Chapter CXLII: Act IV: SCENE 2. Page 601 (2)

The practice of introducing the fools and clowns between the acts and scenes, and after the play was finished, to amuse the audience with extemporaneous wit and buffoonery, has been so well illustrated by the able historian of the English stage, that very little can remain to be said on the subject.[90] It has been traced from the Greek and Roman theatres; and, as their usages were undoubtedly preserved in those of the middle ages that belonged to the countries where Roman influence had been spread, it would not of course be peculiar to the early stage in England. Indeed, the records of the French theatre amply demonstrate the truth of this position, and furnish several examples of the practice in question. In the mystery of _Saint Barbara_ we find this stage direction, "Pausa. Vadant, et Stultus loquitur;" and he is several times introduced in like manner between the scenes, in order that the amusement of the spectators might not be suspended whilst something was in agitation for the further prosecution of the piece.[91] Perhaps the most singular _pause_ in any dramatic composition whatsoever is one which occurs in the very rare morality of _La condamnation des banquetz_ in the following words: "Pause pour pisser le fol. Il prent ung coffinet en lieu de orinal & pisse dedans, et tout coule par bas," sign. M iiij. Nor was the English stage in Shakspeare's time allowed to remain empty. Lupton has related a story of the clown at the Red Bull theatre, who was suddenly called for between the acts, and forgot his fool's cap.[92] Puttenham, speaking of verses that rhime in the middle and end, observes that "they were more commodiously uttered by the buffoons or vices in plays than by any other person."[93] It was likewise part of the stage fool's office to introduce at his own discretion a great many old songs, or at least the fragments of them.[94]

The first symptoms of the decline of the domestic fools, and the causes of it, have been already touched on; and the same reasons may partly be assigned for their exile from the stage. In the præludium to Goffe's _Careless shepherdess_, 1656, 4to, there is a panegyric on them,[95] and some concern is manifested for the fool's absence in the play itself. It is likewise expressly stated that "the motly coat was banish'd with trunk-hose." Yet during the reign of Charles the Second occasional efforts were made to restore the character. In the tragedy of _Thorney abbey, or the London maid_, 1662, 12mo, the prologue is spoken by a fool who uses these words, "the poet's a fool who made the tragedy to tell a story of a king and a court and leave a fool out on't, when in Pacy's and Sommer's and Patche's and Archee's times, my venerable predecessours, a fool was alwaies the principal verb." Shadwell's play of _The woman captain_, 1680, is perhaps the last in which a regular fool is introduced, and even there his master is made to say that the character was then exploded on the stage.

The following is some additional and necessary explanation of the cuts belonging to this dissertation.

Plate II. fig. 1, is from _Catzii emblemata_. Fig. 2 is the duke of Suffolk's fool in the time of Henry VIII., copied from a print in Mr. Brydges's _Memoirs of the peers of England_. Figs. 3 and 4 are from paintings in the author's possession. The centre fig. is from a print by Breughel.

Plate III. All these instruments, excepting fig. 3, before described, are taken from various Dutch and German prints.

Plate IV. fig. 1, is from an old German print by an unknown master.

_Published by T. Tegg, Cheapside, Sept.ʳ 1839._]

_Published by T. Tegg, Cheapside, Sept.ʳ 1839._]

_Published by T. Tegg. Cheapside, Sept.ʳ 1839._]

Figs. 1 and 3 below are from _A booke of Christian prayers_, &c., 1590, 4to, being figures belonging to a dance of Death. Fig. 2 is from the frontispiece to Heywood's comedy of _The fair maid of the exchange_. Similar figures of the costume of fools in the time of James I., or Charles I., may be seen in _The life of Will Summers_, compiled long after his time. Figs. 4 and 5 are from _La grant danse Macabre_, printed at Troyes without date, but about the year 1500, in folio, a book of uncommon rarity and curiosity. Fig. 6 is from the _Stultarum virginum scaphæ, seu naviculæ_ of Badius Ascensius, another work of much rarity, and far exceeding that of the ship of fools by Sebastian Brandt. In all the editions of the latter, a great variety of the fools of the fifteenth century will be found. Fig. 7 is from a French translation of St. Augustine on the city of God, printed at Abbeville 1486. It exemplifies the use of the tabor and pipe by fools; a practice that seems to have been revived by Tarlton in the time of Elizabeth. Figures 3, 4, and 6, have been introduced to show the costume of female fools. Among others of this kind that might deserve notice is a very interesting one in the picture, by Holbein, of Henry the Eighth's family already mentioned.

FOOTNOTES:

[45] See a note by Mr. Ritson in _Twelfth night_, Act II. Scene 3, edit. Steevens, vol. iv. p. 53.

[46] Defence of poesie, near the end.

[47] Mirrour of monsters, 1587, 4to, fo. 7.

[48] Arte of English poesie, 1589, 4to, fo. 243.

[49] _The devil is an ass_, Sc. 1.

[50] _The fox_, Act II. Sc. 1.

[51] Marston's Malcontent, Sc. 7.

[52] See p. 94.

[53] _The devil is an ass_, Sc. 1.

[54] Roman des ducs de Normandie, MS. Reg. 4, C. xi.

[55] Holy state, p. 182.

[56] This person was probably the subject of the following lines in Bancroft's _Epigrams_, 1639, 4to:

"How plumpe's the libertine! how rich and trimme!
He jests with others, fortune jests with him."

Mr. Garrard, in a letter to lord Strafford, says, "There is a new fool in his [Archee's] place, Muckle John, but he will ne'er be so rich, for he cannot abide money."--_Strafford papers_, ii. 154.

[57] Biogr. hist. of England, i. 116.

[58] _The woman captain_, 1680, Sc. i.

