Macrobius on the verb, of
which John has been the chief preserver.
There is also in the library
of the hospital of Cues (Cusa)
near Treves a manuscript of a commonplace book of his of very remarkable
character. It has supplied us with pieces of Cicero’s orations against Piso and for Fonteius which are wanting
in our other copies, and of Vegetius, Porphyrio, and Lactantius. Partly perhaps because of the many Greek
passages in his works, Lactantius was little read or
copied between the ninth and the fifteenth century. To Sedulius however these were no deterrent; he
collects some of them at the end of a Greek psalter which we have of his
transcribing. A remark of Traube’s will
be in place here: “I hazard the guess”, he says, “that wherever Greek passages
survive in Latin works, they are to be referred to Irish influence”.
The manuscripts transcribed
by Sedulius and
his circle remain to be noticed. Those which are most confidently ascribed
to his hand are the Psalter just mentioned, which is signed by him (it is
now in the Arsenal Library at Paris, and was once at St Nicholas's Abbey
at Verdun), and a Graeco-Latin copy of the
Pauline Epistles at Dresden, of which the Codex Augiensis at Trinity
College, Cambridge, is a transcript. There are besides at St Gall a Priscian,
perhaps brought from Ireland, and a Gospels in Greek and Latin (known as A),
and there is a famous book at Berne (363) containing our oldest copy of
Horace’s Odes. In these we find, scribbled on margins, Irish names, and names
of others, such as Hartgar of Tongres, Gunther of
Cologne, Hilduin,
Hincmar, etc., whom we know to have been connected with Sedulius. His own name also
occurs not unfrequently.
Of the less distinguished
members of the band of Irish scholars, Dunchad or Duncant has been asserted and also denied to
be the author of a Comment on Martianus Capella
(not printed). Common to this, and to John the Scot’s comment on the same
author, is a fragment of the lost Peplus of
Theophrastus, which is also copied in a Laon manuscript (444) written by an
Irish teacher, Martin of Laon (f 875). This book contains a Graeco-Latin glossary, and, inter alia, Greek verses by
Martin himself, no better and no worse than those of John.
Glossaries
Room must be found here for a
word about glossaries. They were the indispensable tool of any who aspired to a
knowledge of Greek, and were used by others who had no real grasp of the
language but desired to be thought Greek scholars. The two chief Graeco-Latin glossaries go by the names of Cyrillus and Philoxenus respectively.
The prime authority for the text of Cyrillus is an ancient manuscript in the Harleian collection (5792) which came from the
hospital of Cues. We now know that Laon 444, written by Martin, is a copy of
it, and this means that in the ninth century it was at or near Laon. It was
not, however, written in France, but most likely in Italy : its archetype is
conjectured to have been a papyrus book. Philoxenus depends upon a ninth century
manuscript at Paris, and this too is referred to the neighbourhood of Laon, or
at least to the north of France.
Fergus was another of the
Irish circle; he was the writer of part of the St Gall Gospels (A). Yet
another, of whom we know little more than the name, was Elias, a connecting
link between the Irish and their most distinguished continental pupil, Heine of Auxerre.
Heiric learned what Greek he knew from an Irish teacher or teachers at
Laon; he also sat under Lupus of Ferrières,
and at his lectures took down excerpts from Valerius Maximus and Suetonius. Elias supplied him with the text of two collections
of apophthegms, one current under the name
of Caecilius Balbus. A manuscript now at the
abbey of Melk in Austria preserves (with autograph notes by Heiric) another set of extracts
which is particularly interesting as including some from Petronius. The copy from
which these were taken is now divided between the libraries of Berne and Paris.
His own works are not epoch-making : commentaries on some of the poets, which
supplied material to his pupil Remigius, and a long life of St Germanus of Auxerre in
verse. In this he makes considerable parade of his Greek, intercalating into
his dedications many words which he got from the works of Dionysius the
Areopagite. He makes such experiments in lyric metres as
shew him to have been a student of the Odes and Epodes of Horace, and he is
credited with being the first of his time to pay much attention to these poems,
which were always far less popular than the Satires and Epistles.
Those who have studied the
commentaries of Heiric award
to them higher praise for real soundness of learning than to those of Remigius.
