Introduction
SitesofOblivion
Myintentionwasnottowritethehistoryofthatlanguage,butratherdrawupthe archaeologyofthatsilence.
MichelFoucault, HistoryofMadness¹
But, firstofall,isthereahistoryofsilence?Further,isnotanarchaeology,evenof silence,alogic,thatis,anorganizedlanguage,aproject,anorder,asentence,a syntax,awork?
JacquesDerrida, ‘CogitoandtheHistoryofMadness’²
FascinationwiththeEmeraldIsle aname firstbestowedonIrelandbytheUnited IrishpoetWilliamDrennan hasbeenasourceofendlessinspiration,bothforitsown peopleandforoutsiders.³Inthe1830s,GustavedeBeaumont lifelongcompanion andalteregoofAlexisdeTocqueville foundreasontotourtheislandontwo occasionsandtoinspectcloselyitssocial,political,andreligiousfeatures.Heconcluded that ‘Irelandisalittlecountrywhichraisesthegreatestquestionsofpolitics,moralsand humanity’ . ⁴ Irishwritersofallsorts novelists,poets,andplaywrights haverisento thechallengeand,inaskingdaringquestions,havereachedforthestars.Thequestions posedbyhistoriansofIreland,however,havebeenconstrainedbyconcernsthat irresponsibleexplorationsofthepastmayhaveharmfulramifications,inparticular whenitcomestotheprovinceofUlster perceivedbysomeas ‘TheBlackNorth’ . ⁵
¹MichelFoucault, HistoryofMadness,translatedbyJonathanMurphyandJeanKhalfa(London andNewYork:Routledge,2006),p.xxviii;thequotationistakenfromFoucault’soriginalprefaceto FolieetDéraison:HistoiredelaFolieàl’âgeClassique (Paris:Plon,1961),whichwasremovedfrom subsequentFrencheditions.
²JacquesDerrida, WritingandDifference,translatedbyAlanBass(London:Routledge,2001), p.41;originallypublishedasJacquesDerrida, ‘Cogitoethistoiredelafolie’,in L’écritureetladifférence (Paris:Seuil,1967),pp.51–97.
³ ‘TheEmeraldIsle’ firstappearedinthepoem ‘Erin’,describedas ‘apartysong,writtenwithout therancourofparty,intheyear1795’;WilliamDrennan, FugitivePieces,inVerseandProse (Belfast: printedbyF.D.Finlay,1815),pp.1–4.OriginallypublishedintheUnitedIrishnewspaperthe Press in1797,itfeaturedastheopeningsongfora1798editionoftheUnitedIrishsongbook ‘Paddy’ s Resource’ ; TheIrishHarp(Attun’dtoFreedom):ACollectionofPatrioticSongs;SelectedforPaddy’ s Amusement (Dublin:s.n.,1798),pp.1–3.
⁴‘L’Irlandeestunepetitecontréesurlaquellesedébattentlesplusgrandesquestionsdelapolitique, delamoraleetdel’humanité’;GustavedeBeaumont, L’Irlandesociale,politiqueetréligieuse,3rdedn (Paris:LibrairiedeCharlesGosselin,1839),vol.1,p.ii.
⁵‘TheBlackNorth’ wasnotedinprintintheearlynineteenthcenturyandbythe1830sand1840s wasinwideuseinnewspapersandmagazines.ForanearlyexampleseeEdwardWakefield, AnAccount
Theshirkingawayfromponderingthemoretrickyconundrumsofmemoryisatelling indicator.AlthoughIrishculturehasgeneratedadazzlingpanoplyofcomplexmnemonicpractices,whichcanbefoundamongotherplacesinIreland’srichfolklore traditions,foralongtimeIrishdisciplesofCleowerehesitanttoengagecreativelywith themysteriesofMnemosyneandrarelyventuredbeyondconventionalconceptionsof howthepastcanbestudied.
OntheyearofhisretirementfromtheErasmusSmith’schairofmodernhistoryat TrinityCollegeDublin,theBelfast-bornhistorianTheodoreWilliam(‘Theo’)Moody deliveredinMay1977apresidentialaddresstotheDublinUniversityHistorySociety, whichopenedwithagrandiloquentstatement: ‘Thepastisdead.Nothing,forgoodor ill,canchangeit;nothingcanreviveit.’ Moodyqualifiedthistruismbyaddingthat ‘thereisasenseinwhichthepastliveson:inworksofhumanhandsandminds,in beliefs,institutions,andvalues,andinusall,whoareitslivingextension.Itlivesonin us,bothforgoodandill,shapingourlivesandhelpingtodetermineouraction, whetherornotweknowhowourpresentisrelatedtoourpast.’ Hearguedthat ‘justas individualscannotexistascompletepersonswithoutknowledgeoftheirpast,so humansocietiesmusthavetheirself-knowledgeiftheyaretopreservetheircorporate identityandtheirdistinctivepatternsofliving’.Althoughhewasconvincedthatit wasthedutyofhistorians ‘tosupplythisknowledge’,Moodyconcededthat ‘nations derivetheirconsciousnessoftheirpastnotonly andnotmainly fromhistorians. Theyalsoderiveitfrompopulartraditions,transmittedorally,inwriting,andthrough institutions’
Moody’slecturewasdeliveredagainstthebackdropofabloodyconflictragingin NorthernIreland knownlocallyas ‘theTroubles’.Thiswasatimewhenhistorians becameparticularlyself-consciousaboutappropriationsofhistorythatcouldbeusedto justifypoliticalviolence.Accordingly,Moodydrewacleardistinctionbetweenpopular ‘receivedviews’,whichhelabelled ‘mythology’,andthemoredispassionate ‘knowledge thatthehistorianseekstoextractbytheapplicationofscientificmethodstohis evidence’,whichinhiseyeswashistoryproper.Thetwoweredeemedtobeinevitably atoddswitheachother: ‘historyisamatteroffacingthefactsoftheIrishpast,however painfulsomeofthemmaybe;mythologyisawayofrefusingtofacethehistoricalfacts.’ Historians,heconcluded,mustbecommittedto ‘demythologising’,evenif ‘theeffect onthepublicmindappearstobedisappointinglyslow’ ⁶
Moodydidnotbothertopreciselydefinewhathemeantbymyths,butexplained thatthey ‘combineelementsoffactandof fiction;theyarepartofthedeadpastthat historiansstudy,aswellasbeingpartofthelivingpresentinwhichweall,historians included,areinvolved’.LessinterestedintheancientandmedievallegendsofCeltic mythologythanincurrentpopularbeliefsaboutthepast,hetouchedonasubjectthat wouldpreoccupyEnglishhistorianssomeyearslater,asevidentinthecollectionsof essays TheMythsWeLiveBy (1990),editedbyRaphaelSamuelandPaulThompson, ofIreland,StatisticalandPolitical,vol.2(London:printedforLongman,Hurst,Rees,Orme,and Brown,1812),p.737.
⁶ T.W.Moody, ‘IrishHistoryandIrishMythology’ , Hermathena,124(1978),pp.7–24;reproducedin InterpretingIrishHistory:TheDebateonHistoricalRevisionism,1938–1994,editedbyCiaran Brady(Blackrock,Co.Dublin:IrishAcademicPress,1994),pp.71–86.
and MythsoftheEnglish,editedbyRoyPorterin(1992).⁷ Moody’sinsistenceonan oppositionbetweenhistoryandmythologymirrored,albeitwithoutthecontinental suave,thedistinctionbetweenhistoryandmemoryespousedbytheFrenchhistorian PierreNora.Whereasagenerationofso-called ‘revisionist’ Irishhistorians,mentored byMoodyandhisequallyinfluentialpeerRobert(‘Robin’)DudleyEdwards,chairof modernIrishhistoryatUniversityCollegeDublin,obstinatelydeniedthehistorical valueofmythsandshiedawayfrommemory,Noraassembled125leadinghistorians ofFrancetocollaborateonaninnovativeinterrogationoftheinterfaceofmemory andhistory.Theproduceoftheirlabour,themulti-volume LesLieuxdemémoire (1984–1992),signalledtheadventofaworldwide ‘memoryboom’,whichwould reshapehistoriography.⁸
Insubsequentyears,similarcollaborativestudiesofnationalmemorywereundertakeninall fiveoftheotherfoundingmemberstatesoftheEuropeancommunity,as theconceptof Lieuxdemémoire wasadaptedtoItaly(Luoghidellamemoria,editedby MarioIsnenghi),Germany(Erinnerungsorte,editedbyHagenSchulzeandÉtienne François),theNetherlands(Lieuxdemémoireetidentitésnationales,editedbyPimden BoerandWillemFrijhoff,and Plaatsenvanherinnering,editedbyH.L.Wesseling etal.),Belgium(Belgie,eenparcoursvanherinnering,editedbyJohanTollebeeketal.), andLuxemburg(LieuxdemémoireauLuxembourg,editedbyKmecetal.).Theconcept wasalsotriedoutonaprovincialscaleinvariousareasofFrance,atatransnational regionallevelinCentralEuropeandevenasanall-Europeanproject.⁹ Itwouldtakea whilebeforehistoriansofIrelandcaughtupwiththistrend.Thepublicationin2001of HistoryandMemoryinModernIreland,editedbyIanMcBride,heraldedthebelated arrivalofmemorystudiestotheforefrontofIrishhistory.¹ ⁰ Adecadelater,the interdisciplinaryfour-volumecollection MemoryIreland (2011–14),editedbyOona Frawley,signalledthecomingofageofIrishmemorystudies.¹¹
⁷ RaphaelSamuelandPaulThompson,eds, TheMythsWeLiveBy (LondonandNewYork: Routledge,1990);RoyPorter,ed., MythsoftheEnglish (Cambridge:PolityPress,1992).Subsequent studieshaveexaminedingreaterdetailthehistoryofhistoricalmyths;foraDutchexampleseeLaura CruzandWillemFrijhoff,eds, MythinHistory,HistoryinMyth (LeidenandBoston:Brill,2009).
