See ENGLAND: A. D. 1885-1886.
LIBERI HOMINES.
See SLAVERY, MEDIÆVAL: ENGLAND.
LIBERIA, The founding of the Republic of.
See SLAVERY, NEGRO: A. D. 1816-1847.
LIBERTINES OF GENEVA, The.
The party which opposed Calvin's austere and arbitrary rule in
Geneva were called Libertines.
F. P. Guizot,
John Calvin,
chapter 9-16.
LIBERTINI.
See INGENUI.
LIBERTY BELL, The.
See INDEPENDENCE HALL.
{2000}
LIBERTY BOYS.
The name by which the Sons of Liberty of the American
Revolution were familiarly known.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1765; NEW YORK: A. D. 1773-1774;
and LIBERTY TREE.
LIBERTY CAP.
"This emblem, like many similar ones received by the
revolutions from the hand of chance, was a mystery even to
those who wore it. It had been adopted [at Paris] for the
first time on the day of the triumph of the soldiers of
Châteauvieux [April 15, 1792, when 41 Swiss soldiers of the
regiment of Châteauvieux, condemned to the galleys for
participation in a dangerous mutiny of the garrison at Nancy
in 1790, but liberated in compliance with the demands of the
mob, were fêted as heroes by the Jacobins of Paris]. Some said
it was the coiffure of the galley-slaves, once infamous, but
glorious since it had covered the brows of these martyrs of
the insurrection; and they added that the people wished to
purify this head-dress from every stain by wearing it
themselves. Others only saw in it the Phrygian bonnet, a
symbol of freedom for slaves. The 'bonnet rouge' had from its
first appearance been the subject of dispute and dissension
amongst the Jacobins; the 'exaltés' wore it, whilst the
'modérés' yet abstained from adopting it." Robespierre and his
immediate followers opposed the "frivolity" of the "bonnet
rouge," and momentarily suppressed it in the Assembly. "But
even the voice of Robespierre, and the resolutions of the
Jacobins, could not arrest the outbreak of enthusiasm that had
placed the sign of 'avenging equality' ('l'égalité
vengeresse') on every head; and the evening of the day on
which it was repudiated at the Jacobins' saw it inaugurated at
all the theatres. The bust of Voltaire, the destroyer of
prejudice, was adorned with the Phrygian cap of liberty,
amidst the shouts of the spectators, whilst the cap and pike
became the uniform and weapon of the citizen soldier."
A. de Lamartine,
History of the Girondists,
book 13 (volume 1).
ALSO IN:
H. M. Stephens,
History of the French Revolution,
volume 2, chapter 2.
LIBERTY GAP, Battle of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1863 (JUNE-JULY: TENNESSEE).
LIBERTY PARTY AND LIBERTY LEAGUE.
See SLAVERY, NEGRO: A. D. 1840-1847.
LIBERTY TREE AND LIBERTY HALL.
"Lafayette said, when in Boston, 'The world should never
forget the spot where once stood Liberty Tree, so famous in
your annals.' … The open space at the four corners of
Washington, Essex, and Boylston streets was once known as
Hanover Square, from the royal house of Hanover, and sometimes
as the Elm Neighborhood, from the magnificent elms with which
it was environed. It was one of the finest of these that
obtained the name of Liberty Tree, from its being used on the
first occasion of resistance to the obnoxious Stamp Act. …
At daybreak on the 14th August, 1765, nearly ten years before
active hostilities broke out, an effigy of Mr. Oliver, the
Stamp officer, and a boot, with the Devil peeping out of
it,—an allusion to Lord Bute,—was discovered hanging from
Liberty Tree. The images remained hanging all day, and were
visited by great numbers of people, both from the town and the
neighboring country. Business was almost suspended.
Lieutenant-Governor Hutchinson ordered the sheriff to take the
figures down, but he was obliged to admit that he dared not do
so. As the day closed in the effigies were taken down, placed
upon a bier, and, followed by several thousand people of every
class and condition," were borne through the city and then
burned, after which much riotous conduct on the part of the
crowd occurred. In 1766, when the repeal of the Stamp Act took
place, a large copper plate was fastened to the tree,
inscribed in golden characters:—'This tree was planted in the
year 1646, and pruned by order of the Sons of Liberty,
February 14th, 1766.' … The ground immediately about Liberty
Tree was popularly known as Liberty Hall. In August, 1767, a
flagstaff had been erected, which went through and extended
above its highest branches. A flag hoisted upon this staff was
the signal for the assembling of the Sons of Liberty. … In
August, 1775, the name of Liberty having become offensive to
the Tories and their British allies, the tree was cut down by
a party led by one Job Williams."
S. A. Drake,
Old Landmarks of Boston,
chapter 14.
LIBERUM VETO, The.
See POLAND: A. D. 1578-1652.
LIBRA, The Roman.
The ancient Roman unit of weight was the libra, or pondus,
from which the modern names of the livre and pound are
derived. Its weight was equal to 5,015 Troy gr. or 325 grams,
and it was identical with the Greek-Asiatic mina."
H. W. Chisholm,
Science of Weighing and Measuring,
chapter 2.
See, also, AS.
----------LIBRARIES: Start--------
LIBRARIES:
Ancient, Babylonia and Assyria.
"The Babylonians were … essentially a reading and writing
people. … Books were numerous and students were many. The
books were for the most part written upon clay [tablets] with
a wooden reed or metal stylus, for clay was cheap and
plentiful, and easily impressed with the wedge-shaped lines of
which the characters were composed. But besides clay, papyrus
and possibly also parchment were employed as writing
materials; at all events the papyrus is referred to in the
texts."
A. H. Sayce,
Social Life among the Assyrians and Babylonians,
page 30.
"We must speak of the manner in which the tablet was formed.
Fine clay was selected, kneaded, and moulded into the shape of
the required tablet. One side was flat, and the other rounded.
