ishment for all sorts of treasons committed by those of the female sex." Not a suspicion seems to have crossed the jurist's mind that the supposed barbarity of the Druids was not altogether a conclusive justification for the barbarity of his own contemporaries. So let us take warning from his example, and let the history of our practice of book-burning serve to help us to keep our minds open with regard to anomalies which may still exist amongst us, descended from as suspicious an origin, and as little supported by reason.

***

INTRODUCTION.

There is the sort of attraction that belongs to all forbidden fruit in books which some public authority has condemned to the flames. And seeing that to collect something is a large part of the secret of human happiness, it occurred to me that a variety of the happiness that is sought in book collecting might be found in making a collection of books of this sort. I have, therefore, put together the tollowing narrative of our burnt literature as some kind of aid to any book-lover who shall chose to take my hint and make the peculiarity I have indicated the keynote to the formation of his library.

But the aid I offer is confined to books so condemned in the United Kingdom. Those who would pursue the study farther afield, and extend their wishes beyond the four seas, will find all the aid they need or desire in Peignot's admirable "Dictionaire Critique, Litteraire Critique, Litteraire et Bibliographique, des Principaux Livres Condamnes au Feu, Supprimes ou Censures: Paris, 1806." To have extended my studies to cover this wider ground would have swollen my book, as well as my labor, beyond the limits of my inclination. I may mention that Hart's "Index Expurgatorius" covers this wider ground for England, as far as it

goes.

Nevertheless, I may, perhaps appropriately, by way of introduction, refer to some episodes and illustrations of book burning, to show the place the custom had in the development of civilization, and the distinction of good or bad company and ancient lineage enjoyed by such books as their punishment by burning entitles to places on the shelves of our fire-library. The custom was of pagan observance long before it passed into Christian practice; and for its existence in Greece, and for the first instance I know of, I would refer to the once famous or notorious work of Protagoras, certainly one of the wisest philosophers of sophists of ancient times. He was the first avowed Agnostic, for he wrote a work on the gods, of which the very first remark was that the existence of gods at all he could not himself either affirm or deny. For this

offensive sentiment his book was publicly burnt. But Protagoras, could he have foreseen the future, might have esteemed himself happy to have lived before the Christian epoch, when authors came to share with their works the purifying process of fire. The world grew less humane as well as less sensible as it grew older, and came to think more of orthodoxy than any other condition of the mind.

The virtuous Romans appear to have been greater book-burners than the Greeks, both under the Republic and under the empire. It was the Senate's function to condemn books to the flames, and the Prætor's to see that it was done, generally in the Forum. But for this evil habit we might still possess many valuable works, such as the books attributed to Numa on Pontifical Law (Livy xl.) and those eulogies of Pætus Thrasea and Helvidius, which were burnt, and their authors put to death, under the tyranny of Domitian (Tacitus, Agricola II). Let these cases suffice to connect the custom with Pagan Rome, and to prove that this particular mode of warring with the expression of free thought boasts its precedents in pre-Christian antiquity.

Nevertheless, it is the custom as it was manifested in Christian times that has chief interest for us, because it is only with condemned books of this period that we have any chance of practical acquaintance. Some of these survived the flames, whilst none of antiquity's have come down to us. But on what principle it was that the burning authorities (in France generally the Parlement of Paris, or of the provinces) burnt some books, whilst others were only censured, condemned or suppressed, I am unable to say, and I doubt whether any principle was involved. Peignot has noticed the chief books stigmatized by authority in all these various ways; but, though undoubtedly this wider view is more philosophical, the view is quite comprehensive enough which confines itself to the consideration of books that were condemned to be burnt.

Books so treated may be classified according as they offended against (i) the religion, (ii) the morals, or (iii) the politics of the day, those against the first being by far the most numerous, and so admitting here of notice only of their most conspicuous specime. s.

