Chapter 9

Authorities.—Col. Wauwerman,Liberia; Histoire de la fondation d’un état nègre(Brussels, 1885); J. Büttikofer,Reisebilder aus Liberia(Leiden, 1890); Sir Harry Johnston,Liberia(2 vols., London, 1906), with full bibliography; Maurice Delafosse,Vocabulaires comparatifs de plus de 60 langues et dialectes parlés à la Côte d’Ivoire et dans la région limitrophe(1904), a work which, though it professes to deal mainly with philology, throws a wonderful light on the relationships and history of the native tribes of Liberia.

(H. H. J.)

1Amongst other remarkable negroes that Liberian education produced was Dr E. W. Blyden (b. 1832), the author of many works dealing with negro questions.

LIBERIUS,pope from 352 to 366, the successor of Julius I., was consecrated according to theCatalogus Liberianuson the 22nd of May. His first recorded act was, after a synod had been held at Rome, to write to Constantius, then in quarters at Arles (353-354), asking that a council might be called at Aquileia with reference to the affairs of Athanasius; but his messenger Vincentius of Capua was compelled by the emperor at a conciliabulum held in Arles to subscribe against his will a condemnation of the orthodox patriarch of Alexandria. In 355 Liberius was one of the few who, along with Eusebius of Vercelli, Dionysius of Milan and Lucifer of Cagliari, refused to sign the condemnation of Athanasius, which had anew been imposed at Milan by imperial command upon all the Western bishops; the consequence was his relegation to Beroea in Thrace, Felix II. (antipope) being consecrated his successor by three “catascopi haud episcopi,” as Athanasius called them. At the end of an exile of more than two years he yielded so far as to subscribe a formula giving up the “homoousios,” to abandon Athanasius, and to accept the communion of his adversaries—a serious mistake, with which he has justly been reproached. This submission led the emperor to recall him from exile; but, as the Roman see was officially occupied by Felix, a year passed before Liberius was sent to Rome. It was the emperor’s intention that Liberius should govern the Church jointly with Felix, but on the arrival of Liberius, Felix was expelled by the Roman people. Neither Liberius nor Felix took part in the council of Rimini (359). After the death of the emperor Constantius in 361, Liberius annulled the decrees of that assembly, but, with the concurrence of SS. Athanasius and Hilarius, retained the bishops who had signed and then withdrawn their adherence. In 366 Liberius gave a favourable reception to a deputation of the Eastern episcopate, and admitted into his communion the more moderate of the old Arian party. He died on the 24th of September 366.

His biographers used to be perplexed by a letter purporting to be from Liberius, in the works of Hilary, in which he seems to write, in 352, that he had excommunicated Athanasius at the instance of the Oriental bishops; but the document is now held to be spurious. See Hefele,Conciliengesch. i. 648 seq. Three other letters, though contested by Hefele, seem to have been written by Liberius at the time of his submission to the emperor.

(L. D.*)

LIBER PONTIFICALIS,orGesta Pontificum Romanorum(i.e.book of the popes), consists of the lives of the bishops of Rome from the time of St Peter to the death of Nicholas I. in 867. A supplement continues the series of lives almost to the close of the 9th century, and several other continuations were written later. During the 16th century there was some discussion about the authorship of theLiber, and for some time it was thought to be the work of an Italian monk, Anastasius Bibliothecarius (d. 886). It is now, however, practically certain that it was of composite authorship and that the earlier part of it was compiled about 530, three centuries before the time of Anastasius. This is the view taken by Louis Duchesne and substantially by G. Waitz and T. Mommsen, although these scholars think that it was written about a century later. TheLibercontains much information about papal affairs in general, and about endowments, martyrdoms and the like, but a considerable part of it is obviously legendary. It assumes that the bishops of Rome exercised authority over the Christian Church from its earliest days.

The Liber, which was used by Bede for hisHistoria Ecclesiastica, was first printed at Mainz in 1602. Among other editions is the one edited by T. Mommsen for theMonumenta Germaniae historica. Gesta Romanorum pontificum, Band i., but the best is the one by L. Duchesne,Le Liber pontificalis: texte, introduction, commentaire(Paris, 1884-1892). See also the same writer’sÉtude sur le Liber pontificalis(Paris, 1877); and the article by A. Brackmann in Herzog-Hauck’sRealencyklopädie, Band xi. (Leipzig, 1902).

LIBERTAD,orLa Libertad, a coast department of Peru, bounded N. by Lambayeque and Cajamarca, E. by San Martin, S. by Ancachs, S.W. and W. by the Pacific. Pop. (1906 estimate) 188,200; area 10,209 sq. m. Libertad formerly included the present department of Lambayeque. The Western Cordillera divides it into two nearly equal parts; the western consisting of a narrow, arid, sandy coast zone and the western slopes of the Cordillera broken into valleys by short mountain spurs, and the eastern a high inter-Andine valley lying between the Western and Central Cordilleras and traversed by the upper Marañon or Amazon, which at one point is less than 90 m. in a straight line from the Pacific coast. The coast region is traversed by several short streams, which are fed by the melting snows of the Cordillera and are extensively used for irrigation. These are (the names also applying to their valleys) the Jequetepeque or Pacasmayo, in whose valley rice is an important product, the Chicama, in whose valley the sugar plantations are among the largest and best in Peru, the Moche, Viru, Chao and Santa; the last, with its northern tributary, the Tablachaca, forming the southern boundary line of the department. The Santa Valley is also noted for its sugar plantations. Cotton is produced in several of these valleys, coffee in the Pacasmayo district, and coca on the mountain slopes about Huamachuco and Otuzco, at elevations of 3000 to 6000 ft. above sea-level. The upland regions, which have a moderate rainfall and a cool, healthy climate, are partly devoted to agriculture on a small scale (producing wheat, Indian corn, barley, potatoes, quinua, alfalfa, fruit and vegetables), partly to grazing and partly to mining. Cattle and sheep have been raised on the upland pastures of Libertad and Ancachs since early colonial times, and the llama and alpaca were reared throughout this “sierra” country long before the Spanish conquest. Gold and silver mines are worked in the districts of Huamachuco, Otuzco and Pataz, and coal has been found in the first two. The department had 169 m. of railway in 1906, viz.: from Pacasmayo to Yonán (in Cajamarca) with a branch to Guadalupe, 60 m.; from Salaverry to Trujillo with its extension to Ascope, 47 m.; from Trujillo to Laredo, Galindo and Menocucho, 18½ m.; from Huanchaco to Roma, 25 m.; and from Chicama to Pampas, 18½ m. The principal ports are Pacasmayo and Salaverry, which have long iron piers built by the national government; Malabrigo, Huanchuco, Guañape and Chao are open roadsteads. The capital of the department is Trujillo. The other principal towns are SanPedro, Otuzco, Huamachuco, Santiago de Chuco and Tuyabamba—all provincial capitals and important only through their mining interests, except San Pedro, which stands in the fertile district of the Jequetepeque. The population of Otuzco (35 m. N.E. of Trujillo) was estimated to be about 4000 in 1896, that of Huamachuco (65 m. N.E. of Trujillo) being perhaps slightly less.

LIBERTARIANISM(from Lat.libertas, freedom), in ethics, the doctrine which maintains the freedom of the will, as opposed to necessitarianism or determinism. It has been held in various forms. In its extreme form it maintains that the individual is absolutely free to chose this or that action indifferently (theliberum arbitrium indifferentiae), but most libertarians admit that acquired tendencies, environment and the like, exercise control in a greater or less degree.