The writing was then inscribed on both sides, holes were
pricked in the clay, and then it was baked. The holes allowed
the steam which was generated during the process of baking to
escape. It is thought that the clay used in some of the
tablets was not only well kneaded, but ground in some kind of
mill, for the texture of the clay is as fine as some of our
best modern pottery. The wedges appear to have been impressed
by a square headed instrument."
E. A. W. Budge,
Babylonian Life and History,
p. 105.
{2001}
Assurbanipal, the Sardanapalus of the Greeks, was the greatest
and most celebrated of Assyrian monarchs. He was the principal
patron of Assyrian literature, and the greater part of the
grand library at Nineveh was written during his reign."
G. Smith,
Assyrian Discoveries,
chapter 18.
"Assurbanipal is fond of old books, particularly of the old
sacred works. He collects the scattered specimens from the
chief cities of his empire, and even employs scribes in
Chaldea, Ourouk, Barsippa, and Babylon to copy for him the
tablets deposited in the temples. His principal library is at
Nineveh, in the palace which he built for himself upon the
banks of the Tigris, and which he has just finished
decorating. It contains more than thirty thousand tablets,
methodically classified and arranged in several rooms, with
detailed catalogues for convenient reference. Many of the
works are continued from tablet to tablet and form a series,
each bearing the first words of the text as its title. The
account of the creation, which begins with the phrase:
'Formerly, that which is above was not yet called the heaven,'
was entitled: 'Formerly, that which is above, No.1;'
'Formerly, that which is above, No.2;' and so on to the end.
Assurbanipal is not less proud of his love of letters than of
his political activity, and he is anxious that posterity
should know how much he has done for literature. His name is
inscribed upon every work in his library, ancient and modern.
'The palace of Assurbanipal, king of legions, king of
multitudes, king of Assyria, to whom the god Nebo and the
goddess Tasmetu have granted attentive ears and open eyes to
discover the writings of the scribes of my kingdom, whom the
kings my predecessors, have employed. In my respect for Nebo,
the god of intelligence, I have collected these tablets; I
have had them copied, I have marked them with my name, and I
have deposited them in my palace.' The library at Dur-Sarginu,
although not so rich as the one in Nineveh, is still fairly
well supplied."
G. Maspéro,
Life in Ancient Egypt and Assyria,
chapter 16.
Collections of inscribed tablets had been made by
Tiglath-Pileser II., king of Assyria, B. C. 745, who had
copied some historical inscriptions of his predecessors.
Sargon, the founder of the dynasty to which Assur-bani-pal
belonged, B. C. 722, had increased this library by adding a
collection of astrological and similar texts, and Sennacherib,
B. C. 705, had composed copies of the Assyrian canon, short
histories, and miscellaneous inscriptions, to add to the
collection. Sennacherib also moved the library from Calah, its
original seat, to Nineveh, the capital. Esarhaddon, B. C. 681,
added numerous historical and mythological texts. All the
inscriptions of the former kings were, however, nothing
compared to those written during the reign of Assur-bani-pal.
Thousands of inscribed tablets from all places, and on every
variety of subject, were collected, and copied, and stored in
the library of the palace at Nineveh during his reign; and by
his statements they appear to have been intended for the
inspection of the people, and to spread learning among the
Assyrians. Among these tablets one class consisted of
historical texts, some the histories of the former kings of
Assyria, and others copies of royal inscriptions from various
other places. Similar to these were the copies of treaties,
despatches, and orders from the king to his generals and
ministers, a large number of which formed part of the library.
There was a large collection of letters of all sorts, from
despatches to the king on the one hand, down to private notes
on the other. Geography found a place among the sciences, and
was represented by lists of countries, towns, rivers, and
mountains, notices of the position, products, and character of
districts, &c., &c. There were tables giving accounts of the
law and legal decisions, and tablets with contracts, loans,
deeds of sale and barter, &c. There were lists of tribute and
taxes, accounts of property in the various cities, forming
some approach to a census and general account of the empire.
One large and important section of the library was devoted to
legends of various sorts, many of which were borrowed from
other countries. Among these were the legends of the hero
Izdubar, perhaps the Nimrod of the Bible. One of these legends
gives the Chaldean account of the flood, others of this
description give various fables and stories of evil spirits.
The mythological part of the library embraced lists of the
gods, their titles, attributes, temples, &c., hymns in praise
of various deities, prayers to be used by different classes of
men to different gods, and under various circumstances, as
during eclipses or calamities, on setting out for a campaign,
&c., &e. Astronomy was represented by various tablets and
works on the appearance and motions of the heavens, and the
various celestial phenomena. Astrology was closely connected
with Astronomy, and formed a numerous class of subjects and
inscriptions. An interesting division was formed by the works
on natural history; these consisted of lists of animals,
birds, reptiles, trees, grasses, stones, &c., &c., arranged in
classes, according to their character and affinities as then
understood, lists of minerals and their uses, lists of foods,
&c., &c. Mathematics and arithmetic were found, including
square and cube root, the working out of problems, &c., &c.
Much of the learning on these tablets was borrowed from the
Chaldeans and the people of Babylon, and had originally been
written in a different language and style of writing, hence it
was necessary to have translations and explanations of many of
these; and in order to make their meaning clear, grammars,
dictionaries, and lexicons were prepared, embracing the
principal features of the two languages involved, and enabling
the Assyrians to study the older inscriptions. Such are some
of the principal features of the grand Assyrian library, which
Assur-bani-pal established at Nineveh, and which probably
numbered over 10,000 clay documents."
George Smith,
Ancient History from the Monuments: Assyria,
pages 188-191.
"It is now [1882] more than thirty years since Sir Henry
Layard, passing through one of the doorways of the partially
explored palace in the mound of Konyunjik, guarded by
sculptured fish gods, stood for the first time in the double
chambers containing a large portion of the remains of the
immense library collected by Assurbannipal, King of Nineveh.