I. Of all the books burnt for offense under the first head the most to be regretted, from an historical point of view, I take to be Porphyry's "Treatise Against the Christians," which was burnt A. D. 388 by order of Theodosius the Great. Porphyry believed that Daniel's prophecies had been written after the events foretold in them by some one who took the name of Daniel. It would have been interesting to have known Porphyry's grounds for this not improbable opinion, as well

as his general charges against the Christians; and if there is anything in the tradition of the survival of a copy of Porphyry in one of the libraries of Florence, the testimony of the distinguished Platonist may yet enlighten us on the causes of the growing darkness of the age in which he lived.

All the books of the famous Abelard were burnt by order of Pope Innocent II.; but it was his "Treatise on the Trinity," condemned by the Council of Soissons about 1121, and by the Council of Sens in 1140, which chiefly led St. Bernard to his cruel persecution of this famous man. That great saint, using the habitual language of ecclesiastical charity, called Abelard an infernal dragon and the precursor of Antichrist. Among his heresies Abelard seems to have held the opinion that the devil has no power over man; but at all events the Church had in those days, as Abelard learnt to his cost-though, considering that his disciple, Arnauld, of Brescia was destined to be burnt alive at Rome in 1155, Abelard might have deemed himself fortunate in only incurring imprisonment, and not sharing the fate of his works as well as that of his illustrious follower.

The latter calamity befell John Huss, who, having been led before the bishop's palace to see his own condemned works burnt, was then led on to be burnt himself, in 1415. Many of his works, however, were republished in the following century; but the twenty-nine errors which the Council of Constance detected in his work on the Church would probably nowadays seem venial enough. It was his misfortune to live in those days when the inhumanity of the world was at its climax.

It continued at that climax for some time, though heretical authors were not always burnt with their books. Enjedim, for instance, the Hungarian Socinian, who died in 1596, survived the burning in many places of his "Explanations of Difficult Passages of the Old and New Testaments, from Which the Dogma of the Trinity is Usually Established" (Explicationes locorum difficilium, etc.). Peter d'Osma, also, the Spanish theologian whose "Treatise on Confession" was condemned by the Archbishop of Toledo in the fifteenth century, might have esteemed himself happy that only his chair shared the burning of his book. Pomponacius, an Italian professor of philosophy, whose "Treatise on the Immortaiity of the Soul" (1516) was burnt by the Venetians for the heretical opinion that the soul's immortality was not believed by Aristotle, and could only be proved by Scripture and the authority of the Church, seems to have died peacefully in 1526, albeit with the reputation of an atheist, which his writings do not support. Desperiers was only imprisoned when his "Cymbalum Mundi," censured by the

Sorbonne, was consigned to the flames by the Parlement of Paris (March 17, 1537). And Luther, all of whose works were condemned by the Diet of Worms (1521), actually survived their burning twenty-five years, though he himself had publicly burnt, at Wittenberg, Leo X.'s bull anathematizing his books, as well as the Decretals of previous Popes.

Less fortunate than these were the famous martyrs of free thought-Dolet, Servetus and Tyndale. All the works which Dolet wrote or printed, were burnt as heretical by the Parlement of Paris (February 14, 1543) and himself hanged and burned three years later (August 3, 1546) at the age of thirty seven. The reason seems chiefly to have been Dolet's unsparing exposure of the immoralities of the monks and priests and of the plan of the Sorbonne to put down the art of printing in France. In Peignot is preserved a long list of the names of the works to the publication of which he lent his aid.

The burning of Servetus, the Parisian doctor, at Geneva (October 27. 1553), because his opinions on the Trinity did not agree with Calvin's, is of course the greatest blot on the memory of Calvin. All his books or manuscripts were burnt with him or elsewhere, so that his works are among the rarest of bibliographical treasures, and his "Christianismi Restitutio" (1553) is said to be the rarest book in the world. But apart from their rarity, I should hardly imagine that the works of Servetus possessed the slightest interest, or that their loss was the smallest loss to the world.