LIBERTINES,the nickname, rather than the name, given to various political and social parties. It is futile to deduce the name from the Libertines of Acts vi. 9; these were “sons of freedmen,” for it is vain to make them citizens of an imaginary Libertum, or to substitute (with Beza) Libustines, in the sense of inhabitants of Libya. In a sense akin to the modern use of the term “libertine,”i.e.a person who sets the rules of morality, &c., at defiance, the word seems first to have been applied, as a stigma, to Anabaptists in the Low Countries (Mark Pattison,Essays, ii. 38). It has become especially attached to the liberal party in Geneva, opposed to Calvin and carrying on the tradition of the Liberators in that city; but the term was never applied to them till after Calvin’s death (F. W. Kampschulte,Johann Calvin). Calvin, who wrote against the “Libertins qui se nomment Spirituelz” (1545), never confused them with his political antagonists in Geneva, called Perrinistes from their leader Amadeo Perrin. The objects of Calvin’s polemic were the Anabaptists above mentioned, whose first obscure leader was Coppin of Lisle, followed by Quintin of Hennegau, by whom and his disciples, Bertram des Moulins and Claude Perseval, the principles of the sect were disseminated in France. Quintin was put to death as a heretic at Tournai in 1546. His most notable follower was Antoine Pocquet, a native of Enghien, Belgium, priest and almoner (1540-1549), afterwards pensioner of the queen of Navarre, who was a guest of Bucer at Strassburg (1543-1544) and died some time after 1560. Calvin (who had met Quintin in Paris) describes the doctrines he impugns as pantheistic and antinomian.

See Choisy in Herzog-Hauck’sRealencyklopädie(1902).

(A. Go.*)

LIBERTINES, SYNAGOGUE OF THE,a section of the Hellenistic Jews who attacked Stephen (Acts vi. 9). The passage reads,τίνες τῶν ἐκ τῆς συναγωγῆς τῆς λεγομένης Λιβερτίνων, καὶ Κυρηναίων καὶ Ἀλεξανδρέων, καὶ τῶν ἀπὸ Κιλικίας καὶ Ἀσίας, and opinion is divided as to the number of synagogues here named. The probability is that there are three, corresponding to the geographical regions involved, (1) Rome and Italy, (2) N.E. Africa, (3) Asia Minor. In this case “the Synagogue of the Libertines” is the assembly of “the Freedmen” from Rome, descendants of the Jews enslaved by Pompey after his conquest of Judaea 63B.C.If, however, we takeΛιβερτίνων καὶ Κυρηναίων καὶ Ἀλεξανδρέωνclosely together, the first name must denote the people of some city or district. The obscure town Libertum (inferred from the title Episcopus Libertinensis in connexion with the synod of Carthage,A.D.411) is less likely than the reading (Λιβύωνor)Λιβυστίνωνunderlying certain Armenian versions and Syriac commentaries. The Greek towns lying west from Cyrene would naturally be called Libyan. In any case the interesting point is that these returned Jews, instead of being liberalized by their residence abroad, were more tenacious of Judaism and more bitter against Stephen than those who had never left Judaea.

LIBERTY(Lat.libertas, fromliber, free), generally the state of freedom, especially opposed to subjection, imprisonment or slavery, or with such restricted or figurative meaning as the circumstances imply. The history of political liberty is in modern days identified practically with the progress of civilization. In a more particular sense, “a liberty” is the term for a franchise, a privilege or branch of the crown’s prerogative granted to a subject, as, for example, that of executing legal process; hence the district over which the privilege extends. Such liberties are exempt from the jurisdiction of the sheriff and have separate commissions of the peace, but for purposes of local government form part of the county in which they are situated. The exemption from the jurisdiction of the sheriff was recognized in England by the Sheriffs Act 1887, which provides that the sheriff of a county shall appoint a deputy at the expense of the lord of the liberty, such deputy to reside in or near the liberty. The deputy receives and opens in the sheriff’s name all writs, the return or execution of which belongs to the bailiff of the liberty, and issues to the bailiff the warrant required for the due execution of such writs. The bailiff then becomes liable for non-execution, mis-execution or insufficient return of any writs, and in the case of non-return of any writ, if the sheriff returns that he has delivered the writ to a bailiff of a liberty, the sheriff will be ordered to execute the writ notwithstanding the liberty, and must cause the bailiff to attend before the high court of justice and answer why he did not execute the writ.

In nautical phraseology various usages of the term are derived from its association with a sailor’s leave on shore,e.g.liberty-man, liberty-day, liberty-ticket.

A History of Modern Liberty, in eight volumes, of which the third appeared in 1906, has been written by James Mackinnon; see also Lord Acton’s lectures, and such works as J. S. Mill’sOn Libertyand Sir John Seeley’sIntroduction to Political Science.

LIBERTY PARTY,the first political party organized in the United States to oppose the spread and restrict the political power of slavery, and the lineal precursor of the Free Soil and Republican parties. It originated in the Old North-west. Its organization was preceded there by a long anti-slavery religious movement. James G. Birney (q.v.), to whom more than to any other man belongs the honour of founding and leading the party, began to define the political duties of so-called “abolitionists” about 1836; but for several years thereafter he, in common with other leaders, continued to disclaim all idea of forming a political party. In state and local campaigns, however, non-partisan political action was attempted through the questioning of Whig and Democratic candidates. The utter futility of seeking to obtain in this way any satisfactory concessions to anti-slavery sentiment was speedily and abundantly proved. There arose, consequently, a division in the American Anti-slavery Society between those who were led by W. L. Garrison (q.v.), and advocated political non-resistance—and, besides, had loaded down their anti-slavery views with a variety of religious and social vagaries, unpalatable to all but a small number—and those who were led by Birney, and advocated independent political action. The sentiment of the great majority of “abolitionists” was, by 1838, strongly for such action; and it was clearly sanctioned and implied in the constitution and declared principles of the Anti-slavery Society; but the capture of that organization by the Garrisonians, in a “packed” convention in 1830, made it unavailable as a party nucleus—even if it had not been already outgrown—and hastened a separate party organization. A convention of abolitionists at Warsaw, New York, in November 1839 had resolved that abolitionists were bound by every consideration of duty and expediency to organize an independent political party. Accordingly, the political abolitionists, in another convention at Albany, in April 1840, containing delegates from six states but not one from the North-west, launched the “Liberty Party,” and nominated Birney for the presidency. In the November election he received 7069 votes.1

The political “abolitionists” were abolitionists only as they were restrictionists: they wished to use the federal government to exclude (or abolish) slavery from the federal Territories and the District of Columbia, but they saw no opportunity to attack slavery in the states—i.e.to attack the institutionper se; alsothey declared there should be “absolute and unqualified division of the General Government from slavery”—which implied an amendment of the constitution. They proposed to use ordinary moral and political means to attain their ends—not, like the Garrisonians, to abstain from voting, or favour the dissolution of the Union.