… Since that time, with but slight intermissions, this
treasure-house of a forgotten past has been turned over again
and again, notably in the expeditions of the late Mr. George
Smith, and still the supply of its cuneiform literature is not
exhausted. Until last year [1881] this discovery remained
unique; but the perseverance of the British Museum authorities
and the patient labour of Mr. Rassam were then rewarded by the
exhumation of what is apparently the library chamber of the
temple or palace at Sippara, with all its 10,000 tablets,
resting undisturbed, arranged in their position on the
shelves, just as placed in order by the librarian twenty-five
centuries ago. …
{2002}
From what Berosus tells us with regard to Sippara, or
Pantibiblon (the town of books), the very city, one of whose
libraries has just been brought to light, … it may be
inferred that this was certainly one of the first towns that
collected a library. … It is possible that the mound at
Mugheir enshrines the oldest library of all, for here are the
remains of the city of Ur (probably the Biblical Ur of the
Chaldees). From this spot came the earliest known royal brick
inscription, as follows:—'Urukh, King of Ur, who Bit Nanur
built.' Although there are several texts from Mugheir, such as
that of Dungi, son of Urukh, yet, unless by means of copies
made for later libraries in Assyria, we cannot be said to know
much of its library. Strange to say, however, the British
Museum possesses the signet cylinder of one of the librarians
of Ur, who is the earliest known person holding such an
office. … Its inscription is given thus by
Smith:—'Emuq-sin, the powerful hero, the King of Ur, King of
the four regions; Amil Anu, the tablet-keeper, son of Gatu his
servant.' … Erech, the modern Warka, is a city at which we
know there must have been one or more libraries, for it was
from thence Assurbannipal copied the famous Isdubar series of
legends in twelve tablets, one of which contained the account
of the Deluge. Hence also came the wonderful work on magic in
more than one hundred tablets: for, as we have it, it is
nothing more than a facsimile by Assurbannipal's scribes of a
treatise which had formed part of the collection of the school
of the priests at Erech. … Larsa, now named Senkereh, was
the seat of a tablet collection that seems to have been
largely a mathematical one; for in the remains we possess of
it are tablets containing tables of squares and cube roots and
others, giving the characters for fractions. There are from
here also, however, fragments with lists of the gods, a
portion of a geographical dictionary, lists of temples, &c.
… To a library at Cutha we owe the remnants of a tablet work
containing an account of the creation and the wars of the
gods, and, among others, a very ancient terra-cotta tablet
bearing a copy of an inscription engraved in the temple of the
god Dup Lan at Cutha, by Dungi, King of Ur. The number of
tablets and cylinders found by M. de Sarzec at Zirgulla show
that there too the habit of committing so much to writing was
as rife as in other cities of whose literary character we know
more."
The Libraries of Babylonia and Assyria
(Knowledge, November 24, 1882,
and March 2, 1883).
"One of the most important results of Sir A. H. Layard's
explorations at Nineveh was the discovery of the ruined
library of the ancient city, now buried under the mounds of
Kouyunjik. The broken clay tablets belonging to this library
not only furnished the student with an immense mass of
literary matter, but also with direct aids towards a knowledge
of the Assyrian syllabary and language. Among the literature
represented in the library of Kouyunjik were lists of
characters, with their various phonetic and ideographic
meanings, tables of synonymes, and catalogues of the names of
plants and animals. This, however, was not all. The inventors
of the cuneiform system of writing had been a people who
preceded the Semites in the occupation of Babylonia, and who
spoke an agglutinative language utterly different from that of
their Semitic successors. These Accadians, as they are usually
termed, left behind them a considerable amount of literature,
which was highly prized by the Semitic Babylonians and
Assyrians. A large portion of the Ninevite tablets,
accordingly, consists of interlinear or parallel translations
from Accadian into Assyrian, as well as of reading books,
dictionaries, and grammars, in which the Accadian original is
placed by the side of its Assyrian equivalent."
A. H. Sayce,
Fresh Light from the Ancient Monuments,
chapter 1.
LIBRARIES:
Greece.
"Pisistratus the tyrant is said to have been the first who
supplied books of the liberal sciences at Athens for public
use. Afterwards the Athenians themselves, with great care and
pains, increased their number; but all this multitude of
books, Xerxes, when he obtained possession of Athens, and
burned the whole of the city except the citadel, seized and
carried away to Persia. But king Seleucus, who was called
Nicanor, many years afterwards, was careful that all of them
should be again carried back to Athens." "That Pisistratus was
the first who collected books, seems generally allowed by
ancient writers. … In Greece were several famous libraries.
Clearchus, who was a follower of Plato, founded a magnificent
one in Heraclea. There was one in the island of Cnidos. The
books of Athens were by Sylla removed to Rome. The public
libraries of the Romans were filled with books, not of
miscellaneous literature, but were rather political and sacred
collections, consisting of what regarded their laws and the
ceremonies of their religion."
Aulus Gellius,
The Attic Nights,
book 6, chapter 17 (volume 2),
with foot-note by W. Beloe.
"If the libraries of the Greeks at all resembled in form and
dimensions those found at Pompeii, they were by no means
spacious; neither, in fact, was a great deal of room
necessary, as the manuscripts of the ancients stowed away much
closer than our modern books, and were sometimes kept in
circular boxes, of elegant form, with covers of turned wood.
The volumes consisted of rolls of parchment, sometimes purple
at the back, or papyrus, about twelve or fourteen inches in
breadth, and as many feet long as the subject required. The
pages formed a number of transverse compartments, commencing
at the left, and proceeding in order to the other extremity,
and the reader, holding in either hand one end of the
manuscript, unrolled and rolled it up as he read. Occasionally
these books were placed on shelves, in piles, with the ends
outwards, adorned with golden bosses, the titles of the
various treatises being written on pendant labels."
J. A. St. John,
The Hellenes,
volume 2, page 84.