⁸ PierreNora, LesLieuxdemémoire (Paris:Galimard,1984–1992),3vols.Forareappraisalsee PatrickH.Hutton, TheMemoryPhenomenoninContemporaryHistoricalWriting:HowtheInterestin MemoryHasInfluencedOurUnderstandingofHistory (NewYork:PalgraveMacmillan,2016), pp.29–48.
⁹ SeePimDenBoer, ‘Locimemoriae Lieuxdemémoire’,in CulturalMemoryStudies:An InternationalandInterdisciplinaryHandbook,editedbyAstridErllandAnsgarNünning(Berlinand NewYork:WalterdeGruyter,2008),pp.22–4;BenoîtMajerus, ‘LieuxdeMémoire AEuropean TransferStory’,in WritingtheHistoryofMemory,editedbyStefanBergerandWilliamJohnNiven (London:BloomsburyAcademic,2014),pp.157–71;BenoîtMajerus, ‘The “LieuxdeMémoire” : APlaceofRemembranceforEuropeanHistorians?’,in Erinnerungsorte:Chancen,Grenzenund PerspektiveneinesErfolgskonzeptesindenKulturwissenschaften,editedbyStefanBergerandJoana Seiffert(Essen:Klartext,2014),pp.117–30.
¹
⁰ IanMcBride,ed., HistoryandMemoryinModernIreland (CambridgeandNewYork:Cambridge UniversityPress,2001);seealsoGuyBeiner, ‘HistoryandMemoryinModernIreland’ , IrishHistorical Studies,32,no.128(2001):pp.600–2.
¹¹OonaFrawley,ed., MemoryIreland (Syracuse,N.Y.:SyracuseUniversityPress,2011),vol.1: HistoryandModernity (2011);vol.2: DiasporaandMemoryPractices (2012);vol.3: TheFamineandthe Troubles (2014);vol.4(co-editedwithKatherineO’Callaghan): JamesJoyceandCulturalMemory (2014).
Writingin2001,atatimewhenitseemedthattheextremeviolenceoftheTroubles maybeover,theNorthernIrishhistorianAnthonyTerenceQuincey(‘Tony’)Stewart revisitedMoody’sdictum ‘Thepastisdead,andnothingthatwechoosetobelieve aboutitcaneitherharmorbenefitthosewhowerealiveinit’,addingawarning that ‘ithasthepowertoharmus’.Stewarttookissuewithhistorianscommittedto demythologizing those ‘whowouldpersuadeusthatifonlywecoulddiscoverthe truthaboutourhistory,someofthatharmmightbeneutralised’—andpointedoutthat ‘themythisoftenmorepotentthanthereality,andperhapsadifferentkindoftruth.’ Hepragmaticallyrealizedthat ‘academichistoriansmustresignthemselvestothefact thattheyhavelittlerealinfluenceonanation’sviewofitspast’ andshouldacceptthat ‘whatanationthinksofitshistoryisshapedratherbycolourfulnarrativeandtheneed forapoliticalmyth.’ Keenlyaware ifnotapprehensive ofthepotencyofmemory, Stewartsensedthatvernacularhistoricaltraditionssuggestedotherwaysoflookingat thepastwhichdidnotsitwellwiththewayIrishhistorianshavewrittenhistory.¹²
Inacharacteristicallyquirkyhistoriosophicalreflection,Stewartopinedthat ‘thereis somethingwrongwiththeshapeofIrishhistory ... itisverydifficulttoseewherethe pastendsandthepresentbegins.’ Forsome,hediscerned,history ‘isaburden,tobe castasideassoonaspossible’,whileforothersitis ‘aproblemtowhichonedaysome cleverpersonwill findtheanswer’.Yet, ‘formostIrishpeople’,Stewartobserved, ‘itis simplyafamilyheirloom,a fineoldpaintinginagiltframe,whichtheywouldmissifit wasnolongerthere.’¹³Thelikeningofpopularhistoricalconsciousnesstothepossessionofatreasuredinheritedpaintingisbothsuggestiveandelusive.Heirloomsare oftenkeptinprivatepossessionandlittleisknownofhowtheyhavebeenregarded behindcloseddoors.
Rev.RobertLyonsMarshall,aPresbyterianministerandprofessorofHistoryand EnglishatMageeCollegeinLondonderry,recalledhowhewasonceallowedrareaccess tosuchapainting.Uponvisiting ‘ahousewhereToryismisareligion’,Marshall, who asaunionistandmemberoftheOrangeOrder wasgreetedasatrustedally, happenedtomentionthatoneofhismaternalancestorshad ‘carriedapikein ’98’,that istosaythathehadbeenamongtheUnitedIrishmenwhorebelledagainsttheCrown in1798.Thisconfidentialdisclosureunlockedasecret:
IwastakentoanupstairsroomandtherefromitscoveringofmanywrappersIwasshowna smallwornoilpaintingofthedirectprogenitorofthefamilywhowashangedasarebelin ’98. Buttheportraitisnevershowntoanyexceptthosewhoseforbearsalsocarrythetaint.¹⁴
LiketheportraitofDorianGray,lockedawayinanattictohideitsrecordofunspeakable sins,theawkwardrecollectionofaloyalistfamilyhavingarepublicanrebelancestorwas keptoutofsightandwasonlyfurtivelyrevealedtothosewhocouldbetrusted.
Concernsthatthediscoveryofsuchcompromisingheirloomsmightcauseembarrassmentgavethemahauntingpresence,whichcouldnotbesimplydiscardedand donewith.TheUlsterpoetMaryFlorenceWilsonpennedaninsightfulshortstorythat toldofayoungladywhohadkilledherselfuponhearingthatherlover ‘washangedasa
¹²A.T.Q.Stewart, TheShapeofIrishHistory (Belfast:Blackstaff,2001),p.185. ¹³Ibid.,p.2.
¹⁴ R.L.Marshall, ‘Magherain ’98’,in PresbyterianisminMaghera:ASocialandCongregational History,editedbyS.SidlowMcFarland(Maghera:PresbyterianChurch,1985),p.174.
rebelsometimeinthedarkdaysafter ’98’.Thelady’sfather, ‘amanwhopridedhimself onhisunansweringloyaltytotheBritishthrone’,wasintentonwipingoutthisblemish onthefamily’sreputationandhadherpicturedestroyed.Nonetheless,acenturylater, theghostsoftherebelandofhissweetheartwerereportedlyseenintheareaclutching totheportrait.Uponhearingofanencounterwiththeseshunnedapparitions,a descendantoftheloyalisthouseholdinsistedthatitmustnotbetalkedaboutinthe open: ‘best,weshouldforgetallaboutit.’ But,asWilsonremarked,theadvicetoforget was ‘easiersaidthandone’.¹⁵
Bylisteningtosuchstories,wehavemovedawayfrom History (capitalizedandinthe singular),asithasbeennormallystudiedinthehallsoftheacademy,and findourselves intherealmof histories (inlowercaseandinevitablyintheplural),whichreflectthe myriadwaysinwhichthepastisroutinelyrecalledindiscreetsocialandcultural interactions,someofwhicharebarelynoticeabletooutsiders.¹ ⁶ Wehavealsomoved beyond lieuxdemémoire andstumbledintotheunfamiliardomainof lieuxd’oubli, whichhavebeendefinedas ‘sitesthatpublicmemoryhasexpresslyavoidedbecauseof thedisturbingaffectthattheirinvocationisstillcapableofarousing’.¹⁷ Theserealmsof forgetting,whereindividualsandcommunitiesanxiouslytrytoconcealdiscomforting skeletonsintheircupboards,arestill,byandlarge, terraincognita.Newterminology andconceptualframeworksarerequiredinordertohelpus findourbearingsandtotry andunderstandthedenizensofthesestrangeplaces.Letus firstturnourgazeupon whatwemeanby ‘histories’ andthenconsiderwhatwemeanby ‘forgetting’
VERNACULARHISTORIOGRAPHY
Itisenlighteningtorethinkourrelationshipwiththepastintermsof mythistory andto questionasteadfastconviction,whichhasbeenuphelddogmaticallybymanyhistorians,thatHistory(seenasatruthfulrepresentationoffacts)mustbeirreconcilably divorcedfromMyth(considereda fictionalfabrication).Theiconoclasturgefor demythologizingisanexpressionofamodern ‘hermeneuticsofsuspicion’,which harksbacktotheclassicaldifferentiationbetweensymbolic mythos andcritical logos, throughwhichgenerationsofscholarshavedevaluedtraditions,regardlessofthevital roletheycontinuetoplayinsocietyandculture.¹⁸ ByinsistingthatIrishhistoriansturn theirbackonmyths,TheoMoodynotonlyreiteratedthetenetsofanempiricist historiography,associatedwiththedisciplesofLeopoldvonRanke,butalsoeliciteda time-olddebateonwhetherhistoricalinquiryshoulddisregardpopulartraditions.After
¹⁵ FlorenceMaryWilson, ‘TheManattheWell’ (unpublishedtypescript);FlorenceMaryWilson Papers,IrishLinenCentreandLisburnMuseum.