[59] Bigland's _Collect. for Gloucest._

[60] Perroniana, inter Scaligerana, &c. i. 115.

[61] Vigneul de Marville, Mêlanges, ii. 50.

[62] Table talk, Art. Evil-speaking.

[63] This appears from many of our old plays. Lear threatens his fool with the whip, Act I. Scene 4; and see _As you like it_, Act I. Scene 2. In Dr. Turner's _New booke of spirituall physik_, 1555, 12mo, fo. 8, there is a very curious story of John of Low, the king of Scotland's fool, which throws light on the subject in question. Yet the chastising of the poor fools seems to have been a very unfair practice, when it is considered that they were a privileged class with respect to their wit and satire. Olivia, in _Twelfth night_, says, that "there is no slander in an allowed fool though he do nothing but rail;" and Jaques, in _As you like it_, alludes to the above privilege. See likewise other instances in Reed's _Old plays_, iii. 253, and xi. 417. Yet in cases where the free discourse of fools gave just offence to the ears of modest females they seem to have been treated without mercy, and to have forfeited their usual privilege. This we learn from Brantôme, who, at the end of his _Dames galantes_, relates a story of a fool belonging to Elizabeth of France, who got a whipping in the kitchen for a licentious speech to his mistress. A representation of the manner in which the flagellation of fools was performed may be seen in a German edition of Petrarch _De remediis utriusque fortunæ_, published more than once at Frankfort, in the sixteenth century, part ii. chap. 100.

[64] See his note in _All's well that ends well_, Act I. Scene 3.

[65] Plate II. fig. 1; also figs. 2 and 3, p. 516; and fig. 4, p. 517.

[66] Plate II. fig. 3.

[67] Plate III. figs. 7, 8, 9; also the centre fig. in Plate II. Hence the French call a bauble _marotte_, from _Marionnette_, or little Mary; but if the learned reader should prefer to derive the word from the Greek μορος, or the Latin _morio_, he is at full liberty to do so; and indeed such preference would be supported by the comparatively modern figure of the child's head, which the term _marotte_ might have suggested. The bauble originally used in King Lear is said to have been extant so late as the time of Garrick, and the figure of it would certainly have been worth preserving. To supply its place a representation is given of the head of a real bauble very finely carved in ivory. See Plate IV. figs. 3, 4. A bauble is very often improperly put into the hands of Momus.

[68] Plate III. figs. 2, 6, 7, 9; also figs. 1 and 3, p. 516.

[69] Plate III. fig. 4; and see Strutt's _Dress and habits of the people of England_, Plate LXXI.

[70] Blomefield's _History of Norfolk_, ii. 737.

[71] Plate III. fig. 1. In the Imperial library at Vienna, there is a manuscript calendar, said to have been written in the time of Constantius the son of Constantine the great, with drawings of the twelve months. April is represented as a man dancing with a _crotalum_ in each hand. This instrument was probably constructed of brass, in order to make a rattling noise. See it represented in Plate III. fig. 3, which is copied from a print in _Lambecii Bill. Cæsar. Vindobon._ tom. iv. p. 291. These months are also given in Montfaucon's antiquities.

[72] See Ben Jonson's _Devil is an ass_, Scene 1.

[73] Penry's _O read over John Bridges_, fo. 48.

[74] Plate III. fig. 5. copied from Schopperi ΠΑΝΟΠΛΙΑ, _omnium illiberalium artium genera continens_, &c. Francof. 1568, 12mo, sign. O. 8.

[75] Figs. 1 and 2, p. 516.

[76] Prologue to _King Henry the Eighth_. Marston's _Malcontent_, Act I. Scene 7, and Act III. Scene 1.

[77] Malone's Shakspeare, vol. i. part ii. p. 301.

[78] Plate II. fig. 4. Plate IV. fig. 1.

[79] Plate IV. fig. 1.

[80] Plate II. fig. 2.

[81] Coryat's _Crudities_, p. 9. edit. 1611, 4to. Brand's _Observ. on popular antiquities_, p. 176.

[82] See the notes on a passage in _King John_. Steevens's _Shakspeare_, viii. p. 79, edit. 1793. "The scribe claims the manor of Noverinte, by providing _sheep-skins and calves skins to wrappe his highness wards_ and idiotts in."--_Gesta Grayorum_, 1688, 4to.

[83] See the quotation from Tarlton's _Newes out of purgatory_ given in a preceding page (509). The portrait of Tarlton in Hardinge's _Biographical mirror_, and a print in the title of Greene's _Tu quoque, or the cittie gallant_, show the costume of the purse and feather. See likewise Plate IV. fig. 2; and the centre fig. in Plate II.

[84] Rabelais, book iii. ch 45.

[85] This picture is very well engraven in Caulfield's _Portraits of remarkable persons_, vol. ii. There is a beautifully illuminated psalter preserved among the royal manuscripts in the British Museum, 2 A xvi, written by John Mallard the chaplain and secretary of Henry the Eighth, with several marginal notes in the king's own hand-writing, some of which are in pencil. Prefixed to psalm 52, "Dixit insipiens," according to a very ancient custom, are the figures of king David and a fool, in this instance evidently the portraits of Henry and his favourite Will Somers. That of the latter person is here copied in Plate IV. fig. 2, but rather enlarged. The countenance bears a strong resemblance to that of the figure in Holbein's picture of Henry the Eighth and his family, already noticed in p. 336.

[86] Archæologia, ix. p. 249.

[87] In Tatham's play of The Scot's _figgaries_, 1652, 4to, the king's fool is described as habited in a long coat with a gold rope or chain about his neck.