"The learned reader need not be reminded how wide is the
difference between the ancient 'volumen,' or roll, and the
'volume' of the modern book-trade, and how much smaller the
amount of literary matter which the former may represent. Any
single 'book' or 'part' of a treatise would anciently have
been called 'volumen,' and would reckon as such in the
enumeration of a collection of books. The Iliad of Homer,
which in a modern library may form but a single volume, would
have counted as twenty-four 'volumina' at Alexandria.
{2003}
We read of authors leaving behind them works reckoned, not by
volumes or tens of volumes, but by hundreds. … It will at
once be understood that … the very largest assemblage of
'volumina' assigned as the total of the greatest of the
ancient collections would fall far short, in its real literary
contents, of the second-rate, or even third-rate collections
of the present day."
Libraries, Ancient and Modern
(Edinburgh Review,
January, 1874).
LIBRARIES:
Alexandria.
"The first of the Ptolemies, Lagus, not only endeavoured to
render Alexandria one of the most beautiful and most
commercial of cities, he likewise wished her to become the
cradle of science and philosophy. By the advice of an Athenian
emigrant, Demetrius of Phaleros, this prince established a
society of learned and scientific men, the prototype of our
academies and modern institutions. He caused that celebrated
museum to be raised, that became an ornament to the Bruchion;
and here was deposited the noble library, 'a collection,' says
Titus Livius, 'at once a proof of the magnificence of those
kings, and of their love of science.' Philadelphos, the
successor of Lagus, finding that the library of the Bruchion
already numbered 400,000 volumes, and either thinking that the
edifice could not well make room for any more, or being
desirous, from motives of jealousy, to render his name equally
famous by the construction of a similar monument, founded a
second library in the temple of Serapis, called the Serapeum,
situated at some distance from the Bruchion, in another part
of the town. These two libraries were denominated, for a
length of time, the Mother and the Daughter. During the war
with Egypt, Cæsar, having set fire to the king's fleet, which
happened to be anchored in the great port, it communicated
with the Bruchion; the parent library was consumed, and, if
any remains were rescued from the flames, they were, in all
probability, conveyed to the Serapeum. Consequently, ever
after, there can be no question but of the latter. Euergetes
and the other Ptolemies enlarged it successively; and
Cleopatra added 200,000 manuscripts at once from the library
of King Pergamos, given her by Mark Antony. … Aulus Gellius
and Ammianus Marcellus seem to insinuate that the whole of the
Alexandrian library had been destroyed by fire in the time of
Cæsar. … But both are mistaken on this point. Ammianus, in
the rest of his narrative, evidently confounds Serapeum and
Bruchion. … Suetonius (in his life of Domitian) mentions
that this emperor sent some amanuenses to Alexandria, for the
purpose of copying a quantity of books that were wanting in
his library; consequently a library existed in Alexandria a
long while after Cæsar. Besides, we know that the Serapeum was
only destroyed A. D. 301, by the order of Theodosius.
Doubtless the library suffered considerably on this
last-mentioned occasion; but that it still partly existed is
beyond a doubt, according to the testimony of Oroses, who,
twenty-four years later, made a voyage to Alexandria, and
assures us that he 'saw, in several temples, presses full of
books,' the remains of ancient libraries. … The trustworthy
Oroses, in 415, is the last witness we have of the existence
of a library at Alexandria. The numerous Christian writers of
the fifth and sixth centuries, who have handed down to us so
many trifling facts, have not said a word upon this important
subject. We, therefore, have no certain documents upon the
fate of our library from 415 to 636, or, according to others,
640, when the Arabs took possession of Alexandria—a period of
ignorance and barbarism, of war and revolutions, and vain
disputes between a hundred different sects. Now, towards A. D.
636, or 640, the troops of the caliph, Omar, headed by his
lieutenant, Amrou, took possession of Alexandria. For more
than six centuries, nobody in Europe took the trouble of
ascertaining what had become of the library of Alexandria. At
length, in the year 1660, a learned Oxford scholar, Edward
Pococke, who had been twice to the East, and had brought back
a number of Arabian manuscripts, first introduced the Oriental
history of the physician Abulfarage to the learned world, in a
Latin translation. In it we read the following passage:—'In
those days flourished John of Alexandria, whom we have
surnamed the Grammarian, and who adopted the tenets of the
Christian Jacobites. … He lived to the time when Amrou
Ebno'l-As took Alexandria. He went to visit the conqueror; and
Amrou, who was aware of the height of learning and science
that John had attained, treated him with every distinction,
and listened eagerly, to his lectures on philosophy, which
were quite new to the Arabians. Amrou was himself a man of
intellect and discernment, and very clear-headed. He retained
the learned man about his person. John one day said to him,
"You have visited all the stores of Alexandria, and you have
put your seal on all the different things you found there. I
say nothing about those treasures which have any value for
you; but, in good sooth, you might leave us those of which you
make no use." "What then is it that you want?" interrupted
Amrou. "The books of philosophy that are to be found in the
royal treasury," answered John. "I can dispose of nothing,"
Amrou then said, "without the permission of the lord of all
true believers, Omar Ebno'l-Chattab." He therefore wrote to
Omar, informing him of John's request. He received an answer
from Omar in these words. "As to the books you mention,
either, they agree with God's holy book, and then God's book
is all-sufficient without them; or they disagree with God's
book, in which case they ought not to be preserved." And, in
consequence, Amrou Ebno'l-As caused them to be distributed
amongst the different baths of the city, to serve as fuel. In
this manner they were consumed in half-a-year.' When this
account of Abulfarage's was made known in Europe, it was at
once admitted as a fact, without the least question. … Since
Pococke, another Arab historian, likewise a physician, was
discovered, who gave pretty nearly the same account. This was
Abdollatif, who wrote towards 1200, and consequently prior to
Abulfarage. … Abdollatif does not relate any of the
circumstances accessory to the destruction of the library. But
what faith can we put in a writer who tells us that he has
actually seen what could no longer have been in existence in
his time? 'I have seen;' says he, 'the portico and the college
that Alexander the Great caused to be built, and which
contained the splendid library,' &c. Now, these buildings were
situated within the Bruchion; and since the reign of Aurelian,
who had destroyed it—that is to say, at least nine hundred
years before Abdollatif—the Bruchion was a deserted spot,
covered with ruins and rubbish.