But if Calvin must bear the burden of the death of Servetus, Christianity itself is responsible for the death of William Tyndale, who, deeming it desirable that his countrymen should possess in their own language the book on which their religion was founded, took the infinite trouble of translating the Scriptures into English. His new Testament was forthwith burnt in London, and himself after some years strangled and burnt at Antwerp (1536).

The same literary persecution continued in the next century, the seventeenth. Bissendorf per

ished at the hands of the executioner at the same time that his books, "Noli Gordii Resolutio" (on the priestly calling) (1624) and "The Jesuits," were burnt by the same agent. In the case of the "De Republica Ecclesiastica" (1617), by De Dominis, Christian savagery surpassed itself, for not only was it burnt by sentence of the Inquisition, but also the dead body of its author was exhumed for the purpose. Dominis had been a Jesuit for twenty years, then a bishop, and finally Archbishop of Spalatro. This office he gave up, and retired to England, where he might write. with greater freedom than in Italy. There he

wrote this work and a history of the Council of Trent. His chief offense was his advocacy of the unchristian principles of toleration; he wished to reunite and reconcile the Christian communions. But, alas, for human frailty! he retracted his errors, many of them most sensible opinions, in London, and again at Rome, whither he returned. Pope Urban VIII., however, imprisoned him in the Castle of St. Angelo, where he is said to have died of poison, so that only his dead body was available to burn with his book the same year (1625). Literary lives were tragic in those times.

Simon Morin was burnt with all the copies of his "Pensees" that could be found, on the Place de Greve, at Paris, March 14, 1663. Morin called himself the Son of Man, and such thoughts of his as survived the fire do not lead us in his case to grudge the flames their literary fuel. But it is curious to think that we are only two centuries from the time when the Parlement of Paris could pass such a sentence on such a sufferer.

The Parlement of Dijon condemned to be burnt by the executioner Morisot's "Ahitophili Veritatis Lacrymæ" (July 4, 1625), but, though this work was a violent satire upon the Jesuits, Morisot survived his book thirty-six years, the Jesuits revenging themselves with nothing worse than an epitaph containing a bad pun, to the effect that their enemy, after a life not spent in wisdom, preferred to die as a fool (Voluit mori-sot).

In the same century Molinos, the Spanish priest, and founder of Quietism, wrote his "Conduite Spirituelle," which was condemned to the flames for sixty-eight heritical propositions, whilst its author was consigned to the prisons of the Inquisition, where he died after eleven years of it (1696). Self-absorption of the soul in God to the point of complete indifference to anything done to or by the body, even to the sufferings of the latter in hell, was the doctrine of Quietism that led ecclesiastic authority to feel its usual alarm for consequences; and it must be admitted that similar doctrines have at times played sad havoc with Christian morality. But perhaps they helped Molinos the better to bear his imprisonment.

I may next refer to seventeenth-century writers who were fortunate enough not to share the burning of their books. (1) Wolkelius, a friend of Socinus, the edition of whose book, "De Vera Religione," published at Amsterdam in 1645, was there burnt by order of the magistrates for its Socinian doctrines, appears to have lived for many years afterwards. Schlicttingius, a Polish follower of the same faith, escaped with expulsion from Poland when the Diet condemned his book, "Confessio Fidei Christiance," to be burnt by the executioner. Sainte Foi, or Gerberon, whose "Miroir de la Verite Chretienne" was condemned by several bishops and archbishops, and burnt by.

order of the Parlement of Aix (1678), lived to write other works of probably as little interest. La Peyrere was only imprisoned at Brussels for his book on the " Preadamites," was burnt at Paris (1655). And Pascal saw his famous "Lettres a un Provincial" which made too free with the dignity of all authorities, secular and religious, twice burnt, once in French (1657) and once in Latin (1660), without himself incurring a similar penalty. So did Derodon, professor of philosophy at Nismes, outlive the "Disputatio" (1645), in which he made light of Cyril of Alexandria, and which was condemned and burnt by the Parlement of Toulouse for its opposition to some beliefs of Roman Catholicism.