[88] See the print of Archy engraved by Cecill and prefixed to his _Jests_, in which, unless Mr. Granger could have been certain with respect to what he has called "a parti-coloured tunic," there is nothing discriminative of the fool's dress. This portrait has been copied in Caulfield's above-cited work.

[89] _The woman captain_, Scene I.

[90] See Mr. Malone's _Historical account of the English Stage_.

[91] Parfait, _Histoire du theatre François_, II. pp. 27, 46, 62.

[92] See Mr. Steevens's note at the end of the second act of _The taming of the shrew_.

[93] Arte of English poesie, 69.

[94] See Mr. Steevens's note in _King Lear_, Act III. Scene 6.

[95] See Mr. Malone's note in _All's well that ends well_, Act I. Scene 3.

DISSERTATION II.

ON THE GESTA ROMANORUM.

Enquiries like the present, however unimportant to the generality of readers, will not fail of being duly appreciated by those who take an interest in tracing the origin and progress of literary genius, which has perhaps been never more successfully, and even laudably, employed, than in the composition of such works as combine amusement with instruction. Of these the simple and engaging apologues of many ancient writers form a considerable portion, and have always been justly and generally esteemed. This mode of conveying instruction became so attractive in the middle ages, that the ecclesiastics themselves were under the necessity of introducing narrations both historical and imaginary into their discourses, in order to acquire that degree of popularity and attention which might otherwise have been wanting, and also for the purpose of enforcing their morality by such examples as should touch the feelings of the hearers, and operate, with respect at least to ruder minds, more efficaciously than precept. The work before us was designed to answer these purposes; and it not only proceeded on this ground in common with others of a similar nature, but has even furnished the materials to some of the best writers, and more especially poets, of ancient and modern times.

It will perhaps be expected that some reason should be assigned why the present essay has been attempted, after the labours of Mr. Warton on the same subject, which some may think has been amply and satisfactorily treated, if not exhausted; and if the judgment and accuracy of that pleasing and elegant writer had been commensurate with his taste and industry, the expectation had been exceedingly well founded. This however is, unfortunately, not the case. He has, in this and many other instances, left much to be done and undone; but we ought to feel very grateful to him for having founded a school that has already produced some accomplished pupils, and will, no doubt, contribute to form many a future one. Thus much seems due to an amiable man and excellent character, who has been most undeservedly insulted for errors of small moment, and censured for opinions of the most innocuous kind. Even his antiquarian dullness and perseverance have been arraigned, as if in a work like the history of English poetry, genius should have occupied the place of industry, and have created those facts which honest men are content to discover; a method not uncommon with some writers who have derived too much of their importance from the indolence and superficiality of their readers, and who are unwilling to submit to those laws of providence which justly impose on man the duty of penetrating to the mine before he be permitted to enjoy the precious metal. Such was not Warton. His taste and research will remain the admiration of future ages, when the flimsy compositions of some of his opponents shall be totally forgotten. He has effected, however imperfectly, more for the illustration of English poetry than any or all of his predecessors, or than has hitherto been, accomplished for the poetry of other nations, by any writer whatever.

Mr. Warton's dissertation would, no doubt, have been rendered more perfect, had he been aware of a fact which had not only escaped his own attention, but even that of Mr. Tyrwhitt. Neither of these gentlemen, in consulting the manuscripts of the _Gesta Romanorum_, had perceived that there were _two_ works so entitled, totally distinct from each other, except as to imitation, and certainly compiled by different persons. Of that treated of by Mr. Warton, it is presumed _no manuscript has been yet described_; of the other several manuscripts remain, _but it has never been printed, except in some translated extracts_. It will be better to postpone for the present any further mention of the latter, and to proceed to submit some additional remarks on the other. And first of its use and design.

A particular mode of instruction from the pulpit has been already hinted at, and will admit of some enlargement. Mr. Warton has mentioned one of the earliest instances of introducing Æsop's fables, as recorded by Vincent of Beauvais in the thirteenth century.[96] Supplies of another kind were furnished to those who might be more scrupulous as to the use of profane examples, not only in that great repertory of pious fictions, _The golden legend_, but in multitudes of similar stories, denominated in France _contes devots_, and composed for the purpose of counteracting the great influence which the witty and licentious stories of the minstrels had obtained, of which they were palpable imitations both in construction and versification. Most of these were founded on miracles supposed to have been operated by the Virgin Mary. The earliest known specimens of them were composed in the twelfth century by Hugues Farsi, a monk of St. John de Vignes at Soissons, who was soon followed by many imitators both in prose and verse.[97] His own work was turned into French verse by Gautier de Coinsi, another monk of Soissons, about 1230. A similar collection is the _Lives of the holy fathers_, chiefly from Saint Jerome, and anonymously composed in French verse by some person whose name deserved to have been recorded on account of the great merit of the work, which would be deemed an ornament to any period, for the excellence of the poetry.

The promptuary of examples for the use of preachers, at the end of Herolt's _Sermones discipuli_, composed in 1418, has been already mentioned by Mr. Warton, who has given a curious and correct account of that work; but he has omitted to notice, that, among a multitude of pious authors cited in it, the name of Ovid appears. This practice of indiscriminate quotation became afterwards very common. It was, indeed, sanctioned by a preceding custom, among religious writers, of _moralizing_ works of all denominations. Thus, to mention only a few, Thomas Walleys, a Welsh Dominican friar, had published his moralizations of Ovid's metamorphoses, in the fourteenth century.[98] The _Bestiarium_, a treatise on animals, is, as well as the _Gesta Romanorum_, perhaps an earlier instance. Afterwards the celebrated, but licentious, _Romance of the rose_ was moralized by Jean Molinet. Even the game of chess was moralized; for the reader who may take up Caxton's translation of Jacobus de Cæsolis, will be grievously disappointed should he expect to find any didactic or even historical information. We are not to wonder, therefore, if on the restoration of letters, a system of morality was extracted from Æsop and other fabulists; and, accordingly, some of the early printed editions of Æsop were published under the title of _Æsopus moralizatus_, and this, no doubt, led the way to the moral applications to his fables which afterwards appeared in other languages.