After 1840 the attempt began in earnest to organize the Liberty Party thoroughly, and unite all anti-slavery men. The North-west, where “there was, after 1840, very little known of Garrison and his methods” (T. C. Smith), was the most promising field, but though the contest of state and local campaigns gave morale to the party, it made scant political gains (in 1843 it cast hardly 10% of the total vote); it could not convince the people that slavery should be made the paramount question in politics. In 1844, however, the Texas question gave slavery precisely this pre-eminence in the presidential campaign. Until then, neither Whigs nor Democrats had regarded the Liberty Party seriously; now, however, each party charged that the Liberty movement was corruptly auxiliary to the other. As the campaign progressed, the Whigs alternately abused the Liberty men and made frantic appeals for their support. But the Liberty men were strongly opposed to Clay personally; and even if his equivocal campaign letters (seeClay, Henry) had not left exceedingly small ground for belief that he would resist the annexation of Texas, still the Liberty men were not such as to admit that an end justifies the means; therefore they again nominated Birney. He received 62,263 votes2—many more than enough in New York to have carried that state and the presidency for Clay, had they been thrown to his support. The Whigs, therefore, blamed the Liberty Party for Democratic success and the annexation of Texas; but—quite apart from the issue of political ethics—it is almost certain that though Clay’s chances were injured by the Liberty ticket, they were injured much more outside the Liberty ranks, by his own quibbles.3After 1844 the Liberty Party made little progress. Its leaders were never very strong as politicians, and its ablest organizer, Birney, was about this time compelled by an accident to abandon public life. Moreover, the election of 1844 was in a way fatal to the party; for it seemed to prove that though “abolition” was not the party programme, still its antecedents and personnel were too radical to unite the North; and above all it could not, after 1844, draw the disaffected Whigs, for though their party was steadily moving toward anti-slavery their dislike of the Liberty Party effectually prevented union. Indeed, no party of one idea could hope to satisfy men who had been Whigs or Democrats. At the same time, anti-slavery Whigs and Democrats were segregating in state politics, and the issue of excluding slavery from the new territory acquired from Mexico afforded a golden opportunity to unite all anti-slavery men on the principle of the Wilmot Proviso (1846). The Liberty Party reached its greatest strength (casting 74,017 votes) in the state elections of 1846. Thereafter, though growing somewhat in New England, it rapidly became ineffective in the rest of the North. Many, including Birney, thought it should cease to be an isolated party of one idea—striving for mere balance of power between Whigs and Democrats, welcoming small concessions from them, almost dependent upon them. Some wished to revivify it by making it a party of general reform. One result was the secession and formation of the Liberty League, which in 1847 nominated Gerrit Smith for the presidency. No adequate effort was made to take advantage of the disintegration of other parties. In October 1847, at Buffalo, was held the third and last national convention. John P. Hale—whose election to the United States Senate had justified the first successful union of Liberty men with other anti-slavery men in state politics—was nominated for the presidency. But the nomination by the Democrats of Lewis Cass shattered the Democratic organization in New York and the North-west; and when the Whigs nominated General Taylor, adopted a non-committal platform, and showed hostility to the Wilmot Proviso, the way was cleared for a union of all anti-slavery men. The Liberty Party, abandoning therefore its independent nominations, joined in the first convention and nominations of the Free Soil Party (q.v.), thereby practically losing its identity, although it continued until after the organization of the Republican Party to maintain something of a semi-independent organization. The Liberty Party has the unique honour among third-parties in the United States of seeing its principles rapidly adopted and realized.

See T. C. Smith,History of the Liberty and Free Soil Parties in the Northwest(Harvard University Historical Studies, New York, 1897), and lives and writings of all the public men mentioned above; also of G. W. Julian, J. R. Giddings and S. P. Chase.

LIBITINA,an old Roman goddess of funerals. She had a sanctuary in a sacred grove (perhaps on the Esquiline), where, by an ordinance of Servius Tullius, a piece of money (lucar Libitinae) was deposited whenever a death took place. Here the undertakers (libitinarii), who carried out all funeral arrangements by contract, had their offices, and everything necessary was kept for sale or hire; here all deaths were registered for statistical purposes. The wordLibitinathen came to be used for the business of an undertaker, funeral requisites, and (in the poets) for death itself. By later antiquarians Libitina was sometimes identified with Persephone, but more commonly (partly or completely) with Venus Lubentia or Lubentina, an Italian goddess of gardens. The similarity of name and the fact that Venus Lubentia had a sanctuary in the grove of Libitina favoured this idea. Further, Plutarch (Quaest. Rom.23) mentions a small statue at Delphi of Aphrodite Epitymbia (A. of tombs = Venus Libitina), to which the spirits of the dead were summoned. The inconsistency of selling funeral requisites in the temple of Libitina, seeing that she is identified with Venus, is explained by him as indicating that one and the same goddess presides over birth and death; or the association of such things with the goddess of love and pleasure is intended to show that death is not a calamity, but rather a consummation to be desired. Libitina may, however, have been originally an earth goddess, connected with luxuriant nature and the enjoyments of life (cf.lub-et,lib-ido); then, all such deities being connected with the underworld, she also became the goddess of death, and that side of her character predominated in the later conceptions.

See Plutarch,Numa, 12; Dion. Halic. iv. 15; Festus xvi., s.v. “Rustica Vinalia”; Juvenal xii. 121, with Mayor’s note; G. Wissowa in Roscher’sLexicon der Mythologie, s.v.

1Mr T. C. Smith estimates that probably not one in ten of even professed abolitionists supported Birney; only in Massachusetts did he receive as much as 1% of the total vote cast.2Birney’s vote was reduced by a disgraceful election trick by the Whigs (the circulation of a forged letter on the eve of the election); a trick to which he had exposed himself by an ingenuously honest reception of Democratic advances in a matter of local good-government in Michigan.3E.g. Horace Greeley made the Whig charge; but in later life he repeatedly attributed Clay’s defeat simply to Clay’s own letters; and for Millard Fillmore’s important opinion see footnote toKnow Nothing Party.

1Mr T. C. Smith estimates that probably not one in ten of even professed abolitionists supported Birney; only in Massachusetts did he receive as much as 1% of the total vote cast.

2Birney’s vote was reduced by a disgraceful election trick by the Whigs (the circulation of a forged letter on the eve of the election); a trick to which he had exposed himself by an ingenuously honest reception of Democratic advances in a matter of local good-government in Michigan.

3E.g. Horace Greeley made the Whig charge; but in later life he repeatedly attributed Clay’s defeat simply to Clay’s own letters; and for Millard Fillmore’s important opinion see footnote toKnow Nothing Party.

LIBMANAN,a town of the province of Ambos Camarines, Luzon, Philippine Islands, on the Libmanan river, 11 m. N.W. of Nueva Cáceres, the capital. Pop. (1903) 17,416. It is about 4½ m. N.E. of the Bay of San Miguel. Rice, coco-nuts, hemp, Indian corn, sugarcane, bejuco, arica nuts and camotes, are grown in the vicinity, and the manufactures include hemp goods, alcohol (from coco-nut-palm sap), copra, and baskets, chairs, hammocks and hats of bejuco and bamboo. The Libmanan river, a tributary of the Bicol, into which it empties 2 m. below the town, is famous for its clear cold water and for its sulphur springs. The language is Bicol.

LIBO,in ancient Rome, the name of a family belonging to the Scribonian gens. It is chiefly interesting for its connexion with the Puteal Scribonianum or Puteal Libonis in the forum at Rome,1dedicated or restored by one of its members, perhaps the praetor of 204B.C., or the tribune of the people in 149. In its vicinity the praetor’s tribunal, removed from the comitium in the 2nd centuryB.C., held its sittings, which led to the place becoming the haunt of litigants, money-lenders and business people. According to ancient authorities, the Puteal Liboniswas between the temples of Castor and Vesta, near the Porticus Julia and the Arcus Fabiorum, but no remains have been discovered. The idea that an irregular circle of travertine blocks, found near the temple of Castor, formed part of the puteal is now abandoned.

See Horace,Sat.ii. 6. 35,Epp.i. 19. 8; Cicero,Pro Sestio, 8; for the well-known coin of L. Scribonius Libo, representing the puteal of Libo, which rather resembles acippus(sepulchral monument) or an altar, with laurel wreaths, two lyres and a pair of pincers or tongs below the wreaths (perhaps symbolical of Vulcanus as forger of lightning), see C. Hülsen,The Roman Forum(Eng. trans. by J. B. Carter, 1906), p. 150, where a marble imitation found at Veii is also given.

1Putealwas the name given to an erection (or enclosure) on a spot which had been struck by lightning; it was so called from its resemblance to the stone kerb or low enclosure round a well (puteus).

