{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_1185/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_1185","id":"gutenberg_1185","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/1185","summary":null,"tags":["Category: History - Ancient","Category: History - Early Modern (c. 1450-1750)","Category: History - Medieval/Middle Ages","Category: History - Modern (1750+)","Category: History - Religious","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Science - Biology","Category: Science - Physics","Religion and science -- History"],"text":"Produced by Charles Keller\n\n\n\n\n\nHISTORY OF THE CONFLICT BETWEEN RELIGION AND SCIENCE\n\nBy John William Draper, M. D., LL. D.\n\nPROFESSOR IN THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK,\n\n     AUTHOR OF A TREATISE ON HUMAN PHYSIOLOGY, HISTORY OF THE\n     INTELLECTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF EUROPE, HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN\n     CIVIL WAR, AND OF MANY EXPERIMENTAL MEMOIRS ON CHEMICAL AND\n     OTHER SCIENTIFIC SUBJECTS\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE.\n\nWHOEVER has had an opportunity of becoming acquainted with the mental\ncondition of the intelligent classes in Europe and America, must have\nperceived that there is a great and rapidly-increasing departure from\nthe public religious faith, and that, while among the more frank this\ndivergence is not concealed, there is a far more extensive and far more\ndangerous secession, private and unacknowledged.\n\nSo wide-spread and so powerful is this secession, that it can neither be\ntreated with contempt nor with punishment. It cannot be extinguished by\nderision, by vituperation, or by force. The time is rapidly approaching\nwhen it will give rise to serious political results.\n\nEcclesiastical spirit no longer inspires the policy of the world.\nMilitary fervor in behalf of faith has disappeared. Its only souvenirs\nare the marble effigies of crusading knights, reposing in the silent\ncrypts of churches on their tombs.\n\nThat a crisis is impending is shown by the attitude of the great powers\ntoward the papacy. The papacy represents the ideas and aspirations\nof two-thirds of the population of Europe. It insists on a political\nsupremacy in accordance with its claims to a divine origin and mission,\nand a restoration of the mediaeval order of things, loudly declaring\nthat it will accept no reconciliation with modern civilization.\n\nThe antagonism we thus witness between Religion and Science is the\ncontinuation of a struggle that commenced when Christianity began\nto attain political power. A divine revelation must necessarily be\nintolerant of contradiction; it must repudiate all improvement in\nitself, and view with disdain that arising from the progressive\nintellectual development of man. But our opinions on every subject are\ncontinually liable to modification, from the irresistible advance of\nhuman knowledge.\n\nCan we exaggerate the importance of a contention in which every\nthoughtful person must take part whether he will or not? In a matter so\nsolemn as that of religion, all men, whose temporal interests are not\ninvolved in existing institutions, earnestly desire to find the truth.\nThey seek information as to the subjects in dispute, and as to the\nconduct of the disputants.\n\nThe history of Science is not a mere record of isolated discoveries; it\nis a narrative of the conflict of two contending powers, the expansive\nforce of the human intellect on one side, and the compression arising\nfrom traditionary faith and human interests on the other.\n\nNo one has hitherto treated the subject from this point of view. Yet\nfrom this point it presents itself to us as a living issue--in fact, as\nthe most important of all living issues.\n\nA few years ago, it was the politic and therefore the proper course to\nabstain from all allusion to this controversy, and to keep it as far as\npossible in the background. The tranquillity of society depends so\nmuch on the stability of its religious convictions, that no one can\nbe justified in wantonly disturbing them. But faith is in its nature\nunchangeable, stationary; Science is in its nature progressive; and\neventually a divergence between them, impossible to conceal, must take\nplace. It then becomes the duty of those whose lives have made them\nfamiliar with both modes of thought, to present modestly, but\nfirmly, their views; to compare the antagonistic pretensions calmly,\nimpartially, philosophically. History shows that, if this be not done,\nsocial misfortunes, disastrous and enduring, will ensue. When the old\nmythological religion of Europe broke down under the weight of its own\ninconsistencies, neither the Roman emperors nor the philosophers of\nthose times did any thing adequate for the guidance of public opinion.\nThey left religious affairs to take their chance, and accordingly those\naffairs fell into the hands of ignorant and infuriated ecclesiastics,\nparasites, eunuchs, and slaves.\n\nThe intellectual night which settled on Europe, in consequence of that\ngreat neglect of duty, is passing away; we live in the daybreak of\nbetter things. Society is anxiously expecting light, to see in what\ndirection it is drifting. It plainly discerns that the track along which\nthe voyage of civilization has thus far been made, has been left; and\nthat a new departure, on all unknown sea, has been taken.\n\nThough deeply impressed with such thoughts, I should not have presumed\nto write this book, or to intrude on the public the ideas it presents,\nhad I not made the facts with which it deals a subject of long and\nearnest meditation. And I have gathered a strong incentive to undertake\nthis duty from the circumstance that a \"History of the Intellectual\nDevelopment of Europe,\" published by me several years ago, which has\npassed through many editions in America, and has been reprinted in\nnumerous European languages, English, French, German, Russian, Polish,\nServian, etc., is everywhere received with favor.\n\nIn collecting and arranging the materials for the volumes I published\nunder the title of \"A History of the American Civil War,\" a work of very\ngreat labor, I had become accustomed to the comparison of conflicting\nstatements, the adjustment of conflicting claims. The approval with\nwhich that book has been received by the American public, a critical\njudge of the events considered, has inspired me with additional\nconfidence. I had also devoted much attention to the experimental\ninvestigation of natural phenomena, and had published many well-known\nmemoirs on such subjects. And perhaps no one can give himself to these\npursuits, and spend a large part of his life in the public teaching of\nscience, without partaking of that love of impartiality and truth which\nPhilosophy incites. She inspires us with a desire to dedicate our days\nto the good of our race, so that in the fading light of life's evening\nwe may not, on looking back, be forced to acknowledge how unsubstantial\nand useless are the objects that we have pursued.\n\nThough I have spared no pains in the composition of this book, I am\nvery sensible how unequal it is to the subject, to do justice to which\na knowledge of science, history, theology, politics, is required; every\npage should be alive with intelligence and glistening with facts. But\nthen I have remembered that this is only as it were the preface, or\nforerunner, of a body of literature, which the events and wants of our\ntimes will call forth. We have come to the brink of a great intellectual\nchange. Much of the frivolous reading of the present will be supplanted\nby a thoughtful and austere literature, vivified by endangered\ninterests, and made fervid by ecclesiastical passion.\n\nWhat I have sought to do is, to present a clear and impartial statement\nof the views and acts of the two contending parties. In one sense I have\ntried to identify myself with each, so as to comprehend thoroughly their\nmotives; but in another and higher sense I have endeavored to stand\naloof, and relate with impartiality their actions.\n\nI therefore trust that those, who may be disposed to criticise this\nbook, will bear in mind that its object is not to advocate the views\nand pretensions of either party, but to explain clearly, and without\nshrinking those of both. In the management of each chapter I have\nusually set forth the orthodox view first, and then followed it with\nthat of its opponents.\n\nIn thus treating the subject it has not been necessary to pay much\nregard to more moderate or intermediate opinions, for, though they may\nbe intrinsically of great value, in conflicts of this kind it is not\nwith the moderates but with the extremists that the impartial reader is\nmainly concerned. Their movements determine the issue.\n\nFor this reason I have had little to say respecting the two great\nChristian confessions, the Protestant and Greek Churches. As to the\nlatter, it has never, since the restoration of science, arrayed itself\nin opposition to the advancement of knowledge. On the contrary, it has\nalways met it with welcome. It has observed a reverential attitude to\ntruth, from whatever quarter it might come. Recognizing the apparent\ndiscrepancies between its interpretations of revealed truth and the\ndiscoveries of science, it has always expected that satisfactory\nexplanations and reconciliations would ensue, and in this it has not\nbeen disappointed. It would have been well for modern civilization if\nthe Roman Church had done the same.\n\nIn speaking of Christianity, reference is generally made to the\nRoman Church, partly because its adherents compose the majority of\nChristendom, partly because its demands are the most pretentious, and\npartly because it has commonly sought to enforce those demands by\nthe civil power. None of the Protestant Churches has ever occupied a\nposition so imperious--none has ever had such wide-spread political\ninfluence. For the most part they have been averse to constraint, and\nexcept in very few instances their opposition has not passed beyond the\nexciting of theological odium.\n\nAs to Science, she has never sought to ally herself to civil power. She\nhas never attempted to throw odium or inflict social ruin on any human\nbeing. She has never subjected any one to mental torment, physical\ntorture, least of all to death, for the purpose of upholding or\npromoting her ideas. She presents herself unstained by cruelties and\ncrimes. But in the Vatican--we have only to recall the Inquisition--the\nhands that are now raised in appeals to the Most Merciful are crimsoned.\nThey have been steeped in blood!\n\nThere are two modes of historical composition, the artistic and the\nscientific. The former implies that men give origin to events; it\ntherefore selects some prominent individual, pictures him under\na fanciful form, and makes him the hero of a romance. The latter,\ninsisting that human affairs present an unbroken chain, in which each\nfact is the offspring of some preceding fact, and the parent of some\nsubsequent fact, declares that men do not control events, but that\nevents control men. The former gives origin to compositions, which,\nhowever much they may interest or delight us, are but a grade above\nnovels; the latter is austere, perhaps even repulsive, for it sternly\nimpresses us with a conviction of the irresistible dominion of law, and\nthe insignificance of human exertions. In a subject so solemn as that to\nwhich this book is devoted, the romantic and the popular are altogether\nout of place. He who presumes to treat of it must fix his eyes\nsteadfastly on that chain of destiny which universal history displays;\nhe must turn with disdain from the phantom impostures of pontiffs and\nstatesmen and kings.\n\nIf any thing were needed to show us the untrustworthiness of artistic\nhistorical compositions, our personal experience would furnish it. How\noften do our most intimate friends fail to perceive the real motives of\nour every-day actions; how frequently they misinterpret our intentions!\nIf this be the case in what is passing before our eyes, may we not\nbe satisfied that it is impossible to comprehend justly the doings of\npersons who lived many years ago, and whom we have never seen.\n\nIn selecting and arranging the topics now to be presented, I have been\nguided in part by \"the Confession\" of the late Vatican Council, and in\npart by the order of events in history. Not without interest will the\nreader remark that the subjects offer themselves to us now as they did\nto the old philosophers of Greece. We still deal with the same questions\nabout which they disputed. What is God? What is the soul? What is the\nworld? How is it governed? Have we any standard or criterion of truth?\nAnd the thoughtful reader will earnestly ask, \"Are our solutions of\nthese problems any better than theirs?\"\n\nThe general argument of this book, then, is as follows:\n\nI first direct attention to the origin of modern science as\ndistinguished from ancient, by depending on observation, experiment,\nand mathematical discussion, instead of mere speculation, and shall show\nthat it was a consequence of the Macedonian campaigns, which brought\nAsia and Europe into contact. A brief sketch of those campaigns, and of\nthe Museum of Alexandria, illustrates its character.\n\nThen with brevity I recall the well-known origin of Christianity, and\nshow its advance to the attainment of imperial power, the transformation\nit underwent by its incorporation with paganism, the existing religion\nof the Roman Empire. A clear conception of its incompatibility with\nscience caused it to suppress forcibly the Schools of Alexandria. It was\nconstrained to this by the political necessities of its position.\n\nThe parties to the conflict thus placed, I next relate the story of\ntheir first open struggle; it is the first or Southern Reformation. The\npoint in dispute had respect to the nature of God. It involved the rise\nof Mohammedanism. Its result was, that much of Asia and Africa, with the\nhistoric cities Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Carthage, were wrenched from\nChristendom, and the doctrine of the Unity of God established in the\nlarger portion of what had been the Roman Empire.\n\nThis political event was followed by the restoration of science, the\nestablishment of colleges, schools, libraries, throughout the dominions\nof the Arabians. Those conquerors, pressing forward rapidly in their\nintellectual development, rejected the anthropomorphic ideas of the\nnature of God remaining in their popular belief, and accepted other more\nphilosophical ones, akin to those that had long previously been attained\nto in India. The result of this was a second conflict, that respecting\nthe nature of the soul. Under the designation of Averroism, there came\ninto prominence the theories of Emanation and Absorption. At the\nclose of the middle ages the Inquisition succeeded in excluding those\ndoctrines from Europe, and now the Vatican Council has formally and\nsolemnly anathematized them.\n\nMeantime, through the cultivation of astronomy, geography, and other\nsciences, correct views had been gained as to the position and relations\nof the earth, and as to the structure of the world; and since Religion,\nresting itself on what was assumed to be the proper interpretation\nof the Scriptures, insisted that the earth is the central and most\nimportant part of the universe, a third conflict broke out. In this\nGalileo led the way on the part of Science. Its issue was the overthrow\nof the Church on the question in dispute. Subsequently a subordinate\ncontroversy arose respecting the age of the world, the Church insisting\nthat it is only about six thousand years old. In this she was again\noverthrown The light of history and of science had been gradually\nspreading over Europe. In the sixteenth century the prestige of Roman\nChristianity was greatly diminished by the intellectual reverses it\nhad experienced, and also by its political and moral condition. It was\nclearly seen by many pious men that Religion was not accountable for\nthe false position in which she was found, but that the misfortune was\ndirectly traceable to the alliance she had of old contracted with Roman\npaganism. The obvious remedy, therefore, was a return to primitive\npurity. Thus arose the fourth conflict, known to us as the\nReformation--the second or Northern Reformation. The special form it\nassumed was a contest respecting the standard or criterion of\ntruth, whether it is to be found in the Church or in the Bible. The\ndetermination of this involved a settlement of the rights of reason, or\nintellectual freedom. Luther, who is the conspicuous man of the epoch,\ncarried into effect his intention with no inconsiderable success; and at\nthe close of the struggle it was found that Northern Europe was lost to\nRoman Christianity.\n\nWe are now in the midst of a controversy respecting the mode of\ngovernment of the world, whether it be by incessant divine intervention,\nor by the operation of primordial and unchangeable law. The intellectual\nmovement of Christendom has reached that point which Arabism had\nattained to in the tenth and eleventh centuries; and doctrines which\nwere then discussed are presenting themselves again for review; such are\nthose of Evolution, Creation, Development.\n\nOffered under these general titles, I think it will be found that all\nthe essential points of this great controversy are included. By grouping\nunder these comprehensive heads the facts to be considered, and dealing\nwith each group separately, we shall doubtless acquire clear views of\ntheir inter-connection and their historical succession.\n\nI have treated of these conflicts as nearly as I conveniently could in\ntheir proper chronological order, and, for the sake of completeness,\nhave added chapters on--\n\nAn examination of what Latin Christianity has done for modern\ncivilization.\n\nA corresponding examination of what Science has done.\n\nThe attitude of Roman Christianity in the impending conflict, as defined\nby the Vatican Council.\n\nThe attention of many truth-seeking persons has been so exclusively\ngiven to the details of sectarian dissensions, that the long strife, to\nthe history of which these pages are devoted, is popularly but little\nknown. Having tried to keep steadfastly in view the determination to\nwrite this work in an impartial spirit, to speak with respect of the\ncontending parties, but never to conceal the truth, I commit it to the\nconsiderate judgment of the thoughtful reader.\n\n                              JOHN WILLIAM DRAPER\n\nUNIVERSITY, NEW YORK, December, 1873.\n\n\n\n\n\nHISTORY OF THE CONFLICT BETWEEN RELIGION AND SCIENCE.\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I.\n\n     THE ORIGIN OF SCIENCE.\n\n     Religious condition of the Greeks in the fourth century\n     before Christ.--Their invasion of the Persian Empire brings\n     them in contact with new aspects of Nature, and familiarizes\n     them with new religious systems.--The military,\n     engineering, and scientific activity, stimulated by the\n     Macedonian campaigns, leads to the establishment in\n     Alexandria of an institute, the Museum, for the cultivation\n     of knowledge by experiment, observation, and mathematical\n     discussion.--It is the origin of Science.\n\nGREEK MYTHOLOGY. No spectacle can be presented to the thoughtful\nmind more solemn, more mournful, than that of the dying of an ancient\nreligion, which in its day has given consolation to many generations of\nmen.\n\nFour centuries before the birth of Christ, Greece was fast outgrowing\nher ancient faith. Her philosophers, in their studies of the world, had\nbeen profoundly impressed with the contrast between the majesty of the\noperations of Nature and the worthlessness of the divinities of Olympus.\nHer historians, considering the orderly course of political affairs,\nthe manifest uniformity in the acts of men, and that there was no event\noccurring before their eyes for which they could not find an obvious\ncause in some preceding event, began to suspect that the miracles and\ncelestial interventions, with which the old annals were filled, were\nonly fictions. They demanded, when the age of the supernatural had\nceased, why oracles had become mute, and why there were now no more\nprodigies in the world.\n\nTraditions, descending from immemorial antiquity, and formerly accepted\nby pious men as unquestionable truths, had filled the islands of\nthe Mediterranean and the conterminous countries with supernatural\nwonders--enchantresses, sorcerers, giants, ogres, harpies, gorgons,\ncentaurs, cyclops. The azure vault was the floor of heaven; there Zeus,\nsurrounded by the gods with their wives and mistresses, held his court,\nengaged in pursuits like those of men, and not refraining from acts of\nhuman passion and crime.\n\nA sea-coast broken by numerous indentations, an archipelago with some of\nthe most lovely islands in the world, inspired the Greeks with a taste\nfor maritime life, for geographical discovery, and colonization.\nTheir ships wandered all over the Black and Mediterranean Seas. The\ntime-honored wonders that had been glorified in the \"Odyssey,\" and\nsacred in public faith, were found to have no existence. As a better\nknowledge of Nature was obtained, the sky was shown to be an illusion;\nit was discovered that there is no Olympus, nothing above but space and\nstars. With the vanishing of their habitation, the gods disappeared,\nboth those of the Ionian type of Homer and those of the Doric of Hesiod.\n\nEFFECTS OF DISCOVERY AND CRITICISM. But this did not take place without\nresistance. At first, the public, and particularly its religious\nportion, denounced the rising doubts as atheism. They despoiled some\nof the offenders of their goods, exiled others; some they put to death.\nThey asserted that what had been believed by pious men in the old times,\nand had stood the test of ages, must necessarily be true. Then, as the\nopposing evidence became irresistible, they were content to admit that\nthese marvels were allegories under which the wisdom of the ancients had\nconcealed many sacred and mysterious things. They tried to reconcile,\nwhat now in their misgivings they feared might be myths, with their\nadvancing intellectual state. But their efforts were in vain, for there\nare predestined phases through which on such an occasion public opinion\nmust pass. What it has received with veneration it begins to doubt, then\nit offers new interpretations, then subsides into dissent, and ends with\na rejection of the whole as a mere fable.\n\nIn their secession the philosophers and historians were followed by\nthe poets. Euripides incurred the odium of heresy. Aeschylus narrowly\nescaped being stoned to death for blasphemy. But the frantic efforts\nof those who are interested in supporting delusions must always end in\ndefeat. The demoralization resistlessly extended through every branch of\nliterature, until at length it reached the common people.\n\nTHE PERSIAN EMPIRE. Greek philosophical criticism had lent its aid to\nGreek philosophical discovery in this destruction of the national faith.\nIt sustained by many arguments the wide-spreading unbelief. It compared\nthe doctrines of the different schools with each other, and showed from\ntheir contradictions that man has no criterion of truth; that, since his\nideas of what is good and what is evil differ according to the country\nin which he lives, they can have no foundation in Nature, but must be\naltogether the result of education; that right and wrong are nothing\nmore than fictions created by society for its own purposes. In Athens,\nsome of the more advanced classes had reached such a pass that they not\nonly denied the unseen, the supernatural, they even affirmed that the\nworld is only a day-dream, a phantasm, and that nothing at all exists.\n\nThe topographical configuration of Greece gave an impress to her\npolitical condition. It divided her people into distinct communities\nhaving conflicting interests, and made them incapable of centralization.\nIncessant domestic wars between the rival states checked her\nadvancement. She was poor, her leading men had become corrupt. They were\never ready to barter patriotic considerations for foreign gold, to sell\nthemselves for Persian bribes. Possessing a perception of the beautiful\nas manifested in sculpture and architecture to a degree never\nattained elsewhere either before or since, Greece had lost a practical\nappreciation of the Good and the True.\n\nWhile European Greece, full of ideas of liberty and independence,\nrejected the sovereignty of Persia, Asiatic Greece acknowledged it\nwithout reluctance. At that time the Persian Empire in territorial\nextent was equal to half of modern Europe. It touched the waters of\nthe Mediterranean, the Aegean, the Black, the Caspian, the Indian, the\nPersian, the Red Seas. Through its territories there flowed six of the\ngrandest rivers in the world--the Euphrates, the Tigris, the Indus, the\nJaxartes, the Oxus, the Nile, each more than a thousand miles in length.\nIts surface reached from thirteen hundred feet below the sea-level to\ntwenty thousand feet above. It yielded, therefore, every agricultural\nproduct. Its mineral wealth was boundless. It inherited the prestige of\nthe Median, the Babylonian, the Assyrian, the Chaldean Empires, whose\nannals reached back through more than twenty centuries.\n\nTHE PERSIAN EMPIRE. Persia had always looked upon European Greece as\npolitically insignificant, for it had scarcely half the territorial\nextent of one of her satrapies. Her expeditions for compelling its\nobedience had, however, taught her the military qualities of its people.\nIn her forces were incorporated Greek mercenaries, esteemed the very\nbest of her troops. She did not hesitate sometimes to give the command\nof her armies to Greek generals, of her fleets to Greek captains. In the\npolitical convulsions through which she had passed, Greek soldiers had\noften been used by her contending chiefs. These military operations were\nattended by a momentous result. They revealed, to the quick eye of\nthese warlike mercenaries, the political weakness of the empire and\nthe possibility of reaching its centre. After the death of Cyrus on the\nbattle-field of Cunaxa, it was demonstrated, by the immortal retreat of\nthe ten thousand under Xenophon, that a Greek army could force its way\nto and from the heart of Persia.\n\nThat reverence for the military abilities of Asiatic generals, so\nprofoundly impressed on the Greeks by such engineering exploits as the\nbridging of the Hellespont, and the cutting of the isthmus at Mount\nAthos by Xerxes, had been obliterated at Salamis, Platea, Mycale. To\nplunder rich Persian provinces had become an irresistible temptation.\nSuch was the expedition of Agesilaus, the Spartan king, whose brilliant\nsuccesses were, however, checked by the Persian government resorting to\nits time-proved policy of bribing the neighbors of Sparta to attack her.\n\"I have been conquered by thirty thousand Persian archers,\" bitterly\nexclaimed Agesilaus, as he re-embarked, alluding to the Persian coin,\nthe Daric, which was stamped with the image of an archer.\n\nTHE INVASION OF PERSIA BY GREECE. At length Philip, the King of Macedon,\nprojected a renewal of these attempts, under a far more formidable\norganization, and with a grander object. He managed to have himself\nappointed captain-general of all Greece not for the purpose of a mere\nforay into the Asiatic satrapies, but for the overthrow of the Persian\ndynasty in the very centre of its power. Assassinated while his\npreparations were incomplete, he was succeeded by his son Alexander,\nthen a youth. A general assembly of Greeks at Corinth had unanimously\nelected him in his father's stead. There were some disturbances in\nIllyria; Alexander had to march his army as far north as the Danube to\nquell them. During his absence the Thebans with some others conspired\nagainst him. On his return he took Thebes by assault. He massacred\nsix thousand of its inhabitants, sold thirty thousand for slaves, and\nutterly demolished the city. The military wisdom of this severity was\napparent in his Asiatic campaign. He was not troubled by any revolt in\nhis rear.\n\nTHE MACEDONIAN CAMPAIGN. In the spring B.C. 334 Alexander crossed the\nHellespont into Asia. His army consisted of thirty-four thousand foot\nand four thousand horse. He had with him only seventy talents in money.\nHe marched directly on the Persian army, which, vastly exceeding him in\nstrength, was holding the line of the Granicus. He forced the passage of\nthe river, routed the enemy, and the possession of all Asia Minor, with\nits treasures, was the fruit of the victory. The remainder of that\nyear he spent in the military organization of the conquered provinces.\nMeantime Darius, the Persian king, had advanced an army of six hundred\nthousand men to prevent the passage of the Macedonians into Syria. In\na battle that ensued among the mountain-defiles at Issus, the Persians\nwere again overthrown. So great was the slaughter that Alexander, and\nPtolemy, one of his generals, crossed over a ravine choked with dead\nbodies. It was estimated that the Persian loss was not less than ninety\nthousand foot and ten thousand horse. The royal pavilion fell into the\nconqueror's hands, and with it the wife and several of the children of\nDarius. Syria was thus added to the Greek conquests. In Damascus were\nfound many of the concubines of Darius and his chief officers, together\nwith a vast treasure.\n\nBefore venturing into the plains of Mesopotamia for the final struggle,\nAlexander, to secure his rear and preserve his communications with the\nsea, marched southward down the Mediterranean coast, reducing the cities\nin his way. In his speech before the council of war after Issus, he told\nhis generals that they must not pursue Darius with Tyre unsubdued, and\nPersia in possession of Egypt and Cyprus, for, if Persia should regain\nher seaports, she would transfer the war into Greece, and that it was\nabsolutely necessary for him to be sovereign at sea. With Cyprus and\nEgypt in his possession he felt no solicitude about Greece. The siege\nof Tyre cost him more than half a year. In revenge for this delay,\nhe crucified, it is said, two thousand of his prisoners. Jerusalem\nvoluntarily surrendered, and therefore was treated leniently: but the\npassage of the Macedonian army into Egypt being obstructed at Gaza, the\nPersian governor of which, Betis, made a most obstinate defense, that\nplace, after a siege of two months, was carried by assault, ten thousand\nof its men were massacred, and the rest, with their wives and children,\nsold into slavery. Betis himself was dragged alive round the city at the\nchariot-wheels of the conqueror. There was now no further obstacle. The\nEgyptians, who detested the Persian rule, received their invader with\nopen arms. He organized the country in his own interest, intrusting\nall its military commands to Macedonian officers, and leaving the civil\ngovernment in the hands of native Egyptians.\n\nCONQUEST OF EGYPT. While preparations for the final campaign were being\nmade, he undertook a journey to the temple of Jupiter Ammon, which was\nsituated in an oasis of the Libyan Desert, at a distance of two hundred\nmiles. The oracle declared him to be a son of that god who, under\nthe form of a serpent, had beguiled Olympias, his mother. Immaculate\nconceptions and celestial descents were so currently received in those\ndays, that whoever had greatly distinguished himself in the affairs of\nmen was thought to be of supernatural lineage. Even in Rome, centuries\nlater, no one could with safety have denied that the city owed its\nfounder, Romulus, to an accidental meeting of the god Mars with the\nvirgin Rhea Sylvia, as she went with her pitcher for water to the\nspring. The Egyptian disciples of Plato would have looked with anger on\nthose who rejected the legend that Perictione, the mother of that\ngreat philosopher, a pure virgin, had suffered an immaculate conception\nthrough the influences of Apollo, and that the god had declared to\nAriston, to whom she was betrothed, the parentage of the child. When\nAlexander issued his letters, orders, and decrees, styling himself \"King\nAlexander, the son of Jupiter Ammon,\" they came to the inhabitants of\nEgypt and Syria with an authority that now can hardly be realized. The\nfree-thinking Greeks, however, put on such a supernatural pedigree its\nproper value. Olympias, who, of course, better than all others knew the\nfacts of the case, used jestingly to say, that \"she wished Alexander\nwould cease from incessantly embroiling her with Jupiter's wife.\"\nArrian, the historian of the Macedonian expedition, observes, \"I cannot\ncondemn him for endeavoring to draw his subjects into the belief of his\ndivine origin, nor can I be induced to think it any great crime, for it\nis very reasonable to imagine that he intended no more by it than merely\nto procure the greater authority among his soldiers.\"\n\nGREEK CONQUEST OF PERSIA. All things being thus secured in his rear,\nAlexander, having returned into Syria, directed the march of his army,\nnow consisting of fifty thousand veterans, eastward. After crossing the\nEuphrates, he kept close to the Masian hills, to avoid the intense heat\nof the more southerly Mesopotamian plains; more abundant forage could\nalso thus be procured for the cavalry. On the left bank of the Tigris,\nnear Arbela, he encountered the great army of eleven hundred thousand\nmen brought up by Darius from Babylon. The death of the Persian monarch,\nwhich soon followed the defeat he suffered, left the Macedonian general\nmaster of all the countries from the Danube to the Indus. Eventually he\nextended his conquest to the Ganges. The treasures he seized are almost\nbeyond belief. At Susa alone he found--so Arrian says--fifty thousand\ntalents in money.\n\nEVENTS OF THE CAMPAIGNS. The modern military student cannot look\nupon these wonderful campaigns without admiration. The passage of the\nHellespont; the forcing of the Granicus; the winter spent in a political\norganization of conquered Asia Minor; the march of the right wing and\ncentre of the army along the Syrian Mediterranean coast; the engineering\ndifficulties overcome at the siege of Tyre; the storming of Gaza; the\nisolation of Persia from Greece; the absolute exclusion of her navy from\nthe Mediterranean; the check on all her attempts at intriguing with\nor bribing Athenians or Spartans, heretofore so often resorted to with\nsuccess; the submission of Egypt; another winter spent in the political\norganization of that venerable country; the convergence of the whole\narmy from the Black and Red Seas toward the nitre-covered plains of\nMesopotamia in the ensuing spring; the passage of the Euphrates fringed\nwith its weeping-willows at the broken bridge of Thapsacus; the crossing\nof the Tigris; the nocturnal reconnaissance before the great and\nmemorable battle of Arbela; the oblique movement on the field; the\npiercing of the enemy's centre--a manoeuvre destined to be repeated\nmany centuries subsequently at Austerlitz; the energetic pursuit of\nthe Persian monarch; these are exploits not surpassed by any soldier of\nlater times.\n\nA prodigious stimulus was thus given to Greek intellectual activity.\nThere were men who had marched with the Macedonian army from the Danube\nto the Nile, from the Nile to the Ganges. They had felt the hyperborean\nblasts of the countries beyond the Black Sea, the simooms and\nsand-tempests of the Egyptian deserts. They had seen the Pyramids which\nhad already stood for twenty centuries, the hieroglyph-covered obelisks\nof Luxor, avenues of silent and mysterious sphinxes, colossi of monarchs\nwho reigned in the morning of the world. In the halls of Esar-haddon\nthey had stood before the thrones of grim old Assyrian kings, guarded by\nwinged bulls. In Babylon there still remained its walls, once more than\nsixty miles in compass, and, after the ravages of three centuries and\nthree conquerors, still more than eighty feet in height; there were\nstill the ruins of the temple of cloud encompassed Bel, on its top was\nplanted the observatory wherein the weird Chaldean astronomers had held\nnocturnal communion with the stars; still there were vestiges of the two\npalaces with their hanging gardens in which were great trees growing in\nmid-air, and the wreck of the hydraulic machinery that had supplied\nthem with water from the river. Into the artificial lake with its vast\napparatus of aqueducts and sluices the melted snows of the Armenian\nmountains found their way, and were confined in their course through\nthe city by the embankments of the Euphrates. Most wonderful of all,\nperhaps, was the tunnel under the river-bed.\n\nEFFECT ON THE GREEK ARMY. If Chaldea, Assyria, Babylon, presented\nstupendous and venerable antiquities reaching far back into the night of\ntime, Persia was not without her wonders of a later date. The pillared\nhalls of Persepolis were filled with miracles of art--carvings,\nsculptures, enamels, alabaster libraries, obelisks, sphinxes, colossal\nbulls. Ecbatana, the cool summer retreat of the Persian kings, was\ndefended by seven encircling walls of hewn and polished blocks, the\ninterior ones in succession of increasing height, and of different\ncolors, in astrological accordance with the seven planets. The palace\nwas roofed with silver tiles, its beams were plated with gold. At\nmidnight, in its halls the sunlight was rivaled by many a row of naphtha\ncressets. A paradise--that luxury of the monarchs of the East--was\nplanted in the midst of the city. The Persian Empire, from the\nHellespont to the Indus, was truly the garden of the world.\n\nEFFECTS ON THE GREEK ARMY. I have devoted a few pages to the story of\nthese marvelous campaigns, for the military talent they fostered led\nto the establishment of the mathematical and practical schools of\nAlexandria, the true origin of science. We trace back all our exact\nknowledge to the Macedonian campaigns. Humboldt has well observed that\nan introduction to new and grand objects of Nature enlarges the human\nmind. The soldiers of Alexander and the hosts of his camp-followers\nencountered at every march unexpected and picturesque scenery. Of all\nmen, the Greeks were the most observant, the most readily and profoundly\nimpressed. Here there were interminable sandy plains, there mountains\nwhose peaks were lost above the clouds. In the deserts were mirages,\non the hill-sides shadows of fleeting clouds sweeping over the forests.\nThey were in a land of amber-colored date-palms and cypresses, of\ntamarisks, green myrtles, and oleanders. At Arbela they had fought\nagainst Indian elephants; in the thickets of the Caspian they had roused\nfrom his lair the lurking royal tiger. They had seen animals which,\ncompared with those of Europe, were not only strange, but colossal--the\nrhinoceros, the hippopotamus, the camel, the crocodiles of the Nile\nand the Ganges. They had encountered men of many complexions and many\ncostumes: the swarthy Syrian, the olive-colored Persian, the black\nAfrican. Even of Alexander himself it is related that on his death-bed\nhe caused his admiral, Nearchus, to sit by his side, and found\nconsolation in listening to the adventures of that sailor--the story of\nhis voyage from the Indus up the Persian Gulf. The conqueror had seen\nwith astonishment the ebbing and flowing of the tides. He had built\nships for the exploration of the Caspian, supposing that it and\nthe Black Sea might be gulfs of a great ocean, such as Nearchus had\ndiscovered the Persian and Red Seas to be. He had formed a resolution\nthat his fleet should attempt the circumnavigation of Africa, and come\ninto the Mediterranean through the Pillars of Hercules--a feat which, it\nwas affirmed, had once been accomplished by the Pharaohs.\n\nINTELLECTUAL CONDITION OF PERSIA. Not only her greatest soldiers, but\nalso her greatest philosophers, found in the conquered empire much that\nmight excite the admiration of Greece. Callisthenes obtained in Babylon\na series of Chaldean astronomical observations ranging back through\n1,903 years; these he sent to Aristotle. Perhaps, since they were on\nburnt bricks, duplicates of them may be recovered by modern research\nin the clay libraries of the Assyrian kings. Ptolemy, the Egyptian\nastronomer, possessed a Babylonian record of eclipses, going back\n747 years before our era. Long-continued and close observations were\nnecessary, before some of these astronomical results that have reached\nour times could have been ascertained. Thus the Babylonians had fixed\nthe length of a tropical year within twenty-five seconds of the truth;\ntheir estimate of the sidereal year was barely two minutes in excess.\nThey had detected the precession of the equinoxes. They knew the causes\nof eclipses, and, by the aid of their cycle called Saros, could predict\nthem. Their estimate of the value of that cycle, which is more than\n6,585 days, was within nineteen and a half minutes of the truth.\n\nINTELLECTUAL CONDITION OF PERSIA. Such facts furnish incontrovertible\nproof of the patience and skill with which astronomy had been cultivated\nin Mesopotamia, and that, with very inadequate instrumental means, it\nhad reached no inconsiderable perfection. These old observers had made\na catalogue of the stars, had divided the zodiac into twelve signs; they\nhad parted the day into twelve hours, the night into twelve. They had,\nas Aristotle says, for a long time devoted themselves to observations of\nstar-occultations by the moon. They had correct views of the structure\nof the solar system, and knew the order of the emplacement of the\nplanets. They constructed sundials, clepsydras, astrolabes, gnomons.\n\nNot without interest do we still look on specimens of their method of\nprinting. Upon a revolving roller they engraved, in cuneiform letters,\ntheir records, and, running this over plastic clay formed into blocks,\nproduced ineffaceable proofs. From their tile-libraries we are still\nto reap a literary and historical harvest. They were not without some\nknowledge of optics. The convex lens found at Nimroud shows that they\nwere not unacquainted with magnifying instruments. In arithmetic they\nhad detected the value of position in the digits, though they missed the\ngrand Indian invention of the cipher.\n\nWhat a spectacle for the conquering Greeks, who, up to this time, had\nneither experimented nor observed! They had contented themselves with\nmere meditation and useless speculation.\n\nITS RELIGIOUS CONDITION. But Greek intellectual development, due thus\nin part to a more extended view of Nature, was powerfully aided by the\nknowledge then acquired of the religion of the conquered country. The\nidolatry of Greece had always been a horror to Persia, who, in her\ninvasions, had never failed to destroy the temples and insult the fanes\nof the bestial gods. The impunity with which these sacrileges had\nbeen perpetrated had made a profound impression, and did no little to\nundermine Hellenic faith. But now the worshiper of the vile Olympian\ndivinities, whose obscene lives must have been shocking to every\npious man, was brought in contact with a grand, a solemn, a consistent\nreligious system having its foundation on a philosophical basis. Persia,\nas is the case with all empires of long duration, had passed through\nmany changes of religion. She had followed the Monotheism of Zoroaster;\nhad then accepted Dualism, and exchanged that for Magianism. At the time\nof the Macedonian expedition, she recognized one universal Intelligence,\nthe Creator, Preserver, and Governor of all things, the most holy\nessence of truth, the giver of all good. He was not to be represented by\nany image, or any graven form. And, since, in every thing here below, we\nsee the resultant of two opposing forces, under him were two coequal and\ncoeternal principles, represented by the imagery of Light and Darkness.\nThese principles are in never-ending conflict. The world is their\nbattle-ground, man is their prize.\n\nIn the old legends of Dualism, the Evil Spirit was said to have sent\na serpent to ruin the paradise which the Good Spirit had made. These\nlegends became known to the Jews during their Babylonian captivity.\n\nThe existence of a principle of evil is the necessary incident of the\nexistence of a principle of good, as a shadow is the necessary incident\nof the presence of light. In this manner could be explained the\noccurrence of evil in a world, the maker and ruler of which is supremely\ngood. Each of the personified principles of light and darkness, Ormuzd\nand Ahriman, had his subordinate angels, his counselors, his armies. It\nis the duty of a good man to cultivate truth, purity, and industry. He\nmay look forward, when this life is over, to a life in another world,\nand trust to a resurrection of the body, the immortality of the soul,\nand a conscious future existence.\n\nIn the later years of the empire, the principles of Magianism had\ngradually prevailed more and more over those of Zoroaster. Magianism was\nessentially a worship of the elements. Of these, fire was considered as\nthe most worthy representative of the Supreme Being. On altars erected,\nnot in temples, but under the blue canopy of the sky, perpetual fires\nwere kept burning, and the rising sun was regarded as the noblest object\nof human adoration. In the society of Asia, nothing is visible but the\nmonarch; in the expanse of heaven, all objects vanish in presence of the\nsun.\n\nDEATH OF ALEXANDER. Prematurely cut off in the midst of many great\nprojects Alexander died at Babylon before he had completed his\nthirty-third year (B.C. 323). There was a suspicion that he had been\npoisoned. His temper had become so unbridled, his passion so ferocious,\nthat his generals and even his intimate friends lived in continual\ndread. Clitus, one of the latter, he in a moment of fury had stabbed to\nthe heart. Callisthenes, the intermedium between himself and Aristotle,\nhe had caused to be hanged, or, as was positively asserted by some who\nknew the facts, had had him put upon the rack and then crucified. It\nmay have been in self-defense that the conspirators resolved on his\nassassination. But surely it was a calumny to associate the name of\nAristotle with this transaction. He would have rather borne the worst\nthat Alexander could inflict, than have joined in the perpetration of so\ngreat a crime.\n\nA scene of confusion and bloodshed lasting many years ensued, nor did it\ncease even after the Macedonian generals had divided the empire. Among\nits vicissitudes one incident mainly claims our attention. Ptolemy, who\nwas a son of King Philip by Arsinoe, a beautiful concubine, and who\nin his boyhood had been driven into exile with Alexander, when they\nincurred their father's displeasure, who had been Alexander's comrade\nin many of his battles and all his campaigns, became governor and\neventually king of Egypt.\n\nFOUNDATION OF ALEXANDER. At the siege of Rhodes, Ptolemy had been of\nsuch signal service to its citizens that in gratitude they paid divine\nhonors to him, and saluted him with the title of Soter (the Savior).\nBy that designation--Ptolemy Soter--he is distinguished from succeeding\nkings of the Macedonian dynasty in Egypt.\n\nHe established his seat of government not in any of the old capitals\nof the country, but in Alexandria. At the time of the expedition to\nthe temple of Jupiter Ammon, the Macedonian conqueror had caused the\nfoundations of that city to be laid, foreseeing that it might be\nmade the commercial entrepot between Asia and Europe. It is to be\nparticularly remarked that not only did Alexander himself deport many\nJews from Palestine to people the city, and not only did Ptolemy Soter\nbring one hundred thousand more after his siege of Jerusalem, but\nPhiladelphus, his successor, redeemed from slavery one hundred and\nninety-eight thousand of that people, paying their Egyptian owners a\njust money equivalent for each. To all these Jews the same privileges\nwere accorded as to the Macedonians. In consequence of this considerate\ntreatment, vast numbers of their compatriots and many Syrians\nvoluntarily came into Egypt. To them the designation of Hellenistical\nJews was given. In like manner, tempted by the benign government of\nSoter, multitudes of Greeks sought refuge in the country, and the\ninvasions of Perdiccas and Antigonus showed that Greek soldiers would\ndesert from other Macedonian generals to join is armies.\n\nThe population of Alexandria was therefore of three distinct\nnationalities: 1. Native Egyptians 2. Greeks; 3. Jews--a fact that has\nleft an impress on the religious faith of modern Europe.\n\nGreek architects and Greek engineers had made Alexandria the most\nbeautiful city of the ancient world. They had filled it with magnificent\npalaces, temples, theatres. In its centre, at the intersection of its\ntwo grand avenues, which crossed each other at right angles, and in the\nmidst of gardens, fountains, obelisks, stood the mausoleum, in\nwhich, embalmed after the manner of the Egyptians, rested the body of\nAlexander. In a funereal journey of two years it had been brought with\ngreat pomp from Babylon. At first the coffin was of pure gold, but\nthis having led to a violation of the tomb, it was replaced by one of\nalabaster. But not these, not even the great light-house, Pharos, built\nof blocks of white marble and so high that the fire continually burning\non its top could be seen many miles off at sea--the Pharos counted\nas one of the seven wonders of the world--it is not these magnificent\nachievements of architecture that arrest our attention; the true, the\nmost glorious monument of the Macedonian kings of Egypt is the Museum.\nIts influences will last when even the Pyramids have passed away.\n\nTHE ALEXANDRIAN MUSEUM. The Alexandrian Museum was commenced by Ptolemy\nSoter, and was completed by his son Ptolemy Philadelphus. It was\nsituated in the Bruchion, the aristocratic quarter of the city,\nadjoining the king's palace. Built of marble, it was surrounded with\na piazza, in which the residents might walk and converse together. Its\nsculptured apartments contained the Philadelphian library, and were\ncrowded with the choicest statues and pictures. This library eventually\ncomprised four hundred thousand volumes. In the course of time, probably\non account of inadequate accommodation for so many books, an additional\nlibrary was established in the adjacent quarter Rhacotis, and placed\nin the Serapion or temple of Serapis. The number of volumes in this\nlibrary, which was called the Daughter of that in the Museum, was\neventually three hundred thousand. There were, therefore, seven hundred\nthousand volumes in these royal collections.\n\nAlexandria was not merely the capital of Egypt, it was the intellectual\nmetropolis of the world. Here it was truly said the Genius of the East\nmet the Genius of the West, and this Paris of antiquity became a focus\nof fashionable dissipation and universal skepticism. In the allurements\nof its bewitching society even the Jews forgot their patriotism. They\nabandoned the language of their forefathers, and adopted Greek.\n\nIn the establishment of the Museum, Ptolemy Soter and his son\nPhiladelphus had three objects in view: 1. The perpetuation of such\nknowledge as was then in the world; 2. Its increase; 3. Its diffusion.\n\n1. For the perpetuation of knowledge. Orders were given to the chief\nlibrarian to buy at the king's expense whatever books he could. A body\nof transcribers was maintained in the Museum, whose duty it was to make\ncorrect copies of such works as their owners were not disposed to sell.\nAny books brought by foreigners into Egypt were taken at once to the\nMuseum, and, when correct copies had been made, the transcript was given\nto the owner, and the original placed in the library. Often a very large\npecuniary indemnity was paid. Thus it is said of Ptolemy Euergetes\nthat, having obtained from Athens the works of Euripides, Sophocles,\nand Aeschylus, he sent to their owners transcripts, together with about\nfifteen thousand dollars, as an indemnity. On his return from the Syrian\nexpedition he carried back in triumph all the Egyptian monuments from\nEcbatana and Susa, which Cambyses and other invaders had removed from\nEgypt. These he replaced in their original seats, or added as adornments\nto his museums. When works were translated as well as transcribed, sums\nwhich we should consider as almost incredible were paid, as was the\ncase with the Septuagint translation of the Bible, ordered by Ptolemy\nPhiladelphus.\n\n2. For the increase of knowledge. One of the chief objects of the Museum\nwas that of serving as the home of a body of men who devoted themselves\nto study, and were lodged and maintained at the king's expense.\nOccasionally he himself sat at their table. Anecdotes connected with\nthose festive occasions have descended to our times. In the original\norganization of the Museum the residents were divided into four\nfaculties--literature; mathematics, astronomy, medicine. Minor branches\nwere appropriately classified under one of these general heads; thus\nnatural history was considered to be a branch of medicine. An officer of\nvery great distinction presided over the establishment, and had general\ncharge of its interests. Demetrius Phalareus, perhaps the most learned\nman of his age, who had been governor of Athens for many years, was the\nfirst so appointed. Under him was the librarian, an office sometimes\nheld by men whose names have descended to our times, as Eratosthenes,\nand Apollonius Rhodius.\n\nORGANIZATION OF THE MUSEUM. In connection with the Museum were a\nbotanical and a zoological garden. These gardens, as their names import,\nwere for the purpose of facilitating the study of plants and animals.\nThere was also an astronomical observatory containing armillary spheres,\nglobes, solstitial and equatorial armils, astrolabes, parallactic\nrules, and other apparatus then in use, the graduation on the divided\ninstruments being into degrees and sixths. On the floor of this\nobservatory a meridian line was drawn. The want of correct means of\nmeasuring time and temperature was severely felt; the clepsydra of\nCtesibius answered very imperfectly for the former, the hydrometer\nfloating in a cup of water for the latter; it measured variations of\ntemperature by variations of density. Philadelphus, who toward the close\nof his life was haunted with an intolerable dread of death, devoted much\nof his time to the discovery of an elixir. For such pursuits the Museum\nwas provided with a chemical laboratory. In spite of the prejudices of\nthe age, and especially in spite of Egyptian prejudices, there was\nin connection with the medical department an anatomical room for the\ndissection, not only of the dead, but actually of the living, who for\ncrimes had been condemned.\n\n3. For the diffusion of knowledge. In the Museum was given, by lectures,\nconversation, or other appropriate methods instruction in all the\nvarious departments of human knowledge. There flocked to this great\nintellectual centre, students from all countries. It is said that at one\ntime not fewer than fourteen thousand were in attendance. Subsequently\neven the Christian church received from it some of the most eminent of\nits Fathers, as Clemens Alexandrinus, Origen, Athanasius.\n\nThe library in the Museum was burnt during the siege of Alexandria by\nJulius Caesar. To make amends for this great loss, that collected\nby Eumenes, King of Pergamus, was presented by Mark Antony to Queen\nCleopatra. Originally it was founded as a rival to that of the\nPtolemies. It was added to the collection in the Serapion.\n\nSCIENTIFIC SCHOOL OF THE MUSEUM. It remains now to describe briefly the\nphilosophical basis of the Museum, and some of its contributions to the\nstock of human knowledge.\n\nIn memory of the illustrious founder of this most noble institution--an\ninstitution which antiquity delighted to call \"The divine school of\nAlexandria\"--we must mention in the first rank his \"History of the\nCampaigns of Alexander.\" Great as a soldier and as a sovereign, Ptolemy\nSoter added to his glory by being an author. Time, which has not been\nable to destroy the memory of our obligations to him, has dealt unjustly\nby his work. It is not now extant.\n\nAs might be expected from the friendship that existed between Alexander,\nPtolemy, and Aristotle, the Aristotelian philosophy was the intellectual\ncorner-stone on which the Museum rested. King Philip had committed the\neducation of Alexander to Aristotle, and during the Persian campaigns\nthe conqueror contributed materially, not only in money, but otherwise,\ntoward the \"Natural History\" then in preparation.\n\nThe essential principle of the Aristotelian philosophy was, to rise\nfrom the study of particulars to a knowledge of general principles or\nuniversals, advancing to them by induction. The induction is the\nmore certain as the facts on which it is based are more numerous; its\ncorrectness is established if it should enable us to predict other facts\nuntil then unknown. This system implies endless toil in the collection\nof facts, both by experiment and observation; it implies also a close\nmeditation on them. It is, therefore, essentially a method of labor\nand of reason, not a method of imagination. The failures that Aristotle\nhimself so often exhibits are no proof of its unreliability, but\nrather of its trustworthiness. They are failures arising from want of a\nsufficiency of facts.\n\nETHICAL SCHOOL OF THE MUSEUM. Some of the general results at which\nAristotle arrived are very grand. Thus, he concluded that every thing is\nready to burst into life, and that the various organic forms presented\nto us by Nature are those which existing conditions permit. Should\nthe conditions change, the forms will also change. Hence there is an\nunbroken chain from the simple element through plants and animals up to\nman, the different groups merging by insensible shades into each other.\n\nThe inductive philosophy thus established by Aristotle is a method of\ngreat power. To it all the modern advances in science are due. In\nits most improved form it rises by inductions from phenomena to their\ncauses, and then, imitating the method of the Academy, it descends by\ndeductions from those causes to the detail of phenomena.\n\nWhile thus the Scientific School of Alexandria was founded on the maxims\nof one great Athenian philosopher, the Ethical School was founded on the\nmaxims of another, for Zeno, though a Cypriote or Phoenician, had for\nmany years been established at Athens. His disciples took the name of\nStoics. His doctrines long survived him, and, in times when there was no\nother consolation for man, offered a support in the hour of trial, and\nan unwavering guide in the vicissitudes of life, not only to illustrious\nGreeks, but also to many of the great philosophers, statesmen, generals,\nand emperors of Rome.\n\nTHE PRINCIPLES OF STOICISM. The aim of Zeno was, to furnish a guide\nfor the daily practice of life, to make men virtuous. He insisted that\neducation is the true foundation of virtue, for, if we know what is\ngood, we shall incline to do it. We must trust to sense, to furnish the\ndata of knowledge, and reason will suitably combine them. In this the\naffinity of Zeno to Aristotle is plainly seen. Every appetite, lust,\ndesire, springs from imperfect knowledge. Our nature is imposed upon\nus by Fate, but we must learn to control our passions, and live free,\nintelligent, virtuous, in all things in accordance with reason. Our\nexistence should be intellectual, we should survey with equanimity all\npleasures and all pains. We should never forget that we are freemen, not\nthe slaves of society. \"I possess,\" said the Stoic, \"a treasure which\nnot all the world can rob me of--no one can deprive me of death.\" We\nshould remember that Nature in her operations aims at the universal, and\nnever spares individuals, but uses them as means for the accomplishment\nof her ends. It is, therefore, for us to submit to Destiny, cultivating,\nas the things necessary to virtue, knowledge, temperance, fortitude,\njustice. We must remember that every thing around us is in mutation;\ndecay follows reproduction, and reproduction decay, and that it is\nuseless to repine at death in a world where every thing is dying. As a\ncataract shows from year to year an invariable shape, though the water\ncomposing it is perpetually changing, so the aspect of Nature is nothing\nmore than a flow of matter presenting an impermanent form. The universe,\nconsidered as a whole, is unchangeable. Nothing is eternal but\nspace, atoms, force. The forms of Nature that we see are essentially\ntransitory, they must all pass away.\n\nSTOICISM IN THE MUSEUM. We must bear in mind that the majority of men\nare imperfectly educated, and hence we must not needlessly offend the\nreligious ideas of our age. It is enough for us ourselves to know that,\nthough there is a Supreme Power, there is no Supreme Being. There is an\ninvisible principle, but not a personal God, to whom it would be not\nso much blasphemy as absurdity to impute the form, the sentiments, the\npassions of man. All revelation is, necessarily, a mere fiction. That\nwhich men call chance is only the effect of an unknown cause. Even of\nchances there is a law. There is no such thing as Providence, for Nature\nproceeds under irresistible laws, and in this respect the universe is\nonly a vast automatic engine. The vital force which pervades the world\nis what the illiterate call God. The modifications through which all\nthings are running take place in an irresistible way, and hence it may\nbe said that the progress of the world is, under Destiny, like a seed,\nit can evolve only in a predetermined mode.\n\nThe soul of man is a spark of the vital flame, the general vital\nprinciple. Like heat, it passes from one to another, and is finally\nreabsorbed or reunited in the universal principle from which it came.\nHence we must not expect annihilation, but reunion; and, as the tired\nman looks forward to the insensibility of sleep, so the philosopher,\nweary of the world, should look forward to the tranquillity of\nextinction. Of these things, however, we should think doubtingly, since\nthe mind can produce no certain knowledge from its internal resources\nalone. It is unphilosophical to inquire into first causes; we must deal\nonly with phenomena. Above all, we must never forget that man cannot\nascertain absolute truth, and that the final result of human inquiry\ninto the matter is, that we are incapable of perfect knowledge; that,\neven if the truth be in our possession, we cannot be sure of it.\n\nWhat, then, remains for us? Is it not this--the acquisition of\nknowledge, the cultivation of virtue and of friendship, the observance\nof faith and truth, an unrepining submission to whatever befalls us, a\nlife led in accordance with reason?\n\nPLATONISM IN THE MUSEUM. But, though the Alexandrian Museum was\nespecially intended for the cultivation of the Aristotelian philosophy,\nit must not be supposed that other systems were excluded. Platonism was\nnot only carried to its full development, but in the end it supplanted\nPeripateticism, and through the New Academy left a permanent impress on\nChristianity. The philosophical method of Plato was the inverse of that\nof Aristotle. Its starting-point was universals, the very existence of\nwhich was a matter of faith, and from these it descended to particulars,\nor details. Aristotle, on the contrary, rose from particulars to\nuniversals, advancing to them by inductions.\n\nPlato, therefore, trusted to the imagination, Aristotle to reason.\nThe former descended from the decomposition of a primitive idea into\nparticulars, the latter united particulars into a general conception.\nHence the method of Plato was capable of quickly producing what seemed\nto be splendid, though in reality unsubstantial results; that of\nAristotle was more tardy in its operation, but much more solid. It\nimplied endless labor in the collection of facts, a tedious resort\nto experiment and observation, the application of demonstration. The\nphilosophy of Plato is a gorgeous castle in the air; that of Aristotle\na solid structure, laboriously, and with many failures, founded on the\nsolid rock.\n\nAn appeal to the imagination is much more alluring than the employment\nof reason. In the intellectual decline of Alexandria, indolent methods\nwere preferred to laborious observation and severe mental exercise. The\nschools of Neo-Platonism were crowded with speculative mystics, such\nas Ammonius Saccas and Plotinus. These took the place of the severe\ngeometers of the old Museum.\n\nPHYSICAL SCIENCE IN THE MUSEUM. The Alexandrian school offers the first\nexample of that system which, in the hands of modern physicists, has\nled to such wonderful results. It rejected imagination, and made its\ntheories the expression of facts obtained by experiment and observation,\naided by mathematical discussion. It enforced the principle that the\ntrue method of studying Nature is by experimental interrogation. The\nresearches of Archimedes in specific gravity, and the works of\nPtolemy on optics, resemble our present investigations in experimental\nphilosophy, and stand in striking contrast with the speculative vagaries\nof the older writers. Laplace says that the only observation which the\nhistory of astronomy offers us, made by the Greeks before the school\nof Alexandria, is that of the summer solstice of the year B.C. 432.\nby Meton and Euctemon. We have, for the first time, in that school,\na combined system of observations made with instruments for the\nmeasurement of angles, and calculated by trigonometrical methods.\nAstronomy then took a form which subsequent ages could only perfect.\n\n\nIt does not accord with the compass or the intention of this work to\ngive a detailed account of the contributions of the Alexandrian Museum\nto the stock of human knowledge. It is sufficient that the reader should\nobtain a general impression of their character. For particulars, I\nmay refer him to the sixth chapter of my \"History of the Intellectual\nDevelopment of Europe.\"\n\nEUCLID--ARCHIMEDES. It has just been remarked that the Stoical\nphilosophy doubted whether the mind can ascertain absolute truth. While\nZeno was indulging in such doubts, Euclid was preparing his great work,\ndestined to challenge contradiction from the whole human race. After\nmore than twenty-two centuries it still survives, a model of accuracy,\nperspicuity, and a standard of exact demonstration. This great geometer\nnot only wrote on other mathematical topics, such as Conic Sections and\nPrisms, but there are imputed to him treatises on Harmonics and Optics,\nthe latter subject being discussed on the hypothesis of rays issuing\nfrom the eye to the object.\n\nWith the Alexandrian mathematicians and physicists must be classed\nArchimedes, though he eventually resided in Sicily. Among his\nmathematical works were two books on the Sphere and Cylinder, in\nwhich he gave the demonstration that the solid content of a sphere is\ntwo-thirds that of its circumscribing cylinder. So highly did he esteem\nthis, that he directed the diagram to be engraved on his tombstone. He\nalso treated of the quadrature of the circle and of the parabola; he\nwrote on Conoids and Spheroids, and on the spiral that bears his name,\nthe genesis of which was suggested to him by his friend Conon the\nAlexandrian. As a mathematician, Europe produced no equal to him for\nnearly two thousand years. In physical science he laid the foundation\nof hydrostatics; invented a method for the determination of specific\ngravities; discussed the equilibrium of floating bodies; discovered the\ntrue theory of the lever, and invented a screw, which still bears\nhis name, for raising the water of the Nile. To him also are to be\nattributed the endless screw, and a peculiar form of burning-mirror, by\nwhich, at the siege of Syracuse, it is said that he set the Roman fleet\non fire.\n\nERATOSTHENES--APOLLONIUS--HIPPARCHUS. Eratosthenes, who at one time had\ncharge of the library, was the author of many important works. Among\nthem may be mentioned his determination of the interval between\nthe tropics, and an attempt to ascertain the size of the earth. He\nconsidered the articulation and expansion of continents, the position\nof mountain-chains, the action of clouds, the geological submersion of\nlands, the elevation of ancient sea-beds, the opening of the Dardanelles\nand the straits of Gibraltar, and the relations of the Euxine Sea.\nHe composed a complete system of the earth, in three books--physical,\nmathematical, historical--accompanied by a map of all the parts then\nknown. It is only of late years that the fragments remaining of his\n\"Chronicles of the Theban Kings\" have been justly appreciated. For\nmany centuries they were thrown into discredit by the authority of our\nexisting absurd theological chronology.\n\nIt is unnecessary to adduce the arguments relied upon by the\nAlexandrians to prove the globular form of the earth. They had correct\nideas respecting the doctrine of the sphere, its poles, axis, equator,\narctic and antarctic circles, equinoctial points, solstices, the\ndistribution of climates, etc. I cannot do more than merely allude to\nthe treatises on Conic Sections and on Maxima and Minima by Apollonius,\nwho is said to have been the first to introduce the words ellipse and\nhyperbola. In like manner I must pass the astronomical observations\nof Alistyllus and Timocharis. It was to those of the latter on Spica\nVirginis that Hipparchus was indebted for his great discovery of the\nprecession of the eqninoxes. Hipparchus also determined the first\ninequality of the moon, the equation of the centre. He adopted the\ntheory of epicycles and eccentrics, a geometrical conception for the\npurpose of resolving the apparent motions of the heavenly bodies on the\nprinciple of circular movement. He also undertook to make a catalogue\nof the stars by the method of alineations--that is, by indicating those\nthat are in the same apparent straight line. The number of stars so\ncatalogued was 1,080. If he thus attempted to depict the aspect of\nthe sky, he endeavored to do the same for the surface of the earth, by\nmarking the position of towns and other places by lines of latitude and\nlongitude. He was the first to construct tables of the sun and moon.\n\nTHE SYNTAXIS OF PTOLEMY. In the midst of such a brilliant constellation\nof geometers, astronomers, physicists, conspicuously shines forth\nPtolemy, the author of the great work, \"Syntaxis,\" \"a Treatise on the\nMathematical Construction of the Heavens.\" It maintained its ground\nfor nearly fifteen hundred years, and indeed was only displaced by the\nimmortal \"Principia\" of Newton. It commences with the doctrine that the\nearth is globular and fixed in space, it describes the construction of a\ntable of chords, and instruments for observing the solstices, it deduces\nthe obliquity of the ecliptic, it finds terrestrial latitudes by the\ngnomon, describes climates, shows how ordinary may be converted into\nsidereal time, gives reasons for preferring the tropical to the sidereal\nyear, furnishes the solar theory on the principle of the sun's orbit\nbeing a simple eccentric, explains the equation of time, advances to the\ndiscussion of the motions of the moon, treats of the first inequality,\nof her eclipses, and the motion of her nodes. It then gives Ptolemy's\nown great discovery--that which has made his name immortal--the\ndiscovery of the moon's evection or second inequality, reducing it to\nthe epicyclic theory. It attempts the determination of the distances of\nthe sun and moon from the earth--with, however, only partial success. It\nconsiders the precession of the equinoxes, the discovery of Hipparchus,\nthe full period of which is twenty-five thousand years. It gives a\ncatalogue of 1,022 stars, treats of the nature of the milky-way, and\ndiscusses in the most masterly manner the motions of the planets. This\npoint constitutes another of Ptolemy's claims to scientific fame. His\ndetermination of the planetary orbits was accomplished by comparing\nhis own observations with those of former astronomers, among them the\nobservations of Timocharis on the planet Venus.\n\nINVENTION OF THE STEAM-ENGINE. In the Museum of Alexandria, Ctesibius\ninvented the fire-engine. His pupil, Hero, improved it by giving it two\ncylinders. There, too, the first steam-engine worked. This also was the\ninvention of Hero, and was a reaction engine, on the principle of\nthe eolipile. The silence of the halls of Serapis was broken by the\nwater-clocks of Ctesibius and Apollonius, which drop by drop measured\ntime. When the Roman calendar had fallen into such confusion that it\nhad become absolutely necessary to rectify it, Julius Caesar brought\nSosigenes the astronomer from Alexandria. By his advice the lunar year\nwas abolished, the civil year regulated entirely by the sun, and the\nJulian calendar introduced.\n\nThe Macedonian rulers of Egypt have been blamed for the manner in which\nthey dealt with the religious sentiment of their time. They prostituted\nit to the purpose of state-craft, finding in it a means of governing\ntheir lower classes. To the intelligent they gave philosophy.\n\nPOLICY OF THE PTOLEMIES. But doubtless they defended this policy by the\nexperience gathered in those great campaigns which had made the Greeks\nthe foremost nation of the world. They had seen the mythological\nconceptions of their ancestral country dwindle into fables; the wonders\nwith which the old poets adorned the Mediterranean had been discovered\nto be baseless illusions. From Olympus its divinities had disappeared;\nindeed, Olympus itself had proved to be a phantom of the imagination.\nHades had lost its terrors; no place could be found for it.\n\nFrom the woods and grottoes and rivers of Asia Minor the local gods and\ngoddesses had departed; even their devotees began to doubt whether they\nhad ever been there. If still the Syrian damsels lamented, in their\namorous ditties, the fate of Adonis, it was only as a recollection, not\nas a reality. Again and again had Persia changed her national faith. For\nthe revelation of Zoroaster she had substituted Dualism; then under new\npolitical influences she had adopted Magianism. She had worshiped fire,\nand kept her altars burning on mountain-tops. She had adored the sun.\nWhen Alexander came, she was fast falling into pantheism.\n\nOn a country to which in its political extremity the indigenous gods\nhave been found unable to give any protection, a change of faith is\nimpending. The venerable divinities of Egypt, to whose glory obelisks\nhad been raised and temples dedicated, had again and again submitted\nto the sword of a foreign conqueror. In the land of the Pyramids, the\nColossi, the Sphinx, the images of the gods had ceased to represent\nliving realities. They had ceased to be objects of faith. Others of more\nrecent birth were needful, and Serapis confronted Osiris. In the shops\nand streets of Alexandria there were thousands of Jews who had forgotten\nthe God that had made his habitation behind the veil of the temple.\n\nTradition, revelation, time, all had lost their influence. The\ntraditions of European mythology, the revelations of Asia, the\ntime-consecrated dogmas of Egypt, all had passed or were fast passing\naway. And the Ptolemies recognized how ephemeral are forms of faith.\n\nBut the Ptolemies also recognized that there is something more durable\nthan forms of faith, which, like the organic forms of geological ages,\nonce gone, are clean gone forever, and have no restoration, no return.\nThey recognized that within this world of transient delusions and\nunrealities there is a world of eternal truth.\n\nThat world is not to be discovered through the vain traditions that\nhave brought down to us the opinions of men who lived in the morning of\ncivilization, nor in the dreams of mystics who thought that they were\ninspired. It is to be discovered by the investigations of geometry,\nand by the practical interrogation of Nature. These confer on humanity\nsolid, and innumerable, and inestimable blessings.\n\nThe day will never come when any one of the propositions of Euclid will\nbe denied; no one henceforth will call in question the globular shape of\nthe earth, as recognized by Eratosthenes; the world will not permit\nthe great physical inventions and discoveries made in Alexandria and\nSyracuse to be forgotten. The names of Hipparchus, of Apollonius, of\nPtolemy, of Archimedes, will be mentioned with reverence by men of every\nreligious profession, as long as there are men to speak.\n\nTHE MUSEUM AND MODERN SCIENCE. The Museum of Alexandria was thus\nthe birthplace of modern science. It is true that, long before its\nestablishment, astronomical observations had been made in China and\nMesopotamia; the mathematics also had been cultivated with a certain\ndegree of success in India. But in none of these countries had\ninvestigation assumed a connected and consistent form; in none was\nphysical experimentation resorted to. The characteristic feature of\nAlexandrian, as of modern science, is, that it did not restrict itself\nto observation, but relied on a practical interrogation of Nature.\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II.\n\n     THE ORIGIN OF CHRISTIANITY.--ITS TRANSFORMATION ON ATTAINING\n     IMPERIAL POWER.--ITS RELATIONS TO SCIENCE.\n\n     Religious condition of the Roman Republic.--The adoption of\n     imperialism leads to monotheism.--Christianity spreads over\n     the Roman Empire.--The circumstances under which it\n     attained imperial power make its union with Paganism a\n     political necessity.--Tertullian's description of its\n     doctrines and practices.--Debasing effect of the policy of\n     Constantine on it.--Its alliance with the civil power.--Its\n     incompatibility with science.--Destruction of the\n     Alexandrian Library and prohibition of philosophy.--\n     Exposition of the Augustinian philosophy and Patristic\n     science generally.--The Scriptures made the standard of\n     science.\n\n\nIN a political sense, Christianity is the bequest of the Roman Empire to\nthe world.\n\nAt the epoch of the transition of Rome from the republican to the\nimperial form of government, all the independent nationalities around\nthe Mediterranean Sea had been brought under the control of that central\npower. The conquest that had befallen them in succession had been by no\nmeans a disaster. The perpetual wars they had maintained with each\nother came to an end; the miseries their conflicts had engendered were\nexchanged for universal peace.\n\nNot only as a token of the conquest she had made but also as a\ngratification to her pride, the conquering republic brought the gods\nof the vanquished peoples to Rome. With disdainful toleration, she\npermitted the worship of them all. That paramount authority exercised by\neach divinity in his original seat disappeared at once in the crowd of\ngods and goddesses among whom he had been brought. Already, as we have\nseen, through geographical discoveries and philosophical criticism,\nfaith in the religion of the old days had been profoundly shaken. It\nwas, by this policy of Rome, brought to an end.\n\nMONOTHEISM IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE. The kings of all the conquered provinces\nhad vanished; in their stead one emperor had come. The gods also had\ndisappeared. Considering the connection which in all ages has existed\nbetween political and religious ideas, it was then not at all strange\nthat polytheism should manifest a tendency to pass into monotheism.\nAccordingly, divine honors were paid at first to the deceased and at\nlength to the living emperor.\n\nThe facility with which gods were thus called into existence had a\npowerful moral effect. The manufacture of a new one cast ridicule on\nthe origin of the old Incarnation in the East and apotheosis in the West\nwere fast filling Olympus with divinities. In the East, gods descended\nfrom heaven, and were made incarnate in men; in the West, men ascended\nfrom earth, and took their seat among the gods. It was not the\nimportation of Greek skepticism that made Rome skeptical. The excesses\nof religion itself sapped the foundations of faith.\n\nNot with equal rapidity did all classes of the population adopt\nmonotheistic views. The merchants and lawyers and soldiers, who by the\nnature of their pursuits are more familiar with the vicissitudes of\nlife, and have larger intellectual views, were the first to be affected,\nthe land laborers and farmers the last.\n\nTHE RISE OF CHRISTIANITY When the empire in a military and political\nsense had reached its culmination, in a religious and social aspect\nit had attained its height of immorality. It had become thoroughly\nepicurean; its maxim was, that life should be made a feast, that\nvirtue is only the seasoning of pleasure, and temperance the means of\nprolonging it. Dining-rooms glittering with gold and incrusted with\ngems, slaves in superb apparel, the fascinations of female society where\nall the women were dissolute, magnificent baths, theatres, gladiators,\nsuch were the objects of Roman desire. The conquerors of the world had\ndiscovered that the only thing worth worshiping is Force. By it all\nthings might be secured, all that toil and trade had laboriously\nobtained. The confiscation of goods and lands, the taxation of\nprovinces, were the reward of successful warfare; and the emperor\nwas the symbol of force. There was a social splendor, but it was the\nphosphorescent corruption of the ancient Mediterranean world.\n\nIn one of the Eastern provinces, Syria, some persons in very humble\nlife had associated themselves together for benevolent and religious\npurposes. The doctrines they held were in harmony with that sentiment\nof universal brotherhood arising from the coalescence of the conquered\nkingdoms. They were doctrines inculcated by Jesus.\n\nThe Jewish people at that time entertained a belief, founded on old\ntraditions, that a deliverer would arise among them, who would restore\nthem to their ancient splendor. The disciples of Jesus regarded him\nas this long-expected Messiah. But the priesthood, believing that the\ndoctrines he taught were prejudicial to their interests, denounced\nhim to the Roman governor, who, to satisfy their clamors, reluctantly\ndelivered him over to death.\n\nHis doctrines of benevolence and human brotherhood outlasted that\nevent. The disciples, instead of scattering, organized. They associated\nthemselves on a principle of communism, each throwing into the common\nstock whatever property he possessed, and all his gains. The widows\nand orphans of the community were thus supported, the poor and the sick\nsustained. From this germ was developed a new, and as the events proved,\nall-powerful society--the Church; new, for nothing of the kind had\nexisted in antiquity; powerful, for the local churches, at first\nisolated, soon began to confederate for their common interest. Through\nthis organization Christianity achieved all her political triumphs.