76

that the order of St. Michael was instituted in person by the archangel, who was himself the first knight, and to whom, in fact, chivalry owes it origin.75 In regard to the Tartars, that people, of course, proceeded from Tartarus; which some theologians said was an inferior kind of hell, but others declared to be hell itself. However this might be, the fact of their birthplace being from below was indisputable, and was proved by many circumstances which showed the fatal and mysterious influence they were able to exercise. For the Turks were identical with the Tartars; and it was notorious, that since the Cross had fallen into Turkish hands, all Christian children had ten teeth less than formerly; an universal calamity, which there seemed to be no means of repairing."

Other points relating to the history of past events were cleared up with equal facility. In Europe, during many centuries, the only animal food in general use was pork; beef, veal, and mutton, being comparatively unknown.78 It was, therefore, with

Montfaucon, Monumens de la Mon. Fr. vol. ii. p. 329, for proof, that by the statutes of the order of the Saint Esprit, a chapter of the knights was appointed to be held annually in castello ovi incantati in mirabili periculo."

15 The order of St. Michael, in France, pretends to the possession of a regular descent from Michael the Archangel, who, according to the enlightened judgment of French antiquarians, was the premier chevalier in the world; and it was he, they say, who established the earliest chivalric order in Paradise itself." Mills's History of Chivalry, vol. i. pp. 363, 364.

76 The etymology of Tartars from Tartarus is ascribed to the piety of Saint Louis in Prichard's Physical History, vol. iv. p. 278; but I think that I have met with it before his time, though I cannot now recover the passage. The earliest instance I remember is in 1241, when the saint was twenty-six years old. See a letter from the emperor Frederick, in Matthæi Paris Historia Major, p. 497: "Pervenissent dicti Tartari (imo Tartarei)," &c.; and on the expression of Louis, see p. 496: "Quos vocamus Tartaros ad suas Tartareas sedes." Since the thirteenth century, the subject has attracted the attention of English divines; and the celebrated theologian Whiston mentions" my last famous discovery, or rather my revival of Dr. Giles Fletcher's famous discovery, that the Tartars are no other than the ten tribes of Israel, which have been so long sought for in vain." Memoirs of the Life and Writings of William Whiston, p. 575. Compare, on the opinions held respecting the Tartars, Journal Asiatique, I. série, vol. vi. p. 374, Paris, 1825.

"Peignot (Dict. des Livres, vol. ii. p. 69, Paris, 1806) says, that Rigord, in his history of Philip Augustus, assures his readers " que depuis que la vraie croix a été prise par les Turcs, les enfans n'ont plus que 20 ou 23 dents, au lieu qu'ils en avaient 30 ou 32 auparavant." Even in the fifteenth century, it was believed that the number of teeth had diminished from 32 to 22, or at most 24. See Sprengel, Hist. de la Médecine, vol. ii. pp. 481, 482, Paris, 1815. Compare Hecker on the Black Death, pp. 31, 32, in his learned work, Epidemics of the Middle Ages, published by the Sydenham Society.

78 In the sacred books of the Scandinavians, pork is represented as the principal food, even in heaven. See Mallet's Northern Antiquities, p. 105. It was the chief food of the Irish in the twelfth century: Ledwich, Antiquities of Ireland, Dublin, 1804, p. 370; and also of the Anglo-Saxons at an earlier period. Turner's Hist. of England, vol. iii. p. 22. In France it was equally common, and Charlemagne kept in his forests immense droves of pigs. Note in Esprit des Lois, in Euvres de Montesquieu, p. 513. In Spain, those who did not like pork were tried by the Inquisition as suspected Jews. Llorente, Hist. de l'Inquisition, vol. i. pp. 269, 442, 445.