LIBON,a Greek architect, born at Elis, who was employed to build the great temple of Zeus at Olympia (q.v.) about 460B.C.(Pausanias v. 10. 3).

LIBOURNE,a town of south-western France, capital of an arrondissement of the department of Gironde, situated at the confluence of the Isle with the Dordogne, 22 m. E.N.E. of Bordeaux on the railway to Angoulême. Pop. (1906) town, 15,280; commune, 19,323. The sea is 56 m. distant, but the tide affects the river so as to admit of vessels drawing 14 ft. reaching the town at the highest tides. The Dordogne is here crossed by a stone bridge 492 ft. long, and a suspension bridge across the Isle connects Libourne with Fronsac, built on a hill on which in feudal times stood a powerful fortress. Libourne is regularly built. The Gothic church, restored in the 19th century, has a stone spire 232 ft. high. On the quay there is a machicolated clock-tower which is a survival of the ramparts of the 14th century; and the town-house, containing a small museum and a library, is a quaint relic of the 16th century. There is a statue of the Duc Decazes, who was born in the neighbourhood. The sub-prefecture, tribunals of first instance and of commerce, and a communal college are among the public institutions. The principal articles of commerce are the wines and brandies of the district. Printing and cooperage are among the industries.

Like other sites at the confluence of important rivers, that of Libourne was appropriated at an early period. Under the RomansCondatestood rather more than a mile to the south of the present Libourne; it was destroyed during the troubles of the 5th century. Resuscitated by Charlemagne, it was rebuilt in 1269, under its present name and on the site and plan it still retains, by Roger de Leybourne (of Leybourne in Kent), seneschal of Guienne, acting under the authority of King Edward I. of England. It suffered considerably in the struggles of the French and English for the possession of Guienne in the 14th century.

See R. Guinodie,Hist. de Libourne(2nd ed., 2 vols., Libourne, 1876-1877).

LIBRA(“The Balance”), in astronomy, the 7th sign of the zodiac (q.v.), denoted by the symbol, resembling a pair of scales, probably in allusion to the fact that when the sun enters this part of the ecliptic, at the autumnal equinox, the days and nights are equal. It is also a constellation, not mentioned by Eudoxus or Aratus, but by Manetho (3rd centuryB.C.) and Geminus (1st centuryB.C.), and included by Ptolemy in his 48 asterisms; Ptolemy catalogued 17 stars, Tycho Brahe 10, and Hevelius 20. δLibraeis an Algol (q.v.) variable, the range of magnitude being 5.0 to 6.2, and the period 2 days 7 hrs. 51 min.; and the clusterM. 5 Libraeis a faint globular cluster of which only about one star in eleven is variable.

LIBRARIES.A library (from Lat.liber, book), in the modern sense, is a collection of printed or written literature. As such, it implies an advanced and elaborate civilization. If the term be extended to any considerable collection of written documents, it must be nearly as old as civilization itself. The earliest use to which the invention of inscribed or written signs was put was probably to record important religious and political transactions. These records would naturally be preserved in sacred places, and accordingly the earliest libraries of the world were probably temples, and the earliest librarians priests. And indeed before the extension of the arts of writing and reading the priests were the only persons who could perform such work as,e.g.the compilation of theAnnales Maximi, which was the duty of the pontifices in ancient Rome. The beginnings of literature proper in the shape of ballads and songs may have continued to be conveyed orally only from one generation to another, long after the record of important religious or civil events was regularly committed to writing. The earliest collections of which we know anything, therefore, were collections of archives. Of this character appear to have been such famous collections as that of the Medians at Ecbatana, the Persians at Susa or the hieroglyphic archives of Knossos discovered by A. J. Evans (Scripta Minoa, 1909) of a date synchronizing with the XIIth Egyptian dynasty. It is not until the development of arts and sciences, and the growth of a considerable written literature, and even of a distinct literary class, that we find collections of books which can be called libraries in our modern sense. It is of libraries in the modern sense, and not, except incidentally, of archives that we are to speak.

Ancient Libraries

The researches which have followed the discoveries of P. E. Botta and Sir H. Layard have thrown unexpected light not only upon the history but upon the arts, the sciences and the literatures of the ancient civilizationsAssyria.of Babylonia and Assyria. In all these wondrous revelations no facts are more interesting than those which show the existence of extensive libraries so many ages ago, and none are more eloquent of the elaborateness of these forgotten civilizations. In the course of his excavations at Nineveh in 1850, Layard came upon some chambers in the south-west palace, the floor of which, as well as the adjoining rooms, was covered to the depth of a foot with tablets of clay, covered with cuneiform characters, in many cases so small as to require a magnifying glass. These varied in size from 1 to 12 in. square. A great number of them were broken, as Layard supposed by the falling in of the roof, but as George Smith thought by having fallen from the upper storey, upon which he believed the collection to have been placed. These tablets formed the library of the great monarch Assur-bani-pal—the Sardanapalus of the Greeks—the greatest patron of literature amongst the Assyrians. It is estimated that this library consisted of some ten thousand distinct works and documents, some of the works extending over several tablets. The tablets appear to have been methodically arranged and catalogued, and the library seems to have been thrown open for the general use of the king’s subjects.1A great portion of this library has already been brought to England and deposited in the British museum, but it is calculated that there still remain some 20,000 fragments to be gathered up. For further details as to Assyrian libraries, and the still earlier Babylonian libraries at Tello, the ancient Lagash, and at Niffer, the ancient Nippur, from which the Assyrians drew their science and literature, seeBabyloniaandNippur.

Of the libraries of ancient Egypt our knowledge is scattered and imperfect, but at a time extending to more than 6000 years ago we find numerous scribes of many classes who recorded official events in the life of their royal mastersAncient Egyptian Libraries.or details of their domestic affairs and business transactions. Besides this official literature we possess examples of many commentaries on the sacerdotal books, as well as historical treatises, works on moral philosophy and proverbial wisdom, science, collections of medical receipts as well as a great variety of popular novels and humoristic pieces. At an early date Heliopolis was a literary centre of great importance with culture akin to the Babylonian. Attached to every temple were professional scribes whose function was partly religious and partly scientific. The sacred books of Thoth constituted as it were a complete encyclopaedia of religion and science, and on these books was gradually accumulated an immense mass of exposition and commentary. We possess a record relating to “the land of the collected works [library] of Khufu,” a monarch of the IVth dynasty, and a similar inscription relating to the library of Khafra, the builder of the second pyramid. At Edfuthe library was a small chamber in the temple, on the wall of which is a list of books, among them a manual of Egyptian geography (Brugsch,History of Egypt, 1881, i. 240). The exact position of Akhenaten’s library (or archives) of clay tablets is known and the name of the room has been read on the books of which it has been built. A library of charred books has been found at Mendes (Egypt Expl. Fund,Two Hieroglyphic Papyri), and we have references to temple libraries in the Silsileh “Nile” stelae and perhaps in the great Harris papyri. The most famous of the Egyptian libraries is that of King Osymandyas, described by Diodorus Siculus, who relates that it bore an inscription which he renders by the Greek wordsΨΥΧΗΣ ΙΑΤΡΕΙΟΝ“the Dispensary of the Soul.” Osymandyas has been identified with the great king Rameses II. (1300-1236B.C.) and the seat of the library is supposed to have been the Ramessaeum at Western Thebes. Amen-em-hant was the name of one of the directors of the Theban libraries. Papyri from the palace, of a later date, have been discovered by Professor W. F. Flinders Petrie. At Thebes the scribes of the “Foreign Office” are depicted at work in a room which was perhaps rather an office than a library. The famous Tel-el-Amarna tablets (1383-1365B.C.) were stored in “the place of the records of the King.” There were record offices attached to the granary and treasury departments and we know of a school or college for the reproduction of books, which were kept in boxes and in jars. According to Eustathius there was a great collection at Memphis. A heavy blow was dealt to the old Egyptian literature by the Persian invasion, and many books were carried away by the conquerors. The Egyptians were only delivered from the yoke of Persia to succumb to that of Greece and Rome and henceforward their civilization was dominated by foreign influences. Of the Greek libraries under the Ptolemies we shall speak a little further on.