Among the preachers who interspersed their sermons with narrations of various kinds, a Carthusian monk of the fifteenth century deserves particular mention. With as much quaintness as humility, he styles himself _Guillelmus Hilacensis quondam simplex cordatus pauperculus discalciatus ac contemptibilis denudatus, sapientissimorum rudissimus, electorum infimus, et minorum minimus_. He has left a volume of sermons on the Lord's prayer, with stories in every page.[99] In the British Museum there is a very curious collection of Latin sermons, compiled about the reign of Henry the Sixth, by a person who calls himself a vicar of Magdalen college, Oxford. They abound with stories from Æsop, Cicero, Seneca, Valerius Maximus, Saint Austin, venerable Bede, &c.[100] Stephen Baron, an English Minorite in the reign of Henry the Eighth, has left a similar volume of sermons preached before the university of Cambridge.[101]

Among the most remarkable persons of this description who soon followed, were fathers Menot, Maillard, Barelete, Raulin, Vincent Ferrier, Pierre de Boves, &c., whose discourses are filled with quotations from Virgil, Valerius Maximus, Apuleius, Dante, Petrarch, and the _Gesta Romanorum_. Erasmus, ridiculing the absurdities of some of the theologians, mentions their practice of quoting the _Speculum historiale_ and _Gesta Romanorum_.[102] Schelhorn speaks of a copy of the latter in his possession, dated 1499, in which some former possessor had marked against many of the stories the year in which he had used them in his sermons.[103] Even in the eighteenth century the Italians had not left off this custom. Grosley states, that he heard a buffoon preacher at Rome, who stuffed his discourse with a thousand tales, among which was that of father Philip's geese, from Boccaccio.[104]

There is a remarkable work to which the preachers of the middle ages appear to have been indebted, and which deserves mention here not only on that account, but also from its having hitherto remained in unmerited obscurity. This may be partly owing to its having never been printed. It is a collection of tales and fables that has been ascribed to Odo de Ceriton, Shirton, or Cirington, for all these names are mentioned, a Cistercian monk of the twelfth century. In one manuscript they are called _proverbs_, and given to Hugo de Sancto Victore, of the monastery of Saint Victoire at Paris, and who lived much about the last-named period.[105] There is perhaps no task more difficult than that of ascertaining the real authors of many works of the middle ages, especially where, as in the present instance, there occurs any thing satirical against religious abuses. The evidence with respect to authorship is in favour of the Englishman, because in some of the stories English sentences are found. Nor do the sarcasms against the clergy militate in the least against ecclesiastical manufacture. Numerous instances could be brought to show the satirical spirit of the clergy, frequently towards each other, and generally against the church of Rome.

The work in question is an extraordinary mixture of Æsopian fables with pious and profane histories in great variety. One or two specimens have been already given,[106] but the reader may not regret the trouble of perusing the following in addition. "There is a kind of wren, named after Saint Martin, with very long and slender legs. This bird sitting one day in a tree, in the fullness of his pride suddenly exclaimed; 'It matters not to me though the heavens fall; for with the aid of my strong legs I shall be able to support them.' Presently a leaf fell upon the foolish boaster, who immediately flew away in great terror, exclaiming, 'O Saint Martin, Saint Martin, help your poor bird!'" The moral compares Saint Peter denying Christ to this wren, which it also assimilates to certain pot-valiant soldiers, who boast, in their cups, that each of them can beat three of the stoutest Frenchmen. Again: "Isengrin the wolf, to expiate his sins, became a monk. His brethren endeavoured to teach him his letters, that he might say _Pater noster_; but all that they were able to get from him was, 'lamb, lamb.' They told him to look up to the cross, but could never make him turn his eyes from the sheep. In like manner do the monks cry out for good wine, and fix their eyes on dainty viands and full trenchers; whence the English proverb, _Yf alle that the wolf unto the prest worthe and be sette on to boke salmes to ler, ȝit is ever hys onne eye to the wodeward_."[107] To conclude with one more, "The wolf being dead, the lion assembled the rest of the beasts to celebrate his obsequies. The hare carried the holy water, and the hedge-hogs the wax tapers. The goats tolled the bells; the badger dug the grave; the fox carried the coffin; Berengarius the bear celebrated mass; the ox read the gospels, and the ass the epistles. Mass being finished, and Isengrin duly buried, the beasts partook of a splendid feast, the expense of which was defrayed out of the deceased's property. The parties wished for nothing better than a similar ceremony. So, says the moral, on the death of any rich usurer, the abbots assemble all the _beasts_ of the monastery; for in general, the black and white monks are really brutes, that is, lions in pride; foxes in cunning; hogs in gluttony; goats in luxury; asses in sloth; and hares in cowardice."

Besides the storehouses of this sort of knowledge that have been already described, there were doubtless many others that are now lost; but there is one that ought not to be passed over without some notice. It is the _Summa prædicantium_ of John Bromyard, an English preacher, and a violent opponent of Wicliffe. It is an immense repertory of matter for the use of the clergy, every page containing stories and examples in all possible variety.[108] It is divided into classes of such subjects as were adapted to the pulpit, and must have been a work of immense labour, and the result of much reading. In the article _rapina_ he has a story resembling chap. viii. of the _Gesta Romanorum_, which he probably cites under the title of _Antiqua gesta_.