But the name of the latter lived on, and Heiric’s did not. Remigius learnt of Dunchad as well as of Heiric, and taught at Rheims for
Archbishop Fulk, and at Paris. He lived on into the
tenth century, and, it is said, had Odo of Cluny among his pupils. The tale of
his writings is a long one, consisting almost entirely of commentaries upon
grammarians, poets, and books of the Bible. A tract on the Mass and a glossary
of proper names in the Bible, both ascribed to him, went on being copied down
to the end of the Middle Ages. Few of the many Bibles of the thirteenth century
are without the Interpretationes Nominum.
This is perhaps the place to
mention the mythographers. Two anonymous collections of stories of the ancient
gods and heroes, very baldly told, were printed by Mai from Vatican manuscripts
of the tenth and eleventh centuries, along with a later one which does not
concern us. The second of these mythographers copies a good deal of matter from
the first, and has been, not quite certainly, identified with Remigius. The
first quotes authors as late as Orosius, and mingles
tales from Roman history with his mythology. Neither attained a wide
circulation, but they deserve a word in virtue of their attempts to hand on the
ancient legends and throw light on the allusions to them in classical
literature.
Anastasius the Librarian
By the end of the ninth
century, it is probably true to say that the Irish stimulus had worked itself
out. Had a steady supply of Greek texts been available, one cannot doubt that
men would have been found to make use of them, but, it must be repeated, no new
material was coming in. Byzantium despised the West and did not care to
enlighten it. The Greek monasteries of Southern Italy seem never to have
attracted any attention in the north. The chief scholar at Rome, Anastasius Bibliothecarius,
died in 897 and left no successor. Something more needs to be said of what he
had accomplished. Nearly all his translations, which are not few, were made at
the request of friends or of the Pope. He revised John’s Dionysius and provided
it with scholia rendered from
Greek. He put into Latin the Acts of two Councils, that of 787 and that in
which Photius was deposed and Ignatius restored to
the patriarchate. For John the Deacon, who was designing a large Church
history, he translated the Chronography of
Nicephorus and copied extracts from the chronicles of George the Syncellus and of Theophanes, the three together
forming what was known as the Chronographia tripartita, not to be
confused with the Historia tripartita that was
made for Cassiodorus. It is an imposing list, and there is more than this to
his credit.
The excursions made into
Greek literature in the tenth century are almost negligible. In the middle of it
Leo of Naples produced a version of an Alexander-romance for Duke John of
Naples from a manuscript he had brought from Constantinople. It marks a stage
in the spread of that most influential romance. Later on we encounter another
type of Greek scholar, the man thoroughly familiar with the spoken language,
in Liudprand of
Cremona, diplomat and historian.
It is not pretended that what
has been said here of the study and influence of Greek in these centuries is a
complete survey. The gaps will be obvious to experts. The province of liturgy,
for instance, has not been touched, and there is much in early tropers and other service books which goes to show
that forms were borrowed from the Byzantines. That the litanies of the Saints
first appeared in Greek, transmitted from Rome late in the seventh century to
England by a Greek-speaking Pope, is a proposition recently maintained by that
great scholar Edmund Bishop. Hagiography, again, would easily fill a chapter of
its own. We do not yet know all that was done by eastern monks, driven westward
by the Iconoclastic troubles, in the way of translation of Acts of Saints, or
more generally in the diffusion of their language. Further a small matter,
this, perhaps it would be worth
while to collect the instances in which western scribes have
employed the Greek alphabet for their titles and colophons; it is mainly a
piece of harmless parade, but is not wholly insignificant. Irishmen, Bretons,
and Spaniards were fondest of the practice, though it is not confined to them. Yet
another class of documents in which the use of rare Greek words became a
fashion are the charters of the tenth century, especially those made in
England.
This love of a bizarre
vocabulary, which we have noticed before, crops up again and again almost to the
end of our period. About 830 we have the strange poem of Lios Monocus, a Breton, who uses the Hisperica Famina. About 896, Abbo of St Germain appends
to his two books of verse on the siege of Paris by the Northmen a third which is nothing but a series of
conundrums, unintelligible from the first without a gloss. A hundred years
later our English chronicler Fabius Aethelweard puts the
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle into a very crabbed Latin with tags of verse and sesquipedal compounds of
his own devising.