Passing now to the eighteenth century, we find book burning, then declining in England, in full vigor on the Continent.

The most important book that so suffered was Rousseau's admirable treatise on education, entitled "Emile" (1762), condemned by the Parlement of Paris to be torn and burnt at the foot of its great staircase. It was also burnt at Geneva. Three years later the same writer's "Lettres de la Montagne" were sentenced by the same tr.bunal to the same fate. Not all books burnt should be read, but Rousseau's "Emile" is one that should be.

So should the Marquis de Langle's "Voyage en Espagne" condemned to the flames in 1788, but translated into English, German and Italian. De Langle anticipated this fate for his book if it ever passed the Pyrenees: "So much the better," said he; "the reader loves the books they burn, does the publisher and the author; it is his blue ribbon." But, considering that he wrote against the Inquisition and similar inhumanities or follies of Catholicism, De Langle must have been surprised at the burning of his book in Paris itself.

A book at whose burning we may feel less surprise is the "Theologie Portative ou Dictionnaire Abrege de la Religion Chretienne," by the Abbe Bernier (1775), for a long time attributed to Voltaire, but really the work of an apostate monk, Dulaurent, who took refuge in Holland to write this and similar works.

The number of books of a similar strong antiCatholic tendency that were burnt in these years before the outbreak of the Revolution should be noticed as helping to explain that event. Their titles in most cases may suffice to indicate their nature. De la Mettrie's "L'homme Machine" (1758) was written and burnt in Holland, its author being a doctor, of whom Voltaire said that. he was a madman who only wrote when he was drunk. Of a similar kind was the Testament of Jean Meslier, published posthumously in the "Evangelie de la Raison," and condemned to the flames about 1765. On June 11, 1763, the Parle

ment of Paris ordered to be burnt an anonymous poem, called "La Religion a l'Assemblie du Clerge de France," in which the writer depicted in dark colors the morals of the French bishops of the time (1762). On January 29, 1768, was treated in the same way the "Histoire Impartiale des Jesuites" of Linguet, whose "Annales Politiques" in 1779 conducted him to the Bastile, and who ultimately died at the hands of the Revolutionary Tribunal (1794). But the 18th of August, 1770, is memorable for having seen all the seven following books sentenced to burning by the Parlement of Paris:

1. Woolston's "Discours sur les Miracles de Jesus Christ," translated from the English (1727). 2. Boulanger's "Christianisme Devoile." 3. "Freret's "Examen Critique des Apologistes de la Religion Chretienne" (1767).

4. The "Examen Impartial des Principales Religions du Monde."

5. Baron d'Holbach's "Contagion Sacree, or l'Histoire Naturelle de la Superstition" (1768).

6. Holbach's "Systeme de la Nature ou des Lois du Monde Physique et du Monde Moral." 7. Voltaire's "Dieu et les Hommes; Œuvre Theologique, mais Raissonable” (1769).

No one writer, indeed, of the eighteenth cen tury contributed so many books to the flames as Voltaire. Besides the above work, the following of his works incurred the same fate: (1) the "Lettres Philosophiques" (1833), (2) the "Cantique des Cantiques" (1759). (3) the "Dictionnaire Philosophique" (1764), also burnt at Geneva; (4) "L'Homme aux Quarante Ecus" (1767), (5) "Le Diner du Comte de Boulainvilliers" (1767). de Boulainvilliers" (1767). When we add to these burnings the fact that at least fourteen works of Voltaire were condemned, many others suppressed or forbidden, their author himself twice imprisoned in the Bastile, and often persecuted or obliged to fly from France, we must admit that seldom or never had any writer so eventful a literary career.