¹
⁶ Forthedistinctionbetweenofficialhistoryand ‘histories’,inthecontextof ‘thewaythatsilences andcommemorationslieindifferentkindsofrelationshiptooneanother’,seeGeraldM.Siderand GavinA.Smith,eds, BetweenHistoryandHistories:TheMakingofSilencesandCommemorations (Toronto:UniversityofTorontoPress,1997),pp.8–17.
¹⁷ NancyWood, VectorsofMemory:LegaciesofTraumainPostwarEurope (Oxford:Berg,1999), p.10;seealsoYosefHayimYerushalmi, ‘Réflexionssurl’oubli’,in Usagesdel’oubli (Paris:Seuil,1988), pp.7–21.
¹⁸ RichardKearney, ‘MythandtheCritiqueofTradition’,in ReconcilingMemories,editedbyAlan FalconerandJosephLiechty(Blackrock,Co.Dublin:ColumbaPress,1998;orig.edn1988),pp.37–56.
all,RankewasanadmirerofThucydides,whohadtakentotaskHerodotusforhisuse ofmythsand,indoingso,hadnarrowedthescopeofhistory.
Herodotushadwrittenhis Histories ‘inthehopeoftherebypreservingfromdecay theremembranceofwhatmenhavedone’.Heconsideredithisduty ‘toreportallthat issaid’,thoughhedidnotfeel ‘obligedtobelieveitallalike’.¹⁹ Evaluatingthegreater contributionofthisopen-mindedapproach,ArnaldoMomiglianoperceptively observedthat ‘whenHerodotustooktherecordingoftraditionashisprimaryduty, hewasinfactdoingsomethingmorethansimplysavingfactsfromoblivion.Hewas guidinghistoricalresearchtowardstheexplorationoftheunknownandtheforgotten.’²⁰ Conversely,Thucydides,inwritingacontemporaryaccountofthe Historyofthe PeloponnesianWar,waswaryof ‘imperfectmemory’,aswellasof ‘unduepartiality foronesideortheother’,andtookprideinthe ‘absenceofromance’ inhiswork.²¹In dismissingoraltraditionsasunreliable fictions,Thucydidessteeredthestudyofhistory towardsafocusonpolitical,diplomatic,andmilitaryaffairs.Nevertheless,hiswriting ofhistorywasinevitablyshapedbyprevalentculturalconventionsandreflectedthe mythsofhisday.Despiteitspromisetoprovide ‘exactknowledgeofthepast’,the historicalaccountwrittenbyThucydideswasperspicaciouslylabelled,inasomewhat neglectedcritiquebyFrancisMacdonaldCornford, ‘mythistoria’.²²
AnHerodoteaninterestinhistoricaltraditionsperseveredintomoderntimes throughthescholarlywritingsofalonglineofantiquarians,whoseeruditestudies wereregularlybelittledbyhistoriansfortheirtendencytocollectseeminglytrivial details.²³TheEnlightenment’sinherentaversionofsuperstitionreintroduceddoubts aboutthevalueofpopularbelief.Useoftheterm ‘mythistory’ inEnglishwas first recordedin1737byNathanBaileyinasupplementaryvolumeaddedtothethird editionofhis UniversalEtymologicalEnglishDictionary,whereitwasdefinedas ‘ an historymingledwithfalsefablesandtales’.²⁴ Romanticismoverturnedthisdismissive attitude.Withtheriseofhistoricism,anumberofphilologists,philosophers,and historians whowereindirectlyinfluencedbyGiambattistaVico’ s ScienzaNuova (1725)andmoredirectlybythewritingsofJohannGottfriedHerder rediscovered thehistoricalvalueofpopulartraditions.BesttypifiedbytheBrothersGrimm, collectorsoftraditionsoperatedwithinabuddingenvironmentofculturalnationalism, towhichtheycontributedvernacularresources,whilerekindlingthestudyofmythologyandestablishingthestudyoffolklore.²⁵ Theircontributiontothestudyof history,labelledbyDonaldR.Kelley ‘mythistory’,canbeseenasahistoriographical
¹⁹ TheHistoryofHerodotus,translatedbyGeorgeRawlinson,vol.1(1858),p.121[Histories,Book 1,intro]andvol.2(1860),p.129[Histories,Book7,152].
²
⁰ ArnaldoMomigliano, TheClassicalFoundationsofModernHistoriography (Berkeley:University ofCaliforniaPress,1990),p.37.
²¹Thucydides,HistoryofthePeloponnesianWar,translatedbyRichardCrawley(London: J.M.DentandSons,1910),p.15[Book1,22].
²²FrancisMacdonaldCornford, ThucydidesMythistoricus (London:EdwardArnold,1907).
²³ArnaldoMomigliano, ‘AncientHistoryandtheAntiquarian’ , JournaloftheWarburgand CourtauldInstitutes,13,no.3/4(1950):pp.285–315;Momigliano, ClassicalFoundationsofModern Historiography,pp.54–79.
²
⁴ NathanBailey, TheUniversalEtymologicalEnglishDictionaryContaininganAdditionalCollection ofWords(NotintheFirstVolume),3rdedn,vol.2(London:ThomasCox,1737).
²⁵ PeterBurke, PopularCultureinEarlyModernEurope,3rdedn(FarnhamandBurlington: Ashgate,2009;orig.edn1978),pp.23–48;JoepLeerssen, ‘OralEpic:TheNationFindsaVoice’ ,
counter-movementthatwaslargelyexcludedfromtheprofessionalizationofthe disciplineofhistoryandwassidelinedbytherisetodominanceoftheRankean schoolofhistory.²⁶
Anotherformofmythistory,markedby ‘therecognitionofmyth’,hasbeenidentifiedbyJosephMaliasadistinctlymodernisthistoriography,whichcanbefoundin theexceptionalhistoricalwritingsofJacobBurckhardt,AbyWarburg,ErnstKantorowicz, WalterBenjamin,and,notleast,inthe fictionofJamesJoyce.²⁷ Indeed,asalreadynoted, Irishcreativewritershavebeenaheadofhistoriansindevelopinginnovativeapproachesto thepastandJoyce,morethananyotherauthor,hasbeenrecognized evenby historians forhisinsightsintoculturalmemory.²⁸ Mainstreamhistoriographyhasbeen reluctanttopursuesuchdirections.
Neverafraidtoraisebigquestions,WilliamMcNeill,inhis1985presidential addresstotheAmericanHistoricalSociety,reconsideredthefraughtrelationship between ‘truth,myth,history,andhistorians’ andofferedanappraisalofmythistory.
Acknowledging ‘theelastic,inexactcharacteroftruth’,heshrewdlypointedoutthat ‘ oneperson ’struthisanother’smyth,andthefactthatagroupofpeopleacceptsagiven versionofthepastdoesnotmakethatversionanytruerforoutsiders.’ Hesoberly cautionedthat ‘mythical,self-flatteringversionsofrivalgroups’ pastssimplyserveto intensifytheircapacityforconflict’.Yet,hemaintainedthatthestudyofhistorical mythswas ‘ahighandseriouscalling’ andthatthehistorianmuststrivetounderstand ‘whatagroupofpeopleknowsandbelievesaboutthepast’,asthiswasasigni ficant factorinshapingbothviewsandactions.Incallinguponhistorianstoovercometheir engrainedinhibitionsandembracethestudyofmythistory,McNeillcandidlyadmitted thathedid ‘notexpectthetermtocatchoninprofessionalcircles’.²⁹ McNeill’spredictionhasfulfilleditself.Althoughtheportmanteau ‘mythistory’ aptly capturesthesynthesisoffactsandimaginationthatischaracteristicofmorecreative formsofengagingwiththepast,itisacumbersometermandapartfromafewnotable examples,suchasGaryDickson ’sexaminationofhowthemedievalChildren’sCrusade evolvedintomodernmythistory,ithasnotenteredintocommonusage.³⁰ Thereisa needforamoresuitablelabel,whichcanbetterdescribethewiderrangeofactivities throughwhichthepastisrecalledoutsideofmainstream-of ficialhistory.Consideration ofalternativeterminologyopensarangeofpossibilitiesforthestudyofotherhistories.
in FolkloreandNationalisminEuropeduringtheLongNineteenthCentury,editedbyTimothyBaycroft andDavidM.Hopkin(LeidenandBoston:Brill,2012),pp.11–26.