Gottschalk
It is a relief to turn from
these oddities to some writings which have an appreciable value as literature.
Gottschalk or Godescalcus,
monk of Orbais (805-869),
fills an enormous space in the dogmatic history of his time. He paid dear
enough to Hincmar of Rheims for the errors of his doctrine, and his tragic
story has been remembered by many who forget how grim was his view of election
and reprobation : Christ did not die to save all men, but only the elect. Only
in somewhat recent times have certain lyrics of his been brought to light which
make him a more sympathetic character. There is a lightness about them not very
common; lightness, not of tone, for they are plaintive, but of touch.
Yet more recently Gottschalk
has been accepted as the author of a poem very famous for six or seven
centuries after him, the Eclogue of Theodulus. (Theodulus is
no more than Gottschalk, God’s slave, turned into Greek.) This Eclogue is a
colloquy between Truth (Alithia)
and Falsehood (Pseustis)
with Reason (Phronesis) for umpire. Falsehood cites
a number of incidents from pagan mythology, giving a quatrain to each. Truth
caps every one with a contrast from the scriptures. The verdict is a foregone
conclusion. In length and subject the poem was admirably fitted to be a
school-book, and as a school-book it survived well into the Renaissance period.
In 874 died Hathumoda, first Abbess of Gandersheim. Agius her friend, a monk
of Corvey (?),
wrote a long prose life of her, and also a dialogue in elegiac verse between
himself and her nuns. Rather exalted language has been used about the beauty of
this poem, but its ease and simplicity and truth of feeling do mark it out
among the productions of its time. It is not however distinguished for
originality of thought or excellence of technique.
Opinion is still unsettled as
to whether Agius and
a writer known as Poeta Saxo are identical. Agius would not gain greatly were his claim
established: the poem is nothing but a versification of prose sources (Annals
and Einhard) on the life of Charlemagne.
The community of St Gall, as
may be guessed from the frequent mention of it in these pages, has a wonderful
record for the preservation of ancient literature. It is scarcely less
remarkable for its own literary productions. Two of its writers shall have
special notice now.
The first is Notker Balbulus, the Stammerer (840-912). Several
other Notkers of
St Gall followed him, the most famous of whom was Notker Labeo (d.
1022), translator into German of Boethius and much else. But this first Notker is considerably more
important, principally on two grounds. One was the development of a form of
church poetry known as the Sequence. The essence of it was this. It had become
the fashion to prolong to an exaggerated extent the singing of the word
Alleluia where it occurred at the end of antiphons. The melodies of such
Alleluias were fixed, but were exceedingly hard to remember. Taking the hint
from a Jumieges service-book
that had been brought to St Gall, Notker fitted
the Alleluias with words appropriate to the Church season or feast, putting as
a rule a syllable to each note of the long wandering melody. Thus there grew up
a new form of poem, non-metrical at the outset, which in later years became
bound by stricter rules, and which exercised a great influence upon secular
poetry. In Notker’s hands
it was wholly conditioned by the tune to which it was set. The one example of
it that is widely known in this country is the funeral sequence, Media in vita,
‘In the midst of life’, whether that is truly Notker’s work or not. He is also famous as the
author of the book of reminiscences of Charlemagne called Gesta Karoli and long current
simply as the work of the ‘Monk of St Gall’. It is now recognised as Notker’s. Alas! we possess only a part of it, but
what we have is one of the few books of the period which can really be read
with pleasure. There is not much plan in it; it is in the main Notke’s recollections of
stories told to him in his youth by an old warrior Adalbert who had fought for
the Emperor, and by Adalbert’s son Werinbert,
a cleric, and also by a third informant whose name has been lost with the
preface and the third book of the Gesta.
It was written down at the request of Charles the Fat, who when staying at St
Gall in 883 had been greatly delighted with Notker’s tales of his great-grandfather and
his father. Almost all the picturesque anecdotes that we have of Charlemagne
come from this book; tales of war and peace, of embassies from the East and
what they brought, of the Emperor’s dealings with his clergy, behaviour in church, dress, are to be found here,
many doubtless true, others showing the beginning of a Charlemagne mythology.