\n\nAs we have said, the military domination of Rome had brought about\nuniversal peace, and had generated a sentiment of brotherhood among the\nvanquished nations. Things were, therefore, propitious for the rapid\ndiffusion of the newly-established--the Christian--principle\nthroughout the empire. It spread from Syria through all Asia Minor,\nand successively reached Cyprus, Greece, Italy, eventually extending\nwestward as far as Gaul and Britain.\n\nIts propagation was hastened by missionaries who made it known in all\ndirections. None of the ancient classical philosophies had ever taken\nadvantage of such a means.\n\nPolitical conditions determined the boundaries of the new religion. Its\nlimits were eventually those of the Roman Empire; Rome, doubtfully the\nplace of death of Peter, not Jerusalem, indisputably the place of the\ndeath of our Savior, became the religious capital. It was better to have\npossession of the imperial seven hilled city, than of Gethsemane and\nCalvary with all their holy souvenirs.\n\nIT GATHERS POLITICAL POWER. For many years Christianity manifested\nitself as a system enjoining three things--toward God veneration, in\npersonal life purity, in social life benevolence. In its early days of\nfeebleness it made proselytes only by persuasion, but, as it increased\nin numbers and influence, it began to exhibit political tendencies, a\ndisposition to form a government within the government, an empire within\nthe empire. These tendencies it has never since lost. They are, in\ntruth, the logical result of its development. The Roman emperors,\ndiscovering that it was absolutely incompatible with the imperial\nsystem, tried to put it down by force. This was in accordance with the\nspirit of their military maxims, which had no other means but force for\nthe establishment of conformity.\n\nIn the winter A.D. 302-'3, the Christian soldiers in some of the legions\nrefused to join in the time-honored solemnities for propitiating the\ngods. The mutiny spread so quickly, the emergency became so pressing,\nthat the Emperor Diocletian was compelled to hold a council for the\npurpose of determining what should be done. The difficulty of the\nposition may perhaps be appreciated when it is understood that the wife\nand the daughter of Diocletian himself were Christians. He was a man\nof great capacity and large political views; he recognized in the\nopposition that must be made to the new party a political necessity,\nyet he expressly enjoined that there should be no bloodshed. But who can\ncontrol an infuriated civil commotion? The church of Nicomedia was razed\nto the ground; in retaliation the imperial palace was set on fire, an\nedict was openly insulted and torn down. The Christian officers in the\narmy were cashiered; in all directions, martyrdoms and massacres were\ntaking place. So resistless was the march of events, that not even the\nemperor himself could stop the persecution.\n\nTHE FIRST CHRISTIAN EMPEROR. It had now become evident that the\nChristians constituted a powerful party in the state, animated with\nindignation at the atrocities they had suffered, and determined to\nendure them no longer. After the abdication of Diocletian (A.D. 305),\nConstantine, one of the competitors for the purple, perceiving the\nadvantages that would accrue to him from such a policy, put himself\nforth as the head of the Christian party. This gave him, in every part\nof the empire, men and women ready to encounter fire and sword in his\nbehalf; it gave him unwavering adherents in every legion of the armies.\nIn a decisive battle, near the Milvian bridge, victory crowned his\nschemes. The death of Maximin, and subsequently that of Licinius,\nremoved all obstacles. He ascended the throne of the Caesars--the first\nChristian emperor.\n\nPlace, profit, power--these were in view of whoever now joined the\nconquering sect. Crowds of worldly persons, who cared nothing about its\nreligious ideas, became its warmest supporters. Pagans at heart, their\ninfluence was soon manifested in the paganization of Christianity that\nforthwith ensued. The emperor, no better than they, did nothing to check\ntheir proceedings. But he did not personally conform to the ceremonial\nrequirements of the Church until the close of his evil life, A.D. 337.\n\nTERTULLIAN'S EXPOSITION OF CHRISTIANITY. That we may clearly appreciate\nthe modifications now impressed on Christianity--modifications which\neventually brought it in conflict with science--we must have, as a\nmeans of comparison, a statement of what it was in its purer days.\nSuch, fortunately, we find in the \"Apology or Defense of the Christians\nagainst the Accusations of the Gentiles,\" written by Tertullian, at\nRome, during the persecution of Severus. He addressed it, not to the\nemperor, but to the magistrates who sat in judgment on the accused. It\nis a solemn and most earnest expostulation, setting forth all that could\nbe said in explanation of the subject, a representation of the belief\nand cause of the Christians made in the imperial city in the face of the\nwhole world, not a querulous or passionate ecclesiastical appeal, but\na grave historical document. It has ever been looked upon as one of the\nablest of the early Christian works. Its date is about A.D. 200.\n\nWith no inconsiderable skill Tertullian opens his argument. He tells\nthe magistrates that Christianity is a stranger upon earth, and that she\nexpects to meet with enemies in a country which is not her own. She only\nasks that she may not be condemned unheard, and that Roman magistrates\nwill permit her to defend herself; that the laws of the empire will\ngather lustre, if judgment be passed upon her after she has been tried\nbut not if she is sentenced without a hearing of her cause; that it is\nunjust to hate a thing of which we are ignorant, even though it may be a\nthing worthy of hate; that the laws of Rome deal with actions, not with\nmere names; but that, notwithstanding this, persons have been punished\nbecause they were called Christians, and that without any accusation of\ncrime.\n\nHe then advances to an exposition of the origin, the nature, and the\neffects of Christianity, stating that it is founded on the Hebrew\nScriptures, which are the most venerable of all books. He says to the\nmagistrates: \"The books of Moses, in which God has inclosed, as in\na treasure, all the religion of the Jews, and consequently all the\nChristian religion, reach far beyond the oldest you have, even beyond\nall your public monuments, the establishment of your state, the\nfoundation of many great cities--all that is most advanced by you in all\nages of history, and memory of times; the invention of letters, which\nare the interpreters of sciences and the guardians of all excellent\nthings. I think I may say more--beyond your gods, your temples, your\noracles and sacrifices. The author of those books lived a thousand years\nbefore the siege of Troy, and more than fifteen hundred before Homer.\"\nTime is the ally of truth, and wise men believe nothing but what is\ncertain, and what has been verified by time. The principal authority\nof these Scriptures is derived from their venerable antiquity. The most\nlearned of the Ptolemies, who was surnamed Philadelphus, an accomplished\nprince, by the advice of Demetrius Phalareus, obtained a copy of these\nholy books. It may be found at this day in his library. The divinity of\nthese Scriptures is proved by this, that all that is done in our days\nmay be found predicted in them; they contain all that has since passed\nin the view of men.\n\nIs not the accomplishment of a prophecy a testimony to its truth? Seeing\nthat events which are past have vindicated these prophecies, shall we be\nblamed for trusting them in events that are to come? Now, as we believe\nthings that have been prophesied and have come to pass, so we believe\nthings that have been told us, but not yet come to pass, because they\nhave all been foretold by the same Scriptures, as well those that are\nverified every day as those that still remain to be fulfilled.\n\nThese Holy Scriptures teach us that there is one God, who made the world\nout of nothing, who, though daily seen, is invisible; his infiniteness\nis known only to himself; his immensity conceals, but at the same\ntime discovers him. He has ordained for men, according to their lives,\nrewards and punishments; he will raise all the dead that have ever lived\nfrom the creation of the world, will command them to reassume their\nbodies, and thereupon adjudge them to felicity that has so end, or to\neternal flames. The fires of hell are those hidden flames which the\nearth shuts up in her bosom. He has in past times sent into the world\npreachers or prophets. The prophets of those old times were Jews; they\naddressed their oracles, for such they were, to the Jews, who\nhave stored them up in the Scriptures. On them, as has been said,\nChristianity is founded, though the Christian differs in his ceremonies\nfrom the Jew. We are accused of worshiping a man, and not the God of\nthe Jews. Not so. The honor we bear to Christ does not derogate from the\nhonor we bear to God.\n\nOn account of the merit of these ancient patriarchs, the Jews were the\nonly beloved people of God; he delighted to be in communication with\nthem by his own mouth. By him they were raised to admirable greatness.\nBut with perversity they wickedly ceased to regard him; they changed\nhis laws into a profane worship. He warned them that he would take to\nhimself servants more faithful than they, and, for their crime, punished\nthem by driving them forth from their country. They are now spread all\nover the world; they wander in all parts; they cannot enjoy the air they\nbreathed at their birth; they have neither man nor God for their king.\nAs he threatened them, so he has done. He has taken, in all nations\nand countries of the earth, people more faithful than they. Through his\nprophets he had declared that these should have greater favors, and that\na Messiah should come, to publish a new law among them. This Messiah was\nJesus, who is also God. For God may be derived from God, as the light\nof a candle may be derived from the light of another candle. God and his\nSon are the self-same God--a light is the same light as that from which\nit was taken.\n\nThe Scriptures make known two comings of the Son of God; the first in\nhumility, the second at the day of judgment, in power. The Jews might\nhave known all this from the prophets, but their sins have so blinded\nthem that they did not recognize him at his first coming, and are still\nvainly expecting him. They believed that all the miracles wrought by\nhim were the work of magic. The doctors of the law and the chief priests\nwere envious of him; they denounced him to Pilate. He was crucified,\ndied, was buried, and after three days rose again. For forty days he\nremained among his disciples. Then he was environed in a cloud, and\nrose up to heaven--a truth far more certain than any human testimonies\ntouching the ascension of Romulus or of any other Roman prince mounting\nup to the same place.\n\nTertullian then describes the origin and nature of devils, who, under\nSatan, their prince, produce diseases, irregularities of the air,\nplagues, and the blighting of the blossoms of the earth, who seduce men\nto offer sacrifices, that they may have the blood of the victims, which\nis their food. They are as nimble as the birds, and hence know every\nthing that is passing upon earth; they live in the air, and hence can\nspy what is going on in heaven; for this reason they can impose on men\nreigned prophecies, and deliver oracles. Thus they announced in Rome\nthat a victory would be obtained over King Perseus, when in truth they\nknew that the battle was already won. They falsely cure diseases; for,\ntaking possession of the body of a man, they produce in him a distemper,\nand then ordaining some remedy to be used, they cease to afflict him,\nand men think that a cure has taken place.\n\nThough Christians deny that the emperor is a god, they nevertheless pray\nfor his prosperity, because the general dissolution that threatens the\nuniverse, the conflagration of the world, is retarded so long as the\nglorious majesty of the triumphant Roman Empire shall last. They desire\nnot to be present at the subversion of all Nature. They acknowledge\nonly one republic, but it is the whole world; they constitute one body,\nworship one God, and all look forward to eternal happiness. Not only do\nthey pray for the emperor and the magistrates, but also for peace. They\nread the Scriptures to nourish their faith, lift up their hope, and\nstrengthen the confidence they have in God. They assemble to exhort one\nanother; they remove sinners from their societies; they have bishops who\npreside over them, approved by the suffrages of those whom they are to\nconduct. At the end of each month every one contributes if he will, but\nno one is constrained to give; the money gathered in this manner is\nthe pledge of piety; it is not consumed in eating and drinking, but\nin feeding the poor, and burying them, in comforting children that are\ndestitute of parents and goods, in helping old men who have spent the\nbest of their days in the service of the faithful, in assisting those\nwho have lost by shipwreck what they had, and those who are condemned\nto the mines, or have been banished to islands, or shut up in prisons,\nbecause they professed the religion of the true God. There is but one\nthing that Christians have not in common, and that one thing is their\nwives. They do not feast as if they should die to-morrow, nor build\nas if they should never die. The objects of their life are innocence,\njustice, patience, temperance, chastity.\n\nTo this noble exposition of Christian belief and life in his day,\nTertullian does not hesitate to add an ominous warning to the\nmagistrates he is addressing--ominous, for it was a forecast of a great\nevent soon to come to pass: \"Our origin is but recent, yet already we\nfill all that your power acknowledges--cities, fortresses, islands,\nprovinces, the assemblies of the people, the wards of Rome, the palace,\nthe senate, the public places, and especially the armies. We have\nleft you nothing but your temples. Reflect what wars we are able to\nundertake! With what promptitude might we not arm ourselves were we not\nrestrained by our religion, which teaches us that it is better to be\nkilled than to kill!\"\n\nBefore he closes his defense, Tertullian renews an assertion which,\ncarried into practice, as it subsequently was, affected the intellectual\ndevelopment of all Europe. He declares that the Holy Scriptures are a\ntreasure from which all the true wisdom in the world has been drawn;\nthat every philosopher and every poet is indebted to them. He labors\nto show that they are the standard and measure of all truth, and that\nwhatever is inconsistent with them must necessarily be false.\n\nFrom Tertullian's able work we see what Christianity was while it was\nsuffering persecution and struggling for existence. We have now to\nsee what it became when in possession of imperial power. Great is the\ndifference between Christianity under Severus and Christianity after\nConstantine. Many of the doctrines which at the latter period were\npreeminent, in the former were unknown.\n\nPAGANIZATION OF CHRISTIANITY. Two causes led to the amalgamation of\nChristianity with paganism: 1. The political necessities of the new\ndynasty; 2. The policy adopted by the new religion to insure its spread.\n\n1. Though the Christian party had proved itself sufficiently strong to\ngive a master to the empire, it was never sufficiently strong to destroy\nits antagonist, paganism. The issue of the struggle between them was an\namalgamation of the principles of both. In this, Christianity differed\nfrom Mohammedanism, which absolutely annihilated its antagonist, and\nspread its own doctrines without adulteration.\n\nConstantine continually showed by his acts that he felt he must be the\nimpartial sovereign of all his people, not merely the representative\nof a successful faction. Hence, if he built Christian churches, he also\nrestored pagan temples; if he listened to the clergy, he also consulted\nthe haruspices; if he summoned the Council of Nicea, he also honored the\nstatue of Fortune; if he accepted the rite of baptism, he also struck\na medal bearing his title of \"God.\" His statue, on the top of the great\nporphyry pillar at Constantinople, consisted of an ancient image of\nApollo, whose features were replaced by those of the emperor, and\nits head surrounded by the nails feigned to have been used at the\ncrucifixion of Christ, arranged so as to form a crown of glory.\n\nFeeling that there must be concessions to the defeated pagan party,\nin accordance with its ideas, he looked with favor on the idolatrous\nmovements of his court. In fact, the leaders of these movements were\npersons of his own family.\n\nCHRISTIANITY UNDER CONSTANTINE. 2. To the emperor--a mere worldling--a\nman without any religious convictions, doubtless it appeared best for\nhimself, best for the empire, and best for the contending parties,\nChristian and pagan, to promote their union or amalgamation as much as\npossible. Even sincere Christians do not seem to have been averse to\nthis; perhaps they believed that the new doctrines would diffuse most\nthoroughly by incorporating in themselves ideas borrowed from the old,\nthat Truth would assert her self in the end, and the impurity be cast\noff. In accomplishing this amalgamation, Helena, the empress-mother,\naided by the court ladies, led the way. For her gratification there were\ndiscovered, in a cavern at Jerusalem, wherein they had lain buried for\nmore than three centuries, the Savior's cross, and those of the two\nthieves, the inscription, and the nails that had been used. They were\nidentified by miracle. A true relic-worship set in. The superstition of\nthe old Greek times reappeared; the times when the tools with which the\nTrojan horse was made might still be seen at Metapontum, the sceptre of\nPelops at Chaeroneia, the spear of Achilles at Phaselis, the sword\nof Memnon at Nicomedia, when the Tegeates could show the hide of the\nCalydonian boar and very many cities boasted their possession of the\ntrue palladium of Troy; when there were statues of Minerva that could\nbrandish spears, paintings that could blush, images that could sweat,\nand endless shrines and sanctuaries at which miracle-cures could be\nperformed.\n\nAs years passed on, the faith described by Tertullian was transmuted\ninto one more fashionable and more debased. It was incorporated with\nthe old Greek mythology. Olympus was restored, but the divinities passed\nunder other names. The more powerful provinces insisted on the adoption\nof their time-honored conceptions. Views of the Trinity, in accordance\nwith Egyptian traditions, were established. Not only was the adoration\nof Isis under a new name restored, but even her image, standing on the\ncrescent moon, reappeared. The well-known effigy of that goddess,\nwith the infant Horus in her arms, has descended to our days in\nthe beautiful, artistic creations of the Madonna and Child. Such\nrestorations of old conceptions under novel forms were everywhere\nreceived with delight. When it was announced to the Ephesians that the\nCouncil of that place, headed by Cyril, had decreed that the Virgin\nshould be called \"the Mother of God,\" with tears of joy they embraced\nthe knees of their bishop; it was the old instinct peeping out; their\nancestors would have done the same for Diana.\n\nThis attempt to conciliate worldly converts, by adopting their ideas\nand practices, did not pass without remonstrance from those whose\nintelligence discerned the motive. \"You have,\" says Faustus to\nAugustine, \"substituted your agapae for the sacrifices of the pagans;\nfor their idols your martyrs, whom you serve with the very same honors.\nYou appease the shades of the dead with wine and feasts; you celebrate\nthe solemn festivities of the Gentiles, their calends, and their\nsolstices; and, as to their manners, those you have retained without any\nalteration. Nothing distinguishes you from the pagans, except that you\nhold your assemblies apart from them.\" Pagan observances were everywhere\nintroduced. At weddings it was the custom to sing hymns to Venus.\n\nINTRODUCTION OF ROMAN RITES. Let us pause here a moment, and see, in\nanticipation, to what a depth of intellectual degradation this policy of\npaganization eventually led. Heathen rites were adopted, a pompous\nand splendid ritual, gorgeous robes, mitres, tiaras, wax-tapers,\nprocessional services, lustrations, gold and silver vases, were\nintroduced. The Roman lituus, the chief ensign of the augurs, became the\ncrozier. Churches were built over the tombs of martyrs, and consecrated\nwith rites borrowed from the ancient laws of the Roman pontiffs.\nFestivals and commemorations of martyrs multiplied with the numberless\nfictitious discoveries of their remains. Fasting became the grand means\nof repelling the devil and appeasing God; celibacy the greatest of\nthe virtues. Pilgrimages were made to Palestine and the tombs of the\nmartyrs. Quantities of dust and earth were brought from the Holy Land\nand sold at enormous prices, as antidotes against devils. The virtues\nof consecrated water were upheld. Images and relics were introduced into\nthe churches, and worshiped after the fashion of the heathen gods. It\nwas given out that prodigies and miracles were to be seen in certain\nplaces, as in the heathen times. The happy souls of departed Christians\nwere invoked; it was believed that they were wandering about the world,\nor haunting their graves. There was a multiplication of temples, altars,\nand penitential garments. The festival of the purification of the Virgin\nwas invented to remove the uneasiness of heathen converts on account of\nthe loss of their Lupercalia, or feasts of Pan. The worship of images,\nof fragments of the cross, or bones, nails, and other relics, a true\nfetich worship, was cultivated. Two arguments were relied on for the\nauthenticity of these objects--the authority of the Church, and the\nworking of miracles. Even the worn-out clothing of the saints and the\nearth of their graves were venerated. From Palestine were brought what\nwere affirmed to be the skeletons of St. Mark and St. James, and other\nancient worthies. The apotheosis of the old Roman times was replaced by\ncanonization; tutelary saints succeed to local mythological divinities.\nThen came the mystery of transubstantiation, or the conversion of bread\nand wine by the priest into the flesh and blood of Christ. As centuries\npassed, the paganization became more and more complete. Festivals sacred\nto the memory of the lance with which the Savior's side was pierced,\nthe nails that fastened him to the cross, and the crown of thorns, were\ninstituted. Though there were several abbeys that possessed this last\npeerless relic, no one dared to say that it was impossible they could\nall be authentic.\n\nWe may read with advantage the remarks made by Bishop Newton on this\npaganization of Christianity. He asks: \"Is not the worship of saints and\nangels now in all respects the same that the worship of demons was in\nformer times? The name only is different, the thing is identically\nthe same,... the deified men of the Christians are substituted for the\ndeified men of the heathens. The promoters of this worship were sensible\nthat it was the same, and that the one succeeded to the other; and,\nas the worship is the same, so likewise it is performed with the same\nceremonies. The burning of incense or perfumes on several altars at one\nand the same time; the sprinkling of holy water, or a mixture of salt\nand common water, at going into and coming out of places of public\nworship; the lighting up of a great number of lamps and wax-candles in\nbroad daylight before altars and statues of these deities; the hanging\nup of votive offerings and rich presents as attestations of so many\nmiraculous cures and deliverances from diseases and dangers; the\ncanonization or deification of deceased worthies; the assigning of\ndistinct provinces or prefectures to departed heroes and saints; the\nworshiping and adoring of the dead in their sepulchres, shrines, and\nrelics; the consecrating and bowing down to images; the attributing\nof miraculous powers and virtues to idols; the setting up of little\noratories, altars, and statues in the streets and highways, and on\nthe tops of mountains; the carrying of images and relics in pompous\nprocession, with numerous lights and with music and singing;\nflagellations at solemn seasons under the notion of penance; a great\nvariety of religious orders and fraternities of priests; the shaving of\npriests, or the tonsure as it is called, on the crown of their heads;\nthe imposing of celibacy and vows of chastity on the religious of both\nsexes--all these and many more rites and ceremonies are equally parts of\npagan and popish superstition. Nay, the very same temples, the very same\nimages, which were once consecrated to Jupiter and the other demons, are\nnow consecrated to the Virgin Mary and the other saints. The very same\nrites and inscriptions are ascribed to both, the very same prodigies and\nmiracles are related of these as of those. In short, almost the whole\nof paganism is converted and applied to popery; the one is manifestly\nformed upon the same plan and principles as the other; so that there is\nnot only a conformity, but even a uniformity, in the worship of ancient\nand modern, of heathen and Christian Rome.\"\n\nDEBASEMENT OF CHRISTIANITY. Thus far Bishop Newton; but to return to the\ntimes of Constantine: though these concessions to old and popular ideas\nwere permitted and even encouraged, the dominant religious party never\nfor a moment hesitated to enforce its decisions by the aid of the civil\npower--an aid which was freely given. Constantine thus carried into\neffect the acts of the Council of Nicea. In the affair of Arius, he even\nordered that whoever should find a book of that heretic, and not burn\nit, should be put to death. In like manner Nestor was by Theodosius the\nYounger banished to an Egyptian oasis.\n\nThe pagan party included many of the old aristocratic families of the\nempire; it counted among its adherents all the disciples of the old\nphilosophical schools. It looked down on its antagonist with contempt.\nIt asserted that knowledge is to be obtained only by the laborious\nexercise of human observation and human reason.\n\nThe Christian party asserted that all knowledge is to be found in the\nScriptures and in the traditions of the Church; that, in the written\nrevelation, God had not only given a criterion of truth, but had\nfurnished us all that he intended us to know. The Scriptures, therefore,\ncontain the sum, the end of all knowledge. The clergy, with the emperor\nat their back, would endure no intellectual competition.\n\nThus came into prominence what were termed sacred and profane knowledge;\nthus came into presence of each other two opposing parties, one relying\non human reason as its guide, the other on revelation. Paganism leaned\nfor support on the learning of its philosophers, Christianity on the\ninspiration of its Fathers.\n\nThe Church thus set herself forth as the depository and arbiter of\nknowledge; she was ever ready to resort to the civil power to compel\nobedience to her decisions. She thus took a course which determined her\nwhole future career: she became a stumbling-block in the intellectual\nadvancement of Europe for more than a thousand years.\n\nThe reign of Constantine marks the epoch of the transformation of\nChristianity from a religion into a political system; and though, in\none sense, that system was degraded into an idolatry, in another it had\nrisen into a development of the old Greek mythology. The maxim holds\ngood in the social as well as in the mechanical world, that, when two\nbodies strike, the form of both is changed. Paganism was modified by\nChristianity; Christianity by Paganism.\n\nTHE TRINITARIAN DISPUTE. In the Trinitarian controversy, which first\nbroke out in Egypt--Egypt, the land of Trinities--the chief point in\ndiscussion was to define the position of \"the Son.\" There lived in\nAlexandria a presbyter of the name of Arius, a disappointed candidate\nfor the office of bishop. He took the ground that there was a time when,\nfrom the very nature of sonship, the Son did not exist, and a time at\nwhich he commenced to be, asserting that it is the necessary condition\nof the filial relation that a father must be older than his son. But\nthis assertion evidently denied the coeternity of the three persons of\nthe Trinity; it suggested a subordination or inequality among them,\nand indeed implied a time when the Trinity did not exist. Hereupon, the\nbishop, who had been the successful competitor against Arius, displayed\nhis rhetorical powers in public debates on the question, and, the strife\nspreading, the Jews and pagans, who formed a very large portion of\nthe population of Alexandria, amused themselves with theatrical\nrepresentations of the contest on the stage--the point of their\nburlesques being the equality of age of the Father and his Son.\n\nSuch was the violence the controversy at length assumed, that the matter\nhad to be referred to the emperor. At first he looked upon the dispute\nas altogether frivolous, and perhaps in truth inclined to the assertion\nof Arius, that in the very nature of the thing a father must be older\nthan his son. So great, however, was the pressure laid upon him, that\nhe was eventually compelled to summon the Council of Nicea, which, to\ndispose of the conflict, set forth a formulary or creed, and attached to\nit this anathema: \"The Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizes\nthose who say that there was a time when the Son of God was not, and\nthat, before he was begotten, he was not, and that he was made out of\nnothing, or out of another substance or essence, and is created, or\nchangeable, or alterable.\" Constantine at once enforced the decision of\nthe council by the civil power.\n\nA few years subsequently the Emperor Theodosius prohibited sacrifices,\nmade the inspection of the entrails of animals a capital offense, and\nforbade any one entering a temple. He instituted Inquisitors of Faith,\nand ordained that all who did not accord with the belief of Damasus, the\nBishop of Rome, and Peter, the Bishop of Alexandria, should be driven\ninto exile, and deprived of civil rights. Those who presumed to\ncelebrate Easter on the same day as the Jews, he condemned to death.\nThe Greek language was now ceasing to be known in the West, and true\nlearning was becoming extinct.\n\nAt this time the bishopric of Alexandria was held by one Theophilus. An\nancient temple of Osiris having been given to the Christians of the city\nfor the site of a church, it happened that, in digging the foundation\nfor the new edifice, the obscene symbols of the former worship chanced\nto be found. These, with more zeal than modesty, Theophilus exhibited\nin the market-place to public derision. With less forbearance than the\nChristian party showed when it was insulted in the theatre during the\nTrinitarian dispute, the pagans resorted to violence, and a riot ensued.\nThey held the Serapion as their headquarters. Such were the disorder and\nbloodshed that the emperor had to interfere. He dispatched a rescript to\nAlexandria, enjoining the bishop, Theophilus, to destroy the Serapion;\nand the great library, which had been collected by the Ptolemies, and\nhad escaped the fire of Julius Caesar, was by that fanatic dispersed.\n\nTHE MURDER OF HYPATIA. The bishopric thus held by Theophilus was in due\ntime occupied by his nephew St. Cyril, who had commended himself to\nthe approval of the Alexandrian congregations as a successful and\nfashionable preacher. It was he who had so much to do with the\nintroduction of the worship of the Virgin Mary. His hold upon the\naudiences of the giddy city was, however, much weakened by Hypatia, the\ndaughter of Theon, the mathematician, who not only distinguished herself\nby her expositions of the doctrines of Plato and Aristotle, but also by\nher comments on the writings of Apollonius and other geometers. Each day\nbefore her academy stood a long train of chariots; her lecture-room was\ncrowded with the wealth and fashion of Alexandria. They came to listen\nto her discourses on those questions which man in all ages has asked,\nbut which never yet have been answered: \"What am I? Where am I? What can\nI know?\"\n\nHypatia and Cyril! Philosophy and bigotry. They cannot exist together.\nSo Cyril felt, and on that feeling he acted. As Hypatia repaired to her\nacademy, she was assaulted by Cyril's mob--a mob of many monks. Stripped\nnaked in the street, she was dragged into a church, and there killed by\nthe club of Peter the Reader. The corpse was cut to pieces, the flesh\nwas scraped from the bones with shells, and the remnants cast into a\nfire. For this frightful crime Cyril was never called to account. It\nseemed to be admitted that the end sanctified the means.\n\nSo ended Greek philosophy in Alexandria, so came to an untimely close\nthe learning that the Ptolemies had done so much to promote. The\n\"Daughter Library,\" that of the Serapion, had been dispersed. The fate\nof Hypatia was a warning to all who would cultivate profane knowledge.\nHenceforth there was to be no freedom for human thought. Every one must\nthink as the ecclesiastical authority ordered him, A.D. 414. In Athens\nitself philosophy awaited its doom. Justinian at length prohibited its\nteaching, and caused all its schools in that city to be closed.\n\nPELAGIUS. While these events were transpiring in the Eastern provinces\nof the Roman Empire, the spirit that had produced them was displaying\nitself in the West. A British monk, who had assumed the name of\nPelagius, passed through Western Europe and Northern Africa, teaching\nthat death was not introduced into the world by the sin of Adam; that\non the contrary he was necessarily and by nature mortal, and had he not\nsinned he would nevertheless have died; that the consequences of his\nsins were confined to himself, and did not affect his posterity. From\nthese premises Pelagius drew certain important theological conclusions.\n\nAt Rome, Pelagius had been received with favor; at Carthage, at the\ninstigation of St. Augustine, he was denounced. By a synod, held at\nDiospolis, he was acquitted of heresy, but, on referring the matter to\nthe Bishop of Rome, Innocent I., he was, on the contrary, condemned. It\nhappened that at this moment Innocent died, and his successor, Zosimus,\nannulled his judgment and declared the opinions of Pelagius to be\northodox. These contradictory decisions are still often referred to\nby the opponents of papal infallibility. Things were in this state of\nconfusion, when the wily African bishops, through the influence of Count\nValerius, procured from the emperor an edict denouncing Pelagins as\na heretic; he and his accomplices were condemned to exile and the\nforfeiture of their goods. To affirm that death was in the world before\nthe fall of Adam, was a state crime.\n\nCONDEMNATION OF PELAGIUS. It is very instructive to consider the\nprinciples on which this strange decision was founded. Since the\nquestion was purely philosophical, one might suppose that it would\nhave been discussed on natural principles; instead of that, theological\nconsiderations alone were adduced. The attentive reader will have\nremarked, in Tertullian's statement of the principles of Christianity,\na complete absence of the doctrines of original sin, total depravity,\npredestination, grace, and atonement. The intention of Christianity,\nas set forth by him, has nothing in common with the plan of salvation\nupheld two centuries subsequently. It is to St. Augustine, a\nCarthaginian, that we are indebted for the precision of our views on\nthese important points.\n\nIn deciding whether death had been in the world before the fall of Adam,\nor whether it was the penalty inflicted on the world for his sin,\nthe course taken was to ascertain whether the views of Pelagius were\naccordant or discordant not with Nature but with the theological\ndoctrines of St. Augustine. And the result has been such as might\nbe expected. The doctrine declared to be orthodox by ecclesiastical\nauthority is overthrown by the unquestionable discoveries of modern\nscience. Long before a human being had appeared upon earth, millions of\nindividuals--nay, more, thousands of species and even genera--had died;\nthose which remain with us are an insignificant fraction of the vast\nhosts that have passed away.\n\nA consequence of great importance issued from the decision of the\nPelagian controversy. The book of Genesis had been made the basis of\nChristianity. If, in a theological point of view, to its account of the\nsin in the garden of Eden, and the transgression and punishment of Adam,\nso much weight had been attached, it also in a philosophical point\nof view became the grand authority of Patristic science. Astronomy,\ngeology, geography, anthropology, chronology, and indeed all the various\ndepartments of human knowledge, were made to conform to it.\n\nST. AUGUSTINE. As the doctrines of St. Augustine have had the effect of\nthus placing theology in antagonism with science, it may be interesting\nto examine briefly some of the more purely philosophical views of that\ngreat man. For this purpose, we may appropriately select portions of\nhis study of the first chapter of Genesis, as contained in the eleventh,\ntwelfth, and thirteenth books of his \"Confessions.\"\n\nThese consist of philosophical discussions, largely interspersed\nwith rhapsodies. He prays that God will give him to understand the\nScriptures, and will open their meaning to him; he declares that in\nthem there is nothing superfluous, but that the words have a manifold\nmeaning.\n\nThe face of creation testifies that there has been a Creator; but at\nonce arises the question, \"How and when did he make heaven and earth?\nThey could not have been made IN heaven and earth, the world could not\nhave been made IN the world, nor could they have been made when there\nwas nothing to make them of.\" The solution of this fundamental inquiry\nSt. Augustine finds in saying, \"Thou spakest, and they were made.\"\n\nBut the difficulty does not end here. St. Augustine goes on to remark\nthat the syllables thus uttered by God came forth in succession, and\nthere must have been some created thing to express the words. This\ncreated thing must, therefore, have existed before heaven and earth, and\nyet there could have been no corporeal thing before heaven and earth. It\nmust have been a creature, because the words passed away and came to an\nend but we know that \"the word of the Lord endureth forever.\"\n\nMoreover, it is plain that the words thus spoken could not have been\nspoken successively, but simultaneously, else there would have been time\nand change--succession in its nature implying time; whereas there was\nthen nothing but eternity and immortality. God knows and says eternally\nwhat takes place in time.\n\nCRITICISM OF ST. AUGUSTINE. St. Augustine then defines, not without\nmuch mysticism, what is meant by the opening words of Genesis: \"In\nthe beginning.\" He is guided to his conclusion by another scriptural\npassage: \"How wonderful are thy works, O Lord! in wisdom hast thou made\nthem all.\" This \"wisdom\" is \"the beginning,\" and in that beginning the\nLord created the heaven and the earth.\n\n\"But,\" he adds, \"some one may ask, 'What was God doing before he made\nthe heaven and the earth? for, if at any particular moment he began\nto employ himself, that means time, not eternity. In eternity nothing\ntranspires--the whole is present.'\" In answering this question, he\ncannot forbear one of those touches of rhetoric for which he was so\ncelebrated: \"I will not answer this question by saying that he was\npreparing hell for priers into his mysteries. I say that, before God\nmade heaven and earth, he did not make any thing, for no creature could\nbe made before any creature was made. Time itself is a creature, and\nhence it could not possibly exist before creation.\n\n\"What, then, is time? The past is not, the future is not, the\npresent--who can tell what it is, unless it be that which has no\nduration between two nonentities? There is no such thing as 'a long\ntime,' or 'a short time,' for there are no such things as the past and\nthe future. They have no existence, except in the soul.\"\n\nThe style in which St. Augustine conveyed his ideas is that of a\nrhapsodical conversation with God. His works are an incoherent dream.\nThat the reader may appreciate this remark, I might copy almost at\nrandom any of his paragraphs. The following is from the twelfth book:\n\n\"This then, is what I conceive, O my God, when I hear thy Scripture\nsaying, In the beginning God made heaven and earth: and the earth was\ninvisible and without form, and darkness was upon the deep, and not\nmentioning what day thou createdst them; this is what I conceive,\nthat because of the heaven of heavens--that intellectual heaven, whose\nintelligences know all at once, not in part, not darkly, not through a\nglass, but as a whole, in manifestation, face to face; not this thing\nnow, and that thing anon; but (as I said) know all at once, without any\nsuccession of times; and because of the earth, invisible and without\nform, without any succession of times, which succession presents 'this\nthing now, that thing anon;' because, where there is no form, there\nis no distinction of things; it is, then, on account of these two, a\nprimitive formed, and a primitive formless; the one, heaven, but the\nheaven of heavens; the other, earth, but the earth movable and without\nform; because of these two do I conceive, did thy Scripture say without\nmention of days, In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.\nFor, forthwith it subjoined what earth it spake of; and also in that the\nfirmament is recorded to be created the second day, and called heaven,\nit conveys to us of which heaven he before spake, without mention of\ndays.\n\n\"Wondrous depth of thy words! whose surface behold! is before us,\ninviting to little ones; yet are they a wondrous depth, O my God, a\nwondrous depth! It is awful to look therein; an awfulness of honor, and\na trembling of love. The enemies thereof I hate vehemently; O that thou\nwouldst slay them with thy two-edged sword, that they might no longer be\nenemies to it: for so do I love to have them slain unto themselves, that\nthey may live unto thee.\"\n\nAs an example of the hermeneutical manner in which St. Augustine\nunfolded the concealed facts of the Scriptures, I may cite the following\nfrom the thirteenth book of the \"Confessions;\" his object is to show\nthat the doctrine of the Trinity is contained in the Mosaic narrative of\nthe creation:\n\n\"Lo, now the Trinity appears unto me in a glass darkly, which is thou my\nGod, because thou, O Father, in him who is the beginning of our wisdom,\nwhich is thy wisdom, born of thyself, equal unto thee and coeternal,\nthat is, in thy Son, createdst heaven and earth. Much now have we said\nof the heaven of heavens, and of the earth invisible and without form,\nand of the darksome deep, in reference to the wandering instability of\nits spiritual deformity, unless it had been converted unto him, from\nwhom it had its then degree of life, and by his enlightening became a\nbeauteous life, and the heaven of that heaven, which was afterward\nset between water and water. And under the name of God, I now held the\nFather, who made these things; and under the name of the beginning, the\nSon, in whom he made these things; and believing, as I did, my God as\nthe Trinity, I searched further in his holy words, and lo! thy Spirit\nmoved upon the waters. Behold the Trinity, my God!--Father, and Son, and\nHoly Ghost Creator of all creation.\"\n\nThat I might convey to my reader a just impression of the character of\nSt. Augustine's philosophical writings, I have, in the two quotations\nhere given, substituted for my own translation that of the Rev. Dr.\nPusey, as contained in Vol. I. of the \"Library of Fathers of the Holy\nCatholic Church,\" published at Oxford, 1840.\n\nConsidering the eminent authority which has been attributed to the\nwritings of St. Augustine by the religious world for nearly fifteen\ncenturies, it is proper to speak of them with respect. And indeed it\nis not necessary to do otherwise. The paragraphs here quoted criticise\nthemselves. No one did more than this Father to bring science and\nreligion into antagonism; it was mainly he who diverted the Bible\nfrom its true office--a guide to purity of life--and placed it in the\nperilous position of being the arbiter of human knowledge, an audacious\ntyranny over the mind of man. The example once set, there was no want of\nfollowers; the works of the great Greek philosophers were stigmatized\nas profane; the transcendently glorious achievements of the Museum of\nAlexandria were hidden from sight by a cloud of ignorance, mysticism,\nand unintelligible jargon, out of which there too often flashed the\ndestroying lightnings of ecclesiastical vengeance.\n\n\nA divine revelation of science admits of no improvement, no change, no\nadvance. It discourages as needless, and indeed as presumptuous, all new\ndiscovery, considering it as an unlawful prying into things which it was\nthe intention of God to conceal.\n\nWhat, then, is that sacred, that revealed science, declared by the\nFathers to be the sum of all knowledge?\n\nIt likened all phenomena, natural and spiritual, to human acts. It saw\nin the Almighty, the Eternal, only a gigantic man.\n\nTHE PATRISTIC PHILOSOPHY. As to the earth, it affirmed that it is a flat\nsurface, over which the sky is spread like a dome, or, as St. Augustine\ntells us, is stretched like a skin. In this the sun and moon and stars\nmove, so that they may give light by day and by night to man. The earth\nwas made of matter created by God out of nothing, and, with all the\ntribes of animals and plants inhabiting it, was finished in six days.\nAbove the sky or firmament is heaven; in the dark and fiery space\nbeneath the earth is hell. The earth is the central and most important\nbody of the universe, all other things being intended for and\nsubservient to it.\n\nAs to man, he was made out of the dust of the earth. At first he was\nalone, but subsequently woman was formed from one of his ribs. He is the\ngreatest and choicest of the works of God. He was placed in a paradise\nnear the banks of the Euphrates, and was very wise and very pure; but,\nhaving tasted of the forbidden fruit, and thereby broken the commandment\ngiven to him, he was condemned to labor and to death.\n\nThe descendants of the first man, undeterred by his punishment, pursued\nsuch a career of wickedness that it became necessary to destroy them. A\ndeluge, therefore, flooded the face of the earth, and rose over the tops\nof the mountains. Having accomplished its purpose, the water was dried\nup by a wind.\n\nFrom this catastrophe Noah and his three sons, with their wives, were\nsaved in an ark. Of these sons, Shem remained in Asia and repeopled it.\nHam peopled Africa; Japhet, Europe. As the Fathers were not acquainted\nwith the existence of America, they did not provide an ancestor for its\npeople.\n\nLet us listen to what some of these authorities say in support of their\nassertions. Thus Lactantius, referring to the heretical doctrine of the\nglobular form of the earth, remarks: \"Is it possible that men can be so\nabsurd as to believe that the crops and the trees on the other side of\nthe earth hang downward, and that men have their feet higher than their\nheads? If you ask them how they defend these monstrosities, how things\ndo not fall away from the earth on that side, they reply that the nature\nof things is such that heavy bodies tend toward the centre, like the\nspokes of a wheel, while light bodies, as clouds, smoke, fire, tend from\nthe centre to the heavens on all sides. Now, I am really at a loss what\nto say of those who, when they have once gone wrong, steadily persevere\nin their folly, and defend one absurd opinion by another.\" On the\nquestion of the antipodes, St. Augustine asserts that \"it is impossible\nthere should be inhabitants on the opposite side of the earth, since\nno such race is recorded by Scripture among the descendants of Adam.\"\nPerhaps, however, the most unanswerable argument against the sphericity\nof the earth was this, that \"in the day of judgment, men on the other\nside of a globe could not see the Lord descending through the air.\"\n\nIt is unnecessary for me to say any thing respecting the introduction of\ndeath into the world, the continual interventions of spiritual agencies\nin the course of events, the offices of angels and devils, the expected\nconflagration of the earth, the tower of Babel, the confusion of\ntongues, the dispersion of mankind, the interpretation of natural\nphenomena, as eclipses, the rainbow, etc. Above all, I abstain from\ncommenting on the Patristic conceptions of the Almighty; they are too\nanthropomorphic, and wanting in sublimity.\n\nPerhaps, however, I may quote from Cosmas Indicopleustes the views\nthat were entertained in the sixth century. He wrote a work entitled\n\"Christian Topography,\" the chief intent of which was to confute the\nheretical opinion of the globular form of the earth, and the pagan\nassertion that there is a temperate zone on the southern side of the\ntorrid. He affirms that, according to the true orthodox system of\ngeography, the earth is a quadrangular plane, extending four hundred\ndays' journey east and west, and exactly half as much north and south;\nthat it is inclosed by mountains, on which the sky rests; that one on\nthe north side, huger than the others, by intercepting the rays of the\nsun, produces night; and that the plane of the earth is not set exactly\nhorizontally, but with a little inclination from the north: hence the\nEuphrates, Tigris, and other rivers, running southward, are rapid; but\nthe Nile, having to run up-hill, has necessarily a very slow current.\n\nThe Venerable Bede, writing in the seventh century, tells us that \"the\ncreation was accomplished in six days, and that the earth is its centre\nand its primary object. The heaven is of a fiery and subtile nature,\nround, and equidistant in every part, as a canopy from the centre of the\nearth. It turns round every day with ineffable rapidity, only moderated\nby the resistance of the seven planets, three above the sun--Saturn,\nJupiter, Mars--then the sun; three below--Venus, Mercury, the moon. The\nstars go round in their fixed courses, the northern perform the shortest\ncircle. The highest heaven has its proper limit; it contains the angelic\nvirtues who descend upon earth, assume ethereal bodies, perform human\nfunctions, and return. The heaven is tempered with glacial waters, lest\nit should be set on fire. The inferior heaven is called the firmament,\nbecause it separates the superincumbent waters from the waters below.\nThe firmamental waters are lower than the spiritual heaven, higher than\nall corporeal beings, reserved, some say, for a second deluge; others,\nmore truly, to temper the fire of the fixed stars.\"\n\nWas it for this preposterous scheme--this product of ignorance and\naudacity--that the works of the Greek philosophers were to be given\nup? It was none too soon that the great critics who appeared at the\nReformation, by comparing the works of these writers with one another,\nbrought them to their proper level, and taught us to look upon them all\nwith contempt.\n\nOf this presumptuous system, the strangest part was its logic, the\nnature of its proofs. It relied upon miracle-evidence. A fact was\nsupposed to be demonstrated by an astounding illustration of something\nelse! An Arabian writer, referring to this, says: \"If a conjurer should\nsay to me, 'Three are more than ten, and in proof of it I will change\nthis stick into a serpent,' I might be surprised at his legerdemain,\nbut I certainly should not admit his assertion.\" Yet, for more than\na thousand years, such was the accepted logic, and all over Europe\npropositions equally absurd were accepted on equally ridiculous proof.\n\nSince the party that had become dominant in the empire could not furnish\nworks capable of intellectual competition with those of the great pagan\nauthors, and since it was impossible for it to accept a position of\ninferiority, there arose a political necessity for the discouragement,\nand even persecution, of profane learning. The persecution of the\nPlatonists under Valentinian was due to that necessity. They were\naccused of magic, and many of them were put to death. The profession\nof philosophy had become dangerous--it was a state crime. In its stead\nthere arose a passion for the marvelous, a spirit of superstition. Egypt\nexchanged the great men, who had made her Museum immortal, for bands of\nsolitary monks and sequestered virgins, with which she was overrun.\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III.\n\n     CONFLICT RESPECTING THE DOCTRINE OF THE UNITY OF GOD.--THE\n     FIRST OR SOUTHERN REFORMATION.\n\n     The Egyptians insist on the introduction of the worship of\n     the Virgin Mary--They are resisted by Nestor, the Patriarch\n     of Constantinople, but eventually, through their influence\n     with the emperor, cause Nestor's exile and the dispersion of\n     his followers.\n\n     Prelude to the Southern Reformation--The Persian attack; its\n     moral effects.\n\n     The Arabian Reformation.--Mohammed is brought in contact\n     with the Nestorians--He adopts and extends their principles,\n     rejecting the worship of the Virgin, the doctrine of the\n     Trinity, and every thing in opposition to the unity of God.--\n     He extinguishes idolatry in Arabia, by force, and prepares\n     to make war on the Roman Empire.--His successors conquer\n     Syria, Egypt, Asia Minor, North Africa, Spain, and invade\n     France.\n\n     As the result of this conflict, the doctrine of the unity of\n     God was established in the greater part of the Roman Empire--\n     The cultivation of science was restored, and Christendom\n     lost many of her most illustrious capitals, as Alexandria,\n     Carthage, and, above all, Jerusalem.\n\n\nTHE policy of the Byzantine court had given to primitive Christianity a\npaganized form, which it had spread over all the idolatrous populations\nconstituting the empire. There had been an amalgamation of the two\nparties. Christianity had modified paganism, paganism had modified\nChristianity. The limits of this adulterated religion were the confines\nof the Roman Empire. With this great extension there had come to the\nChristian party political influence and wealth. No insignificant portion\nof the vast public revenues found their way into the treasuries of the\nChurch. As under such circumstances must ever be the case, there were\nmany competitors for the spoils--men who, under the mask of zeal for the\npredominant faith, sought only the enjoyment of its emoluments.\n\nECCLESIASTICAL DISPUTES. Under the early emperors, conquest had reached\nits culmination; the empire was completed; there remained no adequate\nobjects for military life; the days of war-peculation, and the\nplundering of provinces, were over. For the ambitious, however, another\npath was open; other objects presented. A successful career in the\nChurch led to results not unworthy of comparison with those that in\nformer days had been attained by a successful career in the army.\n\nThe ecclesiastical, and indeed, it may be said, much of the political\nhistory of that time, turns on the struggles of the bishops of the\nthree great metropolitan cities--Constantinople, Alexandria, Rome--for\nsupremacy: Constantinople based her claims on the fact that she was\nthe existing imperial city; Alexandria pointed to her commercial\nand literary position; Rome, to her souvenirs. But the Patriarch of\nConstantinople labored under the disadvantage that he was too closely\nunder the eye, and, as he found to his cost, too often under the hand,\nof the emperor. Distance gave security to the episcopates of Alexandria\nand Rome.\n\nECCLESIASTICAL DISPUTES. Religious disputations in the East have\ngenerally turned on diversities of opinion respecting the nature and\nattributes of God; in the West, on the relations and life of man. This\npeculiarity has been strikingly manifested in the transformations that\nChristianity has undergone in Asia and Europe respectively. Accordingly,\nat the time of which we are speaking, all the Eastern provinces of\nthe Roman Empire exhibited an intellectual anarchy. There were fierce\nquarrels respecting the Trinity, the essence of God, the position of the\nSon, the nature of the Holy Spirit, the influences of the Virgin Mary.\nThe triumphant clamor first of one then of another sect was confirmed,\nsometimes by miracle-proof, sometimes by bloodshed. No attempt was ever\nmade to submit the rival opinions to logical examination. All parties,\nhowever, agreed in this, that the imposture of the old classical pagan\nforms of faith was demonstrated by the facility with which they had been\noverthrown. The triumphant ecclesiastics proclaimed that the images of\nthe gods had failed to defend themselves when the time of trial came.\n\nPolytheistic ideas have always been held in repute by the southern\nEuropean races, the Semitic have maintained the unity of God. Perhaps\nthis is due to the fact, as a recent author has suggested, that a\ndiversified landscape of mountains and valleys, islands, and rivers, and\ngulfs, predisposes man to a belief in a multitude of divinities. A vast\nsandy desert, the illimitable ocean, impresses him with an idea of the\noneness of God.\n\nPolitical reasons had led the emperors to look with favor on the\nadmixture of Christianity and paganism, and doubtless by this means the\nbitterness of the rivalry between those antagonists was somewhat abated.\nThe heaven of the popular, the fashionable Christianity was the old\nOlympus, from which the venerable Greek divinities had been removed.\nThere, on a great white throne, sat God the Father, on his right the\nSon, and then the blessed Virgin, clad in a golden robe, and \"covered\nwith various female adornments;\" on the left sat God the Holy Ghost.\nSurrounding these thrones were hosts of angels with their harps. The\nvast expanse beyond was filled with tables, seated at which the happy\nspirits of the just enjoyed a perpetual banquet.\n\nIf, satisfied with this picture of happiness, illiterate persons never\ninquired how the details of such a heaven were carried out, or how much\npleasure there could be in the ennui of such an eternally unchanging,\nunmoving scene, it was not so with the intelligent. As we are soon to\nsee, there were among the higher ecclesiastics those who rejected with\nsentiments of horror these carnal, these materialistic conceptions, and\nraised their protesting voices in vindication of the attributes of the\nOmnipresent, the Almighty God.\n\nEGYPTIAN DOCTRINES. In the paganization of religion, now in all\ndirections taking place, it became the interest of every bishop to\nprocure an adoption of the ideas which, time out of mind, had been\ncurrent in the community under his charge. The Egyptians had already\nthus forced on the Church their peculiar Trinitarian views; and now they\nwere resolved that, under the form of the adoration of the Virgin Mary,\nthe worship of Isis should be restored.\n\nTHE NESTORIANS. It so happened that Nestor, the Bishop of Antioch, who\nentertained the philosophical views of Theodore of Mopsuestia, had\nbeen called by the Emperor Theodosius the Younger to the Episcopate\nof Constantinople (A.D. 427). Nestor rejected the base popular\nanthropomorphism, looking upon it as little better than blasphemous,\nand pictured to himself an awful eternal Divinity, who pervaded the\nuniverse, and had none of the aspects or attributes of man. Nestor\nwas deeply imbued with the doctrines of Aristotle, and attempted to\ncoordinate them with what he considered to be orthodox Christian tenets.\nBetween him and Cyril, the Bishop or Patriarch of Alexandria, a\nquarrel accordingly arose. Cyril represented the paganizing, Nestor the\nphilosophizing party of the Church. This was that Cyril who had murdered\nHypatia. Cyril was determined that the worship of the Virgin as the\nMother of God should be recognized, Nestor was determined that it should\nnot. In a sermon delivered in the metropolitan church at Constantinople,\nhe vindicated the attributes of the Eternal, the Almighty God. \"And can\nthis God have a mother?\" he exclaimed. In other sermons and writings,\nhe set forth with more precision his ideas that the Virgin should be\nconsidered not as the Mother of God, but as the mother of the human\nportion of Christ, that portion being as essentially distinct from the\ndivine as is a temple from its contained deity.\n\nPERSECUTION AND DEATH OF NESTOR. Instigated by the monks of Alexandria,\nthe monks of Constantinople took up arms in behalf of \"the Mother of\nGod.\" The quarrel rose to such a pitch that the emperor was constrained\nto summon a council to meet at Ephesus. In the mean time Cyril had\ngiven a bribe of many pounds of gold to the chief eunuch of the imperial\ncourt, and had thereby obtained the influence of the emperor's sister.\n\"The holy virgin of the court of heaven thus found an ally of her own\nsex in the holy virgin of the emperor's court.\" Cyril hastened to the\ncouncil, attended by a mob of men and women of the baser sort. He\nat once assumed the presidency, and in the midst of a tumult had the\nemperor's rescript read before the Syrian bishops could arrive. A single\nday served to complete his triumph. All offers of accommodation on the\npart of Nestor were refused, his explanations were not read, he was\ncondemned unheard. On the arrival of the Syrian ecclesiastics, a meeting\nof protest was held by them. A riot, with much bloodshed, ensued in the\ncathedral of St. John. Nestor was abandoned by the court, and eventually\nexiled to an Egyptian oasis. His persecutors tormented him as long as\nhe lived, by every means in their power, and at his death gave out that\n\"his blasphemous tongue had been devoured by worms, and that from the\nheats of an Egyptian desert he had escaped only into the hotter torments\nof hell!\"\n\nThe overthrow and punishment of Nestor, however, by no means destroyed\nhis opinions. He and his followers, insisting on the plain inference of\nthe last verse of the first chapter of St. Matthew, together with the\nfifty-fifth and fifty-sixth verses of the thirteenth of the same gospel,\ncould never be brought to an acknowledgment of the perpetual virginity\nof the new queen of heaven. Their philosophical tendencies were soon\nindicated by their actions. While their leader was tormented in an\nAfrican oasis, many of them emigrated to the Euphrates, and established\nthe Chaldean Church. Under their auspices the college of Edessa was\nfounded. From the college of Nisibis issued those doctors who spread\nNestor's tenets through Syria, Arabia, India, Tartary, China, Egypt.\nThe Nestorians, of course, adopted the philosophy of Aristotle, and\ntranslated the works of that great writer into Syriac and Persian. They\nalso made similar translations of later works, such as those of\nPliny. In connection with the Jews they founded the medical college\nof Djondesabour. Their missionaries disseminated the Nestorian form of\nChristianity to such an extent over Asia, that its worshipers eventually\noutnumbered all the European Christians of the Greek and Roman Churches\ncombined. It may be particularly remarked that in Arabia they had a\nbishop.\n\nTHE PERSIAN CAMPAIGN. The dissensions between Constantinople and\nAlexandria had thus filled all Western Asia with sectaries, ferocious\nin their contests with each other, and many of them burning with hatred\nagainst the imperial power for the persecutions it had inflicted on\nthem. A religious revolution, the consequences of which are felt in our\nown times, was the result. It affected the whole world.\n\nWe shall gain a clear view of this great event, if we consider\nseparately the two acts into which it may be decomposed: 1. The\ntemporary overthrow of Asiatic Christianity by the Persians; 2. The\ndecisive and final reformation under the Arabians.\n\n1. It happened (A.D. 590) that, by one of those revolutions so frequent\nin Oriental courts, Chosroes, the lawful heir to the Persian throne, was\ncompelled to seek refuge in the Byzantine Empire, and implore the aid\nof the Emperor Maurice. That aid was cheerfully given. A brief and\nsuccessful campaign restored Chosroes to the throne of his ancestors.\n\nBut the glories of this generous campaign could not preserve Maurice\nhimself. A mutiny broke out in the Roman army, headed by Phocas, a\ncenturion. The statues of the emperor were overthrown. The Patriarch\nof Constantinople, having declared that he had assured himself of the\northodoxy of Phocas, consecrated him emperor. The unfortunate Maurice\nwas dragged from a sanctuary, in which he had sought refuge; his five\nsons were beheaded before his eyes, and then he was put to death. His\nempress was inveigled from the church of St. Sophia, tortured, and\nwith her three young daughters beheaded. The adherents of the massacred\nfamily were pursued with ferocious vindictiveness; of some the eyes were\nblinded, of others the tongues were torn out, or the feet and hands cut\noff, some were whipped to death, others were burnt.\n\nWhen the news reached Rome, Pope Gregory received it with exultation,\npraying that the hands of Phocas might be strengthened against all his\nenemies. As an equivalent for this subserviency, he was greeted with the\ntitle of \"Universal Bishop.\" The cause of his action, as well as of that\nof the Patriarch of Constantinople, was doubtless the fact that Maurice\nwas suspected of Magrian tendencies, into which he had been lured by the\nPersians. The mob of Constantinople had hooted after him in the streets,\nbranding him as a Marcionite, a sect which believed in the Magian\ndoctrine of two conflicting principles.\n\nWith very different sentiments Chosroes heard of the murder of his\nfriend. Phocas had sent him the heads of Maurice and his sons. The\nPersian king turned from the ghastly spectacle with horror, and at once\nmade ready to avenge the wrongs of his benefactor by war.\n\nTHE EXPEDITION OF HERACLIUS. The Exarch of Africa, Heraclius, one of\nthe chief officers of the state, also received the shocking tidings with\nindignation. He was determined that the imperial purple should not be\nusurped by an obscure centurion of disgusting aspect. \"The person of\nthis Phocas was diminutive and deformed; the closeness of his shaggy\neyebrows, his red hair, his beardless chin, were in keeping with his\ncheek, disfigured and discolored by a formidable scar. Ignorant of\nletters, of laws, and even of arms, he indulged in an ample privilege of\nlust and drunkenness.\" At first Heraclius refused tribute and obedience\nto him; then, admonished by age and infirmities, he committed the\ndangerous enterprise of resistance to his son of the same name. A\nprosperous voyage from Carthage soon brought the younger Heraclius in\nfront of Constantinople. The inconstant clergy, senate, and people of\nthe city joined him, the usurper was seized in his palace and beheaded.\n\nINVASION OF CHOSROES. But the revolution that had taken place in\nConstantinople did not arrest the movements of the Persian king. His\nMagian priests had warned him to act independently of the Greeks,\nwhose superstition, they declared, was devoid of all truth and justice.\nChosroes, therefore, crossed the Euphrates; his army was received with\ntransport by the Syrian sectaries, insurrections in his favor everywhere\nbreaking out. In succession, Antioch, Caesarea, Damascus fell; Jerusalem\nitself was taken by storm; the sepulchre of Christ, the churches of\nConstantine and of Helena were given to the flames; the Savior's cross\nwas sent as a trophy to Persia; the churches were rifled of their\nriches; the sacred relics, collected by superstition, were dispersed.\nEgypt was invaded, conquered, and annexed to the Persian Empire; the\nPatriarch of Alexandria escaped by flight to Cyprus; the African coast\nto Tripoli was seized. On the north, Asia Minor was subdued, and for\nten years the Persian forces encamped on the shores of the Bosporus, in\nfront of Constantinople.\n\nIn his extremity Heraclius begged for peace. \"I will never give peace\nto the Emperor of Rome,\" replied the proud Persian, \"till he has abjured\nhis crucified God, and embraced the worship of the sun.\" After a long\ndelay terms were, however, secured, and the Roman Empire was ransomed at\nthe price of \"a thousand talents of gold, a thousand talents of silver,\na thousand silk robes, a thousand horses, and a thousand virgins.\"\n\nBut Heraclius submitted only for a moment. He found means not only\nto restore his affairs but to retaliate on the Persian Empire. The\noperations by which he achieved this result were worthy of the most\nbrilliant days of Rome.\n\nINVASION OF CHOSROES Though her military renown was thus recovered,\nthough her territory was regained, there was something that the Roman\nEmpire had irrecoverably lost. Religious faith could never be restored.\nIn face of the world Magianism had insulted Christianity, by profaning\nher most sacred places--Bethlehem, Gethsemane, Calvary--by burning\nthe sepulchre of Christ, by rifling and destroying the churches, by\nscattering to the winds priceless relics, by carrying off, with shouts\nof laughter, the cross.\n\nMiracles had once abounded in Syria, in Egypt, in Asia Minor; there was\nnot a church which had not its long catalogue of them. Very often they\nwere displayed on unimportant occasions and in insignificant cases. In\nthis supreme moment, when such aid was most urgently demanded, not a\nmiracle was worked.\n\nAmazement filled the Christian populations of the East when they\nwitnessed these Persian sacrileges perpetrated with impunity. The\nheavens should have rolled asunder, the earth should have opened her\nabysses, the sword of the Almighty should have flashed in the sky, the\nfate of Sennacherib should have been repeated. But it was not so. In the\nland of miracles, amazement was followed by consternation--consternation\ndied out in disbelief.\n\n2. But, dreadful as it was, the Persian conquest was but a prelude to\nthe great event, the story of which we have now to relate--the Southern\nrevolt against Christianity. Its issue was the loss of nine-tenths of\nher geographical possessions--Asia, Africa, and part of Europe.\n\nMOHAMMED. In the summer of 581 of the Christian era, there came to\nBozrah, a town on the confines of Syria, south of Damascus, a caravan\nof camels. It was from Mecca, and was laden with the costly products of\nSouth Arabia--Arabia the Happy. The conductor of the caravan, one Abou\nTaleb, and his nephew, a lad of twelve years, were hospitably received\nand entertained at the Nestorian convent of the town.\n\nThe monks of this convent soon found that their young visitor, Halibi or\nMohammed, was the nephew of the guardian of the Caaba, the sacred temple\nof the Arabs. One of them, by name Bahira, spared no pains to secure his\nconversion from the idolatry in which he had been brought up. He found\nthe boy not only precociously intelligent, but eagerly desirous of\ninformation, especially on matters relating to religion.\n\nIn Mohammed's own country the chief object of Meccan worship was a\nblack meteoric stone, kept in the Caaba, with three hundred and sixty\nsubordinate idols, representing the days of the year, as the year was\nthen counted.\n\nAt this time, as we have seen, the Christian Church, through the\nambition and wickedness of its clergy, had been brought into a condition\nof anarchy. Councils had been held on various pretenses, while the real\nmotives were concealed. Too often they were scenes of violence, bribery,\ncorruption. In the West, such were the temptations of riches, luxury,\nand power, presented by the episcopates, that the election of a bishop\nwas often disgraced by frightful murders. In the East, in consequence of\nthe policy of the court of Constantinople, the Church had been torn in\npieces by contentions and schisms. Among a countless host of disputants\nmay be mentioned Arians, Basilidians, Carpocratians, Collyridians,\nEutychians, Gnostics, Jacobites, Marcionites, Marionites, Nestorians,\nSabellians, Valentinians. Of these, the Marionites regarded the Trinity\nas consisting of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Virgin Mary;\nthe Collyridians worshiped the Virgin as a divinity, offering her\nsacrifices of cakes; the Nestorians, as we have seen, denied that God\nhad \"a mother.\" They prided themselves on being the inheritors, the\npossessors of the science of old Greece.\n\nBut, though they were irreconcilable in matters of faith, there was one\npoint in which all these sects agreed--ferocious hatred and persecution\nof each other. Arabia, an unconquered land of liberty, stretching from\nthe Indian Ocean to the Desert of Syria, gave them all, as the tide\nof fortune successively turned, a refuge. It had been so from the old\ntimes. Thither, after the Roman conquest of Palestine, vast numbers of\nJews escaped; thither, immediately after his conversion, St. Paul\ntells the Galatians that he retired. The deserts were now filled with\nChristian anchorites, and among the chief tribes of the Arabs many\nproselytes had been made. Here and there churches had been built. The\nChristian princes of Abyssinia, who were Nestorians, held the southern\nprovince of Arabia--Yemen--in possession.\n\nBy the monk Bahira, in the convent at Bozrah, Mohammed was taught the\ntenets of the Nestorians; from them the young Arab learned the story of\ntheir persecutions. It was these interviews which engendered in him a\nhatred of the idolatrous practices of the Eastern Church, and indeed of\nall idolatry; that taught him, in his wonderful career, never to speak\nof Jesus as the Son of God, but always as \"Jesus, the son of Mary.\" His\nuntutored but active mind could not fail to be profoundly impressed not\nonly with the religious but also with the philosophical ideas of\nhis instructors, who gloried in being the living representatives of\nAristotelian science. His subsequent career shows how completely their\nreligious thoughts had taken possession of him, and repeated acts\nmanifest his affectionate regard for them. His own life was devoted to\nthe expansion and extension of their theological doctrine, and, that\nonce effectually established, his successors energetically adopted and\ndiffused their scientific, their Aristotelian opinions.\n\nAs Mohammed grew to manhood, he made other expeditions to Syria.\nPerhaps, we may suppose, that on these occasions the convent and its\nhospitable in mates were not forgotten. He had a mysterious reverence\nfor that country. A wealthy Meccan widow Chadizah, had intrusted him\nwith the care of her Syrian trade. She was charmed with his capacity\nand fidelity, and (since he is said to have been characterized by the\npossession of singular manly beauty and a most courteous demeanor)\ncharmed with his person. The female heart in all ages and countries is\nthe same. She caused a slave to intimate to him what was passing in her\nmind, and, for the remaining twenty-four years of her life, Mohammed was\nher faithful husband. In a land of polygamy, he never insulted her by\nthe presence of a rival. Many years subsequently, in the height of his\npower, Ayesha, who was one of the most beautiful women in Arabia, said\nto him: \"Was she not old? Did not God give you in me a better wife in\nher place?\" \"No, by God!\" exclaimed Mohammed, and with a burst of honest\ngratitude, \"there never can be a better. She believed in me when men\ndespised me, she relieved me when I was poor and persecuted by the\nworld.\"\n\nHis marriage with Chadizah placed him in circumstances of ease, and gave\nhim an opportunity of indulging his inclination to religious meditation.\nIt so happened that her cousin Waraka, who was a Jew, had turned\nChristian. He was the first to translate the Bible into Arabic. By his\nconversation Mohammed's detestation of idolatry was confirmed.\n\nAfter the example of the Christian anchorites in their hermitages in\nthe desert, Mohammed retired to a grotto in Mount Hera, a few miles from\nMecca, giving himself up to meditation and prayer. In this seclusion,\ncontemplating the awful attributes of the Omnipotent and Eternal God, he\naddressed to his conscience the solemn inquiry, whether he could adopt\nthe dogmas then held in Asiatic Christendom respecting the Trinity, the\nsonship of Jesus as begotten by the Almighty, the character of Mary as\nat once a virgin, a mother, and the queen of heaven, without incurring\nthe guilt and the peril of blasphemy.\n\nBy his solitary meditations in the grotto Mohammed was drawn to the\nconclusion that, through the cloud of dogmas and disputations around\nhim, one great truth might be discerned--the unity of God. Leaning\nagainst the stem of a palm-tree, he unfolded his views on this subject\nto his neighbors and friends, and announced to them that he should\ndedicate his life to the preaching of that truth. Again and again, in\nhis sermons and in the Koran, he declared: \"I am nothing but a public\npreacher.... I preach the oneness of God.\" Such was his own conception\nof his so-called apostleship. Henceforth, to the day of his death, he\nwore on his finger a seal-ring on which was engraved, \"Mohammed, the\nmessenger of God.\"\n\nVICTORIES OF MOHAMMED. It is well known among physicians that prolonged\nfasting and mental anxiety inevitably give rise to hallucination.\nPerhaps there never has been any religious system introduced by\nself-denying, earnest men that did not offer examples of supernatural\ntemptations and supernatural commands. Mysterious voices encouraged the\nArabian preacher to persist in his determination; shadows of strange\nforms passed before him. He heard sounds in the air like those of a\ndistant bell. In a nocturnal dream he was carried by Gabriel from Mecca\nto Jerusalem, and thence in succession through the six heavens. Into the\nseventh the angel feared to intrude and Mohammed alone passed into the\ndread cloud that forever enshrouds the Almighty. \"A shiver thrilled his\nheart as he felt upon his shoulder the touch of the cold hand of God.\"\n\nHis public ministrations met with much resistance and little success at\nfirst. Expelled from Mecca by the upholders of the prevalent idolatry,\nhe sought refuge in Medina, a town in which there were many Jews and\nNestorians; the latter at once became proselytes to his faith. He had\nalready been compelled to send his daughter and others of his disciples\nto Abyssinia, the king of which was a Nestorian Christian. At the end of\nsix years he had made only fifteen hundred converts. But in three little\nskirmishes, magnified in subsequent times by the designation of the\nbattles of Beder, of Ohud, and of the Nations, Mohammed discovered that\nhis most convincing argument was his sword. Afterward, with Oriental\neloquence, he said, \"Paradise will be found in the shadow of the\ncrossing of swords.\" By a series of well-conducted military operations,\nhis enemies were completely overthrown. Arabian idolatry was absolutely\nexterminated; the doctrine he proclaimed, that \"there is but one God,\"\nwas universally adopted by his countrymen, and his own apostleship\naccepted.\n\nDEATH OF MOHAMMED. Let us pass over his stormy life, and hear what\nhe says when, on the pinnacle of earthly power and glory, he was\napproaching its close.\n\nSteadfast in his declaration of the unity of God, he departed from\nMedina on his last pilgrimage to Mecca, at the head of one hundred\nand fourteen thousand devotees, with camels decorated with garlands of\nflowers and fluttering streamers. When he approached the holy city, he\nuttered the solemn invocation: \"Here am I in thy service, O God! Thou\nhast no companion. To thee alone belongeth worship. Thine alone is the\nkingdom. There is none to share it with thee.\"\n\nWith his own hand he offered up the camels in sacrifice. He considered\nthat primeval institution to be equally sacred as prayer, and that no\nreason can be alleged in support of the one which is not equally strong\nin support of the other.\n\nFrom the pulpit of the Caaba he reiterated, \"O my hearers, I am only a\nman like yourselves.\" They remembered that he had once said to one who\napproached him with timid steps: \"Of what dost thou stand in awe? I am\nno king. I am nothing but the son of an Arab woman, who ate flesh dried\nin the sun.\"\n\nHe returned to Medina to die. In his farewell to his congregation, he\nsaid: \"Every thing happens according to the will of God, and has its\nappointed time, which can neither be hastened nor avoided. I return to\nhim who sent me, and my last command to you is, that ye love, honor, and\nuphold each other, that ye exhort each other to faith and constancy in\nbelief, and to the performance of pious deeds. My life has been for your\ngood, and so will be my death.\"\n\nIn his dying agony, his head was reclined on the lap of Ayesha. From\ntime to time he had dipped his hand in a vase of water, and moistened\nhis face. At last he ceased, and, gazing steadfastly upward, said, in\nbroken accents: \"O God--forgive my sins--be it so. I come.\"\n\nShall we speak of this man with disrespect? His precepts are, at this\nday, the religious guide of one-third of the human race.\n\nDOCTRINES OF MOHAMMED. In Mohammed, who had already broken away from the\nancient idolatrous worship of his native country, preparation had been\nmade for the rejection of those tenets which his Nestorian teachers\nhad communicated to him, inconsistent with reason and conscience. And,\nthough, in the first pages of the Koran, he declares his belief in what\nwas delivered to Moses and Jesus, and his reverence for them personally,\nhis veneration for the Almighty is perpetually displayed. He is\nhorror-stricken at the doctrine of the divinity of Jesus, the Worship of\nMary as the mother of God, the adoration of images and paintings, in\nhis eyes a base idolatry. He absolutely rejects the Trinity, of which\nhe seems to have entertained the idea that it could not be interpreted\notherwise than as presenting three distinct Gods.\n\nHis first and ruling idea was simply religious reform--to overthrow\nArabian idolatry, and put an end to the wild sectarianism of\nChristianity. That he proposed to set up a new religion was a calumny\ninvented against him in Constantinople, where he was looked upon with\ndetestation, like that with which in after ages Luther was regarded in\nRome.