This is a modern-English version of The King's Mirror (Speculum regale-Konungs skuggsjá), originally written by unknown author(s). It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling, and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.

Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.

The cover image was created by the transcriber and is placed in the public domain.

The cover image was made by the transcriber and is in the public domain.


The Scandinavian Literature Library

THE KING’S MIRROR

THE KING'S MIRROR


The King's Mirror

(SPECULUM REGALE—KING'S SHADOW)
Translated from Old Norse
WITH INTRODUCTION AND NOTES BY
LAURENCE MARCELLUS LARSON
TWAYNE PUBLISHERS, INC., NEW YORK
&
THE AMERICAN-SCANDINAVIAN FOUNDATION

The Library of Scandinavian Literature
Erik J. Friis, General Editor
Volume 15
The King’s Mirror
Copyright © 1917 by The American-Scandinavian Foundation
Library of Congress catalog card number: 72-1542
Made in the United States of America

TO MY FATHER AND TO THE
MEMORY OF MY MOTHER

vii

FOREWORD

Among the many arguments that have recently been advanced in support of imperialistic ambitions and statesmanship, there is one that justifies and demands aggression in the interest of human culture. According to this rather plausible political philosophy, it is the destiny of the smaller states to be absorbed into the larger and stronger. The application is not to be limited to the so-called “backward races”; it is also extended to the lesser peoples of Europe. These have, it is held, no real right to an independent existence; only the great, the powerful, and the mighty can claim this privilege, for they alone are able to render the higher forms of service to civilization.

Among the many arguments that have recently been made to support imperialistic goals and leadership, there’s one that justifies and calls for aggression in the name of human culture. This somewhat convincing political philosophy suggests that it’s the destiny of smaller states to be taken over by larger, stronger ones. This idea isn’t just aimed at so-called “backward races”; it also applies to the lesser nations of Europe. It is believed that these smaller nations don't truly have the right to independence; only the great, the powerful, and the influential can claim that privilege, as they alone can provide the higher forms of service to civilization.

To this theory the history of the Scandinavian lands provides a complete and striking refutation. In the drama of European development the Northern countries have played important and honorable parts; but except for a brilliant period in Swedish history (chiefly during the seventeenth century) they have never weighed heavily in the Continental balance. Their geographical situation is unfavorable and their economic resources have never been comparable to those of the more prominent states beyond the Baltic and the North Sea. But when viiiwe come to the kingdom of intellect the story is a totally different one. The literary annals of Europe in the nineteenth century give prominence to a series of notable Scandinavian writers who not only achieved recognition in their own lands but found a place in the competition for leadership in the world at large. The productivity of the Northern mind is not of recent origin, however; the literatures of Scandinavia have a history that leads back into the days of heathen worship more than a thousand years ago.

To this theory, the history of the Scandinavian countries provides a complete and striking refutation. In the drama of European development, the Northern countries have played important and honorable roles; but except for a remarkable period in Swedish history (mainly during the seventeenth century), they have never had a significant impact on the Continental balance. Their geographical situation is not ideal, and their economic resources have never compared to those of the more prominent states across the Baltic and the North Sea. However, when we look at the kingdom of intellect, the story is completely different. The literary history of Europe in the nineteenth century highlights a series of outstanding Scandinavian writers who not only gained recognition in their own countries but also competed for leadership on the global stage. The creativity of the Northern mind isn't a recent phenomenon; the literatures of Scandinavia have a history that traces back to the days of pagan worship more than a thousand years ago.

Perhaps the most effective illustration of what a fruitful intellect can accomplish even when placed in the most unpromising environment is medieval Iceland. Along the western and southwestern coasts of the island lay a straggling settlement of Norwegian immigrants whose lives were spent chiefly in a struggle to force the merest subsistence from a niggardly soil. And yet, in the later middle ages and even earlier, there was a literary activity on these Arctic shores which, in output as well as in quality, compares favorably with that of any part of contemporary Europe. Evidently intellectual greatness bears but slight relation to economic advantages or political power. What was true of Iceland was also true of Norway, though in a lesser degree. In that country, too, life was in great measure a continuous struggle with the soil and the sea. Still, even in that land and age, the spirits ixwere active, the arts flourished, and the North added her contribution to the treasures of European culture.

Maybe the best example of what a sharp mind can achieve, even in the toughest conditions, is medieval Iceland. Along the western and southwestern coasts of the island, there was a scattered community of Norwegian immigrants who primarily struggled to scrape by from a barren landscape. Yet, during the later Middle Ages—and even earlier—there was a vibrant literary scene on these Arctic shores that, in terms of both output and quality, rivals that of any region in contemporary Europe. Clearly, intellectual greatness is only loosely connected to economic advantages or political power. What applied to Iceland also applied to Norway, though to a lesser extent. In that country, life was also largely a constant battle with the land and the sea. Still, even in that time and place, creativity thrived, the arts prospered, and the North contributed to the riches of European culture.

The poems and tales of those virile days, the eddas and sagas, are too familiar to need more than a mention in this connection. But the fact is not so commonly known that the medieval Northmen were thinkers and students as well as poets and romancers. They, too, were interested in the mysteries of the universe, in the problems of science, and in the intricate questions of social relationships. In their thinking on these matters they showed more intellectual independence and less slavish regard for venerable authority than was usually the case among medieval writers. And of all the men who in that age of faith tried to analyse and set in order their ideas of the world in which they moved, perhaps none drew more largely on his own spiritual resources than the unknown author of the King’s Mirror.

The poems and stories from those strong days, the eddas and sagas, are well-known enough that we don’t need to elaborate much here. However, it’s not commonly understood that the medieval Northmen were not just poets and storytellers; they were also thinkers and learners. They were curious about the mysteries of the universe, scientific issues, and the complex questions surrounding social relationships. In their exploration of these topics, they displayed more intellectual independence and less blind adherence to long-standing authority than was typical among medieval writers. Among all the individuals in that age of faith who attempted to analyze and organize their understanding of the world around them, perhaps none relied more heavily on their own spiritual insights than the unknown author of the King’s Mirror.

Unlike the sagas and related writings, the purpose of the King’s Mirror is utilitarian and didactic. The author has before him a group of serious and important problems, which he proceeds to discuss for the instruction of his readers. Consequently, certain qualities of style that are often associated with Old Norse literature are not apparent in his work to any marked degree. In his effort to make his language clear, definite, and intelligible, the xauthor sometimes finds it necessary to repeat and restate his ideas, with the result that his literary style is frequently stiff, labored, and pedantic. These defects are, however, not characteristic of the book as a whole. Many of its chapters display rare workmanship and prove that the author of the King’s Mirror is one of the great masters of Old Norse prose.

Unlike the sagas and similar writings, the purpose of the King’s Mirror is practical and educational. The author is addressing a group of serious and significant issues, which he discusses for the benefit of his readers. As a result, certain stylistic qualities typically found in Old Norse literature are not as evident in his work. In his attempt to make his language clear, specific, and understandable, the xauthor sometimes feels the need to repeat and rephrase his ideas, leading to a style that can often feel stiff, forced, and overly formal. However, these shortcomings are not representative of the book as a whole. Many of its chapters exhibit exceptional craftsmanship and demonstrate that the author of the King’s Mirror is one of the great masters of Old Norse prose.

In preparing the translation of this unique work, my aim has been to reproduce the author’s thought as faithfully as possible and to state it in such a form as to satisfy the laws of English syntax. But I have also felt that, so far as it can be done, the flavor of the original should be retained and that a translator, in his effort to satisfy certain conventional demands of modern composition, should not deviate too far from the path of mental habit that the author has beaten in his roamings through the fields of thought. Peculiarities of style and expression, can, it is true, usually not be reproduced in another language; at the same time it is possible to ignore these considerations to such an extent that the product becomes a paraphrase rather than a translation; and I have believed that such a rendition should be avoided, even at the risk of erring on the side of literalness.

In preparing the translation of this unique work, my goal has been to capture the author's ideas as accurately as possible and present them in a way that meets the rules of English grammar. However, I also believe that, as much as possible, the essence of the original should be preserved and that a translator shouldn’t stray too far from the author’s established way of thinking. It's true that unique aspects of style and expression usually can't be replicated in another language; at the same time, it's possible to disregard these factors to such a degree that the result becomes more of a paraphrase than a translation. I believe that such a rendition should be avoided, even if it means leaning towards being more literal.

The importance of the King’s Mirror as a source of information in the study of medieval thought was first brought to my attention by Professor xiJulius E. Olson of the University of Wisconsin, who has also, since the work of preparing this edition was begun, followed its progress with helpful interest. Professors G. T. Flom and A. H. Lybyer of the University of Illinois, and Professor W. H. Schofield of Harvard University, have read the manuscript in whole or part and have contributed many valuable suggestions. My wife, Lillian May Larson, has assisted in a great variety of ways, as in all my work. Dr. H. G. Leach of the American-Scandinavian Foundation has read the proof sheets of the entire volume and has suggested many improvements in the text. To all these persons I wish to express my thanks. I am also deeply indebted to the trustees of the American-Scandinavian Foundation whose generosity has made it possible to publish the work at this time.

The significance of the King’s Mirror as a resource for understanding medieval thought was first pointed out to me by Professor xi Julius E. Olson from the University of Wisconsin, who has also kept a supportive eye on its development since I started preparing this edition. Professors G. T. Flom and A. H. Lybyer from the University of Illinois, along with Professor W. H. Schofield from Harvard University, have reviewed the manuscript in whole or in part and offered many valuable suggestions. My wife, Lillian May Larson, has provided extensive assistance in various ways, just as she has with all my work. Dr. H. G. Leach from the American-Scandinavian Foundation has read through the proof sheets of the entire volume and has recommended numerous improvements to the text. I want to express my gratitude to all these individuals. I am also very thankful to the trustees of the American-Scandinavian Foundation whose generosity has made it possible to publish this work now.

L. M. L.
University of Illinois,
August, 1917.

xiii

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION

    PAGE
  NORTHERN LITERATURE IN THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY 1
  THE SPECULUM REGALE, OR KING’S MIRROR; SOURCES 6
  SCIENTIFIC LORE AND THE BELIEF IN MARVELS 11
  COURTESY AND THE KING’S HOUSEHOLD 26
  THE THEORY OF THE DIVINE RIGHT OF NORWEGIAN KINGSHIP 33
  ETHICAL AND THEOLOGICAL IDEAS OF THE WORK 49
  MODERN CHARACTERISTICS OF THE KING’S MIRROR 53
  THE PROBLEM OF AUTHORSHIP 54
  DATE AND PLACE OF COMPOSITION 59
  EDITIONS OF THE KING’S MIRROR 65

THE KING’S MIRROR

The King's Mirror

I. INTRODUCTION: NAME AND PURPOSE OF THE WORK 72
II. “THE FEAR OF THE LORD IS THE BEGINNING OF WISDOM” 76
III. THE ACTIVITIES AND HABITS OF A MERCHANT 79
IV. THE SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED 81
V. THE SUN AND THE WINDS 86
VI. THE TIDES AND THE CHANGES IN THE COURSE OF THE SUN 92
VII. THE SUBJECT OF THE SUN’S COURSE CONTINUED 95
VIII. THE MARVELS OF NORWAY 99
IX. POPULAR DOUBT AS TO THE GENUINENESS OF MARVELS 102
X. THE NATURAL WONDERS OF IRELAND 105
XI. IRISH MARVELS WHICH HAVE MIRACULOUS ORIGINS 111
XII. THE MARVELS OF THE ICELANDIC SEAS: WHALES; THE KRAKEN 119
XIII. THE WONDERS OF ICELAND 126
xivXIV. THE VOLCANIC FIRES OF ICELAND 130
XV. OTHER ICELANDIC WONDERS: ORE AND MINERAL SPRINGS 133
XVI. THE MARVELS OF THE WATERS ABOUT GREENLAND: MONSTERS, SEALS, AND WALRUSES 135
XVII. THE ANIMAL LIFE OF GREENLAND AND THE CHARACTER OF THE LAND IN THOSE REGIONS 141
XVIII. THE PRODUCTS OF GREENLAND 144
XIX. THE CLIMATE OF GREENLAND; THE NORTHERN LIGHTS 145
XX. THE SUBJECT OF THE NORTHERN LIGHTS CONTINUED 151
XXI. THE ZONES OF HEAT AND COLD 153
XXII. THE WINDS WITH RESPECT TO NAVIGATION 156
XXIII. THE PROPER SEASON FOR NAVIGATION. END OF THE FIRST PART 161
XXIV. INTRODUCTION TO THE SECOND PART: THE KING AND HIS COURT 162
XXV. THE IMPORTANCE OF COURTESY IN THE ROYAL SERVICE 165
XXVI. THE ADVANTAGES DERIVED FROM SERVICE IN THE KING’S HOUSEHOLD 167
XXVII. THE VARIOUS CLASSES AMONG THE KINGSMEN 170
XXVIII. THE HONORED POSITION OF THE KINGSMEN 173
XXIX. THE SUPERIOR ORDER OF KINGSMEN: THE HIRD 175
XXX. HOW A MAN WHO WISHES TO APPLY FOR ADMISSION TO THE ROYAL HOUSEHOLD SERVICE SHOULD APPROACH THE KING 179
XXXI. WHY ONE SHOULD NOT WEAR A MANTLE IN THE ROYAL PRESENCE 184
XXXII. RULES OF SPEECH AND CONVERSATION IN THE KING’S HALL 186
XXXIII. THE PROPER USES OF “YOU” AND “THOU” 188
XXXIV. THE SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED 189
XXXV. CONCERNING FAILURE OF CROPS AND DEARTH IN MORALS AND GOVERNMENT 193
XXXVI. THE CAUSES OF SUCH PERIODS OF DEARTH AND WHAT FORMS THE DEARTH MAY TAKE 195
XXXVII. THE DUTIES, ACTIVITIES, AND AMUSEMENTS OF THE ROYAL GUARDSMEN 203
XXXVIII. WEAPONS FOR OFFENSE AND DEFENSE 217
xvXXXIX. MILITARY ENGINES 220
XL. THE PROPER MANNERS AND CUSTOMS OF A ROYAL COURT 226
XLI. THE SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED 231
XLII. A DISCUSSION OF HOW GOD REWARDS RIGHTEOUSNESS, HUMILITY, AND FIDELITY, ILLUSTRATED BY EXAMPLES DRAWN FROM SACRED AND PROFANE HISTORY 234
XLIII. THE DUTIES AND THE EXALTED POSITION OF THE KING 245
XLIV. THE SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED 248
XLV. CONCERNING THE MODERATION WHICH A KING MUST OBSERVE IN HIS JUDICIAL SENTENCES AND PENALTIES, WITH ILLUSTRATIONS DRAWN FROM THE STORY OF GOD’S JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF ADAM AND EVE, IN WHICH CASE TRUTH AND JUSTICE WERE ASSOCIATED WITH PEACE AND MERCY 251
XLVI. AN EXAMPLE OF RIGHTEOUS SEVERITY IN JUDGMENT DRAWN FROM THE STORY OF GOD’S CONDEMNATION OF LUCIFER 258
XLVII. A FURTHER DISCUSSION OF VERDICTS AND PENALTIES WITH ILLUSTRATIONS FROM THE STORY OF LUCIFER’S REBELLION AND DOWNFALL AND OF THE SIN AND PUNISHMENT OF THE FIRST MAN AND WOMAN 260
XLVIII. A COMMENTARY ON THE STORY OF LUCIFER 272
XLIX. INSTANCES IN WHICH GOD HAS ALLOWED THE DECISION TO BE FRAMED ACCORDING TO THE STERN DEMANDS OF TRUTH AND JUSTICE 277
L. OTHER INSTANCES IN WHICH THE ARGUMENTS OF PEACE AND MERCY HAVE HAD GREATER WEIGHT 279
LI. THE REASONS FOR THIS DIVERSITY IN THE VERDICTS OF GOD 283
LII. THE SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED 284
LIII. INSTANCES IN WHICH GOD HAS MODIFIED HIS SENTENCES AND THE REASONS FOR SUCH MODIFICATIONS 285
LIV. THE KING’S PRAYER 290
LV. A FURTHER DISCUSSION OF THE KING’S BUSINESS ESPECIALLY HIS JUDICIAL DUTIES 297
LVI. THE SPEECH OF WISDOM 299
LVII. DIFFICULT DUTIES OF THE KING’S JUDICIAL OFFICE WITH ILLUSTRATIONS 304
xviLVIII. THE SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED 309
LIX. WHEN JUDGMENTS SHOULD BE SEVERE AND WHEN THEY SHOULD BE MERCIFUL 313
LX. THE SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED 316
LXI. CONCERNING CAPITAL PUNISHMENT 318
LXII. THE SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED 320
LXIII. THE JUDGMENTS OF GOD ILLUSTRATED BY THE STORY OF DAVID AND SAUL 321
LXIV. ILLUSTRATIONS FROM THE JUDGMENTS OF SOLOMON 339
LXV. SOLOMON’S DECISION IN THE CASE OF SHIMEI 341
LXVI. SOLOMON’S JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF ADONIJAH AND HIS FOLLOWERS 344
LXVII. WHY SOLOMON BROKE HIS PROMISE OF PEACE AND SECURITY TO JOAB 353
LXVIII. A DISCUSSION OF PROMISES: WHEN THEY MUST BE KEPT AND WHEN THEY SHOULD BE WITHDRAWN 355
LXIX. CONCERNING THE KINGSHIP AND THE CHURCH AND THE KING’S RESPONSIBILITY TO GOD 357
LXX. THE AUTHORITY OF KINGS AND BISHOPS. END OF THE SECOND PART 363
  BIBLIOGRAPHY 369
  INDEX 375
  FOOTNOTES 403

BelowThe King's Mirror

INTRODUCTION

The place of the thirteenth century in the history of human achievement is a subject upon which scholars have not yet come to a general agreement. There can be no doubt that it was, on the whole, an age of progress in many fields; but there is much in its history that points to stagnation, if not to actual decline. From a superficial study of its annals one might be led to class it with the lesser centuries; most writers are inclined to rank it lower than the fourteenth century, and perhaps not even so high as the twelfth. It was in this period that the crusading movement finally flickered out and the Christian world was compelled to leave the cradle of the holy faith in the hands of the infidel. In the thirteenth century, too, the medieval empire sank into hopeless inefficiency and all but expired. The papacy, which more than any other power was responsible for the ruin of the imperial ambitions, also went into decline. Whether the loss in authority and prestige on the part of the holy see was compensated by a renewed spiritual energy in the church at large may well be doubted: what evidence we have would indicate that the religion of the masses was gross and materialistic, that ethical standards were low, and that the improvement in clerical morals, which the church had hoped would follow the enforcement of celibacy, had failed to appear.

The role of the thirteenth century in the history of human achievement is a topic where scholars still haven't reached a consensus. There's no doubt that, overall, it was a time of progress in many areas, but there are also aspects of its history that suggest stagnation, if not actual decline. A surface-level look at its records might lead one to consider it among the lesser centuries; most writers tend to rank it lower than the fourteenth century, and maybe even below the twelfth. It was during this time that the crusading movement finally faded, and the Christian world had to leave the cradle of the faith in the hands of the infidels. In the thirteenth century, the medieval empire also fell into deep inefficiency and was on the brink of collapse. The papacy, which was largely responsible for the downfall of imperial ambitions, also started to decline. Whether the loss of authority and prestige for the Holy See was balanced by a renewed spiritual energy in the church as a whole is questionable; the evidence we have suggests that the religion practiced by the masses was coarse and materialistic, that ethical standards were low, and that the hoped-for improvement in clerical morals, which the church expected would follow the enforcement of celibacy, did not happen.

2Yet the thirteenth century also had its attractive figures and its important movements. The old social order was indeed crumbling, but in its place appeared two new forces which were to inherit the power and opportunities of feudalism and reshape social life: these were the new monarchy, enjoying wide sovereign powers, and the new national consciousness, which was able to think in larger units. In England the century saw the development of a new representative institution, which has become the mother of modern legislative assemblies. The Italian cities were growing rich from the profits of Oriental trade; in the Flemish towns the weaver’s industry was building up new forms of municipal life; the great German Hansa was laying hold on the commerce of the northern seas. In the realms of higher intellect, in science, philosophy, and theology, the age was a notable one, with Roger Bacon, Albertus Magnus, and Thomas Aquinas as the leaders, each in his field. The century also meant much for the progress of geographical knowledge, for it was in this period that Marco Polo penetrated the mysterious lands of the Far East.

2Yet the thirteenth century also had its appealing figures and significant movements. The old social order was definitely breaking down, but in its place emerged two new forces that would take over the power and opportunities of feudalism and transform social life: these were the new monarchy, which held extensive sovereign powers, and the new national consciousness, capable of thinking in broader units. In England, the century witnessed the emergence of a new representative institution that has become the foundation of modern legislative assemblies. The Italian cities were becoming wealthy from the profits of Eastern trade; in the Flemish towns, the weaving industry was creating new forms of municipal life; the great German Hansa was seizing control of the commerce of the northern seas. In the areas of higher thought, such as science, philosophy, and theology, this was a remarkable time, with Roger Bacon, Albertus Magnus, and Thomas Aquinas leading the way in their respective fields. The century also marked significant advances in geographical knowledge, as it was during this period that Marco Polo explored the mysterious regions of the Far East.

As the historian looks back into this age, he is, therefore, able to find broad traces of much that is regarded as fundamental to modern life. Of first importance in this regard is the employment of popular idioms in literary productions. French literature saw its beginnings in the eleventh century with the chansons de geste, songs of valorous deeds from the heroic age of the Frankish kingdom. In the next century the poets began to use the themes of the Arthurian legends and sang the exploits of the famous British king and the knights of his Round 3Table. A little later came another cycle of poems based on the heroic tales of classical antiquity. The twelfth century witnessed a parallel movement in Germany, which at first was largely an imitation of contemporary French poetry. The poets, however, soon discovered literary treasures in the dim world of the Teutonic past, in the tales of the Nibelungs, in the heroic deeds of Theodoric, and in the exploits of other heroes.

As the historian reflects on this era, he can identify significant elements that are considered essential to modern life. One of the most important aspects in this context is the use of everyday language in literary works. French literature began in the eleventh century with the chansons de geste, songs celebrating heroic deeds from the legendary period of the Frankish kingdom. In the following century, poets started to draw on the themes from the Arthurian legends and sang about the adventures of the renowned British king and the knights of his Round 3Table. Soon after, another series of poems emerged based on the heroic stories of classical antiquity. The twelfth century also saw a similar movement in Germany, which initially largely mimicked contemporary French poetry. However, the poets quickly discovered literary gems in the obscure realm of the Teutonic past, including the tales of the Nibelungs, the heroic feats of Theodoric, and the adventures of other heroes.

Thus in the first half of the thirteenth century there was a large body of French and German verse in circulation. The verses were borne from region to region and from land to land by professional entertainers, who chanted the poems, and by pilgrims and other travelers, who secured manuscript copies. In the course of time the new tales reached the Northern countries, and it was not long before the Northmen were eagerly listening to the stories of chivalrous warfare, militant religion, and tragic love, that they had learned in the southlands.

Thus, in the first half of the thirteenth century, a lot of French and German poetry was circulating. Professional entertainers carried the verses from region to region and from country to country, singing the poems, while pilgrims and other travelers obtained manuscript copies. Over time, these new stories made their way to the Northern countries, and it didn't take long before the Norsemen were eagerly listening to the tales of heroic battles, religious conflicts, and tragic love that they had learned in the southern lands.

The Northern peoples thus had a share in the fruitage of the later middle ages; but they also had a share in their achievements. Politically as well as intellectually the thirteenth century was a great age in the Scandinavian countries. The Danish kingdom rose to the highest point of its power under Valdemar the Victorious, whose troubled reign began in 1202. Valdemar succeeded in extending the territories of Denmark along the entire southern coast of the Baltic Sea; but the greatness was short-lived: after the defeat of the Danes by the North Germans at Börnhoved in 1227, the decline of Danish imperialism began. In Sweden, too, men dreamed of conquest beyond the sea. Under the leadership of Earl 4Birger, the most eminent statesman of medieval Sweden, Swedish power was steadily extended into Finnish territory, and the foundations of Sweden as a great European power was being laid.

The Northern people had a stake in the benefits of the later Middle Ages, but they also contributed to their achievements. Politically and intellectually, the thirteenth century was a remarkable time in the Scandinavian countries. The Danish kingdom reached its peak power under Valdemar the Victorious, whose troubled reign began in 1202. Valdemar managed to expand Denmark's territories along the entire southern coast of the Baltic Sea; however, this greatness was short-lived: after the Danes were defeated by the North Germans at Börnhoved in 1227, the decline of Danish imperialism started. In Sweden, there were also ambitions for conquests overseas. Under the leadership of Earl 4Birger, the most prominent statesman of medieval Sweden, Swedish power gradually increased into Finnish territory, laying the groundwork for Sweden to become a significant European power.

During the days of Valdemar and the great Birger Norway also reached its greatest territorial extent. After a century of factional warfare, the nation settled down to comparative peace. All the Norwegian colonies except those in Ireland, were definitely made subject to the Norwegian crown: these were the Isle of Man, the Hebrides, the Orkneys, the Shetlands, the Faroes, Iceland, and Greenland. In every field of national life there was vigor and enterprise. And on the throne sat a strong, wise, and learned monarch, Hakon IV, the ruler with the “great king-thought.”

During the era of Valdemar and the notable Birger, Norway also reached its greatest territorial size. After a century of civil wars, the country entered a period of relative peace. All Norwegian colonies, except those in Ireland, were officially brought under the Norwegian crown: these included the Isle of Man, the Hebrides, the Orkneys, the Shetlands, the Faroes, Iceland, and Greenland. In every aspect of national life, there was energy and initiative. And on the throne was a strong, wise, and educated ruler, Hakon IV, the monarch with the "great king-thought."

The real greatness of the thirteenth century in the North lies, however, in the literary achievements of the age. It is not known when the Old Norse poets first began to exercise their craft, but the earliest poems that have come down to us date from the ninth century. For two hundred years the literary production was in the form of alliterative verse; but after 1050 there came a time when scaldic poetry did not seem to thrive. This does not mean that the interest in literature died out; it merely took a new form: the age of poetry was followed by an age of prose. With the Christian faith came the Latin alphabet and writing materials, and there was no longer any need to memorize verse. The new form was the saga, which began to appear in the twelfth century and received many notable additions in the thirteenth. The literary movement on the continent, 5therefore, had its counterpart in the North; only here the writings took the form of prose, while there literature was chiefly in verse.

The real greatness of the thirteenth century in the North lies in the literary achievements of the age. It's unclear when the Old Norse poets first started their craft, but the earliest poems we have date back to the ninth century. For two hundred years, the literary output was primarily in alliterative verse; however, after 1050, scaldic poetry didn't seem to be as popular. This doesn't mean interest in literature faded; it simply took a different form: the age of poetry transitioned into an age of prose. With the spread of Christianity came the Latin alphabet and writing materials, eliminating the need to memorize verse. The new form that emerged was the saga, which began to surface in the twelfth century and saw many significant additions in the thirteenth. Therefore, the literary movement on the continent had its counterpart in the North; only here, the writings were in prose, while there, literature was mainly in verse.

These two currents came into contact in the first half of the thirteenth century, when the men and women of the North began to take an interest in the Arthurian romances and other tales that had found their way into Norway. In this new form of Norwegian literature there could not be much originality; still its appearance testifies to a widening of the intellectual horizon. In addition to sagas and romances the period was also productive of written laws, homilies, legends, Biblical narratives, histories, and various other forms of literature. It is to be noted that virtually everything was written in the idiom of the common people. Latin was used to some extent in the North in the later middle ages, but it never came into such general use there as in other parts of Europe. In the thirteenth century it had almost passed out of use as a literary language.

These two movements intersected in the first half of the thirteenth century when people in the North began to show interest in Arthurian romances and other stories that had made their way to Norway. In this new form of Norwegian literature, there wasn't much originality; however, its emergence indicates a broadening of intellectual horizons. In addition to sagas and romances, this period also produced written laws, sermons, legends, Biblical narratives, histories, and various other types of literature. It's important to note that nearly everything was written in the language of the common people. Latin was used to some extent in the North during the later Middle Ages, but it never became as widely used there as in other parts of Europe. By the thirteenth century, it was nearly obsolete as a literary language.

In our interest in tales and romances we must not overlook the fact that the thirteenth century also produced an important literature of the didactic type. For centuries the Christian world had studied the encyclopedic works of Capella, Cassiodorus, and Isidore, or had read the writings of Bede and his many followers who had composed treatises “on the nature of things,” in which they had striven to set in order the known or supposed facts of the physical world. The thirteenth century had an encyclopedist of its own in Vincent of Beauvais, who produced a vast compendium made up of several Specula, which were supposed to contain all 6the knowledge that the world possessed in science, history, theology, and other fields of learning. The age also produced various other Latin works of the didactic sort, of which the Historia Scholastica of Petrus Comestor was perhaps the most significant for the intellectual history of the North.

In our interest in stories and romances, we shouldn't overlook the fact that the thirteenth century also produced significant didactic literature. For centuries, the Christian world studied the encyclopedic works of Capella, Cassiodorus, and Isidore, or read the writings of Bede and his many followers who composed treatises about “the nature of things,” where they tried to organize the known or assumed facts of the physical world. The thirteenth century had its own encyclopedist in Vincent of Beauvais, who created a vast compendium made up of several Specula, which were meant to encompass all the knowledge the world had in science, history, theology, and other fields of learning. The era also produced various other Latin works of a didactic nature, among which the Historia Scholastica by Petrus Comestor was probably the most important for the intellectual history of the North.

Norway had no encyclopedist, but the thirteenth century produced a Norwegian writer who undertook a task which was somewhat of the encyclopedic type. Some time during the reign of Hakon IV, perhaps while Vincent was composing his great Speculum Majus, a learned Norseman wrote the Speculum Regale, or King’s Mirror, a work which a competent critic has characterized as “one of the chief ornaments of Old Norse literature.”[1] Unlike the sagas and the romances, which have in view chiefly the entertainment of the reader, the King’s Mirror is didactic throughout; in a few chapters only does the author depart from his serious purpose, and all but two of these are of distinct value. The purpose of the work is to provide a certain kind of knowledge which will be of use to young men who are looking forward to a career in the higher professions.

Norway didn’t have an encyclopedist, but the 13th century saw a Norwegian writer take on a project that was somewhat encyclopedic. During the reign of Hakon IV, possibly while Vincent was writing his great Speculum Majus, a knowledgeable Norseman created the Speculum Regale, or King’s Mirror, a work that a skilled critic has described as “one of the main highlights of Old Norse literature.”[1] Unlike the sagas and romances, which mainly aim to entertain readers, the King’s Mirror is entirely didactic; the author only strays from his serious goal in a few chapters, and all but two of those are distinctly valuable. The purpose of the work is to provide a specific type of knowledge that will benefit young men looking to pursue careers in higher professions.

As outlined in the introductory chapter, the work was to deal with the four great orders of men in the Norwegian kingdom: the merchants and their interests; the king and his retainers; the church and the clergy; and the peasantry or husbandmen. In the form in which the King’s Mirror has come down to modern times, however, the first two divisions only are included; not the least fragment of any separate discussion of the clerical 7profession or of the agricultural classes has been found. It is, therefore, generally believed that the work was not completed beyond the point where the extant manuscripts close. Why the book was left unfinished cannot be known; but it is a plausible conjecture that illness or perhaps death prevented the author, who was apparently an aged man, from completing the task that he had set before him. It is also possible that the ideas expressed in the closing chapters of the work, especially in the last chapter, which deals with the subject of clerical subordination to the secular powers, were so repugnant to the ecclesiastical thought of the time that the authorities of the church discouraged or perhaps found means to prevent the continuation of the work into the third division, where the author had planned to deal with the church and the clergy.

As stated in the introduction, the work was meant to address the four main groups of people in the Norwegian kingdom: the merchants and their interests; the king and his followers; the church and the clergy; and the peasants or farmers. However, in the version of the King’s Mirror that has survived to modern times, only the first two groups are included; no parts discussing the clergy or the agricultural community have been found. Therefore, it is generally believed that the work was left unfinished at the point where the existing manuscripts end. We can only speculate why the book was not completed; it’s likely that illness or maybe death stopped the author, who seems to have been quite old, from finishing what he had intended to do. It's also possible that the ideas presented in the later chapters of the work, especially in the last chapter that discusses the issue of clerical submission to secular authority, were so offensive to the religious norms of the time that church officials discouraged or possibly even prevented the continuation of the work into the third section that the author had planned to write about the church and clergy.

In form the Speculum is a dialog between a wise and learned father and his son, in which the larger part of the discussion naturally falls to the former. The son asks questions and suggests problems, which the father promptly answers or solves. In the choice of form there is nothing original: the dialog was frequently used by didactic writers in the middle ages, and it was the natural form to adopt. The title, Speculum Regale, is also of a kind that was common in those days.[2] Specula of many sorts were being produced: Speculum Ecclesiae, Speculum Stultorum, Speculum Naturale, and Speculum Perfectionis are some of the titles used for writings of a 8didactic type. The German Sachsenspiegel is an instance of the title employed for a work in a vulgar idiom. There was also a Speculum Regum, or Mirror of Kings, and a century later an English ecclesiastic wrote a Speculum Regis, but the writer knows of no other work called the Speculum Regale.

In its structure, the Speculum is a conversation between a wise and knowledgeable father and his son, where most of the dialogue is naturally led by the father. The son asks questions and presents problems, which the father quickly addresses or solves. There’s nothing groundbreaking about the choice of this format; dialogues were commonly used by instructional writers in the Middle Ages, making it a natural choice. The title, Speculum Regale, was also typical of that time.[2] Various types of Specula were being created: Speculum Ecclesiae, Speculum Stultorum, Speculum Naturale, and Speculum Perfectionis are a few examples of didactic works. The German Sachsenspiegel is an example of a title used for a work in a common language. There was also a Speculum Regum, or Mirror of Kings, and a century later, an English cleric wrote a Speculum Regis, but the author is not aware of any other work titled Speculum Regale.

It is an interesting question whether the King’s Mirror was inspired by any earlier work written along similar lines. Originality was a rare virtue in the middle ages, and the good churchmen who wrote books in those days cannot have regarded plagiarism as a mortal sin. The great writers were freely copied by the lesser men, thoughts, titles, statements, and even the wording being often taken outright. It is, therefore, difficult to determine the sources of statements found in the later works, as they may have been drawn from any one of a whole series of writings on the subject under discussion. The writer has not been able to make an exhaustive examination of all the didactic and devotional literature of the centuries preceding the thirteenth, but the search that has been made has not proved fruitful. There is every reason to believe that the author of the King’s Mirror was an independent thinker and writer. He was doubtless acquainted with a large number of books and had drawn information from a great variety of sources; but when the writing was actually done he had apparently a few volumes only at his disposal. In the region where the work seems to have been composed, on the northern edge of European civilization, there was neither cathedral nor monastery nor any other important ecclesiastical foundation where a collection of books might be 9found.[3] It is likely, therefore, that the author had access to such books only as were in his own possession. But he came to his task with a well-stocked mind, with a vast fund of information gathered by travel and from the experiences of an active life; and thus he drew largely from materials that had become the permanent possession of his memory. This fact, if it be a fact, will also help to explain why so many inaccuracies have crept into his quoted passages; in but very few instances does he give the correct wording of a citation.

It's an intriguing question whether the King’s Mirror was inspired by any earlier work written in a similar style. Originality was not common in the Middle Ages, and the devout authors of that time likely didn’t see plagiarism as a serious offense. Great writers were often copied by lesser ones, with thoughts, titles, phrases, and even specific wording taken directly. This makes it hard to trace the sources of statements found in later works, as they could have come from numerous existing writings on the topic at hand. The writer hasn't been able to thoroughly examine all the instructional and devotional literature from the centuries before the thirteenth, but the searches conducted haven't been very productive. There’s every reason to believe that the author of the King’s Mirror was an independent thinker and writer. He was certainly familiar with many books and gathered information from a wide range of sources; however, when it came time to write, it seems he only had a few volumes available. In the area where the work appears to have been created, at the northern edge of European civilization, there was no cathedral, monastery, or any significant ecclesiastical institution where a collection of books could be found. 9 [3] So it's likely that the author had access only to the books he owned. Nonetheless, he approached his task with a well-stocked mind and a wealth of information gathered from travel and an active life; thus, he drew heavily from material that had taken root in his memory. This fact, if it is indeed a fact, could also explain why numerous inaccuracies have slipped into his citations; in very few cases does he provide the correct wording of a quote.

There can be no doubt that the author had a copy of the Vulgate before him; at least one Biblical passage is correctly given, and it is quoted in its Latin form.[4] It has also been discovered that he had access to an Old Norse paraphrase of a part of the Old Testament, the books of Samuel and of the Kings.[5] It is likely that he was also acquainted with some of the works of Saint Augustine, and perhaps with the writings of certain other medieval authorities. Among these it seems safe to include the Disciplina Clericalis, a collection of tales and ethical observations by Petrus Alfonsus, a converted Jew who wrote in the first half of the twelfth century. The Disciplina is a somewhat fantastic production wholly unlike the sober pages of the Speculum Regale; nevertheless, the two works appear to show certain 10points of resemblance which can hardly have been accidental. The Disciplina is a dialog and the part of the son is much the same as in the King’s Mirror. In both works the young man expresses a desire to become acquainted with the customs of the royal court, inasmuch as he may some day decide to apply for admission to the king’s household service.[6] The description of courtly manners and customs in the earlier dialog, though much briefer than the corresponding discussion in the Norwegian treatise, has some resemblance to the latter which suggests a possible relationship between the two works.

There’s no doubt that the author had a copy of the Vulgate in front of him; at least one Biblical passage is correctly cited, and it’s quoted in Latin.[4] It’s also been found that he had access to an Old Norse paraphrase of part of the Old Testament, specifically the books of Samuel and Kings.[5] He likely also knew some of Saint Augustine’s works and maybe the writings of certain other medieval scholars. Among these, it seems reasonable to include the Disciplina Clericalis, a collection of tales and ethical insights by Petrus Alfonsus, a converted Jew who wrote in the first half of the twelfth century. The Disciplina is a quite imaginative work, completely different from the straightforward pages of the Speculum Regale; however, the two pieces appear to share certain similarities that can't be mere coincidence. The Disciplina is a dialogue, and the part of the son is very similar to that in the King’s Mirror. In both works, the young man shows an interest in learning about the customs of the royal court, as he might someday want to apply for a position in the king’s service.[6] The descriptions of court etiquette and customs in the earlier dialogue, while much shorter than the corresponding section in the Norwegian treatise, bear some resemblance to it, suggesting a possible connection between the two works.

The Norwegian author may also have used some of the many commentaries on the books of Holy Writ, in the production of which the medieval cloisters were so prolific. Of the influence of Petrus Comestor’s Historia Scholastica the writer has found no distinct trace in the King’s Mirror; but one can be quite sure that he knew and had used the Elucidarium of Honorius of Autun. The Elucidarium is a manual of medieval theology which was widely read in the later middle ages and was translated into Old Norse, probably before the King’s Mirror was written.[7] But our Norwegian author was not a slavish follower of earlier authorities: in his use and treatment of materials drawn from the Scriptures he shows remarkable independence. Remarkable at least is his ability to make Biblical narratives serve to 11illustrate his own theories of Norwegian kingship. He was acquainted with some of the legends that circulated through the church and made effective use of them. He must also have known a work on the marvels of Ireland[8] and the letter of Prester John to the Byzantine emperor,[9] in which that mythical priest-king recounts the wonders of India. But the chief source of his work is a long life full of action, conflict, thought, and experience.

The Norwegian author likely drew from various commentaries on the Bible, which were produced in abundance by medieval monasteries. While there’s no clear evidence of Petrus Comestor's Historia Scholastica influencing the King’s Mirror, it’s safe to assume that he was familiar with and utilized Honorius of Autun's Elucidarium. The Elucidarium is a handbook of medieval theology that was widely read in the later Middle Ages and was likely translated into Old Norse before the King’s Mirror was written.[7] However, our Norwegian author wasn’t a mere repeat of earlier authorities: his approach to using and interpreting scripts from the Bible reveals a notable independence. Particularly impressive is his ability to use Biblical stories to illustrate his own ideas about Norwegian kingship. He was familiar with some of the legends that circulated within the church and made effective use of them. He also must have known a work about the wonders of Ireland[8] and the letter from Prester John to the Byzantine emperor,[9] in which this legendary priest-king describes the marvels of India. But the main source of his work is a long life filled with action, conflict, contemplation, and experience.

The importance of the King’s Mirror lies in the insight that it gives into the state of culture and civilization of the North in the later middle ages. The interest follows seven different lines: physical science, especially such matters as are of importance to navigators; geography, particularly the geography of the Arctic lands and waters; the organization of the king’s household and the privileges and duties of the king’s henchmen; military engines, weapons, and armour used in offensive and defensive warfare; ethical ideas, especially rules of conduct for courtiers and merchants; the royal office, the duties of the king and the divine origin of kingship; and the place of the church in the Norwegian state.

The significance of the King’s Mirror lies in the perspective it provides on the culture and civilization of the North during the late Middle Ages. The interest is reflected in seven different areas: physical science, particularly topics important for navigators; geography, especially relating to the Arctic lands and waters; the structure of the king’s household and the rights and responsibilities of the king’s followers; military technology, weapons, and armor used in both offensive and defensive warfare; ethical concepts, particularly guidelines for the behavior of courtiers and merchants; the royal role, including the duties of the king and the divine basis of kingship; and the role of the church within the Norwegian state.

In one of his earlier chapters the author enumerates the chief subjects of a scientific character that ought to be studied by every one who wishes to become a successful merchant. These are the great luminaries of the sky, the motions and the paths of the heavenly bodies, the divisions of time and the changes that bring the seasons, the cardinal points of the compass, and the 12tides and currents of the ocean.[10] In discussing these matters he is naturally led to a statement as to the shape of the earth. All through the middle ages there were thinkers who accepted the teachings of the classical astronomers who had taught that the earth is round like a sphere; but this belief was by no means general. Bede for one appears to have been convinced that the earth is of a spherical shape, though he explains that, because of mountains which rise high above the surface, it cannot be perfectly round.[11] Alexander Neckam, an English scientist who wrote two generations before the King’s Mirror was composed, states in his Praise of Divine Wisdom that “the ancients have ventured to believe that the earth is round, though mountains rise high above its surface.”[12] Neckam’s own ideas on this point are quite confused and he remains discreetly non-committal.

In one of his earlier chapters, the author lists the main scientific topics that everyone should study if they want to be a successful merchant. These include the major stars in the sky, the movements and paths of celestial bodies, the divisions of time and the changes that bring about the seasons, the cardinal points of the compass, and the tides and currents of the ocean.12[10] While discussing these subjects, he naturally leads into a statement about the shape of the earth. Throughout the Middle Ages, there were thinkers who accepted the teachings of classical astronomers, who claimed that the earth is round like a sphere; however, this belief was not universally held. Bede, for example, seems to have believed that the earth is spherical, though he notes that, due to mountains rising significantly above the surface, it cannot be perfectly round.[11] Alexander Neckam, an English scientist who wrote two generations before the King’s Mirror was created, mentions in his Praise of Divine Wisdom that “the ancients dared to believe that the earth is round, even though mountains rise high above its surface.”[12] Neckam’s own views on this matter are quite unclear, and he remains carefully non-committal.

But if the earth is a globe, there is every reason to believe in the existence of antipodes; and if there are antipodes, all cannot behold Christ coming in the clouds on the final day. To the medieval theologians, at least to the larger number of them, this argument disposed effectually of the Ptolemaic theory. Job does indeed say that God “hangeth the earth upon nothing,”[13] and this passage might point to a spherical form; but then the Psalmist affirms that He “stretched out the earth above the waters,”[14] and this statement would indicate 13that the inhabited part of the earth is an island floating upon the waters of the great Ocean, by which it is also surrounded. This belief was generally maintained in the earlier centuries of the classical world, and it had wide acceptance in the middle ages. There were also those who held that beyond and around the outer Ocean is a great girdle of fire. It is likely, however, that many believed with Isidore of Seville that it is useless to speculate on subjects of this sort. “Whether it [the earth] is supported by the density of the air, or whether it is spread out upon the waters ... or how the yielding air can support such a vast mass as the earth, whether such an immense weight can be upheld by the waters without being submerged, or how the earth maintains its balance ... these matters it is not permitted any mortal to know and they are not for us to discuss.”[15]

But if the earth is a globe, there's every reason to believe in the existence of antipodes; and if there are antipodes, not everyone can see Christ coming in the clouds on the final day. For most medieval theologians, this argument effectively dismissed the Ptolemaic theory. Job does say that God “hangs the earth upon nothing,”[13] and this passage might suggest a spherical shape; however, the Psalmist claims that He “stretched out the earth above the waters,”[14] which implies that the inhabited part of the earth is an island floating on the waters of the great Ocean that surrounds it. This belief was commonly held in the earlier centuries of the classical world and was widely accepted in the Middle Ages. There were also those who thought that beyond and around the outer Ocean is a great belt of fire. However, it's likely that many agreed with Isidore of Seville that speculating on such topics is pointless. “Whether it [the earth] is supported by the density of the air, or whether it is spread out upon the waters ... or how the yielding air can support such a vast mass as the earth, whether such an immense weight can be upheld by the waters without being submerged, or how the earth maintains its balance ... these matters are not for any mortal to know and should not be discussed.”[15]

There can be no doubt that the author of the King’s Mirror believed in the Ptolemaic theory of a spherical earth. In speaking of our planet he uses the term jarðarbollr,[16] earth-sphere. In an effort to explain why some countries are hotter than others, he suggests an experiment with an apple. It is not clear how this can shed much light on the problem, but the author boldly states the point to be illustrated: “From this you may infer that the earth-circle is round like a ball.”[17]

There’s no doubt that the author of the King’s Mirror believed in the Ptolemaic theory of a spherical earth. When referring to our planet, he uses the term jarðarbollr,[16] earth-sphere. To explain why some countries are hotter than others, he suggests an experiment with an apple. It's unclear how this can really clarify the issue, but the author confidently states the point he wants to make: “From this you may infer that the earth-circle is round like a ball.”[17]

Toward the close of the medieval period there were certain thinkers who attempted to reconcile the spherical theory with the belief that the inhabited part of the earth is an island. These appear to have believed that 14the earth is a globe partly submerged in a larger sphere composed of water.[18] The visible parts of the earth would rise above the surrounding ocean like a huge island, and the Biblical passages which had caused so much difficulty could thus be interpreted in accord with apparent facts. It is quite clear that the author of the King’s Mirror held no such theory. In a poetic description of how the eight winds form their covenants of friendship at the approach of spring, he tells us that “at midnight the north wind goes forth to meet the coursing sun and leads him through rocky deserts toward the sparse-built shores.”[19] The author, therefore, seems to believe that the earth is a sphere, that there are lands on the opposite side of the earth, and that these lands are inhabited. He also understands that the regions that lie beneath the midnight course of the sun in spring and summer must be thinly populated, as the sun’s path on the opposite side of the earth during the season of lengthening days is constantly approaching nearer the pole.

Toward the end of the medieval period, some thinkers tried to reconcile the spherical Earth theory with the idea that the inhabited part of the Earth is an island. They seemed to believe that the Earth is a globe partially submerged in a larger sphere of water. The visible parts of the Earth would rise above the surrounding ocean like a massive island, allowing for interpretations of challenging Biblical passages to align with observable facts. It’s clear that the author of the King’s Mirror did not subscribe to this theory. In a poetic depiction of how the eight winds form friendships as spring approaches, he states that “at midnight the north wind goes out to meet the moving sun and guides him through rocky deserts toward the sparsely populated shores.” Therefore, the author appears to believe that the Earth is a sphere, that there are lands on the opposite side of the Earth, and that these lands are inhabited. He also recognizes that the regions beneath the sun’s midnight path in spring and summer must be sparsely populated, as the sun’s course on the opposite side of the Earth during the season of longer days is always getting closer to the pole.

But while the author seems to accept the Ptolemaic theory of the universe, he is not able to divest his mind entirely of current geographical notions. There can be no doubt that he believed in the encircling outer ocean, and it is barely possible that he also looked with favor on the belief that the whole was encompassed by a girdle of fire. On this point, however, we cannot be sure: he mentions the belief merely as one that is current, not as one accepted by himself.[20]

But while the author seems to accept the Ptolemaic theory of the universe, he can't completely shake off contemporary geographic ideas. There's no doubt he believed in the surrounding outer ocean, and it’s even possible he favored the idea that everything was surrounded by a ring of fire. However, we can’t be certain on this point: he only mentions the belief as a popular one, not necessarily one that he personally accepted.[20]

15It was commonly held in the middle ages that the earth is divided into five zones, only two of which may be inhabited. This was a theory advanced by a Greek scientist in the fifth century before our era,[21] and was given currency in medieval times chiefly, perhaps, through the works of Macrobius.[22] At first these zones were conceived as belts drawn across the heavens; later they came to be considered as divisions of the earth’s surface. It will be noted that our author uses the older terminology and speaks of the zones as belts on the heaven;[23] it may be inferred, therefore, that he derived his information from one of the earlier Latin treatises on the nature of the universe.[24] For two thousand years it was believed that human life could not exist in the polar and torrid zones. Even as late as the fifteenth century European navigators had great fear of travel into the torrid zone, where the heat was thought to grow more intense as one traveled south, until a point might be reached where water in the sea would boil. The author of the King’s Mirror seems to doubt all this. He regards the polar zones as generally uninhabitable; still, he is sure that Greenland lies within the arctic zone; and yet, Greenland “has beautiful sunshine and is said to have a rather pleasant climate.”[25] He sees quite clearly that the physical nature of a country may have much to do with climatic conditions. The cold of Iceland he ascribes in great part to its position near 16Greenland: “for it is to be expected that severe cold would come thence, since Greenland is ice-clad beyond all other lands.”[26] He conceives the possibility that the south temperate zone is inhabited. “And if people live as near the cold belt on the southern side as the Greenlanders do on the northern, I firmly believe that the north wind blows as warm to them as the south wind to us. For they must look north to see the midday and the sun’s whole course, just as we, who dwell north of the sun, must look to the south.”[27]

15In the Middle Ages, it was widely believed that the earth was divided into five zones, with only two being livable. This idea was proposed by a Greek scientist in the fifth century BCE,[21] and gained popularity during medieval times, mainly through the writings of Macrobius.[22] Initially, these zones were imagined as belts across the sky; later, they were thought of as divisions on the earth's surface. It's worth noting that our author uses the older terminology, referring to the zones as belts in the heavens;[23] thus, it's likely he got his information from one of the earlier Latin texts about the universe.[24] For two thousand years, it was believed that human life couldn’t exist in the polar and tropical zones. Even as recently as the fifteenth century, European explorers were very hesitant to travel into the tropics, fearing that the heat would become unbearable as they moved south, possibly reaching a point where seawater would boil. The author of the King’s Mirror seems skeptical about all this. He considers the polar zones to be largely uninhabitable; however, he acknowledges that Greenland is in the Arctic zone, yet describes it as having “beautiful sunshine and a rather pleasant climate.”[25] He clearly understands that the geography of a region can greatly influence its climate. He attributes Iceland's cold weather largely to its proximity to Greenland: “it is expected that severe cold would come from there, since Greenland is more ice-covered than any other land.”[26] He entertains the possibility that people live in the southern temperate zone. “And if people can live close to the cold zone in the south like the Greenlanders do in the north, I firmly believe that the north wind feels as warm to them as the south wind does to us. They must look north to see midday and the sun's entire path, just as we, who live north of the sun, must look south.”[27]

On the questions of time and its divisions the author of the King’s Mirror seems to have had nearly all the information that the age possessed. He divides the period of day and night into two “days” (dægr) of twelve hours each. Each hour is again divided into smaller hours called ostenta in Latin.[28] Any division below the minute he apparently does not know. The length of the year he fixes at 365 days and six hours, every fourth year these additional hours make twenty-four and we have leap year.[29] The waxing and waning of the moon and the tidal changes in the ocean are also reckoned with fair accuracy.[30]

On the topics of time and its divisions, the author of the King’s Mirror seems to have had almost all the knowledge available at the time. He splits the day and night into two “days” (dægr) of twelve hours each. Each hour is further divided into smaller segments called ostenta in Latin.[28] He apparently does not recognize any divisions smaller than a minute. He defines the length of the year as 365 days and six hours, with every fourth year adding up to twenty-four additional hours, resulting in a leap year.[29] He also accounts for the phases of the moon and the tidal changes in the ocean with reasonable accuracy.[30]

Medieval scientists found these movements in the ocean a great mystery. Some ascribed the tides to the influence of the moon;[31] others believed that they were caused by the collision of the waters of two arms of the ocean, an eastern arm and a western; still others 17imagined that somewhere there were “certain cavern-like abysses, which now swallow up the water, and now spew it forth again.”[32] The author of the Speculum has no doubts on the subject: he believes that the tides are due to the waxing and waning of the moon.[33]

Medieval scientists found the ocean’s movements to be a great mystery. Some attributed the tides to the moon's influence;[31] others thought they were caused by the clash of waters from two parts of the ocean, one to the east and one to the west; still others 17imagined that there were "certain cavern-like depths, which sometimes swallow the water and sometimes release it again.”[32] The author of the Speculum has no doubts about this: he believes the tides are caused by the moon's phases.[33]

In his discussion of the volcanic fires of Iceland he shows that on this subject he was completely under the influence of medieval conceptions. He has heard that Gregory the Great believed that the volcanic eruptions in Sicily have their origins in the infernal regions. Our author is inclined to question, however, that there is anything supernatural about the eruptions of Mount Etna; but he is quite sure that the volcanic fires of Iceland rise from the places of pain. The fires of Sicily are living fires, inasmuch as they devour living materials, such as wood and earth; those of Iceland, on the other hand, consume nothing living but only dead matter like rock. And he therefore concludes that these fires must have their origin in the realms of death.[34]

In his discussion of the volcanic fires of Iceland, he shows that he was completely influenced by medieval ideas on the subject. He has heard that Gregory the Great believed the volcanic eruptions in Sicily come from the underworld. However, our author is skeptical that there's anything supernatural about the eruptions of Mount Etna; he is quite certain that the volcanic fires of Iceland come from places of suffering. The fires of Sicily are alive in the sense that they consume living materials like wood and earth; in contrast, the fires of Iceland only burn dead matter like rock. Therefore, he concludes that these fires must originate from the realms of death.[34]

The author has a suspicion that earthquakes may be due to volcanic action, but he offers another explanation, though he does not give it as his own belief. Down in the bowels of the earth there is probably a large number of caverns and empty passages. “At times it may happen that these passages and cavities will be so completely packed with air either by the winds or by the power of the roaring breakers, that the pressure of the blast cannot be confined, and this may be the origin of those great earthquakes that occur in that country.”[35] 18In this theory there is nothing new or original: the belief that the earth is of a spongy constitution and that earthquakes are caused by air currents is a very old one, which can be followed back through the writings of Alexander Neckam,[36] the Venerable Bede,[37] and others, at least as far as to Isidore.[38] The elder Pliny, who wrote his Natural History in the first century of the Christian era, seems to have held similar views: “I believe there can be no doubt that the winds are the cause of earthquakes.”[39]

The author suspects that earthquakes might be caused by volcanic activity, but he provides another explanation without claiming it as his own belief. Deep within the earth, there are probably many caverns and empty passages. "Sometimes, these passages and cavities can get so completely filled with air, either by winds or the force of crashing waves, that the pressure builds up and can't be contained, which could lead to the major earthquakes that happen in that area.”[35] 18 This theory isn't new or original: the idea that the earth has a spongy structure and that earthquakes are caused by air currents is quite old and can be traced back through the writings of Alexander Neckam,[36] the Venerable Bede,[37] and others, at least as far back as Isidore.[38] The elder Pliny, who wrote his Natural History in the first century AD, seems to have shared similar views: "I believe there's no doubt that winds are the cause of earthquakes.”[39]

The chapters that deal with the northern lights are interesting because they seem to imply that these lights were not visible in those parts of Norway where the King’s Mirror was written. The editors of the Christiania edition of this work call attention to the fact that there have been periods when these phenomena were less prominent, and suggest that there may have been such a period in the thirteenth century.[40] The author discusses these lights as one of the wonders of Greenland, and the natural inference is that they were not known in Norway. But it is also true that he speaks of whales as if they were limited to the seas about Iceland and Greenland, which is manifestly incorrect. It is likely that the author merely wishes to emphasize the fact that the northern lights appear with greater frequency and in greater brilliance in Greenland than anywhere 19in Norway. He gives three theories to account for these phenomena: some ascribe them to a girdle of fire which encircles the earth beyond the outer ocean; others hold that the lights are merely rays of the sun which find their way past the edges of the earth while the sun is coursing underneath; but his own belief is that frost and cold have attained to such a power in the Arctic that they are able to put forth light.[41] In his opinion cold is a positive force as much as heat or any other form of energy. To the men of the author’s time there was nothing strange in this belief: it seems to have been held by many even before the thirteenth century that ice could under certain conditions produce heat and even burn.[42]

The chapters about the northern lights are interesting because they suggest that these lights weren't visible in the parts of Norway where the King’s Mirror was written. The editors of the Christiania edition of this work point out that there have been times when these phenomena were less noticeable and propose that there might have been such a time in the thirteenth century.[40] The author mentions these lights as one of the wonders of Greenland, and it’s implied that they were not recognized in Norway. However, he also talks about whales as if they were only found in the seas around Iceland and Greenland, which is obviously incorrect. It’s likely that the author just wants to highlight that the northern lights occur more frequently and more vividly in Greenland than anywhere else 19in Norway. He presents three theories to explain these phenomena: some think they are caused by a girdle of fire that surrounds the earth beyond the outer ocean; others believe the lights are merely sunlight that creeps past the edges of the earth while the sun is moving below; but his own view is that frost and cold have become so powerful in the Arctic that they can produce light.[41] He believes cold is a positive force just like heat or any other form of energy. For people in the author’s time, there was nothing strange about this belief: many, even before the thirteenth century, seemed to hold that ice could generate heat and even burn under certain conditions.[42]

Among the author’s scientific notions very little that is really original can be found. It is Riant’s belief that he drew to some extent from Oriental sources, the lore of the East having come into the North as the spoil of crusaders or as the acquisitions of Norwegian pilgrims.[43] It may be doubted, however, whether the Saracenic contribution is a real one: almost everything that the author of the Speculum Regale presents as his belief can be found in the Latin scientific manuals of the middle ages. He alludes to the writings of Isidore of Seville, and 20there can be little doubt that he was acquainted with the ideas of the great Spaniard, though he does not accept them all. His ideas as to the shape of the earth and the probable causes of earthquakes may have been derived from the writings of the Venerable Bede, or from one of his numerous followers. The divisions of time are discussed in many of the scientific treatises of the middle ages, but the division of the hour into sixtieths called ostenta is probably not found in any manual written before the ninth century; so far as the writer has been able to determine, ostenta, meaning minutes, first appears in the works of Rabanus Maurus.[44]

Among the author's scientific ideas, there isn't much that is truly original. Riant believes that he was influenced to some extent by Eastern sources, as Eastern knowledge came to the North through crusaders or Norwegian pilgrims.[43] However, it can be questioned whether the contribution from the Saracens is genuine: almost everything the author of the Speculum Regale claims as his own belief can be found in Latin scientific manuals from the Middle Ages. He references the writings of Isidore of Seville, and it's clear he was familiar with the ideas of the notable Spaniard, though he doesn't accept all of them. His thoughts on the shape of the earth and the likely causes of earthquakes might have come from the writings of the Venerable Bede or one of his many followers. Divisions of time are discussed in many scientific treatises from the Middle Ages, but the division of an hour into sixtieths, called ostenta, probably doesn't appear in any manuals written before the ninth century; as far as the writer has been able to determine, ostenta, meaning minutes, first appears in the works of Rabanus Maurus.[44]

The discussion of these scientific notions has its chief value in showing to what extent the Norwegians of the thirteenth century were acquainted with the best theories of the age as to the great facts of the universe. The author’s own contribution to the scientific learning of his time lies almost exclusively in the field of geography. “Beyond comparison the most important geographical writer of the medieval North,” says Dr. Nansen, “and at the same time one of the first in the whole of medieval Europe, was the unknown author who wrote the King’s Mirror.... If one turns from contemporary or earlier European geographical literature, with all its superstition and obscurity, to this masterly work, the difference is very striking.”[45] This is doubtless due to the fact that our author was not a cloistered monk who was content to copy the ideas and expressions of his predecessors with such changes as would satisfy a theological mind, but a 21man who had been active in the secular world and was anxious to get at real facts.

The discussion of these scientific ideas is mainly valuable for highlighting how familiar the Norwegians of the thirteenth century were with the best theories of their time regarding the major facts of the universe. The author's main contribution to the scientific knowledge of his era is almost entirely in the area of geography. “Without a doubt, the most important geographic writer of medieval Northern Europe,” says Dr. Nansen, “and one of the first in all of medieval Europe, was the unknown author of the King’s Mirror.... If you compare this masterful work to contemporary or earlier European geographic literature, filled with superstition and confusion, the difference is striking.”[45] This is likely because our author wasn’t a secluded monk who simply copied the ideas and words of his predecessors with minor adjustments to please a theological mindset but rather a 21man who was engaged in the real world and eager to uncover true facts.

Among the chapters devoted to scientific lore the author has introduced several which are ostensibly intended to serve the purpose of entertainment; the author seems to fear that the interest of his readers is likely to flag, if the dry recital of physical facts is continued unbroken. It is in these chapters, which profess to deal with the marvels of Norway, Ireland, Iceland, Greenland, and the Arctic seas, that he introduces his geographical data. In the description of Greenland are included such important and practical subjects as the general character of the land, the great ice fields, the products of the country, wild animals, and a few facts from the economic life of the people. In the chapters on Iceland the author limits himself to certain physical features, such as glaciers, geysers, mineral springs, volcanoes, and earthquakes. He also gives a “description of the animal world of the northern seas to which there is no parallel in the earlier literature of the world.”[46] He enumerates twenty-one different species of whales[47] and describes several of them with some fulness. He mentions and describes six varieties of seals[48] and also gives a description of the walrus. The marvelous element is represented by detailed accounts of the “sea-hedges” (probably sea quakes) on the coasts of Greenland, the 22merman, the mermaid, and the kraken.[49] But on the whole these chapters give evidence of careful, discriminating observation and a desire to give accurate knowledge.

Among the chapters dedicated to scientific knowledge, the author has included several that are clearly meant to entertain; he seems to worry that his readers’ interest might wane if he continues the dry delivery of physical facts without interruption. In these chapters, which claim to explore the wonders of Norway, Ireland, Iceland, Greenland, and the Arctic seas, he introduces his geographical information. In the description of Greenland, he covers important and practical topics such as the general characteristics of the land, the vast ice fields, the natural resources, wildlife, and some facts about the economic life of the people. In the chapters on Iceland, the author focuses on specific physical features, like glaciers, geysers, mineral springs, volcanoes, and earthquakes. He also provides a “description of the animal life of the northern seas that has no equivalent in earlier literature.”[46] He lists twenty-one different species of whales[47] and describes several of them in detail. He mentions and details six types of seals[48] and also describes the walrus. The element of wonder is conveyed through detailed accounts of the “sea-hedges” (possibly sea quakes) along the coasts of Greenland, the merman, the mermaid, and the kraken.[49] But overall, these chapters demonstrate careful, thoughtful observation and a commitment to providing accurate information.

For all but the two chapters on Ireland the sources of the author’s geographical information are evidently the tales of travelers and his own personal experiences; of literary sources there is no trace. The account of the marvels of Ireland, however, gives rise to certain problems. It may be that the Norwegian geographer based these chapters on literary sources that are still extant, or he may have had access to writings which have since disappeared. It is also possible that some of the information was contributed by travelers who sailed the western seas and had sojourned on the “western isles;” for it must be remembered that Norway still had colonies as far south as the Isle of Man, and that Norsemen were still living in Ireland, though under English rule. When Hakon IV made his expedition into these regions in 1263, some of these Norwegian colonists in Ireland sought his aid in the hope that English rule might be overthrown.[50]

For all the chapters except the two on Ireland, it's clear that the author's geographical information comes from travel stories and his own experiences; there are no literary sources mentioned. However, the section about the wonders of Ireland raises some questions. It's possible that the Norwegian geographer used literary sources that still exist, or he may have had access to writings that are now lost. It's also likely that some of the information came from travelers who sailed the western seas and spent time on the “western isles;” we should remember that Norway had colonies as far south as the Isle of Man, and Norsemen were still living in Ireland, although under English governance. When Hakon IV made his expedition to these areas in 1263, some of these Norwegian settlers in Ireland sought his help in hopes of ending English rule.[50]

It has long been known that many of the tales of Irish wonders and miracles that are recounted in the Speculum Regale are also told in the Topographia Hibernica by Giraldus Cambrensis. The famous Welshman wrote his work several decades before the King’s Mirror was composed; and it is not impossible that the author of the latter had access to the “Irish Topography.” Moreover, the Speculum Regale and the Topographia 23Hibernica have certain common features which correspond so closely that literary kinship seems quite probable. The resemblances, however, are not so much in the details as in the plan and the viewpoint. In the second book of his “Topography,” Giraldus recounts “first those things that nature has planted in the land itself;” and next “those things that have been miraculously performed through the merits of the saints.”[51] The author of the King’s Mirror has adopted a similar grouping. After having discussed some of the wonders of the island he continues: “There still remain certain things that may be thought marvelous; these, however, are not native to the land but have originated in the miraculous powers of holy men.”[52] This correspondence in the general plan is too remarkable to be wholly accidental; at least it should lead us to look for other resemblances elsewhere.

It has long been known that many of the stories of Irish wonders and miracles found in the Speculum Regale are also present in the Topographia Hibernica by Giraldus Cambrensis. The famous Welshman wrote his work several decades before the King’s Mirror was composed, and it's possible that the author of the latter had access to the “Irish Topography.” Moreover, the Speculum Regale and the Topographia Hibernica share certain features that correspond so closely that a literary connection seems quite likely. The similarities, however, are not so much about the details but in the overall structure and perspective. In the second book of his “Topography,” Giraldus recounts “first those things that nature has planted in the land itself;” and then “those things that have been miraculously performed through the merits of the saints.”[51] The author of the King’s Mirror has adopted a similar arrangement. After discussing some of the wonders of the island, he continues: “There still remain certain things that may be considered marvelous; these, however, are not native to the land but have originated in the miraculous powers of holy men.”[52] This similarity in the overall structure is too striking to be purely coincidental; at the very least, it suggests that we should look for more resemblances elsewhere.

In his general description of Ireland the author of the Norwegian work calls attention to the excellence of the land and its temperate climate: “for all through the winter the cattle find their feed in the open.”[53] Giraldus informs us that grass grows in winter as well as in summer, and he adds: “therefore they are accustomed neither to cut hay for fodder nor to provide stables for the cattle.”[54] Both writers emphasize the fact that grapes do not grow on the island. In both writings attention is called to the sacred character of the Irish soil, which makes it impossible for reptiles and venomous animals to live on the land, though Giraldus has his doubts as to the supernatural phase of the matter. Both writers 24add that if sand or dust is brought from Ireland to another country and scattered about a reptile, it will perish.[55] Both characterize the Irish people as savage and murderous, but they also call attention to their kind treatment of holy men, of whom the island has always had many.[56] In fact, every statement in the King’s Mirror as to the nature of the land and the character of the inhabitants can be duplicated in Giraldus’ description of Ireland, except, perhaps, the single observation that the Irish people, because of the mildness of the climate, often wear no clothes.

In his general description of Ireland, the author of the Norwegian work highlights the quality of the land and its mild climate: “for all through the winter the cattle find their feed in the open.”[53] Giraldus informs us that grass grows in winter as well as in summer, and he adds: “therefore they are accustomed neither to cut hay for fodder nor to provide stables for the cattle.”[54] Both writers emphasize that grapes do not grow on the island. In both writings, they highlight the sacred nature of Irish soil, which prevents reptiles and venomous animals from living there, although Giraldus expresses some skepticism about the supernatural aspect of this. Both writers 24 mention that if sand or dust from Ireland is taken to another country and spread around, any reptile will die.[55] They describe the Irish people as savage and murderous, but also note their kindness towards holy men, of whom the island has always had many.[56] In fact, every statement in the King’s Mirror about the characteristics of the land and its people can be found in Giraldus' description of Ireland, except, perhaps, the observation that the Irish people, due to the mild climate, often go without clothes.

But even if Giraldus’ work is to be regarded as one of the sources which the Norwegian author may have used in writing his chapters on the Irish mirabilia, it cannot have been the only or even the principal source. The account of these marvels in the King’s Mirror does not wholly agree with that of the Welshman’s work. In some instances the wonders are told with details that are wanting in the earlier narrative. Frequently, too, the Norwegian version is more explicit as to localities and gives proper names where Giraldus has none. It also records marvels and miracles which are not found in the Topographia Hibernica.

But even if Giraldus’ work is considered one of the sources the Norwegian author might have used when writing his chapters on the Irish wonders, it couldn't have been the only or even the main source. The description of these marvels in the King’s Mirror doesn't completely match the Welshman's work. In some cases, the wonders are described with details that are missing in the earlier narrative. Often, the Norwegian version is more specific about locations and includes proper names where Giraldus does not. It also mentions wonders and miracles that aren’t found in the Topographia Hibernica.

In an edition of the Irish Nennius the editor has added as an appendix a brief account of the “Wonders of Ireland,” many of the tales of which have interesting parallels in the King’s Mirror. There is also a medieval poem on the same theme[57] which contains allusions to much that the Norwegian author has recorded with 25greater fulness. Neither of these works, however, can have been the source from which the chapters on Ireland in the Speculum Regale have been derived.

In an edition of the Irish Nennius, the editor has included a brief overview of the “Wonders of Ireland” as an appendix, many of which have intriguing parallels in the King’s Mirror. There's also a medieval poem on the same topic[57] that references a lot of what the Norwegian author has detailed with more depth. However, neither of these works could have been the source for the chapters on Ireland in the Speculum Regale.

The learned editors of the Christiania edition of the King’s Mirror reached the conclusion that the author did not draw from any literary source but derived his information from current tales and other oral accounts.[58] This is also the opinion of Dr. Kuno Meyer, the eminent student of Celtic philology.[59] Dr. Meyer bases his belief on the form of the Irish proper names. As written in the Speculum Regale they can not have been copied, as the spelling is not normally Irish; he believes, therefore, that they show an effort on the author’s part to reproduce phonetically these names as he heard them spoken. But this theory ignores the fact that in writing them the author employs combinations of consonants which are unusual to say the least. Combinations of ch and gh are used in writing nearly all the Irish proper names that occur in the King’s Mirror and the gh-combination is found nowhere else in the work.[60] It was probably coming into the language in the century to which the work is credited, but the author uses it only as indicated above. It seems likely, therefore, that he had access to a written source, though it is also likely that he did not have this account before him when the writing was actually done. As has already been stated, 26the author seems to have written largely from memory, and his memory is not always accurate.

The knowledgeable editors of the Christiania edition of the King’s Mirror concluded that the author didn’t rely on any written sources but instead gathered his information from contemporary stories and other oral traditions.[58] This view is also supported by Dr. Kuno Meyer, a prominent scholar in Celtic philology.[59] Dr. Meyer’s belief is based on the way Irish proper names are presented. The names in the Speculum Regale can’t have been copied because their spelling isn’t typically Irish; thus, he argues that they reflect the author’s effort to phonetically capture how he heard these names pronounced. However, this theory overlooks the fact that the author uses unusual combinations of consonants in writing them. The combinations of ch and gh appear in nearly all the Irish proper names found in the King’s Mirror, and the gh combination is not seen anywhere else in the text.[60] It likely began to emerge in the language during the century the work is attributed to, but the author only uses it as noted above. Therefore, it seems probable that he had access to a written source, although it’s also likely that he didn’t have this account in front of him while he was writing. As stated earlier, 26 the author appears to have written mostly from memory, and his memory isn’t always reliable.

Having discussed the subjects which he considers of chief importance for the education of a merchant, the learned father proceeds to describe the king’s household and its organization, the manners which one should observe at court, and the business that is likely to come before a king. For the part which deals with the royal court, it is probable that no literary sources were used. The author evidently wrote from long experience in the king’s retinue; he is not discussing an ideal organization but the king’s household as it was in Bergen and Trondhjem in his own day. If he drew from any written description of courtly manners, it may have been from some book like Petrus Alfonsus’ Disciplina Clericalis, which has already been mentioned[61] and which seems to have had a wide circulation throughout western Europe in the later middle ages.

Having discussed the topics he sees as essential for training a merchant, the knowledgeable father goes on to describe the king's household and its organization, the etiquette one should follow at court, and the matters likely to come before a king. Regarding the section on the royal court, it's likely that no literary sources were referenced. The author clearly wrote from extensive experience in the king's entourage; he's not outlining an ideal setup but the king's household as it existed in Bergen and Trondhjem during his time. If he referenced any written accounts of courtly behavior, it might have been from a book like Petrus Alfonsus’ Disciplina Clericalis, which has already been mentioned[61] and appears to have circulated widely across Western Europe in the later Middle Ages.

The chapters that are devoted to the discussion of the duties and activities of the king’s guardsmen, to the manners and customs which should rule in the king’s garth, and to the ethical ideas on which these were largely based are of great interest to the student of medieval culture. They reveal a progress in the direction of refined life and polished manners, which one should scarcely expect to find in the Northern lands. The development of courtesy and refined manners may have been accelerated by the new literature which was coming into Scandinavia from France and Germany, a literature that dealt so largely with the doings of 27knights and kings;[62] but it was probably not so much a matter of bookish instruction as of direct imitation. The Northmen, though they lived far from the great centers of culture, were always in close touch with the rest of the world. In the earlier centuries the viking sailed his dreaded craft wherever there was wealth and plunder and civilized life. After him and often as his companion came the merchant who brought away new ideas along with other desirable wares. After a time Christianity was introduced from the southlands, and the pilgrim and the crusader took the place of the heathen pirate. And all these classes helped to reshape the life of courtesy in the Northern countries.

The chapters that focus on the duties and activities of the king’s guards, the manners and customs that should prevail in the king’s grounds, and the ethical concepts that largely influenced these practices are really interesting for anyone studying medieval culture. They showcase a shift toward a more refined lifestyle and polished manners, which you might not expect to see in the Northern regions. The development of courtesy and refined manners may have been fueled by the new literature coming into Scandinavia from France and Germany, which largely focused on the actions of knights and kings; but it probably had more to do with direct imitation than book learning. The Northmen, even though they lived far from major cultural centers, were always in touch with the rest of the world. In earlier centuries, the viking sailed his feared ship wherever there was wealth, plunder, and civilization. Following him, often as his companion, was the merchant who brought back new ideas along with other valuable goods. Eventually, Christianity was introduced from the south, and the pilgrim and the crusader replaced the pagan pirate. All of these groups contributed to reshaping the culture of courtesy in the Northern countries.

It is difficult to overestimate the influence of the crusader as a pioneer of Christian culture in Scandinavia, but it seems possible that the pilgrim was even more important in this respect. It was no doubt largely through his journeys that German influences began to be felt in the Scandinavian lands, though it is possible that the wide activities of the Hanseatic merchants should also be credited with some importance for the spread of Teutonic culture. It is told in the King’s Mirror that a new mode of dressing the hair and the beard had been introduced from Germany since the author had retired from the royal court.[63] It is significant that the routes usually followed by Norwegian pilgrims who sought the Eternal City and the holy places in the Orient ran through German lands. As a rule the pilgrims traveled through Jutland, Holstein, and the Old Saxon territories and reached the Rhine at 28Mainz. It was also possible to take a more easterly route, and sometimes the travelers would go by sea to the Low Countries and thence southward past Utrecht and Cologne; but all these three routes converged at Mainz, whence the journey led up the Rhine and across the Alps. It will be noted that a long stretch of the journey from Norway to Rome would lead through the German kingdom. Concerning the people of the Old Saxon or German lands an Icelandic scribe makes the following significant remark: “In that country the people are more polished and courteous than in most places and the Northmen imitate their customs quite generally.”[64]

It’s hard to overstate the impact of the crusader as a trailblazer of Christian culture in Scandinavia, but it seems that the pilgrim may have been even more crucial in this regard. It was likely through his travels that German influences began to make their way into the Scandinavian territories, although the extensive activities of the Hanseatic merchants likely played a significant role in the spread of Teutonic culture as well. According to the King’s Mirror, a new style of hair and beard grooming had been brought in from Germany since the author stepped away from the royal court.[63] It's noteworthy that the routes commonly taken by Norwegian pilgrims aiming for the Eternal City and holy sites in the East went through German lands. Usually, the pilgrims journeyed through Jutland, Holstein, and the Old Saxon regions, reaching the Rhine at 28Mainz. They could also opt for a more eastern route, and sometimes the travelers would take to the sea to the Low Countries and then head south past Utrecht and Cologne; however, all three routes converged at Mainz, from where the journey continued up the Rhine and across the Alps. It should be noted that a significant portion of the journey from Norway to Rome would take them through the German kingdom. An Icelandic scribe made an important observation about the people of the Old Saxon or German lands: “In that country, the people are more refined and courteous than in most places, and the Northmen generally adopt their customs.”[64]

The cultural influences which followed in the wake of the returning crusaders were no doubt largely of Frankish origin. As a rule the crusading expeditions followed the sea route along the coasts of France and the Spanish peninsula; thus the Northern warriors came in contact with French ideas and customs in the Frankish homeland as well as in the Christian armies, which were largely made up of enthusiastic and venturesome knights from Frankland. The author of the King’s Mirror urges his son to learn Latin and French, “for these idioms are most widely used.”[65]

The cultural influences that came after the returning crusaders were mostly of Frankish origin. Generally, the crusading missions took the sea route along the coasts of France and the Iberian Peninsula, allowing the Northern warriors to encounter French ideas and customs in the Frankish homeland and in the Christian forces, which were largely composed of eager and adventurous knights from Frankland. The author of the King’s Mirror advises his son to learn Latin and French, “because these languages are the most commonly used.”[65]

One of the reasons why the son wishes to master the mercantile profession is that he desires to travel and 29learn the customs of other lands.[66] In the thirteenth century the Norwegian trade still seems to have been largely with England and the other parts of the British Isles. It is also important to remember that the Norwegian church was a daughter of the church of England, and that occasionally English churchmen were elevated to high office in the Norwegian establishment. It is likely that Master William, who was Hakon IV’s chaplain, was an Englishman; at least he bore an English name.[67]

One of the reasons the son wants to master the trading profession is that he wants to travel and learn about the customs of other countries.29 [66] In the thirteenth century, Norwegian trade still seems to have been mainly with England and other parts of the British Isles. It’s also important to note that the Norwegian church was a branch of the Church of England, and occasionally English churchmen were appointed to high positions in the Norwegian church. It’s likely that Master William, who was Hakon IV’s chaplain, was English; at least he had an English name. [67]

Information as to foreign civilization and the rules of courteous behavior could also pass from land to land and from court to court with the diplomatic missions of the time. The wise father states that envoys who come and go are careful to observe the manners that obtain at the courts to which they are sent.[68] Frequent embassies must have passed between the capitals of England and Norway in the thirteenth century. It is recorded that both King John and his son Henry III received envoys from the king of Norway, and that they brought very acceptable gifts, such as hawks and elks,[69] especially the former: in twelve different years Hakon IV sent hawks to the English king.[70]

Information about foreign cultures and the rules of polite behavior could also travel from country to country and from court to court through the diplomatic missions of the time. The wise father notes that envoys who come and go are careful to observe the customs that are practiced at the courts they visit.[68] There must have been frequent exchanges between the capitals of England and Norway in the thirteenth century. It is recorded that both King John and his son Henry III received envoys from the king of Norway, who brought very welcome gifts, such as hawks and elks,[69] especially the former: over a span of twelve years, Hakon IV sent hawks to the English king.[70]

Embassies also came quite frequently from the imperial court in Germany. It was during the reign of Hakon IV that the Hohenstaufens were waging their last fight with the papacy, and both sides in the conflict seemed anxious to secure the friendship of the great 30Norwegian king. The Saga of Hakon relates that early in the king’s reign “missions began between the emperor and King Hakon.”[71] In 1241, “when King Hakon came to the King’s Crag, that man came to him whose name was Matthew, sent from the emperor Frederick with many noble gifts. Along with him came from abroad five Bluemen (negroes).”[72] Just how acceptable such a gift would be in medieval Norway the chronicler does not state. There can be no doubt, however, that Hakon returned the courtesy. The saga mentions several men who were sent on diplomatic errands to the imperial court. One of these emissaries had to go as far as Sicily, “and the emperor received him well.”[73]

Embassies also frequently arrived from the imperial court in Germany. During Hakon IV's reign, the Hohenstaufens were having their last struggle with the papacy, and both sides in the conflict seemed eager to win the support of the great Norwegian king. The Saga of Hakon says that early in the king’s reign, “missions began between the emperor and King Hakon.” In 1241, “when King Hakon arrived at the King’s Crag, a man named Matthew, sent from the emperor Frederick with many noble gifts, came to him. Along with him came five Bluemen (Black individuals) from abroad.” Just how acceptable such a gift would be in medieval Norway is not mentioned by the chronicler. However, there is no doubt that Hakon returned the courtesy. The saga details several men who were sent on diplomatic missions to the imperial court. One of these envoys traveled as far as Sicily, “and the emperor received him well.”

The relationship with the other Scandinavian kingdoms was more direct. The King’s Mirror states that occasionally kings find it necessary to meet in conference for the discussion of common problems; and that on such occasions the members of the various retinues note carefully the customs and manners of the other groups.[74] These meetings were usually held at some point near the mouth of the Göta River, where the boundaries of the three kingdoms touched a common point. In 1254 such a meeting was held at which Hakon of Norway, Christopher of Denmark, and the great Earl Birger of Sweden were in attendance with their respective retinues.[75]

The relationship with the other Scandinavian kingdoms was more straightforward. The King’s Mirror mentions that sometimes kings feel the need to meet for discussions about common issues; and on those occasions, the members of the different groups pay close attention to each other's customs and behaviors.[74] These meetings usually took place near the mouth of the Göta River, where the borders of the three kingdoms converged. In 1254, a meeting was held where Hakon of Norway, Christopher of Denmark, and the great Earl Birger of Sweden attended with their respective entourages.[75]

The kings of the North were not limited, however, in their diplomatic intercourse to the neighboring monarchies; their ambassadors went out to the remotest parts 31of Europe and even to Africa. Valdemar the Victorious, in his day one of the greatest rulers in Christendom, married as his first wife Dragomir, a Bohemian princess who brought the Dagmar name into Denmark, and took as his second consort Berengaria of Portugal, Queen Bengjerd, whose lofty pride is enshrined in the Danish ballads of the age. Hakon IV married the daughter of his restless rival, Duke Skule; but his daughter Christina was sought in marriage by a prince in far-away Spain. The luckless princess was sent to Castile and was married at Valladolid to a son of Alfonso the Wise.[76] Louis IX of France was anxious to enlist the support of the Norwegian king for his crusading ventures and sent the noted English historian Matthew Paris to present the matter to King Hakon.[77] The mission, however, was without results. Norwegian diplomacy was concerned even with the courts of the infidel: in 1262 an embassy was sent to the Mohammedan sultan of Tunis “with many falcons and those other things which were there hard to get. And when they got out the Soldan received them well, and they stayed there long that winter.”[78]

The kings of the North weren’t just focused on diplomacy with neighboring monarchies; their ambassadors traveled to the farthest corners of Europe and even to Africa. Valdemar the Victorious, who was one of the greatest rulers in Christendom during his time, married Dragomir, a Bohemian princess who brought the Dagmar name to Denmark, and later took Berengaria of Portugal, Queen Bengjerd, as his second wife. Her proud demeanor is celebrated in the Danish ballads of the period. Hakon IV married the daughter of his ambitious rival, Duke Skule; however, his daughter Christina was sought in marriage by a prince from far-off Spain. Unfortunately, the unfortunate princess was sent to Castile and married in Valladolid to a son of Alfonso the Wise. Louis IX of France wanted to secure the support of the Norwegian king for his crusades and sent the well-known English historian Matthew Paris to discuss this with King Hakon. However, the mission achieved no results. Norwegian diplomacy even engaged with the courts of the infidels: in 1262, an embassy was sent to the Muslim sultan of Tunis “with many falcons and those other things which were hard to get there. And when they arrived, the Sultan welcomed them, and they stayed there for a long time that winter.”

An important event of the diplomatic type was the coming of Cardinal William of Sabina as papal legate to crown King Hakon. The coronation ceremony was performed in Bergen, July 29, 1247. At the coronation banquet the cardinal made a speech in which, as the Saga of Hakon reports his remarks, he called particular attention to the polished manners of the Northmen. 32“It was told me that I would here see few men; but even though I saw some, they would be liker to beasts in their behaviour than to men; but now I see here a countless multitude of the folk of this land, and, as it seems to me, with good behaviour.”[79] If the King’s Mirror gives a correct statement of what was counted good manners and proper conduct at the court of Hakon IV, the cardinal’s praise is none too strong.

An important diplomatic event was the arrival of Cardinal William of Sabina as the papal envoy to crown King Hakon. The coronation ceremony took place in Bergen on July 29, 1247. During the coronation banquet, the cardinal delivered a speech in which, as reported by the Saga of Hakon, he highlighted the refined manners of the Northmen. 32“I was told that I would see few men here; but even if I saw some, they would behave more like beasts than like humans; yet now I see a countless crowd of the people of this land, and, as it appears to me, showing good behavior.”[79] If the King’s Mirror accurately reflects what was considered good manners and proper conduct at Hakon IV's court, the cardinal’s praise is indeed well-deserved.

As a part of his discussion of the duties and activities of the king’s henchmen, the author describes the military methods of the age, arms and armour, military engines and devices used in offensive and defensive warfare, and other necessary equipment.[80] He also discusses the ethics of the military profession to some extent. This part of the work has been made the subject of a detailed study by Captain Otto Blom of the Danish artillery, who has tried to fix a date for the composition of the King’s Mirror on the basis of these materials.[81] It is not likely, however, that the work describes the military art of the North; such an elaborate system of equipment and such a variety of military engines and devices the Norwegians probably never knew at any time in the middle ages. It is the military art of Europe which the author describes, especially the war machinery of the crusades. One should not be surprised to find that he had knowledge of the devices which were employed by the Christian hosts in their warfare against the infidel in the Orient. The crusades attracted the Norwegian warriors and they took a part in them almost from the 33beginning. The fifth crusade began in 1217, the year of Hakon IV’s accession to the kingship. Several Norwegian chiefs with their followers joined this movement, some marching by land through Germany and Hungary, while others took the sea route. One is tempted to believe that the author was himself a crusader, but it is also possible that he got his information as to the military art of the south and east from warriors who returned from those lands.

As part of his discussion on the roles and activities of the king’s henchmen, the author outlines the military strategies of the time, including weapons and armor, military machines, and devices used in both offensive and defensive warfare, along with other necessary gear.[80] He also touches on the ethics of being in the military to some extent. Captain Otto Blom of the Danish artillery has conducted a detailed study on this section of the work, attempting to determine when the King’s Mirror was written based on these materials.[81] However, it is unlikely that the work depicts the military practices of the North; such a complex system of equipment and such a variety of military machines and devices were probably unknown to the Norwegians during the Middle Ages. The author describes the military practices of Europe, particularly focusing on the war machines used during the Crusades. It’s not surprising to find that he was knowledgeable about the tactics employed by Christian forces in their battles against nonbelievers in the East. The Crusades attracted Norwegian warriors, and they participated almost from the start. The fifth Crusade began in 1217, the year Hakon IV became king. Several Norwegian leaders, along with their followers, joined this effort, some traveling by land through Germany and Hungary, while others took to the sea. One might be tempted to think that the author was a crusader himself, but it’s also possible that he gathered his insights on the military strategies of the south and east from warriors returning from those regions.

From the subject of proper behavior and good breeding the author passes to a discussion of evil conduct and its effect on the welfare of the kingdom. Many causes, he tells us, may combine to bring calamities upon a land, and if the evils continue any length of time, the realm will be ruined.[82] There may come dearth upon the fields and the fishing grounds near the shores; plagues may carry away cattle, and the huntsman may find a scarcity of game; but worst of all is the dearth which sometimes comes upon the intellects and the moral nature of men. As a prolific source of calamities of the last sort, the author mentions the institution of joint kingship, the evils of which he discusses at some length. His chapter on this subject is an epitome of Norwegian history in the twelfth century when joint kingship was the rule.

From the topic of proper behavior and good upbringing, the author moves to a discussion of bad behavior and its impact on the wellbeing of the kingdom. He explains that many factors can come together to bring misfortunes to a land, and if these issues persist for too long, the realm will be devastated.[82] There may be famine in the fields and in the fishing areas near the shores; diseases may wipe out livestock, and hunters may find a lack of game; but the worst of all is the famine that sometimes affects people's minds and morals. As a major cause of such calamities, the author points to the concept of joint kingship, which he discusses in depth. His chapter on this topic serves as a summary of Norwegian history in the twelfth century when joint kingship was the norm.

According to the laws of medieval Norway before the thirteenth century, the national kingship was the king’s allodial possession and was inherited by his sons at his death. All his sons were legal heirs, those of illegitimate birth as well as those who were born in wedlock. When 34there was more than one heir, the kingship was held jointly, all the claimants receiving the royal title and permission to maintain each his own household. Usually a part of the realm was assigned to each; but it was the administration, and not the kingdom itself, which was thus divided. It is readily seen that such a system would offer unusual opportunities for pretenders; and at least three times in one hundred years men whose princely rights were at best of a doubtful character mounted the Norwegian throne. It is an interesting fact that two of these, the strenuous Sverre and the wise Hakon IV, must be counted among the strongest, ablest, and most attractive kings in the history of Norway.

According to the laws of medieval Norway before the thirteenth century, the national kingship was the king’s allodial possession and was passed down to his sons upon his death. All his sons were legal heirs, including those born out of wedlock as well as those born in marriage. When there was more than one heir, the kingship was shared, with each claimant receiving the royal title and permission to maintain their own household. Typically, a portion of the realm was assigned to each heir; however, it was the administration, not the kingdom itself, that was divided in this way. It's easy to see that such a system would create unique opportunities for pretenders, and at least three times in a hundred years, men whose claims to the throne were at best questionable ascended the Norwegian throne. Interestingly, two of these kings, the determined Sverre and the wise Hakon IV, are considered among the strongest, most capable, and most appealing kings in Norway's history.

Though there had been instances of joint rule before the twelfth century, the history of that unfortunate form of administration properly begins with the death of Magnus Bareleg on an Irish battlefield in 1103. Three illegitimate sons, the oldest being only fourteen years of age, succeeded to the royal title. One of these was the famous Sigurd Jerusalemfarer, who took part in the later stages of the first crusade. About twenty years after King Magnus’ death, a young Irishman, Harold Gilchrist by name, appeared at the Norwegian court and claimed royal rights as a son of the fallen king. King Sigurd forced him to prove his birthright by an appeal to the ordeal, but the Irishman walked unhurt over the hot plowshares. Harold became king in 1130 as joint ruler with Sigurd’s son Magnus, later called “the Blind.”[83] Three of his sons succeeded to the 35kingship in 1136. During the next century several pretenders appeared and civil war became almost the normal state of the country. Between 1103 and 1217 fifteen princes were honored with the royal title; eleven of these were minors. The period closed with the defeat and death of King Hakon’s father-in-law, the pretender Skule, in 1240.

Though there had been instances of joint rule before the twelfth century, the history of that unfortunate form of governance truly begins with the death of Magnus Bareleg on an Irish battlefield in 1103. Three illegitimate sons, the oldest being only fourteen, inherited the royal title. One of them was the famous Sigurd Jerusalemfarer, who participated in the later stages of the first crusade. About twenty years after King Magnus’ death, a young Irishman named Harold Gilchrist appeared at the Norwegian court and claimed royal rights as a son of the fallen king. King Sigurd compelled him to prove his lineage through trial by ordeal, but the Irishman walked unharmed over the hot plowshares. Harold became king in 1130 as a co-ruler with Sigurd’s son Magnus, later known as “the Blind.”[83] Three of his sons succeeded to the kingship in 1136. Over the next century, several pretenders emerged, and civil war became almost the norm in the country. Between 1103 and 1217, fifteen princes held the royal title; eleven of these were minors. The period ended with the defeat and death of King Hakon’s father-in-law, the pretender Skule, in 1240.

It was the history of these hundred years and more of joint kingship, of pretenders, of minorities, and of civil war, which the author of the King’s Mirror had in mind when he wrote his gloomy chapter on the calamities that may befall a state. Perhaps he was thinking more especially of the unnatural conflict between King Hakon and Duke Skule,[84] which was fought out in 1240, and the memory of which was still fresh at the time when the King’s Mirror was being written.

It was the history of these hundred years and more of shared rule, of claimants, of minorities, and of civil war that the author of the King’s Mirror had in mind when he wrote his somber chapter on the disasters that can strike a state. He might have been especially considering the unnatural conflict between King Hakon and Duke Skule,[84] which took place in 1240, and the memory of which was still fresh when the King’s Mirror was being written.

Of the king and his duties as ruler and judge the Speculum Regale has much to say; but as these matters offer no problems that call for discussion, it will not be necessary to examine them in detail. Wholly different is the case of the king’s relation to the church, of the position of the church in the state, of the divine origin of kingship, of the fulness of the royal authority. On these questions the author’s opinions and arguments are of great importance: in the history of the theory of kingship by the grace of God and divine right and of absolute monarchy, the Speculum Regale is an important landmark.

The Speculum Regale has a lot to say about the king and his responsibilities as a ruler and judge, but since these topics don’t raise any issues that need discussion, we won’t need to go into them in detail. The situation is completely different when it comes to the king’s relationship with the church, the church’s role in the state, the divine basis of kingship, and the extent of royal authority. The author's views and arguments on these subjects are highly significant: in the context of the theory of kingship by divine grace, divine right, and absolute monarchy, the Speculum Regale is a crucial reference point.

In the discussion of the origin and powers of the royal office, the King’s Mirror again shows unmistakably the 36influence of events in the preceding century of Norwegian history. So long as the church of Norway was under the supervision of foreign archbishops, first the metropolitan of distant Hamburg and later the archbishop of the Danish (now Swedish) see of Lund, there was little likelihood of any serious clash between the rival powers of church and state. But when, in 1152, an archiepiscopal see was established at Nidaros (Trondhjem) trouble broke out at once. The wave of enthusiasm for a powerful and independent church, which had developed such vigor in the days of Gregory VII, was still rising high. Able men were appointed to the new metropolitan office and the Norwegian church very soon put forth the usual demands of the time: separate ecclesiastical courts and immunity from anything that looked like taxation or forced contribution to the state. At first these claims had no reality in fact, as the kings would not allow them; but in 1163[85] an opportunity came for the church to make its demands effective. In that year a victorious faction asked for the coronation of a new king whose claims to the throne came through his mother only. The pretender was a mere child and the actual power was in the hands of his capable and ambitious father, Erling Skakke. The imperious archbishop Eystein agreed to consecrate the boy king if he would consent to become the vassal of Saint Olaf, or, in other words, of the archbishop of Nidaros. Erling acquiesced and young Magnus was duly crowned. It was further stipulated that in future cases of disputed succession the 37final decision should rest with the bishops.[86] The state was formally made subject to the church. It must be noted, however, that it was not the head of Catholic Christendom who made these claims, but the chief prelate of the national Norwegian church. The theory was doubtless this, that if the pope is superior to the emperor, the archbishop is superior to the king.

In discussing the origin and powers of the royal office, the King’s Mirror clearly reflects the impact of events from the previous century of Norwegian history. As long as the Church of Norway was under the oversight of foreign archbishops—first the metropolitan of distant Hamburg and later the archbishop of the Danish (now Swedish) see of Lund—there was little chance of a serious conflict between the rival powers of church and state. However, when, in 1152, an archiepiscopal see was established at Nidaros (Trondhjem), trouble erupted immediately. The surge of enthusiasm for a strong and independent church, which had gained significant momentum during the time of Gregory VII, was still rising. Capable individuals were appointed to the new metropolitan office, and the Norwegian church quickly made the typical demands of the era: separate ecclesiastical courts and immunity from anything resembling taxation or forced contributions to the state. Initially, these claims had no real backing as the kings would not permit them; but in 1163[85], an opportunity appeared for the church to enforce its demands. That year, a victorious faction sought the coronation of a new king whose claims to the throne were based solely on his mother. The pretender was just a child, and the actual power lay with his capable and ambitious father, Erling Skakke. The authoritative archbishop Eystein agreed to consecrate the boy king if he would consent to become the vassal of Saint Olaf, meaning he would be subordinate to the archbishop of Nidaros. Erling agreed, and young Magnus was subsequently crowned. It was also stipulated that in future succession disputes, the final decision would rest with the bishops.[86] The state was officially made subject to the church. However, it should be noted that it was not the head of Catholic Christendom making these claims, but the chief prelate of the national Norwegian church. The underlying theory seemed to be that if the pope is superior to the emperor, then the archbishop is superior to the king.

The new arrangement did not long remain unchallenged. In 1177 the opposition to the ecclesiastical faction found a leader in Sverre, called Sigurdsson, an adventurer from the Faroe Islands, who pretended to be a grandson of Harold Gilchrist, though the probabilities are that his father was one Unas, a native of the Faroes.[87] Sverre’s followers were known as Birchshanks, because they had been reduced to such straits that they had to bind birch bark around their legs. The faction in control of the government was called the Croziermen and was composed of the higher clergy with an important following among the aristocracy. Sverre’s fight was, therefore, not against King Magnus alone but against the Guelph party of Norway. For half a century there was intermittent civil warfare between the supporters of an independent and vigorous kingship on the one side and the partisans of clerical control on the other. King Sverre’s great service to Norway was that he broke the 38chain of ecclesiastical domination. The conflict was long and bitter and the great king died while it was still on; but when it ended the cause of the Croziermen was lost. The church attained to great power in the Norwegian state, but it never gained complete domination.

The new arrangement didn't stay unchallenged for long. In 1177, the opposition to the church faction found a leader in Sverre, known as Sigurdsson, an adventurer from the Faroe Islands, who claimed to be a grandson of Harold Gilchrist, though it’s likely that his father was a local named Unas. Sverre’s followers were called Birchshanks because they were so desperate that they had to wrap birch bark around their legs. The faction in power was known as the Croziermen, made up of high-ranking clergy with significant support from the aristocracy. So, Sverre was fighting not just against King Magnus but also against the Guelph party in Norway. For half a century, there was ongoing civil war between those supporting an independent and strong kingship on one side and those backing clerical control on the other. King Sverre's major contribution to Norway was that he broke the chain of church domination. The conflict was long and bitter, and the great king died while it was still happening; however, when it finally ended, the Croziermen's cause was lost. The church gained significant power in the Norwegian state, but it never achieved complete control.

Sverre was a man of great intellectual strength; he was a born leader of men, a capable warrior, and a resourceful captain. When it began to look as if victory would crown his efforts, the archbishop fled to England and from his refuge in Saint Edmundsbury excommunicated the king. But exile is irksome to an ambitious man, and after a time the fiery prelate returned to Norway and was reconciled to the strenuous ruler. Eystein’s successor, however, took up the fight once more; and when Sverre made Norway too uncomfortable for him, he fled to Denmark and excommunicated his royal opponent. A few years later, Innocent III, who had just ascended the papal throne, also excommunicated Sverre, and threatened the kingdom with an interdict.[88] But the papal weapons had little effect in the far North; the king forced priests and prelates to remain loyal and to continue in their duties. No doubt they obeyed the excommunicated ruler with great reluctance and much misgiving; but no other course was possible, for the nation was with the king.

Sverre was a man of great intellect; he was a natural leader, a skilled warrior, and a clever captain. When it seemed like victory was within reach, the archbishop fled to England and from his hideout in Saint Edmundsbury excommunicated the king. But being in exile is frustrating for an ambitious person, and after a while, the fiery archbishop returned to Norway and reconciled with the determined ruler. However, Eystein’s successor resumed the conflict; and when Sverre made Norway too difficult for him, he fled to Denmark and excommunicated his royal rival. A few years later, Innocent III, who had just become pope, also excommunicated Sverre and threatened the kingdom with an interdict.[88] But the pope's threats had little impact in the far North; the king forced priests and church leaders to stay loyal and to continue their duties. They probably obeyed the excommunicated ruler with great reluctance and doubt; but there was no other option, as the nation was behind the king.

The militant Faroese was a man with strong literary interests; he was educated for the priesthood and it is believed that he had actually taken orders. He was eloquent 39in speech, but he realized the power of the written as well as of the spoken word. It is a fact worth noting that among the Northmen of the thirteenth century learning was not confined to the clergy. While the author of the King’s Mirror urges the prospective merchant to learn Latin and French, he also warns him not to neglect his mother tongue. King Sverre replied to the ecclesiastical decrees with a manifesto in the Norwegian language in which he stated his position and his claims for the royal office. This pamphlet, which is commonly known as “An Address against the Bishops,” was issued about 1199 and was sent to all the shire courts to be read to the freemen. It was a cleverly written document and seems to have been very effective. In spite of the fact that the king was under the ban, the masses remained loyal.

The passionate Faroese was a man with a deep interest in literature; he was educated to be a priest and is believed to have actually become one. He was articulate in speech, but he understood the impact of both written and spoken words. It’s worth mentioning that among the Norsemen in the thirteenth century, education wasn’t limited to the clergy. While the author of the King’s Mirror encourages future merchants to learn Latin and French, he also advises them not to forget their native language. King Sverre responded to the church's decrees with a manifesto written in Norwegian, where he outlined his stance and claims to the throne. This document, commonly known as “An Address against the Bishops,” was published around 1199 and distributed to all the county courts to be read to the free men. It was well-crafted and appears to have had a significant impact. Despite the king being excommunicated, the people remained loyal.

Between the political theory of the Address and the ideas of kingship expressed in the King’s Mirror there is an agreement which can hardly be accidental. It is more likely that we have in this case literary kinship of the first degree. It has been thought that King Sverre may have prepared his manifesto himself, but this is scarcely probable. Some one of his court, however, must have composed it, perhaps some clerk in the royal scriptorium, for the ideas developed in the document are clearly those of the king. It has also been suggested that the Address and the Speculum Regale may have been written by the same hand;[89] but the only evidence in support of such a conclusion is this agreement of political 40ideas, which may have originated in a careful study of the earlier document by the author of the later work.

Between the political theory of the Address and the ideas of kingship expressed in the King’s Mirror, there is an agreement that seems too coincidental to ignore. It’s more likely that this represents a strong literary connection. Some believe King Sverre may have drafted his manifesto himself, but this is unlikely. Someone from his court must have written it, perhaps a clerk in the royal scriptorium, since the ideas presented in the document clearly align with the king’s views. It has also been proposed that the Address and the Speculum Regale could have been authored by the same person;[89] but the only evidence supporting this conclusion is the alignment of their political ideas, which may have stemmed from a close reading of the earlier document by the writer of the later work.

King Sverre’s Address begins with a violent attack on the higher clergy: the bishops have brought sorrow upon the land and confusion into holy church. This deplorable condition is ascribed chiefly to a reckless use of the power of excommunication. In this connection the king is careful to absolve the pope from all guilt: his unfortunate deeds were due to ignorance and to false representations on the part of the bishops. It is next argued that excommunication is valid only when the sentence of anathema is just; an unjust sentence is not only invalid but it recoils upon the head of him who is the author of the anathema. In support of this contention the author of the manifesto quotes the opinions of such eminent fathers as Saint Jerome, Saint Augustine, Pope Gregory the Great, and other authorities on canon law. It will be remembered that the king himself was under the ban at the time. The author argues further that his view is supported by reason as well as by the law of the church. Bishops have been appointed shepherds of the flocks of God; they are to watch over them, not drive them away into the jaws of the wolves. But if a bishop excommunicates one who is without guilt, he consigns him to hell; and if his decree is effective, he destroys one of God’s sheep.

King Sverre’s Address starts off with a strong critique of the higher clergy: the bishops have caused suffering in the land and chaos in the holy church. This unfortunate situation is mainly blamed on the reckless use of excommunication. In this context, the king is careful to clear the pope of any blame; his unfortunate actions stemmed from ignorance and misleading information provided by the bishops. The argument continues that excommunication is only legitimate when the anathema is justified; an unjust sentence is not only ineffective but also bounces back on the one who issued the anathema. To support this claim, the author of the manifesto cites the views of respected figures like Saint Jerome, Saint Augustine, Pope Gregory the Great, and other experts in canon law. It’s worth noting that the king himself was excommunicated at the time. The author further argues that this perspective is backed by both reason and church law. Bishops have been appointed as guardians of God’s flocks; they are meant to protect them, not drive them into the clutches of wolves. However, if a bishop excommunicates someone who is innocent, he sends them to hell; and if his decree is effective, he harms one of God’s sheep.

From this subject the Address passes to the nature of the royal office. “So great a number of examples show clearly that the salvation of a man’s soul is at stake if he does not observe complete loyalty, kingly worship, and a right obedience; for kingly rule is created by God’s 41command and not by the ordinance of man, and no man can obtain royal authority except by divine dispensation.” The king is not a secular ruler only, he also has holy church in his power and keeping. It is his right and duty to appoint church officials, and the churchmen owe him absolute loyalty the same as his other subjects. Christ pointed out the duty of church officials quite clearly when he paid tribute to his earthly ruler, one who was, moreover, a heathen.[90]

From this topic, the Address moves on to the nature of the royal role. “So many examples clearly show that a person's salvation is at risk if they don't demonstrate complete loyalty, royal respect, and proper obedience; for kingship is established by God’s 41 command and not by human decree, and no one can acquire royal power except through divine permission.” The king is not just a secular leader; he is also responsible for the holy church. It is his right and responsibility to appoint church officials, and the clergy owe him the same absolute loyalty as his other subjects. Christ made the responsibilities of church leaders very clear when he showed respect to his earthly ruler, who was, in fact, a pagan.[90]

It will be seen that the Address puts forth four claims of far-reaching importance: kingship is of divine origin and the king rules by the grace of God; the power of royalty extends to the church as well as to the state and includes the power to appoint the rulers of the church; disloyalty to the king is a mortal sin; an unjust sentence of excommunication is invalid and injures him only who publishes the anathema. On all these points the King’s Mirror is in complete agreement with Sverre’s manifesto.

It will be seen that the Address presents four significant claims: kingship is divinely ordained, and the king rules by God’s grace; royal authority encompasses both the church and the state, including the right to appoint church leaders; being disloyal to the king is a serious sin; and an unjust excommunication is not valid and only harms the person who issues the curse. The King’s Mirror fully supports Sverre’s manifesto on all these points.

In the course of the dialog in the Speculum Regale the son requests his father to take up and discuss the office and business of the king; for, says he, “he is so highly honored and exalted upon earth that all must bend and bow before him as before God.”[91] The father accounts for the power and dignity of kingship in this way: men bow before the king as before God, because he represents the exalted authority of God; he bears God’s own name and occupies the highest judgment 42seat upon earth; consequently, when one honors a king, it is as if he honors God himself, because of the title that he has from God.[92]

In the conversation in the Speculum Regale, the son asks his father to take on and discuss the responsibilities and duties of a king; because, he says, “he is so highly honored and elevated on earth that everyone must bow down before him as they would before God.”[91] The father explains the power and dignity of kingship like this: people bow before the king as they would before God because he represents God's supreme authority; he carries God's own name and sits in the highest judgment seat on earth; therefore, when someone honors a king, it's as if they are honoring God himself, due to the title he has from God.[92]

The author evidently realizes that statements of this sort will not be accepted without further argument, and he naturally proceeds to give his doctrine a basis in Biblical history. The reverence due kingship is fully illustrated with episodes in the career of David. So long as God permitted King Saul to live, David would do nothing to deprive him of his office; for Saul was also the Lord’s anointed. He took swift revenge upon the man who came to his camp pretending that he had slain Saul; for he had sinned against God in bearing arms against His anointed. He also calls attention to Saint Peter’s injunction: “Fear God and honor your king;” and adds that it is “almost as if he had literally said that he who does not show perfect honor to the king does not fear God.”[93]

The author clearly understands that statements like these won't be accepted without further discussion, so he goes on to ground his beliefs in Biblical history. The respect owed to kingship is fully illustrated through events in David's life. As long as God allowed King Saul to live, David did nothing to take away his position because Saul was also chosen by the Lord. He swiftly avenged the man who came to his camp claiming to have killed Saul; that man had sinned against God by fighting against His chosen one. The author also points out Saint Peter’s instruction: “Fear God and honor your king;” adding that it is “almost as if he had literally said that he who does not show perfect honor to the king does not fear God.”[93]

To emphasize his contention that kingship is of divine origin, the author cites the example of Christ. The miracle of the fish in whose mouth the tribute money was found is referred to in the Address as well as in the King’s Mirror. Peter was to examine the first fish, not the second or the third. In the same way, and here the argument is characteristically medieval, “every man should in all things first honor the king and the royal dignity; for God Himself calls the king His anointed.”[94]

To support his argument that kingship comes from divine sources, the author uses Christ as an example. The story of the fish that had the tribute money in its mouth is mentioned in both the Address and the King’s Mirror. Peter was instructed to examine the first fish, not the second or third. Similarly, and this reflects the medieval viewpoint, “every person should always honor the king and royal authority first; for God Himself refers to the king as His anointed.”[94]

But, objects the son, how could Christ who is himself the lord of heaven and earth be willing to submit to an earthly authority? To this the father replies that 43Christ came to earth as a guest and did not wish to deprive the divine institution of kingship of any honor or dignity.[95] The author evidently deems it important to establish this contention; for if Christ submitted to Caesar as to a rightful authority, the church in opposing secular rulers could scarcely claim to be following in the footsteps of the Master.

But, the son questions, how could Christ, who is the lord of heaven and earth, agree to submit to an earthly authority? The father responds that Christ came to earth as a guest and did not want to take away any honor or dignity from the divine institution of kingship.43[95] The author clearly considers this argument important; because if Christ submitted to Caesar as a legitimate authority, the church, in opposing secular rulers, could hardly claim to be following in the footsteps of the Master.

It seems to be a safe conclusion that the doctrine of the divine character of kingship as developed in the King’s Mirror is derived from King Sverre’s Address, unless it should be that the two have drawn from a common source. There is nothing novel about Sverre’s ideas except the form in which they are stated; fundamentally they are a return to the original Norwegian theory of kingship. The Norwegian kings of heathen times were descendants of divine ancestors. They recognized the will of the popular assemblies as a real limitation on their own powers, but no religious authority could claim superiority to the ruler. The king was indeed himself a priest, a mediator between the gods and men. The Christian kings for a century and a half had controlled the church in a very real manner; they had appointed bishops and had also on occasion removed them. The claim of the archbishop to overlordship was therefore distinctly an innovation. The king makes use of arguments from the Bible to support his theory, not because it was based on Scriptural truths, but because to a Christian people these would prove the most convincing.

It seems fair to conclude that the idea of the divine nature of kingship, as outlined in the King’s Mirror, comes from King Sverre’s Address, unless both drew from a shared source. There’s nothing new about Sverre’s concepts except for how they’re presented; at their core, they reflect a return to the original Norwegian view of kingship. The Norwegian kings from pagan times were seen as descendants of divine ancestors. They acknowledged the will of the popular assemblies as a real limit on their authority, but no religious figure could claim superiority over the ruler. The king was indeed a priest himself, serving as a mediator between the gods and people. For over a century, the Christian kings had controlled the church in a significant way; they appointed bishops and occasionally removed them. Thus, the archbishop's claim to overlordship was definitely a new development. The king uses biblical arguments to back his theory, not because it was grounded in Scriptural truths, but because to a Christian society, those would be the most persuasive.

In his statement of the fulness and majesty of the royal power, the author of the Speculum Regale goes, 44however, far beyond the author of the Address. So complete is the king’s power, “that he may dispose as he likes of the lives of all who live in his kingdom.”[96] He “owns the entire kingdom as well as all the people in it, so that all the men who are in his kingdom owe him service whenever his needs demand it.”[97] These sentences would indicate that the author’s position lies close to the verge of absolutism. But Norwegian kingship was anything but absolute; the king had certain well-defined rights, but the people also had some part in the government. Professor Ludvig Daae has put forth the hypothesis that the author of the King’s Mirror was acquainted with the governmental system of Frederick II in his Italian kingdom, which he governed as an absolute monarch.[98] There may be some truth in this for there is no doubt that the character of Frederick’s government was known to the Northmen; but it is also possible that the theory of absolute monarchy had a separate Norse origin, that the insistence on divine right in the long fight with the church had driven the partisans of monarchy far forward along the highway that led to practical absolutism. Less than a generation after the King’s Mirror was composed, the newer ideas of kingship appear in the legislation of Magnus Lawmender. Kings have received their authority from God, for “God Himself deigns to call Himself by their name;” and the preamble continues: “he is, indeed, in great danger before God, who does not with perfect love and reverence uphold them in the authority to which God 45has appointed them.”[99] This is the doctrine of the Address as well as of the Speculum; the significant fact is that the principle has now been introduced into the constitution of the monarchy. It is possible that the author of the King’s Mirror states an alien principle; but it is more probable that he merely gives form to a belief that had been growing among Northmen for some time.

In his description of the fullness and greatness of royal power, the author of the Speculum Regale goes much further than the author of the Address. The king’s power is so complete “that he may decide however he wants about the lives of everyone in his kingdom.”[96] He “owns the entire kingdom and all the people in it, so that all the men in his kingdom owe him service whenever he needs it.”[97] These statements suggest that the author's view is close to absolutism. However, royal rule in Norway was anything but absolute; the king had specific rights, but the people also had a role in governance. Professor Ludvig Daae has proposed that the author of the King’s Mirror was familiar with the government system of Frederick II in his Italian kingdom, which he ruled as an absolute monarch.[98] There may be some truth to this since it's clear that the nature of Frederick’s government was known to the Northmen; but it's also possible that the idea of absolute monarchy had a separate Norse origin, and that the insistence on divine right in the long struggle with the church had pushed supporters of monarchy significantly along the path to practical absolutism. Less than a generation after the King’s Mirror was written, new ideas about kingship appear in the laws of Magnus Lawmender. Kings have received their authority from God, for “God Himself chooses to call Himself by their name;” and the preamble continues: “he is truly in great danger before God, who does not with perfect love and reverence uphold them in the authority that God has appointed for them.”[99] This aligns with the beliefs expressed in both the Address and the Speculum; the important point is that this principle has now been incorporated into the constitution of the monarchy. It's possible that the author of the King’s Mirror presents an outside idea; but it is more likely that he simply reflects a belief that had been developing among the Northmen for some time.

