ROBERTSON'S CRURCIT HISTORY. * THE history of five centuries and a
half, embracing the most obscure period, of the Christian Church Universal, is not to be compressed into a single volume, except at the price of sacrificing most of the qualities that give to books their charm, and make the acquisition of knowledge through printed pages a delightful as well as a useful occupation. It can in a certain sense be effected by treating history as the development of ideas or institutions, as Dr. Newman has done in what is perhaps the most brilliant specimen of his brilliant genius for sophism, the history of "The Development of Christian Doctrine " ; but this he properly styles an essay rather than a history. In another way also a splendid. literary effect can be produced after the example of Carlyle's " History of the French Revolution," where the salient facts and persons are presented in a series of typical pictures, that give the essence and spirit of the whole secular movement. Both these books, and many that more or less closely correspond to them, present what they intend to present with the fulness of detail and clearness of outline necessary to vivid apprehension by the mind of a reader. Their difference lies in the fact that the one class of books coordinates the chaos of events by tracing filiation of ideas through a judicious arrangement of historical phenomena ; the other class, through a selection of historical phenomena presented with their most striking and characteristic circumstances, impresses the imagination as by a true epic that represents at once the spirit and the form of an historic epoch. Mr. Robertson's object would not have been answered by adopting either mode of procedure, nor does his talent appear to be of the kind required for such literary feats. He has aimed at making a useful book of reference, in which the outlines of Church History may be studied as a preliminary to the study in more detail of any particular period ; while at the same time he gives detail sufficient to make his narrative intelligible though not interesting. He furnishes references to the highest authorities, original documents as well as writers who have treated of particular periods, by which the student can either verify his statements or pursue the line of investigation into greater detail for himself. His merits are industry, a careful comparison of conflicting statements, a constant citation of his authorities, and a judgment that strikes us as singularly unbiassed and candid. On the scale that he has adopted—something between such a handbook as Gieseler's and a voluminous history like Milman's History of the Latin Church—he could hardly have conveyed his facts more satisfactorily ; though a far more interesting, and, we think, instructive book, would be written on Church History by taking either of the lines we have indicated above. The handbook has its obvious uses, and the full history no less ; we should not ourselves be inclined to regret the absence from our literature of all histories that fall between these two kinds, except where a philosophical or an artistic purpose gives another sort of value to the book. Still there are so many things to learn in these days, and the "non omnibus omnia" has to be interpreted so much into a necessity of only knowing a few subjects, or perhaps a single subject thoroughly and knowing a little about everything else, that probably Mr. Robertson's book will meet the wants of a great number of students, who have not time for larger works, and yet find mere handbooks utterly intolerable and unintelligible. His evident candour is an invaluable quality in a church historian, and not so common that it may be passed over in silence as a matter of course. It constitutes the great recommendation of the present as it did of the previous volume. Mr. Robertson at the close of each marked epoch of his narrative gives a chapter of general statements, intended to sum up, after the fashion of Macaulay's famous chapter on English society at the Revolution of 1688, the characteristic features of the ecclesiastical life of the epoch and its relations to the civil life. It is from these chapters alone that we can extract any passages of sufficient independent interest for our columns. The following is from the chapter supplementary to the narrative embracing the period from the accession of Gregory the Great to the death of Charlemagne (90-814 A. D.) "The trial of guilt or innocence by means of a solemn appeal to Heaven had been practised among many heathen nations, including those of the North. The Mosaic law had sanctioned it in certain cases; it fell in with the popular appetite for miracles; and the Church now for a time took the management of such trials into her own hands. The Ordeal, or Judgment of God, was not to be resorted to where the guilt of an accused person was clear, but in cases of suspicion, where evidence was wanting or insufficient. The appeal was conducted with great solemnity. The accuser swore to the truth of his charge ; the accused (who