The Portable Medieval Reader

by James Bruce Ross

  As to Jerome, on whose authority the sacred canons forbid the reading of Virgil and other poets, I would maintain without hesitation that if he had been ignorant of the poetry and rhetoric against which he inveighs so beautifully he would never have handed down to us the volumes of Holy Writ translated in his sweetly flowing style from both Greek and Hebrew into the Latin tongue. Never could he have spoken against his critics with such brilliancy of ideas and such charm of language. Nor, in his criticism of rhetoric—which I should regard as a fault in another man—would he have made use of the forces of rhetoric.

  Furthermore, Aurelius Augustine, exponent and champion of the Christian faith, displayed such knowledge of the poets in all his writings that there is scarcely a single letter or treatise of his which is not crowded with poetic ornament. Not to speak of others, his City of God could never have been so strongly and so elaborately fortified against the vanity of the heathen if he had not been familiar with the poets and especially with Virgil....

  Now, if you, through the power of your intellect, without a knowledge of the poets can understand grammar or most of the writings of the holy fathers, filled as they are with poetical allusions, do not forbid the reading of Virgil to me and to others, who delight in such studies, but who have not attained to the lofty heights of your genius. If you enjoy reading your books as by a most brilliant illumination, allow me, whose eyes do not admit so much light, in the midst of my darkness to gaze upon the stars of poetry, whereby the darkness of my night is brightened, and to search out a something for the upbuilding of truth and of our faith from amidst those fables whose bitter rind conceals a savour of exceeding sweetness. If you neither can nor will do this, then, with all good will on my part, leave the poets alone! ...

  So, good-bye! And, according to that verse of Cato—for that apocryphal book has by usage come to be thus known—go right on reading your Virgil, secure, since you are not a priest, against any prohibition by your law. You will find in him delight for your eyes, food for your mind, refreshment for your thought, and you will gain from him no little instruction in the art of eloquence.

  Fare you well again and again, my dearest friend and colleague! Don’t forget me and do give me not only your approval, but your lovel

  From “Letters,” trans. Ephraim Emerton, in Humanism and Tyranny: Studies in the Italian Trecento.

  In Praise of Greek

  LEONARDO BRUNI

  Fifteenth century

  THEN first came the knowledge of Greek letters, which for seven hundred years had been lost among us. It was the Byzantine, Chrysoloras, a nobleman in his own country and most skilled in literature, who brought Greek learning back to us. Because his country was invaded by the Turks, he came by sea to Venice; but as soon as his fame went abroad, he was cordially invited and eagerly besought to come to Florence on a public salary to spread his abundant riches before the youth of the city. At that time [1396] I was studying civil law. But my nature was afire with the love of learning and I had already given no little time to dialectic and rhetoric. Therefore at the coming of Chrysoloras I was divided in my mind, feeling that it was a shame to desert the law and no less wrong to let slip such an occasion for learning Greek. And often with youthful impulsiveness I addressed myself thus: “When you are privileged to gaze upon and have converse with Homer, Plato, and Demosthenes as well as the other poets, philosophers, and orators of whom such wonderful things are reported, and when you might saturate yourself with their admirable teachings, will you turn your back and flee ? Will you permit this opportunity, divinely offered you, to slip by? For seven hundred years now no one in Italy has been in possession of Greek and yet we agree that all knowledge comes from that source. What great advancement of knowledge, enlargement of fame, and increase of pleasure will come to you from an acquaintance with this tongue! There are everywhere quantities of doctors of the civil law and the opportunity of completing your study in this field will not fail you. However, should the one and only doctor of Greek letters disappear, there will be no one from whom to acquire them.”

  Overcome at last by these arguments, I gave myself to Chrysoloras and developed such ardour that whatever I learned by day, I revolved with myself in the night while asleep. I had many fellow-students, two of the number who were particularly proficient belonging to the Florentine nobility.

  Trans. F. Schevill, in The First Century of Italian Humanism (New York: Crofts, 1928).

  The Mirror of Nature

  Questions on Nature

  ADELARD OF BATH

  Early twelfth century

  WHEN I returned to England not long ago, while Henry [I, 1100-1135], the son of William, was ruling, the reunion with my friends was both delightful and satisfactory to me, for I had long been absent from my homeland for the sake of study. When, therefore, in our first meeting, as is often the case, many questions were asked concerning our own welfare and that of our friends, I consequently became aware that I should know about the morals of our people. When, on investigation, I found princes violent, prelates drunken, judges mercenary, patrons inconstant, the common people flatterers, promisers untruthful, friends envious, almost everyone ambitious, nothing, I said, is more impossible to me than to give myself up to this wretchedness. Then they said, “But what do you think can be done, since you neither wish to engage in this moral evil nor are able to prevent it?” I said, “Deliver it to oblivion, for forgetfulness is the one remedy of unanswerable evils. For he who thinks again of what he hates, in a certain measure suffers that which he does not love.”