On the question of the validity of excommunication the teachings of the Speculum Regale are in perfect accord with those of the Address. The uncompromising position and methods of Innocent III had given point to an exceedingly practical question: was a Christian permitted to obey a king who was under the ban of the church? Generally the church held that obedience under the circumstances would be sinful. The author of the Speculum distinguishes closely, however, between just and unjust sentences of excommunication. God has established two houses upon earth, the house of the altar and the house of the judgment seat.[100] There is, therefore, a legitimate sphere of action for the bishop as well as for the king. But an act is not necessarily righteous because it emanates from high authority either in the church or in the state. If the king pronounces an unjust judgment, his act is murder; if a bishop excommunicates a Christian without proper reasons, the ban is of no effect, except that it reacts upon the offending prelate himself.[101]

On the issue of whether excommunication is valid, the teachings of the Speculum Regale align perfectly with those of the Address. The strict stance and methods of Innocent III highlighted a very practical question: could a Christian obey a king who was excommunicated by the church? Generally, the church believed that obedience in such a situation would be wrong. However, the author of the Speculum makes a clear distinction between just and unjust excommunications. God has established two authorities on earth: the church and the state.[100] Therefore, both the bishop and the king have a legitimate role to play. However, just because an action comes from a high authority in either the church or the state doesn’t mean it’s automatically right. If the king delivers an unjust judgment, that act is wrongful; if a bishop excommunicates a Christian without valid reasons, the excommunication has no real effect, except that it will ultimately reflect back on the offending bishop himself.[101]

After the author has thus denied the right of the church to use the sword of excommunication in certain 46cases, there remains the question: has the king any superior authority over the church? The answer is that the king has such authority; and the author fortifies his position by recalling the story how Solomon punished Abiathar the high priest, or bishop as he is called in the King’s Mirror. In reply to the young man’s inquiry whether Solomon did right when he deprived Abiathar of the high-priestly office, the father affirms that the king acted properly and according to law. The king is given a two-edged sword for the reason that he must guard, not only his own house of judgment, but also the house of the altar, which is ordinarily in the bishop’s keeping. Abiathar had sinned in becoming a party to the treasonable intrigues of Adonijah, who was plotting to seize the throne of Israel while his father David was still living. Inasmuch as the high priest had attempted to deprive the Lord’s anointed of his royal rights, Solomon would have been guiltless even if he had taken Abiathar’s life. The author also calls attention to the fact that Abiathar was elevated to the high-priestly office by David himself.[102]

After the author has denied the church's right to use the sword of excommunication in certain 46 cases, the question remains: does the king have any superior authority over the church? The answer is yes, the king has that authority; the author supports this by referencing the story of how Solomon punished Abiathar, the high priest, or bishop as referred to in the King’s Mirror. In response to the young man's question about whether Solomon was right to remove Abiathar from the high-priestly position, the father confirms that the king acted justly and according to the law. The king wields a two-edged sword because he must protect not only his own court but also the altar, which is usually overseen by the bishop. Abiathar committed an offense by aligning himself with Adonijah's treasonous schemes to take the throne of Israel while his father David was still alive. Since the high priest attempted to strip the Lord’s anointed of his royal authority, Solomon would have been justified even if he had taken Abiathar's life. The author also notes that Abiathar was appointed to the high priesthood by David himself.[102]

On the question of the king’s right to control episcopal appointments the King’s Mirror is also in agreement with the earlier Address. On the death of Archbishop John, the Address tells us, “Inge appointed Eystein, his own chaplain, to the archiepiscopal office[103] ... without consulting any cleric in Trondhjem, either the canons or any one else; and he drove Bishop Paul from the episcopal throne in Bergen and chose Nicholas Petersson to be his successor.” Doubtless the philosopher 47of the King’s Mirror, when he wrote of the fall of Abiathar, was also thinking of the many Abiathars of Norwegian history in the twelfth century, especially, perhaps, of the bishops of Sverre’s reign, who had striven so valiantly to rid the nation of its energetic king. There can be no doubt, however, that he regarded the hierarchy as inferior to the secular government. A bishop, who unrighteously excommunicates a Norwegian king and attempts in this way to render him impossible as a ruler, forfeits not only his office but his life.

On the issue of the king’s authority over church appointments, the King’s Mirror aligns with the earlier Address. After Archbishop John died, the Address states, “Inge appointed Eystein, his own chaplain, to the archiepiscopal position[103] ... without consulting any clergy in Trondhjem, including the canons or anyone else; and he ousted Bishop Paul from the episcopal seat in Bergen and chose Nicholas Petersson as his successor.” It's clear that the philosopher of the King’s Mirror, when he mentioned the fall of Abiathar, was reflecting on the many Abiathars in Norwegian history during the twelfth century, particularly the bishops during Sverre’s reign, who fought fiercely to remove the powerful king from the throne. There is no doubt, however, that he viewed the church hierarchy as subordinate to the secular government. A bishop who unjustly excommunicates a Norwegian king and tries to make him incapable of ruling not only loses his position but also his life.

There was another problem in the middle ages which also involved the question of ecclesiastical authority as opposed to secular jurisdiction, the right of sanctuary. There can be no doubt that in the unsettled state of medieval society it was well that there were places where an accused might find security for a time at least; but the right of sanctuary was much abused, too frequently it served to shield the guilty. The King’s Mirror teaches unequivocally that the right of sanctuary cannot be invoked against the orders of the king. As usual the author finds support for his position in the Scriptures. Joab fled to God’s tabernacle and laid hold on the horns of the altar; nevertheless, King Solomon ordered him to be slain, and the command was carried out.[104] Solomon appears to have reasoned in this wise: “It is my duty to carry out the provisions of the sacred law, no matter where the man happens to be whose case is to be determined.” It was not his duty to remove Joab by force, for all just decisions are God’s decisions and not the king’s; and “God’s holy altar will not be defiled or desecrated by 48Joab’s blood, for it will be shed in righteous punishment.”[105] And the author is careful to emphasize the fact that God’s tabernacle was the only house in all the world that was dedicated to Him, and must consequently have had an even greater claim to sacredness than the churches of the author’s own day, of which there was a vast number.[106]

There was another issue in the Middle Ages that also dealt with the question of church authority versus secular power: the right of sanctuary. It's clear that in the unstable environment of medieval society, it was beneficial to have places where someone accused could find safety, at least for a time; however, the right of sanctuary was often misused, too frequently providing cover for the guilty. The King’s Mirror clearly states that the right of sanctuary cannot be claimed against the king’s orders. As usual, the author backs up his view with Scripture. Joab fled to God's tabernacle and grasped the horns of the altar; however, King Solomon commanded that he be killed, and that order was executed. Solomon seemed to reason this way: “It is my duty to uphold the sacred law, regardless of where the person involved is located.” It was not his responsibility to physically remove Joab, since all just decisions are those of God, not the king’s; and “God’s holy altar will not be tainted by Joab’s blood, because it will be spilled in righteous punishment.” The author stresses that God’s tabernacle was the only place in the world dedicated to Him, and therefore must have had an even greater claim to sanctity than the many churches of the author’s time.

There was a Norwegian Joab in the first half of the thirteenth century, who, like the chieftain of old, plotted against his rightful monarch and was finally slain within the sacred precincts of an Augustinian convent. Skule, King Hakon’s father-in-law, was a man of restless ambition, who could not find complete satisfaction in the titles of earl and duke, but stretched forth his hand to seize the crown itself. In 1239 he assumed the royal title, but a few months later (1240) his forces were surprised in Nidaros by the king’s army, and the rebellion came to a sudden end. Skule’s men fled to the churches; his son Peter found refuge in one of the buildings belonging to the monastery of Elgesæter, but was discovered and slain. After a few days Duke Skule himself sought security in the same monastery; but the angry Birchshanks, in spite of the solemn warnings and threatenings of the offended monks, slew the pretender and burned the monastery.[107] This was an act of violence which must have caused much trouble for the king’s partisans, and it is most likely the act which the author of the King’s Mirror had in his thoughts when he wrote of the fate of Joab.

There was a Norwegian named Joab in the first half of the thirteenth century who, like the ancient chieftain, plotted against his rightful king and was ultimately killed within the holy grounds of an Augustinian convent. Skule, King Hakon’s father-in-law, was a man driven by ambition, who couldn’t find complete satisfaction with the titles of earl and duke, and reached out to grab the crown itself. In 1239, he took on the royal title, but just a few months later (1240), his forces were ambushed in Nidaros by the king’s army, bringing the rebellion to an abrupt end. Skule’s men fled to the churches; his son Peter found refuge in one of the buildings belonging to the monastery of Elgesæter, but was found and killed. After a few days, Duke Skule himself sought safety in the same monastery, but the furious Birchshanks, despite the serious warnings and threats from the offended monks, killed the pretender and burned the monastery.[107] This act of violence must have caused a lot of trouble for the king’s supporters, and it’s likely this is what the author of the King’s Mirror had in mind when he wrote about Joab’s fate.

49Writers on political philosophy usually begin their specific discussion of the theory of divine right of kingship when they come to the great political theorists of the fourteenth century.[108] The most famous of these is Marsiglio of Padua, who wrote his Defensor Pacis in 1324. In this work he asserted that the emperor derived his title and sovereignty from God and that his authority was superior to that of the pope. Some years earlier William Occam, an English scholar and philosopher, made similar claims for the rights of the king of France. Earlier still, perhaps in 1310, Dante had claimed divine right for princes generally in his famous work De Monarchia. Somewhat similar, though less precise, ideas had been expressed by John of Paris in 1305. But nearly two generations earlier the doctrine had been stated in all its baldness and with all its implications by the author of the King’s Mirror; and more than a century before Dante wrote his work on “Monarchy” Sverre had published his Address to the Norwegian people. So far as the writer has been able to determine there is no treatise on general medieval politics, at least no such treatise written in English, which contains even an allusion to these two significant works.

49Writers on political philosophy typically start their specific discussions about the theory of the divine right of kingship when they reach the prominent political theorists of the fourteenth century.[108] The most well-known among them is Marsiglio of Padua, who wrote his Defensor Pacis in 1324. In this work, he claimed that the emperor got his title and sovereignty from God and that his authority was greater than that of the pope. A few years earlier, William Occam, an English scholar and philosopher, made similar statements regarding the rights of the king of France. Even earlier, around 1310, Dante claimed divine right for princes in his famous work De Monarchia. John of Paris expressed somewhat similar, though less clear, ideas in 1305. However, nearly two generations earlier, the doctrine was clearly outlined, along with its implications, by the author of the King’s Mirror; and more than a century before Dante wrote his work on “Monarchy,” Sverre had published his Address to the Norwegian people. As far as the writer has been able to determine, there is no comprehensive treatise on general medieval politics, at least none written in English, that even references these two important works.

The ethical ideas that are outlined in the Speculum Regale are also of more than common interest. On most points the learned father preaches the conventional principles of the church with respect to right and wrong conduct, and as a rule his precepts are such as have stood the test of ages of experience. He emphasizes honesty, fair dealing, careful attendance upon worship, 50and devotion to the church; he warns his son to shun vice of every sort; he must also avoid gambling and drinking to excess.[109] In some respects the author’s moral code is Scandinavian rather than Christian: in the emphasis that he places upon reputation and the regard in which one is held by one’s neighbors he seems to echo the sentiment that runs through the earlier Eddic poetry, especially the “Song of the High One.” “One thing I know that always remains,” says Woden, “judgment passed on the dead.”[110] And the Christian scribe more than three centuries later writes thus of one who has departed this life: “But if he lived uprightly while on earth and made proper provision for his soul before he died, then you may take comfort in the good repute that lives after him, and even more in the blissful happiness which you believe he will enjoy with God in the other world.”[111] And again he says: “Now you will appreciate what I told you earlier in our conversation, namely that much depends on the example that a man leaves after him.”[112]

The ethical ideas presented in the Speculum Regale are quite significant. For the most part, the learned father teaches the traditional principles of the church regarding right and wrong behavior, and generally his teachings have proven effective over years of experience. He stresses honesty, fair treatment, dedicated participation in worship, and commitment to the church; he cautions his son to avoid all forms of vice, as well as gambling and excessive drinking.[109] In some ways, the author's moral code is more Scandinavian than Christian: he places great importance on reputation and how one is perceived by one's neighbors, reflecting a sentiment found in earlier Eddic poetry, especially the “Song of the High One.” “One thing I know that always remains,” says Woden, “is the judgment passed on the dead.”[110] And more than three centuries later, the Christian scribe writes about someone who has passed away: “But if he lived rightly while on earth and prepared his soul properly before he died, then you can find comfort in the good reputation that remains after him, and even more in the blissful happiness you believe he will enjoy with God in the afterlife.”[111] He also adds: “Now you’ll understand what I mentioned earlier in our conversation, that much depends on the legacy a man leaves behind.”[112]

The author is also Norse in his emphasis on moderation in every form of indulgence, on the control of one’s passion, and in permitting private revenge. His attitude toward this present world is not medieval: we may enjoy the good things of creation, though not to excess. On the matter of revenge, however, his ideas are characteristically medieval. Private warfare was allowed almost everywhere in the middle ages, and it appears to have a place in the political system of the Speculum Regale. 51But on this point too the author urges moderation. “When you hear things in the speech of other men which offend you much, be sure to investigate with reasonable care whether the tales be true or false; but if they prove to be true and it is proper for you to seek revenge, take it with reason and moderation and never when heated or irritated.”[113]

The author also reflects Norse values in his emphasis on moderation regarding all forms of indulgence, controlling one's passions, and allowing for personal revenge. His perspective on the current world isn’t medieval: we can enjoy the good things in life, but not excessively. However, his views on revenge are distinctly medieval. Private warfare was almost universally accepted during the Middle Ages, and it seems to be part of the political framework of the Speculum Regale. 51 Still, even here, the author advocates for moderation. “When you hear things from others that deeply offend you, make sure to carefully verify whether the stories are true or false; but if they turn out to be true and it's appropriate for you to seek revenge, do it with reason and moderation, and never when you're angry or upset.”[113]

The theology of the King’s Mirror, as far as it can be discerned, is also medieval, though it is remarkable that the Virgin and the saints find only incidental mention in the work. No doubt if the author had been able to complete his treatise as outlined in his introduction, he would have discussed the forms and institutions of the church at greater length and we should be able to know to what extent his theological notions were in agreement with the religious thought of the age.

The theology of the King’s Mirror, as far as we can tell, is also medieval, though it's notable that the Virgin and the saints are mentioned only briefly in the work. If the author had been able to finish his treatise as he outlined in his introduction, he would have discussed the structures and institutions of the church in more detail, and we would have a clearer idea of how his theological ideas aligned with the religious beliefs of the time.

In this connection his theory of penance and punishment for crime is of peculiar interest. He makes considerable use of Biblical narratives to illustrate his teachings and refers at length to some of the less worthy characters of Holy Writ, including certain men who suffered death for criminal offenses. Almost invariably he justifies the punishment by arguing that it was better for the criminal to suffer a swift punishment in death than to suffer eternally in hell. Apparently his theory is that a criminal can cleanse himself in his own blood, that a temporal death can save him from eternal punishment. The idolaters who were slain by Moses and the Levites[114] “were cleansed in their penance and in the pangs which they suffered when they died; and it was 52much better for them to suffer a brief pain in death than a long torture in hell.” The sacramental efficiency of the death penalty seems also to extend to the one who executes punishment: for those who assisted Moses in the slaughter sanctified their hands in the blood of those who were slain. In the same way “a king cleanses himself in the blood of the unjust, if he slays them as a rightful punishment to fulfil the sacred laws.”[115]

In this regard, his theory of penance and punishment for crime is particularly interesting. He makes significant use of Biblical stories to illustrate his teachings and discusses at length some of the less admirable figures from the scriptures, including certain men who were executed for criminal offenses. Almost always, he justifies the punishment by arguing that it is better for the criminal to face a swift death than to suffer eternally in hell. His theory seems to be that a criminal can cleanse himself with his own blood, believing that a temporary death can save him from everlasting punishment. The idolaters who were killed by Moses and the Levites[114] “were cleansed through their penance and the suffering they endured at death; and it was 52 far better for them to experience brief pain in death than prolonged torture in hell.” The sacramental effectiveness of the death penalty also appears to extend to the person who carries out the punishment: those who helped Moses in the slaughter sanctified their hands with the blood of the slain. Similarly, “a king purifies himself with the blood of the unjust if he executes them as rightful punishment to uphold the sacred laws.”[115]

There can be little doubt that this doctrine of the death penalty also shows the influence of the great civil conflict which ended with the death of Duke Skule in 1240. During a century of factional warfare there had been much violence, much slaughter, much “swift punishment.” Applied to Norwegian history the author’s argument amounts to a justification of the slaughter at Elgesæter; for Skule and his partisans had rebelled against the Lord’s anointed. The hands of the Birchshanks were cleansed and sanctified in the blood of the rebels; but the author also has this comforting assurance for the kinsmen of the fallen, that their souls were not lost: Skule and his companions were cleansed from their sins in the last great penance of death.

There’s no doubt that this idea of the death penalty reflects the impact of the significant civil conflict that ended with Duke Skule's death in 1240. During a century filled with factional battles, there was a lot of violence, a lot of killing, and a lot of “swift punishment.” When applied to Norwegian history, the author’s argument essentially justifies the massacre at Elgesæter; because Skule and his followers had revolted against the Lord’s chosen. The hands of the Birchshanks were purified and made holy in the blood of the rebels; however, the author also provides a reassuring message for the relatives of the fallen: their souls were not lost; Skule and his companions were absolved of their sins through the final act of penance, which was death.

It may also be that this same long record of violence, treason, and rebellion was responsible for the prominence that the King’s Mirror gives to the duty of obedience. In the political ethics of the work obedience is the chief virtue and the central principle. Conversely disobedience is the greatest of all sins. When Saul spared the Amalekites, whom the Lord had ordered him to destroy, he sinned far more grievously than did David when he 53dishonored Uriah’s wife and afterward brought about Uriah’s death; for Saul neglected to carry out the commands of God, and “no offense is graver than to be disobedient toward one’s superiors.”[116]

It might also be that this long history of violence, treason, and rebellion led to the importance that the King’s Mirror places on the duty of obedience. In the political ethics of the work, obedience is the key virtue and the main principle. On the other hand, disobedience is the worst sin of all. When Saul spared the Amalekites, whom the Lord had commanded him to destroy, he sinned much more severely than David did when he dishonored Uriah’s wife and ultimately caused Uriah’s death; because Saul failed to follow God's orders, and “no offense is graver than being disobedient to one’s superiors.”[116]

The King’s Mirror is a medieval document; it was in large part inspired by the course of events in Norway during the century of the civil wars; it records the scientific and political thought of a certain definite period in Norwegian history. But even though the author of the work must be classed among the thinkers of his own time, his place is far in advance of most of his fellows. His outlook on the world is broader than that of most medieval writers. In matters of science he is less credulous and less bound by theological thought than others who wrote on these subjects in his own century or earlier. On such questions as the cause of earthquakes and the source of the northern lights he shows an open-mindedness, which is rarely met with in the middle ages.[117] For the author’s view of life was not wholly medieval; on many subjects we find him giving utterance to thoughts which have a distinctly modern appearance. His theory of the state and its functions is distinctly unorthodox. But it is probably in the field of education where the great Northman is farthest in advance of his time. In his day the work of instruction was still in the hands of the church; and the churchmen showed no great anxiety to educate men except for the clerical profession. The King’s Mirror, however, teaches that 54merchants must also be educated: they must learn the art of reckoning and those facts of science that are of interest to navigators; they must study languages, Latin, French, and Norwegian; and they must become thoroughly acquainted with the laws of the land. But the author does not stop here: a merchant should also educate his children. “If children be given to you, let them not grow up without learning a trade; for we may expect a man to keep closer to knowledge and business when he comes of age, if he is trained in youth while under control.”[118]

The King’s Mirror is a medieval text that was largely influenced by events in Norway during the century of the civil wars. It records the scientific and political ideas of a specific time in Norwegian history. While the author can be seen as a thinker of his era, his perspective is much more advanced than that of most of his contemporaries. His view of the world is broader than what most medieval writers held. In terms of science, he is less gullible and less constrained by theological beliefs than others who wrote about these topics in his time or earlier. On issues like the cause of earthquakes and the origin of the northern lights, he demonstrates an open-mindedness that was rare in the Middle Ages.[117] His perspective on life is not entirely medieval; on many topics, he expresses ideas that have a distinctly modern feel. His theory of the state and its roles is notably unconventional. However, it is in the area of education where the great Northman is the most ahead of his time. During his era, instruction was still primarily in the hands of the church, and church leaders showed little interest in educating people beyond those preparing for clerical roles. The King’s Mirror, however, argues that 54merchants also need education: they should learn arithmetic and the scientific facts relevant to sailors; they should study languages like Latin, French, and Norwegian; and they should know the laws of the land thoroughly. But the author goes further: a merchant should also educate his children. “If you have children, don’t let them grow up without learning a trade; for we can expect a man to stick to knowledge and business when he reaches adulthood if he has been trained in his youth while still under guidance.”[118]

The identity of the author of the Speculum Regale has never been disclosed. Anonymous authorship was not uncommon in medieval Norse literature: many of the sagas were written by men whose names are not known. In the thirteenth century, however, it had become customary for writers to claim the honors of authorship. Our philosopher of the King’s Mirror clearly understood that his readers would be curious to know his name: if the book, he tells us in his introductory chapter, has any merit, that should satisfy the reader, and there is no reason why any one should wish to search out the name of the one who wrote it.[119] Evidently he had a purpose in concealing his identity, and the motive is not far to seek.

The identity of the author of the Speculum Regale has never been revealed. Anonymous authorship was common in medieval Norse literature; many of the sagas were written by people whose names we don’t know. However, by the thirteenth century, it had become standard for writers to take credit for their work. The philosopher of the King’s Mirror clearly understood that his readers would want to know his name. If the book, as he mentions in his introductory chapter, has any value, that should be enough for the reader, and there’s no reason for anyone to go looking for the author’s name.[119] Clearly, he had a reason for hiding his identity, and the motive isn’t hard to figure out.

After the death of King Sverre (1202) the conflict between the king and the hierarchy ceased for a time. The church made peace with the monarchy; the exiled bishops returned; and the faction of the Croziermen disintegrated. After a few years, however, the old 55quarrels broke out anew. On the accession of Hakon IV the church yielded once more, though the prelates did not renounce their earlier claims. In 1245, when plans were being made for King Hakon’s coronation, the bishops put forth the suggestion that the king should, on that occasion, renew the agreement of 1163, which gave the bishops control of the succession. But the great king refused. “If we swear such an oath as King Magnus swore, then it seems to us as though our honor would be lessened by it rather than increased.”[120] He flatly asserted that he would be crowned without any conditions attached to the act, or the crown “shall never come upon our head.”

After King Sverre died in 1202, the conflict between the king and the church paused for a while. The church made peace with the monarchy; the exiled bishops returned, and the faction known as the Croziermen fell apart. However, a few years later, the old disputes started again. When Hakon IV took over, the church again submitted, but the bishops didn't give up their previous claims. In 1245, as plans were being made for King Hakon's coronation, the bishops suggested that the king should renew the agreement from 1163, which gave them control over the succession. But the king refused. "If we swear an oath like King Magnus did, it seems to us that our honor would be diminished rather than enhanced." He firmly stated that he would be crowned without any conditions, or "the crown shall never come upon our head."

After the arrival of Cardinal William of Sabina, who had been sent by the pope to officiate at the coronation, and while preparations for that joyous event were going forward, the subject was brought up once more. On the suggestion of the Norwegian bishops the cardinal asked the king to take Magnus Erlingsson’s oath; but the king again refused, and the cardinal decided that “there is no need to speak of it oftener.”[121] The king was crowned and there was peace between the two great forces of church and monarchy, at least so long as Hakon lived. Sometime not long before or after the coronation of the great king (1247) the King’s Mirror seems to have been written. It is clear that such ideas as are enunciated in this work with respect to the submission of the church to the authorities of the state can not have been relished by the hierarchy, and perhaps they were just then somewhat unwelcome to the secular 56rulers as well, since a discussion of this sort might tend to renew ill feeling and stir up strife. Consequently the author may have thought it wiser to remain anonymous.

After Cardinal William of Sabina arrived, sent by the pope to oversee the coronation, and while preparations for this happy event were moving forward, the topic came up again. Following the suggestion of the Norwegian bishops, the cardinal asked the king to accept Magnus Erlingsson’s oath; however, the king refused once more, and the cardinal decided that “there is no need to speak of it oftener.”[121] The king was crowned, and there was peace between the two significant powers of church and monarchy, at least as long as Hakon lived. Not long before or after the coronation of the great king (1247), the King’s Mirror seems to have been written. It’s clear that the ideas expressed in this work regarding the church's submission to state authorities probably didn’t sit well with the hierarchy and might have also been somewhat unwelcome to the secular rulers at that time, as such discussions could reignite hard feelings and cause conflict. Therefore, the author may have thought it wiser to stay anonymous.

Earlier students of the Speculum Regale have believed that the author was some local chieftain, who had spent his more active days at the royal court, but who had later retired to his estates and was spending his declining years in literary pursuits. Various efforts have been made to find this chieftain,[122] but with no success; there is no evidence that the lords or crusaders who have been suggested as probable authors had any literary interests or abilities. There can be no doubt that the author was at one time a prominent member of the royal retinue; he asserts in several places that such was the case.[123] He is, furthermore, too thoroughly familiar with the organization of the royal household to have been an occasional courtier merely. At the same time it is not likely that he was a secular lord; it seems impossible that he could have been anything but a churchman. He knows the Latin language; he is well acquainted with sacred history; he has read a considerable number of medieval books. It is quite unlikely that the various types of learning that are reflected in the chapters of the King’s Mirror could be found in the thirteenth century in any scholar outside the clerical profession. He could not have been one of the higher ecclesiastics, as the prelates belonged to the faction of the Croziermen. The Speculum Regale was evidently written by a member of the 57Norwegian priesthood, though it is possible that he belonged to one of the minor orders. But at all events he was a professional churchman.[124]

Earlier scholars of the Speculum Regale believed that the author was a local chieftain who had spent his more active years at the royal court and later retired to his estates, spending his later years engaged in writing. Various attempts have been made to identify this chieftain,[122] but without success; there is no evidence that the lords or crusaders suggested as potential authors had any literary interests or skills. It's clear that the author was once a notable member of the royal entourage; he states this in several places.[123] Furthermore, he is too familiar with the organization of the royal household to have been just a casual courtier. At the same time, it’s unlikely he was a secular lord; he must have been a churchman. He knows Latin, is well-versed in sacred history, and has read a significant number of medieval books. It’s quite improbable that the various types of knowledge reflected in the chapters of the King’s Mirror could have been found in any scholar outside the church in the thirteenth century. He could not have been one of the higher church officials, as the bishops belonged to the Croziermen faction. The Speculum Regale was clearly written by a member of the 57Norwegian priesthood, although he might have belonged to one of the minor orders. But in any case, he was a professional churchman.[124]

There was an old belief in Norway that the work was written at King Sverre’s court, perhaps by the priest-king himself;[125] but this theory is wholly without foundation. Professor Ludvig Daae, believing that only a few Northmen possessed the necessary qualifications for the authorship of such a work as the King’s Mirror, concluded that it must have been written by Master William, one of the chaplains at the court of Hakon IV.[126] Master William was evidently a man of some erudition; he held a degree (magister) from a European university; he must have traveled abroad and was no doubt a man of experience; he lived and flourished in the period when the work must have been composed. But there is no shred of evidence that Master William actually wrote the King’s Mirror or that he was interested in the problems that are discussed in this work.

There was an old belief in Norway that the work was written at King Sverre’s court, perhaps by the priest-king himself;[125] but this theory is completely unfounded. Professor Ludvig Daae believed that only a few Norwegians had the necessary qualifications for writing such a work as the King’s Mirror, so he concluded that it must have been authored by Master William, one of the chaplains at Hakon IV's court.[126] Master William was clearly a learned man; he held a degree (magister) from a European university; he must have traveled abroad and was likely a man of experience; he lived and thrived in the time when the work was likely composed. However, there is no evidence that Master William actually wrote the King’s Mirror or that he was interested in the topics discussed in this work.

More recently A. V. Heffermehl has made an attempt to prove that the author so long sought for was Ivar Bodde, a Norwegian priest, who seems to have played an important part in the history of Norway in the first half of the thirteenth century as an influential member of the anti-clerical party.[127] Much is not known of Ivar 58Bodde, and nearly all that we do know comes from a speech which he is reported to have delivered in his own defence in 1217.[128] He entered King Sverre’s service “before the fight was at Strindsea,” which was fought in the summer of 1199. This was also the year in which King Sverre seems to have issued his famous Address. “I had good cheer from the king while he lived, and I served him so that at last I knew almost all his secret matters.” In King Inge’s reign (1204-1217) he served in the capacity of chancellor: “and that besides, which was much against my wish, they relied on me for writing letters.” During the same reign he also served as Prince Hakon’s foster father, and was consequently responsible for the education of the great king.[129] Ivar was also skilled in military arts: he was a warrior as well as a priest.[130] He was apparently twice sent to England on diplomatic errands, first to the court of King John, later to that of Henry III.[131] He withdrew from the court in 1217. In 1223 he reappears as one of the king’s chief counsellors. After this year nothing is known of Ivar Bodde.

More recently, A. V. Heffermehl has tried to prove that the long-sought author was Ivar Bodde, a Norwegian priest who seems to have played a significant role in Norway's history during the first half of the thirteenth century as an influential member of the anti-clerical party.[127] Not much is known about Ivar Bodde, and nearly all we do know comes from a speech he reportedly delivered in his defense in 1217.[128] He joined King Sverre’s service “before the battle at Strindsea,” which took place in the summer of 1199. This was also the year King Sverre seems to have issued his famous Address. “I had good support from the king while he lived, and I served him so well that in the end I knew almost all his secret matters.” During King Inge’s reign (1204-1217), he served as chancellor: “and what was more, which was much against my wish, they relied on me to write letters.” During the same reign, he also acted as Prince Hakon’s foster father, making him responsible for the education of the future great king.[129] Ivar was also skilled in military tactics: he was both a warrior and a priest.[130] He was apparently sent to England twice on diplomatic missions, first to the court of King John, and later to that of Henry III.[131] He withdrew from the court in 1217. In 1223, he reappears as one of the king’s top advisers. After that year, nothing is known about Ivar Bodde.

The author of the King’s Mirror was a professional churchman who belonged to the anti-clerical faction; he was a master of the literary art. Ivar Bodde was a man of this type; nothing is known of his literary abilities, but it is clear that a man who was entrusted with the king’s correspondence can not have been without 59literary skill. There seems to be no reason why Ivar Bodde could not have written the King’s Mirror, and he may also have had a hand in the preparation of Sverre’s Address; but that he actually did write either or both of these important works has not yet been proved; there may have been other priests in Norway in the thirteenth century who stood for the divine right of Norwegian kingship.

The author of the King’s Mirror was a professional churchman who was part of the anti-clerical faction; he was skilled in the art of writing. Ivar Bodde fits this description; we don’t know much about his writing skills, but it’s clear that a person who was given the job of handling the king’s correspondence couldn't have lacked literary talent. There’s no reason to believe that Ivar Bodde couldn’t have authored the King’s Mirror, and he might have also contributed to the preparation of Sverre’s Address; however, it hasn’t been proven that he actually wrote either of these significant works. There may have been other priests in Norway during the thirteenth century who supported the divine right of Norwegian kingship.

From certain geographical allusions it is quite clear that the work was written in Norway and in some part of the country that would be counted far to the north. The author mentions two localities in the Lofoten region and he shows considerable knowledge of conditions elsewhere in Halogaland;[132] but it is evident that he did not reside in that part of the kingdom when he was at work on his great treatise. It is generally agreed that the home of the Speculum Regale is Namdalen, a region which lies northeast of the city of Trondhjem and which touches the border of Halogaland on the north.[133] This conclusion is based on certain astronomical observations on the part of the author, namely the length of the shortest day, the daily increase in the length of the day, and the relationship between the length of the sun’s path and the sun’s altitude at noon of the longest and the shortest day.[134] The Norwegian astronomer Hans Geelmuyden has determined that if the author’s statements on these points are to be regarded as scientific computations, they indicate a latitude of 65°, 64° 42´, and 64° 52´ respectively. All these points lie within the 60shire of Namdalen.[135] As the author can scarcely have been much more than a layman in the fields of mathematics and astronomy, the agreement as to results obtained is quite remarkable.

From certain geographical references, it's clear that the work was written in Norway, specifically in a part of the country that is considered far to the north. The author mentions two areas in the Lofoten region and demonstrates considerable knowledge of conditions elsewhere in Halogaland; [132] but it’s obvious that he wasn’t living in that part of the kingdom when he was working on his major treatise. It’s generally accepted that the home of the Speculum Regale is Namdalen, a region located northeast of the city of Trondhjem and bordering Halogaland to the north.[133] This conclusion is based on certain astronomical observations made by the author, specifically the length of the shortest day, the daily increase in daylight hours, and the relationship between the length of the sun’s path and the sun’s altitude at noon on the longest and shortest days.[134] The Norwegian astronomer Hans Geelmuyden has determined that if the author’s statements on these points are considered scientific calculations, they indicate a latitude of 65°, 64° 42´, and 64° 52´ respectively. All these locations fall within the 60shire of Namdalen.[135] Given that the author likely wasn’t much more than an amateur in mathematics and astronomy, it’s quite remarkable that the results align.

The problem of place is relatively unimportant, but the question of the date of composition has more than mere literary interest. There is nothing in the work itself which gives any clue to the year when it was begun or completed. It seems evident, however, that it was written after the period of the civil wars, though while the terrors of that century of conflicts were yet fresh in the memories of men. For various other reasons, too, it is clear that the King’s Mirror was composed in the thirteenth century and more specifically during the reign of Hakon IV.

The issue of location is relatively minor, but the question of when it was written is more than just a literary curiosity. There’s nothing in the work itself that offers a hint about the year it began or was finished. However, it’s clear that it was written after the civil wars, though while the fears from that century of conflict were still fresh in people’s minds. For various other reasons as well, it’s evident that the King’s Mirror was composed in the thirteenth century, specifically during the reign of Hakon IV.

The allusion to the Byzantine emperor Manuel Comnenus,[136] whose reign began in 1143, gives a definite date from which any discussion of this problem must begin. It is also clear that the work was written after the church had begun to lay claim to power in the government of the state, which was in 1163.[137] The author looks back to an evil time when minorities were frequent and joint kingships were the rule;[138] but the period of joint rule virtually came to a close in 1184 when Sverre became sole king; and the last boy king whom the author can have taken into account was Hakon IV, who was thirteen years old when he was given the royal title. It therefore seems evident that the King’s Mirror was written after 1217, the year of Hakon’s accession.

The mention of the Byzantine emperor Manuel Comnenus,[136] whose reign started in 1143, provides a specific starting point for discussing this issue. It's also clear that the work was written after the church began to claim power in the government, which happened in 1163.[137] The author reflects on a troubled time when minorities were common and shared kingships were typical;[138] however, the era of joint rule mostly ended in 1184 when Sverre became the sole king. The last young king the author likely considered was Hakon IV, who was thirteen when he received the royal title. Therefore, it seems clear that the King’s Mirror was written after 1217, the year Hakon became king.

61On the other hand, it is also quite evident that the treatise can not have been written after the great revision of the Norwegian laws which was carried out during the reign of Magnus Lawmender. The new court-law, which was promulgated about 1275, is clearly later than the Speculum Regale: the fine exacted for the death of a king’s thegn, which is given as forty marks in the King’s Mirror, is fixed at a little more than thirteen marks in Magnus’ legislation. In 1273 the law regulating the succession to the throne made impossible the recurrence of joint kingships; but the principle of this arrangement appears to have been accepted as early as 1260, when the king’s son Magnus was given the royal title. Another decree, apparently also from Hakon’s reign, which abolished the responsibility of kinsmen in cases of manslaughter and deprived the relatives of the one who was slain of their share in the blood fine, also runs counter to methods described in the King’s Mirror, which states distinctly that kinsmen share in the payment.[139] It is therefore safe to conclude that the work was written some time between 1217 and 1260.

61On the other hand, it's clear that the treatise couldn't have been written after the major revision of Norwegian laws that took place during Magnus Lawmender's reign. The new court law, which was introduced around 1275, is definitely later than the Speculum Regale: the penalty for the death of a king’s thegn, stated as forty marks in the King’s Mirror, is set at just over thirteen marks in Magnus’ legislation. In 1273, the law regulating the succession to the throne made it impossible to have joint kingships; however, the idea for this arrangement seems to have been accepted as early as 1260, when the king’s son Magnus was granted the royal title. Another decree, likely also from Hakon’s reign, which removed the responsibility of relatives in cases of manslaughter and took away the relatives’ share of the blood fine, also contradicts the methods described in the King’s Mirror, which clearly states that kinsmen share in the payment.[139] Thus, it’s safe to conclude that the work was written sometime between 1217 and 1260.

The earliest attempt to date the King’s Mirror was made by the learned Icelander, Hans Finsen. In an essay included in the Sorö edition (1768) he fixes the time at about 1164.[140] J. Erichsen, who wrote the introduction to this edition, doubts that it was composed at so early a date; impressed with the fact that the work reflects the political views of the Birchshank faction, he is inclined to place the date of composition some time in Sverre’s reign or in the last decade of the twelfth 62century.[141] The striking resemblance between the ideas expressed in the treatise and the guiding principles of Sverre’s regime led the editors of the Christiania edition to the same conclusion: 1196 or soon after.[142] And so it was held that the work is a twelfth century document until a Danish artillery officer, Captain Otto Blom, began to make a careful study of the various types of weapons, armor, and siege engines mentioned in the work. His conclusion, published in 1867, was that the King’s Mirror reflects the military art of the thirteenth century and that the manuscript was composed in the latter half of the century, at any rate not long before 1260.[143] This conclusion has been accepted by Gustav Storm,[144] Ludvig Daae,[145] and virtually all who have written on the subject since Blom’s study appeared, except Heffermehl, whose belief that Ivar Bodde was the author could not permit so late a date, as Ivar, who was a man of prominence at Sverre’s court about 1200, must have been an exceedingly aged man, if he were still living in 1260. Heffermehl is, therefore, compelled to force the date of composition back to the decade 1230-1240.

The earliest attempt to date the King’s Mirror was made by the knowledgeable Icelander, Hans Finsen. In an essay included in the Sorö edition (1768), he estimates the time to be around 1164.[140] J. Erichsen, who wrote the introduction to this edition, doubts that it was created that early; noting that the work reflects the political views of the Birchshank faction, he leans towards placing the date of composition sometime during Sverre’s reign or in the last decade of the twelfth century.62[141] The strong similarities between the ideas in the treatise and the guiding principles of Sverre’s regime led the editors of the Christiania edition to the same conclusion: 1196 or shortly thereafter.[142] As a result, the work was considered a twelfth-century document until a Danish artillery officer, Captain Otto Blom, began to carefully study the various types of weapons, armor, and siege engines mentioned in the work. His conclusion, published in 1867, was that the King’s Mirror reflects the military technology of the thirteenth century and that the manuscript was composed in the latter half of that century, definitely not long before 1260.[143] This conclusion has been accepted by Gustav Storm,[144] Ludvig Daae,[145] and nearly everyone who has written on the subject since Blom’s study was published, except Heffermehl, whose belief that Ivar Bodde was the author doesn’t allow for such a late date. Since Ivar was a significant figure at Sverre’s court around 1200, he would have to have been incredibly old if he were still alive in 1260. Therefore, Heffermehl is forced to push the composition date back to the decade of 1230-1240.

The weakness of Captain Blom’s argument is that he supposes the military art described in the Speculum Regale to be the military art of the North at the time when the work was written. If all the engines and accoutrements that the author describes ever came into use in the North, it was long after 1260. Nearly all the 63weapons and devices mentioned were in use in southern Europe and in the Orient in earlier decades of the thirteenth century; some of them belong to much earlier times. If certain engines and devices which Captain Blom is disposed to regard as mythical are left out of account, it will be found that only three items fail to appear in illustrations from the earlier part of the thirteenth century; and it would not be safe to assume that these were not in use because no drawing of them has been found.

The flaw in Captain Blom’s argument is that he assumes the military tactics described in the Speculum Regale represent the military practices of the North when the work was written. If all the weapons and equipment that the author mentions were ever used in the North, it was well after 1260. Most of the 63 weapons and devices listed were already in use in southern Europe and the East in the earlier decades of the thirteenth century; some come from even earlier periods. If we disregard certain weapons and devices that Captain Blom considers mythical, we find that only three items are not depicted in illustrations from the earlier part of the thirteenth century, and it wouldn’t be safe to conclude that these weren't in use just because no drawings of them have been found.

Viewed against the background of Norwegian history, those chapters of the King’s Mirror which deal with the nature and the rights of monarchy and with the place of the church in the state take on the appearance of a political pamphlet written to defend and justify the doings of the Birchshank party. The motives for composing an apology of this sort may be found at almost any time in the thirteenth century but especially during the decade that closed with the coronation of Hakon IV. It will be remembered that the author of the King’s Mirror discusses the calamities that may befall a kingdom as a result of joint rule.[146] But in 1235, after one of Earl Skule’s periodic attempts at rebellion, his royal son-in-law granted him the administration of one-third of the realm. The grant was ratified the next year with certain changes: instead of a definite, compact fief the earl now received territories everywhere in the kingdom. In 1237 Skule was given the ducal title and to many men it seemed as if the curse of joint kingship was about to afflict the land once more. Two years later the partisans 64of the duke proclaimed him king: like Adonijah of old he tried to displace the Lord’s anointed.[147] But after a few months came the surprise of Skule’s forces in Trondhjem and the duke’s own tragic end in Elgesæter convent.[148] It will be recalled that the author defends King Solomon’s dealings with Joab and lays down the principle that the right of sanctuary will not hold against a king.[149] The rebellion of the Norwegian Adonijah was in 1239; he died the death of Joab in 1240. Three years later the believers in a strong monarchy were disturbed by the news that the bishops had revived the old claim to supremacy in the state. Soon after this series of events the political chapters of the King’s Mirror must have been composed.

Viewed through the lens of Norwegian history, the chapters of the King’s Mirror that discuss the nature and rights of monarchy, as well as the church's role in the state, appear to be a political pamphlet designed to defend and justify the actions of the Birchshank party. The reasons behind writing such an apology can be found throughout the thirteenth century, but particularly during the decade culminating with the coronation of Hakon IV. It's important to note that the author of the King’s Mirror talks about the disasters that can occur in a kingdom due to joint rule.[146] In 1235, after one of Earl Skule’s frequent rebellion attempts, his royal son-in-law granted him control over a third of the realm. This grant was confirmed the following year with some adjustments: instead of receiving a specific, compact fief, the earl was now given territories across the entire kingdom. In 1237, Skule was given the title of duke, and to many, it seemed like the curse of joint kingship was about to plague the land again. Two years later, the duke's supporters declared him king: like Adonijah of old, he sought to replace the Lord’s anointed.[147] However, after a few months came the unexpected attack by Skule’s forces in Trondhjem, leading to the duke’s tragic downfall at Elgesæter convent.[148] It's worth remembering that the author defends King Solomon’s actions regarding Joab and establishes the principle that the right of sanctuary does not stand against a king.[149] The rebellion of the Norwegian Adonijah took place in 1239; he met Joab's fate in 1240. Three years later, supporters of a strong monarchy were alarmed by the news that the bishops had renewed their old claim to supremacy in the state. Shortly after this series of events, the political chapters of the King’s Mirror must have been written.

In 1247, the year of Hakon’s coronation, the hierarchy was once more reconciled to the monarchy, and nothing more is heard of ecclesiastical pretensions during the remainder of the reign. It would seem that after this reconciliation, no churchman, at least not one of the younger generation, would care to send such a challenge as the King’s Mirror out into the world. One of the older men, one who had suffered with Sverre and his impoverished Birchshanks, might have wished to write such a work even after 1247; but after that date the surviving followers of the eloquent king must have been very few indeed, seeing that Sverre had now lain forty-five years in the grave. It is therefore the writer’s opinion, though it cannot be regarded as a demonstrated fact, that the closing chapters of the King’s Mirror were written after 1240, the year when Duke Skule was slain, perhaps after 651243, in which year Norwegian clericalism reasserted itself, but some time before 1247, the year of Hakon’s coronation and final reconciliation with the church.

In 1247, the year Hakon was crowned, the hierarchy was once again harmonized with the monarchy, and there were no further ecclesiastical claims heard during the rest of his reign. It seems that after this reconciliation, no churchman, especially not from the younger generation, would want to challenge the status quo like the King’s Mirror. An older individual, one who had struggled alongside Sverre and his impoverished Birchshanks, might have wanted to write such a piece even after 1247; however, after that time, the remaining followers of the eloquent king must have been very few, given that Sverre had now been dead for forty-five years. Therefore, it's the writer's belief, though it cannot be considered a proven fact, that the final chapters of the King’s Mirror were written after 1240, the year Duke Skule was killed, possibly after 651243, when Norwegian clericalism reasserted itself, but sometime before 1247, the year of Hakon’s coronation and ultimate reconciliation with the church.

In the centuries following its composition the King’s Mirror appears to have had wide currency in the North. When the editors of the Sorö edition began to search for manuscripts, they found a considerable number, though chiefly fragments, in Norway and Iceland; and traces of the work were also found in Sweden.[150] Thus far twenty-five manuscripts have come to light; “some of them are extensive, but many are fragments of only a few leaves.”[151] Copies of the work were made as late as the reformation period and even later.

In the centuries after it was written, the King’s Mirror seems to have been widely circulated in the North. When the editors of the Sorö edition started looking for manuscripts, they found a significant number, mostly fragments, in Norway and Iceland; they also discovered traces of the work in Sweden.[150] So far, twenty-five manuscripts have been identified; “some of them are extensive, but many are just fragments of a few pages.”[151] Copies of the work were created as late as the Reformation period and even afterward.

The first mention of the Speculum Regale in any printed work is in Peder Claussön’s “Description of Norway,”[152] the manuscript of which dates from the earlier years of the seventeenth century. But more than one hundred years were still to pass before this important work was brought to the attention of the literary world. Early in the eighteenth century, however, great interest began to be shown in the records of the Old Northern past. The great Icelandic scholar and antiquarian, Arne Magnussen, had begun to collect manuscripts and was laying the foundation of the Arnamagnean collection, which is one of the treasures of the Danish capital. 66Among other things he found several copies and fragments of manuscripts of the Speculum Regale. No effort was made to publish any of these before the middle of the century was past; but about 1760 three young scholars began to plan editions of this famous work. The first to undertake this task was Professor Gerhard Schöning,[153] a Norwegian by birth, who was at the time rector of the Latin school in Trondhjem but later held a professorship in the Danish academy at Sorö. Schöning began the preparation of a Latin translation of the work, which he planned to publish along with the original version; but his work was never completed. About the same time an Icelandic student at the University of Copenhagen, Hans Finsen,[154] later bishop in his native island, projected an edition, but was unable to carry out his plans for want of a publisher, and turned his materials over to others. The third and only successful attempt at publication was made on the suggestion of a recently organized association of Icelandic scholars known as “the Invisible” society. This association requested Halfdan Einersen,[155] rector of the Latin school at Holar, one of the members and founders of the “invisible” body, to prepare an edition. An Icelandic merchant, Sören Pens, generously offered to bear all the expense of publication.[156]

The first time the Speculum Regale was mentioned in any printed work was in Peder Claussön’s “Description of Norway,”[152] with the manuscript dating back to the early seventeenth century. However, it took more than a hundred years before this significant work caught the attention of the literary world. In the early eighteenth century, interest began to grow in the records of the Old Northern past. The renowned Icelandic scholar and antiquarian, Arne Magnussen, started collecting manuscripts and laid the groundwork for the Arnamagnean collection, which is one of the treasures of the Danish capital. 66Among other things, he found several copies and fragments of the Speculum Regale manuscripts. No efforts were made to publish any of these until the middle of the century; however, around 1760, three young scholars began planning editions of this famous work. The first to take on this task was Professor Gerhard Schöning,[153] a Norwegian by birth, who was then the rector of the Latin school in Trondhjem but later became a professor at the Danish academy in Sorö. Schöning started preparing a Latin translation of the work, intending to publish it alongside the original version, but he never completed it. Around the same time, an Icelandic student at the University of Copenhagen, Hans Finsen,[154] who later became a bishop on his native island, planned an edition but couldn't carry out his plans due to the lack of a publisher, so he handed his materials over to others. The third and only successful attempt to publish came from a recently formed association of Icelandic scholars known as “the Invisible” society. This association asked Halfdan Einersen,[155] the rector of the Latin school at Holar and a member and founder of the “invisible” group, to prepare an edition. An Icelandic merchant, Sören Pens, generously offered to cover all publication costs.[156]

Rector Einersen prepared the text from the best available Icelandic manuscripts. He also made a Danish 67translation and a Latin paraphrase of the same and forwarded the whole to Denmark to be published. The materials were given into the editorial charge of another learned Icelander, Jon Erichsen, teacher of jurisprudence at Sorö Academy. Although Jon Erichsen’s name does not appear on the title page, it is quite clear that the general excellence of the work is in large measure due to his careful collation of Einersen’s text with manuscripts to which the Icelandic rector had not had access. Professor Erichsen discarded Einersen’s Danish translation and prepared one of his own. He also found place in the volume for a dissertation by Hans Finsen, which was first published in 1766, and in which the learned theologian discusses various literary problems, such as the authorship of the work, the date of composition, and the like. All these materials were brought together and published at Sorö in 1768. On the whole the Sorö edition is an excellent piece of work. The Icelandic text was made with great care and reveals the fact that the editors were possessed of a critical insight which for the time was remarkable. The Danish translation is somewhat stiff and literal and does not always follow the laws of Danish syntax; but it is generally accurate and retains an unmistakable flavor of the Old Norse original.

Rector Einersen prepared the text using the best available Icelandic manuscripts. He also made a Danish translation and a Latin paraphrase of the same text and sent everything to Denmark for publication. The materials were placed under the editorial oversight of another knowledgeable Icelander, Jon Erichsen, who was a teacher of law at Sorö Academy. Although Jon Erichsen’s name doesn’t appear on the title page, it’s clear that the overall quality of the work is largely thanks to his careful comparison of Einersen’s text with manuscripts that the Icelandic rector hadn’t had access to. Professor Erichsen discarded Einersen’s Danish translation and created his own. He also included a dissertation by Hans Finsen in the volume, which was first published in 1766, where the learned theologian discusses various literary issues, such as the authorship of the work, the date of composition, and more. All these materials were compiled and published in Sorö in 1768. Overall, the Sorö edition is an excellent piece of work. The Icelandic text was produced with great care and shows that the editors had a remarkable critical insight for their time. The Danish translation is somewhat rigid and literal, not always adhering to Danish syntax rules; however, it is generally accurate and retains an unmistakable essence of the Old Norse original.

Except for some assistance rendered by Professor Schöning, the first edition of the King’s Mirror was the work of Icelanders. The Norwegians were also beginning to show some interest in their medieval past; but Norway was still a part of the Danish monarchy, the political and intellectual center of which was Copenhagen, 68and for half a century longer the Norwegians were unable to do anything to promote the publication of historical materials. However, four years after the Sorö edition had come from the press, a society of Norsemen at the University of Copenhagen was organized, the purpose of which was to further the cause of Norwegian autonomy. After Norway in 1814 resumed her place among the nations of Europe, it was only natural that Norwegian scholars should be attracted to the Old Norse treasures of the middle ages. So far as the means of the impoverished state would allow, publication of the sources of Norwegian history was undertaken. The first Norwegian historian of distinction was Rudolf Keyser, professor in the University of Christiania. In his efforts to draw the attention of his countrymen to the glories of earlier centuries, he was soon reënforced by his younger contemporary, the fiery and industrious scholar and investigator Peter Andreas Munch, who, though his work is somewhat marred by the fervor of his patriotism, has not yet found a superior among the historians of the North. Soon a third was added to these two: Carl R. Unger, a man of remarkable abilities as a linguist. These three now undertook to edit a series of Old Norse texts, among which was the King’s Mirror, which was published under the auspices of the University of Christiania in 1848.

Except for some help from Professor Schöning, the first edition of the King’s Mirror was created by Icelanders. The Norwegians were also starting to show interest in their medieval history, but Norway was still part of the Danish monarchy, with Copenhagen as its political and intellectual center. For another fifty years, the Norwegians were unable to promote the publication of historical materials. However, four years after the Sorö edition was released, a group of Norsemen formed at the University of Copenhagen to support Norwegian autonomy. After Norway regained its place among the nations of Europe in 1814, it was natural for Norwegian scholars to be drawn to the Old Norse treasures from the Middle Ages. As much as the struggling state could afford, they began publishing sources of Norwegian history. The first prominent Norwegian historian was Rudolf Keyser, a professor at the University of Christiania. He was soon joined by the passionate and hardworking scholar Peter Andreas Munch, who, despite his nationalistic fervor, remains unmatched among North's historians. Soon after, a third historian joined them: Carl R. Unger, a talented linguist. Together, these three embarked on editing a series of Old Norse texts, including the King’s Mirror, which was published under the University's auspices in 1848.

The Christiania edition is based on the main manuscript of the Speculum Regale, the manuscript 243 B of the Arnamagnean collection. This was produced in Norway some time during the last quarter of the thirteenth 69century, perhaps not long after 1275.[157] As the manuscript was incomplete in part, the editors also made use of the copies which had been made the basis of the earlier edition. Inasmuch as the materials to be used had been copied at different times and consequently reflected various stages of linguistic development, it was thought desirable to normalize the orthography: and in this part of their task the editors made use of a fragment which was thought to belong to a somewhat earlier date than the main manuscript.[158] If this belief is correct, the Christiania edition must, in respect to orthography, be a comparatively close approximation of the original manuscript.

The Christiania edition is based on the main manuscript of the Speculum Regale, manuscript 243 B from the Arnamagnean collection. This was produced in Norway sometime during the last quarter of the thirteenth century, likely not long after 1275.[157] Since the manuscript was partially incomplete, the editors also referred to copies that had been used for the earlier edition. Because the materials were copied at different times and reflected various stages of linguistic development, it was deemed important to standardize the spelling. In this part of their work, the editors utilized a fragment believed to be from a slightly earlier date than the main manuscript.[158] If this belief is accurate, the Christiania edition should, in terms of spelling, be a fairly close representation of the original manuscript.

In 1881 a third edition prepared by the German philologist Otto Brenner was published under the title Speculum Regale, ein altnorwegischer Dialog. Brenner based his text on the Norwegian manuscript 243 B, but he also made use of the Icelandic copy (243 A) and of some of the older fragments. His edition consequently includes all the materials that had been used in the earlier editions. It was Brenner’s purpose to prepare a text which should give the Norwegian version in its original form, so far as such a restoration is possible. Though scholars are not agreed that Brenner achieved his purpose, all have acknowledged the value of his work, and since its publication his version has been regarded as the standard edition.

In 1881, a third edition prepared by the German scholar Otto Brenner was published titled Speculum Regale, ein altnorwegischer Dialog. Brenner based his text on the Norwegian manuscript 243 B, but he also referenced the Icelandic copy (243 A) and some older fragments. His edition thus includes all the materials from previous editions. Brenner aimed to create a text that represented the Norwegian version in its original form, as much as this restoration is possible. Although scholars do not all agree that Brenner achieved this goal, they have all recognized the importance of his work, and since its publication, his version has been seen as the standard edition.

Two years ago (1915) the University of Illinois published, under the editorial direction of Professor George 70T. Flom, a photographic reproduction of this same manuscript, 243 B. This important linguistic monument has thus been made accessible to scholars in its original form. Professor Flom has also prepared the Old Norse text of the manuscript, which makes a part of the publication, and has prefaced the whole with an extended introduction in which he discusses the history of the manuscript, marginal addenda, abbreviations, and other paleographic and linguistic problems.

Two years ago (1915), the University of Illinois published, under the editorial guidance of Professor George T. Flom, a photo reproduction of this same manuscript, 243 B. This significant linguistic artifact has now been made available to scholars in its original format. Professor Flom also prepared the Old Norse text of the manuscript, included as part of the publication, and he has added a lengthy introduction where he discusses the manuscript's history, marginal notes, abbreviations, and other paleographic and linguistic issues.

Until very recently the Danish version prepared by Jon Erichsen for the Sorö edition was the only translation of the Speculum Regale into a modern language.[159] But a few years ago the first part of the work was published under the title Kongespegelen in the form of a translation into New Norse, a language of recent origin based on the spoken dialects of Norway. As these dialects are closely related to the original idiom of the North, such a translation can be made with comparative ease. The work has recently been completed, and in most respects the New Norse version proves to be a very satisfactory translation.

Until very recently, the Danish version prepared by Jon Erichsen for the Sorö edition was the only translation of the Speculum Regale into a modern language.[159] However, a few years ago, the first part of the work was published under the title Kongespegelen as a translation into New Norse, a recently developed language based on the spoken dialects of Norway. Since these dialects are closely related to the original language of the North, this translation can be done with relative ease. The work has recently been completed, and in most ways, the New Norse version turns out to be a very satisfactory translation.

Some years ago a number of American scholars who have interests in the fields of Scandinavian history, language, and literature united to form a Society for the Advancement of Scandinavian Study. The founders believed that the purpose of the organization might be in part achieved by encouraging the publication of some of the great Scandinavian classics in English translation. It was on the suggestion of this Society that the 71writer undertook to prepare the present version of the King’s Mirror. The translation is based on the text of the Christiania edition, the readings of which have been consistently followed, except in a few instances where the scribe does not seem to have copied his manuscript correctly; in such cases the most satisfactory variant readings have been followed.

A few years ago, a group of American scholars interested in Scandinavian history, language, and literature came together to create a Society for the Advancement of Scandinavian Study. The founders believed that part of the organization's goal could be achieved by promoting the publication of some of the major Scandinavian classics in English translation. It was on the Society's suggestion that the 71author agreed to prepare this version of the King’s Mirror. The translation is based on the text from the Christiania edition, which has been consistently followed, except for a few instances where the scribe appears to have miscopied his manuscript; in those cases, the most accurate variant readings have been used.


72

I
 
INTRODUCTION: NAME AND PURPOSE OF THE WORK

I passed all the crafts before my mind’s eye and studied intently all the practices belonging to each craft; and I saw a vast multitude walking wearily along the paths that slope downward from the highways of virtue into error and vice. Some of these were very steep, and those who followed them perished in desolate ravines; for the long, wearisome road had fatigued them, and they had not enough strength left to climb up the hillside, nor were they able to find the by-paths that led back to the highways of virtue.

I reviewed all the trades in my mind and closely examined the practices related to each one. I noticed a huge crowd trudging wearily down paths that sloped away from the roads of virtue into mistakes and bad behavior. Some of these paths were quite steep, and those who took them ended up in desolate valleys; the long, exhausting journey had worn them out, leaving them too weak to climb back up the hillside or to find the trails that would lead them back to the roads of virtue.

The destruction of this multitude was due, it seemed to me, to various causes: some perished through ignorance, for the ways of error were trodden so generally that they appeared to be the most convenient to follow, and ignorant men mistook them for highways, since the majority seemed to walk in them; some perished because of laziness and carelessness; others feared that they would suffer derision and contumely, if they walked the highroad alone; while still others were led astray by perversity, wickedness, and the various passions.

The destruction of this large crowd was, it seemed to me, caused by several factors: some died because of ignorance, as the paths of error were so frequently taken that they seemed like the easiest ones to choose, and unaware individuals mistook them for main roads, since most people seemed to be traveling them; some perished due to laziness and negligence; others were afraid of being mocked and ridiculed if they walked the right path alone; while still others were misled by stubbornness, evil, and various desires.

But when I had observed how good morals were scorned and how the scorners perished, I began to wonder how to find a road where I should not be traveling entirely alone and yet would not have to choose one of those paths where the crowd were exhausting their 73strength, lest the steep climb should weary me, if I were to make an effort to get back up again.

But after I noticed how good morals were mocked and how those who mocked them ended up suffering, I started to think about how to find a path where I wouldn’t be completely alone but wouldn’t have to choose one of those routes where the crowd was exhausting themselves, fearing that the steep climb would tire me out if I tried to make it back up again. 73

Inasmuch as my father was still living and loved me well, I thought it would be better to seek his counsel than after a slight consideration to reach a decision which might displease him. So I hastened to my father and laid the whole problem before him. He was a wise and kind man, and I found that he was pleased when he heard that my errand was to learn right conduct. He permitted me to ask whatever I wished about the practices of the various crafts, and how they differed. He also promised to make known to me all the usages that are most properly observed by each craft that I might ask about. He further promised to point out, as a warning, the paths of error which most men enter upon when they leave the highways of virtue. Finally he promised to show me the by-paths that those may take who wish to return from wrong roads to the highway.

As long as my father was still alive and cared for me, I thought it would be better to ask for his advice rather than make a quick decision that might upset him. So, I rushed to my father and presented the entire issue to him. He was a wise and kind man, and I could see that he was happy to hear I wanted to learn about proper behavior. He allowed me to ask anything I wanted about the different trades and how they varied. He also promised to tell me all the customs that each trade should follow. Additionally, he promised to warn me about the mistakes most people make when they stray from the path of virtue. Finally, he agreed to show me the alternative routes for those who want to return from the wrong paths to the right way.

Thereupon I began my inquiry by asking about the activities of merchants and their methods. At the close of the first discussion, when my questions had all been answered, I became bolder in speech and mounted to a higher point in our review of the conditions of men; for next I began to inquire into the customs of kings and other princes and of the men who follow and serve them. Nor did I wholly omit to ask about the doings of the clergy and their mode of life. And I closed by inquiring into the activities of the peasants and husbandmen, who till the soil, and into their habits and occupation.

I started my investigation by asking about what merchants do and how they operate. After our first discussion ended and all my questions were answered, I felt more confident and moved on to a broader look at people's circumstances; next, I asked about the customs of kings and other rulers, as well as the people who support and serve them. I also made sure to ask about the actions of the clergy and how they live. Finally, I inquired about the activities of the farmers and laborers who work the land, along with their routines and way of life.

But when my father had given wise and sufficient replies to all the questions that I had asked, certain wise 74and worthy men, who, being present, had heard my questions and his wise and truthful answers, requested me to note down all our conversations and set them in a book, so that our discussions should not perish as soon as we ceased speaking, but prove useful and enjoyable to many who could derive no pastime from us who were present at these conversations.

But when my father had given thoughtful and sufficient answers to all my questions, some knowledgeable and respectable men who were there and had listened to my questions and his wise and truthful responses asked me to write down all our conversations and compile them into a book. They wanted our discussions to be preserved and not disappear as soon as we stopped talking, so that they could be useful and enjoyable to many others who couldn't join us for these conversations.

So I did as they advised and requested. I searched my memory and pondered deeply upon the speeches and set them all in a book, not only for the amusement or the fleeting pastime of those who may hear them, but for the help which the book will offer in many ways to all who read it with proper attention and observe carefully everything that it prescribes. It is written in such a way as to furnish information and entertainment, as well as much practical knowledge, if the contents are carefully learned and remembered. But whoever has clear and proper insight will realize that, if a book is to develop these subjects fully, it will have to be a much larger work than this one.

So I followed their advice and did what they asked. I dug into my memory and thought deeply about the speeches, compiling them all into a book, not just for the enjoyment or passing time of those who may read it, but also for the assistance this book will provide in various ways to anyone who reads it attentively and pays close attention to everything it covers. It's written to offer both information and entertainment, as well as a lot of practical knowledge, if the content is learned and remembered well. However, anyone with a clear and proper understanding will see that to cover these topics thoroughly, the book would need to be much larger than this one.

The book has been given a handsome title: it is called Speculum Regale, not because of pride in him who wrote it, but because the title ought to make those who hear it more eager to know the work itself; and for this reason, too, that if any one wishes to be informed as to proper conduct, courtesy, or comely and precise forms of speech, he will find and see these therein along with many illustrations and all manner of patterns, as in a bright mirror. And it is called King’s Mirror, because in it one may read of the manners of kings as well as of other men. A king, moreover, holds the highest title and 75ought, with his court and all his servants, to observe the most proper customs, so that in them his subjects may see good examples of proper conduct, uprightness, and all other courtly virtues. Besides, every king should look frequently into this mirror and observe first his own conduct and next that of the men who are subject to him. He should reward all whose conduct is good, but should discipline and compel those to observe good morals who cannot learn without threats. Although the book is first and foremost a king’s mirror, yet it is intended for every one as a common possession; since whoever wishes is free to look into it and to seek information, as he may desire, about his own conduct, or any other type of manners which he may find discussed in the book. And I believe that no man will be considered unwise or unmannerly who carefully observes everything that he finds in this work which is suited to his mode of living, no matter what his rank or title may be.

The book has a striking title: it's called Speculum Regale, not out of pride for its author, but because the title should make listeners curious to explore the work itself. Furthermore, anyone seeking guidance on proper behavior, politeness, or clear and precise speech will find many examples and a variety of models within it, much like a bright mirror. It's called King’s Mirror because it offers insights into the behavior of kings as well as other individuals. A king, in particular, holds the highest position and should, along with his court and all his servants, uphold the best customs, so that his subjects can see good examples of proper conduct, integrity, and all other noble virtues. Additionally, every king should frequently look into this mirror to examine his own behavior and then that of those he governs. He should reward those who act well, but discipline and motivate those who cannot improve without being pushed. Although the book primarily serves as a mirror for kings, it is meant for everyone as a shared resource; anyone interested is welcome to look into it for information about their own behavior or any other manners discussed in the book. I believe no one will be viewed as foolish or impolite who carefully follows what they find in this work that suits their lifestyle, regardless of their status or title.

If any one desires or is curious to hear or study this book, he need not inquire about the name or the standing of the man who composed and wrote it, lest perchance he should reject what may be found useful in it because of contempt, envy, or hostile feeling of some sort for the author.[160]

If anyone wants to read or study this book, they don't need to worry about the name or reputation of the person who wrote it, just in case they might dismiss something useful in it out of dislike, jealousy, or some kind of negative feelings toward the author.[160]

76This request, however, which surely may be granted to any man, we should like to make: we ask all good men who hear this book to give it careful thought and study; and if there should be aught which seems necessary to the work but has not been included, whether concerning morals and conduct or discreet and proper forms of speech, let them insert it in proper form and connection. And if they find any matters which seem to impair the work or to have been discussed at too great length, let them discreetly remove all such and thus, amending our ignorance in kindness, help our work to be appreciated in proper spirit. For it was not pride that impelled us to labor but good will toward all who seemed to need and desire knowledge of this sort.

76This request, however, which can certainly be granted to anyone, we would like to make: we ask all decent people who read this book to give it thoughtful consideration and study; and if there’s anything necessary to the work that has been left out, whether related to morals and behavior or appropriate ways of speaking, please add it in the right context. And if you find anything that seems to harm the work or that has been discussed too extensively, please feel free to remove it so that, by helping to correct our oversights, you can help our work be appreciated properly. For it wasn't pride that motivated us to create this but a genuine desire to help everyone who seems to need and want this kind of knowledge.

When I went to my father with these inquiries that I have now mentioned, I learned in the very first words that I addressed to him, how every one ought to salute or address one’s father.

When I approached my father with these questions I've mentioned, I quickly realized in the very first words I spoke to him how everyone should greet or address their father.


II
 
"Respect for the Lord is the foundation of wisdom."

Son. Good day,[161] sire! I have come to see you as it behooves a humble and obedient son to approach a loving and renowned father; and I pray you to listen with patience to the questions that I have in mind to ask and kindly to vouchsafe an answer to each one.

Son. Good day,[161] sir! I’ve come to see you as any respectful and devoted son would approach a loving and well-respected father; and I ask you to listen patiently to the questions I have in mind and kindly provide an answer to each one.

Father. Inasmuch as you are my only son, I am pleased to have you come often to see me, for there are many subjects which we ought to discuss. I shall be glad to 77hear what you wish to inquire about and to answer such questions as are discreetly asked.

Father. Since you're my only son, I'm happy to have you visit me often because there are many topics we need to talk about. I look forward to hearing what you want to ask and to answering your questions as long as they are asked thoughtfully. 77

Son. I have heard the common report (which I believe is true) as to your wisdom, that in all the land it would be difficult to find a man who has greater insight into every form of knowledge than you have; for all those who have difficult matters to settle are eager to get your decision. I have also been told that the same was true when you were at the royal court, and that the entire government, lawmaking, treaty making, and every other sort of business, seemed to be guided by your opinion. Now as I am the lawful heir to your worldly possessions, I should also like to share somewhat in the heritage of your wisdom. Wherefore I wish to have you point out to me the beginnings and the alphabet of wisdom, as far as I am able to learn them from you, so that I may later be able to read all your learned writings, and thus follow in your footsteps. For I am sure that after your decease many will rely on your having trained me after your own ways.

Son. I've heard the common view (which I believe is true) about your wisdom, and it’s said that it would be hard to find anyone in the land with more insight into every type of knowledge than you. Everyone who has tough issues to resolve is eager for your opinion. I've also been told this was the case when you were at the royal court, where it seemed like the entire government, lawmaking, treaty-making, and all other business was guided by your views. Now that I'm the rightful heir to your worldly possessions, I also want to inherit some of your wisdom. So, I wish for you to teach me the basics and foundations of wisdom, as far as I can learn from you, so that I can eventually read all your scholarly works and follow in your footsteps. I’m sure that after you’re gone, many will rely on the fact that you trained me in your ways.

Father. It pleases me to hear you speak in this wise, and I shall be glad to answer; for it is a great comfort to me that I shall leave much wealth for my own true son to enjoy after my days; but I should scarcely regard him as a son, though I had begotten him, if he were a fool. Now if you seek understanding, I will show you the basis and the beginning of all wisdom, as a great and wise man once expressed it: to fear Almighty God, this is the beginning of wisdom.[162] But He is not to be feared as an 78enemy, but rather with the fear of love, as the Son of God taught the man who asked him what the substance of the law was. For the Son of God referred him to the Scripture that reads as follows: Thou shalt love God with all thy heart and with all thy strength and with all thy might.[163] Now one should love God above everything else and fear Him at all times when evil desires arise; he should banish evil longings for God’s sake, though he were bold enough to cherish them for men’s sake. Now if you wish to know what are the beginnings and the first steps in the pursuit of wisdom, this is the true beginning, and there is none other. And whoever learns this and observes it shall not be wanting in true knowledge or in any form of goodness.

Father. I’m glad to hear you speak like this, and I’ll happily respond; it brings me great comfort that I’ll leave a lot of wealth for my true son to enjoy after I'm gone. However, I wouldn't really consider him my son, even if I fathered him, if he lacked wisdom. Now, if you're looking for understanding, I’ll show you the foundation and the start of all wisdom, as a great and wise person once said: to fear Almighty God, this is the beginning of wisdom.[162] But He shouldn’t be feared as an enemy; instead, fear Him with love, as the Son of God taught the man who asked him what the essence of the law was. The Son of God pointed him to the Scripture that says: You shall love God with all your heart, all your strength, and all your might.[163] You should love God above everything else and fear Him at all times when evil desires come up; you should cast aside those evil thoughts for God’s sake, even if you feel tempted to hold onto them for the sake of others. If you want to know what the initial steps in the pursuit of wisdom are, this is the true starting point, and there’s no other. Anyone who learns this and puts it into practice will not lack true knowledge or any kind of goodness.

Son. This is indeed loving counsel, such as one might expect from you; besides, it is good and easily learned by every one whom fortune follows. Still, if one is to be reputed a wise man, it will surely be necessary to take up many things that pertain to the various crafts.

Son. This is truly loving advice, just what I would expect from you; moreover, it's good and easy for anyone who is fortunate to learn. However, if one wants to be seen as a wise person, it's definitely important to engage with many aspects of different trades.

Father. This is the beginning and the alphabet of every good thing. But through the alphabet one learns to read books, and in the same way it is always better the more crafts are added to this art. For through the crafts a man gains wisdom whatever the calling that he intends to follow, whether that of kingsman,[164] yeoman, or merchant.

Father. This is the start and the foundation of every good thing. But just like the alphabet helps you read books, adding more skills makes this knowledge even better. With these skills, a person gains wisdom no matter what path they choose, whether as a noble, a farmer, or a merchant.


79

III
 
THE ACTIVITIES AND HABITS OF A MERCHANT

Son. I am now in my most vigorous years and have a desire to travel abroad; for I would not venture to seek employment at court before I had observed the customs of other men. Such is my intention at present, unless you should give me other advice.

Son. I’m currently in my prime and want to travel abroad; I wouldn’t want to look for a job at court until I’ve seen how other people do things. That’s my plan for now, unless you have other suggestions for me.

Father. Although I have been a kingsman rather than a merchant, I have no fault to find with that calling, for often the best of men are chosen for it. But much depends on whether the man is more like those who are true merchants, or those who take the merchant’s name but are mere frauds and foisterers, buying and selling wrongfully.

Father. Even though I've been more of a nobleman than a merchant, I have nothing against that profession, since often the best people are drawn to it. But it really comes down to whether the person is more like genuine merchants or those who just claim to be merchants but are actually scammers and dishonest traders, engaging in unfair practices.

Son. It would be more seemly for me to be like the rightful ones; for it would be worse than one might think likely, if your son were to imitate those who are not as they ought. But whatever my fate is to be, I desire to have you inform me as to the practices of such men as seem to be capable in that business.

Son. It would be better for me to act like the rightful ones; it would be worse than anyone might expect if your son were to emulate those who aren’t behaving as they should. But no matter what my fate is, I want you to tell me about the ways of those men who seem capable in that field.

Father. The man who is to be a trader will have to brave many perils, sometimes at sea and sometimes in heathen lands,[165] but nearly always among alien peoples; and it must be his constant purpose to act discreetly wherever he happens to be. On the sea he must be alert and fearless.

Father. The man who wants to be a trader will have to face many dangers, sometimes at sea and sometimes in foreign lands,[165] but almost always among unfamiliar cultures; and he must always aim to act wisely no matter where he is. On the sea, he needs to be vigilant and brave.

80When you are in a market town, or wherever you are, be polite and agreeable; then you will secure the friendship of all good men. Make it a habit to rise early in the morning, and go first and immediately to church wherever it seems most convenient to hear the canonical hours, and hear all the hours and mass from matins on. Join in the worship, repeating such psalms and prayers as you have learned. When the services are over, go out to look after your business affairs. If you are unacquainted with the traffic of the town, observe carefully how those who are reputed the best and most prominent merchants conduct their business. You must also be careful to examine the wares that you buy before the purchase is finally made to make sure that they are sound and flawless. And whenever you make a purchase, call in a few trusty men to serve as witnesses as to how the bargain was made.

80When you're in a market town, or anywhere else, be polite and friendly; this will help you gain the trust of good people. Make it a habit to get up early in the morning and head straight to church to listen to the canonical hours and attend mass starting from matins. Participate in the worship, repeating the psalms and prayers you know. Once the services are done, go out to take care of your business. If you’re not familiar with the town's trade, pay close attention to how the best and most prominent merchants handle their business. Also, make sure to carefully check the goods you want to buy before finalizing the purchase to ensure they are good quality. Whenever you make a deal, have a few reliable people with you to witness the transaction.

You should keep occupied with your business till breakfast or, if necessity demands it, till midday; after that you should eat your meal. Keep your table well provided and set with a white cloth, clean victuals, and good drinks. Serve enjoyable meals, if you can afford it. After the meal you may either take a nap or stroll about a little while for pastime and to see what other good merchants are employed with, or whether any new wares have come to the borough which you ought to buy. On returning to your lodgings examine your wares, lest they suffer damage after coming into your hands. If they are found to be injured and you are about to dispose of them, do not conceal the flaws from the purchaser: show him what the defects are and make such a bargain as you 81can; then you cannot be called a deceiver. Also put a good price on your wares, though not too high, and yet very near what you see can be obtained; then you cannot be called a foister.

You should stay busy with your work until breakfast or, if necessary, until noon; after that, you should have your meal. Keep your table well-stocked and set with a clean white cloth, fresh food, and good drinks. Serve enjoyable meals if you can afford it. After eating, you can either take a nap or go for a short walk for leisure to see what other good merchants are up to or if there are any new goods in town that you should buy. When you get back to your place, check your goods to make sure they aren’t damaged since they came into your possession. If you find them damaged and plan to sell them, don’t hide the flaws from the buyer: show him the defects and make the best deal you can; then you won’t be seen as a fraud. Also, set a fair price for your goods, not too high but close to what you know you can get; then you won’t be labeled as a scammer. 81

Finally, remember this, that whenever you have an hour to spare you should give thought to your studies, especially to the law books; for it is clear that those who gain knowledge from books have keener wits than others, since those who are the most learned have the best proofs for their knowledge. Make a study of all the laws, but while you remain a merchant there is no law that you will need to know more thoroughly than the Bjarkey code.[166] If you are acquainted with the law, you will not be annoyed by quibbles when you have suits to bring against men of your own class, but will be able to plead according to law in every case.

Finally, remember this: whenever you have an hour to spare, you should focus on your studies, especially your law books. It's clear that those who gain knowledge from reading have sharper minds than others, as the most educated people provide the best evidence of their understanding. Study all the laws, but while you're a merchant, there’s no law you need to know better than the Bjarkey code.[166] If you know the law, you won’t be bothered by technicalities when you have cases against people in your own field; instead, you’ll be able to argue your case properly in every situation.

But although I have most to say about laws, I regard no man perfect in knowledge unless he has thoroughly learned and mastered the customs of the place where he is sojourning. And if you wish to become perfect in knowledge, you must learn all the languages, first of all Latin and French, for these idioms are most widely used; and yet, do not neglect your native tongue or speech.

But even though I have a lot to say about laws, I don’t consider anyone truly knowledgeable unless they have fully learned and understood the customs of the place they are staying. And if you want to be fully knowledgeable, you need to learn all the languages, especially Latin and French, since they are the most commonly used; however, don’t forget your native language as well.


IV
 
THE SAME TOPIC CONTINUED

Son. May God reward you, sire, for the love of kinship that you show in pointing out so many things that I may find needful,—if I have the good fortune to learn 82them and to remember them after they are learned. And if you think there are any other important matters that ought to be taken up in this discussion, I shall be glad to listen attentively.

Son. May God reward you, sir, for the love of family that you show by highlighting so many things I might find useful—if I’m fortunate enough to learn them and remember them afterward. If you believe there are any other important topics we should discuss, I’d be happy to listen closely. 82

Father. There are, indeed, certain matters which should not be omitted from this discourse, but they can be stated in a few words, if that seems best. Train yourself to be as active as possible, though not so as to injure your health. Strive never to be downcast, for a downcast mind is always morbid; try rather to be friendly and genial at all times, of an even temper and never moody. Be upright and teach the right to every man who wishes to learn from you; and always associate with the best men. Guard your tongue carefully; this is good counsel, for your tongue may honor you, but it may also condemn you. Though you be angry speak few words and never in passion; for unless one is careful, he may utter words in wrath that he would later give gold to have unspoken. On the whole, I know of no revenge, though many employ it, that profits a man less than to bandy heated words with another, even though he has a quarrel to settle with him. You shall know of a truth that no virtue is higher or stronger than the power to keep one’s tongue from foul or profane speech, tattling, or slanderous talk in any form. If children be given to you, let them not grow up without learning a trade; for we may expect a man to keep closer to knowledge and business 83when he comes of age, if he is trained in youth while under control.

Father. There are definitely some points that shouldn't be left out of this conversation, but they can be summarized briefly if that works better. Train yourself to stay as active as possible, but not to the point of harming your health. Always try to stay upbeat, because a gloomy mindset is unhealthy; instead, aim to be friendly and cheerful at all times, maintaining a steady temperament and avoiding moodiness. Be honest and teach the right things to anyone who wants to learn from you; consistently surround yourself with good people. Watch your words closely; this is sound advice because your words can either uplift you or bring you down. Even if you’re angry, speak less and never out of anger; if you’re not careful, you might say things in a fit of rage that you'd regret later. Overall, I can't think of a more pointless form of revenge—though many pursue it—than exchanging heated words with someone, even if you have a disagreement to settle. You will come to realize that no virtue is greater or stronger than the ability to refrain from foul or profane language, gossip, or slander in any form. If you have children, make sure they don't grow up without learning a trade; we can expect a person to stay more engaged with knowledge and work as an adult if they've been trained while young and under guidance. 83

And further, there are certain things which you must beware of and shun like the devil himself: these are drinking, chess, harlots, quarreling, and throwing dice for stakes. For upon such foundations the greatest calamities are built; and unless they strive to avoid these things, few only are able to live long without blame or sin.

And also, there are certain things you should avoid and steer clear of like the plague: these include drinking, playing chess, engaging with prostitutes, arguing, and gambling. Because on these foundations, the worst disasters are built; and unless people work to stay away from these things, very few can live long without blame or sin.

Observe carefully how the sky is lighted, the course of the heavenly bodies, the grouping of the hours, and the points of the horizon. Learn also how to mark the movements of the ocean and to discern how its turmoil ebbs and swells; for that is knowledge which all must possess who wish to trade abroad. Learn arithmetic thoroughly, for merchants have great need of that.

Observe closely how the sky is lit, the path of the stars, the flow of time, and the positions on the horizon. Also, learn to track the movements of the ocean and understand how its chaos rises and falls; this is knowledge that everyone must have if they want to trade overseas. Master arithmetic, as it is essential for merchants.

If you come to a place where the king or some other chief who is in authority has his officials, seek to win their friendship; and if they demand any necessary fees on the ruler’s behalf, be prompt to render all such payments, lest by holding too tightly to little things you lose the greater. Also beware lest the king’s belongings find their way into your purse; for you cannot know but that he may be covetous who has those things in charge, and it is easier to be cautious beforehand than to crave pardon afterwards. If you can dispose of your wares at suitable prices, do not hold them long; for it is the wont of merchants to buy constantly and to sell rapidly.

If you find yourself in a place where the king or another authority figure has their officials, try to make friends with them. If they ask for any necessary fees on behalf of the ruler, be quick to pay them; holding onto small things too tightly might cause you to lose something much bigger. Also, be careful not to let the king’s belongings end up in your possession; you never know if the person in charge might be greedy, and it’s better to be cautious upfront than to seek forgiveness later. If you can sell your goods at reasonable prices, don’t hold on to them for too long; it’s typical for merchants to keep buying and selling quickly.

If you are preparing to carry on trade beyond the seas and you sail your own ship, have it thoroughly coated with tar in the autumn and, if possible, keep it 84tarred all winter. But if the ship is placed on timbers too late to be coated in the fall, tar it when spring opens and let it dry thoroughly afterwards. Always buy shares in good vessels or in none at all. Keep your ship attractive, for then capable men will join you and it will be well manned. Be sure to have your ship ready when summer begins and do your traveling while the season is best. Keep reliable tackle on shipboard at all times, and never remain out at sea in late autumn, if you can avoid it. If you attend carefully to all these things, with God’s mercy you may hope for success. This, too, you must keep constantly in mind, if you wish to be counted a wise man, that you ought never to let a day pass without learning something that will profit you. Be not like those who think it beneath their dignity to hear or learn from others such things even as might avail them much if they knew them. For a man must regard it as great an honor to learn as to teach, if he wishes to be considered thoroughly informed.

If you're getting ready to trade overseas and you're sailing your own ship, make sure to coat it with tar in the fall and, if you can, keep it tarred all winter. But if the ship is on the timbers too late to be coated in the fall, tar it when spring comes and let it dry completely afterward. Always invest in good ships or don’t invest at all. Keep your ship in good condition, because that way capable people will want to join you, and it will be well crewed. Make sure your ship is ready when summer starts, and do your traveling when the weather is best. Keep reliable equipment on board at all times, and avoid being out at sea in late autumn if you can help it. If you pay attention to all these things, with God’s grace you can hope for success. Also, remember this if you want to be considered wise: never let a day go by without learning something that will benefit you. Don't be like those who think it’s beneath them to listen to or learn from others, even if those things could greatly help them. A person should see it as just as much of an honor to learn as it is to teach if they want to be fully informed.

There remain a few minor matters that ought to be mentioned. Whenever you travel at sea, keep on board two or three hundred ells of wadmal of a sort suitable for mending sails, if that should be necessary, a large number of needles, and a supply of thread and cord. It may seem trivial to mention these things, but it is often necessary to have them on hand. You will always need to carry a supply of nails, both spikes and rivets, of such sizes as your ship demands; also good boat hooks and broadaxes, gouges and augers, and all such other tools as ship carpenters make use of. All these things that I have now named you must remember to carry with you 85on shipboard, whenever you sail on a trading voyage and the ship is your own. When you come to a market town where you expect to tarry, seek lodgings from the innkeeper who is reputed the most discreet and the most popular among both kingsmen and boroughmen. Always buy good clothes and eat good fare if your means permit; and never keep unruly or quarrelsome men as attendants or messmates. Keep your temper calm though not to the point of suffering abuse or bringing upon yourself the reproach of cowardice. Though necessity may force you into strife, be not in a hurry to take revenge; first make sure that your effort will succeed and strike where it ought. Never display a heated temper when you see that you are likely to fail, but be sure to maintain your honor at some later time, unless your opponent should offer a satisfactory atonement.

There are a few minor things that need to be mentioned. Whenever you travel by sea, keep onboard two or three hundred ells of wadmal suitable for mending sails, just in case you need it, along with a good number of needles, thread, and cord. It might seem unimportant to point these things out, but they’re often necessary to have on hand. You should also always carry a supply of nails, both spikes and rivets, in sizes that your ship needs; and don't forget good boat hooks, broadaxes, gouges, augers, and any other tools ship carpenters use. You need to remember to bring all of these when you set sail on a trading voyage and the ship is yours. When you arrive at a market town where you plan to stay, look for lodging with the innkeeper known to be the most discreet and popular among both nobles and townsfolk. Always buy good clothes and eat well if your budget allows; never employ unruly or quarrelsome people as attendants or companions. Stay calm, but don’t let others take advantage of you or make you look cowardly. Even if you find yourself in conflict, don't rush into revenge; first, make sure that you can succeed and strike appropriately. Don’t show anger if you sense that you might fail, but ensure you maintain your honor later, unless your opponent offers a satisfactory apology. 85

If your wealth takes on rapid growth, divide it and invest it in a partnership trade in fields where you do not yourself travel; but be cautious in selecting partners. Always let Almighty God, the holy Virgin Mary, and the saint whom you have most frequently called upon to intercede for you be counted among your partners. Watch with care over the property which the saints are to share with you and always bring it faithfully to the place to which it was originally promised.

If your wealth grows quickly, divide it up and invest it in a business venture in areas where you don’t go yourself; just be careful when choosing partners. Always consider Almighty God, the holy Virgin Mary, and the saint you’ve called upon the most for help as part of your partnerships. Keep a close eye on the assets that the saints will share with you and consistently return them to the place where they were originally promised.

If you have much capital invested in trade, divide it into three parts: put one-third into partnerships with men who are permanently located in market boroughs, are trustworthy, and are experienced in business. Place the other two parts in various business ventures; for if your capital is invested in different places, it is not likely 86that you will suffer losses in all your wealth at one time: more likely it will be secure in some localities, though frequent losses be suffered. But if you find that the profits of trade bring a decided increase to your funds, draw out the two-thirds and invest them in good farm land, for such property is generally thought the most secure, whether the enjoyment of it falls to one’s self or to one’s kinsmen. With the remaining third you may do as seems best,—continue to keep it in business or place it all in land. However, though you decide to keep your funds invested in trade, discontinue your own journeys at sea or as a trader in foreign fields, as soon as your means have attained sufficient growth and you have studied foreign customs as much as you like. Keep all that you see in careful memory, the evil with the good; remember evil practices as a warning, and the good customs as useful to yourself and to others who may wish to learn from you.

If you have a lot of money invested in trade, split it into three parts: invest one-third in partnerships with trustworthy, experienced people who are permanently based in market towns. Put the other two-thirds into different business ventures; if your money is spread out, it's less likely that you'll lose everything at once: it's more probable that some of it will be safe, even if you face frequent losses elsewhere. But if you notice that trade profits are really boosting your funds, take out the two-thirds and invest it in good farmland, as this kind of property is usually considered the safest, whether you enjoy it yourself or your relatives do. With the remaining third, do what you think is best—either keep it in business or invest it all in land. However, even if you decide to keep your money in trade, stop making your own journeys at sea or trading in foreign areas once your wealth has grown enough, and you've learned all you want about foreign customs. Keep everything you see in your memory, both the bad and the good; remember bad practices as warnings and good customs as helpful information for yourself and others who may want to learn from you.


V
 
The Sun and the Winds

Son. It is evident that whoever wishes to become informed on such matters as those which you have now discussed must first try to determine what is most worth learning and afterwards to keep in mind all that he has heard. But in your discussion just recently you mentioned several things the nature of which I do not understand, though I have reflected upon your statements, namely, the lights of the sky and the movements of the ocean. Moreover, you urged me to learn these things and stated that there is knowledge in learning them. But 87I cannot comprehend them unless I shall hear them explained; and I know of no other wise master with so kind a will to teach me these matters as yourself. Therefore, with your permission, I will ask you to continue this discussion, so that I may become somewhat better informed on these subjects: how the lights of the sky and the course of the heavenly bodies wax and wane; how the time of the day is told and the hours are grouped; but especially how the ocean moves and what causes its restlessness. For sometimes the ocean appears so blithe and cheerful that one would like to sport with it through an entire season; but soon it displays such fierce wrath and ill-nature that the life and property of those who have anything to do with it are endangered. Now I have thought that, although the sun completes its course according to an established law, that fact cannot produce the unquiet of the sea. If you are disposed to explain these things further, I shall listen gladly and attentively.

Son. It’s clear that anyone who wants to understand topics like the ones we just discussed needs to first figure out what’s truly worth learning and then remember everything they’ve heard. However, in your recent discussion, you brought up several things I don’t quite understand, even though I’ve thought about what you said—specifically, the lights in the sky and the movements of the ocean. You encouraged me to learn about these things and said there’s knowledge to be gained from them. But 87I can’t grasp them unless I hear them explained; and I don’t know any other wise teacher as willing to help me as you are. So, if you don’t mind, I’d like to ask you to continue this discussion so I can be a bit better informed on these subjects: how the lights in the sky and the paths of the celestial bodies change; how we tell the time of day and organize the hours; but especially, how the ocean moves and what causes its turbulence. Sometimes the ocean looks so lively and inviting that it makes you want to play in it all season; but then it can show such fierce anger and bad temper that the lives and belongings of those who interact with it are at risk. I’ve been thinking that while the sun follows its path according to a set rule, that doesn’t seem to explain the restlessness of the sea. If you’re willing to explain these things further, I’ll listen eagerly and closely.

Father. I can indeed give such an explanation, just as I have heard it from the lips of well-informed men, and as seems most reasonable according to the insight that God has given me. The sun has received divers offices: for it brings light and warmth to all the earth, and the various parts of the world rejoice in its approaching; but its course is planned in such a way that it sometimes withdraws from those regions that it approaches at other times. When it first comes to visit the east with warmth and bright beams, the day begins to lift up silvery brows and a pleasant face to the east wind. Soon the east wind is crowned with a golden glory and robed in all his raiments of joy. He eases griefs and regretful sighs and 88turns a bright countenance toward his neighbors on either side, bidding them rejoice with him in his delight and cast away their winterlike sorrows. He also sends blazing rays into the face of the west wind to inform him of his joy and happiness. He advises the west wind, too, that in the evening he shall be clad in garments similar to those which the east wind wore in the morning. Later in the day and at the proper hour the southeast wind displays the glory of his newly-gotten robes and sends warming rays with friendly messages into the face of the northwest wind. But at midday the south wind reveals how he has been endowed with riches of heat, sends warm gifts of friendship across to the north wind, warms his cool face, and invites all the neighboring winds to share in the abundance of his wealth. As the day declines the southwest wind with glad face receives the gentle sheen and genial beams. Having put away wrath, he reveals his desire for peace and concord; he commands the mighty billows and steep wave-crests to subside with waning power and calls forth quickening dews in a wish to be fully reconciled with all his neighbors. Gently he blows a refreshing breath into the face of the northeast wind, warms his wind-chilled lips, and thaws his frosty brow and frozen cheeks. But when evening begins, the west wind, clad in splendor and sunset beauty as if robed for a festal eve, lifts a gleaming brow above a blithe countenance, and sends a message on darting beams across to the east wind telling him to prepare for the festive morrow to come.

Father. I can definitely explain this, just like I’ve heard from knowledgeable people, and it makes sense based on the understanding that God has given me. The sun has many roles: it brings light and warmth to the entire earth, and different parts of the world celebrate its arrival. However, its path is designed so that it sometimes pulls away from areas it visits at other times. When it first shines on the east, bringing warmth and brightness, the day begins to show its bright face and welcoming smile to the east wind. Soon, the east wind is crowned with golden glory and dressed in joyful attire. It eases sorrows and sighs, turning a cheerful face toward its neighbors, inviting them to share in its happiness and to shake off their winter blues. The east wind also sends radiant beams toward the west wind to share its joy. It tells the west wind that by evening, he too will be dressed in similar clothing to what the east wind wore in the morning. Later in the day, the southeast wind shows off his beautiful new robes and sends warm rays and friendly messages to the northwest wind. At midday, the south wind reveals his wealth of heat, sends warm gifts of friendship to the north wind, warms his cool face, and invites all the neighboring winds to enjoy his generosity. As the day winds down, the southwest wind, with a happy face, welcomes the gentle light and warm beams. Having set aside anger, he expresses a desire for peace and harmony; he commands the mighty waves to calm down and calls forth refreshing dews, hoping to reconcile with all his neighbors. Gently, he blows a refreshing breeze towards the northeast wind, warming his chilled lips and thawing his frosty brow and frozen cheeks. But as evening approaches, the west wind, adorned in splendor and the beauty of sunset like it’s dressed for a festive occasion, lifts a shining brow above a cheerful face and sends a message on swift beams to the east wind, telling him to get ready for the joyful day ahead.

At sunset the northwest wind begins to raise his fair brows and with lifted eyelids betokens to all his neighbors 89that the dazzling radiance is now in his keeping. Thereupon he sends forth a shadow over the face of the earth proclaiming to all that now come the hours of rest after the toil of day. But at midnight the north wind goes forth to meet the coursing sun and leads him through rocky deserts toward the sparse-built shores. He calls forth heavy shadows, covers his face with a broad-brimmed helmet, and informs all that he is arrayed for the night watch to keep guard over his neighbors that they may have comfort and untroubled rest after the heat of day. With cool lips he gently blows upon the face of the south wind, that he may be better able to resist the violent heat of the coming day. He also scatters the dark clouds and clears up the face of heaven in order that the sun, when light appears, may be easily able to send forth his warm and radiant beams in all directions. But on the coming of morn the northeast wind begins to open his closed eyelids and blinks to both sides as if to determine whether it is time to rise. Then he opens quickly his clear eyes as if sated with sleep after ended rest. Soon he leads forth the gleaming day into all the homesteads like a fair youth and fitting herald, to give sure knowledge that the radiant sphere and shining sun follows close behind and to command all to be arrayed for his coming. Soon the sun rises and shoots forth his beams in all directions to watch over the covenant made by the winds; and after that he goes on through his ordained course as we have already told.

At sunset, the northwest wind starts to raise his fair brows and, with his eyelids lifted, signals to all his neighbors 89 that the dazzling light is now under his control. Then he casts a shadow over the earth, announcing that it’s time for rest after the day's hard work. But at midnight, the north wind goes out to meet the traveling sun and guides him through rocky deserts toward the sparsely built shores. He summons heavy shadows, hides his face with a broad-brimmed helmet, and tells everyone that he is ready for the night watch, keeping watch over his neighbors so they can have comfort and peaceful rest after the heat of the day. With cool lips, he gently blows on the south wind to help him resist the intense heat of the coming day. He also scatters the dark clouds and clears the sky so that when light comes, the sun can easily send out his warm and radiant rays in all directions. But when morning comes, the northeast wind starts to open his closed eyelids and blinks to both sides, as if checking whether it’s time to rise. Then he quickly opens his bright eyes, as if satisfied with sleep after resting. Soon he brings forth the shining day into all the homes like a handsome young man and fitting herald, ensuring that the radiant sphere and shining sun are close behind and commanding everyone to prepare for his arrival. Shortly after, the sun rises and spreads his rays in all directions to oversee the agreement made by the winds; then he continues on his destined path as we have already described.

When peace has been established among these chiefs that we have just named, it is safe to travel wherever you may wish through the realms of any one of them. 90Then the sea begins to bar out all violent storms and make smooth highways where earlier the route was impassable because of broad billows and mighty waves; and the shores offer harbors in many places which formerly gave no shelter. Now, while this covenant holds, there will be fair sailing for you or any others who wish to travel to foreign shores or steer their ships over the perils of the ocean. It is, therefore, the duty of every man, indeed it is a necessary one, to learn thoroughly when one may look for dangerous seasons and bad routes, or when times come when one may risk everything. For even unwitting beasts observe the seasons, though by instinct, since they have no intellect. Even the fishes, though lacking human insight, know how to find security in the deep seas, while the winter storms are most violent; but when winter wanes, they move nearer the shores and find enjoyment as after a sorrow suffered and past. Later in the spring after the roe has come, they lay the spawn and bring forth a vast multitude of young fishes and in this way increase their race, each after its kind and class. It does, indeed, show great forethought for unintelligent creatures to provide so carefully against the coming winter storms, and to bring forth their offspring at the opening of spring, so that they may enjoy the calm weather of summer and search for food in peace and quiet along the wide shores; for thus they gather strength enough in summer against the ensuing winter to sustain themselves among other fishes in the chilly deep.

When peace is established among the chiefs we just named, it’s safe to travel wherever you wish through their territories. 90 Then the sea starts to block out all violent storms and creates smooth paths where the route used to be impossible due to huge waves and strong currents; the shores now provide harbors in many places that previously offered no shelter. As long as this agreement holds, there will be safe sailing for you or anyone else wishing to travel to foreign shores or navigate their ships through the dangers of the ocean. Therefore, it is the responsibility of everyone, indeed a necessary one, to thoroughly understand when to expect dangerous seasons and bad routes or when it’s a time to take risks. Even instinctual animals notice the seasons, even without intellect. Even the fish, lacking human understanding, know how to find safety in the deep sea during the harsh winter storms; but as winter fades, they come closer to the shores, enjoying life as after a sorrow that has passed. Later in the spring, after spawning, they lay their eggs and produce a vast number of young fish, thus increasing their species, each according to its kind. It indeed shows great foresight for these creatures to carefully prepare for the coming winter storms and to bring forth their young at the start of spring, so they can enjoy the calm summer weather and search for food peacefully along the wide shores; this way, they gather enough strength in summer to last through the upcoming winter and thrive among other fish in the chilly deep.

The covenant brings joy to the sky as well as to the sea; for as spring advances the birds soaring high into 91the air rejoice with beautiful songs in the newly made treaty of these lords as in a coming festival. Their joy is as great as if they have escaped great and terrible dangers which might arise from the strife of these chieftains. Soon they build nests upon the earth and lead birdlings forth from them, each after its kind. Thus they increase their species and care for their young in the summer that these may be able to find their own sustenance in the winter following. Even the earth rejoices in this peace-making, for as soon as the sun begins to pour out its warming rays over the face of the earth, the ice begins to thaw around the frozen grass roots; soon fragrant and fair-hued herbs sprout forth, and the earth shows that she finds gladness and festive joy in the fresh beauty of her emerald robes. She gladly offers to all her offspring the sustenance which she had to refuse them earlier because of the dearth in winter. The trees that stood with dripping branches and frozen roots put forth green leaves, thus showing their joy that the sorrow and distress of winter are past.

The covenant brings joy to both the sky and the sea; as spring unfolds, the birds soaring high into the air celebrate with beautiful songs in this new agreement of the lords, as if welcoming a festival. Their happiness is as if they’ve escaped great and terrible dangers that could have come from the conflicts of these leaders. Soon they build nests on the ground and bring out their chicks, each in its own way. This way, they grow their numbers and take care of their offspring during the summer so that they can fend for themselves in the coming winter. Even the earth celebrates this peace-making; as soon as the sun starts to shine its warm rays onto the land, the ice begins to melt around the frozen grass roots; soon, fragrant and colorful herbs emerge, and the earth shows it is joyful and festive in the fresh beauty of its green attire. It gladly provides for all its young ones the nourishment it had to withhold before due to winter's scarcity. The trees that once stood with dripping branches and frozen roots now sprout green leaves, revealing their joy that the sadness and hardships of winter are over.

Unclean and repulsive beasts display insight and understanding in their ability to determine the proper time to increase their kind and to come out of their dens. They also observe the season when it is necessary to flee the cold and stormy distress of winter and seek shelter under rocks, in large crags, or in the deep scar of the landslide till the time to come forth is at hand. Wild beasts that seek their food in woods or on the mountains know well how to discern the seasons; for they bear the begotten offspring while winter is most severe, so that they may bring forth their young when the grass is 92fresh and the summer is warm. There is a little creeping thing called the ant, which can teach thoughtful men much practical wisdom, whether they be merchants or husbandmen, kings or lesser men. It teaches kings how to build castles and fortresses; in the same way it teaches the merchants and the husbandmen with what industry and at what seasons they ought to pursue their callings; for he who has proper insight and observes carefully the activities of the ant will note many things and derive much profit from them. All other creatures, too, whether clean or unclean, rejoice in this season, and with vigilant eyes seek their food in the warm summer time so as to be able to endure more confidently the perils of a destitute winter season. Now it is this covenant between these eight winds that calls forth all the delights of earth and sky and the calm stirring of the sea according to the command and mysterious skill of Him Who ordained in the beginning that thus should all nature remain until He should change the order of things. Now if you feel that some of these matters have not yet been fully cleared up, you may continue your inquiries and ask what questions you like.

Unclean and unpleasant animals show intelligence and awareness in knowing the right time to reproduce and come out of their hiding places. They also recognize the season when it’s necessary to escape the cold and harshness of winter, seeking shelter under rocks, in large crevices, or in the deep scars left by landslides until it's time to go out again. Wild animals that search for food in the woods or mountains know how to recognize the seasons well; they give birth when winter is at its harshest, so they can have their young when the grass is green and summer is warm. There’s a small creature called an ant that can teach thoughtful people a lot of practical wisdom, whether they’re merchants, farmers, kings, or ordinary folks. It shows kings how to build castles and fortifications; similarly, it instructs merchants and farmers on the right diligence and times to pursue their trades. Those who have good understanding and watch the ant’s activities will notice many lessons and gain significant benefits from them. All other creatures, whether clean or unclean, also enjoy this season and, with keen eyes, look for food in the warm summer to better withstand the hardships of a harsh winter. This covenant among the eight winds brings forth all the joys of the earth and sky and the gentle movement of the sea, according to the command and mysterious skill of Him who established from the beginning that nature should remain in this order until He decides to change things. If you feel that some of these topics haven't been fully explained, you can keep asking questions and inquire further about anything you'd like.


VI
 
THE TIDES AND THE CHANGES IN THE SUN'S PATH

Son. It was a wise thought, it seems to me, to ask those questions to which I have just received such fair replies; and I am encouraged to inquire into certain other matters, namely the waxing of the sun, the moon, and the streams or tides of the ocean,—how much and how rapidly these things wax and wane. Now these 93things that I have brought up for discussion are subjects which especially touch the welfare of seafaring men, and it looks to me as if they would profit much from a knowledge of these matters, since it gives insight into the right conduct of their profession. And since I intend to labor diligently in the trader’s calling, I should like very much, if it can be done, to have you explain further some of those things that I have just mentioned.

Son. It was a smart idea, it seems to me, to ask those questions that I just got such good answers to; and I feel motivated to dig into some other topics, like the rising and setting of the sun, the moon, and the tides of the ocean—how much and how quickly these things change. Now, these topics I’ve brought up for discussion are especially important for sailors, and it seems to me that they would gain a lot from understanding these subjects, as it helps them navigate their profession better. And since I plan to work hard in the trading business, I would really appreciate it if you could explain some of those things I just mentioned a bit more.

Father. Those things that you have now asked about do not all wax or wane with equal rapidity; for the tide, when it rises, completes its course in seven days plus half an hour of the eighth day; and every seventh day there is flood tide in place of ebb. For the tide rises one seventh part daily from the time when the rise begins; and after it turns and begins to fall, it ebbs in the same way during the next seven days but is retarded as much as half an hour of the eighth day,[167] which must be added to the seven days. As to how long an hour should be I can give you definite information; for there should be twenty-four hours in two days, that is, a night and a day, while the sun courses through the eight chief points of the sky: and according to right reckoning the sun will pass through each division in three hours of the day. On the other hand, the moon, while it waxes, completes its course in fifteen days less six hours;[168] and in a like period it wanes until the course is complete and another comes. And it is always true that at this time the flood tide is highest and the ebb strongest. But when the moon has waxed to half, the flood tide is lowest and the ebb, too, 94is quite low. At full moon the flood tide is again very high and the ebb is strong. But when it has waned to half, both ebb and flood are quite low. Merchants are, however, scarcely able to note these changes, as the course is too swift; for the moon takes such long strides both in waxing and waning that men, on that account, find it difficult to determine the divisions of its course. The sun, on the other hand, completes its course more slowly both in ascending and declining, so that one may easily mark all the stages of its course. The sun moves upward one hundred and eighty-two and one-half days and three hours and for a like period it recedes again; it has then completed its entire course, both ascent and decline, in three hundred days, by the twelve-count[169] {360}, plus five days and six hours. Every fourth year this becomes three hundred by the twelve-count and six days more {366}; this is called leap year, for it has one day more than the preceding twelvemonth, the additional hours being gathered into twenty-four, a night and a day. In Latin all hundreds are counted by tens, and there are, therefore, properly computed three hundred by the ten-count plus sixty-six days whenever leap year occurs, while the intervening years have only five days and six hours with as many additional days by the other reckoning as I have just stated.

Father. The things you just asked about don’t all change at the same speed. The tide, when it rises, takes seven days plus half an hour of the eighth day to complete its cycle; and every seventh day, there’s a flood tide instead of an ebb. The tide rises by one-seventh each day from when it starts rising. After it switches and begins to fall, it goes back down in the same way for the next seven days but is delayed by half an hour of the eighth day,[167] which should be added to the seven days. I can give you clear information on how long an hour should be; there are twenty-four hours in two days, meaning a night and a day, while the sun moves through the eight main points in the sky. According to proper calculations, the sun will pass through each section in three hours. On the other hand, the moon, while it’s waxing, finishes its cycle in fifteen days minus six hours;[168] and it wanes in the same amount of time until the cycle completes and another starts. It’s always true that during this time, the flood tide is at its highest and the ebb is at its strongest. But when the moon is half full, both the flood tide and the ebb are quite low. At full moon, the flood tide is very high again, and the ebb is strong. However, merchants can hardly notice these changes because the cycle is too quick; the moon moves so rapidly in both waxing and waning that people find it hard to pinpoint its phases. The sun, on the other hand, completes its path more slowly both when it’s rising and falling, making it easy to see all the stages of its journey. The sun rises for one hundred eighty-two and a half days and three hours, and then it recedes for the same amount of time; it finishes its entire cycle—both rising and falling—in three hundred days, according to the twelve-count[169] {360}, plus five days and six hours. Every fourth year, this totals three hundred by the twelve-count and six extra days {366}; this is called a leap year because it has one extra day compared to the previous year, the additional hours combining into twenty-four, which makes a night and a day. In Latin, all hundreds are counted by tens, so there are correctly calculated three hundred by the ten-count plus sixty-six days whenever it’s a leap year, while the other years have only five days and six hours, plus the extra days as I just mentioned.

But to your question concerning the growth of the sun’s path, how one can most clearly discern it, I can scarcely give an answer so precise as not to be wrong in part; for the sun’s path does not wax at the same 95rate in all parts of the earth. I can, of course, answer according to what I have found in the writings of men who have treated the subject thoroughly, and it is generally believed that their words come very near the truth. I have already told you how many hours there are in a night and day and gave the number as twenty-four.[170] I have indicated the length of each hour in stating that three hours pass while the sun moves across one division of the sky. Now there are some other little hours called ostensa,[171] sixty of which make one of those that I mentioned earlier. It seems to me quite likely that, as far north as we are, the sun’s path waxes five of these little hours in a day and as much less than six as a twelfth part of a little hour. And as to the growth of the sun’s path it seems most reasonable to me that it waxes three-fourths of these hours toward the east and the west and the remaining fourth in height toward the zenith. South of us, however, this reckoning will fail; for north of us the increase is greater and to the south less than we have just stated; and the farther south, the greater is the difference, and the sun more nearly overhead.

But regarding your question about how to clearly see the growth of the sun's path, I can hardly give a precise answer without being partly wrong; the sun’s path doesn’t increase at the same rate everywhere on Earth. I can, of course, share what I've found in the writings of people who have studied this subject thoroughly, and it's generally accepted that their insights are quite close to the truth. I’ve already mentioned how many hours are in a night and day, which is twenty-four.[170] I've indicated the length of each hour by noting that three hours pass as the sun moves across one section of the sky. There are also some smaller hours called ostensa,[171] with sixty of them making up one of those I mentioned earlier. It seems to me quite likely that, as far north as we are, the sun’s path increases by five of these smaller hours in a day, and just under six by a twelfth of a smaller hour. As for the growth of the sun’s path, it seems most reasonable to think that it increases three-fourths of these hours toward the east and west, with the remaining fourth going upward toward the zenith. However, this estimate won’t hold true to the south of us; to the north, the increase is greater, and to the south, it’s less than we’ve just stated. The farther south you go, the greater the difference becomes, and the sun is more directly overhead.


VII
 
THE TOPIC OF THE SUN'S PATH CONTINUED

Son. With your permission I wish to inquire somewhat more fully into this subject, for I do not quite understand it. You have said that the sun’s ascent is more rapid to the north of us, where summer is almost wanting, 96while the strength of winter is so overpowering that summer seems like a mere shadow, and where in many places both snow and ice lie all through summer just as in winter, as is true of Iceland and particularly of Greenland. But I have heard that in the southlands there are no severe winters, the sun being as hot in winter as it is with us in summer; and that in winter, when the sun has less power, both grain and other crops grow, while in summer the earth cannot endure the fervent heat of the sun and consequently yields neither grass nor grain; so that in regions like Apulia and even more so in the land of Jerusalem the heat of summer causes as great distress as the cold of winter with us. Now when you tell me that the sun’s path waxes faster here in the north than yonder in the south, I cannot see the reason why; for there the sun’s heat is as great in winter as it is with us in summer; and it is so much greater in summer that all vegetation on the earth is scorched by it. Therefore it seems to me more likely that the sun’s path waxes most rapidly where the heat is most intense. Now if you can and will clear this up for me so that I can grasp it, I shall listen gladly and attentively.

Son. With your permission, I’d like to ask more about this topic because I'm not entirely clear on it. You mentioned that the sun rises more quickly to the north of us, where summer is almost nonexistent, while the harshness of winter is so strong that summer feels like just a faint memory, and where in many places, snow and ice remain all summer just as they do in winter, as is the case with Iceland and especially Greenland. However, I’ve heard that in the southern regions, there are no harsh winters, and the sun is as hot in winter as it is for us in summer. Additionally, during winter, when the sun is weaker, both grains and other crops still grow, while in summer, the earth can’t handle the intense heat of the sun and doesn't produce any grass or grain; thus, in areas like Apulia and even more so in the land of Jerusalem, the heat of summer causes as much suffering as the cold of winter does for us. Now, when you say that the sun's movement is faster here in the north than down south, I’m puzzled because there the sun’s heat is as strong in winter as ours is in summer, and it’s even hotter in summer to the point that everything on land gets scorched. Therefore, it seems more likely to me that the sun’s path increases the most rapidly where the heat is highest. If you can clarify this for me so I can understand it better, I will listen with great interest.

Father. I shall begin my talk on the subject that I am now to take up with a little illustration, which may help you to a clearer insight, since you find it so difficult to believe the facts as stated. If you take a lighted candle and set it in a room, you may expect it to light up the entire interior, unless something should hinder, though the room be quite large. But if you take an apple and hang it close to the flame, so near that it is heated, the apple will darken nearly half the room or even more. 97However, if you hang the apple near the wall, it will not get hot; the candle will light up the whole house; and the shadow on the wall where the apple hangs will be scarcely half as large as the apple itself. From this you may infer that the earth-circle is round like a ball and not equally near the sun at every point. But where the curved surface lies nearest the sun’s path, there will the greatest heat be; and some of the lands that lie continuously under the unbroken rays cannot be inhabited. On the other hand, those lands which the sun approaches with slanting rays may readily be occupied; and yet, some of these are hotter than others according as they lie nearer the sun’s path. But when the curved and steep slope of the sphere-shaped wheel moves up before the light and the beams of the sun, it will cast the deepest shadow where its curved surface lies nearest the sun; and yet, the lands nearest the sun are always hottest.[172] Now I agree with you that Apulia and Jerusalem are hotter than our own country; but you must know that there are places where the heat is greater than in either of those just mentioned, for some countries are uninhabitable on account of the heat. And I have heard it stated as a fact, that even when the sun mounts highest, the night in those regions is very dark and quite long. From this you must conclude that where the strength and power of the sun are greater, since it is nearer, it must ascend and decline more slowly; for the night is long in summer when the sun mounts highest, and the day is long in winter when it sinks lowest. Now I 98shall explain this so clearly that you will understand it fully.

Father. I will start my discussion on the topic I'm about to address with a little example that might help you understand better, since you find it hard to accept the facts as they are presented. If you place a lit candle in a room, you would expect it to illuminate the entire space, unless something obstructs it, even if the room is quite large. However, if you take an apple and hold it close to the flame, so that it gets hot, the apple will create a shadow that darkens nearly half the room, or even more. 97 But if you hang the apple near the wall, it won’t heat up; the candle will light up the whole house, and the shadow on the wall where the apple hangs will be only about half the size of the apple itself. From this, you can conclude that the earth’s shape is round like a ball and is not equally close to the sun at every point. The areas on the curved surface that are nearest to the sun’s path will experience the most heat; some regions that are constantly under direct sunlight cannot be inhabited. In contrast, the areas where the sun’s rays come in at an angle can be occupied; however, some of these places are hotter than others based on their proximity to the sun’s path. When the curved and steep slope of the spherical surface moves up before the light and the sun's rays, it will cast a deep shadow where its surface is closest to the sun; yet, the areas closest to the sun are always the hottest.[172] Now, I agree with you that Apulia and Jerusalem are hotter than our own country; however, you should be aware that there are places where the heat is even greater than in either of those locations, as some countries are uninhabitable due to the heat. I’ve heard it said as a fact that even when the sun is at its highest, the nights in those regions are very dark and quite long. From this, you must understand that where the sun’s intensity and power are greater, because it is closer, it must rise and set more slowly; the nights are long in summer when the sun is at its highest, and the days are long in winter when it sets at its lowest. Now I 98 will explain this so clearly that you will fully understand it.

You know that here with us in winter the day and the course of the sun are brief; for so short is the sun’s path that it passes through but a single region of the sky, and then only where the sun has considerable strength. But in many places the sun is not to be seen during a large part of winter, for example in Halogaland,[173] as we have not only heard tell but have often and constantly learned and observed with our own eyes. For we know definitely that from about November 10 to January 10 there never comes a day so bright up north in Vaag or at Andenes[174] in Halogaland but that the stars in the sky are visible at midday as at midnight. And although the days have so much light that the stars cannot be seen, nevertheless, in most of the places that we have mentioned the sun remains invisible till January 23. But after that date the days lengthen and the sun mounts so rapidly, that beginning with April 6 daylight does not disappear before September 17, all the intervening time being one continuous day, for daylight never fails in all that while. From this you may safely conclude that, though the sun is hotter in the southern lands that we spoke of earlier, its course waxes and mounts more slowly where the night, even at mid-summer, is deep and long and dark, and where there is never a time in the whole twelvemonth when day does not fail. But in Halogaland, as I have just said, there is no day 99in winter and stars are visible at midday when the day should be brightest; later, however, when the days begin to lengthen, they grow so rapidly that early in spring daylight begins to tarry all the night and continues till much of the autumn is past.

You know that here with us in winter, the days are short and the sun doesn't travel much across the sky. It only shines strongly in one part of the sky for a short time. In many areas, like Halogaland,[173], the sun often isn’t seen for most of winter. We've heard stories and have seen it ourselves. We know for sure that from around November 10 to January 10, there isn’t a single day up north in Vaag or at Andenes[174] in Halogaland that's bright enough to block out the stars, which are visible even at noon. Even when the days are somewhat light, in most of the places I've mentioned, the sun doesn’t appear until January 23. But after that date, the days get longer fast, and starting from April 6, daylight lasts until September 17 without any break, creating one long day of continuous light. From this, you can conclude that while the sun is hotter in the southern regions we talked about earlier, it ascends and sets more slowly where the nights are long and dark, even in mid-summer, and where there’s never a point in the entire year without some night. However, in Halogaland, as I mentioned before, there is no daylight in winter, and stars can be seen at noon when it should be brightest. Later, as the days start to lengthen, they do so quickly, and by early spring, daylight starts to stick around all night and continues until late in autumn.

There remains one more proof which will seem very clear to you. You know that in those localities in Halogaland that we have just mentioned the sun about May 15 begins to shine with the same brightness by night as by day, never setting either at night or during the day but shining continuously in this manner and with this brightness, except when its light is obscured by clouds, even to July 25. Now you know that the sun is only moderately warm in Halogaland, and that there is but a little time in summer when it gives sufficient warmth. Still, there it is with its blazing disk about as long as we have just stated, and it maintains the daylight about as long as we have just computed. But neither fact is true of the southlands, though the sun is hotter there. Now these facts give evidence that the sun is more distant here, for it gives less heat. They also testify to the waxing of its course, for, since its light is as bright by night as by day, its path must lengthen more rapidly here. But yonder it waxes less and more slowly, for there the night has its prescribed period both for length and darkness in summer as well as in winter.

There’s one more piece of evidence that will seem very clear to you. You know that in the areas of Halogaland we just talked about, around May 15, the sun begins to shine at night with the same brightness as it does during the day, never setting at night or during the day, but shining continuously this way until about July 25, except when its light is blocked by clouds. Now, you know that the sun is only moderately warm in Halogaland, and there's only a short period in summer when it provides enough warmth. Still, it shines brightly for about as long as we just mentioned and keeps daylight around for about as long as we calculated. But neither of these things is true in the southern regions, even though the sun is hotter there. These facts show that the sun is farther away here since it provides less heat. They also indicate that its path is extending more quickly here, because its light is just as bright at night as it is during the day. But over there, it extends less and more slowly, because there, the night has its set duration for both length and darkness in summer and winter.