II. Turning now to the books that were burnt for their real or supposed immoral tendency, I may refer briefly in chronological order to the following as the principal offenders, though of course there is not always a clear distinction between what was punished as immoral and punished as irreligious. This applies to the four volumes of the works of the Carmelite Mantaunus, published at Antwerp in 1576, of which nearly all the copies were burnt. This facile poet, who is said to have composed 59,000 verses, was especially severe againt women and against the ecclesiastical profession. In 1664, the "Journal de Louis Gorin de Saint Amour," a satirical work, was condemned, chiefly apparently because it contained the five propositions of Jansenius. In 1623 the Parlement of Paris condemned Theophile to be burnt with

his book, "Le Parnasse des Poetes Satyriques,'
but the author escaped with his burning in effigy,
and with imprisonment in a dungeon. I am
tempted to quote Theophile's impromptu reply to
a man who asserted that all poets were fools:
"Oui, je l'avoue avec vous

Que tous les poetes sont fous;
Mais sachant ce que vous etes
Tous les fous ne sont pas poetes."

(All poets are fools, but all fools are not poets.) Helot also escaped with a burning in effigy when his "L'Ecole des Filles" was burnt at the foot of the gallows (1672), Lyser, who spent his life and his property in the advocacy of polygamy, was threatened by Christian V. with capital punishment if he appeared in Denmark, and his "Discursus Politicus de Polygamia" was sentenced to public burning (1677).

In the eighteenth century (1717) Gigli's satire, the "Vocabularo di Santa Caterina e della Lingua Sanese," Dufresnoy's "Princesses Malabares, ou le Celibat Philosophique" (1734), Deslandes' "Pigmalion ou la Statue Animee" (1741), the Jesuit Busembaum's "Theologia Moralis," which defends as an act of charity the commission to kill an excommunicated person (1757); Toussaint's "Les Mours" (1748), and the Abbe Talbert's satirical poem, "Langrognet aux Enfers" (1760), seem to complete the list of the principal works burnt by public authority; and of these the best is Toussaint's, who in 1764 published an apology for, or retraction of, "Mours," which has far less claim upon public attention than was obtained or merited by the original work.

III. Books condemned for some unpopular political tendency may likewise be arranged in the order of their centuries:

In the sixteenth, the most important are Louis d'Orleans' "Expostulatio" (1593), a violent attack on Henry IV., and condemned by the Parlement of Paris; Archbishop Genebrard's "De Sacrarum Electionum Jure et Necessitate ad Ecclesiæ Gallicaæ Redintegrationem" (1593), condemned by the Parlement of Aix and its author exiled. He maintained the right of the clergy and people to elect bishops, against their nomination by the king. It is curious that the Parlement of Paris thought it necessary to burn the Jesuit Marian's book, "De Rege" (1599), as anti-monarchical, seeing that it appeared with the privilege of the King of Spain. He maintained the right of killing a king for the cause of religion, and called Jacques Clement's act of assassination France's everlasting glory (Galliæ æternum decus). But it is only fair to add that the superior of the order disapproved of the work as much as the Sorbonne.

In the seventeenth century, I notice first the "Ecclesiasticus" of Scioppius, a work directed against our James T. and Casaubon (1611). The libel

having been burnt in London, and its author hanged and beaten in effigy before the king on the stage, was burnt in Paris by order of the Parlement, chiefly for its calumnies on Henry IV. The author, originally a Jesuit, has been called the Attila of writers, having been said to have known the abusive terms of all tongues, and to have had them on the tip of his own. He wrote 104 works, apparently of the violent sort, so that Casaubon called him, according to the style of learned men in those days, "the most cruel of all wild beasts," whilst the Jesuits called him "the public pest of letters and society."

The Senate of Venice caused to be burnt the "Della Liberta Veneta," by a man who called himself Squitinio (1612), because it denied the independence of the republic and asserted that the Emperor had rightful claims over it; and about the same time (1617) the Parlement of Paris consigned to the same penalty D'Aubigne's "Histoire Universelle" for the freedom of its satire on Charles IX., Henry III., Henry IV. and other French royal personages of the time. The second edition of D'Aubigne (1626) is the poorer for being shorn of these caustic passages.