The loss of the third book is particularly exasperating, for in it were
promised recollections of the heroes every-day conversation.
Much more might be said
of Notker, of his
letters, his poems, his humor, his treatise on the
study of the Fathers (a parallel to the Institutions of Cassiodorus), but
proportion must be observed, and we must bid farewell to a man both gifted and
amiable.
Ekkehard; Gesta Berengarii
Our second St Gall author
is Ekkehard, the first of five persons of that
name who are prominent in the Abbey’s annals. He died in 973. Early in life he
began the work by which he has deserved to be remembered, the short epic
of Waltharius. It is
a heroic tale, a single episode in a warrior’s career. Waltharius escapes with his love from the
Hungarian court in which both he and she were kept as hostages, is pursued and
successfully defends himself against great odds. The story ends happily, and
none of the Latin poems of all this age is better worth reading. There is
little of the flavor of a school exercise about it,
and there is a great deal of the freshness of the best romances in the
vernacular.
With the exception of
the Gesta Karoli, most of the writings
we have touched upon recently have been in verse. We will give a few paragraphs
to some of the remaining poets. John the Deacon, a Roman, writing in 875, gives
us a curious versification of a curious old piece called the Caena Cypriani, and mingles it
with personal satire. The whole thing is a jeu d’esprit , written, as Lapotre has shown, on the occasion of the
coronation of Charles the Bald at Rome, and was recited at a banquet where were
present various notabilities (Anastasius the
Librarian among them) who are smartly hit off.
Hucbald of St Amand’s Eclogue
in praise of baldness, produced about 885, must be passed with averted eye.
Every word of its 146 lines begins with the letter C.
The early part of the tenth
century gives us two anonymous books of some slight celebrity, the Gesta Berengarii, a panegyric on that Emperor by an
Italian who knew some Greek, and the Ecbasis captivi by a monk of Toul, “the oldest
beast-epic of the Middle Ages”. Animals are the actors, and tales in which they
figure are woven together not without spirit. But more famous in respect of the
sex of the writer and of the vehicle she has employed are the works of Hrotsvitha, a nun of Gandersheim who wrote about
960. They are collected into three books whereof the first consists of poems on
the lives of the Virgin and certain other saints (the grotesque legend of Gengulphus of Toul is among
them), the second of six so-called comedies, the third of a short epic on Otto
I : another, on the origins of Gandersheim,
is preserved separately. The comedies are the unusual feature. They are written
in no strict metre but in a rhythmical
prose, and treat of episodes from saints’ lives. They are avowedly intended to
extol chastity, as a counterblast to the mischievous writings of Terence. We
have here the earliest of Christian dramas (dramatic only in form, for Hrotsvitha would never have
sanctioned the acting of them) and as such they would in any case be
interesting; but they are not without merit. Short and easily read, their plots
are not ill-chosen, and the dialogue moves quickly. There is even a touch
of humour here and there, as when,
in Dulcitius, the
Roman persecutor makes love to the pots and pans in the kitchen, under the
illusion of their being Christian girls, and gets covered with soot.
Hrotsvitha; Libri Carolini
In one or two cases the
sources employed are interesting. The first poem of the first book deals with
the life of the Virgin and the Infancy of Christ, and is drawn from an
apocryphal Gospel, in a text usually fathered upon Matthew, but here upon James
the Lord’s brother. The second, on the Ascension, is from an unidentified Greek
text translated by a bishop John. One of the plays is an episode from the Acts
of St John the Evangelist.
It must be said once again
that this chapter is not a text-book or a history, but a survey, of the
literature of two centuries. So far it has been mainly occupied with what by a
stretch of language might be called belles lettres : but these form only a small fraction
of the whole bulk of writings which have come to us from the years 800 to 1000.
To leave the rest unglanced at
would be outrageous. Five headings seem to comprise the greatest part of what
it is really essential to notice : Theology, Hagiography leading over to
History, the Sciences and Arts, and books in vernacular languages.
In the enormous department of
Theology we find two great categories, Commentaries on the Scriptures and
controversial writings. Liturgy and Homiletics we must leave untouched. From
the commentators we have a huge bulk of material, but with very few exceptions,
it is wholly unoriginal. Like Bede, these men compiled from earlier authors.