VIII
 
Norway's Marvels

Son. I see this so clearly now that I can no longer gainsay that the sun mounts higher and more rapidly up the sky where there is almost no day in winter and 100the sunlight is so abundant in summer that it shines by night as well as by day throughout almost the entire season. I also see that its course changes much less yonder where it rises high in winter and gives long days with much heat and sunshine, though the night in summer is long and dark. Seafaring traders ought to note the differences precisely so as to be able to determine what seas they are upon, whether they lie to the north or to the south. And it seems unnecessary to inquire any further into these matters, for I believe that I have had correct and sufficient answers. Now since we are wearied with profound questions and thoughtful discourse, let us rest from these for a while and turn our conversation to matters of a lighter sort. And even though I should inquire about things that are not so useful as those others, which are of the highest utility, I pray you for the sake of our intimacy to vouchsafe replies to such questions as I may ask; for my mind is often as eager for amusement as for things of useful intent. And it may seem restful in a long talk, if a few questions come up that can stir the mind to gentle mirth. I do not wish, however, to bring such themes into our talk unless you give me permission.

Son. I realize this so clearly now that I can no longer deny that the sun rises higher and faster in the sky, where there’s almost no daylight in winter, and the sunlight is so plentiful in summer that it shines at night just as it does during the day for almost the entire season. I also see that its path changes much less over there, where it rises high in winter, providing long days filled with warmth and sunshine, while the nights in summer are long and dark. Traders who go out to sea should definitely pay attention to these differences to figure out which seas they’re in, whether they’re heading north or south. It seems unnecessary to dig deeper into these matters because I think I have enough accurate answers. Now that we’re tired from deep questions and serious discussions, let’s take a break from those and talk about lighter topics. And even if I ask about things that aren’t as useful as the others, which are the most important, I kindly ask for your answers to my questions since I often seek fun just as much as I seek useful information. It might feel refreshing in a long conversation to toss in a few questions that can bring some lightheartedness. However, I won’t bring up such topics unless you give me the go-ahead.

Father. I take it that you will ask no stupid questions, seeing that you have thus far inquired into such matters only as seem very pertinent; and you are therefore free to ask whatever you wish; for if the questions do not seem appropriate, we are at liberty to drop them as soon as we like.

Dad. I assume you won’t ask any silly questions since you’ve only asked things that are clearly relevant so far; so feel free to ask whatever you want. If the questions don’t seem suitable, we can just move on from them whenever we want.

Son. Now that I am permitted to choose a topic for entertainment, it occurs to me that I have asked too 101little about Ireland, Iceland, and Greenland, and all the wonders of those lands, such as fire and strange bodies of water, or the various kinds of fish and the monsters that dash about in the ocean, or the boundless ice both in the sea and on the land, or what the Greenlanders call the “northern lights,” or the “sea-hedges” that are found in the waters of Greenland.

Son. Now that I can choose a topic for entertainment, I realize I haven't asked enough about Ireland, Iceland, and Greenland, and all the amazing things in those places, like fire and unusual bodies of water, the different types of fish, and the creatures that swim around in the ocean, or the endless ice both in the sea and on land, or what the Greenlanders refer to as the "northern lights," or the "sea-hedges" found in the waters of Greenland.

Father. I am not much disposed to discuss the wonders that exist among us here in the North, though my reason may be rather trivial: many a man is inclined to be suspicious and think everything fiction that he has not seen with his own eyes; and therefore I do not like to discuss such topics, if my statements are to be called fabrications later on, even though I know them to be true beyond doubt, inasmuch as I have seen some of these things with mine own eyes and have had daily opportunity to inquire about the others from men whom we know to be trustworthy and who have actually seen and examined them, and therefore know them to be genuine beyond question. My reason for bringing up this objection is that a little book has recently come into our country, which is said to have been written in India and recounts the wonders of that country. The book states that it was sent to Emmanuel, emperor of the Greeks.[175] Now it is the belief of most men who have 102heard the book read, that such wonders are impossible, and that what is told in the book is mere falsehood. But if our own country were carefully searched, there would be found no fewer things here than are numbered in that book which would seem as wonderful, or even more so, to men of other lands who have not seen or heard anything like them. Now we call those things fiction because we had not seen them here or heard of them before the coming of that book which I have just mentioned. That little book has, however, been widely circulated, though it has always been questioned and charged with falsehood; and it seems to me that no one has derived honor from it, neither those who have doubted it nor the one who wrote it, even though his work has been widely distributed and has served to amuse and tickle the ear, seeing that what is written in it has always been called fiction.

Father. I'm not really in the mood to talk about the amazing things that exist here in the North, although my reason might seem a bit silly: a lot of people tend to be skeptical and think anything they haven't witnessed themselves is just a lie. So I prefer not to discuss these topics if my claims are going to be dismissed as fabrications later on, even though I know them to be true without a doubt, since I've seen some of these things myself and have had daily chances to ask others about them—people we know are reliable and have actually seen and examined these things, and therefore can confirm they are real beyond question. The reason I bring this up is that a little book recently arrived in our country, supposedly written in India, which talks about the wonders of that land. The book claims it was sent to Emmanuel, the emperor of the Greeks.[175] Most people who have heard the book read believe that such wonders are impossible and that what's written in it is just pure fiction. But if we were to thoroughly explore our own country, we would find just as many incredible things, if not more, that would seem just as amazing to people from other places who haven't seen or heard anything like them. We dismiss those things as fiction simply because we hadn't encountered them here or heard about them before this book arrived. Still, that little book has been widely circulated, despite always being questioned and labeled as falsehood; it seems like no one has gained any respect from it, neither those who doubted it nor the author, even though his work has spread far and has entertained and amused people, considering that what’s written in it has consistently been referred to as fiction.


IX
 
WIDESPREAD SKEPTICISM ABOUT THE AUTHENTICITY OF MARVELS

Son. Of course I cannot know how widely our talks will travel either in our days or later; and yet, with your permission, I will again ask the pleasure of hearing further speech concerning those matters that we might think strange in other lands, but which we know are surely genuine. And we need not be so very skeptical of this book which is said to have been written in India, though many marvels are told in it; for there are many things in our own country, which, though not strange to us, would seem wonderful to other people, if our words should fly so far as to come thither where such things 103are unheard of. But if I should express surprise at any of those tales that are told in that book, it seems to me not least wonderful that manikins are able to subdue those great winged dragons which infest the mountains and desert places there, as the book tells us, and tame them so completely that men are able to ride them just as they please like horses, fierce and venomous beasts though they are said to be and not inclined to allow men in their neighborhood, still less to be tamed and to do service.

Son. Of course, I can’t know how far our conversations will go, either now or in the future; however, if you’re okay with it, I’d like to hear more about those things we might find unusual in other countries, but which we know are definitely real. And we shouldn’t be too skeptical about this book that’s supposedly written in India, even though it includes many marvels; because there are plenty of things in our own country that, while not strange to us, would seem incredible to others if our words were to travel far enough to reach places where such things are unheard of. But if I were to express surprise at any of those stories in that book, I find it particularly amazing that tiny figures can tame those huge winged dragons that are said to roam the mountains and deserts there, and train them so well that people can ride them just like horses, even though they’re described as fierce and venomous creatures that don’t usually allow humans to be near them, let alone be tamed and made to serve.

Father. Both such and many other tales are told in that book which seem so marvelous that many express their doubts about them; but it seems to me that there is no need to compare the wonders that are described there with those that we have in our own country, which would seem as strange to men yonder as those that you have just mentioned seem to us. For it must be possible to tame wild beasts and other animals, though they be fierce and difficult to manage. But it would seem a greater marvel to hear about men who are able to tame trees and boards, so that by fastening boards seven or eight ells long under his feet, a man, who is no fleeter than other men when he is barefooted or shod merely with shoes, is made able to pass the bird on the wing, or the fleetest greyhound that runs in the race, or the reindeer which leaps twice as fast as the hart. For there is a large number of men who run so well on skis that they can strike down nine reindeer with a spear, or even more, in a single run. Now such things must seem incredible, unlikely, and marvelous in all those lands where men do not know with what skill and cleverness it is possible to train the board to such great fleetness that 104on the mountain side nothing of all that walks the earth can escape the swift movements of the man who is shod with such boards. But as soon as he removes the boards from his feet, he is no more agile than any other man. In other places, where men are not trained to such arts, it would be difficult to find a man, no matter how swift, who would not lose all his fleetness if such pieces of wood as we have talked about were bound to his feet. We, however, have sure information and, when snow lies in winter, have opportunity to see men in plenty who are expert in this art.

Father. There are many stories in that book that seem so incredible that some people doubt them; but I think it’s unnecessary to compare the wonders described there with our own, which would seem just as strange to others as yours do to us. It's certainly possible to tame wild animals, even if they're fierce and hard to handle. But it seems even more incredible to hear about people who can tame wooden planks, allowing a person, who is no faster than anyone else when barefoot or just wearing shoes, to outrun a bird in flight, the fastest greyhound in a race, or a reindeer that jumps twice as fast as a deer. There are many who are so skilled at skiing that they can take down nine reindeer or even more in a single run. Such feats must seem unbelievable and astonishing in places where people are unfamiliar with the skill and ingenuity it takes to use skis so effectively that on the mountainside, nothing on earth can evade the swift movements of someone wearing them. But once he takes them off, he’s just as slow as anyone else. In places where people aren’t accustomed to such skills, it would be hard to find anyone, no matter how fast, who wouldn’t lose all their speed if those types of boards were attached to their feet. However, we have reliable information and, during the winter when there's snow, we often see many skilled individuals practicing this art.

Not long since, we mentioned a certain fact which must be thought exceedingly strange elsewhere, as it runs wholly counter to the order which holds good in most places with respect to the change from night to day, namely, that here the sun shines as bright and fair and with as much warmth by night as by day through a large part of the summer.

Not long ago, we brought up a fact that might seem really strange in other places, as it goes completely against the way things usually are when night turns into day. Specifically, here the sun shines just as bright and warm at night as it does during the day for a big part of the summer.

In our own country, in Möre, there is a bog called the Bjarkudal bog, which must also seem wonderful: for every sort of wood that is thrown into it and left there three winters loses its nature as wood and turns into stone.[176] If it is thrown upon the fire, it will glow like stone, though before it would have burned like wood. I have seen and handled many such stones of which the half that rose above the mire was wooden, while the part submerged in the bog was wholly petrified. Now we must call that a marvel, for the bog is located in a 105forest which is heavily wooded with young trees of all sorts; and these are not injured so long as they are green and growing, but as soon as one is hewn down and, having begun to decay, is thrown into the bog, it turns into stone.

In our own country, in Möre, there's a bog called the Bjarkudal bog, which must also seem amazing: because any type of wood thrown into it and left there for three winters loses its wood properties and turns into stone.[176] If it’s thrown in the fire, it glows like stone, even though before it would have burned like wood. I’ve seen and handled many such stones, where the part that rose above the mud was wooden, while the submerged part was completely turned to stone. We have to call that a marvel, because the bog is in a forest filled with young trees of all kinds; and these trees aren’t harmed as long as they are green and growing, but as soon as one is cut down and begins to decay, if it’s thrown into the bog, it turns into stone.


X
 
Ireland's Natural Wonders

Son. I am familiar with all these things since they are found in our own country, and I have seen them all. But I have no knowledge of all those other marvels which are to be found in Iceland, Greenland, and Ireland, and in the seas about those lands, for of those things I have heard rumors only.

Son. I know all about these things since they're found in our own country, and I've experienced them all. But I don't know anything about the wonders in Iceland, Greenland, and Ireland, or in the waters around those lands, because I've only heard rumors about them.

Father. Those lands, if we are to speak more fully about them, differ much in character and are not all of the same appearance. For the wonders of Iceland and Greenland consist in great frost and boundless ice, or in unusual display of flame and fire, or in large fishes and other sea monsters. And these countries are everywhere barren and unfruitful and consequently almost unfit for habitation. But Ireland comes near being the best land that is known to man, though the grape vine does not grow there.[177] And there are many marvels in Ireland, some of which are of such a character that this country may be called holier than all others.

Father. Those lands, if we talk about them in more detail, are quite different and don't all look the same. The wonders of Iceland and Greenland are made up of extreme cold and endless ice, or they show unusual bursts of flame and fire, or feature large fish and other sea creatures. These places are generally barren and unfruitful, making them almost uninhabitable. But Ireland is almost the best land known to man, even though grapevines don’t grow there.[177] And there are many marvels in Ireland, some of which are so remarkable that this country can be called holier than all others.

The country lies on that side of the world where heat and cold are so well tempered that the weather is never very hot or very cold. For all through the winter the cattle find their feed in the open, and the inhabitants 106wear almost no clothes there either in winter or in summer. And so holy is this land beyond all others that no venomous animal can exist there, either snake or toad.[178] When such animals are brought in from other countries, they die as soon as they touch the bare earth or rock.[179] And if wood, earth, or sand is taken from that country and brought to a land where venomous beasts are found, and the sand or earth is strewn around them where they lie, they will never be able to cross the circle but must remain within it and perish. In the same way, if you take a stick of wood which has come from the country of which we now speak and trace a circle around them with it by scratching the soil with the stick, they will soon all lie dead within the circle. It is told of Ireland that men scarcely know of another island of equal size where there are so many holy men. We are also told that the inhabitants of the country are by nature fierce and murderous and very immoral. But bloodthirsty though they be, they have never slain any of the saints who are so numerous in the land; the holy men who have dwelt there have all died in sick bed. For the Irish have been kindly disposed toward all good and holy men, though they have dealt savagely with each other.[180]

The country is located in a part of the world where the temperatures are balanced, so the weather is never extremely hot or extremely cold. Throughout the winter, livestock can graze outdoors, and the people wear very little clothing both in winter and summer. This land is so sacred that no venomous creatures can survive there, whether snakes or toads. When such animals are brought from other regions, they die upon coming into contact with the bare ground or rocks. Additionally, if wood, dirt, or sand is taken from this country and brought to a place where poisonous animals exist, and that sand or dirt is spread around them, those animals will be unable to cross that barrier and will die within it. Similarly, if you take a stick of wood from this particular country and draw a circle in the dirt around them, they will soon all be dead within that circle. It is said about Ireland that there are few islands of comparable size that have so many holy men. We are also told that the inhabitants are naturally fierce, murderous, and very immoral. However, despite their bloodthirstiness, they have never killed any of the saints who are so plentiful there; all the holy men who have lived in the land have died peacefully in their beds. The Irish have been well-disposed toward all good and holy men, although they have acted brutally toward one another.

There is a lake in that country concerning the nature of which strange tales are told; it is called Logechag[181] 107in the native speech. It is quite an extensive lake and has this property, that if you take a stick of the wood that some call holm and others holly but is called acrifolium[182] in Latin and fix it in the lake so that part of it is in the earth, a part in the water, and a part rising above, the part in the earth will turn into iron, the part in the water into stone, while that which stands out above will remain as before. But if you set any other sort of wood in the lake, its nature will not change.[183]

There's a lake in that country with some strange stories surrounding it; it's called Logechag[181] 107 in the local language. It's quite a large lake and has this unique feature: if you take a stick made from a type of wood that some call holm and others holly, but is known as acrifolium[182] in Latin, and place it in the lake so that part of it is in the ground, part is in the water, and part sticks out above, the part in the ground will turn into iron, the part in the water will become stone, while the part above will stay the same. However, if you use any other type of wood in the lake, it won't change. [183]

Again, there are two springs on a mountain called Blandina,[184] which is almost a desert mountain; these have a peculiar nature. One of them has this property that if you take either a white sheep, cow, or horse, or a man with white hair, and wash any one of these with the water, the white will immediately turn to coal black. And such is the nature of the other spring in that place that if a man washes himself in its water, his hair will turn to a snowy white as if he were an aged man, no matter what its color be before, whether red or white or black.[185]

Again, there are two springs on a mountain called Blandina,[184] which is almost a desert mountain; these have a unique quality. One of them has the property that if you wash any white sheep, cow, or horse, or a person with white hair in its water, the white will instantly turn to coal black. The other spring has the effect that if a person washes themselves in its water, their hair will turn to a snowy white, as if they were very old, regardless of its previous color, whether it was red, white, or black.[185]

There is also a lake in that country which the natives call Loycha. In that lake there is what appears to be a little floating island; for it floats about in the lake, here 108and there approaching the shore sometimes so near that one may step out upon it; and this occurs most frequently on Sundays. And such is the property of this islet that if one who is ill steps out upon it and partakes of the herbs that grow there, he is healed at once, no matter what his ailment may be. Another singular fact is this, that never more than one can come upon it at one time, though many may wish to do so; for as soon as one has landed, the island immediately floats away. It also has this peculiarity that it floats constantly about in the lake for seven winters; but as soon as the seventh winter is past, it floats to the shore somewhere and unites with the other land, as if it had always been joined to it. But when that moment has come, a crash like a peal of thunder is heard, and, when the din is past, another island can be seen in the lake of the same size and character as the earlier one. Thus it happens regularly every seventh year that, as soon as the one island has joined the mainland, another appears, though no one knows whence it comes.[186]

There’s also a lake in that country that the locals call Loycha. In that lake, there’s what looks like a small floating island; it drifts around the lake, sometimes getting so close to the shore that you can step onto it, especially on Sundays. The interesting thing about this islet is that if a person who is sick steps onto it and eats the herbs that grow there, they are healed instantly, no matter what illness they have. Another unique fact is that only one person can step onto it at a time, even if many others want to; as soon as someone lands on it, the island floats away. It also has the unusual trait of floating around the lake for seven winters; however, once the seventh winter is over, it floats to the shore and merges with the land, as if it has always been a part of it. When this happens, a sound like thunder is heard, and when the noise dies down, another island can be seen in the lake, just like the one before. This happens every seventh year: as soon as the first island connects with the mainland, another one appears, though no one knows where it comes from.[186]

There is another little island in that country, which the natives call Inhisgluer.[187] There is a large village on this island and also a church; for the population is about large enough for a parish. But when people die there, they are not buried in the earth but are set up around the church along the churchyard fence, and there they 109stand like living men with their limbs all shriveled but their hair and nails unmarred. They never decay and birds never light on them. And every one who is living is able to recognize his father or grandfather and all the successive ancestors from whom he has descended.

There’s another small island in that country, which the locals call Inhisgluer.[187] There’s a large village on this island, along with a church, since the population is about big enough for a parish. However, when people die there, they aren’t buried in the ground but are placed around the church along the churchyard fence, where they stand like living people with their limbs all shriveled but their hair and nails untouched. They never decay, and birds never land on them. Everyone who is alive can recognize their father or grandfather and all the ancestors that came before them.

There is still another quite extensive lake that is called Logri.[188] In that lake is an islet inhabited by men who live a celibate life and may be called, as one likes, either monks or hermits; they live there in such numbers that they fill the island, though at times they are fewer. It is said concerning this isle that it is healthful and quite free from diseases, so that people grow aged more slowly there than elsewhere in the land. But when one does grow very old and sickly and can see the end of the days allotted by the Lord, he has to be carried to some place on the mainland to die; for no one can die of disease on the island. One may sicken and suffer there, but his spirit cannot depart from the body before he has been removed from the island.

There is another large lake called Logri.[188] In that lake, there’s an islet where men live a celibate life and can be referred to as monks or hermits, depending on preference; they inhabit the island in such numbers that it feels full, although there are times when fewer people are present. It is said that this isle is healthy and largely disease-free, allowing people to age more slowly than in other parts of the land. However, when someone becomes very old and ill and can sense that their days are numbered, they must be carried to the mainland to die; for no one can pass away from illness on the island. One can get sick and suffer there, but their spirit cannot leave their body until they have been taken off the island.

There is another large lake which the natives call Logherne.[189] In this lake there is a great abundance of fish of the sort that we call salmon; and the fish is sent into all the country about in such quantities that all have plenty for table use. In this lake there are also many islands, one of which is called Kertinagh by the natives. This 110island might very well be inhabited, as far as size is concerned, if men dared occupy it. But it is reported about this island that the powers of evil have as great authority over one-half of it as they have in hell itself. Venturesome men who have tried to settle there have said that they suffered as great trouble and torment as souls are believed to suffer in hell. But on the other half of the island there is a church with a churchyard about it. Both halves are now deserted, however, though we are told that over the half where the church is the demons have no power.[190]

There’s another big lake that the locals call Logherne.[189] This lake is full of fish, especially the kind we call salmon, and it’s sent all over the region in such large amounts that everyone has plenty to eat. The lake also has many islands, one of which is named Kertinagh by the locals. This 110island could definitely be lived on, size-wise, if people were brave enough to settle there. However, it’s said that evil powers have as much control over half of it as they do in hell. Adventurous people who have tried to live there reported experiencing as much trouble and torment as souls are thought to endure in hell. On the other half of the island, there’s a church with a graveyard around it. Both parts are now empty, though we hear that the demons have no power over the half where the church is.[190]

It once happened in that country (and this seems indeed strange) that a living creature was caught in the forest as to which no one could say definitely whether it was a man or some other animal; for no one could get a word from it or be sure that it understood human speech. It had the human shape, however, in every detail, both as to hands and face and feet; but the entire body was covered with hair as the beasts are, and down the back it had a long coarse mane like that of a horse, which fell to both sides and trailed along the ground when the creature stooped in walking. I believe I have now recounted most of the marvels that have their origin in the nature of the land itself, so far as we seem to have sure knowledge concerning them.

It once happened in that country (and this really does seem strange) that a creature was caught in the forest, and no one could definitely say whether it was a human or some other animal. No one could get a word from it or be sure that it understood human speech. However, it had the shape of a human in every detail, including its hands, face, and feet; but its entire body was covered with hair like animals, and it had a long coarse mane down its back similar to a horse's, which fell to both sides and trailed on the ground when the creature bent over to walk. I believe I have now shared most of the wonders that come from the nature of the land itself, as far as we seem to have reliable knowledge about them.


111

XI
 
IRISH MARVELS WITH MIRACULOUS ORIGINS

Son. I consider it fortunate that I had some curiosity to know about these matters, for there are no doubt many so ill-informed that they have never heard about such things. Most men who may hear these accounts are likely to find them marvelous, though also somewhat informing. But since I gather from your remarks that there may be certain other things that are wonderful and seem worth discussing, either native to the land or having some other origin, I wish to request that nothing be omitted which you consider worth mentioning, now that we have taken up these subjects.

Son. I think it’s lucky that I was curious to learn about these things because many people are probably so uninformed that they’ve never even heard of them. Most guys who hear these stories will likely find them amazing, but also a bit informative. Since I gather from what you’ve said that there are possibly other fascinating things worth discussing, whether they’re local or from somewhere else, I’d like to ask you to include everything you think is important, now that we’re on these topics.

Father. There still remain certain things that may be thought marvelous; these, however, are not native to the land but have originated in the miraculous powers of holy men, and we know of a truth that these do exist. Certain things are told, too, of which we cannot be sure whether they are credible or merely the talk of men, though they are common rumor in that country; but what follows we know to be true beyond a doubt.

Father. There are still some things that seem amazing; however, these aren't from the land itself but come from the miraculous abilities of holy men, and we confidently know they exist. There are also stories that we can't be sure are true or just gossip, though they are widely talked about in that country; but what follows, we know for certain to be true.

In that same lake that I mentioned earlier which is called Logri, lies a little island named Inisclodran. Once there was a holy man named Diermicius who had a church on the isle near which he lived. Into this church and churchyard of which he is the patron no female creature is allowed to enter. All beasts are aware of this, for both birds and other animals which are without human reason avoid it as carefully as humans do. And 112no creature of the female sex ever ventures into that churchyard, nor could it enter if it tried.[191]

In that same lake I mentioned earlier, called Logri, there's a small island named Inisclodran. Once, there was a holy man named Diermicius who had a church on the island where he lived. No females are allowed to enter this church and its churchyard, which he protects. All animals know this, as both birds and other creatures without human reasoning avoid it just like humans do. And no female creature ever dares to go into that churchyard, nor could it get in even if it tried.112[191]

Once there was a holy man in that country named Kevinus, who lived in a place called Glumelaga.[192] At the time he lived almost as a hermit, and the event which we shall now relate occurred in his day. It so befell that a young man was living with him, a kinsman of his who was his servant, and the saint loved the youth very much. But the lad fell ill before his eyes, and the malady grew so heavy and severe that death seemed imminent. It was in the spring time, in the month of March, when the man’s illness was at the worst. Then it happened that the youth asked his kinsman Kevinus to give him an apple, saying that he would find relief from his illness if he got what he asked for. It seemed unlikely, however, that apples could be gotten in that season, as the buds had only just begun to swell and sprout forth leaves on the fruit trees. But because the holy Kevinus grieved sorely over the illness of his kinsman, and also because he was unable to procure what he had requested, he knelt down in prayer and implored God to send him somewhat of those things, so that his kinsman might find the relief that he yearned for. Having risen from prayer, he stepped outside and looked around. Near the house 113stood a willow of large growth. Kevinus looked up among the branches of the willow as if expecting to find help and comfort there; then he saw that apples had grown upon the willow, just as there would be on an apple tree in the proper season. He picked three apples and gave them to the youth, and after the lad had eaten of these, his illness began to leave him and he was cured of the malady. But the willow has ever since continued to keep the gift that God gave it on that occasion, for every year it bears apples like an apple tree; and since that day these have always been called Saint Kevinus’ apples.[193] They have been carried into all parts of Ireland in order that those who are ill may partake of them; and they seem to have virtue in all human ailments, for those who eat of them appear to get relief. But they are not sweet in taste and would not be wanted if men did not prize them for their healing properties. Many wonderful things have come to pass in Ireland which certain highly endowed saints have brought about in an instant; and these, too, must seem very marvelous. Thus far, however, we have spoken only of such things as have been achieved through a holiness so great that they remain as a testimony to this day and seem as wonderful now as on the day when they first occurred. But those other matters that men regard as surely genuine and speak of as actual facts we may now proceed to point out.

Once there was a holy man in that country named Kevinus, who lived in a place called Glumelaga.[192] During his time, he lived almost like a hermit, and the event we’re about to share happened while he was still alive. A young man, a relative of his who served him, lived with him, and the saint cared deeply for this young man. But the lad fell ill in front of him, and his illness became so severe that death seemed near. It was spring, in the month of March, when the man’s sickness was at its worst. Then the youth asked his kinsman Kevinus to give him an apple, saying that it would help ease his illness. However, it seemed unlikely that apples could be found at that time, as the buds had just started to swell and the fruit trees were only beginning to grow leaves. But because holy Kevinus was deeply troubled by his kinsman’s sickness, and he couldn’t get what the young man asked for, he knelt down in prayer and begged God to provide something that would bring relief to his kinsman. After praying, he went outside and looked around. Near the house stood a large willow tree. Kevinus looked up among the branches, hoping to find some help there, and to his surprise, he saw apples growing on the willow just as they would on an apple tree in the right season. He picked three apples and gave them to the youth, and after the lad ate them, his illness began to fade away, and he was cured. Since then, the willow has continued to bear apples every year, just like an apple tree, and they have always been known as Saint Kevinus’ apples.[193] These apples have been distributed all over Ireland so that the sick may partake of them, and they seem to have healing properties for all kinds of ailments; those who eat them often find relief. However, they are not sweet and wouldn’t be desired if people didn’t value them for their healing abilities. Many amazing things have happened in Ireland, brought about by certain highly gifted saints in an instant; these miracles must also seem very remarkable. So far, though, we’ve only discussed events that were accomplished with such great holiness that they serve as a testimony even today, and they still seem as extraordinary as they did when they first occurred. Now, let’s talk about other matters that people consider genuine and speak of as real facts.

In that country there is also a place called Themar,[194] which in olden times was apparently a capital or royal 114borough; now, however, it is deserted, for no one dares to dwell there. It was this event that caused the place to be abandoned: all the people in the land believed that the king who resided at Themar would always render just decisions and never do otherwise; although they were heathen in other respects and did not have the true faith concerning God, they held firmly to their belief that every case would be decided properly if that king passed upon it; and never, they thought, could an unrighteous decision come from his throne. On what seems to have been the highest point of the borough, the king had a handsome and well built castle in which was a large and beautiful hall, where he was accustomed to sit in judgment. But once it happened that certain lawsuits came before the king for decision in which his friends and acquaintances were interested on the one side, and he was anxious to support their contentions in every way. But those who were interested in the suits on the other side were hostile toward him, and he was their enemy. So the outcome was that the king shaped his decision more according to his own wish than to justice. But because an unrighteous judgment had come whence all people expected just decisions and because of this popular belief, the judgment seat was overturned and the hall and the castle likewise, even to their very foundations. The site, too, was overturned, so that those parts of the earth which had formerly pointed downward were now turned upward; and all the houses and halls were turned down into the earth and thus it has been ever since. But because such a great miracle happened there, no one has since dared to inhabit the place, 115nor has any king ventured to set up his throne there; and yet, it is the loveliest place known in all that country. It is also thought that if men should attempt to rebuild the town, not a single day would pass without the appearance of some new marvel.

In that country, there’s also a place called Themar,[194] which was once a capital or royal 114town; now, however, it is deserted because no one dares to live there. The reason for this abandonment was an event: all the people believed that the king who lived in Themar would always make fair decisions and never anything else; although they were pagan in other ways and lacked the true faith in God, they were firm in their belief that every issue would be settled correctly if the king judged it, and they thought that no unjust decision could come from his throne. On what seemed to be the highest point of the town, the king had a beautiful and well-constructed castle that contained a large and lovely hall, where he would sit in judgment. But one day, certain lawsuits came before the king that involved his friends and acquaintances on one side, and he was eager to support their claims in every way. However, those on the other side of the lawsuits were against him, and he was their enemy. In the end, the king shaped his decision more according to his own desires than to justice. Because an unjust judgment came from a place where everyone expected fairness and due to this belief, the judgment seat was overturned, along with the hall and the castle, down to their very foundations. The land was also overturned, so that areas that had once been below were now above; and all the houses and halls were sunk into the earth, and that’s how it has remained. Because such a great miracle occurred there, no one has dared to inhabit the place since, 115nor has any king tried to establish his throne there; yet, it is considered the loveliest place in all that country. It is also believed that if people attempted to rebuild the town, not a single day would pass without some new marvel appearing.

There is still another wonder in that country which must seem quite incredible; nevertheless, those who dwell in the land affirm the truth of it and ascribe it to the anger of a holy man. It is told that when the holy Patricius[195] preached Christianity in that country, there was one clan which opposed him more stubbornly than any other people in the land; and these people strove to do insult in many ways both to God and to the holy man. And when he was preaching the faith to them as to others and came to confer with them where they held their assemblies, they adopted the plan of howling at him like wolves. When he saw that he could do very little to promote his mission among these people, he grew very wroth and prayed God to send some form of affliction upon them to be shared by their posterity as a constant reminder of their disobedience. Later these clansmen did suffer a fitting and severe though very marvelous punishment, for it is told that all the members of that clan are changed into wolves for a period and roam through the woods feeding upon the same food as wolves; but they are worse than wolves, for in all their wiles they have the wit of men, though they are as eager to devour men as to destroy other creatures. It is reported that to some this affliction comes every seventh winter, while in the intervening years they are 116men; others suffer it continuously for seven winters all told and are never stricken again.[196]

There’s yet another incredible wonder in that country; still, the locals confidently affirm its truth and attribute it to the anger of a holy man. It’s said that when the holy Patricius[195] preached Christianity there, one clan opposed him more stubbornly than any other group. These people made various attempts to insult both God and the holy man. When he preached the faith to them like he did with others and tried to meet with them during their gatherings, they resorted to howling at him like wolves. Seeing that he could do very little to further his mission among them, he became very angry and prayed to God to send them a form of suffering that their descendants would also endure, as a constant reminder of their disobedience. Eventually, these clansmen faced a fitting and severe but remarkably strange punishment: it is said that all the members of that clan turn into wolves for a period and roam the woods, eating the same food as wolves. However, they are worse than wolves because, despite their animal form, they possess the cunning of humans and are just as eager to devour people as they are to attack other creatures. It’s reported that some experience this affliction every seventh winter, while in the years in between they are human; others endure it continuously for seven winters and then never face it again.[196]

There is still another matter, that about the men who are called “gelts,”[197] which must seem wonderful. Men appear to become gelts in this way: when hostile forces meet and are drawn up in two lines and both set up a terrifying battle-cry, it happens that timid and youthful men who have never been in the host before are sometimes seized with such fear and terror that they lose their wits and run away from the rest into the forest, where they seek food like beasts and shun the meeting of men like wild animals. It is also told that if these people live in the woods for twenty winters in this way, feathers will grow upon their bodies as on birds; these serve to protect them from frost and cold, but they have no large feathers to use in flight as birds have. But so great is their fleetness said to be that it is not possible for other men or even for greyhounds to come near them; for those men can dash up into a tree almost as swiftly as apes or squirrels.

There's another issue to address, regarding the men known as “gelts,”[197] which seems quite remarkable. Men become gelts this way: when opposing forces clash and line up in two rows while both let out a terrifying battle cry, it often happens that frightened and inexperienced young men, who have never been in battle before, become so overwhelmed with fear that they lose their senses and flee into the forest. There, they search for food like animals and avoid human contact like wild creatures. It's also said that if these individuals live in the woods for twenty years this way, feathers will grow on their bodies like those of birds; these feathers protect them from the cold, but they lack the large feathers necessary for flying like birds do. However, their reported speed is so incredible that neither other men nor even greyhounds can catch up to them; these men can leap up into trees almost as quickly as monkeys or squirrels.

There happened something once in the borough called Cloena,[198] which will also seem marvelous. In this town 117there is a church dedicated to the memory of a saint named Kiranus.[199] One Sunday while the populace was at church hearing mass, it befell that an anchor was dropped from the sky as if thrown from a ship; for a rope was attached to it, and one of the flukes of the anchor got caught in the arch above the church door. The people all rushed out of the church and marveled much as their eyes followed the rope upward. They saw a ship with men on board floating before the anchor cable; and soon they saw a man leap overboard and dive down to the anchor as if to release it. The movements of his hands and feet and all his actions appeared like those of a man swimming in the water. When he came down to the anchor, he tried to loosen it, but the people immediately rushed up and attempted to seize him. In this church where the anchor was caught, there is a bishop’s throne. The bishop was present when this occurred and forbade his people to hold the man; for, said he, it might prove fatal as when one is held under water. As soon as the man was released, he hurried back up to the ship; and when he was up the crew cut the rope and the ship sailed away out of sight. But the anchor has remained in the church since then as a testimony to this event.[200]

Once, something incredible happened in a town called Cloena,[198] which will also seem amazing. In this town, 117 there is a church dedicated to a saint named Kiranus.[199] One Sunday, while the people were at church for mass, an anchor suddenly dropped from the sky as if it had been thrown from a ship; it had a rope attached to it, and one of the flukes got caught in the arch above the church door. The congregation rushed out of the church, astonished, as they looked up at the rope. They saw a ship with men aboard floating near the anchor cable. Soon, they watched a man jump overboard and dive down to the anchor as if to free it. His movements resembled those of someone swimming in water. When he reached the anchor, he tried to loosen it, but the crowd quickly moved in and attempted to grab him. In this church, where the anchor was stuck, there was a bishop’s throne. The bishop was present during this event and instructed the people not to hold the man; he warned that it could be deadly, just like holding someone underwater. Once the man was freed, he quickly swam back to the ship; and as soon as he got on board, the crew cut the rope, and the ship vanished from sight. However, the anchor has stayed in the church since then as evidence of this event.[200]

118I believe we have now mentioned all the features of this country that are most worth discussing. But there is one other matter that I can tell about, if you wish, for the sport or amusement of it. Long time ago a clownish fellow lived in that country; he was a Christian, however, and his name was Klefsan.[201] It is told of this one that there never was a man who, when he saw Klefsan, was not compelled to laugh at his amusing and absurd remarks. Even though a man was heavy at heart, he could not restrain his laughter, we are told, when he heard that man talk. But Klefsan fell ill and died and was buried in the churchyard like other men. He lay long in the earth until the flesh had decayed from his bones, and his bones, too, were largely crumbled. Then it came to pass that other corpses were buried in the same churchyard, and graves were dug so near the place where Klefsan lay that his skull was unearthed, and it was whole. They set it up on a high rock in the churchyard, where it has remained ever since. But whoever comes to that place and sees that skull and looks into the opening where the mouth and tongue once were immediately begins to laugh, even though he were in a sorrowful mood before he caught sight of that skull. Thus his dead bones make almost as many people laugh as he himself did when alive. Now I know of no further facts about that country which appear to be suitable materials with which to lengthen a talk like this.

118I think we've covered all the important aspects of this country worth discussing. However, there's one more story I can share, for fun. A long time ago, there was a goofy guy who lived there; he was a Christian and his name was Klefsan.[201] People say that no one could help but laugh when they heard Klefsan's funny and ridiculous comments. Even if someone was feeling down, they couldn't help but burst out laughing at his words. But Klefsan got sick and passed away, and he was buried in the churchyard like everyone else. He lay there for a long time until his flesh had rotted away, and his bones mostly crumbled. Eventually, other bodies were buried in the same churchyard, and their graves were dug so close to where Klefsan was that his skull was uncovered, and it was intact. They placed it on a high rock in the churchyard, where it has stayed ever since. Anyone who visits that spot and sees the skull, looking into the hollow where the mouth and tongue once were, instantly starts laughing, even if they were feeling sad before. In this way, his bones make just as many people laugh as he did when he was alive. Now, I don't have any more interesting facts about that country that would be suitable for continuing a conversation like this.


119

XII
 
THE WONDERS OF THE ICELANDIC SEAS:
WHALES; THE KRAKEN

Son. Now since we have discussed everything in Ireland that may be counted marvelous, let us have a talk about Iceland and the wonders that are found in the Icelandic seas.

Son. Now that we've talked about all the amazing things in Ireland, let's chat about Iceland and the wonders in the Icelandic seas.

Father. Aside from the whales in the ocean, there are, I should say, but few things in the Icelandic waters which are worth mentioning or discussing. The whales vary much both in kind and size. Those that are called blubber-cutters—and they are the most numerous—grow to a length of twenty ells;[202] a great many of them are, however, so small that they measure only ten ells; the rest are in between, each having its own size. These fishes have neither teeth nor whalebone, nor are they dangerous either to ships or men, but are rather disposed to avoid the fishermen. Nevertheless, they are constantly being caught and driven to land by the hundreds, and where many are caught, they provide much food for men.[203] There are also other varieties of small whales, such as the porpoise, which is never longer than five ells, and the caaing whale, which has a length of seven ells only.

Father. Besides the whales in the ocean, there really aren’t many other things in the Icelandic waters worth mentioning or discussing. The whales come in various types and sizes. The ones called blubber-cutters—and they are the most common—can grow to about twenty ells; [202] many of them, however, are so small that they only measure around ten ells; the rest fall somewhere in between, each with its own size. These fish have neither teeth nor whalebone, and they aren’t a danger to ships or people; in fact, they tend to avoid fishermen. Nevertheless, they are frequently captured and brought ashore by the hundreds, and where many are caught, they provide much food for people. [203] There are also other types of small whales, like the porpoise, which never grows longer than five ells, and the caaing whale, which is only seven ells long.

There is another kind of whales called the grampus, which grow no longer than twelve ells and have teeth 120in proportion to their size very much as dogs have. They are also ravenous for other whales just as dogs are for other beasts. They gather in flocks and attack large whales, and, when a large one is caught alone, they worry and bite it till it succumbs. It is likely, however, that this one, while defending itself with mighty blows, kills a large number of them before it perishes.

There’s another type of whale called the grampus, which grows to about twelve ells long and has teeth that are similar to those of dogs, relative to its size. They are also very aggressive toward other whales, just like dogs are with other animals. They gather in groups and attack large whales, and when they catch one alone, they harass and bite it until it gives in. However, it’s likely that while defending itself with powerful blows, it manages to kill a significant number of them before it dies. 120

There are two other varieties, the beaked whale and the “hog whale,” the largest of which are not more than twenty-five ells in length. These are not fit to be eaten, for the fat that is drawn from them cannot be digested either by man or by any beast that may partake of it. For it runs through them and even through wood; and after it has stood a while, scarcely any vessel can contain it, even if made of horn. There are certain other types which are worth a passing mention only, namely the “raven whale” and the white whale.[204] The white whales are so named because of their snow white color, while most other varieties are black, except that some of them have spots, such as the “shield whale,” the “spear whale,” and the baleen whale. All these kinds that I have just mentioned may be freely eaten and many other kinds too.

There are two other types: the beaked whale and the “hog whale,” the largest of which reach about twenty-five ells in length. These aren’t suitable for eating because the fat extracted from them is indigestible, both for humans and any animals that try it. It flows through them and even through wood; after a while, hardly any container can hold it, even if it’s made of horn. There are a few other types that are worth mentioning only briefly, specifically the “raven whale” and the white whale. The white whales get their name from their snow-white color, while most other types are black, although some have spots, like the “shield whale,” the “spear whale,” and the baleen whale. All the kinds I’ve just mentioned can be eaten freely, along with many others.

There is another sort of whales called the “fish driver,”[205] which is perhaps the most useful of all to 121men; for it drives the herring and all other kinds of fish in toward the land from the ocean outside, as if appointed and sent by the Lord for this purpose. This is its duty and office as long as the fishermen keep the peace on the fishing grounds. Its nature is also peculiar in this, that it seemingly knows how to spare both ships and men. But when the fishermen fall to quarreling and fighting, so that blood is spilt, this whale seems able to perceive it; for it moves in between the land and the fish and chases the shoals back into the ocean, just as it earlier had driven them in toward the men. These whales are not more than thirty ells in length, or forty at the very largest. They would provide good food, if men were allowed to hunt them, but no one is permitted to catch or harm them, since they are of such great and constant service to men.

There’s another type of whale called the “fish driver,”[205] which might be the most beneficial of all to people; it drives the herring and various other types of fish toward the shore from the ocean, as if it’s been appointed and sent by God for this purpose. This is its role as long as the fishermen maintain peace on the fishing grounds. Its nature is also unique in that it seems to know how to avoid harming both ships and people. But when the fishermen start arguing and fighting, causing bloodshed, this whale seems to sense it; it swims in between the land and the fish, driving the schools back into the ocean, just as it previously brought them toward the fishermen. These whales are no more than thirty ells long, or forty at most. They would make for good food if people were allowed to hunt them, but no one is allowed to catch or harm them since they’re so valuable and helpful to humans.

Another kind is called the sperm whale. These are toothed whales, though the teeth are barely large enough to be carved into fair-sized knife handles or chess men. They are neither fierce nor savage, but rather of a gentle nature, and so far as possible they avoid the fishermen. In size they are about like those that I mentioned last. Their teeth are so numerous that more than seventy can be found in the head of a single whale of this sort.

Another type is called the sperm whale. These are toothed whales, although their teeth are only just large enough to be made into decent-sized knife handles or chess pieces. They are neither aggressive nor vicious, but rather gentle, and they try to stay away from fishermen whenever they can. In terms of size, they're about the same as the ones I mentioned earlier. They have so many teeth that you can find more than seventy in the head of a single whale of this kind.

Still another species is called the right whale;[206] this has no fins along the spine and is about as large as the sort that we mentioned last. Sea-faring men fear it very much, for it is by nature disposed to sport with ships.

Still another species is called the right whale;[206] this has no fins along its back and is about as large as the last one we mentioned. People who work at sea are very afraid of it, because it has a tendency to play around with ships.

122There is another kind called the Greenland shark,[207] which is peculiar in this, that it has caul and fat in the abdomen like cattle. The largest of these whales grow to a length of thirty ells at most.

122There's another type called the Greenland shark,[207] which is unique in that it has a membrane and fat in its abdomen similar to cattle. The largest of these sharks can reach a maximum length of thirty ells.

There are certain varieties that are fierce and savage toward men and are constantly seeking to destroy them at every chance. One of these is called the “horse whale,” and another the “red comb.”[208] They are very voracious and malicious and never grow tired of slaying men. They roam about in all the seas looking for ships, and when they find one they leap up, for in that way they are able to sink and destroy it the more quickly. These fishes are unfit for human food; being the natural enemies of mankind, they are, in fact, loathsome. The largest of this type never grow more than thirty or forty ells in length.

There are certain types that are aggressive and harmful towards humans and are always looking for ways to harm them. One of these is known as the "horse whale," and another is the "red comb."[208] They are very greedy and wicked and never get tired of attacking people. They swim around in all the oceans searching for ships, and when they spot one, they leap out of the water, which allows them to sink and destroy it more quickly. These fish are not fit for human consumption; being natural enemies of mankind, they are, in fact, disgusting. The largest ones of this kind never exceed thirty or forty ells in length.

There is still another sort called the narwhal, which may not be eaten for fear of disease, for men fall ill and die if they eat of it. This whale is not large in size; it never grows longer than twenty ells. It is not at all savage but rather tries to avoid fishermen. It has teeth in its head, all small but one which projects from the front of the upper jaw. This tooth is handsome, well formed, and straight as an onion stem. It may grow to a length of seven ells and is as even and smooth as if shaped with a tool. It projects straight forward from the head when the whale is traveling; but sharp and straight though it is, it is of no service as a defensive weapon; for the whale 123is so fond and careful of its tusk that it allows nothing to come near it. I know of no other varieties of whales that are unfit for human food, only these five that I have now enumerated: the two that I mentioned first were the beaked whale and the “hog whale;” the three mentioned later were the “horse whale,” the “red comb,” and the narwhal.

There’s another type called the narwhal, which can’t be eaten because it might cause illness; people can get sick and even die from eating it. This whale isn’t very large; it never grows longer than about twenty feet. It’s not aggressive at all and tends to avoid fishermen. It has several small teeth, but one tooth stands out, projecting from the front of its upper jaw. This tooth is beautiful, well-formed, and straight like an onion stem. It can grow up to seven feet long and is as even and smooth as if it was crafted with a tool. When the whale swims, the tusk sticks out straight from its head; however, despite its sharpness, it isn’t used as a defensive weapon because the whale is so protective of its tusk that it doesn’t allow anything to come near it. I don’t know of any other types of whales that are dangerous to eat, just these five that I’ve listed: the first two I mentioned were the beaked whale and the “hog whale;” the next three were the “horse whale,” the “red comb,” and the narwhal.

There are certain varieties of even greater size which I have not yet described; and all those that I shall now discuss may be eaten by men. Some of them are dangerous for men to meet, while others are gentle and peaceable. One of these is called humpback; this fish is large and very dangerous to ships. It has a habit of striking at the vessel with its fins and of lying and floating just in front of the prow where sailors travel. Though the ship turn aside, the whale will continue to keep in front, so there is no choice but to sail upon it; but if a ship does sail upon it, the whale will throw the vessel and destroy all on board. The largest of these fishes grow to a length of seventy or eighty ells; they are good to eat.

There are some even larger types that I haven't covered yet, and all the ones I'll discuss now are safe for people to eat. Some of them can be dangerous to encounter, while others are friendly and non-threatening. One of these is called the humpback whale; this fish is huge and poses a serious risk to ships. It tends to strike the vessel with its fins and floats right in front of the bow where sailors navigate. Even if the ship tries to steer clear, the whale will persistently stay in front, leaving no option but to sail over it; however, if a ship does sail over it, the whale can overturn the vessel and endanger everyone on board. The largest of these creatures can grow to about seventy or eighty ells long, and they’re good to eat.

Then there is that kind which is called the Greenland whale.[209] This fish grows to a length of eighty or even ninety ells and is as large around as it is long; for a rope that is stretched the length of one will just reach around it where it is bulkiest. Its head is so large that it comprises fully a third of the entire bulk. This fish is very cleanly in choice of food; for people say that it subsists wholly on mist and rain and whatever falls into the sea from the air above. When one is caught and its 124entrails are examined, nothing is found in its abdomen like what is found in other fishes that take food, for the abdomen is empty and clean. It cannot readily open and close its mouth, for the whalebone which grows in it will rise[210] and stand upright in the mouth when it is opened wide; and consequently whales of this type often perish because of their inability to close the mouth. This whale rarely gives trouble to ships. It has no teeth and is fat and good to eat.

Then there's the type known as the Greenland whale.[209] This creature can grow up to eighty or even ninety ells in length and is as wide as it is long; a rope stretched the length of one will just wrap around its biggest part. Its head is so big that it makes up about a third of its total size. This whale is very selective about what it eats; people say it survives entirely on mist, rain, and anything that falls from the sky into the sea. When one gets caught and its insides are checked, there's nothing in its stomach like what you'd find in other fish that eat food, because its belly is empty and clean. It can't easily open and close its mouth because the whalebone inside rises[210] and stays upright when its mouth is wide open; as a result, whales of this kind often die because they can't close their mouths. This whale rarely causes problems for ships. It has no teeth and is fatty and tasty to eat.

Then there is a kind of whale called the rorqual, and this fish is the best of all for food. It is of a peaceful disposition and does not bother ships, though it may swim very close to them. This fish is of great size and length; it is reported that the largest thus far caught have measured thirteen times ten ells, that is, one hundred and thirty ells by the ten-count. Because of its quiet and peaceful behavior it often falls a prey to whale fishers. It is better for eating and smells better than any of the other fishes that we have talked about, though it is said to be very fat; it has no teeth. It has been asserted, too, that if one can get some of the sperm of this whale and be perfectly sure that it came from this sort and no other, it will be found a most effective remedy for eye troubles, leprosy, ague, headache, and for every other ill that afflicts mankind. Sperm from other whales also makes good medicine, though not so good as this sort. And now I have enumerated nearly all the varieties of whales that are hunted by men.

Then there's a type of whale called the rorqual, and this fish is the best for food. It has a peaceful nature and doesn’t disturb ships, even though it may swim very close to them. This fish is quite large; it's been reported that the biggest ones caught so far have measured up to thirteen times ten ells, which is one hundred and thirty ells by the ten-count. Because of its calm and gentle behavior, it often becomes a target for whale hunters. It tastes better and smells nicer than any of the other fish we've discussed, although it is said to be very fatty; it has no teeth. It’s also claimed that if you can get some sperm from this whale and are absolutely sure it’s from this specific type, it can be a very effective remedy for eye problems, leprosy, fever, headaches, and other ailments that plague humans. Sperm from other whales can also be useful for medicine, but not as good as this type. And now I have listed almost all the varieties of whales that are hunted by people.

125There is a fish not yet mentioned which it is scarcely advisable to speak about on account of its size, which to most men will seem incredible. There are, moreover, but very few who can tell anything definite about it, inasmuch as it is rarely seen by men; for it almost never approaches the shore or appears where fishermen can see it, and I doubt that this sort of fish is very plentiful in the sea. In our language it is usually called the “kraken.” I can say nothing definite as to its length in ells, for on those occasions when men have seen it, it has appeared more like an island than a fish. Nor have I heard that one has ever been caught or found dead. It seems likely that there are but two in all the ocean and that these beget no offspring, for I believe it is always the same ones that appear. Nor would it be well for other fishes if they were as numerous as the other whales, seeing that they are so immense and need so much food. It is said, that when these fishes want something to eat, they are in the habit of giving forth a violent belch, which brings up so much food that all sorts of fish in the neighborhood, both large and small, will rush up in the hope of getting nourishment and good fare. Meanwhile the monster keeps it mouth open, and inasmuch as its opening is about as wide as a sound or fjord, the fishes cannot help crowding in in great numbers. But as soon as its mouth and belly are full, the monster closes its mouth and thus catches and shuts in all the fishes that just previously had rushed in eagerly to seek food.[211]

125There's a fish that hasn't been mentioned yet, and it's probably better not to talk about it because of its size, which most people will find unbelievable. Moreover, very few can provide any concrete information about it, since it's rarely seen by humans; it almost never comes close to shore or appears where fishermen can spot it, and I doubt that this type of fish is very common in the ocean. In our language, it's usually called the “kraken.” I can't say anything specific about its length in ells, because when people have seen it, it looks more like an island than a fish. I’ve also never heard that one has ever been caught or found dead. It seems likely that there are only two in the entire ocean and that these don’t reproduce, as I believe it’s always the same ones that show up. It wouldn’t be good for other fish if they were as numerous as other whales, considering how massive they are and how much food they require. It’s said that when these fish are hungry, they often let out a powerful belch, bringing up so much food that all kinds of fish nearby, both big and small, rush in hoping for a meal. Meanwhile, the monster keeps its mouth open, and since its opening is about as wide as a sound or fjord, the fish inevitably crowd in in large numbers. But as soon as its mouth and belly are full, the monster closes its mouth, trapping all the fish that just moments earlier had eagerly rushed in looking for food.[211]

126Now we have mentioned and described most of those things in the Icelandic waters that would be counted wonderful, and among them a few that are more plentiful in other seas than in those which we have just discussed.

126Now we have talked about and described most of the amazing things in the waters around Iceland, including some that are found in greater abundance in other seas than in the ones we just discussed.


XIII
 
THE BEAUTY OF ICELAND

Son. Now since we have named most of the species of fish that roam about in the ocean, those that are worth mentioning or discussing, I should like to hear about those features of the land itself that are most worthy of mention. What do you think of the extraordinary fire which rages constantly in that country? Does it rise out of some natural peculiarity of the land, or can it be that it has its origin in the spirit world? And what do you think about those terrifying earthquakes that can occur there, or those marvelous lakes, or the ice which covers all the higher levels?

Son. Now that we’ve named most of the fish species that swim in the ocean, especially those worth mentioning or discussing, I’d like to hear about the most notable features of the land itself. What do you think about the incredible fire that burns constantly in that area? Does it come from some natural characteristic of the land, or could it possibly have a connection to the spirit world? And what are your thoughts on those frightening earthquakes that can happen there, or the amazing lakes, or the ice that covers all the higher elevations?

Father. As to the ice that is found in Iceland, I am inclined to believe that it is a penalty which the land suffers for lying so close to Greenland; for it is to be expected that severe cold would come thence, since Greenland is ice-clad beyond all other lands. Now since Iceland gets so much cold from that side and receives but little heat from the sun, it necessarily has an over-abundance of ice on the mountain ridges. But concerning the extraordinary fires which burn there, I scarcely know what to say, for they possess a strange nature. I 127have heard that in Sicily there is an immense fire of unusual power which consumes both earth and wood. I have also heard that Saint Gregory has stated in his Dialogues[212] that there are places of torment[213] in the fires of Sicily. But men are much more inclined to believe that there must be such places of torment in those fires in Iceland. For the fires in Sicily feed on living things, as they consume both earth and wood. Trees live; they grow and put forth green leaves; but they dry up and wither when they begin to die; therefore, since they die when they wither, they must be called living while they are green. The earth, too, must be called living, inasmuch as it sometimes yields much fruitage; and as soon as one crop is fallen into decay, it gives new growth. All living creatures, too, are formed of earth, and therefore it surely must be called living. Both these things, earth and wood, the fires of Sicily can burn and consume as nourishment. The fire of Iceland, however, will burn neither earth nor wood, though these be cast upon it; but it feeds upon stone and hard rock and draws vigor from these as other fires do from dry wood. And never is rock or stone so hard but that this fire will melt it like wax and then burn it like fat oil. But when a tree is cast upon the fire, it will not burn but be scorched only. Now since this fire feeds on dead things only and rejects everything that other fires devour, it must surely be said that it is a dead fire; and it 128seems most likely that it is the fire of hell, for in hell all things are dead.

Father. Regarding the ice found in Iceland, I think it's a punishment the land faces for being so close to Greenland; it's expected that intense cold would come from there since Greenland is covered in ice more than any other place. Since Iceland gets so much cold from that direction and receives very little heat from the sun, it inevitably has a lot of ice on its mountain ridges. However, about the strange fires that burn there, I'm not quite sure what to say, as they have an unusual nature. I’ve heard that in Sicily, there’s a massive fire with extraordinary power that consumes both earth and wood. I've also heard that Saint Gregory mentioned in his Dialogues[212] that there are places of torment[213] in the fires of Sicily. However, people are much more inclined to believe there must be such places of torment in those fires in Iceland. The fires in Sicily feed on living things, as they consume both earth and wood. Trees are alive; they grow and produce green leaves, but they dry up and wither when they start to die; thus, since they die when they wither, they must be considered living while they’re green. The earth, too, can be called living, as it sometimes yields a lot of fruit; as soon as one crop decays, it produces new growth. All living creatures are made from earth, so it surely must be viewed as alive. Both earth and wood can be burned and consumed as nourishment by the fires of Sicily. However, the fire in Iceland won’t burn earth or wood, even if they are thrown onto it; instead, it only feeds on stone and hard rock, drawing energy from them like other fires do from dry wood. There is no rock or stone so hard that this fire can't melt it like wax and then burn it like fat oil. When a tree is thrown on the fire, it won’t burn but will only get scorched. Since this fire consumes only dead things and rejects everything that other fires devour, it can definitely be labeled a dead fire; and it seems most likely that it’s the fire of hell, since in hell, everything is dead.

I am also disposed to believe that certain bodies of water in Iceland must be of the same dead nature as the fire that we have described. For there are springs which boil furiously all the time both winter and summer. At times the boiling is so violent that the heated water is thrown high into the air. But whatever is laid near the spring at the time of spouting, whether it be cloth or wood or anything else that the water may touch when it falls down again, will turn to stone. This seems to lead to the conclusion that this water must be dead, seeing that it gives a dead character to whatever it sprinkles and moistens; for the nature of stone is dead. But if the fire should not be dead but have its origin in some peculiarity of the country, the most reasonable theory as to the formation of the land seems to be that there must be many veins, empty passages, and wide cavities in its foundations. At times it may happen that these passages and cavities will be so completely packed with air, either by the winds or by the power of the roaring breakers, that the pressure of the blast cannot be confined, and this may be the origin of those great earthquakes that occur in that country.[214] Now if this should seem a reasonable or plausible explanation, it may be that the great and powerful activity of the air within the foundations of the earth also causes those great fires to be lit and to appear, which burst forth in various parts of the land.[215]

I also tend to think that certain bodies of water in Iceland must be just as lifeless as the fire we've talked about. There are springs that boil aggressively all year round, both in winter and summer. Sometimes, the boiling is so intense that the hot water shoots high into the air. But anything placed near the spring when it erupts, whether it’s cloth, wood, or anything else that the water touches as it falls back down, will turn to stone. This suggests that this water must be lifeless, since it gives a lifeless quality to anything it splashes on; after all, stone is lifeless. However, if the fire isn't lifeless but originates from some unique aspect of the land, then the most reasonable explanation for the formation of the land seems to be that there are many channels, empty spaces, and large cavities beneath it. Sometimes, these channels and cavities might get completely filled with air, either by the wind or the force of crashing waves, to the point that the pressure of the air can't be contained, and this might cause the significant earthquakes that occur in that area.[214] If this sounds like a reasonable or plausible explanation, it’s possible that the great and powerful movement of air beneath the earth also ignites those strong fires that erupt in various parts of the land.[215]

129Now it must not be regarded as settled that the facts are as we have just said; we have merely tried to bring together and compare various opinions in order to determine what seems most reasonable. For we see that all fire originates in force. If a hard stone is stricken against hard iron, fire comes out of the iron and out of the energy of the stroke when they clash. You can also rub pieces of wood against each other in such a way that their antagonism will produce fire. It also happens frequently that two winds rising at the same time will go against each other; and when they meet in the air, heavy blows fall, and these blows give forth a great fire which spreads widely over the sky.[216] At times it also happens that this fire is driven to the earth where it causes much damage by burning houses and sometimes forests and ships at sea. But all the fires that I have now named, whether they come from iron, or winds colliding in the air, or any of those mighty forces which can produce fire, will consume trees, forests, and earth: while the fire which we discussed earlier and which appears in Iceland refuses all these things, as I have already shown. Now these facts lead to this conclusion as to its nature, that it is more likely to have arisen from dead things or from like sources, than those other fires that we have now discussed. And in case it is as we have imagined, it is likely that the great earthquakes of that country originate in the power of those mighty fires that well through the bowels of the land.

129It shouldn't be assumed that the facts are exactly as we've stated; we’ve simply attempted to gather and compare different viewpoints to find what seems most logical. We can see that all fire comes from force. When a hard stone strikes against hard iron, fire is produced from the iron and from the energy of the impact. You can also rub pieces of wood together so that their friction creates fire. Often, two winds that rise simultaneously clash with each other; when they meet in the air, powerful blows occur, and these blows generate a significant fire that spreads widely across the sky.[216] Sometimes, this fire is pushed to the ground, causing extensive damage by burning buildings, and occasionally forests and ships at sea. However, all the fires I've mentioned, whether they originate from iron, colliding winds in the air, or any of those strong forces that can create fire, will consume trees, forests, and land. In contrast, the fire we talked about earlier, which appears in Iceland, does not consume these materials, as I’ve already pointed out. These observations lead to the conclusion about its nature: it’s more likely to have come from lifeless sources rather than from the other types of fires we’ve discussed. If our concept is correct, it’s probable that the significant earthquakes in that region stem from the power of those great fires that surge through the earth.


130

XIV
 
Iceland's volcanic eruptions

Son. I should like very much, with your permission, to ask further about this fire. You stated earlier in your remarks that Gregory has written in his Dialogues that there are places of torment in Sicily; but to me it seems more likely that those places are in Iceland. You also said that so vast are the fires in the bowels of the land that earthquakes arise out of their violent movements; but if the fires are so destructive to stone and rock that it melts them like wax and feeds wholly upon them, I should imagine that it would soon consume all the foundations beneath the land and all the mountains as well. Though you may think I am asking childish questions about these things, still I entreat you to give indulgent replies; for, of course, one can ask many questions that reveal youth rather than wisdom.

Son. I would really like, with your permission, to ask more about this fire. You mentioned earlier that Gregory wrote in his Dialogues that there are places of torment in Sicily; however, it seems to me that those places are more likely in Iceland. You also stated that the fires deep within the earth are so huge that they cause earthquakes from their violent movements; but if these fires are so destructive to stone and rock that they melt them like wax and consume them entirely, I would think that they would soon destroy all the foundations beneath the land and all the mountains too. Even if you think my questions seem childish, I kindly ask you to respond patiently; after all, one can ask many questions that show youthfulness rather than wisdom.

Father. I have no doubt that there are places of torment in Iceland even in places where there is no burning; for in that country the power of frost and ice is as boundless as that of fire. There are those springs of boiling water which we have mentioned earlier. There are also ice-cold streams which flow out of the glaciers with such violence that the earth and the neighboring mountains tremble; for when water flows with such a swift and furious current, mountains will shake because of its vast mass and overpowering strength. And no men can go out upon those river banks to view them unless they bring long ropes to be tied around those who wish to explore, while farther away others sit holding fast the 131rope, so that they may be ready and able to pull them back if the turbulence of the current should make them dizzy. Now it seems evident to me that wherever such a great violence appears and in such terrible forms, there surely must be places of torment. And God has made such great and terrifying things manifest upon earth to man, not only that men may be the more vigilant, and may reflect that these tortures are indeed heavy to think upon, although after they depart this life they will have to suffer those that they see while still on earth; but even more to make them reflect that greater still are the things invisible, which they are not permitted to see. But these things are a testimony, that it is not untrue what we have been told, that those men who will not beware of evil deeds and unrighteousness, while they live on earth, may expect to suffer torment when they leave this world. For many a simple-minded man might think that all this was mere deception unworthy of notice and told merely to terrify, if there were no such evidence as what we have now pointed out. But now no one can deny what he sees before his own eyes, since we hear exactly the same things about the tortures of hell as those which one can see on the island called Iceland: for there are vast and boundless fire, overpowering frost and glaciers, boiling springs, and violent ice-cold streams.[217]

Father. I have no doubt that there are places of torment in Iceland, even in areas without fire; because in that country, the power of frost and ice is as limitless as that of fire. There are those boiling hot springs we've mentioned before. There are also ice-cold streams that rush out of the glaciers with such force that the earth and nearby mountains shake; when water flows with such a swift and fierce current, mountains will tremble because of its massive weight and overwhelming strength. And no one can venture out to those river banks without bringing long ropes to tie around those who want to explore, while others stand back, holding the rope tightly, ready to pull them back if the raging current makes them dizzy. It seems clear to me that wherever such intense violence appears in such terrifying forms, there must surely be places of torment. God has made these great and fearsome things visible to humanity, not only so that people might be more vigilant and realize that these tortures are indeed heavy to contemplate, knowing that after leaving this life, they will endure those they see while still on earth; but even more so to make them understand that greater things still remain hidden from their view. These things serve as proof that what we've been told is not untrue—that those who ignore evil deeds and injustice while living on earth should expect to suffer torment when they leave this world. Many simple-minded people might think all this is just deception unworthy of attention and merely intended to terrify, if there were no evidence like what we've now pointed out. But now, no one can deny what they see with their own eyes, since we hear the same things about the torments of hell that we can observe on the island called Iceland: vast and endless fire, overpowering frost, glaciers, boiling springs, and ferocious ice-cold streams.[217]

But what you suggested just now, namely that this fire is likely to melt and consume the mountains and the 132foundations of the earth, so that the entire land will be destroyed, that cannot come to pass before the time that God has appointed. For neither this created force nor any other governs itself; but all things are compelled to move as God’s providence has ordained from the beginning. And you will understand this better if I take up certain events that can be used to illustrate these things.

But what you just suggested, namely that this fire could melt and destroy the mountains and the foundations of the earth, leading to the complete devastation of the land, cannot happen before the time that God has set. For neither this created force nor any other has control over itself; everything is forced to act according to God’s plan from the beginning. You’ll grasp this better if I discuss certain events that can illustrate these points.

When the lord of death wished to tempt Job, he had no power to do so before he had asked permission; and when this had been granted, he did not have power to carry out his will farther than the permission extended; for he would gladly have slain Job at once, if that had been allowed. He was allowed to take away Job’s wealth and he took it all at the first stroke; but he was not permitted to destroy the man himself. As he yearned for permission to tempt him even more severely than he had already, he was suffered to carry out his will upon Job’s body and upon all the possessions that belonged to him. But he was not permitted to separate soul from body, before the hour should come that He had fixed, Who has all power over life and destiny. But as soon as Satan had received permission to carry out his desires upon Job, he showed immediately how eager he was to act in such matters as were within his power. For it is written that Satan took away from Job his abundant wealth and his seven sons and three daughters, and smote his body with terrible leprosy from the crown to the sole of his feet.

When the lord of death wanted to tempt Job, he had no power to do so until he asked for permission; and when that was granted, he could only go as far as the permission allowed. He would have gladly killed Job right away if he had been allowed to. He was permitted to take away Job’s wealth, which he did all at once, but he couldn’t destroy Job himself. As he craved permission to tempt Job even more than he already had, he was allowed to act on Job’s body and all his possessions. But he was not allowed to separate Job’s soul from his body until the time set by Him who has all power over life and fate. As soon as Satan got the okay to carry out his plans on Job, he immediately showed how eager he was to act within the limits allowed. It is written that Satan took away Job’s great wealth and his seven sons and three daughters, and struck his body with terrible leprosy from head to toe.

Now the meaning of this (which ought to be noted carefully in our minds) is that the Lord of life has power 133over all things and is kindly disposed; while the lord of death has an evil will, but has power over nothing, except as he receives authority beforehand from Him Who rules over all, Who is Almighty God. The devil can, therefore, injure no one to such an extent that he is consumed either by the fires of death which he has kindled and continues to maintain by means of dreadful earthquakes, or by such other fiendish enmity or malignity as he delights in. For he is allowed to do nothing more than the task at hand, as is evident from what I have just related about the case of Job. And if it should be thought necessary to cite several examples in one speech, it will be found that instances of this sort are both plentiful and convincing.

Now, the important thing to understand (which should be carefully considered) is that the Lord of life has power over everything and is benevolent; while the lord of death has malicious intent but holds no real power, except as he receives the authority in advance from Him Who rules over all, Who is Almighty God. The devil can’t harm anyone to the point of complete destruction by the flames of death he has ignited and continues to sustain through terrible earthquakes, or through any other wicked malice he enjoys. He is only allowed to do what's necessary, as is clear from the story of Job I just mentioned. And if it's deemed important to provide several examples in one statement, you will find that there are many convincing instances of this.


XV
 
OTHER ICELANDIC WONDERS: ORE AND MINERAL SPRINGS

Son. It seems evident that the more examples I can hear you cite of the sort that leads to knowledge, the better it will be; and from the instance that you have just given I can see clearly that if Satan was not able to carry out his will against one man, except as far as he was permitted, he will surely have even less power to carry out his desires against many thousands, either by his own effort or through a servant, except as far as permission has been given. Now if we are to go on with this entertaining conversation, as we have been doing, I should like to know, whether there are any other things about this island which you think are worth discussing or which seem remarkable.

Son. It’s clear that the more examples you can give me that lead to knowledge, the better. From the example you just provided, it’s obvious that if Satan couldn’t act against one person without permission, he definitely will have even less power to pursue his desires against thousands, whether on his own or through someone else, unless permission is granted. Now, if we’re going to continue this interesting conversation, as we have been, I’d like to know if there are any other aspects of this island that you think are worth discussing or that seem noteworthy.

134Father. We have already mentioned nearly everything in Iceland that is really worth noticing; but there are a few other things which I may discuss, if you wish. In that country there is an abundance of the ore that iron is made of: it is called “swamp-ore” in the speech of the people there, and the same term is used among ourselves. It has happened at times that great deposits of this ore have been found, and men have prepared to go thither the next day to smelt it and make iron of it, only to find it gone, and none can tell what becomes of it. This is called the “ore-marvel” in that country. There is still another marvel that men wonder at. It is reported that in Iceland there are springs which men call ale-springs. They are so called because the water that runs from them smells more like ale than water; and when one drinks of it, it does not fill as other water does, but is easily digested and goes into the system like ale. There are several springs in that country that are called ale-springs; but one is the best and most famous of all; this one is found in the valley called Hiterdale.[218] It is told about this spring, or the water flowing from it, that it tastes exactly like ale and is very abundant. It is also said that if drunk to excess, it goes into one’s head. If a house is built over the spring it will turn aside from the building and break forth somewhere outside. It is further held that people may drink as much as they like at the spring; but if they carry the water away, it will soon lose its virtue and is then no better than other 135water, or not so good. Now we have discussed many and even trifling things, because in that country they are thought marvelous; and I cannot recall anything else in Iceland that is worth mentioning.

134Father. We’ve already talked about almost everything in Iceland that’s really worth mentioning, but there are a few more things I can cover if you’re interested. In that country, there’s a lot of the ore that iron is made from. The locals call it “swamp-ore,” and we use the same term. There have been times when large deposits of this ore were discovered, and people planned to go there the next day to smelt it and turn it into iron, only to find it mysteriously vanished, and no one knows what happens to it. This phenomenon is referred to as the “ore-marvel” in that region. There’s another strange thing that baffles people. It’s said that Iceland has springs known as ale-springs. They’re called that because the water from them smells more like ale than regular water, and when you drink it, it doesn’t fill you up like other water does; instead, it’s easy to digest and feels like it enters the system like ale. There are several ale-springs in that country, but one is the best and most famous; it’s located in the valley called Hiterdale.[218] They say that the water from this spring tastes exactly like ale and is quite plentiful. It’s also said that if you drink too much of it, it can make you lightheaded. If a house is built over the spring, it’ll flow around the building and come out somewhere else. Furthermore, it’s believed that people can drink as much as they want at the spring, but if they take the water away, it will soon lose its special qualities and then is just like any other135water, or maybe even worse. Now we’ve covered various topics, even trivial ones, since they are considered marvelous in that country; and I can’t think of anything else in Iceland worth mentioning.


XVI
 
THE WONDERS OF THE WATERS AROUND GREENLAND: MONSTERS, SEALS, AND WALRUSES

Son. Now that we have entered upon this interesting conversation and have spoken of the marvels that are found in Iceland and the Icelandic seas, let us close it by calling to mind what is worth noting in the waters of Greenland or in the land itself and the wonders that are to be seen there.

Son. Now that we’ve started this fascinating conversation and talked about the wonders of Iceland and its seas, let’s wrap it up by recalling what’s interesting about the waters of Greenland and the land itself, along with the sights you can see there.

Father. It is reported that the waters about Greenland are infested with monsters, though I do not believe that they have been seen very frequently. Still, people have stories to tell about them, so men must have seen or caught sight of them. It is reported that the monster called merman is found in the seas of Greenland. This monster is tall and of great size and rises straight out of the water. It appears to have shoulders, neck and head, eyes and mouth, and nose and chin like those of a human being; but above the eyes and the eyebrows it looks more like a man with a peaked helmet on his head. It has shoulders like a man’s but no hands. Its body apparently grows narrower from the shoulders down, so that the lower down it has been observed, the more slender it has seemed to be. But no one has ever seen how the lower end is shaped, whether it terminates in a fin like a fish or is pointed like a pole. The form of this 136prodigy has, therefore, looked much like an icicle. No one has ever observed it closely enough to determine whether its body has scales like a fish or skin like a man. Whenever the monster has shown itself, men have always been sure that a storm would follow. They have also noted how it has turned when about to plunge into the waves and in what direction it has fallen; if it has turned toward the ship and has plunged in that direction, the sailors have felt sure that lives would be lost on that ship; but whenever it has turned away from the vessel and has plunged in that direction, they have felt confident that their lives would be spared, even though they should encounter rough waters and severe storms.

Father. It's said that the waters around Greenland are home to monsters, though I don’t think they’ve been sighted very often. Still, people have stories about them, so it’s clear that some must have seen or caught glimpses of them. They say there’s a creature called a merman found in the seas of Greenland. This creature is tall and quite large, rising straight out of the water. It seems to have shoulders, a neck and head, and features like those of a human—eyes, mouth, nose, and chin. However, above the eyes and brows, it resembles a man wearing a pointed helmet. It has shoulders like a man but no hands. Its body appears to taper from the shoulders down, so the lower it has been observed, the slimmer it seems. But no one has ever seen how it ends, whether it has a fin like a fish or a point like a pole. The shape of this 136 creature has been likened to an icicle. No one has ever looked closely enough to tell if its body has scales like a fish or skin like a human. Whenever this monster has appeared, people have always been certain that a storm would follow. They’ve also noticed how it turns before diving into the waves and the direction it falls; if it turns toward the ship and plunges in that way, the sailors are convinced that lives will be lost on that ship. But whenever it turns away from the vessel and dives in that direction, they feel confident their lives will be saved, even if they face rough seas and fierce storms.

Another prodigy called mermaid[219] has also been seen there. This appears to have the form of a woman from the waist upward, for it has large nipples on its breast like a woman, long hands and heavy hair, and its neck and head are formed in every respect like those of a human being. The monster is said to have large hands and its fingers are not parted but bound together by a web like that which joins the toes of water fowls. Below the waist line it has the shape of a fish with scales and 137tail and fins. It is said to have this in common with the one mentioned before, that it rarely appears except before violent storms. Its behavior is often somewhat like this: it will plunge into the waves and will always reappear with fish in its hands; if it then turns toward the ship, playing with the fishes or throwing them at the ship, the men have fears that they will suffer great loss of life. The monster is described as having a large and terrifying face, a sloping forehead and wide brows, a large mouth and wrinkled cheeks. But if it eats the fishes or throws them into the sea away from the ship, the crews have good hopes that their lives will be spared, even though they should meet severe storms.

Another creature known as a mermaid[219] has also been spotted there. It appears to have the upper body of a woman, with large breasts, long arms, and thick hair, and its neck and head look just like a human's. The creature is said to have big hands with fingers that are webbed together, similar to the feet of water birds. Below the waist, its body resembles a fish with scales, a tail, and fins. It's said to share a trait with the aforementioned creature, as it rarely shows itself except before severe storms. Its behavior often looks like this: it dives into the waves and then surfaces with fish in its hands; if it turns toward the ship, playing with the fish or throwing them at the ship, the sailors worry that they'll face a tragic loss of life. The creature is described as having a large and frightening face, a sloping forehead, wide brows, a big mouth, and wrinkled cheeks. However, if it eats the fish or tosses them into the sea away from the ship, the crews feel hopeful that their lives will be spared, even if they encounter harsh storms.

Now there is still another marvel in the seas of Greenland, the facts of which I do not know precisely. It is called “sea hedges,”[220] and it has the appearance as if all the waves and tempests of the ocean have been collected into three heaps, out of which three billows are formed. These hedge in the entire sea, so that no opening can be seen anywhere; they are higher than lofty mountains and resemble steep, overhanging cliffs. In a few cases only have the men been known to escape who were upon the seas when such a thing occurred. But the stories of these happenings must have arisen from the fact that God has always preserved some of those who have been placed in these perils, and their accounts have afterwards spread abroad, passing from man to man. It 138may be that the tales are told as the first ones related them, or the stories may have grown larger or shrunk somewhat. Consequently, we have to speak cautiously about this matter, for of late we have met but very few who have escaped this peril and are able to give us tidings about it.

Now, there's another wonder in the waters of Greenland, the details of which I don't know for sure. It's called "sea hedges,"[220] and it looks like all the waves and storms of the ocean have been piled into three mounds, creating three huge waves. These waves surround the entire sea, making it impossible to see any openings; they're taller than high mountains and look like steep, overhanging cliffs. Only a few people have been known to survive who were at sea when this phenomenon happened. But the stories about these events likely stem from the fact that God has always saved some of those caught in these dangers, and their accounts have spread from person to person. It may be that the tales are told exactly as the first ones recounted them, or perhaps the stories have grown or shrunk over time. Therefore, we need to be careful when discussing this issue, as we have only recently encountered very few who have escaped this danger and can provide us with information about it.

In that same ocean there are many other marvels, though they cannot be reckoned among the prodigies. As soon as one has passed over the deepest part of the ocean, he will encounter such masses of ice in the sea, that I know no equal of it anywhere else in all the earth. Sometimes these ice fields are as flat as if they were frozen on the sea itself. They are about four or five ells thick and extend so far out from the land that it may mean a journey of four days or more to travel across them. There is more ice to the northeast and north of the land than to the south, southwest, and west; consequently, whoever wishes to make the land should sail around it to the southwest and west, till he has come past all those places where ice may be looked for, and approach the land on that side.[221] It has frequently happened that men have sought to make the land too soon and, as a result, have been caught in the ice floes. Some of those who have been caught have perished; but others have got out again, and we have met some of these and have heard their accounts and tales. But all those who 139have been caught in these ice drifts have adopted the same plan: they have taken their small boats and have dragged them up on the ice with them, and in this way have sought to reach land; but the ship and everything else of value had to be abandoned and was lost. Some have had to spend four days or five upon the ice before reaching land, and some even longer.

In that same ocean, there are many other wonders, although they can’t be considered miracles. Once you pass over the deepest part of the ocean, you’ll come across massive ice formations that I haven’t seen the likes of anywhere else on earth. Sometimes, these ice fields are as flat as if they’ve frozen right on the sea. They’re about four to five yards thick and extend so far out from the land that it might take four days or more to cross them. There’s more ice to the northeast and north of the land than to the south, southwest, and west; therefore, anyone wanting to reach the land should sail around to the southwest and west until they’ve passed all the areas where ice is likely to be found and approach the land from that direction.[221] It often happens that people try to reach the land too early and end up getting stuck in the ice. Some of those who’ve been trapped have died, but others have managed to escape, and we’ve met some of them and heard their stories. However, all those who have been caught in these ice flows have followed the same approach: they’ve taken their small boats and dragged them up onto the ice with them in hopes of reaching land; but the ship and all other valuables had to be left behind and were lost. Some have spent four or five days on the ice before making it to land, and some even longer.

These ice floes have peculiar habits. Sometimes they lie as quiet as can be, though cut apart by creeks or large fjords; at other times they travel with a speed so swift and violent that a ship with a fair wind behind is not more speedy; and when once in motion, they travel as often against the wind as with it. There is also ice of a different shape which the Greenlanders call icebergs. In appearance these resemble high mountains rising out of the sea; they never mingle with other ice but stand by themselves.

These ice floes have strange behaviors. Sometimes they lie still and quiet, even though they're separated by creeks or large fjords; other times they move with such speed and force that a ship with the wind at its back isn't any faster; and once they're moving, they often go against the wind as much as with it. There’s also a different kind of ice that the Greenlanders call icebergs. They look like tall mountains rising from the sea and don’t mix with other ice but stand alone.

In those waters there are also many of those species of whales which we have already described. It is claimed that there are all sorts of seals, too, in those seas, and that they have a habit of following the ice, as if abundant food would never be wanting there. These are the species of seals that are found there. One is called the “corse seal;” its length is never more than four ells. There is another sort called the “erken-seal,”[222] which grows to a length of five ells or six at the very longest. Then there is a third kind which is called the “flett seal,” which grows to about the same length as those mentioned above. There is still a fourth kind, called the 140bearded seal, which occasionally grows to a length of six ells or even seven. In addition there are various smaller species, one of which is called the saddleback;[223] it has this name because it does not swim on the belly like other seals but on the back or side; its length is never more than four ells. There remains the smallest kind, which is called the “short seal” and is not more than two ells in length. It has a peculiar nature; for it is reported that these seals can pass under flat ice masses four or even five ells thick and can blow up through them; consequently they can have large openings where-ever they want them.

In those waters, there are also many species of whales that we have already talked about. It's said that there are all kinds of seals in those seas, and they tend to follow the ice, as if there’s always plenty of food available. Here are the types of seals found there. One is called the “corse seal,” and it’s never longer than four ells. Another type is called the “erken-seal,” which can grow to about five or six ells at the most. Then there's a third kind, known as the “flett seal,” which is about the same length as the others mentioned. There's also a fourth type, called the bearded seal, which can sometimes reach six or even seven ells in length. Additionally, there are various smaller species, one of which is called the saddleback; it gets this name because it doesn’t swim on its belly like other seals but rather on its back or side, and it’s never longer than four ells. Lastly, there’s the smallest kind, known as the “short seal,” which measures no more than two ells in length. This type is unique because it’s said that these seals can pass under flat ice masses that are four or five ells thick and can burst through them, allowing them to create large openings wherever they want.

There still remains another species which the Greenlanders count among the whales, but which, it seems to me, ought rather to be classed with the seals.[224] These are called walrus and grow to a length of fourteen ells or fifteen at the very highest. In shape this fish resembles the seal both as to hair, head, skin, and the webbed feet behind; it also has the swimming feet in front like the seal. Its flesh like that of other seals must not be eaten on fast days. Its appearance is distinguished from that of other seals in that it has, in addition to the other small teeth, two large and long tusks, which are placed in the front part of the upper jaw and sometimes grow to a length of nearly an ell and a half. Its hide is thick and good to make ropes of; it can be cut into leather strips of such strength that sixty or more men may pull at one rope without breaking it. The seals that we have just discussed are called fish because they find their food 141in the sea and subsist upon other fishes. They may be freely eaten, though not like the whales, for whale flesh may be eaten on fast days like other fish food, while these fishes may be eaten only on the days when flesh food is allowed. Now I know of nothing else in the waters of Greenland which seems worth mentioning or reporting,—only those things that we have just discussed.

There’s another species that the Greenlanders consider a whale, but it seems to me it should be categorized with seals.[224] These are called walruses and can grow to about fourteen to fifteen ells in length. In shape, this animal resembles the seal in terms of fur, head, skin, and its webbed back feet; it also has swimming limbs in front like a seal. Its meat, like that of other seals, shouldn’t be eaten on fast days. What distinguishes it from other seals is that, in addition to its small teeth, it has two large, long tusks that extend from the front part of the upper jaw and can sometimes reach nearly an ell and a half in length. Its hide is thick and suitable for making ropes, which can be cut into leather strips strong enough that sixty or more men can pull on one rope without it breaking. The seals we've just talked about are categorized as fish because they find their food in the sea and feed on other fish. They can be eaten freely, but not the same way as whale, since whale meat can be consumed on fast days like other fish, while these seals can only be eaten on days when meat is allowed. Right now, I don’t know of anything else in Greenland’s waters that seems worth mentioning or reporting—just those things we’ve just discussed.


XVII
 
THE WILDLIFE OF GREENLAND AND THE NATURE OF THE LAND IN THOSE AREAS

Son. These things must seem wonderful to all who may hear of them,—both what is told about the fishes and that about the monsters which are said to exist in those waters. Now I understand that this ocean must be more tempestuous than all other seas; and therefore I think it strange that it is covered with ice both in winter and in summer, more than all other seas are. I am also curious to know why men should be so eager to fare thither, where there are such great perils to beware of, and what one can look for in that country which can be turned to use or pleasure. With your permission I also wish to ask what the people who inhabit those lands live upon; what the character of the country is, whether it is ice-clad like the ocean or free from ice even though the sea be frozen; and whether corn grows in that country as in other lands. I should also like to know whether you regard it as mainland or as an island, and whether there are any beasts or such other things in that country as there are in other lands.

Son. These things must sound amazing to anyone who hears about them—both the stories about the fish and the tales of the monsters said to inhabit those waters. I now realize that this ocean must be more turbulent than all other seas; and so, I find it strange that it's covered by ice both in winter and summer, more than any other seas. I'm also curious why people are so eager to go there, given the great dangers to watch out for, and what one might find in that land that could be useful or enjoyable. With your permission, I’d also like to ask what the people living there eat; what the landscape is like—whether it's as icy as the ocean or ice-free even though the sea is frozen; and if crops grow there like they do in other places. I’d also like to know if you consider it to be a mainland or an island, and whether there are animals or other things in that country like those found in other regions.

142Father. The answer to your query as to what people go to seek in that country and why they fare thither through such great perils is to be sought in man’s threefold nature. One motive is fame and rivalry, for it is in the nature of man to seek places where great dangers may be met, and thus to win fame. A second motive is curiosity, for it is also in man’s nature to wish to see and experience the things that he has heard about, and thus to learn whether the facts are as told or not. The third is desire for gain; for men seek wealth wherever they have heard that gain is to be gotten, though, on the other hand, there may be great dangers too. But in Greenland it is this way, as you probably know, that whatever comes from other lands is high in price, for this land lies so distant from other countries that men seldom visit it. And everything that is needed to improve the land must be purchased abroad, both iron and all the timber used in building houses. In return for their wares the merchants bring back the following products: buckskin, or hides, sealskins, and rope of the kind that we talked about earlier which is called “leather rope” and is cut from the fish called walrus, and also the teeth of the walrus.

142Father. The answer to your question about what people go looking for in that country and why they venture there despite such great dangers lies in human nature. One reason is the pursuit of fame and competition; it's in our nature to seek out places where we can face great risks and earn recognition. Another reason is curiosity; people naturally want to see and experience the things they've heard about to find out if the stories are true. The third motive is the desire for profit; people chase after wealth wherever they hear it can be found, even if that comes with significant risks. In Greenland, as you probably know, anything imported from other countries is very expensive because it's so remote and rarely visited. Everything needed to improve the land must be bought from abroad, including iron and all the lumber used for building houses. In exchange for their goods, merchants bring back products like buckskin or hides, sealskins, and the type of rope we discussed earlier, known as “leather rope,” made from walrus skin, along with walrus teeth.

As to whether any sort of grain can grow there, my belief is that the country draws but little profit from that source. And yet there are men among those who are counted the wealthiest and most prominent who have tried to sow grain as an experiment; but the great majority in that country do not know what bread is, having never seen it. You have also asked about the extent of the land and whether it is mainland or an island; 143but I believe that few know the size of the land, though all believe that it is continental and connected with some mainland, inasmuch as it evidently contains a number of such animals as are known to live on the mainland but rarely on islands. Hares and wolves are very plentiful and there are multitudes of reindeer. It seems to be generally held, however, that these animals do not inhabit islands, except where men have brought them in; and everybody seems to feel sure that no one has brought them to Greenland, but that they must have run thither from other mainlands. There are bears, too, in that region; they are white, and people think they are native to the country, for they differ very much in their habits from the black bears that roam the forests. These kill horses, cattle, and other beasts to feed upon; but the white bear of Greenland wanders most of the time about on the ice in the sea, hunting seals and whales and feeding upon them. It is also as skillful a swimmer as any seal or whale.

As for whether any type of grain can grow there, I believe the country doesn’t gain much from that source. Still, there are some wealthy and prominent people who have tried to plant grain as an experiment; however, the vast majority of people in that country don’t know what bread is, having never seen it. You’ve also asked about the size of the land and whether it’s part of the mainland or an island; 143 but I think few actually know the land’s size, though everyone seems to believe it’s a continent connected to some mainland, since it clearly has various animals that are known to live on the mainland but rarely on islands. Hares and wolves are plentiful, and there are lots of reindeer. However, it’s generally believed that these animals don’t live on islands unless they’ve been brought there by humans; and everyone seems confident that no one has introduced them to Greenland, so they must have come from other mainland areas. There are bears in that region too; they’re white, and people think they’re native to the country because they behave very differently from the black bears found in the forests. Those black bears prey on horses, cattle, and other animals, while the white bear of Greenland mainly roams the ice in the sea, hunting seals and whales for food. It’s also as skilled a swimmer as any seal or whale.

In reply to your question whether the land thaws out or remains icebound like the sea, I can state definitely that only a small part of the land thaws out, while all the rest remains under the ice. But nobody knows whether the land is large or small, because all the mountain ranges and all the valleys are covered with ice, and no opening has been found anywhere. But it is quite evident that there are such openings, either along the shore or in the valleys that lie between the mountains, through which beasts can find a way; for they could not run thither from other lands, unless they should find open roads through the ice and the soil thawed out. 144Men have often tried to go up into the country and climb the highest mountains in various places to look about and learn whether any land could be found that was free from ice and habitable. But nowhere have they found such a place, except what is now occupied, which is a little strip along the water’s edge.

In response to your question about whether the land thaws or stays frozen like the sea, I can confirm that only a small part of the land thaws, while the rest remains covered by ice. However, no one knows the size of the land because all the mountain ranges and valleys are hidden under ice, and no openings have been discovered anywhere. It’s clear that there must be some openings, either along the shore or in the valleys between the mountains, that allow animals to pass through; they wouldn't have been able to come from other lands without finding pathways through the ice and thawed ground. 144People have often tried to venture into the interior and climb the highest mountains in different areas to see if there’s any land that is free from ice and suitable for living. But they haven’t found such a place anywhere, other than the small strip that is currently inhabited, which is located along the water's edge.

There is much marble in those parts that are inhabited; it is variously colored, both red and blue and streaked with green. There are also many large hawks in the land, which in other countries would be counted very precious,—white falcons, and they are more numerous there than in any other country; but the natives do not know how to make any use of them.[225]

There is a lot of marble in the areas where people live; it comes in different colors, including red, blue, and green streaked patterns. There are also many large hawks in the region, which would be considered very valuable in other countries—white falcons, and they are more common there than anywhere else; however, the locals don’t know how to put them to use.[225]


XVIII
 
Greenland's Products

Son. You stated earlier in your talk that no grain grows in that country; therefore I now want to ask you what the people who inhabit the land live on, how large the population is, what sort of food they have, and whether they have accepted Christianity.

Son. You mentioned earlier in your talk that no crops grow in that country; so now I want to ask you what the people who live there survive on, what the population size is, what kind of food they eat, and whether they've adopted Christianity.

Father. The people in that country are few, for only a small part is sufficiently free from ice to be habitable; but the people are all Christians and have churches and priests. If the land lay near to some other country it might be reckoned a third of a bishopric; but the Greenlanders 145now have their own bishop,[226] as no other arrangement is possible on account of the great distance from other people. You ask what the inhabitants live on in that country since they sow no grain; but men can live on other food than bread.[227] It is reported that the pasturage is good and that there are large and fine farms in Greenland. The farmers raise cattle and sheep in large numbers and make butter and cheese in great quantities. The people subsist chiefly on these foods and on beef; but they also eat the flesh of various kinds of game, such as reindeer, whales, seals, and bears. That is what men live on in that country.

Father. The population in that country is small, as only a tiny area is free from ice and suitable for living; however, everyone there is Christian and they have churches and priests. If this land were closer to another country, it might be considered part of a bishopric; but the Greenlanders 145 now have their own bishop,[226] since no other arrangement is feasible due to the great distance from others. You wonder what the locals eat in that country since they don’t grow any grain, but people can survive on food other than bread.[227] It’s said that the grazing land is good and that there are large, nice farms in Greenland. The farmers raise a lot of cattle and sheep and produce a significant amount of butter and cheese. The people mainly survive on these foods and beef; but they also consume the meat of various game, like reindeer, whales, seals, and bears. That’s what people eat in that country.


XIX
 
THE CLIMATE OF GREENLAND; THE NORTHERN LIGHTS

Son. I believe I still have some questions to ask about this country. How do you account for the fact that Greenland and the ocean that lies about it have greater masses of ice than any other land or sea? For I gather from what you have said that the ocean is deep and also very salt and always in commotion; and I did not suppose that it could freeze readily there, since, where the ocean is deep and the water is salt, ice forms with difficulty, especially when the sea is in turmoil and the waves roll high. But now I hear about these waters that we have just talked about and likewise about the land, 146that there is never an interval when the land or the sea is not covered with ice, except that occasionally an opening appears here and there in the ice field; but this is due to the stirring of the sea and not to the heat.

Son. I still have some questions about this country. How do you explain that Greenland and the surrounding ocean have more ice than any other land or sea? From what you've said, the ocean is deep, very salty, and always moving; I didn't think it could freeze easily there, since ice has a hard time forming where the water is deep and salty, especially when the sea is rough and the waves are high. But now I'm hearing about these waters we just discussed and also about the land, 146 that there’s never a time when the land or sea isn’t covered in ice, except that sometimes there are small openings in the ice field; but that’s because of the movement of the sea, not the heat.

Now since the land is constantly frozen over in both winter and summer, I wish to ask you to tell me exactly how the climate is in Greenland: whether there is any warmth or fair sunshine as in other lands, or if the weather is always unpleasant, and whether that is what causes the excessive ice and frost. I should like to have you clear this matter up for me along with those things that I asked about earlier in our conversation, and what that thing is which the Greenlanders call the northern lights.[228] All these questions I should like to have you answer, and also this, in what part of the world you believe that country to be located: whether it lies somewhere on the edge of the world or about some large bend in the ocean like other extensive lands, seeing that you think it is joined to other mainlands.

Now that the land is always frozen over in both winter and summer, I want to ask you to tell me exactly what the climate is like in Greenland: is there any warmth or nice sunshine like in other places, or is the weather always unpleasant, and could that be what leads to all the ice and frost? I would appreciate it if you could clarify this for me, along with the other things I asked about earlier in our conversation, including what the Greenlanders refer to as the northern lights.[228] I’d like you to answer all these questions, and also let me know where you think that country is located: does it sit on the edge of the world or at some large bend in the ocean like other vast lands, since you believe it’s connected to other mainlands?

Father. The matters about which you have now inquired I cannot wholly clear up for you, inasmuch as I have not yet found any one who has knowledge of the entire “home-circle”[229] and its dimensions and who has explored the whole earth on all its sides, or the nature of the lands and the landmarks located there. If I had ever 147met such a man, one who had seen and examined these things, I should have been able to give you full information about them. But I can at least tell you what those men have conjectured who have formed the most reasonable opinions.

Father. I can’t fully answer your questions because I haven’t come across anyone who knows everything about the entire “home-circle”[229] and its dimensions, or who has explored every part of the earth and its features. If I had ever met such a person—someone who has seen and studied these things—I would be able to provide you with complete answers. But I can at least share what those who have made the most sensible guesses have speculated.

The men who have written best concerning the nature of the earth, following the guidance of Isidore and other learned men,[230] state that there are certain zones on the heavens under which men cannot live. One is very hot and, because of the glowing heat which burns everything that comes beneath it, people cannot exist under this zone. It seems reasonable that this is the broad path of the sun, and I believe it is because this zone is pervaded with the sun’s flaming rays that no one who wishes only a moderately warm dwelling place can live beneath it. These writers have also said concerning two other zones in the sky that under them too the land is uninhabitable; because, on account of their frigidity, it is no more comfortable to dwell under them than under the first mentioned where the heat is torrid. For there the cold has developed such a power that water casts aside its nature and turns into ice masses; in this way all those lands become ice-cold, and the seas too, that lie under either of these two zones. From this I conclude that there are five zones in the heavens: two under 148which the earth is habitable, and three under which it is uninhabitable.

The scholars who have written extensively about the nature of the earth, guided by Isidore and other knowledgeable figures,[230] claim that there are certain areas in the sky where people cannot live. One area is extremely hot, and due to the intense heat that scorches everything beneath it, people cannot survive in this zone. It's reasonable to think that this is the path of the sun, and I believe that it’s the sun’s scorching rays that make it impossible for anyone seeking a moderately warm home to live there. These writers have also mentioned two other zones in the sky where the land is unlivable; due to their extreme cold, they are just as inhospitable as the first zone with its relentless heat. In these cold zones, the chill is so severe that water loses its liquid state and turns into ice; as a result, all lands and seas beneath either of these two zones become frigid. From this, I gather that there are five zones in the sky: two where the earth is livable and three where it is not.

Now all the land that lies under the zones between the hot and the cold belts can be occupied; but it is likely that owing to location the lands differ somewhat, so that some are hotter than others; the hottest being those that are nearest the torrid belt. But lands that are cold, like ours, lie nearer the frigid zones, where the frost is able to use its chilling powers. Now in my opinion it seems most probable that the hot zone extends from east to west in a curved ring like a flaming girdle around the entire sphere. On the other hand, it is quite probable that the cold zones lie on the outer edges of the world to the north and south: and in case I have thought this out correctly, it is not unlikely that Greenland lies under the frigid belt; for most of those who have visited Greenland testify that there the cold has received its greatest strength. Moreover, both sea and land bear testimony in their very selves that there the frost and the overpowering cold have become dominant, for both are frozen and covered with ice in summer as well as in winter.

Now, all the land located between the hot and cold regions can be claimed; however, it's likely that due to their locations, some areas are warmer than others, with the hottest being closest to the hot zone. The colder regions, like ours, are nearer to the cold zones, where frost has the power to chill. In my opinion, it's most likely that the hot zone stretches from east to west in a curved band, like a fiery belt around the whole planet. On the other hand, it's probable that the cold zones are situated at the outer edges of the world to the north and south. If I’ve thought this through correctly, it wouldn't be surprising if Greenland is located within the cold belt, since many who have traveled there report that the cold is intense. Additionally, both land and sea show clear evidence that frost and extreme cold dominate there, as they are frozen and covered with ice in both summer and winter.

It has been stated as a fact that Greenland lies on the outermost edge of the earth toward the north; and I do not believe there is any land in the home-circle beyond Greenland, only the great ocean that runs around the earth. And we are told by men who are informed that alongside Greenland the channel is cut through which the wide ocean rushes into the gap that lies between the land masses and finally branches out into fjords and inlets which cut in between the lands wherever the sea is allowed to flow out upon the earth’s surface.

It’s a fact that Greenland is at the northernmost edge of the earth, and I don't think there’s any land in the home area past Greenland—just the vast ocean that surrounds the planet. Experts tell us that next to Greenland, there’s a channel that allows the wide ocean to pour into the spaces between the land masses and eventually splits into fjords and inlets that carve into the land wherever the sea is permitted to spread across the earth’s surface.

149You asked whether the sun shines in Greenland and whether there ever happens to be fair weather there as in other countries; and you shall know of a truth that the land has beautiful sunshine and is said to have a rather pleasant climate. The sun’s course varies greatly, however; when winter is on, the night is almost continuous; but when it is summer, there is almost constant day. When the sun rises highest, it has abundant power to shine and give light, but very little to give warmth and heat; still, it has sufficient strength, where the ground is free from ice, to warm the soil so that the earth yields good and fragrant grass. Consequently, people may easily till the land where the frost leaves, but that is a very small part.

149You asked if the sun shines in Greenland and if there's ever nice weather there like in other countries; and you should know that the land enjoys beautiful sunshine and is considered to have a fairly pleasant climate. However, the sun's path is quite different; during winter, nights are almost endless; but in summer, it's nearly all day. When the sun is at its highest, it has strong light but provides little warmth; still, it’s enough to warm the ground where it isn’t frozen, allowing the earth to produce good and fragrant grass. As a result, people can easily farm the land where the frost has melted, but that's a very small area.

But as to that matter which you have often inquired about, what those lights can be which the Greenlanders call the northern lights, I have no clear knowledge. I have often met men who have spent a long time in Greenland, but they do not seem to know definitely what those lights are. However, it is true of that subject as of many others of which we have no sure knowledge, that thoughtful men will form opinions and conjectures about it and will make such guesses as seem reasonable and likely to be true. But these northern lights have this peculiar nature, that the darker the night is, the brighter they seem; and they always appear at night but never by day,—most frequently in the densest darkness and rarely by moonlight. In appearance they resemble a vast flame of fire viewed from a great distance. It also looks as if sharp points were shot from this flame up into the sky; these are of uneven height 150and in constant motion, now one, now another darting highest; and the light appears to blaze like a living flame. While these rays are at their highest and brightest, they give forth so much light that people out of doors can easily find their way about and can even go hunting, if need be. Where people sit in houses that have windows, it is so light inside that all within the room can see each other’s faces. The light is very changeable. Sometimes it appears to grow dim, as if a black smoke or a dark fog were blown up among the rays; and then it looks very much as if the light were overcome by this smoke and about to be quenched. But as soon as the smoke begins to grow thinner, the light begins to brighten again; and it happens at times that people think they see large sparks shooting out of it as from glowing iron which has just been taken from the forge. But as night declines and day approaches, the light begins to fade; and when daylight appears, it seems to vanish entirely.

But regarding the thing you’ve often asked about—those lights the Greenlanders call the northern lights—I don’t really know for sure what they are. I’ve met people who’ve spent a long time in Greenland, but they don’t seem to have a definite answer either. It’s true, like many other things we’re unsure about, that thoughtful people will come up with opinions and guesses that seem reasonable and likely true. These northern lights are unique in that the darker the night, the brighter they appear; they always show up at night and never during the day—most often in the deepest darkness and rarely with moonlight. They look like a vast flame of fire viewed from a distance. It also seems like sharp points are shooting from this flame up into the sky; these points vary in height and are constantly moving, with one or another shooting up the highest, and the light looks like a living flame. When these rays are at their peak and brightest, they give off so much light that people outside can easily find their way around and even go hunting if needed. Inside houses with windows, it’s so bright that everyone in the room can see each other's faces. The light changes a lot. Sometimes it seems to dim, almost as if a dark smoke or fog is rising among the rays; at that point, it looks like the light is being overpowered by this smoke and is about to go out. But as the smoke starts to thin, the light brightens again; sometimes people even think they see large sparks shooting out of it, like glowing iron just taken from the forge. But as night ends and day comes, the light starts to fade, and when daylight arrives, it seems to disappear completely.

The men who have thought about and discussed these lights have guessed at three sources, one of which, it seems, ought to be the true one. Some hold that fire circles about the ocean and all the bodies of water that stream about on the outer sides of the globe; and since Greenland lies on the outermost edge of the earth to the north, they think it possible that these lights shine forth from the fires that encircle the outer ocean. Others have suggested that during the hours of night, when the sun’s course is beneath the earth, an occasional gleam of its light may shoot up into the sky; for they insist that Greenland lies so far out on the earth’s edge that the 151curved surface which shuts out the sunlight must be less prominent there. But there are still others who believe (and it seems to me not unlikely) that the frost and the glaciers have become so powerful there that they are able to radiate forth these flames. I know nothing further that has been conjectured on this subject, only these three theories that I have presented; as to their correctness I do not decide, though the last mentioned looks quite plausible to me. I know of no other facts about Greenland that seem worth discussing or mentioning, only those that we have talked about and what we have noted as the opinions of well-informed men.

The men who have thought about and discussed these lights have proposed three possible sources, one of which seems to be the most likely. Some believe that fire circles around the ocean and all the bodies of water that flow along the outer edges of the world; since Greenland is at the extreme northern edge of the earth, they think it's possible that these lights come from the fires surrounding the outer ocean. Others suggest that during the night, when the sun is below the horizon, a glimpse of its light might shoot up into the sky; they argue that Greenland is so far on the edge of the earth that the curved surface blocking the sunlight must be less steep there. Still, there are others who think (and I find this quite possible) that the frost and glaciers have become so intense that they are able to emit these flames. I don't have any further conjectures on this topic, just these three theories I've mentioned; I won't judge their accuracy, though the last one seems quite reasonable to me. I know of no other facts about Greenland that seem worth discussing or mentioning, only those we've talked about and the opinions of knowledgeable individuals we've noted.


XX
 
THE TOPIC OF THE NORTHERN LIGHTS CONTINUED

Son. Everything that you have told here seems wonderful to me, though also very instructive, and this fact most of all, that men, as you have pointed out, are able to leave the earth, as it were, and view for themselves the boundaries which God has drawn amid such great perils. Your last remark, however, suggests that there is yet a little matter to inquire about along this same line. In speaking of those three conjectures you said that you think it most likely that these lights have their origin in frost and ice; but just before in describing their appearance, you added that now and then fog and dark mist resembling smoke would mount up among these lights. But even if the cold should be so prevalent there as to give rise to these lights with their fire-like rays, I cannot help wondering whence that smoke can come 152which sometimes appears to shade and becloud the light till it seems almost quenched; for to me it seems more likely that the smoke is due to heat than to frost. There is one more thing that looks strange to me which you mentioned earlier in your speech, namely that you consider Greenland as having a good climate, even though it is full of ice and glaciers. It is hard for me to understand how such a land can have a good climate.

Son. Everything you've shared here sounds amazing to me, and it's really informative too. What stands out the most is your point that people, as you mentioned, can leave the earth and see for themselves the boundaries that God has set, despite such huge dangers. However, your last comment suggests there’s still something to ask about regarding this topic. When you talked about those three theories, you said you think it's most likely that these lights come from frost and ice; but earlier, when you described how they look, you mentioned that sometimes fog and dark mist that resembles smoke rises among these lights. Even if it’s really cold there, causing these lights to appear with their fiery rays, I can’t help but wonder where that smoke comes from that sometimes seems to shade and dim the light until it looks almost extinguished; it seems to me that the smoke is more likely caused by heat than by frost. There's one more thing that seems odd to me that you mentioned earlier in your talk—you think Greenland has a good climate, despite being full of ice and glaciers. I find it hard to grasp how such a land can have a good climate.

Father. When you say, in asking about the smoke that sometimes appears to accompany the northern lights, that you think it more likely that the smoke comes from heat than from cold, I agree with you. But you must also know that wherever the earth is thawed under the ice, it always retains some heat down in the depths. In the same way the ocean under the ice retains some warmth in its depths. But if the earth were wholly without warmth or heat, it would be one mass of ice from the surface down to its lowest foundations. Likewise, if the ocean were without any heat, it would be solid ice from the surface to the bottom. Now large rifts may appear in the ice that covers the land as well as openings in the ice upon the sea. But wherever the earth thaws out and lies bare, whether in places where there is no ice or under the yawning rifts in the glacier, and wherever the sea lies bare in the openings that have formed in the ice, there steam is emitted from the lower depths; and it may be that this vapor collects and appears like smoke or dark fog; and that, whenever it looks as if the lights are about to be quenched by smoke or fog, it is this vapor that collects before them.

Father. When you say, while asking about the smoke that sometimes comes with the northern lights, that you think it's more likely the smoke comes from heat rather than cold, I agree with you. But you should also know that wherever the ground thaws beneath the ice, it always keeps some heat down below. Similarly, the ocean beneath the ice holds onto some warmth in its depths. If the earth had no warmth or heat, it would be completely frozen from the surface down to its lowest layers. Likewise, if the ocean had no heat, it would be solid ice from top to bottom. Now, large cracks can appear in the ice covering the land, as well as openings in the ice on the sea. However, wherever the ground thaws and is exposed, whether in places without ice or under vast cracks in the glacier, and wherever the sea is uncovered in the openings formed in the ice, steam rises from the lower depths; and this vapor may gather and look like smoke or dark fog; and whenever it seems like the lights are about to be extinguished by smoke or fog, it's this vapor that is gathering in front of them.

153In reply to your remark about the climate of Greenland, that you think it strange that it is called a good climate, I shall tell you something about the nature of the land. When storms do come, they are more severe than in most other places, both with respect to keen winds and vast masses of ice and snow. But usually these spells of rough weather last only a short while and come at long intervals only. In the meantime the weather is fair, though the cold is intense. For it is in the nature of the glacier to emit a cold and continuous breath which drives the storm clouds away from its face so that the sky above is usually clear.[231] But the neighboring lands often have to suffer because of this; for all the regions that lie near get severe weather from this ice, inasmuch as all the storms that the glacier drives away from itself come upon others with keen blasts. Now if this is clear to you, I believe there is no need of giving any further explanation of the subject than what you have now heard.

153In response to your comment about Greenland's climate, and how you find it odd that it's considered a good one, let me share some insights about the land. When storms do occur, they are more intense than in most other areas, with strong winds and large amounts of ice and snow. However, these bouts of rough weather usually only last a short time and happen infrequently. In between, the weather is generally fair, although it can be very cold. This is because glaciers release a cold, continuous airflow that pushes storm clouds away, often leaving the sky above clear.[231] But the neighboring areas often bear the brunt of this; all the regions nearby experience severe weather because any storms that the glacier pushes away end up hitting them with strong blasts. If this makes sense to you, I think that's all the explanation you need on this topic.


XXI
 
THE AREAS OF HEAT AND COLD

Son. These things are all clear to me and it seems reasonable that they should be as you say. Still, there are a few things that you mentioned a little earlier in your talk, which I wish to ask about, if you permit. You said that both sides of the earth are cold, the southern 154as well as the northern. But I hear it said by all men who come from the regions to the south that the farther south one travels, the hotter the lands are. Likewise all the winds that come from the south are both moister and milder than other winds. In the winter those winds always bring a good thaw, while other winds are so cold that they bring frost, and ice is formed. And during the summer the south wind is still warmer than other winds. Now if my questions do not tire you and I do not seem to ask too much, I should like to have you answer this question too.

Son. I understand everything you're saying, and it makes sense to me. However, there are a few things you mentioned earlier that I want to ask about, if that's okay with you. You said that both the southern and northern parts of the Earth are cold. But I've heard from everyone who comes from the southern regions that the farther south you go, the hotter it gets. Also, all the winds that blow from the south are more humid and milder than the others. In winter, those winds always bring a warm thaw, while other winds are so cold they cause frost and ice to form. Even in summer, the south wind is warmer than any of the other winds. If my questions aren't too much for you, I would really like you to answer this one as well.

Father. When I told you that in the skies three belts are traced under which it is difficult to cross, one torrid and two frigid, I added that the hot belt curves from east to west. But if I have stated this correctly, it will be evident that the cold must be as severe in the southern parts as in the northern.[232] I believe, however, that all the regions lying near the hot belt, whether on the south side or on the north, are also hot; but I believe those lands to be frigid which lie very far in either direction. You have stated that all men tell us that the farther south one travels, the greater the heat; but that, I believe, is due to the fact that you have never found any one who has traveled as far south of the hot belt as those lands which we have now talked of lie to the north. You have also said that the winds which come from a southerly direction are warmer than the rest. But it is reasonable that the south wind should be warm when it 155reaches us, even though it comes from the frozen south side of the earth, for it blows through the curved ring of the torrid belt.[233] Consequently, though it blows cold from the south, it is warm when it emerges on the northern side. And if people live as near the cold belt on the southern side as the Greenlanders do on the northern, I firmly believe that the north wind blows as warm to them as the south wind to us. For they must look north to see the midday and the sun’s whole course, just as we, who dwell north of the sun, must look to the south.

Father. When I told you that there are three belts in the sky that are hard to cross—one hot and two cold—I mentioned that the hot belt curves from east to west. If I got that right, it's clear that the cold must be just as severe in the southern regions as in the northern ones.[232] However, I believe that all the areas near the hot belt, both to the south and the north, are also warm; but I think the lands that are very far in either direction are cold. You’ve said that everyone claims that the further south you go, the hotter it gets; but I think that’s because you’ve never encountered anyone who has traveled as far south of the hot belt as those lands we just discussed are to the north. You’ve also mentioned that winds coming from the south are warmer than others. It makes sense that the south wind would be warm by the time it reaches us, even if it originates in the frozen southern part of the earth, because it passes through the curved area of the hot belt.[233] So, even if it starts off cold in the south, it warms up once it comes out on the northern side. And if people live as close to the cold belt in the south as the Greenlanders do in the north, I truly believe that the north wind feels as warm to them as the south wind does to us. They must look north to see noon and the sun’s entire path, just as we, living north of the sun, have to look south.

We have said earlier that in winter the sun’s course here is short, but of such extraordinary length in summer that we then have day nearly all the time. From this you may conclude that the sun’s path is quite broad and that its course is not narrow and straight as if it were always following a certain line. As soon as it reaches the outer edge of its sloping circuit toward the south, those who live on the extreme side of the world to the south have summer and long sun paths, while we have winter and little sunlight. And when the sun comes to the extreme edge of its circuit to the north, we have long-continued sunshine, while they have cold winter. For it is always this way, that the sun rises higher in the north when its path declines in the south: and when its course begins to decline in the north, it begins to wax on the southern side.

We've mentioned before that in winter the sun's path here is short, but during summer it’s so long that we almost have daylight all the time. From this, you can see that the sun's path is quite wide and not just a narrow, straight line. When it reaches the far edge of its slant towards the south, people who live at the southernmost part of the world experience summer and long days of sunlight, while we are in winter with little sunlight. Conversely, when the sun reaches its farthest point to the north, we enjoy prolonged sunshine while they endure cold winter. It’s always like this: when the sun rises higher in the north, its path lowers in the south, and as it begins to drop in the north, it rises in the south.

156You should also know that the change from day to night is due to the movements of the sun. For some places have midday when others have midnight; and the day dawns and brightens in some places just when darkness begins and night falls in other places.[234] For the day and the light always follow the sun, while the shadows flee from it; still they follow after it as it moves away; and there is always night where the shadows are, but always day where the light is. Now if you understand all these things that we have discussed in these hours, the change in day and night, the course of the sun, and all the other matters that we have talked about, you may count yourself thoroughly prepared for the trader’s calling, inasmuch as few only have had more instruction in these subjects than you have had.

156You should also know that the shift from day to night happens because of the sun's movement. Some places experience midday while others experience midnight; the day begins to brighten in some locations just as darkness settles in others.[234] The day and light are always connected to the sun, while shadows move away from it; yet, they trail behind as the sun travels. There is always night where the shadows are, but it’s always day where the light shines. If you’ve grasped everything we’ve talked about in these discussions, including the shift between day and night, the sun’s path, and all the other topics we’ve covered, you can consider yourself well-prepared for a career in trading, as few people have received as much instruction in these areas as you have.


XXII
 
THE WINDS REGARDING NAVIGATION

Son. I should indeed consider it highly informing, if I could remember all the things that you have now told me. I gather from your remarks, however, that you seem to think that I have asked about too many things in these our talks. But if you are not wearied with my questions, there still remains a little matter which, with your permission, I should like to ask about, one that also seems to belong to the knowledge of seafarers.

Son. I would really find it helpful if I could remember everything you just told me. From what you've said, it seems like you think I've asked too many questions during our conversations. But if you’re not tired of my inquiries, there’s still one more thing I’d like to ask about, something that seems relevant to the knowledge of sailors.

In a talk some time ago you said that whoever wishes to be a merchant ought to be prepared early in spring, and be careful not to remain out at sea too late in the 157autumn; but you did not indicate the earliest time in the spring when you think one may risk a journey over-seas to other countries, nor how late you consider it safe to sail the seas in autumn. You told how the ocean manages to quiet its storms, but you did not show under what circumstances it begins to grow restless. Therefore I would fain ask you again to answer this question, even if it does annoy you, for I think that a time may come when it will seem both needful to know this and instructive to understand it.

In a talk a while back, you mentioned that anyone wanting to be a merchant should get ready early in spring and be sure not to stay out at sea too late in the autumn. However, you didn’t specify the earliest time in spring when it’s wise to take an overseas trip, nor did you say how late it’s safe to sail in autumn. You explained how the ocean calms its storms, but you didn’t clarify when it starts to get restless. So, I’d like to ask you again to answer this question, even if it bothers you, because I think there may come a time when knowing this will be both necessary and valuable.

Father. The matters to which you are now referring can scarcely be grouped under one head; for the seas are not all alike, nor are they all of equal extent. Small seas have no great perils, and one may risk crossing them at almost any time; for one has to make sure of fair winds to last a day or two only, which is not difficult for men who understand the weather. And there are many lands where harbors are plentiful as soon as the shore is reached. If the circumstances are such that a man can wait for winds in a good haven or may confidently expect to find good harbors as soon as he has crossed, or if the sea is so narrow that he needs to provide for a journey of only a day or two, then he may venture to sail over such waters almost whenever he wishes. But where travel is beset with greater perils, whether because the sea is wide and full of dangerous currents, or because the prow points toward shores where the harbors are rendered insecure by rocks, breakers, shallows, or sand bars,—wherever the situation is such, one needs to use great caution; and no one should venture to travel over such waters when the season is late.