²⁶ DonaldR.Kelley, ‘MythistoryintheAgeofRanke’,in LeopoldVonRankeandtheShapeofthe HistoricalDiscipline,editedbyGeorgG.IggersandJamesM.Powell(Syracuse,N.Y.:Syracuse UniversityPress,1990),pp.3–20;seealsoPeterBurke, ‘RanketheReactionary’,inibid.,pp.36–44.
²⁷ JosephMali, Mythistory:TheMakingofaModernHistoriography (Chicago:UniversityofChicago Press,2003).
²⁸ Seethecollectedessayson ‘JamesJoyceandCulturalMemory’,inFrawleyandO’Callaghan, MemoryIreland,vol.4.
²⁹ WilliamH.McNeill, ‘Mythistory,orTruth,Myth,History,andHistorians’ , TheAmerican HistoricalReview,91,no.1(February1986):pp.1–10;seealsoChrisLorenz, ‘DrawingtheLine: “Scientific ” HistorybetweenMyth-MakingandMyth-Breaking’,in NarratingtheNation:RepresentationsinHistory,Media,andtheArts,editedbyStefanBerger,LinasEriksonas,andAndrewMycock (NewYork:BerghahnBooks,2008),pp.35–55.
³⁰ SeeGaryDickson, TheChildren’sCrusade:MedievalHistory,ModernMythistory (Houndmills andNewYork:PalgraveMacmillan,2008).
Callingattentiontoanessentialqualityofmythistory,Malidescribedhistorical myths ‘asthosestoriesthatarenotmerelytoldbutactuallylived’.³¹Whereasprofessionalhistorians,suchasMoodyandStewart,typicallyinsistthat ‘thepastisdead’ , outsidethehallsofacademiathepastappearstobealiveandwell.Thedetachment assumedbyacademicsgivestheimpression,inthefamouswordsofL.P.Hartley, that ‘thepastisaforeigncountry ’,aconceptwhichhasbeenthoughtfullyinterrogated byDavidLowenthal.³²Otherformsofengagingwithhistoryrejectthissenseof remotenessandidentifycloselywiththepast,makingita livinghistory.Theevocative term ‘livinghistory’,however,isalreadyspokenfor.Ithasbeenclaimedbyheritage enthusiastsforavarietyofperformativeactivitieswhichseektoreconstructandre-enact thepastforthebenefitofmodern-dayconsumers.³³
Inrecentdecades,livinghistoryhasbeencommodifiedandcommercializedthrough awiderangeofpopularculturalproductionsthatincreasinglyavailofnewmediaand technologiestofacilitatemassconsumptionofhistory.³⁴ Whereaspageantryandtheatre havealwaysofferedawayofrelivinghistory,themushroomingoftheheritageindustry inthelatetwentiethcenturyseemstohavebeendrivenbyananxietythatasupposedly authenticlinkwithpasthasbeenseveredandthebeliefthatthisconnectioncanonlybe regainedinartificialforms,or,ascriticswouldhaveit,thoughfabrication.³⁵ This perceptiondoesnotgivefullcredittomoretraditionalhistoricalpractices suchas storytellingandballadsinging thatarenotonlystillrampant,butarenowwidely disseminatedthroughuseofmoderntechnologies.Moreover,theterm ‘livinghistory’ givesamisleadingsenseofinterminablevitality,akintoeternallife,whichfailsto acknowledgethatmythistorycangothroughperiodsofstagnationandevenceaseto exist.Whentakingintoaccounttheebbsand flowsofhistoricalcuriosity,aspreoccupationwithcertainepisodesfallsinandoutoffashionovertime,itispossibleto identifylifecyclesthatcharthowhistoricalinterestlapsesintoneglectbutmaylaterbe revived,ortouseotherterms remembered,forgotten,andregenerated.
Suchunconventionalhistoryisdistinguishednotonlybyitsvivacity,whichmakes thepastseemtocomealive,butalsobyitspreoccupationwithsubjectsthatwerelong neglectedinmainstreamhistoriography.The1960ssignallednewfoundinterestin historyfrombelow,atermpopularizedbyE.P.Thompsonandassociatedinitsinitial stageswithGeorgeRudé’sstudiesofthehistoricalagencyofcrowds.³⁶ Thisdirection
³¹Mali, Mythistory,p.6.
³²DavidLowenthal, ThePastisaForeignCountry (CambridgeandNewYork:Cambridge UniversityPress,1985).
³³RaphaelSamuel, TheatresofMemory:PastandPresentinContemporaryCulture (Londonand NewYork:Verso,2012;orig.edn1994),pp.169–202.SeealsoJayAnderson, TimeMachines:The WorldofLivingHistory (Nashville,Tenn.:AmericanAssociationforStateandLocalHistory,1984); ScottMagelssen, LivingHistoryMuseums:UndoingHistorythroughPerformance (Lanham,Md.: ScarecrowPress,2007).
³
⁴ JeromedeGroot, ConsumingHistory:HistoriansandHeritageinContemporaryPopularCulture, 2ndedn(LondonandNewYork:Routledge,2016;orig.edn2009).
³
⁵ DavidLowenthal, TheHeritageCrusadeandtheSpoilsofHistory (CambridgeandNewYork, 1998).
³
⁶ E.P.Thompson, ‘HistoryfromBelow’ , TimesLiterarySupplement,no.3345(7April1966), pp.279–80;GeorgeRudé, TheCrowdintheFrenchRevolution (London,Oxford,andNewYork: OxfordUniversityPress,1967;orig.edn1959).SeealsoJimSharpe, ‘HistoryfromBelow’,in New PerspectivesonHistoricalWriting,editedbyPeterBurke(UniversityPark,Pa.:PennsylvaniaState
wasdevelopedinthe1970sand ’80sbytheHistoryWorkshopmovement,whichwas committedto ‘democratisingtheactofhistoricalproduction,enlargingtheconstituencyofhistoricalwriters,andbringingtheexperienceofthepresenttobearuponthe interpretationofthepast’.Itsadherentspromoted people’shistory,which,asnotedby RaphaelSamuel,wasatermthat ‘hashadalongcareer,andcoversanensembleof differentwritings’,thoughits ‘remoteorigins’ couldsupposedlybetracedbackto ‘that no-man ’slandofballadtraditionwheremythandhistoricitycross’.Intenton ‘bringing theboundariesofhistoryclosertothoseofpeople’slives’,writersofpeople’shistory sought ‘analternativeto “dryasdust” scholarship’.People’shistorywasdirected ‘towardstherecoveryofsubjectiveexperience’.Contrarytotheprivilegingofdominant elitesinconventionalhistoriography,sightsweresetonuncoveringthelesser-known experiencesofthedisenfranchised,theoppressed,andthepoor.³⁷
Theideologicalthrustof ‘people’shistory’ chimedwiththepoliticsoftheNewLeft. Thisoutlookisparticularlyapparentin APeople’sHistoryoftheUnitedStates (originally publishedin1980),abest-sellingbookbytheradicalhistorianHowardZinn,who openlyprofessedthathewas ‘scepticalofgovernmentsandtheirattempts,through politicsandculture,toensnareordinarypeopleinagiantwebofnationhoodpretendingtoacommoninterest’.Rejectingthenotionofahomogenousnationalcollective memory—‘wemustnotacceptthememoryofstatesasourown’—Zinnretoldthe historyofNorthAmericafromthepointofviewofNativeAmericans,AfricanAmericans, factoryworkers,immigrantlabourers,theworkingpoor,andwomen.³⁸ Thisapproach sharesacommoninterestwithSubalternstudies,a fieldthatwasdevelopedinthe1980s bySouthAsianpostcolonialscholars mostnotablyRanajitGuha andhassincetaken rootinotherareas,includingLatinAmericaandtheMiddleEast,aswellasmakingan impactonIrishstudies. Subalternhistory denouncedcolonial ‘elitisthistoriography’ and tookuponitselftouncoverthe ‘politicsofthepeople’.³⁹
Bothpeople’shistoryandsubalternhistoryaimfora democratichistory,which willfaithfullyrepresentthehistoricalexperiencesofcommonpeople(demos)and giverecognitiontohowtheythemselveschosetorecalltheirhistory.Theinherently democraticnatureofpeople’shistoryisonlyfullyrevealedwhentakingintoaccount themanymediatorsandaudiencesthroughwhichhistoryhasbeennarratedby ‘the people’,about ‘thepeople’,andfor ‘thepeople’.However,theNeo-Marxist flag-bearers ofhistoryfrombelowhaveattimesresortedtoidealizedandinsufficientlysophisticated notionsof ‘thepeople’,undulyascribingtotheminnateprogressivevalues.Inpractice, democratichistoryisbynomeansegalitarian ithasitsownhierarchiesandmultilayeredpowerstructuresthatgiveanadvantagetocertainpeoplewhoarebetter UniversityPress,1992),pp.24–41;E.J.Hobsbawm, OnHistory (London:Abacus,1998), pp.266–96.
³⁷ RaphaelSamuel, ‘People’sHistory’,in People’sHistoryandSocialistTheory,editedbyRaphael Samuel(LondonandBoston:Routledge&KeganPaul,1981),pp.xv–xxxix.
³⁸ HowardZinn, APeople’sHistoryoftheUnitedStates (LondonandNewYork:Longman,1980), quotationsfrompp.9–11;seealsoHowardZinn, HowardZinnonHistory,2ndedn(NewYork:Seven StoriesPress,2011),pp.211–13(‘TheNewHistory’).