The Glossa Ordinaria, already noticed, is typical. Angelomus of Luxeuil, Haymo of Halberstadt, Raban Maur,
are compilers of this class. For anything like originality we must look to John
the Scot and to Christianus ‘Druthmarus’ of Stavelot, who wrote (in 865) on St Matthew’s Gospel : but
even he is distinguished rather by good sense than by brilliancy.
Radbert and Ratramn; Hagiography
Five principal controversies
occupied the minds and pens of the church writers. At the beginning of our
period we have two: the Adoptionist,
in which Elipandus and Alcuin were the foremost
figures, and the Iconoclastic. The latter produced a remarkable group of books.
The Iconoclastic cause met much opposition, but also some support, in the West.
The Libri Carolini against images, written at the
Emperor's order (whether or no Alcuin had a hand in them is not settled), are
the work of a well-read man who draws interesting illustrations from pagan
mythology and contemporary works of art. Claudius, Bishop of Turin, was also a
hot Iconoclast in deed and in word. We have only extracts from the treatise he
wrote, but we have replies to it from an Irishman, Dungal, and from Jonas of Orleans. Dungal, who quotes the Christian
poets very largely, especially Paulinus of Nola, prefixes to his books some
fragments from Claudius, and says that the whole work was one-third as long
again as the Psalter : he seems to think that this aggravates the offence.
The middle of the ninth
century saw two more great disputes. One is that on Predestination, in which
the monk Gottschalk, who took the most rigid view, was forcibly silenced,
scourged, and imprisoned by Hincmar of Rheims, and written against by John the
Scot and Paschasius Radbert of Corbie, to name only two of a large group. Radbert was a man of very
wide reading and had one of the best libraries of the time at his command. He
is one of the very few who quote Irenaeus Against Heresies. The other dispute
concerned the Eucharist. Radbert is
here again to the fore, in defence of the
view which, developed, is the faith of Rome. Ratramn, also of Corbie,
wrote in a strain which made the Reformers of the sixteenth century claim him
as an early champion on their side.
We have other interesting
matter from Ratramn’s pen;
a treatise against the errors of the Greeks, and a letter to one Rimbert, who had inquired what
was the proper view to take of the race of Cynocephali, tribes of dog-headed
men believed to inhabit parts of Africa. St Christopher, it is not generally
realized, was of this race, and the conversion of one of them is also related
in the eastern Acts of SS. Andrew and Bartholomew. Ratramn, who does not cite these examples,
answers Rimbert with
good sense. If what is reported of the Cynocephali is borne out by facts, they
must be looked upon as reasonable and redeemable beings.
The controversy with the
Greeks is the fifth and last of these to be mentioned here. Besides Ratramn’s book, there is an
important contribution to it by Aeneas of Paris.
To Hagiography the
Carolingian Renaissance gave an immense stimulus. The founding of a multitude
of abbeys and the building of great churches and the stocking of them with
relics of ancient martyrs, begged, bought or stolen from Rome, were operative
causes. Einhard’s story of the translation
of SS. Marcellinus and Peter is one classic to which relic-hunting gave birth,
Rudolf of Fulda’s about St Alexander is another, this last because passages
from the Germania of Tacitus are embodied in it. There was, besides, the
natural wish to possess a readable life of many a patron saint whose doings had
been forgotten or else were only chronicled in barbarous Latin of the seventh
century. Lives invented or rewritten in response to this wish bulk very large
in the Acta Sanctorum. Not
unimportant are the versified Passions and Lives which perhaps begin with Prudentius and Paulinus of Nola and are carried on by Fortunatus (St Martin), Bede (St Cuthbert), Heiric (St Germanus), Notker (St
Gall) and a whole host of anonymi.
All these, fiction or fact, have their interest, but are of course much
inferior to the rare contemporary biographies such as those of St Boniface
by Willibrord and
of St Anschar by Rimbert.
The mention of these leads
naturally to the single biographies of uncanonised persons.
Charlemagne, we have seen, is the subject of the two best. Those of Louis the
Pious by the ‘Astronomus’
and by Thegan have
nothing of the charm and skill of Einhard and Notker. Nearest to them is a British writing, the
first to be mentioned after a long interval of silence, Asserts life of Alfred.