The Jesuit Keller's "Admonitio ad Ludovicum XIII.” (1625), and the same author's "Mysteria Politica (1625), were both sentenced to be burnt; also the Jesuit Sanctarel's "Tractatus de Hæresi" (1625), which claimed for the Pope the right to dispose, not only of the thrones, but also of the lives of princes. This doctrine was approved by the General of the Jesuits, but, under threat of being accounted guilty of treason, expressly disclaimed by the Jesuits as a body. In resisting such pretentions the Sorbonne deserved well of France and humanity. In 1665 the Chatelet ordered to be burnt Claude Joly's "Recueil des Maximes Veritables et Importantes pour l'Institution du Roi, Contre le Fausse et Pernicieuse Politique de Cardinal Pretendu Surintendent de l'Education de Louis XIV." (1652); a book which, if it had been regarded instead of being burnt, might have altered the character of that pernicious devastator, and therefore of history itself, very much for the better. About the same time Milton's" Pro Populo Anglicano Defensio," not to be burnt in England till the Restoration, had a foretaste in Paris of its ultimate fate. Eustache le Noble's satire against the Dutch, "Dialogue d'Esope et de Mercure," and burnt by the executioner at Amsterdam, may complete the list of political works that paid for their offenses by fire in the seventeenth century.

The first to notice in the next century is Giannone's "Historia Civile de Regno di Napoli" (1723), in five volumes, burnt by the Inquisition, which, but for his escape, would have suppressed the author as well as his book, for his free criti

cism of Popes and ecclesiastics. His escape saved the eighteenth century from the reproach of burning a writer. Next deserves a passing allusion, the "Historia Nostri Temporis," by the once famous writer Emmius, whose posthumous book suffered at the hands of George Albert, Prince of East Frisia. The Parlement of Toulouse condemned Reboulet's "Histoire des Filles de la Congregation de l'Enfance" (1734) for accusing Madame de Moudonville, the founder of that convent, of publishing libels against the king. That of Paris and Besancon condemned Boncerf's "Des Inconveniens des Droits Feodaux" (1770).

The number, indeed, of political works burnt during the eighth decade of the last century is as remarkable as the number of religious books so treated about the same period: one of the lesser indications of the coming Revolution. During this decade were condemned: (1) Pidanzet's “Correspondance Secrete et Familiere de Chancelier Maupeon avec Sorhouet" (1771) for being blasphemous and seditious and calculated to rouse people against government; a work that made sport of Maupeon and his Parlement. (2) Beaumarchais' "Memoires" (1774), of the literary style of which Voltaire himself is said to have been jealous, but which was condemned to the flames for its imputations on the powers that were. (3) Lanjuinais' "Monarque Accompli" (1774), whose other title explains why it was condemned, as tending to sedition and revolt, "Prodiges de Bonte, de Savoir, et de Sagesse, qui Font l'Eloge de la Majeste Imperiale Joseph II., et qui Rendent cet Auguste Monarque si Precieux a l'Humanite, Discutes au Tribunal de la Raison et l'Equite." Lanjuinais, principal of a Catholic college in Switzerland, passed over to the Reformed Religion. (4) Martin de Marivaux's "L'Ami des Lois" (1775), a pamphlet in which the author protested against the words put into the mouth. of the king by Chancellor Maupeon, September 7, 1770: "We hold our crown of God alone; the right of law-making, without dependence or partition, belongs to us alone." The author contended that the crown was held only of the nation, and he excited the vengeance of the crown by sending a copy of his work to each member of the Parlement. At the same time, to the same penalty and for the same offense, was condemned to the flames "Le Catechisme du Citoyen, ou Eiemens du Droit Public Francaise, par Demandes et par Responses"; the episode and the origin of the dispute, clearly pointing to the rapidly approaching revolutionary whirlwind, the spirit of which these literary productions anticipated and expressed.

The last book I find to notice is the Abbe Raynal's Histoire Philosophique et Politique des