{2004}
Abulfarage, on the other hand, places the library in the Royal
Treasury; and the anachronism is just as bad. The royal
edifices were all contained within the walls of the Bruchion;
and not one of them could then be left. … As a fact is not
necessarily incontestable because advanced as such by one or
even two historians, several persons of learning and research
have doubted the truth of this assertion. Renaudot (Hist. des
Patriarches d'Alexandrie) had already questioned its
authenticity, by observing: 'This account is rather
suspicious, as is frequently the case with the Arabians.' And,
lastly, Querci, the two Assemani, Villoison, and Gibbon,
completely declared themselves against it. Gibbon at once
expresses his astonishment that two historians, both of Egypt,
should not have said a word about so remarkable an event. The
first of these is Eutychius, patriarch of Alexandria, who
lived in that city 500 years after it was taken by the
Saracens, and who gives a long and detailed account, in his
Annals, both of the siege and the succeeding events; the
second is Elmacin, a most veracious writer, the author of a
History of the Saracens, and who especially relates the life
of Omar, and the taking of Alexandria, with its minutest
circumstances. Is it conceivable or to be believed that these
two historians should have been ignorant of so important a
circumstance? That two learned men who would have been deeply
interested in such a loss should have made no mention of it,
though living and writing in Alexandria—Eutychius, too, at no
distant period from the event? and that we should learn it for
the first time from a stranger who wrote, six centuries after,
on the frontiers of Media? Besides, as Gibbon observes, why
should the Caliph Omar, who was no enemy to science, have
acted, in this one instance, in direct opposition to his
character. … To these reasons may be added the remark of a
German writer, M. Reinhard, who observes that Eutychius
(Annals of Eutychius, volume ii. page 316) transcribes the
very words of the letter in which Amrou gives the Caliph Omar
an account of the taking of Alexandria after a long and
obstinate siege. 'I have carried the town by storm,' says he,
'and without any preceding offer of capitulation. I cannot
describe all the treasures it contains; suffice it to say,
that it numbers 4,000 palaces, 4,000 baths, 40,000 taxable
Jews, 400 theatres, 12,000 gardeners who sell vegetables. Your
Mussulmans demand the privilege of pillaging the city, and
sharing the booty.' Omar, in his reply, disapproves of the
request, and expressly forbids all pillage or dilapidation. It
is plain that, in his official report, Amrou seeks to
exaggerate the value of his conquest, and to magnify its
importance, like the diplomatists of our times. He does not
overlook a single hovel, nor a Jew, nor a gardener. How then
could he have forgotten the library, he who, according to
Abulfarage, was a friend to the fine arts and philosophy? …
Elmacin in turn gives us Amrou's letter nearly in the same
terms, and not one word of the library. … We … run no
great risk in drawing the conclusion, from all these premises,
that the library of the Ptolemies no longer existed in 640 at
the taking of Alexandria by the Saracens. … If it be true,
as we have every reason to think, that in 640 … the
celebrated library no longer existed, we may inquire in what
manner it had been dispersed and destroyed since 415 when
Oroses affirms that he saw it? In the first place we must
observe that Oroses only mentions some presses which he saw in
the temples. It was not, therefore, the library of the
Ptolemies as it once existed in the Serapeum. Let us call to
mind, moreover, that ever since the first Roman emperors,
Egypt had been the theatre of incessant civil warfare, and we
shall be surprised that any traces of the library could still
exist in later times."
Historical Researches on the pretended burning
of the Library of Alexandria by the Saracens
(Fraser's Magazine. April, 1844).
"After summing up the evidence we have been able to collect in
regard to these libraries, we conclude that almost all the
700,000 volumes of the earlier Alexandrian libraries had been
destroyed before the capture of the city by the Arabs; that
another of considerable size, but chiefly of Christian
literature, had been collected in the 250 years just preceding
the Arab occupation; and that Abulpharaj, in a statement that
is not literally true, gives, in the main, a correct account
of the final destruction of the Alexandrian Library."
C. W. Super,
Alexandria and its Libraries
(National Quarterly Review, December, 1875).
ALSO IN:
E. Edwards,
Memoirs of Libraries,
book 1, chapter 5 (volume 1).
E. Edwards,
Libraries and the Founders of Libraries,
chapter 1.
See, also,
EDUCATION, ANCIENT: ALEXANDRIA;
and ALEXANDRIA: B. C. 282-246.
LIBRARIES:
Pergamum.
See PERGAMUM.
LIBRARIES:
Rome.
Pliny states that C. Asinius Pollio was the first who
established a Public Library in Rome. But "Lucullus was
undoubtedly before him in this claim upon the gratitude of the
lovers of books. Plutarch tells us expressly that not only was
the Library of Lucullus remarkable for its extent and for the
beauty of the volumes which composed it, but that the use he
made of them was even more to his honour than the pains he had
taken in their acquisition. The Library, he says, 'was open to
all. The Greeks who were at Rome resorted thither, as it were
to the retreat of the Muses.' It is important to notice that,
according to Pliny, the benefaction of Asinius Pollio to the
literate among the Romans was 'ex manubiis.' This expression,
conjoined with the fact that the statue of M. Varro was placed
in the Library of Pollio, has led a recent distinguished
historian of Rome under the Empire, Mr. Merivale, to suggest,
that very probably Pollio only made additions to that Library
which, as we know from Suetonius, Julius Cæsar had directed to
be formed for public use under the care of Varro. These
exploits of Pollio, which are most likely to have yielded him
the 'spoils of war,' were of a date many years subsequent to
the commission given by Cæsar to Varro. It has been usually,
and somewhat rashly perhaps, inferred that this project, like
many other schemes that were surging in that busy brain,
remained a project only. In the absence of proof either way,
may it not be reasonably conjectured that Varro's bust was
placed in the Library called Pollio's because Varro had in
truth carried out Cæsar's plan, with the ultimate concurrence
and aid of Pollio? This Library—by whomsoever formed—was
probably in the 'atrium libertatis' on the Aventine Mount.