Of others, that of Eigil by Candidus, a Fulda production of
about 840, and that of John of Gorze by
Abbot John of Metz have distinct interest. Agnellus’s collections on the Archbishops of
Ravenna, full of archaeological lore (839), and some of the lives of Popes in
the Liber Pontificalis,
perhaps due to the pen of Anastasius the Librarian,
supply us with many facts we are glad to have, but do not pretend to be artistic
biographies.
History writing takes three
other principal forms. There is the world-chronicle, of which Freculphus of Lisieux and Regino of Prüm (near Trèves) and, later, Marianus Scotus, give examples; there are the annals, commonly
connected with a religious establishment, such as those of Lorsch; and there is the episodic, telling of some
particular campaign or the rise of some great church. To this last class
belongs Nithardus (d.
844), natural son of Angilbert by
Charlemagne’s daughter Bertha, and successor (ultimately) to his father as
lay-abbot of St Riquier.
He writes four short books in clear and simple prose, on Louis the Pious and
the quarrels of Lothar, Charles the Bald, and
Louis the German a strictly contemporary record. Incidentally he has preserved,
by transcribing the terms of the Oath of Strasbourg, the oldest piece of French
and one of the oldest pieces of German which we have. The church of Rheims had
two historians. Flodoard (also
author of some immense poems) begins in the mists of antiquity and carries the
story down to about 966. Richer, whose book is extant (at Bamberg) in the
author’s autograph, dedicates his history to Gerbert ; he devotes small space
to early history and much to his own time : his narrative ends in 995. Widukind of Corvey is another name that cannot be passed
over : his Gesta Saxonum in four books run
to the year 973, but by the 16th chapter of the first book he has reached 880,
so that his also must rank as a history of his own time. Of all these
chroniclers and observers Liudprand of
Cremona is by far the smartest. His spiteful pictures of the Byzantine court
are not easily to be paralleled : he has a real turn for satire and for vivid
description, and the gaps in his text are very much to be deplored.
Geography and science
Of those who treat of the
Arts and Sciences the grammarians are probably the most numerous. I have
renounced the idea of noticing each Irishman or Frank who has left us an Ars, but I would find a place here for mention of two
Epistles, separated in time by a full century, which are largely grammatical in
subject and epistolary only in form. They serve mainly as displays of their
authors’ reading. One is by Ermenrich of Ellwangen to Grimald of St Gall (854), the other by Gunzo of Novara to the monks
of Reichenau (965)
à propos of a monk of St Gall who had rashly criticised his Latin. They are tedious compositions,
but have their importance.
The writers on Geography are
few. Dicuil, an
Irishman (825), draws largely upon ancient sources, but adds something about
Iceland and the Faroe Islands that depends upon the observations of compatriots
who had been there. The famous voyages of Ohthere and Wulfstan, inserted by Alfred into his Orosius, though they are in the vernacular, must find
mention under this head. Other quasi-geographers are the translators of
Alexander’s letter to Aristotle, and other matter on the Marvels of the East.
They probably fall within our period, but the best copies we have of them
Anglo-Saxon versions illustrated with pictures may be of the eleventh century.
Medicine meant chiefly materia medica, collections of recipes, and spells. The Latin
version of Dioscorides,
and the recipes and charms current under the names of Apuleius and Sextus Placidus, were prime authorities. Little new work
was produced.
No idea of the progress made
in Music can be given, but by a specialist : it must suffice here to name Notker, Hoger, and Hucbald of St Amand as the leading exponents.
Gerbert (Sylvester II)
Astronomy and Mathematics
remain. Both were ancillary to church purposes, the settling of the Calendar
and especially the determination of Easter. Bede’s were the text-books which
were perhaps found most useful generally, and that of Helperic of Auxerre (c.
