2 FEBRUARY 1867, Page 16

BOOKS.

MEDLEVAL MYTHS.* FIFTY years ago the expression " myth " was unknown in Eng- land. It is now a recognized popular term. The diffusion of this word is at once the sign and consequence of the spread of new historical views throughout society. There has in fact been no greater or more permanent result achieved by the critical. school of historians, than the establishment of the doctrine that a large number of stories which at one time passed for portions of

• Curious Myths of the Middlo Aga. By 8. a Gould. London: ithlngtons. authentic history, are neither records of real transactions nor the results of deliberate forgery. Even now many persons hardly realize that such tales, for example, as that of " William Tell " may grow up, gain consistency, and find their way into chronicles which record actual facts, without, on the one hand, having any claim to be considered historical, or being on the other fiction invented by some assignable impostor. These tales are really the fruit not so much of fraud, as of the existence of a con- dition of popular feeling which it is difficult for educated per- sons of modern times to comprehend. In many states of society there exists an absolute want of all appreciation of the na- ture of evidence. Tales and legends arise no one knows how, and are received with implicit belief not because of any external evidence of their truth, but because they correspond with the feeling and ideas of the persons to whom and by whom they are narrated. Thus the tale of Tell had, as any one may see who chooses to examine Mr. Gould's book, been known to different nations long before the date assigned to the existence of the Swiss hero. No one can now venture to assert by what means a story found in different forms in Persia, Iceland, and Denmark was at last appropriated to Switzerland, but it is pretty certain that the Swiss peasants who told and repeated the tale of their deliverance were not conscious of imposture. The story was appropriate, and to use a vague expression which is even now made an excuse for believing important facts on slender proof, "the tale bore within itself its own evidence." It is of course true that mythical narrations often have a real relation to historical facts, whilst deliberate fraud often gives currency to what might be thought pure myths. No one, for example, who has not studied the growth of the legend of Tell can say for certain whether the narrative is in the strict sense a myth, or whether it may not be partially an annalist's invention. On this point Mr. Gould throws no light, and indeed fails to give any aid whatever to persons who wish to study the real nature of mythical history.

There arises, for example, a question connected with myths well deserving careful investigation. This is whether it is or is not possible to lay down any rules as to the relation be- tween mythical anecdotes, and the records, often otherwise seemingly historical, with which these legendary details are interwoven. It is no doubt the principle generally adopted by the best historical inquirers, that where one portion of a narra- tive is clearly not historical, the rest must be considered, if not absolutely untrue, at any rate devoid of all evidence of its truth. This principle is on the whole sound. Still, it would cer- tainly be desirable to carry further than has hitherto been done the investigation into the extent to which historical facts became disguised by the growth of legend. An investigation of the kind we propose cannot be applied to the myths of Greece or Rome, since the onlf histories by which the early condition of the Greeks or Romans is known to us are themselves the channel through which obviously mythical stories are handed down. It is, for example, easy enough to discover that the Trojan war was not really such as Homer paints it, but since we have no authority for the war at all except the Homeric poems, it is now impossible to form any judgment as to what the siege of Troy really was, or whether Troy ever stood a siege. But some of the mythical narratives of medimval times afford apparently a more hopeful field for philosophical examination. In some cases at least it must be possible to compare what is known from other sources really to have, taken place, with the mythical narrative which has attached itself to historic names and transactions. Thus Charlemagne's history is well known, and the romances to which that history gave rise are known also ; and it surely might be pos- sible to draw some inference.s of importance as to the growth and nature of mythology, by comparing the Charlemagne of history with the Charlemagne of romance.

Any one, however, who wishes to speculate on the nature of myths will get little direct aid from Mr. Gould, and will, moreover, find in that gentleman's work, short as it is, a good deal which has no bearing on the question of which it professes to treat. What, for example, Dr. Johnson's visit to Col has to do with medimval legends can be apparent to no one except a professional book-maker whilst the long and we own interesting account of Jacques Aymar is only so far connected with the Middle Ages that he professed to track criminals partly by the movement of a rod, and that belief in a divining rod was a mediaeval superstition. Nevertheless, if Mr. Gould tells a good deal that is not worth tell- ing, and shows himself so utterly devoid of all notion of historical criticism that he shows a lingering belief in the story of the " Wandering Jew," still, he tells his tales well, and suggests some important inferences from them which he does not himself draw.

It is, for instance, impossible to read these traditions of the Middle Ages without being struck with some points of very curious contrast between them and the myths of antiquity. Their marked peculiarity is their religious character. The legend of the "Wan- dering Jew " exhibits the darkest side of Christianity as it existed in the Dark Ages. A single insult to Christ is avenged by what was practically eternal punishment. It is, in fact, difficult not to conceive that the " Wandering Jew" in some sense was meant to represent the Jewish race, at once wandering hopelessly over the world, and bearing an involuntary testi- mony to the truth of Christian doctrine. On the other hand, the myth of the " Seven Sleepers " so strikingly represents the brightest side of the Catholic faith, that it is startling to find that the legend is apparently a Christian adaptation of a heathen myth.

Closely connected with the religious nature of medimval tales is their melancholy character. No one will dispute that, on the whole, classical mythology is full of gaiety and brightness, and few persons will deny that mediaeval mythology is strikingly sad and sombre. Let any one, for instance, read the account of the Mountain of Venus and of Tannhauser's fate, and he may form some conjecture as to the state of society in which this tale grew up. It is quite true that the story enforces that the mercy of Heaven spreads further than that of the Pope, but it also intimates that Heaven's mercy came too late to save the unhappy knight. One even of what at first sight appears the hopeful aspect of these myths speaks in reality of social misery. The people of each country believed in the rise of some great deliverer, generally one of the great men of the past, who would arise and save them from their oppressors. Charle- magne was believed to sleep near Salzburg, waiting till the times of Antichrist were fulfilled, when he would wake up and avenge the blood of the Saints. Frederick Barbarossa was thought to be sleeping in a cavern in Thuringia, till his beard should grow round the stone table before him, and it should be time for him to come forth and release Germany from her bondage. Each country, in short, had its own hero, who was to wake up and save the mass of the people from the oppression of the nobles. The existence of the longing for deliverance bears witness to the sufferings endured, and also explains the historical fact that when at last the power of the Kings came into conflict with feudal Lords, the people almost invariably supported the Crown. Men like Louis XI. of France and Henry VII. of England, though in some respects the least heroic of monarchs, gave the mass of the peasants that rest and relief which they had dreamt they might receive from some ancient hero when he rose again from his sleep.

For medimval myths have this further peculiarity, that they really exercised influence on the course of history. No classical legend did this. As far at least as our knowledge goes, ancient mythological considerations rarely influenced thipublic feeling of antiquity. It is indeed possible that the supposed mythological connection between Greece and Rome affected the Roman conquerors of Greece with a sort of enthusiasm for the people they subdued, and thus for a certain time exerted an influence over Roman policy. But if this were so, this is emphatically one of those solitary exceptions which proves what is the nature of the general rule. It would be difficult to find any other example of the policy of Greece or Rome being modified by the influence of religious tradition. On the other hand, mythical conceptions had a real influence in the Europe of the Middle Ages. For example, the legend of Prester John not only led a Pope to send a letter to a ruler who had no real existence, but excited the belief that great and wealthy and unknown kingdoms were to be discovered, and this aided in producing those discoveries which opened a new world to Europe, and in a sense terminated the Middle Ages.