Chapter IV (1)

THE SOURCES FOR THE PERIOD 1100–1250 A. D.

_INTRODUCTION_

To gain anything approaching complete understanding of the status of the geographical lore in Western Europe during the Crusading period, one would be obliged to undertake the colossal task of ransacking practically all the available literature of this age. From an examination of selected specimens of various types of document, however, we may arrive at a fairly correct conception of the kind of geographical thought and information that was current. Certainly our view of the subject would not be materially modified by the further accumulation of illustrative examples. We must, none the less, look to a large variety of sources: to the writings of theologians, philosophers, historians, chroniclers, and topographers; to maps, poetry, romances, and even to works of art. These show us what the sedentary man of the Middle Ages could learn of geography through reading and study. Pilgrim narratives, letters, commercial and diplomatic treaties, and many other miscellaneous documents throw light upon the actual extent of travel during this century and a half.

Writers of the Middle Ages did not specialize as we do at the present day. They treated subjects of the most diverse nature within the pages of the same book. We shall group their productions into a few broad categories: philosophical and theological writings that were read for the most part by the scholar and churchman; translations from Arabic scientific treatises and other works written under Arabic influence; encyclopedic compilations or attempts to encompass the whole range of human learning, also for the scholar, and popularizations of these in prose and verse for the intelligent layman; histories and chronicles; pilgrim narratives and other records of travel; topographical works; and, finally, maps.

Other more instructive classifications might well be made. One in which the works were grouped according to the type of thought of which each is the expression might bring out the conflicting intellectual crosscurrents of the age. In such a classification the great differentiation could be emphasized between writers bound by respect for authority and writers of originality and independence; between those who interpreted the words of Scripture literally, those who interpreted them allegorically, and those who went so far as to neglect or to doubt them. The classification which follows, based upon the purposes which the various groups of writings were intended to serve, is merely one of convenience.

_THEOLOGICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL WORKS_

The distinction between theology, philosophy, and the physical and natural sciences was not sharply drawn during the earlier Middle Ages. Only after the ninth century did the tendency to mark off theology and philosophy as separate spheres of thought become gradually evident,[368] and it remained for a much later age to set off the physical and natural sciences from philosophy.

THEOLOGICAL WORKS

Though not much geography is found in the strictly theological writings of our period, those portions of them which deal with the Creation embody cosmogonic and cosmographic speculations which have a geographic character for reasons that have already been explained.[369] Many of the philosophical writings, on the other hand, are rich in passages of geographical interest; for the physical geography, like the natural history, of the Middle Ages was the province of the philosopher.

_Peter Abelard_

Among the outstanding theologians of the twelfth century was Peter Abelard (1079–1142), whose tragic history is well remembered. In his _Expositio in hexaemeron_, _Sermones_, and more famous _Sic et non_ we find a few scattered observations of a geographical character. Though Abelard’s fame rests upon the keenness of his reasoning and the destructive brilliance of his dialectic, his position when dealing with the Works of the Six Days was that of mystic.[370] We shall have occasion to see how the geographical passages from his works reveal a love of elaborate allegory.

_Hugh of St. Victor_

The monastic school of St. Victor in Paris was preëminently a center of twelfth-century mysticism.[371] A leading figure here was Hugh of St. Victor, who held the direction of studies after about the year 1125 and who enjoyed during his lifetime (he died in 1141) a great reputation for learning in things divine.[372] Among Hugh’s writings we find _Adnotationes elucidatoriae in Pentateuchon_, containing speculations on the Creation, and the curious treatises _De arca Noë mystica_, _De arca Noë morali_, and _De vanitate mundi_,[373] which display a love of symbolism and include the exposition of a strange theory of the westward course of the tide of civilization.[374]

_Hildegard of Bingen_

Hildegard (1098–1179 or 1180), abbess of a Benedictine convent near Bingen on the Rhine, was another lover of the symbolic. Her mystic exaltation took the form of visions in which were revealed to her the secrets of the universe. With the knowledge thereby attained she served her fellow man as a prophetess and healer of disease. Besides a series of letters, she wrote three works recording her visions: _Scivias sive visionum ac revelationum libri tres_ (1141–1150), _Liber vitae meritorum_ (1158–1162), and _Liber divinorum operum simplicis hominis_ (1163–1170). She was also probably the author of two treatises, _Subtilitates diversarum naturarum creaturarum_ and _Causae et curae_, which, though not avowedly the record of visions, could hardly have been written except as the result of some form of religious experience.[375] Her “cosmology and physiology,” as Thorndike points out, were none the less in essential conformity with “the then prevalent theories of natural science” although she “displays no little originality in giving a new turn to the familiar concepts.” She does not, however, “evolve any really new principles of nature.”[376]

_Peter Lombard and Peter Comestor_

To turn from the imaginative and visionary writings of Hugh and Hildegard to the more coldly intellectual theology and philosophy of the age, we find in the _Sic et non_ of Abelard the first example of a new method of handling philosophical and theological questions. This so-called didactic method was destined to find its culminating expression in the mighty volumes of Thomas Aquinas. Its essence was to incite discussion by placing in juxtaposition divergent and contradictory Scriptural and patristic texts on the same subject. Abelard did this in the _Sic et non_ without giving interpretations of his own. Peter Lombard (died 1164), who in his _Sententiae_ followed Abelard’s method, usually gave in addition his own views on a subject, though not infrequently the reader was left faced by two or more conflicting theories. It might almost be said that the _Sententiae_ served to standardize the orthodox doctrine of the age. Shortly after Peter Lombard’s death Peter Comestor (the “eater”), at one time dean of the cathedral church in Troyes and lecturer in Paris, produced an extensive treatise entitled _Historia scholastica_. This compilation of commentaries on Scripture enjoyed an immense popularity at a later period, especially towards the close of the thirteenth century.[377] Comestor, like Peter Lombard, represented the more orthodox point of view.