850) had a wide circulation. But we may neglect every name that appears
in connexion with Mathematics in favour of that of Gerbert of Aurillac, who died as Pope Sylvester II in 1003. He is the
last really outstanding figure. Everything that he wrote and did has
distinction, and he demands a somewhat extended notice. Born at Aurillac (Cantal) he spent the years 967-970 in Spain
with Hatto,
Archbishop of Vich. From 970 to 972 he was with the
Emperor: for the next ten years (972-982) he was master of the cathedral school
at Rheims, and Richer devotes many pages to telling us what he taught there. In
982 he was made Abbot of Bobbio, the literary
treasures of which were no doubt a great attraction to him : in 991 he became
Archbishop of Rheims, in 998 of Ravenna. In the following year he passed to the
Chair of Peter. His political activities, which were great, we will pass over,
and deal only with his literary interests, as they are revealed in his letters
and in other sources. The letters most instructive from this point of view are
mostly written from Bobbio. To Archbishop Adalbero of Rheims he says (Ep. 8), “Procure me the history
of Julius Caesar from Adso,
Abbot of Montièrender,
to be copied, if you want me to furnish you with what I have, viz. the eight
books of Boethius on Astrology and some splendid geometrical diagrams”. To
Abbot Gisalbert (Ep.
9): “The philosopher Demosthenes wrote a book on the diseases and treatment of
the eyes, called Ophthalmicus.
I want the beginning of it, if you have it, and also the end of Cicero
pro rege Deiotaro”. Rainard, a monk, is asked for M.
Manlius De astrologia (who
is thought by Havet not
to be the poet Manilius,
but Boethius) and for some other books. Stephen, a Roman deacon, is to send
Suetonius and Symmachus. “The art of persuasive oratory (Ep. 44) is of the
greatest practical utility. With a view to it I am hard at work collecting a
library, and have spent very large sums at Rome and in other parts of Italy,
and in Germany and the Belgian country, on scribes and on copies of books”. To
a monk of Treves (Ep. 134): “I am too busy to send you the sphere you ask for:
your best chance of getting it is to send me a good copy of the Achilleis of
Statius”." The monk sent the poem, but the sphere was again withheld. Such
extracts show the catholicity of Gerbert’s tastes.
Richer tells the same tale; he runs through the Seven Liberal Arts, and shows
what methods and books Gerbert used in teaching each of them. In Mathematics
his chief innovation seems to have been the revival of the use of the abacus
for calculations, and the employment, in connection with it, of an early form
of the ‘Arabic’ (really Indian) numerals from 1 to 9, without the zero. He also
wrote on mathematical subjects, though, perhaps, no signal discovery stands to
his credit. Besides all this he was a practical workman. William of Malmesbury describes in
rather vague terms an organ made by him which was to all appearance actuated by
steam. To the same excellent author and to Walter Map we owe all the best of
the many legends that have gathered about Gerbert; of the treasure he found at
Rome, guided to it by the statue whose forehead was inscribed “Strike here”, of
the fairy whom he met in the forest near Rheims, and of his death. He, like
Henry IV of England, was not to die but in Jerusalem. His Jerusalem was the
basilica of Sta Croce in Gerusalemme at Rome. It may
be worthwhile to end this sketch of him with a correction. We are commonly told
that the sixth or seventh century uncial manuscript of the Scriptores Gromatici, the Roman writers
on land-measurement, which is now at Wolfenbüttel,
and is known as the Codex Arcerianus,
was Gerbert’s. This
is denied by his latest editor, Boubnov,
though he allows that the book was at Bobbio in the
tenth century.
Books in vernacular
Our last topic is that of
books in vernacular. For practical purposes this unscientific expression means
the Celtic and Teutonic families of speech; our period has nothing to show for
the Romance languages. Most of what it seemed needful to say about Celtic
literature in connection with learning has found a place in the chapter
preceding this. It must be borne in mind that the evolution of fresh native
literatures independent of learning transmitted by books is foreign to our
subject; the fact that the really native product is in itself the best worth
reading is irrelevant here. Famous poems such as the Tain Bo Cuailnge and Beowulf, and
the Dream of the Rood, therefore have to be passed over, and such
parts of the old Northern corpus of poetry as critics allow to be anterior to
the year 1000.