\n\nBut, though he rejected with indignation whatever might seem to\ndisparage the doctrine of the unity of God, he was not able to\nemancipate himself from anthropomorphic conceptions. The God of the\nKoran is altogether human, both corporeally and mentally, if such\nexpressions may with propriety be used. Very soon, however, the\nfollowers of Mohammed divested themselves of these base ideas and rose\nto nobler ones.\n\nThe view here presented of the primitive character of Mohammedanism\nhas long been adopted by many competent authorities. Sir William\nJones, following Locke, regards the main point in the divergence of\nMohammedanism from Christianity to consist \"in denying vehemently the\ncharacter of our Savior as the Son, and his equality as God with the\nFather, of whose unity and attributes the Mohammedans entertain and\nexpress the most awful ideas.\" This opinion has been largely entertained\nin Italy. Dante regarded Mohammed only as the author of a schism, and\nsaw in Islamism only an Arian sect. In England, Whately views it as a\ncorruption of Christianity. It was an offshoot of Nestorianism, and not\nuntil it had overthrown Greek Christianity in many great battles, was\nspreading rapidly over Asia and Africa, and had become intoxicated\nwith its wonderful successes, did it repudiate its primitive limited\nintentions, and assert itself to be founded on a separate and distinct\nrevelation.\n\nTHE FIRST KHALIF. Mohammed's life had been almost entirely consumed\nin the conversion or conquest of his native country. Toward its close,\nhowever, he felt himself strong enough to threaten the invasion of Syria\nand Persia. He had made no provision for the perpetuation of his own\ndominion, and hence it was not without a struggle that a successor was\nappointed. At length Abubeker, the father of Ayesha, was selected. He\nwas proclaimed the first khalif, or successor of the Prophet.\n\nThere is a very important difference between the spread of Mohammedanism\nand the spread of Christianity. The latter was never sufficiently\nstrong to over throw and extirpate idolatry in the Roman Empire. As it\nadvanced, there was an amalgamation, a union. The old forms of the one\nwere vivified by the new spirit of the other, and that paganization to\nwhich reference has already been made was the result.\n\nTHE MOHAMMEDAN HEAVEN. But, in Arabia, Mohammed overthrew and absolutely\nannihilated the old idolatry. No trace of it is found in the doctrines\npreached by him and his successors. The black stone that had fallen from\nheaven--the meteorite of the Caaba--and its encircling idols, passed\ntotally out of view. The essential dogma of the new faith--\"There is but\none God\"--spread without any adulteration. Military successes had, in a\nworldly sense made the religion of the Koran profitable; and, no matter\nwhat dogmas may be, when that is the case, there will be plenty of\nconverts.\n\nAs to the popular doctrines of Mohammedanism, I shall here have nothing\nto say. The reader who is interested in that matter will find an account\nof them in a review of the Koran in the eleventh chapter of my \"History\nof the Intellectual Development of Europe.\" It is enough now to remark\nthat their heaven was arranged in seven stories, and was only a palace\nof Oriental carnal delight. It was filled with black-eyed concubines\nand servants. The form of God was, perhaps, more awful than that\nof paganized Christianity. Anthropomorphism will, however, never be\nobliterated from the ideas of the unintellectual. Their God, at the\nbest, will never be any thing more than the gigantic shadow of a man--a\nvast phantom of humanity--like one of those Alpine spectres seen in the\nmidst of the clouds by him who turns his back on the sun.\n\nAbubeker had scarcely seated himself in the khalifate, when he put forth\nthe following proclamation:\n\nIn the name of the most merciful God! Abubeker to the rest of the true\nbelievers, health and happiness. The mercy and blessing of God be upon\nyou. I praise the most high God. I pray for his prophet Mohammed.\n\nINVASION OF SYRIA. \"This is to inform you that I intend to send the true\nbelievers into Syria, to take it out of the hands of the infidels. And\nI would have you know that the fighting for religion is an act of\nobedience to God.\"\n\nOn the first encounter, Khaled, the Saracen general, hard pressed,\nlifted up his hands in the midst of his army and said: \"O God! these\nvile wretches pray with idolatrous expressions and take to themselves\nanother God besides thee, but we acknowledge thy unity and affirm that\nthere is no other God but thee alone. Help us, we beseech thee, for the\nsake of thy prophet Mohammed, against these idolaters.\" On the part of\nthe Saracens the conquest of Syria was conducted with ferocious piety.\nThe belief of the Syrian Christians aroused in their antagonists\nsentiments of horror and indignation. \"I will cleave the skull of any\nblaspheming idolater who says that the Most Holy God, the Almighty\nand Eternal, has begotten a son.\" The Khalif Omar, who took Jerusalem,\ncommences a letter to Heraclius, the Roman emperor: \"In the name of the\nmost merciful God! Praise be to God, the Lord of this and of the other\nworld, who has neither female consort nor son.\" The Saracens nicknamed\nthe Christians \"Associators,\" because they joined Mary and Jesus as\npartners with the Almighty and Most Holy God.\n\nIt was not the intention of the khalif to command his army; that duty\nwas devolved on Abou Obeidah nominally, on Khaled in reality. In a\nparting review the khalif enjoined on his troops justice, mercy, and the\nobservance of fidelity in their engagements he commanded them to abstain\nfrom all frivolous conversation and from wine, and rigorously to observe\nthe hours of prayer; to be kind to the common people among whom they\npassed, but to show no mercy to their priests.\n\nFALL OF BOZRAH. Eastward of the river Jordan is Bozrah, a strong town\nwhere Mohammed had first met his Nestorian Christian instructors. It was\none of the Roman forts with which the country was dotted over. Before\nthis place the Saracen army encamped. The garrison was strong, the\nramparts were covered with holy crosses and consecrated banners. It\nmight have made a long defense. But its governor, Romanus, betrayed his\ntrust, and stealthily opened its gates to the besiegers. His conduct\nshows to what a deplorable condition the population of Syria had come.\nAfter the surrender, in a speech he made to the people he had betrayed,\nhe said: \"I renounce your society, both in this world and that to come.\nAnd I deny him that was crucified, and whosoever worships him. And I\nchoose God for my Lord, Islam for my faith, Mecca for my temple, the\nMoslems for my brethren, Mohammed for my prophet, who was sent to lead\nus in the right way, and to exalt the true religion in spite of those\nwho join partners with God.\" Since the Persian invasion, Asia Minor,\nSyria, and even Palestine, were full of traitors and apostates, ready to\njoin the Saracens. Romanus was but one of many thousands who had fallen\ninto disbelief through the victories of the Persians.\n\nFALL OF DAMASCUS. From Bozrah it was only seventy miles northward to\nDamascus, the capital of Syria. Thither, without delay, the Saracen army\nmarched. The city was at once summoned to take its option--conversion,\ntribute, or the sword. In his palace at Antioch, barely one hundred and\nfifty miles still farther north, the Emperor Heraclius received tidings\nof the alarming advance of his assailants. He at once dispatched an army\nof seventy thousand men. The Saracens were compelled to raise the\nsiege. A battle took place in the plains of Aiznadin, the Roman army\nwas overthrown and dispersed. Khaled reappeared before Damascus with his\nstandard of the black eagle, and after a renewed investment of seventy\ndays Damascus surrendered.\n\nFrom the Arabian historians of these events we may gather that thus far\nthe Saracen armies were little better than a fanatic mob. Many of the\nmen fought naked. It was not unusual for a warrior to stand forth in\nfront and challenge an antagonist to mortal duel. Nay, more, even the\nwomen engaged in the combats. Picturesque narratives have been\nhanded down to us relating the gallant manner in which they acquitted\nthemselves.\n\nFALL OF JERUSALEM. From Damascus the Saracen army advanced northward,\nguided by the snow-clad peaks of Libanus and the beautiful river\nOrontes. It captured on its way Baalbec, the capital of the Syrian\nvalley, and Emesa, the chief city of the eastern plain. To resist its\nfurther progress, Heraclius collected an army of one hundred and forty\nthousand men. A battle took place at Yermuck; the right wing of the\nSaracens was broken, but the soldiers were driven back to the field by\nthe fanatic expostulations of their women. The conflict ended in\nthe complete overthrow of the Roman army. Forty thousand were taken\nprisoners, and a vast number killed. The whole country now lay open to\nthe victors. The advance of their army had been east of the Jordan.\nIt was clear that, before Asia Minor could be touched, the strong and\nimportant cities of Palestine, which was now in their rear, must be\nsecured. There was a difference of opinion among the generals in the\nfield as to whether Caesarea or Jerusalem should be assailed first. The\nmatter was referred to the khalif, who, rightly preferring the moral\nadvantages of the capture of Jerusalem to the military advantages of the\ncapture of Caesarea, ordered the Holy City to be taken, and that at any\ncost. Close siege was therefore laid to it. The inhabitants, remembering\nthe atrocities inflicted by the Persians, and the indignities that had\nbeen offered to the Savior's sepulchre, prepared now for a vigorous\ndefense. But, after an investment of four months, the Patriarch\nSophronius appeared on the wall, asking terms of capitulation. There had\nbeen misunderstandings among the generals at the capture of Damascus,\nfollowed by a massacre of the fleeing inhabitants. Sophronius,\ntherefore, stipulated that the surrender of Jerusalem should take place\nin presence of the khalif himself Accordingly, Omar, the khalif, came\nfrom Medina for that purpose. He journeyed on a red camel, carrying\na bag of corn and one of dates, a wooden dish, and a leathern\nwater-bottle. The Arab conqueror entered the Holy City riding by the\nside of the Christian patriarch and the transference of the capital of\nChristianity to the representative of Mohammedanism was effected without\ntumult or outrage. Having ordered that a mosque should be built on the\nsite of the temple of Solomon, the khalif returned to the tomb of the\nProphet at Medina.\n\nHeraclius saw plainly that the disasters which were fast settling on\nChristianity were due to the dissensions of its conflicting sects; and\nhence, while he endeavored to defend the empire with his armies, he\nsedulously tried to compose those differences. With this view he pressed\nfor acceptance the Monothelite doctrine of the nature of Christ. But it\nwas now too late. Aleppo and Antioch were taken. Nothing could prevent\nthe Saracens from overrunning Asia Minor. Heraclius himself had to seek\nsafety in flight. Syria, which had been added by Pompey the Great,\nthe rival of Caesar, to the provinces of Rome, seven hundred years\npreviously--Syria, the birthplace of Christianity, the scene of its most\nsacred and precious souvenirs, the land from which Heraclius himself had\nonce expelled the Persian intruder--was irretrievably lost. Apostates\nand traitors had wrought this calamity. We are told that, as the ship\nwhich bore him to Constantinople parted from the shore, Heraclius\ngazed intently on the receding hills, and in the bitterness of anguish\nexclaimed, \"Farewell, Syria, forever farewell!\"\n\nIt is needless to dwell on the remaining details of the Saracen\nconquest: how Tripoli and Tyre were betrayed; how Caesarea was captured;\nhow with the trees of Libanus and the sailors of Phoenicia a Saracen\nfleet was equipped, which drove the Roman navy into the Hellespont; how\nCyprus, Rhodes, and the Cyclades, were ravaged, and the Colossus, which\nwas counted as one of the wonders of the world, sold to a Jew, who\nloaded nine hundred camels with its brass; how the armies of the khalif\nadvanced to the Black Sea, and even lay in front of Constantinople--all\nthis was as nothing after the fall of Jerusalem.\n\nOVERTHROW OF THE PERSIANS. The fall of Jerusalem! the loss of\nthe metropolis of Christianity! In the ideas of that age the two\nantagonistic forms of faith had submitted themselves to the ordeal of\nthe judgment of God. Victory had awarded the prize of battle, Jerusalem,\nto the Mohammedan; and, notwithstanding the temporary successes of the\nCrusaders, after much more than a thousand years in his hands it remains\nto this day. The Byzantine historians are not without excuse for the\ncourse they are condemned for taking: \"They have wholly neglected the\ngreat topic of the ruin of the Eastern Church.\" And as for the Western\nChurch, even the debased popes of the middle ages--the ages of the\nCrusades--could not see without indignation that they were compelled\nto rest the claims of Rome as the metropolis of Christendom on a false\nlegendary story of a visit of St. Peter to that city; while the true\nmetropolis, the grand, the sacred place of the birth, the life, the\ndeath of Christ himself, was in the hands of the infidels! It has not\nbeen the Byzantine historians alone who have tried to conceal this great\ncatastrophe. The Christian writers of Europe on all manner of subjects,\nwhether of history, religion, or science, have followed a similar\ncourse against their conquering antagonists. It has been their constant\npractice to hide what they could not depreciate, and depreciate what\nthey could not hide.\n\nINVASION OF EGYPT. I have not space, nor indeed does it comport with the\nintention of this work, to relate, in such detail as I have given to\nthe fall of Jerusalem, other conquests of the Saracens--conquests which\neventually established a Mohammedan empire far exceeding in geographical\nextent that of Alexander, and even that of Rome. But, devoting a few\nwords to this subject, it may be said that Magianism received a worse\nblow than that which had been inflicted on Christianity; The fate of\nPersia was settled at the battle of Cadesia. At the sack of Ctesiphon,\nthe treasury, the royal arms, and an unlimited spoil, fell into the\nhands of the Saracens. Not without reason do they call the battle of\nNehavend the \"victory of victories.\" In one direction they advanced to\nthe Caspian, in the other southward along the Tigris to Persepolis.\nThe Persian king fled for his life over the great Salt Desert, from the\ncolumns and statues of that city which had lain in ruins since the night\nof the riotous banquet of Alexander. One division of the Arabian army\nforced the Persian monarch over the Oxus. He was assassinated by the\nTurks. His son was driven into China, and became a captain in the\nChinese emperor's guards. The country beyond the Oxus was reduced.\nIt paid a tribute of two million pieces of gold. While the emperor\nat Peking was demanding the friendship of the khalif at Medina, the\nstandard of the Prophet was displayed on the banks of the Indus.\n\nAmong the generals who had greatly distinguished themselves in the\nSyrian wars was Amrou, destined to be the conqueror of Egypt; for the\nkhalifs, not content with their victories on the North and East, now\nturned their eyes to the West, and prepared for the annexation of\nAfrica. As in the former cases, so in this, sectarian treason assisted\nthem. The Saracen army was hailed as the deliverer of the Jacobite\nChurch; the Monophysite Christians of Egypt, that is, they who, in the\nlanguage of the Athanasian Creed, confounded the substance of the\nSon, proclaimed, through their leader, Mokaukas, that they desired no\ncommunion with the Greeks, either in this world or the next, that they\nabjured forever the Byzantine tyrant and his synod of Chalcedon. They\nhastened to pay tribute to the khalif, to repair the roads and bridges,\nand to supply provisions and intelligence to the invading army.\n\nFALL OF ALEXANDRIA. Memphis, one of the old Pharaonic capitals, soon\nfell, and Alexandria was invested. The open sea behind gave opportunity\nto Heraclius to reenforce the garrison continually. On his part, Omar,\nwho was now khalif sent to the succor of the besieging army the veteran\ntroops of Syria. There were many assaults and many sallies. In one Amrou\nhimself was taken prisoner by the besieged, but, through the dexterity\nof a slave, made his escape. After a siege of fourteen months, and a\nloss of twenty-three thousand men, the Saracens captured the city. In\nhis dispatch to the Khalif, Amrou enumerated the splendors of the great\ncity of the West \"its four thousand palaces, four thousand baths, four\nhundred theatres, twelve thousand shops for the sale of vegetable food,\nand forty thousand tributary Jews.\"\n\nSo fell the second great city of Christendom--the fate of Jerusalem had\nfallen on Alexandria, the city of Athanasius, and Arius, and Cyril; the\ncity that had imposed Trinitarian ideas and Mariolatry on the Church.\nIn his palace at Constantinople Heraclius received the fatal tidings.\nHe was overwhelmed with grief. It seemed as if his reign was to be\ndisgraced by the downfall of Christianity. He lived scarcely a month\nafter the loss of the town.\n\nBut if Alexandria had been essential to Constantinople in the supply\nof orthodox faith, she was also essential in the supply of daily food.\nEgypt was the granary of the Byzantines. For this reason two attempts\nwere made by powerful fleets and armies for the recovery of the place,\nand twice had Amrou to renew his conquest. He saw with what facility\nthese attacks could be made, the place being open to the sea; he saw\nthat there was but one and that a fatal remedy. \"By the living God, if\nthis thing be repeated a third time I will make Alexandria as open to\nanybody as is the house of a prostitute!\" He was better than his word,\nfor he forthwith dismantled its fortifications, and made it an untenable\nplace.\n\nFALL OF CARTHAGE. It was not the intention of the khalifs to limit their\nconquest to Egypt. Othman contemplated the annexation of the entire\nNorth-African coast. His general, Abdallah, set out from Memphis with\nforty thousand men, passed through the desert of Barca, and besieged\nTripoli. But, the plague breaking out in his army, he was compelled to\nretreat to Egypt.\n\nAll attempts were now suspended for more than twenty years. Then Akbah\nforced his way from the Nile to the Atlantic Ocean. In front of the\nCanary Islands he rode his horse into the sea, exclaiming: \"Great God!\nif my course were not stopped by this sea, I would still go on to the\nunknown kingdoms of the West, preaching the unity of thy holy name, and\nputting to the sword the rebellious nations who worship any other gods\nthan thee.\"\n\nThese Saracen expeditions had been through the interior of the country,\nfor the Byzantine emperors, controlling for the time the Mediterranean,\nhad retained possession of the cities on the coast. The Khalif\nAbdalmalek at length resolved on the reduction of Carthage, the most\nimportant of those cities, and indeed the capital of North Africa.\nHis general, Hassan, carried it by escalade; but reenforcements from\nConstantinople, aided by some Sicilian and Gothic troops, compelled\nhim to retreat. The relief was, however, only temporary. Hassan, in the\ncourse of a few months renewed his attack. It proved successful, and he\ndelivered Carthage to the flames.\n\nJerusalem, Alexandria, Carthage, three out of the five great Christian\ncapitals, were lost. The fall of Constantinople was only a question of\ntime. After its fall, Rome alone remained.\n\nIn the development of Christianity, Carthage had played no insignificant\npart. It had given to Europe its Latin form of faith, and some of its\ngreatest theologians. It was the home of St. Augustine.\n\nNever in the history of the world had there been so rapid and extensive\na propagation of any religion as Mohammedanism. It was now dominating\nfrom the Altai Mountains to the Atlantic Ocean, from the centre of Asia\nto the western verge of Africa.\n\nCONQUEST OF SPAIN. The Khalif Alwalid next authorized the invasion of\nEurope, the conquest of Andalusia, or the Region of the Evening.\nMusa, his general, found, as had so often been the case elsewhere, two\neffective allies sectarianism and treason--the Archbishop of Toledo and\nCount Julian the Gothic general. Under their lead, in the very crisis\nof the battle of Xeres, a large portion of the army went over to the\ninvaders; the Spanish king was compelled to flee from the field, and in\nthe pursuit he was drowned in the waters of the Guadalquivir.\n\nWith great rapidity Tarik, the lieutenant of Musa, pushed forward from\nthe battle-field to Toledo, and thence northward. On the arrival of Musa\nthe reduction of the Spanish peninsula was completed, and the wreck of\nthe Gothic army driven beyond the Pyrenees into France. Considering the\nconquest of Spain as only the first step in his victories, he announced\nhis intention of forcing his way into Italy, and preaching the unity of\nGod in the Vatican. Thence he would march to Constantinople, and, having\nput all end to the Roman Empire and Christianity, would pass into Asia\nand lay his victorious sword on the footstool of the khalif at Damascus.\n\nBut this was not to be. Musa, envious of his lieutenant, Tarik, had\ntreated him with great indignity. The friends of Tarik at the court of\nthe khalif found means of retaliation. An envoy from Damascus arrested\nMusa in his camp; he was carried before his sovereign, disgraced by a\npublic whipping, and died of a broken heart.\n\nINVASION OF FRANCE. Under other leaders, however, the Saracen conquest\nof France was attempted. In a preliminary campaign the country from the\nmouth of the Garonne to that of the Loire was secured. Then Abderahman,\nthe Saracen commander, dividing his forces into two columns, with one\non the east passed the Rhone, and laid siege to Arles. A Christian army,\nattempting the relief of the place, was defeated with heavy loss.\nHis western column, equally successful, passed the Dordogne, defeated\nanother Christian army, inflicting on it such dreadful loss that,\naccording to its own fugitives, \"God alone could number the slain.\" All\nCentral France was now overrun; the banks of the Loire were reached;\nthe churches and monasteries were despoiled of their treasures; and\nthe tutelar saints, who had worked so many miracles when there was no\nnecessity, were found to want the requisite power when it was so greatly\nneeded.\n\nThe progress of the invaders was at length stopped by Charles Martel\n(A.D. 732). Between Tours and Poictiers, a great battle, which lasted\nseven days, was fought. Abderahman was killed, the Saracens retreated,\nand soon afterward were compelled to recross the Pyrenees.\n\nThe banks of the Loire, therefore, mark the boundary of the Mohammedan\nadvance in Western Europe. Gibbon, in his narrative of these great\nevents, makes this remark: \"A victorious line of march had been\nprolonged above a thousand miles from the rock of Gibraltar to the banks\nof the Loire--a repetition of an equal space would have carried the\nSaracens to the confines of Poland and the Highlands of Scotland.\"\n\nINSULT TO ROME. It is not necessary for me to add to this sketch of the\nmilitary diffusion of Mohammedanism, the operations of the Saracens on\nthe Mediterranean Sea, their conquest of Crete and Sicily, their insult\nto Rome. It will be found, however, that their presence in Sicily\nand the south of Italy exerted a marked influence on the intellectual\ndevelopment of Europe.\n\nTheir insult to Rome! What could be more humiliating than the\ncircumstances under which it took place (A.D. 846)? An insignificant\nSaracen expedition entered the Tiber and appeared before the walls of\nthe city. Too weak to force an entrance, it insulted and plundered the\nprecincts, sacrilegiously violating the tombs of St. Peter and St. Paul.\nHad the city itself been sacked, the moral effect could not have been\ngreater. From the church of St. Peter its altar of silver was torn\naway and sent to Africa--St. Peter's altar, the very emblem of Roman\nChristianity!\n\nConstantinople had already been besieged by the Saracens more than once;\nits fall was predestined, and only postponed. Rome had received the\ndirest insult, the greatest loss that could be inflicted upon it;\nthe venerable churches of Asia Minor had passed out of existence; no\nChristian could set his foot in Jerusalem without permission; the Mosque\nof Omar stood on the site of the Temple of Solomon. Among the ruins of\nAlexandria the Mosque of Mercy marked the spot where a Saracen general,\nsatiated with massacre, had, in contemptuous compassion, spared the\nfugitive relics of the enemies of Mohammed; nothing remained of Carthage\nbut her blackened ruins. The most powerful religious empire that the\nworld had ever seen had suddenly come into existence. It stretched from\nthe Atlantic Ocean to the Chinese Wall, from the shores of the Caspian\nto those of the Indian Ocean, and yet, in one sense, it had not reached\nits culmination. The day was to come when it was to expel the successors\nof the Caesars from their capital, and hold the peninsula of Greece in\nsubjection, to dispute with Christianity the empire of Europe in the\nvery centre of that continent, and in Africa to extend its dogmas and\nfaith across burning deserts and through pestilential forests from the\nMediterranean to regions southward far beyond the equinoctial line.\n\nDISSENSIONS OF THE ARABS. But, though Mohammedanism had not reached its\nculmination, the dominion of the khalifs had. Not the sword of Charles\nMartel, but the internal dissension of the vast Arabian Empire, was the\nsalvation of Europe. Though the Ommiade Khalifs were popular in Syria,\nelsewhere they were looked upon as intruders or usurpers; the kindred\nof the apostle was considered to be the rightful representative of his\nfaith. Three parties, distinguished by their colors, tore the khalifate\nasunder with their disputes, and disgraced it by their atrocities. The\ncolor of the Ommiades was white, that of the Fatimites green, that of\nthe Abassides black; the last represented the party of Abbas, the uncle\nof Mohammed. The result of these discords was a tripartite division\nof the Mohammedan Empire in the tenth century into the khalifates of\nBagdad, of Cairoan, and of Cordova. Unity in Mohammedan political action\nwas at an end, and Christendom found its safeguard, not in supernatural\nhelp, but in the quarrels of the rival potentates. To internal\nanimosities foreign pressures were eventually added and Arabism, which\nhad done so much for the intellectual advancement of the world, came to\nan end when the Turks and the Berbers attained to power.\n\nThe Saracens had become totally regardless of European opposition--they\nwere wholly taken up with their domestic quarrels. Ockley says with\ntruth, in his history: \"The Saracens had scarce a deputy lieutenant or\ngeneral that would not have thought it the greatest affront, and such\nas ought to stigmatize him with indelible disgrace, if he should have\nsuffered himself to have been insulted by the united forces of all\nEurope. And if any one asks why the Greeks did not exert themselves\nmore, in order to the extirpation of these insolent invaders, it is a\nsufficient answer to any person that is acquainted with the characters\nof those men to say that Amrou kept his residence at Alexandria, and\nMoawyah at Damascus.\"\n\nAs to their contempt, this instance may suffice: Nicephorus, the Roman\nemperor, had sent to the Khalif Haroun-al-Raschid a threatening\nletter, and this was the reply: \"In the name of the most merciful God,\nHaroun-al-Raschid, commander of the faithful, to Nicephorus, the Roman\ndog! I have read thy letter, O thou son of an unbelieving mother. Thou\nshalt not hear, thou shalt behold my reply!\" It was written in letters\nof blood and fire on the plains of Phrygia.\n\nPOLITICAL EFFECT OF POLYGAMY. A nation may recover the confiscation\nof its provinces, the confiscation of its wealth; it may survive the\nimposition of enormous war-fines; but it never can recover from that\nmost frightful of all war-acts, the confiscation of its women. When\nAbou Obeidah sent to Omar news of his capture of Antioch, Omar gently\nupbraided him that he had not let the troops have the women. \"If they\nwant to marry in Syria, let them; and let them have as many female\nslaves as they have occasion for.\" It was the institution of polygamy,\nbased upon the confiscation of the women in the vanquished countries,\nthat secured forever the Mohammedan rule. The children of these unions\ngloried in their descent from their conquering fathers. No better proof\ncan be given of the efficacy of this policy than that which is furnished\nby North Africa. The irresistible effect of polygamy in consolidating\nthe new order of things was very striking. In little more than a single\ngeneration, the Khalif was informed by his officers that the tribute\nmust cease, for all the children born in that region were Mohammedans,\nand all spoke Arabic.\n\nMOHAMMEDANISM. Mohammedanism, as left by its founder, was an\nanthropomorphic religion. Its God was only a gigantic man, its heaven\na mansion of carnal pleasures. From these imperfect ideas its more\nintelligent classes very soon freed themselves, substituting for them\nothers more philosophical, more correct. Eventually they attained to an\naccordance with those that have been pronounced in our own times by the\nVatican Council as orthodox. Thus Al-Gazzali says: \"A knowledge of God\ncannot be obtained by means of the knowledge a man has of himself, or\nof his own soul. The attributes of God cannot be determined from\nthe attributes of man. His sovereignty and government can neither be\ncompared nor measured.\"\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV.\n\n     THE RESTORATION OF SCIENCE IN THE SOUTH.\n\n     By the influence of the Nestorians and Jews, the Arabians\n     are turned to the cultivation of Science.--They modify\n     their views as to the destiny of man, and obtain true\n     conceptions respecting the structure of the world.--They\n     ascertain the size of the earth, and determine its shape.--\n     Their khalifs collect great libraries, patronize every\n     department of science and literature, establish astronomical\n     observatories.--They develop the mathematical sciences,\n     invent algebra, and improve geometry and trigonometry.--They\n     collect and translate the old Greek mathematical and\n     astronomical works, and adopt the inductive method of\n     Aristotle.--They establish many colleges, and, with the aid\n     of the Nestorians, organize a public-school system.--They\n     introduce the Arabic numerals and arithmetic, and catalogue\n     and give names to the stars.--They lay the foundation of\n     modern astronomy, chemistry, and physics, and introduce\n     great improvements in agriculture and manufactures.\n\n\n\"IN the course of my long life,\" said the Khalif Ali, \"I have often\nobserved that men are more like the times they live in than they\nare like their fathers.\" This profoundly philosophical remark of the\nson-in-law of Mohammed is strictly true; for, though the personal, the\nbodily lineaments of a man may indicate his parentage, the constitution\nof his mind, and therefore the direction of his thoughts, is determined\nby the environment in which he lives.\n\nWhen Amrou, the lieutenant of the Khalif Omar, conquered Egypt, and\nannexed it to the Saracenic Empire, he found in Alexandria a Greek\ngrammarian, John surnamed Philoponus, or the Labor-lover. Presuming on\nthe friendship which had arisen between them, the Greek solicited as a\ngift the remnant of the great library--a remnant which war and time and\nbigotry had spared. Amrou, therefore, sent to the khalif to ascertain\nhis pleasure. \"If,\" replied the khalif, \"the books agree with the Koran,\nthe Word of God, they are useless, and need not be preserved; if\nthey disagree with it, they are pernicious. Let them be destroyed.\"\nAccordingly, they were distributed among the baths of Alexandria, and it\nis said that six months were barely sufficient to consume them.\n\nAlthough the fact has been denied, there can be little doubt that Omar\ngave this order. The khalif was an illiterate man; his environment\nwas an environment of fanaticism and ignorance. Omar's act was an\nillustration of Ali's remark.\n\nTHE ALEXANDRIAN LIBRARY BURNT. But it must not be supposed that the\nbooks which John the Labor-lover coveted were those which constituted\nthe great library of the Ptolemies, and that of Eumenes, King of\nPergamus. Nearly a thousand years had elapsed since Philadelphus began\nhis collection. Julius Caesar had burnt more than half; the Patriarchs\nof Alexandria had not only permitted but superintended the dispersion\nof almost all the rest. Orosius expressly states that he saw the empty\ncases or shelves of the library twenty years after Theophilus, the uncle\nof St. Cyril, had procured from the Emperor Theodosius a rescript for\nits destruction. Even had this once noble collection never endured such\nacts of violence, the mere wear and tear, and perhaps, I may add, the\npilfering of a thousand years, would have diminished it sadly.\nThough John, as the surname he received indicates, might rejoice in a\nsuperfluity of occupation, we may be certain that the care of a library\nof half a million books would transcend even his well-tried powers; and\nthe cost of preserving and supporting it, that had demanded the ample\nresources of the Ptolemies and the Caesars, was beyond the means of a\ngrammarian. Nor is the time required for its combustion or destruction\nany indication of the extent of the collection. Of all articles of\nfuel, parchment is, perhaps, the most wretched. Paper and papyrus do\nexcellently well as kindling-materials, but we may be sure that the\nbath-men of Alexandria did not resort to parchment so long as they could\nfind any thing else, and of parchment a very large portion of these\nbooks was composed.\n\nThere can, then, be no more doubt that Omar did order the destruction of\nthis library, under an impression of its uselessness or its irreligious\ntendency, than that the Crusaders burnt the library of Tripoli,\nfancifully said to have consisted of three million volumes. The first\napartment entered being found to contain nothing but the Koran, all the\nother books were supposed to be the works of the Arabian impostor,\nand were consequently committed to the flames. In both cases the story\ncontains some truth and much exaggeration. Bigotry, however, has often\ndistinguished itself by such exploits. The Spaniards burnt in Mexico\nvast piles of American picture-writings, an irretrievable loss; and\nCardinal Ximenes delivered to the flames, in the squares of Granada,\neighty thousand Arabic manuscripts, many of them translations of\nclassical authors.\n\nWe have seen how engineering talent, stimulated by Alexander's Persian\ncampaign, led to a wonderful development of pure science under the\nPtolemies; a similar effect may be noted as the result of the Saracenic\nmilitary operations.\n\nThe friendship contracted by Amrou, the conqueror of Egypt, with John\nthe Grammarian, indicates how much the Arabian mind was predisposed to\nliberal ideas. Its step from the idolatry of the Caaba to the monotheism\nof Mohammed prepared it to expatiate in the wide and pleasing fields\nof literature and philosophy. There were two influences to which it\nwas continually exposed. They conspired in determining its path. These\nwere--1. That of the Nestorians in Syria; 2. That of the Jews in Egypt.\n\nINFLUENCE OF THE NESTORIANS AND JEWS. In the last chapter I have briefly\nrelated the persecution of Nestor and his disciples. They bore testimony\nto the oneness of God, through many sufferings and martyrdoms. They\nutterly repudiated an Olympus filled with gods and goddesses. \"Away from\nus a queen of heaven!\"\n\nSuch being their special views, the Nestorians found no difficulty in\naffiliating with their Saracen conquerors, by whom they were treated\nnot only with the highest respect, but intrusted with some of the most\nimportant offices of the state. Mohammed, in the strongest manner,\nprohibited his followers from committing any injuries against them.\nJesuiabbas, their pontiff, concluded treaties both with the Prophet and\nwith Omar, and subsequently the Khalif Haroun-al-Raschid placed all his\npublic schools under the superintendence of John Masue, a Nestorian.\n\nTo the influence of the Nestorians that of the Jews was added. When\nChristianity displayed a tendency to unite itself with paganism, the\nconversion of the Jews was arrested; it totally ceased when Trinitarian\nideas were introduced. The cities of Syria and Egypt were full of Jews.\nIn Alexandria alone, at the time of its capture by Amrou, there were\nforty thousand who paid tribute. Centuries of misfortune and persecution\nhad served only to confirm them in their monotheism, and to strengthen\nthat implacable hatred of idolatry which they had cherished ever\nsince the Babylonian captivity. Associated with the Nestorians, they\ntranslated into Syriac many Greek and Latin philosophical works, which\nwere retranslated into Arabic. While the Nestorian was occupied with\nthe education of the children of the great Mohammedan families, the Jew\nfound his way into them in the character of a physician.\n\nFATALISM OF THE ARABIANS. Under these influences the ferocious\nfanaticism of the Saracens abated, their manners were polished, their\nthoughts elevated. They overran the realms of Philosophy and Science\nas quickly as they had overrun the provinces of the Roman Empire. They\nabandoned the fallacies of vulgar Mohammedanism, accepting in their\nstead scientific truth.\n\nIn a world devoted to idolatry, the sword of the Saracen had vindicated\nthe majesty of God. The doctrine of fatalism, inculcated by the Koran,\nhad powerfully contributed to that result. \"No man can anticipate or\npostpone his predetermined end. Death will overtake us even in lofty\ntowers. From the beginning God hath settled the place in which each man\nshall die.\" In his figurative language the Arab said: \"No man can by\nflight escape his fate. The Destinies ride their horses by night....\nWhether asleep in bed or in the storm of battle, the angel of death will\nfind thee.\" \"I am convinced,\" said Ali, to whose wisdom we have already\nreferred--\"I am convinced that the affairs of men go by divine decree,\nand not by our administration.\" The Mussulmen are those who submissively\nresign themselves to the will of God. They reconciled fate and free-will\nby saying, \"The outline is given us, we color the picture of life as we\nwill.\" They said that, if we would overcome the laws of Nature, we must\nnot resist, we must balance them against each other.\n\nThis dark doctrine prepared its devotees for the accomplishment of great\nthings--things such as the Saracens did accomplish. It converted despair\ninto resignation, and taught men to disdain hope. There was a proverb\namong them that \"Despair is a freeman, Hope is a slave.\"\n\nBut many of the incidents of war showed plainly that medicines\nmay assuage pain, that skill may close wounds, that those who are\nincontestably dying may be snatched from the grave. The Jewish physician\nbecame a living, an accepted protest against the fatalism of the Koran.\nBy degrees the sternness of predestination was mitigated, and it was\nadmitted that in individual life there is an effect due to free-will;\nthat by his voluntary acts man may within certain limits determine his\nown course. But, so far as nations are concerned, since they can yield\nno personal accountability to God, they are placed under the control of\nimmutable law.\n\nIn this respect the contrast between the Christian and the Mohammedan\nnations was very striking: The Christian was convinced of incessant\nprovidential interventions; he believed that there was no such thing as\nlaw in the government of the world. By prayers and entreaties he might\nprevail with God to change the current of affairs, or, if that failed,\nhe might succeed with Christ, or perhaps with the Virgin Mary, or\nthrough the intercession of the saints, or by the influence of their\nrelics or bones. If his own supplications were unavailing, he might\nobtain his desire through the intervention of his priest, or through\nthat of the holy men of the Church, and especially if oblations or gifts\nof money were added. Christendom believed that she could change the\ncourse of affairs by influencing the conduct of superior beings. Islam\nrested in a pious resignation to the unchangeable will of God. The\nprayer of the Christian was mainly an earnest intercession for benefits\nhoped for, that of the Saracen a devout expression of gratitude for the\npast. Both substituted prayer for the ecstatic meditation of India.\nTo the Christian the progress of the world was an exhibition of\ndisconnected impulses, of sudden surprises. To the Mohammedan that\nprogress presented a very different aspect. Every corporeal motion was\ndue to some preceding motion; every thought to some preceding thought;\nevery historical event was the offspring of some preceding event; every\nhuman action was the result of some foregone and accomplished action. In\nthe long annals of our race, nothing has ever been abruptly introduced.\nThere has been an orderly, an inevitable sequence from event to event.\nThere is an iron chain of destiny, of which the links are facts; each\nstands in its preordained place--not one has ever been disturbed, not\none has ever been removed. Every man came into the world without his own\nknowledge, he is to depart from it perhaps against his own wishes. Then\nlet him calmly fold his hands, and expect the issues of fate.\n\nCoincidently with this change of opinion as to the government of\nindividual life, there came a change as respects the mechanical\nconstruction of the world. According to the Koran, the earth is a square\nplane, edged with vast mountains, which serve the double purpose of\nbalancing it in its seat, and of sustaining the dome of the sky. Our\ndevout admiration of the power and wisdom of God should be excited by\nthe spectacle of this vast crystalline brittle expanse, which has been\nsafely set in its position without so much as a crack or any other\ninjury. Above the sky, and resting on it, is heaven, built in seven\nstories, the uppermost being the habitation of God, who, under the form\nof a gigantic man, sits on a throne, having on either side winged bulls,\nlike those in the palaces of old Assyrian kings.\n\nTHEY MEASURE THE EARTH. These ideas, which indeed are not peculiar to\nMohammedanism, but are entertained by all men in a certain stage of\ntheir intellectual development as religious revelations, were\nvery quickly exchanged by the more advanced Mohammedans for others\nscientifically correct. Yet, as has been the case in Christian\ncountries, the advance was not made without resistance on the part\nof the defenders of revealed truth. Thus when Al-Mamun, having become\nacquainted with the globular form of the earth, gave orders to his\nmathematicians and astronomers to measure a degree of a great circle\nupon it, Takyuddin, one of the most celebrated doctors of divinity\nof that time, denounced the wicked khalif, declaring that God would\nassuredly punish him for presumptuously interrupting the devotions\nof the faithful by encouraging and diffusing a false and atheistical\nphilosophy among them. Al-Mamun, however, persisted. On the shores of\nthe Red Sea, in the plains of Shinar, by the aid of an astrolabe, the\nelevation of the pole above the horizon was determined at two stations\non the same meridian, exactly one degree apart. The distance between\nthe two stations was then measured, and found to be two hundred thousand\nHashemite cubits; this gave for the entire circumference of the earth\nabout twenty-four thousand of our miles, a determination not far\nfrom the truth. But, since the spherical form could not be positively\nasserted from one such measurement, the khalif caused another to be made\nnear Cufa in Mesopotamia. His astronomers divided themselves into two\nparties, and, starting from a given point, each party measured an arc\nof one degree, the one northward, the other southward. Their result\nis given in cubits. If the cubit employed was that known as the royal\ncubit, the length of a degree was ascertained within one-third of a mile\nof its true value. From these measures the khalif concluded that the\nglobular form was established.\n\nTHEIR PASSION FOR SCIENCE. It is remarkable how quickly the ferocious\nfanaticism of the Saracens was transformed into a passion for\nintellectual pursuits. At first the Koran was an obstacle to\nliterature and science. Mohammed had extolled it as the grandest of all\ncompositions, and had adduced its unapproachable excellence as a proof\nof his divine mission. But, in little more than twenty years after his\ndeath, the experience that had been acquired in Syria, Persia, Asia\nMinor, Egypt, had produced a striking effect, and Ali the khalif\nreigning at that time, avowedly encouraged all kinds of literary\npursuits. Moawyah, the founder of the Ommiade dynasty, who followed in\n661, revolutionized the government. It had been elective, he made it\nhereditary. He removed its seat from Medina to a more central position\nat Damascus, and entered on a career of luxury and magnificence. He\nbroke the bonds of a stern fanaticism, and put himself forth as a\ncultivator and patron of letters. Thirty years had wrought a wonderful\nchange. A Persian satrap who had occasion to pay homage to Omar, the\nsecond khalif, found him asleep among the beggars on the steps of the\nMosque of Medina; but foreign envoys who had occasion to seek Moawyah,\nthe sixth khalif, were presented to him in a magnificent palace,\ndecorated with exquisite arabesques, and adorned with flower-gardens and\nfountains.\n\nTHEIR LITERATURE. In less than a century after the death of Mohammed,\ntranslations of the chief Greek philosophical authors had been made into\nArabic; poems such as the \"Iliad\" and the \"Odyssey,\" being considered\nto have an irreligious tendency from their mythological allusions, were\nrendered into Syriac, to gratify the curiosity of the learned. Almansor,\nduring his khalifate (A.D. 753-775), transferred the seat of government\nto Bagdad, which he converted into a splendid metropolis; he gave much\nof his time to the study and promotion of astronomy, and established\nschools of medicine and law. His grandson, Haroun-al-Raschid (A.D. 786),\nfollowed his example, and ordered that to every mosque in his dominions\na school should be attached. But the Augustan age of Asiatic learning\nwas during the khalifate of Al-Mamun (A.D. 813-832). He made Bagdad the\ncentre of science, collected great libraries, and surrounded himself\nwith learned men.\n\nThe elevated taste thus cultivated continued after the division of the\nSaracen Empire by internal dissensions into three parts. The Abasside\ndynasty in Asia, the Fatimite in Egypt, and the Ommiade in Spain, became\nrivals not merely in politics, but also in letters and science.\n\nTHEY ORIGINATE CHEMISTRY. In letters the Saracens embraced every topic\nthat can amuse or edify the mind. In later times, it was their boast\nthat they had produced more poets than all other nations combined. In\nscience their great merit consists in this, that they cultivated it\nafter the manner of the Alexandrian Greeks, not after the manner of the\nEuropean Greeks. They perceived that it can never be advanced by mere\nspeculation; its only sure progress is by the practical interrogation of\nNature. The essential characteristics of their method are experiment and\nobservation. Geometry and the mathematical sciences they looked upon\nas instruments of reasoning. In their numerous writings on mechanics,\nhydrostatics, optics, it is interesting to remark that the solution of\na problem is always obtained by performing an experiment, or by an\ninstrumental observation. It was this that made them the originators of\nchemistry, that led them to the invention of all kinds of apparatus for\ndistillation, sublimation, fusion, filtration, etc.; that in astronomy\ncaused them to appeal to divided instruments, as quadrants and\nastrolabes; in chemistry, to employ the balance, the theory of which\nthey were perfectly familiar with; to construct tables of specific\ngravities and astronomical tables, as those of Bagdad, Spain, Samarcand;\nthat produced their great improvements in geometry, trigonometry, the\ninvention of algebra, and the adoption of the Indian numeration in\narithmetic. Such were the results of their preference of the inductive\nmethod of Aristotle, their declining the reveries of Plato.\n\nTHEIR GREAT LIBRARIES. For the establishment and extension of the public\nlibraries, books were sedulously collected. Thus the khalif Al-Mamun\nis reported to have brought into Bagdad hundreds of camel-loads of\nmanuscripts. In a treaty he made with the Greek emperor, Michael III.,\nhe stipulated that one of the Constantinople libraries should be given\nup to him. Among the treasures he thus acquired was the treatise of\nPtolemy on the mathematical construction of the heavens. He had it\nforthwith translated into Arabic, under the title of \"Al-magest.\" The\ncollections thus acquired sometimes became very large; thus the Fatimite\nLibrary at Cairo contained one hundred thousand volumes, elegantly\ntranscribed and bound. Among these, there were six thousand five hundred\nmanuscripts on astronomy and medicine alone. The rules of this library\npermitted the lending out of books to students resident at Cairo. It\nalso contained two globes, one of massive silver and one of brass; the\nlatter was said to have been constructed by Ptolemy, the former cost\nthree thousand golden crowns. The great library of the Spanish khalifs\neventually numbered six hundred thousand volumes; its catalogue alone\noccupied forty-four. Besides this, there were seventy public libraries\nin Andalusia. The collections in the possession of individuals were\nsometimes very extensive. A private doctor refused the invitation of a\nSultan of Bokhara because the carriage of his books would have required\nfour hundred camels.\n\nThere was in every great library a department for the copying or\nmanufacture of translations. Such manufactures were also often an\naffair of private enterprise. Honian, a Nestorian physician, had an\nestablishment of the kind at Bagdad (A.D. 850). He issued versions of\nAristotle, Plato, Hippocrates, Galen, etc. As to original works, it was\nthe custom of the authorities of colleges to require their professors\nto prepare treatises on prescribed topics. Every khalif had his own\nhistorian. Books of romances and tales, such as \"The Thousand and One\nArabian Nights' Entertainments,\" bear testimony to the creative fancy\nof the Saracens. Besides these, there were works on all kinds of\nsubjects--history, jurisprudence, politics, philosophy, biographies not\nonly of illustrious men, but also of celebrated horses and camels. These\nwere issued without any censorship or restraint, though, in later times,\nworks on theology required a license for publication. Books of reference\nabounded, geographical, statistical, medical, historical dictionaries,\nand even abridgments or condensations of them, as the \"Encyclopedic\nDictionary of all the Sciences,\" by Mohammed Abu Abdallah. Much pride\nwas taken in the purity and whiteness of the paper, in the skillful\nintermixture of variously-colored inks, and in the illumination of\ntitles by gilding and other adornments.\n\nThe Saracen Empire was dotted all over with colleges. They were\nestablished in Mongolia, Tartary, Persia, Mesopotamia, Syria, Egypt,\nNorth Africa, Morocco, Fez, Spain. At one extremity of this vast region,\nwhich far exceeded the Roman Empire in geographical extent, were the\ncollege and astronomical observatory of Samarcand, at the other the\nGiralda in Spain. Gibbon, referring to this patronage of learning, says:\n\"The same royal prerogative was claimed by the independent emirs of the\nprovinces, and their emulation diffused the taste and the rewards of\nscience from Samarcand and Bokhara to Fez and Cordova. The vizier of a\nsultan consecrated a sum of two hundred thousand pieces of gold to\nthe foundation of a college at Bagdad, which he endowed with an annual\nrevenue of fifteen thousand dinars. The fruits of instruction were\ncommunicated, perhaps, at different times, to six thousand disciples\nof every degree, from the son of the noble to that of the mechanic; a\nsufficient allowance was provided for the indigent scholars, and the\nmerit or industry of the professors was repaid with adequate stipends.\nIn every city the productions of Arabic literature were copied and\ncollected, by the curiosity of the studious and the vanity of the rich.\"\nThe superintendence of these schools was committed with noble liberality\nsometimes to Nestorians, sometimes to Jews. It mattered not in what\ncountry a man was born, nor what were his religious opinions; his\nattainment in learning was the only thing to be considered. The great\nKhalif Al-Mamun had declared that \"they are the elect of God, his best\nand most useful servants, whose lives are devoted to the improvement\nof their rational faculties; that the teachers of wisdom are the true\nluminaries and legislators of this world, which, without their aid,\nwould again sink into ignorance and barbarism.\"\n\nAfter the example of the medical college of Cairo, other medical\ncolleges required their students to pass a rigid examination. The\ncandidate then received authority to enter on the practice of his\nprofession. The first medical college established in Europe was that\nfounded by the Saracens at Salerno, in Italy. The first astronomical\nobservatory was that erected by them at Seville, in Spain.\n\nTHE ARABIAN SCIENTIFIC MOVEMENT. It would far transcend the limits of\nthis book to give an adequate statement of the results of this imposing\nscientific movement. The ancient sciences were greatly extended--new\nones were brought into existence. The Indian method of arithmetic was\nintroduced, a beautiful invention, which expresses all numbers by ten\ncharacters, giving them an absolute value, and a value by position,\nand furnishing simple rules for the easy performance of all kinds\nof calculations. Algebra, or universal arithmetic--the method of\ncalculating indeterminate quantities, or investigating the relations\nthat subsist among quantities of all kinds, whether arithmetical or\ngeometrical--was developed from the germ that Diophantus had left.\nMohammed Ben Musa furnished the solution of quadratic equations,\nOmar Ben Ibra him that of cubic equations. The Saracens also gave to\ntrigonometry its modern form, substituting sines for chords, which had\nbeen previously used; they elevated it into a separate science.\nMusa, above mentioned, was the author of a \"Treatise on Spherical\nTrigonometry.\" Al-Baghadadi left one on land-surveying, so excellent,\nthat by some it has been declared to be a copy of Euclid's lost work on\nthat subject.\n\nARABIAN ASTRONOMY. In astronomy, they not only made catalogues, but\nmaps of the stars visible in their skies, giving to those of the larger\nmagnitudes the Arabic names they still bear on our celestial globes.\nThey ascertained, as we have seen, the size of the earth by the\nmeasurement of a degree on her surface, determined the obliquity of\nthe ecliptic, published corrected tables of the sun and moon fixed\nthe length of the year, verified the precession of the equinoxes. The\ntreatise of Albategnius on \"The Science of the Stars\" is spoken of by\nLaplace with respect; he also draws attention to an important fragment\nof Ibn-Junis, the astronomer of Hakem, the Khalif of Egypt, A.D. 1000,\nas containing a long series of observations from the time of Almansor,\nof eclipses, equinoxes, solstices, conjunctions of planets, occultations\nof stars--observations which have cast much light on the great\nvariations of the system of the world. The Arabian astronomers also\ndevoted themselves to the construction and perfection of astronomical\ninstruments, to the measurement of time by clocks of various kinds, by\nclepsydras and sun-dials. They were the first to introduce, for this\npurpose, the use of the pendulum.\n\nIn the experimental sciences, they originated chemistry; they discovered\nsome of its most important reagents--sulphuric acid, nitric acid,\nalcohol. They applied that science in the practice of medicine, being\nthe first to publish pharmacopoeias or dispensatories, and to include in\nthem mineral preparations. In mechanics, they had determined the laws\nof falling bodies, had ideas, by no means indistinct, of the nature of\ngravity; they were familiar with the theory of the mechanical powers. In\nhydrostatics they constructed the first tables of the specific gravities\nof bodies, and wrote treatises on the flotation and sinking of bodies\nin water. In optics, they corrected the Greek misconception, that a\nray proceeds from the eye, and touches the object seen, introducing\nthe hypothesis that the ray passes from the object to the eye. They\nunderstood the phenomena of the reflection and refraction of light.\nAlhazen made the great discovery of the curvilinear path of a ray of\nlight through the atmosphere, and proved that we see the sun and moon\nbefore they have risen, and after they have set.\n\nAGRICULTURE AND MANUFACTURE. The effects of this scientific activity are\nplainly perceived in the great improvements that took place in many\nof the industrial arts. Agriculture shows it in better methods of\nirrigation, the skillful employment of manures, the raising of improved\nbreeds of cattle, the enactment of wise codes of rural laws, the\nintroduction of the culture of rice, and that of sugar and coffee. The\nmanufactures show it in the great extension of the industries of silk,\ncotton, wool; in the fabrication of cordova and morocco leather, and\npaper; in mining, casting, and various metallurgic operations; in the\nmaking of Toledo blades.\n\nPassionate lovers of poetry and music, they dedicated much of their\nleisure time to those elegant pursuits. They taught Europe the game of\nchess; they gave it its taste for works of fiction--romances and novels.\nIn the graver domains of literature they took delight: they had many\nadmirable compositions on such subjects as the instability of human\ngreatness; the consequences of irreligion; the reverses of fortune; the\norigin, duration, and end of the world. Sometimes, not without surprise,\nwe meet with ideas which we flatter ourselves have originated in our\nown times. Thus our modern doctrines of evolution and development were\ntaught in their schools. In fact, they carried them much farther than we\nare disposed to do, extending them even to inorganic or mineral\nthings. The fundamental principle of alchemy was the natural process of\ndevelopment of metalline bodies. \"When common people,\" says Al-Khazini,\nwriting in the twelfth century, \"hear from natural philosophers that\ngold is a body which has attained to perfection of maturity, to the\ngoal of completeness, they firmly believe that it is something which has\ngradually come to that perfection by passing through the forms of all\nother metallic bodies, so that its gold nature was originally lead,\nafterward it became tin, then brass, then silver, and finally reached\nthe development of gold; not knowing that the natural philosophers mean,\nin saying this, only something like what they mean when they speak of\nman, and attribute to him a completeness and equilibrium in nature and\nconstitution--not that man was once a bull, and was changed into an\nass, and afterward into a horse, and after that into an ape, and finally\nbecame a man.\"\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V.\n\n     CONFLICT RESPECTING THE NATURE OF THE SOUL.--DOCTRINE OF\n     EMANATION AND ABSORPTION.\n\n     European ideas respecting the soul.--It resembles the form\n     of the body.\n\n     Philosophical views of the Orientals.--The Vedic theology\n     and Buddhism assert the doctrine of emanation and\n     absorption.--It is advocated by Aristotle, who is followed\n     by the Alexandrian school, and subsequently by the Jews and\n     Arabians.--It is found in the writings of Erigena.\n\n     Connection of this doctrine with the theory of conservation\n     and correlation of force.--Parallel between the origin and\n     destiny of the body and the soul.--The necessity of founding\n     human on comparative psychology.\n\n     Averroism, which is based on these facts, is brought into\n     Christendom through Spain and Sicily.\n\n     History of the repression of Averroism.--Revolt of Islam\n     against it.--Antagonism of the Jewish synagogues.--Its\n     destruction undertaken by the papacy.--Institution of the\n     Inquisition in Spain.--Frightful persecutions and their\n     results.--Expulsion of the Jews and Moors.--Overthrow of\n     Averroism in Europe.--Decisive action of the late Vatican\n     Council.\n\n\nTHE pagan Greeks and Romans believed that the spirit of man resembles\nhis bodily form, varying its appearance with his variations, and growing\nwith his growth. Heroes, to whom it had been permitted to descend into\nHades, had therefore without difficulty recognized their former friends.\nNot only had the corporeal aspect been retained, but even the customary\nraiment.\n\nTHE SOUL. The primitive Christians, whose conceptions of a future life\nand of heaven and hell, the abodes of the blessed and the sinful, were\nfar more vivid than those of their pagan predecessors, accepted and\nintensified these ancient ideas. They did not doubt that in the world\nto come they should meet their friends, and hold converse with them, as\nthey had done here upon earth--an expectation that gives consolation to\nthe human heart, reconciling it to the most sorrowful bereavements, and\nrestoring to it its dead.\n\nIn the uncertainty as to what becomes of the soul in the interval\nbetween its separation from the body and the judgment-day, many\ndifferent opinions were held. Some thought that it hovered over the\ngrave, some that it wandered disconsolate through the air. In the\npopular belief, St. Peter sat as a door-keeper at the gate of heaven. To\nhim it had been given to bind or to loose. He admitted or excluded the\nSpirits of men at his pleasure. Many persons, however, were disposed to\ndeny him this power, since his decisions would be anticipatory of the\njudgment-day, which would thus be rendered needless. After the time\nof Gregory the Great, the doctrine of purgatory met with general\nacceptance. A resting-place was provided for departed spirits.\n\nThat the spirits of the dead occasionally revisit the living, or haunt\ntheir former abodes, has been in all ages, in all European countries,\na fixed belief, not confined to rustics, but participated in by the\nintelligent. A pleasing terror gathers round the winter's-evening\nfireside at the stories of apparitions, goblins, ghosts. In the old\ntimes the Romans had their lares, or spirits of those who had led\nvirtuous lives; their larvae or lemures, the spirits of the wicked;\ntheir manes, the spirits of those of whom the merits were doubtful. If\nhuman testimony on such subjects can be of any value, there is a body\nof evidence reaching from the remotest ages to the present time, as\nextensive and unimpeachable as is to be found in support of any thing\nwhatever, that these shades of the dead congregate near tombstones,\nor take up their secret abode in the gloomy chambers of dilapidated\ncastles, or walk by moonlight in moody solitude.\n\nASIATIC PSYCHOLOGICAL VIEWS. While these opinions have universally found\npopular acceptance in Europe, others of a very different nature have\nprevailed extensively in Asia, and indeed very generally in the higher\nregions of thought. Ecclesiastical authority succeeded in repressing\nthem in the sixteenth century, but they never altogether disappeared.\nIn our own times so silently and extensively have they been diffused in\nEurope, that it was found expedient in the papal Syllabus to draw\nthem in a very conspicuous manner into the open light; and the Vatican\nCouncil, agreeing in that view of their obnoxious tendency and secret\nspread, has in an equally prominent and signal manner among its first\ncanons anathematized all persons who hold them. \"Let him be anathema who\nsays that spiritual things are emanations of the divine substance, or\nthat the divine essence by manifestation or development becomes all\nthings.\" In view of this authoritative action, it is necessary now to\nconsider the character and history of these opinions.\n\nIdeas respecting the nature of God necessarily influence ideas\nrespecting the nature of the soul. The eastern Asiatics had adopted the\nconception of an impersonal God, and, as regards the soul, its necessary\nconsequence, the doctrine of emanation and absorption.\n\nEMANATION AND ABSORPTION. Thus the Vedic theology is based on the\nacknowledgment of a universal spirit pervading all things. \"There is in\ntruth but one Deity, the supreme Spirit; he is of the same nature as the\nsoul of man.\" Both the Vedas and the Institutes of Menu affirm that\nthe soul is an emanation of the all-pervading Intellect, and that it is\nnecessarily destined to be reabsorbed. They consider it to be without\nform, and that visible Nature, with all its beauties and harmonies, is\nonly the shadow of God.\n\nVedaism developed itself into Buddhism, which has become the faith of\na majority of the human race. This system acknowledges that there is a\nsupreme Power, but denies that there is a supreme Being. It contemplates\nthe existence of Force, giving rise as its manifestation to matter. It\nadopts the theory of emanation and absorption. In a burning taper it\nsees an effigy of man--an embodiment of matter, and an evolution of\nforce. If we interrogate it respecting the destiny of the soul, it\ndemands of us what has become of the flame when it is blown out, and in\nwhat condition it was before the taper was lighted. Was it a nonentity?\nHas it been annihilated? It admits that the idea of personality which\nhas deluded us through life may not be instantaneously extinguished at\ndeath, but may be lost by slow degrees. On this is founded the doctrine\nof transmigration. But at length reunion with the universal Intellect\ntakes place, Nirwana is reached, oblivion is attained, a state that has\nno relation to matter, space, or time, the state into which the departed\nflame of the extinguished taper has gone, the state in which we were\nbefore we were born. This is the end that we ought to hope for; it is\nreabsorption in the universal Force--supreme bliss, eternal rest.\n\nThrough Aristotle these doctrines were first introduced into Eastern\nEurope; indeed, eventually, as we shall see, he was regarded as the\nauthor of them. They exerted a dominating influence in the later period\nof the Alexandrian school. Philo, the Jew, who lived in the time of\nCaligula, based his philosophy on the theory of emanation. Plotinus\nnot only accepted that theory as applicable to the soul of man, but as\naffording an illustration of the nature of the Trinity. For, as a beam\nof light emanates from the sun, and as warmth emanates from the beam\nwhen it touches material bodies, so from the Father the Son emanates,\nand thence the Holy Ghost. From these views Plotinus derived a practical\nreligious system, teaching the devout how to pass into a condition of\necstasy, a foretaste of absorption into the universal mundane soul.\nIn that condition the soul loses its individual consciousness. In like\nmanner Porphyry sought absorption in or union with God. He was a Tyrian\nby birth, established a school at Rome, and wrote against Christianity;\nhis treatise on that subject was answered by Eusebius and St. Jerome,\nbut the Emperor Theodosius silenced it more effectually by causing all\nthe copies to be burnt. Porphyry bewails his own unworthiness, saying\nthat he had been united to God in ecstasy but once in eighty-six years,\nwhereas his master Plotinus had been so united six times in sixty years.\nA complete system of theology, based on the theory of emanation, was\nconstructed by Proclus, who speculated on the manner in which absorption\ntakes place: whether the soul is instantly reabsorbed and reunited in\nthe moment of death, or whether it retains the sentiment of personality\nfor a time, and subsides into complete reunion by successive steps.\n\nARABIC PSYCHOLOGY. From the Alexandrian Greeks these ideas passed to\nthe Saracen philosophers, who very soon after the capture of the great\nEgyptian city abandoned to the lower orders their anthropomorphic\nnotions of the nature of God and the simulachral form of the spirit of\nman. As Arabism developed itself into a distinct scientific system,\nthe theories of emanation and absorption were among its characteristic\nfeatures. In this abandonment of vulgar Mohammedanism, the example of\nthe Jews greatly assisted. They, too, had given up the anthropomorphism\nof their ancestors; they had exchanged the God who of old lived behind\nthe veil of the temple for an infinite Intelligence pervading the\nuniverse, and, avowing their inability to conceive that any thing\nwhich had on a sudden been called into existence should be capable of\nimmortality, they affirmed that the soul of man is connected with a past\nof which there was no beginning, and with a future to which there is no\nend.\n\nIn the intellectual history of Arabism the Jew and the Saracen are\ncontinually seen together. It was the same in their political history,\nwhether we consider it in Syria, in Egypt, or in Spain. From them\nconjointly Western Europe derived its philosophical ideas, which in\nthe course of time culminated in Averroism; Averroism is philosophical\nIslamism. Europeans generally regarded Averroes as the author of these\nheresies, and the orthodox branded him accordingly, but he was nothing\nmore than their collector and commentator. His works invaded Christendom\nby two routes: from Spain through Southern France they reached Upper\nItaly, engendering numerous heresies on their way; from Sicily they\npassed to Naples and South Italy, under the auspices of Frederick II.\n\nBut, long before Europe suffered this great intellectual invasion, there\nwere what might, perhaps, be termed sporadic instances of Orientalism.\nAs an example I may quote the views of John Erigena (A.D. 800) He had\nadopted and taught the philosophy of Aristotle had made a pilgrimage\nto the birthplace of that philosopher, and indulged a hope of uniting\nphilosophy and religion in the manner proposed by the Christian\necclesiastics who were then studying in the Mohammedan universities of\nSpain. He was a native of Britain.\n\nIn a letter to Charles the Bald, Anastasius expresses his astonishment\n\"how such a barbarian man, coming from the very ends of the earth, and\nremote from human conversation, could comprehend things so clearly, and\ntransfer them into another language so well.\" The general intention of\nhis writings was, as we have said, to unite philosophy with religion,\nbut his treatment of these subjects brought him under ecclesiastical\ncensure, and some of his works were adjudged to the flames. His most\nimportant book is entitled \"De Divisione Nature.\"\n\nErigena's philosophy rests upon the observed and admitted fact that\nevery living thing comes from something that had previously lived. The\nvisible world, being a world of life, has therefore emanated necessarily\nfrom some primordial existence, and that existence is God, who is thus\nthe originator and conservator of all. Whatever we see maintains itself\nas a visible thing through force derived from him, and, were that force\nwithdrawn, it must necessarily disappear. Erigena thus conceives of\nthe Deity as an unceasing participator in Nature, being its preserver,\nmaintainer, upholder, and in that respect answering to the soul of the\nworld of the Greeks. The particular life of individuals is therefore a\npart of general existence, that is, of the mundane soul.\n\nIf ever there were a withdrawal of the maintaining power, all things\nmust return to the source from which they issued--that is, they must\nreturn to God, and be absorbed in him. All visible Nature must thus\npass back into \"the Intellect\" at last. \"The death of the flesh is the\nauspices of the restitution of things, and of a return to their ancient\nconservation. So sounds revert back to the air in which they were born,\nand by which they were maintained, and they are heard no more; no man\nknows what has become of them. In that final absorption which, after\na lapse of time, must necessarily come, God will be all in all, and\nnothing exist but him alone.\" \"I contemplate him as the beginning and\ncause of all things; all things that are and those that have been, but\nnow are not, were created from him, and by him, and in him. I also view\nhim as the end and intransgressible term of all things.... There is a\nfourfold conception of universal Nature--two views of divine Nature, as\norigin and end; two also of framed Nature, causes and effects. There is\nnothing eternal but God.\"\n\nThe return of the soul to the universal Intellect is designated by\nErigena as Theosis, or Deification. In that final absorption all\nremembrance of its past experiences is lost. The soul reverts to the\ncondition in which it was before it animated the body. Necessarily,\ntherefore, Erigena fell under the displeasure of the Church.\n\nIt was in India that men first recognized the fact that force is\nindestructible and eternal. This implies ideas more or less distinct\nof that which we now term its \"correlation and conservation.\"\nConsiderations connected with the stability of the universe give\nstrength to this view, since it is clear that, were there either\nan increase or a diminution, the order of the world must cease. The\ndefinite and invariable amount of energy in the universe must therefore\nbe accepted as a scientific fact. The changes we witness are in its\ndistribution.\n\nBut, since the soul must be regarded as an active principle, to call a\nnew one into existence out of nothing is necessarily to add to the force\npreviously in the world. And, if this has been done in the case of every\nindividual who has been born, and is to be repeated for every individual\nhereafter, the totality of force must be continually increasing.\n\nMoreover, to many devout persons there is something very revolting in\nthe suggestion that the Almighty is a servitor to the caprices and lusts\nof man, and that, at a certain term after its origin, it is necessary\nfor him to create for the embryo a soul.\n\nConsidering man as composed of two portions, a soul and a body, the\nobvious relations of the latter may cast much light on the mysterious,\nthe obscure relations of the former. Now, the substance of which the\nbody consists is obtained from the general mass of matter around us,\nand after death to that general mass it is restored. Has Nature, then,\ndisplayed before our eyes in the origin, mutations, and destiny of the\nmaterial part, the body, a revelation that may guide us to a knowledge\nof the origin and destiny of the companion, the spiritual part, the\nsoul?\n\nLet us listen for a moment to one of the most powerful of Mohammedan\nwriters:\n\n\"God has created the spirit of man out of a drop of his own light;\nits destiny is to return to him. Do not deceive yourself with the vain\nimagination that it will die when the body dies. The form you had on\nyour entrance into this world, and your present form, are not the\nsame; hence there is no necessity of your perishing, on account of the\nperishing of your body. Your spirit came into this world a stranger, it\nis only sojourning, in a temporary home. From the trials and tempests\nof this troublesome life, our refuge is in God. In reunion with him we\nshall find eternal rest--a rest without sorrow, a joy without pain, a\nstrength without infirmity, a knowledge without doubt, a tranquil and\nyet an ecstatic vision of the source of life and light and glory, the\nsource from which we came.\" So says the Saracen philosopher, Al-Gazzali\n(A.D. 1010).\n\nIn a stone the material particles are in a state of stable equilibrium;\nit may, therefore, endure forever. An animal is in reality only a form\nthrough which a stream of matter is incessantly flowing. It receives its\nsupplies, and dismisses its wastes. In this it resembles a cataract,\na river, a flame. The particles that compose it at one instant have\ndeparted from it the next. It depends for its continuance on exterior\nsupplies. It has a definite duration in time, and an inevitable moment\ncomes in which it must die.\n\nIn the great problem of psychology we cannot expect to reach a\nscientific result, if we persist in restricting ourselves to the\ncontemplation of one fact. We must avail ourselves of all accessible\nfacts. Human psychology can never be completely resolved except through\ncomparative psychology. With Descartes, we must inquire whether the\nsouls of animals be relations of the human soul, less perfect members in\nthe same series of development. We must take account of what we discover\nin the intelligent principle of the ant, as well as what we discern in\nthe intelligent principle of man. Where would human physiology be, if\nit were not illuminated by the bright irradiations of comparative\nphysiology?\n\nBrodie, after an exhaustive consideration of the facts, affirms that\nthe mind of animals is essentially the same as that of man. Every one\nfamiliar with the dog will admit that that creature knows right from\nwrong, and is conscious when he has committed a fault. Many domestic\nanimals have reasoning powers, and employ proper means for the\nattainment of ends. How numerous are the anecdotes related of the\nintentional actions of the elephant and the ape! Nor is this apparent\nintelligence due to imitation, to their association with man, for\nwild animals that have no such relation exhibit similar properties. In\ndifferent species, the capacity and character greatly vary. Thus the dog\nis not only more intelligent, but has social and moral qualities that\nthe cat does not possess; the former loves his master, the latter her\nhome.\n\nDu Bois-Reymond makes this striking remark: \"With awe and wonder must\nthe student of Nature regard that microscopic molecule of nervous\nsubstance which is the seat of the laborious, constructive, orderly,\nloyal, dauntless soul of the ant. It has developed itself to its present\nstate through a countless series of generations.\" What an impressive\ninference we may draw from the statement of Huber, who has written so\nwell on this subject: \"If you will watch a single ant at work, you can\ntell what he will next do!\" He is considering the matter, and reasoning\nas you are doing. Listen to one of the many anecdotes which Huber, at\nonce truthful and artless, relates: \"On the visit of an overseer ant to\nthe works, when the laborers had begun the roof too soon, he examined it\nand had it taken down, the wall raised to the proper height, and a new\nceiling constructed with the fragments of the old one.\" Surely these\ninsects are not automata, they show intention. They recognize their old\ncompanions, who have been shut up from them for many months, and exhibit\nsentiments of joy at their return. Their antennal language is capable\nof manifold expression; it suits the interior of the nest, where all is\ndark.\n\nWhile solitary insects do not live to raise their young, social insects\nhave a longer term, they exhibit moral affections and educate\ntheir offspring. Patterns of patience and industry, some of these\ninsignificant creatures will work sixteen or eighteen hours a day. Few\nmen are capable of sustained mental application more than four or five\nhours.\n\nSimilarity of effects indicates similarity of causes; similarity of\nactions demands similarity of organs. I would ask the reader of these\nparagraphs, who is familiar with the habits of animals, and especially\nwith the social relations of that wonderful insect to which reference\nhas been made, to turn to the nineteenth chapter of my work on\nthe \"Intellectual Development of Europe,\" in which he will find a\ndescription of the social system of the Incas of Peru. Perhaps, then, in\nview of the similarity of the social institutions and personal conduct\nof the insect, and the social institutions and personal conduct of the\ncivilized Indian--the one an insignificant speck, the other a man--he\nwill not be disposed to disagree with me in the opinion that \"from bees,\nand wasps, and ants, and birds, from all that low animal life on which\nhe looks with supercilious contempt, man is destined one day to learn\nwhat in truth he really is.\"\n\nThe views of Descartes, who regarded all insects as automata, can\nscarcely be accepted without modification. Insects are automata only\nso far as the action of their ventral cord, and that portion of their\ncephalic ganglia which deals with contemporaneous impressions, is\nconcerned.\n\nIt is one of the functions of vesicular-nervous material to retain\ntraces or relics of impressions brought to it by the organs of sense;\nhence, nervous ganglia, being composed of that material, may be\nconsidered as registering apparatus. They also introduce the element\nof time into the action of the nervous mechanism. An impression, which\nwithout them might have forthwith ended in reflex action, is delayed,\nand with this duration come all those important effects arising through\nthe interaction of many impressions, old and new, upon each other.\n\nThere is no such thing as a spontaneous, or self-originated, thought.\nEvery intellectual act is the consequence of some preceding act. It\ncomes into existence in virtue of something that has gone before. Two\nminds constituted precisely alike, and placed under the influence of\nprecisely the same environment, must give rise to precisely the same\nthought. To such sameness of action we allude in the popular expression\n\"common-sense\"--a term full of meaning. In the origination of a\nthought there are two distinct conditions: the state of the organism\nas dependent on antecedent impressions, and on the existing physical\ncircumstances.\n\nIn the cephalic ganglia of insects are stored up the relics of\nimpressions that have been made upon the common peripheral nerves, and\nin them are kept those which are brought in by the organs of special\nsense--the visual, olfactive, auditory. The interaction of these raises\ninsects above mere mechanical automata, in which the reaction instantly\nfollows the impression.