THE SCHOOL OF CHARTRES: ITS INTELLECTUAL INDEPENDENCE

Unusual intellectual independence was displayed during the twelfth century by the philosophical writers of the school of Chartres[378] and by those who came under their influence. Well known early in the eleventh century, this cathedral school had acquired, in the first half of the twelfth, a European reputation, founded on the boldness and originality of its masters and on the widespread influence which they exerted through their pupils and associates.

_Bernard and Theodoric of Chartres_

Two brothers stand out preëminently among them, Bernard and Theodoric (or Thierry). Very little in detail is known about the life of either. Bernard was probably born late in the eleventh century and was chancellor between 1124 and 1126.[379] He enjoyed an immense reputation and was called by John of Salisbury the most perfect Platonist of his century.[380] It seems likely that he died before 1130 and was not the same man as Bernard Sylvester of Tours, with whom he has often been confused.[381]

We know even less of Theodoric, who enjoyed a contemporary fame as great as, if not even greater than, that of his brother. Theodoric was mentioned by a disciple as the foremost philosopher of the whole of Europe.[382] Master of the school (_magister scholae_) in Chartres in 1121, the successor to Gilbert de la Porrée as chancellor in 1141, he produced a large work on the seven liberal arts (the _Heptateuchon_) and a treatise describing the Creation.[383] The latter, entitled _De sex dierum operibus_, was in many respects unique, representing a remarkably rationalistic discussion of a subject in the treatment of which any display of reason or independence almost inevitably was deemed heresy.[384]

_Adelard of Bath; Hermann the Dalmatian; Robert of Retines_

Bernard and Theodoric maintained scholarly connections throughout Western Europe and counted many famous men among their disciples. The Englishman Adelard of Bath[385] belongs to their broader circle, for it is likely that he was acquainted with the Chartres scholars, at least by reputation, and his important work, _Quaestiones naturales_[386] (dating from between 1107 and 1142), shows that he held many ideas in common with the most famous of Bernard’s pupils, William of Conches. In his wide travels[387] and in his translations from the Arabic[388] Adelard exemplifies another phase of the awakening intellectual life of the age, a turning to Moslem literature for new sources of information and inspiration beyond the standard and easily available collections of classical, Scriptural, and patristic authorities.

Among the disciples of Theodoric may also be counted the travelers and translators from the Arabic, Hermann the Dalmatian (or Hermann the Carinthian) and Robert of Retines, to whose translations we shall later have occasion to refer.[389]

_Bernard Sylvester_

Very closely akin in spirit with the scholars of Chartres was Bernard Sylvester, who taught at Tours in the fifth decade of the twelfth century.[390] It has long been a moot point whether or not Bernard Sylvester was the same as Bernard of Chartres. There are very potent arguments in favor of identifying them, among the most convincing being the remarkable manner in which the philosophy of the _De mundi universitate_ (or _Cosmographia turonense_),[391] written by Bernard Sylvester between 1145 and 1148, gives expression to theories which John of Salisbury ascribes to Bernard of Chartres. Yet, despite these extraordinary similarities, the weight of evidence seems opposed to the theory that the two names refer to the same man.[392] In any case, if Bernard Sylvester was not the brother of Theodoric of Chartres, he was acquainted with Theodoric and with the latter’s work, for it was to Theodoric that he dedicated the _De mundi universitate_.

_William of Conches_

Another member of the Chartres group, William of Conches, was a disciple of Bernard of Chartres in his youth. He taught at Chartres probably as early as 1126. Between 1140 and 1150 he acted as tutor to the young Henry and Geoffrey Plantagenet.[393] Hauréau says that William believed that “la philosophie tient subordonnées à ses principes généraux, comme deux sciences subalternes, la théologie et la physique.”[394] His most significant book, the _De philosophia mundi_,[395] throughout exemplifies this attitude and reveals to us a mind deeply interested in physics and natural science for their own sakes and a desire to explain the phenomena of the universe according to natural and observable laws. The rationalism of his philosophy brought him into conflict with the ecclesiastical authorities and necessitated his retracting various opinions late in life.[396] He died either in 1150 or 1154.

ALEXANDER NECKAM

The scholars of the Chartres group formed the intellectual élite of their age. More in keeping with the normal habit of the period than their mode of thought was the manner in which the Englishman Alexander Neckam dealt with matters of natural science. Born in 1157, Neckam had become a professor at the University of Paris by 1180; later in life he returned to England, became abbot of Cirencester in 1213, and died in 1217.[397] His principal works were _De naturis rerum_, in prose, and a verse paraphrase and enlargement of it entitled _Laus sapiencie divine_, or _De laudibus divinae sapientiae_.[398] In these works we see that Neckam, though inspired by a lively curiosity and even by some degree of understanding of experimental and observational science, was on the whole less original and less courageous intellectually than either Theodoric of Chartres or William of Conches. Instead of trying to explain rationally the phenomena of nature as these earlier writers had done, he was nearly always content merely to describe these phenomena as facts and to draw lengthy moral lessons from them.

* * * * *

These are merely a few characteristic representatives of the host of theologians and philosophers of the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries. Their works serve to illustrate widely diverse tendencies of thought: the heretical independence of the scholars of Chartres as contrasted with the mysticism of Hugh of St. Victor, the orthodoxy of Peter Lombard and Peter Comestor, and the cautious inquisitiveness of Alexander Neckam. Though these men differed in mental caliber, their learning was based almost exclusively on the Latin writings of classical and earlier Christian authors, and most of their geographical knowledge was borrowed from the sources we have discussed in Chapters I and II. But our period was also memorable by reason of the influx of a new body of learning destined to bring about profound modifications in the methods of European scholarship and to add materially to the sum total of European knowledge. This new body of learning was made available through translations from the Arabic.

_TRANSLATIONS FROM THE ARABIC; WORKS WRITTEN UNDER ARABIC INFLUENCE;
ARISTOTELIANISM AND ITS OPPONENTS_

The enthusiasm for the work of translation which prevailed during our period foreshadowed a far broader enthusiasm of the same sort that marked the great age of the Renaissance. Only a relatively few scholars, however, were familiar with Greek; and the number of direct translations from the Greek was limited.[399] The men of the Crusading age received the results of Greek scientific investigation primarily through the medium of the Moslems.