Infinitely the largest place
in these two centuries is occupied by the Anglo-Saxon writings. A certain
number of poems assigned to the latter part of the eighth century are on themes
derived from books. The Andreas of the Vercelli manuscript is from a text which
is only forthcoming in scanty fragments of Latin, though we have it in Greek :
there was also once a poem on the adventures of St Thomas in India, but it has
disappeared; it was too fabulous for Aelfric to use as the basis of his Homily
on the Apostle. Other Acts of Saints are drawn upon in the poems called Elene and Juliana. We have not the original that lies
behind the Dialogue of Salomon and Saturn, but there was one, presumably in
Latin, and a strange book it must have been. The Phoenix is in part at least a
rendering of a poem attributed to Lactantius. One of
the Genesis-poems that which is called Genesis B, and has been said to be anglicised from Old Saxon is held to be under
obligations to the poems of Alcimus Avitus. The ninth century Homilies of the Vercelli
and Blickling manuscripts,
as has been said, present versions of and allusions to the Apocalypse of
Thomas. The source oftenest employed for sermons is not unnaturally the
homily-book of Gregory the Great, to whom Christian England owed so much.
The end of the same century
sees King Alfred’s work : he puts into the hands of his clergy and people
Gregory, Orosius, Bede, and Boethius, and infuses
into Orosius and Boethius something of his own great
spirit. He did not seek to make his people or his priests erudite, but to fit
them for the common duties of their lives : we find little curious learning in
what he wrote or ordered to be written. And in the work of Aelfric, nearly a
hundred years later, I seem to see an equally sober and practical, yet not
prosaic, mind. His sermons, whether he is paraphrasing Gregory on the Sunday
Gospels, or is telling the story of a saint from his Acts, appear to be exactly
fitted to their purpose of leading simple men in the right way : skill in
narrative, beauty of thought, goodness of soul, are there. Whatever Aelfric it
was who composed the Colloquy for schoolboys, he, too, was gifted with sympathy
and freshness. It gives some pictures of ordinary life and manners which have
long been popular, and with good reason.
Of some books and fragments
which concern matters not theological, it is hard to say whether they fall just
within or just outside our period. Such are the medical receipts, the leechdoms and the descriptions of Eastern marvels
already alluded to ; such too the dream-books, the weather prognostics, the
version of the story of Apollonius of Tyre. Byrhtferth of Ramsey,
almost the only author of this class whose name has survived, wrote partly in
Latin and partly in the vernacular upon ‘computus’, Calendarial science,
shortly before the year 1000, when he anticipates the loosing of Satan.
There was a time when it
would have been proper to say that important remains of Welsh poetry far older
than AD 1000 were in existence. That time is past, and it is recognised that the poems of Taliesin and the rest
are not of the first age. Glosses and small fragments of verse are the oldest
things we have in Welsh. Ireland has more, but of the documents so far as they
have not been noticed already which bear on learning, a great many can only be
dated by the linguistic experts, and unanimity is no more the rule among the
scholars than among the politicians of the Celts.
There are, it has been said,
Irish versions of the Aethiopica of Heliodorus, of the Thebaid of Statius and of the Odyssey. To the first no date is assigned; it is not in
print, and for all one can tell it may have been made from a printed edition :
the second appears to be a medieval abstract in prose : the only published text
that represents the third is a short prose tale. It has some traits (as of the
dog of Odysseus recognising him) which are
not derivable from Latin sources, and read like distorted recollections of the
Greek; but the main course of the story is wholly un-Homeric. Nor is it claimed
as falling within our period. I cite this as a specimen of exaggerations that
are current. They are wholly uncalled for. Nobody doubts the reality of the
ancient learning of Ireland. It is safe to predict that sober and critical
research will not lessen but increase our sense of the debt which the modern
world owes, first to Ireland and after her to Britain, as the preservers and
transmitters of the wisdom of old time.
I end this chapter, as I
began it, with these islands; and as I write, just such a storm hangs over them
as that which, breaking, drove Alcuin from their shores eleven centuries ago;
and just such destruction is being wrought in the old homes of learning, Corbie, and St Hiquier, Laon and Rheims, as the Vikings wrought
then. But the destroyers of today are no Vikings. They are, and the more is the
pity, men of a race which has done a vast deal for learning; that has brought
to light things new and old. They are undoing their own work now : they have
robbed the world of beauties and delights that never can be given back. It will
be long before any of the nations can forgive Germany; longer still, I
earnestly hope, before she can forgive herself.
. |