Of the libraries of ancient Greece we have very little knowledge, and such knowledge as we possess comes to us for the most part from late compilers. Amongst those who are known to have collected books are Pisistratus,Greece.Polycrates of Samos, Euclid the Athenian, Nicocrates of Cyprus, Euripides and Aristotle (Athenaeus i. 4). At Cnidus there is said to have been a special collection of works upon medicine. Pisistratus is reported to have been the first of the Greeks who collected books on a large scale. Aulus Gellius, indeed, tells us, in language perhaps “not well suited to the 6th centuryB.C.,”2that he was the first to establish a public library. The authority of Aulus Gellius is hardly sufficient to secure credit for the story that this library was carried away into Persia by Xerxes and subsequently restored to the Athenians by Seleucus Nicator. Plato is known to have been a collector; and Xenophon tells us of the library of Euthydemus. The library of Aristotle was bequeathed by him to his disciple Theophrastus, and by Theophrastus to Neleus, who carried it to Scepsis, where it is said to have been concealed underground to avoid the literary cupidity of the kings of Pergamum. Its subsequent fate has given rise to much controversy, but, according to Strabo (xiii. pp. 608, 609), it was sold to Apellicon of Teos, who carried it to Athens, where after Apellicon’s death it fell a prey to the conqueror Sulla, and was transported by him to Rome. The story told by Athenaeus (i. 4) is that the library of Neleus was purchased by Ptolemy Philadelphus. The names of a few other libraries in Greece are barely known to us from inscriptions; of their character and contents we know nothing. If, indeed, we are to trust Strabo entirely, we must believe that Aristotle was the first person who collected a library, and that he communicated the taste for collecting to the sovereigns of Egypt. It is at all events certain that the libraries of Alexandria were the most important as theyAlexandria.were the most celebrated of the ancient world. Under the enlightened rule of the Ptolemies a society of scholars and men of science was attracted to their capital. It seems pretty certain that Ptolemy Soter had already begun to collect books, but it was in the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus that the libraries were properly organized and established in separate buildings. Ptolemy Philadelphus sent into every part of Greece and Asia to secure the most valuable works, and no exertions or expense were spared in enriching the collections. Ptolemy Euergetes, his successor, is said to have caused all books brought into Egypt by foreigners to be seized for the benefit of the library, while the owners had to be content with receiving copies of them in exchange. Nor did the Alexandrian scholars exhibit the usual Hellenic exclusiveness, and many of the treasures of Egyptian and even of Hebrew literature were by their means translated into Greek. There were two libraries at Alexandria; the larger, in the Brucheum quarter, was in connexion with the Museum, a sort of academy, while the smaller was placed in the Serapeum. The number of volumes in these libraries was very large, although it is difficult to attain any certainty as to the real numbers amongst the widely varying accounts. According to a scholium of Tzetzes, who appears to draw his information from the authority of Callimachus and Eratosthenes, who had been librarians at Alexandria, there were 42,800 vols. or rolls in the Serapeum and 490,000 in the Brucheum.3This enumeration seems to refer to the librarianship of Callimachus himself under Ptolemy Euergetes. In any case the figures agree tolerably well with those given by Aulus Gellius4(700,000) and Seneca5(400,000). It should be observed that, as the ancient roll or volume usually contained a much smaller quantity of matter than a modern book—so that,e.g.the history of Herodotus might form nine “books” or volumes, and theIliadof Homer twenty-four—these numbers must be discounted for the purposes of comparison with modern collections. The series of the first five librarians at Alexandria appears to be pretty well established as follows: Zenodotus, Callimachus, Eratosthenes, Apollonius and Aristophanes; and their activity covers a period of about a century. The first experiments in bibliography appear to have been made in producing catalogues of the Alexandrian libraries. Amongst other lists, two catalogues were prepared by order of Ptolemy Philadelphus, one of the tragedies, the other of the comedies contained in the collections. TheΠίνακεςof Callimachus formed a catalogue of all the principal books arranged in 120 classes. When Caesar set fire to the fleet in the harbour of Alexandria, the flames accidentally extended to the larger library of the Brucheum, and it was destroyed.6Antony endeavoured to repair the loss by presenting to Cleopatra the library from Pergamum. This was very probably placed in the Brucheum, as this continued to be the literary quarter of Alexandria until the time of Aurelian. Thenceforward the Serapeum became the principal library. The usual statement that from the date of the restoration of the Brucheum under Cleopatra the libraries continued in a flourishing condition until they were destroyed after the conquest of Alexandria by the Saracens inA.D.640 can hardly be supported. It is very possible that one of the libraries perished when the Brucheum quarter was destroyed by Aurelian,A.D.273. In 389 or 391 an edict of Theodosius ordered the destruction of the Serapeum, and its books were pillaged by the Christians. When we take into account the disordered condition of the times, and the neglect into which literature and science had fallen, there can be little difficulty in believing that there were but few books left to be destroyed by the soldiers of Amru. The familiar anecdote of the caliph’s message to his general rests mainly upon the evidence of Abulfaraj, so that we may be tempted to agree with Gibbon that the report of a stranger who wrote at the end of six hundred years is overbalanced by the silence of earlier and native annalists. It is, however, so far from easy to settle the question that a cloud of names could easily be cited upon either side, while some of the most careful inquirers confess the difficulty of a decision7(seeAlexandria, III.).

The magnificence and renown of the libraries of the Ptolemies excited the rivalry of the kings of Pergamum, who vied with the Egyptian rulers in their encouragement of literature. TheGerman researches in the acropolis of Pergamum between 1878Pergamum.and 1886 revealed four rooms which had originally been appropriated to the library (Alex. Conze,Die pergamen. Bibliothek, 1884). Despite the obstacles presented by the embargo placed by the Ptolemies upon the export of papyrus, the library of the Attali attained considerable importance, and, as we have seen, when it was transported to Egypt numbered 200,000 vols. We learn from a notice in Suidas that in 221B.C.Antiochus the Great summoned the poet and grammarian Euphorion of Chalcis to be his librarian.