We saw in Chapter III how the Moslems had translated certain works of Aristotle, of Ptolemy, and of the Hindus and had themselves composed sundry treatises under Peripatetic, Ptolemaic, and Hindu influences. Many of these Arabic translations, in turn, were converted into Latin by Occidental scholars of our period.[400]

Western interest in Moslem science centered at first on the translation of astronomical and mathematical treatises and somewhat later on Arabic versions of Aristotle. Indirectly through both of these channels important geographical conceptions gained currency in Europe.

ADELARD OF BATH; PETER ALPHONSI

Among the early translators of astronomical and mathematical treatises was Adelard of Bath, whose connections with the school of Chartres we have already mentioned. Through Adelard’s Latin version of the so-called _Khorazmian Tables_[401] of Al-Khwārizmī, made in the year 1126,[402] knowledge of the Hindu conception of a world center, Arin, was introduced into Europe. The _Khorazmian Tables_ had found their way to Spain by the beginning of the eleventh century and were there adapted from the era of Yezdegerd to that of the Hejira by a certain Maslama al-Majrīṭi of Madrid.[403] In addition to Adelard’s version of Maslama’s work, there is reason to believe that the _Khorazmian Tables_ were also put into Latin by Hermann the Dalmatian.[404]

A contemporary of Adelard of Bath was the Jew, Peter Alphonsi[405] (or Petrus Anfusi), who was baptized in 1106 at the age of forty-five and subsequently became an ardent devotee of Christianity. His _Dialogus cum Judeo_ contains references to Arin and a few significant observations on astronomical geography.

JOHN OF SEVILLE; PLATO OF TIVOLI

In 1135 John of Seville (also known as Johannes Hispanensis, or John of Luna) translated Al-Farghānī’s _On the Elements of Astronomy_,[406] a work from which John of Holywood borrowed much of the materials that he incorporated into his _De sphaera_ and which thereby was fated to produce a profound effect on the future development of astronomical geography during the later Middle Ages. Gerard of Cremona also translated the same work.[407]

From about 1140 dates Plato of Tivoli’s version of the _Astronomy_ of Al-Battānī,[408] a close rendering into Latin of Al-Battānī’s chapters on the theory of astronomy but not of the astronomical and geographical tables that followed in the original Arabic. Our interest in the chapters lies in the fact that they contain (Chapter 6) a brief general description of the inhabited earth widely differing from those found in contemporary Latin geographical works.

“MARSEILLES TABLES” AND “TOLEDO TABLES”

Preserved in a twelfth-century manuscript of the Bibliothèque Nationale is a set of astronomical tables for Marseilles dating from 1140, the work of a certain Raymond of Marseilles.[409] The _Canons_, or introductory explanation, of these tables are drawn largely from the astronomical _Canons_ of Az-Zarqalī;[410] the tables are an adaptation for the meridian of Marseilles of the _Toledo Tables_. Both Az-Zarqalī’s _Canons_ and the _Toledo Tables_, with their modifications like the Marseilles set, contained not a little incidental material of importance from the point of view of astronomical geography, including a list of cities with their latitudes and longitudes derived ultimately from Al-Khwārizmī.[411] That this material enjoyed wide popularity during our period and later is proved by the existence of a large number of manuscripts.[412] One of the translations of Az-Zarqualī’s _Canons_ was done by the hand of the famous Gerard of Cremona, as we have already seen in Chapter III.[413]

ROBERT OF RETINES; HERMANN THE DALMATIAN; DANIEL OF MORLEY

It is almost certain that before 1143 the _Astronomy_ of Al-Battānī was again put into Latin, this time by Robert of Retines[414] (or Robert of Chester). We do not, as in the case of Plato of Tivoli’s version, possess the text of this translation, though we have what was probably Robert’s adaptation to the meridian of London of Al-Battānī’s and Az-Zarqalī’s astronomical tables. This adaptation, for 1149–1150, forms a continuation of tables for the meridian of Toledo in 1149.[415] Furthermore, Al-Battānī is cited, and some of the geographical ideas expressed in his _Astronomy_ are reflected, in the as yet unpublished _Liber de essentiis_ of Hermann the Dalmatian, who was a close associate of Robert and a student of Theodoric of Chartres. The _Liber de essentiis_ was written at Béziers in 1143.[416] Robert also adapted Adelard’s _Khorazmian Tables_ to the meridian of London.[417] Another Englishman, Roger of Hereford, was probably the maker of tables for the meridian of Toledo and certainly of a series for Hereford dating from 1178, based on tables for Toledo and Marseilles.[418] Towards the end of the century, still another Englishman, Daniel of Morley, journeyed to Spain in search of Arabic astronomical lore. Here, at Toledo, he came in contact with Gerard of Cremona. On his return to England he took with him “a precious multitude of books” and, “to explain the teaching of Toledo to Bishop John of Norwich” (1175–1200),[419] wrote a work called _De philosophia_, or _Liber de naturis inferiorum et superiorum_, the astronomy of which, as in the case of John of Holywood’s _De sphaera_, was mainly based on the writings of Al-Farghānī.

GERARD OF CREMONA; JOHN OF HOLYWOOD (SACROBOSCO)

At about the same time, Gerard of Cremona produced a short independent treatise, the _Theorica planetarum_,[420] which became a stock text from which later writers borrowed extensively. This is merely a summary of the _Almagest_, produced apparently before Gerard made his famous translation of that great work in 1175,[421] and is of interest to us because it contains an account of methods of transposing astronomical tables to different longitudes. It had certainly been read by the author of the London tables of 1232,[422] a set which, in addition to being of astronomical value, contains a few incidental notes of geographic importance.

The _De sphaera_[423] of John of Holywood (also known as John of Halifax, or John Sacrobosco), dating from the very end of our period, includes citations from Al-Farghānī’s _Astronomy_ as well as from classical authors and was the most influential work in the field of astronomical geography of its century, though the intrinsic value of its contents was not great.