for three days had been preparing himself by fasting and prayer) asserted his innocence in the same manner ; and he was adjured in the most awful terms not to approach the Lord's table if he were conscious of any guilt in the matter which was to be submitted to the Divine judgment. Both parties then communicated ; and after this the clergy anointed the instruments with which the trial was to be made. "The ordeal was of various kinds. That by wager of battle was introduced into the Burgundian law by the Arian King Gundobald, the contemporary of Clovis, against the remonstrances of Avitus, Bishop of Vienne. It was not uncommon among the Franks, but appears to have been unknown in England until after the Norman conquest. In the trial by hot iron, the amused walked barefoot over heated ploughshares, or (which was the more usual form) he carried a piece of glowing iron in his hand nine times the length of his foot. The foot or the hand (as the case might be) was then bound up and sealed. On the third day it was examined, and according to its appearance the guilt or innocence of the party WR8decided.t The trial of hot water consisted in plunging the arm into a boiling cauldron, and taking out a stone, a ring, or a piece of iron, which was hung at a greater or less depth in proportion to the gravity of the offence in question. That of cold water was performed by throwing the accused into a pond. If he were laden with weights, sinking was a proof of guilt ; if not, it was held to prove his innocence. In the ordeal of the cross' (which, notwithstanding the name which it acquired, was probably of heathen origin,) the accused or his proxy held up the right arm, or both arms. Psalms were sung during the trial, and the sinking or trembling of the arms was evidence of guilt. Among other kinds of ordeal were—holding the hand in fire ; walking in a single thin garment through a burning pile ; eating a cake, which in England was called the corsned; or receiving the holy eucharist. "Some of these practices were condemned after a time. Louis the Pious, after having in 816 prescribed the trial of the cross as a means of deciding between contradictory witnesses, abolished it in the following year, lest that which bath been glorified by the passion of Christ should through any man's rashness be brought to contempt.' Under the same Emperor, the ordeal of cold water was forbidden in 829. Agobard, Archbishop of Lyons, a strenuous opponent of popular superstitions, addressed to Louis two tracts against the judicial combat. He reflects on the heresy of the Burgundian king who had sanctioned it. He denounces such duels as unchristian, and as involving a breach of charity more important than any good which could be expected from them. He argues, that if truth might be thus ascertained, all judges are superfluous ; that the system holds out a premium to brute strength and to perjury ; that the idea of its efficacy is contrary to Scripture, since we are there told to despise the success of this world—since God suffers his saints to be slain, arid has allowed believing nations to be overcome by unbelievers and heretics ; and he appeals to instances in which the vanity of such trials had been manifested. The ordeal, however, continued to be supported by the popular feeling, and the cause which Agobard had opposed soon after found a powerful champion in Hinemar.tt " "+ There is a question how this trial could ever have been successfullyborne. Mr. Soames supposes that the hand was fortified against the heat by some sort of preparation, and that this, with the shortness of the distance, and the interval of three days before inspection, might be enough to account for it (A. S. C. 293). Mr. Hallam, although less confidently, suggests a like explanation (Si. A. ii. 359). Grimm (911) and Rettherg 753) say that the trial was very rarely made, and only in the case of persons against whom the popular feeling would be strong if they (ailed. Freemen might clear themselves by their own oaths, or by that of compurgators (Grinun, 911; Kemble, i. 210); so that the ordeal would be left to slaves (Martens ii. 331), and to such n-omen as could not find a champion. This explanation, however, does not at all account for success. Planck says that in all recorded cases the issue of these ordeals was favourable, and supposes that the clergy employed a pious fraud to save the lives of innocent persons ; iii. 543-6."
" it The third Council of Valence, A. D. 855, ordered that persons who slew or hurt others in judicial combats should be put to penance as robbers and murderers ; and that those slain in such combats should be excluded (loin the sacrifice of the mass and from Christian burial (Can. 12). It also condemned the custom of admitting contradictory oaths (e. 11.) But the system of combats continued, and, as is well known, the English law sanctioned it down to the present century. Atto, Bishop of Vercelli, in the tenth century, complains that clergymen and monks were obliged to undergo it by proxy. (Nlabillon, VII. xix.)"
Previous page