\n\nIn all cases the action of every nerve-centre, no matter what its stage\nof development may be, high or low, depends upon an essential chemical\ncondition--oxidation. Even in man, if the supply of arterial blood\nbe stopped but for a moment, the nerve-mechanism loses its power; if\ndiminished, it correspondingly declines; if, on the contrary, it\nbe increased--as when nitrogen monoxide is breathed--there is more\nenergetic action. Hence there arises a need of repair, a necessity for\nrest and sleep.\n\nTwo fundamental ideas are essentially attached to all our perceptions\nof external things: they are SPACE and TIME, and for these provision is\nmade in the nervous mechanism while it is yet in an almost rudimentary\nstate. The eye is the organ of space, the ear of time; the perceptions\nof which by the elaborate mechanism of these structures become\ninfinitely more precise than would be possible if the sense of touch\nalone were resorted to.\n\nThere are some simple experiments which illustrate the vestiges of\nganglionic impressions. If on a cold, polished metal, as a new razor,\nany object, such as a wafer, be laid, and the metal be then breathed\nupon, and, when the moisture has had time to disappear, the wafer be\nthrown off, though now the most critical inspection of the polished\nsurface can discover no trace of any form, if we breathe once more upon\nit, a spectral image of the wafer comes plainly into view; and this may\nbe done again and again. Nay, more, if the polished metal be carefully\nput aside where nothing can deteriorate its surface, and be so kept for\nmany months, on breathing again upon it the shadowy form emerges.\n\nSuch an illustration shows how trivial an impression may be thus\nregistered and preserved. But, if, on such an inorganic surface, an\nimpression may thus be indelibly marked, how much more likely in the\npurposely-constructed ganglion! A shadow never falls upon a wall without\nleaving thereupon a permanent trace, a trace which might be made visible\nby resorting to proper processes. Photographic operations are cases in\npoint. The portraits of our friends, or landscape views, may be hidden\non the sensitive surface from the eye, but they are ready to make their\nappearance as soon as proper developers are resorted to. A spectre is\nconcealed on a silver or glassy surface until, by our necromancy, we\nmake it come forth into the visible world. Upon the walls of our most\nprivate apartments, where we think the eye of intrusion is altogether\nshut out and our retirement can never be profaned, there exist the\nvestiges of all our acts, silhouettes of whatever we have done.\n\nIf, after the eyelids have been closed for some time, as when we\nfirst awake in the morning, we suddenly and steadfastly gaze at a\nbrightly-illuminated object and then quickly close the lids again, a\nphantom image is perceived in the indefinite darkness beyond us. We may\nsatisfy ourselves that this is not a fiction, but a reality, for many\ndetails that we had not time to identify in the momentary glance may\nbe contemplated at our leisure in the phantom. We may thus make out the\npattern of such an object as a lace curtain hanging in the window, or\nthe branches of a tree beyond. By degrees the image becomes less and\nless distinct; in a minute or two it has disappeared. It seems to have a\ntendency to float away in the vacancy before us. If we attempt to follow\nit by moving the eyeball, it suddenly vanishes.\n\nSuch a duration of impressions on the retina proves that the effect of\nexternal influences on nerve-vesicles is not necessarily transitory.\nIn this there is a correspondence to the duration, the emergence, the\nextinction, of impressions on photographic preparations. Thus, I have\nseen landscapes and architectural views taken in Mexico developed, as\nartists say, months subsequently in New York--the images coming out,\nafter the long voyage, in all their proper forms and in all their proper\ncontrast of light and shade. The photograph had forgotten nothing. It\nhad equally preserved the contour of the everlasting mountains and the\npassing smoke of a bandit-fire.\n\nAre there, then, contained in the brain more permanently, as in the\nretina more transiently, the vestiges of impressions that have been\ngathered by the sensory organs? Is this the explanation of memory--the\nMind contemplating such pictures of past things and events as have\nbeen committed to her custody. In her silent galleries are there hung\nmicrographs of the living and the dead, of scenes that we have\nvisited, of incidents in which we have borne a part? Are these abiding\nimpressions mere signal-marks, like the letters of a book, which impart\nideas to the mind? or are they actual picture-images, inconceivably\nsmaller than those made for us by artists, in which, by the aid of a\nmicroscope, we can see, in a space not bigger than a pinhole, a whole\nfamily group at a glance?\n\nThe phantom images of the retina are not perceptible in the light of the\nday. Those that exist in the sensorium in like manner do not attract our\nattention so long as the sensory organs are in vigorous operation, and\noccupied in bringing new impressions in. But, when those organs become\nweary or dull, or when we experience hours of great anxiety, or are\nin twilight reveries, or are asleep, the latent apparitions have their\nvividness increased by the contrast, and obtrude themselves on the\nmind. For the same reason they occupy us in the delirium of fevers, and\ndoubtless also in the solemn moments of death. During a third part of\nour life, in sleep, we are withdrawn from external influences; hearing\nand sight and the other senses are inactive, but the never-sleeping Mind,\nthat pensive, that veiled enchantress, in her mysterious retirement,\nlooks over the ambrotypes she has collected--ambrotypes, for they are\ntruly unfading impressions--and, combining them together, as they chance\nto occur, constructs from them the panorama of a dream.\n\nNature has thus implanted in the organization of every man means which\nimpressively suggest to him the immortality of the soul and a future\nlife. Even the benighted savage thus sees in his visions the fading\nforms of landscapes, which are, perhaps, connected with some of his\nmost pleasant recollections; and what other conclusion can be possibly\nextract from those unreal pictures than that they are the foreshadowings\nof another land beyond that in which his lot is cast? At intervals he is\nvisited in his dreams by the resemblances of those whom he has loved\nor hated while they were alive; and these manifestations are to him\nincontrovertible proofs of the existence and immortality of the soul.\nIn our most refined social conditions we are never able to shake off the\nimpressions of these occurrences, and are perpetually drawing from\nthem the same conclusions that our uncivilized ancestors did. Our more\nelevated condition of life in no respect relieves us from the inevitable\noperation of our own organization, any more than it relieves us from\ninfirmities and disease. In these respects, all over the globe men are\non an equality. Savage or civilized, we carry within us a mechanism\nwhich presents us with mementoes of the most solemn facts with which we\ncan be concerned. It wants only moments of repose or sickness, when the\ninfluence of external things is diminished, to come into full play, and\nthese are precisely the moments when we are best prepared for the truths\nit is going to suggest. That mechanism is no respecter of persons. It\nneither permits the haughtiest to be free from the monitions, nor leaves\nthe humblest without the consolation of a knowledge of another life.\nOpen to no opportunities of being tampered with by the designing or\ninterested, requiring no extraneous human agency for its effect,\nout always present with every man wherever he may go, it marvelously\nextracts from vestiges of the impressions of the past overwhelming\nproofs of the realities of the future, and, gathering its power from\nwhat would seem to be a most unlikely source, it insensibly leads us, no\nmatter who or where we may be, to a profound belief in the immortal and\nimperishable, from phantoms which have scarcely made their appearance\nbefore they are ready to vanish away.\n\nThe insect differs from a mere automaton in this, that it is influenced\nby old, by registered impressions. In the higher forms of animated life\nthat registration becomes more and more complete, memory becomes more\nperfect. There is not any necessary resemblance between an external form\nand its ganglionic impression, any more than there is between the words\nof a message delivered in a telegraphic office and the signals which\nthe telegraph may give to the distant station; any more than there\nis between the letters of a printed page and the acts or scenes they\ndescribe, but the letters call up with clearness to the mind of the\nreader the events and scenes.\n\nAn animal without any apparatus for the retention of impressions must\nbe a pure automaton--it cannot have memory. From insignificant and\nuncertain beginnings, such an apparatus is gradually evolved, and, as\nits development advances, the intellectual capacity increases. In man,\nthis retention or registration reaches perfection; he guides, himself by\npast as well as by present impressions; he is influenced by experience;\nhis conduct is determined by reason.\n\nA most important advance is made when the capability is acquired by any\nanimal of imparting a knowledge of the impressions stored up in its own\nnerve-centres to another of the same kind. This marks the extension of\nindividual into social life, and indeed is essential thereto. In the\nhigher insects it is accomplished by antennal contacts, in man by\nspeech. Humanity, in its earlier, its savage stages, was limited to\nthis: the knowledge of one person could be transmitted to another by\nconversation. The acts and thoughts of one generation could be imparted\nto another, and influence its acts and thoughts.\n\nBut tradition has its limit. The faculty of speech makes society\npossible--nothing more.\n\nNot without interest do we remark the progress of development of\nthis function. The invention of the art of writing gave extension and\ndurability to the registration or record of impressions. These, which\nhad hitherto been stored up in the brain of one man, might now be\nimparted to the whole human race, and be made to endure forever.\nCivilization became possible--for civilization cannot exist without\nwriting, or the means of record in some shape.\n\nFrom this psychological point of view we perceive the real significance\nof the invention of printing--a development of writing which, by\nincreasing the rapidity of the diffusion of ideas, and insuring their\npermanence, tends to promote civilization and to unify the human race.\n\nIn the foregoing paragraphs, relating to nervous impressions, their\nregistry, and the consequences, that spring from them, I have given an\nabstract of views presented in my work on \"Human Physiology,\" published\nin 1856, and may, therefore, refer the reader to the chapter on \"Inverse\nVision, or Cerebral Sight;\" to Chapter XIV., Book I.; and to Chapter\nVIII., Book II.; of that work, for other particulars.\n\n\nThe only path to scientific human psychology is through comparative\npsychology. It is a long and wearisome path, but it leads to truth.\n\nIs there, then, a vast spiritual existence pervading the universe, even\nas there is a vast existence of matter pervading it--a spirit which,\nas a great German author tells us, \"sleeps in the stone, dreams in the\nanimal, awakes in man?\" Does the soul arise from the one as the body\narises from the other? Do they in like manner return, each to the source\nfrom which it has come? If so, we can interpret human existence, and our\nideas may still be in unison with scientific truth, and in accord with\nour conception of the stability, the unchangeability of the universe.\n\nTo this spiritual existence the Saracens, following Eastern nations,\ngave the designation \"the Active Intellect.\" They believed that the soul\nof man emanated from it, as a rain-drop comes from the sea, and, after a\nseason, returns. So arose among them the imposing doctrines of emanation\nand absorption. The active intellect is God.\n\nIn one of its forms, as we have seen, this idea was developed by Chakia\nMouni, in India, in a most masterly manner, and embodied in the vast\npractical system of Buddhism; in another, it was with less power\npresented among the Saracens by Averroes.\n\nBut, perhaps we ought rather to say that Europeans hold Averroes as\nthe author of this doctrine, because they saw him isolated from his\nantecedents. But Mohammedans gave him little credit for originality.\nHe stood to them in the light of a commentator on Aristotle, and as\npresenting the opinions of the Alexandrian and other philosophical\nschools up to his time. The following excerpts from the \"Historical\nEssay on Averroism,\" by M. Renan, will show how closely the Sarscenic\nideas approached those presented above:\n\nThis system supposes that, at the death of an individual, his\nintelligent principle or soul no longer possesses a separate existence,\nbut returns to or is absorbed in the universal mind, the active\nintelligence, the mundane soul, which is God; from whom, indeed, it had\noriginally emanated or issued forth.\n\nThe universal, or active, or objective intellect, is uncreated,\nimpassible, incorruptible, has neither beginning nor end; nor does it\nincrease as the number of individual souls increases. It is altogether\nseparate from matter. It is, as it were, a cosmic principle. This\noneness of the active intellect, or reason, is the essential principle\nof the Averroistic theory, and is in harmony with the cardinal doctrine\nof Mohammedanism--the unity of God.\n\nThe individual, or passive, or subjective intellect, is an emanation\nfrom the universal, and constitutes what is termed the soul of man. In\none sense it is perishable and ends with the body, but in a higher\nsense it endures; for, after death, it returns to or is absorbed in the\nuniversal soul, and thus of all human souls there remains at last\nbut one--the aggregate of them all, life is not the property of the\nindividual, it belongs to Nature. The end of, man is to enter into union\nmore and more complete with the active intellect--reason. In that the\nhappiness of the soul consists. Our destiny is quietude. It was the\nopinion of Averroes that the transition from the individual to the\nuniversal is instantaneous at death, but the Buddhists maintain that\nhuman personality continues in a declining manner for a certain term\nbefore nonentity, or Nirwana, is attained.\n\nPhilosophy has never proposed but two hypotheses to explain the system\nof the world: first, a personal God existing apart, and a human soul\ncalled into existence or created, and thenceforth immortal; second, an\nimpersonal intelligence, or indeterminate God, and a soul emerging from\nand returning to him. As to the origin of beings, there are two opposite\nopinions: first, that they are created from nothing; second, that they\ncome by development from pre-existing forms. The theory of creation\nbelongs to the first of the above hypotheses, that of evolution to the\nlast.\n\nPhilosophy among the Arabs thus took the same direction that it had\ntaken in China, in India, and indeed throughout the East. Its whole\nspirit depended on the admission of the indestructibility of matter and\nforce. It saw an analogy between the gathering of the material of which\nthe body of man consists from the vast store of matter in Nature, and\nits final restoration to that store, and the emanation of the spirit\nof man from the universal Intellect, the Divinity, and its final\nreabsorption.\n\n\nHaving thus indicated in sufficient detail the philosophical\ncharacteristics of the doctrine of emanation and absorption, I have in\nthe next place to relate its history. It was introduced into Europe by\nthe Spanish Arabs. Spain was the focal point from which, issuing forth,\nit affected the ranks of intelligence and fashion all over Europe, and\nin Spain it had a melancholy end.\n\nThe Spanish khalifs had surrounded themselves with all the luxuries\nof Oriental life. They had magnificent palaces, enchanting gardens,\nseraglios filled with beautiful women. Europe at the present day does\nnot offer more taste, more refinement, more elegance, than might have\nbeen seen, at the epoch of which we are speaking, in the capitals of the\nSpanish Arabs. Their streets were lighted and solidly paved. The houses\nwere frescoed and carpeted; they were warmed in winter by furnaces, and\ncooled in summer with perfumed air brought by underground pipes from\nflower-beds. They had baths, and libraries, and dining-halls, fountains\nof quicksilver and water. City and country were full of conviviality,\nand of dancing to the lute and mandolin. Instead of the drunken and\ngluttonous wassail orgies of their Northern neighbors, the feasts of the\nSaracens were marked by sobriety. Wine was prohibited. The enchanting\nmoonlight evenings of Andalusia were spent by the Moors in sequestered,\nfairy-like gardens or in orange-groves, listening to the romances of\nthe story-teller, or engaged in philosophical discourse; consoling\nthemselves for the disappointments of this life by such reflections\nas that, if virtue were rewarded in this world, we should be without\nexpectations in the life to come; and reconciling themselves to their\ndaily toil by the expectation that rest will be found after death--a\nrest never to be succeeded by labor.\n\nIn the tenth century the Khalif Hakein II. had made beautiful Andalusia\nthe paradise of the world. Christians, Mussulmen, Jews, mixed together\nwithout restraint. There, among many celebrated names that have\ndescended to our times, was Gerbert, destined subsequently to\nbecome pope. There, too, was Peter the Venerable, and many Christian\necclesiastics. Peter says that he found learned men even from Britain\npursuing astronomy. All learned men, no matter from what country they\ncame, or what their religious views, were welcomed. The khalif had in\nhis palace a manufactory of books, and copyists, binders, illuminators.\nHe kept book-buyers in all the great cities of Asia and Africa. His\nlibrary contained four hundred thousand volumes, superbly bound and\nilluminated.\n\nThroughout the Mohammedan dominions in Asia, in Africa, and in Spain,\nthe lower order of Mussulmen entertained a fanatical hatred against\nlearning. Among the more devout--those who claimed to be orthodox--there\nwere painful doubts as to the salvation of the great Khalif\nAl-Mamun--the wicked khalif, as they called him--for he had not only\ndisturbed the people by introducing the writings of Aristotle and other\nGreek heathens, but had even struck at the existence of heaven and\nhell by saying that the earth is a globe, and pretending that he could\nmeasure its size. These persons, from their numbers, constituted a\npolitical power.\n\nAlmansor, who usurped the khalifate to the prejudice of Hakem's son,\nthought that his usurpation would be sustained if he put himself at\nthe head of the orthodox party. He therefore had the library of Hakem\nsearched, and all works of a scientific or philosophical nature carried\ninto the public places and burnt, or thrown into the cisterns of the\npalace. By a similar court revolution Averroes, in his old age--he died\nA.D. 1193--was expelled from Spain; the religious party had triumphed\nover the philosophical. He was denounced as a traitor to religion.\nAn opposition to philosophy had been organized all over the Mussulman\nworld. There was hardly a philosopher who was not punished. Some\nwere put to death, and the consequence was, that Islam was full of\nhypocrites.\n\nInto Italy, Germany, England, Averroism had silently made its way.\nIt found favor in the eyes of the Franciscans, and a focus in the\nUniversity of Paris. By very many of the leading minds it had been\naccepted. But at length the Dominicans, the rivals of the Franciscans,\nsounded an alarm. They said it destroys all personality, conducts\nto fatalism, and renders inexplicable the difference and progress\nof individual intelligences. The declaration that there is but one\nintellect is an error subversive of the merits of the saints, it is\nan assertion that there is no difference among men. What! is there no\ndifference between the holy soul of Peter and the damned soul of Judas?\nare they identical? Averroes in this his blasphemous doctrine denies\ncreation, providence, revelation, the Trinity, the efficacy of prayers,\nof alms, and of litanies; he disbelieves in the resurrection and\nimmortality; he places the summum bonum in mere pleasure.\n\nSo, too, among the Jews who were then the leading intellects of the\nworld, Averroism had been largely propagated. Their great writer\nMaimonides had thoroughly accepted it; his school was spreading it in\nall directions. A furious persecution arose on the part of the orthodox\nJews. Of Maimonides it had been formerly their delight to declare that\nhe was \"the Eagle of the Doctors, the Great Sage, the Glory of the West,\nthe Light of the East, second only to Moses.\" Now, they proclaimed that\nhe had abandoned the faith of Abraham; had denied the possibility of\ncreation, believed in the eternity of the world; had given himself up to\nthe manufacture of atheists; had deprived God of his attributes; made a\nvacuum of him; had declared him inaccessible to prayer, and a stranger\nto the government of the world. The works of Maimonides were committed\nto the flames by the synagogues of Montpellier, Barcelona, and Toledo.\n\nScarcely had the conquering arms of Ferdinand and Isabella overthrown\nthe Arabian dominion in Spain, when measures were taken by the papacy\nto extinguish these opinions, which, it was believed, were undermining\nEuropean Christianity.\n\nUntil Innocent IV. (1243), there was no special tribunal against\nheretics, distinct from those of the bishops. The Inquisition, then\nintroduced, in accordance with the centralization of the times, was\na general and papal tribunal, which displaced the old local ones.\nThe bishops, therefore, viewed the innovation with great dislike,\nconsidering it as an intrusion on their rights. It was established in\nItaly, Spain, Germany, and the southern provinces of France.\n\nThe temporal sovereigns were only too desirous to make use of this\npowerful engine for their own political purposes. Against this the popes\nstrongly protested. They were not willing that its use should pass out\nof the ecclesiastical hand.\n\nThe Inquisition, having already been tried in the south of France, had\nthere proved to be very effective for the suppression of heresy. It had\nbeen introduced into Aragon. Now was assigned to it the duty of dealing\nwith the Jews.\n\nIn the old times under Visigothic rule these people had greatly\nprospered, but the leniency that had been shown to them was succeeded by\natrocious persecution, when the Visigoths abandoned their Arianism and\nbecame orthodox. The most inhuman ordinances were issued against them--a\nlaw was enacted condemning them all to be slaves. It was not to be\nwondered at that, when the Saracen invasion took place, the Jews did\nwhatever they could to promote its success. They, like the Arabs, were\nan Oriental people, both traced their lineage to Abraham, their common\nancestor; both were believers in the unity of God. It was their\ndefense of that doctrine that had brought upon them the hatred of their\nVisigothic masters.\n\nUnder the Saracen rule they were treated with the highest consideration.\nThey became distinguished for their wealth and their learning. For\nthe most part they were Aristotelians. They founded many schools and\ncolleges. Their mercantile interests led them to travel all over the\nworld. They particularly studied the science of medicine. Throughout the\nmiddle ages they were the physicians and bankers of Europe. Of all men\nthey saw the course of human affairs from the most elevated point of\nview. Among the special sciences they became proficient in mathematics\nand astronomy; they composed the tables of Alfonso, and were the cause\nof the voyage of De Gama. They distinguished themselves greatly in light\nliterature. From the tenth to the fourteenth century their literature\nwas the first in Europe. They were to be found in the courts of princes\nas physicians, or as treasurers managing the public finances.\n\nThe orthodox clergy in Navarre had excited popular prejudices against\nthem. To escape the persecutions that arose, many of them feigned to\nturn Christians, and of these many apostatized to their former\nfaith. The papal nuncio at the court of Castile raised a cry for the\nestablishment of the Inquisition. The poorer Jews were accused of\nsacrificing Christian children at the Passover, in mockery of the\ncrucifixion; the richer were denounced as Averroists. Under the\ninfluence of Torquemada, a Dominican monk, the confessor of Queen\nIsabella, that princess solicited a bull from the pope for the\nestablishment of the Holy Office. A bull was accordingly issued in\nNovember, 1478, for the detection and suppression of heresy. In the\nfirst year of the operation of the Inquisition, 1481, two thousand\nvictims were burnt in Andalusia; besides these, many thousands were dug\nup from their graves and burnt; seventeen thousand were fined or\nimprisoned for life. Whoever of the persecuted race could flee, escaped\nfor his life. Torquemada, now appointed inquisitor-general for Castile\nand Leon, illustrated his office by his ferocity. Anonymous accusations\nwere received, the accused was not confronted by witnesses, torture was\nrelied upon for conviction; it was inflicted in vaults where no one\ncould hear the cries of the tormented. As, in pretended mercy, it was\nforbidden to inflict torture a second time, with horrible duplicity it\nwas affirmed that the torment had not been completed at first, but had\nonly been suspended out of charity until the following day! The families\nof the convicted were plunged into irretrievable ruin. Llorente, the\nhistorian of the Inquisition, computes that Torquemada and his\ncollaborators, in the course of eighteen years, burnt at the stake ten\nthousand two hundred and twenty persons, six thousand eight hundred and\nsixty in effigy, and otherwise punished ninety-seven thousand three\nhundred and twenty-one. This frantic priest destroyed Hebrew Bibles\nwherever he could find them, And burnt six thousand volumes of Oriental\nliterature at Salamanca, under an imputation that they inculcated\nJudaism. With unutterable disgust and indignation, we learn that the\npapal government realized much money by selling to the rich\ndispensations to secure them from the Inquisition.\n\nBut all these frightful atrocities proved failures. The conversions\nwere few. Torquemada, therefore, insisted on the immediate banishment\nof every unbaptized Jew. On March 30, 1492, the edict of expulsion was\nsigned. All unbaptized Jews, of whatever age, sex, or condition, were\nordered to leave the realm by the end of the following July. If they\nrevisited it, they should suffer death. They might sell their effects\nand take the proceeds in merchandise or bills of exchange, but not in\ngold or silver. Exiled thus suddenly from the land of their birth, the\nland of their ancestors for hundreds of years, they could not in\nthe glutted market that arose sell what they possessed. Nobody would\npurchase what could be got for nothing after July. The Spanish clergy\noccupied themselves by preaching in the public squares sermons filled\nwith denunciations against their victims, who, when the time for\nexpatriation came, swarmed in the roads and filled the air with their\ncries of despair. Even the Spanish onlookers wept at the scene of agony.\nTorquemada, however, enforced the ordinance that no one should afford\nthem any help.\n\nOf the banished persons some made their way into Africa, some into\nItaly; the latter carried with them to Naples ship-fever, which\ndestroyed not fewer than twenty thousand in that city, and devastated\nthat peninsula; some reached Turkey, a few England. Thousands,\nespecially mothers with nursing children, infants, and old people, died\nby the way; many of them in the agonies of thirst.\n\nThis action against the Jews was soon followed by one against the Moors.\nA pragmatica was issued at Seville, February, 1502, setting forth the\nobligations of the Castilians to drive the enemies of God from the land,\nand ordering that all unbaptized Moors in the kingdoms of Castile and\nLeon above the age of infancy should leave the country by the end of\nApril. They might sell their property, but not take away any gold or\nsilver; they were forbidden to emigrate to the Mohammedan dominions; the\npenalty of disobedience was death. Their condition was thus worse than\nthat of the Jews, who had been permitted to go where they chose. Such\nwas the fiendish intolerance of the Spaniards, that they asserted the\ngovernment would be justified in taking the lives of all the Moors for\ntheir shameless infidelity.\n\nWhat an ungrateful return for the toleration that the Moors in their\nday of power had given to the Christians! No faith was kept with the\nvictims. Granada had surrendered under the solemn guarantee of the full\nenjoyment of civil and religious liberty. At the instigation of\nCardinal Ximenes that pledge was broken, and, after a residence of eight\ncenturies, the Mohammedans were driven out of the land.\n\n\nThe coexistence of three religions in Andalusia--the Christian, the\nMohammedan, the Mosaic--had given opportunity for the development of\nAverroism or philosophical Arabism. This was a repetition of what had\noccurred at Rome, when the gods of all the conquered countries were\nconfronted in that capital, and universal disbelief in them all ensued.\nAverroes himself was accused of having been first a Mussulman, then a\nChristian, then a Jew, and finally a misbeliever. It was affirmed that\nhe was the author of the mysterious book \"De Tribus Impostoribus.\"\n\nIn the middle ages there were two celebrated heretical books, \"The\nEverlasting Gospel,\" and the \"De Tribus Impostoribus.\" The latter was\nvariously imputed to Pope Gerbert, to Frederick II., and to Averroes.\nIn their unrelenting hatred the Dominicans fastened all the blasphemies\ncurrent in those times on Averroes; they never tired of recalling the\ncelebrated and outrageous one respecting the eucharist. His writings had\nfirst been generally made known to Christian Europe by the translation\nof Michael Scot in the beginning of the thirteenth century, but long\nbefore his time the literature of the West, like that of Asia, was full\nof these ideas. We have seen how broadly they were set forth by Erigena.\nThe Arabians, from their first cultivation of philosophy, had been\ninfected by them; they were current in all the colleges of the three\nkhalifates. Considered not as a mode of thought, that will spontaneously\noccur to all men at a certain stage of intellectual development, but as\nhaving originated with Aristotle, they continually found favor with men\nof the highest culture. We see them in Robert Grostete, in Roger Bacon,\nand eventually in Spinoza. Averroes was not their inventor, he merely\ngave them clearness and expression. Among the Jews of the thirteenth\ncentury, he had completely supplanted his imputed master. Aristotle had\npassed away from their eyes; his great commentator, Averroes, stood in\nhis place. So numerous were the converts to the doctrine of emanation\nin Christendom, that Pope Alexander IV. (1255) found it necessary to\ninterfere. By his order, Albertus Magnus composed a work against the\n\"Unity of the Intellect.\" Treating of the origin and nature of the\nsoul, he attempted to prove that the theory of \"a separate intellect,\nenlightening man by irradiation anterior to the individual and surviving\nthe individual, is a detestable error.\" But the most illustrious\nantagonist of the great commentator was St. Thomas Aquinas, the\ndestroyer of all such heresies as the unity of the intellect, the denial\nof Providence, the impossibility of creation; the victories of \"the\nAngelic Doctor\" were celebrated not only in the disputations of the\nDominicans, but also in the works of art of the painters of Florence\nand Pisa. The indignation of that saint knew no bounds when Christians\nbecame the disciples of an infidel, who was worse than a Mohammedan.\nThe wrath of the Dominicans, the order to which St. Thomas belonged, was\nsharpened by the fact that their rivals, the Franciscans, inclined to\nAverroistic views; and Dante, who leaned to the Dominicans, denounced\nAverroes as the author of a most dangerous system. The theological odium\nof all three dominant religions was put upon him; he was pointed out\nas the originator of the atrocious maxim that \"all religions are false,\nalthough all are probably useful.\" An attempt was made at the Council\nof Vienne to have his writings absolutely suppressed, and to forbid all\nChristians reading them. The Dominicans, armed with the weapons of\nthe Inquisition, terrified Christian Europe with their unrelenting\npersecutions. They imputed all the infidelity of the times to the\nArabian philosopher. But he was not without support. In Paris and in the\ncities of Northern Italy the Franciscans sustained his views, and all\nChristendom was agitated with these disputes.\n\nUnder the inspiration of the Dominicans, Averroes became to the Italian\npainters the emblem of unbelief. Many of the Italian towns had pictures\nor frescoes of the Day of Judgment and of Hell. In these Averroes not\nunfrequently appears. Thus, in one at Pisa, he figures with Arius,\nMohammed, and Antichrist. In another he is represented as overthrown by\nSt. Thomas. He had become an essential element in the triumphs of the\ngreat Dominican doctor. He continued thus to be familiar to the Italian\npainters until the sixteenth century. His doctrines were maintained in\nthe University of Padua until the seventeenth.\n\nSuch is, in brief, the history of Averroism as it invaded Europe from\nSpain. Under the auspices of Frederick II., it, in a less imposing\nmanner, issued from Sicily. That sovereign bad adopted it fully. In his\n\"Sicilian Questions\" he had demanded light on the eternity of the world,\nand on the nature of the soul, and supposed he had found it in the\nreplies of Ibn Sabin, an upholder of these doctrines. But in his\nconflict with the papacy be was overthrown, and with him these heresies\nwere destroyed.\n\nIn Upper Italy, Averroism long maintained its ground. It was so\nfashionable in high Venetian society that every gentleman felt\nconstrained to profess it. At length the Church took decisive action\nagainst it. The Lateran Council, A.D. 1512, condemned the abettors of\nthese detestable doctrines to be held as heretics and infidels. As\nwe have seen, the late Vatican Council has anathematized them.\nNotwithstanding that stigma, it is to be borne in mind that these\nopinions are held to be true by a majority of the human race.\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI.\n\n     CONFLICT RESPECTING THE NATURE OF THE WORLD.\n\n     Scriptural view of the world: the earth a flat surface;\n     location of heaven and hell.\n\n     Scientific view: the earth a globe; its size determined; its\n     position in and relations to the solar system.--The three\n     great voyages.--Columbus, De Gama, Magellan.--\n     Circumnavigation of the earth.--Determination of its\n     curvature by the measurement of a degree and by the\n     pendulum.\n\n     The discoveries of Copernicus.--Invention of the telescope.--\n     Galileo brought before the Inquisition.--His punishment.--\n     Victory over the Church.\n\n     Attempts to ascertain the dimensions of the solar system.--\n     Determination of the sun's parallax by the transits of\n     Venus.--Insignificance, of the earth and man.\n\n     Ideas respecting the dimensions of the universe.--Parallax\n     of the stars.--The plurality of worlds asserted by Bruno.--\n     He is seized and murdered by the Inquisition.\n\n\nI HAVE now to present the discussions that arose respecting the third\ngreat philosophical problem--the nature of the world.\n\nAn uncritical observation of the aspect of Nature persuades us that the\nearth is an extended level surface which sustains the dome of the sky,\na firmament dividing the waters above from the waters beneath; that the\nheavenly bodies--the sun, the moon, the stars--pursue their way,\nmoving from east to west, their insignificant size and motion round the\nmotionless earth proclaiming their inferiority. Of the various organic\nforms surrounding man none rival him in dignity, and hence he seems\njustified in concluding that every thing has been created for his\nuse--the sun for the purpose of giving him light by day, the moon and\nstars by night.\n\nComparative theology shows us that this is the conception of Nature\nuniversally adopted in the early phase of intellectual life. It is the\nbelief of all nations in all parts of the world in the beginning of\ntheir civilization: geocentric, for it makes the earth the centre of the\nuniverse; anthropocentric, for it makes man the central object of the\nearth. And not only is this the conclusion spontaneously come to from\ninconsiderate glimpses of the world, it is also the philosophical basis\nof various religious revelations, vouchsafed to man from time to time.\nThese revelations, moreover, declare to him that above the crystalline\ndome of the sky is a region of eternal light and happiness--heaven--the\nabode of God and the angelic hosts, perhaps also his own abode after\ndeath; and beneath the earth a region of eternal darkness and misery,\nthe habitation of those that are evil. In the visible world is thus seen\na picture of the invisible.\n\nOn the basis of this view of the structure of the world great religious\nsystems have been founded, and hence powerful material interests have\nbeen engaged in its support. These have resisted, sometimes by resorting\nto bloodshed, attempts that have been made to correct its incontestable\nerrors--a resistance grounded on the suspicion that the localization of\nheaven and hell and the supreme value of man in the universe might be\naffected.\n\nThat such attempts would be made was inevitable. As soon as men began\nto reason on the subject at all, they could not fail to discredit the\nassertion that the earth is an indefinite plane. No one can doubt that\nthe sun we see to-day is the self-same sun that we saw yesterday. His\nreappearance each morning irresistibly suggests that he has passed on\nthe underside of the earth. But this is incompatible with the reign of\nnight in those regions. It presents more or less distinctly the idea of\nthe globular form of the earth.\n\nThe earth cannot extend indefinitely downward; for the sun cannot go\nthrough it, nor through any crevice or passage in it, Since he rises and\nsets in different positions at different seasons of the year. The stars\nalso move under it in countless courses. There must, therefore, be a\nclear way beneath.\n\nTo reconcile revelation with these innovating facts, schemes, such\nas that of Cosmas Indicopleustes in his Christian Topography, were\ndoubtless often adopted. To this in particular we have had occasion on a\nformer page to refer. It asserted that in the northern parts of the flat\nearth there is an immense mountain, behind which the sun passes, and\nthus produces night.\n\nAt a very remote historical period the mechanism of eclipses had been\ndiscovered. Those of the moon demonstrated that the shadow of the earth\nis always circular. The form of the earth must therefore be globular.\nA body which in all positions casts a circular shadow must itself be\nspherical. Other considerations, with which every one is now familiar,\ncould not fail to establish that such is her figure.\n\nBut the determination of the shape of the earth by no means deposed\nher from her position of superiority. Apparently vastly larger than all\nother things, it was fitting that she should be considered not merely as\nthe centre of the world, but, in truth, as--the world. All other objects\nin their aggregate seemed utterly unimportant in comparison with her.\n\nThough the consequences flowing from an admission of the globular figure\nof the earth affected very profoundly existing theological ideas, they\nwere of much less moment than those depending on a determination of her\nsize. It needed but an elementary knowledge of geometry to perceive that\ncorrect ideas on this point could be readily obtained by measuring a\ndegree on her surface. Probably there were early attempts to accomplish\nthis object, the results of which have been lost. But Eratosthenes\nexecuted one between Syene and Alexandria, in Egypt, Syene being\nsupposed to be exactly under the tropic of Cancer. The two places are,\nhowever, not on the same meridian, and the distance between them was\nestimated, not measured. Two centuries later, Posidonius made another\nattempt between Alexandria and Rhodes; the bright star Canopus just\ngrazed the horizon at the latter place, at Alexandria it rose 7 1/2\ndegrees. In this instance, also, since the direction lay across the sea,\nthe distance was estimated, not measured. Finally, as we have already\nrelated, the Khalif Al-Mamun made two sets of measures, one on the shore\nof the Red Sea, the other near Cufa, in Mesopotamia. The general result\nof these various observations gave for the earth's diameter between\nseven and eight thousand miles.\n\nThis approximate determination of the size of the earth tended to\ndepose her from her dominating position, and gave rise to very serious\ntheological results. In this the ancient investigations of Aristarchus\nof Samos, one of the Alexandrian school, 280 B.C., powerfully aided.\nIn his treatise on the magnitudes and distances of the sun and moon, he\nexplains the ingenious though imperfect method to which he had resorted\nfor the solution of that problem. Many ages previously a speculation had\nbeen brought from India to Europe by Pythagoras. It presented the sun\nas the centre of the system. Around him the planets revolved in circular\norbits, their order of position being Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars,\nJupiter, Saturn, each of them being supposed to rotate on its axis as it\nrevolved round the sun. According to Cicero, Nicetas suggested that,\nif it were admitted that the earth revolves on her axis, the difficulty\npresented by the inconceivable velocity of the heavens would be avoided.\n\nThere is reason to believe that the works of Aristarchus, in the\nAlexandrian Library, were burnt at the time of the fire of Caesar. The\nonly treatise of his that has come down to us is that above mentioned,\non the size and distance of the sun and moon.\n\nAristarchus adopted the Pythagorean system as representing the actual\nfacts. This was the result of a recognition of the sun's amazing\ndistance, and therefore of his enormous size. The heliocentric system,\nthus regarding the sun as the central orb, degraded the earth to a very\nsubordinate rank, making her only one of a company of six revolving\nbodies.\n\nBut this is not the only contribution conferred on astronomy by\nAristarchus, for, considering that the movement of the earth does not\nsensibly affect the apparent position of the stars, he inferred that\nthey are incomparably more distant from us than the sun. He, therefore,\nof all the ancients, as Laplace remarks, had the most correct ideas of\nthe grandeur of the universe. He saw that the earth is of absolutely\ninsignificant size, when compared with the stellar distances. He saw,\ntoo, that there is nothing above us but space and stars.\n\nBut the views of Aristarchus, as respects the emplacement of the\nplanetary bodies, were not accepted by antiquity; the system proposed by\nPtolemy, and incorporated in his \"Syntaxis,\" was universally preferred.\nThe physical philosophy of those times was very imperfect--one of\nPtolemy's objections to the Pythagorean system being that, if the earth\nwere in motion, it would leave the air and other light bodies behind it.\nHe therefore placed the earth in the central position, and in succession\nrevolved round her the Moon, Mercury, Venus, the Sun, Mars, Jupiter,\nSaturn; beyond the orbit of Saturn came the firmament of the fixed\nstars. As to the solid crystalline spheres, one moving from east to\nwest, the other from north to south, these were a fancy of Eudoxus, to\nwhich Ptolemy does not allude.\n\nThe Ptolemaic system is, therefore, essentially a geocentric system. It\nleft the earth in her position of superiority, and hence gave no cause\nof umbrage to religious opinions, Christian or Mohammedan. The immense\nreputation of its author, the signal ability of his great work on the\nmechanism of the heavens, sustained it for almost fourteen hundred\nyears--that is, from the second to the sixteenth century.\n\nIn Christendom, the greater part of this long period was consumed\nin disputes respecting the nature of God, and in struggles for\necclesiastical power. The authority of the Fathers, and the prevailing\nbelief that the Scriptures contain the sum, of all knowledge,\ndiscouraged any investigation of Nature. If by chance a passing interest\nwas taken in some astronomical question, it was at once settled by\na reference to such authorities as the writings of Augustine or\nLactantius, not by an appeal to the phenomena of the heavens. So\ngreat was the preference given to sacred over profane learning that\nChristianity had been in existence fifteen hundred years, and had not\nproduced a single astronomer.\n\nThe Mohammedan nations did much better. Their cultivation of science\ndates from the capture of Alexandria, A.D. 638. This was only six years\nafter the death of the Prophet. In less than two centuries they had\nnot only become acquainted with, but correctly appreciated, the Greek\nscientific writers. As we have already mentioned, by his treaty with\nMichael III., the khalif Al-Mamun had obtained a copy of the \"Syntaxis\"\nof Ptolemy. He had it forthwith translated into Arabic. It became at\nonce the great authority of Saracen astronomy. From this basis the\nSaracens had advanced to the solution of some of the most important\nscientific problems. They had ascertained the dimensions of the earth;\nthey had registered or catalogued all the stars visible in their\nheavens, giving to those of the larger magnitudes the names they still\nbear on our maps and globes; they determined the true length of the\nyear, discovered astronomical refraction, invented the pendulum-clock,\nimproved the photometry of the stars, ascertained the curvilinear\npath of a ray of light through the air, explained the phenomena of the\nhorizontal sun and moon, and why we see those bodies before they have\nrisen and after they have set; measured the height of the atmosphere,\ndetermining it to be fifty-eight miles; given the true theory of the\ntwilight, and of the twinkling of the stars. They had built the first\nobservatory in Europe. So accurate were they in their observations, that\nthe ablest modern mathematicians have made use of their results.\nThus Laplace, in his \"Systeme du Monde,\" adduces the observations of\nAl-Batagni as affording incontestable proof of the diminution of the\neccentricity of the earth's orbit. He uses those of Ibn-Junis in his\ndiscussion of the obliquity of the ecliptic, and also in the case of the\nproblems of the greater inequalities of Jupiter and Saturn.\n\nThese represent but a part, and indeed but a small part, of the services\nrendered by the Arabian astronomers, in the solution of the problem of\nthe nature of the world. Meanwhile, such was the benighted condition of\nChristendom, such its deplorable ignorance, that it cared nothing\nabout the matter. Its attention was engrossed by image-worship,\ntransubstantiation, the merits of the saints, miracles, shrine-cures.\n\nThis indifference continued until the close of the fifteenth century.\nEven then there was no scientific inducement. The inciting motives were\naltogether of a different kind. They originated in commercial rivalries,\nand the question of the shape of the earth was finally settled by three\nsailors, Columbus, De Gama, and, above all, by Ferdinand Magellan.\n\nThe trade of Eastern Asia has always been a source of immense wealth to\nthe Western nations who in succession have obtained it. In the middle\nages it had centred in Upper Italy. It was conducted along two lines--a\nnorthern, by way of the Black and Caspian Seas, and camel-caravans\nbeyond--the headquarters of this were at Genoa; and a southern, through\nthe Syrian and Egyptian ports, and by the Arabian Sea, the headquarters\nof this being at Venice. The merchants engaged in the latter traffic had\nalso made great gains in the transport service of the Crusade-wars.\n\nThe Venetians had managed to maintain amicable relations with the\nMohammedan powers of Syria and Egypt; they were permitted to have\nconsulates at Alexandria and Damascus, and, notwithstanding the military\ncommotions of which those countries had been the scene, the trade was\nstill maintained in a comparatively flourishing condition. But the\nnorthern or Genoese line had been completely broken up by the\nirruptions of the Tartars and the Turks, and the military and political\ndisturbances of the countries through which it passed. The Eastern trade\nof Genoa was not merely in a precarious condition--it was on the brink\nof destruction.\n\nThe circular visible horizon and its dip at sea, the gradual appearance\nand disappearance of ships in the offing, cannot fail to incline\nintelligent sailors to a belief in the globular figure of the earth.\nThe writings of the Mohammedan astronomers and philosophers had given\ncurrency to that doctrine throughout Western Europe, but, as might be\nexpected, it was received with disfavor by theologians. When Genoa was\nthus on the very brink of ruin, it occurred to some of her mariners\nthat, if this view were correct, her affairs might be re-established.\nA ship sailing through the straits of Gibraltar westward, across the\nAtlantic, would not fail to reach the East Indies. There were apparently\nother great advantages. Heavy cargoes might be transported without\ntedious and expensive land-carriage, and without breaking bulk.\n\nAmong the Genoese sailors who entertained these views was Christopher\nColumbus.\n\nHe tells us that his attention was drawn to this subject by the writings\nof Averroes, but among his friends he numbered Toscanelli, a Florentine,\nwho had turned his attention to astronomy, and had become a strong\nadvocate of the globular form. In Genoa itself Columbus met with but\nlittle encouragement. He then spent many years in trying to interest\ndifferent princes in his proposed attempt. Its irreligious tendency was\npointed out by the Spanish ecclesiastics, and condemned by the Council\nof Salamanca; its orthodoxy was confuted from the Pentateuch, the\nPsalms, the Prophecies, the Gospels, the Epistles, and the writings of\nthe Fathers--St. Chrysostom, St. Augustine, St. Jerome, St. Gregory, St.\nBasil, St Ambrose.\n\nAt length, however, encouraged by the Spanish Queen Isabella, and\nsubstantially aided by a wealthy seafaring family, the Pinzons of Palos,\nsome of whom joined him personally, he sailed on August 3, 1492, with\nthree small ships, from Palos, carrying with him a letter from King\nFerdinand to the Grand-Khan of Tartary, and also a chart, or map,\nconstructed on the basis of that of Toscanelli. A little before\nmidnight, October 11, 1492, he saw from the forecastle of his ship a\nmoving light at a distance. Two hours subsequently a signal-gun from\nanother of the ships announced that they had descried land. At sunrise\nColumbus landed in the New World.\n\nOn his return to Europe it was universally supposed that he had reached\nthe eastern parts of Asia, and that therefore his voyage had been\ntheoretically successful. Columbus himself died in that belief. But\nnumerous voyages which were soon undertaken made known the general\ncontour of the American coast-line, and the discovery of the Great South\nSea by Balboa revealed at length the true facts of the case, and the\nmistake into which both Toscanelli and Columbus had fallen, that in a\nvoyage to the West the distance from Europe to Asia could not exceed\nthe distance passed over in a voyage from Italy to the Gulf of Guinea--a\nvoyage that Columbus had repeatedly made.\n\nIn his first voyage, at nightfall on September 13, 1492, being then two\nand a half degrees east of Corvo, one of the Azores, Columbus observed\nthat the compass needles of the ships no longer pointed a little to the\neast of north, but were varying to the west. The deviation became more\nand more marked as the expedition advanced. He was not the first to\ndetect the fact of variation, but he was incontestably the first to\ndiscover the line of no variation. On the return-voyage the reverse\nwas observed; the variation westward diminished until the meridian in\nquestion was reached, when the needles again pointed due north. Thence,\nas the coast of Europe was approached, the variation was to the\neast. Columbus, therefore, came to the conclusion that the line of\nno variation was a fixed geographical line, or boundary, between\nthe Eastern and Western Hemispheres. In the bull of May, 1493, Pope\nAlexander VI. accordingly adopted this line as the perpetual boundary\nbetween the possessions of Spain and Portugal, in his settlement of the\ndisputes of those nations. Subsequently, however, it was discovered that\nthe line was moving eastward. It coincided with the meridian of London\nin 1662.\n\nBy the papal bull the Portuguese possessions were limited to the east of\nthe line of no variation. Information derived from certain Egyptian\nJews had reached that government, that it was possible to sail round the\ncontinent of Africa, there being at its extreme south a cape which could\nbe easily doubled. An expedition of three ships under Vasco de Gama set\nsail, July 9, 1497; it doubled the cape on November 20th, and reached\nCalicut, on the coast of India, May 19, 1498. Under the bull, this\nvoyage to the East gave to the Portuguese the right to the India trade.\n\nUntil the cape was doubled, the course of De Gama's ships was in a\ngeneral manner southward. Very soon, it was noticed that the elevation\nof the pole-star above the horizon was diminishing, and, soon after the\nequator was reached, that star had ceased to be visible. Meantime other\nstars, some of them forming magnificent constellations, had come into\nview--the stars of the Southern Hemisphere. All this was in conformity\nto theoretical expectations founded on the admission of the globular\nform of the earth.\n\nThe political consequences that at once ensued placed the Papal\nGovernment in a position of great embarrassment. Its traditions and\npolicy forbade it to admit any other than the flat figure of the earth,\nas revealed in the Scriptures. Concealment of the facts was impossible,\nsophistry was unavailing. Commercial prosperity now left Venice as well\nas Genoa. The front of Europe was changed. Maritime power had departed\nfrom the Mediterranean countries, and passed to those upon the Atlantic\ncoast.\n\nBut the Spanish Government did not submit to the advantage thus\ngained by its commercial rival without an effort. It listened to the\nrepresentations of one Ferdinand Magellan, that India and the Spice\nIslands could be reached by sailing to the west, if only a strait or\npassage through what had now been recognized as \"the American Continent\"\ncould be discovered; and, if this should be accomplished, Spain,\nunder the papal bull, would have as good a right to the India trade as\nPortugal. Under the command of Magellan, an expedition of five ships,\ncarrying two hundred and thirty-seven men, was dispatched from Seville,\nAugust 10, 1519.\n\nMagellan at once struck boldly for the South American coast, hoping to\nfind some cleft or passage through the continent by which he might reach\nthe great South Sea. For seventy days he was becalmed on the line; his\nsailors were appalled by the apprehension that they had drifted into a\nregion where the winds never blew, and that it was impossible for them\nto escape. Calms, tempests, mutiny, desertion, could not shake his\nresolution. After more than a year he discovered the strait which\nnow bears his name, and, as Pigafetti, an Italian, who was with him,\nrelates, he shed fears of joy when he found that it had pleased God at\nlength to bring him where he might grapple with the unknown dangers of\nthe South Sea, \"the Great and Pacific Ocean.\"\n\nDriven by famine to eat scraps of skin and leather with which his\nrigging was here and there bound, to drink water that had gone putrid,\nhis crew dying of hunger and scurvy, this man, firm in his belief of the\nglobular figure of the earth, steered steadily to the northwest, and for\nnearly four months never saw inhabited land. He estimated that he had\nsailed over the Pacific not less than twelve thousand miles. He crossed\nthe equator, saw once more the pole-star, and at length made land--the\nLadrones. Here he met with adventurers from Sumatra. Among these islands\nhe was killed, either by the savages or by his own men. His lieutenant,\nSebastian d'Elcano, now took command of the ship, directing her course\nfor the Cape of Good Hope, and encountering frightful hardships. He\ndoubled the cape at last, and then for the fourth time crossed the\nequator. On September 7, 1522, after a voyage of more than three years,\nhe brought his ship, the San Vittoria, to anchor in the port of St.\nLucar, near Seville. She had accomplished the greatest achievement in\nthe history of the human race. She had circumnavigated the earth.\n\nThe San Vittoria, sailing westward, had come back to her starting-point.\nHenceforth the theological doctrine of the flatness of the earth was\nirretrievably overthrown.\n\nFive years after the completion of the voyage of Magellan, was made the\nfirst attempt in Christendom to ascertain the size of the earth. This\nwas by Fernel, a French physician, who, having observed the height of\nthe pole at Paris, went thence northward until he came to a place where\nthe height of the pole was exactly one degree more than at that city.\nHe measured the distance between the two stations by the number of\nrevolutions of one of the wheels of his carriage, to which a proper\nindicator bad been attached, and came to the conclusion that the earth's\ncircumference is about twenty-four thousand four hundred and eighty\nItalian miles.\n\nMeasures executed more and more carefully were made in many countries:\nby Snell in Holland; by Norwood between London and York in England; by\nPicard, under the auspices of the French Academy of Sciences, in France.\nPicard's plan was to connect two points by a series of triangles,\nand, thus ascertaining the length of the arc of a meridian intercepted\nbetween them, to compare it with the difference of latitudes found from\ncelestial observations. The stations were Malvoisine in the vicinity\nof Paris, and Sourdon near Amiens. The difference of latitudes was\ndetermined by observing the zenith-distances, of delta Cassiopeia. There\nare two points of interest connected with Picard's operation: it was the\nfirst in which instruments furnished with telescopes were employed;\nand its result, as we shall shortly see, was to Newton the first\nconfirmation of the theory of universal gravitation.\n\nAt this time it had become clear from mechanical considerations, more\nespecially such as had been deduced by Newton, that, since the earth is\na rotating body, her form cannot be that of a perfect sphere, but\nmust be that of a spheroid, oblate or flattened at the poles. It would\nfollow, from this, that the length of a degree must be greater near the\npoles than at the equator.\n\nThe French Academy resolved to extend Picard's operation, by prolonging\nthe measures in each direction, and making the result the basis of a\nmore accurate map of France. Delays, however, took place, and it was not\nuntil 1718 that the measures, from Dunkirk on the north to the southern\nextremity of France, were completed. A discussion arose as to the\ninterpretation of these measures, some affirming that they indicated a\nprolate, others an oblate spheroid; the former figure may be popularly\nrepresented by a lemon, the latter by an orange. To settle this, the\nFrench Government, aided by the Academy, sent out two expeditions to\nmeasure degrees of the meridian--one under the equator, the other as\nfar north as possible; the former went to Peru, the latter to Swedish\nLapland. Very great difficulties were encountered by both parties. The\nLapland commission, however, completed its observations long before the\nPeruvian, which consumed not less than nine years. The results of the\nmeasures thus obtained confirmed the theoretical expectation of the\noblate form. Since that time many extensive and exact repetitions of the\nobservation have been made, among which may be mentioned those of the\nEnglish in England and in India, and particularly that of the French\non the occasion of the introduction of the metric system of weights\nand measures. It was begun by Delambre and Mechain, from Dunkirk to\nBarcelona, and thence extended, by Biot and Arago, to the island\nof Formentera near Minorea. Its length was nearly twelve and a half\ndegrees.\n\nBesides this method of direct measurement, the figure of the earth\nmay be determined from the observed number of oscillations made by a\npendulum of invariable length in different latitudes. These, though they\nconfirm the foregoing results, give a somewhat greater ellipticity\nto the earth than that found by the measurement of degrees. Pendulums\nvibrate more slowly the nearer they are to the equator. It follows,\ntherefore, that they are there farther from the centre of the earth.\n\nFrom the most reliable measures that have been made, the dimensions of\nthe earth may be thus stated:\n\n\n  Greater or equatorial diameter..............7,925 miles.\n  Less or polar diameter......................7,899 \"\n  Difference or polar compression.............   26 \"\n\n\nSuch was the result of the discussion respecting the figure and size\nof the earth. While it was yet undetermined, another controversy arose,\nfraught with even more serious consequences. This was the conflict\nrespecting the earth's position with regard to the sun and the planetary\nbodies.\n\nCopernicus, a Prussian, about the year 1507, had completed a book \"On\nthe Revolutions of the Heavenly Bodies.\" He had journeyed to Italy\nin his youth, had devoted his attention to astronomy, and had taught\nmathematics at Rome. From a profound study of the Ptolemaic and\nPythagorean systems, he had come to a conclusion in favor of the latter,\nthe object of his book being to sustain it. Aware that his doctrines\nwere totally opposed to revealed truth, and foreseeing that they would\nbring upon him the punishments of the Church, he expressed himself in\na cautious and apologetic manner, saying that he had only taken the\nliberty of trying whether, on the supposition of the earth's motion, it\nwas possible to find better explanations than the ancient ones of the\nrevolutions of the celestial orbs; that in doing this he had only\ntaken the privilege that had been allowed to others, of feigning what\nhypothesis they chose. The preface was addressed to Pope Paul III.\n\nFull of misgivings as to what might be the result, he refrained from\npublishing his book for thirty-six years, thinking that \"perhaps it\nmight be better to follow the examples of the Pythagoreans and others,\nwho delivered their doctrine only by tradition and to friends.\" At the\nentreaty of Cardinal Schomberg he at length published it in 1543. A copy\nof it was brought to him on his death-bed. Its fate was such as he had\nanticipated. The Inquisition condemned it as heretical. In their decree,\nprohibiting it, the Congregation of the Index denounced his system\nas \"that false Pythagorean doctrine utterly contrary to the Holy\nScriptures.\"\n\nAstronomers justly affirm that the book of Copernicus, \"De\nRevolutionibus,\" changed the face of their science. It incontestably\nestablished the heliocentric theory. It showed that the distance of the\nfixed stars is infinitely great, and that the earth is a mere point in\nthe heavens. Anticipating Newton, Copernicus imputed gravity to the sun,\nthe moon, and heavenly bodies, but he was led astray by assuming that\nthe celestial motions must be circular. Observations on the orbit of\nMars, and his different diameters at different times, had led Copernicus\nto his theory.\n\nIn thus denouncing the Copernican system as being in contradiction to\nrevelation, the ecclesiastical authorities were doubtless deeply moved\nby inferential considerations. To dethrone the earth from her central\ndominating position, to give her many equals and not a few superiors,\nseemed to diminish her claims upon the Divine regard. If each of the\ncountless myriads of stars was a sun, surrounded by revolving globes,\npeopled with responsible beings like ourselves, if we had fallen so\neasily and had been redeemed at so stupendous a price as the death of\nthe Son of God, how was it with them? Of them were there none who had\nfallen or might fall like us? Where, then, for them could a Savior be\nfound?\n\nDuring the year 1608 one Lippershey, a Hollander, discovered that, by\nlooking through two glass lenses, combined in a certain manner together,\ndistant objects were magnified and rendered very plain. He had invented\nthe telescope. In the following year Galileo, a Florentine, greatly\ndistinguished by his mathematical and scientific writings, hearing\nof the circumstance, but without knowing the particulars of the\nconstruction, invented a form of the instrument for himself. Improving\nit gradually, he succeeded in making one that could magnify thirty\ntimes. Examining the moon, he found that she had valleys like those of\nthe earth, and mountains casting shadows. It had been said in the old\ntimes that in the Pleiades there were formerly seven stars, but a legend\nrelated that one of them had mysteriously disappeared. On turning his\ntelescope toward them, Galileo found that he could easily count not\nfewer than forty. In whatever direction he looked, he discovered stars\nthat were totally invisible to the naked eye.\n\nOn the night of January 7, 1610, he perceived three small stars in\na straight line, adjacent to the planet Jupiter, and, a few evenings\nlater, a fourth. He found that these were revolving in orbits round the\nbody of the planet, and, with transport, recognized that they presented\na miniature representation of the Copernican system.\n\nThe announcement of these wonders at once attracted universal attention.\nThe spiritual authorities were not slow to detect their tendency, as\nendangering the doctrine that the universe was made for man. In the\ncreation of myriads of stars, hitherto invisible, there must surely have\nbeen some other motive than that of illuminating the nights for him.\n\nIt had been objected to the Copernican theory that, if the planets\nMercury and Venus move round the sun in orbits interior to that of the\nearth, they ought to show phases like those of the moon; and that in\nthe case of Venus, which is so brilliant and conspicuous, these phases\nshould be very obvious. Copernicus himself had admitted the force of\nthe objection, and had vainly tried to find an explanation. Galileo, on\nturning his telescope to the planet, discovered that the expected phases\nactually exist; now she was a crescent, then half-moon, then gibbous,\nthen full. Previously to Copernicus, it was supposed that the planets\nshine by their own light, but the phases of Venus and Mars proved that\ntheir light is reflected. The Aristotelian notion, that celestial differ\nfrom terrestrial bodies in being incorruptible, received a rude shock\nfrom the discoveries of Galileo, that there are mountains and valleys in\nthe moon like those of the earth, that the sun is not perfect, but has\nspots on his face, and that he turns on his axis instead of being in a\nstate of majestic rest. The apparition of new stars had already thrown\nserious doubts on this theory of incorruptibility.\n\nThese and many other beautiful telescopic discoveries tended to the\nestablishment of the truth of the Copernican theory and gave unbounded\nalarm to the Church. By the low and ignorant ecclesiastics they were\ndenounced as deceptions or frauds. Some affirmed that the telescope\nmight be relied on well enough for terrestrial objects, but with the\nheavenly bodies it was altogether a different affair. Others declared\nthat its invention was a mere application of Aristotle's remark that\nstars could be seen in the daytime from the bottom of a deep well.\nGalileo was accused of imposture, heresy, blasphemy, atheism. With a\nview of defending himself, he addressed a letter to the Abbe Castelli,\nsuggesting that the Scriptures were never intended to be a scientific\nauthority, but only a moral guide. This made matters worse. He was\nsummoned before the Holy Inquisition, under an accusation of having\ntaught that the earth moves round the sun, a doctrine \"utterly contrary\nto the Scriptures.\" He was ordered to renounce that heresy, on pain of\nbeing imprisoned. He was directed to desist from teaching and advocating\nthe Copernican theory, and pledge himself that he would neither publish\nnor defend it for the future. Knowing well that Truth has no need of\nmartyrs, he assented to the required recantation, and gave the promise\ndemanded.\n\nFor sixteen years the Church had rest. But in 1632 Galileo ventured\non the publication of his work entitled \"The System of the World,\" its\nobject being the vindication of the Copernican doctrine. He was again\nsummoned before the Inquisition at Rome, accused of having asserted\nthat the earth moves round the sun. He was declared to have brought\nupon himself the penalties of heresy. On his knees, with his hand on the\nBible, he was compelled to abjure and curse the doctrine of the movement\nof the earth. What a spectacle! This venerable man, the most illustrious\nof his age, forced by the threat of death to deny facts which his judges\nas well as himself knew to be true! He was then committed to prison,\ntreated with remorseless severity during the remaining ten years of\nhis life, and was denied burial in consecrated ground. Must not that\nbe false which requires for its support so much imposture, so much\nbarbarity? The opinions thus defended by the Inquisition are now objects\nof derision to the whole civilized world.\n\nOne of the greatest of modern mathematicians, referring to this subject,\nsays that the point here contested was one which is for mankind of the\nhighest interest, because of the rank it assigns to the globe that we\ninhabit. If the earth be immovable in the midst of the universe, man has\na right to regard himself as the principal object of the care of Nature.\nBut if the earth be only one of the planets revolving round the sun, an\ninsignificant body in the solar system, she will disappear entirely\nin the immensity of the heavens, in which this system, vast as it may\nappear to us, is nothing but an insensible point.\n\nThe triumphant establishment of the Copernican doctrine dates from the\ninvention of the telescope. Soon there was not to be found in all Europe\nan astronomer who had not accepted the heliocentric theory with its\nessential postulate, the double motion of the earth--movement of\nrotation on her axis, and a movement of revolution round the sun.\nIf additional proof of the latter were needed, it was furnished by\nBradley's great discovery of the aberration of the fixed stars, an\naberration depending partly on the progressive motion of light, and\npartly on the revolution of the earth. Bradley's discovery ranked\nin importance with that of the precession of the equinoxes. Roemer's\ndiscovery of the progressive motion of light, though denounced by\nFontenelle as a seductive error, and not admitted by Cassini, at length\nforced its way to universal acceptance.\n\n\nNext it was necessary to obtain correct ideas of the dimensions of the\nsolar system, or, putting the problem under a more limited form, to\ndetermine the distance of the earth from the sun.\n\nIn the time of Copernicus it was supposed that the sun's distance could\nnot exceed five million miles, and indeed there were many who thought\nthat estimate very extravagant. From a review of the observations of\nTycho Brahe, Kepler, however, concluded that the error was actually in\nthe opposite direction, and that the estimate must be raised to at\nleast thirteen million. In 1670 Cassini showed that these numbers were\naltogether inconsistent with the facts, and gave as his conclusion\neighty-five million.\n\nThe transit of Venus over the face of the sun, June 3, 1769, had been\nforeseen, and its great value in the solution of this fundamental\nproblem in astronomy appreciated. With commendable alacrity various\ngovernments contributed their assistance in making observations, so that\nin Europe there were fifty stations, in Asia six, in America seventeen.\nIt was for this purpose that the English Government dispatched Captain\nCook on his celebrated first voyage. He went to Otaheite. His voyage\nwas crowned with success. The sun rose without a cloud, and the sky\ncontinued equally clear throughout the day. The transit at Cook's\nstation lasted from about half-past nine in the morning until about\nhalf-past three in the afternoon, and all the observations were made in\na satisfactory manner.\n\nBut, on the discussion of the observations made at the different\nstations, it was found that there was not the accordance that could have\nbeen desired--the result varying from eighty-eight to one hundred and\nnine million. The celebrated mathematician, Encke, therefore reviewed\nthem in 1822-'24, and came to the conclusion that the sun's horizontal\nparallax, that is, the angle under which the semi-diameter of the earth\nis seen from the sun, is 8 576/1000 seconds; this gave as the distance\n95,274,000 miles. Subsequently the observations were reconsidered\nby Hansen, who gave as their result 91,659,000 miles. Still later,\nLeverrier made it 91,759,000. Airy and Stone, by another method, made\nit 91,400,000; Stone alone, by a revision of the old observations,\n91,730,000; and finally, Foucault and Fizeau, from physical experiments,\ndetermining the velocity of light, and therefore in their nature\naltogether differing from transit observations, 91,400,000. Until the\nresults of the transit of next year (1874) are ascertained, it must\ntherefore be admitted that the distance of the earth from the sun is\nsomewhat less than ninety-two million miles.\n\nThis distance once determined, the dimensions of the solar system may\nbe ascertained with ease and precision. It is enough to mention that\nthe distance of Neptune from the sun, the most remote of the planets at\npresent known, is about thirty times that of the earth.\n\nBy the aid of these numbers we may begin to gain a just appreciation of\nthe doctrine of the human destiny of the universe--the doctrine that all\nthings were made for man. Seen from the sun, the earth dwindles away to\na mere speck, a mere dust-mote glistening in his beams. If the reader\nwishes a more precise valuation, let him hold a page of this book a\ncouple of feet from his eye; then let him consider one of its dots or\nfull stops; that dot is several hundred times larger in surface than is\nthe earth as seen from the sun!\n\nOf what consequence, then, can such an almost imperceptible particle be?\nOne might think that it could be removed or even annihilated, and yet\nnever be missed. Of what consequence is one of those human monads, of\nwhom more than a thousand millions swarm on the surface of this all\nbut invisible speck, and of a million of whom scarcely one will leave\na trace that he has ever existed? Of what consequence is man, his\npleasures or his pains?\n\nAmong the arguments brought forward against the Copernican system at the\ntime of its promulgation, was one by the great Danish astronomer, Tycho\nBrahe, originally urged by Aristarchus against the Pythagorean system,\nto the effect that, if, as was alleged, the earth moves round the sun,\nthere ought to be a change of the direction in which the fixed stars\nappear. At one time we are nearer to a particular region of the heavens\nby a distance equal to the whole diameter of the earth's orbit than we\nwere six months previously, and hence there ought to be a change in\nthe relative position of the stars; they should seem to separate as we\napproach them, and to close together as we recede from them; or, to use\nthe astronomical expression, these stars should have a yearly parallax.\n\nThe parallax of a star is the angle contained between two lines drawn\nfrom it--one to the sun, the other to the earth.\n\nAt that time, the earth's distance from the sun was greatly\nunder-estimated. Had it been known, as it is now, that that distance\nexceeds ninety million miles, or that the diameter of the orbit is more\nthan one hundred and eighty million, that argument would doubtless have\nhad very great weight.\n\nIn reply to Tycho, it was said that, since the parallax of a body\ndiminishes as its distance increases, a star may be so far off that its\nparallax may be imperceptible. This answer proved to be correct. The\ndetection of the parallax of the stars depended on the improvement of\ninstruments for the measurement of angles.\n\nThe parallax of alpha Centauri, a fine double star of the Southern\nHemisphere, at present considered to be the nearest of the fixed stars,\nwas first determined by Henderson and Maclear at the Cape of Good Hope\nin 1832-'33. It is about nine-tenths of a second. Hence this star is\nalmost two hundred and thirty thousand times as far from us as the sun.\nSeen from it, if the sun were even large enough to fill the whole orbit\nof the earth, or one hundred and eighty million miles in diameter,\nhe would be a mere point. With its companion, it revolves round their\ncommon centre of gravity in eighty-one years, and hence it would seem\nthat their conjoint mass is less than that of the sun.\n\nThe star 61 Cygni is of the sixth magnitude. Its parallax was first\nfound by Bessel in 1838, and is about one-third of a second. The\ndistance from us is, therefore, much more than five hundred thousand\ntimes that of the sun. With its companion, it revolves round their\ncommon centre of gravity in five hundred and twenty years. Their\nconjoint weight is about one-third that of the sun.\n\nThere is reason to believe that the great star Sirius, the brightest\nin the heavens, is about six times as far off as alpha Centauri. His\nprobable diameter is twelve million miles, and the light he emits two\nhundred times more brilliant than that of the sun. Yet, even through the\ntelescope, he has no measurable diameter; he looks merely like a very\nbright spark.\n\nThe stars, then, differ not merely in visible magnitude, but also in\nactual size. As the spectroscope shows, they differ greatly in chemical\nand physical constitution. That instrument is also revealing to us the\nduration of the life of a star, through changes in the refrangibility of\nthe emitted light. Though, as we have seen, the nearest to us is at\nan enormous and all but immeasurable distance, this is but the first\nstep--there are others the rays of which have taken thousands, perhaps\nmillions, of years to reach us! The limits of our own system are far\nbeyond the range of our greatest telescopes; what, then, shall we say of\nother systems beyond? Worlds are scattered like dust in the abysses in\nspace.\n\nHave these gigantic bodies--myriads of which are placed at so vast a\ndistance that our unassisted eyes cannot perceive them--have these no\nother purpose than that assigned by theologians, to give light to us?\nDoes not their enormous size demonstrate that, as they are centres of\nforce, so they must be centres of motion--suns for other systems of\nworlds?\n\nWhile yet these facts were very imperfectly known--indeed, were rather\nspeculations than facts--Giordano Bruno, an Italian, born seven years\nafter the death of Copernicus, published a work on the \"Infinity of\nthe Universe and of Worlds;\" he was also the author of \"Evening\nConversations on Ash-Wednesday,\" an apology for the Copernican system,\nand of \"The One Sole Cause of Things.\" To these may be added an allegory\npublished in 1584, \"The Expulsion of the Triumphant Beast.\" He had also\ncollected, for the use of future astronomers, all the observations he\ncould find respecting the new star that suddenly appeared in Cassiopeia,\nA.D. 1572, and increased in brilliancy, until it surpassed all the other\nstars. It could be plainly seen in the daytime. On a sudden, November\n11th, it was as bright as Venus at her brightest. In the following March\nit was of the first magnitude. It exhibited various hues of color in a\nfew months, and disappeared in March, 1574.\n\nThe star that suddenly appeared in Serpentarius, in Kepler's time\n(1604), was at first brighter than Venus. It lasted more than a year,\nand, passing through various tints of purple, yellow, red, became\nextinguished.\n\nOriginally, Bruno was intended for the Church. He had become a\nDominican, but was led into doubt by his meditations on the subjects of\ntransubstantiation and the immaculate conception. Not caring to\nconceal his opinions, he soon fell under the censure of the spiritual\nauthorities, and found it necessary to seek refuge successively in\nSwitzerland, France, England, Germany. The cold-scented sleuth-hounds of\nthe Inquisition followed his track remorselessly, and eventually hunted\nhim back to Italy. He was arrested in Venice, and confined in the Piombi\nfor six years, without books, or paper, or friends.\n\nIn England he had given lectures on the plurality of worlds, and in that\ncountry had written, in Italian, his most important works. It added\nnot a little to the exasperation against him, that he was perpetually\ndeclaiming against the insincerity; the impostures, of his\npersecutors--that wherever he went he found skepticism varnished over\nand concealed by hypocrisy; and that it was not against the belief of\nmen, but against their pretended belief, that he was fighting; that he\nwas struggling with an orthodoxy that had neither morality nor faith.\n\nIn his \"Evening Conversations\" he had insisted that the Scriptures were\nnever intended to teach science, but morals only; and that they cannot\nbe received as of any authority on astronomical and physical subjects.