ARISTOTELIANISM INTRODUCED THROUGH ARABIC WORKS

The translators of Arabic mathematical and astronomical works during the twelfth century prepared the way for an event of the first magnitude in the intellectual history of the Middle Ages—the reintroduction of Aristotelian learning into the West.[424] It would lead us far beyond the bounds of this study to try to discuss the immense influence of Aristotelianism on the development of European philosophy and theology in and after the thirteenth century. Something of the geographical content of Aristotle’s writings on physics and natural science, however, was indicated in Chapter I, and it was during the closing years of the twelfth and the beginning of the thirteenth centuries that these works began to gain a hold on European thought. Their influence at this time was for the most part exerted through roundabout channels: probably in some cases through Latin translations of Arabic translations from the original Greek; unquestionably in others through Latin translations of Arabic translations of Syriac translations from the original Greek; and in still others through Latin translations of Arabic commentaries on Aristotle or of works inspired by his writings. The desire or ability to tap the sources of Aristotelian lore by direct recourse to Greek texts themselves was exceptional before the middle of the thirteenth century.

The precise date when the Occident became acquainted with the _Physics_ and _De caelo_ is a matter of some doubt. It is likely that Avicenna’s version of these two books had been converted into Latin at Toledo before the middle of the twelfth century by Dominicus Gondisalvi,[425] who worked there under the patronage of Archbishop Raymond, but the extent to which these early translations influenced European science is a subject of controversy. It has been suggested by Duhem that Latin translations of Aristotle were known to the scholars of the Chartres school, Theodoric, Gilbert de la Porrée, and William of Conches, passages in whose works certainly reveal some familiarity with Peripatetic theories.[426] On the other hand, there are no actual citations of Aristotle which would enable us to prove that the passages in question show first-hand knowledge of the books of the Stagirite.[427] The fact that much Peripatetic thought had been brought to the West through the writers of the late Roman and earlier Christian periods often makes it difficult, in the absence of actual citations, to distinguish between what had been learned from these earlier sources and what was contemporaneously derived from the Moslems.

_Gerard of Cremona_

We are on much firmer ground when we turn to the work of Gerard of Cremona,[428] for we know as a fact that before his death in 1187 this indefatigable translator had put into Latin, of the works of Aristotle of geographical interest, the first three books of the _Meteorology_,[429] the _Physics_, the _De caelo et mundo_,[430] and the _De generatione et corruptione_.[431]

_Michael Scot_

Michael Scot, who died in 1236[432] and was remembered by later ages as a great magician, was another student of Aristotelian science. After studying in Spain this Scotsman became court astrologer of the Emperor Frederick II in Sicily. He learned Arabic and composed treatises on astronomy, astrology (_Liber introductorius_ and _Liber particularis_) and physiognomy under the influence of Moslem learning. He also undertook the translation of sundry works on alchemy and astronomy, among them the treatise of Al-Biṭrūjī, based on Aristotelian astronomy, and Aristotle’s _De caelo_ with Averroës’ commentary. Associated with the _Liber particularis_ we have the text of a questionnaire[433] which Frederick II presented to Michael and which reveals something of that versatile Emperor’s burning interest in cosmology and physical geography. The philosopher’s “brief statements” in reply “concerning hell, purgatory, heaven, and the terrestrial paradise are followed by an account of the marvels of nature—strange lakes and rivers of the East, wondrous metals, stones, plants, drugs, and animals, with their respective virtues” (Haskins).[434] Michael in this connection also gives expression to familiar, traditional opinions on the earth as a sphere, though he includes some original observations on volcanoes and hot springs.[435]

_Aristotelianism in the Thirteenth Century_

By the time of Michael Scot Aristotelian theories of physics and of physical geography as introduced through Moslem channels were finding fairly general currency in the West. Arnold the Saxon, for instance, in his encyclopedic treatise written perhaps about 1225, gave citations from the _De caelo et mundo_, the _Meteorology_, and the _Physics_, as well as from Averroës and other Arabic admirers of Aristotle.[436] Aristotelian cosmology, astronomy, and metaphysics, however, were not accepted by Western scholars until after a strenuous intellectual battle had been waged over them. Serious efforts were made to place these teachings forever under the ban of the church. In 1210 and 1215 strict prohibitions against the study of the Averroïstic versions of the _Physics_ and _Metaphysics_ were issued by the authorities of the University of Paris.[437] This shows that by that time not only had the commentaries of Averroës been translated but that they must have become popular.[438] Indeed, the popularity of Aristotle and Averroës was destined to increase despite all prohibitions, and after their works, by the middle of the thirteenth century, had been purged of objectionable matter by the ecclesiastical authorities, they became prescribed studies in the curriculum of the University of Paris. Aristotelianism dominated the scientific thought of the late thirteenth and fourteenth centuries; and the physical geography of the great encyclopedist, Albertus Magnus, was largely based upon it. Albert, indeed, was sometimes unjustly called Aristotle’s ape.

OPPONENTS OF ARISTOTELIANISM

On the other hand, there were many individuals who, though accepting the teachings of Aristotle and his Arabic commentators in regard to specific facts and theories, were none the less sternly opposed to blind and uncritical adoption of them.

_William of Auvergne_

William of Auvergne, bishop of Paris from 1228 to his death in 1249, was leader of the ecclesiastical party that stood out against the study of Aristotelian philosophy and theology in that city. It was nevertheless true, as Duhem tells us, that William’s erudition “had received in abundance additions from sources which had not enriched the erudition of earlier centuries: that is from the works of Aristotle and Arabic authors.”[439] The _De universo_ of William contains much material on cosmology and natural history.