{2005}
From Suetonius we further learn that Augustus added porticoes
to the Temple of Apollo on the Palatine Mount, with (as
appears from monumental inscriptions to those who had charge
of them) two distinct Libraries of Greek and Latin authors;
that Tiberius added to the Public Libraries the works of the
Greek poets Euphorion, Rhianus, and Parthenius,—authors whom
he especially admired and tried to imitate,—and also their
statues; that Caligula (in addition to a scheme for
suppressing Homer) had thoughts of banishing both the works
and the busts of Virgil and of Livy—characterizing the one
as a writer of no genius and of little learning, and the other
(not quite so unfortunately) as a careless and verbose
historian—from all the Libraries; and that Domitian early in
his reign restored at vast expense the Libraries in the
Capitol which had been burnt, and to this end both collected
MSS. from various countries, and sent scribes to Alexandria
expressly to copy or to correct works which were there
preserved. In addition to the Libraries mentioned by
Suetonius, we read in Plutarch of the Library dedicated by
Octavia to the memory of Marcellus; in Aulus Gellius of a
Library in the Palace of Tiberius and of another in the Temple
of Peace; and in Dion Cassius of the more famous Ulpian
Library founded by Trajan. This Library, we are told by
Vopiscus, was in his day added, by way of adornment, to the
Baths of Diocletian. Of private Libraries amongst the Romans
one of the earliest recorded is that which Emilius Paulus
found amongst the spoils of Perseus, and which he is said to
have shared between his sons. The collection of Tyrunnion,
some eighty years later (perhaps), amounted, according to a
passage in Suidas, to 30,000 volumes. That of Lucullus—which,
some will think, ought to be placed in this category—has been
mentioned already. With that—the most famous of all—which
was the delight and the pride of Cicero, every reader of his
letters has an almost personal familiarity, extending even to
the names and services of those who were employed in binding
and in placing the books. … Of the Libraries of the
long-buried cities of Pompeii and Herculaneum there is not a
scintilla of information extant, other than that which has
been gathered from their ruins. At one time great hopes were
entertained of important additions to classical learning from
remains, the discovery of which has so largely increased our
knowledge both of the arts and of the manners of the Romans.
But all effort in this direction has hitherto been either
fruitless or else only tantalizing, from the fragmentary
character of the results attained."
E. Edwards,
Memoirs of Libraries,
pages 26-29.
"Most houses had a library, which, according to Vitruvius,
ought to face the east in order to admit the light of the
morning, and to prevent the books from becoming mouldy. At
Herculaneum a library with bookcases containing 1,700 scrolls
has been discovered. The grammarian Epaphroditus possessed a
library of 30,000, and Sammanicus Serenus, the tutor of the
younger Gordian, one of 62,000 books. Seneca ridicules the
fashionable folly of illiterate men who adorned their walls
with thousands of books, the titles of which were the delight
of the yawning owner. According to Publius Victor, Rome
possessed twenty-nine public libraries, the first of which was
opened by Asinius Polio in the forecourt of the Temple of
Peace; two others were founded during the reign of Augustus,
viz., the Octavian and the Palatine libraries. Tiberius,
Vespasian, Domitian, and Trajan added to their number; the
Ulpian library, founded by the last-mentioned emperor, being
the most important of all."
E. Guhl and W. Koner,
The Life of the Greeks and Romans,
p. 531.
LIBRARIES:
Herculaneum.
"Herculaneum remained a subterranean city from the year 79 to
the year 1706. In the latter year some labourers who were
employed in digging a well came upon a statue, a circumstance
which led—not very speedily but in course of time … —to
systematic excavations. Almost half a century passed, however,
before the first roll of papyrus was discovered, near to
Portici at a depth from the surface of about 120 English feet.
In the course of a year or two, some 250 rolls—most of them
Greek—had been found. … In 1754, further and more careful
researches were made by Camillo Paderni, who succeeded in
getting together no less than 337 Greek volumes and 18 Latin
volumes. The latter were of larger dimensions than the Greek,
and in worse condition. Very naturally, great interest was
excited by these discoveries amongst scholars in all parts of
Europe. In the years 1754 and 1755 the subject was repeatedly
brought before the Royal Society by Mr. Locke and other of its
fellows, sometimes in the form of communications from Paderni
himself; at other times from the notes and observations of
travellers. In one of these papers the disinterred rolls are
described as appearing at first 'like roots of wood, all
black, and seeming to be only of one piece. One of them
falling on the ground, it broke in the middle, and many
letters were observed, by which it was first known that the
rolls were of papyrus. … They were in wooden cases, so much
burnt, … that they cannot be recovered.' … At the
beginning of the present century the attention of the British
government was, to some extent, attracted to this subject. …
Leave was at length obtained from the Neapolitan government
for a literary mission to Herculaneum, which was entrusted to
Mr. Hayter, one of the chaplains to the Prince Regent. But the
results were few and unsatisfactory. … The Commission
subsequently entrusted to Dr. Sickler of Hildburghausen was
still more unfortunate. … In 1818, a committee of the House
of Commons was appointed to inquire into the matter. It
reported that, after an expenditure of about £1,100, no useful
results had been attained. This inquiry and the experiments of
Sickler led Sir Humphrey Davy to investigate the subject, and
to undertake two successive journeys into Italy for its
thorough elucidation. His account of his researches is highly
interesting. … 'My experiments,' says Sir Humphrey Davy, …
'soon convinced me that the nature of these MSS. had been
generally misunderstood; that they had not, as is usually
supposed, been carbonized by the operation of fire, … but
were in a state analogous to peat or Bovey coal, the leaves
being generally cemented into one mass by a peculiar substance
which had formed during the fermentation and chemical change
of the vegetable matter comprising them, in a long course of
ages. The nature of this substance being known, the
destruction of it became a subject of obvious chemical
investigation; and I was fortunate enough to find means of
accomplishing this, without injuring the characters or
destroying the texture of the MSS.' These means Sir Humphrey
Davy has described very minutely in his subsequent
communications to the Royal Society.