\nEspecially must we reject the view they reveal to us of the constitution\nof the world, that the earth is a flat surface, supported on pillars;\nthat the sky is a firmament--the floor of heaven. On the contrary, we\nmust believe that the universe is infinite, and that it is filled with\nself-luminous and opaque worlds, many of them inhabited; that there\nis nothing above and around us but space and stars. His meditations\non these subjects had brought him to the conclusion that the views of\nAverroes are not far from the truth--that there is an Intellect which\nanimates the universe, and of this Intellect the visible world is only\nan emanation or manifestation, originated and sustained by force derived\nfrom it, and, were that force withdrawn, all things would disappear.\nThis ever-present, all-pervading Intellect is God, who lives in all\nthings, even such as seem not to live; that every thing is ready to\nbecome organized, to burst into life. God is, therefore, \"the One Sole\nCause of Things,\" \"the All in All.\"\n\nBruno may hence be considered among philosophical writers as\nintermediate between Averroes and Spinoza. The latter held that God and\nthe Universe are the same, that all events happen by an immutable law\nof Nature, by an unconquerable necessity; that God is the Universe,\nproducing a series of necessary movements or acts, in consequence of\nintrinsic, unchangeable, and irresistible energy.\n\nOn the demand of the spiritual authorities, Bruno was removed from\nVenice to Rome, and confined in the prison of the Inquisition, accused\nnot only of being a heretic, but also a heresiarch, who had written\nthings unseemly concerning religion; the special charge against him\nbeing that he had taught the plurality of worlds, a doctrine repugnant\nto the whole tenor of Scripture and inimical to revealed religion,\nespecially as regards the plan of salvation. After an imprisonment of\ntwo years he was brought before his judges, declared guilty of the\nacts alleged, excommunicated, and, on his nobly refusing to recant, was\ndelivered over to the secular authorities to be punished \"as mercifully\nas possible, and without the shedding of his blood,\" the horrible\nformula for burning a prisoner at the stake. Knowing well that though\nhis tormentors might destroy his body, his thoughts would still live\namong men, he said to his judges, \"Perhaps it is with greater fear\nthat you pass the sentence upon me than I receive it.\" The sentence was\ncarried into effect, and he was burnt at Rome, February 16th, A.D. 1600.\n\nNo one can recall without sentiments of pity the sufferings of those\ncountless martyrs, who first by one party, and then by another, have\nbeen brought for their religious opinions to the stake. But each of\nthese had in his supreme moment a powerful and unfailing support. The\npassage from this life to the next, though through a hard trial, was the\npassage from a transient trouble to eternal happiness, an escape from\nthe cruelty of earth to the charity of heaven. On his way through the\ndark valley the martyr believed that there was an invisible hand that\nwould lead him, a friend that would guide him all the more gently and\nfirmly because of the terrors of the flames. For Bruno there was no\nsuch support. The philosophical opinions, for the sake of which he\nsurrendered his life, could give him no consolation. He must fight the\nlast fight alone. Is there not something very grand in the attitude of\nthis solitary man, something which human nature cannot help admiring, as\nhe stands in the gloomy hall before his inexorable judges? No accuser,\nno witness, no advocate is present, but the familiars of the Holy\nOffice, clad in black, are stealthily moving about. The tormentors and\nthe rack are in the vaults below. He is simply told that he has brought\nupon himself strong suspicions of heresy, since he has said that there\nare other worlds than ours. He is asked if he will recant and abjure\nhis error. He cannot and will not deny what he knows to be true, and\nperhaps--for he had often done so before--he tells his judges that they,\ntoo, in their hearts are of the same belief. What a contrast between\nthis scene of manly honor, of unshaken firmness, of inflexible adherence\nto the truth, and that other scene which took place more than fifteen\ncenturies previously by the fireside in the hall of Caiaphas the\nhigh-priest, when the cock crew, and \"the Lord turned and looked upon\nPeter\" (Luke xxii. 61)! And yet it is upon Peter that the Church has\ngrounded her right to act as she did to Bruno. But perhaps the day\napproaches when posterity will offer an expiation for this great\necclesiastical crime, and a statue of Bruno be unveiled under the dome\nof St. Peter's at Rome.\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII.\n\n     CONTROVERSY RESPECTING THE AGE OF THE EARTH.\n\n     Scriptural view that the Earth is only six thousand years\n     old, and that it was made in a week.--Patristic chronology\n     founded on the ages of the patriarchs.--Difficulties arising\n     from different estimates in different versions of the Bible.\n\n     Legend of the Deluge.--The repeopling.--The Tower of Babel;\n     the confusion of tongues.--The primitive language.\n\n     Discovery by Cassini of the oblateness of the planet\n     Jupiter.--Discovery by Newton of the oblateness of the\n     Earth.--Deduction that she has been modeled by mechanical\n     causes.--Confirmation of this by geological discoveries\n     respecting aqueous rocks; corroboration by organic remains.--\n     The necessity of admitting enormously long periods of\n     time.--Displacement of the doctrine of Creation by that of\n     Evolution--Discoveries respecting the Antiquity of Man.\n\n     The time-scale and space-scale of the world are infinite.--\n     Moderation with which the discussion of the Age of the World\n     has been conducted.\n\n\nTHE true position of the earth in the universe was established only\nafter a long and severe conflict. The Church used whatever power she\nhad, even to the infliction of death, for sustaining her ideas. But\nit was in vain. The evidence in behalf of the Copernican theory became\nirresistible. It was at length universally admitted that the sun is the\ncentral, the ruling body of our system; the earth only one, and by no\nmeans the largest, of a family of encircling planets. Taught by the\nissue of that dispute, when the question of the age of the world\npresented itself for consideration, the Church did not exhibit the\nactive resistance she had displayed on the former occasion. For,\nthough her traditions were again put in jeopardy, they were not, in her\njudgment, so vitally assailed. To dethrone the Earth from her dominating\nposition was, so the spiritual authorities declared, to undermine the\nvery foundation of revealed truth; but discussions respecting the date\nof creation might within certain limits be permitted. Those limits were,\nhowever, very quickly overpassed, and thus the controversy became as\ndangerous as the former one had been.\n\nIt was not possible to adopt the advice given by Plato in his \"Timaeus,\"\nwhen treating of this subject--the origin of the universe: \"It is proper\nthat both I who speak and you who judge should remember that we are but\nmen, and therefore, receiving the probable mythological tradition, it\nis meet that we inquire no further into it.\" Since the time of St.\nAugustine the Scriptures had been made the great and final authority in\nall matters of science, and theologians had deduced from them schemes of\nchronology and cosmogony which had proved to be stumbling-blocks to the\nadvance of real knowledge.\n\nIt is not necessary for us to do more than to allude to some of the\nleading features of these schemes; their peculiarities will be easily\ndiscerned with sufficient clearness. Thus, from the six days of creation\nand the Sabbath-day of rest, since we are told that a day is with the\nLord as a thousand years, it was inferred that the duration of the\nworld will be through six thousand years of suffering, and an additional\nthousand, a millennium of rest. It was generally admitted that the\nearth was about four thousand years old at the birth of Christ, but, so\ncareless had Europe been in the study of its annals, that not Until\nA.D. 627 had it a proper chronology of its own. A Roman abbot, Dionysius\nExiguus, or Dennis the Less, then fixed the vulgar era, and gave Europe\nits present Christian chronology.\n\nThe method followed in obtaining the earliest chronological dates was\nby computations, mainly founded on the lives of the patriarchs. Much\ndifficulty was encountered in reconciling numerical discrepancies. Even\nif, as was taken for granted in those uncritical ages, Moses was the\nauthor of the books imputed to him, due weight was not given to the fact\nthat he related events, many of which took place more than two thousand\nyears before he was born. It scarcely seemed necessary to regard the\nPentateuch as of plenary inspiration, since no means had been provided\nto perpetuate its correctness. The different copies which had escaped\nthe chances of time varied very much; thus the Samaritan made thirteen\nhundred and seven years from the Creation to the Deluge, the Hebrew\nsixteen hundred and fifty-six, the Septuagint twenty-two hundred and\nsixty-three. The Septuagint counted fifteen hundred years more from the\nCreation to Abraham than the Hebrew. In general, however, there was\nan inclination to the supposition that the Deluge took place about two\nthousand years after the Creation, and, after another interval of two\nthousand years, Christ was born. Persons who had given much attention\nto the subject affirmed that there were not less than one hundred\nand thirty-two different opinions as to the year in which the Messiah\nappeared, and hence they declared that it was inexpedient to press for\nacceptance the Scriptural numbers too closely, since it was plain,\nfrom the great differences in different copies, that there had been no\nprovidential intervention to perpetuate a correct reading, nor was there\nany mark by which men could be guided to the only authentic version.\nEven those held in the highest esteem contained undeniable errors. Thus\nthe Septuagint made Methuselah live until after the Deluge.\n\nIt was thought that, in the antediluvian world, the year consisted\nof three hundred and sixty days. Some even affirmed that this was\nthe origin of the division of the circle into three hundred and sixty\ndegrees. At the time of the Deluge, so many theologians declared, the\nmotion of the sun was altered, and the year became five days and six\nhours longer. There was a prevalent opinion that that stupendous event\noccurred on November 2d, in the year of the world 1656. Dr. Whiston,\nhowever, disposed to greater precision, inclined to postpone it to\nNovember 28th. Some thought that the rainbow was not seen until after\nthe flood; others, apparently with better reason, inferred that it was\nthen first established as a sign. On coming forth from the ark, men\nreceived permission to use flesh as food, the antediluvians having been\nherbivorous! It would seem that the Deluge had not occasioned any great\ngeographical changes, for Noah, relying on his antediluvian knowledge,\nproceeded to divide the earth among his three sons, giving to Japhet\nEurope, to Shem Asia, to Ham Africa. No provision was made for America,\nas he did not know of its existence. These patriarchs, undeterred by the\nterrible solitudes to which they were going, by the undrained swamps\nand untracked forests, journeyed to their allotted possessions, and\ncommenced the settlement of the continents.\n\nIn seventy years the Asiatic family had increased to several hundred.\nThey had found their way to the plains of Mesopotamia, and there, for\nsome motive that we cannot divine, began building a tower \"whose top\nmight reach to heaven.\" Eusebius informs us that the work continued for\nforty years. They did not abandon it until a miraculous confusion of\ntheir language took place and dispersed them all over the earth. St.\nAmbrose shows that this confusion could not have been brought about by\nmen. Origen believes that not even the angels accomplished it.\n\nThe confusion of tongues has given rise to many curious speculations\namong divines as to the primitive speech of man. Some have thought\nthat the language of Adam consisted altogether of nouns, that they were\nmonosyllables, and that the confusion was occasioned by the introduction\nof polysyllables. But these learned men must surely have overlooked the\nnumerous conversations reported in Genesis, such as those between the\nAlmighty and Adam, the serpent and Eve, etc. In these all the various\nparts of speech occur. There was, however, a coincidence of opinion\nthat the primitive language was Hebrew. On the general principles of\npatristicism, it was fitting that this should be the case.\n\nThe Greek Fathers computed that, at the time of the dispersion,\nseventy-two nations were formed, and in this conclusion St. Augustine\ncoincides. But difficulties seem to have been recognized in these\ncomputations; thus the learned Dr. Shuckford, who has treated very\nelaborately on all the foregoing points in his excellent work \"On the\nSacred and Profane History of the World connected,\" demonstrates that\nthere could not have been more than twenty-one or twenty-two men, women,\nand children, in each of those kingdoms.\n\nA very vital point in this system of chronological computation, based\nupon the ages of the patriarchs, was the great length of life to which\nthose worthies attained. It was generally supposed that before the Flood\n\"there was a perpetual equinox,\" and no vicissitudes in Nature. After\nthat event the standard of life diminished one-half, and in the time of\nthe Psalmist it had sunk to seventy years, at which it still remains.\nAusterities of climate were affirmed to have arisen through the shifting\nof the earth's axis at the Flood, and to this ill effect were added the\nnoxious influences of that universal catastrophe, which, \"converting the\nsurface of the earth into a vast swamp, gave rise to fermentations of\nthe blood and a weakening of the fibres.\"\n\nWith a view of avoiding difficulties arising from the extraordinary\nlength of the patriarchal lives, certain divines suggested that the\nyears spoken of by the sacred penman were not ordinary but lunar years.\nThis, though it might bring the age of those venerable men within\nthe recent term of life, introduced, however, another insuperable\ndifficulty, since it made them have children when only five or six years\nold.\n\nSacred science, as interpreted by the Fathers of the Church,\ndemonstrated these facts: 1. That the date of Creation was comparatively\nrecent, not more than four or five thousand years before Christ; 2. That\nthe act of Creation occupied the space of six ordinary days; 3. That\nthe Deluge was universal, and that the animals which survived it were\npreserved in an ark; 4. That Adam was created perfect in morality and\nintelligence, that he fell, and that his descendants have shared in his\nsin and his fall.\n\nOf these points and others that might be mentioned there were two on\nwhich ecclesiastical authority felt that it must insist. These were:\n1. The recent date of Creation; for, the remoter that event, the more\nurgent the necessity of vindicating the justice of God, who apparently\nhad left the majority of our race to its fate, and had reserved\nsalvation for the few who were living in the closing ages of the\nworld; 2. The perfect condition of Adam at his creation, since this was\nnecessary to the theory of the fall, and the plan of salvation.\n\nTheological authorities were therefore constrained to look with disfavor\non any attempt to carry back the origin of the earth, to an epoch\nindefinitely remote, and on the Mohammedan theory of the evolution\nof man from lower forms, or his gradual development to his present\ncondition in the long lapse of time.\n\n\nFrom the puerilities, absurdities, and contradictions of the foregoing\nstatement, we may gather how very unsatisfactory this so-called sacred\nscience was. And perhaps we may be brought to the conclusion to\nwhich Dr. Shuckford, above quoted, was constrained to come, after his\nwearisome and unavailing attempt to coordinate its various parts: \"As to\nthe Fathers of the first ages of the Church, they were good men, but not\nmen of universal learning.\"\n\nSacred cosmogony regards the formation and modeling of the earth as the\ndirect act of God; it rejects the intervention of secondary causes in\nthose events.\n\nScientific cosmogony dates from the telescopic discovery made by\nCassini--an Italian astronomer, under whose care Louis XIV. placed the\nObservatory of Paris--that the planet Jupiter is not a sphere, but\nan oblate spheroid, flattened at the poles. Mechanical philosophy\ndemonstrated that such a figure is the necessary result of the rotation\nof a yielding mass, and that the more rapid the rotation the greater the\nflattening, or, what comes to the same thing, the greater the equatorial\nbulging must be.\n\nFrom considerations--purely of a mechanical kind--Newton had foreseen\nthat such likewise, though to a less striking extent, must be the figure\nof the earth. To the protuberant mass is due the precession of the\nequinoxes, which requires twenty-five thousand eight hundred and\nsixty-eight years for its completion, and also the nutation of the\nearth's axis, discovered by Bradley. We have already had occasion to\nremark that the earth's equatorial diameter exceeds the polar by about\ntwenty-six miles.\n\nTwo facts are revealed by the oblateness of the earth: 1. That she has\nformerly been in a yielding or plastic condition; 2. That she has been\nmodeled by a mechanical and therefore a secondary cause.\n\nBut this influence of mechanical causes is manifested not only in\nthe exterior configuration of the globe of the earth as a spheroid of\nrevolution, it also plainly appears on an examination of the arrangement\nof her substance.\n\nIf we consider the aqueous rocks, their aggregate is many miles in\nthickness; yet they undeniably have been of slow deposit. The material\nof which they consist has been obtained by the disintegration of ancient\nlands; it has found its way into the water-courses, and by them been\ndistributed anew. Effects of this kind, taking place before our eyes,\nrequire a very considerable lapse of time to produce a well-marked\nresult--a water deposit may in this manner measure in thickness a few\ninches in a century--what, then, shall we say as to the time consumed in\nthe formation of deposits of many thousand yards?\n\nThe position of the coast-line of Egypt has been known for much more\nthan two thousand years. In that time it has made, by reason of the\ndetritus brought down by the Nile, a distinctly-marked encroachment on\nthe Mediterranean. But all Lower Egypt has had a similar origin. The\ncoast-line near the mouth of the Mississippi has been well known\nfor three hundred years, and during that time has scarcely made a\nperceptible advance on the Gulf of Mexico; but there was a time when the\ndelta of that river was at St. Louis, more than seven hundred miles\nfrom its present position. In Egypt and in America--in fact, in all\ncountries--the rivers have been inch by inch prolonging the land into\nthe sea; the slowness of their work and the vastness of its extent\nsatisfy us that we must concede for the operation enormous periods of\ntime.\n\nTo the same conclusion we are brought if we consider the filling of\nlakes, the deposit of travertines, the denudation of hills, the\ncutting action of the sea on its shores, the undermining of cliffs, the\nweathering of rocks by atmospheric water and carbonic acid.\n\nSedimentary strata must have been originally deposited in planes nearly\nhorizontal. Vast numbers of them have been forced, either by paroxysms\nat intervals or by gradual movement, into all manner of angular\ninclinations. Whatever explanations we may offer of these innumerable\nand immense tilts and fractures, they would seem to demand for their\ncompletion an inconceivable length of time.\n\nThe coal-bearing strata in Wales, by their gradual submergence, have\nattained a thickness of 12,000 feet; in Nova Scotia of 14,570 feet.\nSo slow and so steady was this submergence, that erect trees stand one\nabove another on successive levels; seventeen such repetitions may be\ncounted in a thickness of 4,515 feet. The age of the trees is proved\nby their size, some being four feet in diameter. Round them, as they\ngradually went down with the subsiding soil, calamites grew, at one\nlevel after another. In the Sydney coal-field fifty-nine fossil forests\noccur in superposition.\n\nMarine shells, found on mountain-tops far in the interior of continents,\nwere regarded by theological writers as an indisputable illustration of\nthe Deluge. But when, as geological studies became more exact, it was\nproved that in the crust of the earth vast fresh-water formations are\nrepeatedly intercalated with vast marine ones, like the leaves of a\nbook, it became evident that no single cataclysm was sufficient\nto account for such results; that the same region, through gradual\nvariations of its level and changes in its topographical surroundings,\nhad sometimes been dry land, sometimes covered with fresh and sometimes\nwith sea water. It became evident also that, for the completion of these\nchanges, tens of thousands of years were required.\n\nTo this evidence of a remote origin of the earth, derived from the vast\nsuperficial extent, the enormous thickness, and the varied characters of\nits strata, was added an imposing body of proof depending on its fossil\nremains. The relative ages of formations having been ascertained, it\nwas shown that there has been an advancing physiological progression of\norganic forms, both vegetable and animal, from the oldest to the most\nrecent; that those which inhabit the surface in our times are but an\ninsignificant fraction of the prodigious multitude that have inhabited\nit heretofore; that for each species now living there are thousands\nthat have become extinct. Though special formations are so strikingly\ncharacterized by some predominating type of life as to justify such\nexpressions as the age of mollusks, the age of reptiles, the age of\nmammals, the introduction of the new-comers did not take place abruptly.\nas by sudden creation. They gradually emerged in an antecedent age,\nreached their culmination in the one which they characterize, and then\ngradually died out in a succeeding. There is no such thing as a\nsudden creation, a sudden strange appearance--but there is a slow\nmetamorphosis, a slow development from a preexisting form. Here again\nwe encounter the necessity of admitting for such results long periods\nof time. Within the range of history no well-marked instance of such\ndevelopment has been witnessed, and we speak with hesitation of doubtful\ninstances of extinction. Yet in geological times myriads of evolutions\nand extinctions have occurred.\n\nSince thus, within the experience of man, no case of metamorphosis\nor development has been observed, some have been disposed to deny its\npossibility altogether, affirming that all the different species have\ncome into existence by separate creative acts. But surely it is less\nunphilosophical to suppose that each species has been evolved from a\npredecessor by a modification of its parts, than that it has suddenly\nstarted into existence out of nothing. Nor is there much weight in\nthe remark that no man has ever witnessed such a transformation taking\nplace. Let it be remembered that no man has ever witnessed an act\nof creation, the sudden appearance of an organic form, without any\nprogenitor.\n\nAbrupt, arbitrary, disconnected creative acts may serve to illustrate\nthe Divine power; but that continuous unbroken chain of organisms which\nextends from palaeozoic formations to the formations of recent times, a\nchain in which each link hangs on a preceding and sustains a succeeding\none, demonstrates to us not only that the production of animated beings\nis governed by law, but that it is by law that has undergone no change.\nIn its operation, through myriads of ages, there has been no variation,\nno suspension.\n\nThe foregoing paragraphs may serve to indicate the character of a\nportion of the evidence with which we must deal in considering the\nproblem of the age of the earth. Through the unintermitting labors of\ngeologists, so immense a mass has been accumulated, that many volumes\nwould be required to contain the details. It is drawn from the phenomena\npresented by all kinds of rocks, aqueous, igneous, metamorphic. Of\naqueous rocks it investigates the thickness, the inclined positions,\nand how they rest unconformably on one another; how those that are of\nfresh-water origin are intercalated with those that are marine; how\nvast masses of material have been removed by slow-acting causes of\ndenudation, and extensive geographical surfaces have been remodeled; how\ncontinents have undergone movements of elevation and depression, their\nshores sunk under the ocean, or sea-beaches and sea-cliffs carried far\ninto the interior. It considers the zoological and botanical facts, the\nfauna and flora of the successive ages, and how in an orderly manner the\nchain of organic forms, plants, and animals, has been extended, from its\ndim and doubtful beginnings to our own times. From facts presented by\nthe deposits of coal-coal which, in all its varieties, has originated\nfrom the decay of plants--it not only demon strates the changes that\nhave taken place in the earth's atmosphere, but also universal changes\nof climate. From other facts it proves that there have been oscillations\nof temperature, periods in which the mean heat has risen, and periods\nin which the polar ices and snows have covered large portions of the\nexisting continents--glacial periods, as they are termed.\n\nOne school of geologists, resting its argument on very imposing\nevidence, teaches that the whole mass of the earth, from being in a\nmolten, or perhaps a vaporous condition, has cooled by radiation in the\nlapse of millions of ages, until it has reached its present equilibrium\nof temperature. Astronomical observations give great weight to this\ninterpretation, especially so far as the planetary bodies of the solar\nsystem are concerned. It is also supported by such facts as the small\nmean density of the earth, the increasing temperature at increasing\ndepths, the phenomena of volcanoes and injected veins, and those of\nigneous and metamorphic rocks. To satisfy the physical changes which\nthis school of geologists contemplates, myriads of centuries are\nrequired.\n\nBut, with the views that the adoption of the Copernican system has given\nus, it is plain that we cannot consider the origin and biography of the\nearth in an isolated way; we must include with her all the other members\nof the system or family to which she belongs. Nay, more, we cannot\nrestrict ourselves to the solar system; we must embrace in our\ndiscussions the starry worlds. And, since we have become familiarized\nwith their almost immeasurable distances from one another, we are\nprepared to accept for their origin an immeasurably remote time. There\nare stars so far off that their light, fast as it travels, has taken\nthousands of years to reach us, and hence they must have been in\nexistence many thousands of years ago.\n\nGeologists having unanimously agreed--for perhaps there is not a single\ndissenting voice--that the chronology of the earth must be greatly\nextended, attempts have been made to give precision to it. Some of\nthese have been based on astronomical, some on physical principles. Thus\ncalculations founded on the known changes of the eccentricity of the\nearth's orbit, with a view of determining the lapse of time since the\nbeginning of the last glacial period, have given two hundred and\nforty thousand years. Though the general postulate of the immensity of\ngeological times may be conceded, such calculations are on too uncertain\na theoretical basis to furnish incontestable results.\n\nBut, considering the whole subject from the present scientific\nstand-point, it is very clear that the views presented by theological\nwriters, as derived from the Mosaic record, cannot be admitted. Attempts\nhave been repeatedly made to reconcile the revealed with the discovered\nfacts, but they have proved to be unsatisfactory. The Mosaic time is\ntoo short, the order of creation incorrect, the divine interventions\ntoo anthropomorphic; and, though the presentment of the subject is in\nharmony with the ideas that men have entertained, when first their\nminds were turned to the acquisition of natural knowledge, it is not in\naccordance with their present conceptions of the insignificance of the\nearth and the grandeur of the universe.\n\n\nAmong late geological discoveries is one of special interest; it is the\ndetection of human remains and human works in formations which, though\ngeologically recent, are historically very remote.\n\nThe fossil remains of men, with rude implements of rough or chipped\nflint, of polished stone, of bone, of bronze, are found in Europe in\ncaves, in drifts, in peat-beds. They indicate a savage life, spent in\nhunting and fishing. Recent researches give reason to believe that,\nunder low and base grades, the existence of man can be traced back into\nthe tertiary times. He was contemporary with the southern elephant,\nthe rhinoceros leptorhinus, the great hippopotamus, perhaps even in the\nmiocene contemporary with the mastodon.\n\nAt the close of the Tertiary period, from causes not yet determined, the\nNorthern Hemisphere underwent a great depression of temperature. From\na torrid it passed to a glacial condition. After a period of prodigious\nlength, the temperature again rose, and the glaciers that had so\nextensively covered the surface receded. Once more there was a decline\nin the heat, and the glaciers again advanced, but this time not so far\nas formerly. This ushered in the Quaternary period, during which very\nslowly the temperature came to its present degree. The water deposits\nthat were being made required thousands of centuries for their\ncompletion. At the beginning of the Quaternary period there were\nalive the cave-bear, the cave-lion, the amphibious hippopotamus, the\nrhinoceros with chambered nostrils, the mammoth. In fact, the mammoth\nswarmed. He delighted in a boreal climate. By degrees the reindeer, the\nhorse, the ox, the bison, multiplied, and disputed with him his food.\nPartly for this reason, and partly because of the increasing heat, he\nbecame extinct. From middle Europe, also, the reindeer retired. His\ndeparture marks the end of the Quaternary period.\n\nSince the advent of man on the earth, we have, therefore, to deal with\nperiods of incalculable length. Vast changes in the climate and fauna\nwere produced by the slow operation of causes such as are in action at\nthe present day. Figures cannot enable us to appreciate these enormous\nlapses of time.\n\nIt seems to be satisfactorily established, that a race allied to the\nBasques may be traced back to the Neolithic age. At that time the\nBritish Islands were undergoing a change of level, like that at present\noccurring in the Scandinavian Peninsula. Scotland was rising, England\nwas sinking. In the Pleistocene age there existed in Central Europe a\nrude race of hunters and fishers closely allied to the Esquimaux.\n\nIn the old glacial drift of Scotland the relics of man are found along\nwith those of the fossil elephant. This carries us back to that time\nabove referred to, when a large portion of Europe was covered with ice,\nwhich had edged down from the polar regions to southerly latitudes, and,\nas glaciers, descended from the summits of the mountain-chains into the\nplains. Countless species of animals perished in this cataclysm of ice\nand snow, but man survived.\n\nIn his primitive savage condition, living for the most part on fruits,\nroots, shell-fish, man was in possession of a fact which was certain\neventually to insure his civilization. He knew how to make a fire. In\npeat-beds, under the remains of trees that in those localities have\nlong ago become extinct, his relics are still found, the implements\nthat accompany him indicating a distinct chronological order. Near the\nsurface are those of bronze, lower down those of bone or horn, still\nlower those of polished stone, and beneath all those of chipped or rough\nstone. The date of the origin of some of these beds cannot be estimated\nat less than forty or fifty thousand years.\n\nThe caves that have been examined in France and elsewhere have furnished\nfor the Stone age axes, knives, lance and arrow points, scrapers,\nhammers. The change from what may be termed the chipped to the polished\nstone period is very gradual. It coincides with the domestication of the\ndog, an epoch in hunting-life. It embraces thousands of centuries. The\nappearance of arrow-heads indicates the invention of the bow, and\nthe rise of man from a defensive to an offensive mode of life. The\nintroduction of barbed arrows shows how inventive talent was displaying\nitself; bone and horn tips, that the huntsman was including smaller\nanimals, and perhaps birds, in his chase; bone whistles, his\ncompanionship with other huntsmen or with his dog. The scraping-knives\nof flint indicate the use of skin for clothing, and rude bodkins and\nneedles its manufacture. Shells perforated for bracelets and necklaces\nprove how soon a taste for personal adornment was acquired; the\nimplements necessary for the preparation of pigments suggest the\npainting of the body, and perhaps tattooing; and batons of rank bear\nwitness to the beginning of a social organization.\n\nWith the utmost interest we look upon the first germs of art among these\nprimitive men. They have left its rude sketches on pieces of ivory and\nflakes of bone, and carvings, of the animals contemporary with them. In\nthese prehistoric delineations, sometimes not without spirit, we have\nmammoths, combats of reindeer. One presents us with a man harpooning a\nfish, another a hunting-scene of naked men armed with the dart. Man is\nthe only animal who has the propensity of depicting external forms, and\nof availing himself of the use of fire.\n\nShell-mounds, consisting of bones and shells, some of which may be\njustly described as of vast extent, and of a date anterior to the Bronze\nage, and full of stone implements, bear in all their parts indications\nof the use of fire. These are often adjacent to the existing coasts\nsometimes, however, they are far inland, in certain instances as far\nas fifty miles. Their contents and position indicate for them a date\nposterior to that of the great extinct mammals, but prior to the\ndomesticated. Some of these, it is said, cannot be less than one hundred\nthousand years old.\n\nThe lake-dwellings in Switzerland--huts built on piles or logs, wattled\nwith boughs--were, as may be inferred from the accompanying implements,\nbegun in the Stone age, and continued into that of Bronze. In the latter\nperiod the evidences become numerous of the adoption of an agricultural\nlife.\n\nIt must not be supposed that the periods into which geologists have\nfound it convenient to divide the progress of man in civilization are\nabrupt epochs, which hold good simultaneously for the whole human race.\nThus the wandering Indians of America are only at the present moment\nemerging from the Stone age. They are still to be seen in many places\narmed with arrows, tipped with flakes of flint. It is but as yesterday\nthat some have obtained, from the white man, iron, fire-arms, and the\nhorse.\n\nSo far as investigations have gone, they indisputably refer the\nexistence of man to a date remote from us by many hundreds of thousands\nof years. It must be borne in mind that these investigations are quite\nrecent, and confined to a very limited geographical space. No researches\nhave yet been made in those regions which might reasonably be regarded\nas the primitive habitat of man.\n\nWe are thus carried back immeasurably beyond the six thousand years of\nPatristic chronology. It is difficult to assign a shorter date for the\nlast glaciation of Europe than a quarter of a million of years, and\nhuman existence antedates that. But not only is it this grand fact that\nconfronts us, we have to admit also a primitive animalized state, and a\nslow, a gradual development. But this forlorn, this savage condition\nof humanity is in strong contrast to the paradisiacal happiness of the\ngarden of Eden, and, what is far more serious, it is inconsistent with\nthe theory of the Fall.\n\n\nI have been induced to place the subject of this chapter out of its\nproper chronological order, for the sake of presenting what I had to\nsay respecting the nature of the world more completely by itself. The\ndiscussions that arose as to the age of the earth were long after the\nconflict as to the criterion of truth--that is, after the Reformation;\nindeed, they were substantially included in the present century. They\nhave been conducted with so much moderation as to justify the term\nI have used in the title of this chapter, \"Controversy,\" rather than\n\"Conflict.\" Geology has not had to encounter the vindictive opposition\nwith which astronomy was assailed, and, though, on her part, she has\ninsisted on a concession of great antiquity for the earth, she has\nherself pointed out the unreliability of all numerical estimates thus\nfar offered. The attentive reader of this chapter cannot have failed to\nobserve inconsistencies in the numbers quoted. Though wanting the\nmerit of exactness, those numbers, however, justify the claim of vast\nantiquity, and draw us to the conclusion that the time-scale of the\nworld answers to the space-scale in magnitude.\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII.\n\n     CONFLICT RESPECTING THE CRITERION OF TRUTH.\n\n     Ancient philosophy declares that man has no means of\n     ascertaining the truth.\n\n     Differences of belief arise among the early Christians--An\n     ineffectual attempt is made to remedy them by Councils.--\n     Miracle and ordeal proof introduced.\n\n     The papacy resorts to auricular confession and the\n     Inquisition.--It perpetrates frightful atrocities for the\n     suppression of differences of opinion.\n\n     Effect of the discovery of the Pandects of Justinian and\n     development of the canon law on the nature of evidence.--It\n     becomes more scientific.\n\n     The Reformation establishes the rights of individual\n     reason.--Catholicism asserts that the criterion of truth is\n     in the Church. It restrains the reading of books by the\n     Index Expurgatorius, and combats dissent by such means as\n     the massacre of St. Bartholomew's Eve.\n\n     Examination of the authenticity of the Pentateuch as the\n     Protestant criterion.--Spurious character of those books.\n\n     For Science the criterion of truth is to be found in the\n     revelations of Nature: for the Protestant, it is in the\n     Scriptures; for the Catholic, in an infallible Pope.\n\n\n\"WHAT is truth?\" was the passionate demand of a Roman procurator on one\nof the most momentous occasions in history. And the Divine Person who\nstood before him, to whom the interrogation was addressed, made no\nreply--unless, indeed, silence contained the reply.\n\nOften and vainly had that demand been made before--often and vainly has\nit been made since. No one has yet given a satisfactory answer.\n\nWhen, at the dawn of science in Greece, the ancient religion was\ndisappearing like a mist at sunrise, the pious and thoughtful men of\nthat country were thrown into a condition of intellectual despair.\nAnaxagoras plaintively exclaims, \"Nothing can be known, nothing can be\nlearned, nothing can be certain, sense is limited, intellect is weak,\nlife is short.\" Xenophanes tells us that it is impossible for us to be\ncertain even when we utter the truth. Parmenides declares that the\nvery constitution of man prevents him from ascertaining absolute truth.\nEmpedocles affirms that all philosophical and religious systems must\nbe unreliable, because we have no criterion by which to test them.\nDemocritus asserts that even things that are true cannot impart\ncertainty to us; that the final result of human inquiry is the discovery\nthat man is incapable of absolute knowledge; that, even if the truth be\nin his possession, he cannot be certain of it. Pyrrho bids us reflect\non the necessity of suspending our judgment of things, since we have no\ncriterion of truth; so deep a distrust did he impart to his followers,\nthat they were in the habit of saying, \"We assert nothing; no, not even\nthat we assert nothing.\" Epicurus taught his disciples that truth can\nnever be determined by reason. Arcesilaus, denying both intellectual and\nsensuous knowledge, publicly avowed that he knew nothing, not even his\nown ignorance! The general conclusion to which Greek philosophy came was\nthis--that, in view of the contradiction of the evidence of the\nsenses, we cannot distinguish the true from the false; and such is the\nimperfection of reason, that we cannot affirm the correctness of any\nphilosophical deduction.\n\nIt might be supposed that a revelation from God to man would come with\nsuch force and clearness as to settle all uncertainties and overwhelm\nall opposition. A Greek philosopher, less despairing than others, had\nventured to affirm that the coexistence of two forms of faith, both\nclaiming to be revealed by the omnipotent God, proves that neither of\nthem is true. But let us remember that it is difficult for men to come\nto the same conclusion as regards even material and visible things,\nunless they stand at the same point of view. If discord and distrust\nwere the condition of philosophy three hundred years before the birth\nof Christ, discord and distrust were the condition of religion three\nhundred years after his death. This is what Hilary, the Bishop of\nPoictiers, in his well-known passage written about the time of the\nNicene Council, says:\n\n\"It is a thing equally deplorable and dangerous that there are, as many\ncreeds as opinions among men, as many doctrines as inclinations, and as\nmany sources of blasphemy as there are faults among us, because we make\ncreeds arbitrarily and explain them as arbitrarily. Every year, nay,\nevery moon, we make new creeds to describe invisible mysteries; we\nrepent of what we have done; we defend those who repent; we anathematize\nthose whom we defend; we condemn either the doctrines of others in\nourselves, or our own in that of others; and, reciprocally tearing each\nother to pieces, we have been the cause of each other's ruin.\"\n\nThese are not mere words; but the import of this self-accusation can\nbe realized fully only by such as are familiar with the ecclesiastical\nhistory of those times. As soon as the first fervor of Christianity as a\nsystem of benevolence had declined, dissensions appeared. Ecclesiastical\nhistorians assert that \"as early as the second century began the contest\nbetween faith and reason, religion and philosophy, piety and genius.\" To\ncompose these dissensions, to obtain some authoritative expression, some\ncriterion of truth, assemblies for consultation were resorted to, which\neventually took the form of councils. For a long time they had nothing\nmore than an advisory authority; but, when, in the fourth century,\nChristianity had attained to imperial rule, their dictates became\ncompulsory, being enforced by the civil power. By this the whole face\nof the Church was changed. Oecumenical councils--parliaments of\nChristianity--consisting of delegates from all the churches in the\nworld, were summoned by the authority of the emperor; he presided either\npersonally or nominally in them--composed all differences, and was, in\nfact, the Pope of Christendom. Mosheim, the historian, to whom I have\nmore particularly referred above, speaking of these times, remarks\nthat \"there was nothing to exclude the ignorant from ecclesiastical\npreferment; the savage and illiterate party, who looked on all kinds\nof learning, particularly philosophy, as pernicious to piety, was\nincreasing;\" and, accordingly, \"the disputes carried on in the Council\nof Nicea offered a remarkable example of the greatest ignorance and\nutter confusion of ideas, particularly in the language and explanations\nof those who approved of the decisions of that council.\" Vast as its\ninfluence has been, \"the ancient critics are neither agreed concerning\nthe time nor place in which it was assembled, the number of those who\nsat in it, nor the bishop who presided. No authentic acts of its famous\nsentence have been committed to writing, or, at least, none have been\ntransmitted to our times.\" The Church had now become what, in the\nlanguage of modern politicians, would be called \"a confederated\nrepublic.\" The will of the council was determined by a majority vote,\nand, to secure that, all manner of intrigues and impositions were\nresorted to; the influence of court females, bribery, and violence, were\nnot spared. The Council of Nicea had scarcely adjourned,--when it was\nplain to all impartial men that, as a method of establishing a criterion\nof truth in religious matters, such councils were a total failure. The\nminority had no rights which the majority need respect. The protest of\nmany good men, that a mere majority vote given by delegates, whose right\nto vote had never been examined and authorized, could not be received\nas ascertaining absolute truth, was passed over with contempt, and the\nconsequence was, that council was assembled against council, and their\njarring and contradictory decrees spread perplexity and confusion\nthroughout the Christian world. In the fourth century alone there were\nthirteen councils adverse to Arius, fifteen in his favor, and seventeen\nfor the semi-Arians--in all, forty-five. Minorities were perpetually\nattempting to use the weapon which majorities had abused.\n\nThe impartial ecclesiastical historian above quoted, moreover, says\nthat \"two monstrous and calamitous errors were adopted in this fourth\ncentury: 1. That it was an act of virtue to deceive and lie when, by\nthat means, the interests of the Church might be promoted. 2. That\nerrors in religion, when maintained and adhered to after proper\nadmonition, were punishable with civil penalties and corporal tortures.\"\n\nNot without astonishment can we look back at what, in those times, were\npopularly regarded as criteria of truth. Doctrines were considered\nas established by the number of martyrs who had professed them, by\nmiracles, by the confession of demons, of lunatics, or of persons\npossessed of evil spirits: thus, St. Ambrose, in his disputes with the\nArians, produced men possessed by devils, who, on the approach of the\nrelics of certain martyrs, acknowledged, with loud cries, that the\nNicean doctrine of the three persons of the Godhead was true. But\nthe Arians charged him with suborning these infernal witnesses with a\nweighty bribe. Already, ordeal tribunals were making their appearance.\nDuring the following six centuries they were held as a final resort for\nestablishing guilt or innocence, under the forms of trial by cold water,\nby duel, by the fire, by the cross.\n\nWhat an utter ignorance of the nature of evidence and its laws have we\nhere! An accused man sinks or swims when thrown into a pond of water;\nhe is burnt or escapes unharmed when he holds a piece of red-hot iron\nin his hand; a champion whom he has hired is vanquished or vanquishes in\nsingle fight; he can keep his arms outstretched like a cross, or fails\nto do so longer than his accuser, and his innocence or guilt of some\nimputed crime is established! Are these criteria of truth?\n\nIs it surprising that all Europe was filled with imposture miracles\nduring those ages?--miracles that are a disgrace to the common-sense of\nman!\n\nBut the inevitable day came at length. Assertions and doctrines based\nupon such preposterous evidence were involved in the discredit that fell\nupon the evidence itself. As the thirteenth century is approached, we\nfind unbelief in all directions setting in. First, it is plainly seen\namong the monastic orders, then it spreads rapidly among the common\npeople. Books, such as \"The Everlasting Gospel,\" appear among the\nformer; sects, such as the Catharists, Waldenses, Petrobrussians, arise\namong the latter. They agreed in this, \"that the public and established\nreligion was a motley system of errors and superstitions, and that the\ndominion which the pope had usurped over Christians was unlawful and\ntyrannical; that the claim put forth by Rome, that the Bishop of Rome is\nthe supreme lord of the universe, and that neither princes nor bishops,\ncivil governors nor ecclesiastical rulers, have any lawful power in\nchurch or state but what they receive from him, is utterly without\nfoundation, and a usurpation of the rights of man.\"\n\nTo withstand this flood of impiety, the papal government established two\ninstitutions: 1. The Inquisition; 2. Auricular confession--the latter as\na means of detection, the former as a tribunal for punishment.\n\nIn general terms, the commission of the Inquisition was, to extirpate\nreligious dissent by terrorism, and surround heresy with the most\nhorrible associations; this necessarily implied the power of determining\nwhat constitutes heresy. The criterion of truth was thus in possession\nof this tribunal, which was charged \"to discover and bring to judgment\nheretics lurking in towns, houses, cellars, woods, caves, and fields.\"\nWith such savage alacrity did it carry out its object of protecting the\ninterests of religion, that between 1481 and 1808 it had punished three\nhundred and forty thousand persons, and of these nearly thirty-two\nthousand had been burnt! In its earlier days, when public opinion could\nfind no means of protesting against its atrocities, \"it often put to\ndeath, without appeal, on the very day that they were accused, nobles,\nclerks, monks, hermits, and lay persons of every rank.\" In whatever\ndirection thoughtful men looked, the air was full of fearful shadows. No\none could indulge in freedom of thought without expecting punishment. So\ndreadful were the proceedings of the Inquisition, that the exclamation\nof Pagliarici was the exclamation of thousands: \"It is hardly possible\nfor a man to be a Christian, and die in his bed.\"\n\nThe Inquisition destroyed the sectaries of Southern France in the\nthirteenth century. Its unscrupulous atrocities extirpated Protestantism\nin Italy and Spain. Nor did it confine itself to religious affairs; it\nengaged in the suppression of political discontent. Nicolas Eymeric, who\nwas inquisitor-general of the kingdom of Aragon for nearly fifty years,\nand who died in 1399, has left a frightful statement of its conduct and\nappalling cruelties in his \"Directorium Inquisitorum.\"\n\nThis disgrace of Christianity, and indeed of the human race, had\ndifferent constitutions in different countries. The papal Inquisition\ncontinued the tyranny, and eventually superseded the old episcopal\ninquisitions. The authority of the bishops was unceremoniously put aside\nby the officers of the pope.\n\nBy the action of the fourth Lateran Council, A.D. 1215, the power of\nthe Inquisition was frightfully increased, the necessity of private\nconfession to a priest--auricular confession--being at that time\nformally established. This, so far as domestic life was concerned, gave\nomnipresence and omniscience to the Inquisition. Not a man was safe.\nIn the hands of the priest, who, at the confessional, could extract or\nextort from them their most secret thoughts, his wife and his servants\nwere turned into spies. Summoned before the dread tribunal, he was\nsimply informed that he lay under strong suspicions of heresy. No\naccuser was named; but the thumb-screw, the stretching-rope, the boot\nand wedge, or other enginery of torture, soon supplied that defect, and,\ninnocent or guilty, he accused himself!\n\nNotwithstanding all this power, the Inquisition failed of its purpose.\nWhen the heretic could no longer confront it, he evaded it. A dismal\ndisbelief stealthily pervaded all Europe,--a denial of Providence,\nof the immortality of the soul, of human free-will, and that man can\npossibly resist the absolute necessity, the destiny which envelops him.\nIdeas such as these were cherished in silence by multitudes of persons\ndriven to them by the tyrannical acts of ecclesiasticism. In spite of\npersecution, the Waldenses still survived to propagate their declaration\nthat the Roman Church, since Constantine, had degenerated from its\npurity and sanctity; to protest against the sale of indulgences, which\nthey said had nearly abolished prayer, fasting, alms; to affirm that it\nwas utterly useless to pray for the souls of the dead, since they must\nalready have gone either to heaven or hell. Though it was generally\nbelieved that philosophy or science was pernicious to the interests of\nChristianity or true piety, the Mohammedan literature then prevailing\nin Spain was making converts among all classes of society. We see very\nplainly its influence in many of the sects that then arose; thus, \"the\nBrethren and Sisters of the Free. Spirit\" held that \"the universe came\nby emanation from God, and would finally return to him by absorption;\nthat rational souls are so many portions of the Supreme Deity; and that\nthe universe, considered as one great whole, is God.\" These are ideas\nthat can only be entertained in an advanced intellectual condition. Of\nthis sect it is said that many suffered burning with unclouded serenity,\nwith triumphant feelings of cheerfulness and joy. Their orthodox enemies\naccused them of gratifying their passions at midnight assemblages in\ndarkened rooms, to which both sexes in a condition of nudity repaired. A\nsimilar accusation, as is well known, was brought against the primitive\nChristians by the fashionable society of Rome.\n\nThe influences of the Averroistic philosophy were apparent in many of\nthese sects. That Mohammedan system, considered from a Christian point\nof view, led to the heretical belief that the end of the precepts of\nChristianity is the union of the soul with the Supreme Being; that God\nand Nature have the same relations to each other as the soul and the\nbody; that there is but one individual intelligence; and that one soul\nperforms all the spiritual and rational functions in all the human race.\nWhen, subsequently, toward the time of the Reformation, the Italian\nAverroists were required by the Inquisition to give an account of\nthemselves, they attempted to show that there is a wide distinction\nbetween philosophical and religious truth; that things may be\nphilosophically true, and yet theologically false--an exculpatory device\ncondemned at length by the Lateran Council in the time of Leo X.\n\nBut, in spite of auricular confession, and the Inquisition, these\nheretical tendencies survived. It has been truly said that, at the\nepoch of the Reformation, there lay concealed, in many parts of Europe,\npersons who entertained the most virulent enmity against Christianity.\nIn this pernicious class were many Aristotelians, such as Pomponatius;\nmany philosophers and wits, such as Bodin, Rabelais, Montaigne; many\nItalians, as Leo X., Bembo, Bruno.\n\nMiracle-evidence began to fall into discredit during the eleventh and\ntwelfth centuries. The sarcasms of the Hispano-Moorish philosophers\nhad forcibly drawn the attention of many of the more enlightened\necclesiastics to its illusory nature. The discovery of the Pandects\nof Justinian, at Amalfi, in 1130, doubtless exerted a very powerful\ninfluence in promoting the study of Roman jurisprudence, and\ndisseminating better notions as to the character of legal or\nphilosophical evidence. Hallam has cast some doubt on the well-known\nstory of this discovery, but he admits that the celebrated copy in the\nLaurentian library, at Florence, is the only one containing the entire\nfifty books. Twenty years subsequently, the monk Gratian collected\ntogether the various papal edicts, the canons of councils, the\ndeclarations of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, in a volume\ncalled \"The Decretum,\" considered as the earliest authority in canon\nlaw. In the next century Gregory IX. published five books of Decretals,\nand Boniface VIII. subsequently added a sixth. To these followed the\nClementine Constitutions, a seventh book of Decretals, and \"A Book of\nInstitutes,\" published together, by Gregory XIII., in 1580, under the\ntitle of \"Corpus Juris Canonici.\" The canon law had gradually gained\nenormous power through the control it had obtained over wills, the\nguardianship of orphans, marriages, and divorces.\n\nThe rejection of miracle-evidence, and the substitution of legal\nevidence in its stead, accelerated the approach of the Reformation. No\nlonger was it possible to admit the requirement which, in former days,\nAnselm, the Archbishop of Canterbury, in his treatise, \"Cur Deus Homo,\"\nhad enforced, that we must first believe without examination, and\nmay afterward endeavor to understand what we have thus believed. When\nCajetan said to Luther, \"Thou must believe that one single drop of\nChrist's blood is sufficient to redeem the whole human race, and the\nremaining quantity that was shed in the garden and on the cross was left\nas a legacy to the pope, to be a treasure from which indulgences were\nto be drawn,\" the soul of the sturdy German monk revolted against such\na monstrous assertion, nor would he have believed it though a thousand\nmiracles had been worked in its support. This shameful practice of\nselling indulgences for the commission of sin originated among the\nbishops, who, when they had need of money for their private pleasures,\nobtained it in that way. Abbots and monks, to whom this gainful commerce\nwas denied, raised funds by carrying about relics in solemn procession,\nand charging a fee for touching them. The popes, in their pecuniary\nstraits, perceiving how lucrative the practice might become, deprived\nthe bishops of the right of making such sales, and appropriated it to\nthemselves, establishing agencies, chiefly among the mendicant orders,\nfor the traffic. Among these orders there was a sharp competition, each\nboasting of the superior value of its indulgences through its greater\ninfluence at the court of heaven, its familiar connection with the\nVirgin Mary and the saints in glory. Even against Luther himself, who\nhad been an Augustinian monk, a calumny was circulated that he was\nfirst alienated from the Church by a traffic of this kind having been\nconferred on the Dominicans, instead of on his own order, at the time\nwhen Leo X. was raising funds by this means for building St. Peter's, at\nRome, A.D. 1517. and there is reason to think that Leo himself, in the\nearlier stages of the Reformation, attached weight to that allegation.\n\nIndulgences were thus the immediate inciting cause of the Reformation,\nbut very soon there came into light the real principle that was\nanimating the controversy. It lay in the question, Does the Bible owe\nits authenticity to the Church? or does the Church owe her authenticity\nto the Bible? Where is the criterion of truth?\n\nIt is not necessary for me here to relate the well known particulars of\nthat controversy, the desolating wars and scenes of blood to which it\ngave rise: how Luther posted on the door of the cathedral of Wittemberg\nninety-five theses, and was summoned to Rome to answer for his offense;\nhow he appealed from the pope, ill-informed at the time, to the pope\nwhen he should have been better instructed; how he was condemned as a\nheretic, and thereupon appealed to a general council; how, through the\ndisputes about purgatory, transubstantiation, auricular confession,\nabsolution, the fundamental idea which lay at the bottom of the whole\nmovement came into relief, the right of individual judgment; how Luther\nwas now excommunicated, A.D. 1520, and in defiance burnt the bull of\nexcommunication and the volumes of the canon law, which he denounced as\naiming at the subversion of all civil government, and the exaltation of\nthe papacy; how by this skillful manoeuvre he brought over many of the\nGerman princes to his views; how, summoned before the Imperial Diet at\nWorms, he refused to retract, and, while he was bidden in the castle of\nWartburg, his doctrines were spreading, and a reformation under Zwingli\nbroke out in Switzerland; how the principle of sectarian decomposition\nembedded in the movement gave rise to rivalries and dissensions between\nthe Germans and the Swiss, and even divided the latter among themselves\nunder the leadership of Zwingli and of Calvin; how the Conference of\nMarburg, the Diet of Spires, and that at Augsburg, failed to compose\nthe troubles, and eventually the German Reformation assumed a political\norganization at Smalcalde. The quarrels between the Lutherans and the\nCalvinists gave hopes to Rome that she might recover her losses.\n\nLeo was not slow to discern that the Lutheran Reformation was something\nmore serious than a squabble among some monks about the profits of\nindulgence-sales, and the papacy set itself seriously at work to\novercome the revolters. It instigated the frightful wars that for so\nmany years desolated Europe, and left animosities which neither the\nTreaty of Westphalia, nor the Council of Trent after eighteen years of\ndebate, could compose. No one can read without a shudder the attempts\nthat were made to extend the Inquisition in foreign countries. All\nEurope, Catholic and Protestant, was horror-stricken at the Huguenot\nmassacre of St. Bartholomew's Eve (A.D. 1572). For perfidy and atrocity\nit has no equal in the annals of the world.\n\nThe desperate attempt in which the papacy had been engaged to put down\nits opponents by instigating civil wars, massacres, and assassinations,\nproved to be altogether abortive. Nor had the Council of Trent any\nbetter result. Ostensibly summoned to correct, illustrate, and fix with\nperspicacity the doctrine of the Church, to restore the vigor of\nits discipline, and to reform the lives of its ministers, it was so\nmanipulated that a large majority of its members were Italians, and\nunder the influence of the pope. Hence the Protestants could not\npossibly accept its decisions.\n\nThe issue of the Reformation was the acceptance by all the Protestant\nChurches of the dogma that the Bible is a sufficient guide for every\nChristian man. Tradition was rejected, and the right of private\ninterpretation assured. It was thought that the criterion of truth had\nat length been obtained.\n\nThe authority thus imputed to the Scriptures was not restricted\nto matters of a purely religious or moral kind; it extended over\nphilosophical facts and to the interpretation of Nature. Many went as\nfar as in the old times Epiphanius had done: he believed that the Bible\ncontained a complete system of mineralogy! The Reformers would tolerate\nno science that was not in accordance with Genesis. Among them there\nwere many who maintained that religion and piety could never flourish\nunless separated from learning and science. The fatal maxim that the\nBible contained the sum and substance of all knowledge, useful or\npossible to man--a maxim employed with such pernicious effect of old by\nTertullian and by St. Augustine, and which had so often been enforced\nby papal authority--was still strictly insisted upon. The leaders of\nthe Reformation, Luther and Melanchthon, were determined to banish\nphilosophy from the Church. Luther declared that the study of Aristotle\nis wholly useless; his vilification of that Greek philosopher knew no\nbounds. He is, says Luther, \"truly a devil, a horrid calumniator, a\nwicked sycophant, a prince of darkness, a real Apollyon, a beast, a\nmost horrid impostor on mankind, one in whom there is scarcely any\nphilosophy, a public and professed liar, a goat, a complete epicure,\nthis twice execrable Aristotle.\" The schoolmen were, so Luther said,\n\"locusts, caterpillars, frogs, lice.\" He entertained an abhorrence\nfor them. These opinions, though not so emphatically expressed, were\nentertained by Calvin. So far as science is concerned, nothing is owed\nto the Reformation. The Procrustean bed of the Pentateuch was still\nbefore her.\n\nIn the annals of Christianity the most ill-omened day is that in which\nshe separated herself from science. She compelled Origen, at that time\n(A.D. 231) its chief representative and supporter in the Church, to\nabandon his charge in Alexandria, and retire to Caesarea. In vain\nthrough many subsequent centuries did her leading men spend themselves\nin--as the phrase then went--\"drawing forth the internal juice and\nmarrow of the Scriptures for the explaining of things.\" Universal\nhistory from the third to the sixteenth century shows with what result.\nThe dark ages owe their darkness to this fatal policy. Here and there,\nit is true, there were great men, such as Frederick II. and Alphonso X.,\nwho, standing at a very elevated and general point of view, had detected\nthe value of learning to civilization, and, in the midst of the dreary\nprospect that ecclesiasticism had created around them, had recognized\nthat science alone can improve the social condition of man.\n\nThe infliction of the death-punishment for difference of opinion was\nstill resorted to. When Calvin caused Servetus to be burnt at Geneva, it\nwas obvious to every one that the spirit of persecution was unimpaired.\nThe offense of that philosopher lay in his belief. This was, that the\ngenuine doctrines of Christianity had been lost even before the time of\nthe Council of Nicea; that the Holy Ghost animates the whole system of\nNature, like a soul of the world, and that, with the Christ, it will\nbe absorbed, at the end of all things, into the substance of the Deity,\nfrom which they had emanated. For this he was roasted to death over a\nslow fire. Was there any distinction between this Protestant auto-da-fe\nand the Catholic one of Vanini, who was burnt at Toulouse, by the\nInquisition, in 1629, for his \"Dialogues concerning Nature?\"\n\nThe invention of printing, the dissemination of books, had introduced\na class of dangers which the persecution of the Inquisition could not\nreach. In 1559, Pope Paul IV. instituted the Congregation of the Index\nExpurgatorius. \"Its duty is to examine books and manuscripts intended\nfor publication, and to decide whether the people may be permitted to\nread them; to correct those books of which the errors are not numerous,\nand which contain certain useful and salutary truths, so as to bring\nthem into harmony with the doctrines of the Church; to condemn those\nof which the principles are heretical and pernicious; and to grant the\npeculiar privilege of perusing heretical books to certain persons.\nThis congregation, which is sometimes held in presence of the pope, but\ngenerally in the palace of the Cardinal-president, has a more extensive\njurisdiction than that of the Inquisition, as it not only takes\ncognizance of those books that contain doctrines contrary to the Roman\nCatholic faith, but of those that concern the duties of morality, the\ndiscipline of the Church, the interests of society. Its name is derived\nfrom the alphabetical tables or indexes of heretical books and authors\ncomposed by its appointment.\"\n\nThe Index Expurgatorius of prohibited books at first indicated\nthose works which it was unlawful to read; but, on this being found\ninsufficient, whatever was not permitted was prohibited--an audacious\nattempt to prevent all knowledge, except such as suited the purposes of\nthe Church, from reaching the people.\n\nThe two rival divisions of the Christian Church--Protestant and\nCatholic--were thus in accord on one point: to tolerate no science\nexcept such as they considered to be agreeable to the Scriptures. The\nCatholic, being in possession of centralized power, could make its\ndecisions respected wherever its sway was acknowledged, and enforce the\nmonitions of the Index Expurgatorius; the Protestant, whose influence\nwas diffused among many foci in different nations, could not act in such\na direct and resolute manner. Its mode of procedure was, by raising a\ntheological odium against an offender, to put him under a social ban--a\ncourse perhaps not less effectual than the other.\n\nAs we have seen in former chapters, an antagonism between religion and\nscience had existed from the earliest days of Christianity. On every\noccasion permitting its display it may be detected through successive\ncenturies. We witness it in the downfall of the Alexandrian Museum, in\nthe cases of Erigena and Wiclif, in the contemptuous rejection by the\nheretics of the thirteenth century of the Scriptural account of the\nCreation; but it was not until the epoch of Copernicus, Kepler, and\nGalileo, that the efforts of Science to burst from the thraldom in which\nshe was fettered became uncontrollable. In all countries the political\npower of the Church had greatly declined; her leading men perceived\nthat the cloudy foundation on which she had stood was dissolving away.\nRepressive measures against her antagonists, in old times resorted\nto with effect, could be no longer advantageously employed. To her\ninterests the burning of a philosopher here and there did more harm than\ngood. In her great conflict with astronomy, a conflict in which Galileo\nstands as the central figure, she received an utter overthrow; and, as\nwe have seen, when the immortal work of Newton was printed, she could\noffer no resistance, though Leibnitz affirmed, in the face of Europe,\nthat \"Newton had robbed the Deity of some of his most excellent\nattributes, and had sapped the foundation of natural religion.\"\n\nFrom the time of Newton to our own time, the divergence of science from\nthe dogmas of the Church has continually increased. The Church declared\nthat the earth is the central and most important body in the universe;\nthat the sun and moon and stars are tributary to it. On these points\nshe was worsted by astronomy. She affirmed that a universal deluge had\ncovered the earth; that the only surviving animals were such as had\nbeen saved in an ark. In this her error was established by geology. She\ntaught that there was a first man, who, some six or eight thousand years\nago, was suddenly created or called into existence in a condition of\nphysical and moral perfection, and from that condition he fell. But\nanthropology has shown that human beings existed far back in geological\ntime, and in a savage state but little better than that of the brute.\n\nMany good and well-meaning men have attempted to reconcile the\nstatements of Genesis with the discoveries of science, but it is in\nvain. The divergence has increased so much, that it has become an\nabsolute opposition. One of the antagonists must give way.\n\nMay we not, then, be permitted to examine the authenticity of this book,\nwhich, since the second century, has been put forth as the criterion of\nscientific truth? To maintain itself in a position so exalted, it must\nchallenge human criticism.\n\nIn the early Christian ages, many of the most eminent Fathers of the\nChurch had serious doubts respecting the authorship of the entire\nPentateuch. I have not space, in the limited compass of these pages, to\npresent in detail the facts and arguments that were then and have since\nbeen adduced. The literature of the subject is now very extensive. I\nmay, however, refer the reader to the work of the pious and learned Dean\nPrideaux, on \"The Old and New Testament connected,\" a work which is one\nof the literary ornaments of the last century. He will also find the\nsubject more recently and exhaustively discussed by Bishop Colenso. The\nfollowing paragraphs will convey a sufficiently distinct impression of\nthe present state of the controversy:\n\nThe Pentateuch is affirmed to have been written by Moses, under the\ninfluence of divine inspiration. Considered thus, as a record vouchsafed\nand dictated by the Almighty, it commands not only scientific but\nuniversal consent.\n\nBut here, in the first place, it may be demanded, Who or what is it that\nhas put forth this great claim in its behalf?\n\nNot the work itself. It nowhere claims the authorship of one man, or\nmakes the impious declaration that it is the writing of Almighty God.\n\nNot until after the second century was there any such extravagant\ndemand on human credulity. It originated, not among the higher ranks of\nChristian philosophers, but among the more fervid Fathers of the Church,\nwhose own writings prove them to have been unlearned and uncritical\npersons.\n\nEvery age, from the second century to our times, has offered men of\ngreat ability, both Christian and Jewish, who have altogether repudiated\nthese claims. Their decision has been founded upon the intrinsic\nevidence of the books themselves. These furnish plain indications of at\nleast two distinct authors, who have been respectively termed Elohistic\nand Jehovistic. Hupfeld maintains that the Jehovistic narrative bears\nmarks of having been a second original record, wholly independent of the\nElohistic. The two sources from which the narratives have been derived\nare, in many respects, contradictory of each other. Moreover, it is\nasserted that the books of the Pentateuch are never ascribed to Moses\nin the inscriptions of Hebrew manuscripts, or in printed copies of the\nHebrew Bible, nor are they styled \"Books of Moses\" in the Septuagint or\nVulgate, but only in modern translations.\n\nIt is clear that they cannot be imputed to the sole authorship of Moses,\nsince they record his death. It is clear that they were not written\nuntil many hundred years after that event, since they contain references\nto facts which did not occur until after the establishment of the\ngovernment of kings among the Jews.\n\nNo man may dare to impute them to the inspiration of Almighty God--their\ninconsistencies, incongruities, contradictions, and impossibilities, as\nexposed by many learned and pious moderns, both German and English,\nare so great. It is the decision of these critics that Genesis is a\nnarrative based upon legends; that Exodus is not historically true; that\nthe whole Pentateuch is unhistoric and non-Mosaic; it contains the most\nextraordinary contradictions and impossibilities, sufficient to involve\nthe credibility of the whole--imperfections so many and so conspicuous\nthat they would destroy the authenticity of any modern historical work.\n\nHengstenberg, in his \"Dissertations on the Genuineness of the\nPentateuch,\" says: \"It is the unavoidable fate of a spurious historical\nwork of any length to be involved in contradictions. This must be the\ncase to a very great extent with the Pentateuch, if it be not genuine.\nIf the Pentateuch is spurious, its histories and laws have been\nfabricated in successive portions, and were committed to writing in the\ncourse of many centuries by different individuals. From such a mode of\norigination, a mass of contradictions is inseparable, and the improving\nhand of a later editor could never be capable of entirely obliterating\nthem.\"\n\nTo the above conclusions I may add that we are expressly told by Ezra\n(Esdras ii. 14) that he himself, aided by five other persons, wrote\nthese books in the space of forty days. He says that at the time of the\nBabylonian captivity the ancient sacred writings of the Jews were burnt,\nand gives a particular detail of the circumstances under which these\nwere composed. He sets forth that he undertook to write all that had\nbeen done in the world since the beginning. It may be said that the\nbooks of Esdras are apocryphal, but in return it may be demanded, Has\nthat conclusion been reached on evidence that will withstand modern\ncriticism? In the early ages of Christianity, when the story of the fall\nof man was not considered as essential to the Christian system, and the\ndoctrine of the atonement had not attained that precision which Anselm\neventually gave it, it was very generally admitted by the Fathers of the\nChurch that Ezra probably did so compose the Pentateuch. Thus St. Jerome\nsays, \"Sive Mosem dicere volueris auctorem Pentateuchi, sive Esdram\nejusdem instauratorem operis, non recuso.\" Clemens Alexandrinus\nsays that when these books had been destroyed in the captivity of\nNebuchadnezzar, Esdras, having become inspired prophetically, reproduced\nthem. Irenaeus says the same.\n\nThe incidents contained in Genesis, from the first to the tenth chapters\ninclusive (chapters which, in their bearing upon science, are of more\nimportance than other portions of the Pentateuch), have been obviously\ncompiled from short, fragmentary legends of various authorship. To the\ncritical eye they all, however, present peculiarities which demonstrate\nthat they were written on the banks of the Euphrates, and not in the\nDesert of Arabia. They contain many Chaldaisms. An Egyptian would not\nspeak of the Mediterranean Sea as being west of him, an Assyrian would.\nTheir scenery and machinery, if such expressions may with propriety be\nused, are altogether Assyrian, not Egyptian. They were such records as\none might expect to meet with in the cuneiform impressions of the\ntile libraries of the Mesopotamian kings. It is affirmed that one such\nlegend, that of the Deluge, has already been exhumed, and it is not\nbeyond the bounds of probability that the remainder may in like manner\nbe obtained.\n\nFrom such Assyrian sources, the legends of the creation of the earth and\nheaven, the garden of Eden, the making of man from clay, and of woman\nfrom one of his ribs, the temptation by the serpent, the naming of\nanimals, the cherubim and flaming sword, the Deluge and the ark, the\ndrying up of the waters by the wind, the building of the Tower of\nBabel, and the confusion of tongues, were obtained by Ezra. He commences\nabruptly the proper history of the Jews in the eleventh chapter. At that\npoint his universal history ceases; he occupies himself with the story\nof one family, the descendants of Shem.\n\nIt is of this restriction that the Duke of Argyll, in his book on\n\"Primeval Man,\" very graphically says:\n\nIn the genealogy of the family of Shem we have a list of names which are\nnames, and nothing more to us. It is a genealogy which neither does, nor\npretends to do, more than to trace the order of succession among a few\nfamilies only, out of the millions then already existing in the world.\nNothing but this order of succession is given, nor is it at all certain\nthat this order is consecutive or complete. Nothing is told us of all\nthat lay behind that curtain of thick darkness, in front of which\nthese names are made to pass; and yet there are, as it were, momentary\nliftings, through which we have glimpses of great movements which were\ngoing on, and had been long going on beyond. No shapes are distinctly\nseen. Even the direction of those movements can only be guessed. But\nvoices are heard which are \"as the voices of many waters.\" I agree in\nthe opinion of Hupfeld, that \"the discovery that the Pentateuch is put\ntogether out of various sources, or original documents, is beyond\nall doubt not only one of the most important and most pregnant with\nconsequences for the interpretation of the historical books of the Old\nTestament, or rather for the whole of theology and history, but it is\nalso one of the most certain discoveries which have been made in\nthe domain of criticism and the history of literature. Whatever the\nanticritical party may bring forward to the contrary, it will maintain\nitself, and not retrograde again through any thing, so long as there\nexists such a thing as criticism; and it will not be easy for a reader\nupon the stage of culture on which we stand in the present day, if he\ngoes to the examination unprejudiced, and with an uncorrupted power of\nappreciating the truth, to be able to ward off its influence.\"\n\nWhat then? shall we give up these books? Does not the admission that the\nnarrative of the fall in Eden is legendary carry with it the surrender\nof that most solemn and sacred of Christian doctrines, the atonement?\n\nLet us reflect on this! Christianity, in its earliest days, when it was\nconverting and conquering the world, knew little or nothing about that\ndoctrine. We have seen that, in his \"Apology,\" Tertullian did not\nthink it worth his while to mention it. It originated among the Gnostic\nheretics. It was not admitted by the Alexandrian theological school. It\nwas never prominently advanced by the Fathers. It was not brought into\nits present commanding position until the time of Anselm Philo Judaeus\nspeaks of the story of the fall as symbolical; Origen regarded it as an\nallegory. Perhaps some of the Protestant churches may, with reason, be\naccused of inconsistency, since in part they consider it as mythical, in\npart real. But, if, with them, we admit that the serpent is symbolical\nof Satan, does not that cast an air of allegory over the whole\nnarrative?\n\nIt is to be regretted that the Christian Church has burdened itself with\nthe defense of these books, and voluntarily made itself answerable for\ntheir manifest contradictions and errors. Their vindication, if it\nwere possible, should have been resigned to the Jews, among whom they\noriginated, and by whom they have been transmitted to us. Still more, it\nis to be deeply regretted that the Pentateuch, a production so imperfect\nas to be unable to stand the touch of modern criticism, should be put\nforth as the arbiter of science. Let it be remembered that the exposure\nof the true character of these books has been made, not by captious\nenemies, but by pious and learned churchmen, some of them of the highest\ndignity.\n\nWhile thus the Protestant churches have insisted on the acknowledgment\nof the Scriptures as the criterion of truth, the Catholic has, in our\nown times, declared the infallibility of the pope. It may be said that\nthis infallibility applies only to moral or religious things; but where\nshall the line of separation be drawn? Onmiscience cannot be limited\nto a restricted group of questions; in its very nature it implies the\nknowledge of all, and infallibility means omniscience.\n\nDoubtless, if the fundamental principles of Italian Christianity be\nadmitted, their logical issue is an infallible pope. There is no need to\ndwell on the unphilosophical nature of this conception; it is destroyed\nby an examination of the political history of the papacy, and the\nbiography of the popes. The former exhibits all the errors and mistakes\nto which institutions of a confessedly human character have been found\nliable; the latter is only too frequently a story of sin and shame.\n\nIt was not possible that the authoritative promulgation of the dogma of\npapal infallibility should meet among enlightened Catholics universal\nacceptance. Serious and wide-spread dissent has been produced. A\ndoctrine so revolting to common-sense could not find any other result.