Although most of these works were undoubtedly composed for the immediate purpose of assisting the preachers, it by no means follows that they were exclusively so, or that other uses might not be made of some of them. Not that they could be accessible to the laity in any great degree, inasmuch as they were wrapped up in a learned language. But the private readings of the monks would not be always of a serious and ascetic nature. They might be disposed occasionally to recreate their minds with subjects of a lighter and more amusing nature; and what could be more innocent or delightful than the stories of the _Gesta Romanorum_? They might even have indulged in this kind of recreation during their continuance in the refectory after meals. For this purpose one of the fraternity, more eminently qualified than the rest, might entertain them with the recital of matters that would admit of some moral application to be made by the reader, or which was already attached to the subject. The word _carissimi_, so frequently to be found in the moralizations, seems as much adapted to this purpose, as to the addressing of an auditory from the pulpit. Perhaps the same idea had occurred to him who chose to apply the term _liber monasticus_ to the _Gesta Romanorum_.[109]

The excellent analytical account that has been given of this work would admit of no other improvement than some augmentation of the sources of the stories, and of their several imitations; but with respect to the author of it, some further inquiry may be necessary. Mr. Warton has attempted to show, with considerable ingenuity as well as plausibility, that the _Gesta Romanorum_ was composed by Peter Bercheur, a native of Poitou, and prior of the convent of Saint Eloy at Paris, where he died in 1362.[110] He has founded this opinion on a passage in the _Philologia sacra_ of Salomon Glassius, who, in his chapter _de allegoriis fabularum_, after censuring those writers who not only employed themselves in allegorizing the scriptures, but affected to discover in profane stories and poetical fictions certain matters that seemed to illustrate the mysteries of the Christian faith, makes the following observation: "Hoc in studio excelluit quidam _Petrus Berchorius_ Pictaviensis, ordinis Divi Benedicti: qui _peculiari_ libro, _Gesta Romanorum_, necnon legendas patrum, aliasque aniles fabulas, allegoricè ac mysticè exposuit." On this single testimony, or rather assertion, which is unaccompanied by any proof or reference to authority, Mr. Warton proceeds to assign _his_ reasons for concluding that Bercheur was the author of the _Gesta_, and they are principally these: 1. A general coincidence between the manner and execution of the works of Bercheur and the _Gesta_. 2. A resemblance in their titles. 3. The introduction of some of the stories of the Gesta into the _Repertorium morale_ of Bercheur.[111] 4. His having allegorized the Metamorphoses of Ovid. And 5. His writings being full of allusions to the Roman history. To these might have been added the quotations common to both the _Gesta_ and the _Repertorium_ from Pliny, Seneca, Solinus, and Gervase of Tilbury, and the time in which Berchorius lived, which certainly corresponds with that of the composition of the _Gesta Romanorum_, as far as can be collected from internal evidence. It may be remarked in this place, that Mr. Tyrwhitt, in supposing it to have been written at the end of the 12th or the beginning of the 13th century, has fixed on too early a date.[112] It could not have been written before 1256, because the chronicle of Albertus, which is cited in one of the chapters, terminates with that year.

It might be supposed that very little could be urged in opposition to the foregoing reasons, nor is it here intended to deny absolutely that Bercheur was the author of the _Gesta_: but certain doubts having arisen on the subject, they shall be submitted to the reader, that he may then be enabled to use his own judgment and discretion in deciding the question. With respect to the similitude between the works of Berchorius and the _Gesta Romanorum_, no one would think of maintaining, on this ground alone, that any two compositions, the one anonymous, were written by the same author. It shows, generally speaking, nothing more than coincidence, or, what is more likely, simple imitation; and it is as probable that the author of one of the works should have imitated the other, as that one person should have written both. Perhaps the other reasons might be disposed of in the same way, but it will be better to state specific objections to them; and here Mr. Warton's own evidence might be turned against himself. He had stated on a former occasion,[113] his having seen a manuscript of the _Gesta in almost Saxon characters_; but it is certain that this manuscript had doubly deceived him, and that his eye had caught one or two of the Saxon letters which continued to be used in writing long after Saxon times.

In the preface to the _Repertorium morale_ Bercheur tells us that he was by birth a Frenchman, a Benedictine monk, and the familiar servant of Cardinal de Pratis, or Des Prez, to whom he was indebted for books and other necessaries towards the completion of his works. Now throughout the ponderous tomes that have been consulted for this purpose, there are no Gallicisms to be traced, nor any other symptom of French authorship. On the other hand, there are strong marks that the _Gesta Romanorum_ was composed by a German. In the moralization to chapter 144, there is, in most of the early editions, a German proverb; and, in chapter 142, several German names of Dogs. Many of the stories are extracted from German authors, as Cesarius, Albert of Stade, and Gervase of Tilbury, who wrote his book _De otiis imperialibus_, in Germany. In this country likewise the earliest editions of the _Gesta_ were printed.