_Robert Grosseteste_

The great English churchman, Robert Grosseteste, bishop of Lincoln from 1235 until his death in 1253, presents an even more striking example of the scholar, well read in Aristotelian and Arabic learning, who was prone to question many of the Peripatetic doctrines. Grosseteste deserves a high place in the history of medieval science by reason of the depth of his scholarship and the originality of his ideas. His style, however, is often difficult and obscure. From the geographical point of view several of his treatises are of unusual interest. The _De sphaera_ is devoted to problems of astronomical geography. In the _De impressionibus aëris seu de prognosticatione_ rules are laid down for the preparation of weather forecasts based upon astrological considerations. The _De luce seu de inchoatione formarum_ explains Robert’s theory of the Creation. The _De natura locorum_, in which the influences of celestial rays upon the earth’s surface are discussed, gives expression to many views that were elaborated in fuller detail by Robert’s more famous pupil and intellectual successor, Roger Bacon.[440]

_ENCYCLOPEDIC WORKS_

Our period was marked by the production of encyclopedic works the object of which was to bring together as much human knowledge as possible in convenient, readable, and, frequently, in popular form. These encyclopedias carried on the traditions of Pliny, Solinus, Isidore, Bede, and other earlier writers and for the most part were lacking in originality. Made up of paraphrases and word-for-word excerpts from older books, they exemplify better than any other type of literary production the respect which the man of the Middle Ages felt towards the authority of the written word and his lack of critical acumen. Their immense popularity shows that they satisfied a distinct want: the lore contained in them, however worthless and puerile it often may seem to us, formed an important part of the intellectual cargo of the medieval mind. It is imperative, therefore, that representatives of this type of work should be consulted by anyone who wishes to arrive at a just estimate of the status of medieval knowledge.[441]

Most of the geography of the encyclopedias was a geography handed down from classical times, a geography but distantly related to contemporary facts and one in which fabulous elements tended to persist and multiply at the expense of sound and accurate information. Yet it was the geography of the majority of the lettered men, and the man who did not himself actually travel found here practically the only convenient means of learning about the countries of the world. He might pick up occasional details of routes to Rome and Palestine from pilgrims, traders, or soldiers; but only in the pages of the encyclopedias could he find anything approaching a systematic treatment of the earth and its various parts.

“DE IMAGINE MUNDI”

The most widely read book of this nature was the _De imagine mundi_, which dates from about 1100. Though this has often been attributed in recent years to Honorius of Autun (it has also been ascribed to St. Anselm and with far greater probability to an unknown Honorius Inclusus), the evidence at hand is insufficient to warrant us in coming to any definite conclusions on the vexed question of its authorship.[442] The general character of the compilation is illustrated by a remark at the close of the dedicatory letter: “I place nothing in this work except that which is approved by the best authorities.”[443] The main source of the geographical chapters was the _Etymologiae_ of Isidore, though the author also drew directly from Orosius.[444] It seems likely, indeed, that the geographical chapter of Orosius served as a basis for the entire compilation and provided an outline which was embellished by copious excerpts of detail from the more elaborate writings of Isidore, Augustine, and Bede. Furthermore, it is even probable that the unknown author had a map before him.[445] He appears to have borrowed directly from the _Collectanea rerum memorabilium_ of Solinus his account of the marvels of India, though elsewhere he taps Solinus at second hand through the medium of Isidore.[446]

LAMBERT’S “LIBER FLORIDUS;” GUIDO’S ENCYCLOPEDIA

Dating from approximately the same period is a similar work, the _Liber floridus_ of Lambert. Practically all we know of the author is that he was a canon of St. Omer early in the twelfth century.[447] His book, a hodgepodge of notices, geographical and otherwise, from Isidore, Bede, Martianus Capella, Raban Maur, and others, though it did not enjoy popularity comparable to that of the _De imagine mundi_, nevertheless by no means lapsed into obscurity during the centuries that followed. There are at least eight manuscripts of it preserved in the libraries of Europe, and it was referred to with high praise by writers of the thirteenth century.[448] The manuscripts are illustrated by crude maps, among the few remaining relics of twelfth-century cartography.

Of much the same nature is an encyclopedic compilation made by a certain Guido, probably an Italian, in 1119.[449] It contains excerpts from a variety of sources, including Isidore, the Romance of Alexander, Paul the Deacon, and, more especially, the anonymous Ravenna geographer.

“LUCIDARIUS”

The _De imagine mundi_ became an important source for later writings. It was a standard authority during the closing years of the Middle Ages for those who deliberately undertook to give a geographical description of the earth. The _Lucidarius_ (or _Aurea gemma_) was a popular encyclopedia written in German towards the end of the twelfth century at the order of Henry the Lion. Though embodying the peculiar and fabulous features of the _De imagine mundi_, it omitted the drier but more correct geographical and topographical details.[450] The principal source of much of the natural science in the _Lucidarius_ was William of Conches’ _De philosophia mundi_. The _Lucidarius_ was translated at a later date into Danish, Dutch, and Bohemian,[451] and from it were derived the geographical portions of the famous _Hortus deliciarum_ of the abbess Herrad of Landsperg.[452]

GERVASE OF TILBURY

Another widely read book that came under the influence of the _De imagine mundi_ was the _Otia imperialia_ of Gervase of Tilbury,[453] a protégé of Otto IV and by him appointed marshal of the kingdom of Arles. The _Otia_, composed to entertain the emperor during the leisure moments of his struggle with Frederick II, is in large measure a compilation of facts, fables, and theories borrowed from earlier works. The cosmological chapters are drawn from Peter Comestor’s _Historia scholastica_, the geographical ones from Orosius, Isidore, and, more particularly, the _De imagine mundi_, which furnished a framework into which the statements of the other writers were made to fit.[454] The large number of manuscripts of the _Otia_ bears witness to its great popularity.

JACQUES DE VITRY

Jacques de Vitry, bishop of St. John of Acre until 1220, in his _Historia hierosolymitana_[455] also borrowed from the _De imagine mundi_, especially in describing Palestine and Asia. His interest in the remarkable caused him to include, as had been done by the authors of the German _Lucidarius_, most of the fabulous elements of the earlier book as well as to add fabulous stories from other sources. It was these stories, derived in part from the _Historia hierosolymitana_ and in part directly from the _De imagine mundi_, that accounted for the great popularity of a poem to which we must now turn.