³⁹ SeeRanajitGuha, ‘OnSomeAspectsoftheHistoriographyofColonialIndia’,in Subaltern StudiesI:WritingsonSouthAsianHistoryandSociety,editedbyRanajitGuha(Delhi:OxfordUniversity Press),pp.1–8.ForIrishhistoryandSubalternstudiesseeEóinFlannery, VersionsofIreland:Empire, ModernityandResistanceinIrishCulture (Newcastle:CambridgeScholarsPress,2006),pp.37–54.
ForgetfulRemembrance
equippedtoexploittheculturalcapitalthatcanbegainedbynarratingtheir pasts,totheneglectofothers,whoareeitherleftoutsideofhistoryorrelegatedto itsmargins.
Theexclusionofnon-literatesocietiesfromconventionaldocument-drivenhistory hasbeenpartlyredressedby ethnohistory,a fieldthatcombinesmethodologiesfrom historyandanthropology,withcontributionsfromotherdisciplines,suchasarchaeology.EmergingoutofthestudyofNativeAmericancommunitiesinthepost-Second WorldWareraoftheIndianClaimsCommission,ethnohistoryhassinceexpanded beyondNorthAmericatoMesoamericaandSouthAmerica,aswellasAfricaand Polynesia.Ethnohistorianshavemadeuseoffolkloreandoraltraditionsforemic fieldworkthataimstorevealhowindigenoussocietiesperceivetheirpasts.Pioneering figuresinthedevelopmentofethnohistory,suchasNancyOestreichLurieandWilliam C.Sturtevant,havearguedthatthisapproachcouldbefruitfullyappliedtothestudyof Westernsocieties,butsuchinitiativeshavenotpickedupandveryfewexplicitly designatedethnohistoriesofEuropeancommunitieshavebeenwrittentodate.⁴⁰
Sincethe1980s,historyof ‘ordinarypeople’ hasbeenincreasinglyreferredtoas popularhistory.Theadoptionofthistermridesonthebackofthe flourishofinnovative historicalstudiesofEuropeanpopularculturewrittenbyearlymodernists.Inthese works,vulgar(intheoriginalsenseoftheword,stemmingfrom vulgus thecommon people) ‘popularculture’ isvaguelyconceptualizedinoppositiontoamorerefined elite ‘highculture’,whileacceptingthatnoclearboundariesseparatethetwo.The favouredmethodtobroachthesubjecthasbeenmicrohistory,anapproachdeveloped inthe1970sinItaly(microstoria),withcorrelativesinFrance(microhistoire),and theEnglish-speakingworld.InGermany,ittookaslightlydifferentdirectioninthe ‘historyofeverydaylife’ (Alltagsgeschichte).⁴¹Microhistorieshaveproducedsuch seminalbooksasEmmanuelLeRoyLadurie’ s Montaillou,villageOccitan (1975)and LeCarnavaldeRomans,1579–1580 (1980),CarloGinzburg’ s Ilformaggioeivermi (1976;translatedin1980as TheCheeseandtheWorms),NatalieZemonDavis’ s The ReturnofMartinGuerre (1983),andRobertDarnton’ s TheGreatCatMassacre (1983). Insuchworksthegreatquestionsofhistoryhavebeenbroughttobearonclose examinationsofsmallcommunities,orevenindividuals,byapplyinganthropologicalethnographictools,mostnotablytheconceptof ‘thickdescription’ introducedby CliffordGeertz.⁴²
Historiansofpopularhistoryhavebeenfaultedfortheempathy borderingon unbridledsympathy thattheyhaveshownfortheirsubjects,whichcanleantowards
⁴⁰ NancyOestreichLurie, ‘Ethnohistory:AnEthnologicalPointofView’ , Ethnohistory,8,no.1 (1961):pp.78–92;WilliamC.Sturtevant, ‘Anthropology,History,andEthnohistory’ , Ethnohistory, 13,no.1/2(1966):pp.1–51;seealsoMichaelE.Harkin, ‘Ethnohistory’sEthnohistory:Creatinga DisciplinefromtheGroundUp’ , SocialScienceHistory,34,no.2(2010):pp.113–28.
⁴¹AlfLüdtke, ‘WhatIstheHistoryofEverydayLifeandWhoAreItsPractitioners?’,in TheHistory ofEverydayLife:ReconstructingHistoricalExperiencesandWaysofLife,editedbyAlfLüdtke,translated byWilliamTempler(Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress,1995),pp.3–40.
⁴²LeviGiovanni, ‘OnMicrohistory’,in NewPerspectivesonHistoricalWriting,editedbyPeter Burke(UniversityPark,Pa.:PennsylvaniaStateUniversityPress,1992),pp.93–113;SigurðurGylfi MagnússonandIstvánM.Szíjártó, WhatIsMicrohistory?:TheoryandPractice (Abingdonand NewYork:Routledge,2013);seealsoJohnBrewer, ‘MicrohistoryandtheHistoriesofEveryday Life’ , CulturalandSocialHistory,7,no.1(2010):pp.87–109.
Another random document with no related content on Scribd:
Dat sensus, auget vires, tollitque timorem338
Mortis, et ad martem corda parata facit.
In cruce libertas redit, et perit illa potestas, Hoste triumphato, que dedit ante mori:
In cruce religio, ritus cultusque venuste
Gentis concludunt omnia sacra simul:
In cruce porta patet paradisi, flammeus ensis
Custos secreti desiit esse loci:
Ecce vides quantis prefulgeat illa figuris, Pagina quam pulcre predicet omnis eam.
Mira quidem crucis est virtus, qua tractus ab alto
Vnicus est patris, vt pateretur homo.
Vi crucis infernum Cristus spoliauit, et illam, Perdita que fuerat, inde reuexit ouem:
Vi crucis in celum conscendit, et astra paterni
Luminis ingrediens ad sua regna redit:
Glorificata caro, que sustulit in cruce penas, Presidet in celo sede locata dei.
Sic virtute pie crucis et celestis amoris
Surgit in ecclesia gracia lege noua.
Hic dicit quod, exquo solus deus omnia creauit, solus est a creaturis adorandus, et est eciam magne racionis vt ipse omnia gubernet et secundum merita et demerita hominum in sua voluntate solus iudicet.
Capm xi
Semper id est quod erat et erit, trinus deus vnus;
Nec sibi principium, nec sibi finis adest: Principium tamen et finem dedit omnibus esse, Omnia per quem sunt, et sine quo nichil est.
Que vult illa potest vt sufficiens in idipsum; Iussit, et illico sunt que iubet ipse fore:
Cuius ad imperium famulantur cuncta creata, Hunc volo, credo meum celitus esse deum.
Dum sit aperta dei manus omnia replet habunde, Auertenteque se, vertitur omne retro.
Singula iudicio sapiens sic diuidit equo, Fallere seu falli quod nequit ipse deus.
Res est equa nimis, deus exquo cuncta creauit, Sint vt in arbitrio subdita cuncta suo.
Cum solo causante deo sint cuncta creata, Num fortuna dei soluere possit opus?
Que nil principiis valuit, nec fine valebit, Estimo quod mediis nil valet ipsa suis.
Quis terre molem celique volubile culmen, Quis ve mouere dedit sidera? Nonne deus?
Quis ve saporauit in dulcia flumina fontes, Vel quis amara dedit equora? Nonne deus?
Conditor orbis ad hoc quod condidit esse volebat, Vt deseruiret fabrica tota deo.
Terram vestiuit herbis et floribus herbas, Flores in fructus multiplicare dedit:
Invigilat summo studio ditescere terram, Et fecundare fertilitate sua:
Nec satis est mundus quod flumine, fontibus, ortis,
Floribus et tanto germine diues erat; Res animare nouas, varias formare figuras, Et speciebus eas diuaricare parat.
Diuersi generis animancia terra recepit, Ingemuitque nouo pondere pressa suo;339
Distribuitque locos ad eorum proprietates, Iuxta quod proprium cuilibet esse dedit, Montibus hiis, illis convallibus, hiis nemorosis, Pluribus in planis dans habitare locis: Aera sumpsit auis, piscis sibi vendicat vndas, Planiciem pecudes, deuia queque fere.
Ars operi dictat formas, opifexque figurat, Artificis sequitur fabrica tota manum.
Fortune nichil attribuit, set solus vt ipse
Cuncta creat, solus cuncta creata regit: Est nichil infelix, nichil aut de sorte beatum,
630
Immo viri meritis dat sua dona deus.
Quicquid adest igitur, sapiens qui scripta reuoluit
Dicet fortunam non habuisse ream: Hoc fateor vere, quicquid contingit in orbe, Nos sumus in causa, sint bona siue mala.