  Then, after these things had been said on one side and the other, since a considerable part of the day was left, there was time to talk of other things. A certain nephew of mine who had come along with the others, being more involved in the causes of things than able to explain them, asked me to relate something new from my Arab studies. When the others agreed I had the following discussion with him, which I know was profitable to its hearers, but I do not know if it was pleasant. For this generation has a gigantic vice, that it considers nothing discovered by moderns worthy of being accepted. Thus it is usual that if I should wish to make public my own discovery, I should attribute it to another, saying, “This person says it, not I.” Therefore, lest I should be altogether unheard, I say that a certain lord discovered all my ideas, not I. But enough of this. Now, since it is fitting that I should say something at the request of my friends, I wish to be more certain that it is rightly said by having you [Bishop Richard of Bayeux, to whom this work is dedicated] consider it. For nothing in the liberal arts is so well discussed that it can not shine more splendidly through you. Be present, then, in spirit! For in order to present things succinctly, I set down the chapter headings first. Then I shall reply to my nephew on the causes of things.1. Why plants are produced without the sowing of seed.

  2. How some plants are called hot, since all are more of the earth than of fire.

  3. How different plants grow in the same region.

  4. Why they are not produced from water, or air, or even from fire, as they are from the earth.

  6. Why, when a plant is grafted, the fruit is that of the grafted part, not the trunk.

  7. Why certain beasts chew the cud, and certain others not at all.

  8.Why those which ruminate lie down first on their hind legs and last on their forelegs.

  10. Why all animals which drink do not make water.

  11. Why certain animals have a stomach, and others do not.

  12. Why certain of them see more sharply by night than by day.

  13. Whether beasts have souls.

  15. Why men are not born with horns or other weapons.

  17. Why those who have good intelligence are lacking in memory and vice versa.

  18. Why the seats of imagination, reason, and memory are found in the brain.

  19. Why the nose is located above the mouth.

  20. hy men get bald in front.

  21. Why we hear echoes.

  22. How, as the voic
e comes to the ear, it may penetrate any obstacle.

  23. What opinions should be held concerning vision.

  24. Whether the visible spirit is substance or accident.

  30. Why, as one can see from the darkness into the light, one cannot similarly see from the light into the darkness.

  31. Why we smell, taste, and touch.

  32. Why joy is the cause of weeping.

  33. Why we breathe out of the same mouth now hot and now cold air.

  34. Why the motion of fanning produces heat.

  36. Why the fingers were made unequal.

  37. Why the palm is concave.

  38. Why men cannot walk when they are born, as animals do.

  39. Why men are nourished more by milk.

  42. Why women, if they are more frigid than men, are more wanton in desire.

  43. Why men universally die.

  46. Why the living are afraid of dead bodies.

  48. How or why the globe of the earth is held up in the middle of the air.

  49. If the sphere of the earth were perforated, where a stone thrown into it would fall.

  50. How the earth moves.

  51. Why the waters of the sea are salty.

  52. Whence the ebb and flow of the tides come.

  53. How the ocean does not increase from the influx of rivers.

  54. Why certain rivers are not salty.

  55. How the course of rivers can be perpetual.

  56. How springs burst forth on a mountain top.

  57. Whether there may be other true springs.

  58. Why water does not go out of a full vessel open in the lower part, unless an opening is made above.

  59. Whence the winds arise.

  60. Whence the first movement of air proceeds.

  61. Whether, if one atom is set in motion, all are set in motion, since whatever is moved moves something.

  62. Why the wind does not move around the earth to the upper regions.

  63. Where or whence such great impetus comes to it.

  64. Where thunder comes from.

  65. here lightning comes from.

  66. Why lightning does not come forth from all thunder.

  67. By what power lightning penetrates stones and masses of metal.

  68. Why, when we see the fire, we do not hear the crash, either at once or ever.

  71. hy the planets and especially the sun do not keep their courses through the middle of the aplanon [outermost and immovable sphere of heaven] without revolution.

  73. Whether the stars fall, as they seem to fall.

  74. Whether the stars are animated.

  75. What food the stars eat, if they are animals.

  76. Whether the aplanon should be called an animate body or God....

  Nephew. You have said more than is necessary concerning these childish things. Therefore, let us advance to the nature of animals in itself. For there I have a presentiment that I may cause you uneasiness.