“L’IMAGE DU MONDE”

This poem, the _Image du Monde_,[456] destined to be read for over three centuries, was decidedly the most important of the many works that felt the influence of the _De imagine mundi_. Like its Latin predecessor, it is an attempt at the popularization of universal knowledge. The work of popularization, however, was here carried to the stage of translation into a popular tongue, which rendered the book available to a much broader circle of readers. The style was vivid and not lacking in originality, and the subject matter contained sufficient of the grotesque and unexpected to assure the poem a long-lived success. Though the question of authorship and exact date is a somewhat perplexing one, it seems likely that the _Image du Monde_ was partially composed in Metz in 1245 or 1247 by a certain Gossouin and within the following two or three years was added to either by Gossouin himself or by a certain Walter of Metz, to whom the entire work has occasionally been attributed.[457] Prior, however, to the composition of the second verse redaction by Gossouin or Walter, the poem had been put into a prose form,[458] from which translations were subsequently made into Hebrew, Judeo-German, and English (the last by Caxton in 1480).

“KONUNGS-SKUGGSJÁ”

From the very end of our period there dates an Icelandic dialogue of more or less encyclopedic scope, a work which might well be called a northern counterpart of the _De imagine mundi_. This _Konungs-Skuggsjá_, or _King’s Mirror_,[459] written about the year 1250 or perhaps as late as 1260, contains chapters that reveal to us something of the status of Scandinavian knowledge of the geography and natural phenomena of Iceland, Greenland, and the Arctic seas. But, like the Sagas, so far as we know, it was not translated into Latin or into the vernacular tongues, and the type of knowledge contained in it remained until the great age of discovery virtually the exclusive property of the peoples of Iceland and of the far north of Europe.[460]

GREAT ENCYCLOPEDIAS OF THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY

We cannot well leave the subject of encyclopedic compilations without mentioning such gigantic thirteenth-century productions as the _Specula_ of Vincent of Beauvais,[461] the various writings of Albertus Magnus,[462] and the relatively less ambitious popularizations of Bartholomew Anglicus,[463] Brunetto Latino,[464] and others.[465] The _Opus majus_ of Roger Bacon is also encyclopedic in scope. These great works contain a wealth of reference the systematic study of which would unquestionably shed much additional light on the substance of medieval geographical knowledge. The innumerable pages of Albertus Magnus, indeed, show not a little originality; and Roger Bacon stands somewhat apart from his contemporaries as a fearless exponent of scientific method.[466] On the whole, however, there is no very essential difference between the geography of these men and that of their less well-informed and perhaps less diligent predecessors. This is one reason why we have felt justified in failing to treat them in detail. Another reason is that adequate treatment of the geography of the thirteenth-century encyclopedists would fill another volume at least the size of the present one.

DANTE

A figure, however, whom we cannot refrain from mentioning in this connection, though he lived after 1250 and though his genius far transcended that of any encyclopedist of any age, is Dante. Much of the information amassed by the laborious compilers of encyclopedic works (especially Brunetto Latino) was fused by the poet into the _Divine Comedy_ and molded into his various prose writings. The universality of Dante’s knowledge embraced the geography and cosmography of his age. Though we shall not attempt to deal with Dante’s geographical lore[467] in the pages which follow, it would be a serious mistake to omit all reference to one who flourished so soon after the end of our period and who, besides being a poet of all time, was an outstanding figure in medieval scholarship and, incidentally, in the history of medieval geography.

The reader who wishes to investigate the geography of Dante and of the encyclopedists of the thirteenth century will find brief summaries and references in Notes 92–98 to the present chapter.

_HISTORIES, CHRONICLES, SAGAS, EPIC POEMS_

The writings of the historians and chroniclers of the Middle Ages, though they do not as a rule include systematic expositions of geography, nevertheless often contain incidental geographical matter of no slight interest. The present section is devoted to a very few selected specimens of historical narrative of the Crusading age, whether prose or verse, that are of particular significance from the geographical point of view.

OTTO OF FREISING

Among the outstanding medieval historians was Otto of Freising.[468] A man of intelligence and breadth, steeped in the academic literature of his age, Otto, though never going out of his way to write of geographical subjects, always maintained an attitude of open and receptive interest toward all branches of science. The range of his literary and scholarly learning is a key to the intellectual attainments of the average man of the world of his period. Born about 1114 or 1115 of a noble or even royal family—his maternal grandfather was the Emperor Henry IV—Otto studied in Paris probably early in the second quarter of the century. After his return to Germany in 1132 or 1133, he became a Cistercian and was subsequently made bishop of Freising. His principal works were a _Chronicon_, running from the beginning of the world to the year 1146, and the _Gesta Friderici_, recording the deeds of Frederick Barbarossa down to the year 1156 and continued after that date by Ragewin (or Rahewin).[469] Among other classical authorities Otto may have used Seneca’s _Quaestiones naturales_: most of his geographical ideas, however, were derived from Isidore and Orosius and from certain unknown “topographers” whom he cites as giving details on the rivers of Europe.[470]

GUNTHER OF PAIRIS

On the _Gesta Friderici_ was based an historical poem composed about 1186 by Gunther of Pairis (in Alsace), of whom we know next to nothing.[471] This work, the _Ligurinus_, adds little of material nature to the sources from which it was taken, although the poet converts the simple, straightforward narrative of Otto and Ragewin into a poem vividly expressed. It has been shown that the _Ligurinus_, even though the work of a German author, is a typical product of the poetical school of France of the late twelfth and early thirteenth centuries.[472] Where the writer expands and converts into verse Otto’s and Ragewin’s words describing natural features of the earth’s surface and geographical regions, he displays a sense of color and a feeling for nature that are striking,[473] even though the actual epithets employed are hackneyed and drawn from well-known classical models. Furthermore, in the description of Germany he departs so widely from his literary sources that it seems more than likely that he actually based his lines on personal acquaintance with the country.[474]

WALTER OF CHÂTILLON; WILLIAM THE BRETON

Two other historical poems of the same school and of analogous character to the _Ligurinus_ are the _Alexandreis_[475] of Walter of Châtillon (also known as Walter of Lille), written about 1180, and the _Philippis_ of William the Breton, published about 1225.[476] These are Latin hexameter epics modeled on Virgil and Lucan; full of allusions to Latin literature and mythology, they also show originality and a power of accurate description of scenes and country.[477] The _Alexandreis_ sings the deeds of Alexander the Great; the _Philippis_ the exploits of Philip Augustus of France.