FOOTNOTES:
308 Heading L resumes here
309 1 vocem] visionem DH₂
310 2 acceperat et ex plebis voce communi concepit L
311 Incipit prologus &c. om. L
312 20 Sic EDL Set T
313 29 Sunt C
314 51 Symon excetraque L si non excecraque D
315 Cap i 8 pugna CEDL pungna S pungna H
316 9 obstat ED
317 56 spargis CED
318 65 Desuper EDLT
319 152 Crescit decrescit/crescit D
320 153 Crescit, decrescit] Decrescit subito D
321 168 cunta C
322 174 tegit CE
323 239 No paragr. here CE
324 266 dracho C
325 279 Attamen econtra si iustus D
326 294 obstat CGDL
327 300 anime CEHGDL animi S
328 303 Paragraph here HDL
329 311 illis CE
330 377 Hic SCEHG Hec DLH₂
331 408 resurexit SHT resurrexit CEDL
332 451 f. nosce CE
333 461 nosce CE
334 500, 501 Lingua H
335 536 muniendo (?) C
336 557 signum D
337 559 mentesque CEH
338 561 f. two lines om. T
Hic dicit quod, exquo340 non a fortuna, set meritis et demeritis, ea que nos in mundo prospera et aduersa vocamus digno dei iudicio hominibus contingunt, intendit consequenter scribere de statu hominum, qualiter se ad presens habent, secundum hoc quod per sompnium superius dictum vidit et audiuit.
Incipit prologus libri tercii.
Cum bona siue mala sit nobis sors tribuenda
Ex propriis meritis, hiis magis hiisque minus, Fit mundique status in tres diuisio partes, Omnibus vnde viris stat quasi sortis opus, Et modo per vicia quia sors magis astat iniqua, Ponderet in causis quilibet acta suis:
In quocumque gradu sit homo, videatur in orbe
Que sibi sunt facta, sors cadit vnde rea.
10
Non ego personas culpabo, set increpo culpas,341 Quas in personis cernimus esse reas.
A me non ipso loquor hec, set que michi plebis
Vox dedit, et sortem plangit vbique malam:
Vt loquitur vulgus loquor, et scribendo loquelam342
Plango, quod est sanctus nullus vt ante status.
Quisque suum tangat pectus videatque sequenter
Si sit in hoc talis vnde quietus erit.343
Nescio quis purum se dicet, plebs quia tota Clamat iam lesum quemlibet esse statum.
Culpa quidem lata, non culpa leuis, maculauit
Tempora cum causis, nos quoque nostra loca: Nil generale tamen concludam sub speciali, Nec gero propositum ledere quemque statum. Nouimus esse status tres, sub quibus omnis in orbe
More suo viuit atque ministrat eis.
Non status in culpa reus est, set transgredientes
A virtute status, culpa repugnat eis.
Quod dicunt alii scribam, quia nolo quod vlli
Sumant istud opus de nouitate mea.
Qui culpat vicia virtutes laudat, vt inde
Stet magis ipse bonus in bonitate sua:
Vt patet oppositum nigris manifestius album, Sic bona cum viciis sunt patefacta magis:
Ne grauet ergo bonos, tangat si scriptor iniquos, Ponderet hoc cordis lanx pacientis onus:
Vera negant pingi, quia vera relacio scribi
Debet, non blandi falsa loquela doli.
Si qua michi sintilla foret sensus, precor illam
Ad cumulum fructus augeat ille deus:
Si qua boni scriptura tenet, hoc fons bonitatis
Stillet detque deus que bona scribat homo:
Fructificet deus in famulo que scripta iuuabunt, Digna ministret homo semina, grana deus.
Mole rei victus fateor succumbo, set ipsam
Spes michi promittit claudere fine bono:
Quod spes promittit, amor amplexatur, vtrique
Auxiliumque fides consiliumque facit;344
Suggerit, instigat, suadet, fructumque laboris
Spondet, et exclamat, ‘Incipe, fiet opus.’
Quo minor est sensus meus, adde tuum, deus, et da,
Oro, pios vultus ad mea vota tuos:
Vt nichil abrupte s i b i p r esumat stilus iste, Da veniam cepto, te, deus, oro, meo.
Non ego sidereas affecto tangere sedes, Scribere nec summi mistica quero poli;
Set magis, humana que vox communis ad extra
Plangit in hac terra, scribo moderna mala:
Vtilis aduerso quia confert tempore sermo,
Promere tendo mala iam bona verba die.345
Nulla Susurro queat imponere scandala, per que
Auris in auditu negligat ora libri:
Non malus interpres aliquam michi concitet iram, Quid nisi transgressis dum loquar ipse reis.
Erigat, oro, pia tenuem manus ergo carectam, Vt mea sincero currat in axe rota:
Scribentem iuuet ipse fauor minuatque laborem, Cum magis in pauido pectore p e rstat opus: Omnia peruersas poterunt corrumpere mentes,
Stant tamen illa suis singula tuta locis:
Vt magis ipse queam, reliqui poterintque valere,346
Scit deus, ista mei vota laboris erunt.
Aspice, quique leges ex ipsis concipe verbis,
Hoc michi non odium scribere suadet opus.
Si liber iste suis mordebitur ex inimicis, Hoc peto ne possint hunc lacerare tamen:
Vade, liber, seruos sub eo qui liberat omnes, Nec mala possit iter rumpere lingua tuum;
Si, liber, ora queas transire per inuida liber, Imponent alii scandala nulla tibi.
Non erit in dubio m e a v o x clamans, erit omnis
Namque fides huius maxima vocis homo.
Si michi tam sepe liquet excusacio facta, Ignoscas, timeo naufragus omne fretum. O sapiens, sine quo nichil est sapiencia mundi,
Cuius in obsequium me mea vota ferunt, Te precor instanti da tempore, Criste, misertus, Vt metra que pecii prompta parare queam; Turgida deuitet, falsum mea penna recuset
Scribere, set scribat que modo vera videt.
In primis caueat ne fluctuet, immo decenter
Quod primo pon i t carmine seruet opus:347
Hic nichil offendat lectorem, sit nisi verum
Aut veri simile, quod mea scripta dabunt.
In te qui es verus mea sit sentencia vera, Non ibi figmentum cernere possit homo:
Conueniatque rei verbum sensumque ministret, Dulce sit et quicquam commoditatis habens:
100 Capm . i.
Absit adulari, nec sit michi fabula blesa, Nec michi laus meriti sit sine laude tua.
Da loquar vt vicium minuatur et ammodo virtus Crescat, vt in mundo mundior extet homo: Tu gressus dispone meos, tu pectus adauge, Tu sensus aperi, tu plue verba michi; Et quia sub trino mundi status ordine fertur, Sub trina serie tu mea scripta foue.
Hiis tibi libatis nouus intro nauta profundum, Sacrum pneuma rogans vt mea vela regas.
Hic tractat qualiter status et ordo mundi in tribus consistit gradibus, sunt enim, vt dicit, Clerus, Milicies, et Agricultores, de quorum errore mundi infortunia nobis contingunt. Vnde primo videndum est de errore cleri precipue in ordine prelatorum, qui potenciores aliis existunt; et primo dicet de prelatis illis qui Cristi scolam dogmatizant et eius contrarium operantur.
Incipit liber tercius.348
Sunt Clerus, Miles, Cultor, tres trina gerentes,
S e t d e p r e l a t i s s c r i b e r e t e n d o p r i u s .
S c i s m a p a t e n s h o d i e m o n s t r a t q u o d s u n t d u o p a p e ,
V n u s s c i s m a t i c u s , a l t e r e t i l l e
b o n u s :
F r a n c i a s c i s m a t i c u m c o l i t e t s t a t u i t
v e n e r a n d u m ,
A n g l i a s e t r e c t a m s e r u a t v b i q u e
f i d e m .
E r g o m e i s s c r i p t i s s u p e r h o c
v b i c u m q u e l e g e n d i s
S i n t b o n a d i c t a b o n i s , e t m a l a
l i n q u o m a l i s .
I n t e r p r e l a t o s d u m C r i s t i q u e r o
s e q u a c e s ,
R e g u l a n u l l a m a n e t , q u e p r i u s e s s e
s o l e t .
C r i s t u s e r a t pauper, i l l i cumulantur in auro;
Hic pacem dederat, hii m o d o bella m o u e n t:
C r i s t u s e r a t largus, hii sunt velut archa tenaces;
Hunc labor inuasit, hos fouet aucta quies:
C r i s t u s e r a t mitis, hii sunt t a m e n
i m p e t u o s i;
Hic humilis subiit, hii superesse volunt:
C r i s t u s e r a t m i s e r a n s, hii vindictamque sequntur;
Sustulit hic penas, hos timor inde fugat:
C r i s t u s e r a t virgo, s u n t i l l i r a r o p u d i c i;
Hic bonus est pastor, hii set ouile vorant:
C r i s t u s e r a t verax, hii blandaque verba requirunt;
C r i s t u s e r a t iustus, hii nisi velle vident:
C r i s t u s e r a t constans, hii vento mobiliores; Obstitit ipse malis, hii magis i l l a sinunt: Hii pleno stomacho laudant ieiunia Cristi;
C r i s t u s a q u a m peciit, hii bona vina bibunt:
As follows in CHGEDL,
*Capm . i.
Sunt Clerus, Miles, Cultor, tres trina gerentes; Hic docet, hic pugnat, alter et arua colit. Quid sibi sit Clerus primo videamus, et ecce
Eius in exemplis iam stupet omnis humus.349
Scisma patens hodie monstrat quod sunt duo pape,
Vnus scismaticus, alter et ille bonus:
Francia scismaticum colit et statuit venerandum,
Anglia sed rectam seruat vbique fidem.