  Adelard. It is difficult for me to discuss animals with you, for I have learned from the Arab masters by the guidance of reason, while you, deceived by the picture of authority, follow a halter. For what else should authority be called but a halter? Indeed, just as brute beasts are led by any kind of a halter, and know neither where nor how they are led, and only follow the rope by which they are held, so the authority of your writers leads into danger not a few who have been seized and bound by animal credulity. Whence, usurping for themselves the name of authority, some employ very great licence in writing, so that they have not hesitated to make known to bestial men the false instead of the true. For why do you not fill up sheets of parchment, and why do you not write on the backs, since you usually have hearers in this age who demand no reasonable judgment, but have faith simply in the mention of an old title? For they do not know that reason has been given to each person, so that with it as the first judge he may distinguish between the true and the false. For unless reason should be the universal judge, it is given in vain to individuals. It would suffice that it be given to a writer of precepts, to one, I say, or to many; the rest of them may be content with customs and authorities. Further, those who are called authorities would not have obtained the confidence of lesser men in the first place, unless they had followed reason. Whoever does not know or neglects reason, should deservedly be considered blind. I do not take it too literally that authority ought to be rejected by my judgment. I do, however, claim that reason should first investigate, and what reason has discovered, authority, if it applies, should then support. Authority alone cannot induce belief in the philosopher, nor should it be used for this purpose. Whence the logicians agree that a point is probable, not inevitable, on the basis of authority. Therefore, if you want to hear more from me, give and take reason. For I am not one who can be fed by the picture of a beefsteak. All that is written, to be sure, is like a harlot, showing affection now to this one, now to that one.

  Nephew. It may be sensible to do as you ask, since it may be easy for me to oppose you rationally, and so it may not be safe to follow the authority of your Arabs. Let it stand then; let reason be the sole judge between you and me. And since we are to discuss animals, I ask why some of them ruminate and others do not.

  Adelard. The natures of animals, like those of men, are different. Some, indeed, are naturally hot, others cold, some humid, others dry. Those which are hot digest better the food they have taken, and more easily convert it into blood, but those which are cold do this more poorly. For everything that is changed is more easily changed by heat than by cold. For fire has as a sort of property that it melts that which is joined together. Those animals, therefore, which have a warm stomach digest their food easily. But those whose natures are cold, since they are unable to digest their food from lack of heat, bring it back again to their mouths, so that there they may be able to soften it more easily by a second chewing. Such are cows, deer, goats and the like kind, which doctors call by the Greek term melancholic. That all of these, moreover, are of a cold nature, although it may be clear to doctors, can thus be shown to you. For, on this account, they have harder and more solid fat, which the ordinary person calls tallow. But others, since they are hotter, have softer fat, since it is better digested, which by common usage is called lard.

  From Quaestiones naturales, M. Müller, ed. (Münster, 1924); trans. M.M.M.

  Experimental Science

  ROGER BACON

  Thirteenth century

  I Now wish to unfold the principles of experimental science, since without experience nothing can be sufficiently known. For there are two modes of acquiring knowledge, namely, by reasoning and experience. Reasoning draws a conclusion and makes us grant the conclusion, but does not make the conclusion certain, nor does it remove doubt so that the mind may rest on the intuition of truth, unless the mind discovers it by the path of experience; since many have the arguments relating to what can be known, but because they lack experience they neglect the arguments, and neither avoid what is harmful nor follow what is good. For if a man who has never seen fire should prove by adequate reasoning that fire burns and injures things and destroys them, his mind would not be satisfied thereby, nor would he avoid fire, until he placed his hand or some combustible substance in the fire, so that he might prove by experience that which reasoning taught. But when he has had actual experience of combustion his mind is made certain and rests in the full light of truth. Therefore reasoning does not suffice, but experience does.

  This is also evident in mathematics, where proof is most convincing. But the mind of one who has the most convincing proof in regard to the equilateral triangle will never cleave to the conclusion without experience, nor will he heed it, but will disregard it until experience is offered him by the intersection of two circles, from either intersection of which two lines may be drawn to the extremities of the given line; but then the man accepts the conclusion without any question. Aristotle’s statement, then, that proof is reasoning that causes us to know is to be understood with t
he proviso that the proof is accompanied by its appropriate experience, and is not to be understood of the bare proof....

  He therefore who wishes to rejoice without doubt in regard to the truths underlying phenomena must know how to devote himself to experiment. For authors write many statements, and people believe them through reasoning which they formulate without experience. Their reasoning is wholly false. For it is generally believed that the diamond cannot be broken except by goat’s blood, and philosophers and theologians misuse this idea. But fracture by means of blood of this kind has never been verified, although the effort has been made; and without that blood it can be broken easily. For I have seen this with my own eyes, and this is necessary, because gems cannot be carved except by fragments of this stone. Similarly it is generally believed that the castors employed by physicians are the testicles of the male animal. But this is not true, because the beaver has these under its breast, and both the male and female produce testicles of this kind. Besides these castors the male beaver has its testicles in their natural place; and therefore what is subjoined is a dreadful lie, namely, that when the hunters pursue the beaver, he himself knowing what they are seeking cuts out with his teeth these glands. Moreover, it is generally believed that hot water freezes more quickly than cold water in vessels, and the argument in support of this is advanced that contrary is excited by contrary, just like enemies meeting each other. But it is certain that cold water freezes more quickly for any one who makes the experiment. People attribute this to Aristotle in the second book of the Meteorologics; but he certainly does not make this statement, but he does make one like it, by which they have been deceived, namely, that if cold water and hot water are poured on a cold place, as upon ice, the hot water freezes more quickly, and this is true. But if hot water and cold are placed in two vessels, the cold will freeze more quickly. Therefore all things must be verified by experience.