no small astonishment that the crusaders, on returning from the East, told their countrymen that they had been among a people who, like the Jews, thought pork unclean, and refused to eat it. But the feelings of lively wonder which this intelligence excited, were destroyed as soon as the cause of the fact was explained. The subject was taken up by Mathew Paris, the most eminent historian during the thirteenth century, and one of the most eminent during the Middle Ages." This celebrated writer informs us, that the Mohammedans refuse to eat pork on account of a singular circumstance which happened to their prophet. It appears, that Mohammed, having, on one occasion, gorged himself with food and drink till he was in a state of insensibility, fell asleep on a dunghill, and, in this disgraceful condition, was seen by a litter of pigs. The pigs attacked the fallen prophet, and suffocated him to death; for which reason his followers abominate pigs, and refuse to partake of their flesh.80 This striking fact explains one great peculiarity of the Mohammedans; and another fact, equally striking, explains how it was Late in the sixteenth century, there was a particular disease, said to be caused by the quantity of it eaten in Hungary. Sprengel, Hist. de la Médecine, vol. iii. p. 93; and even at present, the barbarous Lettes are passionately fond of it. Kohl's Rus sia, pp. 386, 387. In the middle of the sixteenth century, I find that Philip II., when in England, generally dined on bacon; of which he ate so much, as frequently to make himself very ill. See Ambassades de Messieurs de Noailles en Angleterre, vol. v. pp. 240, 241, edit. 1763. The ambassador writes, that Philip was grand mangeur oultre mesure," and used to consume large quantities “de lard, dont il faict le plus souvent son principal repas." In the Middle Ages, "les Thuringiens payaient leur tribut en porcs, la denrée la plus précieuse de leur pays." Euvres de Michelet, vol. ii. p. 389.

79 Sismondi (Hist. des Français, vol. vii. pp. 325, 326) passes a high eulogy upon him; and Mosheim (Ecclesiast. History, vol. i. p. 313) says: Among the historians (of the thirteenth century), the first place is due to Mathew Paris; a writer of the highest merit, both in point of knowledge and prudence."

80 Matthæi Paris Historia Major, p. 362. He concludes his account by saying, "Unde adhuc Saraceni sues præ cæteris animalibus exosas habent et abominabiles." Mathew Paris obtained his information from a clergyman, "quendam magni nominis celebrem prædicatorem." p. 360. According to Mathew of Westminster, the pigs not only suffocated Mohammed, but actually ate the greater part of him: "In maxima parte a porcis corrosum invenerunt." Matthæi Westmonast. Flores Historiarum, part i. p. 215.

By a singular contradiction, the African Mohammedans now "believe that a great enmity subsists between hogs and Christians." Mungo Park's Travels, vol. i. p. 185. Many medical authors have supposed that pork is peculiarly unwholesome in hot countries; but this requires confirmation: and it is certain, that it is recommended by Arabian physicians, and is more generally eaten both in Asia and in Africa than is usually believed. Comp. Sprengel, Hist. de la Médecine, vol. ii. p. 323; Vol ney, Voyage en Syrie, vol. i. p. 449; Buchanan's Journey through the Mysore, vol. ii. p. 88, vol. iii. p. 57; Raffles' Hist. of Java, vol. ii. p. 5; Ellis's Hist. of Madagascar, vol. i. pp. 201, 403, 416; Cook's Voyages, vol. ii. p. 265; Burnes's Travels into Bok hara, vol. iii. p. 141. As facts of this sort are important physiologically and socially, it is advisable that they should be collected; and I therefore add, that the NorthAmerican Indians are said to have "a disgus tfo rpork." Journal of the Geog. Society, vol. xv. p. 30; and that Dobell (Travels, vol. ii. p. 260, 8vo, 1830) says, "I believe there is more pork eaten in China than in all the rest of the world put together."

that their sect came into existence. For it was well known, that Mohammed was originally a cardinal, and only became a heretic because he failed in his design of being elected pope.