The early Romans were far too warlike and practical a people to devote much attention to literature, and it is not until the last century of the republic that we hear of libraries in Rome. The collections of Carthage, which fell intoRome.their hands when Scipio sacked that city (146B.C.), had no attractions for them; and with the exception of the writings of Mago upon agriculture, which the senate reserved for translation into Latin, they bestowed all the books upon the kinglets of Africa (Pliny,H.N.xviii. 5). It is in accordance with the military character of the Romans that the first considerable collections of which we hear in Rome were brought there as the spoils of war. The first of these was that brought by Aemilius Paulus from Macedonia after the conquest of Perseus (167B.C.). The library of the conquered monarch was all that he reserved from the prizes of victory for himself and his sons, who were fond of letters. Next came the library of Apellicon the Teian, brought from Athens by Sulla (86B.C.). This passed at his death into the hands of his son, but of its later history nothing is known. The rich stores of literature brought home by Lucullus from his eastern conquests (about 67B.C.) were freely thrown open to his friends and to men of letters. Accordingly his library and the neighbouring walks were much resorted to, especially by Greeks. It was now becoming fashionable for rich men to furnish their libraries well, and the fashion prevailed until it became the subject of Seneca’s scorn and Lucian’s wit. The zeal of Cicero and Atticus in adding to their collections is well known to every reader of the classics. Tyrannion is said to have had 30,000 vols. of his own; and that M. Terentius Varro had large collections we may infer from Cicero’s writing to him: “Si hortum in bibliotheca habes, nihil deerit.” Not to prolong the list of private collectors, Serenus Sammonicus is said to have left to his pupil the young Gordian no less than 62,000 vols. Amongst the numerous projects entertained by Caesar was that of presenting Rome with public libraries, though it is doubtful whether any steps were actually taken towards its execution. The task of collecting and arranging the books was entrusted to Varro. This commission, as well as his own fondness for books, may have led Varro to write the book upon libraries of which a few words only have come down to us, preserved by a grammarian. The honour of being the first actually to dedicate a library to the public is said by Pliny and Ovid to have fallen to G. Asinius Pollio, who erected a library in the Atrium Libertatis on Mount Aventine, defraying the cost from the spoils of his Illyrian campaign. The library of Pollio was followed by the public libraries established by Augustus. That emperor, who did so much for the embellishment of the city, erected two libraries, the Octavian and the Palatine. The former was founded (33B.C.) in honour of his sister, and was placed in the Porticus Octaviae, a magnificent structure, the lower part of which served as a promenade, while the upper part contained the library. The charge of the books was committed to C. Melissus. The other library formed by Augustus was attached to the temple of Apollo on the Palatine hill, and appears from inscriptions to have consisted of two departments, a Greek and a Latin one, which seem to have been separately administered. The charge of the Palatine collections was given to Pompeius Macer, who was succeeded by Julius Hyginus, the grammarian and friend of Ovid. The Octavian library perished in the fire which raged at Rome for three days in the reign of Titus. The Palatine was, at all events in great part, destroyed by fire in the reign of Commodus. The story that its collections were destroyed by order of Pope Gregory the Great in the 6th century is now generally rejected. The successors of Augustus, though they did not equal him in their patronage of learning, maintained the tradition of forming libraries. Tiberius, his immediate successor, established one in his splendid house on the Palatine, to which Gellius refers as the “Tiberian library,” and Suetonius relates that he caused the writings and images of his favourite Greek poets to be placed in the public libraries. Vespasian established a library in the Temple of Peace erected after the burning of the city under Nero. Domitian restored the libraries which had been destroyed in the same conflagration, procuring books from every quarter, and even sending to Alexandria to have copies made. He is also said to have founded the Capitoline library, though others give the credit to Hadrian. The most famous and important of the imperial libraries, however, was that created by Ulpius Trajanus, known as the Ulpian library, which was first established in the Forum of Trajan, but was afterwards removed to the baths of Diocletian. In this library were deposited by Trajan the “libri lintei” and “libri elephantini,” upon which the senatus consulta and other transactions relating to the emperors were written. The library of Domitian, which had been destroyed by fire in the reign of Commodus, was restored by Gordian, who added to it the books bequeathed to him by Serenus Sammonicus. Altogether in the 4th century there are said to have been twenty-eight public libraries in Rome.

Nor were public libraries confined to Rome. We possess records of at least 24 places in Italy, the Grecian provinces, Asia Minor, Cyprus and Africa in which libraries had been established, most of them attached to temples,Roman provincial libraries.usually through the liberality of generous individuals. The library which the younger Pliny dedicated to his townsmen at Comum cost a million sesterces and he contributed a large sum to the support of a library at Milan. Hadrian established one at Athens, described by Pausanias, and recently identified with a building called the Stoa of Hadrian, which shows a striking similarity with the precinct of Athena at Pergamum. Strabo mentions a library at Smyrna; Aulus Gellius one at Patrae and another at Tibur from which books could be borrowed. Recent discoveries at Ephesus in Asia Minor and Timegad in Algeria have furnished precise information as to the structural plan of these buildings. The library at Ephesus was founded by T. Julius Aquila Polemaeanus in memory of his father, pro-consul of Asia in the time of Trajan, aboutA.D.106-107. The library at Timegad was established at a cost of 400,000 sesterces by M. Julius Quintianus Flavius Rogatianus, who probably lived in the 3rd century (R. Cagnat, “Les Bibliothèques municipales dans l’Empire Romain,” 1906,Mém. de l’Acad. des Insc., tom. xxxviii. pt. 1). At Ephesus the light came through a circular opening in the roof; the library at Timegad greatly resembles that discovered at Pompeii and possesses a system of book stores. All these buildings followed the same general plan, consisting of a reading-room and more or less ample book stores; the former was either rectangular or semi-circular in shape and was approached under a stately portico and colonnade. In a niche facing the entrance a statue was always erected; that formerly at Pergamum—a figure of Minerva—is now preserved at Berlin. From a well-known line of Juvenal (Sat.iii. 219) we may assume that a statue of the goddess was usually placed in libraries. The reading-room was also ornamented with busts or life-sized images of celebrated writers. The portraits or authors were also painted on medallions on the presses (armaria) in which the books or rolls were preserved as in the library of Isidore of Seville; sometimes these medallions decorated the walls, as in a private library discovered by Lanciani in 1883 at Rome (Ancient Rome, 1888, p. 193). Movable seats, known to us by pictorial representations, were in use. The books were classified, and the presses (framed of precious woods and highly ornamented) were numbered to facilitate reference from the catalogues. A private library discovered at Herculaneum contained 1756 MSS. placed on shelves round the room to a height of about 6 ft. with a central press. In the public rooms some of the books were arrangedin the reading-room and some in the adjacent book stores. The Christian libraries of later foundation closely followed the classical prototypes not only in their structure but also in smaller details. The general appearance of a Roman library is preserved in the library of the Vatican fitted up by Sextus V. in 1587 with painted presses, busts and antique vases.

As the number of libraries in Rome increased, the librarian, who was generally a slave or freedman, became a recognized public functionary. The names of several librarians are preserved to us in inscriptions, including that of C. Hymenaeus, who appears to have fulfilled the double function of physician and librarian to Augustus. The general superintendence of the public libraries was committed to a special official. Thus from Nero to Trajan, Dionysius, an Alexandrian rhetorician, discharged this function. Under Hadrian it was entrusted to his former tutor C. Julius Vestinus, who afterwards became administrator of the Museum at Alexandria.

When the seat of empire was removed by Constantine to his new capital upon the Bosporus, the emperor established a collection there, in which Christian literature was probably admitted for the first time into an imperialConstantinople.library. Diligent search was made after the Christian books which had been doomed to destruction by Diocletian. Even at the death of Constantine, however, the number of books which had been brought together amounted only to 6900. The smallness of the number, it has been suggested, seems to show that Constantine’s library was mainly intended as a repository of Christian literature. However this may be, the collection was greatly enlarged by some of Constantine’s successors, especially by Julian and Theodosius, at whose death it is said to have increased to 100,000 vols. Julian, himself a close student and voluminous writer, though he did his best to discourage learning among the Christians, and to destroy their libraries, not only augmented the library at Constantinople, but founded others, including one at Nisibis, which was soon afterwards destroyed by fire. From the Theodosian code we learn that in the time of that emperor a staff of seven copyists was attached to the library at Constantinople under the direction of the librarian. The library was burnt under the emperor Zeno in 477, but was again restored.