\nThere are many who affirm that, if infallibility exists anywhere, it is\nin oecumenical councils, and yet such councils have not always agreed\nwith each other. There are also many who remember that councils\nhave deposed popes, and have passed judgment on their clamors and\ncontentions. Not without reason do Protestants demand, What proof can\nbe given that infallibility exists in the Church at all? what proof is\nthere that the Church has ever been fairly or justly represented in\nany council? and why should the truth be ascertained by the vote of a\nmajority rather than by that of a minority? How often it has happened\nthat one man, standing at the right point of view, has descried the\ntruth, and, after having been denounced and persecuted by all others,\nthey have eventually been constrained to adopt his declarations! Of many\ngreat discoveries, has not this been the history?\n\nIt is not for Science to compose these contesting claims; it is not for\nher to determine whether the criterion of truth for the religious man\nshall be found in the Bible, or in the oecumenical council, or in the\npope. She only asks the right, which she so willingly accords to others,\nof adopting a criterion of her own. If she regards unhistorical\nlegends with disdain; if she considers the vote of a majority in the\nascertainment of truth with supreme indifference; if she leaves the\nclaim of infallibility in any human being to be vindicated by the stern\nlogic of coming events--the cold impassiveness which in these matters\nshe maintains is what she displays toward her own doctrines. Without\nhesitation she would give up the theories of gravitation or undulations,\nif she found that they were irreconcilable with facts. For her the\nvolume of inspiration is the book of Nature, of which the open scroll\nis ever spread forth before the eyes of every man. Confronting all, it\nneeds no societies for its dissemination. Infinite in extent, eternal\nin duration, human ambition and human fanaticism have never been able\nto tamper with it. On the earth it is illustrated by all that is\nmagnificent and beautiful, on the heavens its letters are suns and\nworlds.\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX.\n\n     CONTROVERSY RESPECTING THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNIVERSE.\n\n     There are two conceptions of the government of the world: 1.\n     By Providence; 2. By Law.--The former maintained by the\n     priesthood.--Sketch of the introduction of the latter.\n\n     Kepler discovers the laws that preside over the solar\n     system.--His works are denounced by papal authority.--The\n     foundations of mechanical philosophy are laid by Da Vinci.--\n     Galileo discovers the fundamental laws of Dynamics.--Newton\n     applies them to the movements of the celestial bodies, and\n     shows that the solar system is governed by mathematical\n     necessity.--Herschel extends that conclusion to the\n     universe.--The nebular hypothesis.--Theological exceptions\n     to it.\n\n     Evidences of the control of law in the construction of the\n     earth, and in the development of the animal and plant\n     series.--They arose by Evolution, not by Creation.\n\n     The reign of law is exhibited by the historic career of\n     human societies, and in the case of individual man.\n\n     Partial adoption of this view by some of the Reformed\n     Churches.\n\n\nTwo interpretations may be given of the mode of government of the world.\nIt may be by incessant divine interventions, or by the operation of\nunvarying law.\n\nTo the adoption of the former a priesthood will always incline, since\nit must desire to be considered as standing between the prayer of the\nvotary and the providential act. Its importance is magnified by the\npower it claims of determining what that act shall be. In the pre\nChristian (Roman) religion, the grand office of the priesthood was the\ndiscovery of future events by oracles, omens, or an inspection of the\nentrails of animals, and by the offering of sacrifices to propitiate the\ngods. In the later, the Christian times, a higher power was claimed; the\nclergy asserting that, by their intercessions, they could regulate the\ncourse of affairs, avert dangers, secure benefits, work miracles, and\neven change the order of Nature.\n\nNot without reason, therefore, did they look upon the doctrine of\ngovernment by unvarying law with disfavor. It seemed to depreciate\ntheir dignity, to lessen their importance. To them there was something\nshocking in a God who cannot be swayed by human entreaty, a cold,\npassionless divinity--something frightful in fatalism, destiny.\n\nBut the orderly movement of the heavens could not fail in all ages to\nmake a deep impression on thoughtful observers--the rising and setting\nof the sun; the increasing or diminishing light of the day; the waxing\nand waning of the moon; the return of the seasons in their proper\ncourses; the measured march of the wandering planets in the sky--what\nare all these, and a thousand such, but manifestations of an orderly and\nunchanging procession of events? The faith of early observers in this\ninterpretation may perhaps have been shaken by the occurrence of such a\nphenomenon as an eclipse, a sudden and mysterious breach of the ordinary\ncourse of natural events; but it would be resumed in tenfold strength as\nsoon as the discovery was made that eclipses themselves recur, and may\nbe predicted.\n\nAstronomical predictions of all kinds depend upon the admission of this\nfact--that there never has been and never will be any intervention in\nthe operation of natural laws. The scientific philosopher affirms that\nthe condition of the world at any given moment is the direct result\nof its condition in the preceding moment, and the direct cause of its\ncondition in the subsequent moment. Law and chance are only different\nnames for mechanical necessity.\n\nAbout fifty years after the death of Copernicus, John Kepler, a native\nof Wurtemberg, who had adopted the heliocentric theory, and who was\ndeeply impressed with the belief that relationships exist in the\nrevolutions of the planetary bodies round the sun, and that these if\ncorrectly examined would reveal the laws under which those movements\ntake place, devoted himself to the study of the distances, times, and\nvelocities of the planets, and the form of their orbits. His method\nwas, to submit the observations to which he had access, such as those\nof Tycho Brahe, to computations based first on one and then on another\nhypothesis, rejecting the hypothesis if he found that the calculations\ndid not accord with the observations. The incredible labor he had\nundergone (he says, \"I considered, and I computed, until I almost went\nmad\") was at length rewarded, and in 1609 he published his book, \"On the\nMotions of the Planet Mars.\" In this he had attempted to reconcile the\nmovements of that planet to the hypothesis of eccentrics and epicycles,\nbut eventually discovered that the orbit of a planet is not a circle but\nan ellipse, the sun being in one of the foci, and that the areas swept\nover by a line drawn from the planet to the sun are proportional to the\ntimes. These constitute what are now known as the first and second laws\nof Kepler. Eight years subsequently, he was rewarded by the discovery\nof a third law, defining the relation between the mean distances of the\nplanets from the sun and the times of their revolutions; \"the squares of\nthe periodic times are proportional to the cubes of the distances.\" In\n\"An Epitome of the Copernican System,\" published in 1618, he announced\nthis law, and showed that it holds good for the satellites of Jupiter as\nregards their primary. Hence it was inferred that the laws which preside\nover the grand movements of the solar system preside also over the less\nmovements of its constituent parts.\n\nThe conception of law which is unmistakably conveyed by Kepler's\ndiscoveries, and the evidence they gave in support of the heliocentric\nas against the geocentric theory, could not fail to incur the\nreprehension of the Roman authorities. The congregation of the Index,\ntherefore, when they denounced the Copernican system as utterly contrary\nto the Holy Scriptures, prohibited Kepler's \"Epitome\" of that system. It\nwas on this occasion that Kepler submitted his celebrated remonstrance:\n\"Eighty years have elapsed during which the doctrines of Copernicus\nregarding the movement of the earth and the immobility of the sun have\nbeen promulgated without hinderance, because it was deemed allowable to\ndispute concerning natural things, and to elucidate the works of God,\nand now that new testimony is discovered in proof of the truth of those\ndoctrines--testimony which was not known to the spiritual judges--ye\nwould prohibit the promulgation of the true system of the structure of\nthe universe.\"\n\nNone of Kepler's contemporaries believed the law of the areas, nor was\nit accepted until the publication of the \"Principia\" of Newton. In fact,\nno one in those times understood the philosophical meaning of Kepler's\nlaws. He himself did not foresee what they must inevitably lead to. His\nmistakes showed how far he was from perceiving their result. Thus he\nthought that each planet is the seat of an intelligent principle, and\nthat there is a relation between the magnitudes of the orbits of the\nfive principal planets and the five regular solids of geometry. At first\nhe inclined to believe that the orbit of Mars is oval, nor was it until\nafter a wearisome study that he detected the grand truth, its elliptical\nform. An idea of the incorruptibility of the celestial objects had\nled to the adoption of the Aristotelian doctrine of the perfection of\ncircular motions, and to the belief that there were none but circular\nmotions in the heavens. He bitterly complains of this as having been a\nfatal \"thief of his time.\" His philosophical daring is illustrated in\nhis breaking through this time-honored tradition.\n\nIn some most important particulars Kepler anticipated Newton. He was the\nfirst to give clear ideas respecting gravity. He says every particle of\nmatter will rest until it is disturbed by some other particle--that the\nearth attracts a stone more than the stone attracts the earth, and that\nbodies move to each other in proportion to their masses; that the earth\nwould ascend to the moon one-fifty-fourth of the distance, and the moon\nwould move toward the earth the other fifty-three. He affirms that the\nmoon's attraction causes the tides, and that the planets must impress\nirregularities on the moon's motions.\n\nThe progress of astronomy is obviously divisible into three periods:\n\n1. The period of observation of the apparent motions of the heavenly\nbodies.\n\n2. The period of discovery of their real motions, and particularly of\nthe laws of the planetary revolutions; this was signally illustrated by\nCopernicus and Kepler.\n\n3. The period of the ascertainment of the causes of those laws. It was\nthe epoch of Newton.\n\nThe passage of the second into the third period depended on the\ndevelopment of the Dynamical branch of mechanics, which had been in\na stagnant condition from the time of Archimedes or the Alexandrian\nSchool.\n\nIn Christian Europe there had not been a cultivator of mechanical\nphilosophy until Leonardo da Vinci, who was born A.D. 1452. To him, and\nnot to Lord Bacon, must be attributed the renaissance of science. Bacon\nwas not only ignorant of mathematics, but depreciated its application\nto physical inquiries. He contemptuously rejected the Copernican system,\nalleging absurd objections to it. While Galileo was on the brink of\nhis great telescopic discoveries, Bacon was publishing doubts as to\nthe utility of instruments in scientific investigations. To ascribe the\ninductive method to him is to ignore history. His fanciful philosophical\nsuggestions have never been of the slightest practical use. No one has\never thought of employing them. Except among English readers, his name\nis almost unknown.\n\nTo Da Vinci I shall have occasion to allude more particularly on a\nsubsequent page. Of his works still remaining in manuscript, two volumes\nare at Milan, and one in Paris, carried there by Napoleon. After an\ninterval of about seventy years, Da Vinci was followed by the Dutch\nengineer, Stevinus, whose work on the principles of equilibrium was\npublished in 1586. Six years afterward appeared Galileo's treatise on\nmechanics.\n\nTo this great Italian is due the establishment of the three fundamental\nlaws of dynamics, known as the Laws of Motion.\n\nThe consequences of the establishment of these laws were very important.\n\nIt had been supposed that continuous movements, such, for instance, as\nthose of the celestial bodies, could only be maintained by a perpetual\nconsumption and perpetual application of force, but the first of\nGalileo's laws declared that every body will persevere in its state of\nrest, or of uniform motion in a right line, until it is compelled to\nchange that state by disturbing forces. A clear perception of this\nfundamental principle is essential to a comprehension of the elementary\nfacts of physical astronomy. Since all the motions that we witness\ntaking place on the surface of the earth soon come to an end, we are\nled to infer that rest is the natural condition of things. We have made,\nthen, a very great advance when we have become satisfied that a body is\nequally indifferent to rest as to motion, and that it equally perseveres\nin either state until disturbing forces are applied. Such disturbing\nforces in the case of common movements are friction and the resistance\nof the air. When no such resistances exist, movement must be perpetual,\nas is the case with the heavenly bodies, which are moving in a void.\n\nForces, no matter what their difference of magnitude may be, will exert\ntheir full influence conjointly, each as though the other did not exist.\nThus, when a ball is suffered to drop from the mouth of a cannon, it\nfalls to the ground in a certain interval of time through the influence\nof gravity upon it. If, then, it be fired from the cannon, though now\nit may be projected some thousands of feet in a second, the effect\nof gravity upon it will be precisely the same as before. In the\nintermingling of forces there is no deterioration; each produces its own\nspecific effect.\n\nIn the latter half of the seventeenth century, through the works of\nBorelli, Hooke, and Huyghens, it had become plain that circular motions\ncould be accounted for by the laws of Galileo. Borelli, treating of the\nmotions of Jupiter's satellites, shows how a circular movement may arise\nunder the influence of a central force. Hooke exhibited the inflection\nof a direct motion into a circular by a supervening central attraction.\n\nThe year 1687 presents, not only an epoch in European science, but also\nin the intellectual development of man. It is marked by the publication\nof the \"Principia\" of Newton, an incomparable, an immortal work.\n\nOn the principle that all bodies attract each other with forces directly\nas their masses, and inversely as the squares of their distances, Newton\nshowed that all the movements of the celestial bodies may be accounted\nfor, and that Kepler's laws might all have been predicted--the elliptic\nmotions--the described areas the relation of the times and distances. As\nwe have seen, Newton's contemporaries had perceived how circular motions\ncould be explained; that was a special case, but Newton furnished the\nsolution of the general problem, containing all special cases of motion\nin circles, ellipses, parabolas, hyperbolas--that is, in all the conic\nsections.\n\nThe Alexandrian mathematicians had shown that the direction of movement\nof falling bodies is toward the centre of the earth. Newton proved that\nthis must necessarily be the case, the general effect of the attraction\nof all the particles of a sphere being the same as if they were all\nconcentrated in its centre. To this central force, thus determining the\nfall of bodies, the designation of gravity was given. Up to this time,\nno one, except Kepler, had considered how far its influence reached. It\nseemed to Newton possible that it might extend as far as the moon, and\nbe the force that deflects her from a rectilinear path, and makes her\nrevolve in her orbit round the earth. It was easy to compute, on the\nprinciple of the law of inverse squares, whether the earth's attraction\nwas sufficient to produce the observed effect. Employing the measures\nof the size of the earth accessible at the time, Newton found that the\nmoon's deflection was only thirteen feet in a minute; whereas, if his\nhypothesis of gravitation were true, it should be fifteen feet. But in\n1669 Picard, as we have seen, executed the measurement of a degree more\ncarefully than had previously been done; this changed the estimate of\nthe magnitude of the earth, and, therefore, of the distance of the moon;\nand, Newton's attention having been directed to it by some discussions\nthat took place at the Royal Society in 1679, he obtained Picard's\nresults, went home, took out his old papers, and resumed his\ncalculations. As they drew to a close, he became so much agitated\nthat he was obliged to desire a friend to finish them. The expected\ncoincidence was established. It was proved that the moon is retained\nin her orbit and made to revolve round the earth by the force of\nterrestrial gravity. The genii of Kepler had given place to the vortices\nof Descartes, and these in their turn to the central force of Newton.\n\nIn like manner the earth, and each of the planets, are made to move\nin an elliptic orbit round the sun by his attractive force, and\nperturbations arise by reason of the disturbing action of the planetary\nmasses on one another. Knowing the masses and the distances, these\ndisturbances may be computed. Later astronomers have even succeeded with\nthe inverse problem, that is, knowing the perturbations or disturbances,\nto find the place and the mass of the disturbing body. Thus, from the\ndeviations of Uranus from his theoretical position, the discovery of\nNeptune was accomplished.\n\nNewton's merit consisted in this, that he applied the laws of dynamics\nto the movements of the celestial bodies, and insisted that scientific\ntheories must be substantiated by the agreement of observations with\ncalculations.\n\nWhen Kepler announced his three laws, they were received with\ncondemnation by the spiritual authorities, not because of any error they\nwere supposed to present or to contain, but partly because they gave\nsupport to the Copernican system, and partly because it was judged\ninexpedient to admit the prevalence of law of any kind as opposed to\nprovidential intervention. The world was regarded as the theatre in\nwhich the divine will was daily displayed; it was considered derogatory\nto the majesty of God that that will should be fettered in any way. The\npower of the clergy was chiefly manifested in the influence the were\nalleged to possess in changing his arbitrary determinations. It was thus\nthat they could abate the baleful action of comets, secure fine weather\nor rain, prevent eclipses, and, arresting the course of Nature, work all\nmanner of miracles; it was thus that the shadow had been made to go back\non the dial, and the sun and the moon stopped in mid-career.\n\nIn the century preceding the epoch of Newton, a great religious and\npolitical revolution had taken place--the Reformation. Though its\neffect had not been the securing of complete liberty for thought, it had\nweakened many of the old ecclesiastical bonds. In the reformed countries\nthere was no power to express a condemnation of Newton's works, and\namong the clergy there was no disposition to give themselves any concern\nabout the matter. At first the attention of the Protestant was engrossed\nby the movements of his great enemy the Catholic, and when that source\nof disquietude ceased, and the inevitable partitions of the Reformation\narose, that attention was fastened upon the rival and antagonistic\nChurches. The Lutheran, the Calvinist, the Episcopalian, the\nPresbyterian, had something more urgent on hand than Newton's\nmathematical demonstrations.\n\nSo, uncondemned, and indeed unobserved, in this clamor of fighting\nsects, Newton's grand theory solidly established itself. Its\nphilosophical significance was infinitely more momentous than the dogmas\nthat these persons were quarreling about. It not only accepted the\nheliocentric theory and the laws discovered by Kepler, but it proved\nthat, no matter what might be the weight of opposing ecclesiastical\nauthority, the sun MUST be the centre of our system, and that Kepler's\nlaws are the result of a mathematical necessity. It is impossible that\nthey should be other than they are.\n\nBut what is the meaning of all this? Plainly that the solar system\nis not interrupted by providential interventions, but is under the\ngovernment of irreversible law--law that is itself the issue of\nmathematical necessity.\n\nThe telescopic observations of Herschel I. satisfied him that there are\nvery many double stars--double not merely because they are accidentally\nin the same line of view, but because they are connected physically,\nrevolving round each other. These observations were continued and\ngreatly extended by Herschel II. The elements of the elliptic orbit of\nthe double star zeta of the Great Bear were determined by Savary, its\nperiod being fifty-eight and one-quarter years; those of another, sigma\nCoronae, were determined by Hind, its period being more than seven\nhundred and thirty-six years. The orbital movement of these double suns\nin ellipses compels us to admit that the law of gravitation holds good\nfar beyond the boundaries of the solar system; indeed, as far as the\ntelescope can reach, it demonstrates the reign of law. D'Alembert, in\nthe Introduction to the Encyclopaedia, says: \"The universe is but a\nsingle fact; it is only one great truth.\"\n\nShall we, then, conclude that the solar and the starry systems have been\ncalled into existence by God, and that he has then imposed upon them by\nhis arbitrary will laws under the control of which it was his pleasure\nthat their movements should be made?\n\nOr are there reasons for believing that these several systems came into\nexistence not by such an arbitrary fiat, but through the operation of\nlaw?\n\nThe following are some peculiarities displayed by the solar system as\nenumerated by Laplace. All the planets and their satellites move in\nellipses of such small eccentricity that they are nearly circles. All\nthe planets move in the same direction and nearly in the same plane. The\nmovements of the satellites are in the same direction as those of the\nplanets. The movements of rotation of the sun, of the planets, and the\nsatellites, are in the same direction as their orbital motions, and in\nplanes little different.\n\nIt is impossible that so many coincidences could be the result of\nchance! Is it not plain that there must have been a common tie among\nall these bodies, that they are only parts of what must once have been a\nsingle mass?\n\nBut if we admit that the substance of which the solar system consists\nonce existed in a nebulous condition, and was in rotation, all the above\npeculiarities follow as necessary mechanical consequences. Nay, more,\nthe formation of planets, the formation of satellites and of asteroids,\nis accounted for. We see why the outer planets and satellites are larger\nthan the interior ones; why the larger planets rotate rapidly, and the\nsmall ones slowly; why of the satellites the outer planets have more,\nthe inner fewer. We are furnished with indications of the time of\nrevolution of the planets in their orbits, and of the satellites in\ntheirs; we perceive the mode of formation of Saturn's rings. We find an\nexplanation of the physical condition of the sun, and the transitions of\ncondition through which the earth and moon have passed, as indicated by\ntheir geology.\n\nBut two exceptions to the above peculiarities have been noted; they are\nin the cases of Uranus and Neptune.\n\nThe existence of such a nebulous mass once admitted, all the rest\nfollows as a matter of necessity. Is there not, however, a most serious\nobjection in the way? Is not this to exclude Almighty God from the\nworlds he has made?\n\nFirst, we must be satisfied whether there is any solid evidence for\nadmitting the existence of such a nebulous mass.\n\nThe nebular hypothesis rests primarily on the telescopic discovery made\nby Herschel I., that there are scattered here and there in the heavens\npale, gleaming patches of light, a few of which are large enough to be\nvisible to the naked eye. Of these, many may be resolved by a sufficient\ntelescopic power into a congeries of stars, but some, such as the great\nnebula in Orion, have resisted the best instruments hitherto made.\n\nIt was asserted by those who were indisposed to accept the nebular\nhypothesis, that the non-resolution was due to imperfection in the\ntelescopes used. In these instruments two distinct functions may be\nobserved: their light-gathering power depends on the diameter of their\nobject mirror or lens, their defining power depends on the exquisite\ncorrectness of their optical surfaces. Grand instruments may possess\nthe former quality in perfection by reason of their size, but the latter\nvery imperfectly, either through want of original configuration, or\ndistortion arising from flexure through their own weight. But, unless an\ninstrument be perfect in this respect, as well as adequate in the other,\nit may fail to decompose a nebula into discrete points.\n\nFortunately, however, other means for the settlement of this question\nare available. In 1846, it was discovered by the author of this book\nthat the spectrum of an ignited solid is continuous--that is, has\nneither dark nor bright lines. Fraunhofer had previously made known that\nthe spectrum of ignited gases is discontinuous. Here, then, is the means\nof determining whether the light emitted by a given nebula comes from an\nincandescent gas, or from a congeries of ignited solids, stars, or\nsuns. If its spectrum be discontinuous, it is a true nebula or gas; if\ncontinuous, a congeries of stars.\n\nIn 1864, Mr. Huggins made this examination in the case of a nebula in\nthe constellation Draco. It proved to be gaseous.\n\nSubsequent observations have shown that, of sixty nebulae examined,\nnineteen give discontinuous or gaseous spectra--the remainder continuous\nones.\n\nIt may, therefore, be admitted that physical evidence has at length\nbeen obtained, demonstrating the existence of vast masses of matter in a\ngaseous condition, and at a temperature of incandescence. The hypothesis\nof Laplace has thus a firm basis. In such a nebular mass, cooling by\nradiation is a necessary incident, and condensation and rotation the\ninevitable results. There must be a separation of rings all lying in\none plane, a generation of planets and satellites all rotating alike,\na central sun and engirdling globes. From a chaotic mass, through the\noperation of natural laws, an organized system has been produced. An\nintegration of matter into worlds has taken place through a decline of\nheat.\n\nIf such be the cosmogony of the solar system, such the genesis of the\nplanetary worlds, we are constrained to extend our views of the dominion\nof law, and to recognize its agency in the creation as well as in the\nconservation of the innumerable orbs that throng the universe.\n\nBut, again, it may be asked: \"Is there not something profoundly impious\nin this? Are we not excluding Almighty God from the world he has made?\"\n\nWe have often witnessed the formation of a cloud in a serene sky. A hazy\npoint, barely perceptible--a little wreath of mist--increases in volume,\nand becomes darker and denser, until it obscures a large portion of the\nheavens. It throws itself into fantastic shapes, it gathers a glory\nfrom the sun, is borne onward by the wind, and, perhaps, as it gradually\ncame, so it gradually disappears, melting away in the untroubled air.\n\nNow, we say that the little vesicles of which this cloud was composed\narose from the condensation of water-vapor preexisting in the\natmosphere, through reduction of temperature; we show how they assumed\nthe form they present. We assign optical reasons for the brightness\nor blackness of the cloud; we explain, on mechanical principles, its\ndrifting before the wind; for its disappearance we account on\nthe principles of chemistry. It never occurs to us to invoke the\ninterposition of the Almighty in the production and fashioning of this\nfugitive form. We explain all the facts connected with it by physical\nlaws, and perhaps should reverentially hesitate to call into operation\nthe finger of God.\n\nBut the universe is nothing more than such a cloud--a cloud of suns and\nworlds. Supremely grand though it may seem to us, to the Infinite and\nEternal Intellect it is no more than a fleeting mist. If there be a\nmultiplicity of worlds in infinite space, there is also a succession of\nworlds in infinite time. As one after another cloud replaces cloud in\nthe skies, so this starry system, the universe, is the successor of\ncountless others that have preceded it--the predecessor of countless\nothers that will follow. There is an unceasing metamorphosis, a sequence\nof events, without beginning or end.\n\nIf, on physical principles, we account for minor meteorological\nincidents, mists and clouds, is it not permissible for us to appeal to\nthe same principle in the origin of world-systems and universes, which\nare only clouds on a space-scale somewhat larger, mists on a time-scale\nsomewhat less transient? Can any man place the line which bounds\nthe physical on one side, the supernatural on the other? Do not our\nestimates of the extent and the duration of things depend altogether\non our point of view? Were we set in the midst of the great nebula\nof Orion, how transcendently magnificent the scene! The vast\ntransformations, the condensations of a fiery mist into worlds, might\nseem worthy of the immediate presence, the supervision of God; here, at\nour distant station, where millions of miles are inappreciable to our\neyes, and suns seem no bigger than motes in the air, that nebula is more\ninsignificant than the faintest cloud. Galileo, in his description of\nthe constellation of Orion, did not think it worth while so much as to\nmention it. The most rigorous theologian of those days would have seen\nnothing to blame in imputing its origin to secondary causes, nothing\nirreligious in failing to invoke the arbitrary interference of God in\nits metamorphoses. If such be the conclusion to which we come respecting\nit, what would be the conclusion to which an Intelligence seated in it\nmight come respecting us? It occupies an extent of space millions of\ntimes greater than that of our solar system; we are invisible from it,\nand therefore absolutely insignificant. Would such an Intelligence think\nit necessary to require for our origin and maintenance the immediate\nintervention of God?\n\n\nFrom the solar system let us descend to what is still more\ninsignificant--a little portion of it; let us descend to our own earth.\nIn the lapse of time it has experienced great changes. Have these been\ndue to incessant divine interventions, or to the continuous operation of\nunfailing law? The aspect of Nature perpetually varies under our eyes,\nstill more grandly and strikingly has it altered in geological\ntimes. But the laws guiding those changes never exhibit the slightest\nvariation. In the midst of immense vicissitudes they are immutable.\nThe present order of things is only a link in a vast connected chain\nreaching back to an incalculable past, and forward to an infinite\nfuture.\n\nThere is evidence, geological and astronomical, that the temperature of\nthe earth and her satellite was in the remote past very much higher than\nit is now. A decline so slow as to be imperceptible at short intervals,\nbut manifest enough in the course of many ages, has occurred. The heat\nhas been lost by radiation into space.\n\nThe cooling of a mass of any kind, no matter whether large or small, is\nnot discontinuous; it does not go on by fits and starts; it takes\nplace under the operation of a mathematical law, though for such mighty\nchanges as are here contemplated neither the formula of Newton, nor that\nof Dulong and Petit, may apply. It signifies nothing that periods of\npartial decline, glacial periods, or others of temporary elevation, have\nbeen intercalated; it signifies nothing whether these variations may\nhave arisen from topographical variations, as those of level, or from\nperiodicities in the radiation of the sun. A periodical sun would act as\na mere perturbation in the gradual decline of heat. The perturbations of\nthe planetary motions are a confirmation, not a disproof, of gravity.\n\nNow, such a decline of temperature must have been attended by\ninnumerable changes of a physical character in our globe. Her dimensions\nmust have diminished through contraction, the length of her day must\nhave lessened, her surface must have collapsed, and fractures taken\nplace along the lines of least resistance; the density of the sea must\nhave increased, its volume must have become less; the constitution of\nthe atmosphere must have varied, especially in the amount of water-vapor\nand carbonic acid that it contained; the barometric pressure must have\ndeclined.\n\nThese changes, and very many more that might be mentioned, must have\ntaken place not in a discontinuous but in an orderly manner, since the\nmaster-fact, the decline of heat, that was causing them, was itself\nfollowing a mathematical law.\n\nBut not alone did lifeless Nature submit to these inevitable mutations;\nliving Nature was also simultaneously affected.\n\nAn organic form of any kind, vegetable or animal, will remain unchanged\nonly so long as the environment in which it is placed remains unchanged.\nShould an alteration in the environment occur, the organism will either\nbe modified or destroyed.\n\nDestruction is more likely to happen as the change in the environment\nis more sudden; modification or transformation is more possible as that\nchange is more gradual.\n\nSince it is demonstrably certain that lifeless Nature has in the lapse\nof ages undergone vast modifications; since the crust of the earth, and\nthe sea, and the atmosphere, are no longer such as they once were; since\nthe distribution of the land and the ocean and all manner of physical\nconditions have varied; since there have been such grand changes in\nthe environment of living things on the surface of our planet--it\nnecessarily follows that organic Nature must have passed through\ndestructions and transformations in correspondence thereto.\n\nThat such extinctions, such modifications, have taken place, how\ncopious, how convincing, is the evidence!\n\nHere, again, we must observe that, since the disturbing agency\nwas itself following a mathematical law, these its results must be\nconsidered as following that law too.\n\nSuch considerations, then, plainly force upon us the conclusion that\nthe organic progress of the world has been guided by the operation of\nimmutable law--not determined by discontinuous, disconnected, arbitrary\ninterventions of God. They incline us to view favorably the idea of\ntransmutations of one form into another, rather than that of sudden\ncreations.\n\nCreation implies an abrupt appearance, transformation a gradual change.\n\nIn this manner is presented to our contemplation the great theory of\nEvolution. Every organic being has a place in a chain of events. It is\nnot an isolated, a capricious fact, but an unavoidable phenomenon. It\nhas its place in that vast, orderly concourse which has successively\nrisen in the past, has introduced the present, and is preparing the way\nfor a predestined future. From point to point in this vast progression\nthere has been a gradual, a definite, a continuous unfolding, a\nresistless order of evolution. But in the midst of these mighty changes\nstand forth immutable the laws that are dominating over all.\n\nIf we examine the introduction of any type of life in the animal series,\nwe find that it is in accordance with transformation, not with creation.\nIts beginning is under an imperfect form in the midst of other forms,\nof which the time is nearly complete, and which are passing into\nextinction. By degrees, one species after another in succession more and\nmore perfect arises, until, after many ages, a culmination is reached.\nFrom that there is, in like manner, a long, a gradual decline.\n\nThus, though the mammal type of life is the characteristic of the\nTertiary and post-Tertiary periods, it does not suddenly make its\nappearance without premonition in those periods. Far back, in the\nSecondary, we find it under imperfect forms, struggling, as it were, to\nmake good a foothold. At length it gains a predominance under higher and\nbetter models.\n\nSo, too, of reptiles, the characteristic type of life of the Secondary\nperiod. As we see in a dissolving view, out of the fading outlines of\na scene that is passing away, the dim form of a new one emerging, which\ngradually gains strength, reaches its culmination, and then melts\naway in some other that is displacing it, so reptile-life doubtfully,\nappears, reaches its culmination, and gradually declines. In all this\nthere is nothing abrupt; the changes shade into each other by insensible\ndegrees.\n\nHow could it be otherwise? The hot-blooded animals could not exist in\nan atmosphere so laden with carbonic acid as was that of the primitive\ntimes. But the removal of that noxious ingredient from the air by the\nleaves of plants under the influence of sunlight, the enveloping of its\ncarbon in the earth under the form of coal, the disengagement of its\noxygen, permitted their life. As the atmosphere was thus modified,\nthe sea was involved in the change; it surrendered a large part of its\ncarbonic acid, and the limestone hitherto held in solution by it was\ndeposited in the solid form. For every equivalent of carbon buried in\nthe earth, there was an equivalent of carbonate of lime separated from\nthe sea--not necessarily in an amorphous condition, most frequently\nunder an organic form. The sunshine kept up its work day by day, but\nthere were demanded myriads of days for the work to be completed. It was\na slow passage from a noxious to a purified atmosphere, and an equally\nslow passage from a cold-blooded to a hot-blooded type of life. But the\nphysical changes were taking place under the control of law, and the\norganic transformations were not sudden or arbitrary providential acts.\nThey were the immediate, the inevitable consequences of the physical\nchanges, and therefore, like them, the necessary issue of law.\n\nFor a more detailed consideration of this subject, I may refer the\nreader to Chapters I, II., VII, of the second book of my \"Treatise on\nHuman Physiology,\" published in 1856.\n\n\nIs the world, then, governed by law or by providential interventions,\nabruptly breaking the proper sequence of events?\n\nTo complete our view of this question, we turn finally to what, in one\nsense, is the most insignificant, in another the most important, case\nthat can be considered. Do human societies, in their historic career,\nexhibit the marks of a predetermined progress in an unavoidable track?\nIs there any evidence that the life of nations is under the control of\nimmutable law?\n\nMay we conclude that, in society, as in the individual man, parts never\nspring from nothing, but are evolved or developed from parts that are\nalready in existence?\n\nIf any one should object to or deride the doctrine of the evolution\nor successive development of the animated forms which constitute that\nunbroken organic chain reaching from the beginning of life on the globe\nto the present times, let him reflect that he has himself passed through\nmodifications the counterpart of those he disputes. For nine months\nhis type of life was aquatic, and during that time he assumed, in\nsuccession, many distinct but correlated forms. At birth his type of\nlife became aerial; he began respiring the atmospheric air; new elements\nof food were supplied to him; the mode of his nutrition changed; but\nas yet he could see nothing, hear nothing, notice nothing. By degrees\nconscious existence was assumed; he became aware that there is an\nexternal world. In due time organs adapted to another change of food,\nthe teeth, appeared, and a change of food ensued. He then passed through\nthe stages of childhood and youth, his bodily form developing, and with\nit his intellectual powers. At about fifteen years, in consequence of\nthe evolution which special parts of his system had attained, his moral\ncharacter changed. New ideas, new passions, influenced him. And that\nthat was the cause, and this the effect, is demonstrated when, by the\nskill of the surgeon, those parts have been interfered with. Nor does\nthe development, the metamorphosis, end here; it requires many years\nfor the body to reach its full perfection, many years for the mind. A\nculmination is at length reached, and then there is a decline. I need\nnot picture its mournful incidents--the corporeal, the intellectual\nenfeeblement. Perhaps there is little exaggeration in saying that in\nless than a century every human being on the face of the globe, if not\ncut off in an untimely manner, has passed through all these changes.\n\nIs there for each of us a providential intervention as we thus pass\nfrom stage to stage of life? or shall we not rather believe that the\ncountless myriads of human beings who have peopled the earth have been\nunder the guidance of an unchanging, a universal law?\n\nBut individuals are the elementary constituents of communities--nations.\nThey maintain therein a relation like that which the particles of the\nbody maintain to the body itself. These, introduced into it, commence\nand complete their function; they die, and are dismissed.\n\nLike the individual, the nation comes into existence without its own\nknowledge, and dies without its own consent, often against its own will.\nNational life differs in no particular from individual, except in this,\nthat it is spread over a longer span, but no nation can escape its\ninevitable term. Each, if its history be well considered, shows its\ntime of infancy, its time of youth, its time of maturity, its time of\ndecline, if its phases of life be completed.\n\nIn the phases of existence of all, so far as those phases are\ncompleted, there are common characteristics, and, as like accordances in\nindividuals point out that all are living under a reign of law, we\nare justified in inferring that the course of nations, and indeed the\nprogress of humanity, does not take place in a chance or random way,\nthat supernatural interventions never break the chain of historic acts,\nthat every historic event has its warrant in some preceding event, and\ngives warrant to others that are to follow..\n\nBut this conclusion is the essential principle of Stoicism--that Grecian\nphilosophical system which, as I have already said, offered a support in\ntheir hour of trial and an unwavering guide in the vicissitudes of\nlife, not only to many illustrious Greeks, but also to some of the great\nphilosophers, statesmen, generals, and emperors of Rome; a system which\nexcluded chance from every thing, and asserted the direction of all\nevents by irresistible necessity, to the promotion of perfect good; a\nsystem of earnestness, sternness, austerity, virtue--a protest in favor\nof the common-sense of mankind. And perhaps we shall not dissent from\nthe remark of Montesquieu, who affirms that the destruction of the\nStoics was a great calamity to the human race; for they alone made great\ncitizens, great men.\n\nTo the principle of government by law, Latin Christianity, in its papal\nform, is in absolute contradiction. The history of this branch of\nthe Christian Church is almost a diary of miracles and supernatural\ninterventions. These show that the supplications of holy men have often\narrested the course of Nature--if, indeed, there be any such course;\nthat images and pictures have worked wonders; that bones, hairs, and\nother sacred relics, have wrought miracles. The criterion or proof of\nthe authenticity of many of these objects is, not an unchallengeable\nrecord of their origin and history, but an exhibition of their\nmiracle-working powers.\n\nIs not that a strange logic which finds proof of an asserted fact in an\ninexplicable illustration of something else?\n\nEven in the darkest ages intelligent Christian men must have had\nmisgivings as to these alleged providential or miraculous interventions.\nThere is a solemn grandeur in the orderly progress of Nature which\nprofoundly impresses us; and such is the character of continuity in the\nevents of our individual life that we instinctively doubt the occurrence\nof the supernatural in that of our neighbor. The intelligent man knows\nwell that, for his personal behoof, the course of Nature has never been\nchecked; for him no miracle has ever been worked; he attributes justly\nevery event of his life to some antecedent event; this he looks upon\nas the cause, that as the consequence. When it is affirmed that, in his\nneighbor's behalf, such grand interventions have been vouchsafed, he\ncannot do otherwise than believe that his neighbor is either deceived,\nor practising deception.\n\nAs might, then, have been anticipated, the Catholic doctrine of\nmiraculous intervention received a rude shock at the time of the\nReformation, when predestination and election were upheld by some of the\ngreatest theologians, and accepted by some of the greatest Protestant\nChurches. With stoical austerity Calvin declares: \"We were elected from\neternity, before the foundation of the world, from no merit of our own,\nbut according to the purpose of the divine pleasure.\" In affirming this,\nCalvin was resting on the belief that God has from all eternity decreed\nwhatever comes to pass. Thus, after the lapse of many ages, were again\nemerging into prominence the ideas of the Basilidians wad Valentinians,\nChristian sects of the second century, whose Gnostical views led to the\nengraftment of the great doctrine of the Trinity upon Christianity. They\nasserted that all the actions of men are necessary, that even faith is\na natural gift, to which men are forcibly determined, and must therefore\nbe saved, though their lives be ever so irregular. From the Supreme God\nall things proceeded. Thus, also, came into prominence the views which\nwere developed by Augustine in his work, \"De dono perseverantiae.\" These\nwere: that God, by his arbitrary will, has selected certain persons\nwithout respect to foreseen faith or good works, and has infallibly\nordained to bestow upon them eternal happiness; other persons, in like\nmanner, he has condemned to eternal reprobation. The Sublapsarians\nbelieved that \"God permitted the fall of Adam;\" the Supralapsarians that\n\"he predestinated it, with all its pernicious consequences, from all\neternity, and that our first parents had no liberty from the beginning.\"\nIn this, these sectarians disregarded the remark of St. Augustine:\n\"Nefas est dicere Deum aliquid nisi bonum predestinare.\"\n\nIs it true, then, that \"predestination to eternal happiness is the\neverlasting purpose of God, whereby, before the foundations of the world\nwere laid, he hath constantly decreed by his council, secret to us,\nto deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath chosen out of\nmankind?\" Is it true that of the human family there are some who, in\nview of no fault of their own, Almighty God has condemned to unending\ntorture, eternal misery?\n\nIn 1595 the Lambeth Articles asserted that \"God from eternity hath\npredestinated certain men unto life; certain he hath reprobated.\" In\n1618 the Synod of Dort decided in favor of this view. It condemned the\nremonstrants against it, and treated them with such severity, that many\nof them had to flee to foreign countries. Even in the Church of England,\nas is manifested by its seventeenth Article of Faith, these doctrines\nhave found favor.\n\nProbably there was no point which brought down from the Catholics on the\nProtestants severer condemnation than this, their partial acceptance\nof the government of the world by law. In all Reformed Europe miracles\nceased. But, with the cessation of shrine-cure, relic-cure, great\npecuniary profits ended. Indeed, as is well known, it was the sale\nof indulgences that provoked the Reformation--indulgences which are\nessentially a permit from God for the practice of sin, conditioned on\nthe payment of a certain sum of money to the priest.\n\nPhilosophically, the Reformation implied a protest against the Catholic\ndoctrine of incessant divine intervention in human affairs, invoked by\nsacerdotal agency; but this protest was far from being fully made by\nall the Reforming Churches. The evidence in behalf of government by law,\nwhich has of late years been offered by science, is received by many of\nthem with suspicion, perhaps with dislike; sentiments which, however,\nmust eventually give way before the hourly-increasing weight of\nevidence.\n\nShall we not, then, conclude with Cicero, who, quoted by Lactantius,\nsays: \"One eternal and immutable law embraces all things and all times?\"\n\n\n\nCHAPTER X.\n\n     LATIN CHRISTIANITY IN RELATION TO MODERN CIVILIZATION.\n\n     For more than a thousand years Latin Christianity controlled\n     the intelligence of Europe, and is responsible for the\n     result.\n\n     That result is manifested by the condition of the city of\n     Rome at the Reformation, and by the condition of the\n     Continent of Europe in domestic and social life.--European\n     nations suffered under the coexistence of a dual government,\n     a spiritual and a temporal.--They were immersed in\n     ignorance, superstition, discomfort.--Explanation of the\n     failure of Catholicism--Political history of the papacy: it\n     was transmuted from a spiritual confederacy into an absolute\n     monarchy.--Action of the College of Cardinals and the Curia--\n     Demoralization that ensued from the necessity of raising\n     large revenues.\n\n     The advantages accruing to Europe during the Catholic rule\n     arose not from direct intention, but were incidental.\n\n     The general result is, that the political influence of\n     Catholicism was prejudicial to modern civilization.\n\n\nLATIN Christianity is responsible for the condition and progress of\nEurope from the fourth to the sixteenth century. We have now to examine\nhow it discharged its trust.\n\nIt will be convenient to limit to the case of Europe what has here to\nbe presented, though, from the claim of the papacy to superhuman origin,\nand its demand for universal obedience, it should strictly be held to\naccount for the condition of all mankind. Its inefficacy against the\ngreat and venerable religions of Southern and Eastern Asia would furnish\nan important and instructive theme for consideration, and lead us to\nthe conclusion that it has impressed itself only where Roman imperial\ninfluences have prevailed; a political conclusion which, however, it\ncontemptuously rejects.\n\nDoubtless at the inception of the Reformation there were many persons\nwho compared the existing social condition with what it had been in\nancient times. Morals had not changed, intelligence had not advanced,\nsociety had little improved. From the Eternal City itself its splendors\nhad vanished. The marble streets, of which Augustus had once boasted,\nhad disappeared. Temples, broken columns, and the long, arcaded vistas\nof gigantic aqueducts bestriding the desolate Campagna, presented a\nmournful scene. From the uses to which they had been respectively put,\nthe Capitol had been known as Goats' Hill, and the site of the Roman\nForum, whence laws had been issued to the world, as Cows' Field. The\npalace of the Caesars was hidden by mounds of earth, crested with\nflowering shrubs. The baths of Caracalla, with their porticoes, gardens,\nreservoirs, had long ago become useless through the destruction of their\nsupplying aqueducts. On the ruins of that grand edifice, \"flowery glades\nand thickets of odoriferous trees extended in ever-winding labyrinths\nupon immense platforms, and dizzy arches suspended in the air.\" Of\nthe Coliseum, the most colossal of Roman ruins, only about one-third\nremained. Once capable of accommodating nearly ninety thousand\nspectators, it had, in succession, been turned into a fortress in the\nmiddle ages, and then into a stone-quarry to furnish material for the\npalaces of degenerate Roman princes. Some of the popes had occupied it\nas a woollen-mill, some as a saltpetre factory; some had planned the\nconversion of its magnificent arcades into shops for tradesmen. The iron\nclamps which bound its stones together had been stolen. The walls were\nfissured and falling. Even in our own times botanical works have been\ncomposed on the plants which have made this noble wreck their home. \"The\nFlora of the Coliseum\" contains four hundred and twenty species.\nAmong the ruins of classical buildings might be seen broken columns,\ncypresses, and mouldy frescoes, dropping from the walls. Even the\nvegetable world participated in the melancholy change: the myrtle, which\nonce flourished on the Aventine, had nearly become extinct; the laurel,\nwhich once gave its leaves to encircle the brows of emperors, had been\nreplaced by ivy--the companion of death.\n\nBut perhaps it may be said the popes were not responsible for all this.\nLet it be remembered that in less than one hundred and forty years the\ncity had been successively taken by Alaric, Genseric, Rieimer, Vitiges,\nTotila; that many of its great edifices had been converted into\ndefensive works. The aqueducts were destroyed by Vitiges, who ruined the\nCampagna; the palace of the Caesars was ravaged by Totila; then there\nhad been the Lombard sieges; then Robert Guiscard and his Normans had\nburnt the city from the Antonine Column to the Flaminian Gate, from\nthe Lateran to the Capitol; then it was sacked and mutilated by the\nConstable Bourbon; again and again it was flooded by inundations of the\nTiber and shattered by earthquakes. We must, however, bear in mind the\naccusation of Machiavelli, who says, in his \"History of Florence,\" that\nnearly all the barbarian invasions of Italy were by the invitations of\nthe pontiffs, who called in those hordes! It was not the Goth, nor\nthe Vandal, nor the Norman, nor the Saracen, but the popes and their\nnephews, who produced the dilapidation of Rome! Lime-kilns had been fed\nfrom the ruins, classical buildings had become stone-quarries for the\npalaces of Italian princes, and churches were decorated from the old\ntemples.\n\nChurches decorated from the temples! It is for this and such as this\nthat the popes must be held responsible. Superb Corinthian columns bad\nbeen chiseled into images of the saints. Magnificent Egyptian obelisks\nhad been dishonored by papal inscriptions. The Septizonium of Severus\nhad been demolished to furnish materials for the building of St.\nPeter's; the bronze roof of the Pantheon had been melted into columns to\nornament the apostle's tomb.\n\nThe great bell of Viterbo, in the tower of the Capitol, had announced\nthe death of many a pope, and still desecration of the buildings\nand demoralization of the people went on. Papal Rome manifested no\nconsideration, but rather hatred, for classical Rome, The pontiffs had\nbeen subordinates of the Byzantine sovereigns, then lieutenants of the\nFrankish kings, then arbiters of Europe; their government had changed as\nmuch as those of any of the surrounding nations; there had been complete\nmetamorphoses in its maxims, objects, claims. In one point only it had\nnever changed--intolerance. Claiming to be the centre of the religious\nlife of Europe, it steadfastly refused to recognize any religious\nexistence outside of itself, yet both in a political and theological\nsense it was rotten to the core. Erasmus and Luther heard with amazement\nthe blasphemies and witnessed with a shudder the atheism of the city.\n\nThe historian Ranke, to whom I am indebted for many of these facts,\nhas depicted in a very graphic manner the demoralization of the great\nmetropolis. The popes were, for the most part, at their election, aged\nmen. Power was, therefore, incessantly passing into new hands. Every\nelection was a revolution in prospects and expectations. In a community\nwhere all might rise, where all might aspire to all, it necessarily\nfollowed that every man was occupied in thrusting some other into the\nbackground. Though the population of the city at the inception of the\nReformation had sunk to eighty thousand, there were vast crowds of\nplacemen, and still greater ones of aspirants for place. The\nsuccessful occupant of the pontificate had thousands of offices to give\naway--offices from many of which the incumbents had been remorselessly\nejected; many had been created for the purpose of sale. The integrity\nand capacity of an applicant were never inquired into; the points\nconsidered were, what services has he rendered or can he render to the\nparty? how much can he pay for the preferment? An American reader can\nthoroughly realize this state of things. At every presidential election\nhe witnesses similar acts. The election of a pope by the Conclave is not\nunlike the nomination of an American president by a convention. In both\ncases there are many offices to give away.\n\nWilliam of Malmesbury says that in his day the Romans made a sale of\nwhatever was righteous and sacred for gold. After his time there was\nno improvement; the Church degenerated into an instrument for the\nexploitation of money. Vast sums were collected in Italy; vast sums\nwere drawn under all manner of pretenses from surrounding and reluctant\ncountries. Of these the most nefarious was the sale of indulgences\nfor the perpetration of sin. Italian religion had become the art of\nplundering the people.\n\nFor more than a thousand years the sovereign pontiffs had been rulers\nof the city. True, it had witnessed many scenes of devastation for which\nthey were not responsible; but they were responsible for this, that they\nhad never made any vigorous, any persistent effort for its material, its\nmoral improvement. Instead of being in these respects an exemplar for\nthe imitation of the world, it became an exemplar of a condition that\nought to be shunned. Things steadily went on from bad to worse, until\nat the epoch of the Reformation no pious stranger could visit it without\nbeing shocked.\n\nThe papacy, repudiating science as absolutely incompatible with its\npretensions, had in later years addressed itself to the encouragement of\nart. But music and painting, though they may be exquisite adornments\nof life, contain no living force that can develop a weak nation into a\nstrong one; nothing that can permanently assure the material well-being\nor happiness of communities; and hence at the time of the Reformation,\nto one who thoughtfully considered her condition, Rome had lost all\nliving energy. She was no longer the arbiter of the physical or the\nreligious progress of the world. For the progressive maxims of the\nrepublic and the empire, she had substituted the stationary maxims of\nthe papacy. She had the appearance of piety and the possession of art.\nIn this she resembled one of those friar-corpses which we still see in\ntheir brown cowls in the vaults of the Cappuccini, with a breviary or\nsome withered flowers in its hands.\n\nFrom this view of the Eternal City, this survey of what Latin\nChristianity had done for Rome itself, let us turn to the whole European\nContinent. Let us try to determine the true value of the system that was\nguiding society; let us judge it by its fruits.\n\nThe condition of nations as to their well-being is most precisely\nrepresented by the variations of their population. Forms of government\nhave very little influence on population, but policy may control it\ncompletely.\n\nIt has been very satisfactorily shown by authors who have given\nattention to the subject, that the variations of population depend\nupon the interbalancing of the generative force of society and the\nresistances to life.\n\nBy the generative force of society is meant that instinct which\nmanifests itself in the multiplication of the race. To some extent it\ndepends on climate; but, since the climate of Europe did not sensibly\nchange between the fourth and the sixteenth centuries, we may regard\nthis force as having been, on that continent, during the period under\nconsideration, invariable.\n\nBy the resistances to life is meant whatever tends to make individual\nexistence more difficult of support. Among such may be enumerated\ninsufficient food, inadequate clothing, imperfect shelter.\n\nIt is also known that, if the resistances become inappreciable, the\ngenerative force will double a population in twenty-five years.\n\nThe resistances operate in two modes: 1. Physically; since they diminish\nthe number of births, and shorten the term of the life of all. 2.\nIntellectually; since, in a moral, and particularly in a religious\ncommunity, they postpone marriage, by causing individuals to decline\nits responsibilities until they feel that they are competent to meet\nthe charges and cares of a family. Hence the explanation of a\nlong-recognized fact, that the number of marriages during a given period\nhas a connection with the price of food.\n\nThe increase of population keeps pace with the increase of food; and,\nindeed, such being the power of the generative force, it overpasses the\nmeans of subsistence, establishing a constant pressure upon them. Under\nthese circumstances, it necessarily happens that a certain amount of\ndestitution must occur. Individuals have come into existence who must be\nstarved.\n\nAs illustrations of the variations that have occurred in the population\nof different countries, may be mentioned the immense diminution of that\nof Italy in consequence of the wars of Justinian; the depopulation of\nNorth Africa in consequence of theological quarrels; its restoration\nthrough the establishment of Mohammedanism; the increase of that of all\nEurope through the feudal system, when estates became more valuable in\nproportion to the number of retainers they could supply. The crusades\ncaused a sensible diminution, not only through the enormous army losses,\nbut also by reason of the withdrawal of so many able-bodied men\nfrom marriage-life. Similar variations have occurred on the American\nContinent. The population of Mexico was very quickly diminished by two\nmillion through the rapacity and atrocious cruelty of the Spaniards, who\ndrove the civilized Indians to despair. The same happened in Peru.\n\nThe population of England at the Norman conquest was about two million.\nIn five hundred years it had scarcely doubled. It may be supposed that\nthis stationary condition was to some extent induced by the papal policy\nof the enforcement of celibacy in the clergy. The \"legal generative\nforce\" was doubtless affected by that policy, the \"actual generative\nforce\" was not. For those who have made this subject their study have\nlong ago been satisfied that public celibacy is private wickedness. This\nmainly determined the laity, as well as the government in England, to\nsuppress the monasteries. It was openly asserted that there were one\nhundred thousand women in England made dissolute by the clergy.\n\nIn my history of the \"American Civil War,\" I have presented some\nreflections on this point, which I will take the liberty of quoting\nhere: \"What, then, does this stationary condition of the population\nmean? It means, food obtained with hardship, insufficient clothing,\npersonal uncleanness, cabins that could not keep out the weather,\nthe destructive effects of cold and heat, miasm, want of sanitary\nprovisions, absence of physicians, uselessness of shrine-cure, the\ndeceptiveness of miracles, in which society was putting its trust; or,\nto sum up a long catalogue of sorrows, wants, and sufferings, in one\nterm--it means a high death-rate.\n\n\"But more; it means deficient births. And what does that point out?\nMarriage postponed, licentious life, private wickedness, demoralized\nsociety.\n\n\"To an American, who lives in a country that was yesterday an\ninterminable and impenetrable desert, but which to-day is filling with\na population doubling itself every twenty-five years at the prescribed\nrate, this awful waste of actual and contingent life cannot but be a\nmost surprising fact. His curiosity will lead him to inquire what kind\nof system that could have been which was pretending to guide and\ndevelop society, but which must be held responsible for this prodigious\ndestruction, excelling, in its insidious result, war, pestilence, and\nfamine combined; insidious, for men were actually believing that it\nsecured their highest temporal interests. How different now! In England,\nthe same geographical surface is sustaining ten times the population\nof that day, and sending forth its emigrating swarms. Let him, who looks\nback, with veneration on the past, settle in his own mind what such a\nsystem could have been worth.\"\n\nThese variations in the population of Europe have been attended with\nchanges in distribution. The centre of population has passed northward\nsince the establishment of Christianity in the Roman Empire. It\nhas since passed westward, in consequence of the development of\nmanufacturing industry.\n\n\nWe may now examine somewhat more minutely the character of the\nresistances which thus, for a thousand years, kept the population of\nEurope stationary. The surface of the Continent was for the most\npart covered with pathless forests; here and there it was dotted with\nmonasteries and towns. In the lowlands and along the river-courses were\nfens, sometimes hundreds of miles in extent, exhaling their pestiferous\nmiasms, and spreading agues far and wide. In Paris and London, the\nhouses were of wood daubed with clay, and thatched with straw or reeds.\nThey had no windows, and, until the invention of the saw-mill, very\nfew had wooden floors. The luxury of a carpet was unknown; some straw,\nscattered in the room, supplied its place. There were no chimneys; the\nsmoke of the ill-fed, cheerless fire escaped through a hole in the roof.\nIn such habitations there was scarcely any protection from the weather.\nNo attempt was made at drainage, but the putrefying garbage and rubbish\nwere simply thrown out of the door. Men, women, and children, slept\nin the same apartment; not unfrequently, domestic animals were their\ncompanions; in such a confusion of the family, it was impossible that\nmodesty or morality could be maintained. The bed was usually a bag of\nstraw, a wooden log served as a pillow. Personal cleanliness was utterly\nunknown; great officers of state, even dignitaries so high as the\nArchbishop of Canterbury, swarmed with vermin; such, it is related, was\nthe condition of Thomas a Becket, the antagonist of an English king. To\nconceal personal impurity, perfumes were necessarily and profusely\nused. The citizen clothed himself in leather, a garment which, with its\never-accumulating impurity, might last for many years. He was considered\nto be in circumstances of ease, if he could procure fresh meat once\na week for his dinner. The streets had no sewers; they were without\npavement or lamps. After nightfall, the chamber-shatters were thrown\nopen, and slops unceremoniously emptied down, to the discomfiture of the\nwayfarer tracking his path through the narrow streets, with his dismal\nlantern in his hand.\n\nAeneas Sylvius, who afterward became Pope Pius II., and was therefore a\nvery competent and impartial writer, has left us a graphic account of\na journey he made to the British Islands, about 1430. He describes the\nhouses of the peasantry as constructed of stones put together without\nmortar; the roofs were of turf, a stiffened bull's-hide served for a\ndoor. The food consisted of coarse vegetable products, such as peas,\nand even the bark of trees. In some places they were unacquainted with\nbread.\n\nCabins of reeds plastered with mud, houses of wattled stakes,\nchimneyless peat-fires from which there was scarcely an escape for the\nsmoke, dens of physical and moral pollution swarming with vermin, wisps\nof straw twisted round the limbs to keep off the cold, the ague-stricken\npeasant, with no help except shrine-cure! How was it possible that the\npopulation could increase? Shall we, then, wonder that, in the famine of\n1030, human flesh was cooked and sold; or that, in that of 1258, fifteen\nthousand persons died of hunger in London? Shall we wonder that, in some\nof the invasions of the plague, the deaths were so frightfully numerous\nthat the living could hardly bury the dead? By that of 1348, which came\nfrom the East along the lines of commercial travel, and spread all over\nEurope, one-third of the population of France was destroyed.\n\nSuch was the condition of the peasantry, and of the common inhabitants\nof cities. Not much better was that of the nobles. William of\nMalmesbury, speaking of the degraded manners of the Anglo-Saxons, says:\n\"Their nobles, devoted to gluttony and voluptuousness, never visited the\nchurch, but the matins and the mass were read over to them by a hurrying\npriest in their bedchambers, before they rose, themselves not listening.\nThe common people were a prey to the more powerful; their property was\nseized, their bodies dragged away to distant countries; their maidens\nwere either thrown into a brothel, or sold for slaves. Drinking day\nand night was the general pursuit; vices, the companions of inebriety,\nfollowed, effeminating the manly mind.\" The baronial castles were dens\nof robbers. The Saxon chronicler records how men and women were caught\nand dragged into those strongholds, hung up by their thumbs or feet,\nfire applied to them, knotted strings twisted round their heads, and\nmany other torments inflicted to extort ransom.\n\nAll over Europe, the great and profitable political offices were filled\nby ecclesiastics. In every country there was a dual government: 1.\nThat of a local kind, represented by a temporal sovereign; 2. That of\na foreign kind, acknowledging the authority of the pope, This Roman\ninfluence was, in the nature of things, superior to the local; it\nexpressed the sovereign will of one man over all the nations of\nthe continent conjointly, and gathered overwhelming power from its\ncompactness and unity. The local influence was necessarily of a feeble\nnature, since it was commonly weakened by the rivalries of conterminous\nstates, and the dissensions dexterously provoked by its competitor. On\nnot a single occasion could the various European states form a coalition\nagainst their common antagonist. Whenever a question arose, they were\nskillfully taken in detail, and commonly mastered. The ostensible\nobject of papal intrusion was to secure for the different peoples moral\nwell-being; the real object was to obtain large revenues, and give\nsupport to vast bodies of ecclesiastics. The revenues thus abstracted\nwere not infrequently many times greater than those passing into the\ntreasury of the local power. Thus, on the occasion of Innocent IV.\ndemanding provision to be made for three hundred additional Italian\nclergy by the Church of England, and that one of his nephews--a mere\nboy--should have a stall in Lincoln Cathedral, it was found that the sum\nalready annually abstracted by foreign ecclesiastics from England was\nthrice that which went into the coffers of the king.\n\nWhile thus the higher clergy secured every political appointment\nworth having, and abbots vied with counts in the herds of slaves\nthey possessed--some, it is said, owned not fewer than twenty\nthousand--begging friars pervaded society in all directions, picking\nup a share of what still remained to the poor. There was a vast body of\nnon-producers, living in idleness and owning a foreign allegiance, who\nwere subsisting on the fruits of the toil of the laborers. It could not\nbe otherwise than that small farms should be unceasingly merged into\nthe larger estates; that the poor should steadily become poorer; that\nsociety, far from improving, should exhibit a continually increasing\ndemoralization. Outside the monastic institutions no attempt at\nintellectual advancement was made; indeed, so far as the laity were\nconcerned, the influence of the Church was directed to an opposite\nresult, for the maxim universally received was, that \"ignorance is the\nmother of devotion.\"\n\nThe settled practice of republican and imperial Rome was to have swift\ncommunication with all her outlying provinces, by means of substantial\nbridges and roads. One of the prime duties of the legions was to\nconstruct them and keep them in repair. By this, her military authority\nwas assured. But the dominion of papal Rome, depending upon a different\nprinciple, had no exigencies of that kind, and this duty accordingly\nwas left for the local powers to neglect. And so, in all directions,\nthe roads were almost impassable for a large part of the year. A common\nmeans of transportation was in clumsy carts drawn by oxen, going at the\nmost but three or four miles an hour. Where boat-conveyance along\nrivers could not be had, pack-horses and mules were resorted to for\nthe transportation of merchandise, an adequate means for the slender\ncommerce of the times. When large bodies of men had to be moved, the\ndifficulties became almost insuperable. Of this, perhaps, one of the\nbest illustrations may be found in the story of the march of the first\nCrusaders. These restraints upon intercommunication tended powerfully to\npromote the general benighted condition. Journeys by individuals could\nnot be undertaken without much risk, for there was scarcely a moor or a\nforest that had not its highwaymen.\n\nAn illiterate condition everywhere prevailing, gave opportunity for the\ndevelopment of superstition. Europe was full of disgraceful miracles. On\nall the roads pilgrims were wending their way to the shrines of saints,\nrenowned for the cures they had wrought. It had always been the policy\nof the Church to discourage the physician and his art; he interfered too\nmuch with the gifts and profits of the shrines. Time has brought this\nonce lucrative imposture to its proper value. How many shrines are there\nnow in successful operation in Europe?\n\nFor patients too sick to move or be moved, there were no remedies except\nthose of a ghostly kind--the Pater-noster or the Ave. For the prevention\nof diseases, prayers were put up in the churches, but no sanitary\nmeasures were resorted to. From cities reeking with putrefying filth\nit was thought that the plague might be stayed by the prayers of the\npriests, by them rain and dry weather might be secured, and deliverance\nobtained from the baleful influences of eclipses and comets. But when\nHalley's comet came, in 1456, so tremendous was its apparition that\nit was necessary for the pope himself to interfere. He exorcised and\nexpelled it from the skies. It slunk away into the abysses of space,\nterror-stricken by the maledictions of Calixtus III., and did not\nventure back for seventy-five years!\n\nThe physical value of shrine-cures and ghostly remedies is measured\nby the death-rate. In those days it was, probably, about one in\ntwenty-three, under the present more material practice it is about one\nin forty.\n\nThe moral condition of Europe was signally illustrated when syphilis was\nintroduced from the West Indies by the companions of Columbus. It spread\nwith wonderful rapidity; all ranks of persons, from the Holy Father Leo\nX. to the beggar by the wayside, contracting the shameful disease. Many\nexcused their misfortune by declaring that it was an epidemic proceeding\nfrom a certain malignity in the constitution of the air, but in truth\nits spread was due to a certain infirmity in the constitution of man--an\ninfirmity which had not been removed by the spiritual guidance under\nwhich he had been living.\n\nTo the medical efficacy of shrines must be added that of special relics.\nThese were sometimes of the most extraordinary kind. There were several\nabbeys that possessed our Savior's crown of thorns. Eleven had the\nlance that had pierced his side. If any person was adventurous enough\nto suggest that these could not all be authentic, he would have been\ndenounced as an atheist. During the holy wars the Templar-Knights had\ndriven a profitable commerce by bringing from Jerusalem to the Crusading\narmies bottles of the milk of the Blessed Virgin, which they sold for\nenormous sums; these bottles were preserved with pious care in many of\nthe great religious establishments. But perhaps none of these impostures\nsurpassed in audacity that offered by a monastery in Jerusalem, which\npresented to the beholder one of the fingers of the Holy Ghost! Modern\nsociety has silently rendered its verdict on these scandalous objects.\nThough they once nourished the piety of thousands of earnest people,\nthey are now considered too vile to have a place in any public museum.\n\nHow shall we account for the great failure we thus detect in the\nguardianship of the Church over Europe? This is not the result that\nmust have occurred had there been in Rome an unremitting care for the\nspiritual and material prosperity of the continent, had the universal\npastor, the successor of Peter, occupied himself with singleness of\npurpose for the holiness and happiness of his flock.\n\nThe explanation is not difficult to find. It is contained in a story\nof sin and shame. I prefer, therefore, in the following paragraphs, to\noffer explanatory facts derived from Catholic authors, and, indeed, to\npresent them as nearly as I can in the words of those writers.\n\n\nThe story I am about to relate is a narrative of the transformation of a\nconfederacy into an absolute monarchy.\n\nIn the early times every church, without prejudice to its agreement with\nthe Church universal in all essential points, managed its own affairs\nwith perfect freedom and independence, maintaining its own traditional\nusages and discipline, all questions not concerning the whole Church, or\nof primary importance, being settled on the spot.\n\nUntil the beginning of the ninth century, there was no change in the\nconstitution of the Roman Church. But about 845 the Isidorian Decretals\nwere fabricated in the west of Gaul--a forgery containing about one\nhundred pretended decrees of the early popes, together with certain\nspurious writings of other church dignitaries and acts of synods. This\nforgery produced an immense extension of the papal power, it displaced\nthe old system of church government, divesting it of the republican\nattributes it had possessed, and transforming it into an absolute\nmonarchy. It brought the bishops into subjection to Rome, and made the\npontiff the supreme judge of the clergy of the whole Christian world. It\nprepared the way for the great attempt, subsequently made by Hildebrand,\nto convert the states of Europe into a theocratic priest-kingdom, with\nthe pope at its head.\n\nGregory VII., the author of this great attempt, saw that his plans\nwould be best carried out through the agency of synods. He, therefore,\nrestricted the right of holding them to the popes and their legates. To\naid in the matter, a new system of church law was devised by Anselm\nof Lucca, partly from the old Isidorian forgeries, and partly from new\ninventions. To establish the supremacy of Rome, not only had a new\ncivil and a new canon law to be produced, a new history had also to\nbe invented. This furnished needful instances of the deposition\nand excommunication of kings, and proved that they had always been\nsubordinate to the popes. The decretal letters of the popes were put on\na par with Scripture. At length it came to be received, throughout\nthe West, that the popes had been, from the beginning of Christianity,\nlegislators for the whole Church. As absolute sovereigns in later times\ncannot endure representative assemblies, so the papacy, when it wished\nto become absolute, found that the synods of particular national\nchurches must be put an end to, and those only under the immediate\ncontrol of the pontiff permitted. This, in itself, constituted a great\nrevolution.\n\nAnother fiction concocted in Rome in the eighth century led to important\nconsequences. It feigned that the Emperor Constantine, in gratitude for\nhis cure from leprosy, and baptism by Pope Sylvester, had bestowed\nItaly and the Western provinces on the pope, and that, in token of his\nsubordination, he had served the pope as his groom, and led his horse\nsome distance. This forgery was intended to work on the Frankish kings,\nto impress them with a correct idea of their inferiority, and to show\nthat, in the territorial concessions they made to the Church, they were\nnot giving but only restoring what rightfully belonged to it.\n\nThe most potent instrument of the new papal system was Gratian's\nDecretum, which was issued about the middle of the twelfth century. It\nwas a mass of fabrications. It made the whole Christian world, through\nthe papacy, the domain of the Italian clergy. It inculcated that it is\nlawful to constrain men to goodness, to torture and execute heretics,\nand to confiscate their property; that to kill an excommunicated person\nis not murder; that the pope, in his unlimited superiority to all law,\nstands on an equality with the Son of God!\n\nAs the new system of centralization developed, maxims, that in the olden\ntimes would have been held to be shocking, were boldly avowed--the whole\nChurch is the property of the pope to do with as he will; what is simony\nin others is not simony in him; he is above all law, and can be called\nto account by none; whoever disobeys him must be put to death; every\nbaptized man is his subject, and must for life remain so, whether he\nwill or not. Up to the end of the twelfth century, the popes were the\nvicars of Peter; after Innocent III. they were the vicars of Christ.\n\nBut an absolute sovereign has need of revenues, and to this the popes\nwere no exception. The institution of legates was brought in from\nHildebrand's time. Sometimes their duty was to visit churches, sometimes\nthey were sent on special business, but always invested with unlimited\npowers to bring back money over the Alps. And since the pope could not\nonly make laws, but could suspend their operation, a legislation was\nintroduced in view to the purchase of dispensations. Monasteries were\nexempted from episcopal jurisdiction on payment of a tribute to Rome.