{2006}
Briefly, they may be said to have consisted in a mixture of a
solution of glue with alcohol, enough to gelatinize it,
applied by a camel's hair brush, for the separation of the
layers. The process was sometimes assisted by the agency of
ether, and the layers were dried by the action of a stream of
air warmed gradually up to the temperature of boiling water.
'After the chemical operation, the leaves of most of the
fragments separated perfectly from each other, and the Greek
characters were in a high degree distinct. … The MSS. were
probably on shelves of wood, which were broken down when the
roofs of the houses yielded to the weight of the
superincumbent mass. Hence, many of them were crushed and
folded in a moist state, and the leaves of some pressed
together in a perpendicular direction … in confused heaps;
in these heaps the exterior MSS. … must have been acted on
by the water; and as the ancient ink was composed of finely
divided charcoal suspended in a solution of glue or gum,
wherever the water percolated continuously, the characters
were more or less erased.' … Sir Humphrey Davy proceeds to
state that, according to the information given him, the number
of MSS. and fragments of MSS. originally deposited in the
Naples Museum was 1,696; that of these 88 had then been
unrolled and found to be legible; that 319 others had been
operated upon, and more or less unrolled, but were illegible;
that 24 had been sent abroad as presents; and that of the
remaining 1,265—which he had carefully examined—the majority
were either small fragments, or MSS. so crushed and mutilated
as to offer little hope of separation; whilst only from 80 to
120 offered a probability of success (and he elsewhere
adds:—'this estimate, as my researches proceeded, appeared
much too high'). … 'Of the 88 unrolled MSS. … the great
body consists of works of Greek philosophers or sophists; nine
are of Epicurus; thirty-two bear the name of Philodemus, three
of Demetrius, one of each of these authors:—Colotes,
Polystratus, Carneades, Chrysippus; and the subjects of these
works, … and of those the authors of which are unknown, are
either Natural or Moral Philosophy, Medicine, Criticism, and
general observations on Arts, Life, and Manners.'"
E. Edwards,
Memoirs of Libraries,
volume 1, book 1, chapter 5.
LIBRARIES:
Constantinople.
"When Constantine the Great, in the year 336, made Byzantium
the seat of his empire, he in a great measure newly built the
city, decorated it with numerous splendid edifices, and called
it after his own name. Desirous of making reparation to the
Christians, for the injuries they had sustained during the
reign of his tyrannical predecessor, this prince commanded the
most diligent search to be made after those books which had been
doomed to destruction. He caused transcripts to be made of
such books as had escaped the Diocletian persecution; to these
he added others, and with the whole formed a valuable Library
at Constantinople. On the death of Constantine, the number of
books contained in the Imperial Library was only six thousand
nine hundred; but it was successively enlarged by the
emperors, Julian and Theodosius the younger, the latter of
whom augmented it to one hundred thousand volumes. Of these,
more than half were burnt in the seventh century, by command
of the emperor Leo III., in order to destroy all the monuments
that might be quoted in proof against his opposition to the
worship of images. In this library was deposited the only
authentic copy of the Council of Nice: it has also been
asserted that the works of Homer, written in golden letters,
were consumed at the same time, together with a magnificent
copy of the Four Gospels, bound in plates of gold to the
weight of fifteen pounds, and enriched with precious stones.
The convulsions that weakened the lower empire, were by no
means favourable to the interests of literature. During the
reign of Constantine Porphyrogennetus (in the eleventh entry)
literature flourished for a short time: and he is said to have
employed many learned Greeks in collecting books for a library,
the arrangement of which he superintended himself. The final
subversion of the Eastern Empire, and the capture of
Constantinople by Mohammed II., A. D. 1453, dispersed the
literati of Greece over Western Europe: but the Imperial
Library was preserved by the express command of the conqueror,
and continued to be kept in some apartments of the Seraglio;
until Mourad (or Amurath) IV., in a fit of devotion,
sacrificed (as it is reported) all the books in this Library
to his hatred against the Christians."
T. H. Horne,
Introduction to the Study of Bibliography,
pages 23-25.
LIBRARIES:
Tripoli.
Destruction of Library by Crusaders.
See CRUSADES: A. D. 1104-1111.
LIBRARIES:
Mediæval.
Monastic Libraries.
"In every monastery there was established first a library,
then great studios, where, to increase the number of books,
skilful caligraphers transcribed manuscripts; and finally,
schools, open to all those who had need of, or desire for,
instruction. At Montierender, at Lorsch, at Corvey, at Fulda,
at St. Gall, at Reichenau, at Nonantula, at Monte Cassino, at
Wearmouth, at St. Albans, at Croyland, there were famous
libraries. At St. Michael, at Luneburg, there were two—one
for the abbot and one for the monks. In other abbeys, as at
Hirschau, the abbot himself took his place in the Scriptorium,
where many other monks were occupied in copying manuscripts.