Father. The issues you're bringing up can't easily be put under one category; the seas are not the same, nor are they all of the same size. Smaller seas have fewer dangers, and it's possible to risk crossing them almost any time; you just need to make sure you have good winds that last for a day or two, which isn’t hard for those who know about weather. Plus, there are many places where there are plenty of harbors as soon as you reach the shore. If the situation allows a person to wait for winds in a safe harbor or confidently expect to find good harbors right after crossing, or if the sea is so narrow that planning for just a day or two journey is sufficient, then one can choose to sail those waters almost whenever they want. But when travel involves greater dangers, whether because the sea is wide and has treacherous currents, or because the destination has shores with harbors that are unsafe due to rocks, waves, shallows, or sandbars—wherever that’s the case, a lot of caution is necessary; and no one should attempt to travel those waters when the season is late.

158Now as to the time that you asked about, it seems to me most correct to say that one should hardly venture over-seas later than the beginning of October. For at that time the sea begins to grow very restless, and the tempests always increase in violence as autumn passes and winter approaches. And about the time when we date the sixteenth of October, the east wind begins to look sorrowful and thinks himself disgraced, now that his headgear, the golden crown, is taken away. He puts a cloud-covered hat on his head and breathes heavily and violently, as if mourning a recent loss. But when the southeast wind sees how vexed his neighbor is, he is stricken with a double grief: the one sorrow is that he fears the same deprivation as the east wind has suffered; the other is grief over the misfortunes of his good and estimable neighbor. Stirred by the distress of a resentful mind, he knits his brows under the hiding clouds and blows the froth violently about him. When the south wind sees the wrath of his near neighbors, he wraps himself in a cloud-lined mantle in which he conceals his treasures and his wealth of warm rays and blows vigorously as if in terrifying defence. And when the southwest wind observes how friendship has cooled, now that the truce is broken, he sobs forth his soul’s grief in heavy showers, rolls his eyes above his tear-moistened beard, puffs his cheeks under the cloudy helmet, blows the chilling scud violently forward, leads forth huge billows, wide-breasted waves, and breakers that yearn for ships, and orders all the tempests to dash forward in angry contest.

158As for the time you mentioned, I think it's best to say that you should really avoid traveling overseas after the beginning of October. By then, the sea starts to get very restless, and storms tend to get stronger as autumn fades and winter approaches. Around the sixteenth of October, the east wind begins to look sad and feels ashamed, as his golden crown is taken away. He treats himself to a cloud-covered hat and blows heavily and angrily, as if he's mourning a recent loss. When the southeast wind sees how upset his neighbor is, he feels a double sadness: one worry is that he may lose his crown too, and the other is sorrow for his good neighbor's misfortunes. Feeling the distress of a bitter mind, he furrows his brow beneath the hiding clouds and blows froth violently around him. When the south wind notices the anger of his nearby neighbors, he wraps himself in a cloud-lined cloak where he hides his treasures and warm rays, blowing powerfully as if to defend himself against a threat. And when the southwest wind sees that friendship has cooled since the truce has been broken, he mourns with heavy rain, rolling his eyes above his tear-soaked beard, puffing out his cheeks under the cloudy helmet, forcefully blowing chilly squalls ahead, unleashing giant waves, and prompting storms to rush forward in a fierce competition.

But when the west wind observes that a wrathful blast and a sorrowful sighing are coming across to him 159from the east, whence formerly he was accustomed to receive shining beams with festive gifts, he understands clearly that the covenant is broken and that all treaties are renounced. Deeply grieved and pained because of the unpeace, he puts on a black robe of mourning over which he pulls a cloud-gray cloak, and, sitting with wrinkled nose and pouting lips, he breathes heavily with regretful care. And when the ill-tempered northwest wind observes how sorrowful his neighbors look, and sees how he himself has suffered the loss of the evening beauty which he was formerly accustomed to display, he shows at once his temper in stern wrath: he knits his brows fiercely, throws rattling hail violently about, and sends forth the rolling thunder with terrifying gleams of lightning, thus displaying on his part a fearful and merciless anger. But when the north wind misses the friendliness and the kind gifts which he was wont to get from the south wind, he seeks out his hidden treasures and displays the wealth that he has most of: he brings out a dim sheen which glitters with frost, places an ice-cold helmet on his head above his frozen beard, and blows hard against the hail-bearing cloud-heaps. But the chill northeast wind sits wrathful with snowy beard and breathes coldly through his wind-swollen nostrils. Glaring fiercely under his rimy brows, he wrinkles his cheeks beneath his cold and cloudy temples, puffs his jowl with his icy tongue, and blows the piercing drift-snow vigorously forth.

But when the west wind notices a furious blast and a sorrowful sigh coming toward him from the east, where he used to receive bright rays and festive gifts, he clearly understands that the agreement is broken and that all treaties are canceled. Deeply saddened and troubled by the unrest, he puts on a black mourning robe and pulls a cloud-gray cloak over it. Sitting with a wrinkled nose and pouting lips, he breathes heavily with regret. And when the bad-tempered northwest wind sees how sad his neighbors look and realizes he has lost the evening beauty he was used to displaying, he immediately expresses his outrage: he furrows his brow fiercely, throws rattling hail around violently, and sends forth rolling thunder with terrifying flashes of lightning, showcasing his fearsome and merciless anger. But when the north wind feels the absence of the friendliness and kind gifts he used to receive from the south wind, he searches for his hidden treasures and reveals the wealth he has in abundance: he brings out a dim shine that sparkles with frost, places an ice-cold helmet on his head above his frozen beard, and blows hard against the hail-laden clouds. Meanwhile, the chilly northeast wind sits angrily with his snowy beard, breathing coldly through his swollen nostrils. Glaring fiercely under his frosty brows, he wrinkles his cheeks beneath his cold and cloudy temples, puffs his cheeks with his icy breath, and blows the biting drift-snow vigorously.

But since peace has been broken among these eight chiefs and the winds are stirred to stormy violence, it is no longer advisable for men to travel over-seas 160from shore to shore because of great perils: the days shorten; the nights grow darker; the sea becomes restless; the waves grow stronger and the surf is colder; showers increase and storms arise; the breakers swell and the shores refuse good harbors; the sailors become exhausted, the lading is lost, and there is great and constant destruction of life due to a too great venturesomeness; souls are placed in perils of judgment because of recklessness and sudden death. Therefore all sensible men should beware and not venture upon the sea too late in the season; for there are many dangers to look out for and not one alone, if a man dares too much at such times. Consequently, the better plan is to sail while summer is at its best; for one is not likely to meet misfortune if there has been careful and wise forethought. But it would surely pass all expectations if that were to succeed which was foolishly advised and planned at the beginning, though sometimes the outcome may be favorable. I consider it a more sensible plan for a man to remain quiet as long as much danger may be looked for, and to enjoy during the winter in proper style and in restful leisure what he labored to win during the summer, than to risk in a little while through his own obstinate contriving the loss of all the profit which he strove to gain in the summer. But first of all a man must have care for his own person; for he can have no further profit, if it fares so ill that he himself goes under.

But since peace has been disrupted among these eight chiefs and the winds are stirring up violent storms, it's no longer advisable for people to travel overseas from shore to shore due to significant dangers. The days are getting shorter; the nights are becoming darker; the sea is restless; the waves are getting stronger and the surf is colder; rainstorms are increasing and strong winds are rising; the waves are crashing harder and the shores aren't offering good harbors; sailors are becoming exhausted, cargo is being lost, and there's a constant threat to lives because of excessive recklessness; souls are facing judgment because of carelessness and sudden death. Therefore, all sensible individuals should be cautious and not set out to sea too late in the season; there are many dangers to be aware of, not just one, if someone takes too many risks at such times. The smarter move is to sail while summer is at its peak; because if one plans carefully and wisely, misfortune is less likely to strike. However, it would be quite surprising if what was foolishly advised and planned initially turned out to be successful, although sometimes the outcome can be favorable. I believe it's wiser for a person to stay put as long as there’s a lot of danger expected, and to enjoy what they worked hard for in the summer during the winter in a proper and relaxing way, rather than risking everything they earned in summer through stubborn attempts to gain more. Above all, a person must take care of themselves; because if things go badly for them, there won’t be any further profit to be had.


161

XXIII
 
The right season for sailing.
END OF THE FIRST PART

Son. I did wisely to continue my inquiries when we had our last talk; for you have given replies which will be useful as well as instructive for all who have the sense to understand and profit by such matters as we have discussed. But I wish to ask you again to tell me briefly how early in the spring and at what stated time you think one may venture to travel over-seas to other shores, just as I asked in my earlier inquiries.

Son. I'm glad I kept asking my questions after our last conversation because your answers have been helpful and enlightening for anyone who has the insight to grasp and benefit from what we've talked about. But I want to ask you again to briefly tell me how early in the spring and at what specific time you think it's safe to travel overseas to other countries, just as I asked before.

Father. Men may venture out upon almost any sea except the largest as early as the beginning of April. For at the time when we date the sixteenth of March, the days lengthen, the sun rises higher, and the nights grow shorter. The north wind gently clears up the face of heaven with a light and cool breeze, brushes away the restless and storm-laden clouds, and with blithe persuasiveness asks for a new covenant. Then peace is renewed among the winds, for they all yearn for rest after the season of violent wrath and wearisome blasts; so they make a covenant once more in the way that we told earlier when we described the peace making. The showers cease, the waves sink to rest, the breakers flag, the swell of the noisy ocean dies away, all the storms weaken, and quiet follows upon restless turmoil.

Father. Men can set out on almost any sea except the biggest one as early as the beginning of April. By the time we reach March 16th, the days are getting longer, the sun is rising higher, and the nights are becoming shorter. The north wind gently clears the sky with a light, cool breeze, blowing away the restless and stormy clouds, and cheerfully invites a new agreement. Peace is restored among the winds, as they all crave rest after the season of violent storms and exhausting gales; so they make a pact once again, just like we described before when we talked about making peace. The rain stops, the waves settle down, the breakers weaken, the noise of the ocean fades away, all the storms diminish, and calm replaces the restless chaos.

Now I have done as you requested: I have pointed out the seasons with definite dates both in spring and fall, when it seems most advisable to brave the perils of the sea. I have also informed you as to the times that 162seem more suitable for rest than for travel. I have likewise described briefly the sources of light in the sky and the belts that are drawn across the heaven, those under which travel is difficult and those which allow travel. And if you keep carefully in mind all these things that I have discussed with you, you will never be counted among the ignorant navigators, if you shall decide to try the trader’s calling. My advice, therefore, is first to fix in your mind all the facts which you have now heard; and later you shall have a chance to ask further questions, if you should wish to do so.

Now I have done what you asked: I have pointed out the seasons with specific dates in both spring and fall, when it seems best to face the dangers of the sea. I've also told you about the times that are more suitable for resting than for traveling. I've briefly described the sources of light in the sky and the patterns that stretch across the heavens, those under which it's difficult to travel and those that make travel easier. If you keep all these things in mind that I’ve shared with you, you will never be considered one of the uninformed navigators if you decide to pursue a trading career. Therefore, my advice is to first remember all the facts you've just heard; later, you'll have a chance to ask more questions if you'd like.


XXIV
 
INTRODUCTION TO THE SECOND PART:
THE KING AND HIS COURT

Son. The last time that I had a talk with you, sire, I heard a wise speech from your lips, one that should profit every man who intends to follow the craft with which our conversation was concerned. Since then I have meditated on that speech, and I believe that I have fixed firmly in memory most of the facts that were brought out at the time, whatever luck I may have later in trying to apply them. No doubt I ought, like everyone else, to observe carefully all the good which I have been taught; and more is to be expected from those who take thought than from those who forget. But whatever success or good fortune I may have in the practice, I delight to learn while I have the opportunity. Now I still have some subjects in mind which I wish to inquire about, but I am going to ask your consent to a 163discussion before I bring up the questions in which I am now interested; and when I have presented these, I shall await your answers.

Son. The last time we talked, sire, I heard some wise words from you that could really benefit anyone looking to pursue the craft we were discussing. Since then, I've reflected on what you said, and I think I’ve remembered most of the important points, no matter how successfully I manage to apply them later. I definitely should, like everyone else, pay close attention to all the valuable lessons I've learned; we can expect more from those who think carefully than from those who forget. But regardless of my success or good luck in practice, I love learning whenever I can. I still have a few topics I’d like to ask you about, but first, I’d like to get your approval for a discussion before I bring up my questions, and after I present them, I’ll wait for your answers.

Father. When we last met and talked about the doings and mode of living of merchants, we mentioned, I believe, most of the things that were in real need of discussion; and I feel sure that no man will have ill repute from his conduct who everywhere observes with care what was then brought out. But if you still wish and are anxious to make further inquiries into these matters, I shall be glad to answer, if I can. And even if you wish to open another discussion, I shall also be glad to answer, as far as I have knowledge. You have permission, therefore, to ask just as you like; and on my side there shall be such replies as God enables me to give.

Father. When we last met and discussed the activities and lifestyles of merchants, I think we covered most of the important topics that needed attention. I’m confident that no one will be judged poorly for their actions if they carefully consider what we talked about. However, if you still want to dig deeper into these issues, I’d be happy to answer your questions if I can. And if you’d like to start a different discussion, I’m also willing to respond to that, as far as my knowledge allows. So feel free to ask whatever you like, and I’ll do my best to provide answers with the help of God.

Son. The talk that I last heard you give concerning the business of merchants was delivered with more evident wisdom in the answers than in the questions; and I shall now let that subject rest. As I have in mind, with your permission, to try that business, it may be that a very long time will pass between our conversations. And when I am far away from you, I shall have no opportunity to seek your advice, though I should wish to do so, in case my mind should turn to some craft or business other than that of the merchant’s trade. But though, God willing, we may meet again in good health, it seems to me advisable to ask about those things that I am interested in, while I have sure opportunity to learn. And while there is opportunity we should learn what we do not know, for this reason especially, 164that we cannot be sure of a chance to inquire when it seems most needful to seek knowledge. Now after having learned the trader’s mode of living and how to travel in unknown lands, it might happen that I should want to visit the king’s court, where I could see more perfect manners than those to be seen on my commercial tours; and therefore I should like to learn from you, while here at home, such manners as are most needful to know, when one is at court, though it is not sure that I shall have to use them. Now if such an interest does not seem worthless to you, I should like to have you inform me as to those customs that I have mentioned.

Son. The last talk I heard you give about the business of merchants showed more wisdom in your answers than in your questions, and now I’ll set that topic aside. Since I plan to try my hand at that business, there may be a long time before we talk again. When I’m far away from you, I won’t have the chance to ask for your advice, even though I’d want to, if I decide to pursue a different craft or business besides trading. But assuming we meet again in good health, I think it’s wise to ask about the things I’m interested in while I have the chance to learn. We should take the opportunity to learn what we don’t know, especially because we can’t be sure we’ll get another chance when it’s most important to seek knowledge. Now that I’ve learned how traders live and how to travel in unknown lands, I might want to visit the king’s court, where I could observe more refined manners than those I see on my commercial trips. Therefore, I’d like to learn from you, while I’m here at home, the manners that are most important to know when at court, even if it’s not certain I’ll need them. If you don’t think this interest is trivial, I’d appreciate it if you could inform me about those customs I mentioned.

Father. It cannot be called worthless curiosity to wish to know what customs prevail and must be observed at the king’s court; for all courtesy and proper conduct have their origin there, if the mode of life is as it ought to be and as it was ordained of old. Still, customs at court are by no means of one sort only, for there is a multitude of services and offices about the king, and those of his men who are less in rank are usually not held to strict manners. Those who are higher in the service often differ much in manners and deportment, so that the men who observe the better customs are, unfortunately, fewer, as a rule, than those who are moderately courteous, or scarcely so much. Now I do not know whose conduct you are interested in, that of the more mannerly or of the greater number.

Father. It's not just idle curiosity to want to know what customs are followed and expected at the king’s court; after all, all manners and proper behavior originate there, assuming life is lived as it should be, in accordance with old traditions. However, customs at court aren't all the same; there are many roles and responsibilities associated with the king, and those of lower rank usually aren't held to strict standards of etiquette. Those who are higher up often have very different ways of behaving, so unfortunately, there are usually fewer people who adhere to the better customs compared to those who are somewhat polite or barely so. Now, I'm not sure whose behavior you’re interested in – that of the more polite individuals or the larger group.


165

XXV
 
THE IMPORTANCE OF COURTESY IN ROYAL SERVICE

Son. It would be most profitable both for me and for all others who are interested in unfamiliar subjects, whether good breeding or other knowledge, to learn what is best and most useful. For there are but few masters who can teach such things, and they are all more difficult to grasp than those subjects which are of but slight value or wholly worthless. Now since I hear that there are differences both in the duties of men and in the customs of the court, I shall ask you to inform me as to the regulations there and to explain how the services differ and what belongs to each; also to point out the customs which seem good to you and which are surely needful to learn, if one wishes to serve a king with honor, as well as those which one who wishes to be reputed a moral man should shun and beware of. I have this reason, too, for seeking this information so earnestly, that I have seen men come from a king’s household, whose conduct I have noted carefully, most of whom seemed only about as well-bred as those who had never been at court, or even less than they. Now I do not know which is the more likely, whether I do not understand what good breeding means, or that the facts are as they seemed to me.

Son. It would be really beneficial for me and for everyone else interested in unfamiliar topics, whether social skills or other knowledge, to learn what is the best and most useful. There are only a few teachers who can show us these things, and they tend to be harder to grasp than subjects that are of little value or completely useless. Now that I hear there are differences in the responsibilities of people and in the customs of the court, I’d like to ask you to tell me about the rules there and to explain how the roles differ and what each one involves; also to highlight the customs you think are good and surely necessary to learn if someone wants to serve a king honorably, as well as those that someone who wants to be seen as a moral person should avoid. I have another reason for seeking this information so passionately: I have observed people coming from a king’s household, whose behavior I have paid close attention to, and most of them seemed to be about as well-mannered as those who had never been to court, or even less so. Now, I can’t tell which is more likely, whether I don’t understand what good manners really are, or if things are indeed as they appeared to me.

Father. If it should be your fate to serve at court and you wish to be called courtly and polite, you will need to beware of what happens to those who come to court without manners and leave without refinement. But since you have asked how the services and the usages 166at a royal court differ, I shall now explain that to you, and also show why some return thence rude and unpolished. When a dull man fares to court, it is as when an ignorant fellow travels to Jerusalem, or a simpleton enters a good school. An ignorant man who has been to Jerusalem believes himself well informed and tells many things about his journey, though chiefly what seems worthless to a knowing man, or mere sport and foolery. In the same way the simpleton who comes from school believes himself to be perfectly educated; he struts about and shows great disdain whenever he meets one who knows nothing. But when he meets one who is a real scholar, he himself knows naught. So it is, too, when stupid men come to the king’s court: they promptly seek out men of their own kind and learn from them such things as are most easily grasped and into which they had gotten some insight earlier; but this is mere folly and unwisdom. And when they return from court, they will display such manners and courtesy as they learned there. And yet, many who come from strange places, whether from other lands or courts, will behave in this way; but when those who have remained at home find that these men bring great tidings, they come to regard them at once as thoroughly informed, both as to customs and happenings, seeing that they have visited alien peoples and foreign lands; and this is most often the case with dull men. Now if you aim at good breeding, beware lest you fall into such unwisdom. We may now take up the question how the duties of the men at court differ and what belongs to each service.

Father. If it’s your destiny to serve at court and you want to be seen as graceful and polite, you need to be careful about what happens to those who come to court lacking manners and leave without any refinement. Since you’ve asked how the services and customs at a royal court differ, I’ll explain that to you and also show why some people leave feeling rude and unrefined. When a dull person goes to court, it’s like when an uninformed person travels to Jerusalem, or an inexperienced person enters a good school. An uninformed person who has been to Jerusalem believes he has gained knowledge and shares many stories about his trip, mostly things that seem pointless to someone who really knows better, or just silly anecdotes. Similarly, the inexperienced person coming from school thinks he is well-educated; he walks around acting superior whenever he meets someone who knows nothing. But when he encounters a true scholar, he realizes he knows nothing at all. The same goes for foolish men who arrive at the king’s court: they quickly seek out others like themselves and learn the easiest lessons, things they might have picked up before; but this is just folly and ignorance. When they return from court, they will show the manners and politeness they picked up there. Yet, many who come from distant places, whether from other countries or courts, act this way; but when those who stayed at home hear that these people bring exciting news, they instantly regard them as well-informed about customs and events, simply because they have traveled to different cultures; and this is often true for dull men. If you aspire to be well-bred, be careful not to fall into such ignorance. Now, let’s address how the duties of the men at court differ and what each role entails.

167All the men who have gone to the king’s hand[235] are housecarles; but honors and authority are distributed among them according to the merits of each and as the king wishes to grant. Thus one class of housecarles is made up of men who are always present at court, but draw no wages, and do not eat and drink where the hirdmen take their meals. They have to do such service in the king’s garth as the steward shall assign, whether it be to go on a journey or to do manual labor in the garth.

167All the men who have served the king[235] are housecarls; however, honors and authority are divided among them based on each person's merits and what the king chooses to grant. So, there is a group of housecarls who are always at court but don't receive a salary and don’t eat with the hirdmen. They must perform tasks in the king’s yard as assigned by the steward, whether that involves going on a journey or doing manual work in the yard.


XXVI
 
THE BENEFITS OF SERVING IN THE KING'S HOUSEHOLD

Son. I pray you, sire, not to regard me as thoughtless or as wishing to interrupt your discourse, if I inquire briefly about the duties of these men.

Son. Please, sir, don’t see me as careless or as trying to interrupt your speech if I quickly ask about the responsibilities of these men.

Father. While we are on this subject, you had better ask what you like, or you may regret it later, having come away ill-informed about what you wanted to hear, because you did not inquire sufficiently.

Dad. Since we’re talking about this, you should ask whatever you want, or you might regret it later, feeling misinformed about what you wanted to know because you didn’t ask enough questions.

Son. Since those whom you have just mentioned live by labor and manual toil in the king’s garth and have no greater honors than at home in the country, what advantage do they find in being with the king more than in serving their parents or kinsmen in the country or engaging in trade and winning wealth in that way?

Son. Since the people you just mentioned work hard in the king’s garden and don’t have any greater honors than they do back home, what benefit do they get from being with the king instead of serving their parents or relatives in the countryside, or by getting involved in trade and making money that way?

Father. There are many reasons why such men would rather be at court than live in the country or engage in 168trade. Some prefer being at court to living in the country (though in the king’s service their labor is as burdensome, or more so) because, though they are of excellent kinship, they have little wealth and cannot engage in trade on account of their poverty. If they take up work in the country, they find many who have more wealth, though they are no higher in kinship, or scarcely so high. And when quarrels arise, the rich find protection in their wealth and thrust the poor aside, so that these can get no justice in their law suits. Consequently such men think it better to toil in security at court than without protection in the country. Others may have committed manslaughter or have come into other difficulties which make it urgent for them to seek security in the king’s power. Some there are, too, who always find pleasure in being in a throng; they also feel more secure there, whatever may happen. When these come back to the country where earlier they seemed so utterly defenseless, they regard themselves as the peers of every one, because of the protection which they enjoy as kingsmen. If one of them is slain in single combat, the king will take forty marks[236] in thegn money[237] for him as for 169his other thegns, and, in addition, one mark gold as housecarle fine,[238] which he exacts whenever a housecarle is slain.

Father. There are many reasons why these men would prefer to be at court rather than live in the countryside or engage in trade. Some choose court life over country living (even though serving the king can be just as burdensome, if not more) because, despite their noble lineage, they have little money and can't trade due to their poverty. If they work in the countryside, they find many who are wealthier, even if they aren't of higher status, or only slightly so. In disputes, the rich can use their wealth for protection and push the poor aside, leaving them without justice in their legal battles. As a result, these men think it's better to work in a secure environment at court than to be unprotected in the countryside. Others may have committed serious crimes or faced other troubles that make it imperative for them to seek safety under the king's authority. Some, too, simply enjoy being in a crowd; they feel safer there, no matter what might happen. When they return to the countryside, where they once felt completely vulnerable, they see themselves as equals to everyone else, thanks to the protection they receive as the king's men. If one of them is killed in single combat, the king will collect forty marks[236] in thegn money[237] for him, just like for his other thegns, plus one mark of gold as a housecarle fine,[238] which he imposes whenever a housecarle is killed.

You shall also know that many come to court from the country who were considered of little consequence there; and yet, it often happens that the king gives high honors to such men in return for their service, if they perform it well, though they are but slightly honored in their own homes. Those, on the other hand, whom the cotters in the country seemed to value highly for their wealth, kindred, and fellowship, are often no more regarded at the royal court than in their home communities and sometimes even less. Indeed, those who come to the king with riches are often honored less than those who come in poverty. Frequently, men who come to court with little wealth or none at all and have no choice but to accept what the king graciously offers are set so high in riches and power that they tower above their kinsmen, though before they came to the king they were not regarded as their equals. They win this either by bravery in warfare and good deportment at court, or by being faithful to the king in all things and striving to be discreet and loving toward him. For the king helps and promotes those whom he finds to be anxious to remain truly affectionate toward him and to serve him in loyal friendship. For these reasons a king by an act of grace, will very often exalt those who are lacking in riches; and therefore many such are encouraged to seek service at court, where they all expect to win rewards, high honors, and marked advancement in position.

You should also know that many people come to court from the countryside who were seen as having little importance there; yet, it often happens that the king grants significant honors to these individuals in exchange for their service, if they perform it well, even if they receive little recognition at home. Conversely, those who are greatly valued by the country folk for their wealth, family ties, and friendships are often regarded no better at the royal court than they are in their communities, and sometimes even less. In fact, those who arrive at the king's court with riches are often honored less than those who come with nothing. Often, people who come to court with little or no wealth and have to accept whatever the king graciously offers find themselves elevated in wealth and power, standing above their relatives, even though before coming to the king they weren't seen as their equals. They achieve this either through bravery in battle and good behavior at court, or through loyalty to the king in all matters while striving to be respectful and loving towards him. The king helps and promotes those whom he sees as genuinely eager to remain affectionate towards him and serve him in loyal friendship. For these reasons, a king, as an act of generosity, will often elevate those who lack wealth; thus, many of them are encouraged to seek service at court, where they all hope to earn rewards, high honors, and significant advancement in status.


170

XXVII
 
THE DIFFERENT CLASSES AMONG THE KINGSMEN

Son. I believe I have now had correct and adequate answers, and it no longer seems strange to me that such men as you have just talked about would rather be kingsmen than remain in the country, even though their duties are as toilsome as those of the farmer, or even more so. But now I wish to ask you to describe the other services at the king’s court, so that I may, if possible, gain some knowledge of every one of them.

Son. I think I've received accurate and sufficient answers, and it doesn’t surprise me anymore that the men you just mentioned would prefer to be part of the king's circle rather than stay in the countryside, even if their responsibilities are just as demanding, or maybe even more so, than a farmer's. But now I'd like to ask you to explain the other roles at the king's court, so I can, if possible, learn about each one of them.

Father. That is surely possible, and since you are interested in such matters, I shall give you what information I have concerning them. There are certain other housecarles at the king’s court, who, in addition to the housecarle’s title, have a by-name and are called “gests.”[239] They have this name from their manifold duties; for they visit the homes of many, though not always with friendly intent. These men are also in the king’s pay and get half the wages of “hirdmen.” These are the duties that belong to the office of these men: they serve as spies throughout the king’s domain to make sure whether he has any enemies in his kingdom; and if such are found, the gests are to slay them, if they are able to do so. But if the king sends his gests upon his enemies and those against whom they are sent are slain, they are to have for their trouble as much of the enemies’ wealth as they can carry away at the time, only no gold, for that is the king’s, as is all the rest that the gests are unable to bring away. And whenever the king 171becomes aware of an enemy, it is the gest’s duty to pursue the foeman and thus to cleanse the realm. Whenever they are present at court, they keep the various watches about the king, just as the others do who share the king’s bounty in the royal garth, except the head-ward;[240] this they do not keep; nor do they sit at table to eat or drink in the house where the king dines with his hirdmen, except at Christmas and Easter, when they are to eat with the hirdmen in the king’s hall, but at no other time. If any of these men be slain in single combat, the king exacts as large a fine both in thegn money and housecarle fine as for the death of those whom we discussed earlier.

Father. That’s definitely possible, and since you’re interested in these things, I’ll share what I know about them. There are other housecarles at the king’s court who, besides their title, have a nickname and are called “gests.”[239] They get this name from their various duties; they visit many homes, although not always with good intentions. These men are also paid by the king, earning half the wages of “hirdmen.” Their responsibilities include acting as spies throughout the king’s realm to check for any enemies in the kingdom; if they find any, the gests are supposed to kill them if they can. If the king sends his gests after his enemies and they are successful in killing them, the gests can take as much of the enemies’ wealth as they can carry at the time, except for gold, as that belongs to the king, along with anything else they can’t bring away. Whenever the king discovers an enemy, it’s the gest’s duty to pursue and eliminate them to protect the realm. When they’re at court, they keep watch over the king, just like the others who share the king’s favor in the royal enclosure, except for the head-ward;[240] they don’t keep that responsibility; nor do they eat or drink at the table where the king dines with his hirdmen, except at Christmas and Easter, when they can dine with the hirdmen in the king’s hall, but not at any other time. If any of these men are killed in single combat, the king demands as hefty a fine in both thegn money and housecarle fines as for the deaths we talked about earlier.

There is still another class of royal housecarles who do not share the king’s tables and but rarely come to court; these receive nothing from the king but protection and support in securing justice from others; but these, too, are kingsmen. In case any of these are slain, the king exacts the same housecarle fine in addition to the thegn money as in the case of those housecarles who dine at his tables. These men come into his service from various walks of life: some are peasants, some merchants, and some laymen. But this service they owe the king before all his other subjects, namely, that wherever the king’s officials come at his command to present the king’s causes or business, and these housecarles of whom we are speaking are present, they must join the retinue of these officials and render such assistance as they can in all the king’s business. These, too, may claim support 172from the kingsmen in their efforts to obtain justice, wherever they have suits to bring up. Likewise if any of these men are slain, the fines due the king will be increased as much as for those whom we spoke of earlier.

There’s another group of royal housecarles who don’t eat at the king's table and rarely visit the court; they only receive protection from the king and help with getting justice from others. However, they are still considered part of the king's family. If any of them are killed, the king imposes the same housecarle fine in addition to the thegn money, just like for those housecarles who dine with him. These men come into his service from different backgrounds: some are farmers, some are merchants, and some are commoners. But they owe this service to the king above all his other subjects, meaning that whenever the king’s officials arrive at his command to handle the king’s matters and these housecarles are there, they must join the officials’ group and assist with all the king’s business as much as they can. They can also seek support from the kingsmen to help them obtain justice whenever they have legal cases to pursue. Similarly, if any of these men are killed, the fines owed to the king will be increased just like for those we mentioned earlier. 172

There is another class of royal housecarles who receive money payments from the king, some twelve aura,[241] some two marks, some three marks, and others more, in proportion as the king finds them likely to add to his strength and credit. These men do not dine with the king at court; they are abroad in the realm in a sort of official capacity, for some of them are sons of the king’s landedmen,[242] while others are peasants, though so wealthy that they seem to rank with the landedmen. These royal housecarles owe the king the same kind of service as those whom we have just mentioned, but more, inasmuch as they have greater prestige and enjoy greater favors from the king; and the fines due the king in case these men are ill used will be increased about as much as has been stated before. From all these kingsmen that we have now told about, who do not dine at his tables, the king may demand such service as he finds each capable of: some are called to pilot the longships when the king sets out on a naval campaign; some are sent abroad in embassies to foreign rulers and other princes; while others are sent out upon the sea as traders 173with the king’s wares or ships.[243] These are the duties that they are bound to perform with such other duties as may arise out of the king’s needs.

There is another group of royal housecarls who get paid by the king, some receiving around twelve aura, some two marks, some three marks, and others even more, depending on how much the king thinks they will add to his power and reputation. These men don’t eat with the king at court; instead, they travel around the kingdom in an official role, as some are sons of the king’s landowners, while others are peasants who are so wealthy that they seem to belong with the landowners. These royal housecarls owe the king the same kind of service as the ones we just mentioned, but more so, since they have more prestige and receive more favors from the king; and the fines owed to the king in case these men are mistreated will be raised about as much as mentioned before. From all these kingsmen we’ve talked about, who do not dine at his tables, the king can request whatever service he thinks each one can provide: some are called to navigate the longships when the king goes on a naval campaign; some are sent abroad as ambassadors to foreign rulers and other princes; while others are sent out to sea as traders with the king’s goods or ships. These are the duties they are expected to perform in addition to any other tasks that may come up based on the king’s needs.

Now I have told you about several classes of the king’s servants, and you will have to determine which of those enumerated seem to you most likely to know much about courtly behavior and the manners that ought by right to be found at a king’s court; they are all kingsmen, however. And from this you will observe that every man cannot become perfect in all courtly customs and manners just as soon as he sees the king and his men; for a man will have to be both quick-witted and quick to learn, who, if he lacks in breeding, is to learn perfect courtliness in a year’s time, even though every day of the year is spent at court among the hirdmen in the king’s own presence. Now you shall know this of a truth, that there are many at court who have spent a large part of their lives there and have daily opportunities to see good deportment, and yet they never become either courtly or well-bred.

Now I've talked about several types of the king's servants, and you'll need to decide which of those mentioned seems most likely to know a lot about proper behavior and manners that should be present in a king’s court; they're all part of the king's circle. From this, you'll see that not every man can instantly master all courtly customs and manners just by being around the king and his men; a person needs to be both sharp and eager to learn if they want to acquire perfect courtliness in a year, even if they spend every day at court among the king’s attendants. The truth is, there are many at court who have spent a significant part of their lives there and have daily chances to observe proper behavior, yet they still never become refined or well-mannered.


XXVIII
 
THE RESPECTED ROLE OF THE KINGSMEN

Son. If such is the case, that some of the customs at court are so difficult to learn that both quick wit and continued observation are necessary, it seems evident that the men whom you have just now spoken of can 174have but slight knowledge of what constitutes deportment or good manners in the king’s house, though they be kingsmen, since they come but rarely into those of the royal apartments where good manners must especially be observed. But there is yet something that I am anxious to know concerning the duties of those men of whom you spoke last: what profit can such men as have an abundance of wealth and kinsmen find in the king’s service and in binding themselves to his service with the housecarle name as their only title? Why do not they rather seek the honor of being called hirdmen, or remain at home looking after their property as other husbandmen do?

Son. If that's the case, and some of the court customs are so hard to learn that you need both sharp wit and keen observation, it’s clear that the men you just mentioned likely have only a limited understanding of what good behavior and manners mean in the king’s house, even if they are related to royalty, since they rarely enter those royal rooms where manners are crucial. However, there's something else I still want to know about those men you talked about last: what benefit do those who have plenty of wealth and family get from serving the king and taking on the title of housecarle? Why don’t they aim for the honor of being called hirdmen or stay at home managing their property like other farmers?

Father. I should say that you have not inquired very wisely into this matter; still, as you do not appear to be well informed on this subject, I think it better for you to question than to remain ignorant, and since you have inquired I ought to answer. There are many reasons, as we have already said, why men would rather be kingsmen than be called by the peasant’s name only. The first reply must be that the king owns the entire kingdom as well as all the people in it, so that all the men who are in his kingdom owe him service whenever his needs demand it. Thus the king has a right to call upon every freeman, who seems fitted for it or is found to possess suitable insight, to serve in embassies to foreign lords; likewise, when the king calls upon the freemen to pilot his ship in warfare, each one who is appointed must attend, though he be the king’s henchman only so far as he is his subject. Even if a king should order a clerk or a bishop of his kingdom to fare as envoy to another 175king or to the pope, if such is his wish, the one who is called must set out, unless he is willing to risk the king’s enmity and to be driven from the kingdom.

Father. I should mention that you haven't asked about this matter very thoughtfully; however, since you don't seem to be well-versed in this topic, it's better for you to ask questions than to remain uninformed, and since you've asked, I should respond. There are many reasons, as we've already discussed, why men prefer to be associated with royalty rather than just be known by the name of a peasant. The first reason is that the king owns the entire kingdom and all the people in it, meaning that all the men within his realm owe him service whenever he needs it. Thus, the king has the right to call upon every freeman, who appears capable or is found to have the necessary insight, to undertake missions to foreign lords. Similarly, when the king calls upon the freemen to assist in warfare, each appointed individual must attend, even if he is considered a mere subject of the king. Even if a king instructs a clerk or a bishop from his kingdom to go as an envoy to another king or to the pope, if that's what he desires, the person summoned must leave, unless he is willing to face the king's anger and be exiled from the kingdom.

Now since all the men of the realm are thus bound to the royal service, why should not every sensible man regard it a greater advantage to be in the king’s full protection and friendship, no matter what may happen in his intercourse with other men, and to be superior to his comrades and hold them loyal to the king if they will not otherwise obey, than to be called a mere cotter who is constantly under the control of others, though he still owes nearly the same duties as otherwise? Verily you must know that to be called a king’s housecarle is not to be despised as a title of derision; but it is a name of great honor to everyone who bears it. For neither landedmen nor hirdmen, though because of some infirmity or because they are tired of warfare they prefer to cultivate an estate in the country, are willing to surrender the housecarle name because of its honor and security. Now if there is any phase of this subject that seems insufficiently inquired into or explained, we may extend the conversation if you wish.

Now that all the men in the realm are bound to serve the king, why shouldn't every sensible person see it as a greater advantage to be under the king’s full protection and friendship, regardless of how he interacts with others? It’s better to be superior to your peers and keep them loyal to the king, especially if they won’t obey otherwise, than to be just a farmer who is constantly under the control of others, even if he has similar obligations. Truly, you should know that being called a king’s housecarle is not a title to be looked down upon; it is a name of great honor for anyone who holds it. Even landed men or warriors, who might prefer to cultivate land out of weariness from battle or for other reasons, still refuse to give up the name of housecarle because of its honor and security. If there’s any part of this topic that seems insufficiently discussed or explained, we can continue the conversation if you’d like.


XXIX
 
THE SUPERIOR ORDER OF KINGSMEN: THE HIRD

Son. This subject has been discussed almost too fully and has been cleared up for me with such good and complete answers that it looks to me as if a man cannot dispense with the king’s support, if he wishes to found his cause securely. For the multitude is fickle-minded and 176the one unfair toward the other, except those alone to whom God has given wisdom and rectitude; but they are few only and not the mass. However, as there are certain matters relating to the service and manners at court that are still unexplained, I should like to hear you discuss these further, lest I continue ignorant about subjects that I desire to know.

Son. This topic has been talked about almost too much and I’ve received such clear and thorough answers that it seems to me a person can’t go without the king’s support if they want to establish their cause securely. The crowd is changeable and unfair towards one another, except for those few whom God has granted wisdom and integrity; but they are rare and not the majority. However, since there are some matters about court etiquette and practices that are still unclear, I would like to hear you elaborate on these further, so I don't remain uninformed about the things I want to learn.

Father. We must now speak about those of the king’s housecarles who, if they give proper attention, are best able to acquire knowledge as to what is counted good manners in royal circles. They too, however, differ in character, and those are very often the fewer who should be the more numerous. These kingsmen that we are now to discuss have, in addition to the housecarle name, the title of hirdmen. Some bear that title rightfully, but to many it is a nickname. The one who originated the name placed it on a sound basis; for hirdman means the same as keeper and guardian; and those who wish to possess this title rightfully should be true keepers and guardians both of the king’s person and of all his kingship. They should guard the bounds of equity among all the men of the realm, wherever they are present when suits at law are heard. They should also observe good and courtly behavior and every useful custom, for they are at all times nearest the king in all matters. They guard the king’s life and person both night and day; they are always about the king at the table when he eats and drinks, at public assemblies, and at all general gatherings, like near kinsmen.

Father. We now need to talk about those in the king’s household who, if they pay attention, are best suited to understand what good manners are in royal circles. They vary in character, and often the few who should be many. These kingsmen we are about to discuss hold the title of hirdmen in addition to being housecarles. Some have that title rightfully, while for others it’s just a nickname. The person who created the name grounded it in meaning; hirdman translates to keeper and guardian. Those who truly want to hold this title should be genuine keepers and guardians of the king and his entire realm. They need to maintain fairness among all the people in the kingdom whenever legal matters are addressed. They should also practice good and courteous behavior and every valuable custom since they are always closest to the king in all matters. They protect the king’s life and well-being both day and night; they are constantly by his side at meals, during public events, and at all general gatherings, just like close relatives.

These men ought of right to be addressed as lords by all men who bear lesser titles than they do; for they are, 177in a sense, stewards of the realm, if they observe the customs that are suited to their title. They should be chosen from all classes and not from wealthy or distinguished families only; but those who are chosen to this dignity should be perfect in all things, both in ancestry and wealth, and in nobility of mind and courtesy, but above all in conduct. They ought, furthermore, before all others to observe righteousness in every form, so that they may be able to discern clearly what should be loved as belonging to honor and good deportment and what should be shunned as leading to dishonor and shame. For wherever they are present, the eyes of all men are turned upon their manners and behavior; all incline their ears to their words; and all expect, as they ought, to find them so much more excellent than other men in deeds and deportment as they stand nearer the king in service and regard than his other men. And if these men wish by right to enjoy the titles which are given them along with the housecarle name, they must shun vulgarity and rudeness; they must also, more than other men, avoid many things which a foolish desire might suggest. For many things become a disgrace both in words and deeds to well-bred men, which are not a disgrace to the vulgar who behave in that way; wherefore such men must keep watch over their tongues and their behavior.

These men should rightfully be called lords by everyone who holds lesser titles than they do; they are, in a way, stewards of the realm if they follow the customs appropriate to their title. They should be selected from all social classes, not just from wealthy or noble families; however, those chosen for this honor must be exemplary in every respect, including lineage and wealth, as well as in nobility of spirit and courtesy, but especially in their conduct. Moreover, they should, above all others, uphold righteousness in every form, so they can clearly discern what should be embraced as honorable and good behavior and what should be avoided as leading to disgrace and shame. Wherever they are, everyone's attention is directed at their manners and actions; everyone listens closely to their words, and rightly so, they are expected to demonstrate excellence beyond that of others in their actions and conduct, given their closer proximity to the king in service and esteem than his other subjects. If these men wish to rightfully enjoy the titles that come with the housecarle name, they must steer clear of vulgarity and rudeness; they also must, more than others, be cautious about many things that a foolish desire might suggest. For many actions and words that would bring shame to well-bred individuals are not considered disgraceful by the commoners who act in such ways; thus, these men must be vigilant over their speech and behavior.

It also frequently happens that well trained envoys from other lands come to visit the king and his court; and the more polished they are, the more carefully they observe the royal service as well as the manners of the king and his courtiers and all the customs that prevail 178at the court. On returning to their own lands, they will describe the customs and relate the happenings which they saw or heard at the court to which they were sent. But all the rumors that travel to other lands and are circulated about a lord, if they be truthful, will usually either bring him ridicule and contumely or be turned to his honor. It may also frequently come to pass that the kings themselves need to meet in conference to discuss such rules and arrangements as must be kept jointly by the kingdoms.[244] Wherever kings meet, there the best men are always assembled; for the kings bring their chief men with them to such conferences: archbishops, bishops, earls, landedmen, and hirdmen or knights. And the conduct and breeding of those who assemble are carefully noted, first the manners of the mighty ones, and then those of all the rest; for everyone watches closely the behavior of all the others. And if one of the kings or one of his principal men is found indecorous, he soon becomes the subject of ridicule and contempt and is regarded as a common churl. And if a king’s retinue is found to be poorly trained and is lacking in polish, especially if the service of the king’s apartments is not performed in a comely and proper manner, then the king himself is pronounced unfit; for it will be held that if he himself were polite and perfect in manners, all would acquire good breeding from him. Consequently it is possible for a courtly chief to suffer great shame from a vulgar and indecent man; wherefore it is very 179important that those who wish to bear a comely and honorable title in the royal presence should be well informed as to what is becoming or unbecoming. For one cannot hope for great honors from a king, if he has at any time disgraced him where many honorable men were assembled and where it seemed very important to maintain the king’s honor, which is everywhere, for a king must nowhere suffer shame. Heedlessness and evil conduct are therefore ill becoming to a man, if they bring him shame and enmity and cause him to lose his honorable name, his good repute, and his fair service, even though life and limb be spared. And he can even bring such deep dishonor upon his king that with many of his kindred he will be made to suffer a well deserved but ignominious death. Such grades there are both in the duties and in the titles at the royal court as you have now heard described. But if it seems to you that everything has not yet been thoroughly examined, you may inquire further, if you like.

It often happens that well-trained envoys from other countries come to visit the king and his court. The more refined they are, the more closely they observe the royal rituals, as well as the king’s behavior, his courtiers, and all the customs that are practiced at the court. Upon returning to their homelands, they will share the customs and recount the events they saw or heard at the court they visited. However, all the rumors that spread to other lands about a lord, if they are true, will usually either bring him mockery and scorn or enhance his reputation. It can also happen that kings need to meet to discuss rules and arrangements that must be jointly followed by their kingdoms. 178 Wherever kings gather, the best individuals are always present, as the kings bring their top advisors with them to these conferences: archbishops, bishops, earls, landowners, and knights. The behavior and manners of those who gather are closely observed, first the leaders, and then everyone else; for everyone pays close attention to how others behave. If one of the kings or one of his top men behaves poorly, he quickly becomes a target of mockery and disdain, regarded as a common peasant. If a king's entourage is poorly trained and lacks refinement, especially if the king's household is not well-managed, then the king himself is deemed unfit; for it will be believed that if he were polite and behaved perfectly, everyone would reflect that good breeding. Therefore, it is possible for a noble leader to suffer great shame because of a rude and indecent person; hence it is crucial for those who wish to hold a dignified and respected title in the king's presence to be well aware of what is appropriate and inappropriate. One cannot expect great honors from a king if he has ever disgraced him in front of many honorable men, particularly in situations where it is vital to uphold the king's dignity, which is paramount for a king, as he must not be shamed anywhere. Carelessness and bad behavior are therefore unsuitable for someone, especially if they lead to shame and hostility, causing them to lose their honorable name, good reputation, and esteemed service, even if their life and well-being are spared. A person can even bring such severe dishonor upon the king that, along with many of his relatives, he will face a deserved yet disgraceful death. There are various ranks both in the responsibilities and in the titles at the royal court, as you have just learned. If you think that everything has not yet been fully explored, feel free to ask more questions if you wish. 179


XXX
 
HOW A MAN WANTING TO APPLY FOR ADMISSION TO
THE ROYAL HOUSEHOLD SERVICE
SHOULD APPROACH THE KING

Son. It seems to me that we should not fail to continue this discussion and I shall now direct my remarks and questions toward some theme that may help me to see more clearly how one, who comes to seek honors, should appear in the king’s presence and how he must afterwards demean himself in order to attain all those 180distinctions of which you have just told. Now it may happen that I shall want to fare to court and join the king’s service; for since my father and my kinsmen served the king before me and gained honor and high esteem for their service, it is likely that I shall wish to do what my kinsmen achieved before me. Now inasmuch as that is likely, I want to ask you to tell me how I ought to begin my speech when I come to seek audience with a king. State it as clearly as if you were to accompany me to the royal presence, and inform me as to my gestures, my dress, my manner of speech and all matters of deportment that are becoming in the king’s company. Now this time I have asked as I thought best; but even though I have inquired less wisely than I ought, kindly do as before, giving thought to the questions on my part and to the replies from your side.

Son. I think we should keep this conversation going, so I’m going to focus my comments and questions on a topic that can help me understand how someone seeking honors should present themselves in front of the king and how they should act afterward to gain the distinctions you just mentioned. It’s possible that I might want to go to court and serve the king; since my father and my relatives served the king before me and earned honor and respect for their contributions, it’s likely that I want to follow in their footsteps. Given that, I’d like you to tell me how I should start my speech when I request an audience with the king. Please explain it as if you were going with me to meet him, including my gestures, attire, way of speaking, and all the proper conduct expected in the king's presence. This time I've asked as best as I could; but even if my questions aren't as smart as they should be, please respond thoughtfully as before, considering my inquiries and your answers.

Father. Your questions on this subject are not so unwise that one may not very well answer them; for many have need to make such inquiries, if they mean to have their suits brought up before lords and to have them planned as carefully as need be. Now I shall try to clear up these matters that you have asked about, stating what seems most truthful and advisable. When you come, then, to where the king resides, intending to become his man, you should inquire carefully who the men are in the king’s company that are best able to present men’s business to the king in such a way that their speeches please him the most. As soon as you have learned who they are, you must first make their acquaintance and cultivate their friendship; after that make your errand known and ask them to undertake 181your suit. If they undertake your business, they can best find time and occasion for audience and speech with the king, as they often have speech with him. If you are to present your request at a time when the king is at the table, get sure information whether he is in good spirits and pleasant humor. If you should observe that his disposition is somewhat irritable, or that he is displeased about something, or that he has such important affairs to consider that you think your business for that reason cannot be taken up, then let your suit rest for the time being and seek to find the king in better humor some other day. But if you find that he is in merry mood and has no business to take up of such importance that you may not very well state your errand, wait, nevertheless, till he has nearly finished his meal.

Father. Your questions on this topic aren't so foolish that they can't be answered; many people need to ask similar things if they want their issues heard by the lords and organized properly. Now, I'll try to clarify the matters you've inquired about, sharing what seems most truthful and sensible. When you come to where the king lives, planning to become his man, you should carefully ask who in the king’s circle is best at presenting people’s issues to him in a way that he enjoys. Once you find out who they are, you need to get to know them and build a connection. After that, you should share your purpose and ask them to take on your case. If they agree to help you, they can best find a time and opportunity to speak with the king, as they often chat with him. If you need to make your request while the king is at the table, check to see if he is in a good mood. If he seems a bit irritable, unhappy about something, or preoccupied with important matters that might prevent him from addressing your issue, then hold off for now and wait for a day when he’s in a better mood. But if you see that he’s cheerful and doesn’t have anything so pressing that you can’t present your case, just wait until he’s almost done with his meal.

Your costume you should plan beforehand in such a way that you come fully dressed in good apparel, the smartest that you have, and wearing fine trousers and shoes. You must not come without your coat; and also wear a mantle, the best that you have. For trousers always select cloth of a brown dye. It seems quite proper also to wear trousers of black fur, but not of any other sort of cloth, unless it be scarlet. Your coat should be of brown color or green or red, and all such clothes are good and proper. Your linen should be made of good linen stuff, but with little cloth used; your shirt should be short, and all your linen rather light. Your shirt should be cut somewhat shorter than your coat; for no man of taste can deck himself out in flax or hemp. Before you enter the royal presence be sure to have your 182hair and beard carefully trimmed according to the fashions of the court when you join the same. When I was at court it was fashionable to have the hair trimmed short just above the earlaps and then combed down as each hair would naturally lie; but later it was cut shorter in front above the eyebrows. It was the style at that time to wear a short beard and a small moustache; but later the cheeks were shaved according to the German mode;[245] and I doubt that any style will ever come which is more becoming or more suitable in warfare.

You should plan your costume ahead of time so that you arrive fully dressed in your best clothes—wear nice trousers and shoes. Don't show up without your coat, and make sure to wear a cloak, the best you have. For trousers, choose fabric that's brown. It's also fine to wear black fur trousers, but steer clear of other types of fabric, unless it's scarlet. Your coat should be brown, green, or red—all of these are good choices. Your linen should be made of quality material but not overly heavy; your shirt should be short, and your linen should be relatively light. Make sure your shirt is cut slightly shorter than your coat because no tasteful man should wear something made of flax or hemp. Before you go before the king, make sure your hair and beard are neatly trimmed according to the latest court styles. When I was at court, it was trendy to have your hair cut short above the earlobes and then styled down so that it fell naturally; later on, it was cut shorter in the front above the eyebrows. At that time, men typically wore short beards and small mustaches, but later, the German style became popular, where the cheeks were shaved. I doubt any future style will be more flattering or suitable for combat.

Now when you seem to be in proper state to appear before the king both as to dress and other matters, and if you come at a suitable time and have permission from the doorkeeper to enter, you must have your coming planned in such a way that some capable servant can accompany you. But though you are both allowed to enter, do not let him follow you farther than inside the door or, at the farthest, up to the staller’s seat, and leave him there to keep your mantle. Leave your mantle behind when you go before the king and be careful to have your hair brushed smooth, and your beard combed with care. You must have neither hat nor cap nor other covering on your head; for one must appear before lords with uncovered head and ungloved hands, with a blithe face and with limbs and body thoroughly bathed. You should also have the men with you who are to present your suit. Form the habit of holding your head up and your whole body erect when walking; strike a dignified gait, but do not walk too slowly.

Now, when you’re ready to see the king, looking good with your outfit and everything else, make sure you arrive at the right time and have the doorkeeper’s permission to enter. Plan your entrance so that a capable servant can accompany you. Even though both of you can enter, don’t let him follow you any farther than just inside the door or, at most, up to the seat for the attendants. Leave him there to hold your cloak. Remove your cloak before you go before the king, and make sure your hair is neatly styled and your beard is well-groomed. Don’t wear any hats, caps, or other head coverings; you should appear before the lords with your head uncovered and your hands ungloved, with a cheerful expression and your body clean and fresh. Also, bring the men who are there to support your case. Get into the habit of keeping your head up and your body straight while walking; walk with dignity, but don’t move too slowly.

183When you come into the king’s presence, bow humbly before him and address him in these words: “God give you a good day, my lord king!” If the king is at the table when you appear before him, be careful not to lean against the king’s board, as so many a simpleton does; and above all do not lean forward across it as unmannerly churls do, but remain standing far enough away from it so that the service belonging to the royal table may have sufficient space to pass between the table and yourself. But if the king is not at the table, approach his seat only so near as to leave abundant space for all the service between yourself and the footstools that are before the king’s seat. When standing before the king, you should dispose of your hands in such a way that the thumb and forefinger of the right will grasp the left wrist; and then let your hands drop slowly before you as seems most comfortable. Thereupon the men chosen for that purpose shall present your errand to the king. And if fortune allows your suit to prosper immediately according to your wishes, you shall go to the king’s hand and thereafter enter the fellowship of the hird according to the customs which those who plead your case will teach you. But if the king makes promise and fixes a day when you are to appear and the matter is to be settled, it must rest till that time. If the king postpones the decision, saying as is not unlikely: “I know nothing about this man, either as to repute or manners, and cannot reply at once to his request but must first observe clearly his ways of thinking and doing;” then the matter is closed for the time being. But you may, if you are so disposed, continue 184your suit and try to find a more convenient time, when your affairs may have a more favorable outcome. However, while you are seeking to gain the king’s favor, you will need above all to keep close to the best and most discreet men, and you should often be seen in the company of those who are dearest to the king. But pay all the necessary outlay out of your own means, however long this probation may last, unless you should sometime be invited by the king’s order to his tables. And let it not be true in your case as is true in the case of many an unwise man, that the more often you find yourself invited, the more you begin to long for another’s fare, lest upright men come to regard you as selfish and impertinent, and those become hostile who were formerly your friends and comrades. Walk uprightly, therefore, and be heedful in all such matters, lest evil befall you through lack of foresight.

183When you enter the king’s presence, bow respectfully and say, “May God bless you today, my lord king!” If the king is dining when you see him, be careful not to lean on the king’s table like many foolish people do; and above all, don’t lean across it like rude louts, but stand back far enough so that there’s enough space for the serving staff to move between you and the table. If the king is not dining, approach his seat close enough to allow plenty of room for the service between you and the footstools in front of him. When standing before the king, hold your right thumb and forefinger around your left wrist, and let your hands fall comfortably in front of you. Then, the men selected for that task will present your request to the king. If luck is on your side and your plea is granted right away, you’ll go to the king’s side and join the group of followers as those representing you will instruct you. If the king promises a future meeting to resolve the matter, it must wait until then. If the king delays making a decision, saying likely: “I know nothing about this person, neither his reputation nor behavior, and I need time to understand his way of thinking and acting;” then the matter is closed for now. However, you may keep pursuing your request and look for a better time when your situation may turn out better. While trying to win the king’s favor, you should stay close to the best and most discreet individuals, often seen with those who are closest to the king. But cover all your costs from your own resources, no matter how long this trying period lasts, unless the king himself invites you to his table. And don’t let it become true for you as it does for many unwise individuals, that the more often you are invited, the more you start craving what others have, or else honest people may see you as selfish and rude, and those who were once your friends might turn against you. So act honorably, and be careful in all such matters, so that bad things don’t happen to you because of a lack of foresight. 184


XXXI
 
REASONS NOT TO WEAR A MANTLE IN THE PRESENCE OF ROYALTY

Son. If you permit, I will ask to be allowed a few words in this discussion. On what do you base your statement that it is considered good deportment among princes for a man to come bareheaded and without a mantle when he comes to seek audience with them. If anyone did thus in the country, the mob would say that the man was a fool to run about in that way without a cloak like a ninny.

Son. If you don’t mind, I’d like to say a few words in this conversation. What makes you think that it’s seen as proper behavior for a man to approach princes without a hat and without a cloak? If anyone did that in this country, people would just say he’s foolish for walking around without a coat like an idiot.

Father. I told you a little earlier in our conversation that many a man goes about in ignorance as to what is 185fitting in a king’s house, because many things look stupid to the multitude which are considered proper in the presence of kings and other great men. Now you shall know of a truth, not only that it is fitting to come without a mantle when one appears for the first time before a king, but also that in many places it is as proper to wear one’s mantle in the royal presence as to leave it off. But since you have asked the reason why it should seem more decorous to appear before princes without one’s mantle than to wear it, it might be a more than sufficient answer to say that it is the custom wherever well-bred men appear in the presence of mighty lords to come without a mantle, and that whoever is ignorant of that custom is there called a churl.

Father. I mentioned earlier in our conversation that many people don't really understand what's appropriate in a king's presence, as many things that seem silly to the crowd are actually seen as proper when dealing with kings and other important figures. Now you should know for sure that it's proper to show up without a cloak when meeting a king for the first time, but in many places, it's equally acceptable to wear one in front of royalty. Since you asked why it seems more respectful to appear before princes without a cloak rather than wearing one, a simple answer would be that it's the custom for well-mannered people to arrive without a cloak in the presence of powerful lords, and anyone who doesn't know this custom is considered rude.

But these facts may serve as an additional answer: if a man appears before magnates wrapped in his cloak, he shows in that way that he regards himself as an equal to them in whose presence he is; for he comes clad in all his finery like a lord, and acts as if he need not serve any one. But if he lays aside his cloak, he shows that he is ready for service, if the one who is entitled to receive rather than to do service is willing to accept it. Likewise there are instances of this other fact, which often necessitates caution, that many are envious of a king; and if his enemy is rash and bold, he can indeed come before the king with hidden perils and murderous weapons, if he is allowed to wear his mantle; but he cannot easily accomplish this if he comes without his cloak. It is therefore evident that he was a wise man who first ordained the formality that a man should appear without a mantle before great lords and especially 186before kings. For that custom has since led to greater security against secret treason which could easily be hidden under the cloak, if it were worn. The custom has also promoted fair dealing and concord among men, for in this matter they all enjoy the same rights; and this being the accepted custom, one is not suspected or searched more than others.

But these facts may serve as an additional answer: if a man appears before powerful people wrapped in his cloak, he shows that he sees himself as their equal; he comes dressed in all his finery like a lord and behaves as if he doesn’t need to serve anyone. However, if he takes off his cloak, he shows that he is ready for service, assuming the person who is supposed to receive service is willing to accept it. Similarly, there are instances of another fact that often requires caution: many envy a king. If his enemy is reckless and bold, he can indeed approach the king with hidden dangers and deadly weapons if he is allowed to wear his cloak; but he can't easily do this if he comes without it. It’s clear that the person who first established the rule that a man should appear without a cloak before great lords and especially before kings was wise. This tradition has since led to greater security against secret treachery, which could easily be concealed under a cloak if worn. The custom has also encouraged fairness and harmony among people, as in this matter they all have the same rights; and since this is the accepted practice, no one is suspected or searched more than others.


XXXII
 
RULES FOR SPEECH AND CONVERSATION IN THE KING’S HALL

Son. Although this custom seemed strange to me before I heard your comment, it now looks as if it were founded on good sense and is not to be dispensed with; and therefore it will be well if you will continue to recount and point out to me all the forms of speech and conduct which one needs to observe in the presence of kings and other great men.

Son. Although this tradition seemed odd to me before I heard your thoughts, it now appears to be based on good sense and isn’t something to be ignored. So, it would be beneficial if you could keep sharing and highlighting all the ways of speaking and behaving that one should follow in front of kings and other important figures.

Father. Keep carefully in mind, while in the king’s presence, that you ought not to engage in conversation with other men and thus fail to pay heed to everything that the king says, lest it happen, if he addresses a remark to you, that you have to ask what he said. For it always looks ill for one to be so inattentive that the words spoken to him must be repeated before he can hear; and it looks particularly bad in the presence of important men. Still, it can very often come to pass, when one is in a lord’s presence, that other men crowd about him and ask questions of many sorts; sometimes this is due to the stupidity of those who do thus, but 187often the reason may be that he who acts in this way would not be displeased if something should be found to be censured in him who has a plea to make.

Father. Keep in mind, when you’re with the king, that you shouldn’t chat with others and risk missing what he says. If he asks you something, it would be embarrassing to have to ask him to repeat it. It reflects poorly on someone to be so distracted that they need to have their words repeated, especially in front of important people. However, it often happens that when you’re around a lord, people gather and ask all sorts of questions. Sometimes this is simply because they're clueless, but often it's because the person asking is opportunistically trying to find something to criticize in the one who has a request to present.

Now if it should happen while you are standing before a king that some one in the meantime should try to address a question or other remark to you, have friendly words ready on your lips and reply in this wise: “Wait a moment, my good man, while I listen a while to what the king says; later I shall be pleased to talk with you as long as you wish.” If he still tries to have further words with you, speak no more to him then until the king has finished his remarks. If it now should happen that the king has a few words to say to you, be very careful in your answer not to use plural terms in phrases that refer to yourself, though you do use the plural, as is proper, in all phrases referring to the king. But even more you need to beware of what fools frequently do, namely using the plural in phrases referring to yourself, while you employ the singular in those that refer to the king. And if the king should happen to speak a few words to you which you did not catch, and you have to ask what he said, do not say “Eh?” or “What?” or make a fuss about it, but use only the word “Sire;” or if you prefer to ask in more words: “My lord, be not offended if I ask what you said to me, but I did not quite catch it.” But see to it that it happens in rare cases only that the king need to repeat his remarks to you more than once before you grasp them.

Now, if you find yourself standing in front of a king and someone tries to speak to you, have some friendly words ready and respond like this: “Just a moment, my good man, while I listen to what the king has to say; I’d be happy to chat with you afterward as long as you’d like.” If the person keeps trying to talk to you, don’t engage with them until the king is done speaking. If the king happens to say a few words to you, be very careful with your response; avoid using plural terms when referring to yourself, but you can use them appropriately when talking about the king. Be especially mindful to avoid the mistake fools often make of using the plural when talking about themselves while using the singular for the king. And if the king says something you don’t catch, instead of saying “Eh?” or “What?” or causing a scene, just say “Sire;” or, if you prefer a longer version: “My lord, please don’t be upset if I ask what you said, but I didn’t quite catch it.” Just make sure that it’s a rare occasion when the king needs to repeat himself more than once for you to understand.


188

XXXIII
 
THE PROPER USES OF “YOU” AND “THOU”

Son. On what ground is it thought better to phrase all remarks addressed to lords in the plural than in the singular? When one directs a prayer to God, Who is higher and more excellent than all others, the expressions that refer to Him are all phrased in the singular; for everyone who makes his prayer to God speaks in this wise: “Almighty God, my Lord, hear Thou my prayer and be Thou more merciful toward me than I deserve.” But I hear no one form his words in this wise: “My Lord, hear my prayer and deal better with me because of Your mercy than I deserve.” Now I am not sure that my question is a very wise one; still, since you have allowed me to ask whatever I desire to know, I shall look for an informing reply as before, even though I ask like a child.

Son. Why is it considered better to address lords in the plural rather than the singular? When someone prays to God, who is higher and more excellent than anyone else, the phrases used are all in the singular; for everyone who prays says: “Almighty God, my Lord, hear my prayer and be more merciful to me than I deserve.” But I haven’t heard anyone say, “My Lord, hear my prayer and treat me better because of Your mercy than I deserve.” I'm not sure if my question is very smart; however, since you’ve allowed me to ask anything I want to know, I’ll seek an enlightening answer as before, even if my question sounds childish.

Father. I shall indeed be glad to explain everything to you as far as I am able; but I do not see why you are searching into this matter so closely that one shall even have to give reasons for the choice of terms in holy prayer. For the teachers of the church are far better able to interpret matters that belong to divinity than I. But since every question looks toward a reply, I shall explain this to you in a few words, as it seems most reasonable to me; and I shall take up first what seems to me the most important. Now I believe the terms used in sacred prayers are chosen so that we call upon the divine name in the singular rather than in the plural, in order that all who believe in God may clearly understand 189that we believe in one true God and not in numerous idols like the heathen who formerly called upon seven gods. For they held that one god ruled the heavens; another, the heavenly bodies; a third, the earth and its fruits; a fourth, the sea and its waters; a fifth, the air and the winds; a sixth, learning and eloquence; a seventh, death and hell. Now we should honor the one true God Whom all creation serves and call upon Him in singular terms, lest false gods obtain our worship, if when calling upon the divine name we use plural terms, as if there were more than one God. There is this added reason, that simple-minded folk may conclude that there are more gods than one if His name be invoked in plural terms. Thus it is rightfully and wisely ordered, so that a simple and holy faith shall have no cause to stray away from the true highway. Now if you do not fully grasp this speech, we shall find more to say; but if it has led you to clearer insight, we may as well direct our thoughts to the other matters that you have asked about.

Father. I’m happy to explain everything to you as best as I can; however, I don’t understand why you’re digging so deep into this issue that we even have to justify our choice of words in sacred prayer. The church leaders are much better at interpreting divine matters than I am. But since every question seeks an answer, I’ll break it down for you briefly, starting with what I think is the most important point. I believe the terms used in sacred prayers are chosen to call on the divine name in the singular instead of the plural, so that everyone who believes in God can clearly understand that we believe in one true God, not in many idols like the pagans who used to worship seven gods. They thought that one god ruled the heavens, another governed the heavenly bodies, a third managed the earth and its fruits, a fourth controlled the sea and its waters, a fifth ruled the air and the winds, a sixth oversaw knowledge and eloquence, and a seventh managed death and the underworld. We should honor the one true God that all creation serves and call on Him in singular terms, to avoid giving false gods our worship, especially if we use plural terms when referring to the divine, as if there were more than one God. Additionally, simple-minded people might assume there are multiple gods if His name is referred to in the plural. This is why it is justly and wisely arranged, so a simple and holy faith does not stray from the true path. If you don’t fully understand this explanation, we can discuss it more; but if it has given you clearer insight, we can move on to the other matters you wanted to talk about.


XXXIV
 
THE SAME TOPIC CONTINUED

Son. These things seem very clear to me and it appears both reasonable and necessary that one should use the singular rather than the plural in addressing God, lest the true faith be debased by the use of plural expressions and the cunning adversaries obtain the worship that a simple and true faith refuses them. But now I wish to have you turn to what I asked about the mighty men of this world, and explain why it seems better to address them in plural than in singular terms.

Son. These things seem very clear to me, and it seems both reasonable and necessary to use the singular form when addressing God, so that true faith isn’t undermined by plural expressions and the clever enemies don’t receive the worship that a simple and true faith denies them. But now, I want you to focus on what I asked about the powerful people in this world, and explain why it seems better to address them in the plural rather than the singular.

190Father. It might be a sufficient answer to state that it seems better to address princes in plural than in singular terms for the reason that well-bred people have found it so from the beginning; and it has since become a custom among all discreet and courteous men, and is done in honor of those who are addressed and are entitled to a deferential mode of address. But this is the thought which they had in mind who originated these expressions, that men of power are not like all others who have only themselves and their households to care for and are responsible for a few men only. For chieftains are responsible for all those who are subject to them in service or authority, and they have not only one man’s answer on the tongue but have indeed to answer for many. And when a good chief departs this life, it is not as if one man is lost, but it is a great loss to all those who received support and honors from him; and they seem to be of less consequence after they have lost their chief than before while he was living, unless one shall come into his stead who will be as gracious to them as the departed one was. Now since great lords both maintain the honor of many and have great cares and liabilities on their account, it is surely proper to honor them by using the plural forms of address in all speech that those who are humbler and of less consequence may have to address to them. But there remain those things which were learned or thought of when this custom was first ordained: that kings and other powerful men are not alone in their deliberations but are associated with many other wise and distinguished men; and therefore, when a chief is addressed in plural terms, it may be thought 191that the words are not addressed to the king alone, but also to all those who sit in his councils as his advisers.

190Father. It might be enough to say that it seems better to address princes in plural terms rather than singular ones, because courteous people have found this to be true from the start; it has since become a custom among all polite and respectful individuals, honoring those who are being addressed and who deserve a deferential mode of speech. The original thinkers behind these expressions understood that powerful individuals are not like everyone else who only has themselves and their families to worry about and are accountable for just a few people. Chieftains, on the other hand, are responsible for everyone under their service or rule, and they not only speak for themselves but must answer for many others as well. When a good leader passes away, it’s not just one person who is lost, but a significant loss to all those who received support and recognition from him; they seem to matter less after losing their leader than they did when he was alive, unless someone equally gracious takes his place. Since great lords uphold the honor of many and carry significant responsibilities, it is certainly fitting to honor them by using plural forms of address in all communications from those who are lower in status and less significant. However, it’s important to remember the reasoning behind this custom: kings and other powerful figures do not deliberate alone but are surrounded by many wise and distinguished advisers; therefore, when a leader is addressed in plural terms, it may be understood that the words are directed not only to the king but also to all those who sit in his councils as his advisers. 191

In my last speech I also mentioned that you must have care never to use the plural in expressions referring to yourself, lest you seem to regard yourself as on an equality with the one to whom you are speaking, if he is of higher rank than you are. And even when you talk with an equal or with a humbler man than you are, it is not fitting for you to honor yourself with plural terms. You must also beware when in the presence of princes, lest you become too verbose in your talk; for great lords and all discreet men are displeased with prolixity and regard it as tedious and worthless folly. Further, if you have a matter to present, whether it concerns yourself or others, present it clearly but with quick utterance and in the fewest possible words; for constantly there comes before kings and other lords such a great mass of business respecting the manifold needs of their subjects, that they have neither time nor inclination to hear a case discussed in a long, detailed speech. And it is very evident that, if a man is clever and fluent in speech, he will find it easy to state his case in a few rapidly spoken words, so that the one who is to reply will grasp it readily. Then, too, if one is not an orator and, even more, is awkward in speech, the briefer the errand on his tongue, the better it is; for a man can somehow manage to get through with a few words and thus conceal his awkwardness from those to whom it is unknown. But when a man makes an elaborate effort, he will surely seem the more unskilful the longer he talks.

In my last speech, I also mentioned that you should never use the plural when referring to yourself, as it may suggest that you see yourself as equal to the person you’re speaking to, especially if they are of higher rank. Even when you’re talking to someone of equal status or someone lower than you, it’s not appropriate to refer to yourself in plural terms. You should also be careful when speaking in front of princes, as being too wordy can be off-putting; great lords and all sensible individuals find excessive verbosity tedious and foolish. Furthermore, if you have something to present, whether it’s about yourself or others, do so clearly and concisely, using as few words as possible. Kings and other lords are often flooded with various matters regarding their subjects' needs, so they don’t have the time or patience for long-winded discussions. It's clear that if someone is smart and articulate, they can easily make their point quickly so that the listener can understand it right away. Additionally, if someone is not a skilled speaker and struggles with articulation, the fewer words, the better; this way, they can get their message across while hiding their awkwardness from those who might not know them well. However, someone who puts in a lot of effort to be elaborate will only highlight their lack of skill the longer they speak.

192Now such things there are and others like them into which a man, if he wishes to be called well-bred, must get some insight and which he ought to learn at home before he goes very often to have conversation with great lords. And from all this you will see how courtly and cultured they ought to be in their manners and conduct who are constantly to be near a king in all manner of honorable intercourse, since it has appeared to knowing men as if one is scarcely prepared to come into the king’s presence to converse with him unless he has mastered all these things that we have now talked about, except he should be a perfect boor, and not to be reckoned or classed among well-bred people but among the very churls. Still, you must know this, too, that there are many who have spent a long time at court, and know but little or nothing about these things. And this is true of those who bear the hirdman’s name and should be very close to the king, as well as of those who have lesser titles and rarely see the king. It must have been of such as these last mentioned that you spoke earlier in our conversation when you remarked that those who came from the court seemed no more polished or cultured, or even less, than those who had never been at court. To that I replied, and with truth, that everyone who wishes to be proper in his conduct needs to guard against such ignorance as they are guilty of, who know not the meaning of shame or honor or courtesy, and learn nothing from the conduct of good and courtly men, even though they see it daily before their eyes.

192There are things like this that a person who wants to be considered well-mannered should understand, and these are lessons he should learn at home before he often engages in conversation with noble lords. From all of this, you can see how polite and cultured someone needs to be in both manner and behavior if they are to be close to a king in various honorable interactions. It seems clear to knowledgeable people that you can hardly approach the king to chat with him unless you have mastered all these topics we've discussed, unless, of course, you're a total boor, in which case you wouldn't be counted among well-mannered individuals but rather among the very uncultured. However, you should also understand that many who have spent a long time at court know very little or even nothing about these matters. This includes those who are called hirdmen and are supposed to be very close to the king, as well as those with lower titles who hardly ever see the king. It must have been these individuals you referred to earlier in our discussion when you mentioned that those from the court seemed no more refined or cultured—perhaps even less—than those who had never been to court. In response, I truthfully stated that anyone who wants to behave properly should be wary of the ignorance exhibited by those who do not understand the concepts of shame, honor, or courtesy, and do not learn anything from the conduct of gracious and cultured people, even when they see it every day.


193

XXXV
 
ABOUT CROP FAILURE AND A LACK OF MORALS AND GOVERNMENT

Son. It is a fact that I have met some who, though they came from court, either concealed the sort of manners that you have now discussed, if they knew them, or had, as I remarked, never gained insight into such matters. Now it is not strange that those who remain at home in ignorance or are not of an inquiring mind know little or nothing about such things; but it is more to be wondered at, as you have just said, that many remain a long time with the king and close to him in service, and still do not learn either what courtesy means or what courtly manners are. Therefore, since you have warned me to beware of such ignorance, I want to ask you how this can be and how a king who is well-bred and courteous can be willing to keep men about his person to serve him, who refuse to live according to good manners. For I have thought that, if a king is courteous and refined, all would imitate him in decorum, and that he would not care much for churlish men.

Son. I've met some people from the court who either hide the manners we've been discussing, if they even know them, or, as I mentioned, never really understand these things at all. It's not surprising that those who stay at home in ignorance or lack curiosity know very little about such matters; however, as you've pointed out, it is surprising that many who spend a long time close to the king in service still don't grasp what courtesy means or what good manners are. So, since you've warned me to watch out for such ignorance, I want to ask you how this can happen. How can a well-bred and courteous king choose to surround himself with people who refuse to adhere to good manners? I've always thought that if a king is polite and refined, everyone would follow his example, and he wouldn't pay much attention to rude individuals.

Father. It may happen sometimes that a husbandman who is accustomed to eat good bread and clean food has to mix chaff or bran with his flour so as to make his bread and that of his household last longer than common; and at such times he must, though reluctant, partake of such food as is set before him in the same thankful spirit as earlier, when he was given good and clean food; and such cases result from grinding necessity, that is, from crop failures. But scarcity arises in 194many ways. Sometimes there is dearth of grain, even when the earth continues to yield grass and straw, though at times it gives neither. There are times, too, when the earth gives good and sufficient fruitage, and yet no one is profited, for dearth is in the air, and bad weather ruins the crops at harvest time. Sometimes smut[246] causes trouble, though the crop is plentiful and the weather good. It can also happen at times that all vegetation flourishes at its best, and there is no dearth; and yet there may be great scarcity on some man’s farm or among his cattle, or in the ocean, or in the fresh waters, or in the hunting forests. Sometimes when everything goes wrong, it may even come to pass that all these failures occur together; and then bran will be as dear among men as clean flour was earlier, when times were good, or even dearer than that. All these forms of dearth which I have now recounted must be regarded as great calamities in every land where they occur; and it would mean almost complete ruin if they should all appear at the same time and continue for a period of three years.

Father. Sometimes a farmer who’s used to having good bread and clean food has to mix chaff or bran with his flour to make his bread and that of his family last longer than usual. At such times, he must, even if reluctantly, accept what’s put in front of him with the same gratitude as when he had good and clean food. Such situations arise from urgent necessity, like crop failures. But scarcity can happen in many ways. Sometimes there’s a shortage of grain, even while the land keeps producing grass and straw, though occasionally it yields nothing at all. There are times when the crops are plentiful and sufficient, yet no one benefits because the air is dry, and bad weather ruins the harvest. Sometimes disease can affect crops even when the yield is high, and the weather is fine. It can also happen that all vegetation is thriving, and there is no shortage, yet there may still be severe scarcity on a person’s farm, among their livestock, in the ocean, in freshwater, or in the hunting grounds. Sometimes when everything goes wrong, all these failures can happen at once; and then bran will be as expensive among people as clean flour was during good times, or even more so. All these types of scarcity I’ve mentioned should be seen as major disasters in any land where they occur; experiencing all of them simultaneously for three years would nearly spell complete ruin.

There remains another kind of dearth which alone is more distressing than all those which I have enumerated: dearth may come upon the people who inhabit the land, or, what is worse, there may come failure in the morals, the intelligence, or the counsels of those who are to govern the land. For something can be done to help a country where there is famine, if capable men are in control and there is prosperity in the neighboring lands. But if dearth comes upon the people or the morals 195of the nation, far greater misfortunes will arise. For one cannot buy from other countries with money either morals or insight, if what was formerly in the land should be lost or destroyed. But even though there be failure of harvest on a peasant’s farm, which has always been good and which he and his kinsmen before him have owned a long time, he will not take such an angry dislike to it that, caring no longer what becomes of it, he will proceed forthwith to dispose of it; much rather will he plan to garner and store grass and chaff as carefully as he once garnered good and clean grain, or even more so, and in this way provide for his household as best he can, until God wills that times shall improve. In this way, too, a king must act, if he should suffer the misfortune of dearth upon the morals or the intelligence of his realm: he must not renounce the kingdom, but necessity may force him to rate the men of little wit as high as the wise were rated earlier while the kingdom stood highest in prosperity and morals. Sometimes punishment will serve and sometimes prayer; something may also be gained through instruction; but the land must be maintained in every way possible until God wills that times shall improve.

There’s another type of shortage that’s even more distressing than all the ones I’ve mentioned: it’s when the people living in a land face scarcity, or even worse, when there’s a decline in the morals, intelligence, or judgment of those who govern. If a country is suffering from famine, something can still be done to help if capable leaders are in charge and there’s prosperity in nearby regions. But if there’s a shortage affecting the people or the nation’s morals, far worse troubles will follow. You can’t buy morals or wisdom from other countries with money if what was originally in the land is lost or destroyed. Even if a farmer faces a bad harvest on a farm that has always been fruitful and that he and his ancestors have owned for generations, he won’t reject it in anger so completely that he doesn’t care about it anymore and quickly sells it off. Instead, he’s more likely to carefully gather and store hay and chaff just as he once collected good, clean grain, or even more so, in order to provide for his family as best he can until better times come along. In the same way, a king must act if he experiences a decline in the morals or intelligence of his kingdom: he shouldn’t abandon his rule, but necessity may force him to value those with less wisdom just as highly as he once valued the wise when the kingdom was at its peak of prosperity and morals. Sometimes punishment will be effective, sometimes prayer will help; there may also be gains through education; but the land must be sustained in every possible way until better times come according to God’s will. 195


XXXVI
 
THE CAUSES OF SUCH TIMES OF SCARCITY AND WHAT FORMS THE SCARCITY MAY TAKE

Son. I see clearly now that troubles may befall men in many ways, the mighty as well as the humble, kings as well as cotters. But as you have given me this freedom and have allowed me to question you in our conversation, 196I shall ask you to enlarge somewhat fully upon this speech before we take up another. What is your opinion as to the causes of such a severe dearth as may come upon the minds of men, so that all is ruined at the same time, insight and national morals? And do you think such losses should be traced to the people who inhabit the realm or to the king and the men who manage the state with him?

Son. I can see clearly now that troubles can hit people in many ways, affecting both the powerful and the humble, kings as well as common folks. But since you've given me this freedom and allowed me to question you in our discussion, 196I would like you to elaborate a bit more on this topic before we move on to another. What’s your take on the reasons for such a severe shortage that can impact people's minds, leading to a complete breakdown of understanding and national ethics? And do you think these losses should be attributed to the people living in the kingdom or to the king and the officials who govern with him?

Father. What you have now asked about has its origin in various facts and occurrences of a harmful character. I believe, however, that such misfortunes would rarely appear among the people who inhabit and till the land, if the men who govern the realm were discreet and the king himself were wise. But when God, because of the sins of the people, determines to visit a land with a punishment that means destruction to morals and intellect, He will carry out His decision promptly, though in various ways, as soon as He wills it. Instances of this have occurred frequently and in various places, where trouble has come when a chieftain, who possessed both wealth and wisdom and who had been highly honored by the king, having sat in his council and shared largely with him in the government, departed this life leaving four or five sons in his place, all in their early youth or childhood. Then the king and the whole realm have suffered immediate injury: the king has lost a good friend, an excellent adviser, and a strong bulwark. Next the man’s possessions are divided into five parts, and all his projects are disturbed. His household sinks in importance, since each of the sons has but a fifth of all the power that the father derived from his means while he was 197living, and has even less of his insight and knowledge of manners, being a mere child. Greater still will the change be if he leaves no son at his decease but as many daughters as I have now counted sons; but the very greatest change will come if neither sons nor daughters survive him; for then it is likely that his possessions will be split up among distant relatives, unless a near kinsman be found.

Father. What you’ve just asked about comes from various harmful facts and events. However, I believe that such troubles would rarely happen among the people who live and farm the land if the rulers of the realm were sensible, and if the king himself were wise. But when God decides to punish a land for the people’s sins, resulting in destruction to morals and intellect, He will act on that decision quickly and in various ways, whenever He chooses. This has often happened in different places, where trouble arises when a chieftain, who had both wealth and wisdom and was highly respected by the king, dies. If this chieftain has four or five sons who are all very young or still children, then both the king and the entire realm suffer immediately: the king loses a good friend, a great adviser, and a strong support. Afterward, the man’s property gets divided into five parts, disrupting all his plans. His household loses significance since each son only has a fifth of the power their father had while he was alive, and they have even less of his understanding and knowledge, being just children. The situation worsens even more if he leaves no sons but as many daughters as I’ve just counted sons; the biggest change occurs if neither sons nor daughters survive him, as his possessions may end up divided among distant relatives unless a close family member can be found.

Now if many such events should occur at one time in a kingdom, vigor would disappear from the king’s council, though he himself be very capable. And if it should happen (for there are cases of such events as well as of the others) that a king depart this life and leave a young son who succeeds to the paternal kingdom, though a mere child, and young counsellors come into the places of the old and wise advisers who were before,—if all these things that we have now recounted should happen at one time, then it is highly probable that all the government of the realm would be stricken with dearth, and that, when the government goes to ruin, the morals of the nation would also fail to some extent.

Now, if a lot of such events were to happen at once in a kingdom, the king’s council would lose its strength, even if he is very capable. And if a king were to pass away and leave behind a young son who takes over the kingdom, even though he is just a child, and if young advisers replace the old and wise ones that were there before—if all these things were to happen at the same time, then it’s very likely that the government of the realm would struggle, and that as the government falls apart, the morals of the nation would also decline to some extent.

There still remains the one contingency which is most likely to bring on such years of dearth as produce the greatest evils; and unfortunately there are no fewer instances of such issues than of those that we have just mentioned. If a king who has governed a kingdom should happen to die, and leave behind three or four sons, and the men who are likely to be made counsellors be all young and full of temerity, though wealthy and of good ancestry, since they have sprung from families 198that formerly conducted the government with the king,—now if a kingdom should come into such unfortunate circumstances as have been described, with several heirs at the same time, and the evil counsel is furthermore taken to give them all the royal title and dignity, then that realm must be called a rudderless ship or a decayed estate; it may be regarded almost as a ruined kingdom, for it is sown with the worst seeds of famine and the grains of unpeace. For the petty kings, having rent the realm asunder, will quickly divide the loyalty of the people who inhabit the land, both of the rich and of the poor; and each of these lords will then try to draw friends about him, as many as he can. Thereupon each will begin to survey his realm as to population and wealth; and when he recalls what his predecessor possessed, each will feel that he has too little. Then the friends, too, of each one will remind him of and tell about how much the king who ruled before him possessed in wealth and numbers and what great undertakings he set out upon; and it seems as if in every suggestion each one tries to urge his lord to seize upon more than he already has. After that these lords begin to treasure those riches that are of the least profit to the kingdom, namely envy: trivial matters are carefully garnered and great wrath is blown out of them. Soon the love of kinship begins to decay; he who was earlier called friend and relative is now looked upon as an evil-doer, for soon each one begins to be suspicious of the others. But when suspicion and evil rumors begin to appear, wicked men think that good times are at hand, and they all bring out their plows. Before long the seeds of hostility begin to sprout, 199avarice and iniquity flourish, and men grow bold in manslaying, high-handed robbery, and theft.

There’s still one situation that’s most likely to cause years of hardship that lead to major problems; unfortunately, there are just as many examples of this situation as the ones we’ve just discussed. If a king who ruled a kingdom dies and leaves behind three or four sons, and the potential advisors are all young and reckless, though wealthy and from good families—having come from households that once helped govern alongside the king—then if a kingdom finds itself in such unfortunate circumstances with multiple heirs at once, and if the terrible decision is made to grant them all royal titles and honors, that kingdom can be described as a rudderless ship or a failing state. It can nearly be seen as a ruined kingdom, as it’s planted with the worst seeds of famine and discord. The petty kings, having torn the realm apart, will quickly divide the loyalties of the people, both rich and poor. Each of these lords will try to gather as many followers as they can. Then, they will start to assess their own lands in terms of population and wealth; when they think of what their predecessor had, each will feel they own far too little. Their friends will remind them of how much the former king possessed in wealth and followers and the great things he attempted; it seems that with every suggestion, each one tries to push their lord to claim more than he already has. After that, these lords start to hoard riches that are of little use to the kingdom, mainly envy: they carefully collect trivial matters and inflate them into huge grievances. Soon, family ties begin to erode; those who were once called friends and relatives are now seen as wrongdoers, as each one grows suspicious of the others. When suspicion and malicious gossip start to surface, unscrupulous people believe that the time for mischief is upon them, and they all come out with their plows. Before long, the seeds of hostility begin to grow, greed and wrongdoing thrive, and people become bold in killing, armed robbery, and theft.

Now if it happens that one of these princes should wish to punish the aforesaid vices in his kingdom, the wicked take refuge in the service of some other master; and, though they have been driven from home because of their misdeeds, they pretend to have come in innocence to escape the cruel wrath of their lord. The one to whom they have fled gives protection in temerity rather than in mercy; for he wishes to acquire friends in the other’s realm, who may prove useful to himself and hostile to the other in case they should come to disagreement. But those who had to flee because of their evil conduct and law-breaking soon begin to show hostility toward the lord whose subjects they formerly were and to rouse as much enmity as they can between him and the one to whom they have come. They take revenge for their exile by carrying murder, rapine, and plundering into the kingdom, as if they were guiltless and all the blame lay with the lord. Soon immorality begins to multiply, for God shows His wrath in this way, that where the four boundaries of the territories of these chiefs touch, he places a moving wheel which turns on a restless axle. After that each one forgets all brotherly love, and kinship is wrecked. Nothing is now spared, for whenever the people are divided into many factions through loyalty to different chiefs, and these fall out, the masses will rashly pursue their desires, and the morals of the nation go to ruin. For then everyone makes his own moral code according to his own way of thinking; and no one fears punishment any longer when the rulers fall out and are weakened thereby.

Now, if one of these princes wants to address the vices in his kingdom, the wrongdoers quickly find refuge with another master. Even though they've been kicked out because of their bad behavior, they pretend they left innocently to escape their lord's harsh anger. The person they flee to offers protection more out of greed than kindness because they want to gain allies from the displaced lord's kingdom, who might help them if disagreements arise. However, those who fled due to their misconduct and lawbreaking soon start turning against their former lord and try to create as much animosity as possible between him and their new protector. They seek revenge for their exile by bringing violence, looting, and chaos into the new kingdom, acting as if they are innocent and that all the fault lies with their former lord. Soon, immorality spreads, for God shows His displeasure by placing a spinning wheel at the meeting points of these leaders' territories, which turns on a restless axle. After that, brotherly love is forgotten, and family ties break down. Nothing is held back, for when the people split into factions due to loyalty to different leaders, and these leaders quarrel, the masses recklessly chase their desires, leading to the nation's moral decline. At this point, everyone starts creating their own moral standards based on personal beliefs, and no one fears punishment anymore when the rulers are at odds and weakened.

200When each one looks only to his own tricks and wiles, great misfortunes of all kinds will come upon the land. Murder and quarrels will multiply; many women will be carried off as captives of war and violated, while others will be ensnared and seduced into fornication; children will be begotten in adultery and unlawful co-habitation. Some take their kinswomen or sisters-in-law, while others seduce wives away from their husbands; and thus all forms of whoredom are committed and degeneracy will come to light in all the generations that are begotten in such immorality. Every form of crime will be committed. Peasants and subjects become defiant and disobedient; they are not careful to avoid crimes, and though they commit many, they atone for few only. Trusting in their own strength and numbers, they attend seditious meetings; and they choose as their part what is likely to bring a dangerous outcome, for they place all men on the same level, the discreet and decent ones with the coarse and stupid, and they screen foolish and iniquitous men from punishment, though these deserve it every day. And this they do either by swearing falsely and giving false witness in their behalf, or by making a foolhardy and crafty defence at the court of trial, so that the guilty have to answer for nothing before the kingsmen who assist the king in carrying out the law. For the unthinking mob seem to imagine that the king was appointed to be their opponent; and a foolish man regards himself fortunate and highly favored in the eyes of thoughtless people, if he can maintain himself for some time in opposition to royal authority and the prescriptions of law. And if 201such men have disputes to settle anywhere, the wicked will support the foolish one, so that he may prevail in the controversy; thus the upright and the peaceful are robbed of their dues. If the greedy or the quarrelsome is slain because of his avarice, his stupid kinsmen who survive him will feel that their family has been greatly injured and impaired thereby; and if at some earlier time there was slain one of their family who was both wise and peaceful, and whose wisdom and even temper proved useful to many, and if this one was atoned for with a payment to the kindred, they will now ask as large a fine for the unwise as what was formerly taken for the prudent one; otherwise there will be revenge by manslaying.

200When everyone focuses only on their own schemes and tricks, terrible misfortunes will strike the land. Violence and conflicts will increase; many women will be taken as war captives and assaulted, while others will be trapped and seduced into illicit relationships; children will be born from affairs and immoral living situations. Some will take their female relatives or sisters-in-law, while others will lure wives away from their husbands; and as a result, all kinds of sexual immorality will occur, revealing degeneracy across all generations born from such wrongdoing. Every kind of crime will be committed. Farmers and subjects become rebellious and disobedient; they don't bother to steer clear of wrongdoing, and though they commit many offenses, they only seek forgiveness for a few. Relying on their strength and numbers, they gather for rebellious meetings, choosing actions that could lead to dangerous results, as they view all people as equals, mixing the sensible and decent with the rude and foolish, shielding ignorant and wicked individuals from punishment—even though they deserve it every day. They do this either by lying and giving false testimony on their behalf or by crafting a reckless defense in court, so the guilty face no consequences before the king's allies who help enforce the law. The thoughtless crowd seems to believe that the king is meant to be their enemy; and a foolish person considers themselves lucky and favored by the ignorant if they can hold their ground against royal authority and the law for a while. And if 201these individuals have disputes, the wicked will side with the foolish, ensuring they come out on top in the argument; thus, the honest and peaceful will be deprived of what is rightfully theirs. If a greedy or combative person is killed due to their greed, their foolish relatives will feel their family has been significantly wronged; and if previously one of their family members—who was wise and peaceful, whose wisdom and calmness benefited many—was killed and compensated with a payment to their kin, they will now demand as large a fine for the foolish one as was paid for the wise; otherwise, they will seek revenge through murder.

But when God sees that such misjudgments, born of perversity and unwisdom, are decreed, He turns the injustice back upon those who first began to pass unfair and unfounded judgments. For as soon as the foolish or the avaricious sees that he is held in high regard, even more than the wise with his even temper, and that his avarice and folly are turned to honor and advancement, he will do according to his nature and the custom of all foolish men: he will become more grasping and will operate more widely in his greed. And when the mob begins to regard that as worthy of praise and renown which is evil and should be hated by all, the second and the third will learn it and the one after the other, until it becomes common custom; and he alone will be counted a worthy man who is grasping and knows how to detract unjustly from another’s honor to his own profit. After that the one deals greedily with the other, 202till misfortune turns against the very ones whose folly and wickedness originally began these evil practices. For one will finally bring evil upon another, wounds or other afflictions, and thus all old and lawful ordinances must decay. Now everyone holds that the king and other great lords should temper the severity of the laws with mercy; but none of the commoners seems willing to deal justly with another; indeed, each would rather demand more than what he was entitled to from the beginning. But when all lawful ordinances and right punishments are ignored and unlaw and malice take their place, and this condition becomes so general that God is wearied, He applies the punishment that is able to reach all, since the guilt has touched all. He throws hatred and enmity down among the chiefs who are placed in control of the realm; when things go ill there may also come failure of crops; and the chiefs soon begin to quarrel, for each finds complaints in the other’s kingdom, which are finally settled with slaughter and strife.

But when God sees that these misjudgments, born from wickedness and lack of wisdom, are being made, He turns the injustice back on those who first started making unfair and baseless judgments. As soon as the foolish or greedy see that they are esteemed more highly than the wise with their calm demeanor, and that their greed and foolishness are rewarded with honor and advancement, they will act according to their nature and like all foolish people: they will become more greedy and will extend their grasping behavior. And when the crowd begins to praise and honor what is evil and should be despised by all, more people will follow suit, one after another, until it becomes the norm; and only those who are greedy and know how to unjustly diminish another person's honor for their own gain will be considered worthy. After that, one will take advantage of another, 202 until misfortune falls on those whose folly and wickedness started these wrong practices. For one will ultimately bring harm to another, causing wounds or other afflictions, leading to the decline of old and just laws. Now everyone believes that the king and other powerful lords should balance the harshness of the laws with mercy; yet none of the common people seem willing to treat each other fairly; indeed, each would prefer to demand more than they rightfully deserve from the beginning. But when all just laws and appropriate punishments are ignored, and wrongdoing and malice take their place, and this situation becomes so widespread that God becomes weary, He applies a punishment that can affect all since the guilt has touched everyone. He brings hatred and resentment among those in authority over the land; when things go poorly, there may also be crop failures; and leaders quickly start to argue, as each finds faults in the other’s realm, which ultimately leads to violence and conflict.

But whenever famine, murder, and warfare begin to arrive together and visit all those who inhabit the realm, the kingdom will be brought near to utter weakness and ruin, if the period should continue any length of time. Though laws and useful customs may have been observed and maintained to some extent in the times mentioned earlier, they will be wholly forgotten whenever such times appear as those that we have just now described; for in warfare the best men and those of the noblest kinship are destroyed. But failure of crops, rapine, and unpeace of every sort that may then appear will rob those of wealth who are in possession of 203it and have acquired it honestly, while he gets it who can most readily deprive others by theft and plunder. And when such a time comes upon a nation, it will suffer loss in good morals and capable men, wealth and security, and every blessing as long as God permits the plague to continue. But He metes out according to His mercy, for He is able to save such a country, when He finds that the people have been sufficiently chastised for their sins. Now you can imagine how highly moral the people will become, if such a nation is saved by God’s grace and again brought under the rule of a single monarch, and how prosperous the realm may become in the period immediately following such an unrest as I have just described. For then the kingdom was rent, the morals of the people were confused, and their loyalty was divided among a number of lords, each one of whom was striving to contrive and employ against the others cunning, deception, disloyalty, and evil in every form.[247]

But whenever famine, murder, and warfare start to hit all those living in the kingdom, it will be brought close to total weakness and ruin if this situation lasts for any significant time. Although laws and useful customs may have been followed somewhat in the earlier days, they will be completely forgotten when times like those we just described appear; because in warfare, the best people and those of noble lineage are wiped out. But crop failures, looting, and general unrest will strip away the wealth of those who have earned it honestly, while those who are most willing to steal and plunder will take it from them. And when such a situation befalls a nation, it will lose in good morals, capable individuals, wealth, security, and all blessings as long as God allows the chaos to continue. But He measures out according to His mercy, for He is able to save such a country when He sees that the people have been sufficiently punished for their wrongdoings. Now you can imagine how virtuous the people will become if such a nation is saved by God’s grace and restored under the rule of a single monarch, and how prosperous the kingdom may become immediately following such turmoil as I have just described. For then the kingdom was divided, the morals of the people were confused, and their loyalty was split among several lords, each of whom was trying to outsmart and undermine the others through cunning, deception, disloyalty, and all forms of evil.203


XXXVII
 
THE DUTIES, ACTIVITIES, AND ENTERTAINMENT OF THE ROYAL GUARDSMEN

Son. It is perfectly evident that if all these misfortunes should befall a kingdom and the period of trouble 204were to continue for some time, the realm would decline. There surely must be instances of such an issue, and we may safely conclude that wherever such events come to pass, there will be much evil and manifold misfortunes before they cease. I also see clearly that if the morals or laws of a kingdom are undermined by such troubles as you have described, even though God should purpose to rescue it finally from distress and unpeace and bring it again under one ruler after such troublous times, the people who survive are likely to be both wicked and vicious; and there will surely be need, as you have said, of good instruction and at times even of very severe punishment. Furthermore, even if the kingdom did possess tolerable morals for a time before the unpeace came, he who is to undertake the government, though he be very wise, will need to use great determination and severity for a long period, if the realm is to be replaced on its earlier footing.

Son. It’s clear that if a kingdom faces all these disasters and this period of turmoil lasts for a while, the kingdom will decline. There must be examples of such situations, and we can reasonably conclude that wherever these events occur, there will be a lot of suffering and many troubles before they end. I also see that if the morals or laws of a kingdom are weakened by the kind of troubles you’ve described, even if God intends to eventually save it from distress and unrest and restore it under one ruler after such chaotic times, the surviving people are likely to be both corrupt and harmful. There will definitely be a need, as you said, for good guidance and sometimes even very harsh punishment. Moreover, even if the kingdom had decent morals for a while before the unrest hit, the person who takes on the leadership, no matter how wise, will need to show great determination and strictness for a long time to restore the kingdom to its former state.

I have been deeply interested in your discussion of what may bring the greatest damage to a kingdom (and it may be rendered worthless through loss of morals, population, and wealth, if such conditions should arise); and I have now been sufficiently informed as to how matters may shape themselves, if misfortune means to come; and I see clearly what great losses and damage may follow such events. Now it seems to me that we have dwelt rather long upon facts which must bring distress to everyone who wishes to be reputed a moral man (wherefore all, both rich and poor, should implore the Lord to let no such times come in their days), and I will therefore return to what I began with and ask you to 205point out the manners and customs which you think would be becoming to me, if I were employed in the royal service, no matter what times might come, though I will pray the Lord that as long as I live there may be peace and quiet and prosperous times.

I've been really interested in your talk about what could damage a kingdom the most (and it could become worthless through losing morals, population, and wealth if those situations occur); I’ve now learned enough about how things might unfold if misfortune decides to strike, and I clearly see the significant losses and harm that could follow such events. It seems to me that we've spent quite a bit of time on depressing facts that must distress anyone wanting to be seen as a moral person (which is why everyone, both rich and poor, should pray to the Lord to keep such times away from their lives). So, I’ll go back to what I initially asked and request that you point out the manners and customs you think would suit me if I were to serve the royal court, regardless of what may come, though I will pray to the Lord that as long as I live, there will be peace, calm, and good times. 205

Father. No one knows how God will order such things during the days of any man’s lifetime. But if a man determines to be a kingsman and there happens to be much distress and many disasters at the time because of too many rulers or unpeace in some form, he must be careful to join the service of the one who has obtained the power in the most legal manner and is most likely to observe the customs that rightful and well-bred kings have observed before his day. He is then least likely to incur danger in accounting for his service, whether he be called to account in this world or in the next. But you have asked what customs you should observe if you were bound to a royal service, and on that point I can very well inform you.

Father. No one can predict how God will handle things during a person's lifetime. But if someone decides to be a loyal subject and finds themselves in a time of great turmoil and disaster due to too many rulers or some form of conflict, they should be careful to serve the one who has obtained power in the most legitimate way and is most likely to follow the traditions that noble and well-bred kings have upheld before them. This way, they are least likely to face danger when accounting for their service, whether in this life or the next. You’ve asked what traditions you should follow if you were serving a royal, and I can definitely help you with that.

This should be the first principle of all your conduct, never to let your heart be wanting in reverence and fear of God, to love him above everything else, and next to him to love righteousness. Train yourself to be fair, upright, and temperate in all things. Always keep in mind the day of death and guard carefully against vices. Remember that many a man lives but a brief time, while his deeds live long after him; and it is of great importance what is remembered about him. Some have reached fame through good deeds, and these always live after them, for one’s honor lives forever, though the man himself be dead. Some win fame by evil deeds 206and these men, though they be dead, bear a burden of lasting disgrace when their deeds are recalled; their kinsmen, too, and all their descendants after their days have to bear the same dishonor. Those, however, are most numerous who drop away like cattle and are remembered neither for good nor for evil; but you shall know of a truth that such is surely not the purpose of mankind; for all other creatures were made for the pleasure and subsistence of man, while man was created to enjoy the glories of both this and the other world, if he is to realize the purpose of his creation. Every one, therefore, while he still lives, should strive to leave a few such deeds after him as will cause him to be remembered with favor after he has departed this life. But this is above all the duty of kings and other mighty chiefs and of all those who seek their society and enter their service; for after that a man is no longer looked upon as a churl, but is honored as a governor or a chief; and thus he ought to be honored, if he strives to observe the customs that are becoming to himself and his dignity.

This should be the first principle of all your actions: always keep a sense of respect and fear of God in your heart, love Him above everything else, and next, love what is right. Train yourself to be fair, honest, and moderate in everything. Always remember the day of your death and be careful to avoid vices. Keep in mind that many people only live a short time, but their actions are remembered long after they’re gone, and it matters greatly what people remember about them. Some achieve fame through good deeds, and those deeds live on, as one's honor lasts forever, even if the person has passed away. Others gain fame through wrongful actions, and those individuals, even in death, carry a lasting burden of disgrace when their deeds are remembered; their relatives and future generations will also bear that dishonor. However, most people fade away like livestock and are not remembered for good or bad; yet you should know that this is certainly not the purpose of humanity. All other creatures were made for man's enjoyment and survival, while man was created to experience the splendors of both this life and the next if he is to fulfill his purpose. Therefore, everyone, while still alive, should strive to leave behind a few actions that will cause them to be remembered favorably after they’ve left this life. But this is especially the responsibility of kings and other powerful leaders, as well as those who seek their company and enter their service; for once a person is no longer seen as a commoner, but is honored as a leader or a chief, they should be respected if they make an effort to uphold behaviors that befit their status and dignity.

Take heed lest you vacillate in friendship among several chiefs, as fickle men do; for no one who acts thus can be firm in purpose. Love your lord highly and without guile as long as you stay in his service, and never seek the society or the confidence of his enemies, if you wish to remain a man of honor. Above your lord you must love God alone, but no other man. These are the things that you must especially avoid, lest they bring you an evil name: perjury and false testimony, brothels, drinking bouts, except in the king’s house or in decent 207gatherings, casting dice for silver, lust after bribes, and all other evil covetousness; for these things are a great disgrace to every kingsman in this world and his soul will be in peril in the other world, if he is found guilty of such vices. Never get drunk, wherever you are; for it may fall out at any time that you will be summoned to hear a dispute or to supervise something, or that you will have important business of your own to look after. Now if such demands should come to a man while he is drunk, he will be found wholly incompetent; wherefore drunkenness should be avoided by everyone, and most of all by kingsmen and others who wish to be reputed as worthy men, for such are most frequently called to hear suits at law and to other important duties. Moreover, they ought to set good examples for all, as some may wish to learn decorum from their behavior.

Be careful not to waver in your friendships with different leaders, like unreliable people do; anyone who behaves that way can’t be steadfast in their intentions. Value your lord greatly and sincerely while you serve him, and never seek the company or trust of his enemies if you want to remain honorable. You must love God above all, but no one else. You should pay special attention to avoiding these things, as they could damage your reputation: lying and false testimony, visiting brothels, binge drinking unless it’s in the king’s house or at respectable gatherings, gambling for money, being greedy for bribes, and all other forms of greed; these behaviors bring shame to anyone related to a king in this world, and if found guilty of such vices, their soul will be in danger in the afterlife. Never get drunk, no matter where you are; at any moment, you might be called to resolve a dispute or oversee something, or you may have important personal matters to attend to. If someone gets called for such responsibilities while drunk, they will be considered completely unfit; therefore, everyone should avoid drunkenness, especially those related to kings and others who want to be regarded as respectable individuals, as they are often summoned to deal with legal matters and other significant responsibilities. Additionally, they should set good examples for everyone, as others may look to them for guidance on proper behavior.

If you are a kingsman you must observe the same prudence in your address and habits, and do not forget this. You should frequently be seen in your lord’s presence. Early in the morning you must escort him to church, if he observes that custom, as by right he ought to do; listen attentively to the service while you are in the church, and call devoutly upon God for mercy. When the king leaves the church, join him at once and keep sufficiently near him to be in sight, so that he may be able to call you for any purpose, if he should wish to do so. But do not keep so close to him as to make him feel annoyed by your presence, when he wishes to speak with men whom he has called to converse with him, or to discuss such matters as he wishes to keep secret. Never show an interest in those affairs which you see 208that your lord wishes to keep to himself, unless he summons you to share knowledge with him. But if anything should come up that your lord confides to you but wishes to have kept secret, keep it carefully in discreet silence; do not babble about such affairs as should be hidden in your fidelity.

If you're one of the king's men, you need to be careful in how you speak and behave, and don't forget this. You should often be seen in your lord's company. In the morning, you should accompany him to church if that's a tradition he follows, as he should. Pay close attention during the service and sincerely ask God for mercy. When the king leaves the church, join him right away and stay close enough that he can see you, so he can call on you if he needs anything. But don’t stand so close that it makes him uncomfortable when he wants to talk to others or discuss things he wants to keep private. Never show interest in matters your lord prefers to keep to himself, unless he invites you to know about them. If your lord shares something with you but asks you to keep it secret, do so with discretion; don’t gossip about things that should remain confidential out of loyalty.

You must also make a habit of going to the royal apartments early in the morning before the king has arisen; but be sure to come carefully washed and bathed and wearing your best raiment; and wait near the king’s chamber until he has arisen. Go into the king’s chamber if he calls you, but at no other time; but wherever it is that the king summons you, you must come into his presence without your mantle. If it is early in the morning and you have not seen him before, wish him a good day in the words that I have already taught you; but approach only so near as to leave him sufficient room to confer with the men who are nearest to him, and remain standing there. But if he calls you to come nearer, wishing to speak with you in private, then kneel before him but only so near that you can readily hear his words; and come without your mantle. However, if he invites you to be seated, you may put on your cloak, if you like, and be seated where he indicates.

You should also make it a habit to visit the royal apartments early in the morning before the king wakes up; but make sure to arrive clean and well-groomed, wearing your finest clothes. Wait near the king’s chamber until he has gotten up. Go into the king’s chamber if he calls for you, but not at any other time. Wherever the king summons you, you must present yourself without your coat. If it’s early in the morning and you haven’t seen him yet, greet him with a good day using the phrases I’ve already taught you; but stand close enough to leave him room to talk to those around him. If he asks you to come closer to speak privately, then kneel before him, but only close enough to hear him easily; and come without your coat. However, if he invites you to sit down, you can put your cloak on if you wish and sit where he indicates.

Now when it happens that the king goes out to seek diversion, whether it be in town or in the country, or wherever he is sojourning, and you and your comrades accompany him, the retinue looks best, whether you are armed or not, if you walk in equal numbers on either side of the king, though never in compact groups. Wherever you go he should walk in your midst, and 209you and your companions should be arranged in equal numbers before and behind him and on either side. But none of you must walk so near the king that he has not sufficient space to converse with those whom he summons to him, whether he wishes to speak with them openly or in private. And even though he call no one to have speech with him, keep the order such that there is plenty of space around him on all sides. But when the king rides out for amusement and you and your comrades accompany him, arrange the order of riding in the way that I have suggested about your walking; only keep at a greater distance, so that no dirt can splash from your horses upon the king, even though you ride quite rapidly.

Now, when the king goes out to relax, whether in the city or the countryside, or wherever he is staying, and you and your friends are with him, the group looks best if you walk in equal numbers on either side of the king, regardless of whether you're armed. He should walk in the middle of your group, and you and your companions should be arranged in equal numbers in front of and behind him and on either side. But none of you should walk so close to the king that he doesn't have enough space to talk to anyone he calls over, whether he wants to speak to them openly or privately. Even if he doesn't summon anyone, maintain enough space around him on all sides. When the king goes out riding for fun and you and your friends accompany him, arrange your riding order the same way as suggested for walking; just keep a larger distance so that no dirt splashes on the king from your horses, even if you ride fast.

If the king should call you by name, be careful not to answer by “Eh?” or “Hm?” or “What?” but rather speak in this wise: “Yes, my lord, I am glad to listen!” Also take good heed not to rush away early in the morning to eat and drink with greedy and unmannerly men. Wait, as custom demands, till the king’s meal time, and take your seat at the royal tables, whenever you are present at court. But when the king sits down to eat with his hirdmen, these ought all to observe good manners and decent order, and the one should never run in ahead of the other like an ill-bred man; but each ought to know his right place and table companion; and the men should sit at the table in the same order as when they are out walking. The men should go by twos, those who sit together, to lave their hands, whether the washing is done within the hall or without, and then to the table, each in the order and to the seat 210that he knows was assigned to him in the beginning. The hirdmen ought to speak in a low tone at the table so that not a single word will be heard by those who sit on either side of the two who wish to converse; let each one speak to his partner so softly that none shall hear but those who are conversing; then there will be good deportment and quiet in the king’s hall. You may, however, partake freely and quickly of both the food and the drink on the table according to your needs without suffering any discredit to your manners; but always take good heed not to get drunk. You should cast frequent glances toward the king’s seat to see how his service is going forward, and always note carefully when the king raises the beaker to his lips, for you must not eat while he is drinking. If you have a cup in your hand, set it down and do not drink just then. You must show the queen everywhere the same honor as you show the king according as I have told you. And if the king has a guest at his table who ought to be shown the same deference, whether he be a king, an earl, an archbishop, or a bishop, you should observe these same customs which I have just taught you. However, if the number of distinguished people at the royal table should be large, you need not observe this custom as to drinking unless you wish, except when the king or the queen drinks, or when there is another king at the table with them.

If the king calls you by name, be careful not to respond with “Eh?” or “Hm?” or “What?” Instead, say, “Yes, my lord, I’m happy to listen!” Also, be mindful not to rush off early in the morning to eat and drink with rude and greedy people. Wait, as is customary, until the king's mealtime, and take your seat at the royal table whenever you are at court. But when the king sits down to eat with his men, everyone should practice good manners and proper order, and no one should push ahead like an uncouth person; rather, everyone should know their proper place and table mate; the men should sit in the same order at the table as when they are walking around. Men should go in pairs, those who sit together, to wash their hands, whether it's done inside the hall or outside, and then to the table, each in the order and to the seat that was assigned to them at the start. The men should talk in low voices at the table so that no one at either side can hear those who are chatting; each person should speak to their partner quietly so that only those who are talking can hear each other; this way, the king's hall will remain well-behaved and peaceful. However, you can enjoy both the food and drink on the table freely and quickly based on your needs without damaging your manners; just be careful not to get drunk. You should frequently glance towards the king's seat to see how his service is going, and always pay attention to when the king raises his cup to drink, because you must not eat while he is drinking. If you have a cup in your hand, put it down and don’t drink at that moment. You should show the queen the same respect as the king, as I've told you. And if the king has a guest at his table who deserves the same respect, whether they're a king, an earl, an archbishop, or a bishop, you should follow the same customs I’ve just explained. However, if there are many distinguished guests at the royal table, you don’t need to follow this drinking custom unless you want to, except when the king or queen drinks, or if there is another king present at the table with them.

Now if the king’s hirdmen happen to be seated together in the royal hall but with no tables before them and certain lords come in whom the king is pleased to receive with honor, it is the duty of all men to rise before 211them just as before their own lords and to give them such cordial greetings as they know that the king desires. But this is an honor which every kingsman owes to his fellows: when one who has been absent comes in and walks toward the seat where he has his proper place and position, the two who sit nearest to him on either side should rise, receive him in a friendly manner, and bid him welcome among them. Wherever the kingsmen are much in the eyes of other men, whether they sit together at a feast, or walk in the king’s escort, or go out together to make merry, they ought always to speak in rather low tones, to be proper in their actions and elegant in their speech, and to avoid all indecent talk. All these rules which I have now recounted must be learned and observed by all kingsmen who wish to be known for good breeding. But no matter how others behave, be sure that you observe carefully all that I have taught you, and be willing to teach others who may wish to learn from you.

Now, if the king's men happen to be sitting together in the royal hall without any tables in front of them, and certain lords enter whom the king is pleased to honor, it is the duty of everyone to stand before them just like they would for their own lords and to offer them the warm greetings that they know the king desires. However, this is a respect that every member of the king's court owes to their peers: when someone who has been away comes in and approaches the seat where they belong, the two people nearest to them on either side should stand, greet them warmly, and welcome them back among them. Whenever the king's men are under the gaze of others, whether they’re sitting together at a feast, walking in the king's company, or going out together to have fun, they should always speak in a low tone, act appropriately, speak elegantly, and avoid any indecent conversations. All these rules that I have mentioned must be learned and followed by all members of the king's court who want to be recognized for their good manners. But regardless of how others behave, make sure that you carefully observe all that I have taught you, and be willing to teach those who wish to learn from you.

Now if your comrades are planning to go from the king’s apartments to some drinking bout or other merrymaking, and you, too, have the king’s permission to seek diversion, you should prefer the forms of amusement which I shall now point out to you. If you are sojourning where horses may be ridden and you have your own horse, put on heavy armor and, mounting your horse, train yourself in the art of sitting on horseback in the firmest and most handsome manner. Train yourself to press the foot firmly into the stirrup; keep your leg stiff and the heel a little lower than the toes, except when you have to guard against thrusts from the front; 212and practice sitting firmly with the thighs pressed close. Cover your breast and limbs carefully with a curved shield. Train your left hand to grasp firmly the bridle and the grip of the shield, and your right hand to direct the spear-thrust so that all your bodily strength will support it. Train your good steed to veer about when in full gallop; keep him clean and in good condition; keep him shod firmly and well, and provide him with a strong and handsome harness.

Now, if your friends are planning to leave the king's quarters to go to a drinking party or some other celebration, and you also have the king's permission to join in the fun, you should choose the activities I’m about to suggest. If you’re staying somewhere you can ride horses and you have your own horse, put on heavy armor and, once mounted, practice sitting on the horse properly and with style. Train yourself to press your foot firmly into the stirrup; keep your leg straight and your heel slightly lower than your toes, unless you need to defend against attacks from the front; 212 and practice sitting securely with your thighs pressed together. Protect your chest and limbs with a curved shield. Train your left hand to hold the reins and shield tightly, while your right hand directs the spear thrust, using all your strength to support it. Teach your horse to turn quickly while galloping; keep him clean and healthy; make sure his shoes are secure and well-fitted, and equip him with a strong and attractive harness.