Ergo meis scriptis super hoc vbicumque legendis
Sint bona dicta bonis, et mala linquo malis.
Delicias mundi negat omnis regula Cristi, Sed modo prelati preuaricantur ibi.
Cristus erat pauper, illi cumulantur in auro; Hic humilis subiit, hii superesse volunt:
Cristus erat mitis, hos pompa superbit inanis;
Hic pacem dederat, hii modo bella ferunt: Cristus erat miserans, hii vindictamque sequntur;
Mulcet eum pietas, hos mouet ira frequens:350
Cristus erat verax, hii blandaque verba requirunt; Cristus erat iustus, hii nisi velle vident: Cristus erat constans, hii vento mobiliores; Obstitit ille malis, hii mala stare sinunt:351
Cristus erat virgo, sunt illi raro pudici;
Hic bonus est pastor, hii sed ouile vorant: Hii pleno stomacho laudant ieiunia Cristi; Mollibus induti, nudus et ipse pedes:
Et que plus poterunt sibi fercula lauta parari,352
Ad festum Bachi dant holocausta quasi. Esca placens ventri, &c. as 29 ff.
As follows in TH₂,
Sunt clerus, miles, cultor, tres trina gerentes;353
Hic docet, hic pugnat, alter et arua colit. Quid sibi sit clerus primo videamus, et ecce De reliquis fugiens mundus adheret eis.354
Primo prelatos constat preferre sequendos, Nam via doctorum tucior illa foret.
Morigeris verbis modo sunt quam plura docentes, Facta tamen dictis dissona cerno suis.
Ipse Ihesus facere bene cepit, postque docere, Set modo prelatis non manet ille modus. Ille fuit pauper, isti cumulantur in auro; Hic pacem dederat, hii quoque bella ferunt:
Ille fuit largus, hii sunt velut archa tenaces; Hunc labor inuasit, hos fouet aucta quies: Ille fuit mitis, hii sunt magis igne furentes; Hic humilis subiit, hii superesse volunt:
Ille misertus erat, hii vindictamque sequntur; Sustulit hic penas, hos timor inde fugat: Ille fuit virgo, vix vnus castus eorum;
Hic bonus est pastor, hii set ouile vorant: Ille fuit verax, hii blandaque verba requirunt;
Ille fuit iustus, hii nisi velle vident:
Ille fuit constans, hii vento mobiliores;
Obstitit ipse malis, hii magis ipsa sinunt:355
Hii pleno stomacho laudant ieiunia Cristi; Hic limpham peciit, hii bona vina bibunt: Et quotquot poterit &c., as 27 ff.
Et quotquot poterit mens escas premeditari
Lautas, pro stomacho dant renouare suo.
Esca placens ventri, sic est et venter ad escas, Vt Venus a latere stet bene pasta gule.
Respuit in monte sibi Cristus singula regna, Hiis nisi mundana gloria sola placet.
Moribus assuetus olim simplex fuit, et nunc
Presul opes mores deputat esse suos.
Creuerunt set opes et opum furiosa cupido, Et cum possideant plurima, plura petunt.
Sunt in lege dei nuper magis hii meditati, Numen eis vultum prestitit vnde suum:
Nunc magis intrauit animos suspectus honorum, Fit precium dignis, sunt neque cuncta satis.
In precio precium nunc est, dat census honores, Omneque pauperies subdita crimen habet.
Cum loquitur diues, omnis tunc audiet auris, Pauperis ore tamen nulla loquela valet: Si careat censu, sensus nichil est sapienti, Census in orbe modo sensibus ora premit.
Pauper erit stultus, loquitur licet ore Catonis; Diues erit sapiens, nil licet ipse sciat:
Est in conspectu paupertas vilis eorum
Cuiuscumque viri, sit licet ipse bonus; Sit licet et diues peruerse condicionis, Horum iudiciis non erit ipse malus.
Nil artes, nil pacta fides, nil gracia lingue, Nil fons ingenii, nil probitas, sine re: Nullus inops sapiens; vbi res, ibi copia sensus; Si sapiat pauper, nil nisi pauper erit.
Quem mundus reprobat, en nos reprobamus eundem,
Vtque perit pereat perdicionis opus;356 Nos set eum laude nostra dignum reputamus,
Copia quem mundi duxit ad orbis opes: Et sic prelatis mundus prefertur ab intus, Hiis tamen exterius fingitur ipse deus.
Laudamus veteres, nostris tamen vtimur annis, Nec vetus in nobis regula seruat iter: Non tunc iusticiam facinus mortale fugarat, Que nunc ad superos rapta reliquit humum.
Felices anime mundum renuere, set intus
Cura domos superas scandere tota fuit; Non venus aut vinum sublimia pectora fregit, Que magis interius concupiere deum.
Plura videre potes modo set nouitatis ad instans, Que procul a Cristi laude superba gerunt:
Nunc magis illesa seruant sua corpora leta, Set non sunt ista gaudia nata fide: Sufficit hiis sola ficte pietatis in vmbra, Dicant pomposi, quam pius ordo dei.
Pro fidei meritis prelati tot paciuntur, Vnde viros sanctos nos reputamus eos.
Hic loquitur de prelatis illis qui carnalia appetentes vltra modum delicate viuunt.
Capm ii
Permanet ecce status Thome, cessit tamen actus,
Normaque Martini deperit alma quasi; Sic qui pastor erat, nunc Mercenarius extat,357
Quo fugiente lupus spergit vbique gregem. Non caput in gladio iam vincit, nec valet arto Vincere cilicio deliciosa caro:
Ollarum carnes preponit fercula, porros, Gebas pro manna presul habere petit.358
Prodolor! en tales sinus ecclesie modo nutrit, Qui pro diuinis terrea vana petunt.
Ollarum carnes carnalia facta figurant, Que velut in cleri carne libido coquit.
Est carni cognata venus, iactancia, fastus, Ambicio, liuor, crapula, rixa, dolus.
Ventre saginato veneris suspirat ad vsum Carnis amica caro, carnea membra petens: Et sic non poterunt virtutum tangere culmen, Dum dominatur eis ventris iniqus amor.
Subuertunt Sodomam tumor, ocia, copia panis, Impietasque tenax: presul, ad ista caue.
Set modo prelati dicant michi quicquid ad aures, Lex tamen ex proprio velle gubernat eos: Si mundo placeant carnique placencia reddant, Ex anima virtus raro placebit eis.
Bachus adest festo patulo diffusus in auro,
110
Precellit calices maior honore ciphus;
Glorificans mensam non aurea vasa recondit, Quo poterit vano vanus honore frui.
Aula patet cunctis oneratque cibaria mensas,
Indulgetque nimis potibus atque cibis:
Vestibus et facie longus nitet ordo clientum, Ad domini nutus turba parata leues: Sic modico ventri vastus vix sufficit orbis, Atque ministrorum vocibus aula fremit.
Tantum diuitibus, aliis non festa parantur, Nec valet in festo pauper habere locum;
Vanaque sic pietas stat victa cupidine ventris;
Dum sit honor nobis, nil reputatur onus.
Sicque famem Cristi presul laudare gulosus
Presumit, simile nec sibi quicquid agit;
120
130
Quicquid et ad vicium mare nutrit, terra vel aer, Querit habetque sibi luxuriosa fames:
Esuriens anima maceratur, et ipsa voluptas
Carnis ad excessum crassat in ore gulam.
Sic epulis largis est pleno ventre beatus
Luce, set in scortis gaudia noctis habet;
Cumque genas bibulas Bachus rubefecerit ambas, Erigit ex stimulis cornua ceca Venus: Sic preclara viri virtus, sic vita beata
Deliciis pastus cum meretrice cubat.
Frigida nulla timet Acherontis, quem calefactum
Confouet incesti lectus amore sui;
Sicque voluptatum varia dulcedine gaudet, Et desideriis seruit vbique suis;
Sicque ioco, venere, vino sompnoque beatus, Expendit vite tempora vana sue.
Nescit perpetuo quod torrem nutriat igni
Corpus, quod tantis nutrit alitque modis.
Hic loquitur de prelatis illis qui lucris terrenis inhiant, honore prelacie gaudent, et
non vt prosint set vt presint, episcopatum desiderant.
Capm . iii.
140
150
Nemo potest verus dominis seruire duobus,
Presul in officio fert tamen illa duo:
Eterni regis seruum se dicit, et ipse
Terreno regi seruit et astat ei:
Clauiger ethereus Petrus extitit, isteque poscit359
Claues thesauri regis habere sibi.
Sic est deuotus cupidus, mitisque superbus, Celicus et qui plus sollicitatur humo: Sic mundum sic et Cristum retinebit vtrumque, Mundus amicicior, Cristus amicus, erit.
Inter eos, maior quis sit, lis sepe mouetur, Set quis erit melior, questio nulla sonat:
Si tamen ad mundi visum facies bonitatis
Eminet, hoc raro viscera cordis habent.
Hoc deus esse pium statuit quodcunque iuuaret, Nos tamen ad nocuas prouocat ira manus:
Vti iusticia volo, set conuertor in iram,
Principiumque bonum destruit ira sequens:
Carnem castigo, miseros sustento, set inde Nascens furatur gloria vana bonum.
