the unseen world and other essays-第38章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


hostility　of　Mahometanism　to　knowledge；　and　we　have　even　heard　an　edifying　sermon　preached　about　it。　On　seeing　the　story　put　to　such　uses；　one　feels　sometimes　like　using　the　ad　hominem　argument；　and　quoting　the　wholesale　destruction　of　pagan　libraries　under　Valens；　the　burning　of　books　by　the　Latin　stormers　of　Constantinople；　the　alleged　annihilation　of　100；000　volumes　by　Genoese　crusaders　at　Tripoli；　the　book…burning　exploits　of　Torquemada；　the　bonfire　of　80；000　valuable　Arabic　manuscripts；　lighted　up　in　the　square　of　Granada　by　order　of　Cardinal　Ximenes；　and　the　irreparable　cremation　of　Aztec　writings　by　the　first　Christian　bishops　of　Mexico。　These　examples；　with　perhaps　others　which　do　not　now　occur　to　us；　might　be　applied　in　just　though　ungentle　retort　by　Mahometan　doctors。　Yet　the　most　direct　rejoinder　would　probably　not　occur　to　them：　the　Alexandrian　Library　was　NOT　destroyed　by　the　orders　of　Omar；　and　the　whole　story　is　a　figment！

The　very　pithiness　of　it；　so　characteristic　of　the　excellent　but　bigoted　Omar；　is　enough　to　cast　suspicion　upon　it。　De　Quincey　tells　us　that　〃if　a　saying　has　a　proverbial　fame；　the　probability　is　that　it　was　never　said。〃　How　many　amusing　stories　stand　a　chance　of　going　down　to　posterity　as　the　inventions　of　President　Lincoln；　of　which；　nevertheless；　he　is　doubtless　wholly　innocent！　How　characteristic　was　Caesar's　reply　to　the　frightened　pilot！　Yet　in　all　probability　Caesar　never　made　it。

Now　for　the　evidence。　Alexandria　was　captured　by　Armrou　in　640。　The　story　of　the　burning　of　the　library　occurs　for　the　first　time　in　the　works　of　Abulpharagius；　who　flourished　in　1264。　Six　hundred　years　had　elapsed。　It　is　as　if　a　story　about　the　crusades　of　Louis　IX。　were　to　be　found　for　the　first　time　in　the　writings　of　Mr。　Bancroft。　The　Byzantine　historians　were　furiously　angry　with　the　Saracens；　why　did　they；　one　and　all；　neglect　to　mention　such　an　outrageous　piece　of　vandalism？　Their　silence　must　be　considered　quite　conclusive。　Moreover　we　know　〃that　the　caliphs　had　forbidden　under　severe　penalties　the　destruction〃　of　Jewish　and　Christian　books；　a　circumstance　wholly　inconsistent　with　this　famous　story。　And　finally；　what　a　mediaeval　recklessness　of　dates　is　shown　in　lugging　into　the　story　John　the　Grammarian；　who　was　dead　and　in　his　grave　when　Alexandria　was　taken　by　Amrou！

But　the　chief　item　of　proof　remains　to　be　mentioned。　The　Saracens　did　not　burn　the　library；　because　there　was　no　library　there　for　them　to　burn！　It　had　been　destroyed　just　two　hundred　and　fifty　years　before　by　a　rabble　of　monks；　incited　by　the　patriarch　Theophilus；　who　saw　in　such　a　vast　collection　of　pagan　literature　a　perpetual　insult　and　menace　to　religion。　In　the　year　390　this　turbulent　bigot　sacked　the　temple　of　Serapis；　where　the　books　were　kept；　and　drove　out　the　philosophers　who　lodged　there。　Of　this　violent　deed　we　have　contemporary　evidence；　for　Orosius　tells　us　that　less　than　fifteen　years　afterwards；　while　passing　through　Alexandria；　he　saw　the　empty　shelves。　This　fact　disposes　of　the　story。

Passing　from　Egypt　to　France；　and　from　the　seventh　century　to　the　fifteenth；　we　meet　with　a　much　more　difficult　problem。　That　Jeanne　d'Arc　was　burnt　at　the　stake；　at　Rouen；　on　the　30th　of　May；　1431；　and　her　bones　and　ashes　thrown　into　the　Seine；　is　generally　supposed　to　be　as　indisputable　as　any　event　in　modern　history。　Such　is；　however；　hardly　the　case。　Plausible　evidence　has　been　brought　to　prove　that　Jeanne　d'Arc　was　never　burnt　at　the　stake；　but　lived　to　a　ripe　age；　and　was　even　happily　married　to　a　nobleman　of　high　rank　and　reputation。　We　shall　abridge　Mr。　Delepierre's　statement　of　this　curious　case。