But if you are in a borough or some such place where horses cannot be used for recreation, you should take up this form of amusement: go to your chambers and put on heavy armor; next look up some fellow henchman (he may be a native or an alien) who likes to drill with you and whom you know to be well trained to fight behind a shield or a buckler. Always bring heavy armor to this exercise, either chain mail or a thick gambison,[248] and carry a heavy sword and a weighty shield or buckler in your hand. In this game you should strive to learn suitable thrusts and such counterstrokes as are good, necessary, and convenient. Learn precisely how to cover yourself with the shield, so that you may be able to guard well when you have to deal with a foeman. If you feel that it is important to be well trained in these activities, go through the exercise twice a day, if it is convenient; but let no day pass, except holidays, without practicing this drill at least once; for it is counted 213proper for all kingsmen to master this art and, moreover, it must be mastered if it is to be of service. If the drill tires you and makes you thirsty, drink a little now and then, enough to quench your thirst; but while the game is on, be careful not to drink till you are drunk or even merry.

But if you’re in a town or somewhere that doesn’t allow for horse riding for fun, you should try this activity instead: head to your room and put on some heavy armor; then find a friend (they could be local or from elsewhere) who enjoys practicing with you and is skilled at fighting with a shield. Always wear heavy armor for this practice, either chain mail or a thick padded jacket,[248] and hold a heavy sword and a sturdy shield or buckler in your hands. In this activity, focus on learning the right thrusts and effective counterattacks that are necessary and practical. Learn how to properly use your shield to protect yourself so you can defend well against an opponent. If you think it's important to get good at this, practice twice a day if you can; but make sure you don’t skip a day, except on holidays, without at least one practice session. It’s considered essential for everyone to learn this skill, and it needs to be mastered to be useful. If the practice wears you out and makes you thirsty, drink a little now and then to satisfy your thirst; but while you’re playing, be careful not to drink too much or become tipsy.

If you should like to try a variety of drills and pastimes, there are certain sports that one can take up out of doors, if that is thought more diverting. For one thing, you may have a pole prepared, somewhat heavier than a spear shaft, and put up a mark some distance away for a target; with these you can determine how far and how accurately you can throw a spear and do it effectively. It is also counted rare sport and pastime to take one’s bow and go with other men to practice archery. Another pleasant and useful diversion is to practice throwing with a sling both for distance and for accuracy, and with a staff sling[249] as well as with a hand sling, and to practice throwing stone missiles. Formerly the custom was for all who wished to become expert in such arts and thoroughly proficient in war and chivalry to train both hands alike to the use of weapons. Strive after the same skill, if you find yourself gifted for it, inasmuch as those who are trained in that way are the most perfect in these activities and the most dangerous to their enemies.

If you want to try different drills and activities, there are some sports you can enjoy outdoors if you find that more fun. For starters, you can get a pole that's a bit heavier than a spear shaft and set up a target at a distance; with these, you can see how far and how accurately you can throw a spear. Practicing archery with friends is also considered a great sport and pastime. Another enjoyable and useful activity is practicing throwing with a sling, both for distance and accuracy, and using both a staff sling[249] and a hand sling, as well as throwing stone projectiles. In the past, it was common for anyone who wanted to become skilled in these arts and truly proficient in warfare and chivalry to train both hands equally for weapon use. Aim for the same skill if you feel inclined towards it, since those trained this way are the most accomplished in these activities and the most dangerous to their enemies.

You should abhor and avoid manslaying in every form except as a lawful punishment or in common warfare. But in ordinary warfare on the lawful command 214of your chief, you need to shun manslaying no more than any other deed which you know to be right and good. Show courage and bravery in battle; fight with proper and effective blows, such as you have already learned, as if in the best of humor, though filled with noble wrath. Never fight with feigned strokes, needless thrusts, or uncertain shots like a frightened man. Heed these things well that you may be able to match your opponent’s skill in fighting. Be resolute in combat but not hot-headed and least of all boastful. Always remember that there may be those who can give good testimony in your behalf; but never praise your own deeds, lest after a time it should come to pass that you are pursued for the slaughter of men whose death is rated a great loss and the revenge is directed toward you by your own words.

You should strongly dislike and avoid killing in any form, except as a legal punishment or during just battles. In regular warfare, under the lawful orders of your leader, you shouldn't avoid killing any more than you would other actions that you know to be right and good. Show courage and bravery in battle; fight with effective strikes, as you've already learned, as if you are in the best spirits, even if you're filled with righteous anger. Never fight with fake moves, unnecessary attacks, or uncertain shots like someone who's scared. Keep these principles in mind so you can match your opponent's skills. Be determined in combat, but not impulsive or boastful. Always remember that there may be those who can vouch for you, but never praise your own actions, lest it later turn out that you are sought after for the deaths of men considered a major loss, leading to revenge directed at you because of your own words.

If you are fighting on foot in a land battle and are placed at the point of a wedge-shaped column,[250] it is very important to watch the closed shield line in the first onset, lest it become disarranged or broken. Take heed never to bind the front edge of your shield under that of another.[251] You must also be specially careful, when in the battle line, never to throw your spear, unless you have two, for in battle array on land one spear is more effective than two swords. But if the fight is on shipboard, select two spears which are not to be thrown, one with a shaft long enough to reach easily from ship 215to ship and one with a shorter shaft, which you will find particularly serviceable when you try to board the enemy’s ship. Various kinds of darts should be kept on ships, both heavy javelins and lighter ones. Try to strike your opponent’s shield with a heavy javelin, and if the shield glides aside, attack him with a light javelin, unless you are able to reach him with a long-shafted spear. Fight on sea as on land with an even temper and with proper strokes only; and never waste your weapons by hurling them to no purpose.

If you're fighting on foot in a land battle and are positioned at the tip of a wedge-shaped formation,[250] it’s crucial to keep an eye on the closed shield line during the initial assault to prevent it from becoming disorganized or broken. Be sure not to bind the front edge of your shield beneath someone else's.[251] You should also be especially careful when in the battle line to never throw your spear unless you have two, because in a land battle, one spear is more useful than two swords. However, if the fight is on a ship, pick two spears that you won’t throw—one long enough to reach between ships easily and one shorter, which will be especially useful when you’re trying to board the enemy’s ship. Various types of darts should be kept on ships, including both heavy javelins and lighter ones. Aim to hit your opponent’s shield with a heavy javelin, and if the shield deflects aside, attack with a lighter javelin unless you can reach him with a long-shafted spear. Fight at sea just as you would on land, maintaining a calm demeanor and using proper strikes only; and never waste your weapons by throwing them aimlessly.

Weapons of many sorts may be used to advantage on shipboard, which one has no occasion to use on land, except in a fortress or castle. Longhandled scythes[252] and long-shafted broadaxes,[253] “war-beams” and staff slings, darts,[254] and missiles of every sort are serviceable on ships. Crossbows and longbows are useful as well as all other forms of shooting weapons; but coal and sulphur[255] are, however, the most effective munitions of all that I have named. Caltrops[256] cast in lead and good halberds[257] are also effective weapons on shipboard. A tower joined 216to the mast[258] will be serviceable along with these and many other defenses, as is also a beam cloven into four parts and set with prongs of hard steel,[259] which is drawn up against the mast. A “prow-boar”[260] with an ironclad snout is also useful in naval battles. But it is well for men to be carefully trained in handling these before they have to use them; for one knows neither the time nor the hour when he shall have to make use of any particular kind of weapons. But take good heed to collect as many types of weapons as possible, while you still have no need of them; for it is always a distinction to have good weapons, and, furthermore, they are a good possession in times of necessity when one has to use them. For a ship’s defense the following arrangement is necessary: it should be fortified strongly with beams and logs built up into a high rampart, through which there should be four openings, each so large and wide that one or two men in full armor can leap through them; but outside and along the rampart on both sides of the ship there should be laid a level walk of planks to stand upon.[261] This breastwork must be firmly and 217carefully braced so that it cannot be shaken though one leaps violently upon it. Wide shields and chain mail of every sort are good defensive weapons on shipboard; the chief protection, however, is the gambison made of soft linen thoroughly blackened, good helmets, and low caps of steel. There are many other weapons that can be used in naval fights, but it seems needless to discuss more than those which I have now enumerated.

Weapons of various types can be effectively used on ships, which aren't typically used on land except in fortresses or castles. Long-handled scythes[252] and long-shafted broadaxes,[253] “war beams” and staff slings, darts,[254] and all kinds of missiles are useful on ships. Crossbows and longbows are also handy, as well as other shooting weapons; however, coal and sulfur[255] are the most effective munitions I've mentioned. Lead caltrops[256] and good halberds[257] are also effective weapons on board. A tower attached to the mast[258] will be useful alongside these and many other defenses, such as a beam split into four parts with hardened steel prongs,[259] which is pulled up against the mast. A “prow-boar”[260] with an iron-clad snout is also beneficial in naval battles. It’s important for men to be well-trained in using these weapons before they need to; you never know when you'll have to use a specific type of weapon. Be sure to gather as many kinds of weapons as you can while you don’t have an immediate need for them; having good weapons is always beneficial, and they become valuable possessions in times of necessity when they’re needed. For a ship’s defense, it’s essential to have a strong structure made of beams and logs built into a high rampart, with four openings large enough for one or two fully armored men to pass through; there should also be a level walkway of planks on both sides of the ship along the rampart.[261] This breastwork must be securely braced so that it won’t shake even if someone jumps on it forcefully. Wide shields and chain mail of all kinds serve as effective defensive gear on ships; however, the main protection comes from a gambison made of soft linen that’s thoroughly blackened, good helmets, and low steel caps. There are many other weapons suitable for naval battles, but it seems unnecessary to discuss more than those I have listed.


XXXVIII
 
Offensive and defensive weapons

Son. Since we now have before us a discussion which teaches chiefly how a man must prepare himself to meet his enemies in attack and defense, it seems to me that it would be well to say something about how one has to fight on land, on horse or on foot, and in attacking and defending castles. Therefore, if you feel disposed to say anything about such matters, I shall be glad to listen.

Son. Now that we’re having a conversation about how a person should get ready to face their enemies in both offense and defense, I think it’s important to talk about how to fight on land, whether on horseback or on foot, and how to attack and defend castles. So, if you’re willing to share your thoughts on these topics, I’d be happy to listen.

Father. The man who is to fight on horseback needs to make sure, as we have already stated, that he is thoroughly trained in all the arts of mounted warfare. For his horse he will need to provide this equipment:[262] he must keep him carefully and firmly shod; he must also make sure that the saddle is strong, made with high bows, and provided with strong girths and other saddlegear, 218including a durable surcingle across the middle and a breast strap in front.[263] The horse should be protected in such a way both in front of the saddle and behind it that he will not be exposed to weapons, spear-thrust or stroke, or any other form of attack. He should also have a good shabrack[264] made like a gambison of soft and thoroughly blackened linen cloth, for this is a good protection against all kinds of weapons. It may be decorated as one likes, and over the shabrack there should be a good harness of mail. With this equipment every part of the horse should be covered, head, loins, breast, belly, and the entire beast, so that no man, even if on foot, shall be able to reach him with deadly weapons. The horse should have a strong bridle, one that can be gripped firmly and used to rein him in or throw him when necessary. Over the bridle and about the entire head of the horse and around the neck back to the saddle, there should be a harness made like a gambison of firm linen cloth, so that no man shall be able to take away the bridle or the horse by stealth.[265]

Father. A man who is going to fight on horseback needs to ensure, as we’ve already mentioned, that he is well-trained in all aspects of mounted combat. For his horse, he must provide the following gear:[262] he has to keep its shoes in good condition; he must also ensure that the saddle is sturdy, made with high bows, and equipped with strong girths and other saddle accessories, 218 including a durable surcingle in the middle and a breast strap in the front.[263] The horse should be protected both in front of and behind the saddle so that it won’t be vulnerable to weapons, spear thrusts, or any other kind of attack. Additionally, it should have a good shabrack[264] made from soft, well-treated black linen cloth, as this provides excellent protection against various weapons. It can be decorated as desired, and there should be a solid harness of mail over the shabrack. With this setup, every part of the horse should be shielded—its head, loins, breast, belly, and the entire body—so that no person, even if on foot, can reach it with lethal weapons. The horse should have a robust bridle that can be firmly grasped to control or restrain it when needed. Around the bridle and the whole head of the horse, as well as around the neck back to the saddle, there should be a harness made like a gambison of sturdy linen cloth, so that no one can stealthily take the bridle or the horse.[265]

219The rider himself should be equipped in this wise: he should wear good soft breeches made of soft and thoroughly blackened linen cloth, which should reach up to the belt; outside these, good mail hose[266] which should come up high enough to be girded on with a double strap; over these he must have good trousers made of linen cloth of the sort that I have already described; finally, over these he should have good kneepieces made of thick iron and rivets hard as steel.[267] Above and next to the body he should wear a soft gambison, which need not come lower than to the middle of the thigh. Over this he must have a strong breastplate[268] made of good iron covering the body from the nipples to the trousers belt; outside this, a well-made hauberk and over the hauberk a firm gambison made in the manner which I have already described but without sleeves. He must have a dirk[269] and two swords, one girded on and another hanging from the pommel of the saddle. On his head he must have a dependable helmet made of good steel and provided with a visor.[270] He must also have a strong, thick shield fastened to a durable shoulder belt and, in addition, a good sharp spear with a firm shaft and pointed with fine steel. Now it seems needless to 220speak further about the equipment of men who fight on horseback; there are, however, other weapons which a mounted warrior may use, if he wishes; among these are the “horn bow”[271] and the weaker crossbow, which a man can easily draw even when on horseback, and certain other weapons, too, if he should want them.

219The rider should be equipped as follows: he should wear soft breeches made from well-treated black linen that reach up to his belt; on top of these, he needs sturdy mail leggings[266] that come up high enough to be secured with a double strap; he must also wear good trousers made from the same type of linen; finally, he should wear solid knee guards made from thick iron and rivets as hard as steel.[267] For his upper body, he should wear a soft padded vest that doesn’t extend lower than the middle of the thigh. Over this, he must have a strong breastplate[268] made of quality iron, covering from the nipples to the trousers' belt; over this, a well-made chainmail shirt, and on top of the chainmail, a sturdy padded vest constructed as previously described, but without sleeves. He should carry a dagger[269] and two swords—one secured to his side and another hanging from the pommel of the saddle. On his head, he should wear a reliable helmet made of good steel with a visor.[270] He must also have a strong, thick shield attached to a durable shoulder strap and, additionally, a sharp spear with a solid shaft and a finely pointed tip. Now it seems unnecessary to elaborate further on the gear of those who fight on horseback; however, there are other weapons a mounted warrior might choose to use, including the “horn bow”[271] and the less powerful crossbow, which is easy to draw even while mounted, along with certain other weapons if he wishes.


XXXIX
 
Military Engines

Son. Inasmuch as you seem to think that you have described most of the weapons which are convenient to have in naval warfare or in fighting on horseback, I will now ask you to say something about those which you think are most effective in besieging or defending castles.

Son. Since you believe you've covered most of the weapons useful in naval battles or mounted combat, I now want you to discuss which ones you think are the most effective for laying siege to or defending castles.

Father. All the weapons that we have just discussed as useful on ships or on horseback can also be used in attacking and defending castles; but there are many other kinds. If one is to attack a castle with the weapons which I have enumerated, he will also have need of trebuckets:[272] a few powerful ones with which to throw large rocks against stone walls to determine whether they are able to resist such violent blows, and weaker trebuckets for throwing missiles over the walls to demolish the houses within the castle. But if one is unable to break down or shatter a stone wall with trebuckets, 221he will have to try another engine, namely the iron-headed ram,[273] for very few stone walls can withstand its attack. If this engine fails to batter down or shake the wall, it may be advisable to set the cat[274] to work. A tower raised on wheels[275] is useful in besieging castles, if it is constructed so that it rises above the wall which is to be stormed, even though the difference in height be only seven ells; but the higher it is, the more effective it will be in attacking another tower. Scaling ladders on wheels which may be moved backward and forward are also useful for this purpose, if they are boarded up underneath and have good ropes on both sides. And we may say briefly about this craft, that in besieging castles use will be found for all sorts of military engines. But whoever wishes to join in this must be sure that he knows precisely even to the very hour when he shall have need for each device.

Father. All the weapons we've just talked about that are useful on ships or horseback can also be used for attacking and defending castles; however, there are many other types. If someone plans to attack a castle with the weapons I've listed, they'll also need trebuchets:[272] a few powerful ones to hurl large rocks against stone walls to see if they can withstand such heavy impacts, and weaker trebuchets for launching missiles over the walls to destroy the buildings inside the castle. But if they can't break down or damage a stone wall with trebuchets, 221 they must try another device, specifically the iron-headed ram,[273] because very few stone walls can resist its assault. If this device fails to topple or shake the wall, it might be a good idea to employ the cat[274]. A tower mounted on wheels[275] is helpful when besieging castles, as long as it's built to rise above the wall being attacked, even if the height difference is only seven ells; but the taller it is, the more effective it will be when attacking another tower. Scaling ladders on wheels that can be moved back and forth are also useful for this strategy, provided they are secured underneath and have sturdy ropes on both sides. In summary, when besieging castles, all kinds of military devices will be useful. However, anyone wanting to participate in this must ensure that they know exactly when they will need each device, even down to the precise hour.

Those who have to defend a castle may also make use of these weapons which I have now enumerated and many more: trebuckets both large and small, hand slings and staff slings. They will find crossbows and other bows, too, very effective, as well as every other 222type of shooting weapons, such as spears and javelins both light and heavy. But to resist the trebuckets, the cat, and the engine called the ram, it is well to strengthen the entire stone wall on the inside with large oaken timbers; though if earth and clay are plentiful, these materials had better be used. Those who have to defend castles are also in the habit of making curtains of large oak boughs, three or even five deep, to cover the entire wall;[276] and the curtain should be thoroughly plastered with good sticky clay. To defeat the attacks of the ram, men have sometimes filled large bags with hay or straw and lowered them with light iron chains in front of the ram where it sought to pierce the wall. It sometimes happens that the shots fall so rapidly upon a fortress that the defenders are unable to remain at the battlements; it is then advisable to hang out brattices made of light planks and built high enough to reach two ells above the openings in the parapet and three ells below them. They should be wide enough to enable the men to fight with any sort of weapons between the parapet and the brattice wall, and they should be hung from slender beams in such a way that they may be readily drawn in and hung out again later, as one may wish.[277]

Those defending a castle can also use the weapons I've just listed and many others: large and small trebuchets, hand slings, and staff slings. They will find crossbows and other bows quite effective, along with various types of ranged weapons like light and heavy spears and javelins. To counteract the trebuchets, the siege tower, and the ram, it's wise to reinforce the entire inner stone wall with large oak beams; however, if earth and clay are available, those materials are preferable. Defenders often create barriers of large oak branches, stacked three to five deep, to shield the entire wall; and the barrier should be thoroughly covered with strong, sticky clay. To thwart the ram attacks, people sometimes fill large bags with hay or straw and lower them with light iron chains in front of the ram where it aims to breach the wall. There are times when projectiles strike a fortress so rapidly that defenders can't stay at the battlements; in such cases, it's advisable to set up brattices made of light planks that extend high enough to reach two ells above the openings in the parapet and three ells below them. They should be wide enough for the men to fight with any type of weapons between the parapet and the brattice wall, and they should be hung from thin beams so they can be easily pulled in and out as needed.

The “hedgehog”[278] will be found an effective device 223in defending a castle. It is made of large, heavy beams armed along the ridge with a brush of pointed oak nails; it is hung outside the parapet to be dropped on anyone who comes too near the wall. Turnpikes made of large heavy logs armed with sharp teeth of hard oak may be raised on end near the battlements and kept ready to be dropped upon those who approach the castle. Another good device is the “briar,”[279] which is made of good iron and has curved thorns as hard as steel with a barb on every thorn; and the chain, from which it hangs, as high up as a man can reach must be made of spiked links, so that it can be neither held nor hewn; higher up any kind of rope that seems suitable may be used, only, it must be firm and strong. This briar is thrown down among the enemy in the hope of catching one or more of them and then it is pulled up again. A “running wheel”[280] is also a good weapon for those who defend castles: it is made of two millstones with an axle of tough oak joining them. Planks sloping downward are laid out through the openings in the wall; the wheel is rolled out upon these and then down upon the enemy.

The “hedgehog”[278] is an effective device for defending a castle. It's constructed from large, heavy beams with a row of pointed oak nails along the top; it's positioned outside the parapet to be dropped on anyone who gets too close to the wall. Turnpikes made of hefty logs with sharp oak teeth can be raised vertically near the battlements and are ready to be dropped on those who approach the castle. Another useful device is the “briar,”[279] which is made of strong iron and has curved thorns as hard as steel, each with a barb. The chain it's hung from, as high as a person can reach, must be made of spiked links, so it can't be held or cut; higher up, any suitable rope can be used, but it must be solid and sturdy. This briar is dropped among the enemy in hopes of capturing one or more of them, and then it’s pulled back up. A “running wheel”[280] is also a good weapon for castle defenders: it’s made of two millstones connected by a tough oak axle. Planks slanting downward are set up through the wall openings; the wheel is rolled out on these and then down onto the enemy.

A “shot wagon”[281] is also a good device. This is made like any other wagon with two or four wheels as one likes and is intended to carry a load of stones, hot or 224cold as one may prefer. It must also be provided with two firm and strong chains, one on each side, which can be depended on to check the wagon even where it has a long track to run upon. It is meant to run on planks set with a downward slope, but one must be careful to keep the wheels from skidding off the planks. When the chains check the speed, the wagon shoots its load out upon the men below. The more uneven the stones are, some large and some small, the more effective the load will be. Canny men, who are set to defend a wall and wish to throw rocks down upon the attacking line or upon the penthouse, make these rocks of clay with pebbles, slingstones, and other hard stones placed inside. The clay is burned hard enough on the outside to endure the flight while the load is being thrown; but as soon as the rocks fall they break into fragments and consequently cannot be hurled back again. To break down stone walls, however, large, hard rocks are required. Similarly, when one hurls missiles from a stone fortress against an opposing wooden tower or upon the axletrees which support siege engines, towers, scaling ladders, cats, or any other engine on wheels, the larger and harder the rocks that are used, the more effective they will be.

A “shot wagon”[281] is also a useful tool. It's built like any other wagon, with either two or four wheels, depending on your preference, and is designed to carry a load of stones, whether hot or cold. It should also have two sturdy chains, one on each side, that can reliably hold the wagon back, even on a long run. It's meant to roll down planks set at a downward angle, but you need to be careful to prevent the wheels from sliding off the planks. When the chains slow it down, the wagon releases its load onto the people below. The more irregular the stones—some large, some small—the more effective the load will be. Smart defenders, trying to protect a wall and wanting to drop rocks on attackers or onto the roof of their siege tower, create these rocks from clay filled with pebbles, slingstones, and other hard materials. The outside of the clay is hardened enough to survive the throw, but once the rocks hit the ground, they break apart and can't be thrown back. To take down stone walls, however, you need large, solid rocks. Similarly, when launching projectiles from a stone fortress at an enemy wooden tower or at the axles supporting siege engines, towers, scaling ladders, or any other wheeled equipment, the larger and tougher the rocks used, the more effective they will be.

Boiling water, molten glass, and molten lead are also useful in defending walls.[282] But if a cat or any other covered engine which cannot be damaged by hot water is being pushed toward a castle, it is a good plan, if the engine is lower than the walls, to provide beams carefully 225shod with iron underneath and in addition armed with large, sharp, red-hot plowshares. These are to be thrown down upon the wooden engine in which the plowshares are likely to stick fast, while the beams may be hoisted up again. This attack should be followed up with pitch, sulphur, or boiling tar.[283]

Boiling water, molten glass, and molten lead are also effective for defending walls.[282] However, if a catapult or any other shielded device that can't be harmed by hot water approaches a castle, it's smart to use beams reinforced with iron underneath, especially if the device is lower than the walls. Additionally, these beams should be equipped with large, sharp, red-hot plowshares. These will be dropped onto the wooden device, where the plowshares are likely to become stuck, while the beams can be lifted up again. This assault should be followed by using pitch, sulfur, or boiling tar.[283]

Mines dug in the neighborhood of a castle are also an excellent protection; the deeper and narrower they are, the better it is; and where men are shoving mounted engines toward the walls, it were well if there were many mines. All mines should have a number of small openings, which must be covered so as not to be visible on the surface. They should be filled with fuel of the most inflammable sort, peat or anything else that burns readily. When a castle is attacked at night either from wooden towers or with scaling ladders or any other engine on wheels, the defenders should steal out and fire the mines.[284]

Mines dug near a castle provide excellent protection; the deeper and narrower they are, the better. If people are pushing siege engines toward the walls, it’s advantageous to have multiple mines. Each mine should have several small openings that need to be concealed so they aren’t visible on the surface. They should be packed with highly flammable materials, like peat or anything else that burns easily. When a castle is attacked at night—whether from wooden towers, scaling ladders, or any other wheeled equipment—the defenders should sneak out and ignite the mines.[284]

Now if it should happen that the enemy’s stones come over the battlements with such violence that the men cannot remain in the open to defend the wall, it is a good plan to set up strong posts cut from thick oak and to lay large and tough cross beams upon these, then to roof the whole over with firm oak timbers, and finally to cover the roofing with a layer of earth not less than three or four ells in depth, upon which the rocks may be allowed to drop.[285] In like manner the attack of 226a wooden tower that is moving toward a castle may be foiled by setting up strong, firm posts rising considerably higher than the attacking tower. But a more effective contrivance than all the engines that I have now described is a stooping shield-giant which breathes forth flame and fire.[286] And now we shall close our account of the engines that are useful in defending castle walls with the reminder that every sort of weapon with which one can shoot, hurl, hew, or thrust, and every kind that can be used in attack or defense may be brought into service.

If the enemy's projectiles start coming over the walls with such force that the soldiers can't stay outside to defend the wall, it's a smart idea to put up strong posts made from thick oak and lay heavy, sturdy cross beams on them. Then, cover the entire structure with solid oak timbers and add a layer of soil on top that's at least three or four ells deep, allowing the rocks to fall onto this. [285] Similarly, to counter an attacking wooden tower moving toward a castle, you can set up strong, stable posts that are significantly taller than the tower itself. However, a more effective solution than all the devices I’ve mentioned so far is a shield-giant that can unleash flames and fire. [286] And now we’ll wrap up our discussion on the devices useful for defending castle walls with a reminder that any type of weapon capable of shooting, throwing, cutting, or thrusting, as well as any weapon used in attack or defense, can be utilized.


XL
 
THE PROPER MANNERS AND CUSTOMS OF A ROYAL COURT

Son. Since you seem to think that sufficient has been said about weapons both for attack and defense, how they should be made or built, and on what occasion each kind should be used (and after your comments these things are very clear to me), I now wish to ask whether there may not be other subjects which you think ought to be discussed, such as pertain to customs that one must observe in the presence of great men or at royal courts.

Son. Since you believe we've covered enough about weapons for both offense and defense, including how they should be made and when to use each type (and your explanations have made this very clear to me), I now want to ask if there are other topics you think we should discuss, like the customs that should be followed when in the presence of important people or at royal courts.

Father. There still remain a number of things which a man should not fail to hear discussed and to reflect upon, if he is to attend on kings or other magnates and 227wishes to be ranked among them as a worthy man. But there are three things (which are, however, almost the same in reality) which one must observe with care: they are wisdom, good breeding, and courtesy. It is courtesy to be friendly, humble, ready to serve, and elegant in speech; to know how to behave properly while conversing or making merry with other men; to know precisely, when a man is conversing with women, whether they be young or older in years, of gentle or humble estate, how to select such expressions as are suited to their rank and are as proper for them to hear as for him to use. In like manner when one speaks with men, whether they be young or old, gentle or humble, it is well to know how to employ fitting words and how to determine what expressions are proper for each one to take note of. Even when mere pleasantry is intended, it is well to choose fair and decent words. It is also courtesy to know how to discriminate in language, when to use plural and when to use singular forms in addressing the men with whom one is conversing; to know how to select one’s clothes both as to color and other considerations; and to know when to stand or sit, when to rise or kneel. It is also courtesy to know when a man ought to let his hands drop gently and to keep them quiet, or when he ought to move them about in service for himself or for others; to know in what direction to turn his face and breast, and how to turn his back and shoulders. It is courtesy to know precisely when he is free to wear his cloak, hat, or coif, if he has one, and when these are not to be worn; also to know, when at the table, whether good breeding demands that one must watch the great men partake of 228food, or whether one may eat and drink freely in any way that seems convenient and proper. It is also courtesy to refrain from sneers and contemptuous jests, to know clearly what churlishness is and to avoid it carefully.

Father. There are still several things that a person should hear discussed and think about if they want to serve kings or other important people and be seen as a respectable individual. However, there are three things (which are pretty much the same in reality) that one must pay attention to: they are wisdom, good manners, and politeness. Politeness means being friendly, humble, willing to help, and graceful in conversation; knowing how to act appropriately when talking or having fun with others; and understanding how to choose words that are suitable for women, whether they are young or old, from high or low status, so that the expressions are as appropriate for them to hear as they are for him to say. Similarly, when speaking with men, whether they are young or old, of high or low status, it’s important to know how to use appropriate language and figure out what words are suitable for each person to notice. Even in casual conversation, it’s best to use polite and decent language. Additionally, it’s polite to know how to differentiate in language when to use plural and when to use singular forms when addressing the men you’re talking to; how to choose clothes based on color and other factors; and when to stand or sit, when to rise or kneel. It’s also polite to know when to let your hands drop gently and keep them still, or when you should use your hands to help yourself or others; to know which way to turn your face and chest, and how to position your back and shoulders. It’s polite to know exactly when you can wear your cloak, hat, or cap, if you have one, and when you shouldn’t wear them; and to know, when at the table, whether good manners require you to observe how the important people eat, or if you can eat and drink freely in any way that feels comfortable and appropriate. It’s also polite to avoid sarcasm and contemptuous jokes, to clearly understand what rudeness is, and to avoid it carefully.

It is good breeding to be agreeable and never obstinate when one is with other men, and to be modest in demeanor; to walk a proper gait when on foot and to watch one’s limbs carefully wherever one goes to make sure that each will move correctly and yet in a natural way. It is good breeding, too, when one strolls about in a city among strangers, to keep silence and use few words, to shun turmoil and disgraceful tippling, to punish theft and robbery and all other foolish rioting. It is also good breeding to avoid profanity, cursing, scolding, and all other pernicious talk. Be careful also never to appear as the advocate of stupid and dishonest men and especially not to support them in their impudence, but rather to show hatred for wickedness in every form. It is good breeding to shun chess and dice, brothels and perjury, false testimony, and other lasciviousness or filthy behavior. It shows good breeding to be cleanly in food and clothes; to take good care of the ships, horses, weapons, and buildings that one may possess; to be cautious and never rash and to be undismayed in times of stress; never to be ostentatious, domineering, or envious; and to shun arrogance and affectation in every form. But the chief point in all conduct is to love God and holy church, to hear mass regularly, to be diligent in divine service, and to implore mercy for oneself and all other Christian people.

It’s good manners to be friendly and not stubborn when you’re around other people, and to be modest in how you carry yourself; to walk properly when on foot and to be mindful of your movements wherever you go to ensure they’re both correct and natural. It’s also good manners to keep quiet and speak only a little when strolling through a city among strangers, to avoid chaos and disgraceful drinking, to condemn theft, robbery, and any other foolish behavior. It’s important to steer clear of swearing, insults, yelling, and any other harmful talk. Be careful not to support stupid and dishonest people, especially not to back them in their boldness, but instead to show disdain for wickedness in all its forms. It’s good manners to avoid chess and dice, brothels, perjury, false testimony, and any other lewd or immoral behavior. It shows good manners to keep your food and clothes clean; to take good care of your ships, horses, weapons, and buildings; to be cautious and never reckless, and to stay calm in stressful times; never to be showy, bossy, or jealous; and to avoid arrogance and pretense in every way. But the most important thing in all your actions is to love God and the holy church, to attend mass regularly, to be diligent in divine service, and to ask for mercy for yourself and all other Christians.

229No one can attain to all these virtues which we have now enumerated as belonging to courtesy and good breeding, unless he is also endowed with wisdom. These gifts will accompany wisdom: elegance in speech, eloquence, insight into proper conduct, and ability to discriminate between good manners and what passes for such in the sayings of foolish men, though they are in fact bad manners. It is also wisdom, when one is present at the law court, or some other place where men congregate, and hears the speeches and the suits of men, to be able to discern clearly what suits or what speeches delivered there are based on reason and which ones are merely glib palaver and senseless verbosity. It is also wisdom to have a clear appreciation, when decrees are rendered in the disputes of men, of how these are stated, so that not a word will be added or taken away, if one should need to know them at some later time. It is also wisdom to keep faithfully in mind what facts were discussed and what agreements were reached. It is wisdom to know the law thoroughly, to have clear perceptions of what is actual law and what is merely called law, being nothing but quibble and subterfuge. It is also wisdom, if one has a request to make, to be able to determine what he may ask for that will prove serviceable and is proper for the other to grant; also, if one meets a request, to know precisely what he may grant with propriety and in what matters he must be careful not to bind himself or those who come after him, such things, namely, as may prove a disgrace to him rather than a distinction. Finally, it is wisdom not to be strait-handed 230about things which one may just as well dispose of, lest such stint or stinginess bring shame upon him.

229No one can achieve all the virtues related to courtesy and good manners that we've just listed unless they also possess wisdom. Wisdom brings along gifts like elegant speech, eloquence, insight into proper behavior, and the ability to differentiate between true good manners and what foolish people might mistake for good manners, even when those actions are actually inappropriate. It's also wise to be able to judge, when in a courtroom or any gathering, which arguments or speeches are based on reason and which are just smooth talk and pointless chatter. Additionally, when decisions are made in people's disputes, wisdom allows one to understand how these outcomes are phrased so that every word is noted accurately for future reference. Keeping in mind the facts discussed and the agreements reached is also a mark of wisdom. Knowing the law well means recognizing what constitutes real law versus what is simply called law but is actually just clever wordplay and avoidance. Furthermore, when making a request, wisdom involves knowing what can be reasonably asked for that would be helpful and appropriate for someone else to grant; and if receiving a request, understanding exactly what can be granted without risking obligations that could lead to personal shame instead of honor. Lastly, it is wise not to be overly stingy with things that one could just as easily give away since such meanness can cause embarrassment. 230

There is also great wisdom in moderation and righteousness. All forms of learning, insight, and good foresight which is necessary to courtesy and good breeding, to stewardship, government and the enforcement of law,—these, too, are akin to wisdom. And you will need to learn all this thoroughly, if you wish to be known among kings and chieftains as an estimable man, for all who know these things are received with favor among the great. Furthermore, the lives of men who have mastered this knowledge may bring great honor to themselves and profit to many others. But wisdom has many forms, for it springs from roots which have many branches. And from these roots of wisdom rises the mightiest of all stems, which again divides into large boughs, many branches, and a multitude of twigs of different sizes, some small and some large. These are later distributed among men in such a way that some obtain the larger and some the smaller ones, and these riches have their value according as they are loved. He who is sure to appreciate this wealth and share it freely receives a large amount; for the nature of this possession is such that it is most attracted to him who loves it most and uses it most liberally. And if men knew how to value and appreciate these riches properly, gold and silver would seem to them like rust, clay, or ashes, when compared with these treasures. But he who wishes to secure this wealth must begin in this way: he must fear Almighty God and love Him above all things.

There’s a lot of wisdom in moderation and doing what’s right. All kinds of learning, insight, and good judgment are important for being polite and well-mannered, for leadership, governance, and enforcing laws—these too are part of wisdom. You’ll need to learn all this thoroughly if you want to be respected among kings and leaders, as those who understand these things are welcomed by the powerful. Additionally, the lives of those who have mastered this knowledge can bring them great honor and benefit many others. But wisdom takes many forms, as it grows from roots with many branches. From these roots of wisdom comes the strongest trunk, which further divides into large limbs, many branches, and a variety of twigs, some small and some large. These are later spread among people, so some get the larger portions while others get the smaller ones, and these riches are valuable based on how much they are cherished. Those who truly appreciate this wealth and share it generously receive a lot; the nature of this possession is such that it is most attracted to those who love it most and use it most freely. If people understood how to properly value and appreciate these riches, gold and silver would seem to them like rust, dirt, or ashes in comparison to these treasures. But anyone who wants to secure this wealth must start this way: they must fear Almighty God and love Him above everything else.


231

XLI
 
THE SAME TOPIC CONTINUED

Son. It was clearly well-advised to continue this inquiry, for now I have gotten both useful and precise information; and this speech will surely help every man who is at least somewhat intelligent to more definite ideas than he had before. Moreover, those who have received only slender wands from the boughs of wisdom are more numerous than those who have received large branches, some getting but the tiniest twigs, and some a mere leaf, while those who get nothing must indeed be few. Therefore I wish to ask you to instruct me further in the art of choosing and laying hold on those branches which may prove useful to myself and others.

Son. It was definitely a good idea to keep this discussion going, since I’ve now gained both useful and clear information; and this talk will surely help everyone who is at least somewhat smart to have clearer ideas than they did before. Plus, there are way more people who have only received small pieces of wisdom than those who’ve gotten big branches of it, with some getting just tiny twigs and others a single leaf, while those who don’t get anything must be very few. So, I’d like to ask you to teach me more about the art of choosing and grabbing those branches that might be useful to me and others.

Father. The virtues that I have just enumerated grow especially on the boughs of wisdom, but they ramify into a great many good branches and twigs. Now these are the branches which are most useful: a rational outlook, a temperate mind, and the capacity to determine judiciously what one owes to every other man. If you are angry with any man because of a law suit or some evil deed, take careful thought before seeking revenge, as to how important the matter really is and how great a retribution it is worth. When you hear things in the speech of other men which offend you much, be sure to investigate with reasonable care whether the tales be true or false; but if they prove to be true and it is proper for you to seek revenge, take it with reason and moderation and never when heated or irritated. Even though you hear tidings which seem damaging to yourself or 232your business, such as loss of property or men, always bear it with a calm and undaunted temper. Let the loss of wealth seem least to you, for you must bear in mind that it is sinful to worship wealth or to love it too highly, even though it returns a man’s love and comes abundantly into his keeping. And to love wealth much, when it seems inclined to turn away from a man and does not return his love, is surely sinful and will lead to grief. Remember, too, that all come destitute into the world; and our mode of departure from this life is such that wealth cannot follow us out of the world. Nevertheless, you must take heed that nothing is lost through your neglect or indifference. And never grieve so deeply over a loss that you cannot be hopeful and cheerful as before.

Father. The qualities I've just listed stem mainly from wisdom, but they branch out into many good aspects. The most useful branches include a rational perspective, a balanced mind, and the ability to fairly assess what you owe to others. If you're upset with someone due to a lawsuit or a wrong they've done, think carefully before seeking revenge about how significant the issue really is and what kind of response it deserves. When you hear things from others that really offend you, make sure to investigate whether the claims are true or false; if they turn out to be true and it's appropriate for you to seek revenge, do so with reason and restraint, and never when you're angry or agitated. Even when you hear news that seems harmful to you or your business, like losing property or people, try to handle it with a calm and courageous attitude. Treat the loss of wealth as the least of your concerns because you should remember that it's wrong to idolize wealth or love it excessively, even if it seems to love you back and flows abundantly into your life. Loving wealth too much, especially when it appears to be slipping away and doesn’t return your affection, is definitely wrong and will lead to sorrow. Also, keep in mind that everyone comes into this world with nothing, and when we leave this life, wealth cannot follow us out. However, you should be mindful not to let anything slip away due to your neglect or apathy. And never mourn a loss so deeply that you can’t be hopeful and cheerful again.

If you suffer loss of men, bear that loss, too, with a calm spirit; for remember that every man in departing this life fulfils a law in human nature, inasmuch as no one is created to live forever in this world. Let it grieve you more, if an acquaintance of yours who has not lived as he ought here on earth, should die in that state and leave the world in disgrace; but most of all if you fear that his soul is in peril; for such things are rather to be lamented than that in dying he pays a debt to nature. But if he lived uprightly while on earth and made proper provision for his soul before he died, then you may take comfort in the good repute that lives after him, and even more in the blissful happiness which you believe he will enjoy with God in the other world. In the same way you must keep your spirit calm and in good control when such events come to pass as may seem profitable to you and stir your heart to joy and gladness, 233whether it be the death of men whom you have hated, or other happenings in which you might seem to find pleasure. But if you should happen to hear of the death of a man whom you counted an enemy and to whom you had planned to do evil, if opportunity should be found, rejoice much more in that God has saved you from a threefold sin than in the death of him who has departed. For you should be glad that God has prevented your hands from committing the sinful deed that was in your purpose, and has relieved your mind of the long-continued wrath and bitterness which you cherished against your enemy while he lived.

If you experience the loss of loved ones, accept that loss with a calm mindset. Remember that everyone eventually leaves this life, as no one is meant to live forever in this world. It's more painful to see someone you know die having lived poorly, leaving this world in disgrace; but it’s even more concerning if you fear for their soul’s safety. Those situations are more regrettable than the natural end of life. However, if they lived a good life and prepared their soul before dying, you can find comfort in the good name they leave behind, and even more in the happiness you believe they are enjoying with God in the afterlife. You should also maintain your calm and composure when events occur that may seem beneficial to you and bring you joy, whether it’s the death of someone you disliked or other circumstances that might please you. But if you hear about the death of someone you considered an enemy, someone you intended to harm if given the chance, rejoice even more in the fact that God has saved you from committing a serious sin, rather than focusing on the death of that person. Be glad that God has stopped you from acting on your harmful intentions and has freed you from the ongoing anger and bitterness you felt towards your enemy while they were alive.

Likewise, if high honors and dignities should come to you from a king or from other magnates, it is important that you should know how to receive them with modesty, lest what befalls so many an indiscreet man should also happen to you. For it is often the case that when one who is lacking in good sense receives any preferment from great men, he will rate himself so high in his pride and avarice that he counts no other man his equal. But such pretension leads to the downfall of everyone who behaves in this way; inasmuch as it is God’s purpose to strike down immoderate pride with sacred humility; and everyone who is too proud and greedy in his behavior will surely find God a constant opponent. Now if you should be so fortunate as to receive preferments from a king or other princes, remember it is God’s method and purpose, by prompting them (for He holds the minds and hearts of chiefs in His hand), to elevate such men as He wishes to honor and dignity. On the other hand, it is also the duty of every man to 234assist all those who have less strength than he. Keep in mind, then, if God should raise you up to any place of honor, that it must be to the profit of all who are less capable than yourself, except such as hate morality and right counsel; to them it should be a hindrance for a just man to be given power and authority. If God gives you wisdom and clear insight and you have also the good fortune to be awarded honors by great men, there are certain vices which you need especially to guard against: arrogant self-esteem, avarice that yearns for bribes, and forgetful neglect of the needs of men who are less capable than yourself. Keep constantly before your eyes as a warning the misfortunes of those who have fallen into disgrace because of immoderate pride. Also keep in mind, as a comforting hope, the careers of men who have received constant honors because of their steadfast justice and humility.

Similarly, if you receive high honors and titles from a king or other powerful people, it's important to accept them with humility, so you don’t end up like many reckless individuals before you. Often, when someone lacking good judgment is favored by the powerful, they become so inflated with pride and greed that they see no one as their equal. However, such arrogance leads to the ruin of anyone who acts this way; for it is God's intention to bring down excessive pride with true humility; and those who are too proud and greedy will find themselves opposed by God. If you're fortunate enough to gain favor from a king or other leaders, remember that it is God’s will to guide them (as He controls the hearts and minds of rulers) in honoring those He chooses for status and dignity. At the same time, it is everyone’s responsibility to help those who are weaker than themselves. Therefore, if God elevates you to a position of honor, it should be for the benefit of those less capable than you, except for those who reject morality and good advice; for such individuals would see a just person’s power as a threat. If God blesses you with wisdom and clear vision, and you’re also lucky enough to receive accolades from influential people, there are certain vices you must be especially wary of: arrogance, greed that seeks bribes, and neglecting the needs of those less fortunate than yourself. Keep the misfortunes of those who have faced disgrace due to excessive pride in your mind as a cautionary tale. Also, remember, as a source of hope, the paths of those who have consistently received honors because of their unwavering justice and humility.


XLII
 
A DISCUSSION ON HOW GOD REWARDS RIGHTEOUSNESS, HUMILITY, AND FIDELITY, ILLUSTRATED WITH EXAMPLES FROM SACRED AND SECULAR HISTORY

Son. I see clearly that God creates men unequal in power and wisdom because He wishes to see how each one is going to use what He has endowed him with, whether in high living for the glorification of self, or in bountiful kindness toward those who have need of him and have not received such gifts from God. And now I want to ask you to cite a few examples both of men whose good sense and humility have brought them honor and of such as have suffered destruction through vain pride.

Son. I can clearly see that God makes people unequal in power and wisdom because He wants to observe how each individual uses what He has given them, whether for lavish living to glorify themselves, or for generous kindness towards those in need who haven't received such gifts from God. Now, I'd like to ask you to provide a few examples of both those whose good judgment and humility have earned them respect, and those who have faced downfall due to their empty pride.

235Father. There have been so many cases of that sort, that we should have to extend our talk to a great length, if we were to mention all those of either class which we know could serve as examples to show how these things have worked out. I shall therefore name a few only, though some of each kind, for in that way a long discourse may be the sooner finished. The following instances are ancient and easily remembered. When Joseph was sold into Egypt,[287] a mighty lord bought him; but after he had purchased him he found that Joseph was a discreet man, and he preferred and honored him above all his other servants, not only above those whom he kept in bondage, but even above his freeborn kinsmen; and he gave into his hands the oversight of his wealth and property, house and home, and all his welfare. But because Joseph was a handsome man, kind and courteous in behavior, and sensible in speech, he won the love and friendship of all who knew him and were subject to the same lord who was Joseph’s master.

235Father. There have been so many cases like this that we would need to go on for a long time if we tried to cover all the examples we know about. So, I’ll just mention a few from each type to keep this short. The following examples are old and easy to remember. When Joseph was sold into Egypt,[287] a powerful lord bought him; but after purchasing him, the lord discovered that Joseph was a wise man. He preferred and honored Joseph above all his other servants, not just those in bondage but even his own freeborn relatives; he entrusted Joseph with managing his wealth, property, household, and everything that concerned him. Because Joseph was good-looking, kind, polite, and sensible in his speech, he won the affection and friendship of everyone who knew him and served under the same lord who was Joseph’s master.

The wife of this mighty man loved Joseph more than was proper, and impelled by evil desire, she sought to commit a vile sin against her husband, because of the love that she bore for Joseph; and she was not ashamed in her bold passion to intimate to him what she had in mind. But when he learned her purpose, he replied in this wise: “We cannot deal with each other as equals, for you are my lady and I am your thrall; and it would be a very great disgrace for you to submit yourself to me and too bold and rash in me to bring such dishonor 236upon you. But even worse is the unfaithfulness toward my lord which I should be guilty of, if I were to reward his kindness in this way like a treacherous thrall. For he has trusted me, his servant, so far as to give all his wealth and riches into my hands and keeping, and I must not deceive my lawful master with shameful treachery, unless I should wish to prove the saying in daily use that it is ill to have a thrall as a chosen friend.” But when the woman saw that Joseph was a good man and wished to be faithful, she thought it a shame that he should know her faithlessness, and, prompted by enmity and not by justice, she became anxious to work his ruin, if possible. So she told her husband that Joseph had made an unseemly request and added that it showed great audacity in a thrall to make such bold remarks to his lady. She was believed as a good wife, and Joseph was cast into prison strongly fettered and heavily chained, the purpose being to let him end his days by rotting alive because of his pride and faithlessness. But when God, Who always loves justice and humility, saw the faithfulness of Joseph whom He knew to be innocent, He shaped the outcome so that Joseph profited by the condemnation that he had suffered though innocent. For God saved him from prison under such circumstances that he was elevated to far greater prominence than before; and God prompted King Pharaoh to make Joseph master and judge of all Egypt next to the king himself; and this office he held into his old age and as long as he lived.

The wife of this powerful man loved Joseph more than was right, and driven by her twisted desires, she tried to betray her husband because of her feelings for Joseph. She shamelessly hinted to him what she wanted. But when he learned her intentions, he responded: "We can't be equals, because you are my lady and I'm your servant; it would be a huge disgrace for you to lower yourself to me, and it would be reckless and shameful for me to dishonor you like this. Even worse, it would be disloyal to my master if I were to repay his kindness like a treacherous servant. He has trusted me enough to give all his wealth into my care, and I can't betray my rightful master with such shameful treachery, unless I want to prove the saying that it's unwise to have a servant as a close friend." But when the woman saw that Joseph was a good man who wanted to be loyal, she felt ashamed that he knew her unfaithfulness. Driven by spite and not justice, she wanted to ruin him. She told her husband that Joseph had made an inappropriate request and claimed it was very bold of a servant to speak so brazenly to his lady. She was believed as a good wife, and Joseph was thrown into prison, heavily shackled and bound, destined to waste away there because of his pride and loyalty. But when God, who always values justice and humility, saw Joseph's faithfulness and recognized his innocence, He turned the situation around so that Joseph benefited from the unjust punishment he had suffered. God rescued him from prison in such a way that he was elevated to a much higher position than before; He urged King Pharaoh to make Joseph the master and judge of all Egypt, next to the king himself, a role he held for the rest of his life.

Long after this and in another place, a somewhat similar experience came to a famous king, who ruled 237over many realms. He was called by three names, because the languages differed in the lands that he ruled over: in one place he was called Artaxerxes; in another place, Cyrus; and some tell us that to him God spoke these kind words by the mouth of his prophet: “To mine anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden to subdue nations before him; and I will loose the loins of kings,” etc.[288] Others, however, maintain that it was another Cyrus who is referred to in this scripture; but we shall not discuss this any longer, since we cannot be sure whether it was written about this Cyrus or another. But in a third place the king was called Ahasuerus. And whereas he himself was mighty and excellent, he also had a wealthy wife named Vashti, who was his queen. Once when the king was absent in distant warfare to extend his dominion, he had appointed Queen Vashti to govern that part of his kingdom where his court resided. On his return home with a wealth of spoils, he made a great feast to gladden all those among his lords who had accompanied him on the campaign; and Queen Vashti made another feast for her own lords, who had remained at home to assist her in the government. Then the king commanded Vashti to appear before him in his hall in all her regalia and arrayed in all the beauty of queenly raiment and thus to show her joy in his home-coming and do honor to his feast. But Queen Vashti refused to obey the king’s command, saying that she could not leave her own feast, having invited many good chiefs. When the king saw 238her arrogance and pride, he concluded that she esteemed him no more highly for the perilous toil that he had endured while extending his frontiers than she esteemed herself for having remained quietly at home with the regency, which he had left in her hands. Because of this presumption the king became so wrathful, that he decreed that Vashti had forfeited the office of queen and all the authority which she possessed. And he found a captive maiden of the people of Israel, whose name was Esther, who was then in bondage in his kingdom, though she had sprung from a prominent family in her native land, and this maiden the king placed in Vashti’s seat, endowing her with all the power that Vashti had once possessed; and he made Esther queen of all his kingdom.

Long after this and in another place, a somewhat similar experience came to a famous king who ruled over many realms. He was known by three names because of the different languages in the lands he ruled: in one place, he was called Artaxerxes; in another, Cyrus; and some say that God spoke these encouraging words to him through his prophet: “To my anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have held to subdue nations before him; and I will loosen the belts of kings,” etc. Others, however, argue that another Cyrus is referred to in this scripture, but we won't discuss this further since we can't be sure whether it was written about this Cyrus or someone else. In another place, the king was called Ahasuerus. While he himself was powerful and impressive, he also had a wealthy wife named Vashti, who was his queen. Once, when the king was away fighting distant battles to expand his territory, he had appointed Queen Vashti to govern the part of his kingdom where his court was located. Upon returning home with great spoils, he hosted a lavish feast to celebrate with all the lords who had accompanied him on the campaign, while Queen Vashti held another feast for her own lords who had stayed behind to help her manage things. Then the king ordered Vashti to come before him in his hall, dressed in all her royal attire, to show her joy at his return and honor his feast. But Queen Vashti refused to obey his command, saying she couldn't leave her own feast because she had invited many important guests. When the king saw her arrogance and pride, he concluded that she valued him no more for the hard work he had done in extending his frontiers than she valued herself for staying behind with the regency that he had entrusted to her. Because of this presumptuous attitude, the king became so furious that he declared Vashti had lost her position as queen and all the authority that came with it. He then found a captive maiden from Israel, named Esther, who was in bondage in his kingdom, though she came from a prominent family in her homeland. The king then placed Esther in Vashti’s position, giving her all the power that Vashti had once held, and he made Esther queen of all his kingdom.

A few days later another event occurred at this same court. There was a famous and powerful chief named Haman and he was with King Ahasuerus. So highly did the king esteem Haman that all the people were ordered to obey him and bow down before him as before the king himself. Now there was also a man named Mordecai, a captive of the people of Israel, who was Queen Esther’s uncle; but inasmuch as he was both poor and in bondage, he dared not make known his kinship to the queen; nor dared the queen show greater deference to him than to any other in the royal service. Then it happened one day, when Haman the prince came to see the king, that on his return home his way passed near where Mordecai sat. But Mordecai was brooding over the bondage in which he had been placed along with the people who had been taken captive out of Israel; and being in deep thought he failed to notice that Haman 239was passing so near, and consequently did not rise to bow before him. But when Haman saw that an alien thrall neglected to bow the knee before him, he became so wrathful that as soon as he came home he ordered a high gallows to be raised near his house, on which he intended to hang Mordecai. He also caused letters to be sent throughout the realm permitting every man to deal with the people of Israel as he liked: whoever wished to do so might plunder them, or force them into bondage and servitude, or even slay them.

A few days later, another event took place at the same court. There was a well-known and powerful official named Haman, who was close to King Ahasuerus. The king valued Haman so highly that everyone was ordered to obey him and bow down before him as if he were the king himself. There was also a man named Mordecai, a captive from Israel, who was Queen Esther’s uncle; however, since he was both poor and in bondage, he didn’t dare to reveal his relationship to the queen, nor could the queen show him more respect than she did to anyone else in the royal court. One day, when Haman the prince came to see the king, he passed by where Mordecai was sitting on his way home. But Mordecai was deep in thought about the captivity he and his people had suffered, and he didn’t notice Haman passing so close, so he didn’t get up to bow to him. When Haman realized that this foreign servant had ignored him, he became so furious that as soon as he got home, he ordered a large gallows to be built near his house for the purpose of hanging Mordecai. He also sent out letters throughout the kingdom allowing anyone to treat the people of Israel however they wanted: anyone who wished could plunder them, force them into slavery, or even kill them.

When the news of this came to Mordecai, necessity compelled him to deal more boldly with the queen than before: he came to wait upon her, and, throwing himself at her feet, he told these tidings with much sorrow. When the queen heard that the entire nation from which she had sprung was condemned, she called upon God with all her soul; next she sought the king’s presence, robed in the stately apparel of a queen, and fell humbly at his feet. But when the queen had entered and the king saw that she came in such deep humility and with troubled countenance, he perceived that she had a matter of such great importance to bring before him that she would have to find the courage in his favor to state what concerned her. Taking her hand he raised her up, spoke gently to her, seated her beside him, and bade her state clearly all the details of her errand. Queen Esther did as the king commanded and related the whole event just as it had occurred; and then she begged him to take action according to royal mercy rather than according to Haman’s excessive anger. When the king saw Haman’s boundless ambition and arrogant wrath, 240he caused Haman himself to be hanged upon the gallows which he had intended for Mordecai, and sent orders throughout the entire realm that the people of Israel be allowed to live in complete freedom according to the ordinances of their sacred laws; and he gave to Mordecai all the authority that Haman had once possessed.[289]

When Mordecai heard this news, he felt it necessary to approach the queen more boldly than before. He went to see her and, falling at her feet, shared the sad news. When the queen learned that her entire nation was condemned, she prayed to God with all her heart. Then she sought the king’s presence, dressed in her royal garments, and humbly fell at his feet. When the king noticed her deep humility and troubled face, he realized she had something of great importance to discuss and that she would need his favor to address her concerns. He took her hand, lifted her up, spoke gently to her, seated her beside him, and asked her to explain her situation clearly. Queen Esther complied with the king’s request and recounted everything that had happened. She then urged him to act with royal mercy instead of Haman’s fierce anger. When the king recognized Haman’s unchecked ambition and arrogance, he ordered Haman to be hanged on the gallows he had prepared for Mordecai, and he sent orders throughout the land allowing the people of Israel to live freely according to their sacred laws; he also granted Mordecai all the authority that Haman had once held.[289]

From this you will observe that God demands moderation and fairness, humility, justice, and fidelity as a duty from those whom he raises to honor. For Joseph, as we said before, was rewarded with splendid honors and great advancement because of his faithfulness and humility, although he had been sold for money like a thrall into a strange land; but God soon raised him by the king’s command to be a lord and the highest judge in all Egypt next to the king himself. One may also observe from this how much it is contrary to God’s will to exalt oneself through vain conceit; for Queen Vashti lost her queenship and all her power in a single day because of her pride, while a captive maiden of a strange people was appointed in her stead; and Haman lost all his authority in a single day because of his excessive vanity, while his dignities were given to a stranger, a captive thrall. Now if you should win honors from great lords, beware of an outcome like those in the stories which you have just heard, and there are many such; but make good use of the story that I told you earlier about Joseph.

From this, you can see that God expects moderation and fairness, humility, justice, and loyalty from those He chooses for greatness. Joseph, as we mentioned earlier, was rewarded with amazing honors and significant advancement because of his faithfulness and humility, even after being sold for money like a slave in a foreign land. But God quickly elevated him by the king’s command to become a lord and the highest judge in all of Egypt, right next to the king himself. You can also notice how contrary it is to God's will to promote oneself through empty pride; Queen Vashti lost her crown and all her power in just one day because of her arrogance, while a captive girl from a foreign nation took her place. Similarly, Haman lost all his authority in a single day due to his excessive vanity, and his positions were handed over to a stranger, a captive slave. If you gain honors from powerful lords, be cautious of an outcome like those in the tales you've just heard; there are many such examples. Instead, make good use of the story I told you earlier about Joseph.

There are still other examples which go far back into the days of Emperor Constantine: for God had appointed 241him ruler of all the world, and he turned to righteousness and Christianity as soon as he came to understand the holy faith. He gave his mother, Queen Helena, a kingdom east of the sea in the land of the Jews. But because her realm and dominion were there, she came to be persuaded that no faith concerning God could be correct but that held by the Jews; and as letters passed between them, the queen and her son the emperor, they began to realize that they differed somewhat in the beliefs which each of them held concerning God. Then the emperor commanded the queen to come over the sea from the east with her wise and learned men and many other lords to a meeting in Rome, where the verities of the holy faith should be examined. But when the queen arrived with her company, the emperor had called together many bishops including Pope Sylvester and many wise men, both Christians and heathen. When the conference had begun and a court had been appointed to decide between the emperor and the queen, it became evident to both that there was likely to be a violent dispute between the Christian bishops and the learned Jews and other wise men who had come with the queen from the east, in view of the fact that each side would produce weighty arguments from its books against the other to prove and confirm its own learning and holy faith. They saw clearly, therefore, that it would be necessary for the assembly to appoint upright judges, who could weigh in a tolerant and rational spirit all the arguments that might be offered on either side.

There are still other examples that go way back to the time of Emperor Constantine: God had made him the ruler of the entire world, and he embraced righteousness and Christianity as soon as he learned about the holy faith. He gave his mother, Queen Helena, a kingdom on the eastern side of the sea in the land of the Jews. However, because her realm was there, she began to believe that the only true faith concerning God was that of the Jews; and as letters exchanged between her and her son, the emperor, they started to realize that they had different beliefs about God. The emperor then instructed the queen to travel across the sea from the east with her wise scholars and many other lords to a meeting in Rome, where the truths of the holy faith would be examined. When the queen arrived with her entourage, the emperor had gathered many bishops, including Pope Sylvester, along with numerous wise individuals, both Christians and non-Christians. As the conference began and a court was established to resolve the differences between the emperor and the queen, it became clear to both that a fierce debate was likely to occur between the Christian bishops and the learned Jews and other wise men who had accompanied the queen from the east, as each side would present strong arguments from their texts to validate their beliefs and holy faith. They realized that it would be essential for the assembly to appoint fair judges who could thoughtfully and reasonably consider all the arguments that might be put forward by either side.

But whereas the emperor with the pope and the Christian bishops was the defender of holy Christianity and 242the queen the protecting shield of the Jewish faith, it was clear to both that it would be improper for them to subject themselves to temptation by acting as judges in this dispute. So they ordered a careful search to be made among the wise men to find whether there might be some in all their number who were so reliable in wisdom, judgment, and rightmindedness, that all those present could trust them to judge rightly in their contest. But when the entire multitude had been examined, only two men were found whom the people dared choose to be judges in these important matters; and both of these men were heathen and bound neither to the law of the Christians nor to the Jewish faith. One of them was named Craton: he was a great philosopher and thoroughly versed in all learning; he was a friend of mighty men and enjoyed their favor; but never had he cared for more of this world’s riches than what he needed for clothes and food. And when great men sometimes gave him more than he required, he would give away what he did not consume to such as were needy. It was also in his nature to speak little but truthfully, and no man knew that falsehood had ever been found on his lips; wherefore all felt that the merits of wisdom and good character which he possessed would surely make him worthy to judge in these important matters. The other who was chosen judge was named Zenophilus; he was a famous and powerful prince, and where he directed the government it was not known that he had ever swerved from justice. He was a great master of eloquence and learned in all science, friendly in speech and affable, though a man of authority. Nor could anyone 243recall that falsehood had ever been found on his lips. These having been chosen to act as judges in behalf of all present, the Christians and the Jews held a court; and these two decided all the disputes, as they were chosen to do, and it was found as before that in no wise did they deviate from justice.[290]

But while the emperor, along with the pope and the Christian bishops, was the guardian of holy Christianity, and the queen acted as a protective shield for the Jewish faith, both understood that it would be inappropriate for them to risk temptation by serving as judges in this matter. So, they ordered a thorough search among the wise men to find those who were trustworthy in wisdom, judgment, and integrity, so that everyone present could rely on them to judge fairly in their dispute. Yet, after examining the entire crowd, only two men were found that the people felt comfortable selecting as judges in these crucial issues; both were pagans, not bound by either the Christian law or the Jewish faith. One was named Craton; he was a great philosopher, well-versed in all knowledge and favored by powerful individuals, but he never valued worldly riches beyond what was necessary for clothes and food. When influential people occasionally offered him more than he needed, he would give away the excess to those in need. He had a tendency to speak little but always truthfully, and no one could recall him ever uttering a falsehood; thus, everyone believed that his wisdom and good character made him quite deserving of judging these significant matters. The other chosen judge was named Zenophilus; he was a renowned and influential prince, known for never straying from justice in his governance. He was an excellent orator, knowledgeable in all sciences, friendly in conversation yet authoritative. No one could remember him ever speaking falsely. With these two selected as judges for all present, the Christians and Jews held a court, and these two resolved all disputes as they were intended to do, consistently upholding justice.

I have cited these instances that you might appreciate the humility and rightmindedness of both the emperor and the queen; for though they were lords of the entire world, they regarded it as proper to sit in obedience to chosen judges who were much inferior to themselves in both power and wealth and every other respect. Likewise you are to appreciate what great honor these men gained through their wisdom and uprightness; for though they were both heathen, they were superior to all others as to insight into the holy faith and the world’s welfare. And now you will appreciate what I told you earlier in our conversation, namely, that much depends on the example that a man leaves after him. Joseph lived before the birth of our Lord Jesus Christ; he was sold for money into Egypt as an alien thrall; but his faithfulness and humility pleased God so highly that he was made ruler next to the king of all those who were native to the land and had wealth and kinsmen there, whether they were rich or poor. It is many hundred winters since Joseph died, but his glory still lives and is daily recalled among all thoughtful people throughout the world. Queen Vashti died 244long before the birth of Christ, as did Haman the prince; but the disgrace that came upon them because of their pride and folly still lives. Queen Esther bears even to this day the living honor which she gained through her humility; though she was brought to India[291] as a captive bondmaiden, she was later made queen over many large kingdoms and seated upon the throne from which Queen Vashti was banished.

I mentioned these examples so you can recognize the humility and integrity of both the emperor and the queen. Even though they ruled the entire world, they thought it was right to sit in front of chosen judges who were much less powerful, wealthy, and accomplished than they were. You should also see the great honor these judges earned through their wisdom and honesty; even though they were pagan, they had greater insight into the holy faith and the welfare of the world than anyone else. Now, let’s reflect on what I said earlier in our discussion: much depends on the legacy a person leaves behind. Joseph lived long before the birth of our Lord Jesus Christ; he was sold for money into Egypt as a foreign slave. However, his faithfulness and humility pleased God so much that he became the second-in-command next to the king, alongside all those who were natives of the land and had wealth and family there, whether rich or poor. It’s been many hundreds of years since Joseph died, but his glory still endures and is remembered by thoughtful people all around the world. Queen Vashti and Haman the prince died long before Christ was born; yet their disgrace from pride and foolishness is still remembered. Queen Esther still carries the honor she earned through her humility; although she was taken to India as a captive bondwoman, she eventually became queen over many vast kingdoms and was seated on the throne from which Queen Vashti was removed.

Although the events that we last related in speaking of Emperor Constantine and his mother Queen Helena happened after the birth of Christ, it was still so long ago that no man can recall them because of their antiquity; yet they are bright with honor even to this day. Craton and Zenophilus, though they are dead, are celebrated for their wisdom and righteousness. Though both were heathen men, they were chosen to be judges over nearly all the people who were in the world, and were even trusted in behalf of all men, both Christians and Jews, to pass judgment on those laws which neither of them kept, but upon which the welfare of the world nevertheless depended. From such occurrences you will realize that God holds in His hand the tiller with which He turns and moves the hearts of great lords whenever He wishes, and controls all their thoughts according to His will. For King Pharaoh raised up Joseph to a dominion above that of all the other princes who were in the kingdom before him. Ahasuerus deprived Vashti of her queenship, though she was both wealthy and high-born, and appointed Esther queen in her stead. He also 245hanged Haman, the renowned prince, and gave all his power to Mordecai, who was once a bondman brought captive from a strange land. Emperor Constantine placed Craton and Zenophilus, two heathen men, in the judgment seat and trusted them to pass judgment on the verities and the interpretation of the holy faith. Now you shall know of a truth that all these events have come to pass through God’s providence and secret commands; and all these things are noted down for the memory of men in the future, so that all may learn and derive profit from the good examples, but shun the evil ones. And if it should be your fortune to become a kingsman, remember these examples that I have now shown you (and there are a great many others like them which we have not mentioned in this speech); and be sure to follow all those which you see are likely to profit you.

Although the events we previously discussed regarding Emperor Constantine and his mother Queen Helena took place after the birth of Christ, they are so ancient that no one can remember them; yet they are still honored today. Craton and Zenophilus, even in death, are celebrated for their wisdom and integrity. Despite being pagans, they were chosen as judges for almost all the people in the world and were trusted to make decisions for all, including Christians and Jews, on laws that neither of them adhered to, yet which the world's welfare depended upon. From these events, you can see that God controls the hearts of powerful leaders whenever He chooses and directs their thoughts according to His will. For instance, King Pharaoh elevated Joseph above all the other princes in the kingdom before him. Ahasuerus removed Vashti from her queenship, despite her wealth and noble birth, and appointed Esther as queen instead. He also executed Haman, the well-known prince, and gave all his power to Mordecai, who was once a captive slave from a foreign land. Emperor Constantine appointed Craton and Zenophilus, two pagan men, to the judgment seat and trusted them to interpret the truths of the holy faith. You will understand that all these events happened through God's wisdom and hidden commands; these stories are recorded for the memory of future generations, so that everyone may learn from the good examples and avoid the bad ones. If you happen to become a king, remember these examples I have shown you (there are many more that we haven't mentioned in this speech), and make sure to follow those that you see will benefit you.


XLIII
 
THE RESPONSIBILITIES AND THE HIGH STATUS OF THE KING

Son. God reward you, sire, for taking so much time to hear all my questions and for giving such very patient and useful answers: for these talks will surely lead me to think and observe more accurately than I did before. It may also be that others will study these learned discourses in the future and derive knowledge, good insight, and profitable manners from them. There are, however, several other things which I have in mind to investigate and wish very much to ask about. And therefore I beg you not yet to grow weary of teaching me; for your permission gives me courage to confide so fully 246in you that I am not likely to overlook anything that my mind is eager to know. Indeed, it seems to me that this subject opens up such a wide field, that there must be many things left which one needs to know and discern fully, if one wishes to be rated a worthy man by kings or other great lords; and I am eager to hear you talk further about these matters.

Son. Thank you, sir, for taking the time to answer all my questions and for being so patient and helpful. These conversations will definitely help me think and observe more clearly than before. It’s also possible that others will study these insightful discussions in the future and gain knowledge, understanding, and good habits from them. However, there are still several other things I want to explore and really want to ask about. So, I kindly ask you not to get tired of teaching me just yet; your willingness to share encourages me to fully trust you, and I don’t want to miss anything my mind is eager to learn. Truly, it seems to me that this topic opens up such a vast area that there must be many things left to know and understand completely if one wants to be seen as a worthy person by kings or other important figures; and I’m excited to hear you discuss these topics further.

But for this once I wish to inquire about men of greater importance than those who have to serve the mighty. I see clearly that those who serve are in duty bound to strive after the best manners, knowledge, wisdom, and righteousness; but it would seem that those, who are chiefs and rulers and whom all others must serve, owe an even greater duty to seek both knowledge and insight; above all it must be their duty to love every form of righteousness, since they have authority to punish all others who are not righteous. Therefore I wish to ask with your permission what customs the king himself should observe which would accord with his regal dignity. Tell me clearly so that I can understand what business or conduct is demanded of him early in the morning and what affairs he is later occupied with throughout the day; for he is so highly honored and exalted upon earth that all must bend and bow before him as before God. So great is his power that he may dispose as he likes of the lives of all who live in his kingdom: he lets him live whom he wills and causes him to be slain whom he wills. But I have observed this, that if a man becomes another’s banesman, all upright men from that time on have an aversion for him as for a heathen; since to slay a man is counted a great sin for 247which the one who commits it must suffer great penance and much trouble before Christian people will again admit him to fellowship. And again, you told me in an earlier speech to shun manslaughter; but you added that all manslaughter committed by royal command or in battle I need shun no more than any other deed which is counted good. Now if the king has received such great authority from God that all slaughter done by his command is without guilt, I should imagine that he must need to be very wise, cautious, and upright in all his doings; and therefore I wish to have you explain fully the things that I have now asked about, unless you feel that my questions are stupid, or that I am presuming too much in showing curiosity about the doings of such great men.

But for this one time, I want to ask about people who are more important than those who serve the powerful. I see clearly that those who serve are obligated to strive for the best manners, knowledge, wisdom, and righteousness. However, it seems that those who are leaders and rulers, whom everyone else must serve, have an even greater responsibility to seek both knowledge and insight. Above all, they must love every form of righteousness since they have the power to punish those who are not righteous. Therefore, I would like to ask, with your permission, what customs the king himself should follow that align with his royal dignity. Please tell me clearly so I can understand what activities or conduct are expected of him early in the morning and what he is involved in throughout the day. He is so highly honored and exalted that everyone must bow before him as they would before God. His power is so great that he can decide the fate of everyone in his kingdom: he allows some to live and decides who will be killed. But I have noticed that if a man becomes another's banesman, all honorable people will from then on have an aversion to him as if he were a pagan, since killing someone is considered a grave sin for which the perpetrator must undergo severe penance before being accepted back into the community. Furthermore, you previously advised me to avoid manslaughter; however, you also mentioned that any manslaughter committed under royal command or in battle is not to be treated with the same disdain as any other bad deed. Now, if the king has received such immense authority from God that all killings ordered by him are seen as guiltless, I believe he must be very wise, careful, and just in all his actions. Therefore, I would like you to explain fully the matters I have just raised, unless you think my questions are foolish or that I am being too forward in my curiosity about the actions of such great individuals.

Father. Your questions are not stupid, for we may just as well talk about how the king has to order his government or his conduct as about other men. It surely is his bounden duty to seek knowledge and understanding, and he ought indeed to be well informed as to what has occurred in the past, for in that way he will gain insight for all the business that pertains to his kingship. You have stated that he is highly honored and exalted on earth and that all bow before him as before God; and the reason for this is that the king represents divine lordship: for he bears God’s own name and sits upon the highest judgment seat upon earth, wherefore it should be regarded as giving honor to God Himself, when one honors the king, because of the name which he has from God. The son of God himself, when he was on earth, taught by his own example that all should 248honor the king and show him due obedience; for he commanded his apostle Peter to draw fishes up from the depth of the sea and to open the mouth of the fish that he caught first, and said that he would find a penny there, which he ordered him to pay to Caesar as tribute money for them both. From this you are to conclude that it is the duty of every one upon earth to respect and honor the royal title which an earthly man holds from God; for the very son of God thought it proper to honor the royal dignity so highly that he, to the glory of kingship, made himself subject to tribute along with that one of his disciples whom he made chief of all his apostles and gave all priestly honors.

Father. Your questions aren't foolish, since we can discuss how the king should manage his government or behavior just like we talk about other people. It's definitely his responsibility to seek knowledge and understanding, and he should be well-informed about what has happened in the past; this way, he’ll gain insights for everything related to his kingship. You’ve mentioned that he is greatly honored and respected on earth, with everyone bowing to him as they would to God. The reason for this is that the king embodies divine authority: he carries God’s name and sits on the highest judgment throne on earth, which means that honoring the king is, in a way, honoring God Himself because of the name he has from God. The Son of God, during his time on earth, demonstrated through his actions that everyone should honor the king and show him proper obedience. He instructed his apostle Peter to catch fish from the sea and open the mouth of the first one he caught, saying that he would find a coin there, which he told him to pay to Caesar as tribute money for both of them. From this, you can conclude that everyone on earth has a duty to respect and honor the royal title that an earthly man holds from God; the very Son of God deemed it appropriate to uphold the honor of kingship so highly that he willingly subjected himself to tribute alongside the disciple he appointed as the leader of all his apostles and bestowed with all priestly honors.


XLIV
 
THE SAME TOPIC CONTINUED

Son. There remains one thing, which, as usual, I shall need to have explained further, as it is not very clear to me. You stated, and it seems reasonable, that the king holds a title of high honor and dignity from God Himself; but I do not see clearly why God made Himself subject to the tribute of an earthly king; since He must, it seems to me, be above all kings, seeing that He rules the earthly as well as the heavenly kingdom.

Son. There's one thing I still need you to clarify for me because I'm not quite sure about it. You said, and it sounds reasonable, that the king has a title of high honor and dignity from God Himself; but I don't understand why God would make Himself subject to the tribute of an earthly king. It seems to me that He should be above all kings, considering that He rules both the earthly and the heavenly realms.

Father. That God Himself has honored earthly kings you will observe from the fact that, when He came down to earth from the loftiest pinnacles of heaven, He regarded Himself as having come among men as a guest and did not wish to claim a share in the earthly kingship, though he might have done so. But He fulfilled the 249words that David had spoken: “The Lord ruleth in the heavens, but verily he hath given an earthly kingdom to the sons of men.”[292] Now God, while He was on earth, wished to honor earthly kings and kingdoms rather than disparage them in any way; for He would not deprive the earthly kingship of what He had formerly given into the control of earthly lords; but God showed a perfect obedience to Caesar. You should also observe that, just as God commanded His apostle Peter to examine the first fish that he drew and take a penny from its mouth (and God did not want him to examine the second fish or the third, but the first only), similarly every man should in all things first honor the king and the royal dignity. For God Himself calls the king His anointed, and every king who possesses the full honors of royalty is rightly called the Lord’s anointed. In like manner one of God’s apostles said in a sermon while instructing the people in the true faith: “Fear God and honor your king,”[293]—which is almost as if he had literally said that he who does not show perfect honor to the king does not fear God.

Father. You can see that God Himself has honored earthly kings by the fact that when He descended from the highest points of heaven to earth, He viewed Himself as a guest among people and chose not to claim a part in earthly kingship, even though He could have. However, He fulfilled the words spoken by David: “The Lord rules in the heavens, but indeed He has given an earthly kingdom to the sons of men.”249 Now, while on earth, God wanted to honor earthly kings and kingdoms rather than belittle them in any way; He would not take away from the earthly kingship what He had previously entrusted to earthly rulers. Instead, God demonstrated perfect obedience to Caesar. You should also note that just as God instructed His apostle Peter to examine the first fish he caught and take a coin from its mouth (and He did not want him to check the second or third fish, only the first), similarly, every person should always first honor the king and the royal dignity. For God Himself calls the king His anointed, and every king who holds the full honors of royalty is rightly called the Lord’s anointed. Likewise, one of God’s apostles declared in a sermon while teaching people about true faith: “Fear God and honor your king,”—which is almost like saying that he who does not show proper honor to the king does not truly fear God.

Every king, as you have said, ought, indeed, to be wise, well-informed, and above everything upright, that he may be able to realize fully that he is after all merely a servant of God, though he is honored and exalted so highly in the supreme service of God, that all bow down 250before him as before God; for in so doing they worship God and the holy name which the king bears but not the king himself. It is, therefore, in the very nature of kingship to inspire all with a great awe and fear of the king, wherefore every one trembles who hears him named. But he ought also to appear gracious and friendly toward all good men, lest any one should fear him so much as to be deterred from presenting any important request to him because of his severity.

Every king, as you've said, should truly be wise, well-informed, and above all, upright, so he can fully realize that, in the end, he is just a servant of God. Even though he is honored and held in such high regard in God's service that everyone bows down before him as they would before God, they're really worshiping God and the holy name that the king represents, not the king himself. Therefore, it's part of kingship to inspire great awe and fear in people, which is why everyone trembles at the mention of his name. However, he should also come across as gracious and friendly toward all good people, so that no one is so fearful of him that they hesitate to make important requests because of his sternness.

In the night, as soon as the king is sated with sleep, it should be his duty and business to center his thoughts upon the kingdom as a whole and to consider how his plans may be formed and carried out in such a way that God will be well pleased with the care that he gives to the realm; also how it may be made most profitable and obedient to himself; further what measure of firmness he must use in restraining the rich lest they become too arrogant toward the poor, and what caution in uplifting the poor, lest they grow too defiant toward the wealthy; wherefore he needs to ponder and plan judiciously how to hold everyone to moderation in the estate in which he is placed. This, too, the king must be sure to keep in his thoughts, that when it becomes necessary to chastise those who are not satisfied with what God has planned for them, he must not be so lenient in his punishment, that this excessive indulgence should lead anyone to consider it safe to transgress what ought to stand as rightfully ordained. Nor must he be so severe in his penalties that God and rightminded men will regard him as punishing more from a cruel disposition than from a sense of justice. These things and many more a 251king ought to reflect upon at night when he is done with sleep, for then fewer matters will come upon him unawares during the day, when the needs of the land are presented to him.

In the night, once the king is fully rested, it should be his duty to focus on the kingdom as a whole and think about how to make and implement plans in a way that God will be pleased with his care for the realm. He should also consider how to make the kingdom most profitable and obedient to himself, as well as how firm he needs to be in controlling the wealthy so they don’t become too arrogant toward the poor, and how careful he should be in supporting the poor so they don’t become too defiant toward the rich. Therefore, he needs to think carefully and plan how to keep everyone balanced within their position. Additionally, the king must remember that when it's necessary to discipline those who are unhappy with what God has arranged for them, he shouldn’t be so lenient that they feel safe to ignore what is just. At the same time, he shouldn’t be so harsh in his punishments that God and fair-minded people see him as cruel rather than just. These are just some of the things a 251king ought to think about at night after he has finished sleeping, because then he will be better prepared for the day when the kingdom's needs arise.


XLV
 
ABOUT THE MODERATION A KING SHOULD MAINTAIN
IN HIS JUDICIAL DECISIONS AND PUNISHMENTS,
WITH EXAMPLES TAKEN FROM THE STORY OF
GOD’S JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF ADAM AND
EVE, WHERE TRUTH AND JUSTICE
WERE COMBINED WITH PEACE AND MERCY

Son. It is evident that a king must possess great constraint and an even greater sense of justice, as you remarked earlier, if he is to find the true mean in meting out punishment so as to be neither too lenient nor too severe. And now I wish to ask whether there are any examples which may guide him toward this moderation, inasmuch as you have stated that every king should have knowledge of all the examples that are to be found.

Son. It's clear that a king needs to have a lot of self-control and an even stronger sense of justice, as you mentioned earlier, if he wants to find the right balance in delivering punishment, making sure it’s not too lenient or too harsh. Now, I’d like to ask if there are any examples that could help him achieve this balance, since you’ve said that every king should be aware of all the examples that exist.

Father. I repeat what I said then that no man needs to be more learned or better informed in all subjects than a king, for both he and his subjects have great need of this. But one who has a thorough knowledge of past events will meet but few contingencies that are really unexampled. Now the following examples are very ancient, and every king should keep them frequently before his eyes and seek guidance from them for the government of his kingdom.

Father. I’ll say it again: no man needs to be more educated or informed on every topic than a king, since both he and his subjects really need it. However, someone who understands history well will face very few situations that are genuinely unprecedented. The examples that follow are very old, and every king should regularly remind himself of them and use them as guidance for ruling his kingdom.

When God had created the entire world and had beautified it with grass and other herbage, as well as with birds and beasts, He appointed two human beings, 252a man and a woman, to have dominion over everything. He led the two, Adam and Eve, to the highest point of Paradise and showed them all the birds and beasts and all the flowers and glories of Paradise. Then God said to Adam and Eve: “All these things that you now see I give to you for your maintenance and dominion, if you will keep the covenant which I now establish between ourselves. But these are the laws which you must carefully observe, if you wish to keep the gifts which I have now given you: that beautiful tree which you see standing with lovely apples in the midst of Paradise is called the tree of knowledge, and the fruit which the tree bears is called the apples of knowledge. This tree you must not touch nor may you eat of the apples which it bears, for as soon as you eat of them you shall die; but of everything else that you now see you may freely eat according to desire.” Four sisters were called to witness this covenant, divine virgins, who should hear the laws decreed and learn all the terms of the agreement: the first was named Truth, the second, Peace, the third, Justice, and the fourth, Mercy. And God spoke thus to these virgins: “I command you to see to it that Adam does not break this covenant which has been made between Me and him: follow him carefully and protect him as long as he observes these things that are now decreed; but if he transgresses, you shall sit in judgment with your Father, for you are the daughters of the very Judge.”

When God created the entire world and filled it with grass, plants, birds, and animals, He appointed two humans, a man and a woman, to have dominion over everything. He brought Adam and Eve to the highest point of Paradise and showed them all the birds, animals, flowers, and wonders of Paradise. Then God said to Adam and Eve: “All these things you see are yours for your sustenance and rule, as long as you keep the covenant I am establishing with you. Here are the laws you need to follow if you want to keep the gifts I’ve given you: the beautiful tree you see in the middle of Paradise, with lovely apples, is called the tree of knowledge, and the fruit it bears is known as the apples of knowledge. You must not touch this tree or eat its apples, because as soon as you do, you will die; but you may freely eat from everything else you see according to your desire.” Four sisters were invited to witness this covenant, divine virgins who would hear the laws and understand the terms of the agreement: the first was named Truth, the second, Peace, the third, Justice, and the fourth, Mercy. And God said to these virgins: “I command you to ensure that Adam does not break this covenant made between Me and him: watch over him closely and protect him as long as he follows these rules; but if he disobeys, you will sit in judgment with your Father, for you are the daughters of the Judge.”

When the speech was ended, God vanished from Adam’s sight; and Adam went forth to view the glories of Paradise. But at that time the serpent, which was 253more subtle and crafty than any other beast, came in the guise of a maiden[294] to Eve, Adam’s wife, and addressed her in great friendliness: “Blessed is your husband and you with him, since God has given all things into your power; for it is now the duty of every beast to obey your commands, seeing that Adam is our lord and you are our lady. But now I want to ask you whether God has withheld anything upon earth from your dominion, or whether you may enjoy all things as you wish without hesitation.” Eve replied: “God has given us dominion over all things that he has created upon earth except the tree that stands in the midst of Paradise; of this He has forbidden us to eat, having said that we shall die, if we eat thereof.” The serpent said to Eve: “Oho, my lady! He does not wish you to become so wise that you know both good and evil; for He knows the difference between good and evil things, while you know good things only. But when you have eaten of the apples of knowledge, you will become like God and will have knowledge of evil things as well as of good.” As soon as the serpent had disappeared from Eve’s sight, she called Adam her husband and told him all this speech. Then she took two of the apples of knowledge, ate one herself, and gave the other to Adam. But when they had eaten these apples, their knowledge was extended to evil things, as the serpent had said; and they 254began to observe the shapes of beasts and birds and trees, and finally how they themselves were formed. Then said Adam: “We are shamefully naked, we two, for there is nothing to hide our limbs; beasts are covered with hair and tail, birds with feathers, and trees with branches and leaves; we two alone have shamefully naked limbs.” Thereupon they took broad leaves from the trees and covered those of their members which they were most ashamed to have naked. Then Peace came forth and spoke to Adam and Eve: “Now you have broken the law and your covenant with God, and I will no longer give you the security in the open fields that you have thus far enjoyed; but I will keep you safe in a secret hiding place until judgment is pronounced in your case; and I give you this safety that you may have opportunity to present your defense. But you must take good care to make a plea which may profit you, and prove a defense rather than a detriment.” Truth came forth and spoke to Adam: “Take heed, when you come to plead your case, that you do not lie, for then I shall testify with you; tell everything just as it happened, for if you lie about anything, I shall testify against you at once.” Justice came forth and said: “It is my duty and office to make sure that you are not unjustly condemned; but the more you are found guilty of lies and wrongdoing, the more shall I oppose you.” Mercy came forth and said to Adam: “I shall add assistance and mercy to your plea, if you heed carefully all that my sisters have taught.” But fear had come upon Adam and he went away to hide among the trees, lest he should be seen naked.

When the speech was over, God disappeared from Adam’s view, and Adam went out to explore the wonders of Paradise. At that moment, the serpent, which was more cunning and clever than any other creature, approached Eve, Adam’s wife, disguised as a maiden. It spoke to her with great friendliness: “Blessed is your husband and you along with him, since God has given you authority over everything; it is now the duty of every creature to obey you, since Adam is our lord and you are our lady. But I want to ask you if God has kept anything from your control on earth, or if you can enjoy everything freely without hesitation.” Eve replied, “God has granted us dominion over everything He created on earth, except for the tree in the center of Paradise; He has forbidden us to eat from it, saying that we would die if we did.” The serpent responded, “Oh, my lady! He doesn’t want you to become wise enough to know both good and evil; He knows the difference, while you only know what is good. But when you eat from the apples of knowledge, you will be like God, aware of both good and evil.” As soon as the serpent vanished from Eve’s sight, she called her husband Adam and shared all that had been said. Then she took two apples of knowledge, ate one herself, and gave the other to Adam. After they had eaten the apples, their awareness expanded to include evil, just as the serpent had claimed; they began to see the forms of animals, birds, and trees, and eventually noted their own nakedness. Adam exclaimed, “We are shamefully naked, both of us, with nothing to cover our bodies; animals are covered in fur and tails, birds with feathers, and trees with branches and leaves; we alone have bodies that are shamefully exposed.” So they took large leaves from the trees to cover the parts of themselves they were most embarrassed about. Then Peace appeared and spoke to Adam and Eve: “Now you have broken the law and your covenant with God, and I will no longer provide you the safety in the open fields that you have enjoyed until now; instead, I’ll keep you safe in a hidden place until your case is judged; this safety allows you the chance to defend yourselves. But be careful to make a case that benefits you, and prove a defense rather than a liability.” Truth appeared and addressed Adam: “Be careful when you plead your case; do not lie, for I will stand by you; tell everything exactly as it happened, because if you lie about anything, I will testify against you immediately.” Justice came forward and stated, “It is my role to ensure that you are not unfairly condemned; however, the more lies and wrongs you are found guilty of, the more I will oppose you.” Mercy then approached Adam and said, “I will add support and compassion to your plea if you carefully heed everything my sisters have taught you.” But fear overwhelmed Adam, and he went off to hide among the trees, worried about being seen naked.

255At midday God went forth to view the beauties of Paradise and Adam’s stewardship; but as He did not see Adam in the wide fields, He called him, asking where he was. Adam replied: “I hid myself, Lord, because I was ashamed to show myself naked before Thy face.” God answered, saying: “Why shouldst thou be more ashamed of thy nakedness now than at our former meeting, unless it be that thou hast broken the law and hast eaten of the apples of knowledge, which I forbade thee to eat.” Adam replied as if defending himself: “The woman that Thou gavest me led me into this fault; if I had been alone about my affairs and if Thou hadst not given me this wife to advise with me, I should have kept the appointed law and should not have transgressed Thy command.” Then God said to Eve: “Why didst thou give thy husband this evil counsel to break the law?” Eve replied as if defending her case: “The crafty serpent gave me that evil advice; had he not been created or appeared before me, I should not have come upon this evil design.” Then God said: “Since the law has now been broken, I want those virgins whom I appointed keepers of our covenant to sit in judgment with us.” Then Truth spoke: “It is my duty and business to show Adam’s guilt, inasmuch as he has concealed with a lie what most of all led him to transgress. For this was the chief motive in your case, that the apples were fair and pleasant and sweet to taste, and that you desired greatly to be wiser than was promised you. You committed a theft in planning to take them secretly, covetous robbery in taking them without permission, and an act of insolent pride in wishing to become like unto 256God in wisdom beyond what was promised you.” Then God said to Peace that she should give a brief opinion in the case. Peace answered in this wise: “Whereas Thou didst appoint me to watch over Adam’s safety as long as there was no transgression, I now offer to bring him an even greater insecurity, because he did not know how to keep the great freedom which he enjoyed before.” Then God said to Justice that she should give judgment; and she answered in this wise: “Since Adam was unable to keep the freedom that Peace had secured for him, let him now suffer misery and distress instead; and because he coveted knowledge of evil things, let him experience evil in place of good; and because he wished to make himself like God in knowledge beyond what was permitted, and blamed God for his transgression with lying excuses, let him suffer the death of which he was warned before he transgressed.” Then God said to Mercy that she should pass judgment on this transgression. Mercy replied in these words: “As it is my nature to urge forbearance and clemency to some degree in every case, I request that Adam be not destroyed through a merciless death; but since he now must repent of his error as long as he lives, let him have hope of mercy and help in his death, as long as he does not despair.”

255At midday, God went to admire the wonders of Paradise and Adam’s management; but when He didn’t see Adam in the vast fields, He called out to him, asking where he was. Adam replied, “I hid myself, Lord, because I was ashamed to be naked in front of You.” God responded, “Why should you feel more ashamed of your nakedness now than when we last met, unless you have broken the law and eaten from the tree of knowledge that I forbade you from?” Adam, seeming to defend himself, said, “The woman You gave me led me into this mistake. If I had been alone in my affairs and You hadn’t given me this wife to advise me, I would have followed the law and not disobeyed Your command.” Then God asked Eve, “Why did you give your husband this bad advice to break the law?” Eve defended herself, saying, “The crafty serpent gave me that bad counsel; if he hadn’t been created or come to me, I wouldn’t have gone down this wrong path.” God then said, “Since the law has been broken, I want those virgins whom I appointed keepers of our covenant to sit in judgment with us.” Then Truth spoke: “It is my duty to reveal Adam’s guilt since he has hidden the truth of what led him to break the law. For the main reason in your case was that the apples were beautiful, pleasant, and sweet to taste, and you greatly desired to be wiser than what was promised. You committed theft by planning to take them secretly, greedy robbery by taking them without permission, and an act of pride by wishing to be like God in wisdom beyond what was permitted.” Then God asked Peace to give a brief opinion on the case. Peace replied, “Since You appointed me to watch over Adam’s safety as long as there was no transgression, I now propose to bring him even greater insecurity because he didn’t know how to maintain the immense freedom he enjoyed before.” Then God asked Justice for judgment, and she responded, “Since Adam was unable to uphold the freedom that Peace secured for him, let him now face misery and distress instead; and because he craved knowledge of evil, let him experience evil in place of good; and because he wanted to be like God in knowledge beyond what was allowed, and blamed God for his sins with false excuses, let him suffer the death of which he was warned before he transgressed.” Then God turned to Mercy for judgment on this transgression. Mercy replied, “As it is my nature to advocate for some degree of forbearance and clemency in every case, I request that Adam not be condemned to a merciless death; but since he must now repent for his error as long as he lives, let him have hope for mercy and help in his death, as long as he doesn’t despair.”

Then it was discussed whether, in case he had sons, they should suffer for his sin, or be allowed to enjoy the gifts and the riches that God had given him at the beginning, but from which he had been ousted like an outlaw. Justice said: “How can his sons, who will be begotten in exile, enjoy those gifts that he forfeited as 257an outlaw because of transgression? Let his sons follow him to the death. But whereas he shall have hope of mercy and leniency and of a return to the possessions which he has now forfeited, let his sons be recalled with him through a new covenant.” And when sentence had been passed in Adam’s case, the sisters all came to a friendly agreement; Mercy and Truth embraced while Justice and Peace kissed each other with loving gestures.[295]

Then it was discussed whether, if he had sons, they should pay for his sins or be allowed to enjoy the gifts and wealth that God had given him at first, from which he had been driven out like an outlaw. Justice said: “How can his sons, who will be born in exile, enjoy those gifts that he lost as an outlaw because of his wrongdoing? Let his sons follow him to the end. But while he has hope for mercy and a chance to return to the possessions he has now lost, let his sons be brought back with him through a new agreement.” And when the verdict was given in Adam’s case, the sisters all came to a friendly understanding; Mercy and Truth embraced while Justice and Peace kissed each other with affectionate gestures.257[295]

Now every king ought to have these two things frequently in mind: how God appeased His anger toward the man and the woman for breaking the law, and what judges He called in, lest His punishment should be too 258severe and merciless. Moreover, a king does justice to all men when he does justice to any man or woman; but all decisions which imply punishment he must always consider in the presence of these four sisters; and it must be such as will bring them into agreement, so that they can kiss and embrace each other, in which case the judgment will be neither too lenient nor too severe. A king ought to consider very carefully how to bring the minds of the sisters into agreement; for in all trials they are arranged and seated apart in groups; Truth and Justice on one side of the court and Mercy and Peace on the other. They should be agreed and unanimous in every case; but it frequently occurs that Peace and Mercy give the whole suit over to Truth and Justice, though all unite in the verdict none the less. Sometimes it happens that each of the sisters has a full voice in the decision according to right reckoning; but at other times it may be that the larger share falls to Peace and Mercy; but the sisters are unanimous in the verdict none the less. It has also happened at times that, after a verdict has been reached and confirmed, Mercy and Peace have exercised leniency because of the prayers and repentance of him who was in need of it.

Now every king should keep these two things in mind frequently: how God calmed His anger towards the man and woman for breaking the law, and which judges He called upon, so that His punishment wouldn't be too harsh and merciless. Moreover, a king does justice to everyone when he does justice to any individual. However, any decision that involves punishment must always be made considering these four sisters, and it should be such that they come to an agreement, allowing them to embrace each other. In that case, the judgment will not be too lenient or too severe. A king should carefully think about how to align the minds of the sisters; during trials, they sit separately in groups: Truth and Justice on one side of the court, and Mercy and Peace on the other. They should be in agreement and unanimous in every case; however, it often happens that Peace and Mercy defer the whole matter to Truth and Justice, yet they all unite in the verdict nonetheless. Sometimes each of the sisters has a significant voice in the decision according to what is fair; at other times, the greater share may lie with Peace and Mercy, but they still agree on the verdict. There have been occasions where, after a verdict has been reached and confirmed, Mercy and Peace have shown leniency due to the prayers and repentance of the person in need.


XLVI
 
AN EXAMPLE OF JUSTICE AND STRICTNESS IN JUDGMENT
TAKEN FROM THE STORY OF GOD’S
CONDEMNATION OF LUCIFER

Son. It looks to me now as if this is a more intricate matter than I thought earlier; for it must require great understanding and insight to harmonize the opinions 259of these sisters so that they will always be unanimous, seeing that the verdict sometimes leans more to one side than to the other. For you remarked that at times the whole verdict falls to Truth and Justice and no leniency is shown, while at other times the larger share may fall to Peace and Mercy; and you also stated that sometimes a sentence has been modified after it was agreed to and confirmed. Now you have stated that one can find examples of most things, if one looks for them; and if there are any instances of such proceedings, I should like to hear about them, so that the subject may look clearer to me and also to others who may hear about it. And it must surely be the highest duty of kings to be well informed on such things, as on all other subjects, since they will need them very frequently.

Son. It seems to me now that this is a more complex issue than I initially thought; it takes a deep understanding and insight to balance the opinions of these sisters so that they can always agree, especially when the verdict sometimes tends to favor one side more than the other. You mentioned that sometimes the entire verdict goes to Truth and Justice with no leniency, while at other times, the majority may lean towards Peace and Mercy. You also pointed out that sometimes a sentence has been changed after it was finalized. You've said that one can find examples of most things if they look hard enough, and if there are any cases of such situations, I’d like to hear about them, so the matter can be clearer to me and to others who might hear about it. It must definitely be the utmost responsibility of kings to be well-informed about such matters, as well as all other topics, since they will frequently need this knowledge.

Father. The world is now so ancient that, no matter what comes to pass, one is likely to find that similar events have occurred before; and nothing is likely to happen of which a learned man can find no examples. But of the fact that the entire judgment may fall to Truth and Justice, no mercy being shown, there are cases which occurred so early that I know of none before them. When Lucifer, an angel in heaven, turned traitor and committed a base crime against his Lord, Truth and Justice condemned him to swift downfall without hope of pardon. Into this condemnation all his comrades and counsellors fell with him. And these were the crimes which God punished with a merciless doom.

Father. The world is now so old that, no matter what happens, you can usually find that similar events have happened before; and nothing is likely to take place that a knowledgeable person can't find examples of. However, there are certain instances, so early that I know of none before them, where the final judgment is entirely left to Truth and Justice, without any mercy shown. When Lucifer, an angel in heaven, became a traitor and committed a disgraceful act against his Lord, Truth and Justice condemned him to a swift downfall without any chance of forgiveness. All his allies and advisors fell into this condemnation along with him. And these were the offenses that God punished with an unforgiving fate.


260

XLVII
 
A FURTHER DISCUSSION OF VERDICTS AND PENALTIES
WITH EXAMPLES FROM THE STORY OF
LUCIFER’S REBELLION AND FALL
AND OF THE SIN AND PUNISHMENT
OF THE FIRST MAN AND WOMAN

Son. I must ask you not to take offence if the questions which I wish to bring up should seem childish and ill advised; but since I do not fully understand the subject that I intend to ask about next, it may also be that there are others who do not understand it any better than I. And it is that matter about the serpent, which, you said, came to Eve, and speaking to her like a man egged her on to transgress the law. Now I wish to ask whether the serpent, unlike other beasts, was created with power of speech; or whether other animals could speak in those days, though now they are all dumb; and for what reason the serpent wished to lead the woman into transgression.

Son. I hope you won’t take offense if the questions I want to bring up seem silly or poorly thought out. Since I don’t fully understand the topic I want to ask about next, it’s possible that others don’t get it any better than I do. I'm talking about the serpent that you said came to Eve and, speaking to her like a man, encouraged her to break the law. I want to know if the serpent, unlike other animals, was created with the ability to speak, or if other animals could talk back then but are all mute now. Also, why did the serpent want to lead the woman into wrongdoing?

Father. We have had a very lengthy speech before us, and if we were to comment on the whole, it would lengthen very much a discussion that is already long; but certain it is, we have spoken very few words which would not be in need of comment, if a well informed man, who thoroughly understands all these speeches, should come to the task. But I believe it is more advisable for us to continue as we have been doing since we began our conversation, and leave the task of glossing our remarks to others who may hear them later and are willing to do the work with faithful care. Still, inasmuch as every 261question looks toward some reply or solution, it is proper that I should enlarge somewhat on this speech, so as to make the subject a little clearer to you and to others who do not understand it better than you do. I shall, however, run over it in a few words only, for I do not care much to comment on my own remarks.

Father. We've had a really long discussion, and if we were to address everything, it would just make our already lengthy conversation even longer. However, it’s clear that there are very few points we've made that wouldn’t need further explanation if a knowledgeable person, who understands all these points well, were to take on that task. But I think it's better for us to keep going as we've been since we started our talk and let others, who might hear our words later, take on the job of interpreting them with care. Still, since every question aims for an answer or resolution, I should elaborate a bit on this discussion to clarify things for you and for those who may not understand it as well. I’ll keep it brief, though, since I’m not really interested in commenting on my own statements.

You have asked whether serpents and other beasts were created with the power of speech in the days when Adam was appointed keeper of Paradise, and you shall know of a truth that the gift of speech was not given to any bodily creature but man. And since you wish to know why speech was given to the serpent and why it wished to lead the woman into transgression, I shall now proceed to explain. The explanation begins with the fact that God created angels before men. The angels were immortal spirits, free from all corporal weakness, and endowed with great beauty. But though created with perfect beauty, they were held subject to this law, that they must show love and obedience toward their Creator in humility and without deceit. It was promised them that they should keep their beauty and all the other honors that God had given them, as long as they kept this law; at the same time God gave them full freedom to violate the law, if they wished; for He spoke to them in this wise: “Since you were all created at the same moment and none was begotten by another, each one of you shall decide for himself and none for another whether these laws that I have now ordained shall be kept or broken. And if there are those who transgress them, they shall be driven out of this life of bliss; while those who observe the laws shall continue to enjoy unceasing 262happiness and unending life in my noble service. And I give you all a free choice to keep these laws or to break them as you may prefer, in order that those who observe them may be set apart as my chosen jewels, while those who violate them shall suffer hatred and be driven into cruel thralldom and wretched service.”

You asked whether snakes and other creatures were created with the ability to speak when Adam was appointed the caretaker of Paradise, and you should know the truth: the gift of speech was given only to humans, not to any other creature. Since you're curious about why the serpent was able to speak and why it wanted to lead the woman into wrongdoing, I will explain. The explanation starts with the fact that God created angels before humans. The angels were immortal spirits, free from any physical weakness, and filled with great beauty. However, despite being created with perfect beauty, they were bound by the law that they must show love and obedience to their Creator in humility and honesty. They were promised that they could keep their beauty and all the other honors God had given them, as long as they followed this law; at the same time, God granted them full freedom to break the law if they chose. He spoke to them like this: "Since you were all created at the same time and none was born of another, each of you will decide for yourself whether to keep or break the laws I have given you. If anyone breaks them, they will be cast out from this life of bliss; while those who obey the laws will continue to enjoy endless happiness and eternal life in my noble service. I give you all the freedom to either uphold these laws or disregard them as you prefer, so that those who follow them may be set apart as my chosen ones, while those who break them will suffer disdain and be subjected to cruel servitude and misery."

These angels were all fair, but one was more handsome than all the rest, wherefore he was called Lucifer; he was appointed chief of many angels and a great multitude made obeisance to him in service and friendship. But God having finished His speech, Lucifer turned away from God with all his following as if toward the north and spoke thus: “Why should we suffer threats from God in return for our service, seeing that we have power, beauty and numbers in full measure to maintain our prestige? Now I intend, like God, to set up a high-seat in the northern part of heaven[296] and to extend a wise control over half of heaven or even more.” Then God answered and said to Lucifer: “Since thou hast broken the law by treacherous rebellion, thou canst no longer have habitation with us; and whereas thou wouldst enjoy dominion, depart to the kingdom that is prepared for thee, where thou shalt have suffering instead of freedom, misery instead of bliss, sorrows of every kind but no joy. Let all those go with thee who did not oppose thy design.” And as God looked upon them in His wrath, all the heavens trembled before His countenance; and His enemies fled with a terrible downfall, and they suffered 263a horrible change of countenance in the loss of their beauty. Thereupon they sought out the places that were assigned to them and were scattered about in all the caves of hell, each appointed to a separate service. In this way darkness was separated from light.

These angels were all beautiful, but one was more handsome than the others, which is why he was called Lucifer. He was made the leader of many angels, and a great number showed him respect and loyalty. But after God finished His speech, Lucifer turned away from Him with all his followers, moving as if toward the north, and said, “Why should we endure threats from God in return for our service, when we have the power, beauty, and numbers to uphold our status? I plan to, like God, establish a throne in the northern part of heaven[296] and take control over half of heaven or even more.” Then God responded to Lucifer, saying, “Since you have broken the law through your treacherous rebellion, you can no longer dwell with us; and as you seek power, depart to the kingdom prepared for you, where you will face suffering instead of freedom, misery instead of happiness, and sorrows of every kind with no joy. Let everyone who supported your plan go with you.” And as God looked at them in His anger, all the heavens trembled before Him; His enemies fell in a terrible defeat, their beauty lost in a horrific transformation. They then sought out the places assigned to them, becoming scattered throughout all the depths of hell, each designated for a specific purpose. This is how darkness was separated from light.

But when God had made man and had given him a blissful life in Paradise, Lucifer said to his companions: “It is evidently God’s intention to give this one the dominion from which He drove me out, unless he shall act counter to God’s will. Even if God should appoint other angels in our stead, we could never allow it, if we could do anything to prevent it; but our disgrace would be too great, if a man formed of clay or the filthy dust of the earth were to enter into the eternal happiness from which we were expelled. Therefore we must fight incessantly against everyone who has such ambitions and revenge our injuries with fierce hatred upon all those whom we can overcome. Now I shall try to gain a victory over the first man that God has created, so that my companions may be able to overcome those who come later.” Then he armed himself with seven wiles from which he expected great aid: the first was venomous envy; the second, burning hatred; the third, false cunning; the fourth, specious deception; the fifth, haughty arrogance; the sixth, covetous self-seeking; the seventh, lustful desire. Then he said to himself: “Inasmuch as I am now an invisible spirit, I cannot visibly come to have speech with physical man, unless I adorn my ugly countenance with a certain corporeal beauty. I shall therefore enter this serpent which God has created with the face of a maiden and which most resembles 264man in beauty; and I shall speak with his tongue to Eve, Adam’s wife, and learn from her whether they are created to full freedom without obedience to law, or whether God has given them laws to keep, through which I may be able to ruin their covenant with Him.”

But when God created man and gave him a blissful life in Paradise, Lucifer said to his companions: “It's clear that God intends to give this one the authority from which He banished me, unless he goes against God's will. Even if God were to appoint other angels in our place, we can never allow it if we can do anything to stop it; our disgrace would be too immense if a man made from clay or the filthy dust of the earth were to enter into the eternal happiness from which we were thrown out. So we must constantly fight against anyone with such ambitions and take vengeance for our injuries with fierce hatred on all those we can overpower. Now I will try to triumph over the first man that God has created, so that my companions can defeat those who come after.” Then he equipped himself with seven tricks from which he expected great support: the first was malicious envy; the second, burning hatred; the third, deceitful cunning; the fourth, misleading deception; the fifth, arrogant pride; the sixth, greedy self-interest; the seventh, lustful desire. Then he thought to himself: “Since I am now an invisible spirit, I can't physically speak with mankind unless I disguise my ugly appearance with some kind of physical beauty. So, I will enter this serpent that God created, which has the face of a maiden and resembles man in beauty; and I will speak with its tongue to Eve, Adam’s wife, to find out if they are created to have full freedom without obeying laws, or if God has given them laws to follow, through which I could destroy their bond with Him.”

Thereupon this envious spirit sought the serpent that is now called the asp, which in those days walked with upright form on two feet like man and had a face like a maiden’s, as we have just said. And when the evil minded spirit came to Eve concealed in the body of this serpent, he made use of the artifice that is called specious deception, for he spoke to Eve with seductive sweetness using these words: “Blessed is thy husband and thou likewise.” This praise he did not give them out of good will; rather did he praise their happiness in order to drag them into misery through hatred and envy, and he used false cunning when he asked Eve to tell him whether God had given everything to Adam to control and to enjoy without restriction. But when Eve in return for his sweet words had given the desired information, and he heard that death was to be their part if they transgressed, he was glad, and then made use of haughty arrogance in suggesting to Eve that they could become like God in knowledge in this respect, that they might be able to know good from evil. But he used lustful desire when he bade her try how sweet and fragrant was the apple of knowledge which was forbidden her. And he employed covetous self-seeking when he caused Eve to take for her own what God had earlier forbidden her; for God had given everything into the power of Adam and Eve, except this tree; but they longed to 265have this even without permission, though everything else was in their power. They knew this one difference between good and evil, that good was better than evil; wherefore they feared the death that was assured them. But having never tasted the bitterness of evil, they could not know what great misery they would suffer for transgression; but they thought it would be a great distinction to be like God in knowledge, and to know the difference between good and evil things. But when the serpent urged Eve to eat of the apples of knowledge, she began to fear death, and replied thus to the serpent: “I fear that, if I eat, I shall die, for such is God’s threat. Now do you eat first while I look, and if you do not die, I will eat, for if this fruit really does possess death dealing powers, it will surely prove baneful to other living beings besides me.” Then the spirit that was concealed in the serpent said to himself: “I may indeed eat the apple, for it will make me no more guilty or mortal, inasmuch as I am already in the full wrath of God.” But these words the woman did not hear. Then Eve took an apple and placed it in the serpent’s mouth and he ate forthwith. And when she saw that it did him no harm, she immediately picked another apple and ate; and she found it very sweet, just as the serpent had told her.

Then this jealous spirit sought out the serpent, known today as the asp, which in those days walked upright on two feet like a person and had a face like a young woman’s, as we just mentioned. When the evil spirit approached Eve, disguised as the serpent, he used a trick called deceitful persuasion, speaking to her with tempting charm and saying, “Blessed is your husband, and you are too.” He didn’t offer this praise out of goodwill; instead, he celebrated their happiness to pull them into misery through hatred and envy. He pretended to be clever when he asked Eve whether God had given Adam everything to rule and enjoy without limits. But when Eve, swayed by his sweet talk, shared the information he wanted, and he heard that they would face death if they disobeyed, he felt pleased. Then, he arrogantly suggested to Eve that they could become like God in knowledge, able to distinguish between good and evil. He then stirred up her desire when he encouraged her to taste how sweet and fragrant the forbidden apple of knowledge was. He fueled her greed when he led Eve to claim for herself what God had previously forbidden; God had granted them everything except for this tree, yet they craved it even without permission, though everything else was at their disposal. They understood the basic difference between good and evil, knowing that good was preferable to evil; hence, they feared the assured death. However, having never experienced the bitterness of evil, they couldn’t foresee the great misery that would come from disobedience; they mistakenly believed it would be a significant advantage to be like God in knowledge, knowing the difference between good and evil. But when the serpent urged Eve to eat from the apples of knowledge, she began to fear death and replied to the serpent, “I’m afraid that if I eat, I will die, because that’s what God warned. So why don’t you eat first while I watch, and if you don’t die, then I’ll eat. If this fruit really does bring death, it must harm other living beings besides me.” Then the spirit hidden in the serpent thought to himself, “I can eat the apple, for it won’t make me any more guilty or mortal, considering I’m already under God’s full wrath.” But Eve didn’t hear these words. Then Eve picked an apple and put it in the serpent’s mouth, and he ate right away. When she saw that it didn’t harm him, she quickly took another apple and ate it; she found it very sweet, just as the serpent had said.

Thereupon the serpent vanished from Eve’s sight; but she called Adam her husband and told him these things. But because he, too, feared the death that God had threatened, he would not eat, unless he should see Eve eat first. So Eve took two more apples and boldly ate the one forthwith, for she had already tasted the 266sweetness of the fruit, and instead of feeling shame for what she had already done, she longed to taste it oftener. When Adam saw that it did her no harm (and he even observed a pleasurable sweetness upon her lips), he took the apple that she had offered him and ate just as she had done. But when they had eaten the apple, their eyes were opened to a greater knowledge than they had had before, just as the serpent had predicted: for immediately they were ashamed of their naked limbs, since they saw that the bodies of the birds were covered with feathers and those of the beasts with hair, while their own bodies were naked, and they were much ashamed of that. But most of all did it shame them to know that their transgression had made them guilty before God; and they bore their bodies in fear and were ashamed of their naked limbs. Soon they went to hide among the trees, thus giving proof of their shortsightedness, for they did not realize that God had such knowledge of His handiwork and all the things that He had made, that neither bushes nor forests could hide them from His sight, since even the secret hiding places in the caverns of hell lie bare and visible before His eyes at all times.

Then the serpent disappeared from Eve’s view; but she called her husband Adam and told him what happened. However, since he also feared the death that God had warned them about, he wouldn’t eat unless he saw Eve eat first. So Eve took two more apples and confidently ate one right away, since she had already enjoyed the sweetness of the fruit, and instead of feeling guilty for what she had done, she wanted to taste it more often. When Adam saw that it didn’t harm her (and he even noticed a pleasant sweetness on her lips), he took the apple she offered him and ate it just as she had. But after they ate the apple, their eyes were opened to a greater knowledge than they had before, just as the serpent had predicted: they immediately felt ashamed of their naked bodies, noticing that birds were covered with feathers and animals with fur, while they were exposed, and they felt very ashamed of that. Most shameful of all was the realization that their wrongdoing had made them guilty before God; they carried their bodies in fear and were embarrassed by their nakedness. Soon they went to hide among the trees, proving how shortsighted they were, as they didn’t understand that God had such awareness of His creations and everything He had made that neither bushes nor forests could hide them from His sight, since even the secret hiding places in the depths of hell are always bare and visible before His eyes.

But while Adam was in hiding, God spoke to the spirit that was concealed in the serpent: “Through pride and evil intent thou didst raise the first rebellion, there being none to ensnare thee, only thine own pride and envy; wherefore Mine anger rages against thee without mercy, and thou has forfeited eternal happiness and all hope of returning to it. Thou hast now a second time stirred My heart to anger because of the 267sin that has just been committed. Adam will have to suffer punishment for his transgression, but he shall still have hope of return and mercy, because he came into My wrath on account of thy wickedness and seductive guile. And as thou overcamest Adam’s wife while she was yet a virgin, so shall one of her daughters, also a virgin, win a triumph over thee. And just as thou seemest now to have led Adam with all his possessions and kinship as spoils into thy dominion, so shall one of his sons search all thy garners and carry all thy treasures away as spoils; and leading forth Adam and all his faithful kinsmen out of thy power in a glorious triumph, he shall appoint him to an honored place among his sons in the kingdom which thou wert fittingly deprived of. And as a green tree bore the fruit through which thou hast now won thy victory, so shall a dry tree bear the fruit through which thy victory shall be brought to naught.” Then God spoke to the serpent in which the spirit had concealed himself: “Cursed art thou before all the beasts upon earth; because thou hast received Mine enemy and concealed him from the eyes of Eve to the end that, hidden in thee, he might win a victory over mankind. Therefore shalt thou lose the likeness to a maiden’s face which thy countenance has borne and shalt henceforth bear a grim and ugly face hateful to mankind; thou shalt lose the feet that bore thy body upright and henceforth crawl upon breast and belly. Bitter and unclean dust shall be thy food, because thou atest of the apple which thou tookest from the hand of Eve. Thou shalt be a self-chosen vessel of venom and death as evidence that thou didst hide venomous envy 268in thy body. I declare the covenant sundered between thee and all mankind; thy head and neck shall be crushed under the heel and the tread of men in revenge for the treachery which mankind has suffered through thy slippery cunning. And since thou didst cause man to break the law with his mouth and in eating, the spittle that comes forth from the mouth of a fasting man shall prove as dangerous a venom to thy life, if thou taste it, as thy venom is to man, if he taste it.”

But while Adam was hiding, God spoke to the spirit that was hidden in the serpent: “Through pride and evil intent, you started the first rebellion, with no one to trap you but your own pride and envy; therefore, My anger burns against you without mercy, and you have lost eternal happiness and all hope of returning to it. You have, for the second time, stirred My heart to anger because of the sin that has just been committed. Adam will have to face punishment for his wrongdoing, but he will still have hope for return and mercy because he fell into My wrath due to your wickedness and deceptive charm. Just as you overcame Adam’s wife while she was still a virgin, so shall one of her daughters, also a virgin, triumph over you. And just as you seem to have led Adam with all his possessions and kin as spoils into your domain, one of his sons will search all your storage places and take all your treasures away as spoils; leading Adam and all his faithful relatives out of your grasp in a glorious triumph, he will be given an honored place among his sons in the kingdom you have rightly been deprived of. And as a green tree bore the fruit through which you won your victory, so shall a dry tree bear the fruit through which your victory will be undone.” Then God spoke to the serpent where the spirit had concealed itself: “Cursed are you above all the creatures on earth; because you took in My enemy and hid him from Eve's sight so that, concealed in you, he might win a victory over humanity. Therefore, you will lose the beauty of a woman's face that you have carried, and you will now have a grim and ugly face that humanity will despise; you will lose the feet that kept your body upright and will henceforth crawl on your chest and belly. Bitter and filthy dust will be your food, because you ate from the apple that you took from Eve’s hand. You will be a chosen vessel of venom and death as proof that you hid poisonous envy within you. I declare that the covenant is broken between you and all humanity; your head and neck will be crushed under the heel and tread of men in retaliation for the betrayal that humanity has suffered because of your deceptive cunning. And since you caused man to break the law with his mouth and by eating, the saliva that comes from the mouth of a fasting man will be as dangerous a poison to your life, if you taste it, as your poison is to man, if he tastes it.”