At St. Riquier, books bought for high prices, or transcribed
with the utmost care, were regarded as the most valuable
jewels of the monastery. 'Here,' says the chronicler of the
abbey, counting up with innocent pride the volumes which it
contained—'here are the riches of the cloister, the treasures
of the celestial life, which fatten the soul by their
sweetness. This is how we fulfil the excellent precept, Love
the study of the Scriptures, and you will not love vice.' If
we were called upon to enumerate the principal centres of
learning in this century, we should be obliged to name nearly
all the great abbeys whose founders we have mentioned, for
most of them were great homes of knowledge. … The principal
and most constant occupation of the learned Benedictine nuns
was the transcription of manuscripts. It can never be known
how many services to learning and history were rendered by
their delicate hands throughout the middle ages. They brought
to the work a dexterity, an elegance, and an assiduity which
the monks themselves could not attain, and we owe to them some
of the most beautiful specimens of the marvellous caligraphy of
the period. … Nuns, therefore, were the rivals of monks in
the task of enlarging and fertilising the field of Catholic
learning.
{2007}
Every one is aware that the copying of manuscripts was one of
the habitual occupations of monks. By it they fed the
claustral libraries already spoken of, and which are the
principal source of modern knowledge. Thus we must again refer
to the first beginning of the Monastic Orders to find the
earliest traces of a custom which from that time was, as it
were, identified with the practices of religious life. In the
depths of the Thebaïde, in the primitive monasteries of
Tabenna, every house … had its library. There is express
mention made of this in the rule of St. Benedict. … In the
seventh century, St. Benedict Biscop, founder and abbot of
Wearmouth in England, undertook five sea-voyages to search for
and purchase books for his abbey, to which each time he
brought back a large cargo. In the ninth century, Loup of
Ferrières transformed his monastery of St. Josse-sur-Mer into
a kind of depot for the trade in books which was carried on
with England. About the same time, during the wars which
ravaged Lombardy, most of the literary treasures which are now
the pride of the Ambrosian library were being collected in the
abbey of Bobbio. The monastery of Pomposa, near Ravenna, had,
according to contemporaries, a finer library than those of
Rome or of any other town in the world. In the eleventh
century, the library of the abbey of Croyland numbered 3,000
volumes. The library of Novalese had 6,700, which the monks
saved at the risk of their lives when their abbey was
destroyed by the Saracens in 905. Hirschau contained an
immense number of manuscripts. But, for the number and value
of its books, Fulda eclipsed all the monasteries of Germany,
and perhaps of the whole Christian world. On the other hand,
some writers assure us that Monte Cassino, under the Abbot
Didier, the friend of Gregory VII., possessed the richest
collection which it was possible to find. The libraries thus
created by the labours of monks became, as it were, the
intellectual arsenals of princes and potentates. … There
were also collections of books in all the cathedrals, in all
the collegiate churches, and in many of the castles. Much has
been said of the excessive price of certain books during the
middle ages: Robertson and his imitators, in support of this
theory, are fond of quoting the famous collection of homilies
that Grecia Countess of Anjou bought, in 1056, for two hundred
sheep, a measure of wheat, one of millet, one of rye, several
marten-skins, and four pounds of silver. An instance like this
always produces its effect; but these writers forgot to say
that the books bought for such high prices were admirable
specimens of caligraphy, of painting, and of carving. It would
be just as reasonable to quote the exorbitant sums paid at
sales by bibliomaniacs of our days, in order to prove that
since the invention of printing, books have been excessive in
price. Moreover, the ardent fondness of the Countess Grecia
for beautiful books had been shared by other amateurs of a
much earlier date. Bede relates that Alfred, King of
Northumbria in the seventh century, gave eight hides of land
to St. Benedict Biscop in exchange for a Cosmography which
that book-loving abbot had bought at Rome. The monks loved
their books with a passion which has never been surpassed in
modern times. … It is an error to … suppose that books of
theology or piety alone filled the libraries of the monks.
Some enemies of the religious orders have, indeed, argued that
this was the case; but the proof of the contrary is evident in
all documents relating to the subject. The catalogues of the
principal monastic libraries during those centuries which
historians regard as most barbarous, are still in existence;
and these catalogues amply justify the sentence of the great
Leibnitz, when he said, 'Books and learning were preserved by
the monasteries.' It is acknowledged that if, on one hand, the
Benedictines settled in Iceland collected the Eddas and the
principal traditions of the Scandinavian mythology, on the
other all the monuments of Greece and Rome which escaped the
devastations of barbarians were saved by the monks of Italy,
France, and Germany, and by them alone. And if in some
monasteries the scarcity of parchment and the ignorance of the
superiors permitted the destruction, by copyists, of a certain
small number of precious works, how can we forget that without
these same copyists we should possess nothing—absolutely
nothing—of classic antiquity? … Alcuin enumerates among the
books in the library at York the works of Aristotle, Cicero,
Pliny, Virgil, Statius, Lucan, and of Trogus Pompeïus. In his
correspondence with Charlemagne he quotes Ovid, Horace,
Terence, and Cicero, acknowledging that in his youth he had
been more moved by the tears of Dido than by the Psalms of
David."
Count de Montalembert,
The Monks of the West,
book 18, chapter 4 (volume 6).
"It is in the great houses of the Benedictine Order that we
find the largest libraries, such as in England at Bury St.
Edmund's, Glastonbury, Peterborough, Heading, St. Alban's,
and, above all, that of Christ Church in Canterbury, probably
the earliest library formed in England. Among the other
English monasteries of the libraries of which we still possess
catalogues or other details, are St. Peter's at York,
described in the eighth century by Alcuin, St. Cuthbert's at
Durham, and St. Augustine's at Canterbury. At the dissolution
of the monasteries their libraries were dispersed, and the
basis of the great modern libraries is the volumes thus
scattered over England. In general, the volumes were disposed
much as now, that is to say, upright, and in large cases
affixed to a wall, often with doors. The larger volumes at
least were in many cases chained, so that they could only be
used within about six feet of their proper place; and since
the chain was always riveted on the fore-edge of one of the
sides of a book, the back of the volume had to be thrust first