\nThe pope had now become \"the universal bishop;\" he had a concurrent\njurisdiction in all the dioceses, and could bring any cases before\nhis own courts. His relation to the bishops was that of an absolute\nsovereign to his officials. A bishop could resign only by his\npermission, and sees vacated by resignation lapsed to him. Appeals to\nhim were encouraged in every way for the sake of the dispensations;\nthousands of processes came before the Curia, bringing a rich harvest to\nRome. Often when there were disputing claimants to benefices, the\npope would oust them all, and appoint a creature of his own. Often the\ncandidates had to waste years in Rome, and either died there, or carried\nback a vivid impression of the dominant corruption. Germany suffered\nmore than other countries from these appeals and processes, and hence\nof all countries was best prepared for the Reformation. During the\nthirteenth and fourteenth centuries the popes made gigantic strides in\nthe acquisition of power. Instead of recommending their favorites for\nbenefices, now they issued mandates. Their Italian partisans must\nbe rewarded; nothing could be done to satisfy their clamors, but to\nprovide for them in foreign countries. Shoals of contesting claimants\ndied in Rome; and, when death took place in that city, the Pope claimed\nthe right of giving away the benefices. At length it was affirmed that\nhe had the right of disposing of all church-offices without distinction,\nand that the oath of obedience of a bishop to him implied political as\nwell as ecclesiastical subjection. In countries having a dual government\nthis increased the power of the spiritual element prodigiously.\n\nRights of every kind were remorselessly overthrown to complete this\ncentralization. In this the mendicant orders were most efficient aids.\nIt was the pope and those orders on one side, the bishops and the\nparochial clergy on the other. The Roman court had seized the rights\nof synods, metropolitans, bishops, national churches. Incessantly\ninterfered with by the legates, the bishops lost all desire to\ndiscipline their dioceses; incessantly interfered with by the begging\nmonks, the parish priest had become powerless in his own village; his\npastoral influence was utterly destroyed by the papal indulgences and\nabsolutions they sold. The money was carried off to Rome.\n\nPecuniary necessities urged many of the popes to resort to such petty\nexpedients as to require from a prince, a bishop, or a grand-master, who\nhad a cause pending in the court, a present of a golden cup filled\nwith ducats. Such necessities also gave origin to jubilees. Sixtus IV.\nestablished whole colleges, and sold the places at three or four hundred\nducats. Innocent VIII. pawned the papal tiara. Of Leo X. it was said\nthat he squandered the revenues of three popes, he wasted the savings\nof his predecessor, he spent his own income, he anticipated that of his\nsuccessor, he created twenty-one hundred and fifty new offices and sold\nthem; they were considered to be a good investment, as they produced\ntwelve per cent. The interest was extorted from Catholic countries.\nNowhere in Europe could capital be so well invested as at Rome. Large\nsums were raised by the foreclosing of mortgages, and not only by the\nsale but the resale of offices. Men were promoted, for the purpose of\nselling their offices again.\n\nThough against the papal theory, which denounced usurious practices,\nan immense papal banking system had sprung up, in connection with the\nCuria, and sums at usurious interest were advanced to prelates,\nplace-hunters, and litigants. The papal bankers were privileged; all\nothers were under the ban. The Curia had discovered that it was for their\ninterest to have ecclesiastics all over Europe in their debt. They could\nmake them pliant, and excommunicate them for non-payment of interest.\nIn 1327 it was reckoned that half the Christian world was under\nexcommunication: bishops were excommunicated because they could not\nmeet the extortions of legates; and persons were excommunicated,\nunder various pretenses, to compel them to purchase absolution at an\nexorbitant price. The ecclesiastical revenues of all Europe were flowing\ninto Rome, a sink of corruption, simony, usury, bribery, extortion. The\npopes, since 1066, when the great centralizing movement began, had no\ntime to pay attention to the internal affairs of their own special\nflock in the city of Rome. There were thousands of foreign cases, each\nbringing in money. \"Whenever,\" says the Bishop Alvaro Pelayo, \"I entered\nthe apartments of the Roman court clergy, I found them occupied in\ncounting up the gold-coin, which lay about the rooms in heaps.\" Every\nopportunity of extending the jurisdiction of the Curia was welcome.\nExemptions were so managed that fresh grants were constantly necessary.\nBishops were privileged against cathedral chapters, chapters against\ntheir bishops; bishops, convents, and individuals, against the\nextortions of legates.\n\nThe two pillars on which the papal system now rested were the College of\nCardinals and the Curia. The cardinals, in 1059, had become electors of\nthe popes. Up to that time elections were made by the whole body of the\nRoman clergy, and the concurrence of the magistrates and citizens\nwas necessary. But Nicolas II. restricted elections to the College of\nCardinals by a two-thirds vote, and gave to the German emperor the\nright of confirmation. For almost two centuries there was a struggle\nfor mastery between the cardinal oligarchy and papal absolutism. The\ncardinals were willing enough that the pope should be absolute in his\nforeign rule, but they never failed to attempt, before giving him\ntheir votes, to bind him to accord to them a recognized share in the\ngovernment. After his election, and before his consecration, he swore\nto observe certain capitulations, such as a participation of revenues\nbetween himself and the cardinals; an obligation that he would not\nremove them, but would permit them to assemble twice a year to discuss\nwhether he had kept his oath. Repeatedly the popes broke their oath. On\none side, the cardinals wanted a larger share in the church government\nand emoluments; on the other, the popes refused to surrender revenues or\npower. The cardinals wanted to be conspicuous in pomp and extravagance,\nand for this vast sums were requisite. In one instance, not fewer than\nfive hundred benefices were held by one of them; their friends and\nretainers must be supplied, their families enriched. It was affirmed\nthat the whole revenues of France were insufficient to meet their\nexpenditures. In their rivalries it sometimes happened that no pope\nwas elected for several years. It seemed as if they wanted to show how\neasily the Church could get on without the Vicar of Christ.\n\nToward the close of the eleventh century the Roman Church became the\nRoman court. In place of the Christian sheep gently following their\nshepherd in the holy precincts of the city, there had arisen a\nchancery of writers, notaries, tax-gatherers, where transactions about\nprivileges, dispensations, exemptions, were carried on; and suitors\nwent with petitions from door to door. Rome was a rallying-point for\nplace-hunters of every nation. In presence of the enormous mass of\nbusiness-processes, graces, indulgences, absolutions, commands, and\ndecisions, addressed to all parts of Europe and Asia, the functions\nof the local church sank into insignificance. Several hundred persons,\nwhose home was the Curia, were required. Their aim was to rise in it by\nenlarging the profits of the papal treasury. The whole Christian\nworld had become tributary to it. Here every vestige of religion had\ndisappeared; its members were busy with politics, litigations, and\nprocesses; not a word could be heard about spiritual concerns. Every\nstroke of the pen had its price. Benefices, dispensations, licenses,\nabsolutions, indulgences, privileges, were bought and sold like\nmerchandise. The suitor had to bribe every one, from the doorkeeper\nto the pope, or his case was lost. Poor men could neither attain\npreferment, nor hope for it; and the result was, that every cleric felt\nhe had a right to follow the example he had seen at Rome, and that\nhe might make profits out of his spiritual ministries and sacraments,\nhaving bought the right to do so at Rome, and having no other way to\npay off his debt. The transference of power from Italians to Frenchmen,\nthrough the removal of the Curia to Avignon, produced no change--only\nthe Italians felt that the enrichment of Italian families had slipped\nout of their grasp. They had learned to consider the papacy as their\nappanage, and that they, under the Christian dispensation, were God's\nchosen people, as the Jews had been under the Mosaic.\n\nAt the end of the thirteenth century a new kingdom was discovered,\ncapable of yielding immense revenues. This was Purgatory. It was shown\nthat the pope could empty it by his indulgences. In this there was no\nneed of hypocrisy. Things were done openly. The original germ of the\napostolic primacy had now expanded into a colossal monarchy.\n\nNEED OF A GENERAL COUNCIL. The Inquisition had made the papal system\nirresistible. All opposition must be punished with death by fire. A mere\nthought, without having betrayed itself by outward sign, was considered\nas guilt. As time went on, this practice of the Inquisition became\nmore and more atrocious. Torture was resorted to on mere suspicion.\nThe accused was not allowed to know the name of his accuser. He was\nnot permitted to have any legal adviser. There was no appeal. The\nInquisition was ordered not to lean to pity. No recantation was of\navail. The innocent family of the accused was deprived of its\nproperty by confiscation; half went to the papal treasury, half to the\ninquisitors. Life only, said Innocent III., was to be left to the sons\nof misbelievers, and that merely as an act of mercy. The consequence\nwas, that popes, such as Nicolas III., enriched their families through\nplunder acquired by this tribunal. Inquisitors did the same habitually.\n\nThe struggle between the French and Italians for the possession of the\npapacy inevitably led to the schism of the fourteenth century. For more\nthan forty years two rival popes were now anathematizing each other,\ntwo rival Curias were squeezing the nations for money. Eventually, there\nwere three obediences, and triple revenues to be extorted. Nobody, now,\ncould guarantee the validity of the sacraments, for nobody could be\nsure which was the true pope. Men were thus compelled to think for\nthemselves. They could not find who was the legitimate thinker for them.\nThey began to see that the Church must rid herself of the curialistic\nchains, and resort to a General Council. That attempt was again and\nagain made, the intention being to raise the Council into a Parliament\nof Christendom, and make the pope its chief executive officer. But the\nvast interests that had grown out of the corruption of ages could not\nso easily be overcome; the Curia again recovered its ascendency, and\necclesiastical trading was resumed. The Germans, who had never been\npermitted to share in the Curia, took the leading part in these attempts\nat reform. As things went on from bad to worse, even they at last found\nout that all hope of reforming the Church by means of councils was\ndelusive. Erasmus exclaimed, \"If Christ does not deliver his people\nfrom this multiform ecclesiastical tyranny, the tyranny of the Turk will\nbecome less intolerable.\" Cardinals' hats were now sold, and under Leo\nX. ecclesiastical and religious offices were actually put up to auction.\nThe maxim of life had become, interest first, honor afterward. Among\nthe officials, there was not one who could be honest in the dark, and\nvirtuous without a witness. The violet-colored velvet cloaks and white\nermine capes of the cardinals were truly a cover for wickedness.\n\nThe unity of the Church, and therefore its power, required the use of\nLatin as a sacred language. Through this, Rome had stood in an attitude\nstrictly European, and was enabled to maintain a general international\nrelation. It gave her far more power than her asserted celestial\nauthority, and, much as she claims to have done, she is open to\ncondemnation that, with such a signal advantage in her hands, never\nagain to be enjoyed by any successor, she did not accomplish much\nmore. Had not the sovereign pontiffs been so completely occupied with\nmaintaining their emoluments and temporalities in Italy, they might have\nmade the whole continent advance like one man. Their officials could\npass without difficulty into every nation, and communicate without\nembarrassment with each other, from Ireland to Bohemia, from Italy to\nScotland. The possession of a common tongue gave them the administration\nof international affairs with intelligent allies everywhere, speaking\nthe same language.\n\nNot without cause was the hatred manifested by Rome to the restoration\nof Greek and introduction of Hebrew, and the alarm with which she\nperceived the modern languages forming out of the vulgar dialects.\nNot without reason did the Faculty of Theology in Paris re-echo the\nsentiment that, was prevalent in the time of Ximenes, \"What will\nbecome of religion if the study of Greek and Hebrew be permitted?\" The\nprevalence of Latin was the condition of her power; its deterioration,\nthe measure of her decay; its disuse, the signal of her limitation to\na little principality in Italy. In fact, the development of European\nlanguages was the instrument of her overthrow. They formed an effectual\ncommunication between the mendicant friars and the illiterate populace,\nand there was not one of them that did not display in its earliest\nproductions a sovereign contempt for her.\n\nThe rise of the many-tongued European literature was therefore\ncoincident with the decline of papal Christianity; European literature\nwas impossible under Catholic rule. A grand, a solemn, an imposing\nreligious unity enforced the literary unity which is implied in the use\nof a single tongue.\n\nWhile thus the possession of a universal language so signally secured\nher power, the real secret of much of the influence of the Church lay\nin the control she had so skillfully obtained over domestic life. Her\ninfluence diminished as that declined. Coincident with this was her\ndisplacement in the guidance of international relations by diplomacy.\n\nCATHOLICITY AND CIVILIZATION. In the old times of Roman domination the\nencampments of the legions in the provinces had always proved to be foci\nof civilization. The industry and order exhibited in them presented an\nexample not lost on the surrounding barbarians of Britain, Gaul, and\nGermany. And, though it was no part of their duty to occupy themselves\nactively in the betterment of the conquered tribes, but rather to keep\nthem in a depressed condition that aided in maintaining subjection,\na steady improvement both in the individual and social condition took\nplace.\n\nUnder the ecclesiastical domination of Rome similar effects occurred. In\nthe open country the monastery replaced the legionary encampment; in the\nvillage or town, the church was a centre of light. A powerful effect\nwas produced by the elegant luxury of the former, and by the sacred and\nsolemn monitions of the latter.\n\nIn extolling the papal system for what it did in the organization of the\nfamily, the definition of civil policy, the construction of the states\nof Europe, our praise must be limited by the recollection that the chief\nobject of ecclesiastical policy was the aggrandizement of the Church,\nnot the promotion of civilization. The benefit obtained by the laity was\nnot through any special intention, but incidental or collateral.\n\nThere was no far-reaching, no persistent plan to ameliorate the physical\ncondition of the nations. Nothing was done to favor their intellectual\ndevelopment; indeed, on the contrary, it was the settled policy to keep\nthem not merely illiterate, but ignorant. Century after century passed\naway, and left the peasantry but little better than the cattle in the\nfields. Intercommunication and locomotion, which tend so powerfully to\nexpand the ideas, received no encouragement; the majority of men died\nwithout ever having ventured out of the neighborhood in which they were\nborn. For them there was no hope of personal improvement, none of the\nbettering of their lot; there were no comprehensive schemes for the\navoidance of individual want, none for the resistance of famines.\nPestilences were permitted to stalk forth unchecked, or at best opposed\nonly by mummeries. Bad food, wretched clothing, inadequate shelter, were\nsuffered to produce their result, and at the end of a thousand years the\npopulation of Europe had not doubled.\n\nIf policy may be held accountable as much for the births it prevents as\nfor the deaths it occasions, what a great responsibility there is here!\n\nIn this investigation of the influence of Catholicism, we must carefully\nkeep separate what it did for the people and what it did for itself.\nWhen we think of the stately monastery, an embodiment of luxury, with\nits closely-mown lawns, its gardens and bowers, its fountains and many\nmurmuring streams, we must connect it not with the ague-stricken peasant\ndying without help in the fens, but with the abbot, his ambling palfrey,\nhis hawk and hounds, his well-stocked cellar and larder. He is part of\na system that has its centre of authority in Italy.. To that his\nallegiance is due. For its behoof are all his acts. When we survey, as\nstill we may, the magnificent churches and cathedrals of those\ntimes, miracles of architectural skill--the only real miracles of\nCatholicism--when in imagination we restore the transcendently\nimposing, the noble services of which they were once the scene, the\ndim, religious-light streaming in through the many-colored windows, the\nsounds of voices not inferior in their melody to those of heaven,\nthe priests in their sacred vestments, and above all the prostrate\nworshipers listening to litanies and prayers in a foreign and unknown\ntongue, shall we not ask ourselves, Was all this for the sake of those\nworshipers, or for the glory of the great, the overshadowing authority\nat Rome?\n\nBut perhaps some one may say, Are there not limits to human\nexertion--things which no political system, no human power, no matter\nhow excellent its intention, can accomplish? Men cannot be raised from\nbarbarism, a continent cannot be civilized, in a day!\n\nThe Catholic power is not, however, to be tried by any such standard.\nIt scornfully rejected and still rejects a human origin. It claims to\nbe accredited supernaturally. The sovereign pontiff is the Vicar of God\nupon earth. Infallible in judgment, it is given to him to accomplish\nall things by miracle if need be. He had exercised an autocratic tyranny\nover the intellect of Europe for more than a thousand years; and, though\non some occasions he had encountered the resistances of disobedient\nprinces, these, in the aggregate, were of so little moment, that the\nphysical, the political power of the continent may be affirmed to have\nbeen at his disposal.\n\nSuch facts as have been presented in this chapter were, doubtless,\nwell weighed by the Protestant Reformers of the sixteenth century, and\nbrought them to the conclusion that Catholicism had altogether failed in\nits mission; that it had become a vast system of delusion and imposture,\nand that a restoration of true Christianity could only be accomplished\nby returning to the faith and practices of the primitive times. This was\nno decision suddenly arrived at; it had long been the opinion of many\nreligious and learned men. The pious Fratricelli in the middle ages had\nloudly expressed their belief that the fatal gift of a Roman emperor had\nbeen the doom of true religion. It wanted nothing more than the voice of\nLuther to bring men throughout the north of Europe to the determination\nthat the worship of the Virgin Mary, the invocation of saints, the\nworking of miracles, supernatural cures of the sick, the purchase of\nindulgences for the perpetration of sin, and all other evil practices,\nlucrative to their abettors, which had been fastened on Christianity,\nbut which were no part of it, should come to an end. Catholicism, as\na system for promoting the well-being of man, had plainly failed in\njustifying its alleged origin; its performance had not corresponded to\nits great pretensions; and, after an opportunity of more than a\nthousand years' duration, it had left the masses of men submitted to\nits influences, both as regards physical well-being and intellectual\nculture, in a condition far lower than what it ought to have been.\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XI.\n\n     SCIENCE IN RELATION TO MODERN CIVILIZATION.\n\n     Illustration of the general influences of Science from the\n     history of America.\n\n     THE INTRODUCTION OF SCIENCE INTO EUROPE.--It passed from\n     Moorish Spain to Upper Italy, and was favored by the absence\n     of the popes at Avignon.--The effects of printing, of\n     maritime adventure, and of the Reformation--Establishment of\n     the Italian scientific societies.\n\n     THE INTELLECTUAL INFLUENCE OF SCIENCE.--It changed the mode\n     and the direction of thought in Europe.--The transactions of\n     the Royal Society of London, and other scientific societies,\n     furnish an illustration of this.\n\n     THE ECONOMICAL INFLUENCE OF SCIENCE is illustrated by the\n     numerous mechanical and physical inventions, made since the\n     fourteenth century.--Their influence on health and domestic\n     life, on the arts of peace and of war.\n\n     Answer to the question, What has Science done for humanity?\n\n\nEUROPE, at the epoch of the Reformation, furnishes us with the result of\nthe influences of Roman Christianity in the promotion of civilization.\nAmerica, examined in like manner at the present time, furnishes us with\nan illustration of the influences of science.\n\nSCIENCE AND CIVILIZATION. In the course of the seventeenth century a\nsparse European population had settled along the western Atlantic coast.\nAttracted by the cod-fishery of Newfoundland, the French had a little\ncolony north of the St. Lawrence; the English, Dutch, and Swedes,\noccupied the shore of New England and the Middle States; some Huguenots\nwere living in the Carolinas. Rumors of a spring that could confer\nperpetual youth--a fountain of life--had brought a few Spaniards into\nFlorida. Behind the fringe of villages which these adventurers had\nbuilt, lay a vast and unknown country, inhabited by wandering Indians,\nwhose numbers from the Gulf of Mexico to the St. Lawrence did not exceed\none hundred and eighty thousand. From them the European strangers had\nlearned that in those solitary regions there were fresh-water seas,\nand a great river which they called the Mississippi. Some said that it\nflowed through Virginia into the Atlantic, some that it passed through\nFlorida, some that it emptied into the Pacific, and some that it reached\nthe Gulf of Mexico. Parted from their native countries by the stormy\nAtlantic, to cross which implied a voyage of many months, these refugees\nseemed lost to the world.\n\nBut before the close of the nineteenth century the descendants of this\nfeeble people had become one of the great powers of the earth. They\nhad established a republic whose sway extended from the Atlantic to\nthe Pacific. With an army of more than a million men, not on paper, but\nactually in the field, they had overthrown a domestic assailant.\nThey had maintained at sea a war-fleet of nearly seven hundred ships,\ncarrying five thousand guns, some of them the heaviest in the world. The\ntonnage of this navy amounted to half a million. In the defense of their\nnational life they had expended in less than five years more than four\nthousand million dollars. Their census, periodically taken, showed that\nthe population was doubling itself every twenty-five years; it justified\nthe expectation that at the close of that century it would number nearly\none hundred million souls.\n\nKNOWLEDGE IS POWER. A silent continent had been changed into a scene of\nindustry; it was full of the din of machinery and the restless moving\nof men. Where there had been an unbroken forest, there were hundreds of\ncities and towns. To commerce were furnished in profusion some of the\nmost important staples, as cotton, tobacco, breadstuffs. The mines\nyielded incredible quantities of gold, iron, coal. Countless churches,\ncolleges, and public schools, testified that a moral influence vivified\nthis material activity. Locomotion was effectually provided for. The\nrailways exceeded in aggregate length those of all Europe combined.\nIn 1873 the aggregate length of the European railways was sixty-three\nthousand three hundred and sixty miles, that of the American was seventy\nthousand six hundred and fifty miles. One of them, built across the\ncontinent, connected the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.\n\nBut not alone are these material results worthy of notice. Others of a\nmoral and social kind force themselves on our attention. Four million\nnegro slaves had been set free. Legislation, if it inclined to the\nadvantage of any class, inclined to that of the poor. Its intention was\nto raise them from poverty, and better their lot. A career was open\nto talent, and that without any restraint. Every thing was possible to\nintelligence and industry. Many of the most important public offices\nwere filled by men who had risen from the humblest walks of life.\nIf there was not social equality, as there never can be in rich and\nprosperous communities, there was civil equality, rigorously maintained.\n\nIt may perhaps be said that much of this material prosperity arose from\nspecial conditions, such as had never occurred in the case of any people\nbefore, There was a vast, an open theatre of action, a whole continent\nready for any who chose to take possession of it. Nothing more than\ncourage and industry was needed to overcome Nature, and to seize the\nabounding advantages she offered.\n\nILLUSTRATIONS FROM AMERICAN HISTORY. But must not men be animated by a\ngreat principle who successfully transform the primeval solitudes into\nan abode of civilization, who are not dismayed by gloomy forests, or\nrivers, mountains, or frightful deserts, who push their conquering\nway in the course of a century across a continent, and hold it in\nsubjection? Let us contrast with this the results of the invasion of\nMexico and Peru by the Spaniards, who in those countries overthrew\na wonderful civilization, in many respects superior to their own--a\ncivilization that had been accomplished without iron and gunpowder--a\ncivilization resting on an agriculture that had neither horse, nor\nox, nor plough. The Spaniards had a clear base to start from, and\nno obstruction whatever in their advance. They ruined all that the\naboriginal children of America had accomplished. Millions of those\nunfortunates were destroyed by their cruelty. Nations that for\nmany centuries had been living in contentment and prosperity, under\ninstitutions shown by their history to be suitable to them, were plunged\ninto anarchy; the people fell into a baneful superstition, and a\ngreater part of their landed and other property found its way into the\npossession of the Roman Church.\n\nI have selected the foregoing illustration, drawn from American history,\nin preference to many others that might have been taken from European,\nbecause it furnishes an instance of the operation of the acting\nprinciple least interfered with by extraneous conditions. European\npolitical progress is less simple than American.\n\nQUARREL BETWEEN FRANCE AND THE PAPACY. Before considering its manner\nof action, and its results, I will briefly relate how the scientific\nprinciple found an introduction into Europe.\n\nINTRODUCTION OF SCIENCE INTO EUROPE. Not only had the Crusades, for many\nyears, brought vast sums to Rome, extorted from the fears or the piety\nof every Christian nation; they had also increased the papal power to a\nmost dangerous extent. In the dual governments everywhere prevailing in\nEurope, the spiritual had obtained the mastery; the temporal was little\nbetter than its servant.\n\nFrom all quarters, and under all kinds of pretenses, streams of money\nwere steadily flowing into Italy. The temporal princes found that there\nwere left for them inadequate and impoverished revenues. Philip the\nFair, King of France (A.D. 1300), not only determined to check this\ndrain from his dominions, by prohibiting the export of gold and\nsilver without his license; he also resolved that the clergy and the\necclesiastical estates should pay their share of taxes to him.\nThis brought on a mortal contest with the papacy. The king was\nexcommunicated, and, in retaliation, he accused the pope, Boniface\nVIII., of atheism; demanding that he should be tried by a general\ncouncil. He sent some trusty persons into Italy, who seized Boniface in\nhis palace at Anagni, and treated him with so much severity, that in a\nfew days he died. The succeeding pontiff, Benedict XI., was poisoned.\n\nThe French king was determined that the papacy should be purified and\nreformed; that it should no longer be the appanage of a few Italian\nfamilies, who were dexterously transmuting the credulity of Europe into\ncoin--that French influence should prevail in it. He Therefore came to\nan understanding with the cardinals; a French archbishop was elevated\nto the pontificate; he took the name of Clement V. The papal court was\nremoved to Avignon, in France, and Rome was abandoned as the metropolis\nof Christianity.\n\nMOORISH SCIENCE INTRODUCED THROUGH FRANCE. Seventy years elapsed before\nthe papacy was restored to the Eternal City (A.D. 1376). The diminution\nof its influence in the peninsula, that had thus occurred, gave\nopportunity for the memorable intellectual movement which soon\nmanifested itself in the great commercial cities of Upper Italy.\nContemporaneously, also, there were other propitious events. The result\nof the Crusades had shaken the faith of all Christendom. In an age when\nthe test of the ordeal of battle was universally accepted, those wars\nhad ended in leaving the Holy Land in the hands of the Saracens; the\nmany thousand Christian warriors who had returned from them did not\nhesitate to declare that they had found their antagonists not such as\nhad been pictured by the Church, but valiant, courteous, just. Through\nthe gay cities of the South of France a love of romantic literature\nhad been spreading; the wandering troubadours had been singing their\nsongs--songs far from being restricted to ladye-love and feats of war;\noften their burden was the awful atrocities that had been perpetrated\nby papal authority--the religious massacres of Languedoc; often their\nburden was the illicit amours of the clergy. From Moorish Spain the\ngentle and gallant idea of chivalry had been brought, and with it the\nnoble sentiment of \"personal honor,\" destined in the course of time to\ngive a code of its own to Europe.\n\nEFFECT OF THE GREAT SCHISM. The return of the papacy to Rome was far\nfrom restoring the influence of the popes over the Italian Peninsula.\nMore than two generations had passed away since their departure, and,\nhad they come back even in their original strength, they could not\nhave resisted the intellectual progress that had been made during their\nabsence. The papacy, however, came back not to rule, but to be divided\nagainst itself, to encounter the Great Schism. Out of its dissensions\nemerged two rival popes; eventually there were three, each pressing\nhis claims upon the religious, each cursing his rival. A sentiment\nof indignation soon spread all over Europe, a determination that the\nshameful scenes which were then enacting should be ended. How could the\ndogma of a Vicar of God upon earth, the dogma of an infallible pope,\nbe sustained in presence of such scandals? Herein lay the cause of that\nresolution of the ablest ecclesiastics of those times (which, alas for\nEurope! could not be carried into effect), that a general council should\nbe made the permanent religious parliament of the whole continent,\nwith the pope as its chief executive officer. Had that intention been\naccomplished, there would have been at this day no conflict between\nscience and religion; the convulsion of the Reformation would have been\navoided; there would have been no jarring Protestant sects. But the\nCouncils of Constance and Basle failed to shake off the Italian yoke,\nfailed to attain that noble result.\n\nCatholicism was thus weakening; as its leaden pressure lifted, the\nintellect of man expanded. The Saracens had invented the method of\nmaking paper from linen rags and from cotton. The Venetians had brought\nfrom China to Europe the art of printing. The former of these inventions\nwas essential to the latter. Hence forth, without the possibility of a\ncheck, there was intellectual intercommunication among all men.\n\nINVENTION OF PRINTING. The invention of printing was a severe blow to\nCatholicism, which had, previously, enjoyed the inappreciable advantage\nof a monopoly of intercommunication. From its central seat, orders could\nbe disseminated through all the ecclesiastical ranks, and fulminated\nthrough the pulpits. This monopoly and the amazing power it conferred\nwere destroyed by the press. In modern times, the influence of the\npulpit has become insignificant. The pulpit has been thoroughly\nsupplanted by the newspaper.\n\nYet, Catholicism did not yield its ancient advantage without a struggle.\nAs soon as the inevitable tendency of the new art was detected, a\nrestraint upon it, under the form of a censorship, was attempted. It was\nmade necessary to have a permit, in order to print a book. For this, it\nwas needful that the work should have been read, examined, and approved\nby the clergy. There must be a certificate that it was a godly and\northodox book. A bull of excommunication was issued in 1501, by\nAlexander VI., against printers who should publish pernicious doctrines.\nIn 1515 the Lateran Council ordered that no books should be printed but\nsuch as had been inspected by the ecclesiastical censors, under pain of\nexcommunication and fine; the censors being directed \"to take the utmost\ncare that nothing should be printed contrary to the orthodox faith.\"\nThere was thus a dread of religious discussion; a terror lest truth\nshould emerge.\n\nBut these frantic struggles of the powers of ignorance were unavailing.\nIntellectual intercommunication among men was secured. It culminated in\nthe modern newspaper, which daily gives its contemporaneous intelligence\nfrom all parts of the world. Reading became a common occupation. In\nancient society that art was possessed by comparatively few persons.\nModern society owes some of its most striking characteristics to this\nchange.\n\nEFFECTS OF MARITIME ENTERPRISE. Such was the result of bringing into\nEurope the manufacture of paper and the printing-press. In like manner\nthe introduction of the mariner's compass was followed by imposing\nmaterial and moral effects. These were--the discovery of America in\nconsequence of the rivalry of the Venetians and Genoese about the India\ntrade; the doubling of Africa by De Gama; and the circumnavigation of\nthe earth by Magellan. With respect to the last, the grandest of\nall human undertakings, it is to be remembered that Catholicism had\nirrevocably committed itself to the dogma of a flat earth, with the\nsky as the floor of heaven, and hell in the under-world. Some of the\nFathers, whose authority was held to be paramount, had, as we have\npreviously said, furnished philosophical and religious arguments against\nthe globular form. The controversy had now suddenly come to an end--the\nChurch was found to be in error.\n\nThe correction of that geographical error was by no means the only\nimportant result that followed the three great voyages. The spirit of\nColumbus, De Gama, Magellan, diffused itself among all the enterprising\nmen of Western Europe. Society had been hitherto living under the dogma\nof \"loyalty to the king, obedience to the Church.\" It had therefore been\nliving for others, not for itself. The political effect of that dogma\nhad culminated in the Crusades. Countless thousands had perished in\nwars that could bring them no reward, and of which the result had been\nconspicuous failure. Experience had revealed the fact that the only\ngainers were the pontiffs, cardinals, and other ecclesiastics in Rome,\nand the shipmasters of Venice. But, when it became known that the\nwealth of Mexico, Peru, and India, might be shared by any one who had\nenterprise and courage, the motives that had animated the restless\npopulations of Europe suddenly changed. The story of Cortez and Pizarro\nfound enthusiastic listeners everywhere. Maritime adventure supplanted\nreligious enthusiasm.\n\nIf we attempt to isolate the principle that lay at the basis of the\nwonderful social changes that now took place, we may recognize it\nwithout difficulty. Heretofore each man had dedicated his services to\nhis superior--feudal or ecclesiastical; now he had resolved to gather\nthe fruits of his exertions himself. Individualism was becoming\npredominant, loyalty was declining into a sentiment. We shall now see\nhow it was with the Church.\n\nINDIVIDUALISM. Individualism rests on the principle that a man shall\nbe his own master, that he shall have liberty to form his own opinions,\nfreedom to carry into effect his resolves. He is, therefore, ever\nbrought into competition with his fellow-men. His life is a display of\nenergy.\n\nTo remove the stagnation of centuries front European life, to vivify\nsuddenly what had hitherto been an inert mass, to impart to it\nindividualism, was to bring it into conflict with the influences\nthat had been oppressing it. All through the fourteenth and fifteenth\ncenturies uneasy strugglings gave a premonition of what was coming.\nIn the early part of the sixteenth (1517), the battle was joined.\nIndividualism found its embodiment in a sturdy German monk, and\ntherefore, perhaps necessarily, asserted its rights under theological\nforms. There were some preliminary skirmishes about indulgences and\nother minor matters, but very soon the real cause of dispute came\nplainly into view. Martin Luther refused to think as he was ordered to\ndo by his ecclesiastical superiors at Rome; he asserted that he had an\ninalienable right to interpret the Bible for himself.\n\nAt her first glance, Rome saw nothing in Martin Luther but a vulgar,\ninsubordinate, quarrelsome monk. Could the Inquisition have laid hold of\nhim, it would have speedily disposed of his affair; but, as the conflict\nwent on, it was discovered that Martin was not standing alone. Many\nthousands of men, as resolute as himself, were coming up to his support;\nand, while he carried on the combat with writings and words, they made\ngood his propositions with the sword.\n\nTHE REFORMATION. The vilification which was poured on Luther and his\ndoings was so bitter as to be ludicrous. It was declared that his father\nwas not his mother's husband, but an impish incubus, who had deluded\nher; that, after ten years' struggling with his conscience, he had\nbecome an atheist; that he denied the immortality of the soul; that\nhe had composed hymns in honor of drunkenness, a vice to which he\nwas unceasingly addicted; that he blasphemed the Holy Scriptures, and\nparticularly Moses; that he did not believe a word of what he preached;\nthat he had called the Epistle of St. James a thing of straw; and, above\nall, that the Reformation was no work of his, but, in reality, was due\nto a certain astrological position of the stars. It was, however, a\nvulgar saying among the Roman ecclesiastics that Erasmus laid the egg of\nthe Reformation, and Luther hatched it.\n\nRome at first made the mistake of supposing that this was nothing more\nthan a casual outbreak; she failed to discern that it was, in fact, the\nculmination of an internal movement which for two centuries had been\ngoing on in Europe, and which had been hourly gathering force; that,\nhad there been nothing else, the existence of three popes--three\nobediences--would have compelled men to think, to deliberate, to\nconclude for themselves. The Councils of Constance and Basle taught them\nthat there was a higher power than the popes. The long and bloody wars\nthat ensued were closed by the Peace of Westphalia; and then it was\nfound that Central and Northern Europe had cast off the intellectual\ntyranny of Rome, that individualism had carried its point, and had\nestablished the right of every man to think for himself.\n\nDECOMPOSITION OF PROTESTANTISM. But it was impossible that the\nestablishment of this right of private judgment should end with the\nrejection of Catholicism. Early in the movement some of the most\ndistinguished men, such as Erasmus, who had been among its first\npromoters, abandoned it. They perceived that many of the Reformers\nentertained a bitter dislike of learning, and they were afraid of\nbeing brought under bigoted caprice. The Protestant party, having thus\nestablished its existence by dissent and separation, must, in its turn,\nsubmit to the operation of the same principles. A decomposition into\nmany subordinate sects was inevitable. And these, now that they had no\nlonger any thing to fear from their great Italian adversary, commenced\npartisan warfares on each other. As, in different countries, first one\nand then another sect rose to power, it stained itself with cruelties\nperpetrated upon its competitors. The mortal retaliations that had\nensued, when, in the chances of the times, the oppressed got the better\nof their oppressors, convinced the contending sectarians that they must\nconcede to their competitors what they claimed for themselves; and thus,\nfrom their broils and their crimes, the great principle of toleration\nextricated itself. But toleration is only an intermediate stage; and,\nas the intellectual decomposition of Protestantism keeps going on, that\ntransitional condition will lead to a higher and nobler state--the hope\nof philosophy in all past ages of the world--a social state in which\nthere shall be unfettered freedom for thought. Toleration, except\nwhen extorted by fear, can only come from those who are capable of\nentertaining and respecting other opinions than their own. It can\ntherefore only come from philosophy. History teaches us only too plainly\nthat fanaticism is stimulated by religion, and neutralized or eradicated\nby philosophy.\n\nTOLERATION. The avowed object of the Reformation was, to remove from\nChristianity the pagan ideas and pagan rites engrafted upon it by\nConstantine and his successors, in their attempt to reconcile the Roman\nEmpire to it. The Protestants designed to bring it back to its primitive\npurity; and hence, while restoring the ancient doctrines, they cast out\nof it all such practices as the adoration of the Virgin Mary and\nthe invocation of saints. The Virgin Mary, we are assured by the\nEvangelists, had accepted the duties of married life, and borne to her\nhusband several children. In the prevailing idolatry, she had ceased to\nbe regarded as the carpenter's wife; she had become the queen of heaven,\nand the mother of God.\n\nDA VINCI. The science of the Arabians followed the invading track of\ntheir literature, which had come into Christendom by two routes--the\nsouth of France, and Sicily. Favored by the exile of the popes to\nAvignon, and by the Great Schism, it made good its foothold in Upper\nItaly. The Aristotelian or Inductive philosophy, clad in the Saracenic\ncostume that Averroes had given it, made many secret and not a few open\nfriends. It found many minds eager to receive and able to appreciate\nit. Among these were Leonardo da Vinci, who proclaimed the fundamental\nprinciple that experiment and observation are the only reliable\nfoundations of reasoning in science, that experiment is the only\ntrustworthy interpreter of Nature, and is essential to the ascertainment\nof laws. He showed that the action of two perpendicular forces upon a\npoint is the same as that denoted by the diagonal of a rectangle, of\nwhich they represent the sides. From this the passage to the proposition\nof oblique forces was very easy. This proposition was rediscovered by\nStevinus, a century later, and applied by him to the explanation of the\nmechanical powers. Da Vinci gave a clear exposition of the theory of\nforces applied obliquely on a lever, discovered the laws of friction\nsubsequently demonstrated by Amontons, and understood the principle of\nvirtual velocities. He treated of the conditions of descent of bodies\nalong inclined planes and circular arcs, invented the camera-obscura,\ndiscussed correctly several physiological problems, and foreshadowed\nsome of the great conclusions of modern geology, such as the nature\nof fossil remains, and the elevation of continents. He explained the\nearth-light reflected by the moon. With surprising versatility of genius\nhe excelled as a sculptor, architect, engineer; was thoroughly versed in\nthe astronomy, anatomy, and chemistry of his times. In painting, he\nwas the rival of Michel Angelo; in a competition between them, he was\nconsidered to have established his superiority. His \"Last Supper,\" on\nthe wall of the refectory of the Dominican convent of Sta. Maria delle\nGrazie, is well known, from the numerous engravings and copies that have\nbeen made of it.\n\nITALIAN SCIENTIFIC SOCIETIES. Once firmly established in the north of\nItaly, Science soon extended her sway over the entire peninsula. The\nincreasing number of her devotees is indicated by the rise and rapid\nmultiplication of learned societies. These were reproductions of the\nMoorish ones that had formerly existed in Granada and Cordova. As if\nto mark by a monument the track through which civilizing influences had\ncome, the Academy of Toulouse, founded in 1345, has survived to our\nown times. It represented, however, the gay literature of the south of\nFrance, and was known under the fanciful title of \"the Academy of Floral\nGames.\" The first society for the promotion of physical science, the\nAcademia Secretorum Naturae, was founded at Naples, by Baptista\nPorta. It was, as Tiraboschi relates, dissolved by the ecclesiastical\nauthorities. The Lyncean was founded by Prince Frederic Cesi at Rome;\nits device plainly indicated its intention: a lynx, with its eyes turned\nupward toward heaven, tearing a triple-headed Cerberus with its claws.\nThe Accademia del Cimento, established at Florence, 1657, held its\nmeetings in the ducal palace. It lasted ten years, and was then\nsuppressed at the instance of the papal government; as an equivalent,\nthe brother of the grand-duke was made a cardinal. It numbered many\ngreat men, such as Torricelli and Castelli, among its members. The\ncondition of admission into it was an abjuration of all faith, and a\nresolution to inquire into the truth. These societies extricated the\ncultivators of science from the isolation in which they had hitherto\nlived, and, by promoting their intercommunication and union, imparted\nactivity and strength to them all.\n\nReturning now from this digression, this historical sketch of the\ncircumstances under which science was introduced into Europe, I pass to\nthe consideration of its manner of action and its results.\n\nINTELLECTUAL INFLUENCE OF SCIENCE. The influence of science on modern\ncivilization has been twofold: 1. Intellectual; 2. Economical. Under\nthese titles we may conveniently consider it.\n\nIntellectually it overthrew the authority of tradition. It refused to\naccept, unless accompanied by proof, the dicta of any master, no matter\nhow eminent or honored his name. The conditions of admission into\nthe Italian Accademia del Cimento, and the motto adopted by the Royal\nSociety of London, illustrate the position it took in this respect.\n\nIt rejected the supernatural and miraculous as evidence in physical\ndiscussions. It abandoned sign-proof such as the Jews in old days\nrequired, and denied that a demonstration can be given through an\nillustration of something else, thus casting aside the logic that had\nbeen in vogue for many centuries.\n\nIn physical inquiries, its mode of procedure was, to test the value of\nany proposed hypothesis, by executing computations in any special case\non the basis or principle of that hypothesis, and then, by performing an\nexperiment or making an observation, to ascertain whether the result\nof these agreed with the result of the computation. If it did not, the\nhypothesis was to be rejected.\n\nWe may here introduce an illustration or two of this mode of procedure:\n\nTHEORIES OF GRAVITATION AND PHLOGISTON. Newton, suspecting that the\ninfluence of the earth's attraction, gravity, may extend as far as the\nmoon, and be the force that causes her to revolve in her orbit round the\nearth, calculated that, by her motion in her orbit, she was deflected\nfrom the tangent thirteen feet every minute; but, by ascertaining the\nspace through which bodies would fall in one minute at the earth's\nsurface, and supposing it to be diminished in the ratio of the inverse\nsquare, it appeared that the attraction at the moon's orbit would draw\na body through more than fifteen feet. He, therefore, for the time,\nconsidered his hypothesis as unsustained. But it so happened that Picard\nshortly afterward executed more correctly a new measurement of a degree;\nthis changed the estimated magnitude of the earth, and the distance of\nthe moon, which was measured in earth-semidiameters. Newton now renewed\nhis computation, and, as I have related on a previous page, as it drew\nto a close, foreseeing that a coincidence was about to be established,\nwas so much agitated that he was obliged to ask a friend to complete it.\nThe hypothesis was sustained.\n\nA second instance will sufficiently illustrate the method under\nconsideration. It is presented by the chemical theory of phlogiston.\nStahl, the author of this theory, asserted that there is a principle of\ninflammability, to which he gave the name phlogiston, having the quality\nof uniting with substances. Thus, when what we now term a metallic oxide\nwas united to it, a metal was produced; and, if the phlogiston were\nwithdrawn, the metal passed back into its earthy or oxidized state. On\nthis principle, then, the metals were compound bodies, earths combined\nwith phlogiston.\n\nSCIENCE AND ECCLESIASTICISM. But during the eighteenth century the\nbalance was introduced as an instrument of chemical research. Now, if\nthe phlogistic hypothesis be true, it would follow that a metal should\nbe the heavier, its oxide the lighter body, for the former contains\nsomething--phlogiston--that has been added to the latter. But, on\nweighing a portion of any metal, and also the oxide producible from it,\nthe latter proves to be the heavier, and here the phlogistic hypothesis\nfails. Still further, on continuing the investigation, it may be shown\nthat the oxide or calx, as it used to be called, has become heavier by\ncombining with one of the ingredients of the air.\n\nTo Lavoisier is usually attributed this test experiment; but the fact\nthat the weight of a metal increases by calcination was established\nby earlier European experimenters, and, indeed, was well known to the\nArabian chemists. Lavoisier, however, was the first to recognize its\ngreat importance. In his hands it produced a revolution in chemistry.\n\nThe abandonment of the phlogistic theory is an illustration of the\nreadiness with which scientific hypotheses are surrendered, when found\nto be wanting in accordance with facts. Authority and tradition pass for\nnothing. Every thing is settled by an appeal to Nature. It is assumed\nthat the answers she gives to a practical interrogation will ever be\ntrue.\n\nComparing now the philosophical principles on which science was\nproceeding, with the principles on which ecclesiasticism rested, we see\nthat, while the former repudiated tradition, to the latter it was the\nmain support while the former insisted on the agreement of calculation\nand observation, or the correspondence of reasoning and fact, the latter\nleaned upon mysteries; while the former summarily rejected its own\ntheories, if it saw that they could not be coordinated with Nature, the\nlatter found merit in a faith that blindly accepted the inexplicable, a\nsatisfied contemplation of \"things above reason.\" The alienation between\nthe two continually increased. On one side there was a sentiment of\ndisdain, on the other a sentiment of hatred. Impartial witnesses on all\nhands perceived that science was rapidly undermining ecclesiasticism.\n\nMATHEMATICS. Mathematics had thus become the great instrument of\nscientific research, it had become the instrument of scientific\nreasoning. In one respect it may be said that it reduced the operations\nof the mind to a mechanical process, for its symbols often saved the\nlabor of thinking. The habit of mental exactness it encouraged extended\nto other branches of thought, and produced an intellectual revolution.\nNo longer was it possible to be satisfied with miracle-proof, or the\nlogic that had been relied upon throughout the middle ages. Not only did\nit thus influence the manner of thinking, it also changed the direction\nof thought. Of this we may be satisfied by comparing the subjects\nconsidered in the transactions of the various learned societies with the\ndiscussions that had occupied the attention of the middle ages.\n\nBut the use of mathematics was not limited to the verification of\ntheories; as above indicated, it also furnished a means of predicting\nwhat had hitherto been unobserved. In this it offered a counterpart\nto the prophecies of ecclesiasticism. The discovery of Neptune is\nan instance of the kind furnished by astronomy, and that of conical\nrefraction by the optical theory of undulations.\n\nBut, while this great instrument led to such a wonderful development in\nnatural science, it was itself undergoing development--improvement. Let\nus in a few lines recall its progress.\n\nThe germ of algebra may be discerned in the works of Diophantus of\nAlexandria, who is supposed to have lived in the second century of our\nera. In that Egyptian school Euclid had formerly collected the great\ntruths of geometry, and arranged them in logical sequence. Archimedes,\nin Syracuse, had attempted the solution of the higher problems by the\nmethod of exhaustions. Such was the tendency of things that, had the\npatronage of science been continued, algebra would inevitably have been\ninvented.\n\nTo the Arabians we owe our knowledge of the rudiments of algebra; we\nowe to them the very name under which this branch of mathematics passes.\nThey had carefully added, to the remains of the Alexandrian School,\nimprovements obtained in India, and had communicated to the subject\na certain consistency and form. The knowledge of algebra, as they\npossessed it, was first brought into Italy about the beginning of the\nthirteenth century. It attracted so little attention, that nearly three\nhundred years elapsed before any European work on the subject appeared.\nIn 1496 Paccioli published his book entitled \"Arte Maggiore,\" or\n\"Alghebra.\" In 1501, Cardan, of Milan, gave a method for the solution of\ncubic equations; other improvements were contributed by Scipio Ferreo,\n1508, by Tartalea, by Vieta. The Germans now took up the subject. At\nthis time the notation was in an imperfect state.\n\nThe publication of the Geometry of Descartes, which contains the\napplication of algebra to the definition and investigation of curve\nlines (1637), constitutes an epoch in the history of the mathematical\nsciences. Two years previously, Cavalieri's work on Indivisibles had\nappeared. This method was improved by Torricelli and others. The way was\nnow open, for the development of the Infinitesimal Calculus, the method\nof Fluxions of Newton, and the Differential and Integral Calculus\nof Leibnitz. Though in his possession many years previously, Newton\npublished nothing on Fluxions until 1704; the imperfect notation he\nemployed retarded very much the application of his method. Meantime, on\nthe Continent, very largely through the brilliant solutions of some of\nthe higher problems, accomplished by the Bernouillis, the Calculus of\nLeibnitz was universally accepted, and improved by many mathematicians.\nAn extraordinary development of the science now took place, and\ncontinued throughout the century. To the Binomial theorem, previously\ndiscovered by Newton, Taylor now added, in his \"Method of Increments,\"\nthe celebrated theorem that bears his name. This was in 1715. The\nCalculus of Partial Differences was introduced by Euler in 1734. It was\nextended by D'Alembert, and was followed by that of Variations, by Euler\nand Lagrange, and by the method of Derivative Functions, by Lagrange, in\n1772.\n\nBut it was not only in Italy, in Germany, in England, in France, that\nthis great movement in mathematics was witnessed; Scotland had added a\nnew gem to the intellectual diadem with which her brow is encircled,\nby the grand invention of Logarithms, by Napier of Merchiston. It is\nimpossible to give any adequate conception of the scientific importance\nof this incomparable invention. The modern physicist and astronomer\nwill most cordially agree with Briggs, the Professor of Mathematics in\nGresham College, in his exclamation: \"I never saw a book that pleased\nme better, and that made I me more wonder!\" Not without reason did the\nimmortal Kepler regard Napier \"to be the greatest man of his age, in the\ndepartment to which he had applied his abilities.\" Napier died in 1617.\nIt is no exaggeration to say that this invention, by shortening the\nlabors, doubled the life of the astronomer.\n\nBut here I must check myself. I must remember that my present purpose is\nnot to give the history of mathematics, but to consider what science has\ndone for the advancement of human civilization. And now, at once, recurs\nthe question, How is it that the Church produced no geometer in her\nautocratic reign of twelve hundred years?\n\nWith respect to pure mathematics this remark may be made: Its\ncultivation does not demand appliances that are beyond the reach of\nmost individuals. Astronomy must have its observatory, chemistry its\nlaboratory; but mathematics asks only personal disposition and a\nfew books. No great expenditures are called for, nor the services\nof assistants. One would think that nothing could be more congenial,\nnothing more delightful, even in the retirement of monastic life.\n\nShall we answer with Eusebius, \"It is through contempt of such useless\nlabor that we think so little of these matters; we turn our souls to\nthe exercise of better things?\" Better things! What can be better than\nabsolute truth? Are mysteries, miracles, lying impostures, better? It\nwas these that stood in the way!\n\nThe ecclesiastical authorities had recognized, from the outset of this\nscientific invasion, that the principles it was disseminating were\nabsolutely irreconcilable with the current theology. Directly and\nindirectly, they struggled against it. So great was their detestation\nof experimental science, that they thought they had gained a great\nadvantage when the Accademia del Cimento was suppressed. Nor was the\nsentiment restricted to Catholicism. When the Royal Society of London\nwas founded, theological odium was directed against it with so much\nrancor that, doubtless, it would have been extinguished, had not King\nCharles II. given it his open and avowed support. It was accused of\nan intention of \"destroying the established religion, of injuring the\nuniversities, and of upsetting ancient and solid learning.\"\n\nTHE ROYAL SOCIETY OF LONDON. We have only to turn over the pages of its\nTransactions to discern how much this society has done for the progress\nof humanity. It was incorporated in 1662, and has interested itself in\nall the great scientific movements and discoveries that have since been\nmade. It published Newton's \"Principia;\" it promoted Halley's voyage,\nthe first scientific expedition undertaken by any government; it made\nexperiments on the transfusion of blood, and accepted Harvey's discovery\nof the circulation. The encouragement it gave to inoculation led Queen\nCaroline to beg six condemned criminals for experiment, and then to\nsubmit her own children to that operation. Through its encouragement\nBradley accomplished his great discovery, the aberration of the fixed\nstars, and that of the nutation of the earth's axis; to these two\ndiscoveries, Delambre says, we owe the exactness of modern astronomy. It\npromoted the improvement of the thermometer, the measure of temperature,\nand in Harrison's watch, the chronometer, the measure of time. Through\nit the Gregorian Calendar was introduced into England, in 1752, against\na violent religious opposition. Some of its Fellows were pursued through\nthe streets by an ignorant and infuriated mob, who believed it had\nrobbed them of eleven days of their lives; it was found necessary to\nconceal the name of Father Walmesley, a learned Jesuit, who had taken\ndeep interest in the matter; and, Bradley happening to die during the\ncommotion, it was declared that he had suffered a judgment from Heaven\nfor his crime!\n\nTHE ROYAL SOCIETY OF LONDON. If I were to attempt to do justice to the\nmerits of this great society, I should have to devote many pages, to\nsuch subjects as the achromatic telescope of Dollond; the dividing\nengine of Ramsden, which first gave precision to astronomical\nobservations, the measurement of a degree on the earth's surface by\nMason and Dixon; the expeditions of Cook in connection with the transit\nof Venus; his circumnavigation of the earth; his proof that scurvy,\nthe curse of long sea-voyages, may be avoided by the use of vegetable\nsubstances; the polar expeditions; the determination of the density of\nthe earth by Maskelyne's experiments at Scheliallion, and by those\nof Cavendish; the discovery of the planet Uranus by Herschel; the\ncomposition of water by Cavendish and Watt; the determination of the\ndifference of longitude between London and Paris; the invention of\nthe voltaic pile; the surveys of the heavens by the Herschels;\nthe development of the principle of interference by Young, and his\nestablishment of the undulatory theory of light; the ventilation\nof jails and other buildings; the introduction of gas for city\nillumination; the ascertainment of the length of the seconds-pendulum;\nthe measurement of the variations of gravity in different latitudes; the\noperations to ascertain the curvature of the earth; the polar expedition\nof Ross; the invention of the safety-lamp by Davy, and his decomposition\nof the alkalies and earths; the electro-magnetic discoveries of Oersted\nand Faraday; the calculating-engines of Babbage; the measures taken\nat the instance of Humboldt for the establishment of many magnetic\nobservatories; the verification of contemporaneous magnetic disturbances\nover the earth's surface. But it is impossible, in the limited space at\nmy disposal, to give even so little as a catalogue of its Transactions.\nIts spirit was identical with that which animated the Accademia del\nCimento, and its motto accordingly was \"Nullius in Verba.\" It proscribed\nsuperstition, and permitted only calculation, observation, and\nexperiment.\n\nINFLUENCE OF SCIENCE. Not for a moment must it be supposed that in these\ngreat attempts, these great Successes, the Royal Society stood alone.\nIn all the capitals of Europe there were Academies, Institutes, or\nSocieties, equal in distinction, and equally successful in promoting\nhuman knowledge and modern civilization.\n\n\nTHE ECONOMICAL INFLUENCES OF SCIENCE.\n\nThe scientific study of Nature tends not only to correct and ennoble\nthe intellectual conceptions of man; it serves also to ameliorate his\nphysical condition. It perpetually suggests to him the inquiry, how he\nmay make, by their economical application, ascertained facts subservient\nto his use.\n\nThe investigation of principles is quickly followed by practical\ninventions. This, indeed, is the characteristic feature of our times. It\nhas produced a great revolution in national policy.\n\nIn former ages wars were made for the procuring of slaves. A conqueror\ntransported entire populations, and extorted from them forced labor, for\nit was only by human labor that human labor could be relieved. But when\nit was discovered that physical agents and mechanical combinations could\nbe employed to incomparably greater advantage, public policy underwent a\nchange; when it was recognized that the application of a new principle,\nor the invention of a new machine, was better than the acquisition of an\nadditional slave, peace became preferable to war. And not only so, but\nnations possessing great slave or serf populations, as was the care in\nAmerica and Russia, found that considerations of humanity were supported\nby considerations of interest, and set their bondmen free.\n\nSCIENTIFIC INVENTIONS. Thus we live in a period of which a\ncharacteristic is the supplanting of human and animal labor by machines.\nIts mechanical inventions have wrought a social revolution. We appeal\nto the natural, not to the supernatural, for the accomplishment of our\nends. It is with the \"modern civilization\" thus arising that Catholicism\nrefuses to be reconciled. The papacy loudly proclaims its inflexible\nrepudiation of this state of affairs, and insists on a restoration of\nthe medieval condition of things.\n\nThat a piece of amber, when rubbed, will attract and then repel light\nbodies, was a fact known six hundred years before Christ. It remained an\nisolated, uncultivated fact, a mere trifle, until sixteen hundred years\nafter Christ. Then dealt with by the scientific methods of mathematical\ndiscussion and experiment, and practical application made of the result,\nit has permitted men to communicate instantaneously with each other\nacross continents and under oceans. It has centralized the world. By\nenabling the sovereign authority to transmit its mandates without\nregard to distance or to time, it has revolutionized statesmanship and\ncondensed political power.\n\nIn the Museum of Alexandria there was a machine invented by Hero, the\nmathematician, a little more than one hundred years before Christ. It\nrevolved by the agency of steam, and was of the form that we should\nnow call a reaction-engine. This, the germ of one of the most important\ninventions ever made, was remembered as a mere curiosity for seventeen\nhundred years.\n\nChance had nothing to do with the invention of the modern steam-engine.\nIt was the product of meditation and experiment. In the middle of the\nseventeenth century several mechanical engineers attempted to utilize\nthe properties of steam; their labors were brought to perfection by Watt\nin the middle of the eighteenth.\n\nThe steam-engine quickly became the drudge of civilization. It performed\nthe work of many millions of men. It gave, to those who would have been\ncondemned to a life of brutal toil, the opportunity of better pursuits.\nHe who formerly labored might now think.\n\nIts earliest application was in such operations as pumping, wherein mere\nforce is required. Soon, however, it vindicated its delicacy of touch\nin the industrial arts of spinning and weaving. It created vast\nmanufacturing establishments, and supplied clothing for the world. It\nchanged the industry of nations.\n\nIn its application, first to the navigation of rivers, and then to the\nnavigation of the ocean, it more than quadrupled the speed that had\nheretofore been attained. Instead of forty days being requisite for\nthe passage, the Atlantic might now be crossed in eight. But, in land\ntransportation, its power was most strikingly displayed. The admirable\ninvention of the locomotive enabled men to travel farther in less than\nan hour than they formerly could have done in more than a day.\n\nThe locomotive has not only enlarged the field of human activity, but,\nby diminishing space, it has increased the capabilities of human life.\nIn the swift transportation of manufactured goods and agricultural\nproducts, it has become a most efficient incentive to human industry\n\nThe perfection of ocean steam-navigation was greatly promoted by the\ninvention of the chronometer, which rendered it possible to find\nwith accuracy the place of a ship at sea. The great drawback on the\nadvancement of science in the Alexandrian School was the want of an\ninstrument for the measurement of time, and one for the measurement of\ntemperature--the chronometer and the thermometer; indeed, the invention\nof the latter is essential to that of the former. Clepsydras, or\nwater-clocks, had been tried, but they were deficient in accuracy. Of\none of them, ornamented with the signs of the zodiac, and destroyed by\ncertain primitive Christians, St. Polycarp significantly remarked, \"In\nall these monstrous demons is seen an art hostile to God.\" Not until\nabout 1680 did the chronometer begin to approach accuracy. Hooke, the\ncontemporary of Newton, gave it the balance-wheel, with the spiral\nspring, and various escapements in succession were devised, such as the\nanchor, the dead-beat, the duplex, the remontoir. Provisions for the\nvariation of temperature were introduced. It was brought to perfection\neventually by Harrison and Arnold, in their hands becoming an accurate\nmeasure of the flight of time. To the invention of the chronometer\nmust be added that of the reflecting sextant by Godfrey. This permitted\nastronomical observations to be made, notwithstanding the motion of a\nship.\n\nImprovements in ocean navigation are exercising a powerful influence on\nthe distribution of mankind. They are increasing the amount and altering\nthe character of colonization.\n\nDOMESTIC IMPROVEMENT. But not alone have these great discoveries and\ninventions, the offspring of scientific investigation, changed the\nlot of the human race; very many minor ones, perhaps individually\ninsignificant, have in their aggregate accomplished surprising effects.\nThe commencing cultivation of science in the fourteenth century gave\na wonderful stimulus to inventive talent, directed mainly to useful\npractical results; and this, subsequently, was greatly encouraged by the\nsystem of patents, which secure to the originator a reasonable portion\nof the benefits of his skill. It is sufficient to refer in the most\ncursory manner to a few of these improvements; we appreciate at once how\nmuch they have done. The introduction of the saw-mill gave wooden floors\nto houses, banishing those of gypsum, tile, or stone; improvements\ncheapening the manufacture of glass gave windows, making possible the\nwarming of apartments. However, it was not until the sixteenth century\nthat glazing could be well done. The cutting of glass by the diamond\nwas then introduced. The addition of chimneys purified the atmosphere\nof dwellings, smoky and sooty as the huts of savages; it gave that\nindescribable blessing of northern homes--a cheerful fireside. Hitherto\na hole in the roof for the escape of the smoke, a pit in the midst of\nthe floor to contain the fuel, and to be covered with a lid when the\ncurfew-bell sounded or night came, such had been the cheerless and\ninadequate means of warming.\n\nMUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENTS. Though not without a bitter resistance on\nthe part of the clergy, men began to think that pestilences are not\npunishments inflicted by God on society for its religious shortcomings,\nbut the physical consequences of filth and wretchedness; that the proper\nmode of avoiding them is not by praying to the saints, but by insuring\npersonal and municipal cleanliness. In the twelfth century it was\nfound necessary to pave the streets of Paris, the stench in them was so\ndreadful At once dysenteries and spotted fever diminished; a sanitary\ncondition approaching that of the Moorish cities of Spain, which had\nbeen paved for centuries, was attained. In that now beautiful metropolis\nit was forbidden to keep swine, an ordinance resented by the monks\nof the abbey of St. Anthony, who demanded that the pigs of that saint\nshould go where they chose; the government was obliged to compromise the\nmatter by requiring that bells should be fastened to the animals' necks.\nKing Philip, the son of Louis the Fat, had been killed by his horse\nstumbling over a sow. Prohibitions were published against throwing slops\nout of the windows. In 1870 an eye-witness, the author of this book,\nat the close of the pontifical rule in Rome, found that, in walking the\nordure-defiled streets of that city, it was more necessary to inspect\nthe earth than to contemplate the heavens, in order to preserve personal\npurity. Until the beginning of the seventeenth century, the streets of\nBerlin were never swept. There was a law that every countryman, who came\nto market with a cart, should carry back a load of dirt!\n\nPaving was followed by attempts, often of an imperfect kind, at\nthe construction of drains and sewers. It had become obvious to all\nreflecting men that these were necessary to the preservation of health,\nnot only in towns, but in isolated houses. Then followed the lighting\nof the public thoroughfares. At first houses facing the streets were\ncompelled to have candles or lamps in their windows; next the system\nthat had been followed with so much advantage in Cordova and Granada--of\nhaving public lamps--was tried, but this was not brought to perfection\nuntil the present century, when lighting by gas was invented.\nContemporaneously with public lamps were improved organizations for\nnight-watchmen and police.\n\nBy the sixteenth century, mechanical inventions and manufacturing\nimprovements were exercising a conspicuous influence on domestic and\nsocial life. There were looking-glasses and clocks on the walls, mantels\nover the fireplaces. Though in many districts the kitchen-fire was still\nsupplied with turf, the use of coal began to prevail. The table in the\ndining-room offered new delicacies; commerce was bringing to it foreign\nproducts; the coarse drinks of the North were supplanted by the delicate\nwines of the South. Ice-houses were constructed. The bolting of flour,\nintroduced at the windmills, had given whiter and finer bread. By\ndegrees things that had been rarities became common--Indian-corn, the\npotato, the turkey, and, conspicuous in the long list, tobacco. Forks,\nan Italian invention, displaced the filthy use of the fingers. It may be\nsaid that the diet of civilized men now underwent a radical change. Tea\ncame from China, coffee from Arabia, the use of sugar from India, and\nthese to no insignificant degree supplanted fermented liquors. Carpets\nreplaced on the floors the layer of straw; in the chambers\nthere appeared better beds, in the wardrobes cleaner and more\nfrequently-changed clothing. In many towns the aqueduct was substituted\nfor the public fountain and the street-pump. Ceilings which in the old\ndays would have been dingy with soot and dirt, were now decorated with\nornamental frescoes. Baths were more commonly resorted to; there was\nless need to use perfumery for the concealment of personal odors.\nAn increasing taste for the innocent pleasures of horticulture\nwas manifested, by the introduction of many foreign flowers in the\ngardens--the tuberose, the auricula, the crown imperial, the Persian\nlily, the ranunculus, and African marigolds. In the streets there\nappeared sedans, then close carriages, and at length hackney-coaches.\n\nAmong the dull rustics mechanical improvements forced their way, and\ngradually attained, in the implements for ploughing, sowing, mowing,\nreaping, thrashing, the perfection of our own times.\n\nMERCANTILE INVENTIONS. It began to be recognized, in spite of the\npreaching of the mendicant orders, that poverty is the source of crime,\nthe obstruction to knowledge; that the pursuit of riches by commerce is\nfar better than the acquisition of power by war. For, though it may\nbe true, as Montesquieu says, that, while commerce unites nations, it\nantagonizes individuals, and makes a traffic of morality, it alone can\ngive unity to the world; its dream, its hope, is universal peace.\n\nMEDICAL IMPROVEMENTS. Though, instead of a few pages, it would require\nvolumes to record adequately the ameliorations that took place in\ndomestic and social life after science began to exert its beneficent\ninfluences, and inventive talent came to the aid of industry, there\nare some things which cannot be passed in silence. From the port of\nBarcelona the Spanish khalifs had carried on an enormous commerce, and\nthey with their coadjutors--Jewish merchants--had adopted or originated\nmany commercial inventions, which, with matters of pure science,\nthey had transmitted to the trading communities of Europe. The art of\nbook-keeping by double entry was thus brought into Upper Italy. The\ndifferent kinds of insurance were adopted, though strenuously resisted\nby the clergy. They opposed fire and marine insurance, on the ground\nthat it is a tempting of Providence. Life insurance was regarded as\nan act of interference with the consequences of God's will. Houses\nfor lending money on interest and on pledges, that is, banking and\npawnbroking establishments, were bitterly denounced, and especially was\nindignation excited against the taking of high rates of interest,\nwhich was stigmatized as usury--a feeling existing in some backward\ncommunities up to the present day. Bills of exchange in the present form\nand terms were adopted, the office of the public notary established, and\nprotests for dishonored obligations resorted to. Indeed, it may be said,\nwith but little exaggeration, that the commercial machinery now used\nwas thus introduced. I have already remarked that, in consequence of the\ndiscovery of America, the front of Europe had been changed. Many rich\nItalian merchants and many enterprising Jews, had settled in Holland\nEngland, France, and brought into those countries various mercantile\ndevices. The Jews, who cared nothing about papal maledictions, were\nenriched by the pontifical action in relation to the lending of money at\nhigh interest; but Pius II., perceiving the mistake that had been\nmade, withdrew his opposition. Pawnbroking establishments were finally\nauthorized by Leo X., who threatened excommunication of those who wrote\nagainst them. In their turn the Protestants now exhibited a dislike\nagainst establishments thus authorized by Rome. As the theological\ndogma, that the plague, like the earthquake, is an unavoidable\nvisitation from God for the sins of men, began to be doubted, attempts\nwere made to resist its progress by the establishment of quarantines.\nWhen the Mohammedan discovery of inoculation was brought from\nConstantinople in 1721, by Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, it was so\nstrenuously resisted by the clergy, that nothing short of its adoption\nby the royal family of England brought it into use. A similar resistance\nwas exhibited when Jenner introduced his great improvement, vaccination;\nyet a century ago it was the exception to see a face unpitted by\nsmallpox--now it is the exception to see one so disfigured. In like\nmanner, when the great American discovery of anaesthetics was applied\nin obstetrical cases, it was discouraged, not so much for physiological\nreasons, as under the pretense that it was an impious attempt to escape\nfrom the curse denounced against all women in Genesis iii. 16.\n\nMAGIC AND MIRACLES. Inventive ingenuity did not restrict itself to the\nproduction of useful contrivances, it added amusing ones. Soon after the\nintroduction of science into Italy, the houses of the virtuosi began to\nabound in all kinds of curious mechanical surprises, and, as they\nwere termed, magical effects. In the latter the invention of the\nmagic-lantern greatly assisted. Not without reason did the ecclesiastics\ndetest experimental philosophy, for a result of no little importance\nensued--the juggler became a successful rival to the miracle-worker. The\npious frauds enacted in the churches lost their wonder when brought\ninto competition with the tricks of the conjurer in the market-place: he\nbreathed flame, walked on burning coals, held red-hot iron in his\nteeth, drew basketfuls of eggs out of his mouth, worked miracles by\nmarionettes. Yet the old idea of the supernatural was with difficulty\ndestroyed. A horse, whose master had taught him many tricks, was tried\nat Lisbon in 1601, found guilty of being, possessed by the devil, and\nwas burnt. Still later than that many witches were brought to the stake.\n\nDISCOVERIES IN ASTRONOMY AND CHEMISTRY. Once fairly introduced,\ndiscovery and invention have unceasingly advanced at an accelerated\npace. Each continually reacted on the other, continually they sapped\nsupernaturalism. De Dominis commenced, and Newton completed, the\nexplanation of the rainbow; they showed that it was not the weapon of\nwarfare of God, but the accident of rays of light in drops of water. De\nDominis was decoyed to Rome through the promise of an archbishopric,\nand the hope of a cardinal's hat. He was lodged in a fine residence, but\ncarefully watched. Accused of having suggested a concord between Rome\nand England, he was imprisoned in the castle of St Angelo, and there\ndied. He was brought in his coffin before an ecclesiastical tribunal,\nadjudged guilty of heresy, and his body, with a heap of heretical books,\nwas cast into the flames. Franklin, by demonstrating the identity of\nlightning and electricity, deprived Jupiter of his thunder-bolt. The\nmarvels of superstition were displaced by the wonders of truth. The two\ntelescopes, the reflector and the achromatic, inventions of the last\ncentury, permitted man to penetrate into the infinite grandeurs of\nthe universe, to recognize, as far as such a thing is possible, its\nillimitable spaces, its measureless times; and a little later the\nachromatic microscope placed before his eyes the world of the infinitely\nsmall. The air-balloon carried him above the clouds, the diving-bell\nto the bottom of the sea. The thermometer gave him true measures of\nthe variations of heat; the barometer, of the pressure of the air. The\nintroduction of the balance imparted exactness to chemistry, it proved\nthe indestructibility of matter. The discovery of oxygen, hydrogen, and\nmany other gases, the isolation of aluminum, calcium, and other metals,\nshowed that earth and air and water are not elements. With an enterprise\nthat can never be too much commended, advantage was taken of the\ntransits of Venus, and, by sending expeditions to different regions,\nthe distance of the earth from the sun was determined. The step that\nEuropean intellect had made between 1456 and 1759 was illustrated by\nHalley's comet. When it appeared in the former year, it was considered\nas the harbinger of the vengeance of God, the dispenser of the most\ndreadful of his retributions, war, pestilence, famine. By order of the\npope, all the church-bells in Europe were rung to scare it away, the\nfaithful were commanded to add each day another prayer; and, as their\nprayers had often in so marked a manner been answered in eclipses and\ndroughts and rains, so on this occasion it was declared that a victory\nover the comet had been vouchsafed to the pope. But, in the mean time,\nHalley, guided by the revelations of Kepler and Newton, had discovered\nthat its motions, so far from being controlled by the supplications of\nChristendom, were guided in an elliptic orbit by destiny. Knowing that\nNature bad denied to him an opportunity of witnessing the fulfillment\nof his daring prophecy, he besought the astronomers of the succeeding\ngeneration to watch for its return in 1759, and in that year it came.