HISTORIANS AND HISTORIES OF THE CRUSADES

Our period was the age of the reopening of the Levant and the regions of the Black Sea to Western knowledge through the Crusades and through the expansion of commerce that came in their train. The historians of the Crusades, consequently, furnish us with geographical notices of a kind differing from the stereotyped and secondhand geography of the encyclopedias. The items in the Crusaders’ records are often the results of actual experience. They give us an impression of freshness lacking in the pages of dry compilations like the _De imagine mundi_. But the Crusaders were not geographers and were without any true geographical instinct. They rarely felt an interest in anything besides the immediate events they were undertaking to describe or in matters not purely practical or utilitarian.[478]

The most important work, from this point of view, is the _Historia rerum in partibus transmarinis gestarum_ of William of Tyre (born 1130).[479] This covers events in Palestine and in the Crusaders’ states during the years between 1095 and 1185 and abounds in observations on the products and appearance of the country, on the habits of the Arabs—whose language William had probably learned[480]—and on other peoples of the East.

The _Gesta regis Ricardi_, which has sometimes been erroneously ascribed to Benedict of Peterborough,[481] records the voyage of Richard Coeur-de-Lion to the Holy Land in 1190. In the description of the routes to and from Palestine[482] we find a wealth of detail about the countries, isles, and seas traversed. The distinctly nautical style and content in places make it seem not at all improbable that a part of the book at least was derived from some sailing manual. Roger of Hoveden in his _Chronica_[483] (to the year 1201) made use of the same sources as those on which the author of the _Gesta regis Ricardi_ drew, though Roger’s account is fuller and more detailed, especially regarding Spain. Another source for the Crusade of Richard Coeur-de-Lion is the _Estoire de la guerre sainte_ by Ambroise,[484] a professional writer, who took part on the expedition and who described the Holy Land with less understanding than William of Tyre almost exclusively from the point of view of the sufferings and hardships experienced by the Crusaders.

The _Prise de Constantinople_[485] of Robert de Clari, a history of the Fourth Crusade by a participant, is the work of a man of relatively humble estate but of a man who felt more or less genuine interest in strange peoples and their customs. This interest is manifested particularly by the data that he gives on the Komans of the Russian plains, some of whom he undoubtedly had seen on the streets of Constantinople.

A letter from the patriarch of Jerusalem to Innocent III, entitled _La devision de la terre de oultremer et des choses qui i sont_,[486] was composed about 1200 in reply to a request from the Pope for information concerning the Saracen countries. In this anonymous work a geographical sketch of Egypt and Palestine shows that its author had no limited acquaintance with the Moslem faith and the Mohammedan peoples.

SCANDINAVIAN HISTORICAL WORKS

The geographical knowledge acquired by the Crusaders became the common property of all Western Europe. That which was acquired by the Vikings, on the other hand, was disseminated practically not at all among the peoples of the Latin West. Brief mention, therefore, must suffice for the Scandinavian sources, even though of all European folk the Vikings were the most adventurous voyagers and their geographical horizon the widest.

The introduction of Christianity marked the end of the heroic age of Norwegian and Icelandic history. It also ushered in an extraordinary period of literary productivity, the age of the Sagas[487] and Eddas.[488] The composition of the Sagas began in the twelfth and lasted on into the fourteenth century, but the events which they relate occurred far back in pagan days. For the most part bald but telling narratives of adventure, war, and litigation, they devote little space to comment or description; and the numerous place names mentioned are referred to as if the reader were already familiar with them.

The records of the farthest voyages of the Vikings to the shores of Wineland the Good were not given the final written form in which we now know them until after the close of the thirteenth century.[489] On the other hand, the history of Iceland was told by Ari Frodhi (1067–1148) in his _Íslendingabók_;[490] and the chronicles of the settlement of the coasts of this isle and of the discovery of Greenland are recorded in the _Landnámabók_,[491] or _Book of Settlements_, the original of which probably dates from the twelfth century. The famous _Heimskringla_ of Snorri Sturluson, the greatest of early Scandinavian historians, records the history of the kings of Norway. Its title means “the Round World,” and the prelude consists of a brief geographical description of the principal countries of the world. The text includes no less than sixteen Sagas, among them that of Sigurd the Crusader chronicling an adventurous voyage (1109) of a king of southern Norway to the Holy Land by way of the Strait of Gibraltar and homeward overland. Scattered geographical references are found in other Sagas and in the _Icelandic_[492] and _Greenland Annals_[493] which, though written after our period, throw light on events that took place before the mid-thirteenth century.

LATIN HISTORIES OF THE NORTH

Besides the Sagas, three historical works written in Latin by Northern writers of our age deserve particular mention inasmuch as they all contain geographical descriptions of the Scandinavian world. The first of these is the history of Adam of Bremen. On strictly chronological grounds Adam, who died about 1076, belongs before the opening of the Crusading age. We shall discuss him, however, among the historians of the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries, to whose works his writings are more akin in spirit than to those of the earlier Middle Ages. Adam was canon of Bremen and master of the cathedral school of that city in the time of the great Archbishop Adalbert, who had “made Bremen an Arctic Rome and his court the greatest center of Northern learning” (Beazley).[494] The archiepiscopal province of Bremen was the largest in the entire medieval church, including all of Scandinavia, Iceland, Greenland, the Orkneys, the Faroes, and the Hebrides. Adam was thus placed in a most favorable position to gather together materials on the geography and history of these northern lands. His great work (called sometimes _Gesta Hammenburgensis ecclesiae pontificum_, sometimes _Historia ecclesiastica_, and sometimes _Bremensium praesulum historia_) is in four books, the last of which deals with the geography of the North. Much of this was based on information derived from contemporaries; but Adam was also well read in Latin literature and often quotes and copies from the works of Macrobius, Martianus Capella, Solinus, and Orosius.