Mr. Warton, anticipating an objection that might be taken from the omission of any mention of the _Gesta_ by the biographers of Bercheur, has remarked, that it might have been among his smaller pieces, or proscribed by graver writers, or even discarded by its author as a juvenile performance, unsuitable to his character and abounding in fantastic and unedifying narration. But this description does not accord with the _general_ use that we know to have been made of it in the pulpit; nor can it come under the denomination of a work that is not altogether grave, serious, and moral, nor likely to have been the effusion of a glowing or youthful mind. Besides, the biographers of Bercheur are not alone silent as to the _Gesta_; the editors of his printed works were entirely unacquainted with it as his composition, and they were more likely to have been better informed on the subject than Glassius, whose opinion, like Mr. Warton's, seems to have been mere inference, and unsupported by any evidence. But what is more to the point, Bercheur has himself, in the prologue to his _Repertorium_, and in the preface to a French translation of Livy, given a very particular account of his works, among which his moralizations of the _Fabulæ poetarum_, never printed, are mentioned; yet this is certainly not the _Gesta Romanorum_, any more than the _Chronicon_ mentioned by Mr. Warton.[114] Again; most of the known works of Bercheur are still existing in manuscript, but not a single manuscript that can be pronounced to be the _Gesta Romanorum in question_ has occurred after the most diligent research. Such indeed might be supplied from the libraries in Germany, and possibly throw new light on this difficult and mysterious inquiry. Some stress has been laid on the circumstance of four of the stories in the _Gesta_ being related in the _Repertorium morale_,[115] but they are not told in the same words, and the moralizations are entirely different. This has very much the appearance of different authorship. The title of _Reductorium_ to some of the editions of the _Gesta_, together with many other matters, might have been borrowed from the writings of Bercheur by some German Monk, whose name has been irretrievably consigned to oblivion. It is scarcely worth while to mention the blunder that Foppens has committed in ascribing the composition instead of the printing of the _Gesta_, to Gerard De Leeu, of Gouda in Holland.[116]

It remains to offer some account of the various forms in which this once popular and celebrated work has appeared; and the rather, because what has been said on this subject is widely scattered, unconnected, and frequently erroneous.

MANUSCRIPTS.--It is a fact as remarkable as the obscurity which exists concerning the author of the _Gesta_, that no manuscript of this work, that can with certainty be pronounced as such, has been hitherto described. If the vast stores of manuscripts that are contained in the monastic and other libraries of Germany, Switzerland, Italy, and Spain, were examined, there is scarcely a doubt that some original of a work so often printed would be discovered. Father Montfaucon has indeed mentioned a manuscript _Gesta Romanorum_ in the Vatican;[117] but it may be either a transcript from the printed copy, or a different work under the same title, that will presently be noticed.

PRINTED EDITIONS.--The titles of these are different, and are as follows:

No. 1. "Incipiunt hystorie collecte ex gestis romanorum et
quibusdam aliis libris cum applicationibus eorundem."

The colophon. "Et sic est finis."

No. 2. "Incipiunt historie notabiles atque magis principales
collecte ex gestis romanorum et quibusdam aliis notabilibus
gestis cum moralizationibus eorundem."

The colophon. "Et sic est finis."

No. 3. "Ex gestis romanorum hystorie notabiles de viciis
virtutibusque tractantes cum applicacionibus moralisatis et
misticis incipiunt feliciter."

The colophon. "Gesta romanorum cum quibus aliis historiis eisdem
annexis ad moralitates dilucide reducta hic finem habent. Que
diligenter correctis aliorum viciis impressit Johannes de
Westphalia &c."

No. 4. "Recollectorium ex gestis romanorum cum pluribus applicatis
historiis."

No. 5. "Ex gestis romanorum hystorie notabiles collecte de viciis
virtutibusque tractantes cum applicacionibus moralisatis et
mysticis incipiunt _fideliter_." (sometimes _feliciter_.)

The colophon. "Ex gestis Romanorum cum pluribus applicatis
hystoriis de virtutibus et viciis mystice ad intellectum
transumptis recollectorii finis."

It is impossible to speak with certainty as to the _first edition_, on account of the omission of dates, places, and printers' names in some of the early copies. There are two editions so circumstanced, with the titles No. 1 and 2, in folio, and containing 152 chapters only. There is a third printed without date by Nicolas Ketelaer and Gerard de Leempt at Utrecht, in folio, with 152 chapters, to which Lambinet has inaccurately assigned the date of 1473.[118] One of these three is probably the first edition. They are all excessively rare, and a copy containing 152 chapters only would not easily be found in this country.

Of the editions without date, place, or printer, that contain 181 chapters, there are three, and perhaps more. One of these, in folio, is in the British Museum, but imperfect. It was certainly printed with the types used by Ulric Zell, about 1475. Two others, the one in folio, the other in quarto, were printed without date at Louvain, by John of Westphalia. He is said to have printed one edition with the date 1473; but this is probably a mistake copied from one book into another, as Lambinet assures us that the copy in the royal library at Paris has the above date, but in _manuscript only_.[119] The following editions with dates can be spoken of with more confidence.

1. 1480, no place, nor printer. In folio.
2. 1480, at Gouda, by Gerard Leeu. In folio.
3. 1481, at Hasselt, no printer. In folio.
4. 1482, no place, nor printer. In quarto. This is doubtful, being
taken from a bookseller's catalogue.
5. 1488, no place, nor printer. In folio.
6. 1489, no place, nor printer. In folio.
7. 1489, at Strasburg, no printer. In folio.
8. 1490, at Gouda, by Gerard Leeu. In folio.
9. 1493, no place, nor printer. In folio.
10. 1494, no place, nor printer. In quarto.
11. 1494, at Louvain, no printer....
12. 1497, no place, nor printer. In quarto.
13. 1497, at Strasburg, by John Knoblouch. In quarto.
14. 1498, no place, nor printer. In folio.
15. 1499, no place, nor printer. In folio.
16. 1499, at Paris, no printer. In quarto.
17. 1506, at Paris, by Jean Petit. In 12mo.
18. 1508, at Hagenau, by Henry Gran. In folio.
19. 1509, at Paris, by Francois Regnault. In 12mo.
20. 1512, at Venice, no printer. In 12mo.
21. 1515, at Paris, by Jean Petit. In 12mo.
22. 1516, at Venice, by George de Rusconibus. In 8vo.
23. 1517, at Paris, no printer. In 12mo.
24. 1517, at Hagenau, by Henry Gran. In folio.
25. 1520, at Venice, by A. de Bindonis. In 8vo.
26. 1521, at Paris, by Jean Petit. In 12mo.
27. 1521, at Rouen....
28. 1555, at Lyons, no printer. In 12mo.