\n\nINVENTIONS AND DISCOVERIES. Whoever will in a spirit of impartiality\nexamine what had been done by Catholicism for the intellectual and\nmaterial advancement of Europe, during her long reign, and what has been\ndone by science in its brief period of action, can, I am persuaded, come\nto no other conclusion than this, that, in instituting a comparison, he\nhas established a contrast. And yet, how imperfect, how inadequate is\nthe catalogue of facts I have furnished in the foregoing pages! I have\nsaid nothing of the spread of instruction by the diffusion of the arts\nof reading and writing, through public schools, and the consequent\ncreation of a reading community; the modes of manufacturing public\nopinion by newspapers and reviews, the power of journalism, the\ndiffusion of information public and private by the post-office and cheap\nmails, the individual and social advantages of newspaper advertisements.\nI have said nothing of the establishment of hospitals, the first\nexemplar of which was the Invalides of Paris; nothing of the improved\nprisons, reformatories, penitentiaries, asylums, the treatment of\nlunatics, paupers, criminals; nothing of the construction of canals, of\nsanitary engineering, or of census reports; nothing of the invention of\nstereotyping, bleaching by chlorine, the cotton-gin, or of the marvelous\ncontrivances with which cotton-mills are filled--contrivances which have\ngiven us cheap clothing, and therefore added to cleanliness, comfort,\nhealth; nothing of the grand advancement of medicine and surgery, or\nof the discoveries in physiology, the cultivation of the fine arts,\nthe improvement of agriculture and rural economy, the introduction\nof chemical manures and farm-machinery. I have not referred to the\nmanufacture of iron and its vast affiliated industries; to those of\ntextile fabrics; to the collection of museums of natural history,\nantiquities, curiosities. I have passed unnoticed the great subject of\nthe manufacture of machinery by itself--the invention of the slide-rest,\nthe planing-machine, and many other contrivances by which engines can\nbe constructed with almost mathematical correctness. I have said nothing\nadequate about the railway system, or the electric telegraph, nor about\nthe calculus, or lithography, the airpump, or the voltaic battery; the\ndiscovery of Uranus or Neptune, and more than a hundred asteroids; the\nrelation of meteoric streams to comets; nothing of the expeditions by\nland and sea that have been sent forth by various governments for the\ndetermination of important astronomical or geographical questions;\nnothing of the costly and accurate experiments they have caused to be\nmade for the ascertainment of fundamental physical data. I have been so\nunjust to our own century that I have made no allusion to some of its\ngreatest scientific triumphs: its grand conceptions in natural history;\nits discoveries in magnetism and electricity; its invention of the\nbeautiful art of photography; its applications of spectrum analysis; its\nattempts to bring chemistry under the three laws of Avogadro, of Boyle\nand Mariotte, and of Charles; its artificial production of organic\nsubstances from inorganic material, of which the philosophical\nconsequences are of the utmost importance; its reconstruction of\nphysiology by laying the foundation of that science on chemistry; its\nimprovements and advances in topographical surveying and in the correct\nrepresentation of the surface of the globe. I have said nothing about\nrifled-guns and armored ships, nor of the revolution that has been made\nin the art of war; nothing of that gift to women, the sewing-machine;\nnothing of the noble contentions and triumphs of the arts of peace--the\nindustrial exhibitions and world's fairs.\n\nWhat a catalogue have we here, and yet how imperfect! It gives merely a\nrandom glimpse at an ever-increasing intellectual commotion--a mention\nof things as they casually present themselves to view. How striking\nthe contrast between this literary, this scientific activity, and the\nstagnation of the middle ages!\n\nThe intellectual enlightenment that surrounds this activity has imparted\nunnumbered blessings to the human race. In Russia it has emancipated a\nvast serf-population; in America it has given freedom to four million\nnegro slaves. In place of the sparse dole of the monastery-gate, it has\norganized charity and directed legislation to the poor. It has shown\nmedicine its true function, to prevent rather than to cure disease. In\nstatesmanship it has introduced scientific methods, displacing random\nand empirical legislation by a laborious ascertainment of social facts\nprevious to the application of legal remedies. So conspicuous, so\nimpressive is the manner in which it is elevating men, that the hoary\nnations of Asia seek to participate in the boon. Let us not forget that\nour action on them must be attended by their reaction on us. If the\ndestruction of paganism was completed when all the gods were brought\nto Rome and confronted there, now, when by our wonderful facilities of\nlocomotion strange nations and conflicting religions are brought into\ncommon presence--the Mohammedan, the Buddhist, the Brahman-modifications\nof them all must ensue. In that conflict science alone will stand\nsecure; for it has given us grander views of the universe, more awful\nviews of God.\n\nAMERICAN AND FRENCH REVOLUTIONS. The spirit that has imparted life to\nthis movement, that has animated these discoveries and inventions, is\nIndividualism; in some minds the hope of gain, in other and nobler ones\nthe expectation of honor. It is, then, not to be wondered at that\nthis principle found a political embodiment, and that, during the last\ncentury, on two occasions, it gave rise to social convulsions--the\nAmerican and the French Revolutions. The former has ended in the\ndedication of a continent to Individualism--there, under republican\nforms, before the close of the present century, one hundred million\npeople, with no more restraint than their common security requires, will\nbe pursuing an unfettered career. The latter, though it has modified\nthe political aspect of all Europe, and though illustrated by surprising\nmilitary successes, has, thus far, not consummated its intentions; again\nand again it has brought upon France fearful disasters. Her dual form of\ngovernment--her allegiance to her two sovereigns, the political and the\nspiritual--has made her at once the leader and the antagonist of modern\nprogress. With one hand she has enthroned Reason, with the other she\nhas re-established and sustained the pope. Nor will this anomaly in her\nconduct cease until she bestows a true education on all her children,\neven on those of the humblest rustic.\n\nSCIENCE AND CIVILIZATION. The intellectual attack made on existing\nopinions by the French Revolution was not of a scientific, but of a\nliterary character; it was critical and aggressive. But Science has\nnever been an aggressor. She has always acted on the defensive, and left\nto her antagonist the making of wanton attacks. Nevertheless, literary\ndissent is not of such ominous import as scientific; for literature is,\nin its nature, local--science is cosmopolitan.\n\nIf, now, we demand, What has science done for the promotion of modern\ncivilization; what has it done for the happiness, the well-being of\nsociety? we shall find our answer in the same manner that we reached\na just estimate of what Latin Christianity had done. The reader of the\nforegoing paragraphs would undoubtedly infer that there must have\nbeen an amelioration in the lot of our race; but, when we apply the\ntouchstone of statistics, that inference gathers precision. Systems of\nphilosophy and forms of religion find a measure of their influence on\nhumanity in census-returns. Latin Christianity, in a thousand years,\ncould not double the population of Europe; it did not add perceptibly\nto the term of individual life. But, as Dr. Jarvis, in his report to\nthe Massachusetts Board of Health, has stated, at the epoch of the\nReformation \"the average longevity in Geneva was 21.21 years, between\n1814 and 1833 it was 40.68; as large a number of persons now live to\nseventy years as lived to forty, three hundred years ago. In 1693 the\nBritish Government borrowed money by selling annuities on lives from\ninfancy upward, on the basis of the average longevity. The contract\nwas profitable. Ninety-seven years later another tontine, or scale\nof annuities, on the basis of the same expectation of life as in the\nprevious century, was issued. These latter annuitants, however, lived so\nmuch longer than their predecessors, that it proved to be a very costly\nloan for the government. It was found that, while ten thousand of each\nsex in the first tontine died under the age of twenty-eight, only five\nthousand seven hundred and seventy-two males and six thousand four\nhundred and sixteen females in the second tontine died at the same age,\none hundred years later.\"\n\nWe have been comparing the spiritual with the practical, the imaginary\nwith the real. The maxims that have been followed in the earlier and the\nlater period produced their inevitable result. In the former that maxim\nwas, \"Ignorance is the mother of Devotion in the latter, Knowledge is\nPower.\"\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XII.\n\n     THE IMPENDING CRISIS. INDICATIONS OF THE APPROACH OF A\n     RELIGIOUS CRISIS.--THE PREDOMINATING CHRISTIAN CHURCH, THE\n     ROMAN, PERCEIVES THIS, AND MAKES PREPARATION FOR IT.--PIUS\n     IX CONVOKES AN OECUMENICAL COUNCIL--RELATIONS OF THE\n     DIFFERENT EUROPEAN GOVERNMENTS TO THE PAPACY.--RELATIONS OF\n     THE CHURCH TO SCIENCE, AS INDICATED BY THE ENCYCLICAL LETTER\n     AND THE SYLLABUS.\n\n     Acts of the Vatican Council in relation to the infallibility\n     of the pope, and to Science.--Abstract of decisions arrived\n     at.\n\n     Controversy between the Prussian Government and the papacy.--\n     It is a contest between the State and the Church for\n     supremacy--Effect of dual government in Europe--Declaration\n     by the Vatican Council of its position as to Science--The\n     dogmatic constitution of the Catholic faith.--Its\n     definitions respecting God, Revelation, Faith, Reason.--The\n     anathemas it pronounces.--Its denunciation of modern\n     civilization.\n\n     The Protestant Evangelical Alliance and its acts.\n\n     General review of the foregoing definitions, and acts.--\n     Present condition of the controversy, and its future\n     prospects.\n\n\nPREDOMINANCE OF CATHOLICITY. No one who is acquainted with the present\ntone of thought in Christendom can hide from himself the fact that an\nintellectual, a religious crisis is impending.\n\nIn all directions we see the lowering skies, we hear the mutterings\nof the coming storm. In Germany, the national party is arraying itself\nagainst the ultramontane; in France, the men of progress are struggling\nagainst the unprogressive, and in their contest the political supremacy\nof that great country is wellnigh neutralized or lost. In Italy, Rome\nhas passed into the hands of an excommunicated king. The sovereign\npontiff, feigning that he is a prisoner, is fulminating from the Vatican\nhis anathemas, and, in the midst of the most convincing proofs of his\nmanifold errors, asserting his own infallibility. A Catholic archbishop\nwith truth declares that the whole civil society of Europe seems to be\nwithdrawing itself in its public life from Christianity. In England and\nAmerica, religious persons perceive with dismay that the intellectual\nbasis of faith has been undermined by the spirit of the age. They\nprepare for the approaching disaster in the best manner they can.\n\nThe most serious trial through which society can pass is encountered in\nthe exuviation of its religious restraints. The history of Greece and\nthe history of Rome exhibit to us in an impressive manner how great are\nthe perils. But it is not given to religions to endure forever. They\nnecessarily undergo transformation with the intellectual development of\nman. How many countries are there professing the same religion now that\nthey did at the birth of Christ?\n\nIt is estimated that the entire population of Europe is about three\nhundred and one million. Of these, one hundred and eighty-five million\nare Roman Catholics, thirty-three million are Greek Catholics. Of\nProtestants there are seventy-one million, separated into many sects. Of\nJews, five million; of Mohammedans, seven million.\n\nOf the religious subdivisions of America an accurate numerical statement\ncannot be given. The whole of Christian South America is Roman Catholic,\nthe same may be said of Central America and of Mexico, as also of the\nSpanish and French West India possessions. In the United States and\nCanada the Protestant population predominates. To Australia the same\nremark applies. In India the sparse Christian population sinks into\ninsignificance in presence of two hundred million Mohammedans and other\nOriental denominations. The Roman Catholic Church is the most widely\ndiffused and the most powerfully organized of all modern societies. It\nis far more a political than a religious combination. Its principle is\nthat all power is in the clergy, and that for laymen there is only the\nprivilege of obedience. The republican forms under which the Churches\nexisted in primitive Christianity have gradually merged into an absolute\ncentralization, with a man as vice-God at its head. This Church\nasserts that the divine commission under which it acts comprises civil\ngovernment; that it has a right to use the state for its own purposes,\nbut that the state has no right to intermeddle with it; that even in\nProtestant countries it is not merely a coordinate government, but the\nsovereign power. It insists that the state has no rights over any thing\nwhich it declares to be in its domain, and that Protestantism, being\na mere rebellion, has no rights at all; that even in Protestant\ncommunities the Catholic bishop is the only lawful spiritual pastor.\n\nIt is plain, therefore, that of professing Christians the vast majority\nare Catholic; and such is the authoritative demand of the papacy for\nsupremacy, that, in any survey of the present religious condition of\nChristendom, regard must be mainly had to its acts. Its movements are\nguided by the highest intelligence and skill. Catholicism obeys the\norders of one man, and has therefore a unity, a compactness, a power,\nwhich Protestant denominations do not possess. Moreover, it derives\ninestimable strength from the souvenirs of the great name of Rome.\n\nUnembarrassed by any hesitating sentiment, the papacy has contemplated\nthe coming intellectual crisis. It has pronounced its decision, and\noccupied what seems to it to be the most advantageous ground.\n\nThis definition of position we find in the acts of the late Vatican\nCouncil.\n\nTHE OECUMENICAL COUNCIL. Pius IX., by a bull dated June 29, 1868,\nconvoked an Oecumenical Council, to meet in Rome, on December 8, 1869.\nIts sessions ended in July, 1870. Among other matters submitted to its\nconsideration, two stand forth in conspicuous prominence--they are the\nassertion of the infallibility of the Roman pontiff, and the definition\nof the relations of religion to science.\n\nBut the convocation of the Council was far from meeting with general\napproval.\n\nThe views of the Oriental Churches were, for the most part, unfavorable.\nThey affirmed that they saw a desire in the Roman pontiff to set himself\nup as the head of Christianity, whereas they recognized the Lord Jesus\nChrist alone as the head of the Church. They believed that the Council\nwould only lead to new quarrels and scandals. The sentiment of these\nvenerable Churches is well shown by the incident that, when, in\n1867, the Nestorian Patriarch Simeon had been invited by the Chaldean\nPatriarch to return to Roman Catholic unity, he, in his reply, showed\nthat there was no prospect for harmonious action between the East and\nthe West: \"You invite me to kiss humbly the slipper of the Bishop of\nRome; but is he not, in every respect, a man like yourself--is his\ndignity superior to yours? We will never permit to be introduced into\nour holy temples of worship images and statues, which are nothing but\nabominable and impure idols. What! shall we attribute to Almighty God a\nmother, as you dare to do? Away from us, such blasphemy!\"\n\nEXPECTATIONS OF THE PAPACY. Eventually, the patriarchs, archbishops, and\nbishops, from all regions of the world, who took part in this Council,\nwere seven hundred and four.\n\nRome had seen very plainly that Science was not only rapidly undermining\nthe dogmas of the papacy, but was gathering great political power. She\nrecognized that all over Europe there was a fast-spreading secession\namong persons of education, and that its true focus was North Germany.\n\nShe looked, therefore, with deep interest on the Prusso-Austrian War,\ngiving to Austria whatever encouragement she could. The battle of Sadowa\nwas a bitter disappointment to her.\n\nWith satisfaction again she looked upon the breaking out of the\nFranco-Prussian War, not doubting that its issue would be favorable to\nFrance, and therefore favorable to her. Here, again, she was doomed to\ndisappointment at Sedan.\n\nHaving now no further hope, for many years to come, from external war,\nshe resolved to see what could be done by internal insurrection, and the\npresent movement in the German Empire is the result of her machinations.\n\nHad Austria or had France succeeded, Protestantism would have been\noverthrown along with Prussia.\n\nBut, while these military movements were being carried on, a movement of\na different, an intellectual kind, was engaged in. Its principle was, to\nrestore the worn-out mediaeval doctrines and practices, carrying them to\nan extreme, no matter what the consequences might be.\n\nENCYCLICAL LETTER AND SYLLABUS. Not only was it asserted that the papacy\nhas a divine right to participate in the government of all countries,\ncoordinately with their temporal authorities, but that the supremacy of\nRome in this matter must be recognized; and that in any question between\nthem the temporal authority must conform itself to her order.\n\nAnd, since the endangering of her position had been mainly brought about\nby the progress of science, she presumed to define its boundaries, and\nprescribe limits to its authority. Still more, she undertook to denounce\nmodern civilization.\n\nThese measures were contemplated soon after the return of his Holiness\nfrom Gaeta in 1848, and were undertaken by the advice of the Jesuits,\nwho, lingering in the hope that God would work the impossible, supposed\nthat the papacy, in its old age, might be reinvigorated. The organ of\nthe Curia proclaimed the absolute independence of the Church as regards\nthe state; the dependence of the bishops on the pope; of the diocesan\nclergy on the bishops; the obligation of the Protestants to abandon\ntheir atheism, and return to the fold; the absolute condemnation of all\nkinds of toleration. In December, 1854, in an assembly of bishops, the\npope had proclaimed the dogma of the immaculate conception. Ten years\nsubsequently he put forth the celebrated Encyclical Letter and the\nSyllabus.\n\nThe Encyclical Letter is dated December 8, 1864. It was drawn up by\nlearned ecclesiastics, and subsequently debated at the Congregation of\nthe Holy Office, then forwarded to prelates, and finally gone over by\nthe pope and cardinals.\n\nENCYCLICAL LETTER AND SYLLABUS. Many of the clergy objected to its\ncondemnation of modern civilization. Some of the cardinals were\nreluctant to concur in it. The Catholic press accepted it, not, however,\nwithout misgivings and regrets. The Protestant governments put no\nobstacle in its way; the Catholic were embarrassed by it. France allowed\nthe publication only of that portion proclaiming the jubilee; Austria\nand Italy permitted its introduction, but withheld their approval.\nThe political press and legislatures of Catholic countries gave it an\nunfavorable reception. Many deplored it as likely to widen the breach\nbetween the Church and modern society. The Italian press regarded it as\ndetermining a war, without truce or armistice, between the papacy and\nmodern civilization. Even in Spain there were journals that regretted\n\"the obstinacy and blindness of the court of Rome, in branding and\ncondemning modern civilization.\"\n\nIt denounces that \"most pernicious and insane opinion, that liberty of\nconscience and of worship is the right of every man, and that this right\nought, in every well-governed state, to be proclaimed and asserted by\nlaw; and that the will of the people, manifested by public opinion (as\nit is called), or by other means, constitutes a supreme law, independent\nof all divine and human rights.\" It denies the right of parents to\neducate their children outside the Catholic Church. It denounces \"the\nimpudence\" of those who presume to subordinate the authority of the\nChurch and of the Apostolic See, \"conferred upon it by Christ our Lord,\nto the judgment of the civil authority.\" His Holiness commends, to\nthe venerable brothers to whom the Encyclical is addressed, incessant\nprayer, and, \"in order that God may accede the more easily to our and\nyour prayers, let us employ in all confidence, as our mediatrix with\nhim, the Virgin Mary, mother of God, who sits as a queen upon the\nright hand of her only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, in a golden\nvestment, clothed around with various adornments. There is nothing she\ncannot obtain from him.\"\n\nCONVOCATION OF THE COUNCIL. Plainly, the principle now avowed by the\npapacy must bring it into collision even with governments which had\nheretofore maintained amicable relations with it. Great dissatisfaction\nwas manifested by Russia, and the incidents that ensued drew forth from\nhis Holiness an allocution (November, 1866) condemnatory of the course\nof that government. To this, Russia replied, by declaring the Concordat\nof 1867 abrogated.\n\nUndeterred by the result of the battle of Sadowa (July, 1866), though\nit was plain that the political condition of Europe was now profoundly\naffected, and especially the relations of the papacy, the pope delivered\nan allocution (June 27, 1867), confirming the Encyclical and Syllabus.\nHe announced his intention of convoking an Oecumenical Council.\n\nAccordingly, as we have already mentioned, in the following year (June\n29, 1868), a bull was issued convoking that Council. Misunderstandings,\nhowever, had now sprung up with Austria. The Austrian Reichsrath\nhad adopted laws introducing equality of civil rights for all the\ninhabitants of the empire, and restricting the influence of the Church.\nThis produced on the part of the papal government an expostulation.\nActing as Russia had done, the Austrian Government found it necessary to\nabrogate the Concordat of 1855.\n\nIn France, as above stated, the publication of the entire Syllabus was\nnot permitted; but Prussia, desirous of keeping on good terms with the\npapacy, did not disallow it. The exacting disposition of the papacy\nincreased. It was openly declared that the faithful must now sacrifice\nto the Church, property, life, and even their intellectual convictions.\nThe Protestants and the Greeks were invited to tender their submission.\n\nTHE VATICAN COUNCIL. On the appointed day, the Council opened. Its\nobjects were, to translate the Syllabus into practice, to establish the\ndogma of papal infallibility, and define the relations of religion to\nscience. Every preparation had been made that the points determined on\nshould be carried. The bishops were informed that they were coming to\nRome not to deliberate, but to sanction decrees previously made by\nan infallible pope. No idea was entertained of any such thing as\nfree discussion. The minutes of the meetings were not permitted to be\ninspected; the prelates of the opposition were hardly allowed to speak.\nOn January 22, 1870, a petition, requesting that the infallibility of\nthe pope should be defined, was presented; an opposition petition of the\nminority was offered. Hereupon, the deliberations of the minority were\nforbidden, and their publications prohibited. And, though the Curia had\nprovided a compact majority, it was found expedient to issue an order\nthat to carry any proposition it was not necessary that the vote should\nbe near unanimity, a simple majority sufficed. The remonstrances of the\nminority were altogether unheeded.\n\nAs the Council pressed forward to its object, foreign authorities\nbecame alarmed at its reckless determination. A petition drawn up by the\nArchbishop of Vienna, and signed by several cardinals and archbishops,\nentreated his Holiness not to submit the dogma of infallibility for\nconsideration, \"because the Church has to sustain at present a struggle\nunknown in former times, against men who oppose religion itself as\nan institution baneful to human nature, and that it is inopportune\nto impose upon Catholic nations, led into temptation by so many\nmachinations, more dogmas than the Council of Trent proclaimed.\" It\nadded that \"the definition demanded would furnish fresh arms to\nthe enemies of religion, to excite against the Catholic Church the\nresentment of men avowedly the best.\" The Austrian prime-minister\naddressed a protest to the papal government, warning it against any\nsteps that might lead to encroachments on the rights of Austria. The\nFrench Government also addressed a note, suggesting that a French bishop\nshould explain to the Council the condition and the rights of France. To\nthis the papal government replied that a bishop could not reconcile the\ndouble duties of an ambassador and a Father of the Council. Hereupon,\nthe French Government, in a very respectful note, remarked that,\nto prevent ultra opinions from becoming dogmas, it reckoned on the\nmoderation of the bishops, and the prudence of the Holy Father; and,\nto defend its civil and political laws against the encroachments of the\ntheocracy, it had counted on public reason and the patriotism of French\nCatholics. In these remonstrances the North-German Confederation joined,\nseriously pressing them on the consideration of the papal government.\n\nOn April 23d, Von Arnim, the Prussian embassador, united with Daru, the\nFrench minister, in suggesting to the Curia the inexpediency of reviving\nmediaeval ideas. The minority bishops, thus encouraged, demanded now\nthat the relations of the spiritual to the secular power should be\ndetermined before the pope's infallibility was discussed, and that it\nshould be settled whether Christ had conferred on St. Peter and his\nsuccessors a power over kings and emperors.\n\nINFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE. No regard was paid to this, not even delay\nwas consented to. The Jesuits, who were at the bottom of the movement,\ncarried their measures through the packed assembly with a high hand. The\nCouncil omitted no device to screen itself from popular criticism. Its\nproceedings were conducted with the utmost secrecy; all who took part in\nthem were bound by a solemn oath to observe silence.\n\nOn July 13th, the votes were taken. Of 601 votes, 451 were affirmative.\nUnder the majority rule, the measure was pronounced carried, and, five\ndays subsequently, the pope proclaimed the dogma of his infallibility.\nIt has often been remarked that this was the day on which the French\ndeclared war against Prussia. Eight days afterward the French troops\nwere withdrawn from Rome. Perhaps both the statesman and the philosopher\nwill admit that an infallible pope would be a great harmonizing element,\nif only common-sense could acknowledge him.\n\nHereupon, the King of Italy addressed an autograph letter to the pope,\nsetting forth in very respectful terms the necessity that his troops\nshould advance and occupy positions \"indispensable to the security of\nhis Holiness, and the maintenance of order;\" that, while satisfying\nthe national aspirations, the chief of Catholicity, surrounded by the\ndevotion of the Italian populations, \"might preserve on the banks of the\nTiber a glorious seat, independent of all human sovereignty.\"\n\nTo this his Holiness replied in a brief and caustic letter: \"I give\nthanks to God, who has permitted your majesty to fill the last days of\nmy life with bitterness. For the rest, I cannot grant certain requests,\nnor conform with certain principles contained in your letter. Again, I\ncall upon God, and into his hands commit my cause, which is his cause.\nI pray God to grant your majesty many graces, to free you from dangers,\nand to dispense to you his mercy which you so much need.\"\n\nTHE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT. The Italian troops met with but little\nresistance. They occupied Rome on September 20, 1870. A manifesto was\nissued, setting forth the details of a plebiscitum, the vote to be by\nballot, the question, \"the unification of Italy.\" Its result showed how\ncompletely the popular mind in Italy is emancipated from theology. In\nthe Roman provinces the number of votes on the lists was 167,548; the\nnumber who voted, 135,291; the number who voted for annexation, 133,681;\nthe number who voted against it, 1,507; votes annulled, 103. The\nParliament of Italy ratified the vote of the Roman people for annexation\nby a vote of 239 to 20. A royal decree now announced the annexation of\nthe Papal States to the kingdom of Italy, and a manifesto was issued\nindicating the details of the arrangement. It declared that \"by these\nconcessions the Italian Government seeks to prove to Europe that Italy\nrespects the sovereignty of the pope in conformity with the principle of\na free Church in a free state.\"\n\nAFFAIRS IN PRUSSIA. In the Prusso-Austrian War it had been the hope of\nthe papacy, to restore the German Empire under Austria, and make\nGermany a Catholic nation. In the Franco-German War the French expected\nultramontane sympathies in Germany. No means were spared to excite\nCatholic sentiment against the Protestants. No vilification was spared.\nThey were spoken of as atheists; they were declared incapable of being\nhonest men; their sects were pointed out as indicating that their\nsecession was in a state of dissolution. \"The followers of Luther are\nthe most abandoned men in all Europe.\" Even the pope himself, presuming\nthat the whole world had forgotten all history, did not hesitate to say,\n\"Let the German people understand that no other Church but that of Rome\nis the Church of freedom and progress.\"\n\nMeantime, among the clergy of Germany a party was organized to\nremonstrate against, and even resist, the papal usurpation. It protested\nagainst \"a man being placed on the throne of God,\" against a vice-God\nof any kind, nor would it yield its scientific convictions to\necclesiastical authority. Some did not hesitate to accuse the\npope himself of being a heretic. Against these insubordinates\nexcommunications began to be fulminated, and at length it was demanded\nthat certain professors and teachers should be removed from their\noffices, and infallibilists substituted. With this demand the Prussian\nGovernment declined to comply.\n\nThe Prussian Government had earnestly desired to remain on amicable\nterms with the papacy; it had no wish to enter on a theological quarrel;\nbut gradually the conviction was forced upon it that the question was\nnot a religious but a political one--whether the power of the state\nshould be used against the state. A teacher in a gymnasium had been\nexcommunicated; the government, on being required to dismiss him,\nrefused. The Church authorities denounced this as an attack upon faith.\nThe emperor sustained his minister. The organ of the infallible party\nthreatened the emperor with the opposition of all good Catholics, and\ntold him that, in a contention with the pope, systems of government can\nand must change. It was now plain to every one that the question had\nbecome, \"Who is to be master in the state, the government or the Roman\nChurch? It is plainly impossible for men to live under two governments,\none of which declares to be wrong what the other commands. If the\ngovernment will not submit to the Roman Church, the two are enemies.\" A\nconflict was thus forced upon Prussia by Rome--a conflict in which the\nlatter, impelled by her antagonism to modern civilization, is clearly\nthe aggressor.\n\nACTION OF THE PRUSSIAN GOVERNMENT. The government, now recognizing its\nantagonist, defended itself by abolishing the Catholic department in\nthe ministry of Public Worship. This was about midsummer, 1871. In\nthe following November the Imperial Parliament passed a law that\necclesiastics abusing their office, to the disturbance of the public\npeace, should be criminally punished. And, guided by the principle that\nthe future belongs to him to whom the school belongs, a movement arose\nfor the purpose of separating the schools from the Church.\n\nTHE CHURCH A POLITICAL POWER. The Jesuit party was extending and\nstrengthening an organization all over Germany, based on the principle\nthat state legislation in ecclesiastical matters is not binding. Here\nwas an act of open insurrection. Could the government allow itself to be\nintimidated? The Bishop of Ermeland declared that he would not obey the\nlaws of the state if they touched the Church. The government stopped the\npayment of his salary; and, perceiving that there could be no peace\nso long as the Jesuits were permitted to remain in the country, their\nexpulsion was resolved on, and carried into effect. At the close of\n1872 his Holiness delivered an allocution, in which he touched on the\n\"persecution of the Church in the German Empire,\" and asserted that the\nChurch alone has a right to fix the limits between its domain and that\nof the state--a dangerous and inadmissible principle, since under the\nterm morals the Church comprises all the relations of men to each other,\nand asserts that whatever does not assist her oppresses her. Hereupon, a\nfew days subsequently (January 9, 1873), four laws were brought forward\nby the government: 1. Regulating the means by which a person might\nsever his connection with the Church; 2. Restricting the Church in the\nexercise of ecclesiastical punishments; 3. Regulating the ecclesiastical\npower of discipline, forbidding bodily chastisement, regulating fines\nand banishments granting the privilege of an appeal to the Royal Court\nof Justice for Ecclesiastical Affairs, the decision of which is final;\n4. Ordaining the preliminary education and appointment of priests. They\nmust have had a satisfactory education, passed a public examination\nconducted by the state, and have a knowledge of philosophy, history,\nand German literature. Institutions refusing to be superintended by the\nstate are to be closed.\n\nThese laws demonstrate that Germany is resolved that she will no longer\nbe dictated to nor embarrassed by a few Italian noble families; that she\nwill be master of her own house. She sees in the conflict, not an affair\nof religion or of conscience, but a struggle between the sovereignty\nof state legislation and the sovereignty of the Church. She treats the\npapacy not in the aspect of a religious, but of a political power, and\nis resolved that the declaration of the Prussian Constitution shall be\nmaintained, that \"the exercise of religious freedom must not interfere\nwith the duties of a citizen toward the community and the state.\"\n\nDUAL GOVERNMENT IN EUROPE. With truth it is affirmed that the papacy is\nadministered not oecumenically, not as a universal Church, for all\nthe nations, but for the benefit of some Italian families. Look at its\ncomposition! It consists of pope, cardinal bishops, cardinal deacons,\nwho at the present moment are all Italians; cardinal priests, nearly all\nItalians; ministers and secretaries of the Sacred Congregation in Rome,\nall Italians. France has not given a pope since the middle ages. It\nis the same with Austria, Portugal, Spain. In spite of all attempts to\nchange this system of exclusion, to open the dignities of the Church to\nall Catholicism, no foreigner can reach the holy chair. It is recognized\nthat the Church is a domain given by God to the princely Italian\nfamilies. Of fifty-five members of the present College of Cardinals,\nforty are Italians--that is, thirty-two beyond their proper share.\n\nThe stumbling-block to the progress of Europe has been its dual system\nof government. So long as every nation had two sovereigns, a temporal\none at home and a spiritual one in a foreign land--there being different\ntemporal masters in different nations, but only one foreign master\nfor all, the pontiff at Rome--how was it possible that history should\npresent us with any thing more than a narrative of the strifes of these\nrival powers? Whoever will reflect on this state of things will see\nhow it is that those nations which have shaken off the dual form of\ngovernment are those which have made the greatest advance. He will\ndiscern what is the cause of the paralysis which has befallen France. On\none hand she wishes to be the leader of Europe, on the other she clings\nto a dead past. For the sake of propitiating her ignorant classes, she\nenters upon lines of policy which her intelligence must condemn. So\nevenly balanced are the two sovereignties under which she lives, that\nsometimes one, sometimes the other, prevails; and not unfrequently the\none uses the other as an engine for the accomplishment of its ends.\n\nINTENTIONS OF THE POPE. But this dual system approaches its close. To\nthe northern nations, less imaginative and less superstitious, it had\nlong ago become intolerable; they rejected it summarily at the epoch of\nthe Reformation, notwithstanding the protestations and pretensions\nof Rome, Russia, happier than the rest, has never acknowledged the\ninfluence of any foreign spiritual power. She gloried in her attachment\nto the ancient Greek rite, and saw in the papacy nothing more than a\ntroublesome dissenter from the primitive faith. In America the temporal\nand the spiritual have been absolutely divorced--the latter is not\npermitted to have any thing to do with affairs of state, though in all\nother respects liberty is conceded to it. The condition of the New\nWorld also satisfies us that both forms of Christianity, Catholic and\nProtestant, have lost their expansive power; neither can pass beyond its\nlong-established boundary-line--the Catholic republics remain Catholic,\nthe Protestant Protestant. And among the latter the disposition to\nsectarian isolation is disappearing; persons of different denominations\nconsort without hesitation together. They gather their current opinions\nfrom newspapers, not from the Church.\n\nPius IX., in the movements we have been considering, has had two objects\nin view: 1. The more thorough centralization of the papacy, with a\nspiritual autocrat assuming the prerogatives of God at its head; 2.\nControl over the intellectual development of the nations professing\nChristianity.\n\nThe logical consequence of the former of these is political\nintervention. He insists that in all cases the temporal must subordinate\nitself to the spiritual power; all laws inconsistent with the interests\nof the Church must be repealed. They are not binding on the faithful.\nIn the preceding pages I have briefly related some of the complications\nthat have already occurred in the attempt to maintain this policy.\n\nTHE SYLLABUS. I now come to the consideration of the manner in which the\npapacy proposes to establish its intellectual control; how it defines\nits relation to its antagonist, Science, and, seeking a restoration\nof the mediaeval condition, opposes modern civilization, and denounces\nmodern society.\n\nThe Encyclical and Syllabus present the principles which it was the\nobject of the Vatican Council to carry into practical effect. The\nSyllabus stigmatizes pantheism, naturalism, and absolute rationalism,\ndenouncing such opinions as that God is the world; that there is no God\nother than Nature; that theological matters must be treated in the same\nmanner as philosophical ones, that the methods and principles by which\nthe old scholastic doctors cultivated theology are no longer suitable\nto the demands of the age and the progress of science; that every man\nis free to embrace and profess the religion he may believe to be true,\nguided by the light of his reason; that it appertains to the civil\npower to define what are the rights and limits in which the Church\nmay exercise authority; that the Church has not the right of availing\nherself of force or any direct or indirect temporal power; that the\nChurch ought to be separated from the state and the state from the\nChurch; that it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion shall\nbe held as the only religion of the state, to the exclusion of all other\nmodes of worship; that persons coming to reside in Catholic countries\nhave a right to the public exercise of their own worship; that the\nRoman pontiff can and ought to reconcile himself to, and agree with, the\nprogress of modern civilization. The Syllabus claims the right of the\nChurch to control public schools, and denies the right of the state in\nthat respect; it claims the control over marriage and divorce.\n\nSuch of these principles as the Council found expedient at present to\nformularize, were set forth by it in \"The Dogmatic Constitution of\nthe Catholic Faith.\" The essential points of this constitution, more\nespecially as regards the relations of religion to science, we have now\nto examine. It will be understood that the following does not present\nthe entire document, but only an abstract of what appear to be its more\nimportant parts.\n\nCONSTITUTION OF CATHOLIC FAITH. This definition opens with a severe\nreview of the principles and consequences of the Protestant Reformation:\n\n\"The rejection of the divine authority of the Church to teach, and the\nsubjection of all things belonging to religion to the judgment of each\nindividual, have led to the production of many sects, and, as these\ndiffered and disputed with each other, all belief in Christ was\noverthrown in the minds of not a few, and the Holy Scriptures began to\nbe counted as myths and fables. Christianity has been rejected, and\nthe reign of mere Reason as they call it, or Nature, substituted; many\nfalling into the abyss of pantheism, materialism, and atheism, and,\nrepudiating the reasoning nature of man, and every rule of right and\nwrong, they are laboring to overthrow the very foundations of human\nsociety. As this impious heresy is spreading everywhere, not a few\nCatholics have been inveigled by it. They have confounded human science\nand divine faith.\n\n\"But the Church, the Mother and Mistress of nations, is ever ready to\nstrengthen the weak, to take to her bosom those that return, and carry\nthem on to better things. And, now the bishops of the whole world\nbeing gathered together in this Oecumenical Council, and the Holy Ghost\nsitting therein, and judging with us, we have determined to declare from\nthis chair of St. Peter the saving doctrine of Christ, and proscribe and\ncondemn the opposing errors.\n\n\"OF GOD, THE CREATOR OF ALL THINGS.--The Holy Catholic Apostolic Roman\nChurch believes that there is one true and living God, Creator and\nLord of Heaven and Earth, Almighty, Eternal, Immense, Incomprehensible,\nInfinite in understanding and will, and in all perfection. He is\ndistinct from the world. Of his own most free counsel he made alike out\nof nothing two created creatures, a spiritual and a temporal, angelic\nand earthly. Afterward he made the human nature, composed of both.\nMoreover, God by his providence protects and governs all things,\nreaching from end to end mightily, and ordering all things harmoniously.\nEvery thing is open to his eyes, even things that come to pass by the\nfree action of his creatures.\"\n\n\"OF REVELATION.--The Holy Mother Church holds that God can be known with\ncertainty by the natural light of human reason, but that it has also\npleased him to reveal himself and the eternal decrees of his will in a\nsupernatural way. This supernatural revelation, as declared by the\nHoly Council of Trent, is contained in the books of the Old and New\nTestament, as enumerated in the decrees of that Council, and as are to\nbe had in the old Vulgate Latin edition. These are sacred because they\nwere written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. They have God for\ntheir author, and as such have been delivered to the Church.\n\n\"And, in order to restrain restless spirits, who may give erroneous\nexplanations, it is decreed--renewing the decision of the Council of\nTrent--that no one may interpret the sacred Scriptures contrary to the\nsense in which they are interpreted by Holy Mother Church, to whom such\ninterpretation belongs.\"\n\n\"OF FAITH.--Inasmuch as man depends on God as his Lord, and created\nreason is wholly subject to uncreated truth, he is bound when God makes\na revelation to obey it by faith. This faith is a supernatural virtue,\nand the beginning of man's salvation who believes revealed things to\nbe true, not for their intrinsic truth as seen by the natural light\nof reason, but for the authority of God in revealing them. But,\nnevertheless that faith might be agreeable to reason, God willed to\njoin miracles and prophecies, which, showing forth his omnipotence and\nknowledge, are proofs suited to the understanding of all. Such we have\nin Moses and the prophets, and above all in Christ. Now, all those\nthings are to be believed which are written in the word of God, or\nhanded down by tradition, which the Church by her teaching has proposed\nfor belief.\n\n\"No one can be justified without this faith, nor shall any one, unless\nhe persevere therein to the end, attain everlasting life. Hence God,\nthrough his only-begotten Son, has established the Church as the\nguardian and teacher of his revealed word. For only to the Catholic\nChurch do all those signs belong which make evident the credibility of\nthe Christian faith. Nay, more, the very Church herself, in view of\nher wonderful propagation, her eminent holiness, her exhaustless\nfruitfulness in all that is good, her Catholic unity, her unshaken\nstability, offers a great and evident claim to belief, and an undeniable\nproof of her divine mission. Thus the Church shows to her children that\nthe faith they hold rests on a most solid foundation. Wherefore, totally\nunlike is the condition of those who, by the heavenly gift of faith,\nhave embraced the Catholic truth, and of those who, led by human\nopinions, are following, a false religion.\"\n\n\"OF FAITH AND REASON.--Moreover, the Catholic Church has ever held and\nnow holds that there exists a twofold order of knowledge, each of which\nis distinct from the other, both as to its principle and its object. As\nto its principle, because in the one we know by natural reason, in the\nother by divine faith; as to the object, because, besides those things\nwhich our natural reason can attain, there are proposed to our belief\nmysteries hidden in God, which, unless by him revealed, cannot come to\nour knowledge.\n\n\"Reason, indeed, enlightened by faith, and seeking, with diligence and\ngodly sobriety, may, by God's gift, come to some understanding, limited\nin degree, but most wholesome in its effects, of mysteries, both from\nthe analogy of things which are naturally known and from the connection\nof the mysteries themselves with one another and with man's last end.\nBut never can reason be rendered capable of thoroughly understanding\nmysteries as it does those truths which form its proper object. For\nGod's mysteries, in their very nature, so far surpass the reach of\ncreated intellect, that, even when taught by revelation and received by\nfaith, they remain covered by faith itself, as by a veil, and shrouded,\nas it were, in darkness as long as in this mortal life.\n\n\"But, although faith be above reason, there never can be a real\ndisagreement between them, since the same God who reveals mysteries and\ninfuses faith has given man's soul the light of reason, and God cannot\ndeny himself, nor can one truth ever contradict another. Wherefore the\nempty shadow of such contradiction arises chiefly from this, that either\nthe doctrines of faith are not understood and set forth as the Church\nreally holds them, or that the vain devices and opinions of men are\nmistaken for the dictates of reason. We therefore pronounce false every\nassertion which is contrary to the enlightened truth of faith. Moreover,\nthe Church, which, together with her apostolic office of teaching,\nis charged also with the guardianship of the deposits of faith, holds\nlikewise from God the right and the duty to condemn 'knowledge, falsely\nso called,' 'lest any man be cheated by philosophy and vain deceit.'\nHence all the Christian faithful are not only forbidden to defend, as\nlegitimate conclusions of science, those opinions which are known to\nbe contrary to the doctrine of faith, especially when condemned by the\nChurch, but are rather absolutely bound to hold them for errors wearing\nthe deceitful appearance of truth.\"\n\nTHE VATICAN ANATHEMAS. \"Not only is it impossible for faith and reason\never to contradict each other, but they rather afford each other mutual\nassistance. For right reason establishes the foundation of faith, and,\nby the aid of its light, cultivates the science of divine things; and\nfaith, on the other hand, frees and preserves reason from errors, and\nenriches it with knowledge of many kinds. So far, then, is the Church\nfrom opposing the culture of human arts and sciences, that she rather\naids and promotes it in many ways. For she is not ignorant of nor does\nshe despise the advantages which flow from them to the life of man; on\nthe contrary, she acknowledges that, as they sprang from God, the Lord\nof knowledge, so, if they be rightly pursued, they will, through the aid\nof his grace, lead to God. Nor does she forbid any of those sciences\nthe use of its own principles and its own method within its own proper\nsphere; but, recognizing this reasonable freedom, she takes care that\nthey may not, by contradicting God's teaching, fall into errors, or,\noverstepping the due limits, invade or throw into confusion the domain\nof faith.\n\n\"For the doctrine of faith revealed by God has not been proposed, like\nsome philosophical discovery, to be made perfect by human ingenuity, but\nit has been delivered to the spouse of Christ as a divine deposit, to be\nfaithfully guarded and unerringly set forth. Hence, all tenets of holy\nfaith are to be explained always according to the sense and meaning of\nthe Church; nor is it ever lawful to depart therefrom under pretense or\ncolor of a more enlightened explanation. Therefore, as generations and\ncenturies roll on, let the understanding, knowledge, and wisdom of each\nand every one, of individuals and of the whole Church, grow apace and\nincrease exceedingly, yet only in its kind; that is to say retaining\npure and inviolate the sense and meaning and belief of the same\ndoctrine.\"\n\nAmong other canons the following were promulgated.\n\n\"Let him be anathema--\n\n\"Who denies the one true God, Creator and Lord of all things, visible\nand invisible.\n\n\"Who unblushingly affirms that, besides matter, nothing else exists.\n\n\"Who says that the substance or essence of God, and of all things, is\none and the same.\n\n\"Who says that finite things, both corporeal and spiritual, or at least\nspiritual things, are emanations of the divine substance; or that the\ndivine essence, by manifestation or development of itself, becomes all\nthings.\n\n\"Who does not acknowledge that the world and all things which it\ncontains were produced by God out of nothing.\n\n\"Who shall say that man can and ought to, of his own efforts, by means\nof, constant progress, arrive, at last, at the possession of all truth\nand goodness.\n\n\"Who shall refuse to receive, for sacred and canonical, the books of\nHoly Scripture in their integrity, with all their parts, according as\nthey were enumerated by the holy Council of Trent, or shall deny that\nthey are Inspired by God.\n\n\"Who shall say that human reason is in such wise independent, that faith\ncannot be demanded of it by God.\n\n\"Who shall say that divine revelation cannot be rendered credible by\nexternal evidences.\n\n\"Who shall say that no miracles can be wrought, or that they can never\nbe known with certainty, and that the divine origin of Christianity\ncannot be proved by them.\n\n\"Who shall say that divine revelation includes no mysteries, but that\nall the dogmas of faith may be understood and demonstrated by reason\nduly cultivated.\n\n\"Who shall say that human sciences ought to be pursued in such a spirit\nof freedom that one may be allowed to hold as true their assertions,\neven when opposed to revealed doctrine.\n\n\"Who shall say that it may at any time come to pass, in the progress\nof science, that the doctrines set forth by the Church must be taken in\nanother sense than that in which the Church has ever received and yet\nreceives them.\"\n\nTHE EVANGELICAL ALLIANCE. The extraordinary and, indeed, it may be said,\narrogant assumptions contained in these decisions were far from being\nreceived with satisfaction by educated Catholics. On the part of the\nGerman universities there was resistance; and, when, at the close of the\nyear, the decrees of the Vatican Council were generally acquiesced in,\nit was not through conviction of their truth, but through a disciplinary\nsense of obedience.\n\nBy many of the most pious Catholics the entire movement and the results\nto which it had led were looked upon with the sincerest sorrow. Pere\nHyacinthe, in a letter to the superior of his order, says: \"I protest\nagainst the divorce, as impious as it is insensate, sought to be\neffected between the Church, which is our eternal mother, and the\nsociety of the nineteenth century, of which we are the temporal\nchildren, and toward which we have also duties and regards. It is my\nmost profound conviction that, if France in particular, and the Latin\nrace in general, are given up to social, moral, and religious anarchy,\nthe principal cause undoubtedly is not Catholicism itself, but the\nmanner in which Catholicism has for a long time been understood and\npractised.\"\n\nNotwithstanding his infallibility, which implies omniscience, his\nHoliness did not foresee the issue of the Franco-Prussian War. Had the\nprophetical talent been vouchsafed to him, he would have detected the\ninopportuneness of the acts of his Council. His request to the King of\nPrussia for military aid to support his temporal power was denied. The\nexcommunicated King of Italy, as we have seen, took possession of Rome.\nA bitter papal encyclical, strangely contrasting with the courteous\npoliteness of modern state-papers, was issued, November 1, 1870,\ndenouncing the acts of the Piedmontese court, \"which had followed the\ncounsel of the sects of perdition.\" In this his Holiness declares that\nhe is in captivity, and that he will have no agreement with Belial. He\npronounces the greater excommunication, with censures and penalties,\nagainst his antagonists, and prays for \"the intercession of the\nimmaculate Virgin Mary, mother of God, and that of the blessed apostles\nPeter and Paul.\"\n\nOf the various Protestant denominations, several had associated\nthemselves, for the purposes of consultation, under the designation of\nthe Evangelical Alliance. Their last meeting was held in New York, in\nthe autumn of 1873. Though, in this meeting, were gathered together many\npious representatives of the Reformed Churches, European and American,\nit had not the prestige nor the authority of the Great Council that had\njust previously closed its sessions in St. Peters, at Rome. It could\nnot appeal to an unbroken ancestry of far more than a thousand years;\nit could not speak with the authority of an equal and, indeed, of\na superior to emperors and kings. While profound intelligence and a\nstatesmanlike, worldly wisdom gleamed in every thing that the Vatican\nCouncil had done, the Evangelical Alliance met without a clear and\nprecise view of its objects, without any definitely-marked intentions.\nIts wish was to draw into closer union the various Protestant Churches,\nbut it had no well-grounded hope of accomplishing that desirable result.\nIt illustrated the necessary working, of the principle on which\nthose Churches originated. They were founded on dissent and exist by\nseparation.\n\nYet in the action of the Evangelical Alliance may be discerned\ncertain very impressive facts. It averted its eyes from its ancient\nantagonist--that antagonist which had so recently loaded the Reformation\nwith contumely and denunciation--it fastened them, as the Vatican\nCouncil had done, on Science. Under that dreaded name there stood before\nit what seemed to be a spectre of uncertain form, of hourly-dilating\nproportions, of threatening aspect. Sometimes the Alliance addressed\nthis stupendous apparition in words of courtesy, sometimes in tones of\ndenunciation.\n\nTHE VATICAN CONSTITUTION CRITICISED. The Alliance failed to perceive\nthat modern Science is the legitimate sister--indeed, it is the\ntwin-sister--of the Reformation. They were begotten together and\nwere born together. It failed to perceive that, though there is an\nimpossibility of bringing into coalition the many conflicting sects,\nthey may all find in science a point of connection; and that, not a\ndistrustful attitude toward it, but a cordial union with it, is their\ntrue policy.\n\nIt remains now to offer some reflections on this \"Constitution of the\nCatholic Faith,\" as defined by the Vatican Council.\n\nFor objects to present themselves under identical relations to different\npersons, they must be seen from the same point of view. In the instance\nwe are now considering, the religious man has his own especial station;\nthe scientific man another, a very different one. It is not for either\nto demand that his co-observer shall admit that the panorama of facts\nspread before them is actually such as it appears to him to be.\n\nThe Dogmatic Constitution insists on the admission of this postulate,\nthat the Roman Church acts under a divine commission, specially and\nexclusively delivered to it. In virtue of that great authority, it\nrequires of all men the surrender of their intellectual convictions, and\nof all nations the subordination of their civil power.\n\nBut a claim so imposing must be substantiated by the most decisive and\nunimpeachable credentials; proofs, not only of an implied and indirect\nkind, but clear, emphatic, and to the point; proofs that it would be\nimpossible to call in question.\n\nThe Church, however, declares, that she will not submit her claim to\nthe arbitrament of human reason; she demands that it shall be at once\nconceded as an article of faith.\n\nIf this be admitted, all bar requirements must necessarily be assented\nto, no matter how exorbitant they may be.\n\nWith strange inconsistency the Dogmatic Constitution deprecates reason,\naffirming that it cannot determine the points under consideration, and\nyet submits to it arguments for adjudication. In truth, it might be said\nthat the whole composition is a passionate plea to Reason to stultify\nitself in favor of Roman Christianity.\n\nWith points of view so widely asunder, it is impossible that Religion\nand Science should accord in their representation of things. Nor can\nany conclusion in common be reached, except by an appeal to Reason as a\nsupreme and final judge.\n\nThere are many religions in the world, some of them of more venerable\nantiquity, some having far more numerous adherents, than the Roman. How\ncan a selection be made among them, except by such an appeal to Reason?\nReligion and Science must both submit their claims and their dissensions\nto its arbitrament.\n\nAgainst this the Vatican Council protests. It exalts faith to a\nsuperiority over reason; it says that they constitute two separate\norders of knowledge, having respectively for their objects mysteries\nand facts. Faith deals with mysteries, reason with facts. Asserting the\ndominating superiority of faith, it tries to satisfy the reluctant mind\nwith miracles and prophecies.\n\nOn the other hand, Science turns away from the incomprehensible, and\nrests herself on the maxim of Wiclif: \"God forceth not a man to believe\nthat which he cannot understand.\" In the absence of an exhibition of\nsatisfactory credentials on the part of her opponent, she considers\nwhether there be in the history of the papacy, and in the biography of\nthe popes, any thing that can adequately sustain a divine commission,\nany thing that can justify pontifical infallibility, or extort that\nunhesitating obedience which is due to the vice-God.\n\nOne of the most striking and yet contradictory features of the Dogmatic\nConstitution is, the reluctant homage it pays to the intelligence of\nman. It presents a definition of the philosophical basis of Catholicism,\nbut it veils from view the repulsive features of the vulgar faith. It\nsets forth the attributes of God, the Creator of all things, in words\nfitly designating its sublime conception, but it abstains from affirming\nthat this most awful and eternal Being was born of an earthly mother,\nthe wife of a Jewish carpenter, who has since become the queen of\nheaven. The God it depicts is not the God of the middle ages, seated\non his golden throne, surrounded by choirs of angels, but the God of\nPhilosophy. The Constitution has nothing to say about the Trinity,\nnothing of the worship due to the Virgin--on the contrary, that is by\nimplication sternly condemned; nothing about transubstantiation, or\nthe making of the flesh and blood of God by the priest; nothing of the\ninvocation of the saints. It bears on its face subordination to the\nthought of the age, the impress of the intellectual progress of man.\n\nTHE PASSAGE OF EUROPE TO LLAMAISM. Such being the exposition rendered to\nus respecting the attributes of God, it next instructs us as to his\nmode of government of the world. The Church asserts that she possesses a\nsupernatural control over all material and moral events. The priesthood,\nin its various grades, can determine issues of the future, either by the\nexercise of its inherent attributes, or by its influential invocation of\nthe celestial powers. To the sovereign pontiff it has been given to bind\nor loose at his pleasure. It is unlawful to appeal from his judgments\nto an Oecumenical Council, as if to an earthly arbiter superior to him.\nPowers such as these are consistent with arbitrary rule, but they are\ninconsistent with the government of the world by immutable law. Hence\nthe Dogmatic Constitution plants itself firmly in behalf of incessant\nprovidential interventions; it will not for a moment admit that in\nnatural things there is an irresistible sequence of events, or in the\naffairs of men an unavoidable course of acts.\n\nBut has not the order of civilization in all parts of the world been the\nsame? Does not the growth of society resemble individual growth? Do not\nboth exhibit to us phases of youth, of maturity, of decrepitude? To\na person who has carefully considered the progressive civilization of\ngroups of men in regions of the earth far apart, who has observed the\nidentical forms under which that advancing civilization has manifested\nitself, is it not clear that the procedure is determined by law? The\nreligious ideas of the Incas of Peru and the emperors of Mexico, and the\nceremonials of their court-life, were the same as those in Europe--the\nsame as those in Asia. The current of thought had been the same. A swarm\nof bees carried to some distant land will build its combs and regulate\nits social institutions as other unknown swarms would do, and so with\nseparated and disconnected swarms of men. So invariable is this sequence\nof thought and act, that there are philosophers who, transferring the\npast example offered by Asiatic history to the case of Europe, would\nnot hesitate to sustain the proposition--given a bishop of Rome and some\ncenturies, and you will have an infallible pope: given an infallible\npope and a little more time, and you will have Llamaism--Llamaism to\nwhich Asia has long, ago attained.\n\nAs to the origin of corporeal and spiritual things, the Dogmatic\nConstitution adds a solemn emphasis to its declarations, by\nanathematizing all those who hold the doctrine of emanation, or who\nbelieve that visible Nature is only a manifestation of the Divine\nEssence. In this its authors had a task of no ordinary difficulty before\nthem. They must encounter those formidable ideas, whether old or new,\nwhich in our times are so strongly forcing themselves on thoughtful men.\nThe doctrine of the conservation and correlation of Force yields as its\nlogical issue the time-worn Oriental emanation theory; the doctrines of\nEvolution and Development strike at that of successive creative acts.\nThe former rests on the fundamental principle that the quantity of\nforce in the universe is invariable. Though that quantity can neither be\nincreased nor diminished, the forms under which Force expresses itself\nmay be transmuted into each other. As yet this doctrine has not received\ncomplete scientific demonstration, but so numerous and so cogent are the\narguments adduced in its behalf, that it stands in an imposing, almost\nin an authoritative attitude. Now, the Asiatic theory of emanation and\nabsorption is seen to be in harmony with this grand idea. It does not\nhold that, at the conception of a human being, a soul is created by\nGod out of nothing and given to it, but that a portion of the already\nexisting, the divine, the universal intelligence, is imparted, and, when\nlife is over, this returns to and is absorbed in the general source from\nwhich it originally came. The authors of the Constitution forbid these\nideas to be held, under pain of eternal punishment.\n\nIn like manner they dispose of the doctrines of Evolution and\nDevelopment, bluntly insisting that the Church believes in distinct\ncreative acts. The doctrine that every living form is derived from some\npreceding form is scientifically in a much more advanced position than\nthat concerning Force, and probably may be considered as established,\nwhatever may become of the additions with which it has recently been\noverlaid.\n\nIn her condemnation of the Reformation, the Church carries into effect\nher ideas of the subordination of reason to faith. In her eyes the\nReformation is an impious heresy, leading to the abyss of pantheism,\nmaterialism, and atheism, and tending to overthrow the very foundations\nof human society. She therefore would restrain those \"restless spirits\"\nwho, following Luther, have upheld the \"right of every man to interpret\nthe Scriptures for himself.\" She asserts that it is a wicked error to\nadmit Protestants to equal political privileges with Catholics, and that\nto coerce them and suppress them is a sacred duty; that it is abominable\nto permit them to establish educational institutions. Gregory XVI.\ndenounced freedom of conscience as an insane folly, and the freedom of\nthe press a pestilent error, which cannot be sufficiently detested.\n\nBut how is it possible to recognize an inspired and infallible oracle on\nthe Tiber, when it is remembered that again and again successive popes\nhave contradicted each other; that popes have denounced councils, and\ncouncils have denounced popes; that the Bible of Sixtus V. had so many\nadmitted errors--nearly two thousand--that its own authors had to recall\nit? How is it possible for the children of the Church to regard as\n\"delusive errors\" the globular form of the earth, her position as a\nplanet in the solar system, her rotation on her axis, her movement round\nthe sun? How can they deny that there are antipodes, and other worlds\nthan ours? How can they believe that the world was made out of nothing,\ncompleted in a week, finished just as we see it now; that it has\nundergone no change, but that its parts have worked so indifferently as\nto require incessant interventions?\n\nTHE ERRORS OF ECCLESIASTICISM. When Science is thus commanded to\nsurrender her intellectual convictions, may she not ask the ecclesiastic\nto remember the past? The contest respecting the figure of the earth,\nand the location of heaven and hell, ended adversely to him. He affirmed\nthat the earth is an extended plane, and that the sky is a firmament,\nthe floor of heaven, through which again and again persons have been\nseen to ascend. The globular form demonstrated beyond any possibility\nof contradiction by astronomical facts, and by the voyage of Magellan's\nship, he then maintained that it is the central body of the universe,\nall others being in subordination to it, and it the grand object of\nGod's regard. Forced from this position, he next affirmed that it is\nmotionless, the sun and the stars actually revolving, as they apparently\ndo, around it. The invention of the telescope proved that here again\nhe was in error. Then he maintained that all the motions of the solar\nsystem are regulated by providential intervention; the \"Principia\"\nof Newton demonstrated that they are due to irresistible law. He then\naffirmed that the earth and all the celestial bodies were created about\nsix thousand years ago, and that in six days the order of Nature was\nsettled, and plants and animals in their various tribes introduced.\nConstrained by the accumulating mass of adverse evidence, he enlarged\nhis days into periods of indefinite length--only, however, to find that\neven this device was inadequate. The six ages, with their six special\ncreations, could no longer be maintained, when it was discovered that\nspecies, slowly emerged in one age, reached a culmination in a second,\nand gradually died out in a third: this overlapping from age to age\nwould not only have demanded creations, but re-creations also. He\naffirmed that there had been a deluge, which covered the whole earth\nabove the tops of the highest mountains, and that the waters of this\nflood were removed by a wind. Correct ideas respecting the dimensions\nof the atmosphere, and of the sea, and of the operation of evaporation,\nproved how untenable these statements are. Of the progenitors of the\nhuman race, he declared that they had come from their Maker's hand\nperfect, both in body and mind, and had subsequently experienced a fall.\nHe is now considering how best to dispose of the evidence continually\naccumulating respecting the savage condition of prehistoric man.\n\nIs it at all surprising that the number of those who hold the opinions\nof the Church in light esteem should so rapidly increase? How can that\nbe received as a trustworthy guide in the invisible, which falls into so\nmany errors in the visible? How can that give confidence in the moral,\nthe spiritual, which has so signally failed in the physical? It is not\npossible to dispose of these conflicting facts as \"empty shadows,\" \"vain\ndevices,\" \"fictions coming from knowledge falsely so called,\" \"errors\nwearing the deceitful appearance of truth,\" as the Church stigmatizes\nthem. On the contrary, they are stern witnesses, bearing emphatic\nand unimpeachable testimony against the ecclesiastical claim to\ninfallibility, and fastening a conviction of ignorance and blindness\nupon her.\n\nConvicted of so many errors, the papacy makes no attempt at explanation.\nIt ignores the whole matter Nay, more, relying on the efficacy\nof audacity, though confronted by these facts, it lays claim to\ninfallibility.\n\nSEPARATION OF CATHOLICISM AND CIVILIZATION. But, to the pontiff, no\nother rights can be conceded than those he can establish at the bar of\nReason. He cannot claim infallibility in religious affairs, and\ndecline it in scientific. Infallibility embraces all things. It implies\nomniscience. If it holds good for theology, it necessarily holds good\nfor science. How is it possible to coordinate the infallibility of the\npapacy with the well-known errors into which it has fallen?\n\nDoes it not, then, become needful to reject the claim of the papacy\nto the employment of coercion in the maintenance of its opinions; to\nrepudiate utterly the declaration that \"the Inquisition is an urgent\nnecessity in view of the unbelief of the present age,\" and in the name\nof human nature to protest loudly against the ferocity and terrorism of\nthat institution? Has not conscience inalienable rights?\n\nAn impassable and hourly-widening gulf intervenes between Catholicism\nand the spirit of the age. Catholicism insists that blind faith is\nsuperior to reason; that mysteries are of more importance than facts.\nShe claims to be the sole interpreter of Nature and revelation, the\nsupreme arbiter of knowledge; she summarily rejects all modern criticism\nof the Scriptures, and orders the Bible to be accepted in accordance\nwith the views of the theologians of Trent; she openly avows her hatred\nof free institutions and constitutional systems, and declares that those\nare in damnable error who regard the reconciliation of the pope with\nmodern civilization as either possible or desirable.\n\nSCIENCE AND PROTESTANTISM. But the spirit of the age demands--is the\nhuman intellect to be subordinated to the Tridentine Fathers, or to the\nfancy of illiterate and uncritical persons who wrote in the earlier ages\nof the Church? It sees no merit in blind faith, but rather distrusts it.\nIt looks forward to an improvement in the popular canon of credibility\nfor a decision between fact and fiction. It does not consider itself\nbound to believe fables and falsehoods that have been invented for\necclesiastical ends. It finds no argument in behalf of their truth, that\ntraditions and legends have been long-lived; in this respect, those of\nthe Church are greatly inferior to the fables of paganism. The longevity\nof the Church itself is not due to divine protection or intervention,\nbut to the skill with which it has adapted its policy to existing\ncircumstances. If antiquity be the criterion of authenticity, the claims\nof Buddhism must be respected; it has the superior warrant of many\ncenturies. There can be no defense of those deliberate falsifications of\nhistory, that concealment of historical facts, of which the Church has\nso often taken advantage. In these things the end does not justify the\nmeans.\n\nThen has it in truth come to this, that Roman Christianity and Science\nare recognized by their respective adherents as being absolutely\nincompatible; they cannot exist together; one must yield to the other;\nmankind must make its choice--it cannot have both.\n\nSCIENCE AND FAITH. While such is, perhaps, the issue as regards\nCatholicism, a reconciliation of the Reformation with Science is not\nonly possible, but would easily take place, if the Protestant Churches\nwould only live up to the maxim taught by Luther, and established by so\nmany years of war. That maxim is, the right of private interpretation of\nthe Scriptures. It was the foundation of intellectual liberty. But, if\na personal interpretation of the book of Revelation is permissible,\nhow can it be denied in the case of the book of Nature? In the\nmisunderstandings that have taken place, we must ever bear in mind\nthe infirmities of men. The generations that immediately followed\nthe Reformation may perhaps be excused for not comprehending the full\nsignificance of their cardinal principle, and for not on all occasions\ncarrying it into effect. When Calvin caused Servetus, to be burnt, he\nwas animated, not by the principles of the Reformation, but by those\nof Catholicism, from which he had not been able to emancipate himself\ncompletely. And when the clergy of influential Protestant confessions\nhave stigmatized the investigators of Nature as infidels and atheists,\nthe same may be said. For Catholicism to reconcile itself to Science,\nthere are formidable, perhaps insuperable obstacles in the way. For\nProtestantism to achieve that great result there are not. In the one\ncase there is a bitter, a mortal animosity to be overcome; in the other,\na friendship, that misunderstandings have alienated, to be restored.\n\nCIVILIZATION AND RELIGION. But, whatever may be the preparatory\nincidents of that great impending intellectual crisis which Christendom\nmust soon inevitably witness, of this we may rest assured, that the\nsilent secession from the public faith, which in so ominous a manner\ncharacterizes the present generation, will find at length political\nexpression. It is not without significance that France reenforces the\nultramontane tendencies of her lower population, by the promotion of\npilgrimages, the perpetration of miracles, the exhibition of celestial\napparitions. Constrained to do this by her destiny, she does it with\na blush. It is not without significance that Germany resolves to rid\nherself of the incubus of a dual government, by the exclusion of the\nItalian element, and to carry to its completion that Reformation which\nthree centuries ago she left unfinished. The time approaches when\nmen must take their choice between quiescent, immobile faith and\never-advancing Science--faith, with its mediaeval consolations, Science,\nwhich is incessantly scattering its material blessings in the pathway\nof life, elevating the lot of man in this world, and unifying the\nhuman race. Its triumphs are solid and enduring. But the glory which\nCatholicism might gain from a conflict with material ideas is at the\nbest only like that of other celestial meteors when they touch the\natmosphere of the earth--transitory and useless.\n\nThough Guizot's affirmation that the Church has always sided with\ndespotism is only too true, it must be remembered that in the policy\nshe follows there is much of political necessity. She is urged on by\nthe pressure of nineteen centuries. But, if the irresistible indicates\nitself in her action, the inevitable manifests itself in her life. For\nit is with the papacy as with a man. It has passed through the struggles\nof infancy, it has displayed the energies of maturity, and, its work\ncompleted, it must sink into the feebleness and querulousness of old\nage. Its youth can never be renewed. The influence of its souvenirs\nalone will remain. As pagan Rome threw her departing shadow over the\nempire and tinctured all its thoughts, so Christian Rome casts her\nparting shadow over Europe.\n\nINADMISSIBLE CLAIMS OF CATHOLICISM. Will modern civilization consent to\nabandon the career of advancement which has given it so much power and\nhappiness? Will it consent to retrace its steps to the semi-barbarian\nignorance and superstition of the middle ages? Will it submit to the\ndictation of a power, which, claiming divine authority, can present\nno adequate credentials of its office; a power which kept Europe in a\nstagnant condition for many centuries, ferociously suppressing by the\nstake and the sword every attempt at progress; a power that is founded\nin a cloud of mysteries; that sets itself above reason and common-sense;\nthat loudly proclaims the hatred it entertains against liberty of\nthought and freedom in civil institutions; that professes its intention\nof repressing the one and destroying the other whenever it can find the\nopportunity; that denounces as most pernicious and insane the opinion\nthat liberty of conscience and of worship is the right of every man;\nthat protests against that right being proclaimed and asserted by law in\nevery well-governed state; that contemptuously repudiates the principle\nthat the will of the people, manifested by public opinion (as it is\ncalled) or by other means, shall constitute law; that refuses to every\nman any title to opinion in matters of religion, but holds that it is\nsimply his duty to believe what he is told by the Church, and to obey\nher commands; that will not permit any temporal government to define\nthe rights and prescribe limits to the authority of the Church;\nthat declares it not only may but will resort to force to discipline\ndisobedient individuals; that invades the sanctify of private life, by\nmaking, at the confessional, the wife and daughters and servants of one\nsuspected, spies and informers against him; that tries him without an\naccuser, and by torture makes him bear witness against himself; that\ndenies the right of parents to educate their children outside of its own\nChurch, and insists that to it alone belongs the supervision of domestic\nlife and the control of marriages and divorces; that denounces \"the\nimpudence\" of those who presume to subordinate the authority of the\nChurch to the civil authority, or who advocate the separation of the\nChurch from the state; that absolutely repudiates all toleration, and\naffirms that the Catholic religion is entitled to be held as the only\nreligion in every country, to the exclusion of all other modes of\nworship; that requires all laws standing in the way of its interests\nto be repealed, and, if that be refused, orders all its followers to\ndisobey them?\n\nISSUE OF THE CONFLICT. This power, conscious that it can work no miracle\nto serve itself, does not hesitate to disturb society by its intrigues\nagainst governments, and seeks to accomplish its ends by alliances with\ndespotism.\n\nClaims such as these mean a revolt against modern civilization, an\nintention of destroying it, no matter at what social cost. To submit to\nthem without resistance, men must be slaves indeed!\n\nAs to the issue of the coming conflict, can any one doubt? Whatever\nis resting on fiction and fraud will be overthrown. Institutions that\norganize impostures and spread delusions must show what right they have\nto exist. Faith must render an account of herself to Reason. Mysteries\nmust give place to facts. Religion must relinquish that imperious, that\ndomineering position which she has so long maintained against Science.\nThere must be absolute freedom for thought. The ecclesiastic must learn\nto keep himself within the domain he has chosen, and cease to tyrannize\nover the philosopher, who, conscious of his own strength and the purity\nof his motives, will bear such interference no longer. What was\nwritten by Esdras near the willow-fringed rivers of Babylon, more than\ntwenty-three centuries ago, still holds good: \"As for Truth it endureth\nand is always strong; it liveth and conquereth for evermore.\"","title":"History of the Conflict Between Religion and Science","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":108331}