Meanwhile, as Christianity made its way and a distinctively Christian literature grew up, the institution of libraries became part of the ecclesiastical organization. Bishop Alexander (d.A.D.250) established a church library at Jerusalem, and it became the rule to attach to every church a collection necessary for the inculcation of Christian doctrine. There were libraries at Cirta, at Constantinople and at Rome. The basilica of St Lawrence at Rome contained a library orarchivumfounded by Pope Damasus at the end of the 4th century. Most of these collections were housed in the sacred edifices and consisted largely of copies of the Holy Scriptures, liturgical volumes and works of devotion. They also included theGesta MartyrumandMatriculae Pauperumand official correspondence. Many of the basilicas had the apse subdivided into three smaller hemicycles, one of which contained the library (Lanciani, op. cit. p. 187). The largest of these libraries, that founded by Pamphilus (d.A.D.309) at Caesarea, and said to have been increased by Eusebius, the historian of the church, to 30,000 vols., is frequently mentioned by St Jerome. St Augustine bequeathed his collection to the library of the church at Hippo, which was fortunate enough to escape destruction at the hands of the Vandals. The hermit communities of the Egyptian deserts formed organizations which developed into the later monastic orders of Western Europe and the accumulation of books for the brethren was one of their cares.

The removal of the capital to Byzantium was in its result a serious blow to literature. Henceforward the science and learning of the East and West were divorced. The libraries of Rome ceased to collect the writings of the Greeks, while the Greek libraries had never cared much to collect Latin literature. The influence of the church became increasingly hostile to the study of pagan letters. The repeated irruptions of the barbarians soon swept the old learning and libraries alike from the soil of Italy. With the close of the Western empire in 476 the ancient history of libraries may be said to cease.

Medieval Period

During the first few centuries after the fall of the Western empire, literary activity at Constantinople had fallen to its lowest ebb. In the West, amidst the general neglect of learning and literature, the collecting of books,Gaul.though not wholly forgotten, was cared for by few. Sidonius Apollinaris tells us of the libraries of several private collectors in Gaul. Publius Consentius possessed a library at his villa near Narbonne which was due to the labour of three generations. The most notable of these appears to have been the prefect Tonantius Ferreolus, who had formed in his villa of Prusiana, near Nîmes, a collection which his friend playfully compares to that of Alexandria. The Goths, who had been introduced to the Scriptures in their own language by Ulfilas in the 4th century, began to pay some attention to Latin literature. Cassiodorus, the favourite minister of Theodoric, was a collector as well as an author, and on giving up the cares of government retired to a monastery which he founded in Calabria, where he employed his monks in the transcription of books.

Henceforward the charge of books as well as of education fell more and more exclusively into the hands of the church. While the old schools of the rhetoricians died out new monasteries arose everywhere. Knowledge was no longer pursued for its own sake, but became subsidiary to religious and theological teaching. The proscription of the old classical literature, which is symbolized in the fable of the destruction of the Palatine library by Gregory the Great, was only too effectual. The Gregorian tradition of opposition to pagan learning long continued to dominate the literary pursuits of the monastic orders and the labours of the scriptorium.

During the 6th and 7th centuries the learning which had been driven from the Continent took refuge in the British Islands, where it was removed from the political disturbances of the mainland. In the Irish monasteries during thisAlcuin.period there appear to have been many books, and the Venerable Bede was superior to any scholar of his age. Theodore of Tarsus brought a considerable number of books to Canterbury from Rome in the 7th century, including several Greek authors. The library of York, which was founded by Archbishop Egbert, was almost more famous than that of Canterbury. The verses are well known in which Alcuin describes the extensive library under his charge, and the long list of authors whom he enumerates is superior to that of any other library possessed by either England or France in the 12th century, when it was unhappily burnt. The inroads of the Northmen in the 9th and 10th centuries had been fatal to the monastic libraries on both sides of the channel. It was from York that Alcuin came to Charlemagne to superintend the school attached to his palace; and it was doubtless inspired by Alcuin that Charles issued the memorable document which enjoined that in the bishoprics and monasteries within his realm care should be taken that there shall be not only a regular manner of life, but also the study of letters. When Alcuin finally retired from the court to the abbacy of Tours, there to carry out his own theory of monastic discipline and instruction, he wrote to Charles for leave to send to York for copies of the books of which they had so much need at Tours. While Alcuin thus increased the library at Tours,Charlemagne.Charlemagne enlarged that at Fulda, which had been founded in 774, and which all through the middle ages stood in great respect. Lupus Servatus, a pupil of Hrabanus Maurus at Fulda, and afterwards abbot of Ferrières, was a devoted student of the classics and a great collector of books. His correspondence illustrates the difficulties which then attended the study of literature through the paucity and dearness of books, the declining care for learning, and the increasing troubles of the time. Nor were private collections of books altogether wanting during the period in which Charlemagne and his successors laboured to restore the lost traditions ofliberal education and literature. Pepin le Bref had indeed met with scanty response to the request for books which he addressed to the pontiff Paul I. Charlemagne, however, collected a considerable number of choice books for his private use in two places. Although these collections were dispersed at his death, his son Louis formed a library which continued to exist under Charles the Bald. About the same time Everard, count of Friuli, formed a considerable collection which he bequeathed to a monastery. But the greatest private collector of the middle ages was doubtless Gerbert, Pope Sylvester II., who showed the utmost zeal and spent large sums in collecting books, not only in Rome and Italy, but from Germany, Belgium and even from Spain.

The hopes of a revival of secular literature fell with the decline of the schools established by Charles and his successors. The knowledge of letters remained the prerogative of the church, and for the next four or five centuries theSt. Benedict.collecting and multiplication of books were almost entirely confined to the monasteries. Several of the greater orders made these an express duty; this was especially the case with the Benedictines. It was the first care of St Benedict, we are told, that in each newly founded monastery there should be a library, “et velut curia quaedam illustrium auctorum.” Monte Cassino became the starting-point of a long line of institutions which were destined to be the centres of religion and of literature. It must indeed be remembered that literature in the sense of St Benedict meant Biblical and theological works, the lives of the saints and martyrs, and the lives and writings of the fathers. Of the reformed Benedictine orders the Carthusians and the Cistercians were those most devoted to literary pursuits. The abbeys of Fleury, of Melk and of St Gall were remarkable for the splendour of their libraries. In a later age the labours of the congregation of St Maur form one of the most striking chapters in the history of learning. The Augustinians and the Dominicans rank next to the Benedictines in their care for literature. The libraries of St Geneviève and St Victor, belonging to the former, were amongst the largest of the monastic collections. Although their poverty might seem to put them at a disadvantage as collectors, the mendicant orders cultivated literature with much assiduity, and were closely connected with the intellectual movement to which the universities owed their rise. In England Richard of Bury praises them for their extraordinary diligence in collecting books. Sir Richard Whittington built a large library for the Grey Friars in London, and they possessed considerable libraries at Oxford.

It would be impossible to attempt here an account of all the libraries established by the monastic orders. We must be content to enumerate a few of the most eminent.

In Italy Monte Cassino is a striking example of the dangers and vicissitudes to which monastic collections were exposed. Ruined by the Lombards in the 6th century, the monastery was rebuilt and a library established, toMonastic libraries.fall a prey to Saracens and to fire in the 9th. The collection then reformed survived many other chances and changes, and still exists. Boccaccio gives a melancholy description of its condition in his day. It affords a conspicuous example of monastic industry in the transcription not only of theological but also of classical works. The library of Bobbio, which owed its existence to Irish monks, was famous for its palimpsests. The collection, of which a catalogue of the 10th century is given by Muratori (Antiq. Ital. Med. Aev.iii. 817-824), was mainly transferred to the Ambrosian library at Milan. Of the library of Pomposia, near Ravenna, Montfaucon has printed a catalogue dating from the 11th century (Diarium Italicum, chap. xxii.).