GERMAN TRANSLATION.--Of this only one edition has occurred, printed at Augsburg, by John Schopser, 1489, in folio.

DUTCH TRANSLATION.--Two editions are mentioned, the one printed at Gouda, by Gerard Leeu, 1481, and the other at Zwollis, by Peter Van Os, 1484; both in folio.

FRENCH TRANSLATION.--It does not appear who was the author of the translation into this language, which is entitled _Le violier[120] des hystoires Rommaines: moralisez sur les nobles gestes faitz vertueulx et anciennes chroniques de toutes nations de gens, fort recreatif et moral_. It contains only one hundred and forty-nine stories. About the year 1516, Pierre Gringore, herald to the duke of Lorraine, and the author of several moralities and other works, published a book called _Les fantasies de mere sote_, which is only a translation in prose, intermixed with verse, of some twenty or thirty stories in the _Gesta Romanorum_, with their moralizations. He has suppressed all mention of his original, and insinuated in the privilege that he was himself the inventor. This work seems to have preceded the anonymous translation above mentioned, of which it is possible that Gringore might have likewise been the author. There is another French _Gestes Romaines_ by Gaguin the historian, which has been mistaken for a translation of the _Gesta_; but it is nothing more than an extract from the history of the Roman republic. The editions of the _Violier_ are, 1. without date, printed at Paris, by Philip Le Noir, in quarto; 2. 1521, printed at Paris, by Jean de la Garde, in folio; and 3. 1529, printed also at Paris, for Denis Janot, in quarto.

ENGLISH TRANSLATION.--In 1703 was published a little volume entitled _Gesta Romanorum_: or _Forty-five histories originally (as 't is said) collected from the Roman records, with applications or morals for the suppressing vice, and encouraging virtue and the love of God. Vol. I. newly and with care translated from the Latin edition, printed, A.D. M.D.XIV._ This seems to be the first English translation, and the translator B. P. has remarked in his preface that most of the matters contained in his book had, as he understood, appeared already in the English tongue; and therefore he desires the reader, if he should discover a great difference in names, sense, and expression, to compare each work with the Latin copy, by which comparison he conceives it will be found that _his_ translation is faithful. He was not aware that the preceding translation to which he alludes had been made from a different work. The stories are here extracted without attention to the original arrangement, but with a reference in each to the Latin copy. The editor, whoever he was, designed an extension of his labours to other volumes. Next followed an edition of the same work, without date, 18mo, but printed about 1720. It wants the references to the Latin copy, and the former preface is abridged. It contains fourteen additional stories that do not belong to the _original Gesta_. Of this another edition, with the language much altered, was printed in 1722, 18mo, with the same number of stories. The editor signs himself A. B., perhaps Bettesworth the printer.

It is now time to proceed to the description of _another Gesta Romanorum_, and which has indeed been the principal cause of the present dissertation. This work was undoubtedly composed in England in imitation of the other; and therefore it will be necessary for the future to distinguish the two works by the respective appellations of the _original_ and the _English Gesta_.

It is remarkable that neither Mr. Tyrwhitt nor Mr. Warton, both of whom had frequent occasion to inspect the work in question, and to notice certain variations between what they have too loosely termed the _printed copies_ and the _manuscripts_, should not have perceived that the latter were in reality a different performance. Mr. Tyrwhitt indeed, for want of this perception, has made use of certain English features in the manuscripts as an argument to prove that the _original Gesta_ was composed in England.[121]

From the great celebrity of the _original Gesta_, it could not fail of being known to the English clergy, and accordingly we find that it was used by them in the pulpit as in other countries. If the numerous volumes of the sermons of the middle ages that still remain in our college and cathedral libraries were examined, a task by no means here recommended, it would, no doubt, be found, that they had been indebted to it among other similar authorities for many of their _examples_; and to show that this is not a mere conjecture, there is a collection of ancient sermons in the British Museum that affords a solitary instance of the introduction of a story from the _original Gesta_.[122] It is the thirty-ninth story, of two brothers at enmity with each other. Though anonymous, there is no doubt that these sermons were composed by some Englishman, who has cited a multitude of authors, and among other matters the well-known story of the Jew who refused to be delivered from a jakes into which he had fallen on the sabbath day.

It is natural to suppose that a work like the _original Gesta_ would stimulate some person to the compilation of one that should emulate if not altogether supersede it; and accordingly this design was accomplished at a very early period by some Englishman, in all probability a monk. There is a considerable difficulty even in forming a conjecture as to the precise time in which this was done. One of the earliest manuscripts appears to have been written about the reign of Richard the Second, nor is there any internal evidence in this work that places its composition below that period. That its purpose was similar to that of the other is manifest from its being quoted no less than five times in a collection of sermons by a preacher at Magdalen college already mentioned, who has likewise introduced the moralizations generally in the very words of his original. If additional proofs were wanting of the English origin of the work before us, it might be stated, 1. That no manuscript of it appears to exist in any of the catalogues of continental libraries; whereas there are many in those of this country.[123] 2. That in one of the chapters there are some English verses,[124] and in another some English proper names.[125] 3. That it has a few English terms and modes of speech, as _parliament_, _livery of seizin_, &c.

The construction resembles that of the _original Gesta_, from which a great many stories have been retained; but these are always newly written, and sometimes materially altered. The moralizations are uniformly different, and the proper names generally changed. The best manuscripts contain one hundred and two stories, out of which there are upwards of forty that are not in the original work, none of which have been ever printed in the _Latin_ of this _Gesta_, and but few of them in an English translation. The sources from which many of them were taken cannot easily be traced, whilst others are extracted from works that will hereafter be mentioned.