Istud fermentum mundane laudis et ire
Absque lucro meriti respuit ira dei:
In vicium virtus sic vertitur, vt sibi mundus
160
Gaudeat et Cristus transeat absque lucris.
Vt presul prosit dudum sic ordo petebat, Set modo que presit mitra colenda placet.
Presulis ex precibus populo peccante solebat Ira dei minui nec meminisse mali; Nuncque manus Moyses non erigit in prece noster, Nos Amalech ideo vexat in ense suo. Moyse leuante manus Iosue victoria cedit, Dumque remittit eas, victus ab hoste redit: Sic pro plebe manu, lacrimis, prece, sidera pulsans
190
Presul ab instanti munit ab hoste suos; Ac, si dormitet victus torpore sacerdos, Subdita plebs viciis de leuitate cadit.
Quos habeat fructus suplex deuocio iusti,
In precibus Moysi quisque notare potest.
Qui bonus est pastor gregis ex pietate mouetur, Et propriis humeris fert sibi pondus ouis;360
Qui licet inmunis sit ab omni labe, suorum
Membrorum culpas imputat ipse sibi.
Non in se Cristus crimen transisse fatetur, Set reus in membris dicitur esse suis:
Non facit hic populum delinquere, set tamen eius
Suscepit culpas vt remoueret eas.
Nunc tamen, vt d i c u n t , e s t p r e s u l t a l i s in orbe,
Qui docet hoc factum, nec tamen illud agit:
Nam qui de proprio se ledit crimine, raro
Efficitur curis hic aliena salus:
Non valet ille deo conferre salubria voto, Ad mundi cultum qui dedit omne suum.
Presul in orbe gregem curare tenetur egentem,
Ipse videns maculas vngere debet eas:
Set si magnatos presul noscat maculatos, Illos non audet vngere, namque timet.
Si reliqui peccent, quid ob hoc dum soluere possunt?361
Torquentur bursa sic reus atque rea:
Ipse gregis loculos mulget, trahit in tribulosque
Cause quo lana vulsa manebit ei.
Quod corpus peccat peccantis bursa relaxat: Hec statuunt iura presulis ecce noua.
200
Sic iteranda modo venus affert lucra registro; Dum patitur bursa, sunt residiua mala:
Dum loculus pregnat satis, impregnare licebit; Dat partus loculi iura subacta tibi.
Sic timor et lucrum sunt qui peccata relaxant, Sub quorum manibus omne recumbit opus:
220 230 Capm . iiii.
Sic lucri causa presul mulcet sua iura, Annuit et nostris fas adhibere malis:
Mammona sic nummi nobis dispensat iniqui, Non tamen eternas prestat habere domos.
Nunc furit en Iudex, si luxuracio simplex Fiat, et incestum nescit habere reum: Si coheat laicus resolutus cum resoluta, Clamat in ecclesia clerus et horret ea; Clerus et in cohitu si peccet, nil reputatur, Dum Iudex cause parsque sit ipse sue.
Sic modo dii gentis subuertunt cunctipotentis
Iura, que dant michi ius, sum magis vnde reus;
Sicque grauant alios duro sub pondere pressos, Inque suis humeris quam leue fertur onus.
Vxor adulterio deprensa remittitur, in quo
Exemplum venie Cristus habere docet; Tale tamen crimen non aurea bursa redemit,
Set contrita magis mens medicamen habet. Non tamen est lacrima modo que delere valebit
Crimen, si bursa nesciat inde forum:
Bursa valet culpam, valet expurgareque penam, Bursa valet quantum curia nostra valet.
Hic loquitur de l e g i b u s e o r u m
,
362
Num dat pre manibus sceleris veniam michi Cristus?
Non puto, set facto post miseretur eo:
Aut quod peccatum non est, numquid prohibendum363
Hoc Cristus statuit? talia nulla facit.
240
Nunc set, que Moysi neque lex prohibet neque
Cristi,
Plurima decretis dant prohibenda nouis;
Set michi que statuunt hodie peccata, remittunt
Cras, sibi si dedero: de quibus ergo peto.
Aut est quod proprie res peccatum gerit in se,
Aut nisi sit vetita, non foret ipsa mala.
Est si peccatum, tunc cur, quam sit prius actum,
Prestat idem nummis posse licere meis?
Est si res licita, tunc cur sua lex positiua
Hanc fore dampnandam striccius artat eam?
Hoc de iusticia puto non venit, immo voluntas
Taliter vt fiat lucra petendo iubet:
Exequitur iuste rem iustam, qui bene causas
Non zelo nummi iudicat, immo dei.
Legibus ecclesie quicquid sit in orbe ligatum
Ex iusta causa, credo ligare decet:
Set nichil iniustum deus accipit, vnde nec alter
Affirmare potest quod deus ipse negat.
250
260
Alcius ecce Simon temptat renouare volatum, Ne cadat ipse nouo plura timere potest.
Non laqueare venit iter humanum pius ille
Cristus, set planam dirigit ipse viam; Nos tamen ex plano componimus aspera, durum
Ex molli, que scelus pro pietate damus.
Lex etenim Cristi fuit hec quam gracia mulcet, Nostra set ex penis lex positiua riget.
Lex Cristi simplex sub paucis condita verbis
Clauditur, vnde iugum suaue ministrat onus:364
Infinita tamen legis sentencia nostre
Aggravat, et finem vix habet ipsa suum.
Libera lex Cristi satis est, fit legeque nostra
Absque lucro gratis gracia nulla viris.
Omne fit ex causa; sic est quod lex positiua, Quam fundat clerus, grande figurat opus.
In quanto volucres petit auceps carpere plures, Vult tanto laqueos amplificare suos:
270
280
In quanto leges auget clerus positiuas, Fit magis hiis stricta gentis in orbe via:
Cum magis in stricto gradimur, cicius pede lapso
Sternimur, et clero subpeditamur eo:
Cum sibi plus mundum teneat clerusque subactum,
Tum magis ecclesia gestat in orbe l u c r a:
Dum magis est clerus diues, magis inde superbus365
Astat, et ex velle dat sua iura fore.
Sol notat ecclesiam, Sinagogam luna figurat, Set modo custodes ista nec illa ferunt:
Sunt qui nec legis veteris precepta reseruant, Nec que Cristus eis addidit ipse noua.
Nuper erat firmus presul sine crimine sanctus,
Vtilis in populo, dignior ante deum;
Set modo si mundum poterit complectere vanum, Est sibi nil populi laus vel ab ore dei.
Hic loquitur de prelatis qui bona mundi temporalia possidentes spiritualia omittunt.
Capm . v.
Hec vox angelica, que nuper in ethere Romam
Terruit, en nostro iam patet orbe nouo.
Tempore Siluestri, dum Constantinus eidem
Contulit ecclesie terrea dona sue, ‘Virus in ecclesia seritur nunc,’ angelus inquit, ‘Terrea dum mundi fit domus ipsa dei.’
Sic fuit vt dixit, postquam possessio creuit
290
In proprium cleri, virus adhesit ei:
Sic reditus iam quisque suos amat, et sibi quid sit
Vtile sollicitis computat ipse viis.
Ecclesie iura sibi nil sunt, dummodo castra
Curant cum t e r r i s amplificare suis.
Esuriunt mundum semper, set in ordine solum
Nomen ab ecclesiis sufficit illud eis.
300
310
Ordinis angelici fertur quod sunt dominati
Atque potestates, sic et in orbe vides;
Nam quia clerus ibi nequit ipsis assimilari,
Ferre gerarchiam dat sibi terra suam:366
Sic quia prelatus dubitat quid carpere celis,
Huius vult mundi certus honore frui.
Dixit Pilato Cristus, quod in hoc sibi mundo
Non fuerat regnum: iam neque presul eum
Consequitur, set ei contraria sumere cuncti
Regna volunt, et in hiis bella mouere viris.
Pro fidei causis nolunt dare bella paganis,
Solum nec verba pandere lege sacra;
Set pro terrenis si contradixerit ipsis
Saltem Cristicola, dant ibi bella fera.
Sic quia mundana sine Cristo iam capit arma
Clerus in ecclesia, iure carebit ea.
‘Cognoscetis eos,’ Cristus, ‘de fructibus horum,’
Dicit, et est illa regula vera satis.
Quomodocumque suam clerus legem positiuam
Laruat, erit testis cultus ad acta foris.
Egros vmbra Petri sanauit, lux neque nostra
Nec vox nec votum ferre meretur opem.
Subdita decurrit pedibus super equora siccis
320
Petrus, iam nostram mergit et vnda fidem.
Qui nos prosequitur, Cristi de lege iubemur
Illum per nostras rectificare preces;
Nos tamen absque deo de iure nouo positiuo
Vindictam gladii ferre monemus ibi.
Sic hos destruimus quos edificare tenemur, Perdimus et Cristi quod tulit ipse lucri.
‘Sit michi vindicta,’ deus inquit, set quia papa
Est deus in terris, vindicat ipse prius.
Hic loquitur qualiter Cristus pacem suis
discipulis dedit et reliquit: dicit tamen367 quod
modo propter bona terrena guerras saltem