Then God, calling Adam and Eve, asked where they were. And Adam replied: “We hid ourselves, Lord, being ashamed to appear naked before Thy face.” In the first word that Adam answered God, he lied to Him; for they knew themselves guilty of violating the law and hid for that reason; but Adam concealed this in the answer that he gave to God. Then God said to him: “Why should you be more ashamed of your nakedness now than when we last talked together, unless it be that you have increased in knowledge from eating the apples that I forbade you?” But when Adam saw that he could not conceal how they had broken the law, he sought to escape by placing the blame for the act on another rather than on himself, for he answered in these words: “If I had been alone about my affairs and if Thou hadst not given me this woman to advise with me, I should have kept the appointed law and would not have broken Thy commands.” These words added greatly to Adam’s guilt in God’s eyes, for he sought defense rather than mercy. But if he had spoken in this wise: “Remember now, O Lord, that I am formed of fragile stuff like a pot of brittle clay, and am in greater 269need of Thy forbearance and mercy than the merits of my case can demand, for in my weakness I have fallen into great guilt against Thee, O Lord, because of my transgression,”—then his guilt would at once have been lessened in the sight of God, inasmuch as he would be seeking mercy but not defense. But when God heard Adam replying as if excusing himself, He said as if in wrath: “Thou shalt put no blame upon Me for creating the woman; for I gave her to thee to be a delight and a companion, not that thou shouldst commit law-breaking by her counsel. I even warned thee not to transgress and told thee what guilt threatened if thou didst break the law. Why then didst thou follow thy wife’s miserable advice rather than My saving counsel, if thou didst not do it through pride and avarice, wishing to equal Me in knowledge and therefore eager to know what was not promised thee?”

Then God called out to Adam and Eve and asked where they were. Adam replied, “We hid ourselves, Lord, because we were ashamed to be naked before You.” In Adam’s first response to God, he lied; because they felt guilty for breaking the law and hid for that reason, but Adam left that out of his answer. Then God said to him, “Why should you feel more ashamed of your nakedness now than when we last spoke, unless you’ve gained knowledge from eating the fruit I told you to avoid?” But when Adam realized he couldn’t hide how they had broken the law, he tried to shift the blame to someone else instead of taking responsibility himself. He said, “If I had been alone in my affairs and if You hadn’t given me this woman to consult with, I would have followed the law and wouldn’t have broken Your commands.” These words only increased Adam’s guilt in God’s eyes because he was seeking to defend himself rather than seek mercy. If he had instead said, “Remember, Lord, that I am made of fragile stuff like a piece of brittle clay, and I need Your patience and mercy more than my case deserves, for in my weakness I have sinned greatly against You because of my transgression,” his guilt would have been lessened in God’s sight, since he would have been seeking mercy instead of a defense. But when God heard Adam making excuses, He replied in anger: “You will not blame Me for creating the woman; I gave her to you as a joy and a companion, not so you could break the law by following her advice. I warned you not to break the law and told you what consequences you would face if you did. So why did you listen to your wife’s bad advice instead of My wise counsel, unless it was out of pride and greed, wanting to be equal to Me in knowledge and therefore eager to learn what was never promised to you?”

After that God spoke to Eve: “Why didst thou egg thy husband on to transgress?” And Eve was anxious that another should bear the blame for her guilt rather than herself, for she spoke in this wise: “This crafty serpent gave me that evil advice; had he not been created or appeared before me, I should not have transgressed or egged on my husband to transgress.” When God heard Eve’s excuse, He spoke in His wrath: “It looks to Me as if you both wish to blame Me for your law-breaking: Adam blamed Me for having created thee to advise with him, and now thou findest fault with Me for having created the serpent. I created the serpent as I created all the other beasts of the earth, but I did not give him to you as a counsellor; on the contrary, I made 270him subject to your dominion like all the other beasts of the earth. I warned you both to commit no sin and told you to look for death, if you did. Now your deed appears no better in your defense than before in the transgression; wherefore you shall suffer the death with which I threatened you. Though you may not immediately fall down dead, you shall, nevertheless, in your death suffer a long punishment for your offence, and all your offspring shall be responsible with you for this transgression. And the while that you live upon earth you shall suffer sorrowful distress instead of enjoying the blissful freedom which you knew not how to keep. And whereas thou didst transgress before Adam, I will increase thy troubles beyond what you are both to suffer: thou shalt be subject to the control of thy husband and to all his commands, and shalt therefore seem of lesser importance and lower in the sight of thy sons. The children that thou shalt conceive in lustful passion thou shalt bring forth in pain and imminent peril; it shall also be thy duty to give thy children all forms of service in toil and troublesome care while bringing them up.”

After that, God spoke to Eve: “Why did you encourage your husband to break the rules?” Eve felt anxious that someone else should take the blame for her guilt instead of her, so she responded, “This clever serpent gave me that bad advice; if he hadn’t been created or come to me, I wouldn’t have broken the rules or encouraged my husband to do it.” When God heard Eve’s excuse, He spoke in anger: “It seems to Me that you both want to blame Me for your wrongdoing: Adam blamed Me for creating you to consult with him, and now you’re blaming Me for creating the serpent. I created the serpent just like I created all other animals, but I didn’t give him to you as a counselor; on the contrary, I made him subject to your authority like all the other beasts of the earth. I warned you both not to sin and told you to expect death if you did. Now your defense doesn’t make your actions look any better than before; therefore, you will face the death I warned you about. Even if you don’t drop dead right away, you’ll still suffer a long punishment for your offense, and all your descendants will share in this wrongdoing. While you live on earth, you’ll endure painful distress instead of enjoying the blissful freedom you didn’t know how to keep. And since you broke the rules before Adam, I will increase your troubles beyond what you both will suffer: you will be under the control of your husband and all his commands, making you seem less important and lower in the eyes of your sons. The children you conceive in lustful passion will be born in pain and danger; you will also be responsible for caring for them with hard work and troublesome dedication while raising them.”

Then God said: “Adam has now become as wise as any one of us, knowing good and evil. Have care that he does not eat from the tree of life without permission, as he did of the apples of knowledge, lest he live eternally in his guilt.” Thereupon God appointed Cherubim to guard the path leading to the tree of life with a flaming sword which constantly turned its fiery edge in every direction so that none could pass forward without permission. Then God said to Adam: “Because 271thou didst hearken to thy wife’s evil advice rather than to my good counsel and hast eaten of the forbidden fruit, the earth, which gave thee all manner of desirable fruit in her motherly kindness, shall be cursed through thy deed. As if in sorrowful wrath, she shall refuse thee such herbs as thou mayest think suitable for food: thistles and weeds shall she give thee for herbs, unless thou till her soil with labor and drench it with thy sweat; for henceforth thou shalt gain thy food upon earth with toil.” Thereafter God gave Adam and Eve coats of skin and said to them: “Since you are ashamed of your naked limbs, cover yourselves now with the garments of travail and sorrow and fare forth into the wide fields to find your food with irksome toil. And finally you shall rest in the deathlike embraces of earth and be changed again naturally into the mortal materials from which you were made in the beginning.” Then said Adam: “For justice and mercy I thank Thee, O Lord, for I see clearly how greatly I have sinned; likewise do I own Thy grace in that I am not to suffer merciless destruction like Lucifer. Sorrowing shall I descend into the deathlike shadows of hell; yet I shall ever rejoice in the hope of returning; for in this I trust to Thee, O Lord, that Thou wilt show me the light of life even in the darkness of death. And I shall ever look forward to the day when he, who is now rejoicing in my misfortune as in a victory won, shall be afflicted by our returning as one who is overcome and deprived of victory.” Then Eve said: “Though we now depart in sorrow, Lord, because of our great misdoing, we shall take joy in Thy merciful lenience in our distress.” Then God disappeared 272from their sight; and they began to till the earth as God had commanded.

Then God said, “Adam has now become as wise as any of us, knowing good and evil. Be careful that he doesn’t eat from the tree of life without permission, like he did with the apples of knowledge, or he’ll live eternally in his guilt.” So God appointed Cherubim to guard the path to the tree of life with a flaming sword that constantly turned its fiery edge in every direction, so that no one could pass without permission. Then God said to Adam, “Because you listened to your wife’s evil advice instead of my good counsel and ate the forbidden fruit, the earth, which once provided you with all kinds of desirable fruits out of its kindness, will now be cursed because of what you did. In her sorrowful wrath, she will deny you the herbs you might think are good for food; instead, she will give you thistles and weeds, unless you work the soil and soak it with your sweat; from now on, you will earn your food from the earth through toil.” After that, God gave Adam and Eve clothes made from skin and said, “Since you are ashamed of your nakedness, cover yourselves now with the garments of hard work and sorrow, and go out into the fields to find your food through painful effort. Ultimately, you will rest in the lifeless embrace of the earth and be transformed back into the mortal materials from which you were originally made.” Adam then said, “For justice and mercy, I thank You, O Lord, for I see clearly how greatly I have sinned; I also recognize Your grace in that I won’t suffer merciless destruction like Lucifer. I will descend sorrowfully into the shadows of hell; yet I will always rejoice in the hope of returning, for I trust that You will show me the light of life even in the darkness of death. I will always look forward to the day when he, who is now triumphing in my misfortune as if it were a victory, shall be afflicted by our return, like one who has been defeated.” Then Eve said, “Though we now leave in sorrow, Lord, because of our great wrongdoing, we will find joy in Your merciful lenience in our distress.” Then God disappeared from their sight, and they began to work the earth as God had commanded.

Now I have done as you requested, having explained briefly why the serpent sought speech with the woman and what caused him to egg the woman on to violate the law. Still, I have taken up only what is most easily grasped in this speech; for the task of glossing our discourse after deep meditation I prefer to leave to others. But let us continue straight ahead in the discussion as we have begun, since we do not have time to do both.

Now I've done what you asked, briefly explaining why the serpent talked to the woman and what pushed him to encourage her to break the law. Still, I've only touched on the most straightforward points in this speech; I'm leaving the deeper analysis of our conversation to others. But let's keep moving forward with our discussion as we started, since we don't have time for both.


XLVIII
 
A COMMENTARY ON THE STORY OF LUCIFER

Son. I now see clearly why you regard the answers to my last questions as glosses and interpretations of the speeches which you gave earlier rather than a continuation of our original plan; and I fear that, if I should ask you to enlarge further upon this subject, you will consider my questions unwise. But having been granted freedom to ask about whatever I have the curiosity to know, I shall venture another question: and I shall continue to look for good answers as before, even though my questions be childish. Now you have brought out that, when the serpent spoke to the woman as he did, it was the spirit speaking with the serpent’s tongue. You have likewise shown me why the woman was led into sin; that Lucifer was inspired by malicious envy to hinder man from coming into the dominion from which he himself had been expelled. And in your discussion of the judgments of God you had something to 273say both about Lucifer and about Adam, which I am not sure has often been heard before. Now if I should on occasion recall these remarks and repeat them as I have heard you state them, it may be that some one hearing me will say that he has never heard this account before; and therefore I want to ask you to tell me what facts I could state in my reply, so that I shall not seem to withdraw my statements on account of ignorance but rather find such means to support them, that all will think them true rather than false.

Son. I can now see clearly why you think the answers to my last questions are just glosses and interpretations of the earlier speeches instead of a continuation of our original plan; and I'm worried that if I ask you to elaborate further on this topic, you might see my questions as foolish. However, since I've been given the freedom to ask about anything I'm curious about, I'll risk another question: and I will keep seeking good answers as before, even if my questions seem naive. Now you’ve pointed out that when the serpent spoke to the woman, it was the spirit speaking through the serpent. You’ve also explained why the woman was led into temptation; that Lucifer was driven by malicious envy to prevent man from entering the dominion from which he himself had been cast out. In your discussion about God's judgments, you mentioned both Lucifer and Adam, which I’m not sure I’ve heard before. Now, if I happen to recall these comments and repeat them as I heard you share them, someone might say they’ve never heard this account before; so I’d like to ask you to tell me what facts I could mention in my response, so that I won’t appear to backtrack on my statements out of ignorance but instead find ways to support them, making everyone think they’re true rather than false.

Father. The glosses to a speech are like the boughs and branches of a tree. First the roots send up a stem which again branches out into many limbs and boughs. And whatever limb you take, if you examine it with proper care, you will find it joined to the stem which originally sprang up from the roots; and all the boughs and branches draw nourishment from the roots from which the stem grows. But if you hew off a limb and cast it far away from the tree, and one should find it who knows not where it grew, it will look to him like every other branch which he finds on his way, seeing that he does not know where it has grown. But if he carries it back to the stem from which it was cut and fits it there, the branch itself will testify as to what roots it sprang from. It is the same with the interpretation of a sermon; if a man knows how to present a speech properly, he will also know how to interpret it correctly. But as I hear that some things have been introduced into this discussion which have not often been heard, I will now do the questioning for a while, since I have answered more than I have asked. And first I 274wish to ask whether this speech included anything that you already knew.

Father. The notes on a speech are like the branches of a tree. First, the roots send up a trunk that then spreads out into many limbs and branches. No matter which limb you pick, if you examine it closely, you’ll find it connected to the trunk that originally grew from the roots; and all the branches draw nourishment from the roots that support the trunk. But if you cut off a limb and toss it far from the tree, someone who finds it without knowing where it came from will see it as just another branch along their path, since they don’t know its origin. However, if they take it back to the trunk from which it was cut and attach it there, the branch itself will show where it came from. The same goes for interpreting a sermon; if someone knows how to deliver a speech well, they’ll also know how to interpret it accurately. But since I hear that some new ideas have been brought into this discussion that aren’t often heard, I will take the lead in questioning for a bit, as I’ve answered more than I’ve asked. First, I’d like to know if this speech included anything you already knew.

Son. There were a few things but not many. I have heard it quoted from Lucifer’s words that he intended to set his throne as high as that of God; but the answer that God gave to this I had never heard interpreted before, but now you have explained it.

Son. There were a few things but not many. I’ve heard it said that Lucifer wanted to set his throne as high as God’s; but I had never heard the interpretation of God’s response to this before, and now you’ve explained it.

Father. Let me ask again: who do you suppose it was that, standing by, heard Lucifer’s boastful and treacherous words and quoted them afterwards?

Father. Let me ask again: who do you think it was that, standing there, heard Lucifer’s bragging and deceitful words and repeated them later?

Son. I have never heard his name spoken and I am not sure that they were told by any one who heard them at the beginning.

Son. I've never heard his name mentioned, and I'm not sure if anyone who heard it at the start actually told them.

Father. But this you shall know of a surety, that if Lucifer’s words have been quoted by one who heard them in the beginning, he surely must have heard those replies of God also, which I have just given; and he could have reported both speeches, had he wished, since he heard either both or neither. But if he reported Lucifer’s treacherous boasting as he divined it, he surely could have thought out God’s truthful statement of his vengeance in the same way; for either both or neither would be true. For at the very moment when Lucifer transgressed, whether in thought or in words, God had already purposed all the vengeance that was to befall him from the first hour to the last. So great and all-sufficient are God’s thoughts and wisdom, that the vision of the divine foresight sees in the twinkling of an eye all the events that shall come to pass from the first hour to the very last. But He withholds in divine patience all the things that He intends shall come to pass, until 275suitable times appear; and He will let everything happen as He has purposed it heretofore. Now if God should have endowed any one with such great insight and wisdom that he could know all the thoughts of God and should report them as if God had disclosed them in word or speech, he would by no means be telling falsehoods; for all that God has purposed has been told him in his thoughts, whether his lips have spoken about them or not. The apostle Paul tells us that God has given men his Holy Spirit with a definite office and activity: some receive a spirit of prophecy, some a spirit of knowledge and wisdom, some a spirit of eloquence, some a spirit of understanding, and some a spirit of skill;[297] some have these gifts in large measure, others in less; some enjoy one of these gifts, others two, still others three, while some have all, each one as God wills to endow him.

Father. But you should know for sure that if someone quoted Lucifer's words from the beginning, they must have also heard God’s responses which I just provided; and they could have reported both sides if they wanted to, since they heard either both or neither. If they reported Lucifer’s deceitful boasting as he interpreted it, they could have also figured out God’s truthful expression of His vengeance the same way; because either both accounts would be true or neither would be. At the very moment that Lucifer went against God, whether in thought or in word, God had already decided all the consequences that would come to him from the very first moment to the last. God’s thoughts and wisdom are so vast and complete that His divine foresight sees, in an instant, all the events that will happen from the beginning to the very end. But He patiently withholds what He intends to occur until the right time arrives; and He will allow everything to unfold as He has planned from the start. Now, if God were to give someone such deep insight and wisdom that they could understand all His thoughts and report them as if God had revealed them verbally, they wouldn’t be lying; for everything God has intended has been conveyed to him in his thoughts, whether or not he has spoken about it. The apostle Paul tells us that God has given men His Holy Spirit with a specific role and activity: some receive a spirit of prophecy, some a spirit of knowledge and wisdom, some a spirit of eloquence, some a spirit of understanding, and some a spirit of skill;[297] some have these gifts in abundance, others in smaller amounts; some have one gift, others two, still others three, while some possess all, each as God chooses to bestow upon them.

But those who, like King David, have received both the spirit of understanding and of eloquence, have ventured to compose speeches and write books in order that the speeches shall not perish. In some places David has told of God’s purposes, in other places of His deeds, and in still other places he has reported His words; and those who in times past have written glosses to the psalms which David composed have had more to say about what was in David’s mind than about the words that he wrote. For to every word they have added long comments of what David had in thought when he spoke this word; and in these comments they point out the meaning which he had in his thoughts at every word 276that he wrote in the Psalter. In like manner they have proceeded, who have interpreted the words of the Evangelists, and they have brought out much that the Evangelists have left unsaid. Thus they have shown that their comments are on the words of thought which the lips had left unspoken. And if one has received the God-given spirit of a perfect understanding, he has a gift of such a nature that, when he hears a few spoken words, he perceives many words of thought. But David did not himself gloss the Psalter for the reason that he wished to leave to others the task of expressing all those thoughts which came up in his mind, while he continued writing the Psalms as originally planned. Thus all do who have a speech on the tongue which ought to be interpreted: they proceed with the discourse as planned and begun, and leave to others the task of expressing in words what is in their thoughts. Still, you should know that no one has glossed the sayings of David who sat by him, while he was composing the Psalter, and asked what was in his mind at the time. And from this you will perceive that it is the grace of the spirit of insight which guides such men to examine the foundations of the sermons that they hear. Next they investigate how widely the roots ramify which lie beneath the speech; they consider carefully how many limbs grow out of it; and finally they make a count of the branches that sprout from each limb. They also note precisely what bough they take for themselves, that they may be able to trace it correctly back to the roots from which it originally grew. Now if you understand this thoroughly and if you investigate with care and precision everything 277that you hear told, you will not fall into error, no matter whether the comments that you hear be right or wrong, if God has given you the spirit that leads to a right understanding. For every man who is gifted with proper insight and gets into the right path at the beginning will be able to find the highways of reason and to determine what expressions are suitable and will best fit the circumstances. Now gather from these things whatever you can that may give insight; but it does not seem necessary to discuss them further.

But those who, like King David, have been given the spirit of understanding and eloquence have taken the initiative to write speeches and books so that these words won’t disappear. In some instances, David has shared God’s intentions, in others, He has detailed His actions, and in yet more, he has recounted His words; those who have previously added commentary to the psalms David wrote have said more about David’s thoughts than the actual words he penned. With every word, they included extensive interpretations of what was on David’s mind when he expressed that word; in these interpretations, they highlight the meaning that was in his thoughts for every word that appears in the Psalter. They have followed a similar approach in interpreting the words of the Evangelists, uncovering much that the Evangelists didn’t articulate. This way, they have illustrated that their interpretations are based on thoughts that were left unspoken by the lips. If someone receives the God-given spirit of perfect understanding, they have a unique gift that allows them, upon hearing just a few spoken words, to perceive many underlying thoughts. However, David himself did not add commentary to the Psalter because he wanted to leave it to others to express all those thoughts that arose in his mind while he continued writing the Psalms as he intended. This is what everyone does who has a message that needs interpreting: they carry on with their discourse as planned and leave it to others to verbalize what is in their minds. Still, you should know that no one has added commentary to David's sayings who sat beside him while he was composing the Psalter and asked what he was thinking at that time. From this, you will recognize that it is the grace of the spirit of insight that guides such individuals to examine the foundations of the sermons they hear. They then explore how far the roots spread beneath the speech; they carefully consider how many branches grow from it, and ultimately they count the offshoots that come from each branch. They also precisely note which branch they choose for themselves, so they can trace it back accurately to the roots from which it originally sprang. If you grasp this fully and examine everything you hear with care and precision, you won’t fall into error, whether the interpretations you hear are right or wrong, as long as God has blessed you with the spirit that leads to correct understanding. For anyone gifted with proper insight who starts on the right path will be able to find the roads of reason and determine what expressions are appropriate and will best suit the situation. Now gather whatever you can from these ideas that may provide insight; however, it does not seem necessary to discuss them further.


XLIX
 
CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE GOD HAS PERMITTED THE DECISION
TO BE MADE BASED ON THE STRICT
REQUIREMENTS OF TRUTH AND JUSTICE

Son. God reward you, sire, for being so patient in answering all the questions that I am asking. I find, however, that you think my queries wander about in a childish way, but as I cannot keep to the subject of the conversation that we have begun, my questions will come down here and there, as one might expect of youthful ignorance. Still, it seems that it is better to have asked than not about the matter that I brought up last, namely, how one is to determine whether the glosses are correct or not. Now I understand perfectly your statement that a man does not tell a lie about God, if he tells God’s purposes as if they were His own words; for whatever God has determined in His own soul, He has already spoken to Himself in His thoughts, whether He has uttered them with His lips or not; wherefore 278those things may be interpreted as if spoken, because in His mind He has spoken all that to Himself. This, too, is clear to me, that, although no one is able to divine what God had in mind at the beginning, He has Himself revealed it in letting those things come to pass which He had thought and purposed; for it seems very evident that all those things which God has allowed to occur, He had thought upon and wisely planned in his own mind, before they came to pass. It is also quite clear to me that those who have added explanatory glosses to the writings of David, or other men who have written sermons and set them in books, have developed their interpretations by studying out what fundamental thought or purpose had since the beginning lain underneath the words. Afterwards they wisely considered this, too, with what truth probability might be able to account for every branch and twig of that discourse, so that the contents might be revealed. Now since these things begin to look somewhat clearer to me, it may be that I shall continue to reflect upon them, if God gives me the necessary insight. But since I realize that you feel it would be a large and tedious task both to continue the discourse already begun and to make suitable comments, I will now ask you to return to the subject before us and to continue setting forth the judgment of God, giving cases in which He allowed the sentence to be carried out with severity according to the verdict of Justice and Truth, and others in which He showed greater leniency.

Son. Thank you, sir, for being so patient in answering all my questions. I know you think my queries might sound childish, but since I can’t seem to stick to the topic we’re discussing, my questions will wander around, as you’d expect from youthful ignorance. Still, it seems better to ask than to stay silent about the last point I raised, which is how to determine whether the glosses are correct or not. I completely understand your point that a person doesn’t lie about God if they express God’s intentions as if they were His own words; for whatever God has decided in His mind, He has already contemplated it, whether or not He has voiced it aloud. Therefore, those things can be interpreted as spoken because in His mind, He has already articulated them. I also clearly see that although no one can know what God intended at the beginning, He has revealed it by allowing things to happen that reflect His thoughts and purposes. It seems very clear that everything God has allowed to happen, He carefully considered and planned in His mind before it actually occurred. Moreover, it’s quite evident to me that those who have added explanatory glosses to the writings of David or other authors have developed their interpretations by delving into the essential ideas or intents that have been present from the start beneath the words. They then thoughtfully reflected on what truths could explain each aspect of the discourse, allowing its meaning to emerge. Now that these concepts are starting to become clearer to me, I may continue to contemplate them if God grants me the necessary insight. But since I understand that you believe it would be a long and tedious task to continue the discussion we've started and to provide suitable commentary, I will now ask you to return to the main topic and continue explaining God’s judgment, providing examples of instances where He allowed sentences to be carried out with strictness according to Justice and Truth, and others where He displayed more mercy.

Father. The following instances occurred long after the fall but had a similar outcome. Pharaoh, the king of 279Egypt, suffered a merciless doom by the judgment of Truth and Justice.[298] Dathan and Abiram were justly doomed and destroyed.[299] When Joshua led the people of Israel into the land that God had promised them God ordered him to punish the people who dwelt in the city called Jericho with such severity that whatever was living should perish.[300] Long after that, when King Saul led an invasion into Amalek, God commanded him to slay everything that was living; but Saul incurred the anger of God because he did not carry out what was commanded.[301] The case of Judas, one of the apostles of God, is among the examples that belong to a much later date: for Truth and Justice condemned him without mercy for dastardly treachery toward his Lord. There are many similar cases, though we have given these only; and, inasmuch as our speech would get too long, we cannot include in a single discourse all the examples that we know resemble these. But when God decreed all these punishments which we have now recounted, the sisters were all on the judgment seat with Him, Truth and Justice, Mercy and Peace, and they all agreed with Him and kissed and embraced each other.

Father. The following events took place long after the fall but ended similarly. Pharaoh, the king of Egypt, faced a cruel fate due to the judgment of Truth and Justice.[298] Dathan and Abiram were rightly condemned and destroyed.[299] When Joshua brought the Israelites into the land that God had promised them, God instructed him to punish the people living in the city of Jericho so severely that everything alive should perish.[300] Much later, when King Saul launched an attack on Amalek, God commanded him to kill everything that was living; however, Saul angered God by failing to follow through with the order.[301] The case of Judas, one of the apostles of God, is another example from a later time: Truth and Justice condemned him mercilessly for his cowardly betrayal of his Lord. There are many similar examples, though we have only covered these; and since our discussion would become too lengthy, we cannot include all the cases we know that resemble these in one conversation. But when God declared all these punishments we have recounted, the sisters were all present on the judgment seat with Him—Truth and Justice, Mercy and Peace—and they all agreed with Him and embraced one another.


L
 
OTHER INSTANCES WHERE THE ARGUMENTS FOR PEACE
AND MERCY HAVE CARRIED MORE WEIGHT

Son. It is quite evident that in the cases which you have now recounted, Truth and Justice had a larger part in the verdict than Peace and Mercy. But no one can doubt that the sisters were all agreed in these decisions, 280for we may be sure that God never passes a merciless judgment. One will consequently need to ponder these things with careful attention and close thinking; for the judgments of God are largely concealed from men. Therefore I wish to ask you to point out those cases in which Mercy and Peace have chiefly dictated the verdict, so that I may get insight into dooms of both kinds, seeing that examples of both are to be found.

Son. It's clear that in the situations you've just described, Truth and Justice played a bigger role in the verdict than Peace and Mercy. But no one can doubt that the sisters agreed on these decisions, because we can be sure that God never delivers a harsh judgment. Therefore, it's important to carefully consider these matters and think deeply about them; the judgments of God are often hidden from people. So, I'd like to ask you to point out those cases where Mercy and Peace were the main influences on the verdict, so I can understand both types of judgments, since examples of both exist.

Father. There are so many cases of either class, that we cannot include all the verdicts in one discussion; still, we can point out a few of them, in order that both your questions may be answered. The following are events which occurred long ago, when Aaron and Ur, the bishops,[302] committed a great sin against God in that they gave His people two calves made of molten gold, through which the entire nation was led astray from the faith; for the people called these calves the gods of Israel and brought sacrifices to them as to God. But when Moses came down to the people (he had been up on the mountain where he had spoken to God Himself), the bishops ran to meet him, deeply repenting their sins; and, falling at Moses’ feet, they begged him to intercede for them with God, lest He be angered with them according to their deserts. But when God saw how deeply the bishops repented, He heard Moses’ prayer, and the bishops retained the dignities which they had before, and they did penance for their sin. The instance 281that I have now related is one of those in which the greater share in the decision was assigned to Peace and Mercy, though Truth and Justice also consented to the doom; for the bishops would have suffered death for this offence, if Mercy had not been more lenient with them than they deserved. The following event is like this but happened much later: King David fell into this great sin, that he committed adultery with Uriah’s wife and afterwards brought about the death of Uriah himself. After Uriah’s death David took his wife and had her for his own, and surely he deserved death for these sins. But he repented his misdeeds so deeply before God and begged forgiveness so humbly for the sins confessed, that God heard his prayer and did not take away his kingship, but even confirmed him in it, though he had committed these crimes.[303]

Father. There are so many examples of either kind that we can’t cover all the verdicts in one discussion; however, we can highlight a few so that both of your questions can be answered. The following events took place a long time ago when Aaron and Ur, the bishops,[302] committed a serious sin against God by making two golden calves for His people, leading the entire nation away from their faith. The people referred to these calves as the gods of Israel and offered sacrifices to them as if they were God. When Moses came down to the people (he had been on the mountain speaking with God Himself), the bishops rushed to meet him, deeply regretting their sins; they fell at Moses’ feet and pleaded with him to intercede for them with God, fearing His anger due to their actions. But when God saw how genuinely they repented, He heard Moses’ prayer, and the bishops retained their previous positions and did penance for their sin. This instance281 is one where a larger share in the decision was given to Peace and Mercy, although Truth and Justice also agreed with the outcome; the bishops would have faced death for their offense if Mercy hadn’t been more forgiving than they deserved. A similar event occurred much later: King David committed a grave sin by having an affair with Uriah’s wife and then orchestrating Uriah’s death. After Uriah died, David took his wife as his own, and he certainly deserved death for these actions. However, he repented sincerely before God and humbly asked for forgiveness for his confessed sins, which led God to hear his prayer and not strip him of his kingship but instead confirmed him in it, despite his wrongdoings.[303]

The following events occurred much later at the time when our Lord Jesus Christ was on earth among men. The bishops of the Jews and all their other learned men became very hostile toward him and were constantly striving to find something for which they might reproach him. So they took a woman who had openly committed adultery and was worthy of death according to the law of Moses; this woman they brought before Jesus and told him of her crimes. They also said that the law condemned her to die and asked what sentence he would pass in this case. Jesus replied that he who had never committed a sin should cast the first stone upon her. Then they turned away quickly, not daring to question him further, for they all knew themselves 282to have sinned. But Jesus said to the woman: “Woman, since none of those who accused thee has passed judgment in thy case, neither will I condemn thee to die; go in peace, but henceforth beware of sin.” There is another instance which is like those that I related earlier, and which happened in the night when Jesus was seized. His apostle Peter had boastfully protested that he would never forsake him, though all others should leave him, and that he would suffer death with Jesus before he would desert him like a coward. But in the same night when Jesus was seized, Peter denied three times that he had been with him, and the third time he confirmed the statement with an oath that he had not been Jesus’ man. Then he went away out of the hall where Jesus was held and immediately began to repent his sin and all his words and wept bitterly. Nevertheless, after Jesus had risen, Peter’s sins were forgiven, and he retained all the honors that had been promised him before. There is still another event which came to pass a few days later when our Lord was crucified. Two thieves were crucified with him, one on either side; both had been guilty of the same crimes, murder and robbery. But while they hung on the cross, one of them took thought to repent and implored mercy of Jesus, though he, too, like the thieves, hung on a cross. His sins were pardoned and he was given sure promise of paradise on that very day; but his companion was condemned according to his deeds.

The following events took place much later when our Lord Jesus Christ was living on earth among people. The Jewish bishops and their scholars became very hostile toward him, constantly trying to find something to accuse him of. They brought a woman who had openly committed adultery and deserved death according to the law of Moses, and they told Jesus about her crimes. They also mentioned that the law condemned her to die and asked what sentence he would give in this case. Jesus replied that whoever had never sinned should throw the first stone at her. Then they quickly turned away, not daring to question him further, because they all knew they had sinned. But Jesus said to the woman: “Woman, since none of those who accused you has passed judgment on you, neither will I condemn you to die; go in peace, but from now on, be careful not to sin.” There is another incident similar to the ones I've mentioned earlier, which happened the night Jesus was arrested. His apostle Peter had boastfully claimed he would never abandon him, even if everyone else did, and that he would rather die with Jesus than betray him. But that same night, when Jesus was arrested, Peter denied three times that he was with him, and on the third denial, he swore he wasn't one of Jesus’ followers. Then he left the place where Jesus was held and immediately began to regret his words and wept bitterly. Nevertheless, after Jesus rose, Peter was forgiven for his sins and retained all the honors that had been promised to him before. There’s still one more event that happened a few days later when our Lord was crucified. Two thieves were crucified with him, one on each side; both were guilty of the same crimes, murder and robbery. But while they hung on the cross, one of them decided to repent and asked Jesus for mercy, even though he too was hanging on a cross. His sins were forgiven, and he was promised paradise that very day; but his companion was condemned according to his actions.


283

LI
 
THE REASONS FOR THIS VARIETY IN GOD'S VERDICTS

Son. If earthly kings and other chiefs, who are appointed to act as judges, are to adapt their decisions to the examples that you have now given, they must find it very important to learn precisely what each suit is based upon; for in many of these instances, it looks as if the cases were somewhat alike in appearance. Still, all the decisions in the earlier examples led to severe punishments, while in the later ones they all led to mercy and forgiveness. Therefore I now wish to ask you why Pharaoh, Dathan, and Abiram, the people who dwelt in Jericho, and those of Amalek, who were punished by King Saul, were all destroyed without mercy.

Son. If earthly kings and other leaders, who are supposed to act as judges, are going to base their decisions on the examples you’ve just given, they need to really understand what each situation is about; because in many cases, things seem somewhat similar on the surface. However, all the decisions in the earlier examples resulted in severe punishments, while the later ones resulted in mercy and forgiveness. So, I want to ask you why Pharaoh, Dathan, and Abiram, the people who lived in Jericho, and the Amalekites, who were punished by King Saul, were all destroyed without mercy.

Father. These things were all done at the command of Justice and Truth, though Peace and Mercy consented. For Moses daily performed many miracles before King Pharaoh and commanded him to release God’s people; and he might have released them, had he wished, without suffering any injury thereby. He made constant promises that it should be done, but he never kept either word or promise. Now it was right that he should perish in his stubborn wickedness and evil-doing, since he would accept neither mercy nor pardon, though he had the opportunity. Dathan and Abiram, when Moses told them that they had done evil, became angry and refused to repent; and they perished without mercy because they sought no mercy. Those who dwelt in Jericho and Amalek had heard for many days that they 284had done evil both to God’s people and against His will but they offered no atonement; on the contrary, they proposed to take up arms in their defense, wherefore they were overcome by a merciless revenge. But those whom I pointed out to you in the later accounts, Aaron, Ur, David, and the others who were mentioned in those examples, did not conceal their wickedness, but confessed their misdeeds as they were; hoping for pardon, they begged mercy and clemency, and offered to atone, as He should determine, Who, they knew, had the decision in His power. And they promised that nevermore would they fall into such guilt, if they might become fully reconciled.

Father. All these things happened because of Justice and Truth, even though Peace and Mercy agreed. Moses performed many miracles in front of King Pharaoh every day and told him to free God’s people; he could have set them free if he had wanted to, without any consequences for himself. He made promises that it would happen, but he never kept a single promise or word. It was only fair that he should meet his end because of his stubbornness and wrongdoing, as he refused to accept either mercy or forgiveness, despite having the chance. Dathan and Abiram reacted with anger when Moses told them they had done wrong and refused to repent; they died without mercy because they sought none. The people living in Jericho and Amalek had been warned for many days about their wrongdoing against God’s people and against His will, but they didn’t make any effort to atone; instead, they chose to prepare for battle in their defense, which led to them being defeated with no mercy. However, those I mentioned in the later accounts, like Aaron, Ur, David, and others who were cited as examples, did not hide their sins but admitted their wrongdoings as they were. Hoping for forgiveness, they begged for mercy and compassion, and offered to make amends, as He, who held the decision in His hands, saw fit. They promised that they would never fall into such guilt again if they could be fully reconciled.


LII
 
THE SAME TOPIC CONTINUED

Son. I now wish to ask you why such a great distinction was made in the cases of Peter and Judas, though their offences appear similar. Judas returned the money that he had received and repented his evil deed; he confessed that he had sold his innocent Lord, and threw away the silver, saying that he would not keep what had come to him so wrongfully. Now he was destroyed, though he repented; while Peter was forgiven at once, because he repented.

Son. I want to ask you why such a big difference was made between Peter and Judas, even though their actions seem similar. Judas gave back the money he received and regretted what he did; he admitted that he betrayed his innocent Lord and threw away the silver, saying he wouldn’t keep what he got so unfairly. Yet he was lost, even though he felt remorse; while Peter was immediately forgiven because he also repented.

Father. Judas fell in the beginning into sin through avarice and love of wealth and took a bribe to betray his Lord. His repentance was such that he could not hope for pardon, and he asked for no mercy but punished himself with a sudden death. But Peter wept 285bitterly in his repentance, and, hoping for mercy, implored forgiveness. Furthermore, Judas had the greater guilt, for he sold his Lord; and though he repented, he craved no pardon; and he did not abide the judgment of God, but condemned himself forthwith. But Peter denied his Lord through sudden fear and repented immediately in great sorrow; he submitted to the judgment of God and abided it, and did not condemn himself as Judas did. There was a similar outcome in the case of the crucified thieves. Though both acknowledged the sins that they had committed, one prayed for mercy and pardon, while the other asked no mercy but spoke in contempt and derision rather than in prayer or serious thought. Therefore these whom we have now named were saved through the merciful judgments of Mercy and Peace, though Truth and Justice agreed to the verdicts.

Father. Judas fell into sin at first because of greed and his love for money, accepting a bribe to betray his Lord. His regret was so deep that he felt he had no hope for forgiveness and asked for no mercy, instead punishing himself with a quick death. In contrast, Peter wept bitterly for his remorse, hoping for mercy and pleading for forgiveness. Moreover, Judas carried greater guilt because he sold his Lord; although he felt regret, he sought no forgiveness and couldn’t face God's judgment, instead condemning himself immediately. Peter, however, denied his Lord out of sudden fear and immediately repented with great sorrow; he accepted God's judgment and endured it, and did not condemn himself like Judas did. A similar situation occurred with the thieves who were crucified. Although both admitted the sins they had committed, one asked for mercy and forgiveness, while the other sought no mercy at all, speaking in contempt and mockery instead of in prayer or serious reflection. Therefore, those we have mentioned were saved through the merciful judgments of Mercy and Peace, even though Truth and Justice accepted the verdicts.


LIII
 
CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE GOD HAS CHANGED HIS DECISIONS
AND THE REASONS BEHIND THOSE CHANGES

Son. I am beginning to see these things more clearly now and to understand why it is that the larger share in a verdict is sometimes assigned to Justice and Truth and at other times to Peace and Mercy. And now I want to ask you to discuss those cases which you mentioned earlier in which God modified the sentence agreed upon, and to state the causes that led to this.

Son. I'm starting to see these things more clearly now and understand why, at times, a bigger part of a verdict goes to Justice and Truth, while at other times it goes to Peace and Mercy. I’d like to ask you to talk about those cases you mentioned earlier where God changed the agreed-upon sentence and explain the reasons behind this.

Father. To this class belong certain events which occurred a long time ago in the days when Moses was upon the mountain called Sinai. In those days the great 286mass of the people sinned grievously and even fell into whoredom, cohabiting with women of the heathen race. But so strictly had God forbidden this, that everyone who fell into that sin was held worthy of death. Then God said to Moses: “Now shalt thou cease speaking with Me that My wrath may have time to wax hot against this people which I gave into thy charge. For they have fallen into such grievous sins against My commandments that I intend to consume them all in My fierce wrath; and I will give thee another people, far better and stronger and more numerous than this one.” At this point it would almost seem as if a definite sentence had been passed in the case of this nation. Moses, however, asked permission to intercede briefly in behalf of the people of Israel and, this being granted, he spoke these words. “I pray Thee, O Lord, to turn from Thy wrath and do not destroy Thy people, though they have done ill. Let not the Egyptians have this to say, that Thou didst lead Thy people out of Egypt and out of their dominion to consume them in the mountains and the desert; or that Thou wert unable to lead Thy people into the land which Thou hadst promised them from the beginning. Remember, O Lord, Thy servants Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, and do not destroy the generations that have sprung from Israel’s kin which Thou hast Thyself promised to multiply upon earth and to lead securely into the land that is now controlled by Thine enemies.”[304] God heard the prayer of Moses; His wrath was appeased, and He did not slay the people as He had threatened; but He gave their 287punishment into the hands of Moses, instructing him that they must not wholly escape chastisement, though it should not be so severe as God had threatened earlier. Moses returned hastily to the camp and coming upon the people in a tempestuous spirit and in fierce wrath, he slew many thousand men in that day, and in this way pacified the wrath of God. Now this example shows how God lessened a penalty imposed, in that He appeased His wrath before Moses’ prayer. And it shows that neither of the sisters, Truth or Justice, suffered in her rights by this judgment, inasmuch as Moses slew a great host to pacify the wrath of God. But Peace and Mercy also had their rights, seeing that less was done than had been decreed at first.

Father. This class includes certain events that happened long ago, when Moses was on a mountain called Sinai. Back then, the majority of the people sinned greatly and even engaged in immoral acts, living with women from other nations. God had strictly forbidden this, and anyone who committed that sin was considered deserving of death. God then spoke to Moses: “You must stop talking to Me so that My anger can build up against this people I entrusted to you. They have sinned so severely against My commandments that I plan to destroy them all in My fierce anger; and I will give you another people, far better, stronger, and more numerous than this one.” At this point, it seemed like a definite punishment had been decided on for this nation. However, Moses asked for a chance to plead briefly for the people of Israel, and since he was granted permission, he said: “I ask You, O Lord, to turn away from Your anger and not to destroy Your people, even though they have done wrong. Don't let the Egyptians say that You led Your people out of Egypt and out of their control just to kill them in the mountains and the desert; or that You were unable to bring Your people into the land You promised them from the beginning. Remember, O Lord, Your servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and do not destroy the generations that have descended from Israel, which You promised to multiply on earth and to lead safely into the land now held by Your enemies.”[304] God heard Moses' prayer; His anger was calmed, and He did not kill the people as He had threatened; instead, He let Moses administer their punishment, instructing him that they must not completely avoid discipline, although it shouldn't be as harsh as what God had originally declared. Moses quickly returned to the camp and, filled with anger, killed many thousands of men that day, thereby appeasing God's wrath. This example shows how God reduced the intended punishment since He calmed His anger before Moses' prayer. It demonstrates that neither Truth nor Justice lost their rights in this judgment, as Moses killed a great number to appease God's fury. Peace and Mercy also had their rights since less was done than had been initially decreed.

This is another instance that shows how God has modified a judgment already passed. He sent Jonah the prophet to Niniveh with orders to tell the king and all the people of the city that within thirty days Niniveh should be destroyed with all that was therein. Jonah did as God commanded and told these things as true tidings. But when the king understood that the people were of a truth in danger of divine wrath (for the nation was full of whoredoms and wickedness of every form) he descended from his throne, laid aside his royal robes, and did penance and fasted; and he bade all men in the city do likewise, both young and old. And when God saw that they repented of their wickedness with sorrow and penance in many forms, He extended mercy and destroyed neither the city nor the people within it.[305]

This is another example of how God changed a judgment that had already been made. He sent Jonah the prophet to Nineveh with instructions to tell the king and all the people of the city that within thirty days, Nineveh would be destroyed along with everything in it. Jonah did what God commanded and delivered this message as true news. But when the king realized that the people were genuinely in danger of divine anger (since the nation was filled with immorality and every kind of wickedness), he got off his throne, took off his royal robes, and did penance and fasted; he also instructed everyone in the city, both young and old, to do the same. When God saw that they repented for their wrongdoings with genuine sorrow and various acts of penance, He showed mercy and did not destroy the city or the people in it.[305]

288Here is still another instance that points to the same result. Hezekiah was the name of a good king in the land of Israel; he fell ill and meditated deeply about his case, whether God intended to bring him through this illness or to let him die. Then God sent Isaiah His prophet to him; and God said to the prophet that Hezekiah should die of this malady. Isaiah went to the king and said to him: “Take good heed and set your house in order and all your affairs, for God has said that you shall die of this illness and not live.” As soon as Isaiah had spoken these words to the king, he departed; but the king turned his face to the wall and prayed for deliverance in these words: “Remember, O Lord, how steadfast I have been in Thy service, for I have always opposed Thine enemies, and this people that Thou hast given into my keeping have I turned from much wickedness which many of them practiced before I came to the kingship. And there are three reasons why I am loath to die so suddenly now of this illness. The first, which I fear the most, is that I may not have kept Thy commandments fully, and if I die in a state of sin I may look for Thy vengeance in my death. The second is that I have not yet turned all Thy people wholly away from their evil ways; and I fear, if I die suddenly now, that they will soon return to their old abominations. The third, which I fear much, is the victory of Thine enemies over Thy people, seeing that my son is a child; and his power to defend the people against Thine enemies may prove less than is required. But if Thou wilt hear my prayer, O Lord, and add a few days to my life, all these things may be brought into a better state than 289they are at present.” God heard Hezekiah’s prayer and said to Isaiah the prophet: “Return quickly to King Hezekiah and tell him different tidings now from what thou toldest before; for I have heard his prayer, and I will add unto the days of his life fifteen years beyond what I had intended for him, and I will deliver all his realm from the attack of his adversaries.”[306]

288Here's another example that leads to the same conclusion. Hezekiah was a good king in Israel; he fell ill and seriously thought about his situation, wondering if God would heal him or let him die. Then God sent Isaiah, His prophet, to him, telling Isaiah that Hezekiah would die from this illness. Isaiah went to the king and said, “Pay close attention and get your house in order and manage your affairs, because God has said you will die from this illness and not live.” As soon as Isaiah spoke these words, he left; but the king turned his face to the wall and prayed for help, saying: “Remember, Lord, how devoted I have been in Your service, as I have always stood against Your enemies, and I have led this people, whom You entrusted to me, away from the many wicked things they practiced before I became king. There are three reasons why I do not want to die suddenly from this illness. First, I am most afraid that I haven't fully kept Your commandments, and if I die in sin, I may face Your wrath in my death. Second, I haven’t yet turned all Your people away from their wrongdoings; and I worry that if I die suddenly now, they will quickly go back to their old sins. Third, I greatly fear the victory of Your enemies over Your people, especially since my son is just a child; his ability to defend the people against Your enemies may not be strong enough. But if You would hear my prayer, Lord, and give me a few more days to live, all these things could be improved from how they are now.” God heard Hezekiah’s prayer and said to the prophet Isaiah: “Go back quickly to King Hezekiah and tell him different news than what you told him before; for I have heard his prayer, and I will add fifteen years to his life beyond what I originally planned for him, and I will protect his kingdom from his enemies.”[306]

Here is another instance which belongs to a much later time. In the days when Jesus Christ was here upon earth among men, one of his friends, Lazarus by name, fell ill and died of the illness. Bethany was the name of the town where Lazarus was buried. But when he had lain four days in the grave, Jesus came to Bethany. Now it would seem in Lazarus’ case, as in that of all others who have departed from this world, that an irrevocable sentence had been passed, seeing that he had lain four days a dead man in the earth, death having even appointed him a place in his kingdom. Jesus ordered Lazarus’ grave to be opened, and calling him he commanded him to tear himself away from the hands of his dead companions. Thereupon Lazarus rose from the dead, and he lived many days after that. There are many other examples of this kind, but these are the ones which we have preferred to bring to light; and since our talk has been quite long, it seems unnecessary to recount others, though they are plentiful.

Here is another example from a much later time. When Jesus Christ was on earth, one of his friends, named Lazarus, became sick and died from his illness. The town where Lazarus was buried was called Bethany. After he had been in the grave for four days, Jesus arrived in Bethany. In Lazarus' case, just like in the case of everyone who has passed away, it seemed like a final decision had been made, since he had been dead for four days and death had even assigned him a place in its realm. Jesus instructed that Lazarus’ grave be opened, and calling out to him, he commanded him to come back from the dead. Then Lazarus rose from the dead and lived many more days after that. There are many other examples like this, but we’ve chosen to highlight these; and since our discussion has been quite lengthy, it seems unnecessary to mention more, even though there are many.


290

LIV
 
THE KING'S PRAYER

Son. The more examples I hear, the more evident is the truth of what you stated earlier in your remarks, namely that it is very necessary for kings and other rulers who are in charge of justice to be widely informed, if they are to adapt their verdicts to the examples that we have now heard.

Son. The more examples I listen to, the clearer it becomes that what you said earlier is true—that it’s really important for kings and other rulers responsible for justice to be well-informed so they can shape their decisions based on the examples we've just heard.

Father. You should understand this clearly that, since the king holds his title from God, it is surely his duty to suit his decisions to divine examples; and the same is true of all who are appointed to pass judgment, both clerks and laymen. For we no longer have opportunity to ask counsel on any point from God’s own lips, as Moses could; wherefore men should live according to the examples that were set in those days when it was possible to inquire of God Himself what His will was on any matter. Therefore, a king ought to keep these examples frequently upon his lips and before his eyes, and such other examples, too, as may give insight for his own decisions. The most favorable time for such meditation is at night or in the early morning when he is sated with sleep. But when the hour to rise comes and it is time for the king to hear the hours, it is his duty to go to church and listen attentively to the mass and to join in the prayers and in chanting the psalms if he knows them. Like every other Christian man who is at prayers, the king ought to attend with as much devotion as if he stood in the presence of God and spoke to God Himself. He should call to mind the words that David 291uttered when he spoke in this wise: “I shall ever see the Lord before my face, for He is always at my right hand.”[307]

Father. You should understand this clearly: since the king's authority comes from God, it's definitely his responsibility to align his decisions with divine examples. The same applies to everyone who has the responsibility to judge, both clergy and laypeople. We no longer have the chance to hear directly from God like Moses did; therefore, people should live according to the examples set during those times when it was possible to inquire directly about God’s will. A king should regularly keep these examples in mind and consider other precedents that might help him with his own decisions. The best times for such reflection are at night or early in the morning when he's well-rested. But when it's time to get up and for the king to attend to the hours, he must go to church, listen attentively to the mass, and participate in the prayers and psalms if he knows them. Like any other Christian man at prayer, the king should approach with as much devotion as if he were standing in God's presence and speaking to Him directly. He should remember the words that David spoke: “I shall ever see the Lord before my face, for He is always at my right hand.”291[307]

A king should begin his prayer by showing God that he holds the true faith. Next he should make clear that he gives thought to his earthly dominion and the divine power of God. Thereupon he must confess his sins and misdeeds to God, making clear to Him that he does not consider himself as having come without guilt or as if defending his cause. Next he must beg mercy and forgiveness for the transgressions that he has confessed. He must also show God humbly that he regards himself as coming before His knees as a thrall or a servant, though God has exalted him to power among men. He must not fail to remember others besides himself in prayer: his queen, if he has one, who is appointed to rule and defend the land with him; his bishops and all other learned men who are to aid him in maintaining Christianity, and, therefore, owe the duty to offer prayers for him and for all the other people of the kingdom. He ought also to remember all his other lords and knights in his prayer and all the warriors who assist him in the government. Likewise he must remember the husbandmen, the householders, and all his other subjects who maintain his kingdom by labor or other gainful effort. He should, therefore, remember all, men and women, for it is their duty to offer up holy prayers for him every day. And, if he likes, he may use daily the following prayer, which is in the form that I have 292given, but he must pray as devoutly as if he were speaking to God Himself; and these are the words of the prayer.

A king should start his prayer by demonstrating to God that he truly has faith. Then, he should acknowledge his earthly responsibilities and God’s divine authority. After that, he must admit his sins and wrongdoings to God, making it clear that he doesn’t think of himself as innocent or as if he’s justifying his actions. Next, he should ask for mercy and forgiveness for the wrongs he has confessed. He also needs to show God humbly that he sees himself as coming before Him as a servant, even though God has granted him power among people. He shouldn’t forget to pray for others as well: his queen, if he has one, who helps rule and protect the land with him; his bishops and all the other wise individuals who support him in upholding Christianity, and who owe prayers for him and everyone else in the kingdom. He should also remember all his other lords and knights in his prayers, along with the warriors who assist him in governance. Likewise, he must think of the farmers, householders, and all his other subjects who sustain his kingdom through work or other means. Therefore, he should remember everyone, men and women alike, as it’s their duty to offer daily prayers for him. If he wishes, he may use the following prayer, which I have provided in a specific format, but he must pray earnestly as if he were speaking directly to God; and these are the words of the prayer.

“O Thou most merciful God, eternal Father! O Thou most honored Conqueror, Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God! O Thou most gentle Comforter, Holy Spirit! O Thou perpetual fount of wisdom and complete and unshaken faith, Holy Trinity! O Thou indivisible Unity, one omnipotent, unchangeable God: Thou Who sittest above the highest summits of heaven and lookest into the hidden depths below! For no creature can escape Thy dominion, though it should wish to flee from Thy wrath. Even though I should mount to heaven, Thou art there before me; and though I crawl down into the lowest hiding places of hell, Thy spiritual dominion is there; and though I were to fly upon the wings of the winds and hide beyond the uttermost boundaries of the ocean solitudes, even there Thy right hand would seize me and lead me back into Thy control. For Thy mind has numbered the sands driven by the winds and by the power of the ocean about all the earth, and Thine eye knows all the drops of the dewy rain. Therefore, I implore Thee, O my Lord, do not enter into the seat of judgment with me, Thy servant, to search out my righteousness; and do not number the multitude of my sins, but turn Thy face away from mine iniquities and cleanse me from my secret faults and wash away all my guilt. For my sins are great and lie heavy upon my head; they are so many that they seem numberless to me in their multitude,—sins that I have committed in vain thinking, in foolish words, in neglecting Thy commandments 293and forgetting Thy holy law in every way, in indiscreet testimony and thoughtless oaths, in judging unjustly between men, in excessive avarice, and in all manner of useless and evil works. I acknowledge and confess to Thee, O Lord, calling all Thy saints to witness, that I am so guilty of misdeeds and evil works, that I am already condemned by the multitude of my transgressions, unless I may share in the benefits of the exceeding abundance of Thy mercy and of the good and meritorious intercessions of my Lady, the holy Virgin Mary, and of all the saints in whom Thou hast been well pleased since the world began. For the misdeeds and all the iniquity that I have committed from my childhood to this day are uncovered and revealed unto Thee, even though I might wish to conceal and not confess them; for short-sighted frailty was not ashamed to pursue its evil desires before Thy face. But, O Lord, inasmuch as Thou dost not delight in them who are destroyed in sin, but wouldst rather that they should live and be led aright, and because Thou knowest that man is frail and without strength like the dust of the earth or the crumbling leaf, unless Thou strengthen him with the power of Thy mercy, therefore, I implore Thee, do not punish me with the swift judgment of Thy wrath; but let Thy divine patience give me time and will to repent and ability to do penance. Take away from me, O Lord, envy and pride, despair and stubbornness, injustice and violence, and detestable gluttony; cleanse me from the seven cardinal sins and the cursed vices which spring from them. Give me, O Lord, love and constant hope, true faith and humility, wisdom and justice, and ample 294strength to do Thy will at all times. Give me the seven cardinal gifts of the Holy Spirit with all the blessed fruitage that grows out of these; for I am Thy handiwork, created in Thine image, Thy thrall begotten in sin by Thy servant, the son of Thy handmaiden. But Thy mercy has appointed me to Thine office and has exalted me, though unworthy, to the royal dignity and the sacred chieftainship; and Thou hast appointed me to judge and to govern Thy holy people. Therefore, I pray Thee, give more heed to the needs of Thy holy people, which Thou hast appointed me to rule over, than to my merits; but give me the right understanding, self-control and sense of justice, eloquence, purpose, and good intentions, so that I may be able to judge and determine the causes of rich and poor in such a way that Thou wilt be pleased, while they rejoice that justice is done among them. And I pray Thee, O Lord! to pour out Thy spirit of upright understanding upon all my councillors and helpers who assist me in maintaining the government. To my queen, whom Thou hast joined to me with the bonds of marriage, and above all to the hallowed stewards and servants of holy church, the most eminent priest, the bishop of Rome, and all our bishops, abbots, and rulers, to our priests and to all the learned men who are in their charge,—to all these, O Lord, give a chaste and upright spirit, so that they may show their good works and set Thy people good examples and give them right instruction. To the governors and to all those who assist me in guiding and defending the realm, give rightmindedness, abhorrence of evil ways, and the appreciation and love of good 295morals. Make mine enemies truly repentant of their evil and wickedness, cause them to desist from their ferocity, and turn them to a true friendship. To Thy people and all the commonalty give knowledge and a will to love Thee, the true God, a right obedience to their superiors, good peace and rich harvests, and security from enemies. Remember, O Lord, in Thy holy mercy, all the races of mankind for whom our Lord Jesus Christ, Thine only begotten son, shed his blood in redemption, whether they be still living in this world or called home in holy patience by Thy commands. To those, O Lord, who are blinded by error and ignorance and therefore cannot discern Thy Holy Trinity, send Thy spirit of insight, that they may know and understand that Thou art the true God and none other; for no one may approach Thee except Thy holy compassion draws him to Thy love. And be not wroth with me, Thy servant, O Lord, because I have dared to speak with Thee at this time, even though I continue in prayer, but incline Thy compassionate ear and hear and grant what I pray for in Thine abundant kindness. I pray Thee, O Lord, never to give me into the hands of mine enemies because of my misdeeds, or to let me become their victim or captive, and never to let mine enemies rejoice in my misfortunes, whether in body or in spirit, visible or invisible; but if I do aught against Thy holy will and commandments, take me in Thy right hand and chastise me, though not according to my deserts but according to the lenient judgment of Thy mercy; and give me abundant power and resolute strength to oppose all antagonism and all deception. Let me suffer no greater 296temptations than my weakness can resist; let me not end my days in a sudden death; and do not call me out of this world before I shall have repented and rightly atoned for all my sins; and when the strivings of this world have ceased, let me rest eternally with Thee and Thy saints. And from my heart I pray Thee, O Lord, to give me a lawful heir begotten of my loins, whom it may please Thee in Thy mercy to set after my time in the seat of honor where Thou hast placed me; and let my high-seat never pass into the power of other dynasties, but only to such as shall spring from me, the son inheriting from the father in every case. And grant, O Lord, I pray Thee, that no branches that have sprung from me shall wither or decay; and let them not follow after foolish men into error and neglect, but give them insight and wisdom to understand and to know Thy sacred law, and power and a good purpose to love Thee and Thy commands. For Thou only art the true God, Who liveth and reigneth forever, world without end. Amen.”[308]

“O God, most merciful and eternal Father! O honored Conqueror, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God! O gentle Comforter, Holy Spirit! O eternal source of wisdom and steadfast faith, Holy Trinity! O indivisible Unity, one all-powerful, unchanging God: You who sit above the highest heavens and look into the deepest depths below! No creature can escape Your dominion, even if it tries to flee from Your wrath. Even if I ascend to heaven, You are there before me; and if I go down into the lowest depths of hell, Your spiritual dominion is present; and if I were to fly on the wings of the winds and hide in the furthest reaches of the ocean, even there Your hand would find me and bring me back under Your control. For Your mind has counted the sands blown by the winds and the power of the ocean around the earth, and Your eye sees every drop of dew. Therefore, I ask You, O my Lord, do not sit in judgment against me, Your servant, to scrutinize my righteousness; and do not tally my countless sins, but turn Your face away from my iniquities and cleanse me from my hidden faults and wash away all my guilt. For my sins are great and weigh heavily upon me; there are so many that they seem endless to me—sins I’ve committed in foolish thoughts, through reckless words, by neglecting Your commandments and forgetting Your holy law in every way, through careless testimony and thoughtless oaths, by judging unjustly between people, through excessive greed, and in all kinds of wrongful and evil actions. I acknowledge and confess to You, O Lord, calling upon all Your saints as witnesses, that I am guilty of misdeeds and evil acts, deserving condemnation due to the multitude of my transgressions, unless I may share in the rich abundance of Your mercy and in the good and worthy intercessions of my Lady, the holy Virgin Mary, and all the saints with whom You have been pleased since the beginning of the world. For the wrongs and all the evil I have committed from my childhood to this day are laid bare before You, even if I wished to hide them and not confess; for my short-sighted weakness wasn’t ashamed to pursue its desires in Your presence. But, O Lord, since You do not delight in those who perish in sin, but would rather see them live and follow the right path, and because You know that humanity is frail and powerless, like the dust of the earth or the crumbling leaf, unless You strengthen them with the power of Your mercy, I implore You, do not punish me with the swift judgment of Your wrath; rather, let Your divine patience grant me time and the will to repent and the ability to make amends. Remove from me, O Lord, envy and pride, despair and stubbornness, injustice and violence, and detestable gluttony; cleanse me from the seven deadly sins and the cursed vices that come from them. Grant me, O Lord, love and constant hope, true faith and humility, wisdom and justice, and enough strength to do Your will at all times. Give me the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit along with all the blessed fruits that come from them; for I am Your creation, made in Your image, Your servant born of sin. But Your mercy has raised me to Your office and has exalted me, though unworthy, to royal dignity and sacred leadership; and You have appointed me to judge and govern Your holy people. Therefore, I ask You to pay more attention to the needs of Your holy people, whom You have entrusted to my care, than to my merits; but grant me the right understanding, self-control and sense of justice, fluency, purpose, and good intentions, so that I may judge and resolve the cases of rich and poor in a way that pleases You, and that they may rejoice in the justice done among them. And I pray, O Lord! that You pour out Your spirit of wise understanding upon all my advisers and helpers who assist me in governing. To my queen, whom You have joined to me in marriage, and above all to the dedicated stewards and servants of the holy church, the esteemed priest, the bishop of Rome, and all our bishops, abbots, and leaders, to our priests and all the learned individuals under their care—grant them a chaste and upright spirit, so they can display their good works and set a positive example for Your people, providing them with right instruction. To the governors and all those helping me lead and protect the realm, give them sound judgment, a hatred for evil ways, and an appreciation and love for good morals. Transform my enemies into true friends, cause them to cease their hostility, and lead them towards genuine friendship. To Your people and all the community, give them knowledge and a desire to love You, the true God, a respectful obedience to their superiors, good peace, bountiful harvests, and protection from enemies. Remember, O Lord, in Your holy mercy, all of humanity for whom our Lord Jesus Christ, Your only Son, shed His blood for redemption, whether they are still living in this world or have returned home in holy patience by Your command. For those, O Lord, who are blind with error and ignorance and therefore cannot recognize Your Holy Trinity, send Your spirit of insight so they may know and understand that You are the true God and none other; for no one can approach You unless Your holy compassion draws them to Your love. And do not be angry with me, Your servant, O Lord, because I have dared to speak with You at this moment, even though I continue in prayer, but incline Your compassionate ear and hear and grant what I ask in Your generous kindness. I ask, O Lord, never to hand me over to my enemies because of my wrongdoings, or to let me become their victim or captive, and never to let my enemies rejoice over my misfortunes, whether in my body or spirit, visible or invisible; but if I act against Your holy will and commandments, take me by Your right hand and discipline me, but not according to what I deserve; instead, let it be by the leniency of Your mercy; and grant me great power and determination to resist all opposition and deceit. Let me endure no greater temptations than I can withstand; let me not end my days in an unexpected death; and do not call me out of this world before I have repented and rightly atoned for all my sins; and when the struggles of this world have ended, let me rest eternally with You and Your saints. And from my heart, I ask You, O Lord, to give me a lawful heir who comes from my loins, whom it may please You in Your mercy to set in honor after my time; and let my position of authority never pass to others, but only to those who will descend from me, with sons inheriting from their fathers in every case. And grant, O Lord, I beseech You, that no branches from me shall wither or decay; and let them not follow foolish people into error and neglect, but give them insight and wisdom to understand and know Your sacred law, and strength and intention to love You and follow Your commands. For You alone are the true God, Who lives and reigns forever, world without end. Amen.”

Now this prayer that you have just heard is one which the king may offer up, if he wishes, with such other psalms and prayers as he knows. And though he may not always repeat this prayer, he should, nevertheless, pray according to the plan that is outlined in this prayer. And this I verily believe to be his duty every day, until he has heard the hours and the mass, if he means to observe what belongs to his dignity and to his official duties.

Now this prayer that you just heard is one that the king can say if he wishes, along with any other psalms and prayers he knows. And even though he might not say this prayer every time, he should still pray according to the structure laid out in this prayer. I truly believe this is his responsibility every day until he has attended the hours and the mass, if he intends to uphold what is appropriate for his dignity and official responsibilities.


297

LV
 
A FURTHER DISCUSSION OF THE KING’S BUSINESS, ESPECIALLY HIS JUDICIAL DUTIES

Son. I believe you have now cleared up for me what you think ought to be a king’s business, at night after the season for sleep is past while he is meditating upon the needs of his realm and subjects, and in the morning when he goes to church or to devotional services; and it seems to me that these occupations are both useful and important, so much so that they are indispensable. Now that you have shown me what he should be employed with in the night and early in the morning, I wish to ask you to continue and to point out what he should be occupied with during the day: whether it is your opinion that he should ponder the needs of his kingdom while awake at night in order that he may be able to spend the day with greater freedom, after the custom which I hear that kings now follow in most places, either in riding out with hawks or in joining the chase with dogs, or in some other form of diversion, as I hear that kings are in the habit of doing in most countries; or whether you think that he should be otherwise employed, if he does as he ought to do, and that kings seek these diversions more for the sake of recreation than because their rank demand it.

Son. I think you've helped me understand what you believe a king should focus on at night after it's time to sleep, when he reflects on the needs of his kingdom and his subjects, and in the morning when he goes to church or participates in religious services. It seems to me that these tasks are both useful and important, so much so that they are essential. Now that you've clarified what he should do at night and early in the morning, I’d like to ask you to elaborate on what he should be doing during the day. Do you think he should think about the needs of his kingdom while awake at night so that he can enjoy more freedom during the day, following the trend of kings today who often ride out with hawks, join in hunts with dogs, or engage in some other form of leisure, as I've heard kings do in most places? Or do you believe he should be occupied in a different way, if he’s doing what he should, considering that kings pursue these leisure activities more for enjoyment than because their position requires it?

Father. I surely do believe, with respect to what you have just asked about, that kingship was established and appointed to look after the needs of the whole realm and people rather than for sport and vain amusements. Nevertheless, a king must be allowed to seek diversion 298now and then, either with hawks, hounds, horses, or weapons, so that his health and agility at arms or in any form of warfare may be preserved. His chief business, however, is to maintain an intelligent government and to seek good solutions for all the difficult problems and demands which come before him. And you shall know of a truth that it is just as much the king’s duty to observe daily the rules of the sacred law and to preserve justice in holy judgments as it is the bishop’s duty to preserve the order of the sacred mass and all the canonical hours.

Father. I truly believe, regarding your question, that kingship was created to care for the needs of the entire kingdom and its people, not for personal enjoyment or trivial pastimes. Still, a king should be allowed to have some fun now and then, whether that’s with hawks, hounds, horses, or weapons, to keep his health and skills in fighting or any form of warfare in good shape. However, his main responsibility is to uphold a wise government and find good solutions to the complex challenges and demands he faces. And you should know that it is just as much the king’s duty to follow the sacred law and uphold justice in holy judgments as it is for the bishop to maintain the order of the sacred mass and all the appointed hours. 298

Son. I am inquiring so closely into these things for the reason that many believe the royal dignity to have been founded for such pleasure-giving splendor and unrestrained amusement as kings may desire. But now I see clearly from your remarks that a king ought constantly to labor in the yoke of God; wherefore it seems to me that he must have a great burden to support every day in the serious interest that he must show when the needs of his subjects are presented to him. Therefore I wish to ask you once more to show me clearly what should be a king’s duty after the hours have been observed.

Son. I'm digging into these matters because many people think that royal power exists for extravagant pleasure and unrestricted fun that kings might want. But now, based on what you've said, I clearly see that a king should always work under the guidance of God; therefore, it seems to me that he carries a significant burden every day in the serious concern he must show when his subjects come to him with their needs. So, I want to ask you again to clearly explain what a king's responsibilities should be after the official hours.

Father. It was the custom of old at the time when the royal office was established and enjoyed its greatest splendor, that, when a king no longer stood in fear of his enemies but sat in complete security among his henchmen, he selected a splendid house where he could set up his high-seat, which was also to serve as his judgment seat; and this throne he adorned with every form of royal decoration. Then the king sat down upon it and 299observed in what glory and splendor he sat. Next he began to ponder in what way he must occupy this glorious high-seat, so as not to be driven from it with dishonor in spite of his exalted position either because of injustice or malice, indiscretion or folly, inordinate ambition, arrogance, or excessive timidity. Now it looks most reasonable to me that, whereas kingship was originally established in this way as we have just pointed out, a king should continue to maintain the arrangement which was made in the beginning. And as soon as the king comes into this seat which we have just mentioned and has reflected upon all those things which we have just told about, it becomes his duty to pass judgment in the suits and on the needs of his people, if they are presented to him. But when there is no official business brought before him, he should meditate on the source of holy wisdom and study with attentive care all its ways and paths.

Father. Back in the day, when the monarchy was established and at its peak, it was customary for a king, once he no longer feared his enemies and felt secure among his followers, to choose an impressive house to set up his throne, which also served as his judgment seat. He decorated this throne with all kinds of royal embellishments. Then the king would take his seat and reflect on the glory and splendor of his position. Afterward, he would think about how to properly fulfill his role from this grand throne without being disgraced due to injustice, malice, poor judgment, foolishness, excessive ambition, arrogance, or overwhelming fear. It seems reasonable to me that, since kingship was initially established in this way, a king should uphold the original principles. Once the king is in this seat and has contemplated these matters, it becomes his responsibility to judge the cases and address the needs of his people when they are brought to him. However, if there are no official matters to handle, he should reflect on the origins of divine wisdom and diligently study its paths and teachings.


LVI
 
WISDOM SPEECH

Son. I beg you, sire, not to be displeased with me, though I ask thoughtless and stupid questions; but it looks to me like a difficult task to search out the very sources of wisdom and learn its ways and paths. And therefore I wish to ask you to tell me something about this form of study, so that I may, if possible, derive some insight from it.

Son. Please, Your Majesty, don’t be upset with me, even though I ask foolish and silly questions; it seems to me like a tough job to uncover the true origins of wisdom and understand its ways and paths. So, I’d like to ask you to share some information about this kind of study, so that I might, if possible, gain some insight from it.

Father. It ought not to cause displeasure to have one inquire closely into subjects which one is not likely to understand without some direction. But God’s mercy 300reveals and makes known many things to mankind which would be largely hidden from them, if He were unwilling to have them revealed. And many things which were formerly concealed in His own knowledge He has made known to us, because He wishes man to take a profitable interest in the wealth of knowledge which he draws from the divine treasures. But as a guide toward this interest which we have just mentioned one should take special note of the words that Wisdom used concerning herself when she spoke in these terms:

Father. It shouldn't be upsetting to ask questions about topics that one might not understand without some guidance. But God's mercy reveals and discloses many things to humanity that would largely remain hidden if He didn’t want them to be known. There are also many things that were once kept in His own knowledge that He has shared with us because He wants people to take a meaningful interest in the wealth of knowledge they can gain from divine wisdom. To help guide this interest we’ve just talked about, it's important to pay attention to the words that Wisdom spoke about herself when she said:

“I am begotten of God’s own heart; I have proceeded from the mouth of the Highest; and I have ordered all things.[309] The spirit of God moved over empty space, and we separated light from darkness; we appointed hours and times, days and nights, years and winters and everlasting summer. We built a star-lit throne for the King of heaven; yea, God did nothing except in my far-seeing presence. Together we weighed the lightness of the air and the gravity of the earth; we hung the ponderous sphere of earth in the thin air and strengthened the firmament of heaven with mighty forces. We commanded the blazing sun to adorn the brow of day with shining beams; but the inconstant moon we bade illumine the darkness of night with its pale sheen. We created a comely man in our image. God also beautified the face of the earth with trees and herbs yielding manifold fruits; He called forth the beauties of the sky in the form of birds of many kinds; and he concealed multitudes 301of fishes of many sorts in the depths of the waters. He also commanded the four-footed beasts to multiply upon earth into many and divers species. He girded the entire circle of the earth with a roaring ocean and briny streams. He commanded fresh waters to flow forth in steep cascades over the face of the land, and built the foundations of the earth with numerous passages, that the flowing waters might always be able to fulfil the duties assigned them; and He commanded the light vapors to carry heavy waters through the heights of the air by means of enticing warmth. Further He bade the wind-swollen clouds pour forth cool showers over the face of the earth. And the Maker of all things bade me oversee the whole artifice of the divine handiwork. Then I moved briskly with treading foot over the mountain top; I fared lightly over smooth vales and level fields; I strode with toilsome and heavy step over the rough billows; and I measured the width of the level ocean with gentle tread. Pressing forward with stiffened knee, I walked upon the wings of the stormy winds. With gentle speech I taught the silent calm its pleasing manner. I traced my path through the heights of heaven and the expanse of the air; I scanned the curved circle of the restless ocean; and I paced and measured the entire globe of the sphere-shaped earth. I traveled over hills and mountains; I ran over fields and meadows and level valleys; and I gave honey-like dew to all the blossoming herbs. I passed among thorns and bushes and through forests of every kind and gave sweet blossoms to the fruit-bearing trees. I pitched my tent in a shadowless beam of light and went forth from this fair shelter 302arrayed like a bridegroom and glad like a mighty giant rejoicing in the race.[310] But mortal idols envied me, found me guilty, and condemned me to die. In wrath I descended to the lowest valleys and overturned the strongholds of the mighty ones in mine anger. With violence I shattered the metal gates of the strong castles and broke the firm iron pillars and the thick bars of iron. I took gold and gems and jewels, the plunder of warfare, and then journeyed gladly to the higher abodes with priceless booty. I traveled through farms and villages and parishes offering the poor a share in my wealth. I offered the husbandman fruitful corn and partnership with me. I comfort the sorrowing; I give rest to the weary, drink to the thirsty, and food to the hungry. Happy is he who drinks from my cup, for my beverage has an unfailing sweetness. I journey through castles and cities and marts; I run over houses, markets, and streets; I call with a clear and friendly voice, offering food, entertainment, and harmless amusement. Happy is he who goes to my table, for my meat has a more pleasing savour than the sweetest perfume; my drink is sweeter than honey and clearer than any wine; tuneful music is heard at my table in sweet and beautiful melody; there are songs and poems such as rarely are heard, merriment and gladness, and pure joy unmixed with grief. Happy is he who shall live in my house, for in my house are seven great pillars which join together the entire vault under a good roof; they stand upon a floor placed on immovable foundations and they fortify all the walls with great strength. In each of these pillars 303may be found the seven liberal arts of study. Furthermore, my house is strewn with fragrant grasses and lovely herbs; it is hung with beauty and elegance, and splendor in every form. Among the humble I am a pleasant companion, but toward the proud I am stern and haughty. In every school I am the principal teacher and I am the highest form of eloquence in every law court. I am the wisest among lawyers and the chief justice on every bench. Happy is he who is found to be a sincere companion of mine; for I am constantly with my companions guarding them from all perils. Happy is he who suffers no disgrace from me, for my wrath kindles a fire in its passion which burns even to the lowest depths; some day it will consume the foundations of the hills and swallow up the earth with its teeming life. Where can he hide who seeks to escape from me? The spirit of God fills the entire home-circle and searches out the meaning and the interpretation of all knowledge.”

“I am created from God’s own heart; I have come from the mouth of the Most High; and I have organized everything.[309] The spirit of God moved over the void, and we separated light from darkness; we set hours and times, days and nights, years and seasons of summer. We built a throne filled with stars for the King of heaven; indeed, God did nothing except in my all-seeing presence. Together we measured the lightness of the air and the heaviness of the earth; we hung the massive globe of earth in the thin atmosphere and supported the heavens with powerful forces. We commanded the blazing sun to grace the day with its shining rays; and the fickle moon, we instructed to light up the darkness of night with its soft glow. We made a beautiful man in our image. God also adorned the earth with trees and plants bearing many fruits; He called forth the beauty of the sky in the form of birds of all kinds; and He hid countless fish of various kinds in the depths of the waters. He commanded the four-legged beasts to multiply on earth into many diverse species. He surrounded the entire earth with roaring oceans and salty streams. He ordered fresh water to flow in steep cascades across the land and built the foundations of the earth with many channels so the flowing waters could always fulfill their tasks; and He commanded the light vapors to transport heavy waters through the heights of the air with enticing warmth. Furthermore, He instructed the wind-swell clouds to shower cool rain upon the earth. And the Creator of everything commanded me to oversee the entire masterpiece of divine creation. Then I moved energetically across the mountain tops; I walked lightly over smooth valleys and flat fields; I trudged with heavy steps across the rough waves; and I measured the vastness of the calm ocean with a gentle pace. Pressing forward with determination, I walked on the wings of the stormy winds. With soothing words, I taught the peaceful calm its pleasant nature. I traced my path through the heights of heaven and across the open sky; I examined the circular shape of the restless ocean; and I walked and measured the entire globe of the earth. I traveled over hills and mountains; I ran across fields, meadows, and flat valleys; and I provided sweet dew for all the blossoming plants. I moved among thorns and bushes and through forests of every kind, giving beautiful blossoms to the fruit trees. I set up my tent in a beam of light without shadows and emerged from this lovely shelter dressed like a bridegroom and joyful like a mighty giant enjoying the race.[310] But mortal idols envied me, found me guilty, and condemned me to death. In anger, I descended to the lowest valleys and toppled the strongholds of the powerful in my fury. With force, I shattered the metal gates of the strong castles and broke the solid iron pillars and heavy locks. I took gold and gems and treasures from war, and then joyfully traveled to the higher realms with priceless spoils. I passed through farms and villages and towns, offering the poor a share of my wealth. I offered the farmer bountiful grain and partnership with me. I comfort the sorrowful; I give rest to the weary, drink to the thirsty, and food to the hungry. Blessed is he who drinks from my cup, for my drink has an endless sweetness. I move through castles and cities and marketplaces; I traverse houses, markets, and streets; I call out in a clear and friendly voice, offering food, entertainment, and harmless fun. Blessed is he who comes to my table, for my food tastes better than the sweetest perfume; my drink is sweeter than honey and clearer than any wine; delightful music fills the air at my table in sweet and beautiful harmony; there are songs and poetry rarely heard, joy and laughter, and pure happiness without sorrow. Blessed is he who lives in my home, for in my house support seven great pillars that hold up the entire roof; they stand on a solid foundation and strengthen all the walls. In each of these pillars may be found the seven liberal arts of study. Moreover, my house is strewn with fragrant grasses and beautiful herbs; it is adorned with elegance and splendor in all forms. Among the humble, I am a pleasant companion, but toward the proud, I am stern and haughty. In every school, I am the main teacher, and I am the highest form of eloquence in every court of law. I am the wisest among lawyers and the chief justice on every bench. Blessed is he who is found to be a true friend of mine; for I am always with my companions, protecting them from all dangers. Blessed is he who suffers no disgrace from me, for my anger ignites a fire that burns even to the lowest depths; one day it will consume the foundations of the hills and swallow the earth with its abundant life. Where can he hide who seeks to escape from me? The spirit of God fills the entire home and seeks out the meaning and interpretation of all knowledge.”

The speech that you have now heard is one which Wisdom has spoken about herself; there are others like it, but loftier, which are not repeated here. For King Solomon and Jesus the son of Sirach have written with much skill a great many sermons of the kind that Wisdom has spoken about herself in divers ways. But if we were to mention all the speeches that can be found in their writings, our conversation would suffer a great delay; and it seems unnecessary at this time to bring into our talk any lengthy discussion of those things that Wisdom has said about herself. However, it is the duty of every king to know thoroughly all the accounts 304that Wisdom has given of herself or wise men like those just mentioned have written, and each day to ponder some part of those speeches, if the duties of his office leave him any time for that.

The speech you've just heard is one that Wisdom has spoken about herself; there are more impressive ones, but they're not included here. Both King Solomon and Jesus the son of Sirach have skillfully written a lot of sermons where Wisdom talks about herself in various ways. However, mentioning every speech in their writings would take too long, and it seems unnecessary right now to dive into a lengthy discussion about what Wisdom has said about herself. Still, it's important for every king to fully understand all the accounts that Wisdom has provided or that wise men like those mentioned have written and to reflect on some part of those speeches every day, if his duties allow him the time for it. 304


LVII
 
CHALLENGING TASKS OF THE KING’S JUDICIAL OFFICE WITH EXAMPLES

Son. Since it clearly is the official duty of a king to be well informed in all science, it is quite evident that to acquire the knowledge which you have just now discussed must be of the highest importance; for it seems likely that he will be able to gather much insight from it, whether he wishes to meditate on the greatness of divine power or on the needs of men. Now since you do not care to discuss these matters further, I will ask you to continue your remarks with a few words about what a king ought to consider before passing judgments, when he comes into the judgment seat to determine the causes of men.

Son. Since it's clearly the king's job to be well-informed in all fields of knowledge, it's obvious that gaining the insight you just mentioned is extremely important; it seems likely that he will gain valuable understanding from it, whether he wants to reflect on the greatness of divine power or on the needs of people. Now that you prefer not to go deeper into these topics, I would like you to continue by sharing a few thoughts on what a king should consider before making judgments when he takes the judgment seat to decide on people's cases.

Father. It is indeed his duty, as you have remarked, to look carefully into all those speeches that we have now spoken and to study them thoroughly, for this reason, that if he unravels them with care in his thoughts, he will surely find in them, if he has understanding, nearly all those things which pertain to divine power and which show how God has distributed his gifts among men and other created beings. For every king and every other discreet man can learn in this way what he actually is, and what he ought to be, if he wishes to achieve what God has intended for him. You also ask how a king 305should weigh the judgments that he renders in the disputes of men; but I have given a brief reply to that question in an earlier talk, when I told how God passed judgment after His covenant with Adam was broken, and what judges He brought with Him to the judgment seat. I also gave many examples to show how God ordered His verdicts in certain cases of a later time, those of King Pharaoh and all the others who were named later in that conversation; and every king ought surely to weigh what is found in those examples. He must also consider with care whether a case calls for severity and punishment or whether the doom should be tempered; for the judgments ought not to be equally severe in all cases. And every sentence should be kept within the bounds of justice and fairness; and here I may cite another example, if you like.

Father. It is definitely his responsibility, as you've pointed out, to carefully examine all the speeches we've discussed and to study them in-depth. The reason for this is that if he thoughtfully unravels them, he will likely discover, if he has insight, almost everything related to divine power and how God has distributed His gifts among people and other creatures. Every king and every wise person can learn this way about who they truly are and who they should be if they want to fulfill what God intends for them. You also ask how a king should evaluate the judgments he makes in people's disputes; I've briefly addressed that in an earlier conversation, explaining how God rendered judgment after His covenant with Adam was broken and what judges He brought with Him to the judgment seat. I also provided many examples illustrating how God delivered His verdicts in specific situations later on, including those involving King Pharaoh and others mentioned in that discussion; every king should definitely reflect on those examples. He must also carefully consider whether a case requires strictness and punishment or if the verdict should be softened; judgments should not be uniformly harsh in all cases. Each sentence should remain within the limits of justice and fairness; and here I can provide another example, if you'd like.

There is something told of a certain king, which I find most fitting to illustrate this point. This king was a man of fame and power, thoroughly learned in all knowledge and just in all his decisions. Every day there came before him a large number of men whose difficulties he had to settle; and every day he sat a long time on the judgment seat to determine the suits of his people, and with him sat the wise men, whom he had found to be the most discreet and best prepared for such duties. But whenever the king sat in this assembly with the wise men whom he had summoned to serve with him, armed knights stood about the house to make sure that he could sit in perfect security. The king had many sons, one of whom, however, was the dearest of all; for this son loved especially to be 306near his father whenever possible, and he frequently sat on the judgment seat with him. It was in the king’s nature to be slow in reaching decisions; and it was said among men of quick minds that he would surely be able to settle the law suits and speak his verdicts more promptly, if he were truly wise. This remark was approved by the king’s son and by many others among the wise men; and so often was the saying repeated that the king himself got news of it. Now it happened at one time that the king was indisposed after a bleeding; and just then a number of men came to bring their disputes before the king. He then sent for his son, the one who was in the habit of sitting in judgment with him, and said to him: “Summon the wise men who are accustomed to sit in judgment with me and go into my judgment hall and take my seat for to-day, and determine as many of the law suits as you possibly can get over.” It was done as the king commanded. And when the cases were presented to those men, it looked to them as if they could decide the suits in a hurry. But when the king’s son was ready to determine the disputes which had been brought before him, he thought he saw three young men coming forward, handsome yet terrible in appearance. Two of them sat down at his feet, one on either side. One was occupied with a set of writings in which were written out all the cases that were to be settled that day, one case in each document. The other was busy with balances; and these appeared so delicate that, if a little hair was laid upon them, they would be disturbed. The one who had the balances held them up, while the other, who had the documents, 307laid the writings which favored him who had brought the suit into one scale and the writing in his behalf who was to reply in the other; but it looked as if the scales would never balance. Then the king’s son thought he saw that certain documents were brought out in which the decisions and formal verdicts were drawn up, just as he had intended to render judgment and all the wise men had advised. But even after these writings had been laid in the scales, they were as far from balancing as before. When the king’s son saw these things, he looked to see what the third young man was doing, and saw that he stood near with a drawn sword as if ready to strike. The sword was keen-edged and terrible, and the edges looked to him as if they were both on fire. Then he saw clearly that, if he passed judgment before the scales balanced, the sword of the young man would immediately smite his neck. Just then he glanced down before his feet, and there he saw the earth open downwards; underneath he saw the gaping jaws of hell, as if waiting for him to come there. But when he saw these things, he ceased speaking and rendering judgments. When the wise men reminded him that there were suits to be settled, he called them to him, and everyone who came saw all these things that we have now described. After that none dared to pronounce judgment, for the scales of the young man never balanced, and no suit was settled on that day. But thereafter no man thought it strange if the king was slow in pronouncing his decisions.

There’s a story about a certain king that really fits this point. This king was famous and powerful, highly knowledgeable, and fair in all his judgments. Every day, a large number of people came to him with their problems, and he spent a long time on the judgment seat resolving their issues, aided by the wise men he had chosen for their careful thinking and preparedness. Whenever the king sat with these wise men, armed knights surrounded the hall to ensure he could sit safely. The king had many sons, but one was especially dear to him; this son loved to be near his father and often sat beside him on the judgment seat. The king was known to take his time making decisions, and people with sharp minds commented that he could resolve lawsuits and give verdicts much faster if he were truly wise. This view was shared by his son and many of the wise men, and it was said so often that the king eventually heard about it. At one point, when the king was unwell after a bleeding, several men came to present their disputes. He called for his son, who usually sat in judgment with him, and told him, “Call the wise men who usually sit with me and go to my judgment hall. Take my seat today and handle as many cases as you can.” His son did as instructed. When the cases were brought before the wise men, they thought they could quickly decide the matters. However, when the king’s son was ready to settle the disputes, he noticed three young men approaching, who were both handsome and intimidating. Two of them sat at his feet, one on either side. One was focused on a set of documents containing the cases for the day, one case per document. The other was busy with scales that seemed so sensitive that even a hair would disturb them. The one with the scales held them up, while the other placed the documents favoring the plaintiff in one pan and the documents for the defendant in the other; yet, it seemed like the scales would never balance. The king’s son then saw certain documents brought forth that had the decisions and formal verdicts as he had planned to deliver, which all the wise men had advised. But even after placing these writings in the scales, they stayed unbalanced. When the king’s son observed this, he looked at the third young man and saw him standing by with a drawn sword, ready to strike. The sword was sharp and frightening, its edges seeming almost to sparkle with danger. He realized that if he handed down a judgment before the scales balanced, the sword of the young man would instantly strike him down. Then, he glanced down at his feet and saw the earth opening beneath him, revealing the terrifying jaws of hell, as if waiting for him to fall in. Faced with these sights, he stopped speaking and rendering judgments. When the wise men reminded him that cases needed to be resolved, he called them to him, and everyone who came saw all the events we’ve described. After that, no one dared to make a judgment, since the young man’s scales never balanced, and no cases were settled that day. Henceforth, no one found it unusual that the king was slow in making his decisions.

Another and similar example is found in what I told you earlier in our conversation, when we spoke about 308a city in Ireland called Themar;[311] and I shall repeat that story in part, if you wish. This was the leading city in Ireland and the king had his chief residence there; and no one knew of a finer city on earth. Though the inhabitants were heathen at that time and did not know the true faith about God, they were firm in the belief that there could be no deviation from righteousness in judgment on the part of the king who dwelt in Themar; for no decision was pronounced in Ireland which they could consider just before the king at Themar had passed upon it. Now at one time it came to pass that a case was brought before the king who sat in Themar in which his friends and kinsmen were interested on the one side, while men whom the king disliked had a part on the other side; and the king shaped the verdict more according to his own will than to justice. And this soon became evident, for three days later the royal hall and all the other houses that the king occupied were overturned, so that the foundations pointed upward, while the walls and the battlements pointed down into the earth; and the inhabitants immediately began to desert the city and it was never occupied after that. Now from these accounts you are to conclude that God permits such things to be revealed to men, because He wishes them to understand that such an outcome is daily prepared in a spiritual and invisible manner for men who refuse to render just and right judgments, if they are appointed to determine the suits of men.

Another similar example comes from what I told you earlier in our conversation when we discussed a city in Ireland called Themar; and I'll share that story again in part, if you'd like. This was the most important city in Ireland, and the king had his main residence there; no one knew of a better city on earth. Even though the people were pagans at that time and didn’t know the true faith about God, they strongly believed that the king who lived in Themar could not deviate from righteousness in his judgments; no decision in Ireland could be considered just unless it had been approved by the king in Themar first. At one point, a case was brought before the king in Themar where his friends and relatives were on one side, and people he disliked were on the other side; and the king decided the verdict more by his personal preference than by justice. This quickly became obvious, because three days later, the royal hall and all the other buildings the king used were turned upside down, with the foundations sticking up and the walls and battlements pointing down into the ground; and the people immediately started leaving the city, and it was never inhabited again afterward. From these accounts, you should conclude that God allows such things to happen because He wants people to recognize that such outcomes are often prepared in a spiritual and unseen way for those who refuse to deliver fair and just judgments when they are tasked with deciding people’s disputes.


309

LVIII
 
THE SAME TOPIC CONTINUED

Son. These examples apply very well to such men as are avaricious or obstinate or both.

Son. These examples are very relevant to men who are greedy or stubborn or both.

Father. You shall know of a truth, that wherever justice is sold for money or is stricken down by arrogance, divine revenge and punishment, physical or spiritual, will surely come; and an instance of this can be cited, if it is desired. There was a prominent citizen in Athens named Stephen; he was judge in all those cases that arose within the city; he was not known as an unjust man. Now it came to pass that Stephen departed this life, and two groups of angels came to meet him, the one wishing to support his cause, the other charging him with much and heavy guilt and wishing to lead him with them to death. But whereas a dispute arose between them and neither side would yield, one of the angels proposed that they should lead Stephen before the Judge and let the dispute be settled by His judgment. When they came into court, the accusing lawyers cried out saying that they had a grave charge against Stephen, namely, that he had taken a plot of ground from the church of Saint Lawrence by an unjust decree. But the judge said that the saint should decide that case, seeing that he was the one robbed. Now just as Saint Lawrence came up to hear how the suit was going forward, one of the angels said to Stephen: “Why do you not call the holy priest Justin, whom you honored so highly as to have a chapel built for him near your hall and whom you have served in many things? He 310surely will be able to assist you somewhat in these your troubles.”[312] Justin came at the moment when the suit was being brought up before Saint Lawrence; and after the case had been stated, the saint asked why Stephen had plundered him and deprived his church of land. Stephen replied that he did not render that unjust decision purposely, but really thought it was a just decision. Then Saint Lawrence gripped Stephen in the side and pinched him very hard. But Justin interceded for him, begging the saint to show mercy in this cause, both because of his intercession and because Stephen did not know that he had given an unjust decision. While Saint Lawrence was pinching his side, Stephen had a feeling that even if he were to suffer torture for a similar space of time in hell, he would find it no more painful than the clutching of Saint Lawrence. But as soon as Justin interceded for Stephen, the saint released him and forgave the offence.[313]

Father. You should know the truth: whenever justice is traded for money or is undermined by arrogance, divine retribution and punishment, whether physical or spiritual, will inevitably follow; and there's an example of this, if desired. There was a prominent citizen in Athens named Stephen; he served as the judge in all the cases that arose within the city; he was known to be a fair man. It happened that Stephen passed away, and two groups of angels came to meet him, one wanting to advocate for him, the other accusing him of serious guilt and wanting to take him with them to judgment. A dispute broke out between them, and neither side would back down, so one of the angels suggested that they take Stephen before the Judge and let Him decide the matter. When they arrived in court, the accusing lawyers shouted that they had a serious charge against Stephen, claiming he had unjustly taken a piece of land from the church of Saint Lawrence. The judge said that the matter should be decided by the saint, as he was the one who had been wronged. Just as Saint Lawrence came to hear about the case, one of the angels said to Stephen, “Why don’t you call upon the holy priest Justin, whom you respected enough to build a chapel for near your hall and whom you have served in many ways? He surely can help you in this difficult situation.”310 Justin arrived just as the case was being brought before Saint Lawrence; after listening, the saint asked why Stephen had robbed him and taken land from his church. Stephen replied that he hadn’t made that unjust decision on purpose; he genuinely believed it was the right decision. Then Saint Lawrence pinched Stephen hard in the side. But Justin pleaded for him, asking the saint to show mercy because of his intercession and because Stephen didn’t realize he had made an unjust decision. While Saint Lawrence was pinching his side, Stephen felt that even if he were to endure torture for the same amount of time in hell, it wouldn’t be more painful than the grip of Saint Lawrence. But as soon as Justin interceded for Stephen, the saint released him and forgave the offense.[313]

When the prosecutors heard that this indictment had failed, they shouted even more loudly, saying that they had still greater charges against Stephen. So they set forth that a Roman whose name was Tarquin had come to Athens, and since he was an alien and had no kindred there, he thought that he might need help from Stephen in his important affairs, seeing that Stephen was judge and ruler over the whole city; and he gave Stephen a fine horse on condition that he was to have justice and equity. Then the Judge decreed that, if Stephen had 311sold justice for money, he should follow that profit to destruction. But when Stephen was questioned whether this charge was true or not, he denied the accusation and declared that he could not remember ever having taken fee or gift for justice. Now since Stephen had denied the charge, it was ordered that Tarquin himself should be called to straighten the matter. When Tarquin came, he declared that this was not a true charge against Stephen; for he asserted that Stephen had never taken fees for justice so far as he knew. “But having come there a stranger,” said Tarquin, “I thought that I might need the good will of such a man and gave him the horse on my own volition and not at his request.” When the accusers heard that they would surely fail in this indictment too, they cried even more loudly, saying that they had a new charge against Stephen, much greater than either of the others. They asserted that he had arbitrarily and illegally saved three men from the death penalty, whom both law and equity and a just sentence would have condemned. When Stephen was asked whether he was guilty of this charge, he admitted that he had saved the men from death, but declared that he had always regretted having saved them by arbitrary and illegal means. Then the Judge decreed that, if he had rescued men from death by violence whom justice had condemned to die, he must suffer death for it, unless he would do penance where the offence was committed. Then the priest Justin asked Saint Lawrence to help in Stephen’s defense, seeing that he had forgiven him the matter that he had against him and no indictment had been found true except the 312one that was now being considered. So Lawrence and Justin went in haste to the queen and, falling at her feet, begged her to request this favor, that the verdict be modified so that Stephen might be allowed to do penance in the place where he had offended. When the queen interceded for Stephen, her request was granted. Thereupon he was brought back to Athens, and he arose at the moment when his body was to be carried to the grave. He lived three winters after that and did penance for his guilt according to the instruction of the bishop who was in charge of that city.

When the prosecutors found out that this indictment had failed, they shouted even louder, claiming they had even bigger charges against Stephen. They stated that a Roman named Tarquin had come to Athens, and since he was a foreigner without any connections there, he thought he might need help from Stephen in his important matters, considering Stephen was the judge and ruler of the whole city. Tarquin gave Stephen a fine horse on the condition that he would receive justice and fairness. The Judge ruled that if Stephen had sold justice for money, he should follow that gain to his downfall. However, when Stephen was asked if this accusation was true, he denied it and said he couldn’t remember ever accepting a fee or gift for justice. Since Stephen had denied the charge, it was decided that Tarquin himself should be called to clarify the situation. When Tarquin arrived, he stated that this was not a true accusation against Stephen; he claimed that Stephen had never taken fees for justice as far as he knew. “But as a stranger in that place,” Tarquin said, “I thought I might need the goodwill of such a man and gave him the horse of my own accord, not at his request.” When the accusers realized they would likely fail with this indictment too, they yelled even louder, claiming they had a new charge against Stephen, much greater than the previous ones. They argued that he had arbitrarily and illegally saved three men from the death penalty, whom both law and fairness would have condemned. When Stephen was asked if he was guilty of this charge, he acknowledged that he had saved the men from death but insisted that he had always regretted saving them through arbitrary and illegal means. The Judge then ruled that if he had saved men from death by wrongful means whom justice had condemned, he must face death for it, unless he would do penance for the offense committed. Then the priest Justin asked Saint Lawrence to help in Stephen’s defense, as he had forgiven him for the matter he had against him and no true indictment had been found except the one currently being considered. So Lawrence and Justin hurried to the queen and fell at her feet, pleading with her to request that the verdict be adjusted so Stephen could do penance in the place where he had erred. When the queen interceded for Stephen, her request was granted. He was then brought back to Athens, and he arose just as his body was to be taken to the grave. He lived three more winters after that and did penance for his guilt according to the guidance of the bishop who was in charge of that city.

There are many such examples that could be brought up in this talk, if it were thought necessary; and you should now conclude from what I set forth in my last speech that the judgments passed here must be carefully scrutinized, and that it is very important for those who are appointed to be judges to make sure whether the decisions are properly stated and the findings correct. For you heard how precisely the decrees were weighed before the king’s son, when the scales were held up before him but would never balance; and how he was threatened with death, if he should pronounce a different judgment from the one that would balance the scales. You also heard how God punished the king and the city of Themar, because the king had distorted a just decision. Though the people did not hold the true faith about God, He punished the deed nevertheless, because they believed that a wrong decision could never come from Themar. And in the last example you heard how Stephen was held to account for all the dooms that he had pronounced, and suffered a reprimand for having 313taken a gift from a friend; and he was condemned to die for having saved men from death, though many would regard that as a good rather than an evil deed.

There are plenty of examples I could mention in this talk if needed; and from what I shared in my last speech, you should conclude that the judgments made here must be carefully examined, and it’s crucial for those appointed as judges to ensure that the decisions are correctly stated and the findings accurate. You heard how carefully the decrees were weighed before the king’s son, with the scales held up in front of him but never balancing; and how he was threatened with death if he pronounced a different judgment from the one that would make the scales balance. You also heard how God punished the king and the city of Themar because the king twisted a just decision. Even though the people didn’t hold the true faith about God, He punished the act anyway, because they believed that a wrong decision could never come from Themar. In the last example, you heard how Stephen was held accountable for all the judgments he made and faced reprimand for accepting a gift from a friend; and he was condemned to die for saving men from death, though many would see that as a good deed rather than a bad one.


LIX
 
WHEN JUDGMENTS SHOULD BE HARSH AND WHEN THEY SHOULD BE COMPASSIONATE

Son. The more examples of this sort I hear, the more difficult seems the position of those who are appointed to judge. I will ask you, therefore, to indicate some test by which I can know when the judgments ought to be severe and when they should be more lenient.

Son. The more examples like this I hear, the harder it seems for those who have to judge. So, I’ll ask you to suggest some way for me to know when the judgments should be strict and when they should be more forgiving.

Father. It is difficult to state that in definite terms: still, all causes that are brought before the men who have authority to judge will be decided in some way. But I believe that a purpose to judge as they think is right will do the most to keep them from falling into guilt before God. For Stephen was acquitted of the charge that he had caused the church of Saint Lawrence to forfeit land by the fact that he did not know that his decision was wrong; and yet he did not wholly escape punishment, though in some respects he was punished less than he would have been, if he had known that his verdict was wrong. Now there are four things which he who goes into the judgment hall must leave outside and never allow to come into the judgment seat with him or even inside the door. The first is avarice; the second, enmity; the third, obstinacy; the fourth, friendship. For you heard that Stephen was ordered to disclose whether he had accepted a gift from Tarquin and 314had promised to secure justice for him in return for the fee. And the judgment was, that if he had sold justice for money, he should follow the fee to destruction. You heard this, too, that he was condemned to die for having saved men from death by force and in defiance of law. You also heard in the earlier account how the king and the city of Themar perished because the king, being friendly to one side and very hostile to the other, had distorted a just decision. Now for such reasons those four things must be excluded, lest any one of them should cause a righteous doom to be distorted.

Father. It's hard to say this definitively: still, all cases brought before those in authority will be decided somehow. But I believe that the intention to judge as they see fit will do the most to prevent them from feeling guilty before God. For Stephen was cleared of the accusation that he caused the church of Saint Lawrence to lose land because he didn’t know his decision was wrong; yet, he didn't completely escape punishment, though in some ways he faced less than he would have if he had known his verdict was incorrect. Now there are four things that anyone entering the courtroom must leave outside and never bring with them into the judgment seat or even through the door. The first is greed; the second, hatred; the third, stubbornness; the fourth, favoritism. You heard that Stephen was asked to reveal whether he accepted a gift from Tarquin and promised to deliver justice in exchange for the payment. The ruling was that if he sold justice for money, he should follow that payment to ruin. You also heard that he was sentenced to death for saving men from death by force and in violation of the law. You also heard in the earlier account how the king and the city of Themar perished because the king, being biased towards one side and extremely hostile to the other, distorted a fair decision. For these reasons, those four things must be excluded, so that none of them can lead to a distorted righteous judgment.

You have also asked when the sentence should be lenient and when severe, and that question can now be answered in a few words. Careful account should be taken of the circumstances of the man’s case who is accused. If a charge is brought against one who is anxious to keep the peace but is driven to violence by the selfishness and arrogance of another, and, regretting his guilt, is anxious to atone for it,—if such are the circumstances, there should be lenient judgment in his case. Likewise, if a man breaks the law who is ignorant and does not know that he is transgressing, and would not have done the deed had he known it to be contrary to law, his case, too, calls for a lenient sentence. Even when the ugliest cases that are known among men, such as theft and robbery, come up, one should investigate how the crime came about. If a man is so hard bestead that he can get no food either by begging or buying and cannot get work, while hunger and his physical nature drive him beyond endurance, the judge should be lenient with him, even though he be taken in guilt; 315and whenever necessity drives a man into crime and law-breaking, the judgment should be tempered.

You’ve also asked when a sentence should be lenient and when it should be severe, and that question can now be addressed briefly. Careful consideration should be given to the individual circumstances of the accused. If someone is charged but is eager to maintain peace and is forced into violence by the selfishness and arrogance of another, and if they regret their actions and want to make amends, then leniency should be applied in their case. Similarly, if a person breaks the law out of ignorance and genuinely did not know they were breaking it, and would not have acted that way had they known it was illegal, their situation also deserves a lenient sentence. Even in the most serious crimes, like theft and robbery, it’s important to investigate how the crime occurred. If a person is in such dire straits that they can’t access food through begging or buying, and cannot find work, and hunger drives them to desperation, the judge should show leniency, even if they are guilty; whenever necessity compels someone to commit a crime, the judgment should be adjusted accordingly.

However, if the accused are men who have been led into crime by insolence, ambition, avarice, or selfishness, the dooms ought to be severe, though justice and the law of the land must be observed in every instance. And in cases like those to which we have just referred the sentence should be as severe as the law permits; while in the cases mentioned earlier the law should be applied with due allowance for the difficulties that were at hand. If the distress that led to the trouble is considered great, the judgment should be tempered accordingly. But if a king or any ruler who is a judge and has power to punish, takes life as a punishment, he should always do it with great reluctance, in his heart lamenting the death and ill-fortune of the offender. He must take heed, however, lest he slay out of his own cruelty or in anger and hatred for the one who is to die. Let him slay him in just punishment and out of love for those who live after; because he believes that they will live in greater security and lead better lives after having seen the death and troubles of such a one; and because he intends that the fear and terror which the misfortunes of another have brought upon him shall guide those to rectitude and good morals, whom nature is unable to guide because of their excessive ambition or stupidity. A famous man, an upright and excellent emperor, once ordained respecting the decrees of kings, that if a king should become so angry with any one that he planned his death, and if his guilt were not so evident that he could with justice be condemned at once to an immediate 316death, that man should be kept in the king’s garth or in custody forty days before his case should be finally determined.[314] And it would be well if every king would observe this enactment, in order that he might frame his decisions with regard for reason and justice and not in sudden anger. If a man is convicted of an offence for which law and justice impose a fine but not death, the king, or the lord who governs the land, shall seize his wealth, not because he loves and covets the money, but because a just penalty and the laws of the land demand it. If all these things which we have now set forth are carefully observed, I believe that those who are appointed to be judges will suffer no great reproaches from God.

However, if the accused are men driven to crime by arrogance, ambition, greed, or selfishness, the penalties should be harsh, although justice and the law must be upheld in every case. In situations like the ones we just discussed, the sentence should be as severe as the law allows; while in the earlier cases, the law should take into account the challenges that were present. If the distress that led to the wrongdoing is significant, the punishment should be adjusted accordingly. But if a king or any ruler, who acts as a judge and has the authority to punish, resorts to taking a life as punishment, he should always do so with great reluctance, mourning the death and misfortune of the offender in his heart. He must be cautious not to kill out of his own cruelty or in anger and hatred toward the one who is to die. He should execute justice out of love for those who will continue to live, believing that they will enjoy greater safety and lead better lives after witnessing the death and troubles of such a person; and because he intends for the fear and terror that another's misfortunes have caused him to guide those who would otherwise stray because of their excessive ambition or ignorance toward righteousness and good ethics. A notable and honorable emperor once decreed that if a king became so angry with someone that he plotted their death, and if their guilt was not so clear that they could be justly sentenced to immediate execution, that person should be held in the king's custody for forty days before their case is resolved. It would be wise for every king to follow this rule so that he can make his decisions based on reason and justice rather than impulsive anger. If a man is found guilty of an offense for which the law imposes a fine rather than death, the king or lord governing the land shall seize his property, not out of greed, but because the law demands a fitting penalty. If all these guidelines are carefully observed, I believe that those appointed as judges will not face significant reproaches from God.


LX
 
THE SAME TOPIC CONTINUED

Son. It seems reasonable that a land, which is placed in charge of a ruler who attends carefully to these things, will be well governed; and the people ought to show proper appreciation of his government. Still with your permission I shall now ask about certain matters that interest me concerning rightful verdicts. You referred to an order given by an emperor as to punishments decreed by a king (which looks to me like good law), that 317a man who had incurred the king’s wrath should be given a reprieve of forty days in the king’s custody, lest a verdict be rendered too quickly in his case and in violent anger; and it seems to me that a king will need to possess much good nature, if he is to spare a man in his anger. But even so righteous and holy a man as Moses was could not control his wrath on that day, when he came in anger to the people of Israel; for I am told that his wrath rose to such violence that he dashed the two tables of stone, which he bore in his arms and upon which God Himself had written the ten commandments of His law with His own fingers, against a rock and broke them into fragments in his fury; and rushing at once to arms, he and the men who were with him slew many hundred persons that day.[315] I have also heard that David in sudden wrath ordered the man, who came from the battle in which Saul fell, bringing the tidings that Saul was dead, to be slain immediately;[316] and he did not order him to be kept for further inquiry.

Son. It makes sense that a land governed by a ruler who pays close attention to such matters will be well managed, and the people should show proper appreciation for his leadership. However, with your permission, I’d like to ask about some things that concern me regarding fair judgments. You mentioned an order from an emperor about punishments set by a king (which seems like just law) that a man who has angered the king should be given a reprieve of forty days in the king’s custody, so that a judgment isn’t rushed out of anger. It seems to me that a king needs to have a lot of good nature to spare someone in his anger. But even someone as righteous and holy as Moses couldn’t control his wrath that day when he came to the people of Israel in anger; I’ve heard that his anger was so great that he threw down the two stone tablets he was carrying, on which God Himself had written the Ten Commandments, against a rock and shattered them in his rage. He immediately took up arms, and he and his companions killed many hundreds of people that day.[315] I’ve also heard that David, in a fit of anger, ordered the man who brought news from the battle where Saul died to be killed right away;[316] and he didn’t wait to investigate further.

Father. Remember what I called to your attention in an earlier remark, namely, that these laws are intended for men who do not fall into such evident transgressions that a rightful verdict can condemn them to immediate death. But when Moses came away from God, he knew God’s wrath toward all the people of Israel, and consequently did a deed of kindness and not of hatred when by this chastisement he turned them from error and evil ways; just as I have told you that a king in punishing should be moved by kindness and not by hatred. For all penalties that are inflicted because 318of hatred are murder; while punishment inflicted for the sake of love and justice is a holy deed and not murder.

Father. Remember what I mentioned earlier, that these laws are meant for people who don’t commit obvious crimes that would deserve immediate death. But when Moses returned from God, he understood God's anger towards all the people of Israel, and so he acted out of kindness, not hatred, by correcting them and steering them away from their wrongdoings; just like I’ve said that a king should be motivated by kindness, not hatred, when punishing. All penalties given out of hatred are murder; while punishment given out of love and justice is a righteous act and not murder.


LXI
 
ABOUT THE DEATH PENALTY

Son. Now, if you permit, I wish to ask more fully about penalties; for few men, indeed, are able to comprehend how it can be a good, holy, and loving deed to take a man’s life; wherefore I with many others on the outside should like to have you explain briefly how it can be a good and proper deed to slay men in righteous punishment; inasmuch as all gentle and peaceful persons have a great aversion to manslaughter, regarding it as evil and sinful.

Son. If you don't mind, I want to ask more about punishments because very few people really understand how it can be a good, holy, and loving act to take someone's life. So, along with many others, I would like you to explain briefly how it's considered a good and just action to kill people as a form of righteous punishment, especially since all kind and peaceful individuals really dislike manslaughter, seeing it as harmful and wrong.

Father. The subjects that we are now discussing are clearly illustrated in the case of Moses. Holy man as he was and meek and right-minded in every way, had he known that his act of punishment was sinful like any other slaughter, he would not have ordered it. But if he had been so zealous in his obstinate wrath that he had done this deed in anger rather than for the sake of justice, God’s righteousness would surely have punished him with a severe chastisement and stern revenge for the great slaughter that he committed. For Moses commanded every man who took up arms with him to spare none, neither father nor brother nor other kinsmen, if they had been guilty of the deed that had called God’s anger down upon them. Moses showed a threefold righteousness in this chastisement: for those who were with him in the slaughter sanctified their hands in the blood of those whom they slew, since in their deed they rendered 319obedience to their leader and fulfilled the sacred laws. Those who survived regretted their sins and turned their hearts to penitence for having broken the law, while those who were slain were cleansed in their penance and in the pangs which they suffered when they died. And it was much better for them to suffer a brief pain in death than a long torture in hell. Of the same character are the penalties that kings impose; for a king cleanses himself in the blood of the unjust, if he slays them as a rightful punishment to fulfil the sacred laws. Moreover, there are many capable men who fear punishment alone, and would commit crimes if they were not in terror of the king’s revenge. But one who is to suffer punishment will confess his sins and repent of his misdeeds; though if he did not see a sudden death prepared for him, he would show no repentance. He is, therefore, saved by his repentance and the pangs which he suffers in his death. And it is better for him to suffer a brief punishment here than endless agony and torture; for God never punishes the same sin twice. Consequently the king’s punishment becomes a good and kind deed toward all those who are subject to him, for he would rather have the one who is to be punished suffer a brief pain here for his wickedness than to be lost forever, in the world to come. Through this kindness he also saves the righteous and peaceable from the avarice and the wickedness of the violent. We may, therefore, conclude that punishment is a good deed, if it is exacted according to a righteous verdict; for King Saul was deposed from his kingship because he failed to punish according to God’s orders at the time when he invaded the kingdoms of Amalek and the Amorites.

Father. The topics we're discussing are clearly shown in the case of Moses. Although he was a holy man, humble and wise in every way, if he had understood that his act of punishment was as sinful as any other killing, he wouldn’t have commanded it. However, if his stubborn anger drove him to commit this act out of rage rather than for the sake of justice, God’s righteousness would have rightfully punished him with severe consequences for the great slaughter he caused. Moses instructed every man who fought alongside him to spare no one—neither father, brother, nor other relatives—if they were guilty of the actions that brought God's wrath upon them. Moses exhibited a threefold righteousness in this punishment: those who participated in the slaughter stained their hands with the blood of those they killed, as they obeyed their leader and upheld the sacred laws. The survivors regretted their sins and turned to repentance for breaking the law, while the slain were cleansed through their suffering at death. It was far better for them to endure brief pain in death than to face prolonged torment in hell. The same principle applies to the punishments imposed by kings; a king purifies himself with the blood of the unjust if he executes them as just retribution in accordance with sacred laws. Additionally, there are many capable individuals who only fear punishment and would commit crimes if not for the dread of the king’s retribution. However, those facing punishment will confess their sins and repent for their wrongdoings; yet if they didn't see immediate death awaiting them, they would show no remorse. Thus, they are saved by their repentance and the pain they experience in death. It’s better for them to endure brief punishment here than eternal agony; for God never punishes the same sin twice. Therefore, the king’s punishment is ultimately an act of goodness toward all under his rule, as he would prefer the offender to suffer momentarily for their wickedness rather than be lost forever in the afterlife. Through this act of kindness, he also protects the righteous and peaceful from the greed and malice of the violent. We can conclude that punishment is a good act when carried out according to a just verdict; for King Saul lost his kingship because he failed to punish in line with God’s orders when he invaded the kingdoms of Amalek and the Amorites.


320

LXII
 
THE SAME TOPIC CONTINUED

Son. Now I wish to ask you why David slew the man of whom we spoke earlier, him who brought the tidings that Saul had fallen, and whether he slew him justly or did it from sudden anger.

Son. Now I want to ask you why David killed the man we talked about earlier, the one who brought the news that Saul had died, and if he killed him fairly or if it was out of rage.