From somewhat more than a century later we have another Latin history of the Scandinavian North—if Saxo Grammaticus’ curiously heterogeneous combination of mythology, folklore, poetry, and accurate observation deserves the name of history. The first book of this work, known as the _Gesta Danorum_, contains a formal geographical sketch of Denmark, the Baltic, the Scandinavian Peninsula, and remoter countries and isles beyond the Atlantic, wherein fact is blended with romance. There are also occasional observations of geographical interest scattered through the later books.

Finally, in an anonymous _Historia Norwegiae_ dating from the early thirteenth century we find an introductory passage on the geography of the regions with which this history deals: a concise description of Norway is followed by briefer comments on the tributary islands, Iceland, Greenland, the Orkneys, and the Faroes. Especially interesting are the author’s observations upon the volcanoes of Iceland. The contents show that, like Adam of Bremen and Saxo Grammaticus, the writer must have been familiar with the standard geographical books of the Middle Ages, with Bede and Solinus, and perhaps with Isidore and Pliny. The _Historia Norwegiae_, however, can never have enjoyed great popularity, or else more than one manuscript would be known at the present day.[495]

_LEGENDS_

Many of the legends of our period contain material of geographical significance, and a few of these may claim our particular attention.

ROMANCE OF ALEXANDER

The stories of Alexander the Great served to direct men’s attention eastward, for, besides narrating the adventures of the Macedonian conqueror, they gave, as we have already seen,[496] details of a sort about the geography of Asia, particularly of India.[497] Not only were the earlier Latin versions derived from the _Pseudo-Callisthenes_ paraphrased and copied by historians,[498] but new elements were added to the cycle—notably the _Iter ad Paradisum_,[499] an account of Alexander’s journey to Paradise. Walter of Châtillon (or of Lille), about 1180, composed in the style of Lucan a great Latin hexameter poem entitled _Alexandreis_, based in part on the legendary stories of the Macedonian and in part on the more authentic histories of Justin and Quintus Curtius.[500] The widest currency, however, was given to the Romance through its translation into the vernacular tongues. The oldest French version, which covers the earlier portion of the Romance only, was written by Alberic of Besançon (early twelfth century?) in octosyllabic verse of the dialect of the Dauphiny.[501] This was translated into German by one Lamprecht and was rendered into the _langue d’oïl_ in decasyllabic form.[502] The Romance reached its highest vernacular development in a version in alexandrines,[503] the joint composition of Lambert li Tors of Châteaudun, Alexander of Bernai (or of Paris), and Peter of St. Cloud. The existence of more than twenty manuscripts testifies to the popularity of this great poem, which is a sort of mosaic from various sources.[504] Much of it came from the _Pseudo-Callisthenes_ through the medium of Valerius, the _Epitoma_ of Valerius, Alberic of Besançon, and the decasyllabic poem; but some elements can be traced back to Orosius, Justin, Quintus Curtius, Eustatius, and Josephus, and the texts show many later interpolations of unknown origin. The Romance in alexandrines was drawn upon in its turn by later compilers. From the mid-thirteenth century there dates a poem, probably by one Eustace of Kent, which incorporates much material from this and other sources.[505] It includes miscellaneous geographical elements; and certain of the manuscripts are adorned with a wealth of magnificent miniatures, representing, among other things, the marvels of India and all the fantastic creatures encountered by Alexander throughout the East.

PRESTER JOHN

During our period the belief was spread abroad in the existence of a numerous Christian population in Asia. We find an account of Christians in India in an anonymous report of the visit of a certain Patriarch John of India to Rome in 1122, the authenticity of which is apparently confirmed in a letter of Odo, abbot of St. Remi in Rheims, to a certain Count Thomas.[506] Of far greater importance was the fabulous story of Prester John. Belief in this mighty Christian potentate and his immense kingdom may be traced in large measure to the widely read _Letter of Prester John_, dating in its earliest form from before 1177,[507] addressed in some manuscripts to the Byzantine Emperor[508] and elsewhere to other Western monarchs. The popularity of this is attested by the fact that Zarncke, its editor, knew of no less than eighty manuscripts. The question of the sources of the _Letter_ in its original form is obscure, though the origins of the numerous interpolations can nearly all be explained. Much, certainly, was borrowed from the Alexander stories, and much from the legend of St. Thomas in India; other parts are indubitably connected with the great Oriental reservoir of fabulous and miraculous lore. The account of the visit of Patriarch John to Rome and the _Letter of Prester John_ constituted the principal sources of an anonymous and highly fanciful description of India and of Prester John’s country found in a twelfth-century manuscript in the Heiligenkreutzerstift, near Vienna, and commonly called the _Elysaeus_ account.[509] The _Letter of Prester John_ was not only extensively read in its various Latin versions but was translated into French, Italian, German, and English.[510]

ST. BRANDAN

Another legend which enjoyed perhaps an even greater popularity was that dealing with the wanderings of St. Brandan (or Brendan) in the Western Ocean. The story occurs in several distinct forms.[511] The Latin version had already taken shape before our period opened and perhaps dates back to the ninth century or earlier. From it was derived in part an Anglo-Norman version composed in 1121, which ultimately found its way into the _Image du monde_. The legend furthermore gained currency among the Teutonic peoples in a somewhat different version developed probably from a twelfth-century French original.

_PILGRIM NARRATIVES; MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS OF TRAVEL_

The travels of pilgrims and traders during the Middle Ages have been the subject of more careful research in recent years than many other aspects of our study.[512] Consequently, it will suffice merely to give a very brief statement of the more significant pilgrim records dating from the Crusading age.

CHRISTIAN PILGRIM NARRATIVES