82

In regard to the early history of Christianity, the great writers of the Middle Ages were particularly inquisitive; and they preserved the memory of events, of which otherwise we should have been entirely ignorant. After Froissart, the most celebrated historian of the fourteenth century was certainly Mathew of Westminster, with whose name, at least, most readers are familiar. This eminent man directed his attention, among other matters, to the history of Judas, in order to discover the circumstances under which the character of that archapostate was formed. His researches seem to have been very extensive; but their principal results were, that Judas, when an infant, was deserted by his parents, and exposed on an island called Scarioth, from whence he received the name of Judas Iscariot. To this the historian adds, that after Judas grew up, he, among other enormities, slew his own father, and then married his own mother.83 The same writer, in another part of his history, mentions a fact interesting to those who study the antiquities of the Holy See. Some questions had been raised as to the propriety of kissing the pope's toe, and even theologians had their doubts touching so singular a ceremony. But this difficulty also was set at rest by Mathew of Westminster, who explains the true origin of the custom. He says, that formerly it was usual to kiss the hand of his holiness; but that towards the end of the eighth century, a certain lewd woman, in making an offering to the pope, not only kissed his hand, but also pressed it. The pope, his name was Leo,-seeing the danger, cut off his hand, and thus escaped the contamination to which he had been exposed. Since that time, the precaution has been taken of kissing the pope's toe instead of his hand; and, lest any one should doubt the accuracy of this account, the historian assures us that the hand, which had been cut off five or six hundred years before, still existed in Rome, and was indeed a standing miracle, since it was preserved in the Lateran in its original state, free from corruption. And as some readers might wish

84

82 This idea, which was a favourite one in the Middle Ages, is said to have been a Rabbinical invention. See Lettres de Gui Patin, vol. iii. p. 127: "que Mahomet, le faux prophète, avait été cardinal; et que, par dépit de n'avoir été pape, il s'étoit fait hérésiarque."

See the ample details in Matthæi Westmonast. Flores Historiarum, part i. pp. 86, 87; and at p. 88, "Judas matrem suam uxorem duxerat, et quòd patrem suum occiderat."

This took place in the year 798. Matthæi Westmonast. Flores Historiarum, part i. p. 293. The historian thus concludes his relation: "Et statutum est nunc quòd numquam extunc manus Papæ ab offerentibus deoscularetur, sed pes. Cùm

to be informed respecting the Lateran itself, where the hand was kept, this also is considered by the historian, in another part of his great work, where he traces it back to the emperor Nero. For it is said that this wicked persecutor of the faith, on one occasion, vomited a frog covered with blood, which he believed to be his own progeny, and therefore caused to be shut up in a vault, where it remained hidden for some time. Now, in the Latin language, latente means hidden, and rana means a frog; so that, by putting these two words together, we have the origin of the Lateran, which, in fact, was built where the frog was found.85

It would be easy to fill volumes with similar notions; all of which were devoutly believed in those ages of darkness, or, as they have been well called, Ages of Faith. Those, indeed, were golden days for the ecclesiastical profession, since the credulity of men had reached a height which seemed to ensure to the clergy a long and universal dominion. How the prospects of the church were subsequently darkened, and how the human reason began to rebel, will be related in another part of this Introduction, where I shall endeavour to trace the rise of that secular and sceptical spirit to which European civilization owes its origin. But before closing the present chapter, it may be well to give a few more illustrations of the opinions held in the Middle Ages; and for this purpose, I will select the two historical accounts, which, of all others, were the most popular, exercised most influence, and were most universally believed.

The histories to which I refer are those of Arthur and Charlemagne; both of which bear the names of dignitaries of the church, and were received with the respect due to their illustrious authors. That concerning Charlemagne is called the chronicle of Turpin, and purports to be written by Turpin, archbishop of Rheims, a friend of the emperor, and his companion in war.86 From some passages it contains, there is reason to think that it

ante fuerat consuetudo quòd manus, non pes, deoscularetur. In hujus miraculi memoriam reservatur adhuc manus abscissa in thesauro lateranensi, quam dominus custodit incorruptam ad laudem matris suæ."