Of the monastic libraries of France the principal were those of Fleury, of Cluny, of St Riquier and of Corbie. At Fleury Abbot Macharius in 1146 imposed a contribution for library purposes upon the officers of the community and its dependencies, an example which was followed elsewhere. After many vicissitudes, its MSS., numbering 238, were deposited in 1793 in the town library of Orleans. The library of St Riquier in the time of Louis the Pious contained 256 MSS., with over 500 works. Of the collection at Corbie in Picardy we have also catalogues dating from the 12th and from the 17th centuries. Corbie was famous for the industry of its transcribers, and appears to have stood in active literary intercourse with other monasteries. In 1638, 400 of its choicest manuscripts were removed to St Germain-des-Prés. The remainder were removed after 1794, partly to the national library at Paris, partly to the town library of Amiens.

The chief monastic libraries of Germany were at Fulda, Corvey, Reichenau and Sponheim. The library at Fulda owed much to Charlemagne and to its abbot Hrabanus Maurus. Under Abbot Sturmius four hundred monks were hired as copyists. In 1561 the collection numbered 774 volumes. The library of Corvey on the Weser, after being despoiled of some of its treasures in the Reformation age, was presented to the university of Marburg in 1811. It then contained 109 vols., with 400 or 500 titles. The library of Reichenau, of which several catalogues are extant, fell a prey to fire and neglect, and its ruin was consummated by the Thirty Years’ War. The library of Sponheim owes its great renown to John Tritheim, who was abbot at the close of the 15th century. He found it reduced to 10 vols., and left it with upwards of 2000 at his retirement. The library at St Gall, formed as early as 816 by Gozbert, its second abbot, still exists.

In England the principal collections were those of Canterbury, York, Wearmouth, Jarrow, Whitby, Glastonbury, Croyland, Peterborough and Durham. Of the library of the monastery of Christ Church, Canterbury, originallyEngland.founded by Augustine and Theodore, and restored by Lanfranc and Anselm, a catalogue has been preserved dating from the 13th or 14th century, and containing 698 volumes, with about 3000 works. Bennet Biscop, the first abbot of Wearmouth, made five journeys to Rome, and on each occasion returned with a store of books for the library. It was destroyed by the Danes about 867. Of the library at Whitby there is a catalogue dating from the 12th century. The catalogue of Glastonbury has been printed by Hearne in his edition of John of Glastonbury. When the library of Croyland perished by fire in 1091 it contained about 700 vols. The library at Peterborough was also rich; from a catalogue of about the end of the 14th century it had 344 vols., with nearly 1700 titles. The catalogues of the library at the monastery of Durham have been printed by the Surtees Society, and form an interesting series. These catalogues with many others8afford abundant evidence of the limited character of the monkish collections, whether we look at the number of their volumes or at the nature of their contents. The scriptoria were manufactories of books and not centres of learning. That in spite of the labours of so many transcribers the costliness and scarcity of books remained so great may have been partly, but cannot have been wholly, due to the scarcity of writing materials. It may be suspected that indolence and carelessness were the rule in most monasteries, and that but few of the monks keenly realized the whole force of the sentiment expressed by one of their number in the 12th century—“Claustrum sine armario quasi castrum sine armamentario.” Nevertheless it must beadmitted that to the labours of the monastic transcribers we are indebted for the preservation of Latin literature.

The subject of the evolution of the arrangement of library rooms and fittings as gradually developed throughout medieval Europe should not be passed over.9The real origin of library organization in the Christian world, one mayThe development of library arrangements.almost say the origin of modern library methods, began with the rule of St Benedict early in the 6th century. In the 48th chapter the monks were ordered to borrow a book apiece and to read it straight through. There was no special apartment for the books in the primitive Benedictine house. After the books became too numerous to be kept in the church they were preserved inarmaria, or chests, in the cloister; hence the wordarmarius, the Benedictine librarian, who at first joined with it the office of precentor. The Benedictine regulations were developed in the stricter observances of the Cluniacs, which provided for a kind of annual report and stocktaking. The Carthusians were perhaps the first to lend books away from the convent; and the Cistercians to possess a separate library official as well as a room specially devoted to books. The observances of the Augustinians contained rules for the binding, repairing, cataloguing and arranging the books by the librarian, as well as a prescription of the exact kind of chest to be used. Among the Premonstratensians or Reformed Augustinians, it was one of the duties of the librarian to provide for the borrowing of books elsewhere for the use of the monks. The Mendicant Friars found books so necessary that at last Richard de Bury tells us with some exaggeration that their libraries exceeded all others. Many volumes still exist which belonged to the library at Assisi, the parent house of the Franciscans, of which a catalogue was drawn up in 1381. No authentic monastic bookcase can now be found; the doubtful example shown at Bayeux probably contained ecclesiastical utensils. At the Augustinian priory at Barnwell the presses were lined with wood to keep out the damp and were partitioned off both vertically and horizontally. Sometimes there were recesses in the walls of the cloisters fitted with shelves and closed with a door. These recesses developed into a small windowless room in the Cistercian houses. At Clairvaux, Kirkstall, Fountains, Tintern, Netley and elsewhere this small chamber was placed between the chapter-house and the transept of the church. At Meaux in Holderness the books were lodged on shelves against the walls and even over the door of such a chamber. In many houses the treasury or spendiment contained two classes of books—one for the monks generally, others more closely guarded. A press near the infirmary contained books used by the reader in the refectory. By the end of the 15th century the larger monasteries became possessed of many volumes and found themselves obliged to store the books, hitherto placed in various parts of the building, in a separate apartment. We now find libraries being specially built at Canterbury, Durham, Citeaux, Clairvaux and elsewhere, and with this specialization there grew up increased liberality in the use of books and learned strangers were admitted. Even at an early date students were permitted to borrow from the Benedictines at St Germain-des-Prés at Paris, of which a later foundation owned in 1513 a noble library erected over the south wall of the cloister, and enlarged and made very accessible to the outer world in the 17th and 18th centuries. The methods and fittings of college libraries of early foundation closely resembled those of the monastic libraries. There was in both the annual giving out and inspection of what we would now call the lending department for students; while the books, fastened by chains—a kind of reference department kept in the library chamber for the common use of the fellows—followed a similar system in monastic institutions. By the 15th century collegiate and monastic libraries were on the same plan, with the separate room containing books placed on their sides on desks or lecterns, to which they were attached by chains to a horizontal bar. As the books increased the accommodation was augmented by one or two shelves erected above the desks. The library at Cesena in North Italy may still be seen in its original condition. The Laurentian library at Florence was designed by Michelangelo on the monastic model. Another good example of the old form may be seen, in the library of Merton College at Oxford, a long narrow room with bookcases standing between the windows at right angles to the walls. In the chaining system one end was attached to the wooden cover of the book while the other ran freely on a bar fixed by a method of double locks to the front of the shelf or desk on which the book rested. The fore edges of the volumes faced the reader. The seat and shelf were sometimes combined. Low cases were subsequently introduced between the higher cases, and the seat replaced by a step. Shelf lists were placed at the end of each case. There were no chains in the library of the Escorial, erected in 1584, which showed for the first time bookcases placed against the walls. Although chains were no longer part of the appliances in the newly erected libraries they continued to be used and were ordered in bequests in England down to the early part of the 18th century. Triple desks and revolving lecterns, raised by a wooden screw, formed part of the library furniture. The English cathedral libraries were fashioned after the same principle. The old methods were fully reproduced in the fittings at Westminster, erected at a late date. Here we may see books on shelves against the walls as well as in cases at right angles to the walls; the desk-like shelves for the chained volumes (no longer in existence) have a slot in which the chains could be suspended, and are hinged to allow access to shelves below. An ornamental wooden tablet at the end of each case is a survival of the old shelf list. By the end of the 17th century the type of the public library developed from collegiate and monastic prototypes, became fixed as it were throughout Europe (H. R. Tedder, “Evolution of the Public Library,” inTrans. of 2nd Int. Library Conference, 1897, 1898).

Back to Index Next