In　the　archives　of　Metz；　Father　Vignier　discovered　the　following　remarkable　entry：　〃In　the　year　1436；　Messire　Phlin　Marcou　was　Sheriff　of　Metz；　and　on　the　20th　day　of　May　of　the　aforesaid　year　came　the　maid　Jeanne；　who　had　been　in　France；　to　La　Grange　of　Ormes；　near　St。　Prive；　and　was　taken　there　to　confer　with　any　one　of　the　sieurs　of　Metz；　and　she　called　herself　Claude；　and　on　the　same　day　there　came　to　see　her　there　her　two　brothers；　one　of　whom　was　a　knight；　and　was　called　Messire　Pierre；　and　the　other　'petit　Jehan；'　a　squire；　and　they　thought　that　she　had　been　burnt；　but　as　soon　as　they　saw　her　they　recognized　her　and　she　them。　And　on　Monday；　the　21st　day　of　the　said　month；　they　took　their　sister　with　them　to　Boquelon；　and　the　sieur　Nicole；　being　a　knight；　gave　her　a　stout　stallion　of　the　value　of　thirty　francs；　and　a　pair　of　saddle…cloths；　the　sieur　Aubert　Boulle；　a　riding…hood；　the　sieur　Nicole　Groguet；　a　sword；　and　the　said　maiden　mounted　the　said　horse　nimbly；　and　said　several　things　to　the　sieur　Nicole　by　which　he　well　understood　that　it　was　she　who　had　been　in　France；　and　she　was　recognized　by　many　tokens　to　be　the　maid　Jeanne　of　France　who　escorted　King　Charles　to　Rheims；　and　several　declared　that　she　had　been　burnt　in　Normandy；　and　she　spoke　mostly　in　parables。　She　afterwards　returned　to　the　town　of　Marnelle　for　the　feast　of　Pentecost；　and　remained　there　about　three　weeks；　and　then　set　off　to　go　to　Notre　Dame　d'Alliance。　And　when　she　wished　to　leave；　several　of　Metz　went　to　see　her　at　the　said　Marnelle　and　gave　her　several　jewels；　and　they　knew　well　that　she　was　the　maid　Jeanne　of　France；　and　she　then　went　to　Erlon；　in　the　Duchy　of　Luxembourg；　where　she　was　thronged；。。。。　and　there　was　solemnized　the　marriage　of　Monsieur　de　Hermoise；　knight；　and　the　said　maid　Jeanne；　and　afterwards　the　said　sieur　Hermoise；　with　his　wife；　the　Maid；　came　to　live　at　Metz；　in　the　house　the　said　sieur　had；　opposite　St。　Seglenne；　and　remained　there　until　it　pleased　them　to　depart。〃

This　is　surprising　enough；　but　more　remains　behind。　Dining　shortly　afterwards　with　M。　des　Armoises；　member　of　one　of　the　oldest　families　in　Lorraine；　Father　Vignier　was　invited　to　look　over　the　family　archives；　that　he　might　satisfy　his　curiosity　regarding　certain　ancestors　of　his　host。　And　on　looking　over　the　family　register；　what　was　his　astonishment　at　finding　a　contract　of　marriage　between　Robert　des　Armoises；　Knight；　and　Jeanne　d'Arcy；　the　so…called　Maid　of　Orleans！

In　1740；　some　time　after　these　occurrences；　there　was　found；　in　the　town　hall　of　Orleans；　a　bill　of　one　Jacques　l'Argentier；　of　the　year　1436；　in　which　mention　is　made　of　a　small　sum　paid　for　refreshments　furnished　to　a　messenger　who　had　brought　letters　from　the　Maid　of　Orleans；　and　of　twelve　livres　given　to　Jean　du　Lis；　brother　of　Jeanne　d'Arc；　to　help　him　pay　the　expenses　of　his　journey　back　to　his　sister。　Then　come　two　charges　which　we　shall　translate　literally。　〃To　the　sieur　de　Lis；　18th　October；　1436；　for　a　journey　which　he　made　through　the　said　city　while　on　his　way　to　the　Maid；　who　was　then　at　Erlon　in　Luxembourg；　and　for　carrying　letters　from　Jeanne　the　Maid　to　the　King　at　Loicher；　where　he　was　then　staying；　six　livres。〃　And　again：　〃To　Renard　Brune；　25th　July；　1435；　at　evening；　for　paying　the　hire　of　a　messenger　who　was　carrying　letters　from　Jeanne　the　Maid；　and　was　on　his　way　to　William　Beliers；　bailiff　of　Troyes；　two　livres。〃

As　no　doubt　has　been　thrown　upon　the　genuineness　of　these　documents；　it　must　be　considered　established　that　in　1436；　five　years　after　the　public　execution　at　Rouen；　a　young　woman；　believed　to　be　the　real　Jeanne　d'Arc；　was　alive　in　Lorraine　and　was　married　to　a　M。　Hermoises　or　Armoises。　She　may；　of　course；　have　been　an　impostor；　but　in　this　case　it　is　difficult　to　believe　that　her　brothers；　Jean　and　Pierre；　and　the　people　of　Lorraine；　where　she　was　well　known；　would　not　have　detected　the　imposture　at　once。　And　that　Jean　du　Lis；　during　a　familiar　intercourse　of　at　least　several　months；　as　indicated　in　the　above　extracts；　should　have　continued　to　mistake　a　stranger　for　his　own　sister；　with　whom　he　had　lived　from　childhood；　seems　a　very　absurd　supposition。　Nor　is　it　likely　that　an　impostor　would　have　exposed　herself　to　such　a　formidable　test。　If　it　had　been　a　bold　charlatan　who；　taking　advantage　of　the　quite　general　belief；　to　which　we　have　ample　testimony；　that　there　was　something　more　in　the　execution　at　Rouen　than　was　allowed　to　come　to　the　surface；　had　resolved　to　usurp　for　herself　the　honours　due　to　the　woman　who　had　saved　France；　she　would　hardly　have　go