85".... Ita ut Nero se puero gravidum existimaret. . . . . .Tandem dolore nimio vexatus, medicis ait: Accelerate tempus partus, quia languore vix anhelitum habeo respirandi. Tunc ipsum ad vomitum impotionaverunt, et ranam visu terribilem, humoribus infectam, et sanguine edidit cruentatam. . . . . .Unde et pars illa civitatis, ut ali qui dicunt, ubi rana latuerat, Lateranum à latente rana, nomen accepit." Matthai Westmonast. part i. p. 98. Compare the account given by Roger of Hoveden, of a woman who vomited two toads. Script. post Bedam, p. 457 rev. In the Middle Ages there were many superstitions respecting these animals, and they appear to have been used by heralds as marks of degradation. See Lankester's Memorials of Ray, p. 197. Ego Turpinus in valle Caroli loco præfato, astante rege," &c. De Vita Caroli Magni, p. 74, edit. Ciampi.

.87

was really composed at the beginning of the twelfth century; but, in the Middle Ages, men were not nice in these matters, and no one was likely to dispute its authenticity. Indeed, the name of an archbishop of Rheims was sufficient recommendation; and we find accordingly, that in the year 1122 it received the formal approbation of the pope ; and that Vincent de Beauvais, one of the most celebrated writers in the thirteenth century, and tutor to the sons of Louis IX., mentions it as a work of value, and as being the principal authority for the reign of Charlemagne.

89

A book thus generally read, and sanctioned by such competent judges, must be a tolerable standard for testing the knowledge and opinions of those times. On this account, a short notice of it will be useful for our present purpose, as it will enable us to understand the extreme slowness with which history has improved, and the almost imperceptible steps by which it advanced, until fresh life was breathed into it by the great thinkers of the eighteenth century.

In the Chronicle of Turpin, we are informed that the invasion of Spain by Charlemagne took place in consequence of the direct instigation of St. James, the brother of St. John.90 The apostle, being the cause of the attack, adopted measures to secure its success. When Charlemagne besieged Pamplona, that city made an obstinate resistance; but as soon as prayers were offered up by the invaders, the walls suddenly fell to the ground." After this, the emperor rapidly overran the whole country, almost annihilated the Mohammedans, and built innumerable churches. 92

87 Turner (History of England, vol. vii. pp. 256-268) has attempted to prove that it was written by Calixtus II.; but his arguments, though ingenious and learned, are not decisive. Warton (Hist. Eng. Poetry, vol. i. p. 128) says it was composed about 1110.

88

The pope "statuit historiam Sancti Caroli descriptam a beato Turpino Remensi Archiepiscopo esse authenticam." Note in Turner, vol. vii. p. 250.

In his famous Speculum, "il recommande spécialement les études historiques, dont il parait que la plupart de ses contemporains méconnaissaient l'utilité; mais lorsqu'il indique les sources où il puisera ce genre d'instruction, c'est Turpin qu'il désigne comme le principal historien de Charlemagne." Histoire Littéraire de la France, vol. xviii. p. 474, Paris, 1835, 4to; see also p. 517; and on its influence in Spain, see Ticknor's History of Spanish Literature, vol. i. pp. 222, 223. so Caroli Magni Historia, edit. Ciampi, pp. 3-5.

".... Muri collapsi funditus corruerunt." De Vita Caroli, p. 5. On this, Ciampi, in his notes on Turpin, gravely says (pp. 94, 95): "Questo fatto della presa di Pamplona è reso maraviglioso per la subitanea caduta delle mura, a somiglianza delle mura di Gerico." This reminds me of a circumstance mentioned by Monconys, who, on visiting Oxford in 1663, was shown a horn which was preserved in that ancient city, because it was said to be made in the same way as that by which the walls of Jericho were blown down: "Les Juifs tiennent que leurs ancêtres se servirent de pareilles pour abbatre les murailles de Jerico." Voyages de Monconys, vol. iii. p. 95, edit. Paris, 1695.

fecit."

De Vita Caroli, cap. v. pp. 11, 12; is headed "De ecclesiis quas Carolus