Father. When the man had told these tidings, David asked how he knew them. And he said that he had lifted up weapons against Saul at the king’s own request. When David heard this, he spoke thus: “A wretched creature you are, who dared to lay hands on the Lord’s anointed; and it is better for you to suffer a swift punishment here than to have this crime pursue you into everlasting hell.” Thereupon David ordered him to be slain. But when he who had hoped to receive a joyous welcome and good gifts for his tidings, saw that death was to be his reward, he repented that he had falsely imputed this crime to himself and would gladly have withdrawn his words, if he had been permitted to do so. But David spoke thus: “Your own testimony condemns you and not I; for you have charged yourself with this murder of the Lord’s anointed.” We have other and similar instances in the case of the men who slew Ishbosheth, the son of Saul, hoping thereby to win David’s friendship; and they fared to David with the news that they had slain his enemy who had planned to rise up against him and his kingship. But when David heard these tidings he answered in this wise; “Wretches you are for this deed, having slain your lord, though you 321were Ishbosheth’s own men; you have committed a vile and treacherous crime in laying hands upon your lord, and you have not acted as if you were my men and did this out of loyalty to me. Now it will be necessary for you to suffer a swift revenge and a prompt punishment, lest this deed draw you into everlasting torment.” Then David ordered his men to cut off their hands and feet and afterwards to hang them beside a pool in a city called Hebron.[317]

Father. When the man shared this news, David asked how he knew it. He replied that he had raised weapons against Saul at the king's own request. When David heard this, he said, "You are a miserable creature for daring to harm the Lord’s anointed; it’s better for you to face quick punishment here than let this crime follow you into eternal damnation." Then David ordered him to be executed. But when the man, who had hoped for a warm welcome and generous rewards for his news, realized that death awaited him, he regretted falsely claiming this crime and would have gladly taken back his words if he could. But David said, "Your own testimony condemns you, not me; you have accused yourself of murdering the Lord’s anointed." We have other similar examples with the men who killed Ishbosheth, Saul’s son, believing this would earn David’s favor. They came to David with the news that they had killed his enemy who was planning to rise against him and his crown. But when David heard this news, he responded, "You are wretched for this act, having killed your lord, even though you were Ishbosheth’s own men; you committed a vile and treacherous crime by laying hands on your lord, and you did not act as if you were my men doing this out of loyalty to me. Now, you will need to face quick retribution and punishment to prevent this deed from leading you into eternal torment." Then David ordered his men to cut off their hands and feet and later hang them by a pool in a city called Hebron.[317]


LXIII
 
THE JUDGMENTS OF GOD SHOWN THROUGH THE STORY OF DAVID AND SAUL

Son. I will venture to ask one more question about those cases in which it seems to me that God has passed rather strange sentences. I am asking chiefly because I find it hard to understand what reason or circumstance can have caused the difference in these decrees which I now intend to bring up. You stated earlier in your speech that God deprived Saul of his kingdom because he was too lenient in cases of homicide, though a man will think that this was no great offence, as it is easy enough to slay multitudes if that be regarded a better deed than to let them live. Still, this leniency proved such a grievous fault that God said He regretted having chosen Saul king over his people, and immediately threatened—what He later carried out—that the kingship should never be transmitted to his descendants; and immediately, though Saul was still living, He 322appointed another to be king after his days. But after David had become king, he committed a crime which will scarcely seem less when reflected upon; for he committed adultery with the wife of Uriah his knight, a good and faithful man, and afterwards contrived his death, not as a just penalty but because he wanted his wife. But later, when Nathan the prophet pointed out the sin to David and he confessed, he was forgiven at once; indeed, it seemed as if his kingship was more stable after that time than before. Now I do not know which is the worse crime, to kill an innocent man and violate his wife, or to let the guilty have their lives. Many a man, who is ignorant as to the reason why, may indeed imagine that God loved David more than Saul, and that David’s crime was counted less for that reason. But inasmuch as God always judges according to justice and without regard to persons, it would be sinful to hold wrong ideas about this; and it would be well if you could add a few words in explanation, unless you think that my questions are stupid. It may also be that great lords who are chosen to be judges will get a better insight into these things, if they are clearly expressed.

Son. I want to ask one more question about those situations where it seems to me that God has made some unusual judgments. I’m asking mainly because I struggle to understand what reason or circumstance could have led to the differences in these decisions that I’m about to mention. Earlier in your speech, you mentioned that God took away Saul's kingdom because he was too lenient in cases of murder, yet it seems to many that this wasn't a serious offense since it’s easy to kill many if that’s seen as better than letting them live. Still, this leniency was such a serious flaw that God said He regretted making Saul king, and immediately threatened—something He later did—that the kingship would never pass on to Saul's descendants; and right away, even while Saul was still alive, He appointed another to be king after him. But after David became king, he committed a crime that might seem even worse upon reflection; he had an affair with Uriah the Hittite’s wife, a good and loyal man, and then arranged for his death, not as a proper punishment but because he wanted his wife. However, when Nathan the prophet confronted David about his sin and he confessed, he was forgiven right away; in fact, it seemed like his kingship was more secure after that than it had been before. Now, I can't tell which is the worse crime: to kill an innocent man and violate his wife, or to let the guilty live. Many people, not knowing the reason why, might think that God favored David over Saul, and that’s why David’s crime was considered less serious. But since God always judges with fairness and without bias, it would be wrong to have mistaken views about this; it would really help if you could add a few comments for clarification, unless you think my questions are foolish. It could also be that high-ranking judges will gain a better understanding of these issues if they’re clearly explained.

Father. This question is of such a character that it will demand an extended answer, if it is to be fully understood. But since it has been brought up, I shall be glad to answer it as far as I can and as briefly as I can. First it is necessary to recall what I said in an earlier speech when we talked about dooms,—when they should be severe and when lenient: I then brought out the fact that if a good and peace-loving man should 323fall into sin and his deed should seem evil to him and he were anxious to do penance, then the judgment ought to be merciful in his case on account of human nature; for human nature is so frail that no one can be so careful as never to fall into sin. But some add to their offence by taking pride in it, and they are not careful to avoid falling into another sin. Now David was of all men the most adroit in the use of weapons in warfare and he was by nature quite severe in righteous chastisement; but he was a kind-hearted man, friendly toward everyone, and sympathetic toward all who suffered misfortunes. He was also trustworthy in every respect, honest and faithful in friendship and in all his promises, and so virtuous that he would allow nothing vicious about his person,—indeed his like was not found among all the people of Israel; for when God chose David to be king, He testified in these words, saying that He had found a man after His own heart. But human frailty caused him to fall in the matter that we mentioned earlier: he violated Uriah’s wife. But after he had fallen into this transgression and when he was once more alone, he repented deeply, sighing and weeping. Inasmuch as the rules of the law would condemn this crime as a shameful reproach, if it were rumored among the people, David planned to keep the matter quiet, letting God see his repentance but keeping the people in ignorance of his offence, lest they should take his misdeed as an example and regard it as less serious to fall into sin and transgression if they knew of his guilt. So David sought to hide his guilt by a crafty design: for as soon as he learned that Bathsheba, Uriah’s wife, was pregnant, 324he sent for Uriah, and hoping to avoid taking his life, he ordered him to lie with his wife so that the offspring might be known as his, while David would atone in secret for the sin of his whoredom and never afterward come near Uriah’s wife. But when he found that Uriah happened to be unwilling to lie with his wife, he contrived to conceal his sin from men, though he increased it in the sight of God. Later, when Nathan the prophet charged David with all this guilt, he answered as if condemning himself, speaking these words: “So heavy and evil is my transgression that I am worthy of death because of this thing; a wretch am I to have set such an example before God’s people, over whom He has appointed me ruler and judge; rather would I now suffer a speedy death than have this misdeed pursue me to hell. Now since I have set an evil example before the people of God by my sin, I am ready to suffer punishment according to the Lord’s will as a warning to the people not to fall into such transgression.” But when Truth and Justice saw David’s penitence, they permitted Mercy to pass the judgment; for the prophet Nathan replied in this wise: “God sees your repentance, and He does not desire you to suffer death for your sin, but He will punish you with an endurable chastisement for this deed before you die.” Now you must know that God did not forgive David’s crime so completely as to excuse him from just punishment; for this was the first penalty that the king suffered from God: the child which he had begotten with Bathsheba was a man child and very lovely, wherefore David much desired that it might live; but it did not please God to let him enjoy the child 325which he had begotten in such a sinful way. Nevertheless, David lay seven days upon the earth in the raiment of mourning, fasting and imploring God to let the child live. But God would not hear his prayer, and the child expired on the seventh day.[318] And this was the second punishment, that God refused to let David build him a temple;[319] God even called him a murderer, because he had deprived Uriah of life. But for the adultery which he had committed with Uriah’s wife, he had to suffer this disgrace, that his son Absalom, in the sight of all the people, went in unto David’s concubines and thus dishonored his father before all the people.[320]

Father. This question is significant enough to require a lengthy answer for full understanding. However, since it has been raised, I'll gladly respond as much as I can and as briefly as possible. First, it's important to recall what I mentioned in an earlier discussion about judgments—when they should be harsh and when they should be lenient. At that time, I pointed out that if a good, peace-loving person slips into sin, feels remorse for it, and wishes to atone, then the judgment in such cases should be merciful due to human nature; because human nature is so fragile that no one can be entirely careful to avoid sin. Some people, however, compound their offenses by taking pride in them and are careless about not falling into further sin. David was highly skilled in warfare and naturally strict in just punishment; yet he was a kind-hearted man, friendly with everyone, and sympathetic to those facing misfortune. He was also reliable, honest, and faithful in friendship and all his promises, so virtuous that he kept himself from all vice—truly, there was no one like him among all the people of Israel; for when God chose David to be king, He testified that He had found a man after His own heart. But human weakness caused him to fall into the matter we discussed earlier: he committed adultery with Uriah’s wife. After this transgression, when he was alone again, he felt deep remorse, sighing and weeping. Since the law would shamefully condemn this crime if it became public, David planned to keep it secret, letting God see his repentance but keeping the people unaware of his wrongdoing, fearing they might view his sin as less serious if they knew about it. So David sought to hide his guilt with a clever plan: once he found out that Bathsheba, Uriah’s wife, was pregnant, he called for Uriah, hoping to spare his life by sending him home to sleep with his wife, so the child could be thought of as Uriah's while David secretly atoned for his sin and never approached Uriah’s wife again. But when Uriah refused to go home and be with his wife, David tried to conceal his sin from people, though he increased his guilt in God’s eyes. Later, when the prophet Nathan confronted David about his wrongdoing, David responded as if condemning himself, saying, “My sin is so great and evil that I deserve death; I am a wretch for having set such an example before God’s people, who I am appointed to rule and judge; I would rather face a quick death than have my misdeed lead me to hell. Since I have set a bad example for God’s people through my sin, I’m ready to face punishment from the Lord as a warning for others not to fall into such transgression.” But when Truth and Justice saw David’s repentance, they allowed Mercy to pass the judgment; the prophet Nathan replied, “God sees your repentance, and He doesn’t want you to suffer death for your sin, but He will punish you with a lasting consequence before you die.” It’s important to know that God did not forgive David’s crime completely enough to exempt him from just punishment; the first consequence David faced from God was the death of the child he had with Bathsheba, a beautiful boy whom David desperately wanted to live; however, God did not allow him to enjoy the child conceived in such a sinful manner. Regardless, David lay on the ground in mourning for seven days, fasting and pleading with God to spare the child's life. But God didn’t answer his prayer, and the child died on the seventh day.[318] And this was the second punishment: God refused to let David build Him a temple;[319] God even called him a murderer for taking Uriah's life. For the adultery with Uriah’s wife, he had to endure the disgrace of his son Absalom publicly dishonoring him by sleeping with David’s concubines.[320]

You have also asked which crime was the worse, that David caused Uriah to be slain without guilt and seduced his wife, or that Saul refused to kill so many people of Amalek; and you shall know of a truth that Saul’s crime was the greater; for no offence is graver than to be disobedient toward one’s superiors, as Saul was. And you may observe even at this day among cloister folk, that if a monk is disobedient toward his abbot, where an abbot rules the cloister, or toward the prior, where such a one controls, he is forthwith expelled from the holy order and from the monastery and is thenceforth regarded as a layman. Likewise, if a priest refuses to obey his superior the bishop, he is at once deprived of clerical honors, and the right to say mass is taken from him as well as all other official duties. In the same way, if a bishop, be he humble or powerful, 326refuses to obey his superior, he is immediately shorn of his dignity and all his office; and after that he is regarded among learned men as any other layman unworthy of any distinction. And it ought to be even more evident that it could not prosper Saul to be disobedient to such a lord as God Himself, when he was ordered to invade Amalek and the land of the Amorites and to slay all that was living. God took His rod of punishment and placed it in Saul’s hands, bidding him execute His wrath and spare nothing that was living; to burn fortified cities, farmsteads, clothing, and whatever else there was; to lay the entire land in ruins and thus cleanse it with sword and ax and fire. Saul, however, carried out the vengeance that he was charged with in another way, by destroying everything that was lacking in beauty or value; but whatever seemed to him to be beautiful, valuable, and worth possessing he spared, brought home to his country, and distributed among his men. But when Samuel came to Saul and showed him the wrath of God, Saul spoke as if excusing himself: “Praise be to God, for I have fulfilled His command: I invaded Amalek and visited the entire kingdom with fire and sword; but King Agag I have brought with me, wishing to honor God’s command by slaying him here, if He wills that he die. Fat oxen and fine sheep I have brought hither to sacrifice such to God as are acceptable to Him; and the children of the chief men I have brought hither to be kept in bondage and distress, doing fitting service for ourselves.”

You’ve also asked which crime was worse: that David had Uriah killed without guilt and seduced his wife, or that Saul refused to kill so many Amalekites. You should know the truth that Saul’s crime was greater; there’s no greater offense than being disobedient to one’s superiors, as Saul was. Even today, you can see that if a monk disobeys his abbot in a monastery, or the prior if there’s one in charge, he is immediately expelled from the holy order and the monastery, and he is seen as a layman from then on. Similarly, if a priest doesn’t obey his superior, the bishop, he is instantly stripped of his clerical honors, the right to say mass, and all other official responsibilities. Likewise, if a bishop, whether humble or powerful, refuses to obey his superior, he loses his dignity and all his office; afterward, learned men regard him just like any other layman, unworthy of any distinction. It should be clear that it couldn’t go well for Saul to disobey such a lord as God Himself when he was told to invade Amalek and the land of the Amorites and to kill everything alive. God gave Saul the task of executing His wrath, telling him to spare nothing that lived; to burn fortified cities, farms, clothes, and anything else; to destroy the entire land and purify it with sword, axe, and fire. Saul, however, took a different approach to the vengeance he was charged with, destroying everything that lacked beauty or value, but he spared anything he found beautiful, valuable, or worth keeping, bringing it back to his country and distributing it among his men. When Samuel came to Saul and revealed God’s anger, Saul responded as if to excuse himself: “Praise be to God, for I have fulfilled His command: I invaded Amalek and laid waste to the entire kingdom with fire and sword; but I’ve brought King Agag with me, intending to honor God’s command by killing him here, if He wishes for him to die. I’ve brought fat oxen and fine sheep to sacrifice to God, which are acceptable to Him; and I’ve also brought the children of the chief men to keep in bondage and distress, doing useful service for ourselves.”

Then Samuel replied: “How can God now accept that as a sacrifice which He has Himself cursed in His 327anger? For God demands a blessed and not an accursed sacrifice; and you shall know of a surety that obedience is more pleasing to God than any sacrifice.” Truth stood by and said: “What need is there to conceal the motive that induced Saul to neglect doing as God commanded him? Saul imagined himself so firmly established in his kingship that he could order these things more according to his own liking than to God’s command; he showed excessive pride in failing to remember who had given him the power. And this is the reason why he took good horses, oxen, sheep, and much else of value, that he might satisfy the greed of his knights and the rapacity of his other warriors rather than carry out the commands of God. And he spoke falsely when he said that he had brought horses and sheep and other things of value into his kingdom to sacrifice them to God; for he knew that a cursed sacrifice was not acceptable to God.” Then the decision was left to Justice and she decreed in this wise: “Whereas God took His rod of punishment, and placing it in Saul’s hands bade him execute the divine wrath upon a cursed people, let that punishment now come upon Saul and his family which he failed to visit upon those whom God had commanded him to carry it out upon. But the same rod of punishment that was given to Saul to shake over others, another shall now hold and shake over Saul and all his kin. And because he wished in his avarice to possess the riches that were forbidden him, let him now forfeit those riches that were given to him before.”[321] But the reason why Justice passed such a severe judgment upon 328Saul was that God knew his disposition thoroughly. For it was in Saul’s nature to be proud and stubborn in the face of God; and as soon as he thought himself firmly established in his kingdom, he became greedy and avaricious, as is evident from this account.

Then Samuel replied, “How can God accept as a sacrifice what He has cursed in His anger? God desires a blessed sacrifice, not an accursed one; and you will surely know that obedience is more pleasing to God than any sacrifice.” Truth stood by and said, “What’s the point of hiding the reason why Saul neglected to follow God’s command? Saul thought he was so secure in his kingship that he could make decisions based on his own preferences rather than God’s orders; he showed excessive pride by forgetting who gave him the power. This is why he took fine horses, oxen, sheep, and other valuable things—he wanted to satisfy the greed of his knights and the greediness of his other warriors instead of obeying God’s commands. He lied when he claimed he brought horses and sheep and other valuables into his kingdom to sacrifice them to God; he knew that a cursed sacrifice wouldn’t be accepted by God.” Then the decision was left to Justice, and she declared: “Since God handed His rod of punishment to Saul, instructing him to carry out divine wrath on a cursed people, let that punishment now fall on Saul and his family, which he failed to impose on those whom God commanded him to punish. The same rod of punishment that Saul was supposed to wield over others will now be held over him and all his kin. And because he desired the forbidden riches, let him now lose the wealth that was given to him before.” But the reason Justice passed such a harsh judgment on Saul was that God understood his true nature. Saul was proud and stubborn before God; as soon as he felt securely established in his kingdom, he became greedy and avaricious, as this account clearly shows.

Now there was this difference between the tempers of David and Saul: when Nathan the prophet charged David with sin, he spoke reproachfully of his fault, almost as if condemning himself, and implored mercy, though willing to suffer punishment, as if prepared to accept with gratitude any terms which God might impose for his misdeed; therefore he won favor through the lenient judgment of Mercy. Yet, his son died because of Uriah’s death, though David himself did not die; and for violating Uriah’s wife he suffered a great disgrace in that his son dishonored him in the sight of all the people.

Now there was a difference between the personalities of David and Saul: when Nathan the prophet confronted David about his sin, he spoke critically of his wrongdoing, almost as if he were condemning himself, and begged for mercy, even though he was ready to face punishment, as if he would accept with gratitude any conditions God might impose for his mistake; as a result, he gained favor through the gentle judgment of Mercy. However, his son died because of Uriah’s death, even though David himself did not die; and for sleeping with Uriah’s wife, he endured great shame as his son dishonored him in front of everyone.

But when Samuel accused Saul of his crime, he replied as if defending his cause and praised himself for having done so well and spoke in this wise: “Praise be to God, for I have done what He commanded;” though he knew in his own mind that anything else was nearer the truth. Therefore he was stricken by the sentence of Justice, God seeing his arrogant boasting and lying excuses. But his arrogance and envy became even more evident after he discovered that God was angry with him; for Saul fell ill; and now and then madness came upon him, so that he had to be watched when the malady troubled him. Then it was learned that if a man could be found who could play the harp well before him, he would find relief and the illness would 329afflict him less. So they found a lovely youth whose name was David, the son of Jesse in Bethlehem, who knew how to strike the harp skilfully; he came to the king, and whenever the malady came upon Saul, David, standing before him, struck the harp and the illness departed immediately. But when Saul discovered that the malady was less severe, he loved David highly and made him his shield bearer.[322] Samuel, however, had already anointed him king in secret, no one knowing it but his father and his brothers. David remained with Saul many days and served him faithfully; and all men perceived that God was with him in all his doings. Saul, too, was well disposed toward him at first: he gave him his daughter and assigned him a troop to command.[323] But after Saul had won his great victory over the Philistines and David had slain the giant Goliath and they were returning from the warfare, women came forth from cities and fortresses, dancing toward them and singing praises to them for their victory. And the burden of their song was this, that Saul had conquered a thousand but David ten thousand.[324] When Saul heard this he was seized with wrath and envy toward David and said in his own thoughts: “Now I perceive that God has chosen this man to take the kingdom after me instead of my sons; but I shall try to upset this plan if I can, though so cleverly that no one shall perceive that I kill him intentionally.” A few days later Saul’s habitual illness came upon him; but David took his harp and, standing before him, played as was his wont to relieve the king’s illness. Saul had a javelin in his hand which 330he threw at David, aiming to drive it through him and pin him to the wall of the room. Thus he had planned to avoid responsibility for the murder by leading the people to think he had done it in frenzy and not with evil intent. David escaped and found security from that peril. But when Saul saw that David had escaped and he had not caught him, he sent him on frequent forays among heathen people in the hope that he would be slain in warfare. But the more frequently David went out into battle, the more frequent victories and the greater honors did he win; and God magnified him before the eyes of all the people. And the more Saul saw him prosper, the more he envied him.[325]

But when Samuel confronted Saul about his wrongdoing, Saul responded defensively, boasting about how well he had followed God’s commands, even though he knew deep down that was not true. As a result, he faced the consequences of Justice, with God recognizing his arrogance and deceit. Saul's arrogance and jealousy became even clearer once he realized God was angry with him; he fell ill, experiencing bouts of madness that required him to be monitored during his episodes. It was then discovered that if someone could be found to play the harp well for him, it would provide relief and lessen his suffering. They found a talented young man named David, the son of Jesse from Bethlehem, who could play the harp skillfully. He came to the king, and every time Saul experienced his episodes, David played the harp, and the illness would immediately subside. When Saul realized the attacks were less severe, he grew fond of David and appointed him as his armor-bearer. However, Samuel had already secretly anointed David as king, a fact known only to his father and brothers. David stayed with Saul for many days, faithfully serving him, and everyone could see that God was with him in everything he did. At first, Saul was well-disposed toward David; he even gave him his daughter and assigned him a group of soldiers to command. But after Saul achieved a significant victory over the Philistines and David killed the giant Goliath, they returned from battle to the sound of women celebrating, dancing, and singing praises for their victory. The refrain of their song was that Saul had slain thousands, but David had killed ten thousands. When Saul heard this, he was filled with rage and jealousy toward David, realizing in his heart, “Now I see that God has chosen this man to take the kingdom from me rather than pass it to my sons; I will do my best to prevent this, though I’ll have to be clever about it so that no one suspects I intend to harm him.” A few days later, Saul's recurring illness struck again, but David, as usual, took his harp and played to soothe the king. With a javelin in hand, Saul threw it at David, trying to pin him to the wall. He aimed to make it look like an accident, convincing everyone he acted out of madness rather than malice. David managed to escape and found safety from that danger. But when Saul realized David had gotten away and he hadn’t captured him, he started sending David on dangerous missions among enemy forces, hoping he would be killed in battle. However, the more David went into combat, the more victories and honors he achieved, and God made him great in the sight of the people. The more Saul witnessed David's success, the more he envied him.

Now you can imagine the state of King Saul’s mind: he could say nothing against David, only what was good. But since he perceived that God loved David much because of his humility and loyalty, he envied him as Cain envied his brother Abel because God loved him. Indeed, Saul’s enmity toward David became so evident that he could not conceal his intentions to kill him. Then Jonathan, Saul’s son, reminded the king that it would be a sin to slay an innocent man, speaking in this wise: “My lord, why are you angry with your servant David? If there is any guilt on his part that may be injurious to your kingdom or dignity, every man who is with you here will seek his life; and we can seize him whenever we like, for he is not on his guard against us, knowing himself to be guiltless. He has served you long and has been faithful in all things; he fought against great odds when he slew Goliath, and 331God rescued your entire kingdom through David’s wonderful victory, which he won fighting unarmed against a giant. He has waited upon you in your distressing illness; and wherever you have placed him at the head of the host, he has brought a vigorous defense to your kingdom, and no one knows that he has been anything but loyal. Therefore conquer your wrath, sire, and do not fall into such an evident sin of murder before God as to slay an innocent man.”[326] Saul, however, became only the more wrathful and charged with treason his son and everyone else who spoke a good word for David.

Now you can picture King Saul’s state of mind: he could only say good things about David. But he realized that God loved David a lot because of his humility and loyalty, which made him envious, like Cain was of his brother Abel because God favored him. In fact, Saul’s hatred for David became so clear that he couldn’t hide his intentions to kill him. Then Jonathan, Saul’s son, reminded the king that it would be a sin to kill an innocent man, saying, “My lord, why are you angry with your servant David? If he has done anything wrong that could harm your kingdom or your honor, everyone here would want him dead; we could easily take him out since he doesn’t suspect us, believing himself to be innocent. He has served you faithfully for a long time; he fought against tremendous odds when he defeated Goliath, and God saved your entire kingdom through David’s amazing victory over the giant, and he did it without any weapons. He has been there for you during your serious illness; wherever you’ve placed him in charge of the army, he has provided strong defense for your kingdom, and no one sees him as anything but loyal. So, please calm your anger, sire, and don’t commit the obvious sin of murder by killing an innocent man.” Saul, however, became even more angry and accused his son and everyone else who defended David of treason.

David fled from King Saul’s wrath with a few men, but provided with neither clothes nor weapons. He came to the city called Nob, the bishop of which was Ahimelech, a son of Ahitub the bishop; but Ahitub was the son of Ichabod, the son of Phineas, the son of Eli the bishop. When David came to the bishop Ahimelech, he pretended to be traveling on an important mission for King Saul, and asked him to give him and his men something to eat and to furnish him with weapons. The bishop Ahimelech gave him such victuals as he had, but weapons he had none to give him except the sword that had belonged to Goliath; and this he gave him, for he did not know that he was a fugitive, but believed he was traveling on the king’s errand, as he had said. But so fierce was Saul’s hatred toward David, that as soon as he learned that the bishop Ahimelech had given him food, he seized the bishop and all his kinsmen and charged them with treason. The bishop replied to the 332charge in this wise: “My lord, I confess that I gave David what food I had and the weapon that I had, for he said he was traveling on an important errand on your behalf. Why should I not give hospitality to a man like David, who is the best and the most highly esteemed of all the men that you have about you except your sons, and who is furthermore your own son-in-law and has been faithful to you in all things? Never have I had any design against you or your honor. Do not think, my lord, that I, your servant, have plotted with David against your will; I could not know why David traveled in such distress, for he told me that you had sent him with important errands; nor did I know that he had fallen into any guilt against you.” Then Saul replied in fierce anger: “This I swear that you shall perish to-day, you and all your kin.” Thereupon he caused the bishop to be slain along with eighty-five other men, all of whom were robed in the priestly dignity. After that he ordered all who dwelt in the city of Nob to be slain, even women and children, and had the city burned.[327]

David fled from King Saul’s anger with a few men, but he had neither clothes nor weapons. He arrived at the city called Nob, where the priest was Ahimelech, a son of Ahitub, who was the son of Ichabod, the son of Phineas, the son of Eli the priest. When David came to the priest Ahimelech, he pretended to be on an important mission for King Saul and asked him to provide food and weapons for him and his men. The priest Ahimelech gave him all the food he had, but he had no weapons to offer except for the sword that had belonged to Goliath; and he gave it to him, believing he was on the king’s business as he had claimed. However, Saul’s hatred for David was so intense that as soon as he learned that the priest Ahimelech had given him food, he captured the priest and all his relatives and accused them of treason. The priest responded to the accusation this way: “My lord, I admit that I gave David the food I had and the weapon, because he told me he was on an important mission for you. Why shouldn’t I show hospitality to someone like David, who is the best and most honored of all your servants aside from your sons, and who is also your son-in-law and has been loyal to you in everything? I have never plotted against you or your reputation. Don’t think, my lord, that I, your servant, have conspired with David against your wishes; I had no way of knowing why David came to me in such distress, as he said you had sent him with important missions; nor did I know he had done anything wrong against you.” Then Saul responded in furious anger: “I swear you will die today, you and all your relatives.” He then ordered that the priest be killed along with eighty-five other men, all of whom wore priestly garments. After that, he commanded that everyone in the city of Nob be killed, even women and children, and had the city set on fire.[327]

Now I have revealed to you the ferocity which God found in Saul’s heart when he removed him from the kingship, and which later became evident in what you have now heard and in much else of like import, though I have told this only. The displeasure which the king incurred from God fell so heavily upon him, for the reason that God saw in his heart the fierce avarice which later began to appear. Now he wanted to kill David, 333though innocent, because he found that God loved him; and he slew the bishop, though guiltless, and so fierce was he that he slew everything in the city that had life and afterward burned the city. But where God had commanded him to use severity of this sort, there he had spared; here, however, he slew God’s servants in defiance of God’s command. But in David’s case God passed a more lenient judgment for the reason that, just as he perceived the ferocity in Saul’s heart, he found true repentance and clemency in David’s heart, as I shall now show you.

Now I have shown you the intensity that God saw in Saul’s heart when He took away his kingship, which later became clear in what you’ve heard and in much more, though I've only mentioned this. The anger that the king brought upon himself from God weighed heavily on him because God saw the fierce greed in his heart that began to show. He wanted to kill David, even though he was innocent, simply because he realized that God loved him; and he killed the priest, who was also blameless, and he was so ruthless that he killed everyone in the city who was alive and then burned it down. But where God had commanded him to act with such severity, he had shown mercy; here, though, he defied God’s command and killed God’s servants. In David’s situation, however, God judged him more kindly because, while He recognized the brutality in Saul’s heart, He found genuine repentance and mercy in David’s heart, as I will now explain.

There was a son of the bishop Ahimelech, Abiathar by name, who was hid in a cave when all those were slain of whom I have just spoken. Abiathar fled to David and told him all these happenings. But when David heard these tidings, he sighed and spoke thus in deep sorrow: “May God in His mercy forgive me for this slaughter, for I have too great a share in it, having eaten your father’s bread. And now since you have come hither, abide with me; and if God permits me to live, He will also protect you with me, and let whatever God wishes happen to us both.” Thereupon David elevated him to the bishop’s office which his father had held. But when David’s kinsmen learned that he was abiding in the forest, they joined him with a large force counting not fewer than four hundred men; and from that time on David grew in strength as God willed.[328] He camped among the hills with this force and made repeated attacks on Saul’s enemies, but never on the king himself or his men. But whenever Saul learned 334where David lay concealed, he marched out to seek him, intending to slay him.

There was a son of Bishop Ahimelech named Abiathar, who was hiding in a cave when all those I just mentioned were killed. Abiathar fled to David and told him everything that had happened. When David heard this news, he sighed and said in deep sorrow, “May God in His mercy forgive me for this massacre, for I have a significant part in it, having eaten your father's bread. Now that you are here, stay with me; and if God allows me to live, He will also protect you alongside me, and may whatever God wishes happen to both of us.” Then David appointed him to the bishop's position that his father had held. When David’s relatives learned that he was staying in the forest, they joined him with a large group of no fewer than four hundred men; from that point on, David grew stronger as God willed.[328] He camped among the hills with this group and made repeated attacks on Saul’s enemies, but never on the king himself or his soldiers. Whenever Saul found out where David was hiding, he set out to find him, intending to kill him.

Then it happened once, when David and his men were hiding in a large cave, that Saul entered this alone on a necessary errand. Then said David’s companions: “Now God has fulfilled what He has promised you and has delivered your enemy into your hands; be sure to secure this quarry.” David stole up and cut a piece off Saul’s mantle, though the king was not aware of it, and returned to his comrades. Then David’s companions said to him: “If you are unwilling to lay your own hand upon him, let us kill him.” David replied: “My crime would be as great before God, whether I do it myself or bid others do it. God keep me and all our companions from such a sin as to lay hands upon the Lord’s anointed. He is my master and I served him long; he is also the Lord’s anointed and it would be a great crime, if I were to lay hands upon him, for I have no revenge to take either for father or brother or any other kinsman; nor is it as if he had taken the throne which he sits upon from my kinsmen with violence or deceit; but God chose him to it and sanctified him to His service, honoring him with His own name. Wherefore it is right that He Who appointed him to the kingship should deprive him of it according to His will, but not I in vengeful audacity. And I swear this day that God alone shall call him, whether by demanding his soul or by causing him to fall in battle before his enemies; but as for my hands, they shall let him live many days. But I regret deeply that I injured his garment if he shall feel hurt or dishonored because of it.”

Then it happened one time, when David and his men were hiding in a big cave, that Saul entered alone on an urgent errand. David's friends said, "Now God has fulfilled what He promised you and has handed your enemy over to you; make sure to take this chance." David quietly went over and cut off a piece of Saul's robe, but the king didn't notice, and David went back to his friends. David's companions said to him, "If you're not going to do it yourself, let us kill him." David replied, "My guilt before God would be just as great whether I do it myself or tell others to do it. God protect me and all our friends from such a sin as harming the Lord’s anointed. He is my master, and I’ve served him for a long time; he is also the Lord’s chosen one, and it would be a terrible sin for me to harm him, since I have no grudge to settle for my father, brother, or any other relative; nor is it like he took the throne he occupies from my family through violence or deceit; God chose him for this role and set him apart for His purpose, honoring him with His own name. Therefore, it is right for the One who appointed him as king to remove him when He wishes, but not for me to act out of revenge. And I swear today that only God will decide his fate, whether by taking his life or allowing him to fall in battle against his enemies; but as for me, my hands will allow him to live many more days. However, I really regret that I damaged his garment if he feels hurt or disrespected because of it."

335When Saul had departed and returned to his host, David ran up on a hill and cried: “My lord, King Saul! can you hear?” But when Saul turned to hear what this man said, David bent both knees to the earth and bowing before the king said to him: “Those men do ill who tell you, my lord, that I mean to be your enemy; for now I have evidence here in my hand that your life was in my power to-day, when you left all your host and entered the cave alone; and it was no less in my power to injure your life than your clothes, for here I have in my hand a large piece of the skirt of your mantle. Now let God judge between us. You see how they have told lying tales, who say that I have striven after your life.” Saul appreciated these facts fully, for David spoke the truth; and he promised that he would nevermore hate David.[329] But not many days passed before Saul went out again to seek David, as he did constantly after that. Now it came to pass another time, when Saul had made a wearisome journey in search of David, that sleep came upon the king and all his host. And David went into the camp where Saul lay, but none was aware of it. The man who accompanied him was named Abishai and he said to David: “Now you can see that God surely intends to deliver your enemy into your hands, and it is not advisable to refuse what God Himself offers you. I will thrust my spear through him, if you will permit me, and then we shall return to our men.” David answered: “God has done this to tempt me and to see whether I would lay my hands on His anointed. Now I must answer as before, that God shall tear the kingship 336from him, either by demanding his soul or by causing him to fall before his enemies; but as for my hands, they shall let him live many days; for I have no revenge to cherish against him, either for plunder or for the loss of kinsmen, except such as was incurred while he was cleansing the land with righteous punishment; and it is neither my proper business nor that of anyone else to take revenge for such; for it is a more serious matter than even a wise man can conceive to lay hands on the Lord’s anointed, who is dedicated and hallowed to God. Let us take his saddle-cup and his spear for a proof, and then let us return to our forces.”[330]

335When Saul had left and gone back to his camp, David ran up a hill and shouted, “My lord, King Saul! Can you hear me?” When Saul turned to listen, David knelt down and bowed before the king, saying, “Those men are wrong who tell you, my lord, that I want to harm you. Look, I have proof in my hand that today I could have taken your life when you left your entire army and went into the cave alone. I could have harmed you just as easily as I could have taken a piece of your clothing, and here’s a large piece of your robe in my hand. Let God judge between us. You can see how those who say I’m trying to kill you are lying.” Saul fully understood this, for David spoke the truth, and he promised he would never again hate David.[329] But not many days passed before Saul went out again to find David, as he often did. One day, after a tiring journey searching for David, sleep fell upon the king and his entire army. David went into the camp where Saul was lying, and no one noticed him. His companion, Abishai, said to David, “Look, God has clearly handed your enemy over to you, and it’s wise to accept what God is offering you. Let me drive my spear through him, if you’ll allow me, and then we can go back to our men.” David replied, “God has done this to test me and see if I would harm His anointed one. I will say again that God will take the kingship away from him—either by taking his life or by allowing him to fall to his enemies. But I will let him live for now; I hold no grudge against him for his plundering or the loss of my relatives, except for what happened while he was punishing the land righteously. It’s not my place or anyone else's to seek revenge for that, because it’s a serious matter to lay hands on the Lord’s anointed, who is set apart for God. Let’s take his water jug and spear as proof, and then we can return to our troops.”[330]

Now you will understand the character of both King Saul and David from what I have just told you. David knew that he was chosen of God to govern, that he was the Lord’s anointed, consecrated and hallowed to God no less than Saul was. He also knew that God had rejected Saul. And God delivered Saul into David’s hands, so that he could have taken Saul’s life at any time, if he had wished. David showed great faithfulness and humility in this, that every time he saw Saul, he bowed before him and saluted him as any other unhallowed layman would, who had not been set apart for chieftainship. Although Saul lay in wait for his life, David continued to serve him, and worried the king’s enemies as much as he could. On the other hand, Saul had nothing against David except that he knew God had chosen him to be king; and he showed great wickedness and fierce hatred in striving to slay an innocent man, one who served him faithfully. He likewise displayed an 337inordinate vanity in wishing to make away with a man whom God Himself had chosen to rule after him. For these reasons God passed a severe judgment in Saul’s case; for He saw in Saul’s heart what men could not perceive, though subsequently God made this fact evident to the sight of men. But in David’s case God was more lenient, for the reason that He found him always humble and faithful in everything, as He made clear to men later on. There is further evidence of this in the fact, that as soon as David learned that Saul and his son Jonathan had fallen, he and all his host lamented in great sorrow, and David spoke these words: “Be ye cursed, ye mountains of Gilboa! May God nevermore send rain or dew or growing grass upon you, for you led King Saul and his son Jonathan along treacherous paths in their flight across your summits and refused to show them serviceable highways, whereby they could save their lives from the hands of the foeman; nor did you provide them with sheltering ramparts upon your heights. It is a bitter sorrow for all the people of Israel, that splendid chieftains like Saul and Jonathan should pass away from council and government. Great strength and power have perished this day, when such excellent princes are fallen as Saul and Jonathan were, and the many good knights with many good weapons and much good armor who have perished with them. Let the lesser men beware of God’s wrath, since He has allowed the heathen to lay hands on His anointed. Let the multitude bewail a loss like this, that such excellent rulers should fall before the heathen.”[331] Such words and many 338more like them David spoke that day, and thus he lamented their death rather than rejoiced in the fact that the realm had fallen to him and into his keeping. From this you will observe how upright he was, how honest and free from faults. But whenever human nature caused him to fall into sin, he forthwith showed keen repentance, imploring God’s mercy and compassion; and God gave heed at once to his honest regret.

Now you will understand the characters of both King Saul and David from what I’ve just shared with you. David knew he was chosen by God to lead, that he was the Lord’s anointed, set apart and dedicated to God just like Saul was. He also knew that God had rejected Saul. God had delivered Saul into David’s hands, meaning David could have taken Saul’s life at any moment if he wanted to. David demonstrated great loyalty and humility; every time he saw Saul, he bowed before him and greeted him like any ordinary person, someone who hadn’t been chosen for leadership. Even though Saul was out to kill him, David kept serving him and did what he could to harass the king's enemies. On the other side, Saul had no reason to go after David except that he knew God had picked him to be king; and he showed great evil and intense hatred in trying to kill an innocent man who faithfully served him. Saul also displayed excessive pride in wanting to get rid of someone God Himself had chosen to rule after him. For these reasons, God passed a harsh judgment on Saul; He saw what was in Saul’s heart that others couldn’t perceive, though in time God made this clear to everyone. In contrast, God was more forgiving with David because He found him humble and faithful in everything, as He made evident later on. There’s further proof of this: as soon as David learned that Saul and his son Jonathan had died, he and all his followers mourned deeply, and David said: “Cursed be you, mountains of Gilboa! May God never send rain or dew or grass to you, for you led King Saul and his son Jonathan down treacherous paths while they were fleeing and didn’t provide them with safe routes to escape their enemies; nor did you give them shelter on your heights. It’s a great sorrow for all the people of Israel that outstanding leaders like Saul and Jonathan are gone from our councils. Great strength and power have been lost today, as such excellent princes as Saul and Jonathan have fallen, along with many brave knights bearing good weapons and armor who perished with them. Let the lesser men beware of God’s wrath since He has allowed the enemies to harm His anointed. Let the people mourn this tremendous loss, that such great rulers should fall before the enemy.” Such words and many more like them were spoken by David that day, and he mourned their deaths instead of celebrating that the kingdom had passed to him. From this, you can see how upright he was, how honest and free from faults. But whenever his human nature led him to sin, he immediately showed genuine remorse, seeking God’s mercy and compassion; and God listened right away to his sincere regret.

Earlier in our conversation we have told how Absalom, King David’s son, raised the whole land in revolt against his father. But when David’s captains happened to meet Absalom in battle and David learned of his death, he cried out in these words: “What shall it profit me to live, an aged man who grows weaker day by day, now that you, my son Absalom, are dead in the flowertime of youth? Would to God that I could die now and that you my son might live!”[332] David was never so bitter against other men but that he would rather suffer death himself than see another’s death, except where he saw that punishment was inflicted on the demand of justice. This was shown again at one time when David’s entire kingdom incurred the wrath of God, and a pestilence came upon the realm, so violent that people perished by thousands. When the plague approached the city of Jerusalem, David beheld the angel, who was smiting the people, standing between heaven and earth with a blazing sword. And when he saw the angel with the sword lifted as if ready to strike, he placed his neck under the edge and said: “I beg thee, O Lord, that this sword be rather turned against 339my neck than that more of God’s people shall now be slain, and that my Lord’s wrath may fall upon me, who am guilty and worthy of punishment, and upon my family rather than that God’s people shall be rooted out on my account.” As soon as God saw David’s regret and heard his very acceptable prayer, He commanded the angel to desist from slaying the people, and forthwith the plague ceased everywhere in the kingdom.[333]

Earlier in our conversation, we talked about how Absalom, King David’s son, sparked a revolt against his father throughout the land. But when David’s commanders encountered Absalom in battle and David found out about his death, he cried out, “What good is it for me to live, an old man who gets weaker every day, now that you, my son Absalom, are dead in the prime of your youth? I wish I could die now so you, my son, could live!”[332] David was never so bitter towards others that he wouldn’t rather die himself than see someone else die, except when he believed that punishment was necessary for justice. This was demonstrated again when David’s entire kingdom faced God’s wrath, and a plague struck the land so violently that people died by the thousands. As the plague approached the city of Jerusalem, David saw an angel standing between heaven and earth with a blazing sword, striking down the people. When he saw the angel with the sword raised as if to strike, he put his neck under the edge and said, “I beg you, O Lord, let this sword strike me instead of your people, so that more of them won’t be killed. Let your wrath fall on me, who am guilty and deserving of punishment, and on my family, rather than letting your people be wiped out because of me.” As soon as God saw David’s sorrow and heard his heartfelt prayer, He instructed the angel to stop killing the people, and instantly the plague ended across the kingdom.[333]

From these and many other similar instances you will now observe how full of grace and goodness David was toward all men. And just as God saw kindliness, mercy, and humility in his heart, He saw avarice, ferocity, and unmeasured pride in Saul’s heart; consequently every fault was graver before God in Saul’s case than in David’s; for the men were unlike. David was the meekest and the most merciful of men, and whenever he fell into any fault he implored God to spare him; but Saul grew fiercer and more envious the more sins he fell into and the nearer he saw God’s wrath approaching. Now if you think that these answers have led you to a clearer understanding of the matters that you have asked about, I believe it will not be necessary to discuss these subjects any further.

From these and many other similar examples, you'll see how full of grace and goodness David was toward everyone. Just as God saw kindness, mercy, and humility in his heart, He saw greed, brutality, and unchecked pride in Saul’s heart; as a result, every fault was more serious for Saul before God than for David, because the two men were so different. David was the most humble and merciful of men, and whenever he made a mistake, he begged God to forgive him; but Saul became angrier and more jealous the more sins he committed and the closer he felt to God's anger. Now, if you think these answers have given you a better understanding of the topics you've asked about, I believe we don’t need to discuss these subjects any further.


LXIV
 
ILLUSTRATIONS FROM THE JUDGMENTS OF SOLOMON

Son. I see clearly now from what you told in your last speech that the judgments were lenient in David’s case, because he regretted the sins into which he fell, 340but more severe in Saul’s case, because he was less disposed to do penance for his misdeeds. Now there are certain other matters which I am much interested in and which I shall ask about with your permission, namely those events that occurred after David’s death. Once when two women came before King Solomon, quarreling about a child, the king ordered the child to be hewn in pieces and half given to each of them:[334] now I wish to ask whether, if neither of the women had spoken up, the king would have hewn the child asunder or not.

Son. I can see clearly now from what you said in your last speech that the judgments were lenient in David’s case because he regretted the sins he committed, 340 but harsher in Saul’s case because he was less willing to repent for his wrongs. Now there are some other things I’m very interested in and would like to ask about, specifically the events that happened after David’s death. Once when two women came before King Solomon, arguing over a child, the king ordered that the child be cut in half and each of them receive a half: [334] now I want to ask if neither of the women had said anything, would the king have still gone through with cutting the child in half or not?

Father. The king ordered the child to be divided because he knew of a surety that the one who was the mother would not be willing to have the child divided.

Father. The king commanded that the child be split in two because he was certain that the real mother would never agree to that.

Son. I asked whether the king would have divided the child if the mother had kept silence.

Son. I asked if the king would have split the child if the mother had stayed quiet.

Father. If the mother had been so void of mercy that she would not ask him to spare the child, the king would have divided it between them.

Father. If the mother had been so lacking in compassion that she wouldn't ask him to spare the child, the king would have split it between them.

Son. Would it not look to you like plain murder, if he had slain an innocent child, seeing that it was not for punishment?

Son. Wouldn't it seem to you like straightforward murder if he had killed an innocent child, considering it wasn't for punishment?

Father. It would indeed have been murder if he had killed the child; still, the guilt would not have been with the king but with the mother, if she had failed to beg mercy for her child, when she heard the king render a fair judgment in their case, which she realized would mean the child’s death; therefore the guilt would be hers if she withheld the motherly pity which could save the child.

Father. It would definitely have been murder if he had killed the child; however, the blame wouldn’t have been on the king, but on the mother, if she had failed to plead for her child's life when she heard the king give a just ruling in their situation, knowing it would lead to the child’s death. So, the guilt would be hers if she didn’t show the motherly compassion that could save the child.

341Son. What do you think about the death of Joab and Adonijah, whom King Solomon slew? Was that a righteous judgment or not? And why did King Solomon cause Shimei to be slain for cursing his father David, seeing that David had already forgiven Shimei this offence?

341Son. What do you think about the deaths of Joab and Adonijah, whom King Solomon killed? Was that a just decision or not? And why did King Solomon have Shimei killed for cursing his father David, considering that David had already forgiven Shimei for that offense?

Father. If King Solomon had done this except as lawful punishment, God would have visited him with a worthy penalty as for murder. But after he had done all this, God revealed Himself to him in a dream and bade him choose whatever gift he might wish. But Solomon asked God to give him wisdom and insight into righteous judgments. Then God answered him in this wise: “If this choice were given to the multitude, there would be many who would choose riches and power, or a long life, or peace, or success in warfare. But because thou hast chosen this thing, thou shalt receive what thou hast chosen and likewise all the other gifts that I have enumerated.” From this you will observe how well God is pleased with righteousness in judgments; for God gave Solomon all the supreme gifts, because he chose equity as his part. And you will understand that, if he had slain those others unjustly, God would not have given him such excellent gifts as He did give him.

Father. If King Solomon had done this as anything other than a lawful punishment, God would have punished him as if it were murder. But after Solomon acted, God appeared to him in a dream and told him to choose any gift he desired. Solomon asked God for wisdom and the ability to make righteous judgments. Then God responded: “If this choice were offered to the masses, many would choose wealth, power, long life, peace, or victory in war. But since you have chosen wisdom, you will receive that along with all the other gifts I have mentioned.” This demonstrates how much God values righteousness in judgment; He granted Solomon all the greatest gifts because he chose justice as his priority. You can see that if he had unjustly killed those others, God would not have blessed him with such extraordinary gifts.


LXV
 
SOLOMON'S DECISION IN THE CASE OF SHIMEI

Son. What you have just said does indeed seem reasonable. If Solomon had been led to execute these men through selfishness and injustice, he would not have received such excellent gifts from God, as were given 342to him after that deed was done. Still, if I may, I should like to ask you to point out how righteous dooms are worked out, in order that I may understand more clearly, and others too who may hear it, how Solomon could execute Shimei by righteous decree, when his father David had already forgiven him the offence.[335]

Son. What you just said actually makes sense. If Solomon had been made to put these men to death out of selfishness and injustice, he wouldn’t have received such amazing gifts from God, which were given to him after that act was done. Still, if I may, I’d like to ask you to explain how righteous judgments are carried out, so that I can understand better, and others who may hear this can too, how Solomon could have executed Shimei by a righteous decree when his father David had already forgiven him for the offense.[335]

Father. Solomon did this out of regard for justice rather than from cruelty, and for the following reasons. When Shimei cursed David, he did it out of impudence and malice, and for no just cause; but when he begged David for mercy, he asked it more because of fear than of repentance, for he was afraid that David would take his life as the sacred law demanded. But when he implored mercy David replied in these words: “I shall not slay you this time, since you implore my grace; but keep in mind that you will be punished for this deed, unless you atone in true repentance.” In these words David pointed out to Shimei that he ought to atone with loving friendship for the words that he had spoken in sheer hatred. Shimei, however, lived the rest of his days in such a manner that, while no one found him to cherish enmity toward David, it never appeared that he made returns in friendship for David’s mercy in permitting him to live when the law demanded his death. But when he came before Solomon after David’s death, the king said to him: “Remember, Shimei, that you cursed the Lord’s anointed; and it has not appeared that you have truly regretted it since. But this shall be a covenant between us as a reminder to repentance on 343your part, that you shall not enjoy such complete freedom as one who has never fallen into this sin. Now you have large and beautiful dwellings and many houses here in Jerusalem and you may live in peace within the city, enjoying all your possessions according to your desire; but if you ever go outside the city, the punishment of the law shall come upon your head, since you did not take thought to repent before I reminded you.” When the king had ceased speaking, Shimei expressed himself as thankful for this agreement and said that he should find but little inconvenience in being forbidden to leave the city, if he might remain secure in the king’s friendship within the city and enjoy all his possessions. Three years later, however, Shimei forgot this agreement and went outside the city to seek diversion,[336] as if proud of his audacity in violating the covenant. But as soon as these tidings were told to the king, he ordered Shimei to be seized and brought before him, and he said to him: “You have forgotten to be ashamed of having broken the agreement which we two made as a reminder that you owe repentance for having cursed the Lord’s anointed. There is, therefore, a double guilt upon your head now; and it will be better for you to suffer a brief punishment here, so that others may be warned by your misfortune, than that this crime should follow you into eternal death, and others become bolder in such evil, if you die unpunished.” Then the king ordered him to be killed and buried outside the city as a reminder and warning to others never to break a covenant.

Father. Solomon did this out of a sense of justice rather than cruelty, and here’s why. When Shimei cursed David, he acted out of boldness and malice, without any just cause; but when he begged David for mercy, it was more out of fear than genuine repentance, as he feared that David would take his life as the sacred law demanded. When he pleaded for mercy, David responded with these words: “I won’t kill you this time, since you appeal to my grace; but remember, you will face punishment for this act unless you truly repent.” In these words, David indicated to Shimei that he needed to make amends with sincere friendship for the hateful words he had spoken. However, Shimei lived the rest of his life in such a way that, although no one saw him harbor animosity toward David, it never seemed as though he genuinely returned the friendship that David showed by allowing him to live when the law called for his death. When he appeared before Solomon after David’s death, the king said to him: “Remember, Shimei, that you cursed the Lord’s anointed; and it hasn’t seemed like you’ve truly regretted it since. So this will be a covenant between us to remind you of the need for repentance, which means you won’t have the same freedom as someone who’s never committed this sin. You have large and beautiful homes and many houses here in Jerusalem, and you can live peacefully in the city, enjoying everything you own as you wish; but if you ever leave the city, the punishment of the law will fall upon you, since you didn’t take the time to repent before I reminded you.” Once the king stopped speaking, Shimei expressed his gratitude for this agreement and said he wouldn’t mind being restricted from leaving the city if he could stay secure in the king’s favor and enjoy all his possessions. However, three years later, Shimei forgot this agreement and ventured outside the city for entertainment, as if he was proud to defy the covenant. But as soon as the news reached the king, he ordered Shimei to be captured and brought before him, and he said: “You’ve forgotten to feel ashamed for breaking the agreement we made as a reminder that you owe repentance for cursing the Lord’s anointed. Therefore, you now carry a double guilt; and it’s better for you to face a brief punishment here, so that others can learn from your misfortune, than for this crime to lead you to eternal death and embolden others to commit such evils if you die unpunished.” Then the king commanded that he be executed and buried outside the city as a warning to others never to break a covenant.


344

LXVI
 
SOLOMON'S DECISION IN THE MATTER OF ADONIJAH AND HIS SUPPORTERS

Son. Now I wish to ask you why Solomon caused his brother Adonijah to be put to death for requesting Abishag to be his wife.

Son. Now I want to ask you why Solomon had his brother Adonijah killed for asking to marry Abishag.

Father. Adonijah had earlier, as you may have heard, led an uprising against his father. When David had become an aged man and was very decrepit because of his many years, Adonijah appointed himself to be king without his father’s knowledge, and made a festive banquet as newly consecrated king. He sent heralds running through the streets with pipes and drums to proclaim throughout the city that Adonijah was now the king. The chief men who were with him in this plot were Joab, David’s chief captain and his kinsman, and Abiathar the bishop, and many other lords. But when Zadoc the bishop, Nathan the prophet, Benaiah the captain, and Bathsheba the queen came as if in deep sorrow to tell David what great undertakings were hidden from him, he remained silent for some time but sighed heavily. At last he spoke as from a heart full of grief and said: “My sons are not minded like me, for I served King Saul many days, though he sought after my life. And yet God had chosen me to be king, for He was angry with King Saul; but I awaited the judgment of God by which he would be deprived of his kingdom; but I would not condemn him, though he was mine adversary. Now my son has done that to me which I would not do to mine enemy. But because 345Adonijah has taken the kingship to which God Himself appointed me, even before I had renounced it or He Who had chosen me had removed me, he shall fall in disgrace from this dignity, as that one fell who in arrogant pride raised the first rebellion against his Lord.”

Father. Adonijah had previously, as you might have heard, staged a revolt against his father. When David grew old and frail due to his many years, Adonijah declared himself king without his father knowing and threw a festive banquet as the newly crowned king. He sent messengers racing through the streets with instruments to announce throughout the city that Adonijah was now king. The main supporters in this scheme were Joab, David’s top commander and his relative, and Abiathar the priest, along with many other nobles. But when Zadok the priest, Nathan the prophet, Benaiah the commander, and Bathsheba the queen approached David with feigned sorrow to inform him of the major plans being kept from him, he remained silent for a while but let out a heavy sigh. Finally, he spoke with a heart full of sadness and said: “My sons don’t think like I do, for I served King Saul for many years, even though he tried to take my life. Yet God chose me to be king because He was angry with King Saul; but I waited for God’s judgment that would take away his kingdom. I wouldn’t condemn him, even though he was my enemy. Now my son has done to me what I would never do to my enemy. But since Adonijah has taken the kingship that God Himself appointed to me before I renounced it or before He who chose me removed me, he will fall from this position in disgrace, just like the one who arrogantly led the first rebellion against his Lord.”

Then David said to Zadoc the bishop: “Take my mule and harness him with all the accoutrements with which he was arrayed when I rode him in all my glory and set my son Solomon upon him; and taking Nathan the prophet with you and Benaiah the captain and all my most loyal chiefs and knights, ride to the tabernacle of the Lord in Zion[337] and there anoint my son Solomon king. Then take my own trumpet and let it be sounded throughout the city with a festive sound to proclaim that Solomon is king by the will of God and David’s choice. After that you shall bring my son Solomon to me that I may welcome the newly appointed king to my throne.” When David had ceased speaking, Zadoc the bishop did all those things that the king had commanded. And when Solomon returned arrayed in all the tokens of royalty, David rose to receive him, bowed before him, and blessed him in these words: “Praise be to Thee, O God, that Thou wert pleased to exalt me from my low estate to such high honors as I now enjoy, and hast helped me in many perils, and now after much trouble and long toil hast brought me the consolation that mine eyes should behold the one sprung from my loins whom Thou hast Thyself chosen to sit in the seat of honor to which Thou didst formerly appoint me, according 346to Thy promises, O Lord. Now I pray Thee, O Lord, give this young man David’s glory and understanding in double and threefold measure, make him a perfect ruler to govern Thy holy people according to Thy will.” Then David kissed Solomon and said to him: “The God Who rules the heavens multiply peace to you above all the kings upon earth and give you blessings and the fruits of earth and perfect happiness.”[338] When he had ended this speech and benediction, David said to Solomon: “Because I find that God has given you wisdom and understanding, I charge you to govern wisely and justly, though somewhat severely, lest the kingdom should seem to be lacking in government because of your faint-heartedness. But temper the severity of punishment, lest you be thought too stern and merciless. Remember your kinsman Joab, however, who has served me long and with much labor; but it is not fitting that the sinful deeds which he has committed should follow him to hell: for he slew two excellent captains who were in my peace, Abner and Amasa, who had served King Saul with great fidelity. And there are many others whom he slew in his overweening pride, but not in lawful chastisement. And it is better to let him suffer a brief punishment here than that he should be lost eternally because of these crimes. Keep also my promise to Shimei, though he cursed me when I fled from the violence of your brother Absalom; but keep it in such a way that he will be reminded to do penance 347for his misdeeds, lest the curse be forever upon his head which he incurred when he cursed me an innocent man. Let kinship temper your wrath against your brother Adonijah, if you see that he regrets his treasonable uprising against his father. Remember that the bishop Abiathar lost his father and all his kinsmen, because he gave me food, when I came to Nob a fugitive from the face of King Saul. Abiathar deserves well for this, too, that he followed me and bore the ark of God before me, when I fled from the face of your brother Absalom. But do not forget to give him a reminder to repentance for joining your brother Adonijah in treasonable designs against me, lest this offence should follow him to his death. Be manly, strong, and severe, but with moderation. Do the will of God in all things, and both temporal and eternal joys shall be added to you.”[339]

Then David said to Zadok the bishop, “Take my mule and get him ready with all the gear he had when I rode him in my glory, and put my son Solomon on him. Take Nathan the prophet with you, along with Benaiah the captain and all my most loyal chiefs and knights, and ride to the Lord's tabernacle in Zion[337]. There, anoint my son Solomon as king. Then, take my trumpet and sound it throughout the city with a celebratory tone to declare that Solomon is king by God’s will and my choice. After that, bring my son Solomon to me so I can welcome the newly appointed king to my throne.” When David finished speaking, Zadok the bishop did everything the king had commanded. And when Solomon returned dressed in all the royal symbols, David stood to receive him, bowed before him, and blessed him with these words: “Praise be to You, O God, for raising me from humble beginnings to such great honors as I now have, and for helping me through many dangers. Now, after much trouble and hard work, You have given me the joy of seeing the one born from my lineage whom You have chosen to sit where I was once appointed, according to Your promises, O Lord. Now I pray, O Lord, give this young man understanding and glory beyond measure, make him a perfect ruler to govern Your holy people according to Your will.” Then David kissed Solomon and said to him, “The God who rules the heavens grant you peace beyond all kings on earth and bless you with the fruits of the earth and perfect happiness.”[338] When David finished this speech and blessing, he said to Solomon, “Since I see that God has given you wisdom and understanding, I charge you to govern wisely and justly, even if it seems a bit strict, so that the kingdom doesn’t appear to lack leadership because of your timidity. But moderate your punishments so that you aren’t seen as too harsh and unforgiving. Remember your relative Joab, who has served me long and diligently; however, it’s not right for his sinful actions to condemn him forever, for he killed two excellent commanders, Abner and Amasa, who were at peace with me and served King Saul faithfully. He has taken many others' lives in his excessive pride, not in legitimate punishment. And it’s better to let him face a brief punishment now than for him to be lost eternally because of these crimes. Also, keep my promise to Shimei, despite him cursing me when I fled from your brother Absalom's violence; but ensure he is reminded to atone for his wrongs, so the curse he placed upon me as an innocent man doesn’t remain on him forever. Let your family ties soften your anger toward your brother Adonijah if you see he regrets his rebellion against your father. Remember that Abiathar the bishop lost his father and all his family because he helped me with food when I was fleeing from King Saul. Abiathar deserves credit for this, as he followed me and carried the ark of God before me when I fled from your brother Absalom. But don’t forget to remind him to repent for joining your brother Adonijah in treason against me, so that his offense doesn’t follow him to his grave. Be strong and decisive, but with moderation. Do God's will in all things, and both earthly and eternal joys will be granted to you.”[339]

Then said David to Zadoc the bishop and Nathan the prophet: “Go now and prepare a banquet and lead King Solomon into my hall and let him sit in my high-seat amid festive joys.” And they did everything as David bade them. But when Adonijah’s feast was ended, the guests heard singing and piping and all forms of merriment, as if a new joy had come into the city. When Adonijah asked what the merry-making signified, whether the rejoicing was in his honor or new tidings had come, it was told him that David had himself given Solomon his title and all the royal honors and had chosen him to be king; and that Solomon was already hallowed as king and sitting upon David’s throne 348in festive raiment; and that all the people rejoiced in the news as on a merry holiday. When Adonijah heard this report, great terror came upon him and all those who were with him in this conspiracy, and they fled every man to his house. But Adonijah fled to the tabernacle of the Lord and laid his hand upon the sacred altar, as if taking vows of chastity and service in God’s holy tabernacle. Thereupon he sent a man to the king, saying: “Here shall I die, unless my lord King Solomon will promise and assure me that he will not slay me, his servant, for the evil that I have done.” Then King Solomon replied: “Adonijah is my brother by kinship; therefore I will gladly spare him, if he will show true repentance for stirring up treason and rebellion against his father David; and I will bear this burden with him before God on the condition that he must always continue loyal, humble, and free from deceit. But if any treasonable ambitions be found in him, he may expect a swift revenge to come upon his head. Let him now go home to his possessions and enjoy them as long as he keeps what is now decreed.”[340]

Then David said to Zadok the bishop and Nathan the prophet, “Go now and prepare a banquet, and bring King Solomon into my hall to sit in my high seat among the joyful festivities.” They did everything David asked. But when Adonijah's feast was over, the guests heard singing and music, and all kinds of celebrations, as if a new joy had entered the city. When Adonijah inquired what the celebration meant, whether it was in his honor or if there were new tidings, he was told that David had personally given Solomon his title and all the royal honors and had chosen him to be king; that Solomon was already anointed as king and sitting on David’s throne 348 in festive attire; and that everyone rejoiced at the news like it was a holiday. When Adonijah heard this, great fear fell upon him and all those who conspired with him, and they each ran home. But Adonijah fled to the Lord’s tabernacle and grabbed hold of the sacred altar, as if taking vows of purity and service in God’s holy presence. Then he sent someone to the king, saying, “I will die here unless my lord King Solomon promises me that he won’t kill me, his servant, for my wrongdoing.” King Solomon replied, “Adonijah is my brother by blood; therefore, I will spare him if he shows real remorse for his treason and rebellion against our father David; and I will support him before God on the condition that he remains loyal, humble, and honest. But if any treasonous intentions are found in him, he can expect swift consequences. Let him go home and enjoy his possessions as long as he adheres to this decree.”[340]

When the hour of David’s death was approaching, Solomon frequently visited his father; and when the king had departed this life, he mourned for him many days, he and all the lords in the kingdom; and he buried him with every form of royal pomp and at a vast outlay. But after David’s death, Adonijah begged Bathsheba the queen to ask King Solomon to give him Abishag to wife. The facts respecting Abishag were these: when King David grew old, chills entered into 349his flesh, so that clothes were not sufficient to keep him warm; Abishag was a young virgin, the fairest maid in the kingdom and of the best and noblest family; she was brought to King David’s bed to lie close to him and warm him and cherish him, in the hope that the king might draw warmth from her soft and blossoming form and from his desire for the fair virgin. David loved her highly with a perfect affection, but as a foster-mother, not as a wife. And for this reason Abishag won such great honor that she came to be regarded as the first queen and she ranked above all the other queens in the eyes of the people; and thus her dignity was sanctified by David’s embraces. But Adonijah had a purpose in seeking this marriage after David’s decease, for he hoped in this way to obtain the kingship by deceitful intrigue; inasmuch as all the people would say, if he married Abishag, that he was most worthy to sit on David’s throne who was most worthy to mount his bed and lie in the arms which David had hallowed with his very self. He also presumed, as seemed reasonable, that the brothers and all the kinsmen of Abishag would rather have him as king, if she were his, than a man who was not bound to them in this way. Queen Bathsheba undertook Adonijah’s errand and afterwards went to seek an interview with her son King Solomon. As soon as she had entered the royal hall, the king rose to meet his mother and led her to a seat at his side. Then the queen revealed her errand, speaking thus: “I have a little favor to ask of you, but I will not reveal the request before you promise to grant it.” The king replied: “You are my mother, and I cannot refuse what you wish to 350ask; and I surely intend that you shall have what you have come to ask for. But it surely behooves you to keep in mind that you should ask only for what I may freely grant.” Then said Bathsheba the queen to the king: “I have come to ask you to give your brother Adonijah Abishag to wife.”

When the time of David’s death was near, Solomon often visited his father. After the king passed away, Solomon mourned for him for many days, along with all the nobles in the kingdom, and he gave him a grand burial with all the royal honors and significant expenses. After David’s death, Adonijah asked Queen Bathsheba to talk to King Solomon and request that he give him Abishag as his wife. The background on Abishag is as follows: when King David became old, he began to feel cold all the time, and clothes weren't enough to keep him warm. Abishag was a young virgin, the most beautiful girl in the kingdom, from a prestigious family; she was brought to King David’s bed to lie close to him, providing warmth and comfort, hoping he could derive warmth from her gentle and youthful body and his desire for her beauty. David cared for her deeply, but it was more like a nurturing affection than a romantic one. Because of this, Abishag received such great respect that she was seen as the first queen, above all others, and her status was elevated by David’s affection. However, Adonijah had an ulterior motive for seeking this marriage after David's death; he believed that by marrying Abishag, he could unlawfully claim the kingship. People would think he was the most deserving of David's throne if he married the woman who had shared the king’s bed and had been favored by him. He also assumed, quite reasonably, that Abishag's brothers and family would prefer him as king if he were married to her rather than someone who wasn’t connected to them. Queen Bathsheba agreed to take Adonijah's request and later sought a meeting with her son, King Solomon. As soon as she entered the royal hall, the king stood up to greet his mother and led her to a seat beside him. Then the queen expressed her request, saying, “I have a small favor to ask of you, but I won’t disclose it until you promise to grant it.” The king responded, “You are my mother, and I can't refuse what you want to ask; I fully intend to give you what you’ve come to ask for. But you should remember to ask only for what I can agree to.” Bathsheba then said to the king, “I have come to ask you to give your brother Adonijah Abishag as his wife.”

Then King Solomon replied in great wrath: “What is at the bottom of this request that Abishag be given to Adonijah? If you prefer that he should have the kingship rather than I, then ask the kingdom for him; for you know that my brother Adonijah is older than I and once assumed the royal title, being chosen by the chief lords before my father had appointed me to be ruler in obedience to the will of God. Joab the most powerful of the lords and captains and Abiathar the bishop have evidently continued plotting with him even to this day. Abishag is of the noblest kinship in the city and the whole realm; furthermore, she is honored by all as the first queen because of the care that she gave my father in his old age. If she is given to Adonijah to be his wife, the people will regard him as most worthy to sit in David’s seat, since he is thought worthy to lie in the bed and in the arms in which David himself lay. Now when Adonijah had committed treason against his father, I offered to share the responsibility for his sin before God because of our kinship. But now he has repeated and trebled the treason against me, his brother, which he first committed against his father. Therefore I swear by the God Who has placed me on David’s throne that Adonijah shall suffer for his guilt, as shall every one of the others who are with him in this traitorous 351project.” Then King Solomon said to Benaiah the captain: “Go and slay my brother Adonijah, for I would rather have him suffer a swift penalty here, such as the rules of the holy law provide for treason against one’s lord, than to have him carry a traitor’s guilt to hell. Slay also Joab my kinsman, for twice he committed vile offences against King David, when he slew Abner and Amasa, two renowned captains, though they were in David’s peace and protection. But his third and greatest crime is this, that he was traitor to David when he gave Adonijah the royal title; surely he will be lost forever in the world to come, unless he shall do penance in this world by suffering a lawful punishment.”[341]

Then King Solomon responded in furious anger: “What’s behind this request to give Abishag to Adonijah? If you prefer that he should have the kingship instead of me, then ask for the kingdom for him; you know that my brother Adonijah is older and once claimed the royal title, being chosen by the chief lords before my father appointed me to rule according to God’s will. Joab, the most powerful of the lords and captains, and Abiathar the priest have clearly continued to conspire with him even now. Abishag has noble ties in the city and the whole kingdom; moreover, she is honored by everyone as the first queen for the care she provided my father in his old age. If she is given to Adonijah as his wife, the people will see him as deserving to take David’s place, since he is seen as worthy to lie in the bed and arms where David himself lay. When Adonijah committed treason against our father, I was willing to share the blame for his sin before God because of our family ties. But now he has repeated and tripled his treachery against me, his brother, which he initially committed against our father. Therefore, I swear by the God Who has placed me on David’s throne that Adonijah will face consequences for his guilt, as will everyone else involved in this treacherous plan.” Then King Solomon said to Benaiah the captain: “Go and kill my brother Adonijah, for I would rather see him receive a swift punishment here, as dictated by the holy law for treason against one’s lord, than let him carry a traitor’s guilt to hell. Also, execute Joab my relative, for he has twice committed vile acts against King David, when he killed Abner and Amasa, two respected captains, even though they were under David’s peace and protection. But his greatest crime is this: he was a traitor to David when he gave Adonijah the royal title; he will surely be lost forever in the world to come unless he repents in this life by facing lawful punishment.”[341]

In this case King Solomon gives clear proof that it is quite permissible to break vows and promises, if what has been asked or granted is contrary to what is right. He granted what his mother Bathsheba the queen had come to request before he knew what it was; but as soon as he was aware that the prayer was a perilous one, he slew the man who had originally made the request. Benaiah did as King Solomon commanded and slew Adonijah. But just as Joab the captain and Abiathar the bishop had shared in the plans to give Adonijah the royal title, they also had a share in his plan to ask for Abishag to wife; and when they heard of Adonijah’s death, they foresaw their own destruction. Benaiah seized Abiathar the bishop and led him before King Solomon; but Joab fled to God’s tabernacle and laid his hand upon the sacred horn of the altar, as if taking vows of chastity and service in God’s holy tabernacle. Benaiah 352came to God’s sanctuary and said: “Come forth, Joab, the king commands you to come forth out of God’s tabernacle.” But Joab replied: “I have come hither into God’s protection, and I will suffer death here, if I cannot remain in security.” Then Benaiah reported his answer to the king through his messenger; and when the messenger came before the king bringing the bishop Abiathar and related all these things, King Solomon said to him: “Give my command to Benaiah to slay Joab wherever he be found, for his deeds and the decrees of the sacred law slay him and not we.” Benaiah did as King Solomon commanded and slew Joab where he then stood.[342]

In this situation, King Solomon clearly shows that it's acceptable to break vows and promises if what has been asked or granted goes against what is right. He agreed to his mother Bathsheba's request before knowing what it was, but once he realized that the request was dangerous, he had the man who made the request killed. Benaiah followed King Solomon's orders and executed Adonijah. However, since Joab the captain and Abiathar the priest were involved in Adonijah's plan to claim the throne, they also took part in his request to marry Abishag. When they found out about Adonijah's death, they anticipated their own downfall. Benaiah captured Abiathar and brought him before King Solomon, but Joab fled to God's tabernacle and clutched the sacred horn of the altar, seeking refuge and vowing to serve in God's holy space. Benaiah entered the sanctuary and said, “Come out, Joab, the king commands you to leave God's tabernacle.” Joab replied, “I’ve come here for God’s protection, and I’ll accept death here if I can't stay safe.” Benaiah relayed this response to the king through a messenger, and when the messenger returned with Abiathar and explained everything, King Solomon told him, “Instruct Benaiah to kill Joab wherever he is, for his actions and the laws dictate that we should not kill him ourselves.” Benaiah obeyed King Solomon's command and killed Joab right where he stood.[342]

But the king spoke in this wise to the bishop Abiathar: “You know that you have deserved death according to the rules of the holy law; but whereas you lost your father and all your kinsmen in Nob in a single day, because your father had given my father David food, and whereas you also bore the ark of God before my father when he fled before the face of my brother Absalom, therefore it is right that for once you should profit from this and not suffer a sudden death. And for this once you shall purchase your life on the following terms, which you must keep as a constant reminder that you owe penance for the treason which you committed against David: go now to your own fields and abide there as a husbandman and enjoy all your possessions, on the condition, however, that you remain a tiller of the soil. But if you ever stretch forth your hand to perform any priestly service or office, the righteous 353penalty of the sacred law shall surely come upon your head.”[343] Abiathar went home and did as the king commanded and lived many days; but Shimei died three years later, because he failed to keep what had been commanded, as we have already told.

But the king said to Bishop Abiathar: “You know you deserve death according to the holy law; but since you lost your father and all your relatives in Nob in one day because your father gave my father David food, and since you also carried the ark of God before my father when he fled from my brother Absalom, it is right that, for once, you should benefit from this and not face a sudden death. So, this time, you will save your life under the following conditions, which you must remember as a constant reminder that you owe penance for the betrayal you committed against David: now go back to your own land and stay there as a farmer and enjoy all your possessions, with the condition that you remain a tiller of the soil. But if you ever reach out your hand to perform any priestly duty or role, the proper punishment from the sacred law will surely come upon you.” Abiathar went home and did as the king ordered and lived for many days; but Shimei died three years later because he did not keep what had been commanded, as we have already mentioned.


LXVII
 
WHY SOLOMON BROKE HIS PROMISE OF PEACE
AND SECURITY TO JOAB

Son. There are still a few points which, it seems to me, I have not examined sufficiently. How did it occur to Solomon to break peace with Joab, seeing that he had fled into God’s protection and into the house, the only one in all the world, that was dedicated to God? Churches have now been built in almost every part of the world, and it is considered an evil deed to slay a man who has sought sanctuary. But I have thought that the honor of God’s holy house would be the more zealously guarded the fewer such houses were. Another matter which I wish to ask about is this: how did it occur to Solomon to promise what his mother might request and then to break his promise? I should have thought that a wise man like Solomon would have ascertained what the request was likely to be before he gave his promise, and thus avoid recalling his promise, if the request were not to his liking.

Son. There are still a few points that I feel I haven’t looked into deeply enough. Why did Solomon decide to go against Joab, considering that Joab had taken refuge in God’s protection and in the one place in the entire world dedicated to God? Churches are now found almost everywhere, and it's seen as a wrong act to kill someone who has sought sanctuary. However, I’ve considered that the honor of God’s holy house would be better protected if there were fewer such places. Another thing I want to ask is this: why did Solomon promise to grant whatever his mother might ask for and then go back on that promise? I would think that a wise man like Solomon would figure out what the request would likely be before making a promise, thus avoiding the need to break it if he didn’t like the request.

Father. I stated in an earlier speech that he who makes a request should be discreet and ask such things only as are proper and may be freely granted; and all 354those favors that are wisely asked and granted in like manner ought to remain valid and undisturbed. But Solomon set a good and profitable example in this case, when he wisely withdrew the gift that his mother had indiscreetly requested, though he had already granted it. The following example which is evil and belongs to a much later date was set by Herod: once when he was feasting in Galilee he promised to give his step-daughter whatever she might ask; and on her mother’s advice she demanded the head of John the Baptist.[344] Herod knew that John was an innocent and holy man and deeply regretted that he had made this promise. But his repentance bore no fruit, inasmuch as he was not careful to withdraw the gift wisely which she had requested foolishly; nay more, he did the evil deed that she had suggested. Consequently all were destroyed, the women because of their request and Herod because of his gift. King Solomon, however, thought it better to face his mother’s wrathful temper for refusing wisely what he had promised hastily, than to suffer the injury that follows the great crime of allowing foolish and sinful petitions. On the other hand, you should understand clearly that it is never proper for a man to be fickle in promises, and the greater the man, the less fitting it is. But no man is allowed to grant anything that may give rise to crime and sin, even though he has already promised to do so.

Father. I mentioned earlier that someone making a request should be careful and only ask for things that are appropriate and can be freely given; and all favors that are wisely asked for and granted in the same spirit should remain valid and unchallenged. Solomon set a good and sensible example in this situation when he wisely retracted the gift his mother had thoughtlessly asked for, even after he had already granted it. In contrast, there’s a bad example from a later time set by Herod: while he was feasting in Galilee, he promised his step-daughter that she could ask for anything she wanted; on her mother’s advice, she asked for the head of John the Baptist.[344] Herod knew that John was an innocent and holy man and deeply regretted making this promise. However, his regret did not change anything because he wasn’t wise enough to retract the foolish request she made; instead, he went ahead and did the terrible thing she suggested. As a result, all were harmed—the women because of their request and Herod because of his promise. King Solomon, on the other hand, thought it was better to deal with his mother’s angry response for refusing wisely what he had promised too quickly than to suffer the consequences of allowing foolish and sinful requests. On the flip side, you should understand that it’s never appropriate for a person to be inconsistent with their promises, and the higher the person’s status, the less acceptable it is. Yet, no one should grant anything that could lead to wrongdoing or sin, even if they’ve already promised to do so.


355

LXVIII
 
A DISCUSSION OF PROMISES: WHEN THEY MUST BE KEPT
AND WHEN THEY SHOULD BE TAKEN BACK

Son. Now I wish to ask you to tell me somewhat more clearly how far one should keep what he has pledged and how far he may refuse to carry out what he has promised.

Son. Now I want to ask you to explain more clearly how much one should stick to what he has promised and how much he can choose not to follow through on his commitments.

Father. When a lord is asked to grant a favor and the meaning of the request is made clear to him, he ought to ponder carefully what it is that he is asked to do and whether it will bring him injury or honor. If he sees that he can grant it without damage to himself, he ought next to consider the person to whom he is to give what has been asked, and how much may be given in each case, lest he should have an experience like that of Herod, which has already been related. For Herod did not consider fully the merits of the one who made the request, or the occasion, or how much he ought to give. There was this difficulty, too, in Herod’s case, that he was drunk when he made the promise; he had made a great banquet for all his lords, and he failed to consider the occasion; for it was not proper for him to make gifts while drunk, since one who is drunk will rarely be moderate in making gifts. He also failed to observe moderation in this, that he gave such an unusual gift to his step-daughter, a woman who was not of his kin, for he spoke in these terms: “Whatsoever you ask I will give you, though you ask half of my kingdom.” You will observe from this that he was half-mad from drink when he spoke, for his step-daughter had honored him merely 356by beating the drum before him, and her music was entitled to a much smaller reward than the one promised. Nor was it fitting for him to leave the form of the request as well as of the gift to the tongues of others, as he did when he spoke as follows: “Whatsoever you ask you shall have, though you ask half of my kingdom.” But if he had spoken in this wise: “Whatever you ask with discretion and in moderation you shall receive, if I can give it,” then he would have spoken wisely and well, and it would have remained with him whether to grant or to refuse.

Father. When a lord is asked to do a favor and the request is made clear, he should carefully think about what he's being asked and whether it will harm or honor him. If he realizes he can grant it without hurting himself, he should then consider the person he's granting it to and how much he can give in each case, so he doesn't end up like Herod, as has already been mentioned. Herod didn't fully consider the merits of the requester, the situation, or how much he should give. There was also the complication that he was drunk when he made the promise; he had thrown a big banquet for all his lords and neglected to consider the setting, since it isn't wise to make promises while intoxicated, as a drunk person rarely shows restraint in gifting. He also lacked moderation in giving such an extravagant gift to his stepdaughter, who was not related to him, when he exclaimed, “Whatever you ask I will give you, even if you ask for half my kingdom.” It's clear from this that he was partially out of his mind from drinking when he made that statement, as his stepdaughter merely honored him by playing music, which deserved a much smaller reward than what he promised. Additionally, it wasn't appropriate for him to leave the specifics of the request and the gift to others, like when he said, “Whatever you ask you shall have, even if you ask for half my kingdom.” If instead he had said, “Whatever you ask sensibly and moderately, you shall receive, if I am able to give it,” he would have spoken wisely and appropriately, keeping the decision to grant or refuse in his own control.

It now remains to point out what sort of gifts a ruler may properly give, when he is asked to do so. Any request may be granted which will bring honor and help to him who asks and will bring no damage to the lord who gives or to any one else. Thus if a lord is asked to give assistance or money, he may well give it, unless his honor should be discredited by the gift; and he may properly give both the labor and the money so long as he gives them to such as are worthy of great honors. But when one is asked to grant a request that would debase or dishonor him, he must refuse it; and even though he should make a promise thoughtlessly, it is to be wisely withdrawn. And if a man bestows a generous gift on one who shows little appreciation of it and is in no wise worthy to have a long and continued possession of an important gift, inasmuch as he does not show proper appreciation, this gift, too, should be withdrawn; for in this case the man’s own thoughtlessness and lack of discernment take the gift from him and not the fickleness of him who gave. And if one who desired 357a gift has obtained it through falsehood and deceitful pretence, that gift is also to be withdrawn, even though it has been granted; and in this case the man’s own fraud and deceit take the gift from him and not the fickleness of him who promised and gave it. But a prince who means to be cautious in making gifts must consider carefully what is requested, and what sort of man has made the request. And since all do not deserve equally great gifts, one must consider how great a gift each one deserves and on what occasion a gift may be given. Then it shall be said but very seldom that he who gave has withdrawn his gift or that he has been found to be fickle-minded.

It’s important to highlight what types of gifts a ruler can properly give when asked. Any request that brings honor and benefits the requester, without harming the lord who gives or anyone else, can be granted. For instance, if a lord is asked for assistance or money, he can give it unless doing so would damage his reputation; he can also give both labor and money as long as they go to those who truly deserve recognition. However, if asked to grant a request that could diminish or dishonor him, he should refuse; even if he makes a careless promise, he should retract it wisely. If someone gives a generous gift to someone who doesn’t appreciate it and isn’t truly worthy of such an important gift, it should also be taken back; in this case, the giver's own thoughtlessness and poor judgment are to blame, not the ungrateful recipient. If someone obtains a gift through lies and deceit, that gift should also be revoked, regardless of its approval. Here, the fraud and deceit of the recipient are what lose the gift, not the inconsistency of the giver. A cautious prince must carefully evaluate the request and the character of the requester. Since not everyone deserves equally significant gifts, it's necessary to consider the appropriate value of each gift and the right occasion for giving. Therefore, it should be rare for someone to claim that a giver has retracted a gift or that they are fickle.


LXIX
 
ABOUT THE KINGDOM AND THE CHURCH AND
THE KING'S DUTY TO GOD

Son. Now I wish to ask what good reasons there are which would justify King Solomon’s act in causing Joab to be slain in God’s holy tabernacle while he was clinging to God’s sacred altar. Why did he not order him to be brought away first and slain afterwards?

Son. Now I want to ask what valid reasons there are that would justify King Solomon’s decision to have Joab killed in God’s holy tabernacle while he was holding onto God’s sacred altar. Why didn’t he have him taken away first and executed afterward?

Father. The matter about which you have now inquired cannot be made clear without a lengthy explanation, which will seem more like a comment than a proper continuation of the conversation in which we are now engaged. When Solomon concluded that it was better to slay Joab where he then was than to bring him away, he was not without good grounds for his decision; for he did not wish to fall into such a sin as King Saul fell into when he brought sacrifices to God’s 358holy altar. Now Solomon did not wish to make this a pretext that he intended to bring gifts or sacrifices to God’s holy altar, as if he were carrying out episcopal functions; nor did he wish to take away by force or violence anything that had come so near God’s holy altar as Joab then was, inasmuch as he was clinging to the sacred altar. But Solomon pondered the whole matter in his own mind: “It is my duty to carry out the provisions of the sacred law, no matter where the man happens to be whose case is to be determined; but it is not my duty to remove a man by force or violence who has fled to the holy place; for all just decisions are in truth God’s decisions and not mine. And I know of a surety that God’s holy altar will not be defiled or desecrated by Joab’s blood, for it will be shed in righteous punishment and as a penance for him, but not in hatred as in the case of an unjust verdict.” In this decision King Solomon illustrated the division of duties that God made between Moses and Aaron; and he did not wish to disturb this arrangement, lest he should fall into disfavor with God. For God had marked out their duties in such a way that Moses was to watch over the rules of the holy law, while Aaron was to care for the sacrifices that might come to the sacred altar.[345] And you shall know of a truth that this arrangement ought by right to stand even at this day; and you may be able to see this more clearly, if I add a few words in explanation. For the reason is this, that God has established two houses upon earth, each chosen for a definite service. The one is the church; in fact we may give this 359name to both, if we like, for the word church means the same as judgment hall, because there the people meet and assemble. These two houses are the halls of God, and He has appointed two men to keep watch over them. In one of these halls He has placed His table, and this is called the house of bread; for there God’s people gather to receive spiritual food. But in the other hall He has placed His holy judgment seat; and there the people assemble to hear the interpretation of God’s holy verdicts. And God has appointed two keepers to guard these houses: the one is the king, the other the bishop.

Father. The topic you just asked about can't be explained clearly without a long discussion, which might seem more like a comment than a proper continuation of our conversation. When Solomon decided it was better to kill Joab where he was than to bring him out, he had good reasons for that choice; he didn’t want to commit the same sin that King Saul did when he made sacrifices at God’s holy altar. Solomon didn’t want it to appear as if he intended to bring offerings or sacrifices to God’s altar as if he were taking on priestly roles; nor did he want to forcibly take away anything that was so close to God’s altar as Joab was, since Joab was holding onto the sacred altar. Solomon reflected on the matter: “It’s my responsibility to uphold the laws, regardless of where the person involved is; but it’s not right for me to forcibly remove someone who has sought refuge in a holy place, since all just decisions are ultimately God’s and not mine. I am certain that God’s holy altar won’t be defiled by Joab’s blood, as it will be spilled in just punishment and as atonement for his sins, not out of hatred as would happen with an unjust verdict.” Through this choice, King Solomon showed the division of responsibilities that God established between Moses and Aaron; he didn’t want to disrupt that arrangement in case he fell out of favor with God. God had clearly defined their roles, with Moses overseeing the laws while Aaron managed the sacrifices at the altar.[345] And you should know this arrangement should still stand today; you might understand this better if I add a few words to clarify. God has created two institutions on earth, each chosen for a specific purpose. One is the church; we might consider both to share this name because "church" means the same as a judgment hall, where people gather and meet. These two institutions are God's halls, and He has assigned two individuals to oversee them. In one of these halls, He has placed His table, known as the house of bread, where His people gather to receive spiritual nourishment. In the other hall, He has established His holy judgment seat, where the people come to hear interpretations of God’s holy decrees. God has appointed two guardians for these institutions: the king and the bishop.

Now the king is appointed to keep watch over the sacred house in which the holy seat is placed and to keep the holy verdicts of God. In temporal matters he is to judge between men and in such a way that the reward of eternal salvation may be given to him and to all others who after his day uphold the decisions that have been justly rendered. Into his hands God has also committed the sword of punishment with which to strike when the need arises, just as King Solomon did when he laid Joab under the sword of chastisement, with many others whom he subjected to righteous penalties, as we have already told. The king, then, must always strike, not in hatred but for righteous punishment. But if he slay any one out of hatred, it is murder, and he will have to answer for it as murder before God. You shall also know of a truth that no one is allowed to pluck away any of those things that God from the beginning has assigned to His hall and high-seat; for that would be to rob God Himself and His holy judgment 360seat and to disturb arrogantly the arrangement which God has made. And every one who is assigned to this seat should ponder in deep thought what plea he shall have to present when he comes before his own Judge; for every man who comes in his turn before the Highest Judge, having been steward in His hall, may confidently expect Him to employ some mode of address like the following: “Thou bearest Mine own name, for thou art both king and judge as I am; therefore I demand that thou render account for thy stewardship, inasmuch as thou art the appointed judge and leader of My people.” Wherefore each one will need to prepare after long reflection and with great care what he is to reply when he comes before the Judge. If the archangel, in whom there is no sign of weakness, gives his answer with fear and trembling, when he is called upon to render account for his services to our Lord and King, one can imagine what fear and trembling will come upon a frail and sinful man, when he is asked to render account for his stewardship in the presence of God. But he who has had this hall in his keeping will first of all be asked how he has dealt out justice among men; and if he is unable to give a satisfactory account, he may expect to hear this sentence: “Thou wicked thrall, since thou hast not observed justice in thy verdicts, thou shalt fare thither where all verdicts are evil; for thine own mouth has assigned thee to this place, inasmuch as it was not ashamed to deliver dishonest judgments.” But if he can defend the justice of his decisions with good reasons, he shall find joy in his stewardship and hear these 361words: “Inasmuch as thou hast always observed equity as a judge, it is fitting that thou shouldst enjoy a righteous verdict on every count.” He will then be asked further on what some of his actions were based; and after that he will have to show how discreetly and carefully he has kept all those things which God in the beginning committed to this judgment seat. But if he has not kept all those things which God in the beginning assigned to the holy seat of judgment, he will be brought face to face with those who have done their duty well, such as Melchisedek or Moses or David or others who have observed these things as faithfully as those named. Then he will hear these words spoken: “If thou hadst been as thoughtful and solicitous as these were in maintaining the honors which I joined in the beginning to My holy judgment seat, thou wouldst have received the same rewards as these enjoy. But now thou shalt be deprived of an honor here as great as the honor which thou didst take without right from My judgment seat; and to that degree shalt thou be regarded less in worth and merit than those who have kept these honors unimpaired which I entrusted to them. When thou wert given charge of My judgment seat, it was not intended that thou shouldst have power to dispose of services, honors, and holy dignities in a manner different from the one that I established in the beginning. For this office was not given thee as an everlasting inheritance, but it was committed to thee for a time only, that thou mightest obtain an eternal reward, if thou didst guard it faithfully. Thou wert given power to distribute worldly 362riches, gold and silver, though with discretion, but not to dispose of the honors and glories of My holy judgment seat.”

Now the king is appointed to watch over the sacred house where the holy seat is located and to uphold God's holy decrees. In worldly matters, he is to judge between people so that he may receive the reward of eternal salvation, as well as for all others who, after his time, uphold the just decisions made. God has also entrusted him with the sword of punishment to strike when necessary, just as King Solomon did when he dealt with Joab and others who faced righteous penalties, as we've already mentioned. The king must always act, not out of hatred, but for just punishment. If he kills anyone out of hatred, it is murder, and he will have to answer for it as such before God. You should also know for certain that no one is allowed to take away any of the things that God has assigned to His hall and high seat from the beginning; doing so would be like robbing God Himself and disrupting the order He has established. Every person assigned to this seat should consider deeply what they will say when they stand before their own Judge, for anyone who comes before the Highest Judge, having been the steward in His hall, can expect Him to address them like this: “You carry My name, since you are both king and judge as I am; therefore, I demand that you account for your stewardship, given that you are the appointed judge and leader of My people.” Therefore, everyone needs to prepare thoughtfully and carefully what they will say when they come before the Judge. If the archangel, who is entirely without weakness, answers with fear and trembling when called to account for his services to our Lord and King, one can only imagine the fear and trembling that will seize a frail and sinful person when asked to account for their stewardship before God. The one who has overseen this hall will first be questioned on how they have administered justice among people; if they cannot provide a satisfactory answer, they should expect to hear this verdict: “You wicked servant, since you have not upheld justice in your judgments, you will go where all judgments are evil; your own words have condemned you, as they were unashamed to deliver dishonest verdicts.” However, if he can defend the justice of his decisions with solid reasoning, he will find joy in his stewardship and hear these words: “Since you have always maintained fairness as a judge, it is right that you should receive a just verdict on every count.” He will then be asked about the basis of some of his actions; after this, he must demonstrate how carefully he has safeguarded all the things that God initially entrusted to this judgment seat. If he has failed to keep all those things that God assigned to the holy judgment seat, he will be brought face to face with those who have fulfilled their duties well, like Melchisedek, Moses, David, and others who have faithfully upheld these responsibilities. Then he will hear these words: “If you had been as considerate and dedicated as these in maintaining the honors I assigned to My holy judgment seat, you would have received the same rewards they enjoy. But now you shall be deprived of an honor here as great as the honor you unjustly took from My judgment seat; and to that extent, you will be regarded as lesser in worth and merit than those who have preserved the honors entrusted to them. When you were put in charge of My judgment seat, it was not meant for you to wield power over services, honors, and holy dignities in any fashion other than how I established it from the beginning. This office was not given to you as an everlasting inheritance, but it was entrusted to you for a limited time so that you might earn an eternal reward if you protected it faithfully. You were given the authority to distribute worldly riches, gold, and silver, albeit with caution, but not to decide on the honors and glories of My holy judgment seat.”

But if it is found that he has been discreet in his charge, he shall have cause to rejoice in his stewardship; he will, however, be examined in various lines. He will be asked how he has used the rod of punishment which was given into his hands; and it is very important that justice shall have been strictly observed in penalties, lest it go so ill with him as with King Saul, who failed to inflict a just penalty which God had commanded him to execute on the people who dwelt in Amalek, but slew unjustly the bishop Ahimelech and all the priests in Nob. But if it should go so ill with him who is thus called to account for penalties inflicted, that he is found to have stumbled in matters like those just mentioned and in which King Saul fell, he will soon hear these words: “Lead him yonder where King Saul and Herod and Nero and others like them abide, and let him dwell there with them, seeing that he wished to be like them in cruelty.” Still, if in some cases he has been merciful in sentence and punishment and if there is good reason why he should escape the reproaches that we have just mentioned, those facts will not be forgotten. For then he shall find happiness in all his stewardship and very soon shall hear this greeting: “Thou art welcome, thou faithful servant and good friend, for thou hast loyally kept a slight temporal dignity; now thou shalt come into joyful possession of a great honor, constant and everlasting, wholly free from sorrow and danger.” Happy is he who is permitted to hear these words; but wretched 363is he who shall hear those words of wrath which we quoted earlier. But no one needs to doubt that everyone who shall be called to account for his office and stewardship will be addressed in one of these two ways.

But if it turns out that he has been responsible in his role, he will have reason to celebrate his leadership; however, he will be questioned on various points. He will be asked how he has handled the punishment that was entrusted to him; and it's crucial that fairness was upheld in the penalties, so it doesn’t end badly for him like it did for King Saul, who failed to impose a just punishment that God had commanded him against the people of Amalek, but unjustly killed the priest Ahimelech and all the priests in Nob. If it turns out poorly for him when he is held accountable for the penalties imposed, and he is found to have erred in matters like those mentioned where King Saul stumbled, he will soon hear these words: “Take him over there where King Saul, Herod, Nero, and others like them are, and let him stay with them, since he wished to imitate their cruelty.” Still, if in some cases he has been merciful in his judgments and there are valid reasons for him to avoid the criticisms we just mentioned, those facts will be remembered. For then he will find joy in all his duties and will soon hear this greeting: “Welcome, faithful servant and good friend, for you have loyally maintained a modest earthly position; now you shall enter into a joyful and everlasting honor, completely free from sorrow and danger.” Blessed is he who gets to hear these words; but miserable is he who hears the words of judgment we cited earlier. But there’s no doubt that everyone who is held accountable for his role will be addressed in one of these two ways.


LXX
 
THE POWER OF KINGS AND BISHOPS.
CONCLUSION OF THE SECOND PART

Son. I see clearly that one who is to watch over the rules of the sacred law and deal out justice in all cases is surely assigned a very difficult task. It is also evident that King Solomon could not be called to account for having Joab slain in God’s tabernacle, inasmuch as he slew him for a just punishment, not out of enmity or in hatred, as Cain slew his brother Abel. God’s tabernacle was not defiled by Joab’s blood, seeing that it was not shed in hatred; but the earth was defiled by Abel’s blood, because it was shed in hatred. And I understand fully that the sin and the desecration are caused by the hatred and not by the punishment. But now you have spoken of two halls which God has dedicated to His service upon earth, and there are certain things that concern these about which I wish to inquire. You have stated that in one of them God has placed His judgment seat; you have discussed that and also the office of him who is in charge of it. You have also said that in the other hall is God’s table, from which all God’s people shall take spiritual food; and you added that the bishop has been appointed keeper of this hall. Now I wish to ask you why King Solomon removed Abiathar the 364bishop from the office that had been assigned to him, namely that of keeper of the hall to which I have just referred, and removed him so completely that he was never afterwards allowed to put forth his hand to the episcopal office, but was to live from that time on as a churl or a plowboy. But I have thought that neither of these two keepers can have authority to remove the other from the office which has been committed to him. Therefore I should like to have you point out a few considerations which will make clear how King Solomon could remove the bishop Abiathar from his office without incurring reproof from God.

Son. I clearly see that someone tasked with upholding the sacred laws and administering justice is given a very challenging job. It’s also clear that King Solomon can’t be held accountable for having Joab killed in God’s tabernacle, since he did it as a just punishment, not out of hatred or malice like Cain when he killed his brother Abel. Joab’s blood didn’t defile God’s tabernacle because it wasn’t spilled from hatred; however, the earth was defiled by Abel’s blood because it was shed out of hatred. I completely understand that sin and desecration stem from hatred, not from punishment. Now you’ve mentioned two halls dedicated to God’s service on earth, and I have some questions about them. You said that in one of them, God has set His judgment seat; you’ve discussed that along with the role of the one in charge. You also mentioned that the other hall contains God’s table, from which all His people will receive spiritual nourishment; and you added that the bishop is the keeper of this hall. Now I want to ask why King Solomon removed Abiathar, the bishop, from the position he was assigned as the keeper of this hall, and completely barred him from the episcopal office, leaving him to live from then on as a commoner or a farmer. I thought that neither of these two keepers had the authority to remove the other from the office that was entrusted to him. So, I’d like you to explain a few points that clarify how King Solomon could dismiss Bishop Abiathar from his role without facing reprimand from God.

Father. I called your attention to these facts to remind you that both these halls are God’s houses and both king and bishop the servants of God and keepers of these houses; but they do not own them in the sense that they can take anything away from them that was assigned to them in the beginning. Therefore the king must not pluck anything away from the house which the bishop has in his keeping, for neither should rob the other. And there should be no plundering of one by the other, but each ought to support the other for the same One owns both houses, namely God. I have also told you that God has given the rod of punishment into the hands of both the king and the bishop. The rod of punishment that has been committed to the king is a two-edged sword: with this sword it is his duty to smite to the death everyone who tries to take anything away from the sacred hall of which he is the guardian. But the king’s sword is two-edged for the reason that it is also his duty to guard the house which is in the bishop’s 365keeping, if the bishop is unable to defend it with his own rod of punishment. The bishop shall have his rod of punishment in his mouth, and he shall smite with words but not with hands like the king. And the bishop shall strike his blow in the following manner: if any one attempt to dishonor the sacred hall that is in his care, he shall refuse him the table which is placed in this holy house and the holy sustenance which is taken from this table. But when King Solomon deprived Abiathar the bishop of the episcopal office and dignity, he said that Abiathar’s own guilt deprived him and not he. Since he had decreed that David should forfeit his throne before God had ordered it, and had chosen another king to replace David, while he was still living, it was right to deprive him of the episcopal office, seeing that he wanted to rob David of the royal office. Saul’s guilt, on the other hand, when he had slain the bishop Ahimelech and all the priests in the city of Nob, was a grievous burden, because he had done this without just cause. But even if King Solomon should have killed the bishop Abiathar, he would have been without guilt; for the bishop had deprived the house of God of the lord whom God Himself had appointed keeper of the holy judgment seat. The bishop Abiathar had no right either to appoint or to remove any one, as was later made evident; for David chose the one whom he wished to be king in his stead, and the choice which Abiathar had made was of no effect. Abiathar the bishop obtained the episcopal office through the will of David who appointed him to it. Now you are to understand that there is this difference between the business of a king and the duties of a 366bishop: the bishop is appointed to be the king’s teacher, counsellor, and guide, while the king is appointed to be a judge and a man of severity in matters of punishment, to the great terror of all who are subject to him. Nevertheless, the bishop wields a rod of punishment as well as the king. There is this difference, however, between the king’s sword and that of the bishop, that the king’s sword always bites when one strikes with it, and bites to great injury when it is used without right, while it serves him well whom it may strike when it is rightfully used. But the bishop’s sword bites only when it is used rightfully; when it is wrongfully used, it injures him who smites with it, not him who is stricken. When the bishop strikes rightfully, however, his sword wounds even more deeply than the king’s. But this subject we shall discuss more fully at some other time, if it is thought advisable.

Father. I pointed out these facts to remind you that both of these halls are houses of God and both the king and the bishop are servants of God and caretakers of these houses; however, they do not own them in the sense that they can take anything away that was originally assigned to them. Therefore, the king should not remove anything from the house that the bishop manages, as neither should rob the other. There should be no plundering between them; instead, each should support the other since both houses belong to the same One, namely God. I have also mentioned that God has given the authority of punishment to both the king and the bishop. The punishment entrusted to the king is a two-edged sword: with this sword, it is his duty to strike down anyone who tries to take anything away from the sacred hall that he safeguards. But the king’s sword is two-edged because it is also his responsibility to protect the house that is under the bishop’s care if the bishop is unable to defend it with his own authority. The bishop's authority will come from his words, as he will strike with speech, not with his hands like the king. The bishop will act like this: if anyone attempts to dishonor the sacred hall that he oversees, he will deny them the table located in this holy house and the sacred sustenance taken from this table. However, when King Solomon removed Abiathar, the bishop, from his office and position, he stated that it was Abiathar’s own wrongdoing that caused his removal, not Solomon’s decision. Since Abiathar had decreed that David should lose his throne before God had commanded it and had chosen a different king to replace David while David was still alive, it was just to remove him from the episcopal position, given that he wanted to take the royal office from David. On the other hand, Saul's wrongdoing, when he killed the bishop Ahimelech and all the priests in the city of Nob, was a severe burden because he acted without just cause. But even if King Solomon had killed Bishop Abiathar, he would not have been guilty; for the bishop had deprived the house of God of the lord whom God Himself had appointed to guard the holy judgment seat. Bishop Abiathar had no authority to appoint or remove anyone, as became evident later; because David chose who he wanted to be king in his place, and Abiathar’s choice was meaningless. Bishop Abiathar obtained his position through the will of David who appointed him to it. Now you must understand that there is a difference between the role of a king and the duties of a bishop: the bishop is appointed to be the king’s teacher, adviser, and guide, while the king is appointed to be a judge and a stern figure in matters of punishment, instilling great fear in all who are under him. Nevertheless, the bishop also carries a rod of punishment just like the king. However, there is a difference between the king’s sword and that of the bishop; the king’s sword always strikes effectively, causing significant harm when misused, but serves well to those it strikes when used justly. But the bishop’s sword only inflicts wounds when used properly; when misused, it harms the one wielding it, not the one being struck. When the bishop strikes rightly, his sword can wound even more severely than the king’s. But this topic we will delve into more deeply at another time, if deemed appropriate.


367REFERENCES

369

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adam of Bremen: Gesta Hammenburgensis Ecclesias Pontificum, ed. J. M. Lappenberg (Mon. Ger. Hist. Scriptures, VII), Hanover, 1846.

Adam from Bremen: Gesta Hammenburgensis Ecclesias Pontificum, ed. J. M. Lappenberg (Mon. Ger. Hist. Scriptures, VII), Hanover, 1846.

Adventures of Suibhne Geilt, translated by J. G. O’Keefe (Irish Text Society, XII), London, 1913.

Adventures of Suibhne Geilt, translated by J. G. O’Keefe (Irish Text Society, XII), London, 1913.

Alexander Neckam: De Naturis Rerum Libri Duo, ed. Thomas Wright (Rolls Series, No. 34), London, 1863.

Alexander Neckam: De Naturis Rerum Libri Duo, ed. Thomas Wright (Rolls Series, No. 34), London, 1863.

Asher, G. M.: Henry Hudson the Navigator (Hakluyt Society), London, 1860.

Asher, G. M.: Henry Hudson the Navigator (Hakluyt Society), London, 1860.

Bede: Opera Omnia (Migne, Patrologia Latina, XC-XCV), Paris, 1850-51.

Bede: Complete Works (Migne, Patrologia Latina, XC-XCV), Paris, 1850-51.

Bernard (Saint): Opera Omnia (Migne, Patrologia Latina, CLXXXII-CLXXXV), Paris, 1854.

Bernard (Saint): Complete Works (Migne, Patrologia Latina, CLXXXII-CLXXXV), Paris, 1854.

Blom, Otto: Bemærkninger om Kongespeilets Affattelsestid (Aarböger for Nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie), Copenhagen, 1867.

Blom, Otto: Comments on the Time of Composition of the King's Mirror (Yearbooks for Nordic Antiquities and History), Copenhagen, 1867.

Blom, Otto: Lodbössen fra Vedelspang (Aarböger for Nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie), Copenhagen, 1872.

Blom, Otto: Lodbössen from Vedelspang (Yearbook for Nordic Antiquity and History), Copenhagen, 1872.

Bull, Edvard: Interdiktet mot Sverre (Historisk Tidsskrift, Femte Række, III), Christiania, 1915.

Edvard Bull: The Interdict Against Sverre (Historical Journal, Fifth Series, III), Oslo, 1915.

Capella, see Martianus Capella.

Capella, see __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.

Claussön, Peder: Norrigis Bescriffuelse, Copenhagen, 1633.

Claussön, Peder: Norrigis Description, Copenhagen, 1633.

Corpus Poeticum Boreale, ed. Gudbrand Vigfusson and F. York Powell, Oxford, 1883, 2 vols.

Corpus Poeticum Boreale, edited by Gudbrand Vigfusson and F. York Powell, Oxford, 1883, 2 volumes.

Cosmas: The Christian Topography of Cosmas, an Egyptian Monk, translated by J. W. McCrindle, London, 1897.

Cosmas: The Christian Topography of Cosmas, an Egyptian Monk, translated by J. W. McCrindle, London, 1897.

Daae, Ludvig: Studier angaaende Kongespeilet (Aarböger for Nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie), Copenhagen, 1896.

Daae, Ludvig: Studies on the King’s Mirror (Yearbook for Nordic Antiquity and History), Copenhagen, 1896.

Elucidarium, see Honorius of Autun.

Elucidarium, see __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.

Elucidarius (Annaler for Nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie), Copenhagen, 1852 (Danish translation), 1853 (Icelandic text).

Elucidarius (Annals for Nordic Antiquity and History), Copenhagen, 1852 (Danish translation), 1853 (Icelandic text).

Falk, Hjalmar: Altnordische Waffenkunde (Skrifter utgit af Videnskapsselskapet, II, Historisk-filosofisk Klasse), Christiania, 1915.

Falk, Hjalmar: Old Norse Weapons (Published by the Scientific Society, II, Historical-Philosophical Class), Oslo, 1915.

370Figgis, John Neville: The Theory of the Divine Right of Kings, Cambridge, 1896.

370John Neville Figgis: The Theory of the Divine Right of Kings, Cambridge, 1896.

Giraldus Cambrensis: Opera, ed. J. S. Brewer, James F. Dimock, and G. F. Warner (Rolls Series, No. 21), London, 1861-91, 8 vols.

Giraldus of Wales: Opera, edited by J. S. Brewer, James F. Dimock, and G. F. Warner (Rolls Series, No. 21), London, 1861-91, 8 volumes.

Geelmuyden, Hans: Om Stedet for Kongespeilets Forfattelse (Arkiv for Nordisk Filologi, I), Christiania, 1883.

Geelmuyden, Hans: On the Place of the King's Mirror's Composition (Archive for Nordic Philology, I), Oslo, 1883.

Gibbon, Edward: The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, ed. J. B. Bury, London, 1912.

Edward Gibbon: The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, ed. J. B. Bury, London, 1912.

Gjerset, Knut: History of the Norwegian People, New York, 1915, 2 vols.

Knut Gjerset: History of the Norwegian People, New York, 1915, 2 vols.

Hákonar Saga, ed. Gudbrand Vigfusson and G. W. Dasent, Icelandic Sagas, II, IV (Rolls Series, No. 88), London, 1887-94, 2 vols.

Hákonar Saga, edited by Gudbrand Vigfusson and G. W. Dasent, Icelandic Sagas, II, IV (Rolls Series, No. 88), London, 1887-94, 2 volumes.

Heffermehl, A. V.: Presten Ivar Bodde (Historiske Skrifter Tilegnede og Overleverede Professor Dr. Ludvig Daae), Christiania, 1904.

Heffermehl, A. V.: Presten Ivar Bodde (Historical Writings Dedicated to and Passed Down by Professor Dr. Ludvig Daae), Oslo, 1904.

Heilagra Manna Sögur, ed. C. R. Unger, Christiania, 1877, 2 vols.

Heilagra Manna Sögur, ed. C. R. Unger, Oslo, 1877, 2 vols.

Heinzel, Richard: Excurs über den Mythus von den vier Töchtern Gottes (Zeitschrift für deutsches Alterthum, Neue Folge, V), Berlin, 1874.

Heinzel, Richard: Excurs on the Myth of the Four Daughters of God (Journal for German Antiquity, New Series, V), Berlin, 1874.

Herrmann, Paul: Island in Vergangenheit und Gegenwart, Leipzig, 1907, 2 vols.

Paul Herrmann: Island in the Past and Present, Leipzig, 1907, 2 vols.

Hertzberg, Ebbe: Den förste norske Kongekroning (Historisk Tidsskrift, Fjerde Række, III), Christiania, 1905.

Hertzberg, Ebbe: The First Norwegian Coronation (Historical Journal, Fourth Series, III), Oslo, 1905.

Honorius of Autun: Opera Omnia (Migne, Patrologia Latina, CLXXII), Paris, 1854.

Honorius of Autun: Opera Omnia (Migne, Patrologia Latina, CLXXII), Paris, 1854.

Hovgaard, William: The Voyages of the Norsemen to America, New York, 1914.

Hovgaard, William: The Voyages of the Norsemen to America, New York, 1914.

Hudson, Henry, see Asher.

Hudson, Henry, see Asher.

Hugh of Saint Victor: Opera Omnia (Migne, Patrologia Latina, CLXXV-CLXXVII), Paris, 1854.

Hugh of Saint Victor: Complete Works (Migne, Latin Patrology, CLXV-CLXXVII), Paris, 1854.

Isidore (Saint) of Seville: Opera Omnia (Migne, Patrologia Latina, LXXXI-LXXXIV), Paris, 1850.

Isidore (Saint) of Seville: Complete Works (Migne, Patrologia Latina, LXXXI-L84), Paris, 1850.

Jacobus de Voragine: The Golden Legend, ed. George V. O’Neill, Cambridge, 1914.

Jacobus de Voragine: The Golden Legend, ed. George V. O’Neill, Cambridge, 1914.

Kongespegelen, translated by K. Audne, Oslo [Christiania], 1909-13.

Kongespegelen, translated by K. Audne, Oslo [Oslo], 1909-13.

Kongespeilet i Uddrag, translated by Chr. Dorph, Copenhagen, 1892.

Kongespeilet i Uddrag, translated by Chr. Dorph, Copenhagen, 1892.

Kongespeilet, ed. R. Keyser, P. A. Munch, and C. R. Unger, Christiania, 1848.

Kongespeilet, ed. R. Keyser, P. A. Munch, and C. R. Unger, Oslo, 1848.

371Kongs-skuggsio, Det Kongelige Speil, Speculum Regale, ed. Halfdan Einersen, Soröe, 1768.

371Kongs-skuggsio, The Royal Mirror, Royal Speculum, ed. Halfdan Einersen, Soröe, 1768.

Konungs Skuggsjá, ed. George T. Flom (Published by the University of Illinois), Urbana, 1915.

Konungs Skuggsjá, ed. George T. Flom (Published by the University of Illinois), Urbana, 1915.

Larson, Laurence M.: The Household of the Norwegian Kings in the Thirteenth Century (American Historical Review, XIII), 1908.

Laurence M. Larson: The Household of the Norwegian Kings in the Thirteenth Century (American Historical Review, XIII), 1908.

Larson, Laurence M.: Scientific Knowledge in the North in the Thirteenth Century (Publications of the Society for the Advancement of Scandinavian Study, I, No. 4), 1913.

Larson, Laurence M.: Scientific Knowledge in the North in the Thirteenth Century (Publications of the Society for the Advancement of Scandinavian Study, I, No. 4), 1913.

Macrobius, ed. F. Eyssenhardt, Leipzig, 1893.

Macrobius, edited by F. Eyssenhardt, Leipzig, 1893.

Martianus Capella, ed. F. Eyssenhardt, Leipzig, 1866.

Martianus Capella, ed. F. Eyssenhardt, Leipzig, 1866.

Meregarto, Denkmäler deutscher Poesie und Prosa, ed. K. Müllenhoff and W. Scherer, Berlin, 1892.

Meregarto, Monuments of German Poetry and Prose, ed. K. Müllenhoff and W. Scherer, Berlin, 1892.

Meter, Kuno: Irish Memorabilia in the Speculum Regale (Ériu, IV), 1910.

Meter, Kuno: Irish Memorabilia in the Speculum Regale (Ériu, IV), 1910.

Munch, Peter Andreas: Det norske Folks Historie, Christiania, 1852-63, 8 vols.

Munch, Peter Andreas: The History of the Norwegian People, Oslo, 1852-63, 8 vols.

Nansen, Fridtjof: In Northern Mists, London, 1911, 2 vols.

Fridtjof Nansen: In Northern Mists, London, 1911, 2 vols.

Nennius: The Irish Version of the Historia Britonum of Nennius, ed. James Henthorn Todd and Algernon Herbert (Irish Archeological Society), Dublin, 1848.

Nennius: The Irish Version of the Historia Britonum of Nennius, ed. James Henthorn Todd and Algernon Herbert (Irish Archaeological Society), Dublin, 1848.

Norges gamle Love indtil 1387, ed. R. Keyser, P. A. Munch, Gustav Storm, and Ebbe Hertzberg, Christiania, 1846-95, 5 parts.

Norway's old Laws until 1387, ed. R. Keyser, P. A. Munch, Gustav Storm, and Ebbe Hertzberg, Oslo, 1846-95, 5 parts.

Olafsen, O.: Falkefangsten i Norge (Historisk Tidsskrift, Femte Række, III), Christiania, 1915.

Olafsen, O.: The Falcon Hunt in Norway (Historical Journal, Fifth Series, III), Oslo, 1915.

Olson, Julius E. and E. G. Bourne (editors): The Northmen, Columbus, and Cabot (Original Narratives of Early American History), New York, 1906.

Olson, Julius E. and E.G. Bourne (editors): The Northmen, Columbus, and Cabot (Original Narratives of Early American History), New York, 1906.

Oman, Charles: A History of the Art of War in the Middle Ages, London, 1905.

Oman, Charles: A History of the Art of War in the Middle Ages, London, 1905.

Paris, Matthew: Chronica Majora, ed. H. R. Luard (Rolls Series, No. 57), London, 1872-84, 7 vols.

Paris, Matt: Chronica Majora, ed. H. R. Luard (Rolls Series, No. 57), London, 1872-84, 7 vols.

Petit de Juleville, L.: Les Mystères, Paris, 1880, 2 vols.

Petit de Juleville, L.: The Mysteries, Paris, 1880, 2 vols.

Petrus Alfonsus: Discipline Clericalis (Migne, Patrologia Latina, CLCVII), Paris, 1854.

Petrus Alfonsus: Discipline Clericalis (Migne, Patrologia Latina, CLCVII), Paris, 1854.

Petrus Comestor: Historia Scholastica (Migne, Patrologia Latina, CXCVIII), Paris, 1855.

Petrus Comestor: Historia Scholastica (Migne, Patrologia Latina, CXCVIII), Paris, 1855.

Pliny, C.: Plinii Secundi Naturalis Historiae Libri XXXVII, ed. Julius Sillig, Hamburg, 1851-58.

Pliny, C.: The Natural History of Pliny the Elder, Books XXXVII, ed. Julius Sillig, Hamburg, 1851-58.

372Rabanus Maurus: Opera Omnia, (Migne, Patrologia Latina, CVII-CXII), Paris, 1851-52.

372Rabanus Maurus: Complete Works, (Migne, Latin Patrology, CVII-CXII), Paris, 1851-52.

Reliquiae Antiquae, ed. Thomas Wright and James Orchard Halliwell, 1841-43, 2 vols.

Reliquiae Antiquae, ed. Thomas Wright and James Orchard Halliwell, 1841-43, 2 vols.

Riant, Paul: Expéditions et Pèlerinages des Scandinaves en Terre Sainte, Paris, 1865.

Riant, Paul: Expeditions and Pilgrimages of the Scandinavians in the Holy Land, Paris, 1865.

Rotuli Litterarum Clausarum, ed. T. Hardy (Record Commission Publications), London, 1833, 2 vols.

Rotuli Litterarum Clausarum, ed. T. Hardy (Record Commission Publications), London, 1833, 2 vols.

Ruge, Sophus: Geschichte des Zeitalters der Entdeckungen, Berlin, 1881.

Ruge, Sophus: A History of the Age of Discoveries, Berlin, 1881.

Scherer, W.: Die vier Töchter Gottes (Zeitschrift für deutsches Alterthum, Neue Folge, IX), Berlin, 1877.

Scherer, W.: The Four Daughters of God (Journal for German Antiquity, New Series, IX), Berlin, 1877.

Solinus: Collectanea Rerum Memorabilium, ed. Th. Mommsen, Berlin, 1895.

Solinus: Collectanea Rerum Memorabilium, ed. Th. Mommsen, Berlin, 1895.

Speculum Regale, ed. Oscar Brenner, Munich, 1888.

Speculum Regale, edited by Oscar Brenner, Munich, 1888.

Steenstrup, I. Japetus S.: Hvad er KongespeiletsHavgjerdinger?” (Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie), Copenhagen, 1871.