In the following analysis of the additional stories to this _Gesta_, the plan of Mr. Warton has been adopted. Though it should fail in exciting much pleasurable sensation in the reader, it may at least serve to throw a ray or two of light on the manners of the middle ages. The arrangement of the chapters is from MS. Harl. 2270, but the copy used is one of equal value in the author's possession. The variety in these is very inconsiderable.

CHAP. I.--The emperor Anselmus bore a silver shield with five red roses. He had three sons equally beloved by him. His continual wars with the king of Egypt had reduced him so low, that of all his temporal goods only a single tree remained. Being mortally wounded in one of his battles, he called his sons before him, and bequeathed to the eldest all that was under the earth and above the earth belonging to the tree; to the second, all that was great and small in it; and to the youngest, all that was wet and dry in it. On the king's death a dispute arose between his sons concerning the possession of the tree, which by mutual consent was referred for decision to the king of Reason. He caused all the young men to be bled, and ordered that a bone, taken from the breast of their dead father, should be dipped in the blood and afterwards washed. The blood of the two elder sons was easily discharged, but that of the youngest remained. The king declared that he was of the true blood and nature of the bone, and the others bastards; to him therefore the tree was adjudged.

CHAP. II.--The emperor Diocletian, desirous to know what bird had the greatest affection for its young, goes into a wood and returns to his palace with an ostrich's nest, which he places under a glass vessel. The dam follows him, and finding it impossible to get at her offspring, proceeds to a desert, where she remains thirty-four days, and then comes home with a worm called Thurnar; this she kills on the vessel, which being broken by the blood of the animal, her young ones are set at liberty. At this conduct of the bird Diocletian expresses much pleasure.

CHAP. IV.--The emperor Gauterus, reflecting on the vanities of the world, resolves to find a situation where there is nothing but happiness. He leaves his kingdom, and meets a beautiful woman who had lost her husband. She offers him marriage, and abundance of wealth; but on inspecting the nuptial chamber, the emperor is startled and disgusted at the appearance of several serpents and a lion that threaten him with destruction. The lady informs him that he may possibly survive a night or two, but that the animals will afterwards devour him, as they had her husband. The emperor declines the honour of this marriage, and proceeds to another country, where the nobles are desirous to elect him king in the room of their deceased monarch; but finding a bedchamber like the former, he instantly departs, and arrives at a third place, where he is offered the kingdom on similar terms. At length he meets an old man, sitting near a ladder with three steps raised against a wall. He is interrogated as to his wishes, and answers that he sought three things, viz. joy without sorrow, abundance without want, and light without darkness. He is desired to ascend the ladder, when he finds what he had wished for, and continues on the spot during the rest of his life. This is, in substance, the 101st story in the other _Gesta_, but here related with much variety.

CHAP. XVIII.--A knight falls in love with Aglae, the daughter of the emperor Polentius, and being obliged to be absent in the Holy Land for seven years, the lady agrees not to marry till his return. In the mean time the emperor promises his daughter to the king of Hungary, who being deeply in love with her, consents, at her request, to postpone the marriage. On the day before the appointed time, the king of Hungary, riding to the emperor's court in great pomp to celebrate his nuptials, is met by the knight, with whom he enters into conversation, and a violent rain coming on, the king's fine clothes are presently spoiled. The knight remarks that he should have brought his house with him. The king is struck with the singularity of the admonition. They arrive at a deep water, and the king plunging in with his horse, is nearly drowned. The knight tells him that he should have brought his bridge with him. Shortly after the king inquires what time of day it is; his companion replies that it is time to eat, and offers a cake, which is accepted. He then observes to the king that he had acted unwisely in omitting to bring his father and mother with him. As they approach the emperor's palace, the knight requests leave of the king to take another road, meaning to get to the court by a nearer way that was known to him, and carry off the lady before the king should arrive. On being asked what road he intended to take, he declares he will speak the truth. He says, that on that day seven years he had spread a net in a certain place to which he was then going; that if he should find it broken he shall leave it, but if whole, that he shall take it with him. The king arrives at the palace, and is kindly entertained. The emperor interrogates him concerning the particulars of his journey, and on hearing the strange observations that the knight had made, commends him as a wise man, and informs the king that by the house he had meant nothing more than a cloak; that the bridge he talked of, signified the attendants who should have been sent before to ascertain the depth of the water; and that by the king's father and mother, he intimated the bread and wine that he should have brought with him. But when the emperor came to reflect on the meaning of the net which had been spread seven years since, he perceived that his daughter was in danger, and on commanding her chamber to be examined, found his suspicions verified. The king being deceived by the knight and the damsel, returned in disgrace to his own country.

CHAP. XXI.--This is the story of king Lear under the name of Theodosius, emperor of Rome. It has been already given from the old English translation in manuscript. See page 420.

CHAP. XXIV.--Antonius made a law at Rome, that whenever a fire happened in the city a sentinel should cry out to the people to ring all the bells, and secure the gates. A certain warrior was desirous of becoming master of the city, and, apprised of this law, consulted with his companions how it should be evaded. One advised that they should enter the city peaceably, and proclaim a general feast, at which a certain liquor should be used that would set all the guests asleep. The stratagem is adopted, the city fired, the inhabitants carried off, and not one person left to comply with the emperor's edict.

CHAP. XXV.--A certain knight is unjustly accused before an emperor, who, when he finds that the accusation cannot be maintained, endeavours to perplex him with intricate questions, which he is obliged to answer on pain of death. Among these are, the distance of a sigh from the heart? the number of flaggons of salt water in the sea? the depth of it? which are the most honourable and poorest professions? &c. These are all answered satisfactorily, and the knight dismissed with commendation.