Steenstrup, I. Japetus S.: What are the Kings' MirrorsHavgjerdinger?” (Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie), Copenhagen, 1871.

Stjórn, Gammelnorsk Bibelhistorie, ed. C. R. Unger, Christiania, 1862.

Stjórn, Gammelnorsk Bibelhistorie, ed. C. R. Unger, Oslo, 1862.

Storm, Gustav: Brudstykke af en latinsk Oversættelse af Kongespeilet fra det 14de Aarhundrede (Arkiv for Nordisk Filologi, I), Christiania, 1883.

Storm Gustav: Excerpt from a Latin Translation of The King's Mirror from the 14th Century (Archive for Nordic Philology, I), Christiania, 1883.

Storm, Gustav (editor): En Tale mod Biskopperne, Christiania, 1885.

Hurricane Gustav (editor): A Speech Against the Bishops, Christiania, 1885.

Storm, Gustav: Om Tidsforholdet mellem Kongespeilet og Stjórn samt Barlaams Saga (Arkiv for Nordisk Filologi, III), Christiania, 1886.

Storm Gustav: On the Relationship of Time between the King's Mirror and Stjórn as well as Barlaam's Saga (Archive for Nordic Philology, III), Oslo, 1886.

Theodosiani Libri xvi..., ed. Th. Mommsen et Paulus M. Meyer, Berlin, 1905, 3 parts.

Theodosiani Libri xvi..., edited by Th. Mommsen and Paulus M. Meyer, Berlin, 1905, 3 parts.

Vulgate: Biblia Sacra..., ed. P. Michael Hetzenauer, Oeniponte [Innsbruck], 1906.

Vulgate: Biblia Sacra..., ed. P. Michael Hetzenauer, Oeniponte [Innsbruck], 1906.

Weiss, H. J. K.: Kostümekunde, Stuttgart, 1860-72, 5 vols.

Weiss, H. J. K.: Costume Studies, Stuttgart, 1860-72, 5 vols.

Zarncke, Friedrich: Der Priester Johannes, Leipzig, 1879.

Zarncke, Friedrich: Priest Johannes, Leipzig, 1879.


373INDEX

375

INDEX

  • Aaron, high priest in Israel, 280, 284, 358.
  • Abbot, 294, 325.
  • Abel, 330, 363.
  • Abiathar, Hebrew priest, 46, 47, 333, 344, 347, 351353, 363365.
  • Abiram, Hebrew rebel, 279, 283.
  • Abishag, David’s wife, 344, 348351.
  • Abishai, David’s companion, 335.
  • Abner, Hebrew captain, 346, 351.
  • Absalom, David’s son, 325, 338, 346, 347.
  • Acrifolium (aquifolium), 107.
  • Adam, 252257, 261, 266273.
  • Adam von Bremen, 19 note.
  • “Address to the Norwegian People,” King Sverre’s, 3946, 49, 58, 59.
  • Adonijah, David’s son, 46, 64, 341, 344, 345, 347351.
  • Agag, king of Amalek, 326.
  • Ahasuerus, Persian king, 237240, 244.
  • Ahimelech, Hebrew priest, 331333, 362, 365.
  • Albertus Magnus, medieval schoolman, 2.
  • Ale-springs, 134.
  • Alexander Neckam, medieval scientist, 12, 18.
  • 376Alfonso the Wise, Spanish king, 31.
  • Amalek, Amalekites, 52, 279, 283, 319, 325, 326, 362.
  • Amasa, Hebrew captain, 346, 351.
  • Amorites, 319, 326.
  • Andenes, headland in Lofoten, 98.
  • Angels, 261263, 309, 338, 360.
  • Ant, Habits of the, 92.
  • Apples, St. Kevin’s, 113;
  • Apulia, Southern Italy, 96, 97.
  • Arctic, Marvels of the, 21, 105, 119126, 135141.
  • Armor, 217220.
  • Arnamagnean collection, 65, 68.
  • Artaxerxes, Persian king, 237.
  • Arthurian legends, 2, 3.
  • Asp, serpent in Paradise, 264.
  • Athens, 309, 310, 312.
  • Augustine, Saint, 40.
  • Aura, 172.
  • Bacon, Roger, medieval scientist, 2.
  • Balances of justice, The, 306, 307.
  • Baleen whale, 120.
  • Basking sharks, 122 note.
  • Bathsheba, Uriah’s wife, 323325, 344, 348351;
  • 377Beaked whale, 120, 123.
  • Beams used in warfare, 216, 224, 225.
  • Beard, how trimmed and worn at court, 182.
  • Bearded seal, 140.
  • Bears in Greenland, 143.
  • Beasts, Instincts of, 91, 92, 111, 112.
  • Bede, medieval writer, 5, 16 note, 18, 20, 147 note, 257 note.
  • Beluga, a sort of whale, 120 note.
  • Benaiah, Hebrew captain, 344, 345, 351, 352.
  • Bengjerd (Berengaria), Danish queen, 31.
  • Bergen, 26, 46.
  • Bernard, Saint, 257 note.
  • Bethany, Hebrew town, 289.
  • Bethlehem, Hebrew town, 329.
  • Birchshanks, anti-clerical faction in Norway, 37, 52, 61, 63, 64.
  • Birds, Joy of, at coming of spring, 90, 91.
  • Birger, Swedish earl, 4, 30.
  • Birka, old Swedish town, 82 note.
  • Bishops, Political claims of, 3638, 55;
  • 378Bjarkey code, a municipal law, 81.
  • Bjarkudal bog, Norwegian marvel, 104.
  • Blandina (Slieve Bloom mountains in Iceland), 107.
  • Blom, Otto, Captain in Danish artillery, 32, 62, 63.
  • Blood fine, 61.
  • Blubber-cutters, 119.
  • “Bluemen” (negroes), 30.
  • Börnhoved, Battle of, 3.
  • Brattices, 222.
  • Breastplate, 219.
  • Breeches for mounted warriors, 219.
  • Breeding, Good, 227229.
  • Brendan, Irish saint, 125 note.
  • Brenner, Otto, editor of Speculum Regale, 69.
  • “Briar,” weapon for defense, 223.
  • British Isles, 29.
  • Broadax, 215.
  • Caaing whale, 119.
  • Caesar, Christ’s submission to, 43, 248, 249.
  • Cain, 330, 363.
  • Caltrop, device used in warfare, 215.
  • Cap, hat, or coif, When not to wear a, 182, 184, 227.
  • Capella, Martianus, encyclopedist, 5, 147 note.
  • Cassiodorus, encyclopedist, 5.
  • Castles, Weapons for attacking or defending, 220226.
  • 379Cat, siege engine, 221, 222.
  • Chansons de geste, 2.
  • Cherubim, 270.
  • Chess, 83, 228.
  • Christiania, 68.
  • Christiania edition of the King’s Mirror, 62, 68, 69, 71.
  • Christina, Norwegian princess, 31.
  • Christopher, Danish king, 30.
  • Church, The, relation of, to the monarchy, 3538, 55, 357366;
    • ambitions of, 36, 37;
    • opposed by King Sverre, 40.
  • Claussön, Peder, Norwegian writer, 65.
  • Climate of Iceland and Greenland, 15, 96, 143, 148, 149, 153;
    • of Ireland, 23, 24, 105, 106;
    • affected by changes in the sun’s course, 9699.
  • Cloena (Clonmacnois), Irish borough, 116, 117.
  • Clothes, 181, 182, 219, 227, 254, 271.
  • Coal, Use of, in warfare, 215.
  • Cologne, 28.
  • Conduct, Rules of, 8083, 85, 182189, 205211, 227, 228.
  • Constantine, 240244.
  • Conversation, Rules governing, 186191, 209, 210, 227.
  • Copenhagen, 66, 67, 68.
  • “Corse seal,” 139.
  • Cosmas, Egyptian monk and writer, 18 note.
  • Court, The royal, customs of, 73, 173, 176179, 183, 208211;
    • 380promotion at, 169;
    • fashions at, 181186;
    • speech and conversation at, 186, 187;
    • habits suitable to life at, 208210.
  • Courtesy, Rules of, 11, 227, 228;
  • Crafts and professions, 73, 78.
  • Craton, Roman philosopher, 242245.
  • Crossbow, 215, 220.
  • Croziermen, clerical faction in Norway, 37, 38, 54, 56.
  • Crusades, Importance of, for the spread of culture, 27, 32, 33.
  • Culture in the medieval North, 2631.
  • Curtain, a type of fortification, 222.
  • Cyrus, 237.
  • Daae, Ludvig, Norwegian historian, 44, 57, 62.
  • Dagmar (Dragomir), Danish queen, 31.
  • Dante, 49.
  • Dart, 215.
  • Dathan, Hebrew rebel, 279, 283.
  • David, king of Israel, 42, 46, 52, 249, 275, 276, 278, 281, 284, 290, 291, 317, 320342, 344352, 361, 365.
  • Dearth and failure of crops and morals, 33, 193204.
  • 381Death penalty, 318321.
  • Defensor Pacis, 49.
  • De Monarchia, 49.
  • Denmark, 3, 30, 38, 67.
  • Dialogs of Gregory the Great, 127, 130.
  • Dice, Warning against, 83, 228.
  • Diermicius, Irish saint, 111.
  • Dirk, 219.
  • Disciplina Clericalis, 9, 10, 26.
  • Disobedience, Sin of, 52, 53, 325, 326.
  • Divine right of kings, 4145, 49, 59, 246250, 357, 358, 360, 364366.
  • Dooms, see Judgments and Penalties.
  • Dorph, Chr., translator of the King’s Mirror, 70 note.
  • Dragons, 103.
  • Drunkenness, Warning against, 83, 207, 210.
  • Earth, Shape and constitution of the, 1215, 97, 128, 148, 300.
  • Earthquakes, 17, 18, 20, 21, 126, 129.
  • Egypt, 235, 236, 240, 243, 279, 286.
  • Einersen, Halfdan, editor of the King’s Mirror, 66, 67.
  • Elgesæter, Monastery of, 48, 52, 64.
  • Elks, 29.
  • Ell, 119 note.
  • Elucidarium, 10, 75 note, 131 note.
  • Embassies, 2931, 172, 177, 178.
  • 382Emmanuel, see Manuel.
  • Encyclopedists, 5, 6.
  • England, 2, 29, 58.
  • Erichsen, Jon, Icelandic scholar, 61, 67, 70.
  • Erik, Swedish duke, 65 note.
  • “Erken-seal,” 139.
  • Erling Skakke, Norwegian magnate, 36.
  • Esquimaux, 79 note.
  • Esther, queen of Persia, 238, 239, 244.
  • Ethical ideas of the King’s Mirror, 11, 77, 78, 8083, 85, 205207, 213, 214, 228234.
  • Etna, Mount, 17.
  • Eve, the first woman, 252255, 264271.
  • Excommunication, 38, 40, 365, 366.
  • Eystein, Norwegian archbishop, 36, 38, 46.
  • Falcons, 31, 144.
  • Faroes, 4, 37.
  • Finns, 79 note, 173 note.
  • Finsen, Hans, Icelandic bishop, 61, 66, 67.
  • Fire, Source of, 129.
  • “Fish driver,” a sort of whale, 120, 121.
  • Fishes, Instincts of, 90.
  • Flemish towns, 2.
  • “Flett seal,” 139.
  • Flom, G. T., editor of the King’s Mirror, 25 note, 69, 70.
  • France (and French), 26, 28, 39, 54, 81.
  • Frederick II, emperor, 30, 44.
  • 383Galilee, 354.
  • Gambison, defensive covering, 212, 217219.
  • Gardar, diocese in Greenland, 145 note.
  • Garth, King’s, 167.
  • Geelmuyden, Hans, Norwegian astronomer, 59.
  • “Gelts,” 116.
  • Geography of the King’s Mirror, 1117, 20.
  • Germany, 27, 28, 33, 182.
  • Gests, a higher class in the king’s guard, 170, 171.
  • Geysers, 21, 128, 130, 131.
  • Giraldus Cambrensis, medieval writer, 2224, 104 note, 106110 notes.
  • Gjerset, Knut, historian, 168 note.
  • Glaciers, 21, 130, 131, 151.
  • Glass, molten, for defensive warfare, 224.
  • Glosses, 272278.
  • Glumelaga (Glendalough), Irish abbey, 112.
  • Goliath, 329.
  • Göta River, 30.
  • Grampus, 119, 120.
  • Greenland, Geography and climate of, 4, 15, 16, 138, 139, 141150, 152, 153, 155;
  • 384Greenland sharks, 122.
  • Greenland whale, 123, 124.
  • Gregory the Great, 17, 40, 127, 130.
  • Gregory VII, 36.
  • Grosseteste, English bishop, 257 note.
  • Guardsmen, King’s, 6, 26, 176;
  • Hair, how trimmed and worn at court, 182.
  • Hakon IV, Norwegian king, 4, 6, 22, 2935, 48, 57, 58, 60, 64, 65.
  • Hakon V, Norwegian king, 65 note.
  • Hakon’s Saga, 30.
  • Halberd, 215.
  • Halogaland, district in northern Norway, 59, 98, 99.
  • Haman, magnate at the Persian court, 238240, 245.
  • Hamburg, 36.
  • Hand sling, 213, 221.
  • Hansa, the German, 2, 27.
  • Hares in Greenland, 143.
  • Harold Gilchrist (Gille), 34, 37.
  • Hauberk, 219.
  • Hawks, 29, 297, 298;
  • Headward, 171.
  • Heavenly bodies, Course of the, 11, 83, 86;
  • Hebrides, 4.
  • Hebron, 321.
  • “Hedgehog,” defensive weapon, 222, 223.
  • Heffermehl, A. V., Norwegian writer, 39 note, 57, 62.
  • 385Helena, mother of Constantine, 241, 244.
  • Hell, place of cold and heat, 131.
  • Helmet, 219.
  • Henry III, English king, 29, 58.
  • Herod, Jewish king, 354356, 362.
  • Hertzberg, Ebbe, Norwegian historian, 36 note.
  • Hezekiah, king of Juda, 288, 289.
  • Hirdmen, Honored position of, 171, 174176;
    • duties of, 177;
    • habits and diversions of, 207213.
  • Historia Scholastica, 6, 10.
  • Hiterdale, place in Iceland, 134.
  • “Hog whale,” 120, 123.
  • Holar, town in Iceland, 66.
  • Holly, holm, 107.
  • Holstein, 27.
  • Holy Spirit, Office and gifts of the, 275, 292, 294.
  • Honorius of Autun, medieval theologian, 10, 75 note, 131 note, 147 note.
  • Horn bow, 220.
  • Horse, Equipment of the, in war, 217, 218.
  • “Horse whale,” 122, 123.
  • Housecarle fine, 169, 171.
  • Housecarles, King’s, 167, 170175.
  • Household, The king’s, organization and customs of, 11, 26, 29, 165, 166, 178;
    • how to gain admission to, 179184.
  • 386Houses, God’s two, on earth, 358360, 363, 364.
  • Hudson, Henry, 136 note.
  • Hugh of St. Victor, medieval theologian, 257 note.
  • Humpback, a sort of whale, 123.
  • Hundred, The two reckonings of, 94.
  • Hungary, 33.
  • Husbandmen, 6, 73, 92, 291.
  • Icebergs, ice floes, 101, 126, 138, 139.
  • Iceland, Norwegian colony, 4;
  • Idols, Worship of, 189.
  • Illinois, University of, 69.
  • India, 11, 101, 102, 244.
  • Inge, Norwegian king, 46, 58.
  • Ingeborg, Swedish duchess, 65 note.
  • Inhisgluer (Inishglory), island in Ireland, 108.
  • Inisclodran, island in Ireland, 111.
  • Innocent III, 38, 45.
  • Interdict, 38.
  • “Invisible Society,” The, 66.
  • Ireland, Norwegian colony in, 4, 22;
  • Irish Nennius, 24.
  • 387Iron ore found in Iceland, 134.
  • Isaiah, Hebrew prophet, 288, 289.
  • Ishbosheth, king of Israel, 320, 321.
  • Isidore of Seville, encyclopedist, 5, 13, 15 note, 18, 147.
  • Island, Floating, 107, 108;
    • where bodies cannot decay, 108, 109;
    • where none can die, 109;
    • occupied by demons, 109, 110;
    • where no female is allowed, 111, 112.
  • Israel, Land and people of, 46, 238, 239, 279, 280, 286, 317.
  • Italian cities, 2.
  • Ivar Bodde, Norwegian priest, 5759, 62.
  • Javelins, 215.
  • Jericho, 279, 283.
  • Jerome, Saint, 40.
  • Jerusalem, 96, 97, 166, 338.
  • Jesse, father of King David, 329.
  • Jesus Christ recognized kingship, 42, 43, 247249;
    • showed mercy to the woman taken in adultery, 281, 282;
    • forgave Peter and the thief on the cross, 282;
    • raised Lazarus, 289.
  • Jesus, son of Sirach, Hebrew writer, 303.
  • Joab, Hebrew captain, 47, 48, 64, 341, 344, 346, 350353, 357359, 363.
  • Job, 132, 133.
  • John, Norwegian archbishop, 46.
  • 388John the Baptist, 354.
  • John, English king, 29, 58.
  • John of Paris, medieval writer, 49.
  • Joint kingship, Theory and evils of, 3335, 60, 63, 198201, 203 note.
  • Jonah, Hebrew prophet, 287.
  • Jonathan, Saul’s son, 330.
  • Joseph, 235, 236, 240, 243, 244.
  • Joshua, Hebrew chieftain, 279.
  • Judas, 279, 284, 285.
  • Judgments of God to serve as examples, 251258, 277289;
    • of a king at times to be lenient and at times severe, 251, 259, 278, 279, 313321;
    • diverse character of, 283285;
    • reasons for modifying, 285289;
    • of a king to be carefully thought out, 304313;
    • king’s responsibility for, 363366;
    • of the bishops, 364366.
  • Justice, divine virgin, 252, 254, 256259, 278, 279, 281, 283, 285, 287, 324, 328.
  • Justin, priest, 309312.
  • Kertinagh, island in Ireland, 109, 110.
  • Kevinus, Irish saint, 112, 113.
  • Keyser, Rudolf, Norwegian historian, 6 note, 68.
  • King, The, authority and power of, 35, 4045, 52, 75, 174, 175, 246, 247, 298, 299;
    • relation of, to the church, 35, 36, 4648, 363366;
    • 389holds his title from God, 4043, 49, 246251, 290;
    • judicial duties of, 114, 115, 251, 290, 304308, 314, 358360;
    • customs to be observed in presence of, 179192, 227, 228;
    • cap and mantle not to be worn in presence of, 182, 184186;
    • rules of speech in presence of, 183, 186191;
    • if unwise or young may bring ruin upon the land, 197203;
    • diversions of, 208, 209, 297, 298;
    • business of, during the day, 246, 250, 298;
    • to give thought to the realm at night, 250;
    • needs to be well informed, 251;
    • prayer of, 290296;
    • should attend the services of the church, 290, 297;
    • should meditate on the source of wisdom, 299.
  • King’s Crag, Norwegian borough, 30.
  • Kingship, Joint, see Joint kingship.
  • Kingship, Norwegian theory of, 3335, 3944.
  • Kingsmen, 78, 79, 85, 164;
  • 390
  • King’s Mirror, The, plan and purpose of, 68, 7276;
  • Kiranus, Irish saint, 117.
  • Klefsan, Irish clown, 118.
  • Knee pieces, 219.
  • Knights, 178, 322.
  • Knowledge, Tree of, 252, 253, 255, 264, 265.
  • Kongespegelen, 70.
  • Kraken, The, 22, 125.
  • Ladders, Scaling, 221, 225.
  • Lakes, Miracle working, 106110.
  • Landedmen, holders of fiefs in Norway, 172, 175.
  • Langton, Stephen, English archbishop, 257 note.
  • 391Languages, Study of, encouraged, 81.
  • Latin language, Importance of the, 39, 54, 81.
  • Law, Study of, 81.
  • Lawrence, Saint, 309313.
  • Lazarus, 289.
  • Lead, Molten, useful in defensive warfare, 224.
  • Leap year, 94.
  • Levites, 51.
  • Liberal arts, The seven, 303.
  • Licentiousness, to be avoided, 83, 206, 228.
  • Lightning, Source of, 129.
  • Lofoten, 59, 98 note.
  • Logechag (Lough Neagh?), lake in Ireland, 106, 107.
  • Logherne (Lough Erne or Lough Owel), lake in Ireland, 109, 110.
  • Logri (Loch Cré or Loch Ree), lake in Ireland, 109, 111.
  • Longbow, 215.
  • Louis IX, French king, 31.
  • Low Countries, 28.
  • Loycha, lake in Ireland, 107, 108.
  • Lucifer, 259, 262268, 271.
  • Lund, Swedish cathedral town, 36.
  • Macrobius, 15, 147 note, 154 note.
  • Magnus Bareleg, Norwegian king, 34.
  • Magnus the Blind, Norwegian king, 34.
  • Magnus Erlingsson, Norwegian king, 36, 37, 55.
  • 392Magnus Lawmender, Norwegian king, 44, 61.
  • Magnussen, Arne, antiquarian, 65.
  • Mail hose, 219.
  • Mainz, 28.
  • Man, Isle of, 4, 22.
  • Manners, Personal, 32, 164166, 169, 173, 176187, 192, 193, 227, 228;
  • Mantle, When not to wear a, 181, 182, 184186, 227.
  • Manuel Comnenus, Byzantine emperor, 60, 101 note.
  • Marble in Greenland, 144.
  • Mark, measure of value, 168 note, 172.
  • Marsiglio of Padua, medieval political theorist, 49.
  • Martianus Capella, see Capella.
  • Marvels, see Arctic, Greenland, Iceland, India, Ireland, and Norway.
  • Mary, The Virgin, 85.
  • Matthew, an envoy from the imperial court, 30.
  • Matthew Paris, English monk and historian, 31.
  • Melchisedek, 361.
  • Merchants and the mercantile profession, 6, 11, 28, 73, 78, 7986, 9294, 163, 164, 173.
  • Mercy, divine virgin, 252, 254, 256259, 279281, 283, 285, 287, 324, 328.
  • Meregarto, German poem, 19 note.
  • 393Mermaid, 22, 136, 137.
  • Merman, 22, 135, 136.
  • Meyer, Kuno, 25, 109 note, 116 note, 117 note.
  • Military art and engines, 11, 32, 62, 63, 211226.
  • Mineral springs in Iceland, 21, 134, 135.
  • Mines in warfare, 225.
  • Minorities, 35, 60, 197, 203 note.
  • “Mirrors of Princes,” 7 note.
  • Missiles used in warfare, 224, 225.
  • Monsters, 101, 105, 110, 115, 125, 135137.
  • Moon, The, and its influence on the ocean, 9294, 300.
  • Mordecai, Hebrew magnate at the Persian court, 238240, 245.
  • Möre, Norwegian shire, 104.
  • Moses, 51, 52, 280, 281, 283, 285287, 290, 317, 318, 358, 361.
  • Munch, Peter Andreas, Norwegian historian, 68.
  • Munster, 107 note.
  • Namdalen, district in Norway, 9 note, 59, 60.
  • Nansen, Fridtjof, 20, 21.
  • Narwhal, 122, 123.
  • Nathan, Hebrew prophet, 322, 324, 328, 344, 345, 347.
  • Natural History of the Elder Pliny, 18.
  • Navigation, Rules and information relating to, 8385, 90, 100, 156162.
  • Nero, 362.
  • 394Nibelungs, Tales of the, 3.
  • Nicholas Petersson, Norwegian bishop, 46.
  • Nicholas Sæmundarson, Norwegian abbot, 28 note.
  • Nidaros, 9 note, 36, 48;
  • Night and day, Changes of, 94, 98, 104.
  • Nineveh, 287.
  • Nob, city in Israel, 331, 332, 347, 352, 362, 365.
  • Nordland, northern Norway, 98 note.
  • Northern lights, 18, 19, 101, 146, 149152.
  • Norway, Colonies of, 4;
  • Occam, William, medieval schoolman, 49.
  • Olaf, Norwegian saint and king, 36.
  • Ordeal, Harold Gilchrist’s, 34.
  • “Ore-marvel” in Iceland, 134.
  • Orkneys, 4.
  • Ostenta, ostensa, minutes of time, 16, 20, 95.
  • Paradise, 252, 255, 261, 263.
  • Parmenides of Ela, 15 note.
  • Patrick, Saint, 110 note, 115.
  • 395Paul, Norwegian bishop, 46.
  • Paul, Saint, 275.
  • Peace, divine virgin, 252, 254, 256259, 279281, 283, 285, 287.
  • Peasants, yeomen, 73, 78, 172, 174;
  • Penalties, 318322, 324, 325, 327, 328.
  • Penance, Theory of, 51, 52, 318, 319, 321, 343, 346.
  • Pens, Sören, Icelandic merchant, 66.
  • Persia, 244 note.
  • Peter, Saint, 42, 248, 249, 282, 284, 285.
  • Peter, Skule’s son, 48.
  • Petrifying waters, 104, 105, 107, 128.
  • Petrus Alfonsus, 9, 26.
  • Petrus Comestor, 6, 10.
  • Pharaoh, 236, 244, 278, 283, 305.
  • Philistines, 329.
  • Pilgrims and pilgrimages, 3, 19, 27, 28.
  • Pitch, Use of, in defensive warfare, 225.
  • Pliny the Elder, 18.
  • Plural and singular terms, Proper use of, 187190.
  • Polo, Marco, 2.
  • Pope, 175, 241, 294.
  • Porpoise, 119.
  • Portugal, 31.
  • “Praise of Divine Wisdom,” Alexander Neckam’s, 12.
  • Prester John, 11, 101 note.
  • Pretenders to the Norwegian throne, 34, 35, 48.
  • 396Promises, see Vows.
  • Proper names, Irish, 25.
  • “Prow-boar,” device used in naval warfare, 216.
  • Psalter, 276.
  • Ptolemaic theory of the universe, 1214.
  • Purgatory of Saint Patrick, 110 note.
  • Rabanus, Maurus, medieval scholar and writer, 20, 95 note, 147 note.
  • Ram, siege engine, 221, 222.
  • “Raven whale,” 120.
  • “Red comb,” a sort of whale, 122, 123.
  • Reindeer in Greenland, 145.
  • Rhine River, 27, 28.
  • Riant, Count, 19.
  • Right whale, 121, 123 note.
  • Rome, 27, 28, 241.
  • Rorqual, 124.
  • “Running wheel,” device used in defending castles, 223.
  • Sachsenspiegel, 8.
  • Saddle for use in warfare, 218, 219.
  • Saddleback, a sort of seal, 140.
  • Saint Edmundsbury, 38.
  • Salmon, 109.
  • Samuel, Hebrew prophet, 326, 328, 329.
  • Sanctuary, Right of, 48, 64, 348, 351353, 357, 358, 363.
  • Satan, 132, 133.
  • Saul, king of Israel, 42, 52, 53, 279, 283, 317, 319322, 325337,
  • 397339, 340, 344, 347, 357, 362.
  • Saxon lands, 27, 28.
  • Scarlet, 181.
  • Scherer, W., 257 note.
  • Schöning, Gerhard, Norwegian scholar, 66, 67.
  • Scythes for use in warfare, 215.
  • “Sea hedges,” sea quakes, 21, 101, 137, 138.
  • Seals, 21, 139, 140, 142, 145.
  • Self-control, The virtue of, 231233.
  • Serpent, The, in Paradise, 252, 253, 255, 261, 266270, 272.
  • Shabrack, covering for war horse, 218.
  • Shetlands, 4.
  • Shield-giant, military contrivance, 226.
  • “Shield whale,” 120.
  • Shimei, Biblical character, 341343, 346, 353.
  • Ships, Care of, 8385;
  • “Short seal,” 140.
  • “Shot wagon,” device for defending castles, 223, 224.
  • Sicily, 17, 30, 127, 130.
  • Siege warfare, 220226.
  • Sigurd Jerusalemfarer, Norwegian king, 28 note, 34.
  • Sinai, Mount, 285.
  • Skis, Running on, 103, 104.
  • Skule, Norwegian earl and duke, 31, 35, 48, 52, 63, 64.
  • Society for the Advancement of Scandinavian Study, The, 70.
  • 398Solinus, 19 note.
  • Solomon, Hebrew king, 46, 47, 64, 303, 340354, 357, 358, 363365.
  • “Song of the High One,” Eddic poem, 50.
  • Sorö, Danish city, 66, 67.
  • Sorö edition of the King’s Mirror, 61, 6568, 70, 120 note.
  • Spain, 31.
  • “Spear whale,” 120.
  • Speculum Ecclesiae, 7.
  • Speculum Majus, 6.
  • Speculum Naturale, 7.
  • Speculum Perfectionis, 7.
  • Speculum Regale, 69, 17, 19, 22, 25, 43, 45, 49, 50, 56, 59, 61, 66, 6870, 74, 101 note;
  • Speculum Regis, 8.
  • Speculum Regum, 8.
  • Speculum Stultorum, 7.
  • Sperm, 124.
  • Sperm whale, 121.
  • Springs, Marvelous, 107.
  • Staff slings, 213, 215, 221.
  • Steenstrup, I. Japetus S., Danish scientist, 137 note.
  • Stephen, Athenian judge, 309313.
  • Stockholm, 82 note.
  • Storm, Gustav, Norwegian historian, 62.
  • Strindsea, Battle of, 58.
  • Suibhne Geilt, Irish legendary character, 116 note.
  • Sulphur, Use of, in warfare, 215, 225.
  • 399
  • Sun, The, office of, 87, 300;
  • Surcingle, 218.
  • Sverre, Norwegian king, 34, 3739, 47, 5461.
  • Sweden, 3, 4, 30, 65.
  • Swords of kings and bishops, 364366.
  • Sylvester, pope and saint, 241.
  • Table service and manners, 80, 210, 211, 227, 228.
  • Tar, Use of, in warfare, 225
  • Tara, 113 note;
  • Tarquin, Roman citizen, 310, 311, 313, 314.
  • Thegn, King’s, 61.
  • Thegn money, 168, 171.
  • Themar, Irish borough, 113115, 308, 312, 314.
  • Theodoric, 3.
  • Theodosius II, Roman emperor, 316 note.
  • Thieves, The two, at the crucifixion, 282, 285.
  • Thomas Aquinas, medieval philosopher and theologian, 2.
  • Tides, 12, 16, 17, 83, 86, 9294.
  • Time, Divisions of, 11, 16, 9395.
  • Tools for ship repairs, 84.
  • Topographia Hibernica of Giraldus Cambrensis, 22, 23.
  • Torment, Places of, in Sicily and Iceland, 130, 131.
  • 400Towers for siege warfare, 215, 216, 221, 225.
  • Trebuckets, siege engines, 220, 222.
  • Trondhjem, 26, 46, 59, 64, 66;
  • Truth, divine virgin, 252, 254, 255, 257259, 278, 279, 281, 283, 285, 287, 324.
  • Tunis, 31.
  • Turnpikes for use in defensive warfare, 223.
  • Ulster, 107 note.
  • Unas, a Faroese, 37.
  • Unger, Carl R., editor of the King’s Mirror, 68.
  • Ur, Hebrew high priest, 280, 284.
  • Uriah, Hebrew warrior, 53, 281, 322325, 328.
  • Utrecht, 28.
  • Vaag, fishing village in Lofoten, 98.
  • Valdemar the Victorious, Danish king, 3, 4, 31.
  • Valladolid, 31.
  • Vashti, Persian queen, 237, 238, 240, 243, 244.
  • Venomous animals unable to live in Ireland, 106.
  • Vincent of Beauvais, encyclopedist, 5.
  • Volcanic fires, 17, 21, 126129, 130, 131.
  • Vows and promises, when to be kept and when broken, 353357.
  • Vulgate, 9.
  • 401Wadmol, cloth for sail repair, 84.
  • Walrus, 21, 140, 141.
  • “War-beams,” 215.
  • Warfare, Private, 50, 231.
  • Weapons suitable for warfare on land, 213, 214, 217226;
  • Whalebone, 124.
  • Whales, 18, 21, 119124, 139, 140, 145.
  • White bears, 143.
  • White whale, 120.
  • William, king’s chaplain, 29, 57.
  • William of Sabina, cardinal, 31, 55.
  • Willow, Miracle of the, 112, 113.
  • Winds, Covenant of the, 8789, 158161;
    • importance of, in navigation, 150, 160.
  • 402Wisdom, Source and beginning of, 77, 78, 230, 299, 300;
  • Woden, 50.
  • Wolves, Men turned into, 115;
    • in Greenland, 143.
  • Woman taken in adultery, 281, 282.
  • Year, Divisions of the, 94.
  • Zadoc, Hebrew priest, 344347.
  • Zenophilus, Roman prince, 242245.
  • Zion (Gihon), 345.
  • Zones of heat and cold, 15, 16, 147, 148, 153155, 162.

403

FOOTNOTES


1.  R. Keyser in the introduction to the Christiania edition (p. xi).

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.R. Keyser in the introduction to the Christiania edition (p. xi).

2.  It is believed that the title came into use in Europe in imitation of Hindu writers who wrote “Mirrors of Princes.” Nansen, In Northern Mists, II, 242.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.It’s thought that the title was adopted in Europe inspired by Hindu authors who wrote “Mirrors of Princes.” Nansen, In Northern Mists, II, 242.

3.  There must have been important collections of manuscripts at Nidaros (Trondhjem), where there was a cathedral and several monastic institutions. The King’s Mirror was probably composed in Namdalen, about one hundred miles northeast of Nidaros. See below, pp. 5960.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.There must have been significant collections of manuscripts at Nidaros (Trondhjem), which had a cathedral and several monastic institutions. The King’s Mirror was likely written in Namdalen, about a hundred miles northeast of Nidaros. See below, pp. 5960.

4.  See below, p. 237.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See below, p. 237.

5.  Storm, “Om Tidsforholdet mellem Kongespeilet og Stjórn samt Barlaams Saga”: Arkiv for nordisk Filologi, III, 83-88.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Storm, “On the Relationship of the King’s Mirror and the Governance as well as the Saga of Barlaam”: Archive for Nordic Philology, III, 83-88.

6.  See Disciplina Clericalis, fabula xxiv: Migne, Patrologia Latina, CLVII, 698-700.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See Disciplina Clericalis, story xxiv: Migne, Patrologia Latina, CLVII, 698-700.

7.  A fragment of the Elucidarium, comprising, however, the greater part of the work, is published in Annaler for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1852 and 1853; in the former volume a Danish translation is given; the latter contains the Icelandic text.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.A part of the Elucidarium, which includes most of the work, was published in Annaler for nordisk Oldkyndighed in 1852 and 1853; the first volume features a Danish translation, while the second contains the Icelandic text.

8.  See below, pp. 2225.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See below, pp. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_1__–__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_2__.

9.  See below, p. 101 (c. viii).

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See below, p. 101 (c. viii).

10.  C. iv. See also Larson, “Scientific Knowledge in the North in the Thirteenth Century”: Publications of the Society for the Advancement of Scandinavian Study, I, 139-146.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.C. iv. See also Larson, “Scientific Knowledge in the North in the 13th Century”: Publications of the Society for the Advancement of Scandinavian Study, I, 139-146.

11.  De Natura Rerum, c. xlvi: Migne, Patrologia Latina, XC, 264-265.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.De Natura Rerum, c. xlvi: Migne, Patrologia Latina, XC, 264-265.

12.  De Naturis Rerum, 441.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  On the Nature of Things, 441.

13.  Job, xxvi, 7.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Job, 26:7.

14.  Psalms, cxxxvi, 6.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Psalms, 136:6.

15.  De Natura Rerum Liber, c. xlv: Migne, Patrologia Latina, LXXXIII, 1015.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.On the Nature of Things Book, c. xlv: Migne, Latin Patrology, LXXXIII, 1015.

16.  See c. xix.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See ch. 19.

17.  See c. vii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See chapter 7.

18.  Ruge, Geschichte des Zeitalters der Entdeckungen, 97.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ruge, History of the Age of Discoveries, 97.

19.  C. v.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. v.

20.  C. xix.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 19.

21.  Parmenides of Ela (ca. 480 B.C.). Nansen, In Northern Mists, I, 12.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Parmenides of Elea (around 480 BCE). Nansen, In Northern Mists, I, 12.

22.  See below, p. 147 (c. xix). Cf. Ibid., 123.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See below, p. 147 (c. xix). Cf. Ibid., 123.

23.  C. xix.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 19.

24.  Probably from the writings of Isidore, who speaks of the zones as belts on the heavens. Etymologiae, iii, c. xliv; xiii, c. vi; De Natura Rerum, c. x.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.It likely comes from Isidore's writings, where he describes the zones as bands across the sky. Etymologiae, iii, c. xliv; xiii, c. vi; De Natura Rerum, c. x.

25.  C. xix.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 19.

26.  C. xiii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 13.

27.  C. xxi.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 21.

28.  C. vi.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. vi.

29.  Ibid.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Same source.

30.  Ibid.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Same source.

31.  The Venerable Bede held that the moon is in some way responsible for the tides. De Natura Rerum, c. xxxix: Migne, Patrologia Latina, XC, 258-259; see also ibid., XC, 422-426 (De Tempore Ratione, c. xxix).

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The Venerable Bede believed that the moon is somehow responsible for the tides. De Natura Rerum, c. xxxix: Migne, Patrologia Latina, XC, 258-259; see also ibid., XC, 422-426 (De Tempore Ratione, c. xxix).

32.  Alexander Neckam, De Naturis Rerum, 138.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Alexander Neckam, On the Natures of Things, 138.

33.  C. vi.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. vi.

34.  C. xiii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 13.

35.  Ibid.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Same source.

36.  De Naturis Rerum, 158.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  De Naturis Rerum, 158.

37.  De Natura Rerum, c. xlix: Migne, Patrologia Latina, XC, 275-276.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.De Natura Rerum, c. xlix: Migne, Patrologia Latina, XC, 275-276.

38.  De Natura Rerum, c. xlvi: Migne, Patrologia Latina, LXXXIII, 1015. See also The Christian Topography of Cosmas (written about 547), 17-18; Cosmas scoffs at the theory.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.De Natura Rerum, c. xlvi: Migne, Patrologia Latina, LXXXIII, 1015. See also The Christian Topography of Cosmas (written around 547), 17-18; Cosmas mocks the theory.

39.  Naturalis Historiae, I, 201 (ii, c. lxxix).

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Naturalis Historiae, I, 201 (ii, c. lxxix).

40.  P. ix, note.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  P. ix, note.

41.  C. xix.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Ch. 19.

42.  Thus Solinus (pp. xxxiv, xxxvii, 236) says “the sea-ice on this island ignites itself on collision, and when it is ignited it burns like wood.” See Nansen, In Northern Mists, I, 193. Adam von Bremen (Gesta Hammaburgensis Ecclesiae Pontificum, iv, 34) writes: “they report this remarkable thing about it that this ice appears so black and dry that, on account of its age, it burns when it is kindled.” Ibid. The same belief appears in a German poem Meregarto: “Thereby the ice there becomes so hard as crystal, that they make a fire above it till the crystal glows.” Ibid., I, 181.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.So Solinus (pp. xxxiv, xxxvii, 236) says, “the sea ice on this island ignites on impact, and once ignited, it burns like wood.” See Nansen, In Northern Mists, I, 193. Adam von Bremen (Gesta Hammaburgensis Ecclesiae Pontificum, iv, 34) writes, “they report this amazing thing about it that this ice appears so black and dry that, due to its age, it burns when kindled.” Ibid. The same idea appears in a German poem Meregarto: “Thus the ice there becomes as hard as crystal, that they make a fire on top of it until the crystal glows.” Ibid., I, 181.

43.  Riant, Expéditions et Pèlerinages des Scandinaves en Terre Sainte, 440-441.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Riant, Expeditions and Pilgrimages of Scandinavians in the Holy Land, 440-441.

44.  Rabanus Maurus died in 856.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Rabanus Maurus passed away in 856.

45.  Nansen, In Northern Mists, II, 242.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Nansen, In Northern Mists, II, 242.

46.  Nansen, In Northern Mists, II, 243.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Nansen, In Northern Mists, Vol. II, p. 243.

47.  Ibid. “If we make allowance for three of them being probably sharks and for two being perhaps alternative names for the same whale, the total corresponds to the number of species that are known in northern waters.”

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ibid. “If we consider that three of them are likely sharks and that two might be different names for the same whale, the total matches the number of species known in northern waters.”

48.  Ibid. This “corresponds to the number of species living on the coasts of Norway and Greenland.”

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ibid. This "matches the number of species found along the coasts of Norway and Greenland."

49.  Cc. xii, xvi.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Cc. 12, 16.

50.  Hákonar Saga, c. 322.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Hákonar Saga, ca. 322.

51.  Giraldus, Opera, V, 62-64; King’s Mirror, c. x.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Giraldus, Opera, V, 62-64; King’s Mirror, c. x.

52.  Topographia Hibernica, iii, c. 28; King’s Mirror, c. x.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Topographia Hibernica, iii, c. 28; King’s Mirror, c. x.

53.  Topographia Hibernica, ii, introd.: Opera, V, 74.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Topographia Hibernica, ii, introd.: Opera, V, 74.

54.  C. xi.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 11.

55.  C. x.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. x.

56.  Topographia Hibernica, i, c. xxxiii: Opera, V, 67.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Topographia Hibernica, i, c. xxxiii: Opera, V, 67.

57.  See Wright-Halliwell, Reliquiae Antiquae, II, 103-107.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See Wright-Halliwell, Reliquiae Antiquae, Vol. II, pp. 103-107.

58.  P. x.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  P. x.

59.  Ériu, IV., 14-16.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Ériu, IV., 14-16.

60.  In a letter to the writer Professor Meyer expresses the belief that the use of gh in the Irish proper names is an invention by the author. The combination of c and h is also used in certain other proper names, the system varying in the different manuscripts. For a discussion of the writing of proper names in the chief manuscript, see the American Facsimile Edition of the Konungs Skuggsjá (edited by G. T. Flom), xxxvii-xxxix.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.In a letter to the writer, Professor Meyer shares his belief that the use of gh in Irish proper names is something the author invented. The combination of c and h also appears in some other proper names, with the system varying across different manuscripts. For a discussion on how proper names are written in the main manuscript, refer to the American Facsimile Edition of the Konungs Skuggsjá (edited by G. T. Flom), xxxvii-xxxix.

61.  See above, pp. 910.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See above, pp. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_1__–__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_2__.

62.  See above, pp. 23.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See above, pp. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_1__–__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_2__.

63.  C. xxx.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. xxx.

64.  Nikolas Sæmundarson, abbot of Thingeyrar, who made a journey to the Holy Land about 1151, wrote an itinerary for the use of pilgrims from which the above quotation is taken. The itinerary is summarized in Riant, Expéditions et Pèlerinages des Scandinaves en Terre Sainte, 80-87.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Nikolas Sæmundarson, the abbot of Thingeyrar, who traveled to the Holy Land around 1151, wrote a guide for pilgrims, and the quote above is taken from that. The itinerary is summarized in Riant, Expéditions et Pèlerinages des Scandinaves en Terre Sainte, 80-87.

65.  C. iii. It is likely that English culture found its way into the North along with the French. When King Sigurd sailed to the Orient in 1107, he spent the winter of 1107-1108 at the English court.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.C. iii. It's probable that English culture made its way to the North alongside the French. When King Sigurd sailed to the East in 1107, he spent the winter of 1107-1108 at the English court.

66.  C. iii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 3.

67.  Hákonar Saga, c. 228.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Hákonar Saga, c. 228.

68.  C. xxix.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 29.

69.  Rotuli Litterarum Clausarum, I, 382, 506, 509.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Rotuli Litterarum Clausarum, I, 382, 506, 509.

70.  Olafsen, “Falkefangsten i Norge”: Historisk Tidsskrift, Femte Række, III, 351.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Olafsen, “The Falcon Catching in Norway”: Historical Journal, Fifth Series, III, 351.

71.  Hákonar Saga, c. 191.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Hákonar Saga, around 191.

72.  Ibid., c. 243.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Ibid., p. 243.

73.  Ibid., c. 191.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Ibid., around 191.

74.  C. xxix.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 29.

75.  Hákonar Saga, c. 281.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Hákonar Saga, c. 281.

76.  Hákonar Saga, c. 294.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Hákonar Saga, c. 294.

77.  Matthew Paris, Chronica Majora, IV, 651-652.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Matthew Paris, Chronica Majora, IV, 651-652.

78.  Hákonar Saga, c. 313.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Hákonar Saga, around 313.

79.  Hákonar Saga, c. 255. (Dasent’s translation.)

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hákonar Saga, c. 255. (Dasent’s translation.)

80.  Cc. xxxviii-xxxix.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See pages 38-39.

81.  See below, pp. 6263.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See below, pp. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_1__–__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_2__.

82.  C. xxxv.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 35.

83.  The strife that followed the accession of Harold Gille and Magnus the Blind is the subject of Björnson’s great historical drama, Sigurd Slembe (English translation by William Morton Payne).

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The conflict that arose after Harold Gille and Magnus the Blind came to power is the focus of Björnson’s significant historical drama, Sigurd Slembe (translated into English by William Morton Payne).

84.  See below, p. 48.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See below, page 48.

85.  The date usually given is 1164; but Ebbe Hertzberg argues quite conclusively for the earlier year. “Den förste norske Kongekroning”; Historisk Tidsskrift, Fjerde Række, III, 30-37.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The date typically mentioned is 1164, but Ebbe Hertzberg makes a strong case for the earlier year. “Den första norske Kongekroning”; Historisk Tidsskrift, Fjerde Række, III, 30-37.

86.  According to the new rules of succession the oldest legitimate son, if qualified for the office, should inherit the throne. The oldest might be passed over, however, in favor of a younger legitimate son, or even in favor of an illegitimate descendant, if the bishops should find such a procedure expedient. See Gjerset, History of the Norwegian People, I, 364.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.According to the new succession rules, the oldest legitimate son should inherit the throne if he meets the qualifications for the position. However, the oldest son might be skipped in favor of a younger legitimate son, or even an illegitimate descendant, if the bishops decide that this is the best course of action. See Gjerset, History of the Norwegian People, I, 364.

87.  While it seems probable that Sverre was not of royal blood he was not necessarily an impostor; he may have believed his mother’s assertions. For a discussion of the problem see ibid., 376-377.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.While it seems likely that Sverre wasn't of royal descent, he wasn't necessarily a fraud; he might have genuinely believed what his mother claimed. For a discussion of the problem see ibid., 376-377.

88.  It is usually stated that Innocent III actually did lay an interdict on the land, but this appears to be an error. He authorized the bishops to do so, but they seem not to have made use of the authorization. See Bull, “Interdiktet mot Sverre”: Historisk Tidsskrift, Femte Række, III, 321-324.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.It's often said that Innocent III placed an interdict on the land, but this seems to be a mistake. He gave the bishops the power to do so, but they apparently didn't act on that authority. See Bull, “Interdiktet mot Sverre”: Historisk Tidsskrift, Femte Række, III, 321-324.

89.  This appears to be Heffermehl’s opinion. See Historiske Skrifter tilegnede Ludvig Daae, 87.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.This seems to be Heffermehl’s view. See Historiske Skrifter tilegnede Ludvig Daae, 87.

90.  The Address is published as an appendix to the Christiania edition of the King’s Mirror. It has also been issued in separate form under the title En Tale mod Biskopperne; this edition is by Gustav Storm.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The Address is included as an appendix in the Christiania edition of the King’s Mirror. It has also been published separately under the title En Tale mod Biskopperne; this edition is by Gustav Storm.

91.  C. xliii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 43.

92.  C. xliii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 43.

93.  C. xliv.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 44.

94.  Ibid.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Same source.

95.  C. xliv.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 44.

96.  C. xliii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 43.

97.  C. xxviii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 28.

98.  “Studier angaaende Kongespeilet”: Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1896, 189.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.“Study Regarding the King's Mirror”: Yearbook for Nordic Antiquities, 1896, 189.

99.  Norges gamle Love, II. 23; Gjerset, History of the Norwegian People, I, 463.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The Old Laws of Norway, II. 23; Gjerset, History of the Norwegian People, I, 463.

100.  C. lxix.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 69.

101.  C. lxx.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 70.

102.  C. lxx.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 70.

103.  Archbishop Eystein was consecrated in 1161.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Archbishop Eystein was ordained in 1161.

104.  C. lxvi.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 66.

105.  C. lxix.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 69.

106.  C. lxvii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Chapter 67.

107.  Hákonar Saga, cc. 239-241; Munch, Det norske Folks Historie, III, 977-978.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hákonar Saga, cc. 239-241; Munch, The History of the Norwegian People, III, 977-978.

108.  On this subject, see Figgis, Divine Right of Kings, c. iii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.For more on this topic, check out Figgis, Divine Right of Kings, chapter iii.

109.  Cc. iii-iv, xxxvii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Cc. 3-4, 37.

110.  C. xli.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 41.

111.  Hávamál, 40: Corpus Poeticum Boreale, I, 8.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hávamál, 40: Corpus Poeticum Boreale, I, 8.

112.  C. xlii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 42.

113.  C. xli.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 41.

114.  Exodus, xxxii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Exodus 32.

115.  C. lxi.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 61.

116.  C. lxiii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 63.

117.  See Larson, “Scientific Knowledge in the North in the Thirteenth Century”: Publications of the Society for the Advancement of Scandinavian Study, I, 141-146.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See Larson, “Scientific Knowledge in the North in the 13th Century”: Publications of the Society for the Advancement of Scandinavian Study, I, 141-146.

118.  C. iv.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 4.

119.  C. i.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. i.

120.  Hákonar Saga, c. 247.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Hákonar Saga, c. 247.

121.  Ibid., c. 251.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Same source., c. 251.

122.  See the Sorö edition, xxiii; Munch, Det norske Folks Historie, III, 399, note.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Check out the Sorö edition, xxiii; Munch, The History of the Norwegian People, III, 399, note.

123.  Cc. ii, iii, xxx.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Ch. 2, 3, 30.

124.  Cf. Daae, “Studier angaaende Kongespeilet”: Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1896, 180-181. Daae holds that the author was a clergyman.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See Daae, “Studies about the King’s Mirror”: Yearbooks for Nordic Antiquity, 1896, 180-181. Daae argues that the author was a clergyman.

125.  Ibid., 1896, 178.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Same source., 1896, 178.

126.  Ibid., 1896, 192-196; see also pp. 179 ff. Daae believes that Master William must have held a position at court corresponding to the office of chancellor; he also conjectures that he was the tutor of the king’s sons. Master William is mentioned in the Hákonar Saga, cc. 210, 228.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ibid., 1896, 192-196; see also pp. 179 ff. Daae thinks that Master William likely had a role at court similar to that of chancellor; he also speculates that he might have been the tutor for the king’s sons. Master William is referenced in the Hákonar Saga, cc. 210, 228.

127.  Historiske Skrifter tilegnede Ludvig Daae, 79-104 (“Presten Ivar Bodde”). Ivar is one of the characters in Ibsen’s Pretenders.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Historical Writings Dedicated to Ludvig Daae, 79-104 (“The Priest Ivar Bodde”). Ivar is one of the characters in Ibsen’s Pretenders.

128.  Hákonar Saga, c. 21.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Hákonar Saga, around 21.

129.  Historiske Skrifter tilegnede Ludvig Daae, 88-89 (Heffermehl); Hákonar Saga, c. 20.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Historical Writings Dedicated to Ludvig Daae, 88-89 (Heffermehl); The Saga of Hákon, c. 20.

130.  Historiske Skrifter tilegnede Ludvig Daae, 80.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Historical Writings Dedicated to Ludvig Daae, 80.

131.  Ibid., 81, 85.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Same source., 81, 85.

132.  C. vii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Chapter 7.

133.  See the Sorö edition, pp. lix-lx; the Christiana edition, p. v.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Check the Sorö edition, pages lix-lx; the Christiana edition, page v.

134.  Cc. vi, vii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Colossians 6, 7.

135.  “Om Stedet for Kongespeilets Forfattelse”: Arkiv for nordisk Filologi, I, 205-208.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.“On the Instead of the King’s Mirror’s Composition”: Archive for Nordic Philology, I, 205-208.

136.  C. viii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Chapter 8.

137.  See above, p. 36.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See above, p. 36.

138.  See above, pp. 3335.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See above, pp. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_1__–__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_2__.

139.  C. xxxvi (p. 201).

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 36 (p. 201).

140.  See page xx of the Sorö edition.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See page xx of the Sorö edition.

141.  See pages lxv-lxvi of the Sorö edition.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See pages 65-66 of the Sorö edition.

142.  Christiania edition, p. viii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Christiania edition, p. 8.

143.  Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1867, 65-109. See above, p. 32.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1867, 65-109. See above, p. 32.

144.  Arkiv for nordisk Filologi, III, 83-88.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Archives for Nordic Philology, III, 83-88.

145.  Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1896, 176-177.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1896, 176-177.

146.  C. xxxvi.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 36.

147.  C. lxvi.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Chapter 66.

148.  See above, p. 48.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See above, p. 48.

149.  C. lxix.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 69.

150.  See the Sorö edition, pp. xxix-xxxvii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Check out the Sorö edition, pages xxix-xxxvii.

151.  Konungs Skuggsjá (ed. G. T. Flom), p. i. Among the fragments is a part of a Latin paraphrase made in Sweden in the first half of the fourteenth century. The translator was a cleric in the service of the Duchess Ingeborg, a daughter of the Norwegian King Hakon V. Ingeborg was married to the Swedish Duke Erik. Arkiv for nordisk Filologi, I, 110-112.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Konungs Skuggsjá (ed. G. T. Flom), p. i. Among the fragments is a part of a Latin paraphrase made in Sweden in the early 1300s. The translator was a cleric working for Duchess Ingeborg, the daughter of Norwegian King Hakon V. Ingeborg was married to Swedish Duke Erik. Arkiv for nordisk Filologi, I, 110-112.

152.  Norrigis Bescriffuelse. See Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1896, 172 (Daae).

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Norrigis Bescriffuelse. See Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1896, 172 (Daae).

153.  Schöning’s dates are 1722-1780. He was professor of Latin literature and history at Sorö, but his real achievements lie in the field of Norwegian history.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Schöning lived from 1722 to 1780. He was a professor of Latin literature and history at Sorø, but his true accomplishments are in the area of Norwegian history.

154.  1739-1796.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  1739-1796.

155.  1732-1785.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  1732-1785.

156.  See the introduction to the Sorö edition, xxv-xxviii, from which the above facts have been culled.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Check out the introduction to the Sorö edition, pages xxv-xxviii, from which the above information has been taken.

157.  See Flom’s edition of Konungs Skuggsjá, introduction.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Check out Flom’s edition of Konungs Skuggsjá, introduction.

158.  See the Christiania edition, pp. xiii-xvi.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Check out the Christiania edition, pages xiii-xvi.

159.  In 1892 a small volume of extracts from the King’s Mirror translated by Chr. Dorph was published in Copenhagen.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.In 1892, a small collection of excerpts from the King’s Mirror translated by Chr. Dorph was published in Copenhagen.

160.  It seems probable that the form in which the author of the Speculum expresses his desire to remain anonymous shows the influence of the Old Norse version of the Elucidarium, a theological discussion in dialog form, which dates from the twelfth century and is ascribed to Honorius of Autun. The author of the Elucidarium writes as follows in his preface: “My name, however, I have purposely withheld, lest wicked men should be prompted by a feeling of envy to cast aside a useful work.” For the original Latin preface to the Elucidarium see Migne, Patrologia Latina, CLXXII, 1110; the Old Norse version is given in Annaler for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1857, p. 240, 1858, p. 24.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.It seems likely that the way the author of the Speculum expresses his wish to stay anonymous is influenced by the Old Norse version of the Elucidarium, a theological dialogue that dates back to the twelfth century and is attributed to Honorius of Autun. The author of the Elucidarium states in his preface: “My name, however, I have intentionally kept secret, so that spiteful people aren’t encouraged by envy to dismiss a valuable work.” For the original Latin preface to the Elucidarium, see Migne, Patrologia Latina, CLXXII, 1110; the Old Norse version is found in Annaler for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1857, p. 240, 1858, p. 24.

161.  Good day (God dag) is still the common form of greeting among Norwegians and other Scandinavians.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Good day (God dag) is still the usual way to greet people in Norway and other Scandinavian countries.

162.  Proverbs, ix, 10. In the use of Scriptural quotations the author is seldom accurate.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Proverbs, ix, 10. The author is rarely accurate when using quotes from Scripture.

163.  St. Luke, x, 27.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  St. Luke, 10:27.

164.  A “kingsman” (konungsmaðr) was any one who had formally entered into the king’s personal service, whether he was actually employed at court or not. See below, cc. xxiv ff.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.A “kingsman” (konungsmaðr) was anyone who had officially joined the king’s personal service, regardless of whether they were actually working at court or not. See below, cc. xxiv ff.

165.  These “heathen lands” were probably the regions along the Arctic inhabited by the Finns; it is also possible that the author alludes to trading voyages to lands occupied by Esquimaux, though he makes no mention of these people anywhere in his work.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.These “heathen lands” were likely the areas in the Arctic where the Finns lived; it’s also possible that the author is referring to trade trips to territories inhabited by Eskimos, although he doesn't mention these people anywhere in his work.

166.  The “Birch-isle” code was originally a set of rules governing commercial intercourse. After a time it became a more elaborate law governing the municipality as well as the traders who were more or less permanently located there. It is believed that the name is derived from Birka, a trading center in eastern Sweden not far from the site of modern Stockholm. The “Birch-Isle” code is published in Norges Gamle Love, I, part iii, 303-336.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The "Birch-isle" code was initially a set of rules for trade. Over time, it evolved into a more complex legal framework that governed not just the traders, but also the local municipality where they were more or less permanently based. It's thought that the name comes from Birka, a trading hub in eastern Sweden, close to where modern Stockholm is located. The "Birch-Isle" code is published in Norges Gamle Love, I, part iii, 303-336.

167.  The mean retardation is forty-eight minutes.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The average delay is forty-eight minutes.

168.  This is within twenty-two minutes of the length of the lunar half-month.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.This is within twenty-two minutes of the duration of the lunar half-month.

169.  The Northmen in medieval times had two hundreds, the great hundred, or duodecimal hundred, which counted 120 (12 × 10) and the ordinary hundred (10 × 10).

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.In medieval times, the Northmen had two types of hundreds: the great hundred, or duodecimal hundred, which totaled 120 (12 × 10), and the regular hundred (10 × 10).

170.  See Brenner’s edition, 20.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Check out Brenner’s edition, 20.

171.  Error for ostenta; the ostentum, computed at one-sixtieth of an hour, seems to appear first in the writings of Rabanus Maurus (ninth century).

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Error for ostenta; the ostentum, calculated as one-sixtieth of an hour, seems to first appear in the works of Rabanus Maurus (ninth century).

172.  It is evident from this discussion that the author believes in a spherical earth; elsewhere, too, he speaks of the sphere of earth (jarðarbollr); see c. lvi.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.It's clear from this discussion that the author believes in a spherical earth; he also refers to the sphere of the earth (jarðarbollr); see c. lvi.

173.  Halogaland, the modern Nordland, is that part of Norway lying north of the sixty-fifth parallel.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Halogaland, now known as Nordland, is the area of Norway located north of the sixty-fifth parallel.

174.  Vaag and Andenes are points in the Lofoten Islands; their latitudes are 68° 12´ 35″ and 69° 18´ 50″ respectively.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Vaag and Andenes are locations in the Lofoten Islands; their latitudes are 68° 12′ 35″ and 69° 18′ 50″ respectively.

175.  Manuel I, Comnenus, 1143-1180. The “little book” is thought to have been one of the many forms of the legend of Prester John, a fabulous Christian ruler of India of whom much was heard in the middle ages. About 1165 a letter from the “Presbyter Johannes” addressed to the emperor Manuel Comnenus was circulated through Europe and later found its way into the North. In the extant copies of this letter many marvels are told, though the wonder mentioned in the Speculum Regale does not appear. See Zarncke, Der Priester Johannes, 83-98.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Manuel I, Comnenus, 1143-1180. The “little book” is believed to have been one of the many versions of the legend of Prester John, a legendary Christian ruler of India who was widely discussed in the Middle Ages. Around 1165, a letter from “Presbyter Johannes” addressed to Emperor Manuel Comnenus circulated throughout Europe and eventually reached the North. In the existing copies of this letter, many wonders are described, although the marvel mentioned in the Speculum Regale is not included. See Zarncke, Der Priester Johannes, 83-98.

176.  The “Birchdale” bog seems to be a myth; but that stories of such a marvel were current is evident from a statement by Giraldus Cambrensis, who has heard that there was such a bog in Norway. Opera, V, 86. Möre is an old Norwegian shire lying to the west of Trondhjem along the coast.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The “Birchdale” bog appears to be a myth; however, the fact that stories of such a wonder existed is clear from a statement by Giraldus Cambrensis, who mentioned that he had heard of a bog like that in Norway. Opera, V, 86. Möre is an old Norwegian district located to the west of Trondhjem along the coast.

177.  Cf. Giraldus Cambrensis, Opera, V, 26-28. Giraldus quotes Bede (Historia Ecclesiastica, i, c. 1). See also Isidore, Etymologiae, xiv, 6.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See Giraldus Cambrensis, Opera, V, 26-28. Giraldus references Bede (Historia Ecclesiastica, i, c. 1). Also check Isidore, Etymologiae, xiv, 6.

178.  Cf. Giraldus, Opera, V, 62; see also Bede, Hist. Eccles., i, c. 1.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See Giraldus, Opera, V, 62; also refer to Bede, Hist. Eccles., i, c. 1.

179.  “Wonders of Ireland” (Irish Nennius, 219); this writer states that the experiment has been made.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.“Wonders of Ireland” (Irish Nennius, 219); this author claims that the experiment has been conducted.

180.  Giraldus tells us that the Irish are faithless and treacherous (Opera, V, 165) but that the island has no martyrs (ibid., 174). Cf. Ériu, IV, 4 (Meyer, “Irish Memorabilia in the Speculum Regale”).

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Giraldus mentions that the Irish are untrustworthy and deceitful (Opera, V, 165) but notes that the island has no martyrs (ibid., 174). See Ériu, IV, 4 (Meyer, “Irish Memorabilia in the Speculum Regale”).

181.  The editor of the Irish Nennius gives this name as Loch n-Echach (Lough Neagh). P. 195, note.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The editor of the Irish Nennius refers to this as Loch n-Echach (Lough Neagh). P. 195, note.

182.  Error for aquifolium.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Error for aquifolium.

183.  See the “Wonders of Ireland” (Irish Nennius, 195) where a similar account is given; but according to this “the part of it that sinks into the earth will be stone, the part that remains in the water will be iron.” Giraldus writes of a petrifying well (fons) in the north of Ulster, but gives no place name. Opera, V, 86. See also Wright-Halliwell, Reliquiae Antiquae, II, 103. (Latin poem on the wonders of Ireland.)

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Check out the “Wonders of Ireland” (Irish Nennius, 195) where a similar story is shared; however, it states, “the part that sinks into the earth will be stone, and the part that stays in the water will be iron.” Giraldus mentions a petrifying well (fons) in northern Ulster, but doesn’t specify a location. Opera, V, 86. See also Wright-Halliwell, Reliquiae Antiquae, II, 103. (Latin poem on the wonders of Ireland.)

184.  Blandina (Bladina, Bladma) is the Slieve Bloom range in central Ireland.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Blandina (Bladina, Bladma) is the Slieve Bloom mountains in central Ireland.

185.  Giraldus has heard of such springs, but he locates the one in Ulster and the other in Munster. Opera, V, 84. A spring that whitens hair is mentioned in Wright-Halliwell, Reliquiae Antiquae, II, 104, and in the Irish Nennius, 195.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Giraldus has heard of these springs, but he identifies one in Ulster and another in Munster. Opera, V, 84. A spring that turns hair white is referenced in Wright-Halliwell, Reliquiae Antiquae, II, 104, and in the Irish Nennius, 195.

186.  See Ériu, IV, 6. Kuno Meyer knows of no such story in Irish folklore, but refers to similar tales told of floating islands in Wales and Scotland.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See Ériu, IV, 6. Kuno Meyer is unaware of any such story in Irish folklore, but he points out similar tales about floating islands in Wales and Scotland.

187.  Inhisgluair, now Inishglory, is on the west coast of Ireland in county Mayo. Giraldus mentions the legend but assigns it to a different locality; see Opera, V, 83 and note. The Irish Nennius (193) adds that the nails and hair grow and that unsalted meat does not decay on the island. The island is also referred to in the Reliquiae Antiquae, II, 103.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Inisgluair, now known as Inishglory, is located on the west coast of Ireland in County Mayo. Giraldus mentions the legend but attributes it to a different place; see Opera, V, 83 and note. The Irish Nennius (193) adds that nails and hair continue to grow and that unsalted meat does not spoil on the island. The island is also mentioned in the Reliquiae Antiquae, II, 103.

188.  Giraldus refers briefly to this legend. Opera, V, 81. The editor of Giraldus’ writings adds in a note (ibid.): “the isle of the living was three miles from Roscrea, parish of Cobally, in a lake called Loch Cré, now dried up.” Roscrea is near the north edge of Munster not far from the Slieve Bloom mountains. See also the Irish Nennius, 217. Meyer identifies Logri with Loch Ree in west central Ireland. Ériu, IV, 7.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Giraldus briefly mentions this legend. Opera, V, 81. The editor of Giraldus' writings adds in a note (ibid.): “the isle of the living was three miles from Roscrea, parish of Cobally, in a lake called Loch Cré, which is now dried up.” Roscrea is located near the northern edge of Munster, not far from the Slieve Bloom mountains. See also the Irish Nennius, 217. Meyer associates Logri with Loch Ree in west central Ireland. Ériu, IV, 7.

189.  Probably Lough Erne, though Loch Uair, now Lough Owel, in Westmeath has also been suggested.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Most likely Lough Erne, although some have also suggested Loch Uair, which is now Lough Owel, in Westmeath.

190.  Giraldus calls this island the Purgatory of Saint Patrick; but this famous place was “on an island in Lough Derg, in county Donegal.” Opera, V, 82-83 and note. It seems likely, however, that two different legends have been confused in the Welshman’s account.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Giraldus refers to this island as the Purgatory of Saint Patrick; however, this well-known site was “on an island in Lough Derg, in County Donegal.” Opera, V, 82-83 and note. It seems probable, though, that two distinct legends have been mixed up in the Welshman's story.

191.  The holy island which is shunned by all females is mentioned by Giraldus (Opera, V, 80-81), but he fails to give the name of either the lake or the island. In the “Wonders of Ireland” (Irish Nennius, 217) this island is also the one on which no one is permitted to die. A similar legend is alluded to in Reliquiae Antiquae, II, 107. Meyer believes that “the Norse version offers a combination or confusion of two different Irish stories, one relating to Diarmait’s churchyard in Inis Clothrann, and the other relating to an island on Loch Cré.” Ériu, IV, 9.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The holy island that is avoided by all women is mentioned by Giraldus (Opera, V, 80-81), but he doesn't provide the names of either the lake or the island. In the “Wonders of Ireland” (Irish Nennius, 217), this island is also the one where no one is allowed to die. A similar legend is mentioned in Reliquiae Antiquae, II, 107. Meyer thinks that “the Norse version combines or confuses two different Irish stories, one about Diarmait’s graveyard in Inis Clothrann, and the other about an island on Loch Cré.” Ériu, IV, 9.

192.  Glendalough. St. Kevin was the founder of the great abbey of Glendalough. The year of his death is variously given as 617 and 618.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Glendalough. St. Kevin founded the famous abbey of Glendalough. The year he died is reported to be either 617 or 618.

193.  For a less detailed account of Saint Kevin and the wonderful willow, see Giraldus, Opera, V, 113. Cf. Ériu, IV, 9.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.For a simpler version of the story of Saint Kevin and the amazing willow, check out Giraldus, Opera, V, 113. See also Ériu, IV, 9.

194.  Themar was the ancient royal seat Temhair, now Tara. It seems to be alluded to in Reliquiae Antiquae, II, 105. Cf. Ériu, IV, 10.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Themar was the old royal seat Temhair, now known as Tara. It appears to be referenced in Reliquiae Antiquae, II, 105. See also Ériu, IV, 10.

195.  Saint Patrick.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  St. Patrick.

196.  See the poem on the “Wonders of Ireland” (Reliquiae Antiquae, II, 105), where this transformation is alluded to. Stories of men who have become wolves are also told in Giraldus, Opera, V, 101, and in the Irish Nennius, 205; but these differ widely from the account given above. Stories of werewolves and lycanthropy are found in folklore everywhere.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Check out the poem about the “Wonders of Ireland” (Reliquiae Antiquae, II, 105), where this transformation is mentioned. There are also tales of men turning into wolves in Giraldus, Opera, V, 101, and in the Irish Nennius, 205; however, these vary greatly from the account above. Legends of werewolves and lycanthropy appear in folklore all around the world.

197.  Gelt (gjalti) is evidently a Celtic loanword, a form of the Irish geilt, meaning mad or madman. Cf. the Adventures of Suibhne Geilt, translated by J. G. O’Keefe. Suibhne was an Irish king who lost his reason in battle and for years afterwards led a wild life in the woods. O’Keefe thinks that the author of the King’s Mirror must have heard the tale of Suibhne (pp. xxxiv-xxxv). See also Ériu, IV, 12.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Gelt (gjalti) is clearly a loanword from Celtic, derived from the Irish geilt, meaning crazy or madman. Compare it with the Adventures of Suibhne Geilt, translated by J. G. O’Keefe. Suibhne was an Irish king who lost his sanity in battle and spent years living a wild life in the woods. O’Keefe believes that the author of the King’s Mirror must have been familiar with the story of Suibhne (pp. xxxiv-xxxv). Also see Ériu, IV, 12.

198.  Kuno Meyer identifies Cloena with Clonmacnois. Ériu, IV, 12. Clonmacnois is in King’s county eight miles southwest of Athlone.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Kuno Meyer connects Cloena with Clonmacnois. Ériu, IV, 12. Clonmacnois is located in King's County, eight miles southwest of Athlone.

199.  St. Ciaran (Kiranus) of Clonmacnois was the founder of a great monastery there. The year of his death is given as 547.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.St. Ciaran (Kiranus) of Clonmacnois was the founder of a significant monastery there. He is believed to have died in 547.

200.  In the Irish Nennius (211-213) the following version of this tale appears. “Congalach, son of Maelmithig, was at the fair of Teltown on a certain day, when he saw a ship (sailing) along in the air. One of the crew cast a dart at a salmon. The dart fell down in the presence of the gathering, and a man came out of the ship after it. When he seized its end from above, a man from below seized it from below. Upon which the man from above said: ‘I am being drowned,’ said he. ‘Let him go,’ said Congalach; and he is allowed to go up, and then he goes from them swimming.” The translation is by Kuno Meyer: Ériu, IV, 13. Congalach was an Irish king (944-956); Teltown is in county Meath. The legend is alluded to in Reliquiae Antiquae, II, 105, with some difference in details.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.In the Irish Nennius (211-213), this version of the tale appears. “Congalach, son of Maelmithig, was at the fair of Teltown one day when he saw a ship sailing through the air. One of the crew threw a dart at a salmon. The dart fell down in front of the crowd, and a man came out of the ship after it. When he grabbed the end from above, another man grabbed it from below. The man from above said, ‘I’m drowning.’ ‘Let him go,’ said Congalach; and he was allowed to come up, then he swam away.” The translation is by Kuno Meyer: Ériu, IV, 13. Congalach was an Irish king (944-956); Teltown is in County Meath. The legend is referenced in Reliquiae Antiquae, II, 105, with some differences in details.

201.  A somewhat different version of this tale is found in the poem on the “Wonders of Ireland” (Reliquiae Antiquae, II, 105). See also Ériu, IV, 14.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.A different version of this story is in the poem about the “Wonders of Ireland” (Reliquiae Antiquae, II, 105). Also, check out Ériu, IV, 14.

202.  An ell was approximately eighteen inches.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.An ell was about eighteen inches.

203.  Whale fishing is an ancient industry in Norway; it is mentioned as early as the ninth century in the writings of Alfred the Great. See Nansen, In Northern Mists, I, 172.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Whale fishing is an old industry in Norway; it’s mentioned as far back as the ninth century in the writings of Alfred the Great. See Nansen, In Northern Mists, I, 172.

204.  Probably the beluga, also called white whale. The other varieties named in this paragraph, excepting the beaked whale and the baleen whale seem not to have been identified with any known types of whales. It has been suggested that some of them may have been sharks. See Nansen, In Northern Mists, II, 243.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Most likely the beluga, also known as the white whale. The other types mentioned in this paragraph, except for the beaked whale and the baleen whale, don’t seem to match any known whale species. It's been suggested that some of them might have been sharks. See Nansen, In Northern Mists, II, 243.

205.  The editor of the Sorö edition identifies this with the nor-caper (Balæna glacialis), though he thinks it possible that the fin-fish (Balænoptera laticeps) may be meant (p. 125).

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The editor of the Sorö edition connects this to the nor-caper (Balæna glacialis), but he also believes it's possible that the fin-fish (Balænoptera laticeps) is being referenced (p. 125).

206.  Balæna mysticetus; also called bowhead or Greenland whale.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Balæna mysticetus; commonly known as the bowhead or Greenland whale.

207.  It is possible that the basking sharks are meant rather than the Greenland sharks; they are larger than the Greenland sharks, but do not seem to be common in the Arctic waters.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.It’s possible that the basking sharks are the ones being referred to instead of the Greenland sharks; they’re bigger than Greenland sharks but don’t seem to be found often in Arctic waters.

208.  The “horse whale” and the “red comb” have not been identified.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The “horse whale” and the “red comb” are still unrecognized.

209.  This is another name for the right whale described above; the author’s classification in this case must have been based on size only.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.This is another name for the right whale mentioned earlier; the author's classification here must have been based solely on size.

210.  The author seems to believe that the whalebone rises from the lower jaw or the floor of the mouth; as a matter of fact it is fastened to the palate.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The author seems to think that the whalebone comes from the lower jaw or the bottom of the mouth; in reality, it’s attached to the roof of the mouth.

211.  The kraken myth probably came to the North with the legend of St. Brendan, an Irish abbot, who was believed to have made a journey into the Atlantic about the middle of the sixth century. The oldest extant form of the legend, the Navigatio Brendani, dates from the eleventh century. For earlier versions of the myth see Nansen, In Northern Mists, II, 234.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The kraken legend likely made its way to the North with the tale of St. Brendan, an Irish abbot who was thought to have traveled into the Atlantic around the middle of the sixth century. The oldest surviving version of this legend, the Navigatio Brendani, comes from the eleventh century. For earlier versions of the myth, see Nansen, In Northern Mists, II, 234.

212.  Dialogorum Libri IV. Pope Gregory died in 604. The Icelandic version of Gregory’s Dialogues is published in Heilagra Manna Sögur, I.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Dialogorum Libri IV. Pope Gregory passed away in 604. The Icelandic version of Gregory’s Dialogues is included in Heilagra Manna Sögur, I.

213.  It is difficult to determine whether the author uses “places of torment” as a term for hell or for purgatory; it seems probable, however, that in this case hell is meant.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.It’s hard to say if the author refers to “places of torment” as hell or purgatory; however, it seems likely that in this context, hell is intended.

214.  For the history of this theory see above, pp. 1718.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.For the history of this theory, refer to the pages above, 1718.

215.  The number of volcanoes in Iceland is variously given, but the more reliable authorities give 107.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Different sources provide various counts of volcanoes in Iceland, but the more credible estimates suggest there are 107.

216.  The common belief of medieval scientists was that lightning was caused by the collision of clouds.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Medieval scientists commonly believed that lightning was caused by clouds colliding.

217.  The belief that hell was a region of extreme cold as well as of heat was common in the middle ages. The author of the King’s Mirror probably derived his ideas of hell in part from the Old Norse version of the Elucidarium of Honorius of Autun. See Annaler for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1857, 292.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Back in the Middle Ages, many people believed that hell was not just a hot place but also one that could be extremely cold. The writer of the King’s Mirror likely got some of his ideas about hell from the Old Norse version of the Elucidarium by Honorius of Autun. See Annaler for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1857, 292.

218.  Mineral springs yielding carbonated waters are found in Iceland, though they are not numerous. The Hiterdale spring is probably mythical. See Herrmann, Island, I, 66.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Mineral springs with carbonated water can be found in Iceland, but they're not very common. The Hiterdale spring is likely just a legend. See Herrmann, Island, I, 66.

219.  The belief that mermaids lived in the Arctic waters was one that was long held by European navigators. Henry Hudson reports that on his voyage into the Arctic in 1608 (June 15) some of his men saw a mermaid. “This morning one of our companie looking over boord saw a mermaid, and calling up some of the companie to see her, one more came up and by that time shee was come close to the ships side, looking earnestly on the men: a little after a sea came and overturned her: from the navill upward her backe and breasts were like a womans, as they say that saw her; her body as big as one of us; her skin very white, and long haire hanging downe behind of colour blacke: in her going downe they saw her tayle, which was like the tayle of a porposse and speckled like a macrell.” Asher, Henry Hudson, 28.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The belief that mermaids lived in the Arctic waters was one that European navigators held for a long time. Henry Hudson reports that during his voyage into the Arctic in 1608 (June 15), some of his crew saw a mermaid. “This morning, one of our crew members looked over the side and saw a mermaid, and called some of the crew to see her. One more person came up, and by that time, she had come close to the ship, looking intently at the men. A little later, a wave came and overturned her: from the navel up, her back and breasts looked like a woman's, according to those who saw her; her body was as big as one of us; her skin was very white, and she had long hair hanging down her back that was black. As she went down, they saw her tail, which resembled that of a porpoise and was speckled like a mackerel.” Asher, Henry Hudson, 28.

220.  The Danish scientist I. Japetus S. Steenstrup has shown in his paper “Hvad er Kongespeilets Havgjerdinger?” that this phenomenon is produced by sea quakes. The three huge waves did not form a triangle as the author’s account would seem to imply; they were three successive waves rolling in toward the shore. Steenstrup argues chiefly from the behavior of sea quakes in modern times. Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie, 1871.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The Danish scientist I. Japetus S. Steenstrup demonstrated in his paper “What are the Sea Waves of the King’s Mirror?” that this phenomenon is caused by sea quakes. The three massive waves didn't actually form a triangle as the author's description may suggest; instead, they were three consecutive waves moving towards the shore. Steenstrup mainly draws on the behavior of sea quakes in modern times. Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie, 1871.

221.  The settled portion of Greenland is in the southern part on the west coast. The author wishes to say that a ship sailing from Norway to Greenland must round Cape Farewell and proceed some distance up the west coast before trying to make land. For a discussion of the conditions of settlement in Greenland and the navigation of the waters about Greenland, see Hovgaard, The Voyages of the Norsemen to America, c. ii; Nansen, In Northern Mists, cc. vii, viii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The inhabited part of Greenland is located in the southern region along the west coast. The author wants to point out that a ship traveling from Norway to Greenland needs to go around Cape Farewell and then sail a bit up the west coast before attempting to reach the shore. For a discussion on the settlement conditions in Greenland and navigation in the surrounding waters, see Hovgaard, The Voyages of the Norsemen to America, ch. ii; Nansen, In Northern Mists, chs. vii, viii.

222.  This is called haverkn in modern Norse and seems to be the same as the grey seal: Halichoerus gryphus. See Nansen, In Northern Mists, II. 155.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.This is known as haverkn in modern Norse and appears to be the same as the grey seal: Halichoerus gryphus. See Nansen, In Northern Mists, II. 155.

223.  Also called the harp seal: Phoca Grœnlandica.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Also known as the harp seal: Phoca Grœnlandica.

224.  This observation accords with modern scientific classification.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.This observation aligns with current scientific classification.

225.  In the thirteenth century, the century of the King’s Mirror, falconry was a favorite sport of the European nobility and there seems to have been some demand for Norwegian hawks. In the Close Rolls of the reign of Henry III there are allusions to gifts of hawks sent by the king of Norway to the English king. See above p. 29.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.In the 13th century, the time of the King’s Mirror, falconry was a popular sport among European nobility, and it seems there was a demand for Norwegian hawks. The Close Rolls from Henry III's reign mention gifts of hawks sent by the king of Norway to the English king. See above p. 29.

226.  The diocese of Gardar in Greenland was established about 1110. For an account of the Norwegian colony in Greenland see Gjerset, History of the Norwegian People, I, 197-204.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The diocese of Gardar in Greenland was founded around 1110. For details on the Norwegian colony in Greenland, check out Gjerset, History of the Norwegian People, I, 197-204.

227.  Cf. the papal letter of Alexander VI, written in 1492. Olson and Bourne, The Northmen, Columbus, and Cabot, 73-74.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See the papal letter from Alexander VI, written in 1492. Olson and Bourne, The Northmen, Columbus, and Cabot, 73-74.

228.  We should infer from the form of this question and from the later discussion of the northern lights that this phenomenon was not prominent in Norway in the thirteenth century. There seem to be periods when these “lights” are less in evidence than at other times. But it should also be noted that the author discusses whales in connection with Greenland and Iceland only, though it is extremely likely that whales were not unknown on the shores of Norway.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.We can gather from the way this question is phrased and from the later discussion about the northern lights that this phenomenon wasn't well-known in Norway during the thirteenth century. There appear to be times when these “lights” are less visible than at other times. However, it's also important to point out that the author only talks about whales in relation to Greenland and Iceland, even though it's highly likely that whales were also present along the shores of Norway.

229.  The “home-circle” (kringla heimsins) was the Old Norse translation for the Latin orbis terrae, orb of the earth.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The “home-circle” (kringla heimsins) was the Old Norse translation for the Latin orbis terrae, which means the globe of the earth.

230.  Isidore of Seville (d. 636) discusses the five zones in his Etymologiae, iii, c. xliv; xiii, c. vi; and in his De Natura Rerum, c. x. The editors of the Sorö edition suggest that the “other learned men” may be Macrobius and Martianus Capella, the famous encyclopedists of the fifth century (p. 195). But as these writers preceded Isidore by nearly two centuries, it is unlikely that their works were more than indirect sources for the scientific statements in the Speculum Regale. It is more probable that the reference is to such writers as Bede, Rabanus Maurus, and Honorius of Autun, though it is impossible to specify what authority was followed.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Isidore of Seville (d. 636) talks about the five zones in his Etymologiae, iii, c. xliv; xiii, c. vi; and in his De Natura Rerum, c. x. The editors of the Sorö edition suggest that the “other learned men” might be Macrobius and Martianus Capella, the well-known encyclopedists of the fifth century (p. 195). However, since these writers came before Isidore by almost two centuries, it’s unlikely that their works served as more than indirect sources for the scientific claims in the Speculum Regale. It’s more likely that the reference points to writers like Bede, Rabanus Maurus, and Honorius of Autun, although it’s impossible to pinpoint which authority was actually followed.

231.  By glacier the author evidently means the great inland ice masses. On the effect of this inland ice on the climate of Greenland and neighboring regions, see Nansen, In Northern Mists, II, 247.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.When the author refers to glaciers, they clearly mean the massive inland ice sheets. For information on how this inland ice affects the climate of Greenland and nearby areas, see Nansen, In Northern Mists, II, 247.

232.  Cf. Macrobius, 601. “... for both the northern and the southern extremities lie stiff with perpetual frost, and they are like two zones with which the earth is girdled, but narrow as if they were circlets drawn about the farthest regions.”

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Cf. Macrobius, 601. “... for both the northern and southern ends are frozen solid all the time, resembling two bands that circle the earth, yet they are narrow like rings around the most distant areas.”

233.  Macrobius states the same belief in quite similar terms: the south wind comes from a frozen clime just as the north wind does; but “since it comes to us through the flames of the torrid zone and mixes with the fire, it becomes hot, so that what was cold in the beginning comes to us with warmth.” (P. 603.)

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Macrobius expresses the same idea in a similar way: the south wind originates from a cold region just like the north wind does; however, “as it travels through the heat of the hot zone and blends with the fire, it becomes warm, so what was cold at first arrives to us heated.” (P. 603.)

234.  Cf. Capella, Satiricon, 204.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See Capella, Satiricon, 204.

235.  To go to the king’s hand (ganga konungi til handa) is the technical term for the formal initiation into the royal service. “The king was in his high-seat with his guard grouped about him; across his knees lay a sword, his right hand grasping the hilt. The candidate approached, knelt, touched the swordhilt, and kissed the royal hand. He then arose and took the oath of fealty. Kneeling once more he placed his folded hands between those of the king and kissed his new lord.” Larson, “The Household of the Norwegian Kings in the Thirteenth Century:” American Historical Review, XIII, 461.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.To go to the king’s hand (ganga konungi til handa) is the official term for starting a role in royal service. “The king was seated high with his guards around him; a sword lay across his knees, and he held the hilt in his right hand. The candidate stepped forward, knelt, touched the sword hilt, and kissed the king’s hand. He then stood up and took the oath of loyalty. Kneeling again, he placed his hands together between the king's hands and kissed his new lord.” Larson, “The Household of the Norwegian Kings in the Thirteenth Century:” American Historical Review, XIII, 461.

236.  The mark as a standard of value was widely used in the middle ages. Originally it was a measure of weight equivalent to eight ounces of gold or silver. Its value varied at different times and in different places. Dr. Gjerset estimates the purchasing power of a mark of silver in the fourteenth century as equal to that of $80 at the present time. History of the Norwegian People, II, 18-19, note.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The mark as a standard of value was widely used in the Middle Ages. Originally, it was a measure of weight equivalent to eight ounces of gold or silver. Its value varied at different times and in different locations. Dr. Gjerset estimates that the purchasing power of a mark of silver in the fourteenth century is equal to about $80 today. History of the Norwegian People, II, 18-19, note.

237.  Thegn money (þegngildi) was a fine paid to the king by one who had been guilty of manslaughter.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Thegn money (þegngildi) was a payment made to the king by someone who had committed manslaughter.

238.  The housecarle fine was higher than that exacted for the death of a common subject because the housecarle stood in a personal relation to the king.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The fine for killing a housecarle was higher than that required for the death of an ordinary person because the housecarle had a personal connection to the king.

239.  See American Historical Review, XIII, 469-471.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. See American Historical Review, XIII, 469-471.

240.  The head-ward was stationed near the king’s person, usually outside the door of the chamber where he slept. See American Historical Review, XIII, 462.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The head attendant was positioned close to the king, typically outside the door of his sleeping chamber. See American Historical Review, XIII, 462.

241.  The Eyrir (pl. aura, from Latin aurum?) was an ounce of silver, or one-eighth of a mark.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The Eyrir (plural aura, possibly from Latin aurum?) was a unit of silver, equivalent to one ounce, or one-eighth of a mark.

242.  The landedman (lendir maðr) was one who enjoyed a fief granted by the king. The term was also used in a more restricted sense for the local chieftains who in return for the fief enjoyed gave certain assistance in the local administration. See Norges Gamle Love, V, 396-397; Gjerset, History of the Norwegian People, I, 387-388; American Historical Review, XIII, 467-468.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The landed man (lendir maðr) was someone who held a fief granted by the king. The term was also used in a more limited way for local chieftains who, in exchange for the fief, provided certain support in local administration. See Norges Gamle Love, V, 396-397; Gjerset, History of the Norwegian People, I, 387-388; American Historical Review, XIII, 467-468.

243.  The kings of medieval Norway seem to have engaged quite actively in the mercantile profession. The trade with the Finns was made a royal monopoly at least as early as the tenth century; later the trade with Greenland also passed into the king’s hands.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The kings of medieval Norway appear to have been quite involved in trade. The trade with the Finns became a royal monopoly by at least the tenth century; later, trade with Greenland also fell under the king’s control.

244.  Such meetings of two or three of the kings of the North were occasionally held all through the later middle ages. The conferences were often held at some point near the mouth of the Göta River, on the southwest coast of modern Sweden. See above, p. 30.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Meetings between two or three of the northern kings took place now and then throughout the later Middle Ages. These conferences were often held near the mouth of the Göta River, along the southwest coast of what is now Sweden. See above, p. 30.

245.  It is impossible to determine what style of beard this jaðarskegg was; if we may judge from contemporary German illustrations, the German mode was a smooth-shaven face. See also Weiss, Kostumekunde, II, 581.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.It's impossible to tell what style of beard this jaðarskegg was; if we can judge from current German illustrations, the German trend was a clean-shaven face. See also Weiss, Kostumekunde, II, 581.

246.  Skjaðak. The translation is uncertain; possibly some sort of weed is meant.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Skjaðak. The translation is unclear; it might refer to a type of weed.

247.  In this chapter the author has summed up the history of Norwegian kingship in the twelfth century, when minorities were frequent and joint kingships almost the rule. Three boys were proclaimed kings in 1103; two kings shared the power in 1130; the royal title fell to three children in 1136. At no time was the realm actually divided, the theory being that the administration and the revenues might be divided, while the monarchy remained a unit. The century was a period of great calamities; pretenders were numerous; and civil war raged at intervals. For a fuller discussion of the theory of Norwegian kingship in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, see above, pp. 35 ff.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.In this chapter, the author outlines the history of Norwegian kingship in the twelfth century, a time when minorities were common and co-kingships were nearly the norm. Three boys were declared kings in 1103; two kings shared power in 1130; and in 1136, the royal title went to three children. At no point was the realm actually divided; the idea was that while the administration and revenues could be split, the monarchy itself remained a single entity. This century was marked by significant calamities; there were many claimants to the throne, and civil war broke out at intervals. For a more detailed discussion on the theory of Norwegian kingship in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, see above, pp. 35 ff.

248.  The gambison (panzari) was a form of defensive armor made of cloth padded and quilted. It is described on page 217 as being made “of soft linen thoroughly blackened.” Usually it was worn under the coat of mail, but it could also be worn outside. See Annaler for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1867, 74 ff. (Blom.); Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 181-182.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The gambison (panzari) was a type of protective armor made from padded and quilted cloth. It's described on page 217 as being made “of soft linen thoroughly blackened.” Typically, it was worn under the chainmail, but it could also be worn on the outside. See Annaler for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1867, 74 ff. (Blom.); Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 181-182.

249.  The staff sling was a sling fastened to the end of a stick; it was an earlier form which was not used much in the thirteenth century.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The staff sling was a type of sling attached to the end of a stick; it was an earlier version that wasn't used much in the thirteenth century.

250.  The wedge-shaped column (svínfylking, perhaps so named from a fancied resemblance to a boar’s head) was a common form of battle array among the Northern peoples as well as among the early Germans generally.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The wedge-shaped formation (svínfylking, possibly named for its imagined resemblance to a boar’s head) was a common battle tactic among the Northern peoples and the early Germans in general.

251.  As the shield was born on the left arm, the front edge would be the right edge.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Since the shield was worn on the left arm, the front edge would be on the right side.

252.  These scythes were apparently used to catch and hold the hostile ships and perhaps also to cut the ropes on the ship. See the Sorö edition, 388.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.These scythes were likely used to grab and hold the enemy ships and maybe also to cut the ropes on the ship. See the Sorö edition, 388.

253.  The broadax (skeggöx) had the blade extended backward somewhat like that of a halberd, though in the latter case the extension was usually forward. See Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 108-110.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The broadax (skeggöx) featured a blade that curved backward, somewhat like a halberd, although with a halberd, the extension typically angled forward. See Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 108-110.

254.  Skeptifletta: a dart of some sort with a cord attached.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Skeptifletta: a type of dart with a string attached.

255.  Coal and sulphur seem to have been used chiefly to fire the enemy’s ship.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Coal and sulfur appear to have primarily been used to ignite the enemy's ship.

256.  Caltrops were instruments provided with iron prongs and were usually scattered where the enemy’s horsemen were likely to pass, in the hope of maiming the horses. It is evident that they were also used in naval warfare, the purpose being to maim the men on the enemy’s deck. See the Sorö edition, 392.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Caltrops were tools with sharp iron spikes that were typically spread out wherever enemy cavalry might ride, with the intention of injuring the horses. It's clear that they were also used in naval battles, aiming to hurt the enemy's crew on deck. See the Sorö edition, 392.

257.  Atgeirr. The translation is doubtful, but it seems clear that some kind of spear useful for striking as well as for thrusting is meant. See Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 81-82.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Atgeirr. The translation is uncertain, but it’s apparent that it refers to some type of spear that is useful for both striking and thrusting. See Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 81-82.

258.  Probably some sort of a cage placed at the top or near the top of the mast from which men with bows and slings could fight to better advantage. See Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1872, 242; Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 197.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.It was likely some kind of cage situated at the top or close to the top of the mast where men with bows and slings could fight more effectively. See Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1872, 242; Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 197.

259.  Only one end of the beam was cloven in this way. See the Sorö edition, 394-395. The beam was apparently fastened to the mast and used to crush the sides of the enemy’s ship in much the same way as the ram was used against a castle wall. See Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 199.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Only one end of the beam was split this way. Check the Sorö edition, pages 394-395. The beam was apparently attached to the mast and used to smash the sides of the enemy’s ship, similar to how a ram was used against a castle wall. See Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, page 199.

260.  The prow-boar (rôðrgoltr) was not a beak but apparently some device fastened to the prow which served much the same purpose, namely to run down and sink an opposing ship. See the Sorö edition, 395-396; Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 198-199.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The prow-boar (rôðrgoltr) wasn't a beak but seemed to be some kind of device attached to the front of a ship, intended to ram and sink an enemy vessel. See the Sorö edition, 395-396; Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 198-199.

261.  See the Sorö edition, 397-399; Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 196. This rampart was built of logs and planks and raised on the gunwales. Sometimes it seems to have been placed along the entire length of the ship, but often, perhaps, only where the ship was lowest. Inside it was braced with strong beams. The plank walk on the outside projected over the edge of the ship and was no doubt in part intended to make it difficult for the enemy to board it.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See the Sorö edition, 397-399; Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 196. This barrier was made of logs and planks and raised on the edges of the ship. Sometimes it appears to have extended the entire length of the ship, but often, possibly, only where the ship was at its lowest point. Inside, it was supported with strong beams. The walkway on the outside extended over the edge of the ship and was likely partly meant to make it harder for enemies to board.

262.  On the equipment of the horse in medieval warfare, see Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1867, 90-97.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.For information on horse gear used in medieval battles, refer to Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1867, 90-97.

263.  In the thirteenth century the saddle was made with high bows before and behind so as to provide a firmer seat for the rider. The surcingle was a girth drawn over the saddle; the breast strap served to keep the saddle from slipping backwards. Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 91.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.In the thirteenth century, the saddle had high bows in the front and back to give the rider a more secure seat. The surcingle was a girth fastened over the saddle, while the breast strap helped prevent the saddle from sliding back. Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 91.

264.  Kovertur, from medieval French couverture. But the couverture was not a covering worn underneath the mail; it was probably the mail itself or an outer covering for the horse. See Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 191.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Kovertur, from medieval French couverture. But the couverture was not a covering worn under the armor; it was likely the armor itself or a cover for the horse. See Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 191.

265.  Falk believes that this description is in some respects inaccurate. No such elaborate equipment could have been used in the North where cavalry was not an important part of the host in the thirteenth century. He also doubts that an equipment just like the one described was in use anywhere in Europe at the time. Ibid., 190-191. The medieval couverture was not placed beneath the covering of mail as the Speculum Regale states; and Falk can see no reason why a gambison placed beneath the mail should be ornamented. It seems clear that the author is somewhat confused as to these various coverings.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Falk thinks this description is, in some ways, inaccurate. No complex equipment like this could have been used in the North where cavalry wasn't a significant part of the army in the thirteenth century. He also questions whether any equipment exactly like what’s described was used anywhere in Europe at that time. Ibid., 190-191. The medieval couverture wasn’t placed beneath the mail like the Speculum Regale says, and Falk sees no reason for a gambison under the mail to be decorated. It’s clear that the author is a bit confused about these different types of coverings.

266.  The mail hose were made of chain mail. Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1867, 73-74.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The mail hoses were made of chain mail. Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1867, 73-74.

267.  The kneepieces, or genouillères were pieces of armor worn to protect the knees.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The kneepieces, or genouillères, were armor designed to protect the knees.

268.  Blom thinks that the breastplate was a new thing in the thirteenth century (ibid., 76), but Falk believes that it was used quite generally (Altnordische Waffenkunde, 182).

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Blom thinks the breastplate was a new invention in the thirteenth century (ibid., 76), but Falk believes it was commonly used (Altnordische Waffenkunde, 182).

269.  The dirk (brynknifr) was probably a poniard-like weapon used to pierce the chain mail at the joints. Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 124.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The dirk (brynknifr) was likely a dagger-like weapon used to stab through the chain mail at the joints. Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 124.

270.  The helmet with the visor appears in the illustrations of the closing years of the twelfth century; the earlier helmet was a steel cap with a nose guard. Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 83-84.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The helmet with the visor shows up in illustrations from the late twelfth century; the earlier design was a steel cap with a nose guard. Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 83-84.

271.  Little seems to be known about the hornbow. Captain Blom finds it mentioned in the Latin sources as balista cornea or balista cum cornu. Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1867, 100-101. Falk believes that it was a bow which was reinforced on the inner side with horn. Altnordische Waffenkunde, 91-92.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Not much is known about the hornbow. Captain Blom finds it mentioned in Latin sources as balista cornea or balista cum cornu. Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1867, 100-101. Falk thinks it was a bow that had horn reinforcement on the inner side. Altnordische Waffenkunde, 91-92.

272.  The trebucket (French trébuchet) was a siege engine which came into use in the twelfth century; it was worked by counterpoises. For a description see Oman, Art of War, 143-144; Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1867, 103-104; Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 193-194.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The trebucket (French trébuchet) was a siege weapon that became popular in the twelfth century; it operated using counterweights. For a description, see Oman, Art of War, 143-144; Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1867, 103-104; Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 193-194.

273.  The ram was a massive beam used to batter down walls; it was an inheritance from antiquity and was much in use. See Oman, Art of War, 132; Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1867, 104; Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 198.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The ram was a huge beam used to break down walls; it was a legacy from ancient times and was commonly used. See Oman, Art of War, 132; Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1867, 104; Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 198.

274.  Grafsvin. Falk translates this with “badger” and seems to believe that it was a shelter on wheels under which the attackers might work in comparative safety. Altnordische Waffenkunde, 196. It is more likely, however, that a “cat” is meant. The cat was a long pointed pole used to loosen the stones in a wall and thus to make a breach. It is also called a “sow” and the Old Norse term grafsvin, “digging boar,” was evidently an attempt to translate the Latin term scrofa or sus, “hog” or “sow.” For a description of the cat, see Oman, Art of War, 132.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grafsvin. Falk translates this as “badger” and seems to think it was a mobile shelter where attackers could work relatively safely. Altnordische Waffenkunde, 196. However, it’s more likely that it refers to a “cat.” The cat was a long, pointed pole used to loosen stones in a wall to create a breach. It’s also known as a “sow,” and the Old Norse term grafsvin, meaning “digging boar,” was clearly an attempt to translate the Latin term scrofa or sus, meaning “hog” or “sow.” For a description of the cat, see Oman, Art of War, 132.

275.  On the subject of the movable tower see Oman, Art of War, 134-135, 549.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.For information on the movable tower, refer to Oman, Art of War, 134-135, 549.

276.  These curtains were evidently placed on the outer side of the wall.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.These curtains were clearly put on the outside of the wall.

277.  This translation of hengivigskarð is based on Blom’s interpretation (Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1867, 105-106, note). The brattices were projecting galleries built along the top of the wall and were in use before it became customary to build stone parapets. Cf. Oman, Art of War, 534.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.This translation of hengivigskarð is based on Blom’s interpretation (Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1867, 105-106, note). The brattices were projecting galleries that were built along the top of the wall and were used before it became standard to construct stone parapets. See Oman, Art of War, 534.

278.  The hedgehog (ericius) in common use was a form of the cheval de frise and was laid on the earth to impede a hostile advance. I know of no other mention of the device (igelkǫttr) described above.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The hedgehog (ericius) commonly referred to was a type of cheval de frise and was positioned on the ground to obstruct an enemy attack. I’m not aware of any other references to the device (igelkǫttr) described above.

279.  Captain Blom is disposed to look on the brynklungr as an imaginary device (Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1867, 106) but Falk finds that some such instrument was in use in Italy as early as the tenth century (Altnordische Waffenkunde, 199-200).

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Captain Blom tends to regard the brynklungr as a fictional gadget (Aarböger for nordisk Oldkyndighed, 1867, 106), but Falk discovers that a similar instrument was actually used in Italy as early as the tenth century (Altnordische Waffenkunde, 199-200).

280.  Devices somewhat similar to the “running wheel” seem to have been used in medieval warfare, but of this particular form no other mention has been found. See Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 200.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Devices somewhat like the "running wheel" appear to have been used in medieval warfare, but no other references to this specific type have been discovered. See Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 200.

281.  Ibid. The “shot wagon” is not mentioned elsewhere.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ibid. The “shot wagon” isn’t referred to anywhere else.

282.  See the Sorö edition, 424-425, where the editor cites a number of references to the use of fire in defensive warfare; these are nearly all drawn from the sagas.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Check out the Sorö edition, pages 424-425, where the editor lists several references to using fire in defense warfare; almost all of these are taken from the sagas.

283.  Evidently the purpose would be to crush the engine with the beam, to set it on fire with the hot plowshares, and to put the assailants to flight with the pitch, sulphur, or tar; these would also feed the flames.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Clearly, the plan was to crush the engine with the beam, set it on fire with the hot plowshares, and drive the attackers away using pitch, sulfur, or tar; these would also help fuel the flames.

284.  On the subject of mines see Oman, Art of War, 549-550.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.For information on mines, refer to Oman, Art of War, pages 549-550.

285.  The posts were apparently placed on top of the wall, the purpose being to raise the wall to a greater height as well as to furnish shelter for the defenders.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The posts were clearly positioned on top of the wall, aiming to increase the wall's height and provide protection for the defenders.

286.  The shield-giant was probably a mythical device; but it is possible as has been suggested that its fiery breath may refer to the use of Greek fire, with which the Norwegians became acquainted during the crusades, or even to early experiments with gunpowder. Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 200-201. It is not known when gunpowder was invented, but the earliest known formula for making it is found in the writings of Roger Bacon, who was a contemporary of the author of the King’s Mirror.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The shield-giant was likely a legendary creation; however, it has been proposed that its fiery breath might refer to the use of Greek fire, which the Norwegians encountered during the Crusades, or potentially to early experiments with gunpowder. Falk, Altnordische Waffenkunde, 200-201. The exact time when gunpowder was invented is unknown, but the earliest known recipe for making it appears in the writings of Roger Bacon, who lived around the same time as the author of the King’s Mirror.

287.  Genesis, cc. xxxix-xli. The author treats the Biblical narratives with great freedom.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Genesis, chs. 39-41. The author approaches the Biblical stories with a lot of freedom.

288.  Isaiah, xlv, 1. In this case the author quotes directly from the Vulgate: “Christo meo Sciro, cujus apprehendi dexteram, ut subjiciam ante faciem ejus gentes et dorsa regum vertam.”

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Isaiah, xlv, 1. In this case the author quotes directly from the Vulgate: “To my anointed, Cyrus, whose hand I have taken, to subdue nations before him and disarm kings.”

289.  See Esther, cc. i-viii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See Esther, chapters i-viii.

290.  The author’s source for his account of the council where Craton and Zenophilus served as judges is the legend of Pope Silvester, probably the Old Norse version of the legend, Silvesters Saga, published by Unger in Heilagra Manna Sögur, II, 245-286.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The author's source for his story about the council where Craton and Zenophilus acted as judges is the legend of Pope Silvester, likely the Old Norse version of the legend, Silvesters Saga, published by Unger in Heilagra Manna Sögur, II, 245-286.

291.  Not India but Persia in the Biblical story; but the Northmen in the middle ages used the term India very much as we use the term Orient to-day.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Not India but Persia in the Biblical story; however, the Northmen in the Middle Ages used the term India much like we use the term Orient today.

292.  The reference is evidently to Psalms, cxv, 16: “The heavens, even the heavens, are the Lord’s: but the earth hath he given to the children of men” (King James’ version). The Vulgate reads (cxiii, 16), “Caelum caeli Domino; terram autem dedit filiis hominum.” In neither case is the idea of an earthly kingship implied. It is evident that the author is quoting and translating from memory.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The reference clearly points to Psalms, 115:16: “The heavens, even the heavens, belong to the Lord, but he has given the earth to the children of men” (King James version). The Vulgate states (113:16), “Caelum caeli Domino; terram autem dedit filiis hominum.” In neither case is the concept of an earthly kingship suggested. It’s clear that the author is quoting and translating from memory.

293.  I Peter, ii, 17.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  1 Peter, 2, 17.

294.  The compiler of Stjórn, an Old Norse paraphrase of the larger part of the Old Testament, following Petrus Comestor’s Historia Scholastica, attributes to Bede the statement that the serpent in those days bore the face of a maiden (p. 34). The author of the King’s Mirror cannot have used Stjórn, as it seems to be a production of the fourteenth century, nor is there any evidence that he knew the Historia Scholastica.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The compiler of Stjórn, an Old Norse paraphrase of most of the Old Testament, based on Petrus Comestor’s Historia Scholastica, claims that Bede said the serpent back then had the face of a maiden (p. 34). The author of the King’s Mirror likely didn’t use Stjórn, since it appears to be a work from the fourteenth century, and there’s no evidence that he was familiar with Historia Scholastica.

295.  The story of the court proceedings in Paradise after the fall of man and the discussion between Mercy and Peace on the one side and Truth and Justice on the other was widely current in the thirteenth century. It made an important scene in certain types of mystery plays, and it seems quite likely that the source of the version given in the King’s Mirror must be sought in some dramatic representation of the creation story. The account of the trial was made the theme of two poems in Old French which have been attributed to the English ecclesiastics Archbishop Langton and Bishop Grosseteste, both of whom were contemporaries of our Norwegian author.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The story of the court proceedings in Paradise after humanity's fall and the debate between Mercy and Peace on one side and Truth and Justice on the other was popular in the thirteenth century. It was an important scene in certain kinds of mystery plays, and it seems likely that the version presented in the King’s Mirror comes from some dramatic interpretation of the creation story. The trial was the subject of two poems in Old French, attributed to the English clergy Archbishop Langton and Bishop Grosseteste, who were contemporaries of our Norwegian author.

Homilies were written on this theme in the twelfth century by St. Bernard of Clairvaux (Migne, Patrologia Latina, CLXXXIII, 770) and by Hugh of St. Victor (ibid., CLXXVII, 623-626). There is a still earlier version of the story in a homily attributed, though for no good reason, to the Venerable Bede. According to this story a man has a son and four daughters named Mercy, Truth, Peace, and Justice. He also has a servant whom he wishes to try by giving him an easy task. The servant fails and is handed over to the executioner. The daughters now come into violent disagreement, but the son finds a way out of the difficulty: he saves the servant and succeeds in bringing the sisters into agreement. Ibid., XCIV, 505-507.

Homilies were written on this theme in the twelfth century by St. Bernard of Clairvaux (Migne, Patrologia Latina, CLXXXIII, 770) and by Hugh of St. Victor (ibid., CLXXVII, 623-626). There's an even earlier version of the story in a homily attributed, though without good reason, to the Venerable Bede. In this story, a man has a son and four daughters named Mercy, Truth, Peace, and Justice. He also has a servant he wants to test with an easy task. The servant fails and is turned over to the executioner. The daughters then start to argue fiercely, but the son finds a solution: he saves the servant and manages to reconcile the sisters. Ibid., XCIV, 505-507.

W. Scherer, in Zeitschrift für deutsche Altertumskunde, N. F., IX, 414-416, finds traces of the legend in Talmudic sources. In the Hebrew story, however, the disagreement is over the expediency of creating man, Mercy favoring and Truth opposing the project. The ultimate source appears to be Psalms, lxxxv, 10: “Mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed each other.”

W. Scherer, in Zeitschrift für deutsche Altertumskunde, N. F., IX, 414-416, finds references to the legend in Talmudic sources. In the Hebrew version of the story, the argument is about whether it’s wise to create man, with Mercy supporting and Truth against the idea. The original source seems to be Psalms, lxxxv, 10: “Mercy and truth have met; righteousness and peace have embraced each other.”

For bibliographical information see L. Petit du Juleville, Les Mystères, II, 359.

For bibliographical information, see L. Petit du Juleville, Les Mystères, II, 359.

296.  The statement that Lucifer planned to set up a rival throne in the northern regions of heaven also appears in the Michaels Saga (Heilagra Manna Sögur, I, 677). It was apparently a common belief in medieval Christendom and was based on Isaiah, xiv, 13.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The idea that Lucifer intended to establish a competing throne in the northern parts of heaven is mentioned in the Michaels Saga (Heilagra Manna Sögur, I, 677). This belief was apparently widespread in medieval Christianity and was derived from Isaiah, xiv, 13.

297.  I Corinthians, xii, 4-10.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  1 Corinthians, 12:4-10.

298.  Exodus, xiv.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Exodus, 14.

299.  Numbers, xvi.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Numbers, 16.

300.  Joshua, vi.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Joshua, Chapter 6.

301.  I Samuel, xv.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  1 Samuel, 15.

302.  Exodus, xxxii. No high priest by the name of Ur is mentioned in this connection; but Hur, the son of Caleb, is associated with Aaron on two earlier occasions. See ibid., xvii, 10; xxiv, 14. There was a legend that Ur refused to make the golden calf and that the people spitting into his face suffocated him with the spittle. Petrus Comestor, Historia Scholastica, c. 73: Migne, Patrologia Latina, CXCVIII, 1189.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Exodus, xxxii. No high priest named Ur is mentioned here; however, Hur, Caleb's son, is mentioned alongside Aaron on two previous occasions. See ibid., xvii, 10; xxiv, 14. There was a legend that Ur refused to create the golden calf, and the people, spitting in his face, suffocated him with their saliva. Petrus Comestor, Historia Scholastica, c. 73: Migne, Patrologia Latina, CXCVIII, 1189.

303.  II Samuel, xii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  2 Samuel, 12.

304.  Exodus, xxxii, 7-14.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Exodus, 32, 7-14.

305.  Jonah, iii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Jonah, 3.

306.  II Kings, xx; Isaiah, xxxviii. The prayer is imaginary.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.2 Kings, xx; Isaiah, xxxviii. The prayer is fictional.

307.  Probably from Psalms, xvi, 8 (Vulgate, xv, 8): “I have set the Lord always before me, because He is at my right hand....”

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Probably from Psalms, 16:8 (Vulgate, 15:8): “I always keep the Lord in front of me, because He is at my right hand....”

308.  This prayer is a translation of a Latin original which the author has incorporated and given in full. Both the original and the author’s translation are given in the manuscripts.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.This prayer is a translation of a Latin original that the author has included and provided in full. Both the original text and the author's translation are available in the manuscripts.

309.  Cf. Proverbs, viii, 22 ff.; see also, among the “Apochrypha,” Ecclesiasticus (The Wisdom of Jesus the son of Sirach), xxiv, 5 ff.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See Proverbs, 8:22 and following; also check out, among the "Apocrypha," Ecclesiasticus (The Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach), 24:5 and following.

310.  An echo of Psalms, xix, 5.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  An echo of Psalms, 19:5.

311.  C. xi.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  C. 11.

312.  According to the legend the priest Justin assisted at the funeral of St. Lawrence. Heilagra Manna Sögur, I, 430.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.According to the legend, the priest Justin was present at St. Lawrence's funeral. Heilagra Manna Sögur, I, 430.

313.  A somewhat different version of this story is given in the Legenda Aurea of Jacques de Voragine, who quotes the “Miracles of the Virgin Mary.”

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.A slightly different version of this story is found in the Legenda Aurea by Jacques de Voragine, who cites the “Miracles of the Virgin Mary.”

314.  This is probably an allusion to the edict of Theodosius II “which interposes a salutary interval of thirty days between the sentence and the execution.” Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, III, 176; Mommsen and Meyer (editors), Theodosiani Libri XVI, I, part 2, 503 (viii, 40:13). The edict was probably a part of the penance exacted from the Emperor after his massacre of the Thessalonians. See Ambrosius Saga in Heilagra Manna Sögur, I, 40.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.This likely refers to the decree by Theodosius II “which sets a beneficial pause of thirty days between the sentence and the execution.” Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, III, 176; Mommsen and Meyer (editors), Theodosiani Libri XVI, I, part 2, 503 (viii, 40:13). The decree was probably part of the penance imposed on the Emperor after his massacre of the Thessalonians. See Ambrosius Saga in Heilagra Manna Sögur, I, 40.

315.  Exodus, xxxii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Exodus, 32.

316.  II Samuel, i.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  2 Samuel, i.

317.  II Samuel, iv.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  2 Samuel, 4.

318.  The story of David’s great sin concerning Bathsheba and Uriah and its consequences is told in II Samuel, xi-xii, but it is probable that the author’s source is some Biblical paraphrase rather than the Vulgate itself.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The account of David’s major wrongdoing involving Bathsheba and Uriah and its repercussions can be found in II Samuel, xi-xii, but it’s likely that the author’s source is a Biblical paraphrase instead of the Vulgate itself.

319.  I Chronicles, xxii, 8.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  1 Chronicles, 22:8.

320.  II Samuel, xvi, 21-22.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  2 Samuel, 16:21-22.

321.  On this episode see I Samuel, xv.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.On this episode, check out I Samuel, xv.

322.  I Samuel, xvi, 14-23.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  1 Samuel, 16:14-23.

323.  Ibid., xviii, 12-21.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Same source., xviii, 12-21.

324.  Ibid., xviii, 6-9.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Same source., xviii, 6-9.

325.  Cf. I Samuel, xix, 8-11.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See I Samuel, xix, 8-11.

326.  Cf. I Samuel, xix, 4-7.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See I Samuel, 19:4-7.

327.  On the fate of Ahimelech and the inhabitants of Nob, cf. I Samuel, xxi, 1-9; xxii, 9-19.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.For the story of Ahimelech and the people of Nob, see I Samuel, 21:1-9; 22:9-19.

328.  I Samuel, xxii, 1-2, 20-23.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  1 Samuel, 22, 1-2, 20-23.

329.  The story of David and Saul at En-gedi is told in I Samuel, xxiv.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The story of David and Saul at En-gedi is recounted in I Samuel, chapter 24.

330.  Cf. I Samuel, xxvi.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See I Samuel, xxvi.

331.  Cf. David’s lament in II Samuel, i: 17-27. The author has made but slight use of David’s own language.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See David’s lament in II Samuel, 1: 17-27. The author has only made minimal use of David’s own words.

332.  Cf. II Samuel, xviii, 33.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See II Samuel, 18:33.

333.  Cf. II Samuel, xxiv.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See 2 Samuel, 24.

334.  See I Kings, iii, 16-28.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See 1 Kings, 3:16-28.

335.  The story of Shimei is told in II Samuel, xvi, 5-8; xix, 16-23; I Kings, ii, 8-9, 36-46.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The story of Shimei is found in II Samuel, 16:5-8; 19:16-23; I Kings, 2:8-9, 36-46.

336.  According to the Scriptural story Shimei left Jerusalem to bring back two runaway servants. I Kings, ii, 39-40.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.According to the biblical story, Shimei left Jerusalem to retrieve two runaway servants. I Kings, ii, 39-40.

337.  Error for Gihon.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  Gihon error.

338.  On the subject of Adonijah’s rebellion and Solomon’s triumphant accession see I Kings, i. The author has used little more than the outline of the story as given in the Bible.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.For details about Adonijah’s rebellion and Solomon’s successful rise to power, check out I Kings, i. The author has primarily relied on the basic outline of the story as presented in the Bible.

339.  Cf. I Kings, ii, 1-11. In the Biblical story David’s charge to Solomon comes after the day of Solomon’s accession, and not, as the author has it, during the day.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See I Kings, 2, 1-11. In the Biblical story, David’s instructions to Solomon happen after Solomon becomes king, not, as the author suggests, during that day.

340.  Cf. I Kings, i, 41-53.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See I Kings, 1, 41-53.

341.  Cf. I Kings, ii, 13 ff.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See 1 Kings, 2:13 and following.

342.  Cf. I Kings, ii, 28-34.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See I Kings, 2, 28-34.

343.  Cf. I Kings, ii, 26-27.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See I Kings, 2:26-27.

344.  Cf. Matthew xiv, 1-12; Mark, vi, 16-29.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See Matthew 14:1-12; Mark 6:16-29.

345.  See Exodus, xxviii.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.  See Exodus, 28.


 

  • Transcriber’s Notes:
    • The footnotes have been gathered together and inserted after the index. A “FOOTNOTES” entry was added to the Table of Contents.
    • Missing or obscured punctuation was silently corrected.
    • Typographical errors were silently corrected.
    • Inconsistent spelling and hyphenation were made consistent only when a predominant form was found in this book.

 


Download ePUB

If you like this ebook, consider a donation!